Things have become more and more curious in the world of future predicting – a field I have been involved in (peripherally) since it began to become clear at the dawn of Big Data (2000) that there was more to the data than just the data.
Although there was a good bit of success with early approaches that involved purely linguistic shift, since 2012, or so, I’ve been working on a broader spectrum approach. Future does not belong to one – it belongs to all.
The reason for going broad spectrum: The future doesn’t hide itself from us in just one way.
Even a simple observation like that, however is misleading in a sense: Because the future doesn’t necessarily hide – we just don’t happen to be able to perceive it.
To be sure, in early predictive linguistics there were some marked successes. But at data continued to explode, the misses did, as well.
But in the meantime, I was noticing how other predictive methods were generating some pretty good hits: Both my personal experiences with dream work as well as those posted to the www.nationaldreamcenter.com website have shown marked areas of high correlation between images commonly associated with words – and later events to follow.
The work of others has continued as well, such as www.recordedfuture.com.
It doesn’t stop there, either. Another amazing source of information about the future has come from simply setting up a deliberate series of Google searches. This has been highly rewarding as well.
I’m sure you’ve been over to look at www.google.com/trends website – because – if you haven’t – you’re missing a key part of how we make decisions around here when comes to judgment calls about period news events.
Here’s not a poll, but a summary of web searches done around the demoncratic presidential debate:
Say what you will about Bernie Sanders – He was the rock star of Search – and for that reason, we turned the “big data microscope” on him in our analysis yesterday for Peoplenomics readers.
I figure Google doesn’t lie. Hillary? Um…you see the point?
Not to rehash that debate here, but you can clearly see the hand of the co-opted Mainstream Media with their pro Hillary bias leaking all over the place.
As one example, a BBC news story was dissected and it referenced Clinton 23 times to Sanders being mentioned 17 times. Even more astounding was the BBC “analysis” called Hillary the winner.
Sorry, the future – and Reality – don’t look like that in modelspace; and it doesn’t matter which methodology you use – Sanders kicked it and Hillary lost.
Still, this demoncratic and repugnants hack class of political suck-ups, is a fine group of wannabes to study because one of them is likely to become the next president. Save us, please.
The problem with the data is that while we can see the candidates more clearly now, the public hasn’t yet made up its mind which is the least of the evils and that, as much as anything, will determine the next resident of The Oval.
Part of the problem is we don’t know the next president yet because the inputs are varying. While my “dream ticket” which would offer real choice about our future is not on the horizon yet, something like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren on the demoncrat side with Trump and Carson on the repugnants’ side, would sure be fun – and offer a sincerely different outcome, I expect.
Problem is: There’s no data to point to and say “This is coming.” It’s not.
Each approach to futuring gives us different things to think about.
At the emotional, Jungian, archetype level there’s a high level of frustration in the country right now and for this year the Year of the Outsiders and Non-Corporates is holding sway.
This is something the mainstream repugnician party doesn’t understand because if they did, an old way corporate sell-out like Paul Ryan (pro secret trade deal, open border supporter)( would not have been floated
At the data level – both polls and search – the outsiders are also showing strong as the repugant core can’t seem to figure out that the We the People types are fed up with They the Multinational tax-avoiders and jobjackers..
What the public is slowly coming to realize is the that future has transitioned from being a collection of outcomes based on ideals to a world where the future is determined as much by transactions. This was cast in stone when the Supreme Corps outrageously decided that legal fictions *(corporations) have the same right to influence the future as flesh and blood voters – perhaps the worst case of “misprudence” in the past century.
As if you couldn’t tell, I’m off working on “new thinking” about the future.
The screenscrape (top of page) from the www.nostracodeus.com development lab (Grady’s basement) shows how we are starting to work in Grady’s discoveries about Fine Structure Constants (FSC) to the predictive engine.
You may remember from our previous work that there seems to be a “murder cycle” afoot – and it runs from about 135 days on the short end to 150 on the long – which centers around 143 days. This is when we expect to see mass murders pop up in headlines.
This, then, leads to a couple of new challenges. One of them is refining the prediction so that it’s useful: It does no good to say “in a week or two we will have a mass murder.” Because information that is not actionable is useless.
The specificity problem is huge, though. Our inputs can be as vast as G.A.