frequently asked questions:
one of the united nations sustainable development goals is no poverty. in fact, it’s their first goal and it’s not mentioned on your site? why is that?
i thought about it for a long time before i removed it. the goal no poverty is problematic for two reasons:
for one, it’s not a real goal in the sense no poverty is only possible if you limit people’s freedom. meaning, when you allow people to choose there will always be two cities so to speak; the rich and the poor. as another said, the poor will always be among us. this is a harsh reality best understood in the context of our daily life. everyday we make these decisions. every day we get to choose if we are going to be rich, or poor. when we don’t get to choose is its own issue.
secondly, conflicted, we chose to use the term “poverty eradication” and then we decided to eradicate the first goal altogether and replace it with a smarter goal: investing in our future.
when it comes to an idea such as “poverty eradication”, i was uncertain about the word “eradication”. i think its definition and usage is appropriate, however, it lends to implications that are problematic such as “the eradication of the impoverished”. would “alleviation” be a better word? i thought ”alleviation” is the likely outcome, however, that’s not the goal i would like to communicate. this is just an example of potential problems i foresee regarding my study, research, and work. this work always requires scholarship and expertise outside my own perspective.
right now, the artificial intelligent chat bots like ChatGPT and Gemini, they struggle with some of these distinctions particularly because of the ever expanding guardrails placed on them.
this is why academic freedom is also important to us.
what’s your relationship with the united nations?
this is a really great question. we are still figuring that out. 🤝
when i originally started working with the university at buffalo i told them i had three goals for my project: zero poverty, zero emissions, and zero waste. these goals were based on my response to bill gates book “how to avoid a climate disaster”.
however, while preparing for a study abroad trip i was introduced to the sustainability goals. when i took a look at the course, took a look at the goals, and took a look at my calendar i noticed the trip spanned seventeen days and there was seventeen goals. so i decided i will take the seventeen days to build a website to reflect the 17 goals and expand my project.
it was perfect timing because the course turned out to be an effort to get me to view my project as social work. i grasped what i could from a policy standpoint and rejected the restriction to the social work field.
later i decided to use artificial intelligence to help me create new frameworks for the goals. i think my new frameworks are a workable guide to actually achieving the goals. a recent supreme court ruling in the united states on the use of derivative work was perfect timing for me to accelerate this process.
your original goals were based on bill gates book “how to avoid a climate disaster” how did that come about?
i was in the library with my daughter and i randomly picked the book up. after reading the first few chapters i began to grasp the scope and nature of bill’s problems. the realization was enough for me to make the difficult decision to make a professional pivot. it was a difficult decision because i would be moving on to my third career.
at my age, starting a new career comes with its risks. before making my final decision, i shared my thoughts with my then team lead. she tried to convince me to stay onboard her team and organization because she had picked up bryan stevenson’s book “just mercy” and thought we could make an impact.
i countered by letting her know i had picked up bill gate’s book and thought we could make an impact. the differing factor was the way i saw it. if i don’t help bill gates solve his problems, then the bryan stevenson problem would be the least of our problems.
you were trying to raise $150,000,000,000? are you serious? what kind of ponzi…
yes. when i got to the university of buffalo in my first meetings I asked for $150,000,000,000 and a building so i can build the “center for tomorrow”. they already had the building called the “center for tomorrow” sitting empty. i think their catering company was using it for storage. they said, “no!”.
then i met with their sustainability director and i pitched the development of new standards for leed (leadership in energy and environmental design). he said, “no.”. in fact, he said more than “no”. he explained the inner workings of the university of buffalo. in short, they legally can’t invest, and then he said there’s no way i can undermine the decades of work by leed.
i took those “no!”’s with a grain of salt, switched strategies, and made the decision to go private. how else can i raise $150,000,000,000. so i began development through their incubators and this triggered a series of internal conflicts within the university, that ultimately “graduated” me in my freshman year. 😂
ideally, i’d be housed in a university system, rather than going private. but when i looked around their campus nothing was “green” or “sustainable” including their “green” and “sustainable” projects and i voiced this fact. this caused its own conflicts especially with the folks at leed!
why don’t you develop oaks + oars as a non-profit?
have you ever managed a team of volunteers? that’s not something i am interested in doing again.
besides, our initial goal was to raise $150,000,000,000. can you imagine us trying to raise that amount through donations and grants?