Real-world problems, a lot of times they don't have a clear bottom line win, otherwise wouldn't debate things. According to Roo, set by the candidates themselves. What we are trying to accomplish here is really to demonstrate that we can have a meaningful and valuable discussion between men and machine. We are actually trying to show that a computer system can add, if you want a conversation or decision making, by bringing facts and doing a different kind of argumentation. Hello Dan. Thank you for the opportunity to be here today. The debate system tries to understand the concept over which we are debating. Having analyzed the data, I will argue that we should subsidize music education. When it gets the topic until you hear the first speech it's collecting all the possible arguments, trying to remove redundancy. It is about recognizing important issues for society. The system is evolving. IBM's debate can have all the opinions in the world, but IBM's debate does not pay taxes and we do. You are speaking at the extremely fast rate of 218 words per minute. There is no need to hurry. The value of this technology is really to allow decision makers to take more informed decisions. There is a territory which is uncharted to some extent and this is where we are now. Thank you for listening.