 My name is Charles Nesson, I'm the well-professor of Law at Harvard Law School and the founder of the Berkman Center. The answer is yes. That has been wonderful stimulation to it. But I'd say I started with the idea that the advent of the net creates an inflection point that changes the defaults. So for example, Zitron was talking about recording and my pension for keeping a record, basically laying down a digital track. And the differentiation that emerges in thinking about public and private is enabled by thinking of the recording as separate from the distribution. So in a sense what everyone's worried about about privacy in the digital world is moving from a world in which actions were not recorded into an environment in which digital actions are recorded. And the defaults changed and so privacy then becomes a challenge of coming to terms with the new environment. I felt the biggest insight for me came during Ethan Zuckerman's talk when he made the cycle from the protests in Tunisia around through the language barrier back down to be mirrored by the protesters in the social media to which they had access. And the insight that came from it was articulated by him as the viewpoint of the programmer who makes the tools that allows this to happen. I would first see privacy as a form of secrecy. Privacy and secrecy to me are quite the same. From the programmer's point of view as articulated in the conference, writing the program and controlling access for surveillance and access for privacy concerns, from the programmer's point of view the programming is the same. So from that side you start to see a kind of balance that has to do more with coming to terms with the new environment. In a sense we express our public identities earlier and earlier in life. The elder people fear for it but the youth embraces it. And of course they embrace the technology and for them the payoff is so much greater than the concerns for privacy that they see their elders quivering before.