They also join a coalition of data. For example, the LASS, L-A-S-S, e-community that use distributed ledgers to make sure people who put data in cannot change the data afterward, so that people can trust that if people say there is air pollution now, they cannot change the number the day before election.
For example, people who see the remote island, when people get sick, they always require helicopter to take them to the main Taiwan island for treatment, but it may be dangerous. There was a helicopter crash, so people didn’t feel safe, but then they don’t trust the local nurse either. It’s a social problem.
This makes the government’s trust to people more pronounced than if we ask a few representatives to come to Taipei to present their cases, or to do focus groups, or whatever. This is about bringing tech to people. This is not about asking people to come to tech, whether it’s gov tech or civic tech.
If you just use this view to view data as something that builds relationship over time, then all the jurisdictional differences, and the USMCA paradigm, and the GDPR paradigm, and so on, eventually converge. It’s just every culture have different norms of how quickly to trust strangers, to which degree, but it’s the same overall.
Because this about people who are not comfortable with any modality, have a voice to say, how about we consider that modality? That makes the inclusion the core of the open government process in both cases, rather than just transparency or participation, which are instrumental values, inclusion and trust is the core value that creates the impact.
While I do that, thanks to broadband as a human right, we have people here in the Social Innovation Lab, the Public Service from 12 ministries to participate through two way telepresence to see whatever I see, to hear whatever I hear so that people can build rapport, that is to say trust to the central ministries.
Taiwan, I think...It’s unique in Asia, where there’s a inexpensive air quality measurement box, air box, then you automatically see thousands of people just connecting together their individual measurement devices, because they care about their air quality and they, frankly speaking, want to trust their neighbors’ numbers more than the government’s numbers. [laughs]
They invited the whole team to Wellington, and shared with them this same SCADA data for the public water corporation. They also co-created a solution to reduce the water leakage. This is better than any bilateral agreement, because to share this kind of raw data to a foreign digital service is a sign of enormous trust .
It just counts whether those data are there and whether they are open license, and so on, which is all good and well, but it creates an incentive for the government to instead of viewing trust as the primary goal and accountability and inclusion as the foundational value, and transparency and participation as the just the instruments.
People are very thirsty to know that after the CNDP position changed, what kind of...Because we saw the website, it’s built by the Cap Collectif. They built the république numérique consultation website so we know them well. We trust their execution of the online part, but we really don’t know about the social configuraiton.
In Taiwan, we have the Taiwan Fact Checking Center, TWFCC which is a member of the IFCN at Poynter which is a network of all the fact checkers around the world. They get fast-tracked acceptance into membership after just three months of its founding. It’s a collaborative effort by lots of very well trusted NGOs.
This is literally co-created by hundreds of people, the new tax filing system of this year. 96 percent of people loves it. The other four percent know that their ideas and their feelings will be taken into account the next year. This really builds radical trust among people. They know they get invitation just by complaining.
For example, with GSMA we have a very close relationship. We work with them on different projects, so they’ll be part of our global board of trustees , but also they’ll be part of the think tank, because they have units that are dedicated just to recession policymaking, so we’ll be working closely with them.
...and actually only delivered the substance back to the meetings. I think it really builds mutual trust after you experience this for a time or two. It really aligns what career public service is like, because it really reinforces the message of what the values that our career public servants hold without exposing them to personal risk.
There’s debatable whether there’s a better constitutional design or not, but at least it’s an independent organization, well trusted by the population. They now are moving to publish their audit reports, including the specifics of the campaign donations online, so that not just they can do the auditing, but everybody can do the auditing.
Whether it’s through radical transparency, or whether it’s through open data, or through open policymaking, or through this kind of imagined scenarios of foresight, all this is basically saying, "We trust you to not be mobs, to not disrupt the public administration, but actually bring something that we have not thought of to the table."
Learning, not in the sense of reading books -- although, that helps -- but by actually getting to know the people in both sides or many sides, who suffer from those or deliver those injustices. Then, try to form some sort of solidarity that lets them at least trust you to a degree where you can get useful information.
Actually, cyber security, of course, underlies the whole idea of safe space. If people don’t trust the Internet, then they won’t exercise the freedom of speech or freedom of assembly online, and this whole thing is void. This is built on the security, and security meaning a subjective feeling of security about using the Internet.
In the previous generation, it was pen and paper. Only the key results after each meeting is recorded, but not the entire process. You can maybe reverse engineer between the words a little bit about how we got there, but there is no foundation of trust between the different ministries who would participate in the same meeting.
…We didn’t cover the semiconductor supply chain, but they do have their own zero- trust architecture standard, the SEMI E187. That is a direct result of the WannaCry incident at TSMC. And so, they learned from that and produced a really top-notch cybersecurity awareness, toolkits, certification, and everything. And because that is broadly compatible with CMMC and the latest NIST recommendations for zero- trust , so some cross-certification would be really nice. Like if the Taiwanese people can, in a Taiwanese lab, pass something that is cross-certified with CMMC or with NIST and…
