#systemsthinking — Public Fediverse posts
Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #systemsthinking, aggregated by home.social.
-
Consciousness can be understood as a reflexive semiotic capacity through which environmental structure internally models, evaluates, and modifies the conditions of its own persistence and transformation.
Its planetary-scale expression becomes visible in the Anthropocene.Preprint:
https://zenodo.org/records/20335139#PlanetarySemiosis #Anthropocene #Consciousness #OriginOfLife #EnvironmentalStructure #EarthSystemScience #Astrobiology #PhilosophyOfMind #SystemsThinking #Preprint #WeirdScience #cats
-
Consciousness can be understood as a reflexive semiotic capacity through which environmental structure internally models, evaluates, and modifies the conditions of its own persistence and transformation.
Its planetary-scale expression becomes visible in the Anthropocene.Preprint:
https://zenodo.org/records/20335139#PlanetarySemiosis #Anthropocene #Consciousness #OriginOfLife #EnvironmentalStructure #EarthSystemScience #Astrobiology #PhilosophyOfMind #SystemsThinking #Preprint #WeirdScience #cats
-
Consciousness can be understood as a reflexive semiotic capacity through which environmental structure internally models, evaluates, and modifies the conditions of its own persistence and transformation.
Its planetary-scale expression becomes visible in the Anthropocene.Preprint:
https://zenodo.org/records/20335139#PlanetarySemiosis #Anthropocene #Consciousness #OriginOfLife #EnvironmentalStructure #EarthSystemScience #Astrobiology #PhilosophyOfMind #SystemsThinking #Preprint #WeirdScience #cats
-
Consciousness can be understood as a reflexive semiotic capacity through which environmental structure internally models, evaluates, and modifies the conditions of its own persistence and transformation.
Its planetary-scale expression becomes visible in the Anthropocene.Preprint:
https://zenodo.org/records/20335139#PlanetarySemiosis #Anthropocene #Consciousness #OriginOfLife #EnvironmentalStructure #EarthSystemScience #Astrobiology #PhilosophyOfMind #SystemsThinking #Preprint #WeirdScience #cats
-
I was looking for something I had previously read in a book.
Pro tip 🤓: This is why I create illustrated notes, so I can quickly find what I was looking for.
And it is fun. 😃
-
I was looking for something I had previously read in a book.
Pro tip 🤓: This is why I create illustrated notes, so I can quickly find what I was looking for.
And it is fun. 😃
-
I was looking for something I had previously read in a book.
Pro tip 🤓: This is why I create illustrated notes, so I can quickly find what I was looking for.
And it is fun. 😃
-
I was looking for something I had previously read in a book.
Pro tip 🤓: This is why I create illustrated notes, so I can quickly find what I was looking for.
And it is fun. 😃
-
I was looking for something I had previously read in a book.
Pro tip 🤓: This is why I create illustrated notes, so I can quickly find what I was looking for.
And it is fun. 😃
-
What if I told you that we could reduce the energy used per useful AI output by ~100x through existing techniques?
https://blog.dougbelshaw.com/ais-energy-problem-is-a-systems-problem
(I'm "looking forward" to people replying before actually, you know, reading the post. Maybe don't be that person?)
-
What if I told you that we could reduce the energy used per useful AI output by ~100x through existing techniques?
https://blog.dougbelshaw.com/ais-energy-problem-is-a-systems-problem
(I'm "looking forward" to people replying before actually, you know, reading the post. Maybe don't be that person?)
-
What if I told you that we could reduce the energy used per useful AI output by ~100x through existing techniques?
https://blog.dougbelshaw.com/ais-energy-problem-is-a-systems-problem
(I'm "looking forward" to people replying before actually, you know, reading the post. Maybe don't be that person?)
-
What if I told you that we could reduce the energy used per useful AI output by ~100x through existing techniques?
https://blog.dougbelshaw.com/ais-energy-problem-is-a-systems-problem
(I'm "looking forward" to people replying before actually, you know, reading the post. Maybe don't be that person?)
-
What if I told you that we could reduce the energy used per useful AI output by ~100x through existing techniques?
https://blog.dougbelshaw.com/ais-energy-problem-is-a-systems-problem
(I'm "looking forward" to people replying before actually, you know, reading the post. Maybe don't be that person?)
-
Learn how PlotWeaver: Cards of Creation works, and then try it for yourself.
https://www.plotweavergame.com/#PlotWeaver #GameDesign #WritingCommunity #AmWriting #TTRPG #IndieGames #SystemsThinking #CreativeWriting #StoryStructure #WritingTips #IndieDev #Cooperative
-
Learn how PlotWeaver: Cards of Creation works, and then try it for yourself.
https://www.plotweavergame.com/#PlotWeaver #GameDesign #WritingCommunity #AmWriting #TTRPG #IndieGames #SystemsThinking #CreativeWriting #StoryStructure #WritingTips #IndieDev #Cooperative
-
Learn how PlotWeaver: Cards of Creation works, and then try it for yourself.
https://www.plotweavergame.com/#PlotWeaver #GameDesign #WritingCommunity #AmWriting #TTRPG #IndieGames #SystemsThinking #CreativeWriting #StoryStructure #WritingTips #IndieDev #Cooperative
-
Learn how PlotWeaver: Cards of Creation works, and then try it for yourself.
https://www.plotweavergame.com/#PlotWeaver #GameDesign #WritingCommunity #AmWriting #TTRPG #IndieGames #SystemsThinking #CreativeWriting #StoryStructure #WritingTips #IndieDev #Cooperative
-
Learn how PlotWeaver: Cards of Creation works, and then try it for yourself.
https://www.plotweavergame.com/#PlotWeaver #GameDesign #WritingCommunity #AmWriting #TTRPG #IndieGames #SystemsThinking #CreativeWriting #StoryStructure #WritingTips #IndieDev #Cooperative
-
Why this age of polycrisis demands a new kind of peace
-
Why this age of polycrisis demands a new kind of peace
-
Why this age of polycrisis demands a new kind of peace
-
Why this age of polycrisis demands a new kind of peace
-
Why this age of polycrisis demands a new kind of peace
-
Organisational Dysfunction of the Day
The collaboration that isn't
Context: Two teams decide to work together. A shared initiative, a joint project, a problem neither can solve alone. There is enthusiasm on both sides, and a genuine excitement about what they might build together. Everyone has a picture in their head of what that looks like and what they want to get out of it, and everyone assumes the others have the same one. Who owns what, and what success looks like for each of them, is left open. Good intentions and regular syncs will be enough. For a while, they are. Then something goes wrong. Credit lands unevenly. Decisions get made by the louder team. One side feels their contribution has been absorbed rather than shared. Trust erodes quietly. The collaboration continues in name but not in spirit.
OST explains: Two teams are two social systems, each with its own purpose, its own design principle, its own internal logic. The shared purpose is assumed rather than agreed upon. There are two clean ways to work across that boundary. A clear transactional relationship: a contract, explicit deliverables, arm's length. Or deliberately create a new, shared system with a common purpose both sides have actually agreed to, a structure for how the collaboration works and is coordinated, and a design principle governing the joint work. What tends to happen instead is neither. The teams proceed as if goodwill substitutes for structure. The result is laissez-faire more often than not. No clear location of responsibility, no purpose anyone has committed to, no shared system. DP1 (bureaucracy) fills the vacuum, as it always does: the team with more power, more visibility, or a stronger brand quietly starts setting the terms. The other finds itself inside someone else's system without ever agreeing to join it. The same dynamic plays out between companies, just with invoices adding a harder edge to the same underlying confusion. The collaboration was real. The shared system never was.
#OpenSystemsTheory #SocioTechnical #OrgDesign #systemsThinking
-
Organisational Dysfunction of the Day
The collaboration that isn't
Context: Two teams decide to work together. A shared initiative, a joint project, a problem neither can solve alone. There is enthusiasm on both sides, and a genuine excitement about what they might build together. Everyone has a picture in their head of what that looks like and what they want to get out of it, and everyone assumes the others have the same one. Who owns what, and what success looks like for each of them, is left open. Good intentions and regular syncs will be enough. For a while, they are. Then something goes wrong. Credit lands unevenly. Decisions get made by the louder team. One side feels their contribution has been absorbed rather than shared. Trust erodes quietly. The collaboration continues in name but not in spirit.
OST explains: Two teams are two social systems, each with its own purpose, its own design principle, its own internal logic. The shared purpose is assumed rather than agreed upon. There are two clean ways to work across that boundary. A clear transactional relationship: a contract, explicit deliverables, arm's length. Or deliberately create a new, shared system with a common purpose both sides have actually agreed to, a structure for how the collaboration works and is coordinated, and a design principle governing the joint work. What tends to happen instead is neither. The teams proceed as if goodwill substitutes for structure. The result is laissez-faire more often than not. No clear location of responsibility, no purpose anyone has committed to, no shared system. DP1 (bureaucracy) fills the vacuum, as it always does: the team with more power, more visibility, or a stronger brand quietly starts setting the terms. The other finds itself inside someone else's system without ever agreeing to join it. The same dynamic plays out between companies, just with invoices adding a harder edge to the same underlying confusion. The collaboration was real. The shared system never was.
#OpenSystemsTheory #SocioTechnical #OrgDesign #systemsThinking
-
Organisational Dysfunction of the Day
The collaboration that isn't
Context: Two teams decide to work together. A shared initiative, a joint project, a problem neither can solve alone. There is enthusiasm on both sides, and a genuine excitement about what they might build together. Everyone has a picture in their head of what that looks like and what they want to get out of it, and everyone assumes the others have the same one. Who owns what, and what success looks like for each of them, is left open. Good intentions and regular syncs will be enough. For a while, they are. Then something goes wrong. Credit lands unevenly. Decisions get made by the louder team. One side feels their contribution has been absorbed rather than shared. Trust erodes quietly. The collaboration continues in name but not in spirit.
OST explains: Two teams are two social systems, each with its own purpose, its own design principle, its own internal logic. The shared purpose is assumed rather than agreed upon. There are two clean ways to work across that boundary. A clear transactional relationship: a contract, explicit deliverables, arm's length. Or deliberately create a new, shared system with a common purpose both sides have actually agreed to, a structure for how the collaboration works and is coordinated, and a design principle governing the joint work. What tends to happen instead is neither. The teams proceed as if goodwill substitutes for structure. The result is laissez-faire more often than not. No clear location of responsibility, no purpose anyone has committed to, no shared system. DP1 (bureaucracy) fills the vacuum, as it always does: the team with more power, more visibility, or a stronger brand quietly starts setting the terms. The other finds itself inside someone else's system without ever agreeing to join it. The same dynamic plays out between companies, just with invoices adding a harder edge to the same underlying confusion. The collaboration was real. The shared system never was.
#OpenSystemsTheory #SocioTechnical #OrgDesign #systemsThinking
-
Organisational Dysfunction of the Day
The collaboration that isn't
Context: Two teams decide to work together. A shared initiative, a joint project, a problem neither can solve alone. There is enthusiasm on both sides, and a genuine excitement about what they might build together. Everyone has a picture in their head of what that looks like and what they want to get out of it, and everyone assumes the others have the same one. Who owns what, and what success looks like for each of them, is left open. Good intentions and regular syncs will be enough. For a while, they are. Then something goes wrong. Credit lands unevenly. Decisions get made by the louder team. One side feels their contribution has been absorbed rather than shared. Trust erodes quietly. The collaboration continues in name but not in spirit.
OST explains: Two teams are two social systems, each with its own purpose, its own design principle, its own internal logic. The shared purpose is assumed rather than agreed upon. There are two clean ways to work across that boundary. A clear transactional relationship: a contract, explicit deliverables, arm's length. Or deliberately create a new, shared system with a common purpose both sides have actually agreed to, a structure for how the collaboration works and is coordinated, and a design principle governing the joint work. What tends to happen instead is neither. The teams proceed as if goodwill substitutes for structure. The result is laissez-faire more often than not. No clear location of responsibility, no purpose anyone has committed to, no shared system. DP1 (bureaucracy) fills the vacuum, as it always does: the team with more power, more visibility, or a stronger brand quietly starts setting the terms. The other finds itself inside someone else's system without ever agreeing to join it. The same dynamic plays out between companies, just with invoices adding a harder edge to the same underlying confusion. The collaboration was real. The shared system never was.
#OpenSystemsTheory #SocioTechnical #OrgDesign #systemsThinking
-
Organisational Dysfunction of the Day
The collaboration that isn't
Context: Two teams decide to work together. A shared initiative, a joint project, a problem neither can solve alone. There is enthusiasm on both sides, and a genuine excitement about what they might build together. Everyone has a picture in their head of what that looks like and what they want to get out of it, and everyone assumes the others have the same one. Who owns what, and what success looks like for each of them, is left open. Good intentions and regular syncs will be enough. For a while, they are. Then something goes wrong. Credit lands unevenly. Decisions get made by the louder team. One side feels their contribution has been absorbed rather than shared. Trust erodes quietly. The collaboration continues in name but not in spirit.
OST explains: Two teams are two social systems, each with its own purpose, its own design principle, its own internal logic. The shared purpose is assumed rather than agreed upon. There are two clean ways to work across that boundary. A clear transactional relationship: a contract, explicit deliverables, arm's length. Or deliberately create a new, shared system with a common purpose both sides have actually agreed to, a structure for how the collaboration works and is coordinated, and a design principle governing the joint work. What tends to happen instead is neither. The teams proceed as if goodwill substitutes for structure. The result is laissez-faire more often than not. No clear location of responsibility, no purpose anyone has committed to, no shared system. DP1 (bureaucracy) fills the vacuum, as it always does: the team with more power, more visibility, or a stronger brand quietly starts setting the terms. The other finds itself inside someone else's system without ever agreeing to join it. The same dynamic plays out between companies, just with invoices adding a harder edge to the same underlying confusion. The collaboration was real. The shared system never was.
#OpenSystemsTheory #SocioTechnical #OrgDesign #systemsThinking
-
Hi fediverse! 👋 Exploring ecological & holistic systems thinking, inspired by Meadows, Capra & Pirsig.
Following: @antlerboy @snowded @psybertron @raumplaner @johncarlosbaez @alexthurow
Who else to follow? Other tags to track? 🌿
#SystemsThinking #Complexity #Cynefin #Cybernetics #LivingSystems #LeveragePoints #SystemDynamics #DeepEcology #Permaculture -
Hi fediverse! 👋 Exploring ecological & holistic systems thinking, inspired by Meadows, Capra & Pirsig.
Following: @antlerboy @snowded @psybertron @raumplaner @johncarlosbaez @alexthurow
Who else to follow? Other tags to track? 🌿
#SystemsThinking #Complexity #Cynefin #Cybernetics #LivingSystems #LeveragePoints #SystemDynamics #DeepEcology #Permaculture -
Hi fediverse! 👋 Exploring ecological & holistic systems thinking, inspired by Meadows, Capra & Pirsig.
Following: @antlerboy @snowded @psybertron @raumplaner @johncarlosbaez @alexthurow
Who else to follow? Other tags to track? 🌿
#SystemsThinking #Complexity #Cynefin #Cybernetics #LivingSystems #LeveragePoints #SystemDynamics #DeepEcology #Permaculture -
Hi fediverse! 👋 Exploring ecological & holistic systems thinking, inspired by Meadows, Capra & Pirsig.
Following: @antlerboy @snowded @psybertron @raumplaner @johncarlosbaez @alexthurow
Who else to follow? Other tags to track? 🌿
#SystemsThinking #Complexity #Cynefin #Cybernetics #LivingSystems #LeveragePoints #SystemDynamics #DeepEcology #Permaculture -
Hi fediverse! 👋 Exploring ecological & holistic systems thinking, inspired by Meadows, Capra & Pirsig.
Following: @antlerboy @snowded @psybertron @raumplaner @johncarlosbaez @alexthurow
Who else to follow? Other tags to track? 🌿
#SystemsThinking #Complexity #Cynefin #Cybernetics #LivingSystems #LeveragePoints #SystemDynamics #DeepEcology #Permaculture -
Why I Version Datasets Like Software https://tinyurl.com/2swz6r7j
#OpenData #SystemsThinking #Versioning #KnowledgeInfrastructure #PublicDatasets #DigitalPreservation #OpenKnowledge
-
Empathy is not a soft extra. It is a warning system.
It tells us where a process is failing before the dashboard does, where people are being lost between forms, platforms, policies, and polite automated replies.
#CivicIntelligence #Empathy #SystemsThinking #DigitalGovernance #HumanCenteredDesign #AlgorithmicGovernance #PublicInterestTech #Ethics #REDefine
-
Empathy is not a soft extra. It is a warning system.
It tells us where a process is failing before the dashboard does, where people are being lost between forms, platforms, policies, and polite automated replies.
#CivicIntelligence #Empathy #SystemsThinking #DigitalGovernance #HumanCenteredDesign #AlgorithmicGovernance #PublicInterestTech #Ethics #REDefine
-
Empathy is not a soft extra. It is a warning system.
It tells us where a process is failing before the dashboard does, where people are being lost between forms, platforms, policies, and polite automated replies.
#CivicIntelligence #Empathy #SystemsThinking #DigitalGovernance #HumanCenteredDesign #AlgorithmicGovernance #PublicInterestTech #Ethics #REDefine
-
Empathy is not a soft extra. It is a warning system.
It tells us where a process is failing before the dashboard does, where people are being lost between forms, platforms, policies, and polite automated replies.
#CivicIntelligence #Empathy #SystemsThinking #DigitalGovernance #HumanCenteredDesign #AlgorithmicGovernance #PublicInterestTech #Ethics #REDefine
-
Empathy is not a soft extra. It is a warning system.
It tells us where a process is failing before the dashboard does, where people are being lost between forms, platforms, policies, and polite automated replies.
#CivicIntelligence #Empathy #SystemsThinking #DigitalGovernance #HumanCenteredDesign #AlgorithmicGovernance #PublicInterestTech #Ethics #REDefine
-
In conversation: Dave Murphy and Tom Murphy – Can modernity become sustainable?
-
In conversation: Dave Murphy and Tom Murphy – Can modernity become sustainable?
-
In conversation: Dave Murphy and Tom Murphy – Can modernity become sustainable?
-
In conversation: Dave Murphy and Tom Murphy – Can modernity become sustainable?
-
AI didn't create new problems. It removed the friction that used to make existing ones obvious.
The question for leaders isn't whether AI can replace developers. It's whether their teams know how to lead AI well.
Nothing about leadership changed. We're just seeing it more clearly now.
-
AI didn't create new problems. It removed the friction that used to make existing ones obvious.
The question for leaders isn't whether AI can replace developers. It's whether their teams know how to lead AI well.
Nothing about leadership changed. We're just seeing it more clearly now.
