Time for a couple of channel updates. The channel is about to hit 10,000 subscribers, and I have absolutely nothing planned for this celebration. I blew through 5,000 subscribers a few months back, and it was so quick I didn't really feel like it was appropriate to do anything for it, but now we're coming up on 10,000 and I would feel remiss if I didn't do something to celebrate you guys. And I don't have a plan, but whatever I do, I want it to be for you as a community. So if you have any suggestions, leave a comment down below. And remember, whatever your suggestion is, this celebration is about the viewers and the subscribers, not about me.  I want to celebrate you. And another thing, these Saturday videos are probably going to become less of a thing, or at least no longer a regular feature. I'm still going to be doing fan art galleries probably once a month and, you know, the various channel update to let you know what's going on on Saturdays, but they're not going to be a regularly scheduled feature. And I probably won't be premiering Saturday videos anymore. And part of the reason for this is I want to focus more on my weekday videos and part of the reason for it is simply that people aren't viewing these weekend videos quite as often as they are the others. So I want to do the kind of content that my viewers and subscribers are excited for, and that's the weekday stuff. I'll probably do a reading every once in a while if I feel up to it, or if it's something I've written for the site and I want it to be out there, but just look at the Saturday videos as sort of a bonus, not a regular feature. And just in case anyone's wondering, no, that doesn't mean anything is happening to the Tuesday or Thursday videos as they're going to stay exactly the same. We're going to be premiering them like always. And I know nothing I said so far would indicate that I'm going to do else-wise, but sometimes people ask that question whenever they're not told explicitly one thing or another. Anyway, that's it for this one. Here's the next 10,000 subscribers. Thank you very much for watching.


And maybe some challenges for you to get to Jacksonville?    I can maybe throw it up here in the back of your mind as well. He's a great athlete, he's a sneaky athlete for sure. You can definitely see it on tape a lot with his own re-game and whatnot. But he's a sneaky athlete and we just got to prepare a rally and tackle. What are some of the things that you're seeing just from your perspective as far as these explosive plays that you guys have given up? We just got to come out here, all get on the same page and just come out here and challenge and compete. That's kind of been the big focus this week, especially at the last game. Just getting up, challenging and competing on every play. Challenges for his first review, when the pocket breaks down, we're back inside to the side. What's the hardest thing about sticking to receiving? Just keeping your eyes on your man and plastering, it's definitely easier said than done. But you got to keep your eyes on your man, keep your eyes on his hips and just plaster, try to match them because when scrambles happen, receivers can go left, right, forward, back, they can pretty much freelance. And so you just kind of playing off him, you're playing basketball at that point. It's pretty much harder to get a receiver at that point than it is at the start of the play. Yeah, definitely, because receivers can pretty much go anywhere. So you're just trying to plaster, just keep your eyes on your man, stand his hip pocket, do the best job you can. Can you take us through that process of going against bunch formation, zero splits? As a nickel, I would imagine you got to jam the point, man. Can you just kind of take me through that whole process of how that works? It's a lot of communication that goes until they line up and get those stacks and bunches to kind of get guys off. So we can't get up there and challenge. When they do that, they want softer coverage from the defense. So we just got to get up there as a group, line up and kind of figure out how we're going to challenge these guys out of the bunches and out of the stacks. Is that something that you're encouraged to do, to jam that point, man, to throw everything off? Yeah, we're definitely encouraged to get up there and challenge. That's what we're trying to do. So whenever they end the bunches in the stacks, we got to get up there and challenge. We got to all be on the same page because there's different ways to work them. But we just got to get up there and challenge. I think you've done with that so far. Definitely, we can improve. We can always improve on every aspect of the game. So we're definitely working hard to improve on that, every other aspect of the game. You're kind of in Caleb's shoes this time last year. How much of you kind of said, hey, hang in there, your time's coming. And how has he kind of handled maybe the patience part of it? Caleb's a great young talent. He's an exceptional talent. You can tell from being in the meeting rooms with him, coming out here in the practice field, every day he's striving to get better and just be great and live up to his own expectations. He's very high on himself. And so I feel like Caleb's a great guy. He's just figuring it out right now. And once he figures out, he's going to be exceptional corner in his league.  I've kind of made an emphasis on maybe playing a little bit more physical this week and trying to do that to get open. I wonder if you've noticed that in practice as I've made it open.


यहाँ से हम फिर एक नहीं नहीं तोपिक शुरू कर रहे है, वो तोपिक है, नूलिज कन्तिनूटी मैंज्मेंद. तुह यह देखते है, नूलिज कन्तिनूटी से क्या मुराद है, अस्पस्पक अप्लिकेशन आप नूलिज मैंज्मेंद. अगर आदन्टिफाइंग, भुईबिल नूलिज, तो वलनरेबल आप आप रिस्क वुगाग से भी आप देखता है, दूछ तो देपार्चर अप वन अप नूलिज आप नूलिज आप यह थे है, वुच चले जाते है, उनका जो नूलिज है वआप ने साथ ले जाते है, तो उस नूलिज को अगर हम मैझफूज रखने का, यह जो निपलाईज हमारे पस रहे जाते है, उन तक अगर त्राष्फर करने का को इंतजाम करें, तो इसको हम नूलिज कंडिनूटी मैनेज्मेंगे, किसी के रटार होने से यह एडारा चोडने गडन्दीजे में जो नूलिज है, वो लोस नहोज एडारे का, और इडारे को से नुखसान ना पूझें, सकसेस्ट्सोल आरनादिशन्स जो होती है, वाम तोर पर तो इसस्थ को इमपोटेंस डेती है, उने में एक असेट होट है, पीपल फोजग के लगार है, जो उन की एचर है जो उन के मैंआबावर है उसको नृए पुटझीट से दितहने, और दूसरा है नूलग दे पोठेस यह वो जो। एचर यह नूलझハै, उंके फम पहास जो नुलज हैट वो बहुत � incompotent होता है उुर होड एक asset की हसीयसे इसारे में इसमल होड एक. if we talk about human capital, if we talk about this knowledge, then it either comes as obvious, that yet these valuable assets are not at all like physical and inventory this knowledge of HR or Main power or workers, this knowledge does not stand out as tangible or inventory इशुज क्या है, इसे रेलेटर्ट, नोलज लोस जब होता है, तो से रेलेटर्ट मसाल क्या होतें। आदर अटार्टार्मट, यह यह एक रेपोट है, एक कमपनीने रेपोट बनाई, उनो लें, इस में कुछ इशुज जो है, वो मैंचन किये है। तो से पहला इशु क्या था, इदार्टार्मट of our record 77 million baby boomers, अभ यह baby boomers वो है, जो सीन्यर हमारी ख्लास्ती, जो सीन्यर एज में जो सीन्यर है, उन में से millions ने जो इदारे चोड दीए, as the potential to result in huge losses of critical tacit knowledge, उनक्लूड़िंग औरगनाजाशनल आन टेकनिकल नूलिज लेटे तो की प्रुसेसिज आन खमपिटेन्सिज, के बोग सारे प्रुसेसिज खमपिटेन्सिज का जो बड़ा एक क्रितिकल नूलिज था, जो कि तेशिट फाम में ता उन एक श्पीरिएंस लोगों के रेटार होने से यह चोडने से क्या हूँँँ, कि वो इदारे के पास नहीं रहा, एक एक लोस पेदा हो गया. The problems are not limited to retirement. Churn within organizations and new business models for offshoring work, necessitate careful identification and transfer of knowledge. The problem is not only retirement. New business models are coming. One is that people leave their positions before retirement. And the other is that the new business model has become a different branch of an organization. And in other countries, even in the whole world, the interaction between the knowledgeable people is reduced. As a result of this, there will be a problem. Another issue is that organizations often have difficulty in pinpointing when and where knowledge loss and knowledge needs may occur. That organizations do not know, they do not even know where the loss of knowledge is happening and how much knowledge is needed and how to protect it. Because of ignorance, they do not know, because of that, there is a loss of knowledge. Employees, especially new hires, are facing steeper, longer learning curves at the same time that employers are looking for faster revenue and higher productivity. Whenever a company hire a new employee, the expectation is that as soon as they come, they should take our work very high, they should increase it, they should improve it. Our revenue, our productivity should be better, there should be effectiveness and efficiency in it. When the new employee who comes from abroad, he needs a lot of time to learn that knowledge, that the culture of the organization and its processes, are between these two and the reason is that the loss of knowledge in that organization is not being arranged. In these issues, knowledge retention and transfer efforts are complicated by generational gaps that influence how people work and collaborate with one another. That the gap between the generations does not give any attention to that, it is not understood by that too. And the way of knowledge-seeking of one generation, there is a difference from the second generation and this is also the reason, because of its ignorance, because of its lack of training, that is why knowledge is not transferred from one generation to another generation. Knowledge loss and time-to-competency issues for new hires threaten to compromise organizations growth strategies. What happens is that the organization wants to move forward, it makes its growth strategy, when the new hired employees learn that knowledge, and in this way, there is a danger that the organization's strategy to move forward, they will not be able to carry out those new responsibilities. Now let's talk about the loss of knowledge, and different types of people or different types of subject areas look at it in their own way. In this, there are different perspectives of knowledge loss. In this, HR's people, human resources, tends to view knowledge loss as employee turnover, where the major types are resignations, retirements and layoffs. HR's department sees that what is the meaning of knowledge loss, that employees have been left behind, that they have been retired, resignations have been given, or the administration has removed them. There are different forms of knowledge, but they see that we lack knowledgeable employees. Let's look at the information technology, and tends to view knowledge loss as system errors, such as crashes and failure of backups, that the system has crashed, the software is not working, the backup is not maintaining properly, and knowledge loss has been achieved because people have been left behind. Similarly, the concept of organizational learning looks at knowledge loss that views knowledge loss as ineffectiveness of organizational routines and organizational memory, that the routines of organization are not getting affected, that effectiveness has been damaged and organizational memory has been lost, and knowledge management sees that as not being able to share and preserve knowledge, that the administration is not capable of sharing knowledge or preserving it. There are different perspectives to look at, the concept of knowledge continuity management and the definition of management as specific transfer of critical knowledge from existing employees to those who will replace them, that the employees who are working because they are leaving the remaining knowledge to the seniors who are leaving how to transfer the remaining knowledge. We will call this concept as knowledge continuity management. There are two timelines which are knowledge continuity management First of all, to ensure that present day employees can continue to benefit from the knowledge of those leaving the organization that those who are going their knowledge who are working here how they will benefit from it and this work is going to continue and secondly to ensure that existing employees can reuse this knowledge in the future that they will use that knowledge in the future too that they are leaving and in addition newly hired employees will also be able to benefit from this cumulative knowledge base that a knowledge base a repository in which the experience of these people can be saved and in the future the remaining responsibilities can be easily used.


When I was young, I was always with my kids. When I was young I was always with my kids. I learned that the way to happiness is the way to happiness. Because the paths we take together have an infinite variety of stories. The fish I fish every day are only found in the sea. We go out to eat and to drink. And we have to monitor the world. It's time to take action. We all have a role to play. Let's make the best of life and the society here. We need a food system that sustains lives, the planet and protects its workers.


Oh, you guys my video timed out. Isn't that interesting? I'm doing Dana Play-Doh and it timed out I might need to make some storage on my phone here because I'm using my phone to record today It seems as though With Dana we're talking to Dana Play-Doh who you might recognize as Kimberly Drummond from the TV show different strokes back in the 80s She's talking about her experiences in the afterlife when she first arrived Let's let's ask the next question. How is being there? How is being there? Are you finally? With your son. Oh, so did you so Kimberly or I'm sorry. I'm sorry keep calling you Kimberly But that's how I know her Dana, that's how I know you How is being with your son, are you with your son, I guess your son is in the afterlife. Yes Yes, but it's different and then I see like a name an N name Like I don't know if it's Nicholas or Somebody else Nick and I see I Don't know if that's somebody that's with her in the afterlife that she's mentioning or if it's somebody that was here She's talking about her sister and her mom and How they were heartbroken or somebody Something about heart being heartbroken about her death. She said I never really got over the loss of my son Was he like an infant a sudden infant thing? I feel like she got pregnant and it was a surprise being pregnant I can't see her married. So if she was married, she must have been a single mom at some point and Looks like there was two kids though. There's more than one so I don't know if there was a loss of a child or Another like a miscarriage. I don't understand that. Okay, so let's see There's a lot of guilt around her son It's overwhelming. It's overwhelming. She says it's overwhelming I wonder if she was on some kind of medication or taking drugs or something at the time that her son died because it feels like She blames herself And I see like jail time or something like was somebody in jail That she was with or around or did she get arrested or something at some point? You guys put that in the comments below because she's showing me all this, you know It's like chaotic. It's like flickers of things almost like I'm watching a movie and I just see parts bits and pieces and it's just It's all mixed up like a puzzle that comes through It's disorienting is what I'm gonna say So are you are you reincarnated? This is another question No There's a pause there Not ready That's what she says How is the way that you would like to be remembered On earth How would you like to be remembered on earth? For doing the best that I could she says I did the best that I could I don't want to make excuses or blame other people but there is a lot of There's a lot at stake when you're famous and There's a lot of um scrutiny that you're under a lot of judgment a lot of criticism and It's not fair How much pressure is It comes with so much. There's such a cost to it and She's talking about other roles other movie roles I look like it looks like she was a bad girl in a movie Like a bad She's a bad girl or something and I'm one of the movies that she was in but Getting regular work and being kind of stuck. She's kind of showing me being stuck on tv Like maybe she wanted to be in movies more is what it feels like I did the best I could she says I want her to be remembered for for doing the best that I could I don't really know that I want to be remembered. That's what she says Like maybe just being a regular person having a normal life would have been a better way for me to To live but Like I see all sorts of stuff you guys like I don't I can't tell if she's showing me different movies that she's been in her life Because it's all just Disorienting and not it's fragmented Ah, okay. So here's a good question. Here's the final question here in our conversation with dana plato Could you tell the audience or advise? Your thoughts about depression and then she says thank you or he says thank you So you did suffer from depression It's almost like she's neurotic a little bit though like that like her head is like Like you take pills to like make you feel like get you up and make you feel energy Energy-wise and then it fights against this like inside this current inside that drags you down. She said so it's It's this constant fight. She said it's constant fight. You need to be up and you need to be focusing to be present But the but then there's an energy like dragging down.  It's horrible. It's I wouldn't wish it on anyone It's not something that was understood or Acknowledged or diagnosed even it wasn't even it was considered just like a problem like you were damaged, you know If you if you had something you couldn't keep yourself together It's unexplainable It's it's a feeling of Just empty I don't really know that I'd have advice on dealing with depression Maybe to Ask for help sooner Don't let it get so bad that you want to take your own life. I wonder if she committed suicide I can't tell it looks like an overdose or something or medication and she's not well So the being not being well might not be not physically well might be depression not well She says now you're getting closer. Now you got it She says it doesn't really matter What what I did or didn't do what I chose the path that I chose What matters is that you have your own choice to make people have their own choices And when you when you're in a state of depression, it's hard to remember that I would like if if I could Give advice I would share that you To remember even when you're feeling just so awful that You have choices And that you're not don't be afraid to be a burden on other people You know call your friends call your family reach out You know call a hotline call a stranger whatever you need to do to remind yourself that you have life and That you're worth you're worth You're worth it Just remember that you have you have a choice And that you chose to be here you chose to have a life and It really is important not to take that for granted Then I'll listen. I see the name Jacob. I don't know if that means anything you guys Thank you Dana for showing up here. So I want to be real clear. Have you healed? Very calming energy. She says she said there's much more peace now But it took time It was really difficult to understand to understand death that life was just over and to let go of what could have been for my life it took it took me some time to Really understand and accept being a spirit Just just a spirit which it sounds I don't mean it to sound like that it it sounds when I say it like that it doesn't sound How it is but there's a much more peace but but then I look back and I I feel as though I mean I could have had more time. I could have had a better life I could have made a difference. I could have helped other people. I could have done more I did the best I could I don't I'm not angry with myself But I know that I wasted my life I wasted some of the time that I was gifted and That's something that I I continue to heal on So before I would come back I would want to make sure that I felt very whole As a spirit first And that's a process that is a process as you say healing, you know healing and it is a process it is At least for me. That's how it's been It's it's different for everyone. I think But for me, that's how it's been Well, thank you so much Dana I appreciate your time and I'm sure here the viewers at above life channel will also appreciate The energy and the insight that you're bringing forward, especially the awareness about depression Much appreciated. Thank you to our viewer from Mexico who submitted these questions on the you choose the channel video If you have somebody that you'd like to recommend that I channel from the afterlife provide that person's name five questions Put your name and where you're from So that I can acknowledge you on the video and put it on the you choose the channel video here at above life channel I hope that we have been able to inspire your spirit of it today with a connection from the afterlife built you with some hope some insight and Encouragement to live your life. It's your life after all So live it Just live it Thanks so much for watching be sure to like and subscribe to above life channel on youtube So you never miss a weekly channeling video


And we turn to hear from Marshall Van Alstine from across the river at BU who among other things is the person who coined the phrase and assisted society's investigation of network effects a phrase we now cast off casually but that has been kind of seismic in its way of having people think about the way that networks affect life and become embedded and gain their own momentum etc etc and Marshall I I think you've got an idea or two to share over to you well thanks John and you're you're generous for credit there I think there are lots of other folks also working in network effects I'm hoping that we can do some interesting things with that I also want to see if we can use some platform business models to speak about ways to solve this what I particularly thank Jill for her comments on political ads and creating up the context for this because one of the things I really want to address is specifically the falsity of news and the falsity of advertising in in politics I think the example just posted a moment ago deep fakes not allowed in the Twitter case but are allowed in the Facebook case is exactly the kind of thing would like to try to go into I'm hoping that I can share screen then give this a shot let's try this top two very well I'm so I have a couple of slides for a couple of different ideas I'm no if this is coming through or not so far so good I also want to apologize in advance I'm literally just coming off of the fevers my voice is a little bit horse relative to what it should be so I'm hoping that I'll be a little on the nose but yes you know it's certainly certainly relevant so I want to try to introduce an idea from information economics a lot of the different solutions for fake news have come from the computer science side or some from the regulatory side I'd like to use is some ideas from information economics and mechanism design to see if we might be able to go after it to give you a quick summer and I invite feedback on this I have a even a short write up on this will really would welcome your input on ways to approach this particular problem if we take a look at some of the existing solutions each of the lines in blue or some of the common versions of it whether it's fact-checking for crowds and algorithms whether it's media literacy and educating consumers truth chasers where folks can kind of you know follow up false ads with false information true information you know the other really popular one is tagging and product labeling know the idea of being to inform folks that they're getting bad information or banning the content or the person to remove the problem or demoting it in the newsfeed almost every single one of these has certain challenges you know whether it's the fact-checking and the product and tagging and labeling one of the biggest problems there is that they then try to discredit the labeler so if the original story is false and maybe they simply try to discredit the person doing the labeling as we've seen in some of the attacks in the media I think there's a wonderful book out on that recently you know with network propaganda or if you look at educating consumers often there's this question of confirmation bias so many folks would distrust those who would educate them empirically it turns out the truth chasers just don't seem to work they seem to have very little impact of what folks believe and interestingly enough after Alex Jones got de-platformed from a couple of folks for propagating fake news it was remarkable that his uh that visits to his website exploded so in some sense use that not only to increase his popularity but then claim media censorship and generate even additional revenues from other sources I should say by the way that's fascinating it'll be interesting to hear I think Joan Donovan who will follow may have something to say about it I had thought the conventional wisdom was that Alex Jones had been defamed as a result of that so fascinating thank you so it's interesting I think there may be a temporal version of it it's not in this slide deck but in the different slide deck Alexa I can show you the actual plot of visits to his websites and Alexa showed that his rank improved by several dozen places following that for some fairly extended period of time so I think it has eventually fallen back below but it was immediately after he actually experienced quite a rise in attention for hadn't been the platform from all of these in the categories also didn't raise a question for you which of these methods effectively changes the incentives to produce misinformation that one of the problems that identified here is really what I would argue is really that almost all these solutions put the burden on the user or on the platform rather than the author of the lies in some sense almost all of them the fact checking the tagging educating consumers the truth chasers all of these put the burden on someone else and they don't necessarily change the incentives one of the things we'd like to do is to see if we can actually put some of the burden back on the authors of the lies see if we can actually clean up the proportion of information that's misinformation in the news feed and again I want to thank Jill for the setup in some sense the problem of fake ads is really wonderful was at one extent we've got Twitter which makes a decision to stop all political advertisement Twitter globally so they just won't take any kind of political advertisement for a candidate and the opposite extreme is Martin Zuckerberg who in Georgetown said you know they won't fact check political ads of any kind they think it's up to the users to do that so no matter how egregious the lies they're entirely willing to propagate it on the premise that the users can and should decide so at the one extreme Twitter is in a position puts us in a position of no political ads which prevents political discourse and it's actually extremely difficult for newcomers to come in and gain a voice if you're a new candidate and you can't buy a political ad it's a very difficult for you to actually gain the attention that you might actually want at the other extreme you know Mark Zuckerberg solution is to let basically anything go and they don't want to be the policeman or the arbiter of it and users themselves are then forced to decide so here's one possible solution this is one of several but one specifically just to try to keep this down to 10 minutes suppose that we were to implement something that was with a standard information economic mechanism which was of the form of an honest ad guarantee it'd be really simple mechanism suppose that political ads came with a guarantee of authenticity from the author in some sense this is a guarantee or a bond which is forfeit if the representations are false but they returned if they are true now here are a couple of the properties of this basic very simple proposal the first is that no one knows better than the author whether the basis for that claim is true you've authored that so question is are you willing to stand by the claim that you're actually making it's also the case that if it's simply a monetary pledge you know an honest ad guarantee that politicians and democracies are perfectly free to lie if they wish it just becomes more expensive on the flip side what's nice about this particular mechanism is that could actually still work even in totalitarian regimes if it were adopted in this case whistleblowers could get their messages out even under totalitarian regimes it would still be possible to disseminate truth so in that case it's an instance where others might try to discourage it but you could still get it out the mechanism still works you're simply trying to pledge that something is true and in the case of damage the proceeds can be used undo the damage or underwrite another public good if that's true now here's the simple illustrations here's a an example of how this might work so suppose that an honest ad pledge would come out with something like 10 times the ad price it would simply be put in x grow there's a hypothetical fact checker suppose that it snopes or political act or hoax layer or wonderfully even a random sample of fox and cnn viewers in this case what you're trying to do is to eliminate bias you just simply make it independent in here a challenger could pay a simple challenge price more than the ad price to fact check the ad the challenge should be more expensive than an ad because otherwise you should simply take out an ad if you simply disagree now if the ad turned out to have been false then the claim of the pledge goes to the challenger if the ad is true the chain the challenge goes back to the ad buyer if there's no challenger there's no harm and the pledge simply goes back to the buyer it's simply refunded so what are the different properties of something like this in this case the ad buyer has an disincentive to lie in this case it's simply more expensive you wouldn't guarantee an ad that's going to be very that's going to be misinformation a challenger as a disincentive to challenge if the only thing you're going to do is to prove an opponent right if it's a true claim then you're really not going to bother to do that the platform such as zuckerberg's case or twitter doesn't have the authority to decide the truth in this case and the fact checker has no incentive to cheat because the challenge price is paid regardless so unlike the financial crisis in 2008 where the ratings agencies were paid by the bank to doing the rating in this case there's no incentive to cheat so that this is unbiased and neutral but notice in every single instance the cost to guarantee truth is zero because it's simply refunded in this case again the cost to guarantee the lie is expensive but the cost to guarantee truth is zero either because it wasn't challenged because if it was challenged it's then proved to be true and it's refunded in the first place the next element of this is in a technological sense or in a bottleneck sense it easily scales you only check the challenged ads and in that case the cost to cover it's all very straightforward most commonly one of the objections is okay well what about half truth in this case well the beauty of this is we have a ready example immediately at hand many of you may have come across most recent case where a pack for trump bought an ad saying that biden offered ukraine a billion dollars to fire the prosecutor investigating barisma over his son what's interesting about that is that politifact actually rated that as half true yes biden's son did work for barisma yes a billion dollars with withheld but no it was not because they were you preventing corruption it was the opposite it's because they were not investigating corruption so for half truth you could simply get half the money back what's fun about this is that gradations in this of this estimation are not only possible they're already happening uh to give you some fun illustrations of this and these are already available on there um trump claims for example he won west virginia by a margin of 42 points 42 points well ironically actually that one turns out to be true um you know or if you pick another example uh you know there's a claim democratic controlled house never asked john bolton to testify that turns out to have been false or the claim you know perhaps i was the person to save pre-existing conditions in your health care well not only is that false but the attempts to repeal the prior legislation would have meant that the existing uh protections on pre-desting conditions would have been overturned so uh politifact rated that when pants on fire false here it's simply an illustration that the gradations are possible so it should actually it should still possibly work there's other elements of this that actually have some interesting properties to it so let's take a look at a couple of other interesting examples so how do you know how to set the pledge or the size of the lie price with the honest ads guarantee what's interesting about this is it doesn't actually matter it turns out that it's actually self-adjusting suppose that exon mobile keeps claiming that fossil fuels don't cause global warming or that morris claims that cigarettes don't cause cancer something really interesting if this keeps happening because what that implies is the lie price is sufficiently low in an economic sense what's happening is that the private gain from lying is exceeding the social cost and so they're keep buying the ads the implication is the externality is so high that you should increase the lie price what this means is we've now just found an economic mechanism which is efficient search for the size of the negative externality that is in fact causing harm so in the context of global warming or in the context of cigarettes or other things of that source the honest ads guarantee actually serves as a mechanism to in some sense internalize the cosian externality exactly like the carbon tax on global warming those kinds of things actually can be priced by a market mechanisms or a market for truth in this particular context there are possible interesting thought on this is what about poor political entrants those that don't necessarily have the 10 times lie price in order to post the bond well this one actually turns out be quite easily you simply precheck the message in that case the bonds markets can easily ensure quantifiable risks again the whole idea is to create a marketplace for truth these kinds of things easily exist and it would be very straightforward to try to ensure claims of that sort now legal scholars among you might object one step further one of these is what about first amendment scrutiny it's difficult to require a pledge to speak because you can't require funding in that that would be considered a friction or a limitation on speech the beauty of this is that in political context voluntary compliance is a signal this is the source of the Nobel Prize in 2001 for information economics won by ackerloft spends and stiglitz the idea is that credible signals are those which are expensive in this you can actually signal a an important action even though the obvious illustration of this do you trust a product that is sold as is in this particular context reluctance of a super PAC to promise that it's not lying suggests that they probably are lying especially when in this particular context lying not lying is actually free because it's actually refunded in this case but you're putting something at risk which makes it a credible signal and you're going to be more likely to put out truthful messages in that context for what it's worth this is a whole this is just number two and a whole collection of possible market style interventions in a market for truth to see how this works but Jonathan asked us to keep this to about 10 minutes so those of you that are interested we're actually working on a collection of these and would actually then you know love to engage in discussion other ways to see if we could actually operationalize this so by all means jump in push back and let me know what you think Marshall thank you so much the classic contestable proposition as a way of getting people thinking about things and in fact before we turn to our third presentation and Joan Donovan I just want to if it's permissible cold call none other than Dean Martha Minow who couldn't help but feel was almost invoked by the mention of Newt Minow in Jill Lepore's presentation but also here I'm so curious Martha this seems to be like exactly in your wheelhouse to ask an incisive question about it's a very large wheelhouse but this is like dead center so I'm so curious if there's a question on your mind that you'd want to ask Marshall right now before we move on it's an ingenious idea and it makes the idea of marketplace of ideas something real rather than a distraction so I'm intrigued by it I'm interested in your last comment though about the bond market I mean it I'm trying to think about the auxiliary actors here who that might be the bond market it might be the intermediaries that do the pre-checking none of that is free so how do you think about those costs so actually what I'd like to do again this is part of a much longer discussion is to design a governance model to make to have other parties participate in numerous different ways so the governance model I would think would split the same way that we use current governance between kind of executive legislative and judicial branches I would split the definition of fake news from the adjudication of fake news and then the execution of the rules applied to fake news so you could for example get Fox and CNN to agree on the definitions of fake news then organizations such as snopes and political fact and others could be the adjudicators of fake news and then the platforms such the social media platforms could be then the executors of the decisions regarding that fake news but this but you're correct you then invite a whole host of other parties because they're financial transactions to take an interest in the risk bearing and it's entirely possible that the markets for risk bearing the hedging the insurance would be entirely happy to underwrite different candidates in different in different ways and again given that there would be mechanisms to pre-check these things you can then assign different risk levels to different categories of statements that are being made and these could apply even to the risk levels that ExxonMobil might claim relative to the risk levels that Donald Trump might claim so you could assign risk levels in different prices to exactly those kinds of things and again in marketplace here ought to be able to price these things fairly efficiently. Jonathan can I ask a question? Sure go ahead Jolapur. Yeah I just think this is a fascinating presentation I'm just wondering though given that I mean I see this is largely a problem of civic education and better informed citizenry to outsource this to the market at a time of rising populist sentiment seems to me profoundly disempowering to ordinary citizens in a democracy so I'm being your provocation with a provocation but I wonder how you respond to that. So you know my favorite article on that kind of issue is a really wonderful one done by Dana Boyd she has a fantastic article which is you think you want media literacy do you and it's a really wonderful send up of different ideas on that she makes a couple of different points um one of them is that the attempts to educate the population have a number of different effects one of them is to get the exact same kinds of pushback that you get in other contexts which who's presuming to do the education in this case so lots of folks on the conservative side might say liberals are trying to educate them and wouldn't have the right to do that so another the question they necessarily pose is what gives you the right to educate me in this in this context another point that she makes which I think is also quite profound is that the tendency to provide media literacy has empirical evidence to suggest that rather than being discriminating between true and false information the tendency is to reject almost all different media rather than to differentially reject them so it is in some ways counterproductive and it has the tendency to make people more cynical so in this case the hope is to help clean up the media stream and get people to make more truthful claims in addition to these other mechanisms but I think the market for truth has some potential to balance a lot of these different interests my hope is that we can create a number of different knobs that you can tune I'll give you a really simple example in this case a society that values greater freedom of expression so it's at the live price very low at the moment the current live price is zero you might anticipate an asian society which doesn't value expression perhaps as much but values the integrity of messaging higher it might set the live price higher but even there the beauty would be that in a different context by tuning a different knob dissidents could even get their message out rather than simply having a government say that okay you can't even discuss Tiananmen Square or other things at that point I think one of the nice elements of this is you have knobs that you can tune with different societies able to tune them to different levels