PPPProgress Is Not Perfect (Four P's #184)
The Evolution of our Species, Societies, and Families
Darwin wrote about how species compete for resources to survive and evolve:
A twig in the forest battles its neighbors to exist. Over time, species diversify, giving rise to new twigs, which then diversify to create yet more species. If a twig is able to survive long enough to become a branch, it’ll create new twigs. The species that die out will become branches that produce no new growth.
As preparation for my backyard garden begins with indoor seed germination (growing squash, honeydew, tomatoes, cucumber and cantaloupe) this week, I've been thinking a lot about the evolution of our own species: From semi-nomadic hunters to stationary farming, we've come a long way. Our own evolutionary biology is full of progress, but there are usually trade-offs and costs for that progress elsewhere. In modern life, the question comes down to society's acceptance of, or pushback against, these trade-offs.
SOMETHING PRACTICAL: The Price of that Progress
We've been "putting down roots" for millennia, compelled by progress and simplification while striving for perfection and symmetry. We have gotten smarter and more knowledgeable about how things work, and we've also lost some things along the way. And by "we," I mean those of us who have grown up in what authors Heather Heying and Bret Weinstein call "WEIRD" countries: western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic.
So is modernity undermining our natural abilities in ways that we don’t fully understand? People in hunter-gatherer societies, such as bushmen of Southern Africa, have repeatedly proven to have stronger visual and perceptive abilities. WEIRD civilizations have spent the past century or two working to improve our exercise routines and diets. Reductionism happens when you take a complex system, such as the human body, and try to simplify it down to a few measurable parts. In the modern world, we’re able to create drugs that are meticulously calibrated to enact a particular physiological change in our bodies. The problem is that our bodies are not meticulously calibrated. Instead, we’re complex beings with delicate communication systems operating among our mental state, our hormones, and our organs that cannot always be healed by pulling on a simple physiological lever.
Modern science drives reductionist side effects in very clear ways. Take processed food. These days, we have successfully managed to extend the shelf-life of various food products by adding a substance called propionic acid, which stops mold from growing. The downside of propionic acid is that it affects the brain development of fetuses in the womb, and is associated with higher rates of autism in children who are exposed to it. Once again, that convenient magic bullet is simply an illusion.
With progress comes drawbacks and setback. We're living longer, but there's no proof that we're living happier. The two don't need to be mutually exclusive, but they often are.
SOMETHING PERSONAL: Parenthood’s Pride & Pitfalls
My daughter turns 8 years old this week (Happy Birthday, Sydney!), and the celebration included two dozen of her friends working together to bake and decorate cupcakes. I marveled at the creativity and independence of these girls, while also worrying about how technology and information is accelerating their loss of innocence. All of this between 3pm and 4pm on a chilly, spring Sunday afternoon scheduled in between lacrosse games, art classes, other parties, and other weekend children business.
Humans have the longest childhoods of any species. In essence, childhood is the time when we learn about ourselves, how we should behave, and who or what we might become. With all of the progress we've made as a species, parents in the twenty-first century have increasingly stifled youthful discovery and exploration. My generation (even more so than our parents' generation) tends to keep tight control over our children by scheduling and planning their time for them; We choose what activities they’ll do, and direct them to play in a certain way.
As I watched those Syd and her friends interact, form their own bonds and interact within their own social constructs, pangs of panic permeated my frosting-and-sugar-infused brain about how our persistent guidance throughout their childhoods may inhibit their development into truly capable adults, inhibiting the developing brain from refining itself in the way evolution intended. Make no mistake... I know these girls will be trouble, but for now, it's at least the good kind. My hope is that I can find the right balance of guidance and acceptance... nature AND nurture.
SOMETHING PROFESSIONAL: A Plurality of Paths
Another week, another slate of projects, and another set of great learnings for our team at Mint. And while not every step is perfect, our tech platform continues to get better and our offering more flexible and customizable. As leaders in this space like to remind us, we're "still early." But are we? Being early would mean that there is a beginning, middle, and end... but as we know with evolution, change is both rapid and slow, and even those definitions are relative.
A lot is said, written, and debated about the progression from Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 to Web3, but the shifts taking place are also relative. It is neither linear nor direct. Progress and opportunities for artists and individual creators look very different than those for brand marketers, financial traders, sports teams, start-ups, and more. The technology is quite versatile, and use cases that advance expectation, behavior and value exchange highlight multiple models and ways that the evolving internet can support all of them. Blockchains, cryptocurrency, metaverses, microverses, and non-fungible tokens enable many divergent and convergent paths.
The evolution of digital marketing from long, editorial content to multimedia to social and streaming to distributed ownership has been 25 years in the making. Marketers thinking too long and hard about what web3 can mean for their brands may be getting a little ahead of themselves. Instead, thinking about the next 12-24 months in a context of Web 2.5 may be, in fact, more productive.
Mint's most recent collaboration for Axiom, SpaceX, and NASA to sell NFTs and tokens minted from space on the first private mission to the International Space Station has been incredible, supporting and engaging the space enthusiast community. A combination of collectibles for sale and tokens for progressive community-building with a multi-year plan, we've also learned a lot from these rocket scientists about how THEY build... with checklists, redundancy, communications patterns, timelines, and milestone reviews.
Some other early-but-not-early lesson? Even in the last 18 months, we've evolved from art-led NFTs selling for hundreds (or thousands) of dollars to tokens that don't even need to be sold that unlock engagement and experiences. NFTs as ownable jpegs is NFT 1.0. NFTs as keys to, or rewards for, participation is NFT 2.0.
Personally, I don't believe any brand should be minting NFTs on ethereum. I don't believe any brand should be focusing projects on OpenSea or even require cryptocurrency to engage. Think less about direct revenue potential and more about investment and the return on that investment. Try a variety of things, from partnerships and borrowing relevance to original creation. And most importantly, the only real failure at this point would be in not learning from both the successes and the mistakes made along the way.
SOMETHING POLITICAL: Primacy as a Problem
Over the past two decades, the progress and price of the American political process has hastened the social devolution of America. From the peak of unity on September 12, 2001 to the inexcusable attempts at character assassination of Supreme Court Justice nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson by Republican Senators last month, the drop-off could not be more stark. In a culture of intolerance, Americans have turned on one another – going from countrymen to enemies and spelling out a dark future for American democracy.
The nation is deeply divided. Economic disparity, class- and race-based politics, and anti-LGBTQ policies are on the rise, with major institutions spewing extremist rhetoric over and over. Facts have become fiction, and there are very few leaders who seem capable of putting in work to get America back on track. Across political party lines, millions of people are left wondering: How did we get here? And what comes next?
It’s easy to point fingers at politicians for leading the country astray, but blame won’t bring the old America back. This storm has been brewing for years now – and contrary to popular belief, it wasn’t spurred on by any one person or party. Things went wrong when community stopped being the core of American life, when mass media could dispel falsehoods straight to receptive audiences. With social media, a new way of thinking had emerged: I’m right, you’re wrong, shut up. People started viewing diversity of thought as something undesirable – dangerous, even. The unspoken sentiment became, How dare other people think differently than me?
Of course, America has always been divided. We had a fucking Civil War, so diversity of thought is nothing new. Division is actually at the root of progress. Homogeneous thinking, on the other hand, hinders progress – and conformity comes at a dangerous cost. Americans shouldn’t strive to all think the same way. By law, they’re entitled to hold different opinions – something that can’t be said for people in other countries. Civil discourse and respect for fellow citizens are to be celebrated, not condemned.
Since the weeks and months after 9/11, the passage of time has pulled Americans apart once again. At the end of the day, Americans will always be different. They will never see eye to eye. But they should forever be united in one thing: their identity as citizens -- with inalienable rights worth fighting for. Our most recent national/global pandemic tore us even further apart. It shouldn’t take another tragedy for Americans to come together. To reclaim our nation, We the People must respectfully agree to disagree, while allowing for the rights of everyone to be fully realized.