Hello everyone, how are you? Warming up. It's cold out there already.  He's currently the director of the National Center for Technology in Dispute Resolution. He's a professor and Meritus at UMass Amherst and, most importantly, which brings us to the topic of today, also the co-author of a great book called Digital Justice Technology and the Internet of Disputes co-authored with Orna Rabinovic. I highly recommend this book. You actually have some flyers on your tables with a discount. I may add. This book is one of the books where you walk away and depending on the mood of the day when you read it, you're leaving more optimistic or sometimes more pessimistic depending on the mood of the day. So be careful when you read it because in one way the book tracks actually and tells the story, the history of the internet as a story of more and more disputes and certainly these days I feel very much we have an abundance of disputes not only looking at the commercial web like the good old eBay problems of disputes between buyers and sellers, but of course when we look at social media when we talk about hate speech and harassment and cyberbullying and disagreements about, you know, ratings and many other things. So it's in a way a history of disputes but on the other hand side on the more optimistic note it's also a book that tells us the story that the same technology can actually be used not only to resolve disputes but also to prevent them and to mitigate them and to me that's particularly timely topic as we are facing as a society, but of course particularly also the provider of platforms face so many design choices and have to consider what's in the repertoire available how we can use digital technology to actually create a more peaceful world and the more harmonious society to borrow a Chinese term. Now there's no one better actually than Ethan to tell this story. Ethan is a true pioneer, a thought leader when it comes to the field of dispute resolution online. He was among the pioneers actually of eBay's famous dispute resolution systems, which he developed to help develop and test. I think in the late 90s that feels very long time ago much has happened since and so it couldn't be more excited to hear the story from you. Where have we arrived and what's ahead? Digital justice, thanks for being here Ethan. I'm looking forward to your talk. That's a extremely extremely kind of viewers, but I think you've summarized the whole book already. We almost actually we struggle with the title and one day we thought we'd call digital injustice. Then we went back to digital justice. I suppose it could have been called either one, but we felt better with the title digital justice than injustice. So I was in I was in Brussels recently giving a talk and afterwards a member of the audience came up to me and asked me this question. Where does justice take place and he didn't give me a chance to answer. Because he said justice takes place here. This is the largest courthouse in the world. And I said well, I think this is the largest courthouse in the world and or this or something in the cloud. But I told him I thought he was making a mistake and thinking that this was just a phone. This is a chameleon. It can be it could be a courthouse. It can be almost anything. All it takes is some imagination. So I put this courthouse inside the phone. Not very professionally, I know. But still I sent this off to him and I haven't heard from him since. This is the essence of the book. Not simply digital justice, but access to justice. And there's no shorter, more succinct statement about access to justice. And Kafka, the law, should be accessible to everyone at all times.  The biggest courthouse in the world is in Turkey for some reason. But the problem with that courthouse is that it gets a small percentage of disputes. So we're dealing with we're dealing with a level of conflict that's extraordinarily high. I think when we started writing the book, it was a little less obvious than it is today. I don't think we have to make it's not hard to make a persuasive statement about being worried really about the level of conflict online. But what do we do about this? So there are efforts before we get to that. This is basically the model that most people in the dispute resolution field think figuratively represents what's happening. Very few disputes at the top. Alternate ADR, alternative dispute resolution, mediation, negotiation or arbitration, somewhat more. And then basically most people have to figure out for themselves what to do with their problems. So if you have a problem with your car mechanic that's on you, nobody's going to get inside that huge courthouse in Brussels or any courthouse in this country for less than quite a few thousand dollars unless you go to a mediation center or maybe possibly a small claims court. But I'm having a little trouble with the screen or getting used to the screen. But if I hadn't persuaded you thus far that there are lots of disputes, these are basically disputes that have been resolved and Alibaba has overtaken eBay for a number of years. eBay boasted it handled 60 million disputes a year, obviously without human intervention. Alibaba claims not only a hundred million, but a higher success rate. Yeah, 95% without the online dispute resolution. China imposes pressures, parties to settle more than eBay does. So that counts for that. Resolver is a British company that's been in business only for two years. It's growing rapidly. And Resolver reason for being is to help people make complaints. That may strike you as an odd business model because many of you probably think you know how to complain. But sometimes it's not so easy to find who to complain to. Certainly hard to find. Hard to find telephone numbers or addresses online. And Resolver has a list of 100,000 individuals at British companies who you can complain to and they help you and they automate the process. League of Legends, are there any League of Legends players here? One. One who's willing to admit it. Or two. League of Legends has 67 million users. They realized at some point that they were not going to be able to thrive if people got into conflicts with each other. So they have an online jury system. And then there's Wikipedia, which many of you know about, has a very elaborate system of resolving disputes. American Orbitration Association handled 100,000. Should make clear, all of this online, sometimes with a little human intervention, eBay, some small percentage are handled by humans, but mostly online. And on my screen, half of the screen is red and half is not red. Are you seeing that? No. All black. I have no idea why. But the red on my screen goes down to American Orbitration Association and then becomes black with the domain name disputes and sharing economy and so forth. And that's in black because those entities or processes, in my opinion at least, don't work as well and haven't worked as well. And they're not necessarily as fair as the ones at the top. And then you get down to one at the bottom, which I just stuck here. We'll deal with this later. AT&T has 120 million mobile phone customers and its arbitration system attracted the grand number of 27 out of 120 million. So Orr has mentioned that disputes on the internet are fairly recent phenomenon. If you date the internet back to 1969, you find that really for the first 25 years or so, there were no disputes. If you're interested in dispute resolution, it's an interesting case study of what kind of infrastructure is needed in order for them not to settle disputes, but for there not to be any disputes at all. So when the academics and the military were in charge of things, and the US government prohibited the use of the net for e-commerce, where do you get disputes? There were no students online. Students generated a lot of disputes. There was no customers online, there was no e-commerce. There was a social network of sorts, an informal one. People who could use the net used it to communicate, but nothing, no social network of the kind we see. And there were, of course, in the 80s, some cases that did go to court, mostly copyright cases. Well, this changed rapidly in the last 10 to 20 years, so much so that Mr. Kfor is embarrassed by this statement. But I don't think he really should be embarrassed, because if you're back in 1993, it was fair enough to think this is good. We don't have to do anything to make this good. This is inherently good. And unfortunately, it's not inherently good. The point about disputes is you don't have to really do anything to generate disputes. You have to do a lot to resolve disputes and even more to prevent disputes. But if you want to set up an environment where there are lots of disputes, take a look at the internet. Doesn't require huge strategies. So how can we improve access to what we call justice? We need more tools. Most of all, I think we need the last thing. We need a new focus on preventing disputes. Mediators and arbitrators almost have nothing to do with preventing disputes, because those are private confidential processes. So if you think about trying to find patterns in areas where there are lots of disputes, eBay does that, that takes some effort, but confidentiality is threatened by that. If you're strictly a mediator, again, you're not going to be able to handle huge numbers of cases of the kind we had here. So what happens? Why is there, why do we need these dispute resolution processes? Why would Alibaba bother setting up a system to handle 100 million or eBay 60 million? Or in these areas, which we sort of case studies that we devote a chapter in each two in the book, why are they concerned with disputes? And it's a rather simple answer, and that is if you're going to enter a disputing environment, you're entering an environment that brings some risk. You want to enter a safe environment, and there is this statement by someone at Facebook who was here a few weeks ago. I don't buy into the validity of this statement, but it does represent clearly the rationale for why we need dispute resolution processes. Basically, we want people to feel safe when using Facebook. When I first got involved with eBay, I haven't been involved with them for 10 or more years, but the question with eBay at the start was why would anybody buy anything from somebody they didn't know who was located at a distance? And what could you do to help them feel safer? And the answer was you could promise them that if they resolve disputes, if they have a dispute, you'll resolve them. We're, I'm sorry, somehow this is taken off by itself. I'm blaming the technology. So the access to justice issue, we've seen it before. In the mid-70s and early 80s, people in this building, or not this building, but this university, I've got a very sensitive piece of the device here, discovered the same thing that I mentioned earlier, namely that the courts are overloaded. They can't handle things. Therefore, things should be handled privately and mediation and arbitration were the choices there. Alternative dispute resolution became a model for online dispute resolution some years later. I think those of you who are more interested or interested in our online dispute resolution can look at it carefully as it's branched out from ADR. If you wanna know how eBay resolves disputes, here's a simple example. The eBay system's impressive, but really it's impressive only in terms of numbers. It's not impressive in terms of complexity. So eBay simply uses forms. And the goal of these forms is two-fold. One is to clarify what the dispute is about. More importantly, it's designed to allow the parties to communicate civilly with each other. The vast majority of disputes between buyers and sellers are based on miscommunication or accidents, but almost everyone who makes a purchase on eBay and finds it not to their liking, almost everyone thinks they've been defrauded. So the key goal is to persuade the parties to talk enough so that they realize they haven't been defrauded. These forms enable them to focus in on what kind of solution there might be. And you end up with 60 million. So one current example of an access to hopefully justice, but maybe injustice. This is a case that's potentially going to the Supreme Court. It went to the Supreme Court once, and it was sent down for a technical reason about standing. But Mr. Robin, anybody know Spokia familiar with it? It's a bad place. So if you are represented there, I would get out of there. Unless you can tell me later, you found to find it different. Spokia is what's called a people search engine. You can search for people on Google, but you're not going to find as much about them as you will on Spokia. And Thomas Robbins looked himself up on Spokia, found that there was almost nothing that was accurate about him. His age was wrong, his economic well-being was wrong, his job situation was wrong, he wasn't married, he didn't have children, his expertise was off. And Mr. Spokia sued based on the Fair Credit Reporting Act. So it's one of the few federal statutes we have that help with accuracy, promote accuracy in records. If you're interested later, I can talk about the issue of how to correct records because in healthcare, in e-commerce, almost in every chapter of the book, there is an issue with records not necessarily being stolen, and not records based on problems of privacy, but records based on accuracy. And the records are not accurate, judgments and decisions made on the basis of those records are going to be mistakes. So Mr. Spokia runs the risk of being turned down for a mortgage, for example. So this statement in the Fair Credit Reporting Act required them to follow reasonable procedures to ensure maximum possible accuracy of the information that it makes available for use in credit reports. Seems to be a violation of Mr. Spokia, but the district court, federal district court denied him relief. The Court of Appeals reversed that, granted him relief. And then I went to the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court sent it back down to the Court of Appeals because it said, there's no real concrete proof that he's been injured. How many of you think that he's been injured? If you were in this situation, would you think you'd been injured? I would have guessed more. But so the court says he hasn't been injured. There's this false information about him, but no basic injury. So this case was decided in his favor by the Court of Appeals the second time it went to them. And it's unclear whether Spokia will try to appeal to the US Supreme Court or not. But it seems to me an example in the legal system of trying to secure access to justice. And this is not a trivial case. The number of amicus briefs filed in this case probably are 50, and all of the big players filed amicus briefs on Spokia's behalf. I think most of us would have preferred that they filed briefs supporting Mr. Robbins. But all of them, I think it reveals something about them. All of them are afraid of more lawsuits. And they've all filed a lot of retainers of lawyers. And they've all filed briefs in support of Spokia. So the case was sent back and recently decided in Mr. Spokia's behalf. So just two more slides, and I think I've used up my time. Digital injustice as well as justice. Yes, there's hard to know, as I said, whether to call this book digital injustice or digital justice. The underlying issue, as I think I've said already, is that conflicts, it doesn't take any special action to generate a conflict. If you have a transaction, if you have a relationship, if some entity has a billion members, there inevitably going to be disputes. Whether those entities that have a billion users design systems appropriately is a lot harder. And then of course there are those entities that think that terms of service can cover all of this and that prevent disputes. So here are my two worst examples. First from Partners Health Care. How many of you belong to Partners Health Care? Last general, Brigham and Wegep, women's. So how many of you use their online patient portal? So you've agreed to this. In the event of any problem with patient gateway, that's their portal. Or any of its content, you agree that your sole remedy is to cease using patient gateway. Under no circumstances shall partners or any partners affiliate be liable in any way for your use of patient gateway or of any of its content, including but not limited to any errors or omissions in any content. I find that so egregious that I don't know what to say more about it. But I will say one more thing about it. And that is all of us should take a look at our online medical records. Probably almost all of you have access to your medical records online, either through patient gateway or Beth Israel's, which is called patient site. And the interesting thing about these records online is that when you look at your record, it will probably be the first time in your life that you've seen your medical record. I haven't encountered anyone who had access to their, or who asked for access to their paper, the NILA folder record, even though federal law requires physicians to make them available. But all of our records are online and people are seeing for the first time that there are lots of mistakes. My wife's record said she had diabetes, which fortunately she didn't have. My own records said I had an anxiety attack that caused me to go to the hospital in 2005. I don't know where they got this from. And the problem with medical records, it's almost impossible to correct them. Because you're not allowed to delete anything from a medical record in case litigation ensues. So they might, if your medical record contains an error and you complain enough, they may put it at the end of the record so that anybody interested in your record will have to scroll down 10 screens, but I urge you to take a look, see your record. The other one is one mentioned earlier, AT&T's arbitration system. Well, AT&T is not alone. In terms of service for any wireless carrier and any bank will mandate use of arbitration, which means that it will not allow class action lawsuits if you're injured. In theory, there's nothing wrong with arbitration, but nobody uses it. And then there is something wrong with that. And AT&T is not alone. The agency that was established during the Obama administration of consumer finance protection agency banned the use of these clauses in commercial contracts, consumer contracts, not wireless contracts, credit card contracts, but the Trump administration either has recently or is about to get that off the books. So if you want to complain, you have to ask for arbitration and the problem with that is it's going to go nowhere. So I think my power is up. Thank you very much. Obviously, if anybody has any questions, that's what the rest of the time is for. Thank you. And I feel encouraged and provoked by your presentation to ask the first questionnaire for me. And it goes back essentially to your first slide with the courthouse building in the smartphone. And the question is twofold and centers around the terminology also a little bit, digital justice. First of all, the first question is your presentation has focused strongly on disputes and the question of dispute resolution and also to some extent prevention. And I'm wondering whether you could comment a little bit more about the relationship between disputes and justice and these two concepts. So the first slide. So most people look at justice in two ways, not entirely consistent ways. One, substantively, asking basically whether the outcome was just. And we've done a little of that but that hasn't been our focus. The other way to look at access to justice is to look at access. Does one who feels aggrieved have an opportunity to correct the problem that has caused them, problem that exists for them. That's the Kafkaesque model of access to justice and that's the one we chose to develop more space to than the other one. Which is also a great segue to my next question which is more justice as a process, right? You mentioned there is the output component, there is the access component and this now directly relates to the title digital justice. Would you say that somehow the digital vision that you sketch also in the book, of course in much more detail, reflects back on what justice may mean in the digital age. Is there some sort of technological feedback loop on the very concept of justice? Also looking at the eBay snapshot you provided where it's a form and not necessarily a rhetorical space of arguments that seem to determine justice. Yeah, I think one thing I would say is that we're in early stage of trying to figure out really how do we handle these challenges to justice based on what occurs online. Really all of the activity in this space that we talk about or almost all of the activity is pretty recent. Facebook doesn't get started until 2007. Amazon and eBay get started quickly in 1995 but still it's fairly recent. So we don't have a good array of processes to look at. We have the array that I had on the screen half of which, my opinion, are severely lacking. We could have, for example, a domain name dispute process that actually involved domain name holders and challengers to those domain names to reach a reasonable solution. But instead, as many of you may know, the trademark owner wins 85% of the time. So I think that's an online dispute resolution process. I'd say it's a flawed process. I have, I mean, sometimes this does, I admit, depress me but one thing I'm optimistic about is that we will see some creativity in designing processes. Maybe artificial intelligence may be net next to your post in terms of process, problems and solutions. Yeah, so AI and algorithms are big issues for people designing these systems and the challenge is, as I said, transactions generate disputes. So this is a question we don't answer in the book. How do you deal with algorithm that somehow you think is leading to a result you don't care for? Thank you. Let me open up here. Questions, comments? Hi there, thanks for your great comments. Jessica Field from the CyberLock Clinic here. So we deal with, a lot of our clients are interested in the possibility of online dispute resolution and we've found that the tools that are available seem to deal really well with sort of simple disputes that often have monetary resolutions but don't always deal with other kinds of, both objectives that clients might have, like having a public forum in which to air grievances or merely an opportunity to feel heard or the possibility of some sort of injunctive relief. Are there systems that you're aware of that are either like under development or even currently available that deal a little better with that broader universe of concerns that you're sort of haggling over, like how much do you owe me for not sending the merchandise that I thought I had ordered? Well, first of all, a desire to be heard is really one of the core elements of a valid dispute resolution process. So offline, one of the things mediators struggle with is to make sure the parties have had this ability to be heard. You're right in one respect, the disputes, the many, many millions of disputes, as I said, actually are easy disputes. They involve goods, the sale of goods. There are other disputes, you know, other so-called sharing economy platforms, like TaskRabbit, for example, which generates lots of disputes, but not goods, rather, services. And services, you know, goods are either or. Services are harder to resolve. You may think you've done a good job doing something. Whoever hired you may think you've done a terrible job. I think we haven't had, we've certainly tried to have forums, large forums in which a lot of people can be heard. Many people who are experts at facilitating large groups to resolve a problem have an interest in doing it online and actually have been doing some of it online. There may be people here from the program on negotiation who have something to say about that, so, but I'd say, first of all, you know, if you walk across about 100 feet away, there is the program on negotiation, and those people are experts. And I confess, I've tried for years to get them to be interested in the Berkman Center and haven't found anybody really eager, so maybe you can make that your mission. The other thing is, the Cyber Law Clinic had a big victory last year in a case we talk about in the book, and that is people who have devices implanted in their bodies and don't own the data that's wirely sent off from those devices in their body. And you guys did get an exception so that your clients could actually have access to the data generated by them, which seems, again, something obvious, but the law wasn't on their side, and it's still you won, but I'm not sure everybody would win. You know, those are cases that involve complex issues, and there's no reason you can't handle those online. So I think in terms of our having, being more optimistic that we'll have systems that can handle more complex disputes, absolutely. Anybody else? The question is, you know, the YouTube's in the news about now regarding how they take down the ad revenue. Most news is saying, there isn't anything comparable. The other side is saying because it's an ad revenue, not how the S grow, it's new situation. So the question is, do you see a comparable example company called Case for the current YouTube disputes? Yeah, so I forget. What was, what did YouTube do in the last day or two? Took down all category of? The YouTube Kids category, which was basically lack of wisdom, not quite listed, and there's a lot of stuff getting through the truth in a hotel. So I think one of the challenges in all of this is we've got guarantees of freedom of the press. We innately don't like government interfering with expression, and we may feel even stronger about that given what the administration says about these things. On the other hand, the environment we're dealing with here is different from the environment that existed 20 years ago and forget about 200 years ago. So personally, I have no problem with YouTube taking down serious images that children are looking at. Where do you draw the line? Don't ask me that question. You are gonna ask it. Other situations more like you have a person recording a video of a game, the game company dispute sets, the YouTuber has all of their ad revenue polls for a week. So that's like the whole, that's a whole major dispute resolution thing. I don't know. I'm trying to figure out if there are any good guys out there. When you look at the statistics on the AT&T and the language from partners, that they seem to violate the statute that most states have about unfair or deceptive acts. On its face is the fact that you have an arbitration system with 120 million mobile phones, but only 27 cases. Is there anyone out there trying to make a case that the system itself is either unfair or deceptive? Well, maybe the cyber law clinic wants to take this on, but the problem is you've agreed to this. Okay? You weren't coerced into agreeing to this. You don't have to look at your medical record online. This isn't, I'm not saying something I believe is good. I think the defense is. You agreed to that. They made their site available to you. If I were a physician, I frankly don't know why the physicians aren't angry about this. They don't know about this. I don't, you know, probably no one knows about this. But I don't read all of these terms of service. No human being could read all of them. But if you do pick out the big companies, Airbnb, and others, you'll find that when they get started, what I can tell you is that there's a pattern. When they get started, they take the stance, we're not responsible for anything. We're just sitting on the platform. I think we're just gonna mention that. After a period of time, they find out that they're gonna lose business if they don't handle some of these disputes. So they get more involved in these disputes. They were reluctant at first to get involved because they thought that would make them legally liable for whatever. So that's the pattern. eBay now gets involved in lots and lots of disputes itself. But here, you've agreed to it. Unless somebody thinks you're not agreeing to it. If I may follow up question directly on the incentives of the platforms. You mentioned Uber, right? Something that strikes me, whoever has used Uber before, if you have to cancel a trip because the driver doesn't arrive in time or not the time that it stated, and then you can say, well, but we didn't find each other or the other. So you can easily get a refund even if you had paid your flat fee. So I'm wondering, is that kind of leading us into a world where these platforms are doing something similar that the credit companies did before where it just becomes a cost of business? And if so, to factor in the dispute resolution part, and if so, what does that mean for justice? If it becomes essentially a cost of doing business and is not a real dispute resolution because it's automated and just cost of doing business? Well, I think that's what it becomes. Should have mentioned it. I mean, probably the most widely used online dispute resolution process is the one that the credit card companies have called Chargeback Systems. It doesn't satisfy lots of people, but it does satisfy lots of people because there are lots of disputes. Having recently, just two days ago, been charged $5 by Uber for not showing up when the car arrived. I'm sympathetic to customers. And what we do talk about in the book is this issue of whether drivers are employees or independent contractors. That seems to be on its way to getting settled. And when that gets settled, there will be more, I think more likelihood of an online process. This is, as I said, my machine has its own brain. I hadn't intended to show this, but this is the IRS. This brain is smarter than I am because this is a great screen. That's the predictive analytics part. If you can read it, read it. Why aren't our government agencies handling these disputes? Well, I would like to turn this off because... The gentleman you saw actually lives around here, and he's the gentleman in the case that begins the book. He had various medical problems and he had been to different hospitals. And that's Israel, which was where his main doctors were. Gave him a chance to send all of his data to Google Health. Google Health doesn't exist anymore, but in 2010 Google Health existed and Google Health made it possible for you to have all of your medical records in one place. That's a problem still. Your medical records may be with partners, Beth Israel, whatever, and you have different doctors in different places and maybe the Cyber Law Clinic can figure out a way to solve that, but it's a serious health problem. So Google Health was attractive to this fellow and he decided to push the button on the Beth Israel website to send all of his records to Google Health. And almost immediately on the screen it said, warning, you have all of these diseases and he was a sick person to begin with, so he didn't like seeing that he had cancer of this and high blood pressure and literally a list of things. So what Beth Israel had done, which he quickly figured out, was sent insurance codes to Google rather than clinical diagnoses. So insurance codes don't map particularly well with medical problems. So if you've seen your doctor or somebody in the office trying to figure out what code to put in, there were at that time 7,000 codes, now there are 70,000 codes. It's a complicated mess, frankly. But this was basically, for our purposes, this was an intriguing dispute, so we used it to begin the book. And it also indicates how things go wrong, not when anybody's intending for anything to go wrong. Just to follow on your questioners, a colleague of Ethan and mine at the National Center for Technology and Dispute Resolution, Colin Rule, who was one of the other architects at eBay, gave a presentation once. And he said that they figured out through their research that customers would rather lose a dispute quickly than win a dispute over a long period of time, over a really protracted period of time. And that one of the key questions for anyone architecting that kind of dispute resolution system is to figure out how to obtain some kind of justice that is expedient, but that doesn't obey those perverse assentives to just deny people quickly or something like that. Ethan, my question for you is, you painted this picture of an early internet that shared so many norms and was such a closely bounded social community that disputes weren't as prevalent. And now we have a much more heterogenous internet, a much more conflictual one where conflict is a growth industry. Which do you think is easier? Building increasingly large, sophisticated and elaborate methods of resolving disputes once they occur or somehow building social norms and technologies that support the social norms that create a common sense of community and behave prophylactically at preventing disputes? Well, I'd say the latter is much harder to do. How many of us belong to systems that we find advantageous to belong to but we don't really like what's going on? Most of you probably belong to Facebook. Facebook wants you to feel safe. I don't know if anybody feels safe using anything online. But I'm old enough to remember, in 1992, a real cut-off when lots of universities let students use the internet for free when the U.S. government allowed commercial activity. And that was a debate back then. The researchers said, you know, we've got the system. Nobody gets hurt by it. We get along well. Of course, only a small percentage of the public even knows it exists. But it serves its function. And if you change the rules, not only will you have pornography, which was an obvious one, but you'll have all kinds of conflict. The other side said, our economy needs to grow. Well, here's a way for our economy to grow. So all of those things happened. So I don't think you can be nostalgic for what went on back then, but I don't think you can be concerned about what's happening now. Anybody else? Just maybe as a last question, building up on that, how do you think about the interfaces and you addressed it in the last chapter of the book where you talk about the remaining role of courts, right? So these technological systems, but then also the human-based systems, how also going back to the social norms point, how do you see the interaction among these systems? Well, first of all, I think there's no reason why courts can't be more engaged in online dispute resolution.  If I asked how many people in this room have actually been a party to a case that went to court other than a small claims court, I'd be surprised if 10 people raised their hand. How many of you have had a case in court? Yeah, so maybe less than 10. There's no reason why the processes that work in the private sector can't frequently work in the public sector. And there are examples of this in Michigan. There's somebody at Michigan Law School who runs something called Matterhorn, which has basically runs the courts. And then there's... It's not run by a court, but having received my fair share of parking tickets on Mass Ave, it appeals to me. It's called Do Not Pay. You can look it up. They'll handle your case for you if you want to appeal a parking ticket. But they've designed what they claim are a thousand bots to help people basically navigate the court system. So when judges are more technologically familiar, which is one thing holding things back and maybe budgets are a little better, I think we're going to see a lot of this handled by court. And the thing you might find troublesome is, which I'm surprised no one mentioned, and that is what do you do with when it becomes easier to complain and then you have more cases. So those people who would simply live with whatever problem they had, all of a sudden find, well, with two clicks of my finger, I can fill out a complaint against anybody. We'll work on that. Maybe the cyber law clinic can work on that too. So it seems that the next 10 years will be more interesting than the past 10 years in terms of how this story unfolds, whether the emphasis is on more disputes or on more resolution. Please join me in thanking Ethan for this presentation. Thank you. Thank you.


The warm temperatures this past weekend did not keep a first-time event from happening. In this week's community spotlight, our Josh Peterson shows us how a first-time event made use of the snow we have left and how it was put to use for a good cause. As the holiday classic goes, it's lovely weather for a sleigh ride together with you. The Beltrami County fairgrounds took on a more seasonal feel with the sound of jingle bells and the sight of horse-drawn sleighs that were all part of an event to benefit the Bemidji community food shelf. It's great. It's a perfect day to be out here. You don't need a blanket. You can just wear a light jacket and there's enough snow to have the events. Even though this is the first year that the Bemidji community food shelf has offered a sleigh ride event, it actually has a longer history beginning over in Cook County. My uncle, Mike Hansen, does a sleigh ride up in Cook, Minnesota for the food shelf every year and my mom and dad and my husband and I go up there every year to help out and the last two years I said when we got we were coming home I said I want to do this ride. I want to do something like this for our food shelf. For the Bemidji community food shelf, this opportunity came at the right time. The March food drive is extremely important for the area because it not only helps with food donations but monetary donations can stretch well into the summer months when the food shelf is at its busiest peak. Starting Thanksgiving time and then Christmas, those are the times that people generally think of giving to the food shelf and then the summer months, not so much. But the interesting thing is that's the time of our highest usage. When it comes to helping the food shelf, anyone can step forward and put together a project. Whether it's simple or elaborate, any help with raising awareness and funds is welcome. I would like to see lots of little events, lots of these kind of grass roots events popping up because they're diverse you know and each event might attract somebody new. But the first year of hosting a community sleigh ride considered a success. The hope is that it returns and sees continued growth for years to come. I'd like to see it grow. I'd like to see more people coming out and doing different things. With this week's community spotlight in Bemidji, Josh Peterson, Lakeland News. If you've enjoyed this segment of Lakeland News, please consider making a tax-deductible contribution to Lakeland Public Television.


Live from Manhattan, it's theCUBE, covering AWS Summit, New York City, 2017. Brought to you by Amazon Web Services. And we are live at AWS Summit, here at the Javits Center, New York City. We're in Midtown, Manhattan. A lot of activity going on outside. You can imagine all the buzz inside as well. Some are between six, seven, 8,000 attendees, kind of tough to tell right now, but everybody's shamed inside here on the show floor and they've been here all day. They're going to stay for a while, I think, too. As I said, a lot of buzz going on and good buzz too. Along with Stu Miniman, I'm John Wallace and we're now joined by Eric Windish, who is the co-founder and the CTO of IOPyte and Erica. Thanks for being with us here on theCUBE. Thank you, thank you for having me. You have had a big day. Yes, we have. It's always fun to talk about money, but you did have a fairly significant announcement this morning to make. Tell us about that. Yeah, so this morning we announced funding for 2.5 million dollars from several investors, including NEA, Madrona, and Underscore. So yeah, you don't often get to high five everybody, right, for a day like that. I mean, that kind of validation, obviously, is something that not you just take to the bank, you take it to the marketplace too. Yeah, absolutely. And we actually, we started, our first check was from Techstars. So we joined Techstars here in New York City and did that last year for their summer program and it was really great. And that was the first validation that we really had. And then having that further validation from major VCs like NEA and Madrona, Underscore, that really was really validating for us, as well as just the fact that we're building, and we're hiring and we're building and having what I think is an increasingly awesome product. Sure. Well, tell us about IOPyte. I mean, for folks at home who are watching, might not be familiar with your space. What you're doing, how you do it? Yeah. So we provide tools for software developers to build and manage their applications on Amazon Lambda. So basically it's all serverless. We're actually built on serverless as well. We monitor with IOPyte, we dog food everything. And we are providing deeper insights into those application workloads, as well as, you know, correlating the information in more useful ways, deeper knowledge of what exactly is happening in the run time. So like we're able to see like the data we ingest tells us information on the processes and the containers and the virtual machines that are running your Lambda workload. So we can see things like memory leaks and we can see file descriptor leaks and disk space utilization leaks, things like that, that Amazon doesn't collect or at least doesn't give you that information. So we're looking at ways we can provide more value to users of Lambda and also extending it with plugins. So we have a plugin for tracing where you can time aspects of your application as well as profiling. So you can enable a profiling plugin and you get a full flame graph. So you can see these are all the functions and this one ran and this one ran and the stack looks like this. And so you can see the full flame graph of what happened and when and full timing information. This kind of insight that nothing else really gives you. Yeah, Erica, every time we have a new technology we go through this kind of diffusion of innovation that goes through.  How do I use it? We saw that containers and each wave seems to be going faster and faster. So there's still plenty of people I talked to that were like serverless what? You know, some new as a service. I mean, I thought I knew it was SaaS and everything else like that. You're digging into these environments further. Can you give us what are some of the key use cases you're seeing? What are the challenges that customers are having? You know, kind of what works, what doesn't work? You know, help us unpack that some. So I think there's a different number of challenges that users run into today. One is the fact that it is new. So some of the tools are still evolving. You know, operations tools, development tools are still evolving. Just this week, then Amazon announced Sam Local so you can do editing and debugging locally on your machine or your laptop that wasn't available before, right? So these tools were very much still in the learning phase for some of the tools. But some of the things like what we're doing with IOPyte in some ways is more traditional because we're bringing in, you know, some of the basic monitoring tools and capabilities that you expect from other platforms. But the other side also innovating because we bring in, you know, we're bridging that development and operations into a single tool. So it's not development and operations. It's, and not even just different tools for those two things, but a single tool for those. So I think that's part of the solution, part of the problem. You know, in terms of workloads, I think there's a lot of ETLs streaming applications, very infrequent things like cron jobs, web applications. You can take Flask applications or Express applications and just port them directly over the Lambda with, you know, almost a lift and shift for those, right? So there's a lot of power for bringing on the web because you pay for the requests. You don't scale your application and build your application for the number of servers that you need to handle the requests. It scales per request and you pay per request. And that's what's powerful in both scale of operations and team and like financially, but also, yeah, I lost train of thought there, but it all scales that way, right? Like just according to the request. Yeah, bring us into a typical customer. And I know there are no typical customers. Everyone's a little bit different, but you've got the developers, you've got the operators. Finance has always had, you know, there's challenges with cloud in general, but serverless, you know, at least promises that it's going to be less expensive. What are those dynamics from an organizational standpoint that you see inside? In terms of cost? Not just cost, but you know, do the developers make something and the operators are like, wait, you know, there's challenges there or who drives this initiative in general? Does finance come and say, has finance heard about this and said, hey, you know, I heard I could save 60 to 70% of my cloud if you just, you know, re-architect this on Lambda. You know, is that the developers coming through and saying, oh, wow, this is great and can do it or operators. Who's driving the initiatives and what are some of those dynamics? Yeah, so I see a combination of these things.  So you're going to build serverless unless you can't, right? Serverless by default, anything else as an exception. Then there's organizations where developers are really pushing for it because it simplifies their requirements, right? It's a self-service aspect, right? Even if they can spin up VMs, like even if they have self-service VMs, they don't have to spin up VMs, they don't have to build Docker images, they don't have to look at how the operating system is configured. They write code and they deploy code. There's no other steps, right? They're not like, oh, what version of Python is on here and how do I install all the libraries and how do I, right? Like with serverless, you just write the code and you ship the code, which is really, really nice. So, you know, in a way, it's like having a golden image that you can't change and you just know you're always going to build for in every application that every organization is building to the same golden image, which simplifies a lot of things.  So, I mean, so first off, you know, what gave birth to that and then where do you think with serverless computing, serverless application, so on and so forth, where is that going? You know, what's going to be the real value at the end of the day of that? So, I mean, so first of all, the term serverless, I look at it as yes, there are servers. Serverless is servers are not my concern as a developer, right? I am not worrying about what the server looks like or operating those servers necessarily. I care about building my application, which is why we're looking at building tools that are bridging development and operations so that operations is part of your development. But I see the direction of serverless really interesting in a few ways. One is that it's going to be available for more use cases, right? So, right now, there's certain use cases that make sense and one of the challenges is figuring out which use cases it doesn't work for. Eventually, you're not going to have that question, potentially, right? So, maybe we get to a point where you don't have to ask, like, the challenge isn't, is serverless good for this use case? Maybe it's good for all use cases, eventually down the road. Maybe. Another thing is... If I could just follow up on that. Some of the announcements today, like AWS Glue, has serverless in the background there. Seems very promising. Things like machine learning or artificial intelligence that serverless, you know, IOT, where I need to balance the surface area of attack there, but with serverless, it won't be active as much and there'll be links that are a little bit more dynamic. So, lots of those new use cases seem to be built really well for serverless. What aren't some of the cases today that you just say, hey, you know, don't even go serverless there? Oh, don't go serverless, where to do that? Yeah. Well, so, Lambda has an execution time window which can be limiting for some things that you might want to do. So, like, Lambda in particular may not be the best case for all video encoding tasks. Some video encoding tasks, if you can time limit it, can be fine, but it's not good for all video encoding tasks because, you know, it's a batch process, potentially. Serverless processes that can, like, let's say, paralyze that and say, we're going to run Lambda, but we're going to say, split this up into, you know, into segments, for instance. You can do that, or if you do it as a stream, right? Like, you pipe a video and blocks into a kinesis, right? You can make that work, but it becomes a challenge to do those kinds of work use cases. Yeah, it was the example I think in the keynote was this hide process that would have taken five years, we can do 155 seconds. Right, but you have to paralyze it, right? Right, exactly. And if you can't paralyze a task and you can't do it within five or 10 minutes, you can't use Lambda for it today. But that's other things, you know, it's also dependent on how you define serverless. Because if serverless is Lambda, right, that's one thing. But if serverless is these other, you know, SaaS products, as well potentially, like AWS Transcode Service, well, is that serverless? If it is, then, you know, there you go. There's a solution potentially for you. So it's, there's very blurry lines sometimes around what is serverless and like, we're looking at IO pipe around serverless functions, right, and that's like, I feel the same way around cloud in general, was that there's server like cloud compute and it kind of evolved over time and the cloud is everything, right? All these things are in the cloud. But originally, when we're talking cloud, five years ago, 10 years ago, it was all compute. That's what we were talking about. So these terms change over time. So it's hard to say what serverless will be in five years or 10 years because it'll mean something different. But, or next week. Yeah. For that matter. Eric, last question I have. Sure. $2.5 million. What's that going to drive? What do we expect to see from your company? And give us any final thoughts on what you'd like to see for the maturation of the serverless technology field? Yeah. So we've been hiring and building out a team. We're working on improving the user experience of the product. We are adding additional plugins and enhancements to the service. We feel that we have a really good base with our 1.0 announcement. Because we're not just the 2.5 million, we also announced our 1.0. And the 1.0 has a really good base of functionality. And we're looking at adding additional plugins and additional features that can extend the service. So we're looking at doing that without money. And with serverless in general, I think this is really compelling what we're going to see in the next year. Because we're going to see more large enterprises and more enterprise adoption, I think. I mean, I was involved early in cloud. I was involved early in Docker. And, you know, this point of serverless is very much at the early days of those technologies. And I definitely saw a rocket ship taking off. And I think in the next year, it's going to be really interesting to kind of see it starting to, you know, orbit a little bit. Well, new product, new funding, and a new day. So congratulations on a good day. And thank you for being with us here on theCUBE. Thank you very much. You bet. Well, we'll continue here at the Javits Center. We're in Midtown, Manhattan, continuing our coverage of the AWS Summit here on theCUBE.


Appalachian Wireless has a plan to make your life simpler. It's called forward pay. No contract, no credit check, no problem. Plans start at $19.99 a month and include unlimited talk and text or ticket to the max with unlimited data plus for only $89.99, which has 50 gig of high-speed data because we are you. We are Appalachian Wireless. The city of Pikeville and Jones Oil are teaming up again to take up donations for those affected by the flooding throughout Pike County. We're just going to ask everybody to come out and tell them what they can. People are in dire need of just about anything. Cleaning supplies, diapers, wheelbarrows, shovels, box stands, anything that you think of that you will need to survive. Some people and a lot of people have lost everything they've got. And we hope this truck will be here for the next seven to 10 days and give you an opportunity to gather up stuff in your house. If you don't need it, bring it over here. Donate it into a good shape so people can use it and get back on their feet. Food items and cleaning supplies are still in dire need, but they ask that no one bring clothing items. We ask not to bring any clothing. And there's some other agencies that think the Dream Center is working on that can be taken there and they're separated in sizes and all that. So it's just very hard for us to be able to do that. They've got the personnel to do it. Those seeking to donate items can drop them off between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. Some items still needed are non-perishable food items, cleaning supplies, and personal hygiene items. You can drop off all donations at the trailer parked at the Pikeville Fire Department. For Mountain Top News, I'm Kelsey Deem.


What's up everybody? Jayce here for Jazby's casebricks.com 2019-20 Panini Prism 1 pack celebrate round on teams number 105 Just sold out and again for immaculate spots being given away here Now I know immaculate has been delayed since I believe Friday or Saturday for some reason guys USPS is really really backed up in our area So they haven't been able to unload trucks. So we were expecting it today on Monday, but they said hopefully tomorrow So they're really trying all they can but we can't really do anything about it Hopefully this fills and breaks tomorrow, but again, these are to give away the final four spots I believe in the immaculate 2018-19 Chase Luke Donchich So again the way this works is we randomize customer names and teams open up the pack Distribute the hits then at the end of the break we randomize the customer names and top four win spots in immaculate I know it says downtown mixer here. I think they just forgot to take that off pretty much four spots in immaculate and again It is sold out. We are just waiting for it to arrive tomorrow. Hopefully so four spots in this break So let's do the break first guys. Good luck. Let's roll it Two and a five seven times. Good luck one two three four five six seven seven times Quinn Donna Ryan seven times teams down one two three four five six and seven seven times Clips down to the calves All right, so Quinn you have the clippers Mike with the jazz That's cancer the T was Mike with the blazes quit with the 76ers Kevin with the Hornets Mike with the Lakers Brett Floyd with the wizards David with the raptors Christian with the pistons Quinn with the thunder Scott Claren with the Hawks Ryan with the King's first Brad with the Rockets Mike with the Suns Quinn with the Nets Ryan with the Mavericks as well as the pastures and the Grizzlies Mike with the nuggets Craig with the wars round with the Bulls and they were the Celtics Aaron with the Knicks Justin with the magic Steve last mobile Jopel against Quinn with the bugs around with the heat as well and the calves So here you go. No one's really gonna trade on this. So let's close the trade a window Let's do this break and again use the dice roll around am I the customer names again? See who gets spots in the mac of it All right, here you go. Good luck, and that's like a great centering. It is a silver Zion Williamson Damn Steve last spot mojo Well, Steve if you don't get a spot in the mac that I think you'd be pretty happy getting this and this centering is pretty solid It's a little off, but honestly it might PSA 10 to be honest Crazy and a quindy where this one? Well, that was a nice little pack, right? There you go now Let's randomize the customer names and It's a six and two eight times top four get a spot each in the mac of it six seven eight good luck one two three four five six seven and eight eight times six enough to Get luck Ryan you're in Quinn it's okay. You're still in as well SKS you're in and Mike After eight times and gradually so we're giving away four spots Mike SKS Quinn and Ryan you're in Appreciate it guys. So this should be the last pack break. We need to do to sell out the break now again Hopefully we're just waiting for it to get here tomorrow. Appreciate you guys. Jasper's case race calm


So, today we are building a little robot friend. Wow, wow, wow! The awesome people over at DJI, uh, I went over there this morning and they were like, hey, we have a little gift for you. So I went to their office and they had this guy out on the table for me. This is the DJI RoboMaster S1.  I'll tell you that later. But they had this little guy, they're loaning me this one and they're giving me this one, which is pretty sweet because you can have little robot battles with the little laser gun thing and there's also a bunch of different games, but it also has a camera as you saw. So DJI, they make a ton of cool camera stuff, a lot of which I use on my channel. They make the Ronin, they make the Ronin S, they have the new Ronin SC, they have the Osmo, they have all of the drones like the Phantom and the Inspire and the Mavic, the Mavic Pro which I have. They make a ton of awesome gear, a lot of which I use. So thank you so much DJI for reaching out and giving me one of these boys. So the thing about it is that when you get one of these, you don't just get a box that has this in it. You get a box with a bunch of parts in it, which is really cool. At least for me, I really like that. Some other people may like more of a, you just take it out of the box and use it right away, but I think it's pretty cool that you got to build this little guy. So I thought today we would do that and we would build this little guy. Oh, this is going to be a lot more than I thought. It's each individual thing. It's each little individual wheel thing. So you see these, all of those. That's these, these wheels.  Okay, so we have a lot of parts here. I definitely need to read the instructions on this. Oh, good, they're in Japanese. Okay, here we go. Step number one. You got to put glue on this shit? It's like making a Gundam. Is that glue or is that lube? Tell me, glue or lube? I think it might be lube. Okay, so we got to put, oh my God, dude. I found the lube. I'll be saving this for later, okay. Guys, I don't know how I'm going to do this. I'm going to grease up these holes and I'll see in a bit, I guess. Each little wheel in this, it's so much. This is going to take me so much longer than I originally thought.  After an hour, I've got all four wheels done.  I'm to step two. That literally took me an hour. Keep going, Ethan, keep going, you'll get the hang of it. This is super fun. If any of you guys end up getting one of these, let me know what you think. I really am having a good time just sitting here building this thing. I don't know if it's good content, who knows? I mean, this is probably going to be a very short part of the video, but it's really fun to build. Now it's getting to the engines. I've been doing this for almost two hours. Last wheel, last wheel, two and a half hours in. Okay, jeez. So we got all the wheels done thus far. I'm going to wash my hands off because there's grease everywhere. Now to put on the big boy, I think. Guys, it's almost done. It is almost done. The computer in there, we've got the wheels on. We've got everything connected. Now we're putting the turret on top. The dude from DJI was right. He was like, this will take about three hours to do. And I was like, Pishposh, it'll take me 12. Guys, we're so close to being done with this. I'm so excited. Then I'll have two of them. This is so much fun to build. Three hours later, we are almost done. It didn't really even seem like that long, to be honest. All we got to do is put this bottom plate on, boys. Dog, we done did it. The one that came with the thing, the one that I built. Hell, yeah, I got two of these boys now. Hell, yeah, I got two of these boys. Now, we just got to see if this boy run. Oh, he turned on. He turned on, ladies and gentlemen. Oh, he make noise, ladies and gentlemen. Do he connect, ladies and gentlemen? Ladies and gentlemen, does he work? Yeah! Wow, ready? Yeah, he got a laser. Wow, and he rolled. He rolled so well. Oh, not so well on the carpet though. But do he do better? Ow, let me just make sure I set him up correctly. He's not supposed to do this. I gotta figure out where I went wrong. I'm wondering if maybe I have one of the wheels on wrong? Oh, I do have the wheels on wrong. I figured it out, guys. Where did those screws go?  That's the nice thing, is we're figuring it out. And this is a thing that we created, so like we can fix it. There we go. Okay, now let's see if it works. Okay, I think that's it. I think it's having a little bit of a hard time doing the strafe on the tile or on the carpet. It still doesn't seem to be performing as well as the other one. Maybe it just needs to be warmed up a little bit. Look who we have here. Wow. So Andrew is now here, and I've got both of the robots set up. My robot still isn't, do it. My robot still, I can't figure out what's wrong with wheels, but I was like, you know what? I'll just have a little bit of a slower robot. It's fine. So now we're going to go. I'll kick you in your sleep. So now we're going to go and we're going to battle them out. We're going to battle, first of all, hold on, wait, first, first, first. I made all these BBs, so we got to fill up, we got to fill up the boys with them. Let's go, come here, take this out like this, then you lower this, and then you fill it up with BBs.  Did you spill on the floor? Like four of them. Andrew, what a happy boy. So we have them here now. We've got the two little guys. We put the gel beads in them, so then we can fire them. It fires really, really slowly, but watch Andrew whip around. Wow, look at them go, ha ha, so cool. Look at them go. Mine is significantly slower than Andrew's because my wheels are all garbage right now. All right, so now Andrew and I are going to have a little battle, so you'll be able to see our point of view from the robot's point of view, and a little wide here, so, enjoy. What are you doing, so I have tension. Move faster. Look at them go. Now like back up and stuff, and it should follow you. That's trick though. Maybe not. Look at him, he's following you around. How's it make you feel, special? Like a dog, is it fun? It also pressed the little square thing. Yeah, wait, do that again. It's getting speed boosts. Oh no, wait, explain to the camera what you did. So in the settings, there's three different speeds. They're slow, medium, fast, and then custom. Custom. Wait a minute, wait a minute. Andrew. Wait a minute, let's try this. We may have just broken this. Oh, she has speedster now. Oh, you ruined them. So we found out that in the settings, you can actually mess with it way more, but you can ramp up all the speeds. You can also change the colors, which is really cool, and customize it to be your own. I'm gonna be red. All right, Andrew, are you ready for the thrill of a lifetime? Absolutely. Oh, don't waste the camera. I love how you can just like drift. I know, dude, that's the most fun part of it. It's so fun. You won't get me, Sam, I am. You won't get me, Grinningham. Oh my God, you're hitting me. You're hitting me. Oh, I died. Did you die? No. I was destroyed. Oh, sad. Revive. Captain, we're back online. Captain, oh. Did I hit you? Oh, I'm, I'm wigging out right now. Oh, yeah, because you died. That's so cool. Revive. Invincibility. Oh. Oh. Kiss. Kiss. Come and cover it, please.  That's the texting and driving we'll do, dude. One percent. Not only can you use. This is dead. Are you dead? I'm dead. Oh no, all right, P. Well, did you have fun? I had a great time. I had a great time. We don't have any jumps to bring these boys off of. Maybe someday in the future. Again, huge, huge, huge thank you for DJI for sending me these guys. Thank you. Huge thank you to Stuart in particular who gave me a little crash course. Hey, Stu. All right. These are super, super fun to play with. The cameras on them are pretty sweet. Also, if you want to get one of these for yourself or any other of DJI's sweet, sweet stuff, they've got drones, they've got gimbals, they've got different cameras.  They have a ton of stuff. So go down in the link in the description below. Not only would we get some sweet camera gear, but also it also helps me out a little bit. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. This was super, super fun. There was a lot of stuff too that we didn't even test out. There's like almost like a Mario Kart-esque kind of thing where these little, they have these little signs and you can get items when you race and shoot them at your opponents. But we didn't have to have this stuff that up. It's really nifty. So thank you guys so much for watching. Hope you liked this little video. I don't know how this will come together at all, but it's just fun. And now I have a tree in my hair. Anyway, that's it for this one. And did you have anything you wanna say? Bird. You heard it here, folks. Bye for now.


The violence in Libya has had a significant impact on the provision of healthcare across the country. We've documented healthcare workers being targeted as well as patients, and they have been assaulted, intimidated, threatened and injured, usually by members of armed groups during attacks on medical facilities. We don't have control on stopping the fighting, but we can make a strong plea and advocacy. Please spare the health facilities and health workers because they are serving everybody, including you. And if you target them, you incapacitate the capacity to be able and available for the people to get healthcare when they need it most. We also call on commanders of armed groups to publicly condemn any attacks against medical facilities or medical personnel and to instruct their subordinates against any such attacks.


Working in a communication context often involves conducting some form of research. This is obvious in the case of researchers working in universities. But communication research is also conducted, for example, in market and opinion research firms, by marketing departments, strategy and corporate communication departments in organizations, and also by data journalists. Before starting a research project, it is important to consider ethical issues, especially concerning unintended and undesired side effects. An example of an ethical principle that may apply is that of minimizing harm. This is obvious in medical research, where administering a new drug could lead to health damage. But, on the other hand, it is important that such research takes place. Otherwise, we would either not develop any new medicines, or we would give them untested to large parts of the population. Obviously, an undesirable cause of action. Therefore, the question arises as to how far research can go. This question is not a new one. Think of the Stanford Prison Experiment, an experiment from 1971 that some of you may be familiar with from the film The Experiment. In order to understand the psychology of imprisonment, researchers simulated the prison environment. The setup was simple. Put participants in a prison, let half of them be guards and half of them prisoners, and watch what happens. The researchers had to stop the experiment because the guards started to torture the prisoners. Let us now consider several possible causes of reasoning about the ethics of this experiment. Someone might argue that the suffering of a couple of participants for a limited number of days is justifiable as it is outweighed by a larger societal goal, the creation of knowledge. This would be a clearly utilitarian reasoning. But even a utilitarian might arrive at the conclusion that the experiment is unethical. For example, because the insight gained is so minimal that it is not outweighed by the suffering. A deontologist such as Kant, however, would treat such arguments as irrelevant, as in his framework, a human being and as such their suffering can never be only a means to an end. And a virtue ethics perspective might focus instead on the character of the experimenter, which does not play a role in either the utilitarian or the deontological reasoning. For instance, a virtuous character might prescribe that the researcher should avoid any unpleasant situation for participants. Because research ethics is a very broad field, we want to focus on some specific dilemmas that are specifically relevant in the communication context. In experiments, a researcher might use some stimulus materials that have an undesired long-term effect. Imagine a researcher that studies the role of emotions in politics. She uses non-mutual stimuli to induce emotions such as anger or fear to find out how this influences someone's attitudes towards immigration. How do you deal with misleading the participants? Or, to discover the effects of violent pornography, researchers might need to deliberately expose people to such content. But how do you deal with any unwanted effects of such exposure? In so-called field experiments, this becomes even more problematic. In 2010, researchers exposed 61 million Facebook users to different versions of advertisements to encourage them to vote during the US elections. This gave some unique insights in what persuades people to go to the voting booth. But even beyond the question of whether the users really consented to being participants in such experiments, it can be potentially very problematic if such studies do in fact influence voting outcomes. You might think that ethics mainly play a role in experiments because experiments by design somehow manipulate people. But also in other types of research, such as survey research, unintended and ethically problematic side effects can arise. In survey research, research ethics involve the formulation and selection of questions. You need to ensure that those questions are asked that provide the best measurement, not those that lead to the most favorable outcome. A special case of surveys is the case of polling. That is to say, the measurement of voting intentions and the publication of estimates of how many seats a party would get if we were to hold elections now. We are interested in estimating the voting intentions of the population, but by publishing the results, we might in fact change the voting intention of the public. People might decide to strategically change their voting intention based on what the expected effect of their vote is, given the poor results. While some argue that reports on how politicians or parties perform in polls help citizens in their voting intentions, others argue that they distort the voting process. Therefore, in some countries, publishing polling results close to election day is even forbidden. However one stands on this issue, it illustrates that formulation of the questions, timing and publishing decisions can have major consequences, which, as in the last videos, again opens up a lot of room for discussion about utilitarian versus deontological ethics. Some additional issues arise in research and communication contexts involving the use of so-called big data. We will discuss these in a later clip.


Everybody for us here ripping One sec 2022 tier one baseball hobby 12 box case number 71 random team style. You can always find these results at latent sports cards calm Thanks for joining everybody and good luck Here we go guys. I'm not gonna recap this break at the end. It's gonna be a quick one and we are behind So I don't want to fall too far behind here Just because make it pristine filled up. So that's the other reason we're going at a fine pace Yeah, these are quick. So next three recap here game use Jersey Acuna for Atlanta 50 of 249 Royals Otto Whitmer field 5 of 299 And silver ink tier one talent auto Matt Chapman 6 of 10 for Oakland nice hit A's Silver ink tier one talent Wilson auto Yankees Jersey card with that pinched tripe on it. Glebert Torres 365 of 399 Mariners auto Kyle Lewis 45 of 199 and tier one talent auto Dodgers max Muncie 120 of 299 Perfect pizza. Yeah, thin cry. I love thin crust pizza Dual Jersey Cleveland early win 9 of 25 game used very cool Early win. That's a great picture name Blue jays auto Lopez auto rookie auto there 85 out of 299 And blue jays again tier one talent auto to Oscar Hernandez 204 of 299 I hate using that tape thing The old the old way just take a bunch of tape and put little strips everywhere That's what I do, man.  I never had that contraption Red Sox Jersey Dustin Petroya 141 of 349 Cool hit Marlins a tier one talent silver ink auto Derek Lee 5 of 10 Nice one fish White Sox rookie auto Jake burger 251 of 299 Dude, I'll give you up for some burger fire right now You guys like burger fire five guys Although the five guys has like they're the one one of the ones that five guys do like milkshakes I might I might slide with that Game use jersey mount castle 398 of 399 Orioles Tier one talent auto Dodgers Gavin Lux 174 of 299. That's an Altamon, right? Yeah, gotcha Braves auto Austin Riley 46 of 199 nice hit Atlanta a good auto there Say I had backyard a couple of times. I just ordered it from the old shop, which was like In like Longwood Altamon area, so I would order it from there Padres Jersey card of Mike Piazza 150 of 399 Padres Mike Piazza Dodgers auto Gary Sheffield 111 of 299 Dodgers Sheffield and Padres Piazza in this box That's kind of wild, right? And a bronze ink that's auto Darrell strawberry number three of 25 I'm talking about Dietrich wise Pats have a good front a good defensive front for sure. That's definitely the strength of the entire team Is like the front seven lot of depth along the defensive line Button relic cubs Alfonso Soriano four of five Nice Soriano congrats cubbies Ray's rookie auto Vidal Bruhan 51 out of 299 Those 240s, I think it is that's a 240 You say 240s they just they just like And twins auto Josh Donaldson six at 25 twins Josh Donaldson Yeah, yeah gills Dietrich wise jr. Yep braves jersey card freddy freeman 118 of 299 If there's one thing that I would trust bella check with my life It's to draft and coach linebackers and delinemen It's pretty good with like elite like corners and two defensive mastermind Rangers rookie auto Joe Barlow 285 of 299 And Phillies jersey auto Aaron nulla 19 of 99 the game used memorabilia auto And special teams players. That's exactly right Like they'll check would be truly invincible if he could draft offensive talent outside of the O line Dodgers jersey card max muncie 176 of 399 Astros rookie auto jake meyers 142 of 299 And mariners auto Edgar Martinez 52 of 125 two relics in this box Orioles train mancini 38 of 399 Yankees jersey card cc sabathea 131 of 399 Got blue jays, that's here went down on Marcus semi 91 of 299 gills Oh man Yanni Hernandez rangers rookie auto 133 of 299 that's actually funny. That's funny. Did you see he said jake? That's funny Dude every time I pull a sammy sosa bat like everyone's like oh cork cork is any cork in there every time Jersey card braves dansby swanson three or 2326 of 349 Right, so what's your go-to taco bell order? boy, whoa Yeah, louis orias 392 of 399 jersey card for the rowers God rookie auto yankees louis heel 46 and 299 Blue jays auto george springer 189 of 199 very simple I mean can't go wrong taco 12 packs They don't use enough cinnamon sugar on them. They're really a skimp. They're cutting they're cutting corners over there Definitely different. Yeah, I agree with that Astros jersey Justin Berlander 199 of 399 TJ free del reds rookie auto 169 of 299 White socks are a white socks jim tomey auto 54 of 99 white socks jim tome And on the back is a carlia stremsky auto for the red socks 13 of 75 nice yazz And that'll do it everybody again, like I said, we're gonna skip the recap here Really quick break though. It's just 10 minutes if you need to go back and watch it. Thanks everybody more baseball coming up