Update from IIW.  Here are the notes that Neil Thomson took in the session that he and Darrell O'Donnell ran at recent IIW 35

Darrell brought up a series of topcis, new to topic, about 20 people including some heavy hitters, many will be looing at the notes and as an 'unoffical steal'!  No big gaps, turning minds to blocking or mitigating.  How do we make it easy for people to make the right choices.?  What kind of message do we want to send to technical thinking.  Receptive overall to incorporating thinking but not much certainty as to what that looks like at that point.  Need to make it clear to policy makers, but you cannot hope that the tech will solve, the tech alone cannot overcome the harms. 

Phil Wolff concerned that there is a gap between very technical principled idea of how this should work and everything that happens downstream. Separated by time, jurisidiction, etc, very difficult to imagine that this has any kind of negative externality.  Not obvious, and if they do see it why is it my concern vs others' concern

Neil Thomson commented that there is definitely a tension to make it usable but at what point do you want to protect the tech that is useful without constraining the tech itself.

Phil Wolff suggested a list of harms and countermeasures that is very specific as an appendix.  Christine Martin suggested a good idea.

Neil Thomson suggested a companion document with existing mitigations and other suggestions.  Very precise definition of harms.

Phil Wolff commented that first had to get community buy in to the fact of negative externalities, then we are inviting others to participate in harms work, quantifying risk and growing knowledge.  Processes fro quantifying risk and being accountable need to include human harms.  Not walk through the architecture, but an agreement that this is a necessary process.  Concensus that there is a problem is the call to action from this paper.

Neil Thomson consensus from Canada is also starting on things like filtering for those under 18 years.

follow up at next IIW requested.  

Terms Wiki is done -  https://github.com/trustoverip/hxwg/wiki, forced to be much more specific about the terms that we use, and should have been done before the public version.  IE the glossary in the pdf version is not correct.

Paper is in PDF version

md version is under development. Definitely talk to Andor/Anti. Can help get in github properly

md version now complete in folder ready for github, Elisa Trevino is going to help Nicky with github.

Blog for development is here:  Phil also has written Negative Externalities and will add to blog - this is an excellent approach No.1 = Houston we have a problem!

Phil Wolff has already added some things, and Pyrou Chung has offered to contribute.

Jill suggested a set of guiding principles to support designers and implementers because environment is changing so quickly, we can easily test these principles.  Can we find principles also with diverse examples of their application.  EG Bills of Rights, Hippocratic Oath applies almost everywhere and accepted.

Common values = challenge - e.g. strict Muslim vs freedom from persecution for sexuality.

Comes back to ethics - gets embedded in politics and legal views.  EG Jill lived in many countries, how do you form that common bond = Family.

Depends on environment, context.  Recognition that application of principles in the context in which it sits.  EG China, see chinese first then British or Australian second, speaks to a fundamental view of how they view their identity.  So e.g. in Australia, must give up your Chinese PP to become an Australian national.  Chinese Gov imposes rules not Australian. Analogous with tudor period Catholic vs Protestant/Anglican. Can't have 1st master as Pope, consider purgatory, links are similar today - e.g. soul=land for indigenous people, very different approach to the land in Western mindset.

APO suggested by Jill  https://apo.org.au/ once paper is ready could be useful to add to this resource.  If in different state, what needs to happen?  Would open up to many others.  Read by gov and industry.  Could be a way to promote to a broader audience. 

Get researchers together to bring our next steps for research - going deeper on wicked problems.  Theoretical and practical contribution is needed.  Where does it fit into theoretical vs practical thinking. Identify the nutty issues, then find PhD students to explore in depth. Also on the ground studies.  Maybe working to build a student/researcher community to bring others together.

Jill's extensive and thorough commentary is here. can serve as a basis for next steps on research side

.

Nicky Hickman to outline checklist document

Nicky wanted to publicly acknowledge Phil Wolff 's enormous contribution to this paper, would not have happened without him.

Target Monday for publication date to accommodate Thanksgiving. 

Nicky to coordinate with Judith to arrange open event - for inclusion in blog post for call to action.  Join us - specific topic to review harms and strategies together and figure out next steps as an organisation/ community.