Not so much. The main challenge we have is mostly that fact-checkers are seen as part of the Internet governance community that mostly concerns the platforms that have signed on the counter-disinformation manifesto, that is to say Facebook, Google, Line, PTT, the usual suspects.
Sure, as any news workers is.
This is a way for people in Taiwan to learn more about Indonesia, as you have described.
Right, because Bangkok has not yet set up one.
The Philippines?
My point being we can also share this background instead of the generative adversarial one.
We have some of the most affordable unlimited 4G connection now at $16 per month, and a very good digital opportunity plan that gives more than 98 percent of people in rural and indigenous places 10 megabits per second Internet access, and all this needs to happen for the Taiwan ...
I don’t think it’s a problem to say that Taiwan has had a long history down from its semiconductors to their routers and hubs, to the Internet connection ISPs.
Yeah, and we don’t even need to highlight the PRC part. Taiwan’s cybersecurity infrastructure is top notch anyway, even before the Great Firewall. In fact, we built much of the personal computers, the Internet, even on the hardware level, when the Internet first came to place.
To export.
Not at all.
I personally taught, through virtual reality, students from the Academy of Art in Hangzhou, even after becoming a digital minister. It’s not seen as a big deal.
Of course, but the TFCC, as you described, they are entirely social sector. It’s not like we are signing MOUs of any sort. It’s the academic exchange between social sector organizations, which happens all the time.
Good.
That’s good enough. If it has, as I think they have, the Poynter IFCN criteria, they have to at least be transparent, or they’ll cease to be [laughs] neutral, or we’ll discover that they’re not neutral. It’s the same covenant that the TFCC here have signed.
OK, that’s good. In Taiwan’s case, they’re, an arm’s length or two away from the DPP, and so it’s seen as more neutral.
Does the administration like it?
I am aware of that.
Sure, and it’s going to be automated now, because the advances in picture generation now, you cannot really tell the difference when it’s synthetic.
Indeed. We’re starting to see it in some implementations of our curriculum, which I helped develop.
I totally agree.
Yeah, basically being assimilated biologically with the Pingpu peoples.
…all the way to Māori, culturally.
We’re a Pacific island, too.
We do have room for improvement, and some of this happens to local domestic workers too.
That’s one of the OFF’s distinguishing characteristics.
I like their new slogan, “Smart nation”. At least it’s referring to a group of people.
Same for “Smart cities” and “Dumb citizens”.
…which is a perversion of categories. We say “human resource”, and we say “incentivize companies”. It’s a perversion of categories.
Thank you.
Yes.
That’s right.
It’s also my job description.
OK. I’ll share your spreadsheets with the…
Thank you so much.
I think it will go well. All right.
Also, make it so customizable so that even people in trilingual cases, in indigenous cases, and things like that, can flexibly enable these without incurring burden among monolingual consultations. That’s going to be a very important direction, if I successfully get to join the Pol.is Foundation. It’s called Math and ...
Just full disclosure, I’m flying to New York. If the premiere approves, I’m going to join the board of the Pol.is Foundation. When that happens, there will be a lot more international collaboration to make the user experience not only good for Taiwanese people, that are bilingual, or monolingual in ...
It’s important, because we are in charge of sending user experience feedbacks as concrete pull requests back to Pol.is Foundation. We made a lot of changes that the Pol.is Foundation did just merge straight in.
Yeah, because you are going to use that. [laughs]
I know. I think Pol.is itself would be actually what I would like you to improve the user experience.
We really need to shoot for the best case. Maybe it lands to the second best, but let it not fall into the fear, uncertainty, and doubt, which creates a divide between the people. The senior researchers, they’re all very fluent bilingually in ‘93. Society changed. [laughs]
The second best, of course, is that they have an import function. “If the social sectors think it’s OK, we’re OK.” The worst case is, as I said, fear, uncertainty, and doubt. “How come we made so many mistakes? We refuse to accept that.”
That’s right. No, I totally agree. It’s just how to integrate it into the official flow. The best idea is that the official flow, review board members, are themselves are also community participants. Then that makes a lot of sense, because they carry the context back.
That’s something we can help them figure out. It doesn’t have to be Wiktionary, or we can partner with Wiktionary, but with a review process in-between. One way or another, it needs to be collective intelligence.
The problem is that they can’t really figure out to import back, because Wiktionary, everybody can change. Who will do the quality reviews? What about vandalism? What about people injecting political agenda? What about province of China?
I talked to them before becoming the digital minister. I was just a random advocate. At that point, they actually agreed to export their data, for example, to Wiktionary, which is a good place. People can then discuss and collaborate on it.
The society changed.
They were cutting edge in ‘93.
It’s not what it means. That’s right.
