Audrey Tang: Very happy to be joining you, and good local time, everyone.
唐鳳:非常高興能參與, 大家「當地時間」安。
David Biello: So, tell us about -- Sorry to -- Tell us about digital tools and COVID.
大衛·比爾羅:跟我們談談—— 抱歉, 跟我們談談數位工具和新型冠狀病毒。
AT: Sure. Yeah, I'm really happy to share with you how Taiwan successfully countered the COVID using the power of digital democracy tools. As we know, democracy improves as more people participate. And digital technology remains one of the best ways to improve participation, as long as the focus is on finding common ground, that is to say, prosocial media instead of antisocial media. And there's three key ideas that I would like to share today about digital democracy that is fast, fair and fun.
唐:好的。 我很高興能和大家分享 台灣如何成功利用數位民主工具的力量 對抗新型冠狀病毒, 我們知道:越多人參與,民主就越進步。 而數位科技仍然是 改善參與的最佳方式之一, 只要能把焦點放在尋找共同點, 與其反對社群媒體, 不如善用社群媒體。 今天我想要分享三個 關於數位民主的關鍵想法: 快速、公平、有趣。
First about the fast part. Whereas many jurisdictions began countering coronavirus only this year, Taiwan started last year. Last December, when Dr. Li Wenliang, the PRC whistleblower, posted that there are new SARS cases, he got inquiries and eventually punishments from PRC police institutions. But at the same time, the Taiwan equivalent of Reddit, the Ptt board, has someone called nomorepipe reposting Dr. Li Wenliang's whistleblowing. And our medical officers immediately noticed this post and issued an order that says all passengers flying in from Wuhan to Taiwan need to start health inspections the very next day, which is the first day of January.
先來談談:快速。 許多國家是今年 才開始對抗新型冠狀病毒, 台灣則是去年就開始了。 去年十二月,當中國的吹哨者李文亮醫生 張貼文章談到新的 SARS 案例時, 他受到中國的公安機構質問, 最終受到懲罰。 但,同時, 台灣類似 Reddit 的電子佈告欄 PTT, 一位名為 nomorepipe 的使用者 重新貼出李文亮醫生的吹哨文。 我們的醫療官員馬上就注意到這篇文章, 並發出命令, 要求所有從武漢飛到台灣的乘客, 在隔天就要開始接受健康調查, 也就是 2020/01/01。
And this says to me two things. First, the civil society trusts the government enough to talk about possible new SARS outbreaks in the public forum. And the government trusts citizens enough to take it seriously and treat it as if SARS has happened again, something we've always been preparing for, since 2003. And because of this open civil society, according to the CIVICUS Monitor after the Sunflower Occupy, Taiwan is now the most open society in the whole of Asia. We enjoy the same freedom of speech, of assembly, [unclear] as other liberal democracies, but with the emphasis on keeping an open mind to novel ideas from the society. And that is why our schools and businesses still remain open today, there was no lockdown, it's been a month with no local confirmed cases.
這告訴我兩件事。 第一,公民社會夠相信政府, 足以在公開的討論區 談論潛在的新 SARS 爆發。 而政府也夠相信公民, 足以認真看待它,視之為 SARS 2.0 處理, 這是我們從 2003 年之後 就一直在準備的事。 因為這樣開放的公民社會, 根據 CIVICUS Monitor,太陽花事件後, 台灣現在是全亞洲最開放的社會。 我們和其他自由民主政體 享有同樣的言論、集會自由, 但也強調要以開放的心看待 來自社會的新穎想法。 那就是為什麼現在我們的學校 和企業仍然在運作, 沒有封城, 已經有一個月都沒有本土病例了。
So the fast part. Every day, our Central Epidemic Command Center, or CECC, holds a press conference, which is always livestreamed, and we work with the journalists, they answer all the questions from the journalists, and whenever there's a new idea coming in from the social sector, anyone can pick up their phone and call 1922 and tell that idea to the CECC.
再來是快速的部分。 每天中央流行疫情指揮中心 CECC 都會召開記者會,且一定有直播, 我們和新聞記者合作, 他們會回答所有來自記者的問題, 任何時候有社會性的疫情提議, 任何人都可以拿起電話,播打 1922, 把點子告訴疾管局。
For example, there was one day in April where a young boy has said he doesn't want to go to school because his school mates may laugh at him because all he had is a pink medical mask. The very next day, everybody in the CECC press conference started wearing pink medical masks, making sure that everybody learns about gender mainstreaming. And so this kind of rapid response system builds trust between the government and the civil society.
比如,四月有一天, 有個小男孩說他不想上學, 因為學校的朋友會嘲笑他, 因為他只有粉紅色的醫療口罩。 隔天, 指揮中心記者會上的每個人 都開始戴粉紅的醫療口罩, 確保大家都能了解性別主流化。 這種快速反應的系統 在政府和公民社會間建立起信任感。
And the second focus is fairness. Making sure everybody can use their national health insurance card to collect masks from nearby pharmacies, not only do we publish the stock level of masks of all pharmacies, 6,000 of them, we publish it every 30 seconds. That's why our civic hackers, our civil engineers in the digital space, built more than 100 tools that enable people to view a map, or people with blindness who talk to chat bots, voice assistants, all of them can get the same inclusive access to information about which pharmacies near them still have masks. And because the national health insurance single payer is more than 99.9 percent of health coverage, people who show any symptoms will then be able to take the medical mask, go to a local clinic, knowing fully that they will get treated fairly without incurring any financial burden. And so people designed a dashboard that lets everybody see our supply is indeed growing, and whether there's over- or undersupply, so that we codesign this distribution system with the pharmacies, with the whole of society.
第二個焦點就是:公平。 確保人人可以用健保卡 到鄰近的藥局買到口罩, 我們不僅會刊出所有藥局的口罩存量, 共 6,000 家藥局, 資料還會每 30 秒更新一次。 那就是為什麼我們的公民駭客、 數位世界的公民工程師, 創造了超過百種工具, 讓大家能夠瀏覽地圖, 或讓視障者能和聊天機器人說話, 他們都沒被排擠,同樣能得到 鄰近藥局是否有口罩的資訊。 因為全民健保納保普及率達 99.9%, 任何有症狀的人 都能夠戴著醫療口罩 到當地的診所, 清楚知道他們會被公平對待, 不會有任何財務重擔。 所以有人設計出了一個儀表板, 讓所有人看到口罩的供應量的確在成長, 抑或是供應過多或不足, 讓我們可以和藥局、 整個社會合作, 共同設計出這個分佈系統。
So based on this analysis, we show that there was a peak at 70 percent, and that remaining 20 percent of people were often young, work very long hours, when they go off work, the pharmacies also went off work, and so we work with convenience stores so that everybody can collect their mask anytime, 24 hours a day. So we ensure fairness of all kinds, based on the digital democracy's feedback.
根據這項分析, 領取人集中在某 70%, 剩餘其中 20% ,常是工時很長的年輕人, 當他們下班時,藥局也關門了, 所以我們和便利商店合作, 讓大家一天 24 小時都可以取得口罩。 我們確保做到各方面的公平, 憑藉的是數位民主的回饋。
And finally, I would like to acknowledge that this is a very stressful time. People feel anxious, outraged, there's a lot of panic buying, a lot of conspiracy theories in all economies. And in Taiwan, our counter-disinformation strategy is very simple. It's called "humor over rumor." So when there was a panic buying of tissue paper, for example, there was a rumor that says, "Oh, we're ramping up mass production, it's the same material as tissue papers, and so we'll run out of tissue paper soon." And our premier showed a very memetic picture that I simply have to share with you. In very large print, he shows his bottom, wiggling it a little bit, and then the large print says "Each of us only have one pair of buttocks." And of course, the serious table shows that tissue paper came from South American materials, and medical masks come from domestic materials, and there's no way that ramping up production of one will hurt the production of the other. And so that went absolutely viral. And because of that, the panic buying died down in a day or two. And finally, we found out the person who spread the rumor in the first place was the tissue paper reseller.
最後,我想這的確是 令人神經緊繃的時期。 大家會感到焦慮、憤慨, 很多恐慌性購買, 很多陰謀論,在各經濟體中都是如此。 在台灣, 我們對抗假資訊的策略非常簡單。 叫做「用幽默戰勝謠言」。 以衛生紙的恐慌性購買為例, 當時有謠言說: 「喔,我們要增加口罩量產, 要用的材料和衛生紙一樣, 所以我們很快就會沒有衛生紙了。」 而行政院長的因應方式是一張迷因圖片, 我一定要跟大家分享一下。 配合非常大的字, 他展示出他的屁股, 還會稍稍搖擺, 上面的大字寫著: 「我們每個人都只有一對屁股。」 當然,上面有個認真的表格, 說明衛生紙的材料來自南美, 而醫療口罩的則來自國內, 其一增加產能不會 減少另一者的產能。 這張圖被瘋傳。 因此,恐慌性購買 在一、兩天內就消失了。 最後,我們發現一開始 散播這個謠言的人, 是衛生紙的經銷商。
And this is not just a single shock point in social media. Every single day, the daily press conference gets translated by the spokesdog of the Ministry of Health and Welfare, that translated a lot of things. For example, our physical distancing is phrased as saying "If you are outdoors, you need to keep two dog-lengths away, if you are indoor, three dog-lengths away," and so on. And hand sanitation rules, and so on. So because all this goes viral, we make sure that the factual humor spreads faster than rumor. And they serve as a vaccine, as inoculation, so that when people see the conspiracy theories, the R0 value of that will be below one, meaning that those ideas will not spread.
這並不只是社群媒體上的單一減震點。 每天, 衛福部的「發言狗」 都會轉譯每日記者會, 會轉譯許多內容。 比如,該保持的實體距離,像是: 「如果你在戶外, 必須要與人保持兩隻狗的距離; 在室內,則是三隻狗的距離」等等。 還有洗手的規則等等。 因為這些內容都會被瘋傳, 我們確保:以事實為根據的幽默 傳得比謠言快。 它們就像是疫苗、預防接種, 當大家看到陰謀論時, 陰謀論的基本傳染數就會低於 1, 也就是說那些想法不會散播開來。
And so I only have this five-minute briefing, the rest of it will be driven by your Q and A, but please feel free to read more about Taiwan's counter-coronavirus strategy, at taiwancanhelp.us. Thank you.
我只有這 5 分鐘的簡報, 接下來就是問答時間了, 但歡迎多閱讀些台灣 對抗新型冠狀病毒策略的資訊, 網址是 taiwancanhelp.us。 謝謝。
DB: That's incredible. And I love this "humor versus rumor." The problem here in the US, perhaps, is that the rumors seem to travel faster than any response, whether humorous or not. How do you defeat that aspect in Taiwan?
比:那真了不起。 我很喜歡「用幽默戰勝謠言」。 也許,美國的問題 是謠言的傳播速度 比任何因應措施都快, 不論幽默或不幽默。 在台灣如何在速度上戰勝謠言?
AT: Yeah, we found that, of course, humor implicitly means there is a sublimation of upsetness, of outrage. And so as you see, for example, in our premier's example, he makes fun of himself. He doesn't make a joke at the expense of other people. And this was the key. Because people think it hilarious, they share it, but with no malicious or toxic intentions. People remember the actual payload, that table about materials used to produce masks, much more easily. If they make a joke that excludes parts of the society, of course, that part of society will feel outraged and we will end up creating more divisiveness, rather than prosocial behavior. So the humor at no expense, not excluding any part of society, I think that was the key.
唐:我們發現,當然, 幽默本身就意味著 把沮喪、憤慨給昇華。 所以,比如我們行政院長的例子, 可以看到他拿自己開玩笑。 他沒有把幽默建築在他人身上。 這是關鍵。 因為大家覺得很好笑, 他們就會分享, 但沒有惡意或有害的意圖。 大家還會記得真正要傳遞的訊息, 製造口罩用什麼材料的表格, 且更容易記得多。 如果他們的玩笑 排除了社會的某部分, 當然,那部分的人民會感到憤怒, 最後就會創造出更多不和, 而不是利社會的行為。 所以,不消費別人的幽默, 不排除社會的任何一部分, 我想那就是關鍵。
DB: It's also incredible because Taiwan has such close ties to the origin point of this.
比:還有一點很了不起, 因為台灣和疫情的原點 有如此緊密的關係。
AT: PRC, yes.
唐:中國,是的。
DB: The mainland. So given those close economic ties, how do you survive that kind of disruption?
比:大陸。 在經濟上有如此密切的關係, 你們如何挺過這突發狀況?
AT: Yeah, I mean, at this moment, it's been almost a month now with no local confirmed cases, so we're doing fine. And what we are doing, essentially, is just to respond faster than pretty much anyone. We started responding last year, whereas pretty much everybody else started responding this year. We tried to warn the world last year, but, anyway. So in any case, the point here is that if you start early enough, you get to make sure that the border control is the main point where you quarantine all the returning residents and so on, instead of waiting until the community spread stage, where even more human-right invading techniques would probably have to be deployed one way or the other.
唐:在這個時間點, 已經近一個月沒有本土病例了, 所以我們還好。 基本上,我們在做的 只是比其他人更快因應。 我們從去年就開始因應, 其他人多半是今年才開始因應。 去年,我們試圖警告世界,但總之…… 不論如何, 重點是,如果開始得夠早, 就可以確保邊境控制, 把所有返國的居民隔離等等, 而不是等到社區感染的階段, 若等到這個時候,可能不論如何 都得採用更侵犯人權的技術了。
And so in Taiwan, we've not declared an emergency situation. We're firmly under the constitutional law. Because of that, every measure the administration is taking is also applicable in non-coronavirus times. And this forces us to innovate. Much as the idea of "we are an open liberal democracy" prevented us from doing takedowns. And therefore, we have to innovate of humor versus rumor, because the easy path, the takedown of online speech, is not accessible to us.
在台灣,我們沒有宣佈任何緊急狀態。 我們完全以憲法為準。 因此,政府採用的任何措施 也適用於非新型冠狀病毒的時期。 這迫使我們創新。 就很像「我們是個開放 自由民主社會」的想法, 讓我們不採取直接刪除言論。 因此我們得用創新的 「用幽默戰勝謠言」, 因為簡單的方法──將線上言論都移除, 不是我們能用的方式。
Our design criteria, which is no lockdowns, also prevented us from doing any, you know, very invasive privacy encroaching response system. So we have to innovate at the border, and make sure that we have a sufficient number of, for example, quarantine hotels or the so-called "digital fences," where your phone is basically connected to the nearby telecoms, and they make sure that if they go out of the 15-meter or so radius, an SMS is sent to the local household managers or police and so on. But because we focus all these measures at the border, the vast majority of people live a normal life.
我們設計的背景條件並不是封城, 也會讓我們無法去做任何 非常侵犯隱私的因應系統。 在邊境我們也得創新, 比如,確保我們有足夠的隔離飯店 或所謂的「電子圍籬」, 把你的手機連結到附近的電信公司, 確保如果你離開隔離範圍 15 公尺, 系統就會發送簡訊 給民政單位或警方等等。 但因為我們在邊境重視這些措施, 大部分的人還可以正常生活。
DB: Let's talk about that a little bit. So walk me through the digital tools and how they were applied to COVID.
比:我們來談談這一點。 跟我說明一下這些數位工具, 以及如何將它們用在疫情上。
AT: Yes. So there's three parts that I just outlined. The first one is the collective intelligence system. Through online spaces that we design to be devoid of Reply buttons, because we see that, when there's Reply buttons, people focus on each other's face part, not the book part, and without "Reply" buttons, you can get collective intelligence working out their rough consensus of where the direction is going with the response strategies. So we use a lot of new technologies, such as Polis, which is essentially a forum that lets you upvote and downvote each other's feelings, but with real-time clustering, so that if you go to cohack.tw, you see six such conversations, talking about how to protect the most vulnerable people, how to make a smooth transition, how to make a fair distribution of supplies and so on.
唐:好的。 我剛才有提到三個部分。 第一部分是群眾智慧系統。 我們設計了一些線上空間, 是避開「回覆」鈕的, 因為我們知道,只要有回覆鈕, 大家會專注在彼此的「臉」 (觀點) 而非「書」(事實), 若沒有回覆鈕, 就能匯集群眾智慧, 本著對方向的粗略共識, 大家會想出因應策略。 所以我們用了許多新科技, 比如 Polis, 基本上它是個討論區, 讓你可以贊成或反對 彼此的感覺, 但有即時的分群, 所以如果你上 cohack.tw 網站, 可以看到六大類主題, 討論:保護社會弱勢族群、 邁向疫後過渡措施、 管理防疫相關資源等等。
And people are free to voice their ideas, and upvote and downvote each other's ideas. But the trick is that we show people the main divisive points, and the main consensual points, and we respond only to the ideas that can convince all the different opinion groups. So people are encouraged to post more eclectic, more nuanced ideas and they discover, at the end of this consultation, that everybody, actually, agrees with most things, with most of their neighbors on most of the issues. And that is what we call the social mandate, or the democratic mandate, that then informs our development of the counter-coronavirus strategy and helping the world with such tools.
大家都可以自由地發言, 並贊同或反對他人的想法。 但秘訣在於:我們會讓大家 看到主要的分歧點 以及主要的共識點, 我們只回應那些 能說服所有意見群組的想法。 這樣會鼓勵大家發表 更兼容並蓄且細緻的想法, 且他們發現,在這商議的尾聲, 大家其實在大部分的議題上 會和多數的鄰近組別都有共識。 那就是我們所謂的社會委任, 或民主委任, 這些工具就能提供我們資訊來開發 對抗疫情的策略,並協助世界。
And so this is the first part, it's called listening at scale for rough consensus. The second part I already covered is the distribute ledger, where everybody can go to a nearby pharmacy, present their NHI card, buy nine masks, or 10 if you're a child, and see the stock level of that pharmacy on their phone actually decreasing by nine or 10 in a couple of minutes. And if they grow by nine or 10, of course, you call the 1922, and report something fishy is going on. But this is participatory accountability. This is published every 30 seconds. So everybody holds each other accountable, and that massively increases trust.
這是第一部分, 稱為:大規模傾聽以達粗略的共識。 我已經談過的第二部分 是分配的細目資訊, 大家都可以到附近的藥局, 拿出健保卡,購買 9 個口罩, 若是兒童則可以買 10 個, 且幾分鐘後就能在他們的手機上看到 那間藥局的庫存量 真的少了 9 或 10 個。 如果數字多了 9 或 10 個, 當然,你可以打 1922, 回報有可疑狀況。 但這就是參與式的問責性。 這每 30 秒就更新一次。 彼此相輔相成,共同當責, 信任感就會因此大增。
And finally, the third one, the humor versus rumor, I think the important thing to see here is that wherever there's a trending disinformation or conspiracy theory, you respond to it with a humorous package within two hours. We have discovered, if we respond within two hours, then more people see the vaccination than the conspiracy theory. But if you respond four hours or a day afterwards, then that's a lost cause. You can't really counter that using humor anymore, you have to invite the person who spread those messages into cocreation workshops. But we're OK with that, too.
最後,第三部分,幽默 vs. 謠言, 我認為這裡的重點 在於當假資訊或陰謀論出現時, 你要在兩小時內 用幽默方式來回應。 我們發現,如果在兩小時內回應, 會有更多人看到這接種的資訊 而非陰謀論。 但如果你四小時或一天後才回應, 那就注定失敗。 你已經無法再用幽默來反擊, 你得要邀請散播那些訊息的人 參與共同創造的討論會。 但那樣也沒關係。
DB: Your speed is incredible. I see Whitney has joined us with some questions.
比:你們的速度很了不起。 惠妮帶了一些問題給我們。
Whitney Pennington Rodgers: That's right, we have a few coming in already from the audience. Hi there, Audrey. And we'll start with one from our community member Michael Backes. He asks how long has humor versus rumor been a strategy that you've implemented. Excuse me. "How long has humor versus rumor strategy been implemented? Were comedians consulted to make the humor?"
惠妮·潘尼頓·羅傑斯:沒錯, 我們已經有幾個來自觀眾的問題。 嗨,唐鳳。 我們先從社群成員 麥可·貝克斯的問題開始。 他問:「你們導入幽默 vs. 謠言策略 有多久的歷史? 對不起。 幽默 vs. 謠言策略被導入多久了? 這背後是否有諮詢喜劇演員?」
AT: Yes, definitely. Comedians are our most cherished colleagues. And each and every ministry has a team of what we call participation officers in charge of engaging with trending topics. And it's a more than 100 people-strong team now. We meet every month and also every couple of weeks on specific topics. It's been like that since late 2016, but it's not until our previous spokesperson, Kolas Yotaka, joined about a year and a half ago, do the professional comedians get to the team. Previously, this was more about inviting the people who post, you know, quotes like "Our tax filing system is explosively hostile," and gets trending, and previously, the POs just invited those people. Everybody who complains about the finance minister's tax-filing experience gets invited to the cocreation of that tax filing experience. So previously, it was that. But Kolas Yotaka and the premier Su Tseng-chang said, wouldn't it be much better and reach more people if we add some dogs to it or cat's pictures to it? And that's been around for a year and a half.
唐:是的,當然有。 喜劇演員是我們最珍貴的同事。 每一個部會都有個 「開放政府聯絡人」團隊, 負責處理熱門的主題。 團隊陣容堅強,已有超過一百人。 我們每個月、每兩週都會開會, 討論特定主題。 大概是從 2016 年底開始, 但直到我們的前發言人谷辣斯·尤達卡 在一年半前加入我們, 才有職業的喜劇演員加入團隊。 先前,重點比較是在邀請張貼類似 「我們的報稅系統非常不友善」這種句子 還爆紅起來的人, 先前,我們的開放政府 聯絡人會邀請這些人。 只要你抱怨 財務部的報稅體驗, 便會受邀共同優化報稅體驗。 先前是那樣。 但谷辣斯·尤達卡和行政院長蘇貞昌問 我們能否做得更好,觸及更多人, 若加上一些貓狗的圖片? 這種做法已經有一年半左右了。
WPR: Definitely, I think it makes a lot of difference, just even seeing them without being part of the thought process behind that. And we have another question here from G. Ryan Ansin. He asks, "What would you rank the level of trust your community had before the pandemic, in order for the government to have a chance at properly controlling this crisis?"
羅:我也相信那絕對會不同。 即使我只是看到結果, 而沒有參與背後的思考過程, 還有另一個問題, 來自 G. 萊恩·安森。 他問:「你認為在疫情之前 你們的社會有多高的信任度, 政府才能有機會 妥當地控制這場危機?」
AT: I would say that a community trusts each other. And that is the main point of digital democracy. This is not about people trusting the government more. This is about the government trusting the citizens more, making the state transparent to the citizen, not the citizen transparent to the state, which would be some other regime. So making the state transparent to the citizens doesn't always elicit more trust, because you may see something wrong, something missing, something exclusively hostile to its user experience, an so on, of the state. So it doesn't necessarily lead to more trust from the government. Sorry, from the citizen to the government. But it always leads to more trust between the social sector stakeholders.
唐:我會說,社會大眾信賴彼此。 那正是數位民主的重點。 重點不是要人民更相信政府。 而是政府要更相信公民, 讓國家對公民透明化, 而不是公民對國家透明化, 那會是另一種政體。 國家對公民更透明化, 不見得一定會帶來更多信任, 因為你可能會看到些問題或疏漏, 有些會讓使用者體驗變得不友善, 諸如此類。 所以不見得會造成政府有更多信任。 抱歉,是公民對政府有更多信任。 但終會使社會部門的利害關係者 彼此更信任。
So I would say the level of trust between the people who are working on, for example, medical officers, and people who are working with the pandemic responses, people who manufacture medical masks, and so on, all these people, the trust level between them is very high. And not necessarily they trust the government. But we don't need that for a successful response. If you ask a random person on the street, they will say Taiwan is performing so well because of the people. When the CECC tells us to wear the mask, we wear the mask. When the CECC tells us not to wear a mask, like, if you are keeping physical distance, we wear a mask anyway. And so because of that, I think it's the social sector's trust between those different stakeholders that's the key to the response.
所以,我會說人與人之間的信任程度, 比如, 醫療人員、 疫情因應相關工作的人員、 製造醫療口罩的人員, 諸如此類, 所有這些人, 他們之間的信任程度非常高。 他們不見得一定相信政府。 但成功的因應未必得要對政府的信任。 如果你在街上隨便問一個人, 他們會說台灣表現突出是因為人民。 當控制中心要我們戴上口罩, 我們就戴上口罩。 當控制中心告訴我們不要戴口罩, 比如在可以保持實體社交距離時, 我們還是把口罩戴著。 正因如此, 我認為社會部門中 各個利害關係人之間的信任 才是因應的關鍵。
WPR: I will come back shortly with more questions, but I'll leave you guys to continue your conversation.
羅:我很快就會再帶更多問題回來, 但我先讓你們繼續談話。
AT: Awesome.
唐:好的。
DB: Well, clearly, part of that trust in government was maybe not there in 2014 during the Sunflower Movement. So talk to me about that and how that led to this, kind of, digital transformation.
比:很顯然,有部分對政府的信任 在 2014 年太陽花事件時並不存在。 跟我談談這點, 以及那件事如何導致如此的數位轉型。
AT: Indeed. Before March 2014, if you asked a random person on the street in Taiwan, like, whether it's possible for a minister -- that's me -- to have their office in a park, literally a park, anyone can walk in and talk to me for 40 minutes at a time, I'm currently in that park, the Social Innovation Lab, they would say that this is crazy, right? No public officials work like that. But that was because on March 18, 2014, hundreds of young activists, most of them college students, occupied the legislature to express their profound opposition to a trade pact with Beijing under consideration, and the secretive manner in which it was pushed through the parliament by Kuomintang, the ruling party at the time. And so the protesters demanded, very simply, that the pact be scraped, and the government to institute a more transparent ratification process. And that drew widespread public support.
唐:的確。 在 2014 年 3 月之前, 如果在台灣街上隨機訪問, 有沒有可能會有一個官員—— 也就是我——把辦公室設在 名副其實的公園裡, 大家都可以走進來跟我談事情, 一次 40 分鐘, 我現在就身處這個公園 ── 社會創新實驗中心, 他們會說那太瘋狂了,對吧? 沒有政府官員這樣工作的。 但,那是因為 2014/03/18, 數百名年輕的社會運動參與者, 多數是大學生, 佔據了立法院, 去表達他們深思後強烈反對 和北京所訂的服貿協議, 也抗議當時秘密協議於國會闖關, 由當時的執政黨──國民黨所推動。 所以,抗議者的訴求很簡單, 他們要求廢除該協議, 並要求政府制定更透明的簽署流程。 因此吸引了更廣泛的民眾支持。
It ended a little more than three weeks later, after the government promised and agreed on the four demands [unclear] of legislative oversight. A poll released after the occupation showed that more than 75 percent remained dissatisfied with the ruling government, illustrating the crisis of trust that was caused by a trade deal dispute. And to heal this rift and communicate better with everyday citizens, the administration reached out to the people who supported the occupiers, for example, the g0v community, which has been seeking to improve government transparency through the creation of open-source tools. And so, Jaclyn Tsai, a government minister at the time, attended our hackathon and proposed the establishment of novel platforms with the online community to exchange policy ideas.
事件在大約三週之後告終, 在政府保證並同意 四項和立法監督相關要求的前提下。 在佔據事件之後的民調顯示: 有 75% 的人仍然不滿意 掌權的政府, 顯示貿易協定爭議導致的信任危機。 為了治好這個裂痕 及和所有公民做更好的溝通, 政府決定要向外接觸支持佔領者的人, 比如 g0v 社群, 這個社群一直努力 透過創造開放原始碼的工具 來改善政府的透明度。 所以,當時的政務委員蔡玉玲 出席了我們的駭客松, 提議用線上社群建立一個新穎的平台 來交換政策的想法。
And an experiment was born called vTaiwan, that pioneerly used tools such as Polis, that allows for "agree" or "disagree" with no Reply button, that gets people's rough consensus on issues such as crowdfunding, equity-based crowdfunding, to be precise, teleworking and many other cyber-related legislation, of which there is no existing unions or associations. And it proved to be very successful. They solved the Uber problem, for example, and by now, you can call an Uber -- I just called an Uber this week -- but in any case, they are operating as taxis. They set up a local taxi company called Q Taxi, and that was because on the platform, people cared about insurance, they care about registration, they care about all the sort of, protection of the passengers, and so on. So we changed the taxi regulations, and now Uber is just another taxi company along with the other co-ops.
一個叫做 vTaiwan 的實驗就此誕生, 率先使用像 Polis 的工具, 沒有回覆鈕,只有 「同意」或「不同意」, 取得人民的粗略共識, 處理的議題包括:群眾募資, 明確來說應該是:股權眾籌, 遠程辦公,及許多其他網路相關的立法, 當時都還沒有相關的公會或組織存在。 結果證明非常成功。 比如,他們解決了優步議題, 現在,你可以叫優步—— 我這週才叫過一次優步—— 無論如何,他們以計程車的模式運作。 他們設立了一個當地計程車公司 叫做 Q Taxi, 因為透過平台知道: 大家會在乎保險, 會在乎執業登記, 會在乎各種對乘客的保護等等。 所以我們改變了計程車的規定, 現在優步就只是一家計程車公司, 和其他同業一樣。
DB: So you're actually, in a way, crowdsourcing laws that, well, then become laws.
比:所以,某種程度上,你們真的 把法律做群眾外包,接著立法。
AT: Yeah, learn more at crowd.law. It's a real website.
唐:是的,在 crowd.law 可找到更多相關資訊。 那是個真的網站。
DB: So, some might say that this seems easier, because Taiwan is an island, that maybe helps you control COVID, helps promote social cohesion, maybe it's a smaller country than some. Do you think that this could be scaled beyond Taiwan?
比:有些人可能會說, 因為台灣是個島嶼, 才比較容易辦到, 這個因素也許能協助你們 控制好新型冠狀病毒, 協助推動社會團結, 也許是因為你們比一般的國家更小。 你認為這種做法能擴大到台灣以外嗎?
AT: Well, first of all, 23 million people is still quite some people. It's not a city, as some usually say, you know, "Taiwan is a city-state." Well, 23 million people, not quite a city-state. And what I'm trying to get at, is that the high population density and a variety of cultures -- we have more than 20 national languages -- doesn't necessarily lead to social cohesion, as you said. Rather, I think, this is the humbleness of all the ministers in the counter-coronavirus response. They all took on an attitude of "So we learned about SARS" -- many of them were in charge of the SARS back then, but that was classical epidemiology. This is SARS 2.0, it has different characteristics. And the tools that we use are very different, because of the digital transformation. And so we are in it to learn together with the citizens.
唐:嗯,首先, 2,300 萬人還不算少。 台灣不是個城市, 有些人會說「台灣是個城邦」。 2,300 萬人不太算是城邦。 我想要說的 是我們的人口密度很高 且有多樣性的文化—— 我們國內用的語言就超過 20 種—— 這不見得會導致你所說的社會團結。 我認為重點在於所有官員在對抗 新型冠狀病毒的因應過程中保持謙遜。 從面對 SARS 經驗中學到教訓, 部份官員也有過去對抗 SARS 的經驗, 但那是典型的流行病學。 這次是 SARS 2.0,有不同的特徵。 因為我們使用的工具非常不同, 因為像這樣的數位轉型。 所以在這次事件中 我們和公民一起學習。
Our vice president at the time, Dr. Chen Chien-jen, an academician, literally wrote the textbook on epidemiology. However, he still says, "You know, what I'm going to do is record an online MOOC, a crash course on epidemiology, that shares with, I think, more than 20,00 people enrolled the first day, I was among them, to learn about important ideas, like the R0 and the basic transmission and how the various different measures work, and then they asked people to innovate. If you think of a new way that the vice president did not think of, just call 1922, and your idea will become the next day's press conference.
我們當時的副總統── 陳健仁博士是位學者, 也確實寫過流行病學的教科書。 然而,他仍說: 「我打算要做的是 錄製大規模開放線上課堂, 關於流行病學的速成班, 並且和第一天 註冊參加的兩千人分享, 我是其中之一, 去了解重要的概念, 像是 R0 基本傳染數 以及各種不同的措施如何運作, 接著,他們邀請大家創新。 如果你能想出 副總統沒有想出的新方法, 只要播打 1922, 你的想法就會出現在隔天的記者會上。
And this is this colearning strategy, I think, that more than anything enabled the social cohesion, as you speak. But this is more of a robust civil society than the uniformity. There's no uniformity at all in Taiwan, everybody is entitled to their ideas, and all the social innovations, ranging from using a traditional rice cooker to revitalize, to disinfect the mask, to pink medical mask, and so on, there's all variety of very interesting ideas that get amplified by the daily press conference.
我想,這種共同學習的策略 才是你所說的社會團結 背後的關鍵。 但,重點比較是在穩健的公民社會 而不是一致性。 在台灣完全沒有一致性, 每個人都能提出自己的想法, 還有所有這些社會創新, 從用傳統的電鍋, 將口罩殺菌重複利用, 到粉紅色的醫療口罩等等, 有各式各樣很有趣的點子, 透過每日記者會放大。
DB: That's beautiful. Now -- oh, Whitney is back, so I will let her ask the next question.
比:那真的很好。 現在——喔,惠妮回來了, 先讓她問下一個問題吧。
WPR: Sure, we're having some more questions come in. One from our community member Aria Bendix. Aria asked, "How do you ensure that digital campaigns act quickly without sacrificing accuracy? In the US, there was a fear of inciting panic about COVID-19 in early January."
羅:好的,我們還有 陸續收到一些問題。 我們的社群成員艾莉亞·班迪克斯 提出一個問題。 艾莉亞問:「要如何 確保數位活動能快速執行, 同時不犧牲正確性? 在美國,一月初時出現一波恐慌, 害怕對疫情的過度煽動。」
AT: This is a great question. So most of the scientific ideas about the COVID are evolving, right? The efficacy of masks, for example, is a very good example, because the different characteristics of previous respiratory diseases respond differently to the facial mask. And so, our digital campaigns focus on the idea of getting the rough consensus through. So basically, it's a reflection of the society, through Polis, through Slido, through the joint platform, the various tools that vTaiwan has prototyped, we know that people are feeling a rough consensus about things and we're responding to the society, saying, "This is what you all feel and this is what we're doing to respond to your feelings.
唐:這是個好問題。 關於新型冠狀病毒的科學點子 在不斷演化,對吧? 比如,口罩的效力就是個好例子, 因為先前不同的呼吸系統疾病 有不同的特性, 對口罩也會有不同的反應。 所以,我們的數位活動 把焦點放在能夠取得粗略的共識。 也就是反映出社會的共識, 藉由 Polis、Slido、任何協作的平台、 vTaiwan 設計原型使用的多種工具, 我們知道人民對於事物的粗略共識, 而我們在對社會做出回應,說: 「這是你們大家的感受, 我們打算這樣回應你們的感受。
And the scientific consensus is still developing, but we know, for example, people feel that wearing a mask mostly protects you, because it reminds you to not touch your face and wash your hands properly." And these, regardless of everything else, are the two things that everybody agrees with. So we just capitalize on that and say, "OK, wash your hands properly, and don't touch your face, and wearing a mask reminds you of that." And that lets us cut through the kind of, very ideologically charged debates and focus on what people generally resonate with one another. And that's how we act quickly without sacrificing scientific accuracy.
科學上的共識仍然在發展中, 但我們知道,比如, 大家覺得戴上口罩最能保護你, 因為它能提醒你不要觸碰臉, 且要好好洗手。」 先不管其他, 這兩件事是大家都同意的。 所以我們就利用它們,說: 「好的,要好好洗手, 且不要觸碰你的臉, 戴口罩能提醒你這些事。」 這種做法讓我們可以克服 充滿意識形態的辯論, 把焦點放在大家普遍的共鳴。 那就是為什麼我們 能快速又不犧牲科學正確性。
WPR: And this next question sort of feels connected to this as well. It's a question from an anonymous community member. "Pragmatically, do you think any of your policies could be applied in the United States under the current Trump administration?"
羅:下一個問題或許和這個問題有關聯。 這個問題來自匿名的社群成員。 「在實用面上,你認為你們的政策 有哪些可以應用在 目前由川普執政的美國?」
AT: Quite a few, actually. We work with many states in the US and abroad on what we call "epicenter to epicenter diplomacy." (Laughs) So what we're doing essentially is, for example, there was a chat bot in Taiwan that lets you, but especially people under home quarantine, to ask the chat bot anything. And if there is a scientific adviser who already wrote a frequently asked question, the chat bot just responds with that, but otherwise, they will call the science advisory board and write an accessible response to that, and the spokesdog would translate that into a cute dog meme.
唐:其實有不少。 我們和美國許多州及他國合作, 進行「震央對震央外交」。(笑) 基本上,我們在做的是, 比如,在台灣有個聊天機器人, 讓你,特別是居家隔離的人, 可以問聊天機器人任何事。 如果有一位科學顧問 已經寫好了常見問題, 聊天機器人就會照劇本回應, 要不然,他們就會找國外的科學顧問 來撰寫回應, 而發言狗會把它轉換成可愛小狗迷因。
And so this feedback cycle of people very easily accessing, finding, and asking a scientist, and an open API that allows for voice assistance and other third-party developers to get through it, resonates with many US states, and I think many of them are implementing it. And before the World Health Assembly, I think three days before, we held a 14 countries [unclear] lateral meeting, kind of, pre-WHA, where we shared many small, like, quick wins like this. And I think many jurisdictions took some of that, including the humor versus rumor. Many of them said that they're going to recruit comedians now.
這個回饋循環 讓大家能容易接觸、 找到、詢問科學家, 還附有開放的 API 供語音助理使用, 其他第三方開發者也能取用它, 美國許多州有共鳴, 且許多州已經在導入它。 在世界衛生大會 WHA 之前大概三天左右, 我們舉辦了 14 國的橫向會議, 有點像 WHA 會前會, 會中我們分享了一些 小型且快速見效的方法。 我相信有許多國家採納了分享, 包括幽默 vs. 謠言。 很多人說, 他們現在要招募一些喜劇演員。
WPR: (Laughs) I love that.
羅:(笑)我喜歡這點。
DB: I hope so.
比:希望如此。
WPR: I hope so too. And we have one more question, which is actually a follow-up, from Michael Backes, who asked a question earlier. "Does the Ministry plan to publish their plans in a white paper?" Sounds like you're already sharing your plans with folks, but do you have a plan to put it out on paper?
羅:我也希望如此。 我們還有一個算是接連先前的問題, 來自先前發問的麥可`貝克斯。 「政府是否打算把他們的計畫 以白皮書的形式出版?」 聽起來你們已經在和大家 分享你們的計畫, 但你們是否有打算以書面形式出版?
AT: Of course. Yeah, and multiple white papers. So if you go to taiwancanhelp.us, that is where most of our strategy is, and that website is actually crowdsourced as well, and it shows that more than five million now, I think, medical masks donated to the humanitarian aid. It's also crowdsourced. People who have some masks in their homes, who did not collect the rationed masks, they can use an app, say, "I want to dedicate this to international humanitarian aid," and half of them choose to publish their names, so you can also see the names of people who participated in this. And there's also an "Ask Taiwan Anything" website,
唐:當然。 是的,且是數本白皮書。 在 taiwancanhelp.us 網站上 可以看到我們大部分的策略, 那個網站其實也是群眾外包的, 上面顯示,我想目前已經捐助了 500 萬個醫療口罩給人道救援。 口罩也是群眾外包的。 有些人家中有些口罩, 他們沒有去領分配的口罩, 他們可以用 APP,說: 「我想要把這口罩捐給國際人道救援。」 有一半的人選擇公開自己的姓名, 所以你也可以看到參與此活動的人名。 還有「什麼都可以問台灣」網站,
(Laughs)
(笑)
at fightcovid.edu.tw, that outlines, in white paper form, all the response strategies, so check those out.
網址是 fightcovid.edu.tw。 在那裡,所有的因應策略 都以白皮書的形式提供, 可以去看看。
WPR: Great. Well, I will disappear and be back later with some other questions.
羅:好極了。 我要先告退,等會兒再帶其他問題回來。
DB: A blizzard of white papers, if you will. I'd like to turn the focus on you a little bit. How does a conservative anarchist become a digital minister?
比:可說是有大量的白皮書。 我想要把焦點稍微轉到你身上。 一名保守的無政府主義者 如何化身為數位政務委員?
AT: Yeah, by occupying the parliament, and through that.
唐:透過佔領國會。
(Laughs)
(笑)
More interestingly, I would say that I go working with the government, but never for the government. And I work with the people, not for the people. I'm like this Lagrange point between the people's movements on one side and the government on the other side. Sometimes right in the middle, trying to do some coach or translation work. Sometimes in a kind of triangle point, trying to supply both sides with tools for prosocial communication. But always with this idea of getting the shared values out of different positions, out of varied positions. Because all too often, democracy is built as a showdown between opposing values.
更有趣的是, 我會說我與政府一起做事, 但從不是為政府做事。 我與人民一起做事, 但不是為人民做事。 我就像是拉格朗日點(平動點), 一邊是人民的運動, 另一邊則是政府。 有時就在中間, 試著做一些指導或翻譯的工作。 有時則像是三角形的點, 試圖供應雙方工具,做利社會溝通。 但不變的想法是: 要從不同立場、各種立場的人身上 找到共同的價值觀。 因為,民主太常變成價值觀的對決。
But in the pandemic, in the infodemic, in climate change, in many of those structural issues, the virus or carbon dioxide doesn't sit down and negotiate with you. It's a structural issue that requires common values built out of different positions. And so that is why my working principle is radical transparency. Every conversation, including this one, is on the record, including the internal meetings that I hold. So you can see all the different meeting transcripts in my YouTube channel, in the SayIt platform, where people can see, after I became digital minister, I held 1,300 meetings with more than 5,000 speakers, with more than 260,000 utterances. And every one of them has a URL that becomes a social object that people can have a conversation on.
但在疫情時,假訊息大流行時, 在氣候變遷時, 在許多結構性議題中, 病毒或二氧化碳並不會坐下來和你協商。 處理結構性議題,就需要 從不同的立場找到共同的價值觀。 那就是為什麼我的工作原則是極度透明。 所有的對談,包括這場對談, 都會記錄下來, 包括我主持的網路會議。 所有的會議文字記錄都會公開, 可以在我的 YouTube 頻道, 在 SayIt 平台上找到, 在那裡可以看到, 我成為數位大臣之後, 我主持了 1,300 場會議, 有超過 5,000 位講者, 超過 26 萬則觀點被表達出來。 每一個會議都有一個網址, 可以成為大家談論的社會主題。
And because of that, for example, when Uber's David Plouffe visited me to lobby for Uber, because of radical transparency, he is very much aware of that, and so he made all the arguments based on public good, based on sustainability, and things like that, because he knows that the other sides would see his positions very clearly and transparently. So that encourages people to add on each other's argument, instead of attacking each other's person, you know, credits and things like that. And so I think that, more than anything, is the main principle of conserving the anarchism of the internet, which is about, you know, nobody can force anyone to hook to the internet, or to adhere to a new internet protocol. Everything has to be done using rough consensus and running code.
因此, 比如,當優步的大衛·普洛菲 拜訪我進行遊說, 因為極度透明, 他非常清楚這一點, 所以他所有的論點都以公共利益為基礎, 以永續性為基礎, 因為他知道其他各方的人 可以非常清楚、透明地看見他的立場。 那就會鼓勵大家去深入彼此的論點, 而不是對彼此做人身攻擊, 比如攻擊對方的信用等等。 我認為,最重要的原則是: 保留網路的無政府主義, 也就是 沒有人可以強迫任何人對網路上癮, 或者遵守新的網際協定。 粗略的共識和進擊的程式,就是準則。
DB: I wish you had more counterparts all around the world. Maybe you wish you had more counterparts all around the world.
比:我真希望全世界有更多像你這樣的人。 也許你也希望全世界有更多像你這樣的人。
AT: That's why these ideas are worth spreading.
唐:因為這些想法正是 「值得傳播的想法」。
DB: There you go. So one of the challenges that might arise with some of these digital tools is access. How do you approach that part of it for folks maybe who don't have the best broadband connection or the latest mobile phone or whatever it might be that's required?
比:沒錯。 這些數位工具可能會帶來的 挑戰之一就是: 接觸管道。 你要如何處理這個部分, 協助連線頻寬不夠的人, 或者沒有手機或其他必備品的人?
AT: Well, anywhere in Taiwan, even on the top of Taiwan, almost 4,000 meters high, the Saviah, or the Jade Mountain, you're guaranteed to have 10 megabits per second over 4G or fiber or cable, with just 16 US dollars a month, an unlimited plan. And actually, on the top of the mountain, it's faster, fewer people use that bandwidth. And if you don't, it's my fault. It's personally my fault. In Taiwan, we have broadband as a human right. And so when we're deploying 5G, we're looking at places where the 4G has the weakest signal, and we begin with those places in our 5G deployment. And only by deploying broadband as a human right can we say that this is for everybody. That digital democracy actually strengthens democracy. Otherwise, we would be excluding parts of the society.
唐:在台灣的任何地方, 就算是在台灣最高 將近四千公尺的海拔, 也就是玉山的山頂, 都保證取得 10MB/s 的網速, 透過 4G 或有線網路, 且一個月只要 16 美金 就可以有網路吃到飽。 其實,在山頂上傳輸速度還更快, 因為用頻寬的人少。 若你沒有這種頻寬,是我的責任, 是我的職責。 在台灣,寬頻是人權。 當我們部署 5G 網路時, 我們找 4G 訊號最弱的地方, 我們的 5G 網路部署從那些地方開始。 只有把寬頻當作人權來部署, 我們才能說這是人人都享有的。 數位民主是會強化民主的。 否則社會某些部分就會被排除。
And this also applies to, for example, you can go to a local digital opportunity center to rent a tablet that's guaranteed to be manufactured in the past three years, and things like that, to enable, also, the different digital access by the digital opportunity centers, universities and schools, and public libraries, very important. And if people who prefer to talk in their town hall, I personally go to that town hall with a 360 recorder, and livestream that to Taipei and to other municipalities, where the central government's public servants can join in a connected room style, but listening to the local people who set the agenda. So people still do face-to-face meetings, we're not doing this to replace face-to-face meetings. We're bringing more stakeholders from central government in the local town halls, and we're amplifying their voices by making sure the transcripts, the mind maps, and things like that are spread through the internet in real time, but we don't ever ask the elderly to, say, "Oh, you have to learn typing, otherwise you don't do democracy." It's not our style. But that requires broadband. Because if you don't have broadband, but only a very limited bandwidth, you are forced to use text-based communication.
這也可以應用在,比如, 你可以去當地的機會中心, 去租借平板電腦,保證是 過去三年間出產的新貨, 像這類的事情, 讓你有多種管道與數位聯結, 可透過數位機會中心、大學、學校, 還有公立圖書館,這非常重要。 如果有人偏好在市民大會中發言, 我會親自帶著 360 度攝影機去市民大會, 向台北及其他縣市進行直播, 在直播中,中央政府的公僕可以 加入到連線聊天室, 但傾聽當地人設定的議程。 大家仍然會開面對面的會議, 我們所做的並不是取代面對面會議。 我們是把更多利害關係人 從中央政府帶到當地的公民大會中, 我們在放大他們的聲音── 透過:文字記錄、心智圖等方法── 在網路上即時傳播出去, 但我們絕對不會要求長者,比如: 「喔,你必須要學打字, 不然你就不能參與民主。」 那不是我們的風格。 但那需要寬頻。 若沒有寬頻,只有很窄的頻寬, 你就會被迫使用文字溝通。
DB: That's right. Well, with access, of course, comes access for folks who maybe will misuse the platform. You talked a little bit about disinformation and using humor to beat rumor. But sometimes, disinformation is more weaponized. How do you combat those kinds of attacks, really?
比:沒錯。 當然,隨著能夠運用, 就會有些濫用數位平台的人。 你先前談了一些假資訊, 以及用幽默打敗謠言。 但有時,假資訊會被當作武器。 你要如何對抗那種攻擊?
AT: Right, so you mean malinformation, then. So essentially, information designed to cause intentional public harm. And that's no laughing matter. So for that, we have an idea called "notice and public notice." So this is a Reuters photo, and I will read the original caption. The original caption says "A teenage extradition bill protester in Hong Kong is seen during a march to demand democracy and political reform in Hong Kong." OK, a very neutral title by the Reuters. But there was a spreading of malinformation back last November, just leading to our presidential election, that shows something else entirely. This is the same photo -- that says "This 13-year-old thug bought new iPhones, game consoles and brand-name sports shoes, and recruiting his brothers to murder police and collect 200,000 dollars." And this, of course, is a weapon designed to sow discord, and to elicit in Taiwan's voters a kind of distaste for Hong Kong.
唐:好,所以你指的是惡意資訊。 就是意圖導致公眾損害的資訊。 那可不是開玩笑的。 對此,我們有一個想法, 叫做「注意並公告」。 這是路透社的照片, 讓我把原始的標題讀出來。 原始的標題寫著: 「香港有位抗議引渡法案的青少年 出現在遊行中, 要求香港的民主及政治改革。」 路透社的標題非常中立。 但在去年十一月 發生了惡意資訊的散播, 和我們的總統選舉有關, 內容全然不同。 這是同一張照片,上面寫著 「這位 13 歲的暴徒買了新的 iPhone、 遊戲主機,及名牌運動鞋, 並且招集他弟兄們一同去殺警, 酬勞 20 萬美金。」 當然這是一種武器, 設計來種下爭端, 造成台灣的投票者產生對香港的厭惡。
And because they know that this is the main issue. And had we resorted to takedowns, that will not work, because that would only evoke more outrage. So we didn't do a takedown. Instead, we worked with the fact checkers and professional journalists to attribute this original message back to the first day that it was posted. And it came from Zhongyang Zhengfawei. That is the main political and legal unit of the central party, in the Central Communist Party, in CCP. And we know that it's their Weibo account that first did this new caption. So we sent out a public notice and with the partners in social media companies, pretty much all of them, they just put this very small reminder next to each time that this is shared with the wrong caption, that says "This actually came from the central propaganda unit of the CCP. Click here to learn more. To learn about the whole story."
因為他們知道這是當下的重要議題。 如果我們選擇將資訊下架, 並不會有用, 因為那只會促成更多憤怒。 所以我們沒有做下架。 反之,我們和事實查核者 以及專業記者合作, 把這原始的訊息 追溯到 它被張貼出來的第一天。 它來自中央政法委長安劍── 那是主要的政治與法律單位, 隸屬於中國共產黨。 我們知道最初由其微博帳號 發佈這段新的標題。 所以我們發出公告, 通知社群媒體公司中的合作夥伴, 幾乎全都通知了, 每當加上錯誤說明的這張圖片 被分享出去時, 他們就會放上一個小小提醒, 上面說:「這其實是來自 中國共產黨的中央宣傳單位。 若要了解更多完整脈絡,請點選這裡。」
And that, we found, that has worked, because people understand this is then not a news material. This is rather an appropriation of Reuters' news material and a copyright infringement and I think that's part of the [unclear]. In any case, the point is that when people understand that this is an intentional narrative, they won't just randomly share it. They may share it, but with a comment that says "This is what the Zhongyang Zhengfawei is trying to do to our democracy."
我們發現這種方式有效, 因為大家能夠了解這並不是新聞素材。 這是盜用路透社新聞素材 以及侵犯版權, 我想那是貿易協議的一部分。 無論如何,重點是當大家了解 這是刻意捏造的故事, 他們就不會隨機分享它。 他們可能會分享,但會加上註解: 「中央政法委試圖對我們的民主 做出這種行動。」
DB: Seems like some of the global social media companies could learn something from notice and public notice.
比:看來有些全球社群媒體公司 可以從「注意並公告」中學習。
AT: Public notice, that's right.
唐:公告,是的。
DB: What advice would you have for the Twitters and Facebooks and LINEs and WhatsApps, and you name it, of the world?
比:你能否提供些建議 給推特、臉書、Line、WhatsApp 及其他這類公司?
AT: Yeah. So, just before our election, we said to all of them that we're not making a law to kind of punish them. However, we're sharing this very simple fact that there is this norm in Taiwan that we even have a separate branch of the government, the control branch, that published the campaign donation and expense. And it just so occurred to us that in the previous election, the mayoral one, there was a lot of candidates that did not include any social media advertisements in their expense to the Control Yuan. And so essentially, that means that there is a separate amount of political donation and expense that evades public scrutiny. And our Control Yuan published their numbers in raw data form, that is to say, they're not statistics, but individual records of who donated for what cause, when, where, and investigative journalists are very happy, because they can then make investigative reports about the connections between the candidates and the people who fund them.
唐:好的。 在我們的選舉之前, 我們對這些公司說, 我們不會制訂法律懲罰他們。 然而,我們要分享一個非常簡單的事實: 在台灣我們有種規範, 政府甚至有專門獨立的機構, 監察的機構, 負責發佈活動捐獻和費用。 於是我們想到, 在前次選舉,市長選舉, 有許多候選人 沒有列舉任何社群媒體廣告費用, 在交給監察院的費用明細中, 基本上,那就表示政治獻金和費用 有其他項目可以躲避大眾的監督 。 我們的監察院以原始資料的形式 公佈了他們的數字, 原始資料不是統計概要, 而是個別的明細,誰為了什麼理由 在何時何地捐獻, 這讓調查記者非常開心, 因為他們可以做調查報告, 報導候選人和資助他們的人之間的關係。
But they cannot work with the same material from the global social media companies. So I said, "Look, this is very simple. This is the social norm here, I don't really care about other jurisdictions. You either adhere to the social norm that is set by the Control Yuan and the investigative journalists, or maybe you will face social sanctions. And this is not the government mandate, but it's the people fed up with, you know, black box, and that's part of the Sunflower Occupy's demands, also. And so Facebook actually published in the Ad Library, I think at that time, one of the fastest response strategies, where everybody who has basically any dark pattern advertisement will get revealed very quickly, and investigative journalists work with the local civic technologists to make sure that if anybody dare to use social media in such a divisive way, within an hour, there will be a report out condemning that. So nobody tried that during the previous presidential election season.
但全球社群媒體公司就不會 給他們這樣的素材運用。 所以我說:「聽好,這非常簡單。 這是這裡的社會規範, 我不在乎其他的國家。 你可以選擇遵守監察院 和調查記者設下的社會規範, 否則可能會面臨社會制裁。 這並不是政府命令, 而是因為人們受夠了黑箱操作, 這也是部分太陽花運動的要求。 臉書其實也發表在廣告檔案庫, 我認為是當時最快的應對策略之一, 基本上每個行為可疑的帳號 會很快被舉報, 調查記者也和當地的技術人員合作, 保證若有人敢惡意操弄社交媒體, 一個小時內,會有一份報告譴責這種行為。 所以沒人在先前的總統選舉期間嘗試。
DB: So change is possible.
比:所以說改變是可行的。
AT: Mhm.
唐:嗯。
WPR: Hey there, we have some more questions from the community. There is an anonymous one that says, "I believe Taiwan is outside WHO entirely and has a 130-part preparation program -- developed entirely on its own -- to what extent does it credit its preparation to building its own system?"
羅:我們還有些來自社群的問題。 這是一位匿名人士, 說「我想臺灣未加入世界衛生組織, 而有超過 130 項的防疫相關程式, 完全自行開發, 它在多大程度上歸功於 建立自己系統的準備?」
AT: Well, a little bit, I guess. We tried to warn the WHO, but at that point -- we are not totally outside, we have limited scientific access. But we do not have any ministerial access. And this is very different, right? If you only have limited scientific access, unless the other side's top epidemiologist happens to be the vice president, like in Taiwan's case, they don't always do the storytelling well enough to translate that into political action as our vice president did, right? So the lack of ministerial access, I think, is to the detriment of the global community, because otherwise, people could have responded as we did in the first day of January, instead of having to wait for weeks before the WHO declared that this is something, that there's definitely human to human transmission, that you should inspect people coming in from Wuhan, which they eventually did, but that's already two weeks or three weeks after what we did.
唐:我猜有一小部分。 我們嘗試警告世界衛生組織, 但在那時候 --- 我們沒有完全失聯, 但僅有有限的科學管道。 但我們沒有官方管道。 這是截然不同的,對吧? 如果你只有有限的科學管道, 除非該國的頂尖流行病學家 碰巧是副總統, 就像臺灣的情況一樣, 專家不總是能有效地 將道理轉化為政治行動, 就像我們的副總統一樣,對吧? 所以缺乏官方管道,我認為, 對世界而言是種損失, 否則大家也能像台灣一樣反應, 在一月的第一天, 不是等待數週後, 直到世界衛生組織宣佈, 這確認會是人傳人的病毒, 你需要對來自武漢的人檢查, 他們最終這麼做了, 但這是在我們已經行動 2~3 週後才做的。
WPR: Makes a lot of sense.
羅:很有道理。
DB: More scientists and technologists in politics. That sounds like that's the answer.
比:更多的科學家和技術人員參與政治。 聽起來這就是答案。
AT: Yeah.
唐:是啊。
WPR: And then we have another question here from Kamal Srinivasan about your reopening strategy. "How are you enabling restaurants and retailers to open safely in Taiwan?"
羅:現在是來自卡瑪律·施尼瓦桑的問題, 關於你們的重新開放策略。 「你們如何確保臺灣的餐廳 和零售商安全地營業?」
AT: Oh, they never closed, so ... (Laughs)
唐: 啊,他們從來都沒停業, 所以...(笑)
WPR: Oh!
羅:啊!(驚訝)
AT: Yeah, they never closed, there was no lockdown, there was no closure. We just said a very simple thing in the CECC press conference, that there's going to be physical distancing. You maintain one and a half meters indoors or wear a mask. And that's it. And so there are some restaurants that put up, I guess, red curtains, some put very cute teddy bears and so on, on the chairs, to make sure that people spread evenly, some installed see-through glass or plastic walls between the seats. There's various social innovations happening around. And I think the only shops that got closed for a while, because they could not innovate quick enough to respond to these rules, was the intimate escort bars. But eventually, even they invented new ways, by handing out these caps that are plastic shielding, but still leaves room for drinking behind it. And so they opened with that social innovation.
唐: 對,他們從未關閉, 沒有封城,沒有停業。 我們在 CECC 新聞發佈會上說得很簡單, 將會有實體距離。 你需要在室內保持 1.5 米的距離 或者戴口罩。 就這樣。 有些餐廳放了,我猜,紅色簾子, 有些放了很可愛的泰迪熊 諸如此類的物品在椅子上, 確保人平均分散, 還有些餐廳安裝了可視玻璃或塑膠牆 在座位之間。 各種各樣的社會創新就在週遭發生。 我認為唯一稍微停業的業者, 是因為來不及因應新常規, 是那些親密的陪酒酒吧。 但最終,他們也發明了新方法, 做法是發放面罩, 方便喝飲料的塑膠面罩, 之後,他們透過這項創新正常地營業了。
DB: That's amazing.
比:太棒了!
WPR: It is, yeah, it's a lot to learn from your strategies there. Thank you, I'll be back towards the end with some final questions.
羅:的確,從你說的策略裡 我們能學到很多。 謝謝。 我會在尾聲時送來最後的問題。
DB: I'm very happy to hear that the restaurants were not closed down, because I think Taipei has some of the best food in the world of any city that I've visited, so, you know, kudos to you for that. So the big concern when it comes to using digital tools for COVID or using digital tools for democracy is always privacy. You've talked about that a little bit, but I'm sure the citizens of Taiwan are perhaps equally concerned about their privacy, especially given the geopolitical context.
比:很高興聽到餐廳沒有停業, 在我的經驗中, 台北相較其他城市,有著更多的美食。 為你們對此感到佩服。 那麼, 在使用數位化工具應對新冠, 或為了民主使用數位化工具時, 隱私是一個很大的擔憂。 你稍微聊到這個主題, 但我相信臺灣的民眾 可能也同樣關心自己的隱私, 特別是考慮到地理政治背景。那麼...
AT: Definitely.
唐: 當然。
DB: So how do you cope with those demands?
比:那麼你們如何應對這些需求?
AT: Yeah, we design with not only defensive strategy, like minimization of data collection, but also proactive measures, such as privacy-enhancing technologies. One of the top teams that emerged out of our cohack, the TW response from the Polis, how to make contact tracing easier, focused not on the contact tracers, not on the medical officers, but on the person. So they basically said, "OK, you have a phone, you can record your temperatures, you can record your whereabouts and things like that, but that is strictly in your phone. It doesn't even use Bluetooth. So there's no transmission. Technology uses open-source, you can check it, you can use it in airplane mode. And when the contact tracer eventually tells you that you are part of a high-risk group, and they really want your contact history, this tool can then generate a single-use URL that only contains the precise information, anonymized, that the contact tracers want.
唐:是啊,我們不僅設計了防範措施, 例如:最少化的資料收集, 還有積極主動的措施, 比如:加強隱私的技術。 從我們的「防疫松」中 脫穎而出的頂級團隊之一, 來自 Polis 平臺的 TW 回應, 如何更方便地追蹤聯絡史, 不是關注於追蹤者, 也不是關注醫務人員, 而是在於被追蹤的人。 總之他們會說好吧,你有一部手機, 你能記錄你的體溫, 你能記錄行蹤或是其他事情, 但這些資訊嚴格保存在你的手機上。 甚至不使用藍牙, 所以資訊沒有傳播。 這個技術使用開放原始碼, 你能檢查它,你能在飛行模式時使用它。 當追蹤人員最終告訴你, 你屬於新冠高風險族群, 他們需要你接觸史, 這個工具能生成一次性網址連結, 這個網址只包含了 追蹤者所需的匿名明確資訊。 但這不會像傳統的面談,
But it will not, like in a traditional interview, let you ask -- they ask a question, they only want to know your whereabouts, but you answer with such accuracy that you end up compromising other people's privacy. So basically, this is about designing with an aim to enhance other people's privacy, because personal data is never truly personal. It's always social, it's always intersectional. If I take a selfie at a party, I inadvertently also take pretty much everybody else's who are in the picture, the surroundings, the ambiance, and so on, and if I upload it to a cloud service, then I actually decimate the bargaining power, the negotiation power of everybody around me, because then their data is part of the cloud, and the cloud doesn't have to compensate them or get their agreement for it.
像是他們發問,只想知道你的行蹤記錄, 但你為了精確地回答, 同時也暴露了他人的隱私。 所以基本上, 這設計始於保護他人隱私。 因為個人資訊從來都不是純粹私人的。 它總是社交性的、互相關聯的。 如果我在派對上拍一張自拍, 我不經意間也拍下了別人 誰在照片裡,週圍是什麼,氣氛等等, 如果我把這張照片上傳到雲端, 那麼我實際上降低了議價能力, 以及我週圍每個人的談判權, 因為他們的資訊也是雲端的一部分, 雲端不必補償他們 或是得到他們的同意。
And so only by designing the tools with privacy enhancing as a positive value, and not enhancing only the person's own privacy, just like a medical mask, it protects you, but mostly it also protects others, right? So if we design tools using that idea, and always open-source and with an open API, then we're in a much better shape than in centralized or so-called cloud-based services.
所以只有藉由設計工具 以提高隱私為正向指標, 不僅增強個人的隱私, 像是醫用口罩,它保護了你, 也在大多數情況下保護他人,對不對? 所以若我們依此想法設計工具, 並且始終保持開源,並帶有開放的 API, 那麼我們的狀況要比 集中式或所謂的雲端服務好得多。
DB: Well, you're clearly living in the future, and I guess that's quite literal, in the sense of, it's tomorrow morning there.
比:嗯,你顯然生活在未來, 而這不只是比喻, 你那邊也已經是明天早上。
AT: Twelve hours.
唐:12 小時。
DB: Yes. Tell me, what do you see in the future? What comes next?
比:是的。 告訴我:你眼中的未來, 接下來會發生什麼?
AT: Yes, so I see the coronavirus as a great amplifier. If you start with an authoritarian society, the coronavirus, with all its lockdowns and so on, has the potential of making it even a more totalitarian society. If people place their trust, however, on the social sector, on the ingenuity of social innovators, then the pandemic, as in Taiwan, actually strengthens our democracy, so that people feel, truly, that everybody can think of something that improves the welfare of not just Taiwan, but pretty much everybody else in the world.
唐: 好的,我認為新冠病毒 是一個很好的放大器。 如果你從一個專制社會開始, 新冠病毒,以及它帶來的封鎖等等, 有可能造就一個更極權主義的社會。 但是,如果人們將他們的信任 託付於社會各部門上, 信任社會創新者的聰明才智, 那麼這場大流行,就像在台灣一樣, 實際上強化了我們的民主, 讓人們真正感受到,每個人都可以想出一些 改善福利的事情, 不僅是在台灣,而是世界上幾乎所有其他人。
And so, my point here is that the great amplifier comes if no matter you want it or not, but the society, what they can do, is do what Taiwan did after SARS. In 2003, when SARS came, we had to shut down an entire hospital, barricading it with no definite termination date. It was very traumatic, everybody above the age of 30 remembers how traumatic it was. The municipalities and the central government were saying very different things, and that is why after SARS, the constitutional courts charged the legislature to set up the system as you see today, and also that is why, when people responding to that crisis back in 2003 built this very robust response system that there's early drills.
所以,我的意思是, 不管你願意不願意,大放大器都會來, 但社會能做的 就是做 SARS 之後台灣做的事情。 2003年 SARS 來臨時, 我們不得不關閉了整個醫院,封鎖了它, 沒有明確的終止日期。 這是非常痛苦的, 30 歲以上的每個人 都記得那是多麼的痛苦。 市政當局和中央政府的說法截然不同, 這就是為什麼在 SARS 之後, 憲法法院要求立法機關 建立你今天看到的系統, 這也是為什麼人們在 2003 年 應對那場危機時 建立了這個非常強大的響應系統, 有早期的演習。
So just as the Sunflower Occupy, because of the crisis in trust let us build new tools that put trust first, I think the coronavirus is the chance for everybody who have survived through the first wave to settle on a new set of norms that will reinforce your founding values, instead of taking on alien values in the name of survival.
因此,就像向日葵佔領運動一樣, 信任危機讓我們建立 把信任放在首位的新工具, 我認為冠狀病毒是個機會, 讓每個第一波浪潮中的倖存者 有機會建立一套新的規範 強化你的創始價值觀, 而不是以生存為名,接受外來的價值觀。
DB: Yeah, let's hope so, and let's hope the rest of the world is as prepared as Taiwan the next time around. When it comes to digital democracy, though, and digital citizenship, where do you see that going, both in Taiwan and maybe in the rest of the world?
比:沒錯,我們希望如此, 我們希望下一次世界其他地方 方 也像台灣一樣做好準備。 然而談到數字民主和數字公民時, 您認為這在台灣 和世界其他地方的走向為何?
AT: Well, I have my job description here, which I will read to you. It's literally my job description and the answer to that question. And so, here goes. When we see the internet of things, let's make it the internet of beings. When we see virtual reality, let's make it a shared reality. When we see machine learning, let's make it collaborative learning. When we see user experience, let's make it about human experience. And whenever we hear the singularity is near, let us always remember the plurality is here. Thank you for listening.
唐:我讀我的工作描述給你聽。 這實際上是我的工作描述 和這個問題的答案。 我們看見「萬物聯網」, 願我們將智慧聯網。 我們看見「虛擬實境」, 願我們將實境共享。 我們看見「機器學習」, 願我們能協力學習。 我們看見「用戶體驗」, 願我們能體驗人際。 我們聽到「奇點即將接近」, 但願我們惦記:「眾點」就在這裡。 謝謝你的聆聽。
DB: Wow. I have to give that a little clap, that was beautiful.
比:哇。我必須稍稍鼓掌,太美了。
(Laughs)
(笑聲)
Quite a job description too. So, conservative anarchist, digital minister, and with that job description -- that's pretty impressive.
職位描述得很不錯。 保守的無政府主義者、數字部長, 以及這份工作描述—— 比:這令人印象深刻。 唐:是個詩人。
AT: A poetician, yes.
DB: (Laughs) So I struggle to imagine an adoption of these techniques in the US, and that may be my pessimism weighing in. But what words of hope do you have for the US, as we cope with COVID?
(笑聲) 比:那麼, 我很難想像美國會採用這些技術, 這可能是我的悲觀情緒在起作用。 但是當我們應對 COVID 時, 你對美國有什麼希望的話?
AT: Well, as I mentioned, during SARS in Taiwan, nobody imagined we could have CECC and a cute spokesdog. Before the Sunflower movement, during a large protest, there was, I think, half a million people on the street, and many more. Nobody thought that we could have a collective intelligence system that puts open government data as a way to rebuild citizen participation. And so, never lose hope. As my favorite singer, Leonard Cohen -- a poet, also -- is fond of saying, "Ring the bells that still can ring and forget any perfect offering. There is a crack in everything and that is how the light gets in."
唐:就像我提到的,在台灣 SARS 期間, 沒有人想到我們會有 CECC 和一隻可愛的代言狗。 在向日葵運動之前, 在一場大規模的抗議活動中, 我想,街上有 50 萬人,甚至更多。 沒有人認為我們會有一個集體情報系統, 將開放的政府數據 作為重建公民參與的一種方式。 所以,永遠不要失去希望。 正如我喜歡的歌手兼詩人 倫納德·科恩(Leonard Cohen) 喜歡說的那樣: 「鐘能敲響就敲響, 十全樽俎莫指望。 萬事萬物都有缺口, 缺口就是光的入口。」
WPR: Wow. That's so beautiful, and it feels like such a great message to, sort of, leave the audience with, and sharing the sentiment that everyone seems to be so grateful for what you've shared, Audrey, and all the great information and insight into Taiwan's strategies.
羅:哇。太美了。 感覺就是留給觀眾很棒的信息和情緒。 唐鳳,大家都非常感激你的分享, 所有偉大的信息、慧眼和台灣的策略。
AT: Thank you.
唐:謝謝。
WPR: And David --
DB: I was just going to say, thank you so much for that, thank you for that beautiful job description, and for all the wisdom you shared in rapid-fire fashion. I think it wasn't just one idea that you shared, but maybe, I don't know, 20, 30, 40? I lost count at some point.
比:我只是想說非常感謝你, 感謝你漂亮的職位描述, 和你快速分享的所有智慧。 您不僅僅分享一個想法, 而是 20、30、40 個想法? 我數不清了。 (笑聲)
AT: Well, it's called Ideas Worth Spreading, it's a plural form.
唐:它叫做 Ideas Worth Spreading, 複數形式。
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
DB: Very true. Well, thank you so much for joining us.
比:非常正確。非常感謝你參與。 羅:謝謝你,唐鳳。 比:祝你一切順利。
WPR: Thank you, Audrey.
DB: And I wish you luck with everything.
AT: Thank you, and have a good local time. Stay safe.
唐:謝謝。祝您在本地愉快,平平安安。