 Moving on, on this session, we have a third debate now on dust technology care about health. I will have the pleasure to interact with Carlos Moerera. Carlos Moerera is the founder and the CEO of Wisekey with a cybersecurity company based out of Geneva. He spent about 17 years in the United Nations as an expert on cybersecurity and trust models. So no doubt he will come back on this question. It is my pleasure to introduce this debate, dust technology care about health. And I would say having been in technology for decades, I'm always anxious to start with technology because very rapidly, if you don't have people passionate about a certain type of technology, can they answer what question? Because technology is always a solution in search of a problem by design. So that's the challenge. So I will try to put some context. And for this debate, I was thinking of referring to the work of Carlota Perez, who is an economist and published a seminal book at least for people in technology in 2002 called Technology Revolution and Financial Capital. And I'm sorry for her because I will go very fast. But basically it says they are in the fifth technology revolution. They are like a congrats cycle for technology and basically they have three phases. There is the boom and then it leads to a crisis because the boom always entails excess leads to a crisis. And then ultimately when society understand the potential and it takes some time of these new technology, they appropriate the technology and put it at work to solve more critical problems. And I think this wave started with mass production of processors. That's the foundation of the information technology. Thank you, Intel. And then it has grown. We've seen the excess. I don't need to explain them. And we suffer from some of them and notably the monopolies that have been built around technology and the incredible power of these organizations. So they are excess in the way technology is used. But now we see we have major challenges at society level where technology will be part of the answer. And we will put it to work. And I'm a promoter of what I say is I call the planet-centric design. When you discuss with enterprise and there is one not to be in front of someone named them, but someone will recognize who is a large tire company and that says what does it help? What does it bring if we develop the most efficient, the most effective, the best ever tire company? And if the world as we know it will have disappeared in 10, 15 years. The conscious of this overarching problem is very high across. And I think it affects health as well. Health is part of it. You can't be healthy if you're in a dying or unhealthy ecosystem. So you saw a lot of craze in technology around the ultimate customer experience about the way you look and I'll come back to handle your citizens. But my view, this is passé. The problem is to address the human being, the consumer, the citizen, the employee in the planet context. And we should think more broadly on a planet-centric design. And it's not only about being sustainable. You hear a lot of commitment. Given the way we consume, it's about also regeneration. So Arthur will see if the next revolution is biotechnology or clean tech. But hopefully they will work hand in hand together with information technology. So that's a little bit of the context we've all done that I would see for this session of the WPC on health. So planet-centric design based on this evolution and the need to regain control of technology. When you think of taking control of technology, for me, there are always three dimensions that you need to check for whatever technology you, I speak, information technology you're looking at. Number one is data. We heard about data. We'll develop a view. Of course, data is the object of information technology. The second thing and Carlos will develop afterwards more on this is security. Security has not been part of the initial design of information technology. Again, back to Intel. If you think of Moore's law, Moore's law is just about performance and cost. That's how all of the information technology has been built. And now you start to see because of the transfer of value online on information technology. Of course, the more value, the more interest there is for people accessing either the information. That's what we call through advanced persistent threat. Primarily the government agencies or organized crime. There is not a week without that you read about the ransomware attack. But Carlos will develop this topic and then the standards. I think people don't pay enough attention to the standards when they look at technology. It was mentioned in the previous debate slightly. It's because all these technologies are built in silos, most of them. And then we have an issue of the interoperability between the different system and for the information exchange. And if you want to have a debate, now we'll come on practical examples. If I develop briefly on data, the first thing that strikes me this year. I'd like to share is that how come we had two major events. First, the pandemic, obviously. Second, the US presidential election. How can it be that with available data, available data brokers, you can manage your political arguments street by street, house by house, individual by individual in every family. And you can deliver it constantly for weeks. And then we are told we cannot track clusters for me. That's something I have some ideas, but that's something extremely striking. How come we are faced with this? And we heard this morning from an rightly so from the representative of the industry, be it Sanofi or Axa, the data is key. That's what we need. Not only the technical data, but the data about the behavior. And yes, I hear about GDPR, so general data protection rules. Yes, but it exists today. You can run a billion dollar for each camp, a billion dollar more campaign and get the success that you want, the goal that you want. And probably Jacques, it's because there is another giver there very clearly. There is someone setting the direction that's in our case. But I think data and when you go a little bit deeper, it's the same situation today. According to a study done recently by E3 on the GovTech governance tech market, what is called the GAFAM, so the big US technology group, represents 73.3% of global investment in artificial intelligence for health care. So it's another edge taken. What do we do? There are initiatives and luckily under the leadership of Commissioner Thierry Breton, who was rightly, rightly raised around the bell about the enterprise data, which is the last thing that Europe can protect against the US and China. We've published on this with the feedback in 2018 on the geopolitical importance of data. So I don't want to develop more. But clearly, yes, there is a big topic. As I mentioned, the second pillar is security. I will leave it to Carlos Leitron. He will not cover only this, but certainly this part. And I will conclude my introduction on the importance of the standards. Standards are important in technology. If you think of the internet that allows us to, it's you heard IPv4, IPv6 stands for Internet Protocol. It is a standard. You heard about Ethereum, maybe in blockchain. It is a standard. I mean, every time there is a big battle, what allows us to cooperate and you heard maybe about open whatever, and proprietary technology, it's this battle, this constant battle. And I don't want to refer to common goods because we are not there, but certainly it's fundamental. And we heard this morning the difficulties. If you think of what's happening and back to the COVID, who are where the pandemic started? At least that's what we're told. Where's a smart city? It's a Chinese smart city. And Chinese smart city means a security city, meaning they have all the means, and we've done a study as well with the free on this, to do the surveillance, to monitor the behavior of the people. Still, they could not identify it, but the response was a very centrally managed response, as you would expect it in China. And then we heard this morning that other Asian country has had very good results in their response, and not to be mentioned by Professor Flau, and Japan, Korea. This is not a centrally managed response. This is, there are different authorities. The individual rights to my data, my information are respected, but it's organized in a way that they can cooperate, that the exchange takes place. If you don't enter this concept into your design and you don't pay attention to technology choices on which standard you're going to run, then you will have no choice but a centrally managed model, because that's the only way you can have an end-to-end view, but it doesn't fit most of our political regime, and I would say likely so, at least personally. But then, if you're outside of a centrally managed government, then you need to be able to cooperate, you need to be able to aggregate the data, you need to be able to trace the data, and this can only be done if you pay attention to the standards. So again, a context to summarize beyond health and for health, a planet-centric design, and then looking at your technology choices and the way you design your data, we've discussed about it. Probably there will be other questions. We'll cover security now with Carlos and the question of standards, which by the way, going back to the UN, is a big debate on distributed and decentralized form of governance. And I think there are difficulties, but it's also a direction in which to go. And to finish on this, I think we won't find big global solution to your health problem, your climate problem order. We'll need to act locally. That's what we've seen. The big challenge is how do you bring the global power to the local initiative so that they can then communicate and work together and leverage what they can. That's the problem with circular economy. If you just circle it locally, it's good for the few hundreds you're there. You just don't move the needles for the rest of the planet. So how do you make it? You have the scaling effect and that goes through interoperability understanding. So that's for my quick interaction on the technology principles in my view that matter in this debate.