Thank you. Cool talk so far. Like my son Harvey here, we all love to explore and we all love to ask questions. We're all scientists under the skin. It's just a lot of us have been educated out of this view. Open science is the idea that anyone can get involved because everything is freely available and open on the web. I work on a disease called Shistosemisus and Nicolectotropical disease that affects about half a billion people around the world. It's a big problem. It's a parasite that lives in your blood and it does very bad things to you. It's a Nicolectotropical disease meaning there's very little funding for a given amount of suffering it causes. There's a great drug, Prozacquanzil, this is a chemical structure for the drug. It's a synthetic compound that is made on a ton scale by a company in South Korea called Shimpoong. Distributed by the Gates Foundation, WHO, by the Shistosemisus control initiative in Imperial College in London. It has a feature. It's asymmetric. It's mirror image doesn't superimpose back on itself like your hands. They're the same but not. Limonines like this, once smells of lemons, once smells of oranges, they're mirror images. This is my wife, she's symmetric, which is why she says beautiful. The Prozacquanzil has this feature. Generally it's easier to make symmetric things like bowls and mugs and stuff. By the time you get to this road and sculpture which is asymmetric it gets expensive. This is a problem with molecules if you're going to make things cheaply. Pony glycotropical diseases for example. The thing about organic chemistry is that we can make any molecule you want for a price. Anything you want, this is my to toxin. They're very complicated molecule. So you're made by a lab in the States. The problem is the price. We can make it but the cost is a problem. For Shistos we want this drug, the Prozacquanzil for a low price. It has this feature of asymmetry. We've got the thing on the top. We want the thing on the bottom left. We don't want the thing on the bottom right. How do we do that and keep the price down? Well we need to be able to solve this problem if we're any good at anything. How do you solve problems like this? You're either working academia like this where you have a cathedral model, software guys should know about this. Where everything works beautifully and someone's in charge and there's artisans who are highly trained and things. Or you do the bizarre model. Anyone can come along and it's a bit chaotic and smells a little bit but it gets things done. I think we need the bottom thing. Science does things on the left. Long processes appear review and people reproducing other people's work and it's lengthy and cost a lot of money. I think we need the thing on the right where everyone works at the same time on the web gets things done cheaply. Openly. Now there's some things about this which are tricky. This is the basic cycle. You post a problem on the web. You post kernel data. People reveal holes in your approach and you ask the community for input. The community provides detail about how you might improve it and then someone in charge prunes it. This is just the open cycle, pretty clear and pretty obvious. So to do this you have to post data, kernel data. We did this. This paper up on the top here and Glaxo has done this with malaria data. This is step one though. You want to collaborate on the web. You want to work with people and not just post data. So open science is an active process of collaboration on the web. We started a website called synaptically where we posted our initial data for free for everyone to see. And we got a kind of trickle of interest like this great suggestion by a colleague of mine on the bottom, Craig Williams in Queensland who suggested something but what really changed our project was we were funded by the Australian government and the World Health Organization to do this project. And now what we're doing is posting a lot of raw data on the web on this website on the bottom. Every experiment we do is revealed for free on the web and this reaction that we're doing on the top is the cool thing we're doing at the moment. What's amazing about this project really is we've had companies donate things to an open project. Companies becoming involved. Isn't that surprising? Maybe not because they're able to showcase their expertise without fear of client confidentiality. So it's been a wonderful journey to have that happening. Why would you do science in this way? Well, one big thing of course is it's transparent. You can re-engage the public by doing science this way. It's a great thing to re-engage their trust because they're funding the science, right? They should be able to see what's going on. Another big advantage of doing open science like this is that if somebody dies or if the money runs out or something, they can be replaced like a staffish. You lock off one of those arms and it just re-grows. Everything is on the web. So it always carries on no matter what happens to the project. The big advantage of open science, there is speed. Open science is fast, right? Experts can identify themselves and help you out in whatever you want to do. I don't think in the future that traditional science in closed labs is going to be able to compete with open science for speed once it gets established. What we've learned in the last few years of doing this is that you need to post stuff on the web for people to get their teastuck into. You have to post kernel data. You've got to just ask people for help and expect to reply. You've got to post data for people to get their teastuck into. That's crucial. It's something we're addressing right now. In the future, I guess the thing that we really need is a way of collaborating with people on the web and experimental science is really hard. We need a killer application, an electronic lab book that allows collaboration to happen just as easy as you were talking to someone in the lab or something. Where are we going with this? We're right at the start. We need to move beyond philanthropy into science in more general areas. We need to show the funding agencies that science like this can leverage funding from a small amount of money to a large amount of effort. We need you guys, the public and everybody else to get involved and release your inner geek. Thanks.