starting with the report

roughly suggesting, one should really draw a graph or chart and ask....what things am i interested in comparing? what are the questions I want to get information on.  ...can be tough to know in advance.

The leap of faith

When should you take a big risk? Two things come to
Mind. 1. When you are most comfortable and 2. when everything is crumblIng around you. The latter context for leaps of faith may seem easier, whereas making the jump when you are in the comfortable context requires balls.

Boundary Transitions

When the nature of the systems constraints change over time. They can be slow or sat an they can be auto-catalytic or they can require monumental and continuous effort

the importance of failure

for most things, failure is only a matter of time - the key is how well you manage failure.  Let's not get so focused on doing things successfully, rather let's build resilience and focus on dealing with failure better.

On Planning, On Meetings

Sit in an all day meeting and realize how much work you could have gotten done.  If you can't cancel or leave the meeting, you've got to make efficient use in it - but how?...besides intermittent iPhone e-mailing, the obvious answer is brainstorming for another project/task; prioritizing to-do list; and then the obvious 'actively day-dream'...I would refer to this as a combination between active listening and day dreaming.  Greatness ensues. But don't do too much daydreaming...

Open your eyes to error

Just like success, error has it's place. and it's damn important.  Even when you can eliminate error (and when you think you should....it may be best if you didn't).

Experimental meshing of two coherent ideas

freezing one water molecule at a time sounds ridiculous, because we know that we can just let our freezer do it!!! your freezer is able to adjust the tension in the environment...the ambience that is pervasive within the systems dynamics (see McKelvey's work on adaptive tension).... The tension values essentially are between, Order -T- Complexity -T- Chaos. 

The system is subjected to the environment because it's an ordered system. Trying to subject a complex system using an "ordered environment" works usually and relatively okay, but systemically, this approach has tragic consequences.  Perhaps submiting a complex system to a complex environment would have effects on complex systems? Is this like doing safe to fail experiments?  not sure, but i do know the old adage, you require variety to beat variety...aka you need complexity to beat complexity

The possibles, the plausibles.

I don't deal with probable too much anymore, because strategy on the probable can be done by a whole bunch of those damned gaussian particles.  But in terms of the Pareto particles, now those are what i'm talking about!

So anyways, we have the adjacent possible from kauffman, we have the imaginable possible from snowden - same word, two different meanings? how do you know?

Entropy is the amount of hidden information, where high entropy means lots of hidden information and low entropy means less hidden information.

The number of ways agents in a system can be rearranged without changing the macro view of the system is it's entropy. The more things u can rearrange the higher the entropy. The smaller the number of things you can change before affecting the macrO view of the system, the lower it's entropy.

Over time, entropy tends to increase. E.g drop of black ink in water will dissipate to form a uniform greyish color. Does this make sense?

Thanks Boltzmann.

Safe fail

Doing things is challenging and really takes years of practice - especially when failure is assumed to be 'bad' as opposed to seeing it as learning.

A question arises: what about failure in ordered systems; impose it have the same implications as it does in complex ones?