This article describes SparkMaps as Hunome's visual tool for representing collective understanding and diverse viewpoints on specific themes or subjects. The platform aims to help groups see the breadth of their collective knowledge, reach shared understanding, and make better decisions based on that understanding. SparkMaps begin with an initial thought or idea that expands through collaborative contributions, covering themes like cultural adjustment, curiosity, AI limitations, future of work, misinformation, demographic shifts, universal basic income, and EU energy policy. The article outlines methods for using online meetings to build SparkMaps collectively, including starting with personal stories, reflecting on contributions, identifying knowledge gaps, and scheduling follow-up sessions for continued development. It mentions positive feedback from organizations like Systems Change Finland and Friends of Curiosity regarding the tool's effectiveness for discovering new connections and insights.

This article explores research from the University of Pennsylvania and American University that identifies two types of curiosity: "hunters" who connect closely related topics in tight clusters to fill knowledge gaps, and "busybodies" who jump between diverse topics creating loose knowledge networks. The research used Wikipedia browsing patterns as a novel measurement approach. The piece argues that curiosity involves both consumption (gathering information) and curation (shaping and retaining it), with both aspects contributing to wellbeing through "aha moments" when understanding crystallizes. However, the author suggests that losing curated information—through forgotten notes, lost tweets, or failed memory—can create frustration that negatively impacts wellbeing. The article proposes that understanding these curiosity patterns can inform the design of tools that better support information discovery and retention, claiming this could enhance emotional satisfaction and overall wellbeing.

This article critiques traditional social media platforms for promoting fragmentation, polarization, and individualistic "one-to-many" communication structures that the author argues diminish meaningful collective action. The piece contrasts fleeting social media messages with building lasting understanding, describing personal frustrations with Twitter's ephemeral nature and difficulty facilitating coherent group discussions. The author advocates for moving beyond the follower-based model toward what they term "atomic communities" that form around shared interests and thinking rather than personal branding. The article criticizes social media's advertising-based revenue model as creating inherent bias, comparing it to Google founders' 1998 warning about advertising-funded search engines. It contrasts traditional search results with what the author calls "boutique search for understanding" that provides insights and thought connections rather than isolated information fragments, arguing that current platforms waste users' efforts on temporary content rather than building lasting knowledge.