One thing about anthropo - it assumes everyone knows what that is.
Exactly. The possible weakness is that not every single person knows about the geologic era we are living in.
But the concept has around 20 years (and firstly coined in the 80s), there are books, a film, art exhibitions, there is an issue of Nature completely dedicated to it.
If we intend to talk to the general public, I agree an explanation is needed; if we talk to people in the environmental field, my opinion is that it won’t be a big problem.
We are a niche business. Everyone we talk to will know what it is. I do not see this as a big problem.
if that’s our target audience, I agree with @alberto - if we want to branch out and reach new/other audiences, @johncoate has a point. But still, in terms of being found online, a weird name is better than a name everyone uses - and anything “green” is unfortunately a bit in abundance.
(tho I’m personally a fan of Deep Green)
There’s apparently a recycling company called TerraCycle, immediately thought of this thread when reading this article https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2019/1/24/18196388/unilever-pepsico-procter-gamble-reusable-packaging
To misquote you creatively a little.
If I search Deep Green I get: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_ecology
That could be a good association.
My biggest beef is with “Deep”, because my associations are:
a) calm, quiet, heavy, massive, inertia (not stimulating)
b) deep time - i.e. very, very slow moving processes (1000s of years)
I think some of us are in a phase where everything is Deep these days, deep green, but also a client’s funding program and another proposal we wrote for a ‘deep dive’ event.
At her Ethnography training a while back, @amelia was talking about participant observation as a ‘deep hanging out’.
Not least, I’ve been personally calling my non work and non tech weekends ‘deep chillin’. I only know see where I got it from haha.
So you see where this all comes from… Some collective meta synergy
I guess deep is the new complex. We already know that green is the new black.
So let’s call the unit “Complex Black” instead
But seriously, let’s decide… Who feels confident enough to call it?
Hi Matt, @nadia just came out with the name Earth OS, which - if I got it right - seems to be something you worked on. @alberto, @noemi and I really like the idea. Would you agree to use it for the unit?
All - I re-read the thread. I’m not convinced by what I read.
The discusison started off with naming edgeryder’s (new) climate/environment unit and seems to have lost to focus on ‘what is edgeryder’s specificty regarding this subject’. I feel that should be back in the focus
The ‘anthropocene question’ goes beyond the subject ‘climate / environment’; it is about (the possible) People-Earth-Relation(s). I would favour a name that captures this feature.
Any name with ‘green’ or ‘anthropo’ or … sets off different associations in different minds. Which association to pick or to stay away from them (as far as possible)? My choice would be to stay away as far as possible.
So what? ‘People-Earth-Edge’?
So AnthropoScene ?
Hello - ‘AnthropoScene’ is already in use, see: https://scholar.google.be/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=anthroposcene&btnG= - regards, Martin
and not EarthOS = Earth Operating System ?
EOS (earth observing system) is used as acronym at inernational sacle, but EarthOS seesm to be ‘about free’. You find reference like https://toolbox.biomimicry.org/core-concepts/earths-operating-system/ and only somereference in scientific literatur. Thus, ‘EarthOS’ should do the job, as I see it.
About the proposal to use EarthOS (or Earth OS) as the name for Edgeryders’ climate / environment unit: I like that idea. There’s one catch though: at the same time I don’t want to give up using the name for this project, which I still consider active, with plans to re-publish the whole content.
But that project is pretty aligned with what the Edgeryders’ environmental unit would do: working towards a system in which the planet is used sustainably and responsibly.
So my condition would be: when you use this name, you have to accept that it comes with a history, which would be transferred to this unit as well and documented by me in some form in the future. And that there is a publication “EarthOS” that I’d re-publish as part of this unit in the future. If that sounds reasonable, go ahead. I did not protect / trademark the name in any way.
Of course, it sounds reasonable.
In fact, maybe this is a good opportunity to dig up some perfect matching resources from in there for the upcoming work, repackage and re-purpose them, with due references!
are you open to including the emotional, psychological, social, economic and organising elements into the manuals/operating system?