Bill Warters, Wayne State University: Did your system include any systems for conflict resolution?
VV: Considering the intellectual ensemble of groups available now with networks, it is possible that you may get better answers to questions. Area of internet is rich in potential for inventing dispute resolution techniques. These are areas that I have great optimism about.
Andrew Dyjach, political science student, Wayne State University: With these "creative engine," shouldn’t there be new engines for figuring out how to figure out how to use these creative systems. VV: Change produces a constant tension or problem. Conflict resolution mechanisms should be testable in the current situation. Social science could be thinking, testing, instrumenting how various forms of problem solving and planning are working. [http://cci.mit.edu]
Matt Arnold: Verifiability and establishing truth. One of the thing about politics is about figuring out who is telling the truth. What do you think about the ability of us as citizens to tell what is true.
VV: If a person looks at storage trends, physical science can suck up any given number of exobytes; so can fiction. Friends of privacy deliberately inserts notable amounts of lies just to create uncertainty in the web and protect privacy; governments actively support this. It would be interesting to work scenarios around what would happen if notions that "nothing is true" become prevalent. On the one hand, it seems hard to falsify facebook accounts. On the other hand, if you look at questions of spam we see the flowering of false information. (Incidentally, the fact that nobody predicted spam, despite the fact that it seems eminently predictable given Moore’s law and balance sheets suggests that we may not be as good at predicting as we might think).