That’s the alignment that you’re looking for.

Matter of fact, gender balanced representation is constitutionally protected in Taiwan. We are required to have a certain ratio of representatives in the Parliament and any level of counsels. That was a pretty advanced constitution when it was written.

That’s a very good...I agree, too. That must, of course, inform your standpoint about a so-called interpretable artificial intelligence. which is actually a subclass of this problem.

Of course it’s an open problem. It’s good that you’re highlighting the important things we need to consider, instead of just...

White hat, too, for that matter.

That’s what black hack security figures do.

A practical way for non-trivial algorithms.

What about including more stakeholders into that audit, like transgender people?

Yeah, we do.

Even if it just posts produced statistics, like a list of parameter of lengths of last names?

I know it’s legal.

Far as I know, it’s legal under GDPR, his idea, it’s the only thing I know. Algorithmically, whether it makes any sense, I don’t have any ideas.

Yeah, I know.

They did the research. What I know is that it...

Just like people would want the data to be radically usable, one has to find the algorithm that doesn’t strike a compromise between usability and privacy laws. Then it’s peer reviewed, so every data owner gets to run it simultaneously. That makes it scientific, according to Sandy.

Researchers publish the algorithms. The algorithms wants peer reviewed to cause minimizing in privacy laws, statistically speaking, whatever. The data on there runs the algorithms and publishes only the statistics. Essentially, the algorithm only becomes only another statistical method. Then the data never leaves the hand of data owner, let ...

Exactly to your point, Sandy was advocating something very different. He still is advocating that the data never gets this treatment post-processing, differential privacy, whatever, algorithms should.

Anonymity, that’s right. Anonymization doesn’t mean 100 percent anonymization, but anyway, going that way.

Data anonymization?

I’m sure it’s good. It will come back to you. [laughs]

No, it’s not.

Yeah?

That’s the one school of thought. It’s essentially data anonymization.

Google does that, for telemetry. Firefox does that now, too.

Not really.

It’s technically the same. It’s just if you were calculating averages and so on. It lessens the burden of post-processing.

I mean if Olfa flips the heads. He flips again and says he is of heads. No if numbers. It’s less complicated than...

It will be statistically significant. [laughs]

If Olfa flips the coin again, we have less post-processing to do.

I love this that the individual is protected, yet we can learn about the ensemble. We can learn about the group. I love such things.

Now, the fact that you said you saw a prostitute, well I don’t know whether it is you had to say you saw a prostitute or because you had to say the truth.

What comes up is number. As you said, nobody knows what the outcome was. You have to flip it in private. Then if it says one thing, you have to say the truth. If it’s other thing, you have to say, "Yes, I saw a prostitute this year" or something. ...

We’re not supposed to know in Europe.

If it comes up with a face, you have to say yes. If it comes up with a number, you have to say the truth. That’s how it works. Number truth, face, you say yes, now over flips.

Not flipping?

"...you can say whatever you want to say."

You flip again.

The example I always give is if you want to know something about a public issue, I would give you coin two of that and say, "Here you go. Flip that coin. If it comes up with a number, you have to say the truth. If it comes up with ...

In Germany, it’s simply legal. Germany’s is not an issue out there. Other countries, it’s an issue, mainland China, although you walk in the streets Shanghai, every [non-English speech] is everywhere. What I hate is hypocrisy. One thing I love doing with data is busting hypocrisy.

It’s legal but only if the local government has allowed it. So far, there’s only five different instances of brothels. It’s very legal on a very limited circumstance.

How can we prevent...I think absolutely critical is the answer to that differential privacy that in principle, you can’t use it in against the person. My favorite example, which I’m sure you know, is if you want to learn about let’s say prostitution or drug use or whatever things are ...

The notion that you can learn, going back to what you said, that there are people who want to learn about drugs, I mean medical drugs, and so on. There is a lot to be said to give them access to the data.

But there are other things. I think this is for me is a second order effect. Differential privacy is great. Synthetic data is great.

That part of the book I think is complicated part which no journalist ever talk to me about because I think it’s simply not possible to really say this in very simple terms. Or at least I can’t. I can’t really do it, the cost of using the data.

Exactly, there’s different chemicals when combined more toxic.

I talk about in the book in a section which is complicated...Of course it’s not easy to make it really simple. I talk about erosion, the necessary. I do draw the parallel to EPA that as you burn things, yes, there are side effects.

Now there’s two schools of thought. One said that we should run a differential privacy or pay an amenity, whatever, to make the algorithms...I call it privacy laws as pollution. Like if you have a plant burning coal, burning gas, whatever, you want to put the environmental control so that ...

Now of course it’s for the purpose of administrative health and welfare. It’s never used outside of the purpose of health and welfare. There’s bound to be people for social good I’m sure who want to do analysis of the data outside of the purpose of health and welfare.

Right. I positioned this next to open data because, for example, the Minister of Health and Welfare, because of monetary insurance, has a lot of data about everybody’s health and insurance, and how we’re using it, basically, a clinical record of everybody.

This is very hard.