Once upon a time, the world was a big, dysfunctional family. It was run by the great and powerful parents, and the people were helpless and hopeless naughty children. If any of the more rowdier children questioned the authority of the parents, they were scolded. If they went exploring into the parents' rooms, or even into the secret filing cabinets, they were punished, and told that for their own good they must never go in there again.
Nekada davno, svet je bio velika i nefunkcionalna porodica. Njom su vladali veliki i moćni roditelji, a narod su bila nezaštićena i beznadežna, bezobrazna deca. Ako bi neka od agresivnije dece preispitivala autoritet roditelja, grdili bi ih. Ako bi išli u sobu roditelja da bi istraživali ili čak otvarali tajne fioke, bili su kažnjavani i govoreno im je da za njihovo dobro ne smeju nikada više tamo da ulaze.
Then one day, a man came to town with boxes and boxes of secret documents stolen from the parents' rooms. "Look what they've been hiding from you," he said. The children looked and were amazed. There were maps and minutes from meetings where the parents were slagging each other off. They behaved just like the children. And they made mistakes, too, just like the children. The only difference was, their mistakes were in the secret filing cabinets. Well, there was a girl in the town, and she didn't think they should be in the secret filing cabinets, or if they were, there ought to be a law to allow the children access. And so she set about to make it so.
Jednog dana, neki čovek je došao u grad sa mnogo kutija tajnih dokumenata, ukradenih iz roditeljskih soba. "Pogledajte šta su skrivali od vas", rekao je. Deca su pogledala i bila su zadivljena. Tu su se nalazile mape i beleške sa sastanaka gde su se roditelji međusobno svađali. Ponašali su se baš kao ta deca. Pravili su i greške, baš kao deca. Jedina razlika je bila u tome što su se njihove greške nalazile u tajnim fiokama. Postojala je jedna devojka u gradu koja nije mislila da one treba da budu u tajnim fiokama ili ukoliko su i bile, da bi trebalo da postoji zakon koji dozvoljava deci da im pristupe. Odlučila je da učini sve da do toga dođe.
Well, I'm the girl in that story, and the secret documents that I was interested in were located in this building, the British Parliament, and the data that I wanted to get my hands on were the expense receipts of members of Parliament. I thought this was a basic question to ask in a democracy. (Applause) It wasn't like I was asking for the code to a nuclear bunker, or anything like that, but the amount of resistance I got from this Freedom of Information request, you would have thought I'd asked something like this.
Ja sam devojka iz priče, a tajna dokumenta za koja sam bila zainteresovana nalazila su se u ovoj zgradi, britanskom Parlamentu, dok su se podaci koje sam želela da dobijem, odnosili na potvrde o troškovima skupštinskih poslanika. Smatrala sam da je to osnovno pitanje koje treba postaviti u demokratiji. (Aplauz) Nisam ja tražila šifru za nuklearni bunker ili bilo šta slično, ali nivo otpora na koji sam naišla na zahtev koji je zagarantovan slobodnim pristupom informacijama, bi vam delovao kao da sam zatražila nešto slično.
So I fought for about five years doing this, and it was one of many hundreds of requests that I made, not -- I didn't -- Hey, look, I didn't set out, honestly, to revolutionize the British Parliament. That was not my intention. I was just making these requests as part of research for my first book. But it ended up in this very long, protracted legal battle and there I was after five years fighting against Parliament in front of three of Britain's most eminent High Court judges waiting for their ruling about whether or not Parliament had to release this data. And I've got to tell you, I wasn't that hopeful, because I'd seen the establishment. I thought, it always sticks together. I am out of luck.
Borila sam se oko pet godina radeći ovo, i ovo je jedan od nekoliko stotina zahteva koje sam poslala, ne - nisam - vidite, iskreno, nisam rešila da napravim promene u britanskom Parlamentu. To nije bila moja namera. Slala sam ove zahteve kao deo istraživanja za moju prvu knjigu. Ali se to završilo u veoma dugačkoj, razvučenoj pravnoj borbi i bila sam tu posle pet godina borbe protiv Parlamenta, ispred troje najeminentnijih sudija britanskog Visokog suda, čekajući presudu o tome da li Parlament treba ili ne treba da izda ove podatke. Moram da priznam da nisam bila optimistična zato što sam videla establišment. Mislila sam da se oni uvek drže zajedno. Nemam šanse.
Well, guess what? I won. Hooray. (Applause)
Znate šta? Pobedila sam. Ura. (Aplauz)
Well, that's not exactly the story, because the problem was that Parliament delayed and delayed releasing that data, and then they tried to retrospectively change the law so that it would no longer apply to them. The transparency law they'd passed earlier that applied to everybody else, they tried to keep it so it didn't apply to them. What they hadn't counted on was digitization, because that meant that all those paper receipts had been scanned in electronically, and it was very easy for somebody to just copy that entire database, put it on a disk, and then just saunter outside of Parliament, which they did, and then they shopped that disk to the highest bidder, which was the Daily Telegraph, and then, you all remember, there was weeks and weeks of revelations, everything from porn movies and bath plugs and new kitchens and mortgages that had never been paid off. The end result was six ministers resigned, the first speaker of the house in 300 years was forced to resign, a new government was elected on a mandate of transparency, 120 MPs stepped down at that election, and so far, four MPs and two lords have done jail time for fraud. So, thank you. (Applause)
Pa, priča nije baš takva, jer je problem bio u tome što je Parlament odlagao objavljivanje podataka, a onda su pokušali da retrospektivno promene zakon kako se ne bi odnosio na njih. Pokušali su da promene zakon o transparentnosti, koji su ranije doneli, kako se ne bi odnosio na njih. Ali nisu računali na digitalizaciju, jer to je značilo da su svi papirni računi elektronski skenirani, što olakšava svakome da kopira celokupnu bazu podataka, snimi je na disk i sa njom odšeta iz Parlamenta, što je i urađeno, a onda je disk prodat najboljem ponuđaču, što je bio "Daily Telegraph", a potom, sećate se, usledile su nedelje i nedelje otkrića, od pornografskih filmova, preko kada, novih kuhinja i hipoteka koje nikad nisu otplaćene. Krajnji rezultat je da je šest ministara dalo otkaze, predsedvajući skupštine, prvi put za 300 godina bio je primoran da da otkaz, izbrana je nova vlada na mandat transparentnosti. Na tim izborima je 120 poslanika dalo otkaze, i do sada su četvoro poslanika i dva lorda odslužili kazne zatvora za proneveru. Hvala. (Aplauz)
Well, I tell you that story because it wasn't unique to Britain. It was an example of a culture clash that's happening all over the world between bewigged and bestockinged officials who think that they can rule over us without very much prying from the public, and then suddenly confronted with a public who is no longer content with that arrangement, and not only not content with it, now, more often, armed with official data itself.
Ova priča nije jedinstvena za Veliku Britaniju. To je bio primer kulturnog sukoba koji se dešava širom sveta između golih i bosih zvaničnika koji misle da mogu da vladaju nama bez mnogo uplitanja javnosti, a onda su odjednom suočeni sa javnošću koja više nije zadovoljna takvim stanjem stvari, i ne samo to, sad je čak i naoružana zvaničnim podacima.
So we are moving to this democratization of information, and I've been in this field for quite a while. Slightly embarrassing admission: Even when I was a kid, I used to have these little spy books, and I would, like, see what everybody was doing in my neighborhood and log it down. I think that was a pretty good indication about my future career as an investigative journalist, and what I've seen from being in this access to information field for so long is that it used to be quite a niche interest, and it's gone mainstream. Everybody, increasingly, around the world, wants to know about what people in power are doing. They want a say in decisions that are made in their name and with their money. It's this democratization of information that I think is an information enlightenment, and it has many of the same principles of the first Enlightenment. It's about searching for the truth, not because somebody says it's true, "because I say so." No, it's about trying to find the truth based on what you can see and what can be tested. That, in the first Enlightenment, led to questions about the right of kings, the divine right of kings to rule over people, or that women should be subordinate to men, or that the Church was the official word of God.
Dakle, krećemo se ka demokratizaciji informacija, a ja sam u ovom polju prilično dugo. Pomalo se stidim da priznam: i kao klinka sam imala špijunske knjige, i gledala bih šta svi u mom komšiluku rade i to bih beležila. Mislim da je to bio prilično dobar pokazatelj moje buduće karijere u istraživačkom novinarstvu, a ono što sam videla, provevši mnogo u ovom polju pristupa informacijama je da je to bilo polje specifičnog interesovanja, a sada postaje mejnstrim. Sve više ljudi širom sveta želi da zna šta ljudi na vlasti rade. Žele da učestvuju u odlukama koje se donose u njihovo ime i sa njihovim novcem. Ova demokratizacija informacija je po mom mišljenju, informatičko prosvetljenje, i deli mnogo istih principa kao prvo Prosvetiteljstvo. Glavna osobina je potraga za istinom, ne zato što neko kaže da je to istina, "jer ja tako kažem". Ne, traži se istina zasnovana na onome što možete videti i što može da se proveri. U prvom Prosvetiteljstvu, to je dovelo do pitanja o uzvišenom pravu kraljeva da vladaju narodom, ili o tome da li bi žene trebalo da su podređene muškarcima, ili da je crkva zvanična reč božija.
Obviously the Church weren't very happy about this, and they tried to suppress it, but what they hadn't counted on was technology, and then they had the printing press, which suddenly enabled these ideas to spread cheaply, far and fast, and people would come together in coffee houses, discuss the ideas, plot revolution.
Naravno, crkva zbog toga nije bila srećna i pokušala je da to suzbije, ali nije računala na tehnologiju, a tada su imali štamparsku presu, koja je odjednom omogućila da se ove ideje prošire jeftino, daleko i brzo, ljudi bi se okupljali u kafanama, razgovarali o idejama, planirali revoluciju.
In our day, we have digitization. That strips all the physical mass out of information, so now it's almost zero cost to copy and share information. Our printing press is the Internet. Our coffee houses are social networks. We're moving to what I would think of as a fully connected system, and we have global decisions to make in this system, decisions about climate, about finance systems, about resources. And think about it -- if we want to make an important decision about buying a house, we don't just go off. I mean, I don't know about you, but I want to see a lot of houses before I put that much money into it. And if we're thinking about a finance system, we need a lot of information to take in. It's just not possible for one person to take in the amount, the volume of information, and analyze it to make good decisions.
Danas, imamo digitalizaciju. To iz informacija ukida fizički aspekt, pa je sada skoro besplatno kopirati i deliti informacije. Naša stamparska presa je internet. Naše kafane su društvene mreže. Krećemo se ka onome što nazivam potpuno povezanim sistemom, i u njemu moramo da donosimo globalne odluke, odluke o klimi, finansijskim sistemima, resursima. Razmislite - Ako želimo da donesemo važnu odluku o kupovini kuće, ne odlazimo tek tako, ne znam za vas, ali ja želim da vidim mnogo kuća pre nego što dam mnogo novca. Ako razmišljamo o finansijskom sistemu, potrebno je da vidimo mnogo informacija. Nije moguće da jedna osoba primi tu količinu informacija, da je analizira i donese dobre odluke.
So that's why we're seeing increasingly this demand for access to information. That's why we're starting to see more disclosure laws come out, so for example, on the environment, there's the Aarhus Convention, which is a European directive that gives people a very strong right to know, so if your water company is dumping water into your river, sewage water into your river, you have a right to know about it. In the finance industry, you now have more of a right to know about what's going on, so we have different anti-bribery laws, money regulations, increased corporate disclosure, so you can now track assets across borders. And it's getting harder to hide assets, tax avoidance, pay inequality. So that's great. We're starting to find out more and more about these systems.
Zato vidimo povećane zahteve za pristup informacijama. Zato viđamo sve više zakona o objavljivanju tako da na primer za ekologiju postoji Arhuska konvencija, koja predstavlja evropske smernice koje ljudima daju snažno pravo da znaju, na primer, da li njihov vodovod ispušta kanalizacionu vodu u reke, imaju pravo da znaju to. U finansijama sada imate više prava da znate šta se dešava, tako da imamo razne zakone protiv korupcije, regulacije novca, povećanu korporativnu transparentnost, tako da se sredstva prate preko granica. Sve je teže sakriti imetak, izbegavati porez i plaćati nejednako radnike. To je sjajno. Počinjemo da otkrivamo sve više i više o ovim sistemima.
And they're all moving to this central system, this fully connected system, all of them except one. Can you guess which one? It's the system which underpins all these other systems. It's the system by which we organize and exercise power, and there I'm talking about politics, because in politics, we're back to this system, this top-down hierarchy. And how is it possible that the volume of information can be processed that needs to in this system? Well, it just can't. That's it. And I think this is largely what's behind the crisis of legitimacy in our different governments right now.
Oni se svi kreću ka ovom centralnom sistemu koji je potpuno povezan. Svi osim jednog. Možete li da pogodite kojeg? To je sistem koji je osnova svih ovih ostalih sistema. To je sistem po kom organizujemo i praktikujemo moć, a pričam o politici, jer se u politici vraćamo na ovaj sistem, hijerarhiju s vrha na dole. Kako je moguće da može da se obradi količina podataka koja je potrebna u ovom sistemu? Jednostavno nije moguće. To je to. Mislim da je ovo velikim delom iza krize legitimiteta u raznim vladama u ovom trenutku.
So I've told you a bit about what I did to try and drag Parliament, kicking and screaming, into the 21st century, and I'm just going to give you a couple of examples of what a few other people I know are doing.
Rekla sam vam nešto o tome šta sam radila kako bih uz šutiranje i vrisku dovukla parlament u 21. vek i samo ću vam pružiti nekoliko primera toga šta rade neki drugi ljudi koje poznajem.
So this is a guy called Seb Bacon. He's a computer programmer, and he built a site called Alaveteli, and what it is, it's a Freedom of Information platform. It's open-source, with documentation, and it allows you to make a Freedom of Information request, to ask your public body a question, so it takes all the hassle out of it, and I can tell you that there is a lot of hassle making these requests, so it takes all of that hassle out, and you just type in your question, for example, how many police officers have a criminal record? It zooms it off to the appropriate person, it tells you when the time limit is coming to an end, it keeps track of all the correspondence, it posts it up there, and it becomes an archive of public knowledge. So that's open-source and it can be used in any country where there is some kind of Freedom of Information law. So there's a list there of the different countries that have it, and then there's a few more coming on board. So if any of you out there like the sound of that and have a law like that in your country, I know that Seb would love to hear from you about collaborating and getting that into your country.
Ovo je Seb Bejkon. On je kompjuterski programer i napravio je sajt pod nazivom Alaveteli, a to je platforma za Slobodu informacija. Otvorenog je izvornog koda, sa dokumentacijom, i dozvoljava vam da napravite zahtev za Slobodu informacija, da javnoj instituciji postavite pitanje, tako da to eliminiše sav napor, i mogu vam reći da je prilično naporno ulagati ove zahteve, tako da toga ovde nema, samo ukucate svoje pitanje. Na primer, koliko policajaca ima krivični dosije? To vas usmeri na odgovarajuću osobu i kaže vam kada ističe vremenski rok, prati svu korespondenciju, postavi je na sajt i to postaje arhiva javnog znanja. To je zasnovano na otvorenom izvornom kodu i može se koristiti u svakoj zemlji gde postoji neki zakon o slobodi informacija. Tu je spisak raznih zemalja koje imaju tako nešto, kao i još nekoliko koje se priključuju. Ukoliko se nekom od vas sviđa kako ovo zvuči i imate takav zakon u svojoj zemlji, znam da bi Seb voleo da se čuje sa vama u vezi sa saradnjom i uvođenjem ovoga u vašoj zemlji.
This is Birgitta Jónsdóttir. She's an Icelandic MP. And quite an unusual MP. In Iceland, she was one of the protesters who was outside of Parliament when the country's economy collapsed, and then she was elected on a reform mandate, and she's now spearheading this project. It's the Icelandic Modern Media Initiative, and they've just got funding to make it an international modern media project, and this is taking all of the best laws around the world about freedom of expression, protection of whistleblowers, protection from libel, source protection, and trying to make Iceland a publishing haven. It's a place where your data can be free, so when we think about, increasingly, how governments want to access user data, what they're trying to do in Iceland is make this safe haven where it can happen.
Ovo je Birgita Jonsdotir. Ona je poslanica u parlamentu Islanda. I to prilično neobična. Ona je bila jedna od protestanata koji su na Islandu bili ispred parlamenta kada je ekonomija te zemlje doživela slom i onda je dobila mandat za reformu i sada vodi ovaj projekat. To je Inicijativa za moderne medije Islanda i upravo su dobili sredstva da od toga naprave međunarodni medijski projekat koji bi uzeo sve najbolje zakone o slobodi izražavanja širom sveta, o zaštiti uzbunjivača, zaštiti od klevete, zaštiti izvora, i ovaj projekat bi od Islanda napravio izdavački raj. To je mesto gde vaši podaci mogu da budu slobodni, tako da kada sve više mislimo o tome kako vlade žele da pristupe podacima, na Islandu pokušavaju da od ovoga naprave raj gde to može da se desi.
In my own field of investigative journalism, we're also having to start thinking globally, so this is a site called Investigative Dashboard. And if you're trying to track a dictator's assets, for example, Hosni Mubarak, you know, he's just funneling out cash from his country when he knows he's in trouble, and what you want to do to investigate that is, you need to have access to all of the world's, as many as you can, companies' house registrations databases. So this is a website that tries to agglomerate all of those databases into one place so you can start searching for, you know, his relatives, his friends, the head of his security services. You can try and find out how he's moving out assets from that country.
U mom polju istraživačkog novinarstva, takođe moramo da mislimo globalno - ovo je sajt koji se zove Istraživačka tabla. Na primer, ako pokušavate da pratite imovinu nekog diktatora, na primer Hosnija Mubaraka, on samo izliva novac iz svoje zemlje kada zna da je u nevolji, i želite da istražite ovo, morate da imate pristup svim bazama podataka, svih mogućih kompanija na svetu, što je više moguće njih. Ovo je sajt koji pokušava da skupi sve te baze podataka na jednom mestu tako da možete da počnete pretragu recimo za njegovim rođacima, prijateljima, šefovima bezbednosnih službi. Možete da pokušate da otkrijete kako izmešta imovinu van zemlje.
But again, when it comes to the decisions which are impacting us the most, perhaps, the most important decisions that are being made about war and so forth, again we can't just make a Freedom of Information request. It's really difficult. So we're still having to rely on illegitimate ways of getting information, through leaks. So when the Guardian did this investigation about the Afghan War, you know, they can't walk into the Department of Defense and ask for all the information. You know, they're just not going to get it. So this came from leaks of tens of thousands of dispatches that were written by American soldiers about the Afghan War, and leaked, and then they're able to do this investigation.
Ali opet, kada su u pitanju odluke koje najviše utiču na nas, možda najbitnije odluke koje se donose u vezi sa ratovima i sličnim stvarima, ne možemo da napravimo zahtev kroz Slobodu informacija. Zaista je teško. Tako još uvek moramo da se oslanjamo na nelegitimne načine dobijanja informacija, kada one procure. Kada je Gardijan sproveo istragu o ratu u Avganistanu, nisu mogli da ušetaju u Ministarstvo odbrane i pitaju za informacije. Jednostavno ih neće dobiti. Ovo je došlo iz procurelih informacija iz desetina hiljada obaveštenja koja su napisali američki vojnici o ratu u Avganistanu i koja su procurela, i mogu da vode ovu istragu.
Another rather large investigation is around world diplomacy. Again, this is all based around leaks, 251,000 U.S. diplomatic cables, and I was involved in this investigation because I got this leak through a leak from a disgruntled WikiLeaker and ended up going to work at the Guardian. So I can tell you firsthand what it was like to have access to this leak. It was amazing. I mean, it was amazing. It reminded me of that scene in "The Wizard of Oz." Do you know the one I mean? Where the little dog Toto runs across to where the wizard [is], and he pulls back, the dog's pulling back the curtain, and -- "Don't look behind the screen. Don't look at the man behind the screen." It was just like that, because what you started to see is that all of these grand statesmen, these very pompous politicians, they were just like us. They all bitched about each other. I mean, quite gossipy, those cables. Okay, but I thought it was a very important point for all of us to grasp, these are human beings just like us. They don't have special powers. They're not magic. They are not our parents. Beyond that, what I found most fascinating was the level of endemic corruption that I saw across all different countries, and particularly centered around the heart of power, around public officials who were embezzling the public's money for their own personal enrichment, and allowed to do that because of official secrecy.
Još jedna velika istraga bavi se svetskom diplomatijom. Opet, ovo je sve zasnovano na procurelim informacijama, 251 000 diplomatskih poruka SAD-a i ja sam bila uključena u ovu istragu jer sam dobila ove informacije kroz druge procurele informacije od nezadovoljnog uzbunjivača i završila sam radeći u Gardijanu. Iz prve ruke vam mogu reći kako je to kada imate pristup ovim informacijama. Bilo je neverovatno. Zaista neverovatno. Podsetilo me je na scenu iz "Čarobnjaka iz Oza". Znate li na koju mislim? Na onu gde psić Toto trči do čarobnjaka i povuče zavesu, povuče je nazad i - "Ne gledaj iza paravana. Ne gledaj čoveka iza ekrana." Bilo je baš poput toga, jer počinjete da vidite sve te velike državnike, pompozne političare, vidite da su isti kao mi. Svi su kukali jedni na druge. Bilo je dosta tračeva u ovim porukama. U redu, ali mislila sam da je bilo veoma važno za nas da shvatimo da su ovo ljudska bića poput nas. Nemaju posebne moći. Nisu magični. Nisu naši roditelji. Iznad toga, najviše me je fascinirao nivo endemske korupcije koju sam videla širom raznih zemalja, koja je naročito bila fokusirana oko centra moći, oko javnih zvaničnika koji su proneveravali novac javnosti radi svoje lične koristi, i bilo im je dozvoljeno da rade to zbog zvanične tajnosti.
So I've mentioned WikiLeaks, because surely what could be more open than publishing all the material? Because that is what Julian Assange did. He wasn't content with the way the newspapers published it to be safe and legal. He threw it all out there. That did end up with vulnerable people in Afghanistan being exposed. It also meant that the Belarussian dictator was given a handy list of all the pro-democracy campaigners in that country who had spoken to the U.S. government. Is that radical openness? I say it's not, because for me, what it means, it doesn't mean abdicating power, responsibility, accountability, it's actually being a partner with power. It's about sharing responsibility, sharing accountability. Also, the fact that he threatened to sue me because I got a leak of his leaks, I thought that showed a remarkable sort of inconsistency in ideology, to be honest, as well. (Laughs)
Pomenula sam Vikiliks, jer šta bi moglo biti otvorenije od objavljivanja svog materijala? To je uradio Džulijan Asanž. Nije bio zadovoljan načinom na koji su novine objavljivale materijal, bezbedno i legalno. Samo je objavio sve to. To se završilo tako što su razotkrivene ranjive osobe u Avganistanu. Takođe je podrazumevalo da je beloruski diktator dobio zgodan spisak svih pro-demokratskih aktivista u toj zemlji koji su komunicirali sa vladom SAD-a. Da li je to radikalna otvorenost? Za mene nije, jer to za mene ne znači odricanje od moći, odgovornosti, to je zapravo partnerstvo s moći. Radi se o deljenju odgovornosti, polaganju računa. Takođe, tu je i činjenica da je pretio da me tuži jer sam dobila procurele informacije koje su procurele od njega. Pomislila sam i da je to pokazalo neverovatnu nedoslednost u ideologiji, iskreno. (Smeh)
The other thing is that power is incredibly seductive, and you must have two real qualities, I think, when you come to the table, when you're dealing with power, talking about power, because of its seductive capacity. You've got to have skepticism and humility. Skepticism, because you must always be challenging. I want to see why do you -- you just say so? That's not good enough. I want to see the evidence behind why that's so. And humility because we are all human. We all make mistakes. And if you don't have skepticism and humility, then it's a really short journey to go from reformer to autocrat, and I think you only have to read "Animal Farm" to get that message about how power corrupts people.
Druga stvar je to da je moć neverovatno zavodljiva, i mislim da morate imati dve prave osobine, kada sednete za sto i kada se bavite moći, pričate o njoj, zbog njenog zavodljivog svojstva. Morate imati skepticizma i poniznosti. Skepticizma, jer uvek morate izazivati nešto. Želim da vidim zašto - jer ti tako kažeš? To nije dovoljno dobro. Želim da vidim dokaze zašto je to tako. Poniznost, zato što smo svi ljudi. Svi pravimo greške. Ako nemate skepticizma i poniznosti, onda je veoma kratak put od reformatora do autokrate, i mislim da samo treba da pročitate "Životinjsku farmu" da vidite kako moć kvari ljude.
So what is the solution? It is, I believe, to embody within the rule of law rights to information. At the moment our rights are incredibly weak. In a lot of countries, we have Official Secrets Acts, including in Britain here. We have an Official Secrets Act with no public interest test. So that means it's a crime, people are punished, quite severely in a lot of cases, for publishing or giving away official information. Now wouldn't it be amazing, and really, this is what I want all of you to think about, if we had an Official Disclosure Act where officials were punished if they were found to have suppressed or hidden information that was in the public interest? So that -- yes. Yes! My power pose. (Applause) (Laughs) I would like us to work towards that.
Šta je rešenje? Verujem da je u tome da se unutar vladavine zakona otelotvore prava na informacije. Naša prava su trenutno neverovatno mala. U mnogo zemalja postoji Zakon zvaničnih tajni, uključujući i Veliku Britaniju. Imamo Zakon o zvaničnim tajnama bez probe javnog interesa. To znači da je zločin, ljudi se kažnjavaju, prilično strogo u dosta slučajeva, ako objave ili daju zvanične informacije. Zar ne bi bilo sjajno, i zaista želim da svi razmislite o ovome, kada bismo imali zvanični Zakon o objavljivanju gde bi zvaničnici bili kažnjeni ako bi se otkrilo da su zataškavali ili krili informacije od javnog interesa? Tako da - da. Da! Moj stav moći. (Aplauz) (Smeh) Želela bih da radimo na tome.
So it's not all bad news. I mean, there definitely is progress on the line, but I think what we find is that the closer that we get right into the heart of power, the more opaque, closed it becomes. So it was only just the other week that I heard London's Metropolitan Police Commissioner talking about why the police need access to all of our communications, spying on us without any judicial oversight, and he said it was a matter of life and death. He actually said that, it was a matter of life and death. There was no evidence. He presented no evidence of that. It was just, "Because I say so. You have to trust me. Take it on faith." Well, I'm sorry, people, but we are back to the pre-Enlightenment Church, and we need to fight against that.
Nisu sve vesti loše. Definitivno postoji napredak, ali mislim da otkrivamo da što bliže priđemo centru moći, kao da postane sve neprozirniji i zatvoreniji. Pre nekoliko nedelja sam čula da je poverenik Metropolitanske policije u Londonu pričao o tome zašto je policiji potreban pristup svoj našoj komunikaciji, da nas špijuniraju bez pravnog nadgledanja, i rekao je da je to pitanje života i smrti. Zapravo je to rekao, da je pitanje života i smrti. Nije bilo dokaza. Nije pružio nikakav dokaz za to. Bilo je samo: "Jer ja tako kažem. Morate mi verovati. Verujte na reč." Ljudi, žao mi je, ali vraćamo se na crkvu pre Prosvetljenja, i moramo se boriti protiv toga.
So he was talking about the law in Britain which is the Communications Data Bill, an absolutely outrageous piece of legislation. In America, you have the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act. You've got drones now being considered for domestic surveillance. You have the National Security Agency building the world's giantest spy center. It's just this colossal -- it's five times bigger than the U.S. Capitol, in which they're going to intercept and analyze communications, traffic and personal data to try and figure out who's the troublemaker in society.
Pričao je o zakonu u Velikoj Britaniji, to je predlog Zakona o komunikaciji, apsolutno nečuvenog dokumenta. U Americi, imate Zakon o deljenju i zaštiti sajber informacija. Bespilotne letelice se sada smatraju domaćim nadgledanjem. Nacionalna agencija za bezbednost gradi najveći špijunski centar na svetu. Kolosalne je veličine - pet puta veći od Kongresa u SAD, i tu pokušavaju da presretnu i analiziraju komunikaciju, saobraćaj i lične podatke kako bi otkrili ko pravi probleme u našem društvu.
Well, to go back to our original story, the parents have panicked. They've locked all the doors. They've kitted out the house with CCTV cameras. They're watching all of us. They've dug a basement, and they've built a spy center to try and run algorithms and figure out which ones of us are troublesome, and if any of us complain about that, we're arrested for terrorism. Well, is that a fairy tale or a living nightmare? Some fairy tales have happy endings. Some don't. I think we've all read the Grimms' fairy tales, which are, indeed, very grim. But the world isn't a fairy tale, and it could be more brutal than we want to acknowledge. Equally, it could be better than we've been led to believe, but either way, we have to start seeing it exactly as it is, with all of its problems, because it's only by seeing it with all of its problems that we'll be able to fix them and live in a world in which we can all be happily ever after. (Laughs) Thank you very much. (Applause) Thank you. (Applause)
Da se vratimo na prvobitnu priču, roditelji su se uspaničili. Zaključali su sva vrata. Opremili su kuću kamerama za nadzor. Posmatraju sve nas. Iskopali su podrum i napravili špijunski centar gde pokreću algoritme kako bi otkrili ko od nas pravi probleme, i ako bilo ko pokuša da se požali na to, uhapsiće nas zbog terorizma. Da li je to bajka ili živi košmar? Neke bajke imaju srećne završetke. Neke nemaju. Mislim da smo svi pročitali bajke braće Grim, koje su prilično sumorne. Ali svet nije bajka, i mogao bi da bude brutalniji nego što želimo da priznamo. Isto tako bi mogao biti bolji nego što su nas naterali da mislimo, ali u svakom slučaju moramo da počnemo da ga gledamo kakav jeste, sa svim njegovim problemima, jer jedino kroz to posmatranje sa svim problemima možemo da ih popravimo i budemo u svetu gde svi možemo živeti srećno do kraja života. (Smeh) Hvala vam mnogo. (Aplauz) Hvala vam. (Aplauz)