 to speak with Toby Negrin, the Chief Product Officer for the What The Media Foundation. Many of you know Toby. Toby has worked at the foundation for nearly eight years. He has almost 20 years of experience integrating data, research, and design to support free knowledge projects. Audrey is known for revitalizing the computer languages, Pearl and Haskell, as well as building the online spreadsheet system, EtherCalc, in collaboration with Dan Bricklin. In the public sector, Audrey served on the Taiwan National Development Council's Open Data Committee and the 12-year basic education curriculum committee and led the country's first e-rollmaking project. In the private sector, Audrey worked as a consultant with Apple on computational linguistics, with Oxford University Press on crowd lexicography, and with social text on social interaction design. In the social sector, Audrey actively contributes to GovZero, a vibrant community focusing on creating tools for the for civil society with the call to fork the government. After Audrey and Toby talk, we'll open up to questions from all of you. I'll collect your questions through the Q&A function of the Google Meet. You can find it by clicking on the icon of the three shapes in the top right of the screen next to your self view. You can leave questions and upload them there anytime during the talk. And then during the Q&A, I'll share the most popular questions with our speakers. So without further ado, let's hand it over to Audrey and Toby. Thank you. Thank you, Sarah. Audrey, this is actually a super exciting night for me. Thank you so much for speaking with us. I wouldn't necessarily walk across the street for LeBron James, but it's incredibly exciting to meet one of my heroes from the Pearl days, as well as someone who has contributed so much to the ideas that make Wikipedia what it is. So thank you very much for coming. It is really, it is really, I'm sort of, I'm sort of nervous. Thank you. So just to get us started, you've had a fascinating journey, career journey as a hacker, an entrepreneur, an open source pioneer to becoming the youngest ever cabinet member in Taiwan. What advice do you have for engineers and technologists who want to do more work that is mission and purpose driven? And sort of as a, as a pearl nerd, how is your, you know, how's your experience with open source communities affected how you view your role in government? With the government. With the government. Yes, sorry. Yeah, I don't work for the government. So anyway, I think that the point here is working with the people, not for the people, right? That's the original idea of open source. Previously, the free software movement is about human rights. It's about the digital rights and dignity and so on. And open source flips that around and tells the companies, organizations that have a lot of bureaucracy saying, you know, and it's actually better if you work with the citizens, the participants, not treating them as just users or consumers, users being, you know, I have preferred term in some other addictive industry that I try not to use. So the philosophy here of working with not for carries directly to the government. And my role is a minister at large. And in my office, there's more than 12 secondments from all the different ministries, each have their own value, of course. But we can build shared values out of those different perspectives. And again, this is something we learn from open source community is called open multistakeholderism. People can argue very passionately about a position they believe in. But our work is to produce good enough consensus or rough consensus in for example, when we're working on counter the pandemic with no lockdown so far, less than 20 deaths for Taiwan, encountering the infodemic with no takedown. We have onsite people. For example, I work very closely like sitting next to me is our Minister of Health, Sir Contement, who was a contact tracer from the SARS days in 2003. So she knows a lot about contact tracing and about public health and epidemiology and so on, and also have online experience. So when we design those digital systems, we're not saying, oh, the contact tracer should work for our digital system is the other way around. We need to work with the contact tracer. So each system will develop, reduce their risk, reduce the time spent and build mutual trust. What made you decide to work with the government as sort of your next challenge? We occupied the parliament. So we kind of invited ourselves in. In 2014, March, as part of the sunflower movement, we occupied the legislature for 22 days. At the time, the legislature, the MPs were refusing to deliberate substantially a trade agreement with Beijing regime. And what I did, and many other people in the GovZero movement did, was essentially demonstration, not as in protest, but as in demo, like demoing when the MPs were on strike, how people, half a million people on the street and many more online can take their place, quite literally, and with good open source crowdsourcing tools, making sure that we can't get a good enough consensus. And we did. After 22 days, we sat on 40 months, not one less, and these are agreed by the head of the department. So the occupy was a success, and it affected a widespread deliberation practice on aspects of the trade agreement. For example, one of the 20 or so NGOs focused on whether we allow PRC-based components in our then new 4G infrastructure. So it's like the conversation that everybody was having in the past couple of years, just six years earlier, and that the conversation was, again, crowdsourced. It's as a social norm. And so this norm-based policy deliberation is quite new. It's actually almost impossible to do without modern live streaming technology, broadband as a human rights, and other underlying conditions. But we proved that it works. And so at the end of that year, 2014, all the mayors that supported open government gets elected sometime actually surprising to them. And the people who did not support the occupiers, they don't get elected as mayors. And so the public service just worked with us then. We work as reverse mentors that are maybe young, but pair with the existing minister to show them the art of processing. Yeah, awesome. And folks who haven't had a chance to learn about the sunflower movement, I would check it out. It's really interesting, kind of amazing. So, Minister, when I was doing some research for this call, thanks, Dan. When I was doing some research for this call, I was watching one of your TED talks. And it was just like, there were four or five great ideas that I wanted to try today at Wikipedia. But one of the most interesting ones to me was gov.zero. And this notion of having like sort of flipping the government around. Could you talk a little bit more about gov.zero and just sort of give folks an idea of what's happening there? Definitely. So gov.zero or g0v.tw has this great slogan and pasting this here. And it says, ask not why nobody is doing something. You are that nobody. So basically, the idea is that when people complain about something from the government or expatly or as missing. In Taiwan, the government website always ends in something that gov.tw, well, in your jurisdiction as well, was a different country code. And gov.zero registered this brilliant website, g0v.tw. So, for each and every government services, like join the gov.tw that you don't like, well, you just change the O to a zero. And then you get into join the g0v.tw, which is the shadow government, the alternate version that works always in a more fun way. And all the gov.zero projects are free of copyright and patent restrictions. That's to say, if it's the OSI and open definition when it comes to code and data. So whenever the good prototype is done in the gov.zero, we can always merge them back to the government. So in Taiwan, there's no clear distinction between civic tech and gov.tech. Just in the past three days, gov.zero co-created a specification for privacy-preserving, secure multi-policy check-in system based on SMS for contact tracing. And the spec and the reference implementation was done entirely in the social sector. But we, because it's free of copyright, simply merge it back and deploy it in just 24 hours. And so now it's actually actively running. And so this shows the ability of crowdsourcing and not just procurement, which is more about the government setting the agenda and getting the citizens to implement it for a fee, right? This is what we call reverse procurement, where the citizen already set a norm. And broadly speaking, everybody already understands the norm and thinks the norm is better. But of course, the civic tech people can't really pay the going maintenance price, especially penetration testing is every security. And so it gets merged back. So it's forked the government's Tesla slogan with the intention to merge like a soft fork. Yeah, that is, that is super cool. I mean, as Wikipedia has in some ways, I think it was sort of founded with that kind of ethos in mind, like you could really do anything. And then after after 20 years, it's become like this global, global resource that that sort of there's this feeling that we have to protect it. Again, I think we see that in some communities. I think we sort of see that here. And I just the idea that like there could be a shadow Wikipedia, that you could really sort of try to get back to sort of the roots is something that's that's really, that's really interesting in that and that you're talking made me think a little bit more about, because we sort of feel like we have kind of this kind of sort of this almost contradictory mission. And so I think that the you know, thinking about sort of, you know, what you've done with with the government was was really, really kind of interesting and inspiring. Is there anything you've you've learned about gov zero after you I think it's it's been in operation for about five years now is that right since 12 2012. So now wow so any any like any any any sort of advice or thoughts after doing it for a decade. So just three words fast, fair and fun. Anything that's fast and fair and fun become successful social innovation. Because people remix it. And the remix get instant gratification and so on. But if it's not fast, or not fair, or not fun, then people lose the interest and they devote their time as well. Awesome. So I want to talk about, I'd like to ask you about inclusion and belonging in digital communities, which is something that we're starting to think about more here is we start to really sort of think about how to take Wikipedia's mission from sort of the states and parts of Asia and Europe where it's very popular and spread the mission out to the world. And so we know technology can be used to exclude or erase certain populations. What about the flip side? Do you have any, how can technology be used to increase the sense of belonging and participation? So I think about the various ways that people in even very low bandwidth situations that nevertheless have good participation tools. For example, in I believe Lisbon a few years back, they did participatory budgeting using ATM. Meaning that you can just use your ATM and then instead of selecting which bank account to wire to, you select which budget item you would like to propose. They didn't go all the way to use quadratic funding where people can crowdfund use the ATM for public work, maybe because quadratic funding wasn't invented yet by that time, but it's a good start. And I think about the SMS-based system we just wrote out, which is specifically designed for places and people who do not have a smartphone. They can't even scan a QR code, but you can just SMS to 1922, the universal toll-free number inside one for pandemic control, and then enter the numbers on the poster and then send and then you finish the check-in. And so when we design all the workflows, I work with my own grandmother. She's 88 years old now and she serves as this great focus group leader. And we make sure, for example, when we were rationing out masks, she introduced me to her younger friends who complained about the distance from the residence of theirs to the pharmacies, which may be like half an hour away by public transportation. And her younger friends, such as Grandma Young here, is 77 years old, so younger only to her, I guess. And then this is Grandma Young. And we worked together then to test this ATM-based voting system, well, not voting system, pre-ordering system, where she could wire like two euros to the center of disease control, get a receipt, and then go to the counter and then get some mask ration. That was last April. And then Grandma Young said, you know, if you make me take my debit card out, I would rather take the bus and go back to the pharmacy for 30 minutes and queue in line because she was very anxious that people queuing after her in an ATM will see her password and wire the entire saving of her to other people, to other account, or if she mistypes something, then goes from wiring to the CDC to some other account where she couldn't really recover from. So it's not that simple for FAST to mean just a safe space for the elderly people, for the senior people, and the people with no broadband connection. So we instead work with the universal healthcare in Taiwan, which has an IC card, and she can just insert it to the kiosk. No password needed. It's specific purpose just for pandemic control, and then pay in coin on that counter for the masks. And so it's not always the fastest, but it's what people feel most safe. And if you co-design with people so that they feel safe, their wisdom prompts the sort of ways that enabled collaboration. And she went and taught her younger friends like 66 years, that was in some way. Nice. The younger set. No, that's great. I always take our new product ideas to my teenagers and sort of ask them if there's too much reading or if it's boring, and they never fail with the honest feedback. And I think on a more serious note, I think we've come to realize that the experiences for the rest of the world are not going to be designed from San Francisco or London. We need to have the folks who we need to admit, they need to be created in the context of the people who are using them. And we're moving a lot of our product development out into Asia and Africa to really try to live that. But that's great. So I want to talk a little bit about the pandemic since you brought it up. And as you said, Taiwan's had really an incredible response. And you've actually been a big part of that. So I wanted to ask you about some of the sort of open source inspired mask campaigns that you've done in Taiwan. And can you talk a little bit about those? Sure, certainly. So the mask campaign began last January. Around the end of January, a couple of public health experts visited the cabinet office and shared their numeric models, Professor Fancy Tai and Chen Yixuan. And according to their models and to everyone who have played the plague incorporated, especially the cure mode, this will feel very familiar. Their model says if you get 75% of people wearing mask and washing hands in all neighborhoods, then the R-value would be under one for the new SARS variant, SARS 2.0 as we call it. But if you don't have that evenly distributed in all neighborhoods, then the neighborhoods that has less than 75 mask adoption will get a R-value above one, and then you cannot avoid a community spread, a exponential growth. So once we realized that last January, then we immediately began to work to ration the mask, because at the time we only produced about 2 million medical masks per day, but Taiwan has a population of 23 million people. So rationing is the only way. And instead of using mobile payment or whatever, we just use the health card. And the health card is in service of also immigrant workers, foreign people who do not have citizenship, but they nevertheless enjoy universal health care. So they know it's actually cheaper to get the mask, to get to a clinic, to get a full diagnosis if they develop COVID-19 symptoms. It's cheaper than a single RT-PCR test in any other country. And so because of that, there's no financial or social burden to get those ration masks and report to the clinic. However, people did not know which pharmacy have some mask and which did not. And so a bunch of civic tech people in the Go Zero channel co-created what we call the mask rationing map. And the map, very simply put, allows people to queue in line and on their phone more than 100 different tools display the real-time mask availability in the nearby pharmacies. So they can see the person queuing before them, swiping the IC card, and see in real-time a couple of minutes later, this number would drop. And so if it run out of mask, it becomes gray or red if it's dangerously alone in stock. And so people can't go to a slightly farther, but fully stocked pharmacy for the masks. And so it enables the very fair distribution. And because we trust citizens with real-time open data or open API, this means that all the pharmacies, more than 90% of them have a fiber optic connection back to their national health insurance administration. And so because of that, the number is quite accurate and enables people to analyze independently to get the distribution mechanism fixed. In particular, we have someone from our parliament, MP Gao Hong-An. She was VP of Data Analytics at Foxconn Group. So she knows something about data and understanding. And behind her is the interpolation screen in our parliament. And people may recognize that as OpenStreetMap. And in fact, it's the Geoping An system that the Taiwan company developed. They work often with the UN system for humanitarian aid, like during the Nepal earthquake and so on, which I believe we can be the OpenStreetMap humanitarian workforce, also work with Taiwan people to crowdsource the recognition of the satellite images. And so the community analyzed that and showed that we had a data bias, actually, because we used to say, according to the GovZero map here, we see the population centers almost aligned perfectly with the mask availability and pharmacies. So we think it's a fair distribution, 75%. Why not? But MP Gao with the community of OpenStreetMap said, no, it's not true, because not everyone own a helicopter. So what looks like fear and a distance on the map is not the same when people have to spend time on public transportation. So it's actually heavily biased because people in rural areas have to pay a disproportionate time cost in order to access it. And so she suggested a better rationing method and suggested that we do preordering and work with some vending machine vendors to help the preordering to happen. And that worked really, really well. And so she said, yesterday's interpolation become tomorrow's co-creation because ministry changes on our house, ministry simplices, legislator teaches us. And this is not possible unless we have a shared open data that's updated in real time. So by April, we reached the 75% in all the different districts and neighborhoods. Excellent. Wow, that's fantastic. Is it possible to emigrate to Taiwan? Yes, we have a Gold Card system. And we also have Bureau of Citizenship. And we hand out Gold Cards to anyone who have, and I quote, the potential to contribute to science or technology to Taiwan. And you enjoy universal healthcare too, and you can bring your family. So here is the Gold Card application checklist. It's co-created by Gold Card holders, also long time open source contributors from the open stack, I believe, and other projects who have emigrated to Taiwan, and actually are dual citizens now. So feel free to join their staff. Awesome. Thank you. I hope I have some potential, but that's really cool. I mean, just say compared to the state's initial response to COVID, it sounds what you did is pretty remarkable. Would you like to share some of the dog pictures that you used? I just think there are probably a few dog lovers here, and I just thought those were a nice lighthearted way to think about the pandemic, or not think about the pandemic, but they're cute dog pictures. Yeah, it's called Humor Over Rumor. It's our counter-infodemic strategy. So I think what was the name of the dog? It's called Zhongcai. It's a wordplay. It's a brilliant wordplay because Zhongcai means like the CEO, and Chai is Shiba. So Zhongcai is a very good Mandarin transliteration of the Dogamim. So basically this is the chief doger of pandemic control, basically. And the dog lives with the participation officer of Ministry of Health. And so I'm sure that in each ministry, there's a team of people who engage in emerging hashtags full-time. And we set up this system since 2016. So instead of just media offices that talk to the press, or parliamentary offices that talk to the MPs, the participation offices engage all the trending hashtags, and basically Coach or Jam, all this information so that the clarification is more funny than the disinformation. And then people will just share the meme as a contextualizing service. That's the basic idea. Nice. Fantastic. Sarah, how are we doing on time? I've got a few more questions, but I definitely want to let folks... Close-eyed stairs. Yeah, I mean, never just side-chatting about that. You're doing fine on time, and we're just trying to decide on a time to wrap for questions, but you can keep going for now. Okay, awesome. Peter, do you want to ask the public's question? Do you want me to ask it? Whatever you think is best, Toby. Okay, I'll let you do it, because we were chatting about it, and I've got some other ones. So minister, going back to... Oh, okay, awesome. Let's just... Peter, do you want to ask it? I'm just going to break the rules. Sorry, Sarah. Do you want to ask your question? Sure. Yeah, I had two, Toby, so I'm going to ask both, and you tell me which one you were thinking of. Ask the one we were talking about earlier, and then you can ask your other one later. Okay, all right. All right, so hi, Adri. My name is Peter, but I don't know if that's relevant in this context. Anyhow, the question related to policies, how, if it all has polis and the interactions you've watched emerge within it, impacted the way that you think about how communication tools for use in collaborative context should be designed? Is that a clear question? Yes. So, for context, polis is an AI-powered conversation tool, where AI means assistive intelligence, because otherwise we can't really ensure that conversation emerged in a pro-social way. It may diverge and never converge. And so, using polis for public deliberation is like setting the digital equivalent of a town hall or something, a public building for civic participation, instead of having to have a public deliberation on, say, Facebook, which is like holding a town hall in a nightclub with loud music and addictive drinks and private bouncer, and you have to shout to get hurt. I mean, I'm sure you can do that with a lot of effort, but it's not a good use of the nightlife district. And so, the point here is that when we set up the polis conversation, for example, on Uber, we witness two things immediately. First, people were quite surprised that if we simply ask for each other's feelings instead of suggestions, there's some really good, good enough consensus. The solutions may not converge that quickly, but if you ask how do you feel about all this, then actually people feel more or less the same way. People all feel that passenger liability is very important, whether they're Uber drivers or taxi drivers in 2015. So, instead of debating like let's classify it as sharing economy, let's classify it as gig economy, let's classify it as platform economy or whatever, we simply ask, how do you feel? And so, we call it a weekly survey because the survey items, the polls, questions are crowdsourced. It's not fixed as in most other surveys. And so, I think the most important picture is this one, whereas when you ask people how do you feel about Uber, actually, the shape is like this. But if you ask what's your suggestion of our legalization about sharing economy, it will probably flip. So, the trick is to ask people how they feel. And then out of those common feelings, a lot of very clear thread emerge and the communication can become pro-social rather than anti-social. And so, the lack of reply button, of course, that also helps the troll control, the visualization of commonalities, the resilience against like fake accounts. If you get 2,000 people voting exactly the same way, it doesn't increase the area and so on. Of course, all these are standard troll control measures that Wikipedia actually is the champion here. But the most important thing is to set agenda around people's feelings, not suggestions. Peter is actually the product manager for our on-wiki communication tools. And when I was listening to your TED Talk, this was one of the ideas that really resonated. We're trying to, I think Peter and I were chatting about this before and we were talking about opinionated software. And right now, our software is sort of implicitly opinionated that if you know wiki text and you're good at arguing on the internet, you should have a voice. And we'd really like to think of ways that are more representative. And I think Polis, and there are some others, but Polis is just really interesting. And then when I saw that sort of distribution of how people felt, that was just really interesting. And so, yeah. And I think Polis is an open source project, right? I think it's... Of course, of course. We host it on our own pre-meets as well, at actually polis.gov.tw, which is actually quite symbolic because something that gov.tw on the kind of top domain means that it's a permanent structure of the public service. So basically it's digital public infrastructure. But it's, of course, free software. But we also contribute a lot by hiring professional penetration testers, cybersecurity auditors, and providing our own, like, hosting environments to make sure that even though the development is out there in the social sector, the citizens of Taiwan can feel safe for it to be part of our democratic institution. Awesome. So sort of in, I think, sort of, I guess, to sum up before we can move on to more questions, I wanted to run a theory by you, Minister, about open source and open knowledge. And I'm happy to have you disagree. But for me, like, at the beginning of the century when Wikipedia began, sort of open source and open knowledge were sort of entwined. They were very much the same thing. And many of the people who were sort of the early creators of Wikipedia were also the people who worked on the software platform. But it feels like in some ways, in 20 years, like, open source and open knowledge have somehow deviated, where open source in some ways seems sort of in many ways to be accepted, even co-opted by sort of major corporations. It feels like open knowledge is actually sort of more radical than ever. You see, with disinformation campaigns and various governments and other entities poisoning the public discourse, I just wanted to sort of get your thoughts on the future of open source and open knowledge. And, you know, sort of is there a way to sort of bring back that passion that we all felt at the beginning of the century? Well, when the term open source was coined, that was 97, right? 98. I was kind of part of that whole thing, because we have to translate all these to Mandarin. And so we discovered very quickly that open source actually could be translated as either Kaian or Kaifeng Yuan Shi Ma. And the first translation uses the open source intelligence word root. That is to say, there was a term open source before, the open source movement, right? And it means that the context of the intelligence is from publicly available sources that could be independently checked by unrelated intelligence workers or some other definition I didn't look upon Wikipedia. But anyway, so if we classify open source as providing computer code and documentation information to the open source intelligence community, that's naturally bridges together the two communities again, which is why I always prefer the Kaian like open water source translation is also shorter and easier to run compared to the open source code conversation which made it code based and even exclude documentation folks. Interesting. So actually, and you're like, they are still, they are still really, really intertwined if you think about it. If you contextualize it as a, you know, source code is just one form of open source intelligence, contextualizing vehicle media, right? And the idea of counter disinformation using contextualizing service, I think it's what's the open source intelligence and open source development communities can both contribute because without the source code also could be fact checked in a sense. You're basically just trading one bias dispelling service with another potentially bias service and that leads us nowhere. Right, right. So in some ways, you could think of sort of Wikipedia and references and the revision history as being like open source knowledge. That's exactly right. And it's doubly true, of course, with wiki data, which is by definition, reusable structural data. Definitely. Interesting. That's, yeah, that's good. That's something that's, yeah, I guess when we always find things diverging, we should try to find a way to bring them, bring them back together. So I guess, Sarah, this is my last question. Is that cool? That is perfect because I was just going to tell you it's probably time to open up the Q&A. I'm going to ask a question from somebody who couldn't be on the call tonight. Can I ask one more question, Sarah? Oh, I'm so sorry. Yes, go ahead. I just want to do the last question. Minister, do you have any advice for Wikipedia and Wikimedia? Like anything that you'd like us to be doing or you think opportunities that we're missing? No, the last time I personally contributed to the code was during the visual editor, I contributed something like 50 lines as a contractor, which was probably rewritten. But I think I joined because I think visual editor really is one of the keys, right? One of the keys to make sure that people who are not versed in wiki text has equity in getting participation into the community. It's also a difficult problem because the norm around collaborative documents like Google Doc, which is real time, is quite different from the kind of revision based ones. So it's a hot problem. But I think recently we've found a lot of products and the local Wikimedia meetups and so on kind of work around these problems quite well by making sure that for kind of Greenfield articles in a particular campaign and so on, they can use the visual first or whatever first norms for their communication and therefore are not asking the wiki text based norms to be carried over, basically creating a more friendly norm. And I think that's a pretty good sign. Although I'm sure that it costs community some tensions and so on, but I'm sure that it expands the base of people who feel comfortable with the editor. And if people feel comfortable with becoming the editor, then the main challenge to Wikimedia are really any large organization, which was, of course, more people view, much more people view and less people contribute and people contribute become a cabal. Well, there's no cabal. But anyway, the early adopters dominating the norms that could be solved by essentially would do what Buckminster Fuller said, build a new system that slowly gradually rendered the OSYSTEM obsolete without fighting it. Yes. I think that's what, yes, that I think that kind of exactly describes sort of our very sort of slow, but steady like software development methodology where we really work with the existing communities and we kind of sort of nudge them towards like, hey, this mobile phone, a lot of people have them and maybe we should make it possible to edit Wikipedia on your phone, for example. But yeah, so yeah, Visual Editor is everywhere now. So your 50 lines of code were well done. So thank you for that. Yeah. And I think that the Wiki1 and other kind of forks is like the zero for Wikipedia during that time of my participation also helped a lot to popularize like alternate layout inspirations for people to participate from the background where a monospace phone was not the norm. So I think you managed the transition well. Yeah. Well, I mean, I think one thing I think we're proud of here is that, you know, we didn't try to change things too dramatically like we didn't go against the community. And like a lot of digital services, you know, our usage really just blew up during the pandemic when people not only had a lot of time on their hands, but they needed good information, not just about COVID, but about the US election and things all over the world. And it was really gratifying to see the number of editors in particular actually go back to the levels that they were in like 2006, 2007. So that was really exciting. Cool. Thank you. Sarah, back to you. Thanks. Awesome. Thank you. So yes, I have a couple of questions. And one of them, the first one I want to start with is from Claudia. She couldn't be here. So I'll share her question. How can democratic online communities best resist the pressures of disinformation, especially when it comes from state-backed actors? Sure. I mean, that depends on how powerful is that state. Sorry, country system. But I mean, in many cases, contextualizing service is pretty much the only viable way in democratic polities. Because if you do anything else like forcing the companies to take down stuff or imposing your own censorship rules or whatever, then it by definition kind of make you less democratic as a polity. And that in turn decimates, like literally cut by 10%, the motivation for the social sector to contribute. And then the disinformation epidemic become out of control. It would be like doing lockdown all the time. And people get fatigued and they do not develop the social solidarity services that's required to understand the pandemic and invent new ways to manage it well. So in Taiwan, in addition to humor over rumor, which actually is my preferred way of countering it, we also made sure that public participation plays a large role in it. The average, do you see this? The average response time is 16 minutes when we detect a trending disinformation by people reporting to it, like flagging spawn and the contextualizing service. You see, this is the original disinformation that says perm your hair multiple times a week will be subject to $1 million fine. And then the context first that is not true. And then our premier head of cabinet says, I may be bought now, but I will not punish people who look like my youth. And the fine print that says what we're doing is actually introduce a label and requirement for hair products, nothing about the hair cutters. And then the premier as he looks now says, however, if you perm your hair many times a week, it will not damage your bank account, but it would damage your hair. Just look at me for what will happen to your hair. Very dangerous. So by kind of quite literally making himself the butt of the joke, well, we have another literal one where he literally made himself the butt of a joke, we made sure that people remix the message is just hilarious. And it doesn't really attack anyone. So this context reached everyone. And so when people shared and did this information, they're much more inclined to share this much more funny one. And then the context gets shared along with it. And it requires professional journalists from the International Fact Check Network with the GovZero community, which built a co-facts service where people can forward even into an encrypted channels forward to the bot, which does the fact checking service to them. It required a leading anti-verse company, Trend Micro, which developed another chatbot that also checked for deep fakes and visual and audio and stuff and so on. So there's a variable ecosystem, much like what we did to counter spam. It's just this disinformation to spam is like SARS to flu. It's basically the same thing, but with just a higher damage and a higher R value. And for state-based interference, we made sure that they are banned, basically. During our presidential election, for example, all the political and social advertisements must only come from the domestic funding sources, because we treat them as campaign donations. And we did not pass any law for that. There's a strong social norm that says if Facebook doesn't treat them as political contributions, we're going to boycott Facebook, social sanction. And so to build such a norm, I think it's the most important thing. Wow, that's super interesting. I'm going to pass it on to Peter. You actually have a couple more questions, Peter. So I'm going to go ahead and let you ask those. That sounds good, but the caveat that I've spoken, yeah, can you hear me? Just with the caveat that I have many questions. Yeah, that's, yeah, please intervene. But I will ask. Okay, Audrey, one of the questions that I had was, can you share some of the metaphors that shape the way you, someone who was influenced over how resources are allocated, approach interacting with the public? And I asked that with kind of an acute awareness for an appreciation for language. So that's how that question came to be. So, phosphorfront, I shared that. Humor over rumor, I shared that too. And so there's another quote that I rather like. And it's from our president, Dr. Tsai Ing-wen in her inauguration speech, actually, in 2016. And she said, before we think about democracy as a showdown between two opposing values, but now democracy must become a conversation between many diverse values. And this, like, non-binary thinking, it's the most important thing. I may be, like, personally blessed because I've went through two puberties. So I don't have in my mind the category of people closer to me and the people farther away from me, just because we, you know, probably share a similar puberty experience, no matter your gender. And this applies to pretty much everything. And when people think in a non-binary way, which, by the way, people sometimes challenge me saying, you're a digital minister, how can you be non-binary? And, like, digital means, like, decimal, right, digits, I have 10 digits. So basically, the plurality, that is the most important thing. And so the metaphor that I use is taking all the sides, no matter how many stakeholder groups are there, if I cannot argue from their perspective, it's my fault. And I will travel and spend time as no graphic or just hanging out until I can see things from their perspective. Awesome. Thank you. Peter, I did just get another question from another person who couldn't be here. So I'm going to go ahead and ask that one and then let you have the next question if you want it. So one second. This question is from Shristi and she asks, I read about how you address the mass supply problem in the early days of the pandemic. I'm curious to know if you have any ideas or thoughts on how to solve the ongoing severe oxygen crisis in India. How can the problem in India be solved in similar or different ways? Yeah. When it comes to distribution, India, the digital infrastructure with all its privacy concerns and so on, I don't think the problem is at the digital level. And just like no matter how many lines of code we write, we could not increase production from $2 million a day to $20 million a day. That's the specialty of the industry. We also cannot write some code to produce oxygen making machines, which is why Taiwan donated oxygen generating machines to India. And so I think the point here is not think about equitable rationing at this particular point in time, because unlike the PPEs, which really has to ration very in a very fair manner for you to even work, right? The same goes for the exposure notification system. If you don't get 70 or so percent of people installing it, the Bluetooth-based privacy perversing preserving exposure notification doesn't work. So these are the problem of equitable distribution. And also the recent SMS checking system is of the same shape, but the oxygen supply is not of the same shape. So I'm not exactly sure that crowdsourcing can help here. Thank you. The next question that we have is from Mateus. Mateus, are you on the call? Yeah, I am. Can you hear me? Okay. Would you like to ask? Sure. Yeah. I mean, from your examples, it seems that for the public health problems that the pandemic brought, open source and crowdsourced data were very useful and a key point. Could you see this playing a part on other social problems that could decrease social inequality or maybe open source being applied to more economic problems? And I don't know. Yeah. I'm sure that's clear enough. It is. Well, the Polish conversation we had around UberX eventually led to the legalization of the Multipurpose Taxi Act. And Uber is now a Taiwan taxi company, the Q-taxi. And it enabled, crucially, the local church and temples to serve on the rural areas without getting a professional taxi company license, but essentially using the Multipurpose Taxi Act to ensure that they can socialize their own community transportation in a fair way and gather the data in the social sector. So it's a data collaborative with social sector, again setting the data norms and do most of the data retention and collection. And so the data collaborative insight here, I think is widely applicable, especially around things of common concern like climate and environmental sensing. This is the Airbox Network primary schoolers in Taiwan. Nowadays, I'm very familiar with these cheap NBIOT systems, where they measure PM2.5 and other weather data right to a distributed ledger. And then they don't learn GDPR, data controllership, stewardship from some top-down lecture, which is impossible, by the way, but by maintaining their own airboxes. And suddenly, the ideas of data quality stewardship and controllership makes so much sense if you actually have a node in the distributed ledger. And it's the idea of sustainable development and global citizenship education. And based on this, then a lot of students co-create, I think, a undergrad, co-create a map on top of which that is like Pokemon Go. You can find the check in points near you that provides refillable water. So if the system calculates that you may suffer from heat damage soon because of rising temperature, you can get a notification to refill your bottle. And instead of buying new plastic bottles, it also shows how much plastic you saved, like the carbon footprints that you helped reduce. And then the check-in also enabled the community to explore the local agricultural products and the local history, and so on. I don't think it has yet merged or collaborated with the Wikipedia Local Places of Interest and Museum and History Project, but it's a natural extension. And so because of that, it inspired people to think about education, not in a way of literacy, which was more about consuming data and media, but rather about competence, which is based on the idea that everybody produce media and data. And when you are a producer, then you learn to work with the existing system, the communities, which made the crowdsourcing possible, and that in turn made the economic distribution more fair because you then get the kind of work that is worthwhile to your community and also pays well because it links to the data collaborative that provides more additional value for the aggregated data, which, of course, Wikimedia knows best, but you probably know the idea. Thanks. Awesome. So I think we have time for one final question, and we actually only have one more question, and it's from Peter. So I'm going to let you ask that last question. It's totally fine. Go ahead. Okay. Yeah, Audrey, I was just, in some of the interviews that you've given, I was really just struck by the way that you've defined your role. And so I was wondering if you could share some of the thinking that sits beneath those kind of linguistic adjustments that you make in your description. You say, when we see the Internet of Things, let's make an Internet of Beings. When we see virtual reality, let's make it a shared reality. I wonder if you could kind of unpack the philosophy that sits beneath that. Certainly. So, and with all due credit, this started with a Larry Wall tweet, and Tim Toadie, Larry Wall tweeted as a linguist, I'm sure, that's when we see singularity, why is nobody talking about the plurality, which is already here. So it was just so inspiring, because you see, when we think about AI and other emerging technologies, it could be positioned either in the place of individuals. And that's quite natural if you think about things in an individualistic manner. But the problem is that it's essentially zero sum, and it leads to singularity. Or you can place AI between human beings, between human groups, and say, oh, our bandwidth, for example, for democracy, was too low, because there was no assistive intelligence. There was only three bits per person every four years uploaded, called it loading. And so the idea is, if you think of democracy as a communication system, and then put AI and other new technologies in a appropriate technology way, which to me means it could be appropriated by the local people, and then there's no competition. So I guess that the whole idea was this two dogs fighting with each other, that the link between them can be seen as a prize to be won in the tug of war, or it could be seen as a way to collaborate, all depends on how you look at it. And so taking all the sides basically extended from kind of two nodes to many nodes or a small network, and so on. And so when I say, you know, when we see Internet of Things, let's make it Internet of Beings. When we say virtual reality, let's make a shared reality. When we see machine learning, let's make collaborative learning. When we see user experience, let's make it about human experience is all pointed to this idea of kind of transcultural republic of citizens, right? It's a way to say it's not about one culture cancelling another out. It's about the plurality itself used to be difficult to see all the signs, but with assistive intelligence. Now we can for the first time, and that shows, for example, that photos graph, and that illustrate the idea of plurality too. That's fire. Thank you so much. Awesome. Really, thank you all. We're right at time. So I just wanted to extend a thank you so much to Audrey and Toby. This was really, really awesome. And I'm so glad that we were able to do this. And I wanted to thank Brendan and Nadie for logistic support. And then just a big giant huge thank you to Lin Nguyen who set everything up and coordinated the entire event. We really couldn't have done it without Lin. So thank you. Thank you. Live long and prosper. Live long and prosper. Likewise.