跳到主要內容

IGF 2017 highlights need for greater dialogue



Recently I participated remotely in my first Internet Governance Forum — IGF 2017 — which was held at the United Nations Office in Geneva, Switzerland from 18 to 21 December.

From the comfort of our offices and homes, I (along with 1,660 other remote participants) was able to listen to and participate in a range of multistakeholder discussions surrounding emerging technologies and Internet governance-related issues on the theme of Shape Your Digital Future!

Gaps between technical communities and policy makers

Dialogue is an important component of the multistakeholder model — multiple parties come together to contextualize a problem and resolve it through information exchange. That said, it is difficult for different groups to let go of preconceptions.

In some sessions, there were participants that were solely of the opinion that policy is the first priority, and that technical problems can’t be stated in the policy or explained to people.

These people need to think widely; they also need to have the ability to translate what people want in policies and adjust them accordingly. That said, it is difficult to translate opinions from technical communities to policy makers, which only strengthens the need for clear communication and dialogue.

Gaps between developed and developing economies

The Internet has become a commonplace utility for many. In my home, Taiwan, Internet penetration is among the highest and most affordable in the world. However, for many people the Internet is still a luxury.

I found from participating at the IGF that this gap, between developed and developing economies, brings with it varying priorities:
  • Developed economies talked about trust, cybersecurity, governance and policies, surveillance, ethical issues, and emerging technologies such as the Internet of Things and Blockchain.
  • Developing economies talked about infrastructure, rights to access the Internet, affordable Internet, quality education, as well as human rights and safety issues.
Needless to say, the discussion about the Internet has evolved from the haves and have-nots, which is why such multistakeholder mechanisms like the IGF are important for planning for the future development of the Internet. Different stakeholders sit together to discuss and find the solution, and people can learn from each other and consider other people’s perspectives, needs and experiences.

Language may be the largest barrier

More than 2,000 participants from 142 economies, representing all stakeholder groups and regions, attended IGF 2017 in person.

The IGF provides translation services to allow attendees — in person and remotely — to understand speakers so long as they speak in any of the six UN official languages: English, Chinese, French, Arabic, Spanish and Russian — most sessions were in English.

Although this allows a large majority of people to easily share and understand each other’s views, it does impact the experience of those whom such language is a second or third language, particularly those from Asia Pacific economies. Some topics are difficult enough to explain in your own language let alone trying to interpret their meaning for another language.

Obviously, it would be great to get more people adding to the dialogue in their native language, but how can we make it more convenient?

Besides inclusion of language, respect for religion, culture and customs is also important to encourage people to share their opinions.

I learned how to work on the Internet

IGF 2017 wasn’t all about listening to discussions. I was able to participate in working groups, including the NRIs working group. It was a great experience to collaborate with people (whom I’ve never met in different economies and time zones) on working documents, and discuss issues on mailing lists and in online meetings.


Wish for more people to join IGF

It is difficult for young people in Asian economies, particularly students, to sit with government officials and talk about Internet or government policies — it can be overwhelming and they may feel they do not have enough experience to share.

At the closing plenary, Jianne Soriano said, “Being young is not a disadvantage, it is a strength.” It’s great that the IGF understands the need to include the opinions and ideas of younger people in discussions that are ultimately shaping their future.

This message is something that I’m looking forward to taking back to and implementing at the Taiwan IGF, and to hopefully encourage more younger participants to IGF 2018.


This article is published on APNIC Blog. Robert Mitchell, the editor has edited it.

留言

這個網誌中的熱門文章

觀察台灣租車公司資料外洩事件和國外的類似個案

一月底時, TechCrunch 的報導讓大家注意到台灣的租車公司發生了資料外洩事件,從報導中可以得知,這次的資料外洩的範圍,部分信用卡號碼、客戶身份證明文件,以及租車者的相片、簽名和租車詳細資訊。由於是租車公司,主管機關大概是交通部公路總局,所以也看到台灣的 後續報導 是公路總局要求該公司限期改善,在 TechCrunch 的原報導中也提到他們有發信問數位發展部,已經通報  TWCERT/CC  協助處理,也已經無法自該資料庫下載資料。 這件事情讓我想到幾個美國的案件,我簡單的摘要並提供美國FTC的案件連結,有興趣的人可以再去網站上閱讀: Equifax資料外洩案: 2017年時的Equifax資料外洩案十分有名,由於它是一家跨國消費者信用調查的公司,所以儲存了大量的美國、加拿大、英國人民的個人資料、財務與金流資訊,被評估會讓這些被資料外洩的受害者可能會遇上身分被竊取、詐欺等事件。 經過調查, 在這次的資料外洩案中有 1.47 億人的個人資料被外洩,在去年12月與美國FTC、消費者金融保護局、和一些美國地區達成和解,在和解協議中,需要支付4.25 億美元給受到資料外洩案影響的人,到2026年之前,美國的消費者透過特定的網站,每年可以取得7份免費的信用評估報告,另外,受害者也可以在特定期間內,針對因受到身分被竊取、詐欺的而影響,要求賠償需要恢復身分所花費的時數及費用,每小時賠償25美元,最多20小時。 對於常常接到電話詐騙、在公共場所大聲報出自己身分證號碼的台灣人來說,可能不覺得有什麼,但從2017年關注這個事情到現在,我想美國人對於因資料外洩而導致身分被竊取、詐騙,實在是謹慎且處理方式完整許多。 連結: Equifax Data Breach Settlement Drizly 資料外洩案 資料外洩的案子常在網路上出現,看到後來我常常都麻木了。2018年還有萬豪酒店集團的資料外洩案、國泰航空的資料外洩案、四大會計公司輪流出包把客戶的財務資料存在雲端系統,還把帳號密碼未經加密就寫在某個公開的服務裡。 2018年對我來說幾乎是資料外洩案爆發的一年,但對長期服務於資安領域的人來說,這些都不是新案。 美國的 Drizly 是 UBER 所經營的一個販賣及運送含酒精飲料的網站,他們使用了Amazon的雲端服務,在上面儲存了消費者的電子郵件位置、郵務地址、電話號碼、單一裝置識

[movie]Selena 哭泣的玫瑰

歌手:Selena Quintanilla Perez(1971~1995) 從wikipedia查Selena 導演:Gregory Nava 主要演員:Jennifer Lopez, Jackie Guerra 推薦CD: LIVE THE LAST CONCERT 電影原聲帶: 哭泣的玫瑰 最近在聽一張已絕版的專輯,已逝拉丁歌手Selena的Dreaming Of You。這位歌手只活了短暫的二十三年,死於自己歌友會主席的槍下。在她短暫的生命裡,歌唱事業佔了她二十三年生命中的大部份,然而她也曾在1987年獲得Tejano Music Awards本年度最佳女歌手獎、最佳表演獎並於1993年獲葛萊美最佳表演獎,之後又以《 Amor Prohibido 》這張專輯獲得1994年葛萊美金獎,跨越了國藉的隔閡,是位非常傑出的拉丁女歌手。 這部Selena在台灣被譯作《哭泣的玫瑰》1997年時由Jennifer Lopez演出,由於電影拍攝出資者是Selena的父親Abraham Quintanilla,而他們一家屬於墨裔美國人,所以在片中還可以看到移民者的一些感觸。 Abraham年輕時就有組團表演的夢想,但他的身份使他的樂團在白人舞廳裡無法得到表演機會,當他們在墨西哥舞廳裡歌唱時又因為只懂得唱白人的抒情歌曲,使喜愛跳舞的拉丁人民無法隨樂起舞而引起暴動,接著便結束了他的音樂夢,當他發現自己十歲的小女兒Selena具有音樂天份時,整個家庭都投入表演事業,由他擔任經紀人,全家四處表演。 由於她在年紀小小時便四處表演,所以她無法像其他同年齡的女孩一樣有機會談戀愛或是遊玩,在片中也有這麼一段台詞認為自己屬於被保護下長大的孩子,在光鮮亮麗的歌手外表下,她也想像其他女孩一樣有機會談戀愛、結婚、生子,在這部電影裡都可以看到父親對女兒的關懷,希望留下女兒美好的一面,所以也不會有一些緋聞或是不好的新聞,比較像是父親為了紀念自己的小女兒而拍攝的電影。 這部電影裡,Abraham提到到的一些觀點訴盡了移民們的心酸,他對西班牙語不流利但即將上台演唱的Selena說:「在美國要了解美國歷史,要比美國人更美國人,但也不能忘記墨西哥的歷史,要比墨西哥人更墨西哥人…。」也許因為以前慘痛的經驗,所以告訴女兒一定要學西班牙話,從拉丁歌曲開始表演。Selena的成功除了她本身的天賦和與生俱有的親和力外,我

為什麼我支持《數位中介服務法》草案

在經歷許多次反抗台灣政府所立的網路相關法案後,我其實沒想過除了《數位通傳法》草案外,我還會再支持另一部法律草案,雖然 《數位通傳法》草案還壓在某處,但如果有人讀過《數位通傳法》的草案,再讀這部《數位中介服務法》草案,就會知道這部草案的重要性,而且也可以顯示台灣網路使用者的成熟度,更重要的,這是我第一次看到引入國際網路治理多方利害關係人機制的法律草案,而且是用在正確的地方。 有興趣想知道我在讀法條時的筆記和當下的感想,可以看我這則  Tweet 。這篇不使用逐條讀法條的方式來寫,因為那會讓人昏昏欲睡,我也不去比對歐盟《數位服務法》,因為我在讀《數位服務法》草案時,該草案特別強調是加強歐盟 E-Commerce Directive  ,而不是取代它,而且更多著重在預防盜版、仿冒,保護消費者的法案。所以當有輿論提到參考自《數位服務法》的《數位中介服務法》草案限縮言論自由時,我其實是一頭問號的,但一直到今天我才有時間讀《數位中介服務法》草案,這篇文章出自於我的個人經驗和閱讀法案的心得,與擔任的職務無關。 如果最近注意一下網路的資訊,有幾件事該注意一下: 有許多人在社群平台,如Facebook或是其他網路看到一些廣告,而這些廣告可能是要你支持台灣農產品、台灣製的產品,結果你收到時,上面還寫著簡體字,通常這是所謂的一頁式廣告詐騙,而行政院的消費者保護會在 2019 年時就有新聞稿在警告「 一頁式廣告詐騙多 小心查證保障多 」,之後像公視或是其他單位都有相關的活動在提醒大家小心這類廣告。但目前這些廣告其實多數不易處理,因為不容易取證、保留證據,等到追查到時已經找不到對方了。 有不少親密照片與影片在情侶分手後,被報復性的上傳到情色網站或透過即時通訊傳到親友的帳號裡,或是被洩露個資,遭到公開的霸凌。 之前有一個專題:「 青春煉獄:網路獵騙性私密影像事件簿 」,光是讀完這個專題報導我就覺得受傷。 有人使用 Deep Fake 把台灣名人的臉部照片合成至色情影片再上傳至色情影片平台,今年 7 月才被判刑。 還有許多創作者藉由網路分享作品時,被人盜用,甚至有國外的使用者修改台灣人的作品去參與比賽還獲獎。 有一次打電話問某個部會,如果消費者在國外電子商務平台買東西,但資料被外洩怎麼辦?雖然政府願意協助,但衡量至國外打官司的時間和成本,就會讓人卻步。 有些行為在現實世界裡有法可管,例如《兒童與