Georgia in Miami

Ivan in Amsterdam

You can listen to the entire show, including a piece by Chris Vallance on Maker Faire Africa, here.

The BBC also recently featured the work of Foko Madagascar, a Rising Voices grantee. Christina Corbett of BBC World Radio interviewed Tahina and Andry.

Tahina (on far right) explaining how to use Ushahidi to report from mobile phones during times of crisis.

Andry on the phone with Ariniaina explaining that it was not safe to be outside because soldiers were firing tear gas.

In May Solana interviewed Tahina about his use of Ushahidi to improve reporting during the coup. You can learn more about Madagascar’s 2009 political crisis on the Global Voices special coverage page.

Chapter 1: Make-shift Slums

Tokyo slum during the US occupation years.

As Kevin Kelly rightly points out, “every city begins as a slum … a seasonal camp with free-wheeling make-shift expediency.” Cities are founded on economic opportunity, spontaneous slums, and lawless saloons. Eventually gender ratios equal out, churches move in, government takes shape, and urban planning is institutionalized.

Chapter 2: Hegemony Rules

During the transition from slum to civic center some social group usually takes power and dictates policy. It tends to be the ethnic majority though in the case of colonized countries that was almost never the case. In most cities in the United States power lied among the WASP community. Ethnic minorities were pushed out to the edges while the elite built Victorian homes around the downtown business districts and plazas.

Chapter 3: White Flight and suburbanization

This is the chapter that takes on different manifestations depending on the ethnic and class make-up of a city, but the basic concept is still generally applicable. During WWII in the United States there was an influx of black americans seeking work in urban centers. After WWII four developments (other than blatant racism) led to white flight from urban centers to suburban communities. First was population density. After the war soldiers returned home to urban centers, but those who moved in while they were gone also remained. Then there was the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education Supreme Court decision, which began the process of desegregating the country’s public schools. White parents felt that their children would receive a lower level of education in a desegregated school, and so they moved to suburbs where neighborhoods and their schools were all white. Third, the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1956 enabled the workday commute from suburb to city center. Lastly, suburban developers had large returns to scale as they could purchase a single large plot of land and build hundreds or even thousands of nearly identical homes.

Chapter 4: Urban Gentrification

White flight certainly continues today, often in new manifestations, but a far greater trend is urban gentrification. While the majority of white Americans from my generation grew up in mostly white suburban neighborhoods, our schools and public institutions became increasingly integrated and multicultural. Television and mass media brought the Cosby Show, The Jeffersons, Fresh Prince, and Family Matters into our living room. And then came hip-hop. All of a sudden there was nothing less cool than to have grown up in the suburbs. Young people from affluent suburbs moved into lower-income urban neighborhoods where they opened coffee shops, art galleries, and cocktail bars. Awkwardness and antagonism between the newly arrived affluent and the established lower-income population were inevitable. In the worst of cases property prices increased and low-income renters were forced to move out to other neighborhoods. However, there has also been an effort by young people across different classes in gentrified neighborhoods to shape a common aesthetic around hip-hop, indie rock, street art, and skateboarding.

This is where we are today, at least my generation, or at the very least, my group of friends. We live in urban multicultural neighborhoods where the one thread that ties everyone together is pop culture and consumerism. In fact, I mentioned to Chippla a few days ago that perhaps America has been able to achieve a higher degree of multiculturalism than Europe (which favors assimilation) because the entire country is unabashedly pro-consumerist whereas most European countries at least pretend to be anti-consumerist.

Chapter 5: Increased urbanization or decentralization?

Urban farms in China

The thing is, multiculturalism can be exhausting. Identity politics become an ingrained part of daily life. You are expected to know something – if not everything – about every cultural, ethnic, and sub-cultural group in your neighborhood. There are few common bonds around music, art, religion, or culture because the choices become infinite. Separate studies in the UK and the US have both found that as neighborhoods become more diverse the reported happiness and civic participation of their residents both decrease. Though the trend has been occurring for decades, today more than ever we don’t interact with – or even know the names of – our neighbors. And yet the allure of hip multiculturalism still brings more affluent youth from suburban America, which increases the cost of rent, requiring a higher income and longer working hours. Life in gentrified America may look like American Apparel advertisements when you upload those dinner party photos to Flickr, but work overload, economic debt, information overload, and cultural overload are also all parts of living in gentrified America.

I often wonder if my friends will soon give up on city life. Paying $2,000 a month on rent while working 50 hours a week to bring home just enough to get by isn’t anyone’s idea of the American Dream. The escape fantasy of finding a cabin in the woods with a decent internet connection becomes more and more appealing.

I mentioned this to Ivan last week over an espresso macchiato and under a gloomy Amsterdam sky. He tries to escape city life as often as possible, but he also wonders if the problem isn’t with cities, but rather cities as we know them. Maybe we don’t really desire the farm and forest as much as we desire a little farm and forest in our cities. He reminded me of the community garden right outside of Revaz’s apartment in Washington DC. Ivan would love to get a plot and test out his green thumb, but the waiting list is over a year.

I think that, ultimately, whether my generation flees or embraces city life comes down to economics. If city governments are able to make enough green space and agricultural land without raising already-high rent and property prices then multicultural gentrification might be here to stay. Otherwise, I believe a new (and environmentally harmful) flight to the open countryside could soon be underway.

Loosely related: Stewart Brand’s presentation on “Cities and Time“, HowStuffWorks’ article on “Five Modern Abandoned Cities“, and McKinsey Global Institute’s “Preparing for China’s Urban Billion“.

My hope is that one day our children will look back at photos like this one and make fun of us in the same way that we look back at photos of our parents from the 60’s and 70’s and shake our heads in sympathy and shame.

Portnoy was ahead of his time. Fast forward three and a half years and the number of translators on Global Voices is greater than the number of authors and editors. Our articles are regularly translated into about 20 different languages and Jer has developed an entire system within WordPress to manage and organize the translations of articles. Additionally, we are no longer alone. Meedan is translating articles and conversations about current events in the Middle East. Yeeyan serves as a hub for volunteer translators who translate between Chinese and English. And TED has had much success recruiting volunteers to translate and subtitle their videos.

Furthermore, a number of open source programmers have begun developing tools to serve this ever-expanding group of volunteer translators. Those tools must also compete with proprietary tools like Google’s new Translator Toolkit, which was recently used by volunteers at Effat University in Saudi Arabia to translate over 100,000 words from the English Wikipedia into Arabic.

Aspriation Tech, an NGO based in San Francisco, invited a number of translators, programmers, and publishers to Amsterdam last week to discuss how the social translation movement can be made more efficient, sustainable, and fun. Representing Global Voices at the gathering were Solana, Leonard, Georgia, Ivan, Ethan, Silvia, Anna, Rezwan, Jer, Paula, Marc, and me. For those interested in learning more, notes from all the sessions are available on the Open Translation Tools wiki, Ethan has a nice summary blog post, photos are on Flickr, and updates are on Twitter, and more related blog posts are available here. For those of you who wish to learn more about open source translation software, a valuable guide has been published on FLOSSManuals. There is another guide about open source “video translation”. For more information about the history of Lingua, Leonard has made an excellent timeline and Chris Salzberg has done thorough academic research on the community.

Once we all reach that caloric daily limit then the food industry can only grow at 1% (the average growth rate of the earth’s population). There is, after all, only so much food you can stuff down one person. The food industry got around this limitation by developing “foods” without any calories or fat – things like Coke Zero and potato chips made with Olean, which famously – so I’ve been told – causes anal leakage:

[Hence the need for anal bleaching.]

Information is also an inelastic good. There is a limit to how much information the human brain can consume in a single day. Once we reach that limit we develop information obesity – or, information overload as it’s normally called – which leads to stress, guilt, and feelings of meaninglessness. We may ask ourselves what is the point of drinking a diet soda that our bodies do not need. And we might also ask ourselves, what is the use of consuming information at all, and how do we know if we need it or not?

Information has always been a commodity. The greater the demand for information, and the more scarce that information is, the greater its value. The business model behind selling information has always been to function as a gatekeeper between the information and the access to that information. In relation to one another, information was scarce and demand was high.

That is, until all of the world’s information was made available in aggregate. Added to the “old media” are billions of contributions of information from sources that were previously excluded by the gatekeepers. Demand for information has stayed the same (after all, there is only so much the human brain can process per day) but the supply of information expands exponentially. (Kevin Kelly calls this phenomenon “the expansion of ignorance“.)

As information expands exponentially, the value of each individual piece of information declines exponentially. With the abundance of information comes the scarcity of attention. Value now lies not in information, but in its relevance: filtering, sorting, contextualizing that which “speaks to us”. Value is not in data but in eloquence.

There is, however, still one more gate between information and access to that information: language. If I were monolingual then I would only have access to a percentage of the world’s information available online. Let’s say, for example, that I wanted more information about Dao Lang, a Chinese pop star and the number one search term in China for 2005. Information about the singer in English is scant, but surely there are thousands of articles available in Chinese. If only I could request – and probably pay – someone to translate one of those articles into English.

Conceptualizing a system to allow readers to request translations of content that interest them and to facilitate the process of that translation is the new job description for Marc Herman who is leading Global Voices’ translation exchange.

I am skeptical of the project, but it’s the type of skepticism that I hope is proven wrong. The most obvious question is, how do I know that I want to read something if I don’t know what it says? And, more importantly, why would I invest time and money requesting more information with less context when my hard drive is already brimming over with unread articles, unwatched movies, and un-listened-to podcasts?

To make such an investment I would need a pretty strong connection to Dao Lang, the Chinese pop singer. And if such a strong connection existed, wouldn’t that inspire me to learn Chinese, or to meet fellow Dao Lang fans who could provide me with the context I’m looking for?

We consume information as much for our social needs as our need to be informed. In fact, I’m not sure you can even distinguish the two. We don’t really care about Mark Sanford and his affair, but we read about it because the collective awareness about the case allows us to participate in conversations about the values and issues that underlie it. When I was in Argentina 80% of the news I read was about Argentina and the region because it allowed me to engage in conversations with those around me. Now that I’m in The Hague I’m following related news. Our social interactions define the information we consume much more than the other way around.

Social translation is here to stay, but the key is that it is social. Lena translated my post about Cochabamba as a gesture of friendship. Once money is inserted into the equation it becomes something else.

A lot of communities and tools have sprung up in recent years trying to make the translation market more efficient by cutting out wasteful middleman agencies like Lionbridge. Among others are Social Translator, dotSUB, Worldwide Lexicon, and iCanLocalize. Some companies like Facebook and LinkedIn have flirted with crowdsourcing the localization of their websites, but the lesson tends to be that volunteer translators don’t feel very social toward for-profit companies. There will always be a demand for translated information, but those translations will still have to compete in a world of over-abundant information and starved attention.

I’ve been thinking a lot about the supply and demand of information these days. A couple months ago I walked into El Ateneo, one of the world’s largest bookstores, to meet up with my buddy Scott. As I looked around at the mountains upon mountains of hardcovers, paperbacks, magazines, and newspapers I was hit by a kind of intellectual vertigo. On the one hand, here is humanity’s greatest accomplishment: culture, the ability to transmit knowledge, stories, and values from one generation to the next to eternity. On the other hand, with sadness and frustration I realized that in my life I would only come into contact with a small percentage of that culture. And that with each new year – and the exponential expansion of information – I would come into contact with a smaller and smaller percentage. The expansion of ignorance is inevitable.

I am also now 29-years-old; dangerously close to real adulthood. Last year I spent the first half of my birthday with Revaz, Carolina, Álvaro, Gabriel and friends from HiperBarrio in Colombia and the second half with Georgia, CB, Nikipedia and a ton of Global Voices friends in Budapest. The result is to the right.

This year I was able to once again catch up with some of the GV family and, once again, consume too much alcohol from just about every corner of the planet. But, sadly, I wasn’t able to spend any time with my friends back in Colombia.

Speaking with Silvia – who is originally from Medellín but now lives in Spain – I realized just how much I miss beautiful Antioquia. And then came this video:

It is so amazing that the internet – and all the tools that have been built on top of it – can enable us to feel so much warmth and love oceans and hemispheres apart. Living in a new city just about every single week can be difficult, but the ways in which we are able to stay connected and how those connections affect our emotions across time zones and oceans … well, it’s really re-writing what it means to be human.

Thank you Jorge, Deneiber, Diego, Santiago, Catalina, Gabriel, and all of HiperBarrio. And thank you everyone who sent bday wishes – you made it a wonderful day.

… unmodified sexual organs are unaesthetic; that the ritual gives young people the opportunity to display courage in their transition to adulthood; that you can see their excitement as they go to their ceremony, their pride when they return. You will say that it is very strange that someone who has not been through it should presume to now whether or not sex is pleasurable for you. And, if someone should try to force you to stop from the outside, you may decide to defend the practice as an expression of your cultural identity. They say it is mutilation, but is that any more than a reflex response to an unfamiliar practice? They exaggerate the medical risks. They say that female circumcision demeans women, but do not seem to think that male circumcision demeans men.

Let me clarify, Appiah is himself against female genital cutting, but what he wants to emphasize is this: “a good deal of what we intuitively take to be right, we take to be right just because it is what we are used to.”

Those butchers want to torture you on your first days in this world and cause you unbearable pain when urine touches the gaping wound .. those ignorant butchers! Fear them not, no one will lay a finger on you as long as I am alive. When you grow up you can cut off whichever part of your body you choose … until then no one will touch you.

That is an excerpt from a blog post of an Egyptian mother who recently gave birth to a newborn baby. The doctor suggested circumcision, but the mother adamantly refused. The baby, I should point out, is a boy. (A Facebook group in Arabic to end male circumcision currently has 973 members.)

Is male circumcision wrong? On the one hand, it alters the most private anatomy of a baby boy before he is able to make the decision for himself. It also reduces his sensitivity and sexual pleasure. On the other hand, doctors report improved hygiene and lower HIV transmission among males who are circumcised. Is there a single moral answer for all humanity or does it depend on each culture, community, and country?

This is where Cosmopolitanism becomes deeply philosophical. Tracing its roots to the Cynics and the Stoics, Cosmopolitanism is founded on moral universalism, the idea that the same moral code applies to all humans regardless of their race, religion, culture, nationality, or any other sub-category of our humanness. It stands in stark contrast to moral relativism, which states that our moral beliefs do not reflect universal moral truths, but rather are mere values based on our social and temporal circumstances.

For the vast majority of the past 10,000 years, it was not considered ‘wrong’ to kill someone from outside your tribe; that is just how it was. Today it is not considered ‘wrong’ to kill chimpanzees for science or cows for dinner; that is just how it is. Moral relativists say this is because our “morals” are simply social norms that we construct to live peacefully. Kwame Anthony Appiah says that morals are universal and eternal, even if we haven’t yet discovered what those timeless moral laws are.

Conversation doesn’t have to lead to consensus about anything, especially not values; it’s enough that it helps people get used to one another.

As a believer of evolution, I don’t subscribe to Appiah’s moral universalism. (And I have yet to find a way to believe in one without contradicting the other.) But that doesn’t lessen my appreciation of Cosmopolitanism as a framework for thinking about ethics at a global level. I would consider its golden rule to be this: “focus on understanding difference first; work on coming to an agreement about universality later.” It is very much related to what Chris Blattman half-jokingly calls “A Thinkavist Manifesto“: that it is better to understand without acting than it is to act without understanding.

Several of the book’s chapters challenged some of my previous-held thoughts, but none more so than “In Praise of Contamination.” Appiah pokes fun at “cultural preservationists” who “make their case by invoking the evil of cultural imperialism.” Such talk, he says, is based on “an image of how the world used to be – an image that is both unrealistic and unappealing.” He reminds us that there is no such thing as cultural purity. Brightly colored kente clothing that is associated with West Africa and worn by so many Black nationalists in the USA was originally imported by the Dutch from Indonesia. Most “native” cultures and languages in Southern Africa actually came from a single group, the Bantu, who made up the African cultural empire from 1500 to 1000 BC. And the bombin, the most distinctive accessory of female indigenous dress in Bolivia, was introduced by British railway workers in the 1920’s.

Any group of individuals have the choice to maintain their own culture or to adopt the culture of others. While so many cultural anthropologists lament the latter, Appiah is adamant that the choice is not theirs to make. He says it is “deeply condescending” to force anyone to adopt any cultural practice or tradition, even if it is their own.

As Lokman and I finished our last foamy swigs of beer at Cambridge Commons I asked him what he’s learned so far in his Ph.D. thesis research of Global Voices. What were his impressions, for example, of how we all communicate on the vast network of mailing lists Global Voices uses to stay on the same page?

“Something that stands out for me,” he said, his words always slow and measured, “is just how polite and receptive everyone is. No idea is treated as too far out there, and everyone is encouraged to speak up.” We walked another 30 yards back toward Harvard Law School until Lokman was ready to finish his thought: “and that’s one of the reasons I’m interested in studying Global Voices. I think it represents the future for all of us. We are all going to have to learn how to communicate and work with people from completely different cultures who speak different languages.”

I thought of Lokman’s observation weeks later when I was staying at a $10-a-night hostel in northern Argentina. It was late, we all had drunk too much wine, and in the corner by the pool table two Israelis, a German, and an Australian Jew were yelling at one another about when it is and is not appropriate to make holocaust jokes. At one point I thought fists were going to fly. I finished my glass of wine, headed back to my dorm room, and made a mental observation that not every global community was as exemplarily tolerant as Global Voices.

Every morning we – all seven billion of us – wake up with a certain amount of cognitive energy, our mental fuel tank for the day to come. We use up this cognitive energy every time our brain must process information and apply knowledge. This includes tasks as seemingly mundane as packing a school lunch for our children, and as complex as understanding the fundamentals of quantum mechanics.

On the one hand, today’s competitive knowledge economy is requiring a larger percentage of the world’s population to expend more cognitive energy than human beings have ever done in the past. Software programmers, for example, often spend 60 hours a week thinking about the logical rules behind the applications on our computers and cell phones. The need to make a day’s worth of cognition as efficient as possible has led to a whole industry of productivity gurus, and to a market of “nueroenhancing drugs.”

On the other hand, the efficiency of the modern global economy means that many individuals in the developed world are working far fewer hours than ever before. Tim Ferriss has recruited a large following on the internet by recommending a four-hour work week. Even those who aren’t able to heed Ferriss’ call to abandon the 9 – 5 office life still spend an average of two office hours per day (one-fourth of their working time) surfing the web for personal use. Salary.com estimated that those 2.09 hours of “wasted time” per 8-hour workday add up to $759 billion per year that employers in the United States spent on salaries “for which real work was expected, but not actually performed.”

In terms of discussing cloud intelligence, however, corporate America’s economic loss is far less interesting than what those millions of office employees are doing with their two hours of personal internet use every day.

Cognitive Surplus and The New Socialism

Starting with the Second World War a whole series of things happened–rising GDP per capita, rising educational attainment, rising life expectancy and, critically, a rising number of people who were working five-day work weeks. For the first time, society forced onto an enormous number of its citizens the requirement to manage something they had never had to manage before–free time.

And what did we do with that free time? Well, mostly we spent it watching TV.

Clay Shirky, Gin, Television, and Social Surplus

In fact, Clay Shirky points out that in the United States we still spend an average of 100 million hours every single weekend just watching advertisements. What else can you do with 100 million hours? According to Shirky, it took roughly 100 million “thought hours” to build Wikipedia, the largest encyclopedia ever assembled and the most popular general reference work on the Internet.

It would be wrong to overstate Shirky’s argument that all of human society is waking from a sitcom-watching slumber to become active producers of online content; after all, most young people today who give up their expensive cable packages for slightly less expensive internet connections are now watching those same sitcoms on their laptops; clips from American Idol dominate YouTube; and the vast majority of the most popular daily search terms on Google are related to celebrity news. The passive consumption that defined decades of television watching, is also a mainstay of today’s connected generation.

Still, even if only an estimated ten percent of internet users actively contribute content, they have already constructed an vast online repository of culture, knowledge, and tools. And we are just at the beginning of what’s to come.

Kevin Kelly calls Wikipedia, Flickr, and Twitter the “vanguard of a cultural movement”, an emerging “global collectivist society.” Amateur photographers, he reminds us, have published over three billion photographs on Flickr. Six billion videos are uploaded to YouTube every month. The blog search engine Technorati tracks over a million blog posts published every single day. Apple’s pervasive iTunes media player serves over 125,000 podcasts, including more than 25,000 video podcasts.

The small minority of internet users who actively contribute content sure do contribute a lot of it. They review restaurants and businesses on Yelp. They fulfill the role of editors by recommending content on Delicious, StumpleUpon, Digg, and Reddit. They share their medical history on Patients Like Me and Google Health. They create high quality maps of their communities on OpenStreetMap and design 3D models of buildings, monuments, and landmarks using Google’s free SketchUp software. They report news just like traditional journalists. On Flickr they help the United States’ Library of Congress describe and contextualize the photographs in their collection. They translate blog posts, articles, magazines, and videos into different languages.

What is even more incredible is that they do this all for free, without receiving any economic compensation whatsoever. Hundreds of millions of internet users are spending a small amount of their day’s cognitive energy not on the work that they are paid to do, but rather the online projects and forms of self-expression that interest them. Kevin Kelly calls it a “New Socialism“, which is based on sharing and community, but not limited by political ideology. (The most active contributors of free content are as likely to idolize Adam Smith as Karl Marx.)

The Cloud: The Third Chapter of the Internet

A little over fifty years ago, Thomas Watson from IBM said that he could foresee a need for perhaps five computers worldwide, and we now know that that figure was wrong, because he overestimated by four.

Clay Shirky, Napster Speech 2

Whether you speak in terms of clouds, streams, or waves (the modern internet sounds like a naturalist’s dreamscape), the recent preview of Google Wave is indicative of a fundamental change that has transformed how we interact with the internet and how the internet enables us to interact with one another.

The modern web was developed in order to enable academics and scientists to share their research with one another. This was done primarily over email, but also with static (and often ugly) web pages. The second chapter began in the 1990’s when, during a bubble of investment, web programmers developed new technologies that made websites more dynamic by using databases, and more interactive thanks to JavaScript and Flash. The investment bubble burst, but those same technologies were implemented to create the tools that make up the internet as we know it today: wikis, blogs, RSS readers, YouTube, Flickr, MySpace, Twitter, and Facebook.

We have now come to the third chapter of the Internet. The “cloud” refers to all those servers based around the world that store our personal data, but which we rarely ever think about. If you are a Gmail user, then your emails live “in the cloud”, on a server at one of Google’s many server farms. Our daily thoughts, in the form of Twitter messages, live in the cloud, as does our search history, our Facebook activity, all of the pictures we publish on Flickr and Picasa.

Just two years ago I stored all of my text documents on my own computer and would send them via email to anyone who showed interest. If they made edits to my documents, then I would need to update my own local copy. Today my documents are stored “in the cloud”, on Google Docs, where they can be instantly accessed by trusted friends and colleagues. At any time I can access the most recent copy of any document on my computer or mobile phone. Today we don’t just publish information to the internet; we actually create it online and then download it to our computers and cell phones when we need it.

The cloud is growing exponentially. Every day more and more of us spend a small percentage of our cognitive energy to add value to the cloud. And as we do so, the cloud itself becomes more intelligent, a vast social brain in which every internet user is a metaphorical neuron. In fact, the structure of the internet and the processes it depends on is similar to that of the human brain.

The less evolved brain

Neurons in the cingulate cortex of a mouse. [via Wikipedia]

The human brain is by far the most complex organ that three to four billion years of natural selection on this planet have been able to produce. It consists of roughly 100 billion neurons, each linked to 10,000 synaptic connections. Information travels across the brain via small electrical impulses that are transmitted from neuron to neuron, much in the same way that information travels across the internet. Right now, while you’re reading this, billions of small electrical impulses are firing away in your brain as you parse the information, store it in your memory, and apply your own knowledge to add context and challenge what I write.

Visualization of the internet by the Opte Project.

In comparison, the internet is a decidedly less complex and less evolved organ. Internet World Stats estimates that there are 1.6 billion internet users, or “social neurons”. According to one study, the average Facebook user is connected to 164 “friends”, a far cry from the 10,000 synaptic connections between our 100 billion brain cells. In other words, while the internet could one day become self-aware, it is still in the earliest chapters of its evolution. Yet, already there are several examples which reveal how the internet is rapidly becoming humanity’s social nervous system. Joshua-Michele Ross points to the emergency response following the Mumbai terrorist attacks, Obama’s “Project Houdini“, and Google’s global virus forecasting as three manifestations of the networked social brain.

The human brain formed its present structure over 10,000 years ago when our ancestors encountered environments which required the type of advanced reasoning only provided by a larger brain. With a larger brain came moral reasoning, consciousness, and most importantly, language, without which we could not transmit culture and knowledge across generations. The organ we each carry around in our skulls today, however, has evolved little in the past 10,000 years. It formed when our ancestors lived in tribes of roughly 150 people, not mega-cities filled with millions, and personal address books filled with thousands of contacts.

As the cloud continues to expand exponentially with more information, more social neurons, and more connections between them, our own humble human brains will need to adapt in order to make the most effective use of the cloud without succumbing to lifetimes of mere “continuous partial attention.”

No matter how actively or passively we spend our time online, what we can all be sure of is that one day sooner or later our brain will stop functioning and our stay here on planet Earth will conclude. We will remain, of course, in the memories of our friends and family, and also in the bits and bytes of digital footprints that we leave in the cloud for the generations that follow. What they do with the information we leave behind – or, indeed, what the cloud itself does with the information – will depend on a new type of networked evolution that values sharing and community over proprietary protection.

The writing on the wall across the street reads:

Ni indigenismo, ni oligarquía
Viva la revolución obrera

The main thoroughfare of wrinkled, potholed pavement branches out into a vast labyrinthine lattice of cobble-stoned alleys named after Latin American countries and leaders of this revolution and that. One in every ten buildings is a concrete and brick skeleton, an assertion of what could be but isn’t quite yet, a metaphor for this entire continent.

Eddie and I walk through Cochabamba’s downtown in search of what is either late lunch or early dinner. The informal economy punctuates every street corner; pirated DVD’s, candied peanuts, diabetes in a box. The main plaza (the best damn thing that the Spaniards brought to the new world) is filled with the usual shoeshiners toting their wooden footrests and the teenage couples sticking their tongues down one another’s throats. Plump old women sit in the shade peddling handicrafts and Chinese imports. The leafy trees weigh heavy with history.

On the walk back to Eddie’s apartment the streets are busy with the buzzing excitement of dusk: young girls smile embarrassingly as they exchange the day’s gossip, boys with slicked back hair and puffed-out chests hold on tightly to the hands of their girlfriends. The full moon is hidden behind the hills, waiting for the city to settle down before rising and slowly painting the valley floor from north to south in milky moonlight.

I know this isn’t my continent. I know I will always be a stranger here, no matter how many modismos I learn, no matter how many lyrics I can sing, no matter how many dishes I can cook. But walking through the streets of Latin American cities and pueblos always fills me with a sense of familiarity, a sense of calm.

Today’s podcast is a collection of some of my favorite electronic music from Latin America. It is meant for long walks through cobblestoned callejones of your favorite Latin American city.

Download (Right-click, save as)

They believe in human dignity across the nations, and they live their creed. They share these ideals with people in many countries, speaking many languages. As thoroughgoing globalists, they make full use of the World Wide Web. This band of brothers and sisters resist the crass consumerism of modern Western society and its growing influence in the rest of the world. But these people also resist the temptations of the narrow nationalisms of the countries where they were born. They would never go to war for a country; but they will enlist in a campaign against any nation that gets in the way of universal justice. Indeed, they resist the call of all local allegiances, all traditional loyalties, even to family. They oppose them because they get in the way of the one thing that matters: building a community of enlightened men and women across the world … Sometimes they agonize in their discussions about whether they can reverse the world’s evils or whether their struggle is hopeless. But mostly they soldier on in their efforts to make the world a better place.

That comes from Kwame Anthony Appiah’s Cosmopolitanism, a framework for thinking about universal ethics in a “world of strangers.” At first glance the description seems apt for the hundreds of bloggers, editors, and translators that make up Global Voices. It could also easily describe the dozens of human rights geeks gathered a couple months ago in Berkeley. Or a week later in San Jose. It could describe Teddy, Alex, Juliana, Erik, and hundreds of others.

But no. That was Appiah’s description of Al Qaeda and the global Muslim fundamentalists they attract. An important reminder that there is another side to cultural globalization, and we’re not engaging that other side in conversation.