WEBVTT 00:00.000 --> 00:10.240 It's time, everybody. It's time for the organizers panel, which is really the hot topics 00:10.240 --> 00:17.720 panel, which I'm thinking maybe we don't do next year. We'll do a feedback portion of 00:17.720 --> 00:25.520 this to like, if you were people like and don't like this year. All right, we're missing 00:25.560 --> 00:30.520 some organizers. We're missing an organizer. All right, we'll start with 00:30.520 --> 00:41.520 out Bradley. We can. We can. It's the end of the day. We're all totally exhausted. I 00:41.520 --> 00:46.520 think that the you should come on in a little closer so that we're all in the camera. 00:47.520 --> 00:57.520 No, we need this side is better. Yes. All right, so this is the time where usually the 00:57.520 --> 01:06.520 two for six of us, you know, reflect on some of the topics that were raised during the day 01:06.520 --> 01:11.520 and talk about some of the hot topics and things that we're thinking about that maybe didn't get covered 01:11.520 --> 01:19.520 in the Deverem. I'm kind of tempted to just kind of open it up to questions and sets since the 01:19.520 --> 01:24.520 number of people here is kind of ideal for kind of much more interactive session where 01:24.520 --> 01:28.520 instead of talking at you the things that we think you want to hear about. You tell us what 01:28.520 --> 01:31.520 we want to hear about. Why don't we just list some of the things we were thinking of talking 01:31.520 --> 01:36.520 about and then you tell us if those are things you want to hear. Do you want to say what you 01:36.520 --> 01:43.520 were thinking you might address? Yes. I was going to reflect upon is it 14 years of the legal 01:43.520 --> 01:48.520 Deverem? Something like that. I was going to make a comment about some of the topics 01:48.520 --> 01:55.520 we heard about today, the DMA, CRA and the open source AI definition. Just my thoughts 01:55.520 --> 01:58.520 and maybe elaborate on that. 01:58.520 --> 02:04.520 Yeah, I was going to mention the Neo4j case in the Amicus brief that we filed in generally 02:04.520 --> 02:11.520 like the kind of issues facing the GPL family of licenses and what's going on with that. 02:11.520 --> 02:19.520 I think what else was I going to talk about? Other things that I was going to mention 02:19.520 --> 02:24.520 but I think that's the only one that no one else will raise. 02:24.520 --> 02:32.520 Well, I have no prepared topics to talk about. I have been thinking a lot in general about the 02:32.520 --> 02:42.520 effect of the panel that I moderated. What is the meaning of free slash open AI or open machine learning 02:42.520 --> 02:49.520 or whatever terminology you want? That is something that has come up in a lot of my work in certain 02:49.520 --> 02:58.520 ways and it's also a personal interest to me just as what I think is a very difficult topic. 02:58.520 --> 03:03.520 But I have opinions on other things too, so. I remember one of the other things I wanted to 03:03.520 --> 03:08.520 address in this panel, which was I was going to sort of talk about doing things in new ways 03:08.520 --> 03:13.520 and finding new mechanisms to address the same old issues and not trying to approach the same 03:13.520 --> 03:17.520 problems in the same ways anymore and just having new approaches like we've done in the 03:17.520 --> 03:22.520 copy left enforcement space but in others as well. 03:22.520 --> 03:28.520 So because in my head it was mainly like who raised their hands first and how do I make sure 03:28.520 --> 03:34.520 that everyone feels treated equally. I made some notes. One thing was for me in a 03:34.520 --> 03:41.520 Pam's talk that often in our community we think we have copyright. Let's fix all our 03:41.520 --> 03:47.520 problems with copyright and I like this comment there to that this is something we should 03:47.520 --> 03:51.520 talk about over come and think about other solutions there including like trademarks. 03:51.520 --> 03:55.520 But I think there are many other things out there which we should think about and not just 03:55.520 --> 04:01.520 we have this hammer. So always use this hammer because everything else is a nail. 04:01.520 --> 04:09.520 Then the other thing for me was when we had to talk about by Denver for the case with 04:10.520 --> 04:16.520 the AVM case that's something which for me again highlighted how important it is 04:16.520 --> 04:22.520 in our movement also for the next the case that there are people who are persistent 04:22.520 --> 04:30.520 patient and continue to do this work even so it can be very very frustrating to have 04:30.520 --> 04:36.520 discussions with manufacturers and other people who are not playing by the rules and 04:36.520 --> 04:42.520 reminding them about that and saying friendly during all that time. So I think that's a very 04:42.520 --> 04:49.520 good skill set we need for the next few decades in our movement and the other thing 04:49.520 --> 04:57.520 for me which I think is something very important is when we think about the how 04:57.520 --> 05:04.520 Apple is arguing why certain things should not be done on their computers and they often 05:04.520 --> 05:09.520 argue that that's not a computer is an iPhone. I think that's something we will see more 05:09.520 --> 05:15.520 often that people try to tell us that their computers are not computers and the laws that 05:15.520 --> 05:20.520 or the the rules that are out there for computers don't apply to them. 05:20.520 --> 05:22.520 So. 05:22.520 --> 05:33.520 All right. Yeah. So and I mean to to continue there I think I mean for me the obviously 05:33.520 --> 05:38.520 there was a certain sector play the role in the last years and that's basically that 05:38.520 --> 05:44.520 what we also wanted to showcase that it's a it's a very it's a process and the process is long 05:44.520 --> 05:49.520 and you need to be around and while this process is happening there are also other files 05:49.520 --> 05:55.520 upcoming so we can also talk about procurement directive or funding topics and I mean the 05:55.520 --> 06:00.520 machine is still ongoing right so the department in the commission they they also work on 06:00.520 --> 06:06.520 other files not only not not just only on on a T security we do have a new commission 06:06.520 --> 06:11.520 where there is a tech commissioner for tech sovereignty which is quite interesting for 06:11.520 --> 06:16.520 us I think and something we need to work on so the debate about digital or tech 06:16.520 --> 06:23.520 sovereignty and also in Europe we discuss an idea of a one stack you will stack whatever 06:23.520 --> 06:29.520 you want to call it in order to be more independent from whatever so this is a bit 06:29.520 --> 06:36.520 unclear though but this is also debate should have at one point so I was late for the 06:36.520 --> 06:41.520 late for the organizers now because there were like four people asking more CRA questions 06:41.520 --> 06:46.520 on the hallway even though we just had like two hours on CRA so I agree with Alex that 06:46.520 --> 06:51.520 it's been a very strange experience for me because right around the moment I received the 06:51.520 --> 06:56.520 title which is more aspirational than actual because I have a lot of logistical work I do at 06:56.520 --> 07:03.520 the time I think I'm going to see as well but I get this title policy fell I'm like 07:03.520 --> 07:08.520 great I'm in charge of policy and I figured you know I'm a US person off to think about 07:08.520 --> 07:13.520 US policy concerns and like three months after I get a title to GDPR stuff starts 07:13.520 --> 07:19.520 and then now the CRA stuff started I'm like so so like I'm basically completely 07:19.520 --> 07:22.520 ill-equipped to my job as a US American because Europeans are trailblazing generally speaking 07:22.520 --> 07:26.520 good pretty good policy that that affects everybody around the world and I'm glad for 07:26.520 --> 07:31.520 it because it's good policy but I feel like this constant fish out of water and that's been 07:31.520 --> 07:35.520 an interesting thing to watch over the last few years the other thing that I think is happening 07:35.520 --> 07:39.520 that's really interesting is I became to talk about software right through Pau stuff already 07:39.520 --> 07:45.520 so my colleague Denver who's in the in the audience has done amazing work really 07:46.520 --> 07:52.520 building community bridges between free software traditional free software people and folks who are 07:52.520 --> 07:58.520 excited about the right to repair and I think mainly thanks Denver's work we've done a lot 07:58.520 --> 08:06.520 in the US and Canada educating activists there that almost every piece of equipment that's larger 08:06.520 --> 08:14.520 than like a toaster even some toasters now at this point are running software and therefore 08:14.520 --> 08:19.520 if you have a right to repair the hardware but don't have a right to repair the software 08:19.520 --> 08:23.520 which is basically the rights that copy left gives you then you actually don't have 08:23.520 --> 08:26.520 the right to repair and we've been doing really interesting work and it's just a lot of 08:26.520 --> 08:30.520 interesting stuff like happening the right to repair community it's I would love to see all 08:30.520 --> 08:34.520 of you go build alliances with people who are excited about right to repair if you want 08:34.520 --> 08:41.520 that's probably the most important thing to do is a free software activist right now 08:42.520 --> 08:48.520 Kevin I was going to say who wants to 08:53.520 --> 08:58.520 I did this work out the whole day so I'll continue 08:59.520 --> 09:14.520 I so I don't mentioned 14 years ago and then no but that was for me the time we won 09:14.520 --> 09:27.520 because until then my whole life was how do we get a free Java information we have that 09:27.520 --> 09:41.520 and for me the feeling is we won and Java was the last hold out what's my question 09:41.520 --> 09:50.520 my question is has it become easier it feels to me like it's now easier because 09:51.520 --> 10:01.520 everybody knows you create something and it should be free software and that seems to 10:04.520 --> 10:11.520 we were really working on those copyright assignments and being really precise 10:12.520 --> 10:19.520 do you have the feeling that's all getting easier are there now other problems 10:21.520 --> 10:27.520 do you mean is easier from a developer point of view 10:28.520 --> 10:34.520 yeah sorry 10:35.520 --> 10:40.520 easier from 10:40.520 --> 10:50.520 15 20 years back it felt like people were fighting to prevent free software to be developed 10:51.520 --> 10:57.520 so it feels like the article also was the last one that tried to restrict 11:06.520 --> 11:11.520 I'm maybe I'm just an optimist but I love that you're an optimist mark that's 11:11.520 --> 11:16.520 I've enjoyed collaborating with you yes I think it has got easier because people have 11:16.520 --> 11:23.520 come to expect open source or free software and so many context and we understand the licensing 11:23.520 --> 11:30.520 better we understand the agreements better and at the same time the software ecosystem 11:30.520 --> 11:35.520 continues to get more complex we have network services that are software licenses for the 11:35.520 --> 11:42.520 most part really didn't anticipate you know now we have you know what I'm going to put 11:42.520 --> 11:47.520 call AI which includes a lot of different things right but you know we may not have really 11:47.520 --> 11:55.520 fully anticipated that so well you know the code that we line of written 20 years ago 11:55.520 --> 12:02.520 is much much easier because of open source our work as developer continues to be 12:02.520 --> 12:07.520 complex for it because of all of these changes that continue to happen 12:08.520 --> 12:14.520 I'm going to say the same thing and you're going to say it's normal how to go 12:14.520 --> 12:23.520 I think the thing I have to tell you is our generation really made a big mistake 12:23.520 --> 12:30.520 because I think we failed to communicate our values about software rights and freedom 12:31.520 --> 12:37.520 to the next generation of developers and users and this is why in my opinion there isn't 12:37.520 --> 12:42.520 really an interest in copyright licensing companies work really hard to convince people not to go 12:42.520 --> 12:47.520 anywhere near copyright and we weren't out there explaining why we made the choices we did 12:47.520 --> 12:51.520 in a way that they could understand and join in our communities we didn't want to write 12:51.520 --> 12:54.520 in their languages we're all still writing and see and they're coming up writing in 12:55.520 --> 13:00.520 I mean if I were to go back in time I'd become a JavaScript developer in 1999 13:00.520 --> 13:08.520 or 2000 and bring copyrights to the JavaScript world and we didn't do that and so now 13:08.520 --> 13:13.520 most open source and free software that most people use is in fact proprietary 13:13.520 --> 13:18.520 because it's non copyrighted that has been proprietary by some company. 13:18.520 --> 13:25.520 I have kind of a warped perspective on this I'm not a developer I mean I guess a lot 13:25.520 --> 13:33.520 of you all are not developers like full time but I have seen I wouldn't I wouldn't 13:33.520 --> 13:39.520 call myself an optimist about this sort of stuff I've seen a degradation over that time period 13:39.520 --> 13:45.520 and I could disappoint me I don't talk about this too much but you know part of it is 13:45.520 --> 13:52.520 the decline of interest in copyright some of it is a rise of interest in this is something 13:52.520 --> 13:59.520 I see recently in the use of copyright as a sort of you know strong copyright protection 13:59.520 --> 14:07.520 as at least US lawyers would say as a tool for advancing policies that you know for 14:07.520 --> 14:12.520 you know developers might care about even if they're not exactly the same as the policies 14:12.520 --> 14:18.520 advanced by traditional proprietary software developers I think I do see this kind of 14:18.520 --> 14:29.520 generational change where people younger people sort of inherited this world and they 14:29.520 --> 14:37.520 yeah I mean talking about this for a long time of course but they they don't they they 14:37.520 --> 14:45.520 they seem to to not care about some of the principles that I thought were important let's 14:45.520 --> 14:50.520 say that and maybe maybe I'm wrong to think they're important but but what I think of 14:50.520 --> 14:55.520 is kind of this anti discrimination principle like you know maybe that's wrong maybe 14:55.520 --> 15:02.520 that's like a vestige of 1990's techno libertarianism or something so I'm I'm actually 15:02.520 --> 15:09.520 wondering if I some of the things I assumed were core to this you know I don't like 15:09.520 --> 15:15.520 to think of it as a movement but I'll call it a movement or you know maybe wrong 15:15.520 --> 15:23.520 and otherwise I see as I said like a kind of disappointing degradation in the sense 15:23.520 --> 15:29.520 that people seem to not care as much about the things that I thought I saw them caring 15:29.520 --> 15:35.520 about 14 years ago and that by the way if you've loved downwards spirals of pessimism 15:35.520 --> 15:40.520 you should watch me and Fontana discuss false policy it's better than doom scrolling 15:40.520 --> 15:47.520 I was gonna I'm gonna say something pessimistic and then I'll go to my my trademark optimism 15:47.520 --> 15:53.520 the pessimist thing is that you know like this is nothing new exactly but in the time that 15:53.520 --> 15:59.520 you're discussing here the corporate co-option of free software was complete and so we're in the 15:59.520 --> 16:04.520 situation where my mother last week or three weeks ago was like you know there was a meta 16:04.520 --> 16:08.520 ad in the New York Times that was a full page saying how much they loved open source 16:08.520 --> 16:13.520 right and you know like what is it what is it deal with that and how is that really to what you do 16:13.520 --> 16:20.520 when I go into policy spaces when I talk to legislators when I talk to policy makers 16:20.520 --> 16:25.520 private foundations when I talk to real silent decision makers they are immediately 16:25.520 --> 16:31.520 glazed over when they hear the term open source or even free software because they 16:31.520 --> 16:36.520 think it means corporate interest they think it means that what corporations are going to use 16:36.520 --> 16:41.520 and I have to explain that actually there's this thing called software freedom 16:41.520 --> 16:46.520 and that there's a think called software rights and the water has become so muddied 16:46.520 --> 16:50.520 that was interesting is that all this effort to separate to talk about the business 16:50.520 --> 16:56.520 pragmatism was so effective that it not only caused what I think Fontana was talking about 16:56.520 --> 17:02.520 in terms of like people sometimes losing sight of the beliefs that we thought that they had 17:02.520 --> 17:10.520 but also resulted in in this you know the arguments about where we were so worried about 17:10.520 --> 17:15.520 adoption also made us lose our way and I think it's been quite difficult 17:15.520 --> 17:21.520 but the optimistic part about this is that ordinary people not necessarily 17:21.520 --> 17:26.520 technologists understand so much better now that these issues matter and so when we talk 17:26.520 --> 17:31.520 about software rights repair or when we talk about software rights people understand 17:31.520 --> 17:36.520 that there's something there that's really important and that is so much easier 17:36.520 --> 17:42.520 that is a very hard road right that is a road where we have to do this like huge 17:42.520 --> 17:46.520 by the movement where we are all talking about our software rights and why the 17:46.520 --> 17:49.520 owners and how we need to get our software freedom but we're starting 17:49.520 --> 17:55.520 to place where those rights those principles are focused and that's really different 17:55.520 --> 17:58.520 than what happened before 17:58.520 --> 18:04.520 so I add one one other angle to the question so 2011 18:05.520 --> 18:09.520 from my perspective in the policy work it was really hard 18:09.520 --> 18:13.520 to get people to talk about free software topics 18:13.520 --> 18:17.520 when you went there you still had most people pointed you talk to our 18:17.520 --> 18:22.520 admins is that like I don't want to talk with you what which version of windows 18:22.520 --> 18:25.520 you were installing there I want to talk with you about the technical 18:25.520 --> 18:30.520 technological distribution of power about sovereignty about being in control 18:31.520 --> 18:34.520 saving our democracy that's what I want to talk with you about 18:34.520 --> 18:38.520 that was really difficult at the time now over the years with again 18:38.520 --> 18:43.520 very persistent people who are going there talking with them 18:43.520 --> 18:48.520 and then they also realized maybe I should think about those topics 18:48.520 --> 18:52.520 or have my employees think about those topics there were more and more people 18:52.520 --> 18:56.520 getting interested in that and we also have people at that time 18:57.520 --> 19:02.520 the juniors interns often with whom we talked about those topics 19:02.520 --> 19:04.520 who are meanwhile in the institutions 19:04.520 --> 19:08.520 at positions where they have more decision making power 19:08.520 --> 19:12.520 on the other hand there are now so many people out there 19:12.520 --> 19:18.520 and they realize that that topics related to technology 19:18.520 --> 19:23.520 they matter to society that we are flooded with questions about that 19:23.520 --> 19:28.520 and that's really a problem because there are so many topics now out there 19:28.520 --> 19:32.520 and so many people who want to do something about those topics 19:32.520 --> 19:35.520 but the organizations working in those fields 19:35.520 --> 19:40.520 we did not get an exponential increase in donations 19:40.520 --> 19:43.520 and being able to hire more people to work on this 19:43.520 --> 19:46.520 so one of the difficult things at the moment is really 19:46.520 --> 19:49.520 we have to prioritize really really hard 19:49.520 --> 19:53.520 there would be many possibilities out there to really create things 19:53.520 --> 19:57.520 but you have to prioritize so hard for those questions 19:57.520 --> 20:01.520 so this is really difficult because you see that there are people that 20:01.520 --> 20:03.520 they want to talk with you the other one to talk to you 20:03.520 --> 20:07.520 and you say well we can't work with all of you 20:07.520 --> 20:11.520 even so you could make progress in all those different areas 20:11.520 --> 20:15.520 so that feels harder sometimes than the old times when people 20:15.520 --> 20:18.520 said like I don't want to talk to you I don't want to talk you 20:18.520 --> 20:22.520 you were happy there was one person who wanted to talk with you 20:22.520 --> 20:23.520 and wanted to help you 20:23.520 --> 20:25.520 and that connects to what I was saying before 20:25.520 --> 20:28.520 because those corporate representatives are always available 20:28.520 --> 20:30.520 they are well funded 20:30.520 --> 20:35.520 so the companies that are out there in the name of community 20:35.520 --> 20:38.520 will always have someone who can afford to be there 20:38.520 --> 20:41.520 who will speak for what they think is the open source community 20:41.520 --> 20:43.520 and that is really really difficult 20:43.520 --> 20:46.520 and I'd say that I appreciate what you're answered to that Matias 20:46.520 --> 20:48.520 and like a true executive director 20:48.520 --> 20:51.520 and I'd say that like the funding for a fast foundation 20:51.520 --> 20:53.520 I should have mentioned this before from a policy perspective 20:53.520 --> 20:55.520 all the things that we could talk about 20:55.520 --> 20:59.520 is that funding has declined for all of these organizations 20:59.520 --> 21:03.520 many of them have announced layoffs and shrinking 21:03.520 --> 21:06.520 and every single organization in the charitable space 21:06.520 --> 21:10.520 has experienced the pain of the declining donations 21:10.520 --> 21:12.520 and we just you're right we just can't keep up 21:12.520 --> 21:14.520 to the funding part 21:14.520 --> 21:16.520 and since I also brought that up in the beginning 21:16.520 --> 21:18.520 I also want to point to a funding death room 21:18.520 --> 21:20.520 which is happening tomorrow 21:20.520 --> 21:22.520 and very address all of these questions 21:22.520 --> 21:24.520 from different perspectives 21:24.520 --> 21:26.520 a whole day long 21:26.520 --> 21:30.520 but do make a donation to the FCF Europe 21:30.520 --> 21:32.520 and South of Freedom Conservancy please 21:32.520 --> 21:33.520 before you leave the room 21:33.520 --> 21:36.520 I'm really appreciative of everybody who's still here 21:36.520 --> 21:40.520 because I've spent most of the day standing at that door 21:40.520 --> 21:42.520 and occasionally having to yell at people not to enter 21:42.520 --> 21:44.520 even though the sign said don't enter 21:44.520 --> 21:45.520 because it was full in here 21:45.520 --> 21:47.520 those of you that have stayed this late 21:47.520 --> 21:50.520 after like what four five seven hours on CRA 21:50.520 --> 21:52.520 and everything else means 21:52.520 --> 21:55.520 means that you're really interested in what we're doing in this dev room 21:55.520 --> 21:58.520 so I would like to turn over the audience to tell us 21:58.520 --> 22:00.520 what did we not cover that you wanted to see 22:00.520 --> 22:02.520 and what did we cover too much 22:02.520 --> 22:04.520 do we cover the CRA too much 22:11.520 --> 22:13.520 Hi, thank you very much 22:13.520 --> 22:16.520 by the way, it was a great day today here 22:16.520 --> 22:19.520 I have one last hint 22:19.520 --> 22:24.520 maybe there might come some kind of shit storm 22:24.520 --> 22:28.520 because since last week since the deep seek 22:28.520 --> 22:31.520 and I'm not talking about the website 22:31.520 --> 22:33.520 but also the API 22:33.520 --> 22:38.520 and because we have had the discussion of free licenses 22:39.520 --> 22:41.520 and free everything 22:41.520 --> 22:43.520 in combination with AI 22:43.520 --> 22:46.520 or better machine learning or digital parents 22:46.520 --> 22:50.520 and at the moment the windows changing in Germany 22:50.520 --> 22:53.520 for example there were several articles 22:53.520 --> 22:55.520 by smaller companies hidden champions 22:55.520 --> 22:58.520 so to say but if many rich customers 22:58.520 --> 23:00.520 for example all banks 23:00.520 --> 23:01.520 and they say 23:01.520 --> 23:05.520 those open source or open source license 23:05.520 --> 23:08.520 so models are a danger for national security 23:08.520 --> 23:10.520 this is a fresh new turn 23:10.520 --> 23:14.520 since last week I can send you the articles for example 23:14.520 --> 23:18.520 just so we need more people like you 23:18.520 --> 23:21.520 for helping the society and this community 23:21.520 --> 23:22.520 thanks 23:29.520 --> 23:31.520 Hi, thank you so much for an excellent day 23:31.520 --> 23:33.520 I know that you must be exhausted by this point in time 23:33.520 --> 23:36.520 but it's been really rich and really interesting to listen to everything 23:36.520 --> 23:39.520 so a couple of points that come to my mind 23:39.520 --> 23:42.520 that potentially be answered by you 23:42.520 --> 23:45.520 or in a future panel is first of all more related to my PhD 23:45.520 --> 23:47.520 I'm at the University of Cambridge 23:47.520 --> 23:48.520 it's Karen and some others 23:48.520 --> 23:51.520 and I'm looking at global governance of open source software 23:51.520 --> 23:53.520 so I'm really interested in what the CRA 23:53.520 --> 23:57.520 and other moves from states and regional powers 23:57.520 --> 24:00.520 etc. mean for the potential fragmentation of open source 24:00.520 --> 24:02.520 if you have any initial responses to that 24:02.520 --> 24:04.520 happy to chat afterwards as well 24:04.520 --> 24:07.520 and then the second thing is a discussion that I was having earlier 24:07.520 --> 24:08.520 with Eva Black 24:08.520 --> 24:12.520 like with the Trump administration now coming into power 24:12.520 --> 24:16.520 what does that mean for the changing approaches of CSR 24:16.520 --> 24:18.520 and others within the US administration 24:18.520 --> 24:21.520 when it comes to the obscurity of open source software etc 24:21.520 --> 24:22.520 thank you 24:23.520 --> 24:30.520 Should we first gather some more and then we 24:30.520 --> 24:32.520 yeah 24:32.520 --> 24:38.520 one quick response I'd make to that I think 24:38.520 --> 24:42.520 is that I'm reminded of when I was undergraduate 24:42.520 --> 24:47.520 and there was something on about the US congress on TV 24:47.520 --> 24:49.520 and I said to my roommate I was like 24:49.520 --> 24:52.520 I never get anything done it takes so long to 24:52.520 --> 24:54.520 and it looked at me and he said 24:54.520 --> 24:57.520 you don't want to live in a society where the law is changed overnight 24:57.520 --> 25:00.520 you want to live in a society where it takes a long time 25:00.520 --> 25:03.520 so that people can digest and get feedback and so forth 25:03.520 --> 25:06.520 and it was one of the most insightful things anybody ever said to me 25:06.520 --> 25:08.520 I think what I feel right now 25:08.520 --> 25:10.520 given that I'm from the US is 25:10.520 --> 25:12.520 things were changing overnight 25:12.520 --> 25:14.520 and it even feels that way with the CRA 25:14.520 --> 25:16.520 feels like it was rushed 25:16.520 --> 25:18.520 and that's very frustrating 25:18.520 --> 25:20.520 I think for all of us in policy work 25:20.520 --> 25:22.520 and open source and free software 25:22.520 --> 25:25.520 I mean you saw us in the panel like I'm asking Alex and Alex is asking me 25:25.520 --> 25:28.520 and we're trying to figure it out in real time 25:28.520 --> 25:30.520 and as Matthias mentioned we're underfunded 25:30.520 --> 25:33.520 so and then care much as well 25:33.520 --> 25:36.520 so I mean I think that's our big, my biggest fear is that 25:36.520 --> 25:39.520 we can't complete the task in the time a lot 25:39.520 --> 25:45.520 okay yeah a question 25:45.520 --> 25:49.520 then or a comment since you asked what you had done 25:49.520 --> 25:51.520 and what was maybe left out 25:51.520 --> 25:53.520 I think it was a great day here 25:53.520 --> 25:57.520 as maybe let's say a practitioner 25:57.520 --> 26:01.520 I think what we see is a little bit of anxiety around 26:01.520 --> 26:03.520 about the CRA and so on 26:03.520 --> 26:07.520 and a lot of the people in this room 26:08.520 --> 26:10.520 have good ideas 26:10.520 --> 26:14.520 and for instance the representatives of the commission say 26:14.520 --> 26:16.520 now come talk to us 26:16.520 --> 26:19.520 or if you do this and that I think it would be fine 26:19.520 --> 26:22.520 and I think it would be really be good 26:22.520 --> 26:27.520 if there was some way to lower the barrier to entry 26:27.520 --> 26:30.520 especially small developers 26:30.520 --> 26:34.520 maybe by some documentation that can help 26:34.520 --> 26:37.520 say if you do this then you will be fine 26:37.520 --> 26:41.520 templates you know I get up 26:41.520 --> 26:45.520 that you can clone where there are more files 26:45.520 --> 26:48.520 with some legal text that somebody has written 26:48.520 --> 26:50.520 and so on I don't know if it's in the scope of this 26:50.520 --> 26:54.520 step room but then maybe a small brother to this step room 26:58.520 --> 27:03.520 I mean I think we have several resources on this 27:03.520 --> 27:06.520 and maybe it's a good idea to pull them 27:06.520 --> 27:08.520 for the next step room together 27:08.520 --> 27:10.520 and share some links as well 27:12.520 --> 27:16.520 so I think it's a pretty good idea to 27:16.520 --> 27:20.520 for the next year to show at least what we have done 27:20.520 --> 27:23.520 what we have worked on on the topics that we present here 27:23.520 --> 27:27.520 and maybe ask the speakers to also add some more like resources 27:27.520 --> 27:29.520 that they think that should be shared 27:29.520 --> 27:31.520 so I think that's a pretty nice idea 27:32.520 --> 27:34.520 Thank you 27:41.520 --> 27:44.520 Thank you so firstly I would suggest that you get the 27:44.520 --> 27:47.520 Jansen stage for the next year 27:47.520 --> 27:51.520 and I think the biggest concern I have 27:51.520 --> 27:53.520 that I'd like to see discussed 27:55.520 --> 27:58.520 I suggest you get Jansen stage next year if you will 27:58.520 --> 28:00.520 worth it 28:01.520 --> 28:04.520 and in terms of topics for next year 28:04.520 --> 28:08.520 I'd like to see the question of whether open source software 28:08.520 --> 28:11.520 and the freedom of computer users can survive 28:11.520 --> 28:14.520 mandatory identity verification 28:14.520 --> 28:16.520 which is something that just being proposed 28:16.520 --> 28:19.520 in all corners of the world 28:19.520 --> 28:22.520 and it's part of the proposed chat control 28:23.520 --> 28:25.520 regulation in the EU 28:25.520 --> 28:29.520 it's already a possibility for the UK regulator 28:29.520 --> 28:31.520 to acquire it 28:31.520 --> 28:34.520 as I'm sure there are similar things in the USA 28:34.520 --> 28:37.520 so that's what I would like to see discussed next year 28:39.520 --> 28:42.520 I want to quickly address the space issue 28:42.520 --> 28:45.520 so what's happened with this devroom 28:45.520 --> 28:48.520 is we were way before our time 28:48.520 --> 28:50.520 and there have been so many devrooms that have 28:50.520 --> 28:52.520 spun off from us 28:52.520 --> 28:55.520 I mean the S-Bond Devroom which I was making jokes about this morning 28:55.520 --> 28:58.520 I mean S-Bond was a topic for this devroom 28:58.520 --> 29:00.520 and they decided they didn't like 29:00.520 --> 29:02.520 how we were going to get made 29:02.520 --> 29:03.520 it's just teasing you 29:03.520 --> 29:04.520 but it was good reason 29:04.520 --> 29:06.520 because there was enough interest 29:06.520 --> 29:08.520 in a separate devroom which of course 29:08.520 --> 29:09.520 then puts us in competition 29:09.520 --> 29:12.520 was stuff that used to be under our topic 29:12.520 --> 29:14.520 so it's been difficult 29:14.520 --> 29:16.520 we've had lots of negotiation with the Fossil Morgan 29:16.520 --> 29:19.520 I think the best thing you can do for us is email them 29:19.520 --> 29:21.520 Hey, I was at the legal policy devroom 29:21.520 --> 29:23.520 and it was line out the door 29:23.520 --> 29:25.520 and I really hope it's in UA next year 29:25.520 --> 29:27.520 because I think they will listen 29:27.520 --> 29:29.520 oh and two days again 29:29.520 --> 29:31.520 I don't know if we're going 29:31.520 --> 29:33.520 I don't know if we're going back two days 29:33.520 --> 29:35.520 and I sure like it when I have a day off in Fossil 29:35.520 --> 29:37.520 one once in a while 29:37.520 --> 29:39.520 I did pay off two days again so 29:39.520 --> 29:42.520 but we had very very nice proposals for talks 29:42.520 --> 29:44.520 and we had to decline a lot so 29:44.520 --> 29:46.520 and I think there's also from the topics 29:46.520 --> 29:47.520 we're putting up here 29:47.520 --> 29:49.520 we definitely have room for two days 29:49.520 --> 29:50.520 to discuss things 29:50.520 --> 29:52.520 also with one detail maybe 29:52.520 --> 29:55.520 Please don't suggest that we go back to UA 29:55.520 --> 29:56.520 I like UA 29:56.520 --> 29:58.520 There are other larger rooms 29:58.520 --> 29:59.520 yeah because 29:59.520 --> 30:01.520 some of you were here 30:01.520 --> 30:02.520 those years where you had to 30:02.520 --> 30:04.520 trap through the mud 30:04.520 --> 30:05.520 to get to the room 30:05.520 --> 30:06.520 one 30:06.520 --> 30:08.520 two 30:08.520 --> 30:09.520 two 30:09.520 --> 30:10.520 the UA 30:10.520 --> 30:12.520 if you're up in the fifth floor 30:12.520 --> 30:13.520 as we were 30:13.520 --> 30:15.520 once we had accessibility issues 30:15.520 --> 30:17.520 I like 30:17.520 --> 30:20.520 luckily I advocated about my heart condition 30:20.520 --> 30:22.520 and you know people know that I was born 30:22.520 --> 30:23.520 or the heart condition 30:23.520 --> 30:25.520 two years ago I had a regular heartbeat 30:25.520 --> 30:27.520 and I could not walk up five 30:27.520 --> 30:28.520 flights of stairs 30:28.520 --> 30:29.520 at that time 30:29.520 --> 30:31.520 and so I don't want to go back to UA 30:31.520 --> 30:34.520 that's what he that's what was suggested 30:34.520 --> 30:36.520 I read that was the original suggestion 30:36.520 --> 30:37.520 was Jensen 30:37.520 --> 30:39.520 but we you know we just do the best we can 30:39.520 --> 30:40.520 we're so glad you're here 30:40.520 --> 30:42.520 definitely email them to say that you enjoyed 30:42.520 --> 30:44.520 this track if you did 30:45.520 --> 30:48.520 and wait wait a second I come with the microphone 30:48.520 --> 30:52.520 quickly about the other topic with the identity thing 30:52.520 --> 30:54.520 I think very important topic 30:54.520 --> 30:56.520 there are people out there who try to 30:56.520 --> 30:59.520 who are working on solutions there with free software 30:59.520 --> 31:02.520 there are some very strange policy decisions there 31:02.520 --> 31:06.520 to hand all the identity stuff over to proprietary software providers 31:06.520 --> 31:08.520 so definitely a topic 31:08.520 --> 31:12.520 encourage people you know to submit a talk for next year 31:13.520 --> 31:15.520 yeah I think also rounding 31:15.520 --> 31:20.520 and free software 31:20.520 --> 31:24.520 in a comprehensive way might be really 31:24.520 --> 31:27.520 because that's always an evergreen topic 31:27.520 --> 31:29.520 that is only more relevant 31:29.520 --> 31:31.520 I just add that 31:31.520 --> 31:33.520 identity 31:33.520 --> 31:35.520 is it not working 31:35.520 --> 31:37.520 is it now okay 31:37.520 --> 31:39.520 I'll also just add that identity is a topic 31:39.520 --> 31:40.520 that's near and dear to my heart 31:40.520 --> 31:42.520 I think it's a very important topic 31:42.520 --> 31:45.520 and I do see a relationship with free software 31:45.520 --> 31:48.520 just wanting to be aware of 31:48.520 --> 31:50.520 if someone tells you that the answer 31:50.520 --> 31:52.520 to identity is the blockchain 31:52.520 --> 31:54.520 question them 31:54.520 --> 31:57.520 so that was the first 31:57.520 --> 31:59.520 introduction 31:59.520 --> 32:01.520 so it's first time that somebody's 32:01.520 --> 32:02.520 I looked at it 32:02.520 --> 32:03.520 and then 32:03.520 --> 32:07.520 and then 32:07.520 --> 32:09.520 someone in the audience I wanted to film the video 32:09.520 --> 32:10.520 some of the audience shouted 32:10.520 --> 32:11.520 it will be the same for AI 32:11.520 --> 32:12.520 in a few years 32:12.520 --> 32:13.520 it will be just like blockchain 32:13.520 --> 32:14.520 I can't agree with that 32:14.520 --> 32:15.520 more 32:15.520 --> 32:17.520 it's totally correct 32:17.520 --> 32:19.520 one thing I want to say when we're talking about 32:19.520 --> 32:21.520 like topics and submitting talks 32:21.520 --> 32:23.520 one of the things we have tried really hard 32:23.520 --> 32:25.520 and we used to have more time to do more outreach 32:25.520 --> 32:27.520 but we'd love for you to do the outreach 32:27.520 --> 32:29.520 we want people 32:29.520 --> 32:32.520 who are developers to come in and talk about policy topics 32:32.520 --> 32:35.520 we find that developers feel like they don't 32:35.520 --> 32:36.520 know anything 32:36.520 --> 32:38.520 and they usually know a lot more than they realize 32:38.520 --> 32:40.520 and historically 32:40.520 --> 32:43.520 the talks we've gotten from developers about policy topics 32:43.520 --> 32:44.520 have been absolutely excellent 32:44.520 --> 32:46.520 so even if you're just new to a topic 32:46.520 --> 32:48.520 and do some research and say 32:48.520 --> 32:49.520 oh maybe I could learn a couple things 32:49.520 --> 32:51.520 because it doesn't take long to be 32:51.520 --> 32:58.520 I think it's not working 32:58.520 --> 32:59.520 I think it's not working 32:59.520 --> 33:00.520 Richard 33:00.520 --> 33:02.520 I think it's not working 33:02.520 --> 33:04.520 Richard 33:04.520 --> 33:06.520 I see 33:06.520 --> 33:09.520 just kind of further to what Bradley said 33:09.520 --> 33:11.520 I think we use 33:11.520 --> 33:14.520 and the sort of the 14 year retrospective theme 33:14.520 --> 33:16.520 I think we used to get earlier on 33:16.520 --> 33:18.520 and the history of the devroom 33:18.520 --> 33:19.520 more talks 33:19.520 --> 33:21.520 from developers 33:21.520 --> 33:23.520 talks on legal topics 33:23.520 --> 33:25.520 I remember some of them very well 33:25.520 --> 33:28.520 and I think that there are fewer now 33:28.520 --> 33:32.520 I haven't tried to make us a study 33:32.520 --> 33:34.520 but I think we have more 33:35.520 --> 33:38.520 not that other perspectives aren't good 33:38.520 --> 33:40.520 like what could be better than you know 33:40.520 --> 33:42.520 Pam's talk on trademarks 33:42.520 --> 33:45.520 Pam, right 33:45.520 --> 33:49.520 but we used to get so many interesting talks 33:49.520 --> 33:51.520 from developers 33:51.520 --> 33:53.520 and that was the original vision I think 33:53.520 --> 33:54.520 for the devroom 33:54.520 --> 33:56.520 and I think 33:56.520 --> 33:58.520 I think that 33:58.520 --> 34:01.520 that has declined for some reason 34:02.520 --> 34:04.520 but that said, I really like that we have 34:04.520 --> 34:07.520 we bring in outside experts 34:07.520 --> 34:09.520 and having that precisely a lot of nodding 34:09.520 --> 34:12.520 so I really liked that we had folks from the European Commission 34:12.520 --> 34:13.520 in the room 34:13.520 --> 34:14.520 lots of nodding 34:14.520 --> 34:16.520 and that we have had an anti-trust expert 34:16.520 --> 34:19.520 and people who aren't as this early coming from our space 34:19.520 --> 34:20.520 and for deep within 34:20.520 --> 34:22.520 so that we get additional perspective 34:22.520 --> 34:23.520 so look at that 34:23.520 --> 34:24.520 lots of nodding 34:24.520 --> 34:27.520 So before we continue to circle 34:27.520 --> 34:30.520 on the stage, I hand over 34:31.520 --> 34:33.520 just a comment that 34:33.520 --> 34:35.520 by this time next year 34:35.520 --> 34:37.520 the US identity 34:37.520 --> 34:39.520 would be provided by a single company 34:39.520 --> 34:41.520 by a single person 34:41.520 --> 34:44.520 I think that's the goal 34:44.520 --> 34:46.520 and what's happening this weekend 34:46.520 --> 34:48.520 yes 34:48.520 --> 34:51.520 I mean that 34:51.520 --> 34:53.520 this weekend is happening 34:53.520 --> 34:55.520 lots of things are happening there 34:56.520 --> 35:00.520 okay, yes 35:00.520 --> 35:03.520 one other question 35:03.520 --> 35:07.520 if you consider doing something like 35:07.520 --> 35:10.520 a policy come 35:10.520 --> 35:11.520 next to foster 35:11.520 --> 35:13.520 like you had a couple of left come 35:13.520 --> 35:15.520 I liked it 35:15.520 --> 35:17.520 but maybe it's too much work 35:17.520 --> 35:18.520 I love that idea 35:18.520 --> 35:20.520 we did once you were twice 35:20.520 --> 35:21.520 in a coffee left con 35:21.520 --> 35:22.520 after 35:23.520 --> 35:25.520 a policy that happens around 35:25.520 --> 35:26.520 phosem 35:26.520 --> 35:28.520 but it is effectively 35:28.520 --> 35:29.520 invitation only 35:29.520 --> 35:31.520 or it's hard to get an invitation 35:31.520 --> 35:32.520 to it 35:32.520 --> 35:33.520 which is interesting 35:33.520 --> 35:35.520 because we at this in this 35:35.520 --> 35:37.520 Deverem was founded 35:37.520 --> 35:38.520 as a way to make a 35:38.520 --> 35:40.520 policy room that was available 35:40.520 --> 35:41.520 to all 35:41.520 --> 35:43.520 so I think that that sort of 35:43.520 --> 35:45.520 what this was meant to be 35:45.520 --> 35:47.520 I think there's still a hunger 35:47.520 --> 35:48.520 for these topics 35:48.520 --> 35:50.520 and an ability to do workshops 35:51.520 --> 35:52.520 other similar things 35:52.520 --> 35:54.520 I don't know 35:54.520 --> 35:56.520 do you want to mention policy? 35:56.520 --> 35:57.520 yes 35:57.520 --> 35:58.520 yes 35:58.520 --> 35:59.520 so there is a conference 35:59.520 --> 36:00.520 that it's a far 36:00.520 --> 36:01.520 field from here 36:01.520 --> 36:02.520 but there's a conference coming up 36:02.520 --> 36:03.520 in the very end of July 36:03.520 --> 36:04.520 beginning of August 36:04.520 --> 36:05.520 called Fosse 36:05.520 --> 36:07.520 for you know open source software 36:07.520 --> 36:08.520 yearly 36:08.520 --> 36:09.520 and this will be the third year 36:09.520 --> 36:11.520 for it so the name is now true 36:11.520 --> 36:13.520 and it's in Portland, Oregon 36:13.520 --> 36:15.520 and run by software freedom 36:15.520 --> 36:16.520 conservancy 36:16.520 --> 36:18.520 and we have tracks that are open 36:18.520 --> 36:20.520 and we follow the Fosse model 36:20.520 --> 36:22.520 with volunteer organized tracks 36:22.520 --> 36:24.520 and so the call for tracks is now open 36:24.520 --> 36:26.520 so if there is something you would like 36:26.520 --> 36:27.520 to see mark 36:27.520 --> 36:29.520 or anybody else in this room 36:29.520 --> 36:31.520 please submit a check 36:31.520 --> 36:33.520 and then we provide all the infrastructure 36:33.520 --> 36:34.520 and then we'll have 36:34.520 --> 36:35.520 you know you'll have the day 36:35.520 --> 36:36.520 that you would like 36:36.520 --> 36:37.520 and we're happy to help 36:37.520 --> 36:39.520 maybe one 36:39.520 --> 36:41.520 anecdote 36:41.520 --> 36:42.520 so the first year 36:42.520 --> 36:44.520 I was here was in 2005 36:44.520 --> 36:46.520 and for me at that time 36:47.520 --> 36:50.520 Fosse was very, very technical only 36:50.520 --> 36:52.520 and there were very few 36:52.520 --> 36:54.520 very few talks 36:54.520 --> 36:55.520 that were not technical 36:55.520 --> 36:57.520 and I actually there was an 36:57.520 --> 36:58.520 Fosse of Ibooth 36:58.520 --> 37:00.520 in the age building here 37:00.520 --> 37:02.520 and there was Ellen Cox 37:02.520 --> 37:04.520 and he talked with an MEP 37:04.520 --> 37:05.520 there was an MEP at a time 37:05.520 --> 37:07.520 who was here at Fosse 37:07.520 --> 37:09.520 and Ellen Cox was talking with him 37:09.520 --> 37:11.520 and was explaining him 37:11.520 --> 37:13.520 that when you're sending around 37:13.520 --> 37:14.520 Doc documents 37:14.520 --> 37:16.520 that you can find out a bit about 37:16.520 --> 37:18.520 a history of that file 37:18.520 --> 37:21.520 and the MEP was looking 37:21.520 --> 37:23.520 at him a bit like 37:23.520 --> 37:24.520 what? 37:24.520 --> 37:26.520 and I was standing next to him 37:26.520 --> 37:27.520 and was like 37:27.520 --> 37:28.520 like nodding and the MEP was looking 37:28.520 --> 37:29.520 and he said 37:29.520 --> 37:31.520 do you also know about that? 37:31.520 --> 37:32.520 and 37:32.520 --> 37:33.520 he said 37:33.520 --> 37:34.520 yes 37:34.520 --> 37:35.520 and he 37:35.520 --> 37:36.520 you just saw 37:36.520 --> 37:38.520 how his brain started to 37:38.520 --> 37:39.520 oh my god 37:39.520 --> 37:41.520 what was in those documents 37:41.520 --> 37:43.520 before I was sending them out 37:43.520 --> 37:45.520 and that was something which at that time 37:45.520 --> 37:47.520 there were very few other talks 37:47.520 --> 37:48.520 here 37:48.520 --> 37:49.520 than the technical talks 37:49.520 --> 37:51.520 I think our deaf room here 37:51.520 --> 37:53.520 was one of the deaf rooms 37:53.520 --> 37:55.520 that actually had those other aspects here 37:55.520 --> 37:57.520 and I think 37:57.520 --> 37:59.520 as good as their other events 37:59.520 --> 38:00.520 it's good that there are other events 38:00.520 --> 38:02.520 who are focusing on other topics 38:02.520 --> 38:04.520 but what we want to make sure 38:04.520 --> 38:06.520 is that people who mainly care about 38:06.520 --> 38:08.520 technical aspects 38:08.520 --> 38:09.520 that they have an easy way 38:09.520 --> 38:11.520 to also enter other topics 38:11.520 --> 38:13.520 and that it's easy for them to just say 38:13.520 --> 38:15.520 well I do 38:15.520 --> 38:17.520 technical technical technical talk 38:17.520 --> 38:19.520 but there is this one talk about 38:19.520 --> 38:21.520 this year a there is this one talk 38:21.520 --> 38:23.520 about trademarks there is this one talk 38:23.520 --> 38:25.520 about license compliance 38:25.520 --> 38:27.520 and it's easy for me to enter that 38:27.520 --> 38:29.520 and also get a bit of 38:29.520 --> 38:31.520 another perspective on the topic 38:31.520 --> 38:33.520 so I think it's important 38:33.520 --> 38:35.520 that there are now more of those topics 38:35.520 --> 38:37.520 here and that we have more of those discussions 38:37.520 --> 38:39.520 because 38:39.520 --> 38:41.520 technology is not 38:41.520 --> 38:43.520 something that is not political 38:43.520 --> 38:45.520 it's not something that is not a 38:45.520 --> 38:47.520 a problem for like 38:47.520 --> 38:49.520 as a society it's not something 38:49.520 --> 38:51.520 which is completely out of the economic 38:51.520 --> 38:53.520 equations so it's something we need 38:53.520 --> 38:55.520 to think about on all those different 38:55.520 --> 38:57.520 angles that's why I'm really glad 38:57.520 --> 38:59.520 that we have this variety of 38:59.520 --> 39:01.520 more topics here that are not just 39:01.520 --> 39:03.520 covering the technical aspects 39:03.520 --> 39:05.520 I just want to yes and 39:05.520 --> 39:07.520 what materials we're just saying 39:07.520 --> 39:09.520 that moment in 2005 when he 39:09.520 --> 39:11.520 described to 2011 when 39:11.520 --> 39:13.520 thanks to Tom Marble who is 39:13.520 --> 39:15.520 is the hero of this 39:15.520 --> 39:17.520 devourum has always been he had 39:17.520 --> 39:19.520 experienced running 39:19.520 --> 39:21.520 he had experienced running 39:21.520 --> 39:23.520 the co-wending the Java 39:23.520 --> 39:25.520 devourum for many years the free 39:25.520 --> 39:27.520 Java devourum and he came to 39:27.520 --> 39:29.520 us a couple of us initially 39:29.520 --> 39:31.520 and said you also do like a 39:31.520 --> 39:33.520 legal devourum thing you know all the stuff 39:33.520 --> 39:35.520 and we great at fuzz them 39:35.520 --> 39:37.520 that and he talked us into doing 39:37.520 --> 39:39.520 a proposal and we got a lot of pushback 39:39.520 --> 39:41.520 there was one specific fuzz 39:41.520 --> 39:43.520 the organizer I'm not going to name 39:43.520 --> 39:45.520 was like nope this is technical 39:45.520 --> 39:47.520 only conference that's why they're called 39:47.520 --> 39:49.520 devourum that's not dev that's 39:49.520 --> 39:51.520 legal or something and we had 39:51.520 --> 39:53.520 talk about inaccessible rooms like 39:53.520 --> 39:55.520 anti-accessibility our first year we were in 39:55.520 --> 39:57.520 this room in AW that you had to walk 39:57.520 --> 39:59.520 up this winding staircase 39:59.520 --> 40:01.520 and as I was remembering that today 40:01.520 --> 40:03.520 doing crowd control because I 40:03.520 --> 40:05.520 searched on the top of that staircase 40:05.520 --> 40:07.520 because it only seated like 20 people 40:07.520 --> 40:09.520 and we would line we would have to 40:09.520 --> 40:11.520 only have to and we'd line people 40:11.520 --> 40:13.520 all the way down the spiral staircase 40:13.520 --> 40:15.520 in one side and then we'd slowly 40:15.520 --> 40:17.520 let the people out down the other side 40:17.520 --> 40:19.520 and we went back to that fuzz 40:19.520 --> 40:21.520 organizer and he said well 40:21.520 --> 40:23.520 maybe you should have a slightly bigger 40:23.520 --> 40:25.520 room and it's been as much 40:25.520 --> 40:27.520 as I like to tease like so 40:27.520 --> 40:29.520 in the s-bomb devourum 40:29.520 --> 40:31.520 I was being recorded 40:31.520 --> 40:33.520 I don't know if he's going to know it 40:33.520 --> 40:35.520 I think it's actually wonderful 40:35.520 --> 40:37.520 that we have these spinoff devourums 40:37.520 --> 40:39.520 that are now doing issues that are not 40:39.520 --> 40:41.520 technical 40:41.520 --> 40:43.520 per se I mean there's technical parts of 40:43.520 --> 40:45.520 s-bomb's but 40:45.520 --> 40:47.520 Simon Fips has his devourum 40:47.520 --> 40:49.520 that he's running tomorrow 40:49.520 --> 40:51.520 we have the funding devourum now 40:51.520 --> 40:53.520 that Matias and Alex are also 40:53.520 --> 40:55.520 co-writing community 40:55.520 --> 40:57.520 community was the first one 40:57.520 --> 40:59.520 and that was the I forgot about that 40:59.520 --> 41:01.520 they were like well we want to do a whole 41:01.520 --> 41:03.520 community devourum because there's 41:03.520 --> 41:05.520 talks used to be in our devourum 41:05.520 --> 41:07.520 and so I mean as much as we get jealous 41:07.520 --> 41:09.520 when other devourums get bigger rooms 41:09.520 --> 41:11.520 they're all that sort of thing 41:11.520 --> 41:13.520 we're much more happy 41:13.520 --> 41:15.520 we get a little bit jealous 41:15.520 --> 41:17.520 it's true but we also are very proud 41:17.520 --> 41:19.520 that we were able to create 41:19.520 --> 41:21.520 that at fuzzum and it's spun off 41:21.520 --> 41:23.520 and there's so many excellent devourums now 41:23.520 --> 41:25.520 in parallel and on other days 41:25.520 --> 41:26.520 in hours okay but I think the net 41:26.520 --> 41:28.520 discussion about this devourum is really quite boring 41:28.520 --> 41:30.520 and we're 41:30.520 --> 41:32.520 no no no no it's not your pod we've all gone there 41:32.520 --> 41:34.520 and I love it but we do have like 41:34.520 --> 41:36.520 possibly ten more minutes to talk about something 41:36.520 --> 41:38.520 that is substantive 41:38.520 --> 41:40.520 so if anybody want to ask us a 41:40.520 --> 41:42.520 substantive question of the topics 41:42.520 --> 41:44.520 that we suggested or something else 41:44.520 --> 41:46.520 you're supposed to go 41:48.520 --> 41:50.520 and that but I don't know about 41:50.520 --> 41:52.520 oh 41:52.520 --> 41:54.520 oh 41:56.520 --> 41:58.520 then first of all thanks so much for 41:58.520 --> 42:00.520 organizing this it's been super interesting 42:00.520 --> 42:02.520 I've been using free and open 42:02.520 --> 42:04.520 software for many years but it's my first time 42:04.520 --> 42:06.520 at fuzzum and I was really happy to see 42:06.520 --> 42:08.520 that there's a legal and policy 42:08.520 --> 42:10.520 devourum because I have a law background 42:10.520 --> 42:12.520 and working international law 42:12.520 --> 42:14.520 and I was wondering 42:14.520 --> 42:16.520 something that kind of struck me a little bit 42:16.520 --> 42:18.520 in the talks today 42:18.520 --> 42:20.520 was that it was mostly US and EU 42:20.520 --> 42:22.520 focused 42:22.520 --> 42:24.520 you know 42:24.520 --> 42:26.520 of other like or is that something 42:26.520 --> 42:28.520 that you're thinking about for future 42:28.520 --> 42:30.520 iterations or is there another 42:30.520 --> 42:32.520 conference that is a bit more global 42:32.520 --> 42:34.520 I mean I know for instance rights 42:34.520 --> 42:36.520 con that is sort of human rights 42:36.520 --> 42:38.520 in the digital age 42:38.520 --> 42:40.520 but in terms of sort of I'm really interested in 42:40.520 --> 42:42.520 in flaws focused events 42:42.520 --> 42:44.520 that have a you know copi left 42:44.520 --> 42:46.520 aspect and like that kind of mindset 42:46.520 --> 42:48.520 so I was wondering if there's others 42:48.520 --> 42:50.520 that are a bit more international 42:50.520 --> 42:52.520 not just EU and US. 42:52.520 --> 42:54.520 This sort of tends to be a little bit more international 42:54.520 --> 42:56.520 that was this year but bear in mind 42:56.520 --> 42:58.520 that the lunar new year 42:58.520 --> 43:00.520 made our the speakers that we're planning to come 43:00.520 --> 43:02.520 to fuzz them this year 43:02.520 --> 43:04.520 unable to come so we had a couple of 43:04.520 --> 43:08.520 speakers who really had topics that were quite relevant 43:08.520 --> 43:10.520 that couldn't come so 43:10.520 --> 43:12.520 so I think that that's you know 43:12.520 --> 43:14.520 if there are places in particular 43:14.520 --> 43:16.520 that you think we should reach out to 43:16.520 --> 43:18.520 to experts in those places 43:18.520 --> 43:20.520 we would love to include them too 43:20.520 --> 43:22.520 and one problem we also saw 43:22.520 --> 43:24.520 going back to funding 43:24.520 --> 43:26.520 is that we also had people 43:26.520 --> 43:28.520 like from for example china 43:28.520 --> 43:30.520 or other areas where 43:30.520 --> 43:32.520 who were interested to give it 43:32.520 --> 43:34.520 talk here but at the moment 43:34.520 --> 43:36.520 a lot of there are a lot of 43:36.520 --> 43:38.520 problems to find travel funding 43:38.520 --> 43:40.520 to get people here so 43:40.520 --> 43:42.520 that's of course and also restricting 43:42.520 --> 43:44.520 it a bit 43:44.520 --> 43:46.520 and whom you cannot invite 43:46.520 --> 43:48.520 let me just add that 43:48.520 --> 43:50.520 in the past I had 43:50.520 --> 43:52.520 the privilege of attending 43:52.520 --> 43:54.520 a large open source conference 43:54.520 --> 43:56.520 in South America called Fisley 43:56.520 --> 43:58.520 which is typically in Brazil 43:58.520 --> 44:00.520 and I found that to be remarkable 44:00.520 --> 44:02.520 it was a lot of 44:02.520 --> 44:04.520 young enthusiastic developers 44:04.520 --> 44:06.520 and really cool like 44:06.520 --> 44:08.520 almost half women which was really great 44:08.520 --> 44:10.520 I've never attended Foss Asia 44:10.520 --> 44:12.520 but I understand that that's 44:12.520 --> 44:14.520 an Asian open source conference 44:14.520 --> 44:16.520 and so maybe there would be 44:16.520 --> 44:18.520 I mean I would love to have 44:18.520 --> 44:20.520 that truly global content 44:20.520 --> 44:22.520 it's tricky to get those speakers 44:22.520 --> 44:24.520 from my experience 44:24.520 --> 44:26.520 this room has been the most global one 44:26.520 --> 44:28.520 that I've experienced 44:28.520 --> 44:30.520 and if we can get those Asian and South American 44:30.520 --> 44:34.520 and Antarctic contributions that would be great 44:34.520 --> 44:36.520 yeah funding definitely has been a problem 44:36.520 --> 44:40.520 for South America for this year as well 44:42.520 --> 44:46.520 okay 44:46.520 --> 44:50.520 I think if someone else didn't 44:50.520 --> 44:52.520 okay 44:52.520 --> 44:56.520 can I just add that the open chain community 44:56.520 --> 44:58.520 has quite a few conferences 44:58.520 --> 45:00.520 based in East Asia 45:00.520 --> 45:02.520 and those tend to be a little more 45:02.520 --> 45:04.520 corporate than the volunteer 45:04.520 --> 45:06.520 conferences including Foss Dem 45:06.520 --> 45:08.520 but they have loads of talks about 45:08.520 --> 45:10.520 compliance with GPL 45:10.520 --> 45:12.520 about governance for free 45:12.520 --> 45:14.520 and open source software 45:14.520 --> 45:16.520 and that might be a good place to look 45:16.520 --> 45:18.520 if you want something more focused on Asia 45:18.520 --> 45:22.520 than you knew it 45:22.520 --> 45:24.520 so a special is 45:24.520 --> 45:26.520 you're such the king of 45:26.520 --> 45:28.520 understatement 45:28.520 --> 45:30.520 I just want to point out that he said 45:30.520 --> 45:32.520 they are a bit corporate 45:32.520 --> 45:34.520 they are extremely corporate 45:34.520 --> 45:36.520 they are primarily conferences for 45:36.520 --> 45:38.520 corporate entities to talk about 45:38.520 --> 45:40.520 that I think you're referring to 45:40.520 --> 45:42.520 my impression 45:42.520 --> 45:44.520 I'm biased on my 45:44.520 --> 45:46.520 but I get the impression they're primarily 45:46.520 --> 45:48.520 designed and this is why they won't 45:48.520 --> 45:50.520 speak there to figure out how to get around 45:50.520 --> 45:52.520 copy left and so they don't get together 45:52.520 --> 45:54.520 to say like how do we do more GPL 45:54.520 --> 45:56.520 violations and a lot of those conferences 45:56.520 --> 45:58.520 so it's really and I think this is 45:58.520 --> 46:00.520 I'm starting to go mad about Foss Dem again 46:00.520 --> 46:02.520 but this is a special place 46:02.520 --> 46:04.520 and a special thing that's happened in history 46:04.520 --> 46:06.520 it relates to the fact that the university 46:06.520 --> 46:08.520 is going to be a bit different 46:08.520 --> 46:10.520 and it's going to be a bit different 46:10.520 --> 46:12.520 and it's going to be a bit different 46:12.520 --> 46:14.520 I think this week and they let people 46:14.520 --> 46:16.520 they have a culpable deniability 46:16.520 --> 46:18.520 about how many people are here 46:18.520 --> 46:20.520 and that's why we have to watch the room 46:20.520 --> 46:22.520 because the one rule is 46:22.520 --> 46:24.520 don't violate the fire code 46:24.520 --> 46:26.520 and I think we're trying to reproduce 46:26.520 --> 46:28.520 that in the US with Fossy 46:28.520 --> 46:30.520 but I think it's challenging to reproduce it 46:30.520 --> 46:32.520 the thing I try to keep in mind 46:32.520 --> 46:34.520 is the first Foss Dem 46:34.520 --> 46:36.520 25 years 46:36.520 --> 46:38.520 and two 46:44.520 --> 46:50.520 and just that we have that on one's on record 46:50.520 --> 46:52.520 this is a conference 46:52.520 --> 46:54.520 which is mainly organized by volunteers 46:54.520 --> 46:56.520 and this is a conference that wouldn't happen 46:56.520 --> 46:58.520 if all the people who are running around here 46:58.520 --> 47:00.520 with those yellow shirts 47:00.520 --> 47:03.520 wouldn't spend many, many hours to do that 47:03.520 --> 47:05.520 and when you look out for other conferences 47:05.520 --> 47:07.520 it's often like they are organized 47:07.520 --> 47:09.520 they get a money, they pay people to organize it 47:09.520 --> 47:11.520 not that this is bad 47:11.520 --> 47:13.520 but this thing here is quite unique 47:13.520 --> 47:15.520 at that scale 47:15.520 --> 47:19.520 so let's record some applause for 47:19.520 --> 47:21.520 all the Foss Dem volunteers out there 47:21.520 --> 47:23.520 Thank you 47:29.520 --> 47:31.520 I let you repeat the comment 47:31.520 --> 47:33.520 or no? 47:33.520 --> 47:35.520 Okay, but I have one last question 47:35.520 --> 47:37.520 you have ten minutes left 47:37.520 --> 47:39.520 right? 47:39.520 --> 47:41.520 I had a question about right to repair 47:41.520 --> 47:43.520 policy 47:43.520 --> 47:45.520 it's a very pro right to repair 47:45.520 --> 47:49.520 but software 47:49.520 --> 47:51.520 I think is a little bit more complicated 47:51.520 --> 47:53.520 than hardware 47:53.520 --> 47:55.520 is there are there any limitations 47:55.520 --> 47:57.520 in your mind on 47:57.520 --> 47:59.520 who gets the right to repair 47:59.520 --> 48:03.520 and what protections they have? 48:03.520 --> 48:05.520 You want to start? 48:09.520 --> 48:11.520 I guess the first comment I want to make 48:11.520 --> 48:13.520 is 48:13.520 --> 48:15.520 sorry 48:15.520 --> 48:17.520 is to 48:17.520 --> 48:19.520 be software exceptional 48:19.520 --> 48:21.520 and this 48:21.520 --> 48:23.520 goes back to 48:23.520 --> 48:25.520 the assertion by Apple 48:25.520 --> 48:27.520 that the iPhone is not a computer 48:27.520 --> 48:29.520 it's obviously a computer 48:29.520 --> 48:31.520 and really what we're doing 48:31.520 --> 48:33.520 in free software 48:33.520 --> 48:35.520 among other things is 48:35.520 --> 48:37.520 to educate people 48:37.520 --> 48:39.520 that there's a war on general purpose computers 48:39.520 --> 48:41.520 everything with a microprocessor 48:41.520 --> 48:43.520 as a general purpose computer 48:43.520 --> 48:45.520 and people have tried to lock it 48:45.520 --> 48:47.520 from putting our own software on it 48:47.520 --> 48:49.520 and I think that that's false 48:49.520 --> 48:51.520 and so I think that software 48:51.520 --> 48:53.520 is probably the most 48:53.520 --> 48:55.520 repairable 48:55.520 --> 48:57.520 of everything 48:57.520 --> 48:59.520 and so it's really important 48:59.520 --> 49:01.520 that we insist on that 49:01.520 --> 49:02.520 and it's just on 49:02.520 --> 49:03.520 software 49:03.520 --> 49:05.520 repair as it is combined with hardware 49:05.520 --> 49:07.520 yeah 49:07.520 --> 49:09.520 I agree with 49:09.520 --> 49:11.520 I love it when Tom is more radical than me 49:11.520 --> 49:13.520 it's always fun to have somebody more 49:13.520 --> 49:15.520 when you're usually the most radical person in the room 49:15.520 --> 49:17.520 the thing I would add to that 49:17.520 --> 49:18.520 is that 49:18.520 --> 49:19.520 we have 49:19.520 --> 49:21.520 we have this really interesting thing 49:21.520 --> 49:23.520 about software so to go to a little bit 49:23.520 --> 49:25.520 down the software acceptials and route 49:25.520 --> 49:29.520 we actually invented our community as a whole 49:29.520 --> 49:33.520 invented a software rights repair license 49:33.520 --> 49:35.520 it was called the general public license 49:35.520 --> 49:39.520 and it is the most widely deployed license 49:39.520 --> 49:41.520 in software 49:41.520 --> 49:45.520 devices that don't give you the right to repair 49:45.520 --> 49:47.520 so what I'm saying is 49:47.520 --> 49:49.520 most of the things that people want to repair 49:49.520 --> 49:51.520 are running Linux 49:51.520 --> 49:53.520 and violating the GPL 49:53.520 --> 49:55.520 so what's happened is these companies 49:55.520 --> 49:57.520 have redefined tried to redefine 49:57.520 --> 49:59.520 with the GPL means 49:59.520 --> 50:01.520 they somehow there's this place 50:01.520 --> 50:03.520 in section three where it says 50:03.520 --> 50:05.520 the scripts used to control compilation 50:05.520 --> 50:07.520 and installation of the executable 50:07.520 --> 50:09.520 and somehow every lawyer for every company 50:09.520 --> 50:11.520 like stops reading when they hit those words 50:11.520 --> 50:13.520 and claims they're not there 50:13.520 --> 50:15.520 and so we have this great opportunity 50:15.520 --> 50:17.520 to do software rights repair 50:17.520 --> 50:19.520 because the companies 50:19.520 --> 50:21.520 have to make a choice now 50:21.520 --> 50:23.520 they're so other than Apple 50:23.520 --> 50:25.520 they're so relying on Linux 50:25.520 --> 50:27.520 that they cannot produce their products 50:27.520 --> 50:29.520 without giving people the right to repair 50:29.520 --> 50:31.520 if they're going to comply with copyright 50:31.520 --> 50:33.520 so we should give it to them 50:33.520 --> 50:35.520 I know you would want to say something about this 50:35.520 --> 50:37.520 and just the only thing 50:37.520 --> 50:39.520 you wanted to wrap it up 50:39.520 --> 50:41.520 one last question okay 50:43.520 --> 50:45.520 I trust 50:45.520 --> 50:47.520 oh, Denver wants to 50:47.520 --> 50:49.520 okay 50:55.520 --> 50:59.520 so to address that question a little bit 50:59.520 --> 51:01.520 I think 51:01.520 --> 51:03.520 it sounds like you were talking a little bit about complexity 51:03.520 --> 51:05.520 of software repair versus complexity 51:05.520 --> 51:07.520 of hardware repair 51:07.520 --> 51:09.520 and so I think 51:09.520 --> 51:11.520 my take on that is 51:11.520 --> 51:13.520 it's kind of a timeline thing 51:13.520 --> 51:15.520 like I think cars were really complicated 51:15.520 --> 51:17.520 to repair in the beginning 51:17.520 --> 51:19.520 and then they got simpler 51:19.520 --> 51:21.520 like my father really likes 51:21.520 --> 51:23.520 repairing vehicles 51:23.520 --> 51:25.520 and things 51:25.520 --> 51:27.520 and when they were just hardware 51:27.520 --> 51:29.520 that was basically a solve problem 51:29.520 --> 51:31.520 and now 51:31.520 --> 51:35.520 when they added software to cars 51:35.520 --> 51:37.520 they didn't give us the source code 51:37.520 --> 51:39.520 and now my father can't fix his car anymore 51:39.520 --> 51:41.520 because 51:41.520 --> 51:43.520 not because it's software 51:43.520 --> 51:45.520 but because it's software 51:45.520 --> 51:47.520 he's not allowed to repair 51:47.520 --> 51:49.520 and so I think all of these people 51:49.520 --> 51:51.520 who knew how to repair these things 51:51.520 --> 51:53.520 they would have naturally learned software 51:53.520 --> 51:55.520 if that was available to them 51:55.520 --> 51:57.520 but I don't think it's a complexity thing 51:57.520 --> 51:59.520 I think it is an access thing 51:59.520 --> 52:01.520 and I think that as we get more access 52:01.520 --> 52:03.520 as people are able to reinstall 52:03.520 --> 52:05.520 modified software 52:05.520 --> 52:07.520 onto their devices 52:07.520 --> 52:09.520 that we will get the same thing that we had 52:09.520 --> 52:11.520 in repair 52:11.520 --> 52:12.520 for software. 52:12.520 --> 52:13.520 We were complaining 52:13.520 --> 52:15.520 earlier about our lack of resources 52:15.520 --> 52:17.520 and how few people we have 52:17.520 --> 52:19.520 and how much work there is 52:19.520 --> 52:21.520 and that's a true of what I'm about to say 52:21.520 --> 52:23.520 but believe it or not 52:23.520 --> 52:25.520 one of the most exciting things 52:25.520 --> 52:27.520 about being at software freedom 52:27.520 --> 52:29.520 the violation reports come in 52:29.520 --> 52:31.520 because they're from people 52:31.520 --> 52:33.520 who are so excited to do something 52:33.520 --> 52:35.520 with the equipment that they have 52:35.520 --> 52:37.520 they want to make repairs 52:37.520 --> 52:39.520 they want to make improvements 52:39.520 --> 52:41.520 and they don't have that 52:41.520 --> 52:43.520 if they had access to the source code 52:43.520 --> 52:45.520 would do something about it 52:45.520 --> 52:47.520 and one of the things that we're trying to do 52:47.520 --> 52:49.520 with use the source 52:49.520 --> 52:51.520 is to be able to put all of that 52:51.520 --> 52:53.520 in a place where people can collaborate together 52:53.520 --> 52:55.520 and they can learn together 52:55.520 --> 52:57.520 repairs are much more practical 52:57.520 --> 52:59.520 and we have the infrastructure 52:59.520 --> 53:01.520 and social support to be able to do it. 53:01.520 --> 53:03.520 Shall we now mute this 53:03.520 --> 53:05.520 and have a last round? 53:05.520 --> 53:07.520 Yeah. 53:11.520 --> 53:15.520 So, thank you for coming 53:15.520 --> 53:16.520 for 14 years 53:16.520 --> 53:19.520 and spawning a lot of children 53:19.520 --> 53:21.520 devrooms and keep these topics going 53:21.520 --> 53:23.520 it's really great. 53:23.520 --> 53:25.520 I also want to acknowledge that 53:25.520 --> 53:27.520 you know, economically 53:27.520 --> 53:29.520 this is a very difficult time 53:29.520 --> 53:31.520 for the non-profit 53:31.520 --> 53:33.520 organizations in our space 53:33.520 --> 53:35.520 and I really would encourage you 53:35.520 --> 53:37.520 to if you can 53:37.520 --> 53:39.520 try to support 53:39.520 --> 53:41.520 organizations like software freedom 53:41.520 --> 53:43.520 and the free software foundation 53:43.520 --> 53:45.520 that are doing a lot of great work 53:45.520 --> 53:47.520 in advocacy for us and for the whole community 53:47.520 --> 53:49.520 so thank you so much for coming. 53:49.520 --> 53:51.520 I wanted to 53:51.520 --> 53:53.520 thank you all for coming 53:53.520 --> 53:55.520 and also we would love your 53:55.520 --> 53:57.520 input into what to do 53:57.520 --> 53:59.520 for next year's devroom 53:59.520 --> 54:01.520 this year we had a input session 54:01.520 --> 54:03.520 before we submitted our track 54:03.520 --> 54:05.520 proposals so that we could get 54:05.520 --> 54:07.520 people on the community to participate 54:07.520 --> 54:08.520 so I want to just call for that 54:08.520 --> 54:09.520 participation now 54:09.520 --> 54:11.520 that when they open the 54:11.520 --> 54:13.520 devroom proposal 54:13.520 --> 54:15.520 I assume some of us here will 54:15.520 --> 54:17.520 want to participate in doing it again. 54:17.520 --> 54:19.520 Raise your hand if you want to see this 54:19.520 --> 54:21.520 event. 54:21.520 --> 54:23.520 If you have a good 54:23.520 --> 54:27.520 attendance here for the video. 54:27.520 --> 54:29.520 But, yes. 54:29.520 --> 54:31.520 Definitely engage. 54:31.520 --> 54:33.520 We would love to hear if you want to hear more 54:33.520 --> 54:35.520 international participation. 54:35.520 --> 54:37.520 We would love to hear if you want to hear 54:37.520 --> 54:39.520 about governance issues. 54:39.520 --> 54:41.520 Whatever it is that you are interested 54:41.520 --> 54:45.520 in and it will give us time to get the right 54:45.520 --> 54:47.520 experts in. 54:47.520 --> 54:56.520 an impotent. So definitely we want you to be a part of this and we don't like what we think is important is not necessarily the most important thing and so you need to tell us. 54:57.520 --> 55:13.520 Well, so I I have been away for a few years and yeah, so this is so this this is actually I mean I haven't really talked about this publicly very much or at all actually but this 55:13.520 --> 55:23.520 This devroom that Tom largely helped create has been very special to me. This, you know, coming to Faustum this weekend 55:24.520 --> 55:34.520 Coming to Brussels this weekend became a very special thing for me personally that I looked forward to but then after, you know, after COVID, I didn't want to 55:35.520 --> 55:47.520 I was reluctant to come back. I think because I felt well what I liked about Faustum was not Faustum but was sort of escaping the US for a few days and coming to Brussels, which I 55:48.520 --> 55:53.520 I really I had never been to before before this devroom got started and actually is a city I like a lot 55:54.520 --> 55:58.520 But it is good to be back and I don't like this room, but 55:59.520 --> 56:08.520 I I I it's good it's good to be back and I do I do hope to have an opportunity to help out again and also I want to say that not every 56:09.520 --> 56:17.520 Lawyer in a company stops reading the GPL when it at certain words, even if even if some of them do 56:18.520 --> 56:23.520 There are other lawyers in the country. 56:23.520 --> 56:29.520 Yeah, I I just want to thank you again for all the questions your feedback that you gave during the day that you 56:30.520 --> 56:33.520 Yeah, and the tier for for ages in this 56:34.520 --> 56:39.520 Darkroom and yeah, it was a lot of fun and yeah, happy to be back next year 56:41.520 --> 56:50.520 I know that it can be very overwhelming to hear about all those topics and see so many developments in our area 56:50.520 --> 57:00.520 I would like to encourage you don't start acting when you think that you are now feeling ready to be a hero or 57:01.520 --> 57:07.520 That you're waiting for someone else to be the hero who will solve those topics 57:08.520 --> 57:13.520 But just start with something small start with some activities there. We don't need to wait for heroes 57:14.520 --> 57:23.520 Every one of us can do something it can be something small in total the sum of all our small actions that will be the thing that will accomplish change in society 57:24.520 --> 57:33.520 So start with something small now do something else tomorrow next week another small thing and let's all do that together and then I think we will make great progress 57:34.520 --> 57:40.520 And I never miss a trick as you all know so I didn't mean against the wall merely because I was doing crowd control all day 57:41.520 --> 57:43.520 I knew it would give me the last word when we did this 57:44.520 --> 57:50.520 And I was I was actually going to say something that was contradicting what Matthias just said 57:51.520 --> 57:54.520 So I was going to tell people to be a hero, but I think he's he said this a little bit better 57:55.520 --> 57:57.520 There's somebody at this conference not in this room right now 57:58.520 --> 58:07.520 Who basically lives a double life they they are a free software activist under completely different name and they're you know the real legal name they work for a major 58:08.520 --> 58:11.520 Corporation that's very unfriendly different software 58:12.520 --> 58:20.520 Now I don't expect you all to become double agents like that that's a lot to ask but there are sort of almost double agents like Richard found out it's kind of almost 58:21.520 --> 58:27.520 But there's there's a lot you can do if you're working for a company 58:28.520 --> 58:38.520 One of the biggest things I encourage people to ask questions don't just you get orders ask questions why and try to suggest that maybe policies ought to change 58:40.520 --> 58:44.520 Companies are not democracies so you don't get a vote, but 58:45.520 --> 58:48.520 irritants get things done. I mean I've based my entire career around that 58:49.520 --> 58:54.520 So I do think there's things that you can do with regard to submitting I agree with Karen 58:55.520 --> 58:59.520 I think the CFP opens now even though it's not technically open one last thing on that 59:00.520 --> 59:06.520 I wanted to tell everybody is that the panels you see in this bedroom going back years they are generally built from people 59:07.520 --> 59:12.520 Four or five people who submitted a talk on that topic and we're like well everyone's talking about this let's put them together 59:12.520 --> 59:20.520 Let's get them talking to each other before the conference so they can come in and present all the different views on this topic and so 59:21.520 --> 59:26.520 So if you want to be on a panel just submit a talk about the thing you want to go talk about and we may just come back to you and ask 59:27.520 --> 59:32.520 Or you could say that that's true you could submit you had permission to submit I would like to be on a panel about this here's my bio 59:33.520 --> 59:37.520 Is that good with everybody? Okay, so definitely do that and thank you. Thank you all for coming 59:37.520 --> 59:45.520 I and especially the people who are still here at the end of the day. I see I see the faces who used to camp back when we were in small rooms like the faces who there was discussions 59:46.520 --> 59:51.520 I this is just so funny I have to tell it people were trying to figure out how they could go to the bathroom because you lose your seat 59:52.520 --> 59:56.520 And then you have to get back in line so I'm glad we have a large enough room. They don't have to do that anymore 59:57.520 --> 01:00:00.520 But I'm so glad you all came and that you continue to come. Thank you 01:00:07.520 --> 01:00:09.520 Thank you