Joi Ito's Web

Joi Ito's conversation with the living web.

As a child I travelled a lot, but mostly between US and Japan. I dealt with a lot of bicultural issues, but the rest of the world seemed far away. In the 90's I started going to Europe and Asia more, but it was always to "civilized" places.

Several years ago, I became actively involved in trying to reform Japan and I was allowed to be quite vocal about this. Last year, I gave a rant at Davos about how broken Japanese democracy was. Afterwards, Ms. Ogata, the former UN High Commissioner for Refugees told me that I should stop ranting as a Japanese and think more about global democracy and global issues. These words stuck with me and last year I tried to think about blogs and emergent democracy outside of the Japanese context. With the US elections front and center, the obvious place to try to apply these thoughts was the US. Having spent a year or so thinking about US politics, I realize how important the US election is, but I'm drawn more and more to countries that need more help.

I think many of us avoid thinking about or worrying about the rest of the world. We hear people talking about poverty, but it sounds like something in some far away country on a National Geographic special. Most people just don't care. To be honest, I cared, but in retrospect, I didn't REALLY care. I guess better late than never. As I prepare for my trip to Africa with Ethan and try to figure out exactly how I can contribute and what I should be studying, I'm drawn back to organizations such as the UNHCR. On the flight back to Japan, I saw Beyond Borders, a movie about relief work and the UNHCR, starring Angelina Jolie. The movie captured some of the experiences of being an activist on a global level and I watched it thinking about what drove some people to such high levels of commitment. Googling around, I found Angelina Jolie's journal from her mission to Russia last year. (We need to get her a blog...) What is really striking to me and something that I'm trying understand is the process that people go through to reach a higher level of caring for human beings outside of their immediate circle. I think that this process holds the key for some of the important contributions that technologies can make.


Your sentiments are noble, not enough people do REALLY care about the large portion of the planet living below the poverty line. However, I disagree with your suggestion that your (US) presidential election is not related to helping countries in greater economic, and social, need.

Films and rhetoric help raise awareness but as we have seen repeatedly in Africa even grand appeals such as 'Live Aid' all offer only short term relief.

I offer the opinion that using the democracy available to you, in your own country(ies) and helping change your administration to one that has a more ethical foreign policy is perhaps the single most important thing one can do in helping iron out the gross imbalance between the world's rich and poor, not only abroad but at home as well.


Having seen the movie here in Tokyo at a film festival, I feel that using "Beyond Borders" to somehow illustrate the work of the UNHCR actually takes away from their efforts. I am not alone here.

 "Beyond Borders so trivializes the plight of the world's displaced peoples that it becomes actively obnoxious."

"Beyond Borders has good intentions and wants to call attention to the plight of refugees, but what a clueless vulgarization it makes of its worthy motives."

"Despite all its grisly sights, the most disturbing thing about Beyond Borders is the magnitude of its miscalculation. In this movie, the world's a stage for ill-fated romance, and famine and war aren't much more than props."

"By the time the closing credits come up, you're left with the unshakable feeling that things might have been a tad better off if all involved had scrapped this terrible film and instead donated the multimillion-dollar budget to charity."

"Beyond Borders makes an earnest stab at illustrating the hardships and sacrifices humanitarian workers contend with -- but in the end, all the suffering merely forms an amorphous backdrop for a Harlequin romance."
-- Megan Lehmann, NEW YORK POST

"A liberal video game that demeans the very refugees it tries to spotlight."
-- Elvis Mitchell, NEW YORK TIMES

Beyond Borders []


I'll take you on a crawl through the Middle East some time, and see how you feel after looking at THAT level of poverty and chaos. Then I'll sit you down with some of my people that are either from those torn-up places, so you can learn their stories, or "went native" (just like me) when "in country."

And if you have about a week of free time, I'll start (just -start-) to explain the politics of the region and what went wrong, is going wrong, and will come back to haunt the world that REALLY doesn't care.

Sam. Agree US politics is important, but there are a lot of people who are working on this and I will continue to do so in whatever capacity that I can. However, it is slightly limited because I am not a US citizen.

Gen. Right. My point was that the movie "got me thinking" about these things and it appears that Angelina Jolie does care.

Michael. I might take you up on that.

I think that sometimes people tend to try and help solve problems in other countries while over looking problems in their own country. If you live in the US, you don't need to go to Somalia to find black people that need help. In California or Texas you can find Hispanic families that could use a hand, instead of going to Colombia.

I disagree with Ms. Ogata that you should care about the entire world instead of just Japan. I don't see anything wrong with talking about Japan's broken democracy, since it's a problem that needs to be fixed.

People make it seem like they are helping more if the go to the Congo-DRC with the Peace Corps than if they go to their local food kitchen and volunteering. What's wrong with focusing on local issues? To me, nothing.

> What's wrong with focusing
> on local issues?

Nothing, it's a great idea; I'm trying to do more of it myself. But there are many places where everyone is in dire straits, so there is no one local to lend a hand.

Joi, this:

> something that I'm trying
> understand is the process
> that people go through to
> reach a higher level of
> caring

strikes me also as being vitally important. What is the difference between someone who cares, and someone who does not? Knowing that might be a huge step forward in getting people to care.

I am happy for ya Joi, but you should do it only if you want to and not because you 'should'. Personally, I feel happier investing more time on family and friends.

you're on to something very important here -- arguably the most urgent issue we face. Sometimes I think it is the exposure to culture shock at an early age that made me aware of cross cultural issues, but ultimately it probably comes down to a number of things: can we think about others suffering if we dont know where our next meal is going to come from? Conversely, can we even comprehend the kind of life being lived for 10 years in a refugee tent if we dont know where our meals come from (ie those who dont know hunger)?

Somehow we need to be able to see the interdependence of all nature, including human nature. But for some reason most people are swept up in the logic that says we are above nature, that we can game the system to take whatever we want, by whatever means necessary. If that means sending invading armies, then let their blood flow (so long as it's not my family's).

What connects us to others is those stories of people who live in different circumstances, and in which we find a common thread. So perhaps we need stories -- everyday stories which connect us at a visceral level. Maybe then we can see "others" not as alien or enemies, but as part of our human nature.

Sound like a feel-good ad for blogs?

(flame guard on) The most effective thing people of average wealth can do for the world's poor is try to raise the price of Microsoft stock.

Bill Gates through his foundation has done more for the health of the poor than any group in recent history. With a current endowment of $26 billion (USD), a methodology that involves quantitative followups and rigorous benchmarking to make sure that the money is well spent, and a great approach to helping causes that nobody finds it sexy to help, the foundation can actually make a difference in saving literally millions of lives a year (see for numbers). With Gates rich enough personally now and with plenty set aside for his kids, any appreciation in his roughly 1 billion shares ( or so Microsoft stock will go toward his foundation.

Of course, now that the top bloggers, Joi himself, wall street and other influentials have decided that Macs, Ipods and (any tech company other than microsoft) are just so much cooler than big bad MS all of that money goes into Steve Jobs's next media venture and Silicon Valleys overpriced lifestyles and not to the needy. In fact, if Microsoft were trading at the same Price/Earnings ratio as Apple, Bill Gates and his foundation would be roughly 87.5% richer and his roughly 1 billion shares would be equate to $26 Billion more for the foundation. In other words, you would double the size of the Gates foundation by simply valuing Microsoft at an identical level as Apple assuming Gates only invests the appreciation into foundation. To take this analogy to an even greater extreme, an influential person bragging about switching away from Microsoft may have actually cost lives. (flame guard off)

There's a huge moral step deciding overtly to help the world's indigent. To actually make a difference is an even more challenging undertaking. One thing you can change is the way that your circle treats people and companies that ultimately make a difference.

Joi, I really hope you make the significant difference that many of us wish we were capable enough to have earned the opportunity to do so.

I personally hope you don't abandon your efforts to make a difference in Japan. You are in a much better position to understand and perhaps influence what happens there.

There are many involved in efforts around the world, but how many have an ear with people of influence in Japan *and* the will to see change.

Japan is such an important part of the world economy. As anyone observing the global economy knows when major economies have hickups or are in decline there are very real repercussions around the world.

You could say that Japan is an important variable in a sensitive chaotic system. Small changes in value can precipitate larger changes around the planet.

You may remember this - John Perry Barlow wrote a long article in Wired magazine (in 1999, I think) that was a diary/chronicle of his (one-or-two-month) trip to Africa exploring how people were starting to use the Internet. It was fascinating, and it was pre bust. I would guess it's an easy article to find in Wired's archives (google "John Perry Barlow Africa Internet" ?)

Indeed it is critical for all of us to care much more about all of the world, not just the society in which we live.

And it seems pretty clear that there is already in place a global infrastructure of capitalism, commerce and politics that guarantees that things stay pretty much the same and that rich men continue to extract and exploit the resources (human and otherwise) that are available.

Interconnected people and technology are I think probably the only vehicle, and the only possibility, left that is not controlled ... with which and by which people can be helped to connect and co-create initiatives that can make substantive change happen.

Joi and commenters -- some excellent quips and thoughts. It is a real pleasure to listen to this diverse lot speak about a topic that is so central to our species.

As I began thinking about REALLY caring in the context of local/global relief/development I began thinking about what distinguishes relief work from development work. This is a very old distinction and one more eloquently made by professionals in the field, but my experiences growing up in the third world and living now in the first are my excuse for rehashing this distinction.

Crisis relief is nearly always an act of incursion from the outside.

Sustainable development is always already local.

Relief does not require much understanding of the story within which the victim dwells. Development cannot happen without such understanding. Crossing this amorphous boundary is what it is to begin moving from relief to development.

One example of this is how we use our tools. Tools of know-how, mechanical capability and digital communication are necessary for both relief and development. In relief work specialists come in for short periods of triage in which the foreign nature of the methods and materials used are secondary to crisis aversion. In development work the focus is not on the project of crisis aversion, but on the program of structural change. Knowing how to position new knowledge within the social frameworks and plausibility structures already in place on the ground and knowing how to respectfully introduce new mechanized capabilities and communication channels into the fabric of a society is what determines if the intention to develop sustainable change ever makes it past a certain technological oddity or foreign industrial colonialism.

It is far easier to do relief work than it is to do development. It is easier to raise money for dramatic rescue operations and easier to recruit short-term professionals to carry them out than it is to work day-in and day-out in the details of a long-term, under-capitalized change initiative that gestates and nurtures contexts less prone to the emergencies relief agencies were created to address.

My musings should not be misconstrued as advocating development over relief work. Obviously, both are needed and it is perhaps even artificial to separate them in the manner of this brief analysis.

JPB's article was titled Africa Rising (January 1998). You've probably already read it, back in the mists of time.

In case not, it's here:

Dan, good point about relief work vs development work. I personally am probably more suited for development work and hope that I can help make a difference with technology. Ethan and I are plotting to try to help give people a voice in these countries. I think blogging plays a role. Also, I think that creative commons can play a role. I think that the culture of these countries is not appreciated well. We see them in movies from Hollywood and as samples in over-produced music. I think that creative commons makes it possible for artists to from these countries to share their work and allow "un-neutered" versions of the culture to be mail available on the Net. I realize that this isn't going to immediately put bread on the table and that most people in the countries are not able to use computers, but I think it is a step towards addressing "the caring problem." Hoder has been able to make a huge difference in getting Iranian's to blog and blogs have become one of the few voices that we hear from Iran.

But to your point, there are many angles. Human rights work, relief, development, etc. All important.

As for Bill Gate. I am encouraged to see him doing this sort of giving, but I'm not sure whether I think "make me rich, then I'll give to the poor" is my favorite method. I'd like to lead by example and if I do believe that grass roots activity and general awareness are extremely important. I understand the logic, but I don't know if I like the, "I just switch from Apple to Windows so I'm helping the poor and I'm OK" attitude. Again, hats off to Bill, but I'm going to try to provide my own impact.

As for Japan. Yes. I will continue to work on helping Japan. Japan is having a mild economic recovery right now and most people are focused making sure we stay this path and are not in a particularly revolutionary mood. There is change going on, but it is slow and methodical. Not really my style. ;-) Also, I think awareness of the rest of the world and tolerance for difference is one of the things Japan lacks most so I think I can tie these projects together.

Joi, I agree with Jonathan Shore when he points out your influences in helping reform Japan; in some ways, I would argue you are more needed here than wherever else you have your eyes set on. Yes, it's slow, and yes it's tiring and often inefficient compared to your experiences with other more Western environments, but maybe that's because there is no more low-hanging fruit. Japan isn't the second largest economy by fluke; all the basic needs had been established here long ago, so needed reform is now more along the lines of social awareness. The old cliche of teaching a farmer how to fish rather than just give fish could be applicable in this case. From what I'm gathering, you're seeing the plight of poverty in [un/under]developed countries and wanting to help with basics, such as water, hygien, etc -- tangible differences you feel you can make with your own two hands. That would be "giving fish". But then, consider that you could probably get a brigade of Japanese to do the assistance -- "teaching how to fish". Up until the SDF deployment in Iraq, Japan's "assistance" with global affairs and development has predominantly been through financial means. Helpful, but definitely not the best Japan could be doing. You, Joi, can help Japan do its best in international affairs much better (albeit much faster) than most. I am not by any means trying to trivialize the approach to social causes you are taking, but rather just playing devil's advocate on where your influence and skills are best deployed.

Having said that, I'm getting the sense that you feel change in Japan happens more easily from the outside than from within....

I used to think that hearing Japanese talk about global peace and democracy was a really great thing. Now I wonder if its not just a coverup/substitution for any lack of honest debate on the lack of democracy here in Japan.

You might want to check out Encountering Development for another perspective on the effects of international cooperation and development. My international development teacher back at Waseda recommended it to me and I thought it definetly presented a challenging viewpoint.

In the book Escobar talks about how "1st world" countries define what "3rd world" means (as a reverse mirror image of themselves) and then proceed to make countries over from their culturally biased perspective.

Even if you don't agree with everything Escobar says, a lot of people agree with his critiques, so it might be useful to know about this school of thought. Cheers.

"Having said that, I'm getting the sense that you feel change in Japan happens more easily from the outside than from within...."

Interesting thought from Matt. On one hand, I think that maybe it is easier to make change from outside than from within. In the world we live in, the demands of the global market has the greatest influence on most countries policies. This is no different in Japan. Of course, it doesn't mean that there is not a push for change from within, it's just that the impetus for that change is a desire not to be left behind. If everyone else in the world wanted a change in Japan, and decided to vote with their wallets, the Japanese citizens would then push for change so they can hang on to their ipods.

That being said, I think that working to make change locally is extremely important. For most people, being secure and satisfied at home, on a local level is a prerequisite for caring about others abroad. I think this has a lot to do with the tipping point of when people start to "REALLY care" about global issues, and will start to make consumer decisions based on their global effects, as opposed to thinking only about themselves.

However, I think it's a little too simplistic to say either someone REALLY cares or they don't. I do some things that would lead people to think I don't REALLY care, and you do things that lead me to think that you don't REALLY care. Of course you do care, and it is all relative.

I have thought a lot about my own phases, or where the tipping point is, thinking that if I can find the tipping point, it will be easy to make the whole world care. Unfortunately, that tipping point and the is going to be different for everyone. What happens after the tipping point will also depend on the person and their lifestyle, abilities, and connections. Joi, for instance, is in a position where he can maybe make more of an impact by focusing on a global level, while some people are better equiped to focus their efforts on a local level. Some people may only be able to work on an individual level.

The stages I have identified in myself, and my tiipping point are as follows. It would be interesting to hear where your tipping point was Joi.

1. Ignorance
----Blissfully unaware of problems and plights of both neighbors and those thousands of miles away.

2. Awareness
----Heard something on the news. Know it's not good. Think "Someone should do something about that."

3. Superficial action
----Start making easy changes, that don't effect my lifestyle. Requesting paper bags instead of plastic. Recycle bottles. "Adopt" a poor kid in Columbia. Begin to feel "I am good.", yet continue with my own irresponsible patterns of consumption, make decisions based on my own wants, rather than how they will effect other people.

My Tipping point
3.5 Relative satisfied with own economic / social condition
----Realize that I don't need to be rich, that my "quality of life" is not based on how much money I have, that I don't need to own what TV, movies, and blogs tell me I do. Begin to have less-quantitative values. Spend less time trying to get richer, begin to have more time to read about both local and global issues.

4. Deeper awareness
----Aware of how my life-style decisions are effecting other people in a negative way. Begin to seriously think about global / local inequalities and what it really means.

4.5 Dissatisfied with own condition as an irresponsible-consumer.
----Realize that my superficial actions are worthless, no matter how many times I re-use a plastic bag, it doesn't help if I am using it buy sweat-shop goods at Wal-Mart. In order to make change, I have to change my lifestyle first, because it is my lifestyle that promotes global inequality.

5. Despair
----Overwhelmed with the enormity of the situation, and the impossibility of changing my behavior, yet remaining a member of a society that doesn't share my values, and puts enormous pressure to put myself first.

6. Find examples / community
----Begin reading, searching, eventually find a community and examples of people who share my values.

7. Resolution / Search for answers
----If they can do it, I can do it too. Resolve that I will make consumer decisions based on a "first, do no harm" approach.
Research, research, research. What are the effects of my decisions? How much do I need to consume? What should I avoid? What can I cut out? What can I use as a substitute?

8. Implementation on a personal level
----Live own life according to the information I am finding. Strive to make good decisions. This is a semi-active approach. While I am actively changing my own lifestyle, placing my wallet vote, I am not doing anything to actively influence others to make large scale changes.

9. Despair
----Plagued with increased awareness, filled with despair that for every good choice or sacrifice I make, there are hundreds of thousands of individuals who don't care, who are working against a sustainable, equitable earth, who can nullify a years worth of my sacrifices, with a single trip to the mall.

10. Implementation on a local level
----Activism on a local level. First, setting an example to those around you by living in a way that promotes your ideals. Devoting time and money to help local institutions influence local policy.

11. Implementation on a global level
While I am not there yet, I have recently applied to a couple graduate programs regarding policy making for sustainability and global equity, in the hopes that I can use what I learn there to implement more wide-spread changes and influence more than my friends and family.

Kevin: stories, yes. I grew up in New Guinea, so I could walk in and out of other people's stories as a boy. I think that helped me later on. The net is a great way for undiluted stories to disseminate. Projects shared online between classrooms on opposite sides of the world, that sort of thing. that's pretty much exactly how it's gone for me too. I'm on step 9.5 right about now; that is, starting on step 10. Would you mind if I copied that to my blog?


Interesting post and thought provoking... The comments are interesting too.

Thanks for the link to Angelina Jolie's journal. Our family spent the month of December in Urlask, KZ adopting a 14 year old girl. We did not experience the depth of poverty and transcent living that Angelina visited but I can feel the interactions with the warm and beautiful people of the region.

Our new daughter grew up in an orphanage at the geographic borders of Europe and Asia (Ural River. There is a depth of life in this part of the world that I can't yet describe. We were able to deeply bond with some incredible people and go a bit beyond the "heaviness" of the culture. Bringing a child into the "1st world" and having a responsibility to our local family and global community can very challenging. So much of me wants to fix the challenges all over the world when I read things like this.

So the challenge is where to go and how to help? I believe it's about balance, understanding and attention.

Somehow I feels easier to talk about or think about helping the outside world. As we planned our adption trip to Uralsk I made contact with local NGO's and asked lots of questions about local-region community that lives in poverty by western standards. Nothing could prepare me for the depth and complexity before actually visiting this place. And nothing could prepare me for bringing a new individual into our family. We became active experiential learners in the growth of family and community while in Kazakhstan. The people we were able to get close to were so much more similiar to us than some of our American neighbors and yet there was so much difference.

I've been given another opportunity to deepen my inner awareness and found some interesting surprises. My children are teaching me locally and globally every day and I can feel how quickly stepping back into my world I can settle back into a simple I centered awareness.

Kevin, your tipping points are an interesting way to describe levels of development and awareness internally and externally.

What I find is with all this discussion it comes back to remembering what I've forgotten and we as a community have forgotten under layers and layers of systems of better living.

Life is incredibly simple, living it is not. We can all help to make living less complex and more simple.

Regarding "the process that people go through to reach a higher level of caring for human beings outside of their immediate circle" a wonderful model might be the study of what inspired Bobby Sager, who practices one of the most remarkable models for "hands-on" philanthropy I’ve seen. He has transformed his success in the private sector into meaningful altruistic results. See

sennoma: Please do :)

Aw crap, sorry about all the trackbacks! I kept getting an error, and I forgot to come here and check whether it was actually failing or not.

*hangs head*

joi says:
> Ethan and I are plotting to try
> to help give people a voice in
> these countries. I think
> blogging plays a role. Also, I
> think that creative commons
> can play a role....
> I think it is a step towards
> addressing "the caring problem."

Would you talk a bit about this at SXSW Interactive next month? I would be fascinated to hear more about the work you and Ethan are undertaking.

Integration Research, a not-for-profit org whose board I am on, may have some overlapping cultural/technological vision in this regard.


I'm not personally dedicated to any religion or faith, but the following seems apropos to the question of whether to contribute first in your own back yard, or that of your distant neighbor's:

"Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye. (Matt. 7:1-5)"

In this passage, a kernel of undeniable common sense defeats any accusation of selfishness, but It's mainly a spirited protest against hypocrisy. Not a problem in your case, but it's always good to keep this quote in the back of your mind.

It seems to me that either with or without the existence of a God, the responsibility of our species as guardian of the planet and each other, is apparent and urgent. Perhaps the question then becomes, where can I do my best work? The mere fact that you're asking yourself this question is a heartening thing for a fellow human to see.

As a working-class person, I'm pretty sure I'm already living in the rest of the world (also known locally as Brooklyn). As Manuel Castells points out in The Network Society, the developed and under-developed worlds no longer occupy non-overlapping geographical spaces: The Third World is present in every city. Here along Myrtle Avenue, for example, you've got projects out of Spike Lee's "Clockers" (literally) on one side of the park and x-million-dollar brownstones on the other, all using the same deli to pick up their New York Post. So you don't really have to travel great distances to observe global phenomena at work: They arrive with a writ of eminent domain from their cronies at City Hall to build an NBA basketball arena on your property.

The same goes for the Gates Foundation: I attended a ferocious debate among NGOs at the World Social Forum last year about whether organizations should accept donated Microsoft software or use open-source products. One side argued that Microsoft products were what the job market demanded, the other that general computer literacy (say, learning spreadsheets and word-processing through Open Office) would allow students to adapt quickly to any comparable system and enable them make informed choices rather than being locked in to a proprietary technology.

It's a choice you face in your own life: brand-name products increasingly have ethical principles built into them. Starbucks pays fair prices to growers, so we like it; Liquor companies campaign for responsible consumption, so we think better of them; Philip Morris delivers a quit-smoking message during the Super Bowl, so we despise them less; Microsoft makes huge charitable contributions to foster IT education in the developing world.

The problem is, critics say, that Microsoft's largesse is tied in with its own interest in cornering developing markets by creating captive consumers for its products. And this argument is very persuasive to "the rest of the world." Increasingly, developing countries are saying that they prefer to develop their own technology (Brazil, China, India, Israel). And why not? What would you prefer? A handout tied to a system into whose development you have no input, or the ability to affordably develop your own machine on your own terms? Would you rather run your own business or be dependent on a Kafkaesque welfare system? If you've ever been on unemployment, disability, or public assistance in the five boroughs of New York (2 out of 3 for me), you probably won't have to think twice about that one. I don't know about you, but the rest of the world lives right next door here in Brooklyn.

Interesting thoughts on 1st and 3rd world existing across the street from each other. It just shows how much we miss in our local community when we become aware of global social issues.

Would it be too paranoid to suggest that Mrs. Ogata mostly just wanted you to stop embarrassing the Japanese government?

The idea of focusing your efforts on improving democracy in the US instead of Japan smacks me as more than a little ludicrous.

Considering that you seemed to be achieving some serious visibility on the Japanese-focused front, it seems like a lost opportunity to switch to a different shiny object...

5 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Caring about the rest of the world.

TrackBack URL for this entry:

Joi Ito, in one of his thinking-out-loud style posts, wondered about what it is that makes people care: What is really striking to me and something that I'm trying understand is the process that people go through to reach a higher level of caring for h... Read More

Joi Ito, in one of his thinking-out-loud style posts, wondered about what it is that makes people care: What is really striking to me and something that I'm trying understand is the process that people go through to reach a higher level of caring for h... Read More

Joi Ito, in one of his thinking-out-loud style posts, wondered about what it is that makes people care: What is really striking to me and something that I'm trying understand is the process that people go through to reach a higher level of caring for h... Read More

Joi Ito, in one of his thinking-out-loud style posts, wondered about what it is that makes people care: What is really striking to me and something that I'm trying understand is the process that people go through to reach a higher level of caring for h... Read More

Joi Ito, in one of his thinking-out-loud style posts, wondered about what it is that makes people care: What is really striking to me and something that I'm trying understand is the process that people go through to reach a higher level of caring for h... Read More