...I can’t really see any national secrets, because otherwise they might as well not exist.

So naturally, I can’t...

One of my algorithmic work is to make sure that anything I can see, I can also make everybody see, including any other country.

There are, of course, some gives and takes. For example, I can’t look at national security, or top secret, or any confidential information.

I was very clear on my anarchistic inclinations. He says "fine".

I came to him saying "I was doing all this work in the civil society. If you recruit me to work in the cabinet, I will do exactly the same thing."

Everything is recorded because I refused any exclusive interviews. All the journalists need to ask me publicly. That includes people in the Prime Minister’s office.

Yeah, we had a one month’s negotiation in public before I entered the cabinet.

As of today. In any case...

It’s a he.

Yeah.

...but maybe not in my own lifetime.

To destroy the state, eventually...

I have a working relationship with the Prime Minister.

Yes.

Yeah, that’s right. That’s what I want to do.

It’s a more radical way to say radical centrism...

Well, I’m a conservative anarchist...

It’s mostly not about policy making, although it’s occasionally about policy making. It’s mostly about communication.

My job is mostly, as I explained, to communicate, to make sure that the Premier gets accurate picture of what’s happening when it comes to digital affairs, and to make sure that when the premier wants something to be done about something digitally and that the stakeholders in the digital ...

That’s the answer.

If it’s just one intranet, for example, with five people and four computers, and they don’t connect to the public Internet, then the Internet Protocol’s still works but it’s just for those four computers to talk to each other, then of course it has no transformational potential. It is just ...

Yeah, but for me, the politically useful Internet is the capitalized Internet, the one Internet.

This distinction doesn’t really carry when we were speaking...

When he talks about the global public Internet, he used the upper case "I".

The Internet Society, some people in it like Vint Cerf, is very careful when he talks about internets which he used the lower case "i".

It’s an intranet there. Not really the Internet.

It doesn’t decide, it enables. It’s what we call a necessary, but not sufficient condition to the other levels.

Yeah, of course. The World Wide Web is just one application. Like many other applications before it, Email or whatever, it may change. It might fade. Other applications can thrive.

The World Web is now a, you can say, it’s a connected documentation space or there are many ways to describe the World Wide Web. The World Wide Web is just one of the many, many, many, different applications of the Internet. Mostly when we talk about politics or about ...

No, I think it goes back to what we mean by Internet. Internet, if you just go to its original definition, it’s just a technical way for computers to talk to each other. It’s called the Internet Protocol or IP, which is to be short. On top of it, people ...

It doesn’t talk about, for example, regular how Facebook or Twitter is applying this protocol, which is on the upper level. It’s above the application layer. This is about the link, the communication layer.

No, it’s just a government of the Internet in the protocol level. The protocol is how the machines talk to each other.

There are the governing bodies of the Internet. The strange thing about these bodies is that they’re not answering to sovereign state or to the United Nations. They’re just answering to its own governing structure which is radically transparent.

The regulatory body is called ICANN which is the commission. ICANN stands for the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers.

Yes, it starts this way because it worked as a DARPA project. [laughs]

There is a technical arm and a political arm... The engineering group is called the Internet Engineering Task Force.

No, it’s a real governing structure. You can see it. Everything is pretty transparent.

The Internet Society, that’s a real...

They answer to the stakeholder groups, which means, the users of the Internet. That’s how it gets its legitimacy. It doesn’t get legitimacy from the Westphalian model of sovereignty.

It means politically that it doesn’t respond to sovereignty. That it has its own concept of sovereignty. That’s it sees any act of censorship as damage and just roots around it which is why the Internet society or the Internet governing bodies they don’t answer to UN. They don’t answer ...

Yeah, but that is coded in the law, in the code.

That’s the end-to-end principle. The Internet at a point is basically saying, although there are three physical networks, it must act as one and not forbidding any two points inside the network from innovating new ways to communicate.

The Internet Protocol says these two points should not have any say on what these two points are trying to do. If the point A invents a new way to talk to point B, those two middle points must not interfere with this innovation.

The Internet Protocol, it doesn’t build a new computer network from scratch. It just talks about a way how existing computer network operators need to talk to each other. That’s the "inter-" part of the Internet. As part of the Internet Protocol, what this says is basically... Because you can ...

Yes, the political model is called the end-to-end principle. It’s very hard coded that you can say it’s the constitution of the Internet literally because it’s how it’s constituted together. Before the Internet, there’s already computer networks. There’s many computer networks. The point is that they don’t talk to each ...

I’m aware of that.

Now with the monoid, the category can change. It’s a more relaxed form of monad.

It’s not as strong as a monad. Monads must keep to its monad laws, meaning that there are laws in the monad theory that says that you must completely remain in the same category (of endofunctors).

Meaning that it looks like a monad, but it’s not quite a monad. It’s a more relaxed form of monad. When you add any point to it, it still forms a coherent whole, so to speak.