 Yeah, so my office door looks like this and it shows my schedule and I also travel around Taiwan to talk to people and connect back to this space, that's why. Ah, okay. Cool, how many people are? Drop in by. They're very, very variable but usually maybe 10 every Wednesday. Which travel party is mine? I think this one, this one I think is mine. Okay, that's it. You got the one to write. That's correct, you'll get one, please. Okay. You're the one? Yeah. I'm the one. Okay. Um, get up. I mean, Taiwan has a digital ministry. You, so what's your job exactly? Okay. What do you do as a digital minister of Taiwan? Okay, do I talk to you or do I talk to the camera? Talk to me. Okay. Okay. All right. All right. So, and if I introduce some concepts, do I introduce you to the front or to my screen? I think better to you. To my screen, so I'll move it a little bit here. Okay. Okay. Okay. So, as a digital minister, my work is to further the sustainable development goals through digital means that connects the economy, the society, and the departments together and through enhancing reliable data and encouraging effective partnerships and opening innovation. And I wrote my own job description three years ago. You did? Yes. Yes. I'll read you my job description very because like this, when we see the internet of things, let's make it an internet of beings. When we see virtual reality, let's make it a shared reality. When we see machine learning, let's make it collaborative learning. When we see user experience, let's make it about human experience. And whenever we hear the singularity, isn't it? Let us always remember the plurality. It's like a poem. It is a poem. Would you today like write the same job description as like three years ago or would you change something? Yeah. I just wrote a new poem yesterday. And how does it go in your poem? Yeah. Also job description. Yeah. It's also job description-ish. And it goes like this. It says, whirling ocean, beautiful islands, a transcultural republic of citizens. Okay. This sounds like those Japanese high quotes. Yeah. Do you have any meaning of it? Yes. Taiwan, of course, is not only the land part of it. It's also our surrounding ocean and sea that has 10% of the total ocean biodiversity on earth. And so it's always important to begin a view that it's not just on the land but actually through climate actions and sustainable goals to expand our horizons toward the ocean. And so that's why it's begun with whirling ocean. And then it's not just one island, but many islands. We have the Pescadora Islands, the Arquit Island, the Green Island and so on. And so it is not just enough to take care of Braben as a human right on the main island. It is now also very important to get all the smaller islands also connected to the Braben as a human right to make telemedicine education and so on. And transcultural means the freedom to move from culture to culture, just like the freedom to move from country to another. Because starting this year in Taiwan we have more than 20 official languages. We have more and more languages from indigenous nations. We have the Taiwanese Olok and Hakka and Mandarin and many other languages as well. And they're all equally official. And it's a new thing as of this year. And so to make machine learning, for example, learn not only from people who speak English or Mandarin, but also from all the different lineages, all the different cultures and traditions. And be able to communicate through those cultures, that's why I'm named Transcultural and the Republic of Citizens means that starting next year our referendums are in different years than the elections. Ah, yeah, because up until now it has always been like you said, new elections. Yes, yes. So there used to be, I would say, capturing of agenda of the deliberative part of democracy by the representative part of democracy. But now because there will be alternating years, there will be one year of presidential election and then one year of national referendum and then one year of mayoral election and one year of national referendum. So it allows an entire year of deliberative action outside of party politics and outside of representative politics. So it's a new design that allows for more direct participation in the agenda setting by the citizens without a political setting that captures them by the political parties. And so that's what I'm named by Republic of Citizens are meaningful. I know the meaning in those three lines. Yes. Okay, yeah, but like as a digital man it's, you know, are there like, what's the worst you can do? What worry are the most? Well, again, in order of sequence, right, if people don't care about the ocean, if they don't care about the climate, if people work on only furthering one interest at the expense of the islands. So like economy, if it's done in a linear way at the expense of society environment or innovation at the expense of social justice and privacy and things like that, that would worry me. Okay. And what about like the upcoming elections? What role does social media play in the elections? Yes, so social media is a great amplifier of people's both pro-social tendencies but also anti-social tendencies. And so it's social, but it doesn't say whether it's pro-social or anti-social. And in Taiwan, what we've seen is that it tends to reward mostly the more extreme voices so that they amplify more. So there may only be five divisive ideas among all the possible ideas that concern the society. But social media, when it's done in a design in an anti-social way tends to over amplify the voices of the divisive and give less room for the consensual. But how does social media work in Taiwan? Does it work a little bit differently from other countries or is it like the same thing? Well, in Taiwan, because we have broadband as a human right so no matter where you are in Taiwan, you have 10 megabits per second at 15 euros per month and because of that everybody is very much into video producing and video sharing. And so I would say that it is not only text-based, a lot of it is image and video-based and people very easily start their own broadcast stations just sharing their views through live streaming. So there's a lot more live streaming going on compared to other jurisdictions mostly because it's unlimited data for everyone. And I would also say that the use of end-to-end encryption is maybe more inside one through an app called Line. A lot of people are using Line for end-to-end encryption not only among individuals but also among groups of people. But what does this mean if you have more streaming and not only text-based solutions? Does this have an impact then, for example, on all those topics like fake news that it's like you have less fake news because everybody is more streaming because it's like I don't know. Less possible. Do you think it's extremely streaming? So nowadays it's also easy to synthesize video. So it's for deep fakes. Yeah, I forgot about you. So it's not exactly like that it's harder. The problem actually become bigger because people would believe it more if they have seen a picture or a video as compared to text. Text is open for interpretation. Text is usually very final in its presentation. So I would say that it actually amplified especially the feeling of anger and helplessness if people show you an image of, for example, I don't know, it was this image that says during the Hong Kong protest the payment for the rioters is such that at most they pay up to 20 million dollars I think Rimming B for murdering a police, which is a piece of disinformation. Is this also something we should viral in Taiwan? Yes, and that was a photo. And this is a kind of comic drawing that caused for basically so-called suicide deaths. And again, this is a piece of disinformation. There was no such event going on in Hong Kong. You can very easily see because it's not spelled in Cantonese. It's spelled in Hanyu Pinyin, which actually no Hong Kong protesters would use. So you mean Hanyu Pinyin is like Mandarin, not Cantonese? Yes, well, it's written in Cantonese to make it look like Cantonese. But actually it uses Hanyu Pinyin, which is Mandarin Pinyin, actually only used in PRC because in Taiwan we use the Juin system. And it also got some Cantonism as well. Okay. Yes, but what I'm trying to say is that if it's only this text, it would not be as provoking anger as a drawing or maybe a synthesized image or AVU. So is that the fake news problem bigger in Taiwan because people are using more picture and more video? I would say it incites more emotion. And it also makes clarifications more important. So the website that I'm showing you here is actually clarifying this as false and because they can cite from the video and from the images. It also makes clarification more pertinent to the message because you can then compare where the image came. It was from the royalties, but they changed the caption and so on. And what does it mean for the upcoming election? I mean, everybody is extensively using social media, not like the people from the Hans party but also like everybody is using social media. And does it also mean that like the whole presidential elections are going to be quite partial and also angry because I mean, we have like those people from Hans party who are using the opposite of fake news and also vice versa. And I get the impression that it's quite heated. Well, we're a young democracy, so elections are always heated. But I think social media is unique in that it allows the turning the helpless anger into a outrage very easily by clicking share. So whenever people feel anger, they may not have the mental capacity to check the veracity of the image or video, but they can very easily turn it into something more positive subjectively by clicking share and sending a message of outrage so that people are angry about the same thing together instead of an individual anger. And so that tend to spread. Okay, so anger as I was just showing you was also equally people devote their time to fact checking to commit it to respond to each and every of those messages within 60 minutes. I think the deadline from each ministry is two hours. So within two hours, they have to produce the clarification cards that are also visual that within two hours within like 200 words at least two pictures that clarify this. But how does this work? This is like one of the means how you protect against the fake news. Every ministry is only having a look at the... The trending distribution. Just like the trending ones or just the trending ones concerning their ministry? Of course, they can only respond to the ones concerning their ministry but the trending one also is a volunteer basis. People either reported underlying system directly to a public dashboard like flagging us by email or people can just work with the time fact check center and say I see this trending, would you like to check it? But one way or another, it will end up on the ministry's pellet and they will look at whether it's a intentional harmful entry. And if so within two hours, usually within 60 minutes now they will roll out this two picture cards that are less than 200 words and easy to cross and are humorous. And for example, but like so the people from the ministry they just have to do the monitoring, the people are doing the monitoring and then they will respond to it. Do you have like a good example from the past? So this is actually a very humorous one. This clarifying rumor that says, tell me your hair many times a week will be subject to a million dollar fine starting next week and that's not true. And then the pellet which is less than 200 words says I may be bought now. So it's a younger version of the prime minister but would not punish people with hair. And then the fine princess what we've done is introducing labeling requirements for hair products starting July 2021 and then a prime minister as he looks analysis. However, while prime minister hair many times a week will not damage your pocket, it will damage your hair when serious you may end up looking like me. Okay, so and then what is then also like approved by the minister himself and like this team? So of course the image would have to be pretty clear to use. So it's actually a very tight pipeline. You can think of it like a kind of sitcom producer a mimetic engineer team that can very easily and swiftly put the clarification messages from the ministry into this mimetic packaging so that it goes viral. So now if you, for example, search on search engine like the keywords that we just show or something like that then you will actually the first few hits will be this clarification messages and it's their relatives. Can we also have a closer look at this picture? Anyway, I will go through the whole thing again just with my camera on the screen so that we can just remember it. Sure. So after that we are doing it afterwards or shall we already do it? I would say afterwards and we don't interrupt you. Okay. Just make it out that then you have the hair, the hair thing. The hair thing, yes. Yeah, the hair thing, the whole thing, maybe your poems in the beginning just that they have a bit of close-ups and everything and you can capture it. And how many people are doing this for you? Like five? I'm at some of five people. Yeah, so they're not doing it for me, they're doing it for their minister. Yeah, so I'm mostly just advocating this way of a swift, open and structured response but the actual coaching is by our spokesperson, Vulasio Takkar and in each ministry they have a team of five people or more, but five is a kind of basic. And do you also have another example? For example, something which is also connected to the elections? I would say one of the important things is that our clarifications are not fact checks. It's just our clarification, like a piece of puzzle from the administration. So we don't directly deal with election. This would be from Han or Tsai or Song's office. But they are doing it themselves. They are doing it themselves, but that's not our purview. Our purview is common to the administrative functions but we're not doing it for the elections. Okay, so when it comes to fake news, this is like one of the main tools? You have a lot of other tools? Well, and also when I said that our fact check centre, actually every piece of fact check that they do, that they combine information from various different sources, for example this one, the Hong Kong one, once they clarified it as not correct, it's actually dialed down on Facebook. So Facebook, when people share this piece of information, they will no longer reach people's newsfeed. That easily, you'll have to scroll two hours to see it. It's exactly like moving a piece of junk mail from your inbox to your spam box so that people by default don't look into it. But it's not a takedown. So if you look specifically for it, it's still there. Okay, and how big is like in general trolling a problem in Taiwan? Especially when it comes to China and foreign countries? Strolling, if you mean automatic or semi-automatic posting of messages to elicit negative emotion, to distract from public discussion. Then we have evidence, of course, there are hundreds of thousands of fake accounts. For example, on the Hong Kong protests alone, there's 200,000 fake accounts on Twitter designed to trove discussions and they're all semi-automated from the same block of computers within the PRC that doesn't need to bypass the great firewall. They're blessed by the great firewall to directly troll Twitter and Facebook and Google. And are there also such trolling forms and kinds of questions concerning Taiwan? I think so. I think there's just recently people discovered that there's a set of content forms that republishes in traditional Chinese language, script, whatever the simplified Chinese messages that's pushed out by the PRC or something kind of just instantly or even before they post in simplified Chinese. And so that's kind of an instant translation of the messages as pushed out. For example, this Hong Kong one, which is a good example because it's also posted on the way of the Chang'an sword, which is the official weight law of the Zhongyang-Zheng Huawei in the PRC. And so it's not merely spreading this in Taiwan, it's rather taking something of a kind of official propaganda and localize it in Cantonese and traditional Chinese and spread it in the social media. But is there something that it comes like to report like propaganda and we just really targeted, let's say, for the Taiwanese market by China? For the Taiwanese market. Yeah, like for the Taiwanese market. It's like, who would buy this? Maybe in a different sense of buying. Right, so as you can see, there are many pertaining early to Taiwan messages. Some of them are not disinformation, they're rather mold information. What's for you the difference between disinformation and mold information? So disinformation is untruth with the intention to do harm. And mold information is information spread with intention to do harm. They may or may not be true, but they are intended to be framed in a way to do harm. So, for example, there was a protest back in 2016, actually. And there was a kind of real video of that protest that is almost three years ago. But then there's a reframed message of such a protest as if it's happening right now. And what's like the message behind it? So it's trying to discredit the institutional media. The framing is, there was such a very loud protest in front of the residential office building, but the media turned a deaf and blind eye to it. So that was the framing. And did, for example, such kind of a message, did this get to the people or to the Taiwanese? Well, of course, it's only after it's shared by many people do they get flattered to the attention of the town fact-checking center. So they, of course, kind of by default, have to reach at least some volunteers, their flackers, for the town fact-checking center to get noticed. And, for example, the Hong Kong 160 and Shenzhen? When it's reported to the TFC. So it's maybe only within one hour. But while it's spreading, the TFC is in parallel doing its fact-checking work. So this comes like to this whole fact-checking work. How many cases are you people or like the people in the other ministry and dealing with the conflict in China and Taiwan? Is it like a lot or? Well, if you main China as in kind of the land, the territory that it currently governs, and there's many about, for example, this was about epidemic in, I think, rat. And there's also a kind of virus in pigs and so on. So there's some, of course, concerning to that area of their jurisdiction. But I would say it's not a majority because all what they want to do is to serve the sport. So a local topic actually makes more sense to do so. For example, this one is a disinformation about Dr. Tsai Ing-wen and a dialogue with a, allegedly, a small vendor from a kind of change the name from Li Keqiang to Tsai Ing-wen and we spread on social media. This was also one of the posts you already trended before? Yes, yes, trended before the TFC looked at it. Do you have an example of what's the post which trended the most? No, I don't. Maybe you can ask the TFC. Because it depends on how early they intervened. Because once they published this as a disinformation as false, it will stop the virality. The virality, as determined by Facebook, will be dialed down to less than one-tenth of the previous. So the earlier this fact check appears, the slower it will trend afterward. And so we could never predict what would happen if not for this fact check. But can one say that China is trying to interfere with the social media and Taiwan? Because maybe like the election, the general and the point of view of people? Well, we know for sure that they have these hundreds of thousand fake accounts. And some of them, of course, gets deleted by Twitter and published there. Metadata corroborated by Facebook and Google. And so just based on the fact that there were this amount of bots or fake accounts that are blessed by the firewall, I think it's safe to say that there are some still remaining, even though some of them get suspended. So is it a big problem or not so big a problem? It depends on who you're asking. To me, I think comparatively, it's less a big problem for this election than the previous one. Why? Because the previous election is also a referendum. And so there's many different places where you can so discord. Basically each and every referendum topic is one in which this information, more information can operate. But for this election, because we've decoupled the referendums with the presidential elections, so there's less room for this information to navigate. It's not to say that they're not serious. It's just to say the surface of this information is narrow. Do you have this? I don't have your question. If you want it, maybe not it on it. So in general, it is a problem of fake news and malinformation, disinformation from China. So what can you do against it? I think working with journalists is by far the best way and to revitalize people's participation in journalism. Because as I said, everybody is a YouTuber and livestreamer. So it's not just about media literacy, which is about readers' literacy or viewers' literacy, but about media competence, like when everybody is a media broadcaster. What kind of competence do they make to make sure that this kind of viral angry messages can spread but rather something that's more humorous, that's more to the point and so on, that may spread easily and that is the kind of competence education can play a large role. And also we see a lot of institutional media now working with us like social media, as well as a lot of participation from the volunteer group to voluntarily type in all the presidential candidates' public speech into transcripts, and then do a fact check to each and every part of what a presidential candidate has said. And just by participating in the process, it shows everyone how institutional media does fact checking so it's checking in journalism in China, which is why we always say disinformation in Taiwan is fake news because unfortunately in Taiwan news and journalism translate to the same word. And so there's no way to say fake news in Mandarin without offending journalists. What's that again? It's like the same word. Yeah, so news is Xing Wen and journalism is Xing Wenbongzuo. The Department of Journalism is Xing Wenxi and the journalist is Xing Wenbongzuo. So it's Jia Xing Wen, which would also describe of course a fake journalist, fake journalism. But journalism by definition is the opposition of fake because it's a process to determine reality, if not truth, but at least reality from different perspectives. And so by combining these two together, in Mandarin, it is a front to journalists also. And because my parents were both journalists out of video piety, I cannot say that. Okay, so it's information then. But disinformation Jia Xing Wen has no such problem because it pertains to the intentional harm by untruth. Of course a journalist would never do that. But so in the end, the main tool is fact checking. And the fact checking can be done hard by the government, can be done by the media, can be done by the people going to you. But also the product of fact checking need to be clarified in the sense that are humorous. That stands alone. Why has it to be humorous? So it's catchy? Yes, it's catchy that it can spread more than disinformation because joy spreads further than anger. But also if you feel a helplessness in the anger, humor turns it into joy and that blocks the psychological pathway that turns it into outrage. And so people actually have more mental capacity to look into the thing together rather than being in a very divisive mood. When the time on start is this whole... Humor sign. You know, this whole humor thing and that is humor against disinformation. Because you're a journalist, right? Exactly, you can say it. It's one of those chivalrous words. It's like one year, two years ago or when the time on start? So I remember that I started proposing this idea I think early 2017. And that's when I outlined using my own experience in working to counter spam those almost 20 years ago. So I proposed that we keep it swift, open and structured. And the structure is a mimetic structure that is to say to make it humorous and it spreads faster. So that was the... an idea that I raised in the cabinet meeting that is gradually realized by spokespersons Shibuya and Nakulasu Daga in the past couple years. So it only took... also did you think like this has already changed a lot during the... I would say so, I would say so. Especially for this election because of the surface is more narrow. The referendums is out of the picture. I think a lot of disinformation necessarily then pertains the administrative functions. And so the clarification from the ministries play a larger role on this because the referendum agenda are said by the people. Often this disinformation pertaining a referendum, there's nothing a ministry can say. But presidential candidates are representative. And so their platforms of course all pertain to administrative functions. And so these are something that ministry have something to say. And so also the people already got more educated. And more aware that this is going on. So quite a fast process. Everything has a magic that it doesn't change so fast. People change so fast. I would also like to credit for example the Line media system where they have a dashboard that just showed the latest trending clarifications. And they arranged to work with many different fan checkers as well as the Executive Yuan, the administration. So that they give a section of their popular media called Line Today. And they can show how many, every day how many people flag messages as disinformation for fact checking. And how many people eventually got around to share or read the clarifications instead of the disinformation. So it shows kind of this pipeline. And I am grateful I think that online today if you can look at the top news it's below the gossiping and entertainment. But then it's the second section after the gossiping entertainment the clarifications for rumors. And because of that it's very funny. And then after that it's world news and social issue like everyday issues and online video and so on. But it's good that we're on the second section, the clarifications. I sometimes tell our ministerial colleagues that that's because we're not funny enough. That's why we're on the second section. If we're funny enough we will be above entertainment and gossip. Do you have an example of like the, it can be like from your ministry which really went trending because it was so funny? Okay, yes. I can show you a short video. So then you have like thumb, you out thumb yourself. I'll show you a short video that I did. So like if you just talk about virality this video went somewhat viral. It has more than 140k views but it's also syndicated by various different thumb pages that all together bring it I think to more than one million views. And it's just a very simple thing. So I can show you first the original and then the remixes. I have seen like the, not this one, just the five minutes, five minute interview on DW. That's the five minute one. Yeah, right. So the first few sections went viral. Hong Kong has been protesting for democracy and against what they perceive as a growing influence by the mainland to the government from China. As an official from Taiwan, an island which Beijing considers a breakaway territory, how do you view these protests? The breakaway was at a neolithic age, I believe. So just after it went viral. Yeah. And then people started remixing and adding a lot of kind of rap coaching and things like that. Do you have an example of that? Yeah, the remix. I think the first remix was from Taiwan One Power basically just captioning and just highlighting that particular perspective. And that also went somewhat viral. And I think there's then a lot of Photoshop versions that started to come. And then the mainstream media took notice of it. And then it went viral again on mainstream media. And then let me show you the remix. And just go to one of my friends, V, and look it. It was a while ago. So you can see, for example, a Photoshop. I love this. I love his classes. And then it shows the fan page, the mimetic engineer that's responsible for it. And then, of course, then we can go into here and then look at how the Photoshop went. And then we'll see that people are actually then supplying the neolithic geographic information and explaining how exactly the plate pictonics use. So as I said, humor brings a curiosity in people. And creativity. And creativity. And people actually wanted to learn how to break away exactly what happened 8,500 years ago. And when it comes to this other platform, drawing the government and TW, as I understand, this is also an initiative. Yes, this one. What's the most popular topic nowadays in this platform? We don't have to guess. So from the petition part of it, there's, of course, also regulations and budgets. But the petition part, which is more popular, I guess, then you can search in it and you can easily sort it by the number of petitions. And then you can see all the historically trending ones or just the newer trending ones. In the newer trending ones, you will see that animal rights and animal welfare is by far the largest topic. For example, this one concerns larger dogs than, I guess, very large cats. And whether there are, frankly, transportation options in the Taiwan rail system for them. Why do you think... It's cute. It's cute. Not because Taiwanese have such a special relationship to cats and dogs. I mean, even your president is posing. That's our first family. That's our first family. You cannot corrupt them. It's very briefly by catnips, but you're directly corrupt. So Taiwanese have a really special relationship to cats and dogs. Yeah. Well, there's also a petition going on on companion birds in public transportation options. And also one on animal welfare, seeking alternatives to competitions by weight for pigs raised for ceremonial ritual purposes. And so animal welfare, I would say, is by far the largest. And there's also many ones concerning the rights to excess nature. For example, this one is about amateur fishing in the harbors. And there's also a similar topic that people participated on mountaineering and hiking, because previously these were forbidden. The sea and the mountains were forbidden for ordinary people to access without permit, because it's a martial law legacy. Maybe the mountains are dangerous because people at that time thought maybe we're a real warfare going on if you allow too many people to access the deeper mountains and so on, which is no longer a problem now. And so we're systemically using the joint platform to engage people, relaxing the rules and increasing the self-regulation of mountaineering and amateur fishing and all the sea activities and mountaineering activities. And how successful and how successful is that initiative? Previous and successful. You know how it affected policy change? Yeah. So of all the cases that we work with directly, almost 60 cases now, half of which resulted in decisive regulatory policy change. The other half get maybe something different, but I would say not necessarily worse. For example, there was one petition, wow, nice number, 8,000 people strong that says Taiwan should change the time 72 GMT plus now. For some reason. And then there's an equally strong petition. Also 8,000 people strong. That says we should remain GMT plus 8 without changing to GMT plus 9. So obviously you cannot please those petition subjects. For example, also if it comes to China, I have several petitions. For example, once we're saying we want a department against China like influence on the joint platform. I haven't seen that. This one? Do you have a key word or something that I can search for? Because it needs 5,000 petitions for it to raise to our monthly meeting of participation officers. Are all they happen? Why just them, I think, those are the ones which happens? Yeah, it's the Star Flag. Yes. So yeah, that's a really good one because you can see how the Ministry of Justice answered it. I think this one is the flag and this one was something else. Classical. Text. Ah, I know. So yeah, the flag one is actually very very nice because we actually changed the regulations around the petitions because of this. When in its first incarnation you can see the response from the Ministry of Justice. That says this according to the constitutional ruling, a number of 3 to 8, the constitutional definition of the original territory is a a political question of the most serious level. And so it is outside the judicial branch and indeed the Ministry of Justice should not be done by the court or indeed the Ministry of Justice to make such a decision. And so they basically said that this is something that concerns a presidential and exclusively presidential purview and it's outside of the administration, the Ministries to tackle it. And right after that, this is I think the one that you are referring to, and right after that we changed the regulation, saying that the petition must pertain only to the Ministry of Functions within the administration. So saying that issues pertain to diplomacy to defence that are specifically presidential purviews is not for the joint platforms administrative section to deal with. How do I have it? So this is the administration and this is the National Auditing Office and this is the CDC's Yeah, sure, sure. We just tied in here. You know, I think as much because one of them do you remember we had like, we looked for people and suggested they want to have like a ministry about this information This one? Yes. So again, it's rejected because it is the presidential purview. It's because of this Yeah, there's a clause. There's a clause. Right, so basically we look systemically at what is the presidential purview that the administration should not touch because those are political questions pertaining to the President and we said that it is basically issues pertaining to the Chinese continent issues pertaining to foreign affairs issues pertaining to national defence and these are the things that you can buy to the President about but it is beyond the ministers to respond and because a minister cannot respond and the opposition calls for ministerial response so it is falling outside of the ministry of the administration of the joint platform I suggest because it's already 9.50 when we start with the shooting of the screens. The last answer I think Yeah, I can say it again I think because the reason we have it already before when he explained it about the flag scene. Yeah, it's the same answer. Just before or true before If you think it's important then just be careful to do it again because in the end I was more focusing on your hands. How can I frame it then? Not every question not every petition will be subject to this 5.000 signature collecting. For example, we have one people who want to have a new ministry or department against the China interference for example this wasn't approved. But after the original petition about the flag we took a systemic view as what are the presidential reviews for political questions and these are issues concerning the Chinese continent foreign policy as well as national defense. And because these are by constitution something that the president have to say but neither the ministers nor the administration have to say about our petition system basically demand early responses from ministers so we've changed the regulation pertaining to the petition says if we propose something that is outside of the purview of the administration then we would not enter the collection stage of the petition. We're back. Let's start with perhaps the screens of the joint government and I hope I can decipher my opinion. It was really good. The very first one already with the this is like the the original one the one from 2017. And like the important thing is that it's a response. It's a political question. So here is where it sites the constitutional courts ruling saying that this is a major political question and according to the separation of powers constitutional idea the branches are not in line to answer this directly. Neither the judicial branch can determine a political question directly nor should the ministry of justice do so. And then to the top again to the top again where you see the proposal. Okay, here is the proposal. Or like way up so we only have like the title. Okay. Or just like this, maybe here. And so we change the regulation shortly after that. Okay, and then let's go to the hair picture. Oh yeah, the hair picture. So I'll this one as well, maybe. The protest video. The protest video. Could you even start it? Hmm. Well, I can search for it. No, that's fine. Yeah, but you can search for it too. No, if we did not see it before. But it's fact-shared response. Okay. Well, I can show you more details. But these are the same. Just remixed in various different. Yeah, it's fine. I really want to show that. Okay. Like the hair? Yes, the hair thing. So maybe it's good if I just move over again. Okay. And then we switch to pictures. You can see the clarification cards. Can you? These are the two clarification pictures. One from our premier and one from our deputy premier. And so this is our deputy premier getting a haircut. So maybe they were trying like different ways of tackling this. But I think this one went more viral because as you can see, this is on the top of the search result. And just... Focus on this one. And I can also show the English translation. If that works. Okay. As I said, this is the English translation. But I didn't translate this part. Where it says if you premier hair, you would damage your hair. Okay. That's the point. That's the point, yes. Also the Hong Kong? The Hong Kong. What would you like from the Hong Kong one? We have like the example of the 20,000 to 2000. Yes, yes. So let me just search for one. Yeah, there's quite a few Hong Kong ones in the tele-effect check center. Very interesting. Yes, so that was the picture. This is the picture again? Okay. So that you don't see it and then back to the picture? Okay. So also another picture. Back to the picture. What do I have on my list? I have your quotes. So just from the very beginning like this is not true and then it shows the picture and then it shows the source of the picture and then it shows the kind of false flag comic of this supposedly call for suicides. But then it's written in Cantonese that are not really white and spelled also incorrectly on the screen. Okay. And when you actually join the group you'll see that it's mostly spun. So somebody probably trolled. Okay. You know, then you have the poems. You know the poems? Yes. The first one. So I'll just go through it. Maybe it's easier for the camera. Everything I can. When we see the internet of things let's make it the internet of beings. When we see virtual reality let's make it a shared reality. When we see machine learning let's make it collaborative learning. When we see user experience let's make it about human experience. And whenever we see that its singularity may be new that it's always remembered. That's the reality. This is what we talked about yesterday. Yeah. But this is new. I just wrote yesterday. That's for us? Yeah. It's actually for you because I was thinking about Switzerland actually and how this transcultural Republic of Citizens is a pretty good description of people from coming together by direct democracy. The back. Maybe I say it. Yes. World in Ocean beautiful islands a transcultural Republic of Citizens or maybe in Mandarin. How long did you think about this poem? All day yesterday. The first eight words are commonplace like everybody in Taiwan above my age or even a bit under my age learns it from I think it's high school textbook because it's part of the the forward of the Taiwan history. So it talks about it. And so what I really did yesterday was just through those eight characters. So literally Republic of Citizens between flowers. I think we have all and also I would like to have if you could like also film a few life of her gadgets. So we get a little bit of the impression that it is a digital workplace. Of course the metrics we is at our notes. So are we on time? Yeah we are on time.