Still not over the debate between the Minister of Culture, Mrs. Sinde, and a group of bloggers and specialists in what we call orbit 2.0, but there is a question inescapable: 11:30 am on the Minister has withdrawn from the meeting to attend the inauguration of a museum.

I imagine that Ms. Sinde should not have to be a tasteful dish having to deal with a small representation of the wider community, representing at that time, according to an emerging movement in the net in the last 48 hours . Certainly a collective, without pretending to be, represents many more and is more plural and has a stronger social base that another group of "red logo."

And is that when public objectives are confused with the media, this is the disaster which it originated. The stubbornness in wanting to see a "reality" that does not really reflect the true citizen, even with the current debate that emerges in the collective cultural management professionals in this country, is a wave that leads to frustration and barracks "winter" of certain oligarchs and "shouting" of the nineteenth century as far as ICT and civic attitudes are concerned.

The point is that something has changed, despite the amount of egos hurt and humiliated that we saw in the hash tag # show on Twitter.

That change is the possibility that citizens have the power to encourage discussion, to the incorporation of the public agenda of citizen initiatives by 2.0 collaborative tools and of course the possibility of "real" to intervene in public debate.

I'm used to hearing about oGov by our public representatives in this first great occasion, the Government had a great opportunity to see a new social communicative context and the misses. I am more than convinced that this is because from the communication department of the Ministry of Culture has been downplayed, but the truth is that it is a shame. Culture hoped that at least they were more sensitive to change.

Moncloa I hope that we see the great potential that this represents as a tool of social information (I know that in other ministries and see this as a potential and not a threat, and are working on measures to respect, as we will see results over 2010), and not try to overshadow such as the alleged "threat" that some believe to see. (Especially in settings of communication offices).

It is clear that the fact "Twitter" live a meeting with institutional representatives worldwide, without interference, without being "cooked" in a subsequent intervention or "appearance" joint, will certainly change the perception of information and Information reality. And this is good news.

Finally, we will begin debating the new systems of representation in collective interests through social networks and collaborative tools that are already in full control and public use within the clou computing. And this is the real challenge of eParticipation and oGov so that in the future be used in a full and transparent to society.

I hope your opinions ...

PS: About 11:54 everything seems to go wrong and that positions the Ministry of Culture are not conciliatory. Will report more slowly when you have more material and can reflect on it.

It is sometimes necessary, by necessity intellectual, ethical or simply hedonist, ooze reflections on what we are concerned, disorientation or inflicted doubts about our future, both individually or as a species. There are times for displays of optimism, in fact is hard not to lose his sanity to the overwhelming social and media pressure on our destination: the crisis that dominates and justifies everything, climate change, the avid human need to possess, have and want ...

In short, determinism with which it has always been justified because we are as we are as we are.

Right here, I draw the line, I refuse to accept fatalistic theories and conservatism on our fate as rare intelligent species on our planet. Despite my agnosticism activist for almost everything, there is a loophole that always leave the faith, man's ability to reinvent itself as a species, to find a way where most are dark, others, the minority, are light (excuse me the Manichean and topical picture to describe this view).

It's funny, but it is the turn of the century and especially the end of the millennium, that result in fatalistic perceptions, but the Sunrise of the third millennium of this era, so constituted by humanity, it is even more fatalistic than some thought or even imagined. I feel sorry for them but the fatalism and pessimism do not fall in my dictionary and less in these times.

A great scientist like Edward Lorenz , a physicist and climatologist, showed in the last century that determinism was an invention of men: that is a clear system of social control, invented by men and sustained by them, supported by pseudo-scientific theories, with the end of majority rule. Einstein gave us relativity and to show a new path in the universe. At first we know of what is conventionally known as the " butterfly effect ", a result that proved the same by stating that" any physical system that behaves in an irregular basis would be unpredictable. " What more beautiful to define the No Predestination.

And is that science is so beautiful, willing and open to change, non-dogmatism, to open the barriers of knowledge.

The twentieth century saw how the story ends with the Newtonian illusion of absolute space and time and inert, the Quantum Theory destroyed the Newtonian dream of a controllable measurement process, and chaos theory ended with the vision of the precibilidad deterministic Laplacian . I firmly believe that this century will expand new frontiers with the establishment of new scientific paradigms passing the General Theory of Relativity, the first steps on the determination of the baryonic matter and energy of the universe, the unification of all fields beautiful a single definition ...

I truly believe that this century has to be among the entrepreneurs in all fields, I refuse to fatalism and determinism prevailing, I refuse to see how pale withered our systems of social control. I believe in our species, the possibility to avoid what seems inevitable.

I believe, need to believe ...

Let me begin this post with a starting date with the Green Paper on Innovation from the European Commission in 1996. Although 13 years have passed, his life is full to the economic and social times we live in:

"Innovation is not just an economic mechanism or a technical process. First, it is a social phenomenon through which individuals and societies express their creativity, their needs and desires. Thus, regardless of its purpose, its effects or its methods, innovation is closely interwoven with social conditions in which it occurs. The history, culture, education, political organization, institutional and economic structure of each society determine, ultimately, its ability to generate and accept the news. This is one more reason to pay more attention to the implementation of the principle of subsidiarity in policies to promote innovation. "

Having said that, as part of political strategies that drove the great statesman and visionary Europe that was Jacques Delors , I begin by clarifying what is meant by Social Innovation , a term that is becoming stale in the fields and soon to be 2.0 reduced to a minimum when canabalizado intellectual by populist politics in which we are immersed in this end of the decade.

Social Innovation is about new ideas citizens, who work in delivering new social and collaborative goals, making the case that social innovation to meet social needs by developing new products, services and organizations. That is generating a new mark on the territory of a cross and a horizontal hierarchy at the level of ideas. This is the base of eParticipation and o-Gov.

Thus social agents are behind it, not only are individuals: they are private organizations and public administrations and enterprises, governments, associations and, finally, city (I will call this phenomenon has metacity ).

And what means the Social Innovation?

Well, almost everything: the demographic and ecological sustainability, the new "hubs" of communication 2.0, knowledge innovation applied to the generation of new economic and social projects, climate change, unemployment and ways to combat the aging population and health resources. In short, the Social Innovation is the seed of social change by and for citizenship and therein lies its strength as an engine of social change, which should help to change many pre-assigned roles, after decades of stagnation in the environments of administration, government and citizen relations.

That said, how can we chart a path that leads us to carry out a strategy that falls to develop our projects, under the direction of social innovation. I propose these 10 steps to be followed so that we can establish a permanent social process of innovation in our projects:

This is what I estimate as a proactive Decalogue to the Social Innovation. Develop tools for our projects that meet these criteria, under the main criterion of readiness for constant change and adjustment, not to mention the objectives and long-term goals (in substitution for methodological criteria) are a strong guarantee for Innovation a powerful engine for social change in our surroundings.

The question is: Are our organizations ready for it?

First of all, friend reader to, I want to make three points: a) I am a strong advocate of power generation based on nuclear energy, b) I am a strong supporter of renewable energy (although they do not provide nearly nothing to the global electricity consumption c) No delivery of dogmatism and "tenebrists" as they get used to blur the debate about nuclear energy.

What did I have clear is that I want to leave a cleaner, safer world for future generations and I have even clearer that the generation of electricity from fossil fuels YES condemns humanity to a certain destination: the impending climate change, and this is a reality, not the result of nuclear energy, has been a combination of comfort and technological requirements involving our current society and that none of us, asumémoslo, we will resign.

Having said that I make a series of testable facts, easy to reach and largely available to the public in a book, which I highly recommend reading: Nuclear why not? Manuel Lozano Leyva , one of the best nuclear physicists Europe.

I do not want a whole lot (now that I turned this premise to start), but to go for parts: Do we want to continue to rely on fossil fuels? The answer is no, we can not pay that high price on the future of future generations of mankind. This is already a fact, this option is not feasible. On the other hand we have the problem brought about by the wind, energy is expensive (currently highly subsidized and therefore impracticable in its operation in private hands, at a time withdraw heavy subsidies received) and also has the problem that can not be combined in the energy transportation system. Its peak production to be quickly introduced into the system for consumption (This is the reason that when we look at a wind farm on a day of strong wind turbines standing there they do not work: the system simply lacks the capacity to absorb all the energy generated).

There are currently 438 operational nuclear power plants in the world (www.insc.anl.com ) and say there are five types of nuclear power plant, the most common being called PWR (pressurized water system). These are the type that are installed in Spain, belonging to the 1st generation plants were built in the world, using technology fission (the merger for the time being tested in models tokamak , and will undoubtedly be to revolutionize the energy future of the planet, but its development and strengthening the model could change the planet's energy and therefore the budget - this will be the subject of another post, below). The most efficient and safer today is called CANDU (2nd Generation). In Finland is building the first plant of the 3rd Generation type and is already developing the clean and efficient model that represents the 4th generation model, which will take several years to translate into reality.

The Central Finland 3rd Generation will generate an output of 1,600 MW, compared to 1,097 out of Cofrentes (Valencia) in 1984 inaugurated the type BWR (boiling water system).

All that said, some information that helps clarify what is happening. We all irritate each time the bill comes electricity bill, do we have to pay a thing called the euphemistic name of "tariff deficit." You know what that is? Well, that's the toll we pay all the Spanish since 1991, due to the Nuclear Moratorium Felipe Gonzalez signed at the time (and all subsequent presidents have been maintained. By the way Felipe Gonzalez is now in favor of repealing the moratorium, nuclear debate and show clearly inform the public about the pros and cons of this type of energy generation). We all like to get chest over in Spain do not build new nuclear plants that we focus on renewable energy, but the stubborn reality shows us that when we have peak demand in Spain, the need to import, mainly from France, which by the way produces 85% of its energy through nuclear power stations. Spain ie more energy is consumed nuclear origin which actually occurs.

Let. Therefore the tariff deficit is the neglect of ongoing projects that had to launch new nuclear power plants (some under construction) by the power companies. Specifically: Lemóniz I and II, Valdecaballeros I and II, Trillo II, Escatrón I and II, Santillan, Regoloda and Sayago. Come on, a trifle. This is the kind of actions (and policy decisions) which made citizens pay coup poll, without the population has had the slightest chance of forging a strong opinion that determines their future and that of humanity.

More information. Dispose a myth. One of the recurring nightmares in the collective imagination is the possibility of a nuclear plant explodes with nuclear mushroom included, anywhere in the world. Do not you have more bad dreams: the possibility of this happening is simply ZERO possibilities. It is impossible. Why is it impossible? For the simple reason that the nuclear fuel used is of a rich minority of isotopes needed (between 3 and 4% of wealth is called enriched uranium, the fuel type based on uranium oxide using plants. To make an atomic bomb need Uranium enriched to 80%). More precisely, the amount of uranium to make a small atomic bomb is 30 kg (it is a extremely dense material) in the case of plutonium is about 11 kg but less abundant type of plant, and 3rd generation are based on the use of uranium. (The amount of uranium used in nuclear power plant of this type of material to build a nuclear bomb reaches some tens of grams).

About storage. This certainly remains an issue more important than the plants themselves, however the scientific community says that new models of containment are much safer than the 1st generation and most of the scientific community states that an medium-term future, reuse waste may be present in future fusion plants (the future of nuclear energy), remember that the alternative is to continue burning fossil fuels to maintain our rate of consumption.

Do not want to elaborate further, except to recall four major nuclear disasters: Hiroshima and Nagasaki, say no more on this monument to the brutality of humanity, that has nothing to do with power (but studies suggest that cancer have occurred since his firing until now, left me very puzzled, and studies to get bored). Another disaster was the Three Mile Island (Harrisburg) . This was particularly significant, since the escape that he suffered was magnified by the release at the same time the movie " The China Syndrome , "a screenplay based on Michael Crichton's alarmist and starring Jane Fonda. Developed the idea that a nuclear plant in Pennsylvania merged its core, operated and appeared in China (the archenemy of the United States by the USSR in the 70s), by the way guess where it was Harrisburg (what a coincidence, right?). The point is that through a science fiction script (any of the facts that tells Crichton is supported by a serious theory), made such a stir last remaining echoes of that in the world population. In fact Jane Fonda became a tireless propagator of anti-nuclear message (and environmentalist, socialist) throughout the world, until she met Ted Turner , but that's another story. The third important fact was the incident at the plant of British nuclear enrequicimiento Sellafield (Level 3 leak - based on an alert system of 1 to 5 that contaminated part of the nuclear plant), this fact was used by Greenpeace and other organizations as a tribute latent danger to society of nuclear energy. Indeed the incident of Harrisburg, was something more serious, level 5, which means that there was a leak in the vicinity of the plant without an imminent danger to the public.

The last thing I want to cite is that of Chernobyl (former USSR), since it is an incident (the most serious in the history of nuclear energy) and that this particular post is to be longer than usual, I will leave for a subsequent entry, dedicated to this subject.

What I write is not a dogma, it can actually be wrong, but the objective facts that I have been accumulating on the generation of all types of energy throughout the world, I understand that energy is cleaner and more efficient (and less dependent for our balance of payments). Remember that all the oil and natural gas we consume comes precisely from nations not reliable in terms of respect for human rights and ecological concerns.

I leave you thinking to open what I hope will be a lengthy and interesting debate about our future.

I hope your contributions.

Before talking about the nuclear issue in depth, I am preparing a post about it, I want to focus on a subject that I have the good fortune to live in first person, within a group of excellent professionals, enthusiasts of his work and absolute "believers" of what they have in hand.

Those who follow me for Facebook, Twitter and other tools 2.0, surely you know that I am referring to the Red Guadalinfo . But what is Guadalinfo ?

In short, innovation is a social space, using the digital to analog transform to transform the territory immediately. This innovative effort from the synergies between ICTs and the capacity of organized society, so that from the institutional (ie the municipality) will help change (progress) the social environment, from an economic, cultural, inclusive, supportive , etc.

That is the greatness of the project. A project from a portal that aims to be the place of refuge for all and all Andalusians (and not to be, feel or empathize with Andalusia Andalusia), uses a number of physical nodes in the territory (about 750) , where the figure of the Revitalizing Local emerges as a unifying of digital with analog, making an important work for society, since it can connect with the digital to large segments of the population that would otherwise have no opportunity to know what ICTs can do for them. That is the core functionality of the Centers Guadalinfo.

In addition, the greatness of Guadalinfo lies not only in the interconnection of analog approximation of citizens to their digitization. The challenge Guadalinfo ahead and in which thousands of citizens participate at this time, advised by a vast network of professionals, is to transform each municipality, county and province of Andalucía, with input from the public. People have the opportunity, through Guadalinfo , the opportunity to implement projects supported by the network and therefore the institutions and organizations active in each municipality, will be realized.

That is, it tries to make a permanent feedback between citizenship and responsible insititucionales, making tools available to the public, through strategic alliances (woven both locally and regionally, will depend on the "audacity" of the project in question) that seek trust and involvement of the entire social fabric of Andalusia.

That said, it is easy to understand why we talk about Guadalinfo as the largest social network in Spain. This is not a social network use, as we understand the orbit 2.0. Guadalinfo aspires to be the driving force for social innovation as the main pillar of the transformation of our ciudadades and towns.

In Guadalinfo have a plan, do you dare to follow?