 Good morning everyone. It's another beautiful day here in Hiroshima on the second day of WCCE. How is yesterday? It's very fine. That's good, very good. Yes, we have about 150 or 60 attendants on here. These large rooms and another 150 or more participants in another room. And also we have more than 50 participants online. Thank you for your attendance. Today's keynote speaker is one you've already been waiting for, Audrey Tan-san. Yes, and then this session's chair, by Don't Pass It, I feel this is Richard's. So, good morning, Don-san and Audrey-san. Good morning. Good morning. Yes, so I move to the microphone to the Don-san, please. Thank you and good morning everyone. As the chair of IFIP TC3 and on behalf of the WCCE 2022 conference, I have enormous pleasure in welcoming you, Audrey, Audrey Tan, to speak to us all this morning. If I may say a few words of introduction and background. Audrey Tan is a Taiwanese free software programmer and digital minister of Taiwan. She is recognized as one of the world's most successful open source software developers. And she started her own IT company at the age of 19. In 2014, she became a digital advisor to Apple, where she was involved in artificial intelligence projects, such as the development of Apple's virtual personal assistant Siri. Following the sunflower student movement demonstrations, the Prime Minister of Taiwan invited Audrey Tan to create media literacy curricula for Taiwan schools. Following this work in August 2016, she was invited to join Taiwan's executive run as a minister without portfolio, helping government agencies to communicate policy goals and managing information published by government through digital means. She became Taiwan's youngest ever government minister. In 2019, she made the list of the top 100 global thinkers published by Foreign Policy magazine. With too many exceptional projects for me to mention during this brief introduction, and without wishing to keep you from Audrey Tan's discussion of the questions raised in advance. I will now ask Minister Tang to address this conference. Thank you and welcome. Hello. Good local time everyone. I'm really honored to be here. As you can see, there's already a lot of questions that was raised beforehand. And I thank you for voting on it. Because in a duration of one hour, it is not possible for me to give detailed answer to all your questions. Indeed, that's 31 questions of less than two minutes each. And it's very important that you let me know, for example, the top ones are already over 20 votes, meaning that at least 20 people would like to hear my answer to it. And there's this QR code. Feel free to scan. It's the same link as you have received and continue voting on it. It's continuous democracy. And that's my job in Taiwan. It is to make democracy higher bandwidth, lower latency and wider connectivity. That is to say, instead of waiting for four years, uploading just a few bits in a paper vote, which is still very important, of course, we need to include the very young people younger than 18 who do not have yet the voting rights, or people overseas who cannot travel to vote into this kind of online voting so that we know exactly what is at focus for them, and we can answer accordingly. Without further ado, I'll be very democratic and start answering the top voted questions from this point on with. So the top question at the moment. In elementary junior high and high schools in Japan where teachers are too busy to respond to new educational needs, including it information technology education, any suggestions. It's not necessarily to spend your time on it. Actually, the time spent could be negative. That is to say it can save your time when you introduce that to your education. If we do not use Slido, if we use built in zoom Q&A, if we make everyone type their questions, and then a moderator will have to read through all the questions, and there's no way for the crowd to moderate. Well, that will be of course wasting time. But with the pro social social media that is Slido people continue to raise questions yet during my talk, I can see at any given time, what are the trending topics that people would like me to address. So in that sense, everybody save time and especially the lecture save time, because we know what topics to focus on the most. And even if you're not among the 22 who voted for this question. It's like the game Tetris. You can see the next two blocks. And maybe those are the questions that you have in mind and are waiting to be answered so it focus everyone's attention on this shared social object that is this discussion. Again, this is in very strong contrast to the distractions that the tablets and the screens that many teachers feel that if they're in the students Hans, they would distract people from attending to the lecture. So it all depends on how you configure the space. If the space is configured to be pro social so that people develop bonds through the use of the same technologies, or different technologies to where the same values and goals. Then the it in education become a time saver, but to accomplish that it does require competent planning. But again, I think many of your students are digital natives. They already know many platforms beyond the Slido that they feel comfortable collaborating in. Maybe it's scratch, maybe it's online spreadsheets and documents, maybe it's Minecraft. So I think it makes sense to join to meet your students where they are and convince them that you are part of the world of co creation. And so, with that, they can take care of a lot of mundane chores moderation indeed a code can take care of that. And then that leaves you with more time to actually address the questions and do your lecture and so on. We will know that we did a asynchronous arrangement where the question are collected beforehand in an online form and then put to vote a day before and all that through this asynchronous communication save everybody time and energy. So I hope that address part of the question. If you feel that your question has been abridged, or if you need to ask new questions, please just post them on Slido, I will look at it and surface it as necessary. So 24 people would like to know, is it possible to measure creativity educators need tools to observe with the learners the progress in obtaining creativity skills. This is an excellent question. To me, creativity is best measured in communities. If there is a community that is creative in their endeavor. You can look at the signals, like how much this question inspire other people. 24 people gets inspired by this question. So this question may be more creative than other questions, but in isolation in one to one setting indeed it's more difficult to judge creativity because it may take a lot of different modalities and the teacher may or may not be an expert in all these when measuring those creative modalities. So my suggestion is that instead of PBL as problem based learning, we need to imagine PBL as purpose based learning. For example, we're here to gather to share knowledge. That's our purpose. But in some of your classes, maybe the purpose is to revitalize your nearby communities in Taiwan we call it regional revitalization the same in Japan, or in some classes the purpose may be figuring out way to communicate about the climate urgency. Again, that is a clear purpose. With this clear purpose. Well, there's more than one way to do it. People in many different modalities can work, not in an individual to individual competition basis, but on a co-creation basis. And it's very easy then to see which ones are most creative for they may or may not be original, but they build upon this shared purpose to lay out common projects, and then of course face common problems. But if you start with small problems and exercises is harder to measure creativity, but with a larger question, like how do we develop ways to build trust online. That's a very, very hard and very open question. Then it becomes easy in a community to see which proposals which activities are the most creative. So a clear shared sense of purpose and a community connected to the purpose to me is the background to measure creativity. I hope that answered the question. So, should I just just go on. Okay. Okay. 24 people would like to know, in your opinion, which country will grow dramatically in the near future. For example, 10 years. Well, of course, it's the internet. The internet with the lowest satellites and many new technologies, so called 6G technologies in the future will connect people in a way that feels like our neighbors. At this moment, I'm just this two dimensional image with, of course, hand gestures I hope translated properly, but you do not feel that we're in the same room. There's no co presence. Right. So, I can share my feelings, but not my surroundings, not my ambience. But with 6G technologies in 10 years, we will be able to communicate not just ourselves in a camera, but how we feel in the surroundings, the ambience. So for people in different places, they will be able to connect in such a way that it feels like co presence. If I look to the left to the right, I actually see you nodding. Or if I have something to show to demonstrate, and everyone can get a copy and inspect by themselves, I can transfer the objects to you and so on. So it will change the idea of neighborhood. Previously, the neighborhoods are the people who physically are close to you. But in 10 years, neighborhoods will become people who identify with the same values as you people who share the same sense of purpose as you, because the surroundings become transportable shareable over the internet. So, there will be a lot of fractal like snowflake like small, so called countries jurisdictions, where people would prefer to spend more time with, and our idea of overlapping citizenhood will change. The idea of citizenhood previously is limited by the West Valley and idea of the territory bounds where you are, and your territory determine your jurisdiction and your country, and so on. But when people can join the neighborhoods that share the same sense of purpose and culture. Well, it becomes possible for me to be a time zone traveler, like I already am. I wake up in North and South America and travel to Indo Pacific during the day and the evening. I'm in Africa and Europe. I'm already like that, but currently in two dimensions. But it will become possible then to feel like I'm physically among my compatriots of similar values and cultures, despite that we're in very different time zones. I think the idea of a network state and overlapping pluralities of network countries, that will be a reality in 10 years time. Hope that answered the question. So 18 people would like to know what is special in Taiwan's digital development. Do you think Taiwan's policy can work in other countries. For example, if you lead Japan's digital development, what you do and what what is the difficulties. We are already having a digital minister, and we appeared in panels to get both the current one and we maintain very good connections. So I don't think that Taiwan is so special in having a digital minister. And you have a digital agency before we do. Next week, we will have a ministry of digital affairs for real, and I'll be the minister for digital affairs. Prior to that, I'm a minister at large that connects different ministries together. And we finally decided to bring in the communications, the cybersecurity, the platform economy, the government into a new ministry inspired by the Japanese action of the digital agency. So in that sense, Japan is in the future, or literally one hour in the future, slightly in the future. Now, I want to however share that we have because we joined later informing a ministry of digital affairs. We have a saying that broadband is a human right. I think this is now shared by the Japan government with the idea of no one left behind. But we also have another idea of we do not teach digital literacy. We teach digital competence. Indeed competence can only be learned together. It cannot be taught because competence is when you're creative. What you see is when you're a consumer competence is when you're a producer. So by making sure that people, even in the elementary school, co create the worlds in which they learn. It changes the motivation of the students from external, which is validation examinations and so on, to internal, meaning that they want to create a world and share it with the class with the entire country with the international community, and they can create the materials that the people after them have access to. So I think this is quite different in elementary school with stress that, for example, the air qualities are measured by the air box like a raspberry pie or Arduino chip, but that is collective maintained by the students. Not only they can inform their parents, whether they walk to work or have to take some transportation because of PM 2.5. They learn about data stewardship about data bias about distributed ledgers in a way that cannot be taught and can only be learned if you co create the material that other people rely on. So this is data democracy and digital competence. I think this is a very important idea in education. And I think we stand ready to share with all the jurisdictions that want to join us in learning from the primary school is not just teaching the primary school layers of that answer your question. So 15 people would like to know there are problems such as the difficulties of coordination between education elementary and junior high schools and university education like there's a gap. And a mismatch between education up to the undergrad level university and after the graduation, the education required in the industry. So any ideas for how to facilitate the mutual cooperation. Excellent question. Now in Taiwan. We have up to 10% of students, not connected directly to the curriculum, but they enjoy the same rise and privileges as students of their age. We call them experimental education students in experimental education which may be homeschooled group school institution school that explore ways how to solve this mismatch. For example, there's a middle, I think senior high. There's a senior high in the Taipei city. That is completely digital. It doesn't even have a campus, but a campus is distributed among the different places of learning, but they coordinate like the Minerva school and they both face to face and online, but there's no fixed site, no fixed seat for each student. And with this arrangement, it's become very easy then to bring into the university, even though they're just in your high to attend the university classes to share in the university resources because they're no longer bound by the space. The same for the education required in the industry. They can connect to the institutions very easily and very quickly. So this reminds me when I was 14. I told the head of my middle high. You know, I can spend eight hours a day after school to do research, or I can spend 16 hours a day to do research. And the only thing that prevents me of doing research is not the access to professors in silver, because they're all available online. It is just this law that says my parents will be fine. There will be a monetary penalty if I stop showing to school in the middle school is compulsory education. After I explained this, the head of my school say, Well, your email printouts and all this validates your claim from tomorrow on, you don't have to attend my school anymore. I said, What about the auditing? What about the reports and so on. And she said, Well, I'll handle them for you. So, well, it was before experimental education, but already people in the positions of power is still in me that I still believe to the state that career public servants are the most innovative people. They can figure out ways, even before you have a experimental education law to connect you to the communities of practice. So as I understand many teachers are here attending this conversation. So I would encourage you to think of ways that even within the confines of your current classes and curriculum and so on. Maybe there are ways to co-create the learning environment so that the students who feel a need to connect to the academia or the industry can begin doing so with the full blessing of you and the head of their schools. For me, it's life changing. And that led directly to the experimental education movement in Taiwan. And then now our basic education full of ideas like autonomy, data competence, and so on. That was directly lifted from the research, the labs of experimental education. We take the parts that worked and then put it into our basic education reform. This is like a relationship between research and development. Again, this is also mutual cooperation. Someone asks, I'm 16, a high school student. What were you doing and interested in and when you're 16. This is a nice segue from the previous question because I dropped out when I was 14. And then the research topic that I chose at its own. It's called swift trust, meaning how come that people trust random strangers online so easily. But in some anti social spaces, why some even very good friends when they interact in some specific way online. It's very easy to lose trust and even block and unfriend each other. Why do online modalities lead to quick trust and quick distrust. That was the research question I was very interested in. However, it's impossible to study this question without actually constructing various different spaces and interacting with people online. So that led me to my startup that I co-founded with a couple other people when I was 15 years old. We collectively built the first customer to customer auction site in Taiwan, the cool bid. We built a search engine together. We built many interactions online. So that led me to today where I'm still studying the same topic. Of course, I've shared some of my learnings. Like if you're fast, fair and fun, it's easy to build trust. But if you're not fast, fair and fun is easy to lose trust. But it's not a fixed theory. The theory changes whenever there's 6G, there's share reality, there's co-presence. The theory must catch up with the modalities that we're interacting with. So the point I'm making is that if the purpose, if the open research problem is interesting enough, then it's not just me. It's people all over the world figuring out. First is decentralization at the World Web. Now is centralization in Web 2.0. Now we're looking at re-decentralization in Web 3 and so on. And all this lead to different theories of swift trust and distrust. So I'm still in the trenches. So this week I still publish to the social archive, the open access papers and so on. So it's important to choose a topic that is open, that is wide, that's fast and fair and fun. I hope that answers your question. So 17 people would like to know, some elementary school teachers believe it is better for the development of children when they write and create products in a tangible way with their own hands. It cannot be the same if it's done on the screen or virtually. So how would you address them and how to appropriate initiative to computers in the class? I firmly believe that technology should adapt to serve the humanity. It's not that a society to change, to adapt to the technologists. This is the most important thing. It's variously called as appropriate technology or inclusive technology and so on. So in this particular case, we need to look at technologies that caters to the people who learn with a modality of interaction. And only then can they be part of the class. So, which is why, for example, I always interact with a screen with a stylus. This is my phone. And I always interact with a stylus list that you think it's about Android, it's Apple too. I also have a Apple pencil. So in this sense, because I think in a canvas, and I find that only with a stylus or a pencil, can I think in a way that is intentional. So this is a touch screen. It becomes not me swiping the screen. Very quickly it becomes the screen swiping me. And so I lose my autonomy. I don't have creativity anymore. I become conditioned by the touch screen. I'm very easily addicted. Maybe it's just me, but I have a inkling that it's not just me. So I have this discipline that I always interact with the screen on the pencil or mouse or keyboard or touchpad anything but a touch screen. And I think this is a sign that I'm asking the technology to adapt to my particular psychological needs, not changing my psychology into that of a addicted fear of missing out space just because the touch screen application developers want it that way. So to take full control of how the technology is deployed. This is the most important thing. Just like a stylus can be used as a way to draw things. We too should cultivate the kind of interactions on the classes that caters to the people who prefer more to that of a tangible. Maybe you fold like origami and things like that. But you put it in a overhead camera so that the camera can during your folding, figure out what you're folding and share it so that you can 3D print your folding materials, the products and so on. So the people feel that when you're interacting with the idea, the computer is here to help you to disseminate the idea to share the idea to find a community, but the computer is not here to automate you to take your hands away from the act of creation. And I think the way that teachers interact with such technologies will have a defining influence on the students. If the teachers is very afraid of technology distance themselves with technology, then it's far more likely that the students will one day out of rebellion or individualization or whatever, just embrace technology with all its downsides. This is very much like banning the certain discussions or banning manga or banning anime and so on in my childhood. So if the teachers take a distancing behavior, then it doesn't work. But during my childhood. For a while, my dad tried to ask me to not play video games, because he feels that video games are too addictive. And then I asked him to sit down and play the video game I'm playing with me. It happens to be Sid Meyers civilization. And I explained to him that I wasn't able to read the history books, because I don't know what a boat looked like. That was before the steam engine and after the steam engine and so on. I don't have this firsthand knowledge of how it feels like to live so so far away back. But with the game, it become easier for me to imagine the kind of conflicts, the kind of philosophies, the kind of technological responses to the various historical moments. And then it becomes easy for me to read Will Durant's history of the world that he bought, which is a lot of paper tomes. And without the civilization game as kind of introduction course. It's impossible for me to engage with the history books. And just like the head of my school, my dad is a very reasonable person, and he became convinced. And then we play some video games together. So I think it's important for the teachers to listen to the students, but also to make your own intention designs. So that is the video game, of course, but choose the kind of video game that resonates well with the history class without whatever class you're teaching. And then you will be able to build a report to build mutual support with your students and then the student will learn competence is only when you can design your own interactions with computers and with screens hope that answer the question. 18 people would like to know. I'm the Clark Monroe International High School student. Is there anything we should do, while we are students, what current technology is the most important to master that's actually two questions. The first question. I always stress, you need to sleep well and sleep plenty. I don't function well without a hours of sleep, but you're a high school student. Maybe you need nine hours of sleep. It's up to you. And if I don't sleep enough, like if I sleep only for six hours, I always make sure to take a nap as soon as possible to make up for the eight hours that I need, because the debt by sleep deprivation cannot be repaid in the weekends. It hurts the brain. The short term memory does not write completely to long term memory, if you are in a state of sleep deprivation for as few as just three days. So, if you study way late, but you have to wake up early in the morning, chances are that the fragmented knowledge you write into your long term memory may be clouded in a way that does not create a canvas for creative thinking, and that has this long term effect. And I understand Japan just like Taiwan is a society that price hard work and so sleep deprivation may be a problem in your jurisdiction just like in ours. So whenever I give talk to a high school students, I always stress that sleep sufficiently. There's a precondition of you actually learning anything. Now, some high school students after attending one of my lectures, eventually started a petition or e petition platform join platform that says the schools doesn't open the first class until I think it was nine or something. But many schools that they were hailing from required that they are at school already at campus aid or something. And they think this is unnecessary because they were not doing anything anyway. So it's just for the convenience or whatever. So they asked the Ministry of Education to change the rules so that they can attend the class only when the first class begins. So that they can get sufficient amount of sleep quoting me. And interestingly, more than 5000 students sign on this petition very quickly. And even that was during COVID. We held this online discussions where many high school students make very recent arguments citing the latest on the sleep research, saying that the teacher's job will be reduced decimated. If they do not sleep well, or the students do not sleep well. And finally, the schools said that they require still one day a week for the announcements or the deliberations about the school's internal proceedings or whatever. So one day a week, you will still have to attend the school on 8am or something. But for the rest of the week. Yeah, everybody can sleep until the first class. It's a very successful social movement. So to answer the second half of the question, I think the most important technology is thinking about democracy as a kind of social technology to think about ways to do governance that let people share their powers in a way that feels safe to them. It combines a lot of cutting edge research. For example, just like Slido, you can post your ideas and the counter points, but there's no way to reply to each other. So there's no room for personal attack. But there's very easy for us to surface the most cogent points on the pro and the con so that we can focus our conversation very easily by the upvotes and so on. So by taking into the social interaction design, we create a safe space for democracy that makes safe power sharing easier for the principles and the ministry of education. And this is, of course, I'm biased because this is my line of research, but I really think that democracy as a social technology is the most important to master because it allows you as a high school students, just like in Taiwan. To take control of your fate, even before you turn 18. And if you become an active citizen, engage in this way, chances are you will also inspire other people. Most of the most important petitions most significant petitions online here in Taiwan were created by people around 17 year old and 70 year old working together, because they both have more time on their hands, I guess, and also care more about the future sustainability instead of just the next quarters profit and losses. So long term thinking through democracy as a social technology I think this is very important to master together. 18 people would like to know what is the major goals of life in your current point of view. To me, the point of life is to leave the world a better place when I log out compare when I log in. That is to say, be a good enough ancestor. Now, the idea of good ancestor is not new. I certainly didn't create this. Many indigenous people in Canada, more other places have this idea of seven generations. That is to say when we plan for profit and losses, we need to think about people seven generations down the line to be a good ancestor, not just be a good person to your current business, because in a democracy, it's easy to forget about future people, because by definition they don't have a vote. But if we only optimize for the people 18 years or older in the society, then the people who don't have a vote are at a disadvantage. It becomes easier than in the name of liberalism or market capitalism and so on to make decisions that make the current generation prosper at the expense of future generations. This is an inherent issue in representative democracy. So, studying ways to live a life of good enough ancestor is to give the future generations a vote metaphorically speaking. In New Zealand, for example, the Maori people, the indigenous people have this idea that the Wananui River, among others, have spirit. And this spirit constitutionally speaking for them, including the right to health, the right to sustain and so on. It's like a person, this natural personhood idea takes the idea of this sanctity of health and life and so on. I guess it's a river, so the right to move, I guess, into account, and they appoint the stewards. It's just like if you're someone who are represented by your lawyer and so on, because you're too young or because you don't know how the law works and so on. There are people who are speakers from the indigenous and from the government communities to take the representativeness of the river, taking care of its future, sitting on the board of companies, voting on the decisions, suing for damage, and so on. So representing this person, this river as a person, is one of the ways to invent in the democracies the interest of people seven generations down the line. Now, good enough ancestor means we are not trying to be a perfect ancestor. Because, again, when we're creating solutions, if we take away possibilities, if we over concentrate power, so that people younger than us do not have a way to change our solutions, then maybe our solution seems perfect for our generation. But what we're actually doing is taking liberty away from future generations. But it's very easy to fall into the trap. If you take an optimizing mindset, like collect enough data, like an AI calculates the most optimal utility function, but most of the future generations need cannot be anticipated by the data of the past and the present. But be good enough is also to ask ourselves in doing our design, are we over optimizing for the present. Do people one generation to generation down the line, have the means to just redesign completely if they face a very different threat, a very different challenge, like the COVID, nobody designed for it. But there was sufficient flexibility and agility in the design of our public health system, so we can respond in time. So again, being open, not for closing the future, free the future. This is also very important and a major goal of life to me. 17 people would like to know what industry do you think will grow in the future, about 10 years, which is still underrated now. This is an excellent question. I think, as I mentioned, the industry, what the business of making communities that people feel that they're also a citizen in. This is something called world building, I guess, community building. Of course, it's just like traditional community building by in a way that transcends time zones. This is a future. I won't say it's underrated because you hear all this cause to meta versus or things like that. So it's not underrated. I do think that a lot of our conversations around meta versus was not around community building at this moment. It was more about advertisements early merchandise, making sure that people have the coolest avatar and things like that. Of course, that may be interesting from a design point of view. But if people do not have the most basic right of determining what kind of community they want. If they need to go through an intermediary, a gatekeeper that takes, I don't know, 25% or 52% cuts of all transactions and so on, then it become harder to imagine community building. It would be essentially the landlord setting all the rules about governance and the people who rent the room. Well, they can be escorted out by private bouncers anytime. Right. So, if you focus on community building, then the idea of metaverse must give way to the idea of a plurality. So not as singularity where everybody meet on this flat metaverse, but rather everyone has the ability to form new personal connections, like email, like podcast. There are decentralized technologies that freeze the future, instead of constraints the future into a few bottlenecks or choke points. The idea of re decentralization, I think that's underrated the idea of connecting to the social sector to the co ops to the social entrepreneurs to community building and not captured by this choke point capitalism doesn't think you can look it up. Not captured by choke point capitalism. I think this is underrated now, but that is the direction we need to go. If we are going to grow a future where there are many different universes where we can freely associate among ourselves again retaining the freedom to associate to free speech and also to the press to set the ways that freeze our imaginations not in a particular way of formatting our expressions, but rather to express the way we want to interact itself as a way to express the possibilities that imagine new ways of social organizations and so on. And that is very underrated at the moment. So 14 people would like to know in Japan, communication on social media and the Internet causes trouble. So here's the question. Is this problem also happening in Taiwan. Also, are there any special communication issues related to the Internet and SNS in Taiwan. So according to the feed them project for many years running now, Taiwan is identified by experts as the place with the highest amount of information manipulation attacks from outside of our jurisdiction. That is to say, we're subject to the most relentless assault of information manipulation. This is quite unique in Taiwan. And this raised the antibody, the immunity, the inoculation level of everyone in Taiwan, just like if you get repeated exposed to various different coronavirus variants. At some point, you would develop a very strong antibody that keeps you healthy against new Greek alphabets new variants, the same in Taiwan. So in 2018, for example, we have a very special issue leading to the mayoral and referendum election that year. We saw a lot of external advertisements on Facebook and other social media that precision targets particular part of our voters. And interestingly, it's not on political issues is on social issues. There was a trending rumor that said, for example, the people in Hong Kong, they're not protesters, they're young people being paid $200,000 to murder police to cause riot and so on, with a very scary looking photo that was taken by Reuters. So the photo is real. But the Reuters report originally only said that there are young protesters in Hong Kong. That's it. But this alternate caption is something new. It's manufactured and precision advertisements were used to change people's feelings around Hong Kong. Now, this create a particular challenge, because we must not take it down. If we take it down, it actually feel conspiracy theories like this must be something right. What's the state would not be taking it down. So trying to take down or in like coronavirus lockdown or any top down, take down measures that will actually feel a fatigue. If you're in lockdown for too long, you don't trust the government anymore because there's this lack of coordination among the community that was inhibited by the lockdown. So in 2018, instead, we chose a way called notice and public notice. We noticed this, but the state does not do fact checking. Instead, we encourage independent journalists with contributions by, for example, the cofax project of the G zero the community cofax. They work with the international fact checking network like tower fact check center, Michael Penn, but also our private sector trend micro who's called as Google look and so on to collect the signals. It's like contact tracing. We can see which variants of information manipulation are having a higher basic reproduction number, a higher our number, and the ones that do not have a higher our number. Because people voluntarily share the signals on the line platform, you can long press and say, I think this is maybe information manipulation, and we get to see which ones are trending. So the ones that are not trending, we simply ignore them because they die out very easily. But the ones that are trending the fact checkers focus their contact tracing their attribution power to trace this alternate caption of people being paid to murder police to the court way board account by the communist political and law unit. So it occurs to everyone then that this alternate caption first appear on that way board account. And then people start adding on it. So Facebook and many social media, they promise then to have this mandatory label. So you can still share it. It's just like you can send spam, but the recipient will see this. This email is labeled as spam as a junk mail, the same for the label, the label will say, and what this about, you know, murdering police whatever the photo is real but this caption is sponsored by the law unit of the Chinese Communist Party click here to learn more. And this is an independent investigation by professional journalists with the help of the citizen fact checking community. Now if we take that down. There's no way for the middle schoolers to participate in this collaborative checking only by leaving it up, tolerating it a little bit, but do contact tracing and so on. And we actually develop antibodies together, because when people see this with this label, they're aware that a there's information manipulation going on. And second, maybe they also can participate in the fact checking community. So these are the democratic competence, digital competence that I was alluding to a few questions back. So making those incoming virus. The population by the people specializing in journalism civic journalism just like probably else to take the mRNA of the incoming virus, change us by protein and so on. We can make a viral vaccine that shields our, our mind against potential new mutations of the virus of the mind. I hope that answered this question. So, with 10 minutes left. I must apologize because there's new questions coming up. I answer one and there's new ones coming up. I cannot address them all. Maybe I can only address two more questions. So, Mitsuka relate to know in the thrive of democratizing technology. How do we keep each individual including big tech accountable for their own actions. And how do we share access when much of the power lies within the top. This is a great question. The power within a network. So, in a company, for example, it is structured in a hierarchy or in a government ministry, it is structured hierarchically. Indeed, the power lies in the top, and they must be shared, but it's not always easy. On the other hand, there are also network making power to use the term from Manuel Castells. Now we're making power is like a switching power. The power is in the intersectionality of networks. So if you are the only one in your hierarchy that have a strong positive support, mutual trust with some other network where you're also not in the top. This connecting power this switching power enables you to take account of this hierarchy with the viewpoint of that hierarchy and vice versa. And then you create this horizontal power that connects different worlds together in a way that holds them mutually accountable. So in a democratic society, the role of academia of media in general, journalism, and so on, serves as this connecting agency that makes the hierarchies that otherwise would not meet. They will then have to meet with each other, because otherwise they lose legitimacy. Here's an example about democratizing technology in 2015 when Uber first entered Taiwan. They started operating legally, but in just a few months, they start recruiting people without professional driver's license, and their idea very simply put at the time is that their code dispatch better than loss. So in the name of efficiency, people shouldn't obey the old laws but should indeed obey the new code. And so that went viral. It's a so-called sharing economy. But of course, people didn't like the idea, say it's not sharing economy. They're not even carpooling. They are doing gig economy, extractive economy or whatever. But if we keep on this ideological debate, we cannot solve practical problems. The only way to solve this issue is to ask everyone who are a stakeholder who have a stake. So we send to the taxi union, to the Uber, driver's Uber passenger, everyone the same link. It's like Polis. It's like Slido. But on Polis, instead of this one-dimensional ranking like Slido, we have this two-dimensional canvas where you can see which people feel close to you. You can see their sentiments like insurance is necessary, registration is necessary, and so on. And you can like or dislike. But the like or dislike simply put you in different clusters as soft for the distance, not to shout down any person. But for the people who are on different camps, it has two effects. First, you see your friends and families feeling very differently. Maybe you didn't talk about this over dinner, but it shows that it is possible then to have different ideologies while the second point. While seeing, oh, actually, for the majority of reflections after three weeks of voting without replying, people can see that everyone sees registration, insurance, and so on. These are important. They feel that search pricing is great, but undercutting meter not so great. They feel like in the places where there's no Uber service because they're too rural and so on, the local co-ops, temples, churches must also be authorized, not just for profit companies to run their own fleets in a sharing economy way and so on. All these are the points, the consensus, the common points hidden in plain sight. If we focus on gig economy versus sharing economy, there's no way for us to know that actually we mostly agree with most of each other on most of everything. And then we hold ourselves accountable saying we invite Uber representative, taxi representative, and so on. And our agenda is crowdsourced, just like I only answer to the top vote is lighter question. They only answer to the top 10 sentiments widely agreed by the passengers and the drivers alike. So, Uber then have to commit saying, okay, okay, we will not undercut existing meters, we'll make sure our driver have professional license and so on and so forth, while the taxi companies who want to serve the rural places also receive new business models. So for the past few years now, Uber is a legal taxi company, the Q taxi in Taiwan, but yet in the rural areas, the co-ops, the people who take care of the elderly and so on, they can also get a professional driver's license and start carpooling or driving for tourism or what not. So this is what I call people public private partnership, starting with the norm that people broadly agree on, amplify that with the public sectors platforms, and then the private sector hold each other accountable, implementing the same norms. This is how we get the power that was previously concentrated at the top, nevertheless agree because they see that their constituents, their employees, their members, they already have norms, they already agree with each other across those different hierarchies. So for them to stay relevant, they will have to share their power. So I hope that answered the question. So the final question then. Do you think that a study of quantum physics have impact on our future? If so, how will it impact? Well, I think it will have a strong impact if only to free ourselves from the computational thinking that was limited by the von Neumann model. A lot of people think about computational thinking in a way that is more about sequential refactoring of large problem to the small problems, the sequential processing, the automation and things like that, which is how classical computers work. But because I study functional programming, that's my professional training, to me, the world is not something that you issue command and ask the world to follow your command. But to me, the world is something that you observe with a value and then make sure that the world you observe coalesce around the kind of value that you share with other members of the world. And I think this kind of functional viewpoint, although it was not the mainstream, nowadays more mainstream in computer science, you will gain new boost if people learn about qubits about ion traps and all sort of different ways to build quantum computers and free our mind about what computation of thinking really means. So thank you for the awesome questions and this will be the end of this lecture. Thank you very much, Minister Tang. Thank you very much for sharing your, your insights, and also for your very positive way of looking forward. It is so important for us that we need to take on board a positive way in order for us to think about how to move forward, not only for ourselves but for our futures. I also very much can associate with your thinking with regard to the consumer producer, I would call it a dilemma that we have and maybe how we balance that in the future. And also your great concern for democratization and how we view that across our entire population and that we don't forget that we need to take on board our young people. And that we treat our young people with respect with regard to democratization. So I thank you for your insights and your ways of answering those questions and the attention and the detail that you've given to us. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you so much. And on behalf of the participants on site, again, I will give the great appreciation to address and the insightful talk. So thank you so much. And also the session chair don't thank you so much for a very good and address and so this session is finished and this moment so thank you for yes. And so.