Quick review of Michel Geovanni Santiago-Martínez on the Internet
@GeoSantiagoM at https://x.com/GeoSantiagoM
Quick review of Michel Geovanni Santiago-Martínez on the Internet
Geo, I looked at your activities, posts and interests. Your page at https://mcb.uconn.edu/person/michel-geovanni-santiago-martinez-geo/ You might want to link there as well as your department from your Twitter(X) page.
None of your publications is “open access”. Links to abstract pages is better than nothing at all. With 5.4 Billion people using the Internet now, you want to do anything possible to save them time. 1 second each for 5.4 Billion is about 171.12 mean solar years. So “oh just search and look around” is discourteous and wasteful. Count your own time when you are click navigating and search navigating. Small delays add up. I see how it affects the whole human species.
Your Google Scholar page is actually fairly decent, but I did not check all of them. Most are going to “pay per view”. Google seems to always start well, but never carries through and builds sustainable communities. They mostly fight among themselves inside their company, so it probably comes from the top and probably one or two bad actors.
https://scholar.google.es/citations?user=-xTBTJUAAAAJ
Your ResearchGate page is good. And you are sharing full-text so people can see enough detail to consider collaborations and interests. I am fairly certain it is indexed by the search engines, but probably not indexed or considered by the chatty AIs. I am working on cases and policies to balance the need for humans to connect with other content creators world-wide over time, against the wishes of publishers who want to grab and go. It seems to be sorting out, but more people need to look at their communities. A tiny effort (relative to the weight of communities that can have 100s of Millions or even Billions of members) can gain efficiencies close to world global GDP. I am looking at the financial motives and accounting for countries, cities, large corporations, organizations, and global issue groups to see what small changes can shirt decisions a bit. I changes the accounting reports for a large credit union to they could focus on margins at a glance, then work directly with clear ideas of what they could afford to give back. They have grown from that and open membership policies, so it seems good.
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Michel-Santiago-Martinez
I like the tone and range of your paper, Extreme heat alters the performance of hosts and pathogen from Jun 2023. I would prefer they not use PDF, because it locks the methods and data inside a proprietary format that enriched one company and they are not “giving back”. What I would prefer is that groups talk directly to each other, allow access to collaborative workspaces, be audited and use verified open tools. But rather than making endless copies that get copied and posted without attribution — without linking to the vibrant living communities — those dead papers accumulate like dead leaves.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/371471224_Extreme_heat_alters_the_performance_of_hosts_and_pathogen
I have been working about 12 hours today without a break and I have 8 more hours to go. So I won’t read your papers just now.
But I am beginning to get a glimmer of how your range of scales from “ecoPhysiology” helps. I go mostly by the SI prefixes (Standard Internet, Systeme Internationale +) from 1E-30 (quecto, small lowercase) to 1E30 (Quetta, large upper case). There are groups that go well outside that range, but any issue now that goes from helioSpheric, about TeraMeters (1E15) to inside atoms (more and more common) down to picoMeters (1E-15).
Your note indicated you wanted to add all the metabolic data, and there are groups working on that. The problem for their users, is they do not have a broad enough view of the potential users – when more AI assisted groups can ask eco (global scale) correlations and effects they might change behavior at human and related species sizes down to atomic scale in the organisms. I have to do that stretching and considerations every day, just to read all that humans do on the Internet. And I know that because of that stretching an complete habits, I can often see things emerge decades before they are done at the slow pace of centuries old paper habits of organizations and industries.
1E-15 to 1E15 is 1E30 = 10^30 or 30 powers of ten. But that can be handled, because every power of 1000 usually has many tens of thousands of humans looking at it. It might be a bit chaotic, but the evidence and phenomena, people and methods can simply be inventoried. Most every too use by the “high energy physics” groups down at the atto (1E-18) Meters and Seconds is usually being tried at bio level (Brazil is 4.32E6 Meters). The computers now can handle that and I have been encouraging the semiconductor and device groups to work on picoMeter (1E-12 Meters) memory technologies and faster memories to give another factor of 1000 for the growing future demand for these kinds of problems. Ask why is “climate change” not a useful tool for all humans, I can write about that in detail. It is mostly that groups stop at the edge of their Internet domains and never consider what other see they are doing or not doing.
Perhaps “ecoChemistry” might help to go down a little deeper. I know the protein folding groups and many of the ones doing first principles calculations and simulations. I am trying to check those against the groups gathering and compiling experimental data. And trying to keep the “big data” groups from using horrible inefficient and bloated format to pad their claims to “big”.
Yes, “ecoChemistry” is 12,600 entries.
“eco-chemistry” is 8,800 entries
It is possible to define and build entire new global subjects and global communities now, from scratch almost overnight. When ad hoc groups try that on their own, they mostly have not slogged through it enough tmes and leave bit gaps. I will add that to my list of “build the profile for “eco-chemistry”. I see “ecoMetabolism” already and I know a lot of terms that belong in those.
I see you are trying to encourage people from many countries. If you are serious about it, then remember you are likely to live to be 120. So plan for those deeper years. And plan for all countries to mature and begin using global open collaborative methods with AI (better ones with appropriate memory and lossless methods) assistance. The communities will grow fairly naturally, but will then immediately fall into bad habits because they are trying to use small herd interaction rules and not ‘hundreds of millions”.
I have been working on these issues over 120,000 hours. That is not enough for any one serious problem but I have enough to guide me and get basic structures and policies. If you get 120,000 people in the world, have them spend an hour each day on global issues, take all the conversations between them and their AIs and with people and AIs in groups – that whole can be monitored in real time and summarized for plans.
I just realized that in the first of the science fiction books (I try to follow Robert Forwards example) I wrote a decades or so ago, Dana is facilitating literal mind merges for research groups to tackle in a few days what they normally would need several years for. Then in the second book, she helps create a true intelligent entity, and he (preferred) can merge millions of humans asynchronously at global scale.
The high bandwidth interface between human brains and computers is already possible. Machine learning, better understanding of the whole of all ways humans interact with their environment, with each other and with global memory — allows that. Intent to remember something and bring it into the common memory area is all it takes, because the details are already in the memory of the AIs doing the facilitatation.
I can barely see now, my eyes are so tired.
But I wanted to say hello and write down a few of the things that come to mind when I try to see how your world looks.
Richard Collins, The Internet Foundation
