<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Pedro talks about social tools and social change</title>
	<atom:link href="http://remarkk.com/2008/03/02/pedro-talks-about-social-tools-and-social-change/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://remarkk.com/2008/03/02/pedro-talks-about-social-tools-and-social-change/</link>
	<description>OPEN creative communities</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Jul 2010 03:40:08 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Patrick</title>
		<link>http://remarkk.com/2008/03/02/pedro-talks-about-social-tools-and-social-change/comment-page-1/#comment-106615</link>
		<dc:creator>Patrick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2008 18:21:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://remarkk.com/2008/03/02/pedro-talks-about-social-tools-and-social-change/#comment-106615</guid>
		<description>Sounds like a guy who has the right idea, and I imagine he&#039;d tried it out too. Much of technology could really be oriented toward community engagement, but the purposes are usually determined by management. Chomsky says that technology does have a big impact, but most of the time those advancements are spurred on in the pursuit of eliminating redundant personelle, or streamlining workflow. 
I wonder how community commissioned technology would work. I suppose since books came out of a need for governments to manage their people, and later supplanted those very institutions, we might hope the same for microsoft excel.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sounds like a guy who has the right idea, and I imagine he&#8217;d tried it out too. Much of technology could really be oriented toward community engagement, but the purposes are usually determined by management. Chomsky says that technology does have a big impact, but most of the time those advancements are spurred on in the pursuit of eliminating redundant personelle, or streamlining workflow.<br />
I wonder how community commissioned technology would work. I suppose since books came out of a need for governments to manage their people, and later supplanted those very institutions, we might hope the same for microsoft excel.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Goran Matic</title>
		<link>http://remarkk.com/2008/03/02/pedro-talks-about-social-tools-and-social-change/comment-page-1/#comment-106598</link>
		<dc:creator>Goran Matic</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2008 16:43:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://remarkk.com/2008/03/02/pedro-talks-about-social-tools-and-social-change/#comment-106598</guid>
		<description>Wonderful elucidation from Pedro - it does indeed seem like we are all working on a way of contributing to the world in order to enable a &quot;new way of being&quot; that is differently integrated with our environments - whether they are social or natural in origin (and if we even choose to differentiate between the two).

Technology can definitely play the &quot;glue&quot; role in this - printing press was a technology too, after all, as was a plough / plow - we may simply need to &quot;tweak it right&quot;, perhaps, to keep on emerging through vision, communicate, and share through passion;

This is starting to look like something akin to a.. revolution of passion, of interconnectedness, and of the heart -

It&#039;s curious that through technology, we are actually returning to the humanistic principles that we seem to have initially abandoned through our initial fascination with technology (science-fiction of the 80&#039;s, anyone?), and an apparent mechanization of ourselves and of our society (universe is like clockwork) - 

I suppose it is becoming apparent that we always embody our imagination (to &quot;em-body&quot; - to take not just the external stimuli, but also the structural paradigms, into the body, whether physical, mental or emotional) -

So why indeed not use imagination, through our passion, as channeled via technology, to embody something different and more aligned with humanistic principles; 

In this way, the circle completes itself.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wonderful elucidation from Pedro &#8211; it does indeed seem like we are all working on a way of contributing to the world in order to enable a &#8220;new way of being&#8221; that is differently integrated with our environments &#8211; whether they are social or natural in origin (and if we even choose to differentiate between the two).</p>
<p>Technology can definitely play the &#8220;glue&#8221; role in this &#8211; printing press was a technology too, after all, as was a plough / plow &#8211; we may simply need to &#8220;tweak it right&#8221;, perhaps, to keep on emerging through vision, communicate, and share through passion;</p>
<p>This is starting to look like something akin to a.. revolution of passion, of interconnectedness, and of the heart -</p>
<p>It&#8217;s curious that through technology, we are actually returning to the humanistic principles that we seem to have initially abandoned through our initial fascination with technology (science-fiction of the 80&#8242;s, anyone?), and an apparent mechanization of ourselves and of our society (universe is like clockwork) &#8211; </p>
<p>I suppose it is becoming apparent that we always embody our imagination (to &#8220;em-body&#8221; &#8211; to take not just the external stimuli, but also the structural paradigms, into the body, whether physical, mental or emotional) -</p>
<p>So why indeed not use imagination, through our passion, as channeled via technology, to embody something different and more aligned with humanistic principles; </p>
<p>In this way, the circle completes itself.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
