The Futurica Trilogy Audio Book (All Books and Chapters)

The Futurica Trilogy: Chapter 1 – Technology As The Driving Force Of History


The Futurica Trilogy: Chapter 2 – Feudalism, Capitalism, and Informationalism


The Futurica Trilogy: Chapter 3 – Plurarchical Society The Death of Etatism and The Crisis of Democracy


The Futurica Trilogy: Chapter – 4 Information, Propaganda and Entertainment


The Futurica Trilogy: Chapter 5 – Curators, Nexialists and Eternalists


The Futurica Trilogy: Chapter 6 – Globalisation, the Death of Mass Media


The Futurica Trilogy: Chapter 7 – The New Biology And Netocratic Ethics


The Futurica: Chapter 8 – The Convulsions of Collectivity, The Death of Man and the Virtual Subject


The Futurica Trilogy: Chapter 8 – The Convulsions of Collectivity, The Death of Man and the Virtual Subject


The Futurica Trilogy: Chaper 9 – Network Pyramids – Attentionalistic Power Hierarchies


The Futurica Trilogy: Chapter 10 – Sex and Tribalism, Virtual Education and the Inequality of the Brain


The Futurica Trilogy: Chapter 11 – Behind The Firewall Neocratic Civil War And Virtual Revolutionaries

Engagement Rank

What is Engagement Rank as a Search Engine Ranking Factor?

Engagement Rank is a neologism for an implied Google algorithm that is making itself known to SEO analysts worldwide.  It was first acknowledged by Bruce Clay in 2012 via his purchase of the domain http://www.EngagementRank.com forwarded to BruceClay.com. In 2013, Russell Wright (former student of Bruce Clay) suggested the need for an expanded definition of Engagement Rank as several new “engagement-based” search engine ranking factors were validated in early 2013 by the Network Empire Team.

Kevin Gibbons in his Search Engine Watch article (Is Human Engagement Google’s New Ranking Factor for 2013?) provides a good starter-list of likely factors that Google will take into account when determining the Engagement Rank of a website or page:

High Engagement Rank factors are probably awarded to content that is:

  1. Entertaining (Added by Network Empire)
  2. Remarkable
  3. Insightful
  4. First (Original or Novel)
  5. Creative
  6. Useful
  7. Unique
  8. Agile
  9. Prepared to adapt (Early Warning or Futurist – added by Network Empire)

 

Kevin Gibbon goes on to suggest some specific proprietary algorithmic factors. These are a part of what we suggested should be grouped as Engagement Rank:

Bounce rates:

If a user hits your content from Google, then bounces straight back out, that’s not a good sign. Obviously, you want your content to engage and resonate with your audience.

Referring traffic:

A good link should have the ability to send traffic from a targeted audience. If a link can drive leads, it’s a good link! Any SEO value is a bonus.

Social signals:

Are people sharing your content via social channels?

Authorship:

Who wrote the content? Are they an authoritative writer or influencer within your niche?

Additional Engagement Rank Factors Predicted by the Network Empire Team:

Bounce rate (as described above) is not specific enough to reveal the full impact of Engagement Rank on the new web. TOS or Time on Site is perhaps a more important factor. But to reduce Engagement Rank to the simplest common denominator – it is necessary only to look at Youtube as an effective ranking factor in our tests throughout 2013.

Youtube as a Ranking Wild Card in 2013

Throught 2012 and 2013 we have noticed that Youtube has been a “wild card” and in many cases a get out of jail free card in many instances of SEO – when properly used. It makes sense that videos and especially Youtube videos would get unfair ranking factor. The reason for this should be obvious.

1. Google owns Youtube.

2. They are ramping up the largest ever adwords system called video adwords.

3. They can insert these ads directly under any and every video about any topic engaging any viewer within the global pool of over 1.8 billion viewers.

4. When a video is included on an html page (or any kind of page for that matter) time on page and therefore time on site increase by thousands of percents.

5. This engagement time is increased even when a video is placed on a so-called “Spam” or “auto-generated” web page which begs the questions “If a video plays on an autoblogged spam page, engaging the viewer for several minutes, is it STILL SPAM? Hint: My answer is “no”, and so is Google’s based on the ease with which they rank pages with their own Youtube videos and html pages that embed them.

6. Pages with Youtube video embedded within them get indexed via the Google sitemap technology very easily. Even by the tens of thousands.

7. Youtube has become a MASSIVE Domain Authority like no other because of the increased engagement it provides to all external website via Youtube iframes.

Additional Factors Added to the Engagement Rank Algorithm:

 Time on Site (Not Just Bounce Rate)

Bounce rate is a great indicator but time on site is obviously more important to Google because when you follow the money, that is what it is about/ The longer the time on site, the more time Google has to engage more people with more videos exposing them to more video ads as described in the last section. This is where the money is – long term branding and engagement.

– Number of Views, Interactive Likes and View/Engagement Time for Specific Videos Hosted Directly on Youtube

It is entirely possible that the number of views a video has received directly on Youtube may become a Ranking Factor for that video and/or the indexed html page that contains that embedded video. In fact, it is entirely possible that this is aready a ranking factor. This would explain many of the ranking anamolies we have seen.

– Number of Times Embedded on Other Websites Outside of the Youtube Environment

When a Youtube video is embedded on a high number of external websites, this redirects Domain Authority to the Youtube page containing the video. But something else may be happening that you can really USE. I realize it is a huge claim, but we currently theorize that it may be true: When you embed a popular video that has already been proven to attract high engagement time – it may actually help rank your html page, blop post or page.

Recursion

Recursion (and/or recursive embeddedness) is the process of repeating items in a self-similar way. For instance, when the surfaces of two mirrors are exactly parallel with each other the nested images that occur are a form of infinite recursion. Also see fractal. Also see recursion in computer science.

The term has a variety of meanings specific to a variety of disciplines ranging from linguistics to logic.

The most common application of recursion is in mathematics and computer science, in which it refers to a method of defining functions in which the function being defined is applied within its own definition.

Russell Wright of Theme Zoom is fond of using recursion in the context of neurocognitive emergence theory, artificial intelligence as well as hydrodynmic theory (as related to water purification and energizing mechanisms) within fluid dynamics. *Wright studied with Dan E Winter for many years as an intern. Daniel Winter (former child prodigy and controversial genius electronic engineer) is a huge proponant of recursive embeddedness and fractal (Phi) mathematics. This influence can be seen in Wright’s new and emerging philosophy called Epimemetics, where recursive embededness is a core Epimeme.

Rollin McCraty of Heartmath (involved in the early lawsuit between Dan Winter and Meru) also has a wealth of legitimate scientific information dedicated to Heart Coherence. Please see Mr. McCraty’s 2003 statement on this issue.

VS Ramachandran’s work in neuroscience predicts the existence of a portion of the brain called metarepresentation generator and this is the source of what he calls “recursive embedding” and he predicts this region as the location of recursive (self-aware) thought.

Cycle of Boredom and Defeat

The little-known concept called the Cycle of Boredom was first revealed to Russell Wright of Network Empire by P. Belcher, and Russell continues to make improvements and enhancements on this concept and insert it into Network Empire Painkiller Article Marketing concepts (PAM). The original Cycle of Boredom is drawn from the discipline of sexual psychology and dopaminergics but is explained in terms of neuromarketing.

The best way to use these concepts for marketing is to think of them in terms of your Marketing Offer. As Gary Halbert once said: “It’s the Offer Stupid!”.

By offer, we mean your sales copy and the accompanying headline that goes with it.

In addition to being a very useful guide to understanding the state of mind of your prospect or customer – it might also be one of the keys to spiritual enlightenment. By understanding the cycle, you might be able to understand yourself better and perhaps even accelerate or bypass some of the most difficult phases in the Cycle of Boredom.

We will use the cycle of boredom in the context of a romantic relationship because, for some reason, people seem to understand it better when first described in this way. Here are the phases simplified:

  1. Interested: A man shows mild interest in a woman or a woman in a man. They are indirect at first, and checking to see if the person is a prospect and possible mate. In this phase, he or she is looking for ‘deal breakers’ that would deter them from becoming ‘hot and bothered’.
  2. Hot and Bothered: As his excitement starts to grow (sometimes and often even sexually) he becomes more than interested. He wants the woman very badly and will work very hard to get her – often travelling great distances to acquire her or impress her.
  3. New and Excited: Once he has gotten the woman, everything is new and exciting. He shares photographs and plans with his friends and family – sometimes the wedding is planned. This is called ‘The Honeymoon Phase’ or perhaps the ‘pre-honeymoon phase’ if they are not yet married.
  4. Comfortable: Once they are married the couple will start to settle down into a comfortable and ‘normal’ domestic life.
  5. Bored: As time passes the humdrum domestic life gets boring in any number of ways – sexually and emotionally. This is the phase when one could want to say “I hate the way you chew your food.”
  6. Stalled: This is when one or both couples begin to realize there is a problem. Something is not right. A stalled relationship can make itself known in many ways. No friendly things to say. No new energy coming into the relationship. Not doing new things together. Spending more time by oneself instead of together.
  7. Trapped: It is at this phase where one or both people feel ‘trapped’ or ‘stuck’ in the relationship. They cannot seem to find any joy in it, or do what they want to do. This is where the struggle begins.
  8. Utter Despair: Things go terribly wrong at this point. Depression sets in with one or both persons in the relationship. Crying. Anxiety. Sometimes anger or even illness manifests itself as a sign of deep seated dissatisfaction.
  9. Looking for  Options: At this point either one or both persons in the relationship start to get a ‘roaming eye’. They might look through dating sites. They might have an affair. You get the idea. Or maybe you have lived it?
  10. Fearing Change: If they are caught having an affair, sometimes the man (or woman) will beg to be taken back because of fear of change. New relationships are unpredictable and scary with a high degree of risk.
  11. Fearing Failure (stall here if you are unlucky): If returning to the relationship is not an option, keeping with the new relationship can be scary because you are afraid it might fail. Or, if trying to find a new relationship, it can be very scary because the failed relationship comes to mind easily. So many failures causes one to expect failures.
  12. Breakthrough (if you are lucky): Sometimes a new relationship can move a person beyond his limitation and act as a catalyst to get out of the Cycle of Boredom, despair, fear and failure that comes from desperately trying to fix something that does not work. A breakthrough might also happen when an individual decides to stay by himself/herself for awhile in order to find the value and meaning of ones life from within. Sometimes during a difficult relationship (or even a good relationship) people ‘lose themselves’ in the ‘other’ person. A breakthrough can occur just facing the ‘loss’ that comes from losing a long time partner in divorce, separation or even death. In some cases an individual could remain in the ‘Utter Despair’ phase for a long time, especially in the case of the death of a close partner. Even in such a case breakthrough is possible. A breakthrough could be defined as many things. In the case of relationship loss or change, it is becoming a better, healthier, more vibrant and successful you in the face of such loss. Accepting the new gifts that come from a new person or situation and moving on having grown to have a more vibrant life.

Translating the Cycle of Boredom and Defeat into ‘Opportunity Offer’ Marketing

There are several ways to translate the cycle of boredom into a marketing agenda using Product Creation and writing your Irresistable Offer and Copy.

  • Find out which of the above ‘Phases’ are the most likely for the customer or prospect inhabits or experiences when they are making a buying decision for your product and/or the problem your product (or offer) solves.
  • Find out wich of the above ‘Phases’ are what the customer or prospect is trying to ESCAPE from and write your copy and/or opportunity or bolt-on opportunity offer to approach that.

Translating the Cycle of Boredom and Defeat into ‘Painfinder’ Marketing

When thinking of a product or offer in terms of a product that solves a direct pain or problem, things are a little more complicated in terms of your USP or IS-DNA.This is especially true if many other solutions and products to the problem are available.

If you solution to a problem is not ‘novel’ (unique or new) or everyone is already happy with the current offering to the pain or problem, then there is not really a GIM or Gap In Market. Please see the definition called Gap In Market + Easy Soloution + Unique Selling Proposition = Write Your Own Check for more information.

The type of offer that you create will be directly dependent upon many factors, including your USP and the degree of the GIM (Gap in Market).

For instance, if you are selling asprin, there is not Gap In Market, because there are many types of asprin on the market. This means you have to create a USP based on something other than merely fixing someones headache. So you will need to have a USP and IS-DNA based on a ‘New and Improved’ type of asprin. If your asprin is just exactly like everyone elses, then you probably should not go to market. This seems obvious, but mnay people do not know this common sense fact.

Here is where we get into ‘Brand Loyalty’ or ‘Solution Loyalty’.

For instance, if you are coming onto the market with a new and improved type of asprin that ‘stops headaches before they ever start and doubles as a nutritional supplement’ then you will need to pull people away from Cycle of Boredom and Defeat Phase 6 (Comfortable). Like relationships, people get comfortable with brands and common solutions, because they are the ‘Devil they Know’. For commodities, it is suprisingly difficult to get the consumer to try something new and different, unless the offer is positioned as an ‘Opportunity’. Your copy and offer should be crafted to move your prospect from ‘Comfortable’ to ‘interested’ and/or to Hot and Bothered.

Epimemetics (Epimemes)

Epimemetics Update for September 11th, 2015

The above diagram is a pseudoscientific wimsical rendering only to inspire creative thought. Obviously replicators dont neatly attach themselves to a (bad drawing of) DNA. In fact, the only real saving grace of the hierarchy implied is the ‘R6 Destination Unknown’ which removes it from a totalist agenda. The drawing may actually do more damage than good to the actual science of memetics, and could be removed at any moment.

What Was the Epimemetics Project?

Epimemetics is an experimental meta-philosophy of cultural meme-transcendence via the study of meta-belief. The proposed purpose of Epimemetics is to facilitate conscious acts of cultural creation.

It’s Magic Till Science. Then it’s Magic Again.– Russell Wright

Epimemetics Was NOT an Atheistic MetaBelief System!

Important! Epimemetics is not an atheistic philosophy, is is Syntheistic and Biocentric! Because Epimemetics builds upon (some of) the work of Susan Blackmore and Richard Dawkins, some have decided that we are atheists. The truth is not so simple.

Epimemetics predicts that the 4th and 5th replicator may emerge if mankinds survives the widespread propagation of The Third Cultural Replicator ( i.e. Temes/Technology Memes). Epimemetics also predicts that the cracking of the mathematical code which is the underpinnings of the Biocentric Universe Theory could be discovered as quantum computing reaches it’s peak during the Third Replicator Phase of cultural evolution – which we are living NOW. It also predicts that the cracking of the Biocentric Code will require a synthesis of Quantum Physics and Neuroscience. Once this neurocognitively integrated “new math” is complete, it could (theoretically) dissolve the quantum gravitational limitations of the work of Albert Einstein and render extreme equations such as Stephen Hawking’s current Big Bang Theory, obsolete or less useful for bridging the paradox between gravity A and Gravity B. In summary, Epimemetics predicts (dangerously) that the Universe will be understood to be an interaction between (recursive) consciousness and the quantum computer that is the Universe. (See The Fourth Replicator) The primary crack could occur when the Double Slit Experiment (that is baffling quantum physicists as we speak) is re-examined via neuroscientist VS Ramachandrin’s Split Brain analysis. Experiments are being proposed by Russell Wright of Epimemetics LLC, where each side of the brain could have a unique and alternate influence on the “probablity outcome” of the Double Slit Experiment or could create a probability “phase cancellation” on the predicted outcome of the experiment when the observer is fully taken into account – especially the binary limitations of the observers brain.

 

Abstract: What Is Epimemetic Meta-Theory?

Epimemetics is both an intentional systems theory and a meta-theory of sociocultural evolution that predicts the existence of the fourth, fifth and sixth (cultural) replicator. The axiom of epimemetic theory is derived from multidisciplinary conclusions about mathematical recursion (or recursive embeddedness) as it relates to emergence theory and Robert Lanza’s BioCentric Universe Theory. The meta-theory of epimemetics was first proposed in 2011 by technology inventor Russell Wright of Epimemetics LLC and was approved as a default domain and topic in the Freebase fact archive in 2014.

Within epimemetic theory, the fourth replicators are predicted to evolve sometime after Susan Blackmore’s third replicators (also called Temes or technology memes). *See Susan Blackmore, TED Talk, Memes and Temes, 2011. The Replicator is a concept first theorized by Richard Dawkins in his highly controversial book The Selfish Gene. As a meta-theory, epimemetics proposes a stacked epistemology as suggested by George M. Whitesides in his groundbreaking TED Talk on simplicity versus emergence theory. In this context, epimemetics itself emerged as a meta-theory that predicts the existence of a human culture that has evolved to a higher order of lateral thinking capacity. Additional benefits could be increased emotional intelligence, global increases in cultural creativity and biological coherency. Epimemetic theory suggests that such coherent signs could occur as the fourth replicator emerges out of the third. The timing and extent of this [cultural] emergence is undefined as it may be largely dependent upon the outcome of mankinds relationship with artificial intelligence, augmented reality and/or technology as prosthesis.

Epimemetics: A Proposed Synthesis of Evolutionary Darwinism, Neuroeconomics, Neurotheology, Behavioral Anthropology and Memetics

Why Has The Epimemetics Project Been Sidelined?

Russell Wright took many of his Epimemetics ideas to their cerebral conclusion. The response to the project was met with varying degrees of understanding (and interest) within his technology culture from 2012 to 2016. It is is possible that the ideas are simply ahead of their time or too abstract to be of deep interest. Or they were simply underworked and lacked the rigor required for widespread culture inception. It is also possible that the ideas were simply bad, or even wrong. In either case the relinquishment of this project came as a joy, not as a sacrifice. It was fun.

Catalyst for Abandoning the Epimemetics project

After reading the complete Futurica Trilogy, Russell was intellectually exhausted by the implications of his own work as well as the complexity memetic-Darwinism – past, present and future.

You may learn more about Russell’s intellectual exhaustion caused by the Futurica Trilogy at The Future of The Future.