Michael Pokocky January 6, 2008 at 12:48 pm

{@ Lucas}

You put Edison as one example of networking but did you know that there was another man who actually refused the Nobel Prize and was in fact responsible for the invention of the AC current which while under the employ of Edison both men were at great dispute with one another.

Factor in this mystery man’s heritage and you can draw your own conclusions about who gets the prize and the fame in the history books.

I refer the reader to Nikola Tesla { http://www.teslasociety.com/biography.htm } where you can read all about who really was responsible for the world we live in today.

In citing Tesla/Edison I draw a direct observation to the fallibility of Networking today.

Even in our most guarded trusted relationships in a real life scenario as we see with Tesla and Edison there is the unsuspecting probability that the inevitable will happen as it did with Tesla and Edison.

The idea that {trusted relationships} can ever be built online is absolutely an improbability. The direct and indirect conversations taking into account every conceivable medium available to us on the web today are at most shallow and inevitably boring. Even more pronounced is the idea that Social Interaction is being promoted as the business tool of the now, notwithstanding the future. It hasn’t arrived.

I declare that mixing business with social interaction will inevitably and constantly result in {mistrust misrepresentation broken promised and failure to communicate}.

At best the Net is an opportunity to {BE CONNECTED} but with whom and with what?

Lucas Wyrsch January 5, 2008 at 9:43 am

According to the International Labor Organization in Geneva, Switzerland, there are almost 200 millions expatriates all over the world!

What share would this 3.03% of the global population make if the virtual country of expatriates were an independent state?

It would be the fifth most populated country in the world after China, India, USA and Indonesia!

But the virtual country of expatriates is no brick and mortar state, it’s already a digital notion.

Now try to enter into the wired world of social networking communities and try to imagine that they could be organized lake states, nations and countries!

You may have democracies, monarchies, open- and closed societies, even totalitarian states would be possible and dictatorships.

There are more stringent laws in some and other are more tolerant, but there still are rules
and codes of conducts.

Now try to imagine what happens when you leave your home country, be it by your free will or be it by expulsion.

Do you think that you could take with you all your connections?

That’s just impossible as most of the connections will remain brick and mortar and will be lost, once you’re away from your home country.

As an expatriate, you’ll emigrate to a host country, ok!

Now, try to imagine a new form of digital expatriates and you get a new form of immigrants and emigrants, people who leave a social network for another and people who immigrate with no connections at all and some other who take most of the connections with them and you’re quite near an incredible reality, I call LUCK!

What do we need in life to succeed?It’s LUCK!

Please feel free to have a look at Roger Hamilton “Key to Wealth“, where he explaines that L stands for LocationU for UnderstandingC for Connections andK for Knowledgeand you have the key to wealth, the key to success, the key to make more with your life than just vegetate at 0.01% of your potential!

Roger Hamilton’s “Key to Wealth” is a great presentation that explains you the power of the guanxi game!

There are millions of business schools around the world that offer you knowledge but there are still only very few social networking sites and only one ecademy that offer access to connections.

Think about one of the greatest inventors ever, Thomas Alva Edison who has founded one of the world’s most respected companies, GE and keep in mind that he only went to an official school during three months!

Thanks to his job as a telegraph operator he could create his mastermind groups that lead to his networks of connections that made him one of the most successful inventors ever!

Thomas Alva Edison, Andrew Carnegie and Napoleon Hill offer us all the understanding of the importance of networking.

The Chinese knew about the importance of networking already thousands of years ago!Ecademy’s cause is ‘to build the world’s largest Trusted Business Network by connecting people to each other – enabling knowledge, contacts and opportunities to be shared for World Wide Wealth’

Just me two cents

– Lucas

Michael Pokocky January 5, 2008 at 8:10 am

Where there is clarity there is no choice. Where there is choice, there’s misery.

Social networks as they exist now are better than nothing but are akin to slums of misery and profound confusion.

The people did not make the networks nor do they have a veto role in the rules that govern existing social networks.

I believe that we have reached enough people with the message, {Social Networking is on the Internet}. Now what? We see people joining in record numbers whatever is the best. That is human nature. How do they find what is the best, The news. But when the news pointed out that the best sites to join were the very ones our children were on we joined because we were curious. Our children seem to fair pretty well on the Net with their {gang} which is a group of friends that all know each other from school and join up to catch up on their social networks. But when big media tells us that Facebook is the place to go from LinkedIn it was amazing to see the record number of people joining Facebook without giving it a second of thought while rationalizing in their minds that their professional profile is a Linkedin profile and their social profile is a Facebook profile.

What is going on here? Human nature again. It is human nature to want to be young again. As Picasso said, “Every child is an artist. The problem is how to remain an artist once he grows up.”

{if} we are dependent then what does that mean? It means that we are not {thinking for ourselves}.

{if} we are independent then what does that mean? It means that we are deluding ourselves if we buy into the current idea of a social network. And furthermore we are not thinking for ourselves.

The common thread between this dualist question is that we are not {thinking} period!

We know through the demand for connecting with one another and the potential of the Net, which is, right now, in each of our individual imaginations, is enormous. Never in the history of humanity have we had the ability to connect to so many people.

The problem with the current models of social networking is their revenue models. They are built on advertising because nobody wants to pay for joining a social network. That is a given. Free is the standard, but someone has to pay for the burn rate per month of dollars to run these enormous networks.

The solution is at hand, but it has not been clearly defined yet.

Clarity. Once we’ve got that there will be no choices. Therefore there will be no misery.

At this point then we will all be independent in the truest sense of the word and our only dependency will be to our creative potential.

There is much to still consider Jay and keep on going because one day someone is going to have an Ahh! moment and that is when things will change for the user for the better.

Our grandparents had it right. Right work. Right reason. Right results.

I don’t think this is the case right now because we are dependent on {trusting} the current Networks to be doing right by us, but unfortunately they are not. And who is making a killing off of us? Every site that can attract a free user to its network is making a buck off of us.

I say its time we the people realize this and take back what is rightfully ours: our personal networks of individuals that we have invested time and energy to build and to figure out a way to be of service to one another at our ends of the net so that we can create a win-win-win situation for all.

Now that is {Clarity}!!!!!

Comments on this entry are closed.

{ 1 trackback }

Previous post:

Next post: