– – – – –


Any form of money that is in public circulation. Currency includes both hard money (coins) and soft money (paper money). Typically currency refers to money that is legally designated as such by the governing body, but in some cultures currency can refer to any object that has a perceived value and can be exchanged for other objects.

Read more:


wikipedia small





currency (from Middle English: curraunt, “in circulation”, from Latin: currens, -entis) in the most specific use of the word refers to money in any form when in actual use or circulation, as a medium of exchange, especially circulating paper money. This use is synonymous with banknotes, or (sometimes) with banknotes plus coins, meaning the physical tokens used for money by a government.

A much more general use of the word currency is anything that is used in any circumstances, as a medium of exchange. In this use, “currency” is a synonym for the concept of money.

– – – – –



adding this page after listening to emerging leaders labs video – where someone said:

currency – the currents we can see

and so thinking – perhaps currency is closer to the 2nd definition given above: the fact of quality of being generally accepted or in use.

imagine if everyone got a do overevery day. that today/fresh/now-ness, that’s the current/flow-ness we see: we assume good. we open our eyes/ears.. and see all the stories.

everyday anew.

and then spending the next morning thinking over and over about.. alternatives to currency (ie: bitcoin – great idea, but rich money-wise have advantage – no?) – and about min income (- great idea, but perpetuating the idea of a need to trade for stuff, making us marketed people – 10 day cares ness – no?) a

and so then about – each person getting a certain amount of money (so then would people have more kids to get more money..?) and then about doing it every day (for equity sake – a daily – you get another go regardless) – and then about – why do we even need that thing for exchange. why can’t we just realize the abundance we live in (like a healthy/wealthy family) and let people have what they need (even if it’s just what they think they need, even if it’s out of greed, even if some take too much at first) – ie: what if we trusted you.. ness. and then – there’s always – what about the slackers – the free-loaders.. those who would take advantage. but who’s problem is this perception of taking advantage? taking advantage of what? of this abundance?

so (assumedly) deciding on some kind of min currency really comes down to the thinking/idea that people must have something to exchange – perhaps because we have to be in control – because we still believe that getting is the important thing. it really comes down to us (the ones who insist on some form of currency/regulation) being the insecure ones.

ie: so say there are people who keep taking more than they need (which would no doubt happen – detox ness).. tightening the reigns isn’t going to make that go away in the long run. modeling what really matters will. modeling (and the modelers modeling it in authenticity) that fittingness (ie: you being you, more than you gathering up things) matters more than any acquisition/hoarding – and that currency/exchange really has nothing to do with that.. is what will (eventually) be attractive to people. it’s like you let a person eat cookies all they want until they realize – it’s not the cookies that they really want. can we hasten that irrelevance (mindset) of our access to cookies..? to the point where we are ..

quiet enough to see


..the currents we can see  (even if we can’t) -ness

transparency as the new currency.. ness

trust as authentic trust – as in – not dependent on trustworthiness..

what if regulation isn’t making us richer and/or more orderly. what if regulation is making us poorer.. and less orderly..

what if…














what if money were no object


money ness









thinking on this from Rachel’s talk here:

P2P Foundation (@P2P_Foundation)
7/27/14 6:26 AM
▶ Rachel Botsman on The Reputation Economy | Am…: Rachel Botsman explores ‘The Reputation Economy: Savvy Use…
wrong…?  at 17 min
what if we assume it’s not all based on money.
so we need to:
1) jump right into no strings.. no exchange.. just what do you need.. what do you have ness (with tech to ground the chaos and hasten the lag time)
2) create some transitional phase – where perhaps, ie: everyone gets 20 tokens each day sort of thing.. to start modeling this.. everyday anew.. no judgment. while at the same time we’re shortening the time between intention and action – so offering goodness more space to breathe (ie: i think if we focus less on proving/documenting ourselves – even ie: reputation .. and leaving a legacy reputation, … if we truly felt free of that – and believed that we – all – got a go everyday –  i think we’d all be spending our days on things that mattered – and currency and reputation et al – would become irrelevant.

Glad to see everyone proudly tweeting their Uber passenger rating, the increasing algorithmic regulation of our lives happily unexamined

So when Uber and self-driving cars replace public transportation, who gets a ride? Oh right. The algorithm decides. Nice.

this is just like the thing where your SAT score is perfectly correlated to your parents’ income, isn’t it

see that’s precisely my concern with the passenger rating system. why won’t it reinscribe those racist practices?

because I’m really curious if this is how racist practices get reinscribed but *shrug* via an algorithm


i’m thinking we need a world where everyone gets a go – everyday. no strings attached.


Bill Viola on current ness

drop of water now ness


klout et al

currency, credential, reputation ness




resisting reduction manifesto