 And software as a service by design because processing happens on the server side in the cloud is to, and this model in many cases is based on notizing personal data through target advertising means data is not in our hands anymore. It is copied onto servers. So by the way, and I will reuse, you know, catchphrase as you've probably been here with, there is no cloud. The cloud is someone else's computer. That's a very nice way to introduce the cloud to, you know, ordinary people with things. The cloud is something magical. No, the cloud is just someone else's computer. And in the cloud, data is centralized. There is no freedom for users to have any, you know, impact on the data because, well, maybe there is some free and open source software on the servers like the kernel and a few things, but really the application itself is not free software. And so the user has no control over the application and therefore has no control of what is being done, his or her data. So you're probably all familiar with the fate of Edward Snowden, the whistleower, which basically, you know, has released a lot of information. He's had a lot of information from his employer at the NSA to journalists. And what really boils down to is data centralization makes mass surveillance economically possible. Basically, the NSA and several other government agencies want to listen to everyone. They want to record every conversation, whether it happened on the phone or on a computer. And they do that because it's their mission. And because it's too expensive to do surveillance of 7 billion people on Earth right now, it's a lot cheaper to go and fetch the data from the very companies that concentrate our data into a few silos. And this is an issue as explained here. This is Glenn Bilwald, which is one of the two journalists that met with Edward Snowden first. It's basically, if you are under surveillance, you do self-censorship. Mass surveillance, and I'm quoting him here, mass surveillance creates a prison in the mind. If you are under surveillance, you change your behavior. And this is not just something we think. It's scientifically proven. We do self-censor. And here's the proof. So Wikipedia has a lot of pages, and it's totally okay to be visiting Wikipedia pages. You know, it's legal to visit Wikipedia pages. I mean, right? We agree on that. But there are some pages we discuss, which discuss topics that are today. A little touchy. Islam, or Jihad, or terrorism are such topics and pages that people may, you know, they hear a lot about this in the media, and it's really good that as citizens they want to know more and go to Wikipedia to learn more about these topics. But at the same time, if you look at the Jihad page, maybe you could think, um, I could get into trouble because we'll think, you know, someone they could think I am doing it for the wrong reasons. And so what you see here is basically the mean audience of these such pages with touchy subjects on the US version of Wikipedia. And so as you see, the trend is increasing really fast. And then here that black mark is the first known revelations where we learn that surveillance, mass surveillance was happening, and people knew they were under surveillance. Probably, not for sure, but they were programs of mass surveillance. And as you can see, the trend here suddenly there is a sudden drop in visiting these pages. Which once again, it is legal to view and read these pages. It is a good thing. But as we know, as we are under surveillance, we change our behavior. In many cases, we don't know we change our behavior. But we do not dare visiting Wikipedia anymore because we could catch a bullet for being around. So this is a real and scientific example of how we change our behavior when we know we are under surveillance. And this is why it's such a big issue with mass surveillance. You have heard, I'm sure, Larry Lessig, which said, basically, caught his law. If in the digital age, the people who write the software are the people who decide what other people can do. Because, you know, software is everywhere in our lives. And so, well, we as software developers decide what other people do. And this is exactly why if we have free software, we can have a free society. And there's another thing which is really nice, that if code is law, and I think it is, then architecture is politics. The way we architecture software and stuff is actually we decide how things are going to work. So it's up to us hackers, I mean that of course in a good way, to build the internet we want. The internet that we want and the internet that it ended down to us. So here's a larger view of the picture. We have to build a new one. We need to buy the new, or GNU, whatever, decentralized internet, instead of centralized internet owned by a handful of corporations. We need all kinds of free and open source decentralized efforts to build that internet. Start with a personal solution which is working on, cozy, but there are other solutions. Why you know host, sandstorm, cloud and next cloud are examples of such open source and free software solution to give back control of the internet to the users. But there are all sorts of projects here today that are going to be presented in this room. There are so many and so diverse, I could not come up with proper categories to explain. There are people who do service hosting like Shaton and Formasoft. There are, you know, of course software, there are do-it-yourself ISPs, Wi-Fi infrastructure based on free software and all that kind of thing. So there are many things and this is what is going to cool today as we are going to discard all of these new approaches to build a decentralized internet with the hope of making this a movement, just a bunch, not just a bunch of projects, but really people working together. And that was the goal of these days today is to get people together and connect them so that we build together a decentralized internet. Thank you. I see that we already have a question here. Ludo, two questions. So the first question I have is what about cables? It's nice to control the internet made of cables connecting data centers to others. So in the data centers we can have all the solutions we want. But like big cables are owned by huge corporations. Do you know of any efforts of having cables owned by the people, not owned by Orange, by KPN, by PT, by ATT? Do they like efforts to like put a cable between the US? Well, let's be like more European centric, a cable between say Europe, mainland and the UK. That wouldn't be controlled by big corporations. I need to repeat the questions. Keep your questions short because you're not heard on video. And so what about the cables that make the internet, the fickle internet? They do matter. They need to exist. And I think the issue is more like on the last mile or a few last miles. And this is why they do it yourself. ISPs are really interesting. The actual cables, the big cables, optical cables under the sea and stuff like that, we are totally not there yet. But if we do have encryption enabled, I think this solves a lot of the issues connected with that. It's not solving all of them. But if it's encrypted they are not going to be doing internet neutrality stuff against internet neutrality and stuff like that. So I think we're pretty safe there. It doesn't mean we don't have to try. But I think there are more urgent matters that are mostly related in my opinion to devices and servers and such. The good news is that we have Raspberry Pi's for basically 50 euros. You can build a decent server now. The question is, is it going to be safe and secure and easy to administer? That's the question we need to solve. But at least the hardware here is here and extremely promising. I'll take your left. Keep it short because I have to repeat it. Maybe encryption isn't the server block because we've seen recently in China for example that it blocks VDNs. So maybe this is a real issue. Yes, and so what's your question? Is encryption a solution? Is it efficient or cheap? Do you put cables under the sea? No, I agree. It's dangerous everywhere. I mean the internet for the people is under attack pretty much on every front. So banning encryption is a major issue and I think it's a political one and we need to fight in favor of encryption pretty much everywhere we are. It's going to be hard for me to fight for the Chinese but I can fight in Europe and I do fight in France. It's my country and everywhere I can. So yes, encryption right to encryption is something we need to fight for absolutely. Is there another question? Find out what the people that match it is there for a long time but sort of a new topic for the public. So where did the idea of building a decentralized internet come from? That's if I understand your question. Well I wasn't like I said with Mozilla for 17 years. And 20 years ago I was at Fozdem which if I remember correctly was called Osdem at the time, not Fozdem because the free part was only open source not free. And Richard Stollman came and yelled and well of course. And so it changed so it works. So yelling works. And I was with a colleague and we had the first Mozilla dev room. And after 17 years I was like now the issue is not so much on the client side it's also on the server side. This is why I've joined Cozy to create that. And of course I ended up knowing a lot of people in similar things. And Julien Tazidin and mom together came and well we know people that are interested in something which is pretty similar. Tazidin is involved in DIY ASP. Mom is involved in one unit host and together well connect with other projects. And we say let's request a room, a dev room at Fozdem like I did in Mozilla like 17 years ago. And it happened thank you Fozdem. And I hope this is the first one. The next one is going to be a lot bigger and bigger. And if you see you know the first Mozilla dev room was like pretty much this size and now it's really huge. So maybe this is the story you know. You will be able to say to your eventually I was there. And another question. I see two issues for doing the decentralized business. Data center on the economic side is very efficient compared to the decentralized. Maybe we need to put more money on the table for something safer. And the second one that the data is centralized and gives you, give everyone a lot of services. When the data is centralized today like Google Maps. So how to give the user all the data like Google is able to give services with data. Trade the data. So your question is how is there a chance that we win with the decentralized approach as opposed to centralized approach. First I think the internet is inherently decentralized. That's one thing it was built to be centralized. Second there are things that are working for us. The smartphone industry is building power efficient and powerful chips that are very very inexpensive. Think if there is a new chip called a new board called the Orange Pi Zero which is 7 euros. And it's quite core 1.2 gigahertz. You know it really is something. So even the Raspberry Pi which is inexpensive it's just the beginning. And thanks to the smartphone industry that's taking our data we're actually it's empowering us with new hardware which is very efficient. So it doesn't have to be fully decentralized. And as my personal opinion I'm a pragmatic pragmatist and I think that if we start to halfway decentralized and we decentralize not well if we decentralize halfway and have like I don't know regional servers it's a lot better than having a worldwide server. So we could use we could leverage the efficiency of data centers but have more control over that. And this is something we're going to see with the Google lies your life and their approach with from a soft you will see it's very and you read French do you. I encourage you to read a book because that's what I explained on 300 pages basically yes. Sir. Yes. I mean it's it's so I repeat question is it going to work with the email the email question because of spam protection against spam is really hard. But who wants a Gmail account here in this room raise your hand. Okay. Now this is the problem. If you started moving your email from Google to an RISP email that would be a lot of progress. Not not the perfect solution but progress and you know in re decentralizing the email. So yes we can start with that and the world's going to change. You know just buy your own domain and use the email servers of your poster. That's already a start and these people know how to run a mail server that is recognized by Gmail. So. So what about ordinary users for having a decentralized Internet. Yeah. So if if I may and we have like two more minutes. I'll give you a very quick example of what we do at Cozy which basically enables you to connect your data from all your devices and with connectors to all your services on your personal cloud. And this personal cloud you know it's like personal like a smartphone is personal. No username. It's you just enter the password and enter and you have access and you it's just like a smartphone. You know you can buttons. You have calendar contacts and files and photos. You can import your data from Google. You can add connectors and applications. You see your files. You see your contacts and such your calendar. All of that works and it runs not necessarily at home. It can run on a on a server that you pay for. And so there is no incentive for the hosting company you pay to data mine your data because they already make good money by renting you service space. So that's what we want to do. I'm not saying it's perfect but it's a good medium term solution. It's easy to use and you don't have to worry about the security because you have you know professionals that manage to manage your server. That's it. I think we will need to prepare for the next hot. Ludo have a one last quick question. One. Why do you think Snowden's revisions were more impactful than the discovery of children years before where everybody at some point had a terrorist bomb in their email. I think Snowden had an impact because it made the front page of the media. That's pretty much it. I think it was better than that but it's already pretty good. Time is up. We need to prepare for the next talk. Thank you very much.