• Human tactile acuity can reach 13 nm, as reported in a 2013 Nature paper (https://www.nature.com/articles/srep02617), highlighting the extraordinary sensitivity of biological mechanoreceptors.

• Discussion of the 2008–2011 Google Books settlement attempt: Google tried to secure a compulsory, perpetual license to all copyrighted books worldwide via a class-action settlement, but the court rejected it in 2011 over copyright, antitrust, and privacy concerns.

• Participants debated the legal precedent set by Authors Guild v. Google, noting that while Google’s mass scanning was ultimately deemed fair use for search and snippet display, the ruling appears to hinge on “transformative” use rather than simple possession.

• Implication drawn for AI training data: if Google can legally possess and process entire copyrighted corpora for search, similar logic could shield OpenAI or others who scrape books for model training, provided the output is “transformative” and not a market substitute.

• Open question raised: why the AI community still operates in a “cloak-and-dagger” manner around data acquisition when the Google Books precedent suggests that mere possession for computational purposes may be lawful.

• Brief mention of “organ futures” as an emerging fintech concept—financial instruments that could allow trading or speculation on future availability of human organs (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_futures).