[00:00:00] Sara, thank you so much for joining me. I’m delighted that we made this work. We’ve been playing email tag for a while to make this happen. So thank you for being here. Would you like to take a minute and tell our audience a bit about yourself?

Hi. Yeah, thank you so much for inviting me and not giving up on me and making this schedule work.

Yeah. So, my name is Sara. I am originally from the Czech Republic, although as you can tell from my accent, I spent a long time in the UK. I’ve got a bit of a weird background cuz I actually studied archeology and evolutionary anthropology at Oxford and then I returned back to the Czech Republic around the time that Covid started.

And my entire career was spent in various tech startups, especially centering around artificial intelligence, and also community building, which is why I’m excited to be on this podcast. And basically when I returned back to the Czech Republic, I found out at the start of Covid that people who haven’t necessarily studied technology are kind of scared of it.

There’s like this natural knee-jerk reaction, especially [00:01:00] towards kind of big buzzwords like artificial intelligence. And I thought, well, actually during a time of crisis, it’s imperative from an evolutionary perspective to embrace technology and understand it rather than shy away from it because it’ll help us survive the crisis.

So I started demystifying and teaching and popularizing these kind of big like kind of grandiose terms for the general public. And actually that kind of led me back to really missing archeology massively, because I kind of see that the history of humanity is nothing but a history of innovation and how we deal with that.

So we started a new research group. Here at the Czech Technical University called Chaos Athlete, where we’re actually studying the complexity of social structures and the anatomy of civilization. We want to basically figure out why humans behave and organize themselves the way that they do and how they interact with technology to basically adapt their social structures to the conditions around them.

So, yeah, I think we’ve got plenty to talk about.

That is [00:02:00] so cool. I’m bouncing. I mean, we’re video off because of connection issues on both ends. Actually, you don’t know this, but my connection is a little bit weak too. But I’m actually bouncing, like, I’m excited.

That’s great. I’m smiling ear to ear, so, I think it’s a mutually happy podcast.

This is great .

Yeah. Can you describe for me what community means to you?

Yeah, I think, what I’m really interested in is kind of the parallels with other animals and other kind of groups of organisms. So for example, like swarm intelligence and like the whole hive mind aspect is super interesting for me.

I think that, for me community in the human context is some kind of organic natural emergence of complexity, like social complexity where you basically outsource some of the things that you’re not able to do as an individual onto a group of people. However, a community also for me is organic.

So for example, for me, a nation state that’s got, you know, 10, 20, a hundred [00:03:00] million people, that’s not really a community anymore. That’s basically using symbolism to keep a massive group of people that otherwise wouldn’t be able to stick together. Just cause of the sheer size of the group to kind of like put them into like some kind of structure.

And then you need all the ministries and all the, you know, federal bureaus and what have you to kind of like keep that artificially together. For me, the best kind of example of a community is a tribe. And Robin Dunbar, who’s a great author, also teaches at Oxford Evolutionary Psychology.

He talks about the fact that, you know, you have that kind of organic number of maybe 150 up to 250 people that kind of like, you know, that’s the group that survives and exists during a zombie apocalypse. But like, keeping it bigger than that, we don’t really have the cognitive capacity to maintain more close functional relationships than that.

So that really interests me and that’s what community means to me.

Hmm. I love it. There’s so much there that’s fun. So I agree that there seems to be a maximum number. I had come at it from a very specific perspective. So, [00:04:00] in common value or common profit, in order for that to work, each and every member of the community needs to get actual value from the person standing right next to them.

And functionally speaking at some point, adding one additional member doesn’t necessarily add value unless that specific member has a really valuable specialty. And even at that point, at some point, there’s no new really valuable specialty that we as a community need to be going and looking for.

Right? So, there is a functional limit and I hadn’t put a number on it. 150 to 250 seems reasonable. Maybe the number is higher. Maybe it’s not. But from a value perspective, you know, if there’s 200 people in the community, the 201st person is incrementally so small that it only matters to me if the value they bring is enormous.

Mm-hmm. Yeah. I mean that for me is super exciting in terms of the context of [00:05:00] blockchain, for example, because like how we describe or traditionally see value in at least like the Euro-American society, it’s usually like a transfer, like a direct transfer or something. So it can be, you know, a gift for Christmas.

It can be a financial transaction that’s probably like the most the kind of like most maybe poignant one that our society’s built around. But blockchain is really interesting that there is a peer to peer communication and that you have these pods of people that are, it started off, you know, maybe trading cryptocurrencies, but you can suddenly trade, you know, and if you look beyond the hype of like just trading stupid pictures of monkeys, for example, NFTs, and making sure that you can actually trade behavior.

The fact that you can basically swap community engagement and it’s written forever on blockchain, a decentralized way, that for me is fascinating. And that’s actually something I don’t have answers to yet, but it’s something that we want to study with our research group, whether the way that people behave in the web three and the metaverse space, whether that’s actually really similar to the way that we behaved on the [00:06:00] Savannah, like a million, you know, years ago, for example.

And I think that seeing the kind of similarities between our kind of natural organic behavior in the physical world and in, for example, the web three space. I think there’s a lot to unpack there. So I’m curious what the research will bring, but I’ve got just hypotheses right now. No answers yet.

Oh, so much fun. But you know, asking the right question matters perhaps a lot more than even having an answer.

Yeah. Yeah, it’s true. And it’s a massive shame that the educational sector, I mean, in the UK and the US it’s, you know, a lot better. But in the Czech Republic, we still, so part of Austria-Hungary, so this really fussy old empire that the Habsburgs used to run here in Europe for several hundred years, and our educational system, I mean, there’s some great ex exceptions, but like it hasn’t really moved from the rigid, okay, you study physics or you study the humanities or you study computer science.

And for me it’s all about the interdisciplinarity. And if we want to understand community, we need to blend AI, we need to blend web three, we need [00:07:00] to blend anthropology, evolution, philosophy.

And I really hope that like global education will go in that direction, kind of lifelong interdisciplinary learning. And I think that will help us understand community on a much deeper level as well.

And we need to, we need to, the conversation around community hasn’t been pushed forward in a hundred years.

You’re absolutely right. Yeah. And I think that we understand community in a really kind of put in the work, like I used to, you know, work in the digitalization of politics for example, there’s a political party, they buy this like organization digitalization software, but then they realize that they need to hire someone to look after it and to actually manage the community. And that’s a step that they’re often like not prepared to take because they think, oh, well, it’ll become automated. It’ll happen automatically.

Well, it won’t, like you still need to manage these softwares. You need to input the data. And then you have whole new questions, you know, popping up in the era of digitalization about the right to be forgotten. Data privacy, whether the data’s stored securely, cybersecurity in general.

And I’m kind of like wondering [00:08:00] whether a lot of organizations are ready to take that next step in digitalizing their communities with, you know, bearing all these other things in mind that they need to look out for. So I just think it’s one of the core topics that’s unfortunately often seen as like a wishy-washy, soft skills emotive topic that actually like builds the core of our humanity.

And if we wanna progress further and, you know, colonize Mars, we need to understand community. Otherwise we’re screwed. Pardon my French .

I completely agree and I’m with you. We need to stop calling them soft skills. I have started calling them me and my own conversations and with friends I’ve started calling them human skills.

Yeah, yeah, absolutely.

To me, there’s human skills. There’s the skills that allow us to be interconnected, and to grow in our connectedness to become better humans. And then there’s all the other stuff.

Exactly. I mean, we’re for example, one of the to kind of like go off on that, one of the topics and [00:09:00] projects we’re doing with our research group right now is with Deloitte and we’re kind of cooperating Deloitte, Czech Republic, Deloitte, America, but also other offices across Europe and middle East and Africa.

And one of the things that we wanna figure out is whether managers, and like in general, like people decide more or make more authentic decisions in virtual reality settings than in kinda like in real life. And we wanna understand like if for example, a employee comes to you and they say, look, I can’t finish this project today or this week, or I’m behind on schedule because I need to look after my kids.

Whether you are much more likely to answer them honestly, and to maybe like more kind of fruitfully solve the discussion or the problem at hand than you would in real life, because you’ve got all the pressures of community as well. You know, will they talk about you in the corridor or what? By the water cooler.

Will there be like other repercussions regarding like various like HR processes, et cetera. Like how are you actually going to make a decision? And I think that, often, we’re not actually very authentic in our decision making that would make the [00:10:00] community healthier because we’re scared or we have certain like prejudices or like unconscious biases or whatever you might call it towards the situation itself.

So we’re kind of digging into that a little bit. And I think that the, like virtual reality and the kind of like metaverse, not in the sense of the buzzword, but in the sense of like the cloud civilization that is forming around us, that we have a huge opportunity to test out scenarios, you know, not in real life.

There were plenty of political regimes and horrific managerial practices that in the past you had no other way of testing out, but to actually run the experiment in your own company or in your own country now, you can relatively like, you know, free of emotive charge or like meaning that you don’t have to fire or kill people like we did in history.

You can actually test out whether certain scenarios will work and be productive for community or not. So yeah, I see a huge, huge enriching, yeah, of community through technology in the future.

That is so amazing. I love it. Yeah, a hundred percent. Like, let’s [00:11:00] learn without somebody’s head being on the chopping block.

That’s a fantastic approach.

Yeah, I mean, yeah, we hope to, so basically the core of our research we’re taking Plato’s Republic because he kind of described the ideal society there, but he described it like he died a long time ago. So we tend to see, you know, ancient Greek philosophers as being right about pretty much everything.

What he was basically describing is eugenics. It’s pretty horrific. Like he basically talks about like three aspects of society and he says, well, you’ve got the philosophers, they’re the most important. Well obviously he’d say that, then you’ve got the warriors who kind of protect the like ideal polish, like the ideal society.

And then you’ve got the majority, the plebs or the plebeians. And they have no right to decide anything because they’re basically dumb and then shouldn’t be allowed to vote. He even discusses the way that like different people should be married and produce the optimal, most healthy children for the kind of society to survive.

And that basically, like you give them the illusion of choice that they can marry however they like, but actually like in the background, the [00:12:00] philosophers like fix these boats and they put people together that they think are healthy basically to create like this master race that will like support the policy in the future.

And it’s actually, when you look at it in the context of, you know, the 20th century, it’s pretty nuts. And what we wanna do is basically show that whenever in the past someone talked about creating a perfect society is a hugely dystopian, and that people have, you know, that they decide for themselves and they have certain kind of embedded morals and ethics, but that it can work organically.

And for me, freedom is fundamentally important and the freedom of the individual. And I don’t think that’s mutually exclusive for the functional society. And that’s something that we wanna investigate as well, because academia’s pretty bad at, you know, looking at the role of the individual unless it’s a famous person.

And we really wanna understand how the individual, through free choice can actually like make their life and make the life of the society around them better and more free. And that it doesn’t necessarily dampen the fact that you’ll have an organized, functional society. It might have to be on a smaller [00:13:00] scale.

But nonetheless it can be, you know, sustainable and pretty resilient. So again, those are just my, you know, personal hypotheses. But we want to create, basically this huge VR environment and really create Plato’s Republic to test out, like, you know, are you going to rebel against the philosophers? Are you going to create your own policy?

How are you going to behave when put in front of a kind of ethically difficult decision. So, yeah, we’ll see what comes out of it. We can do another podcast maybe in years’ time and check in on that.

I suspect that you’re gonna have an open invitation, Sara.

Oh, Thank you. And likewise, I can’t wait to do a collaboration, maybe.

Yeah. This is very cool. I, so once a month I actually host an open conversation and people just show up and decide that they wanna have a conversation about community. Last month we talked about the role of the individual in community, and the conversation lasted about hour and a half, two hours long.

And the conclusion of that conversation was that community works because of the individual.

[00:14:00] Yes. Yeah, yeah, exactly. I mean, this is really, really interesting in terms of like European history as well because a lot of the times the individual had to be literally demonized. But you know, and often when we speak about individualism, we speak about, like, some we equated with selfishness for some reason.

And you know, we’ve got this idea of the social contract. You have to put society like before you. But you have to ask yourself like what the motivation was for drilling that into people’s heads. A lot of the time the motivation was so that they, you know, pay taxes, or they go to law. And you know, where you are sitting in America right now and America’s one of those examples where people were actually like, well no, I don’t wanna pay taxes without representation.

That doesn’t make any sense. And there are these points of history that are often actually not taught in history books or not enough, when actually both like individualism and like, kind of like not be trampled on. And I don’t necessarily mean that in a political sense at all, but like having that kind of like self-determination didn’t really go like with the higher [00:15:00] picture of what the powers that they wanted the society to evolve into.

And this kind of like idea between like letting the individuals have a say and like creating individuals and free individuals in the educational system. And then trying to maintain, you know, like a huge empire or a huge republic and making sure that people don’t rebel too much. Those often go head to head.

And again, I think kind of the fact that we’ve got technology where people can kind of like, you know, escape to and do their own stuff and do their own business and do their own, build their own relationships with people from across the globe, it’s really challenging that like, you know, centuries or millennia old kind of dichotomy.

So, yeah. Excited about what’s to come.

Me too. And it sounds like you agree, and I’m delighted you do. I’ve started referring to it, and I actually haven’t said this on the air yet, but I’ve started referring to the dichotomy of the individual in the community as a false dichotomy.

Yes. Yes. I agree with that. Sorry. Yeah, go for it. I’m just too excited, to keep jumping in.

No, I [00:16:00] love it. We’re both so excited. We can’t hold back. It’s fantastic. So I have actually referred to community as the Superpower of Humanity and what’s cool about the way that you look at it, and particularly in this conversation we’re having right now where the individual makes it work, that means that it’s an opt-in superpower.

Mm-hmm. Yeah. Definitely. And I love the fact that you’re talking about a false dichotomy because as a cool anthropologist, I mean like, you know, last century, one of the fathers of like modern anthropology and definitely the approach of structuralism called leic Straus, not the genes, but the guy.

But a anthropologist of the same name. And he basically talks about the fact that humans can’t really think in anything else but opposites or in dichotomies. And often that is a false way to think. Like, for example we really fail to think in parallels or that like, you know, same things can be happening at the same time.

And you can really see that, for example, here in Europe the European Union’s [00:17:00] reaction to blockchain, because on blockchain you can have, you know, decentralized, autonomous organizations. So these DAOs that, for example, the state of Wyoming already kind of enabled, you basically don’t have a state controlled currency.

Because like crypto, you know, it’s encrypted. Like it says in the name. It cuts out, the middle man, it cuts out the third party. It’s purely peer to peer. And suddenly you’ve got this kind of like almost Parallel society emerging. And I was a part of an NGO here in Prague that basically emerged after the fall of communism.

There was a very famous essay by Barla Bender who spoke about the parallel polish. And the NGO is great. And it’s basically kind of crypto anarchy, but it’s also kind of like, thinking about like how these technologies change the structure of society. And basically what it broadly says is that you’ve got this kind of official layer of society, but then you’ve got this underground as well.

And the underground doesn’t have to be anarchists with walls cocktails. That can be my grandma who can store her pension in crypto. You know, it can be anyone else who’s basically like kind of [00:18:00] existing on one hand, yes, as a part of the nation state, but on the other hand, like creating completely their own new local communities in a decentralized way.

We could really see that at the start of Covid, that before the states had a chance to react, the people have already self-organized and they were, you know, sewing face masks or they were like bringing each other food or like disinfectants, or whatever that might have been. And that was phenomenal, that was swarm intelligence at play, and that’s what I found fascinating.

That you don’t need a, like a higher power to like, let you know what you need to do, that people organize themselves and lo and behold, it all still works. So I agree that community, especially as we, you know, in hundreds of years, like become a multi-planetary species, we need to understand that completely, fundamentally in order to be able to survive in other contexts as well.

Mm-hmm. Amazing. Love it, it’ll be interesting to go down this road now that you’ve sort of opened the door, but what makes an amazing community leader?

Ooh, that’s a good [00:19:00] question. So again, we’re. Yeah. We’re actually, we’re discussing this with a friend of mine, Thomas Deron, who’s a great Belgian, but working in here in Prague.

We’re working on this Deloitte VR research project together, and we’re actually exploring the idea of leadership. And the funny thing is that, for example, in Czech you don’t actually have the word for leader. The word for leader in Czech is the equivalent to Fira, which, you know, we don’t wanna go down that road again after the second World War.

Yeah. Nope. Nope.

So the actual, like, what you say as well on your website, you know, and the kind of like different elements of community, like a shared language. If the community doesn’t even have a proper linguistic expression for leader, how can you expect for, you know, that type of leadership to emerge?

We actually use the English word for it here in the Czech Republic and I think that, yeah, it’s really interesting and I actually think that, you know, leadership, traditionally you had to uphold a structure that is able to you know, defend itself, provide food for people because you’ve got division of labor, so you need to make sure that the [00:20:00] people who do, you know,

fine arts and crafts can still buy foods and supplies because otherwise they’ll starve to death. So you’ve got this whole supply chain that needs to be working because you’ve got likely more than 250 people. So there’s bits of society that need to look after themselves. But I think that often, like a leader, for example, when he’s too benevolent or he or she is more too benevolent, it’s often seen as a weakness.

And I actually think like that we’re again, like entering a new age where, It’s a question of whether humans have evolved enough to be able to kind of take this seriously and absorb it. But actually, like a leader is the one who gives people the like true freedom without being scared of the reaction.

And I don’t think that we’re seeing that too much these days because. Fundamentally what you have with, for example, nation states right now, it’s like a toxic relationship. You know, it’s like the best relationships are that the person can leave at any moment. But they don’t want to because they’re happy with you.

It’s not a healthy relationship of the other person’s coerced to staying with you, you know, or else they’ll have to pay a fine go to [00:21:00] prison. And right now, for example, what I think would be brilliant from leaders of like, you know, modern Nation states to say look, if for example, our country isn’t working for you and you wanna have a citizenship in another country, you can go and organize that.

And we don’t mind. And I think that that would show such chutzpah from the side of the nation state, that they’re not afraid to lose their cleon tell, because the people are just so happy to be living there, for example. I think that would be great, but one can only dream.

I know that there’s some countries that do it, like Estonia for example, or Panama, that like are pretty like liberal with giving citizenships to like even people who, you know, weren’t born there. So there are experiments happening with this and I have a few friends who are so-called country hackers where they might be, you know have health insurance in one country be ma making money and paying taxes in another country, have a citizenship in a third country.

But you need to have really high technological education and like general education to be able to do that. And also you need to have the money to pay for all the admin around it. So I think those kind of principles of country hacking became more [00:22:00] democratized. That would, I think show leadership in a whole different light.

Sorry, long-winded answer.

May I float a concept that you might dive right into?

I’m sorry.

I said, may I float a concept related to leadership that you might have a lot of fun with?

Oh yeah, absolutely. So, sorry, I just didn’t hear you for a second, but absolutely, go for it.

What I’ve, all this research that I’ve been doing into community and the conversations I’ve been having, and help me see that there are two types of leadership, and I don’t think this is a false dichotomy.

There is static leadership and fluid leadership. And static leadership is a relatively modern concept, whereas fluid leadership is a very human concept, and what that means is, let’s say we’re out hunting. I can be certain Sara, that if you and I are out hunting, I can be absolutely certain that I personally will not always be able to see better than you.

And [00:23:00] so from a human perspective, what we want to do is succeed. We want to achieve our goal. We want to get the prey, and we must be able to inside our hunting party, trade leadership fluidly with absolutely zero friction. Because at some point you will see better than I. Trade leadership with zero friction.

And so I’ve been calling that fluid leadership.

Yes. Yeah. I love that. It’s the whole aspect of ego as well, isn’t it? Like I for example, sometimes look at political campaigns and I think, wow, you’re putting so many millions of dollars into a campaign like that, you know, that you might not even win what happens to those millions of dollars afterwards?

You know, maybe that’s a whole other question, but that’d be better invested in science or something, but I’m just tooting my own horn. But yeah, I completely agree. And when the structures that we live in are not really they’re not really made for that, right? So if you have a president or a prime minister or a king or queen or whatever there isn’t really a mechanism in place that [00:24:00] says without assassination or revolution or another vote.

That’s basically of just like a assassination, just without like, you know, dead bodies. Let’s trade this. Like this is not working. Let’s trade this. And this kind of like really unhealthy tribalism and like clinging onto power is, in my opinion, completely destructive. And I have a friend, for example, who runs a kind of investment, like a VC kind of hedge fund in a hedge fund and a BC fund in Switzerland.

And he’s saying that he’s right now, putting mechanisms in place to make sure that when he gets, you know, a little senile, which he says will happen when he’s like 45, which, you know, he’s being way too waters. But when he basically becomes out of touch, he wants to put mechanisms in place that are not going to, you know, invite a coup or like some kind of unhealthy situation, but that will enable him to kind of bow out with grace and be fluidly kind of replaced because like he knows that he cannot keep the power forever.

And, you know, I see this all the time. Like you go into like a meeting or like, you go into some kinda like big strategy like discussion, and you see people who’ve been on the [00:25:00] board and their executives have been there, you know, for 35 years, and you think, God damn, like you can’t be like open-minded about stuff anymore, like you’ve been here for way too long.

And if you’re doing great at this, then fine. Like, you know, God forbid I’m the last person who’d want to take power away from someone. If you’re doing great after 35 years, awesome. But you should have the fluidity to give someone who’s a clerk in your company the opportunity, you know, because like there might be a fresh point of view that you’re just not seeing, and yeah, I think we haven’t really caught up with that yet as the western world.

It’s so weird that you and I are looking at sort of original human approaches and realizing that we haven’t caught up to ourselves.

Exactly. And that’s, I think, that’s actually I think a big problem that kind of early archeology and anthropology and I’m speaking about it just because that’s what I know, right.

But a big problem that those disciplines have created academically, like early 20th century, maybe late 19th century, [00:26:00] is that we’ve just seen like social evolution as always being that of progress and that we always kind of think that, you know, the sun shines out of our respective behinds and that basically the civilization that we’ve created, that is possible.

You mean it doesn’t?

Well, you know, out of mine it does, and I’m sure out of yours as as well,

but that we kind of think that we can do no wrong and that, we’ve kind of reached the pinnacle of civilization. But actually, you know, like a sub-Saharan like tribal fluid organization can actually be a lot more resilient. And like we’ve lived for 99% of human history as tribal hunter and gatherers, like we haven’t like lived in civilizations of, you know, 20 million people plus in any given nation state.

So it’s a fraction of our history that we’re actually living in these structures, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that they’re better. And you know, I often go to these like discussions for academic or like from a popularization perspective where we discuss, for example, the role of democracy in like the modern world.

And like, we had this discussion with a great historian [00:27:00] and we were both kind of on the same side with this. Like we’ve created these fetishes out of words like democracy, but what does that actually mean? Like democracy and ancient Greece, like, a small fraction of the population was actually allowed to vote.

It wasn’t democracy. It was a very elite endeavor where like the average people like were not allowed to even come close to the ballot box because they were considered like unfit for the task. And like we clinging onto these like Post Renaissance “S” words that have become empty, they’ve become just buzzwords of the media without actually sitting down and thinking .

You know, is democracy the best way of organizing a society? And that doesn’t mean that, again, it’s a dichotomy where the only other possible solution is an autocracy. No. Like, there’s thousands of different ways how you can make a society work. Like there’s thousands of ways from like various social context around the globe, but we’re just not even happy to even look at them because we think that we’ve just, you know, got it all figured out when clearly we don’t.

And I’m always wondering like and in extremist scenario, You know, when we do [00:28:00] colonize Mars, we’re going to be starting with really small groups of people, right? Maybe like 10, 20, 30, 50. What’s gonna happen when someone steals your like morning ration of dried eggs? You know, after nine months, like you’re not going to be thinking whether that person’s from France or America or China or Russia.

You’re gonna be thinking. I don’t have anything to eat today. And you’re going to be thinking about murder a hundred percent. But that’s going to cross someone’s mind. And you’re not gonna be really helped by like the Napoleonic code from the 19th century. You’re gonna be helped by understanding human social evolution.

And I think that we really need to get back to basics if we wanna advance as humanity. Sorry, I’m getting too excited.

Oh, I’m with you. I so am with you. Yes, amazing. This is what happens when you take two community geeks and hand them a loaded gun. And by loaded gun, I mean a mic that they’re allowed to speak into.

Yeah. Yeah, exactly. Exactly. So, I’m curious how you perceive community.

Mm. Beautiful. [00:29:00] Community, to me is the, it actually, your description was beautiful. To me it is the most basic highest level of human collection. You know, I’ve looked at it in a couple of different ways.

One of the ways that I look at it, which is a lot of fun for me is that we are first a multicellular being. And so our cells work together to make our body and they work together to make us into this being that’s really cool. And what we’ve done as an animal is we’ve taken that, ourselves, working together to make this really cool body.

And we’ve taken that to the next level. And in a very real sense, I see humans as meaningfully the opposite of tigers.

Mm-hmm. Yep. Yeah, I see what you mean.

Where tigers are extraordinary, beautiful, rabid killing machines that do really, really well alone. Humans are more or less the nature’s attempt to see what the opposite might look like.

Humans [00:30:00] alone are, you know, not particularly impressive as an animal, but humans together are extraordinary.

Yes, exactly. It’s like that man in black quote or men in black quote when Tommy Jones says like, you know, man is an impressive animal, but humans are you know, a really dumb species.

And it’s, I think that you’ve got both sides of that, right? I think that like humans are, they have huge possibilities when they work together. And I think that this whole kind of like, high mind approach, and, you know, the whole like decentralization of knowledge that you see happening here, thanks to the internet.

It’s just incredible. Like, you know, 200 years ago, you’d be lucky if you’ve got like a basic education now anyone can have any information that they want at the tip of their fingertips. So, I think that’s just fantastic. And at the same time, it’s not mutually exclusive with being a strong individual and, you know, following your dreams and having a good life.

And I see a lot of that, you know, having spoken, and I love your definition. And you know, having spoken a lot in the [00:31:00] late last like, you know, two years about artificial intelligence, for example you know, when I say to people look like a lot of jobs can be automated and that can actually mean that as a society we can shift into the post-industrial model where you don’t work like nine to five Monday to Friday, and you know, you are meant to be proud of that because I don’t want to, I mean, I’m not a lazy person.

But at the same time, I don’t wanna spend, you know first 18 years in education or 20 or 25 depending how high you go. Then like 40 years in a job and then get a golden handshake and then die like that. I don’t think that that’s what humans are designed for. We’ve got more capabilities than that.

And, but when at the same time you give people that kinda like philosophical question. Aha, so what would you do if you could only work like two days a month? Their first reaction is like that they feel guilty, you know, people like feel guilty, having free time, being creative, like actually enjoying their lives.

And they feel that the majority of the time they have to suffer, and save for rent. And that’s kind of like their life’s goal. And then like when they have free time, they kind of say, okay, maybe two [00:32:00] hours of Netflix, and that’s enough for me. And so many people are so miserable. So I’m trying to figure out how, as well, we can like rethink free time, rethink how we spend, and structure our lives, and again, understanding community will be pivotal to making changes in that.

Wow. What a powerful question. What would you do if you only had to work two days a month?

Yeah. What would you do?

You know what, I don’t have any answer to that.

Yeah. No, me either. That’s the thing. I don’t either, because I’m probably like, you know, even if I won the lottery or something, I’d probably still carry on working.

Well definitely, you know, doing science ,and actually I could probably fund my research group, which would be nice. Oh, that sounds good. Actually have money as a scientist. That sounds awesome.

I would, you know what, you’re right. I would have lots and lots and lots of meaningful conversations about community.

Yes. Yeah. Doing what you actually love, right?

Yeah.

Yeah. I love that. I love that. [00:33:00]

Amazing. Sara, you have been phenomenal. I end my interviews typically with three questions. The first is for the people that have been as electrified as I have by this conversation, where can they you?

Oh, thank you very much.

So I’ve got a link tree Sara Pollak and you’ve got all my like various interviews there and also all my social media. So I think Instagram is probably where I may be most active, but I do like plenty of content with my research group Chaos as well. So I’ll ping you the link for link so you can catch up with me.

Yes, Sara Polak. Thank you.

Yes. Awesome. Thank you. Second question. This is a curve ball. This one’s loaded. Is there a question that you wish I had asked you but have not.

Ooh. Actually, no, not really. You asked me like, the most important one, which I really love, like how I would describe community, like at the very beginning.

And I loved that you know, there’s plenty of directions in which we [00:34:00] could go, whether that’s, kind of politics or how people kind of like perceive, you know, education, how they wanna educate themselves how people approach their jobs, their relationships their religion. But I think that all of that, if there’s one thing that I want my answers like to kind of spark in people, it’s curiosity and it’s to challenge everything around you because not, , you know, being a spoiled brat and just like being angry at the world.

But just realizing that every single, so whether it’s the way that currency is minted, whether it’s the way that the school education system is kind of set up, the welfare system, anything like the flag that you pledge allegiance to, that they’re fantastic, but they’re all symbols. And they’re all symbols created with a very specific purpose.

And I just want people to think critically about that, and I think that one, if the state, and if the society gave kind of more space to this kind of free thinking, then you know, you wouldn’t have the need for crazy conspiracy theories because there would be an openness. People would be demonized for having various opinions, and you could actually [00:35:00] have a good old kind of, Ancient Greek philosophical discussion about like important things that matter.

And I don’t think that that space is being really healthily created. Definitely not on social media right now. So I just want people to kind of respect each other regardless of the opinions that they have, and try to actually answer the big questions in life so that we can move forward as a society.

And I hope that this podcast can just like, help spark that curiosity at the very least. And thank you for asking brilliant questions.

Thank you. Oh my goodness. Thank you. And me too. That is exactly what I hope for. Third question. What’s next? What’s next for community? What’s next for this discuss?

Yeah. I think what’s next for community is web three a hundred percent. Like, I see a huge, huge potential in that I see people either escaping to it, like I see it as a form of escapism and people starting their companies there. There’s education like possibilities for education there as well.

So for example, the open source project of POW apps which is basically like a proof of attendance [00:36:00] protocol. So you get this kind of like minted N F T, where if you go to a talk or you go to a conference, you can get this like essentially like virtual sticker that’s unique to you and written on blockchain.

You can change the way that you record history. So history until now has pretty much been written by victor’s or by very influential people that want to create a certain image of themselves. But I can tell you as an archeologist, at least the way I see it, is that history is like one massive PR campaign.

You know, you don’t have the kind of stories of the homeless, you don’t have the stories of the marginalized groups. You don’t have the stories of people who disagreed with the regime because they get very useful, obliterated out of that history. So blockchain is giving us, it’s a huge step up from web two, which is a very kind of, especially on social media.

You know, you put on cleavage and you get 5,000 likes because that’s the way the algorithms are structured. I think Web three is a lot more complex and I think it gives us the possibility of creating 3D communities, but in the cloud and regardless of the physical geopolitical structures that we have on like physical [00:37:00] earth.

So I’m really fascinated by that. I kind of give it the term that I kind of figured out would be pretty cool, which is cloud civilizations. And that’s actually something that.

I love it. That was amazing. I’m a hundred percent with you. That was beautiful. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you so much for in inviting me and I’ll definitely, we’ll pee each other and we’ll make some kind of research collab happen. That’d be great.

Yes, we will.

Thanks for joining us this week on Elements of Community.

Make sure to visit our website, ElementsOfCommunity.us, where you can subscribe to the show in iTunes, Stitcher, Spotify, or via rss, so you’ll never miss a show. While you’re at it, if you found value in this show, we’d appreciate a rating on iTunes, or if you’d simply tell a friend about the show, that would help us out too.

Be sure to tune in next week for our next episode.