 Greetings, I'm Audrey Tang, Taiwan's digital minister, and really happy to be here virtually in the Morals and Machines event to talk about Taiwan's digital transformation. The first question is, why do I think Taiwan has been so successful in managing digital transformation? Well, indeed, Taiwan is selected as one of the top four super innovators according to the World Economic Forum, and the reason I think is that we have broadband is human rights. Whereas in other countries, you may have internet as a human right, but in Taiwan, anywhere you have 10 megabits per second, if you don't, it's my fault. And we make sure that the 4G unlimited data plan is just around 15 euros per month. Combined, it makes that any new government services reaches the maximum amount of people. And we also make sure that in indigenous places, in the rural places and so on, that are the places that we look first when we're deploying 5G connectivity. And so the geography of Taiwan, of course, also help from the northmost to the southmost of Taiwan, it's just one hour and a half by high speed rails. So because of that, I think we can be maximally inclusive when we're rolling out new digital services, along with a constitutionally protected education budget that makes sure that design thinking and creative thinking can be empowering all the students regardless of where they are in the Taiwan Island. The second question is, for a country to be equipped for the digital future, its inhabitants must be equipped for it. How should the education system be designed so that the citizens are equipped to live and work in the digital future and so that their fears are removed? So I think it's very important to have people's fear, uncertainty and doubt, to be answered through practice as early as possible. I often take the metaphor of fire. Fire is, of course, the origin of civilization, but it's also very dangerous. It has the potential to destroy cities. But people worked with fire by not limiting it to a series of ritualistic priests or shamans or paramedic, right? People teach each other cooking, even young child cooking as early as possible. So people understand the dangers, but as well as the safety concerns of fire. So it's the same as with machine learning as a one, because we have broadens the human right from this year onward. We are introducing a new curriculum that have media literacy and ICT critical thinking skills, not as one particular class, but integrating it into all the different classes and different fields of education. And so through this way, people learn from a very early age to become data stewards, to become responsible data holders so that they can measure, for example, their air quality is very easily from their schools at their packed balcony and so on, so that the abstract concepts, such as accountability, data stewardship and so on, make sense in a very early age. And we'll also give all the primary school children free access to our Taiwanese supercomputer, which is top 20 supercomputer cluster that has equipped with in place open data storage of all the atmospheric data and meteorological data and so on, so they can freely do experiments on it. The third question concerns the digital transformation about the democracy, which focus our mindset more on political decision making and participation through digital media and processes. So what would be the core elements of democracy? 4.0, I think the core element, as with other democracy revisions, is trust and legitimacy. In social media nowadays, people tend to have polarized views because the government doesn't give a context of the why of policymaking, but just the what of policymaking. So personally, I practice radical transparency. Every single meeting that I chair, every meeting with journalists and lobbies and so on, we publish the full transcript after 10 days of co-editing into the internet for a future reference. And through this way, people cannot really argue from a private benefit in lobbying, they have to argue based on public benefits. And by radical transparency, people can also sit virtually in my office and feel what it's like to be in the daily life of a digital minister. And so through this way, the accountability is provided well before the policy is introduced and that I think builds the foundation of trust because then people can understand why and the context of policymaking. The fourth question concerns, do we need new ethical rules in the digital world? Of course, the digital world will have different rules of engagement. You tend to engage with parts of people rather than the entirety of people. You tend to engage with people's synthetic image of themselves instead of a spontaneous image of themselves. And all this change a rule of engagement drastically. This year, we're witnessing artificial intelligence that is capable of synthesizing what looks like coherent speech. If you go to talktotransformer.com, they can generate essays that on the surface looks very convincing, but it's actually synthetic. And the same goes to so-called deep fake technologies for facial expressions and things like that. And so we need new ethical rules in making sure that people can attribute the text, the image, the authorship into a accountable fashion that people can understand when algorithm make judgments based on the profiles that they get collected. They need to understand the data is the beginning of a relationship that imbues the fiduciary duty of the data operators. And if the data operator uses it instead to generate synthetic images that falsely represent the person donating their personal likeness and so on, that would be a violation of trust. And all this were not possible or at least were very expensive for the current generation of machine learning algorithms. So I think the society needs to have a public, not just demonstration, but rather a public conversation around it and to establish new ethical norms. The fifth question is, what is being radically transparent as I explained mean to me and how has it changed myself? Well, as a open source developer and engaged in a free software movement, radical transparency is just a norm, right? Because the internet government derives its legitimacy in radical transparency. The internet society, the RFC process, the IETF has no army, has no navy, has no air force. So the only way that they can compel people to adopt radically new protocols is just to radical transparency and by radical transparency also radical participation. And by radical, I mean at a root, meaning that from the inception of the idea into the deployment and iteration of feedback, everything needs to be kept in a way that makes the full accountability like every line of code, every line of change, every documentation change, every test change need to attribute it to somebody and that somebody need to be held into account to explain why exactly is they doing this commit message or pull requests or things like that. And so I'm at a moment just putting this into a political realm so that we can deal with code, not just the code of algorithm but also code of law. With this question concerns, how can we achieve more diverse representation in the field of developers who are sharing our future? I like this question very much. I think diverse representation stems from diverse backgrounds of living. So in Taiwan, actually in the east side of Taiwan, about half of our territory is around 15 or 16 indigenous nations. And each of them bring a diverse culture that is very different from the western part of Taiwan which is considerably more western. So I think what really makes sense is not one side or the other dominating the discussion but rather making sure that all our public decisions if they concern for example a precinct or a township that has more than half population in one particular indigenous nation then it need to be done bilingually or even in the language of that nation. And when we choose the language this way we also use machine learning like we partner with the Mozilla Common Voice to make sure that the indigenous people people with more lower resources when it comes to convincing the multinational to adopt their languages won't shrink from the introduction of voice technology and other machine learning technologies but rather can introduce their language in a way that is effortless as possible. We have specific acts such as the National Languages Act the Indigenous Languages Act and things like that to ensure the equal representation and also re-presentation of their culture into our K-12 curriculum. So regardless of what ethnicity you are you can opt in and become part of the indigenous culture just in the K-12 education. The seventh question concerns what would I have done in my life? I haven't taken a job as a digital minister but actually this is exactly the same thing as I've always been doing. Regardless of whether I wear the hat as a digital minister or as a civic hacker or a hacktivist I'm always doing the same thing namely making online channels that can collect the collective intelligence and demodulate and modulate the various different positions so that we can find common values out of the potential diverse, divisive landscapes and perspectives. And the internet is very powerful because it lets people find their tribe people who think like you but also it lets you find people who don't think like you but nevertheless can converse with the same value as you even from a different position or perspective. So for one particular policy matter you may have people who specifically understand the domain or people understand the emerging technologies that can bring better solutions or people who are working in the public service or the regulatory sector that can realize this for maximization of social impact and my work is just to create spaces such as a Taiwan presidential hackathon to put those trialing words together and give them binding power namely by giving the president's award a trophy that when awarded to five teams every year the trophy is a projector they will turn it on that projects the image of the president handing the trophy to you and it signals the presidential promise that whatever you prototype during the three months of hackathon we will actually take it to the public service and maintain it indefinitely but actually a large charity a large NPO a large international NGO a large multinational a large for-profit company with good CSR strategy can all do this, right? It doesn't have to be a public sector or the president it can be realized in any of the different fashions as long as they work toward the common goals that is the UN sustainable development goals at the moment and so I'm very happy to work across sectors by using exactly some methodology and toward exactly some aim that is partnership for the global goals and finally the last question well we'll have changed the Taiwanese society in a way people interact with the digital world in five years time well we have the digital transformation plan that says in the next five years time we will have digital twins of each other that is to say we will be very easily interacting with the virtual avatars through 5G technology so that in a classroom there may be actually from six different classrooms that will weave them together into a virtual classroom and people can interact with other people in real time as if they're actually there and interact in a way that maximizes the teaching's impact toward people in rural or indigenous places and things like that so you can see that Taiwan values by far the equality and social justice of digital transformation we want to empower the people who are currently blocked by geography blocked by cultural differences blocked by a minority status in the community and so on but bring them into this new digital world that is maximally inclusive by automatically presenting their positions their sentiments, their feelings in a way that can build empathy between people of different cultures and let people build a policy which we call holopolis it is like a holographic polis of people and let people understand that we have the common future and we can deliberate the common future not just by voting which is like providing three bits of information uploading every four years but rather through radical participation in the budget level, in the presidential hackathon level in regulatory co-creation level through sandboxes as well as just by mobilizing social resources so that we can realize the social benefits and environmental benefits with a good business model as well so this is called triple bottom line so I think the digital technologies is just to make sure that people trust each other's numbers more through distributed ledgers and so on to foster effective partnership as I mentioned about trial and goal teams as well as open innovation so that people don't have to fail they can just try and find out what doesn't work what does work but maximizing whatever that they learned into a digital world in the commons so thank you for listening and this is my contribution to the Morris and the machines event thank you so much