 And we're back. Hey, can everybody hear me? Or can anybody hear me? We can hear you. Fantastic. Great. So here we are at much of this breakout meeting was not broadcast, just as we were getting our stuff together. And I forgot to hit the button, my bad. But just as a quick catch up, I think we went through the personal data stuff already, and we decided to consolidate the meetings. For the next couple, after Thanksgiving and after Thanksgiving and one in December, I will have emailed out to everybody in the legal forums, and we've got close to 1,000 people now, all told, that are signed up. So we should have a lot more people that want to play, and then we'll take it from there. So right now, we're going through this document with Marcy, who is our fearless leader of computational law. There we go. I don't know if you can see that, and I'm helping to take some notes. So I think what we'd said, Marcy, just to go backwards a little bit and get what we said is, let's stick with Kristoff's plan to start with and note ideas to change. And then the other thing was have a design charrette among principles, which is us and Kristoff and probably Sandy of MIT, and probably first of Harvard Law and maybe Roland of Stanford if they are in two, BTC, at around time of computational law course second week of January at MIT Media Lab, where, by the way, a number of you are already on the schedule to say a few words, including you Marcy. OK, so that's one thing, and then what was the other stuff that we were talking about? Can you maybe take the helm? And then just remind me of the things we said, and then maybe just lead us through the rest of the open questions. Sure. So it's great to think about getting in a room and brainstorming a lot of the details in January, but just kind of as a structure to kick off. We were starting to talk about potential collaborators and other projects that are going on that we want to learn from, potentially that this project is compatible or even a potential partner with some of those existing projects. So some of the questions we've already addressed that you've dropped into the notes, including the structure of the competition, which will be more of a challenge in working, as Christoph laid out in the original plan with MIT students. So I know you've got part of the program getting planned for January. One of the things that I had dropped in there was a suggestion for potential sponsors. Not that could be as data partners or hardware partners or also financial partners, but the companies that are working on Smart City products right now, whether it's Microsoft, GE, IBM, Cisco, et cetera, that all of these companies are going to potentially be interested in a model like the one that we were talking about that will show how this data can be used not just in quantifying, but also feeding back into the policy process, which I think is where it really starts to sing. And then other collaborators who are working on city-focused tech projects out there. We've talked about a few that came up in the last meeting, including Code for America's Brigade Network, Bloomberg's For What Works Cities initiative, City Innovate Foundation, which is out here in San Francisco. It's a vertical lab that combines federal, state, and local initiatives, and they've been working with a few cities across the country. Night Cities Project, which has been around for a long time, they fund a lot of pilot projects in the cities that they serve. I had never heard of Bill Gates Belmont Project, where he's apparently financing the building of a new Spartan City in Arizona. I just found out that JPMorgan Chase is actually working with. What line number in the shared markdown dot file is the Belmont Project, so I can get down to it? Good question. I'm not seeing a line. Maybe. Oh, I have to click a remark up. Let's see. Number 44. OK, cool, got it. So I'm going to put some notes in there. Great. And just found out, and I think this is probably really consistent with the work that Sandy's been doing on the open algorithm project, that JPMorgan Chase is starting to look at the data that they have from some of the cities, I think 13 cities across the country that they serve and spoke with a representative from there who was really interested in finding out more about this project. And then also, I put National League of Cities on there just because I think they would be a great resource and place where we should at least let them know what's up. And they may have suggestions as we start to look at which cities would make good pilot cities. They certainly could have some benefit there. And I just stumbled across this new publication that I think launched last week called Marketplace.City. It aims to be the Yelp for Smart City Products. And it's a new site, but it's looking to aggregate a lot of the information about smart city products and projects and what people are doing. OK, so question. Two questions, actually. One of them is, are you able to come, Marci? And then also, I know, Christian, you're doing a lot of stuff starting up some things. And are you able to come and do this design charrette either the day before or the day after the computational law course? And those days are, it's the second week. It could be the Monday or the Friday of the second week of January. If we hosted something at the Media Lab. I feel you. Let's see, I meant, see us through the 12th. And then right after that, I can come. OK, let's see. So that would be one. The 12th is Friday. Oh, that's the entire week. OK, well, I thought that the session was at the end of the month. I had it down to the 29th and 30th. That's OK, it's the 9th, 10th, and 11th. And the 20th and 30th was the October thing. So CES is, you're saying CES is the 9th, 10th, and 11th. Yeah, there may be some overlap with others, actually. OK, well, one thing we could potentially look at is doing it the third week instead of the second week. OK, we can talk offline about that. Right, because I think it'd be essential for this. Yeah, I would love to be there for that. OK. And then the second question was, Chris, is our ringer resident here with Legal Hackers for doing IDO style, like charrettes and facilitation techniques. And I was wondering, are you around in January? And would you be interested in helping to facilitate the computational law design challenge? Absolutely, that sounds like a great activity, our series of activities. We'll sit down and walk through which workshops we want to do. But yeah, we have our pick of the litter, and we can mix and match which things you think would work best for the stage that everyone's at for producing solutions and generating solutions. Perfect. OK, and then, Christian, what do you think of the idea of working with something like sovereign or some blockchain-pegged individual identity for individuals to work with a simulation or something? Is that realistic or unrealistic? Like should we default to an open ID connected anvil or something? No, it's definitely worth exploring the self-sovereign credentials, especially with sovereign. I think that's an interesting opportunity. I wouldn't be able to give you a 100% answer on the feasibility of it just yet, but it sounds good. OK, so here's what I'm doing. And tell me if this OK, Marci. But I want to, it's like, I guess, the putative note-taker at least. I'm going into the doc. And what if we said next steps, which actually can you help me with next steps? And then I was going to nominate a couple. So there's going to be like one and two and three that you have there. But one thing that we could talk about is evaluate readiness, value, and fit. Of blockchain-based ID for individuals. And then I'll just say sovereign. Other for a city test. And then the other one is develop a curated design session for January with principles. And then, Chris, can I put you in there, like Chris, to work with Marci? I think that's OK to actually come up with some ideas. Sorry, could you just clarify again what the outcome would be on line 25? Develop a curated design session up front. I love it. And then, Christian, can I basically put you down for helping to evaluate Christian to look and can we work together in that and collaborate with Daz on it? Is that OK? Yes. OK. OK. And then report back to group on November 30, I think, is our last one. OK. So there we go. OK, so what are the other next steps that we have to do, Marci? So I have a question about the selection of the city. And whether that's, I put it down as kind of a chicken and egg question. And given this pilot, the way that Chris often described initially was kind of that the cities would compete to be parts of the pilot, which that's one way to do it. And I think then, as a part of the charrette, we would be kind of laying out what the evaluation criteria would be for the city to be selected. Another way to do that might be if we had in mind kind of working backwards from what's available in particular cities, because some further along than others, as far as what they collect and how they standardize it and what can be opened and things like that. So that's something we want to talk about before January, or if that's something to really dig into at the January session. How about this, what if we said there's an item which is develop options for identifying and selecting cities, and I'll say see chicken and egg, an egg conundrum, chicken egg insight bullet, to be determined as part of agenda, making for the design session. Perfect. And then do you mind doing that? Can you write up the dilemma and let us respect how it could be that way? Yeah, that's fine. Do you want to work with somebody? That can be a part of talking with Chris about the design session. OK, but I feel like you're up for that, Chris. You're up special. Sorry, could you repeat? Just for figuring out how to select a city and what the criteria should be for a city for the pilot. Thinking that that's something that we may take through to the design session at the charrette, but maybe talking, kind of prepping what would go into that consideration beforehand might be something you and I could chat about. For sure. Yeah, we definitely want to have some informed assumptions around what the city is and what the needs are and things like that. So yeah, we should identify one or a few and then come up with some stats about it upon which everyone else could base their assumptions. Great. OK, I'm trying to find the schedule of the meetings here. I'm kind of striking out. I think it's, oh, here it is. Looks like it's December 7th. Is the next one, is that? Yeah. Is that appropriate timing? Is that realistic? OK. Is sooner better, later? Either works for me. I'm happy to talk sooner. OK, so what if we, there's a next step. You want to, could we say, like an offline working session to be scheduled by Marcy, is that all right? That sounds good. And then, Dada, just kind of taking a roll call of the working group. So is everyone on this call plus Elizabeth and Christoph is Antoni? Is that pretty much the working group or scheduling purposes? I think so. I think we probably missed some people, but I think it is. And then what I would suggest, I would say invite all on call November 16 plus Tony. Why? And who else did we forget? Oh, and Christoph. We should invite him or team Designee. And then what I was going to suggest is I can make another item here, which is Dada to invite somebody like, why don't we call this instead of the working group? What if we call this like a steering committee, if that's OK? So this would be like a steering committee. And then we would invite like a working group of all people involved, all of them in MIT legal forum and others who are good fit as part of next steps, email to the big list. Is that OK? Sounds good. You can feed back and help from this broader community. OK. Is there any other next steps? It's not necessarily next step, but it's something I just wanted to flag, which is I know that we're talking about all of this at a city level. I just wanted to flag that this week, actually, there were kind of some large steps taken in Congress. The evidence-based policy bill passed the House. And there's been a lot of the evidence-based, the first evidence-based policy commission put out. It's findings a few months ago, when there was a conference and a meeting to talk through next steps on that. And one of the things that emerged from that meeting was that data standards are the absolute kind of key that no one yet has and everyone wants. So I think what becomes so interesting in a pilot like this is being able to really think through data standards that might have applicability at lots of levels of jurisdiction. So I just think it's comforting to know that we're working on this in the context of a larger movement that really needs it. OK. How about this? If you look in there, it's your Dock on line 17. Yes. Like larger cohorts of cities to adopt a Dock or invent, as needed, found the road, something like that. Yeah. I think it's great context to keep in mind because of the use among cities or cohorts is a thank you. Thanks. People are leaving the thing I'm at and telling me where I can go. And it's going to help. Awesome. That's always a success. Oh, God, we're broadcasting, of course. So it's maybe common use among cities or stakeholders. Stakeholders, I might have stake later tonight, is a criteria for use in our test. Is that good? That's good. Common slash widespread. OK. Is there any other next step? I think you should take note of. There's one other piece that I just wanted to flag that I think may have come up in the session at Cambridge, or in Cambridge, and this kind of ties into the piece that you and Christian are working on with the identity. And that is that, and a lot of Sandy's work kind of looking at individual actions and behaviors. But I think one of the really cool opportunities of this project is the potential to look at policy impacts, not just based on how it impacts a budget or other kind of outside indicators, but how the policies are impacting individuals. And that's going to require solving that identity piece and helping people feel secure with their data being accessed and the use, et cetera. So that, I think, is one of the most exciting piece, that part of potentially getting that right and working with Sovereign and finding a way for individuals to allow their data to be used in this kind of a city pilot in a way that can be, that Christian can be happy and secure. I still have internalized his talk from the legal forum significantly. But I think that's a really exciting. You might be absolutely. Yeah, oh, I'm sorry. And the video's going, I'm almost done, though. Thanks, I'll come right over to you. That's great, that's really great. I wrote online 18. We need to give personal data sharing and ownership control, really some rights for this project. It is a challenge, an opportunity, and a privilege. How about that? There you go, that is extremely well put. And you want to know why it's a privilege? Because it's permission management, authorizations. It's privilege management, mate, come on. There you go. Anything else that we should note for next steps or anything? I think there's a lot here and a lot, especially a lot to address when we're finally all in the same room with the whiteboard. Yeah. Okay, great. Well, I look forward to, just as a reminder, as a roundup. So like next steps include, the Marcy's on the hook for, and I'll make it so it's highlighted. Marcy's on the hook to come up about the interest of selecting the city. Christian is on the hook to, and can work with Chris on that to some extent, and also with Daza. I'll put my name in there. I can help you think about some, like National Mayor's Conference or something like that. And then I'll put my name on the hook to take a look at the identity system and personal data system. I can help with that. We have Chris is on the hook and Marcy can help to come up with a facilitation and like a design workshop approach for our charrette in January. Then I am on the hook to include an invitation to the previous for MIT Legal Forum, of people that wanna work on a working group for next steps on this cool project. And I'll do that. And then offline Marcy is on the hook. Wait a second. Marcy to, not Marcy, Marcy to invite. You're on the hook to invite people to like just like a working session to kind of move along a bit between now and the next big meeting. And I guess the last thing is next big group steering meeting where maybe we can decide stuff is December 7th at 30 p.m. Eastern, 2.30 p.m. Pacific on NBC on Hangout. Perfect. Sounds awesome. Do we get reminders and things like that? Need little trinkets. Marcy, can you charge from now? Yeah, I can set that. I'll just set it up as a recurring thing on the calendar. Thank you so much. That's huge, life saver. And Ilan, I'm not sure I have your information. Can you tell me? Yeah, yes. Yeah, I can send you the information. I can help. I didn't say anything because I was, I'm from the SOBA group. I'm slightly, I guess, outside possible help, but I can lend a helping hand right now. I don't have any particular things on my schedule. So if you need me to do anything, just throw it my way. I'll text you my email information on the chat. Great. Thank you. Okay. Well then, Marcy, can you bring it home? I think it's all been written. This is fabulous. Thanks so much for taking notes, Daza. That's impressive. And we're four minutes over, even with technical difficulties. So, well done. Okay. Thanks. I suppose we stand adjourned. And thanks for helping Ilan and SOBA. See you soon. Thanks, everybody. No problem.