0:00:01.167,0:00:02.500
Hi there, everyone.

0:00:03.722,0:00:07.389
I would like to start[br]by asking you a simple question.

0:00:07.452,0:00:08.484
And that is,

0:00:08.531,0:00:12.536
who of you wants to build a product[br]that is as captivating and engaging

0:00:12.561,0:00:14.494
as, say, Facebook or Twitter?

0:00:14.641,0:00:17.307
If you think so, please raise your hand.

0:00:17.513,0:00:20.339
Something that's as captivating[br]and engaging as Twitter.

0:00:20.355,0:00:22.088
Please keep your hands up.

0:00:22.625,0:00:24.878
Now, those of you[br]who have kept your hands up,

0:00:24.919,0:00:26.902
please keep your hands up if you feel

0:00:26.950,0:00:29.997
that you're spending more time[br]than you should spend

0:00:30.030,0:00:32.910
on sites like Facebook or Twitter,

0:00:32.934,0:00:34.997
time that would be better spent

0:00:35.038,0:00:38.624
with friends or spouses[br]or doing things that you actually love.

0:00:39.720,0:00:42.085
Okay. Those who still have[br]their arms up,

0:00:42.133,0:00:44.200
please discuss after the break.

0:00:44.220,0:00:46.077
(Laughter)

0:00:46.125,0:00:48.066
So, why am I asking this question?

0:00:48.474,0:00:49.529
I am asking it,

0:00:49.591,0:00:52.442
because we are today talking[br]about moral persuasion:

0:00:52.501,0:00:56.483
What is moral and immoral[br]in trying to change people's behaviors

0:00:56.507,0:00:58.960
by using technology and using design?

0:00:58.984,0:01:00.816
And I don't know what you expect,

0:01:00.840,0:01:02.793
but when I was thinking about that issue,

0:01:02.817,0:01:06.856
I early on realized what I'm not able[br]to give you are answers.

0:01:07.443,0:01:10.214
I'm not able to tell you[br]what is moral or immoral,

0:01:10.238,0:01:12.785
because we're living[br]in a pluralist society.

0:01:12.809,0:01:17.051
My values can be radically[br]different from your values,

0:01:17.075,0:01:20.252
which means that what I consider[br]moral or immoral based on that

0:01:20.276,0:01:23.888
might not necessarily be[br]what you consider moral or immoral.

0:01:24.269,0:01:27.483
But I also realized[br]there is one thing that I could give you,

0:01:27.507,0:01:30.040
and that is what this guy[br]behind me gave the world...

0:01:30.064,0:01:31.214
Socrates.

0:01:31.238,0:01:32.633
It is questions.

0:01:32.657,0:01:35.290
What I can do and what[br]I would like to do with you

0:01:35.314,0:01:37.259
is give you, like that initial question,

0:01:37.283,0:01:41.914
a set of questions[br]to figure out for yourselves,

0:01:42.017,0:01:45.658
layer by layer, like peeling an onion,

0:01:45.682,0:01:50.702
getting at the core of what you believe[br]is moral or immoral persuasion.

0:01:51.099,0:01:54.287
And I'd like to do that[br]with a couple of examples

0:01:54.446,0:01:57.597
as was said, a couple of examples[br]of technologies

0:01:57.664,0:02:02.644
where people have used game elements[br]to get people to do things.

0:02:03.561,0:02:06.545
So, here's the first example[br]leading us to our first question.

0:02:06.585,0:02:09.118
one of my favorite examples[br]of gamification,

0:02:09.143,0:02:10.538
Buster Benson's health month.

0:02:10.568,0:02:14.243
It's a simple application[br]where you set yourself health rules

0:02:14.942,0:02:15.942
for one month.

0:02:16.188,0:02:18.767
Rules like, I want to exercise[br]six times a week.

0:02:18.823,0:02:20.656
Or, I don't want to drink any alcohol.

0:02:20.704,0:02:23.767
And every morning you get[br]an email, asking you,

0:02:23.853,0:02:25.583
Did you stick to your rules or not?

0:02:25.607,0:02:27.894
And you say yes or no[br]to the different questions.

0:02:27.927,0:02:30.553
And then, on the platform,[br]you can see how well you did,

0:02:30.958,0:02:33.625
you can earn points and badges for that,

0:02:33.665,0:02:36.058
That information is shared[br]with your peers,

0:02:36.108,0:02:38.990
and if you don't stick to a rule,[br]you loose a health point,

0:02:39.015,0:02:41.140
but you friends ccan chip in[br]and heal you.

0:02:41.879,0:02:45.442
Beautiful example, and I believe[br]most of you will agree with me

0:02:45.760,0:02:48.490
that it kind of sounds[br]like ethical persuasion, right?

0:02:48.561,0:02:50.910
It sounds like something[br]that is good to do.

0:02:50.948,0:02:52.482
Here's another example.

0:02:52.768,0:02:55.513
Very similar in the kind of[br]thinking behind it,

0:02:55.569,0:02:57.505
very different example - Lockers.

0:02:57.593,0:03:01.069
It's a social platform[br]where people set up profiles

0:03:01.180,0:03:04.418
and on them, the main thing they do[br]is they put up product pictures

0:03:04.498,0:03:06.565
pictures of products they like,

0:03:06.617,0:03:08.831
and link their profiles with their friends

0:03:08.863,0:03:12.339
and every time I click[br]on one of those products on your page,

0:03:12.371,0:03:13.474
you get points,

0:03:13.487,0:03:16.783
and every time you click[br]on a product page on my page,

0:03:17.125,0:03:18.125
I get points,

0:03:18.157,0:03:20.791
and if you actually buy something[br]I get a lot of points.

0:03:20.838,0:03:23.490
and both of us can then[br]exchange these points

0:03:23.831,0:03:26.165
into percentages of these products.

0:03:26.538,0:03:28.101
Now, I don't know how you feel,

0:03:28.173,0:03:30.839
but personally I think[br]that Health Month

0:03:30.895,0:03:33.628
is something that feels to me very benign

0:03:33.704,0:03:37.005
and a good piece, a moral piece[br]of technology,

0:03:37.046,0:03:40.632
whereas there's something about Locker[br]that makes me feel a little queezy.

0:03:41.514,0:03:44.918
Thinking about what is it exactly[br]that makes me feel queezy here,

0:03:44.943,0:03:46.450
in this case, versus the other,

0:03:46.490,0:03:48.640
was a very simple answer,[br]and that is, well,

0:03:48.657,0:03:50.505
the intention behind it, right?

0:03:51.355,0:03:54.997
In one case, the intention is,[br]"That site wants me to be healthier,

0:03:55.022,0:03:57.418
and the other site wants me to shop more."

0:03:57.683,0:04:00.723
So it's at first a very simple,[br]very obvious question

0:04:00.747,0:04:01.943
I would like to give you:

0:04:01.967,0:04:04.654
What are your intentions[br]if you are designing something?

0:04:05.008,0:04:08.381
And obviously, intentions[br]are not the only thing,

0:04:08.705,0:04:12.140
so here is another example[br]for one of these applications.

0:04:12.307,0:04:15.394
There are a couple of these kinds[br]of Eco dashboards right now...

0:04:15.418,0:04:16.878
Dashboards built into cars...

0:04:16.902,0:04:19.733
Which try to motivate you[br]to drive more fuel-efficiently.

0:04:19.757,0:04:21.531
This here is Nissan's MyLeaf,

0:04:21.555,0:04:25.518
where your driving behavior[br]is compared with the driving behavior

0:04:25.543,0:04:26.694
of other people,

0:04:26.718,0:04:29.995
so you can compete for who drives a route[br]the most fuel-efficiently.

0:04:30.019,0:04:32.496
And these things are[br]very effective, it turns out...

0:04:32.520,0:04:36.459
So effective that they motivate people[br]to engage in unsafe driving behaviors,

0:04:36.483,0:04:38.444
like not stopping at a red light,

0:04:38.469,0:04:41.184
because that way you have[br]to stop and restart the engine,

0:04:41.208,0:04:43.931
and that would use quite[br]some fuel, wouldn't it?

0:04:44.978,0:04:49.387
So despite this being[br]a very well-intended application,

0:04:49.411,0:04:51.786
obviously there was a side effect of that.

0:04:51.810,0:04:54.358
Here's another example[br]for one of these side effects.

0:04:54.382,0:04:59.166
Commendable: a site that allows parents[br]to give their kids little badges

0:04:59.190,0:05:01.848
for doing the things[br]that parents want their kids to do,

0:05:01.872,0:05:03.188
like tying their shoes.

0:05:03.212,0:05:05.456
And at first that sounds very nice,

0:05:05.480,0:05:07.630
very benign, well-intended.

0:05:07.654,0:05:11.923
But it turns out, if you look into[br]research on people's mindset,

0:05:11.948,0:05:13.435
caring about outcomes,

0:05:13.459,0:05:15.232
caring about public recognition,

0:05:15.256,0:05:19.117
caring about these kinds[br]of public tokens of recognition

0:05:19.141,0:05:21.135
is not necessarily very helpful

0:05:21.159,0:05:23.466
for your long-term[br]psychological well-being.

0:05:23.490,0:05:26.166
It's better if you care[br]about learning something.

0:05:26.190,0:05:28.095
It's better when you care about yourself

0:05:28.119,0:05:30.693
than how you appear[br]in front of other people.

0:05:31.161,0:05:36.202
So that kind of motivational tool[br]that is used actually, in and of itself,

0:05:36.226,0:05:38.134
has a long-term side effect,

0:05:38.158,0:05:39.968
in that every time we use a technology

0:05:39.992,0:05:43.166
that uses something[br]like public recognition or status,

0:05:43.190,0:05:45.566
we're actually positively endorsing this

0:05:45.590,0:05:49.000
as a good and normal thing[br]to care about...

0:05:49.024,0:05:51.888
That way, possibly having[br]a detrimental effect

0:05:51.912,0:05:55.767
on the long-term psychological[br]well-being of ourselves as a culture.

0:05:55.791,0:05:58.435
So that's a second, very obvious question:

0:05:58.459,0:06:00.770
What are the effects[br]of what you're doing...

0:06:00.794,0:06:04.918
The effects you're having[br]with the device, like less fuel,

0:06:04.942,0:06:07.647
as well as the effects[br]of the actual tools you're using

0:06:07.671,0:06:09.345
to get people to do things...

0:06:09.369,0:06:10.940
Public recognition?

0:06:11.264,0:06:14.185
Now is that all... intention, effect?

0:06:14.209,0:06:17.343
Well, there are some technologies[br]which obviously combine both.

0:06:17.367,0:06:20.154
Both good long-term and short-term effects

0:06:20.178,0:06:24.409
and a positive intention[br]like Fred Stutzman's "Freedom,"

0:06:24.611,0:06:26.818
where the whole point[br]of that application is...

0:06:26.842,0:06:30.567
Well, we're usually so bombarded[br]with constant requests by other people,

0:06:30.591,0:06:31.747
with this device,

0:06:31.771,0:06:35.251
you can shut off the Internet[br]connectivity of your PC of choice

0:06:35.275,0:06:36.723
for a pre-set amount of time,

0:06:36.747,0:06:38.718
to actually get some work done.

0:06:39.742,0:06:42.893
And I think most of us will agree[br]that's something well-intended,

0:06:42.917,0:06:45.137
and also has good consequences.

0:06:45.161,0:06:46.807
In the words of Michel Foucault,

0:06:46.831,0:06:48.771
it is a "technology of the self."

0:06:48.795,0:06:51.632
It is a technology[br]that empowers the individual

0:06:51.656,0:06:53.471
to determine its own life course,

0:06:53.495,0:06:55.014
to shape itself.

0:06:55.850,0:06:59.094
But the problem is,[br]as Foucault points out,

0:06:59.358,0:07:01.143
that every technology of the self

0:07:01.167,0:07:04.612
has a technology of domination[br]as its flip side.

0:07:04.636,0:07:09.239
As you see in today's modern[br]liberal democracies,

0:07:09.263,0:07:13.946
the society, the state,[br]not only allows us to determine our self,

0:07:13.970,0:07:15.121
to shape our self,

0:07:15.145,0:07:17.136
it also demands it of us.

0:07:17.160,0:07:19.121
It demands that we optimize ourselves,

0:07:19.145,0:07:20.985
that we control ourselves,

0:07:21.009,0:07:23.720
that we self-manage continuously,

0:07:23.744,0:07:27.347
because that's the only way[br]in which such a liberal society works.

0:07:27.434,0:07:28.450
In a way,

0:07:28.585,0:07:32.069
the kind of devices like[br]Fred Stutzman's "Freedom,"

0:07:32.125,0:07:35.593
or Buster Benson's Helth Month,[br]are technologies of domination,

0:07:35.601,0:07:37.334
because they want us to be

0:07:37.513,0:07:40.855
(Robotic voice) fitter, happier,[br]more productive,

0:07:40.950,0:07:43.902
comfortable, not drinking too much,

0:07:44.069,0:07:47.553
regular exercise at the gym[br]three days a week,

0:07:47.688,0:07:51.521
gettin on better with your[br]associate employee contemporaries.

0:07:51.546,0:07:53.434
At ease.[br]Eating well.

0:07:53.530,0:07:56.878
No more microwave dinners[br]and saturated fats.

0:07:56.966,0:08:00.148
A patient, better driver,[br]a safer car,

0:08:00.212,0:08:02.188
[unclear]

0:08:02.228,0:08:04.807
sleeping well, no bad dreams.

0:08:06.261,0:08:10.529
SD: These technologies want us[br]to stay in the game

0:08:10.553,0:08:13.326
that society has devised for us.

0:08:13.350,0:08:15.637
They want us to fit in even better.

0:08:15.661,0:08:18.239
They want us to optimize[br]ourselves to fit in.

0:08:19.168,0:08:22.247
Now, I don't say that[br]is necessarily a bad thing;

0:08:22.833,0:08:27.161
I just think that this example[br]points us to a general realization,

0:08:27.185,0:08:30.988
and that is: no matter what technology[br]or design you look at,

0:08:31.012,0:08:34.033
even something we consider[br]as well-intended

0:08:35.857,0:08:38.994
and as good in its effects[br]as Stutzman's Freedom,

0:08:39.246,0:08:41.953
comes with certain values embedded in it.

0:08:41.977,0:08:43.914
And we can question these values.

0:08:43.938,0:08:45.882
We can question: Is it a good thing

0:08:45.906,0:08:49.390
that all of us continuously[br]self-optimize ourselves

0:08:49.414,0:08:51.425
to fit better into that society?

0:08:51.449,0:08:52.941
Or to give you another example:

0:08:52.976,0:08:56.031
the one at the initial presentation,

0:08:56.065,0:08:58.541
What about a piece[br]of persuasive technology

0:08:58.565,0:09:01.756
that convinces Muslim women[br]to wear their headscarves?

0:09:01.780,0:09:03.832
Is that a good or a bad technology

0:09:03.856,0:09:06.419
in its intentions or in its effects?

0:09:07.143,0:09:11.397
Well, that basically depends on[br]the kind of values you bring to bear

0:09:11.421,0:09:13.658
to make these kinds of judgments.

0:09:13.682,0:09:15.210
So that's a third question:

0:09:15.234,0:09:16.762
What values do you use to judge?

0:09:17.388,0:09:18.729
And speaking of values:

0:09:18.753,0:09:22.109
I've noticed that in the discussion[br]about moral persuasion online

0:09:22.133,0:09:23.770
and when I'm talking with people,

0:09:24.394,0:09:27.061
more often than not,[br]there is a weird bias.

0:09:27.603,0:09:30.499
And that bias is that we're asking:

0:09:30.523,0:09:33.336
Is this or that "still" ethical?

0:09:33.360,0:09:36.010
Is it "still" permissible?

0:09:37.234,0:09:38.432
We're asking things like:

0:09:38.456,0:09:40.645
Is this Oxfam donation form,

0:09:40.669,0:09:43.717
where the regular monthly[br]donation is the preset default,

0:09:43.741,0:09:45.820
and people, maybe without intending it,

0:09:45.844,0:09:50.455
are encouraged or nudged[br]into giving a regular donation

0:09:50.480,0:09:51.969
instead of a one-time donation,

0:09:51.993,0:09:53.336
is that "still' permissible?

0:09:53.360,0:09:54.723
Is it "still" ethical?

0:09:54.747,0:09:56.226
We're fishing at the low end.

0:09:56.819,0:09:59.293
But in fact, that question,[br]"Is it 'still' ethical?"

0:09:59.317,0:10:01.098
is just one way of looking at ethics.

0:10:01.122,0:10:06.014
Because if you look at the beginning[br]of ethics in Western culture,

0:10:06.038,0:10:09.570
you see a very different idea[br]of what ethics also could be.

0:10:09.910,0:10:13.907
For Aristotle, ethics[br]was not about the question,

0:10:13.931,0:10:16.203
"Is that still good, or is it bad?"

0:10:16.227,0:10:19.655
Ethics was about the question[br]of how to live life well.

0:10:20.156,0:10:22.337
And he put that in the word "arête,"

0:10:22.361,0:10:25.116
which we, from [Ancient Greek],[br]translate as "virtue."

0:10:25.140,0:10:26.780
But really, it means "excellence."

0:10:26.804,0:10:32.235
It means living up to your own[br]full potential as a human being.

0:10:33.377,0:10:35.033
And that is an idea that, I think,

0:10:35.057,0:10:38.353
Paul Richard Buchanan[br]put nicely in a recent essay,

0:10:38.378,0:10:40.521
where he said,[br]"Products are vivid arguments

0:10:40.545,0:10:42.668
about how we should live our lives."

0:10:43.126,0:10:45.703
Our designs are not ethical or unethical

0:10:45.727,0:10:50.317
in that they're using ethical[br]or unethical means of persuading us.

0:10:50.701,0:10:52.271
They have a moral component

0:10:52.295,0:10:56.522
just in the kind of vision[br]and the aspiration of the good life

0:10:56.546,0:10:57.894
that they present to us.

0:10:58.381,0:11:01.884
And if you look into the designed[br]environment around us

0:11:01.908,0:11:03.080
with that kind of lens,

0:11:03.104,0:11:05.557
asking, "What is the vision[br]of the good life

0:11:05.581,0:11:08.319
that our products, our design,[br]present to us?",

0:11:08.343,0:11:10.619
then you often get the shivers,

0:11:10.643,0:11:12.971
because of how little[br]we expect of each other,

0:11:12.995,0:11:16.885
of how little we actually[br]seem to expect of our life,

0:11:16.909,0:11:18.943
and what the good life looks like.

0:11:20.050,0:11:23.073
So that's a fourth question[br]I'd like to leave you with:

0:11:23.397,0:11:27.759
What vision of the good life[br]do your designs convey?

0:11:28.489,0:11:29.861
And speaking of design,

0:11:29.885,0:11:34.075
you'll notice that I already[br]broadened the discussion,

0:11:34.099,0:11:38.543
because it's not just persuasive[br]technology that we're talking about here,

0:11:38.567,0:11:42.644
it's any piece of design[br]that we put out here in the world.

0:11:42.668,0:11:44.068
I don't know whether you know

0:11:44.092,0:11:47.647
the great communication researcher[br]Paul Watzlawick who, back in the '60s,

0:11:47.671,0:11:50.182
made the argument[br]that we cannot not communicate.

0:11:50.206,0:11:52.807
Even if we choose to be silent,[br]we chose to be silent,

0:11:52.831,0:11:55.787
and we're communicating something[br]by choosing to be silent.

0:11:55.811,0:11:58.546
And in the same way[br]that we cannot not communicate,

0:11:58.570,0:12:00.101
we cannot not persuade:

0:12:00.125,0:12:02.136
whatever we do or refrain from doing,

0:12:02.160,0:12:06.525
whatever we put out there[br]as a piece of design, into the world,

0:12:06.549,0:12:08.596
has a persuasive component.

0:12:08.620,0:12:10.493
It tries to affect people.

0:12:10.517,0:12:14.264
It puts a certain vision of the good life[br]out there in front of us,

0:12:14.888,0:12:16.513
which is what Peter-Paul Verbeek,

0:12:16.537,0:12:19.253
the Dutch philosopher of technology, says.

0:12:20.277,0:12:24.225
No matter whether we as designers[br]intend it or not,

0:12:24.249,0:12:26.391
we materialize morality.

0:12:26.415,0:12:29.218
We make certain things[br]harder and easier to do.

0:12:29.242,0:12:31.453
We organize the existence of people.

0:12:31.477,0:12:32.628
We put a certain vision

0:12:32.652,0:12:36.056
of what good or bad or normal or usual is

0:12:36.080,0:12:37.231
in front of people,

0:12:37.255,0:12:39.655
by everything we put[br]out there in the world.

0:12:40.087,0:12:43.173
Even something as innocuous[br]as a set of school chairs

0:12:43.203,0:12:47.409
as a set of chairs that you're sitting on[br]and I'm standing in front of,

0:12:48.297,0:12:50.344
is a persuasive technology,

0:12:50.368,0:12:55.058
because it presents and materializes[br]a certain vision of the good life...

0:12:55.082,0:12:57.939
A good life in which teaching[br]and learning and listening

0:12:57.963,0:13:01.062
is about one person teaching,[br]the others listening;

0:13:01.086,0:13:05.139
in which it is about[br]learning-is-done-while-sitting;

0:13:05.163,0:13:06.758
in which you learn for yourself;

0:13:06.782,0:13:09.202
in which you're not supposed[br]to change these rules,

0:13:09.226,0:13:11.673
because the chairs[br]are fixed to the ground.

0:13:12.828,0:13:15.739
And even something as innocuous[br]as a single-design chair,

0:13:15.763,0:13:17.335
like this one by Arne Jacobsen,

0:13:17.359,0:13:19.135
is a persuasive technology,

0:13:19.159,0:13:22.202
because, again, it communicates[br]an idea of the good life:

0:13:22.675,0:13:28.087
a good life... a life that you,[br]as a designer, consent to by saying,

0:13:28.124,0:13:31.631
"In a good life, goods are produced[br]as sustainably or unsustainably

0:13:31.655,0:13:33.266
as this chair.

0:13:33.290,0:13:35.267
Workers are treated as well or as badly

0:13:35.291,0:13:37.863
as the workers were treated[br]that built that chair."

0:13:38.202,0:13:40.503
The good life is a life[br]where design is important

0:13:40.527,0:13:43.448
because somebody obviously took[br]the time and spent the money

0:13:43.472,0:13:45.256
for that kind of well-designed chair;

0:13:45.280,0:13:46.684
where tradition is important,

0:13:46.708,0:13:49.874
because this is a traditional classic[br]and someone cared about this;

0:13:49.898,0:13:52.588
and where there is something[br]as conspicuous consumption,

0:13:52.612,0:13:55.568
where it is OK and normal to spend[br]a humongous amount of money

0:13:55.592,0:13:57.642
on such a chair,

0:13:57.667,0:14:00.240
to signal to other people[br]what your social status is.

0:14:02.164,0:14:05.481
So these are the kinds of layers,[br]the kinds of questions

0:14:05.505,0:14:07.475
I wanted to lead you through today;

0:14:07.499,0:14:10.533
the question of: What are the intentions[br]that you bring to bear

0:14:10.557,0:14:12.117
when you're designing something?

0:14:12.141,0:14:15.393
What are the effects, intended[br]and unintended, that you're having?

0:14:15.417,0:14:18.218
What are the values[br]you're using to judge those?

0:14:18.242,0:14:20.215
What are the virtues, the aspirations

0:14:20.239,0:14:22.267
that you're actually expressing in that?

0:14:22.640,0:14:24.497
And how does that apply,

0:14:24.521,0:14:26.507
not just to persuasive technology,

0:14:26.531,0:14:28.579
but to everything you design?

0:14:29.452,0:14:30.743
Do we stop there?

0:14:31.355,0:14:32.522
I don't think so.

0:14:32.831,0:14:37.269
I think that all of these things[br]are eventually informed

0:14:37.293,0:14:38.716
by the core of all of this,

0:14:38.740,0:14:41.831
and this is nothing but life itself.

0:14:42.134,0:14:44.851
Why, when the question[br]of what the good life is

0:14:44.875,0:14:47.214
informs everything that we design,

0:14:47.238,0:14:50.032
should we stop at design[br]and not ask ourselves:

0:14:50.056,0:14:52.046
How does it apply to our own life?

0:14:52.421,0:14:55.133
"Why should the lamp[br]or the house be an art object,

0:14:55.157,0:14:56.333
but not our life?"

0:14:56.357,0:14:57.840
as Michel Foucault puts it.

0:14:58.236,0:15:01.764
Just to give you a practical[br]example of Buster Benson.

0:15:01.789,0:15:03.765
whom I mentioned at the beginning.

0:15:03.871,0:15:06.728
This is Buster setting[br]up a pull-up machine

0:15:06.753,0:15:09.365
at the office of his new[br]start-up, Habit Labs,

0:15:09.389,0:15:12.604
where they're trying to build[br]other applications like "Health Month"

0:15:12.628,0:15:13.786
for people.

0:15:13.810,0:15:15.772
And why is he building a thing like this?

0:15:15.796,0:15:17.829
Well, here is the set of axioms

0:15:17.853,0:15:22.897
that Habit Labs, Buster's start-up,[br]put up for themselves

0:15:22.975,0:15:25.680
on how they wanted to work[br]together as a team

0:15:25.704,0:15:27.733
when they're building[br]these applications...

0:15:27.757,0:15:29.946
A set of moral principles[br]they set themselves

0:15:29.970,0:15:31.331
for working together...

0:15:31.355,0:15:32.593
One of them being,

0:15:32.617,0:15:35.704
"We take care of our own health[br]and manage our own burnout."

0:15:36.061,0:15:40.901
Because ultimately,[br]how can you ask yourselves

0:15:40.985,0:15:44.915
and how can you find an answer[br]on what vision of the good life

0:15:44.939,0:15:48.108
you want to convey and create[br]with your designs

0:15:48.132,0:15:49.862
without asking the question:

0:15:49.886,0:15:53.718
What vision of the good life[br]do you yourself want to live?

0:15:53.885,0:15:55.059
And with that,

0:15:55.827,0:15:57.239
I thank you.

0:15:57.494,0:16:01.650
(Applause)