 Welcome to this from 2019, where there are lots of discussions about the ethical considerations to build a fair and equal information and knowledge society. To discuss this big theme, I am joined by Ayanna Samuels, aerospace engineer, international development professional and gender advocate. Ayanna, thank you very much for talking to us today. Thank you for having me. It's an honor. So Ayanna, you have been involved with three different panels, and one of them was on AI and ethics, because when it comes to building or creating a new technology, it's important that ethical considerations are included from the very start. Yes, yes. That is so critical, because oftentimes we seek to retrofit. We consider whether the ethical realities are as they should be, and even worse, it can be after there's a faux pas. And we say, wow, we didn't realize that this is something we ought to have considered. The conversation now, especially around AI, is when we are building such systems, what are the ethical dimensions we should take into account? What are the data privacy concerns we should ensure we treat with? And I'm very pleased that the discourse that has been happening, that that has been a very formative part of what people are considering in how to ensure AI stays ethical and remains a tool that will enhance technology and our goal to be connected rather than be adverse to that. And I spoke about the progress the Caribbean is making in this space. There are many countries that have their data privacy laws intact that are discussing how to infuse that within the private and public sector, and the needle is moving forward quite positively. Now another panel you were involved with was to do with the intersection of gender and disability. Yes. Because often there are many issues going on in someone's life that will stop them from being able to access technology, for instance, to enhance their lives. Absolutely. And I'm so happy you brought that up because when it comes to bridging the digital divide, the conversation has been very technical and economic, almost like a 2D perspective at best, sometimes just 1D. But it's really a 3D, 4D conversation because many people present with multiple forms of social disadvantage. There are many people who have disadvantages or disabilities that we can't see, cognitive sensory, et cetera, that really affect their ability to, shall we say, be a part of bridging the digital divide. And so if I were to give you an example, in research we have seen, there are, let's say, people who are blind. And for these individuals, it is critical that if they want to take the bus that the stops are announced. And when that doesn't happen, it becomes a very anxious experience. And there are situations where it will happen, that the announcements are made, and it won't happen. And so they feel that that's not a mode of transportation they can rely on, but the alternative of taking a taxi for women as a single woman is not something that the participants who spoke with us felt was safe or affordable. So there are three things that come to mind there. There's gender, there's socioeconomic status, and there is disability. Are we doing enough for that community to ensure that simple fixes, like ensuring that public transportation systems, all and no one's their stops, are in place? And it's easy for that to be forgotten, often times they're not a part of the conversation when we're developing solutions. And my motto is everybody who will be affected needs to be at the discussion table when we are envisioning such systems. So that intersectional perspective must be incorporated in seeking to, shall we say, truly bridge the digital divide. And who can help with this? Governments, the private sector, who are the key players to address this issue? I know everybody has a stake in it, so it depends on what we're seeking to do. If it is something like public transportation, then you'd imagine it would be much more government, public sector, but oftentimes we enter into contracts with private sector companies to outfit the buses, etc. So everybody then has to have a seat at the table. That includes members of the community, of people with disabilities, as I would have mentioned. They're very vocal advocates in that space, but they're often not necessarily told that these meetings, these initiatives are being planned, and as we said before, not necessarily at the time it should be. And so now there is a strong push for us to remember that there are intersectional realities. I myself, I'm a black woman. I am from a developing country. And when people look at me, the first thing they don't tend to see is a rocket scientist. And so I have lived that life. I know what it's like to feel like your voice isn't heard. And so I am very passionate about ensuring we remember that many people have an intersectional reality and that must be taken into account when considering not just access to ICTs but whether people can afford it and whether they really can incorporate that which exists into their lives. So how could you use ICTs and technology generally to make sure that your voice is heard? How can it be a tool for inclusion and to change perceptions, maybe? Yes. Oh, thank you so much for that. It becomes a tool for inclusion when we ensure that people can afford it, can access it and are made aware that it exists. And there's so many different pieces of the puzzle because there's also the question of barriers to learning about digital tools. Are most of the educational programs in English, is that something that becomes prohibitive for a majority of people in the world? What are we doing to address that? In cases where assistive technologies exist for people with disabilities, what is the cost like for these systems? There are many systems out there to assist people with reading programs on computers, etc., etc., but the cost remains prohibitive. Their licenses may be attacked by malware, fixing it becomes a problem. Even for something as benign as a wheelchair, there are many insurance programs that don't help with fixing it after they may deliver the first wheelchair. And so that becomes a real problem for the community of people with disabilities and there are many cases where assistive technologies aren't even a part of what's covered by insurance. So we still have a way to go. For me, it almost is more hurtful to know that the technology exists, but you just can't afford it. And so we still have a way to go to ensure that we really have provided a conduit for people who present with multiple forms of disadvantage to be involved meaningfully in our efforts to bridge digital divide. Are we making progress in addressing this digital divide? The fact that this conversation is even happening with people who are decision makers makes me feel absolutely yes. I saw the aha moments, I heard people coming to me after I spoke about this intersectional reality and people feel very passionately about it. I'm very proud that WISIS had many members of the community of people with disabilities on panels, not just in the audience, so we are making progress. However, time is ticking away. The rate at which we have been moving needs to be faster and we need to apply public pressure on companies making these products or, let's say, governments to provide incentives for the community of people with disabilities to be able to afford, even if it means, you know, shall we say helping to bring the cost down for significant specific segments of people? Ayanna Sagnolz, thank you so much for talking to us today. It's always very exciting for me. Likewise. Thank you for your passion. Cheers.