ministers that have a similar incredibly neutral view, not necessarily a partisanship, but just on being a nexus of trust across political parties.
I think that’s really good, the way that I’m showing the trust, that there’s nothing to hide
Yes, exactly, but then they don’t really trust whether people look at their data, and things
That builds trust, because with paper you can’t do that. It’s about digital personal data
Yeah, because people generally trust that there is a systematic approach to report and handle
for open-government partnership’s sake, but that we do #SDG17 to further the trust between the various sectors and various interest in humanity.
They don’t actually get a lot of credibility or trust from the academic community of the things
, that can respond to the goal that reinforce the trust between citizens and the government? Measuring impact is something really important.
, the trust that you hold so true with your own security services?
Because it’s open source, the governance is in the social sector, and people can trust
not trusted. If it’s the appliances nearby that are all reporting the same, that justifies their claim
It takes them a much shorter time for people to trust each other online. It’s easy to get people
to a virtual person. This is why most of the time we say “meeting in person builds 30% of trust
people’s trust in institutional journalism and on institutional media, in general, and institutional
, not necessarily governments, that want to trust citizens more.
. If you trust someone more, of course, you share more of your personal data. They must act in the interest of you. That is the relation of you.
that we make each part of the society trust each other more based on reliable data.
of trust in political leaders, which is something that, at least in some other countries, may
it more important that the public trust their officials.
It’s just, instead of trusting a single one, we are making sure
