 nice to meet you very nice meeting you uh fang has yet to arrive yes uh he got delayed somehow i guess but okay it's fine uh so that's in the end you and i can meet and then he can join that's right that this is the co-working space yeah it is okay i'm sure she'll love it i mean this looks pretty oh it decorated yeah yeah it's uh very hipster it's like uh it's not a normal co-working space it's like uh for artists and so forth but it's it's cute it is cute i'll just grab some coffee and this is our administration building as you can see it's also kind of hipster you get business origami you get any number of post-it notes it's shaped very much like a co-working space but not a rc one uh we have another office that's the more artsy one so so yeah let's get started because i have maybe an hour or so yeah sounds good okay so so yeah first thank you for for making the time no thank you for making the time right and um i mean we can talk about a million subjects but i'm most interested in qv uh and and and so what what i mean i've read the paper uh and i've talked with quite a few um people interested in implementing the idea from the social financing side as well as from the public donation side as well as from the extracting promise out of mayor is promising to do to not do something within their term side um and and so on so i mean just for the sake of benefit of the readers and viewers of this recorded video um would you like to outline some of the main ideas and topics that you you're personally now working on our focused and then we can yeah so so um around quadratic voting the thing that we are most interested in is first of all um the idea of having a democratic system that allows minorities to protect themselves rather than uh to have bureaucrats or judges or something like that being in charge of protecting minorities by giving every citizen an equal budget of what we call voice credits that they allocate to support or oppose issues and candidates that they most strongly favor or oppose but not allowing people to just be extremists and dominate an issue because it would become increasingly expensive to have more influence on an issue the more influence that you have uh so that's the quadratic nature and um this can be applied to uh voting situations it can be applied by politicians to poll to figure out positions that might form a legitimate basis for legitimate public decision making it can also be used for funding so if you want to fund local public goods Vitalik Buterin and I worked on a variant of this idea we're rather than it just being a way of voting you would actually have public matching funds that could be given to different local projects or even say to media and individuals could make contributions and the amount that would be received by the say the charitable cause or the candidate or whatever would be the sum of the square would be the sum of the square roots all squared and so what that would mean is that smaller contributions would receive more matching funds from the public and causes that had received contributions from more people would also receive more matching funds so it's a way of overcoming the usual free writer problem where when you have public projects people don't want to individually contribute to them because they would only do it if other people would go along with them so um I've been working on all of those um and uh we've been thinking about applications for everything from funding news media because you know it's not usually well funded just really private means but on the other hand you don't really want the government funding it because it could control the media and undermine democracy um and everything from that to um you know making decisions in local councils and uh at the same time we've also been working on these sort of identity solutions that would be necessary to support a system like that because it requires a notion of different voters and if you don't want that to all be done by some central government authority approving people to participate we've been working on identity solutions as well that's great thank you for the summary who came up with the monica liberal radicalism if I may ask uh me and zoe hit sig okay it's it's excellent thank you right so um if I say I'm a person interested in participating uh in crowdfunding you just mentioned I'm a regular um donating or actually funding uh person on patreon uh and now Kickstarter has introduced a new drip I'm sure that you're aware of many other such platforms and of course Kickstarter is a b-corp supposedly that they drive their social purpose and so on but nowadays we're also seeing quite a few because the technology is out there now quite a few what we call platform cooperatism or with any other name but people are basically putting up their own crowdfunding distributing schemes upon open collectives and other open co-op movements so are you aware of any of these adopting qv I mean from any user perspective I think that's probably what makes the most sense to have the first experience in yeah so um there's a donation platform on ethereum called we trust that actually put a hundred thousand dollars or 500 eth behind matching funds for uh liberal radicalism for donations to charity and there's also a lot of different mostly ethereum based platforms that have been using quadratic voting for various governance things everything from regulating um the process of electing people to do block making within a permissioned system that is used for doing import export regulatory compliance to um commercial real estate developments that are tokenizing real estate and that are governing some of the choices about how to invest the community resources using this mechanism that's yeah there's a there's a wide range of different projects like that so starting this month if you get to spring that we trust IO you can actually have the first experience of qv exactly you found yes so um but I mean I just looked at uh the uh there's the usual suspects such as the Mary and the sense research um how yes uh and which one second yeah sure funds are okay Jerry's phone here hi hi how are you doing no worries Audrey's on the line so we should just jump jump in because she is being recorded here you can come in and you can close the door and you have to actually do this to get it to stay close all right sorry okay now it's me and fun here together hi hello hello no problem it's just fine take your time uh grab something this is very RC hipster place I wish I'm here yeah it is a very hipster yes so yeah I was just looking at this so functions for context uh I'm looking through this um crowdfunding website that is currently applying Glenn's idea of what we called a qv or quadratic voting and here is the um can you see my screen yeah okay so this is basically a matching donation scheme now through giving Tuesday uh and for this month they're matching based on the liberal radicalism idea which uh Glenn just explained kindly for our viewers in short it basically says if you have a lot of money or if you can mobilize a lot of people to donate small amount of money each it's going to be roughly the same by taking the square roots of each donation and matching them accordingly and there's the usual suspects miri sense the ubuntu foundation joining this um crowdfunding experiment I would say but there's also uh African advocacy network as well surgeons of hope and the more traditional charities and of course some the people in between like code for America which I'm not surprised at all as being listed here and so I was just about to ask Glenn how do you how do you think is the synergy between the different uh projects here because one of the underlying assumption in the qv idea is that projects themselves um compete somewhat for resources so that the I wouldn't say winner takes all but the most well known charities or most well known causes or most well known participatory budget items or whatever dominates the resource kind of in a uh network effect increasing returns uh fashion uh and qv is designed to kind of mitigate that so taking this very concrete example of quite a few people funding the the lupus foundation uh and at the moment not much at all um at the African advocacy network how does it help well one one property that qv absolutely does have is that in the in this particular formula the more people that are contributing to something the more the effect of a marginal dollar you contribute on that particular one but on the other hand unlike sort of purely majoritarian schemes um it's not like that's predetermined it's not like oh you have to just vote for one thing instead the notion is you could give a little bit of funding to some things more funding to others uh etc and so the notion is that it should allow sort of for an optimal balance between you not wanting things to be too fragmented because people feel they can freeride on the things that already have momentum and on the other hand things being uh too concentrated because like the democratic process just leads whatever the majority prefers to win right but i mean does it require a overview effect of the current budget situation or do you think that it can also work in an uncoordinated fashion where people just make individual choices i think you do need to have probably some view of what the current funding levels are and you actually saw that on that site they make it pretty transparent what the current funding levels are so that's helpful for the users right so it requires a period of time and just like participatory budgeting actually but instead of dot voting uh you have dots that grow or shrink based on how many dots you you spent on a particular item um so have you actually um visualized this because when i see the spraying we trust i don't see any visualization of the shrinking dots if you know what i mean yeah i haven't come up with a really compelling visualization of it but in some of the articles online i believe there's one where they show this kind of cool diagram which shows i don't know if you saw this one but they show little blocks stacked on top of each other by their height and then that's very very cute yes and so then anything with the same height but then the volume of them shows how much actually comes from the contributions relative to how much comes from the matching so the matching is like sort of the right hand side and the blocks width is how much comes from the private contributions so i thought that was a smart visualization of it oh yeah that's a great visualization so just just think that you have any number of square votes really and that's you can you can buy areas but the areas is going to count toward their height i think that's a beautiful beautiful thing um actually that applies to circles also right it doesn't have to be squares or another thing you can apply it to is is a funnel so imagine like a you have like a triangle and you pour your liquid into the triangle and how high it gets determines how much value there gets you see what i mean yes of course yeah so so and it ties very well with the idea of the the experiment actually that's that's going on because it's a spring right so you can have spring that goes into a funnel and it's all very water commons based yeah liquid solutions okay that's great so i wish people watching this video will volunteer some visualizations because we have real data now and the spring we trust is on the the chain right it's on on ethereum so anyone can take the public chain data and do cool amazing visualizations yeah all right so um fun would you like to quickly introduce yourself to our viewers and and so so that we can we can chat more freely i'm sure right afterwards but it's just i have maybe only 40 minutes after this so so we can maybe switch from topic to topic yeah yeah sure so yeah and my name is phong and i'm a service design consultant at pittis great so i am one of audrey's agenda is open government so i help facilitate the mechanism which is called present participation officers network it's a network of 70 severe servants across 34 ministries yeah and we hope to use that mechanism to cut across the governmental silos and help people to work towards different issues more openly and creatively not just within the circle but also onto the wider stakeholders it sounds a little bit like what at microsoft we call the office of the chief technology officer it's like one office that's allowed to cut across everything and facilitate collaboration yeah great that's radical horizontalism for you yeah yes um and uh and phong helped build this network of people um and each ministry can have a team of people and at a moment we're still using old school approval voting uh to pick every month what's topic of priority to work on uh and because they come from e petition you can also think of it as a kind of approval voting uh where at anytime anyone can decide to counter sign a petition to raise their priority about which that we take a interest in looking at and at a moment in taiwan there's 23 million people and uh e petition network uh online is being used by five million people so one quarter of the population which is not too bad uh and people just um counter sign each other and we have some machine recommendation algorithm like a netflix or amazon uh that recommends similar interested petitions but it's also of course for budgeting visualization regulation pre announcement participatory budgeting on the city level so it's an all-in-one participation platform and so um the the way it works is that whenever there's anything that receives five thousand signatures over uh two months period gets a view uh from all the participation officers and they can explain and defend whether it needs a cross ministry or collaboration and then we do a approval uh voting anonymously on it and then we select two cases every month to collaborate on but each and everyone that reached the five thousand people threshold automatically gets um a binding power to basically being interviewed being talked with by the stakeholders and publish the full um transcript of the conversation and get a point by point response within two months uh from the respective ministry so that's one of the more successful uh direct democracy ish experiments that we do and it's been working pretty well because people essentially when they're petitioning have unlimited number of votes uh and they are somewhat authenticated through sms and so it's difficult to get five thousand sms numbers as you know and so that's the system that we're currently working on i'm just as as you were talking about this crowdfunding idea i was just wondering uh how qv or a similar um design can can help but it seems like when it's just a general setting or priority setting uh and it's not allocation of resources it's kind of um okay to use approval voting now well i think approval voting is better than some systems but i would prefer a qv based system because what i'd like people to be able to express is the same thing that they in other cases express through a protest so when you get it in protest it's a more costly action than just signing a petition but it shows that something's very important to you and so but not everyone likes to protest not everyone likes to be out in public so i'd like a more private way for people to do that so if every citizen had a budget of credits and they could say this issue is incredibly important to me maybe only you would need 300 things like that but if you would need 10 000 or 15 000 if people just say well i'm interested but i don't really care right so at the moment for example at any given moment uh the joint platform may have 100 petitions going on uh and truth truth is that maybe uh after two months only five of them will get the five thousand people threshold that's that's the situation the reality we're now facing so what you're proposing essentially is that um if you can get any number like 500 people feeling that this is really important for some definition really important so much so that they are willing to forsake their capability of petitioning for that particular month on any particular issue any other issue they dedicate their petition resource so to speak on this issue then it only takes you know a square root of our current threshold to basically pin it into our must respond board and the number is going to be very low it's going to be 70 per people basically yeah and conversely like you know you you said you have these recommendation things there might be some people who just are having fun and on the website they click on one and then they follow the recommendation they click on the other and they don't even think anything about it right and those things you might want to require 10 000 or 15 000 such signatures in order to respond because they're not really driven by passion they're driven you know depth of importance they're just driven by entertainment you know what i mean and so you want to have some way of measuring that and the ideas that quadratic voting could help you do that right so from a interface or experience design perspective because we have a professional experience designer here how would that even work i mean medium says you know if you're just passing by you just click on claps it's one each but if you feel really strongly you can keep holding that clap button and it will grow in number would you recommend some interface like that or do you have something else in mind i actually i quite enjoy that medium interface i think it's pretty good i mean i think i think it would be better to have some sort of a token if you can build the infrastructure that's necessary for that but obviously that requires a more persistent identity than just an sms code right so that's the disadvantage of it but i think if you can do that then people don't have to spend so much time holding down the clap you can just reveal it through how they spend the scarce resource right so it would be like a slider or something yes fun was yeah you just raised a very important point like how can we distinguish um if the vote is really valuable yeah am i passionate about that or am i just doing this for entertaining and the question is how can we tell what are the criteria that we can set up to evaluate that well i can show you what it looks like for quadratic voting it might help you see it i can give you a nice um user space let me see whether i can let's do the screen share thing yeah i just need to get my bra i'm using brave to get it here we go what the right address is okay uh it's going to take me a little while to get the website up because i need to find it can you grab my phone from there yeah i just uh i don't have the address yeah i don't have the address saved on right here so sorry yeah the advantage of brave is that it doesn't remember everything that you've ever done but the disadvantage of brave is that it doesn't remember everything that you've ever done so uh okay there we go right it's okay uh it's it's more human uh it proves we're not all exo core texas exactly okay there we go and now i'm in a screen share um here we go did you get it well yes um uh that's great okay so you have a hundred credits left and here are various referenda which you could vote in favor of or against so an immediate tax cut for wealthy individuals and corporations let's say we're opposed to that we put one credit on that background requirements for all gun purchase let's say we're in favor of that but we actually are strongly in favor so we want to put more than one vote on it so you see my votes are going down faster and faster as i put more and more votes on it you see what i mean whereas if i put just one vote on that it just goes very quickly so this measures how much you care about it yeah by making it increasingly expensive to have more votes so that you'll buy votes just up to the point where you care enough yeah and then that will be proportional the number of votes that you've already bought sure and in regards to those you can touch the screen yeah yeah who are those people who set up the the the statements well in this case this was a poll that we did for a political candidate in the united states but um in general it doesn't have to be that it could be actually citizens proposing these things and then once they cross the 5000 you know vote threshold they could be allowed sure yeah so far i do have any thoughts about how applicable or where it could be applicable in our process because i'm very eager to prototype it yeah i think this is a very good idea and i think this also reflects to our conversation earlier last week we talked about when you propose certain things the stage before it is noticing raising awareness yeah yeah and because when you want to propose something it depends on your allocation of attention yes your allocation of attention based on the information uh you receive right and also the people you interact with right but what if um your encode chamber is limited so it prevent you from seeing the um the people's view from other sites even within the same topic yes and i see this is a very uh dangerous move towards proposal so why would like to talk a little bit more is a step before like how can we make sure that we got democratic discourses yeah sorry sorry to shut down i don't know what happened no it's just fine so what i was gonna say is that the voting mechanism itself can help shape the incentives people have to get information under quadratic voting having very extreme opinions is very expensive to do having more moderate opinions is cheaper so the hope and unlike in match standard voting if you take somebody who you really disagree with and you cause them to disagree a little bit less even if you don't completely change their mind that still makes a difference in political outcomes so that creates an incentive for people to talk to more diverse sets of people rather than just the people who they could have a chance to get to truly agree with them you see what i mean when you say it's expensive well it because it becomes more the cost of the votes goes up the more votes that you get yeah in terms of the units of the credits that i was just showing yeah so so i don't think that the voting mechanism itself can solve all these problems of course education is hugely important but i do think that the voting mechanism can help create an environment where the incentives are aligned with that and and it can actually be pretty powerful because if you think about it you know the founders of the american republic they didn't want a two-party system but they created a set of incentives created a two-party system in spite of themselves right because once you have plurality vote one first pass the post it creates a two-party system right and so i think that some of these incentives can filter back into the way that the politics is organized and the process can be part of the noticing as well yeah yeah that's also true that's a very good point which is that actually one thing we found when we use this survey with people is that because they have a constraint and they have to make these trade-offs we often get comments from people that they learned a lot about their own preferences they didn't realize that they cared so much more about this thing than the other thing until they had to actually make the trade-off between them yeah so so just to follow up on that very quickly because when you talk about trade-offs the interface you just showed has upvotes and downvotes that kind of cancel each other out and the crowdfunding experiments the spring is entirely upvote only yeah it carries no notion of compensation right and so are there tangible differences in both mathematics and also in psychology when you design things in a upvote downvote kind of way versus an upvote only way yeah no absolutely so it's it's there's complicated trade-offs between those on the one hand if you have downvotes you have the possibility of censorship that may not be desirable you also have the possibility um yeah so so i think that that's that's a problem it's also can be a little bit more complicated for people but without downvotes if you have things that are genuinely harmful for example a petition that might be hate speech or directed targeted against some group in the population it's actually quite important that you allow downvotes on that as well in order to try to limit the possibility of having potentially hateful perspectives right so it's like signal the you know blockers exactly okay i think that makes a lot of sense yeah in some politics for example this doesn't happen i don't think in the taiwanese system but in the united states there's often something that happens where a very a politician that's very not popular will do well not because they're popular but just because people are afraid of the other alternative and if you could vote negatively on the other alternative that issue wouldn't show up i see i see well that's that's a powerful argument right there um i'd like to show you the uh real interface of petitioning that we are talking about because i think that will uh help massively and that's something that foundry can carry on in the conversation afterwards um so this is machine translated but uh very quickly just to give you an idea uh for example there is someone who's marry x who we know the sms number but we don't reveal it they don't have to be under a real name they can be a pseudonym uh so it's quite like israelian voting uh in this sense i see um they can choose a nickname basically but that's consistent over time there's an identity but that is not mapped into a real identity only that we know there's a sms number behind it okay um and then um they proposed to amend the provision of our public service leave rules um at a moment of petition it was at least half a day for each vacation but they wanted to changed into by hour which by the way takes takes effect this week so i took an hour off yesterday i succeeded yes right it's a successful petition uh and as you can see um there's a timer that says two months within the timer there has to be 5000 signatures and this check passed and the response is done and there's an agency response in each and every uh step um which uh and you can see the supporting argument of each person participating um but of course nobody has the time to read through the 5000 um people's commentaries they used to be foundry's uh largest headache uh in reading through those 5000 um people's commentary uh because sometimes people just you know copy and paste to whatever mobilize them to to counter sign the petition sometimes people just write a lot that has no relationship whatsoever with the petition just text analysis that can help you process that that's right so instead of doing text analysis we just did crowdsourcing so this is the actual interface now that saves foundry a lot of time um basically we have two columns uh underneath every petition that people can uh basically post their supporting arguments on the left hand column and um not exactly counter but other arguments on the right hand column uh and so basically what we're now doing uh is something that is out of the playbook of betterecavik i don't know whether you know the Icelandic experiment from the better party um and so the betterecavik has the same design uh and we took a page by not actually showing um the bars in a proportional to their number of comments because that only encouraged spam and nothing really nothing good happens but so you can see there's 46 supporting arguments and 11 counter arguments and then uh you each one can receive any number of upvotes and downvotes of course there's a flag button for truly hate speech stuff but otherwise we just sort but uh we discovered very early on of course exactly as you mentioned although it takes the troll away because they cannot really reply to anything right there's no reply button so there's no incentive to attack people still um people just you know casually um uh use downvotes to kind of censor um the good arguments um and so we changed the rule now that we take the absolute number of either the upvotes or downvotes so this one having more downvotes actually um makes this show on the top that's interesting so i think this is another area where something like quadratic voting could be interesting because it could make it costly to just censor but on the other hand it could allow you to flag borderline hate speech you know what i mean like that you don't have time to actually investigate and so forth so i think i think that's another potentially interesting thing and in principle you could even unify the two systems together and say that both the signatures of the petitions and the up and downvotes for the arguments could be part of a unified system like you can cost some credit uh to to download something slightly or you can cost some credit to add a supporting argument and it's it's the credit pool uh everybody receive a new every month and then uh it's used basically just to sort the signals not the substantial deliberation which will happen afterward according to found some roadmap yeah exactly so so that's the um that's what we call them voice credits as we think voting is a sort of voice arguments or a sort of voice all these things are sorts of voice and we'd like to have a token that can represent a currency for that voice rather than just a currency for buying things so but but why voice credits instead of voice tokens or whatever because credits is more fungible more square roots no it's just it's just a different word for the same thing okay so so you don't have an attachment to um the the name in fact i wouldn't even call it credits they're just called voice like you know you can just think of it as a unit and in fact we in in the book we use to denote uh the like currency marker rather than like a dollar sign we use a voice bubble ah okay like literally it also literally a speech bubble yeah exactly like like uh what like this one the speech bubble yes except it has it going to the right hand side so it looks a little bit like a queue and so that's like quadratic you know what i mean oh this is this is very cute um yeah so um the gov zero movement um which i'm a a part of um yeah you used to have the first version of its logo shaped like this uh yes exactly that's exactly what ours looks like too okay wow it's interesting independent invention um and um of course we we eventually shifted uh to to this logo just because everybody types gqv the tw when looking at this logo exactly for us that's good gqv government like quadratic voting maybe you should revive you should revive the original one but for a different purpose well i mean i i still have the domain named gqv the taiwan so um it's currently unused i'm happy to donate that to your purpose okay well and i think the v here um which is the shape of a vote uh really actually carries the the idea of quadratic voting also right because it's basically a stamp approval on what um your voice matters like and we can make the dot here you know um proportional exactly as you visualize so this original logo has some uses yay for recycling like it all right another very interesting residence uh that i wanted to mention is that you know many of these ideas in the book um came from someone named william vickery william vickery was a famous economist uh who won the nobel prize and most of his ideas were based on the work of another economist named henry george and henry george has a very deep relationship to taiwan i bet most people in taiwan don't know about it but um george inspired the ideas of sun yat sen uh almost as much as carl marx inspired the ideas of lenin and so there are many elements of policy in taiwan which actually come from the ideas of henry george yes like the least bad tax yeah exactly exactly yes and so uh the book is very connected to these ideas of henry george and uh yeah taiwan scandinavia and singapore the countries that have been most influenced by those ideas so there's a natural affinity i think mm-hmm yes uh i think aside from single tax which is less related um there's also the idea of the citizen's uh dividend i think that's also a george idea and the secret ballot and the secret ballot was introduced into the united states by henry george ah okay right so so i think all of these are very relevant nowadays because we're essentially building a code-based normativity around the same ideas that is uh legal by design instead of by interpretation right uh in george's time it would have to have a lot of um post-fact interpretations and negotiations and whatever to make the system that he designed actually work as intended instead of as people uh you know just uh randomly interpreted to be but but nowadays we get to code these algorithms into code so but a communication effort of course is the most important that we can find the intuitive interface that makes people get it and so that it becomes the social norm and then we compile that into code so that yeah that's the most important thing is that there's a notion of social legitimacy around the ideas and and that's the reason why what we're trying to do with these ideas is not just to go to government bureaucrats but very much like the uh approach you're taking of trying to be open and communicate with the public and engage them because we believe that ultimately these ideas will be successful if and only if they are able to become part of people's widespread notion of legitimacy because if they don't do that then they're imposed by a state and they'll be rejected and if they do do that then anything that the state does will have to follow that because otherwise people will be upset right and so that's why rather than taking the usual economist approach if we just talk to the central bank we just talk to the IMF instead what we're trying to do is actually build a social movement we have dozens of clubs all around the world um that are forming around these ideas we're working with entrepreneurs to experiment with them we're talking to folks like you who can try experimenting with them in participatory democracy we want things that are not just experiments but experiments that people ordinary people can feel and can get a sense for and can come to incorporate into their notions of what's fair so instead of fighting the system fighting the existing reality you're building a new model that eventually makes the existing model obsolete which is the Buckminster Fuller quote that Fenrir always uses in her slides okay that's great I'm happy to donate to your cause starting with the GQV domain we can see where it goes from that well I hope you can also participate and we're gonna have a conference in Detroit in in March and we'll be in touch with you about that we'd love to have you participating in it and to find any place where you can experiment and collaborate with us on experimenting with these things I think that would be very exciting for all of us but that that's awesome I mean March is parliamentary inquiry period but I have a way of appearing through telepresence robots double robotics holograms and the source and so I'm happy to virtually be there and there's also a very quick prototyping system that we work with the cup zero movement called v Taiwan basically every Wednesday anyone can come up with an idea of saying oh how about let's do an experiment this way and everybody just kind of tags alone like literally I think two this week's experiment is the social physics tags from Sandy from Alex Ventland yeah and and I mean it also is a voice credit voice token so to speak because it only measures the volume of your voice and the voice is not strictly speaking quadratic if you count the distance but in any case yes it shows the proximity and how loud people are speaking and how much attention they're monopolizing so to speak and so we can distribute it more fairly in a physical space even if the physical space has its own attenuation parameters we can change those parameters so it's almost like speculative well it's very interesting what you say because actually the one inspiration for us calling it voice credits is the physical voice because in ancient sparta um wait the way that they used to do the vote was to try to incorporate intensity of preference they allowed people to shout in favor or shout against it's a little bit like the clapping thing you were saying and whichever side shouted louder in total based on what you could hear would win the vote and it's it's inverse square right yeah sort of yeah okay but it has some similarities except of course it privileges people who happen to be able to shout right yes and and also I imagine people who stand in a more strategic position yes that's true as well yeah yeah so yeah I mean one of the things that we did in virtual reality is attenuation design so now right now with Skype of course everybody here like it's just two of us so we hear us and equally but one of the experiments we did in virtual reality is to change the position by having people physically walk toward the position they take and then change the attenuation factors and and because it's virtual reality you see so you can normalize people's input voice level to the same level but but then your position determines the sound dissipation and so that's one of the interesting experiments but I can go on and on but what I mean is that it's very easy to prototype new ideas including QV in the VTHA one meetups and even the national petition mechanism if we can find there's a beta version there's a beta website and so you we can also test this dynamic out on the beta website anyway we tried on the beta site for a year for the visualization of the budget of the entire national budget of more than 1300 actually governmental projects and because the ministries in charge were kind of afraid that if they let everybody literally see the relative budget allocation and how it's being executed and all the 1300 cases that they will be swamped with comments and so we only tried an initial pilot with 65 national priority projects before we let people see that actually responding publicly has a lot better properties because for things like social housing which everybody cares about how well we're doing and how exactly which procurement and spendings went on people won't waste each other's time they will actually ask quality questions and once you respond to them fully and in public everybody just found them through search engines and respective authorities don't have to pick up phones each one not knowing 550 people have asked this particular question before so it saves everybody time over time but I'm amortized but in the beginning we have to put it on the beta stage to show to the competent authorities in all the different thirty four ministry that this is going to be a time saver another time was there for them and I think that's a great idea yeah so I think the station I would love to do something like that with QV and you know if you guys have relevant developers and you can do it on your own that would be great and we're happy to consult but also there's now a whole movement we have hundreds of people who are organized around these ideas probably thousands and in the ethereum community and different communities and we'd be happy to find people to collaborate with you if you need support in trying to build a prototype oh yeah like free energy that's great yes absolutely just let us know and we'll we'll connect you to people who would be interested in being engaged right so um yeah I just the last thing I want to show is that this is the official participation uh platform including municipalities the corrective and auditing agency and of course an administration of taiwan is enjoying the gov that tw uh and um if you change the o to a zero as its customary to the gov zero movement you get into the shadow government which is joined the g0v the tw and anyone can just leave their email address there and join the slack channel on the g0v movement at at moment I think it's four thousand people or so uh and uh yeah I'm happy to to donate join the gqv the tw and see what you guys can come up with uh and basically prototype the joint gov tw system with a reimagination of the qv system and we'll see how far we can take from that that sounds great so we'll we'll follow up maybe by email and find the best way to coordinate collaboration okay and it's time for me so uh I will leave you more time and thank you for this hour long chat and I'll just help though everything to youtube to help spreading the cause I really appreciate it thanks so much and if anyone is watching it is interested in being involved we're working on this in taiwan um the movement's called radical exchange and you can find me at glenn weill on and twitter and uh we can be in contact okay thank you so much uh and uh enjoy your time in this wonderful r&c hipster co-working space take care of you bye