betting on the sync

Many incredible people, have been seeking many incredible solutions, to bettering:





et al

for many years.

What if we already have the solution(s), we just don’t have them in sync. [people, space/resources, tech]

What if we bet (why bet) on an experiment, that no one has yet tried.

Imagine – if something so seemingly ridiculous – changes the entire world – for good – in a jiffy.

everyone in sync law


betting on the sync has at its essence betting on humanity – that people are good. that if we could just focus on connecting them, shortening the time between intention (daily curiosity) and action – that 7 billion people would/could indeed co-create/be the world our hearts know is possible.


arranging synchronicities – just at the edge of your courage..


we have enough good people.. perhaps what we’re missing is a mechanism to facilitate this sync/dance – .. (enough people, spaces/resources/tech)..

it's most unethical



different how..?

perhaps so many.. like Bucky and Illich and Jacobs and Holt and Papert and … saw the vision (of ie: networked individualism ness) but we, then, didn’t have the means, and/or the (zoom dance) focus, to carry it out. at least not with enough sync for it to work (by realizing the ongoingly not working ness is the working ness.. et al)

we never took/accepted/realized those x-d glasses/dimensions, in order to see our issue/problem/pickle as (in Jane’s words) organized complexity. and so – then – we were/are always getting distracted by the shiny.

we’re so intoxicated/trained/believing that certain spaces are where we go to live/learn/be (ie: conferences/classrooms/etc).. because that’s what’s been prepped for us by experts – and well – because that’s the way we’ve always done it.  so when we go to those spaces – we put ourselves on autopilot.. ie: turn ourselves off.. ready to be filled/changed.

we keep prepping for and then attending theses prepped spaces.. encouraging deadness. the rallying/repeating/regurgitating whatever has been prepped for us to rally/repeat/regurgitate. and since it’s often shiny, ie: seemingly better than what we have/experience now- and the space is designed around getting us in the mode/zone required. how could we not.

perhaps we trust 7 billion to slow down and listen, as if there were 7 billion classes/conferences/etc going on 24/7. ie: each moment an adventure. a year to be 5 again ish. just to see.

in the city – (Jane tells so vividly in ch 22 of death and life) eclectic ness on steroids. 24/7 aliveness. messy – yet all interconnected. all inclusive. chaordic. none of us are free if one of us is chained ness.

as the day – without getting the x-d ness of in the city.. we misunderstand the essence of trust. the 100% ness of it. the – partial freedom is no freedom ness. and so we end up experimenting with people who are (after 7ish hour days at what they’re supposed to do) too tired to be curious/alive/themselves.


Wim Elfrink:

if we can’t get something done in 6 months, we can’t get something done in 6 years. theory and practice have to come together..

David Graeber:

It’s high time, I think, to brush the entire argument aside. In fact, “communism” is not some magical utopia, and neither does it have anything to do with ownership of the means of production. It is something that exists right now—that exists, to some degree, in any human society, although there has never been one in which everything has been organized in that way, and it would be difficult to imagine how there could be. All of us act like communists a good deal of the time. None of us act like a communist consistently.

maybe it could. at least approaching a limit of betterness we have not yet seen.