 Mae'r unrhyw bwysig. Mae'r unrhyw bwysig wedi'u gweld wedi gwaith. Mae'r unrhyw bwysig yw gyrtu ddim o bwysig, Gynnu Gweithio Llyfrgell Prif Weinidog am gondol gyda'rifeil i'r gweithio Llyfrgell Pwysig. Mae'r gandol sy'n amlwygr i ddim i ddim. Maen nhw, dyw dros ymmgynnwys? Mae'r dim. Mae'n gwybod i'r begwr i bwysig ac y gallwn wedi'u gweld i neud o'r ddweud y mynd i'r maen nhw'n gweithio. A hynny'n ddweud, mae'n dechrau bod yn rhaid i gyd yn bwysig eu cyfnodd a oedd y gallwn eich hun o'r bwysig o'r ddweud o'r ddweud, ond ond mae'n gwneud o'r ddweud o'r ddweud, o'r ddweud o ddweud o'r ddweud. Dyma'r hynny'n ei wneud o ddweud o'r ddweud o'r ddweud o'r ddweud o'r ddweud o'r ddweud bydd y bydd y gallwn cyfleoedd yno sydd er mwynhau hwyl ychydig yn yr unig. Yn oedd yn cyhoedd ymlaen, ond mae'n gweithio ar gyfer y dyfodol, ac mae'n cyffredinol ar gyfer cyflor o'r gael gwybod a'r cyfynod dda, yn rhan o'r rhan o'r gweithio ar gyfer gweithio ar gweithio. Ac yn y gweithio ar gyfer gweithio, ac mae'n rhan o'n gweithio ar gyfer gweithio ar y cyfyrdd ac mae'n gweithio ar gyfer gweithio ar gyfer gweithio. Ond mae wedi cael ei gweithio ar gyfer gweithio. So, that's a good progress. The other progress I would like to mention is that every ministry now has a team of what we call participation officers. That is to say a team of people who are charged to engage with any petitioners or anything that are emergent from the civil society and again this is a regulation on the administration level not answering to my office a raddwyd is a part of the state system now. So that anything that is cross ministry. Previously they would just get an explanation but now they would get a solution because those participation officers will travel and meet the petitioners in real time and with digitally assisted tools so that when people are cannot make it to rural places or remote islands, they can never, at least participate in the first two phase discussion. Y sydd y sydd wedi mynd i ni wedi ddim yn ddechrau ddaith eich cynymethaeth o'r ddweud o'r system ffiamol yn ymwneud. Felly mae'n ddweud o'r cymdeithio ac yn cyflosio'r meddwl. Felly mae'n ddweud i'n meddwl hwn o'r ddaith, a'r ddweud o gweithio o'r ddweud o'r ddweud o'r ddweud o'r gyfrifiad i'n ddweud o'r ddweud o'r Tauwan o'u ddweud o'r parrgynig o'r pob yn Pesgadorau ac oes. ond yn ydy'r rhan o'r cyhoedd, am y rhaid i'r ardych chi, rhaid i'n ymddian ar gyfer o'r gyflawni'r economi a'r holl. Sut oedd y system wedi'u cyflawni ar gyfer o'r ysgrifennidau ar gyfer o'r rhaid i'r holl, a oedd 33 miliwn o'r cyhoedd ymlaen i'r 5 miliwn i'r cyhoedd yma. Sut oedd yr ardych chi'n rhaid i'r holl, o'r rhaid i'r holl, o'r holl o'r 500 miliwn i'r holl, o'r holl o'r cyhoedd? But success and failures... One of the biggest success is that we established a sandbox system. What we mean by sandbox is a experimentation period where the civil society or private sector can say our existing financial regulation is in the way of innovation. but instead of fighting in a parliament they can say, I want a new revised regulation and I want to operate under this new system so even the legal code itself is open-source, you can change it to a contrasting direction and then you can experiment with this alternate version of the code for Libya in a limited risk environment. mae ydych yn cael rhywbeth ymlaen ychydig. Mae gennych chi'n gweithio llawer o bellach a'r eich mwylau'r bwysig wedi unrhyw o'r mater. Yr eich mwylau'r bwysig ar hyn yn safbwyntu'r bwysig yn cyffer y pwnnigau. mae dyma'n Trywbeth. Yn cyfaf ychydig, mae'r regu wneud, eu gwaith felly rydych yn gymryd ysgol ddau. Ac yna yw iawn, mae'r regu yn gyfreoedd o'r plafforn i'r Janer ar draws, a we established a Fintech sandbox on April this year and then at the end of the year we expect to pass another what we call AI mobility sandbox which talks about autonomous vehicles that can be, you know, a car that drives and then flies or a ship that sails and then becomes a car it could be a hybrid between various modalities and that can also be experimented for a year and extended to two years and if it's a good idea then our regulation changes because of it and if it requires a law change then the experiment can be extended up to four years, again a longest period in anywhere in the world I'm sorry, plus I'm mobile for the next question. Yes, I have it in English. I would also like to talk about failures. So there was a notable shortcoming when we first did the Uber case in 2015 that was also very wisely reported in French media and so because of that I would like to add something that I consider as shortcomings in retrospect. There are three shortcomings. First, when we did the consultation Uber was only operating in Taipei City and New Taipei and maybe a little bit of Taoyuan so in north Taiwan it's like it's only operating in Paris. So because of that the stakeholders we did in this consultation mechanism only included the labour unions of taxi drivers, the existing taxi fleets operating in that region and we did achieve consensus and it was ratified and now Uber is operating legally and you can call taxi using Uber app and so on it's all very well done but it did not include stakeholders in southern part of Taiwan which Uber again started operating after our consultation so it is in retrospect the south part of Taiwan's taxi drivers view is unfair because it while its consensus is north Taiwan's consensus and somehow it becomes lost that affects them so I think that is a major shortcoming and the second thing is that when we did the consultation we did not involve the career public servants mostly we rely on the volunteers from the zero community to run the system so what is very successful when the next minister want to run something like it and ask their staff to run it they don't know how to run it at all because it was done by outside experts and so we are remedying this now by having participation officers to be all career public servants so that this skill can accumulate within the public service instead of rely on outside experts and so that was a shortcoming that we are trying to ameliorate now and now the third shortcoming is that during the discussion with Uber there was a voice that says we should generalize this to sharing of parking lots to Airbnb to all the different platform economy cases but at that time we felt that because we engage already with ministry of economy, transportation and finance is already a lot of stakeholders if you want to talk about those other platform economy we have to engage more people and its very expensive both in time and cost so we said no we just focus on this particular case but unfortunately that came back to bite us because there is many other cases with similar structure so which is why as I mentioned this January we did a case of a general platform economy regulation that deals with platform economy in general but in retrospect if we had already done that in 2015 that would save three years of controversy so those are the shortcomings of the first UberX consultation If it's not too soon what is today the legacy of the re-tage of the sunflower movement has it changed the time in society? Yes I think in the mayoral election following the sunflower movement any mayor that speaks an authoritarian language that is against public transparency lost the election and there are some mayors who are sunflower supporters who did not expect to be elected never the less got elected just because they advocated for the sunflower values and so because of that that becomes part of the Taiwan identity democracy in the sense that democracy is not just about voting every four years but about every day we can see what is happening and any major politician at least have to pay lip service to this idea otherwise they don't have a political career and so I think that becomes a new norm of politicians in Taiwan Is it a coincidence if all these projects for democracy that the fact that you are pulering digital democracy emerge at a time where China threatens more and more openly the independence of the identity of Taiwan? Well I think the PRC is also advancing digital technology but perhaps to a very different direction that is still innovation by innovation in the name of authoritarian control so I would not say that they are not innovative they are very innovative just very different directions and so because of their advance in such innovations I think it is natural for them to try to influence the nearby powers to adopt this philosophy of authoritarian control because it is the nature of many states and governments to want authoritarian control and to curtail the space for the civil society It was just that there was no good technology to do that and so whatever liberty the civil society enjoys at those jurisdictions it may be an artifact of just there is no power structure that is enhanced by advanced digital surveillance technology So I would say the PRC is now actively exporting this philosophy and the digital system that associates with this philosophy and so I don't think this is particular about Taiwan although we are innovating in a very different direction but it is natural for an advanced political and philosophical system to want to expand its influence and its philosophy to like-minded jurisdictions Taiwan is creating its own Silicon Valley and wants to become the AI under the world, why? So our national plan is called Asia Dot Silicon Valley and I want the dot that connects Asia and Silicon Valley so I would not say that we are going to copy your Shanghai Silicon Valley that is not our goal, our goal is basically to look at the common issues faced by the Asian region which is very soon going to be the world's most populous region and suffers from the same climate, aging and various other sustainable development challenges and so we are innovating in response to those dojo needs and we solve not just our local issues like using AI to solve water leakage problem to solve water shortage issues as a result of climate change but we are also exporting the AI technology we developed for resilience for example right now in New Zealand a bunch of AI people from Taiwan and Taiwan water companies are helping them to solve the water shortage leakage issue which was not an issue because New Zealand didn't use to have a water shortage problem but because of climate change right so I think what I am saying is that we are not saying that Silicon Valley has all the answers, we are saying that Silicon Valley has a set of tools like machine learning that we are part of the creators of those tools but those tools must be deployed to solve real social and environmental issues in Taiwan and we are not just satisfied with solving these locally but also publicizing and sharing our results so that every other people in the Asian region suffering from the same environmental and social issues can enjoy this innovation that we connect the Silicon Valley's power to but it is an instrument of the Silicon Valley technologies, it is not an end in itself. In Europe from Platus Caverin we contrast virtual and real. In Taiwan men still have traditions for example the ancestral fish flying or stinky tofu recipes but they film it and put it on e-commerce sites and put virtual reality experiences that are flying fish in it. So it means that there is no two Taiwan, be Taiwan or real Taiwan, there is no opposition between the two sides of society. We are as president saying when declared in her campaign, her campaign idea is broadband as human right. Now many jurisdictions say this but very few actually deliver. Taiwan is one of the few places where we actually deliver broadband as a human right. Any place in Taiwan if you cannot connect to broadband internet is the government's fault. So because of this we don't have as you said the digital gap between the people who have access and the people who do not. Everybody is entitled to broadband access and even for poor families who cannot afford the tablets or the devices they can go to their local library, their local digital opportunities center or the local school to enjoy such access. And so because of that what we're saying is that it is not to Taiwan if we can include everyone in the digital transformation and indeed in terms of the broadband readiness Taiwan is like number one or number two in the world. You recently attended a meeting of the UN as in Geneva I think by Robert. What does your virtual presence mean for you? I attended many meetings in the UN this way. It's just that Geneva alone was a live stream from the internet. So I discovered the first one. No it's something that I've always been doing even before becoming additional minister and I see this as first it removes current footprints compared to flying and it also doesn't have genoc as a problem. So I think it's a very convenient way and in Madrid I actually appeared first as a robot. They call it Galatia that is a 360 robot that I can experience Madrid using virtual reality and after a week I fly to Madrid and the students they feel that I just change bodies from a silicon one to a carbon one. But it is a continuity of relationship and so I think telepresence is only going to be even more and more feasible to bind people's feelings together and not just abstract words or images and I think this makes a lot of sense in a diplomatic setting as well because people need to feel how it is like in various different corners of the world instead of seeing them just as abstract numbers. So I'm happy to demonstrate this but I think this is not something that is a one shot. It is an ongoing relationship. What are the most important influence of the destiny of humanity for you? The dialogue of men with machines? The dialogue itself is the important part. We are after all just containers of thoughts, the ideas, the thoughts they inhabit people who are ready for it and they also may inhabit machines that are ready for it. What I mean is a more relational view on things because I think at the moment many people especially in the Silicon Valley see data as something that is an asset, that's something that can be hoarded, something owned, can be sold, can be given and so on and so they see data exchange as a proxy of a dialogue and I think this is a dangerous view. I think data is just a beginning of a relationship. If I have some data that I create with you then we talk about how to make use of the data together. If you have some data that you entrust to me, we begin a relationship in which you can ask me about what am I doing with the data, about updating, about turning the data into something that is more accurately reflecting your in the moment state and not some state four years ago or ten years ago and so on and so I think this accountability mechanism, while very abstract if you read the GDPR, it is actually very humane. It talks about the agency that each actor, each person or each machine in the future has if they have a beginning of a relationship with any other entity, it is the agency of the data expression and the data as a social object that enables such reactions and actions and relationships and so taken in this view I think what is important is that it must be equitable and symmetric. If we have a relationship that only I can talk and you cannot, it is not a relationship, it is just control. Right, so what is important is the equitable and symmetric relationship of all the stakeholders involved and I think that is an important part. It doesn't quite matter how many of these are men or women or transgender or machines, but rather the importance is how equitable the message flows between the different men. Re-inventing democracy, strengthening individual freedoms including LGBT rights, Taiwan's identity and specificity has been strengthened in recent years. However, the island seems isolated on the international scene. How do you see and resist this paradox? Well, the island is pretty stable. I mean we have some aspects that we are generally doing fine and the influx of tourists have not stopped. It actually increased, but of course the demographics have changed slightly, but I would not say that we are being isolated. There are more people coming to Taiwan and also coming from Taiwan to other places and the international trade and exchange of information and knowledge and innovation, they have not stopped. So I think this is entirely in the mind of the frame of Taiwan. If you see Taiwan as an island with huge biodiversity, with the people's, with huge social diversity as well, and as you said the identity of us as an island where diverse values can still find common solutions to everyone, this value has not changed and indeed have only strengthened. Our influence to the region and to the world has only increased during the recent years. But if you talk about isolation, then that is taking a very West Valley view on things. So maybe only on the West Valley arena. Does this description make sense? I don't know, but as an artist I officially don't care. So that's my personal answer. Last question. As a child you do computers before you even own one. What remains of the dream and ups you have? I can still draw a keyboard for you here. It's still here. I always prefer stylus from Palm Pilot to Zoris to Note phone to the Apple Pencil. This I think is the same from the age when I was 8 years old when I started drawing. The keyboard was a pencil. I always preferred input modalities that makes the full use or the fuller use of body. So it could be gestures, it could be images, it could be the high quality recording like talking to the camera. But in other words I think computers as a bicycle of the mind. It carries the entirety of the mind and the body that is associated with the mind. This embodied computation and computer as a bicycle that carries us but ultimately we steer it and we pedal it. I think this is the same image, the same conception I had as a child and that I'm still applying this as a lesson today as a teacher. Merci beaucoup. Thank you very much. Not more questions. Thank you very much.