Awesome .. 670 responses to my survey of changing practices - forms.gle/kcwQSd8HV7sAhn… ... thank you all so much. I need to get this upto about 1,000 in order to stand a chance of picking out the weak signals, so please share it. Takes about 10-15 minutes. All help appreciated.
Me : Over 800 responses now to the survey, thank you - forms.gle/au9kLWLia3qQJp…
X : Will you publish the data?
Me : No. I'll publish the results, the test of the hypothesis.
X : What if I want to look for something else?
Me : Give me your hypothesis and I'll test it.
X : I was more hoping to find interesting correlations.
Me : Oh, hell no. You can always find correlations if you go looking for correlations. Madness lies that way. It's why you build a hypothesis, collect data, test the hypothesis.
X : What if it's wrong.
Me : Then it's wrong.
X : But there could be ...
Me : No. Once the person has run the hypothesis, they are then polluted. You don't go looking for other correlations in a data set. You get one shot. You can run another's hypothesis but then again, it's a one shot deal. I'm religious about this.
Me : If you want to go looking for correlations in a data set then once you found a correlation, you discard the entire dataset, build your hypothesis on your correlation and collect an entirely new dataset to test it. You never say "I found this correlation in this data".
X : So, I could use the dataset to find a correlation but only if I then go create an entirely new dataset to test it?
Me : Yep and never use the first dataset as any form of justification for your correlation.
X : So, can I?
Me : No. It's a trust issue. I'll run your hypothesis.
X : But I don't know what I'm looking for!
Me : Yep, and that's not filling me with confidence. Do you know how often people go looking for correlations in a dataset and then use the dataset as justification of the correlation?
X : A lot?
Me : In business, all the bloody time.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Fabulous, thank you so very much. 1,001 responses to the survey. This is wonderful. Now, to run the tests and find out whether the hypothesis is wrong or right. Before I run the test (it'll take hours to build what I need), I suppose I better say what I am looking for ...
... the hypothesis is that within the sample there are two distinct populations - a traditional and a next generation - along with a majority that are "in between". Due to bias in sampling (i.e. my tweet streams) then the Next Gen is likely to be much more represented ..
... than the Traditional but that's ok, we're are looking for a phenotypic difference in the populations. The reason for cast the net wide is that hopefully we may catch 20+ of both. As I said, the vast majority will be "in between" ...
X : How do you distinguish between a pipeline item on your map vs a component?
Me : A pipeline represents a non exclusive OR ... i.e. this OR that OR that, where you have multiple evolving components of the same "meaning". e.g. power needs Coal OR solar OR wind OR ...
e.g. film content NEEDs Action OR Thriller OR SciFi OR Costume Drama OR ...
e.g. collective NEEDs Family OR Nation OR Football Club OR Church OR Company ...
Normally, the connections on a map represent a logical AND.
Cup of tea NEEDs Cup AND Tea AND Hot Water
Hot Water NEEDs cold water AND kettle
Kettle NEEDs Power
Power NEEDs Solar OR Coal OR Wind OR ...
X : Thoughts on Palestine?
Me : My thoughts are with the innocent lost on both sides. I would hope in the future the UN would have a standing army that could end such conflicts, whether there or Yemen and yes ... there are too many power interests at play for that to happen.
X : A UN standing army?
Me : Yes. In my view, the UN should have the single most powerful and overwhelmingly destructive military force with a mission to end conflicts quickly and force all sides to a negotiation mediated by the UN ... regardless of the conflict, anywhere.
X : That'll never happen.
Me : I know. Too many power interests at play. Maybe, one day in the future.
X : Not a fan of bitcoin?
Me : Nope. Never was. I don't like the societal payload of laissez faire.
X : Not a fan of crypto currency?
Me : Didn't say that. There are many issues with crypto currencies (for example, energy consumption due to proof of work) but there is potential.
... I've always said there is potential in the blockchain.
X : Ethereum?
Me : Half and half. Proof of stake etc, still lacking aspects of transparency in ownership but there are some interesting ERC-20. Hoge for example - hoge.finance
X : Why interesting?
Me : It's all to do with the culture map. If we finally get around to having the whole Me vs We discussion in society and determining our actual beliefs and behaviours that we value ....
X : Is there more to write on the book?
Me : Lots - strategy, gameplay, culture, political and ... oodles to finish.
X : When are you going to do this?
Me : When I have time.
X : Any ideas when?
Me : I'll probably retire in about 20 years, so I should have time then.
X : What if someone else beats you to it?
Me : Saves me a job. I do encourage others to write books on mapping for this very purpose. I'd prefer to spend my retirement fishing (without a fishing rod i.e. sitting on the bank of a river drinking coffee and having a smoke).
X : What if you die before you finish it?
Me : Well, I believe it ceases to be my problem at that point.
X : Can't you ...
Me : .... hmmm, prioritize? I have other priorities - my research, my work, the family, repainting the house, the garden allotment etc etc.
Over 240 people signed up for Map Camp, there are hundred or so early bird tickets left ... I know it's not until October 13th - mapcamp.co.uk ... but if we keep this rate up, we should have a 1,000 mappers attending. That's exciting.
The topics we're going to be applying maps too vary from "The Green Economy" to "Maps, Ethics and Power" to "One Size Fits All -Capitalism vs Communism" ... oh, I'm looking forward to this ...
The titles of course ... may change. We use a format of three speakers (a triad) to explore each topic and one of the first things the speakers do is decide what the actual topic will be. I do like a bit of emergence with my conferences.