submit to the network you define you specify what's the contents on the node are so you have Datasets some sort of logic claims and the logical relations between those and You also specify the position of the node that you prove of the contribution that they're proposing in the graph so I specify the contents and the nodes connections and When it will be accepted you You know your authorship will be permanently linked to that node So you both know what you have contributed, but also more importantly you would know Where a contribution lies in the context of the rest of the knowledge and it's quite fixed So if you think for example when you buy a Real estate property The land registry records Not only what your house is and maybe it's like less interesting even But you know you have a balcony and whatever three bedrooms, but it also tells you what the address is and it's very important just if you Only specify, you know the contents of the house. You would not be able to find it and you're not really protected So when you submit the node it has to go to validation and the two types of validation machine validation and human validation machine validation Wherever we can use it for to validate analysis or graphing functions I mean outcomes of the graphing functions and the human validation is pretty much a peer review which we have adapted and We have a kind of game theoretical protocol for peer review where author nominates a bounty and then the peers or reviews are selected from a fraction random fraction pools so you have Minimize the potential for Kind of rigging the system by your friends reviewing your positively for example Reviews have to pay stakes Before they doing review and they have opportunity Well, there's probability of them losing them if they do not perform well if they do not produce good work around time or even For example in cases say for example you have six reviews and four reviews voted yes and two voted no Or valid and valid then the minority will lose their stake and the majority will receive it so that everyone Maintains an interest in actually doing work In this validation protocol and then afterwards anything within the graph can be challenged so Peer of you can be challenged After this protocol and all the nodes and their connections can be challenged and remodeled and there is a kind of curation market slash Game theory protocol or behavioral economics behind it So and that provides accountability Especially in the case of peer review because usually what happens now is the peer review is done and that's it you forget about it And nobody talks about it anymore So Lots of peer review is kind of an unfair, but there is no way to appeal about it and Once the validation has come through and if in case of acceptance the network then reaches the consensus on the known Content and its position on the graph and consensus on the graph itself So everybody on the network has exactly the same information about current state of knowledge This is kind of the basic Workflow of something that would be similar to a paper Submission thing so How a community can engage with it with this platform. So say for example, you have historic literature put it into the platform and then Small or slightly larger community can resolve it into a more efficient graph Then they can put proposals on top of it Represented by peas here and then Ideally they would go to funding bodies. So it's almost like making review and getting your Implications from the historical literature and then you go to funding body say well these proposals seem good Could you allocate potential funding to this and the funding body can allocate? Money where which in case could be tokenized or transferred in tokens They can allocate the funding by instead of allocating to one lab It would allocate it to a body of knowledge that can be produced in the future and anyone within That domain can get the share of that funding So you you never bet only on one horse there and then in the end You know after some time passes the community the funding is allocated the community builds extension to this graph and You know new data produce any nodes produced and then some milestones or breakthroughs reached like discovery or a molecule for example and the funding arrives at that node at that point in the graph and it trickles down to the rest of the Discovery chain that participated in the production of this Graph so in that way you no longer need to hire what are you doing? In isolation Until you reach this breakthrough point you can contribute at any point of this graph and let somebody else Reach the major breakthrough but you would still be rewarded for your contribution in this chain of discovery and a slightly more So that that's kind of a general View of how the platform could function In the same way like we're writing research papers, but on more granular level But here's a more specific example where things are a lot more specified So this is a this is a project that we work with with pathogen surveillance network And these graphs are representation of Ebola outbreak and each node represents sampling at clinical centers of different pathogens of Ebola virus and then it's Assembled in these phylogenetic graphs or you can you know specify where it is geographically or you can have also time series and see how the Spread of the disease happened. So what I'm trying to communicate here is On this network with this software that can be plugged into the core you can have distributed computing so say for example somebody sequence genome in Africa and The genome sequence you put on the network. There are some machines that can come in and analyze it for a genetic variance to see which clones are Which and whereabouts they are in the geographical locations You have automatic graphing functions. So in a longer doing it manually like in a historic literature example but The network what network allows you to do is to reach consent consensus of methods. So say for example, you all know that the genomic Sequencing data is valid and it doesn't have huge differences that would allow artifacts You have again a consensus of graph data So everybody knows that the graph that we're working on is this one and not some other graph that you generated locally And you can use these graphs for custom value assignment economic Consentivization so say for example, you found that the new particularly infectious clone is emerging is in Guinea You can incentivize that whole part of the graph Or you can increase the incentivization and hopefully a lot more sequencing Contributions will come from that So we've got a functional release that's coming out in February 2019 where we'll have two modules this kind of paper module and then pathogen surveillance module then will experiment With the network and see how we can play with real situation and see what the outcomes will be and We'll invite anyone to engage with this by you can come and write your own modules or experiment within your communities in terms of research Both on science or on behavioral or economical models Thank you very much So we are quite well on time Maybe we can have two questions and then we have a coffee break and for half an hour So are you I can ask a question. So are you at which stage are you currently with the like? implementation of this is it Well, we developing it And it's the functional version will come out in February. So the stages. I mean we've done quite a lot of Kind of back-end and network establishment and communication between I bear first fabric and design some ways That and tested some ways that allow, you know programming language agnostic Interaction of different components. I didn't understand where the content will come from Are you going to start by new findings with new findings or? Well, you probably start with historical literature. I mean nobody starts with new findings any papers has introduction so You always have to put your findings into a content. I mean if you want start with new findings historical publications. I meant sorry The access to historical publications to publications that have been published before Yeah, scientific findings. So I didn't get how you will bring their meaning into your system Minorly or by some sort of scraper It's I mean say for example you you have something to contribute and you want to put some historical literature in it You take five papers you put them into the System if you want to resolve them into more granular graph if you don't want You just leave them as they are Thanks. I wanted to ask in your peer review section.  I was just wondering how you're going to use that Well when you have a submission you kind of get a template of what you're submitting so data sets and whatever and Then you specify how you want your peer review being done and then you Nominate a bounty so there's a native token on the platform. So I say I don't tend tokens which will be equally divided between peer reviewers and then to select the peer reviewers a call goes out to A random fraction so the you can never predict who is who is actually gonna receive a call And then let's say you specify that he wants done of five peer reviews. So they come in The first five to self-recruit Will be in your review poll. That's how we're doing at the moment, but maybe there's a slightly better Model of doing this. I don't know. So I love the idea and of organizing knowledge. That's pretty great How do how are you going to make sure do you have any plan for it that if people put in? their knowledge their pieces of knowledge whatever it is going to be data or Publications in this sense also historical that they're not going to be Overlapping so that in the end we really make sure that we build up on the knowledge and not just built kind of parallel chunks That are not connected Well, the community says there's like what you call a curation market and I call network cohesion protocol So they you know anyone any user or all the users are incentivized to make the graph more Coherent so resolve redundancies or where you need maybe some nodes are too chunky you need to separate them and create two out of one and also, you know Maintain the right number of connections and make sure that they complete Does that answer? Who are going to be those curators that sense? Anyone the the users on a platform are anonymous and anyone can participate In that process, so it's not there are no there's no reputation. There are no experts They're only economic incentives for right behaviors and their penalties for wrong behaviors on the platform so if you choose to do something you Have a chance of earning something but also you have a risk of losing it So it's up to you if you feel an expert enough to go for it Thank you Will does this or will it have an AI system associated with it? It can have yet. So you can have actors could be a eyes I'm not specifically building a eyes Here but a eyes can be plugged in Yes, and would that be open source with the algorithm to be open source. Well, the platform will be all open source You know the core and all the modules will be open source and you can build your own modules And we're building like a dummy module which can easily be taken and build up into whatever you need Okay, so we have a coffee break now for half an hour and then we'll just meet you again The person whom you're trying to reach is currently unavailable Person whom you're trying to reach is currently unavailable Please leave a message after the beep All right, everyone. Hope you had a lovely break now. We're back in the room for a Awesome talk from someone from Akasha. Has anyone heard of Akasha project? cool They are definitely big players that ought to be ought to be Notice for the work what they're doing and today we've got Martin talking about collaborative research not just about Akasha But some other really interesting things he's been doing around distributed organizations. So thanks Martin Thank you very much. Oh super loud So I Maybe before I started presentation And Two things so one is that I've been here before Charing the two sessions, but this is only because I was chairing the sessions, right? Because this is all Zunke organizing this but importantly tomorrow and the day after we have this workshop steps that don't ask me to co-organize with him and You can check it out on this website and if you're still interested in joining we are at Coat University and Yeah, you can you are happy to come to us and or send me a message and join either one day or two days and just talk to me about this Then the idea of this talk was to talk about decentralized autonomous organizations what I thought is to take a step back and we had already very nice presentations today about How such a DAO could work on the legal side and how it can help to finance research I try to go and and give you kind of a journey through the history of of science and Theoretical background there and how this could inform us how we can actually build blockchain applications and systems in a for science Word to the Akasha project so so I've just recently started to work with this Akasha of the Akasha foundation was founded by Mihai Alicia who is a co-founder of Ethereum and The the project that's currently Well known as a crypto economic experiment if you want to say that's this Akasha depth decentralized application And you can go to the website Akasha dot world and look at it download it There's also a web version away a browser version available now, but this is this is one aspect of it What what we are now currently working on is? growing a team That is exploring how we can use basically blockchain applications to build Collective collective intelligence and so it's we are kind of we describe as at the border of blockchain and collective intelligence Which is a new term maybe for some of you and but just fundamentally to to have a paradigm shift in how organizations are working and that's a That definitely has also an application in research and science and this is how I came to the whole field Because I had an idea that I thought there is something about this whole way how it's self-organizing that could be very well applied to research And then I read Zunka's paper and that's how for one year now. I'm in this rabbit hole so Actually, so to start with I want to make a claim and that is that the research discovery process actually already is decentralized and The poor problem that we are facing is that our organizations are currently not or not yet So that's the way that we are as human beings currently organized. We have very hierarchical structures Scientific laboratory resembles very much the organization structure of the German military in the First World War and of Companies and the universities are structured in the same way and there's some social biologists That that have studied this and compared it to other systems of organization in biology And they describe the human system basically as we are creating partitioned hierarchies Because we believe this is how we have to control people and organize them and the instructions flow down and parallel streams and Actually creating a lot of bottlenecks We have multiple levels of command and a lot of information is lost in the centralized system Also also be as the risk of information loss or you have a single load of failure so decentralization now as actually The process to move back from a centralized entity through a decentralized network of hubs and nodes and Spokes to a distributed mesh basically so the the word decentralization at least according to the interpretation of my colleague Philip Sheldrake also is actually describing the process of moving through this three phases here and The internet in itself it initially was a planned as a distributed mesh network where you have no single point of failure It's a military research project or in the initiative ultimately So if one node is destroyed you will still find ways to wire around and find information and Flow happening so in this system We basically try to eliminate single nodes of failure in another way speaking scientifically the PI in a way Is a single node of failure in that sense that that that he has a lot of burden to carry you have to write the grants you have to Review papers you have to write papers you have to take care of all the students and things are at least getting stuck there And much worse things can happen In terms of also abuse of power and these kind of things that we have seen recently some institutions in Europe So Now science actually is a decentralized self-organizing system and here I refer to Michael Pulani who Wrote this article the Republic of Science and actually I'm grateful to Stefan Kraus was a professor on Oslo And he was at the last meeting and he introduced that at his essay to us and and so I it's an analysis of how Scientific structure actually is organized and he did it because he was concerned about the policy changes in the UK and how they are changing to a more quantified research policy system that tried to Direct the choice of the research as what to do and to evaluate them which in the 60s wasn't really implemented yet which is implemented today and So he describes that signed activities of scientists are coordinated and rely on constant communication and The adjustment of independent initiatives occurs in response of the results obtained by others It's kind of obvious we're building on the shoulder of giants or and we heard us in the previous talk as well Then he goes on that he wants that if we are changing this we may basically Bring science and the scientific progress to a virtual standstill that is just the second part and I'm not Complaining about I'm just trying to analyze what we are seeing and now when you think about a decentralized autonomous organizations and the Concepts behind it. There's a there's an important term that we hear many times and that is Stigmarie, okay, and this is a social biological term that was introduced Biologist, I guess he was in the in the 60s also and that suggests that if you can define it as Important determinants of an individual's behavior are stimuli from work previously accomplished so I found it really cool because it really mirrors the analysis that we had from Pugliani on how how he thinks research is working and Actually, Stigmarie was used to describe how termites are building their their complex structures without an apparent building plan and there's another Study and as a book called the ants by by Hull dobler in the 80s And he says individuals in a dense hetero key Respond not only to the Stigmarie stimuli from work in progress, but also to stimuli received from their neighbors Okay, and and and this process is actually something we can illustrate and funny enough It was illustrated not in the 80s, but again in the 60s in the essay by Pugliani and that is he gives the example of a Group of people that have the task to build a puzzle on the floor and this is this long text is better put text But you can read it later. That's why I put it here Just tell you so so you're building a puzzle and you have one you have one organizing center like the boss and You're blindfolded and now you're presenting the pieces of puzzle to this guy And he's the one that tells you where to put the puzzle so that's a very leggy process It's not working well, but what works very well is if Instead of doing this you have all the people Maybe some have specialized tasks like looking a bit cleaning up and doing other things But in all that they are looking at what my neighbors are doing where I am at and And maybe that helps me to instruct to find the slot for my own piece because I see the progress of the others as well And again, this is actually How we could describe a scientific process and and we are looking into scientific literature We know what others have discovered. We are building up on these hypotheses. We are not gonna reinvent the wheel so From this basically, how do we now approach and the pro decentralized science and What we need according to my understanding is three boundary conditions So we require a free flow of information Apparently if we are restricting the access to information We are locking out not people in very elite institutions But potentially those that are not able to for instance access the scientific literature as the equally as We can do here then We need to establish some rules for governance So I guess what is very important is to to be open and inclusive and to somehow have a System of reputation established as well that allows us to filter the good and the bad things and the crazy things Although there are examples that this works actually quite well And an open project and we need to remove obsolete intermediaries because they are Currently not doing is a good deal. So first one Free flow of information is actually established as of today because as some of you have probably also installed on their Google Chrome browser I have a plug-in allows us to in real time when we read a paper and science on nature That's behind the paywall you download the PDF. It goes directly to sci-hop I just did it with my last paper and blood like the pre-print that was behind a paywall is already there you can read it and I Asked the journal is it okay to have a pre-print and they told me no you cannot have a pre-print this we are not doing this Then we are not going to accept it. So 2018 for a biologist. That's the reality and The theoretical concept behind this is that data and knowledge are actually something that's defined by a economist and Berkeley called so-called anti rival goods there's also work by primavera the Philippi on this Approach and that is that actually value that we can gain as a society from freely disseminating knowledge It's larger and it's exceeding the value that the profit that a single entity can gain by putting the information and knowledge Behind the paywall and this is I think important to inform us of how we should design system Design decentralized systems that are there to to create value for us Unfortunately, we cannot necessarily measure all the externalities that that occur But in principle that would be the case and a good example for this is the distribution of language So imagine and you you would you define you you are gonna speak your own language now And you try to buy a bread as impossible. It will not work, right? But the more people speak your language the the higher the value would be for this new language that you have developed and An example for this would be not only in that knowledge like medical information or publications But also computer code would also fall into this category of an anti rival good The more people are using a software the more valuable it becomes and Linux is a prominent example of that Then open as an inclusion. There is a nice example and Laurie was speaking yesterday. And so there's a very famous mathematician He was basically autodidactically training himself in India to to work He lived most of his life in severe poverty and he tried several times to to send his documents to To to Britain to to mathematicians, I guess an oxford and their comment was well He has a taste for mathematics and some ability, but he lacks the educational background and foundation needed to be accepted by mathematicians So that's a very sad thing because we have a dot org email address or an affiliation with an institution we are somehow thinking that we are chosen to be the smart guys and the voices of others are just not heard or you cannot actually even make the The way to be heard and that's a really silly thing Now there are already ways of successful collaboration And this is a super long text But I find it cool because I'm from a biomedical field So just want to give you one extra excerpt out of this and that is so whenever Bush was running the War Department of Research in the US they built in at MIT the radar lab to try to shoot down the German planes even at night. It's really awesome stuff and To to get there they had to put the people in it in a team together and and and had a physicist to work on this But there also was interest in medical research and then he said after the war for biologists in particular for medical Scientists, which might be the spine medicalists, so I enjoyed a lot There can be a little indecision for their war work hardly has hardly required him to leave the old path They will basically carry on war research and they did carry this on in their familiar peacetime laboratories and their objectives are Remaining much the same. So they are fighting like this. Yeah, we have no systematic approaches of curing cancer, but the physicist They have left the epidemic epidemic pursuits. They were kind of put in these camps Where now they had to work in a combined effort, of course They were now triggered to determine you have to build this but at the same time they had quite a lot of resources and the freedom of choice and In a combined effort they felt the steer of achievement of doing something as a team They have been part of a great team now as peace approaches when asked where they will find objectives worthy their best and actually we see Physicist or physical funding has remained relatively flat over history and Interestingly, we see quite cool projects coming out of it It's also that physics to defend of the biologists and other fields is a more mature field. So we are like 200 years behind physics and biology and medicine I'd say but Nevertheless, so the CERN would be an example for a large massive and actually quite hierarchically structured collaborative experiments put together by humans. There are other examples and Like Linux the internet Wikipedia Polymath project and even the Ethereum Foundation They they all start with something that Peter Glor from MIT at the Center for Collective Intelligence Describes as a collaborative innovation network, which usually starts in a small group of people that have a crazy idea They are intrinsically motivated and that's actually actually a nucleus initially and surprisingly by the way because we always think this field The scientific field and this is so big and all these thousands of scientists and no Actually, there's really very few that are really super experts in one field and and the rest are just running after them like the lemmings I mean if you think about CRISPR and Cas9 is this micro RNAs if you're familiar with that It's like one like two three amazing papers and then everyone else is just doing it You have like a peak thousand papers the next year and honestly most of it you can just burn, right? So it's this nuclear group that started field and and that's actually can then have a very big impact on society and create something radically new So we we don't have to close our eyes and say it's impossible to start as 10 or 15 people are for the theorem something That's gonna be very big So how to scale this that the importance is that in order to remove the single point of failures Nothing works if you imagine you would now entrust Facebook or any other company currently exists to manage Globally such innovation networks. This is not likely to happen, right? so and this is where I think the The idea of a decentralized autonomous organization and the decentralized infrastructure that we are currently building fits very nicely in and To just paraphrase it it would require Or enable us to have transparent Stakeholder controls and decide control and decentralize the organized entities and we have heard a lot of struggle here already these days Actually struggle of understanding how this can be implemented and we are not sure really what is going to work from that So at Akasha we have now started to to think about something that we call the conversational now And I'm not gonna show these diagrams now, but I just want to say this is informed by work from Paul Pangaro who He phrases he put this term out that wealth creation has shifted from prior knowledge to the ability to gain new knowledge and action And it's a bit complicated can sink it in but what it actually means is if we have free access to all the information We have to wonder how do we create now? Some value to to at least feed the people that are working on doing this right and and and creating the new information and And I think that's where the key struggle and the problem right now is how can we find new mechanisms that enable us to Yeah, to get paid for the for the conversation that we are doing because this is the time that we spent Talking with other people or thinking by ourselves. So having an internal conversation and and this is a resource that is limited This is our attention. Yeah, and someone that got it very wrong is actually all these social media of today that are just Sucking our attention for stupid stuff But the networks are there in these platforms But but the paradigm that they have used and this is what Paul Pangaro also says they have been wrong and there was a discussion in Berlin in 2011 if you look at this his talk where people in the audience were Exactly debating the same and said well, you know, we can tweet we can co-work on the internet with all these things But do I trust Twitter with all the data that I would put in them? And and so this was before Ethereum before the blockchain Movement basically and I think with this new technology There's a new way to open this discussion and that's what we are currently doing and now in the end. I give you an crazy idea So the end of institution some some radical thoughts of how could we change a research institute or build a research initiative in the future So basically I would say there would be no publications Results results are annotated by librarians that are experts in data annotation They are publishing the results and very clear description Basically instantaneously on the institute server. So the institute maintaining the database and the integrity for the for the For the academic workers and maybe you have a librarian in every lab That could be actually cool and then scientists work within this system at the heterographic network level and in order to create This heterarchy and you get rid of the hierarchies You would have a pool of definitely qualified people and usually they're always more than they would be fitting in the institution So instead of having impact factors and p-values Fighting about about this kind of stuff. You would basically run a lottery. Okay, so we had a pool of People that could be included in the next round of research in the institute and we give them five-year appointments like Universal basic income for five years to do research That's kind of a fellowship. You have to be qualified for this and definitely you will earn less than you would earn in the industry So it's something that you have to really wonder whether you want to do it But what we want are people that are intrinsically motivated. Yeah, and not people that that are kind of Doing it necessarily just for the fame and not contributing much to our advancement and Basically anyone could be contributing we could even say that those that are not going in the First tier track of like going through a good university and getting the education qualifications to enter the lottery could still enter the lottery by Proposing good ideas and maybe helping from the outside on the on the platform to work on the kind of crowd-sourced Projects and that could earn you something not much reputation, but just the token to take part in the next lottery And maybe you make it in And actually this is something cut funny I told Zürich so I thought when you read this book the glass bleed a beat game from Hermann Hesse He describes this world of the scientists and the world of the new more normal mortal people and and he describes science as a game Or basically any any kind of intellectual thing and this is so important and like today They don't they don't even want to think about real world problems They're just getting an expert in in one field and that's the scientific world and and they take also some normal people in and and And and and educate them But then normally they go back and do companies and stuff But those that are really intrinsically motivated sacrifice their life and live kind of like monks in the scientific field And I thought okay. This is cool actually this as actually how maybe scientific Work used to be as well and anyways, I just recommend to read this if you are with the background of academia and So I want to thank you. This is the end of my talk. I'm currently I'm working with with Mihai Phillip Sheldrake and Andre Samba who are forming our nuclear research team at Akasha and We are doing other things and this was now really on my reflections on research and blockchain, but yeah, I Just want to thank them too because there's a lot of influence I get from them right now. Cool. Thanks Have you figured out how this actually interfaces with Akasha network yet or is it still under research? Well, okay, again, so so what I told you here is kind of both ideas and everything and With the within the Akasha system the reason why I got kind of sucked into this and like a year ago I I uploaded some of my genotyping data to to to Akasha in December and And I went a description below about what I did and all the primers I used the melting temperatures everything and so I said, hey, here's my lap book I'm gonna have a new thread column on the Akasha depth That is now here my lap book for all the genotyping and so now everyone could go in and look at this and actually vote on it Even could even maybe fork it and have a new thread and add other comments And so it basically this is already there right so and it's very simple and what I didn't say is like products like the polymath They are just a block. Okay, that is just an open block where mathematicians put challenges and then piece by piece try to direct the people to the answer so It's simple, but I'm not sure if I answer your question, but yeah Thanks. Thanks for the nice talk And it was really inspiring to to see all the literature what you read and get inspiration from and that's what I want to Give a kind of link to Steven Johnson writes about technology and innovation and he wrote a book about Wonderland And he writes in that book that all the new innovations and new technologies are rising from a playful way so he says that play and Yeah, doing silly things without any reason talking on Twitter with other scientists Can lead to really crucial and and super innovation So if you're looking for your next book, please read that cool right cool, then we have a Skype, okay So greetings from Stefan Krauss. He actually wanted to Skype in two, but it doesn't work out and I want to announce his Conference, it's called notes conference. It will be in March in in Oslo, it's about It's about new funding methods that in the research new incentivation structures and it's blockchain will be a Big part of this conference. It's for us and fifth of March next year Okay, now we have a skype in by Jason Jason from novella tech and he will talk about doing an SEC compliant ICO and he actually did it with his project of a he will he will talk about this Sorry, okay. Okay. Well, this is it up. I Want to use the time and think I know the camp under the camp is Nound to you too many to basically most likely Organize the RPE conference in years and he helped me a lot and also confidence to like set up this conference without him I would not have would never ever have done this here. So thank you to Anu if you see this on the livestream and Is it working? So he might not be able to see us. Okay. Hi Okay Hi, Jason. Hi Good. It's okay. Oh excellent. Okay. So you can see us for the life in the 30 seconds delay It's like like flying to the moon or something, right? No, this is like eight seconds, right? Oh, no Okay, good It's yours Jason, okay Yeah, can you see my screen? No, we can't see your screen Yeah, let me try to see if I could figure that out. I just did a Skype update. They wouldn't let me use it without an update. So You know, they've been screwing around with this stuff Every modern conference has to have a Skype or Google Hangouts thing and where we go into Technologies, it's just a tie part of the new way to do it. Yeah, I mean, I don't know Skype is really I don't know what's gone on with those guys, but they took something It's really just without your slides. Is that okay too? What's that? Just like tell us what the certificate in the background read No in your office. No, I'm just joking. So you just like go ahead without slides. Is that okay? Yeah, I'm having a hard time hearing you son. Okay Okay There's a delay There no, it's a neck. It's kind of like you must be in a big room because there's quite a an echo Okay, so we drop it or you just like tell us. Oh there you go. You saw you sound good now Do you want me to just go ahead and send this to you? Yeah, I mean just like talk without the Light then yeah Well, that would be let me fire this off to you son. Okay, because There there's some yeah Miniscule things here Freakin Skype. God. I hate those guys Yeah, see there's a fun aspect in the Skype things, right? Yeah, I mean, how do you take such a good thing and screw it up? We want to do the same with signs, right? Yeah, good thing and screw it up. Yeah, they would screw up all kinds of things. All right I fired this off to your blockchain email address. Okay, okay, so just go ahead now. Okay, and You have three minutes. I hear somebody whispering Yeah, okay, we just start okay Okay, pal you should have that your your notes so anyway, thanks Sonke for inviting me in As you guys know, there is a lot going on out here in the regulatory space You know 2017 was a really bad year From a token perspective because the amount of fraud that took place In the ICO space So, you know, I just came back from a conference in Malta. I was in a conference in San Francisco the week before that Chicago the week before that there's Definitely a movement of foot for security token offerings as STOs or STO and one can think of a stow as a regulated ICO and I think this year 2019 is going to be the year of the stow and Anybody that thinks they're gonna launch an ICO in the mature markets say Europe Asia and the United States They're gonna be rudely awakened. I think last count there over a thousand subpoenas out in the US for ICOs that were done and they're subpoenaing Not only the ICO issuers, but they're service providers. That's their lawyers and accountants So they're going after everybody in the ICO ecosystem that improperly raised money and You know before I go any further. I think it's important to recognize that a I'm not a registered financial advisor. So Use all of this advice at your own risk And so let me put that out there and second one This is going to be very US centric and I'm sorry for that and Part of that is because most of the developed countries seem to follow in behind the US Lead on these regulatory issues now This has not been the case a hundred percent in the ICO space because you have Malta Isle of man Singapore a couple other jurisdiction Switzerland who have taken the bull by the horns and move forward But now the best is coming online and you're starting to see some pivot back to what the US regulatory environment is looking like so the first thing that I'm sorry, I heard somebody Okay, so the first thing to think of a stow ICO is really a crowdfunding sale and What that means is in essence that anybody can come in and buy and In the US that creates that right off the bat creates significant Regulatory problems part of it is because the US government believes it has to protect investors against unscrupulous fraudsters and mainly Unsophisticated investors have to be protected against these unscrupulous fraudsters so That's first and foremost as a crowdfunding sale as an ICO without that regulatory backing who's qualified to do It the other thing that's important to mention is that stows and ICOs are really about raising capital at the end of the day let's call it the way it is it's about raising capital and If you raise capital in exchange for something that's going to be Regulated that's going to be considered a financial instrument So as I said the ICO can be thought of is unregulated and the STO can be thought of regulated and this brings up this big argument of securities versus utilities or security token versus utility tokens and One can break down currencies into Really three major categories the alt coins the utilities and the securities I'm not really going to focus much on the alt coins except they use their own blockchain Or they can also run on top of existing block chains the utility and security tokens run on top of existing block chains, so they're not running off their own and the You guys know these right? Ethereum, Omni, Ripple, guys like that are the block chains that these would run on I think Sonke at some point is going to have his own block chain So we'll see a utility or security token from any suspect But that's a real quick overview of those and so at the end of the day, what's a security token? it's a security and that means it has features above and beyond utility and It can still have utility features, but it's got these features up and above it and in our case What we did with these securities and exchange commission was we took Securities and it's very important to recognize as security you're conveying a form of ownership to the holder and so we backed that with a special class of equity and What we had told the SEC was yes anybody that buys our tokens Because we're making it a security. They're going to get the rights to a special class of equity And one might think of it then as an option or a warrant so that you buy your token and then at some point down the Line you'd be able to get equity as a result of that The second thing is is that this should also convey some kinds of voting rights now in our case We provide voting rights within the path of things like You know where the conference should be held. What kind of features should be provided? Who has the rights to vote for grants that sort of thing, but you could go further and say well They have rights to corporate governance that would create Really significant issues from a governance perspective if you start offering these people to their trading tokens Voting rights at the base the warrant level. It's not they're not a deal from a digital perspective to manage it but it does when it comes down to getting votes for liquidity events say M&A or IPOs where now you've got to send out a tremendous amount of documentation and get those votes collected but We used an ERC 20 fungible token You could use a couple of others obviously to do that off the blockchain using a smart contract and There's some liquidity Requirements or lack of liquidity that you might run into depending on the regulation that you have in the US You know you could buy the token today But you're probably not going to be able to sell it tomorrow You're probably gonna have to wait 366 days before you're gonna be able to resell that token now That's still better They end the current corporate situation in the United States where if somebody makes an investment in a company at the equity level You know, they're probably talking five to ten years before they're gonna see an ROI off of that investment They have no liquidity for a long time. That's dead money So buying a token would get you within a year a little over a year one extra day over a year Liquidity opportunity so that it would be tradable with others And of course you have the rights to exchange for fiat at that time and and that's a really powerful reason to do it So now I'm gonna talk briefly about some of the Liquidity and regulation side of this one is that the liquidity is gonna depend on the regulation that's used and One other thing that's really important is that you have to use a licensed security exchange So all these exchanges that everybody's aware of today. You can just right wipe those right off the table with the US and There's only one security platform on board today. That's Tepla Rumor is there will be three or four more coming on board in the next few months And as you guys know NASDAQ and NYSE are both planning for token exchanges that would be security exchanges So those guys are moved really heavily into this and this landscape is going to mature rapidly over the next 12 to 24 months I'll give you some comparatives because there's a as I just came back from the Malta event. There were a lot of There were a lot of pundits who claim to know what all these us regulatory environments And sub paragraphs are and let me just tell you that 99% of the people you're gonna hear this stuff from they don't have it down and And it's trust but I suppose but distrust but verify even say and So what I'm going to do is run through five paragraphs in which you can right legally raise capital in the United States and Do this under the snow side of the equation? So the first one is the rule 504 regulation D It's the only 504 that you have to worry about and you in this one You can right raise up to five million dollars twelve months No more than that if you were to raise any more than that you'd have to return that capital to whoever made that investment Anybody can make an investment That's a really nice thing about this is that anybody can invest you don't have You don't have to verify investor stats that makes sense anybody can invest nobody you don't need to verify investor status Those are all restrict restale. You're not permitted to advertise and there's no ongoing reporting So that's a really elegant One to go with is the five or D the one downside to it is you can't be advertising and if you guys know if you're out on telegram and You're talking about what you're doing that's advertised you get into a lot of trouble really fast with the SEC that So cutting down really tremendous way to get the information out about what you're doing In the 506 B, which is the next one. There's no cap on the amount you can raise So in the prior one I mentioned there was five million this one. There's no cap However on the permitted investor side, it's unlimited to accredited but you can only take up to 35 Non-accredited investors and you have to verify that they're sophisticated investors So, you know, you you can raise let's say you've raised 10 million dollars You can only take 35 non accredited investors and you have to validate somehow that they're sophisticated investors And you generally do that with a form whereby the investor validate where she is capable of doing it Again, those tokens will be restricted from resale for a period of time. No advertising is It's a you know, you can't go out and advertise this stuff in telegram on a website and Fortunately, there's no ongoing reporting and that's really important because as you know Filing in the SEC in the US is all expensive in of itself before, you know file a red D But to have foreign reporting on top of it's just an additional at cost The 506 C which third type has no cap on the amount you can raise. So that's nice It's unlimited accredited You can't take any non-credited. You have to verify the investor status Obviously to make sure that you don't have non-accredited in there. It's restricted from resale You're gonna have the same problem with tokens there. The nice thing about that Advertising is that's really good So you have a no cap on the amount you can raise you can only raise it from accredited investors And you have to validate their status But advertising is allowed and there's no ongoing reporting. So that's a really elegant model to go with now we get into the crowdfunding Which reg a's and there's two tiers of the reg a so there's reg a tier one in which you can raise $20 million within a 12 month period of time on that 366 day you can launch a new $20 million raise Anybody is permitted to play in this space no need to verify their status and Existing security holders can sell into the off 30% but validate that Advertising is allowed and you can also use to test the waters before and after the offering so it gives you this Little quasi way to advertise before you spend time going out and doing a really big marketing campaign Because in the test the waters if you don't get any positive feedback You might want to really seriously think about a whether you do the offering or be the way you're Advertising the offering talking about it may not resonate So that ability to test the waters is a really nice way to make sure you don't dump money into a do or die situation and there's no ongoing report almost Almost done and the next one is the reg a tier two. We did that one. It cost us about $180,000 And that was in the Midwest. That's fairly inexpensive. It allowed it fairly inexpensive relative to folks Very difficult for a startup to do Allows you to raise $50 million in a 12-month period Anybody can invest you have to verify their status 10% not accredited and cool and anybody can sell into the offering and Advertising is allowed along with test the waters and there's ongoing reporting requirements. So you have this ongoing Expense and I am clearly that you have to spend so it's the one that just keeps on cost The last one is the regs. Yeah, and many of you may be aware of that That's the one you put it up on a platform like start engine and you can raise up to a million seventy thousand Anybody can invest there is some ongoing reporting there But the investor claims have to be verified, but that's all done by platform the regs. Yeah Can't be thought of doing a pre-sale. It's a way to think of it as a pre-sale and anybody can play So you also have bad actor disqualification on all of these so you better plan for AML KYC Across the board. So with that I think I've covered kind of a high level that the SEOs are here. The ICOs are gone if plan on using American investors The US has very long arms and they do not have any problem coming after you Wherever you are outside of the United States, you're getting US investors. So sorry about that Welcome to the land of anti science Thank you very much. I said one quick question like a really yeah. Yeah. Yeah, okay. Is that yep? Okay. Yeah, you're just like one So in terms of okay, so let's say let's say a person Invests, did you hear anything about if people were to actually invest in I guess in one of these ICOs? That didn't didn't do their due to our are those people on the hook Yeah, so here's the deal You're gonna see a landslide in my opinion of class action lawsuits against these ICOs going forward As I said, there's a number of subpoenas out right now And if you are an ICO and you raised money and you didn't use SCC guidelines to do it in the US You're you definitely you're gonna see the legal end of this and you're gonna see a lot of inexperienced Entrepreneurs that are gonna be ruined as a result of this. They just didn't know they thought oh my god I can raise money and this is really nice and they go out and do it They're great at marketing, but they didn't do what they were supposed to do right at the tour link Thank you very much. So we learned something and have a great day Jason. Yeah. Yeah, I'm sorry I couldn't make it son. K.  Yeah. Okay, so have a great day and we'll miss each other next time again. Yeah. Bye. Bye Yeah, I just I miss Jason like five six Okay, it's the last talk before we have the open panel is by John and They just were one we're funded by welcome trust right and you talk about So we're based in Sydney, so this is the first time we've actually managed to be here In person and after Jason's experience. It's it's a really it's really nice to have not be worrying too much about the tech We just give the presentation I'll talk to my Yeah, or we just connected to this one Okay Okay, so just to introduce myself. I am a cognitive scientist by training. So I've begun working in psychology and then moved more towards neuroscience side of things and Really the focus of my research over the last few years has been on neurodevelopmental conditions things like autism and Down syndrome and Lank language difficulties and kids dyslexia that kind of thing And I guess over the last few years I've become increasingly frustrated with the state of research and the way that we do research and I guess that's partly that is So generic to the field of psychology So I think you know psychology has really been the sort of ground zero for the replication crisis that is affecting science so we now know that These problems are sort of fairly generic across the scientific spectrum But it really began when people started realizing that lots of psychology studies didn't replicate even when we thought that they were You know pretty solid pretty solid research But there were also a number of problems that I think are more kind of germane to the kind of more specific research that I do in in the sort of clinical side of cognitive research So at the beginning of this year, I co-founded Frankel open science Which is a really a sort of collaboration between researchers on the one hand like myself So people with more of a background in tech There's my co-founder is Pete Godbalk who's been working in blockchain and and development for for like four or five years So that's well the the blockchain side at least for four or five years, which is relatively speaking a long time obviously and so One of the things that we're really thinking about is you know trying to solve solve problems And there's been lots of great discussions over the last couple of days But one kind of comment that really sort of struck out for me was some of that Carmen said Yesterday when you know what we want what we would what we're trying to do is build tools that make it easier for Researchers to do good research to do open research to get the best value from the efforts that they're putting in And you know what what lots people trying to do is build tools, right? So building cool tools But the strategy that we don't want to do is just kind of build tools and then just hope that scientists I will come along and use them and as Colin mentioned, you know different scientific fields have different needs So really what we're trying to do is develop Solutions to problems within this fairly narrow field, but then doing it in a way that then we hope sort generalizes To other fields that we can then sort of work with So what are the problems that we we're facing particularly in this sort of area of cognitive science with some clinical applications so so one one of these sort of driving forces for me starting this idea was This idea that you know the tests that we're using to assess patients and people with different conditions In a cognitive way that it's a really sort of outdated model lots of it's a lot of it is done with pen and paper tests They're really expensive You can cost like thousand literally thousands of dollars to buy these tests And then you have to pay for the bits of paper that you're writing on each time you use it It's really inefficient because it's pen and paper and then there's lots of like opportunities for human error And also it's kind of inaccessible for lots of different populations So working with kids with autism I found out that was You know lots of tests that we use they they perform really poorly, but that's just because You know that they find it difficult interacting with other people But also accessible in terms of the fact that to administer these tests you need to be really highly trained And so that if you live in like a remote community or somewhere that doesn't have services of psychologists or Speech therapists and so on you just can't get assessed so we wanted to develop applications that make all this easier In the broadest game There's also the idea that you know if we were trying to make sense of conditions like autism we need large data sets and Really most of the research that's been done today has been severely underpowered And so we need collaboration between lots of different partners lots of different researchers people in sort of clinical space And if we're going to do that then we also need the infrastructure for sharing the data for making sure that it's secure And it's all being done ethically So really this is this is the kind of problems that we were trying to solve so as Sonke mentioned We've we've just received funding from the world and trust for a small sort of pilot application that we're building this is working with a clinical neuropsychologist Professor Greg Savage who's an expert in dementia so this first up is focusing on memory abilities in dementia although the Obviously in our so diagram or animation This is using a child as an example But the idea is that the first step of the application is that researchers collect data using the application No one way And instead of the data sitting on the iPad or then being transferred to someone's hard drive It's automatically and securely archived in cloud storage initially And that's that's done. It could be lots of different places. It could be somewhere like fig chair or open science framework And that allows us to build in to the data Collection this this sort of process of data archiving which then makes it easier to share the data and obviously That means that then the researcher has the ability to share that immediately with collaborators within the team And so none of this involved blockchain so far But the the blockchains comes in when we Look at the payment for this. So instead of paying Thousands of dollars you pay tokens. So you play pay Frankel tokens each time you use these applications And what that then means is that as you're collecting the data There's already a record of the fact that that data has been collected that goes immediately on the blockchain So we're calling it metadata by metadata like literally just meaning data about the data So it would be pretty limited. So just you know, the Who is this a collecting the data? And information about where the data has been stored, but obviously if the data is still kind of Secure and unlocked you can't actually get the data itself and there obviously wouldn't be any Identifying data at that point What it does mean though is that this metadata is immediately available to the public So anyone can interrogate the the blockchain look at who's collected data with these applications So that there's there's a record of all the data that exists and then the final stage would be at the point of Publication or at whatever point it makes sense to share the data more openly either publicly or to You know the scientific community And that again would be situation-specific So the idea is at this point at any point the researcher can unlock the the data It makes it easy to share the data instead of having to sort of search around on their hard drive for the data They can just change the access privileges to it And then the final part is that as a reward for sharing your data openly you get refund of some or potentially all of the tokens so oh And initially the idea is that we are building these apps like we're doing with this welcome trust grant But the idea is that the infrastructure that we're building around it We can then integrate with other applications that other other researchers or other app developers build And as I mentioned we're starting with this fairly narrow focus on cognitive assessment tests But we think that in the longer term this may be a model that might apply to other fields of research So just to reiterate what's happened in this sort of scenario So we make it easy for researchers to share their data It's allowing us to build standards for data and metadata into the application rather than forcing researchers to kind of do it So independently at MOSFest, which I attended last weekend or the weekend before losing track of time There there was a big discussion among psychology researchers about Developing standards that could be used across like lots of different fields of research And it's all fairly straightforward, but it takes time and it's kind of not the kind of thing that researchers are going to do Automatically so so we're making that all easy for them We're providing a public record of the existence and location of the data so it makes it findable and It's important that you know when we're thinking about the replicability Problems that we're facing a lot of it is because of selective publication of data. So a lot of data is collected and then not published so At the very least we're providing a record of all the data that has been collected not just the data that's been published And one thing we're thinking about is you know including within that meta meta data on the blockchain the hash of the De-identified data and then and then we can start thinking about how we can create a sort of scientific supply chain from the data As it's being collected all the way eventually to what's coming out in the paper and also we're adding Incentivization so there's an incentive to share the data Even if the study isn't published so if you collect data and then you can't get the research published You still can essentially get your money back or your tokens back By sharing that data and that might be useful to other people And and also there's an incentivation incentivization to share your sort of code or your applications that you're building as a researcher for collecting data And potentially any other analysis software So you you also get tokens in return And importantly when we were talking about incentivization, you know these are tokens that their prime purpose is for collecting data So we're not incentivizing people with tokens that are exchanged for money We accept incentivizing them with tokens that allow them to do more research and we think you know If you're trying to incentivize scientists what you want to incentivize them is is the ability to collect more data and do more science So just finally I want to talk about a concept that we talk about a lot at Frankel This isn't mine. This is this is comes from Pete my co-founder and Another guy he's working with called Tim and they talk a lot about incremental decentralization. So This is the idea that you know the end goal for a lot of what we're trying to do might be full decentralization of research And there's lots of cool ideas But it's gonna be really hard to jump all the way there in one step. And so what we need to do is you know work with Technology like centralized technology that does already do a good job. So things like fig share and OSF Already exist. And so it makes sense to work with those and eventually we might move towards things like IPFS As as a you know as the next step But we want to take it one step at a time and the other the other part of it really is, you know Trying to remove the friction points. So if you want people to be using these we want them to make it easy for them to Get into using cryptocurrency tokens and that's not a straightforward thing to do a few years ago Pete Tried to persuade me to get into Bitcoin When Bitcoin wasn't what wasn't With what it is now and I didn't because it took me so long to try and figure out how to create a crypto wallet. So One thing that we've we've worked on and that we now have and and you can actually I'm gonna talk about this tomorrow The steps worked up is the Frankel Google powered Sorry the Frankel Google powered wallet So this is something that we think is pretty pretty cool So instead of having to go through all the rigmarole of creating a wallet you can literally sign up and create a Wallet an Ethereum address that you control using your Google account and It's it's quite clever how it works. I don't have time to explain it, but I'll talk about it more tomorrow And essentially it takes two minutes to click and then you have an Ethereum account and sorry In the room address and a Google account. So if you want to know more and come to the workshop tomorrow And I guess that feels like about 10 minutes Thank you. Thank you very much strong Thank you very much. Is there any question comment? And actually brought us already into an important thing. It's not just to build tools, right? Yeah, any comments questions? No, if they are not Thank you again. Okay. We already Yeah Okay So, okay, cool now So let's do like we plan for 45 more minutes. Okay So it's the last talk and I want to invite you to participate in an open panel and We'll discuss all problems blockchain We've shown that we are not naive towards what blockchain can do right in science We went to like to be completely destroyed our visions Went through the new database Decentralization new ways to like constrain the access to data went through them Tough technological things there actually if we if we want if we want to like consult politicians one day to change the law We should like understand the limitations of the technology at some point, right? So that would be good and then we went through like the crypto economy of science new incentivation structures and Publishing of course the peer review process and Well had some interesting concept in investing in early-stage project and I just invite you now to come to the panel and Everybody else is invited to contribute and we just like have an open discussion and Sasha and Benedict will like kickstart the discussion Okay, so Carmen Lombard and whoever wants to come just come up here. Okay? Yeah Who wants to like have a seat here John you want to join us somebody else like my can join us you can join us But you are all tire parties. Oh, this is a panel. Hey, you're all welcome in the panel. No, okay Yeah, okay, okay, we don't sit in line. Okay. So yeah, we have it open Okay Yeah And then we're off to really to do some fun, right? Otherwise we would be asleep soon We have to wake up and then we'll talk about a little bit and then we have beer Yeah I can sit too So Zürnke false Benedict and me to kickstart the panel otherwise nobody would come up so we have put together a couple of thoughts and The idea of our thoughts is that we we don't really know where it's going. We discussed this for two days and We think it's complicated. So maybe we have do we have the slides? No, we don't have slides Well, it's pretty simple slides only have a couple of words on it So I will I will just say what's on it. So we have a title slide first And so I said something about like the the open science ecosystem where we say that basically what what Benedict and I typically do is we look at organizations and when people throw technology at organizations in In most cases these organizations do not use the technology the way that people Intended when they designed the technology and what goes wrong why they use it wrongly or why they don't use it at all It's typically what goes over our our desk and we look at this for Particularly the academic field. So we looked at why people withhold data why people don't Publish open access and so on and so forth and now we try to look at what happens in in Blockchain for science and a lot of the discussion that we see comes from basically the idea that Blockchain for science seems a blockchain in general seems to address From an infrastructure perspective a lot of the issues we see in a scientific system So in a way we we we called it that There is the idea of good scientific practice and a lot of the The artifacts of how good scientific practice could work seem to be seem to correspond to Aspects of blockchain.  In blockchain and so the the fundamental idea is science is somehow either corrupted or some people say it's broken we need to fix it in some degree to make it better and Blockchain seems to be some way of a technology we can use it so The good thing about that is that people have good intention. They want to make science better It's not really sure. We don't really have consensus in what exactly is broken. So some people say well, we have Ethical problems that openness is kind of like a thing other people say well We have productivity issues. We really should be faster in the system So people have different opinions on what's broken, but all in the room kind of agree that it's broken Actually, not not not we were not so negative This was like yesterday. Yeah, we discussed we discussed that it's like kind of okay and compared with other systems Yeah, yeah, yeah, but it's okay, but it's a general perspective like towards open science as well and yeah It could be better. Yeah. Some people go as far and saying that's really Yeah, maybe decentralization somehow like yeah, and some people say some bill. I mean their projects are building tools, right? It could be better. Yeah And so what what we discussed when we prepared for today or when we thought about that is this all goes back to Good scientific practice and people say we can have this Equivalent in infrastructure to what good scientific practice is and we thought about well What actually where does good scientific practice come from? What what do we consider as good scientific practice and we and and that this is actually a very complicated complicated thing So if I and I work in a team at a university in Amsterdam where we research mostly innovation openness and collaboration and a lot of my colleagues don't have a problem at all and publishing those results in and Completely closed subscription channel Because in their field the way the people that they talk to they seem to consider it as good or okay Scientific practice to do it that way And so if you give them something open something different they'll say well, that's nice But that does not really work the way that I was taught what good scientific practice is And I think that the concept of good scientific practice is very very complicated because as we have learned before we have a Decentralized scientific system in these decentralized hops We might have hierarchy and this hierarchy also influences what people consider as good scientific practice But we don't have a central hub where someone can just say this is the way it should be done Everybody kind of has to come to that conclusion on their own That's also why we all have a different idea of what exactly is good scientific practice Where we should draw the line and what could be could be done better And so I think that the one of the first ideas. I think that that's interesting is to consider that for ourselves What do we how do we came to the point to consider what we consider good good scientific? practice and one thing I always came through when thinking about that was the word of discipline and discipline is kind of interesting because this one had three meanings and When we look at at a university typically at the university researcher is not really the scientific practice of that research It doesn't really come from the university It typically comes from the discipline that research is involved in and what is considered good scientific practice in that discipline but discipline also kind of means to To have discipline in doing something to do something according to the rules Which also are set in a way by the discipline, but discipline also has a negative connotation Discipline also means to discipline someone So if you do not work according to what we consider good scientific practice was in a field Then the discipline can't work your field your community can discipline you by saying that isn't good scientific practice and So we we thought about business kind of goes back to like one of your slides about Do we address every single kind of field to who did we take with and I think it's a pivotal aspect to to not think about like research and oftentimes it's kind of like people oversimplify why scientists act the way they do and when we kind of incorporate why we think things are Should be done in a certain good scientific practice Then I think we come to a point was it's actually far more complicated than these very simple ideas of why people Practice science the way they do and that's I think where I pass over to you So Hey What what Sasha basically said is that good scientific practice is something that is negotiated within the scientific communities Or within the scientific disciplines and what we also think or what I kind of also think is that scientists Do not always do what's in the best interest for science. They do what they are disciplined to so this is one of the meanings that Sasha also that Sasha also Just mentioned and it also relates very much to what Martin just said before when it comes to Stigmarie So let me give you one example So there's this this one case and I think everyone knows about that at the global scientific output doubles every nine years But many peer-reviewed papers do not withstand replication so if we look at psychology for example one-third of the pay of the results Only can be replicated at the same time many peer-reviewed and papers do not get ever cited one So after five years for example About one-third of the publications from psychology do not get a citation at all and When researchers are asked if they want to share the data They never usually say we don't have the necessary tools They usually say and we don't want to give it away because we want to publish another paper That again, nobody will or very few people will read will read or am site So the common truth here is that and we publish more than we can read and review I think Martin also said that we should completely give away with publications I would say that we would do good enough if we would publish less and What I'm also trying to point out is that there are like a lot of these Idiocies in in academia. There's also for example the case of peer review There was like for example a few weeks ago. I was at the force 11 in Montreal And there was one guy presenting the results from a comparative study between the bio archive and the top journals from from biomedicine and what he basically pointed out is that the Quality between the peer reviewed and publications and top journals and biomedicine did not differ so much in quality Compared to those in the preprint Repository on archive, but nobody actually questions the institution of peer review or very few do or at least Often we try to to implement a technical equivalent of the peer review. We already know Also, if you if you think for example, then often interdisciplinary and collaboration How could for example to peer reviewers ever be able to review an interdisciplinary paper that has ideas from let's say Three four and five disciplines so that there needs to be something more and reactive when it comes to peer review as well I'm also talking about in a disciplinary Collaboration That could also like start again with these journalists or what do journalists basically do that organizations put out or institutions put out Our scholarly societies put out so that basically just limit They make intellectually intellectual boundaries so we can like we only stick to the people that we know We stick to the journals that we know and we do not actually Try to to publish something in a journal beyond our discipline So by just setting these and disciplinary boundaries, for example in the disciplinary and collaboration is Prevented and this is a decision by design Often and it's also an example for let's say Stability and also when we look for example at how public infrastructure is often Funded like it's also again going back to organize stability Like they get they have an idea for infrastructure project like in public publicly funded project They have an idea in 2013 you get the money in 2014 and then you follow work packages for the next three years and then at the end produce what you had in mind in 2013 so The idea or the concept that we like came up with or what we thought like it would relate to also because when we think about Scientific ethics and and good scientific practice like Merton also often talks about Organized skepticism so what you see here actually is a rather organized stability and it's especially True sometimes for academia where smart people act and collectively stupid Okay, we got it There's like so much cool up right so and then like open sign is it is it but we should like get it like somehow into the Direction of like is there is it useful that we talk blockchain in these field and like get this up moving and like not to go Into silos or in one cultures because these are all like legacy Things and problems and like some are specific to science world some are not specific here So is it is it is it like Should we like continue with that? How should we continue with that? Should we not continue with it, right? Yep, well, I mean yeah Yeah, no, no, it's like it's open, right? Yeah, yeah Yeah, yeah, everybody can participate. No, no, I mean we should we should like keep it. We should keep it specific Okay, like The little specific thing that we wanted to go into was actually that at fostering good scientific practice means Understanding the complexities of practice in each field and this was also something that I think you Am set in your in your talk. Well We had wonderful slides about three things that we suggest. Yeah. Yeah, sorry. Sorry. Yeah, really graphically very strong so So the first one we had like someone who was diving in the ocean and We basically said if you want to develop infrastructure for someone you just can't throw that infrastructure at them and Say those are smart people. They'll see that they'll use it You really have to understand what it is that drives these people what how they make the decision That they make because the reality is that no researcher wakes up and there's well If I only I had something to do today So they all are already busy and so changing practice means that there's always like an Opportunity cost in doing that. I think The second thing we had we called it the puts on a plus problem Everybody knows the puts on a plus. Yeah, 20s This used to be like the place to be in Berlin and like if you look if you watch Bobby Berlin is all like people Running around puts on plus and then after the the wall came down they rebuilt puts on a plus and they Didn't take into consideration that people actually want to use it They'll just ask cool architects to build Hybrids there and now nobody wants to be at put some plus only tourists hang around there But I like people that live in Berlin like they don't go to put some plus completely failed Infrastructure project and I think that happens if you if you have a great idea and say we built something shiny But you don't really build it with the community that's supposed to use it. Okay. Good So this is all too shiny what we have at the moment or Infrastructure projects have that problem just visions or like Well, it's no well, they actually built something at puts on a plus But it didn't build it with the people that it was for they basically had the idea of we'll show you what you need It's like these if you if you build it, they will come kind of attitude. We'll build something so great Everybody will like it you build it people. So well, that's yeah, really what we like. It's shiny But we kind of like yeah, so we cannot expect that the technology by itself will change Signs and stuff and but I know what I mean is you cannot develop a technology that people will use without really doing that With the people who are supposed to use it. Okay That's the third one the people that are supposed to use it are are in a decentralized academic system They basically live in little tribes. You can't say I talked to a couple of scientists. I know how science works Because yeah, okay Yeah, okay. Okay, okay, so Okay, let's just open it up Sorry, sorry, I didn't want to interrupt you I thought it was already open up Okay, yeah, well what I want to say I think it's about enabling people to actually do Science so instead of like all spending a lot of time on really stupid things that you know as you said like a lot of I mean there are smart people But then you force them to spend like a day or a few days formatting papers Like for particular journals and there's like so many steps where we waste our time But they're really that could be easily automated. So I think it's about Opening up time and space to do this creative work like what people really like to do instead of all of these Boring things that nobody really enjoys, but you have to because there are no legacy. Yeah So it's about enabling to do cool interesting and creative science. Yeah, okay To answer directly to that I feel that a lot of the discussions that we have actually are the opposite What we would like to measure more people have to track more things that they do now when I do a review Also have to put that into a system to get an additional token that I can buy something from so it's all like additional hassle for me Actually in that system and oftentimes I feel that yeah that the exact opposite is actually Yeah, it's actually happening I mean all this project like open science So it's like new tools If it's light share or something people don't upload the presentation right they keep it So don't copy my slides or something, you know creative comments took a long time until it took off right But it slowly we are getting there and just like this is a decentralized slide share will not Create any additional excitement to the average scientist. I completely agree with that So I think we should probably focus more on removing all the unnecessary clutter rather than adding more tools more like new different things and like Different technologies and approaches. We just need to clean up Like things that are really useless or they don't make any sense or but and I think there's like blockchain can do something because you don't have I mean like if people if you look at like where the blockchain is used in the outside Well, it creates a bulletproof something and it it's just an easy way to like Can be an easy way to uh to distribute shares to maintain shareholders. It's a very effective way You don't have to go you have to go you don't have to do with money transfer You are doing it on shame so you can like pay dividends easily to like for example the building right and blockchain can be a way to This to uh to break down the barriers and the and the and the media breaches right that you that you you mentioned Come and so yet we have to reformat that it then we Uh, especially if it comes to value in science like new research funding I mean how much effort it is for the grand submission things I mean, I mean, but we are not like getting rid of this review process But if you have new ways of like distributing maybe money invest early in ideas in ip easily We have like less media breaches Yeah, we don't have to go through iBan to like transfer some value So this could be a way to get rid of a lot of overhead Maybe yeah, just one single blockchain would be good. Yeah If you would like to have all the legal things work off because I feel like yeah that that the opposite is happening We have like I get constant like emails from I don't know orchid some things on my orchid. I need to Take care of it. I don't know put it there. I have to go through everything then Someone else emails me. We have that on our institute website. I need to update this So I feel like I I don't know I inherited 20 additional tamagotchis Yeah, yeah, yeah in the name of open science. Yeah. Yeah, that's right. That's right And then this other spamming. Yeah, so any comment contributions or Yeah There have been Lots of talk about like a scientific community But we all live in different countries with different jurisdictions like probably scientific process like if you are If you are computational chemists like would be the same like in australia and in china But when it comes to the funding model, how this money is processed is completely different So like access to knowledge. Yes, this has to be universal But how like whether There is incentive model Which will feed all and walk analogy But we can like this blockchain create a lot of different incentive models And research money distribution schemes easily like we have this monolithic system today Or like very few only very few and scientists adapt to it games a system Yeah, basically publish like behave like create artificial complexity Because they are incentivized in this way and we had this slide Right. So and if we if we create a lot of ways, it's like the google algorithm is not published If you don't know the system, you can't game it, right? So maybe then you just end up doing good science Yeah, I we martin and I we had this discussion earlier. I think you ran away now No, no, you silly A lot of a lot of discussions are kind of about if we could reinvent science today Yeah, it would look completely different. Good. I like this experiment Yeah, and I always thought well that wouldn't be possible because we always have this possibility but what if we Like just put an alternative Smaller thing next to it as an experiment and see how that would perform. Yeah, yeah, basically Take people who are willing to take the risk and say well, that's actually a better idea Give them their own little institute and let them just do Yeah, yeah, this will we'll see 10 years later if their careers are done. Cool. Yeah, this is like what we want to do, right? We like amend the system carefully carefully, we amend it like on the other side, but I think that's probably the It's probably one of the only ways to really have Otherwise, you will never have a drastic Flip. Yeah And in that way if you say well, that's the rules that we That we governed out a little new thing mine And that might be a possibility to completely start from scratch and not have this discussion about but we really Need all this old crap that we Yeah I mean the difference to earlier Open science approaches or web 2.0 science 2.0 revolution is that there was like well, you have to get the people there Right, why do people move to research get to be seen now? They maybe discuss there, right? Why do people like slides are very slowly, right? And we have like all these things but I think in the blockchain revolution and we are talking of years here now It's the first time that we actually have a chance to influence the money distribution and value flow It's not only like an New interface and this can be a driving factor. Imagine people get money. They will be there in a second, right? Give me this tool. I will install it. Okay. I will use whatever I blockchain you fire everything Okay, I'm not so sure that it actually come in growth But I think there is a there is a chance to like if you attach money to it to have an experiment of an alternative system Yeah, we think about the discussions We had I don't know like five six years ago to what science 2.0 You can't do like an alternative systems system where they do science 2.0 like that Yeah, I mean like how long did it take like the web 2.0 and science was 10 years more or less, right? We're talking 10 years and I blockchain in 10 years. Hmm. How will it look like? So five years, yeah, what's the percentage of of of science of public was funded with public money probably 80 percent Yeah, yeah, like I was speaking with ron and during the break like and On average if it takes we're talking about millions and it will take Like Years to fund. Yeah, I like how we're into this blockchain ecosystem money will come from Our academic institutions are not in the business of adapting Revolutionary and disruptive technologies Yeah, they like extremely conservative In the world Let's be realistic It's it's worth to look at how Opening science failed in the past, right? So, uh, we we mentioned martin mentioned in this talk the poly mass project block Which is also referred to and michael nielsen's reinventing discovery, which is a great example And I remember like 15 years ago or a little bit less We had this great optimism about blocks and about wikipedia because because it seemed like okay We we we have the infrastructure For doing research in a completely different way and in a way that that was true Yes, but why what happened instead and this is really the irony when when when I give workshops on scholarly Communication to phd students today and I ask them who in the room is running a block versus who in the room Is actively having a research gate profile Nearly nobody uses a block which gives you gives you a great amount of autonomy Yes, uh already But many many many people have a research gate profile and when you compare it research gate is like a bad copy of how The research system works. Yes, you you gather Totally meaningless points for for yeah, yeah, you know research like the impact factor system Yeah, this is interesting and and and what what is new and this was yeah Yeah, I just need to repeat what was already said is that we now Address so so this is what happened in the space of the web, which is the space of like Absolutely effortless Distributing information and making copies of things and what we have now is a revolution on the level of value transfer And having a decentralized permissionless protocols for that So now we can tackle the the economic level and the the the economic autonomy and the incentive systems, which is uh kind of promising, but we will be uh So we will look how this turns out right next wave so to say exactly. Yeah, good What what always fascinates me is the fact that the web was developed so research Can exchange information and everybody understood that except for the research Yeah, or Unbelievable, right? They turned their pdf pages online behind paywalls. Yeah. Yeah, it's very interesting. Yeah Okay He said then they said I mean this these have been problems that work that are with open signs web 2.0 address The world is visions right and if we didn't end up there, right? Like we had this we had this vision of like value transfer in web 2.0 2 It didn't work out. It didn't happen, right Yeah, and I think the important thing is then to look back and see what can we do differently this time? Yeah, right to the same issue Yeah, and like yeah, yeah, just like Yeah, I just had an idea about this internet. I just Recently stumbled upon this uh when when the first nodes were established You know between these two universities and and actually the the driving force apparently was that the scientists were really reluctant to share the information Even then when the when this started this experiment was done and here interestingly the only thing The only way it was working is actually what I think works sometimes really well in the US and much better than in in Europe and said that the funding agencies said like if you guys not Work together like you're not going to get these machines twice in this case the computing infrastructure We have to share it and we are not going to pay every university a computer Because it's too expensive and you have to share the resource So that might be an it's an idea of Uh, and that's actually what also the initiative of john is and Trontana is interesting right because in a way it should be really coming from the top Uh, sometimes as well that that we have to Have this open science movement in europe But but but this should then not necessarily be controlled by by entities that are Having such a strong financial interest and this is Again, yeah, anyways Yeah, okay Yeah, and I like the idea like philip in philip zander's talk. Okay, so like the funders like get to 30 percent overhead Right for administration and like how much time there is like I think they are like things that the european commission the grant money that is distributed It outweighs the effort to like why this grant application All right, I don't I can't cite this but it's like a lot right so people just like it is like it all went mad Right. Yeah, and you have increasing competition So it's not only for the people that actually won the grant but we had grant applications last year where we had a Like they funded 3% of the applications Even for the people that got the grant was a lot of work, but like 97% Wrote that entire thing and throw it away or like send it in next year again So I think that is the big the big bottleneck currently. Okay. Yeah And we have here. Yeah, just just wanted to to Put a question to the panel so Yeah, or to to to our big panel So what I'm asking myself. So we are now in the end of this first blockchain for for science conference I have two questions. Who are we are we more politicians or are we scientists? Are we just citizens? And independent of this question When we meet next year, what do we want to have achieved? So that's something I think we could speculate on for for the the end of the session Who are we? It's a good question Huh well In the last day Like I lost account of the number of projects which are trying to resolve the same issue Whether it is this or not like whether it's like peer review or something. So like it all Should make sense to get some kind of basic agreement on What kind of uh, I don't know like whether you join forces and what kind of governance mechanism and what kind of standards is going to be used How it's going like whether we are able to do it. I don't know during martin's workshop in the in the next couple of days Hopefully something some in some shape or So Like if we'll until next year have some kind of basic structure basic governance model or and who are we like anybody who like We should be looking forward and thinking about like What is like how algorithms are going to reuse this data the future it's like because Big companies and like I don't know if you've had about like the risk soft bank for example It's uh investing in all kind of algorithms and they invest in money into Into like which they get from Saudi sovereign fund their own uber bnb and everything else everything now is an algorithm basic plan. You just feed data into it Whether you run a shop or model agency. It's the same It's it's database Okay, um, so I have a question for you guys. It's a hypothetical situation. Um, it's about how you would threat model against uh against this So let's say that you have a you have a You know, you're a token system whatever whatever whatever application it is And you have a handful of exchanges that have your token available You charge a certain Specific price for a certain type of thing Let's say the price moves, you know the price moves around and you adjust it to you know to fit that You know fiat So let's say that somebody decides That like let's say let's say they're only let's say they're You know 10 10 million tokens floating around on all of the markets and someone decides to to Buy all the tokens How are you uh, so Now there are no more tokens available and you have your application that you just built. How are you going to make that token system work? Uh Isn't that base specific question? Yeah, no, that's a no. How are you going to threat model against that? Basically said somebody just buys all token No, because no, there will be no more tokens somebody basically bought all the tokens off of the exchanges There are no more left on the exchanges And then you're rich. What's that and this moment you are rich and fine and you have your design No, I'm no I'm asking like how like if you if you've built a system How do you how do you defend against that? How do you threat model against it? I said somebody just buy is it like just get all the rights like funds your science project perfectly No, no, no, okay here. I'll state it again because this is this is this is going to come up Okay, so somebody just like Monopolizes something or this you have a system, right? You've released all the tokens on the markets um, the your your system relies on these tokens um For functionality Somebody decides to buy all of the tokens and now Your system won't work. So how do you defend against that? Maybe if you generalize this question like how do you prevent like decentralized system to be centralized again, right? like This threat monopolize basically no this specific. No, I'm asking specifically. How do you threat model against? Okay, you love what you're yeah, so this is I think on the one level This is a general crypto economics question and not so specific for our field of application But on the other hand, I would like to point you to the work of uh, alex Score and uh, the dape people maybe other people apply this as well. They have this concept of a secondary Market for a token so that you have an internal regulation that makes use of a utility token Was in a certain system which has incentives and everything you got And then you have a secondary market where you can buy Stakes in that whole system where you can end up being the only owner of this System and still you have no means to to influence what the scientists were doing So I don't know if this addresses your concerns, but Also, I just wanted to say yesterday. We we looked at space the central. I don't know if Yeah, did you want to say because aragon came to mind and you're using that right?  The purpose is to actually reserve a large percentage as rewards in the ecosystem So that's one reason it's like you do whatever an ic or whatever To raise some funds to start to like, you know bootstrap the initial team to develop the technology But then you have like a large percentage of it That's reserved for you know the intellectual contributors the incentives to you know create the network and Like you could think of that as like knowledge mining just like bitcoin or ethereum It's like the it's not like the entire token supply is on the market the day that Bitcoin You know like the mining started to begin. It's like it's maintained because these rewards are available So if you think of these knowledge, you know collective intelligence ecosystem, it has those same, you know mechanics, so And I mean the same thing as far as like buying 100 percent of the token supply We haven't really seen that happen unless it's like a very small cap token. It's like that can happen for any Token it doesn't matter whether it's like science or not. So But it's I don't think it's very easy and there will never be a hundred percent of your supply on the market One of the reasons why I bring that up is that I mean if we think about the threat that was there was made to To pick okay This is like a great discussion and we should have the crypto economy discussion And I'm very sorry that we didn't do it. We do an own conference on that But as as you are already deep in this and that's why I think you like blockchain for science in the future Okay, cool. Yeah, there's no way around it. Okay, there is Yeah, yeah Yeah, yeah, for example, yeah Yeah, something like this and who we are. Okay. Yeah Try to get an ICO and buy Lamborghinis for Initial sticker offering. Okay, so Okay, I do our ICO Okay, I actually wanted to go back exactly to the same point. So I'm glad we were aligned Um, immediately after one of you asked that question I had three uh, three things came to my mind and it's actually to everybody Who in here has a bit of a technical knowledge about blockchain? Like 10 people who wrote a smart contract ever 20 20 people Okay, when we discuss this next year, we need to make sure that everybody in the room has a good understanding of how blockchain technically works Okay, we can't evaluate We can't we can't evaluate if it makes sense for science if we don't have that knowledge at hand So I think that would be goal number one that I would suggest Um, well second of all, we should be like in in terms of numbers There should be more of us we need to find a way to convince researchers to somehow Come on board, but that's not just researchers. Everybody is related to the research infrastructure And that means engaging even publishers Who were heavily criticized During this conference, but no, no, no, they weren't so badly, right? We did a good job in not like we said that they are part of the ecosystem, right? And we are all in the same boat, right? We are not we are not fighting against the publishers I don't like I don't want to say that way. I didn't say that That also means they are librarians anybody basically who's in their infrastructure, right? We should have More people on board from very different universities. Yeah, this is a good point. Yeah, and I actually tried it Yeah, it was not like people. Okay. I actually called some high level people and talked to the others and Well, it is like blockchain is all a hype. We don't have a trust problem with publishers Uh, it's not scalability scalable, you know, they have like We are already working on it in 30 years And uh, this is nothing new. Okay. So this was the answers but others are Others are very happy and engaging and want to come and couldn't make it. I'm not saying any names Okay, but I completely agree with it and we like continue with this effort. Yeah You can try the top down or like drop ambassadors, you know in different countries that have already connections to those kinds of Institutions and try that So I guess like going back to who are we I think it's like everyone who has some kind of interest in research Which is again going funders researchers and publishers and I think again, there needs to be communication and there's always It from at least from my perspective like all these like it's a little bit granular, right? So funders are having their own problems and then researchers are having like a Bunch of problems kind of linked to everyone else's essentially and everyone is trying to change Uh system from uh from their own perspective, right? Everyone but everyone has also different ideas where the biggest pain points are so again opening up a conversation would be really good and bringing more people in and But we also need to educate people and like increase the awareness that there are things that are happening changing and I think It's easy to kind of get drowned in the open science bubble where where everyone around you is talking about open science But actually when you go back to the university people don't know that osf exists like even for web 2.0 solution exists. They just don't know so speaking about web 3.0 Solutions like it's like science fiction almost and then again People don't know what blockchain is and you don't need to write a smart contract to kind of but you need to at least understand the concept because that's what the exciting part of blockchain is like it Opens up a different way of thinking so it's not about just replacing Current institutions or current models of funding is just it's actually trying to build something new And what I think we should aim for next year is to create this Sandbox and invite every stakeholder and publisher and fund funders and just create this game System and where we can try these new things because essentially nobody really knows what they're doing I think that's why I think we should just admit that we don't really know how to fix this thing like We just don't know but we need to try and like a lot of things will fail But some things will come up and say like oh look this is actually really useful It works and we should keep it But we need to create this safe environment for trying testing blowing things up And we need to admit this that this is what it is that it's not a real solution. It's just trying So I think that's what we should aim for next year Just to refer to you because I had Yeah, I um, so I agree perfectly with you in terms of education about the fact that we need to know At least the concept I think we really have to go a little bit deeper than the concept because there are a lot of people who Know the concept but you really need to know a little bit more in a technical level What is possible what not in order to answer the question that was posted So I don't mean like on the level of a programmer necessarily But it to argue that we need blockchain specifically and the blockchain is the right answer to solve problems like we need to Have a clear understanding of the shortcomings like how it works to know what it can do or what it cannot write And to you mentioned also the experimentation that was my third point because I said initially I had three points So that we need to control the experiment. So actually very maybe small projects and some approach it like researchers Which a lot of us are right. So try to Find a way to quantify how much of a difference this actually makes I think there will be a goal that we should think about it. Yeah What I personally would like to to ask all of you for next year is to bring your negative Experiences as well. So all the faults all the the errors that we can learn from those what did not work and Yeah, speculate on what could be the reason why it did not work. So if we are experimenting commenting to your Last comment then it would be extremely useful Maybe to write provide a platform to share experiences to share the best practices The worst practices and to learn from all of these The other thing if we are talking about Fixing science which is broken. There are other Aspects as well, which were not mentioned during this conference Like the trust issue what is generally spoken that the public does not trust science There are already several initiatives, which could be nicely put into blockchain Like patients voting for what kind of diseases should be granted to to investigate and find medicines Involving science journalism or figuring out how science could be translated to the public and so on and so on So it would be nice to yeah spread out To stakeholders who are not here today I would like to add to the conversation about building The sandbox and allowing people to learn how to get this into their own hands And and I agree that this does not necessarily entail Learning to program something or so. We have already things like aragon for instance. This is kind of a graphical user interface for building your own DAO or something and and What what I would like to see is having such a sandbox and and research about what is happening The failures the problems with that sandbox, but to do this in For a certain discipline for young researchers who would like to do this from a certain discipline With real money from a real funding agency So I would like to see one or two funding agency being courageous and saying, okay We pour really a certain amount of money into the system now build your DAO and Let's see what happens, right? So so that we see that this is really serious and possible if it is possible I have a comment. Um, I think that yeah, what I've observed In this conference is yeah, a lot of people are proposing similar platforms But they have different tokens and it was like, how do we break out of these silos? if a lot of them are ethereum based thinking about actual like kind of ethereum standards that can allow research to Interoperate between the platforms can be good Or also for the different groups choosing a specialization of scientific research to build the community around that research And then collaborating as an alliance on the actual, you know Plumbing like the infrastructure because I think that if we really want network effects We have to kind of maybe align towards the type of science or research we're more interested in And you know leave the product and the smart contracts and all that to people that have More expertise in that realm and you build this alliance So then you can actually grow the network effects of having a global scientific community Like someone said where a lot of us might be based in like different regions different countries as well So if you're like strategize with the universities in the regions build this common infrastructure and you know focus on that then I mean, I think The problem is like people think about these token models because they're like, oh, okay. I can get funded and work on this job You know have us funded as my full-time job So there's that competitive aspect that people think that they need to do it themselves Because it can at least guarantee them and their groups a job And so that's like what we face as a community. It's kind of like the forces of capitalism that are Standing in the way of us like truly collaborating in ways So I think that that's the main thing that we need to overcome because I think that's the greatest barrier towards Collaborating as early stage like bootstrapped companies go It's just a comment Yes, I think that's a super important issue that you raised there. I mean all of these efforts including Doing research on what happens with with blockchain and science and having nice sandbox games and so Will Still it will be necessary to educate people and train them on open science Yes, because this um like like being convinced about okay My career as a young career researcher depends on some journal brand name or so this does not go away By the way of some technical whatever alternative Right as long as you feel like okay, I will be just judge based on that journal brand name Or so you will behave like that. So Yeah Um, sorry So we were talking about like what we want to see for next year and next year I would like to see more people from Developing countries to the global south so So I went to a talk A few months ago by a lawyer in in australia and um, she made a really I think insightful point which was that You know when we're thinking about blockchain in countries like australia germany usa We're thinking about it as an alternative to Institutions that we already have that we kind of trust we may think that blockchain does things better or more efficiently or You know more democratically, but it's trying to replace institutions that Or or complement institutions that already exist when we're thinking about other countries Like where they don't have those institutions That's where potentially blockchain can be transformational, which is why for example, you know when we look at the Our like frankle community, um, we look at you know the people on our telegram group A lot of them from nigeria And I'm not sure you know how universal that is across other other projects But you know as soon as you mention nigeria everyone kind of rolls their eyes, right? But there's a reason for that and and it's because crypto is huge in in nigeria because From you know from from my understanding from what we've been with the feedback we've been getting is that they you know, they don't have these trusted institutions for for Like banks and so on so You know if we're thinking about this for science as well, then maybe you know the transformational effect Of blockchain for science will not be felt in countries like germany and australia. It will be in nigeria and india and philippines and so on and you know where we've got So it's a big problems Yes, they don't have the legacy structures that prevents them from adopting the innovation or the new stuff, right? And they stay all like in germany. We don't be as radiologists don't send Images through the internet right in brazil they do right So it is because we have our legacy institutes that have no interest in like creating these new ways and these developing countries can skip this step Yeah, like island is very good at digitization because they could rebuild their public administration and we still have to go like to the Things here all the time right for job I need your badge I just want to give you a like Okay Linking to that comment. I would like to get back to a question. You thank you raised like 15 minutes ago And which goes on the global level So where will blockchain be in the in the next five years in the next 10 years? We heard a lot about Yeah possibilities for changing science. Maybe with this technology We heard a lot about challenges like interoperability and Scalability, but where could it be taking into account that a lot of countries suffering From really like threats Which we don't even can imagine in like developed western countries with this well functioning institutions in a way like Sure, there's some diminishing trust in media and politics Surely i'm observable, but yeah, where where could block blockchain be on a global level within the next 10 years for example It depends on the quantum computing right On the quantum computing in the state of it Ah, yeah, okay, we didn't have the quantum computing question the whole conference. Wow Now you know you like oh Okay, good Energy consumption was not a topic. There's a hot topic all the time usually. Yeah, okay quantum computing is good to okay We had it. Yeah cool, so we Okay, I know what what we don't want to have for sure It's like under the under the label of decentralization and blockchain to have a blockchain if I anything that it's completely Centralized right and we prevent this from happening right So if they say they like we have this new blockchain decentralized research publisher or social network or whatever And it's in if they are like five nodes And there's like a governance structure that consists of one person and they call it blockchain We will like void against that. Okay. This is like one thing we are going to do. Okay. It's a minimal Minimal thing. Okay, we all agree on that And everything it's it'll be a rather destructive year. Yeah. Yeah, we will be so because There are some projects that go in this direction. Yeah, and oh we have blockchain and there are others out and We don't name them. Okay, so this is like what we agree on the minimal level Right and then and we don't want to create a structure that is self maintaining And like just pays business class tickets to for people to fly somewhere and has a lot of administration overhead Okay, we are like we don't build that right So I put on the web page that if we build a structure and we archive the goals The the society or thing or company or will disappear Okay Because then we will do work on something else. Okay, so these are like divisions, okay And any any comments or important steps or yeah, okay Yeah, and like really real ones and not ones that are created to have a real user story Yeah, yeah, okay. We don't we don't come up with fake stories. Okay. Let's just like wait two or three more years If we have to I will I will never invite a researcher and he said like oh, I'm doing all blockchainified now Yeah, and we will like promote him and tell the story and in reality. He doesn't even understand what the wallet is Okay, we are not doing this. Okay. Okay. So yeah You mentioned it would be great if we could Convinced funding organizations to contribute financially to some research projects So I think we have enough of a critical mass to Prepare a pretty kick ass research proposal. Why don't we do that? Why don't we? I think the research proposal I thought so often about this But I'm not going to answer this question of the reviewers if there's an agency that wants to fund us That's okay. If somebody wants to write research proposal.  I'm not going to do that Yeah, okay, seriously If they if they come back it doesn't scale blockchain is just a hype, you know I don't want to read these answers after I spent three weeks of writing this proposal If somebody wants to do that go ahead Yeah I I write I write half a page proposal Yeah, and that should be enough. Yeah, because every project can be explained in half a half a page Yeah, I have everything else is like overhead legacy, right There is a price from the european union, right? It's called blockchain for social good. This is a surprise, but I'm not yeah I mean, I see your point. It's a lot of work I'm not pointing fingers Very very serious answer takes a lead I I would definitely Contribute in serious ways, but but somebody has to take the lead you have this initiative I think it would be great and this is the right funding line or probably and let's try this sure. Yeah. Yeah I thought about writing there, but then and then I had like these comments back and stuff So we just like do this and we create some knowledge movement and maybe somebody will support us Maybe others not the projects. Maybe they can an international society of blockchain for science We actually have one already and there's like it's a the legal structure is like it's a One-click org, right? So it's probably a burglary is right We can expand that but it also creates a lot of overhead already, right And I don't want to sit down and write standards Right that are like just like maybe rappers for like what's necessary in blockchain world And we are already come up with a lot of things that we need to work on and we discuss these things here So so there's no point in like writing more documents, right? And we have live streams and this discussions I mean we can do the cargo cult of like writing a grant application 30 pages and Have nice powerpoint diagrams and everything. It's uh, it's a proxy, right? It's yeah Yeah, but then there will be the question like what's the problem that you are solving, right? And this is like the question is there a problem is blockchain the rate method and then I will have I don't see that this will go through as a research project And I'm fed up with this proxy measurements We will like have this thing happening as soon as there's money like we have the molecule project for example that is like Ready at like not 10 years from now, right that it can and if these things work out And we already had like billers blockchain like open science tools for example that wants a poster price It's already working, right? You can like create the immutable timestamp of something, right? So what what kind of research do we need to do anymore? I don't And you want to measure it how Yeah, yeah, but how do we measure this if we if we fix So the problem with a lot of things and grant application is that they want to have something measurable at the end and Like in economics it like it has shown that you can well We'll like have something that we know if we have to like address this measurement Then we'll do it in this way that the outcome will be so it's positive But it's a it's a hard and it's a very hard thing to measure orchid is six years old We have five five million people And that value proposition is still a hard for us to measure. It's getting easier.  Yeah, you people can do that all the time I mean take that but yeah, seriously, it's not it's so this is not real world So what we are discussing is that this uh reward system of scientists Which is based on impact factor is not the correct one And if you want to disrupt it then we can measure it We can define something completely new and that could be one of the research proposals I mean But with many things you just have to think and be like smart and see that this is a way that it's good And you just do it right? Yeah, we can measure it. So with social scientific methods, you can measure a lot of things You can you have to define concrete concepts Which are actually measurable and then it's not only impact factor No, no, no, but I don't want to have any metrics and stuff, right? No, no, no, no just how blockchain For science is working. Okay. Yeah, okay Yeah, some of you can do that, right? Yeah. Yeah. Okay, cool We want to be okay. So I want to close this is so we have the minimal minimum. Oh, sorry. Sorry. Sorry. Yeah, sorry There's been tremendous Tremendous strides since last year's meeting Next year's meeting Virtually everyone in attendance Will have used will have developed used and had some experience with these implementations Yeah, could okay and what I what I would suggest the way of thinking about structuring the segments Is the three the three primary comments that have come from from this group discussion are Let's see the applications. Let's have every application develop that's developed have an opportunity to see it Let's have some feedback on what the user experience has been what the learnings have been from the developers And let's combine that with what the research tells us about this collection of that type of application That use case or use cases as they cluster together. I think there's tremendous learnings that could come from that And it's a mix of both slideware research Tangible or intangible very difficult to get the data and so forth But there are some that that want to do the research, but we also want to see the applications themselves in real life Cool Yeah, I'm okay with that as a state. It's a last statement. Somebody wants to like give you a more last statement or Okay, so we close it here. Okay Good. So thank you very much And I thank you a lot now as your organizer again And I think it was I had a lot of fun. It was very stressful. I had a lot of help And I yeah, no, no, and I'm off the hook now until tomorrow Martin well he does this and I'm happy now and there will be like After hour is at the bar at the hotel or restaurant if you want to meet there, right? We don't if you want if you want to have another one as a meeting spot Just let me know we can announce it here now And I wish you safe travels and thanks again for everything and this was exciting today's and the feedback You can send all kind of feedback. Please good and bad or maybe bad just for my email and and okay, and Yeah, thank you very much for everything. Yeah Okay, thank you to the tears that helped me with the presentations that were awesome And they are like really good really good at it and they work in blockchain space and at bundles block and you talk to them Okay, and the sci-fi academy live streaming team