This creation/evolution of life on this planet has been unfolding for a time period that exceeds 4 billion years. Life on Earth has become a complex interconnected system during this time span. Life continues to adapt and evolve, driven by the genetic algorithms inherent in its DNA. Algorithms are formulas or recipes for solving problems. These genetic algorithms are analogous to the algorithms used in software to create operating systems and programs for computers.

Both adaptation and evolution provide feedback into the web of life sustained by the pool of DNA-based genetic algorithms. Evolution creates change; adaptation helps organisms react to and anticipate change. Life is the continuation of information perpetuated by clever genetic algorithms, a dance between adaptation and evolution. Richard Dawkin, in his new book, Digital River, makes the point that all current life forms carry successful DNA. Every living being is the result of an organism staying alive long enough to reproduce and pass its genetic algorithm into the future-success breeds success.

Feedback, an essential property of complex systems, functions to help organisms adapt and evolve by providing communication, the flow of data and information. Life forms have feedback mechanisms based on the interaction of chemical and neural processes. The human organism handles feedback through a complex interaction between our endocrine and nervous systems. Our bodies are constantly communicating and gathering data to maintain a stable condition for survival. Feedback is communication.

Because communication, a multi-directional exchange of data, information and knowledge, is an essential tool for feedback, life forms on Earth have evolved a variety of internal and external communication channels that provide the raw data for processing by biological intelligence. To survive, maintain and evolve, biological systems must predict the future. DNA, being the underlying "intelligence" for biological systems, must communicate, and does so on a cellular level in all organisms on Earth (well almost... there are some RNA-based life forms). Within an organism, DNA communicates its instructions with chemical messengers. Outside the cellular level DNA has evolved other communication mechanisms so species can communicate with themselves, with members of other species and with the physical properties of Earth. For organisms to communicate, a variety of mechanisms have evolved: neural-networks for processing stimuli and responses; sound organs which both send and receive; visual organs; glands that secret pheromones or chemical messengers; and other methods not currently understood by the human species.

The evolution of humans has brought us to the point where our DNA can "see" itself and its place in the Cosmos. We are perhaps the most complex life form that DNA has created on this planet. Communication within our species is extraordinarily complex as a result of our ability for language. Even when it was only vocal, it accelerated the social/cultural evolution of our species. Then about 4000 years ago the ability to write the language began to emerge. The writing of language was a quantum leap for human communication. It projected communication into physical space and time, outside of the purely biological construct. Before written languages, communication was confined to small groups in a limited geographical space and only passed information to the future via the synaptic storage of our brains.

Our ability to write language means that data, information, knowledge and wisdom are no longer limited to oral communication only. Humans created a means to communicate into the future, outside of the chemical process of genetics and synaptic storage. DNA and synaptic storage are no longer the only way to pass information into the future.

The ability to write and store language, first on stones and papyrus, has linked our species over ever greater space and time. The development of paper and the mechanized printing press further revolutionized communication. The publishing of books, magazines and newspapers became a major form of international communication towards the end of the 18th century and began the globalization of communication.

Communication is an evolutionary process. Human biological evolution brought us to the point where language developed. Since the development of language, the evolution of communication has been driven by forces outside of the genetic algorithms of DNA. The acceleration of human knowledge is in a positive feedback loop with the rapid technological change fueled by the digitalization and storage of most forms of human communication: written language, sound, and visual-the digital globalization of human communication.

The globalization of communication has not provided uniform access. Communication in the form of publishing on paper, TV or radio has the distinction of being a one-to-many communication channel that results in an uneven distribution of political, social and economic power to the 'ones' who communicate to the 'many'. Corporations, governments and religious organizations have always had the greatest access to communication infrastructure and the trend has accelerated in just the last few decades. (See the book, Media Monopoly by Ben Bagdikian).

Some of the more "privileged" members of our species are engaged in a global communication network that allows many-to-one, one-to-many and one-to-one digital communication. They can access information, exchange data and weave webs of information and thoughts into the virtual global neural net. The network provides this linked group of humans with the advantage of "seeing" and "hearing" on a global level. This provides them with an opportunity for predicting the future-anticipating change-at the global level. The members of this group have created a feedback mechanism that is far greater than any other species. Given that humans are here to perpetuate the DNA they are transporting, there might be some connection between the evolution of our language, communication technology and the evolution of our species.

It seems only natural that we would create a global feedback mechanism that functions somewhat like our biological one. This network creates greater feedback and more rapid adaptation, perhaps leading to accelerated evolution. Has DNA passed on one of its evolutionary functions to our species or are we assuming it by mistake? Will this global communication network of satellites, digital radio signals, fiber optic cable, coaxial cable, copper wires, packet switching technology, digital real-time video images, and other forms of computer mediated communication - cyberspace - create a neural net similar to our central nervous system?

Cyberspace is already inhabited by a number of select humans. And then, there are the humans that are not in cyberspace and may never be. If this is an evolutionary adaptive process linked to DNA somehow, will the "cyberspace" dwellers and "realspace" dwellers become so divergent that they will develop into different species? It seems unlikely, but they are already in a different social/economic class. At the very least we need to acknowledge the widening gap between these two groups and begin to discern what effect this gap will have on our species.

When the corporate media talks about cyberspace they are usually referring to the Internet in some way. Most of the "news" comes from the corporate media so our knowledge and understanding of cyberspace (internet/infobahn/multimedia/video-on-demand/digital cash/wireless/cellular/ ) is based on their perceptions of it or more likely how they want to package it to continue using any and all forms of communication to sell products. Remember, the role of the media is to keep capitalism in hyper-drive-consumption is everything. And realize that the media corporations are diversified transnational corporations and they want to control and use the global communication network for their ends, keeping capital moving through their part of cyberspace.

In the United States the use of the World-Wide Web, a part of the Internet that moves the most packets of data, is currently dominated by rich white men. It is a frighteningly clear reflection of the current social/economic/political power structure in the United States, and although it might not be white men in other parts of the globe they are mostly rich males.

Is this global telecommunication network a result of the genetic algorithms that created our species? If so does that mean that rich white men are the current pinnacle of our species evolution? Seems unlikely. The global communication network may have the appearance of a neural network, but it lacks in complexity, size and the ability to reproduce itself. And more important it's too controlled to be a truly self-organizing system based on its complexity. It may be more of a byproduct of our genetic algorithms than a selected result.

The digital global communication network as it is currently unfolding is not going to empower and connect all the members of our species. It can't, because the corporations building it are not interested in altruism. And altruism is the reason it would make sense to network our species together.

At the individual level our mind/body works together to maintain a healthy productive evolving person. It does this by efficiency, cooperation and communication. We are constantly engaged in altruism within ourselves. So what happens if we expand our communication to more and more of these mind/bodies that are engaged in efficiency, cooperation and communication? Would the world be a better place? Would we lose our diversity and become a monoculture? Some fear a "global village" instead of a "globe of villages". A liver cell and a fibroblast look and act differently, and yet, they work together in our bodies for the good of the whole.

Can we all be connected and improve the lot of humanity? Will digital communication networks move us towards that understanding? Maybe that depends on who takes part in it.

Complexity theory postulates that systems reach a certain level of complexity and either evolve to another level of organization, fall into chaos and collapse, or fail because there isn't enough complexity to fuel the system. All current DNA life forms have passed the test of continuing to increase in complexity without falling into chaos or simplicity. Do life forms that fail, fail from too much complexity or too little? Do social structures fail because of too much or too little complexity? Probably both events happen, too much and too little, the edge is a fine line.

Networking our species globally, and I mean all members of the species that want to be, would most certainly increase complexity. What would happen then? Would we evolve to a new level of human organization or fall into chaos?

I realize we need to make communication work at several levels below global: family, community, and bioregion. But the globe is being "wired" and I don't think we have the option not to pay close attention to that. It will change the way our species coevolves with the earth.

We do have choices, lots of choices about how to be involved, too numerous to mention. Each of us needs to be engaged in life the best we can, to be present is to communicate. In the absence of presence there is no communication. Without communication there is no change. Be here now, take part, we all make a difference. If we all make a difference; it will be different.