locators it gives in return. The indexing mechanism is dynamic, so as new resources are made available, they generally become known to the various search engines.

The result is that finding a particular bit of sustenance on the Internet that can satisfy a particular appetite is a bit like searching for prey within the primitive physical ecosystem. The tools are different, and the logical capabilities of search engine queries give the effect of configurable senses, but save for the fact that the prey generally wants to be found, the game is much the same. Of significant importance, at least to our considerations, is the fact that the role of broker is a concept of some value; in essence, it represents content in its own right. We would be remiss if we didn’t comment on this.

When social ecosystems come into play, the rules concerning interactions become subjective. One of the effects of such subjective judgment is the finding that some appetites shouldn’t be sated. In some instances, prohibitions follow arguably sound principles; seemingly appropriate moral judgments if you will. Sanctions against the arbitrary killing of one person by another generally meet with considerable approval of the relevant social groups. Hence, fulfilling the appetite of the sociopath is deemed highly inappropriate. In some instances, of course, satisfying slightly less aberrant appetites meet with considerable, if not overwhelming, approval. An old adage from the New Jersey streets says “Make a law, make a business.” The business of broker can have value, even when deleterious consequences incur from its interactions. In essence, there can be great value in providing social middleware. Consider a couple of the examples we alluded to above: illegal alcohol and recreational drugs. We realize, of course, that we’re expressing a somewhat parochial attitude by considering alcohol something other than a recreational drug. Our only significant justification is to allow the consideration of two rather distinct environments through anecdotal illustration.

On January 16, 1919 the Constitution of the United States was modified through the ratification of the XVIII^th Amendment; the prohibition against the “manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from” the United States. By establishing this prohibition within the basic trust infrastructure (the Constitution) rather than simply within the primary policy infrastructure (the United States Code) of the United States social ecosystem, the action took on the overtones of a statement of theology, as it largely was, comparable to what one would find within Islam. The results certainly lent credence to the ostensible New Jersey homily that we noted above; a big, illegal business was created. It was the business of sating the appetites of much of the American public for now illicit alcohol. It resulted in the creation of essentially a parallel social ecosystem; that of organized crime, which adopted a grouping mechanism related to that most basic human social order, the family. The manufacture, sale and transportation of alcohol saw the creation of a generic broker operation, in the form of crime families that, over time, translated operations aimed at the provision of alcohol into derivative business operations in gambling, prostitution and protection. We suggest that this appeared much like a broker arrangement, because a significant aspect of criminal organizations was aimed at connecting legal manufacturers of liquor in foreign countries with otherwise legal entertainment facilities within the United States; e.g. rum runner operations. The efficient operation of this parallel social ecosystem soon resulted in a significant impact on the normal social ecosystem of the country; in essence, the criminal sub-system took on the characteristics of a parasitic relationship with the normal social structure. In time, it seemed that the only way to address this disease was through the repeal of prohibition, which took place through the ratification of the XXI^st Amendment on December 5, 1933.

Book available at Midori Press (regular)
Book available at Midori Press (signed)
Book available at Amazon (regular)