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

女性在防災包中應準備的物品

全球在這幾年地震頻繁,再加上戰爭的陰影愈來愈大,坊間已經有各種災難包的清單作為一般人備災參考,也看到有些廠商會與名人合作,推廣救災包的重要性。我也採購一個以減少準備的成本,但在檢視與思考廠商陳列的物資清單裡,還是少了什麼,特別是如果遇到戰爭時,那些救災包,不論是幫小朋友準備的、幫寵物準備的,看似很棒,仔細想想,比較像露營用的物品清單。 這讓我很沮喪,因為我買了一個還要花更多成本準備急救藥品的防災包。身為女性,我會選擇多備急救藥品及衛生物品,因為那是能保護生命與尊嚴的基本協助。 網站中所販售的急救內容物是備而不用,反而有些必要的物品,如 止血帶 、止痛藥等,可能因為法規管制而沒有被列在販售的急救藥品清單中,但也沒有詳細的列在教學文章中,許多必要的物品都被輕描淡寫的帶過。我雖然已採購該防災包,但仔細想想,那個可能比較像露營用的清單,有點後悔,但我會留著當基礎,再把沒必要的東西改為必要的物品。災難來臨時,我們都只能選擇必要的,而不是選擇想要的。 急救訓練時的經驗 專科時曾與同學接受紅十字會的急救訓練,有一堂課裡,參與的學員們都討論過「物盡其用」這件事,例如在山上突然骨折或不幸出現開放性傷口時,有什麼東西是可以拿來急救使用的?且當災難來臨時,我們只能帶必要的物品離開,也能減少不必要負重,確保行動方便。 我曾檢視過多份清單,但都沒有看到女性必備的物品。有些東西不論在何時對女性來說是必備的:保險套、避孕藥、衛生棉、消毒藥片,有些物品因為國內法規管制,所以不會在販售清單上出現,所以還是需要自己準備。 保險套 :在戰亂或災區,被迫流離失所時,女性容易因性暴力而面臨傳染病或非預期懷孕風險。雖然保險套無法完全保護女性尊嚴,但至少能減少性病與意外懷孕的風險。另一方面,與許多大型儲水袋相比,保險套體積小、攜帶方便,也能臨時裝水,在缺乏乾淨飲用水的環境下派上用場。 避孕藥 :若在災難或戰爭環境中,醫療資源極度不足,女性若意外懷孕,將面臨極高的健康危機。避孕藥雖然在一般通路不易買到,但若能事先向醫師取得處方並納入防災包,就能有效降低非計畫性懷孕。 衛生棉 :一般型的衛生棉也好,或是夜安型(例如34、40公分)的衛生棉,除了生理期使用外,厚實且吸水量大,在臨時缺少紗布或繃帶時,也可用作包紮或止血墊。如果場地髒亂,同時也能暫時保持傷口乾燥,減少感染風險。雖然占空間,但在災難環境中,這些吸水性佳的材...

5月7日快速分享—關於數位貨幣、央行數位貨幣

搜尋一下網路新聞,最近民間成立了推廣數位貨幣的協會,這是一個好消息。 這讓我似乎應該把數位通貨提前寫完放在 Blog ,但其實我想先寫關於資料的部份,不過還是快速的寫一下最近閱讀央行數位貨幣(Central Bank Digital Currency,簡稱 CBDC)文章的心得。 央行總裁楊金龍先生在2018年的有篇文章:「 數位金流與虛擬通貨-央行在數位時代的角色 」,很值得大家花點時間閱讀,了解以台灣央行的角度如何看貨幣、總體經濟與個體使用者,裡面沒有高深難懂的專業詞彙,卻能直接把眾多媒體報導中關於鼓勵數位貨幣的盲點直接點破。例如,先前我也認同,各種加密貨幣曾主打著要讓窮人不經由銀行或第三方認證而進入經濟活動的理想,但現實的世界裡,窮人可能不見得有手機,而就全球政府的對數位貨幣的監管態度,窮人依然無法藉由使用加密貨幣進入經濟活動。 先前文章 有提過,在2017年時,芬蘭移民局與當地的區塊鏈技術創業公司 MONI 合作,協助芬蘭政府發放MONI預付卡,利用區塊鏈透明、公開且不易更改的特性,開始為每個使用 MONI 預付卡的難民們建立經濟活動的相關記錄,這提供了無法證明自己身份的難民們一個機會重新建立起自己的經濟活動身份。但在 2019 年 3 月時卻 公告 將於 4 月底時停止將難民們的救濟金支付於 MONI 預付卡中,並要求難民們將 MONI 預付卡的資金轉出,同時也要求雇主們將工資發放於芬蘭政府於2016年時合作的 Prepaid Financial Service (簡稱 PFS ) 預付卡中,當時出現許多難民的薪資都卡在 MONI 預付卡裡。 目前觀察全球央行的共識,所發行的數位貨幣 (CBDC) 將不會具有法定貨幣的地位,比較適用於銀行間清算、國際貿易間的金流活動,這樣的央行數位貨幣被稱為「批發型央行數位貨幣」 (Wholesaler CBDC) ,另一種稱為「零售型/通用型數位貨幣」(Retail Digital Currency) 則是我們常見到的消費端的數位貨幣,這則不具有任何的法律效力,政府也不會為這樣的貨幣擔保,就金流的追蹤來說,不論是數位貨幣或是現行的法幣,政府、各級金融相關機構對於金額過大、不正常的交易金額都應該要保有警覺心。 這幾段就用了一堆名詞:數位通貨、加密貨幣、數位貨幣、法定貨幣、央行數位貨幣、批發型央行數位貨幣、零售型/通用型數位...

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...