Computer protocols are a good analogy for a conversation. Do we Trust the information we are receiving.
...
This is also a Systems Exchange for the presumed benefit of both systems.
More Detail
| Expand | ||
|---|---|---|
| ||
All communication protocols start with declaring you are open to communicate and hint at what language we are open to communicate in. |
| Expand | ||
|---|---|---|
| ||
Is the other person/computer safe to talk to? What is their status? What information can be shared with them? |
...
| Expand | ||
|---|---|---|
| ||
If a computer isn’t running software which is compatible then the conversation doesn’t work. Likewise two humans that don’t have compatible language, ideas and beliefs about the subject matter in kind have a hard job communicating with each other. |
| Expand | ||
|---|---|---|
| ||
This is also a Systems Exchange for the presumed benefit of both systems. |
| Expand | ||
|---|---|---|
| ||
This is like Reflecting Back - was the Narrative received?. Acknowledgements can be like YES/NO - the problem is what are we saying yes/no to? Checksums are more complete since presumably they show that the information was received correctly and fully. But checksums can fail - it is possible for two sets of data to have the same checksum. |
| Expand | ||
|---|---|---|
| ||
Two computers that both talk say ‘brotli’ which is a new more efficient compression algorithm from Google will be able to transmit information to each other faster than two which are using the older ‘gzip’ compression. The same analogy exists for humans. A team which speaks a common more efficient language will be able to communicate faster and more effectively. |
Next: Clarification