跳至主要內容

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

此網誌的熱門文章

聽死神說故事--偷書賊

書名:偷書賊(THE Book Thief) 作者:Markus Zusak ISBN:9789866973420 作者網站: Markus Zusak 譯者:呂玉嬋 出版:木馬文化 封面取自博客來網路書局。 購買於小小書房。 這個夏天讀《偷書賊》和《失物之書》,會在兩本不同的故事裡看到同一個時空背景所發生的故事,同樣是發生在孩子身上的事,同樣在說文字的力量,但《偷書賊》的節奏比《失物之書》緩慢一些。我盡量不要比較這兩本書,因為這是很無聊的事,但在閱讀的過程裡總驚訝這兩個故事有那麼多巧合之處,不是情節上的相似,而是在人物角色和背景總是有相似或是對立的情況出現。 《偷書賊》的女主角是被德國夫妻領養的莉賽爾,原本也要一同被領養的莉賽爾的弟弟卻死於火車上,莉賽爾在遭受與父母分離及弟弟的死亡後,在精神上受了極大的創傷,幸運的是領養她的父母是故事書中最仁慈的角色,給了莉賽爾完整的愛,不同於此時期裡其他的孩子可能瀕臨餓死或是送入集中營或是在街頭流浪被流彈波及,莉賽爾因為養父母的照顧和周遭的朋友、躲在地下室的猶太人…還有偏愛她的死神。 這個故事的特別處之一,敘述者不是主角或是任何一個書中的角色,而是沒有時空限制,總是旁觀的第三者,特別是在二戰的年代,無所不在的死神,戰場、集中營、巷弄裡,特別的是,這個死神總是想要表現祂冷酷無情和輕蔑人類的一面,但實際上我們從書中讀到的,是祂憐憫人類、輕視、無奈、驚訝人類的個性,也像人類一樣會抱怨工作、具有詩意、幽默感,也就是具有人性的一面: 人類只有在一天的開始與結束時,才會觀察顏色的變化。 但是對我而言,一天當中,每個短暫片刻都呈現出不同的色度與調性。 光是一個小時的時間,就包含了幾千種不同的顏色:蜜蠟黃、柔絲藍、陰鬱黑。 我是做這行的,當然特別注意顏色的變化。 …她貫徹始終,只要經過三十三號的門口,從沒有忘記吐痰,還會外加一句「死豬」。我發現德國人有個特點:他們真的很愛豬。 這個具有人性的死神成了說書者,祂說著在戰時會發生在任何一個角落的故事,然而我們透過祂的眼睛,看到一個帶著色彩、煙硝味濃厚、心驚膽跳與眼淚的故事,祂不儘是旁觀者,同時也是貫穿整個故事的主要角色之一。 整個故事讀起來有對納粹主義的不滿也有對當時情況的無奈。裡面對於創傷後壓力症候群( PTSD )的描寫也很貼切,莉賽爾和猶太人麥克斯分別經歷了不同程度的打擊,也產生了同樣的症狀,

關於我所了解的數位錢包 (Digital Wallet)

Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay 「電子身分證」(eID)和「數位身分證」(Digital Identity)的議題在台灣始終一直具有爭論,但出發點都是好的,希望透過電子化或數位化的方式,讓人民不需要隨時隨地為實體卡的期限、有效性而擔心,但隨之而來的是容易被追蹤、把所有功能都整合在一張卡片時,若卡片遺失,就需要負擔的手續及風險。 更換身分證也涉及許多政治議題的操作,例如在 2019年 ,時任內政部長脫口而出「不換新身分證無罰則 恐無法投票」使全民嘩然。更早的時候,還有聽聞過因為其他國家都更換為多卡合一的晶片或電子身分證,所以台灣也應跟著換,以加速實現智慧台灣的願景。2020年時,我自己 再整理相關的內容 ,相關部門在推動晶片身分證(New ID)的方式則是以民眾比較容易參與的卡面設計開始,但後續的資安問題、資料外洩事件,及新冠大流行,延宕整件事的進度。 2019年時台灣沒有數位發展部(以下簡稱數位部)、沒有獨立的個人資料保護機關、個人資料保護法的主管機關「暫時」是國發會,沒有法源依據卻同時也被拿來作認證身分用途的健保卡、有法源也有主管機關的「自然人憑證」並不是每個人都有。許多公共服務上仍以實際臨櫃服務優先考量,雖然當時已有許多文件可以自網站下載或線上申請,但多數服務只能將實際流程網路化,而不是利用網路優化服務流程,反而增加挫折感。 當COVID-19肆虐後,改變許多服務,也實際的數位化,而許多卡片雖然在緊急情況下被拿來作為認證身分的用途,但從報稅、領口罩、全民普發現金,台灣政府和人民也一起改變使用行為。 目前已知的幾個數位身分證、數位錢包應用 先列一下自己已知道的幾個在進行的案例,不會說太多,因為有許多研究報告可以參考,也可以參考各國在數位身分證上的政策頁面。  1. 歐盟數位身分錢包 2021年注意到歐盟執委會公布數位身分證相關法案的修正案,後來通過許多歐洲社群使用者持續反對的「歐盟數位身分錢包」( European Digital Identity Wallets )相關立法框架,並推動 4 個大型示範計畫。熟悉歐盟這10年來的電子化、數位化或數位市場法、數位服務法的人會理解,這是一整個將公共行政數位化的過程,從立法、試驗、修法,其實都很完善。台灣也有相關的研究,有興趣的人再自己找找看。 關於「歐盟數位身分錢包」,我所理解的

Some reflections when I see those internet giants controlling our daily lives

DALL·E - A vibrant, detailed scene capturing the essence of technology monopolies, represented by towering skyscrapers with logos of major tech companies. Twenty years ago, I was a student in a 5-year college. My major was international trade. The world was wild for globalization, and the internet was beginning. We studied international trade rules in the commercial college, L/C, insurance of the cargo (on board or before on board, or other conditions), the difference between container terminals and freight stations, etc. Some rules are still workable in e-commerce. E-commerce or online shopping is still working on the basics of international trade. As a student, I learned what we should pay attention to when a company wants to set up a branch company or expand its subsidiary in another country; the company needs to follow the local law and customs and respect the local culture, especially when a company needs to have advertisement or marketing events to promote their products. Also, t