 So I'd like to start with a little scope of what everybody thinks. How many people here like to work for free? How many people like to get paid for the work that you do? Yeah, that's not even half, that's surprising. Well, actually, we're all already working for free. Every day, you create value in your lives for some of the biggest tech companies in the world, and they're becoming monopolies. Now, if you were here back in 2011 at the World Economic Forum, or even read their report, you would have likely heard of this issue, which they said was the digital economy and the new asset is the personal data. And the problem was identified back then that you have these contributors and you have the people that want the data and who sits in the middle but the companies. And they create products and services that have become less and less of value to capture our data and then they sell those in other products to their true customers. And so when I heard about this and when Snowden came out with his revelations, I was quite disturbed and so I did an artistic gesture as a reaction. We are all data slaves. I don't know about you, but I've had enough of being exploited. You know who's got it made? Corporations. If companies can make money from my information, information that I generate just by being alive, then so can I. I've decided to play their game but with a little twist by bringing the whole process down to the individual by incorporating my identity. So my solution was to create a legal container that I could then try to collect and control my personal information from. And so I looked at the ways in which I emanated data all the ways and I went as far as I could to collect it. Here's just 25 data points showing the blinking red light is the heart rate and it shows everything that you can collect just from a phone and maybe a Fitbit or something like that. And so that allowed me to try and do that but also try to bring it to the market. So I cut it up into the categories that I saw we were being cut up into. But this was my provocation. This was a protest. It wasn't that this is where I think we should go. I was trying to say there's a value we're all creating and is this where we want to go? Where do we want to go? And so I started to think of alternatives because any protest needs a solution or a demand and I was thinking well if everybody had to become a personal corporation we need something more collective, a collective data broker and data unions. And eventually five years later this thinking brought me to meet other people such as Glenn Weil who wrote the book Radical Markets and Founded Radical Exchange and together we have been thinking about what these ideas would look like. And with many others we want to move beyond critiquing to actual alternatives. The ideas I'm going to present here there are two of them so one will continue with data and then I'm also going to talk about voting but there are ideas that we don't think that they're exactly those that need to be implemented but that hold a sense of the broader principles that we could implement. So we see data as what is created by us, its life. There are uniquely forming patterns of social commitments that we create through the variety of communities that we take part in and this weaves this web of social data that is vibrant and expanding and could be so much more if there was a different structure. So one part of a data dignified world is where this new type of institution so you still have a similar structure but at the top you have what we call mids mediators of individual data. And instead of these being for profit companies or they could be profit companies but they act like fiduciaries on the behalf of people where they can collectively bargain for us and sell our data that we deem is okay to sell that we agree and we decide and that money and services come back to us and it creates more of a closed loop system. Now to illustrate this further I'd like to give an example of Jane. Jane belongs to several mids. There's a music mid, a cooking mid, an energy mid and a health data mid. With the music mid she is a musician and so it's something like Spotify but she actually is a member of it. It's not a C corporation or a private company. And so she makes music, she receives some income from that and there are listeners who pay a subscription but also receive some income from their data analysis and then there are programmers that keep developing the platform. Then when she's cooking she has some bots and technology in the environment and it's kind of like having a child in the room in the kitchen with her where she's teaching it what she's doing, what ingredients are and what are the methods that we eat and cook. Now I want to move on to another idea. This is the second idea of voting. When we have large populations like we have especially in China with many different interests one person, one vote starts to break down and so we're working on this idea that comes from again Glenn Wilde who wrote a paper back in 2014 with Eric Posner and more recently we've been working with Santiago Ciri of Democracy Earth to create an interface and it's called quadratic voting and how it works is instead of having one person, one vote you get a number of credits. So say you get 100 credits and you have 10 decisions to vote on. Every vote is a quadratic cost of the credits. So if you have one vote, you spend one token. If you want to vote twice on something, the same thing, you have to spend four and if you want to vote three times you have to spend nine credits. And what's really important is that it slows you down, it slows the process down. It makes you think about what really matters because if you want to yell as much as you want around one issue you can do that but it's going to cost you and it's not going to matter as much. So it's to incentivize spreading out what you care about. And it was used recently in Colorado. The legislature, the Democratic legislature used it to vote on their spending bill which they had $40 million to spend on 120 million in requests. So they were also voting anonymously and privately and they received more nuance in what people felt and the representative said there was better signal with less noise and they were able to capture people's intensity on what mattered to them. So now again, these are just a couple of the ideas and designs and like I said earlier, it's not exactly about these designs. These are ways to start getting you to think broadly, move past the problems, move past the critiquing and going over and over again and thinking about alternatives. Some of the other ideas that we're working on relate to moving beyond private property, to diversely shared property, to a novel approach with public funding, again a quadratic way of finance and other means of increasing returns for fair, efficient and complex ways. And we aren't the only ones hungry for change. Just in a year we have 150 chapters around the world. There's a few starting in China just this week. And together they're committed to embracing markets and technology to build bold visions that reflect our diversely shared lives. And we believe that together we can be more prosperous and things can be more efficient and that we could grow our cooperative society. So I want to end this on a deep Chinese philosopher's words that capture a bit the spirit of what we believe. I don't know how to say this in Chinese, I'm sorry. Xiling Zhang is the philosopher. And so this is closed. This is open. Together they make flapping wings and these two together are leads to change. So like the Chinese culture that the interaction of the yin, the moon, the yang, the sun, the dong which is motion and jing motionless are the push and pull that create new things. And this is what we are striving for. Thank you very much.