Hello everybody, and we're live at the closing plenary session. Let's give people, oh we should shoot something else to telegram to tell everybody it's live, I guess. Yeah, we can. We'll give people a couple of minutes or a few minutes to kind of join the live stream and then we will get started with a review and report outs of the, welcome of the breakout sessions and we'll start to synthesize everything that we learned today. So stand by as people join us and then we will begin in just a minute or so. Okay, so we've got a few people online. Alright, so let's go ahead and get started. So let me just do a quick ask. Warren, Beth, are you gonna be ready? Not ready? Okay. Deanna, are you ready? Yeah. You can just come right on up. Great. So we're gonna get started by doing report outs of the several individual small group breakout sessions. And there was some, frankly, some great activity and some great discussion that happened. Great out sessions. They should be great out. So the first report out, excuse me, is on the, you can do it, is she on there? The first report out is on the integrating apps and services with an interoperable legal platform and star students and great volunteer contributors helped a lot with the class and we appreciate it. It's Deanna and could you maybe introduce yourself and give us a quick overview of what happened and there's actually several sessions in this breakout. It was more like a breakout track on this topic. So hi, my name is Deanna and this morning we are kind of trying to explain how to integrate several legal apps and services. So kindly, Juan was explaining versus the simple integration with Microsoft servers and also with Slack. That actually was a really cool one. He also kind of keep the note he's more infrastructure not software. Cool examples as well is some app that was able to save up to $20 million. For other people that are wondering how this work out. She refers how they managed the scrum development phase. So this mean is quite fast, not a very long process. He also gave some other uses because it was one of the questions besides the discovery and so on. It's case management and database. So for instance, someone is able to visualize the whole process. And the last two, this kind of bar examples he gave was natural language processing. First, you have a text that you need to translate to other language. So he was showing how this works into the platform. And the second one was the integration with Slack that everyone is using. For instance, someone is referencing a document or someone changed the document. You can see the whole thing in Slack. So this is kind of more how this is done. And we explain how they are working with this. And also you see a little bit of code and was kind of enough to explain. And so people who would be scared of code as well. So it was more or less like this. Yeah. Well, and I think too, and having kind of popped in for and been a monitor for part of one of the sessions. It was really cool to see him turn stuff that people wouldn't think of as, you know, information that's usable. So information just in maybe like a table. They know what one was able to do is able to show people how to turn stuff that's in a table into something that's a dynamic object that can be used and called upon by different different apps and services out there that can help just improve that general flow of the way that, you know, any legal process is done or any human process that is kind of on top of that legal process is done. So it really, I think does a good job of kind of inching us forward in terms of like progressing the way that the practice of law is done into something that's more efficient. That's more transparent. That's more auditable. That's more understandable. That's more computational. So I very thankful that we were able to get one to join us for not one, but two days and three sessions across two days. And he definitely wins the award for most sessions. Yeah, and also very much also for most prep in a certain way. He had his whole development team working for days across the couple of weeks of prep for to develop on the sort of scaffolding of these four different applications that they show to show the range of ways that you could access and kind of manipulate and use the data that was available to do the app where they took data from Discovery and painted on a map. The app where they did some cognitive search so help of basically translation through a rest interface with Microsoft or it could have been Google or it could have been anyone. That's the point of this open application programming layer. And then perhaps the best of all that that slack application today, right? Yeah. So showing how you could actually and maybe more of a human centered method of practicing law around people talking and collaborating not necessarily a document centered on practice. So a little bit more like the way people develop in technology and the way people work in modern business environment. So really, really refreshing. And so thanks again one. So I'm going to do the report out for Elizabeth Reneres. I was her monitor and thank and thank you for joining for that. Thanks for everything. I think we should give a quick round of applause to Diana. She killed the role of very much like how Nila was last year is just a superstar student that stepped up and contributed a lot. So thank you. And who knows maybe next year, you know, you get up and start getting some roles. So what's going to happen after Elizabeth? And you do? Yeah, we were going to we can jump in and talk about the smart legal contracts after that. Okay, great. So in Elizabeth Reneres, my mic on. I'll switch you. Okay. Okay, great. Mike one in Elizabeth Reneres is breakout session on legal frameworks for identity and personal data looking on the one hand of the property law paradigm. We're buying and selling and treating data is something that we own versus human rights and civil liberties framework, which is such a different way to look at identity and people's most intimate objects, our papers and our effects and emanations of our of our identity, like near equivalence, like, you know, like the unique patterns like for voice recognition, facial recognition. So these are the things maybe just half a step away from DNA itself. And so there's these gradations play out in cyberspace, very definitely with identity and how do we track from physical to digital world and what frameworks apply. Do any current framework supply appropriately and how do we know what what what do we think about what should apply. So some of the highlights from that lecture were, first of all, the questions were terrific. We had some very good engagement from the people in the sessions. So thank you for that. And one of the things that Elizabeth spoke to that comes to mind as particularly interesting was in response to the question, what how do we know which framework ought to apply to to to a personal data and identity. I mean, what happens if when you apply if there's two frameworks that apply at the same time. What if they have different rules and requirements, what if they achieve different legal results. Will that be confusing somehow, and how do we manage that kind of complexity. How will people know how to behave and what to do. And so the way she treated that was by one of the insights that she shared was maybe we need to be careful not to have too much reductionism with this to almost try to think of like a like very binary rules of like if a B and C. Then D and F and if you know, but maybe just be what we need to understand more is maybe a little bit more nuance and providing more kind of. I guess I would say something like legal processes by which the result in a given set of circumstances can be determined. So in the law we have like multi part, like multi pronged weighted, you know, sort of algorithms that we apply in all kinds in all kinds of situations in the law totality of circumstances, but not without a little bit more. So she was saying maybe we ought to do is think about what are some of the key circumstances and factors one would take into account. And so so that was very interesting. Another thing that came up was the threat of several questions was the international overlay here.  It's a matter of many layers of international law and treaty and custom and some countries and regions and European Union and other have legal sources for human rights and civil liberties that are regional. Which further complicates an international analysis and and and so we mused about that for a while. Go back, I guess, but the basic thing is there was a lot of great content. Check the video for everything. I can't I can't I don't want to repeat everything, but it was at the end. Oh, there was one other question that came up with Johnny joined us from a session that we had to postpone for technical reasons. The question the session on basically the world of work and what's going to happen with work as we go through this whole digital transformation and specifically on what legal frameworks ought to apply. There's a lot for data when you're in an employee situation or and then what does it mean even if it's not employee analysis or it's not a labor union kind of negotiated agreement that that governs use. But what if you're a gig worker and so now we still have work and what are the rights and obligations and who gets all the benefits from this data and do do even know what's going on with the data. Are we so free when we're independent contractors like we have this kind of idea from the 1850s of I've got my tool belt and my horse and you know I'm totally free to be an independent contractor and kind of call it my way. There's new gradations of what it means to be a worker and and and that came up a great deal too. Yeah, I'm really excited for when we wind up ultimately having that session because I think it's I think there hasn't been a lot of discussion in this area that can kind of balance out some of the information asymmetries that have developed within kind of like data marketplace that's out there. So that will be one to tune into for sure and we'll be sure to get the live session posted and have it so that everybody who is in this in this course is able to go back and collaborate on it and kind of provide feedback and basically relive the experience of the last couple of days. Can we switch to your mic? Yeah. You're on. All right, so in the smart legal contract session we had a couple difficulties. We we that session started a little bit later anyway I think it started 115 and due to some audio issues the conversation didn't really get going until probably about 120.  So we apologize for having to subject you to that but some of the interesting things that we were able to cover in the smart legal contract session included some some things that I think you're going to hear more about later and that would be with non fungible tokens and figuring out how those could be used in the art or music context to kind of at least help scope out the different rights that musicians could have. We talked about some of the market implications of being able to actually distribute all of this knowledge and a way that in ways that are lower cost and that provide more a little bit more customization and granularity and specificity. When it comes to the the apportionment of rights and so I think if you if you tune into that you will probably be able to hopefully see that you know the direction things are heading is very exciting because it's more kind of based on meritocracy a little bit or the ideas that it will be more merit based and kind of working in a way that gets it to the people who created it. And so I think that's something that all of the music people have been here can definitely appreciate and it goes back to something George said yesterday where he talked about kind of the decommodification of music from being something that you know is. Is less focused on the product and more focused on the people and the situations and kind of all those things that makes music so so good and so personable. And trying to think of we did we did have the good fortune also to discuss one of my favorite topics we dove into the world of crypto kiddies a little bit and talked about framing kind of the the. What was it the PRO to music. The music creator to kind of like the music house like the Red Bull music house and using that kind of constellation and that ecology is a case study in the ways that you could build out a potential potential or at least map out some of the some of the things that we talked about yesterday. And so that was it and it was unfortunately cut short and we apologize again for that. Thanks yeah it was it was alarming so I'm learning from from the punmeister so. Another another product that we that we want to do before we close the report out is on this in person session that happened yesterday kind of concurrently with with this primarily online course that we did in partnership with open music initiative. And some invited collaborators from IBM who worked with hyper ledger and Red Bull as as Brian just mentioned helping us think through these these these issues with the context of the Red Bull music house music house which is got a lot. Thank you line please which has got a lot of which is involved in many different parts of the music ecosystem. Yeah it was a very creative workshop and Tim may help to to facilitate and inscribe and actually co co create part of that I was wondering if you could help give us a little report out of what happened. Yeah so after a really amazing day of lectures on the presentations the class can together to one figure out what the purpose of the of technology for the open music initiative will look like and we kind of determine that. The goal is to make sure that musicians are paid and are credited properly for the wonderful music that they produce. So we were able to use an architecture like a scaffolding that included figuring out the roles of different players in what we're trying to in the like the landscape we're looking at and then breaking it down by business legal and technology. And what we ended up doing was using Red Bull and the artists that they use to do this to do this and it was really great because we had a crypto expert in the room from IBM hyper ledger who was able to walk us through some of the limitations of the technology and how we could address certain issues in order to successfully achieve the goal. So yeah that's kind of a high level overview. Can I just say one thing about that? Please. So I think one of the great things about that session was that you had different stakeholders there and you know with very different backgrounds sort of working through how this would all work and so I thought that was a really really successful session. Yeah and I think that goes back to one of kind of the general approaches that we've tried to keep constant throughout the entire course where we talked about the business legal and technical sections of kind of mapping out diagram and what not. But something that we talked about a little bit yesterday was how important the social aspect of all of this is. And so to the extent that we can, those things are ones that should be highlighted. And coming up next or the next report out is going to be with Beth and Warren from the bankruptcy and dynamic design workshop that sought to kind of map out that whole process and better understand it and figure out you know to what extent are these crypto assets kind of how do you how do we treat them in a bankruptcy context. Yeah, so really awesome discussion about, you know, trying to create a framework for talking about this extremely complex subject of, you know, if a token holders, or if there is a bankruptcy of a blockchain company and token holders are, you know, involved our tokens assets are the token holders, secure creditors, unsecured creditors, not part of a creditor class at all of bankruptcy. I mean, if the tokens are considered an asset. So, yeah, we had, you know, a diagram that kind of emerged. And so we drew that out. I think it is about to appear behind us. And yeah, so while that's getting up there, I just wanted to share that, you know, some of us talked about the fact that there's the real time work for continuing to collaborate about this and kind of expand our dynamics design framework for thinking about this complex system. And then the arena, which is like resource repository that I've been using to map out, you know, my thoughts and okay, so if you can see the links behind us, or whatever direction that is. And yeah, and then I'm sorry, quick public service announcement. Also, if you want to get really like all the bits and bytes, check out the telegram channel where we've just pumped a high quality image of this diagram. Yeah. And, and there will be, you know, even more high quality image on the real time board. So, which is a, you know, tool for sharing like flow charts and design and we also be posting those in the telegram if anyone wants to continue and, you know, talk further about all of those questions that arose that we only got to scratch the surface of, you know, if there's some immediate questions that arose, such as, you know, what changes if there's a non fungible token involved what if it's a stable coin could these different types of token classes be used in conjunction with each other for protecting, you know, different classes of creditors or you know just basically starting to strategically use these levers and mechanisms and structures that kind of emergent bankruptcy to, you know, like make smarter decisions about making ICOs and having token assets. So, yeah, I think Warren's going to go through the chart a little bit. Right. So I can. And so two things that we have up and one of them is is not in the picture but it's up on the real time board, which is essentially a breakdown of the high level hierarchy of the structure within the bankruptcy code that determines how you might treat a particular claim within the bankruptcy structure and essentially it's a waterfall kind of approach where you first decide whether you have a claim or not. And then you go through the types of claims in order to see whether you're a high high priority for payment or a low priority payment and that list is essentially secured claims. Consumer deposit claims, regular unsecured claims, subordinated unsecured claims, and finally equity positions. So that information, including I think I think you'll be putting up some sort of logical structures, conditional statements essentially that lets you decide whether or not a particular type of asset class or asset claim falls within one of those categories. The second thing that's up on this board is a sort of way of thinking about the token itself and the relationship between the token holder and the various parties that help you understand how a token might fit within this structure. So the idea is you're looking at a sort of diagramic structure where you have a actor and acted upon and the action. So you've got these three things going on. And one thing that came out of the questions, which was very interesting was the fact that there very often is a difference between the token issuer and a separate trust or authority that has some control fee functions. And so we've set this up as sort of three party diagram. There may be additional kinds of relationships that people might come up with. And the idea of the diagram though is to break down the characteristics of the token. So that instead of thinking about it as a token of some type or another, you think about it as this collection of characteristics, and then you can take that collection of characteristics and view it through the lens of the conditional statements that describe the statutory construct. And that can give you some idea as to how that particular token might be treated within the statutory construct. Yeah, and you know that has really cool applications for tying into some of the things about smart contracts that people have been talking about where it's like, you know, how can we create, you know, a recording contract a smart contract like you know a type of, you know, machine readable and human readable and like, you know, legal system interoperable structure that's able to encode all of this complex information without having, you know, to narrow of parameters but also, you know accounting for complexity and even automating out some of the complexity so that, you know, these decisions that can be made about, you know, I guess the point behind the bankruptcy which is making sure that everyone is behaving in an ethical way that makes sure that everyone is whole and like businesses are structured and, you know, with efficiency and, you know, equal like access to justice pretty much so yeah. I think that wraps it up. Okay. Awesome. Thank you so much. It was so awesome. Oh, yeah. Yeah. You're really reading my thoughts. That was awesome and you know. Yeah, I do. It's a matter of fact. Get on in there. I just want to add, I think this is a really cool way of. Can you play this? Thanks. I think this is a really cool way of, yeah. This seems like a really good way of taking a legal process, figuring out how it kind of fits in with new technologies and kind of learning what the steps are to kind of atomize that down at different levels so that, you know, we can start computing the law in meaningful ways. I'm going to mute. Okay, yes. Yeah. You're up. Yeah. Yeah. It's also an interesting part about the. The. The. The. The. The. The. Super. The. The. Expert in this whole field, sort of thinking about what, you know, when the system fails when, when, when the system goes bankrupt, that helps think about how to deal with that helps you understand what this is what the. What the parts of the system were, right? So, so we had lots of questions about, you know, how to understand the tokens of various types and how to treat them based on who would get what when, when the whole thing went bankrupt. That was very useful. Maybe an approach that could be used in lots of ways. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Just so part of the reason why just by way of reflection why I asked Beth and Warren to, first of all, to team up on this is because Beth has got depth in this blockchain space and using analytic and design oriented approaches like mechanism design comes out of economics and obviously Warren has got real depth and expertise in bankruptcy and is also quite the.  Your dad's a bankruptcy lawyer and he's hanging out with Tony Lye and legal.io and in that space. You worked in two bankruptcy courts more of the point. Yeah. Law school and Warren's got amazing technical depth is teaching data science lawyers chairs the legal analytics committee of the ABA. We thought it would be a good pairing. But on this topic, there's even want to spend more resources and time and focus on it was precisely because one can know the nature of a thing. Sometimes most, most clearly at the key life cycle events and birth and death are the biggest ones. And so when the thing comes apart, there's very important reasons to have to understand it, especially when when it's a when it's a legal entity. And there may be debts outstanding people are motivated. And so we've had now centuries of experience and focus and legislation and the result of fighting and arguing and curiosity people working out how should we how should we arrange this. We can now perhaps learn a lot, not only from that but extrapolate some of it might be a direct bit. And we're trying to understand the different the different types of classes and get names for things when they're when they're all intangible digital assets. We need some help with frameworks. And secondly, we can perhaps begin to extrapolate from this and think about non bankruptcy frameworks that could apply during the entire life cycle of digital assets. Just just as you were saying, Brian, I think it's it's particularly valuable source of knowledge and a good starting off point for looking at how about the birth of a life cycle digital entities and classes of digital assets. And certainly the other key life cycles like when they're exchanged or when they transform and all that. So, so thanks again. And so looking forward. Another person we'd like to invite to reflect on their session is Christian Smith, who provided the session on basically cryptography information security and protocols and we had we did some feedback. We had feedback from students, everybody enjoyed your session everyone learned a lot. So some people were there's still now there's a lot of furious Google searching going on now to as people are grappling with and digesting on what you had to say. And we'd love to invite you now to reflect on your session and any further thoughts that you have. First of all, does I sent you the slides and the references so there's a whole bunch of links and they're not posted there yet. So we'd like to announce that as soon as we look at email that there will be that will post Christians slides and links and that will give you more to work on less to Google. Yep. So, I guess one of the motivations for the talk or the topic here was that that I've had so many so many conversations over the past couple of years about people trying to use blockchain and other technologies involved cryptography and not understanding some of the basic concepts behind them. And what's happening is there's a sort of cascading effect where people hear things from other people that aren't entirely well grounded and repeat them and everyone starts to believe things that aren't necessarily 100% true. And there's a kind of a lack of basic literacy on not just not just the way that cryptography works at the level of the primitives but also in the context around it. And that's one of the things that's been the most missing in the discussions is the understanding of why you use certain cryptographic techniques, what the limits of them are, what context is required around them and how you stitch them together to solve higher order problems. So, we have a real fundamental literacy issue with cryptography at the same time that we're trying to grapple with really big social and legal issues. And a good example of that right now is with GDPR and blockchain. And recently, I forget which organization in France, CNIL, CNIL or something. Folks have started publishing thoughts on reflecting on how does GDPR relate to blockchain because when they were working on GDPR they weren't really thinking about blockchain. They were kind of building up from legal principles and stuff like that. And so there's a really kind of a serious disconnect there and it shows up most clearly in the right to erasure, right? So you have blockchains and IPFS and some of these technologies, they rely heavily on immutability. You can't change things after the fact, that's one of their principal characteristics. And people are trying to use them for privacy-sensitive applications and put some kind of sensitive data on there or relate it somehow in ways that aren't necessarily secure. And they're finding that some of the requirements of GDPR, like the right to erasure, are completely incompatible with that. They're antithetical to the higher constructs. Exactly. And that's just one really glaring example. There are many, many more. Another is around the idea of even definitions of something like blockchain. California passed some legislation where they defined what blockchain is. But if you were to look at, for example, they used the term decentralized or decentralization in their definition having to do with the database. And they completely missed the point. And if you look at a piece that Vitalik wrote on decentralization, their definition is self-contradictory according to one view or some aspect of decentralization. So those kinds of issues are really a problem. And I felt that we need to work on building up better awareness and understanding of basic concepts and also the kind of work that proper legitimate photographers do. I'm not claiming to be one, but folks do have these very well-established, well-developed practices that most folks working in some of these really important topics today are completely unaware of. So I think that was the point of my lecture. Thank you.  So one thing I would, you were very much in the room yesterday, kind of spiritually. We were going through basically a kind of a design-oriented discussion with musicians and technologists and business people and lawyers and others in the open music initiative context. And there was some high level, I would almost call it vision of what would be better somehow with technology, like why can't musicians get paid more. I call that something more of a vision, kind of like, but something that was, I think, entirely constructive was when TMA and others helped to identify what the more specific objectives were. Not the functional specific requirements, but an objective that could achieve purposes and vision. And then to work backwards from that to start to look at what would the requirements and constraints and implications be. And it reminded me in the information security context of the basic wisdom of the practices behind looking at what the point is in the context. And then using that very much to narrow down the right framework and to apply the right questions to ask the right kind of tools or primitives that may be appropriate. And so I think there may be a primitive here, which is, you know, it's helpful to start with the end in mind. It's something that a grandmother might say, but let's just face it, it doesn't go without saying. And we maybe even need to be more methodical and more thoughtful and more deliberate and just more urgent in some ways about about asking these fundamental questions. When we're dealing with these systems in particular, whether security elements of mine at play, but also when we're looking at value mapping and when we're looking at what how to structure a business model, and how to structure the architecture of a system, similar kind of thinking can be helpful to map back to revenue and incentives and all of that stuff. So the way you're able to describe it in a reasoned, you know, kind of easy to accept is how I feel like way I think was entirely helpful. And thanks also again for helping share the good word in the gospel of what is a public key and what is a private key and what is a hash function. Which just bears repeating again and again until everybody gets it. So thank you Christian for being a great contributor again this year. So there's one more report out that I'll handle and then we're going to do a preview of a new journal that's going to be launching. And then by popular demand, we're actually going to work through a hands on scenario. So the final report out, once we've missed when someone telegram us or tapped me on the shoulder, but it's Jameson Dempsey's breakout session yesterday on legal hackers. And it was terrific and we had some great engagement there. He described legal hackers as an international movement, all the different chapters around the world, the types of activities we do, how it's structured. Thanks Red Bull. Thanks. Thank you for showing up. And some of the questions. So one interesting thing that was a takeaway for me was that we have a student who is accepted in the course from around Nairobi. And he's been a good contributor and he's asked many good questions. He's been very diligent I think in the application process. And at the same time, some of what came through as we've been calibrating with him is he feels like so many of us around the world that maybe aren't in like New York or in Paris or in Beijing where some of us just were recently. Silicon Valley. Silicon Valley. This is somewhat remote. This is sort of a niche topic. And so he was looking at this class as a way to get more involved in discussions with Jameson and discovered there's a thriving legal hackers community in Nairobi. And we were talking about the computational on blockchain festival last year at Nairobi and some of the other things happening in the community there. And I think that's what the connection made. This is exactly what legal hackers is about. And partly some of the approach that we're taking in this open education free and available to all lecture series and workshop series for the computational law course in 2019 at MIT. And so for me that was one of the best outcomes is just a person at a time. A place at a time, a city at a time is how it is we can all move forward. And so there were many other great connections made as well. I think the main thing that he talked about that we'll hit at the end when we look forward to activities you might be interested in was the 2019 computational law and blockchain festival, which I think we're on track to not have maybe 100 cities and all the continents. Over 50 last year. And there's going to be ample opportunities to dig more deeply into certainly every topic that we've talked about in this course and many more. If you want to learn more about that, go to legal hackers.org and just review all the great stuff that happened around the world in 2018 in March and then also take a look at the Stanford. Journal of Blockchain Law and Policy. Thank you. We're in the most recent issue, issue one, volume two, I think. Volume two issue one, where there was a nice written basically report out in a sense of the activities and the discussion track of that. So what's going to happen next is we're going to do a preview of a bit of a hacker project that we got together to do here during the course. Many things were started, many things were built. And one of them as we previewed to you a little earlier. Oh, don't go away, Brian. We're going to bring you in this was a basically a open publication and which we're going to be calling the MIT computational law journal models somewhat after Stanford's journal that we just discussed. Stanford's journal, perhaps a little known, actually did arise very much out of last year's computational law and blockchain festival. And that's where they garnered the initial input for some of those articles. And of course the discussion track became some of the content and that's where some of the organizing happened. And it occurred to us as we're prepping for this class, we have a lot more content here than we in a sense know what to do with. And some of it we think has life and value and relevance beyond the four corners of this class. Couldn't we leverage that and sort of reframe some of that to be appropriate input as media chunks in sort of a multimedia journal. And that's what we went ahead and did. And so to kind of walk us through how that looks and then also to we'll be having invitations for you to help us continue to iterate this is Mila who had the hot hand and I gave her an administrator account on pub pub. And she put together a rough outline. Can you show us what we came up with? Okay, so we're going to share screen. Okay, let's do it. So thank you for the intro. So this is actually an open call for collaboration besides walking you through this website with this journal we're putting together. So in your front page you can see a little bit of our mission here. So the MIT computational journal is a work in progress and is planned to unofficial launching in 2019. The pulling draft of course is a contact, but mainly we wish to generate foster and propagate public ideas around open technology. And our purpose is to transform law for the digital age. Here we have the prelaunch editorial board. I'm happy to compose alongside my friends and colleagues. And here we have the session for articles and posts. And this is exactly where we wish you will collaborate either with pieces that come due to what you've seen and discussed in this course or other things as subjects you might be studying at this moment. You will have event session in which you can find not only computational workshop course, but also the competition competition online blockchain fast forward. So that's basically it. And also there's one for third tab, which is a projects tab. We would love to fill in with amazing contributions from you all. So happy to contribute. You're here. And well done. Can I come up to you? Yeah. And I have to say this is very much in the legal hacker spirit and very much I think in the MIT spirit of we, we do rapid prototyping. We build and we iterate and we get feedback. This is a way to make progress. And you did it. And so thank you for bringing the legal hacker spirit back to MIT and for helping to create this journal that we hope really can be a nexus point for the whole community. Most of whom aren't even part of our community yet. So now there's another interface to join and to contribute and to collaborate. So speaking of which, one of the best things you can have in a journal is content. And one of the collaborators at law.mit.edu who is a double major graduate of MIT and now a Harvard law student is Robert Mahari. Many of you will be familiar with him from previous activities. And Robert actually drafted two vignettes that are now in our GitHub wiki in the class repository. And we emailed you the one on negotiation bot that explores a scenario that could truly transform the process of negotiation coming to agreement on contractual terms. And so not just the process is different but the nature of the legal instrument is entirely different as well. And so I'd like to invite Robert who came all the way down Massachusetts Avenue from Harvard Law School back home to MIT where we regard you as ours even though you're temporarily somewhere else. And I'd like to ask you if you'd be willing, oh I'm sorry one other piece of feedback is we engage several students kind of randomly to ask for feedback on the first day yesterday. And they and among other things we ask them what's working, what's not working, some technical things. But on content what do you crave more of? We have one more day, day three, we have time to do some more stuff. And what we got back primarily really uniformly from everyone, I think we hold five different people was some were technologists, some were lawyers, they're from all over the world. And they said we'd like some more, something we can get our head around some more of a concrete example that we can discuss. Well that's why we put vignettes actually into the repository. They're scenario based and capable of legal analysis and they're written in a way like Warren and Beth were talking about earlier, mapping the actors and the actions in a system and to the like parties and transactions. This is one of those places where law and technology at the design phase at least have compatible languages. And so Robert wrote up a couple of these and we asked, and so Robert can you walk us through the negotiation box scenario? Sure, the one on our M&A. The other one. The one. The sort of insurance thing. Yeah, absolutely, sure. Maybe say who you are. So thanks for the intro. Like Daza said, I'm a double major from MIT, chemical engineering and management. And then I took a year off working private equity started collaborating with Daza and kind of developed this interest for legal tech diamond up at the law school that shall be unnamed. And we've been we've been working on these things kind of internationally. All sorts of things that started with GDPR. I don't know if you remember. I do. And this was kind of born from a workshop on AI and the future of legal profession, where we were having these relatively intensive breakout fire started as conversations.  So we started to paint a picture and we then memorialize this here. And specifically this this vignette had the background. Someone just bought their first home and they're getting home insurance plan. And they have certain priorities. You know, they want to start family. They're concerned about long term financial security. They're in their first job, hope insert promotion, things like that. And so they signed this general contract with the home insurance company, the way you would do it in any other case. And it's like as a standard contract form contract that doesn't really afford you any way to negotiate. But what happens then is that after filling out a questionnaire assessing what exactly the needs of this homeowner are what the financial background is what the kind of emphasis is she wants to place on the negotiation, an AI negotiation bot takes over contacts the home insurers negotiation bot and starts hashing things out assigning kind of value to, you know, certain kind of more freaky scenarios for for this homeowner specifically. She wants to prevent in every way she can a situation where she's exposed to a large financial loss because she's trying to build up this nest egg and cares a lot about her financial security. So based on the kind of background that she has provided to her bot through the questionnaire, based on what the home insurance company is valuing always the bot always works out you know what is the price of changing the clause what is the price of the concession, they hash out this very, very long document that kind of covers all the possible or attempts to cover a lot more possible solution space if you want to think of it that way. It's many thousands of pages long, it's legally binding, and it's added to a distributed ledger of cryptic contracts cannot be further amended. And then years pass. And one morning there's a hail storm on the greenhouse and that's a $5,000 damage simultaneously in the same moment a lightning strikes a tree nearby it falls onto the bedroom causes $8,000 damage. Now the general contract that you know the homeowner read that was the standard document said that the homeowner would be responsible $1,000 out of pocket for each damage event. And the question is well what's a damage event and if two things happen simultaneously is that one event or two. And you could litigate over this and it would be expensive and it would be frustrating and it would be the way we do it today. But instead we look towards this many thousand page long contract and page 8,764 it reads should the house and the greenhouse be damaged separately by hail lightning thunder etc. At the same time the total out of pocket contribution shall be $1,357. Everything's cleared up. This is legally binding document. There's no litigation. There's no time loss. The insurer covers the remaining damage.  And so again, this is really just to illustrate you know what it could be. I don't think the technology is really there where we could actually trust something of this to happen. But I think it's an interesting kind of primer. And I don't know how you have been doing this in terms of getting feedback from people and having them contribute. I'm asking him right now to contribute feedback. Yeah so yeah we'd love feedback. Feedback is always great. Love to answer questions. So thank you. So for those of you that aren't monitoring telegram, could you look at the pigeonhole? Yeah. We've invited feedback through the pigeonhole that's on the same page with the closing plenary stream. Oh here we are. Two shots. Are you getting some? Oh right up there. Are people saying things? Can you scan to see if there's anything we should address? While you're doing that, I want to say here comes legal hacking in progress. So you remember a few moments ago when I said journals are great with content? And then you were talking about this content. Well we have an idea. And furthermore we've been talking about having a more solid collaboration, especially with you so close to MIT again. Oh Mila. We've just made an offer and we've received an acceptance for another victim, for another happy participant on our pre-launch editorial board. And we're wondering if you wouldn't use your administrator access on the MIT constitutional law journal draft site to add Robert Mahari to our team. And we'd like to work with you, among other things, in addition to your editorial role. I know you're good with the grammar and with helping with drafting because I've seen you do it. But we'd like to invite you to iterate and we can work with you. You're vignettes and scenarios into one of the published articles or posts in the first issue of the journal. Absolutely. I'd love to. And if I can help kind of create connections up the road. There are some journals there. Yeah, I've heard that there's sometimes write things and talk about stuff. And so maybe we'd make some open calls for contributions at that little school down the road. Okay, so are we good on that? Did it happen already? Okay, so we'll hook up as soon as we're off the broadcast. So while we're here, any feedback on the vignettes, Brian? Ah, yes. Brendan has the most direct feedback in saying that AI bots will be abundant. So that is a pretty strong endorsement. I think Brendan's a super knowledgeable dude. Also a crowd. Former media lab alumnus. Any other feedback? So the rest, it seems to just be more general feedback. Just had one question pop up. Yeah, kind of in the general feedback van. Anything else? Okay, all right. The app stays open for a while though. So we may get some asynchronous feedback based on people who are watching this farther into the future. And I encourage you all to read Roberts other than yet on the merger and acquisition space as well and how that could be transformed with more automation. But also with the algorithms that can reflect even more nuanced kinds of goals and priorities and other kind of trigger events. When one's perhaps looking for potential acquisition targets or when one wants to remain open to reasonable offers for the purchase or merger of one's own business. So just making it more transparent and more like a market. And then allowing all the paperwork and legal fees and everything else to do diligence to start to become expressed and effectuated through the application of AI fueled data driven model based workflows and processes is very exciting. So take a look at that one as well. Okay, so any final reflection? No, I mean, I think this is awesome. And if people have questions, I don't know what the set up is, but I'm happy to answer and collaborate. I think the beauty of this is the like international collaboration aspect. Here, here. Thank you very much. And what country are you sometimes found in? Born and raised in Switzerland. And I am four and a half. Perfect. Great. Well, thanks again. Thanks for legal hacker. Okay. So what's next is next, the fame of the bake off. Okay, now we're going to do a quick bake off that Brian's going to lead us through which is a hands on it will be very much from scratch to because we don't have anything that exists yet. But and do you want me to go on screen share speaker?  All right, so today, everybody, we're based on the feedback that we got yesterday with wanting to create something that is actually usable and that can be kind of kind of like a live app that maybe people walk away and say hey that's that's pretty neat. I am going to create a GitHub repository for the computational law journal. I'll add the MIT license because that's where we are. It's a public repository. We're going to create it. And so basically what I'm going to do is show you a very quick way to create a website for free. So this is the computational law journal. I'm going to call it the GitHub pages site provided this. I'll do I'll say placeholder description so that I can get through everything that I want to get through. I'm going to commit that file from there. We can go to settings. We can go down to GitHub pages. We can select use the master branch. We can choose a theme. We can say slate. We can select it. Then we have ourselves a real. I forgot to click save I think then maybe not maybe it takes a minute there with us. Okay, so there that's all it takes to create a website. I'm going to take this one step further though and show you a couple of cool things that you can do within this site. I'm going to see how far I can get in the next 10 minutes. So maybe you decided you wanted to add a something like a client intake form. Let's let's call this client intake form. And in this form you want to know the client's name and it changes its short answer. You want to know their address. You want to know their country and state and send. And I'm going to copy this link. I'm going to throw this link in telegram. Everybody fill this out with some sample information. Notably though I'm going to grab the embed code. I'm going to copy that embed code. I'm going to go over here to our great website that we've started. I'm going to add the file there. I'm going to commit the changes now our website even though it looks weird in this markdown version. When it's rendered in HTML it looks a lot better. So in a few moments that will update. And next we can go to responses. We can open Google Sheets. We can click create and we can see the Google Sheets. So as these entries start pouring in I can say let's add a pivot table. And this pivot table has rows and values. I will do column A and I don't remember what I did for location. So that's going to be column D. I'm going to actually delete that. It's column D. And then the values are going to be the count of column D. And then from there hopefully we get some awesome. So we've got a couple of responses and it messed up here. So I'm going to delete this page. Delete. Oh did I do them all at times? That was a mistake. Oh they should be short answer text. I wonder if that's strange that they all appeared. Okay great. So jasha banana filled this out. And now I'll go back to pivot table, create the pivot table. And say the rows are that one. And say the columns are, or weight the values are the count of that one. So we can see the count of where they're located. If you had something like a, maybe you wanted to do something like create a compliance monitoring application you could use this as one way to do it. If you then decide you want to insert a chart of this information. To kind of see where everything's from. You can do that. I'm trying to make the chart work right. Well you're doing that. I want to point a domain at it. Okay. Okay great. So let me take off the screen for a minute. Hello everybody. So well Brian's just sorting out the tables so that they kind of work. I'm going to show you very quickly how literally after he started doing something once I got a better sense of what he was doing. I thought oh he's making a site. And well something that it's good to have in a site is a domain name. Yep. Well let's take a look at that. So I just kind of literally moments ago about computational law journal.org. And it's in fact spelled correctly so that's good. And let's go back here. So if you were to get that on GoDaddy or any other site. The way you could point the domain at a GitHub pages website for free instantaneously or anywhere else. But let's take a look at the moment. In this case to the a name. You just kind of go to DNS. Just do a little bit of a setting here. Sometimes it can be confusing to talk to people through it. So here's a screenshot. So if you just exactly do this it will work. Points to this IP address. I save it. And now I'm going to do I'm going to add a second one. Just so it propagates a little bit faster through the DNS system. So that we can actually show you it working. And I think real time as soon as Brian's done the others. The other IP addresses and spy for which is how GitHub does it. And we documented this in our resources page. And we go to the computational law journal. Yep. Let's go back to your screen share. Second. There we go. So on the settings page in GitHub. You kind of go down to GitHub pages. See that nice little thing there. Custom domain. Computational.Journal.org.org. Yeah. Because you know. Org. Org and then save it. Org obviously. Org obviously. And then notice if you scroll down again it kind of tells you what your domain is. If you click it it will probably actually go there now. Okay. Not yet. So give it a minute. When you're done with the pivot table. This website will be completely working. And we'll have integrated inputs. And we'll have integrated processing and different visualizations. Way to explore the data. Yeah. So are you done with the website? Yeah. Well I got the pivot table added. Okay. And I'll talk a little bit about how I got there. But from this we generated the. And I think it may have an issue to do with some formatting. Which you can kind of. Okay. So here we go. I'll update this a little bit. And instead change it so that it is viewing a new pivot table. Just to kind of see if we can hash this out a little bit. So it looks embedded and close it up. Yeah. Actually I'll just leave it alone and see if it's refreshed. Because I did get the embed code of the old one there. Oh. Yeah. Okay. It takes a few minutes. So is that good for now? Yeah. Okay. But I think the one thing that I wanted to highlight with this is that the potential applications of this can be pretty cool. But it also is a good way of helping kind of frame what computational thinking looks like. How it can be kind of quickly and easily turned into some sort of minimal viable product. And then from there you know you can make it more robust. You can use an actual database instead of Google Sheets is a way to store that information. You can develop more advanced kind of computer sciences that you can apply on top of that data. And then you can play around with the output so that they're more interactive. So that they can be used to provide custom notifications maybe in the happening certain events like for example if you're out of compliance with the GDPR. And so I think this is something that I hope people have found useful. And if you have any questions feel free to provide some feedback about how this could you know be improved. And I hope this now I'm going to see if this is updated but it hasn't a last. Okay. Well, it will update and perhaps even by the end of this session. And so last thing is if we look at computational law dot pub dot org are we going to see something new. Okay, just take one other look at hacking live. You can go to mine. And oh, sorry. computational law. I had the I'm on the page. Going down. Well, look what we see here. Isn't that perfect. So this is a very good example of putting how it is possible to rapidly prototype and you know you could there's nothing about computation or computational law or engineering that that requires you to do things in a rapid way. You could do it in the waterfall method or, you know, different types of business that that's for short. But it is particularly well suited. We think, especially when you're building applications. So that you don't get into a situation where you put a lot of time and effort into a technology. This may be information that's somewhat new to attorneys that are not steep in technology but where you put a lot of time and effort into technology and and and then you find out later. It's not perfectly well suited to what you had in mind by doing a minimum viable product kind of or a smallest workable rendition, trying it out, adding a little more complexity, adding some more features and functions and getting feed. Trying it yourself to make sure it works also getting feedback from all the stakeholders, the users, the administrators, the people that will rely on others that may have apps and services and integrate with it. So it's a way that you can navigate and it's in it's a really well suited design and deployment methodology, I would say for for these more modern computing methods, and that includes in the law. It's probably why we do legal hackathons and why we do the other variants of that event such as rapid prototype jams in the law. So, Brian, could I could ask you to pipe in for one thing before we do the overall flows. We're, we couldn't be more excited about this about this idea of doing a kind of a legal publishing thing about the topics that were so interested in computation and law. And I'm sorry, let me switch the general question is very general. As a member of our community, and a person that's steeped in the topics, I was with someone that knows something about legal publishing, frankly. Could you just speak a little bit about as we look forward, and we try to put this all together. Do you have any kind of thoughts or reflections on, you know, how direction we might go or are there any other kinds of legal publishing journals that do this type of topic we might want to look at, or is there anything we might want to try to do that would be, you know, a particularly good fit for this type of publication. I mean, so we did, you know, we don't really publish journals, but I think that the one thing that's kind of most legal journals are laws journal articles are typically in this very sort of intimidating format. And so it'd be nice to kind of make this more accessible to the computational side of the house rather than just legal journals for lawyers. So it'd be very interesting to have take advantage of this online medium, have things, you know, much more code based interactive links to demos, etc, etc, online communities, that sort of stuff. And as you know, as a reflection of this community, I think it would be awesome. Excellent. Excellent. So, so some of what we might want to look at as we continue to formulate what the tabs are in the content sections is, we do have a concept of projects, and that's not to build out. Brian mentioned code, like what about actual examples of things working snippets of code, and you mentioned online community. So right now we have native and public discussion and feedback and comments. But online community Google broader some kind of sense of chat like we have with Telegram or occasional special interest groups that could meet maybe through Google that could be integrated or pages that would allow ongoing working groups to share and iterate content or to do reviews and things like that. Have fireside chats at that kind of thing. Yeah. Well, just the whole, you know, you've already got an RSS speed so you can obviously have a kind of log part that just contain, you know, just has links to stuff like this course and the various materials and stuff. Oh, yeah, the course as well. So something we had talked about was actually having a course courses or education or something like that tab and that made it to the, is that in the final, it may not be in the current iteration, it went through a few phases last night. So now it's under events, but something where we where we put, you know, there's a lot of courses on coding for lawyers on, you know, long legal issues within I triple E and I international telecommunications union. There's a lot of IETF and other like technology places where they've got legal subtracts, something that relates to all that learning there all those courses all the continuing legal education, starting to gather more of those in some in a place. Well, Warren Agans class is not the extent that I'm some of that type of material was available. So the people interested in this new, well, this new, I guess, generation for the law on this new way that the law will exist could start to learn from that as well. I think that's a that's very, very good idea. And we can do that. Our first thought was to put a course in open courseware or something like that, but the idea of collecting it or maybe a version of it and collecting other people's courses as well and letting that grow would would be terrific. Yeah, any any other just from just thinking about publishing and community building and I don't know standards or workflows or approval chains or marketing or who are the readers. So any other advice you can share with us while we have you. I feel like you're asking you're looking for something in particular. No, not at all. I'm just thinking like I've never published a journal before. I think many of us haven't met as many of the people involved in the Stanford Journal. They do have some kind of faculty oversight and people here but these journals on the new topics, I can think of a few of them are being done by people that that have not done journals before. One thing I guess I'll just say one thing I'm wondering is how much of a journal format and scope is even appropriate here. You mentioned code snippets and community. These are not typical features of a academic journal for sure. I'm wondering if something that's more like a multimedia site or a place where people can actually interact in some way or you know medium is interesting mediums not a journal but it's a publishing site. What kind of modes or types of creatures could be a good fit? Some of the scientific journals nowadays do contain things like the data or links to the data repositories on which the paper is based and so on. Do contain links to working code so it's becoming more and more mainstream that you know in order that people want replicability that's always a huge issue these days. This wouldn't be about replicating scientific findings but allowing people to adapt what people are suggesting when that's applicable would be really useful. So I don't know if you know it's the one decision that the journal will have to make is whether things are peer reviewed or not. And if it is peer reviewed then of course then you need that whole structure of reviewers and editors to nag the reviewers to submit their reviews and all mechanism of you know if the paper was rejected for these reasons and all that sort of stuff which is a lot of overhead. Well yeah that is something to think about but maybe one thing we could look to bring on is initially we call things posts and it's more like a blog post and we make it clear it's not peer reviewed. It may be edited and there may be iterations and then look to at some point bring on articles that are more like you know scientific and professional community kinds of articles that are peer reviewed. And bring that on as one content type. That brings up the whole sponsorship and having the occasional poster session or symposium where people come and present their papers some of which may be published and who could have sponsored. Reimbursed people for flying in or I noticed the Stanford journal has some sponsorship and they're actually now using it not just for articles but they're using it for seed events. So in New York we're doing a computational law and blockchain festival with consensus and with some other people and they're sponsoring pizza because when people eat the pizza then they're happy and then they say things and then we capture the discussion track and then volume three issue one will have proceedings of the 2019 thing and so like they're kind of going further upstream like the life cycle events of what will ultimately create consents. So maybe there's some creative ways we all can think about just how we'll put this together and bootstrap it and iterate it over time. Some people who are happy to sponsor pizza events even more so pizza is great pizza is Prana for hacking. All right so so I would like to do just like a closing round out now and I don't know if you'd be when we just go right down the line. Can you get a start just like so you've been here for three days I know you had some other stuff going yesterday but and you're also here last year and you were a great speaker. I have to say when you showed us the identity in the blockchain and stuff any reflections on kind of how did how did it how did it go. What did you learn and any feedback on you know things that we could do better or or or anything like that. Yeah so I'm always happy to participate I think you know it's you're definitely ambitious to try so many different sessions simultaneously maybe too many. And I thought the in person sessions where there's kind of at least some people in person with some online participation seemed to me a lot better than the ones that were purely online personal experience. I really liked him is even even as I said where you know you actually had you would gather sort of stakeholders representing different interests and perspectives to work through. Use case in a safe space here where you know it wasn't really no one was trying to sell anything they were just really working through stuff. And I think that's super valuable. Again I learned so many just getting introduced to so many different topics and and technologies and ways to think about things. It's always useful for me to participate and also bring in some of the January interns that we have and overwhelm them with this immersion in law and technology. Thank you so maybe we need to look at not having so many on so many concurrent sessions are online. It's very useful to have sessions where there's people in the room and people online get better at finding ways to do that. One of the things we're trying to avoid this year we may have overcorrected was to make it so make sure that when we have some people in the room and some people online that the people online don't get basically completely forgotten. And so we basically tried a method that very much favored people. It was like online first pretty much and I think from your feedback and I think from what we all observe you know maybe doing something that's more mixed would be good. But I'll just say without ever compromising I'm making sure everybody online has a way to communicate and to fully participate in some way. But we should look at redoing that and some of that may just be making sure there's more resources for everyone online to start on time and we have everything kind of ready to go. Maybe more time between sessions and maybe fewer sessions make sure all of that goes well. And I think the digital thing is great for kind of you know gathering the most important questions at the end of the session so you don't have some rando asking this weird question and everyone else will know something else. But maybe not it's not the sort of best interactive facilitator for me. Yeah, yeah so keep looking at the modes for continuous feedback. Maybe we're back to voice on that and muting people that are talking that kind of thing. Yeah, or some other kind of chat mechanism and just being able to see people's reactions and people seem engaged. Do they not seem engaged? It's really a good idea to tell them. Here. Thank you Brian. And I don't want to put you on the spot but I think round of applause for Brian. Thank you. And thanks for all the pizza in years past. Just one more time. Like we're, you guys are like, the stomach goes right to the hacker heart. So a TMA? Oh, thank you. Thanks, but I don't want to hit you up every year. Maybe later. Thank you. TMA reflections, please. So I hear a lot of what Brian said. I think looking back on the last two days, what I was really impressed with was actually our ability to engage the online community. I think last year we really should be able to get any interaction. So I think maybe we went too far on the other side this year. But yeah, we're corrected. But I think we learned some really valuable lessons about ways to have a workflow that works with bringing people from other countries like, you know, to MIT virtually. Yeah. And then I think that my one like constructive criticism would be maybe we could or like suggestion is to find a way to allow online participants to interactively engage. Because I think one of the things that you were talking about, like being able to like diagram out or wipe or something together was really like, was really constructive. And I know that on some of the breakout sessions that happened, but maybe it was like one lecture that everyone could participate in. And the online members could also, I don't know, like provide feedback or be a part of that process. That would be more valuable because there's definitely something to be said about having so many people in a room, all being able to kind of throw a little bit, you know, out about what they know and like what they thought. Excellent. Thank you, TMA. And I don't know if you're aware of it, but TMA is like put her entire like she's stopped not just these three days of her life, but many days before, really for everybody online in particular to be available and to make it make something that's connected and human and humane. So I just want to thank you for helping us all. What is it? The team mentor. Team monitor at TMA. Camila. I'd like to start off by saying, as a foreigner, for me what TMA has done, it's just amazing. Of course, it's very good to be here in person on MIT, just breathing this air already if you're like more intelligent a little bit. But it is very important, you know, that we can get this information and this knowledge as further as we can. So this is one thing. We should look for more ways to collaborate and engage online, especially for building if possible. You know, we have like an expert hack in here and others in this room as well. So this is would be like one of my main goals and the second one and comments. And the second one is that I was really touched by the lecture that was given by both Brian and Brian. And we may have like a project coming on. Even Burning Man. The United Computational States. United Computational States that we're going to do a demo on Burning Man. That might take for the course and also an invite to see if we can pull that off. And thank you for helping us get the first iteration. You have things have to start somewhere or they go nowhere. So thanks for helping really launch the beginning of Computational Law Journal at MIT. Thank you. I feel like with that last one, we also need to give a shout out to Cripper Era for coming up with the idea of the, of not just, you know, this idea of computational jurisdictions like ones that could be like Burning Man, but actually going to Burning Man. He made the conceptual link of well you could have a Burning Man camp that explored some of this stuff and then look at bringing it out to a wider thing like an entire city sort of thing. But that's another great example. What is the smallest potential way you can still meaningfully test at least some aspect of an idea and get a start and something that people would actually like to do. Christophe Pereira from GE, the man of true legal hackers. So in the best way. Brian, reflections on the course. Yeah, it was again a ton of fun. I know I mentioned that, you know, at the beginning when we were shooting the introductory videos, maybe last week or a couple of weeks ago that one of the things that I was most looking forward to was just having fun around people and actually hacking on projects and coming up with new ways of doing things, being exposed to things that I didn't even know exist. And kind of really just using that as a way to have a conversation that in a way that helps people like move forward. Meaningfully, it kind of goes back to that legal hackers mission a little bit, I think, but you know, figuring out how to actually make this make this kind of justice layer that is embedded in everybody's lives, whether they like it or not, making that something that is a little bit more human focused and that can have a real impact on how people do things just based on the ways that it's organized, the way that it's designed, the technologies that's used to help facilitate some of these things. I think that's been such a refreshing and fun thing to be a part of. And, you know, as far as commentary, again, I wouldn't suggest getting involved on the core team unless you're fine with not sleeping or eating until 11 p.m. after day one of the... What do I ask?  Okay, every night. But it's been a ton of fun. Right here. Well, thanks for putting it together, literally putting it together. When we got some feedback from students yesterday when we were following people, one of the things they said was, what was great to have that schedule page where we could kind of just have some anchor in the vastness of cyberspace where we know if we had to get it back to that land mass, we could get to where we need to go and kind of keep track of what's going on. And we were pretty good at updating it. And I remember we were first just getting together and prepping for the course. You were just kind of like, you just kind of like changed the whole site and put some tabs on the top and packed it into existence in a good way. And then lecture, frankly, if I could go forward one more, is, you know, we had a kind of very high level overview of, you know, data applications, analytics and so forth from the thing I said in China. And then we had some very specific deep dives in the computational contracts and this bankruptcy context and, you know, integrating apps and services. But your lecture kind of a survey of computation and law. And then it was very practical examples of how it could be useful. And then the walkthrough of using open source toolset like DocAssemble and all the integrations, what we do with that. I thought really scratch it and frankly I feel it advanced the whole enterprise that's coming together, this whole like new kind of community of thought and practice around computational law. So I think you really nailed it. And one of the best decisions we've made was elevating you to a co-instructor this year. So thank you. No, just got to make people drink the computational law Kool-Aid and we'll all be fine. We're sounding, I feel like we're progressively sounding more cult-like with these metaphors but hopefully not. Well, anyway, I do think that you kind of made it tasty, you made it colorful, you made it refreshing. So it does have some things in common with Kool-Aid and your next name is Brian, the cool Brian. I'm not actually the cool Brian. Well, and what you're listening to is the coolest Brian. In my book. So, that's how that went through. So I'd say please join me in just thanking Brian Wilson, Legal Hacker, for putting it together. Thank you Brian. Good. Yeah, it was fun and it is fun. So speaking to going forward a little bit, we've got a couple of quick shout-outs for what you can do next and then we'll wrap. One shout-out comes, oh, is it working? Okay, so let me do that last. One shout-out is from our fellow collaborator, Robert Mahari and so there's something coming up next. Can I get the mic back? Yeah, let me get that over to you. Three, one shout-out. So one thing that's happening next that's extremely relevant and it's a topic here we didn't get as deep into as I hope that we would. It's coming up just later this month and there is an opportunity to participate if you're around Boston, more to the point, anywhere online. So Robert, what's happening? So we're doing a three-day hackathon on law, ethics, MAI, focused specifically on sentencing. So if you know about the compass sentencing algorithm, we're trying to make a better version of that. And so you can sign up on, I think it's like HLS Hackers, it should be up on that. HLS Hackers, I didn't know about that. HLS hackathon.org. And sorry. And yeah, we'd love to have remote participation. I can try and help with logistics and if you're in the Boston area, definitely come by. And is there a way to get my contact information out there? Yes. What can we share? You know, HLS email. I'll send that with the link over to you. Send it by email and then we will telegram it to everybody and then we'll send a wrap-up email to everyone as well. And please let's remember to include this in it. So two other quick wrap-up things that we really, really do want you to know. Present everyone. If I hit refresh. If I go to Brian's screen, then you shall see something glorious. Perhaps. Glorious. Stop screen share. Here's your screen. Well, look at what we've got here. What's the URL say? Computational.Journal.org. I'll be deaf. And so there you have it, Tom. You've actually got a working website with integrated in a data input mechanism for form base. And then in real time, if you start, if anyone wants to fill that form out, you can actually see the data develop and visualize it, you know, which is later on another part of the same screen. Very, very interesting. Another possible mechanism for feedback live, by the way, during online sessions. I'll have to figure out how to resize the embed codes for the embedded Google cheats page. But yeah, I'm happy that works. Me too. And then one more thing we've got that we want to just make sure people see and are aware of. Am I scrolling? Yeah. I can pull it up. Yeah, great. Legal hackers. Here we go.  Dot. Wait, are we on the right screen? Yeah, click mine. I tried. Oh, there we go. Legal hackers.org. And then click on, we're CLB. That's the 2018. Okay. Well, actually, so let's show them the secret. So if you then change the URL from CLB Fest 2018, unpublished, if you go 2019, you can actually see what we've been working on around the world and soon to go public. The learn track, the hack track, the discuss track coming to a city near you, or your city. And so we encourage everyone to participate in the computational on blockchain festival activities that are local to you. And I know it's a number of us are going to try to make some, some of those activities available online as well. And if you're in a city and you're thinking, I would love it if there was something like this in my city, but we don't have one in my city or my country. How much would you love it? Because if you'd love it very, very much, there's a form that you can fill out at legal hackers.org, which we all filled out or we did at least. And then it says, I want to register a node on this distributed network and create a city. So it's permissionless in that sense. And then we actually take that data and paint it on a Google map and have some automatic links and so forth. And so go ahead and create a node in your city and invite and build your community there. Okay, then. So I think it was really other. There was one final thing, which is we got some great feedback on the plenary from Dennis and his suggestion was, have you thought about doing a podcast as part of this journal, this multimedia journal? Good idea. That's something I know some of us talked about in the past. It's natural. And so now we have, thank you, and we'll take that on board. And then he also used the word and is one of his comments on continuous. Are there more opportunities? So when Brian, you listening was saying, kind of activities and kind of community building, are there, in addition to like an event of an article that was posted, a podcast that was distributed, are there opportunities for more continuous connection of people in community? I think that we should take that on board as well. That could be a nexus point to connect people. And there's always some significant number of legal hackers awake and curious and who want to play around the world at any given time. The sun never sets on legal hacking. True. I think we do have one last thing that we also need to do. I think everybody here, we would all be remiss without thanking you for helping assemble all of this. Let's do it. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you.  I've learned a lot. It's nothing I'd rather be doing these two, these several days. And that's why we do it. And this is, it's a free, volunteer, open and accessible forum. And part of the reason why it is so special is because we like it and therefore, and we sculpt it in the way that, that, that responds to what it is we're curious about. And when, when people are curious about things, there's a really good chance other people are curious too. And so this is very much in a way to, to share what we're into is birds of a feather as it were. So it's been a delight and a real honor to be able to hang out with all the, all the birds with the feather pattern. So, so beautiful. And so, so, well, I don't know how to put it. Just, just so awesome as you all. So thank you very much for co-creating all together the 2019 MIT, IAP computational law workshop course. That's because like there's a lot of committees involved in that one. And, and thank you so much everybody who literally brought the life and vigor to the course who were the students and the other participants and all of the lecturers, all of the discussion leaders, a special, special shout out to all of you. You literally are the course. And so of course, we love you. So if you keep track of what's going on here and where you can learn more once we carried everything, come back to our course site, check law.mit.edu. And perhaps best of all, come back and check computationallaw.pubpub.org. And maybe we'll elevate that to computational. We might update that URL, but watch it there as it evolves and help us co-create that as well. Get involved and make your suggestions for content. And we put calls for papers and events and so forth. Come join and collaborate with us. And let's all hack the law together. Thank you.


This is exciting. But these days are exciting for all of us, not only for me. Tech-wise, we are living in an age, in the golden age, of our species. We have built unbelievable technologies with the huge potential for improvements in the areas of health, energy, food, security, and still talking about AI and the future. We all have worrying thoughts and questions in our head, especially one is observing our attention. How will the future of work look like? I'm Sophie Kidenos. I'm the founder and CEO of Search Inc. In a nutshell, what we do, we have built a SaaS product based on machine learning, and we are able to radically streamline business processes. Thank you so much for the invitation. I feel very, very honored to be here today and have the opportunity to talk to all of you. So talking about the future of work, we can probably learn something from history. Looking back, we had the same worries during all three industrial revolutions. And yes, we have experienced unemployment peaks, but only short-term. So far, automation has not destroyed jobs in the long run. It has redefined them, and especially unskilled workers have benefited greatly from capitalism. So the big question is, will the fourth industrial revolution have the same long-term effects than the previous one? Or will it be the first one that will finally decimate our jobs on the long run? To be able to answer this question, I would love to be a little bit more precise around artificial intelligence. We have narrow AI. We have general AI. And I would love to start with the comparison between our human brain and narrow AI, because narrow AI is where we are today. OK, this slide should look different. Just imagine a wonderful slide with great animations, because this is what our human brain is really good at. So to repeat, only 1% of our human brain, you would need 82,000 processors of the world's best supercomputer. So I think we can agree on the fact that we are far away from rebuilding the human brain capacity in total. Deep learning models have no real understanding what their input is. Yes, you can feed it with a lot of training data. And if you are lucky, it is able to classify just horses out of a set of horses and donkeys. But it will have no clue that this is an animal. It can run. It can kneel. It has a warm body. In comparison to our human brain, we have the ability to abstract, to imagine things. We even have the ability to create unicorns or Pegasus out of normal horses. And we even have the ability to create unicorns that are producing ice cream in a creative way. So we humans are really good with learning behaviors without having them seen ever before. You can show a two-year-old just a picture of horse riding, let's say for three minutes, and the chance that it is able to transfer this learning into reality is very high. Think about it for a second. It's amazing. And this ability of learning is theoretically never ending. Everyone here in the room has the ability to learn every single day without a lot of training data and even with no training data. And it's the opposite with a neural net. You have to be super patient. You have to feed it high numbers of annotated and labeled training data. And if you are lucky, it is able to do a very specific task. Just because Google Go was able to win against the best player in Go, it will still lose against me or you or you and Jess because it's narrow AI. It's the opposite with general AI. General AI would mean that we are able to rebuild our human brain capacity 100% with our ability of memory, the ability to imagine, to think abstract, and even to dream. So is it possible that we are just at the face of this hype and that we are in front of the so-called AI winter soon? Because if yes, all our worries would be for nothing. This is true for general AI. Scientists predict that it will take another 100 to 150 years that we are at that point. So for our discussion around the future of work, we can for now at least ignore this guy. What about narrow AI? Neuronets are out there since decades. Google Go or Watson are nothing brand new anymore. So do we see any drastic changes in our labor market now? No. Is it also just a big hype, narrow AI? We don't think so. We believe that narrow AI will have improvements and will be more and more powerful over the next decades.  But it will develop, and it will need less training data, way faster period of training time, and it will be way more versatile with a lot of broader applications. It will not be an intelligent danger slash sexy super AI. It will just be the natural progression of narrow AI that will have impact on our labor market. And it's just at the beginning. You all know that narrow AI needs training data. We get more and more training data every single day. Computing power is constantly improving. And the vision of quantum computing is at least getting closer to reality. And our models are getting way more flexible. So yes, narrow AI is also hyped a little bit, but it is underestimated in the long run. And it could also happen that we will experience a point of exponential growth. So we still have the question to be answered. Will this industrial revolution be the first one that is decimating jobs in the long run? Oxford published a paper, and they predict that 47% of employment opportunities will be occupied by machines in the next two decades. I think this number is too high in the short run, but the tendency is correct in the long run and could especially be painful for unskilled workers and development countries. So it's unclear yet if this industrial revolution will produce so many new job profiles that it's able to compensate the decimated ones. But I think this question is not relevant. We are intelligent human beings, and we should think about the necessary safety nets early enough in any case. Like every transformation, also this one comes with opportunities. The work we know today will change. We will work less hours a day, way more flexible models, like working remotely or on a freelancer basis, will increase, and by many of us, also preferred. And totally new job profiles will be created, unforeseen, exciting jobs that we cannot even envision today. So what can we do to proactively ride this train? A transformation of our educational system, our skill sets, will be necessary. And we have to make sure that especially unskilled workers have the opportunity to upgrade their skills early enough. Educational systems have to adapt. And we have to make sure that we make mathematical science way more attractive for the next generation. Governments, they have to work on concepts like the necessary regulations, interventions, stronger safety nets for all of us. But the good thing is they are working on it already. So the calming thing is it's not the first time that we are worrying about things like that. During all revolutions, people were excited and afraid in parallel, just because emotions like hope and fear are key drivers for our human evolution. And evolution is based on adaption. And we humans are exceptionally good with that. Actually, it's the essence of our growth for an individual, but also for humanity itself. So to sum it up, I'm not saying that we will not have challenges. I am saying that they will not happen overnight, sudden, or unexpected. And I will have a profound impact on our society, but we still have time to prepare. And imagine what our human brain is able to do. We are able to think about different scenarios of the future. We are even able to think about the best scenario for all of us. We have the unique ability to feel responsibility, to ask questions, to challenge each other, and to collaborate. So I think we should not be afraid of the future of work. Thank you.


How to find love again after losing a relationship? Hi, this is Helena Hart from commitmentconnection.com and in this video I wanted to answer a question I received from a woman in our community who asks how to find love again after the loss of a long-term relationship. But first, if you're ready to attract the man you want and create the relationship you've always dreamed of, click on the button to subscribe to our YouTube channel to stay up to date on all of the latest videos. So to answer this question, how to find love again after losing a relationship? Or perhaps after getting out of a long-term relationship where things feel really hopeless or maybe you're feeling really heartbroken right now. I've definitely been there myself. I've worked with so many women who are in that exact same situation right now. So first of all, my heart goes out to you and I just want you to know that it is possible to find love again after the loss of a relationship. And if this is something that you really want, if you have a desire to find love again and have love and a great relationship in your life, it's a sure thing and it's on its way to you. And the first thing that came to mind when I read this question was a story actually from someone in my family, my grandmother who is, she's amazing. She's really, really funny and amazing woman. She's 87 years old and she was married for 65 years to my grandfather who passed away a few years ago and eventually my grandma sold the house and moved into like a retirement community. And you might think that that would sort of be it for her, you know, in those communities, it's like 90 to 95% women. Typically she was telling me because obviously women live a lot longer than men and she ended up meeting this great guy who's 91 years old and they're together now and she's so happy and she says I'm so in love with my best friend and he's really like handsome and charming and he does nice things for her. He brings her groceries upstairs to her apartment there every time she goes to the store. It's really sweet and it just, it really gave me a lot of hope and you know, a lot of other people in my family. So hopefully that gave you some hope as well. And you know, come to find out later, there was actually another man who was interested in her in the same community. So where some people might think or have this like scarcity mindset, like all the good men are taken or it's not possible for me to find love again at this age or at this stage of my life. I just see so much evidence out there that it's really not true. If you have a desire for something, if you don't want to be lonely anymore and you want to find that love, it's absolutely on its way to you.  This will come find you. So that is something that I would love to just share with the world. This is totally possible. It's all about believing that it's true for you. You know, if you have this belief that I have to hang on to this relationship because there's nothing else out there for me, that's what you're going to see in the world and you're going to attract evidence to confirm that belief because you know, our brains are sort of hardwired to want to be right all the time. So this is really important. Believing that it's possible for you, believing that there's another guy out there and you know, I'm not sure the details from this question. I don't know if you just got divorced or if you're going through a breakup right now, but you know, the next relationship might not be exactly like the relationship you just came from, you know. It's like having a pet, you know, if you have like a cat or a dog that's really special to you and you know, if it passes away and you get another one, that love for the new animal is not the same always as the last one. It's a new relationship and a new experience and it's sort of similar in your love life as well. You know, the love you had for the last man, it's never going to die. You never really lose that love in my opinion. That love kind of lives on but you take those experiences with you into your next relationship. So what I would recommend here is really becoming a match to your ideal relationship. That means you have to focus on what is right in your life, not focus on what went wrong in the last relationship. We can tend to sort of justify where we stand or kind of defend or explain where we are. For example, talking about all the reasons why your last relationship didn't work out and then we end up sort of attracting those same experiences and qualities in the next person. If you've ever known a woman who gets into the same sort of relationship with the same type of man over and over and over, even though consciously she wants to attract a different kind of man, that's sort of what's going on, you know? So you really want to become a match to those qualities and characteristics that you're seeking in your ideal man, in your next relationship. So to do that, you know, really get in touch with what feelings would you like to feel in your ideal relationship? Most women say they want to feel loved and cared for and understood and safe, those kinds of things. So really becoming a match to those qualities involves making sure that you're giving those things to yourself first rather than this knee-jerk reaction of, okay, I lost this relationship so I'm going to go out and find those things in a man and trying to get those things out of the next man. You really want to give those feelings to yourself first and radiate that out. That's what will attract a better man to you. You know, if you're a breakup was painful or if you're going through a divorce, if you want to attract a different kind of man, you really want to become a match to those qualities that you're looking for in a relationship rather than going over and over in your head why the last relationship didn't work out. So I hope that gave you some tips on how to move on and find love again after the loss of a relationship and I would love to hear your experiences with this. If you have any thoughts or comments, please type them in at the bottom of this video and if you have any other questions for me that you'd like me to answer in a future video, be sure to type those into the comment section as well. So I will see you in the next video. Thanks for watching and if you'd like to discover exactly what to say and do to get the man and relationship you've always wanted, click the button on the right side of this video to visit our website and I will talk to you soon.