 All right. Hey, everybody. We're gonna get started Thank you for joining us for today's event the battle for the global internet I am Dustin Phillips executive director of ISOC DC and we'd like to thank New America and Diplo Foundation for partnering with us and Pulling this event together and we'd like to thank the esteemed panel for leading the discussion We are going to look at what the coming months might mean for internet governance The numerous processes happening over the next few months could be an inflection point For the way the internet functions both at home and around the world and we have a great panel of experts here to provide their Perspectives, but we also have a lot of experts in the crowd So we hope that today's event will be interactive with some time at the end for Q&A Additionally to contribute to the discussion both Online please use the hashtag global internet and with that I would like to turn it over to our moderator Teresa Horosova the project development director for Diplo Foundation Thank you everybody for coming and making time welcome also to everybody following us online Please be part of the conversation on Twitter, especially if following remotely as Dustin said we are using the hashtag global internet with capital G capital I and My colleague in the room can also pick up some points from the Twitter discussions to feed in to this event As Dustin said we we should be looking at what is up for digital policy in the upcoming months We are now at the end of September and already up until now This has been quite an eventful year with many kind of hot issues on the agenda To name a few which you know might have defined this year in digital policy We can we can mention the the Facebook and Cambridge Analytica scandal and the the kind of consequences of that all the discussion about about the general data protection regulation Discussions on the future of autonomous vehicles or let's say discussions on taxing the internet economy or and ongoing on cyber security geopolitics and Really a lot more is to come in those three remaining Months that we have still ahead of us and we do believe that some of some of the new kind of Let's say decisions or developments around digital policy really will be taking place at some of these global fora That are coming ahead That's the plan for today We will cover a few selected events which we have considered as being kind of crucial for for developments We probably will have omitted some and we also might not although in this very kind of well-represented panel Have the expertise to cover them all in all these aspects So therefore we also encourage you in the later part of this this panel to draw on your expertise And please do come in and enrich us and each other We have some excellent speakers here to guide us through that I will start on my left We're just telling a few words about each of them and let's start with the Yovan Yovan Kurbalia who is here at his new capacity today as a co-chair of the secretariat of the newly formed High-level panel on digital cooperation. This is a new initiative that has kind of you know shaken up a little bit The discussions of digital policy with quite some expectations coming coming out for it It it was Directed to be established directly by the United Nations Secretary general Antonio Gutteres and the idea of the panel is to basically strengthen digital cooperation We will hear from Yovan what it means practically and concretely Yovan is the founding director of Diplo foundation the organization that I am representing here he's he's a former diplomat and author of a Publication introduction to internet governance, which has already been translated to more than 10 languages and is currently in its sixth edition Further we have Becky board Becky board is is the is the deputy general counsel and chief privacy Officer at Noistar where she oversees the various privacy by design Initiatives of the company and at the same time Becky is on the board of directors of ICANN The internet corporation for assigned names and numbers as we have another important meeting of this organization coming up soon That's what Becky will bring in I will then continue with With our friend then colleague Shane choose who is the co-chair of the IGF USA Internet Governance Forum USA It is the national version of the global Internet Governance Forum that Shane will be covering in this panel At the same time Shane is the visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute where she's managing the global internet strategy program Not not to mention that she's also president of logon circle strategies We're working with her clients to create coordinated public policy approach on various issues such as so cyber security and And I see these on the global scale and Lastly to have at least some more gender balance in this panel We have Robert morgos who is from here at New America He's the senior policy analyst at the cyber security initiative, which is which is the program that that helped us put this event together He's working on some very interesting research By the way, you can collect a copy of his recent study there at the entry if you haven't done that So and he works on issues such as mechanisms to counter the spread of offensive cyber capability Cyber security and international governance and also the Russian Internet doctrine So that's just to give you a little glimpse of who we have here today to share their Reflections on the upcoming events with us Yovan first to you this initiative the high-level panel on digital cooperation was announced around the summer It is expected to work for a few months and you had your first meeting Of the full panel in New York just a few days ago What can you tell us? What can we expect from this? Thank you Thank you Robert. Thank you colleagues and friends and I would I have a bit difficult situation because the Everybody knows about icon and the IGF, but I guess very few are aware of You and high-level panel. It's really long title. Could you raise your hands? How many of you are aware of the? Activities and main aims Okay, that's that's not bad almost half half of the room do you mind if I just give a few indication what what the panel is about and Then then reflect on the on the latest developments It was established on the 12th of July by UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres with the major aim to Increase the level and address some pressing issues on the on the in digital field The tightly was carefully choose this digital cooperation in order to provide possibilities for the for the new and fresh approaches in the in in in this field the panel consists of 22 members 11 Women and it also has Four people beyond 30 below 35 therefore that has the elements of the of the of the sort of a next generation of Leaders it is multi-stakeholder in its composition. It has representatives from governments private sector civil society quite a Good distribution when it comes to the different Continents and regions it is core chair by Melinda Gates and Jack Ma. This is more or less the construct of the Overall construct of the panel What the secretary general ask us at the very beginning of this process is to Take humble professional and inclusive approach to discussion on digital cooperation In the terms of reference if you consult it is is clearly indicated the panel should not propose Establishment of new fora for the digital Digital policy the remits of the panel activities are are quite quite clear we think that there is a lot of space to improve existing organizations to Suggest new mechanism within the existing organizations and make Digital policy and digital cooperation more inclusive and more effective the panel had the first online meeting in August mid-August and it met on Monday and Tuesday in New York and It was the the discussion at the panel the overall spirit of a discussion basically could be outlined around the discussion on the principles of digital cooperation survey of existing mechanism of digital cooperation and Application of digital cooperation to specific fields like capacity development like the overall question of the data and The panel will basically engage in a public consultations Over the next four months and have another meeting in January in Geneva at the end of January The report should be ready by April and May and then there will be some sort of a dissemination phase for two or three three months the real question is what is what is digital cooperation and This is I'm I'm trying to address the sort of big question marks in the room, which we are often often asked Digital cooperation exists really on different levels. It exists in local communities all over the world in the way How how for example M-Pesa was developed and established in Africa. It exists also in in in the multi-stakeholder intergovernmental and other and other spaces While the panel is not going to to propose establishment of new for a which was clearly indicated by the secretary general It will try to tackle questions of interdisciplinarity as one of the issues in dealing with digital policy issues We are finding increasing number of silos policy silos Which are making less inclusive and less optimal digital digital policy on national regional and global level This is definitely going to be one of the aspects of digital cooperation, which will be by the panel and for others I will wait for questions and Discussion follow-up. Thank you. Thank you. Also for everybody. There will be on Monday as I've understood Two update calls virtual town hall meetings where the community will be able to learn a bit more concretely What were the outcomes of this meeting the one more convenient for this time zone will be happening if I'm not mistaken at 11 A.m. Eastern time, so I think if you go on the website of the panel you can register for this meeting and then then login and learn even more Thank you, and I'm sure that there will be some more questions later From New York for the first meeting of the HLP because I'll be using a lot of acronyms We are moving to Barcelona to icon 63 This will be the meeting of the as I've explained Internet Corporation for assigned names and numbers Which is basically the organizations that kind of provides the the technical ways about the NS system run and also divide defines policies on the on the names and numbers on the internet a lot of kind of bus around icon has been around GDPR another acronym global data protection Regulation and and the who is a database? Are these the topics that are expected to dominate this meeting or what should we expect back here? Say that I am speaking on my own behalf and not speaking for the board or Organization it just makes it easier if I start out by saying that but those of you who know me know that I will tell you what I think Barcelona promises to be a very busy meeting as You've noted I can's compliance and compliance of the contracted parties registries and registrars with the European general data protection regulation and how that fits into and Can remain consistent with the provision of who is data? Is is probably topic number one right now the The expedited policy development process that is working on developing a policy around the the Temporary policy that the board put in place on an emergency basis in May is meeting face-to-face in Los Angeles and there will be more meetings of both the community and the EPDP group in Barcelona and many more coming up to that That is a that's a critically important issue Who is has been in who is which is for anybody who doesn't know that? publicly available information about those who register domain names and it's used by many many stakeholders law enforcement intellectual property rights holders businesses and individuals to understand Who has registered a name and to communicate with those people and that's been Within I can's wheelhouse since I can's creation 20 years ago. This is I can's 20th birthday Which is really hard to believe? There's some debate about what actual day it is But we will be celebrating that in Barcelona as well The the this is a huge issue, but it raises some ancillary issues that I think are critically front and center For I can one is just the resiliency and scalability of the of the model and how you create Incentives for stakeholders across the community to come together and Get out of their corners and actually develop solutions. This is that the EPDP is a is a is a test of that and I think the GNSO the generic name supporting organization council has noted concern about How the policy development processes work whether we need to think about consensus in a different way and so the Council has issued something that they call PDP 3.0 policy development process 3.0 that sort of Continuing to evolve the processes by which I can makes decisions is Very high up on the list of our agenda topics because I can's Stakeholder model is really a you know a critical piece of this and Unless it can actually get decisions made that that's a an issue for it There are other concerns about decision-making outside of the sort of Traditional policy development context. We did this in the transition from the relationship between I can in the US government. We had these cross-community working groups Those worked pretty well, but they but they did have this deadline and a consequence if there was if a Resolution wasn't reached and so we're trying to think about what the lessons learned from that isn't how we need to structure things We have a couple of other policy development issues on the table protections of acronyms for International organizations things that are of significance to to these groups, but don't neatly fit into Trademark or other sort of international legal regimes So that's the that that though all of those issues will be On the agenda in Barcelona and then I can is of course a big participant and supporter of the IGF And so we'll be preparing for our participation in IGF in Paris in November Mm-hmm just a month after Approximately after after the meeting in Barcelona Before going to Shane, I will make a little diver to Robert because between the IGF and I can We will have another meeting that is absolutely crucial The acronym I'll be using now is PP 18 standing for the planning potential a conference of the ITU of the international telecommunications union, which will be taking place in Dubai and Robert, I know that you have followed the process Which you know in the preparation for for the plenipotentiary conference takes months and months before this event And it's really difficult to follow unless You're a real insider, but this meeting will decide on the next four-year plan kind of for the organization Tell us more. What can we expect? Yeah, just really briefly because I'm not actually from the ITU or Involved necessarily in the in the plenipot, but just in speaking with folks who are Quickly on the ITU for those who don't know it's a UN agency specialized agency That's been around for over a century That manages the allocation of global spectrum It develops technical standards for telecom and provides capacity building the member states to both improve access to ICT and Improve the nature of that access to ICT. They played a big part in recent years in cybersecurity capacity building in particular the plenipot as as Teresa mentioned happens every four years and it's the The Forum in which member states set the ITU sort of strategic direction talk about finances Talk about leadership amend what the organization's remit might be in some cases Topics that are expected to be on the docket this upcoming year are a lot of this sort of technology buzzwords that you keep hearing They're expecting lock chain to be something that comes up They're expecting artificial intelligence and big data to be on on the on the agenda because you know, this the last one happened four years ago Next generation or fifth generation Telecommunications Infrastructure is also something that's expected to be sort of a hot topic and then there are a couple of potential hot button issues Particularly when we talk about sort of the global politics of internet governance The first involves the question of whether or not There should be another world Wicked world conference on international telecommunications Which is the conference that happened in 2012 where? Folks who have been following the internet governments process for a while will remember there was a bit of a diplomatic impasse at the end On whether or not the ITU should update the international telecommunications regulations in order to give them more of a remit For regulating the global internet and that leads to the second major hot button issue And that is whether or not there will be an update to the remit of the ITU to include internet technologies within their sort of regulatory remit Many in the developing world look to the ITU for guidance in navigating public policy challenges associated with every new digital technology parts of the world including the likes of sort of Russia and China often try to use the ITU as means to Consolidate or legitimize more state control over telecommunications technology And still others like the UK Australia and traditionally the US View that ladder bit as sort of mission creep for the ITU So those are some of the dynamics that are going to be going on at Plenty Pot Which it like Teresa said starts in the end of October and sort of creeps in in November Yeah, and so three weeks, sorry, I've never been I'm not an ITU member Yeah Yeah, I think that they were all you know, I mean as late as 1999 Plenty Pot was five weeks long But I I'm sure there are some of you in the room who follow the the PP 18 Preparation more intensely. So please please jump in add and still before the IGF. There is IETF 103 Internet engineering task force meeting another example of a meeting that is quite impossible to follow if you're an outsider It's basically a Forum that kind of puts together people and creates technical and engineering documents that make the internet work better Most of the work of this organization actually takes place in mailing lists long before the meeting I was once fortunate to to observe what what the ITF Meeting looks like and really if you're just like You know parachuted to this meeting It's really really demanding if there is anybody in the room or anybody from the internet society Which is of course very much involved in these meetings in the room Please jump in jump in in a bit to tell us more and finally from Bangkok where ITF meeting is happening we are going to Paris and That will certainly be one of the highlights of this year's Even the next meeting of the internet governance forum This year it should be a bit different than than the previous ones. Shane. What are your expectations? This one is very late in the planning process, which is a bit unusual So we're still kind of catching up and not all the workshops have been chosen yet I'm sure any of them have been which is a bit odd We know that in 2019 we're going to Germany so in 2018 We're trying to make sure we make the the best of the IGF there. It will be in Paris. There are key Thing is openness and sorry. What's my keyword there? Trust sorry, it's the Internet of Trust, which I'm still trying to kind of figure out I am the co-chair of IGF USA. We feed into this process, but we're not the only part of the process so Teresa and Jovan are the the conveners of Diplo runs the What's your I'm sorry Euro dig which I've been fortunate to attend and they do a fantastic job in the way that they organize and have very good Constructive dialogues that Euro dig so we we brought them in this year very early on in the IGF USA process to try to help Facilitate more constructive dialogue at IGF USA. We actually use we're talking about big data earlier We use a little bit of small data, but good data We start the group at IGF USA with a survey and thank you Steve Del Bianca who did a lot of work for us in that area and part of the challenge with a multi-stakeholder process is This one for us goes from kind of I can being macro to a little bit more micro is hashing out everybody's intent and their hidden agendas and the small data Set that we take helps us guide into what we think are going to be the key areas of discussion That will be important in July. So we understand what it's like to do it on a small scale I imagine how challenging this is to do it on a large scale, but a lot of key issues are smart cities privacy Civil society is very engaged. We've had fake news panels for two years running and We've done different things where we've had scenarios and we've done that also at the international level not just at the national level one year we went to actually Several of us were invited to IGF Russia several years ago to kind of do a scenario where you look at, you know What happens if we end up in a bifurcated internet system versus our current system and they're good Sessions to run people through that makes them think forward into the processes and the policies they're putting forward I want to let you all know right now that you're invited to participate in IGF USA Just to make sure I get this date right July 27th We're working on the contract right now 25th, okay at CSIS it is we've go out of our way to be a very transparent Open and public process. It's on Twitter. It's on Facebook. It has its own website, which is now IGF USA dot us We're migrating and it's it's a good way for us as American citizens to understand what we bring to the table, but when we learn so much when we go to the International Forum because we realize that there's a lot of struggles that are happening with people that are either not as connected as we are or They may be having really interesting things that we should be emulating We're seeing a lot in the mobile payment area coming out of Africa And so the IGF USA is a really interesting place to have a cross-functional dialogue with groups I found at the last one in Geneva the best discussions were with the youth groups that you go to the youth forums And they were having really interesting, you know, forward-thinking processes. They weren't Continuing to haggle over, you know old conventions that they think should be implemented on to the internet and it was really refreshing But this year I think we will continue to see There's always usually a track on local local content and the importance of keeping local content There was actually an island that was the focus a couple years ago that we're still doing things on parchment paper So, you know the end actually at somebody from the Library of Congress contact me and say well, okay You know, how do how do we continue to make sure that we're documenting all this all the way along? They're thinking about when we look back at how the internet evolves, you know, how do we want to trace the process through that? There's also always a still usually cyber security track, which is is is both macro and micro again You're looking at the global issues of looking to protect and defend as well as the micro issues of how you Organically grow better cyber security habits among citizens and teach them And then data protection on the other side of the privacy is always, you know a key element of seeing how people are managing that both from a an Enterprise perspective the challenges of small business and what they're doing So we really try to use the forum for best practices and norms The one thing that I think we are trying to move it forward with is once we have these dialogues is move it out of IGF IGF is a bit of a talk shop It's not meant to be a decisional body And what we want to do from there is push things to the ITF if it's something that belongs there or push it to the forum That should have the actual next step dialogue rather than making IGF become something that it was never initially meant to be Thank you. Thank you Shane IGF also if you cannot make it there can be fully followed remotely and Actively remotely with full remote participation, so I can't encourage you to participate this year It will be slightly shorter than in the previous years already last year in Geneva It was cut by one day because it was happening just a week before Christmas This year it will actually be only a three-day event with the elimination of the day zero One reason for that is that it will be attached to another forum the Paris Peace Forum If I'm not mistaken the name of the name which will attract more kind of heads-of-state Representation and the hope is that having these two events next to each other Can also address a little bit of criticism that there is the words the Internet Governance Forum that the government Representation is not as strong as it as it should be for such a multi stakeholder forum because clearly it's a forum that doesn't take that many decisions Therefore So we will have some people that will leave Dubai and come over to Paris But we're not expecting as large of a crowd as we normally have because we usually have full participation of many governments correct Yeah, usually this is a 2000 plus meeting. So let's see what it looks like for this year and excellent Now Robert you have written a paper which is entitled the idealized internet versus internet realities You are working on a follow-up paper that is kind of looking into the camps in digital policy or internet governance if you wish How does your research fit in kind of this events overview we've covered? Yeah, thanks Teresa. So I Guess the way that the research fits in at a high level is it provides context for What we just talked about and one thing that I think became clear as we were sort of going down the line here is that Internet governance is not one thing digital governance is not one thing It's sort of at to Yoban's point there. So, you know silos have developed within internet governance But one of the things that I found over the course of the research in that first paper which is the one that's available here and as I've sort of dived into the second piece of research is that there are several sort of trends That underpin all of these happenings at the international level the first major trend that we can see is That states are increasingly pushing to and in many cases doing their own thing when it comes to internet governance In the wake of wicket there were sort of two primary camps and then a group of states in the middle You had this sort of free and open internet camp that followed a multi stakeholder model for governing the global internet And you had this sort of sovereign and controlled camp that wanted more of a statist approach to governing the internet at the international level Those two camps largely still exist and there's still this group of states that exist in the middle The difference is that the unit of analysis has kind of changed where it used to be that we were talking about multi-stakeholder global internet governance models versus a state driven global internet governance model for the most part what we're seeing is now states are diverging domestically and what I suggest is likely to happen is States will begin to choose their own governance models and they are beginning to choose their own government governance models Domestically and those will eventually start to trickle up to the international level rather than from the international level down to the state level one sort of the second Trend that I'm noticing and this is particularly in the research that I'm working on right now and the papers should be out Sort of the next month and a half or so This piece of research is looking at these two camps as Teresa called it One is sort of this sovereign and controlled group of states that's headed by the cast of characters that you'd likely expect to be in that group You have Russia. You have China. You have most of the SEO countries some authoritarian countries in Africa following this model And the other is what was sort of this free open multi-stakeholder model for governing the internet the architecture cyber security data protection all of that one thing that we're noticing in Collecting some of the data for that study is that the sovereign and controlled camp seems to sort of have stood pat They know sort of what their model looks like They know how to implement the model although there are variations between the way that the Russians would do it in the way The Chinese would do it in the way that the Saudis would do it for example Whereas there seems to be some discord in the sort of pro free and open internet camp about how exactly you need to Set up your protocols how you need to set up your regulations How you need to set up your legislation in order to enable the sort of internet environment that we want What that means is that you have these countries that are pro open internet falling on the spectrum if you think about a sort of a two To access to axes in two spectrums You have sort of content openness on one axis and you have sort of closed and open and then you have sort of the character of governance on another axis and you have sort of fully statist versus sort of an equitable distribution of decision-making power and well countries pro that are pro open internet tend to sort of stay in the open side of the content openness spectrum they tend to sort of go up and down when it comes to the status approach versus a multi stakeholder approach and that's a change from 2014 where The consensus seemed to be that in order to enable an open and free internet You needed to have a multi stakeholder approach to governing the architecture That leads to the third trend and that is that Security whether it is what we traditionally think of as cyber security or what we think of as the more sort of Russian or Chinese approach to information security content controls and whatnot has become a very real consideration for countries that have traditionally promoted an open Open Internet the 2016 election was the obvious eye-opening moment for the US but this has been happening in parts of Eastern Europe and Western Europe for a long time and What that has made some countries realize and it's not just the information side, but it's also on the sort of data protection and network protection side is that the state may have a bigger role to play in Ensuring the security of this space whatever it is and what that means is that increasingly increasingly we are seeing countries set up Systems that are akin to firewalls at national borders and the operative question then becomes well what are those firewalls need to weed out in the Chinese model or To a lesser extent because it's not really technical in Russia the Russian model that those firewalls would be catching political speech that is potentially destabilizing to the regime in the British model They're trying to sort of weed out malicious packets instead of necessarily weeding out malicious information They're there then technical questions about whether you can Filter out certain traffic and not affect the information environment The jury sort of still out on that, but I think those sort of three overarching trends are Important when we sort of talk about the the developments over the next 12 to 18 months in internet governments Thank you. Thank you Robert. That's great I think it's also important that you stress a little bit this kind of national or regional Global dynamics because we've been covering a lot mainly the global events and the global fora, but All in all of course these there will be those represented and pushed by their national interests and Yeah, it's it will be interesting to see would you like any of you like to elaborate on this national regional global aspects Can you touched upon it also slightly in the when you explain the process of the national IGF feeding into the global event? So presio one Maybe just one one comment on what Robert was outlining so clearly and in the tree trends Which is always useful to to to memorize is some sort of shift from the binary view on Digital politics to towards some one can call it analog coverage and We have been noticing in the discussion in the consultations that the views about and positions about digital policy Within the countries on the regional level on the global level are becoming increasingly diverse sometimes even even paradoxical and this is one one observation that Summarizing this that we may need some sort of more analog digital cooperation and digital policy for the for the binary world or digital world and the reason is very simple because the digital is entering into the into daily life the Daily life of the families individuals countries is is quite complex. It's it's paradoxical It cannot be put into the nicely outlined frameworks therefore that element of the messy messy policy or messy governance is is clear in our Preliminary collecting of the stories worldwide on the on the digital policy another aspect this national regional global sort of Mapping is that we are seeing more and more governance from edges. For example, you have the new Rwandan regulation of using drones Therefore you have more and more local communities trying to answer the local questions and in a way Feeding into the into the regional and global processes and that is another trend that we can expect that it will be So I can was really born in the midst of this sort of disparity discussion between the sort of sovereign and control camp and the free and open camp and I think there's always been a spectrum in the Free and open camp. I think you know in 1998 there was a sort of clear understanding that the internet was still Very young and there was a little bit of well we could pass a regulation, but what if everybody did? I think we've sort of moved Away from that and I think so I think that that's right And and I also think it's right that cyber security in Is writhing this in an enormous way? You know, I think As you said internet governance is not one thing and so Placing this in that is the sovereign in control or is it a multi-state equal to model? You need to talk about which piece of internet governance you're talking about and then it may be Appropriate for sovereigns to take a bigger role in some aspects and for the multi-stakeholder Approach to apply in other areas where that works more so I think it's important to to you know to continue to think of this is not a binary but but Looking at you know, what what does the multi-stakeholder approach do well? What do we need more? local or national or regional Things to do and that's a that's a big issue for I can but of course we have always had You know advocates In the in the room in the in the government advisory committee in particular for a much more This should be state controlled or controlled by an inter-governmental organization I Would add to that. I think we are seeing new challenges around trust and truth as we've seen the information be weaponized Which is actually a very old tactic. It's just using a new tool So the challenge there is you know, can we enable real trust which is really authentication? You know, can I validate where this information is coming from even if I don't know for sure that it's truthful? Can I trust the point of where it's entering into the system? And then you know what I think this is where it becomes an interesting You know for us, it's a freedom discussion for others It's a sovereign discussion of like what do you do about the people that are either getting paid to send Misinformation out on the system as we are recognizing in the 2016 elections, you know it we were a little naive I mean it kind of hit us upside the head We didn't realize anybody would ever consider doing that because we're real believers in democracy And there are a lot of people that we're using the ability to sway people and we didn't and we weren't expecting it So now we're a little bit on guard for it The challenge is going to be does this move into a more of an international discussion about you know What happens when we know we don't we see government and enterprise and in businesses as very separate entities, you know Countries like China don't the things that we see as off the table. They don't see a table So, you know, we have some very interesting discussions ahead. I doubt this is gonna come up that well Plenty pot always gets interesting from a political perspective. That's the one that probably will you know? You wish it wasn't three weeks. They condense it. It would be like watching a good Senate hearing So I think that there's going to be some you know interesting dialogues in all of these forms Thank you The national fine we've covered now. What about the regional such as the dynamics between the European Union and the United States? This is a very very interesting aspect. Any of you like to touch upon I think the most natural topic on that one right now is privacy So obviously the GDPR has brought cookies to America, which makes me very angry and get tired of cooking I didn't like cooking on them whenever I visited Europe now have to click on them every day And I wouldn't them to go away. I don't think that they're adding anything So the the challenge is I think we had a you're not a lot of questions yet. We'll get there Is that I think it was an easy way for somebody a lawyer out of a risk assessment It did not answer the question of privacy So I think what we are hopefully going towards in here in the United States is a discussion between data and privacy Which are separate at least in the way we manage them We've always we've always managed information through why do you gather the information the federal trade commission through? The you know the SEC why am I gathering this information and then what am I planning on doing? It's not because me as an individual has information to put forward being a good free market girl I look at that as a price as a actual right that I wish people would realize and be able to monetize on we've kind of gone Inverted on that so if we're gonna change that there's a lot of you know a lot of change in front of us But we're also seeing now that California which quite often You know is the the major agent of change one of the reasons why you know when you've had a data breach is because of the state of California they have passed legislation which is You know changing the way of people are tending to look at privacy and now all of a sudden We're seeing a sea change and wanting national privacy rules I've been a big believer that you know nobody knows what those click through You know terms of service or terms of use are that we need to have emojis And I always thought I would be kind of like one of these and now I'm thinking there's some easy dollar sign Which is like we collect we sell You know just just tell me what you're doing with it and I'll decide whether or not I want to give it to you The problem is I probably do really want the service that's attached to it, but you know I'm I'm I call the mattress tag of the internet. I'm just clicking through reports, right? The one thing I'd add to that is the sort of interesting dynamic that a single Subregion frankly of the globe was able to create What is in a de facto sense going to be global regulation? And I think that's a very interesting dynamic to track because you hear especially on the corporate side a lot of folks Concerned about the fragmentation of regulatory environments, especially when it comes to data protection And here we have this race potentially this race to the bottom in terms of sort of data protection Where if you want your data protection regulation to be meaningful, it needs to be the most meaningful, right? It needs to be potentially the most restrictive which If I were to pass judgment, I think is not a very great dynamic for us to be in but is one that's definitely worth noting Becky I just want to add a couple of twists on this so first of all the this Regulatory arms race is nothing new California has been regulating for the United States for years and We've been dealing with European data protection regulation for 15 20 years now As well, and I think that you know, it's one thing if Vermont passes a law everybody You know sort of blocks Vermont out of their Vermont residents out, but I had a customer ask me how we were going to tell the difference between Californians and Other Americans and I said we're not even going to try it, but the truth is It's a business non-starter to really distinguish between Americans and Europeans So Microsoft has issued a very interesting blog that says on a per capita and absolute basis More Americans than any other group has taken care has taken advantage of the rights that are afforded to EA residents under GDPR Microsoft made a decision to make that global and frankly It is really hard to explain to consumers why they get certain rights if they're European and not if they're American that's sort of a non-starter for everybody. It's my experience with respect to people using our GDPR compliant portal that in fact more Americans and Europeans taking advantage of that That's my experience with all of the companies with whom we interact in the Advertising ecosystem so The interesting thing is that the California law is likely to go into effect without any regulations now because it's so the Legislature Essentially the Attorney General said you told me to write regulations. That's fine, but you gave me no money to do it So the California legislature said this is just like incredible Okay, we'll give you all of the money for the fines That from the fines to write regulations so you essentially you have to start finding people before you have authority to write regulations It's fabulous and the law goes into effect on you know six months after Jen January 1st, 2020. Yeah, whether there are regulations or not I mean to me we're already in a in a world where we're dealing with GDPR We ought to figure out how to do something that gets the United States and adequacy Determination otherwise, it's it's a kind of useless exercise and I know that all of the you know big platforms and a bunch of Telecom companies stood up and said yes, we'd like global preemption, but We tried to do preemption and data breach law and the ability to get Consensus around what the data breach law should say They're never formed and so everybody learned to live with whatever the strictest Rule was which was probably California Although there are twists and turns in every one of them and I think You know I have to say when I look back on what we did wrong in the 1990s not developing some kind of Omnibus privacy regulation was the thing that I think was that it turns out to have been the biggest mistake Because we just didn't play in that in that discussion Thank you, right Maybe just one comment on the Different ways how data and privacy is perceived globally We just heard about the differences between United States of Europe But one can also see the difference when it comes to Africa where for example there the major Digital policy instrument convention on the African Union has in its title cybersecurity and privacy protection and I inquired the why why it was the case and one of the reason is that the Revealing of data especially in complex situation in a tribal conflict situation and that could be the matter of life and death Therefore you have completely completely different context In the different regions Asia has the more pro-market economic Approach and this is an interesting aspect in many fields that increasingly the digital policy and is Shaped by the by the local cultural policy Context and dynamics and data is one of the examples Thank you, if you allow me, I think I would turn to make it more interactive I can I can collect the fewer we can take one by one Steve over to you first Steve you could wait one second Over for the people and if you can reintroduce yourself for our online audience. Thank you, Steve You said that the UN panels charter says that it should not create new entities and organization. Thank you for that We don't need yet another Exactly, but that's the right angle because we don't need new entities and Shane picked up on that We need new ideas that have been tried someplace and whether they can be applied and implemented in another place Which is what you said about IGF is taking the ideas and pushing them out to places where they could be implemented And it might be new ideas that I can Becky with respect to a new way to do consensus or a new idea on I can't Constructure the way it does relationships with people that register domain names for purposes of who is GDPR is a new idea that is being tested in multiple places But along with the new ideas we need a new framework and maybe Robert has come closest to approaching that framework of analyzing the aspirational versus the reality And you tried to put it on a statist versus multi-stakeholder, but there's something in between And we've seen it here in this country with this administration Justice Department While the Constitution would never allow the government to do this This government is trying to force platforms where others express ideas to suppress bad news About the president so that good news will creep higher into search results And that wasn't just a non serious tweet from a non serious president The Justice Department met with the Attorney General's this week and Suggested using antitrust laws for that so the fact that states are trying to lean on platforms Platforms where people usually have free expression Strikes me as a concern that I hope makes its way into your new analysis. Thank you Steve. Thank you very much Sorry didn't know the rules earlier shame, but but when you talked about the reason you're sure Tina You're just a cyber strategist you talked about the regional issues and I think everyone immediately defaults to the privacy issue But I think that what's happened in Europe it goes way beyond just personal data And it really goes to the issue of who's benefiting from Monetizing any type of data not just and I think that that really is driving some of the antitrust issues that are going on So I wanted to hear some comment about After we sort out the personal data category What's the next type of data because I think that all the machine learning and artificial intelligence Opportunities in the future are gonna depend upon Lots of rich data sets not just the personal data But the smart buildings the connected cities and all of that and I think that's the next conversation to talk about I just wanted to hear your perspectives on it. Thank you, Tina We can take one more and then there will be another round, please sir My name is Anthony Vance. I'm with the office of public affairs of the Baha'is of the United States This question is probably more for Robert than anybody else, but Certainly others are free to jump in I wanted to ask about a very specific case at the national level But it may apply to a number of countries it has to do with the development of a national internet and For example Iran has Developed a national internet that it uses to control From what I understand. I don't read Persian and but I've talked to friends who have explained this to me that they can actually divert information or divert searches in So that people don't get access to information that the way that they could before I'm wondering if this is a trend if it's something addressed by the regulatory environment that You all are dealing with whether there's any method for calling out Countries with respect to this, you know, where you might see this going in the future Not just Iran, but you know globally Certainly, you know from our perspective 15 years ago before the internet There was the average Iranian citizen had one view of the average his average Baha'i coast citizen But the a number of factors the most important being the access to free the free flow of information dramatically has dramatically changed the the view of the average Iranian citizen towards his average Baha'i fellow citizen So very important development for for us, and I'm sure for many other minority groups around the world Thank you, sir Let's turn back because that would kind of be on the edge of my capacity We will start with Steve which I guess is mainly a question of you to Yovan. Yovan. I think this steep kind of Expressed it. Well, there was a lot of kind of nervousness. Is this a new body? Is this a new organization For me what was convincing also is it was to hear that this is work that is limited for a few months that will have an outcome Report, so how would you how would you address these concerns of the community and the question? That's the the the first the temporary aspect is is important Timespan is nine months and in April we will will Produce the report and I think it is important also for for framing of the overall overall exercise It's the first point. The second point is what what secretary general clearly Indicated in the mandate that it should not replace existing fora and it should be as creative as possible in in adding the more agility more dynamism to the existing processes and the We heard about about some of them He basically gave us the three criteria for success. The first one is high quality report Which obviously will be the main result. The second one is Inclusive and agile process of consulting communities worldwide Getting the stories like story from Rwanda about drawn very effective drawn drawn regulation and Getting the stories from local communities worldwide that getting the well-known stories from icon or the from how wikipedia is Is basically managed and and that's the second criteria this agile agile process and third element Which is extremely important is the is the capacity building through the process? It is clear that many governments and many other stakeholders are facing the challenge to grasp the overall impact on digital on Society on policy economy and That is the third criteria Which which the panel will be focusing on in the process of building building capacity in the interaction And that's the basic the overall overall mandate. Therefore few keywords is modesty and humbleness in our approach creativity in innovation Agility and inclusivity in the in the overall process Thank you Anybody else want to elaborate on this point? Okay, so going to the second question of Tina on the what goes beyond the personal data Monetization of this data for for developments really moving the world of digital policies such as artificial intelligence Would Becky or Shane would you like to address this question because the third one will go to Robert? well, I mean it's clear that there is anxiety about the size and reach of these Global platforms, so I think it's clear that that's not limited to Europe. I think you know There've been hearings on sort of a dependent when one becomes very Dominant, how do you keep others honest? I'm not I mean, I'm not sure it goes to data sets much beyond personal data because that's where Other than other than the how do you keep these big platforms honest without competition? And it seems to me that's the question that more that you know regulators are struggling to look at the antitrust paradigm doesn't Doesn't quite fit. You know, it's not it's a very different You know in some in some ways It's like railroads because there's a network effect but you can specify a Gauge for a railroad and the internet is Content is a little is a little bit different. I think so. I think it's I don't I don't think that we have a clear paradigm to look at It through I think when we when people talk about monetization of data. They are talking about monetization of personal data and I actually Find these conversations difficult like I'm just gonna say one thing that I think is gonna be fascinating to see how this plays out in Europe is this notion that You have to be able to Withdraw your consent for anything without suffering any negative consequences that the the it cannot be that the That ultimate endpoint of that is you have to offer your services for free if you're a private company And I'm sure that's not what they think and have in mind But it's it is really that's going to be tested and it's going to be a very interesting test So the question is to me the question is is the value exchange Is that is the is what's going on transparent and clear and is the value exchange Adequate and and meaningful and and are there actual real protections for it? I I think I mean I think people don't know understand the value exchange at this point And and it's not clear to me that that the value exchange will stay where it is now And based on what I'm seeing in terms of people all of a sudden Understanding that they may have some right to demand that they know exactly what data you have about them or erase it that Consumers do not think that the value exchange has properly said at this point One of my colleagues who's from New Zealand who's one calls that the American Enterprise Institute wrote a great blog last week on tech policy Daily about you know New Zealand tends to be a little bit Petri dish because they're very social in their you know Aspect of looking at these things so they they try things where they quickly abandon things They realize that they're not going to work and so one of them was the on the idea of Obviscating people through search and the problem was that people get tethered So if Becky and I robbed a bank together and then I wanted to be Absolved to that and said you can't talk about it The problem is you can still look up Becky and I come up in the search because there's a certain point in the search Where we are now tethered together So there's a lot of interesting algorithm questions that come up in this as well as other items that are going to be It's the you know kind of the natural way that things progressed and we're asking for that to be unwound. I'm not sure to what end Thank you going to the third question and the development of national internet Robert. Can you kick this off? Yeah So Iran's not alone in in doing so You know Iran is sort of towards one end of the spectrum and to your point all of this is sort of existing on spectrum So there you're talking about the the character of governance It's not either you are multi-stakeholder or you are a status that because of the number of issues you sort of fall in the middle in some places Iran's on one end of the spectrum along with sort of North Korea, which is the extreme example You could argue that China has a similar setup with their internet, especially with the way that they filter out content It's technically set up a little bit differently But the point is that the way that the physical architecture of the internet works there and the non-physical Architecture works is there are choke points that sovereigns are able to exercise control over and what I think we're seeing is more and more as the potential Liberalizing to some Destabilizing to others potential of the internet becomes clear and clear you have states around the world that are beginning to counteract that via actions that place certain restrictions on these choke points and it it all comes back to this Conversation that I sort of brought up about this notion of national-level firewalls right and there is some acceptance in Liberal Democratic countries that maybe we do need to do a better job we being governments I'm not actually government, but that governments need to do a better job of Protecting the internet in their country the UK is a leading example the Israelis are a leading example in this They're doing more and more to try to filter out bad traffic The the challenge becomes how do you balance that with the free flow of information because packets and traffic are information inherently The other sort of Major question there that I have is this balance between openness and security so In most western internet doctrine and some eastern internet doctrine you'll see Words or synonyms of these words and they appear everywhere. It's free open interoperable secure resilient or Something like that What I think we didn't quite wrap our heads around when we were coming up with these five principles that drive you know Internet policy and digital policy is that there's actually some inherent tensions in some of those Principles and the ones that are most at tension in my view are openness and security Open architecture implies that the architecture does not see what is traversing it and therefore does not treat any packet differently from any other packet That's antithetical to security. You want to be able to filter out some packets interoperability also Potentially poses challenges to openness or to security openness and freedom are in you know, they're intertwined There are countries around the world that recognize that and in many ways They began to act on that both internationally by trying to highlight these tensions And domestically when they began to set up their internet and the the sort of thing to watch on this front is there are 100 countries out there in the world around the world that are still in the sort of nascent years of setting up their network infrastructure and the big question becomes In these countries, which direction are we going to go? Are we going to go towards an internet that air is more on the side of openness and maybe compromises Stability or security which it doesn't have to do right? I'm not saying that there's a necessarily a binary there Or are we going to see them err on the more sort of For lack of a better term conservative side where you know state stability is still primal or primary Excuse me, and we need to sort of set up our internets in a way that allows us to exercise control over the stability on that Yeah, it might be primal to that was maybe Freudian slip Yeah, but I know that others on this panel will also have thoughts on this exact topic Since people could speak so you know This is just a matter of where do we allow the level of control to come in and when is it impeding on somebody? Else's rights and it's it's very you know a lot of what the internet has done is speed up things that we were able to separate out Because of time and distance and now all of a sudden they're very front and center I don't know you know some of these places. This is more things that you want working on you know How do we? Recommend that I mean they're out they tend to be more recommendations than rights that on some of these areas You know we prefer that their people were informed and they could make up their own decisions and choices But there's a lot of governments who prefer that they don't have that information And it's interesting. This is this whole internet governance conversation if you want to talk about it from a macro perspective is almost a microcosm for that Maybe there aren't necessarily fully universally shared rights and principles and when it comes to different regions or different countries There are different values placed and that is beginning to manifest in the way that the internet is being rolled out and experienced around the world as well I don't know. I there's a part of me that thinks that that Trying to put the free and open internet Jeannie back in a bottle is gonna fail every time and so the question ought to be And and people have been trying to manipulate other people with information some since the beginning of time and so the question is You know in in Eras where we thought there was an appropriate balance between sort of fact and and Free Information what what were the conditions that led to that being the case? I have to say that on November 9th 2016 I Said I have to quit my job and become a high school teacher Because because what I think is that the only way we're gonna deal with this is is through educating People I just don't think we're gonna be able to put that Jeannie back in in a bottle except if you want to because you want to control the kind of information and not because you want fact-based Objective information available, but because you want to manipulate people for a particular purpose Just we comment on this let's say cognitive toolkit of whatever digital policy internet governance of digital cooperation What I've been observing for quite some time is that there are many issues where the lack of knowledge of information contributes to the Implication and this binary logic us and them Sort of good and bad and it is very easy to slip into that that logic, but it's very human You know, this is the way how we organize cognitive like Our reality and if you can provide there are a lot of possibilities of providing that the Steve Mentioned the additional information building capacity Exposing different communities to each other what I've been noticing is that you have a cyber security community Which is really a focus community which has its own language which has its own way of shaping the Problems and solutions regardless more or less regardless the national origins and you have IG community You have emerging AI community. You have data community You have a you have a and in that on if you can help building more awareness more knowledge There could be a possibility for some Indian solution But we have to be prepared for also this trade-off solution Which you indicated Robert and when it comes to trade-offs one has to have as transparent possible processes it is possible check and balances in built into the into the process and the possibility to use the New Zealand experience to revisit the the attempts in the policymaking and That the question of openness and security will be quite a few areas where where these Delicate trade-offs will have to be to be found in the by the spectrum therefore win-win through education training awareness building Exposure building some sort of digital empathy if I can call it this way and then when it cannot work then move to to the really carefully Design the trade-off When I can was Very young we thought that the sort of geographic and language and cultural diversity was going to be the sort of the biggest Challenge I really do think it is that vertical That the computer scientists know how to talk to each other all around the world But you don't actual property owners know how to speak to each other globally. It's that vertical diversity that seems is really That's where the challenges come in When we have a diplomats and computer scientists in the same room I usually take example of protocol because you have Protocolley computer science and you have protocol in diplomacy as a way of organizing the exchanges But then the perception is completely completely different therefore my attempts to Resawareness through the simple term which is protocol sometimes was successful, but in many times Multistakeholder as well we were we were I was taking part in the OAS is confidence-building measures process and We were doing simultaneous translation and the translator in the back was like this isn't this isn't a word It's it's barely even a concept in our in our society And and so that you know, we got we got sidetracked a little bit for about an hour and a half trying to figure out the best way to Actually put that in in a context that made sense Thank you. Thank you for bringing up the question of the of the silos. I'm sure we can have a second round Steve Famous bank robbers Becky and Shane Shane you talked about an emoji with a dollar sign that would say they're selling my data But I would ask whether you two could draw a distinction It would have been useful in yesterday's Senate hearing right that monetization for sure But almost never involves the selling of any data senator tester was wigged out that he was searching for tires Right and the next day he saw tire ads as he went around the web He thinks somebody sold his data and I believe you'll confirm there's nobody sold any data the platforms Use the fact that he searched for tires To take tire ads direct them to his face, but the tire guys never learned who he was So can we can we make a distinction between monetizing and selling data? And will that be constructed where we go forward? Well, there's a lot of For as many people use and love the internet There's still a lot of education that needs to take place on how it all works I remember my smartest friends back in the late 90s. The first thing she said is how's this all free? And and I was like, but it's cool Who cares so, you know, I think that the fact that people are getting wigged out They've been doing something and not realizing some level of I hate even these were consequence because I'm not sure that there's actual I mean depending on your point of view, right? So I think a lot of those just transparency I'm not sure that people's behavior will change much if they were to do something like that and the other thing is like How long do you retain the data? That's always that you know the question is, you know, do I keep it a day a week a month a year? You know the cops want you to keep it for eternity the data for the view around the data centers I wanted to go away yesterday So, you know, that's that's there's a lot of layers to that and then deciding the importance to those But I just think if you were more transparent because there seems to down this is front and center Just tell us be transparent about it. I don't think the actual human behavior will change that much They'll just be informed if they choose to be So Requires you essentially to have a button on your on your website that says don't click here To tell me not to sell your data. I mean, it's just I don't sell my data. That is the That's correct. There's really in that case. I could tell you exactly how that's working and I mean Data is being monetized people are are, you know advertisers are paying money to Platforms and vice versa to get that information out there There is still a lot of there is still a lot of a Lot of education to be done but the but the the interesting thing about that was he did not see that as a Legitim a value exchange that he was that was reasonable to him And so I think the other thing that has to happen is advertised Advertisers and platforms have to understand I think that they're a huge amount of Self-inflicted wounds in this industry. I was just like, you know, don't show me the same ad for You know at every website I go to for the next six weeks or you know, I am a 60-plus year old woman. Don't show me the ad for you know Well, yes It was actually even worse than that So I think that there's a lot of self-inflicted wounds But it but it is a clear indication that we that consumers don't think they're getting value from this And we've got to do a better job Why'd I get to go the next level? I wanted to know that I bought those shoes at Neiman's and they can stop showing them to me But they don't go the full slide That's where people don't catch that either is that they don't actually know that I ever purchased I'd tell them I'd say please I've they were you know, I bought these you have to write the review Well, eventually they'll get my credit card data, and then it'll all be great You don't look good in that color don't buy that What does it look like on Twitter? Is there any particular dynamics worth bringing here? Okay, please more questions comments Sharing from your involvement Fine Please sir Hi, my name is a Jack Kropansky unaffiliated former software developer My question is about a weaponization of information because before the to the 2016 election we didn't talk about that concept of propaganda and and And a lot of other stuff, but is there any efforts going on in the international levels about that? and and how do you differentiate that from propaganda or is it all the same thing and Before 2016, you know, we were active in the US a lot of elements and organizations and government agencies to Agitating in other countries. How is that different from what happened in 2016? Well, it's an element of psychological warfare, and I'll let you give the serious answer here But because I always say, you know, it's um, I'm sorry. Go ahead. I've lost my train From The international level is not the right place to be litigating or legislating on this for a number of reasons for about a decade now There has been a proposal Sort of spearheaded by a bunch of Shanghai cooperation organization countries including likes of Russia China some of the Central Asian Republics for a code of conduct code of conduct on information security and they that is the group That's been talking at the international level Sort of most prominently about the weaponization of information. They've been concerned about it for a long time Weaponization of information means something very very different to them or it did mean something very very different to them than it did to us what's interesting though is You want to hope and think that 2016 didn't change that but the cynic in me looks at that and says well The way that we view information, especially online might be converging a little bit more than should make most people who want free expression And free flow of information comfortable so that would just be sort of my Take on saying international level is probably not the right place to do this Subregional or regional works in some cases But you want people who are coming to the table with the same sort of definition for what we're talking about in order to have progress on it and that just That's a that's a lost cause internationally My kind of farce the point was I was telling a friend or I suggested to a friend wine He's a spy a couple years ago that social media hasn't ruined. We all know spice Has ruined his industry and he's like what do you mean? I said well all those things that you run around and collect on people that were like dossier type information They're all on Instagram now on Facebook, you know like you're gonna say to some 20 year old kid You know, I saw you drunk. I put that on Instagram, you know, they're gonna be like proud of it So that I think actually that that part of the weaponization in the psychological warfare was clever enough to realize Where to move that lever of what was people's fear point and what was an inflection point for them? Because things that used to be considered kind of like, you know Behind the curtain things that you wouldn't share with other people are very much out in the open now so I could just Yes, but your friends the spies are very worried about this. Well, yeah I think you look at the broadening of what siphias covers And I think that there's a demonstrable interest in looking at in using siphias To protect consumer information. I mean talk about closing the barn door After the horses have escaped that might be a situation, but I think that The convergence issue is I think that that National security folks are in fact extremely worried about the amount of consumer data that is available from a national security perspective You know, there is a famous paper about endangered professions and I didn't see the spies That could be that could be But hairdressers are one of the profession which will survive Automation well, it doesn't doesn't apply concern me directly But it is one of the profession with a good future on the question of the International action. There is one one small development Related to a little autonomous weapons and use of the artificial intelligence in the in the weaponry The UN government group of experts concluded their work in August and adopted the principles 10 principles for the development of little autonomous weapons and it was one of the rare recent sort of a Space where the agreement was reached and the artificial intelligence is probably becoming one field where some movements could Could the could the Could happen on the on the international level and these 10 principles including the question of the ultimate human agency In the use of the weapons and I can we can share that that's that's one field that something some developments Happened on the question of weaponization There's been several books written just and reviewed just this week about how you know China is obviously they don't have the they have all the big data They want that can be shared pretty easily and they don't have privacy issues So they're going to have a different level of the way that they're going to you know use AI But I was also at an event on AI the other night with the Cherdoff group and they were talking about how There's several countries now that are not keeping the human in the loop for a kill decision with using AI and drones And that gets to be very scary, you know, we're gonna let just you know machines make complete full-loop decisions So that will be a whole nother level. I'm sure of international discussions we had Thank you We started this event with kind of summarizing what were some of the Hot issues shaping the agenda. We we looked ahead at some of the events this year And it guess is what will kind of shake and shape the digital police internet governance discourse in 2019 Robert Sure, yeah, I think we'll continue to see this trend of localization of governments I think it started to play out, you know 2015 2016 and I think it's only going to accelerate where more and more we're going to see countries Taking their own approach to how they want their internet to work And you know that might lead to the dreaded f-word fragmentation But I think that they're also like, you know today It's it's hard for me to say that necessarily we have a global internet that has shared values, you know We have a series of connected networks But I don't think you can call and you can't call it a solitary single single thing at this point And I think that will continue. Thank you Shane. I've said many times on panels I don't want it to be 2020 and the internet's not cool anymore So I feel like that's our biggest challenge for the next years to come is keeping the good and figuring out how to Manage some of what can people consider bad Becky I think You know in the ICANN world, we're gonna be very much focused on scalability and Evolution of the of the ICANN in particular Multistakeholder model how we make it make it work for the next 20 years or however long it needs to exist Increasable exercise my hope a bit optimistic is that interdependence that exists in online world Will get more in the focus and while the localization moves and dynamics Will have definitely dates go there will be more and more people calculating what could be lost in the case of the serious fragmentation of the internet and from grandmas connecting from their countries of origin to their Grandstones sons and daughters Thousand kilometers away to people who rely on the on the internet in their daily daily work Therefore that element of interdependence in e-commerce in the social social media using daily routines Gives me hope that we'll have we'll have some positive trends towards more cooperation in the digital field Thank you, so let's keep the global internet cool Thank you for coming here and giving preference to talking about the internet and not watching the Kavanaugh hearing for instance Thank you to all of the all of those watching us online and Keep in touch and see you soon. Thank you