Thanks to the Long Island Press for the kind words ...

Citizen Journalists

Long Island Blogs Tackle Topics From Politics To Sports To Rude Behavior In The Hamptons...And Beyond

By Long Island Press Staff

"It's 2 a.m., and that pepperoni pizza isn't nearly as enjoyable as it was four hours ago. You click on your ungodly expensive cable/satellite TV system, and despite hundreds of channels, there is nothing to watch.
That mode of leisure exhausted, you boot up your computer, because billions of websites can't deny you enjoyment, can they? But even then, it can be hard to see the forest for the trees, as you might scan hundreds of uninspired and/or un-updated pages that make you wish you had settled for the salad.
Fear not. The citizen journalist has your back. From our own acid-tongued Chick Dubinsky to LI master maven Lou Savinetti (http://longislandideafactory.blogspot.com), they bring thoughts and news the mainstream press never could."

Read the entire article here:

http://longislandpress.com/main.asp?SectionID=2&SubSectionID=2&ArticleID=13617&TM=83529.21

"One Long Island" Metachart 10.5.07

(Click on image for larger view)

Long Island Idea Bank: Part Two

Just as we proposed in the early 90s with a "Land Bank" for the Town of Oyster Bay (Oyster Bay 2000) as a means of protecting and preserving open space and redeveloping underutilized or improperly utilized parcels for the public good thus protecting and developing one of the Town's important "assets" we now look to the Long Island Idea Bank as a way of protecting and "developing" another important Long Island asset: our immense capacity for innovation and potential for productive collaboration. In short, our brainpower and ideas.

There is no doubt that Long Island possesses and has access to some of the finest minds on the planet. We have not, to date to any great extent, been able to marshall this ability for the collective good of all the residents on Long Island. An "idea bank" while not a new idea in itself. is a necessary component in the overall structure of the "One Long Island" project we are proposing in that there needs to be a central clearinghouse of ideas (in all stages of completion) for us to draw from and contribute to. We might also call it the Long Island Idea Library.

The Long Island Idea Bank concept, as all "One Long Island" projects must be viewed in concert with all the other components of our proposal. The idea is to collaborate and coordinate, not to continue to maintain separate disjointed static organizations or to create a new "super" or "meta" bureaucracy.

More in Part Three.

Good reading ...

"A range of organisations - with direct experience of working with diverse groups in society - has produced guidance or can offer advice on how to effectively involve different groups in decision making." (click for entire article)

Long Island Idea Bank: Part One

Meta Regionalism: Part One

How far can we extend the "One Long Island" and "Long Island 3.0" concepts?

Can we envision the concept of inter-collaborative regional "meta organizations" both here in New York and elsewhere?

First, obviously, we need to prove our theories here on Long Island. But clearly, if structured properly, if inclusive enough, if we are able to "filter out" negative and destructive elements and focus on continually innovating, collaborating and "building bridges," there is really no theoretical end point.

It is almost as if we are creating a non-governmental based and voluntary "Virtual Federalism" or a "Meta Federalism" of sorts. Diversity creates multiple options and opportunities, but there is a recognition of a common "collaborative" organizational requirement for the common good. Now if we can only debate the issues without the overt personal attacks, we may actually be able to compete in the world in the long term.

Large scale change of a type we are proposing is similar to listening to an Ornette Coleman composition. At first listen it sounds completely arbitrary and disorganized. But the more you listen the layers of complexity reveal themselves and the organization, logic and beauty become evident.

We must train ourselves to think critically, but more expansively.

More in part two.

Training Long Island "Change Agents": Part One

9 Tips for Change Agents

Turner's role at XBS is that of 'chief change agent.' Here are her nine lessons for would-be change agents.

From: Issue 05 October 1996 Page 124 By: Nicholas Morgan

The job title on Chris Turner's business card simply reads "Learning Person."

"It's like 'citizen of the world,'" she says. "Ultimately my hope is that people in all parts of XBS will see themselves as Learning Persons."

As nonhierarchical as her job title sounds, Turner's role at XBS is that of "chief change agent." Here are her nine lessons for would-be change agents.

1. Be open to data at the start. "Even if you think you know what you're doing, chances are you don't know what you could be doing. Open up your mind to as much new thinking as you can absorb. You may find different and better ideas than the ones your organization started with."

2. Network like crazy. "There is a network of people who are thinking about learning organizations. I've found you can get in touch with them easily. People say to me, `I can't believe you talked with so-and-so! How'd you do it?' The answer is, I called him."

3. Document your own learning. "People in the organization need to see documentation for their own comfort. The smartest thing I did was to create a matrix of ideas from leading thinkers. I documented two categories of thinking -- the elements of a learning organization, and the pitfalls to avoid."

4. Take senior management along. Turner's own education included benchmarking trips to Saturn, Texas Instruments, Motorola, General Electric, and other companies known for their innovative approaches to learning. "Some of the people in the senior group were very skeptical," Turner says. "It helped to take them on these benchmarking trips to show them other companies that were actually doing some of the same learning practices."

5. No fear! "You've got to be fearless and not worry about keeping your job."

6. Be a learning person yourself. "Change agents have to be in love with learning and constantly learning new things themselves. Then they find new ways to communicate those things to the organization as a whole."

7. Laugh when it hurts. "This can be very discouraging work. You need a good sense of humor. It also helps if you've got a mantra you can say to yourself when things aren't going too well."

8. Know the business before you try to change anything. "I don't think you can do this work if you're just a theorist. I've been a sales rep, I've been in a marketing job where I worked with the operations side. So when I go about the work of creating a change strategy, I already have an understanding of the people in our organization and what they do."

9. Finish what you start. "I made a list of change projects we'd started and never finished in the past. We called it 'the black hole.' I determined early on I didn't want to be part of a second-rate movie."

http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/05/changetips.html

"Viral" Information Systems: Part Two

When we talk about "viral" information systems, there are a few things to keep in mind.

One, we are talking about the dissemination or distribution of accurate information within the context of our entire "One Long Island" project.

Two, we are talking about empowering folks who wish to participate in the collaborative and dynamic environment we are attempting to create here on Long Island and elsewhere.

Three, we are talking about "breaking down the silos" that separate good people and organizations from doing positive work in their communities and, further, we are talking about helping to create a methodology for communities to help one another without artificial boundaries.

We are not talking about a "free for all" or the distribution of non-productive information.

Once we collaborate, we all have a better appreciation of each other's circumstances and needs. What we are proposing allows a better flow of diverse ideas so that we may find the common ground needed to move forward.

Just as a "viral" system can increase the "dynamism" of the information we share, so too can this viral concept be used to create organizations and structures needed to address the faster rate of change we are likely to encounter now and into the future in a less stressful and more understandable manner.

More in Part Three.

"Viral" Information Systems: Part One

I think most folks have heard of "viral" marketing by now.

So what if we use some of those techniques to enhance information flow on Long Island (and elsewhere)? What is the best method to do so?

We've posted previously about the attributes of the flexibility and cost effectiveness and of an XML based system. We've also posted previously about how, with the advent of new Web 2.0 and 3.0 technologies Long Islanders (and others) can create an environment whereby they are active participants in the information flow (New York State Alert System, Citizen Media Network and Citizen Alert Network etc.).

We've also seen recently the use of text messaging (SMS) to alert student of possible dangers on their campuses.

The above graphic (click on the graphic for a larger view) illustrates how an XML based system (in all its variants and bridge attributes) can be used to create a "viral" information system where information can be distributed to many from single or multiple points of origin.

More in part two.

Good model for Long Island and New York...

Open Standards Commitment

The Liberty Alliance is committed to creating technical standards that solve global identity management needs and can be easily implemented by the widest possible audience. We believe that technical standards must be interoperable and open in order to be most useful and to promote further innovation. Interoperable and open standards are particularly important to digital identity technology and processes as they influence business conduct and social interactions online. This is important to our members as well as the larger deploying marketplace which we support.

Our statement describes critical elements to an open standard and the development process we feel it should follow.

Many of our members have issued similar open standards calls. The Danish government has detailed the importance of open standards in a published paper which stresses the importance of defining “an open standard by its properties in its purest form to remove uncertainty, while recognising that in practice owners will choose the degree of openness they expect to provide the greatest return.”

An article in eGovernment News explains that the position of the Danish government is consistent with other European approaches:

The Danish National IT and Telecom Agency’s “pragmatic approach” to the definition of open standards is similar to the approach adopted by the European Commission’s IDA Programme. Indeed, according to the European Interoperability Framework for pan-European eGovernment services released by IDA in January 2004, open standards and open source software are two of the general principles that should be considered for any e-government services to be set-up at a pan-European level. The framework says that, in this context, "open" should mean the standard fulfils the following requirements:

· The costs for the use of the standard are low.
· The standard has been published.
· The standard is adopted on the basis of an open decision-making procedure.
· The intellectual property rights to the standard are vested in a not-for-profit organisation, which operates a completely free access policy.
· There are no constraints on the re-use of the standard.

The use of open standards is widely regarded as a cornerstone for the development of interoperable e-government services at local, regional, national and pan-European level. Speaking at the World Standards Day on 14 October 2003, EU Enterprise and Information Society Commissioner Erkki Liikanen stressed that "open standards are important to help create interoperable and affordable solutions for everybody. They also promote competition by setting up a technical playing field that is level to all market players. This means lower costs for enterprises and, ultimately, the consumer".

This approach and position has been endorsed by the New Zealand Government as well, after extensive research and reference of work by other organizations, resulting in similar statements on the definition of an open standard.

We welcome the industry in joining us in delivering open standards for the benefit of the marketplace, enterprises and end users.

(http://www.projectliberty.org/liberty/about/open_standards_commitment)

On point editorial from the Long Island Business News ...

"That’s a hard sell here, in the shadow of the Capital of Capitalism, but it’s exactly how we need to start thinking. Long Island leaders and residents must be willing to compromise, to see the bigger picture, to endure bottom lines that are not as fat as they might be.
It’s not as easy as buying the local pub, not here. But if we can craft a regional plan that makes optimal use of our population and potential, there may be a future here after all."

(Click to read entire article)

Accelerate Long Island, a Long Island Meta Accelerator: Part II

Food for thought ...

"... none other than Plato himself dictated that the circle was the perfect form for celestial movement, and for the next two thousand years, astronomers said that planetary orbits were circular — even though their observational data suggested otherwise. Even Copernicus used circles in his heliocentric model of the universe. Only after much soul-searching did Kepler use the ellipse to describe the heavenly paths. Everyone has externally-imposed "shoulds" and values that influence their thinking. "

"DoI Theory is concerned with the manner in which a new technological idea, artefact or technique, or a new use of an old one, migrates from creation to use. According to DoI theory, technological innovation is communicated through particular channels, over time, among the members of a social system.

The stages through which a technological innovation passes are:
knowledge (exposure to its existence, and understanding of its functions);
persuasion (the forming of a favourable attitude to it);
decision (commitment to its adoption);
implementation (putting it to use); and
confirmation (reinforcement based on positive outcomes from it). "

"the need for collaborative design because design problems are
- complex " requiring social creativity in which stakeholders from different
disciplines have to collaborate
- ill-defined " requiring the integration of problem framing and problem
solving
- have no (single) answer " argumentation support, consideration of tradeoffs
- unique (“a universe of one”) " requiring learning when no one knows the
answer"

One Long Island Project: Dynamic, Collaborative and Sustainable Regionalism

First a word about the posts and ideas on the Long Island Idea Factory site.

While we are primarily concerned with our home region of Long Island, we believe that many of the ideas we are proposing would work in other regions of New York State and elsewhere as well.

After all, why couldn't there be a One New York Project, a New York 3.0, a New York Meta Think Tank, a New York Virtual Congress, a Virtual New York Constitution, a New York School of Meta Interdisciplinary Studies and so on? We're only limited by our imagination and willingness to work collaboratively for what we wish to see accomplished.

So rather than ask the question why should we collaborate, we should be asking the question why wouldn't we collaborate? We should understand by now that Long Island and New York are competing nationally and internationally. Innovation and collaboration are key to our success.

We can't really afford to engage in the old "upstate - downstate" rivalries any longer and be expected to taken seriously as an economic and innovation powerhouse in the future. This "old thinking" will eventually diminish or destroy any advantages we currently enjoy.

Change is undeniably difficult. And large scale change even more so. Long Island's (and New York's) current method of a "non-integrated" approach to issue resolution has clearly not been a success on many levels. Future demands will be exponentially larger and more complex than they are today. We must have an approach and a methodology for successfully navigating these future storms. "One Long Island" is a potential solution.

Even after we "resolve" an issue, the resolution must be "recycled" to ensure its continued viability under changing circumstances and fact patterns. When we speak about a "perpetual" and "dynamic" Long Island this is one of the main concepts we are advancing.

... or the Meta Chart Version of 9.24.07

(Click for larger image)

Kind of where we are on 9.24.07 ...

(Click for larger view)

Long Island School of Meta Interdisciplinary Studies: THINK!

The NY Times bolsters the case for our "One Long Island Project" ...

... now if we could only get them to read the Long Island Idea Factory!

The City

Why New York Stagnates

Published: September 23, 2007

Imagine, for a moment, that you are a business executive thinking about moving your company — an upscale, high-tech company — to New York or maybe Connecticut or perhaps California. After a little research, you find out that most of New York’s system for encouraging new businesses is based on one thing: political pork.

There is no workable economic development plan for the whole state. Instead, businesses are forced to beg for a hodgepodge of handouts, each of which depends less on what the companies have to offer in terms of jobs or revenue than on which bigwigs they know in Albany. Suddenly, Massachusetts and North Carolina and Texas begin to look better and better and better.

For all the bellowing in Albany about the need for more jobs, the noisemakers themselves are a big part of the problem, handing out inducements like favors at a political gala. The net result is to reinforce the political status quo.

That New York does not have a statewide economic strategy is a disgrace. A few haphazard attempts to “help business” don’t really help the economy, and taxpayers should be in full revolt about the tons of money that has been parceled out — for Empire Zones and other economic boondoggles — with not enough new jobs to show for it.

Some business groups have argued that New York loses these jobs because of its taxes, but a report from A. T. Kearney earlier this year concluded that the real problem is the state’s herky-jerky system for bringing in new businesses.

One bright spot in this grim statewide picture is nanotechnology. With tons of state money, and a push from former Gov. George Pataki, the Albany area is fast becoming one of the more important nanotechnology locations in the world. But attempts to clone the Albany project have not gone well elsewhere.

The idea is to use a top-flight educational institution — the Rennselaer Polytechnic Institute, for instance — and find a business partner like I.B.M. to help pay the cost of creating such a complex. New York’s universities are spread across the state, offering the possibility that other research centers could be created to provide jobs and economic health. State financing and tax breaks are important, but they will not really work if there is no strong business partner.

The Kearney report notes that between 1990 and 2005, New York State lost higher-paying jobs in manufacturing, financial services and other areas. Over the same period, the state gained lower-paying jobs in education, health services and professional services. New York needs to keep those jobs, even the lower-paying ones, and add more higher-paying jobs.

Gov. Eliot Spitzer and Joseph Bruno, the State Senate leader, have been hissing mad at each other for months, even as the jobs wander off elsewhere. Time to get a grip, fellows. For the sake of all New Yorkers, Albany’s leaders need to grit their teeth and sit down together and start forming a genuine long-range economic plan that focuses more on bringing in new jobs than preserving their own.

Some light reading for a Sunday ...

An Extended Problem Solving Theory
We are now ready to present an extended theory of hu-
man problem solving that moves beyond the abstract
framework provided by the standard version. This forms
a key part of Icarus, an account of the human cogni-
tive architecture. We will present only those aspects
of Icarus relevant to problem solving, but we have pre-
sented more complete descriptions elsewhere (Choi et al.,
2004). We will use the phenomena listed above to orga-
nize our points.

(click to read entire article)

Long Island School of Meta Interdisciplinary Studies

A way to teach collaboration and dynamism. Any ideas out there for inclusion in a curriculum?

Long Island Congress: A Virtual Meta Think Tank

We've posted previously about how the Long Island Congress Idea may be used as a "virtual think tank" (perhaps even a virtual meta-think tank) that will have the ability to "break down the silos" and the provincialism which invariably cause progress to be slow, if at all, on Long Island.

Why is it important to create a "virtual think tank" in the first place? Don't we meet enough? Aren't there enough plans and proposals out there?

Again, yes and no.

As we've stated previously there are a lot of static reports out there and there are a lot of meetings going on. But how do you ever know if the correct information is being disseminated to the right organization? How do you know that there is the right mix of people and disciplines in the room. Most importantly, where is the follow-up?

Starting and stopping projects then starting again is the real killer. No momentum is created, no dynamism exists. Therefore, progress is stalled.

Add this to the fact that there are competing egos and agendas and that the general public has a pronounced distrust for most "traditional" sources of information and you have a prescription for stagnation. For the elected official being creative and taking chances is sometimes the "kiss of death" in Darwinian field of politics. Fear of failure is a big momentum killer.

A "virtual think tank" allows individuals and organizations to collaborate without conflict. Creativity is encouraged and rewarded. The end result is the key, not who accomplishes it or takes credit for it. ( "Success has many fathers, but failure is an orphan." ). Fear of failure is eliminated to a great extent with our proposal. It also helps everyone to be less myopic and provincial in their views.

I refuse to believe that with the brainpower and resources we have on Long Island, that we can not find, promote and implement viable solutions to most of our present and future issues.

So yes it is important we have a "virtual think tank" here on Long Island (as it is important in other regions) no matter what we ultimately call it or the process we use to create it.

Long Island Decision Model: Part Four

The Long Island School of Dynamic or Meta-Interdisciplinarianism: Part One

Isn't "metainterdisciplinarianism" a redundant word? After all if we are practicing interdisciplinarianism aren't we already using all the tools available to us?

Yes and no.

From what I can gather "interdisciplinarianism" generally does not, despite its apparent meaning, refer to the attempt to bring all disciplines together for a common regional ongoing and dynamic purpose. It seems to be limits to brings "certain" disciplines (but not all) together for a particular project. (Interdisciplinarity is the act of drawing from two or more academic disciplines and integrating their insights to work together in pursuit of a common goal. "Interdisciplinary Studies", as they are called, use interdisciplinarity to develop a greater understanding of a problem that is too complex or wide-ranging (i.e. AIDS pandemic, global warming) to be dealt with using the knowledge and methodology of just one discipline.) Close but no cigar for our purposes.

With the One Long Island Project we are talking about a dynamic, perpetual process which encompasses all elements working together for a common purpose (hence metainterdisciplinarianism).

I believe it would be helpful to the process if we assist or teach folks how to cooperate and how to build bridges for mutual benefit, not only in a "philosophical sense" but in a technical way as well.

I don't know that anyone would call this new course of study "The Long Island School of Metainterdisciplinarianism" (The Long Island School of Metainterdisciplinarian Studies) but whatever it is called, I believe it is an important part of changing the dynamics on Long Island for the better. Maybe we should call it The Long Island School of Dynamic Interdisciplinarianism instead. Could be Transdisciplinarity as well I suppose.

Hey. That's why it's called an idea factory. We're trying to explore all options. Some will work. Some won't. But let's get all of Long Island thinking and collaborating for the common good. The idea is to get everyone (or at least willing participants) to leave their comfort zone and to think differently. See things from a new vantage point and perspective. THINK. COLLABERATE. ACT. REPEAT. "Everything is theoretically impossible, until it is done. Robert A. Heinlein"

Long Island Change Management:Part One

Changing the way we "do business on" and "think" about Long Island is a long term project.

Some good preliminary ideas are here, here, here (where the above image is from) and here.

As we've indicated previously, the concept behind Long Island 3.0 (The One Long Island Project) is to create something that transcends current limitations and personal or organizational ambitions and instead, creates a long term and sustainable environment for the flexibility and dynamism Long Island will require to navigate the future.

"Change. Ours is an era of massive change, sometimes liberating, other times traumatic. Organisations find themselves buffeted by external forces: technological, market, political and cultural. They are challenged to become ever more efficient, effective, productive and competitive. How can they be active masters of change rather than reactive servants? How can change in organisations be driven by their people rather than the organisation in the abstract, or its leaders having to drag them along? Organisations will fail if they are not capable of learning, in a collective sense, as well as the individuals who spend their days at work there. They will fail if they do not regard themselves as places of continuous personal and corporate reinvention, of individual and institutional transformation. The organisation and every person within it needs to envision themselves, not as a change object, but as an agent of change."

One Long Island Project: Part One

Another way to conceptualize the Long Island 3.0 series of proposals.

The hardest thing to do, I think, is to explain complex ideas in simple terms. It may be a skill I don't possess. I will continue to try however.

Some of you have asked me what the "agenda" is for all of this. Why are you writing this blog?

Well the reason I'm writing about Long Island is because I actually enjoy this sort of thing and also, being an individual whose relatives have only known Long Island as a home since they "arrived" here in the late 1880s through the early part of the last century, I have an affinity for and a desire to see Long Island stay the great place its been for my family and friends.

However, for Long Island to remain a great place it must change in a sustainable and dynamic manner. I think most Long Islanders see that. My hope is that I can contribute some piece of the puzzle that helps this come about.

Ah, but you are, or have been, political aren't you? You must be setting yourself up for another run!

Sorry. Been there, done that and did the best I knew how at the time (Oyster Bay 2000 [circa 1993]). I have great respect for everyone who puts themselves in the public eye and subjects themselves (and their family) to the "democratic process." Whether its a school board or President of the United States, it takes the "fire in the belly." I'm happy to help good people get elected ... it just isn't for me anymore.

I don't believe that what I wish to help accomplish on Long Island is best served through elective office. Elective officials are sometimes constrained and limited in what they can accomplish by the "parameters" of their office. If possible, I want to spend my time forging productive "links" and coalitions between disparate (and sometimes seemingly incompatible) organizations for the common good. I think Long Island 3.0 (or the"One Long Island Project") will be helpful in this regard. Sometimes those who seem to have all the power are themselves limited by authority and must be assisted as well in doing the public good ("Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown"). It has been my experience that most elected officials want to do the right thing and are elected officials primarily to do the public good and not for personal aggrandizement.

I am a firm believer in the process and believe everyone should be involved in getting good people elected. If you don't participate currently, you should in some manner. Going door to door is one of the best educational experiences a person can have. I know it was for me.

Among other things, it teaches you humility, teaches you what you don't know, forces you to see other points of view, shows you the value of compromise and cooperation, makes you work for your votes (we always appreciate something more when you work for it) and requires you to engage in a real and direct way, all the different types of folks you wish to represent. Most importantly it teaches you that elected office is a privilege, not a right.

I don't care what level of office you are seeking, if you are not going directly to the people (obviously as your physical abilities allow) and asking them for their vote, you are not being honest with yourself or the people you seek to represent. Citizens coming to see you is not the same as you going to see them. Obviously the larger the office the more difficult this becomes, but no matter what the office is it should be done at some point if for no other reason than to keep the flame of humility alive in all elected officials.

Even as I advocate for "virtual this" and "meta that" I remember the value of looking folks in the eye and asking for their vote. Hopefully what I propose is not taken as a replacement for this direct interaction but rather as a way to assist all Long Islanders in among other things, the process of dynamic self governance through informed decision-making.

OK. Time to get off the soapbox.

I hope I've answered some of your questions. As always keep 'em coming.

Random thoughts on a Friday ...

(Overcome All Difficulties)

Long Island 3.0 is a methodology that allows all Long Islanders to collaborate in a dynamic manner, presuming they wish to do so. How do we maintain a collective focus with Long Island 3.0 so as to deflect the actions of those who wish to have little or no change? Can we encourage our great Long Island colleges and universities to expand the concept of "Long Island Studies" to incorporate some or all of the Long Island 3.0 concepts and create a whole army of professional Long Island "synthesizers," folks who see the big picture and know how to bring disparate elements together for a common purpose?

How can we show that by cooperating, we enlarge the opportunities for those already established? To enact change those in power, who obviously believe they have the most to lose (maybe they're correct, depending on the circumstances) must cooperate. Leadership, on some level, is the absence of fear. Established organizations must show that they are willing to "sacrifice" at some level for the greater good. Give a little now, reap the benefits of a more prosperous Long Island later. Perhaps we should call it the "One Long Island Project."

Opinion is important. Ideas are important. But employing some type of "Long Island Scientific Method" is critical to sustainable positive change. It is always tougher to argue with a demonstrated reality than with an opinion, no matter how well formed. Long Island 3.0 provides some of the framework needed to establish a "Long Island Scientific Method."

Giving up is not an option. Just complaining is not an option. Creating controversy for personal or organizational advantage is not an option. Having an idea or an opinion that you are unwilling to defend is not an option. Failure is not an option.

How do we make competitors into collaborators for the public good on Long Island? By freeing up the exchange of information through the various concepts contained in Long Island 3.0 (and elsewhere of course) we create opportunities we perhaps never knew existed. For example through ideas like the "Citizen Media Network" (an outgrowth of the Community Congress idea of the early 90's) and a companion of the Virtual Long Island Congress and all the other Long Island 3.0 ideas, we enable all not-for-profit groups (who do so much to help Long Islanders) obtain access to thousands (millions?) of additional contacts that they would not normally have access to otherwise.

We must begin the process of reshaping Long Island now, not just for short term and based upon immediate needs, but we must change the very manner in which we think about Long Island and how we communicate with one another ..... Interesting article ..... "So if we can't predict the future, why try? Because we have to." ..... Different, but interesting nevertheless.

Long Island Meta-Accelerator Project: Part One

We've posted previously about how the Long Island 3.0 concepts have the potential to turn Long Island into one unified "accelerator" project.

Sort of like this only not just limited to business issues. Ours would be more all encompassing; a "meta-accelerator. "

Why can't we use our collective abilities to "make a profit" for Long Island. Use it to lower taxes. Attract business. Initiate and implement new ideas. More in part two.

As a side note, perhaps the reason there are so many different and diverse organizations (of all types) on Long Island is precisely because we have never had any method for "bringing it all together" before ... a self fulfilling prophesy of sorts. Different and diverse organizations are a good thing, so long as they are working towards a common, dynamic and organized mission. Hopefully Long Island 3.0 can, over time, help solve this riddle and promote diversity and innovation directed toward a common purpose.

Implementing Long Island 3.0

The above diagram illustrates one way to look at how to implement (or begin to implement) the Long Island 3.0 concept.

A key is to identify those in all relevant disciplines who have the "core competency" required in a particular field (it may be multiple individuals and/or organizations) then to determine who those individuals and organizations have the ability to influence. When we say influence, we are using it in the "collaborative" context, not the "command" context.

Obviously, some will have multiple core competencies and multiple spheres of influence. Together, the scope of their collective abilities should create the "Joint Sphere (s) of Influence" that covers not only all of Long Island, but reaches out nationally and internationally.


I short we may look at Long Island 3.0 as using a "social networking" theory of sorts to its fullest application.

Why is a "dynamic" Long Island important?

Why is a "dynamic" Long Island important?

As we've stated in previous posts a "dynamic" Long Island is, in effect, a Long Island in perpetual motion. There is no "down time" for stagnation and negativism to creep in and stop progress (whatever form this progress eventually becomes is a by-product of the collaboration Long Island 3.0 encourages).

We use the term Long Island 3.0 to encompass all the different ideas we promote on this site including the Long Island Congress, the Virtual Long Island Constitution , Citizen Media Network etc. Long Island 3.0 is not only a series of proposals, but hopefully a way to point to a "Long Island Philosophy" of sorts. A new and pragmatic way to think about Long Island and its future and to hopefully encourage the positive change we require.

Additionally, and as we've stated previously, there are many good people and good organizations striving to make Long Island a better place. The issue more often than not seems to boil down to the loss of momentum. Many good ideas and programs "die on the vine" for a lack of momentum.

Long Island 3.0 counteracts this loss of momentum by establishing flexible standards (technical and otherwise) which create the "dynamism" Long Island requires to forge a new identity for this century and beyond.

Some random thoughts on a Monday ...

How about a "Long Island Housing Corporation" (to promote need appropriate housing) as an outgrowth of the Virtual Long Island Constitution and the cooperation between all political subdivisions (and others). Similar to the "Long Island Municipal Investment Group (maybe even a subdivision thereof?)" we wrote about earlier, a continuation of the overarching theory that the more ties we have to one another the more likely it is we will cooperate.

How about all the Long Island software developed or utilized for the inter-connectivity of Long Island is done as "open source" and subject to an Long Island Open Source Licensing Agreement? Again this will help us all work from the same playbook and foster cooperation, local innovation and business development. Even software that is proprietary should be required to utilize some "open architecture" so that we can create all the bridges we need to foster the idea of "one Long Island."

How do we utilize both "right brain" Long Island talent and "left brain" Long Island talent?

Can we create a "modular Long Island talent pool" where individuals and organizations which are preeminent in their field take the lead on certain aspects of the Long Island 3.0 concept?

I'll try to develop these themes in later posts.

Long Island "Super Cruncher"

This article helps to explain a part of what Long Island 3.0 is about.

We advocate using new technology to come to rational, fact based public policy (and as part of an overall Long Island "Common Language" Project we had discussed earlier which will also facilitate communication and positive outcomes.).

In the article the author envisions "the replacement of expertise and intuition by objective, data-based decision making, made possible by a virtually inexhaustible supply of inexpensive information."

I think this author is a bit severe. Rather than replacing "expertise and intuition" I would instead say we are replacing misinformation and intransigence which lead to stagnation.

The bottom line is that the technology is here today and it is readily available. Let's use it for the common good of Long Island.

Possible applications of a Virtual Long Island Constitution

So how do we solve our housing issues?

If we agree with the premise (subject to the dynamic meta-analyses we've been preaching for the past 100 or so posts) that there is a need for more housing to keep our young workers and families here on Long Island (and to attract more professionals of all types), then let us take a simple, common sense approach to the issue.

Let's also agree that we be able to, with reasonable certainty, analyze and come to a defensible position on the who, what, where, how much, time frame (solves issue for 10 years, 20 years, 50 or more years?) and all the various environmental and quality of life concerns of the issue (I know it sounds like a lot, but it is reasonably simple to do accurate projections with the right modeling software).

Let's also agree that this issue is a shared issue amongst all Long Islanders.

Then we can agree that a Long Island Constitution (virtual or otherwise) could, as one of its outcomes, design a plan where all political subdivisions agree to construct (or allow to be constructed) X number of housing units at Y cost (sort of Long Island Meta-Leadership concept). We should also include all New York State owned land, school district property, and all other possible locations for housing.

In short, let's take a comprehensive, inclusive, well analyzed approach to the matter and enter into a "contract" of sorts (LI Constitution) to get the job done for the future health of Long Island.

Why is this important? Shouldn't our leaders (political and otherwise) just know how to get this done?

Well, yes and no.

It is not only the responsibility of our "leaders" to get this (and all other issues important for Long Island's future) done, it is really our responsibility. We must give our leaders the courage and the backing to make positive change for Long Island. We must reward innovation if we wish to remain competitive as a region.

Our "leaders" don't want to be the first to go "too far out on a limb" and be perceived as causing their "constituents" to bear an unfair share of the burden for, in this case, new housing development. This is a perfectly reasonable and rational view.

I believe most Long Islanders will support any effort to improve Long Island if they believe the process is fair and equitable. Additionally, I don't think it is productive for media (and others) to slam elected officials and other leaders in isolation (or at all for that matter, critique yes, personal attacks, no). If there are issues to be solved on Long Island, they are issues for all of us to solve. The media should foster cooperation while obviously fulfilling it's traditional obligation as a "public watchdog." But a good watchdog should see things that are actually there, not bark at every sound that it hears.

In the end, again, the public is its own best watchdog (see the Citizen Media Network and Citizen Alert Network concepts on this site).


A Long Island Constitution (virtual or otherwise), based upon fair and accurate information, properly analyzed is a necessary step in solving any of the long term issues for Long Island.

The role of Long Island colleges and universities

Here is a good overview and perhaps some part of a model for Long Island colleges, universities and high schools and the role they might play in a Long Island "renaissance."

Again, a central theme in Long Island 3.0 is to make the highest and best use of all Long Island resources for the common good.

Certainly all our educational institutions (including our library systems) will play a vital role in Long Island's future.

Perhaps it is time for a new type of "Long Island Studies" curriculum. One that focuses on Long Island 3.0 (or Long Island 3.0 type) concepts.

After all, if we are sincere about wanting our young people to stay on Long Island we should really give them seat at the table and integrate their ideas and concepts into the mix.

Thanks for the kind words ...

Thinking outside the box, Long Island 3.0 problem solving

Filed under: local businesses, Long Island Issues — admin @ 1:31 pm

It is inspiring to discover the Long Island Idea Factory a local Long Island blog that asks the big questions and offers a unique blend of critical analysis and commentary. The common theme that unites many of the individual posts is simple enough: adapt the latest web information technology and social media to help solve Long Island’s regional problems. Of course, the devil is in the details and as people in technology would say - in the implementation. The first step though is bringing some of these Internet technolgy tools to the attention of Long Island’s business leaders, nonprofit leaders, community organizers, and cconcerned citizens. There is increasing recognition that persistent problems like affordable housing and the so-called “brain drain” (the migration of young adults from Long Island to other states) must be solved on a regional basis. It will be interesting to see how the Long Island Idea Factory can help organizations and communties move forward toward common solutions.

Life Imitates Mathematics

I viewed this program last evening on the Mandelbrot set and was struck by the "common sense" implications a mathematical theorem has on life, social organization, and in general, how all things are created and are "self-organized" from simple beginnings.

Which led me to think that if we on Long Island can create the right set of circumstances for positive change, positive change will not only occur but remain "self organized" and "self renewing."

Not that we are remotely in the same league as Benoit Mandelbrot but what we are proposing with Long Island 3.o, the Long Island Congress, the Long Island Constitution and Long Island Meta-democracy is similar to this concept.

"A body in motion tends to stay in motion unless acted on by an outside force"

If we can construct a set of circumstances on Long Island for positive change, then the positive change should continue unless interrupted by something highly unusual since, if done properly, Long Island 3.o should be pretty well protected from the run-of-the-mill "outside forces."

Nice to see ...

... NY - Alert now has XML/RSS feeds. 

Hopefully this will start a trend for all New York Political Subdivisions and other public entities (federal, state and local) as we stated in previous posts on this site.

Let's hope this is the beginning of an integrated communications platform.

Long Island as a Meta-Democracy: Part Two

Long Island as a Meta-Democracy: Part One

First a few definitions of "meta-democracy" none of which is 100% on point for our purposes but helpful nevertheless here, here, here and here (although one could argue democracy is by its very definition "meta").

For Long Island to make significant, positive change, the change must be based upon knowledge. Knowledge is essential to an educated and motivated Long Island citizenry. Education requires participation. Long Island 3.o offers, among other things, a method to encourage participation (virtual or otherwise) in a simple yet robust and effective manner. Hence, the "virtual" Long Island Democracy (Long Island Congress, Long Island 3.0, Virtual Long Island Constitution) leads to a Long Island Meta-Democracy.

This is not a political solution nor does it replace current institutions (at least not for the foreseeable future).

It is a form of "self governance" within the framework of a "self sustaining and self correcting" system.

It is not enough anymore to depend solely on current organizational models. For Long Island to progress and remain vital in the world at large, it will need an active and educated public to do so.

"If you want to change the culture, you will have to start by changing the organization." Mary Douglas

"There is an inverse relationship between reliance on the state and self-reliance." William F. Buckley, Jr.

More in part two.

Modular Long Island ...

By way of review, a significant part of our Long Island 3.0 project requires us to use as many "open standards" as possible so as to accelerate our ability  to communicate clearly and with purpose. 

While the Long Island Congress is a "virtual think tank" model in many ways, the end game here is results and "applied technology" which we can use to make Long Island a regional powerhouse throughout the world. 

We need a system that is simple and "modular" so that all its components are designed to connect with one another and to readily accept and integrate new designs quickly and effectively, both within the Long Island framework and with the world at large.

Like a carbon molecule easily joins with other molecules to form complex organisms, so too must our Long Island 3.0 projects easily bond with one another to create a "symbiotic diversity" which allows Long Island to prosper.

There are links between almost every endeavor we undertake on Long Island. Long Island 3.0 will allow us to uncover them and use them for the common good.

A good model for the Long Island Congress?

"Operating Principles

1. As a service organization, CCRL is committed to helping its primary customers, collaborative regional organizations, to achieve their fullest potential success in improving the economy, environment, and social equity of their regions. CCRL must always strive to understand clearly their needs and wants, and to deliver high-quality direct support, whether through information and other resources, technical assistance, training, brokering, or promotion.
2. As a constituency-based organization, CCRL is committed to representing the interests of the network of regional collaboratives with the public sector, particularly the state government, and with other public interest organizations. In general, this involves advancing new policies and programs that support the goals and strategies of the regional organizations.
3. As a leadership organization, CCRL is committed to the generation and promotion of new ideas, strategies, policies, and programs that will challenge the thinking and actions of the CRI network, and ourselves so that we might continue to learn and to improve our effectiveness.
4. CCRL is committed to collaboration, inclusion, innovation, boundary crossing, accountability, and continuous improvement."

This model seems to encapsulate one way a "Long Island Congress" might be structured although it is not as dynamic as we would like (as far as I can tell) and it might be too bureaucratic for our needs. 

We'll continue to research other models for all the "Long Island 3.0" projects although my gut feeling is that we'll have to develop some sort of hybrid model to suit our needs.

Just another way to look at Long Island 3.0 ...

Click for larger image.

Clearly, as I've explained in previous posts, I think this dynamic model will help solve some of our regional issues and perhaps even lead to a unified  "Long Island Philosophy" of some type.

Additionally, in our new "virtual" Long Island, we may want to consider engaging our students in activities which will reflect and help shape the Long Island they will inherit. While many schools, colleges and universities have very fine "Long Island" studies programs, we do not have a "dynamic" common thread to engage our young people in the process. All avenues, including interactive "gaming" specific to Long Island should be developed by our universities and business accelerators to encourage active participation. 

In short, only focused education and active participation from an engaged population (student and otherwise) will win the hearts and minds of Long Islanders and allow substantive, positive change to take place.