 Some of you may already know her. You see her around to do this so many times. Okay? But for those who don't know, our dear speaker let me introduce Audrey. Audrey Tang is a civic hacker and a Thailand's digital minister in charge of social communications. Audrey is known for revitalizing the computer languages throughout the capital as well as building the online spreadsheet system ever cut in collaboration with Dan Rippen. In the public sector, Audrey served the Thailand National Development Council's Open Data Community and K-12 Curriculum Committee and also had the company's first evil-making project. In the private sector, Audrey worked as a consultant to Apple on computational linguistics with Oxford University Press for incredible lexicography and with social text and social interaction design. In the social sector, Audrey contributes Thailand's government through the DOG-Zero or GATV, a vibrant community focusing on creating tools for civil society with a called work government. This afternoon's session is supposed to be a keynote, but we're doing things very differently. So before we begin, I would like to ask everyone to please switch on mobile phone's data if you have it. If you don't, please log in to this location's open Wi-Fi. Please open your phone's first. Connect to the Internet through IDIA, but you'll also be able to use your mobile Internet. So that's IDIA. If you don't have the Internet yet, then open the browser and log in. So we have four options. You can connect through guest 01, guest 02, up to 04. And the password will be the same as the usual view. So if you're accessing guest 01, your password will be guest 01. If you're accessing the other ones, guest 02 will have guest 02 as the password as well, up to guest 04. Is everybody ready? Okay. Get your phones ready. So instead of a typical keynote speech, our speaker would like to field questions. Make this more casual and make this more interactive. So if you have any questions that you feel like throwing in, about any issue, but hopefully you can throw questions about the youth and social innovation because our speaker is more than capable of answering the questions for you. Without further ado, everyone, minister Abidam. Thank you for your great introduction. And as I already said, the next hour will be highly interactive. Once you scan the STR code or alternately join the slide. And entering today's day 00729 without the pound sign, you will be able to post questions anonymously. Now, once you're posted your questions as, here we go. As you have posted your questions. As you can see, this is highly interactive. You can like each other's questions. Once you see a question that you would also like to ask, you can just press like. And so the more likes each question received, the higher it will be on this scoreboard. So as people can see, obviously, four people feel the need for me to speak more slowly. And here I am speaking more slowly. And once I answer to a question, I will just archive it so that you can see other questions as well. And the newest question appears on the bottom, such as an anonymous person posting their anonymous friends. The door's made, things for the anonymous like. And then we just continue. And so if by the end of this hour, I have been able to answer every question, then we'll just take a question, but I'll read through them all. However, if before the end of the hour, I've answered everything and nobody raised their hand, then we will call it an early exit. But that never happened. I don't think this will happen here. And at any time, if you feel that my answers is not intelligently satisfactory, you may also just raise your hand and the person raised their hand takes priority over the slide of questions. So that's our configuration. Is everybody okay with that? And I'm speaking in adequate speed, I trust. Okay, that's good. And so, let's get started. Six months, people would like to know, Dear Audrey, can I please introduce some experiences of the last presidential hackathon, which was just yesterday. And of course, I'm happy to bring some latest news about the presidential hackathon. This is my office, by the way. This is a cooler space than this one. And you're always welcome to visit. It's the social innovation lab near the Jay Gould flower market. And so, yeah, let's get started on the presidential hackathon. So the presidential hackathon is President Tsai's idea. President Tsai, in her inauguration speech, said, before we think of democracy as a clash between two opposing values. But now, through co-creation, we need to shape democracy into a conversation between diverse values. And indeed, for each innovation, there could be people who focus on their environmental growth, or people who focus on their sustainability of the social system. There could be people who focus on disruptiveness, that is to say, do things in a different way, people who would focus on the social justice and things like that. And traditionally, the public sector is invisible. So imagine that this is the ministry of the economy, and this is the ministry of the environment. And the public servant anonymously stored all the tensions between the different poles of the society and is very rarely visible. And so President Tsai just yesterday said in her kind of interaction with the public service, people are dressed very formally, speak in a very formal manner, very clearly articulated, even though people may not understand what they're articulating about. But anyway, they have this kind of professional look. However, the presidential mechanism is designed so that every public service can try out their latest ideas and experiment them with the civil society in the private sector for three months without having to commit to anything. So this is an actual case of a hackathon. We call it the mobility hackathon that was last year. So these are self-driving vehicles and actually tricycles. And the greatest thing about these is that they don't harm people when they run into walls because they're really slow. And these slow self-driving tricycles are open source and open hardware, so people can just take these prototypes and change it however they want. For example, they don't like it to look like a cyclop. So we change it so that it's two eyes. It can wing it to you. It can read your number book expression. It has its own number book expression. And so we can integrate them better with the society and build a norm before we make any laws or regulations about it. And this is actually one of the core sustainable goal items is the 1717 effective partnership. And so once we had these prototypes, this is true in many different countries. They may have a prototype fund. They may have some hack-a-sons. And usually the hack-a-sons surface the best idea. But the problem with many hack-a-sons around the world is that there's no political commitment to those ideas being implemented. So if that hack-a-sons didn't produce anything useful, well, people learn something, people build relationships. But if the hack-a-sons do something, usually it takes years for those ideas to truly become a public service. And so presidential hack-a-sons is a new design that people after submitting their idea and working in what we call tri-lingual teams that is to say the public service expertise, the private sector technological expertise, and the social sector domain expertise, we coach the top-ranking teams every year into tri-lingual relationship and then they deliver a prototype. And so for example, this is an actual case from last year. We have a water corporation who maintains the world's longest pipeline just discovered that they have a lot of mundane work where the repairs people just use a kind of method to listen through the pipes to detect water leaks. And when a new leak happens, it takes an average two months for somebody to hear about it, literally. And most of their day is actually spent on listening to pipes that are not leaking and therefore not very fulfilling job. So through this cross-sectional collaboration, last year they just invented this chatbot and this skilled craftspeople, when waking up, they receive their kind of digital practice telling them that here are the three most likely points, me and you, that maybe leaking was over 70% precision and they spend most of the time just trying to find out solutions instead of listening through things that are not leaking. So in this case, we indexed everything using the global goals, so New Zealand people performed on Wellington discovered that, oh, we brought a new solution to target 6.4, which is increasing water use efficiency. So right after the hackathon, they invited this team to Wellington to collaboratively solve problems for New Zealand using New Zealand's SCADA data of water pressure and water flow analysis. And so this shows enormous trust of like-minded people who are more of such a data collaborative. So what is the price of the presentation hackathon? Each team has at least a public servant in it, so we cannot give out cash price. There is no cash price. The price for the top 15 every year is a trophy. And a trophy is a projector. If you turn the projector on, it projects the image of Dr. Tsai Ing-wen handing the trophy to you. And so that's very useful in the tunnel. Imagine that if you are a mid-level public servant and your director general said that they don't have the budget for your idea. They don't have the political will for your idea and so on making, I'm sure, very good excuses. And then you can just turn on the projector and then summon the president. And suddenly the director general will have to say, oh yes, we will include your idea into our ministers next year's policy. Because that is the actual price. The price is presidential promise that we will do whatever it takes within the next year to include your idea into our government's public policy. And so that is the best award that the Surgeon Innovator can receive. And so this year we received many, many cases and there's many AI and CI teams. That was the top 10 that we judged through the leader of the group yesterday. And so there's many AI cases. For example, this one is very interesting. They use only public data as publicly disclosed by illicit companies to compute the most likely companies to engage in illicit financial flow next quarter. And so this brings kind of beneficial ownership to a whole new level. It can just use public indicators for example, trading of lines and so on to determine whether some companies very likely to actually committed a financial fraudulent claim to a bank and it's very likely to dissolve within the next quarter. And between the biggest presidential hackathon with 3 months between the second round of hackathon prototype they just gave the judges a prediction of what will happen in the next quarter. It was the most likely to be reviewed as illicit flow. And by yesterday one of their prediction targets actually gets reviewed that it is conducting illicit financial flow. So machine learning has some merits and so they want to apply. Now the financial ministry, the ministry for banks, the ministry for national development and so on would then have to figure out a way to include this kind of AI prediction system into their daily operation and indeed while supposedly if you look at the public information this is proposed by an individual in the social sector with some community group in actual fact this entire proposal is written by a kind of frontline staff in the text bureau and they totally did not have their DG support. But the great thing about presidential hackathon is that you can hunt your proposal to the social sector and the social sector the civil society proposes for you and you can just say oh we're just collaborating for three months and then if it works then some of your life changes right because your ministry is then committed to take your idea as the ministry's idea but if it doesn't count out there's no risk at all. So this is a new design to have a risk free way for the public service to collaborate with the social at the private sector. There's many interesting cases for example this one used also AI to automatically explain why drunk driving and safe driving is sentenced in whichever way because people quite it's quite distrustful of the judges when it comes to drunk driving so people constantly said that you need higher sentences and so on but actually drunk driving is very mechanical in determining its sentencing and so it basically just use AI to analyze all the 50,000 persecutions and injustiations before and the injustiations all correspond to a formula and the AI just explained this formula in late people's terms and this one also won the top five place and so I think this year is pretty interesting because we have a very good balance of ideas coming out of citizens and ideas coming out of the public sector and so the top five teams and this one is of a different color it's SDG 11 sustainable cities and community and this is actually Minister of Health and Welfare and Minister of Interior as well as the private sector collaborating to look at elders that live alone and perhaps in a building with their elevators and not very universally accessible whether the government actually have plans to improve such elders life, chances are even if we just post all of this into like social media or into their district office it's very unlikely that this elder person will receive this information actually we have numbers to prove that less than one fifth received the information and so this is basically a kind of targeted advertisement to just locate the most required citizens and just visit them using a kind of top list of 1,000 elders to visit and have a feedback system so that the local people working on long-term healthcare can just improve the model and things like that so there's a lot of AI on this so that's some experiences and this year also for the first time we have an international track to the competition in a different track maybe next year we'll most into a single track but this year the two winners are Malaysia's cartelology I think that's in the new word but the idea is that they look at all the public procurement and again using AI to calculate how likely that these bidders form a cartel so that it makes the public procurement much more effective and the health care team also use public procurement data to do an environmental assessment so the local communities can calculate how likely that this public construction rule wasn't or adapt to climate change and participate in a very early stage instead of only at a business and after it's all implemented and therefore going to protest and things like that and so we have the Minister of Transparency from Honduras here yesterday to deliver his remarks and so now I think this is a very interesting project so usually I take longer to answer the first question just so that people have time to press like and so I will be a little bit more swift in responses in a lot of questions and one would like to know how does Taiwan bridge the visual divide between a younger and over generation excellent question in Taiwan we have broad-ten as human right that is to say anywhere in Taiwan even if in the most rural places if you don't have 10 megabits per second that's my fault you can talk to me so it's guaranteed that while every Wednesday from 10am to 10pm anyone can meet me at the social innovation lab to talk about anything as long as we agree to have our transcript posted in the open so you can see that as the Minister I've talked to 4,000 people 200,000 speeches over this number of sections and this applies even to internal meetings that I hold so anybody can see it's not just the summary of the meeting but actually everybody's every utterance is listed here and publicly indexable and can be freely quoted and so on it's entirely in the commons free of copyright and so as long as anybody agrees with the idea of radical transparency they can have a kind of asynchronous debate through me by meeting with me every Wednesday but people then observe that people who are not living close to high speed rails may not be that amicable to meet me in Taipei so I just go to them so every other Tuesday or so I visit the most unlikely to reach high speed rail places that is to say rural, indigenous and offshore outlets and local co-ops such as entrepreneur charities and NGOs advocating for regional revitalization and if I speak to them one to one it's very likely that they would just project their kind of private interest into the conversation but because this is multi-stakeholder so people have to correspond their ideas, their lobbying into the sustainable goals which would present a long-term public interest and when they do that they can see I2I through this kind of projection people from the different municipalities the 12 different ministries in Taipei City in Taichung City in Kowchun City, Taoyuan City and so on and now also the eastern part the Hualien and Taidong everybody is connected through a video link through the zoom system so that people can see each other and so they don't have to actually travel all the way to Taipei they don't even have to the internet, the internet is used for archival and for amplification of people's voices, to many people this is just a regular town hall the meat in the space that they are used to meat is just the digital minister visits them and bring with me the 12 ministries and the five municipalities so that people can meet the I2I and listen to the whole story and this is great because Providence Human Rights enables a high definition meeting if it's a very pixelated people project whatever they think about the other side but if it's a high definition video conference in Mandarin we say 10 million 17 people trust each other 30% just by meeting face to face and we use this kind of video conference we build the trust of around 20% and so the administrative interior would never say oh I understood your story now I have to write an A4 report and copy it to the administrative economy or administrative health because administrative economy is literally sitting in the same room and so they want actually using A4 textual copies which are even lower resolution than no resolution video conference but actually people understand the context together and make a decision brainstorm a decision to resolve a local problem just immediately because people understand that it will be published to the public internet in two weeks and so within two weeks people invariably find some solution for other people to adopt and for local people to vet whether it's a good idea or not so in a short summary we bring technology to the local people we don't ask local people to come to technology and we bridge digital divide by creating such a meeting so that the younger generation and the older generation can focus on the same social object the same social issue the same global goals so that they have some topics to carry on to have a conversation and because each meeting determine the agenda of the next meeting it is a continuous dialogue not just across the different generations but actually across different localities in Taiwan so problem is human right and a radically transparent conversation and the public service engagement so that they understand they will not be at risk because if they bring on something it doesn't work it's all my fault anyway but if it does work then the public service actually get due credit because their name is listed on the public registry of everything that is responded by the public service so it's very good compared to the battle days when anything good that they do is the minister's credit and everything that they don't do well the minister can always blame the public service this is exactly the reverse of the battle days the student Xi Jinping I'm sure it's the homonym we like to know what do you think the future relationship between the Chinese and Chinese use will be specifically in the digital world this is a great question so regardless of who asked this question I would like to share some thoughts around our kind of different vantage point as you can see around this region most people who are facing with a kind of trade off between state control or in the words of President Xi Jinping harmony versus the freedom of expression as the one most people in this region and from the people on the Chinese continent and people in Taiwan choose a somewhat compromise situation where it's not entirely state control but it's not entirely free and open either it is some balance a very delicate balance between the two but in our region Taiwan and the PRC stand in kind of complete opposition well I guess I should include North Korean stand in opposition according to the civic's moment in that whenever we see a social phenomenon such as this information is the one Taiwan prides itself in devising solutions that doesn't concentrate power into the state actually all the situations that we see we make the state radically transparent to the people so for example in response to disinformation so yeah we do a very good to public TV series about it but that's not the point that I'm making so we make sure that each ministry is not equipped with a team that whenever they see a rumor they can come up with a viral clarification that is even more funny than the original rumor within 60 minutes so this is not taking away the freedom of speech this is exercising the freedom of speech and so this doesn't censor anything rather just make sure that our clarification is funny so for example there was a rumor that says turning your hair twice a week will be subject to an NT one million dollar fine starting next week of course this is not true but the way that we defunk this myth is not just saying this is not true because studies have found that if you already hold a rumor in your brain you don't like being corrected right so it's best if we can be humorous about it so within an hour we have this very funny part it's not true the premier in this younger version of himself says I may be bald now but I will not punish people with hair and the fight term says what we've actually introduced is a labeling requirement for people making hair products to label their ingredients and only takes place in 2021 I didn't translate this but this is our premier not bald saying however if you keep turning your hair many times in a week it will damage your hair and you may end up looking like me all that analytics showed that this one went far more viral than the original disinformation and more people have seen this before they see the disinformation and people this is genuinely funny and not aggressive right he made fun of himself not some other people and so this is genuinely funny so people become inoculated whenever people see the disinformation after this clarification people are going to trust this idea more not only because this is a real time clarification although this is very important but also it is framed in a way that is easily memorable I'm sure that you can now remember as to say and so this kind of mimetic engineering if it's done in a way that doesn't take the freedom of the civil society but rather it makes the public service much more responsive to the civil society and so this is the direction we're going and if people worry about how we're spending the budget for example and so on we also have this e-participation platform join the GOV at TW where you can see the projects from each ministry and all the ministries are committed to just publish all their KPIs or their procurements everything into it and in this presidential hackathon yesterday the National Audit Office also commits to open their audit information into the same platform so that people can have a full life cycle conversation with everybody involved in the public conversation and so again radical transparency here meaning making the state radically transparent to the people I think is what Taiwan is all about now of course in the PRC what they're also doing is radical transparency but making the citizens radically transparent to the state in a very multi-countable way through such systems such as social private and so I think people who have experienced both governance principles can make the best judgment in contrasting these two very different philosophies and this same technology indeed the same terms but actually running in very opposite directions and so I think if you're from a nearby jurisdiction there are parts that you can learn from the Taiwan experience there are also parts that you can learn from authoritarian experience but what we're trying to do to engage young people is just to make this free and open as effective if not more effective as inclusive I'm sure it's not inclusive in participation as compared to the authoritarian way and so I think as young people we can fairly experience both directions and make a judgment by ourselves and see whether we would like to live more in this direction or that direction but with the kind of cultural capacity to translate different governance philosophies into the generation, the cost of generational gap and in Taiwan the e-participation platform I just mentioned has 5 million participants out of 23 million people of our population and the most active practitioners are people around 15 years old and people around 65 years old those 65 year olds have a lot of time on their counts and so does the 15 years olds those generations care about public affairs more than care about private affairs for obvious reasons and they are all very keen on making a decade or longer planning horizons such as the sustainable rules again for obvious reasons one because they care about their brain children the other because they are in a business and have climate change and so all of this I think makes the intergenerational solidarity that have the young people lead the way indeed one of the most impactful petitions is by a 16 years old around 2 years ago about banning gradually plastic straws and other one time use utensils from everyday circulation so if you are enjoying this bubble milk tea rest assured that within a year all the straws will become paper based or other recycled material and not plastic based at all very interesting because people who are used to authoritarian top down thinking when they see such a petition amassing 5000 signatures in no time they imagine that this must be a very senior activist but it turns out that she is just 16 years old and this is her civics class home assignment and she needs to find something to rally people that instead of going to strike every Friday as some other people doing other parts of the world actually make sure that the cross-generational listening is done in a collaborative meeting and young people can truly lead a way even before they receive the right to vote or to refrain them and again this is a very interesting design to have people in around 15 years of leading the democratic direction and again I think this is something that people in PRC or people are more good in PRC like government system can truly lead bits and pieces from our design so I'm pretty optimistic in that if we have young people in both philosophies interacting with each other they can just pick out a better part from each other and also learn to translate culturally across the two Matrix that Austrian apologists will ask for this but how does it feel to be the first transgender minister in the world, not just in Taiwan well, firstly, first openly transgender we don't know others and from Taiwan all communists just may be transgender just not very independent and I'm not facing any challenge so first of all it's entirely normal I don't think people raise an egg on my gender identity post-gender anyway it's fine, it's my answer and also in Taiwan gender mainstream I think that's the right word and so when Dr. Tsai Ing-Wen became our president to many people it's just Dr. Tsai Ing-Wen it's not a female president it's of course more noteworthy that her family is not politicians so in this around this region it's usually whether you're a male or a woman transgender usually a person of a political family has a higher chance of becoming the president but she is entirely earning the presidency by her own merit and so for example when she posted this on May 17, it's not warm we took a big step towards true equality in many ways in a better country again this is seen as kind of normal in Taiwan and I received a lot of inquiry from Japan Thailand and South Korea who are having this ongoing debate of how to reconcile our culture versus a marriage equality and I said this is because first of all we have a very gender balanced national parliament far higher than any of our nearby jurisdictions and we have a gender impact assessment system that's been running for 12 years and so every public so that even people working in economy finance, in taxation ostensibly have nothing to do with gender at all they're still required to file in those gender impact assessment evaluations for each and every national policy no exceptions they have to think about how it affects people across different genders and after 12 years of constant review from the gender equality committee which comprises of 51% civil society readers and 49% or less government ministers they actually make sure everything is measured if across 200 projects and 20 bills every year something is not measured in the gender dashboard these CSO leaders and ministers can just order the gender dashboard to add new statistics about the candidate for legislative community development association members numbers of volunteers across genders, proportion of female executives, number of people in labor, in different kind of school masters and so on and so all those measurement qualities just accumulated through the 12 years of GIA and so when we had a constitutional ruling as well as the two referenda that defines very simply that we must legalize marriage equality but we must legalize only the bylaws and not the in-laws people made it very clear and what we call here in Mandarin so this is again a Taiwanese innovation that we legalize all the rights and duties of all the bylaws in marriage in the civil code by hyperlicking the special act to part of the civil code but we legalize none of the in-laws because in Taiwan depending on your community but usually we have 16 words just for families and uncles alone and people find it hard to adapt to marriage equality and so we deliberately left out the part about in-laws in the equality act and so again this kind of innovation is not just about taking one side or the other about appeasing one generation or the other but it's actually a very careful conversation across all the ministry civil service that has been kind of panic generating from the drill in the years past for 12 years and then came up with a fast response as well as the referendum wanted and so this kind of environment I think more than Dr. Simon's leadership more than me serving as a minister I think is part of the culture and the public service to look at everything in a gender sensitive way and that if you want to just adopt something from Taiwan regards to this I would really encourage you to look into gender impacted assessment is a really good system that can reinvigorate the civil service of not only gender equality but also LGBT representation which is the next question Edwin would like to know should there be quota for LGBT representation in Taiwan's parliament similar to existing gender quotas that ensures female representation you are aware that this is constitutional change to your thinking about that the gender representation is written in the constitution which Odo is coined many decades ago was one of the most progressive I think the most progressive in Asia when a constitutional idea is proposed but the problem is that of course that constitution was designed for the Chinese continent and therefore in a much larger area than currently Taiwan and the Taiwanese islands have and so people adjusted the constitution many times in the constitutional amendment in the last amendment they sealed the constitution saying that it takes 3 quarters of parliament as well as referendum to make any constitutional changes at all and so we are kind of stuck in some very archaic part of the constitution that are frankly speaking out of date for example the voting age is 20 years old and unlike almost every other jurisdiction which writes this into law the constitution writes this into the constitution and the constitution is very hard to change so everybody else have changed to 18 years old or even 17 years old or 16 years old but we are stuck with 20 years old and therefore it's a different age compared to referendum which does allow 18 years old to vote and so this is ridiculous to put it honestly and so I think what's best is just to focus on the part of constitution that overwhelmingly everybody want to change and just do a single precision change to show that constitution can be changed and making it more clear how to change the constitution than opening up to like for example before the LGBT I would argue for a German constitution's idea that includes the right of life for animals to be included in constitution that's my kind of pet advocacy item but as I understand less than 50% in Taiwan supports this idea and so I would just argue for the one that has vast majority support which is reducing the age of voting and then once we get that kind of wedge in the constitution then we can gradually design a new way to effect constitutional change by making referendum to affirm the constitution much more possible the statistics tells us that everybody in Taiwan regardless of their age agree to lower that part of constitution aside from people who are precisely 20 years old I wonder why so maybe they just got a right to vote and therefore don't want people from 18 years old to share this so this is very interesting psychologically speaking but people who are 21 years old are generally in favor of changing that part of constitution so I think strategic wise we need to get that kind of bottom up civil society that way like the Iceland style but actually working and for it to be included in the constitutional process before we talk about LGBT or other issues that requires more consensus Peter from Popkin we have very illustrative members said that I read online that you once identify as an anarchist I still consider yourself that have you personally considered working within government with that very simply put I work with the government not for the government and certainly not within the government so the idea very simple is that when I joined to work with the government I had a public negotiation with the premier across one month across this cycle like asking anything for it so that everybody could have a public conversation with the government and I was very proud of that the white condition of my entering the cabinet and so we ended up determining these three conditions for me to enter the first one you already know is radical transparency anything that I chair be it somebody visiting me to lobby or a journalist or public speech such as this one is being recorded this is a market difference from everybody else because according to most countries freedom of information act FOIA everything that can be published is after a decision is made you can ask for any transfer after this point but in the drafting stage usually is heavily redacted but by publishing in the drafting stage is the only way for the people to understand the context of policy making as well as what ideas were considered but ultimately discarded by the public sector in the civil society can indeed pick it up and just implement those discarded idea knowing that there are analysts within the government arguing for that idea and they even have names so you can just contact them in weekends and propose a presidential platform idea and so this is basically micro sectoral collaboration much more to the point and so that's the first condition and the second condition is that my staff is entirely voluntary association so it's a core anarchist idea the idea very simple is I don't give any staff orders and I don't accept any orders from my fellow ministers or the prime minister anyway and so everything that my colleagues do is voluntary association and so my office is very interesting there's no digital ministry but a lot of people voluntarily join my office from each different ministry so inside of one there are 32 vertical ministries as listed here and above the 32 there are nine horizontal ministers and one of the horizontal ministers so digital minister with a portfolio but with that portfolio one is very misleading as I said you know my portfolio is open government using engagement and social innovation so the idea is that every ministry can send exactly one person to my office and they collectively determine what my office does and I never issue them any orders and they just score and rank themselves and so there is no bureaucracy at all in my office now with the 32 ministries supposedly I can have 32 colleagues by the moment I only have 21 many does some ministries never send anyone to my office working in geographical transparency for example the minister of defense and I wonder why and I think the council for concomitment of China never send anyone I guess for similar reasons it turns out that after a year the minister of foreign affairs did send somebody and we worked together on public diplomacy and I've heard that now it's easily a dozen people from all over wanting to join my office but they need to take the funds otherwise we become a foreign service branch and so by this horizontal composition it ensures that all the ministry have a habit of working out loud and I'm afraid of getting people's idea whenever we're just pre-planning something so I think it's even more important for the foreign affairs because too often people discover about our bilateral agreements or something only after it's signed but it's a public service asks the people what are your ideas to improve the foreign service so we do together for example with the AIT which is the American de-factual embassy and that says let's share all your ideas about how to promote Taiwan's visibility in the world in conjunction with AIT and we use AI powered conversation in Google for digital AIT you can see this conversation ongoing actually I'm afraid to join the conversation and this one is about how to make our visible the current one is about how to make commercial price more close and as everybody can see there are a lot of questions there are statements that people propose and half of the people really like the idea and the other half really hates the idea such as this idea every time the PRC closed an international door for Taiwan the US should try opening one for Taiwan someplace else and the right hand group is totally favored and people in the left hand group isn't in favor at all but if this is a popular poll we would have stopped it but this system called pollists is really showing everybody there's only one statement that is divisive as this one actually most people agree with most of the things, most of the time and this then become what we call group informed consensus and a voluntary association people voluntarily donate their ideas people voluntarily share whether they resonate or not with it and again this is entirely anarchistic meaning that there's no people second that agenda before this is entirely emergent but we do get some really good ideas that then we as the AIT and MOFA to commit themselves too and so in this kind of public conversations for example people said that the US should send someone to the Taiwan presidential hackathon and AIT was like sure and then this year we do have somebody from AIT joining the presidential hackathon and so it's just a very quick commitment and a public conversation like this one my role is that like a little branch point between two celestial qualities the movements on one side and the governments on the other and as a kind of midpoint and make sure that people can understand each other's concerns and a branch point to facilitate both sides to find the common ideas that despite different positions can determine the shared values so that's my second working condition is voluntary association the third one is much easier it's called location independence it means that wherever I'm working I'm working and so I don't have to be trapped within the administration building I can just tour around Taiwan across all the ministries and using a cybersecurity proof sense mark system which is entirely open source it includes all the productivity software that I'm sure that you've used something like that, rocket chat which is exactly what it's like we can't which is exactly like travel, Davros which is exactly a draw box the list goes on I'm sure that you can finish the rest and so every time you can see very clearly which of the ministries delegating my office is online who is actually working who is maybe taking a nap and across all the different working items like our participation in international design conference or that we're making a film for the National Palace Museum which is a cabinet member by the way of how to make their registration much more smooth and things like that and so all this is working out well and so I don't have to go into the office I can just follow what everybody is doing through this entirely virtual workspace and so all of my contributions is actually open source and everybody, every government can work with it and so I always emphasize that I'm working with the Taiwan government because the Taiwan government although it's a great laugh for these ideas every other jurisdiction can also make our contributions and indeed the private sector and the social sector can also do so and so being a conservative and I think the conservative part is about conserving the various traditions and honoring the elders in both sense of that word both indigenous elders and age wise elders wisdoms and their culture but then bring them into a new digital space where it's easier now to listen as the people rather than just talk to them as the people like radius and television and so that's conservative anarchism in a nutshell and we said how is Taiwan preparing against cyber warfare and media disinformation especially in the upcoming presidential election a few things so against disinformation which we don't use the f-word in fake news because in Taiwan news and journalism both translate to Xing Wen and so saying fake news is like saying fake journalism and which offends the journalists which are actually our main ally in defending against disinformation and both my parents are journalists so out of the video I'll use that word so we would say you see the traditional side of me but in any case disinformation disinformation has a crystal clear legal definition in Taiwan it must be intentional it must be harmful to the public to the democracy not harmful to a minister's image that's good journalism and it must be untrue so intentional harmful untrue is beyond the protection of freedom of speech if it's determined to disrupt the freedom of speech through cognitive space warfare and into space operation I think that's the standard PLA term in any case what we're doing is that we're having three defenses and three proactive actions three responses and three actions to have a defense against it the first defense I already shared is to have very funny very viral ministers including the prime minister that goes viral whenever there's a rumor we have within one hour a clarification the second is that we have been working together with the social sector, with the civil society and in a cross-stores way to do fact checking so instead of our nearby jurisdictions such as Singapore which recently passed a law that says any ministry, that's me can just look at any media or any digital news and say I don't like this wedding please change it into a corrected wedding and I can order it for unrelated media as well so it's indeed a very quick and swift solution that technically doesn't take down anything but it gives the ministries all the power and so in Taiwan because we were for speech freedom and we also are facing the election so we don't want the ministry to hold all the power we would rather to have the civil society hold this power so in Taiwan anyone can join this community called co-facts or collaborative facts and in the entering crypto channel which is like whatsapp that a lot of people use here in Taiwan anyone can long press a message and forward it to the lines built in feature what they call a flagging as rumor and once we do that it's forwarded to those fact checkings and everybody can contribute to the fact checking Wikipedia style co-facts system along with the line clarification it's exactly the same design as we adopted two decades ago to counter spy and junk mail see if you receive an email it should be private communication the ministries really should not change the title in your inbox that would be very creepy actually but if people receive an email that is not personal but rather the senator says oh I'm in royalty far away jurisdiction I have 2 billion dollars I want to stow it somewhere else if you just paid a tiny transaction fee of a few thousand dollars we can make a arrangement and so on I'm not sure if any of you do but 20 years ago this kind of plan our inbox is more than half of our inbox and people were saying email is bad and things like that because it's not charging this type and Bill Gates was saying post a sign to send an email it was that bad but the fix turns out it's not sponsored nor is it any loss but rather a very simple flag button that would convince all the mail providers to install and that says fly as a spy and it's that simple so now that you see a junk mail you can just fly as a spy and it goes to the social sector goes to the spy house collective and then people just analyze using machine learning of the spam senders so the next time that particular person sends another email to another person it doesn't allow to inbox but rather it allows into a special folder called junk mail if you have too much time you can still go through it so it's not entirely takedown but it doesn't waste people's time by default and there that restores email's utility and so all those fact check as false items as a biology of the fact checking in an international fact checking system they then enter the algorithms so for example Facebook is now committed they already implemented that anything does fact check as false if you have a friend that posts something that fact check as false Facebook would much prefer to show you on your newsfeed your other friends posts so you will not see that by default but it's not the takedown so if you go to that friend's profile you can still see that post but you will always show a related link that shows the fact checking by the fact checking center and friends and so by this it's reduced its virality to less than one fifth of the previous virality while the clarification gets more virality because well it's fun and also line dedicated to some space in line today for the newest clarification so those two taken together increase the virality of inoculation and decrease the virality of disinformation now because the idea is about election as well so in elections this is a unique situation because in Taiwan we have the world's most transparent among the most transparent political contribution law so each and every donation to an election campaign you can look at the complete record which is usually readable like expression in the corrective the control unit which is the fourth branch of the government so the control unit publishes everything into a public internet and the media always independently analyzed the political contributions across all the campaign donors that's true as of the last election but perhaps because of that what we witness in the last election which foreign power wanting to influence the election results you would not go through the campaign donation because it's too transparent rather you would engage in precision targeting Facebook on social media on every other place indeed during that period the people from Chinese continent is I think second largest donor in political advertisement in Facebook but Facebook is not open in the PRC where those advertisements but in any case we're not subject to the campaign transparency law and so we have very little idea aside from a few people from Tencent to run some Facebook pages we don't really have any idea of how this money works that and so now we have this draft in the parliament that will be hopefully read before the next election very simple, we just treat precision targeting and political advertisement as exactly the same as campaign donation so each and every record need to be made public Facebook need to disclose what criteria that people have issued as the precision targeting and just like in Taiwan in the long term everybody have to disclose who ultimately paid for these advertisements and if we can trace a pavement into a non-Taiwan locality no matter which jurisdiction it is then they will have to pay a 50 million anti-liberal fine and if we cannot enforce that then the Taiwanese kind of intermediary that those would have to suffer this fine and all this is just to get the transparency out there and have the transparency so that everybody can analyze independently what really is going on during the campaign donation so again we fight this kind of information operation with more not less transparency and so that's the three defenses and the three proactive actions first one of course is participation officers in every ministries in charge of engaging people who have a great idea online and so people can meet me every Wednesday everything is archived but then people can also engage through e-petition and through e-petition people can very easily say things like the tax filing software is explosively hostile to use this is a real petition two years ago and in each ministry there are people like Hansing who are participation officers that just meets with people who are about to go to the street but have not yet go to the street and so they can just post a reply saying everybody who complain about the ministries of finance is now really invited into the ministry of finance to co-create the tax filing experience together and so that is what he actually wrote two years ago I promised to give public servants credit so that's how I did it but in any case then we met the petitioner who is a professional interaction designer who cares a lot about design, people who care suffer the most and so they just gather in a co-creation meeting, live stream through a cycle, everybody can just at any time no matter where you are in time or not just give complaints about the tax filing software and so through this proactive engagement we made sure that we used the journey map before the tax filing during the tax filing, after the tax filing what are people's actions requirements, issues emotion and solutions to those bad feelings and we trained the participation officer in the art of not harmonizing people's voices so if somebody posts through Slido that the tax filing software is explosively verbose we must counter our own inclination into just tuning it down into something that's more civil we must just write a positive note and post 自倒多 explosively worded and if somebody said that the software is so baroque as to confuse the developed people we must just show that and we must not take out anything aside from exclamation marks and so all of this then lets people understand this mess is actually limited it's just a hundred or so posts of that if we fix those we will have a much better tax filing experience so it turns people who complain into co-creators and we invited people who care the most and therefore complain the most for co-creation workshops and these are the people who complain the most and these are the people that they wear most toxic on and if you meet face to face and do a 30% of trust it's very unlikely for you to become even more toxic as compared to online trolley so we make sure that the trolls have no way to grow if you have 500 posts each saying the same thing it's just one post it notes anyway and so together we co-designed a tax filing experience for Maka and Linux last year the approval rate is 96% and it's now rolled out into the Windows users this year and the approval rate is even higher I think 8 or 99% but the great thing is not just about this experience it's designed well if you spend budget you can always get a good design but rather we have thousands of people feeling that they took part in this redesign and therefore much more likely to advocate for this new design to their friends and families and this is actually the best way to counter this information it's by building solidarity between a career public servant as well as a citizenry and so this is again something that we are very insistent in building because if you have a friend that you can meet every week and listen to their ideas and maybe you go to movies together if you hear a disinformation about that friend you will just check with that friend but if you have a friend that only meets you every 2 months or 3 months and always speaks in bureaucratic legalese language and forgets half of the questions that you ask them and then of course you will understand that they don't really care about you and all the disinformation then have a lot more room to grow so this is own government is going to counter this information and finally we have the building classification especially like today which is the kind of model of digital citizen of life because many platforms nowadays really don't want the jurisdictions to go in a more authoritarian direction so they are all now promoting the power model wherever they have a chance and finally we build public awareness campaign for the children in K212 starting this year creating critical thinking by asking the teacher to never act as an authority but rather look at every information online with the students so again working not as an authority but as a facilitator to guess people's different positions have the children understand why people have different agenda and then have very good public TV that is on HBO Asia and that shows how media frames issues and how to discuss things in a much more balanced way this is called the world between us which is again a public TV film and so this series defences and through proactive actions are roughly speaking while we are thinking about counter this information even during election and this is again thinking of them not as autos but rather as vaccination against something that spreads because means are really just you know ideological virus and if we want to talk you know negotiate with means it doesn't work it's as pointless as sitting down and negotiating with a flu because different categories you see and so basically if we can look at it in a much more public health perspective then we can build much better systems to assess the triage the seriousness as well as to build good counter measures so that's probably it I think we are at time and I'm always very punctual so sorry that I don't get to answer all the 50 questions and but of course I'm amenable to a group photo I don't have anything after this anyway and so maybe we move on to the group photo session thank you I think it's very popular but thank you very much Henry for covering a breadth of issues I think that more than suffices some instead of having to use keynote speech right so as mentioned I don't know who requested that group photo but please everyone can you take a photo of this one sure actually so please send it from front row and then we'll have