Datasets:

zake7749

/

chinese-speech-corpus

like 0

[ { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們今天的協調會就跟我在院裡主持的一樣，就是會有兩份，一份是跟院處做成一般的會議紀錄，另外一個是會做逐字紀錄，逐字紀錄是大家都有10個工作天可以修改，不管是用化名，我們也有這樣的情況，或者是實質去修改自己發言的內容，只要上下文還算連貫一致，都可以的，所以不用擔心會被斷章取義等等，雖然我最近被斷章取義滿厲害的，但是應該不會有這樣的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家文來文往都看過了，其實文來文往的壞處是雙方的爭點沒有辦法對焦的情況，所以才特別請院處的朋友、財政部的朋友們一起來想一下我們在現有的法律裡面，特別是全民健保法裡面第一類落進去的話，就不會落到第二類去的話，如果第二類落不進去才會落到第二類去，這樣的精神應該怎麼樣在不具有僱用關係的，也就是勞動合作社無一定雇主的社員的情況之下去解釋這一件事，我想這個是最上面的，這個如果定位比較清楚的話，其他的其實都是執行的細節而已，法律的層級因為我想我們的立法者在立法時，對於勞動合作社也不一定是每個人都非常清楚，所以其實我們也不是只有在這一件事上，在幾乎所有的法律上，只要跟勞動合作社有關的，都會發現大家沒有考慮到勞動合作社性質的情況，所以這並不是任何部會朋友們的問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是就像立法者允許一些行政的解釋空間，我們要確保各部會的解釋，不要同樣的法律文字，但是做出不同的解釋，這樣子讓民間會五所依循，所以主要是要有一致的依循，先請內政部這邊先把努力看到主要的爭點來作一點說明，我們再來集思廣益看看如何解決。" }, { "speaker": "陳佳容", "speech": "政委及各位代表大家午安，首先真的要感謝政委願意對這樣的問題專程撥出一個時間來，真的非常感謝，全部的勞動合作社都很關注。" }, { "speaker": "陳佳容", "speech": "我想兩次的文都有看到，我想衛福部對於勞動合作社原則無一定雇主部分是沒有爭執，所以我們解讀應該在第二類的部分沒有問題，那個爭點是在第34條解釋的部分。" }, { "speaker": "陳佳容", "speech": "因為我們在解讀上很清楚第1類第1目至第3目的被保險人之投保單位，如果前面是成立的，然後是屬於第2類的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第34條就不適用。" }, { "speaker": "陳佳容", "speech": "是。所以在這裡會繞不出來，覺得明明寫得這麼清楚，怎麼彼此兩個部會的落差這麼多，我想這裡應該是處理第34條就足夠了。" }, { "speaker": "盧胤雯", "speech": "我們把目前兩個做法用很簡單的PPT先跟大家說明，好不好？我們直接進到第34條，這個是依第34條的架構來做的。" }, { "speaker": "盧胤雯", "speech": "投保單位我們說是雇主，雇主是要付兩種保費，第一種是一般保險費，他的算法都有提，就像投保的金額變成費率，是有負擔一個比率，現在是60％，一家平均眷口數，現在爭點在於補充保險費，投保單位支付的薪資總額要減掉受僱員工投保金額的總額再乘以補充保險的費率，這中間差在哪裡？" }, { "speaker": "盧胤雯", "speech": "我講一個比較具體的，像電子業，員工薪水一個月是拿5萬、10萬，但是有非常高額的年終獎金，對財政部來說，這個人的年收入是不只月投保金額，有很大的gap是在獎金，所以當時為了這一個部分，我們把這個錢在補充保費來作反映，所以會有補充保費的規範，我先把過去的故事先跟大家報告。" }, { "speaker": "盧胤雯", "speech": "回到內政部或者是衛福部，衛福部、內政部都是投保單位，內政部除了要發給員工薪資以外，還會付什麼錢？我們會有需要來部裡演講的老師，他拿到的也是「50」，他是我們的員工嗎？他不是，所以這個需要加總在這裡面，這個是沒有被扣到的，我們結算以後這一塊沒有扣到的，我們會有一個補充保險費。" }, { "speaker": "盧胤雯", "speech": "我們再往下看第二張，下面這張表是現有健保署實務運作時這樣算的，補充保險費提到是支付薪資總額，這個怎麼算的？是不拘發放的形式、也不論發放的對象，這個是我們之間很大的誤解，明明是第1類第1至3目，發給的對象是不拘的，我衛福部是第1類第1目，但是我會發給那一些可能來演講的老師，不見得是這個，有可能第2至6類，都有可能，所以現在的問題會出在這裡，這個是我們可能要溝通的點，我是不是先說明到這裡？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "先確認一下，縱使不是第34條適用的狀態，實務上按照補充保險費的規定，其實並沒有特別說一定是第幾類，事實上我們看到補充保險費，像第1至6類的第31條也有補充保險費的相關規定。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "簡單來講，你的主張是補充保險費的這個概念，可能是跟第34條脫鉤的，是這樣嗎？" }, { "speaker": "盧胤雯", "speech": "我們科長先補充。" }, { "speaker": "蔣翠蘋", "speech": "跟政委報告，這個部分就是在講第34條，大家解讀跟內政部解讀不一樣的是，我們的第1至3目是在界定投保單位，如果本身是一個第1目至第3目的投保單位，發出去的薪資所得還是沒有對象，你找一個人來兼差，你不會知道是第幾類的，本身衛福部是第1類的投保單位，只要是這個投保單位，就是符合第34條的對象，發出去的總薪資就通通要負擔雇主的責任，薪資有可能負擔的是一般受僱員工即公務員，也有可能是來這邊打工的，打工的有可能不會在這邊加保，才會有一個發出去的薪資總數，扣掉投保金額，表示投保金額已經負擔過一般保險費了，那個差額是雇主沒有負擔到責任的部分，是用收取補充保險費的方式，基本上第34條的精神就是在這邊，只要有僱用員工，無論是兼差或者是全職的，都應該要跟雇主的責任，這樣才可以避免會用兼職員工來取代全職員工，這對員工來說也是一種保障，以上說明。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我先確認文意，你的意思是第1類第1目至第3目被保險人之投保單位，這個是從第15條來的定義嗎？你剛剛已經講說這不是跟著我們分類被保險人，也就是第10條的分法，而是跟著第15條的分法嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以假設現在有一個勞合社並沒有僱用任何的員工，他當然就不能成為投保單位。" }, { "speaker": "蔣翠蘋", "speech": "不好意思，再補充一下，如果本身雇主沒有僱用任何一個人，他也會去成立投保單位，所以要有沒有申請成立。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。我現在是勞合社，我沒有僱用任何員工，就連我的理事主席也不是雇員的情況下，你的意思是不管第10條來看，第15條來看，反正就不成立投保單位。如果不成立投保單位的話，您剛剛所說的，像第1類第1目至第3目，也就是第29條的那個定義就不能適用在他的頭上？" }, { "speaker": "盧胤雯", "speech": "第34條。" }, { "speaker": "蔣翠蘋", "speech": "對，就不適用第34條。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個是第一件事，而第29條也是一樣的。凡是在這邊有提到所屬之投保單位，只要是有「投保單位」這四個字出現的時候，必須要先成立投保單位再成立，如果一個勞合社沒有成立投保單位，意思是沒有雇員的話，當然這一整件事都不存在。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以從我看起來，有一個勞合社既有僱用的一些人，他實際上成立了那些人的投保單位，但是又主張他的社員其實不算，這個時候是產生兩邊認定上的瑕疵，對不對？" }, { "speaker": "蔣翠蘋", "speech": "（點頭）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "看內政部這邊，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "陳佳容", "speech": "剛剛衛福部的長官有提到「不拘發放形式，不論發放對象」，這個是對應哪一個條文？第二個，第34條來看，我們的爭點在於受僱這一件事，因為社員不是雇主，如何來定義「受僱」？因為跟勞動部的僱用關係的解釋是不是不一樣？因為我們應該是以勞動部的僱用關係來看受僱的定義。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他們講得滿清楚的，意思是在這邊擴充了「其受僱者」那四個字的定義，這邊講起來是包含委外兼職、演講等等，這一些當然其實以勞動部看起來沒有監督指揮關係等等，但是這邊預防頓逃進這個關係裡面，所以只要有拿給付的錢都算叫做第34條裡面的「其受僱者」。" }, { "speaker": "蔣翠蘋", "speech": "「的薪資所得」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我有聽懂，對，「的薪資所得」，所以意思是即使定性上不是「其受僱者」，他的薪資所得還是進入第34條的範圍，對不對？" }, { "speaker": "蔣翠蘋", "speech": "（點頭）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這邊的意思是「不是受僱者，單位投保金額顯然是0」，即使是0，支付薪資大於0，大於0就全部算進去了，意思是不是這樣？" }, { "speaker": "蔣翠蘋", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "只要是人類，不分本國、外國人？" }, { "speaker": "蔣翠蘋", "speech": "要看有沒有符合財政部的屬性。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "要看「薪資所得」四字是交給財政部去定義。" }, { "speaker": "蔣翠蘋", "speech": "依他們的定義。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也就是「薪資所得」四字的定義。這個進入所得稅法的涵括範圍內？" }, { "speaker": "蔣翠蘋", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以按照所得稅法所定義的那一種薪資所得，無論是不是按照勞動基準法所定義的「受僱」，基本上都算作我們減號的左邊，右邊如果不該當，也就是不是受僱者，你就填0，這一筆錢還是要扣起來，意思是這樣？" }, { "speaker": "蔣翠蘋", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣滿清楚的。" }, { "speaker": "陳佳容", "speech": "這樣的問題是，以投保單位來看，勞動合作有行政人員，他是僱用關係，所以超過5個就是變成勞保單位，也就是變成兩種狀況，他就是一個投保單位，也就是就會進到第34條的投保認定，如果不是投保單位就不是，所以同樣的狀況底下，也就是無一定雇主的社員所組織的，但是有僱用行政人員的時候，結果是不一樣的，因此結果差異滿大的，負擔滿重的，我們希望有一個統一的、通用的一般解釋方式來處理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為到「薪資所得」四字的時候，我們就進到賦稅署的範圍裡面了，進入到你們的守備範圍。因為這裡面的兩邊主張，其實我細看也不完全一樣，這邊會認為薪資所得按照所得稅法，其實意思是「凡公教軍警公私事業之薪資勞務之所得」的部分，也就是在第14條的部分。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們剛剛講到這整套的情況，扣掉行政人員，不曉得財政部怎麼看？" }, { "speaker": "吳君泰", "speech": "跟政委、長官報告，原則上就像剛剛提到的，所得的定義裡面，有關於薪資所得，就像剛剛所提到第14條相關的規定，當然除了本法的規定以外，我們也會針對不同的行為所衍生可能所得的情況來做一些解釋，所以其實像這個案子的勞合社，也就是目前沒有僱用關係的個人社員，因為基本上在這個型態上提供相關的勞務來獲得相關的報酬，所以今年3月7日發了一個解釋令，針對這樣子型態，我們不以有沒有僱用關係，因為也沒有說一定要有僱用關係才有薪資所得，我們其實是框有沒有勞務的型態，因此我們針對沒有僱用關係，但確實是提供勞務所獲得的報酬，這部分我們就把它認定是屬於所得稅法薪資的所得。" }, { "speaker": "吳君泰", "speech": "在薪資所得的規範下來之後，針對勞合社有開立免扣繳憑單的義務在，因為本身就是要開立扣繳憑單，所以在3月7日發的解釋令裡面，一併註明的是這一些勞合社要做什麼事。" }, { "speaker": "吳君泰", "speech": "因為是跟勞務買售人代收個人社員提供的報酬，然後全數轉給個人社員，這一塊我們當時解說這部分沒有課營業稅的問題，所以當時這個案子基本上是有營業稅的情況，所以我們才做了營業稅相關的解釋。" }, { "speaker": "吳君泰", "speech": "因為這要整個來看，所以會衍生個人社員有所謂的勞務報酬，就有衍生到薪資所得的部分，因此才會整個連續下來，就會衍生現在兩個部會針對全民健康保險法第34條到底要不要補充保費的爭議。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "感謝，我先確認一下我聽到的，如果不對，請跟我講。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "簡單來講，按照3月7日的想法，大概可以分成兩種，一個是勞合社的雇員，這樣是給付報酬，給付報酬是薪資所得，也就是把薪資給付到帳戶裡面，第二種情況是沒有僱用關係，也就是勞合社的社員，這個是轉付薪資報酬，但是仍然是薪資報酬，但是這兩個主要的差別，其實是在營業稅上，而不是在所得稅上，因為薪資報酬的所得稅是一樣的，是這個意思嗎？" }, { "speaker": "吳君泰", "speech": "屬性都是薪資報酬。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，依照衛福部這邊施行細則第55條，以財政部的這個函情況下，無論如何是算作薪資報酬，所以才會回到剛剛第34條的這邊，也就是放到減號的右邊去，對不對？" }, { "speaker": "蔣翠蘋", "speech": "左邊。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然右邊一直都是0，這個沒有任何人有爭議。財政部的想法是非常清楚。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "現在主要的狀態是，我們知道勞合社都在等今天討論的結果，我們實務上也知道勞合社有時就會聘行政人員，所以會成立投保單位，如果今天做成了，大家都不改任何立場、函釋或者怎麼樣的話，當然可以預見的是，有一些勞合社，可能會想盡辦法不要成立投保單位，然後把行政人員想辦法用另外的組織形態，或者是透過直接購買行政的這一件事，會把它化整為零、不成立僱用關係，想盡辦法不要讓自己變成投保單位，變成落入不是第1類，整個從來不可能落入第1類的狀況，這個是實務，因為上有政策、下有對策。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個情況，我不知道你們之前有沒有碰到過，或者是會覺得這一種情況要怎麼樣處理？" }, { "speaker": "盧胤雯", "speech": "我先說明，因為這個修法是102年，也就是二代健保之後才入法的，確實像政委所提到的，102年辦的時候，導致滿大的財政，因為每個單位都沒有編，好比衛福部也一樣，尤其社福團體來澄清，我們也有很多勞務委外，他就沒有編，假設今天是某大學來跟衛福部或者某社福團體來標衛福部的案子，所以他是一個投保單位。" }, { "speaker": "盧胤雯", "speech": "他除了幫他可能會聘的研究人員或者是工作人員來加勞健保之外，現在又衍生一個投保單位又要有補充保費，這個錢並沒有算進去。行政院當時有函覆當時的衛生署，也就是得動用預備金，而後都要編列一般預算，這一件事當時就有函釋，請大家務要幫忙，也就是這個錢要算進來。" }, { "speaker": "盧胤雯", "speech": "當時的情況一直到現在，＃大部分比較有經驗的投保單位，多數都知道這一件事會變成雇主的成本，所以在管理費上反映。＃salary因此為何在上次協調會的時候，這個案子的起因就是這個合作勞動社去跟榮總標了案子，榮總的錢是來自於退輔會，退輔會當時也同意你把這個成本反映到管理費，他ok的，所以這一件事沒有人不願意出這個錢。" }, { "speaker": "盧胤雯", "speech": "誤會在於可能我們講得還不夠清楚，為了這一件事，我們也要求了健保署，在成立投保單位的時候，要讓投保單位知道他還有這個成本，這一件事也已經要求六個分署都要去作宣導，我們也都有盯健保署，他們也有回饋給我們，都有在做，但是可能做得不夠，這一點我們會努力，多數是清楚的，可能問題出在真的沒有講清楚。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "真的，我們跟勞合社的對談上，他們沒有收到這個訊息。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "很抱歉，我剛剛問的問題不是這個，我剛剛問的問題是，在施行細則第44條裡面有提到如果一個投保單位180天都沒有人真的成為他的保險對象，那這樣的話，其實是可以註銷的，註銷之後就不再有投保單位的適格，也就不再成為投保單位，這個時候當然剛剛講的那一些都跟他一點關係都沒有。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我剛剛具體的詢問是，今天的這個結果一旦出來、公布了，我可以預見的是，假設現在只有一個行政人員，就可以想盡辦法弄成不是投保對象，不管是什麼方法，這個時候只要等180天，就完全消失在視線之內，你們有沒有碰過什麼情況或者是想法？" }, { "speaker": "盧胤雯", "speech": "我們內部確實對這個有做過討論，也清楚這個就是不患寡、患不均。" }, { "speaker": "盧胤雯", "speech": "所以這個法是從102年當時到現在，我們也發現這個問題，坦白來講，上有政策、下有對策，所以我們內部也有在討論，當時訂了這個之後，可能會發現有一些還不夠周延，這個我們確實會在下一次修法時，這一件事會把它一次補上，讓人家覺得不夠公平的，以後內部的……" }, { "speaker": "蔣翠蘋", "speech": "我再補充一下，將來的方向其實是原本的立法原意，只是當時寫條文的時候有限定投保單位，也就是變成你有投保單位，才去做補充保費的扣取，但是原本的精神就如政委所說的，你有薪資給付，有人幫你做事，就是要負擔雇主的責任，不是負擔一般保險費，不然就是用補充保險費的方式來負擔。" }, { "speaker": "蔣翠蘋", "speech": "如果本身跟他真的沒有僱用關係，因為本來就沒有在考慮僱用關係，也就是考慮勞務報酬，如果認為是代收轉付的話，副座報告有其源頭，應該把源頭納入考慮來承攬這一些業務的時候，補充說明。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我綜整一下我聽到的，從衛福部的立場，重點不是算第1類第1至3目，而是最後有薪資所得出現，總有某一個人要補充上這個保費，這個人當然可以發案子給勞合社的這個單位，而不是勞合社本身，因為我們瞭解勞合社並沒有什麼他覺得自己就是轉付而已，但是畢竟他是薪資，所以這個薪資必須在某一個程度上被人負擔到。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以這邊的概念如果找勞合社的話，其實也瞭解到勞合社自己就是雇主、雇員，根本沒有雇主、雇員的關係，也就是一人公司不成立投保單位，也不是投保單位，這樣的情況下，概念上未來最理想的情形下，這個還是要付，但說不定是派工作給他的人去接收，也就是讓做勞務單位所接收，並不是一人公司沒有成立投保單位來負擔，但是這個時候要溝通非常清楚，不管是這邊負擔或者是那邊負擔，總是要有人負擔，意思是不是這樣？" }, { "speaker": "蔣翠蘋", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "陳佳容", "speech": "謝謝政委釐清。我們的困難是，剛剛政委有提到合作社並不是勞務買售人，是從勞務買售人那邊拿到錢轉給社員，所以理論上要付的是勞務買售人。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是付薪資給勞動者。" }, { "speaker": "陳佳容", "speech": "一個很完美的例子是公務機關，他沒有問題，但在市場上是很難轉嫁，我們在看這個條文的時候，他並不是僱用關係，如何轉嫁給別人？如果是家庭僱用的話，那個部分怎麼講得清楚？如何跟勞務買售人要這一筆錢，一定是自己吸收，因為轉嫁不出去。" }, { "speaker": "陳佳容", "speech": "勞務承攬有很多的狀況，講的例子是所謂公開招標的方式，如果不是呢？他去承攬的部分，轉嫁不出去都是社員去承擔，不管是稅的問題或是其他的問題，都是社員要自己承擔這一塊。" }, { "speaker": "盧胤雯", "speech": "我們內部也跟健保署極力溝通，目前唯一能夠鬆口的是，買售人若非投保單位可以放寬，但是要跟健保署舉證，這個可以。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好比像勞合社不是投保單位，假設行政人員想辦法都變不見了，然後又接另外一家勞合社之類的案子……" }, { "speaker": "蔣翠蘋", "speech": "他的意思是買的對象並不是榮總，而是跟個人買。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "理解，但是如果跟不是個人買。" }, { "speaker": "陳佳容", "speech": "比如家庭的清潔需求，買售人就不是投保單位。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是＃社間合作，也可能兩邊都不是投保單位#invoice。" }, { "speaker": "蔣翠蘋", "speech": "是。內政部的長官是勞動合作社是一個單位，但是跟承攬對象並不是投保單位，這一個部分我們討論是有放寬的空間。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想要講的是，我是寫程式的，我參數改成這樣子，一定弄一個沒有行政人員的勞合社來接案子，想辦法把社間合作給有成立投保單位真正出現的勞合社，這樣子不是投保單位，你放寬了，不負健保的責任，這邊成立投保單位也無所謂，反正你這邊放寬還是可以僱行政人員。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我專門找7個人，說不定是這7個勞合社的理事主席，一起成立一個代收轉付勞動合作社，這也是一種勞動，代收轉付也很累，我就不要請行政人員。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣自動是不是放寬之後，突然這一件事就解決了？" }, { "speaker": "蔣翠蘋", "speech": "我懂政委的意思，我確認一下政委的意思。" }, { "speaker": "蔣翠蘋", "speech": "是不是提供勞務者本身先弄成不是投保單位，把工作包給一個是投保單位的，假設他又被財政部認定是代收轉付的薪資所得，這樣就回到剛剛所講的，這不是我們的立法原意，我們的立法原意是只要你有給出去薪資所得，這一些將來是……只是現在的法規。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我理解。所謂現行法規的灰色地帶，如果今天要把這個灰色地帶講清楚，這邊馬上就會變成鑽漏洞……如果是合法的，就不會叫「鑽漏洞」，財政部叫「節稅」或什麼之類的。" }, { "speaker": "吳君泰", "speech": "「避稅」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，就是避保費的一招就會出現，按照這邊的講法其實不是立法原意，有一天法律修改以後，白色地帶還是會被框進來，但是目前這邊放寬的話，實務上會出現這個情況，大家並沒有說有什麼狀態，因為我們如果要說這樣子，就是要區分個人不是投保單位，去請勞合社來清潔家裡，還有七個理事主席組成虛擬的代收轉付勞合社來作清潔狀態，這其實是沒有辦法區分的，因為從健保署的角度來看，都不是投保單位，都不是在你的視線之內。" }, { "speaker": "盧胤雯", "speech": "我們的好奇是，因為轉嫁到這個人，那個人在財政部的個人薪資所得，那一段的扣稅，因為勞務就不是投保單位，是個人，因此他省了這個，但是多了那個。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不是個人，是另外一家勞合社，這裡沒有個人。" }, { "speaker": "盧胤雯", "speech": "喔！對。" }, { "speaker": "蔣翠蘋", "speech": "政委的腦筋轉得很快。" }, { "speaker": "陳佳容", "speech": "都有可能。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為這個情況跟他等180天，然後也在你們的視線裡消失，其實是非常像的，我們也沒有辦法防堵這個，然後不照顧到你們本來細則就已經明訂180天之後他就消失，因為他沒有再僱任何人的情況，我們現在很難回溯說要防堵這個，不然真的要回去改那個細則了，看起來這是合理避保費的做法，如果我的理解沒有錯的話。" }, { "speaker": "陳佳容", "speech": "所以衛福部的建議是，有沒有可行，我們還是用舉證的方式，雖然是一個投保單位，是就他僱用行政人員的部分來作補充保費，但是社員是屬於無一定雇主，是不是可以用舉證的方式造冊，然後給健保署來作處理？" }, { "speaker": "蔣翠蘋", "speech": "舉證什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "＃內政部的提議是保持是投保單位，不需要想辦法找一個代收轉付勞合社來當中間的白手套，而是自己成立白手套的切分點，這邊是代收轉付，那邊是僱用給付，我的兩個名冊給付明細等等都給健保署＃invoice，健保署就可以說：「我雖然成立了投保單位，但是他是虛擬的，不是非僱用關係這邊的投保單位，以我對你們細則的理解，其實沒有辦法做到這一件事。」確實沒有辦法，我看起來細則裡面不存在這個認定的空間。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以整個放寬買售人不是投保單位，這一件事勞合社當然就放寬，免負擔補充保費，但是很難說這個勞合社裡面的那一個員工算在薪資裡面，但是他的社員不算在社員裡面，因這部分已經切給財政部了，其實不是他們可以認定的。" }, { "speaker": "陳佳容", "speech": "所以是由勞合社來作舉證，等於是代收轉付的這一塊。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但無論怎麼舉證都還是薪資，我們現在說的放寬是買售人非投保單位的狀態，這個狀態之所以可行，是因為他可以在代收轉付成立的情況下還是可以說，如果買售人非投保單位的狀態出現的話，其實你不需要在這邊給名冊或不給名冊，因為這個狀態一旦出現，你就自動放寬，你給名冊反而增加他們的管理成本，以我的理解，而且事實上不可能集合，因為你們合作社是社務的主管機關，除了相信你之外，到底還有什麼別的辦法？" }, { "speaker": "陳佳容", "speech": "但是這樣輔導很困難，有好幾套標準、制度在運作。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就看衛福部有沒有什麼想法？我們之前常常做數位化的系統，會做讓民眾節省一小時，但是要讓公務員花兩小時的案子出來，這樣就不太永續，實務上大家都爆肝到一個程度。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我們當然希望不要以鄰為壑，就是不要認為這邊解釋的成本省下來，但是要增加這邊稽核，或是查核的成本？我不知道你們這邊有沒有現成查核成本就可以知道所謂是否缺代收轉付性質的認定？" }, { "speaker": "蔣翠蘋", "speech": "都要自己舉證。＃現在是請他舉證他的買售人，不是投保單位的這一段，因為對健保署來講，他是用財政部統一的資料在作稽核，如果財政部那邊的資料顯示這個薪資給付是合作社給的話，自然必須要負擔補充保險費，所以必須要自己去舉證，而且這真的是代收轉付，這要經過認定的，並不是他認為沒有僱用關係，他自己認為代收轉付就可以了，這必須要嚴謹。＃invoice" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他的做法是勞務買售人，你所謂舉出來的意思是他的統編、身分證字號或者是稅籍？" }, { "speaker": "蔣翠蘋", "speech": "不是，基本上健保署原則就是收，如果要豁免的話，要自己舉證說有合約，或者是形式是什麼，像他們查帳的背後相關資料，證明這一筆薪資所得是跟兩個家庭主婦買來的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個在財政部這邊看起來覺得ok嗎？你們的令，也有一個類似像憑證的概念。" }, { "speaker": "吳君泰", "speech": "對。這個舉證剛才所提到的，應該說這個＃確認是屬於一個代收轉付的性質，所以勞動合作社本身要有一個相關的憑證，而且有編制相關代收轉付的社員名冊、收付的明細，作為勞動合作社列帳憑證，這是被稽徵機關未來有選擇必要的時候，認為可以是屬於代收轉付，因此可以不用繳營業稅，我們在解釋令上有這樣的機制。＃tax" }, { "speaker": "吳君泰", "speech": "但是這是為了讓稽徵機關有一個可以備用的，也就是必要時，可以看看你是不是真的是代收轉付的性質而可以免營業稅。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我要講的是，你們這個令裡面，憑證上的文字有三角形，是勞務買售人的什麼？好比像姓名，你要寫到身分證字號、居住地址，你們的概念上這個算什麼？也就是由個人社員交由勞務買售人售之的時候，我如果在家裡清潔，他是寫我的姓名或是要寫到更多？" }, { "speaker": "吳君泰", "speech": "跟政委報告，因為這不是我們這一組的令，這個是另外一組所發的令。就我的理解，合作社把這個錢收到之後，要開立一個憑證，註明是由我這個社員交給某某家庭主婦，也就是作為類似收據的概念在裡面。" }, { "speaker": "吳君泰", "speech": "當然勞合社必須還要再作明細的資料，作為本身勞合社的憑證，然後可以供稽徵機關未來需要選查時可以提供。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "簡單來講，假設以家事清潔為例子，這個滿好的例子，我是一個持家者，我當然是有我的姓名，他給我的憑證裡面，只要寫我的姓名就好了。但在勞合社這邊，不能只寫我的姓名，必須要更清楚的資料，同名同姓的很多，憑證裡面要給到更細讓你們看，意思是不是這樣？" }, { "speaker": "吳君泰", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以勞合社給的資料是大於給持家者的資料？" }, { "speaker": "吳君泰", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以衛福部的概念，或許我們可以做出一個講法，或許勞合社的列帳憑證的資訊，裡面已經有足夠的資訊讓我們在勾稽的時候可以自動化，而不是訪查——沒有人有力氣訪查——自動化的方式知道不是投保單位，也許可以免除掉剛剛所說的補充保費狀態，是吧！可以先說一下嗎？先確認一下我們的理解是一致的。" }, { "speaker": "蔣翠蘋", "speech": "意思沒有錯，但還沒有開始執行，實務面的細節，到時要再跟保險人確認，是怎麼樣的流程，大家不要花這麼多的精神，然後可以怎麼樣最流暢，但是基本上就是要做相關的舉證，類似財政部的相關資料，因為基本上是不是代收轉付的東西，事實上還是要以他們的標準來當作標準。" }, { "speaker": "蔣翠蘋", "speech": "很大的前提是，因為大家都比較忽略勞雇關係，因為合作社跟社員事實上以我們的理解，不見得一定沒有僱用關係，所以前提必須沒有僱用關係，真的是代收轉付，這個憑證還是要以財政部比較嚴謹的認定方法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛剛財政部已經表示這一張憑證上的字樣不是重點，他們稽核是放在勞合社的這一筆資料，那張紙是不是要寫到「勞務進行時間幾點至幾點的過程中，不是被我們僱用的人，而只是普通社員等等」，似乎沒有這個必要，對不對？還是其實有這個必要？有的話也要講啊！" }, { "speaker": "吳君泰", "speech": "這個跟政委報告，這是今年3月7日才發的令，這個令坦白來講，基本上是要解決勞合社的營業稅要不要課稅問題，所以我們用這個方式來解它。因此備註的是需要一些憑證，不管是列帳憑證或者是什麼，都是供稽徵機關查核。" }, { "speaker": "吳君泰", "speech": "但是要表達的是，這個是for稅的查核，至於要寫到多細，這個是今年3月7日的令，到現在的情形其實也沒有多久的時間，所以我不確定稽徵機關實務上有沒有需要更細的資料，還沒有形成一個範例之類的。" }, { "speaker": "吳君泰", "speech": "但我要再表達一點，剛剛衛福部的長官是，如果在查核現在這個案子補充保費的部分，要用現在這個來做認列，因為補充保費跟稅畢竟還是不同，是不是一定都依照稽徵機關要他所提供的資料，可能衛福部自己要考慮一下。而且除了代收轉付之外，背後的這一個是不是所謂的投保單位，你們的強度或是跟稅上不太一樣，也許不能一概用這個資料，這可能要請衛福部審慎考量。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他們之所以可以這樣用，並不是因為這個好用或不好用，而是因為在細則第55條裡面已經很明確指向所得稅法第14條第1項第3類去了，我們依法行政，這個是我看起來唯一可行的一條通道，你們的令也是扣著薪資所得，所以就會變成你們的令跟第55條發生關聯，所以並不是好像一魚兩吃嗎？就是一個憑證忽然可以作兩個用法，而是在細則第55條本來薪資所得的認定，是所得稅法怎麼講就怎麼講。" }, { "speaker": "吳君泰", "speech": "對，這個沒有問題，所得稅法是跟各類所得自然有其自然的定義，衛福部的扣稅標準要跟著，這個也ok，只是在這個案子上看到的憑證，是不是要獨立於稅……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是不是要兩魚兩吃。" }, { "speaker": "吳君泰", "speech": "是，這個要再考量一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不過這個我想我們還是以減少勞合社的成本為主要的考量，如果要作為一個列帳憑證專門給財政部，又做一個列帳憑證專門給衛福部或者是給健保署，然後格式還不一樣，我們馬上就被批評擾民，這一些理事主席其實從某個角度來講，被選出來全部都是民意代表，內政部合團司就會面臨很大的壓力。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我的建議是，合作社民意開立憑證上的註明需要到多細，我想會希望我們先去看一下到底實際發生的案例裡面，到底已經到多細，盡可能不要增加他的麻煩，我想還是請合團司來幫忙，看一下現有按照3月的令，在執行時的範本是什麼，也許我們可以有一、兩個範本直接放在你們的網站上，因為你們的網站上本來就有這個令，隨時可以加一、兩個附件，這個來開立憑證比較好的格式是什麼，大家印出來填幾個就上去了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣的好處什麼？第一個，大家可以知道這個是我們今天三部會商說這個確實是薪資所得，這個在說明上會變得很容易，因為勞合社說這個大部分都不是薪資，如果把薪資所得代收轉付直接印在範本上，這樣大家就不會在這邊覺得到底是或不是。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "然後如果這邊後來說買售人如果不是投保單位的話，他可以豁免等等，也就直接印在那一張上，這個憑證事實上是有說明功能的，所以這個時候的這個買售人，甚至填他的名字時，也許勾「非投保單位」或什麼之類的，你懂我的意思嗎？那張紙一魚兩吃，之所以大家常常會購併是做目的外之利用，但現在還沒有一個範本，我們可以把這十個魚設計成雙頭魚，也就是兩個部分都寫在這個憑證上，這樣就不會有目的外的問題，這張憑證很明顯可以充當目的外使用，我們希望買售人充分理解到在勞合社的紀錄裡面，已經被登記成不是投保單位，因為這個是他自己的權益，如果明明是投保單位的話，你也不能說看到上面說不是投保單位，然後不來告知這個勞合社，所以這時法律歸屬的權責就會變得比較分明，不然就會變成買售人後來來抗議說是投保單位，或者他後來抗議其實不是投保單位，也沒有辦法讓勞合社一下子就知道所有的買售人主張是投保單位或不是投保單位的時候，到底他的狀態是怎麼樣，所以不如在那個憑證上，我們就說這一件事發生的時候，是或不是投保單位，這一件事就很清楚。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "憑證發出去，我這邊當然會有類似副本，或者是列印憑證之前的資料庫，也就是財政部跟衛福部都可以看的，這樣是不是比較好一點？" }, { "speaker": "蔣翠蘋", "speech": "謝謝政委設想很周到。我們部裡面來做這個範例沒有問題，是不是可以請財政部再跟衛福部確認這樣的表單是認可的？因為我們常常看到財政部這個分署認，那個分署不認，或許我們可以用比較正式的方式來行文，也就是把表單設計出來，大家來確認，然後來說這個是哪一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們建議工作層級先確認，沒有問題的話，我們提到像社創的兩個月一次會議上，因為那個是院的會議，可以留有你可以給三級機關的紀錄，現在很多是三級機關資料彼此確認沒有那麼容易，我們在院這邊留一個會議紀錄，他們由上而下確認，大家說沒有問題就沒有問題了，就循著之前跟工程會等等的那一種做法來作，好不好？" }, { "speaker": "陳佳容", "speech": "好，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這邊是不是還ok？" }, { "speaker": "盧胤雯", "speech": "還ok。" }, { "speaker": "陳佳容", "speech": "謝謝政委，我們有一個實務上的問題，剛剛衛福部是說勞務買售人不是投保單位的話就可以，但是我們實務上的運作是，是自然人的買售人，並不是投保單位，在運作上就沒有問題，也不會要開這個，所以一般合作社是今天服務這一家，錢他自己收，收了之後他只是去社裡面去繳行政操作費，因此基本上就沒有所得來透過合作社處理。" }, { "speaker": "陳佳容", "speech": "會有問題都是集體承攬的部分，一定是勞務買售人，也就是一定是有投保單位，等於這一塊是解決了個人這一塊。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就像我剛剛講在中間成立一個代收轉付就解決了，至少到法律修正以前是解決了，真的啊！中間多一個穿透式……對不起，我不能亂用法律名稱（笑），真的是有一點像穿透式買售人情況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "真的中間有一個代收轉付的勞合社，所有提供的服務是代收轉付，沒有行政人員，所以不是投保單位，跟一個有投保單位（民間機構）來進行承攬，而這個承攬因為不是投保單位，所以就不落入剛剛第34條的整套東西當中，因為做到之後就馬上發給有投保單位的勞合社，也就是社間合作，這樣沒有問題，只要寫買售人是勞合社，這樣就解決了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一件事其實等於是規避掉這一件事所有補充保費的部分，其實按照衛福部的想法是這個應該要修，只是還沒有修進來而已，這個會變成在過渡時期的情況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個並不完全是一件壞事，我們拋出這個，並不是真的設立它，而是拋出這個想法的話，未來等到全民健保法修法的話，關於勞合社的性質，立法委員才有實際的狀態，才可以問說立法之爭議到底這一種情況是算在補充保費還是不算在補充保費，這個是很具體的討論。因為立法院並沒有就具體的情況來做討論，這個未必是一件壞事，目前好像只能解決這個程度而已，比這個解決到更多的話，是要修正到細則了，但是我看現在的能量並沒有到修細則的程度。" }, { "speaker": "陳佳容", "speech": "我們補充一下，勞動合作社要成立類似這樣的代收轉付，我們一定不會讓他成立。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然。實務上如果真的本來就沒有什麼行政需求，說不定真的等180天，等自己的投保單位失格喪失，然後就註銷，註銷完就什麼都沒有。" }, { "speaker": "陳佳容", "speech": "確實有一些規模就沒有。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "開始註銷或者是沒有設立，很自然就會變成這一種代收轉付的中間人，你不需他設立也沒有用。" }, { "speaker": "陳佳容", "speech": "因為他有合作社法，社員有70％的限制。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "理解。" }, { "speaker": "陳佳容", "speech": "還有其他的限制。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們也知道農合用準社員的方法來處理。" }, { "speaker": "陳佳容", "speech": "我們會一起處理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "坦白來說，合作社法最新的這一版，就是大家在試其邊界，也是各位正在處理的課題，所以我想是綜合考慮會比較好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在這邊至少買售人沒有設立投保單位，或者是勞合社沒有設立投保單位的這兩個情況，只要在憑證當中的兩個之一有看到這一件事的話，至少這邊願意做明確的認定，我覺得已經有所推進了。" }, { "speaker": "盧胤雯", "speech": "今天健保署沒有來，所以在實務上還是要跟健保署討論，法規是我們這邊訂，但是實務執行有非常多的樣態。" }, { "speaker": "盧胤雯", "speech": "因為他們不會想一些，所以未來在查核上如何認定，我們真的要問，就像剛剛政委所提到的，有可能可以有什麼樣的變形，在實務查核上有沒有什麼樣的想法，我們可以再問。" }, { "speaker": "盧胤雯", "speech": "但是確實有舉幾個例子，像勞動合作社是盲人按摩，所以售買人是盲人，具體這一件事，是的，他沒有意見，但是剛剛提到變形的，實務查核上有沒有意見，我們還要再詢問。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一定很有意見，我們是上有政策，一定會有別的對策，不是這個對策也是會有別的對策。這個憑證是建議做法，如果這邊有開立憑證，他可以同時充當這個查核之用，而且有這樣的帳冊，不管未來法律怎麼變，至少這一件事的定性，三個部會是同意的，所以如果不這樣做，其實會有社會壓力，我們現在跟勞合社做生意，以後都看到會養成憑證習慣的話，有一個是勞合社，但是他不開，就會說他是不是雇員，他其實是雇員等等，這樣還是會對合作教育有一點好處，不管是一開始是要為了避保險費或者是營業稅或者是別的東西，但是讓大家更知道勞合社的性質，這樣才是重點。" }, { "speaker": "陳佳容", "speech": "是的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果大家ok的話，麻煩做成正式會議紀錄的時候，也請大家看一下足以拿回去做工作記得對焦，請健保署再溝通看看，因為衛福部的意向很明確，麻煩內政部給範本，像給買售人跟自己要紀錄哪一些欄位的部分，最好這兩個是一致的，如果發現欄位非常多，填的時候填其中幾個就好了，給買售人是子集合，勞合社的欄位是大的集合，然後再確認這兩邊的稽徵是沒有問題，所以就把你們合作社的官網上跟著這個令一起公告或者是另行公告沒有關係，這個公告之前，如果剛好有社創會議，就帶到社創會議來，大家再確認一次，這樣子他們只給給健保署或者是給其他的，就公文上比較容易一點。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們是12月27日是社創聯繫會議，所以希望12月27日這一些作業都完成，中間儘量除非必要，不要文來文往，真的有發公文的需求，大家把需求發出來，用那一場的會議紀錄來發公文，大家的行政成本都減一些。" }, { "speaker": "陳佳容", "speech": "我們的窗口先聯繫。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "今天就先到這邊，非常謝謝大家。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "Thank you for your time. My name is Rino Nugroho. I’m from Sebelas Maret University in Indonesia. Today, I have a research with my colleague, Professor Liao, from NSYSU and my colleague as well in UNS and assistant at NSYSU, Galan." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "I would like to know more about misinformation and disinformation. You already read of the informed consent. You agree to do this interview, am I right?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, you are right." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "This is part of the…" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "…100 percent correct." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "This is part of the…" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "True." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "Thank you." }, { "speaker": "Dachi Liao", "speech": "Just ask the questions." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No disputes." }, { "speaker": "Dachi Liao", "speech": "Take it easy, take it easy. Minister is really nice. Don’t worry, he’s not a typical…" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I’m not going to evade any of the questions. I understand I can opt out of questions, but I will answer each and every one. Go ahead." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "The first thing that I want to ask is how do you know about misinformation or disinformation and fake news?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We don’t use the term fake news here in the administration. We talk about disinformation, which is intentional untruth that cause public harm. That’s disinformation. If it’s unintentional, then it’s just misinformed." }, { "speaker": "Dachi Liao", "speech": "Why do you not mention fake news?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In Mandarin, news, 新聞, and journalism, 新聞業, share the same word. There’s no way to say fake news without offending journalists in Mandarin. We don’t have two words for news and journalism. It’s the same word. Journalism is literally “news work.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "If we say fake news, 假新聞, then it sounds like we’re accusing journalists of wrongdoing. Because both my parents are journalists, out of filial piety, 孝道, I cannot use the term fake news." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "I get the idea of it." }, { "speaker": "Dachi Liao", "speech": "That’s very interesting." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "That’s interesting terminology. Usually, there are some literature saying fake news. In my country, they also say fake news is…" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s right, but in one of the UN reports that I read, they also crossed the term fake news and switched to disinformation. Nowadays, when we talk about the disinformation crisis, we also call it a infodemic. That’s something that’s new this year because of the pandemic." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "Sorry again, but it’s part of the process of the interview. What is your position right now that may affect or affected by the disinformation or misinformation?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "A lot of the work that we are doing is based on the idea of people, public, private partnership. That is to say the social sector will set the norm. For example, countering coronavirus, we would need the social sector to get a norm of wearing mask and washing hands. If the social norm is not established, top-down actions doesn’t quite work, and we know that around the world." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The same holds for the infodemic, just as it’s for the pandemic. It requires a communally recognized norm. For example, during the elections, it needs to be a norm that all the candidates need to disclose their campaign donation and expenditure for independent journalists to analyze. That’s a norm." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "If people do not hold that as a norm, then no amount of top-down action will get the dark patterns, the people who spread disinformation during election campaign to discourage people from voting, to undermine the trust in the democratic process and so on." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "All that requires a strong social sector norm to be set around the democratic process. That’s why I always put people first in people, public, private partnership." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "Triple P." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, PPPP, people first, then public sector, then private sector, and then partnership." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "Interesting." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is my position." }, { "speaker": "Dachi Liao", "speech": "PPPP, you follow that." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "Yeah. Is it right if I say that, in combating the disinformation, you in Taiwan using social engineering? Like you said before, you creating the norm instead of just top-down?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, but I wouldn’t call it engineering. Social engineering has a meaning in cybersecurity. That means to essentially counterfeit somebody’s identity, so that’s what you mean by social engineering. Again, to avoid ambiguity, we use a social-sector-first approach." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "Social sector first approach?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah. The social sector is variously called voluntary sector, third sector, or civic sector. There’s many term for this idea. We say social sector because it points to the social innovation, which is part of my work. We use the social innovation from the social sector to tackle issues of social media. [laughs] Then it’s the same prefix in all those components." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I would also say that the Taiwan model of social-sector-first approach also means that the legitimacy of social-sector actors is higher than that of public sector and the private sector, for example the Executive Yuan or Facebook. Both have a lower legitimacy compared to social sector organizations. I think that’s correct and that needs to be the case." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "That’s interesting. If you say the social sector, who would be in the social sector if you identify them?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "For example, there is this idea that professional journalists can serve in a non-partisan way to fact-check existing messages. In Taiwan, for example, that’s the Taiwan Fact-Check Center, which is part of the International Fact-Checking Network, the IFCN." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Because it’s voluntary, it solves a common problem, and anyone can contribute. That fits the definition of social sector. Certain, the TFCC is not a business in the private sector. Neither are they a extension of the administration, so they are not part of the public sector. I would refer to the TFCC, for example, as a social-sector actor." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "TFCC is like a crowd concept? People will try to do the fact-check rather than…" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They have full-time staff, but the funding is based on small-scale crowd funding. They don’t accept donation from political parties, politicians, or the public sector." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "They’re trying to be free from all of those." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s right, so they could be neutral when it comes to fact-checking." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "That’s interesting. That is the strategy, the social sector first?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "Do you think it is difficult to handle that? In some countries, doing that kind of approach having difficulties as well. At some point, they become partisan, they become opposition, or they become government supporters." }, { "speaker": "Dachi Liao", "speech": "Cannot be trusted by the public." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "How can they be trusted by…" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s exactly right. More than one fact-checker is essential. For example, MyGoPen, which is another International Fact-Check Network member in Taiwan, they can fact-check some time, but the TFCC may have a different view on the same thing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The more people join and participate as essentially part-time fact-checkers, the more the fact-checkers themselves will be held to account when it comes to transparency and accountability. Participatory accountability is very important to support the social sector." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That holds true for everyone in Taiwan’s social sector. Their legitimacy, why is it high? That is because everyone can participate and hold them accountable in the process." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "That’s interesting." }, { "speaker": "Dachi Liao", "speech": "What made this kind of fact-check…" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In Taiwan, members of IFCN is just MyGoPen and TFCC. There are also other non-IFCN-accredited fact-checking groups available. For example, the Cofacts project from g0v is not a IFCN member, but it is trusted by many. Cofacts also partners, for example, with Trend Micro, which is Taiwan’s leading antivirus company. That’s one example." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There’s a company called Whoscall in Taiwan that does fraud detection for caller identification and so on, but they are not a IFCN…" }, { "speaker": "Dachi Liao", "speech": "Fact-check." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They’re not a IFCN member, but they do have a chat bot that partners with Cofacts for fact-checking and scam detection purposes. It’s called Meiyu 美玉姨, Aunt Meiyu." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Whoscall and Meiyu are not IFCN members." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "According to your opinion, apart from the COVID-19, what is the most threatening of disinformation in Taiwan." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "At the moment, of course, we are between a presidential election and the referenda. It’s alternating years, a presidential election, and then the next year, a referendum and the national referendum. The next year will be mayoral election, then referendum, then election, then referendum. It’s on this zigzag, tick-tock…not that TikTok." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "…tempo. Every time we are approaching one particular referenda or one particular election, the disinformation concerning those referenda topics will start to grow." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The reason is that people already pay attention to these topics, so the likelihood of people sharing some unconfirmed piece of information increases because people would, of course, want to share something of a timely and pressing topic to their friends and families to inform them better on the election or on the referenda." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The topic that is the most trending depends on, because we’re in the referendum year this year, the ongoing referendum signatures. These trending referendum topics, of course, also become [snaps] a more shareable ground for disinformation." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "You said before that you understand that the disinformation, they tend to be high during election or during referendum." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In the months leading up to an election or referenda, all up to the date itself. During the election day, for example, we also had disinformation that tried to discredit the voting process saying there’s invisible ink printed by CIA or something like that." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "That’s similar to us." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Of course, we dispelled that. During our counting, YouTubers can look at the counting because we allow recording devices, and we only use paper ballots. During that time, all the different parties’ members can use an app. It may be called 英眼部隊 or 穿雲箭, or some other app to, in real time, tally the counting process and report any unusual circumstances." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The public trust in those counting process is higher than the agents that spread the disinformation about the election process, which is why, by and large, and thanks to a contribution to TFCN and so on, by the election day, the clarification message has already spread to more people than the disinformation that tried to attack the voting process." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "On the week afterward, the conspiracy theories and so on just die down. Our presidential election this time is pretty well-guarded by the citizens’ participation in the counting process. Again, that’s a case for participatory accountability." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "Interestingly, how do you know that there’s some issues going up and some issues going down? Are you having something that is…" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "If you look at the dashboard in the LINE company, they show such a trend, and it’s public." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "You use the same data?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah. Anyone can long-press a message in LINE into an encrypted messaging platform to report trending disinformation. Like this many people have reported this many likely disinformation. This shows the trendiness of such disinformations at this very moment." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "Just to clarify, before disinformation is spread, you predict that, and then you give another…" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "A clarification." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "…a clarification before the disinformation." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s already trending on certain groups…" }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "It’s already trending?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "…in the LINE platform. Because they are end-to-end encrypted, you can’t find them with a Google search or something. Between the time the that it gets trending on selected LINE groups to the time that it gets trending on public media or on public social media, this is the period that we need to work a clarification message. We’re already aware of it, but it has not yet affected a majority of the population." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "Very interesting. One of the way to fight the disinformation is just giving all the story before the fake news be observed. I think that’s the best strategy to use." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, but, of course, the clarification that we give also need to be trending. It also need to be viral. Our approach is called humor over rumor, making sure that our clarification messages are humorous so people will share it." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "Interesting." }, { "speaker": "Dachi Liao", "speech": "Humor over rumor, very interesting term." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "Research also tells that usually disinformation spread using humor. You use humor to clarify the…" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly, yes." }, { "speaker": "Dachi Liao", "speech": "Can you give a example how humor over rumor…?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "For example, this is a very cute…" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "…Shiba Inu. This is called Zongchai. It’s a Shiba Inu. It’s a dog. The dog lives with the Ministry of Health and Welfare’s participation officer so that any time there’s a rumor about the pandemic, the dog can go out and clarify." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "For example, the dog can also remind you to cover your mouth and nose when sneezing, so don’t do this. Then, when we introduce physical distancing rules, there’s many different versions, different messages. People were not sure how to observe the physical distancing. I just said 1.5 meters, but it’s not easy to remember." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The clarification messages says, “If you’re indoor, keep three Shiba Inu away,” and I can mentally picture three dogs between us. [laughs] If you’re outdoor, you have to keep two Shiba Inu away or wear a mask. That’s a funny clarification." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "That’s funny." }, { "speaker": "Dachi Liao", "speech": "Can you pass this to us? That’s a kind of a…" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Of course." }, { "speaker": "Dachi Liao", "speech": "[laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "Thank you." }, { "speaker": "Dachi Liao", "speech": "A great example. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, the Shiba Inu is very cute. It’s called Zongchai." }, { "speaker": "Dachi Liao", "speech": "Zongchai is a Mandarin pronunciation. In Mandarin, we say 總柴, similar to Zongchai. It’s a trusted…" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s a word play by itself. It sounds similar to 總裁, a Shiba Inu." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This particular Shiba Inu dog, this particular dog has the name Zongchai, and “Zongcai” means CEO." }, { "speaker": "Dachi Liao", "speech": "Trusted CEO." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s like the chief dog." }, { "speaker": "Dachi Liao", "speech": "It’s similar as the…" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The chief Shiba Inu. That’s a wordplay. Even the name of the dog is part of the humor." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "Interesting." }, { "speaker": "Dachi Liao", "speech": "Who made this kind of a humor…" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The participation officer in the Ministry of Health and Welfare." }, { "speaker": "Dachi Liao", "speech": "I heard about them." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The PO literally lives with this dog." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "All they need to do is to go back home, which is quite close to the Ministry, and take new pictures. They don’t even need to pay for Shutterstock or some other photo." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "Thank you. For the next question, do you think that disinformation have a special purpose here in Taiwan?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Have a what?" }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "Have a purpose." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Each disinformation, because it’s intentional untruth for public harm, has a different intention. The intention varies, so each disinformation have a very different purpose." }, { "speaker": "Dachi Liao", "speech": "Can you name a few you feel is…" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Of course. For example, there was a disinformation that says killing a police in Hong Kong earns young people $20 million. That’s intentional. It’s not true. It causes harm. This was trending last November, right before our presidential election, probably because the person or the group who spread this disinformation understood that this will become the deciding issue in our presidential election." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They want to preemptively paint the Hong Kong protesters as riotous so that it will not be a factor in our presidential election. They back it up with photo, like this photo. Actually, this photo was from Reuters, and the Reuters photo said nothing about paying anything or about murdering police. It has a very neutral caption that says there are young people in the protests. That’s all it says." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "However, the disinformation switch to a very different caption, but retaining the same photo. This is intentional, and it causes harm. The Taiwan Fact-Check Center traced the first poster of this message. It is the Weibo account of the Zhongyang Zhengfawei, Chang’an Jian, the Communist Party’s political and law unit. It’s not covert. It’s overt. It’s posted publicly on their Weibo." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Interestingly, this makes the round in Taiwanese social media but not in Hong Kong. This is very interesting when it comes to the intention. We would say, of course, the purpose seems likely to try to make Hong Kong a non-issue for the Taiwanese presidential election. That seems to be the intention of this disinformation, but I have not talked to Chang’an Jian, so I cannot confirm that it’s their true intention." }, { "speaker": "Dachi Liao", "speech": "How do we deal with that?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We use a tactic called notice and public notice. Whenever you want to share this mis-captioned photo on, say, Facebook, you can still share it, but it shows a public notice, “According to the TFCC, this information is a disinformation that was first posted by the Chinese Communist Party’s Chang’an Jian Weibo account.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You’re not forced to take down anything. We’re not taking down anything, but whenever this is making the rounds, everyone sees this public attribution that this is essentially state-sponsored propaganda." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "Who did this, TFCC? Who did all of those…" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The TFCC provided the fact-check. If you want to see how it is done, you can look at the TFCC website and search for the 204. The 204th fact-check that they did is this particular one, just one example." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "In that case, is it right if I say that the disinformation comes from outside the country?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There are also disinformation that comes from inside the country. For example, there was another disinformation at this time this year, on this February, that says, “We’re running out of masks. The only way to get a mask is to share this message and leave your contact information.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s, of course, not true. This, of course, incites a kind of panic in the persons that they share. The TFCC people actually shared this and left their contact info, but they didn’t receive a box of masks as promised." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "[laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Obviously, it is disinformation and probably just to scam people, to get people’s contact emails and know that they are more likely suspect to scams. This probably is domestic. This probably is not something that comes from outside of the country." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "Which one is more dominant? Is it outside or inside the country?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Can’t say that as a generic response. It all depends on particular agenda. Also depends on how close it is to the presidential election. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "In terms of presidential election, some countries also have the echo chambers effect where each of the supporters have entrusted their own links and so forth. Is it happens as well here?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Of course. According to independent media who actually interviewed the people who goes to the rally of the presidential candidate Han Kuo-yu, presidential candidate Tsai Ing-wen, surprisingly, they have a lot more in common than they thought." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Both camps believe in deepening democratization, and both camps believe in connecting more with international community. It’s just either camp, although knowing this is important, accuse the other camp of not doing this enough, but the values are the same." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "How about COVID-19, specifically? Are there any disinformation that is still going until now?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now, probably not. I already shared the one about the mask shortage thing." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "It’s for early 2020." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It was in February. Around the same time, there was a lot of disinformation like, in County X or Town X in Taiwan, there’s a lot of corpses that are being hidden by the local authorities, with some photo from some zombie movies and things like that. They stopped trending long ago." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I would say during the height of the pandemic, there’s some disinformation. Since we are essentially post-COVID since May, the kind of disinformation…It trends on the idea of people actually caring about this. The same message will not make people share it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "If you want share a message that says, “In County X, there’s 10,000 people dying of COVID, and it’s being hidden by the local municipal mayor,” this may make it very sensational back in February or March, but it makes no dent in public awareness here because people understand it’s not very unlikely to be the case." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "About that, what do you think is more prevalent in terms of the reason triggering the spread of COVID-19 fake news or other disinformation? Some researchers found that there are three, at least. Interpersonal relationship, I mean by saying here, if I close to you, then I tend to trust you more than the government or more than other sources." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "Or the issue relevance. Let’s say COVID-19 in February will be fairly…" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly, more relevant than now." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "…trustable. Sometimes the disinformation getting spread wider because the personal efficacy. Here, if someone just don’t care about it, “I don’t care about this. I don’t have any issues about that, and I don’t care about it.” Which one is more dominant in here?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I think the main thing is none of the three. The main thing is the emotional tone of the message. All the example I just shared with you evoke a sense of outrage. In Taiwan, we call this outrage directed to a specific person or to specific people as 出征, going on an expedition." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Meaning that people would seek some sort of revenge or discrimination out of a perceived injustice that evokes the sense of outrage. The more that the disinformation travels on this shared sense of vengeful outrage, the more likely that it will spread." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "It’s common to use scare tactics in spreading disinformation?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, but also outrage, meaning that there need to be a clearly identified wrong. For example, paying young people to murder police is wrong, so we need to share the message to support law for police. This is outrage." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "In some countries, there are some issues with disinformation and democracy. How do you perceive this in Taiwan?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In Taiwan, we think that, if we counter disinformation, we must not make a U-turn back to the martial law days where the government can censor unwelcome speech from the civil society, from the social sector. Well, in the martial law, there was no social sector. [laughs] There was just some civil society individuals because they were not allowed to form a coalition. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We really don’t want to make this U-turn, which is why this social problem need to be solved by the social sector with social innovation. The more that we encourage, like notice and public notice, which makes it more social, rather than take-down, which makes it more anti-social. All the prosocial efforts organized by the social sector is to be preferred because it makes the democratic system more democratic." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "On the other hand, the antisocial ways, for example, a forced take-down, will essentially divide the population into the people who believe in such a take-down and the people who do not believe in such a take-down. Every time something authoritarian is done, the society become more polarized and less democratic." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We will often intentionally not do any of those take-downs or any of those top-down approaches, but rather rely on the social sector who may be seen as more indirect. Actually, it’s more empowering." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "In some countries, they believe that using that kind of social-sector approach or similar to like that, using that takes time to do that. Does it…" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s more indirect." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "Yes, indirect. That’s why, in some countries, they’re doing the top-down approach." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Of course, but you can compare that to a lockdown. The lockdown is very effective the first time around, but once the lockdown is longer in time or if you repeatedly do lockdown, then it cause a fatigue. People don’t want to comply any more because the more you do it, the more people feel restricted." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The first time around, of course, it’s very effective. I’m not disputing that, but the marginal return will be diminishing over time. On the other hand, if we just rely on people sharing cute dog pictures and reminding each other to wear a mask to protect against your own unwashed hands, this maybe looks slow at first." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Because it’s people’s own idea, it’s social innovation, it doesn’t rely on any lockdown. Eventually, it will empower the civil society so that the social sector will be able then to remind each other to not only wear mask but be very innovative in promoting pink, rainbow, the flag of the country, or many other [laughs] design of medical masks. It becomes a statement of fashion. If you do a top-down lockdown, none of this innovation will be possible." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "Interesting. In terms of infodemics, we’ve done some research on some countries using the website, and then we took from…What we call the website?" }, { "speaker": "Septyanto Galan Prakoso", "speech": "The…" }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "I forget the name of the website. We look at some countries, and Taiwan one of them. The only three countries that use fact-checkers provided by government regarding the infodemics, and Taiwan is not one of them." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, because the Taiwan Fact-Check Center or MyGoPen are not government entities." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "You use the same strategy in the infodemics?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s not run by the government." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "Not from the government, so let the TFCC do that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly." }, { "speaker": "Dachi Liao", "speech": "It’s not part of official sector." }, { "speaker": "Septyanto Galan Prakoso", "speech": "The name of the website is Worldometers." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Worldometers, yeah." }, { "speaker": "Dachi Liao", "speech": "Social sector." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "Any other questions from you all?" }, { "speaker": "Dachi Liao", "speech": "I do have a question. I really appreciated the social-sector-first approach but, in our society, not to mention other country yet, actually, it’s an imbalance, the power relation between society and the state." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I know." }, { "speaker": "Dachi Liao", "speech": "You know. State is always stronger so far. You are the strongest social leaders in the past, but right now, you are in government. [laughs] This imbalance of relationship between the state and the society, if the government intentionally distribute disinformation, what the social…" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then it makes it very hard for the social sector to clarify it." }, { "speaker": "Dachi Liao", "speech": "What can social sector do? We really encounter this kind of problem. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is a issue faced by pretty much all the countries. Sometimes, the government itself send misinformation. It may not be intentionally false, but it is false. The government is misinformed. Just because it is a government statement, it becomes very difficult for independent fact-checkers to fact-check the government." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "On the other hand, if they are state-sponsored, they don’t even have this opportunity in the first place. Just saying very difficult for the TFCC to fact-check the government doesn’t mean that TFCC can’t fact-check the government. It’s just difficult." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We can actually look at the TFCC portfolio about the information. It’s very interesting because the government has also been fact-checked and then changed, clarified, or retracted previous statements that are fact-checked as not true. If you analyze the entire TFCC report, these incidents are in single digits. It’s not known to happen much, but it did happen." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "A recent example of it actually happening and the government changing its messages, saying, “We were misinformed. We got it wrong,” was about a beef noodle thing, which, of course, Professor Liao can fill in on the details." }, { "speaker": "Dachi Liao", "speech": "[laughs] Yeah, literally." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then the premier did apologize by admitting that the initial source of information was not the case. That did happen, but these are in the single digits, meaning that it does not happen often. The professor’s point is well-taken; it takes courage and a lot of resolve for independent fact-checkers to call on the government’s mistakes. That is true." }, { "speaker": "Septyanto Galan Prakoso", "speech": "I have a question. Also learning from the examples from my country, basically, the ministry that is responsible to counter the disinformation during the pandemic times is the Minister of Health and…" }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "Welfare." }, { "speaker": "Septyanto Galan Prakoso", "speech": "…Welfare here in Taiwan? Or, is there any coordination with other special bodies or ministries that also can collaborate together?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Mainly, it’s MOHW." }, { "speaker": "Septyanto Galan Prakoso", "speech": "The Minister of Information is maybe assisting on the progress of the mechanisms or mainly just done by one ministry?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No, because COVID, no matter whether it’s about the counter-COVID strategy or whether it’s about the welfare, like recovering, that’s health and welfare. Both are within the MOHW. It is mostly just because the MOHW encompasses pretty much all counter-COVID processes." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s not that only they do counter-disinformation. Other ministries do counter-disinformation as well. It just so happens that COVID is mostly about health and welfare." }, { "speaker": "Septyanto Galan Prakoso", "speech": "Thank you very much, minister. In our case, the responsibility is taken care of by a certain task force that especially established only for counter the COVID and the pandemic." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "Every ministry has the right to counter the disinformation?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They have a obligation." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "How they do that? They use their official accounts, LINE or Twitter?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, or Facebook, Instagram, or whatever. The clarification messages, they are government-produced. There’s no copyright, so anyone can just copy it. Actually, they’re designed to be copied, like the cute dog picture. Anyone can translate it into your language." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Actually, it has been translated voluntarily too. [laughs] We even design the card to. Instead of overlaying text with photo, which makes it hard to translate…" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "…we make sure that it’s easily translatable." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "Any more questions? You?" }, { "speaker": "Dachi Liao", "speech": "Not for the formal interview." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Not for the formal interview?" }, { "speaker": "Dachi Liao", "speech": "Not into the recorder." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "It comes to the last questions. We have talked much about disinformation in Taiwan. Do you have any other issues regarding the disinformation that not covered in our interview before…" }, { "speaker": "Dachi Liao", "speech": "You want to share with the…" }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "…that you want to share with me?" }, { "speaker": "Dachi Liao", "speech": "…Indonesia country? We need to write a report. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "Or your perception on other?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Why not? There is a interesting development this year that combines the cybersecurity attack and the disinformation operation together. In the Taiwan Fact-Check Center, if you search for Team T5 and Taiwan Fact-Check Center, you see the report. This is in Mandarin, but, of course, you can machine translate it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What this is saying is that the advanced, persistent threats – essentially state-sponsored, black-hat hackers – are now helping the disinformation organizers to create fake accounts that makes all sort of cybersecurity-related disinformation. It’s both to shield the disinformation actors from being identified as, well, professionals." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Also, it is to combine the cybersecurity threat profile. People, if they buy into the disinformation, it makes them more susceptible for phishing attacks, for cybersecurity attacks. These two become intertwined. This is a pretty comprehensive report that was just published last month. I will suggest you to look into it." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "Team T5?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, Team T5, and it’s in the Taiwan Fact-Check Center website." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "Any issues about deep fake so far in Taiwan?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In Taiwan, we already have this thing called animated news, or 動新聞, for a very long time. [laughs] People I guess are more resilient…" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "…against the synthetic video because…" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "…it’s pioneered in Taiwan." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "Thank you, Madame Minister, for you time." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Thank you, sure." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "It’s my pleasure. Thank you for this opportunity to have this kind of interview. I have some new issues that can be enlightening in some way. Thank you very much." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Thank you." }, { "speaker": "Rino Nugroho", "speech": "I turn off my recorder from now." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes." } ]

[ { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "各位午安。今天針對政院所屬各機關政府資料分類及授權利用收費原則，進行討論。從 2012 年開始，政府就推動資料開放。去年起，行政院宣示「開放、不收費為原則，不開放、收費為例外。」因此，需要一個規範，讓原則和規範都有所依據。從五月開始，已經開了多次的會議，針對資料分類和收費原則做出草案。希望利用這個機會來討論。在多次討論之後，分為甲類「開放資料」，適用今天要討論的授權條款。乙類為有限度利用，而丙類是不開放。各機關在網路上，如果是適用和民間社群討論的開放資料，以最廣的利用為原則，幾乎等同於公共財了。這樣的授權是事後無法撤銷，轉授權也包含在內，是很廣的授權範圍。同時各機關在處理時，也要確定權利是完整的，也就是能夠取得完整的授權。如果授權來源不完整，那就分為乙類，這是我們內部溝通的原則。丙類則是不對外開放的。今天對於這個分類和原則，大家一起討論辦法本身是否妥適，因為部會意見很多，請簡處長主持後續討論。" }, { "speaker": "國發會簡處長", "speech": "我們今天定出的準則，已經和政委、國庫署協調討論，有初步的草案出來。" }, { "speaker": "國發會莊分析師", "speech": "歷程和主體架構進行說明。從 5/12 開始，在政府收費以圖資為大宗，邀集內政部、農委會、法務部，討論了圖資的收費原則。在 5/15 蔡政委的會議上，我們討論了是否可採私法授權的議題。我們希望規費收取金額做出盤點，這樣針對資料開放的衝擊，能有更進一步的瞭解。於 6/10 確定了資料分類的方式，以及授權的範本，定調為司法的關係行為。於 6/25 請法規會提供條款修訂，也召開了跨部會的討論。" }, { "speaker": "國發會簡處長", "speech": "乙類定義：擬改為「有償或有限制條件」之授權利用。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "內容無太大意見，因為要先離開，「開放格式」希望有所明確定義。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "建議採用 Open Definition 的定義。" }, { "speaker": "國發會簡處長", "speech": "同意。" }, { "speaker": "張維志", "speech": "我很疑惑的是，丙類為不開放資料，以法令不得公開為限制。" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "這個在逐條討論時會處理。" }, { "speaker": "國發會陳科長", "speech": "第五頁先針對法規適用之疑義討論。請財政部對優先序發表看法。" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "先請財政部說明。" }, { "speaker": "國庫署", "speech": "我們對這個原則的基本態度，是因為規費法裡明文規定有規費需求，但資訊公開法又要求主動公開。" }, { "speaker": "法務部", "speech": "我們已定義為私法關係，而規費法是公法行為，所以規費法並不適用，所以我們才要定這個標準。" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "這需要更清楚的理清：規費法下之任何辦法，屬於公法行為，履行時有公開的義務。" }, { "speaker": "佚名", "speech": "第一條「以民事契約約定其授權利用之收費項目有所依循」，實務上認為規費法為公法關係，" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "私法關係裡為什麼不能有收費的用語和樣態？" }, { "speaker": "法務部", "speech": "舉一個例子，例如國有財產（土地）和民間設定地上權的方式，但這是使用民事契約，" }, { "speaker": "內政部", "speech": "我認為私法、規費法需要分開沒錯，我同意要走私法才能推得動。" }, { "speaker": "國庫署", "speech": "我的意思是大家原本是在習慣的公法關係下，訂定收費標準。" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "開放資料的授權條款是非常寬的，規費法是沒有這麼寬的空間的，所以私法才能完全處理這個部份。" }, { "speaker": "國發會簡處長", "speech": "甲類授權條款，已用院函方式通知，各機關近期將會收到。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部", "speech": "原來規費法是公法，Open Data、收費資料則是私法，這很清楚。" }, { "speaker": "國發會簡處長", "speech": "在第五點，每季開的諮詢會議裡，就是要逐項討論、做出轉換。" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "我們談開放資料時，民間在意的是授權條款，因為利用到一半如果權利撤回，使用意願就降低了。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "規費法是範圍是抄錄、郵寄、閱覽，而不及於再利用。" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "私法契約因為是合約關係，所以授權才能明定。" }, { "speaker": "農委會林務局", "speech": "航空照片影像，是用國土測繪法，是以公法規定，做有償的使用。" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "甲類是可以商業利用的，這是未來各機關可以逐項盤點業管資料，加以討論的。" }, { "speaker": "國發會簡處長", "speech": "依照各部會開放資料設置的諮詢小組要點，各三級、四級機關都應提報清單來做決定。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "學理上來說，重點在於公法、私法。這個二元分立是德日法系的特點。" }, { "speaker": "國發會簡處長", "speech": "目前進入逐條討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "此處電子表單的意思，主要是以 PDF 格式記載文數字，但仍採用「開放授權」釋出的資料。" }, { "speaker": "國發會簡處長", "speech": "電子表單加進去，可能成為過於特定的項目，這樣 GIS 和地圖都要列出了..." }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "這個「等」的意思就是不限制特定樣態。" }, { "speaker": "內政部", "speech": "謄本的收費？" }, { "speaker": "國發會陳科長", "speech": "2012 年的收費原則，作成的資料，和謄本（規費法）是互不相屬的。舉例來說地藉資料，如果屬於地藉謄本，特定於個人時，也不屬於開放資料。" }, { "speaker": "張維志", "speech": "例如過去五十年的選舉公報是紙本尚未電子化，是否受此規則處理？" }, { "speaker": "國發會簡處長", "speech": "未電子化之資料，應由檔案法、資訊公開法來處理。這份確實是針對電子資料來處理。" }, { "speaker": "張維志", "speech": "國外經常會列舉資料集，但不限定於電子資料集。" }, { "speaker": "內政部", "speech": "是否有考量的空間？畢竟紙本資料也是應公開的事項。" }, { "speaker": "國發會簡處長", "speech": "理解有授權時，紙本資料可以電子化之後再授權。" }, { "speaker": "內政部", "speech": "Whisky 應該是想說，目前沒有電子化的資料，如果就可以不開放，那就少了一大半了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "甲類資料的定義為開放格式，所以紙本要先數位化。" }, { "speaker": "國發會陳科長", "speech": "我們目前要統一放在 data.gov.tw 上，所以是以電子資料為原則。" }, { "speaker": "張維志", "speech": "如果拿掉這個限制，應該就有很多東西可以進來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實乙類資料也必須是開放格式，而紙本不能說是開放格式..." }, { "speaker": "張維志", "speech": "同意，這和未來的 API 化也有關連。" }, { "speaker": "國發會簡處長", "speech": "紙本載體之資料，競合的程度就不只在規費法，而牽涉到了檔案法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果保留「電子」字樣，是否未來資料的電子化，能夠使用新的辨法或新的法令來處理？" }, { "speaker": "國發會簡處長", "speech": "由於行政命令的位階，所以要盤點的項目很多，用未來的新辦法來處理的難度仍然很高。" }, { "speaker": "內政部", "speech": "建議改為「政府電子資料分類及授權利用收費利用原則」，避免名實不符的狀態。" }, { "speaker": "國發會簡處長", "speech": "以政府資訊公開法第三條，已定義非電子資料，「圖片、文書、照片」等媒介物。" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "內政部所提，「政府資料」改為「政府電子資料」，在法律上，第二條都已經是電子資料了。" }, { "speaker": "張維志", "speech": "無論我們如何制定，這都是行政原則。無論哪一塊，都會和法衝突，所以我不知道加上紙本資料，到底會衝擊到多少法？" }, { "speaker": "國發會簡處長", "speech": "檔案法對於紙本資料的索引，這是公開的，並無疑義。" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "政府資訊公開法是公法，以「知的權利」為意旨。" }, { "speaker": "國發會簡處長", "speech": "先保留，請文播紀錄留下 Whisky 的不同意見。" }, { "speaker": "國發會莊分析師", "speech": "第三點。" }, { "speaker": "法規會", "speech": "「公開」、「開放」操作上意思相同？" }, { "speaker": "張維志", "speech": "我對分類要回到法律面來談，「不得公開」絕對是「不得開放」，雖然「政府資訊公開法」不是母法，但是如果依此法「不得公開」，自然是不得主動開放。所以我覺得不需要特別列在這裡。" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "這裡的政府資料，不是講開放資料，第二條又明訂為電子資料。甲乙丙是方便內部溝通使用。" }, { "speaker": "張維志", "speech": "乙類是回到規費法嗎？" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "不是這樣，乙類仍然是私法關係。" }, { "speaker": "國發會簡處長", "speech": "規費法是公法，乙類仍然是民事契約。" }, { "speaker": "張維志", "speech": "為什麼不是回到規費法？" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "我們一直卡在規費法（不能自帶授權條款）..." }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "我們討論的方式，用的是英國在開放資料時，順便使用了乙類的資料，放上「限制利用」的條款，仍然是一個私法契約，使之能使用浮動的效果。規費法沒有授權機制，所以沒有辦法緩衝。Whisky 說公開和開放不要混起來，Open Definition 對 Open「開放」做定義。能看而不能用的「公開」，這會讓公務部門和民間有一個 sense，看到「公開」的時候不一定能再利用，看到「開放」時就可以。舉例：Microsoft 弄了 Shared Source License「公開分享而不開放改作」，比較像今天說的乙類資料。所以社群用到 Open Data 「開放資料」的話，它帶有一種特定的文化意義。" }, { "speaker": "張維志", "speech": "乙類是為了能過渡到甲類，可是我國所有的資料都是乙類到甲類來。乙類是規定了開放格式沒錯，但是應該在這裡呈現嗎？Open Office 格式、資料交換格式，這些需要全部綁在一起談嗎？" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "一件事情要有它的可執行性。乙類資料是確實存在的。這個分類包含外部和內部溝通的成分。" }, { "speaker": "張維志", "speech": "如果從政府資料來看的話，應該是分成「開放」「公開」「不可公開」。" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "因為這麼多部會，甲乙丙是溝通使用，也希望出席者協助把公部門的分類方式，溝通給利用者知道，我們會盡量放在甲類裡。" }, { "speaker": "張維志", "speech": "是!" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "「私法關係」和「甲乙丙類」的兩大概念，是今天會議要溝通的重點。" }, { "speaker": "國發會簡處長", "speech": "這個討論我覺得滿好的。" }, { "speaker": "國庫署", "speech": "當初的提議是政院提統一的標準，在一定金額以上，提到政院級來處理。內部討論是否用「五千萬」為初步想法？" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "建議不要寫在明文裡，而是財政部再發文公告。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部", "speech": "要有明確的金額和計算基準，部會比較敢放心做。" }, { "speaker": "國發會簡處長", "speech": "建議由財政部議定後，請政院開放資料諮詢小組決定，統一通知各機關。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部", "speech": "乙類授權條款各機關訂定，是否中央可以給參考，避免差異過大？" }, { "speaker": "國發會簡處長", "speech": "NDC 會和工業局，參考現有條款修正，作為範本提供給各機關。" }, { "speaker": "衷嵐焜", "speech": "對於第三條，「達一定金額以上者」，看起來是很慎重的事情。" }, { "speaker": "國庫署", "speech": "有這樣的建議，就是因為用了很多的成本，政府的錢是來自所有的人民，而資料的使用者可能只有部份的人民。" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "要提報給小組看一下（小組裡也有民間的幾位委員），一部份的原因是開放資料，是國際上所有人都可利用，而這些資料是國內的納稅人建置的。" }, { "speaker": "衷嵐焜", "speech": "「花了很多錢建置，所以不要拿出來給外人用」...？" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "動機上不一定是惡意的，利用情況如何還是請諮詢小組來審。" }, { "speaker": "衷嵐焜", "speech": "公共財資源如果有排除、稀缺、耗損性，收錢是有意義的。" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "我們會希望不斷的討論、諮詢小組的運作，透過具體的個案，才會讓意見在論理上更為完整。" }, { "speaker": "衷嵐焜", "speech": "如果沒有一開始的少數人先自由利用，未來就難以加速後續低廉的使用成本。" }, { "speaker": "國發會簡處長", "speech": "請國庫署幫忙，在第三條定義之後，目前未收費之資料，不應因此加以收費。" }, { "speaker": "國庫署", "speech": "這個我們難以承諾。如果個案討論後是需要收費，不能因為目前未收費就不收費。" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "具體的情況，還是以個案討論為主。我們今天先處理原則。" }, { "speaker": "國庫署", "speech": "第五點稱「前點」，其實是「第三點」？" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "乙類建議改成「以有償方式授權、保留事後撤回之權利，或其他限制利用者。」" }, { "speaker": "法務部", "speech": "意思是可以事後撤回？" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "乙類包含到期撤回的樣態。簡單說，就是「有條件，不是甲類的」就是乙類。" }, { "speaker": "國發會莊分析師", "speech": "vTaiwan> 建置成本應考慮，其次為商業用途，載體最後。同意不同費率。" }, { "speaker": "國庫署", "speech": "如果完全講電子資料，可以排除掉載體費用。" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "如果印紙本，希望用規費法，不要在這裡處理。" }, { "speaker": "內政部", "speech": "同意。" }, { "speaker": "國庫署", "speech": "我們可以放到說明欄去。在國外也是要付光碟的成本。" }, { "speaker": "國發會簡處長", "speech": "建議去除「紙本」字樣，因其無法再度利用。" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "光碟比較便宜，紙本可能很多錢..." }, { "speaker": "國庫署", "speech": "第四點第一款說乙類資料要參考下列項目，並不是說每一案都一定要全部加上去。" }, { "speaker": "法規會", "speech": "邊際成本的意思是「廠商每單位增加之成本」，各單位是否理解？" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "第二款「按合理比例分攤」在以參考為原則時，可以拿掉，合理與否是參考者可以酌情衡量的。" }, { "speaker": "國庫署", "speech": "國外立法例有使用 reasonable 字樣，在實務上航照資料的成本是極高的，如果 100% 給使用者是不合理的，因為這是施政所需，不只是為了民間需求用的。" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "因為是機關要參考，所以不用列到每個情況。" }, { "speaker": "教育部", "speech": "我覺得不是分攤的概念，本來就是為了行政所需建置的。" }, { "speaker": "國發會簡處長", "speech": "所以「合理分攤比例」我覺得可以去掉，這些依業務作成的資料，原本並不是為民間蒐集的。" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "所以刪成兩條「成本（用了多少預算）」和「商業利用（對方收益回饋）」。" }, { "speaker": "內政部地政司", "speech": "社群活動時，曾經為了要電子化政府所做資料的花費有過討論，「即使沒有社群使用」是政府就要花費的。我覺得建置成本不需要計入民間使用攤提。如果為了民間的需求來電子化資料，那是因民間而有建置成本。但是如果已經有現有資料系統，那麼就不應該收取行政管理成本。" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "乙類資料上，有去識別化的成本、有上游取得成本..." }, { "speaker": "內政部地政司", "speech": "乙類資料可以舉個例子嗎？" }, { "speaker": "文化部", "speech": "部內蒐集的活動資訊，例如民間年代、寬宏、兩廳院提供的資訊，這些簡介的圖文，只能在活動期間利用，這就是乙類資料。" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "時間限制也是一種限制，仍屬於乙類資料。" }, { "speaker": "內政部國土測繪中心", "speech": "我們是少數在販售圖資的單位。" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "特定人士、特定時間，也都算是乙類資料。收費只是一種條件。" }, { "speaker": "國發會陳科長", "speech": "建議把「知」和「用」分開，「知」是資訊公開法，「用」則是甲乙丙三類資料。" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "法律再理清一下。乙類不是一定要收費，只要有限制條件「非甲類」就是乙類了。" }, { "speaker": "內政部國土測繪中心", "speech": "加值型和非加值型資料，在我們本來就有區分。" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "授權的限制在哪裡，應該要講清楚。" }, { "speaker": "國庫署", "speech": "現行收費資料，如果用今天的原則做成乙類，授權的樣態是比較清楚的。" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "第四點簡化為兩項確定。" }, { "speaker": "國發會莊分析師", "speech": "法規會> 分類方式應如何徵詢、擬定？" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "法規會的文字，待會來討論。" }, { "speaker": "衛福部", "speech": "統計處使用「行政院公報管理及考核作業要點」相當頻繁，如果能夠統一 14 日為「不得 7 日」，作業上應該比較習慣。" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "這比較是政府如何執行檢視程序的方式。" }, { "speaker": "張維志", "speech": "資料清單，乙類是要公佈和限制利用之理由，希望可以把資料欄位名稱及型態公佈出來。" }, { "speaker": "國發會簡處長", "speech": "好的。資料集形成時，我們可以公佈 metadata。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "七天、十四天我沒有特別意見。" }, { "speaker": "內政部國土測繪中心", "speech": "同意。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部", "speech": "同意。" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "字樣上請法規會協助。" }, { "speaker": "法規會", "speech": "國發會要公開諮詢的只是收費嗎？還是連同分類？" }, { "speaker": "內政部", "speech": "第五點稱「前點」，其實是「第三點」，就已包含甲類。" }, { "speaker": "國發會簡處長", "speech": "第五點包含甲乙丙，所以再對乙類做額外限制的諮詢。" }, { "speaker": "內政部", "speech": "第二項的後面可以拿到第一項後面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果第一項的「資料之分類」移除，是否在第二項明訂「甲類資料」為宜（如法規會意見），或是移除第二項第一款，提到第二項內文？" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "第一項專門處理乙類，但第二項「甲乙丙」類的字樣，請法規會協助處理。" }, { "speaker": "公共工程委員會", "speech": "對於民間競標取得的資料及收費方式，是否逐案都要送到開放資料諮詢委員會？" }, { "speaker": "國發會簡處長", "speech": "不是在這裡處理，我們（包括開放資料諮詢委員會）只處理通案。" }, { "speaker": "教育部", "speech": "（二）「徵詢期間結束後，」字樣可移除。" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "同意。第三項的具體字樣，我們請法規會來協助。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "國發會的初稿是兩周，我建議改成 14 日，衛福部是「不得少於 7 日」，這也是很好。" }, { "speaker": "國發會莊分析師", "speech": "第六點。" }, { "speaker": "國發會簡處長", "speech": "以各機關來說，都有資訊公開專區，所以放在 data.gov.tw 沒有問題，但如果有放在部會專區上，也是沒有問題的。" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "如法規會、經濟部所建議。" }, { "speaker": "國庫署", "speech": "謄本是地方政府的大宗收入，內政部放謄本會不會影響？" }, { "speaker": "內政部", "speech": "這是規費法的部份... 謝謝提醒。" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "這件事會後處理。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "乙類資料的清單可以放 data.gov.tw，但各國也沒有這樣處理的先例。" }, { "speaker": "法規會", "speech": "第四點「地方政府授權」確定移除？" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "可以由國庫署發函，不要寫在準則裡面。" }, { "speaker": "公共工程委員會", "speech": "第五點檢討原則裡「屬於通案不屬於個案」，「不涉及現有契約」、「不包含競標方式」等，是否能在原則裡註明？" }, { "speaker": "國發會陳科長", "speech": "這個規則不涉及採購法。" }, { "speaker": "公共工程委員會", "speech": "請列入會議紀錄。" }, { "speaker": "衛福部", "speech": "簡版的會議紀錄可以摘述各部會發言，希望盡量詳細。" }, { "speaker": "蔡政務委員", "speech": "簡版紀錄製作時，可以參考 g0v.hackpad.com 上的逐字稿。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "各位課發會的委員、代表、同仁早安，我算了一下人數，只差兩票就可以達到開會人數。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我們可以先介紹新委員。兩位業界的代表：" }, { "speaker": "業務報告", "speech": "確認第二屆第二、三次記錄及辦理情形。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "有些領綱可能會遲交，所以還有可能再增開課發會。" }, { "speaker": "提案討論", "speech": "一、彙整委員所提對於第一群組內領綱草案之意見，供相關領綱研修小組參酌，詳列如附件1之「十二年國民基本教育課程研究發展會(第二屆)對各領域課程綱要草案(104年6月第1版)意見彙整表」。" }, { "speaker": "辦理情形", "speech": "一、已彙整委員對於第一、二、三、四群組領域課程綱要草案(以下簡稱領綱草案)所提相關意見，並請各領域課程綱要研修小組(以下簡稱領綱研修小組)提供回應說明，詳如19-81頁)，將併同修改後之第2版領綱草案，於本次會議依序討論之。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "請看附件中，研修小組是否有回應。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "附件二整理的邏輯，以19頁為例。從最左邊是六月的第一版，接下來是課發會整體的書面意見。再來是大會6/29每位的意見彙整，再來是決議版簽核，交由研修小組回應，並且參酌前述各委員意見修改。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "主要訊息都在附件二，方便委員閱讀，如果擔心紀錄不完整的話，後面附件也有逐一列舉，可以比對。" }, { "speaker": "提案討論", "speech": "案由三" }, { "speaker": "辦理情形", "speech": "一、彙整委員意見提供各領綱研修小組之辦理情形，同案由二之一。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "這邊要請參與第二群組的課發委員，注意上次提出來的，是否都有呼應？" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "值得好好說明的原因，是因為呼應這次十二年國教課綱研修的三個精神。" }, { "speaker": "劉欣宜", "speech": "剛才提到，各領綱附錄二（153頁）的呈現形式，作為例子跟大家說明。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "九年一貫到現在，因應社會變遷，有很多要新教的。" }, { "speaker": "提案討論", "speech": "案由四。" }, { "speaker": "辦理情形", "speech": "已彙整委員對於第一、二、三、四群組領域課程綱要草案(以下簡稱領綱草案)所提相關意見，並請各領域課程綱要研修小組(以下簡稱領綱研修小組)提供回應說明，詳如附件2(第19-81頁)，將併同修改後之第2版領綱草案，於本次會議依序討論之。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "健康與體育上次沒有送進來。明天會第一次看到，請第三群組委員稍微關心一下。" }, { "speaker": "提案討論", "speech": "案由五。" }, { "speaker": "辦理情形", "speech": "已彙整委員對於第一、二、三、四群組領域課程綱要草案(以下簡稱領綱草案)所提相關意見，並請各領域課程綱要研修小組(以下簡稱領綱研修小組)提供回應說明，詳如附件2(第19-81頁)，將併同修改後之第2版領綱草案，於本次會議依序討論之。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "以上五案，是否都忠實反應意見？如無問題，進入業務報告。" }, { "speaker": "業務報告", "speech": "經104年6月29日十二年國民基本教育課程研究發展會(以下簡稱課發會)第二屆第2、3次會後，各領綱研修小組已分別調整各領綱草案。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "這是6/29到今天，工作的情形，有人要問洪主任嗎？沒有，都接受，進入正式議程。" }, { "speaker": "提案討論", "speech": "國教院課程及教學研究中心，有關十二年國民基本教育語文領域-國語文（含國民中小學、普通型、技術型及綜合型高中）課程綱要（草案），提請討論。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "要先跟委員們說明，文字大致都是一樣的，除了附件頁數之外。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "國語文研修團隊的代表，是副召集人蔡曉楓助理研究員。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曉楓", "speech": "我們比較大的爭議點，是文白比例的問題，還有學習內容是否要調整的問題，很抱歉無法做太大的調整。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "蔡研究員剛才要表達的是，中國文化基本教材既然這次已經變成必修，所以其他的比例不宜過高，保持45%-55%。國語文課發委員們，這樣可以嗎？" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "當初文白比例的意見，其實來自於兩個地方。文言文的撰寫，確實大部份比白話文高明、精鍊，當然網路文學更精鍊，不過我們可能看不懂。但這不是最重要的。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "是不是45%就不要提？把文化基本教材和其他教材合起來算，算出一個新的比例，我們就講這個比例。如果這樣算進來的話，恐怕其實是提高的。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "文化基本教材是以節數為單位。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曉楓", "speech": "文化基本教材是有很多則。古文我們是用篇數去算，如果加入則數的話會混淆，因為每則可能只有兩三句話。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "可能要寫在更明顯的地位。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "需符合三年平均45-55%，我教科書怎麼寫都有彈性，可以平均到三年裡來。" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "有心人會問，為什麼文化基本教材不算文言文？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "這是文字、數字遊戲，原則上我們不想看到45%出現，因為會引起很大的爭議。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曉楓", "speech": "學習內容類別修改，「文本」和「文字分類」是不一樣的，在表格的前面加上了文字的說明。另一方面，很感謝院長和第一群組委員給我們的意見，應該加上文件上說明。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "請看11頁，學習內容這一塊。要不要加上「為原則」，不然999字不行，1001也不行？一篇文章給這麼硬的限制，是很奇怪的，改一個字都不行，簡直比憲法還偉大，所謂「一千個常用字」，是否可以加上「為原則」？可以多十個生字、少五個字嗎？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "委員主要提的是，分類和普通知識不同，以及文法詞彙對大眾的接受程度。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曉楓", "speech": "一千字可以在前面加「約」。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "委員提的，語言學詞彙後面加上「運用」？" }, { "speaker": "蔡曉楓", "speech": "領綱委員應可以接受，但還要調整。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "p11-14 的專業描述，林委員提到對教師和學生會有衝擊、造成困難。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "15 頁另一個小地方，提「食衣住行」而未提「育樂」，在文化裡不提，是為什麼呢？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我建議小學到高中，定義應該要是一樣的。麻煩小組互相對照，要舉的例子不要有差異。" }, { "speaker": "陳思玎", "speech": "我自己覺得，林文虎委員提到的語文課綱問題，不只是語文課綱。我們這次十二年國教裡，最會影響到的，就是第五項「學習重點」，分成學習表現（技能能力）、學習內容（基本知識概念）。" }, { "speaker": "歐用生", "speech": "非常感謝語文委員會的委員。聽了兩位的高見，我補充兩點。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "我最近在看國中的教科書，國中的國文教科書把語文學的東西和一般的文章，確實是分開的。語文學的部分，確實完全沒有跟文章、學生聽說讀寫做整合與應用。我是滿認同林文虎委員和陳思玎委員的意見。除了加上「運用」以外，是否可以酌情可以稍微再減量一點？請國文領域回去再調整，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "請何委員從語文研究的角度說明。" }, { "speaker": "何寄澎", "speech": "抱歉晚來了，沒有聆聽到林委員、陳委員兩位的高見。簡單說明，剛才歐校長提到了，我自己也補充一點。各位談到的問題有大有小，如果就大的來看，國語文在一到六年級叫國語，七年以後叫國文。" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "我贊成絕對不要製造新的名詞，讓大家不瞭解、誤解。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "爭議小組已經存在。何委員的意見，可以多加討論。" }, { "speaker": "王垠", "speech": "我贊成。在20頁對文字、文本、文化我也很confused，但既然這是有學理上的依據，是不是雙方要有個對話，才能解決？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "所以王委員同意成立第二次爭議小組。各委員是否同意？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我建議小組自己做一次雙向表，看是否能把學習表現和內容對應到。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "這個議題討論過很多次了，我對黃校長的爭議小組有很高的期待。" }, { "speaker": "方新舟", "speech": "被林委員點名了。院長說以學習者為主體，我很認同。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "林委員提到網路上日常使用的書面語，言簡意賅，常常無法唸出來，只能在書面使用。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "方委員提到的可執行，這是一個關鍵。簡潔、清楚、量要少，這就是一種原則。" }, { "speaker": "何寄澎", "speech": "我也看不太懂技術手冊。我在政府機構服務，甚至新進人員寫的公文，我也看不太懂。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "決定成立第二次爭議小組，拜託黃秀霜委員主持。各位可以看到時間表，要徵得大家同意，國語文的公聽會可能會延後，原本 8/15 要公佈第三版草案、8/18 上網，是否同意會慢？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "一定要做好，要充份討論。第三版時，課發委員擔心之處要有改變。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "做得好比做得快重要。數學領綱的召集人說，數學會慢，「如果自己不安心，就送不出去」，我喜歡這樣的態度。我對爭議小組有很高的期待，也請主席給出明確的要處理的事項。我們提過「修辭」的問題，現在領綱就看不到了。原本二十二種「修辭」，現在改成「各類文句表達的意義」，就好多了。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "第一點，技術綜合和一般高中的舉例、分類一定要一致。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "加上第七點，主題類別的整理。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "國語文這邊，老師的教學方法一定要檢討。好玩的東西到了老師手上，都變成一大堆知識。我覺得從小學到高中都要檢視一下。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曉楓", "speech": "我希望如果要成立爭議小組，各委員意見均很明確。在領綱大會上，我們一直不知道哪些該調哪些不該調。如果像「學習者為重點」，這對我們比較模糊。如果要成為提案，請給比較明確的指示。" }, { "speaker": "陳思玎", "speech": "我想舉個例子，以學習者需求為主，請看到英語文課綱，稍微做個對照。請看英語文p6-7學習重點，分為語言能力（聽說讀寫做）、p14 學習興趣與態度、p15 學習方法與策略、p16 文化習俗、p17 邏輯。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "p7 各項都寫成 4-I-1。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曉楓", "speech": "列印是舊版，新版已改正。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "建議做一個雙向對照，也就是是否能在菜單裡拿到？如果當年級沒有書法教學，是無法銜接起來的。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "請技術和綜合型高中的報告。" }, { "speaker": "宋修德", "speech": "剛才的問題，我已經紀錄了，以及文言範文等五、六個問題，會帶回去討論。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "就拜託爭議小組了。慢慢做，比較完善時，再放在網路上，或放公聽會。" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "版本上看到六月的原因，是因為六月沒有討論也沒有收到新版。" }, { "speaker": "林明佳", "speech": "第二外語部份，請翻到案由二第四點，第二小點講的第十八頁刪除的文字，因為會議紀錄未確認，這篇說的是給第二外國語文的建議，還不是決議。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "好的，第二外語的紀錄要修改，先就英語文討論。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "標示法，英語文第六頁 1-3-12、1-3-13 有一個「聽懂歌謠的主要內容」，相同的內容有不同的編碼，這是很奇怪的，也出現很多次。不同的編碼用的標記，擺在最前面，這樣很混亂。如果用標註的話，希望星號或雙圈放在編碼的後面。" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "剛才提到標註，我很認同要標愈少愈好。標註不宜放在前面，應該放在編碼後面。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "林委員的意見如果做得到就做，難度用學習內容調整，就不會在國小、國中重複要求。" }, { "speaker": "林明佳", "speech": "國小 1-3-12 聽懂簡易故事，加雙圈之外，還用星號表示可以視學生程度安排。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "重疊之處，請想辦法用學習內容，來表現它的難度。" }, { "speaker": "林明佳", "speech": "加深、加廣的選修規劃，跟委員報告：新版在第二頁時間分配上，就應該要列出五門課。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "這是針對加深、加廣六學分的學習重點。" }, { "speaker": "林明佳", "speech": "我們會帶回去修訂。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "第二外語（新住民語），請楊老師。" }, { "speaker": "楊承淑", "speech": "第二外語，有關於 p247 的內容、修正與建議，如果在文字上有任何修訂，希望跟新住民語有正式的對話，再行調整。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "最重要的是總綱裡有提到。" }, { "speaker": "楊承淑", "speech": "我們希望抱持開放的胸襟來看這件事情。在高中、彈性的時段，如果還要壓縮的話，請容許我們還有討論的空間。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "小學目前可以開放選修泰語、印尼語等，如果高中除了英語之外，可以變成第二外語的選修，希望可以跟羅老師再討論。" }, { "speaker": "林明佳", "speech": "就總綱的規範報告。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "領綱上網之後，大家也會想看總綱。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "雙圈其實是星號的前備條件。" }, { "speaker": "林明佳", "speech": "請看第六頁 1-3-14，對應到國中 1-4-10「辨識句子、語調情緒與態度」，星號的意思是高階的能力，對照會議手冊 225 頁，表示各校針對時數規劃，可以自行研發適性教學教材。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "回到 1-3-14 和 1-5-13，顯然內容是不一樣的（少一個「簡易」），所以編碼自然不同。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "對於林文虎委員的顧慮，對於雙指標合併成單指標，其他委員的意見？" }, { "speaker": "陳思玎", "speech": "我們討論了許多次，英語和本土語言都想用標識，解決學生程度雙峰分布的問題。這在各領域都有，但這和學生的家庭，以及城鄉落差，都是很大的。如果可以在課綱上，用標記來容許不同的表現。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "優先看起來，標示是對課綱的更細緻的表達。" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "針對剛剛提到的，說明兩點。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "這是英語的情況。第二外語請文瑤。" }, { "speaker": "鄭文瑤", "speech": "因為第二外語要上網了，有一個比較特別的地方是師資安排和培育。中小學老師的發證和聘用，像師資培育法已有規定。我們總綱裡只有提到「協助專業發展」，但我們在領綱裡提到了「配套」，主要是規範行政單位的實行要項。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "第二外語，第25頁的師資培用，各領綱可以有需求，但規範教育部、縣市教育局要做哪些事，似乎不是領綱應該做的，可以放在協作平台。對於老師的要求，可以寫下來。" }, { "speaker": "曾祥榕", "speech": "8/6 新住民語組和第二外國語組要開會，但請課發會先形成決議。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "這要回到總綱，各階段都有明確規範。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "第二外語加深、加廣選修（六學分），是為了銜接大學升學的進路，讓學生選的。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "就如總綱所規範。" }, { "speaker": "楊承淑", "speech": "第二外語組願意抱持開放的態度對話。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "這算是爭議議題嗎？高中不能成為第二外語，和總綱是違背的。" }, { "speaker": "方新舟", "speech": "因為我服務過新住民，剛看到的就是有七個語言。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "是否可以加入線上課程，再用檢定考試評量，這是可以考量的。" }, { "speaker": "鄭文瑤", "speech": "領綱後續的師資，配套是需要加強的。因為我們今天在討論的是領綱，所以比較不建議在此會議呈現。但我同意這可以在協作平台，做進一步的對話。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "各領綱實施要點能否提及師資來源，當時是說可以看領域現況。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "在多元選修裡開設新住民語文，建議依地區特性開設課程。" }, { "speaker": "林明佳", "speech": "那我就依主席建議討論。以東南亞為主的，可能指的是國小的必修課，但彈性和選修課，就不限於第二外語。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "13:30 另有一個會議，我們繼續往下走。第二外國語處理完了？接著是閩南語。" }, { "speaker": "方耀乾", "speech": "現在快要下午一點了，時間可能比較緊迫。" }, { "speaker": "歐用生", "speech": "建議主席先用餐，太辛苦了。" }, { "speaker": "方耀乾", "speech": "謝謝委員的指正。就委員所說能力問題，第一個是溝通，第二個是愛鄉土。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "教育部有推薦用字，像是「天烏烏」。" }, { "speaker": "何寄澎", "speech": "是全部都有漢字嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "此階段的常用字，全部都有漢字。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "教育部有詞典、有推薦用字表，可以作為支撐。" }, { "speaker": "歐用生", "speech": "以前有台通、台羅的爭議，現在的情況？" }, { "speaker": "方耀乾", "speech": "這是在10-20年前的爭議，現在已經全部使用台羅音標，也有常用詞典和詞表，大部份滿足了語言的需求。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "請客家語。" }, { "speaker": "方耀乾", "speech": "江委員下午有會議，目前就是照表列上面的，原則上報告並沒有補充報告，以書面呈現為主。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "第六點，各語文領域要統一用詞（「聆聽、說話」vs「聽、說」），這是誰來做？" }, { "speaker": "楊承淑", "speech": "我想本土語言的聆聽和外語不同。漢語只是聽，外語需要「聽辨」區別聲音，本土語言也會需要。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "本來語文就有爭議小組，所有語文領域裡的聽、說、讀、寫，希望各領綱提供適合他們的解釋。請提醒黃委員。各位委員有人會說客語嗎？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "如果沒有爭議，用辭修改之後，就上網了。" }, { "speaker": "方新舟", "speech": "我想提工具的問題，像國語用注音符號，其他語文用標音，這樣會有問題嗎？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "上次爭議時特別講說，在同一個學習階段授課，是否會有負擔？負擔的程度會是如何？" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "第三年級，特別是新住民、原住民，如果不是專家，難以判斷。" }, { "speaker": "王雅萍", "speech": "小組有辯論過，在九年一貫時沒有那麼快教符號，但是有做認圖到拼音（不強調書寫）。" }, { "speaker": "方新舟", "speech": "我很意外聽到這樣的結果。" }, { "speaker": "王雅萍", "speech": "但是注音符號的學習成果就比較不好。" }, { "speaker": "方新舟", "speech": "如果定課綱時不把方法論描述出來，我覺得加這麼多進去只會造成挫折感。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "謝謝方委員的提醒。如果對特定學生有衝突或困難，可以在實施要點裡稍加說明。" }, { "speaker": "方新舟", "speech": "我和許多老師、校長談過，看到很多原住民的小孩使用注音符號有困難。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "完全同意方委員的意見。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "可以考慮，是不是讓一年級的小孩，減輕剛進來的負擔。" }, { "speaker": "王雅萍", "speech": "修正部份均有共識，8/11、8/12 會在台東、屏東開諮詢會議，如果有需要修正之處再進行，目前狀況良好。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "但是注音符號會比較跟不上？" }, { "speaker": "王雅萍", "speech": "沒錯。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "請給小孩一些路可以走。" }, { "speaker": "王雅萍", "speech": "在總綱最後希望過的是甲案（國中必修），後來變成選修。" }, { "speaker": "鄭文瑤", "speech": "因為王委員特別提出原住民師資部份，還是回應一下。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "24頁的師資安排，只要是交付教育部做的，就會移到領綱外面，但還是會納入平台，也請你們經常盯著我們達成。" }, { "speaker": "余政賢", "speech": "第三點，新住民的「領域」文字我們會用破折號處理。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "不是說禁止多標音系統一起教，而是留一條路給教師決定。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "很多人在閱讀時，如果只讀領綱不讀總綱，那「素養導向」的精神，就不知其詳了。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "第四點以後，同心圓的概念、順序性等，是否可以省略？" }, { "speaker": "方耀乾", "speech": "我贊同林文虎委員的說法，因為字數不是多到占太大的篇幅，我覺得應該保留。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "單獨頁數不多，但加起來很多。各領綱不滿意的話可再提出保留。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "國語文和英語，「表現或能力內容」太多了，我要求減量，不是削減品質，而是實質減量。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "會檢討。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "提出臨時動議。" }, { "speaker": "臨時動議", "speech": "提案人唐鳳委員、洪詠善委員案由為落實程序透明，課程研究發展會之大會與分組會議（下稱「課程研究發展會」），以及各領域、科目、群科課程綱要草案公聽會（下稱「公聽會」）之紀錄，應以發言記名、完整記錄、主動公開為原則，不記名、不記錄、不公開為例外，以昭公信，並保障各界討論者之充份知情權。說明1. 課程研究發展會應預先提供，予受邀出席者知悉。2. 公聽會主辦單位應於事前公告接受申請，並於結束後 48 小時內公開影音紀錄。3. 課程研究發展會、公聽會出席人員，得徵求現場出席者同意後，自行現場製作逐字紀錄。於表示不同意紀錄之出席者發言時，應以下述「具名，但不記錄」原則為之。4. 公聽會出席人員各得邀請最多 1 位旁聽紀錄人員，以協助記錄。旁聽紀錄人員名單應於開會前 1 工作天，提供予主席知悉。5. 課程研究發展會出席人員如欲邀請旁聽紀錄人員，應於開會 7 天前提供名單，並經主席同意，方可為之。6. 課程研究發展會、公聽會記錄人員，應將各發言者之每次發言重點摘要，作成具名紀錄。文字呈現方式為：發言者名稱：...發言內容...7. 發言者於發言時，得註明當次發言為「具名，但不記錄」，此時應暫停所有音訊錄製（以消音方式呈現）。文字呈現方式為：發言者名稱：...接下來這段不列入紀錄，理由是...發言者名稱：（不列入紀錄）8. 發言者於發言時，得註明當次發言為「記錄，但不具名」，此時應暫停所有影像錄製（以空白畫面呈現）。文字呈現方式為：（不具名）：...發言內容...9. 會後 7 日內為修正期，期間內受邀出席者得依據主辦方之摘要紀錄，於線上共筆網址自行編修逐字紀錄、書面提出修正，並瀏覽其他出席者作成之修正。10. 依第七點、第八點註明之發言，逐字紀錄、摘要紀錄應以相同方式呈現。11. 修正期結束後 48 小時內，國教院應將逐字紀錄轉換為靜態網頁，與摘要紀錄同時公開於網站上。茲建請各領域、科目、群科課程綱要聯席會議參酌，並就各項會議性質，逐項討論是否適用、針對各項會議需調整的參數（內容阿拉伯數字部份），以及理由。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "第一點，自行製作逐字紀錄，會透過協作網址，今天會寄給所有委員，可以上去增補。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "摘要紀錄上我同意可以具名，但是逐字紀錄如果有二十個版本，如何確認哪個是正確的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "逐字紀錄是共用一個系統，多位記錄人員可以互相補正，所以只會有一個版本。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "我同意這樣的具名紀錄方式，這是時代的趨勢。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "主動公開的好處，就是可以一次讓大家參考。" }, { "speaker": "陳思玎", "speech": "我們說情、理、法，唐委員說的是法理的部份。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這次提案針對我們課發會本身、公聽會、以及各群組會議。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "在場是否有委員不同意唐委員對本次課發會做出逐字紀錄？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我看到很多委員在沉思，可能還要一些時間沉澱。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "請葉雅卿確認議程：數學、自然科學、全民國防。" }, { "speaker": "孫明霞", "speech": "第二群組的綜整人今天無法出席，我僅代表做報告。" }, { "speaker": "張鎮華", "speech": "謝謝剛才的解釋。再補充一下重點。" }, { "speaker": "楊瑞明", "speech": "技術型高中、綜合高中由我召集老師研修。這次因為綜高的課程和普高落差太大，造成高一準用普高課本，到高二時出現 65% 斷裂、45% 重疊。這次我們盡量三塊有共同的對談，特別邀請長期參與的曾老師。也做了知識參與和知識地圖的盤點和調查。在需要的當中，在哪個學期放才合適。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "前一陣子爭議有微調過，不能做為參考嗎？好像不協調的部份還是存在？" }, { "speaker": "曾政清", "speech": "三年前我們微調過，在學科中心有許多教師表示有教學困難。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "之前微調過，做了補充教材，有幫助嗎？" }, { "speaker": "曾政清", "speech": "有幫助，但目前還需要調整。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "所以還有 10%-15% 的差異，需要繼續工作。因為每次出去時，委員比較不會讀別人的版本，所以延後的必要性應該要寫得出來，例如「課發委員覺得還不行」等。當然有一版空白是比較嚴重的。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "除了技綜普高的時數差異之外，技術上都是可以處理的，只是兩方面都各有主張。" }, { "speaker": "張鎮華", "speech": "感謝指點，其中三點我們有討論過了。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "統計的問題是否有處理？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這裡 Data Science 就是統計的意思。" }, { "speaker": "歐用生", "speech": "小組的目標寫得很好，但是我們從早上看到現在，每個領域都有一樣的問題，好比說學習表現，也就是達成目標非常重要的地方。這裡內容講的都是數學，很多都是學科本身的內容。要培養的能力，如「以簡馭繁」，是表現在什麼地方？" }, { "speaker": "鄭漢文", "speech": "過去用學習階段，以年段做學習表現（p8-9），學習內容卻是用年級來定義，是否有轉化？如果從學習內容來談，我有一些建議。" }, { "speaker": "張鎮華", "speech": "先用大方向解釋。數學和其他領域很大的不同，是用分年撰寫，而不是分階段撰寫。" }, { "speaker": "方新舟", "speech": "呼應一下應用的事情。在偏鄉和後段的學生，經常會問到，花這麼多時間學數學，到底要如何使用？公制在生活上是否用得到？公制當然是要教，這是國際通用的，但也可以放入生活的單位。" }, { "speaker": "張鎮華", "speech": "小組會討論公制、台制、英制的出現程度。" }, { "speaker": "潘慧玲", "speech": "第三頁倒數第三行所分的軌道，是否需要調整？" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "生活上應用問題的教材，現行國中小教材的第一單元第一頁，都會講一個很生活的數學案例，但教師都會跳過不教。再好的教材，沒有搭配教學都是沒有用的。" }, { "speaker": "張鎮華", "speech": "我們會參照來做。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "請委員決定，數學是否可以延後？跟不上大家 8/18 的進度？可不可以審查的工作和公聽會同步？" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "我們衡量後續反應，如果數學圈裡還有衝突，我不建議送草稿。" }, { "speaker": "張鎮華", "speech": "我比較希望先審查再公聽。林委員有解釋說，數學裡是有派別的差異，雖然送出審查給五到十人，但自認為有資格審查的人有更多，所以這個效應我不太敢承擔。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "希望諮詢人數再多一些。要想一些比較給大家知道的理由，例如普技綜高三方代表還在整合，或是跟自然科學間的關係等，委員也提了許多意見。會慢多久？" }, { "speaker": "方新舟", "speech": "數學和國語文是否延後到同一時間公佈？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "等明天開完會再來一起看。還是要有一個時間點。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "可能很難做到。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "希望別組不要學... 數學就這樣吧，辛苦了。" }, { "speaker": "陳泰然", "speech": "感謝 7/24 參與的課發會委員，提出許多意見。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "p14 學習內容的 3-4 年級、5-6 年級這邊，I-B-2-3 電池或燈泡可以有並聯和串聯的接法，這個單元很獨立，前不著村後不著店，一直要到國二才會再出現。國小老師教這個單元時很有趣，非常狀況百出，搞不清楚的多有人在，因為電是極少數你看不到它的東西，只能用嘴巴講。當然在現場教學有很大的困擾。" }, { "speaker": "陳泰然", "speech": "會帶回去討論。這個主題確實是前不著村後不著店，太獨立了，我們會帶回去討論。" }, { "speaker": "鄭文瑤", "speech": "大張的 p33 裡提到（九）國小包班教學，對自然師資能力的把關，自然科知能是否充足？" }, { "speaker": "陳泰然", "speech": "感謝說明，如果師資上能夠配合，我們樂見其成。" }, { "speaker": "鄭漢文", "speech": "學習內容和教科書編寫、教師都有關。" }, { "speaker": "陳泰然", "speech": "剛剛提到學習內容的四個方面：" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "再丟一個難題看看。看一下第 24 頁原子模型的發展，A-A-4-5 說到元素的規律周期性，其實是講周期表，國中都是用背的，那是慘無人道的事情。我常常告訴老師，你不妨用簡單的原子模型來講即可。" }, { "speaker": "陳泰然", "speech": "謝謝林委員。週期性、元素的問題我再回去問問看。" }, { "speaker": "王垠", "speech": "p69 實施要點第五小點「自然科學探究，於前一學期擬定計劃」。" }, { "speaker": "陳泰然", "speech": "依總綱精神說是領域實驗室，其實到高中都是談分科，在現場上都是說「物理」、「化學」實驗室。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "可能要邀技術、綜合型高中的來回應。" }, { "speaker": "陳生明", "speech": "明天要開會，各種委員問到相關的事項，我們會討論。" }, { "speaker": "李彥儀", "speech": "請問因為有分 A、B 版，是否簡要說明？裡面打星號的部份是否說明？" }, { "speaker": "陳生明", "speech": "時數在 138 頁，以物理、化學、生物各有 A、B 版，學分數各有不同，有時間的分配和類群科的差異。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "自然科學稍微修一下，可以來得及 8/18 上網。包括技術型和綜合型的都可以。各位委員可以嗎？" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "技職的自然 p152，後面有沒有更細的說明？" }, { "speaker": "陳生明", "speech": "請看附錄的地方 p179，有表現、內容、對應和指引，還有配合時事，例如氣爆和食安。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "主題和國中重疊很多？" }, { "speaker": "陳生明", "speech": "我們希望把十二年國教做出橫向連貫，所以我們的主題、次主題其實都是一樣的，差別是在國小、國中、高中（普高必選修、技綜高）各要學什麼，標題都一樣，但是內容是都不一樣的，在附錄裡的差別非常大。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "p179 好比說電的認識、力的作用，如果用這個標題，是否能有更深的描述？不然在國中已經教過了。" }, { "speaker": "陳生明", "speech": "請看 p276-p279，在物理的 B 版裡把學習內容右邊相對頁的指引，寫得很詳細了。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "國高中的統整，可以再走過一次。然後就上網了。" }, { "speaker": "游光昭", "speech": "課綱工作小組已經調整，欣然接受所有的建議，很多具體的建議是我們沒有處理得很好的。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "可以結合STEM專題運用，再增加科技的一些美感。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "要從總綱回應，綜合高中是自選科目共四學分，所以學分不宜放在領域裡。" }, { "speaker": "游光昭", "speech": "國小沒有時數，至少把內容讓大家一貫讀得懂。如果放在這裡，十二年一次看比較清楚。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "我覺得不宜。科技領域雖然說「宜在國小階段」，但總綱在國小是沒有分配到特定時間，所以會誤導看的人，以為科技在國小也要兩學分，這是有疑慮的，沒有就是不行，建議放在附錄。" }, { "speaker": "游光昭", "speech": "這是舊版，群組的版本已經調整了。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "我的意思是，內容我真的看不出來。材料說多不多，就是木、電、電子電機。" }, { "speaker": "方新舟", "speech": "呼應一下「動手做」這件事。三年前我們做均一的時候，我們以為台灣有那麼多本科畢業的資訊老師，應該可以做網頁修改吧？我們剛從可汗學院拿到全部的軟體，需要志工幫忙，後來發現所謂的資訊教師，其實沒有寫程式的能力。" }, { "speaker": "鄭文瑤", "speech": "在 p23 教學資源括號五，看到教師需要檢定核可。科技是自然生活區分出來的，剛才方委員的提議我們也會在協作平台上重新檢視，看整個科技領域教師的職前搭配。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "同意。8/18 是否跟得上上網？" }, { "speaker": "游光昭", "speech": "可以，我們 8/10 就可以確認。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "首先，在國防裡分為「認知、情意、技能」。科技用「知識、情意、技能」。別的領域都不這樣分了..." }, { "speaker": "林育慈", "speech": "生活科技沒有這樣分了，如果要刪除，可以帶回去討論。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "意見三跟六不一致，反而給小組帶來困擾..." }, { "speaker": "吳文龍", "speech": "這次的架構有很大的更動。上次課發會之後我們做出六點回應，所以文字書寫的難度已經降低了。這個草案的內容，我們挑燈夜戰到九點半。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "我只提一點原則。當初全民國防，在驚濤駭浪中通過的理由，是台灣多災多難，防救應該是很重要的內涵。現在如果只能占次主題的十幾分之一的話，至少要對應到各地區的課程份量。" }, { "speaker": "林曉瑩", "speech": "九八課綱也是36小時，防衛動員包含災害防救有22小時。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "災害防救有配22小時，但如果只看課綱看起來就只有五分之一，是有落差的。" }, { "speaker": "吳文龍", "speech": "可以寫在實施要點裡。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "三跟六的衝突如何調解？交付小組參考。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "以前是軍訓，現在是全民國防，所謂步槍簡介、基本教練、實彈射擊，學生把它當成校外教學一樣，沒有理由剝奪孩子郊遊的快樂。" }, { "speaker": "潘慧玲", "speech": "我也贊成國防科技保留。在學習表現裡有防衛技能，之前說要拿掉，林文虎委員也談了，可以再參酌。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "謝謝潘委員。上次也提過，學習表現的程度寫得不夠高，公聽會出去可能比較沒有人會注意，所以潘老師也再幫我們看一下，尤其高中需要的是批判、思考。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "素養工作圈也會幫忙。" }, { "speaker": "謝金城", "speech": "歷次戰史，例如「鄭成功復台、清朝攻台戰爭、日軍攻台戰爭」這些用詞，目前爭議很大。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "建議搭配社會領域用詞。" }, { "speaker": "秦葆琦", "speech": "社會領域的用詞還沒出來。" }, { "speaker": "吳文龍", "speech": "國防要比社會先上網，所以這些舉例文字會先拿掉。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "除了數學以外，其他都可以 8/18 上網，最晚 8/15 要拿出來，還有 12 天。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "...以下不記錄。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "那大家就挑燈夜戰吧。" }, { "speaker": "方新舟", "speech": "以後是否請領綱召集人盡量都出席？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "同意。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "目前有十九位委員到場，有兩位在路上，現在是否可以先開議？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "今天和昨天相同，就是逐一領域確認是否可以 8/18 上網。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "剛才是報告事項。現在有二十人了，會議正式開始。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "請陳思玎委員報告。" }, { "speaker": "陳思玎", "speech": "報告的內容，是在第三群組開會後，經過核心小組開會確認，用 Skype 與召集人確認後，提供了一個電子版，請大家看一下這個版本。" }, { "speaker": "歐用生", "speech": "大家早安。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "一、二年級是我們最看重的，數學國語都多一節，生活又六節，委員是有很高的理想。" }, { "speaker": "方新舟", "speech": "在數學上我們也有類似的問題。" }, { "speaker": "曾世杰", "speech": "經費、設備、法令、師資，是所有領綱都會提出的問題。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "方委員聽起來放心嗎？" }, { "speaker": "方新舟", "speech": "謝謝曾副院長的解釋，但真的不放心，但在數學領域裡，我們想要引入新的工具，像計算機導入後，會受到多大的反彈。依我來看，計算機導入我看來已經落後 20-30 年了，我的小孩念國高中時就在用了。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "課綱的前瞻性，怎樣可以讓領綱走得遠，或是課綱多久就可以修，這個機制要出來。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "七月底明年的預算籌編完，我國保障 22.5% 所以天花板是不會降的。現場在少子化，按照標準要減四千位老師，所以現場用既有的教育品質、規模來看，是在萎縮的。" }, { "speaker": "鄭文瑤", "speech": "副院長特別提到協作，針對於跨單位的師資培育，原本就有規劃。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我跟研究員看領綱草案時，和所有研究員說過「從基本理念，看不到未來」，感覺非常的平實。" }, { "speaker": "秦葆琦", "speech": "我十年來擔任生活課程的召集人，這裡針對十年來的進度報告。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "大方向聽起來不錯。這個領域也必須是統整，因為一門課六小時，一定是包含了以前單獨上的那些課，所以這個方向是對的。" }, { "speaker": "何寄澎", "speech": "謝謝主席。首先表示我也很高興看到生活課程的綱要，以下都是參考意見。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "順著這個想法，我想說順序有一點點混亂。" }, { "speaker": "卓俊辰", "speech": "具體建議，列出的關鍵生活能力當然很理想，但務實的考量這是小學一、二年級在學的，所以延伸出來的表現指標，一定要嚴謹去檢視，是否適合這個年齡的身心條件、發展，以及心靈特質，一定要嚴謹的檢視和對應。" }, { "speaker": "王垠", "speech": "兩個小問題。一是七個關鍵生活能力，根據來源是什麼？我猜想可能是根據課程目標來的。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "綜整議題：內在的邏輯、發展性、文字上的調整。" }, { "speaker": "陳思玎", "speech": "感謝各位委員這次表示的意見，上次沒有什麼意見可能是因為排在最後一個..." }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "可以跟得上 8/15 交稿、8/18 上網嗎？有把握嗎？委員是否可以放行？" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "我是很不喜歡再開一次會，但全新創意的東西，輕易放行是不重視它。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "一個是不放行，另一可能，是歐老師原本就會參與生活領域，以及召集人黃老師。" }, { "speaker": "潘慧玲", "speech": "建議確認關鍵點。生活領域向上銜接時，是否要關照到低年級沒有出現的領域？" }, { "speaker": "陳思玎", "speech": "目前九年一貫的生活課程，內容也是放在附錄裡，可以參考的素材。" }, { "speaker": "歐用生", "speech": "我同意依照他們的方式，在學習內容對選取原則講得更清楚，以及「不可以分科」等消極表列，讓出版社和教師自編教材時，有原則性的配套措施可以參照。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "附議「不要有規定內容」，但應增加「內容選擇原則」，再把不應該做的（如 1+1+1+1）放到附錄裡。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "這是一個矛盾，要做判斷：既要開放現場的自由，又要有要求。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "擺在附錄可以接受，但三年級教的東西在一、二年級是沒有的。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "這就是小組為難的地方。" }, { "speaker": "秦葆琦", "speech": "我們的委員當中，自然、社會、藝術的人都有。我上星期才和自然科的許院長討論..." }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "也有委員問，如果教科書還可以用舊的方式編，是否你們的理想就無法達成？" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "召集人在國外，作為副召集人說明。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "附錄二，在第一學習階段，是達成共識了？那就放到生活領域？" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "生活領域有邀我們的召集人一起開會，我們也很欣賞超越學科的統整概念。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "生活領域尚未回應，是否應移出來？這看起來還沒有共識。" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "星號在這裡是必修，但第一群組的星號是選修。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "那我們換一個符號，這個好處理。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "音樂在校園的喜悅，洪主任提了很多，但在藝術領域的課程目標都沒有喜悅和高興。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "群組在 p13 鑑賞是學習構面，我們把線拿掉，就可以使用許多學習內容，來達到這個目標。在核心群組會繼續討論，但我覺得是很好的方向。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "隔壁面的線拿掉了，但在版面上還是一對一，所以拿掉時要小心。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "快樂、喜悅的用辭？" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "這個可以改。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "藝術送交生活領域？" }, { "speaker": "秦葆琦", "speech": "藝術送交生活領域，這在 p46 達成共識的第 13 項，藝術領域的附錄二拿掉。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "群組委員擔心的都是師資的問題。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "所以 8/18 出去時，藝術的附錄二確定要拿掉？" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "按照我們定的分工體例，藝術本來就不能把手伸進第一學習階段。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "那就拿掉附錄二。" }, { "speaker": "卓俊辰", "speech": "藝術領域 p11 表七，從第一到第五階段安排，但事實上是第二階段才開始，所以第一階段應移除。" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "延續剛才的意見，紫色 p11 的表七，第一階段確實不宜出現。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "同意拿掉。表七會用文字敘寫。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "所以重複的地方，其實是他們核心的地方。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "藝術不會有太大、泛政治化的問題，但有情緒的問題。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "我很贊同。文化部、原民會都給我們很多指教，他們認為有必要性。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "p12 學習內容，音樂欣賞 A-4-1 台灣傳統歌謠，一直到世界音樂，就只有台灣和世界？" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "「經典歌曲」。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "這是小細節，通常也都沒事... 以下不記錄。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "請副召列入考慮。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "請張景媛教授報告。" }, { "speaker": "張景媛", "speech": "代替方德隆院長報告。" }, { "speaker": "林逸棟", "speech": "技職司代表回應。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "這是第一次送進來，所以還沒有送出。" }, { "speaker": "林逸棟", "speech": "第二個，共識第三點，跨學制協調一定要做，但請主席裁示是由誰做這個工作。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "這還是要回到第三群組。請黃政傑委員全權負責。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "技高 p330、p331 有多一個科目「法律與生活」，是普高沒有的。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "我建議在程序上，因為技職這一塊國教院沒有操作過，所以都會出現不連貫、對不準的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "資料是有寄的。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "6/29 時，技高還沒有進來，所以無法說明，技高有收到也有進來開會。" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "兩點呼應。在第一群組的語文裡也有一樣的情況，但我們都有邀請技高、綜高來開會，也很謝謝課發中心的協助。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "普高之前未規範是因為... 以下不記錄。" }, { "speaker": "鄭文瑤", "speech": "綜合活動涵括了輔導、生命規劃等，主要是培養探索、創新的素養，但這個在其他領域也有，所以說服力比較不足。" }, { "speaker": "潘慧玲", "speech": "跨學制的配合機制，下午要審查其他學制，現場也有技高、綜高代表，是否請他們現場說明？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "這一天半是對一般科目，召集人都有邀請，下午就專門是術科群組。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "普高 p12-14 頁，生命教育科目，只有一個學分，學習內容有 52 項，在 20 堂課裡，每一個內容都很大，如「宗教的起源、核心」，「宗教對苦難和死亡的看法」，上得完嗎？是否再斟酌？" }, { "speaker": "張景媛", "speech": "生命教育最後一次開會就有提到要減量，之前已經減過一次。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我們是希望有效率的開會。" }, { "speaker": "張景媛", "speech": "希望縱向在國、高中的字眼都貫得更好。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "這次的重點是十二年一貫，不像之前是九年加上高中高職，如果這次沒有接好，任務就算是失敗了，因為這是核心的事情。" }, { "speaker": "林逸棟", "speech": "跨學制是第三群組統整。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "這是技高提的建議，綜合七選二，或是藝術四選二，學校的意思是「誰選」？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "這需要配套措施，所以仍然是協作平台的議題，我們才能追蹤。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "如果委員的意見，這次可以修得好，那建議可以放行。" }, { "speaker": "張景媛", "speech": "8/7 有會議。主要是要跟技高要有機會對話。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "8/15 是否能把剛才提到適度減量的目標完成？可以的話就放行了。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "社會科，請葉雅卿確認議程。" }, { "speaker": "劉阿榮", "speech": "召集人朱校長人在國外，我是副召集人，同時是公民與社會的召集人。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "這和昨天數學跟不上的情況有點像。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "時間的底限？" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "明年二月要公佈的話，十二月要送課審會，這是假設陸續都通過的情況。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "在研究院立場，我們會請他們提前完成，也請課發委員瞭解他們的情況。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "高校長不能來，由我和陳院長報告。" }, { "speaker": "程瑞福", "speech": "委員意見非常明確，我們會做修訂。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "食安在生活也會講？" }, { "speaker": "李駱遜", "speech": "家政會講到。" }, { "speaker": "張景媛", "speech": "我們在生活領域是用活動，例如帶學生去超市進行校外教學。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "食安牽涉複雜，重點是要列出議題面向，包括食物生產、土地污染，和自然、社會都有關係。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "所以如果有聯席會議，請分配一下輕重緩急。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "高中階段兩學分「健康與護理」、兩學分「體育」。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "學習重點，像職業傷害，普高和技高都會碰到，是可以統整的。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "至少在「基本理念」要有一段，可以看到健康體育為什麼是一個領域。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "還是要強調，我們自己對內、對外的說法就是「一貫」，不是割裂的。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "各群組都有這個問題，但是第三群組現在剛好談到，上次也有談到。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "國語文就已經發現這個問題，我想我們沒有忽略掉這個問題，只是要如何更嚴謹。" }, { "speaker": "孫明霞", "speech": "原本分開是為了學分數不同和考科的銜接。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "健體是否可以只有一份領綱？綜合的時數呢？" }, { "speaker": "張景媛", "speech": "生涯規劃的學分數不同（普高一學分，綜高兩學分）。生命教育普高只有一學分..." }, { "speaker": "林逸棟", "speech": "法律與生活和環境科學概論是普高沒有的科目，且生命教育與生涯規劃的學分數與普高也不同。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "院長講的方向是不錯，但要請各領域自行判斷。" }, { "speaker": "程瑞福", "speech": "健體學分數是相同的，只是在說明時幾個字不同，內容完全一樣。" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "健體是很棒的領域，召集人今天剛好不在，真的可以嘗試三種不同的高中形式共用領綱。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "技高 p407 體育，請對照普高健康知識的學習內容 p43 來看。" }, { "speaker": "潘慧玲", "speech": "一個是學習表現，一個是學習內容..." }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "後面的條碼一樣，敘寫方式不一樣。" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "只是呈現方式不同，內容是一樣的。" }, { "speaker": "潘慧玲", "speech": "主席剛請健體領域整理。請大家看 p9，統整表現的表述，和「技能」相關有九個詞，p10 有「健康技能」，到 p11 的健康「技能」、體育「技能」的意思又不同，能否統整？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "潘委員提到，「認識健康、生活技能」、「演練基本健康技能」、「認識動作技能概念」，重覆數次，是否指一樣的東西？這是不利於理解的。" }, { "speaker": "程瑞福", "speech": "標號會調整到一致。" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "以下細節調整建議，不用記錄。" }, { "speaker": "程瑞福", "speech": "技能部份如果要調整，可能會影響到評量。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我們這次就是說素養導向，並不是直接連到評量。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "放行。以下不記錄..." }, { "speaker": "潘慧玲", "speech": "健體在技高、綜高的表格呈現方式不同，後續如何處理融入？" }, { "speaker": "林逸棟", "speech": "技高的格式和普高，原本就設定成可以不同，因為技高可以包含設備基準等。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "這部份請潘老師幫忙，我們在會後協商。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "建議找一個人朗讀一遍，進行錯字、錯詞的校正工作。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "排版、標題一致，我們國教院領綱工作團隊會來做。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "雖然這是個草案，但公聽會很多老師會來，老師最會找錯字了..." }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "下午只有一個議案，就是技術型高中的類群課程，會分五個類型，請孫校長報告。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "基礎目標有一點太簡略了。我想請十五群的召集人田老師主持說明。" }, { "speaker": "田振榮", "speech": "抱歉遲到，因為今天四技、二專放榜，我們在檢討後續人數的事宜。" }, { "speaker": "孫明霞", "speech": "因為高級中等學校法已經分類，所以建議依此分類定調。" }, { "speaker": "林逸棟", "speech": "技職司補充。當天不只有課發會委員、主持人李校長也找了專家學者，一起進行審查，並請研修團隊回應。" }, { "speaker": "王垠", "speech": "前面三大段，基本理念、教育目標、類群科歸屬，每本都一樣，是否需要？" }, { "speaker": "林逸棟", "speech": "技術型課程綱要和其他不同之處，就是各群科都獨立成冊。" }, { "speaker": "田振榮", "speech": "我們的上位是總綱，所以基本理念都講共通的部份，在群科歸屬的下半部，進入群、科的後半段，就開始分流了。接著各群的表達方式就不一樣了。" }, { "speaker": "王垠", "speech": "所以基本理念是共通的。類群有理念嗎？" }, { "speaker": "田振榮", "speech": "沒有，只有第四點的共同目標。" }, { "speaker": "謝金城", "speech": "目錄頁大小寫混合使用。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "我有參加第四群組。也想請教方委員和唐委員的意見。" }, { "speaker": "方新舟", "speech": "我想確實在未來發展時，一方面會到工廠、公司裡，也會做跨領域的合作。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我工作二十年，現在已經退休了，和公部門、私部門都只是合作關係。" }, { "speaker": "潘慧玲", "speech": "上次有提出跨領域學習，目前看到的版本似乎還沒有調整。" }, { "speaker": "田振榮", "speech": "感謝各位委員的建議。無論是核心素養、工藝之美、關鍵能力（包含溝通、創意、問題解決，如澳洲有七、八項之多），我們是沒有特別強調。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "十八歲的孩子，希望他們從任何學校畢業，都有欣賞美、動手操作、解決問題、繼續學習的能力。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "當初總綱定義時，技職專業科目可以有自己撰寫課綱內容的空間嗎？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "是，今天下午這個是放鬆的。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "當初會要做雙向細目、學習重點，是為了讓彼此扣合。" }, { "speaker": "方新舟", "speech": "回應林委員，我看了一下電機電子類群，覺得前瞻性是不夠的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "前幾天有收到 7/28 版本的電子檔。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "我覺得基本理念應該要看到群科的基本理念，而不是只有技術型高中的基本理念。" }, { "speaker": "田振榮", "speech": "謝謝各位委員。專業的部份我也只能轉達。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "有一個建議。未來技職會成為焦點，但太多本了，可能說不清楚。" }, { "speaker": "鄭文瑤", "speech": "群科裡的核心能力都很清楚，像動力機械群的第三頁。如果這是核心能力，那把「基礎」拿掉，會有差別嗎？因為看到「基礎」會聯想到還有「精熟」的面向。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "「精熟」很重要，目標都說「會」、「瞭解」、「認識」，這是不夠的，一定要某些是精熟的。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "總結一下。很多委員第一次看到技術型高中這麼多的科目，是立基在十八歲的孩子，無論從哪類高中出來，都要有一樣的基本能力，這是我們的基本期許。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "院長講得很好。技職高中就業的比重到底是多少？職校的課程，是否能培養他們真實在社會工作的能力？這是規劃這次課綱要檢討的。未來要強化的是哪裡？這也關連到林委員剛才講的重點。" }, { "speaker": "林逸棟", "speech": "技職司報告。第四群組會議召開之前，為避免第四群組課發委員不了解技術型高中課綱之研發內容，我們有邀集第四群組課發委員先進行報告說明，讓委員了解研發過程及調整的重點。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "這是對素養導向教學的不理解。這不是雙向細目表就完成的。" }, { "speaker": "田振榮", "speech": "在教學的現場，教師對教學的態度，講白了是只為了升學。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "我覺得基本理念裡，你剛才講的那些就應該列進去。" }, { "speaker": "李彥儀", "speech": "技職司業務督導說明。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "我指的是「科本位」裡的群科內容，因為現場老師一定可以想出五年後不落伍的學科，但如果群科裡沒有文字引導他寫的話，就寫不出來。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "外語群 p14 數位科技、p18 數位的大綱，跟粉紅色這本國中、國小資訊科的內容，大抵是重疊的。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "我剛才的發言，適用所有的群科，不再重複。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "資訊節數不一定要減少，但建議針對該群科的資訊工具介紹。" }, { "speaker": "黃居正", "speech": "建築用字：橋「樑」應有木字邊。廚房應有「人」字。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "呼應丁委員、唐委員的意見，ICT在中小學已經就有，數位原住民本來就會操作這些。" }, { "speaker": "李彥儀", "speech": "外語群之簡報實務在技能課程裡很重要，如果直接刪除我不贊成。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "同意。剛才我說的是專業科目裡的「數位科技概論」，不是說實習科目裡的「簡報實務」。" }, { "speaker": "田振榮", "speech": "這是兩千多人提供過意見，有業界、大專，參與者的名單可以提供給各位。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "請加上「領域職場專業」的描述。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "實習科目我同意加上描述，但專業科目裡的「數位科技概論」和外語關係不大。" }, { "speaker": "方新舟", "speech": "像葉丙成老師在台大開的presentation課非常熱門，可見簡報是有許多不同層次的。" }, { "speaker": "李彥儀", "speech": "3D 列印是很重要的，我們也有 Fab Truck 在各校巡迴跑。" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "未來性是大家的共識，但要寫成文字，真的並不容易。" }, { "speaker": "黃璀娟", "speech": "經濟學之前在實務上設計的很難，請看商業群第二學年，幾乎就是大一的課程，非常的理論化，數學非常的多。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "商管群如果多學些個人金融、體系介紹會有幫助，但這裡學的到是大一的總體經濟學模型。" }, { "speaker": "蔡志偉", "speech": "設計、藝術兩群我有一些統整的想法。我不清楚過去和現在有什麼差別，但特別從這兩個去看，看不太到特殊性。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我們等藝術群再來討論。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "這也是通案的事，外語群第七頁左邊那一欄，粗體字部份，（節數）都有括號，如果沒有括號是指學分數，但下三欄都沒有括號，這會看不懂。" }, { "speaker": "方新舟", "speech": "剛才主席考我，商業管理的「程式設計」是否足夠前瞻，我覺得太前瞻了。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "應用外語的「英、日語」聽說讀寫，是都要會，還是「或」？也有別的語種，建議表達得更清楚。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "設計群報告過了，請蔡委員就設計群發言。" }, { "speaker": "蔡志偉", "speech": "很多設計的東西都有原住民族的特色，但教育裡並沒有做出實際操作內容。" }, { "speaker": "林逸棟", "speech": "外語群的群科歸屬表只有兩科，就是應用英語、日語科。因為只有兩科，所以只有學習這兩種語言，但外語群教育目標「英語、日語」中間應該修正為「或」字。" }, { "speaker": "田振榮", "speech": "7/28開完會之後，針對幾位課發委員的意見有做過修改。還沒有拿到正式會議紀錄，我們就先行討論了，也在修改當中。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "如果只顧及目前教師的就業問題，也可能耽誤到未來小孩的學習。我們可以有所要求。以下不記錄..." }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "我剛才已經講太多了，以下也不記錄..." }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "已知的部份，務必一定要改好。" }, { "speaker": "黃居正", "speech": "家政群 p24 危機評估與管理，有顧客「刁難」應變技巧，用詞在倫理學上可能引導負面思想，是否可以與顧客「投訴」合併處理？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "家政裡有幼兒、服裝、美髮，這以前是媽媽要做的，現在都是一個專業。" }, { "speaker": "卓俊辰", "speech": "造形和服裝、設計是比較偏設計類群的屬性。" }, { "speaker": "鄭文瑤", "speech": "家政群p45教學大綱括號七，內容項目「配合T.P.O.的整體造型」為專有名詞，建議註明為Time/Place/Occasion（時間、地點、場合）。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "希望強調本土飲品，如珍珠奶茶。" }, { "speaker": "田振榮", "speech": "酒類在高職實施，各有各的論點，這是兩難的問題。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "家政群裡有家政科，是一個很早就有的科。教育部標出核心能力，是具備家政服務業的基礎知能等等。幼保和時尚模特兒比較專門，容易理解，但時尚模特兒可以算家政嗎？我理解這不是今天可以解決的。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "家政課綱的定義，和黃教授定義不太一樣。我們的家政科出來，不是做家政服務的。" }, { "speaker": "李彥儀", "speech": "這件事此次無法處理。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "好。但如果考慮家庭的話，幼兒照護之外，老人照護呢？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "只有概論裡有提到。" }, { "speaker": "田振榮", "speech": "家政無論什麼定位，都會碰到老人照護。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "我去訪視開南的老人照護學系，這也不是護理啊…" }, { "speaker": "李彥儀", "speech": "護理科以前在高職，但後來提昇由專科學校培育，所以目前就不在技術型高中了。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "這就不論辯了。如果持這個主張的人，說長照一定需要有護理基礎，我想這有社會說服力，我覺得可以理解。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "是十六歲還是十八歲？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "《兒童及少年福利與權益保障法》第 43 條，未滿十八歲不能飲酒。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "同意不列入課綱裡。" }, { "speaker": "林逸棟", "speech": "幼保科如果不願意包括長照，我們只有尊重。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "這個說不通的。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "拿著食譜做菜，自己不吃，是沒辦法培養廚藝的。" }, { "speaker": "卓俊辰", "speech": "家政專業科目，特別列了「職業倫理」兩學分，是唯一群科裡有的。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "各個群組請帶回去商量，每個職業的倫理都是很重要的。" }, { "speaker": "田振榮", "speech": "主席特別說「最後」了... 我想特別感謝各位課發委員，我們人不多，大約五、六個人，洪主任參與我們很多次會，過程中帶領了上百人，發展了十五群的課綱。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "剛才在商業群的經濟和會計，請盡量降低難度，不要為難老師和孩子。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "藝術 p7 實習科目，這裡很特別的是音樂科（國樂、西樂）的學生，是考專業科目進去的。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "群科綱要設計時，有的像教科書章節，有的像 Syllabus，比較看不到像普高的委員們，去討論學生如何學習。" }, { "speaker": "李彥儀", "speech": "我們下次開會，請邀請各群科的召集人一起來開會，不要只是田校長轉達。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "有很多範本可以看了，希望可以有更好的品質送出來。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "群科就不趕這個時間了，就延後一點處理。" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "可以參考其他領域。" }, { "speaker": "田振榮", "speech": "已收到，新版目前還在編撰。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "麻煩孫、李兩位委員繼續幫忙盯。謝謝課發會所有的委員。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "希望逐字記錄在提請委員審閱前，要先順過一次，不然對講話較多的人，是額外的負擔。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好的，我會在接下來 48 小時裡，和林妮蒨助理一起協作，先改得比較通順，再寄送給委員審訂。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "動議提到「公聽會直播要項」，這部份國教院可以辦理。" }, { "speaker": "方新舟", "speech": "建議國教院以唐委員的動議內容，先擬定作業要點修正案，下次課發會正式提案討論，不要用動議的方式處理，這樣對這兩天未出席的委員比較尊重。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "完全同意方委員的意見。這也是我最早對國教院的提議。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "今天原本有二十幾人出席簽到，現在有些委員先離開了。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "大家午安，課發委員目前有十八位到場，有兩位委員在本院開會尚未結束，一定會到，徵詢各位是否可以開會？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": null }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "課發會會議紀錄全部公開，接受全民提供意見。作為主席，我知道不能、也不可能擅自做結論，因為有你們的監督。" }, { "speaker": "張旭政", "speech": "全國教師會記者會提出的黑箱問題：如果這是為了全體國民中小學的重要工作，是否可以告訴我們領綱小組成員，以及如是何挑選進去的？到底院裡挑選小組成員的理由是什麼？我們為此問題，和國教院多次公文往返，但一直得不到答案，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "我們的新聞稿有寫，領綱組成是依據「十二年國民基本教育課程研究發展會領域課程綱要研修小組委員組成及遴聘程序」辦理。" }, { "speaker": "張旭政", "speech": "我們在意的是領綱小組的「社會團體」名單，也就是 21-29 位裡的。" }, { "speaker": "李彥儀", "speech": "我想詢問，我們今天是課發會，是否可以回到議案的議程來？" }, { "speaker": "張旭政", "speech": "當然可以。這個話題不是我們主動提的。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "宣佈開會。" }, { "speaker": "紀錄確認", "speech": "確認104年8月3、4日十二年國民基本教育課程研究發展會(第二屆)(以下簡稱課發會)第4、5、6、7次會議紀錄及辦理情形。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "這是國語文在 8/3 開會的意見，國語文群組早上才剛開過會，是否有意見？" }, { "speaker": "紀錄確認", "speech": "案由二：有關十二年國民基本教育語文領域-英語文(含國民中小學、普通型、技術型及綜合型高中)課程綱要(草案)，提請討論。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "請各位回到 p4，我們對於第二外語的建議，英語文第八點..." }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "上星期新住民群組大會時有派兩位代表，談了五十分鐘不歡而散。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "所以是「要求」高中在多元選修裡開設新住民語文？" }, { "speaker": "陳思玎", "speech": "關於本次會議議程中 p4 英語文第八點，因為目前第二外語和新住民的召集人未列席，他們上次有提到新住民語文課程在國小已經實施，如果國高中也有機會實施，是有延續性的。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "第一波通過的草案，除了自然會在今天下午三點上網之外，都上網了。" }, { "speaker": "紀錄確認", "speech": "104年8月3日課發會第5次會議紀錄及辦理情形：" }, { "speaker": "孫明霞", "speech": "三（一）災害防救已有 22 個小時，在 36 小時裡比例很高了。所謂「但只占課綱五分之一」實屬誤解，我建議刪除（例如：...）這個括號。" }, { "speaker": "紀錄確認", "speech": "104年8月3日課發會第6次會議紀錄及辦理情形：" }, { "speaker": "紀錄確認", "speech": "104年8月4日課發會第7次會議紀錄及辦理情形：" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「重要工具Excel」建議改為「重要工具：電子試算表（如Excel）」，以免有贊助特定廠商的問題。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "同意。" }, { "speaker": "業務報告", "speech": "一、十二年國民基本教育各領域課程綱要草案經104年8月3、4日課發會第4至7次會議詳細討論後，涉及各領綱草案整體之意見，羅列如下，請各領綱研修小組於參酌各次會議之課發會委員意見外，亦須併同針對各領綱草案所提共通意見納入，以利修改各領綱草案：" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "這是上次開完會後，每個領綱都要注意的。" }, { "speaker": "陳思玎", "speech": "生活課程綱要的修訂內容待會就要報告了，當時我們生活課程接到會議紀錄時，對修改課綱更具未來性和前瞻性的建議有討論，當然這個建議是針對每個領綱，我們認為此次課綱的研修是立足在現在當下課程實施的問題，同時也是走向未來的。" }, { "speaker": "張惠博", "speech": "今天已確認的紀錄，p9. 自然科學研修小組的意見，和其他領域的意見的方向、切入點，語句不太一樣，看起來，並沒有針對自然科學領綱提出實質意見。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "這個可以當作通案，帶回去和其他領綱討論，對於我們社會自己有的、好的成就，也讓孩子們知道。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "在排版、覆校的過程裡，我們討論如何回應「未來的不可確定性」？" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "未來性是滿需要的，因為「課綱、教材、教師一產出就是落伍的」，教室裡坐的人都是未來的。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "學習內容可以更柔性、更減量，留空間給未來不確定的情況。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "除了外審之外，各領域都有時代尖端的專家，平常離教育很遠，讓他們來看看。例如 PCHome 團隊，或唐鳳委員，多一點這樣的人，看到他們專業的那一塊？外審委員之前我們找的都是已經認識的人，但是如果國教院可以透過其他方式，連絡到各業界的專家，可能會更好。" }, { "speaker": "歐用生", "speech": "p22 第四點，報紙上說社會科會暫緩。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我建議放在給審查委員的意見表裡。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "領綱撰寫時，都是以「學生」為主詞，展現出能力或素養。" }, { "speaker": "張旭政", "speech": "上次會議我沒有出席，但主要對「同意各領綱小組規劃師資授課等適任原則」字樣提出意見，並希望列入紀錄。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "理解，也請張委員特別注意紀錄中其他的適法性問題。" }, { "speaker": "業務報告", "speech": "二、經104年8月3、4日課發會第4至7次會議討論初步通過的領綱草案，共計19份：" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "我們原本是要 2 月完成公告，教科書必須有 26 個月的編審期，所以最晚是明年 6 月前要公告，才能在 107 學年各教育階段一年級逐年實施。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "這是「分秒必爭」的規劃。對社會領域，很可能 9/22 無法處理，所以我希望 9/10 左右，再開一個工作小組的進度檢視會。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "同意，9/10 請課程中心確認第二波（含社會領域）的時程。" }, { "speaker": "提案討論", "speech": "案由一：有關十二年國民基本教育生活課程課程綱要(草案)，提請討論。" }, { "speaker": "秦葆琦", "speech": "生活課程在 8/13 提出的草案，就是現在的附件 3。" }, { "speaker": "吳武典", "speech": "今天對生活領域，已經看到不少修改，但在正式推出前，希望附錄可以將「參考素材」標題可以改為「示例」，引導性，不要變得太過剛性，不要一綱多本、卻各本都差不多。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "先請謝金城委員代表第三群組報告。" }, { "speaker": "謝金城", "speech": "理念和要點上，句子確實不是很順。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "吳老師在講的時候，我想說的是，可以對照 p98-p100 的建議，再衡量生活領域的報告，剛才聽起來都 OK，只有一點有空間。" }, { "speaker": "參考意見", "speech": null }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": null }, { "speaker": "鄭漢文", "speech": "p3 （五）感知與欣賞 p6 倒數第二行，「感知與欣賞」後的「欣賞」可刪除。" }, { "speaker": "陳思玎", "speech": "從參與生活課程從開始到現在，對於文字敘述、用詞，在敘寫時反覆和召集人、老師們討論，每個人對於用詞如何是精準的、能夠表達心裡想說的話，基於不同的用語習慣可以有無數種的表述方式。因此建議若文中的用詞如果沒有語法的不正確或誤用，請尊重課綱研修委員們的文字表述方式。" }, { "speaker": "歐用生", "speech": "我參與生活課程比較多次，很肯定他們的努力。以下不記錄..." }, { "speaker": "陳瓊花", "speech": "感謝生活領域團隊的辛苦。" }, { "speaker": "張惠博", "speech": "剛剛聽了生活課程的報告，很像是兒童版的通識教育，但其課程概念結構完整。" }, { "speaker": "鄭漢文", "speech": "生活課程裡，有很多比較、差異，但生活也應強調的是統整和相互依存。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "我也要先離開... 以下不記錄。" }, { "speaker": "王垠", "speech": "p1 基本理念，看到的是三個大標題，比較不容易開門見山。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "案由二我也先表示同意。" }, { "speaker": "李彥儀", "speech": "我也先表示同意。" }, { "speaker": "吳武典", "speech": "想提出「愛國」教育的問題。世界各國沒有學校課程不從小教學生愛國的，像美國，國民愛國得不得了。" }, { "speaker": "陳思玎", "speech": "如果小孩會愛自己、愛家、愛土地，自然就愛國了。如果以孩子為主體，能學到團體的規範，就能與人和諧的相處，對我們而言，這就是一個愛國家的表現了。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "陳委員和小組代表也都表示文字願意修改。" }, { "speaker": "陳思玎", "speech": "同意。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "生活領綱 8/31 如果能提供草案，我們就準備上網了。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "另外示例部份，是否附錄先不上網，課程手冊時再一起上線？別的領域也是這樣處理的。" }, { "speaker": "歐用生", "speech": "有事先離開，個人同意案由二。" }, { "speaker": "曾世杰", "speech": "我大力支持，拜託大家。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "案由二。p102 是要修正 104 年 4 月 20 日的議事程序，加上「紀錄」部份。" }, { "speaker": "張旭政", "speech": "我贊成這個方向。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "開玩笑的時候，彼此調侃不予紀錄。" }, { "speaker": "吳武典", "speech": "我不反對。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "會有怎樣的難關，我們要一關、一關過。" }, { "speaker": "謝金城", "speech": "國教署的會議，我們代表協會參加，那次討論的內容比較敏感，和教師有切身關係，請調時間兩年改成三年，與會者覺得影響很大。" }, { "speaker": "張旭政", "speech": "謝校長的情形，我們組織每星期都遇到。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "像「教育大家談」的討論會議被人身攻擊是一回事，但課發會的性質不一樣。" }, { "speaker": "張惠博", "speech": "在會議中，我們都是基於自身的教育見解、價值、學術訓練發言，但是，課綱的建立，仍有社會、文化、經濟、政治等因素在裡面。" }, { "speaker": "孫明霞", "speech": "我非常贊成。但我也比較希望，因為聘請時沒有這樣的告知，所以用信賴保護原則，希望可以再次確認，然後以全部都記名為原則。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "p22 業務報告裡，「...等適任原則」引起了討論。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "各委員互相提醒，這就是我們的「共好」。" }, { "speaker": "王垠", "speech": "假設通過的話，是否溯及既往？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是從這次開始。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "國教院的紀錄會公開在自己的網頁上，只是從這次開始，改由以記名為原則。" }, { "speaker": "謝金城", "speech": "如果有人對特定委員發言表達不同看法，國教院是否有責任？" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "國教院可以在網頁上，連結到委員自行紀錄的逐字稿。" }, { "speaker": "吳武典", "speech": "我覺得有些記名、有些不記名，這樣不徹底，是有點困難的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "司法院就是公開的..." }, { "speaker": "吳武典", "speech": "目的一樣，就是希望不要讓外界的批評阻礙我們。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "為什麼「有人不公開姓名」是有爭議的？" }, { "speaker": "謝金城", "speech": "到社會領域時，會不會有人因此不敢講話？" }, { "speaker": "陳思玎", "speech": "之前課審會時，雖然沒有這樣的紀錄原則，但後來也「被」公開了。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "聽起來，包括先離開的委員（曾、李、鄭、林、張、歐等六位），在場的委員都是同意的。" }, { "speaker": "吳武典", "speech": "疑慮中，勉強贊成。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "這個案子，是否就通過？" }, { "speaker": "吳武典", "speech": "希望字句在發表前，能先自我檢核，並得做必要的修飾。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一定會先和國教院的同仁確認。" }, { "speaker": "鄭文瑤", "speech": "專業的發言，當然可受公評。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我覺得有逐字紀錄，比較我們原先的重點紀錄，其實更容易有上下文的脈絡。" }, { "speaker": "吳武典", "speech": "要保障言論自由。" }, { "speaker": "謝金城", "speech": "團體代表人列席時，是否能發言？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "可發言，但不參與表決。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "列席可以發表所代表單位或團體意見，如果有書面授權，代理的人才可以表決。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "團體、行政代表，如果書面授權代理，可以算作出席人數嗎？" }, { "speaker": "范信賢", "speech": "議事程序 p104 第一點可以修改成「書面授權，可代表出席」，在下次大會提案。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我們下次會確認。個人代表一定要到，團體、機關的「書面委託出席」列為下次的議案。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "下次大會在 10/4-9 之間，調查委員的時間。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "謝謝大家，我們十月見！" } ]

[ { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "各位伙伴大家午安，大家好。我是這一場的主持人，我是彭啟明，任職於天氣風險管理開發公司，同時也是臺灣開放資料聯盟的會長。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "今天非常榮幸能夠主持這一場非常有意義的『開放^資料』。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "各位知道我們今天的講者是唐鳳，每個人心目中都有一個神，我知道唐鳳是在自由軟體的時候，那時候不知道他的中文名字是什麼，只知道有一個英文名字在網路上，然後這幾年他做開源，然後g0v，現在還有一些社會的運動。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "『開放資料』其實在臺灣這兩三年真的還蠻重要的，有的時候我感覺起來是像鐵板一樣，這個牆還蠻高的，但是政府裡面小幫手也幫助我們很多，所以需要大家各種力量的努力。下面，我們熱烈歡迎唐鳳。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝彭會長達人的介紹。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "今天的演講結構大概是這樣，我會分兩個部分，一個部分講Open Data ，另一個部分講Data Governance，兩個部分加起來大概講35分鐘，最多40分鐘，最後留10分鐘左右的時間問答。我的演講一般來講都會被認為講得特別快，所以如果有聽不清楚或者想討論的也歡迎隨時打斷我，然後我們就講的內容去討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當時昇瑋要我講的時候，本來是『開放×資料』，各位議程上還可以看到，我後來想一想，乘法左右兩邊對調是一樣的，但是資料開放跟開放資料是完全不一樣的兩個概念，所以就換成了『開放^資料』。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這是最近發生的一個例子，我們國家教育研究院課程發展委員會，我現在是課發會的委員，我們開會的時候聽到吳部長說『學生要求會上的發言都被公開，這樣委員就沒有辦法放心』，在他講這句話的時候我正在會場跟其他委員說把『被』字去掉，主動公開，大家就可以放心了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所謂的『開放^資料』，很多人是想先取得資料，這些資料本來不是為了開放而取得的，它是目的外之利用，然後政府再把它開放出來，可是這樣就有很多問題，包含個資的問題、目的外之利用的問題，當初被搜集的人其實不一定為了取樣，他們也不一定是主動的，你也許還要取得他們的同意，等等。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是你如果把它調換起來，一開始請使用者說做這件事情就是為了要累積資料，就是為了要把資料開放出來，這樣你就完全沒有後續利用的問題，這叫做主動公開。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "先請大家想一想，『資料開放：被動開放』跟『開放資料：主動開放資料』是兩件不同的事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第一部分的主題要討論的就是Crowdsoursing（眾包），怎麼樣說服許許多多的人，一起來願意提供資料，讓後續的利用者使用？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們在這裡黑客松的時候，通常都會用三個關鍵字來介紹自己：開源、公民、黑客。開源的意思是部分或者全部地拋棄掉著作權讓其他人利用，公民的意思是關心這個社會，黑客的意思就是用有創造力的方式解決問題（當然不一定是不合法的）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我是1994年出社會的，工作了20年，2013年退休了，退休之後就沒事做，跟一般退休人士一樣做志願性質的事情。我退休之後才發現，臺灣的第三部門有別於由上而下各個科層的公部門，跟以市場機制為交換的私部門，每個人自動自發願意捐一點時間、捐一點力氣出來，這種志願部門非常強大。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "誰也不能命令誰，也不是通過金錢交換的方式，每個人自願地去填坑，用這樣的方式就可以跟公部門、私部門有各種不同程度的合作。以私部門而言，我這5年來在跟蘋果合作做Siri的案子，所以看到資料的時候腦裡想到的都不是數字，都是文字，因為其實我們處理的東西全部都是自然語言，而且是雙向的東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "Socialtext，就是我2013年賣掉的那個公司，是把Facebook試著賣到各大政府和各大企業裡面。萌典是g0v的，我待會兒介紹，目前正在跟牛津大學合作。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我的第二個部分，就是Data Governance，會講到跟臺灣的國發會合作。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛才有聽到我在課發會剛擔任委員，開了三次會。我主要做的事情就是希望能夠建立一個系統，把所有課發會每個人講的話，還有照片都公開，這樣的話每個人每個時候講了什麼話可以成功地呈現在全民的面前。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實g0v本來另外就有一個專案，就是零時政府立法院，ly.g0v.tw就可以到零時政府的立法院，它顯示的東西跟這邊的政府是一樣的，只是說比較視覺化，比較容易，每一個法條好像購物車：到什麼程度，甚至它給的每個字，你可以把那個東西的超鏈結分享出來，我們就可以就法案的修正做討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "既然司法院也是逐字稿，立法院也是逐字稿，為什麼國教院不能是逐字稿？這是我的基本想法。經過三次討論以後，也很感謝20位出席的委員全部同意，所以從今天開始如果各位到archive.tw的話，就可以看到之前三次跟之後所有的國教院的逐字稿。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "為什麼我會想要做這些事情？我自己開始寫程式是1989年的事情，當時我8歲。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在我開始寫程式的時候我爸剛好在天安門，他是從5月採訪到6月1號，我們知道沒幾天就發生天安門事件，因為這樣的關係所以他對學生運動起了非常大的興趣，1989年年底去了柏林，當時有一個柏林圍牆倒塌的事件。當時東德警方沒有開槍，很多人都覺得是因為已經發生了6月那件事情，他們不想要重蹈覆轍，當然1990年臺灣野百合，也都會有類似的想法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為我爸的博士論文是做天安門學運裡面的人際關係研究，所以到德國，然後把當時流亡在德法的中國名人士結合起來，試著去做深入的訪談跟研究。我陪著他去念博士，所以整天在客廳聽到的就是要民主化，要對話，讓整件事情不要有那麼悲慘的結局。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我是1993年回臺灣的，我從一年級以後就沒有再去學校，為什麼？因為1994年發生了一件人類歷史上很重大的事情，就是全球資訊網的發明，我發現我在上面可以接觸到所有尖端的研究，而且不需要等十年時間編成教科書，就可以接觸到目前關心的事情發展到怎麼樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我從全球資訊網得到那麼多，我也想給回一些東西，所以說我剛才的一個想法就是促進一個安全的空間，這裡隔著螢幕不會有剝奪彼此發言權的狀況，大家可以互相學習，一步一步朝向實際可行的想法或者實際可行的理念，把它實現出來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "最近跟我長期合作的呂家華，他說『技術者背後不會也不該只有技術，每個技術背後有它追求的價值』。我跟家華說我的價值在1994年開始就非常穩定了，就是持守這個價值。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "接下來很快速地跟大家介紹一下在g0v這兩年多來，怎麼樣做Crowdsoursing，怎麼樣做眾包。2013年春Wired訪問張大春，張大春喜歡玩『臉書』，也很關心政治，然後外界問說臉書能不能影響政治，他回答『絕對不會。它會讓公民以為自己參與，好象真的有做什麼事，但是事實上並沒有改變，想不出來一個讓大家真正參與行動的實踐』。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "玩臉書的時候大家都很懶，都只有1分鐘。如果用一句話來形容零時政府g0v，它就是一個讓大家又懶，又可以參與的真正的行動的實踐。舉一個例子，監察院的政治獻金，資料只有他們自己有，提供給民間的只有影印出來的資訊，也就是說只有監察人才能做監察，人民只能幫他做覆核。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可是你說這是因為監察院黑箱嗎？也不是，而是因為定那個想法的那些人，本來就是卡在影印機時代的人，並沒有想到這些資料放出來是有更多的價值、應用。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然，立法委員是最會被這個開放影響的，所以他們排案可能排到最後一案，不審這個修正案。所以怎麼辦？就有一位馮光遠，是一位國寶級的白目，他除了跟計程車司機吵架之外，也會提很多很有趣的主意。他挖了一個坑，我們用一個太陽與北風的戰略，實際去監察院印資料，然後把它拿出來、把它轉成結構化資料。監察院一定會跳出來，說怎麼能保證資料百分百正確呢，這個時候我們就可以說『好啊，你們改一下查閱辦法，你們自己去釋出百分百正確的資料』。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "專案裡有NGO、工程師可能不到四成，還有設計師，還有做文案的，很多資料包。在這裡『豆腐』的意思就是被切成一塊一塊。第一批印出來的資料大概30萬筆，號召了9700多人參與在24小時之內，每一格有三個人以上看過，這個就是所謂的宅力文字辨識 Otaku Character Recognition，大家宅在家裡沒有事的時候就花一點點時間。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那為什麼能夠這樣呢？像馮光遠當然不可能自己跑到監察院印幾百頁資料出來，所以確實是有NGO、核456的朋友們跑進去。他們印出來之後就是這樣一張A4紙，我試過要這樣key大概要3分鐘到5分鐘，如果號召大家來捐3分鐘或者5分鐘，根本不會有人來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "g0v有一個最主要的概念，就是分身伐樹的概念。我們如果把它切成低於1分鐘，每個人只要花10秒鐘就可以做貢獻，那麼他們花的時間就跟有一個評論、有一個分享、有一個讚差不多，而且他們能夠獲得心理上的快樂是勝過在臉書上發文章的，這樣的話就可以把臉書上的人吸引過來，主動變成資料的貢獻者跟提供者。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我們就把它遊戲化，變成一個數位化的網站，在上面說現在有40萬筆，每次資料包上線的時候就會有更多筆輸入。有玩過開心農場的人就知道，人類是一種很奇怪的動物，你只要看到一個數字一直跑，即使不睡覺都會想把它跑到0，只要有一個進度條，不睡覺都要跑到滿。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以大家都在臉書上分享，一大堆人跳出來，24小時就把它變成了結構化資料。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "結構化資料可以做什麼？在座的各位比我都知道可以拿來什麼，我們只能做一些很基本的，比如說顯示。這裡沒有針對特定委員的意思，但是我們可以知道他的政治現金從哪裡來，花到哪裡去，如果他是議員的話，跟他的補助款的公司之間有什麼關聯。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好比在11/29投票的時候g0v的朋友們找到了各地的市徽，就有人說按進去發現22個候選人，我看完了補助記錄、出席記錄、投票記錄之後就只需要從兩個人選，所以這對民主的深化是有幫助的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然，我們也可以看到有些政黨特別艱困的選區，需要許多的競選經費，民進黨也有，中間紅色的顏清標委員不太需要政黨，自己有很多的選舉經費，可以做一些比較。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣的模式是g0v一直以來運行的模式，本來群眾媒體，像張大春或者是馮光遠，他們個人都非常有影響力，臉書隨便上發一個文就有幾百個贊，但是他們並沒有行動主義的感受。像馮光遠好了，他為什麼用比較cynical文筆來寫東西？很大一部分是因為他覺得，他寫的東西不能真的改變什麼，這樣的話就會有一種無力感。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "g0v提供一個空間，結合社運團體，好比剛才說的核456，他們持續進去把東西印出來，他們不習慣的是什麼？是分身伐樹，他們很習慣的是十個人，然後可能花一整年，把東西都打成資料，並不習慣把它切出去拿給幾萬個陌生人一起協作，所以這是開源模式。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "最後就是我們自由軟體的人，我們欠缺的就是公民精神，我們平常其實真的沒有那麼關心這些事情。g0v就是把這三種人結合在同一個空間，讓大家彼此學習到彼此的優點，這樣就可以作出這三方單一都沒有辦法做出來的事情。現在有很多臉書的訂閱，有很多透明公開的專案的共筆。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "高嘉良去開會的時候，全世界20幾個國家做civic tech的人聚在一起，他們統計了一下，看起來以色列跟臺灣是最活躍的，臺灣的規模又是以色列的10倍，所以高嘉良就說我們不出國比賽不知道自己第一名。可是這個第一名並不是那麼值得驕傲，如果是在英國或者美國，他們的陽光法案，本來監察院這些資料就是公開的，不需要花那麼多力氣去做這些事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "反過來講，如果是在北韓或者在中華人民共和國，或者在一些中東國家，我們不要說12萬人，我們聚集到12個人就被請去喝茶了。所以你需要有一個卡在影印機時代的政府，跟一個蓬勃自由的公民系統，這樣才能作出像開放政治獻金這樣的事情來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "今天跟昨天，都是兩個月一次的大型黑客松，幾百個人，有很多東西吃，進來的人自己拿一個自己的專長貼紙，可以貼在自己的肩膀上面，第一次來的人有梅花鹿，來很多次的人有黑熊。這個東西要做什麼呢？重點就是要提案。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "昨天有20多個提案，每個提案人上來挖一個坑，說有些事情需要做，好比開放政治現金，然後需要什麼樣專長的人，比如需要兩個法律工作者、兩個文字工作者、兩個設計師等等，然後就組隊，最後就會發表，通常就會約每兩個禮拜做下去。g0v並不是一個一般意義上的團體或者組織，因為挖坑的人不能強迫別人來填坑，他填坑也不受坑主的指揮，很多坑主挖完就跑了，所以每個人都是自己要做什麼就做什麼。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為是開源的關係，所以你填到一半跑掉也不會良心不安，接下來的人不用問你，也可以做下去。在這樣的前提下就是一個迴圈，你加入黑客松可以認識很多坑，你加入坑之後會認識更多人，他們會把推到各種松，你又認識更多坑，這就是一個零的迴圈。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那為什麼叫做坑，而不叫做專案呢？因為我們不要有專案經理人、專案代表人的頭銜，我們就是挖坑、填坑的，它完全沒有上下階級。坑的另外一個意思就是說，一切東西都有不完美的東西，我們先面對，現承認那個不完美的東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我很喜歡的一個歌手的一句話，『萬事萬物都有缺口，缺口就是光的入口』。所有的事情都有不完美的地方，這樣別人才有參加的動力。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "舉一個最簡單的例子，零時政府一開始的兩位發起人是特別會寫程式，但是特別不會做logo的，他們做的logo超醜，可是他們不怕丟臉，就把這樣超醜的logo掛著，有一位設計師就來了，他說看著這個logo全身不舒服。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所謂『誰在乎誰痛苦』，所以他就很痛苦，他一整天如果不把它做得更好一點的話什麼事都不用做，後來他就把它做得比較漂亮。後來我們發現在手機上、平板電腦上看起來沒有辨識度，那個紅點太小了，後來又改良，可是如果不是一開始有人不怕丟臉，就不會一張圖惹怒設計師，把更好的創意引發出來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這是八仙塵爆時所有急診室推床的狀況，這是當時臺北資訊局提供的資料。塵爆的時候是在周末，人不在，所以g0v的朋友就可以自己做這樣的系統，也做各地血庫存量的系統。尼泊爾救災的時候也有，當時是把衛星圖切成一小塊一小塊，同樣每個人只需要貢獻一點點時間就可以把那塊的道路和建築物標出來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我記得這是第一次在24小時之後，就獲得了衛星地圖上捐出來的震後圖資，這樣就可以把震後的也標出來，這樣的話紅十字會、聯合國進去的時候能走哪一條、不能走哪一條路，以及最重要的就是災民自己設置的帳棚在哪裡。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我有經常參加的長期專案就是萌典。萌典有非常多國語兩岸辭典，民間捐出來的國語、台語（閩南語、客家語、阿美語），上個月藏語都進來了，基本上臺灣有人在使用的語言我們都會收錄。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "為什麼萌典能做這麼多呢？並不是因為我這麼厲害，懂這麼多種語言。我完全不懂阿美語。重點是做阿美語的那個團隊根本不用問過我，因為我們採取的是協作的方式，而不是合作的方式。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "合作的方式是大家都要先建立共識，先同意，可是我們知道到20個人都會出現階層，因為不可能每個人都很熟每個人，到150個人就再也不可能合作了，這是人類的限制。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在香港佔中當時有一個畫家畫了這樣一幅圖，為什麼之前香港每一次社會運動都失敗，因為要大會通過，大會不通過的那一派就會覺得被收割了，所以就要切割。雖然香港社運發展得很蓬勃，他們充滿了社會運動的三大要素，就是收割、切割、帥哥，但是沒有辦法取得政治上的進展原因其中之一是：一直都要合作，而沒有辦法採取協作的模式。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在雨傘運動前夕他們領導都被抓了，所以他們在街上的哪些人不得已採取協作的模式，每個人每個地區做的事情都公開出來，直播、逐字稿，別的地方看到好主意就採用，不好的主意，像練詠春拳這個就不會採用，比較好的主意，像架關公像出來發現白道黑道都不太敢攻這個地方，那麼別的地方說做一個聖母瑪麗亞像，這個就叫做A/B testing，結果就會發現黑道兩個都怕，但是警察不怕聖母瑪麗亞，所以說後面關公就比較流行。重點是誰都沒有問過誰，這是一個協作的模型。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在網路上你要主動取得資料，在你邀請之前一定要先把鏈結和分享的文化做出來。像萌典當初為什麼發出這個計劃？就是因為教育部網站的辭典，你查到一個詞拷貝到臉書上，別人是打不開的。我的意思是說辭典網站是1995年的作品，當時大家並沒有permalink這個概念，所以我們就用新的概念做了一次。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "資料的網址就是permalink，有它就可以做linked data。有這樣的鏈結以後，大家就開始在臉書上分享在萌典上查的詞。那麼萌典上沒有詞怎麼辦？絕對不是『404找不到』，而是把它斷詞，比如說斷成開放、資料、工作坊，然後給出底下的定義，而且配上一個漂漂亮亮的九宮格的書法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們知道在臉書上面要有傳染力，最好的方法就是附上一張圖，但是如果要附圖的話，截圖、盜圖這個問題很大。這個時候，萌典只要打字就幫你生圖出來，而且還有各種不同的開放免費字體的圖，大家覺得很好玩，這就是為什麼我們每個月有幾百萬人次。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為這樣的關係，每次我們邀請大家來做貢獻的時候，即使只有萬分之一的人來做貢獻也蠻多的。我們在幫教育部挑錯字的時候，用一個程式做對比，發現這樣兩個有一個是錯字時，電腦不能判斷哪一個是錯字，所以就請人腦來判斷，而每一個這樣的錯誤又有一個鏈結，所以你參加之後又可以分享和留言，很好玩就會分享，18天國教院收到的6000多個校正裡面有5000多個是我們這邊給出的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個例子是阿美語字典，這次不是切豆腐，是切豆干了，切成一條一條，你只要會打字就可以把它打出來。在臉書上我們發現阿美族的人很多，阿美族的朋友也很多，他們這樣號召的力量絕對不亞於政治獻金，所以同樣的一瞬間這麼厚的一本字典，一瞬間又變成了一本結構化的資料，然後你現在到amis.moedict.tw，你可以打『四邊形』就可以查到阿美語。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這就是我們在g0v怎麼做Crowdsourcing，怎麼樣讓大家覺得主動提供資料不僅是一件有意義的事情，而且也是一件好玩的事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我在之前擔任了六個月的行政院的顧問，現在已經卸任了，是從data governance的角度來看這件事情。我跟國發會主要合作的是vTaiwan這個計劃，這個計劃很特別，完全沒有拿任何補助款，從政府的角度來看是收集民意，從民間校對來看是收集部會意見。這是一個雙向的溝通平台，我們在這上面討論很多網路法規的調適。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在網路上面做法規調適其實不是一個新的概念，從2004年Michael Herze教授就一直在討論，但是他們一直都會碰到很多問題。目前碰到的問題總結成三大障礙，而越過這三大障礙稍微比較成功的，是康奈爾的RegulationRoom，vTaiwan是以此作為範本，然後從這個基礎上面開始開發。是哪三個障礙？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一是無知之牆：制定新創企業法案的人都沒有開過新創企業，但是那些實際會被法案影響的人都是最後一秒鐘才知道。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "二是白目之牆：假設你現在有組織，你有一個關心的聯盟，你越過了無知之牆，實際到臉書或者其他地方去做討論，然後讓公共部門碰到，就會遇到白目之牆。如果那個空間設計得不好，一開始大家比較認真討論，可是後來留言的人不是說好棒棒就是說好壞壞，而且奇怪的是那些人得到的讚都很多，接下來就會有人開始貼圖了，一發不可收拾，然後就不用討論了，所以在這種情況下，你在臉書上要做有意義的討論，有效評論，對行政機關有意義的討論是非常非常困難的事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "三是資訊爆炸之牆：假設你又越過了白目之牆，開始真正討論那個法案，然後就會碰到資訊爆炸之牆，當一個法案要改一個字的時候，事實上又有別的主管機關，差不多要看50萬字左右，才能知道一個字的改動對所有人的影響是什麼。當然在行政也有專門的人來做這件事情，但並不是大家都有這種專業，所以就會變成懶人包來讓大家表達意見，可是很少的懶人包會直接連結到data，這樣懶人包裡面沒有寫的就不知道，很難作出完整的討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這裡是12/9的時候，g0v有4位朋友被邀請到蔡玉玲主持的一個會議，會議中勞動部的各科科長都到了，他們說想要討論電傳勞動，電傳勞動是什麼？就是我們在家寫程式，剛好我們四個人都是在家寫程式，所以他們想問，我們是否可以代表遠距工作者給一些意見。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他們就說『請問一下遠距電傳勞動者有沒有工會，是否可以邀請工會代表給一些政策上的指導』，然後我們就哈哈大笑。我們寫程式的人在遠距工作的時候自動打卡，但我們不敢代表遠端寫曲子的，不敢代表遠端畫漫畫的，這些其實完全不同的工作，而且也不可能有人敢說代表全臺灣的遠距的畫漫畫的，因為每個人都不一樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個問題，新創公司，因為當時勞動部的朋友們念頭一轉，最會找電傳勞動者的雇主是新創公司，我們不如把老板找來，他們也許可以分享一些意見，他們就問『請問一下新創公司有沒有工會代表，有沒有理事長，我們也可以請來』，當然也沒有，因為工會通常是一個很成型的產業，新創公司下一餐發不發得出來都是問題，怎麼可能有空去組工會。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "而且更重要的是，這個社群是鬆散的。不會有人站出來說『勞動部您好，我代表所有臺灣的新創公司』，這是不可能的，所以會議很難按照他們本來的程序召開。因此，蔡玉玲就來g0v這邊以鄉民的身份挖個坑，然後說我們來討論：『可不可以不要到開曼設公司』？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "臺灣有非常多的公司都是去開曼設立，因為創始人想要保有超過51%的控制權，而在臺灣的公司法規下，他們只有第二輪或者第三輪一定會被dilute掉，而技術股認定又很困難，所以沒有辦法跟創投合作。公司法也許應該要修正，但是要怎麼修正？他們找不到代表，這就是vTaiwan成立的一個開始。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "按照g0v一貫的效率，我們瞬間變出了一個prototype，然後在2月1號開始初步討論，真的有很多新創公司的朋友和法律界的朋友來討論，討論之後過了一個半月，借用行政院場地辦了民間的諮詢會議，用直播、文播的方式讓大家知道。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "過了五天之後，我們請在討論裡面有提出建設性意見的人，一起來寫出一個建議書。我們不太懂法律，所以是按照我們知道第一線事務的狀態，來提建議。我已經退休了，所以我是中立的主持人，帶學者跟這些新創公司的朋友，討論公司法如果要修改的時候，它的應修改事項、不得修改事項、應該考慮的東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "之後建議書就送給經濟部，經濟部就審這個草案，然後再找各個縣市的團隊，他們討論一輪之後覺得這個建議書不錯，於是就逐條回覆哪些有採納、哪些沒有採納，哪些在未來的實施細則裡面訂定，過了一個半月就出院會了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "立法院為什麼會把有些法案往後排，排到最後一案？立法院最常用的原因，就是『尚未取得社會共識』。經過這樣的過程，尤其是一些立委助理也有參加，他們沒有辦法說尚未取得社會共識，所以兩大黨都表態說完全支持vTaiwan的這份建議書、完全支持這個精神。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以公司法就修改了，實施細則即將頒布，在今年年底之前上路。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們工作組怎麼進行呢？我們在討論裡面，會看大家的論點，字體有七個粗細，越粗表示越多人給這個論點，O表示實況的描述，R是大家的反應和期待，I是大家的具體建議。我們給出所有的留言，現場的人在現場參加，不能前來的人可以通過螢幕參加，我們這邊討論每20分鐘會切過去20分鐘，然後去看線上，去收集這邊的意見，盡可能讓遠端的人和近端的人有相同參與的權限。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們獲得了一個粗略共識以後，就寫一個建議書，請行政人員去逐條回覆。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "討論完公司法之後，我們就開始討論資料相關的，這個是去識別化的議題。公共部門收集了很多資料，你把它改成一些代碼，但是那個代碼跟識別符一一對應，這樣算去識別化嗎？這個在國際上的定義並不明白，所以說我們當時vTaiwan就在討論：到底什麼樣的程度算是無從識別。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在這裡想再強調一次，如果是特定目的，使用者在生成這個資料的時候，就知道這個資料會被你拿來做分析的話，你就完全不需要管這一大堆限制。為什麼我們要討論這個？是因為它是要做目的外之利用，所以要經過一個去識別化的方式，我們在vTaiwan很慎重地討論了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "Google Chrome在回報你的使用訊息的時候，它對每個位元丟一個硬幣，有一半的幾率是正確的回報，有一半的機率是亂數值回報，這個叫做differential privacy，這個時候我們即使是NSA，在中間截聽了這些資料，也沒有辦法推斷出這個人到底機器上面的狀況是什麼樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "今天我們不可能討論很多技術細節，但是按照不同的資料使用方法，我們可以使用不同的去識別化的方法，而代碼化真的不是一個有效的去識別化方法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所有這些討論的每一字都有記錄。資料很有趣，一般送禮物的時候你送了別人禮物，你就沒有了，但是資料是你送完別人之後你跟他都有，用的人越多、價值越多，像所有這些討論，以及各部會的意見都收集在vTaiwan這個平台上。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們重點就是讓很多人一起來討論，至少開放30天以上。這張我就不講了，但是重點是說這些都是免費資源，你不太需要花任何成本，自己架一個vTaiwan，目前每個月大概一百萬人次。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "國發會還有一個平台，但是它做的是中後期，就是已經有階段性的想法，讓大家表態，我們是在最前期，就是行政人員還不知道要做什麼的時候，我們是做在前面，而且是完全開源的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們參考RegulationRoom的架構，在上面有做一些額外的修改。它是請學者們來對話，但是我們是直接請部會來對話，部對對所有的問題七天之內要回覆，國際法的問題科法所會在七天之內回覆。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們要的是政府制定應有的民主精神與態度。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "最後回來講跟資料科學比較相關的。vTaiwan接下來要討論什麼議題，其實是大家自己來決定的，在vTaiwan上面的參與者們最想討論的就是Uber、Airbnb。像數位遺產或者無人飛行器討論得比較少，數位連署是最少的，蠻可憐的。我們可以看到一個趨勢，只要出現英文字就會出現在前面..." }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為這樣的關係我們就優先討論Uber，我們採取的工具是pol.is。大約有一半的參加者是司機朋友們，他們在開車的時候不可能拿出一台電腦來打意見，所以我們盡可能簡化他們參與的方式：先看在全世界Uber的狀況，然後在臺灣的狀況以及目前大家的意見，大家上來之後看到別人的留言，只需要在手機上點同意或者不同意，就會自動歸到跟他相似的群體裡面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "目前三萬人次，他們慢慢開始互相說服，然後就慢慢變成兩群。第一群開始很兇，他們說交通部已經駁回Uber的訴願，為什麼臺北市政府還不取消公司登記？第二群是說『如果不趕時間，就算馬路邊有許多計程車，還是會選擇Uber』。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "隨著時間的過去，他們會一直想要著出新的論點來說服其他人，所以群組一的人修正他們的論點，其實他們的重點是交通部還是有責任去取締，這邊就說計程車司機都要加入車隊才能生存、如果也加入Uber的話可以顛覆這項不成文的規定。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "雙方會互相拉票，因為這個意見的關係，我們可以看到第二群組多了2%左右的票。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "到最後的重點其實並不只是這些群組怎麼想，而是大家跨群組的感受。大家都覺得法律是可以根據科技來修改的，安全是最重要的，乘客保障是最重要的。95%的人覺得如果政府可以應對Uber的挑戰，把計程車也升級，慢慢計程車有一套評價的方式，這樣的話司機也可以獲得很好的服務品質。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也有一開始相當兇的人說『應盡一切努力使其停業，不需要國人表示意見』，最後65%的人表示反對，65%的人覺得應該還是要討論一下，之後如果你要認為它不合法，你再說它不合法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "最後是產生一些共同建議：公平管制規則，不是因為Uber的公司名稱有英文就要幫助。設計一套法律，我上了Uber的車上之後怎麼知道那個人是那個人、那台車是那台車？交通運輸還是有一些公共性，即使Uber宣稱它是免費平台，還是應該像食品藥品這樣嚴格地把關。還有人說自用車載客可以登記，上下班的時候順帶載一些人。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這裡為大家挖一個坑，我們在下個星期四的行政院公開直播，包含Uber的人、交通部的人，以及計程車隊和公會的人，都會對資料做一次討論。Uber目前已經出了一份分析報告，如果各位資料科學的前輩朋友們願意下載一下我們的這個平台，我們全部都會合併到下星期四的報告裡面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "最後，非常感謝挖坑的人和填坑的人。謝謝大家！" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "我們開放兩個問題。" }, { "speaker": "提問", "speech": "你好，感謝你這個報告。我一般看g0v都是資訊的平台，剛才了解到推動政策的過程。我有兩個問題，第一個問題，我認為我們香港應該有自己的Wikileaks，事實上沒有，你們好象有一點像，但是又不太像，是因為用公開的資訊來做一些整理，你們有沒有這方面的計劃？第二個問題，臺灣常常看到的民意很多時候都是媒體主動，有些政策建議政府不一定會接納，你們跟媒體的關係如何？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我非常快速地回答，因為第一個只要一句話來回答：歡迎你來挖坑，請到g0v上面提一個專案，我目前還沒有看到，但是只要你提了就有人做。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第二個問題，我們跟媒體的關係其實跟政府的關係差不多。這邊的政府發文給零時政府的時候其實真的是給『零時政府 高村長 嘉良』，這是一個特殊的政府對政府的關係。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第三部門要有第三部門的樣子，我們的樣子就是fork the government：我們並不是否定現成的所有東西，fork的意思就是拿現在的東西往一個不同的方向去開發，如果那個開發是好主意的話我們希望本來的那個主線能夠合併進去，否則的話反正大家都是自願的，沒有什麼成本。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們跟媒體的合作也是這樣的概念：我們是供稿的，他們願意採納就採納。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "我有一個問題，vTaiwan跟join競爭嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有，我們是它們的上游，vTaiwan這邊只討論跟網路使用者為主要的利益相關者，因為我們不希望討論有不當代表的人。join沒有挑這個，所以上面例如有通姦除罪化、同性婚姻，但是我們沒有任何研究顯示說，這兩個議題的利害相關者是重度的網路使用者或者有任何重疊性，因此我們不討論這個，我們只做利害關係人的討論平台。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "join試了不同的方法，他們有0800的專線，你可以任何時候打進去，會幫你記下這個意見，如果有回應的話還會打電話給你，這讓更多人參加。所以我覺得這是在於政策實行各個階段，這個部分是特別適合的，並不是競爭的關係。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "不會打架。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不會。" }, { "speaker": "提問", "speech": "謝謝精彩的演講，我覺得Crowdsourcing這方面的能力非常強，但是最後您有列出六個意見，這是誰來列的，最後大家凝聚的六個是客觀的，還是主觀的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非常好的問題。為什麼我們叫做意見徵集？重點就是說這些數字本身不賦予意義，我們只是選擇出在第一階段要討論哪些問題而已。另外一個，我們希望越多樣的意見出來越好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛才的那六點其實彼此之間是有衝突的，但建議是公共部門可以回應的。感受跟期待：是在什麼樣的感覺底下做出這樣的建議？這是客觀的。但是要怎麼分出感受、期待或者建議，它當然多少有一些主觀的因素在裡面。" }, { "speaker": "提問", "speech": "有沒有可能把這個平台跟i-voting結合？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這是非常好的主意。那就交給你了，麻煩在hackpad上寫一個計劃，謝謝。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "我們最後用熱烈的掌聲感謝唐鳳，謝謝！" } ]

[ { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家好，今天的會議正式開始，首先說明麥克風使用規則，為了避免出現回音，請大家發言後記得把麥克風按掉，至於中間圓桌的朋友煩請輪流傳麥克風，這也是一種共享麥克風的概念。" }, { "speaker": "陳敦基", "speech": "不好意思，晚到了一點。" }, { "speaker": "王晉元", "speech": "大家好，我是交通大學運輸管理學系的王晉元，今天很高興來到這裡。" }, { "speaker": "周文生", "speech": "大家好，我是中央警察大學交通系周文生。我想我今天來，是因為剛好正在執行交通部運研所的一項計程車相關的課題，裡面當然也包含了今天所談的 Uber 的問題。這是我今天來這場會議的主要目的。" }, { "speaker": "翟本喬", "speech": "大家好，我是翟本喬。我罵過 Uber，Uber 今天要來回應。" }, { "speaker": "王穆衡", "speech": "各位大家好，我是交通部路政司王穆衡。因為我來自交通部，大家可能知道我等一下要代表官方做一些說法。" }, { "speaker": "胡迪琦", "speech": "大家好，我是交通部路政司胡迪琦，今天來這邊，也是第一次參與這樣的會議。" }, { "speaker": "謝慧美", "speech": "大家好，我是財政部賦稅署謝慧美，今天也是第一次來參加這樣的會議。" }, { "speaker": "林華容", "speech": "大家好，我是財政部賦稅署林華容，也是第一次參與這個會議。" }, { "speaker": "胡美蓁", "speech": "主席、各位先進大家好，我是經濟部商業司胡美蓁，很高興來到這邊與會。" }, { "speaker": "曾碧雲", "speech": "大家好，我是商業司曾碧雲。今天也是很開心有這樣的機會，第一次參與這樣的討論會議。" }, { "speaker": "呂繼宗", "speech": "大家好，我是賦稅署呂繼宗，今天很高興與會。" }, { "speaker": "金世仰", "speech": "大家好，我是財政部台北國稅局金世仰，很高興今天有這個機會來跟大家交流意見。" }, { "speaker": "林聖慧", "speech": "大家晚安，我是財政部台北國稅局林聖慧。今天很高興來參與、思考這個新興的行業對於我們所得稅的影響。謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "目前這邊的感受，大部份都是「很高興」、「很期待」。那我們來看一下共享麥克風桌的感受..." }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "大家好，我是 AppWorks 共同創辦人 IC，也是青年顧問團的成員之一。" }, { "speaker": "趙式隆", "speech": "大家好，我是青年顧問團的式隆，我同時也是學悅科技的共同創辦人。" }, { "speaker": "彭彥翰", "speech": "各位大家好，我是青年顧問團的彭彥翰，現在是中華國樂團的副指揮，同時也是師大社教所的博士班學生。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們既然提到當事人... 先請內桌的兩位當事人自我介紹。" }, { "speaker": "黃維俊", "speech": "大家好，我是台灣大車隊的黃維俊。非常高興今天有這個機會，能夠來參加共享經濟議題討論。也希望藉這個機會，無論是正方或是反方的意見，都能夠獲得充分的交流。" }, { "speaker": "許錦嘉", "speech": "大家好，我是台灣大車隊許錦嘉。今天非常榮幸能夠參加這個會議，待會我也樂於分享我們自己車隊的一些看法。" }, { "speaker": "王明雄", "speech": "各位晚安，我是業者，台北市計程車商業同業公會的理事長，我叫王明雄。" }, { "speaker": "李瓊淑", "speech": "大家好，我是台灣大車隊總經理李瓊淑。今天非常高興可以參與這樣的會議，也希望通過這樣的會議，瞭解政府、各位業者、還有在場的各位學者，對這件事情的看法。" }, { "speaker": "鄭穎怡", "speech": "大家好，我是 Uber 的亞太區公共政策經理 Vicky。你們應該聽得出我不是台灣人..." }, { "speaker": "顧立楷", "speech": "大家好，我是 Uber 台北區的總經理，我叫顧立楷。一樣是非常高興、非常榮幸被邀請到這邊來，跟大家討論共享經濟的議題。" }, { "speaker": "謝樹藝", "speech": "大家好，我是謝樹藝，我的職業是律師，我是 Uber 的資深顧問。" }, { "speaker": "雨蒼", "speech": "大家好，我是社群參與者雨蒼，今天會過來主要是代表楊孝先來發表一些意見。" }, { "speaker": "吳家林", "speech": "大家好，我是國發會法協中心吳家林。非常歡迎各位，我是第六次來參加這個會議了。" }, { "speaker": "謝孟珊", "speech": "大家好，我是科法所孟珊（Stella）。" }, { "speaker": "薛雅婷", "speech": "大家好，我是速錄師，我的名字叫薛雅婷，大家可以叫我 Wendy。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然，也請我們諮詢會議的總召集人，跟我們說幾句話。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "各位好，我是行政院蔡玉玲政委。今天非常榮幸，其實今天是我們虛擬世界法規調適 Version 2（vTaiwan 2.0）的會議，我們在形式上也有改變，之前做了一些意見調查，等一下唐鳳也會 share 調查的結果。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "先介紹今天時間的結構。剛剛各位自我介紹之後，也很高興線上已經快要有一百位朋友，和我們一起參加這次的直播。" }, { "speaker": "TonyQ", "speech": "大家好，我是 TonyQ，本名是王景弘，本身是網站開發工程師，算是資訊業代表吧。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家都覺得科技跟法律應該與實際俱進、安全是最重要的。" }, { "speaker": "王穆衡", "speech": "由於時間安排，就由我交通部當作第一個，做個回應。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛剛交通部花了十五分鐘，我想也給 Uber 十五分鐘，就直接切換到他們簡報。" }, { "speaker": "顧立楷", "speech": "大家好，首先謝謝行政院和 g0v 的朋友，給我們帶來這麼好的 vTaiwan 平台。我們非常樂於跟大家交換意見，收集各種不同民眾的意見。這部分是有個公開透明的平台，是全世界比較少看到的。" }, { "speaker": "鄭穎怡", "speech": "其他國家對Uber有這樣的法規出現，所以譬如說美國，我們美國的生意業務是從 2009 年、54個地區有關於共乘法規。亞洲菲律賓五月的時候也做過、你們也談過。" }, { "speaker": "顧立楷", "speech": "如何合法繳稅？目前 Uber 公司並不像大型跨國企業如 Facebook，在全球各地都有獲利非常多的地方，我們其實在全球各地都還在投資的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "鄭穎怡", "speech": "最後我們要談的是安全的部分，在 pol.is 上的每個群組，我們都看到安全是最受關注的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝，非常的準時。" }, { "speaker": "許錦嘉", "speech": "主席、委員、交通部各位長官，大家好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想，vTaiwan就是多重的、利益相關者的對話平台。" }, { "speaker": "王明雄", "speech": "兩位共同主持人、各位與會來賓，今天晚上大家真的幸會了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我有看到互相拉攏的感覺，或者是「你們有做、我們也有做」，也有其他對話的聲音。" }, { "speaker": "雨蒼", "speech": "幫楊孝先（nchild）提兩個問題。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "我想到第一個原因，我是從國外搭Uber習慣的，反過來看我們的車隊，這個對觀光客來說這可能是選擇的理由之一。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "群眾募資，之前我們有在 vTaiwan 上討論過。" }, { "speaker": "翟本喬", "speech": "交通部剛剛講了你叫了Uber就是讓計程車閒置，而且你只是把錢從計程車移到Uber，有的時候有比較好的車，Benz，有閒置能力可以放一台Benz在家裡的車，我們國家有必要擔心他的就業問題嗎？我想是不需要的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "...當然，直銷也不是vTaiwan討論的話題。XD" }, { "speaker": "王晉元", "speech": "剛Uber提到單親媽媽笑的很開心，我覺得是只看到新人笑、沒看到舊人哭。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛剛有聽到一個新的概念，像是「共享經濟示範區」。" }, { "speaker": "王穆衡", "speech": "首先交通部所做的裁判是針對「明確非法」這一塊，也就是沒有拿到營業的許可，不能攬客或者是自定價格收費，這一點是非常明確的。這在事證明確及法令存在之下，我沒有權說不處理這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以修改「計程車服務業核准經營辦法」並不是跟Uber作討論或調查，而是問一個「實際目前法上的態樣」，就用那個方式定義嗎？" }, { "speaker": "王穆衡", "speech": "是的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好的。剛才有另一個問題，就是所謂「兩千萬的保險」是哪一家納保、如何給付等，請 Uber 回答。" }, { "speaker": "顧立楷", "speech": "我們希望做的是一種創新的商業模式。Uber不僅是用Benz或者是高檔車，不過現在看到的是比如單親媽媽，不可能每一個人都有一台Benz在家裡。" }, { "speaker": "翟本喬", "speech": "你這樣說，沒有回答到我的問題。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "所以說，如果台灣有發生事故的時候，是要到美國，還是到荷蘭去 claim？" }, { "speaker": "顧立楷", "speech": "依照我們平台的角色，我們一開始幫助協調當地保險的部分，這也是我們一開始做的義務。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "目前發生過幾次這種 claim？" }, { "speaker": "顧立楷", "speech": "目前沒有。" }, { "speaker": "翟本喬", "speech": "我想很簡單的一個問題：你們是哪一家保險公司，保單可不可以給我看？" }, { "speaker": "王明雄", "speech": "我代他回答啦，「今天沒有帶來」。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "顧立楷", "speech": "我平常不會隨身帶著那張保單在身上。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "翟本喬", "speech": "那你可不可以、什麼時候可以告訴我們台灣的民眾，是哪一家保險公司，保這兩千萬的額度？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "今天不是辯論會，所以您的問題，他們沒有馬上回答的義務..." }, { "speaker": "翟本喬", "speech": "我只是對這種把我當白痴的行為，感到非常不滿。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "...而且我們也不希望有人身攻擊的狀況發生，無論是被動的，還是..." }, { "speaker": "TonyQ", "speech": "我今天是以資訊能力較高，且經濟能力較好，常搭計程車的人的身份發言，對 Uber 我要持反方態度，我本身喜歡搭乘台灣大車隊高於 Uber。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "請台灣大車隊，可以快速回應一下。" }, { "speaker": "李瓊淑", "speech": "預計到十月，所有的車子都可以用信用卡及悠遊卡支付，第三方工具都會上路。" }, { "speaker": "陳敦基", "speech": "剛才來的時候，我說我是交通政策方面的專業，其實我的專長是在「交通運輸經濟」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝陳教授精闢的見解，目前我們還在第零階段意見徵集。" }, { "speaker": "謝樹藝", "speech": "會後會將Uber公司的保單先給政委辦公室審閱。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "先總結一下，您的意見是，輔導他們取得職業駕照、取得良民證，甚至是擺在車上，您認為這都不是那麼大的問題。比較大的是車子本身的問題？" }, { "speaker": "王明雄", "speech": "Uber顧問先生，你回去可以跟內部討論一下。" }, { "speaker": "彭彥翰", "speech": "可以有這麼大的騷動，表示鑽到了一些漏洞，Uber 的生存就是證明。" }, { "speaker": "周文生", "speech": "今天主要是聽大家的意見，過去開會常常是我先把狀況跟大家說明，因為在這個行業我已經有二十幾年的經驗。" }, { "speaker": "趙式隆", "speech": "我算是坐Uber、神州快車、滴滴打車經驗相當豐富的人，我喜歡跟司機聊天，發現其實都不是共乘的概念，都是專程從遠地來接我的，不是順道載我，且還有司機跟我說我可不可以在這裡先放你下車，因為這樣我還有補貼。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "雖然場地沒有時間限制，但最後還是希望有個總結。" }, { "speaker": "雨蒼", "speech": "網路上很多聲音提到，傳統計程車司機被車行的特許管理制度給欺壓，剛剛交通部的報告也提到，計程車司機目前在台灣收入算低，剛剛看了一下，有個3年前新聞就寫，計程車司機月賺9萬，在車行層層剝削後，只賺3萬。我想請問一下，因為Uber的出現讓很多司機似乎有辦法取得更好的權益，台灣大哥大或計程車工會怎麼看這個問題？交通部或勞動部、甚至車行未來有沒有方案應對這種剝削？計程車工會是不是有發揮替司機說話的功能？ Uber的出現，其實也點出許多計程車行業目前還做不到的功能。舉例來說，對乘客來說，也有許多問題－－乘客搭車後，如何評價司機？如何避免司機繞路、被塞車塞在路上？以及如果司機繞路，有沒有更方便的方式要求退費？叫車的時候，能不能選擇車子品質和服務等級？有沒有對服務不好的司機做輔導？有沒有辦法搭完車直接印出發票？ 我希望大家除了檢討Uber功能以外，也應該對既有的計程車行業做審視，去改善司機的工作品質，也改善乘客的體驗。" }, { "speaker": "李瓊淑", "speech": "計程車的計費應該在年底之前都會上路，坐上車的收據我想都會有的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "您是說如果允許收費兩倍的話，就會提供兩倍高的服務品質嗎？" }, { "speaker": "李瓊淑", "speech": "不完全是這樣。Uber 還有所謂的「浮動計價」，在尖峰時段多收錢。" }, { "speaker": "王明雄", "speech": "Uber 是 20%。假使可以開放我們做的話，我們只要2%。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "今天很高興跟大家一起分享想法。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "謝謝大家從不同的角度去看這一個問題，我想對於將來要思考這個政策的時候，絕對非常有幫助。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家好，很高興今天大家非常準時，所以我們就準時開始。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "大家好，我是蔡玉玲政委，今天很高興我們來談一個大家很關心的題目——Airbnb。" }, { "speaker": "林玥秀", "speech": "主席及各位與會的來賓大家好，我叫林玥秀，我來自高雄，國立高雄餐旅大學，我是餐旅學院的院長，很高興今天有這個機會參與討論。" }, { "speaker": "朱家瑩", "speech": "大家好，我叫朱家瑩，我現在是自由作家，不敢講作家。事實上我以前在民生報跟聯合報服務了二十幾年，主要負責旅遊方面的一些新聞，現在是自由撰稿人，幫天下雜誌、國家地理雜誌、Lonely Planet這些雜誌撰稿。" }, { "speaker": "王景弘", "speech": "大家好我是王景宏，大家叫我TonyQ，我本身是網路技術人員，算是資訊圈的身份與會。" }, { "speaker": "劉士銘", "speech": "大家好，我是交通部觀光局旅館業查報中心主任劉士銘，很高興參加這個會議。" }, { "speaker": "高文婷", "speech": "主席、各位長官及各位與會代表大家好，我是內政部營建署建築管理組組長高文婷。" }, { "speaker": "林家正", "speech": "大家好，我是林家正，我現在服務在內政部地政司，有關於土地使用的部分由我們這邊來負責。" }, { "speaker": "梁建文", "speech": "主席還有各位與會先進大家好，我是消防署代表梁建文，梁專員。" }, { "speaker": "翁培佑", "speech": "主席、各位女士、先生大家好，我是財政部賦稅署消費稅組組長翁培佑，非常高興參加今天會議。" }, { "speaker": "蘇靜娟", "speech": "大家好，我叫蘇靜娟，現在服務在財政部賦稅署，從事有關於營業稅的相關業務。" }, { "speaker": "呂繼宗", "speech": "大家好，我是財政部賦稅署專員呂繼宗，很高興與會。" }, { "speaker": "胡美蓁", "speech": "主席、各位先進大家晚安，我是經濟部商業司專門委員胡美蓁。" }, { "speaker": "金瑞音", "speech": "主席、各位先進大家好，我是經濟部商業司金瑞音。" }, { "speaker": "Mike Orgill", "speech": "Hi, good evening, I’m Mike Orgill, Director of Public Policy of Airbnb, thank you so much for inviting us to be here tonight." }, { "speaker": "Sanghyun Lee", "speech": "Good evening, my name is Sanghyun Lee, Public Policy Manager, from Korea. Thank you for inviting us." }, { "speaker": "Henek Lo", "speech": "大家好，我叫 Henek Lo，是 Airbnb 香港跟台灣的總經理，很榮幸在這裡跟大家見面，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "Claudette Lam", "speech": "我是Claudette，負責香港的partnerships，請多多指教。" }, { "speaker": "陳幼臻", "speech": "大家好，我是陳幼臻，台北市美國商會的代表。" }, { "speaker": "徐銀樹", "speech": "大家好，我是全國旅館公會的理事長，我叫徐銀樹，請大家多多指教。" }, { "speaker": "郭懿昌", "speech": "大家好，我是途中青年旅舍 founder，郭懿昌。" }, { "speaker": "黃秀惠", "speech": "主持人、蔡政委、大家晚安，我來自澎湖，我是澎湖民宿發展協會的理事長，我叫黃秀惠，歡迎大家有機會到澎湖來玩。" }, { "speaker": "劉美琇", "speech": "大家好，我是國發會法協中心副主任劉美琇，我們是負責推動行政院核定的虛擬世界法規調適的相關工作。" }, { "speaker": "吳家林", "speech": "我是國發會法協中心吳家林。" }, { "speaker": "薛雅婷", "speech": "大家好，我是速錄師薛雅婷，今天負責同步紀錄各位的發言，歡迎大家踴躍發言。" }, { "speaker": "彭彥翰", "speech": "大家好，我是行政院青年顧問團彭彥翰，現在是中華國樂團的副指揮，同時也是師大教育研究所的博士生。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "很高興大家都在現場，現在線上27位快要30位的朋友... 變成30位了。很高興今天大家來看線上的直播。接下來我花10分鐘的時間，把前面三個星期在網路上進行意見徵集的活動，跟大家介紹。" }, { "speaker": "劉士銘", "speech": "當然整個運作的方式是房客需要透過Airbnb來住房時，經由尋找客源，經過一個預訂的聯繫後可以入住，當然Airbnb裡面有一些關於消費糾紛爭議的處理方式，比如我要取消訂房，或者是對於房型的內容與我所看到的不一樣，當然相關的處理方式與瞭解的可能都是透過一些回應，由Airbnb來作一些處理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "問一個網路上提的問題：所謂「日租套房」，指的是非法從事旅館業行為的業者，或是法令裡有其他的定義？" }, { "speaker": "劉士銘", "speech": "需要取得消防法規來取得合法的申請及登記，並不代表所有的日租套房都是非法的，當然我們也有一些住宅區是經過無法的程序成為一個旅館業，目前我們看到大部分的日租套房裡面都規避這個地方，因此是從事非法行為。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛才提到目前有一些合法、接受輔導的日租套房，我記得看到數字是幾十個，現在可能已經上百個案例？但有些仍然是非法的。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "日租套房如果符合的話就是合法，但現在大部分很多都是不合法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "感謝很準時，剛好10分鐘。去掉我剛剛問的問題，其實大概只用了8分鐘左右的時間。" }, { "speaker": "Henek Lo", "speech": "謝謝行政院及vTaiwan給我們機會參加今天的討論。因為我不是台灣人，所以發言不清楚的地方，請大家見諒。台灣政府對於共享經濟的相關議題採取如此開放立場，我們非常感激，透過今天的簡報我們向大家、經濟部說明Airbnb商業模式及我們與各國政府一同合作針對分享住宿新創法規及分享經濟的影響。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我問一個網路上的問題，您說3000萬保障計畫的這一件事，在台灣有使用過嗎？" }, { "speaker": "Mike Orgill", "speech": "剛才的回答是，有關之前講到100萬美金，相當於台幣3000萬的房東保障計畫，可以保障的範圍是可小可大，也就是連地毯上紅酒的污漬，都可以在保障的範圍內。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不曉得利益關係人有沒有要回應或者發言？" }, { "speaker": "徐銀樹", "speech": "我想讓台灣的旅館業及民宿業有更多的機會。" }, { "speaker": "郭懿昌", "speech": "我今天會用一個比較中立的立場。住宿方提供者提供這樣的空間，然後去媒合，所以本質上還是把住宿的空間切割成不同的時段去做空間的使用行為，所以我們也很感謝觀光局在上個禮拜作一些資訊的彙整及討論，我們自己在網路上也有一個社群想要做青年旅舍，不好意思，我們雖然拿旅館執照，但我們仍然認為是一個獨立的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "今天講的就是自用住宅招租的行為，交通部給我們的民宿定義裡，「鄉野生活」就是在觀光區。不曉得民宿協會這邊有什麼想法？" }, { "speaker": "黃秀惠", "speech": "其實剛剛郭先生有提到，不是只有Airbnb的問題，其實網路的移動及訂房的系統，並不是只有 Airbnb 有這樣的問題，像澎湖地區、花蓮都很多，其實共享經濟及內涵是相符合的，民宿也是我們來提供住處的服務，其實跟共享經濟是有相同的利益存在。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有位稍微晚來的朋友，請簡單和大家自我介紹一下。" }, { "speaker": "趙式隆", "speech": "因為我還滿常出外旅行，其實我是Airbnb的愛用者之一，所以等一下有一些想法可以與大家分享。" }, { "speaker": "林玥秀", "speech": "其實我今天在這邊收獲非常多，Airbnb公司其實已經有提到有關100萬美金，其實我覺得比較偏重在案例，是不是有過這樣的案例。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想這一輪發言之後，我再請這邊回應。" }, { "speaker": "林玥秀", "speech": "那只是一個建議。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是說具體有多少件嗎？" }, { "speaker": "林玥秀", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "陳良源", "speech": "之前的會議比較delay，所以比較晚一點到。我是陳良源，我跟各位報告，我是學觀光的，我畢業後在旅館工作過，大部分的工作時間是交通局，退休後在真理大學，我對此議題非常有興趣，因此觀光局一邀請我，我一口答應。" }, { "speaker": "陳良源", "speech": "郭先生剛才說「難道國民的安全不重要嗎？為何要再三檢查？」這是營業與非營業的問題，你自己住在家裡面，你自己的安全要負責，並不是你的安全要政府來負責。" }, { "speaker": "郭懿昌", "speech": "我只是轉述網路上別人的陳述，並不是我自己的觀點。" }, { "speaker": "陳良源", "speech": "自住者要負自己的責任，但營業的話，你要負的責任並不是一般的責任，你必須要負專業的責任，因此你當然要更被重視這一個問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以這樣說來，民宿算是營業行為？" }, { "speaker": "陳良源", "speech": "副業的話不是。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好的。接下來請Airbnb回應。" }, { "speaker": "Mike Orgill", "speech": "主要有三個部分。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "我剛剛提到是有關於安全的問題..." }, { "speaker": "Mike Orgill", "speech": "這個是非常重要的問題，這也牽涉到我們剛剛說信任與安全部門、信任與安全的機制，這是我們在商業模式非常重要的環節。" }, { "speaker": "林玥秀", "speech": "有32萬入境台灣旅客有使用Airbnb，不知道入境旅客的收入他們是如何保留，或者是政府如何收取這裡頭一些相關的稅收？目前他們的想法為何？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛才講到有關於賦稅部分，不曉得經濟部及財政部的朋友有沒有要先回應的？之後再開放所有的朋友發言。" }, { "speaker": "翁培佑", "speech": "我們非常高興聽到 Airbnb 願意作政府及住宿業者間的橋梁，可以讓他們依法繳稅，我們非常高興聽到這樣的訊息。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "最後這句比較是宣示性質...（笑）" }, { "speaker": "Henek Lo", "speech": "其實Airbnb的總部現在是在新加坡，我個人也是在新加坡工作，所以今天跟大家見面是出差過來。" }, { "speaker": "胡美蓁", "speech": "像剛剛講房間分享的概念比較像目前民宿的型式，我只想補充：依照商業登記法，目前民宿是不用辦理商業登記的，未來即使是可以成立民宿，我想納管可能還是在民宿主管機關，大概沒有再作商業登記這一塊的管理，以上補充，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "趙式隆", "speech": "我自己本身是Airbnb的愛用者，所以我在這邊以一個愛用者的角度及算是長期在關注公共議題及負責人的角度來看這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "最後面一點，是關於保險在本地如何處理，第二個是否是真的自住房子出租。" }, { "speaker": "彭彥翰", "speech": "上次我也有參加Uber會議，究竟現在的模式是合法的產值或者是搶走了？我覺得這一件事或許我們都要再確定一下。" }, { "speaker": "朱家瑩", "speech": "我在這邊是以一個觀光業媒體角度來發言。其實像剛剛談的稅收、旅館業是不是多付出多少成本去維持旅客安全的問題，其實老實講我在訂房時不一定會想到這一些，只要方便，你提供的東西大家都講好，其實網路上也很多review，好像是可信度高、又便宜，為何不能？我想這是需求的來源，既然有這麼多的旅客採取，也就表示那個需求是存在的，我相信會再更增加，但這個問題我們沒有辦法，政府也好，或者是合法的民宿業者也好，沒有辦法把它視而不見。" }, { "speaker": "陳良源", "speech": "補充一下，你有營業的金額、盈餘的收益，你就必須要繳營業稅、收益稅，以上。" }, { "speaker": "王景弘", "speech": "其實我對自己出國的一些想法，我覺得裡面有幾個點想強調一下，其實便宜與否並不是今天爭論的重點，也就是一般旅館是不是便宜，這是一件事，重點在於我住的房子，我偶爾拿出來出租，如果需要程序，程序是否簡便？或者我有沒有機會這麼做？如果我想要這麼做，我是要符合那些安全規範對上幾十間房間的大旅館，是不是不一樣的？房間可能還有一些大廳及公共空間的要求，那一些要求是不是在日租條件底下是不是一樣的，這一寫在房子出租的點上是要被討論的。" }, { "speaker": "Mike Orgill", "speech": "有一連串非常多的問題。" }, { "speaker": "朱家瑩", "speech": "是不是有一個退場機制，也就是你被檢舉了，被使用者抱怨很多，要到達怎麼樣的程度，你們才會把這一個房東去著重在網路之外，因為我在網路上看到一個新聞，也就是在西班牙他有一個少年被關在房東住的地方好幾天，後來才出來求助，我相信像這樣的房東一定會被你們排除在外，但有沒有一個什麼樣的機制？" }, { "speaker": "徐銀樹", "speech": "我想一個會議開到最後是尾聲，我想提出我個人願意來協助，如果你願意替台灣合法的旅館來行銷，我相信我願意幫你。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "真的非常熱情！" }, { "speaker": "郭懿昌", "speech": "不好意思，剛剛有提到有關於Airbnb在核心的定位上是在短期的租賃，並不是專業經營的部分，所以其實剛剛也有延續到前面提到的，也就是提到篩選機制的時候，是不是要建立一個回報的機制，這個機制由誰來認定？" }, { "speaker": "黃秀惠", "speech": "我想這其實這不是Airbnb的問題，我們也希望Airbnb的部分，全台灣合法的民宿都來（參與），其實包括「Agoda」、「booking.com」等很多網路平台都會到台灣各縣市的民宿協會來邀請合作，我們也很歡迎你們來跟我們合作，重點是現在是因為都會區非法旅宿業的問題，我有聽說未來台北市可能會開放某一區空的舊房子，獨棟的那一種，我不曉得，可能會在某一區，也許是為未來共享民宿的開放，我聽說有這樣的訊息，我不知道（是否真的）。" }, { "speaker": "林玥秀", "speech": "首先感謝主辦單位辦這個活動，在座每一個人都有不同的身分，其實我們是消費者非常感謝用這樣的機制來拓展我們的旅遊，用更積極實用的方式。不管是產、官、學，我們希望看到更多公平社會正義的實現，我想呼籲的是，也許下一個議題可以積極去回應，也就是台灣政府要如何積極面？比如收到稅金或者是保險面，不管是對房東面的求償，也許是房客的求償，不管是來自哪一個國家。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "有幾個問題要請教，剛剛Airbnb提到是針對自用跟偶爾使用，但這房子並不是專門營業，所以請問如何查核，也就是如何確定這是自用，而且是偶爾使用Airbnb的房間？" }, { "speaker": "Mike Orgill", "speech": "剛剛講到不好房東的問題，如果房東有被申訴或者是不好行為的話，我們確實可以在平台當中除掉。全球有150萬個房源，每一個不一樣，我們必須要一一考量，所以並沒有放諸四海皆可適用。" }, { "speaker": "彭彥翰", "speech": "最後補充一句話，你們的數據雖然說平均出租的天數是一年30至60天，但交通部調查的結果卻是日租套房佔了八成。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "作為工程師，我也順便補充一下：「中位數」跟「算數平均數」是不一樣的概念。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "我們超過22分鐘，不過回答理事長講的，這個平台是所有行政院在推跟網路的政策都會有這樣的會議，所以晚上開會並不是特別為了Airbnb。選晚上是希望大家都下班後可以一起來關心公共議題，因此這個是這個平台在晚上開的原因。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "大家好。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "其他三科的草案都出來了，請問社會領綱進展如何？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "接下來會報告，我們會逐一說明。" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "案由一：同意生活課程綱要草案，8/31 上網公告，從 9/19 公聽會開始。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "這是關於生活課程建議修改，上次課發會也都同意在 8/31 上網公告了。" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "補充案由一辨理情形。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "右手邊各單位的代表，如果無法出席，要如何處理，我們會討論，這就是今天的案由一：我們的議事程序要怎麼修正？" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "業務報告。今天由唐鳳委員自行記錄，邀請速錄師薛雅婷列席進行逐字記錄。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "如果各位委員希望自己的某一段發言不要紀錄，請事先聲明。謝謝雅婷。" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "領綱草案共計 19 份，已於 8 月 18 日公告進行網路論壇，另已完成書面審查，分送各領綱小組參考。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "這是我們目前為止還沒有完成的領綱的進度。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我們真的需要每個人一本議程，比較好開會。" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "團體或教育行政機關代表因故無法出席，得指派代表「列席」改為「出席」。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "這是針對機關團體代表，如果未能親自出席，把「列席」改成有表決權的「出席」，主要的原因是有得到機關團體的授權。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "p15-17 是程序，p18 頁之後是對照表。" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "群科小組初步討論，檢附於附件 6 的 p22-40，附件 7 的 p41-58。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "照例請孫校長做整體報告。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "謝謝孫委員。" }, { "speaker": "孫明霞", "speech": "上次課發會提到，對各科目的「之一」「之二」要分別寫，但這次提上來似乎沒有分開，是否有些困難？請這五群科說明一下。" }, { "speaker": "楊瑞明", "speech": "首先謝謝課發會對於這十五個專業領域的指導，首先對於「之一」及「之二」，我們在總計畫和楊朝祥校長特別討論過，以下作一個回報。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "謝謝。接下來請動力機械群代表發言。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "剛剛校長的回應，讓我想到一個問題，我先請各位看一下格式統一的這件事，在技術高中這一塊是不是重要的。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "謝謝林委員對整體格式上的建議。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "呼應林委員，我記得一、二及三、四的部分，我上次也有提意見：如果這個課不需要分成兩門，乾脆合起來成為一門課就好了。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "剛才楊老師解釋過，我們過去九年一貫也是這樣的形式。" }, { "speaker": "陳瑞洲", "speech": "我是動力機械群副召集人。先感謝委員幫忙設想教學內涵。向委員報告的是，當初會做這樣的設計有三個主要的前提。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "這是通案的問題。如果這樣設計的話，在學年學分制的立場是不能接受的，因為影響到學生選課的彈性。" }, { "speaker": "楊瑞明", "speech": "這不止是通案，我想在各群科的編法都一樣。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "關於剛剛一、二的問題，牽涉到當初總綱「不要一個禮拜只上一堂課」的原則。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "剛才聽起來是為了開課方便。但現在高中、高職早已是學年學分制了。一門課是多少學分，哪些課是必修、哪些課是選修，選修可以挑著選，到最後符合畢業的規定，現在的制度是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "還有沒有委員要補充？" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "技職不會比普通高中差，十五群科當中有三、四種版本我覺得很不錯的版本。" }, { "speaker": "吳武典", "speech": "課綱必須要注意精確跟一致性。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "其他委員就這五個群科，有沒有什麼意見？" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "關於動力機械群的一個問題，抱歉，因為我比較熟一點，所以是以這個為案例來看。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "前面這五個群科有沒有要回應？" }, { "speaker": "陳瑞洲", "speech": "林委員是汽車專家。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "我不能接受的原因，是我不只教20年、也開了18年的公司，我相信臺灣的汽車公司根本沒有人用手來拆輪胎。" }, { "speaker": "陳瑞洲", "speech": "請委員看底盤實習的六小時，實際的內容包括四個大項：輪胎規格說明（高寬、扁平比、速率限制），要讓學生瞭解，一定要花時間。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我想我們都有一個出發點，這個時代變化太快了，隨著科技進步，孩子要面對的未來的情況也有不同。在這個情況之下，也請群科委員再考慮一下。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "內容可以再考量，但是格式應該要統一。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "如果是一跟二現在有兩個區分，除非真的必要，否則我建議是一門課就把它開完。" }, { "speaker": "楊瑞明", "speech": "對於剛剛委員所有統籌的建議，我簡單回應。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "謝謝楊教授和各群科有這個肩膀擔起來，我們就針對今天摘要的結論來處理。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "現在高中一個課兩學分，可不可以從上學期上到下學期？" }, { "speaker": "簡菲莉", "speech": "就高中現場來說，實施 107 總綱的精神，就是要降低每周的科目數。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "如果課發會今天做出決定，就是「一、二」的內容要分別敘明，那麼對高職現有的試教方式，並沒有影響。" }, { "speaker": "簡菲莉", "speech": "我覺得要確認的是一個科目或者是兩科目，如果沒有弄清楚的話，就不知道怎樣的內容能算作兩個學分，所以要先知道是合併成一個科目，或者算作兩個科目。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "這有表、裡的問題。剛簡校長講的是實作面，讓孩子減少學科數量總數的壓力，這個是當初從小一到十二整個課綱統一的要求。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "感謝簡校長把十二年國教總綱的精神做了很清楚的說明。" }, { "speaker": "孫明霞", "speech": "商管群 p28，會計、經濟太理論化的問題，當時討論很久，接下來也請說明。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": " 有沒有課發委員要發言的？" }, { "speaker": "張旭政", "speech": "我替高職老師的擔憂表述一下。" }, { "speaker": "鄭漢文", "speech": "野保科、畜產科，目前都歸在一類，但我覺得野保科未來比較會走向休閒、農業技能。這個部份寫得不是很清楚。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "請商管群和農業群回應。" }, { "speaker": "温玲玉", "speech": "我手機上目前有十幾位委員在 Line 上待命..." }, { "speaker": "鄔家琪", "speech": "謝謝委員對農業群的意見。" }, { "speaker": "張旭政", "speech": "剛才商管群老師的說法我聽不太懂：「目前七個科在招生，不能有七個技能領域，所以縮成三個。」" }, { "speaker": "張惠雯", "speech": "單科不能設立技能領域，一定要由兩科合起來設立，這個是我們設技能領域的原則。" }, { "speaker": "温玲玉", "speech": "溝通會議我們都有紀錄，如果委員有需要我們可以給您，包括名稱的調整也開過會，我們也想過很多，真的沒有想到更好的，如果委員有更好的名稱可以跟我們建議。" }, { "speaker": "王垠", "speech": "有三點請教。" }, { "speaker": "張旭政", "speech": "我不是高職老師，只是小學老師，但我還是聽不太懂剛才的說明。" }, { "speaker": "楊瑞明", "speech": "我們高職類科一共有15個群，91科，免試入學，要讓91科讓學生對準到適才適性。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我說明一下。張老師代表全教總，後面有許多的老師。剛剛已經講了開了很多次的會議，可能還是有一些老師沒有聽到。" }, { "speaker": "温玲玉", "speech": "我們非常用心在規劃，我自己從九九課綱開始，十年來都參加規劃，也非常感謝部長、司長給我這些機會。" }, { "speaker": "張旭政", "speech": "這次的議題就是我們全教總的幹部，林金財委員，希望我帶過來的。您認為有跟他們達成共識，但顯然沒有達成共識。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊花", "speech": "我想請教一下，領域的名稱和職業名稱是否有關？應該是沒有嘛，因為這個名稱是我們創的。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "謝謝陳委員的建議，但我想還是麻煩技職司再溝通，還是麻煩技職司溝通，也請小組將委員的建議帶回去商量。" }, { "speaker": "孫明霞", "speech": "p36 家政群，在 10/2 晚上討論滿久的。家政群強烈表達，適用技能並非三擇一開設，而是只能選「生活應用技能」，因另二領域之科目，家政科若無多門校訂科目配合，則無法學習如舞台表演實務、服裝設計實務等課程。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "針對這五個群科，請委員表示意見。" }, { "speaker": "鄭漢文", "speech": "其實我感覺是少了很多內容，因為很多食品其實是外來的添加物所造成的問題。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": " 還有沒有委員發言？如果沒有的話，我們就請群科回應。" }, { "speaker": "俞克維", "speech": "我想針對課發會第七次會議裡面所談到的這些意見回覆。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "謝謝海事群的說明。" }, { "speaker": "葉信平", "speech": "剛才水產群 p54-p58，雖然是保育類的動物，我們建議學生還是需要認識的，但在附錄一「水產」的名稱可以再做修改，謝謝委員。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "接下來請家政群說明。" }, { "speaker": "侯佳伶", "speech": "感謝委員的寶貴建議，課發會書面意見 p36 第一點當中應為「家政科」，並不是家政群的共同意見。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "藝術群？藝術群沒有回應的話，委員有沒有想提出的問題？" }, { "speaker": "俞克維", "speech": "想跟各委員請示：單一個科目的「一、二」分在上下學期。我們在一般科目裡面，國語文等於是「一到六」從頭到尾這樣排下來。" }, { "speaker": "孫明霞", "speech": "對於藝術群科，我們是不是之後再全部檢視一次？" }, { "speaker": "陳明宗", "speech": "回應剛剛委員提到食品添加物，以及節數太少的問題。確實食安問題非常嚴重，也是大家關注的，並不是只有四學分而已。" }, { "speaker": "李隆盛", "speech": "我們在周五已經跟研修小組討論過，今天孫校長的綜整報告是禮拜五討論出來的結論，各研修小組也做了回應，楊教授也代表研修小組的組成做出回應。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我們請洪委員來說明時間。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "請見附件三 p13，如果各位同意 15 群科草案上網的話，今天的意見在整理、研究之後，10/22 前要送給國教院，10/23 就開始展開網路論壇。" }, { "speaker": "張旭政", "speech": "我現在具體建議：15 群科的課程綱要是否通過，我們保留到禮拜四後，再來做表決。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "是否有委員附議？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "那麼再依程序往下走。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "1票反對。是否有委員贊成？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "15票同意，1票沒有意見。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "數學領域，因為技高跟綜高的新版本還沒有進來，所以我們就先報告第三版，好嗎？" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "（宣讀 p6）" }, { "speaker": "簡菲莉", "speech": "請翻到 p59 附件八，就有共識之處報告。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "有沒有補充說明？" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "我補充說明一下，各位可以看到，達成共識的部分只有針對普通高中，但在技術型高中跟綜合型高中這邊，是沒有完全達成共識的部分，待會林教授會過來說明。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我們把時間交給課發委員。" }, { "speaker": "簡菲莉", "speech": "跟大家報告：10月1日第二群組針對數學領綱討論，在會議上對於技術型及綜合型高中的草案，是非常嚴肅地退回了。" }, { "speaker": "林福來", "speech": "要請課發委員注意的主要議題，是技術型和綜合型高中研修小組，非常希望普通型高中把現在放在高一的兩個單元「排列組合、古典機率」，和高二的「平面向量」對調。" }, { "speaker": "張鎮華", "speech": "第二，雖然10月1日並沒有討論到我們這個版本的修改，但我還是覺得有義務跟大家簡單報告，上次大家看到的跟這一次看到的確有一些不同，我用比較快的方式來回應上一次大家的意見，讓大家知道我們都有在反應這個事情。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "我上次在分組會議的提案，剛才林老師有重複過一次，但顯然普高數學沒有納入考慮，我再說明一次。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "曾老師說只有1/4調不過來。" }, { "speaker": "林福來", "speech": "我們當天有討論到，如果不再更動，學生要轉軌時，要如何轉銜。" }, { "speaker": "簡菲莉", "speech": "如果學生需要轉銜，要如何安排？那天晚上我們進行了非常多的討論。" }, { "speaker": "張鎮華", "speech": "其實「1/4 學期的差別」是簡略的說法。我請大家聽一個數字，普通高中的人次是 18000 人，其中 40％ 是學術型的，60％會唸技術型。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "召集人這樣說，有沒有說服大家？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "以召集人這樣說的話，後面教學的實施，也包括以後會有的「諮詢教師」，要如何讓沒有讀過總綱的人也知道要如何替學生設計？可能要加強一下。" }, { "speaker": "楊瑞明", "speech": "數學在普高當中的發展，這次比九九課綱都強化非常多，我們特別感謝林老師，前一陣子也召開了一次協調會。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "有沒有比較能說服各位委員？" }, { "speaker": "林福來", "speech": "技高的數學上一版很複雜、分科太多，就我的瞭解，很難規劃。" }, { "speaker": "張鎮華", "speech": "同意這個應該要討論。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "可以參考普高的寫法..." }, { "speaker": "林福來", "speech": "普高我們也提供了參考內容。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "現在有普通高中，包括國中小的一版。以及綜高、技高，我們分開談一下。" }, { "speaker": "楊瑞明", "speech": "學習表現，我們可以依林教授的建議做出修改，但是結構上已經不再能修改了。" }, { "speaker": "林福來", "speech": "是否可以請課發會委員大會決議，對「學習表現」作出必要的修定之後，重新召開分組會議，再通過一次？" }, { "speaker": "楊瑞明", "speech": "可以。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "如果 10/15 可以完成，第二群組再開一次會覺得可以的話，是否就送出了？也就是委由第二群組的委員決定？" }, { "speaker": "張鎮華", "speech": "上次會議的結論，是可以先送外部專家審查，不用等到 10/23。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "但我們還是希望在 10/23 上網，這樣才能在第二波辦公聽會..." }, { "speaker": "林福來", "speech": "這次課程發展給我的感覺，開會前都拿不到資料，我要怎麼給意見？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我們是要從 107 上路的時間點反過來推，所以確實有一點趕，真的是沒有做到很好。" }, { "speaker": "張鎮華", "speech": "我想數學說不定會落後一個月，但我希望大家能思考我們落後一、兩個月，未來帶給大家比較大的安定的好處。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我很高興張老師一直很審慎，也感謝林福來老師的協助。" }, { "speaker": "林福來", "speech": "往往委員的專長是國小到國中OK，或是國中到高中也OK，但要找到從國小到高中整體審閱的人，相當困難。" }, { "speaker": "張鎮華", "speech": "建議各個階段的委員都要有一些，會比較好。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "數學領綱，從小學到普通高中是一塊。技高跟綜高這一塊，希望楊老師領導一下，看能不能在 10/15 出一版修改？" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "我們接受教育部的委託，是要在 2016 年 2 月陸續公告。" }, { "speaker": "張鎮華", "speech": "我們盡量。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "那我回去再把數學時程重新規劃一下。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "所以數學就延到第三波來辦，技高、綜高修了以後，第二群組再開一次會。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我們還欠一位委員就達開會的標準，我們有把握的應該有兩位委員會來，我想因為已經9點40幾分了，我們可以先作報告。" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "業務報告：" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "其實我們已經通過技高及綜高數學進入第二波的公聽會，然而因為在普通型高中考量到要送書面審查，所以希望先審然後再公聽會。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "大家有沒有意見？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確認一下，就是在網路論壇一開始的時候，國語文領綱草案還不會完成審查？" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "審查和公聽是並行的。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "補充說明，本來數學在第三波公聽會，現在把第二波跟第三波合在一起，時間上是可以的，可以節省本院的人力，就不會再跑第二次、第三次的公聽會，我們就把它全部合併在11月27日、28日及12月4日、5日，綜高跟技高的數學就一併來看。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "第1、2頁有列出「目前幾個領域還在努力研修當中」，課發會開會有提供意見，之後這一些領域必須再依照課發會的意見去修訂。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "請詠善主任說明，這一定是透明的，要保證雙方的溝通。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "這滿重要的，無論是在蒐集公聽階段或者是網路論壇審查的意見，乃至於送到我們課發會來，都有許多修改的意見，並且也在課發會作成決議。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "孫委員？" }, { "speaker": "孫明霞", "speech": "十五群科比較複雜，各群不是那麼相同，但還是要有課綱整合的一致性，所以我個人是比較贊成再召開一次，我不曉得其他的委員意見如何，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "這個我們等一下討論後列進來。" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "(四)生活課程、技術型高中十五群科之草案，已初步通過課發會討論，預計依前述第二波領域/科目/群科課程綱要草案研議進程規劃，進行分區公聽會、網路論壇及書面審查。規劃之分區公聽會時間如下：" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我們剛剛說過了，公聽會有這一些時間點，請委員來參加。第5點。我們接著提案討論。" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "提案單位：國教院課程及教學研究中心。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "謝謝雅卿。我們剛剛說明了，有兩個日期要更改。" }, { "speaker": "李瑞騰", "speech": "謝謝主席。" }, { "speaker": "呂武志", "speech": "剛剛普通型高中召集人說「報告非常簡單」，其實是非常詳盡。" }, { "speaker": "鄭亞薇", "speech": "我們綜高委員裡面，有四位是技高委員。" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "首先要謝謝語文領域的召集人非常辛苦，我們在8月19日召開這一場會議，針對有爭議的部分，做了整個處理的方案，也在10月1日上個禮拜時進行國語文第一群組第三次的會議，做了相關的討論，包含我們普通型、技術型、綜合型高中整個語文領綱，就文字也做了相關的修正。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "黃委員特別跟我說，李召集人說有成就感。" }, { "speaker": "曾世杰", "speech": "我不是要問內容，我想問一下，10月1日在黃召集人這邊有開會，第一群組開會之後，我們是不是還要在開過大會以後，再做修正草案？" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "曾世杰", "speech": "時程大概是什麼時候？" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "現在是第三版，今天大會的決定、群組會議的意見，會交給各領綱的小組研修。" }, { "speaker": "陳思玎", "speech": "前一次會議所看到的內容與這一次相比，其實整個調整的部分並不是很巨大，但上一次所關注的表述不是很清楚的地方，我覺得在這一次的內容裡頭做了諸多的調整。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "還有沒有意見？" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "關於綜高、技高及普高的草案，普高部分我主要是看實施要點，看起來實施要點大致上能夠針對國語文領域去講如何實施、課程發展編選等等怎麼做，所以就形式及內容來說是OK的，這是普高的部分。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "其實這些內容在總綱都寫過了，是不是對國語文來調整，或者拿掉？" }, { "speaker": "李瑞騰", "speech": "這在研修小組討論的過程中，也曾經提出來過。在撰寫學習內容時，我們當然也很清楚瞭解，在一至三學習階段沒有辦法避免碰觸到文化。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我的具體建議就是，在第20頁當中「各階段教材編選原則」那裡，第一至第三階段，陳委員對於文化的考量，在這一塊多寫一些，在找教材時更注重多元文化，不管是社群或者是精神層面，我想可以在這邊寫。" }, { "speaker": "陳思玎", "speech": "我把我的看法再說清楚一點。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "呼應陳委員，看到第17頁，第四階段是第五階段內容的前面一部份。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "這裡有幾個解決的方法..." }, { "speaker": "李瑞騰", "speech": "我想課發會委員提出意見，對我們在行政程序上就必須要走程序，我們是尊重的。" }, { "speaker": "孫明霞", "speech": "請看綜合型高中第15頁「課程設計原則」。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊花", "speech": "我想請教一下綜高跟技高的格式、體例。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "要不要回應一下？" }, { "speaker": "鄭亞薇", "speech": "委員的建議，可以移到第11頁的敘述內容上，我們會再作進一步的研擬，讓它比較能夠更周延一點。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "您的意思是？" }, { "speaker": "鄭亞薇", "speech": "第15頁「課程設計」下面有寫為什麼，倒數第6行有一個說明。" }, { "speaker": "孫明霞", "speech": "綜合型高中未來升學是跟普通型的高中，或跟技術型的相同。" }, { "speaker": "宋修德", "speech": "我主要是協助技術型高中，綜合型高中是另外的許教授，他沒有出席，我在這邊也代為回應一下。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "呂武志", "speech": "謝謝寶貴的建議，剛剛跟綜高同樣的情況，我們在技高A、B、C會再做同樣的調整。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "各位委員有沒有其他意見？" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "普高第24頁，之後有一些必修科目跟選修科目的課綱，這個規劃裡面都分成「課程內涵→教材編選→教學實施→學習評量→教學重點→學習表現」，大概固定的格式是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "詠善有沒有要說明？" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "有一個說明、一個提問。" }, { "speaker": "簡菲莉", "speech": "技術型高中的必修在每學期是三個學分，我不太清楚為什麼要做這樣的設計？萬一有技高的同學轉學到普高去，在必修國文的部分就會有學分數不足的問題。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "國語文 3/3/3 的學分安排，請研修小組回應。" }, { "speaker": "宋修德", "speech": "部定必修課程，在技高、綜高，不只是國語文有這個問題，英語文、數學都有這樣的問題。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "綜高的情況確實跟普高比較不一樣。但如果同一個學校有普通科、綜合科等，把三種課綱對起來，確實會有一些狀況，這個狀況學校要去面對。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "普通高中、綜合高中、技術高中教學方法上，我們想辦法抓出共通的地方。學校開三類型課程的話，國文老師都要教，教學法需要整理一下。" }, { "speaker": "方新舟", "speech": "我是外行人，如果我提出不恰當的問題，不用花太多時間討論。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "閱讀幾千字，或者是整本書..." }, { "speaker": "簡菲莉", "speech": "第二次發言，就接著剛剛方先生的想法再往下延伸，因為今天的委員也有大考中心的夥伴在現場。" }, { "speaker": "王垠", "speech": "在高中教學現場，不可諱言受到考試非常嚴重的制約，但我對於高中生的素養還是有很高度的想像。" }, { "speaker": "歐用生", "speech": "非常肯定我們的小組。" }, { "speaker": "謝金城", "speech": "各位委員大家好，我從在基層所看到的提出省思，和一些看法。" }, { "speaker": "管美蓉", "speech": "幾位校長都提到大考中心的大問題。我在大學入學考試中心第一處，跟各位報告一下，我對於課綱的部分沒有太多的建議跟看法，但關於考試的部分，有一個新的變化。" }, { "speaker": "方新舟", "speech": "非常感謝管老師告訴我們，未來考試會有大幅度的改變。" }, { "speaker": "曾世杰", "speech": "我現在是站在國語文小組的角度來思考，大家的期待很深，我們提一些具體的建議。" }, { "speaker": "陳伯璋", "speech": "歐教授提到語言本身如何把美感的目標，轉化成為具體的學習表現。我昨天剛好參加國教院工作室的主持，遇到一位畫家，提到米羅的畫是從篆書提取養分。" }, { "speaker": "鄭漢文", "speech": "有關於課程大綱第20頁中間，注音符號那一段，如果我是編寫教材的人，很難去想像這一段話要表達什麼樣的意涵，因此這部分能夠再請教一下。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "「審美與感知的素養」不知道是指什麼。寫這個目標時的「審美」是什麼？我們一般講到審美的時候，裡面就是會有感知，然後會有判斷。如果審美有感知、判斷，上面加上「感知的素養」，這是一句很難理解的話。是不是要考慮再做比較明確的敘述？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "曾世杰委員暫時離席到立法院，他有一個意見，我幫他說一下：綜高 p20 「圖書設備」現在太偏重文學類，是否過於限縮類別，能否擴充？" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "我有一個建議。大家在這場課發會當中，所有的委員對於國語文課綱並不是只看課綱，而是看到學生的學習，更重要的是關心到怎麼樣透過國語文，增加學生不只閱讀，還有思辨、審美、溝通及表達的能力。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "還有沒有委員對於國語文課綱有建議？" }, { "speaker": "李瑞騰", "speech": "請問主席可以給我幾分鐘？" }, { "speaker": "李瑞騰", "speech": "那我可以講到下午？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "不行。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "李瑞騰", "speech": "謝謝各位委員的指教。我們知道剛剛很多意見的層次很高，也有個案普遍化的現象。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "有很多學習內容時，委員會擔心是否太瑣碎。" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "特別代表第一群組，感謝課發委員提出許多意見。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "基本理念其實已經很完善了，我的意思只是參考手冊 p25 的文字，做後續研修參考的建議。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "臨時動議第一案：「第四群組再開一次會。」" }, { "speaker": "孫明霞", "speech": "我的意思是，既然公告的時間延後了，再開一次會比較完善。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "代簡菲莉委員宣讀臨時動議。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "簡委員希望協作平台的進度，成為業務報告之一。" }, { "speaker": "曾世杰", "speech": "各地公聽會都是問到配套措施，我們的回答都是「協作中心」來處理。" }, { "speaker": "陳思玎", "speech": "我們第一波的任務，也就是書面課綱呈現，已經到一個收尾了。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "這個提案是很重要的。從總綱、領綱、公聽會做下來，要實施就是「配套措施」四個字。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "黃委員的身分是協作組的委員，也是協作中心的委員。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以上發言、提案及相關資料是否都列入記錄？" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "我覺得這是要落實的，也為了表示有負起責任。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "有點沉重，但配套措施和進度追蹤確實是必要的。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "配套措施是教育部國教署的權責，我們可以建請國教署做研究案。" }, { "speaker": "李瑞騰", "speech": "是否可以盡快取得今天的紀錄？我們會發信給所有委員確認。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "逐字紀錄已經做成，草稿今天就會提供。" }, { "speaker": "李瑞騰", "speech": "剛剛對文化領域，前三階段要不要加入，或是只要物質文化等，可能要花很多時間討論。我們就根據會議紀錄，讓委員們知道有這些意見。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "今天的會議就到這裡。謝謝大家！" } ]

[ { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "各位委員大家好，王垠委員待會會來，我們先開始報告，進入議程時他應該就到了。" }, { "speaker": "業務報告", "speech": "一、本次會議唐鳳委員於104年10月8日提出10/21十二年國民基本教育課程研究發展會(以下簡稱課發會)之委員自行記錄及邀請協助記錄人員申請單(邀請協助記錄人員為中華民國仲裁協會薛雅婷)，茲依議事程序之規範，於徵求主席同意後，由委員自行現場製作逐字紀錄，以發言記名、公開為原則(委員不記名或不公開者於發言前事先聲明)，協助記錄者為列席人員。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "謝謝剛剛的宣讀。大家對業務報告有沒有什麼問題？" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "沒有的話，我們就列入備查。" }, { "speaker": "提案討論", "speech": "案由一：有關十二年國民基本教育健康與體育領域(含國民中小學、普通型及技術型高中)課程課程綱要(草案)，提請討論。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "謝謝，在報告之前，先請雅卿說明紙本附件貼錯的地方。" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "議程資料第3頁下方有一個附件一覽表，附件6應該是「國民中小學及普通型高中書面審查回應意見」，附件10是「藝術領域書面審查回應意見」，附件12是「生活領域書面審查回應意見」。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "接著我們請健康領域及技術型高中研修小組報告。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "健康與體育領域經過北、中、南、東的公聽會，以及書面審查，意見已經彙整，並且具體回應在附件當中，請各位委員來作一些參酌。" }, { "speaker": "黃梅芬", "speech": "各位先進大家好。健體領域經過四場公聽會之後，各場次都有非常多的民眾或是老師、家長等代表提供寶貴意見。這些意見我們都相當重視，所以後續針對健康的部分及體育的部分，就每一位所提出的意見討論後，有作一些修正或新增。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "謝謝黃委員。請技術高中報告。" }, { "speaker": "李美芳", "speech": "技術型高中，與普通型高中做出平行的修正。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "謝謝報告。" }, { "speaker": "王垠", "speech": "主席、各位委員，普高跟技高課綱我想提幾個想法。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "還有沒有其他的意見？沒有的話，請回應一下。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "基本理念最段一段的目標文字修正，回去會參考技高的寫法來修改。" }, { "speaker": "李美芳", "speech": "當時在修正的時候，考量到除了自我照顧的能力，高職的學生也應該要有照顧其他人的能力，因此才會列出這樣課程的目標。" }, { "speaker": "黃梅芬", "speech": "我想這也是在公聽會許多老師的看法。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "各位委員還有沒有意見？" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "國民體育法，每週150分鐘，平均一天多了30分鐘，現在是排在課間、下課或者是午休。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "是課間操嗎？" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "國民體育法第6條的講法是「參與每日活動」，不能排成兩節課。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "謝謝丁委員幫忙查資料。" }, { "speaker": "黃梅芬", "speech": "這一塊是在課綱架構之外，各校的情況不一樣。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "這一案就這樣子。接下來繼續進行案由二。" }, { "speaker": "提案討論", "speech": "案由二：有關十二年國民基本教育藝術領域(含國民中小學、普通型及技術型高中)課程綱要(草案)，提請討論。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊花", "speech": "大家午安。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "各位委員有沒有什麼意見？剛有提到在地藝術..." }, { "speaker": "陳瓊花", "speech": "本來我們用「本土」，有一些是用「在地」，後來我們統一用「在地」，像國中、小普通型高中第4頁，在核心素養C3往最右邊是「藝-U-C-3」，也改為「探索在地」。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "那三個科目的用詞，是要學校自行選開嗎？" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊花", "speech": "可以開藝術、美術，或者開藝術生活。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "是不是也可以考慮「學生想要學什麼」？" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊花", "speech": "回應一下主席，這是我們內部委員提出來的，希望能夠再做修正。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "雙引號跟單引號混合使用，是不是有特殊用意？" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊花", "speech": "雙引號『設計與視覺應用』等，是 under「藝術生活」的子類的意思。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "學校的上課要依學生考量，不能說學生依照老師的需要。學生有需要、有興趣想學，就從這裡開課。" }, { "speaker": "提案討論", "speech": "一、旨揭領綱草案共二份，包含國教院主政之1-12年級課程綱要(含：10-12年級之普通型高級中等學校教育課程綱要草案)及技職司主政之10-12年級技術型高級中等學校課程綱要草案。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "綜合活動請李委員報告。" }, { "speaker": "李駱遜", "speech": "今天方院長有事，代他報告。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "兩件事請教。剛剛有提到教師每週時數太高，是哪一個階段？" }, { "speaker": "李駱遜", "speech": "高中，指的是藝能課不平均，不均等。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "第二，烹飪課在國中是在綜合活動。" }, { "speaker": "李駱遜", "speech": "這個議題是家政老師提出來的。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "剛剛講的是老師每週授課時數的規定？" }, { "speaker": "黃梅芬", "speech": "剛剛提到藥膳的部分，健體領域也收到同樣的看法及訊息。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "黃委員的意見很重要，請生活領域參考。" }, { "speaker": "陳立言", "speech": "技術型高中綜合活動領域，經過三次書面審查及公聽會後，意見並沒有很多，大概有兩大類。" }, { "speaker": "陳立言", "speech": "在四區公聽會當中，我感受到相當多社會團體，他們對於性平的議題，提出非常多彼此類似的建議。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "那個是性別議題的ABC..." }, { "speaker": "陳立言", "speech": "對，這其實很基本。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "大家對於綜合領域，還有沒有什麼意見？" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "這個原則也涉及到前面兩案的內容。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊花", "speech": "好像是說家政比較多。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "這要提到學校去研議，由配套措施來處理。" }, { "speaker": "陳立言", "speech": "感謝主席的建議。領綱在寫的時候，其實總綱規劃七個科目開4學分是不能改的，因此我們建議了「課程時數及科目分配」表。" }, { "speaker": "范信賢", "speech": "像剛剛有提到七科當中選4學分來開，這在部定必修課程有提到「各領域必修課程可研擬跨科之統整型、探究型或實作型課程內容。」" }, { "speaker": "陳立言", "speech": "比較可行的是第二種：學生還是只選兩科，但學校開七科。" }, { "speaker": "范信賢", "speech": "實施要點可以。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "可以嗎？如果可以的話，像一般選修科開課，最多是開多少科？這個是第一點。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "這個在健體領綱草案第79頁。" }, { "speaker": "范信賢", "speech": "昨天的統整工作圈有討論這點。請看到第3頁，這部分只有訂到加深加廣的部分，訂出來的6個學分在領綱草案第47頁，其實放在學習重點裡，在必修之後，接著放選修課程學習重點，這都符合目前的規範。" }, { "speaker": "黃梅芬", "speech": "健體可以比照綜合、藝術等相近的領域。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "大家有沒有其他的意見？" }, { "speaker": "范信賢", "speech": "報告的內容，是依照今天的會議紀錄整理。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "謝謝卓俊辰委員。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "跨領域小組也要開會，再到課發會報告一下，大致一致就好。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "非常感謝各位委員及各位師長。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "3點37分結束，今天很有效率，表示領綱小組都做得很好，委員都很滿意，非常謝謝大家。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "今天很開心來這邊，這和我今天在環保署是同一份簡報，內容也是公開的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實剛剛有提到PPP跟公民參與主要的一些差別，我想我把我理解中的定義跟大家分享，如果定義OK的話，就大家自由聊，如果定義很不OK，我們就直接談定義。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有一派覺得PPP是公私協力，是公部門跟私部門的合作。但我們是公部門跟第三部門的協力，像跟NGO的協力，但當然裡面也會有私部門的利益關係人，只是結構上不是促參，這個是我自己理解的方式。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個關鍵字是開放資料，我自己在DataSci.tw那一場其實也有講到：人可以看得懂的是資訊，我們在中文裡面，至少在字典裡面，「數據」都是資料，但資料不一定是數據。我自己通常說數據是指numeric data，量測出來給機器的是數據。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是我在這五年來幫Apple開發Siri，都是處理文字資料，並不是數字資料，所以我並不會用數據來想。我們用數據來想時，都會直接往sensor走，但我覺得結構化的文字資料是開放的大宗，也可以做很好的結構化處理，這個是資訊跟資料的區別。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "接著是開放資料，如果我們完全只是講政府把資料開放的話，最常的是資訊公開法，但資訊公開法對東西的定義只是public「不特定人可讀」，但我們現在做open data是附加的，還要能夠改作，也就是要做衍生的著作，在著作權上不做額外的限制。另外是要允許自由的改作，也就是你釋出的資料不能跟微軟簽了一批很貴的約或者是跟其他的大廠簽很多的約，所以一定要用XML、JSON、CSV這一類的格式來釋出，所以開放的要件是除了不特定的人之外還有「自由」和「改作」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「資料開放」跟「開放資料」是名動形式跟動名形式，其實是不一樣的。前者是先有資訊再決定要不要公開，但這樣的問題是在資訊、資料先累積的過程中，等到要開放的時，在中間跟中間資料的脈絡是會消失或者是必須要重建，像是現在21世紀你要去猜當年的作者是誰，這個是草稿或者是贗品或者是倣製。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「開放資料」是主動的，使用metadata-aware tools，你在創造資料、做的時候那一件事情本身，我們在資料交換的時候，就一併存了一份可以開放的版本，這樣的話，這樣才能在我們產生資料的時候，那個脈絡才可以被繼續下去。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我自己通常會舉一個例子是我進課發會，因為當時發生課綱案，裡面有一個很關鍵的是，教育部覺得委員會已經錄音了，但如果當時是覺得沒有要公開，事後公開的話，會違反信賴保護原則。這就是所謂的「先有資料再開放」會碰到的問題，因為當時蒐集目的跟事後的利用目的是分開的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我加入課發會主要做的事情，是把逐字稿系統介紹給課發會，我一個人打了兩篇6萬字，後來就變成一個可以取代錄音，比錄音還好的逐字稿系統。原本當然是為了防弊，後來也發現有興利的作用：每一次開會之後有哪一些決議或者是小組的人就可以track，然後就可以馬上開始做。如果要事後整理，其實往往就不記得下一次要做什麼。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "最後一張slide，是最近有兩位也是自己試著做過開放跟參與的人，各自有感而發的各說一句話，這二句話我覺得很好玩，所以就放上去。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "左邊柯P表示說，如果讓大家知道有參與式預算，但不解釋說預算是什麼回事，就問大家的意見，那不能說是參與，這是民粹。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "右邊是曾經做過自經區溝通會的管爺，他有這樣的想法，就是即使想辦法把政策說出來，但如果沒有傾聽、參與的空間，那等於就是說服，力量其實是不那麼強的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以一開始的定義，就也包含開放資料跟公民參與的關係。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大概先講到這邊，有沒有人對定義或者是框架要討論的？在進入實體之前？" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "對於資料與資訊的分別，我有不太一樣的看法。什麼時候叫資訊，什麼時候是資料？其實 context 才是重要的地方，目前政府開放資料很多是從業務報告過來，不是最原始的資料轉過來。資料變為報告之後，已經跑過一層程序了，然後再整理成開放資料時，很多問題都因此而來。這些所謂的開放資料其實是完整的報告書，並不是要讓你拿來做運算或處理分析的。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "所以在這裡面我會認為所有的東西都可以是資料，只要我抽離 context。同時要有一定的程序跟步驟，但我們該從整個流程源頭的地方就開始處理，如果到後面才處理（轉開放資料）是根本來不及。目前的作法就是，把這些非結構，不清楚的東西丟給資訊單位去做，而資訊單位是無法接受那麼多的東西。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "目前並沒有這一套處理資料的 SOP。大家也不知道該怎麼去做，我今天在新竹市政府，他們開放 160 項，每一項都很棒，但每一項仔細看會發現都不足（品質，內容），因為那是要滿足政府需求產出的東西，那是有目的的，並不是要拿去外面做賺錢加值的事情。PPP 應該要在這邊進入，如何產生新的（政府與民間的）關係，這不是講 BOT 的東西，而是說在這一塊如何延伸。而 g0v 就是一直在努力這一塊。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "想瞭解..." }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "g0v 的工程師不懂資料（背後的脈絡），因為資料要拿來用的時候，我們需要的是資訊，工程師可以很容易地把視覺化做出來，但要把這一切放到脈絡下，要說故事的那個人就不存在了。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "像急診室病床的視覺化，可以即時知道每一個醫院中有多少空的床位。但有一件事沒有被討論：看床位其實是沒有用的，也不能只從這來決定病人要送到哪裡。其實在救護車運送過程中就有系統會處理這個問題。我們須要的是資訊，但這一切都還只是資料的視覺化 (data visualization)。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "所以我說 g0v 有嘗試想解決這問題，或者是我們講反核或者是廢核我們把資料做出來，後面的人在哪裡？這裡的人從來沒有進來過，這些人都是遠遠的地方看，都是用傳統的方式來做，我認為如果要用PPP的話，是要整個拉進來變成一條線，不只是政府的問題，民間這邊也有問題。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "剛進來的是都認識吧！蘇縣長。剛剛有在做逐字稿，你介意或者是不介意？" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "沒關係。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "他很open。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛剛我們定義裡，Whisky所說的就是我剛剛說數據的部分，我剛剛特別通常講的，是文字資料一開始是給人看的，所以g0v做很多事情，讓它也可以給機器看。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但Whisky講的是numeric data，sensor產生出來的東西就是給機器看的，人不太能夠直接賦予意義，就會有數據到資訊的處理需求。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "其實Whisky講的不只是sensor，而是牽涉到有很多..." }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "其實他剛剛講的是，我們有很多的文字資料因為政府在開放的時候，沒有後面的元資料（或稱為後設資料），所以其實這一些資料對他們來說是很難用的。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "再來Whisky剛剛說到其實有一個資料需要和懂資料的人一起合作。比如他剛剛舉一個很明確的例子，取得了醫院相關的資料，需要問一些懂醫院的人，好比醫勞盟等等。缺乏與這一些人合作，就所以很難有進一步的發揮。要叫政府官員進來合作的話，會更怕，因為政府官員最大的致命點，我想你們做這麼久的工作應該都知道，我不曉得有沒有人要對這個發言？" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "我再補充一下，這一個東西丟出來的時候，其實民眾是非常熱絡，大家會覺得為什麼衛福部不做這個？我心想完蛋了，但衛福部不說為什麼不做，這是非常好的機會溝通，但政府一直沒有sense去回答人家的問題。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "你講的這個問題更明確的話，我會聯想到別的方向。你要講更明確嗎？" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "我只講過一句話，政府不會接球，只做亡羊補牢的動作，都沒有做先準備好的事情，那時候其實是翟本喬講的，也沒有試著把民間的力量拉進來，只是站在圈圈內做防禦性的事情，完全都有補不完的洞，搓破一個問題就破了。防疫這一件事，鄉民就說市長聽到了，就把東西送進去，但市長是聽到知道，翟本喬就把這一件事放在馬英九前面。其實是雲林縣自己有問題，他在防疫有問題，台南市也一樣，其實滿嚴重的，但做得很好，為了要回答這個問題，花了三年時間去整理資料。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "口蹄疫嗎？" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "是禽流感。其實完全沒有用，那時候我說政府真的不會接球，接到這個球之後，應該要做的事情是要擴大討論全國防疫的問題，如果要講擴大防疫問題的話，我可以一次開放資料出來。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "那個是組織文化，就算不是很大的局處，小問題出來只好就要蓋20幾個章才能出去，他們很怕講錯話。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "他們其實最怕的是從台南是那邊最怕的是官員要去立法院被質詢，地方怕被監察院糾正，不要說監察院沒有用，他們很怕。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "今天要討論組織面未來怎麼樣像第三部門，私部門我們今天不討論，第三部門跟政府之間如何來合作，這個組織面的事情要如何合作，一個是我們剛剛講到的，遇到事件時政府的回應要如何回應，我想這一件事是我們今天要處理的，如果要找他們的立委去修理也是另外一件事，也不是不能做。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "這一件事既然都提到，我們就先處理這個問題。你們有人要發言嗎？" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "我講一下最近登革熱跟禽流感的問題，其實資訊系統、法規系統與管理系統是要結合的，我們在討論的時候發現很大的關鍵，500頭以下通通都不用登記。" }, { "speaker": "諮委3", "speech": "自己處理掉嗎？" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "就隨便養。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "這個都沒有制止的。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "因為現在規定本來是3000頭，降到500頭，現在他會說也沒有500頭，即使是養到1000頭。其實是整個管理系統出現很大的漏洞，因此資訊系統的完整性會有很大的問題。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "我舉這個例子是制度管理與資訊是一個連結關係的，不登記要處理，不登記是因為有違法的問題，因此這個是管理體制與資訊系統有時候要一併來考量。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "還有最近大家也知道登革熱的問題很大的問題很嚴重，也出現一個法制與資訊的問題很大的問題，也就是你得到的話，資料不可以給人家，比如這一里得到，不給里長知道，不給里長知道的理由是因為你是因為傳染病防治法規定，傳染病的規定不能公開。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "其實另外一個個資法的規定是有一條規定是你為了醫療、衛生的防治必要是可以不受這個限制，所以他們這一次為什麼發現很大的問題，是因為里長不曉得誰得病，地方的防疫在這裡通通是被動的，因為不曉得誰得了，有這個問題。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "後來就出現一個很關鍵的點，若這兩個感染點的距離，如果是50公尺或者是100公尺，有群聚感染的噴灑方式，如果是資訊化的話，資料全部key進去，可以馬上在網站資料跑出來說這個是群聚感染了，但這個資訊就把不處理它，就沒有辦法即時圍堵的噴灑做法，這個是二個很嚴重重災區在資訊整合上出現很大的問題，最近又有人丟進去，發現整個網站一下子就出來，這個有沒有群聚感染，結果通通跑出來了，整個的防治方式很快立即處理，如果完全按照人力比對，這二個地方有沒有超過50公尺根本不知道，這正好有兩個例子。也就是光有資訊，但沒有考慮管理系統其實是沒有辦法解讀意義。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "剛剛提到整個資料是有關係的，其實是跟醫生回報，並不是居住的地方有關係，所以我們是從在地的衛生所拿過來的，在沒有爆發之前大家不注意這個問題，就不會積極回報，那時候才發現整個爆起來，那個資料其實一開始是對不起來，後來才慢慢對起來，其實這真的有一個最原始的問題，大家都不重資訊，大家也不注重資料，其實巨量資料都不在後面的分析，而是在前面準備好了沒有，在最源頭的地方都沒有準備好過，一直在講沒有準備好的東西。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "剛剛有提到這個是資訊的問題、資料流通的問題，我們把這個做完了，其實開放資料有一部分解決部會的交換，其實有講商業的模式發展，但對內的治療這一塊是最重要，但卻沒有好好討論過，開放資料其實可以協助政府節省很多錢、省下很多人力。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "像登革熱他們說一直做很多人力跟事情，有沒有辦法從開放資料解決問題、協助他們，我覺得很奇怪，政府做很多事情要讓人民知道、要讓人民協助你，但沒有做這一些事情，只做1999的地方就夠了？要把噴灑的地方都提出來，如果有回報出來會知道下一步，並不是在官方間，而是要彼此間的關係，所以我們說PPP，柯市長才會說那是民粹，的確是，因為我們都是拿印象來發言跟回話，其實資料攤出來根本不需要討論，基本上我們在討論是同一件事。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "有很多是發生登革熱都沒有去噴，有人連續噴了好幾次，結果有的人是發生了一個月都沒有來噴。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "我們來講開放資料很重要的地方是業務性的資料，會在業務單位的手上做一個SOP的表格而已，他不需要回報，但人在哪裡是不會回報，像消防隊的出勤，其實新竹市也有做，那個也有告訴我說哪一個消防隊做什麼事，其實都可以跟社區的整合服務起來都非常有用，但這個東西是屬於消防隊裡面可能某個人的電腦裡面的一個檔案，這東西是不會回到開放資料的流裡面去，如果不講的話是沒有人會知道，他只會做一件事，就是今年出勤幾次、誰做了什麼，這個東西會開放出來讓你知道，但這個東西用的沒那麼大。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "我順便講一個，柯市長說要做安心地圖，他把竊盜資料，內政部說要用週報的方式公布，但台北市是用一個月的月報，月報對任何人都沒有用處，如果不是即時當天的話，如果真的要讓大家安心是要當天，我是要今天就知道隔壁的事情，並不是知道上個月的事情，一個月拿來做統計會很有趣。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "那個是讓官員安心的，搞錯方向（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "我跟大家報告一下平常會碰到的例子，臺灣的監視器有什麼很大的問題，臺灣以前都裝很多的監視器，發生兇殺案的時候發現壞掉，而且這個監視器沒有相連。" }, { "speaker": "諮委3", "speech": "而且是隸屬於不同部門的。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "而且也沒有人在監看，但這個監視器怎麼用整個系統是沒有建立起來的。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "沒有監看。台北市有1萬4000支。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "我那時候有做一件事，哪一個地方裝的監視器，派出所要知道所有監視器的連線網，因為這個東西一開始裝是跟治安有關係，現有的監視器的第一件事就是要讓所有派出所知道派出所內有多少的監視器，這樣就可以知道監視器跟犯罪熱點的關係，這是第一個會有關係的。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "第二，分局裡面裝了多少的監視器要有一個監控平台，才能夠知道全部，當然這到了總局的部分，可能沒有要求到這個程度，至少派出所是第一線，對分局是很重要的線，監視器應該要有一個總掌控。這個資訊保留的期限與犯罪結合，就可以馬上看出這一個地方哪一些與治安是有match。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "我對隱私非常在意，我去查第一件事，相關的法令規範是什麼東西，抱歉，沒有，只有警察局有做相關的規範，剛剛縣長講的事是很多的系統，市政府會補助家裡可以裝一套監視器，我爸爸堅持不開，因為他認為那不是他要看的事情，發生事情的時候可以說我的影片，但我可以確認是有在運作中的，剛剛縣長講的是有在監看，但不知道為什麼會這樣。" }, { "speaker": "諮委3", "speech": "現在很多國外的監視器其實不是人在看，而是電腦在分析的，也就是所謂的影像分析，比如這個東西萬一有很多人聚集，是不是發生暴動或者是打架，就會馬上判斷這個地方會知道；好比這裡是紅線，但停在這裡就會被拍到。這個中控中心會搜集很多相關的資料，除了監視器之外，還有包括空氣品質、溫度及濕度跟環境的資料，還有像河岸邊有人跳下去就會跳出來，其實是看到這一些運用有很多人在用，我們現在連整合都整合不起來，可能連哪一些壞了都不知道。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "其實還有很多系統是不相容的。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "其實Whisky點得很客氣。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "監視器很多人知道喜歡做治安管控的工具，但是沒有一個法律的規範出來；第二個是這個東西很多人擔心隱私的問題。所以這個問題我們先拿到一邊去好了，我們今天就不討論這個問題/我想我們今天還是回到主題裡面，當然我們剛剛已經有點到這幾個例子，那個例子相當明確，也就是這幾個例子未來到底政府跟民間如何合作，如果要舉例子我想很多，包含電信公司他們基本上是政府的保護產業，他們是不是做得好？像食安幾乎也是政府特許的產業，有沒有受到好的監控？我們也不曉得。所以，政府部門跟民間第三部門好好合作，讓臺灣更有秩序，而不只是在治安不管是竊盜事件或者是殺人事件在發生的時候能夠很快弄好，藉由很多事情可以讓政府與民間力量結合。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "應該是讓民間的組織能夠跳出來，像剛剛有講到一些問題，靠民間組織起來，我不曉得你們心裡覺得政府的介入是有助於民間組織的合作？我的看法是不可能。我在這一段時間結束之後，我要回去自己的工作，我也不想再進入政府的團隊。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "還是要看人，政府是沒有那個文化，但不是做不到這一件事，還是可以做到這一件事，其實是有機會的，只是沒有人在做。也沒有那個文化在做，其實如果有人主導就好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "歡迎挖坑！" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "政府扮演某種角度，其實民間會更好。只是政府要怎麼做？目前沒有這種文化，都是多做多錯，不做不錯。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "其實我在當縣長的時候，我找不到一個適當的人當主管。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "資訊部門位階太低了。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "當時我們是獨立單位。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "有試過一年，後來又調回來。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "有一點可惜，高雄也是一年就下來了。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "今天講PPP的時候，我們要講開放政府的時候，也就是開放政府這個名詞在研考會在四年前、五年前的白皮書就有講過了，開放政府是送到每一個人的家裡面，這是一個大眾的概念。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "那一句話你相信嗎？" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "不可能。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "你看所有的政府網站，哪一個不是業務導向？有那個城市的政府網站在做服務？" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "我們的公務人員降低，薪資也降低，這個時候我們就可以質疑，你要做的事情你能降低什麼事來做？根本就沒有那個條件，如果有條件就去做，但有那個條件做大政府的事情嗎？" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "所以其實我一直質疑網路智慧新臺灣的白皮書，把各部會再做的事情拉進來。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "林佳龍也在做這一件事，沒關係。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "這裡面要討論的是五年後台北市政府要長成什麼樣子？是要做小政府或者是PPP這一塊，不然就是政府會倒閉，一直說要做什麼事，但卻一直做不到。" }, { "speaker": "王景弘", "speech": "我覺得這一件事位階有一點太高，我從我的角度來看這一件事，官民參與其實我過去一年花很多力氣在第一線上。很清楚的點是外界必須要有公部門的知識，不然就是要有公務門的搭配，也就是要有瞭解公務體系的人去搭配，比方像我之前在政委辦公室，有同事會幫我瞭解裡面的文化，讓我可以知道裡面的運作是什麼樣子，在那個角度上我可以跟外部溝通跟內部的情況怎麼樣，讓他們理解點在哪裡，也可以避免剛剛提到外面的人做得很高興，衛福部做沒有用的東西，那個是一個方向，像PPP在做的事情也是類似的事情。" }, { "speaker": "王景弘", "speech": "公民參與最大的門檻其實是公與民的不信任感，說實在話公務員也把參與的人想得自作聰明，像我自己的狀況是在桃園縣政府服過一年的社會役，所以對公務部門的運作及流程相對有經驗，其實我也有跟北市府的資訊局運作的時候的點是一樣的，像講如果是中低收等等講完之後，他知道你講關鍵字，其實信任感會大幅度提升，其實合作的部分也會相對比較友善一點。" }, { "speaker": "王景弘", "speech": "其實我覺得最重要的問題是呼應白皮書的意見，其實國家並不是沒有政策，像第一線的資訊素養是不夠的，他們不理解IT工具，他們並沒有接受定期的訓練，也沒有理解那些數據如何變成資料，最後出來的東西、大家收到的東西是什麼，像我們之前跟社會局在談的時候常常遇到一件事，大家只是把舊的東西弄成新的東西，這站在資料的角度來講是很可怕的事情。" }, { "speaker": "王景弘", "speech": "其實民眾參與治理，我覺得重要的點是建立民眾跟內部溝通的橋梁，也就是民眾跟執行者那一塊的橋梁，如果定期有一定的名額可以讓民間以觀察者或者是協作者的角色進來，有一點像替代役的角色，雖然我覺得替代役是誤打誤撞，也就是瞭解你的業務運作，然後來思考業務該如何運作，這其實是很有趣的角色，如果有資訊素養的人跟他們一起工作的話，其實是很有幫助的。" }, { "speaker": "王景弘", "speech": "但這會碰到我們一直卡住的問題，基本上不會有人願意進來陪你玩這一件事，動機跟誘因如何處理是一回事，其實以我的例子來講，我過去一年跟公部門協作例子是非常累，自己也要有自己的時間，然後再協助這一件事，真的很累，撐一年有一點累，像他們資訊訓練課程，我已經排到快瘋了，那個東西要這樣下來做的人畢竟少，而且我們做也不見得做對，我們也缺乏討論、缺點群體，那個如果有很多觀察者，每一個地方負責一個部分，大家聚在一起講群聚的意見，它是一個生態性，它會慢慢改變、慢慢累積，慢慢推動，我覺得那是很好的方向。" }, { "speaker": "王景弘", "speech": "我認為要改變官民關係要把官民的界限模糊掉，以安全的區域模糊掉，來訓練外部的人來瞭解政府內部，這個是非常重要的過程。像我對政府很有好感的理由是因為我爸是公務員，如果我不是長在公務員家庭，我不會這麼有興趣，這很清楚，我發言到這裡。" }, { "speaker": "諮委3", "speech": "這個概念很像芝加哥的做法。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "Code for America？" }, { "speaker": "諮委3", "speech": "芝加哥的做法很多是民眾跟民眾之間，可以在平台上互動。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "我說一下過去怎麼做的，我到2010年手機APP很不流行，我們那時候做了幾件事情滿有趣的，第一件事是我們把髒亂點放在台南縣政府的首頁，所以任何人只要發現有髒亂就可以通報到首頁，因為當時縣下面有31個鄉鎮，所以光是道路清潔我就管不動了，我們就弄一個髒亂點通報，每一個禮拜都說這報幾個單位、有沒有清，然後又開始做清潔競賽，所以聽說一、二個月裡面有半個及一半以上的清潔對長被換掉，之後我們再換髒亂廁所通報，接著再把哪一些道路好比種樹列管進來，當時那部分可能還沒有做到。但最有效的是髒亂點通報。" }, { "speaker": "諮委3", "speech": "現在會更容易。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "1999。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "現在更困難，因為回應的速度不夠，丟東西出來，沒有辦法馬上回應，回應速度不夠快。" }, { "speaker": "諮委3", "speech": "他們的平台是我放就上去了。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "但派工派不出來。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "我去台南的時候講就發現這一件事，太受歡迎，所以累積的速度會非常快。" }, { "speaker": "諮委4", "speech": "波士頓也有做過，因為你也不可能馬上做出來，有一個research。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "現在是把部分的丟出來用，認為是可以處理的，因為真的很怕。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "給我一點時間就好了，我想繼續補充的是，不是政府介入有問題，而是上面的人有沒有心的問題。開放資料已經推四年了，這之前是由國發會主動推不動，但由張副院長跟毛院長整個往前衝，張副院長找我們去開會，我們跟他講說必須每一個部會要有資訊委員小組，他們做了我們說必須要有外面的人進去，他們也做了，每一個人有1/3的外部委員進去，他衝的時候，因為跟他配合的是金管會或者是中選會就積極去做，但其他就不會，就是一樣設置一個委員會在小組，每一個都有，一樣的層級、一樣的做法，但從每一個部會，態度不一樣往下就不一樣，直接把中選會叫過來為什麼不開放，然後就開放了，他的層級可以做這一件事，但沒有那麼多的時間，其實真的是文化、人的問題，一層層下去的話，如何把文化帶進去，那才是真正的問題。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "像北市府預算開放那個也是，聽說市府下很多局也開始想做類似的事情，但資訊局沒有辦法應付了，太多了。TonyQ好像有在這一塊幫忙做標準化。" }, { "speaker": "諮委3", "speech": "像很多資料的限制，像data都不一樣。" }, { "speaker": "王景弘", "speech": "預算？" }, { "speaker": "諮委3", "speech": "不光是預算，像很多項目不同的模式，幾乎都不一樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果有中央標準，通常比較沒經費的縣市就會使用。不然每一個都一套，簡單講就是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "諮委3", "speech": "整合起來很困難。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "其實國發會訂標準，地方並不會知道。每一個地方的是自己發包出去，發包不會規定這一件事，廠商會做自己的事，所以資料的一致化非常重要。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，因為現在符合這個標準沒有什麼好處，未來是如果符合標準就會自動有視覺化等應用。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "現在是有一堆意見，但沒有辦法回應，公布之後就必須要應付回應。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "後面其實可以讓各局處想要做的就可以，平台有了就強迫他們發，這個是好事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這邊串起來就好。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "要思考如何把這個模式帶到其他的縣市去。" }, { "speaker": "王景弘", "speech": "那時候高雄市主動放人，嘉義跟台東是主動來放，隔沒一個禮拜我們就全放，而且我們在做這一個地方自己的感觸是一個縣市做了，我們的經驗是跨縣市傳承，我們會在公共區傳遞，那個影響其實是大的，像我們幫台北市做一件很誇張的事，是做公務員電信。" }, { "speaker": "王景弘", "speech": "補助案有通過跟不通過，他們的問題是雙掛號很難處理，訴願找單子找半天，一群人沒時間，他們跟郵局談說要數位化，發現郵局不太想做，我陪他們去開會，你們有沒有2000份，加起來可能1000多出來，他說你這樣我們很難辦，郵局的態度是說，而且掛號有一個問題，我們把公文列印系統，公務員開放格式，那個就是統一的，我們做成公文，然後秘書處覺得OK，看起來是一樣的，其實就可以過，那部分也過了，我們就把掛號條印上去，也把郵局的回執聯印好，整個QR code都用好，其實他們也有共同的硬碟，只要找出兩個東西都有，出去的跟回來的影像檔都找得到，列印從A點變成B點，丟回來把掃描機掃一輪，可以找替代役，歸檔是自動的。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "像你也要處理機密性的問題？因為你必須要讓他信任你不會看到他的公文？" }, { "speaker": "王景弘", "speech": "第一個是系統會在內部，隔離在內部裡面，第一個防範措施是在他家。第二個是請他提供四則公開的公文讓我測試，密件的部分我請他自己測試，我不看。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "你處理就好，今天沒有那麼多時間。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "電子公文有沒有可能經過電子公文的人，批示、意見都在上面完成？" }, { "speaker": "王景弘", "speech": "有。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "他不是處理那一段，他是處理整個完了要送出去，然後跟郵局談好了，他要連郵局那一關都做好，但郵局說你這樣做，省掉郵局很多的程序，所以這其實是現在IP帶來很大的好處，他把很多的程序本來要經過很多人的關卡完成，整個縮到整個IP平台。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "是指列印端嗎？" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "是給民間。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "你收到電子公文，你可以在網路上去處理你的意見。" }, { "speaker": "王景弘", "speech": "那是要不要建立系統的問題。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "台北市政府內部有一個公文流程系統，現在處理的是公文流程系統，而是公文流程系統結束要跟民間界面那一端。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "我現在問的是有沒有做到？" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "有，全國的公文系統都有。應該有吧！" }, { "speaker": "諮委3", "speech": "可以。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "其實都沒有這一段。" }, { "speaker": "諮委3", "speech": "如果是電子公文系統，只要誰登入，我看了，就應該要留下人事時地物。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "因為縣長拿到的是他們印出來給你們簽的，他們留紙本，再把影本回到公文系統去，但他們內部有一部分的流程是他們之間登打上去，但我在猜也有很多加計的部分再回到上面。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "不給你簽電子公文，所以你沒有看到那個，我那時候當處長也是這樣，看不到。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "這個很關鍵，如果確實是這樣的流程，可以節省非常多的紙張，像那一些送公文的人，基本上都可以省很多，而且追溯系統很重要。" }, { "speaker": "王景弘", "speech": "找到一個需求解決很重要，但找到需求是很重要的事情。社會局有一個工作人員瞭解，但又不滿於現狀，我常常跟他聊天，你要瞭解他的需求，然後還要即時的處理，其實後面更困難，其實柯P他又有能力去做前面的POC，我們再進去加碼背書，雖然最近deadline快到了，我很焦慮。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "王景弘", "speech": "但事實上一起在談，這是我們必須要思考的一環，並不是大家來想一天就想到了，這個是看久之後就看到的東西，在社會局的時候，我們那時候還有一些很扯的東西，讓我再講幾個社會局的例子，我們社會局的資訊系統像國民年金的補助案，我在內部寫了一個小程式，如果分析完不合格就直接亮紅字，看到就可以刪掉，沒亮就可以繼續看。" }, { "speaker": "王景弘", "speech": "原本審核要1分鐘多變成只要12秒，這東西很多都是在第一線看久就可以看到，這其實是加速我們要做，這是一個個細節，一個個最底層的環節，堆積起來是很可怕的，我覺得bottom-up很重要，但我覺得公務員也要會使用，上次我去有一個公務員一條格線搞不定，找我去幫忙，盡可能讓民間進到底層，如果讓他們有一日的體驗計畫或者是什麼，我覺得是更有幫助的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "g0v的模式主要是建立在兩套系統上，就是共同編輯的文件和試算表系統。也是大家不用學習就會的東西，因為跟office長得差不多，可以留下足夠多的資料，讓大家去貢獻一點時間。" }, { "speaker": "王景弘", "speech": "北市府社會局現在連跨局處的合作都用雲端同步，而且他們chrome也是大幅度提升，我覺得滿可怕的。" }, { "speaker": "王景弘", "speech": "我補充一下經歷，我去年覺得進入北市很危險，所以跟蔡政委有一些合作，那時候我們有以民間的角度幫他做一些資訊上的服務，選後他覺得內部要有不同的意見，據說江宜樺院長希望各部長跟政委要有年輕人在裡面，能夠帶在身邊。" }, { "speaker": "王景弘", "speech": "據說是江宜樺指示，但我老闆是第一個完成這一件事的人，他就找我去，他其實應該還找很多人，問來問去北市府去不得，業界還在考慮，中央說有一些資訊法規可以玩。我本來是以機要的身分來談，但後來我沒有大學畢業，所以我後來是以資策會計畫。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當年在自由軟體鑄造廠，我是印表機耗材..." }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "我真的不知道！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我的意思是學歷不足，就要繞好幾層..." }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "他們也不敢讓我知道。我做過這麼多奇怪的事！我讓人家做人頭做那麼多。還有誰要報告？" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "其實剛剛看的東西都是我們一開始…" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "你有做機要？" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "其實他們希望有人在外面罵，我在外面罵的時候，他們就跟部會說外面有人在罵你，你還不趕快做。其實剛剛那一些都是治標不治本的方法，其實我們四年前去高雄的時候，曾文生講過一句話，能不能有一個標案的範本把開放資料放進去，從系統端解決這一個問題？而不是訓練每一個人都要知道開放資料。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "剛剛所有的報告都是要產生前面的資料，但有一些會進系統、有一些不會進去，這些才是最大的問題，一直訓練後面的人，下一個走掉會是誰，但如果有一個制度化的東西，就把這個東西解決掉的話，公務員最喜歡這一種事，按一個按鍵資料就跑出來了。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "他們都在講資料格式的問題，那不是大問題，很容易解決，但在描述資料的時候，那才是問題，那並不是每一個人都可以寫，連業務單位自己都寫不出來，資料的實用性、可用性會大大降低，這是我覺得很難解決問題，但我覺得這是要拉出來由民間幫他解決，民間可以幫他描寫這一些資料，都用溝通的方法。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "我們過去經驗，資料不會是民間來描寫的。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "但都會把title拷貝下來，並不會寫任何的東西，其實我們要過圖書館出書的目錄，他們說data的描述是有著作權。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "誰說有？" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "國家圖書館。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "他們不能代表，我這邊合作的是智財權的專家。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "公文書沒有著作權。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "比方作者是誰，還有對data是做一些描述。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "是書的內容描述，寫一篇小文章，如果只是簡單的出版社。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "如果像google是沒有，字數太少是沒有。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "兩個人來寫都一樣的內容的話，這不會受著作權保護。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "這可以跟他們談，其實我比較想解決的是制度面的問題。從基本那邊處理完，能夠用制度上科技方式解決問題都不是問題，不該是拉到這邊讓每一個人學開放資料，這個是沒有意義的事。為什麼部會不願意按照民間的東西做出來？我覺得那也不是問題，那真的不是問題！只要民間有能夠處理掉的話，只要開放出來的資料都不會改變格式的話，其實那不會是問題。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "這就是最難的問題。你叫公務員不改格式，那是很難的問題。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "這個是制度的問題，制度完了之後不要改格式，只要一個東西在中間就可以解決完了，我們會發現都一直解決後面的問題。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "我們從數位典藏計畫一開始就在處理這個東西，這個真的是非常困難的問題。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "氣象資料每一次一改版，開發者就要趕工，所以我們一直希望可以改變這個格式的問題，我們發現國家標準地方或者是資料品質的評鑑，其實國發會今年才要發案子，明年研究，後年才會實施，好比格式的問題等等明年才要開始做研究案。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "我們政府有沒有在管資料格式最高的單位？" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "有，檔案局。" }, { "speaker": "諮委1", "speech": "國發會的資管處。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "是不是原來的研考會？這部分的解決應該要從這個角度，也就是由這個單位做正式的命令，將來所有的資訊格式要統一。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是，這講很多次了。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "如果不是正式的公文書，或者可以用regulation要求他們。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "國外其實有。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "不同地方就是要查核這個格式有沒有共同性。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "所以這個是可以從研考會，列為你要變成一個資訊的規則。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我自己的想法，我在退休之前，我2013年退休..." }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "你把我放到哪裡..." }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是這一家公司賣給另外一家公司。當然還在跟蘋果合作，不過那個是興趣，這個是2008年我進去跟發明試算表的人當同事，我們那時候做的就是FB for Work或者是Google App for Enterprise的事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "公務員當時常常會上開心農場，雖然本來沒有FB，但為了要上開心農場，所以學會上FB。我們建了一個內網，同時配上Wiki，所以大家互動的紀錄就會慢慢把懂的事情留下來，大客戶是醫療相關或者是國防相關，澳洲政府也是早期的用戶，都是比較在意intranet隱私的，不然他們就是用FB或者是google就好了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們在導入的時候，在09年的時候我們寫了一篇分析報告。導入成功跟失敗有一個很簡單的看法，這個系統進去的時候，如果能讓他們的業務中間生出更漂亮的東西，我們叫做in the flow of work，就是在工作過程中使用的東西，就會成功。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果是above the flow of work，一開始做一套，後來又做一套，即使大老闆說要這個、顧問費隨便算，一年之內一定解約，即使畫面再漂亮都沒有用。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但如果一些少數的人在裡面，開始找到一個能夠把這個東西丟上去，跨部門來用... 像英國的一家鐵路公司SE Railways就是用裡面最簡單的microblogging的功能，也就是在臉書上或者是推特上做每一個班誤點的通報，他們就趕快用hashtag的代號，這就是非常便宜的方式。但是這些資料也算是公司機密，所以不能用推特作這件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為我們都是data-centric API design，可以在上面做出更多的應用來，光是microblogging就把每一個站的排班表等等就等於是他們的資訊盒，像Wiki是很後來才用，這就是變成是他們無可取代的訊息匯流排。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我只想講一個概念：剛才說要訂一個方式，給所有的人訂一個統一的格式，這是非常關鍵的，但如果那個格式是樹狀分類學Taxonomy，那樣就一定會變成做一套分類給上面看，自己按照實際業務需要做一些自己的附加Excel檔，因為沒有辦法跟他實際需要的東西用上。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以後來我們在資訊設計，常用的是「弱聯結」或者是「弱結構」，所謂的「Folksonomy」，也就是大家開始繞著他幫他加標籤，變成是半結構化semi-structured data。也就是我現在有一份資料丟出來，但容許讓任何人引到別的資料去，這樣看起來雖然沒有那麼漂亮，但是比較有彈性。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也就是說，如果說規定這個世界上只有十個tag或者是一百個tag，這個是哪一些的子集合或者是母集合，事實上根本沒有人會使用。相反在推特上把一個流行的hashtag呈現給大家，大家就會自動自發把同異字等等建立起來，這等於是你要求大家都用，但用的這個東西是最基本的，也就是彈性夠，以致於任何人可以分支出去，不影響未來合併的可能性，這是盡可能翻成中文了，這就是沒有衝突的資料結構，這樣的話，我覺得長期看來才有希望，而不是又講了火星文。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在資訊科學上，可以想成是CRDT（Conflict-free replicated data type）。大家編輯每一份文件，也就是事後合併是沒有成本的，目前電子化功能系統，如果是用剛性結構的欄位，只要有一個欄位分出去就沒有辦法合併，這個是很大的差別。這跟課發會把剛性課綱改成柔性課綱的方向有一點像，但今天沒有要講這個，所以就先到這裡。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "第一個是回應前面討論的內容，我不是開放社群，我這半年、一年都是跟他們在學，像學Hackpad、Hackfoldr技術那一些很快，但他們講一些比較專業的東西我比較不懂。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "但從我來看的話，資料這一件事有二個連接，一個是資料在那邊可以如何運作，資料管理每一個部會都不同，每一次要把所有的部門都拉在一起，否則以現在的系統是很難動，政治人物上來之後除了大老闆出來還有後面要處理的，而且我要講台北市資訊局比研考會更有研考的概念，我要誠實地說。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "你以為你（諮委1）在那邊坐著聽就可以嗎？" }, { "speaker": "諮委1", "speech": "我要講話，你不讓我講..." }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "我有不讓他講嗎？" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我們現在遇到的是同時要處理這四塊，接著是從資料出發是一個是你自己公開跟網路搜集來的，自己公開的部分，公務員遇到的就是進一步要如何回應跟一旦公開要公開更多。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "像現在唐鳳show的是資料夾，現在點進去每一個公務部門把100多筆網友的流言去做回應，這部分其實是需要有人去訓練的，公務系統不清楚這部分要如何回應，我也要說預算視覺化這一件事對我來講是比較技術末端，誠實來說是用視覺化其實是換長期的亮點，而是從後續運用、公開參與來串，其實我覺得研考的部分是KPI，他們當初一直強推KPI的地圖，也就是未來的規劃都還是管理的思維，而不是你有一個plan思維的話，會比較麻煩。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "你從網路搜集來，不管是從FB或者是什麼，回到公務系統比較麻煩的是拿了這一些東西要怎麼做？要如何做雲端分析及判讀，這一些事情是我現在看到公務機關從資料出發，我有接觸到一個比較大的問題。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "第二個是從問題跟需求出發，這部分幾位剛剛有提到開放社群可以做到幾個部分，公務系統的狀況可以提出需求，但我們現在遇到的狀況是建置好之後，下一個會遇到的問題是要「抓交替」，很好笑其實都是替代役在做，因為我們現在整個的操作都是從技術末端開始，找到可以做的，但前面的架構我們沒有辦法處理，像公務系統這一端要出發的話，其實有更多的部分，像Whisky所說的，民間的部分對開放資料的瞭解相對於也沒有太清楚，所以其實還需要去協助，像Whisky也要協助一些團體讓他們瞭解。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "像還有一個是廠商外包的關係，公部門跟民間合作總是標案，但標案運作並沒有改變文化，全部是交辦事項。" }, { "speaker": "王景弘", "speech": "我都是用義工的方式，這最簡單。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "這不一定是最合理的。遇到的問題是有需求，好比有跟公部門對立面的團體，執政者要處理既有問題、面對，那真的沒有辦法迴避，你剛剛說要找醫療，團體就會跟你說他們的立場。因為現在是談民進黨未來的政策，一個政治人物如果要做，不能只是技術末端。我覺得應該要如何真實面對這一些問題，現在看到有一些關鍵字，但我現在看到是政策配合未來的操作，不管是北市府或者是中央現在的分工都是斷裂的。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "是分工太細，導致沒有辦法串聯。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "而是上面那個人有沒有想要串。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "難。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我是說你願意不願意去串跟你去串的問題解決？現在是連有沒有意圖，都是個問號。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "「串」是什麼意思？" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "先要有架構跟整體思考，先作點跟線。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "還是有一個串的頭。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我接下來想要試著談。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我們現在在談的不一定是開放資料公民參與，並不是民眾參與如何決策，其實Whisky都在講張想要做的是產業，但因為治理面沒有處理好，產業相關的推動也都只能是治標不治本。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "政府的資料品質從來不可能放到產業去做，所有的資料是為了回應政府的目的。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "有一個可以，就是現在股市公開觀測站，那個是政府的。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "但他們不願意公開。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "那個是公開的資料。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "你可以爬，但你要買。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "你可以爬，他們會告你嗎？" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "我有一點意見。其實公開跟不公開資料，其實demand是非常重要。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "年輕人先講。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我不一定會處理到。人在裡面陪伴的文化很需要的資料是一個資料架構跟技術，這半年或一年，公部門是努力引入操作技術，但還不夠。我誠實來說，輸入到我們每一個的行程都很難排，之所以會這麼不健康是因為她現在覺得在看守期間，所以她也不願意或無法去碰前面大的架構。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "沒有經費出來。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "對我來講那不是大的架構。我覺得前端比較缺，我們剛剛都談到mediator這個角色，一個是政府的內外，第二個是跨部會跟局處，第三個是治理架構出來之後如何跟技術者溝通，不可以讓兩邊銜不起來，所以對我來講這個角色要處理三塊，政府的對外的說話及姿態與企業很不一樣，如果民進黨執政真的想要好好推動，未來上來要置入一些人，並不是只找在選舉期間陪著我的這一些人或家臣，到底這些的角色在哪裡？也就是政府對外，有辦法跟民間團體與企業對話，北市資訊局小彭在這一件事的二端、三端我覺得是處理最好的。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "如果用民間團體是組織者的角色，現在國外比如歐洲他們有一種角色就是mediator。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "有一些信任是邊走邊累積，我是說過去累積跟民間團體也好，否則兩邊拉短時間是困難的。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "第三個是架構的層次，像現在不太有政治人物去處理減法的問題，加發我們可以用行政規則處理，我不確定民進黨有沒有在處理這個東西，我知道民間是有，12月4日會開類似的研討會，如果我從治理架構來看這一些東西，文官系統是承載不了的，很多東西要加疊到文官上。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "北市府一直在喊「冗事」，是為了要減少開會而開會，但現在是為了「冗事」而開會。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我看到有人另外在談，因為那是另一群人處理的東西，我覺得這個也是民進黨上任之後要面對。整合之後下面要work，但並沒有處理在行政系統的操作，剛剛審計、預算都只是一塊，很多都只是在「被給定」的情況下，細節那些真的都要好好處理。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "第二要面對的東西是如何留下來的？因為現在都是從操作細節進去，整個既有思考還要再轉換，也或許民進黨和現在執政者的mindset沒有差太多，但這一件事應該要處理，一個是減法的部分，一個是既有系統，比如不知道大家對join的瞭解，大家對vTaiwan的瞭解。對我來講，現在的操作都有定位上的問題，還有推法或者是所謂的SOP，如果真的要處理的話，其實的確是文官系統相對熟悉的東西，比如會談到如何跟實體公聽會的結合，但這一塊都是目前政府還沒有辦法去處理的，但二個架構已經在了。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我只是說一個是減法的東西要處理，第二個是目前執政，及如何處理更好，這也是既有政府做不到的東西。所以整個來講，我覺得各點各線的東西，地方政府也好，不管是五都，比如像宜蘭沒有辦法做像三都、五都的資源，但其實它可以處理公聽跟聽證，這其實是連帶的。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我們講很多都是從行政面去談，這的確會談到一個問題，由上而下推，參與式的治理還是要有中央的資源，但如何避免抑制地方的能量？這也是縣市在談預算的部分民眾會有疑慮的，因為標案方式由上而下會遇到的，但這其實是假議題，並不是國家中心主義，現在是核心，而是資源要如何分配的問題。治理架構面我覺得是政黨或者是政治人物很少看到，不管藍或者是綠都會講減核電廠，但沒有人瞭解他們如何與民間團體可以合作，如果我們要談公民協力，國民黨、民進黨都在談首爾減掉一座核電廠，但沒有人把治理的部分搞最清楚，而是拿口號或者是能源效率來談，沒有看到這一塊。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我覺得從開放資料來看是一端，但整個架構沒有清楚，其實我們講再多技術層面，我們講現在的管考運作要不是很形式，就是有一天會爆掉。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "很抱歉，我不是開放社群掛的..." }, { "speaker": "王景弘", "speech": "你是..." }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "沒有人把民間加進去，但首爾市上面的這一些人，有一組十二個是架在那邊，跟四十八個真的過去民間，像Whisky所講的這些人協作，這一些協作的能量如何讓市府運作，下一步已經要開始弄新創的公司。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "是誰要做？" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "首爾市府要培養。也就是用公跟民協力，玩得非常漂亮，就我的瞭解，恐怕臺灣就首爾比較熟悉的是環保團體。這不是我們今天的主題，不是從開放資料，而是從治理架構，也就是開放資料、架構與企業是拉起來看的。" }, { "speaker": "諮委1", "speech": "事實上今天聽大家講我覺得比較開心，至少大家參與了一些東西，我覺得11/29的選舉幫了不少忙，讓大家跟現在的執政團隊更願意讓年輕人進入。" }, { "speaker": "諮委1", "speech": "剛剛大家也提到了很多問題，我會建議社群的運作還是應該要保持自己的運作，不要太期待新政府有太大量的改變，我覺得那個機會不太大。" }, { "speaker": "王景弘", "speech": "我們的預設也都是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "諮委1", "speech": "我覺得我們有一個東西可以，第一個是比較大的問題，像誰比較有機會，因為臺灣的政府組織架構其實是上世代的架構，並沒有根據現在的環境來調整，所以沒有辦法處理現在的事務，因為人事組織的制度會發現前端會有很多人，也就是服務端會有很多人，但在重要的腦筋這一塊沒什麼人，所以組織架構事實上是要豐富大腦，就要事實上是以前的制度並沒有做這樣，所以事實上大腦上是不太豐富的，因此不太有辦法去組織每天遇到的東西。" }, { "speaker": "諮委1", "speech": "大家都會想到我已經很累了，半年後誰要接手，包括架構的部分，包括民進黨時代的組織到現在還沒有通過，有一部分執行、有部分是說到時候再說，因此要馬上做大組織的調整，也就是應付社會的發展，我覺得有一點困難，但我覺得可以用某些東西。" }, { "speaker": "諮委1", "speech": "比如一面做小調整，一面是人，如何塞一些人到重要的地方，比如台北市就塞對人，像我會覺得未來新政府能夠像現在張善政如此支持的人不太多，雖然張善政目前很支持，部會裡面大家叫他張科長就知道他沒有足夠腦幫忙。" }, { "speaker": "諮委1", "speech": "雖然他很用力推，但部會的整合也不是很容易，所以如果塞一些人在重要的點，做一些重要的串聯，好比是合作。" }, { "speaker": "諮委1", "speech": "像我之前碰到很多人，他們也滿擔心的..." }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "他們已經說在抓交替..." }, { "speaker": "諮委1", "speech": "未來在部會的一些人，跟他們說這一塊的東西可以讓台灣國際發展，也就是讓未來的組織可以快速調整，讓這一些人可以應付新的環境，不然大概很難。" }, { "speaker": "諮委1", "speech": "我覺得透過這一些合作去複製成功的範例，像有成功的範例去複製的時候就可以去做，像之前國發會那一些東西大家都不用，因為不好用。" }, { "speaker": "諮委1", "speech": "現在資訊都委外，很多單位是沒有資訊人力的，你要怪它嗎？" }, { "speaker": "諮委1", "speech": "我的意思是說人不夠，所以如何引進外部的資源是非常重要的。大家不用太擔心很多東西會被丟掉，而是改一個名字繼續存在，像民進黨執政，不管誰當院長，他喊的口號，下一任的院長一定不見，8100下來就不叫8100了，事實上內容都一樣，像智慧臺灣的內容跟數位臺灣也差不多。" }, { "speaker": "諮委1", "speech": "剛剛講的網路智慧新臺灣都是一模一樣，像法人他們會應付這一種輪替的，不要說政黨輪替，而是大頭的輪替，所以東西都不會變，然後名字會一直變，這個是比較擔心的，因為只是名字喊出很多好聽的名字，但內容都沒有變，因此我們變成要處理到底監督機制怎麼樣去處理這一塊，所以或許像未來，智庫要如何辦演這樣的角色？" }, { "speaker": "諮委1", "speech": "以前很多社群及社團很活躍，民進黨執政之後反而最慘的是這一些社群及社團，所以維持社群及社團自主性這部分是很重要的。" }, { "speaker": "諮委1", "speech": "我覺得大家還有再做open data的部分，他們為什麼很不好，而是因為要量，現在大家看到的某些需求不夠，而是要看哪一些是民眾及產業最需要的最先出來，如果只是因為大家在裡面有看到一筆做就做一筆，這樣也會很累，所以我覺得未來大家還有很多事可以做。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "我先打斷一句話。人家熱情進來，以為要聽老頭子講一些有智慧的話，你講的比他們還令人沮喪。" }, { "speaker": "諮委1", "speech": "我講得很多正面..." }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "我們指望你要當大老..." }, { "speaker": "諮委1", "speech": "我說要透過interconnection，怎麼樣大家在可以合作的基礎上去串聯，因為真的很難做一些大組織的改變。" }, { "speaker": "諮委1", "speech": "而且當隱私性的問題，像剛剛維志提到的也常常會被忽視，data的open像剛剛講到匿名，看到你講的內容或者是別人講的內容就知道你在現場。尤其執政者會覺得你們這一些人很煩，也就是因為已經很忙了，所以會覺得要有一些機制如何處理。" }, { "speaker": "諮委1", "speech": "像加拿大很多年前我去看，對於隱私的幫助很大，像在台灣大樓的管理員在車道就知道老闆進來了，像加拿大在捷運裡面監控系統把車子跟人及車牌都蓋住，所以他們必須要很快速做人、車子、車牌的置換，如果是捷運或者是公車很多，所以他們的機會就很多。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "加拿大沒有什麼人..." }, { "speaker": "諮委1", "speech": "他們在隱私的部分，在一開始的建置就放進來，大家可以看到台北市政府之前監視器的招標公告是要做人臉辨識，像把某人的照片放進去，就知道他今天走的路程，要求要做到這麼厲害的廠商，而且還要有測試報告才能去標，所以要求事實上不是隱私，而是要很快找到他要找的人，如果像剛剛大家講，很多東西一開始規劃就要加進來，事實上很多issues就不見了。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "這個是很多人關心的問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個是vTaiwan的十二案之一，有寫一份建議書。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們對民進黨執政的一個檢驗，會是你們的法務是否能把特種個資的部分實施起來？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "現在完全卡住的，是特別敏感個資的部分，除了醫療衛生及犯罪預防之外，這就是健保案最核心的那一點，現在是因為現在的政府說這個太難施行、不施行，所以健保個資利用不算違法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果能夠把特種個資施行的話，問題會少一堆，但這後面有太多的利益要處理。這是一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外，新個資法是抄歐盟之前的架構，但他們的三大價值是醫療、研究及歷史保存，不知道為什麼到臺灣就變成醫療、衛生及犯罪預防，我們可以看到國家的價值並不是完全一樣...（笑）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我沒有要爭辯這個價值，而是這些價值沒有落實，要如何落實。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "至於技術標準，其實都已經有整理出來一份，之後可以整理給大家，如果前面的價值有落實的話，我們實務上才可以很容易做list，也就是現在是統計資料，好比是ETC的資料，如果要拿去給所有的人使用，這就變成open data，就要讓原持有人沒有辦法識別，這也是處理完幾欄幾列就可以解決的一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個架構至少是美國、歐盟、紐西蘭都有使用，但在臺灣一直沒有辦法推的主要原因，是對新個資法的共識沒有建立起來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "需要推動的，是去識別化標準的認定。也就是說，目前個資分成目的內利用，像是今天逐字稿寄給大家。而目的外的利用是，我沒有講要寄給逐字給其他人利用，後來才想要利用。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以一開始就聲明要做這一件事，就是目的內利用，這件事就結束了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "現在要推open data，往私部門的open data的特質，就是會一直用目的外利用來做統計，因為大部分sensor並不是為了open data設定，而是幾十年前就設定好的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以用臺權會的講法，就是必須要鑽漏洞，也就是以統計及學術研究的必要，按照目前的個資法來開放。這個時候的目的外利用，必須要無從識別當事人，但現在的問題是何謂「無從識別」？這裡其實是按照不同國家、不同法系甚至是不同的利用方式有不同的標準，但在我們討論這個建議之前，原本是「不具技術者無法識別」就可以了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像是把所有的身分證字號的欄都變成Hash，這個問題很大，如果這個Hash到別的資料集也是相同的值，可以連結攻擊..." }, { "speaker": "諮委1", "speech": "身分證很容易算..." }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是的，就按照內文去連結就結束了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "代碼化不能算作去識別化，但不知道為什麼，之前沒有去建立這個肯認..." }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "張副院長為什麼沒有好好處理？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在vTaiwan討論之前，這些規範還沒有完成。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "目前還在CNS計畫的附錄當中，但能不能落實，也要看上位價值的概念宣示。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "CNS這個層級，上面的人看不到。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果特種個資那條沒有施行的話，實務上很容易說有增進公共利益，就開放了..." }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "現在是急著要開放..." }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我的意思是，就像其實剛剛您講的非常好，歐盟在2017年說要培植去識別化、打馬賽克，其實這個是非常hot的研究主題，因為自從safe harbor廢除後，所有server都要在存在歐盟當地，都要在這裡計算。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這當然是可以說服人的說法，兩相權衡之下，或許可以遮掉欄位，讓原持有人也無從識別？這是目前的幾種講法，我不知道你們要如何進行這件事。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "廖哥有沒有處理？" }, { "speaker": "諮委1", "speech": "現在會把所有各縣市都集中在一起管理，但政府都沒有能力，所以都委外，所以一出門，就可被知道，不用上高速公路。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "很多政府的狀況是內部資料銜接時，直接把資料庫給我。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "認為只要使用，就會不安全了，寧願給資料庫，不要動到自己那邊。" }, { "speaker": "諮委1", "speech": "每一個資料庫裡面，每一個是幾十種特徵，為什麼要建這麼多的資料在裡面？" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "就是資安教育不夠..." }, { "speaker": "王景弘", "speech": "我知道電子發票的案例也是一樣，也是叫國發會去copy。" }, { "speaker": "諮委1", "speech": "其實在入口監視器那邊就知道有誰進來了。" }, { "speaker": "諮委1", "speech": "關於高層級官員，未來幾年大概都不太可能有這麼懂資訊、資安的人來當副院長，所以重視程度大概不會比現在高。" }, { "speaker": "諮委1", "speech": "雖然現在很重視，但東西很難做。" }, { "speaker": "諮委1", "speech": "未來如果執政者副院長或者是科技部也好，對這一塊並沒有這麼積極的時候，就變成要用人，怎麼樣有人可以願意接受？" }, { "speaker": "吳長鋼", "speech": "唐鳳之前沒有來過新境界智庫嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "從來沒有，這是第一次。" }, { "speaker": "吳長鋼", "speech": "我要講非常簡單也是技術性，我要講的是像open data目前是簡處長在推，那時候他說其實看到文官體制會不會再來不知道，那時候他會說可不可以有更多的權限，比如有一、兩年約聘的空間讓新的人進去，也就是真的還是有很多要做事的事務官。" }, { "speaker": "吳長鋼", "speech": "民進黨上臺的時候文官體系沒有做得很好，唐鳳進去行政院六個月接觸的都是事務官，整個中華民國政府要運作，最重要是長期的文官體系跟事務官是慢慢來，這些人在民進黨執政下，能不能知道要如何做？這個是很關鍵的銜接。" }, { "speaker": "吳長鋼", "speech": "其實臺灣還是有幾個人，不管像唐鳳去國際的社群，或者是鄭延修博士，民進黨不管是讓公部門或者是私部門，讓更多人去參加國際會議，因為太多事都關起來，其實很多規範、格式國際很早就知道，好比付個1萬或5萬美金年費，把那個分享回來，讓我們不需要閉門造車，在民間部門也有很多的格式。" }, { "speaker": "吳長鋼", "speech": "很重要的是臺灣資訊有太多的問題，不管是法人的問題或者是太多廠商外包之後，跨部門無法串聯的等等問題，我自己覺得這一年來其實像毛治國院長、張副院或者是蔡政委這樣的政府官員是非常少見，希望民進黨執政能夠不要漏掉。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "我是覺得這樣的討論其實缺一個很關鍵的東西，以政府到底要做什麼，那個是非常重要的，你要把那個需求界定出來，那個需求界定出來很多東西就要配合需求在動，我想不是說開放政府或者是開放data，應該是政府要如何運用這個data做比較好的決策、比較好的服務，像哪一些比較具體的是什麼，要從這個方向去談，才會跟那一些官僚系統聽得懂、老百姓也才聽得懂，一定要從這個角度去看。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "政府可能需要專業技術公司、專業的服務公司來參與，但那個需求是什麼，必須區隔清楚，如果沒有弄清楚就變成沒有辦法聚焦。我舉一個很簡單的例子，好比我接觸一個廠商，這個廠商就是要做網路金融銀行借貸，也就是要做網路的保險公司，這是一個business，也就是我們現在有一個聯徵中心，有每一個人的信用資料，如果那一套資料好比個人的聯徵資料可以取得，可以附聯徵資料來，就可以按照這個信用能借多少錢。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "我舉這個例子是，我們討論這一件事是要有很有效率或者是很有意義，我要開一家網路的銀行公司，這個是很賺錢的，馬上可以讓產業發展，我建議這一種討論可能需要demand。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "銀行會給你填表格，上面可以填很多字，然後可以跟聯徵中心要資料。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "但我要填表格。" }, { "speaker": "諮委3", "speech": "銀行才會給，但我成立網路公司不會給我。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "你個人要申請是沒有數位化的，但對公司來說變成要重打。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "現在聯徵中心的也不全，好比買東西跳票，跳票當然會跑到銀行這邊，好比跟其他的保險公司。" }, { "speaker": "諮委1", "speech": "事實上有很多東西可以做，比方每一次去領錢的資料，只要跟財經公司結合，每一個人每一次領錢是領1萬或者是領1000元，一分析就知道誰是阿舍（台語）或者是學生，事實上從出生開始，很多用提款機領錢紀錄，任何的信用卡交易紀錄，其實都知道。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "健保署直接跟我說他們財稅中心有更多資料，像每一個公司的申報去回推去年的年收是多少。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "從保費就知道。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "因為時間有一點晚，如果還有意見的話，我們再找時間再戰。剛剛有談到公民參與，這一塊要認真談。另外，蘇煥智剛剛講的demand，其實代表很多人對資料的想法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想很快速處理，目前處理這樣的東西，其實在國發會的底下是資料開放諮詢小組。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他們的想法是民間如果對公部門有任何要求的話，就是往國發會提，接下來國發會會分案，也就是按照要求的性質，分到政府資料開放諮詢小組。32個都會分到。" }, { "speaker": "諮委1", "speech": "國庫署？" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "那個是財政部下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這些要求本身也都是open data。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "其實光看open data諮詢委員會的名單，就可以知道哪一個是玩真的、玩假的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個是財政部的名單。每一個部會現在按照編制都有這樣的新制，裡面也有各處處長的成員。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "由次長擔任資訊長的角色。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個要講清楚的是，現在有一個很固定的流程，每一個要求提供資料、品質改善及格式調整都會分案到每一個部會的資訊小組，每一個資訊小組就是三個月開一次會，這邊的每一份資料是國發會才有的，那時要求把這個變成開放資料，像追PChome的訂單資料一樣，現在是小組討論或決定釋出與否，這個流程是已經在run了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個部分有沒有人在裡面，或者是這個流程有沒有人要再結合隱私評估，像IRB等，那是未來的發展。國發會第四階段的政府電子化，是以這個當作區段。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "從個人來說，像每一個人要有自己的資料、紀錄，這個在歐盟叫data portability，也就是每一個人拿資料帶著就走，這個是下一階段的重點。這件事不太需要政務官，主要是需要每一個作業要把data interchange加進去，這本來就是國發會的業務，所以你們只要不擋，它還是會發生。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "比如提demand的人，要的是哪些部分？" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "他問的是對政策好的影響，對政府作更好的服務，對人民產生好的價值，這樣的案例我們有沒有比較清楚的？我不曉得你們在講登革熱，以登革熱來講，這是有一定的作用，他們把資訊更加視覺化掉，可是以目前的爆發情況，我們只能講說有很多事情不是data做得到的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然，但也是這樣才知道哪裡不足，如果沒有攤開來的話，就是unknown unknown，連哪裡不足都不知道。有初步資料時，至少可以把不知道的，變成大概知道哪裡不足。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "高雄對登革熱做很好，但花很多資源在上面，如果把資料放出來的話，可以分一部分的業務給人民，就不會花那麼多時間跟資源。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "像八仙氣爆的案例。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "你們都是參加g0v「網路國會」社群的人？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "社群是叫「零時政府」。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "我一直在談國會，也就是要涉及到立法階段，人民可以參與立法，人民可以知道那個法案的內容、提案，其實這當你在國會階段的時候，變成人民可以表示意見，表示可以逐條表示意見，也就是參與那個程度，法案進到國會。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果要例子，是有這個例子。" }, { "speaker": "王景弘", "speech": "德國當然有parliament watch，英國有Parliamentlive，都可以看到剛剛講的。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "長照法才剛三讀通過，但已經討論了七年。每一次都有開公聽會，相關的組織都有進去，一般人都不會知道。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "蘇想要加入g0v，下次請他去。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "要讓所有的人民都有機會可以提案。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "其實g0v在兩年前把立法院的公報就整理出來了。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "要透明化那個。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "每一個條文，誰講的話都知道。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "那是過去式..." }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "要有人處理這一塊。" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "我談這個是你剛才提到政府的公聽會、行政部門的公聽會，你逼這一些在立法院的時候，任何人都可以發表意見跟提建議案。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像這個關鍵字可以找「癌症免疫細胞療法」，這是5000人連署，部會不能不回應。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "包括你剛剛在show的sunlight foundation，美國的資料都是開放資料，可以下關鍵字，只要有人提到東西，就會通知你，你剛剛有發表意見，而且那個是開源的。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "你們兩個已經玩在一起？" }, { "speaker": "蘇煥智", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "吳長鋼", "speech": "總統給問也是提1000個連署的部分，我是負責NGO的團體部分，我也跟NGO深入的政策提案，其實國發會就順便丟上去問，就看民進黨的互動願意不願意？" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "市長給問嗎？台南、台中、高雄及台北，沒有一個人敢做，所以他們上去會做嗎？跟你保證絕對不會做！" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "你們先試試看。" }, { "speaker": "諮委1", "speech": "前一陣子是說台北市政府有做，但好像都達不到標準。" }, { "speaker": "Whisky", "speech": "其實最關鍵的事是市長信箱或者是1999，應該有一個透明的平台，不只是「市長給問嗎」。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "你要先相信政黨的影響力，你先做了，我們再看政黨如何處理。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "王景弘", "speech": "我今天的結論是不論政黨怎麼做，我們永遠都還是在那個位置上，我們還在長大。" }, { "speaker": "王景弘", "speech": "所以不管是臺灣需要怎樣的步驟，我們都會做，而且這都是我們自己的需要跟方向，這跟政黨是毫無關係。" }, { "speaker": "王景弘", "speech": "我們跟政黨是合作的關係，也是互相支持，在共同目標其實要互相支持，但不同的目標也是不同的角色。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "其實你們講的也是未來政黨要處理的，像我們以前坐在那個位置過的都知道，像隱私權的部分..." }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像剛剛那一張圖，是多方利益關係人聚會，坐下來一起討論的。主要是比較法制..." }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "我是指資訊方面..." }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "資訊方面，像是工研院、學界做的，常常是部分去識別化的k-anonymity。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "而differential privacy目前做得最好的，反而是Google... 不過這個是技術細節了。" }, { "speaker": "諮委2", "speech": "因為我明天還要早起，今天就先到這裡。謝謝大家！" } ]

[ { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "早安，課發委員、領綱召集人及本院研究員早安，我剛剛算了一下有17位課發委員，按照規定有20位，是不是依往例，我們知道林文虎委員一定會到，只是他會遲到，還有謝金城委員會晚到，鄭漢文委員10點半左右會到，還有林校長也是會來，所以這四位委員都會到，只是會晚到。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我們徵求在座的委員同意不同意今天先開始報告的事項？如果可以的話，我們就把今天前面的報告先說明，後面要討論的話我們再等四個委員到之後再進行。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "那我們就開始進行今天第十一次課發會。" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "確認前次會議紀錄及辦理情形。" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "一、104年10月5日十二年國民基本教育課程研究發展會(第二屆)(以下簡稱課發會)第9次會議紀錄及辦理情形。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "從會議紀錄裡從第1頁至第20頁是第九次的會議紀錄。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "丁委員到了..." }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "因為會議執行情形事實上都已經在各小組分別執行，如果委員可以同意的話，您的意見我們都寫得很清楚，如果可以的話，我們就不像過去逐一唸那一些意見的執行情形，自第1頁至第21頁。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "最重要的是第21頁課發會希望能夠協作平台的進度，並列為報告，所以等一下會列為協作平台的報告，所以關於上一次會議紀錄及進行，是否就用比較簡單不逐一唸的方式進行？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "今天的議程確定完之後，就有很多的業務報告，有很多的案由，今天最重要的是很多領綱經過公聽、審查及課發會委員的建議慢慢修改，修改完之後不同群組就跟著領綱小組去開會，如果課發委員覺得可以的話，逐一的領綱看過以後就看是不是要往課審會送，所以後面的案由就會從藝術領域開始，一案一案來看，歷程都走過了，所以請課發委員做最後的確認，這是今天重要的討論案由。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "不曉得我們這樣的安排，也就是上次的會議紀錄都確認以後，我們會請做業務報告，再討論案由，可以嗎？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "謝謝。我們正式從業務報告開始。" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "業務報告。" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "一、本次會議唐鳳委員於104年11月1日提出本次(11月7日)課發會之委員自行記錄及邀請協助記錄人員申請單(邀請協助記錄人員為中華民國仲裁協會薛雅婷)，茲依議事程序之規範，於徵求主席同意後，由委員自行現場製作逐字紀錄，以發言記名、公開為原則(委員不記名或不公開者於發言前事先聲明)，協助記錄者為列席人員。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "今天在座的委員有沒有不同意公開紀錄？或者要到你發言的時候再說公開與否？這個遊戲規則我們都清楚吧？" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "二、有關十二年國民基本教育各領域課程綱要研修進度，分述如下：" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "(一)英語文(含第二外國語文)、自然科學、閩南語文、客家語文、原住民族語文、新住民語文、全民國防教育、科技、藝術、健康與體育、綜合活動等國民中小學、普高、技高、綜高之草案共19份，已依第一波領域/科目/群科課程綱要草案研議進程規劃(如議程附件2，第36-38頁)，完成分區公聽會、網路論壇、書面審查，由各領綱研修小組開會討論後提出第四版草案，預計經本次課發會大會討論後，由各領綱研修小組再次研修草案後，於11月15日提交第五版草案。下次課發會大會預定於11月21、22日召開。" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "(二)社會：依據教育部8月28日課審會決議辦理，由教育部組成「高級中等學校歷史課綱專家諮詢小組」，釐清歷史微調課綱新舊課綱爭議點，並就後續歷史課綱研修方式與撰寫原則提出建議。" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "(三)數學、生活課程、國語文及技術型高中十五群科之草案，依第二波領域/科目/群科課程綱要草案研議進程規劃(如議程附件3，第39-41頁)，預計於104年11月9日公布草案，進行網路論壇，並籌備辦理分區公聽會，其時程如下：" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "1.中區：104年11月27日(五)下午，國立中興大學。" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "2.北區：104年11月28日(六)上、下午，國教院臺北院區。" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "3.東區：104年12月4日(五)下午，慈濟大學附屬高級中學。" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "4.南區：104年12月5日(六)下午，國立高雄師範大學。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我們到這邊告一段落，業務報告二特別提到十九份領綱草案，這邊寫的是今天如果各位委員沒有比較建議讓他們修改的話，我剛剛有提過就直接往課審會送。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "如果需要再看的話，需要預計的時間是11月21日及22日開課發會，但我們知道11月21日是全國教育聯合大會，所以基本上我們在座有非常多教育的相關人士都會去參加，所以21日就不能考慮了，所以22日跟另外一天的選擇。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "20日。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "剛剛已經講了是11月21日及20日這兩天，我們會請助理再用mail跟各位委員聯繫。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "第三，接著是去公聽了，是包括十五群科的草案，時間及地點都記載在上面，有沒有什麼想法或者是建議？有關於業務報告一至二？" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "大家早安，在業務報告三協作中心運作及目前所規劃的議題之前，我先來說明一下，今天我們上午第一場，下午還有另外一場，為了能夠讓各位委員更清楚在整體議程上的安排，能夠提升我們在討論過程當中大家能夠充分互動，所以我簡要說明今天檢附的資料及等一下進行的流程。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "檢附的資料總共有十八個附件，從附件二及附件三，再者在附件七（一）可以看到在桌子上有很厚的附件7－1及附件7－2，7－1是上午場，7－2是下午場，各份草案是回應公聽會的審查表，上午拿7－1就可以瞭解各領域的回應狀況。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "附件8是另外抽出來的附件，這個是技術型、綜合型及高中所談的網路論壇及公聽會的回應。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "附件9是針對8月3、4日召開課發會研議第一破的草案，大家就可以看得到到底第二版有哪一些意見，一直往8月3、4日又做什麼決議，最右邊那欄是研修小組如何回應，這一份資料請各位委員等一下討論的時候，也可以一併參考，附件9是課發會的彙整及回應。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "至於附件10至附件11是第三群組的書面說明，比較特別的是從附件12至附件14，有一個特色就是除了成立十五小組之外，還成立跨領域小組，跨領域小組有三個工作圈，分別是統整工作圈、素養工作、及議題工作圈，分別會針對這一次的草案提出整體的檢視及建議，等一下會進行報告。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "附件15及附件16是綜整意見。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "附件17、附件18是新住民加開公聽會的說明，容下午場再討論。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "由於業務報告大家都非常關心，但課綱準備的狀況是如何，所以容我花多一點的時間，大概10至15分鐘的時間來說明。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "接下來在每一個案由及每一份草案在課發會的運作及設計上都有群組會議幫忙大會事先檢視，因此群組的會議就會進來報告。非常重要的是，我們如何能夠更對焦研修草案，案由一的時候，大家都會拿到案由一藝術領域的草案送上來，所以大家應該已經拿到案由一的「藝術」。案由二的時候，助理就會趕快再拿案由二，因為書面資料真的很多。我想這部分來協助各位委員逐案進行研討。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "接下來我就開始進行業務報告，請大家看到第42頁附件4。大家都有聽到「協作中心」，到底處理的東西為何？可以把課綱一一搜集，更重要的是讓這一些配套能夠實施、落實，因此首先可以看到協作中心在第42頁中有一個非常重要的目標，第2項「建立跨系統協作平台」。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "大家要知道有哪一些系統，現在目前是四大系統，在第43頁（三），課研、課推、師培、評量。其實現在的系統代表就是課發會的委員，課研系統是國教院，由院長召集；師培系統，國教署副署長也是委員；評量系統有大考中心的副司長也是我們課發會的委員。換言之，課發會裡就有四大系統的代表了。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "進入到一級協作的時候，很重要的回到第42頁，本中心的任務必須要能夠規劃、協調及管考，種種議題必須要有全面的規劃，因此一級的協作是把規劃作協調，後續再逐一管考。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "接著回到第43頁，秘書組是要落實追蹤及規劃管考，規劃組其實也成立了規劃小組，在這個小組也涵納各系統的代表，透過大家的研討把議題逐一分析，大家就可以看得到有哪一些議題是大家所關心的，從總綱一直到領綱。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "請看到第43頁最下方（四），這個工作圈例如高教司來解決考試的關係。國育院也有自己來處理工作小組的會議。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "第47頁在組織架構圖，目前總召集人一級協作是由林政次擔任協作中心的總召集人，副總召集人是有四個系統像署長、院長及司長來作為副總召集人，下面有工作圈的分工。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "第48頁大家可以很關心到底這一些議題要如何做決定？協作議題彙整進來後就會交給第二級的協作中心，也就是各系統開始進行草案研商來形成決策。有些是可以自己解決，但有的是必須要跨系統解決，像課研要如何跟考招聯動來協作，就必須要送到這邊來作跨系統的協調。當然各自密集對話，但是要回到系統當中形成決策，並且要逐一讓大家知道決策的進度、慢慢往下走，並且確認每一個議題都是要追蹤及管考，確認是否已執行完畢，因此跟各位說明的是，在一級與各系統二級整個的運作方式是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "第49頁我們都把議題填報送到規劃組彙整。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "第50頁目前彙整的議題有哪一些？從第52頁開始，這個分工表有四大系統，總共有十八項協作的議題：" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "課研：1-1課程綱要前導學校建立、1-2新舊課綱銜接、1-3素養導向領域教學與評量的規劃、1-4高級中等學校適性選修課程。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "課推：2-1法規修訂、2-2課綱宣導及教師研習、2-3學校課程計畫與課程評鑑、2-4設備需求、2-5各級課程領導與輔導團隊建立、2-6開設選修課程的相關配套、2-7教學與評量資源建立。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "師培：3-1領域/科目劃分與師資培育課程的搭配、3-2教師增能進修及專長認證、3-3師培系統與課程研發、課程推動的連結。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "評量：4-1各類型高級中等學校的轉銜、4-2高級中等教育階段課綱與考招連動的規劃、4-3國中教育會考與大專院校入學考試的素養導向題型開發、4-4學生適性升學輔導。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "十八項協作議題分別在課研系統，也就是課程與教學的研發有四項議題，大家可以看得到最左邊，教學評量規劃及高級中等學校課程等，中間有提到由規劃組作議題的研析及說明。灰底是規劃組在第七次會議當中提出來建議修正，後續我們會再提交到一級協作這邊來落實確定。再往右邊走是管考期程。再往右邊是主政單位及協政單位。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "第51頁大部分是由國教署來主政，第52頁是學校課程計畫及評鑑，設備、輔導團隊、選修配套及教學評量的建議，這一些同樣經過規劃組把我們從總綱的文字，再過來透過規劃組邀請的各系統及實務代表，我們把這一些重要議題內涵作一個盤整及說明。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "接著看到第54頁，師資培育課程的搭配、專門技術認證、課程推動連結、升學輔導等，包含各類型的轉銜、國中會考等等，這是目前在一級中心管考的協作議題，我們都會定期透過一級協作的會議來確認寫作這一些十八項議題執行的狀況及需要跨系統溝通協調的項目有哪一些。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "接著看到第56頁，附件六。大家都在看領綱，總綱已經列入到協作中心種種的議題，到了領綱各個小組研修出來，對於整個彙整表，這邊先盤點出來是第一波的領綱。每一個領域都希望有不同系統來協作的配套，例如英語文有羅列十一項，包括空間、軟體、硬體等，請各位委員來看，並請各位委員能夠參見目前所彙整出來的。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "第58頁是閩南語及客語是聘任經費問題及設備問題。在原住民族關心的滿多，包括原住民族委員會，大概可以分為教材的審定及審查機制，還有師資培育、認證及待遇等等，學校空間、設備、圖書及數位資源等等，在原住民總共有羅列二十五項建議內容。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "第62頁新住民目前提出了三項，最主要是教材及相關教學資源等等。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "第63頁是自然科學，總共有九項，當然很重要，因為自然科學的特色是在探究、實作，還有包含國中有1/3要做實驗，是否每一班25名就增設一名，這就有很多具體的建議。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "第64頁是科技，科技這一次是新的領域，所以如何讓每一所學校能夠找到合適的師資，這裡有提出配套的建議，師資包含了鑑定及師培，最重要的是設備，藝術領域當中最關心的是整體要通盤檢討基本授課的終點，當然包含了整體教學的資源設備。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "在健體的部分也提出相當多的，包括了合格師資的需求，對於政策推動的具體建議，例如：要有標竿學校，像看到對於標竿學校的建議。還有協同教學。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "第69頁的綜合活動也特別提出兩項，這也特別寫到這一次實施要點，老師要有關鍵能力，比如國小要有基礎研習三十六個小時提出來放在實施要點。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "第70頁是全民國防提出的七項同樣在教科書及課推包含國防資源的應用、師資等準備這是目前我們彙整出來的，大家關心怎麼只有這一些，當然還有第二波，陸陸續續都會送進來，包含國語文。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "請各位看到第74頁的數學，如何把補救教學列入正式課程，包含全國性評量要如何規劃建議，在第七至八項都有非常具體的建議，提供給考招的單位來參考，包含使用計算機如何考試的建議。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "第76頁是社會。生活也提出三項，也就是推動、落實、輔導及師資安排。技術型的十五群科還沒有提出協作的需求。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "請再回到業務報告第22頁，種種協作的議題，其實在各個系統都已經開始啟動，我們在10月16日召開協作中心第七次會議有具體的決議，我唸一下：第一，確認領綱的研修是在課程研發的系統及課發會、課審會的全館項目，我們回到課程研發的機制來做。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "一級協作中心提供行政溝通協調平台，不會決定領綱內容規範的項目。但配套還是這麼多，第二，為了積極回應各小組提出來的建議，請研發系統彙整相關的建議，會各主政的單位參考、審酌納入計有規劃管考，倘有必要，由課程研發系統彙整跟業務單位對於這一些相關建議的回應意見，並且安排業務單位與領綱委員對話機制，來完備溝通程序。第三，如果各領綱小組提供的相關行政建議，確實有待協作事項，我們就是循程序送進到協作中心，並邀請業務單位研商，讓協作中心的會議討論確認之後，我們再用查核點來完成情形。換言之，我們剛剛提到各領綱的配套，都會送到各主政單位，讓各系統瞭解在領綱過程落實的重要配套，當然在過程當中，其實各系統已經開始工作了，其實還是邀請課發系統及各高中代表都已經有做了，而且也安排國英數社自的召集人也都過去對話了，因此由這樣的各系統工作圈主動邀集領綱團隊，課發系統及相關人員進入研討，這樣的機制我想已經在工作中了，未來也會積極促成對話的機會。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "以上是我對於協作中心的簡要報告，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "不曉得各位委員對於協作中心平台，或者是已經規劃要進行的議題，有沒有什麼意見或看法？" }, { "speaker": "方新舟", "speech": "謝謝非常清楚的解釋。" }, { "speaker": "方新舟", "speech": "一、協作平台是在上位思考的架構底下來運作，我想我們其實有幾個很大的題目是沒有討論的，舉例來講我們已經二十一世紀了，我們的孩子都是數位時代的原住民，我們什麼時候要從哪一個年級讓學生都有電腦設備，這是很重要的決定，其實不是只有數學或者是自然科學領域會用到電腦，包括像國文、英文、藝術，其實現在都已經融入在裡面了，但現在上位思考這個結果，各領綱其實討論的時候都討論不夠深入，也沒有遠見，因此上位思考一定要先存在，因此沒有清楚決定的話，其實每一個領綱在談的時候，都會很猶豫不曉得要做什麼樣的角色。" }, { "speaker": "方新舟", "speech": "第二、我們按照目前規劃來推的話，其實我們缺上千位的老師，一時間是產生不出來的，因此我們如何應用大學可能會多出來的老師機制，或者是用到研究所的學生來彌補這部分，其實我覺得那個議題滿大。" }, { "speaker": "方新舟", "speech": "另外，其實國外有非常多資訊科技平台，我們如何把它納入進來，而不需要自己再重新建置一次？那也不是領綱的部分可以談的。" }, { "speaker": "方新舟", "speech": "以上二點建議，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "林福來", "speech": "這個流程圖讓大家知道我們在做什麼，現在的氛圍是課綱的修訂不要是黑箱，如何讓社會知道你做的不是黑箱，這一次我們每一次課綱修訂的流程圖是不是也可以畫出來？可能幾個領域會有稍微的差異，但大體上應該會一致，我們應該有這個流程圖，到時候就可以公告了，如果有的話非常好。" }, { "speaker": "林福來", "speech": "第二個問題我聽下來也不太知道，因為數學領域是剛剛要出去開公聽會，制定課綱委員及現場在教學都是偏數學教育界，看來是會有落差的，這個落差可能會在公聽會裡面提出來，我不知道我們這邊的流程怎麼走，所以讓最後課綱出來，其實是大家都已經compromise，那個程序在哪裡？" }, { "speaker": "林福來", "speech": "換句話說，好比是把三角比移到國三，公聽會聽出來怎麼樣的議題，如何在協調論辯的委員會讓雙方可以充分互動，最後決定？" }, { "speaker": "林福來", "speech": "最後不管怎麼樣，大家都參與了最後的決定，而不是只有課綱委員，如果只是回到課綱委員小組來討論，那就等於是黑箱作業。" }, { "speaker": "林福來", "speech": "所以既然有重大議題出現，是不是有一個程序可以讓正反雙方有一個論辯的機會讓最後可以共同決定，提這個小建議供參考。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "剛剛看到整個協作平台的架構跟規劃的人相當好，但整個協作平台的工作架構是採用科層式的思維，我們這一次的修改是以國中小及高職要縱向連起來，普高、技高也橫向連起來，要以這個架構來達成我們的主要任務，也就是結合國內目前的部門來講，是相當適合的。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "但可能還缺少另外一個風格，科層式風格可以解決某一類的問題，但無法解決另外一類的問題，也就是現場教學進度的問題，這一類的問題用科層式的方法是不容易解決，比較適合用躍遷式的去從事可能性開發、實驗性的風格，比較可能取得現場教學改變或躍遷的需要，這應該是次要任務，不像前面那麼需要，這是目前一定要做到的事情，否則十年、二十年整個課程是沒有一個統整的機制，這是很麻煩的事。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "但我們其實也可以把教學現場當作一個次要的目標，這也是次要目標，我剛剛講的那一個架構不是那麼容易達到，比較適合開放式的參與平台，在我們現在的規劃裡面，比較是一個開放式的方式，或者是志工性的工作小組，又或者把這兩個結合在一起。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "十年前在推動九年一貫是有一個工作小組，這是有開放性的平台，又或者是義工性小組的工作平台，上一次是要在過去的現場教學找到的可能性，這一次我們的目標不一樣，但是不是例如剛剛講的協作平台中第一類1－1、1－2及1－4這三個可以用這一種開放式的參與平台及志工性的工作小組加進去？" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "這幾個部門把不同的組織模式跟工作模式加進去，我們可以架一個橋，這個橋連結過去，國內蓬勃的實驗或體制內翻轉教學變成課綱，落實到教育現場等種種參考資料，所以我的建議是我們是不是在第一期協作平台按照高度課程的方式來做，很需要沒有問題，也符合我們的主要目標，但以1－1、1－2及1－4是不是可以加入協作架構及志工之工作模式？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我們現在有三位委員給的意見我覺得很重要，我先作一些建議，看看合不合適。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "第一，除了規劃小組後面提出來的議題是各個領綱提出來的，這一些是不是也回到規劃小組當中，我會請求這一些領綱研修小組在提出來林林總總的建議當中稍微排序一下，哪一些工作是107年開始推動？也就是這個東西若沒有完成，這一個課程就沒有辦法推動？可能會有助於規劃小組在判斷每一件事情的緊急與迫切性，我們就會請各單位趕快做這一件事，再不趕快做會來不及。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "包括剛才方特別提到我們對於電腦的訓練、應用，在學校當中到底要從哪一個年級開始，方委員提到是上位概念，規劃小組要趕快放進來，像師資的培訓有多迫切需要，也是我剛剛建議的，各個領綱排序一下，若107年不行的話，是不是可以在108年或109年？不管是領綱提出來的或者是委員提出來的，請務必放到小組會議當中，所以下次開課發會的時候，請回應放到哪一個平台或者是中心，什麼時候可以開始做。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "第二，林委員有提到出去公聽之後一定會有不同的意見回來，我們尊重研發小組討論，如果研發小組有非常好的意見，我們當然也會聽，但發現雙方爭執不下時，在課發會當中有一個爭議小組機制，我們馬上成立爭議小組，過去有成立過全民國防或者是國語文，可以請其他的學者及老師再來討論。我們課發會有怎麼樣的運作及討論，如何再回到課發會，麻煩工作人員找給課發會。" }, { "speaker": "林福來", "speech": "是誰決定哪些是爭議？不應該是由領綱的研發小組決定。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我們委員都會分配在不同的群組裡頭，到領綱小組去開會，因此一定有些東西沒有辦法有一個比較好的共識，委員都會在課發會這邊。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "包括是不是要成立一個爭議小組，課發會委員就會決定是不是需要成立，然後馬上會請群組的委員開始啟動，目前是這樣的運作方式。" }, { "speaker": "林福來", "speech": "重點是有重要的落差看法時，雙方可以論辯，達到 compromise，這很重要。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我們會建議領綱小組要再多辦幾次諮詢會，但爭議還是會存在，所以還是要由課發會來決定啟動爭議小組，因此會針對委員提出來不同的爭議，由全體委員來判斷，由爭議小組來處理，這是回應林委員的問題。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "丁委員的提議非常好，丁委員提到實驗性質的學校，如何把寶貴的經驗送進來，民間教育的力量真的是不可忽視，有非常多的菜肴都已經在各地燒，希望我的比喻是好的，也就是一級一級規劃，都是為了十二年國教。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我們再開放委員發言。" }, { "speaker": "簡菲莉", "speech": "我想談一下第52頁2－6「協作」議題，我們看一下說明的部分，我會覺得用這樣子的開修選課課程其實是弱化，這牽扯到學校總體架構，如果我們回到新課程總綱精神的話，如果真的要落實總綱中期望以學生為中心的學校課程，其實是一生一課表的概念，但總綱當中卻沒有這樣寫，我試著排過所有的課程，我用變動最小及變動最大來看總綱。" }, { "speaker": "簡菲莉", "speech": "我用普通高中為例，其實落差會非常大，如果用現行課程體制架構及班級制、導師制套總綱其實是沒有辦法達成目標的！其實這一個大項次絕對不是開設選修課程的配套，這把總綱當中的議題縮小了，我們看到這個主題會以為是在處理選修課程的問題，但這個問題是在談學校總體課程如何做的問題，這其實是非常複雜的。" }, { "speaker": "簡菲莉", "speech": "為何2－6會用這樣的題目？過去的選修都是玩假的，他們都沒有在上選修，而是在上必修的課本內容，現在的總綱裡頭，國文有加深、加廣，學生一定要選才可以畢業，過去沒有國文科加深、加廣教材，如果我是出版社我要不要發展加深、加廣的課程？我不知道學校會不會用。因為由這個學校來決定要不要上。" }, { "speaker": "簡菲莉", "speech": "當我們研發課綱的團體沒有宣示說這一件事是要玩真的，學校不會認為是真的，他們會用以前的思維來處理這一件事，因此2－6是更大的主題來做這一件事，也就是學校整體課程的圖像。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我們要加2－6的議題，或者是要加學校課程的圖像？" }, { "speaker": "簡菲莉", "speech": "未來會變成一個光譜，有最小或者最大，每一個學校要切說4/10或1/10讓學生選，每一個學校的條件不一樣會採不同的進度慢慢調整，我們要讓學校知道是可以在這當中作一個選擇的。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我們就這樣修改或者是要送回去？我們會寫下來然後再做規劃及確認。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "適性學習其實有兩種不同的路線，一種是我們按照現在以學科中心的科教學，這樣的目的走下去的最終、最高境界是「一生一課表」。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "但還有另外一個路線就是主題課程，沒有一生一課表，這兩種都會包含落差很大的同學，如果同質性很高的一群同學，他們可能使用相似的課表，但如果落差很大的一群同學，一生一課表走下去，那比較適合現在學科中心的路線。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "另外一種也有很多學校在處理的「主題課程」，在一個主題任務底下，程度不同的學生在一個任務底下擔任任務有不同的角色，並沒有一生一課表，而是這一群學生一課表，這兩種對適性學習都可以，所以我們今天在2－6只是說這是我們選修課程的升級，我覺得這樣是適切的，但如果把2－6弄成未來的走向，我們就完全採取學科中心增加選修，其次就是一生一課表。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "我比較主張2－6維持現在的標題跟現在的內容，就諭示說我們要就選修課程的內容更深化、升級，但並沒有放棄其他適性學習的路線及方針。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "如果沒有聽錯的話，是選修課程一定要做，而是如何保證一定有做，因為這是國教署主政，也就是有一定要繼續研發，最後維持的是選修是玩真的，如何在配套上玩真的可以玩出來，這個是重要的。" }, { "speaker": "林福來", "speech": "「開設選修課程的相關配套」建議改成「落實選修課程的相關配套」。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "研究員要稍微帶到要排一下，不解決就沒有辦法開課，會方便規劃小組來思考這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "方委員跟我講領綱一路開路，到快要看到光線了，但我說還有另外一個隧道要走..." }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "其實我可以跟各位委員報告，國教署那邊也動起來了，國教署要針對這一些配套要如何做，自己都有整理一個工作小組，開始認真做，政次這邊也有考慮希望協助外部委員，也就是來監督落實是怎麼樣的落實方法，這是副座給我的表達，我真的很認真感受到有很認真在做，但有一些議題我們沒有考量到，像是方委員剛才提到的電腦化教學模式。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我也跟自己的同仁講過很多次，在這一次的領綱當中，有沒有把科技這一件事放到領綱的思維裡很重要，所以要回去看一下科技跟這一個領綱之間的關係有沒有想到科技如何幫忙你推領綱，或者是推這一門學科的學習上如何做一個很重要的助手、學生怎麼用及老師如何教？" }, { "speaker": "方新舟", "speech": "像剛剛提到的部分，其實偏鄉學校沒有老師可以提供這個課程，如果我們持續建置 MOOCs，也許放進來的話，問題就不會這麼困難。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "這個就是更上位的概念，像這個都要一併考量了。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "請教育部來規劃，看高中的 AP 課程能不能用 MOOCs。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "業務報告可不可以告一個段落？" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "時間很晚了，還有三案要討論..." }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "業務報告。" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "案由一：有關十二年國民基本教育藝術領域(含國民中小學、普通型及技術型高中)課程綱要(草案)，提請討論。" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "說明：" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "一、旨揭領綱草案共二份，包含國教院主政之1-12年級課程綱要(含：10-12年級之普通型高級中等學校教育課程綱要草案)及技職司主政之10-12年級技術型高級中等學校課程綱要草案。已完成9/5-10/3之分區公聽會及網路論壇，蒐集各界意見，由領綱研修小組參酌前述意見後，提出第四版草案，並完成下列資料，供委員參酌討論：" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "(一)國民中小學及普通型高中：分區公聽會、網路論壇及書面審查回應意見(如附件7，另附紙本)。" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "(二)技術型高中分區公聽會回應意見(如附件8，另附紙本)；其他無針對技術型高中之網路論壇意見。" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "(三)領綱研修團隊針對8月4日課發會第6次會議所提意見之回應說明(如附件9，另附紙本)。" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "(四)前述草案及資料經10月21日課發會第三群組第4次會議討論後，提出綜整意見，詳如附件10(第頁)。及第三群組第四版領綱(藝術、健體、綜合)草案修訂之簡要書面說明(如附件11(第頁)。" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "(五)跨領域研修小組-統整工作圈、核心素養工作圈、議題工作圈檢核第四版草案資料之相關意見：" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "1.領域統整工作圈檢視表(附件12，第頁)。" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "2.核心素養工作圈提交課發會建議(附件13，第頁)。" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "3.議題工作圈之四項重大議題實質內涵表及附錄二「議題融入課程綱要示例說明」(附件14，第頁)。" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "(六)並檢附旨揭草案第四版資料(另附紙本)及公聽會版領綱草案。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "請說明。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊花", "speech": "由我來就藝術領域整體性說明，請各位翻到會議紀錄文本第83頁。就三個部分跟委員報告：" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊花", "speech": "第一，有關於公聽網路審查的意見，第二個是對意見的處理，第三個是目前整體修正的情形。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊花", "speech": "第一個部分主要可以包括五個面向：第一，授課時數不足，無論國中小、技術型高中都認為不足，尤其技術型高中，來參與論壇的一些師長認為只有幾個學校而已。…第五個部分是在專業措詞用語的精準度。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊花", "speech": "這五大面向的處理是1－1有關於授課時數。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊花", "speech": "第二個是大部分接受有關於意見的1－2、1－3及1－5，分別是由整體委員規劃小組、專業小組分別針對各項意見逐條審視，大家集體討論後的調整、調修。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊花", "speech": "第三個，參與者對草案已經有所誤解，因此我們整個小組在思索意見的合意性及相關的處置。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊花", "speech": "第四個，整體修訂的情形大概分成三點來說明。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊花", "speech": "（一）整體來講我們有大概95％完全接受，要很明列傳統各項細節，傳統藝術及在地藝術部分我們有針對於學習內容的項目做一些說明，所以這一部分可以讓老師參考或者是作教材研發用，因此大部分來講，沒有很大的爭議或者是衝突部分，因此我們這樣子處理。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊花", "speech": "（二）整體來講，我們的學習表現在普通型國中一百條有八條調修，但在學習內容我們調修了二十五條。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊花", "speech": "（三）在技術型高中的委員跟普通型高中有重疊，我們透過一個機制讓兩邊有更多最近修訂的對話，所以技術型高中調修的情形比較多，內容大概調修了33％，學習內容23％。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "我先徵求各位委員的意見，跨領域的小組總共有提出三個附件，分別是「12、統整工作圈」、「13、素養工作圈」、「14、議題工作圈」，我們會在上午場第一個案由報告一次，下午場再整體報告一次，接著是通案處理。不知道這樣子的方式可以嗎？也就是藝術報告完之後，接下來二至五不再報告，除非若有必要再提出來。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "請看到第93頁，統整工作圈在各領域撰寫的格式上及符合總綱，促進領域內的統整及連貫。附件十二針對時間分配我們提出解釋的規劃說明，剛剛所談到的藝術，這邊會提出建議修改，這樣的建議是提供各個領綱、研修小組參考，這是有關於時間的建議。其他的部分請委員參閱。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "有關於實施要點也有檢視，不論是文字上的修改、建議，或者有包含到主管機關單位涉及是否在實施要點要納進來的一些建議，提請各位委員等一下在討論時逐一確認。包含藝術部分、綜合活動等等部分，其實都有相關的實施要點之相關權責配套建議。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "接著是第102頁，針對領域之內的統整連貫，也就是跨學習階段如何作縱向連貫我們也提出檢視。這邊檢視的是客家委員，包到領域之間，新住民委員也提出了跨領域的檢視，這部分的檢視資料請各委員參考，也請研修小組來參考並加以研修。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "接下來要把麥克風交給「素養工作圈」，我們請了林世華老師來說明。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "兩年從我從臺師大退休，一年前我從課發會退休，其實我第一屆已經退休了，但當時連同素養工作圈一起退，所以還留有一個尾巴。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "素養工作圈其實我參與的程度不高，至少是倒數第二個進去，所以我名義上來代表，但我盡我所能把跨領域的素養工作圈對於第四版關於素養的審查，向各位報告。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "我們這一圈的是要叫「頭目」或者是「圈長」（笑）蔡清田，他領軍的至少有十位，我推敲主幹是林永豐教授，這幾位教授我一半有見過，一半沒有見過，還包括三位國教院的同仁，一位主要的負責同仁，一個是楊俊鴻，一位是曾祥榕，還有一位核心人物鄭任君，是他打電話給我，叫我來。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "後來為了不要讓事情難辦，所以我還是來了。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "請各位委員翻到第106頁，也就是主任剛剛所說的附件十三，這個是跨領域素養工作圈對於第四版的建議。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "我先說明一下我的工作方式，我們是分工制，每一個科目或者是領域，比較能幹的分到五個，比較不能幹的分到一個，分開各自閱讀跟瞭解撰寫的情況，並且提出建議再彙整，彙整的結果其實我的記憶已經不是那麼清楚，也就是現在各位看到的第106頁至第109頁或110頁，提出了四個主要的建議。" }, { "speaker": "書面報告", "speech": "一、有關各領域/科目學習表現動詞暨實施要點與核心素養呼應之建議。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "第一個是第106頁的上端，是有關於核心素養當中很重要的學習表現的撰寫，那個「撰寫」與writing很有藝術性。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "第二個建議是第107頁，約莫上面數下來第4行，那是撰寫上的建議。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "第三個是有關於編碼，也就是核心素養當中重點的編碼，那個編碼其實複雜度已經高過我所能理解的範疇，所以二、三部分等一下楊俊宏會幫忙說明。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "接著可以看到第108頁有一個部分領域統籌性的寫法，我後面主要希望跟各位報告其中的第一項，因為這是團體決議，雖然我很愛說話，但我盡量避免個人的意見，我原來想要照著唸一遍，但我可能連唸都唸不好。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "承襲洪主任所說的，今天上午第一場針對一般性，並沒針對校長所說的藝術領域來說明。我們就作一個通盤性的說明，有關於各個領域動詞、實施要點與核心素養的建議，這裡有提出七項。" }, { "speaker": "書面報告", "speech": "（一）學習表現內容盡量單純化，一條表現以一個重要的概念為佳，並刪除贅字。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "（一）至（六）是一般性的說明，一般性的說明是建議性的東西，其實我的印象當中比較像是九年一貫的時代，學習表現內容盡量單純化，一條表現比一個重要的概念為佳，不必要的字就必要出現，避免顯得很多字，條數也有可能會增加。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "第二個是建議學習表現的條目總數。意思就是現在的總數數量有點大，大到有一點無法控制，我們還滿專心在看。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "第三個是學習表現涵蓋面太廣，缺少明顯性，導致教學者無法評核。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "第四個是發展學習當中的動詞一覽表，使教育階段的動詞層次能夠加深、加廣循序漸進發展，能夠更突顯高層次的學習表現。這一次國教院的同仁非常用功及努力，對於學習內容及表現兩個是以二維度的觀點很清楚界定出撰寫，這其實基本上是一個分類的法則，並不是撰寫的方法，但也不錯，因為規格明確，我們就以看到的動詞及名詞組合作為我們看的領域或科目，因此在核心素養發展手冊中對於動詞有一些建議，請各位研修小組贊成。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "第五個是請各科在研擬學習表現時，必須在每一個學習階段內要緊扣教育階段的核心素養，其實我原來是很擔心的，這是一個很複雜的問題，但我剛剛報告給洪主任說還有一組在前面，也就是讓前面去搞定，這一組看一下就好。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "第六個實施要點內涵必須要落實層面，落實又跑出來了，我不太清楚。這裡寫的是假設要落實，我們並不是寫著玩的，但事實怎麼樣我不知道。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "（七）我們的委員有寫出它的修改意見，因此這當中有一些這樣的建議。比如綜合活動的建議，像2A－3－1，覺察不同性別及互動方式，應用同理心來增進人際關係，我不知道委員是誰，可能也是我，建議要寫成覺察不同性別的互動方式，這有可能改到最後是非常麻煩，各位可以想見國教院設定的規格是以動詞與名詞為主，學習表現到底如何定位，其實我也自己在揣摩，學習表現其實是動詞與名詞，但課發會來看，好像對於期待不盡相同。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "藝術領域4－1－1或－2，其實這兩個建議有一點類似，其實這都出現不只一個動詞，那樣會有一點麻煩，也就是要抓哪一個，因此會建議常常把動詞往前帶或者是往後帶。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "自然領域有提出兩個比較大的建議，這樣的撰寫方法寫很長，我就不唸了。（一）基本上是說寫的廣度非常大，但這個廣度大是可以理解，因此期待學習表現的動詞加名詞的形式就會比較牴觸，像自然2C－4－2，如果各位看動詞就會發現非常多，主要的原因是撰寫的時候就都寫出來了，到時會產生一個麻煩，也就是教學者到底要抓哪一個學習表現，可能會產生困難，否則不能說他的學習表現是錯的，因此也許有不同考量才撰寫成這樣。（二）請卓參右邊的表達方式，都是希望可以去簡化它。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "全民國防的部分的動詞部分是不是規格太高，也就是「評價」，要求高中的學生來評價，是不是不太恰當。以上幾乎是宣讀性的報告，之後我再針對個人的意見。" }, { "speaker": "書面報告", "speech": "    1.若普高、技高、綜高的領域/科目核心素養之具體內涵相同，則不用加上學校類型的代號。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "請核心素養加註文字上的一致性，第三個是在談核心素養與學習重點的編碼注意事項，核心素養的部分，如果高級中等教育階段，普高、技高的具體內涵相同，則不用加上學校類型的代號，像健體AU1的寫法，這裡表示健體領域沒有分普高、技高及綜高的差異，如果普高、技高及綜高的內涵不同的話，請普高加註S，技高加V，綜高加C，像數學可以分數S、數V及數C。如果沒有對應的項目就請填無對應的部分，像全民國防在國小、國中沒有時數分配，就請刪除這部分的表格。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "第三點有提到依照領綱的研修手冊最左側三欄應該是總綱核心素養項目與總綱核心項目的說明，若無法修正則以總綱核心素養的關聯性或關係為何。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "第四點剛剛有提到如果核心素養具體內涵沒有分的話，那就不用再第一碼上加上SVC來劃分。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "有關於學習表現的部分，請看到第107頁下方及第107上方，只有一種編碼，第一碼有不同的可能性，也就是第一碼可以按照領域科目的不同，可以有不一樣的編碼方式，技術型高中的學習重點以上述的不同可能擇一使用，可以用第二種、第三種或者是第四種。技術型高中討論編碼是否一致，不一致可以加上學校類型的字眼「技」或「綜」。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "第四點，學習表現內容這二個領域並不是用二維項目的呈現，因為我們總綱裡面有提到領域科目可以進行跨領域、領域教學，所以一對一沒有辦法進行雙向度的彈性組合，因此不管在核心素養發展手冊或領綱研究手冊基本上都有作表現跟內容雙向度的說明，因為領綱基本上提供彈性組合的空間，所以建請藝術領綱及綜合領綱的表現內容可以用二維度的方式呈現，以利未來教科書的內容為雙向度多元的彈性空間，因為林委員之前也有對藝術有提出一些建議，因為這會涉及到未來跨領域的表現及內容組合，領域內不同表現度領域的彈性空間，這是有關於核心素養工作圈的一些報告。" }, { "speaker": "劉欣宜", "speech": "接下來是有關於議題工作圈，因為議題工作圈的召集人下午才會來，我先說明。有關於議題的部分，這一次是以課領綱來處理，在第一波課綱有滿多的意見，特別是性別的部分，所以對於議題的處理有幾個方式。" }, { "speaker": "劉欣宜", "speech": "第一，我們在10月31日有針對四個重大議題的實質內涵召開相關的諮詢會議，也針對十五個議題的部分我們有一個內部的討論會議，針對這十五個議題作更細緻的討論。" }, { "speaker": "劉欣宜", "speech": "我們在11月5日議題工作圈的會議當中有做一個確認，所以目前在109頁開始是我們綜合前面公聽會、諮詢會議及核心工作圈討論後新的四項重大議題實質內涵新內容。請各位委員看到第109頁的部分，以黑體標示是我們在公聽會及諮詢會當中意見比較多的部分，像第一個主題是性別特質認同多樣性的尊重，這部分當時在討論時，很多的意見是說性別特質跟性別認同的部分是不是要特別放進來，後來我們的處理方式是回歸到性別平等教育法的用詞，所以我們整個就是依據性平法來修訂。接著就是有關於性別歧視要不要放入？後來在討論的過程當中，因為性別歧視的消除其實是性別平等教育當中重要的目標之一，也明定在性別平等教育法當中，因此這後來把性別平等歧視維持。" }, { "speaker": "劉欣宜", "speech": "接著是有關於身體自主權的部分，從國小至高中，整個對身體自主權維護及能力的進展，因此我們後來從探索到認識，進一步能力的層次修改。" }, { "speaker": "劉欣宜", "speech": "接著是第109頁學習主題當中有一個社會公共事務及性別平等運動，在實質內涵當中有特別提到，有一個文字是性別平權，但性別平權會引發社會運動比較積極地提倡，因此在後來的諮詢及內部討論中，我們一併談到性別「平等」，回歸到相關的法令及政策都是及性別「平等」的字眼；接著是以社會公共事務的方式來作一個研修。" }, { "speaker": "劉欣宜", "speech": "第110頁最主要的改變是在最後的一個主題，也就是性別與多元文化的部分，進一步會把「本土」加進去，本來是寫到國際性別議題的面向，我們在相關的意見當中，我們特別提到有關於我國的部分也具有很重要性，因此這裡就把本土納進來，並且加上要培養學生能夠分析不同的觀點，這裡是有關於性平最主要文字的修正。" }, { "speaker": "劉欣宜", "speech": "第111頁是有關於人權教育的部分，在搜集的意見當中比較少，作了幾個主要的改變，大致上是在是第111頁第一個人權基本概念主題下國小實質內涵，原本有三條，後來想說以對應的方式，整併為一條，修改為認識人權是與生據來有不容剝奪，其他的部分是動詞的微幅修正，希望把能力的層次展現出來。" }, { "speaker": "劉欣宜", "speech": "第113頁是環境教育的部分，與原本的實質意涵不會修正太多，像碳循環及復育納入。" }, { "speaker": "劉欣宜", "speech": "第114頁海洋教育的部分，有談到臺灣與其他國家，後來在會議的討論中發現特別提到臺灣時，會引起相關的爭議，所以我們在這裡的處理會以我國方式來作相關的修改，因此是寫成我國與其他國家，如果是牽扯到國家概念的時候我們會用這樣的方式來修正，這個是特別在海洋教育的理念有相關的修改。" }, { "speaker": "劉欣宜", "speech": "這是前面四個重大議題經歷了公聽會、諮詢會議、內部討論及工作圈實質的架構修正，依照這個實質架構之後，就會到各領域的附錄二，也就是相關哪一些實質內涵領域、學習重點，所以議題工作圈是以國語文為例，這是新的，用剛剛前面所提的四個重點議題、新架構來重新作領綱學習重點的對應，而呈現在118頁。" }, { "speaker": "劉欣宜", "speech": "有一個比較大的改變是第118頁原本對十九個分成三大類，一個是已經單獨設定科目，另外一個是領域內容有涵蓋相關的議題，第三個是重大議題的部分。10月31日內部討論會議及後續核心工作圈的處理上，我們有重新圍調一下，分別是十五項議題與重大議題，十五項就會到剛剛所說的第一破，我們不會再特別去作區分，而是以十五個議題用這樣的方式重新定義其類別，其實在各領綱有關於類別的部分修改。" }, { "speaker": "劉欣宜", "speech": "接著是四個議題跟實質內涵來作領綱實習的對應，以上作一個說明，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "基本上都給了各個建議，也都送去了，我們只要看各領域有沒有意見跟有沒有接受。接下來有哪一個委員要發言？" }, { "speaker": "林福來", "speech": "一個國家的課綱、不同領域的課綱，如何叫國家公告的課綱，我想這個定義不一樣，在德國目前國家的課綱還很少，換句話說，他們沒有非常把握這個課綱公告後有相當長的一段時間，不管怎麼樣都不用去調，才會變成國家課綱，好比數學科十幾年前公告一個，但高中以上根本沒。" }, { "speaker": "林福來", "speech": "也就是課綱由國家來公告，代表這一次是所有的課綱、領域出去的時候，都是十二年課綱的title嗎？或者是有一些領域是暫訂課綱或者是實驗課綱？或者是全民國防教育從來沒有在現場實作過，你說公告了，你說很久未發生問題且一定可以使用，我不太相信，因此現在的課綱是不是有一些領域在臺灣實作那麼久，因此大概不會有太大的問題，這時我們公告是OK的；但有一些領域其實我有一點擔心，是不是真的要訂下來，然後等到下一期的時候全部課綱又來，我覺得不太對，因此是不是可以在公告時，至少有兩類，這個考慮一下。" }, { "speaker": "林福來", "speech": "剛剛世華兄在報告的時候，委員的建議我不懂，原來人家寫得我很懂，結果改了之後我完全不懂，我們最後公告出來是要聽誰的？憑什麼整個素養圈去規範全部的素養是同樣的寫法？而不是針對學術圈本來就這樣，大家都懂，編教材的人都懂，突然為了整齊劃一然後給了一個規約出來。" }, { "speaker": "林福來", "speech": "看一下綜合活動第1條，同理心我知道，同理我不知道，所以如果是用中文的寫法也不是這樣寫，用中文的寫法對我來講，是「對不同性別的方式來發展同理心」，但也不是要這樣，而是要用一個sentence pattern，動詞在前面或者是後面，我們全部把它混淆了，因此工作圈當中真的要一致嗎？" }, { "speaker": "林福來", "speech": "或者是在自然學科就探究活動做一個詮釋，如果很簡單留下幾個字，那就要拉倒另外一層去說明，自然學科有一個文化在那裡，我們真的要炮火這麼大unify？或者是小孩子學得很好是比較重要的，而不是在這個形式的否定，請斟酌一下。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "這兩件事，林委員有提到由國家公告的課綱或者是領綱是不是要比較長久性？一有一些比較穩，有一些是我們看得到隨時要改變，是不是叫做實驗性質？這個是我們可以決定的嗎？（笑）" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "其實有一些東西公布沒多久就要修，因此有賦予這樣的機制，聽聽各位委員的意見，特別是由國家公告了，應該是一個比較長遠的核心或基礎。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "另外還有一個工作例子，像高級中學這一塊的數學都沒有，請陳委員發言。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊花", "speech": "主席、各位委員，延續林委員的發言。我有一點著急，我們當然非常感謝素養工作圈，第108頁第4點第1小點，基本上會把目前藝術領域研擬出來的全部打翻，這一件事就藝術領域是非常嚴重的事情，就目前節骨眼我們真的是非常有困難作整體性的調整，我剛剛是有一點著急的。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊花", "speech": "在公聽的過程當中，在藝術的部分，整體來講比課綱還明確、清楚，但剛剛聽起來，素養工作圈所擔心的是跨領域時不容易，我覺得跨領域的方式其實有很多種，而是如何針對於學習表現透過老師在做跨領域不同教學，如何把教學表現精緻化，其實是在教材的研發可以解決這個問題，因此這部分是不是可以請委員們審慎考量。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我們就不討論林委員第一個議題，也就是國家的部分（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "我想很重要，但早期第一屆課發委員的時候，沒有請林委員來，那一件事應該要在總綱裡面談，也就是對總綱、課綱的定位，當初就應該談，因此應該在當時就談，現在再談我覺得很麻煩，可做的事不是不可以談，有訂下一個我個人覺得很重要的條款，也就是修訂開始之時，在這個基礎下我認為什麼都可以談，因為談的東西可能三、五年大修的時候必須要納進來，但現在還沒有送出門的時候，就談這個問題，別人不知道我們在談什麼，只覺得我們是追著尾巴的驢子原地打轉，我認為在這個場合不宜..." }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "（個人經驗分享，不記錄。）" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "第二，有關於素養的質疑，第106頁的相關修訂，我們當初就是要把範例兩個字拿掉，後面表格的第一個欄位是說可能參酌的表達方式或提醒，並不是要強制這樣做，我還是喜歡舉剛剛教授提到的自然領域的例子，像2c-IV-2的學習表現並不是不好，而是這一條涵蓋了一至十二年的學習表現，這一條做到，孩子都大學畢業了，所以不可能學習表現到這麼大，所有的科學都沒有離開這條的範圍，因此我認為學習表現要精準一點，學習涵蓋面不宜這麼廣，這是一個非常簡單的邏輯。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "再者，至於中文領域我認為只是表達一種寫法，當寫兩個字的時候，是不是適合如何整理，會讓讀的人知道是在引述前段或者是後段，好比在引述2a－III－1時知道是引述什麼東西，這是一個建議的思考，也不代表一定要這樣做，各領域、各領綱我認為我參加時，我覺得大家很客氣地提出思考，大家覺得如果要這樣寫就這樣寫，該領域的人都同意那就同意。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "就藝術那一條「能探索媒材，進而創造」，我也不是很認同後來的提醒，但我們不太清楚媒材特性，第一個是特性、第二個是技法、第三個是創作，抑或是探索媒材及技法後才創作，這一件事看到是之後的創作，這是兩個角度的看法或者是一個角度的看法？這個是有關於素養的部分。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "我認為工作圈應該不是要去糾正或者是匡正哪一個領域。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "另外，我認為有一點一定要被強調，第102頁第二點，這個學習表現真的太多了，大家怎麼那麼捨不得？" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "最後，還有一個跨領域工作圈的部分，請各位看到第104頁，我建議再釐清一下，我很擔心這個東西送出去，事實上我不是一個很專心、認真的人，我相信比我更認真、專心的人讀這個會很困擾，請看到J44，理解化石燃料與…氣候變遷的關係，通常的人理解是石化燃料，是不是真的有「化石燃料」？" }, { "speaker": "簡菲莉", "speech": "這個是正確的寫法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「化石」包括煤炭。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "其實報紙都是寫石化。我不知道有沒有誤解。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "看到「J45認識產品的生產與消費的生命週期，以及造成資源消耗及環境污染的，能探討其生態足跡、水足跡、及碳足跡」，到底是兩項或者是三項？" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "認識產品的生產與消費週期，以及造成資源消耗及環境污染的什麼東西？這是第二件事。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "還有探討水足跡？哪一個是補充的敘述？" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "請看到 「J46認識及願意雨水收集、再生水利用、節水措施；探討再利用物質的效益，及再生能源發電的優缺點」，我自己讀不懂，我想我讀不懂，別人也一樣會有困擾。如果真的是化石應該有一些註解，我一直強調的是課綱是給一般人讀的，並不是給專家學者讀的。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "接著是認識與願意雨水搜集再生水利用，但認識與願意這兩件事是不同層級，是一件事嗎？是要用兩個動詞或者是一個動詞好？" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "探討再利用物質的效力，及再生能源發電的優缺點是兩件事或者是一件事？通常一個條文當中很喜歡包好幾件事，我不知道是要包幾件事，這樣唸起來也很怪，仔細唸還是很怪，所以我覺得在條文的設計上是不是可以更讓人理解的寫法？這是當時「素養工作圈」在當初在讀學習領域時我不懂的地方，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "統整、議題、素養工作圈是把每一份都看過所提出的建議，今天有三位素養工作圈的委員，你們這只是參考，不一定要改，這個很關鍵。統整工作圈我剛剛有商量那比較是在形式上、規格上及編碼，那就交由國教院來看，不要在編碼或規格上出差錯，那不好；素養工作圈你們的建議參考用，可以嗎？就解決了藝術領域的困擾。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "其實也不適合在今天這邊提，但我現在不說話，下次我沒出席就不能說。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "我剛剛說明的前提是這個任務規格有一個下定，我們是把這個觀點、任務達成，原則上是這樣的話，我們就要盡力朝這個規格，但並不是要百分之強制，這對我來講是可量級，目前用的規格是不是能夠百分之百cover住，從各領域來看是不一定的，當然最簡單的方式就是放開，如果這個可以接受當然就無傷大雅。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "我現在要提的是一個解套方法，可不可以不要說一定是動詞或者是名詞的「鐵規格」，也就是以這個規格為主，但可以容許說明清楚其他格式；第二，我們的學習內容跟學習表現這兩個東西原來是被綁在動詞與名詞上，因此學習內容就會一個很清楚的知識內容，其實學習內容不一定是知識內容，但我看了幾個科技領域都在寫，這東西對誰比較有利？就是對該科或者是該領域知識結構很清楚的，比如自然科或者是數學科，像藝術或者是中文活動就完蛋了，如果要跟知識的話，那學生不知道，好比何謂「印象派」？所以要學知識是不容易的。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "我再舉一個九年一貫的例子，像數學內容是寫數量、代數、集合與圖形空間，但看最後一個，最後一個是連結，連結後面還寫五個，也就是內容當中的最後一項都是動詞，我們把內容不一定要綁死在知識內容還是可以解套，學習的內容是建議，但並沒有匡在學習內容。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "像學習內容的部分我不知道要幹麻，但俊鴻有教我，其實是用認知層次，我們有寫出一覽表，但事實上也沒有寫出幾個動詞，因此要拿出來分，其實是很困難的，我們要看學習表現的事情。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "從文件或者是討論當中我發現有幾個不同的考量：" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "第一，把學習表現當作目標，我要請張武昌來對質，請各位看到第56頁，序號一是為落實英語文教學的重點，達到學習表現指標，如果表現指標達成，顯然是視為目標，不然要達成什麼？所以學生表現有可能被詮釋為目標。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "第二，俊鴻說後面要怎麼評有可能是目標也可能不只是目標，課綱對於後面怎麼評不只是宣示，要如何評的話，要看後面有沒有什麼主張。假設有全國性的機制，比如升學考試，大學比較難搞，也就是升學考試掛著課程一種，在框架下就掛著，本來已經篤定要做這一種事，但現在又不一定了。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "另外一個評量的可能性會不會是在學學生成績考察，如果這幾個可能性能夠盡量是宣示性的東西，這是要考量的，這是量性的評量或者是質性的評量或者是二者之一又或者只有一個，像宣示是兩種，也就是有沒有全國性的機制，又或者我們宣布跟紐西蘭對幹，事實上是只有質性，而沒有量性，所以紐西蘭非常勇猛，如果我們有這一種明確的宣示，就會把學習表現當作目標及評量的依據。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "如果我們評量的主張只有質性，那麼我們的學習表現要好好寫，而且要寫得非常明確且條數少，如果全部採量性，質性放在那裡，只有量性的話，就不用擔心，這一件事不用擔心，九年一貫好幾百條在那裡，後端評量的人其實會在課程標準的後頭另外行程一個標準，也就是評量標準，就把這一件事推開，這樣真的很要不得；如果前面寫得好，後面的平台就會比較省力。後面完全只有數量，前面鬆一點其實無傷大雅，現在要收尾，這是兩個不一樣的考量。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "所以其實條數要盡量少，其實是為了要確保後段，現在少的程序到底是前還是後，我認為不是大問題，只要有個量性的問題在後頭。如果全部是質性評量的話不會有評量標準，這一次國教院承載了一個滿重的責任，也就是把評量那一塊扛起來，我們在考量學習時為了要讓它少，就是可行性，大家每一條都看，看了都懂，所以就再也不要看，這是目前大問題，目前到底要寫幾條是可handle的範圍，他們的條數在每一個領域當中，大概不會超過二十，因為超過的話，我看看的人就會很難規劃，這是以另外一個觀點來推。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "不過，撰寫如何簡化，其實是有一些方法，我們回到剛剛的例子來看，這個完全同意，因為讀懂最重要，都懂最重要是不是要靠撰寫？因為指標是要給老師看，主要掌握的是給老師，因此把指標這部分盡量寫清楚，容許後面有一個收尾的空間。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "比如綜合活動第一條的寫法，我現在看是看到兩對動詞加名詞，但有一個可寫、不寫，好比是增進人際關係，各位知道我的意思嗎？我們在寫的時候，為了要讓它清楚，會加上一些沒有寫沒關係的，那會清楚沒有錯，但說不定搞不清楚，因此我們在考慮的時候，我們在九年一貫的時候是在考慮這一類的，也就是促進終生學習，因此寬廣很重要，但不一定要學習表現上弄出來。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "自然科兩項，我在懷疑問題可能是出在我們是以一個領域來寫，如果用動詞來規劃，其實層次是不一樣的，假定是在初中的階段，我猜應該要繼續往下寫，也許國一至國三要達到哪一個動詞，我以前看九年一貫的東西，一開始我認為是專家亂寫，但後來發現真的沒有亂寫，因此可能必須要在形式上稍微作一些調整，使得後續執行能夠比較往前推，也沒有影響到前面的節奏，我認為還是希望盡量在格式上有一些鬆動，但仍要朝一個評量的方式來進行。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "現在我們要不要照顧到評量？因為素養工作圈會把這個當作評量的指標，如果不照顧到評量，回來就很簡單，第一個是我們的敘述有別的解釋，那就表示學習不清，第二個是我們本來自己的文字不順，像剛剛文虎委員唸了兩個字。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "另外是拿更小的學生讀給他聽，如果他沒有辦法跟著你所讀的複誦，其實就表示這一段文字有問題，這都是我們檢視文字順不順的方式。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "素養工作圈要不要照顧到評量？" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "我們大概沒有什麼機會「不照顧到評量」，因為評量有很多個層次，第一個是學堂當中老師的學堂評量就一定會用到，而且那是學習當中最重要的評量，國內我估計有五成的孩子不需要總結性評量，五成是參加會考是參加假的，但學習每一堂課都是真的，那部分的評量，極少數的老師是用量化的評量，不然都是口頭詢問，但憑什麼認為學得好或不好？必須要有一個規準，這就是我們的學習表現。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "因此當初在設計這個的時候，我今天在總綱討論這個格式的時候，我沒有想到會考或基測的評量，而是老師用這個學習表現來這個課程及表現，才知道這一堂課要把學生送到哪裡去，基於這樣，沒有理由不要學習表現。因此我剛剛說學習表現有很多子項目的時候，就是讓老師不知道這裡面要看哪一項。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "如果迷糊的時候，又不知道到底達標了沒有，這是我們當初在意可不可以敘述稍微清楚一點、目標清楚一點。如果我們沒有改善，依然之後的學生表現是假的，藝術人文領域的問題就不會有問題了，所以剛剛世華教授有提到這一塊，藝術領域有不同的表意，有的領域是偏向一對一，也就是一個學習表現對一個學習內容，就像我今天手上翻到的多對多，好幾條學習表現對好幾條的學習內容，請各位看到第15頁十至十二年級「美 2-V-1，美 A-V-1」是一對一的審美感知，對於隔壁第14頁音樂3－V－1，音樂還是一對多，我只是轉達素養工作圈。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "基本上第13頁都是一對一，同一個領域都有很多不同的寫法，有一對一、一對多及多對一，基本上多對多在跨領域上或者是跨科上比較容易找到一個學習表現，好比音樂學習表現跟視覺學習表現是比較容易看到類似的，而可以跨區的，如果只有一對一，好比第13頁表二的第四階段，如果不搭的話，就沒有辦法去與「在地文化」連結，當初的擔心是這樣而已，如果藝術領域還是可以做得到，那就OK，因此建議一對一是限縮了跟別人融合及結合的可能性。如果覺得OK，我也不認為有問題。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "至於動詞格式的部分，我個人沒有意見，素養工作圈認為好像這是困擾，只要一個規格訂下去就有規格外的，問題是這個規格到底有沒有多數都合用，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "十二年國教推行的未來十年當中，我們應該要假設課程組織模式及現場教學模式會有大規模重新洗牌的現象，不能預期在未來的課程模式與教學模式是過去十年以外插法來延伸。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "其實現在有很多課程的評量假設優先考慮，這個課程是不是只問耕耘不問收獲，是不是有一些課程根本評量就是有概念，決定這個評量對課程來講是正向，才考慮這個評量當中要做量化評量或者是質性評量。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "如果我們作預期，各領域當中有關於跟整個素養的段落大致相似就可以，如果我們定位這個課程的主要任務是要黏合我國課程的意旨區塊，這個段落寫到大致相似就達到目標，如果這個段落當中作一個嚴格的格式化要求，其實會徒勞無功，因為太多鞋，腳伸不進去，包括很多教學模式目前已經在現場發展，並不是用你的角度去思考。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "另外一個就各領域來講是一定程度本質性的差別，數學、科學、社會及語文甚至是使用不同的符號。連這四個區塊都不同的符號，現在卻在格式上要求統一，這真的會跟現場有不合的情況出現。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "課發會管的是大致相似，並不是在講不同的東西，更細緻的格式化，我建議打住就好。" }, { "speaker": "林福來", "speech": "第一，課綱裡面的學習表現我們給它的定位是什麼？大家剛剛在談，我很同意剛剛文虎說的，很多老師是拿在課綱上談我的教學有沒有讓學生可以有這樣的表現，不一定是考試，做一個題目就知道學習的表現。" }, { "speaker": "林福來", "speech": "因此要拉離開這個評量，但是怎麼樣定位的評量，表示整個學習表現其實是水平表現及垂直表現，總結性是垂直性的表現，因此如何描述是有不同的結構，因此我們剛剛講說要很少條的學習表現，我們在想比較上位的結構，當老師看到那個的時候，其實是很難去對，所以在底下一層教書看的是希望比較細一點，也就是看到學生這禮拜的學習是怎麼樣，所以素養這部分應該是有不同結構式的。" }, { "speaker": "林福來", "speech": "第二，到底全部一致性或者是我們有一個怎麼樣的結構性，讓不同學習領域，好比幾十年來的學術理論本身用的動詞都不太一樣，比如我們用學習表現來講，幾個在數學裡面是已經被調整過了，因為很多學生還是用它，但其他學科沒有調整回去，對數學老師、課程使用者反而造成其困難。" }, { "speaker": "林福來", "speech": "因此我們認為希望有學習層次的動詞，但在你的領域用你自己的，而不是全部的素養都是用那幾個字，好比在數學裡面拋出常用的結構，他們就去學，他們認為這幾個就當作一段，因此我們就用這幾個字代表什麼意義，我們都很清楚假設這一些都被調到不同的動詞去。" }, { "speaker": "林福來", "speech": "再者，像剛剛的自然，這可能會對他們是很大的挑戰。比如現在舉的這兩個例子，表示課綱在設計的時候，所謂的學習表現要描述地跟我們原來整個課綱希望呈現的在認知上是有落差的，不管哪一個階段，其實是體質的問題，並不是在於內容的差異，探究活動就是這樣的事情，小學從頭開始這些程序可能都有，只是品質不一樣，品質不一樣不願意用別的動詞來，所以學科本來就有這一些差異，如何容許進來？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "請王委員。" }, { "speaker": "王垠", "speech": "主席，我個人這樣建議，我個人充分理解三個工作圈所提出來的建議，我這邊的想法就這三個工作圈所提出來的建議，想聽聽各個領域召集人對於這一些建議哪些可以接納、哪些不方便接納及目前實質上的困難之想法，課發會委員再作一個綜合性的研判，以上。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "這三個工作圈的報告，因為全部綜整的意見在這邊，接下來我們就看領域的回應了，就不會像這樣的討論，因此這時我們還是要抓一個原則，剛剛羅委員提的是各個領域報告時，三個工作圈的建議，就交給課發委員的判斷，討論是如今天上午的討論。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "幾個重點：" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "第一，數量多：是我們一直在開課發會不斷重複請求各領域有沒有可能條數再刪。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "第二，文字通順：就拿起來朗讀，找五、六年級的同學來朗讀，讀出不同意涵的問題比較嚴重，看看再找不同的老師，是不是接受委員的建議，在我們的程序上，其實我們會需要群組代表作一個報告，作完報告我們就請群組再看看如何回應，接著我們再來判斷。" }, { "speaker": "卓俊辰", "speech": "我針對藝術領域部分來報告，主要有三點：" }, { "speaker": "卓俊辰", "speech": "第一，關於技術型高中部分的時間分配，特別提到「藝術生活科」涵蓋『設計與視覺應用』、『音樂應用』、『表演藝術』三類內容，得視教師資與授課之專長領域，至少擇一類開課。建議以學生需求為第一考量，刪除「得視教師資與授課之專長領域，至少擇一類開課。」委員建議應該要考量學生的需求為第一考量，建議刪除剛剛所提的格式與師資授課專長領域擇一類開課之敘述，建議可以刪除，這是第一個主要的意見。" }, { "speaker": "卓俊辰", "speech": "第二，針對學習內容份量問題，建議領綱小組再審慎考量統整相關的內容，避免有重複地部分，最主要的是在第四次會議，有委員特別提到，尤其是根據原住民教育法的規範，特別提到各級學校課程、教材之文化觀點納入原住民歷史文化與價值觀，增進族群間的瞭解及尊重，主要是這樣的立法參考。委員建議原住民族藝術能不能考量要納入課綱內容或是獨立規劃，有這樣的建議在第四次會議提出參考。" }, { "speaker": "卓俊辰", "speech": "最後，建議在相關的修訂，能夠提供書面的內容，這部分藝術領域在第83頁也提供簡要的書面說明，以上報告，請各位指教，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊花", "speech": "主席、各位委員，針對剛剛卓主任所提的部分，技高的部分會刪除，有關於學習內容份量的部分，我們會持續修，大概是可以再調整。目前就技高來講，學習表現有十五條，學習內容有三十條，但有三個科目，所以基本上來講其實是滿好的。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊花", "speech": "另外，整個國中小、普通高中在學習表現一百條，但有美術、音樂及表演藝術三各類科，所以大概是二十五條左右，我們可以再來看是不是更為精簡。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊花", "speech": "特別感謝文虎委員及歐委員，讓整體上形式結構有一點彈性的可能，特別感謝文虎委員在開會時提供非常寶貴的意見，大家也試著朝跨連結的整合。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊花", "speech": "剛剛聽下來非常能夠理解工作圈其實一個核心的思考，我想書面的東西這麼多的資料，一下子沒有辦法完全能夠掌握藝術領域。雖然我們有各藝術類別，像音樂、美術及表演藝術，但在上層結構就離不開「做」、「看」、「用」，也就是「表現」、「鑑賞」及「實踐」。再依據這樣的共通內涵去發展在音樂表現要有什麼樣的技術能力等等，應該是說在整個內在結構應該可以符合工作圈的一些期待，以上補充，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "就藝術領域課發委員看一看，麻煩你們再翻一下，因為接下來我要問大家一個很重要的問題。是不是可以送課審會？" }, { "speaker": "王垠", "speech": "我延續剛剛的想法，工作圈在時間分配上有兩個建議，我想請教一下校長，我們這樣的建議是不是可以接受？" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊花", "speech": "接受。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "我只有提供一個參考意見，麻煩看到藝術領域第6頁，五到六年紀第二學習階段，我只舉一個例子，我們來看實踐那一欄，一個是藝術參與，第二個是生活應用，藝術參與是3－2－1，生活應用是3－2－2，這兩條中間會畫一條隔線是分數於藝術參與跟生活應用。但這一條線是不是可一比照上一個審美理解，上面的就不要畫了？音樂活動跟音樂會的禮儀為什麼不能用3－2－2，這樣就不會有一對一的問題，畫掉兩條線是不是要畫到藝術參與，這個調整就會變成一對多或者是多對一，而且合理性比較容易解釋，我指的是這樣，可不可以再解釋一下？包括第7頁也是，這樣畫當然容易，但合理性會被質疑，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊花", "speech": "完全理解委員提的，我們團隊會朝這個方向調整。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "有關於藝術領域有沒有建議？藝術領域的小組會把今天的意見帶回去，並且把那一條線給劃掉。是不是可以把藝術領域送課審會？應該這樣問，修改以後，課發委員是不是要再看一次，或者是放心就送到二審？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "也就是群組再開一次會，然後送到課審？可以嗎？那就麻煩藝術領域修改完以後，請群組開一個會再開一次，然後我們就送課審，大家都同意嗎？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "謝謝，辛苦了。大家邊用餐，我們邊往下走。有沒有人反對？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "第二個領域是健康與體育。我跟委員報告一下，說明也可以不要唸，因為提例是一樣的。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我剛剛忘記說，有關於性別議題，改動的字眼，請委員特別看一下，那個是非常有爭議的，不同團體對於名詞的定義，因此允許我在最後的時候看一下議題工作圈。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "請俊鴻老師報告。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "健體領域已經針對公聽會、網路論壇、書面審查及課發會委員的意見作綜整及回應。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "第三點針對8月4日課發會所提的意見及說明，請委員看到附件九第24至第25頁，這是有關於健體領域對課發會委員所提意見的回應。因此有因應時代變化來作文字上的說明及調整，課程目標的部分也改為學生為動詞的使用，並由原來精簡為八條目標。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "動詞已用委員的意見修正。評量的部分也接受委員的意見。原來僅用百分比的方式呈現，現在改為用描述來說明。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "有關於技術型、高中型的我們力求一致，包括會議中有進行討論及協商。健體領域已經跟自然綜合活動領域已經達成溝通領域。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "像排球這是屬於體育的專有名詞，健康與體育的標榜都有兩科的專業考量，並不會影響到後續的教材組織及評量實施，實施要點的部分已經整合必修及選修兩個部分，其他的格式及文字都已經按照委員的意見來修正。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "有關於公聽會、網路論壇、書面審查委員的意見回應請看到議程第84至第85頁，有關於基本理念基本上有作相關文字的書面及調整，議題的文字像並別平等融入到文字的說明當中，課程目標的部分，也進行文字的修正及調整，並減少課程目標的條目數，核心素養的部分也進行文字的修正及調整，扣緊健體與素養間的關聯性。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "健體是公聽會比較關注的問題，像第三個侵入性運動改為攻守入侵性運動，這邊有針對公聽會的意見來回應。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "從第5至12點是有關於性教育的部分，這在公聽會的表達意見比較多，我們也作了比較多的相關修正，用一些比較強烈的用詞，像破除我們該列為因應的用詞，像接納我們改為尊重，其他生理性別有爭議的我們也改為性別多樣性的認識，積極行動我們也改為一般性用詞之行動，其他青少年思考負責任何決定也有作修正。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "第13點是很多中醫的公聽會出席代表，希望能夠融入中醫養生的部分，所以我們也新增傳統醫學的養生之道。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "第14點也增加懷孕、受孕及哺乳等。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "第85頁的跨性別一詞在公聽會也有很多的爭議，改為性別的認識與尊重。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "第16點是關於照顧。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "第86頁我們在相關的回應當中有作一些說明，像體適能的部分，我們建議從第二階段才開始，這並無不妥，健康教育根據WHO（世界衛生組織），那個字要改為大寫。因此我們要建議原來一些相關的分類，因此這是有關於相關沒有配合修正的說明，這是有關於十二年國教國民小學、國民中學及高中的說明，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "施登堯", "speech": "因為時間已經很長，我就不特別作報告。" }, { "speaker": "施登堯", "speech": "因為四場公聽會我都有參加，每一個細部的聲音我都有聽到，技術型高中在我們這一次改變最主要的目的是希望跟普通高中儘量一致，生活領域的課程之健體領域可以統一起來，俊鴻所說的部分也就是技術型高中所做的方向，這一次公聽會大部分的提問有很多不是跟課綱有相關，而是屬於後面的配套措施。" }, { "speaker": "施登堯", "speech": "剛剛洪主任也有提到將來在協作中心處理，我現在比較擔憂的是有兩個部分現在沒有很明確排進去，就是未來課程發展手冊的具體模板及將來續行方向，這是比較能夠務實基層領域與教科書商的部分，今天還沒有很明確聽到工作時程。" }, { "speaker": "施登堯", "speech": "另外一個是主任有提到我們已經有考招及協作，我記得教育部有另外做一個評量，我記得還沒有明確的部分，有關於課綱的部分，我們幾乎都已經處理掉了。" }, { "speaker": "施登堯", "speech": "這一次比較大的衝突是性別議題的部分，因為過去以來少數民間團體主導整個性別議題的用字及方向，課綱的領域我還是會建議以教育導向為主，儘量不要以少數性別團體造成比較多的社會運動影響學校及內部，這一次是家長團體反應非常強烈，我認為如果沒有問題的話，建請課發會委員能夠讓這個案子趕快通過進入課審會的程序。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "請卓委員。" }, { "speaker": "卓俊辰", "speech": "第三群組第四次的會議，針對健體領域部分所提供的意見達成共識部分，第一個是建議基本理念敘述方式，建議能夠作調整，尤其是在總結的部分，不太適合以舉例方式敘述，此為第一點建議。" }, { "speaker": "卓俊辰", "speech": "第二，有關於課程目標部分，建議能簡化，尤其普高與技高二部分能夠做一些一致性的整合。" }, { "speaker": "卓俊辰", "speech": "第三與第四，特別針對外界的回應希望能夠檢視並增補一些回應的內容，有任何修訂也能夠提供書面說明。" }, { "speaker": "卓俊辰", "speech": "第五，有關於跨領域的部分，就等跨領域小組研議提供意見後，再請領綱小組參考修訂。" }, { "speaker": "卓俊辰", "speech": "最後一點，針對高中選修課程規劃部分，關於呈現方式及編排位置，建議能夠跟其他領域一致，委員也建議這部分是不是考量可以納入課程手冊的範疇呈現，以上報告。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "有沒有回應？" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "第81頁的基本理念我們會按照委員的建議來修正，有關於課程目標或者是課綱內容可以儘量普高與技高一致的方向來研議。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "有關於公聽會的意見，我們絕大部分都已經回應了，少數部分我們在13日健體大會當中會作一個確認、補充回應及說明。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "第86頁提供給各學校課程及規劃，在13日的健體大會也會研議。朝向把多元選修的課程名稱放在時間分配及科目組合文字的敘述當中，具體多元選修課綱的內容，這放在未來的健體的課程手冊當中呈現，所以這部分我們會在13日的健體大會當中處理，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "有沒有委員有建議？" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "大家好。" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "我現在看到的是技高的部分，請各位委員翻到會議資料第90頁「■融入學習內容：C-V-6 針對遭受性騷擾與性害被害人倡議關懷行動。」這是技高的部分，健康與護理這邊有很多議題融入的部分，我看到有很多將學習主題融入實施要點，但後面的說明其實是空白的，後面沒有勾選也沒有說明如何改，人權的部分是建議將下列學習主題融入實施要點，但我看到後面的融入說明是融入學習內容，而且跨性別的認識與尊重不是性平嗎？怎麼感覺前面講人權，後面講性平，內容不是很一致。" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "請各位委員翻到粉紅色公聽會這一本，我看到了技高的部分，大家從後面翻比較容易，請看到技高的第30頁，這是有關於研修說明，讓大家瞭解到底修改什麼。第30頁一樣是很多欄位，前面有建議但後面都沒有說明。" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "包括第31頁環境教育、海洋教育的說明都是空白的，如果覺得不適宜把它融入實施要點的話，是不是可以加上無法融入或者是無法調整的原因，這樣大家比較容易接受為何是空白的，因此建議不要有空白。" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "第32頁也是有三個大欄位是空白的。" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "第33頁我還滿建議，如果有融入的話，第33頁體育的部分就有把融入實施要點當中如何寫的，把它特別用粗體字框出來有寫進去、寫在哪裡，這是給領綱的建議，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "施登堯", "speech": "完全支持想法，我會回去協調，我想應該是誤解了，如果我們找得到融入再來寫，而且要寫清楚到底如何融入，所以莊委員才會提到體育，剛開始我們找不到，後來我們送外審的時候，有一個外審的審查委員提審我們現在在作業的內容是可以融入的，因此我們融入之後做一個說明，我想莊委員對這樣的方式比較容易接受，我再跟老師說明一下，希望健護跟體育的方式是一樣的，如果萬一真的找不到就直接寫「無法融入」即可。" }, { "speaker": "簡菲莉", "speech": "比如建護可能會排不進去，有時候可能開在高一、高二等等都有，事實上很多必修都被擠壓，沒有辦法上完，而最後高三才上必修，我想請教的是到底有沒有問題？但我真的必須提醒健護沒有辦法排進去高一，如果現場老師有這個疑問的時候，我該怎麼處理？" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "請看到第3頁，我們有作一些時間分配跟組合的說明，有關於固定必修健康與護理的兩個學分是建議高一上下學期排課，因為下面有一個跨科六選修的健康與體育的課程模組，按照這樣子的循序漸進的原理，應該是說先上完兩個學分的健康與護理的必修課程，有興趣再加選。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "像安全教育與災害防護與健康休閑跨科目的選修學分，目前健康與護理學科中心的調查，基本上目前大部分的高中開在高一比較多，因此有關於這樣的問題討論，建議在高一當中開設，若有什麼樣子問題，我們可以做一些調配，因為我們這邊只是寫「建議」，如果開在高二或者是高三，可能要思考後面的六個選修學分要如何搭配。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "簡委員的意思是現行就已經排不進去，所以你們的建議是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "簡菲莉", "speech": "比如生活、科技、家政都通通排在高一，所以高一其實是排不進去的。會產生一個矛盾，如果排在必修的話，家政要怎麼排，或者是從領綱裡面即便還沒有修過必修，但可以先修選修，可以嗎？我的意思是這樣。會不會有錯置的問題？基本能力還沒有學好就加深、加廣？" }, { "speaker": "施登堯", "speech": "技術型高中是沒有選修的，所以完全沒有這個問題，但十二年一貫一開始就提這個問題，也就是我們如果有三個科目六個學分可以選，如果我們不是被排在第一年的話，後面這一些根本就不可能有邏輯性的情況，課綱小組就認為用建議好了，也不能規範學校一定要強制這樣排。" }, { "speaker": "施登堯", "speech": "就現在學校高中學分制，他們對於排課的邏輯，我想會有很大的調整，我的建議是說如果我們的選修當時設定是要加深加廣，我們就一定要有一個機制要讓它的必修排在前面一點，這個機制是課綱可以處理的，這樣會不會造成學校很大的困擾，因為一開始學校要排進去就要塞兩學分，那就要調動，會影響到學校的發展，因此學科會有很嚴重的爭吵。" }, { "speaker": "施登堯", "speech": "也許選修科目跟必修科目不要有加深、加廣的聯繫，偏向於學校能夠自行開課的規劃，而且現在的內容都要放在附錄去，因此這部分課綱小組不一定要做那麼有學科連貫性的說法。" }, { "speaker": "簡菲莉", "speech": "是不是一定要切開來？" }, { "speaker": "施登堯", "speech": "對，這樣對學校也比較好，像學校是不是有這種師資的時候，可行性也會比較高。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "接著是課程手冊的發展，會另組一個課程計畫，會由領綱委員為一個工作團隊、工作計畫，將領綱當中必須要說清楚、講明白解釋，到底這個領綱的特色是什麼等等，相關的模組包含哪一些，我們現在已經正在建置當中，應該是在1月會召開領域聯席會確定。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "手冊當中也會對於學校開課一些比較原則性的釋例，例如加深、加廣的選修，學校可以如何配搭，可以提供一些參考的原則讓學校參考。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "接著是有關於健體的部分，在8月3日、4日課發會當中就已經提出來，希望能夠做一個領域課程架構統整健康與體育。也就是說，在現行的普通性型高中與國中、小於第22頁中有十六個類別，在學習的內容有十六個主題，建議要能夠再統整，以現行的九年一貫，其實分段能力指標總共只有七個類別而已，但研修出來光是第一學期階段，以學習內容為例，我有精算過，第一學習階段在第23頁總共有六十三條的學習內容，但在九年一貫的第一學期階段的能力指標總共是三十三條，換言之是double，太多了。我想請問為什麼沒有辦法統整？第63條放在一、二年級真的有辦法上完嗎？這要如何解決？" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "第二，想提出有關於實施要點，請看到實施要點的撰寫，我們可以看到第50頁，可以看到先談健康教育，再談體育，整體是寫健康與體育，但現在發展出來的感覺是分兩科寫，有沒有可能在實施要點當中用整體寫，除非有這一個科目，也就是共同先寫完，如果有因為科目真的有非常不同需求，後面再稍微寫，也就是在健康教育要注意什麼、體育要注意什麼，例如在教材上的不同。現在的序寫方式我感覺就是兩科加起來，因此想要請教與希望能夠再整合的。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "第三，附錄三是多元選修提供的整個課程綱要，在模板當中我們是提供多元選修，也就是學校研發課程的權責，我們真的要提供，希望建議參考如數學，其實在課程發展段，就會是多元選修要開設什麼，有哪一些性向或者是需求的學生來修習，就只有科目名稱的建議，並不會有課程綱要，因此建議要刪除附錄三，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "有關於主任的建議我作一些回應，如果健康教育的表現基本上是八類別，體育也是八類別，比較多的是健康教育學習內容的十項主題，這也是有經過健體大會的討論，像食安問題、青少年性教育問題、吸毒問題，為了法令健體領綱的需求，因此把健康教育的內容分為十個主題，比如衛生組織相關的文獻來看，基本上是有理論的依據。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "有關於體育基本上是八大類，有沒有統整基本上會反應在健體的教材，表現及內容會作所謂跨科的對應，也就是統整健體的教材，這是我們的思維，即有關於統整的部分會反應在教材及教科書的內容。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "如果領綱沒有統整，不能叫教科書商幫你統整，因為現在很方便分科撰寫，剛剛委員提出來，所以他們是不可能做這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "一開始是用領域的方式在撰寫。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "其實裡面有很多是很相近的，是不是相近就寫成一樣，下面再說健康的特色是什麼，體育的特色。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "請委員看到第50、51頁的部分，有關於發展原則，這部分基本上都是用領域的架構在寫，到第51頁第2、3點才是分割，因此那時候有關於實施要點的寫法一開始就一起寫，是以領域的架構來寫，到後面的第2點、第3點才用分割的方式寫，如果教材編選或者是實施會再特別寫，不然就一起寫，因此我們有領域的實施要點及分割的實施要點，分割的撰寫是為了補充實施要點的不足才撰寫。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "有關於第79頁的部分我剛剛已經有報告過，有關於附錄三的部分，我們會在13日的健體大會思考，現在把科目的名稱直接分類，有關於附錄三課程綱要的內涵會放在健體的課程當中。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我們公聽會第42頁提到教學準備，健康教育下面第2點寫的是體育教學實施是一模一樣，這與你剛剛講你們會把共同的寫在一起再分是很不一樣的，幾乎每一頁都可以看得到你們把健康跟體育分開的。課發委員拜託你們務必融合，因為這是一個領域。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "粉紅色是公聽會的版本。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "九年一貫就已經融合了，不能到這邊又拆了。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "有關於教學實施的部分，如果是以11月20日的版本，如果可以整併我們就盡量整併在教學領域的實施下修正。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "項目上沒有辦法再刪減嗎？" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "有關於主題及類別，像外界有很多聲音，比如性教育、食安問題及毒品問題，如果再刪的話，外界會反應為什麼少了這一些，因此在所謂公共的意見及精簡關於健體的內容中必須取得一個平很，因為外界很多都會提到與健體領綱有關係，如果再刪的話，會認為怎麼又刪這個跟那個，因此我們在多跟少間謀求一個最好的平衡。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "你們跟綜合活動也會有很高的重疊嗎？像食安那一塊？你有無跟綜合活動討論過？" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "有開會過有關於食品食物的一些營養問題。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "有關於性別平等的部分，有沒有跟議題工作圈的用詞一樣？" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "我們內部有先針對性教育的部分作修改，未來跟性別議題作橫向的聯繫，然後再取得裡面用詞的一致性。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "有關於健體這個領域，委員有沒有意見？" }, { "speaker": "謝金城", "speech": "公聽會那一天我也在現場，確實很多單位也堅持他們的意，如果每一個意見都納進來內容非常多，不納進來又擔心他們有什麼意見。" }, { "speaker": "謝金城", "speech": "我現在有一個問題要請教一下，也就是在第五學習階段的學習內容有關於性教育的部分，在粉紅色公聽會這一本第33頁，C－V－12「色情媒體的識讀與批判」，有關於在健體這一本第二版第45頁性教育部分，「C－V－11媒體性訊息判讀批判」，哪一個是我們要的？「色情媒體」我覺得非常不適當，原來的是媒體性訊息判讀批判，我覺得比較適合。" }, { "speaker": "謝金城", "speech": "請看到公聽會第30頁，這裡有一個性別平等教育，內容是解構社會文化內容與影響，融入學習課程當中C－V－10，色情媒體的釋讀與批判，一個是C－V－11、一個是C－V－12，現在又是C－V－10，是不是編號有問題？我認為用「色情媒體」在教科書是不應該，而且「色情媒體」也不會界定是「色情媒體」，所以是不是要刪除這個詞？" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "粉紅色公聽會的版本，白色是修改後的版本，因此在健體領域已經沒有「色情媒體」的批判。我們已經改成白色這一本第45頁，已經改成「C-V-11 媒體性訊息的拒絕與批判」。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "因此「色情」已經不見了。我們會跟著改，以後不會有色情媒體這四個字。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "我們常常回應各界的關心，因此我要更應該宣示這一次課綱在統整上的努力，如果可能的話，是否能在學習表現中的類別，既然叫「別」，那就表示有可區隔性，我們能否都把知識一類、技術一類、態度一類，再從態度推出學習表現？學習內容其實也可以參考現行課程綱要，為什麼學習課程的學習內容有辦法分幾類，像高中的教材綱要只有六、七類；換言之，還是希望能夠再統整，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "請看到第8頁，第8頁已經有作學習表現的統整，這邊會寫認知○等四面向，在表現當中有根據委員意見作一些分類及統整。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "有關於學習內容部分的意見，我會帶回去跟各位委員討論，看有沒有辦法再做一些精簡及整併的工作，比如像有委員提到藥物教育、人與食物，就健康教育的專業已經有提出，就他們來講食物與藥物是不同的概念，是不同的相關用詞，因此有討論到人與食物、藥物要不要整併，委員的意見不要整併，如果整併會影響到後來的教材，他們認為兩個概念不能混淆。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "有關於委員的意見我會帶回去，再看看有沒有再就學習內容整併可能性的存在。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "討論可不可告一個段落？可以的話，要請委員表達一下有關於健體修改，修改完了還是要拜託第三群組開會，程序走過後是不是可以送課審會？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "比較有保留喔！我想多項目及健康體育如何讓人家更看得到是一個領域非常需要這部分領域的老師、專家及學者再努力。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "委員是不是覺得還不是送課審會的時機？今天課發會沒有推薦健體送課審會，需要再修，我們下一次再開會，再看健體，非常謝謝健體的代表與委員，我們知道感受不好，但我們真的希望可以再處理，謝謝施老師、俊鴻等。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "接下來是有關於科技。" }, { "speaker": "李德財", "speech": "我想報告一下，有關於公聽會、網路論壇及委員意見都有回應，都在附件7－1，總共有五十多頁，我想就不一一說，有關於短語關係的建議，如果能夠納入就納入，不能納入我們就做一個說明，能納入的部分是有老師關心，科技領域的部分，國小是沒有課程的，所以他們認為七至九年級的學生會有銜接的問題，因此就資訊領域的部分我們有做一些調整，這個是比較大的調整，我想內容不能調整大家也有看過，也就是這樣作可能會比較順暢。" }, { "speaker": "李德財", "speech": "另外，大家關心另外一件事，也就是關於資訊領域，像我剛剛講過課綱，課綱做好之後要落實，也就是大家碰到的問題，剛剛有提到師資的問題、學生程式設計及英文網頁閱讀的問題，還有希望把藝術加進來放到內容的部分，我們領綱小組在討論過程當中，我們希望在高中階段有兩個學分，生活科技與資訊科技各兩個學分，這兩個學分已經不那麼多，又把藝術內容加進來的話，可能有它的困難，因此我們認為就實施重點的部分有提到科技領域的教學內容是「以數學、科學及社會等作為橫向聯繫，能夠透過藝術領域…」，也就是透過實作的關係，由現場的教師有藝術能力、音樂能力等納入到實作的過程中，能夠讓學生有藝術方面的素養，這是最多的要求，可能課綱上沒有辦法納入，這是我想在這裡回應。" }, { "speaker": "李德財", "speech": "剛剛有提到資訊教育及生活教育有意見，說法律違反了剛剛的規定，我們認為制度是不一樣的，資訊教育本來就沒有這樣一個科，所以我想我們希望本來就有資訊教育的教科書，希望本來就分開來，我現在也一直鼓勵大學教授開始寫資訊教育方面的教科書。" }, { "speaker": "李德財", "speech": "剛剛方委員提到師資培育的問題，我們也希望利用大學教授、研究生的能力來參與師資培育的部分，上次處理資訊教育提出時，我也跟部長作這樣的建議，也就是現在大學班有試辦師資教育的培育計畫，像中興大學就有試辦。" }, { "speaker": "李德財", "speech": "另外，有關於設備問題就不是課綱來做，是由教育部來作，是不是能把BYOD納進到課綱裡？" }, { "speaker": "李德財", "speech": "關於在教學實施中，把 Art 加到 STEM 裡成為 STEAM 的討論，目前的規劃是不是課發委員能認同？" }, { "speaker": "李德財", "speech": "這是我們簡短報告，不知道技術型高中有沒有要說明？" }, { "speaker": "游光昭", "speech": "技術領域有四學分，資訊和生活科技各兩學分，跟普高一樣。因為兩邊課綱的人員基本上是大致重疊，我們把課綱基本上往技術高中時是比較偏技術實用性的內容多一些，少一些比較理論性，因為我們把課程定位訂在科技素養，18歲應該要有的素養，所以兩邊的架構是一樣的。" }, { "speaker": "游光昭", "speech": "在這樣的架構下，因為技術型高中額外有開過三次外審會議，所以我印象當中有超過四十人次的意見審查，裡面有一半是技職高中的老師，所以內容基本上大家都沒有問題，因此在公聽會的時候，我們的意見是非常少，我們一起辦公聽，大部分都辦在高中的部分，技術高中基本上沒有什麼意見。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "有關於第二群組，可以看到第126頁有共識的議題，我很快唸一下。" }, { "speaker": "書面報告", "speech": "一、普通型：" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我記得召集人都回應這一些議題，課發委員關於這一些領域有沒有什麼意見？" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "剛剛提到高中缺設備，是缺什麼性質的設備？" }, { "speaker": "游光昭", "speech": "我們現在不管是資訊科技或者是生活科技，資訊科技相對單純是需要電腦及周邊的設備，現在設備的規劃是朝有一點類似像我們剛剛講的簡單工具做一些創意設計，這在國中及高中都是相對缺乏的。" }, { "speaker": "游光昭", "speech": "尤其是高中必須要有多一點工程的時候，需要的基本設備會比高中多一點精密的設備，這在高中是沒有的，因此深度稍微多一點，因為不可能太多，但國中目前是完全空白的，高中雖然有一點，但比照國中部分要深一點，因此相對來講是需要多一點的。" }, { "speaker": "林福來", "speech": "我記得上一次第二群組在開會時給的建議，那一天希望就綠色那一本第5頁空白的地方填一些東西，也就是真正把生活科技、資訊科技及藝術美學做一些結合，至少在欣賞階段。" }, { "speaker": "林福來", "speech": "比如每一次出產的手機大家都在看顏色，美學已經結合在每一天的生活中，如果寫上只是把物件拿出來鑑賞，基本上不會增加太多的負擔，若提到課綱來，學生知道生活科技也可以往設計的方向走，而不是只是在做一些硬的東西。" }, { "speaker": "李德財", "speech": "謝謝林委員的建議，我們要把STEAM放Art在裡面的時候，對我們來講是相當沉重，因此內容的部分我們不能再往Art進去，但在實作美學的部分是可以納入實作內容，在空白比較不好的話，我們再把它加回去，再把內容修正，像網頁設計的美感等等，就內容的部分我們會再修正，這部分如果要的話，我們會再補。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "因為工程很大，如果說整個工程…" }, { "speaker": "游光昭", "speech": "我們在桌上型很多的機具大概國中的部分就類似，因為高中的課程裡面並沒有一個可以銜接大學的工程，高中所需要的是工程機具操作使用需要比較精準，而是要製作比較精準的，並不會因為手動操作工程設計上的誤差，所以類似像3D印表機，或者切割上比較好一點的機器是需要的，這一、兩台是可以的，但基本上跟國中比較基本的桌上型的簡單空間需要的機器之配備是一樣的。" }, { "speaker": "方新舟", "speech": "其實我們每一個禮拜有6萬多個學生在使用，大部分使用的方式是把學生帶到電腦教室裡面去，實際上與上課的情境是脫節的，老師在上課的時候，必須要把學生帶到電腦教室裡面去，這對老師上課影響很大。" }, { "speaker": "方新舟", "speech": "第二，有關於很多的行動載具，不管是平板電腦或者是ChromeBook也好，學校接外面網路頻寬不夠，內部無限或者是對外的頻寬都必須要升級，這通常不是學校本身能夠做的事情，二十一世紀假設往後十年都要用到，政府要思考要多大的投資，否則他們一定要到電腦教室才能用電腦，其實是無法跟數學課或者是物理課，又或者國文、中文與英文的連結在一起，因此是無法把科技融入在教育當中，因此上位思考的投資很大，但也是我們必須一定要突破的一點。" }, { "speaker": "方新舟", "speech": "第二，實施要點有提到要培養讓學生有閱讀的素養，我有提到是不是把國外學習很好的coding的網站定義下去，以臺灣軟體的實力來說，不可能再自己創造一個類似的網站出來，如果自己做不出來或者是勉強要去做，但又做不好，其實對學生的學習是不好的，因此我們直接指明用國外的網站，唯一的直接障礙是英語，我覺得可以直接比較有效，這要再講清楚一點。" }, { "speaker": "李德財", "speech": "上位思考我想提一個範圍參考，我在大學，學校要做無限設施的點就要1、200萬，全國要做的時候，這個經費是相當高及可觀的經費，每一個人若要有一個平板及電腦，因為還有偏向學校的部分，這是相當困難的事情，因此針對這一件事，我認為跟大學有某一種合作的話，當然移到別的地方去是有困難，但我覺得至少是有這麼一個短期的解決方式。" }, { "speaker": "李德財", "speech": "現在不是很清楚這個做法是否可行，因為那一些英文網站也不見得是永久的，因此我會建議在課程手冊時是不是有放出來，因此我相信提供幾個英文網站可以給學生參考，因此我認為可以併行，因此我認為提供一個計畫給教育部參考，也就是給計畫讓這些專業人員來作中文、英文同時進行，讓學生可以加強中文與英文，並不是放在實施要點，不過不知道方委員能不能接受，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "如果是3D印表機的部分，有自由硬體，也就是設計圖已經上網公開，另一種是商業的。如果自由硬體跟3D印表機在2萬元左右，這個是沒有問題的，這個事情跟另外一個是有關的，如果設備比較缺乏，若可以鼓勵自由硬體，那問題就會大很多，所以在課綱實施要點的人要不要去稍微提一下？" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "第二，臺灣學術網路當作學校裡面上網基礎的頻寬完全不可行，並不是10Mbps或者是100Mbps的問題，而是中、小學的網路跟大學是連在一起，常常區的管理中心就是大學，大學的環境是這樣子，大學的環境是今天的一個伺服器亂篡。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "第三，因為需要有設備沒有用處，因此如果現在要以網路作基礎，不然就把中、小學切開，否則另外想辦法，尤其教學這個東西，如果一上課的穩定性是很重要的，很可能不穩定就再調一下，一堂課就少了1/3，數位學習是載具的問題，都會區的高中學生都有數位載具，政府要不要把精神放在偏遠地區學生就數位載具的共用？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "對於科技領域有沒有什麼意見？" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "請大家看到公聽會這一本草案大概1/3的第8頁。" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "我這邊看到的是學習表現的編碼，已經把生活科技跟資訊科技就像健體一樣壁壘分明完全劃開，我認為科技要完全融合，所以這是不是可以稍微融合一下？" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "第二，學習表現的編碼，其實所有領域的編碼只要是學習表現第一碼就是數字，學習內容第一碼才會是英文，這邊用英文就會讓人家誤以為是學習內容，所以是不是可以把K、A改成數字1、2、3、4？" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "第三，所有學習領域跟編碼都沒有畫線，而只有畫一橫，其實是沒有必要把它拆開的。" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "第四，學習領域在後面的文字之後再加第二層的說明，所以第二層的說明比如第9頁是科技的起源與演進，後面有講到科技的產品、本質等，這要再詳細說明，可不可以用附錄的方式或者是其他課程手冊或文件來說明，不要在課綱裡面說得這麼細。" }, { "speaker": "林哲立", "speech": "關於編碼的部分我們是用小寫的部分來寫，這個是跟課綱的部分一樣。另外，是不是有提到第二層次的問題，我們之前在公聽會或者是群組會議的委員有提到我們寫的內容比較簡略，所以我們才加上去，因為我們的大項其實已經非常粗略，如果照這樣下去，這其實還不夠明確，所以後來我們就依照委員的建議加第二層，能夠讓定義更清楚，這個是有關於生活科技、資訊科技就這部分的序寫方式，我們在領域間是用學科的方式來統整，學門是有各自獨立的知識架構在，我們認為這與健體的狀況是不大一樣，統整的方式是有關於加深、加廣的方式，或者是用校定的必、選修來統整。" }, { "speaker": "李德財", "speech": "我想很多的學習內容沒有必要一定要統整在一起，每一個領域不一定要把生活科技跟資訊科技合在一起，這是我的看法。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "第一，普通型跟技術型高中在國小跟國中階段寫的內容不一樣，建議可以寫一樣。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "第二，國中、小及普通型高中，第44頁三到六年級是用彈性課程已經明顯違反到總綱對於彈性課程的規劃，所以建議把它刪除，或者如果真的要寫就回到符合總綱的規劃範疇中。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "第三，附錄四的雙向細目表，這個是給教課書未來自己要編的雙向細目表，這不是我們來編，因此附錄四的部分，如果可以的話把它刪除。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "可不可以送課審會？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "謝謝你們點頭，修過後，請第二群組委員參與後修正，然後再送。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "接著是全民國防教育。" }, { "speaker": "曾世杰", "speech": "全民國防教育，我們就援上例不逐字唸文字，我們一開始請領綱研修小組進行研修說明。一定要清楚指到你說的地方在哪裡。" }, { "speaker": "李德財", "speech": "各位委員可以拿到草案第四版的部分，這裡有提出一個意見是希望回到學生的學習上，基本上我們對於學生全民國防的部分，未來的目標是培養學生對國家的責任感，還有未來職業的傾向部分可以有哪一些職業的需求，像國防人才、國防建設的部分，這部分我們有新增進去，也就是可以對未來職業的部分。" }, { "speaker": "李德財", "speech": "因為有委員說希望我們在基本理念的時候沒有回應到，所以我們加了自主行動、溝通互動及社會核心素養，這是要引起學生的動機，這是自主行動的部分，透過討論互動的部分來增進，這部分都是按照委員的意見來進行修改。" }, { "speaker": "李德財", "speech": "第2頁是領域核心素養，A1是核心素質與精進，第3行的地方我們原本是說讓學生可以規劃國防事務，但在研討的過程中，我們認為讓高中生規劃有一點難度，只要可以參與一些國防事務就好，因此原先的規劃我們改為參與國防事務。E3有關於藝術涵養及美感涵養部分，大概是軍火或者是軍化有一些歷史上的文字部分，委員覺得這只是其中的一小部分，所以我們只放在一些內容的說明裡面，直接補述可以用軍歌的部分，或者是帶到軍史館參觀。再者是全C－1，也就是公民意識的部分，這部分也是新增的。全C－U－2，原先的寫法是先從全面總綱的部分改寫，委員也希望我們修正，於是在C2的部分把全民國防最重要的部分動員跟災害的部分放進來，因此在核心素養的部分大概有這四項。" }, { "speaker": "李德財", "speech": "第5頁修改的內容比較多，包含主題C，全民國防的實踐經驗，原本是國民維護的安全作為，有委員提到希望更有國際性，因此我們改寫是「各國體現全民的…作跨國比較」。主題D有很多委員提到兩岸關係的安全情勢是不是要特別提出來，基於兩岸關係是特別的，所以我們還是把兩岸關係的部分保留。主題F，其中有提到不對稱的部分，這部分我們已經移到附錄的部分，因為有一些委員認為不對稱的部分可能對於學生來講比較難，因此我們移到後面的說明。原本還有第三項是訂立制度跟人才招募，這已經改到F－J－2，因此人才招募的部分會就這部分提及，因此會簡要。軍備與國防科技的部分，過去有介紹武器及軍購是分開來講，現在是在J－V－1把武器的介紹及發展就會包含到軍火的部分，也就是武器及軍購是一起的。" }, { "speaker": "李德財", "speech": "接著是要不要把災害防救放在前面或者是防衛動員的部分，有委員認為後者範圍比較大，所以在災害防救是平時的動員，因此我們把防衛動員放在前面，因此這兩個位置有調換。大概在學習的內容部分報告到此。" }, { "speaker": "李德財", "speech": "接著是教學支援與設備，也就是國防部及國防教育單位依本實施是新增的，如果國防部有一些支援寫進來會比較方便。整個修訂的內容包含這幾項，再請各位委員討論，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "請看到議程第126頁，針對達成共識的部分，全民國防第二群組要修改核心素養，要讓它更有實踐性。第三個已經修改並回應了。第四個是考量未教官要從校園退出，所以教官的用詞將修改為教師。高級中等學校應鼓勵中等教師專業對話，在討論的議題或建議，我剛剛已經很仔細聽了，其實都已經根據這個學習內容有回應了，我就不再回應，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "孫明霞", "speech": "剛剛是不是有回應到群組會議待討論決議的事情？我看了剛剛第四版並沒有回應，是不是說這一個版本？這個版本並沒有回應，是不是要說明一下？" }, { "speaker": "孫明霞", "speech": "請注意一下第129頁共識第5點，裡面有漏兩個字。" }, { "speaker": "孫明霞", "speech": "高級中等學校應鼓勵教師(官)成立專業社群、「全民國防教育」教學研究會或課程小組，促進教學專業對話。" }, { "speaker": "孫明霞", "speech": "這是第一個要修訂的。" }, { "speaker": "孫明霞", "speech": "第二，我們待討論的議題及建議給他們研發小組了嗎？給的是第四版本。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "第四版本跟群組是同一個版本。" }, { "speaker": "孫明霞", "speech": "我不曉得回應的有沒有意見？假設沒有意見的話，我要再修訂一下。請看到第130頁第7點，附錄三的全民國防教育必修學習內容的說明，那個內容的說明與前面的修訂並沒有配合起來。" }, { "speaker": "孫明霞", "speech": "例如：「全民國防教育必修學習內容說明-國防政策與國家軍隊」主題，內容提及參考最新版國防報告書，恐將使教科書出版商於不了解主題規劃立意情形下，將該報告書內容全部納入，造成教學與學習上之困難，建議弱化此部分之描述。" }, { "speaker": "孫明霞", "speech": "另外「不對稱作戰」因涉及國防思維之主軸與核心，建議予以保留。" }, { "speaker": "孫明霞", "speech": "以上是根據我們那一天討論的，有沒有意見？" }, { "speaker": "吳文龍", "speech": "應該就是照修訂的意見。" }, { "speaker": "孫明霞", "speech": "如果照修訂的意見改，我就沒有意見。" }, { "speaker": "吳文龍", "speech": "目前我們的寫法是以教官（師），我們希望兩種身分，如果有受過一般的就可以上課，但目前其實現實上都是教官在上，但教官的學分是不夠，所以目前並沒有老師的身分，我們目前就會用教官（老師），也許教官退出之後，就可以把教官的部分改成老師，但現階段以教官為主。" }, { "speaker": "吳文龍", "speech": "公聽會我們是用「教官（師）」，如果我們把教官拿掉，就變成只有「教師」，我們當心這部分會有反彈的聲音出現。" }, { "speaker": "吳文龍", "speech": "如果以後教官退出校園的話，我們還是可以做一些刪訂？" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "那一天的說法有跟我解釋過，但你們那一天有說要溝通，按目前教育部跟立法院的決議是教官八年要退出校園，課綱這樣寫，變成教官必須留在校園的理由，本來已經講好了，但還沒有改課綱，所以課綱規定要留下來，變成這種局面，你們說教官退出校園的時候由教師來授課，而不是這一次課綱修訂變成為教官要永遠留在校園的理由，因為你會後有答應我修正到這個程度，今天又退一步，我覺得這會變成教官永遠留在校園的理由，再三思，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "林福來", "speech": "我想這個是丁志仁委員的意見，我很清楚說要把「官」字拿掉，你說現在是完全沒有按照當時的意見修訂，想一想變成這個是主要的議題，透過的課綱的公布，變成教官留在學校，相當棘手。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為那一場會議我沒有去，有一個建議是我們可不可以反過來寫，也就是「教師（官）」，加一個逗號或者是註解去說這個是在教官還沒有退出校園的時候適用。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在中文當中，括弧表示可以選用的名詞，也就是寫成「教師（官）」。" }, { "speaker": "曾世杰", "speech": "非常認同，我們可以用附註說明來解釋教官還在的時候使用。" }, { "speaker": "林福來", "speech": "從初中到高中的時候，當有第一次課程出來的時候，總是有很多過渡，如果把「官」留與不留，其實這一些教官我們也希望上這一些課，等於可以讓這一些教師有什麼資格，且有配套因應，並不是說讓這一些人有教師資格就直接上臺，我認為不太合適，這是比較積極的。" }, { "speaker": "曾世杰", "speech": "對唐委員的建議是否贊成？" }, { "speaker": "林福來", "speech": "我覺得就是「教師」，有責任趕快幫他們辦在職進修，趕快上課。" }, { "speaker": "吳文龍", "speech": "他們本來就有修教育學分，但數量不夠，所以不能稱為正式老師，為什麼修的學分不夠，而不能變成正式老師，這是有背後歷史的因素，他們的確是有上一些軍訓的學分，因此改成教師（官），這部分如果可以接受，因為這是比較文字上的修改，看各位委員能不能接受？我覺得主要還是整個內容的架構是否合適。" }, { "speaker": "林福來", "speech": "我覺得這個是社會議題，也就是教官離開校園，這個是社會氛圍的訴求，現在課綱出來，如何把教官又可以留著上課？基本上這是矛盾的點，要小心一點。" }, { "speaker": "孫明霞", "speech": "我比較偏向唐委員的意見，我也知道現況，所以這一件事要比較慎重一點，當然備註可以說明，這目前的狀況是比較可行，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "對國民義務教育的階段，那是實際上的演變，我也是比較贊成唐委員的意見，因為有整個時代的過渡期，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "謝金城", "speech": "教官對校園幫忙真的非常多，事實上在國、高中可以發現教官是校園一個重要的安全來源，假設教官退出校園後會發生什麼問題？" }, { "speaker": "謝金城", "speech": "第一，現在教官都還是兼生活教育組的組長，也就是老師最不喜歡當的工作，因為現在高中有這樣的編制，所以在管理上非常正常，假設未來沒有教官後，希望找人來當組長，這在國中沒有人要當，只好找代課老師來當。如果高中之後沒有教官的話？如果沒有老師要擔任，包括訓導主任等都沒有人要擔任，因此教官對學校正面的態度應該要給予肯定。要把這麼好的東西弄出去，接下來要怎麼辦？如果沒有教官在這個位置的話，有沒有解決的方案？" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "我是第一屆的委員，花了很長的時間，也就是要不要設領域跟科目的事情，討論到最後第一屆委員的結論是依全民國防設科室是因為這一個東西對我國來講有其意義及重要性，這一件事必須跟教官是否留在校園脫鉤，這個是我們當時同意他設科的問題，現在謝委員又更能推翻那個前提了，總綱都已經過了，我們現在必須follow這一科設科的前提是必須跟教官是否留在校園脫鉤，這與後中教育的必要性來考慮。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "我剛剛提的是，我們避免讓這一科設科讓教官留在校園的依據，這一點我們課綱很重要，我可以接受唐委員的意見，也就是寫「教師（官）」，還要加附一點，也就是沒有足夠多的教師可以在新國防教育的科目底下，因此在過渡期底下，讓教官也可以來上這個課程，這樣的落實可以理解是不是留在校園脫鉤，並不是留在校園的依據。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛剛我想謝委員有提到關於輔導的部分，這個部分其實比較沒有問題，因為輔導法施行細則106年8月1日，開始就要用輔導教師的方式補足教官的功能，現在是在做107年的課綱，106年發生的事情我們要當作已經發生了，這部分不是全民國防領域處理的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我同意丁委員的意見，我們一開始理解不足，但逐年增加師資，充足的時候教官就可以如括弧的退出校園，我覺得這樣是比較妥當的。" }, { "speaker": "鄭文瑤", "speech": "為什麼現在教師沒有正規的全民國防出來，其實當初在因應課程的時候，淡江大學都已經開設出來了，但確實是受限在教學現場面向上，是因為現有的教官必須擔任教學，因此在這樣互相的連結上導致正規去形成全民國防就業那一塊其實是比較沒有那麼充裕，因此變成一般的時程不會去選擇這樣來成為教學的專長科目，這個是有連帶性的。" }, { "speaker": "鄭文瑤", "speech": "但我們也確實去瞭解到歷史背景，為什麼教官的學分雖然有修，但沒有辦法成為老師，而是因為在師資培育的制度上是有一個很嚴謹的規劃，也就是課程修完要辦實習及檢定通過，這個是在培育老師的制度規準，因為教官並不是老師，回到身分上會受限這一些面向，因此會有一些困難性，因此未來可能要做的部分是教官未來真的是老師，在我們的經驗裡一定要有法律的授權同意免實習跟檢定，但我認為會有高度的困難，因為立法委員一直在關心這一塊。" }, { "speaker": "鄭文瑤", "speech": "另外，過渡時期可能教官會漸漸因為未來不再進行教學而退出校園，教學的功能會慢慢沒有那麼迫切時，漸漸會有一些需求讓一般人去修習全民國防教育課程來成為老師並擔任授課，因為這有時間性，我會希望主政是學課司應該要幫我們評估需求，教官大概在幾年內漸漸師資教學需求出現，一定要及早給我們培育機關，我們才能跟培育大學溝通三年或五年後，馬上全民國防的老師一定有市場要進來，因此我們要提早培育，這一塊的配套要麻煩放在科目後面評估並及早說明，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "第一，把今天對於教官、教師的意見整理出來送到主管機關，也就是學務科教司。我們是不是直接寫「授課者」？然後把這個權責就不要卡在這邊討論是教官或教師，就寫「授課者」。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "第二，在第18頁（或48頁）在多元選修的主題建議刪除，放在實施要點的課程發展當中說明，希望能夠提供多元選修大概有哪幾個供學習參考科目名稱。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我剛剛提「教師（官）」正是因為希望學校在同時有全民國防能力教師、也有教官時，學校無論如何是使用教師，而不要使用教官。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果寫成授課者，這個差序就消失了，感覺是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "謝金城", "speech": "剛剛洪主任提出的意見，我們必須在課發會做一個決定，但我想從現實面來看，我也同意唐委員講的教師（官）比較符合現在的現況。" }, { "speaker": "謝金城", "speech": "草案第5頁有三個意見，群組會議針對學習內容D－V－2兩岸安全情勢與發展，我們建議把「安全」二字拿掉，這樣會比較中性，不曉得研發全民國防的意見是怎麼樣？" }, { "speaker": "謝金城", "speech": "第5頁「參」很明顯是少掉「現況」；第5點裡面的戰爭我們都不稱戰役，請問戰爭跟戰役的差別在哪裡？" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "課綱的基本立場是教課綱的人是教師，如果可以寫授課者，那麼其他領域是不是可以改授課者？那麼就放棄課綱的人員是教師，是不是路人甲、路人乙只要是授課者就可以這一套課綱的內容？" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "再者是一致性的問題，既然各領域都是預設，有特別一個領域寫不一樣，是不是導致我們早上討論這麼久，起碼各領域要相仿或相似，不能差別這麼大，所以我不贊成洪詠善剛剛的提議。" }, { "speaker": "曾世杰", "speech": "有關於教師跟教官的議題，我來作一個結論：大多數的意見是贊成唐鳳的意見，然後再用註解的方式。" }, { "speaker": "曾世杰", "speech": "第5頁第三項的「現況」少了「現」；「戰役」與「戰爭」的部分，有沒有要回應？" }, { "speaker": "吳文龍", "speech": "王校長本身也是我們的委員，所以我們一定會接受。戰爭跟戰役的部分我們之前有討論過，因為戰爭的範圍比較大，所以我們有一點擔心要跟臺灣有相關的，教科書上要找到那一些可能會有困難，所以我們有把範圍縮小，但上面所講的安全情勢把「安全」拿掉，這方面的文字修正都沒有問題。" }, { "speaker": "曾世杰", "speech": "接著是我自己的意見，比如第5頁H－5－1這是很奇怪的，「全民防衛時機與實施」改為「全民防衛動機與實施」好不好？" }, { "speaker": "曾世杰", "speech": "接著看到第四版第8頁，有特別的（三），國防部、教育部主管單位應怎麼樣，我們前面是不是有一個決議說要求教育部或者是要求其他配合的不要放在課綱裡，放在協作機制裡，是不子？這是不是要拿掉？" }, { "speaker": "孫明霞", "speech": "在10月25日第二群組會議「待討論議題及建議」第四至六點皆已有具體建議如下：" }, { "speaker": "曾世杰", "speech": "如果是這樣的話，研修小組是不是要再確認一下，因為文字好像沒有完全依照前面的討論作修改？按照剛剛孫委員所講的，她是非常清楚的，那個文字跟現在的版本是不一樣的。" }, { "speaker": "孫明霞", "speech": "其實我們綜整報告是對的，不曉得第四版是不是回應回來？" }, { "speaker": "孫明霞", "speech": "假設不是，我們沒有關係，就用綜整報告決議來修正。" }, { "speaker": "曾世杰", "speech": "就用最後的綜整報告來修正。最後要請教各位委員，也就是是否同意全民課綱送到課審會？" }, { "speaker": "鄭文瑤", "speech": "我還是特別希望後續的配套，因為培育需要時間，所以麻煩一定要評估全民國防教育教師的需求數量，讓我們及早因應及培育，這是我特別希望能夠做的。" }, { "speaker": "曾世杰", "speech": "關於師資的部分要送到協作中心，請紀錄下來。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "接下來進行早上最後一個群組。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "張武昌", "speech": "就英文的部分，我們在公聽會及相關的報告當中在重視能力落差上所作的一些學習表示上的修正，包括打星號或者是畫雙圈等等，這一波課綱研修比較顯著的差異，像重視策略教學、重視邏輯思考等等，這一些我們甚至都已經想說什麼時候跟處長來談這一些事。" }, { "speaker": "張武昌", "speech": "很多老師認為我們現在1,200單字有很多已經太舊，希望我們能夠協助，所以我們希望提到協作中心來考量，目前在初審、公聽會及網路意見都有作適當的回應，因此各位看到手邊資料，8月3、4日所提的意見我們都已經做了回覆。" }, { "speaker": "張武昌", "speech": "有關於附件八技術型、綜合型的部分我們都有作回應，就科技的部分也有委員提出來是不是能夠將網站上的英文有閱讀的能力，其實在我們的普高跟技術型高中課綱裡面都有要求這個能力，因此請放心，以上，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "剛剛字彙1200是什麼意思？" }, { "speaker": "張武昌", "speech": "他們認為那已經有點時間了，像「tape recorder」原本是常用詞，大家認為已經不用了，這需要一些經費來調整，所以我們提到協作中心去。因為外面很多的聲音說字表要調整。" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "現在雖然講英文，但我要把語文的部分一次報告，其實我們當天在開會的時候，全部有做一個統一的共識，這樣可以節省後面的時間。" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "請各位委員看到會議紀錄最後第133頁，重複的部分我就不再唸，也就是語文能力這五項，其實不只是我們第一群組的問題，我剛剛也看了前面各個領域，有些國小的寫完再寫國中，然後再寫高中，就是分很大段，國小、國中、高中都列完後再列一個能力，所以每一個領域方式都不太一樣，如果那個都要提到，就要規範格式如何。" }, { "speaker": "書面報告", "speech": "（一）10月29日課發會第一群組第4次會議「達成共識之議題」共三點：" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "非常謝謝莊委員，格式上在送課審會之前，研究院會再整個負責。關於內容的部分各位委員有沒有意見？" }, { "speaker": "方新舟", "speech": "謝謝莊老師剛剛講到的部分，不過我剛剛講到科技融入教學的部分，不只是單單講閱讀而已，我現在手上有一個美國的App叫Duolingo，也就是全世界大概有6、7000萬人用的一個語言學習工具，我現在播放一下，他現在講一句話要我輸入剛剛聽進去的那一句話，也會叫我講一句話英文給他聽，他會把所聽得懂的字打出來來糾正我。" }, { "speaker": "方新舟", "speech": "我想講的是手上有手機的人大概知道，語音辨識的功能非常強大了，其實是已經變成個人化的老師，不管是學中文或者是英文或者是德文，其實這一些工具是十年前沒有辦法想像的東西，但在我們教育現場當中，都沒有把這一些工具納入，因此我想提醒的是，臺灣常常講說我們是資訊大國，但我們在資訊的應用上就像一個弱小的國家，並沒有作一個上位思考的方式，這不單單只是看網頁上的資料，而是看如何把這一些工具納入教育領域。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "課發委員有沒有關於英語及第二外語有意見？" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "我剛剛漏講了一點，其實當天副署長特別強調各領域在寫學習表現指標時，有一些會寫第一學習階段（一、二年級）、第二學習階段（三、四年級），但我今天看了很多不一樣，希望可以統一。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "我們會交由課審會這邊來處理。就第二階段的國民中學刪除。" }, { "speaker": "林明佳", "speech": "我來說明應用外語核心素養的部分，他們的想法是現在在國中或者是國小選修課都有開課的空間，所以其實工作圈還滿堅持把核心素養從國中那邊寫，不管是在國中或者是高中，國中在加深、加廣是選修跟必選修，但整體來講是選修課，工作圈還滿堅持要把核心素養寫到那去。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "寫個「建議」，就會變成必須要成立的事。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "但不是，就是學校裡面如果可以，就開選修。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "例如剛剛的科技也是一樣，在國小是沒有結束的，可是也把它列出來，在這邊我們統一處理，但第二外語其實是在高中的部分，因此我建議要把它刪除，不然真的只是建議。聽聽看其他課發委員的意見。" }, { "speaker": "張武昌", "speech": "即使國際化規定是英語，並不是每一個孩子學的英文都一樣好，是不是要給他們一個選擇，事實上國中有一個跨領域統整的機會，基本上就是從這個方向在思考，因為英文並不是唯一的選項，如果有一個開始，以後會比較好一點，大概是這個概念。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "那就留著。請委員表示一下英語文是不是可以送課審會？" }, { "speaker": "林福來", "speech": "我剛剛提到個人化學習的工具，我知道不適合放在課綱裡面，是不是可以放在課程手冊可以提到。" }, { "speaker": "張武昌", "speech": "基本上我們是在學習方法與策略這邊，文字是說能利用工具書或者是其他線上資源主動瞭解所接觸英文的內容，以這一條學習的內容或者是能力指標應該是有達到目的。" }, { "speaker": "張武昌", "speech": "在臺灣我常常在思考並不是我們沒有資源，而是根本無感，我舉一個例子，比如捷運上面一大堆bilingual signs等等，他們是不看的，或是語音說transfer station，很多人都是無感的。" }, { "speaker": "張武昌", "speech": "所以要如何讓學生有感是第一個任務，不然永遠都沒有救。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "課程手冊當中可能要幫老師如何有感，我看到幼兒真的非常有感，我們的捷運上有四種聲調，很好玩，而且會反覆，所以環境還是會有幫助的。" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "我要講一下，手冊資料第95頁領域統整工作圈給第二外國語的建議，第二外國語是不是加深、加廣選修課程是否獨立的篇章，我這邊覺得還是要獨立，我們目前是獨立，我只是回應領域統整工作圈的建議，英語文跟第二外國語是必須分等的，因為第二外國語如張院長所講的，其實在國中的時候就可以選修，而且課程編排是用level的，外國是level 1選起，但如果已經學過就直接從第二階開始上，好比選修一節跟六節是不一樣的，所以不能說國中上到哪裡、高中上到哪裡，因此這部分我回應工作圈有關於第二外國語是要獨立出來。" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "第96頁倒數第四欄，原來的時間分配特別就第一至第四階段，…開設新新住民語文及社團活動，工作圈建議把它改成開設日韓外語等，正式彈性課程因為在社團中有另外獨立，因此我們建議還是按照原來的設計分配說明。" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "請看到下一欄，工作圈有建議第二外國語文需要聚焦在第二外國語文，我的建議是後面是「（含新住民語）」，這在總綱當中特別強調到高中就已經屬於第二外國語了，在小學、國中是本土語，到了高中是外國語，因此還是要給新住民語一個地位。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "召集人說都接受。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "林明佳", "speech": "加深、加廣的六學分在高中是在第二外語的部分，在總綱裡面是多元選修，所以學分數是有一點差異的，其實我們在二外的工作圈有討論過，其實在閩南語的公聽會還有提到這一點，最好還是維持現狀，現在把加深、加廣也加入新住民語文的話，他們會說新住民比起在高中還有更多開課空間，因此多元選修才會有新住民語。" }, { "speaker": "張武昌", "speech": "我覺得以明佳的為主，因為她去過比較多公聽會，她的比較代表民意。" }, { "speaker": "鄭文瑤", "speech": "其實已經經過很多次的討論，我在參與部裡面國際移動的計畫，我想召集人都有參加，最主要的部分現在有一個重點，國際化英語是一個4很重要的銜接，其中一個部分有提供給召集人參考，比如提升高中生的國際視野，希望將國際新聞能夠有一個很完整的資料庫融入到相關生活，辦理一些競賽，拓展一些學生的視野。" }, { "speaker": "鄭文瑤", "speech": "小學生的部分是透過時事的分享競賽，讓小學生有世界地圖的概念，也就是讓小朋友有該機的概念。" }, { "speaker": "鄭文瑤", "speech": "接著是國際朋友，國際朋友是希望能夠協助，中學生透過網路書信認識一位外國朋友，融入在地化的相關課程。希望能夠透過外籍生協助中小學的綱要，提供給召集人參考，能夠融入在課程實施。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "可以進入課審會嗎？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "除了健體外，都建議可以送課審，按照今天的建議修了以後，還要開群組會議，就麻煩參與群組的課發委員幫我們看一下。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "形式上的處理，國教院會負責，如果需要修改就請課發委員幫我們看一下，然後就送課審會。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "謝謝早上各領域的委員，我們也很對不起各領域的委員，陪我們坐了這麼久。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "針對早上所準備的資料不再重述了，我們有很多資料可以讓各領綱小組帶回去參酌。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "附件四至六是教育部協作中心的運作要點及議題分工，還有已經送進來、各個領域提出需要配套的規劃，這邊已經提出彙整表，上面已經有作成決定，也就是各領綱要找出最優先排序前三個，請各領綱協助。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "接著就是在附件統整工作圈，請看到附件十二至附件十四，有素養工作圈及四大重要議題工作圈的重要內涵部分，這部分再請各個領域參考，但上午已經說過一次，因此下午的部分要再說一次嗎？我建議不要，就把紀錄送去參考。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "請自然領域的召集人，很快作一下修改的過程及內容說明。" }, { "speaker": "陳泰然", "speech": "有關於公聽會、網路論壇及書面審的意見，我想今天比較重要的是10月25日工作小組討論會議後的綜整，請各位翻到第124頁至第130頁，我稍微說明一下，第二群組10月25日會議決議是提案二牽涉到普通型、綜高型的部分，決議的部分有三個建議，我們都接受，且在處理中。" }, { "speaker": "陳泰然", "speech": "接著是有關於第127頁提案二，案由及達成共識的部分及待討論的議題及建議，達成共識的議題是這一次經過公聽會及早期諮詢、網路論壇所搜集的意見及能做的部分，很重要的是有關於自然科學領域的學習內容遞減，其實是很強烈的意見，這部分我們已經再考慮過了，基本上是不可能往下走的。教育部必修內容方面，以化學的例子減掉了1/3或1/4，這我們整個學習內容上有比較少。" }, { "speaker": "陳泰然", "speech": "在討論議題的部分，我們已經第二點加入，第三點、第四點已經加入了，普通高中是順利的，沒有問題的，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "陳生明", "speech": "在技術型及綜合型高中的部分，我們經過了四次的公聽會也有數次的審查會，另外也有設備基準及經過兩次審查會的等等過程，有各方面的意見及網路論壇，其實我們都有當場回應跟作當場溝通，因此大致上都互動非常好。" }, { "speaker": "陳生明", "speech": "另外也有跟十五群科的專業科互動，因為我們一般科目將來要配合所有將來各類十五群科的專業需求，因此這部分我們也作了互相的溝通，整個平台非常順暢，包括環境、地理等等就課程中主題相似要寫的部分作了充分溝通，原有過多重疊，但已經作過溝通。" }, { "speaker": "陳生明", "speech": "再者，就實作的部分其實我們原來就有強調，在課程當中至少有1/3的時間、內容及實作實驗的一些實力都在課綱當中已經寫進去了。" }, { "speaker": "陳生明", "speech": "包括科技運用、網路平台運用，包括四項重大議題都有融入到課綱當中。" }, { "speaker": "陳泰然", "speech": "昨天我們素養小組開會，但我沒有參加，第127頁待討論的部分，第一項就是25號那一天說要加上STEM字樣，我們那時候也覺得很好，但我們覺得再考量發現不同，不同的理由很簡單，因為我們把工程的部分都弄離開，不在我們自然科裡面。" }, { "speaker": "陳泰然", "speech": "精神還在，但課綱就不以STEM就暫時不放，但我們精神上會在，但文字不跟隨美國的，以免被認為有copy之嫌，因此考慮的結果暫不修訂。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "精神是什麼意思？" }, { "speaker": "黃茂在", "speech": "這在美國都有，但我們放在課綱文件當中不太適合。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "請各位看到第125頁，自然部分達成共識：普通型已經依照意見作出初步回應及草案，學習的內容在保留基礎之餘，力求融入新知。。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "待討論的議題及建議在普通型的部分，在剛剛所談的有關於STEM怎樣來連結，第二個是自然科學需要提出明確的策略來落實課綱，以及透過協作平台來達到。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "第三個是關於課綱草案的實施要點，若有超過25名學生去增設一名科學教師，需要評估研究，請再考量。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "第四項，新課綱若有新增內容，就應要求該領域老師再進修。譬如自然科宇宙學要進物理，應要求自然科老師增長現有的職能，希望自然領綱加強這部分。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "關於技高強調的技能，在課綱研修應該要盡量著力。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "每班超過25名的部分是保留還是拿掉？" }, { "speaker": "陳泰然", "speech": "這個自然科學探究與實作不能看成一個科目，但如果每班超過25人，實際上操作是困難的，因此到底怎麼樣才能讓這一件事達成，我們會考量在哪一個地方呈現並具體落實。" }, { "speaker": "陳泰然", "speech": "剛剛已經唸了，就把宇宙學唸出來，若宇宙學唸出來的話，我就要回到群組會議當中提到，公聽會反應比較多的是物理的幾個概念：一個是夸克，一個是量子，一個是宇宙學，但到最後宇宙學的部分，物理決定說希望地科可以考量納進來，跟夸克結合起來，這樣可能可以減少一些不必要的困擾，現在地科也接過來了，正在融合。雖然地科時數是很有限，但我們考量最早期九五課綱在地科，後來是因為種種理由搬到物理，後來又有種種理由說地科比較恰當，因此又回到地科。我們隨後會回到地科。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "地科老師要不要受訓？" }, { "speaker": "陳泰然", "speech": "我們應該會放在在職訓練。" }, { "speaker": "曾世杰", "speech": "夸克跟量子現象呢？" }, { "speaker": "陳泰然", "speech": "很多的想法認為物理不應該侷限在十九世紀，二十世紀的東西都還沒有進來，所以二十一世紀更沒有進來。很多都說國中都在教，為什麼高中不能教？因此這一些概念也要適度接納，只談理論，不談現象，對學生來說應該還好。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "每班25名學生及師培，提過協作平台的時候，是不是非常必要的第一要件？也就是之前沒有它就無法實施這個課程？要先排序一下，我們就請協作平台盡快處理。" }, { "speaker": "陳泰然", "speech": "謝謝主席的裁示。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "有關於自然科學的這一份。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "技高和綜高有一個指引，但不知道指引的性質在哪裡？" }, { "speaker": "陳生明", "speech": "目前沒有另外規劃，我不知道未來的規劃。當初在課發委員有提到內容，是一個標題一樣，像國中、高中、綜高、技高跟普高，我們要配合專業及內容，所以就寫的部分有就內容規範，甚至有一些實作的部分，我們也有作一些規劃。" }, { "speaker": "陳生明", "speech": "看看大家的想法，我們那部分目前沒有寫得很詳細，只是初步的規劃，未來還是要手冊，可能又要更多、更清楚或更詳實。目前指引只是一個課綱大致上規範內容的方向，以上報告。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "因為指引幾乎很明確，像課程大綱的授課時數都規劃進去，這部分是否能夠納入課程手冊來說明，這應該只是建議吧！不然只能編兩節課。" }, { "speaker": "孫明霞", "speech": "請看到第2頁，因為有分物理、化學及生物，物理B版中物理是時數比較多，物理4－6課綱寫起來到底是四或者是六，裡面有規劃4的是選什麼、6選什麼，有沒有做這樣的規劃？" }, { "speaker": "陳生明", "speech": "我們在規劃當中有加星號，沒有加就是四學分，有加就是六學分，因為我們有十五群科，有的物理很重要，有的就是要四學分，因此裡面有多種彈性，我一直提到在98、99課綱的時候，希望物理、化學、生物要寫十五種課綱，不過那是很難的，我們就這樣一個彈性的處理，裡面有四學分，亦有六學分，真的更多到八學分或者是十學分，我們再從校內的一些科目加強，以上。" }, { "speaker": "歐用生", "speech": "我發現有很多特色，比如綜合型高中自然科學領域課綱p.25(一)教師在教學前應編寫教案，我覺得這個很進步，其他領域應該都要學習，這是非常好的構想。一般我們的名稱都叫「教案」，可以用「單元活動教學設計」。" }, { "speaker": "歐用生", "speech": "第二，第1頁的課程目標4，養成觀跟社會價值觀之養成，兩個養成是不是可以再調適？" }, { "speaker": "歐用生", "speech": "第三，我離中學雖然很久，但記得讀中學時好像實驗做得很少，幾乎都沒有實驗，所以是不是可以再加強一下？" }, { "speaker": "陳泰然", "speech": "你唸書的時候也是我唸書的時候都沒有，這次我們幾乎要強迫它非做不可，所以國中有1/3是動手做的，高中還有必修四個學分，真正要動手做的，不管是實驗室或者是到野外，都要動手做，所以請你放心。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "針對素養指標有問了一下，所以麻煩工作圈可以看一下附件十三及附件十四，如果跟各領域有關，我們早上的結論是請參考，能修改就改。" }, { "speaker": "陳泰然", "speech": "我們回去會再看。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "關於這一塊還有沒有意見？如果沒有的話，就請各位委員決定關於課發領綱是否送課審會？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "請第二群組再開一次會，請課發委員確認該改的都改了。形式方面我們主任會負責。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "（笑）接下來還有課程手冊，工作還沒完喔！" }, { "speaker": "陳泰然", "speech": "我們接著就會開會。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "接下來我們往綜合活動。" }, { "speaker": "方德隆", "speech": "大家看一下附件十，第三群組綜整報告這邊，一路看下來是第82頁，提案三是有關於綜合活動三達成的議題，第3頁是有關於藝能科老師希望降低基本授課節數，這不是我們能決定，這要交由協作中心研議。第4、5點是有關於綜高七選二的部分要如何處理。第五個是有關於技高將來開課經費問題，這可能也要協作中心再討論。" }, { "speaker": "方德隆", "speech": "我要說明的是附件十一，特別是第91頁的整理，我們經過北、中、南、東整理後我們有做一些處理，比如文字等等，特別是生命教育科的委員，已經將52項的學習內容調整為25項，這是很重要的。沒有調整的文字疏漏，比如公聽會的意見希望我們能夠增加團體合作服務領導，我們覺得這兩個概念其實在綜合活動的內涵中已經有了，因此我們也做了回應。" }, { "speaker": "方德隆", "speech": "需要小組再召開會議是有關於國中的童軍、家政及輔導，希望加強統一，最近的研習會都會召開。" }, { "speaker": "方德隆", "speech": "這個是公聽會的意見，我們也會在總綱的研修課程中考量。" }, { "speaker": "方德隆", "speech": "接著是有關於跨領域，社會領域作橫向的協調，類似的內容也有跨科的討論，像家政的生涯規劃都有財務管理，這兩個科目就把生涯規劃讓家政來管理，這樣就避免重複的部分。" }, { "speaker": "方德隆", "speech": "再者，有關於協作配套的部分，授課的時數降低可能沒有辦法處理。" }, { "speaker": "方德隆", "speech": "再者，性別的部分也要交給工作圈來處理。" }, { "speaker": "方德隆", "speech": "再者，中醫的部分要看如何處理。" }, { "speaker": "方德隆", "speech": "其實媒體素養的部分已經把媒體素養那很重要的概念，我們也希望最後能夠積極落實。" }, { "speaker": "方德隆", "speech": "至於有關於附件十三至十五，後面我們都會再積極回應，國中、國小至高中先報告到這邊，技術型高中的部分請陳教授回應一下。" }, { "speaker": "陳立言", "speech": "我再說明一下有關於技術型高中的綜合領域。三場公聽會之後，最主要除了一些文字修正外，最主要還有一個意見，在技術型高中的綜合活動領域跟科技領域的七個科目選兩科開設，因此有很多的意見認為這樣子的變成我們雖然規劃了七個科目，但會不會造成很多科目無法開成？我們在第三群組的會議中也有討論，目前的做法是未來在實施綱要的部分作說明，希望技術型高中不要一個課程開兩個科目，盡量依照學生的需要讓他們從七科目選，只要某一個科目達到班級可以開課的人數即可開課，並不是一個學校開兩個科目，我們把它放在實施的要點裡面說明，這可能對這兩個領域開兩個學分問題會有比較好的幫助，以上補充，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "卓俊辰", "speech": "第四次會議針對綜合活動領域的部分，召集人教務長都有針對這部分回應，我就不要再重複，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "你們提到的議題，特別是性平的部分，請務必參考，也就是這邊已經確認的用詞、用字，與附件十四議題人物的內涵對一下，這樣我們不逐一對。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "在技術型綜合活動領綱的部分，也就是第14頁學習表現與內容，在整個的表格上右欄學習表現會對應核心素養，學生表現最右邊有一個融入議題，建議把他它刪除的原因是，學習表現對核心素養的對應關係應該讓教材編輯者能夠自己發揮，因此會在附錄一時一定要有一個對應的釋例。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "在融入議題的部分其實有四個議題，在總綱的部分有十九個議題，換言之，我提到第16頁的「家庭」，在家庭這邊的舉的內容很多，這裡只能融入性別教育，其實更重要的是家庭教育，所以應該加以建議刪除，因此在附錄二的部分統一說明就好了，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "歐用生", "speech": "自主學習，我覺得這個非常棒，這是很大的突破。但在國小階段是不是缺失這個東西？是不是認為國小階段就沒有必要，因此就沒有看到這方面的內容？國中部分也沒有，我只是請教一下。" }, { "speaker": "李駱遜", "speech": "我回應一下歐老師的問題，未來想像的部分，我們在附錄三補充說明裡面有做這樣的回應，請看到第47頁上面學習表現第4項勾勒未來想像的部分我們也有放進去，在學習內容當中可能沒有辦法寫得很清楚，所以我們后面又再加了一個補充說明把它寫得更清晰；國中的部分第65頁、第66頁的部分就生涯發展部分也有相關說明。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "就綜合活動的部分，各位委員認為可不可以送課審會？容我再重複一下議題工作圈，后面的附件務必要參考，我們對於素養工作圈的部分也務必參考，請修改了以後，第三群組再召開一次會議，課發委員會參與，並看看是否確定，若確定後就送課審會。謝謝委員。" }, { "speaker": "張惠貞", "speech": "召集人有國際研討會不克前來，所以由我來報告。" }, { "speaker": "張惠貞", "speech": "經過四場的公聽會、網路論壇及書面審查，我們這一組都做了處理及回覆，我們也開了三次會來處理問題，10月8日、10月15日及昨天都有開會並作處理。" }, { "speaker": "張惠貞", "speech": "我來作一個大體上的報告，我們把拼音放在第二個階段，國小三年級才開始，他們很關心認為我們應該把語言的學習放在第一階段，因為他們認為語言的學習是放在第一階段，不會影響到其他孩子對英語或者其他語言的學習，這是他們的意見，而且依照語言學習的進程，應該先學習語音再學習文字，因此他們認為要調過來，因此是一個模仿拼音，後來才是漢字書寫，這部分表達滿多元的。" }, { "speaker": "張惠貞", "speech": "第二，有關於名稱的問題，四場公聽會當中對於閩南語的名稱是不是認為可以用台語作為名稱比較好，因為他們認為閩南語有一些歧視的意見。但我們召集人有回應說並不是我們小組可以決定。" }, { "speaker": "張惠貞", "speech": "第三，有關於授課時數的問題，是不是一週一個小時變成一週兩個小時，延伸為國中必修，現場當中有很多團體，也有本土的教師，並且有很關心十二年課綱的家長，希望變成為國中的必修，一週是不是變成兩節課。" }, { "speaker": "張惠貞", "speech": "第四，有關於學習內容的問題，我剛剛有作了一些報告，有關於拼音是不是第一階段，我們小組也有一些回應，文字認讀其實是比較符合聽說讀寫的學習進程，因此我們就學習內容上有多加這一項。以上是我們經過公聽會作一些回應，群組委員也希望我們在學習內容上，國小、國中及高中就這個表格是不是要一致，我們小組也正在進行處理，以上作一個簡單報告，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "主席太厲害，我沒有舉手就知道我要發言。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "麻煩各位委員看到附件7－2，也就是公聽會、網路論壇這一本，請看到第179頁，所有公聽會我看了都有同樣的問題，也就是做了整體回應，等於是編號1至編號4，前面發言的人不只四個，所以我們不知道哪一個對應哪一個、並不知道哪一句回應哪一個人，這樣會找不到。" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "我去參加閩南語文時其實是很清楚的，但變到這邊的時候就完全不知道哪一句變哪一句，建議文件要修改，不然就是在發言人前面加編號，後面再去對照編號。另外一種方式是依鼓勵學校這一段話，假設您是回應北區某某人，就在前面寫上「北區某某人：」即代表回應。" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "當天會議我們有建議只要課綱已明定，在回應地方就不要修「此建議交由課發會研議」，因為現在的研議都是不可能的，可以下一屆再改。比如第169頁是針對第164頁的回應，事實上總綱就已經訂好，所以所有裡面交由課發會研議的部分，只要是課綱有明定都麻煩修改。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "回應表的部分有分兩類型，為了今天各位委員能夠在不同的，包含公聽會、網路論壇及書面審查能夠一目了然，因此做的就是大家今天所看到的附件7－1與7－2，以閩南語為例，會分門別列，然後再一一羅列，下面是研修小組的回應。第二類的整理方法是所有的回應隨著課綱研修確定，因此要放到網路上給各界看，讓他們知道公聽會發表意見，意見是怎麼被處理，這部分我們就用第二類，也就是分門別列，把公聽會是誰、什麼表達及研修小組的回應一一羅列，這個部分今天沒有呈現。以上是對表格的說明。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "接著要對閩南語文的問題，其實我們是放在附錄四的，而不是今天提到課發會就提到前面，本土語文其實是校定必修或選修，全體對於這樣的領綱是沒有辦法放到正文，這部分建議放在附錄，如果有必要就提供參考。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "其實第一次課發會針對我們現在要學這麼多的符號，小學一年級進去要有這麼多的羅馬符號，要學注音符號、國字、數字等，是不是真的能記得，但我只記得你們給的答案是孩子沒問題，不能我們大人說沒問題，有沒有證據孩子負擔得了？現在又多了羅馬拼音的符號。從小孩的觀點來說，如何負擔及如何協調，委員有沒有解套？" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "我們之前成立過小組來討論，希望各個語言別能夠有共識，不要集中在第一學期階段，讓小孩在入小學時的負擔很重，因此這部分我們也協調了不同的語言別，不過國語文、英語文、原住民及相關不同語系的部分，這部分也針對他們不同的語言評估，因此目前其實是有做整個相關的規劃，因此有一些語言別是在第一學習階段，也就是國語文及原住民語文跟新住民的部分；而第二階段是進入到英語文、閩南語文、客家語文。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "其實是編出來之後全部一起教。" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "在語言當中都有非常明確的階段別的切入語文符號部分，像閩南語就是第二學期階段三年級有一個標音系統部分。" }, { "speaker": "曾世杰", "speech": "我看到我們的公聽會及網路論壇都在講應該在第一學期階段開始，后來我們決定第二學期階段也開始，剛剛黃校長講的，我們有沒有回應？在哪裡回應強調第一學期階段開始？" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "時間順序我說明一下，每一次只要涉及到第一群組的會議我都會去參加，閩南語的方召集人其實也都說明得很清楚，時間序我們的程序是我們的領綱小組先討論，在語言別評估哪一個階段進入到標音系統會比較適當，他們評估這在第二學期階段，因此他們在學期撰寫領綱時是放在第二階段。" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "接著進入到網路公聽及現場公聽，有人建議其實可以放在第一學期階段，召集人當場都有特別說明，我想惠如委員也有參加閩南語領綱的公聽說明會，如果一年級就進去標音系統，對孩子的負擔太重，連大人都不見得看得懂，方召集人有說明。" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "因此，綜合公聽會的意見後，閩南語的領綱小姐還是建議放在第二階段，也跟其他的語言別有所區隔，接下來我們請惠如委員說明。" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "我是沒有參加他們的公聽會，我是參加會議。所有的語言別只有新住民語文在第一學期階段，那是因為他們沒有辦法用漢字來表達，但在閩南語文已經有漢字可以表達，因此這在閩南語文在第二階段學習，而新住民原文卻沒有辦法的原因。" }, { "speaker": "張家貞", "speech": "其實我們在公聽會的時候，家長及本土老師提出這樣意見的時候，我們的召集人都有如委員的說明，小孩的學習可能沒有辦法給他們太多東西，當然有城鄉的差異，看怎樣的狀況來處理，基本上是放在第二學期的階段，我們當時是這樣的回答。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "這本來就具有爭議性及意見滿不同的看法，但我們來看一下是不是如校長所說的第二階段才開始，我先看到書面的資料，請看到第9頁標音系統，AA－1－1、AA－1－2，AA－1－2沒有問題，因為是文字認讀。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "AA－4－1羅馬拼音，AA－4－2是漢字書寫，第二階段至第三階段都一樣是羅馬拼音，做兩次的目的何在？" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "學習內容必須要跟學習表現呼應，請看到第6頁，3－1－1就直接說「建立學習閩南語的習慣」，他只有說文字認讀而已，而沒有標音，我不知道如何處理它，我不是很瞭解。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "到了3－2－1的時候，就說日常生活中的閩南語文並瞭解其意義，到這邊的時候才扣得住隔壁第9頁A－2－1有羅馬拼音及書寫，這個我比較能瞭解到。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "3－1－1到底是識字而不學拼音，既然能識字而不學拼音的話，為何還要學拼音？拼音只有一個目的是要讓他識字，都已經能識字了，為何還要畫蛇添足？我不太知道閩南語文是為不認識閩南語文的人學的，當早期本土社會出現時閩南語算是滿被壓抑的語言，現在反而是比較吃香，因此閩南語文化是比較強勢的，在母語型態下，聽說不是問題，我常常到南部去上課，南部的老師會跟我反應，我不知道我們為什麼要學閩南語，因為我們講的可能比老師還要好，我就不能理解，當然這是後話。課程的時代意義有沒有轉變？3－1－1的學習表現與A－1－1與A－2－1是有明顯上的邏輯不通，就已經可以辨識字了，為何還要學羅馬拼音？" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "就算學羅馬拼音我覺得對孩子也不厚道，因為剛開始學英文，豆芽菜才剛接觸，就要賦予豆芽菜不同的意義，我覺得對孩子是一個混淆，因為一階段放在一階段的難處，其實也一直是可以推行的，我不知道這個邏輯在哪裡" }, { "speaker": "張家貞", "speech": "謝謝委員給的提示。" }, { "speaker": "張家貞", "speech": "為什麼羅馬拼音會同樣出現在國小及國中，事實上會牽扯到現場實際上的瞭解，事實上孩子到國中以前不一定有學拼音，這是提到城鄉問題，因此我們希望他國小學拼音，而上國中沒有學可以延續下來，依照我們的瞭解真的有些孩子以前老師沒有教拼音，這也有牽涉到師資的問題，因此在擬學習內容時就做這樣的考量，我們會覺得就目前的學習狀況不一，因此從國小、國中至高中就拼音的部分可以幫他加強，這是我們當時的初忠，因此才會就國小、國中都有拼音的學習。" }, { "speaker": "張家貞", "speech": "3－1－1部分不管孩子是否已經識字或拼音，當時我們小組在研擬時有一個想法，也就是希望給學習閩南語孩子有一個培養的態度，他樂意且喜歡閩南語的作品及閱讀，當時我們在擬學習表的立場及想法是這樣子的，以上回答。" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "因為剛好方召集人不在，我也以一直參加閩南語研發的角色來說明。" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "我瞭解文虎委員關心的所在，也就是在剛剛所提到第9頁草案當中有AA1－1與AA2－1有文字為何還要拼音？有沒有此必要性。在閩南語的文字上，其實就閩南語或台語其實有很多爭議，何時要切入拼音也有問題，因此當時在處理公聽時處理滿好的，不同的孩子也有不同學習的面向，我們有文字的認讀，其實還是要有羅馬拼音，並不是說我們文字的認讀之後就不要有羅馬拼音。" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "其實「天烏烏，欲落雨」其實連結到閩南語的記憶當中，但在閩南語的教學中不是要這一些孩子中文字，而且還需要可以學習羅馬拼音，這是在整個閩南語中要這樣定義，因此拼音系統的介入是在第二學期階段，AA－1－1文字的認讀是讓孩子透過中文字學台語音，有一些人認為第一階段就要放入羅馬拼音，因此是有陰影，就是接納公聽會一些人的看法作以上意見。" }, { "speaker": "曾世杰", "speech": "第一，我的外曾祖母55歲才開始入基督教，學習拼音。" }, { "speaker": "曾世杰", "speech": "第二，現在羅馬拼音是因為注音符號無法完全標音，像台語「反對」的「tuì / ㄉㄨㄧ˪」和「對」的「tio̍h / ㄉㄧㄜㆷ͘」聲調，並不是注音能夠表徵的，因此是需要羅馬拼音。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "我還是不太能接受這種講法，國字就一字多音，那沒有什麼了不起，從來都有一字多音，放到哪裡都一樣。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "剛剛黃校長提到的，我覺得造船者在看這一艘船還是坐船者看這一艘船，過語的注音是渡船，只要能過渡到文字，小三、小四就不再寫注音了，如果到國中的話還要寫注音的話，那就變成笑話，而是要更少的資源去學更多的文字；如果是造船者就不是了，要把船扛回家，所以當然是不一樣的。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "剛剛校長一談，我認為閩南語感覺好像造船，我們可能有不同的解讀，但我還是認為拼音放在任何一個語言都不應該是主體，既然是渡船就不應該作為主體。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "剛剛副座提到的我到80歲還要學，那是我的興趣，但7歲或8歲的小孩子，如果能夠自主表達意見的話，恐怕90％是不會同意的，因為我們要看孩子學習的狀況，我必須要說我們必須要貼近孩子的想法，要不然我們一起來學四種拼音看看，看你覺得你快樂嗎？我想一想我們自己也來學四種拼音看看，看看你快樂嗎？而且某兩種拼音是同一個符號，而且還可能會混淆的。因此我在想過去閩南語已經有一段很長的歷史，特別推拼音，而閩南語依然可以發展，我們是不是可以找出更好的方式，如果再用一個角度的話，我們50歲來學羅馬拼音不是很好嗎？" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "第一，我不能說服我自己拼音是造船人的船，而不是渡河人的船。第二，我不認為剛剛那個邏輯可以被我接受，說因為羅馬拼音曾經有老師沒有教，到國中又要導入課綱。那高中一定也要再導進去，因為國中一定又有人沒有教？各領域如果有一些沒有上完，不要忘了我們在技術高中的時候，曾經一個科目放一到四我們都有很多意見，覺得這一種講法不太能接受，因為前階段沒有學好，在後階段也列進去，因此這一種講法邏輯上很難講得通，尤其是編碼上的混淆，兩個一樣的條目用一樣的編碼，明顯是吾黨所宗一定要搞定的事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我作電子萌典專案的時候，其實就是以臺羅、客語拼音、漢語拼音、注音符號，四個系統一起學，確實是有一點困難。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "回應林委員的說法，其實大部分的使用者，二年級到四年級台語、客語的老師和學生，我們會發現，不管城鄉都會有同樣的情況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有部分的小孩從小會講台語，會講的是最基本的字，「天烏烏」看到就讀得出來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像「tio̍h / ㄉㄧㄜㆷ͘」其實中文寫的是「著」不是「對」，基本上一字一音時，學生可以理解。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但學生把懂的字讀出來，並不代表台語用到的只有那100個可以唸出來的字。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "要學新的字時，因為很多連老師都唸不出來，因此因此在小三左右要教拼音的重點，是學會一些書寫用的字，以及漢字的文讀音。這個是台語特別多，國語沒有那麼多。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外我們介紹文學作品時，某些作者也認為有些字詞找不到漢字，所以會用臺羅或白話字來表達。如果不教拼音，在唸這些人的作品時，會變成沒有辦法學習到這些字詞。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "全漢跟全羅都有人支持，但讀寫台語文用到的實況，就是漢羅混合的。兩個都學，才可以讓台語文變成不是只是在菜市場用的那些話。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果是本來不會唸台語的小孩，拼音就能讓他們開始學最基本的字。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我自己其實是用注音符號的延伸，「方音符號系統」來學台語，這在台灣提倡的人可能不到百分之一... （笑）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我沒有要特別擁護哪一套拼音系統，只是想說，無論是用注音符號、方音、或者是羅馬拼音，這個學習的節奏是相同的。" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "有沒有可能不將羅馬拼音放入到閩南語教學的課綱當中？假設不可能的話，我們就一定要放，問題只是在第一階段放，或是第二階段放，最大的共識是在第二階段放。" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "第二，你說在羅馬拼音到底是造船或者是渡船，在你的邏輯是造船，但在某一寫人是造船也是渡船，沒有造船就沒有辦法渡船。" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "第三，在同樣的學習內容當中的羅馬拼音，像在國中階段也發現，這個地方在先前的大會也開過針對一些東西可能在不同的階段需要重複讓孩子學習的時候，我們有一個特殊的標號，也就是雙圈的部分，我想這部分在大會當中跨領域也有共識。" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "具體的建議是：這部分先討論到這邊，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "王垠", "speech": "其實跟公聽會有一個很大的出入，草案第1頁的時間分配是用表格式的，之前是用條列式的，其實內容上有很大的不同。看到高中階段備註第二點，「…」我們原來是沒有，原本是要強設開設六學分的總綱規定，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "張家貞", "speech": "這個表格是因為審查委員希望我們把表格化，委員唸的那一段文字是在總綱裡面的。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "沒有吧！" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "大概不能這樣寫。我覺得只要寫到需求開設就好，後面劃掉，否則如果讓學校任意開課，就會變成不能開，兩個都會有限制，所以兩個都拿掉。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "這個是委員建議你們畫表格嗎？" }, { "speaker": "張家貞", "speech": "書面審查委員希望我們這樣做。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "因為本土包含了客家語文其實是同樣的，在國小、國中，總綱規範當中是必修的，要選就一定要開，所以過小、國中是有總綱的位置。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "但在高中的部分是在校定必修或者是選修那邊開設，因此會建議時間分配的高中階段應該要刪除掉，然後在實施要點的課程發展當中敘明如果高中校內必修或者是多元選修依照學生的需求來提供課程，我還是要回到總綱的文字規範。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "時間分配那邊，就高級中等學校那邊整個拿掉。第12頁高級中學階段內容也要拿掉。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "我還是想最後再講一段話，不管是唐委員或者是黃校長的講法我都同意。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "今天會坐在這裡的，大概在學習上都有過人之處，除了我之外... 所以通常都不是一般的孩子，課綱真的是給一般的孩子用的。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "看看第1頁的課程目標，每週一節課不要認為跟國語文相去不遠，如果要達到這些目標的話，其實是要更多的學習，學校完全不理會課綱也能活下去，如果課綱能讓人家不理會，我們也可以繼續這樣子活下去，我知道今天講閩南語課綱是很不聰明的，因為從公聽會看得出來是有一個非常強大的領域，誰都不願意去找這個麻煩，但我要說的是十二年國教課綱其實是屬於實做型的課綱，如果是一個禮拜一節課，這個目標真的能達到嗎？我覺得可以達到的話，國文跟英文的部分要怎麼寫。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "事實上寫的問題比較大，今天之所以會有拼音跟識字的問題都是「讀」、「寫」，是不是會讓讓變成重視他或者是應付他？這是我提出來的一點看法，反正這個領綱遲早要過的，只不過我們真的要想一想一個禮拜一節課可以做到這個地步，臺灣真的會變成神島。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "除了聽之外，其實讀寫能力跟一部分的說是共用的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一個人國語文程度若提高10分，閩南語文跟客家語文程度自然也有4、5分，有重疊之處。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果能編成共同閱讀的話，尤其是閱讀古文教材，是可以重疊滿大的。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "同樣的教材，你唸的是國語音或者是閩南語？" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "領綱裡寫的是「已知用閩南語從事思考、溝通討論」，所以不能用國語思考。這並沒有那麼簡單。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實是林委員所說的這樣。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "林委員的是大哉問，其實課程目標是寫十二年，是希望到高級中學都持續培養能力，不是把高級中學這一塊拿掉。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我們可不可以決定？可不可以送課審會？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "可以送課審，然後再經過第一群組修改再送課審會。" }, { "speaker": "張惠貞", "speech": "謝謝各位可以讓我們送課審會，因為我們10月8日、10月15日及昨天又開了核心會議，我們小組再整理內容，因此再做一點修正，所以容許我們把它修正好後，11月12日還會做核心的重新修訂，以及13日還有大會，若大會完之後是不是可以送群組會議跟課發會？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "送群組會議就好了。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "接著客語。" }, { "speaker": "楊秀菁", "speech": "其實對我們的實質內容比較少，先前課發會對我們有一些修改的建議，大致上我們都有根據課發會的建議來修正，還有少部分的調整，同等工作圈的學習內容還是有一些重複的部分，我們會再交由核心會議的細部會議修正。" }, { "speaker": "楊秀菁", "speech": "包括很多的時間分配等部分，剛剛有提到要擺在高中的部分，所以我們會一併處理。" }, { "speaker": "楊秀菁", "speech": "課發會的建議我們有作網底跟標示。" }, { "speaker": "楊秀菁", "speech": "在主要學習內容的部分，請看到草案第7頁，不管是在課發會或者是公聽會比較聽到一些意見，也就是我們原來的序寫會有一個問題，因此我們大致有做修訂，接著比較大的修訂是在評量的部分…。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "開放給委員來討論，因為剛剛都已經一併報告過了。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "有關於客家語文附錄四放在這邊的主要目的是什麼？是否有可能把它移到以後的課程手冊？" }, { "speaker": "楊秀菁", "speech": "當初認為這樣比較沒有辦法清楚掌握到，所以建議用表格呈現，這也是延續九年一貫的做法，他們認為這比較明確，讓大家一眼就可以知道不同學習的重點是什麼，假設建議要擺在個人課程手冊，我們會請核心小組來看一下大家要如何處理，以上。" }, { "speaker": "歐用生", "speech": "請看到第6頁寫作的部分，4A－1－1這部分我不是很清楚，因為我不是客家人，客家語是不是有文字？" }, { "speaker": "楊秀菁", "speech": "有，漢字。" }, { "speaker": "歐用生", "speech": "第二個問題，小學階段需要有一些文字嗎？評量1－2「…」，是不是在小學階段還要再寫一些什麼？我們現在看到的語文就已經五、六種語文，將來小孩子真的很可憐。" }, { "speaker": "楊秀菁", "speech": "簡單回應，其實客家語言的委員在修訂文字書寫時，基本上還是以既有的漢字為主，所以這裡講說要認識一些文字書寫，是用中文就可以來呈現，因此在第一、二階段的認識階段都是以漢字為主，因為客語雖然很常用，但漢字寫起來非常難，因此他們主要是以簡單的開始，因此不管是筆試或者是文字書寫第一、二階段都以漢字為主，不會進入到拼音，以上說明。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "第6頁能夠識別客家語文及本國語文書寫的差異，這裡會有本國語文書寫指是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "楊秀菁", "speech": "本國語言講的是國語，就是有一些語法轉到客家的文學作品，雖然是漢字，但是語法不太一樣。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "所以本國語文裡面有各式各樣的？" }, { "speaker": "楊秀菁", "speech": "這其實有牽扯到一些立場的問題，也就是他們認為客語也是本國語言的一種，所以他們不想要只強調國語文，他們認為基本上對應的對象也是國語文。" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "這部分我有兩點要澄清的地方及一個建議，剛剛歐委員擔心孩子可能要同時學很多的語言很辛苦，我們要特別說明一下，因為本土語言總共分成閩、客、原、新，其實是多選一的方式，而且是只有一節課，以上說明。" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "第二，就客家語文的部分，文字與漢字是一樣的，比如謝謝是「安仔細 / an³¹zii³¹se⁵⁵」。" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "十二年基本教育其實對於專有名詞都有固定的語文用法，其實是用統一的國語文之統一名稱來說明。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "剛剛秀菁的說法，表示用詞是有特別的用意。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "四縣的漢字寫法應該是「恁仔細 / an³¹zii³¹se⁵⁵」，海陸用的是「承蒙 / shin⁵⁵mung⁵⁵」。" }, { "speaker": "謝金城", "speech": "其實我的小孩子距離上國小還不遠，尤其是在小三的時候，那時候要學很多語言，我太太本身是客家人，我是閩南人，我的小孩子回到家裡後不知道怎麼講話，所以有一段時間，到現在我們的共同語言是國語，小孩子已經上到高中，客語及閩南語都不會講，因為當時太多混淆，我們想這樣下去也不是辦法，閩南語有閩南語的拼音方法、客語有客語的拼音方法、英語有英語的拼音方法，整個是錯亂的。因此我們要考量學習者的環境，如果沒有那個環境，硬要他接受，其實是沒有辦法的，因此我們說如果客語跟閩南語學一種，就讓他自己學。但學校不是這樣，可能什麼學生都要，就變成學生要跟著老師的語言來學習，因此我們在訂課綱時應該要站在小學生的立場來想，因為聽說讀寫不容易，在座有誰可以讀跟寫台文漢字？閩南語或者是客語有辦法寫得出來嗎？" }, { "speaker": "謝金城", "speech": "可能只有唐教授可以。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "謝金城", "speech": "如果不可以的話，那就越寫越多，因此這要多站在學生的立場來想比較容易成功，否則站在很多工具的學習上，就會造成很多學生的困擾、家庭的困擾，因為國小每週要上一節，因此老師一定要去學客語或者是閩南語其中一種，這也是現場國小很多老師的疑惑。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "台語可以用電腦輸入的嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以，輸入法是教育部開發的。" }, { "speaker": "曾世杰", "speech": "我覺得大家對於孩子們是否學很多，不知道學不學得會。1983年有一個生命覺識的研究，一種完全不給符號，一種是給符號，有加符號的小孩子學好一點，如果有表音的符號，將來要回憶出那個字代表什麼意思的時候，表現會好一點，這是1983年就有人做了實驗為證；英文是完全的拼音文字。" }, { "speaker": "曾世杰", "speech": "孩子不管學哪一種語言的時候，有沒有可能一個禮拜一節課，只是用聽、說，到后來就可以記得出這個語言，或者是仍然需要一個文字媒介幫他回憶語言的語音？不管中文上的意符或拼音符號，所有的文字都是音的，如果在過程當中能夠表徵符號的話，我覺得對學習是比較好的；當然會不會造成混淆我不知道。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "三個語言通過了以後，因為我怕講了又會影響結果，但我想三個一定都會過是沒什麼問題。剛剛院長問有沒有證據，其實答案是有的，但不是重點。多語學習的觀點發現學習本身會互相激發。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "第二，學標音或者是學字在學習上是有意義的，如果我們學習語文○，如果有○其實對語言的學習是會有幫助，我剛剛說是單語跟多語，這並不是假的，其他的議題我們就不討論了，目前看得到真正的研究顯示是有多的學習，但是不是剛開始的時候多少會有一些互相的牽制現象，即使是如此，是好的嗎？" }, { "speaker": "謝金城", "speech": "簡單的問候是會的。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "其實有時候可以鼓勵小孩子多說其他的語言。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "專業會不會也是一種障礙？當一個調查時會不會有很多的變數，如果當初的實驗是不是也提供一個數據，實驗的對象、實驗的學生、實驗的人群之量體夠不夠大，是不是有平均的分布？" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "如果有一個多元學習互相成就、互相激蕩的量出來，是不是也出現一個多元學習放棄學習的量，因為多元一起學習，那就不學了，或者是拒學，多學文字外對於語言學習是有幫助的，因此就這樣學習的時候是不是有一部分的人放棄，放棄的比例拿進來、成就的比例也拿進來，這樣才可以衡量學習是否好或有效。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "現在的小學生我在現場看滿多的，孩子特別在二年級都是非常活潑跟可愛，可是我們的孩子在一年級過一半就開始放棄學習，我跟老師說現在就放棄學習，未來的十幾年怎麼辦？那個孩子其實沒有問題，因為我親自教過他，有的孩子是真的可以吃兩碗，但我們一定要他吃兩碗，他就不吃了，他不會告訴你壓力過大、扛不住，然後就放棄了，老師會很婉轉鼓勵跟勉勵，所以到小二就有比較高的比例放棄，這是很正常的。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "因此這一些數據也能夠同時看到放棄的比例，我就比較相信這個數據，否則我的發言比較在乎我看到的是過去忽略掉那一塊的孩子，可能我們的個人經驗比較讓我們看到有成就的那一群孩子，因為那是各位的族群，那一群人才是臺灣的未來，因為有成就的人早就算在功勞裡面了，那一群人如果我們放棄的孩子才是課綱加分的選項，因此我想要瞭解的是如果有辦法實證放棄的點是低的或者是相對低，我覺得那個數據是可以參考的。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "我當然知道一起學習不是太壞，但吃不下就會噎死，很簡單就是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "曾世杰", "speech": "我再補充說明一下，我很贊成文虎兄對孩子的學習。" }, { "speaker": "曾世杰", "speech": "我跟大家談一件事，新竹堅石鄉的心光國小，校長跟我講說他們學校補助教學科技化評量是弱的，但英文通過最高，因為我們小孩子從小就在學羅馬拼音，因此可能對他們來講有牽引的效果。" }, { "speaker": "曾世杰", "speech": "拼音文字是羅馬文字的拼音，好像跟英文是同時開始的，因此在子音上是相似的，因此也許有互相刺激激發的效果。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "這就是題目可愛的地方，可以好好來研究，客語不用拼音，就是用漢字。所以每一種語言都有不一樣文字的表徵需要研究，也要考慮跨語文，中文是非常特別的一個符號表徵，因此我只能說還有很多需要的研究。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "剛剛有一個比較怪的是，我們用的語文是「其他本國語文書寫」，這部分是不是可以改？雖然我知道你們委員有特別的用意，但有特別的用意就不太好。" }, { "speaker": "楊秀菁", "speech": "我回去跟我們的委員商量一下。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "委員還有沒有針對這部分意見？如果沒有意見的話，是不是可以送課審會？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "客語修改後就送課審會。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "接下來是原民語。" }, { "speaker": "湯愛玉", "speech": "主席、各位委員大家好，我們這一組原住民族語文因此小組的召集人下午有課，所以就由我來代表發言，我是副召集人，我是太魯閣族的 Apay。" }, { "speaker": "湯愛玉", "speech": "已經完全了書面的審查，最近加開三場諮詢會議。對於公聽會的意見，研修小組已經針對內容作文字的調整，請看到會議資料第232頁至第254頁，大概二十幾頁的篇幅，其實公聽會的結果，他們的重點對研修小組的領綱都沒有太大的意見，基本上是關於師資培育及語文政策的回應，二十多頁的回應，事實上研修小組已經編寫一些條例，因為這一次總綱從基本理念一直到學習評量，所以沒有寫到師資培育的部分，但事實上我們都已經擬好了，我們有就這部分提一些資料在第59頁至第62頁，我們也有做一些排序。" }, { "speaker": "湯愛玉", "speech": "我們比較疑惑的是我們覺得這方面非常重要，我們也知道國際化必須要本土化，但沒有師資培育重要的政策及培育條例，很難做細節部分，因此我們很希望這一次做的第59至第62頁的25條是不是可以作確認並作繼續處理，我們也有作持續性關懷。" }, { "speaker": "湯愛玉", "speech": "希望教育部的課審會也有原住民代表，以上報告。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "就內容方面有沒有建議？" }, { "speaker": "湯愛玉", "speech": "我們修改在第232至254頁，針對公聽會提出的意見所作的回應，包括修改的說明都在右欄。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "課發委員都看過他們改的那一塊。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "關於你們提到要送協作平台的部分沒有問題，請你們排一下排序最需要做到的。" }, { "speaker": "謝金城", "speech": "哪裡有改？" }, { "speaker": "湯愛玉", "speech": "第232至254頁都有改了。公聽會跟審查意見都有放在裡面。" }, { "speaker": "曾世杰", "speech": "請看到草案第7頁，這裡有一個聽說讀寫聆聽部分的第四階段，能分辨句子的正確語調，第三階段是生活階段的語調。「語調」是什麼意思？" }, { "speaker": "湯愛玉", "speech": "可以分辨疑問句或者是肯定句等等，原住民語言也有這樣的機制。" }, { "speaker": "曾世杰", "speech": "發展上應該先聽嗎？比如說話第三階段第一項能正確說出句子的語調，發展順序應該依照第7頁最上面上來的格子，到第四階段才能聽，但事實上第三階段就可以說了，卻到第四階段才能聽，我覺得這一件事好像應該要倒過來。" }, { "speaker": "湯愛玉", "speech": "謝謝曾副院長，再拿回去給研修小姐討論。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "一樣是學習搭配的問題，請看到第6頁，1－1－2有一個單雙音節及1－－1，說話的隔壁第7頁是2－1－1單母音跟子音，1－2是單雙音節及中音。書寫不一樣了，但二年級有一個單雙音節的語詞，但還好。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "我要看的是第10頁的部分，第10頁是學習內容，我們立了那個標準要求之後，我們的內容是一年紀的AA1－1，只有母音跟子音，數學系統是另外一件事，但到了第二階段才有學到單多音節，在剛剛的聽說讀裡面在第一階段就要檢測單多音節，但在學習內容當中卻在第10頁的兩年後才有辦法學到單多音節及中音，請問以哪一個為正確？前面的學習表現都是在第一階段就必須要有，教材擺到第二階段才有，我剛剛講的是第10頁學習內容AA－2－1、AA－2－2。" }, { "speaker": "湯愛玉", "speech": "第6頁聽辨子音及母音，原住民有很多是單雙音節以上，第10頁就變成單跟多音節，因此並不是單跟雙，而是單與多音節。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "我現在講的是第二階段，第一階段並沒有這一些東西。學習內容第一階段都沒有這一些東西，請看到第10頁第一階段只有母音、子音及學習系統，學習表現都在第一階段就要求中音跟音節。" }, { "speaker": "湯愛玉", "speech": "我們可以做的調整是第10頁的第二個可以往上調，單音節的部分可以放到學習階段第一階段。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "剛剛的共識是說要放到第二階段才要學拼音，我不知道是不是這樣子？" }, { "speaker": "林明佳", "speech": "我們是先處理拼音的部分。" }, { "speaker": "王垠", "speech": "請看到第14頁課程要點發展第11項及第12項，這裡有特別提到「普高英語文必修的…」、「…」？" }, { "speaker": "林明佳", "speech": "這個是針對原住民族地區跟重點學習有這樣的規定，所以我們才特別寫這個。" }, { "speaker": "王垠", "speech": "但這裡是全稱，總綱規範的是原住民重點學校，專班要開設這樣的課程，前提是用普高，普高是全國都要開設的。文字上是不是可以再調整？" }, { "speaker": "林明佳", "speech": "我們再帶回一併研議。" }, { "speaker": "曾世杰", "speech": "我對語調有一些建議，請看到第7頁說話的部分，在第三點第1項能正確說出語調，語調是○，你能不能講出國語的聲調？因此這個句子是滿奇怪的，因此把一跟三合併，第三是能說出簡單句，如果以正確的語調說出簡單句，那就對了。" }, { "speaker": "曾世杰", "speech": "另外是第四階段，也可以把它改成以正確的語調說出複雜句，要琉璃說出句子，「的語調」就拿掉。" }, { "speaker": "林明佳", "speech": "我簡單回應一下，原住民族語文的語調會不一樣，我們特別寫成兩條，剛剛特別提到2－3－1是五、六年級了，簡單句分開來可能是子義是溝通，語調是不同場景的變化，我們是兩個分開來，所以才會有兩個學習表現。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "如果寫「原住民有哪一些語調」，這個是你們的用意嗎？比如國語文當中有什麼各式各樣的詞彙的形式上的東西，你們的用意應該是句子跟調。" }, { "speaker": "曾世杰", "speech": "你們是不是指台東原住民用拉長的聲音，表達「很———久」的意思？" }, { "speaker": "湯愛玉", "speech": "語調會隨著不同的場景來表達，所以不是那麼容易列出陳述句還是什麼，其實是有語義上的不同，因此作不同的表現。" }, { "speaker": "曾世杰", "speech": "還是寫「能表徵意義的語調」，因為語調是不能說的。" }, { "speaker": "林明佳", "speech": "可能一樣的句子不同的語調會有不同的意思，所以跟能說出簡單句是兩個層面的學習。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "我提一個問題，如果合起來我就比較容易理解，像副院長提的我就比較容易理解，我是要請教能說出簡單句，學了四年，到了第五年終於能說出簡單句，各位看到第7頁就要簡易說出自我介紹，不知道這裡面含括與否簡單句。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "接著不是簡單句，而是比較完整的自我介紹，可能介紹他的家族或兄弟姐妹或在哪裡等等，所以2－2－7是能自我介紹，但一至三年級只能說簡單句，這個邏輯順序我不太容易理解，若我是老師，我不知道他什麼時候才能讓他說一句話，但如果能夠以正確的語調來說簡單句，這個我可以理解，像以前可能講得不標準，我們校正一下就可以比較容易理解。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "聽讀說都框在第三階段的簡單句，但聽、讀、說在一、二階段就完成了，當然這當中有聽辯各種句子的日常生活用語，這算不算簡單句？或者日常生活當中的簡單詞與簡單句是不一樣，因為在原住民語我不是那麼熟悉。" }, { "speaker": "湯愛玉", "speech": "我們會拿回去再一起研修。" }, { "speaker": "湯愛玉", "speech": "當初我們在討論時，說話第一階段，第7頁的2－1－4招呼語跟問候用，也就是「你好」、「我的名字」；到第三個階段時，我們事實上要把簡單句的定義再明確寫出來，這大概可以讓大家知道這兩個階段的差異。" }, { "speaker": "歐用生", "speech": "我們有那麼多族，這麼多族是不是適合用這個課綱？各族間有沒有特別的語言學習問題？" }, { "speaker": "歐用生", "speech": "接著是有關於格式的問題，第1頁的時間分配是不是單純化一點？多少小時如何分配就好了，至於時數的部分是不是要移到時數的部分去，這樣比較簡單一點。" }, { "speaker": "湯愛玉", "speech": "關於第一個問題，我們開了公聽會及諮詢會議，大部分的現場人士給我們很正面的建議是這一套課綱是可行的，就文化部分，各族的特色不一樣，阿美漁獵、布農打獵等，就這部分的是可以。" }, { "speaker": "林明佳", "speech": "我們之所以寫這麼多，「…聯合部落學習開設…」那個課程就沒辦法開。" }, { "speaker": "歐用生", "speech": "我的意思是說，這個是課程實施的部分…" }, { "speaker": "林明佳", "speech": "「得聯合部落學校開設」相關課程那是實質要點，所以我們可以討論看看是不是可以往後移。" }, { "speaker": "孫明霞", "speech": "實施要點裡面的說明，對於高級中等教育這一個階段的各種型態學校協辦比較不是那麼清楚。第10頁的高級中學階段的意思是高級中等學校，還有普通型、綜合型及技術型，目前是這樣的意思，你就要分好。" }, { "speaker": "孫明霞", "speech": "第14頁又寫「普通型高級中等學校」，第二項寫到「普通高級中學學科中心」，這當中的用詞不太一樣，你要分清楚，假設是「高級中等教育階段」那都要寫一樣，好比法令已修訂不寫「高中（高職）」，回去要檢視一下。" }, { "speaker": "孫明霞", "speech": "規範也要一致。" }, { "speaker": "湯愛玉", "speech": "我們回去會再研修。" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "三中語言都有寫到「普通級高級中等學校依性向能力來開設語言」，我剛剛查了一些總綱，多元選修六學分，這個六學分是說可以有很多其他的選，但就截取后面照抄后面的，這個語言就要開六學分，因此這就造成名義上的混淆，因為要去解釋所有寫這一句的都要刪除。" }, { "speaker": "方新舟", "speech": "我不是語言的專家，剛剛世華老師說會有加成的作用，我認為是相反的，小學是講閩南語，大學是講國語，之後講英文，閩南語我幾乎都忘光了，只有英文跟國語還可以。" }, { "speaker": "方新舟", "speech": "看起來大家都面臨到師資的問題，像剛剛湯老師有提到師資是很大的調整，我剛剛看了閩南語、客語及原住民語，我建議是不是直接往模課師（MOOCs）直接放進去，因為有一些部落的媽媽們雖然沒有大學的學位，就可以用這個工具教小學的孩子，如果用這個方法也可以用在語言上，師資的部分比較有這個機會得到解決，當然方法論還需要再進一步研究，不過在所有的科技媒體以目前的看法，模課師（MOOCs）似乎是很好的方法。" }, { "speaker": "方新舟", "speech": "我就這幾個語言的部分沒有講太多，就科技及數位的部分講最多，因此特別說一下。" }, { "speaker": "湯愛玉", "speech": "17頁的部分我們會回去研修。" }, { "speaker": "林佳明", "speech": "教學資源第9項有寫連結大學端的資源，不曉得是哪一個部分？" }, { "speaker": "方新舟", "speech": "不只是大學部。" }, { "speaker": "林佳明", "speech": "我們會加在第六項的部分。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "關於第17頁第九點，這部分可能要拿到協作中心，並不是要給中、小學的課堂中。" }, { "speaker": "林佳明", "speech": "其實是公聽會有這個意見，希望我們連結那邊的資源。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "還有教育部要做什麼事情，都要放到協作平台。教學資源請整理，然後再給協作平台，依序寫出來，寫在這邊協作平台看不到，老師也不需要看這個，我們就幫老師把環境做好，公聽會的時候就說已經送到協作平台去了。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "我請教一下第2頁第7行，國民中學彈性的學習課程開設原住民主語文供學生研究，這個我們有一番討論，是供原住民學生選修，只要學校有原住民學生就要開，但如果沒有原住民學生是可以不開的。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "當然這個文字上的解讀，硬要把後面的學生等號畫成前面的原住民族生，也是可以，但有點牽強，我不知道當初的總綱跟文字怎麼寫的，所以最好對一下。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "我們的法意有錯，應該要調整，法意應該不是供一般學生學習。" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "全文的內容是「國民中學階段本土語文、新住民與聞…學生有學習意願及彈性時間…應於彈性學習課程開設原住民族課程最少一節課供學習，以上課程語文課程得於假日或寒暑假實施。」" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "是否可以送給課審會？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "再請課發委員辛苦一點。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "另外，最重要有一點，其實有一些實習是很普通的名字，像剛剛有提到的，我上一次有問過唐委員，我們互相檢查該要命名的用機器檢查，不要用人工檢查，看久會忘掉，該有固定的詞語，我們就用機器，謝謝唐委員點頭，一併檢查就不會漏掉，就不會大家用自己的寫法去寫固定的用詞用語。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "還有一個語言是新住民語文。" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "一、依據教育部104年9月17日臺教社(二)字第1040126588A號函，增辦一場次新住民語文課程綱要草案公聽會。" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": "二、新住民語文領綱草案公聽會訂於104年11月29日(星期日)13:30-16:00假本院臺北院區10樓國際會議廳辦理。" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": " 四、 報名方式、時間及截止日期：" }, { "speaker": "葉雅卿", "speech": " 五、 新住民語文領綱草案公聽會相關資料，已公布於本院「十二年國民基本教育領域/科目/群科課程綱要草案網路論壇」網頁 (網址：http://12basic-forum.naer.edu.tw/)，與會人員可先行下載閱讀。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "教育部希望我們辦一場新住民語文的公聽會，要不要先說明一下？" }, { "speaker": "夏曉鵑", "speech": "我很簡要說明一下研修到現在的狀況，我們經過公聽會、網路論壇及各方的意見，基本上網路論壇跟公聽會都是針對教育部的意見，就是師資、教材這方面的問題，針對領綱的內容沒有太多實體的意見，基本上是正面的。" }, { "speaker": "夏曉鵑", "speech": "我們的回覆意見在附件二第255頁之後，基本上文字修改我們盡可能修理，針對可發會的意見我們都接受，唯一一個問題是不是按照年級而且按照程度的部分，意見的部分其實是在公聽會的參與者也有提出這樣的建議，看看課發會決議我們還是要按照年級來寫，或者是同意我們原來語文的程度，麻煩做成決議後再帶回去。其他的部分不就細節多說，我們都有回應。" }, { "speaker": "夏曉鵑", "speech": "就公聽會的部分，要在11月29日再辦一場公聽會。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我會在這邊真的很對不起夏老師，也就是等公聽的意見回來，可能沒有什麼大改，也許不需要改或者是需要改，是不是等下一次課發會的時候再送進來，否則會忽略掉那一次要開公聽會的意義及意見了。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "我覺得應該徵求新住民的意見，他們覺得要審就要審，因為公聽會是外加的，如果新住民覺得不同意，我們現在就審，等到有談到再審，不能人家等了半天說不審就不審，我不同意這樣的會議程序，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "這裡面有兩點：" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "第一，其實老師很關心要以年級還是程度，其實新住民在整個領綱的時候，他們有提到程度差異真的很大，所以當時是希望用程度別，不完全用年級的部分，因為這部分聽聽大家的意見。" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "第二，大家可以就目前的資料有什麼意見，在11月29日有更完整的面向來面對公聽。" }, { "speaker": "歐用生", "speech": "程度如何決定？又分成什麼程度可以說明一下嗎？" }, { "speaker": "夏曉鵑", "speech": "現在人數最多的東南亞國家，這幾個國家的語言又不太一樣，所以我們沒有辦法議定及考試、檢定，在現場教學的老師在一開始的時候有做一些專業判斷，覺得這個小朋友從處，可能6歲以前在外婆家長大，可能越語就會很好，所以是由現場的老師判斷及分班。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "目前是七個東南亞國家，對應到菲律賓及馬來西亞火炬計畫的五國，菲律賓、馬來西亞的新住民語文是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "夏曉鵑", "speech": "每一個國家都有，像菲律賓是Talalog。" }, { "speaker": "夏曉鵑", "speech": "我們常常以為他們會講英文就不要上Talalog，但那個是那一個國家所謂的官方語言。" }, { "speaker": "夏曉鵑", "speech": "馬來西亞就是Bahasa Malaysia，有很多不同的分支，馬來語是他們的官方語言，以上說明。" }, { "speaker": "歐用生", "speech": "事實上語言的學習本來有很大的差異，像剛剛談過的那幾種語言，像客家話一出生就會講客語，到學校還要教簡單的東西，所以很不合理，因此我原則上贊成是用程度的方式，這樣的方式會比較好一點。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "跟歐老師的意見一樣，其實其他的幾個語言如果有需要，應該優先考慮混語，其他的領域達到撰寫的立場，我們會尊重。但在新住民這邊，我支持不要用原民來區分，而是用相同程度來分班。" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "我也是支持用程度來分，像第二外國語本來就是在高中才產生的，裡面不寫第幾學習階段，而是直接寫level 1、level 2，事實上課綱第2頁還寫第一階段、第二階段，因此看不出來是用level分的，我建議通通不要用學習階段，全部講好都是用level。" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "第14頁是小問題，請教育部什麼問題的時候，教育部「應」如何協調教育單位，這一點也要提給協作中心。" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "再者是排版跑掉了，改一下就好了。" }, { "speaker": "謝金城", "speech": "剛剛那個問題可不可以說一下第9頁的學習表現，如果是採用學習能夠分階段要如何分？請看到12表格的…，是不是學習階段是把第一改第二就可以了嗎？" }, { "speaker": "夏曉鵑", "speech": "原來設計就是用語文的程度，就是用語文的程度，如果大家有這樣的共識，我們就會依照這樣方式。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "其實這三種語言都不適合。" }, { "speaker": "余政賢", "speech": "level 1我們就會性「以羅馬數字1程度表示初階」，就名詞我們會再討論，委員如果對名詞有建議我們也會接受，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "建議其他幾個語言，第一級、第二級及第三級能力有普通好的、一點點好的，所以我們如果同意的話，新住民語也OK，就沒有先例可行，可以就採用。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "我在想的是如果新住民要給課審會的時候，他們一定會為什麼他可以用，其他不可以用，因為背景是相似的，因此要回到哪裡去？" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "其實我們當時在看的時候，大家可以交換一下意見，其實大家可以發現文字表現是用…，其實是行諸四海皆準，並不是以等號為一年級或者是二年級，用這樣的名詞對於其他的閩、客、原都適用，也給老師在教學中有彈性的空間，不要再分程度一及程度二，不然大家就會說我為什麼是程度一，篩選的機制為何？所謂的學習階段不等同於年級，這是我剛剛發言之前有提到，提供給大家參考。" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "因為這部分就像主席剛剛說的不用拍板定案，所以大家都可以提供寶貴的意見。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "我跟謝老師有不一樣的意見，整套課綱最忌諱的是一詞多涵義，因此一詞一定要一涵義，大體來講，大多數的學習階段、第二學習階段都要…，其實可以用初階、中階及進階，事實上也不要分太多，以現場操作來講，初階、中階及進階就夠用了，其實是可以對學生對過去的學習的基礎。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我們可不可以採初階、中階及進階。如果到課審會說應該有這種方式，那也很好，請課審會退還給我們，我們再來改，這是比較符合學習的樣態。關於新住民這一塊課發委員還有沒有意見？" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "我確定閩南語，但我不太確定客語，也就是師資的語言認證是用歐盟的標準，歐盟的標準很奇怪，外國語是跨國的，所以閩南語認證的時候是直接用歐盟的標準，不過是純語言，並沒有模仿，其他的語言包括客語都是用歐盟的認證，如果跨國語言都用同一套標準作相同的語言認證就可以直接拿過來使用。" }, { "speaker": "林世華", "speech": "不過語言認證不是拿來分級及而是來表現，大概說明。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我記得閩南語的文件有特別寫到。新住民因為還有一次的公聽會，所以麻煩召集人把公聽會看看要怎麼樣再整理。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "為什麼多一次公聽會？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我們沒有要求，是上級要求..." }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "（個人感受，不記錄。）" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我們有附教育部給我們的公文。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "我有一個直接的建議，新住民語應該讓它這樣通過，但一個但書是公聽會有一些大幅度修改的部分，再過來，直接審那部分就可以了，因為看起來沒有太大的問題，而且分級也是好的，因為公聽會我不認為會有太大的問題。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "但我們要放到第二波，也就是今天通過，同樣的公聽會回來後，看看有沒有需要修改，我們再送第一組的會議。課發委員同意今天讓他通過嗎？" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "我預計不會有什麼太大差異的變化出來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "公聽會的計畫是說過來是給課發會研議，我們可以通過，但不送課審會，這兩個應該是切開的。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "但那個「通過」就怪怪的，今天的通過就送課審，但又有公聽會。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果以今天的版本沒有問題通過，如果實際上公聽會後沒有新的版本給群組，就可以直接送課審會？" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我們還是公聽會完了之後再走第二波。" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "請第一群組看過後再召開。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "一定要。然後再跟著第二波。" }, { "speaker": "夏曉鵑", "speech": "我有一個問題，那今天的會議紀錄不是要說新住民語文寫「沒有通過」課發會的審查嗎？" }, { "speaker": "黃秀霜", "speech": "我剛剛的建議是大家看到我們的會議資料當中我們有整個的程序，假設我們今天寫通過，下一個步驟就是要送課審會，因此會造成國家教育研究院的程序為難，因為我剛好是第一群組的召集人，本來第一群組都還要再召開會議，所以送第一群組開會討論，其實是通過的，只是說第一群組的程序。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "就按照黃委員的方式紀錄。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我知道大家很累，今天議題的部分，因為這是第一次送課發會，會議手冊當中第109頁好幾張，第二波才會公聽，各位可以帶回家看一下，也就是議題融入課程這幾頁，從附件十四我們從來沒看過這個文件，大家都修改了，好多的領域都要用這一份文件，因此請各位務必閱讀，早上文虎委員有提到句子不通順，下一次就具體的議題來修。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "大家看到附件十四，星期一就會進行第二波國語文群科的網路論壇，這一部分實質內涵已經修訂過，所以就會再搜集意見，這一段時間邀請各位委員能夠再看一下實質的內涵，第二波課發大會再一併參酌意見且提出討論。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "我想每一個領域都請委員仔細讀過再放網路論壇，這一份比較特別，所以我在這裡才提出來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這份附件，請問什麼時候公開？" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "這是第一波放了之後，再修訂的版本，會再隨第二波的領綱進行公聽跟網路論壇，預計下星期一上網，再依照收到的意見持續修正。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "這些重大議題，真的要好好來處理..." }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "（個人感受，不記錄。）" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "現在剩的重大議題是性平、人權、環境及海洋嗎？" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "（個人感受，不記錄。）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這邊有兩件事。我看電子檔，可能跟大家手上的紙本不太一樣，有紅字跟藍字的兩種區別，E-4、J-4及J-14這三個是藍字，而所有其他的都是紅字，我不知道哪一個小組的同仁幫忙編輯，請問有沒有不同的意義？" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "請把電子檔給委員。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "這個檔再寄給各位委員，也就是把紅的、藍的拿掉。就是讀對這個字眼的理解，我們來讀這個文字就好了。" }, { "speaker": "柯華葳", "speech": "各位委員非常辛苦！謝謝！" } ]

[ { "speaker": "許雲翔", "speech": "我們是接受國發會的委託，進行公共諮詢與政策行銷的案子。做了一個行為準則，幫我們檢視這樣的規範會不會有問題，想知道實際參與者以及管制的人的想法。" }, { "speaker": "莊明芬", "speech": "許教授是本案的協同主持人，期中報告已經結束。這是今年的重要委託計畫之一，做這個社群媒體做到現在，政府部門發現用web 2.0是重要的，過程中有沒有一些SOP，可以讓政府跟民眾互動過程中可以進行得更順暢，更貼近需要。" }, { "speaker": "許雲翔", "speech": "先請唐鳳老師發言，有備而來，準備了ppt。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛才在看OGP有哪些參與的判準... 我用口述的。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "我是目前在衛福部工作的羅佩琪，我這邊大概分三部份說明。一是比較看不懂的部份，二是建議，三是一些大的、沒有納進來的概念。" }, { "speaker": "許雲翔", "speech": "技術上回答，為什麼會是議題指認才議題階段判斷，訪談結果，之前我看到的文件，政府內部來說，他們會把問題指認當成第一步，再來是利害關係人來做盤點，要呈給高階主管來判斷。跟部會訪談結果，關鍵字怎麼陳列出來是困難，但這比較技術性，屬於行政流程。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "關鍵字是什麼？小字典還是搜尋引擎的？" }, { "speaker": "許雲翔", "speech": "是從閱聽者角度出發，比較像標題。" }, { "speaker": "許明暉", "speech": "我對社群媒體很無知，是來學習的。" }, { "speaker": "陳泉錫", "speech": "今日出席是以學習為主，我來之前，我想要關心的幾個問題大概是：社群媒體搜尋到的資訊是不是真的是majority的意見。很多議題的主要民眾不見得常常上網來看資料，但是是要被關心的人。未來政府做決策的時候要如何使用，如何拿捏，多少分量採網路社群，多少比率從其他管道拿意見，不能直接拿社群的意見當成我們的政策方向。" }, { "speaker": "許雲翔", "speech": "不用那麼fashion的解決方案，我以前在國外念書租房子，就會收到電子訊息說明我附近有多少罪犯等訊息，這背後涉及到怎麼設計跨部會討論，這是很好的出發點。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "我也是來學習成分比較多，唐鳳跟Peggy說的，一個是大架構、一個是內部執行面向。我謹就個人認知供各位參考。首先，我們做網路公共諮詢，應該是有二個面向的議題：一個是政策本質問題，也就是「是否該去做」某件事情，做或不做各有何利弊，大家一起來討論；另一個是執行層面問題，「怎麼做」。做的方法很多，這麼多方法，請大家來討論，因為可能政府的方法會造成某些人的損害。" }, { "speaker": "許雲翔", "speech": "謝謝潘主任，我說明一下為什麼是政府內部→社群媒體→政府內部？因為社群媒體有自己的自主性，處理相關文獻，對於刪文會很敏感，會有很大反彈，這樣的想法之下，研究者這邊有清楚的切割開來。政府內部程序走完之後，盡量不要影響它的動態，可以做一下微調。微調的程度有多少，這是我們要再思考。" }, { "speaker": "莊明芬", "speech": "謝謝大家的分享。就架構來說，整體建議程序，政府內部的流程少了inform的準備、素材的準備，過去做過哪些公聽會，沒有高品質inform就沒有高品質的討論，過去的形成背景需要一個交代。join上很多議題我也覺得太深奧。陳核的時候也要把這些涵蓋進去。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "呼應主任所說「前測」的概念，我完全附議，我也可以理解許教授說明社群對「刪文、修正」的敏感；但這兩件事是獨立的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第一個是關於跨部會，我先只是分享一下vTaiwan的經驗，每個部會、處室都有自己的帳號，我們會cue不同部會來，例如網路霸凌除了法務跟衛福部，但也牽涉到教育的時候，我們會cue教育部來。" }, { "speaker": "許雲翔", "speech": "還有沒有尚未參與發言者，希望發言。" }, { "speaker": "蔣添鑫", "speech": "各位先進好，我是委託單位，這是未來重要的方向，我從三個面向來講我今天的建議，這個研究的目標，希望做到的事情；我對目前架構的看法；第三個是我個人的建議或想像。" }, { "speaker": "陳英傑", "speech": "我是負責Join平台的承辦科科長，剛才大家討論很多，受益良多。我要提「社群媒體」代表的是說，眾人的聲音在網路上去表達，你要找電子媒體需要程序，一般人會覺得成本太高，所以會在公眾論壇表達意見，近期的洪仲丘、三一八在社群討論熱烈，但政府參與不高，政府沒有適時進入參與，告訴他們正確的觀念或方向，會導致負面情緒，希望有理性的討論園地，透過行政程序或手段，也跟社群的老師們合作，如何去跟民眾互動，希望大家都聽得懂的語言。發言在Join的經營上，希望來了解這個問題，提供相關的名詞說明、議題背景。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "最後分享一份資料，是Join培訓完去行政院跟副院長報告的內容。報告的重點不是關於工作坊的成效，而是部會實際要執行網路互動的困難點。我們發現培訓後部會同仁的狀況是「知識跟技能有吸收，實際落實有困難」，困難之處大家可以看這些從匿名問卷整理出來的困境：第一，人力不足，業務量已繁重，趕鴨子上架反而做出的溝通粗糙，引來更多民怨；第二，KPI 衝量重量不重質，造成多勝少負情況，阻礙了理想言說情境；第三，由上而下（長官依照輿情指定議題，反而變成大眾媒體做議題設定）的議題待思量；第四，長官層級也需要培訓；第五，跨部會協調機制仍然缺乏；第六，執行時需要輔導機制，例如有人建議「國發會可以讓講師團有權實際到機關執行案例，仿照企業診斷流程」，和後續陪伴指導的需求。" }, { "speaker": "許雲翔", "speech": "由上而下、由下而上都有，能否內化成公務員的素養機制，還是會回到培訓的部分，需要讓他能夠去內化到工作流程，希望把培訓加入流程。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "除了培訓，也希望有標竿學習，不一定都是比賽，除了衛福部之外，希望有好的案例，可以被參考模仿學習。Peggy在衛福部已經是經典了，希望能有另一個公務部門可資借鏡的經驗，會更有說服力。" }, { "speaker": "陳泉錫", "speech": "Peggy所彙整的回饋意見中，公務員不願意接受社群互動的困境，值得重視。公務機關目前員額嚴格受限，但業務與與效率要求日益增多，多數公務員真的是忙。但是否真忙，可以客觀的比較這個業務性質跟國外比較，可大致了解公務員叫人力不足，是不是合理。如不合理即應補人，否則社群互動反成公務人員負擔。" }, { "speaker": "謝翠娟", "speech": "我知道老師壓力很大，跟大家說明，希望有一個個案變成案例，追蹤一個事件，希望有個案可以學習，假如這件事是大家都要做的，希望減少協成本，不管是個案或通則，這次是要跟政策賽跑，要跑得更快才有價值，不是想像中未來十年要做的，馬上要做出來的領先在做的人。但是要請老師除了現況了解，要比現況做個更快，看國外的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我提一個具體的建議，這份逐字記錄後寄給與會者，有十天時間，大家如果有覺得不適合公開的可以直接修改或刪掉，自己的發言自己刪。" }, { "speaker": "謝翠娟", "speech": "同意，但只有這個研究座談這樣處理，而非整個研究案。" }, { "speaker": "許雲翔", "speech": "是否還有想要表達的？" }, { "speaker": "林純秀", "speech": "半個局外人來看，想給一點建議，主辦單位給這樣的建議。這個東西如果是公務人員日常工作，為什麼要做這個平台，是為了做溝通，跨部會溝通，公部門不是單一個體，橫向縱向這些配套有沒有做起來，但是這是一個開始。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "快速歸納，vTaiwan也算是一個研究案... 因為沒有拿政府的錢，可以隨意做嘗試。" }, { "speaker": "林純秀", "speech": "剛才講太快，質、量問題，公共政策討論量的問題，而是資料完整性，公聽會、民間資料等，越完整，利害關係人就會進來，根本不需要公部門做操做。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "呼應唐鳳的部份，我覺得目前缺一塊是「政府內創新案例的紀錄與傳播」。Airbnb在vTaiwan的徵詢很順利，是因為vTaiwan的前一案(uber)徵詢過程中的所有逐字稿、會議、流程等都有留下完整紀錄跟脈絡，airbnb看完後對於整體流程就有概念了。所以，如何把這些政策溝通的創新案例記錄下來，讓未來想要仿效的政府單位、想要參與的民眾有前例可循，這件事也很重要。" }, { "speaker": "許雲翔", "speech": "不只是mediator，我們研究者也是拿你們的案例，這個可以呼應到主任說的標竿學習，可以更容易來做。與會的各位是否還有想要補充討論的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "今天的逐字稿會議紀錄已經出來了。導入真的不難..." }, { "speaker": "許雲翔", "speech": "看到自己的文字在上面有點嚇到..." } ]

[ { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "為了節省時間，我們開始開會。確定議程有沒有問題？" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "沒有意見就確定。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "接著主席報告，是「謝謝大家出席。」" }, { "speaker": "書面報告", "speech": "業務報告。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "本次議程共有六個附件：綜整意見、融入說明、藝術課綱草案、11/7課發會第11-12次會議紀錄摘要、綜合草案、健體草案。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "補充說明，附件1第4至9頁，我們在各領綱草案進行時，請針對群組第三群組第四次會議的決議提出回應及說明。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "這這部分請大家可以看到第4頁，這是針對健體還有很多的意也有作成決定。提案二是針對藝術，提案三是針對綜整。以上。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "這個部分我們等一下來討論。" }, { "speaker": "劉欣宜", "speech": "有關於剛剛提到第四大點各領綱草案附錄二內容，議題工作圈在做議題二的時候是跟著各個領綱小組進行的，但目前的進度，大家手邊領綱的議題二是依據領綱草案第四版的對應重點，但第五版的草案是課發會群組會議上會討論的。" }, { "speaker": "劉欣宜", "speech": "議題工作圈也會針對群組會議確認確認第五版的領綱草案內容再來作學習的更新，因為各個領綱其實都有微幅調整，先作第一點說明。" }, { "speaker": "劉欣宜", "speech": "第二，第一波領綱議題融入的部分，其實在四區的公聽會當中，有收到滿多的建議及意見，所以議題工作圈在10月31日及11月7日的課發會都有針對委員提出 來或者是諮詢老師提出的建議作一個調整，目前最新版的議題架構請大家可以看到第10頁的議題附件二，這是有關於議題融入最新的架構這個這個架構就會再依據 今天群組會議後領綱草案第五版再做對應的連結。因此可以從第13頁可以開展，依據是性平、人權、環境及海洋，歷經了幾次的會議、核心工作圈的會議及課發會 的討論，這個是最新的定版，也會在我們的公聽會當中，我們想請各位委員及主席確認議題工作圈會再針對今天確認後的課綱草案第五版來更新附錄二的內容，同時 也會在第二波的草案中會進行當中，接著會牽涉到架構的修正，也會同步更新目前第一波領綱草案的內容，以上說明，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "謝謝剛剛欣宜的說明。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "我們看到藝術及綜合活動在今天會議之後，是第五版領綱草案，今天群組會議討論確認後，就送到教育部課審會，這算跑最快（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "第二個部分健康與體育也是今天第五版的領綱草案，今天群組討論完後就送課發會大會，還要跑那一趟。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "第三個是社會的部分，教育部課審會成立了一個叫做「歷史課綱專家諮詢小組」，這個小組的任務就是後面那一些，其實那邊的任務型比這邊多很多，這個是簡化的，之後才會進行社會領域課綱的研修，所以研修的程序可能還要一段時間。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "第四個是生活課程草案，這是第二波才要進入到公聽會及網路論壇。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "整個進度是這樣，OK嗎？" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "業務報告第四點是請求大家同意，也就是領綱附錄二的資料，附錄二的資料請大家同意議題工作圈對於附錄二領綱學習重點依領綱草案第五版草案更新之，也請委員針對附錄二提供意見。這樣可以嗎？" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "第四點（三），請同意實質內涵的部分，因為第二波草案及網路論壇還會有一些意見進來，所以同意讓議題實質內涵能夠配合第二波的公聽會及網路論壇的意見，持續來作修改，定案後送課審會。可以的話，我們就同意。" }, { "speaker": "范信賢", "speech": "「10月23日」請修正為今天「11月23日」。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "業務報告第1行，10月改成11月。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "謝謝唐鳳委員及薛雅婷紀錄。" }, { "speaker": "書面報告", "speech": "案由一：有關十二年國民基本教育藝術領域(含國民中小學、普通型及技術型高中)課程綱要(草案)，提請討論。" }, { "speaker": "書面報告", "speech": "一、旨揭領綱草案共二份，包含國教院主政之1-12年級課程綱要(含：10-12年級之普通型高級中等學校教育課程綱要草案)及技職司主政之10-12年級技術型高級中等學校課程綱要草案。" }, { "speaker": "書面報告", "speech": "二、上述領綱草案經104年11月7日課發會第11次會議討論，並同意藝術領域課程綱要(草案)在參酌課發會委員意見後，於本群組會議討論確認修訂之版本後，送教育部課程審議會。" }, { "speaker": "書面報告", "speech": "三、茲由藝術領綱研修團隊參酌課發會委員意見，調整草案內容並提出第五版領綱草案，詳如附件3(另附紙本)。另檢附領綱研修團隊針對11月7日課發會第11次會議所提意見之回應說明(如附件4)。" }, { "speaker": "書面報告", "speech": "四、請藝術領域課程綱要研修小組及技術型高級中等學校研修團隊分別進行5分鐘研修說明。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "請看到第33頁。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊花", "speech": "藝術領域分為兩個區塊跟各位師長報告，一個是國小、中、普通型高中及技術型高中，在上次的會議當中，有關於學習內容中間的橫線，我們通通把它去除了，這是一個大的改變；第二個部分是就份量更加精準的這一塊也作了一些調整。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊花", "speech": "上次會議當中總共的藝術領域四個階段，學習表現總共有100條，現在調為97條，97條四個學習階段在三個主要的學習專業，平均起來大概比如視覺藝術、表 演藝術大概只有只有8條，在學習內容的部分原來是140我們，我們減併為135條，所以四除以三，每一個類別大概是11左右。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊花", "speech": "相關細節的調整請師長看到第5頁至第19頁的灰色底都是經過調整細節內容的修訂。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊花", "speech": "第三個部分是當我們在開全體委員會時，院裡面有特別提到電影藝術能夠加進去，想辦法加在學習內容，讓藝術學習的部分把藝術調進去，這是主要有關於小學、國中、普通型高中修訂的大調整部分。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊花", "speech": "另外，有關於技術型高中，在上次的會議，我們主要修訂的在第2頁科目組合時間分配的部分，本來有一個以老師為考量，這個我們把它刪除了。因為技術型高中相 關學習表現內容份量的部分，大家沒有特別覺得需要再作調整，不過我們在有關於名詞釋義針對空間性表現及基本設計部分，我們有做一點修正，讓它跟其他的差不 多份量，跟各位委員報告，請各位委員能夠給予指正。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "謝謝陳委員，有補充的嗎？大家有沒有什麼意見？對於藝術領域第五版的草案？大家都沉默是表示都同意的意思嗎？" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "我針對後續的處理，我們國教院會再次校對跟總綱文字一致化的處理，這個部分是我們後續會做的。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "現在我來請教，因為技術型高中也在頁邊，那是整體的詢問，對於技術型高中草案的附錄二，現在是在議題融入說明擺的是過程性的文件，各位委員可以參考以例如 為例，像健體也是一樣的。這個是過程性的文件，在未來的進度上，我們也有行文給技職作議題融入的說明，牛組長在這邊，是不是明年啟動，把內涵放進來，也就 是技術型高中的草案與議題內容說明的進度，可不可以在這一次的會議當中一併提出報告？謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "牛涵釗", "speech": "不好意思，剛剛從台南趕上來，還有一點喘。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "牛涵釗", "speech": "工作小組這邊目前針對課綱整合各領域的部分，實際上宋教授要指示先由小組研議之後再向大會作確認，現在各領域在各會議當中部分都還在修正，所以小組這邊來 講目前還沒有作一個比較明確的指示何時要進行這樣的工作，但相關的內容部分已經有初步的草案，現在就是等之後會開一個會議，之後就會作確認，以上作這樣的報告，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "能不能有這樣的一個決議，就是關於技術型高中附錄二議題融入實質內涵及重點的對應是不是等技職司回函之後，將進度告知課發會委員，然後我們再來同步把這樣子的修訂時程放進去，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "范信賢", "speech": "這個意思是說高中這邊，附錄二就請技術型高中到時候跟著進度修訂的時候，也請委員同意，我們也會更換，同時送到課審會去，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "課審會看到的是這個文件，但實質的內涵要同步更新，所以也請技術型高中的團隊，就是領綱附錄二的議題實質內涵要用最新的實質內涵，但對應學習重點要如何做 就依據技職司的進度來規劃，我知道很像是預計在明年才有辦法做到這一件事，但因為這是技職司行文過來，整理的進度才會讓課發會委員瞭解，實質內涵請更新。" }, { "speaker": "牛涵釗", "speech": "一直都在更新，只是呈現的方式我們還是有一些小細部的討論。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊花", "speech": "其實在整個作業過程當中，其實都有一直對應、更新。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "剛剛的意見要怎麼決議？" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "能不能同意等技職司送到議題融入時程之後，我們會讓課發會委員知道，未來附錄二在技職司草案的精神，但我們是不是同意以這樣的草案送到課審會去？" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "大家同意嗎？" }, { "speaker": "范信賢", "speech": "到時候會同步送進去課審會，比如藝術領域國民中、小學就一起送進去，比如藝術型領域的封面不一樣，像可不可以有封面及目次，另外一個是並沒有封面及目次， 是不是就封面的部分要再處理過。這樣名稱就要再稍微確認一下，因為這邊是把技術型高中寫在前面，所以兩邊的抬頭不一樣，因此請說明。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "因為是以課發會的名義送進去，所以整個排版的確定當然是請技術型高中團隊初步處理之後，國教院再統一排版、目次及整個抬頭名稱，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "謝謝。有關於排版的格式由國教院統一處理，剛剛討論的議題融入在技術型高中的課綱草案，就是要配合技職司的決定，然後來做調整，是這個意思。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "這一次比較趕，要不然通常是東西送進課發會的時候，該有的東西都要有，要不然課發會的委員會說審什麼，什麼東西都沒有，開會的時候就同意你們怎麼樣，會有一點這樣的情況。（笑）；不過這一次的情況比較趕，所以我們就同意這樣的情況來做。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "第一案就這樣子通過，我們非常謝謝藝術領域及技術型高中這部分的努力，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "接下來就進入到案由二，請說明一下。" }, { "speaker": "書面報告", "speech": "案由二：有關十二年國民基本教育綜合活動領域(含國民中小學、普通型及技術型高中)課程綱要(草案)，提請討論。" }, { "speaker": "書面報告", "speech": "一、旨揭領綱草案共二份，包含國教院主政之1-12年級課程綱要(含：10-12年級之普通型高級中等學校教育課程綱要草案)及技職司主政之10-12年級技術型高級中等學校課程綱要草案。" }, { "speaker": "書面報告", "speech": "二、上述領綱草案經104年11月7日課發會第11次會議討論，並同意綜合活動領域課程綱要(草案)在參酌課發會委員意見後，於本群組會議討論確認修訂之版本後，送教育部課程審議會。" }, { "speaker": "書面報告", "speech": "三、茲由綜合活動領綱研修團隊參酌課發會委員意見，調整草案內容並提出第五版領綱草案，詳如附件5(另附紙本)。另檢附領綱研修團隊針對11月7日課發會第11次會議所提意見之回應說明(如附件4)。" }, { "speaker": "書面報告", "speech": "四、請綜合活動領域課程綱要研修小組及技術型高級中等學校研修團隊分別進行5分鐘研修說明。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "謝謝，我們請綜合領域說明一下。" }, { "speaker": "李駱遜", "speech": "大家午安，我先來報告一下總和活動，上一次課發會並沒有針對這部分有很多的要求改進部分，我們自己在國中學習內容部分有再做調整，我們開了好幾次的會議，還有國中的聯席會議，就把國家的學習內容及學習表現作了一個更精準的對應。" }, { "speaker": "李駱遜", "speech": "我們在11月19日的核心會議當中，所有的委員又再幫忙把我們的草案從頭到尾閱讀過一次，因為我們先寄給他們，請他們在家先閱讀過，在這個草案當中，他們 覺得還有一些文字不夠清楚、淺白的地方有一些修改的意見，因此在基本理念部分有作一些調整，在後面的說明文字部分，大家有覺得不夠清楚的地方在文字上也再 做一些調整。" }, { "speaker": "李駱遜", "speech": "在我們今天給各位的資料，黑底都是這一次會議裡面作的一些調整部分，請大家參閱並給予我們意見。" }, { "speaker": "李駱遜", "speech": "有關於議題的部分，我們在學習重點的部分有作調整，我們馬上跟議題作同步滾動式的修正及對應，非常感謝欣宜等同仁提供最新修正的資料，所以我們就一直在做彼此的聯繫及修正，我相信在議題的部分，尤其是性平部分也可以對得越來越好，非常感謝欣宜他們的辛苦，以上是綜合活動在國中小及普通高中的報告。接下來報告技職的部分。" }, { "speaker": "陳立言", "speech": "綜合領域的修正主要是參考上次的會議決議，學習重點格式有一欄刪除，比如我們在學習表現最右邊核心素養的對應我們把它刪除，在學習內容最右邊本來有一個對應的融入議題也把它刪除，這是最主要的修正。" }, { "speaker": "陳立言", "speech": "另外依據決議，我們在實施要點最前面我們有加了一段文字（第18頁），主要說明這七科並不是只開設兩科，而是依據辦理學習選課的調查，依據學生的興趣來開課，開課數不是只有兩個學分，是至少修四學分，依照上次的決議就實施要點來作說明。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "大家對於綜合領域第五版有沒有意見？看起來調整滿多。" }, { "speaker": "李駱遜", "speech": "有調整滿多的。" }, { "speaker": "劉欣宜", "speech": "剛剛老師有針對國民中小學及綜合活動的部分有作說明，大家會發現有夾頁的部分，其實完成的時間稍微早一點，議題工作圈針對前面業務報告更新版的架構我們就 試做了一份，所以是夾頁。夾頁裡面議題的內容就是最新版的架構，同時也就最新版綜合活動領域課綱草案最新重點的釋例來作關聯性的解釋，因此我來解釋一下插入折頁的功用。" }, { "speaker": "王垠", "speech": "一個名稱的請教，所有的封面都是叫「普通型高級中等學校」，但分成四種。我的意思是寫「普通型高級中等學校」還是「普通型高級中學」？" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "應該是「普通型高級中等學校」，不過這個要查一下法律。" }, { "speaker": "王垠", "speech": "高級中等教育法？" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "對，這再查一下高級中等教育法確認。" }, { "speaker": "范信賢", "speech": "依高級中等教育法，應該是「普通型高級中等學校」沒有錯。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "立法院想要大量增加輔導人力、教師，我現在確認一件事，未來中小學的老師與綜合活動的施教是不是毫無關係？" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "我們現在所有規劃，有關於綜合活動領域，因為我看你們的學習重點甚至還劃分這個是家政、童軍或者是輔導的學習重點，我只是要確認我們課綱的立場，現在規劃所有的領域的施教是不是完全跟未來要大量進入中小學校園的輔導人力脫勾？他們現在立法通過了。" }, { "speaker": "李駱遜", "speech": "這個部分我們不清楚，輔導的委員沒有提出相關的意見，但這可能是需要去考量到的。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "你的意思是？列入會議紀錄要怎麼列？" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "這一次是輔導方面的人在立法院遊說蔣乃辛委員，灌進大量的人力進去。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "因為灌太多了，所以選後會再推動修改，會再做一點調整及修正。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "現在只是要求會議紀錄上，我們這邊課綱所有的修訂都不會成為未來中小學增加輔導人力的原因及理由之一，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "陳立言", "speech": "這個議題在非常多學校都有討論，不過那個是輔導人力，跟原來在國中就有「輔導課程」的師資是兩回事，因為輔導課本來就有，並不是新增加，課綱只是因應總綱作調整。丁委員說的是針對學生的輔導人力，並不是針對課程，這是我所瞭解的部分，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "現在對綜合領域有沒有什麼意見？" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "我的建議就是在技術型高中第24頁，因為是七選二用每一科的實施要點來撰寫，我會建議每一科在整體能夠作體例上的一致性，比如評量每一科撰寫的都不太一樣，比如教學資源有很多，像法律與生活的資源，「社會運動」作為教學資源，這應該是在語意界定上能夠再清楚、體例一致。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "第24頁應該是「認知」，並不是「認真」。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "所以我會建議研修小姐是否就整份文件能夠再校對一次。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "對於筆試之評量方式，但各科在描述學習評量也會有很大的差異性，我會建議是否能夠再統整一下撰寫的用詞及體例，以上建議。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "這個建議可以嗎？" }, { "speaker": "陳立言", "speech": "可以。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "這個是針對技術型高中的實施要點。剛剛有查過高等教育法，「高級中等學校」之用詞是OK的。還有沒有其他的意見？如果沒有的話，就請技術型高中的部分再作實施要點各科的撰寫統整。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "另外，丁委員你那個要列入紀錄嗎？" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "要。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "綜合領域的課綱研修之國中、小的人力與學生輔導法之學生擴增人力部分是無關的。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "接下來我們就進行案由三。" }, { "speaker": "書面報告", "speech": "案由三：有關十二年國民基本教育健康與體育領域(含國民中小學、普通型及技術型高中)課程課程綱要(草案)，提請討論。" }, { "speaker": "書面報告", "speech": "一、旨揭領綱草案共二份，包含國教院主政之1-12年級課程綱要(含：10-12年級之普通型高級中等學校教育課程綱要草案)及技職司主政之10-12年級技術型高級中等學校課程綱要草案。" }, { "speaker": "書面報告", "speech": "二、上述領綱草案經104年11月7日課發會第11次會議討論，決議請健體領綱研修小組參酌課發會委員意見調整草案內容後，召開第三群組及課發會大會討論。" }, { "speaker": "書面報告", "speech": "三、茲由健康與體育領綱研修團隊參酌課發會委員意見，調整草案內容並提出第五版領綱草案，詳如附件6(另附紙本)。另檢附領綱研修團隊針對11月7日課發會第11次會議所提意見之回應說明(如附件4，第頁)。" }, { "speaker": "書面報告", "speech": "四、請綜合活動領域課程綱要研修小組及技術型高級中等學校研修團隊分別進行10分鐘研修說明。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "麻煩健體領域說明。" }, { "speaker": "高俊雄", "speech": "大家午安，我與楊俊鴻都是在健體領域。大家手上拿的紙本是增修的過程，詳細一點再請俊鴻來說明。" }, { "speaker": "高俊雄", "speech": "這一次所呈現的資料還是聚焦在健康與體育這兩個科目的融合，融合在一起，當然融合包含基本理念，課程目標及學習重點，這個融合並不容易，各位知道九年一貫 到現在，其實在過程裡面，為了把領域裡面要融合在一起，除了開一般性的委員大會之外，事實上我們開了諮詢會議，中小學校長、理事長、或者是社會上個別的專 業人士，都個別從他們的角度來看，就十二年課綱理念要如何進行處理，才會對學生有真正的幫助。我們可以發現去除兩個科目委員的一些本位，幫助非常大。" }, { "speaker": "高俊雄", "speech": "之後我們就回到大會裡面，有一些所聘的委員，甚至有些是核心委員的小組會議，還有健康與體育分科工作小組會議，所以這一些大概都是我們在融合的過程當中，體制內所做的一些方法及程序。" }, { "speaker": "高俊雄", "speech": "當然在國教院洪主任及俊鴻研究員、幾位助理的協助，其實融合過程中的往返，再給委員審視後，甚至在委員大會討論完之後只是訂原則，之後再回到工作小組再訂時，修正完的內容再經過五位副召再看，才送到課審會的審查。" }, { "speaker": "高俊雄", "speech": "當然在這個過程當中，幾次大會都有忘情王委員、卓委員及謝委員到大會來指導，希望課發會的意見能夠真正落實並抓得精準。" }, { "speaker": "高俊雄", "speech": "各位手上有30頁的資料，這部分我請楊研究員來說明。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "根據課發會委員的意見，都有作滿大幅度的修正，從基本理念到課程目標，基本理念有作一些相關文字的修正，課程目標是普高及技高的課程目標來達成一致，不管是普高或者是技高的課程目標一共都是九項的課程目標。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "第3頁的時間分配與科目組合，在這裡有加上一些黃點，這是有經過修正的，本來我們是有附錄三的部分，現在已經把附錄三拿掉，但希望把學習開設的多元選修健體的課程，比如健康促進與自我照護或體育接進階的多元選修，這個有放在第3頁。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "原來附錄三教學大綱的內容會放在健體領域的課程手冊當中，這個是有關於時間分配與科目組合的修正情形。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "有關於學習重點是我們這一次比較大幅度的調整及修正的地方，請各位看到草案第8頁，有一個學習向度的整併，整併為四個學習表現的類別。原本是17項的類 別，現在整併為9項必修科目的主題，我們在選修課程當中有一個跨科的模組，也就是健康與運動休閒模組，基本上我們的表現內容都已經進行所謂領域架構的統整 及整併工作，實質的表現及內容條目數的精簡，這是我們主要的修正項目。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "比如第16頁的學習內容本來有63條，現在已經整併為37條，有關於九年一貫低年級是33條，因為九年一貫是二至三節，我們課綱是三節，所以是增加了一些條目數，因此有作一些整併的工作，每一個學習階段都減少。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "請看到第37頁，課發委員的意見之前的版本是健康寫健康的，體育寫體育的，這一次的修正要點，教材選用與體育的教材選用是分科的，教學實施、教學資源與學 習評量，基本上都是用領域的概念來進行整合的續寫，這是我們經過差不多一個禮拜多的時間，根據課發委員的意見來進行修正的項目。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "有關於技術型高中的部分，也是跟著十二年國教課綱來作一些連動的相關修正，這是我初步的報告，謝謝" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "謝謝兩位委員的報告。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "請看到國民中小學及普高健體第25頁，第25頁的「挑戰性運動」其中的「Gb 游泳」，第三階段的要求標準是手腳聯合動作及前進15公尺；再看到第15頁，學習內容一樣是「挑戰性運動」其中的「Gb 游泳」，要求是游泳前進50公尺。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "我想不管是普高或者是技高，到15歲的時候，我們一直強調我們是一個海洋國家要有面山教育、面海教育，最好15歲到18歲要求我們的同學在面山教育、面海 教育把游泳當作基本的生活技能，要有一個比較相近的標準，這兩個確實是差距比較大的。當然我是比較接受技高這邊的標準，所以是不是可以把兩個拉一樣，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "謝謝丁委員的指教，一個是國小高年級標準，另外一個是技術高中的標準，所以標準的程度是不一樣的，因為中間那一碼是不一樣的。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "請丁委員看到第34頁，有普通高中的標準。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "確實，是一樣的。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "還有沒有什麼意見？" }, { "speaker": "范信賢", "speech": "請健康再麻煩注意幾個地方：" }, { "speaker": "范信賢", "speech": "第一，請看到一（一）並不是九個項目，一到三年級都是這樣子嗎？" }, { "speaker": "范信賢", "speech": "第二，再第3頁所有的模組課程會開這三個科目，第35頁選修的部分是整體都列出來，但看不出來哪一個科目底下會有什麼內容。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "在第36頁有。" }, { "speaker": "范信賢", "speech": "不好意思，那就沒有問題。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "第8頁的學習內容我會再做文字的修正，第36頁有選修的內容。" }, { "speaker": "張旭政", "speech": "討論一下，有沒有討論過電子競技的問題？" }, { "speaker": "張旭政", "speech": "因為電子競技的社會接受度不高，但因為孩子的運動空間不是很夠，現在的數位產品又有很多類似像作運動的遊戲， 有沒有考慮這部分放進去？也就是有機會在課程裡面顯現？這只是跟兩位討論一下，並沒有一定要做什麼樣的要求。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "電子競技是在第幾頁？" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "沒有寫在課綱裡。" }, { "speaker": "高俊雄", "speech": "謝謝委員，我們也確實討論過，這部分應該比較傾向於剛剛委員關心的體育科目裡面是不是有可能放進來，最典型的是大家所說的電遊，基本上是希望運動、體育是有大肌肉、小肌肉整體性的進行，所以體育分科裡面沒有放的原因應該是在這裡。" }, { "speaker": "高俊雄", "speech": "當然我們也知道最近有一些發展出來的是電子遊戲，是打鼓、跳舞或者是街舞，真的是運用電子器材來作有氧舞蹈，是很接近的。" }, { "speaker": "高俊雄", "speech": "我們沒有放進來，是認真這應該是手段之一，在編列教材時，可以考慮有哪一些可以協助有氧運動裡面，哪一些電子遊戲是對運 動有幫助的，也許在那個層次是會有幫助的。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "還有沒有其他的意見？" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "非常敬佩高校長的小組密集討論，能夠作整體架構的調整，真的很棒，而且我昨天到院，我們的助理還工作中，可以看得出真的一個禮拜不眠不休工作，非常敬佩。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "對於整個健體領綱的草案，有幾點的建議及請教，對於國中小普通型高中第3頁，時間分配科目組合最下方的備註，這邊有談到「未來可選擇作為升學進路」， 對於學習的劃分及未來學習的規劃，能不能把這個移到課程手冊，到底怎麼樣的課程規劃是對準到不同的大學、 升學進度來作整體的說明。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "第二，針對多元選修總共有開設這一些科目的建議，我建議會放在第38頁的多元適性的部分來規劃，讓一看就知道在課程發展的時候是就注意到多元選修可以開設這樣的科目。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "接著，在第8頁課程學習重點的架構，學習內容第4行有談到普通型高中選修的模組，「課程模組」為健康與體育休閒。搭配這個我也是一點請教，請看到第35 頁，第35頁有針對模組提出了6學分跨科目的選修，我覺得這個前瞻性，非常棒。對於學習表現是不是可以區分2學分或者是4學分或者是6學分？2學分的學習表現都要達成嗎？或者是不同學分的學習表現的量應該會有差別，這是一個請教。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "最後一個請教是在第25頁，學習內容第三階段「健康心理」，健康心理有談到人際關係、家庭成員等等，我就會對照到剛剛通過的綜合活動領域，我們請各位委員 =再翻到綜合活動領域第7頁，這邊也有提到學習內容，也有提到「人際互動與經營」，但請看到「家庭人際溝通的態度與技巧」，從人際互動與經營的第二階段與第三階段。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "我要請教的是，有沒有辦法把健體於綜合在較相近的學習內容上，彼此再區隔出來，避免同樣的學習內容在不同的領域重複出現，這個是關於人際關係提出的建議，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "謝謝，剛剛講的都有抓到重點，有沒有什麼回應？" }, { "speaker": "李駱遜", "speech": "就綜合的部分，在學習內容的部分有補充說明，我們認為可以跟健體作滿清楚的區隔，因為我們也曾經有跟他們一起開過聯席會議，我們都有討論到相關類似內容的 部分，我們當時也有討論到一個是看學習表現，另外一個是綜合活動在學習內容後面的附錄有增加補充說明，總這兩個部分可以有一個比較清楚的區隔，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "高俊雄", "speech": "我來說明一下普高加深、加廣第五學習階段的部分，以健康與學習的課程模組有6學分，基本上是大學招聯會高中要選哪一些領域歸納公布出來的，招聯會並不是唯 一歸納的，像高校評鑑這四十幾個領域不太一樣，為何會選招聯會，畢竟高中生到大學階段是最接近的，招聯會把所有大學裡面開設的相關學系在學士階段與健康體育有關的歸納出來，因此我們備註說明採取了招聯會的學群，因為大學的發展是有可能改變，過二、三年後，因為調整而歸納出不一樣，因此確實是會有改變的，因 此建議不一定放在備註，也許放在之後的手冊當中會比較好，我們是可以考慮這樣來做，其他的部分我請楊俊鴻來說明。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "有關於高中選修課程6個學分為跨科目的選修，因為選修的學習表現與必修是在第五學習階段，所以學習表現並不會因為必修或者是選修之別而有所不同，因此兩個是一致的。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "有關於學習內容的部分，請看到第36頁，基本上三種各2學分，是以兩向度的矩陣來組合，會產生出表現與內容不同的配對來選出一個單元，是用這樣的架構方式來選出未來的教材。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "剛剛有談到健康心理的部分，請看到第25頁F-a3－3，良好的溝通與技巧方法，剛剛主任也有提到綜合活動的例子，但第22頁可以看到與健康的學習表現來對應，基本上我們發展的基本精神是表現與內容雙向度的組合，比如人際關係良好的溝通、技巧與方法，這邊可以看到「願意培養健康的生活型態」，基本上是用雙向度的對應來產生出教材的單元，因此基本上配出來for健康心理，就不會跟綜合活動是一樣的，這是符合健康的脈絡在談的。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "因為以前的九年一貫是能力指標，因此比較容易產生出重複，但與學習表現搭配起來，就會跟健康教育每一個教材單元有所區隔，我們之前也是有經過一些相關會議 的討論，在這邊就看各位委員是不是建議要進行修正，如果採取雙向度的教材可以有所區隔的話，是不是可以達成所謂不重複的目的，這個是我提出的一些看 法，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "還有什麼意見嗎？" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "我follow一下第35頁，我滿贊同學習表現與必修表現是一致的，第31頁學習表現的階段對應到第35頁的學習表現其實有一些項目都已經拿掉了，顯然它不一樣。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "我再請教，如果是一致的話，整個架構也應該要跟第31頁學習表現的架構要一致的，這是第一個建議。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "第二個建議，那麼多的學習表現放在2個學分、4個學分或者是6個學分，如何配搭學習內容，這個部分真的有一點困難，因為學習表現尤其是健體，很多都是在體 能活動上，我要如何設計教學及後段的評量，這其實是學習表現更重要的，反而並不是在學習內容上，繼續請教，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "可能是第35頁與第36頁上面就學習表現再作精簡，提出跟第36頁學習內容最接近的表現留下來，其他再做一些精簡，像這個架構我們會跟必修課程去調整，因此普通型的架構是以前的，這沒有修正到，但我們在必修的課程架構已經有調整過，我們會再跟著調整。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "有關於學習表現太多的部分，可以思考來做一個精簡，比如像正向態度有哪幾項會跟安全教育、災害防護、健康與休閒生活，如果有接近的話，搭配組合的再留下 來，如果比較多餘的話，就會把它去除掉，學習表現有6學分看起來就不會有那麼多的表現，可以作一些精簡，作一些搭配學習表現條目的部分" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "我也是要附議主任的部分，為什麼現在還有16項的部分。" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "剛剛俊鴻說會調整了，我甚至覺得像第36頁科目有三個，我甚至覺得每一個科目就要以這個科目來列它的學習表現，就是不要整個在一起，整個在一起我們就不知 道學到科目一會學到哪一些、學到科目二會學到哪一些，所以三個科目分開列學習表現，而且應該要以1A、1B的方式。" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "我們再來看技高的部分，技高也是用舊的標準，請看到技高的第11頁，健康與護理列1至8。請看到第14頁從9開始，很明確可以看得出來是把16項切一半。 建議技高的部分跟普高一樣改成新的版本，一個禮拜可以改成這樣，真的很佩服你們，是不是都沒有睡覺？真的太厲害了！佩服得五體投地。" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "接著是議題的部分，可想而知會有一些東西沒有改到，請看到普高這一本第54頁，議題融入的內容部分都已經改了，但表現的編碼都是舊的，因此這個地方也要同步修正。" }, { "speaker": "莊惠如", "speech": "努力了這一個多禮拜，太佩服了。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "我們有好幾天都是很晚才睡的。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "有關於莊委員提出的，如果需要跟著連動，我們會在大會之前，如果大家覺得可以的話，在大會之前全部來作統一格式，將普高及技高相關文字內涵的修正，這個是沒有問題的。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "有關於普通型選修課程，謝謝莊委員提出這麼好的意見，安全教育與傷害防護這是一個科目，這個科目有哪一些配合的表現可以列出來，然後對應它的學習內容，這 是比較好處理的方式，這樣子就很清楚安全教育與災害防護有哪一些表現、內容可以相互對應，健康與休閒也是一樣，我們會作這樣的處理，每一個科目可以對應表 現內容。" }, { "speaker": "王垠", "speech": "延續第36頁的部分，我們這邊有三個選修科目，學習的內容我覺得不是很精簡，如果還有一些說明，我覺得會更好。" }, { "speaker": "王垠", "speech": "我這邊有一個請教，請看到科目a-V-5「其他事故傷害防護」之「其他事故」的重點應該是交通安全意外事故，這邊變成「其他事故」，是不是變成比較次要的？" }, { "speaker": "王垠", "speech": "另外，這邊有科目一、科目二及科目三，我覺得可以不需要，因為大抬頭就是科目了。" }, { "speaker": "張旭政", "speech": "我提的問題跟剛剛的有關，我想一想還是在這個領域裡面處理，部裡面連著兩年做了中小學學童網路成癮的調查，如果我沒有記錯，6、7％是有重度的問題，接近兩成是有可能的狀況，成癮就是疾病，如果接近兩成的話，這是很可怕的問題。" }, { "speaker": "張旭政", "speech": "因為我們現在就是網路的世界，學童經常接觸學習，其實電子經濟已經變成是體育科目的一部分，其實健康體育這一個領域裡面，有沒有可能處理學童到底是網路成癮，或者是輔導學童適當運用數位產品？" }, { "speaker": "張旭政", "speech": "否則部裡面連兩年發布這樣的新聞稿，如果假設依照教育部所提出來的，他覺得中小學學童有兩成網路成癮問題的話，到底怎麼樣在我們學校的教育或者是課程裡面有沒有辦法處理？否則這個問題丟出來不是只是丟好玩的而已嗎？" }, { "speaker": "張旭政", "speech": "我一直想瞭解部丟這個問題是要做什麼？我剛剛想一想還是有可能在這個領域處理這個問題，因此就教兩位委員的看法，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "還有沒有其他的意見？請回應。" }, { "speaker": "高俊雄", "speech": "我先針對成癮的部分來談起，當然不一定很明確有答案，特別是在處理課綱時。" }, { "speaker": "高俊雄", "speech": "上個禮拜國家衛生研究院跟我們學校一位教授的魏教授，就是用國衛院裡面國人的大資料庫作研究，三年前那一篇文章發表在IF 33.6的Lancet醫學期刊上。" }, { "speaker": "高俊雄", "speech": "「一個禮拜五天都規律運動30分鐘以上，可以延長壽命三年」，他們有達到這樣一個初步整體的結論。" }, { "speaker": "高俊雄", "speech": "上個禮拜他們發現的現象是如果你們的運動不只對心肺而已，對肌肉有幫助的運動，對於菸成癮是有幫助的，國務院的魏教授有發表。" }, { "speaker": "高俊雄", "speech": "當然體育、健體說有多厲害，也不是在說練大肌肉對網路成癮一定會有幫助，但最近的研究都是在研究這方面，尤其最近腦波的影響，你做什麼樣的強度運作，也就是心跳會跳到多少的比例，確實對你的腦波裡面的影響是很明顯的，所以對於你去影響成癮的事情，他們說可以有一些補償效果，因為他們講得最直接是運動到哪一個level，腦內的嗎啡會影響到腦波。" }, { "speaker": "高俊雄", "speech": "但我們確實在課綱當中沒有認真在討論這個事情，跟張委員回覆。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "重大議題對我們網路成癮有沒有相關？照道理，這個是滿重要的議題，因為我們現在都悶在房間裡面看電腦及看手機，照道理應該要接觸自然、出去運動及走走，但每天對付這些東西... 有沒有談到這個？" }, { "speaker": "劉欣宜", "speech": "有關網路成癮的部分，我舉一個例子來說，請看到綜合活動那一份領綱，也就是高中小領綱附錄二最新版，第2頁會提到議題工作圈在這一波領綱當中處理的19項議題，剛剛有提到網路成癮的部分，事實上在這一項議題，比如科技教育、資訊教育會提到一些相關的東西，有一些內涵是包含在這裡面的。" }, { "speaker": "劉欣宜", "speech": "不過這邊同時會牽涉到，目前除了議題工作圈研擬十五個學習主題的這些內涵之外，事實上還要把這一些內涵的部分在各領綱當中融入，跟議題工作圈的內涵對應。所以，剛剛主任也有提，我們之後在11月29日會召開十五個議題與各個領綱之間的諮詢會議。" }, { "speaker": "劉欣宜", "speech": "為什麼會這樣做？比如剛剛提到網路成癮資訊與科技的內涵當中有提到，事實上我們也抓取了 一些藝術領域相關在裡面，但這一些議題學習主題內容是不是適切及合適，這同時必須要有這幾個議題的專家或領綱的專家共同進一步確認，所以11月29日我們 會做這樣的諮詢，也希望各個領綱可以有代表，比如像召集人推薦或者是召集人本身與當初的主筆者及外部的諮詢者來共同討論，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "回覆張委員的意見，這在領綱草案第34頁，網路成癮會涉及到消費者健康，所以EV－5－3有提到，是用一個比較概括性、大範圍來描述，科技產品可能會對人的健康會對人有什麼影響，所以網路成癮會反應在教科書層次的部分，如果要跟學習內容來對應的話。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "像FB－5－1，健康生活型態的改善與執行，因此網路成癮是窩在電腦或者是滑手機的整體狀況會有影響，這與學習內容會有關聯的，因此為了要達到學習內容，就會類似把網路成癮的一些相關教材內容將之呈現，這會把課綱轉化成實質的教材會touch到的部分。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "就王校長剛剛所提到的部分，像其他事故傷害的部分，因為要列出很多事故傷害，那可能會變成太多了，所以我們用比較重要的運動傷害、職場傷害，其他的事故也有可能是爬山事故的傷害防護、交通安全的傷害防護，我們都把它放在a－V－5的部分。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "因為這個是選修的課程，所以我們提供給各校。「其他事故傷害防護」由各校決定，是有關交通安全或者是有關於運動爬山，或者是水上安全的一些防護，可以把它放在其他的事故傷害防護的範圍當中，這是這部分的處理，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "謝謝，還有沒有其他的問題？如果暫時沒有，我來說一下我的小問題，也就是就文字上的部分，這個是學習內容，但裡面有一些寫的方式與學習表現一樣，比如第24頁「Bc－III－1」要有出現表現的寫法，「選擇適合的伸展動作」應改為「適合伸展動作的選擇」。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "第25頁的「促進健康各方面...」也一樣。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "p33 學習內容，藥物教育 Bb-III-3 「避免」也改一下文字；DB－V－1及V－2的文字要改一下。Db－V－6「倡議」也是表現的寫法，請改一下。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "第41頁的五、（一）2.有提到「應捨棄片面的技能或一次性的紀錄測量，宜兼顧學生發展、個別差異、文化差異…」我建議要調整。「應捨棄」屬於比較強烈的用詞，如果講說「避免片面的技能或一次性的紀錄測量」，如果要這樣講的話，後面應該要把相對的應該要做的正面東西要講出來。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "所以「片面」應該要對「整體」，這個評量要有整體性；「一次性」就希望有「持續性」，不要只寫一次性，也就是重點是在這裡的時候，要把後面要怎麼做寫出來。如果不是的話，重點是後面的話，這一句話就不要。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "我不知道，這個還是由你們專業的領域去決定，我是講文字的部分。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "請看到第54頁，這個我不太確定當時在做這一部分時有沒有什麼規範，因為這裡是講「融入課程綱要學習重點之示例」，會有學習表現及學習內容，因此這裡面會出現學習表現、有的是學習內容，是不是在每一個領域的課綱附錄都這樣做？如果是的話，這就OK，如果不是的話，這就必須要調整，請欣宜回覆一下。" }, { "speaker": "劉欣宜", "speech": "以第54頁來說，當時議題工作圈在討論時，因為這裡主要是示例，所以在討論的過程中就有提到舉學習內容或表現文字的話，只有學習內容，看的人或許會覺得學 習內容事實上要跟表現扣在一起，但看內容的話沒有辦法連結到內涵，因此用重點之示例來表現。" }, { "speaker": "劉欣宜", "speech": "但數量上有考量到示例，所以有考量到內容跟學習都是3項，但都可以放在這裡，這是當時的考量。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "不曉得有沒有什麼回應？" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "有關於學習內容的寫法，我們會再做一些文字的調整及更改，能夠與學習表現的寫法有一些區隔。" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "第41頁捨棄片面文字等修正，會再做修正，也會用正面描述的方式來說明我們健體領域評量原則該如何進行，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "謝謝，大家還有沒有其他的意見？" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "其實健體與藝術有一個連結，大家知道什麼嗎？就是舞蹈，我想先請教一下，舞蹈在健體是表現性運動，從內容上也看得到土風舞及各種舞蹈的創造，其實我們也看到舞蹈在整個學習內容上也包含了整個創作。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "未來可能是可以讓兩個領域的老師有一個統整的規劃、設計及教學，但能不能在這邊，也就是舞蹈放在表現性的運 動之重點與放在藝術領域的舞蹈重點有何差異？" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "你們有彼此談過嗎？" }, { "speaker": "楊俊鴻", "speech": "還沒。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "還沒的話，是不是當成回家作業？（笑）" }, { "speaker": "施登堯", "speech": "大家午安，剛剛一下課就趕過來，我其實之前就有想到這個問題，只是在之前的會議裡面沒有談到，我還滿開心可以避過。" }, { "speaker": "施登堯", "speech": "一個月以前，我們在師大辦了一個師資培育的國際會議，表現藝術就是參與第三屆的會議，我們的場地都是在同一個地方，那一天也有舞蹈在做PCM，因此與表演藝術的老師有接觸到。" }, { "speaker": "施登堯", "speech": "其實我們在現場看到的是兩個世界，但我覺得將來兩個領域要進行一些對話，我想是必要的。" }, { "speaker": "施登堯", "speech": "所謂的「兩個世界」是指舞蹈的課程放在體育裡面當作一個學習內容來思考時，它還是for教育，但如果沒有表演藝術放在藝術系統也是for教育，既然是跳舞 為什麼會不一樣？我其實滿期待兩群老師可以好好坐下來什麼不一樣？" }, { "speaker": "施登堯", "speech": "我們可以看到表演藝術會比較強調技術與將來在舞臺上要呈現的東西，我們體育比較在意的是節奏、音樂及互動如何在日常生活中實現，體育除了要進入比賽這一塊，倒是比較少需要上場表演給人家看。" }, { "speaker": "施登堯", "speech": "不過我想我也不是舞蹈專家，所以我也很期待有機會對 話，因為事實上兩個單位都存在，所以兩群人常常在一起，但到現在好像都沒有對話過，這是一個問題。" }, { "speaker": "施登堯", "speech": "我想這一次的修改讓領域裡面的一些想法會更加集中，因為技術型那邊從原來分科的邏輯變成是領域架構分科邏輯，這一次有作很大的調整，我想這一次的調整應該會比較呼應總綱的需求。" }, { "speaker": "施登堯", "speech": "課綱是滾動式修正的，我們也希望有更多希望我們調整的能夠提出來，可以讓我們回去作更細部的討論，我作以上的回應，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "剛剛談到網路成癮，我建議我們這一次課綱不要提到任何網路成癮的事情，因為我剛剛上網查了一下資料，到底我們現在所謂的網路成癮是其他疾病的顯現，例如因為寂寞，因為網路並不代表任何具體的事務，它只是一個通路。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "到底是心理疾病的現象，比如學生過於寂寞或者是人際關係有一些問題，或者是賭博網站或者是性成癮，而是其他心理疾病的顯現，或者是已經獨立成為一個心理疾病，其實是沒有定論的，我剛剛花了一些時間去查。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "反而現在看起來「網路成癮」是大人太忙，小孩上網時間過長，大人對小孩所貼的標籤及污名化的方法。如果要講的話，為什麼不講電視成癮或者是閱讀成癮？" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "所以要正式成為一種心理疾病，要討論到一定的程度，然後真的有很堅持的生理研究與心理基礎來鑑定為一種疾病。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "我剛剛找了一下資料，沒有任何真正研究來區分是不是其他因素，而網路只是一個通路，幫助他去作一個比較有用的方法。特別是智慧型手機或者是平板型電腦出來之後，兒童在這方面所使用的時間過多，大人有非常多的不滿。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "但作為一個國家課綱，要把它作這樣的界定，然後寫進去課綱裡面，我覺得政府當作一個立場，我認為言之過早，因此我認為有關於網路成癮，我覺得不要去提，有關於正面或者是負面的態度都保留，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "張旭政", "speech": "我剛剛就講部裡面講網路成癮，但生活趨勢卻越來越往網路的方向走，所以我壓根都不認為這是成癮，我壓根認為這是生活型態的改變。" }, { "speaker": "張旭政", "speech": "因為我的感覺是年輕人的整個生活型態，已經依賴網路及3C產品非常嚴重，但在課綱的設計，我認為有一點趕不上他們生活型態的改變，但這問題很大、太大，所以我就不想再講下去，我想就講到這個地方。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "我剛剛聽到網路成癮疾病，我倒是覺得很訝異，也很新鮮，因為一個「疾病」是有一個很嚴謹的過程去決定，並不是一個人主觀的課程來決定，比如在KTV一個人拿著麥克風，很多人不拿，就說那個拿的人是有疾病的。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "會發現有越來越多的人愛上網，一個公司要發展一個網路系統，要花好幾億，那麼多人在發展的東西，為什麼我們的國家不發展一個從網路上學習英文，做一個很好的讀英文的遊戲？" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "如果網站是有吸引力的，我們要檢討的並不是那個網站為什麼那麼有吸引力，而是要檢討為什麼我們那麼沒有吸引力。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "像蔡依林的音樂會，那麼多人站在那裡還大吼大叫的，怎麼沒有人缺課呢？" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "這些都不是疾病，而是一個個現象，值得我們去探討。" }, { "speaker": "林文虎", "speech": "我們不認為那個現象是好，但我們也不認為那個現象是壞的，都可以給我們刺激，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "我們談很久，不過在談的時候，並沒有說網路成癮是疾病，因為疾病到成癮還是有一個距離，只是上癮會被認為是不好的，因此用這個詞。不過今天大家對網路成癮有不同的意見，所以大家就本身參考這個意見後續想一想，如果有必要再討論。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "有關於今天健體的討論，我們稍微歸納一下幾個方向：" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "第一，有關於選修課程的部分，選修課程建議能夠針對所設計的科目去撰寫有關的學習表現及學習內容等等，就是希望能夠有一個比較詳細的設計。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "第二，第32頁、第36頁的學習內容與學習表現能夠對焦，且學習表現的數量能夠酌減，剛剛有討論各方可以同意的方向。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "第三，技高的學習表現、學習內容是不也能夠配合改新的版本？因為現在好像有一點新舊混淆，因此希望能夠做這樣的調整。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "第四，有關於健體的舞蹈及藝術舞蹈，在課程教學上的對話，這個是後續必須去進行能夠來作一些溝通，並且做一些區隔，這樣少數的時間會比較有利。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "第五，有關於各領綱與議題間的互動，現在有規劃後續的諮詢會議，以及第二波公聽會及網路論壇都會有其他的意見，希望各領綱將來再配合調整。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "第六，有一些可能在我們的課綱，現在不能寫太多的東西，是不是可以將來在課程手冊裡面去作比較多的說明？這個部分是剛剛有討論到一些消費者的健康或者是有 談到電子競技的問題等等，又或者其他事故的安全部分，如果這部分在選修科目有詳細規劃，這部分應該是比較清楚的。將來在課綱當中融不進的，是不是在手冊當 中可以再做一些說明。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "第七，接著是有關於其他修正的建議，請健體領域能夠參考會議紀錄再做相關的修改。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "第八，因為現在議題工作圈是後面還有一些處理，但統整工作圈可能也需要針對各領域的課綱，可能會有一些橫向相關跨領域要再做檢核，我們今天很高興有停止有 一些檢核，也就是我們領域之間還沒有對話，看看後續什麼時間點是一個適合的時間點來作檢核，再配合各領域來對話，這是跨領域小組的部分。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "另外，我剛剛有看到藝術領域最後有一個修訂的說明，健體好像也有一個修訂的說明，綜合也有，綜合是在最後。裡面有講到小組。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "這個事情結束之後，應該是研修委員會、小組的成員，將來必須要把它列出來，這是在這一段時間有很多爭議，也就是課綱研修的委員對外沒有公開，後來教育部的回應是「我們事情做完以後就會公開。」（笑）" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "課審會還沒有，課審會只叫歷史的諮詢小組要公開，但課審會自己的沒有公開，我們這邊是都有公開了。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "我們現在是公開了，這些課綱文件也必須是要把委員列在上面。這是要他們負責，也是尊重他們，他們的名字應該在課綱裡面，到時候不要忘記了。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "大家不曉得還有沒有其他的意見？" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "「信心希望聯盟」參加十二年國教公聽會，因為他當初堅持性別只能有兩性，男生跟女生，他在 YouTube po一段影片說我們「承認多元性別」，呼籲國人，尤其是家長們要起來抵制，以免未來我們的學童們受到不當教育的影響，「提早接受同性戀，未來變成同性戀。」" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "不是那麼多朋友有參加公聽會，但是上傳到YouTube之後，一定是把連結到處發送，就有朋友問我是不是課綱真的是這樣子訂定，會不會讓家長們害怕？" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "對於這一件 事，我們是預備都不管嗎？還是有一些澄清或者是說明？性別議題小組有沒有在場？好像是在健體的公聽會看到彩虹那邊的人跟他有吵起來。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "這件事情是預計過一段時間會變化，因此我在這邊提出，看第三群組有沒有什麼要準備澄清或者是說明的地方，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "劉欣宜", "speech": "有關於議題工作圈的部分，就像丁委員所說的，我們在第一波公聽會的會場當中及之後都有收到很多，特別是有關於性平的意見，丁委員有提到我們的處理方式或者是我們回應，就處理方式的部分我先做一個說明。" }, { "speaker": "劉欣宜", "speech": "針對目前第二波公聽會，因為在第一波公聽會的時候，議題是併各領綱一起公聽，所以在議題工作圈委員的參與上，我們請議題委員可以就自己專長領域的部分瞭解，但會發現問題非常多，意見也很多，所以我們在第二波公聽會的時候，我們盡量每一場都有議題工作圈的委員參加。" }, { "speaker": "劉欣宜", "speech": "尤其語文領域、生活課程等等這幾個會跟性平特別有關，所以在這幾個領域的場次，我們特別會有性平小組的委員到現場，針對有關於性平的內容來作回應，這是第一個部分的處理方式。" }, { "speaker": "劉欣宜", "speech": "第二個部分的處理方式是承接著事實上我們這一段時間都一直作擴大諮詢的工作，公聽會、網路論壇，像剛剛也有提到十五議題，其實裡面有一些東西的內容跟性平的內容有關，所以我們也還在做議題間有沒有一些重複性，或者是會不會有一些互斥的內容再確認。" }, { "speaker": "劉欣宜", "speech": "第三個部分，剛剛有提到，事實上我們在目前手邊議程第14頁開始，第14頁是性平議題目前訂出來最新版的實質內涵，事實上在裡面並不會特別提到同志的議題， 我們要特別強調不同性別者的成就或貢獻，比如我們在裡面有很多的用詞，像第一個部分是「生理性別」、「性傾向」，性別認同及性別多樣性的尊重，我們在這幾 次的會議當中很多意見提到我們原本是沒有特別寫到「生理性別」，在這幾次意見當中都會提到「生理性別」這一塊是消失的，因此我們都回歸到性平教育法的用詞。" }, { "speaker": "劉欣宜", "speech": "我們之後會在議題說明手冊當中都會有更詳細的研修說明，還有針對各個學習主題及實質內涵的部分會再有更清楚的解釋，這是幾個我們目前會處理的方式。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "我聽完剛剛的解釋，我覺得還是失於被動，因為這一件事你有機會解釋的人永遠比沒有機會解釋的人要少很多，「信心希望聯盟」之所以用YouTube來做影 片，就是要touch很多對象。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "我知道彩虹那邊是最左翼的。就我們來看，我們其實是以人權的觀點去尊重不同的同胞，以人權的觀點破除刻版化的印象，並不算是最左翼，家長是可以安心的。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "我想家長對尊重同性戀的同胞，或者是不同性傾向的同胞或者是破除刻板化，都沒有意見。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "「信心希望聯盟」他們這一些人，其實不是代表家長，可能只代表基督教系統、最右翼的那些人。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "所以我們可能是不是也有可能去製作YouTube，直接去touch不同的對象？重要的是不要掉到那個陷阱：我們沒有做什麼，但我們卻被人指稱我們有做什麼。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "我還要再強調一件事，如果不用新的手段，我們用傳統的方式，像公聽會就性平小組派一個代表出席，恐怕終究要掉進我們有機會解釋的對象遠比我們沒有機會解釋的對象少很多。本來就是三人成虎、眾口鑠金，如果花一點力氣可以防止這個風險，我建議去做的，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "張旭政", "speech": "以上發言，是否要列入紀錄？" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "要紀錄，本來就是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實逐字稿可以觸及的人數，有機會比 YouTube 還多…" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "感謝委員，其實對於性別平等的實質內涵能夠很關注，我在邀請各位委員，其實也針對今天議程實質第14頁性別平等教育的主題及實質內涵來提出一些意見。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "剛剛丁委員提到的澄清及說明，其實我們在10月30日進行諮詢會議之後，我們在11月3日有發新聞稿來說明，其實當天有不同的立場的人來參與我們的諮詢， 針對性別歧視、性別平權、性傾向等用詞我們都有很深入的對話，這個對話也就是作為議題工作圈目前大家所看到的實質內涵之修改很重要依據。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "我們一樣會繼續採取公聽會，當然實質內涵也需要各位委員來提供意見，我們也很瞭解，其實在臺灣整體的社會，對於性別平等教育這方面的關注仍存在不同的觀點 及意見分歧，未來在課發會，我們還是會有不同意見變成一個爭議小組的話，其實在院內也考慮成立一個性別小組來處理這個議題。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "未來如果在課發會形成爭議小組的話... （以下假設性發言，不紀錄）" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "感謝各位委員針對實質內涵再持續提供給我們意見，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "剛剛丁委員提出的主題應該是滿重要，不過在臺灣或者是其他國家也一樣，這個議題本來就是很爭論性的，需要繼續討論。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "不過剛剛的發言需要一個焦點，也就是是不是將來在一些溝通的管道方面，像人家會用YouTube，我們可以來辦活動。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "他們是用動畫。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "因為溝通的方式現在我們不要侷限於這樣，如果再侷限於傳統的方法，根本沒有辦法像YouTube無遠弗界。" }, { "speaker": "丁志仁", "speech": "他做10分鐘的動畫，點閱人次已經8萬多的人次，很快就要破10萬人次了。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "這個管道是可以參考。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "另外課發會委員將來針對實質議題，如果有什麼其他意見，還可以再課發會表示意見、提供建言。今天我們開會開很久了，還有沒有其他要談的事？如果沒有的話， 我們就要感謝今天文書報告的三個領域，藝術、綜合及健體，大家都很辛苦，但都很認真，把這一件事做到這樣。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "健體領域需要一個代表在課發會報告，有沒有人自願？我們上次有人自願。這沒什麼太多好報告的，因為有一組已經送到課審會了。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "感謝王委員。" }, { "speaker": "洪詠善", "speech": "這時候要感謝，因為第一波要送到課審會，至少今天確認有兩份，就是綜合及藝術，這一段時間我們知道所有的委員真的都是不眠不休、非常用心且積極處理新的課綱，新的課綱就是對於現在學生未來學習一個很重要的方向，其實各界都寄予很高的期望，我代表國教院很高的感謝，對於後續的排版等我們會來做，非常感謝課發 委員及團隊，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "最後我講一下，因為在來的路上跟莊委員聊天，莊委員就說這一次課綱研修怎麼這麼辛苦，她特別對助理的辛苦表示感謝，因為她看在眼裡，也對助理的能力非常肯定，也就是說助理很厲害。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "她問我說之後會怎樣？我說之後會怎樣據我的瞭解是之後就解散了，我們就談到臺灣現在怎麼變這樣，優秀的人可是用一用就解散、不見了，不知道去哪裡，我提這 個最主要是說，還有人講課綱研修為什麼花這麼少錢，大家都是犧牲奉獻，開課發會的會一天、半天，然後領了多少錢？講到錢大家不太想想下去..." }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "不過基本上就是整體課綱研發應該要再投入多一些，一個是時間，因為非常緊迫，第二個是經費及人力，我在想說後續領綱如果結束的時候，其實後續還有其他要做的事，後續可以 做的事是要如何能夠連貫，不要到這邊就斷掉，很多優秀人在的培育，其實工作也隨時都會沒工作，因為規劃就是延續性，因此就人才培育是很重要的。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "另外，我大概在兩、三天前有一個研討會，有年輕人提到「課綱研修為什麼我們都沒有參與到？」他說委員是誰他們根本都不知道，因此他對於課綱研修領域是不是適任，他講的是很含蓄、客氣，但實際上是質疑的。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "我是有作一些回應，但這也是今後要看的：如何能夠有更多的參與？而且課綱研修要如何再透明化？這部分以後也要再說明。因為課發會是幾十個人，領綱小組最多也是幾十個人，比較多的是六十幾個人，但基本上都是幾十個人，不是站在裡面的人就會覺得，如果這整個資訊不是很透明的話，他會覺得什麼都不知道、什麼都不能表示意見等等。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "因為國教院、課發會及課審會都是第一次辦，之後可能要對課綱研修審議的模式要做一些反省，再看看之後要如何做改進，這是我最近的感想。這個是大問題，將來有參與的委員也可以提供一些經驗。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "像光逐字稿紀錄及委員名單公開，事實上是好幾位委員努力做這一件事，課發會才可以比較大聲說「都公開了」。" }, { "speaker": "黃政傑", "speech": "今天謝謝大家的參與，感謝！" } ]

[ { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以我跟你介紹一下這一次大概的團隊，其實都是各方的英雄好漢組成的民間自主的團體，就是很強的設計師、很強的做網頁的、做視覺、做攝影的，都是各方，其實大家就是很關心台灣，覺得說好像總統大選有點無聊。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "不是無聊，Boring。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "就Boring，就沒有實質的討論、辯論，民間希望有一些可以真的針對關鍵議題討論。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "有啊！我們很認真在討論啊！我們講那什麼公共住宅、什麼松山機場，可是好像沒有人要來。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對啊，一般媒體不會關心啊！" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "大家也不想這個…" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以你會有感覺，當你談嚴肅問題的時候，媒體都不會關心，只有表演的時候才會關心。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "這沒辦法。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "政治人物都變藝人。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "接下來到大選前會有8集，每次錄一集，有一個是住宅政策、有產業轉型。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以我們就是會前30分鐘，看你的時間，後面10分鐘就是會有觀眾問答。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "好…" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "這很短，一下就過去了。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "還是可以走動。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "可以準備了。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "距離現場直播還有3分鐘。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "哇~那個聊天室的人數爆增，迅速增加，就迅速增加中，在這5分鐘內。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "有人說好久沒看柯P上節目了。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "不會啊！每天電視都有啊！怎麼會沒？" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "沒有，有品質的訪問。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "你這樣那些拿麥的記者會很難過。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "沒關係，事實。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "離現場直播還有2分鐘。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "很多人關心市長吃飽了嗎？別餓肚子。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "有啦！今天吃了一碗麵。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "市長說吃了一碗麵，回應網友的關心。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "距離現場直播還有1分鐘。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "好。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "你怎麼衣衫襤褸？為什麼？" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對啊，在市政府工作太辛苦了。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "不知道是薪水不夠還是怎樣？" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "工作服。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "要爬電線桿還是要…" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "上一次還問那個什麼Janet說衣不蔽體，衣衫襤褸就算了，後面還給它補了一句衣不蔽體。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "30秒。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "20秒。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "10。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "9。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "8。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "7。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "6。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "5。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "4。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "3。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "2。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "進片頭。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "8。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "7。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "6。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "5。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "4。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "3。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "2。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "進現場。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "各位觀眾大家好，歡迎收看政問，第一個以新型態的政論節目。我想我們都厭倦了政治只是無意義的喧嘩和口水，我們希望的是政治人物可以提出更多對公共政策有意義的辯論，我們也不希望大選只是政治人物的權力遊戲，而是希望選舉可以成為所有的公民一起來思辯、來討論台灣未來的機會。很高興今天我們第一集的節目邀請到可能是全台灣最著名的醫生，也是現在的台北市長柯文哲先生，柯市長你好。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "大家好。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "柯市長表示他今天已經吃過麵了，謝謝網友的關心。市長，現在11月底剛好差不多從您去年當選到現在是1年的時間，想先問一個輕鬆的問題就是從醫生到市長，你覺得這1年的心情有什麼樣的變化？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "沒有，沒有變化。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "都是一樣的，一樣的想法。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "反正我都還是這個樣子啊。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "回到醫療問題，就是很多人會覺得說台灣好像出現一個醫療崩壞的一個現況，我不知道你是不是同意這樣的描述，或者用你的方法你會怎麼樣來描述台灣醫療跟健保的現在最核心的哪些問題？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "台灣的健保雖然說常常會批評，各方面批評，但是你真的給他做問卷說台灣的健保要不要取消？沒有人敢取消，所以它滿意度還是很高，我想那個要求要維持的一定超過95%的。所以應該這樣講，就是說它雖然很多問題，不過終究，終究在整個世界上看起來，它還是目前一個很好的制度，所以以前黃煌雄還開玩笑講說台灣有兩樣是…對中國大陸有兩樣最重要，一個是總統大選，就是政治改革，一個是健保這社會改革。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "所以我倒覺得健保，健保跟國王一樣安全，大家常常有抱怨，不過它其實真的Performance還不錯，至少到現在為止是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "比較負面的，就是我也知道就是現在很多國外，包括美國，其實歐巴馬之前也來跟台灣取經，你覺得現在有什麼樣的問題是可能我們必須要面對的？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "大概…講起來其實是這樣，一個系統的問題，不會是單一問題，你要講很多。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "從專科醫師太多、家醫這個制度沒有實行、轉診制度失敗、那個健保給付的問題 費用，林林總總講起來，不過當然還是一句話，就是說如果只能用一句話來講台灣健保的問題，一句話的話，就健保到底是保險還是社會福利？它如果是社會保險的話它就不能Cover那麼多，它如果是社會福利就不能那麼便宜，講完了，只能用一句話的話。我們常常就是用社會保險的錢在做社會福利的事，所以就…到後來就開始壓榨醫生，因為那個入不敷出，怎麼辦？就轉過頭來Cost down，所以Cost down就開始壓迫醫生跟護理師的薪水，就這樣。不過當然是有一些問題，不過短期內應該還撐得住，不過長期還是一些基本面的問題要解決。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以對，我也看過您說這個，我們要解決問題，它是社會保險還社會福利？可是那你的態度是什麼？你覺得哪一個會比較健康一點？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "都是這樣嘛，天下沒有白吃的午餐嘛！這個大家要面對所以我每次說，面對問題是解決問題的第一步，就是說其實健保要當社會福利或社會保險我是都沒意見，就是大家實事求是就好，你不能說我不要付錢，我什麼都要，就是不要付錢，那不可能，就這樣。所以我倒是個人沒有什麼一定要怎樣，只是民眾認清事實就好。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以像你剛剛說，因為這個是環環相扣的嘛，因為這些問題導致…包括有人說02年開始實行了總額制度，使得這個好像每個醫院就很必須支付盈虧，很辛苦，然後必須Cost down，然後醫生就得很辛苦過勞，好像每一個環節都…所以你剛才提到說還是有一些基本面問題，所以我們想說第一刀你覺得要處理的是什麼樣的問題？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "如果問我的話，我是主張回歸保險的機制，就是說福利不要那麼多。現在台北市，台北市好像6歲以下小孩子看病，那個急診，看急診不用錢。我們現在台北市立聯合醫院你知道，好像本來掛號是80塊，可是我們現在只要50塊，其他30塊是用…是補助的，所以台北市民每次去市立聯合醫院看一次病，市政府就要補助30塊錢，這1年加起來4億。所以我想還是這樣，如果問我的話說台灣健保怎麼解決？我覺得實事求是就好，不過難在哪裡你知道？每次那個社會福利放很容易，收很困難。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對，一直都這樣。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "一直都這樣嘛，所以我就…所以這一次那個重陽敬老金就咬緊牙關我一定要把它砍掉，即使民調掉5%以上我還是要砍，就這樣。你想想看，連一個重陽敬老金都不敢砍了，那台灣的年金制度怎麼改革？" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "每個都知道那個不管是軍保 農保 公保，不管什麼保通通會破產，可是沒人敢去碰，這次總統大選這個最嚴重的問題也沒有人要討論，因為一討論民調就掉了。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以我們就希望透過你的聲音呼籲改革的力量。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "我就是試試看，我來試一遍，從重陽敬老金開始砍起，我看發生什麼事。其實也沒有什麼事，就被罵一罵而已，罵又不痛。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "但該做的還是要做。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "對啊，這個就是說，這也是一個很有趣的題目，就是說為什麼台灣的政治人物沒有人敢做該做的事？其實也沒那麼嚴重，我跟你講，通常議會這樣罵…罵到最後那些議員就說，他也覺得應該要做，說他只是為了表達說他要替選民爭取福利，所以他是在罵我，但是罵完以後他說你還是繼續做，我也知道反正他盡他的義務，我也盡我的義務，就這樣。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "這個好像是政治的本質。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "反正都在表演，所以以前我說那是羅馬競技場，我現在有新的體悟，現在那個叫維也納歌劇院，就是我們進去每個人都在唱歌，有男高音、女高音，反正就這樣。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "再回到具體一點，因為你剛剛提到很多問題，我們提一個具體的問題就是之前醫勞盟有做一個研究，就是幾乎有1000多個以上的醫生做的調查，大部分的醫生都覺得要修改健保裡面的核刪制度，甚至很多人覺得說裡面有黑箱審查的制度，應該要解決這個問題，你怎麼看這個問題？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "這個叫必要之惡，你要是問那個醫院說你覺得要不要有醫院評鑑制度？也是每個人也是不喜歡，你會說你主張醫院評鑑取消掉嗎？其實我倒覺得這樣，核刪當然有些是…我倒覺得是這樣，核刪是要有，只是說有些要改善，比方說我覺得困難在哪裡？我也知道出題出在哪裡。因為醫療分業太多，你不要以為耳鼻喉科一個科，耳鼻喉科裡面比方說專門看鼻子跟聽耳朵的有沒有，他就不見得就…像聽覺或是那種要耳鳴，那滿專門的。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "所以不是每個耳鼻喉科，比如說我配一個耳鼻喉科專科醫師來，然後審查這些費用，結果他審到一個是那個耳鳴的，他常常就看不懂那個東西，就亂砍。所以我倒覺得並不是核刪制度不對，只是說沒有找到適合的人來核刪，只是說有時候因為他…你僱一個人來，他問題說他一大堆案子上來，他不見得每個都很熟悉。像我是加護病房的專家，你叫我去審婦產科的我一樣亂審，那不是我專長，所以我倒覺得不是核刪，不是那個健保核刪的制度不對，是沒有找到適當的人。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "怎麼樣可以找到？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "這就是實事求是嘛！第一個你還是這樣，第一個去審查的人你要有一個態度，不會的就不要亂刪，你就說不會，就另找高明或怎樣，另外是有一個申覆制度。我跟你講，我在台大的時候我也常常在寫健保申覆，每次寫到快要吐血，可是後來有時候…可是坦白講，10筆裡面，被刪掉的10筆，有時候7筆自己看一看，也是該刪。因為有時候就懶惰，我們叫Routine啊，比方說一三五抽白血球，你就不會想說有沒有需要，沒有什麼去看看，如果沒有必要有時候就懶惰你知道，就禮拜一三五抽白血球，你就不會說今天先去看一下病人有沒有需要再來抽。所以坦白講，我以前寫健保申覆有時候也是，我自己看一看也是該刪，其實我自己開的處方3個月後被人家刪，我再回來看也是該刪。但有些我覺得不應該被刪一個很大原因是，因為他不是那個的專家，你不是葉克膜的專家來審那個葉克膜為什麼要這樣用，這個當然會出問題。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "關於這個問題，就是審查問題，因為是不是要審查也是要具名負責也是一個滿爭議的話題，你怎麼看？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "這個跟市議會做到所有投票全部要具名一樣，基本上我倒認為不需要。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "不需要。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "但是健保局要盡到一個責任，說應該允許他覆核對不對，申覆。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "然後還有審查人員也不要不會假裝會，該換…說不會，我們這個時代就不太習慣說我不會，我不會不是什麼丟臉的事。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "大家不願意承認自己不會。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "對，人家聽故事的話，我以前在台大念到五年級，我就覺得很奇怪，我問到總醫師他每一題都會，我問那個宋瑞樓，那時候是內科教授。奇怪，我每次問他他都說這一條很奇怪，回家想想看，我那時候就奇怪，為什麼宋瑞樓，我們的內科教授知識比那個總醫師的知識還差，你知道為什麼嗎？學問有四種境界，最差的叫不知道自己不知道，再來是知道自己不知道，再來是知道自己知道，最厲害叫不知道自己知道。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "網友有沒有記下來？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "你知道最差的叫做不知道自己不知道，總醫師就是不知道自己不知道，所以他每一條都會。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "是喔。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "到那個宋教授你知道，宋瑞樓教授，因為他的學問有一個程度，他知道自己不知道，一個程度叫知道自己知道，就是說你是世界級的專家，你知道我會，最高境界叫不知道自己知道。有沒有例子？有，牛頓，每次人家說牛頓F=ma，你去唸那個，你去翻那個數學原理，牛頓原稿，他不是寫F=ma，他寫F dp over dt耶，那個P=mv，它是衝量對時間的微分，叫做 Force，叫力量。反正這個算了，這個…" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "這傻了…" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "算了，你不是念物理系就不用知道，我意思就是說，像牛頓那個，牛頓就覺得好像時間跟速度有什麼東西，它好像一個…這最高的智慧叫直覺，直覺。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以你相信直覺。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "相信啊！不過這個，反正我們都不會達到那個境界，所以不用煩惱，那個境界沒有幾個，高斯、牛頓，沒有幾個，阿基米德，沒有幾個人，算了。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "我們今天變成科學課，再回到那個健保。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "你看，我最大的本領就是把人家牽…牽到別的地方去。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "大家科學教育一下也不錯，好，還有一個也是常常討論的問題，是健保點數的折扣，你怎麼看？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "這本來就很好笑，我跟你講，那個健保有點數降到0.8幾的。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "這造成很大的問題。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "我跟你講，如果0.85還可以，表示說我們的獲利率要超過15%，不然公司就倒閉了對不對？可是醫院有沒有倒？沒有倒，所以果然是獲利率超過15%，所以…我倒覺得點數那是一個很好笑的題目，本來就不應該這樣做。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以要改。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "要改，健保要改有沒有？就是我以前講的家醫、分級、轉診、論人計酬這四條要做，這個不用其他永遠沒有辦法解決，我們現在是論件計酬。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "所以這很好笑，比方說你生病來給我看病，用一個很簡單的方法把你醫好，我賺不到錢，為什麼？因為他是按照開的藥量，他做動作，所以我要讓你很悽慘你知道，一下洗個腎、一下用個呼吸器，加護病房多住幾天，這樣我賺的錢比較多。所以我們目前這種，我們叫論量計酬有沒有？造成我們台灣的醫生不是選用最有效率的方式去解決病人，所以說給付制度的偏差，沒辦法。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以應該是論人計酬？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "我是主張論人計酬啦！不過我在想論人計酬，那些開醫一定反對，但是我覺得是這樣，那是系統的問題，一定要論人計酬，要不然就論病計酬。論量計酬一定…這個很多故事，我以前在台大" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "我們喜歡聽故事，喜歡聽故事。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "有啊！我講以前我在台大，我曾經主持過那個急診後送病房，就設一個病房，後來就是，我後來我們就做我用我指揮的病房跟內科的病房去做比較，我們發表在那個國際醫學雜誌，我後來發現我那個病房同樣一個病進來，一個住院Cost比內科病房少4萬塊，醫生內科說不公平，一定是疾病嚴重度不一樣，我說好啊，我們按照疾病嚴重度選一樣嚴重的病人再比較一次，變成差4萬塊，每一個病人總平均少4萬塊，比較嚴重的少10萬塊。所以我那病房非常有效率，你知道為什麼嗎？我只要問一個題目你就知道為什麼，病房的病人比較嚴重還是門診的病人比較嚴重？" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "病房。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "好，我們用最沒有經驗的住院醫師去看病房的病人，然後用有經驗的主治醫師去看門診的病人，你覺得合理嗎？" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "不合理。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "這個叫資源錯置，我只是把它倒過來而已，我用主治醫師去看病房，然後用主治醫師加專科護理師就變職業團隊對不對，所以它效率變很高。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "好，問題來了，這個發表在…在台大醫院做研究，然後有用健保的數據，然後發表在國際醫學會雜誌。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "然後我去…我就發表出來就給我們台大院長看，滿懷喜歡，我想說這個院長一定很高興，我們台大醫院做這麼偉大的研究。院長看一看沒有講話，你知道為什麼嗎？因為我那個病房是低獲利單位。所以目前台灣的醫療不是以最有效率的狀態存在，它是以獲利率最高的狀態存在。這還沒講完，我後來不服氣，我還去健保局去報，我就講說，我說台灣的醫療制度一定要改，花了1個鐘頭演講我那個偉大的病房的功績，講一大堆，講完以後那些健保官員說，柯教授你講的都實在是很有道理，但是、可是、但是，後來就沒有下文，所以台灣的醫療不是以最有效率狀態存在。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "民眾會好奇，到底為什麼不能夠改？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "這個很簡單。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "癥結。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "我們整個醫療體系都被財團把持，就是這樣啊。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "這是關鍵問題，把財團把持。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "所以我們整個國家不是以最有效率的狀態存在，台灣的醫療不是以最有效率的狀態存在，我們是以獲利率最高的狀態存在。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "就商業邏輯。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "對，商業邏輯。其實能不能改？每個人都知道怎麼改，可是沒人要去改。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以這個沒辦法打破，除非要出現有魄力的政治人物。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "除非我當總統。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "你這麼說。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "大家嚇呆了。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "今天有梗了…" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "沒有，不是，其實…" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "因為這個很悲哀，大家都知道問題，但動不了，這個是很悲哀的事情。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "這個大家都知道，沒有人敢改的多的是，年金不是一樣嗎？住宅政策不是嗎？每一樣都是啊！哪一樣不是？" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以其實你也曾經說過，就健保問題不只是醫療問題，是政治經濟也是文化的問題。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "根本就政治問題而已，只是沒人敢，每個人都知道怎麼改，沒有人敢改而已。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對，再回到另外一個比較具體的問題，就是醫療人力不均，健保導致醫療人力不均，然後大家說五大皆空的問題，護病比過高，在現行的情況下我們可以做什麼樣的改變來提高民眾的這個權益？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "這個…其實這也是一個問題。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "我常常說台灣不是世界上最先進的國家，我常常在…每次在制訂台灣的政策，先看一下美國怎麼做再回來看台灣，美國，我們在台灣有…我們的醫療體系裡面有兩個美國沒有，不是，美國有，台灣沒有的，專科護理師跟那個PA醫師助理。台灣專科護理師數雖然開始有，但是一直限制他的工作，為什麼你知道？因為醫生很怕專科護理師來搶他的飯碗。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "所以他一直限縮他，其實我跟你講，比較聰明應該怎麼做？應該是限制醫學院畢業人數，然後開放專科護理師，如果以醫師，如果純粹醫師團體要保障他的利益應該這樣做，可是我們台灣不是，我們是醫師團體拚命去壓制那個專科護理師，然後增加醫師的名額，就會發生什麼事？我們現在是主治醫師做住院醫師的工作，住院醫師做專科護理師的工作，然後…不是，主治醫師做住院醫師的工作，住院醫師做實習醫師的工作，實習醫師做歐巴桑的工作，就這樣。他是Download的，其實應該Upgrade，就是說你…應該是說每個主治醫師應該要…他可以Download給專科護理師的工作，給專科護理師做，這樣成本才會下降。其實這個每個人都知道怎麼改，這也不是我發明，美國就是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "是…" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "所以台灣的政治上最…我覺得台灣是這樣，台灣做一個國家，它不是最先進，所以不用自己發明，看一看國外再回來想一想就知道怎麼改了。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "但通常都是改革的政治阻力比較大。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "其實也沒那麼大，是你要不要而已，看你有沒有瘋這樣。YouBike要把它取消收費，你只要夠狠就可以，對不對？哪有YouBike坐不要錢的，哪有那回事，就給它收費，有困難嗎？奇怪，沒有人敢。我說路邊停車為什麼不收費？馬路是給車子走的，不是停車用的，馬路是馬路，不是停車場，為什麼不收費？" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以有很多長期不合理的事大家好像習以為常，也不去改變它。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "沒人敢改，我也想不通為什麼，無法理解。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "這部分可不可以再談一談，就是說好像你也反對醫生加入勞基法，不太贊成。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "不是啦，應該這樣講啦，也不是不太贊成。其實在美國是這樣，美國是住院醫師有加入，主治醫師沒有加入。我倒覺得是這樣，如果醫生要加入勞基法也可以，不過費用就會上升一點，因為你要輪班，輪班那個Cost還會再上升一點，也沒有什麼不可以，也可以，就是一分錢一分貨啊。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "是…下一個問題說關於醫療糾紛，這個是很多我想醫生包括民眾都很擔心的問題，您之前也說過就是開刀的風險比搭飛機還高，然後你也很明確主張這個不責難醫療補償是一定要推動，可不可以再多談一點？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "不責難醫療制度這也是…其實最近立法院有要…本來有人要推，後來也沒有過你知道，我也覺得這問題出在哪裡？全世界推醫療不責難的國家是北歐，有成功，但是我認為在台灣是現階段沒有辦法，你知道為什麼嗎？醫療不責難制度它分兩部分，一個是叫風險保險，就是說我們大家籌一筆錢，結果那不預期的傷亡你知道，死亡或什麼我們就賠他，OK，但是這個後面還有一個東西我們沒有看到，它叫做乖乖講實話。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "乖乖講實話。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "所以在北歐是這樣，比方說一個婦產科醫師接生，產婦死掉了，好吧，死了，那就這樣。好吧，我們就國家替你賠錢嘛對不對，到底發生什麼事？怎麼這個產婦會搞到死掉？你要講實話，到底問題出在哪裡？然後不責難，你講實話他們會去改進系統，所以不責難醫療制度它有兩部分，一個是保險、一個是講實話，因為你不講實話就沒有辦法修正體系，所以北歐的生產死亡率是全世界最低，因為它有不責難的醫療保險制度，可是我認為在台灣為什麼現階段做不到？保險這部分簡單，我們大家就湊一筆錢對不對，當然會吵架，這到底錢是要醫生出還是要政府出？還是要病人出？這個也可以討論，OK，這解決。後面那個我們現階段沒辦法解決，醫生不會講實話，為什麼？因為他講實話就被殺，他一定會在後面再被告幹什麼的，然後我們也沒有辦法，我們沒有辦法去原諒別人犯錯。所以我以前在美國的時候，我在美國的時候外科最重要的會議叫MM Conference，Mortality and Morbidity，Morbidity叫併發症，Mortality叫死亡，併發症死亡討論會，對外科醫生來講那很重要的會議就是說，這個病人被你搞死了，到底發生什麼事？所以在美國你知道，MM Conference是一個很重要會議就是說，我們要討論這Case為什麼搞死掉，或是為什麼出併發症？然後再研究說我們下次要怎麼改進。我回到台灣你知道，每次MM Conference大家第一句話你知道，那個是誰開的？大家忍不住問說那誰開的，然後有沒有趁機再捅他一刀。所以我後來回台大醫院，外科MM Conference我都不想去聽，因為全部在粉飾太平嘛，不然就是趁機鬥爭你的，所以不會講實話。所以不責難醫療制度要成功還有一個很根本的原因是國民的水準，所以互愛、互信、互諒你知道，互愛嘛、互信、這個要互諒，你能夠原諒說那醫生不是故意的，他只是他在系統上有錯，有什麼東西我們去改正。現在不是，每次出事要抓一個女巫來燒死，就這樣，沒辦法，國民的水準。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以文化的問題。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "國民的水準這樣而已，你能怎麼辦？" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "這沒辦法。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "要時間嘛！所以國家之前途，國家之力量在於國民全體，所以…這也是我最近對政治的新的體悟。對啊，凱薩說I come、I see、I conquer，我說I come、I see、I teach，我現在把自己當作一個傳道者，開始在教導人民什麼是對的、什麼是錯的，要教導你們的信念，要堅持信念、要堅持對的東西。真的，我們要開始改變那個凱薩的想法，凱薩是我來、我見、我征服，現在不是，我來、我見、我教，我來傳播我的思想、我來傳播我的Idea，I spread my idea，應當是這樣。所以這也是最近我的在政治上的一個體會，所以我們不要再當Leader，我們要當Promoter。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "Promoter。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "Promoter，一個促進者，那才對。所以我有講，不責難醫療制度一開始會覺得說，我會同意應該要推行，可是後來推到一半我看一看也是困難，為什麼？因為…假設我幫你賠錢，可是我們沒有檢討制度，那錢馬上就賠光了，因為它系統不會改進，一下就賠光，沒有用。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以我想提醒一下網友就是，我們第一個在網頁上，大家下面有那個pol.is可以參與，然後另外聊天室大家可以踴躍提問，我們在9點30分的時候會整理網友的重要意見再提給柯市長，對不起，柯老師，OK，柯老師現在喜歡…" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "柯醫師。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "喜歡教學，你現在說要Teach。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "我是柯醫師，柯P、柯教授。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "醫療糾紛你自己有遇過。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "有啊！兩件啊！" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對，有沒有具體的例子？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "有啊！我被告過兩次啊！我第一次被告，奇怪，我這麼會講話怎麼會被告？我就去查，我去問，我去問他說你怎麼會告我？他說我朋友說要告比較大的。你知道嗎？有一次我一個案子我被告，七個被告，同一個案子，從那個副院長、外科主任，然後耳鼻喉科主任，然後什麼呼吸治療科主任、外科加護病房主任，全部都告。這故事是這樣，有一個女生她是先天性脊柱肌肉萎縮症，就是肌肉萎縮，有一天心臟瓣膜壞掉，心臟瓣膜壞掉到台大醫院來看，心臟瓣膜壞掉換個瓣膜，手術插管，因為她肌肉萎縮，拔管起來，呼吸困難再插回去，隔2個禮拜再拔，又不行再插回去，後來發現因為她肌肉萎縮是持續在進行，時間久她越來越嚴重，後來拔兩次不行做氣切，做氣切，反正沒有辦法脫離呼吸器，加護病房住2個月就轉到普通病房，住9個月最後就肺炎死掉了。以醫生的立場我犯錯什麼？瓣膜壞掉換瓣膜，管子拔兩次不行做氣切，氣切用…呼吸器用11個月肺炎死掉，這很正常啊！我後來去翻病歷才知道我為什麼被告？這個病是隱性遺傳的病，她四個兄弟姊妹，她這個病，她那個妹妹，她一個…好像一個弟弟也是這個病，他從地方法院、高等法院、最高法院，然後上訴，再到什麼，到監察院一直告…告好多年，你知道為什麼要一直告嗎？後來才知道為什麼。故事講完你知道為什麼要一直告嗎？" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "不知道。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "父母兩個結婚，生下四個小孩子，兩個是隱性遺傳的病，都是這個病死掉，他今天如果不告醫生，不把這個仇恨往外丟，夫妻兩個吵架就好了啊！兩個人結婚隱性遺傳嘛對不對。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "所以後來有一次我跟朱樹勳講，主治醫師是朱樹勳，我跟他講說我在台大當…一個病人在台大醫院住了11個月住到死掉，為什麼我們整個醫療體系沒有察覺到父母潛意識的罪惡感？我們沒有把他解除他的罪惡感，所以我跟你講，絕大多數的醫療糾紛沒有醫療過失，絕大多數的醫療過失沒有醫療糾紛，因為很多醫療過失死了家屬也不知道，就這樣…結束。絕大多的醫療糾紛其實不是過失，是家屬不爽，家屬有個什麼潛意識的那個心理焦慮。這個案子你知道那個父母為什麼一直告一直告醫生？因為他就是一個潛意識的罪惡感他沒辦法解除。這第一個案子，還有一個案子被告那才好笑，有一個醫生他爸爸大腸癌到台大開刀，好，開，開完以後，因為他是內科醫生，他有一天，他住加護病房，那時候進來看，血壓200，他跟那個住院醫師說我爸爸血壓200要注意，結果那個住院醫師不曉得他是醫生你知道，還罵他說你不要…就給他擺臉色。他兒子出去想一想，不安你知道，打電話進來說我爸爸，我剛才進去看我爸爸血壓收縮壓200，要小心，結果那住院醫師給他掛電話，那天晚上腦出血中風死掉，你會不會告？" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "很不爽。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "就告了，我還跟那個醫生說我們是同行的，你爸爸80幾歲，就算沒有發生這件事情搞不好這個也不見得那麼樂觀對不對，而且在加護病房住這麼久了對不對，我看情況也不是很好，這個小醫生就是臭屁你知道，有眼無珠，不識你這個貴大醫生，你要不要饒他？他就說對他不爽，一定要告，就這樣。我為什麼被告？因為我是加護病房主任，陪告。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "怎麼辦，除了你剛剛說的建立互信、互諒文化，制度上有什麼可以解決問題？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "還是那句話，絕大多數的醫療糾紛沒有醫療過失，絕大多數醫療過失沒有醫療糾紛，其實絕大多數醫療糾紛是可以避免的，也就是說我們新一代的醫生還是要接受，接受這種應對進退的訓練，要知道家屬潛意識的罪惡感、要知道他Concern的是什麼，還是有些可以避免。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以在醫學院教育裡面可以有改變。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "有，以前都沒有教，現在我要走的時候已經開始在教了，但是我不曉得現在教的效果怎麼樣。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "OK。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "還要教一套防身技術，對啊。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以從教育到改變這個。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "要啦！這個安寧療護，很多，還有醫生自己的…自己的 Psychology，你要夠強 還有同理心，然後你知道說為什麼…要知道，要拿很多案例出來教。像我第一個被告那案例就知道，其實我是很無辜，因為他只是他只是家屬潛意識的罪惡感沒辦法解除，他就告一大堆人，可是我要問的是為什麼台大醫院，她在台大醫院住了11個月，我們沒有人知道說父母潛意識的罪惡感？這個醫療體系要去反省。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "是。好，那我們就進入網友對柯P時間。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "好，我有問題。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "好，我們那邊有那個" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "不要問太難的。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "關鍵評論網的朋友收集了網友的問題想要提問柯P，然後柯P說不能太難的。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "好，陳姓網友說現在是五大皆空的狀況，可是那其中要怎麼讓醫學系畢業生回到這五科？雖然剛才有提到說要降低他們的人數，第一個人數，但是現在已經存在的要怎麼回到這五科？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "我跟你講，這個還是市場決定一切，一開始，一開始衛生署那個什麼那個醫生處長來說，五大科四大皆空怎麼解決？後來我們想出一個方法，很爛的方法，我們現在畢業1300個對不對，我們就把那個住院醫師的容量都設定好，讓你沒有辦法選其他科，就是說皮膚科把你專科醫師限縮到只能人數很少，所以乖乖把他逼到五大科去。有沒有解決問題？還是沒有，為什麼？" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "因為他外科當了2年還是跑去當醫美，還是沒…不過有部分解決了，其實方法最後還是要回歸市場機制，沒辦法，當然我們那時那個…我們限縮小科的名額有沒有有一些效果。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "是…" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "因為你只有兩個選擇嘛，一個是不要當醫生，一個是乖乖去當五大科，有沒有效果？有，但是我們還是很多外科幹一幹還是跑去當醫美，部分有解決，所以說短期，所以台灣目前五大科表面上都有缺，但是因為我們把那個小科的專科醫師名額限縮到很厲害，所以五大科人數還是夠。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "了解。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "短期有解決，但是長期還是要根本解決問題。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "好，有沒有第二個問題？" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "好，現在有很多因為藥品的健保制度的關係，導致現在許多藥廠會退出台灣，已經變成有錢沒有藥的情形，請問柯P這邊的看法是？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "一樣，這還是市場決定一切，因為外國藥廠它研發什麼很貴，它進台灣市場，你那個什麼藥價黑洞全部把它砍掉，它沒有利潤，那老子不賣總可以吧，對不對。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "但這個是市場問題還是健保制度可以改變？改變這個邏輯。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "可啊！你自費啊！" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "用自費啊！所以說很多自費的藥台灣還是有市場，但是有時候健保其實也是民粹，他說我發現自費，有錢人才有用，年輕人、窮人不能用，乾脆都不要讓它進口台灣，免得製造政治上的麻煩。所以我覺得是這樣，很多問題講到最後還是Market，市場決定一切。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "OK，好，接下來。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "還有，為什麼比較專業的專科反而會比開業的薪水還要低？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "沒辦法！就好像你…這個我倒覺得這也不用，這個是這樣，錢本來就身外之物，你一定要問我說…亞里斯多德的學生一直問亞里斯多德，讀書有什麼好處？最後亞里斯多德受不了，給他5塊錢說你再問我說…你再問我說讀書有什麼好處，不然給你5塊錢好不好。就是這樣啊！本來就是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以你的意思是不要比。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "不是啦！你要比，比不完，你說我要當一個很有良心的醫生，你會賺錢才是怪事，有良心的醫生怎麼會賺錢？用膝蓋想也知道。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "我們還有嗎？" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "還有。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "應該有很多專業的問題。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "剛剛柯醫師提到說醫療不責難的補償制度在台灣比較難行，您認為的話應該怎麼辦？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "革命分階段，我覺得，後來我覺得那個比較…爭議比較少的，像我們婦產科還是有開始，婦產科的死亡、小孩子的死亡，生產死亡還是有，還是有開始有補…有賠償。我倒覺得這個還是那個問題，國民的水準你沒有…所以有時候台灣話說沒有那個屁股不要吃那個瀉藥你知道，國民的水準不到，硬要配那個制度，有時候還是很困難。所以現在是這樣，就是說從生產的風險開始，有部分的不責難。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "有那個保險給付，那個叫風險的保險，其他的要全部Cover還沒辦法，所以一步一步來。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "OK。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "革命分階段。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "革命階段論，下一個問題。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "目前大家跳得非常快。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "市長，我想問一下就是說，你一直提說這個家醫、分級、轉診、論人計酬是必要改革，可不可以大概講一下這1年來台北市政府你做了哪一些改革？也許是不是可以推廣到全國做參考。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "有啊！我們分兩部門，一個叫公部門、一個私部門，私部門就是我們用北投在試驗一些…就是說你去參加家醫科的話，比方說有免掛號費什麼，開始讓大家開始有建立家醫制度。另外是在醫院，比方說啦，我們那個市立聯合醫院的家醫科就去包掉…去處理一些比方說什麼安養院的那些老人，慢慢在公部門一線、私部門一線，開始在測試家醫制度。有啦，我們都有慢慢在做。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "你接下來咧？特別是醫療改革，在市政府這邊有什麼可以做的？還想要繼續做的？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "我倒覺得如果一步一步，這種家醫制度慢慢，社區…不是，家醫制度家醫制度一旦有了，居家護理、居家安寧就可以慢慢推。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "我也是這樣嘛，由點而面而…由點而線而面慢慢推，所以從市立聯合醫院開始做，可以做多久算多少，北投區開始試驗，如果可以的話就可以傳到其他區去，台北市有12個區，你北投先做，北投也才試驗沒有幾個月。我跟你講，每一個計畫從設計到完到弄，所以是這樣，應該還是蔣經國那句話，今天不做，明天更要後悔。其實很多東西做都要花很長的時間，這次我去韓國首爾一個很感慨的地方，我去韓國首爾看，看它的公共住宅有沒有，我問你，如果高房租、高房價是台灣人民最痛恨的事。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "我問你，我們的中央政府在過去20年做了什麼事？Zero，0。韓國，我去看韓國說你們的公共住宅做得不錯，它26年前就開始設公宅公司，所以它也不是…它也是走了26年才走到今天這個樣子對不對，我們台北市是走到現在還不到1年，我們開始推什麼公宅公司，但那個財務怎麼調度？房租怎麼算？我們都還在摸索。我第一次就踢到鐵板，拿聯開宅去當公共住宅，我就踢到一次鐵板，這不對嘛！對不對，3萬塊以上，我現在學乖了，房租3萬塊以上的不要來當公共住宅，不要傻，太好笑了！3萬塊房租你要當公共住宅。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "當然。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "這個一碰就知道不對，因為我後來推出去租的比例很低，馬上檢討原因，為什麼？就知道3萬塊以上的就不要當公共住宅，直接賣掉，我們要蓋那個比較便宜的，所以這次興隆國宅蓋，它就蓋一坪只有差不多500多，這個就可以忍受，對。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "反應好，對。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "所以有時候，有時候不要幻想說革命一次成功，它也是要時間，所以應該怎樣？想到就開始做，有錯就改，一步一步做下去。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "慢慢累積。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "所以我們看韓國說它的公共住宅，你也不要羨慕它，它26年前就開始做了，我們台灣是什麼都沒做，所以我們才開始做，開始做一定會受到批評什麼，也不要難過，先行者都是孤獨的，先知在家鄉都是寂寞的，真的。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "感受很深喔。我們網友是不是還有一個問題？" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "有，剛剛市長有提到說，論人計酬是可行的，在台灣也有試行的計畫，可是如果全國試行的話有可能嗎？能不能夠及時？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "這個是這樣，在澎湖可以、在金門可以，因為 Isolated。在全台灣很困難，因為他跑來跑去嘛，所以這個的確是大問題，我坦白講。所以有時候制度是這樣，一開始走偏了你知道，後來很難很難彎回來。不過我倒覺得這樣，也許可以在金門、馬祖，那種澎湖先一步一步試，有成功的Model再慢慢推回來，你在台灣本島現在現階段做不到，因為那變成Doctor shopping太厲害了，你沒辦法限制他看病，現階段沒辦法。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以柯市長，我們今天談了很多問題，因為都是環環相扣，很多細節、具體或者很多觀念的問題，但是今天面對總統大選，我們還是希望可以給三個候選人一些具體的政策上的建議，所以如果是你，你覺得對他們來說，醫療的健保制度你會提什麼樣的，覺得他們必須最重要要做的 Priority 是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "兩個字，勇敢。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "勇敢。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "其實怎麼做大家都曉得，就是有沒有勇敢。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "還是政治決心的問題。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "有沒有勇氣去推而已，只差在勇敢，我後來發現不是執行力，是勇敢而已。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "這個是台灣政治人物最缺乏的。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "對啊！我跟你講，什麼是對的？我都已經不知道講太多遍，講到自己都覺得不好意思，什麼是對的、什麼是錯大家都知道，可是對的事情沒有人在做，錯的事情每天在做，就這樣而已。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "你覺得你這1年的，你的這個受歡迎有激發出、改變一點台灣政治文化嗎？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "有啦！還是有啦！至少公開透明這一點就改變很多，我們台北市政府至少現在都市計畫、都市審議、環境保護還有那個文資審議，現在全部錄影，再直接轉播，至少這個…單單這個公開透明改變台灣很多了，我們預算全部上網公告。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "我哪裡需要議會，全部乾脆上網公告就好了，我們又不是要來撈錢的對不對，就全部上網公告就好了。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "好，今天非常感謝柯市長，我們其實有幫大家談了40分鐘，談了非常多重要的問題，我想我們有幾個摘要，就是今天上課大家做的筆記，同學很認真。柯市長認為第一道要處理什麼問題呢？是最主要回歸保險機制，台灣醫療目前不是以效率存在，而是以商業機制，我們的問題是被財團把持，這個都是必須大刀闊斧的。那麼應該降低醫學院的人數，提高專科醫師。最重要最重要的是，政治人物決策者應該要有勇氣去排除阻力、實行改革方案，我想這個是今天柯市長給我們最大的一個啟示，再次感謝柯市長。下一次我們節目的主題是關於教育，我們邀請到葉丙成教授，主題是20年教改過後台灣教育的困境該如何翻轉？希望同一時間大家繼續收看、繼續提問、繼續用公民的力量來關注我們的政治，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "我都還沒講到一半耶！我還可以再講5個鐘頭。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "我們還會談住宅政策，不然下次你來談住宅政策。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "住宅政策反而不懂。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "哈蜜瓜。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "哈蜜瓜。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "市長知道哈蜜瓜的梗嗎？" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "聽說這個很有梗，最近。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "有哈味。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "這什麼意思？" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "就是…" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "誰會解釋？" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "她要解釋。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "就是有一個受訪…有一個媽媽在路上被電視台訪問，然後問她說妳覺得哈蜜瓜好吃嗎？她說哈蜜瓜很好吃啊！因為它有一個哈味。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "就這樣，這什麼意思？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "聽不懂啊。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "它就是有哈味。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "是一個梗這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "哈味是誰？" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "哈味就是…沒有，沒有是誰，就是說這個說法大家覺得很好笑吧，是不是？" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "她想說是一個什麼味道，結果講成哈味。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以我們還要繼續吃，表演吃哈蜜瓜。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "你們東西不夠我表演，我已經吃完了。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "市長謝謝。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以我跟你介紹一下這一次大概的團隊，其實都是各方的英雄好漢組成的民間自主的團體，就是很強的設計師、很強的做網頁的、做視覺、做攝影的，都是各方，其實大家就是很關心台灣，覺得說好像總統大選有點無聊。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "不是無聊，Boring。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "就Boring，就沒有實質的討論、辯論，民間希望有一些可以真的針對關鍵議題討論。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "有啊！我們很認真在討論啊！我們講那什麼公共住宅、什麼松山機場，可是好像沒有人要來。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對啊，一般媒體不會關心啊！" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "大家也不想這個…" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以你會有感覺，當你談嚴肅問題的時候，媒體都不會關心，只有表演的時候才會關心。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "這沒辦法。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "政治人物都變藝人。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "接下來到大選前會有8集，每次錄一集，有一個是住宅政策、有產業轉型。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以我們就是會前30分鐘，看你的時間，後面10分鐘就是會有觀眾問答。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "好…" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "這很短，一下就過去了。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "還是可以走動。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "可以準備了。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "距離現場直播還有3分鐘。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "哇~那個聊天室的人數爆增，迅速增加，就迅速增加中，在這5分鐘內。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "有人說好久沒看柯P上節目了。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "不會啊！每天電視都有啊！怎麼會沒？" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "沒有，有品質的訪問。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "你這樣那些拿麥的記者會很難過。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "沒關係，事實。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "離現場直播還有2分鐘。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "很多人關心市長吃飽了嗎？別餓肚子。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "有啦！今天吃了一碗麵。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "市長說吃了一碗麵，回應網友的關心。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "距離現場直播還有1分鐘。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "好。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "你怎麼衣衫襤褸？為什麼？" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對啊，在市政府工作太辛苦了。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "不知道是薪水不夠還是怎樣？" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "工作服。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "要爬電線桿還是要…" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "上一次還問那個什麼Janet說衣不蔽體，衣衫襤褸就算了，後面還給它補了一句衣不蔽體。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "30秒。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "20秒。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "10。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "9。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "8。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "7。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "6。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "5。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "4。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "3。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "2。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "進片頭。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "8。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "7。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "6。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "5。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "4。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "3。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "2。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "進現場。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "各位觀眾大家好，歡迎收看政問，第一個以新型態的政論節目。我想我們都厭倦了政治只是無意義的喧嘩和口水，我們希望的是政治人物可以提出更多對公共政策有意義的辯論，我們也不希望大選只是政治人物的權力遊戲，而是希望選舉可以成為所有的公民一起來思辯、來討論台灣未來的機會。很高興今天我們第一集的節目邀請到可能是全台灣最著名的醫生，也是現在的台北市長柯文哲先生，柯市長你好。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "大家好。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "柯市長表示他今天已經吃過麵了，謝謝網友的關心。市長，現在11月底剛好差不多從您去年當選到現在是1年的時間，想先問一個輕鬆的問題就是從醫生到市長，你覺得這1年的心情有什麼樣的變化？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "沒有，沒有變化。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "都是一樣的，一樣的想法。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "反正我都還是這個樣子啊。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "回到醫療問題，就是很多人會覺得說台灣好像出現一個醫療崩壞的一個現況，我不知道你是不是同意這樣的描述，或者用你的方法你會怎麼樣來描述台灣醫療跟健保的現在最核心的哪些問題？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "台灣的健保雖然說常常會批評，各方面批評，但是你真的給他做問卷說台灣的健保要不要取消？沒有人敢取消，所以它滿意度還是很高，我想那個要求要維持的一定超過95%的。所以應該這樣講，就是說它雖然很多問題，不過終究，終究在整個世界上看起來，它還是目前一個很好的制度，所以以前黃煌雄還開玩笑講說台灣有兩樣是…對中國大陸有兩樣最重要，一個是總統大選，就是政治改革，一個是健保這社會改革。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "所以我倒覺得健保，健保跟國王一樣安全，大家常常有抱怨，不過它其實真的Performance還不錯，至少到現在為止是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "比較負面的，就是我也知道就是現在很多國外，包括美國，其實歐巴馬之前也來跟台灣取經，你覺得現在有什麼樣的問題是可能我們必須要面對的？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "大概…講起來其實是這樣，一個系統的問題，不會是單一問題，你要講很多。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "從專科醫師太多、家醫這個制度沒有實行、轉診制度失敗、那個健保給付的問題 費用，林林總總講起來，不過當然還是一句話，就是說如果只能用一句話來講台灣健保的問題，一句話的話，就健保到底是保險還是社會福利？它如果是社會保險的話它就不能Cover那麼多，它如果是社會福利就不能那麼便宜，講完了，只能用一句話的話。我們常常就是用社會保險的錢在做社會福利的事，所以就…到後來就開始壓榨醫生，因為那個入不敷出，怎麼辦？就轉過頭來Cost down，所以Cost down就開始壓迫醫生跟護理師的薪水，就這樣。不過當然是有一些問題，不過短期內應該還撐得住，不過長期還是一些基本面的問題要解決。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以對，我也看過您說這個，我們要解決問題，它是社會保險還社會福利？可是那你的態度是什麼？你覺得哪一個會比較健康一點？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "都是這樣嘛，天下沒有白吃的午餐嘛！這個大家要面對所以我每次說，面對問題是解決問題的第一步，就是說其實健保要當社會福利或社會保險我是都沒意見，就是大家實事求是就好，你不能說我不要付錢，我什麼都要，就是不要付錢，那不可能，就這樣。所以我倒是個人沒有什麼一定要怎樣，只是民眾認清事實就好。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以像你剛剛說，因為這個是環環相扣的嘛，因為這些問題導致…包括有人說02年開始實行了總額制度，使得這個好像每個醫院就很必須支付盈虧，很辛苦，然後必須Cost down，然後醫生就得很辛苦過勞，好像每一個環節都…所以你剛才提到說還是有一些基本面問題，所以我們想說第一刀你覺得要處理的是什麼樣的問題？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "如果問我的話，我是主張回歸保險的機制，就是說福利不要那麼多。現在台北市，台北市好像6歲以下小孩子看病，那個急診，看急診不用錢。我們現在台北市立聯合醫院你知道，好像本來掛號是80塊，可是我們現在只要50塊，其他30塊是用…是補助的，所以台北市民每次去市立聯合醫院看一次病，市政府就要補助30塊錢，這1年加起來4億。所以我想還是這樣，如果問我的話說台灣健保怎麼解決？我覺得實事求是就好，不過難在哪裡你知道？每次那個社會福利放很容易，收很困難。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對，一直都這樣。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "一直都這樣嘛，所以我就…所以這一次那個重陽敬老金就咬緊牙關我一定要把它砍掉，即使民調掉5%以上我還是要砍，就這樣。你想想看，連一個重陽敬老金都不敢砍了，那台灣的年金制度怎麼改革？" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "每個都知道那個不管是軍保 農保 公保，不管什麼保通通會破產，可是沒人敢去碰，這次總統大選這個最嚴重的問題也沒有人要討論，因為一討論民調就掉了。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以我們就希望透過你的聲音呼籲改革的力量。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "我就是試試看，我來試一遍，從重陽敬老金開始砍起，我看發生什麼事。其實也沒有什麼事，就被罵一罵而已，罵又不痛。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "但該做的還是要做。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "對啊，這個就是說，這也是一個很有趣的題目，就是說為什麼台灣的政治人物沒有人敢做該做的事？其實也沒那麼嚴重，我跟你講，通常議會這樣罵…罵到最後那些議員就說，他也覺得應該要做，說他只是為了表達說他要替選民爭取福利，所以他是在罵我，但是罵完以後他說你還是繼續做，我也知道反正他盡他的義務，我也盡我的義務，就這樣。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "這個好像是政治的本質。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "反正都在表演，所以以前我說那是羅馬競技場，我現在有新的體悟，現在那個叫維也納歌劇院，就是我們進去每個人都在唱歌，有男高音、女高音，反正就這樣。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "再回到具體一點，因為你剛剛提到很多問題，我們提一個具體的問題就是之前醫勞盟有做一個研究，就是幾乎有1000多個以上的醫生做的調查，大部分的醫生都覺得要修改健保裡面的核刪制度，甚至很多人覺得說裡面有黑箱審查的制度，應該要解決這個問題，你怎麼看這個問題？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "這個叫必要之惡，你要是問那個醫院說你覺得要不要有醫院評鑑制度？也是每個人也是不喜歡，你會說你主張醫院評鑑取消掉嗎？其實我倒覺得這樣，核刪當然有些是…我倒覺得是這樣，核刪是要有，只是說有些要改善，比方說我覺得困難在哪裡？我也知道出題出在哪裡。因為醫療分業太多，你不要以為耳鼻喉科一個科，耳鼻喉科裡面比方說專門看鼻子跟聽耳朵的有沒有，他就不見得就…像聽覺或是那種要耳鳴，那滿專門的。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "所以不是每個耳鼻喉科，比如說我配一個耳鼻喉科專科醫師來，然後審查這些費用，結果他審到一個是那個耳鳴的，他常常就看不懂那個東西，就亂砍。所以我倒覺得並不是核刪制度不對，只是說沒有找到適合的人來核刪，只是說有時候因為他…你僱一個人來，他問題說他一大堆案子上來，他不見得每個都很熟悉。像我是加護病房的專家，你叫我去審婦產科的我一樣亂審，那不是我專長，所以我倒覺得不是核刪，不是那個健保核刪的制度不對，是沒有找到適當的人。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "怎麼樣可以找到？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "這就是實事求是嘛！第一個你還是這樣，第一個去審查的人你要有一個態度，不會的就不要亂刪，你就說不會，就另找高明或怎樣，另外是有一個申覆制度。我跟你講，我在台大的時候我也常常在寫健保申覆，每次寫到快要吐血，可是後來有時候…可是坦白講，10筆裡面，被刪掉的10筆，有時候7筆自己看一看，也是該刪。因為有時候就懶惰，我們叫Routine啊，比方說一三五抽白血球，你就不會想說有沒有需要，沒有什麼去看看，如果沒有必要有時候就懶惰你知道，就禮拜一三五抽白血球，你就不會說今天先去看一下病人有沒有需要再來抽。所以坦白講，我以前寫健保申覆有時候也是，我自己看一看也是該刪，其實我自己開的處方3個月後被人家刪，我再回來看也是該刪。但有些我覺得不應該被刪一個很大原因是，因為他不是那個的專家，你不是葉克膜的專家來審那個葉克膜為什麼要這樣用，這個當然會出問題。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "關於這個問題，就是審查問題，因為是不是要審查也是要具名負責也是一個滿爭議的話題，你怎麼看？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "這個跟市議會做到所有投票全部要具名一樣，基本上我倒認為不需要。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "不需要。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "但是健保局要盡到一個責任，說應該允許他覆核對不對，申覆。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "然後還有審查人員也不要不會假裝會，該換…說不會，我們這個時代就不太習慣說我不會，我不會不是什麼丟臉的事。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "大家不願意承認自己不會。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "對，人家聽故事的話，我以前在台大念到五年級，我就覺得很奇怪，我問到總醫師他每一題都會，我問那個宋瑞樓，那時候是內科教授。奇怪，我每次問他他都說這一條很奇怪，回家想想看，我那時候就奇怪，為什麼宋瑞樓，我們的內科教授知識比那個總醫師的知識還差，你知道為什麼嗎？學問有四種境界，最差的叫不知道自己不知道，再來是知道自己不知道，再來是知道自己知道，最厲害叫不知道自己知道。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "網友有沒有記下來？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "你知道最差的叫做不知道自己不知道，總醫師就是不知道自己不知道，所以他每一條都會。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "是喔。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "到那個宋教授你知道，宋瑞樓教授，因為他的學問有一個程度，他知道自己不知道，一個程度叫知道自己知道，就是說你是世界級的專家，你知道我會，最高境界叫不知道自己知道。有沒有例子？有，牛頓，每次人家說牛頓F=ma，你去唸那個，你去翻那個數學原理，牛頓原稿，他不是寫F=ma，他寫F dp over dt耶，那個P=mv，它是衝量對時間的微分，叫做 Force，叫力量。反正這個算了，這個…" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "這傻了…" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "算了，你不是念物理系就不用知道，我意思就是說，像牛頓那個，牛頓就覺得好像時間跟速度有什麼東西，它好像一個…這最高的智慧叫直覺，直覺。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以你相信直覺。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "相信啊！不過這個，反正我們都不會達到那個境界，所以不用煩惱，那個境界沒有幾個，高斯、牛頓，沒有幾個，阿基米德，沒有幾個人，算了。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "我們今天變成科學課，再回到那個健保。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "你看，我最大的本領就是把人家牽…牽到別的地方去。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "大家科學教育一下也不錯，好，還有一個也是常常討論的問題，是健保點數的折扣，你怎麼看？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "這本來就很好笑，我跟你講，那個健保有點數降到0.8幾的。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "這造成很大的問題。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "我跟你講，如果0.85還可以，表示說我們的獲利率要超過15%，不然公司就倒閉了對不對？可是醫院有沒有倒？沒有倒，所以果然是獲利率超過15%，所以…我倒覺得點數那是一個很好笑的題目，本來就不應該這樣做。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以要改。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "要改，健保要改有沒有？就是我以前講的家醫、分級、轉診、論人計酬這四條要做，這個不用其他永遠沒有辦法解決，我們現在是論件計酬。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "所以這很好笑，比方說你生病來給我看病，用一個很簡單的方法把你醫好，我賺不到錢，為什麼？因為他是按照開的藥量，他做動作，所以我要讓你很悽慘你知道，一下洗個腎、一下用個呼吸器，加護病房多住幾天，這樣我賺的錢比較多。所以我們目前這種，我們叫論量計酬有沒有？造成我們台灣的醫生不是選用最有效率的方式去解決病人，所以說給付制度的偏差，沒辦法。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以應該是論人計酬？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "我是主張論人計酬啦！不過我在想論人計酬，那些開醫一定反對，但是我覺得是這樣，那是系統的問題，一定要論人計酬，要不然就論病計酬。論量計酬一定…這個很多故事，我以前在台大" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "我們喜歡聽故事，喜歡聽故事。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "有啊！我講以前我在台大，我曾經主持過那個急診後送病房，就設一個病房，後來就是，我後來我們就做我用我指揮的病房跟內科的病房去做比較，我們發表在那個國際醫學雜誌，我後來發現我那個病房同樣一個病進來，一個住院Cost比內科病房少4萬塊，醫生內科說不公平，一定是疾病嚴重度不一樣，我說好啊，我們按照疾病嚴重度選一樣嚴重的病人再比較一次，變成差4萬塊，每一個病人總平均少4萬塊，比較嚴重的少10萬塊。所以我那病房非常有效率，你知道為什麼嗎？我只要問一個題目你就知道為什麼，病房的病人比較嚴重還是門診的病人比較嚴重？" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "病房。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "好，我們用最沒有經驗的住院醫師去看病房的病人，然後用有經驗的主治醫師去看門診的病人，你覺得合理嗎？" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "不合理。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "這個叫資源錯置，我只是把它倒過來而已，我用主治醫師去看病房，然後用主治醫師加專科護理師就變職業團隊對不對，所以它效率變很高。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "好，問題來了，這個發表在…在台大醫院做研究，然後有用健保的數據，然後發表在國際醫學會雜誌。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "然後我去…我就發表出來就給我們台大院長看，滿懷喜歡，我想說這個院長一定很高興，我們台大醫院做這麼偉大的研究。院長看一看沒有講話，你知道為什麼嗎？因為我那個病房是低獲利單位。所以目前台灣的醫療不是以最有效率的狀態存在，它是以獲利率最高的狀態存在。這還沒講完，我後來不服氣，我還去健保局去報，我就講說，我說台灣的醫療制度一定要改，花了1個鐘頭演講我那個偉大的病房的功績，講一大堆，講完以後那些健保官員說，柯教授你講的都實在是很有道理，但是、可是、但是，後來就沒有下文，所以台灣的醫療不是以最有效率狀態存在。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "民眾會好奇，到底為什麼不能夠改？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "這個很簡單。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "癥結。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "我們整個醫療體系都被財團把持，就是這樣啊。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "這是關鍵問題，把財團把持。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "所以我們整個國家不是以最有效率的狀態存在，台灣的醫療不是以最有效率的狀態存在，我們是以獲利率最高的狀態存在。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "就商業邏輯。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "對，商業邏輯。其實能不能改？每個人都知道怎麼改，可是沒人要去改。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以這個沒辦法打破，除非要出現有魄力的政治人物。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "除非我當總統。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "你這麼說。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "大家嚇呆了。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "今天有梗了…" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "沒有，不是，其實…" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "因為這個很悲哀，大家都知道問題，但動不了，這個是很悲哀的事情。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "這個大家都知道，沒有人敢改的多的是，年金不是一樣嗎？住宅政策不是嗎？每一樣都是啊！哪一樣不是？" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以其實你也曾經說過，就健保問題不只是醫療問題，是政治經濟也是文化的問題。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "根本就政治問題而已，只是沒人敢，每個人都知道怎麼改，沒有人敢改而已。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對，再回到另外一個比較具體的問題，就是醫療人力不均，健保導致醫療人力不均，然後大家說五大皆空的問題，護病比過高，在現行的情況下我們可以做什麼樣的改變來提高民眾的這個權益？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "這個…其實這也是一個問題。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "我常常說台灣不是世界上最先進的國家，我常常在…每次在制訂台灣的政策，先看一下美國怎麼做再回來看台灣，美國，我們在台灣有…我們的醫療體系裡面有兩個美國沒有，不是，美國有，台灣沒有的，專科護理師跟那個PA醫師助理。台灣專科護理師數雖然開始有，但是一直限制他的工作，為什麼你知道？因為醫生很怕專科護理師來搶他的飯碗。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "所以他一直限縮他，其實我跟你講，比較聰明應該怎麼做？應該是限制醫學院畢業人數，然後開放專科護理師，如果以醫師，如果純粹醫師團體要保障他的利益應該這樣做，可是我們台灣不是，我們是醫師團體拚命去壓制那個專科護理師，然後增加醫師的名額，就會發生什麼事？我們現在是主治醫師做住院醫師的工作，住院醫師做專科護理師的工作，然後…不是，主治醫師做住院醫師的工作，住院醫師做實習醫師的工作，實習醫師做歐巴桑的工作，就這樣。他是Download的，其實應該Upgrade，就是說你…應該是說每個主治醫師應該要…他可以Download給專科護理師的工作，給專科護理師做，這樣成本才會下降。其實這個每個人都知道怎麼改，這也不是我發明，美國就是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "是…" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "所以台灣的政治上最…我覺得台灣是這樣，台灣做一個國家，它不是最先進，所以不用自己發明，看一看國外再回來想一想就知道怎麼改了。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "但通常都是改革的政治阻力比較大。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "其實也沒那麼大，是你要不要而已，看你有沒有瘋這樣。YouBike要把它取消收費，你只要夠狠就可以，對不對？哪有YouBike坐不要錢的，哪有那回事，就給它收費，有困難嗎？奇怪，沒有人敢。我說路邊停車為什麼不收費？馬路是給車子走的，不是停車用的，馬路是馬路，不是停車場，為什麼不收費？" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以有很多長期不合理的事大家好像習以為常，也不去改變它。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "沒人敢改，我也想不通為什麼，無法理解。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "這部分可不可以再談一談，就是說好像你也反對醫生加入勞基法，不太贊成。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "不是啦，應該這樣講啦，也不是不太贊成。其實在美國是這樣，美國是住院醫師有加入，主治醫師沒有加入。我倒覺得是這樣，如果醫生要加入勞基法也可以，不過費用就會上升一點，因為你要輪班，輪班那個Cost還會再上升一點，也沒有什麼不可以，也可以，就是一分錢一分貨啊。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "是…下一個問題說關於醫療糾紛，這個是很多我想醫生包括民眾都很擔心的問題，您之前也說過就是開刀的風險比搭飛機還高，然後你也很明確主張這個不責難醫療補償是一定要推動，可不可以再多談一點？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "不責難醫療制度這也是…其實最近立法院有要…本來有人要推，後來也沒有過你知道，我也覺得這問題出在哪裡？全世界推醫療不責難的國家是北歐，有成功，但是我認為在台灣是現階段沒有辦法，你知道為什麼嗎？醫療不責難制度它分兩部分，一個是叫風險保險，就是說我們大家籌一筆錢，結果那不預期的傷亡你知道，死亡或什麼我們就賠他，OK，但是這個後面還有一個東西我們沒有看到，它叫做乖乖講實話。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "乖乖講實話。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "所以在北歐是這樣，比方說一個婦產科醫師接生，產婦死掉了，好吧，死了，那就這樣。好吧，我們就國家替你賠錢嘛對不對，到底發生什麼事？怎麼這個產婦會搞到死掉？你要講實話，到底問題出在哪裡？然後不責難，你講實話他們會去改進系統，所以不責難醫療制度它有兩部分，一個是保險、一個是講實話，因為你不講實話就沒有辦法修正體系，所以北歐的生產死亡率是全世界最低，因為它有不責難的醫療保險制度，可是我認為在台灣為什麼現階段做不到？保險這部分簡單，我們大家就湊一筆錢對不對，當然會吵架，這到底錢是要醫生出還是要政府出？還是要病人出？這個也可以討論，OK，這解決。後面那個我們現階段沒辦法解決，醫生不會講實話，為什麼？因為他講實話就被殺，他一定會在後面再被告幹什麼的，然後我們也沒有辦法，我們沒有辦法去原諒別人犯錯。所以我以前在美國的時候，我在美國的時候外科最重要的會議叫MM Conference，Mortality and Morbidity，Morbidity叫併發症，Mortality叫死亡，併發症死亡討論會，對外科醫生來講那很重要的會議就是說，這個病人被你搞死了，到底發生什麼事？所以在美國你知道，MM Conference是一個很重要會議就是說，我們要討論這Case為什麼搞死掉，或是為什麼出併發症？然後再研究說我們下次要怎麼改進。我回到台灣你知道，每次MM Conference大家第一句話你知道，那個是誰開的？大家忍不住問說那誰開的，然後有沒有趁機再捅他一刀。所以我後來回台大醫院，外科MM Conference我都不想去聽，因為全部在粉飾太平嘛，不然就是趁機鬥爭你的，所以不會講實話。所以不責難醫療制度要成功還有一個很根本的原因是國民的水準，所以互愛、互信、互諒你知道，互愛嘛、互信、這個要互諒，你能夠原諒說那醫生不是故意的，他只是他在系統上有錯，有什麼東西我們去改正。現在不是，每次出事要抓一個女巫來燒死，就這樣，沒辦法，國民的水準。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以文化的問題。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "國民的水準這樣而已，你能怎麼辦？" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "這沒辦法。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "要時間嘛！所以國家之前途，國家之力量在於國民全體，所以…這也是我最近對政治的新的體悟。對啊，凱薩說I come、I see、I conquer，我說I come、I see、I teach，我現在把自己當作一個傳道者，開始在教導人民什麼是對的、什麼是錯的，要教導你們的信念，要堅持信念、要堅持對的東西。真的，我們要開始改變那個凱薩的想法，凱薩是我來、我見、我征服，現在不是，我來、我見、我教，我來傳播我的思想、我來傳播我的Idea，I spread my idea，應當是這樣。所以這也是最近我的在政治上的一個體會，所以我們不要再當Leader，我們要當Promoter。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "Promoter。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "Promoter，一個促進者，那才對。所以我有講，不責難醫療制度一開始會覺得說，我會同意應該要推行，可是後來推到一半我看一看也是困難，為什麼？因為…假設我幫你賠錢，可是我們沒有檢討制度，那錢馬上就賠光了，因為它系統不會改進，一下就賠光，沒有用。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以我想提醒一下網友就是，我們第一個在網頁上，大家下面有那個pol.is可以參與，然後另外聊天室大家可以踴躍提問，我們在9點30分的時候會整理網友的重要意見再提給柯市長，對不起，柯老師，OK，柯老師現在喜歡…" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "柯醫師。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "喜歡教學，你現在說要Teach。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "我是柯醫師，柯P、柯教授。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "醫療糾紛你自己有遇過。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "有啊！兩件啊！" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對，有沒有具體的例子？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "有啊！我被告過兩次啊！我第一次被告，奇怪，我這麼會講話怎麼會被告？我就去查，我去問，我去問他說你怎麼會告我？他說我朋友說要告比較大的。你知道嗎？有一次我一個案子我被告，七個被告，同一個案子，從那個副院長、外科主任，然後耳鼻喉科主任，然後什麼呼吸治療科主任、外科加護病房主任，全部都告。這故事是這樣，有一個女生她是先天性脊柱肌肉萎縮症，就是肌肉萎縮，有一天心臟瓣膜壞掉，心臟瓣膜壞掉到台大醫院來看，心臟瓣膜壞掉換個瓣膜，手術插管，因為她肌肉萎縮，拔管起來，呼吸困難再插回去，隔2個禮拜再拔，又不行再插回去，後來發現因為她肌肉萎縮是持續在進行，時間久她越來越嚴重，後來拔兩次不行做氣切，做氣切，反正沒有辦法脫離呼吸器，加護病房住2個月就轉到普通病房，住9個月最後就肺炎死掉了。以醫生的立場我犯錯什麼？瓣膜壞掉換瓣膜，管子拔兩次不行做氣切，氣切用…呼吸器用11個月肺炎死掉，這很正常啊！我後來去翻病歷才知道我為什麼被告？這個病是隱性遺傳的病，她四個兄弟姊妹，她這個病，她那個妹妹，她一個…好像一個弟弟也是這個病，他從地方法院、高等法院、最高法院，然後上訴，再到什麼，到監察院一直告…告好多年，你知道為什麼要一直告嗎？後來才知道為什麼。故事講完你知道為什麼要一直告嗎？" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "不知道。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "父母兩個結婚，生下四個小孩子，兩個是隱性遺傳的病，都是這個病死掉，他今天如果不告醫生，不把這個仇恨往外丟，夫妻兩個吵架就好了啊！兩個人結婚隱性遺傳嘛對不對。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "所以後來有一次我跟朱樹勳講，主治醫師是朱樹勳，我跟他講說我在台大當…一個病人在台大醫院住了11個月住到死掉，為什麼我們整個醫療體系沒有察覺到父母潛意識的罪惡感？我們沒有把他解除他的罪惡感，所以我跟你講，絕大多數的醫療糾紛沒有醫療過失，絕大多數的醫療過失沒有醫療糾紛，因為很多醫療過失死了家屬也不知道，就這樣…結束。絕大多的醫療糾紛其實不是過失，是家屬不爽，家屬有個什麼潛意識的那個心理焦慮。這個案子你知道那個父母為什麼一直告一直告醫生？因為他就是一個潛意識的罪惡感他沒辦法解除。這第一個案子，還有一個案子被告那才好笑，有一個醫生他爸爸大腸癌到台大開刀，好，開，開完以後，因為他是內科醫生，他有一天，他住加護病房，那時候進來看，血壓200，他跟那個住院醫師說我爸爸血壓200要注意，結果那個住院醫師不曉得他是醫生你知道，還罵他說你不要…就給他擺臉色。他兒子出去想一想，不安你知道，打電話進來說我爸爸，我剛才進去看我爸爸血壓收縮壓200，要小心，結果那住院醫師給他掛電話，那天晚上腦出血中風死掉，你會不會告？" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "很不爽。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "就告了，我還跟那個醫生說我們是同行的，你爸爸80幾歲，就算沒有發生這件事情搞不好這個也不見得那麼樂觀對不對，而且在加護病房住這麼久了對不對，我看情況也不是很好，這個小醫生就是臭屁你知道，有眼無珠，不識你這個貴大醫生，你要不要饒他？他就說對他不爽，一定要告，就這樣。我為什麼被告？因為我是加護病房主任，陪告。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "怎麼辦，除了你剛剛說的建立互信、互諒文化，制度上有什麼可以解決問題？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "還是那句話，絕大多數的醫療糾紛沒有醫療過失，絕大多數醫療過失沒有醫療糾紛，其實絕大多數醫療糾紛是可以避免的，也就是說我們新一代的醫生還是要接受，接受這種應對進退的訓練，要知道家屬潛意識的罪惡感、要知道他Concern的是什麼，還是有些可以避免。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以在醫學院教育裡面可以有改變。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "有，以前都沒有教，現在我要走的時候已經開始在教了，但是我不曉得現在教的效果怎麼樣。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "OK。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "還要教一套防身技術，對啊。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以從教育到改變這個。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "要啦！這個安寧療護，很多，還有醫生自己的…自己的 Psychology，你要夠強 還有同理心，然後你知道說為什麼…要知道，要拿很多案例出來教。像我第一個被告那案例就知道，其實我是很無辜，因為他只是他只是家屬潛意識的罪惡感沒辦法解除，他就告一大堆人，可是我要問的是為什麼台大醫院，她在台大醫院住了11個月，我們沒有人知道說父母潛意識的罪惡感？這個醫療體系要去反省。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "是。好，那我們就進入網友對柯P時間。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "好，我有問題。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "好，我們那邊有那個" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "不要問太難的。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "關鍵評論網的朋友收集了網友的問題想要提問柯P，然後柯P說不能太難的。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "好，陳姓網友說現在是五大皆空的狀況，可是那其中要怎麼讓醫學系畢業生回到這五科？雖然剛才有提到說要降低他們的人數，第一個人數，但是現在已經存在的要怎麼回到這五科？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "我跟你講，這個還是市場決定一切，一開始，一開始衛生署那個什麼那個醫生處長來說，五大科四大皆空怎麼解決？後來我們想出一個方法，很爛的方法，我們現在畢業1300個對不對，我們就把那個住院醫師的容量都設定好，讓你沒有辦法選其他科，就是說皮膚科把你專科醫師限縮到只能人數很少，所以乖乖把他逼到五大科去。有沒有解決問題？還是沒有，為什麼？" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "因為他外科當了2年還是跑去當醫美，還是沒…不過有部分解決了，其實方法最後還是要回歸市場機制，沒辦法，當然我們那時那個…我們限縮小科的名額有沒有有一些效果。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "是…" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "因為你只有兩個選擇嘛，一個是不要當醫生，一個是乖乖去當五大科，有沒有效果？有，但是我們還是很多外科幹一幹還是跑去當醫美，部分有解決，所以說短期，所以台灣目前五大科表面上都有缺，但是因為我們把那個小科的專科醫師名額限縮到很厲害，所以五大科人數還是夠。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "了解。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "短期有解決，但是長期還是要根本解決問題。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "好，有沒有第二個問題？" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "好，現在有很多因為藥品的健保制度的關係，導致現在許多藥廠會退出台灣，已經變成有錢沒有藥的情形，請問柯P這邊的看法是？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "一樣，這還是市場決定一切，因為外國藥廠它研發什麼很貴，它進台灣市場，你那個什麼藥價黑洞全部把它砍掉，它沒有利潤，那老子不賣總可以吧，對不對。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "但這個是市場問題還是健保制度可以改變？改變這個邏輯。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "可啊！你自費啊！" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "用自費啊！所以說很多自費的藥台灣還是有市場，但是有時候健保其實也是民粹，他說我發現自費，有錢人才有用，年輕人、窮人不能用，乾脆都不要讓它進口台灣，免得製造政治上的麻煩。所以我覺得是這樣，很多問題講到最後還是Market，市場決定一切。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "OK，好，接下來。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "還有，為什麼比較專業的專科反而會比開業的薪水還要低？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "沒辦法！就好像你…這個我倒覺得這也不用，這個是這樣，錢本來就身外之物，你一定要問我說…亞里斯多德的學生一直問亞里斯多德，讀書有什麼好處？最後亞里斯多德受不了，給他5塊錢說你再問我說…你再問我說讀書有什麼好處，不然給你5塊錢好不好。就是這樣啊！本來就是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以你的意思是不要比。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "不是啦！你要比，比不完，你說我要當一個很有良心的醫生，你會賺錢才是怪事，有良心的醫生怎麼會賺錢？用膝蓋想也知道。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "我們還有嗎？" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "還有。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "應該有很多專業的問題。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "剛剛柯醫師提到說醫療不責難的補償制度在台灣比較難行，您認為的話應該怎麼辦？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "革命分階段，我覺得，後來我覺得那個比較…爭議比較少的，像我們婦產科還是有開始，婦產科的死亡、小孩子的死亡，生產死亡還是有，還是有開始有補…有賠償。我倒覺得這個還是那個問題，國民的水準你沒有…所以有時候台灣話說沒有那個屁股不要吃那個瀉藥你知道，國民的水準不到，硬要配那個制度，有時候還是很困難。所以現在是這樣，就是說從生產的風險開始，有部分的不責難。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "有那個保險給付，那個叫風險的保險，其他的要全部Cover還沒辦法，所以一步一步來。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "OK。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "革命分階段。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "革命階段論，下一個問題。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "目前大家跳得非常快。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "市長，我想問一下就是說，你一直提說這個家醫、分級、轉診、論人計酬是必要改革，可不可以大概講一下這1年來台北市政府你做了哪一些改革？也許是不是可以推廣到全國做參考。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "有啊！我們分兩部門，一個叫公部門、一個私部門，私部門就是我們用北投在試驗一些…就是說你去參加家醫科的話，比方說有免掛號費什麼，開始讓大家開始有建立家醫制度。另外是在醫院，比方說啦，我們那個市立聯合醫院的家醫科就去包掉…去處理一些比方說什麼安養院的那些老人，慢慢在公部門一線、私部門一線，開始在測試家醫制度。有啦，我們都有慢慢在做。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "你接下來咧？特別是醫療改革，在市政府這邊有什麼可以做的？還想要繼續做的？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "我倒覺得如果一步一步，這種家醫制度慢慢，社區…不是，家醫制度家醫制度一旦有了，居家護理、居家安寧就可以慢慢推。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "我也是這樣嘛，由點而面而…由點而線而面慢慢推，所以從市立聯合醫院開始做，可以做多久算多少，北投區開始試驗，如果可以的話就可以傳到其他區去，台北市有12個區，你北投先做，北投也才試驗沒有幾個月。我跟你講，每一個計畫從設計到完到弄，所以是這樣，應該還是蔣經國那句話，今天不做，明天更要後悔。其實很多東西做都要花很長的時間，這次我去韓國首爾一個很感慨的地方，我去韓國首爾看，看它的公共住宅有沒有，我問你，如果高房租、高房價是台灣人民最痛恨的事。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "我問你，我們的中央政府在過去20年做了什麼事？Zero，0。韓國，我去看韓國說你們的公共住宅做得不錯，它26年前就開始設公宅公司，所以它也不是…它也是走了26年才走到今天這個樣子對不對，我們台北市是走到現在還不到1年，我們開始推什麼公宅公司，但那個財務怎麼調度？房租怎麼算？我們都還在摸索。我第一次就踢到鐵板，拿聯開宅去當公共住宅，我就踢到一次鐵板，這不對嘛！對不對，3萬塊以上，我現在學乖了，房租3萬塊以上的不要來當公共住宅，不要傻，太好笑了！3萬塊房租你要當公共住宅。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "當然。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "這個一碰就知道不對，因為我後來推出去租的比例很低，馬上檢討原因，為什麼？就知道3萬塊以上的就不要當公共住宅，直接賣掉，我們要蓋那個比較便宜的，所以這次興隆國宅蓋，它就蓋一坪只有差不多500多，這個就可以忍受，對。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "反應好，對。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "所以有時候，有時候不要幻想說革命一次成功，它也是要時間，所以應該怎樣？想到就開始做，有錯就改，一步一步做下去。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "慢慢累積。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "所以我們看韓國說它的公共住宅，你也不要羨慕它，它26年前就開始做了，我們台灣是什麼都沒做，所以我們才開始做，開始做一定會受到批評什麼，也不要難過，先行者都是孤獨的，先知在家鄉都是寂寞的，真的。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "感受很深喔。我們網友是不是還有一個問題？" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "有，剛剛市長有提到說，論人計酬是可行的，在台灣也有試行的計畫，可是如果全國試行的話有可能嗎？能不能夠及時？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "這個是這樣，在澎湖可以、在金門可以，因為 Isolated。在全台灣很困難，因為他跑來跑去嘛，所以這個的確是大問題，我坦白講。所以有時候制度是這樣，一開始走偏了你知道，後來很難很難彎回來。不過我倒覺得這樣，也許可以在金門、馬祖，那種澎湖先一步一步試，有成功的Model再慢慢推回來，你在台灣本島現在現階段做不到，因為那變成Doctor shopping太厲害了，你沒辦法限制他看病，現階段沒辦法。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以柯市長，我們今天談了很多問題，因為都是環環相扣，很多細節、具體或者很多觀念的問題，但是今天面對總統大選，我們還是希望可以給三個候選人一些具體的政策上的建議，所以如果是你，你覺得對他們來說，醫療的健保制度你會提什麼樣的，覺得他們必須最重要要做的 Priority 是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "兩個字，勇敢。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "勇敢。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "其實怎麼做大家都曉得，就是有沒有勇敢。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "還是政治決心的問題。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "有沒有勇氣去推而已，只差在勇敢，我後來發現不是執行力，是勇敢而已。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "這個是台灣政治人物最缺乏的。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "對啊！我跟你講，什麼是對的？我都已經不知道講太多遍，講到自己都覺得不好意思，什麼是對的、什麼是錯大家都知道，可是對的事情沒有人在做，錯的事情每天在做，就這樣而已。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "你覺得你這1年的，你的這個受歡迎有激發出、改變一點台灣政治文化嗎？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "有啦！還是有啦！至少公開透明這一點就改變很多，我們台北市政府至少現在都市計畫、都市審議、環境保護還有那個文資審議，現在全部錄影，再直接轉播，至少這個…單單這個公開透明改變台灣很多了，我們預算全部上網公告。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "我哪裡需要議會，全部乾脆上網公告就好了，我們又不是要來撈錢的對不對，就全部上網公告就好了。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "好，今天非常感謝柯市長，我們其實有幫大家談了40分鐘，談了非常多重要的問題，我想我們有幾個摘要，就是今天上課大家做的筆記，同學很認真。柯市長認為第一道要處理什麼問題呢？是最主要回歸保險機制，台灣醫療目前不是以效率存在，而是以商業機制，我們的問題是被財團把持，這個都是必須大刀闊斧的。那麼應該降低醫學院的人數，提高專科醫師。最重要最重要的是，政治人物決策者應該要有勇氣去排除阻力、實行改革方案，我想這個是今天柯市長給我們最大的一個啟示，再次感謝柯市長。下一次我們節目的主題是關於教育，我們邀請到葉丙成教授，主題是20年教改過後台灣教育的困境該如何翻轉？希望同一時間大家繼續收看、繼續提問、繼續用公民的力量來關注我們的政治，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "我都還沒講到一半耶！我還可以再講5個鐘頭。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "我們還會談住宅政策，不然下次你來談住宅政策。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "住宅政策反而不懂。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "哈蜜瓜。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "哈蜜瓜。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "市長知道哈蜜瓜的梗嗎？" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "聽說這個很有梗，最近。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "有哈味。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "這什麼意思？" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "就是…" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "誰會解釋？" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "她要解釋。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "就是有一個受訪…有一個媽媽在路上被電視台訪問，然後問她說妳覺得哈蜜瓜好吃嗎？她說哈蜜瓜很好吃啊！因為它有一個哈味。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "就這樣，這什麼意思？" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "聽不懂啊。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "它就是有哈味。" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "是一個梗這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "哈味是誰？" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "哈味就是…沒有，沒有是誰，就是說這個說法大家覺得很好笑吧，是不是？" }, { "speaker": "工作人員", "speech": "她想說是一個什麼味道，結果講成哈味。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "所以我們還要繼續吃，表演吃哈蜜瓜。" }, { "speaker": "柯文哲", "speech": "你們東西不夠我表演，我已經吃完了。" }, { "speaker": "張鐵志", "speech": "市長謝謝。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "莊明芬", "speech": "大家早安，今天副院長無法到，所以今天由我來代。今天之所以召開這一個會議是因為我們認為議題應該要更結構化一點，或者是放在上面的東西要更能夠引起公民的回應，所以希望借重社群的經驗來幫機關如何在議題的設定上或者是回應上作更完善的鋪陳。" }, { "speaker": "莊明芬", "speech": "我們跟副院長報告，在執行半年的成果之後，副院長希望藉由社群的力量，可以將議題放在眾開講，如果機關有議題的話，就可以透過每個月會開一次類似這樣子的工作小組來作社群與機關間互動與討論，今天剛好是小型工作小組的第一次開始，不管是由下而上或者是由上而下的議題，我們很樂於建構這樣的平台可以更圓滿。" }, { "speaker": "莊明芬", "speech": "今天就這兩個議題請社群來幫我們進行輔導，我們另外今天也有財政部資訊中心的同仁到場，財政部目前是沒有議題，但是我想未來是議題很多的，財政部我知道社群也不會讓你們就坐在那裡，也希望你們扮演網友的角色一起來看看這兩個議題討論的成果，因為我們覺得財政部在眾開講上有一些議題，這部分我想未來是可長可久的，所以我們也希望輔導更多的機關同仁如何來進行眾開講的議題。" }, { "speaker": "莊明芬", "speech": "我今天講了那麼多，其實我應該要介紹我們這一個社群，我們今天請到三位社群的中堅份子，一位是唐鳳，我想唐鳳真的是非常有內容的人，越跟唐鳳相處越知道唐鳳這個人很不簡單，以後跟唐鳳多認識就會瞭解她。" }, { "speaker": "莊明芬", "speech": "Peggy是病後人生的站長，也潛入了衛福部。" }, { "speaker": "莊明芬", "speech": "今天表訂的時間會到12點結束，中間任何的過程當中我們就把時間交給社群。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "各位前輩大家好，我想問一下之前有參加過培訓的人可以舉手嗎？（兩位舉手）" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "在開始之前我還是大致說明一下，今天主要到的兩個單位是內政部及環保署，分別有一個議題要處理。財政部的朋友今天主要是來旁聽，各位可以把自己想成是一般網友，如果這個議題按照大家設計、刊登上Join平台後，會不會有問題？可以提供內政部、環保署一些建議。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "另外補充介紹一位，這是幫我們做紀錄的Wendy，因為她在紀錄，所以我沒有請她自我介紹。為了讓我們也可更了解各位，也讓紀錄知道各位的名字，接下來請每個人用20秒至30秒的時間，介紹你來自哪一個單位、叫什麼名字及為什麼今天會來這裡，讓我知道你對今天這個活動的認知。" }, { "speaker": "黃肇傑", "speech": "大家好，我是黃肇傑，今天之所以來，希望跟大家學習認識更多。" }, { "speaker": "王瓊苑", "speech": "我是來自於內政部資訊我叫做王瓊苑，我負責eID的規劃，看看這個議題如何在網路上被探討。" }, { "speaker": "A同學", "speech": "我是負責eID計畫的議題，今天來學習如何放在網站上讓大家回答。" }, { "speaker": "黃旭初", "speech": "我是內政部戶政司科長，主要負責承辦eID。" }, { "speaker": "施伯憲", "speech": "負責內政部相關新聞輿情。" }, { "speaker": "劉英純", "speech": "今天是因為想瞭解這個議題，所以來參加。" }, { "speaker": "劉智雯", "speech": "本身是多媒體小組，本身是網路公共政策網路商業平台的負責窗口，所以就來了。" }, { "speaker": "潘聖惠", "speech": "我是負責中心的網站業務。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "財政部沒有議題，為什麼還會來參加今天的討論？" }, { "speaker": "潘聖惠", "speech": "因為首長很有興趣，希望可以來學習。" }, { "speaker": "黃庭瑋", "speech": "我是被叫來的。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "因為長官認為我們還不夠重視這一件事，所以臨時加派我來。" }, { "speaker": "鄭伊翔", "speech": "科長問我有沒有興趣，我認為有興趣，所以就來了。" }, { "speaker": "徐淑芷", "speech": "環保署空保處機車定檢業務主辦科科長。" }, { "speaker": "蕭吉良", "speech": "業務承辦。" }, { "speaker": "陳英傑", "speech": "我是這個業務的承辦科長。" }, { "speaker": "程麗華", "speech": "我是這個業務的承辦人。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "我負責督導這個平台。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我之前是行政院的顧問，不過已經卸任。我之前有負責Uber跟Airbnb的公眾諮詢，當小編當了六個月左右。今天主要是分享一些經驗和心得，不敢說是定論。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "大家好，我今天狀況不是很好，但也是會努力討論各位的議題要不要上架。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "剛剛還沒有到齊之前，我稍微做了些田野訪調，大部分的人其實不太知道為什麼會過來，在場有兩位來自內政部的同仁上過培訓。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "緣由前面有提到因為之前副院長有交辦眾開講上去這麼久，可以跟民眾做互動，但有一塊最難，並不是後臺操作，而是議題如何設定；很多議題我們覺得很不錯，結果被民眾罵翻或者是網友大量湧入，這時要如何處理或調整？這一塊是最難的。也因此今年9月及10月辦了兩次培訓，大致上讓各個部會有種子部隊去理解到底眾開講是什麼，包含內政部及環保署參與了第一梯次，財政部參與了第二梯次。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "在這個培訓結束之後，我們跟副院長進行了一次報告，說明培訓的狀況，我直接給大家show一下當初我們的簡單報告，其實並不是所有的人都有上到培訓，如剛才所說的，我們辦了兩次的培訓，培訓了85個人、16個部會，所有的培訓資料如果大家回去問當初有來參加過的同仁，資料或者是演講的資料都有留下來。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "工作坊的講師是社群的人，但同時有民間經驗及政府經驗的人，家華主要的領域是審議民主，她是台北市政府公民參與委員會的召集人，所以目前比較頻繁跟市政府運作，同時家華也接觸民間團體，例如跟內政部議題很相關的議題的台權會，家華也有一些互動。唐鳳是g0v的貢獻者，同時這陣子有跟行政院合作像虛擬法規調適，像他剛剛提到Uber跟Airbnb的案子，之前是經濟部推了公司法的修法，這整部法的修法過程，通通都是在網路發生，從草案開始到後面的討論，到最後送進立法院版本，都是在唐鳳協助的平台上整個推展出來。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "我自己來自民間，現在在衛福部工作，大致的特色是民間跟政府方稍微有一些接觸。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "我快速show一下培訓完的問卷結果，，整體來說實際上的落實大家會說工具學到了，但他們沒有辦法實際落實，他們碰到幾個問題，下面的問題都是參加的同仁回饋給我們。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "我們會發現大概有幾件事情，主要很多議題是上面拋下來的，但上面拋下來是來自於輿情，所以跟政策的連結會比較低，像之前內政部的住宅政策，只拋來四個字，該如何拋什麼東西上去是比較合適的，這對於直接接到指示的部會會比較難處理，這需要協助。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "第二，雖然覺得網路這一件事很重要，人力不夠、沒有經驗，所以就算來培訓，也只培訓了五個人，未來要上架的議題該如何辦，他們不太清楚。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "本身的業務都做不完了，哪有餘力來做這一些事，還有人提到長官都以量來作KPI，而不以質來作KPI，如何放其實是沒有做更多的著墨。甚至有的議題部會不覺得合適，以及有的議題像內政部的議題跨非常多的部會，還有實際執行的時候，大家覺得需要一些真正的輔導機制過來。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "看到大家有這麼多的問題之後，我們其實也在思考除了兩次短期性的培訓之外，我們還能做一些什麼樣的事情？所以我們當初就提了一個提議，國發會跟各位之間會討論有什麼議題，國發會認為這個評估不確定這個議題寫出來合適與否，我們就可以Call out，我們稱自己是「外審機制」，國發會審查可能需要一些輔導機制過來的時候，就會Call我們召開這樣的會議，就像上架前討論目前這樣的設定會不會有什麼問題，這個是今天為什麼大家會來的原因。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "至於我們今天整體過程會分四個步驟，第一是今天的順序會先處理內政部的議題，再處理環保署的議題，時間會先切一半。前面內政部的議題需要麻煩承辦科長或者是承辦人，等一下花10至15分鐘的時間簡單跟我們說明一下你們在這個議題上，為什麼你們會決定要放議題上來，我們都有收到資料了，就請快速跟我們概述這個議題的背景如何。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "這部分在執行的時候，要麻煩環保署、財政部，因為內政部的議題對你們來說，你們就是一般民眾，等第一輪報告完議題之後，麻煩給我們快速的回饋，你身為網民給我們一些回饋，這是第一個部分。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "第一個部分結束之後，第二個部分就回到講師來，所有的議題都要鎖定到底跟誰溝通，所以第二階段會是由講師來帶領大家作利害關係人及政策階段的分析，這也會影響到後面的主題設定等等，大家之前已經交過資料了，我們嘗試希望做得更深。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "第三個部分是從大家原本已經出來的稿子要上架的內容提出一些具體的建議，也就是大方向要如何修正，這個是大家彼此互動的過程，如果前面是有共識的，我們就可以列出具體的比如哪一些資料要補、文字的部分大方向如何修正。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "我也說明一下，今天一直有一個打字的聲音，事實上我們今天會全程紀錄下來，為什麼要紀錄呢？我大概說明一下，紀錄的功能會有兩個，第一個功能是部會之間一直有這樣的經驗，討論政策的機會，但每一次沒有留下紀錄，每一次都要開會、重新培訓。我們希望等到這個議題過了之後，可以讓大家知道為什麼這次的Join會用這樣的方式進行，剛剛講部會間，政府內及外部的人民，我們希望今天的討論是未來可以公開出來讓大家知道我們為何把這個議題放到網路上讓大家討論。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "但這樣大家可能會有一點害怕今天講話可能要很小心。所以我們同時有兩個但書，會議紀錄到底什麼時候公開，這個時間點我們會議結束前會跟大家討論定案，目前初步想法是議題已經放上去或者是議題已經徵詢結束了再放；第二，今天所有的會議紀錄會先提供給在場的每一位都確認完之後再上架，所以你在過程中發現今天講太多失言的話，你希望用匿名、用「A君」之類的來表達也OK，或想刪修發言的內容也可以。以上兩個但書，到這邊有任何問題嗎？" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "有沒有內政部的同仁願意用10至15分鐘的時間來說明？" }, { "speaker": "黃旭初", "speech": "事實上有關於國民身分證整合其他證卡之議題，最主要在我們長期以來都經常有接收到外面來的資訊，因為不管是民代或者是民眾，他們在使用政府服務時，會需使用國民身分證、自然人憑證、健保卡等，有一些人會認為為何不整合成一張卡，不會有資源浪費的情況，這是我們從外界所得到的一些訊息。" }, { "speaker": "黃旭初", "speech": "國民身分證從以前是每十年會換發一次，其實之前就有一次討論，但民眾對很多資安有很多的疑慮，但可以參考的範例並不多，所以大家的疑慮非常多。但到目前為止，全世界大部分很多國家的身分證都已晶片化，如仍拿紙卡，就覺得很遜：我有一個朋友是泰國人，他以為我們用的也是晶片卡，結果我拿出來給他看是紙卡。很不好意思，因為我是主辦科的科長，他也跟我說他們國家考慮要不要用這張卡來提款，因此在我們的認識裡面，有一些相對於我們資訊比較落後的國家，事實上都已經很廣泛被運用，但我們國內情況比較特殊，包括統獨意識、藍綠競爭，事實上有一些東西是可以公眾所評論，在比較強大的拉鋸之下，其實是非常難進行的，這是我個人的感覺。" }, { "speaker": "黃旭初", "speech": "上次發卡大概是在95年，我們大概10年會重新發卡一次，我們也認為在這時候發卡，再發紙本是很遜，因此我們可以看到世界的潮流，目前一百多個多少大概只剩下二、三十個國家是用傳統的身分證。" }, { "speaker": "黃旭初", "speech": "在發卡規劃的過程，我們也有想到是不是把這張卡當作一個載具，健保卡及自然人憑證都可放在上面，例如目前信用卡也有很多用途，不只當信用卡使用，因此我們也想到今天的身分證是不是也一樣，畢竟是政府的基礎建設。" }, { "speaker": "黃旭初", "speech": "我們規劃的過程中，發現由於民眾收到片段或者是不完整的訊息，會有一些疑慮，整合多張卡遺失了是不是很麻煩、會不會有許多個資外洩的疑慮、是否不尊重民眾之選擇權，但我們從國外的經驗或者把期程提早來看，事實上並不是不讓民眾有不選擇的餘地，站在政府資源整合共享的角度來看，強制整合是理所當然的，當然民眾有一些社群會認為不應該要強制民眾，但就我們的角度來看，我們會認為這是社會資源浪費。" }, { "speaker": "黃旭初", "speech": "因此我們在擬了整個計畫之後，找了部會及相關的社團來討論，比如人權會都有很多的意見，他們認為不應該強制民眾只能有一張卡，而沒有選擇權。當然，從我個人的經驗及所受的訓練，我認為太多的選擇事實上也是一種資源浪費，當然大家看這一件事的角度都不一樣。" }, { "speaker": "黃旭初", "speech": "我們將來即使開放給民眾選擇也會受到挑戰，為何一張卡即可，然後要容許多張卡，這也是一種浪費，發卡及維運所費不便宜，因此透過這一個平台的討論，不見得會有共識，從不同的角度來看，會有多種的結果；就業務的主辦提出目前的規劃，這是我們的經驗或者我們認為這是比較妥適，但把這樣的議題擺在公共討論平台上面，給我們這樣的機會去了解各種不同的意見，對將來計畫的修訂是非常有幫助的。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "寫出這一份文案的人，可以簡單說明一下之所以會放這一些文字上來的原因？" }, { "speaker": "黃旭初", "speech": "第一個看到的是卡面上有什麼資訊，有的會比較擔心、有的年紀比較大、有的沒有結婚，不想有這一些資訊在卡面上，事實上在我們行政的過程中有很多的回饋，所以我們在規劃卡片的時候，盡量把卡片資訊減少，部分的資訊擺在晶片中。" }, { "speaker": "黃旭初", "speech": "我相信卡片中所儲存的資訊大家也應該很關心，所以我們在整個內容當中，我們會說明卡片儲存的內容到底有哪一些資料，民眾最關心的是資訊安全部分，就資訊安全的做法，因為考慮到一張卡遺失，民眾會不會很麻煩，因此就身分證遺失的話，事實上對民眾更方便。盡量讓民眾知道晶片身分證的做法，因為有很多的反對意見是來自於對我們做法不明白，因此我們盡量就大家想知道或較有質疑的資訊盡量提出。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "最後列出來實際上會問大家問題，討論的內容是不是這一個部分？" }, { "speaker": "黃旭初", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "我快速唸一遍，唸完後請環保署、財政部快速看過，他們議題的設定，看起來是先說明eID會存什麼內容，以及大家關心的資安他們說會更安全，還有最常見的Q＆A，討論問題部分寫的是「內政部擬推動eID，eID 結合了國民身分證、自然人憑證及健保卡，並依國人自行決定是否再結合電子票證，您對本計畫上述內容有什麼想法或疑慮」也就是整體包含在一起問有什麼問題，另外也提到「如果有其他任何的建議，也歡迎一併留言讓我們知道」。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "平常網友也不會看這麼多，我先請教坐在我左側的環保署跟財政部，看完以上的東西，有沒有任何意願回覆？回覆什麼內容？如果不願意回覆，你覺得網友討論這個議題的困難點為何？請說明一下小小的想法。" }, { "speaker": "徐淑芷", "speech": "我如果是網民，我看題目內容那麼多絕對不會回覆，而且一個題目問那麼多問題，到底要回覆哪一點？以我來說，一般日常生活我不需要身分證就可以辦很多事，為什麼一定要這個卡，我的身分證是鎖在保險箱，根本不需要身分證，我會擔心的是若掉的話，那個風險很大，其他卡掉的話，可以通知銀行剪卡，但我的身分證一掉，就會擔心別人會不會偽造或者是做護照等其他用途，所以我覺得問題應簡要另要說明為何要推以說服民眾認同。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "網友總是會有很多元樣貌，她大概講到幾個重點，也就是這個問題有一點大，全部被包含在裡面，眾開講裡面有子議題，把大議題拆除不同的項目放到不同頁面，這個我們等一下可以介紹這個功能再來討論。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "第二個部分，很經典會有疑慮的部分，我相信這個的疑慮點大家都有聽過，或許這部分可以回饋到Q＆A中來充實內容。有沒有第二位？" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "我想民眾更想要知道為什麼要做，他提了很多為什麼要做這一件事的原因，但Q＆A在這個問題當中表達不出。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "網民的背景知識比較少(唐鳳比較多......)，但一般民眾是沒有的，我第一次看到內政部的議題初稿，已經覺得跟目前其他議題比起來是有誠意的了，但建議「inform」的資料可以更多，像我這邊有想到的是，目前議題是放這一些東西，但其實像我們有先收到的ppt檔，你們有做出來，看起來是在政院報告過，那一份對我來講，相對起來詳實很多，國際案例多很多；既然內政部在這個案子的立場是希望推的，這份資訊量充足的ppt可以給民眾更多推動的背後緣由跟想法。再徵求還有沒有網友想給建議？" }, { "speaker": "鄭伊翔", "speech": "我如果是網民的話，我最擔心的是安全的部分，方便、成本低、潮流及多用途的部分剛剛我聽到，也有提到以後可以拿來提款及報稅，但必須要考慮到零時攻擊(一種發現漏洞之後在修復之前集中攻擊的模式)，比如加密方式被破解之後，像eID遺失狀況下，安全上會有什麼疑慮？" }, { "speaker": "鄭伊翔", "speech": "大部分的網友會很焦慮的是，如果在路上被警察臨檢時可以取得什麼樣的資訊，以及對此資訊做何使用？" }, { "speaker": "鄭伊翔", "speech": "像eID的部分，比如在政府機關或者是在刷卡的時候，可以完全紀錄到你的身份，這一些東西在身份驗證上具有什麼效力，這個都需要做考慮的。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "主要提到的是inform的部分，我自己的感覺是相關資料很多，但基本上畢竟目前部會的立場是希望推的，所以希望放正面立場的資料，但其實這個議題等一下可能在做利害關係人的時候，會發現跨部會間的態度不一樣、人權團體態度不一樣，這兩塊在態度上目前在議題中沒有引據，但其實就算不提，網友也會提，因此就這整個議題上，除了可以嚴正聲明內政部是這樣的立場外，其他的部分是不是也可以呈現部會或者民間團體的疑慮點有哪些，在就這些疑慮點對照到內政部的想法做回應。與其被網友挖出來負面意見，不如自己先放進來，會更加分。有無第四位網友想回覆？" }, { "speaker": "蘇英豪", "speech": "以公務同仁角色來看的話，現在很多公務機關都使用公文線上簽核，用的憑證都是自然人憑證，將來這個eID結合自然人憑證的話，勢必公務同仁每一天都要帶這一張卡上班，然後也需要隨時都要插在電腦上，就是這一張卡的使用品質有沒有符合每天一直插卡使用的需求，這個請補充說明。" }, { "speaker": "蘇英豪", "speech": "另外以民眾的立場，議題說明有提及「依國人自行決定是否再結合電子票證」，這將來要如何決定？是辦公民投票或者是公聽會之類的，沒有講述得很清楚，民眾在針對這個敘述做回應時時就會有非常多的意見出來，這部分也可能會造成內政部推動上的困難。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "這個也是關於Inform的部分，會發現inform也可以有不同分眾，同仁的角度或者是回到民眾的角度，不見得時間一定來得及能做那麼深，但的確不同的角色想知道的、需要Inform的角度是不一樣的。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "這回到剛剛提到，資料的提供其實很多既有的材料都可以跟著這次議題釋出，例如計畫草案中我有看到，包括不同部會的態度、民間的態度，都有寫到，這個是我們等一下可以討論的，這些更完整的文件，有沒有可能在這一次的徵詢上，把原本既有的材料放上去，是不是會有幫助。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "時間差不多，我統整下來，大概分成三點，第一個部分大家很關心的是Inform的資料不夠，或許可以再加強。第二，Inform講的都是支持eID的點，反對、或對eID的疑慮是不是有可能一起並陳，再把內政部的回覆放上去。第三，議題太大要如何拆，利害關係及政策階段分析的部分會處理這一塊。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為打光的關係，白板不一定看得很清楚。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我花大概2、3分鐘的時間，我自己很長期關心這一個題目，我下個禮拜一晚上剛好要跟臺權會跟EFF剛好來臺灣有一個交談，也就是講政府如何使用諮詢等等，我打個廣告，如果願意的話，可以跟臺權會及EFF聊聊。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但這並不是打廣告而已，我們每一次作政策溝通的時候，任何特定的議題，像Uber議題，會有臺灣大車隊等，你可以事前不通知他，他就會來洗板，不然就是事前通知他，把他納入這個議題設定裡面，他反而還會去跟他們說，他們可以來溝通討論，也就是盡早把關係人納入進來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第二，我剛剛滿感動，其實大家講的這一些與草案當中搜集到可能的想法都差不多，但「外」的部分，我剛剛主要聽到兩個：第一個是國際都在做了，我們不做的話很落伍；第二個是現在的做法很浪費成本，也沒有辦法產生其他的效益。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "還有一個是現在是時間，十年要換發一次。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛剛Peggy說了，這樣主要是用正面的方法來表述。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "從反面來考慮：十年一次是慣例，十二年或者是十三年或者是十四年再換，會有任何困難嗎？等下回答就好，不需要我講一個就回答。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外，國際上所有人都在用：其實臺權會在這個草案列他們的爭點，有一個沒有列到，我知道臺權會最會講的是，國際上大家一定要有身分證的只有十二個國家，現在變成十一個，其他國家eID技術很先進，但他們需要，才拿；這其實在那個草案當中還沒有看到對於這部分的回應。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在節省社會成本上面，我把我媽當作網友去問她對於這一件事的看法，她說本來用健保卡都是沒有照片，健保卡只是醫療用的ID卡。但未來一結合，刷健保卡是不是就一定要看到照片？因為身分證上一定要有照片。也就是節省成本的時候，同時會有外部負擔，這個是建議可以放在Q＆A裡面的問題。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "放在網路上或者是實體，我們在做政策討論要處理的都一樣，我的意思是面對到的問題，不代表網友不care，你們同樣整理出來的東西，恐怕要如何分成資訊放到之後的Join，資訊分層也許會有一些基本的資料，可以再問他說願意再多花一點時間的話，有一個什麼樣完整資料在哪裡。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "第二，剛剛講不管是公務員，這樣頻繁使用卡品質的問題，或者是民眾在問後續回應到政策的問題，因為eID是跨部會、跨功能可以透過一些情境題的Q＆A拉回來部分。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我猜eID不只在Join，還會面對很多的實體公聽會等等會議，像Join上來跟後續本來法定程序要如何辦、如何連結，恐怕可以先就這一次把一些資料做出來，為我後續在行政程序本來要做的部分有好的鋪排，因為到政策階段會拉很長，所以恐怕是虛擬跟實體一併來想。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "我怕剛剛講流程的時候沒有講得很清楚，我們今天的流程，現在內政部講完，現在換成環保署來做報告，再進行講師利害關係人分析。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "補充一個部分：關於一個議題放到Join上之後是收網友的意見，我們剛剛說這是收網友的意見，公聽會則是收實體的意見，因此兩邊都有，這會發生一個問題，也就是網友相比於公聽會，其實網友會很常問一個問題，在網路上搜集完以及後會不會用、意見如何呈現，這個是在網路上很常被挑戰的。所以之前在衛福部有一個問題是關於長照的議題，討論長照服務法子法，所以我們用了一個方法，也就是虛擬跟實體如何串接起來，當時的議題是6月底7月初上的，我們在上議題的同時，當時我們就多一行聲明是收到的意見我們會整理成一份網友意見彙整表，也就是變成一份文件，同時這一份文件會變成下一個階段實體公聽會時附件的參考資料。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "對我的同事來說，他不一定會採納網友的意見，因為不知道網友意見的品質為何，但他可以承諾會把意見放到公聽會；而對網友來講也有多進一步進入公聽會。這就像家華所說虛擬及實體可以思考看看有沒有辦法整合起來，因此一邊環保署在報告的時候，內政部也可以一邊思考你們接下來整個eID討論除了想放上Join之外，實體會不會有相關的公聽會及有何結合可能。" }, { "speaker": "徐淑芷", "speech": "有關機車定檢費用，目前我們是用空污基金來補助，一年大概要5億8,000萬元，這其實是空污基金所有支出當中最大的一筆支出。其實曾有一陣子空污基金快要入不敷出，我們檢討後想推動民眾機車定檢自費，但簽上去之後因評估民眾反彈及考量對選情影響，最後因而作罷。" }, { "speaker": "徐淑芷", "speech": "104年10月26日立法院審查預算的時候，有委員提議並納入主決議，定檢費用每年近6億，應研議降低該項支出，把錢拿去推動電動車及使用環境，應較有效益。對我們來說研議是沒困難的，是推動上才會面臨很多困難，因為我們已研議了很多年。" }, { "speaker": "徐淑芷", "speech": "我們認為就降低機車定檢支出有兩個方式可以處理，一是降低每輛機車之檢測費用，也就是80元降為60元，一年就節省了1.5億，這是可以節省經費的方式；另維持定檢費用不變，請民眾負擔一部分，即80元不變，民眾出30元、空污基金補助50元，這也是一種方式。那一天立法院審議預算時，記者不寫別的議題，就寫機車定檢要民眾自付，好幾天我們的email就回應不完，甚至有人還說「環保署是白癡，怎麼會提這個議題」，之後行政院指示我們要把此議題放在眾開講，基本上我覺得現在的柴油車、汽油車定檢民眾須自付費用且費用蠻高的，我個人覺得機車定檢費用80元相對來說，應對車主不是很大的負擔，也許可以透過眾開講搜集民眾的意見，做為政策是否推動之參考。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "這個議題有時限嗎？立委有沒有要你們多久的回覆？" }, { "speaker": "徐淑芷", "speech": "要我們研議但沒有要求訂什麼時候要實施，因為媒體報導明年開始定檢要自費，所以反彈的聲浪很大。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "就剛剛聽到的，立委有反彈、上簽過很多次被打回來，這個金額是否降低，先聽到這裡，內政部大軍有沒有任何的意見回饋？剛剛左側怎麼狠毒的對待你們，你們現在就可以怎麼對待他們......（笑）" }, { "speaker": "黃旭初", "speech": "這一件事是不是屬於公益性質，也就是對於大眾是不是正面的感受，由民眾來負擔才可以。如果公益性質很低，應該是還不需要，從這樣來看，我看不出來對空污性質的部分所占的比例。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "使用者付費的這一件事必須連同公益性來講，但整個議題公益性的討論好像比較少的，這是第一位網友的回饋。有沒有第二位網友？內政部網軍或者是財政部網軍要發言的？沒有的話，我就隨便亂指的。" }, { "speaker": "莊明芬", "speech": "如果我是民眾，我會看到空污基金有沒有指定的用途？" }, { "speaker": "徐淑芷", "speech": "專款專用。" }, { "speaker": "莊明芬", "speech": "機車定檢是不是項目之一？如果不是的話，就是用途不對。我另外一個感覺是，空污基金我們的時間點好像快用完，如果沒有的話，每一年的6億要從哪裡挹注？也就是空污基金已經快用完，環保署要用哪一個預算來支付一年大概6億元的費用？" }, { "speaker": "莊明芬", "speech": "另外，我沒有機車，我沒有機車為什麼要幫有機車的人負擔這個費用？" }, { "speaker": "徐淑芷", "speech": "我們可能在議題設定時沒有講到這些背景資料，固定污染源是按照污染排放量來收，移動污染源是依車用汽柴油銷售量向油公司徵收每一公升收0.2元，一年從油裡收約28億，其中的6億花在定檢，而且是每年都必須之支出，因此該項支出無法降低將對其他推動項目有一些限制及影響。" }, { "speaker": "徐淑芷", "speech": "基本上，機車定檢費用並不是全民稅收來負擔，是從污染者收的費用來專款專用於空氣污染的改善，我國機車太多了，將近1,400萬輛，密度高且人口密集，其實對民眾的健康影響蠻大，像現在PM2.5是一級致癌物。機車定檢至少可以維持車子排起狀況不會惡化，也知道有惡化趕快調修或換車，因此基本上可以符合空污基金使用的目的。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "總結一下，我們開過會前會，當時想問的問題跟大家有一點類似，的確像空污基金完全沒有審，像副處長會提到全民納稅錢來的，又重複的概念但想再講一次，背景資訊沒有寫，網民就會問，有可能就會歪掉變成是「政府瘋了嗎，為什麼要用全民的錢」，與其在後面才被挖資料，不如在背景資訊時主動說清楚釋出。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "我接下來一定得點財政部？" }, { "speaker": "潘聖惠", "speech": "我以一個路邊大嬸的身份來發言，以我市井小民來說以前不用繳錢，之後為什麼要繳錢。但比較理性想一想為車子定檢、為環境減少污染，多少還是甘願付一點錢，現在是到底要付多少錢，這是路邊大嬸的意見。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "一定也要用衛福部的案例來對照一下，我們三個第一次看到你問大家要不要收錢，民眾應該不可能回答他們想繳錢。因此背景資訊上要強化方向，一個是Inform公益性的討論要出來，另外一個是大家思考Join平台的時候，並不是把一些文字放到上面討論，而是要包含議題上去之後，我要不要主動作一些傳播。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "像長照子法的議題，當時有討論到機構評鑑指標，評鑑指標這一件事上其實立場滿明確，機構就會說為什麼要有評鑑、評鑑目的為何，但另一邊一般民眾有長輩住在裡面，會覺得評鑑是必要的、會指明哪一些項目覺得要保留。所以當時除了把議題放上去之外的同時，我們有做一件事是我們先search好利害關係人有哪些，議題出去的時候，我們有pass議題給長照社團，也就是確保不同的聲音可以同時出來，因此放上議題的同時，議題的傳播也可以搭配思考。以上感謝路邊大嬸給我們的靈感。" }, { "speaker": "A同學", "speech": "以我騎二行程機車的角度來發言，原來機車定檢有補助給機車行，因為我每一次在定檢從來不知道它是需要錢的，因為我只要花250元，我的車子才會通過。一定要換濾網還是什麼，我永遠每一年只要記得準備250元我就過關了。" }, { "speaker": "A同學", "speech": "第二，沒想到我現在還要自己負擔機車定檢費，我就知道250元還要再加上80元，330元我可能要想一下我要檢查嗎？我等到有一天被逮到再說。" }, { "speaker": "徐淑芷", "speech": "所以我們要補充逾期未定檢罰2000元。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我沒有機車，但有聽說從去年開始，每年要繳燃料費。" }, { "speaker": "徐淑芷", "speech": "燃料費是交通部收的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當中的意思不是很明白，是無論如何都要繳80元，或者是不繳的話會被抓、被罰，然後再繳80元。" }, { "speaker": "徐淑芷", "speech": "有檢測才有付費，沒有檢測就沒有付費，定檢站要依實際檢測數向我們請款，我們審查通過才會撥款。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "這一輪有沒有任何的網友不吐不快？" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "其實發現會跟上一輪有一點類似，也就是網友怎麼看這個問題，就看你給他多少資訊，包括公益性討論、專用性的討論、使用者的觀點，在適當時套用一些情境，把這個議題跟他切身相關性呈現出來。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "第二，除了Inform之外，如何傳播這個議題是由不同立場的人同時來討論，這個也很重要。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "兩邊都一輪之後，我把時間交給家華，同時會帶兩邊同時討論不斷強調利害關係人的分析及政策階段的分析如何執行，經過這一輪討論之後，再聚焦大家議題可以再怎麼修正。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "本來我想的是兩件事，以後Join的來源不只是輿情，還會有立委質詢。我再做培訓的時候，會有字目議題，在汽機車定檢時Peggy提到是議題，但我們要設定議題架構是更重要的問題，比如空污基金的預算分配，因此我在思考汽車定檢是扣住政策評估，或者是在這個政策之下要付多少錢，又或者我們要談空污基金的預算分配，就我們知道環保署未來要朝向如果要作參與式預算，會從基金下手。環保署把這個議題拋上來跟立委質詢是有一點關係，因此我在想的是，恐怕以這個案例可以再思考有兩個互相有影響的政策我們到底想處理哪一塊。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "不管處理哪一塊，如何在前因後果上間的關係講清楚。" }, { "speaker": "徐淑芷", "speech": "基本上這個議題只是立委要求我們研議降低機車定檢費用支出，也就是民眾使用者付費，因此我們想了解一般民眾或者是網民對機車定檢付費之看法，單獨就這一件事來搜集民眾的意見。" }, { "speaker": "徐淑芷", "speech": "還有一件事不吐不快，騎二行程機車的朋友，二行程機車真的是高污染車輛，所以目前我們提高補助積極鼓勵民眾汰換，建議您可參考相關補助，淘汰二行程機車現在是一個好時機，希望你趕快把握這個時機。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "即便是食品，原本公務機關設定的範疇不只是這邊，因此會影響到要討論的回應。包括空污基金在討論預算的分配，不代表民眾要如何決定，包括土污都有可能，只是說如果在這個政策要檢討的同時，要不要納進來？" }, { "speaker": "徐淑芷", "speech": "納進來可能會失焦，主題會發散偏掉。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "你們覺得會偏掉，所以是長官對你們說要放進來就放進來，如果長官不認為要放進來，你們就不認為要放進來？" }, { "speaker": "徐淑芷", "speech": "（點頭）" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "當初培訓時也有跟一起參與的機關談說，如果要把題目放上Join，各部會可能很少辦聽證，甚至我連環評都一樣，這兩個會涉及到我到底把設計議題拋出來，我們今天這個表講不到的是，在第1點與第2點作討論時是只有跟內部人討論，這是一個思考議題要如何上架，但誰一起思考的框架會不一樣。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "政策開始，上架，然後鬼打牆。這個涉及到到底要不要啟動一個會議，或者是放到Join，大家先來評估到底要哪一些人來參與，想聽到什麼及如何回應。這個想清楚會影響到議題的設定、背景資料的準備、準備上去後用何方式作議題擴散，但在這部分我也要補充一點，本來鎖定的人不一定馬上就會上來，有可能還是在複製不是網路上的傳統動員，所以還是要有心裡準備大家回應的這個問題之外，在這個範疇之外的東西，你會用什麼樣的方式作互動，如果是避而不答的話，恐怕整個上Join就是扣分。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "第三，題目一旦放到網路上，跟實體很不一樣的是，並不是一個在三個小時或者是四個小時的會議，恐怕連你在睡覺、上廁所的時候都有人在上面留言，那討論的回應要如何做又是一個階段。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "第四，如果我們以政策或者是計畫結案，是網路結案後，後續整體要如何綜整之完整回饋。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "因此以上四個階段可以看成網路，但第三個部分可以調整一下是實體會議及結案討論要做的事等，如果是政策階段、合法化等，就我而言，其實環保署已經在執行後的狀態，但我不確定eID是在第二階段或者是已經要進行到第三階段。如果已經進行到第三階段，我滿好奇的，你們在草案當中盤點各部會的爭點，目前有沒有新的update？會不會是我們自己在討論？恐怕在上Join之前，跨機關要有一個Join，也就是跨機關是不是要再處理一次？" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "這部分我們要有一些想像，跨機關不處理、要處理，題目要如何設定，途徑就會不一樣。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "因此，題目上上去可能要考慮一下政策本身進行到哪裡，對應到Join的操作，放到臺前及要回應的東西，在網路上一定有不一定關注這一些議題的網友，有來酸的、很認真討論、有搞不清楚狀況的，但或許也有一群人是長期關心這個議題的，他跟你處理的就我之前看，包括之前航空城丟上來的問題，並不是談議題設定，而是談整個過程的制定問題，因此就會變成在這個平台上的小編有無辦法綜整回應，並不是一篇一篇回應，這樣會回不完，所以要知道到底哪一些利害關係人著眼的部分及如何回。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "Peggy現在在衛福部是在FB回法，這個月或者是這個禮拜回答哪一些問題，環保署近期PM2.5吵得很兇，我的意思是這一些議題丟上去後，發散是必然的，絕對是必然的，只是要如何做政策回應，你在回應的時候，要如何處理好，這讓長官跟小編都要有心裡準備，而是要正向思考如何透過這個平台把話說清楚，我覺得兩位的發言逐字稿修一修丟上去，某一些程度會比現在準備的文字更適合。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "當然不是說之前大家做的苦工不重要，而是公文書的呈現與放到網路上說清楚的文字是比較不一樣，其實不管是環保署或者是內政部把話說得很清楚，只是檯面下你們要不要放上來還可以再考慮。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我們會建議每一個部會要把議題丟上來之前，就先做過這樣的思考，因此才請各位把表單出來，但表單沒有那麼立體，因此要跟各位說聲抱歉。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "接著是利害關係人的盤點，我想先說一件事，絕對不是政府的內或外，包括政府內部，等一下我們可以來操作看看，不管是以eID或者是機車定檢費用從何而來，恐怕都會有支持或不支持，甚至可以打破只是光譜的方式，可能是一群一群的，然後有遠近，通常我們的操作會是透過一張便利貼，一張就寫一個利害關係人，我們比較不建議先寫「政府」，我想內政部很清楚，自然人憑證除了內政部之外，不同部會的態度是很不一樣的，必須要進一步面對不同態度之背後的原因，到底不同的原因之影響政策，還有不同的原因支持親疏。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "這個問題呈現是不是要對外，所謂的對外是呈現在你們的議題上，所謂的eID是身分證結合自然人憑證嗎？這是一組問題，或者是除了結合自然人憑證，我們希望結合健保，不同的議題呈現其實就是不同的主管機關。像身分證之外，健保卡要不要在一起，但對應的是不同的主管機關，為何我會說這一件事內政部可以思考要不要透過議題的設定，同時讓民眾看到的不是資料都放在一起的問題，背後也涉及到主管機關不同的態度及擔憂。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "是我上架之前就要處理一次，不把跨部會的問題也呈現，我覺得這個是要想過的，不然到時候會遇到一個問題，如果有人上來問，並不是內政部可以回答的，而是比如衛福部或者是戶政，你們的小編只能點點點嗎？或者是你們的小編可以找他們回應？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "戶政是內政部的。駕照屬於交通部，是跨部會。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "利害關係人重要是議題如何上架、如何說明，以及涉及到後續的回應。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "環保署的利害關係人沒有那麼複雜，但我覺得環保署的議題利害關係人設定出來之後，我隨便想像一般就拉到PM2.5去談，因此利害關係人拉出來，你也要有心裡準備要如何回應？我們當然可以告訴他們這一次討論求解範圍是哪裡到哪裡，但這一次要處理的議題是要處理這一些，但他就不回應，這恐怕是不好的操作，或者是盤點過一次利害關係人，某種程度預料有哪一些跟這一次你們鎖定範圍的議題可以再上來，你們可以事先說明你們在互動過程中會先以汽車檢定相關的議題作綜整的回應，但在結案之後就汽車的部分也可以回應，這個是事前可以說清楚。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "為什麼要最後整合？因為很多並不是只有空污，是需要很多科室一起回應的問題，因此這在事前Inform也是很重要，也許是過程中的回應，在一開始的回應希望大家可以想一下，因此等一下會想請大家討論的是，到底這一個議題在政策什麼階段很簡單，但事實上要請大家談一下這個議題的利害關係人。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "但因為今天時間的關係，我們不做第三件事，即政策階段很清楚，利害關係人的盤點，像當初法務部的題目是「是否同意同性婚姻法」等，放上的題目都是這樣的設定，但我們後來在利害關係人及政策階段處理後，其實比較建議的是你認為在多元成家在這個議題上如何整理爭點，他們整理爭點後會再進一步啟動子議題。因為他們的議題是涉及很大不同的價值判斷，因此恐怕先讓大家把爭點丟進來，再針對爭點開啟不同的討論或者是不同選項的討論，並不是一開始就是用「是」或「否」。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "再另外補充，通常這樣子的處理，直接丟出去的情況就是灌票或捍衛自己的主張，如果拉一個可以討論的空間效果會比較好，我們在實體的討論，把婚姻平權的議題拉開來，並不是都支持三個法案，其實背景是有三個層次。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我要呼應Peggy剛剛講的，恐怕大家放上去的資料最好是把不同的意見放進去，像這一個議題是在處理核四的爭議，核四燃料棒還沒決定要不要插入、運轉，從行政院、不同政黨至民間的六個方案讓大家討論，突顯不同方案讓大家考慮的，如果未來eID丟上去，不同的部會有不同的考量，不只民間，不同部會考量是不是要呈現，當然內政部也可以考量，當然Join是在比較後面，我們可以來處理議題，看來你們也處理很久也很多次了，有沒有新的update，或者是卡在哪裡？我們可以聊一下。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "我先說明一下，等一下大家做的事情基本上就是兩個，也就是一開始這一張圖上有說政策可以分成不同的階段，可以大家看到綠色的部分，請先判斷你的eID問題、機車定檢的問題，是在問題認定初期討論，或是已經到政策規劃階段了？又或者是從一開始抓到問題形成政策的方向？又或者是可以拆成一些不同的子題？" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "已經進行跨部會的討論，我想eID已經在進行了，或者是已經執行一段在政策評估，也許你們的議題不能單一落在其中一個，可能介在第二與三間或者是第三與四間。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "現在發下去的海報紙剛剛家華有講到，請大家畫上十字線，橫線往右例如是支持，越支持是貼越右邊，越反對是越貼在左邊，如果是中立的人是中間，條件性支持、條件性反對，可能就落在中線跟兩個端點之間，因此請拉出態度上是什麼。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "第二，縱軸的線是影響力，像環保署的議題放在最上面可能是立法委員，因為他的一句話就要開始做這一些事，相對起來可能還有一些媒體，不同媒體有不同報導的方向，又或者是不同的民間團體，像臺權會顯然在反對，因此影響力也可以評估。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "因此請大家先貼上來是支持或反對及影響力之大小，這個利害關係人不只是政府、民間，還有政府內部，像之前議題是跨了四、五個部會，因此要麻煩內政部在貼的時候，可以把不同的部會一樣標出來。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "最後提醒，貼出來之後，內政部、環保署是不是你們已經有定見，或者是你們是中立方，也可以貼出來。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "因為環保署今天只有兩位，財政部可以協助一下，或者是財政部聽一下環保署或者是內政部都可以。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "現在先以20分鐘的時間先畫出這一張。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "補充一句話，剛剛講立法委員，並不是那張紙就寫「立法委員」，而是寫「田秋堇委員」。或者是知道這一個人，或者是有這樣價值的人或者是有這樣態度的人在什麼位置，而不是單純寫網友或者是立法委員，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "各位前輩們請先暫停一下，等一下還會有繼續討論的時間，可以讓大家再細調。現在中場我要請大家接續幫我多討論「三個問題」，等一下連同利害關係人請兩邊各派一個人在你們的位置上作一下簡短報告，我們等一下會再給大家至少10分鐘的時間。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "第一個問題：inform的內容是否需要調整，藉由利害關係人目前寫出來的東西，inform的材料是不是有一些需要調整，或者是應該要新加入哪一些內容，以內政部來說，可能在Q＆A的問題上，或者是已經有很完整各部會的立場，是不是乾脆把他們的立場之質疑先列出來，再列出內政部的反應，這個大家可以討論，舊的資料哪些資料要附上來，像環保署不斷提到空污基金大名詞加進來，請大家討論原本的Inform怎麼修正。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "第二個是請大家說明結果的運用，例如剛剛提到意見可以送到實體的公聽會去，但不見得剛好有公聽會，結果如何處理還是可以做一些公告，像我們處理的方法是各位的意見全部進來之後，我們會在最後做一個統整，也就是把全部每一則流言放在excel表裡面，分類針對幾個議題來做回覆，也就是按照類別來回覆。這些都是結果的可能運用方式。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "第三，接著是整體的議題方向，針對兩邊給大家的意見思考，內政部的海報看過去全部的橘色，通通都是跨部會，所以如何處理跨部會的議題有幾個方向：" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "也就是對這一塊想要回應的內容，網友可以留言，也就是先不提健保卡進來，但這一塊健保卡先用附註的方式來處理就好，這個是附註的方法，也就是內政部一定會碰到跨部會的問題。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "接著請家華說明你只跟大家討論定檢的錢，這個是OK的，尤其有一些關注的環保團體會說空污基金的分配及預算等等，這邊的做法很類似，也許可以一開始說明這個是定檢的說明，也就是可以預想一下如何處理，也就是很有雄心壯志如何拉進來討論。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "Inform要加入哪一些資料、哪一些內容，結果的部分如何跟實體結合，以及議題的大方向、跨部會的問題，請大家稍微討論一下，給大家討論一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我補充1分鐘，剛才Peggy講得非常清楚，在Inform的時候，我們會分成三個層次，要瞭解到在網路上網友來不管對這個議題關注很久，或者是看到FB在上面罵就來，所有人都只給你1分鐘的時間，因此在Inform的時候，我們先假設對方只有1分鐘哪一些東西放在裡面，讓大家知道為什麼，這一件事跟他有什麼關係；第二，如果他上鉤了（笑），感興趣，他想瞭解10分鐘，這樣就可以放到第二個階段。或者是本來就關心這個團體，會有一小時以上的時間，也就是如何形成1分鐘跟10分鐘？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "基本的草案等都可以給出來，不是說不能給，但我們之前輔導的案子，像某個署把五年的計畫，把250頁的PDF列在前面讓人下載，網友的反應通常是「這樣的話你講就好了，問我做什麼」？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以大家先想一想大家會搜集到最後這個階段的資料，分成如果對方是1分鐘，你要讓他知道什麼；如果對方有10分鐘，你想讓他知道什麼？" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "再次一片沉靜（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "時間差不多了，請確認一下每一組會報告的是誰？環保署是科長，內政部也是科長。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "總共會報五件事，第一個是政策階段、利害關係人及上面的問題。" }, { "speaker": "徐淑芷", "speech": "各位好，我很快簡要說明，其實這議題應該是政策已經執行到一個階段，檢討要不要修正的評估階段，利害關係人包括民眾、機車車主、非機車車主（汽油車、柴油車）、政黨及交通部等，基本上比較會反對的應該是車主，因為要他們付費增加支出，因此車主會有一些反彈。" }, { "speaker": "徐淑芷", "speech": "另外，定檢站也會反對，原本定檢車主都是老顧客，要收錢傷感情可能會收不下去，甚至可能須自行吸收代為付費。有些不是定檢站的機車行就非常贊成，長來電詢問何時實施。" }, { "speaker": "徐淑芷", "speech": "空污基金管理委員會基於空污基金支出之成本效益考量，每次看到機車定檢每年花6億，就會要求應檢討，認同使用者付費，因此他們是非常贊成的。" }, { "speaker": "徐淑芷", "speech": "有關於Inform的部分，參採大家意見我們會加入空污基金的簡介，機車定檢的成效，為什麼每一年要花這麼多錢，當然包含支出占比及會不會影響到其他支出的運用。" }, { "speaker": "徐淑芷", "speech": "徵詢意見如果不聚焦在機車定檢費用檢討的話，可能會發散無法得到具體意見回饋。至於其他如空氣品質不好，或是穹頂之下的霾害，或其他有關於空污基金運用的議題等，我們可以統籌原則性的回應，並告訴網友相關的意見，後續的議題都定時在滾動式檢討，我們會納入檢討参採，以上報告，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "剛剛是報署長的八卦，現在要報部長的八卦嗎？（笑）" }, { "speaker": "黃旭初", "speech": "我們可以知道晶片身分證在促進電子化的工作事實上是有多的幫助，所以可以看到很多大部分政府機關是站在比較支持的角度，比較不支持的，目前是衛福部，而衛福部的理由我個人看起來理由不太充分。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "理由是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "A同學", "speech": "（衛福部考量法規及作業方式等 ，不記錄。）" }, { "speaker": "黃旭初", "speech": "站在比較不支持角度的應該是臺權會，事實上臺權會對eID的政策是認為需要給民眾更多的選擇權，事實上並不是全面否定eID政策。" }, { "speaker": "黃旭初", "speech": "當然對民眾來講會有一些方便與不方便的地方，有民眾提到現行身分證用起來沒有問題，為什麼要換發eID，另外民眾說如果多卡合一掉了會很麻煩，大概是類似這些意見。" }, { "speaker": "黃旭初", "speech": "就Inform的部分，我個人會比較建議全部改成Q＆A來反應這個問題，因為我們整個計畫太多、太雜，大家不會有耐心看得下去，如果有一些能夠引起民眾的興趣，就會往下看。" }, { "speaker": "黃旭初", "speech": "事實上這個計畫內政部已經由院裡面的角度來擬這個計畫，也已經報院了，跟健保署、臺權會、利害團體等有一些不一樣的意見，就內政部的立場無法作政策性的決定，因此我們就以內政部的立場擬一個計畫到院，而院也到國發會來審議，最後會有一個版本，因此外界才會有是不是多頭馬車的聲音出來，事實上並沒有，因此這還在院內的討論階段，最後一定會有一個單一的決策。" }, { "speaker": "黃旭初", "speech": "接著我們用Q＆A的方式是一方面藉這個機會解決民眾的疑慮，看看有什麼意見我們需要改善及處理，我們接收到之後，也會跟院內討論並修正意見，修正完我們幾項觀點來計畫。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "不管整理在白板上，環保署認為政策執行到階段，進入到是否評估修正，內政部是是否報院，最後的苦主是國發會嗎？" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "環保署很清楚誰會反對、誰會贊成，也拉出利益關係，是有關於定檢站及機車行。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "機車行是非定檢的單位，但內政部有趣的是有抓出反對的衛福部、臺權會及反對的建議，或者是提出更多的選擇權及衛福部的理由，我的想法是這會不會在Join的說明區或介紹區，最後列出最後要思考及呈現的都是要不要，如果要的話，要如何呈現在Join這個平台上，如果都可以盤點成這樣，是不是大家覺得要把它呈現出來？" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "接著是科長說他個人的判斷是全部改成用Q＆A來回應，也就是包括議題上如何說明，是不是都是用Q＆A的方式？剛剛科長說是個人的想法。我認為這個很好，但沒有辦法完全用Q＆A。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "環保署是直接說列出空污基金的介紹、機車安檢成效及現在的支出比例多少，如果不檢測的話，要知道要罰多少錢即2,000元。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "如果大家認為降低移動污染源的話，認為大家可以多思考推動電動車，我覺得這個脈絡是清楚的，差別會在於我如何在上面呈現，如果有一個政策建議方向是什麼，用的語言、文字很重要。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "另外，環保署提到未來評估如何回應，恐怕未來會有一個機車定檢，也就是研修法案列為參考，但如果列這一項，我馬上會想到網友會說什麼時候要做這一件事？會在什麼時期？我不知道你們列出來之後會不會有一個時間表？" }, { "speaker": "徐淑芷", "speech": "我剛剛說的意思係指意見蒐集結果是作為評估政策要不要朝這個方向去走，以及後續朝這個方向去走，一定要訂定相關的法規，意見可以併在訂定法規研擬時參採，第一是評估要不要走這個方向，第二是如果大家都贊成走這個方向意見參採納入法規修訂。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "透過什麼樣的評估機制？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛剛家華是說，這個評估是不是現在就知道1月或2月，或什麼時候可以完成這個結論？" }, { "speaker": "徐淑芷", "speech": "我們原來規劃12月1日要放上平台一個月，所以明年初會綜整相關意見，其實這個收費制度的檢討，網路上的意見是一個參考來源，其他我們還會透過環保局、機車公會、定檢站及民眾等多個管道收集意見。" }, { "speaker": "徐淑芷", "speech": "另外，因為立院要求研議，所以到時候研議結果應會於1月或2月底提出報告函送立法院衛環委員會。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我們會有Join資料評估，第二個是定檢站，第三個是其他，也就是1月底或2月會交給立委的評估報告書，那個評估報告書再丟到Join上面給大家看嗎？" }, { "speaker": "徐淑芷", "speech": "目前無規劃。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是不公開，只給委員會嗎？" }, { "speaker": "徐淑芷", "speech": "我們函送給衛環委員會，應該是公開的。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "那就報上來，如果你們會後做這麼多苦工，可以讓大家知道環保署有這麼多的苦工。" }, { "speaker": "徐淑芷", "speech": "如果蒐集意見結果大家都反對，還要放上去嗎？" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "並不是一定要買單，但要跟他說道理為什麼大家覺得這樣，當然最後是政治責任的問題了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我待會用一個實際的例子來demo。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我一開始有講一個概念，大家願意捐出1分鐘或者是20分鐘幫你想事情，捍衛利益是少數，更多人希望對政策有貢獻，如果大家接到好比1,000個人，每一個人捐10分鐘其實也滿多時間。如果你花對等的時間，但不讓這些人知道，這1,000個人會覺得是已讀不回，這樣下一次問他的時候，下一次可能就只剩100個人理你，接下來就只剩下樁腳（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "即使沒有採納，但1月底到2月初看到報告書，也就是意見有納進去，第二個是這邊同仁們花了相應的時間在處理他們的意見，會有更多人來幫忙。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "我也用部裡面的案例。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "大家可以看到6月底上去，7月2日的時候我們就先補充說明會如何處理收到的意見，這邊的意見並不是說我們會拿去研議，跟他講研議一次其實對他來講是空的，我們會跟他說會到8月31日結束，同時再給一個明確的時間點是9月7日之前，我們會把所有的意見彙整為一份民眾意見徵詢彙整表，同時公開在本頁及粉絲團等等，也會變成是子法等等。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "這個是7月2日，我們說9月7日之前，所以我們就在9月7日把大家的意見整理出來，整理出來之後，因為我們在這一個時間點還沒有定案哪一些人可以用、哪一些人不可以用，所以我們先搜集，因此可以看到原始的，其實后臺就可以把所有的留言彙整出來，彙整出來之後我們還可以做一件事就是把比較好閱讀的PDF版本，總之是整理出來讓民眾知道好像真的有在看。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "我們這一次有多做一點，但這沒有那麼重要。重點是一份資料出來，這個文件會送到公聽會去，這大概是一種處理的方法。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "其實空污做這麼多苦功，我建議做。也就是讓他們知道意見不是單一管道，還有定檢站2,000個點，還有其他的來源，你們會綜整這一些，至少會交評估報告，也就是會不會改變政策，如果會的話，就會按照大家的意見來參酌。在一開始Join的前面就讓大家知道、並且清楚。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "再者，就這個議題在拉出去其他的子題或者是母題有一個綜整性的回應。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "最後，內政部是現在就已經報院了，所以現在是給行政院跟國發會參考嗎？因此我的意思是說你們上去的姿態是什麼？也就是變成國發會要變成小編來回應才是，我剛剛聽到這邊是覺得很有趣，照理來講這並不是你們現在可以影響的？" }, { "speaker": "黃旭初", "speech": "絕對不是推責任的意思，我只是說明目前我們的計畫走到哪裡。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個揭露出來是很重要的。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "如果是揭露成這樣，這邊搜集到一堆東西，要如何回來這邊？舉例而言，環保署是最後說我有一個評估報告，而且要送衛環委員會。這邊呢？" }, { "speaker": "黃旭初", "speech": "最後有一些什麼意見及決議，我們會要修計畫，在修計畫的過程中，民眾所提供的意見，不管是用來修正計畫或者是作為將來執行的參考，其實都還是可以成案的。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "大概何時會回到你們要修計畫的時間？" }, { "speaker": "黃旭初", "speech": "要看院裡面。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "就是搜集民眾的意見，然後列表整理，內政部職權上能回應就回應。你們這一次會想找其他部會開小會或者是通知他們說如果到時候有關，問他們要不要回應，有沒有這樣的想法？" }, { "speaker": "黃旭初", "speech": "這部分可能比較需要其他說明的是衛福部。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "你們有想如何處理這一塊？" }, { "speaker": "黃旭初", "speech": "目前因為還不知道民眾會提到的。如果有需要衛福部幫忙的話，我們事實上是會提出正式公文。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "我也可以先問一下健保署的態度。" }, { "speaker": "黃旭初", "speech": "因為這一件事情，我覺得還滿敏感的，因為並不是一個承辦人就可以代表衛福部的意見，我們在開會的過程中，衛福部的代表都是帶著草稿來唸。（笑）太過有爭議的東西，承辦人也沒有能力處理。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "如果這個議題涉及到跨部會，可能是一開始上架前幾個部會知道這一件事，有一些默契會比較好，但那是過程，這個還是要回到一開始議題的設定，會不會一開始就會提要有自然人憑證、身分證及健保，或者是初步推動想像有什麼可能，因為納入的不同，所以主管機關不一樣，這就是不同資料的呈現。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "因此內政部可以回去再想想是不是從議題設定上，你們要如何處理，如果你們希望全部都納進來的話，會建議最好先跟衛福部等等有一個討論，那當然不只是發公文了，有一點複雜性，因此需要有一點小會。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我建議可以在上架之前，先跟臺權會說明，看要打電話或者是拜訪等，你們可以列上他們的意見，他們覺得這樣是否OK？或者是有哪一些可以調整？這些都是建議，我想最後請Peggy及唐鳳作一些最後綜合建議。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "簡單說明。再一次業配一下，下禮拜一晚上6點30分的話，有空的話可以google「身份識別、隱私權與自由」，這跟中研院法律所、中研院資訊所、臺權會等會到，那其實是一個很好的機會去確認莊庭瑞從臺權會來描述是否恰當，或者是否是隔空放話而被記者操作，那也是有可能的，你們上了Join之後，臺權會比較不會發新聞稿、請記者來等等的事情，雙方比較能夠溝通一點，這是一個很具體的建議。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "除了利益關係人的溝通之外，我想給大家看一下Inform的例子，我算是他們的技術顧問。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個我覺得還滿重要，剛剛大家在想像1分鐘讓大家能夠理解什麼的時候，這是一個最近的例子。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這是一個網站叫「政問」，是民間的文青及設計公司想要辦政論節目，他們訪問前任臺大創傷醫學部主任--柯文哲。他們其實參考我們之前在vTaiwan的方式，也就是拿這一些意見問柯文哲，問他有沒有解決的方法，因此從這個角度來看，雖然柯文哲並不是衛福部，他有一點像Join的角色：有這個議題在平台討論時，大家提了一個禮拜的意見，他花半個小時的時間親自跟大家說明，針對這些意見有什麼解決方法。柯文哲不是衛福部，我也不知道他能提供哪些具體政策；但他仍然可以提供經驗。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一開始是大家的回應可以如何處理、如何回答等，一開始家華有給一些意見，也就是這個團隊的Inform、太多字，他們想要講很清楚的問題，這個是屬於10分鐘的版本，要先對這個議題有興趣，才可以花10分鐘看這一些東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因此，這兩天政問團隊製作了另外一個1分鐘的版本，我先耽誤大家1分鐘，請看一下這個版本（播放影片）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然大家不可能自己畫到這樣的動畫，我自己也不可能畫出來。我的意思是它裡面平常有一些做PPT的時候，比較不會考量到的點，但對網路溝通很重要：他們只用黑體、不用標楷體，很明確把每一個問題的關鍵字拿出來，各花5秒鐘排列出來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當只有1分鐘可以用的時候，這個是最讓大家有效，願意再花10分鐘看落落長的七大子題的方式。如果1分鐘內放很多標楷體的細部資訊上去，可能看的人到第40秒就轉去看FB的貓咪了，那就不會有幫忙的動機了。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "我第一次接觸家華跟唐鳳的時候，我說做到這種程度是不可能的，因為外包出去就是要花70萬元；但今天他們給我們一些idea：如果要做到極致，可以如何做。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "我覺得環保署很明確了，如果把Inform寫出來就超級完整，我覺得做得很好。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "內政部的部分是Q＆A，我講一下衛福部的案例，剛剛家華說全部的Inform都用Q＆A，可能要有一些前言，比如民眾有一些訴求，綠色的字是Q，也就是到底有沒有公開資訊，接著是下一個Q。第二個類別又是一個Q，又是答案，又是Q，又是答案。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "所以全部用Q＆A的方式是可行的，為什麼今天會有這一份文件，因此沒頭沒腦是有一點問題的，也就是要有緣起，後面再用Q＆A的方式來呈現是可行的。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "這一份文件是業務單位提供的資料（衛生署），因為所有的業務單位是寫的，底是全白是OK，有素材出來是比較重要的，美工我認為是比較後段來做的。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "因此Inform的部分，我覺得環保署加這個就很可行，內政部Q＆A的部分我覺得前言加一下。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "另外，剛剛家華及唐鳳有提到內政部聽到會嚇到我們要先作比較難的橫向溝通，內政部做操作這個議題，以Join開一個小小會，那個頂多是告訴他們要做什麼事，如果要cue到的話，是不是可以回應一下，如果說三天以內要回覆，健保署絕對會拒絕。最後徵詢一個月結束了，最後要做綜整回應的時候，健保署是不是可以針對有問到衛福部的部分可以回答，這個是國發會或者是我可以協助的，因此家華的意思是不能用公文的意思是為什麼會丟這個東西，請幫忙的範圍到哪裡。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "就臺權會的部分，我來舉一個例子，我不知道各部會與反對方的互動方式，我講我的親身經驗。我這一次把東西拋到外面之前，就做了這一件事，我做這一件事非常恐慌，我直接跟聯繫人Caspar Wang是原始提議的人，他就說「你們這背景說明出去，我看你們會被罵到臭頭喔」，他回饋了我四點，有一些是我們真的沒有想到的，我覺得應該是這個議題在開始的時候，我們就不斷持續有在跟原始提案人保持互動，所以當我們東西出去之前就說這個是care的事情，可不可以請幫我們檢視一下，看看是否有缺，以我們目前的這一個案子是稍微可行的。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "臺權會的概念是一樣的，家華與唐鳳是很熟識的，內政部怕丟一個議題出來，給臺權會發一個新聞稿把內政部罵到臭頭，是不是透過二位的關係，因為他們跟臺權會比較熟，所以如果可以的話，可以透過他們兩位的人脈先跟對方溝通，至少透過這兩位的關係，除非溝通的內容與後面的內容是不一樣，可以確保到時候你們丟出來的東西不會變成攻擊的對象。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "我來統整一下，在今天的活動結束之後，如果需要協助回應，請健保署幫忙，臺權會的部分是不是要透過講師的人脈而不會被攻擊得太兇。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "另外，盤出來的結果支持方、反對方在哪裡，議題出去之後，如何連結到團體，我身為部會瞭解不一定有時間做，但有時間的話，下一步議題上去之後，通知下一個單位就議題討論，避免到時候一面倒的情況出現，這個等一下大家也花一點時間可以準備。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "有沒有任何環保署或者是內政部可以再回應的部分？或者覺得以上都不可行的，科長有沒有話講？" }, { "speaker": "黃旭初", "speech": "其實今天的收獲很多。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "我講一下最後幾個比較行政上的重要事情，我覺得今天基本上是一個開放式的討論，讓大家聽聽看放上去之後，先練習一下有什麼修正的空間。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "後續的討論是接下來回去之後，針對今天有提到的內容有需要修正，內部當然還是要經過簽核的程序，要上議題之前，因為還是要跟國發會講一聲，把你們最後修正完要修正的時間請回報給國發會，如果簽完的內容還是一樣可以提供給國發會參考一下，基本上我們都是建議用的，新的內容看要給國發會，如果有需要，可以直接來跟我們說，我們一樣可以提供書面的方式提供意見，但最後還是要回到各部會提出時間。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "第二，如果大家一開始有提到我們今天一開始Wendy在打字，她現在用的是一個速錄，是一個特別的機器。不耽誤時間，我們會議紀錄就這樣處理，看大家有沒有任何的異議趕快舉手？今天所有的內容我們會在下午的時候就把這一些逐字稿寄給各位，但那個文件是封閉的文件，除了權限之外，其他人是進不去的，這個是個人的發言，十天的時間，如果有任何想要修正，直接在那個文件上修正，那會是一個直接到時候寄過去就是有修正的地方，就直接刪除，或者是要把名字拉掉，就改成A君或者是小叮當，請給大家十天的時間，給大家確定的是這一份文件我們希望是可以公開的，同時是可以給部會流程之經驗傳承，至於公開的時間點，我提一個意見，因為我們部裡面提到碰到大選很麻煩，所以這一個東西的釋出，至少是等到大選後，議題上去就上去，議題可能差不多也結束了，大選也結束了，我自己想壓在1月31日這一個時間點放上去，不知道各位有沒有任何的想法？" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "大家今天的發言，今天下午會把逐字稿寄給大家，有十天的時間可以修正，可以把內容刪除，也可以全部匿名，十天之後就會定稿，基於各種選舉等等的考量，所以我們壓到1月底的時候把這一份文件公開出來，有沒有任何人覺得時間上還是有疑慮的？請舉手。如果不敢舉的話，等一下來跟我說。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "今天下午一樣我們寄出逐字稿給大家，我很誠實說今天第一次用比較小型的方式，平常的培訓會有比較完整的一天半的時間之案例分析，所以我們要確認這樣的模式對大家理解Join或者是調整議題有沒有任何可以改變的空間，如果有任何意見都請在意見表裡面讓我們知道。" }, { "speaker": "莊明芬", "speech": "就像Peggy講的，這個是小型工作坊的方式，我們希望這樣的陪伴制度是到明年的1至3月，為什麼我們這麼積極？國發會這麼積極的事情並不是副院長交辦，因為我們認為社群媒體真的需要這樣的機制來搜集民眾的意見，所以我們做這一件事並不是長官的push，事實上我們有很多熱情的工作夥伴，所以我們希望這個平台在大家的協力合作之下，能夠讓它繼續存活下去，我覺得這個是非常重要的。" }, { "speaker": "莊明芬", "speech": "在發布之前就能夠透過這樣的程序，建立施政的理性及立基，我覺得非常感謝三位社群的好朋友來陪伴，我覺得他們不是陪伴而已，而是傾囊，我覺得這個是非常好的學習，如果各位在會後有任何的問卷或有任何不滿，其實我們不擔心負面的批評，我們都會虛心來接受及調整，謝謝大家今天的參與，謝謝。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "感謝各位參加join平台12月份工作坊，先請督導單位國發資管處副處長講話。" }, { "speaker": "莊明芬", "speech": "歡迎經濟部內政部兩個部會參加由上而下議題的輔導，不久之前輔導過兩個案子，一個是晶片身分證，一個是機車定檢自費，議題在平台上已經露出，希望國發會在這個輔導平台上，各位回去準備好的議題，能夠在近期內上線，我發現這平台只剩下一個議題就是機車定檢，希望火種不要熄滅，有源源不絕的政策案例在上面讓民眾共同討論，經濟部內政部回去也希望可以盡快上線。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "感謝副處長，剛副處長提到這工作坊成效還ok，但可能今天來現場的各位還不知道要做什麼，所以我們快速做個流程較做自我介紹，幾位講師也可以趁機認識大家對join平台的認知，一人15秒，講三件事：名字、部會；為什麼會在這邊；對join平台的了解程度。" }, { "speaker": "趙晏正", "speech": "經濟部委辦單位，今天是指派來了解眾開講如何操作，未登記工廠屬爭議性議題，希望在平台上得到一些feedback。" }, { "speaker": "陳河成", "speech": "經濟部中部，未登記輔導工廠檢討，想知道眾開講如何辦理。" }, { "speaker": "許世峰", "speech": "南投來的，未登記工廠政策，學習眾開講。" }, { "speaker": "許正宗", "speech": "對業務前半段有參與，剛回到單位不久，想了解並充分利用本平台上以對目前業務執行有幫助。" }, { "speaker": "陳嘉豪", "speech": "經濟部負責join平台聯絡的參考，中部辦公室跟未登記工廠輔導的一起來參加工作坊。" }, { "speaker": "劉意銓", "speech": "經濟部秘書室，窗口之一，跟中辦一起來。" }, { "speaker": "陳品君", "speech": "今天是來見習怎麼幫中辦網路上打這場仗。" }, { "speaker": "林純秀", "speech": "聯經數位，旁聽平台如何調整。" }, { "speaker": "李文翔", "speech": "旁聽大家對join平台有什麼想法。" }, { "speaker": "施又慈", "speech": "了解大家對join平台想法。" }, { "speaker": "林怡怡", "speech": "聯經數位，想了解大家想法。" }, { "speaker": "劉智雯", "speech": "join平台窗口，今天來是陪同戶政司來參與會議，目前大致了解平台運作。" }, { "speaker": "施伯憲", "speech": "新聞輿情處理，join平台會議已經第三次。" }, { "speaker": "林佑熹", "speech": "內政部戶政司人口政策科，希望在網路上對現行各政府機關辦理的未婚聯誼提供建議，有無意願參加政府機關辦理的聯誼活動及建議辦理方式，俾為參考。" }, { "speaker": "何袖綾", "speech": "議題承辦人，來聽聽有什麼建議。" }, { "speaker": "林漢彬", "speech": "內政部營建署，有參加過未登記工廠議題擬定過程，這次來目的是了解眾開講的平台對我們未來政府相關政策有什麼幫助。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "正式職位是國發會開放資料諮詢委員，之前在vTaiwan類似眾開講方式跟網路上的人一起制定閉鎖型公司法，uber、airbnb政策，有些心得可以跟大家做分享。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "join相關培訓都有機會參與，目前有協助台北市、台南市做利害關係人跟公民參與會議，對join理解比較多的公務同仁對他是既陌生又害怕，但是又得面對，目前公務系統感覺，國發會這邊我的觀察是很有心，但跟各位是平台單位，中間怎麼跟大家互動是慢慢摸索拿捏。" }, { "speaker": "恩恩", "speech": "公民憲政推動聯盟秘書，今天來幫忙做會議紀錄。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "先簡單花十分鐘講三件事情，為什麼會有這個工作坊、進行流程跟紀錄原則。以下發言的簡報都放在：https://goo.gl/V5Hsxz)" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "內政部報告時請經濟部假裝自己是網友來聽，第一個是聽不懂的地方或寫出來民眾看不懂的部分，第二個是問出來的問題是否設定怪怪的，第三個是有沒有問出問題之前覺得沒有提供哪些資訊讓民眾無法回答。也會cue聯經。" }, { "speaker": "內政部同仁", "speech": "書面資料請各位參考，這案子連續兩年我們都有主辦未婚聯誼，也有許多民眾參加，但事後於立院會議遭立法委員提出「內政部開婚友社、與民間爭利」等批評，但實務上屢有民眾詢問內政部何時要再辦理連誼活動，且其他相關部會及縣市政府也有舉辦等。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "有立委、政府和學者，內政部夾在一間。一部分是結婚率跟生育率的關係做說明，今天這整個是最上面還有人口政策白皮書，被訂在白皮書裡面是有具體理由的。" }, { "speaker": "回饋1", "speech": "總共三個子議題，第一個和第二個問的對象從說明看起來好像給未婚的人回答，第三個好像給一般民眾回答，那是否贊成由政府辦，最後問會提供想參加意願嗎，可是問題是贊成與否和參加意願放在一起好像怪怪的；第一題若要問我是否贊成政府辦理，那我想知道政府辦理哪邊會比民間更好，能否用品質或數字指標做說明？第二題政府分攤兩成服務費用提供參加者意願，問題設定看起來有點怪，不知道想獲得的答案是什麼？是政府負擔多少你才願意參加或民眾負擔多少才願意增加？" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "預設溝通對象三題不太一樣，可能需要做個區分；第二個聽同仁報告時講的很好，贊不贊成由政府辦，但不知道政府怎麼樣比較好，但同仁有提到個資隱私和設定篩選，這個可以補充在書面上；分擔兩成，我覺得感覺希望會得到會提高意願的答案，裡面寫到過去辦是大多不收費，剛剛有提到地方政府有收，可以明確數字會有幫助，這份資料有提到成效不彰，造成配對率低，我好奇配對率和活動的關聯。" }, { "speaker": "回饋2", "speech": "政府分擔兩成，我比較看不懂，原價到底多少，數字要精準，如果上網來看這訊息會想知道政府從什麼時候開始辦，配對成功多少，每年可以給統計數據，就可以跟民間紅娘PK一下，網友若覺得成效不好是否就讓民間去發展？過去成效配對比率要講一下，經費支出如果不方便說總數，也要講一下大概多少費用支持，如何配置最好。" }, { "speaker": "回饋3", "speech": "成本成效沒有相關資料之外還有結構性問題，工時太常沒有時間談戀愛怎麼有時間結婚，結構性問題在上面沒處理到。另外是這會讓我想到最近在做類似政策是國內旅遊住宿補助，觀光單位會辦的旅遊活動，超便宜但秒殺，會有很多網友覺得夠公平，搶不到會罵，在這議題上會不會有類似問題？看起來像是要大家對預算配置給建議，但有些相關資料沒出來，一年要花多少來辦活動，是否有助於婚姻、生育率提升，中間有很多假設性問題。" }, { "speaker": "內政部同仁", "speech": "內政部連續兩年辦理未婚聯誼，約三千對左右參加。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "網友們有把事前討論想講的講完了，我們一開始有想說這數字是否有什麼還願制度，現在看起來是個資的關係無法，即使如此可以講一下當立委質詢時會問成效，（內：都沒有講），議題設定時會覺得人口政策白皮書有個表談到托育、懷孕人權等六點，最後才是促進媒合，可以把這些東西用超連結讓網友知道有這整個策略。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "剛剛建議分三類，第一是背景策略，第二是提供資料層面，第三是問題設定相關。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部同仁", "speech": "未登記工廠是源自農地工廠議題，早期農村時代鼓勵發展產業、設立工廠，時代演變至今，保護農地轉變成為重要議題。為什麼當初工廠可以設在農地上，甚至有可能危害環境，所以現在須要被納管檢討。99年由立法院通過工廠管理輔導法修法，增修第33條及第34條輔導未登記工廠，在法令授權下，允許以劃定集聚特定地區跟補辦臨時工廠登記來處理。補辦臨時工廠登記的對象是屬低汙染工廠，且要符合環保、消防、水利、水保等法令規定才允許進到輔導範圍內，其後針對這些廠商進行後續輔導措施，包含土地、經管等措施。" }, { "speaker": "回饋1", "speech": "聽不太清楚。" }, { "speaker": "回饋2", "speech": "太專業了。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "今天中午也花了一點時間標了不懂的部分，但還是不太懂，請唐鳳試著詮釋。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個議題我沒有接觸過，不過感謝經濟部有架一個輔導網，給實際要去登記的農地廠商，有個答客問，是不是登記就不會被罰、是不是登記就可以用外籍勞工？我是從裡面拼湊想法，如果講錯可以糾正。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "有提到的數字結構化之後好像會比較理解狀況，11000真正輔導成功只有四千多，那剩下七千怎麼了？狀態是什麼？另外一條線是根本沒登記的兩萬七為什麼沒有進來？有什麼困難？把這些說明更清楚，對議題本身有更多了解。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "像剛剛唐鳳的講的東西可能會有幫助，有沒有回饋？" }, { "speaker": "經濟部同仁", "speech": "我先回答一下，有嘗試用懶人包，大家知道懶人包有優缺點，快速了解但內容沒辦法一次表達很多，但很多都是藏在法律細節裡面，像媒體輿論發酵的點不是政策內容，就會變成法令細節很細但不會有人去看，一般人不太了解這議題時只會標題殺人，只會就某些標題去看，不會看規範哪些東西、做了哪些事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有人會因為交不出回饋金？到底多少錢？" }, { "speaker": "經濟部同仁", "speech": "中間就要付出，回饋金至少十幾萬跑不掉。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以加起來是好幾個十幾萬。五十到一百多？" }, { "speaker": "經濟部同仁", "speech": "不止。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以沒有幾百萬就沒辦法。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "JOIN來看的還是一般民眾，的確這個議題應該鎖定專業的人，但大家不會想要做白工，放上去都沒有人回不好，可以思考如何丟上去才會有人回，我們當初丟長照時會去網路上把相關的論壇討論整理放上來，相關傳播可以搭配思考，我也呼應唐鳳說過，有張圖在那邊，有個結構性來講會有幫助，如何把架構變成文字，錄聲音檔也好，都會有些幫助。我有把一開始看一些詞看不懂可以回饋。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "以下簡報內容置於：http://goo.gl/p8XY9n。接下來談兩個部分，要上join之前談的兩個議題在政策兩階段，今天上join有點困難，他們會期待什麼議題在什麼層次可以一起設定，民眾會希望越前端越好，例如公辦未婚聯誼會到如何提高生育率、結婚率，他可能會想辯論是不是一定要提高生育率，再來是inform有些人想要懶人包，有些需要多點資料，對很多民眾和團體他們要的是討論，但網路上大多平台都是做政策解釋，有些平台有投票，join雖然有，這功能是否真的要啟動，而這功能是否一開始就要投票，機關也要思考，題目上來後很多人會好奇結論會怎麼被參採，剛剛都還沒提到我的議題放上join之後收集意見怎麼回饋到政策執行端，最後是課責性問題。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "一個議題拋出公眾討論，細分可以成這八個階段，但放到眾開講或整個join平台大家要做的是什麼？評估哪些人參與、想聽到什麼、如何回應，第二組不是不能做join，但要評估利害關係人，是不是你們現在鎖定的？如果是的話，他們是否習慣在網路上討論？如果第一個答案你們的回應是希望利害關係人，我滿好奇的工廠老闆無論合法與否，他們會上這個平台嗎？如果是希望不特定的公眾回應，那你的inform要做好。剛剛這位同仁你講一遍操作拍攝會比網路文件更好，你議題拋出來之後、希望哪些人參與、如何回應，這些人是不是習慣用網路討論的人。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "連動的議題設定，議題資料準備到什麼程度，用什麼樣的方式去擴散這些資料，要誠實的說join是剛開始的，想像放上去就有很多人不是不可能，但是除非爭議性很高，是複製現實動員結構，像同性婚姻就是既有團體動員，這些還會涉及到網路上來的是什麼人，你的小編要怎麼回應，最後大家會很在意join操作到一個階段後續怎麼回饋到政策，評估時期就一併思考，在join上架說明處就說明清楚，要參與討論的人都可以知曉。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "接下來要請各位思考你的議題在政策什麼階段，你可以不要用這個白話問，比如說你在問題設定，情境白話文就是長官想要做、民間有很強反映、立委議員質詢出事，或者有些問題提出已經做過研究，或找過專家資訊，或已經通過立院，或已經在執行過程了，有機關委託標案了，或是已經進到政策評估。要想清楚放網路交代清楚，因為會有網友質疑為什麼不是先期就讓民眾參與，但至少要讓民眾知道求解範圍，上來談可以談到什麼程度，也不排除網友陸續抱怨為何不是一開始就參與。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "這是幾位朋友一起辦的工作坊，每個部會針對丟上來議題什麼階段做思考，小編要有心理準備會遇到什麼問題，如何交代網友意見，除了綜整性的回、立即可以釐清的想法歐通知外，事後會做什麼事情，如何去說明判斷議題階段是很有關係的。如何讓網友知道走到現在，我想提個建議是議題放上來可以有時間軸的概念，像剛剛經濟部是從97年，整個政策從甚麼時間點開始、有什麼演變，這可以讓網友更清楚。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "要請各位做兩件事。第一件事是政策階段，有個評估表，原本對於政策階段理解方式跟家華講的不一樣，也許可以調整，確認議題的五個階段，是問題認定、政策規劃、立法院或行政命令合法化階段、執行、或是進行評估。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "大家已經做的是政策階段和利害關係人，再請大家花十分鐘，第三個是請多增加討論，現在開始預想這些利害關係人未來會上來丟想法，收到意見後要怎麼運用？我用一個例子說明，大家說出的不同立場未來會有這個方式出現在join平台上，未來你們會有小編要去回應。目前衛福部的經驗，會把留言分成幾種類別，第一個是釐清網友留言，第二個是制止極端留言，第三是伸手要東西、提供資訊。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部同仁", "speech": "大家好，我們因為政策已經過了好幾年，現在想說下一步怎麼做，曾經引起很大騷動，院裡面要我們討論這個議題，今天階段是在評估階段，下一步政策怎麼走，有些立委急著提出修正案，所以要評估。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "第一個在評估沒有問題，是在問下一步怎麼辦？立委要求評估報告，後面議題修正怎麼運用是在2018評估報告裡面，在這議題裡面立委縣市政府不是藍綠的問題，但為什麼立委縣市政府關心是跟所在地域和產業結構有關，希望再延長的包括時間和範圍，這邊希望不希望延長也不希望就地合法，這個議題拉出方向球是原意，但之後join結果會放到報告裡面。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我們的議題政策執行的階段，因為人口政策白皮書已經有規定各部會要執行，我們利害關係人這邊立委陳其邁、段宜康兩位比較反對，他們覺得這是民間婚友社的工作，不是由我們公部門辦理，中立的是民間婚友社，或許可以考慮合辦，對他們可能有好處，單身者的父母、適婚年齡的單身者可能是持贊成態度的一方。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "如果民眾覺得ok續辦會參採，所以題目會改成內政部想辦，怎麼辦？所以題目就不是開放式的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為之前被停，現在要續辦，要辦得更好，希望大家給意見。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "主要是收集怎麼辦更好，但如果大家都覺得不要辦也可以暫停？所以主要就是參採join平台。會放在白皮書檢討報告裡面。關心的立委是這兩位，立委會反對是否通常有什麼原因？例如支持者反彈？" }, { "speaker": "內政部同仁", "speech": "立委反對內政部辦理未婚聯誼的理由，可能是基於預算編列及使用之考量。" }, { "speaker": "內政部同仁", "speech": "段是對內政部、文化部，因為文化部拍了鼓勵大家結婚的影片，他說人口政策是生育不是結婚。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "有沒有可能把背景說明寫進去。" }, { "speaker": "內政部同仁", "speech": "立委質疑的部分，不宜納入議題說明。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "所以主要是白皮書部分要補過來，包括資料和數據。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "兩邊加了更多修正後都更清楚了，部內經驗供大家參考，我們拋了長照議題，因為算滿重要的事情，網友會問重複問題，我們就把它變成常見問題QA，有些幾行字也是回答，這個回答結束後就超級好用，除了放到join上也放到粉絲團，像網友就問長照保險要繳多少，小編貼連結給它就好。如果發現大量一樣的問題可以這樣節省成本。經濟部這方便很吃香是因為有整理過相關問題，如果網友伸手要資料可以丟連結，減少回應成本。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "快速講衍生補充資料，有三點，第一個join有整體脈絡，但只有三小時無法攤開來講，五個政策階段，包括問題認定、政策規劃、政策合法化、政策執行、政策評估，不管是哪個階段有一些事情要評估。" }, { "speaker": "莊明芬", "speech": "工作坊具體效果是最好，對我來講具體效果就是回去之後把綜整後的資料經過機關內部同意後可以上到JOIN平台，謝謝大家參與。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "Maxime Vatteblé", "speech": "We have a quick sequence in our video where the interviewee just introduce himself or herself. If you can say, in quick sentences, “My name is,” “I live in,”, who you are, in three or four sentences?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "My name is Audrey Tang, I live on the Internet. Physically, for two months every year, I’m in Paris. For the rest of the months, I’m usually based in Taipei, Taiwan. That’s it." }, { "speaker": "Maxime Vatteblé", "speech": "Thank you very much. I read in an interview, when you were eight years old, you used to draw a computer on paper sheets, in an attempt to learn programming. Is this true?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, it is true." }, { "speaker": "Maxime Vatteblé", "speech": "What gave you that idea to draw?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There were books about computer programming, but back then computers were expensive. We were not a rich family, so my parents were not exactly sure whether to buy this very expensive gadget. That was back in 1989." }, { "speaker": "Maxime Vatteblé", "speech": "Do you remember when you first discovered the Web, and the first time you connected?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Certainly. The Web came actually much later. It’s around 1993-1994. I was on computer networks before that. In 1992, there was already Internet coverage. That was when I lived in Germany. When I moved back to Taiwan, that was in 1993." }, { "speaker": "Maxime Vatteblé", "speech": "How was the early days of the Web in Taiwan?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Like most of the rest of the world, the first Internet users were people in the academic community. People who study computer science, people who have this very powerful computing center in many of Taiwan’s universities, especially in Taipei and Hsinchu." }, { "speaker": "Maxime Vatteblé", "speech": "Did you feel as a privilege to be one of the Internet pioneers, I would say, in your country, or did you feel like there was something really new there? Did you immediately see the potential of the Internet?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I was 13 years old at the time. It was actually very democratizing. The initial setup fees were not that high. The telecom did not charge special fees for access to international forums. It was a flat rate. As we were not a rich family, I don’t think it’s a privilege, actually." }, { "speaker": "Maxime Vatteblé", "speech": "Let’s talk about your childhood in Europe with Chinese activists after your father visited China in 1989. How was it? What did you learn from all these experiences to be among this kind of people when you were young?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They were exiled! They couldn’t return to their country anymore. They were locked out from their country — because they believed that there is a better way for the people to communicate with the government, which they perceived as not taking the input from the people." }, { "speaker": "Maxime Vatteblé", "speech": "Talking about sharing information, you were an early adopter of Wikipedia. How was it to discover this kind of knowledge? How did you share the info? Did you write some articles on Wikipedia, on Taiwan, or maybe other as a subject or as a topic? Tell us more about that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Wikipedia came very late. My history working with the Internet, my first project when I participate in the Internet, and that was before the Web, was the Gutenberg Project. It’s still very much alive today — anybody can read public domain books, usually published before the First World War, because that’s how the copyright system works." }, { "speaker": "Maxime Vatteblé", "speech": "Talking about a lot of projects you were on, you joined the Internet Engineering Task Force, is that right? You were working with them? Can you explain what it is? What was your role then?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The fun thing about Internet Engineering Task Force is that really, there’s no joining or leaving. It is just a space. It has two components. First, it has an online space. Mostly, I joined mailing lists — that is to say people emailing each other and copying everybody else. Aside from that, they also have face-to-face meetings where people can look and then talk to each other and learn from each other face-to-face in a high-bandwidth way." }, { "speaker": "Maxime Vatteblé", "speech": "When did the work take place?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It was in the early 2000s." }, { "speaker": "Maxime Vatteblé", "speech": "Do you still have contacts with the IETF community?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Certainly. The way IETF works, it is not only for people who have lots of ideas; the work does not stop when RFCs are published. Instead, they want everybody to test-drive it. Again, just like my early role with the Gutenberg Project, my current role is to look at the newest RFCs, try to implement the drafts, try to put them into action, and see if it actually works, or is actually contradicting each other." }, { "speaker": "Maxime Vatteblé", "speech": "Was it through this collaboration that you found the Gov-Zero (g0v) Project? Can you explain what this is and what we can do about this?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I did not start the g0v movement. It was started late 2012 by my very good friend CL Kao and three of his friends. The way g0v works is this — we have a slogan, called “Fork the Government.” Fork has a very specific meaning in open-source development. It means take whatever is here, not rejecting it, but taking it to a different direction." }, { "speaker": "Maxime Vatteblé", "speech": "Hacking politics, in a way." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It is." }, { "speaker": "Maxime Vatteblé", "speech": "Talking about politics, when we think about Taiwan, we think about the Sunflower Movement. There was a link between the Internet, the Web and this student movement. Can you briefly explain it to a public who doesn’t know anything about that? Maybe then when you explain the link with the old Internet thing and the occupy movement..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes. The Sunflower Movement was in March 2014. Around that time already the Occupy Movement, the Arab Spring, the work from others organizers had already taken place, and researchers like Manuel Castells had already wrote analyses about them." }, { "speaker": "Maxime Vatteblé", "speech": "Yeah, it seems this time the political landscape really changed in Taiwan. For instance, the new mayor of Taipei, he was elected thanks to social media. Can you tell us according to you, why is it possible in Taiwan to be elected through social media?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "As I explained, 80 percent of Taiwan’s population is on Internet, which is coming very close to the literacy rate. It just enabled a very rapid dissemination of ideas, of critiques, of conversations, of dialogues." }, { "speaker": "Maxime Vatteblé", "speech": "Would you say that Taiwan is maybe a really great and unique example of new politics, if you have to compare with Europe, with this strong growth of social media, and this as an example in particular? Would you say that Taiwan is maybe a new symbol for young users on the Internet maybe to empower themselves in this era, in the few sentences if you can?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Taiwan is a very unique place. I see Taiwan has a lot of innovation, on civic legislation, and social media, because it is very tightly bound. Pretty much everybody is online, everybody understands more or less the same language, so it’s very easy for ideas to spread, and to experiment." }, { "speaker": "Maxime Vatteblé", "speech": "Do you think this trust will be strengthened in May when your new president will be in charge officially?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, certainly. Dr. Tsai’s campaign team did a great job! She ran a campaign modeled as a public and civic education process. She published her campaign’s visual design assets as an open source project — that is straight from Mayor Ko’s campaign, of course, she didn’t have to reinvent this." }, { "speaker": "Maxime Vatteblé", "speech": "Which social media, in Taiwan, maybe is the most used or the most efficient to communicate and share information about politics or maybe the critiques about China?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There are two main social media outlets in Taiwan, and they complement each other. There is one where the entire world uses, it’s Facebook. Pretty much everybody on Taiwan is on Facebook. There’s a projection like in a little bit more than 10 years, there may be more Taiwanese Facebook accounts than Taiwanese population, [laughs] because people have multiple accounts. There’s a lot of people on Facebook." }, { "speaker": "Maxime Vatteblé", "speech": "How would you see the future of the Web in Taiwan? Would it be a space which is relating both freedom to its users, maybe even be more used to make a political campaign, or to distribute information? If you were to compare it with the early beginnings in Taiwan, what is evolution and how do you see it in the near future?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There is a project called Mozilla which is the makers of the Firefox browser and a lot of other Web technologies, they are one of the main innovators of the Web..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The Web has a bright future in Taiwan. First, everybody’s on the Web, and everybody recognized the ideas of the early Web — the hyperlinks and distributed publishing — things like that which makes the Web unique. There’s a lot of very interesting experiments, such as twreporter.org, an entirely crowd-funded media for investigative journalism, in the form of not-for-profit Web publication." }, { "speaker": "Maxime Vatteblé", "speech": "There’ll be one last question. Is it OK?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Mm-hmm." }, { "speaker": "Maxime Vatteblé", "speech": "You describe yourself as a \"conservative anarchist,\" and, at the same time, you still do consulting work with Apple and other big companies. How do you respond to criticism you were maybe facing about that little paradox between these two things of using that is complementary?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I work \"with\" Apple. I don’t work \"for\" Apple. My title — independent contractor — reflects this distinction. My main work at Apple or at the Oxford University Press is, actually, introducing them to works from the open source society, and people who reached out to me from those organizations — such as Socialtext — were already friends that I trusted. They are fellows in the open source and free software movements." }, { "speaker": "Maxime Vatteblé", "speech": "Thank you very much." } ]

[ { "speaker": "Marie Richeux", "speech": "Would you like to begin to introduce yourself, by sharing with us your first time visiting in Paris?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When I was very young, when I was 11, I lived in Saarland, and it’s very close to French borders. Actually, in our schools we taught German, and then French, and then English, in that order. So I traveled with my parents through Luxembourg to Paris, to these nearby regions; we see a lot of different cultures intermingling each other." }, { "speaker": "Voiceover", "speech": "In ’87 is decided to create a triple liaison connection. The first one in Japan. There was one in Paris and one in the States. I think it was in New York. So, there was a connection. Our student from Japan sent a picture that took a very long time to arrive. It was a picture that want take time to download." }, { "speaker": "Marie Richeux", "speech": "20-30 years before it happened. It didn’t take that much time. Here we are in 2015, listening to what was the first time we saw the connection of those two computers. Do you remember, Audrey, the first time when you see the two computers get together and connect around the world?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Certainly. When I was in Germany, I already practiced computer programming. But at that time, the way for computers to talk to each other was limited to the academia, to universities, the early pioneers of the Internet." }, { "speaker": "Marie Richeux", "speech": "You were a girl, a teenager — did your parents and understood that you were doing and understand the progress from one year from the other? They’ve seen the revolution going on, your parents?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, actually the Beijing protest in 1989 was the first year of a color camera was paired with satellite connections and photofax machines, so people can get colored footage out. Because back then, people thought that photos had to be in films." }, { "speaker": "Marie Richeux", "speech": "You say that you had understand that at that point?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes." }, { "speaker": "Voiceover", "speech": "The informatic code is the law. It’s been too hard to talk about it, and citizens don’t usually talk about it. But it’s important that, though cyberspace is called unreal, it’s very real now. We need to put this under the control of civil powers, and not in the hand of a few actors who won’t be as goodwilling or full of goodness as we are." }, { "speaker": "Marie Richeux", "speech": "The person from the universities in France mentioned that the code is law. It reminded me very much of everything about your teenage years." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Well when Lawrence Lessig, the law professor and the creator of the Creative Commons movement — where authors relinquish part of our copyright so that we can work with the world on creations together — when he coined the idea that code is law, he doesn’t literally mean law as in courtroom, or for judges, or the jurisdiction." }, { "speaker": "Marie Richeux", "speech": "You have been sharing this code, and to give it to everybody — all the citizens — so they can become their own architects. When do you realize the importance of this idea ?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When I was 12, I decided that I don’t want to be schooled anymore in the school system. I started to leave the school system when I was 13, and when I was 14 I discovered the Web. But before when I was 14, there were two years where I had access to the Internet and when I’m not satisfied with the education system. So I discovered this Gutenberg Project on the Internet." }, { "speaker": "Marie Richeux", "speech": "And then you gave all your knowledge of the code to other people. How did you make that accessible?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "On the Internet, by default — that means without doing anything — any computer can talk to any computer. When somebody has a better idea, they don’t have to ask anybody’s permission. They can just make it happen on their computer. When a nearby computer sees it and wants to adopt the same protocol, again, they don’t have to ask for anybody’s permission." }, { "speaker": "Voiceover", "speech": "Along the street were some houses and stores. They used to live here and do business, or it was their family. You can see the barriers over there, the green barrier. Inside this land is going to be sold to big companies or hotels that may do a financial center or a tourist industry here." }, { "speaker": "Interpreter", "speech": "That’s the music you choose? No?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No, the one I chose was “Lux Aurumque”." }, { "speaker": "Interpreter", "speech": "You’re very nice. You’re explaining very clearly. [laughs] I was so scared of everything." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Well I’m a professional mediator. It’s my job to talk like this. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Interpreter", "speech": "And you do it perfectly." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is very nostalgic Taiwanese pop music." }, { "speaker": "Interpreter", "speech": "Yeah, you like it?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, it’s nostalgic." }, { "speaker": "Interpreter", "speech": "Had you imagined your idea would take that long to get into all the houses and stuff like that in Taiwan? I thought it would have taken much more time. One year, one year, one year just seems like..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, it’s very, very fast. I think that’s because Taiwan was the main manufacturing place of personal computers at that time. All those personal computers were made in Taiwan." }, { "speaker": "Interpreter", "speech": "Yeah, because I don’t have the feeling it was like that in France." }, { "speaker": "Marie Richeux", "speech": "For people outside Taiwan, how would you explain the revolution of Sunflower movement to them ?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This music you just played, it’s pretty nice to hear that. It describes this idea that when people are in love, they could just idle there, do nothing, but they still feel like they’re in love. The are content with their life, with a satisfaction in harmony with the environment." }, { "speaker": "Marie Richeux", "speech": "When you say \"we,\" you mean the technical team to work on Internet connectivity during these days?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes. When I say “we,” I mean the Gov Zero, the g0v. We are a movement, just like the Internet, that anybody can join. The only requirement is that you must allow other people to reuse your work. That’s it. Anybody can start any project. The translation, the transcripting, the logistics, the video live streaming, everything was done by volunteers using our own space for coordination." }, { "speaker": "Voiceover", "speech": "The word “neutrality” is something very new, and it was not an issue in the origins of Internet. It was the normal result of the architecture that’s been created on Internet. It’s agnostic to the way you use it. From this original point of view, you had the freedom to create." }, { "speaker": "Marie Richeux", "speech": "About the occupation of 22 days in Taiwan, you emphasized on Internet neutrality. How would you explain that?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Certainly. The term Internet neutrality means three very important things, and they intertwine with each other. First, it means that anybody can talk to anybody. There’s no discrimination based on who you are. Second, it means that when anybody sends a message, it is carried verbatim — that is to say without alteration — to its intended recipient. It means that no tampering with the message." }, { "speaker": "Marie Richeux", "speech": "Would you use the same tools to put online everything from anyone, any part, any ideas they have, give all their content? Would the people in Taiwan have done this for their government, even for an administration that you didn’t agree with?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I said the three virtues were: end-to-end, anybody-to-anybody; freedom from tampering and from censorship; and freedom to invent new uses. These all pertain to things that we voluntarily put on the Internet. The Internet is a way to talk to each other." }, { "speaker": "Marie Richeux", "speech": "Yes, we can come back to the legal definition. It’s like the definition of a lawmaker, so I will trust it, because you know what it is. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The word \"hacker,\" when it was first used in the 17th century, it means people who hack on the wood and to make tools using wood. They also make their own woodworking tools, and most of the woodworking tools and the furniture at that time were made of wood themselves." }, { "speaker": "Marie Richeux", "speech": "I noticed that when you introduced yourself, that you were retired?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Mm-hmm." }, { "speaker": "Marie Richeux", "speech": "You’re not very old. Why do you call yourself retired?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Well, I did work professionally for 20 years. When I say I retired, I mean that my time is spent primarily in the third sector. That means I work with people who volunteer, who work with me, who can join or leave at any time." }, { "speaker": "Marie Richeux", "speech": "When you were working for 20 years, did that give you enough money to live without being a problem for you?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It is true that I work with some Silicon Valley companies and as an entrepreneur, but I’m not particularly rich. It’s just that I decided that my skills or my time is valued enough so that people are willing to let me live, somewhat comfortably perhaps, in exchange of my time." }, { "speaker": "Marie Richeux", "speech": "But your knowledge may also enable big groups in the private sector. For instance, would you work with Facebook, or with Google?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The thing with open source, with giving my copyright away, is that I cannot control who use it. For example, I invented a way of making a spreadsheet faster over the Web. But when I was working on it, first I’m working on somebody else’s prior work. Second, I cannot control who will be the next person using my work." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We are listening to the first Virtual Choir, curated by Eric Whitacre, the composer of this music, with 185 singers from 12 countries. These people did the recordings at their homes, wearing headphones, some people singing some parts, some singing other parts, and they were singing by looking at the conductor-composer himself in a silent film, who conducts everybody’s singing in an asynchronous way." }, { "speaker": "Marie Richeux", "speech": "So it is a grand movement, involving each and every participants, on the internet. Do you think this kind of collaboration gives us hope for the future?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I have a lot of hope, because I was also a conductor of this type of work, but with the government and the private sector. When Uber comes to Taiwan, they did not ask for anybody’s permission." }, { "speaker": "Interpreter", "speech": "So at the end, what was the decision about Uber?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The consensus was that they had to pay taxes, they had to display prominently their registration, and that they had to provide the insurance statements. We also compared these concerns with other countries, who had similar contentions not only with Uber, but also with Airbnb." }, { "speaker": "Interpreter", "speech": "So Uber can also become a dispatch system for existing taxis?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, that’s how it works in London." }, { "speaker": "Interpreter", "speech": "Yeah, you have the mini cab and the black cab there." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly." }, { "speaker": "Interpreter", "speech": "At which time will you have the meeting of the night of ideas?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "At midnight, with Blaise from Google." }, { "speaker": "Marie Richeux", "speech": "Thank you so much for spending the time with us. We look forward seeing you tonight at the Nuit des Idées." } ]

[ { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "Paris capitale du monde des idées, le ministère des affaires étrangères organise aujourd’hui la première nuit des idées en invitant des intellectuels, des universitaires, des penseurs, des écrivains, des artistes du monde entier." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "Tous plongeront sur ce vaste, très vaste sujet: ’ Pensez le monde de demain ’ dans une approche évidemment pluridisciplinaire et en pensant d’ailleurs d’autre part or des frontières de l’Hexagone." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "Mon dieu ce que ça fait du bien que d’essayer de réfléchir de cette manière là en regardant les choses et les sujets non pas depuis ici. Mais depuis là-bas. Je salue nos invités ce soir, Souleymane Bachir Diagne, bonsoir monsieur." }, { "speaker": "Souleymane Bachir Diagne", "speech": "Bonsoir." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "Merci d’être au micro de France Inter, vous êtes philosophe professeur à la Columbia university. Saskia Sassen, bonsoir." }, { "speaker": "Saskia Sassen", "speech": "Bonsoir." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "Et merci d’être également au micro de France Inter. Sociologue économiste néerlando-américaine." }, { "speaker": "Saskia Sassen", "speech": "Oui." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "On poursuit le tour de table avec Audrey Tang. Bonsoir, programmatrice de logiciels libres taïwanaise. Merci d’être là." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "Et merci également à Michel Zlotowski qu’on entend murmurer pour la traduction simultanée des propos." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "Alors, pour commencer, j’aimerais que vous vous présentiez tout simplement et que vous essayiez de nous dire en quelques mots sur quel sujet, sur quelle problématique vous travaillez. On commence avec vous Saskia Sassen." }, { "speaker": "Saskia Sassen", "speech": "Alors, dans ce moment, j’ai justement fini un bouquin que je viens présenter ici aussi qui s’appelle expulsion ?" }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "Expulsion chez Gallimard." }, { "speaker": "Saskia Sassen", "speech": "Alors, c’est une espèce d’études de la sauvagerie de notre monde. Ça m’a fait beaucoup plaisir." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "D’analyser la sauvagerie du monde, ça vous a fait beaucoup plaisir ? [rire]" }, { "speaker": "Saskia Sassen", "speech": "Oui. Non, parce qu’il faut identifier aussi l’ennemi: Qu’est ce que c’est vraiment le problème ? Alors, ça c’était intéressant. Je suis très contente d’être ici à la nuit de Paris, je trouve ça merveilleux." }, { "speaker": "Saskia Sassen", "speech": "Imagine, vous depuis les choses qui sont passées à Paris d’avoir à deux heures du matin je crois qu’elle parle d’aujourd’hui matin, quelque chose comme ça. Merveilleux. C’est bien." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "Vous dites, il faut isoler l’ennemi. C’est qui ?" }, { "speaker": "Saskia Sassen", "speech": "Il y a plusieurs. Mais un vraiment problématique, c’est la financialisation de tout. Je pense les finances comme une industrie d’extraction." }, { "speaker": "Saskia Sassen", "speech": "Alors, c’est comme la laminerie, une fois qu’elle a extrait ce qu’elle veut, il va continuer en laissant toute cette misère disons. N’est ce pas ? Alors, ça c’est un facteur très important. Une industrie très complexe." }, { "speaker": "Saskia Sassen", "speech": "La deuxième problématique que je trouve très important, c’est qu’il y a deux vecteurs qui se passent aujourd’hui. Un nous montre par exemple on marche par Paris, par Londres, toutes les grandes villes, tout va bien. Tout va beaucoup mieux qu’il y a 20 ans. Mais ça rend invisible toute une série de phénomènes d’expulsion, de souffrances, de plus de pauvresse, etc." }, { "speaker": "Saskia Sassen", "speech": "Alors, ça devient un peu obscur, invisible dans sa pleine matérialité." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "Je comprends bien et votre travail consiste justement à rendre visible ces phénomènes-là. Souleymane Bachir Diagne, même question pour vous. Présentez-nous vos travaux. Sur quoi portent-ils à l’heure actuelle ?" }, { "speaker": "Souleymane Bachir Diagne", "speech": "Alors, je travaille dans trois domaines différents. Je suis philosophe, vous l’avez dit, je travaille dans le domaine de la philosophie, de l’algèbre et de la logique." }, { "speaker": "Souleymane Bachir Diagne", "speech": "Je travaille également sur l’histoire de la philosophie dans le monde islamique et je travaille en ce moment sur un livre portant sur la traduction." }, { "speaker": "Souleymane Bachir Diagne", "speech": "Traduction conçue au sens de rencontres, réciprocités, et cetera. Et au fond, c’est mon travail sur l’histoire, la philosophie dans le monde islamique qui justifie pour l’instant que je sois ce soir avec Olivier Rouault en conversation autour de la question: quelle spiritualité pour demain ? Voilà sur quoi je travaille." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "Et qu’est ce qui fait l’unité des trois espaces que vous venez de décrire dans vos recherches ?" }, { "speaker": "Souleymane Bachir Diagne", "speech": "Alors, je viens de dire que mon travail portera sur la traduction. Je crois que le concept de traduction est précisément ce qui fait l’unité." }, { "speaker": "Souleymane Bachir Diagne", "speech": "Quand je dis que j’ai travaillé d’abord en histoire de la logique et de l’algébrisation de la logique, il s’agit d’un langage, la naissance du langage qui aujourd’hui est le langage de nos ordinateurs, la manière dont nous traduisons nos raisonnements qui se font normalement dans la langue naturelle, dans la langue des machines." }, { "speaker": "Souleymane Bachir Diagne", "speech": "Et de la même manière quand je travaille sur l’histoire de la philosophie dans le monde islamique ou sur l’histoire de la philosophie en Afrique, ce qu’il en est de la philosophie en Afrique. Je parle toujours de rencontres, de traductions réelles - puisque la philosophie grecque a été traduite en arabe - et de rencontres culturelles." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "Est-ce qu’il y a une dimension, en la pressent, politique derrière ce concept de traduction, de rencontres, d’hybridations, de métissages, je ne sais pas exactement comment il faut le dire ?" }, { "speaker": "Souleymane Bachir Diagne", "speech": "Absolument. Ce concept est de part en part politique parce qu’effectivement, il y a une politique de la traduction qui est double:" }, { "speaker": "Souleymane Bachir Diagne", "speech": "D’abord traduire c’est établir une équivalence entre les langues. Vous n’avez plus à ce moment là une langue dominante, une langue impériale qui dominerait les langues indigènes. Quand vous traduisez c’est une manière de créer de la réciprocité. Voilà un aspect politique." }, { "speaker": "Souleymane Bachir Diagne", "speech": "L’autre aspect politique c’est que en créant cette réciprocité, au fond, vous indiquez que la traduction c’est une dimension importante du vivre ensemble. Quand Umberto Eco dit: ’ La langue de l’Europe c’est la traduction ’." }, { "speaker": "Souleymane Bachir Diagne", "speech": "C’est aucune des langues européennes, mais c’est la rencontre en traduction, on peut enfler ce propos à la dimension du monde entier et dire la langue du monde c’est la traduction." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "Allez le tour de table continue avec Audrey Tang. Sur quoi travaillez-vous ? Quel est votre métier j’ai envie de dire ? Et pourquoi êtes-vous à Paris dans le cadre de cette nuit des idées ?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "J’ai travaillé comme quelqu’un dans l’informatique depuis 20 ans. Mais j’ai pris ma retraite il y a deux ans et après avoir pris ma retraite, j’ai travaillé avec la société civile du mouvement Occupy à Taiwan où nous avons occupé le parlement pendant 20 jours." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Et nous avons manifesté devant le gouvernement pour dire comment on devait avoir une démocratie et on utilise le même principe, les mêmes applications créées pour une information démocratique de l’Internet pour faire un dialogue entre les diverses parties prenantes." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Moi j’étais le médiateur pour la délégation Uber à Taipei et avec les ministères concernés et je suis aussi médiateur avec Airbnb et d’autres forces mondialisées qui veulent parler avec l’administration taïwanaise. Et je suis également responsable de la mise en place d’un espace de délibération pour le public numérique à Taiwan." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Donc, c’est une façon d’établir des lois par le peuple." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "L’informatique pour vous c’est un outil au service d’une autre manière de faire de la politique ?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Comme le professeur vient de dire, l’informatique c’est une façon de mettre de la logique dans un certain espace. La logique c’est comme des notes par exemple et on joue de ces notes là grâce à l’ordinateur. Et là, on le met dans un espace où on peut interagir de manière non violente et on tire les meilleures pratiques de notre spécialité et on les met dans cet espace qui ne permet que ce type de dialogue réflexif constructif." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Et lorsque l’espace est structuré de cette façon là comme une technologie ouverte non violente, on arrive à un consensus. Il y a une convergence, on peut se mettre à la place des autres. On peut sortir ce qu’est la souffrance des autres, ce qu’est la joie des autres sans avoir à dialoguer simplement à partir de l’endroit d’où nous sommes." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "Allez encore une question générale pour tous les trois et on entre dans la problématique qui vous est soumise par cette nuit des idées, pensez le monde de demain." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "Le monde d’aujourd’hui c’est déjà compliqué. Est-ce que vous vous inscrivez dans l’affiliation de ce qu’on appelle l’intellectuel à la française - C’est-à-dire l’intellectuel organique celui qui intervient dans l’espace publique, dont le savoir vient légitimer le pouvoir à parler, à dire, à dénoncer ? Ou est ce que ça, ça vous semble une figure ancienne et désormais dépassée ? Saskia Sassen." }, { "speaker": "Saskia Sassen", "speech": "Non, je trouve ça très important et très intéressant. Ce n’est pas possible de le faire dans tous les pays. C’est vrai qu’à New York on peut le faire un peu. Mais disons à Chicago, ça devient déjà plus difficile. N’est ce pas ?" }, { "speaker": "Saskia Sassen", "speech": "Alors, je crois que l’Amérique, les états unis n’aident pas cette manière. Je dois dire aussi que dans mon cas personnellement quand je fais ma recherche, je dois vraiment abandonner l’espace publique. Je dois aller creuser. Et je veux me perdre dans tant d’argumentations, tant de dates, et cetera. Je ne peux pas à ce point aussi penser d’une autre manière. Je dois vraiment pénétrer, entrer et me perdre un peu et ça me fonctionne bien." }, { "speaker": "Saskia Sassen", "speech": "Moi, j’aime beaucoup interroger les catégories qui existent. Alors pour moi je dis toujours que moi j’opère dans le fuzzy edges du paradigme." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "Fuzzy edges..." }, { "speaker": "Souleymane Bachir Diagne", "speech": "Les parties qui ne sont pas déterminées précisément." }, { "speaker": "Saskia Sassen", "speech": "Oui. Edges, vous savez, pas le centre du paradigme. Le centre du paradigme est fort. Ça c’est bien, ça me va bien, et cetera. Mais, ça ne m’intéresse pas. Alors pour moi par exemple, je ne rejette pas les grandes catégories. Je les interroge. Alors, je dis quand j’invoque cette catégorie pour expliquer quelque chose qu’est ce que c’est que je ne vois pas ? Et c’est un peu comme le grand cercle de lumière: Plus forte cette lumière dans une rue la nuit, plus forte cette lumière, plus on voit tout dans le centre de lumière. Et plus, on ne peut pas voir, c’est que c’est autour de ce centre." }, { "speaker": "Saskia Sassen", "speech": "Et c’est pour ça qu’il y a une espèce de transversalité dans mon travail qui fait beaucoup de confusion. [rire]" }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "Des confusions fécondes. [rire]" }, { "speaker": "Saskia Sassen", "speech": "Je l’espère." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "Souleymane Bachir Diagne, la tradition de l’intellectuel. Est-ce que vous vous reconnaissez dedans ou ça n’est pas du tout le type de rapport que vous avez à votre propre savoir ?" }, { "speaker": "Souleymane Bachir Diagne", "speech": "Je crois que c’est obligé finalement de se reconnaître dans ces traditions là. C’est-à-dire que les thèmes sur lesquels j’écris au fond sont les thèmes qui me conduisent d’une manière tout à fait naturelle me semble-il à intervenir également dans l’espace public d’une manière évidemment moins lumineuse si vous voulez, flamboyante. La tradition des Sartres, etc. Mais, d’une manière qui est quand même la mienne." }, { "speaker": "Souleymane Bachir Diagne", "speech": "D’abord, je dois dire géographiquement, je vis vraiment entre trois pays. Je vis entre les états unis, la France où cette tradition là est encore réelle et le Sénégal." }, { "speaker": "Souleymane Bachir Diagne", "speech": "Et quand j’interviens, bien évidemment quand j’écris un livre sur l’algèbre de Boole, on n’intervient pas dans l’espace public sur l’Algèbre de Boole. En revanche, quand je conduis l’interrogation qui est la mienne, qui consiste à me demander ce que signifie la fidélité. Une des thèses que je soutiens, c’est que la fidélité n’est pas dans la crispation sur une identité mais justement dans le mouvement de devenir ce que l’on a à devenir." }, { "speaker": "Souleymane Bachir Diagne", "speech": "Et bien, c’est une thèse que j’applique à la fois à ma réflexion sur le champ africain et à ma réflexion sur le champ islamique. Je travaille je vous l’ai dit dans le domaine de la philosophie dans le monde islamique, ça veut dire donc que moi, je travaille sur une tradition intellectuelle celle de la philosophie, une tradition spirituelle, celle du mysticisme, du soufisme et par la force des choses étant donné la configuration de notre monde actuel et étant donné le bruit que font les religions et en particulier la religion islamique, ce travail devient de lui-même une forme d’intervention dans les débats publiques et donc, on a cette responsabilité il faut l’accepter, il faut accepter qu’on ait cette responsabilité parce qu’on travaille dans le domaine où on travaille." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "Même question pour Audrey Tang, est ce que vous vous pensez comme intellectuelle, activiste, militante ? Quel mot vous semble correspondre le mieux à ce que vous faites ?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Moi, je me définis comme un anarchiste conservateur. Et en 1993 quand j’ai quitté l’école je me suis éduquée moi-même grâce aux œuvres disponibles des classiques qui n’étaient plus couvertes par les droits d’auteurs, donc, écrits avant la première guerre mondiale et numérisés par la communauté Internet." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Donc, je peux lire tous les classiques sans rien payer parce que je ne viens pas d’une famille aisée. Et c’est d’une certaine manière quelque chose de très français comme le collège de France qui dit que le savoir appartient au monde entier." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Je ne dirais pas que je suis un intellectuel dans une discipline ou une autre parce que la façon dont j’ai appris. Je vois comme des étoiles dans le ciel la nuit. Mais je ne les vois pas comme des constellations appartenant à des écoles spécifiques. Les étoiles sont comme elles sont." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "Allez essayons de regarder le monde qui nous entoure avant de penser le monde de demain. J’aimerais vous demander si le monde d’aujourd’hui n’est pas finalement le plus difficile à penser." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "J’ai la sensation qu’il y a de l’inédit partout, que nous sommes en crise perpétuelle, que les catégories intellectuelles même assez récentes avec lesquelles on pouvait jouer sans périmer et qu’on voit mal lesquelles pourraient nous rendre le monde, notre monde, ici, aujourd’hui plus compréhensible." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "Est-ce que je me trompe totalement ou est ce que vous partagez aussi ce sentiment d’avancer, de tâtonner comme ça dans l’ombre et dans le noir ? Saskia Sassen." }, { "speaker": "Saskia Sassen", "speech": "Oui et non. Oui parce qu’on sait trop. Moi, je parle six langues, pas tellement bien. Mais quand même six langues. Alors, je suis partout le monde. Il y a tant de choses qui se passent. Il y a tant de manières de terroriser, tant de manières de le penser. Alors, on sait trop. Mais de l’autre côté, moi quand je fais ma recherche, j’ai des vecteurs très forts, je ne me perds pas. Je sais qu’il n y a pas besoin de savoir tout sur conditions. Il faut savoir quelque chose qui porte, qui bouge, qui peut avoir des conséquences sévères, même si c’est un élément minimal. Alors ça m’aide de trouver vous savez de manières de..." }, { "speaker": "Saskia Sassen", "speech": "Et je crois qu’un problème dans la science sociale en Amérique où il y a tant de capacités pour tous les ordinateurs, tous les datasets. On pourrait savoir tous les derniers détails de tant de situations. Et la science sociale fait beaucoup de ça. Et je trouve ça quand même un peu pas nécessaire." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "Mais, est ce qu’il faut continuer à penser l’État ? Est ce qu’il faut continuer à penser l’école ? Est-ce qu’il faut continuer à penser les institutions, les frontières, les nations ? Enfin, toutes ces choses qui sont en mouvement et en crise ou est ce qu’il faut changer d’objet ?" }, { "speaker": "Saskia Sassen", "speech": "Changer d’objet non. Mais, il faut quand même interroger toutes ces catégories. C’est pour ça que pour moi l’espace c’est les espaces flous du paradigme. Et aussi, j’ai designé un espace pour moi-même que j’appelle avant méthode. Pas la méthode ou après. Mais l’anté-méthode." }, { "speaker": "Saskia Sassen", "speech": "Alors, là, c’est un défi parce qu’il faut découvrir quelque chose pour procéder. Alors, pour moi l’État c’est une catégorie qu’il faut interroger. Et je veux entrer dans l’État et dire on m’a éloignée tellement que j’ai dit qu’est ce que je vois là. Je veux perdre le concept un peu vous savez. On peut entrer et regarder des détails. Où est-ce que je suis ? J’ai fait ça avec les finances, je suis entrée dans l’État, la banque centrale, etc. Il dit qu’est ce qu’ils font ici ? Ils font plutôt de la recherche de l’utilité à tous les genres, vous savez ?" }, { "speaker": "Saskia Sassen", "speech": "Ce n’est pas seulement cela les finances. Mais la finance est devenue un monstre. C’est quand même monstrueux que c’est installé dans une institution, qui est une institution à Beavel, institut de recherche pour le peuple du pays." }, { "speaker": "Saskia Sassen", "speech": "Alors, des choses comme ça commencent à déstabiliser la catégorie forte, la version forte d’une catégorie. Et ça commence à montrer tout un assemblage de choses. Alors, je trouve que territoire national aujourd’hui, qu’est ce ça veut dire ? Il y a le territoire national, il y a le board et tout ça. Mais il y a d’autres choses qui se passent aussi." }, { "speaker": "Saskia Sassen", "speech": "Alors, je pense à certaines géographies de la centralité qui traversent la vieille division nord sud est ouest, qui n’implique pas tout un territoire national. Ce n’est pas le vieil impérialisme où il y a la France, l’Afrique et l’Asie. Non c’est très partiel. Et ce sont de nouveaux espaces où la citoyenneté par exemple ne compte pas. Ce qui compte c’est le pouvoir économique. Alors, vous savez ce sont des formations qui déstabilisent des catégories comme l’État, la citoyenneté. Mais elles ne les détruisent pas. La demande c’est que ça devienne des briques l’État, la citoyenneté dans ce contexte où ça peut donner de nouveaux modèles, de nouvelles possibilités des espaces d’action." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "Souleymane Bachir Diagne, il faut réinvestir ces vieilles catégories, les repenser, les décaler, y entrer pour les regarder d’un autre point de vue, comme vient de le dire Saskia Sassen, ou est ce que vous, vous cherchez de nouveaux outils pour penser le monde aujourd’hui ?" }, { "speaker": "Souleymane Bachir Diagne", "speech": "Alors déjà il faut pour penser le monde aujourd’hui, se donner de la profondeur historique, ne pas avoir l’impression que le monde aujourd’hui dans sa configuration qui nous trouble tant, qui nous donne l’impression que nos catégories habituelles ne marchent plus, que l’explication que ce qui se passe est même au-delà de nos catégories explicatives habituelles." }, { "speaker": "Souleymane Bachir Diagne", "speech": "Si on se donne la profondeur historique, on commence à avoir une bonne intelligence des choses. Je vous donne un exemple, nous parlions tout à l’heure d’un des domaines dans lequel je travaille, l’islam. Dire simplement c’est évident ce que l’islam n’est pas né le 11 septembre 2001, que c’est une religion qui est millénaire une fois et demi, que c’est une longue tradition intellectuelle, que c’est une longue tradition spirituelle, ça remet à l’endroit un certain nombre de caractérisations très rapides, très simplistes et une sorte d’incompréhension." }, { "speaker": "Souleymane Bachir Diagne", "speech": "Quand on se dit cette religion est la culture et la tradition intellectuelle et spirituelle d’un milliard et demi d’êtres humains, on commence à ce moment là, à avoir une meilleure intelligence des choses que quand on se demande des questions à l’emporte pièces du genre est ce que c’est compatible avec la démocratie. Est-ce que c’est compatible avec la société ouverte, etc. Des questions qui ne veulent strictement rien dire." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "Et pourtant on se les pose." }, { "speaker": "Souleymane Bachir Diagne", "speech": "On se les pose. Alors, on se donne cette profondeur historique si vous voulez en amont. C’est-à-dire qu’on regarde historiquement et on se donne également la profondeur temporel en aval. Et c’est ça l’intérêt de cette nuit des idées. Se projeter dans l’avenir, ça nous permet aussi de mettre en perspective les urgences telles que nous les vivons. Avoir le sentiment que nous sommes quelque peu noyés dans une actualité qu’on a du mal à saisir pour laquelle on a l’impression que les mots et les concepts habituels ne marchent pas, ne fonctionnent pas comme instances explicatives." }, { "speaker": "Souleymane Bachir Diagne", "speech": "Si on se projette dans l’avenir en disant au fond quelles sont les tendances et quel est le monde qui risque de se produire ou quel est le monde que nous voulons ? À ce moment là, on a une position qui nous amène à rendre intelligible les réalités que nous vivons au présent et de dégager ce qu’il faut faire. Et c’est ça l’intérêt d’une réflexion de type de celle à laquelle nous sommes invités, une réflexion qui regarde demain. Et regarder demain c’est à la fois le préparer et c’est aussi mieux comprendre aujourd’hui." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "Paris a été, vous le savez, frappée à plusieurs reprises par le terrorisme en 2015, est-ce que le terrorisme n’est pas le mur qui nous empêche de penser aujourd’hui ?" }, { "speaker": "Souleymane Bachir Diagne", "speech": "Vous savez, j’ai fait très attention à un texte d’un philosophe pour lequel j’ai énormément d’admiration, qui est Edgar Morin, qui a rapproché le terrorisme contemporain du terrorisme ancien et a essayé de lire au fond le terrorisme contemporain aussi à la lumière du terrorisme ancien. Cette manière de croire que puisque l’histoire est fondamentalement violence. C’est la manière régalienne en philosophie de croire que l’histoire est fondamentalement violence et que la violence va être accouchée d’un monde meilleur." }, { "speaker": "Souleymane Bachir Diagne", "speech": "Si vous partez de cette prémisse là, l’idée selon laquelle en faisant de l’hyper violence, en rajoutant si vous voulez dans la violence, vous accélérer les choses. Vous accélérez ce qui doit arriver, cette manière apocalyptique et hallucinée de voir le monde. Et là une histoire aussi si vous regardez avec intelligence l’histoire du terrorisme et que vous commencez à avoir ce genre de catégories pour penser les choses qui nous arrivent aujourd’hui, vous avez probablement moins l’impression que c’est quelque chose d’absolument inouï, d’impensable qui nous arrive et pour lesquels nous sommes totalement désarmés. Ne jamais accepter que la raison soit désarmée et ne jamais accepter que l’explication ne soit pas possible." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "J’aime énormément notre conversation et le temps avance. Donc, j’aimerai vous livrer pour finir avant de vous laisser vous aiguiller dans la nuit intellectuelle parisienne, vous livrer un concept, celui de démocratie. Audrey Tang. C’est pour vous le concept le plus central, le plus cardinal aujourd’hui à investir, à réinvestir, à repenser ?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Avant de parler de la démocratie, il faut parler de démos, c’est-à-dire la foule, la population. Un peuple, des gens qui sont au même endroit imaginaire ou pas. Mais au moins, ils pensent qu’ils peuvent interagir les uns avec les autres d’une façon qui a du sens." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Quand je pense aux musulmans, je pense à 150 millions, ou 150 milles musulmans à Taiwan, les indonésiens qui travaillent avec nous tous les jours. Et il y a quelques heures, je parlais avec nos interlocuteurs de ce soir. Ils nous ont dit: ’ Peut-être que certains ne voudraient pas que nous parlions avec le reste du démos. ’" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Et en le disant, c’est exactement comme le climat. Regardez la terre de l’extérieur. Vous pouvez voir beaucoup de tsunamis, beaucoup de changements dans le climat de climat arctique. Bien sûr, les tsunamis ne négocient pas avec les hommes politiques. Ce sont des catégories d’objets complètement différents. Mais, si on les considère comme un système qui fait partie de la terre, vous voyez qu’il y a des causes." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Ça peut être des virus de l’esprit, ça peut être des virus de l’espace. Mais, on peut en parler de toute façon systémique. Ce ne sont pas des choses qui sont inévitables parce que simplement les symptômes refusent de parler. Et les gens qui peuvent encore parler sont une foule. Et là où il y a une foule, il y a la démocratie." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "La démocratie Saskia Sassen, ça vous intéresserait de rentrer dedans pour voir comment elle est construite et ce qu’on en voit et ce qu’on n’en voit pas comme vous l’avez fait pour..." }, { "speaker": "Saskia Sassen", "speech": "J’ai bien aimé ce qu’il a dit." }, { "speaker": "Souleymane Bachir Diagne", "speech": "Oui, c’est très profond." }, { "speaker": "Saskia Sassen", "speech": "C’est très bien. C’est vraiment très bien. Mais, je trouve que démocratie, c’est ce type de mot que cette invitation n’a pas pensé." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "Pourquoi ?" }, { "speaker": "Saskia Sassen", "speech": "Parce qu’on l’utilise avec une telle facilité, vous savez. Je me demande qu’est-ce qui se passerait si on a une vraie discussion sur ce que maintenant on veut dans le friend democracy avec une autre langue, avec un autre mot." }, { "speaker": "Saskia Sassen", "speech": "Je trouve que le mot vraiment se fatigue. Et quand nos mots sont fatigués, ça donne une hésitation à ne pas penser. Alors..." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "C’est dangereux ?" }, { "speaker": "Saskia Sassen", "speech": "C’est dangereux. Quoi, c’est dangereux ?" }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "C’est dangereux de voir que cette forme politique qui finalement n’a pas que des avantages et qui a même beaucoup d’avantages est entrain de s’affaisser, de s’affadir à tel point qu’on voit apparaître ce qu’on appelle les démocraties illibérales, des démocraties autoritaires, des démocraties qui ont la non démocratie à l’intérieur d’elles-mêmes." }, { "speaker": "Saskia Sassen", "speech": "C’est pour ça. Nous devons comprendre qu’est ce qu’on veut ? Quand on dit démocratie. Qu’est ce que c’est la chose qu’on veut vraiment ? Quels sont les éléments principaux ? La participation a tout. Le fait que chaque neighborhood devrait avoir des gens qui peuvent y travailler, qui peuvent faire une économie locale, etc. Tant de choses très pratiques. Alors, on monte à des choses plus compliquées. Quel système politique pourrait aider ça ? Alors, je trouve que beaucoup de pays dans l’Europe réussissent assez bien. Mais, maintenant, il y a un peu de décadence." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "Oui, ça commence à se fragiliser. Souleymane Bachir Diagne sur la démocratie, ce sera ma dernière question." }, { "speaker": "Souleymane Bachir Diagne", "speech": "Oui, alors, je souscrits totalement à ce qu’ont dit Audrey et Saskia sur la démocratie. Je voudrais y ajouter un autre mot qui est un mot voisin, mais pas tout à fait, pluralisme. Je trouve que c’est également un concept tout à fait important aujourd’hui de nous réconcilier tous avec l’idée du pluriel. L’idée dans le pluralisme du monde qui est également l’autre face de son unité. L’idée qu’il y a une humanité, une condition humaine. Mais, qu’en même temps, cette condition a des visages pluriels et qu’il est bel et bon qu’il en soit ainsi." }, { "speaker": "Souleymane Bachir Diagne", "speech": "L’éducation au pluralisme est très importante et puisque nous avons parlé des religions. Il faut que les religions sachent exhiber aussi à l’heure actuelle leur capacité d’accepter le Pluralisme et leur capacité d’éduquer au pluralisme." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "Bon courage !" }, { "speaker": "Souleymane Bachir Diagne", "speech": "Mais, oui c’est tout un programme, il faut s’y atteler. C’est la tâche." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "Ça c’est la grande tâche d’après vous dès lors qu’on pense le monde de demain, de construire le pluralisme ?" }, { "speaker": "Souleymane Bachir Diagne", "speech": "Parce que le monde de demain est à cette condition-là." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "Moi, je me demande s’il ne sera pas plus violent le monde de demain que celui qu’on a connu ces 30, 40 dernières années." }, { "speaker": "Souleymane Bachir Diagne", "speech": "Si on prolonge simplement, si on extrapole les tendances actuelles, on peut le dire. Mais, justement, il ne s’agit pas simplement d’extrapoler des tendances. Il s’agit aussi d’avoir l’imagination et la volonté politique de dire voici le monde que nous voulons." }, { "speaker": "Saskia Sassen", "speech": "Si c’est demandé, si cette explosion de petites violences partout, si ça c’est une conséquence de la dégradation du système. Comme ça il ne peut pas un armistice pour finir avec une guerre." }, { "speaker": "Saskia Sassen", "speech": "Par exemple, ça montre une limitation très sévère disons du système. Écoutez merci à tous les trois c’était absolument passionnant, je rêverai de passer la nuit philosophique avec vous." }, { "speaker": "Nicolas Demorand", "speech": "En tout bien tout honneur. Souleymane Bachir Diagne, philosophe professeur à la Columbia university. Saskia Sassen, sociologue économiste nérlando-américaine, parlant six langues, spécialiste de la mondialisation. Audrey Tang programmatrice de logiciels libres. Merci beaucoup d’avoir été au micro de France Inter." } ]

[ { "speaker": "Florent Latrive", "speech": "Blaise, we are talking about “the day after tomorrow,” because tomorrow is crap, it’s too close from today. The day after tomorrow is much more free and cool. It’s full of new technologies and politics." }, { "speaker": "Blaise Agüera y Arcas", "speech": "At Google, I work on machine intelligence. My group is part of a larger organization of more than 1,000 people called Research and Machine Intelligence." }, { "speaker": "Florent Latrive", "speech": "This kind of technologies that you have just described, is it possible to find that kind of technologies nowadays in the shops?" }, { "speaker": "Blaise Agüera y Arcas", "speech": "Yes, it is. For example, one of the things that my group makes is the deep neural networks that look at photos and analyze what’s in them, and these algorithms are able to tag the contents of the photos." }, { "speaker": "Florent Latrive", "speech": "You have use a word, \"neural network.\" How would you describe that technology?" }, { "speaker": "Blaise Agüera y Arcas", "speech": "In the beginning of computer science, the fathers of computer science, John von Neumann, Alan Turing, were very, very interested in brains and in thinking as well as in computation and mathematics. The origins of computational neuroscience and the study of neurons and the creation of computers, these origins were very tightly intertwined." }, { "speaker": "Florent Latrive", "speech": "Brute force of computation, versus computation like the human brain, is that correct?" }, { "speaker": "Blaise Agüera y Arcas", "speech": "Yes. The brute force approach is one that’s based on the idea of mathematical calculation in series and sequence. That model of computation allows you to do things like calculate the trajectory of an orbit to within 12 significant digits, things like this. These were the kinds of things that the very earliest computers did." }, { "speaker": "Florent Latrive", "speech": "What is the first experiment of a neural network that astonished you, and you say that it’s the beginning of something?" }, { "speaker": "Blaise Agüera y Arcas", "speech": "I think that it was solving the ImageNet challenge. This happened several years ago. This was very closely related to the problem that I was just telling you about, deciding what is in the photo. ImageNet is a database of millions of photographs that have all been labeled by hand with what is in there." }, { "speaker": "Florent Latrive", "speech": "Thank you, Blaise. We’ll come back to our neural network soon after. Audrey?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sorry for the technical difficulties. Because Blaise has a slide that’s entirely visual, we have to fix the filming problem. We devised a solution." }, { "speaker": "Florent Latrive", "speech": "Blaise, it’s your fault." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No, it’s not." }, { "speaker": "Florent Latrive", "speech": "That’s OK." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Film crew will just film my screen. This is mirrors of mirrors." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I can see a recursive image of my own screen from the mirrors there. This is actually pretty metaphoric." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I’m happy to be here to talk about the day after tomorrow. The midnight reminds us that we are among the stars. If you look up in the night sky, you see that Earth is a place among the stars. I’ve been working with the technology called virtual reality. I have a virtual reality headset here which Florent will put on for effect — never mind." }, { "speaker": "Voiceover — Richard Gariott", "speech": "The most beautiful thing I’ve ever seen is the earth from space. On this little ball is everything we’ve ever known, all of the history, all of the future, all the beauty of what it means to be human." }, { "speaker": "Voiceover —  SpaceVR staff", "speech": "The world that everyone uses is fragile. You can’t understand that from the ground, because it’s not really relevant to you. From the ground, it looks like the sky goes up forever. From space, it looks very small." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right. From space, we all look very small, and we are very tightly bound together. We share the Earth. All of our problems are of a global scale at the moment, including the climate and everything that people at this night have talked about. The observer effect makes us able to see the problem on a global scale." }, { "speaker": "Voiceover — Richard Gariott", "speech": "My conception of the scale of the reality of the earth went from being unimaginably large to absolutely finite and, in fact, small. It goes from infinity to one. I’m going to get goosebumps about this sort of stuff when I talk about it. Even today, it was only after my flight that I began to go, \"I can’t be the only one who’s had this sort of reaction.\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Actually, during this whole event, during lunch, and during the radio interviews, I’ve been asking Saskia Sassen, Souleymane Bachir Diagne, and everybody I met to put on this goggles and watch Earth with me together." }, { "speaker": "Voiceover — Richard Gariott", "speech": "We would all benefit if we all had a shared experience of this kind. Virtual reality is very well positioned right now. It’s starting to give truly immersive experiences and make you feel like you’re there." }, { "speaker": "Voiceover —  SpaceVR staff", "speech": "The difference between a flat video and VR is the difference between watching a football game and being in the stadium." }, { "speaker": "Voiceover — Jeffrey Mamber", "speech": "It wasn’t until I experienced virtual reality that it became clear to me that it’s one of the missing pieces in the puzzle of how we get everybody to understand the beauty of space." }, { "speaker": "Voiceover —  SpaceVR staff", "speech": "The overview effect has such a profound impact that once you’ve seen it, there is no going back." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There’s one saying in politics: \"Where you stand depend on where you sit.\"" }, { "speaker": "VoiceOver — Jaclyn Tsai", "speech": "What we do not want to see, is by evoking the name of innovation, you do not pay taxes, or use it as an excuse to break laws." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s Minister Jaclyn Tsai, originally led IBM Asia’s law department. The thing is that after this kind of method, we extract promise from all the stakeholders. If their promise overlap, we have a bill right there. If we don’t, if it needs more clarification, help from the local government and so on, as it currently is, everybody know why UberX is still illegal." }, { "speaker": "VoiceOver — Chandana Ekanayake", "speech": "Tilt Brush was one of my favorite demos when I first got to try the Vive. I love it. It’s one of the best things I have done and like to show it off to people that never tried VR." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Because of time, I have to rush this a little bit. But the point is that I was just talking with Blaise, and we thought in virtual reality a facilitator can talk with not just 300 people with telecommunication and telepresence. We can talk with 7,000 people, as we have here, because people can just put on their Google Cardboard or some other virtual reality headset, and participate virtually, as if they are there." }, { "speaker": "Voiceover —  SpaceVR staff", "speech": "We won’t just be bystanders to history. We will feel like active participants, standing side by side with astronauts." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It is my wish that — this is also a French idea, from Lacan — this Borromean Knot means all the three sectors cannot do without each other. If one breaks, everyone breaks. We’re in the same earth together. This is my hope, that with the digital democratic tools, we can go closer and closer to this ideal." }, { "speaker": "Blaise Agüera y Arcas", "speech": "Thank you, Audrey." }, { "speaker": "Florent Latrive", "speech": "Blaise, you have started to explain to us how we worked with artificial intelligence, so you could start with your presentation now about the political consequences of all that." }, { "speaker": "Blaise Agüera y Arcas", "speech": "Audrey, thank you so much for setting us up with a sub-optimal but functional situation, here." }, { "speaker": "Florent Latrive", "speech": "An example of machine learning, doing art?" }, { "speaker": "Blaise Agüera y Arcas", "speech": "Yes. Let me skip all of the expository material, and find something along those lines. This is just a fun picture that may actually come across in the camera. This is a picture of Rosenblatt, who was a very early pioneer in computer science, who actually did attempt to implement the neuron-based computational model that von Neumann and Turing talked about, way back in the ’40s and ’50s." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Let’s show this in stereo." }, { "speaker": "Blaise Agüera y Arcas", "speech": "Now, if you had the goggles, and you were seeing this in your headset, this could be in 3D..." }, { "speaker": "Florent Latrive", "speech": "In fact, this technology, it’s important that you have talked, both of you, about values embedded in technologies. Sometimes, we say that technology is neutral. Is it the case or not? How do you think that we should work on technology to avoid that we face some crush, for instance?" }, { "speaker": "Blaise Agüera y Arcas", "speech": "I don’t think that technologies are neutral. There is a big debate in the US. It’s, of course, the only industrialized country that is having this debate about guns in which the people in favor of not having gun control say things like, \"Guns are neutral pieces of technology, and it’s people who kill people and not guns.\"" }, { "speaker": "Florent Latrive", "speech": "That’s a good example, because for the kind of technology you show us about pattern recollection or image recognition, right now, we see more and more of this technology used to recognize people, to distinguish between the black and white and the people who behave this way or this way. It’s many control technologies and not empowerment technologies." }, { "speaker": "Blaise Agüera y Arcas", "speech": "The ability to recognize people from an image of their face and recognize a bunch of their characteristics, of the same kinds of characteristics that you or I would see when we look at a person’s face, is in itself a neutral technology." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Just a quick word. In the beginning of the free software movement, Richard Stallman who started this idea of free software, defined four different kind of freedoms about software." }, { "speaker": "Florent Latrive", "speech": "We are very far from a decentralized organization, and everybody can own and control technology, but all this technology is centralized heavy by corporation or government both. We are very far from that." }, { "speaker": "Blaise Agüera y Arcas", "speech": "I’m not sure how far we are from that. I think that the situation is not necessarily as you see it, in the sense that, for example, an Android phone is an incredibly powerful computing device which, when you buy it, is yours. Anything, any software that you run on this device that executes locally is your software running on your data." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Again, just one word from me. We have existential proof in the form of a project that is sponsoring work with some free software people. It’s called Sandstorm. What it does is it flips the default. It makes it possible to think of the web like you install apps on your phone. By default, it’s secure, it’s sand-boxed. It can only run on the server you trust." }, { "speaker": "Florent Latrive", "speech": "Both of you are believers in technology. You are strongly optimist about that. You think that we are capable of doing stuff, interesting stuff with that. If you have only one fear, something could go ugly with technology. What can it be?" }, { "speaker": "Blaise Agüera y Arcas", "speech": "I think that the most disastrous thing that I know of right now that is happening as a consequence of our technology is the destruction of our ecosystem, actually. There are other scenarios that we can hypothesize about in the future, but this is one that we know is happening now and is a direct consequence of our technology." }, { "speaker": "Florent Latrive", "speech": "Thank you, Blaise." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Can I take two minutes?" }, { "speaker": "Florent Latrive", "speech": "Two minutes." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, two minutes. Start counting..." } ]

[ { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "開會時間:105年2月4日(星期四)下午1時30分" }, { "speaker": "廠商", "speech": "建議直接參考會議資料，：https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4Dee6_4G1R5dGVoSXRscEJsMm95OFpvcmpUVG5HOGNaR3lZ/view?usp=sharing" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "程序問題，今天的討論可以公開嗎？" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "先給出席者" }, { "speaker": "簡宏偉", "speech": "那今天就是公開了，但一樣10天先給大家看" }, { "speaker": "黃東益教授", "speech": null }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "黃老師都講完了，join本來就有cookie跟GA，問卷框架外就有行為分析框架，以隱私權政策看起來，承辦的第三方，當然不能把後端資料庫給你們，但是可以帶唯一識別碼給你們，只要把cookie用不可逆轉的加密方式，讓我們知道問卷填寫者是誰且不能反推身分就可大量減少題目。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "除了功能性的問題之外，問卷也有詢問它是否好用，以增進大家接受的程度。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "補充Peggy所說，很多選項不是只有四等第可以有更多選擇，除了inform，單向放的資訊理解之外，回應的部分其實也有包括留言，去看讚不讚是有一定的危險，我們要做的是政策溝通，目前問卷是政策說明，過去培訓的內容都可以有具體選項，第三塊才是回應。" }, { "speaker": "簡宏偉", "speech": "如專家的建議，後台有的數字有即可。" }, { "speaker": "廠商", "speech": "我們之前問過平台廠商，得到的回覆是瀏覽行為無法跟帳戶連結，所以才需要額外問使用情形。至於其他建議都很好，我們會照做；使用度非常高的是否需要做focus團體，也可考慮。" }, { "speaker": "簡宏偉", "speech": "這邊我們會來協調。最近有更換廠商，所有權都歸國發會，這部分我們會協調處理出來。" }, { "speaker": "科技會報", "speech": "建議長程的部分，這個工具的定位，目前是被歸在「數位機會調查」裡面長這個小東西，建議應該拉出來變成一個大東西。" }, { "speaker": "內政部", "speech": "玉管處有參加過排雲供電的議題，我提一個小小的建議，這次計畫在做問卷調查，但事後端資料其實很值得分析，民眾參與過多少議題、發言過幾則，是否可能加入後端資料的分析？" }, { "speaker": "財政部", "speech": "科技會報的長官有提到，成案之後，部會的因應過程，應該要有足夠的準備，之前部裡面有一個提點子，很快的達到五千位門檻，有兩個月準備過程，比較沒有那麼充分，因為稅有既定立場。如果涉及到基本政策，部會如何做足夠準備措施，這是需要學習的。" }, { "speaker": "廠商", "speech": "後端資料要看國發會是否釋出及能不能有效連結。" }, { "speaker": "教育部", "speech": "認同黃老師所說，建議調查的對象是有系統性跟代表性的抽樣，應該要從後台分析，分析哪些人曾特別關注過哪些議題，就其關注的議題去調查。" }, { "speaker": "法務部", "speech": "這次針對四個功能分項調查，如果有勾選，後續問卷就不需要再問這些問題，基本資料的部分，像是法務部有首長信箱滿意度調查，有年齡、教育程度跟性別，但民眾會覺得跟問卷內容不相關，民眾會反映，至少讓民眾可以pass過。" }, { "speaker": "簡宏偉", "speech": "最後一點滿好的。" }, { "speaker": "交通部", "speech": "委員做很多說明了，我們對資訊部分整體的使用看國發會的需求，沒有特別的建議。針對問卷內容，機關的回應跟速度的部分，目前的問法不會知道原因。可列出原因供勾選，搭配讓大家去填寫，這樣機關才會知道為什麼不滿意。" }, { "speaker": "簡宏偉", "speech": "請壓軸的環保署。" }, { "speaker": "環保署", "speech": "使用者的看法來看，一個是個人資料的部分，登入的時候本身已經登錄，有些功能已經參與過，可以show出來問即可。第二個，第一次登入的問題，可能30秒連網站連對網站的理解都還沒有，我們在資料庫裏面整個就會有缺失。" }, { "speaker": "簡宏偉", "speech": "建議可以讓使用者知道目前已經做到第幾頁，或是讓使用者知道問卷需要填寫多久，讓大家心裡有個底。甚至美國的一些表格也會寫說「這份文件預計需要寫多久」，例如我看到10min的問卷我就跳掉了。" }, { "speaker": "廠商", "speech": "問卷調查會提示還剩下幾頁要填，但因為這次題目有很多跳題設計，實際要填答的長短是跟受訪者使用的服務多寡有關，所以時間提示的落差一定會很大；錯漏字、小時這些都會更正；至於個資，受訪者本來就可以選擇不答。加問不滿意的原因應該沒有問題，但前提是要有log，用省掉的題目來換，不然問卷會太長。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有兩個模式，桌機是有關閉視窗的動作，但行動載具沒有關閉視窗的動作，希望行動載具也能用預設留e-mail。" }, { "speaker": "廠商", "speech": "是否還是三月執行？" }, { "speaker": "簡宏偉", "speech": "希望做完整，不要只是做完就結束了。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "會員和瀏覽分流的具體原因，是在不登入的情況下也可以留言。" }, { "speaker": "簡宏偉", "speech": "得到結果要公開，問卷結果變成open data釋出；也希望當受訪者填完問卷以後，也可以及時顯示出來。" }, { "speaker": "廠商", "speech": "經費有困難。" }, { "speaker": "簡宏偉", "speech": "經費是後面再說的事情。希望不是辛苦做了結果60分，要做就盡量做到好。這部分是可以談的，希望資料可以開放出來、統計結果即時呈現。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "願意做公開，只是我們看不到前言，可能也需要在前言敘明。" }, { "speaker": "黃東益教授", "speech": "Peggy建議的可以加，家華提的參與過的議題希望能加入。簡處長提的動態比例有一些效果，我參觀過瑞士電子投票，怕讓他覺得他是minority，透明度是很好，但會不會影響投票行為，也要評估。" }, { "speaker": "內政部", "speech": "問卷裡面有一題是「你們曾參與哪些議題」，這是複選，對應到27-28，假如他對滿意、不滿意應該要分開。" }, { "speaker": "簡宏偉", "speech": "前面的議題是不同機關，有些滿意有些不滿意應該要分開。團體這邊有辦法嗎？" }, { "speaker": "廠商", "speech": "可以。" }, { "speaker": "黃東益教授", "speech": "希望最後能有開放性的問不滿意原因。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不滿意的話與其寫原因，改成問「部會怎麼做你覺得會比較好」。" }, { "speaker": "簡宏偉", "speech": "eID有透過院長信箱或內政部，他有說他不會寫email或用這個網站，如果這個是針對已經在使用的網路族群，不會使用網路的部分或許定在別的地方做調查。" }, { "speaker": "Peggy Lo", "speech": "前言段請再 review 過。" }, { "speaker": "黃東益教授", "speech": "也可以給外部委員測試。" }, { "speaker": "內政部", "speech": "跳出來的視窗是怎麼呈現，會不會有民眾以為是釣魚網站？" }, { "speaker": "簡宏偉", "speech": "可以想一下。彈跳視窗的確會比較困擾。我的看法是不要干擾，不干擾就會願意，之後人家就不想來了。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "內部機關調查的部分也是滿重要的，坦白說很多內政部的議題也是外部壓力才會po，例如婚姻媒合、eID，排雲山莊也是行政院要求，希望未來是政策形成前就把議題po出來，政府機關寧願被鄉民在不同平台罵，不會擔心外面發展成什麼樣子，很怕在這邊他需要去處理，社群好像就可以被當成不知道。內部問卷建議真的要做。" }, { "speaker": "簡宏偉", "speech": "特別感謝法務部，很積極的把議題po出來。改變沒有那麼容易，這樣的互動狀況目前是正常的，部會幫了很多的忙，內政部排雲山莊媒合等都是。事情無法一步到位，大家一起努力。" }, { "speaker": "簡宏偉", "speech": "今天針對整個問卷作座談會，定期會針對各部會要提出的問題做討論，這有一個一定的程序，Join也有實施要點，人數限制、部會回應情形，都有明確的要求，部會的回應必須要是副首長以記者會或公開做說明，財政部可以參考衛福部，衛福部也是涉及修法，當時衛福部回應說明接下來會涉及修法。" }, { "speaker": "簡宏偉", "speech": "各位還有沒有希望補充的部分？" }, { "speaker": "簡宏偉", "speech": "最後請幫我們做一個國外相關經驗的分享。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我剛從法國回來，法國外交部找我們去討論如何面對公民社會(在恐攻之後)，法國會很希望知道我們是怎麼處理這些議題的。宣揚國外剛剛開始，想分享國外我們可以學習的部分：" } ]

[ { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家晚安，很高興我們在這邊再一次開始了vTaiwan，一開始我們都要提醒一下這個按鈕的用法，按一下開始講，講完之後再按一下關掉。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "今天我想對於個人資料去識別化驗證規範，第一次由標檢局說明，去年已經有說明過，法務部有很多具體實作的標準由標檢局來引導，這一次續篇可以讓我們理解到從開始討論到現在大概幾個月的過程當中，標檢局跟第一次施作的案例與方式。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在開始簡報之前，我們也開始先大家簡短自我介紹一下，主要是讓我們的速錄師可以知道你願意怎麼樣被紀錄，你的名字及來自於哪裡，如果大家ok的話，我們就從總召集人開始。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "大家開始，我是蔡玉玲，很高興我們又討論去識別化的議題。我想從過去形塑這樣的機制，一直到現在有一個比較具體的進度，也希望透過這個機會，我們做一個更深入的討論，今天有非常多的專家學者，我們希望透過這樣的討論可以讓我們這樣的機制更完善，現在後面還有衛福部跟內政部用這樣去做去識別化來認證，我想今天的討論對往後的推動是非常重要的，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "我現在是以交通大學兼任的講師來出席，我今天想跟大家分享一下我所觀察到國內、外在做資料去識別化與授權處理上會有什麼樣的流程，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "翁清坤", "speech": "我是輔大財法系的老師，我的專長是研究個資，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "陳曉慧", "speech": "是臺灣大學科技管理所的老師，承上次，這次又被邀請。" }, { "speaker": "王邦傑", "speech": "我們這次在去識別化驗證主要提供的內容是，我們目前有一個team專門focus隱私保護去識別化的工具等等。" }, { "speaker": "蔡敦仁", "speech": "我是蔡敦仁，我是長期參加標檢局標準制定，也擔任資訊安全分組的召集人，有CNS29100、CNS29191，在這個分組被制定出來。各自去識別化驗證的規劃我也是有參與撰寫，所以可能這是一個出版未來可能跟整個驗證越來越成熟，可能還會需要有一些改進及也希望各位先進可以提出一些建議。" }, { "speaker": "王聰麟", "speech": "我是經濟部標檢局副局長王聰麟，本局積極配合蔡政委的領導，有關的時程盡量在時程之內完成階段性的任務，到目前都還在進行當中，先報告到這邊。" }, { "speaker": "楊禮源", "speech": "我是經濟部標準檢驗局楊禮源，我們是配合蔡政委的推廣，很高興今天有機會分享，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "邱垂興", "speech": "我主要業務是有關於機電與資通國家標準的制定，也會配合個人去識別化的推動，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "李春生", "speech": "大家好，我是李春生，我們去年是按照蔡政委的指示，從9月至11月三個月的時間，我們是第一個透過根據標檢局個人去識別化的驗證與控制，根據這個標準的流程，我們去做一個驗證，從去年11月底拿到第一張驗證證書，等一下我們會把整個過程跟各位報告。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "我是謝明峯，很高興有幾天來參與去識別化的驗證，我們是工作團隊之一。" }, { "speaker": "顏大淵", "speech": "我是財政部顏大淵，我是負責本中心這一次有關於制定文件跟實作案例的成員之一，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "洪仕勳", "speech": "我是洪士勳，我也是目前這個案子的實作案例成員之一，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "蕭暉議", "speech": "我是資策會所的副所長，我們是根據巨量安全與開放資料的技術上作很多的研究，個資去識別化當然是很重要的問題，政府要開放資料，當然要能夠保障個人資料不會被洩漏出去，我們從技術的角度來看，在什麼樣的狀況之下，之後還可以提供資料的價值，這是我第一次參加，希望學一點東西也可以貢獻，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "薛榮銀", "speech": "各位晚安，我是薛榮銀，我是資策會大數據所的。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "我是小兒科醫師，我關注這個問題是101年有26個人寄存證信函拒絕個人健保資料，我就是那26個人之一，不過我沒有去參與訴訟，所以關心這個議題，看個人資料能不能推出的相關議題。" }, { "speaker": "森里螢一", "speech": "我是一般網友代表，我滿關心個人資料去識別化的議題，之前一次會議我也有參加，所以我這一次繼續參加。" }, { "speaker": "李世德", "speech": "大家好，我是法務部法律事務司李科長，是負責個人資料保護法的工作，很高興今天能夠跟各位見面，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "林裕嘉", "speech": "大家好，我是法務部法律司的專員，主要的工作是負責個資法的業務，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "吳家林", "speech": "我是國家發展委員會法協中心吳家林科長，在個人資料去識別化的業務裡面，在負責推動、教育訓練的工作，我是第一次參加正式會議，請大家多多指教及謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "陳柏宇", "speech": "我是國家發展委員會法協中心的陳柏宇。" }, { "speaker": "謝孟珊", "speech": "大家好，我是資策會課法所的研究員。" }, { "speaker": "薛雅婷", "speech": "大家好，我是速錄師，今天負責製作現場同步會議紀錄，歡迎大家踴躍發言，I謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "莊盈志", "speech": "在去識別化的部分，如同剛剛楊科長所談的，我們國發會協助的角色是在去識別化的協助推廣，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "趙式隆", "speech": "我參與這個會議參與了很多次，我印象中今天並不是第一次講個人資料去識別化，上次就有講到一些，在這裡我就有看到議題，很期待聽到各位專家的一些見解，也學習一下，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "彭彥翰", "speech": "大家好，我是青年顧問團的彭彥翰，我很關注這個議題，但我自認不是專家，但我來這邊學習，順便提供一些路人非專業意見的想法。" }, { "speaker": "羊正鈺", "speech": "我是青年顧問團的小楊，因為我在網路媒體工作，剛好會遇到一些個資法的問題，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如同剛剛很多位都有提到，我們上次在這邊開同樣會議的時候，處理的是為什麼要去識別化的問題，我們今天已經到怎麼做去識別化的階段。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想如果法務部今天沒有簡報的話，我們直接請標檢局開始，從「怎麼做」來說明。" }, { "speaker": "楊禮源", "speech": "大家好，還有線上的各位朋友大家好，首先由經濟部標準檢驗局跟大家報告「個人資料去識別化驗證標準及推廣」，我們這一次簡報的部分大概有分作四個部分，第一個部分要跟大家報告的是這個案子的背景，第二個部分是要跟大家報告行政院對這個議題非常主動積極，一直指示我們各部會相關去辦理去識別化的規範，第三個部分會跟各位報告驗證標準規範驗證的過程及相關的內容，最後跟大家分享我們推廣的經驗。" }, { "speaker": "楊禮源", "speech": "我們知道在面臨大數據時代跟網路時代的來臨，如何在符合個資法的前提之下來運用我們所謂DATA的議題，事實上在國內有非常迫切的需求，為了要解決個資利用的爭議及合法利用的大數據與政府的應用及商業模式推動的需求，國內的需求迫切性是非常急迫的。" }, { "speaker": "楊禮源", "speech": "國內的行政機關在個資利用解決的意義上是從101年開始，101年在5、7月健保資料運用的部分，因為有七個民間團隊認為提供給國衛院法令授權依據，也拒絕將個人健保資料作業務之外的利用，其中10人不服，提起訴願。在101年11月衛生署駁回訴願。102年1月其中8人向高等行政法院提起訴訟。在103年5月高等法院駁回。103年7月原告不服，繼續向最高行政法院來上訴。同年11月最高行政法院發回高等法院再更審。去年1月高等法院已經召開準備程序，目前最新的進度是已經完成準備程序，預計在今年3月進行我們言詞辯論程序。" }, { "speaker": "楊禮源", "speech": "在這個議題的爭議點的應用上主要是他們認為提供研究健保資料的去識別化是不是已經達到無從識別當事人的程度，這個議題大家有相當的爭議。人權團體主張健保署衛福部國衛院還是有可能被間接或直接識別，但他們認為資料已經去識別化依照法務部相關的意旨並非可直接知道。" }, { "speaker": "楊禮源", "speech": "要使國內大數據在應用上有一個很快速的發展，行政院召開非常密集的會議，各部會也都在相關的配合下積極運作這樣的議題，在104年1月行政院召開了第二十七次的會議，在104年5月是由蔡政委主持召開應用大數據潮流的會議，接著7月再召開第二十八次會議。這幾次的會議是有說經濟部要對相關程序的訂定，相關個人資料去識別標準的訂定，裁示由經濟部標檢局負責辦理。" }, { "speaker": "楊禮源", "speech": "其中有一個會議是在去年7月14日由蔡政委，研商因應大數據潮流個人資料去識別化可行機制，會議的決議有關於OPEN DATA個人資料去識別化的應用是要透過中立第三方的驗證機制，有助於我國大數據的應用，當初是責成一個月內要求個人資料去識別化的相關資料規範。應徵標準資料去識別化後財資中心率先來作為第一個驗證。" }, { "speaker": "楊禮源", "speech": "有關於個人資料去識別驗證規範的研訂，事實上還在蓬勃發展當中，比如ISO 29191，比如相關的措施做法還在發展中；歐盟在這一塊事實上是比較嚴謹，歐盟提出WP 216也有考慮。在美國聯邦法案去識別化的價值應用，也明訂可以用專家判斷法與安全港來判定。日本是在2014年12月公布已經把匿名化處理資料與個人資料保護委員會納入配套法律當中。因此，國際的趨勢還在蓬勃發展當中。" }, { "speaker": "楊禮源", "speech": "在國內的話，因為相關國家標準事實上ISO有制定比較高階的標準及其中一個標準是是ISO29100，標檢局也在103年6月4日公布為CNS29100，名字是「資訊技術－安全技術－隱私權框架」，是一個高階的要求，可以應用在組織技術程序各層面個人資料的保護。因為在標準裡面有提到，有兩個行徑是適用在政府機關開放的情境，是委託給委託機構處理的情境，因此在這個標準裡面大概可以適用到我們目前OPEN DATA跟BIG DATA應用的方式。" }, { "speaker": "楊禮源", "speech": "另外一個標準是我們所謂的CNS29191，主要是資訊技術、安全技術，是針對部分匿名及部分去連結的標準公布，在標準適用的範圍是大數據需要被重新識別，當然我們知道政府開放資料是不能重新識別，但這裡是說具正當理由下是可以重新識別。" }, { "speaker": "楊禮源", "speech": "因為國內的需求非常迫切，國際上目前只有公布比較高階的標準，局也是很快制定為國家標準，因為在迫切的需求性之下，原則上我們先採用跟大家包括CNS29100跟CNS29191的標準，再者是已經涵蓋了BIG DATA、OPEN DATA比較高階的要求。" }, { "speaker": "楊禮源", "speech": "前次會議有說會採用第三方中立來做一個驗收的提供，因此我們會朝驗證的規範來做這樣的規劃，大家看這一張圖是基本驗證規範的三階架構圖，像一個金字塔，這會包括最高階的驗證標準、中階具體控制措施及低階執行作業程序。在高階的作業標準基本上會比較屬於原則性的要求，那就是我們剛剛跟大家報告CNS29100、CNS29191，比如隱私權那一塊的部分。因為在政府機關的OPEN DATA，之前有跟法務部研議過是強調個人資料不能被重新識別，因此我們這邊也再次強調一次。在中階的控制措施上，事實上國際規範還沒有寫得很清楚，如果大家知道ISO27001的話，它是一個非常成熟的國際標準，但因為去識別化的議題非常新，所以還沒有訂進去，若干年後會訂進來，標檢局就參考十個標準訂定了一個個人資料去識別化的措施來作為在這個議題上具體的要求。低階的受驗證程序就受驗證組織考量本身資料型態依標準要求及相關措施來自己建置作業程序，以符合要求。" }, { "speaker": "楊禮源", "speech": "會由高階的標準，CNS29100、CNS29191展開到中階，最後再展開到實際作業程序。在驗證的應用上受驗證的單位要依照自己的資料型態來訂定SOP，最後要符合到高階跟二階標準跟控制措施的要求。" }, { "speaker": "楊禮源", "speech": "因為這個議題在國際的標準上，中階的控制措施還沒有被納入到標準裡面去，為了要因應國內迫切的需求，我們是請標準委員蔡教授來起草，也經過非常多相關機關的討論，參考了將近十個國際標準，包含CNS29100、CNS29191、CNS27017等等，包括一些國家的ICO我們都納進來參考，指定控制措施，率先完備。" }, { "speaker": "楊禮源", "speech": "在控制措施上是要作為驗證上的使用，主要的內涵包含了用語及定義，第二個是風險管理過程、隱私權政策、隱私權原則、重新識別PII之要求及PII去識別化過程。" }, { "speaker": "楊禮源", "speech": "相關的規範事實上我們也召開了非常多的會議，政委也主持了會議，個人去識別化的會議，8月份也在研議控制措施的部分，我們主要的決議是有取得目前相關政府機關的共識，現階段會以我國跟國際標準CNS29100、CNS29191個人資料去識別化的要求，並且附加要求政府的開放資料不能被識別，我們就訂定了我們的控制措施。" }, { "speaker": "楊禮源", "speech": "我們之前的會議研議之後，我們在去年8月在行政院由蔡政委主持的會議報告，我們報告這一些規範的部分跟控制措施的研議結果。會議決議是CNS29100、CNS29191可以作為國家現階段推動OPEN DATA、BIG DATA個人資料去識別化標準的部分，我們參酌國際規範的控制措施來作為具體要求的參考。因為規範出來之後，當次的會議上也裁示財政部資訊中心要在11月完成驗證。" }, { "speaker": "楊禮源", "speech": "規範確定完之後，事實上行政院也要求我們來作推廣，我們在8月的時候就跟國發會、國資辦研議，我們的說明對象也分作政府機關與民間企業來辦理。政府機關的說明會在去年10月27日有辦理，共有32個中央機關及14個地方機關派員參加，我們還有函請相關部會調查民間的需求，共有76家的需求，我們也發函請他們來局裡面辦理業界說明會。在去年11月30日財政部資訊中心也依照驗證規範草案第一家率先驗證，取得第一席驗證，變成是我們國家第一個通過個人資料去識別化的驗證，敬請大家指教。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非常感謝報告。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我整理一下，這一次是去年11月我們vTaiwan有討論過也有給過建議，凡是作為開放資料使用的，基本上我們是以不能重新識別為基礎，所以雖然剛剛有討論到CNS29191的規範，等一下財資中心會用的是不能重行識別的CNS29100。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "線上有500位朋友，歡迎隨時打字留言，在下一階段幫大家詢問。我們歡迎財資中心。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "各位先進及線上的朋友，大家好，我們根據經濟部標準檢驗據控制措施來進行試辦案的報告。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "我們大概在8月18日如標準檢驗局所報告的，根據行政院研商會議結論，依據經濟部標準檢驗局的要求來作一個標準作業。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "我們除了完成試辦案例完，還有導入驗證過程，包含了一階1份，二階11份、三階1份、四階15份。倒入驗證機關制定的文件，整個位階如同標檢局報告的第三階作業部分。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "在文件列表當中，詳如畫面所列，大部分都是依循整個控制措施來訂定，比較特別的部分包含一階文件一次風險評鑑的部分、三次文件去識別化作業過程的規範，主要的報告也會針對這兩個部分來說明。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "另外要再補充說明，我們這一次倒入驗證的涵蓋範圍，整個個人資料去識別化過程驗證要求及控制措施有七個章節，第一個章節是目的，第二個章節是用語及定義，這個部分是不包含驗證要求及控制措施的部分，所以沒有納入驗證的範圍。第五個章節所指的是隱私權的保護原則，這個部分因為財政資訊中心已經有導入英國的案例，這一次也沒有包含第七章的重新識別要求。我們在這一次識別案例當中，主要是所得稅的資料，所謂綜合所得稅的核定版包含了幾個主要的欄位，有所得稅申報戶的資料，包含所在的地址、戶籍編號等等，另外也會有所得總額或相關扣除額總額。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "我們是以102年度綜合所得稅的資料為實作，102年度的綜合所得稅應該是在103年度申報，當確認之後應該是到104年下半年，這個是綜合所得稅的最新資料。這個資料超過720萬筆的紀錄。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "我們在做個人資料去識別化的過程當中，第一個要進行的是隱私風險評鑑。在我們的程序當中主要是期望值的概念，我們先評估這些資料如果不小心外洩或被人家再識別對機關的衝擊是多少，最低是8分，最高是40分。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "這樣的資料放出來之後被別人猜出來的可能性有多大？我們會去評估三個因素，我們會找一個最高來計算。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "我們參考美國的做法，美國一般針對開放資料或者放出去之後不可控制狀態的話，他們重新識別的可能性會訂定在1/22左右，如果以我們現在目前在做的案例，如果8至40分之間如果取其中大概是24分，如果再乘上1/22，是1.2左右，所以我們認為在個人資料去識別化的過程當中，我們希望風險值能夠控制在1.2以下。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "在這個案例當中，底下會說明計算出來是26分，如果把風險值控制在1.2以下，大概相當於我們把重新識別的可能性控制在1/22左右。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "我們把衝擊構面分成八個構面來看，包含有無直接識別欄位或者是間接識別欄位，個人資料所要處理資料集的計入列的數量等等的這一些因素去評估，我們這樣算出來之後，這個案例的重新構面是26分。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "我們來計算重新識別的可能性：重現性。這樣的定義是假設在資料接收者的團隊如果剛好認識資料集所指稱的資料當中，我們放出了100人，可能其中認識5人，直接猜到5人的機率是5％，可能不變的話，權重就會比較高，如果不變的話，就會降低。在這個案例當中母體資料數很大，以一個人的鄧巴數為150左右，我們換算下來的重現性相當低，因此這在後續處理當中是一個決定性的作用。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "第二個要評估的是資源可用性。有無外界的相關資料與我們要處理的資料經過比對，而讓別人更容易猜出來？這個案例當中雖然我們處理的母體紀錄是720萬筆，我們會去分群，分完結果是6萬多筆，根據95％的信心水準，誤差為正負5％，抽出了375筆，網路上經由社群媒體或者是引擎來搜尋有沒有相關的資料，但我們是沒有比對出相關的狀況，因此以外界的狀況來看是接近於0。以重新識別的可能性來講，也不會在後續當中起到決定性的重要。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "第三個是區別性。主要是根據威脅模型來評估，這個主要是參照美國去處理個人健康資訊的方式。在這個威脅模型當中會去評估三個模型，第一個模型是去評估內部控管、外部動機與能力。是兩湖報好的狀況沒有要去釋出，同時也要考慮外界有無高度的意願來供給，根據右上角的舉證來做出攻擊機率，這個是參考美國個人資訊的模型。不過在這個案例當中我們主要是要處理OPEN DATA的狀況，相當於這張表當中最底下的這一航，所以我們會以攻擊機率等於1來計算。我們會去算T2，當這些機率是在長期運作的狀況之下，可能外界的興趣越來越高，在逐年的演進過程當中，可能資料就喪失了、被人家偷走。我們一樣計算出被偷走的機率，在這個程序當中我們計算如果一年沒有被偷走，一年的機率是1/365，兩年內沒有被投走是1/730，依此類推。這一次是以OPEN DATA來計算，所以是低的方式來計算。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "如果要符合風險評鑑的結果，換句話說，我們猜中的最高機率是要設定在1/22，才能維持剛剛一開始所講風險值維持在1.2下的結果。底下會說明，如果是以1/22的話，K匿名法是如何實作？" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "當一個資料集當中如果有一個或多個的屬性結合起來，比如住在某地20歲的男性，這樣的屬性結合起來可以指定到特定的個人，這個狀況可以等於1，如果這樣的屬性結合起來之後，可能可以找到五個人跟他的特性一模一樣，這個時候我們就會說K值等於5。如何達到這個目標？處理的方式主要有兩種，主要是資料的母體的當中來作概化，例如20歲的男性修正為15至25歲，另外一個方式是抑制，等於直接刪除或隱藏掉。如何判定？我只要把這個資料概化或抑制，就可以知道K值是多少。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "當一個資料表包含的欄位有姓名、年齡、性別、住所、宗教等等，如果把姓名用X等，都會發現同一個顏色的紀錄都會有兩筆以上，第一筆與第三筆是一模一樣等，這樣的狀況我們就會稱這樣的集合是符合K等於2的狀態。換句話說，當資料經過這樣的處理之後，因為有兩筆的紀錄是一模一樣，所以無法指定到特定的個人，猜測到的機率是1/2。換句話說，如果要達到K等於22的目標，我就是把我的資料經過處理之後經過分群，最少的那一群是22，就可以達到K等於22的目的。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "個人資料去識別化程序主要是參考經濟部標準局的制定，判定直接識別欄位，如果有就直接刪除，例如資料做DATA的處理，把直接識別的欄位用一個亂碼來取代，如果沒有重新識別的要求，這樣的欄位其實是沒有意義的，所以就會直接刪除。再來是按照我們的需要來選擇未來所要釋出的欄位，而且要判定這一些欄位哪一些是間接識別，哪一些是不涉及個人的資訊，接下來是進行到風險，我們來算一下這樣的處理要把K設定多少才能滿足風險評鑑的目標。接下來是調整參數，經過處理以後，可以達到K值的紀錄。K值都處理完之後，就會有一個離群值，這邊用5％的個體回應全體50％的支配模式，意思就是如果在二十個人的群體當中，如果有一個人的收入占所有二十人的一半以上，顯然這樣的狀況、這樣的個人很容易被猜出來，如果有這樣特殊狀況的數據就要經過特別的處理。但在我們這一個例子當中，等一下會提到收入是用等分位來處理，所以離群值的狀況不會出現，也不會在這個案例當中發生。接下來是把所有處理完的資料進行抽樣，根據統計學來做抽樣，再拿到網路上或者是社群媒體上搜尋，找有沒有相關可以比對的資料，再來確定所計算出來的風險值會不會違背設定，接下來輸出，並作查核驗證。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "接下來是一個實作案例，不過為了要說明我們在資訊可利用性，也就是資料的豐富度及個人資料保護中間的取捨上，我們舉了三個狀況來說明：第一個狀況是戶籍地址概化處理的方式，到底我們要公布街弄、村里或鄉鎮。第二個是在欄位的取捨上要納入多少的欄位來做K匿名法的分群處理，到底是可以接收到什麼程度。第三個是最終的實作結果為何只納入戶籍地址等之結果。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "同時為了要做OPEN DATA，所以沒有做識別要求。我們要稍微說明一下，內政部為了要讓一些資料不那麼容易被猜出來，有被定義了一些地理空間的區位，最小統計區聚合起來就是一級發布區，人數是450或更多一點，再把鄉林聚合起來就是二級發布區，也就是3000人左右，以大家理解的概念，最小統計區是一個結果，二級發布區是一個村里的小單位，為了要說明一個最極端的狀況，我們把所得總額分成四等位，收入最低的25％、25％至50％間、50％至75％間及75％以上等分位，我們是處理到K等於22的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "我們先用台北市的資料來觀察，如果以最小統計區來做，可以發現不符合K等於22的群組資料會占31％，也就是太容易會被猜出來，一級是11％，而級是萬分之4，如果用一級發布區以下的資料可用性較低，因為最終的結果都會用抑制的方式來處理，不符合K等於22的要求。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "換句話說，我們依照狀況1的結論，如果要符合K等於22的要求，而且要讓狀況超過95％以上的話，至少要用到二級發布區，同時我們考慮到計算的能力，我們也去問潛在的使用者，二級發布區地理空間大小類似村里，一般民眾可能比較不敏感，考慮到這一些因素，因此最後在做地理空間概化的處理上會用村里界進行戶籍地址概化，這個是狀況一報告的結論。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "這個是實作案例：狀況2。讓為了實作資料比較高的可用性，我們讓比較多的欄位納進來處理，包含了戶籍地址、所得總額、所得凈額、應納稅額，也包含了撫養人數、扣除額人數。概化處理方式是用村里來處理，所得總額的方式是以10等分位組來處理。同時我們計算所得凈額及應納稅額音高度相關於所得總額，相關係數也到0.99及0.97，所以在處理的當中我們只針對所得總額來計算。所得凈額跟應納稅額也是用10等分位組，低度間接概化，我們是用低密度來處理。可以發現這樣的數據還滿ok的，不符合K等於22的資料不占3％左右。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "這個案子也是我們實際上第一次提到現場驗證案例的結果，不過我們在現場驗證時在稽核時雙方有密切討論，討論到幾個因素，其實我們有一些不去計算其實不符合K匿名法的定義。可以包含了所得凈額、應納稅額不分群，低度間接識別欄位也沒有納入分群，第一次討論之後我們矯正，所有的欄位都要納入，就如下一個的實作案例狀況。我們處理戶籍地址、所得總額、所得凈額、應納稅額，地度間接識別欄位不用。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "我們可以發現當資料的欄位增加了兩個之後，一樣用村里用概化的處理，這時沒有辦法滿足一個群組超過22個人以上的狀況已經高達18％，所以說這樣的資料可用性很低，以後都要用刪除的方式來釋出。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "就這個取捨來看可以知道K匿名法對於個資識別相關欄位的限制會有一定的限制，當欄位越多的話，當要達到K匿名法就越粗糙，以這個例子來講，如果要達到K匿名法是22，戶籍地址的概化的等級要再加大，可能要到鄉鎮等級來處理。大家會考慮到對顆粒不宜過粗的需求度高，因此我們就考慮回到剛才的狀況來處理，地理空間的概化方式還是用村里來做，間接識別是用戶籍地址、所得總額，這樣的狀況就會回到二的狀況，也就是2.87％的紀錄不會符合K等於22的要求。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "大家會好奇這樣的資料處理之下有哪一些會損失？黑色的部分是最後會用遮罩處理的方式來處理，都市地區的密度較高，相對來講非都市地區人數比較稀疏，換句話說，沒有辦法滿足K等於22的可能性會加高，此為第一個觀察。第二個觀察，對於非都市地區高所得的人群，人數比較小，相當於都市地區比較少。高所得狀況少的狀況下，高所得的區就會被遮罩掉，在所得群組越高的部分，最後被遮罩的可能性就越高。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "我們也在行政院12月有報告，因為要去分群，所以不太適用在連續型的資料，可能會產生資料的損失，不過這邊要特別補充說明的是，不管用任何的隱私保護技術來處理都一定會產生資料的損失，只不過K匿名法會增加資料攔項的增加會有比較大的限制。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "另外，其實是保護技術除了K匿名法之外，還有很多的實作方式，建議持續引入新的技術來滿足需求。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "除了目前所實作的案例之外，衛福部、內政部也會持續去嘗試用隱私保護技術的方式來實作。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "其實統計資料與去識別化的原始資料有不同的應用標的，高群組會比低所得還要大，恐怕會失真，去識別化的原始資料會有每一個地理空間下面所得比較詳細的分群，或者會更適合展店的分析，這樣去識別化的處理可能還是要確認未來的應用情境是什麼再來選擇。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "接著處理的過程當中，也感謝內政部、科法所、工研院的合作，以上報告。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非常感謝，感覺非常崎嶇的過程。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我非常快速的摘要一下，我們一開始去客觀理解到，這一個資料本身如果外溢個人隱私，產生的衝擊有多少，從客觀的欄位等，來看我們能夠承受多少的衝擊。因為這個資料的筆數非常大，所以重現性、可用性都接近於0的狀況，主要扣問的是區別性。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在風險值定義為1.2下求取倒數，得到1/22的重新識別的可能性。我其實滿好奇1.2一開始是在哪一個標準裡面，但我想因為時間的關係，等一下的流程是，我想先請實際參與這個過程也是制定這個標準的蔡老師先講評一下，這樣做的特點是什麼，有什麼可以改進及加強的地方，接下來巨資中心的王老師，我們人比較多，請時間抓一下，這樣我們可以有好幾次的詢問。" }, { "speaker": "蔡敦仁", "speech": "謝謝主持人。" }, { "speaker": "蔡敦仁", "speech": "我想財政資訊中心是第一個通過驗證的單位，整個規範其實剛開始的時候也不知道它的可操作性多高，實際上也滿感謝財政資訊中心給我們這個機會真的去檢驗過，我們最後的結論是其實可操作性是滿高的。" }, { "speaker": "蔡敦仁", "speech": "因為所謂的個資去識別化的驗證過程，實際上是屬於我們管理系統的驗證，跟ISO9001是同一類的，整個精神「做你所說、說你所做」，你本身要提出一個方法學，像風險值是有一個方法學，然後從下面去展開，因為每一個單位的屬性不一樣、每一個資料也不一樣，所以去考量的因素也不同，有八個面向。我們去做驗證的時候，其實是看它的合理性，在正常狀況、合理範圍之下，我們覺得已經做得滿充分了，至於有一些值，因為他們要承受多少的風險是以每一個單位自己來衡量，因為風險不可能降到0，絕對不會發生的事情，不管在什麼樣的情況之下都有一些剩餘的風險，這剩餘的風險我們有很多的處理方法，比如把它轉移買保險或什麼，或者是我們這個單位有自己去承受。" }, { "speaker": "蔡敦仁", "speech": "比如像剛剛講1.2，這實際上跟一開始的評分是有關係的，跟自己訂出的級距，比如是1、3或是5，如果以1來講，1.2我們在驗證稽核的時候，我們認為這個是合理的。當然後面還要再去作精算，那就屬於保險的範疇，比如要買多少錢的保險。這整套的方法學，我覺得在這麼短的時間裡面，因為只有三個月去發展，他們的思考也滿合理的，因為最後的呈現有一些部分可能會在驗證的時候有討論過，所以有作適度的修改，我們因為在這整個過程裡面是相互互動的過程，我相信不只從這裡面學到一些東西，其實我們做驗證的時候，也從這裡面得到一些回饋，所以我們有一個感覺，如果往後再作驗證的時候會更周延一點，不管在守法上或者是在整個思維上。" }, { "speaker": "蔡敦仁", "speech": "我是認為本來就已經做了很多事情做得滿完備的，然後這個驗證不是憑空生出來的，只是把過去做的一些事情整理，套進一些方法學進來，我們有第三方比較客觀來提供一些看法，這裡面因為是第一次驗證，所以這裡面缺了一塊證據。所謂「做你所說、說你所做」，因為證據還沒有產生，有很多東西我們是未來要看它有沒有實施某些事情，當然處理這個過程是沒問題，可是譬如說你後續可能要做一些像內部稽核，比如說我們有一些控制措施是要求如果萬一真的被人家去投訴說你這裡面揭露我的個資，怎麼要去應對？有沒有什麼緊急應變計畫？這個我們在控制措施裡面有要求，可是因為這個是第一次，所以實際上也沒有發生過的事情，他們可能只能拿出來一些程序、有一些步驟，甚至有一些機制可以來應付後續產生的這一些事情。" }, { "speaker": "蔡敦仁", "speech": "另外一個，剛才有提到，可能不是很注意，我們做過所有的去識別化之後，其實要有一個檢查的動作，譬如說我要從網際網路上，比如用GOOGLE搜尋引擎，也許到網站去，比如用新聞網站或者是政府其他公開的資料庫做交叉比對，因為我們很容易知道什麼是直接識別的資料，可是間接識別資料老實說很難把它完全去除掉，因為你把所有的間接識別資料全部去除掉的話，等於資料是沒用，你只要留下任何有用的資訊，其實它都有一些蛛絲馬跡，很怕這一個單位公布或者是這個公司公布的是某一部分去識別化的資料，然後你自己認為沒辦法再重新被人家識別，但另外一個單位也抱持了同樣的想法，很多的單位都有不同的資料，我們只要經過網路把它還原出來原來的資料是什麼人，也就是所謂的當事人，這一部分必須要有一個機制，我們要上網去把這些資料做過搜尋，搜尋過後沒有問題的有一個報告，然後根據我們的一些原則，譬如說在什麼樣的情況之下留下一些軌跡，我們才能說我們是通過了這樣的一個檢查。" }, { "speaker": "蔡敦仁", "speech": "我們也要看這整個步驟的合理性跟它的結果，這是滿耗費時間的，而且這種動作並不是實際上你去識別化一次就完了，而且很多網際網路上的資料蓬勃發展，可能每隔一段時間就要重新識別一次，一旦要重新識別一次的時候又發現可能不能識別了，沒有辦法重新識別又被重新識別，這時候又有一些SOP如何做後續的處理，比如要下架或者是也許進一步識別化，這是連續持續不斷檢驗與改善的過程；但我們在做第一次驗證時是看不到後面，所以我只能講說我們的驗證在初步所呈現的不管是文件上的做法是ok的。而後續我們要有一些追查，比如一個驗證體系一個有效是三年，每一年我們會去做follow，我們當初有做一些觀察事項，我們在後續每一年還要保持證書有效，我們還會再持續下去。" }, { "speaker": "蔡敦仁", "speech": "我個人的感覺是在這麼短的時間去做出這樣的一個成果，他們的的證書我想是實至名歸，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "王邦傑", "speech": "我呼應一下蔡教授提出的見解，其實我們輔導作驗證的時候，會前我就聽到很多人說隱私風險評鑑怎麼來的是有很多問題，我必須坦白說我們使用的這個標準本身並不會明訂某些參數該是多少，再以資料隱私的角度來講的話，每一個資料集都有不同的特性或每一個領域的獨特性，所以當我們看到這個標準跟這個隱私風險評鑑，其實我們也很困難，就像蔡教授所講的沒有先例，所以我們取得的方法是對安全性的重視是個人健康資訊的資料是最受重視，所以我們去搜集一些相關的法規。" }, { "speaker": "王邦傑", "speech": "第二，在美國學界有一派，他們的研究論文是專注在個人健康資料隱私的保護方面，他們也有出書，我們整合這一些資訊之後也有發現他們對個人資料在釋出的時候進行隱私保護，他們其實把它定義了一個像剛剛提到重新識別可能性的建議範圍。所謂的「建議範圍」是如果以K匿名法來匿名的話，如果以OPEN DATA，至少希望K是20。如果是在受限區域內使用，比如是經由特定的合約關係或者是國內健保資料的研究是在受監控的使用，是不能另外參閱外部的資料，在這個情況之下就會認為K值是3到5就好，這個是在重新識別可能性這邊是盡可能統整學術界相關的看法。" }, { "speaker": "王邦傑", "speech": "以衝擊值來看，以資料構面內容及領域都不同，而且在業務上、使用上也需要在業務上使用的人來評估及觀察，因此我們當初跟財政中心做了很多討論，我們希望能夠讓領域內的人去匯集一個共識，來決定這個資料價值高不高，當它出來的時候對大家的衝擊會不會很嚴重，因此才會有衝擊構面的評分表，當這兩樣東西都齊備之後我們要決定在驗證時必須要驗證組織可以接受的風險的base line是多少，我們就用世界上大家已經用OPEN DATA的K值必須是20，在他的衝擊構面評分裡面來算出來組織風險是1.2，這個公式這樣決定之後，去年10月份我去新加坡做一個訪問，新加坡的政府資料開放做得非常好，我在他的簡報之中也有察覺到他們在做個人資料保護時的一些蛛絲馬跡，雖然我問他，他不願意明白跟我講，他其實也引用美國那一份的研究內容，也就是OPEN DATA的K值是20，這個緣由是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "王邦傑", "speech": "其實在HIPAA Privacy Rule這一些學者專家裡面認為，其實就跟傳統議題中有攻、有防，我們做的是防守，HIPAA Privacy Rule他們認為所有的資料開放出去應該要建立資料保護團隊應該要做去識別化工具的開放，要一直不斷精進，但他也認為有一個team要負責攻擊，也就是網路上要發展一些新不同的發展趨勢、研究，回過頭來檢視防守這一方做得好不好，這就跟蔡教授所提的，即便驗證過，驗證過的資料，其實每一年還要再看過是不是在當下還是好的，如果還有不足之處，我們下一次再有新類型資料進來時，我們要如何有改善措施，讓我們對資料的保護能夠永遠走在最前面，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝大家忍受我的手寫白板。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是先決定了K至少要是20，剛剛得出 1.2是部會按照他們資料的特性去決定，這樣有回答我的問題，謝謝。驗證是三年為期，接下來會有定期重驗的機制。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想問一下其他三位老師有沒有對其他的討論或point，也就是剛才試做的程序，接下來會有兩個部會，不是用K匿名法，但也是用相同的措施做相同的事情，在他們定案之前，有沒有什麼要提醒他們的？" }, { "speaker": "陳曉慧", "speech": "謝謝財資中心在這麼短的時間內做給大家看。" }, { "speaker": "陳曉慧", "speech": "蔡教授跟王博士也有說明，當我們看到這個公式的時候，一般來講在螢幕上會用負面衝擊乘上機率等於期望值，這基本上沒有什麼問題。我想討論的是剛剛講的重點，我們目前看到的衝擊構面是有幾件事可以想一想的，第一個是可識別性，可識別性其實分成了直接識別、間接識別及不易間接識別，如果直接識別的話不會是5分，而是爆表，是不可以有直接識別的情況。為什麼5萬筆以上的資料會是1分呢？這個事情我不是很理解，資料量對衝擊構面的影響是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "陳曉慧", "speech": "接下來的問題滿有趣的是敏感度的問題，這邊提到敏感度有四種的分數是高的，敏感度是三種的時候是中的，沒有敏感是ok。我不知道「敏感」的定義是不是個資法第6條所講的？比如是不是犯罪前科紀錄資料？或者是是不是個人的病歷資料？如果一到三種與四種並不是3至5分的問題，所以希望可以想一下後面的邏輯是什麼。" }, { "speaker": "陳曉慧", "speech": "還有信譽衝擊是非常重要，其實對機關來講是信譽，這涉及到民眾中心未來對財政中心的信任度有多少，如果是取決於媒體的抱怨，只有地方媒體，少數的媒體我們給他1分，而比較多人抱怨是很多分，這樣很簡單，我們把公關做好一點就可以了，而且這個是事後的，所以信譽損害是事後的，而今天如同蔡老師跟王博士所講的這是前端就在測試了，所以可能很難講今天我們公布這四個欄位或這兩個欄位之後到底是單一的會來抱怨還是多少會來抱怨？這其實是困難的。" }, { "speaker": "陳曉慧", "speech": "但以信譽的角度，這涉及到個人的人格權，我們今天很認真想一想，到底法律人會怎麼看待信譽損害的時候，我們可以說假設一個案子，比如在學校裡面現在常常是把模範生陳○X或王X○，但我們知道一個模範生的資料被洩漏之後或者是被猜出這個模範生是王小明，王小明可能很高興被人猜到是我。" }, { "speaker": "陳曉慧", "speech": "第二個是學號，就算是把中間的幾個碼去掉，甚至是用其他方式分類代化或分群，萬一又被猜到的話，大家不會太在意，因為學號還是可以被猜出來的。" }, { "speaker": "陳曉慧", "speech": "但是接下來其他的事情，本校有五個學生跟輔導老師談過話，有精神嚴重的問題，因此對我來講一定是很嚴重的事，我不相信學校是在保護我的資料，因此信譽的損害，未來這個東西要經過法院檢證的時候，也希望法院未來會如何檢證的角度來思考對人格權造成的衝擊，反向來講其實是雙面的，因為學校曾經洩漏了我找輔導老師的資料，我從此以後再也不會去學校或再也不會去輔導中心，但很可惜我們不可能不繳稅，如果稅非繳不可的話，稅務資料如果一旦洩漏的話，人民對於財政部的信任度高、中或低可以再想一想。" }, { "speaker": "陳曉慧", "speech": "接下來主管懲處的衝擊，法律人認為分數要是低一點的話，一旦這個資料洩漏，科長負責就好了，我們就不會叫處長負責，這個分數從5分降到1分，這個並不是非常客觀的標準。我覺得這個部分可以再想一想。" }, { "speaker": "陳曉慧", "speech": "接下來這個是對個人當事人衝擊的時候，我當然贊同王老師跟蔡老師講的是業務單位要再詳細分析的事，今天這樣一個稅務資料被洩漏的時候，對我們當事人的影響是什麼？只是知道某甲去年繳了比我多的稅或者是會造成什麼樣的損害，因為我的稅被別人知道了，從此之後保險公司知道我沒什麼錢，所以不願意保我，會不會有這樣的問題可以想一想。這其實會找相關業內的人士一起來討論，因為這個簡報比較簡略，沒有提到是不是會如同國外在做隱私資料衝擊影響時會找相關的利益團體、學者專家及當事人來討論，如果未來有更多的資料揭露會更清楚今天的評分為什麼會這樣的評分。" }, { "speaker": "陳曉慧", "speech": "接下來是財務的衝擊，我比較不理解的是對誰的衝擊，法院判一個電話資料是500元，一筆電話洩漏只有500元，我們這裡有兩個可能，主管機關沒有洩漏，洩漏之後是用法院來計算嗎？法院如此低的時候，分數一律都很低，只有1分，還有是用整體財產損失來計算嗎？我們知道有一些金融資料損失之後，在韓國甚至造成全民都要換發身分證的狀況，所以這個財務衝擊是對機關的衝擊、機關未來損賠的風險有多高，對於整體整個社會要面對整個財稅資料洩漏之後要處理的問題，這其實在衡量這個數字的時候，也許可以再告訴我們後面的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "陳曉慧", "speech": "還有一件事，隱私並不是針對個人的問題，個資是個人的問題，這邊一共有四個欄位是跟個人資料相關，就是前面的四個格式，包含是不是直接、間接識別，個人資料、個人檔案欄位、是不是屬於敏感性資料欄位，這個是個資。其實在考慮負面衝擊的時候，就隱私的部分考慮到族群，比如都市跟城市的人有產品，城市裡面特別地區因為在這樣的分類下從此就知道住在台北市大安區的人是什麼樣的狀況，因為分群之後造成對某一個群體的影響或某一個地區的影響，也必須在隱私裡面要稍微做一些評估。因為這個構面非常重要，這個是文獻上1/20的時候，就會得到一個可不可容忍的風險值，所以我會認為這張衝擊構面圖可以再考量。" }, { "speaker": "陳曉慧", "speech": "接下是可識別性一共有三個點，非常好，這個是個人資料去識別化驗證標準規範的說明裡面，非常詳細在第6.2.4/5/6/7/8有一個實作指引，作了很明確的定義。接著評鑑風險有提到一件事，重現性風險、…都要考慮。有一件事非常重要，如同剛剛王博士與蔡老師有再三提到要考慮外部的問題，如果我們用擇一法的話，外部的這一件事是並沒有考慮到的，所以在公式上我們就直接採用20或者是文件上所提到的數字，未來可以給法院接受，因為有學術依據。但完全踢掉的話，我們認為完全沒有辦法接受，因此整個資料做完又要再重做一次，比如這是財政部的資料，但台北市不會用這麼粗的單位，而是用這麼細的單位發的時候，是不是就會被對出來的問題，因此假設資源可用性又要再被檢證一次的時候，適合不適合在這個公式中被踢掉，這個要想一想。" }, { "speaker": "陳曉慧", "speech": "接著是重現性的問題，它的定義是根據資料將時序連結到PII來計算。有一個資料連結到我的資料，這個重現性就會變高。權重是容易被理解，但為什麼最後是乘以鄧巴數/資料集中總個體數，其實我數學不是很好。因為這個資料是每一年要公布的，所以每年公布像公務員就是每一年增加2％，政府每一年幫我們加薪一點點，但是個人並不是這樣的，當他的資料在變動的時候，他其實很容易就對出來了，這一件事只要多花的兩、三年就知道最近某某公司的董事長響應政府提高收入的政策，馬上全部公司加薪多少錢，也許我就好好去對這個地區的資料，我就可以對出來某某人都是某公司的人受惠於政府的宣導政策及公司的配合政策，因此我覺得這一件事是重要的。" }, { "speaker": "陳曉慧", "speech": "但重要性用擇一的方式沒有被考慮的其實是可惜的，是不是可以考慮要點中要求三個都要考慮的時候，我不知道在數學上，因為我個人數學不是很好，法律人數學好的人很多，但我不是那一個。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "陳曉慧", "speech": "因此我們是不是要權重加以計算…如果最後還要再處理一次的話，要不要在這邊處理，這不是很清楚，因此這是各位專家再想一想。" }, { "speaker": "陳曉慧", "speech": "我關心的是像我這種數學不好的人，我想所有去識別化的資料到OPEN DATA，都要面臨社會溝通的問題，如果把去識別化做到最好跟數學都可以證明，最後都要面對社會溝通的問題，我們這時必須要用聽得懂的方法告訴他，以剛剛這一件事來講，我就請我的數學比較好的解釋給我聽，他直接說跟我一樣的資料有22個，如果有每一個資料欄位就放心多了，那就比剛剛各位解釋了很多鄧巴數（笑），其實我很認真，也有去查，所以我是覺得希望各位專家再用一個比較基礎的方式能夠告訴我。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我們有做逐字紀錄，所以老師剛剛做的白話解釋，已經記錄到網路上了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "老師有提到相當多的層面，但有一項可以先明確回答，也就是對誰的財務衝擊？" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "原來我們在設計衝擊構面評分的時候分兩個面向來看，第一個定量、一個是定性，第1到第4是定量，5、6、7、8其實是定性的描述，其實是沒有一定的公式去進行換算，主要是去識別化操作小組的共識，並沒有一定的公式。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "額外要解釋的是針對可識別性的部分，並不是指已經處理完的資料，而是指原來的資料當中有無包含直接識別，是有直接的定義。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "有關於財務衝擊的部分，指的是對機關內部的財務衝擊，以上簡要說明。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非常感謝，不曉得翁老師有沒有要補充的？" }, { "speaker": "翁清坤", "speech": "去識別化其實很專業，像大數據的時代，像人類的資料不單是當事人自己的，跟他有接觸的就會自然而然觀察及蒐集他的資料，所以社會大眾其實對某一個或者是集合起來的這些個人資料之利用正當性。" }, { "speaker": "翁清坤", "speech": "包括在很多領域，醫療、電信等等，所以消費者最關心的不單只是自己的個人資料會不會被人家用，如果被人家用的時候，他的隱私會外洩，但我們看全世界各國的資料可以知道大概的趨勢是一個社會都會想要去做資料採礦，但一個關鍵點是利用者除非在法律上有一定正當的權利或者是契約同一不用去識別化，或者是不相干的第三人想要來利用這個資料，很重要的原則是要去識別化。" }, { "speaker": "翁清坤", "speech": "不過我們的標檢局很努力幫我們草擬出世界上這一些規範，但對大眾來講還是不懂，像很多國外的○網站就可以看得到，比如這一個網站在從事電子商務的時候，關於消費者電子資料搜集時有無符合當地的隱私標準，比如像美國會有○，或者是像日本就有○，像國內也有發展TPIPAS也是隱私標章。這一個概念到底有無去識別化，像剛剛先進有提到到時候已經不是個資了，所以要能夠利用，可能要滿足在不同的情境底下，對消費者來講比較難，所以我們要導入中介的專業組織來幫各位作把關，像跟國內的TPIPAS來合作，以上是我的淺見。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "比較另類的觀點，我提出來這一些所謂的標準流程其實是建築在一個有可能會傾倒的風險，風險是一開始我們有說過一切的標準是法務部的函釋，他們認為個人資料只要經過去識別化就不是個人資料。但是行政函釋我們都知道還是會經過之後司法審判的檢驗，甚至可能會逆轉。從個人資料保護法裡面清楚告訴你的是，個人資料搜集、處理及利用都必須經過書面的同意或者是有其他法律的但書及利用的條件來使用，我今天問各位一個問題去識別化處理是不是個人資料處理？在去識別化資料之前需不需要得到他的同意或引據法律但書？" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "我非常認同蔡教授所講的，操作性滿高的標準，另外要用這個標準流程去處理個人資料去識別化要進入所謂的OPEN DATA，它的操作成本、行政成本等是否很高？我並不是說這個標準完全不可行，我的觀點是要引用這個標準去進行個人資料的處理最好還是要用個人資料保護法第16條公務單位基於公務需求才去做這樣的處理，另外其實是輔助我們在觀察國際情勢上看到的，很多公務機關或非公務機關在搜集資料時，其實在收取資料條款時已經說如何做去識別化處理，在去識別化處理都吸納規則訂出來，大家可以看危機媒體協會去看並不會去搜集，但在搜集的過程中一定會有相關的紀錄被紀錄下來。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "但這一些資料會進行某些標準去進行去識別化處理，他們認為是去識別化的資料會轉成OPEN DATA的使用，我們認為這樣比較符合方式，因為公務單位在搜集時如果用吸納的條款，並不是一定要經過這麼嚴正的規則，就可以依照比較簡單的方式來處理。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "至於非常嚴謹，我認為已經非常嚴謹，它的成本應該是非常高，其實光擬訂成本已經有時間成本，更需要成本，我覺得它還是必須在一個特殊的狀況下才去運作。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "另外再補充，比如美國的地理資訊局他們其實大部分的地理圖資都是跟民間的○公司取得，民間機關去吸納，先訂定同意書，被吸納的民眾說資料是會作去識別化處理，最後再把這樣的資料提供給公部門，我認為這是相輔相成的模式，不是每一件事都要經過這麼繁複的標準，補充一點淺見。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為法務部今天也有在這邊，我之前看函釋並沒有定義「去識別化處理」本身這一件事的性質，只是說做完之後就不是個資，所以這應該是未定義的狀況。我不知道法務部有沒有想要補充的？" }, { "speaker": "林裕嘉", "speech": "103年11月17日，這部分基礎的解釋過程裡面，當然是有參考了歐盟他們的做法，歐盟1995年個人資料保護指令在一開始的時候很清楚定義到有關於個人資料定義是直接、間接識別格式，在立法理由的說明內再去強調一個反向的，若是該資料無從直接或間接識別該個人資料狀態的話，當然就非我們個資法所定義的個人資料。" }, { "speaker": "林裕嘉", "speech": "剛剛也有提到符合把一些資料本身直接、間接識別的狀態去做一個處理，打成無從直接、間接識別該當的過程，這個處理是不是還要再得到當事人的同意等等，其實歐盟有經過一個所謂法律的解釋，WP 216的解釋去處理到這個問題時，他們是把它放在處理的概念裡面，若是針對於個人資料在進行處理的這個過程，你用的這個措施是讓它不要去識別出該個人方式的話，這也不會造成對當事人權益造成損害，因此歐盟現有的法令認為這個是許可的，因此我們參考歐盟的見解，而且剛好在103年11月17日當時日本也正在進行整個在修法提議的過程，剛剛標檢局的簡報裡面也有提到日本的修法，日本的修法在去年已經完成，他們預計會在明年度開始會實施，約一年半的時間。" }, { "speaker": "林裕嘉", "speech": "他們的法律是在討論有關於匿名化的措施，他們還沒有制定法律之前，在日本的國內討論這個問題，他們也是認為若用加工的方式，也就跟歐盟討論的情況，「加工」就是我們剛剛所討論的處理。以加工的方式讓資料去識別出該當事人是誰的狀況，它也會變成一個非個資的狀態，因此我們當時是先根據整個勾稽的走向先提出一個資本的說明，但是真正的重點還是在於應用去識別化的技術去達成無從直接、間接識別該當事人，這是一個很抽象的描述，具體要如何做，我們終於從抽象走到具體，我們可以讓各位看到這個過程如何進行，雖然這個過程或許大家有很多不同的意見來參與，但我覺得踏出第一步是最重要的，以上。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為剛剛有說網路上500位朋友可以留言，我想法務部既然在，線上的問題我們先問一下。他說如果機關將來通過驗證並拿到標章的時候，如果像健保案時，這個意義是不是可以拿來當免責事由，或者是由當事人承擔舉證責任，而非機關承擔舉證責任？" }, { "speaker": "林裕嘉", "speech": "拿到隱私權的認證標章就可以拿來當作表彰，我覺得這一步太快，取得這樣的標準或驗證，真實的意義不在於現在立刻就可以說，絕對不可以被處罰，當然意義不在這邊，最重要的意義是蔡政委有提到很重要的觀點，這其實是自律管理的模式，在還沒有面臨法律訴訟之前，我願意用一個比較嚴謹的方式來做，這個過程、方式可以公開、透明向大家說明，如果未來在法院有個案依據的話，我覺得因為這個有比較清楚檢視的依據進行，先不論是後面認定的結果為何，我們當然是期盼給外界達到一個這樣驗證的流程至少可以證明做這一件事並不是故意要去違反法律等等的思考模式，其他進一階段因有驗證過程，所以輕而易舉卸除所有的舉證責任，我認為這個還是回到法院，舉證責任在第一階段會先由被告（機關）說明你的東西去識別化的程度如何，就像今天所說的事實該如何做，若經過一個階段這樣的舉證明確之後，就看法官怎麼樣去做採信。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以是增強，並不是絕對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "同樣因為時間的關係，我想邀請剛才沒有發言過的社群及其他機關的參與者，如果有問題就請直接舉手。" }, { "speaker": "蕭暉議", "speech": "我是資策會的大數據所，我不是法律的專家，我是技術人員。從技術的角度，我覺得制定的標準是很合理的第一步，也就是制定了人家可以依循要怎麼做才可以達到大家可以認可的去識別化，如果K值訂很高的話，其實猜到的機會是相對很低，受的損害是不高。" }, { "speaker": "蕭暉議", "speech": "剛剛也有人提到成本是不是很高？從技術的角度，假設你已經要把哪一些欄位定義成間接可以識別，可以開發成一組資料來做匿名其實不是相對那麼難，如果大家可以同意技術的話，可以從科技的角度來說，開發出這樣的tool可以能夠應用到各種不同的資料，其實相對來講並不是那麼難。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "技術上，確實從0到1是最貴的，從1到2比較容易。但當然也有人力定期驗證的成本。" }, { "speaker": "彭彥翰", "speech": "各位大家好，我是彭彥翰。我想講衝擊構面評分的部分。一個資料可識別性如果達到直接識別的傷害，跟全國人民的傷害在我們眼裡是一樣的，這在上面是很不合理的一件事，很多東西都5分，事實上相較起來並不是同等級的傷害，所以在這個很根本的評分上就已經有很可以質疑的地方，所以從這個模型就讓我們覺得需要修正，考慮的事情有一點太多，又必須把每一個東西都訂在範圍裡，可能比較不準確。" }, { "speaker": "彭彥翰", "speech": "再來，我很在意的是這一份超辛苦的報告，但結論卻是告訴我們建議持續引入新的技術以滿足不同的需求。所以我在想說在小組的研究當中到底有沒有比你們認為K匿名法更好的？或者是其他可能的需求？" }, { "speaker": "彭彥翰", "speech": "第三，因為我們有講到第三方單位來進行評分，我有一個直覺，這真的是直覺，如果有心這個人，我不能明確定義這個人在這一群當中的哪一個，我知道有心要侵犯，如果有意要找到我，他到底可不可以找到？我們能不能用某一種，我只是假設有一個程式，我們可以算出透過所有可以搜尋的資料，經過幾個步驟才可以精準比對出一個人在哪一格，我們是不是可以訂一個數字，比如5萬次以上，我們就說這個資料安全？會不會比這麼複雜的評估還要更直接或準確，如果我們有第三方客觀單位來做這一件事，當然我這只是想法，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "森里螢一", "speech": "我想提出質疑的是衝擊構面評分的部分，有一個無影響，我想應該是不太可能吧！或多或少應該都有吧！" }, { "speaker": "森里螢一", "speech": "另外這一份報告老實講是滿專業的，如果要講給一般大眾聽，甚至是到立法院聽讓立委聽，立委不可能聽得懂這一種東西，要如何讓立委們及一般民眾聽得懂，我想這是非常重要的地方。" }, { "speaker": "趙式隆", "speech": "各位長官、先進，大家好，我是工程師，我覺得今天聽到這個東西非常親切。大家在講衝擊構面圖，我覺得這個是相當好的一步，因為任何的模型都有一些不完美，這是我從讀博士班得到的很好的結論。" }, { "speaker": "趙式隆", "speech": "我自己本身的專業是做通訊，所以我玩機率完了很多年，一直玩到偵測與評估，所以今天看這個東西的感覺是你今天要做這一件事要讓大家很不容易猜到，當你手上有一個資料的時候，你已經很不容易猜到，假設我們手上有更多的資料，如果這個資料過了很久，或者是這個東西搭配了其他的資料，我們有沒有辦法更容易猜到他？這是我今天也許想要提出來，這並不一定是今天討論的重點，這也許是之後我們在開會時會再討論到，假設如果我們今天已經知道一件事，如果有一個人已經拿了A部門的資料、再拿B部門資料，可以猜得中，這樣怎麼辦？我們可不可以把這一些資料收回來？經過部會的協調，也許部會用去識別化的方式不一樣，你怎麼樣統一的標準，例如這一些資料送出去之後給誰使用？或者是部會間如何協調？這一些東西去識別化的資料變高的時候，也許價值就變低了，在去識別化不同評估的時候，是不是不同的人拿到不同的資料，我們知道拿到A資料的人，我們知道拿到B資料會更容易猜中，是不是要限制同時拿到的規則？" }, { "speaker": "趙式隆", "speech": "接下來下一步是不是當我們檢驗這一些資料時，是不是拿到去識別化程度的時候，我自己寫程式，我們知道把一個東西放在一起是不是要做一些close的交叉檢驗，以上淺見。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛剛提到連結攻擊，我們之前的建議書裡也有討論到，是不是也可以請專業的機構來處理。但今天的主題是去識別化的驗證，所以這確實不在今天的討論範圍內。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "還有沒有其他的發言？（無人舉手）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那我想請財資中心回答剛才大家的問題：為什麼一開始使用K匿名法？具體的定期驗證成本有多高？有沒有更加量化或自動化的方式？如何讓這個模式繼續走下去？大概是這些問題。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "我這邊簡要說明一下，第一個是針對我們為什麼選用K匿名法的原因。主要是我們看了雖然沒有說一定要用K匿名法，而是說可以用K匿名法，所以我們直接評估用K匿名法的方式來做。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "當然我們看K匿名法之外，我們也有稍微看一下其他的方法，不過坦白講，這個技術持續發展中，K匿名法是相對比較容易施作的，其他實作的方式，我相信還是要等未來衛福部、內政部用其他的方法是不是有其他可以改善的空間，這是第一個說明的部分。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "第二個說明的部分，有很多在座先進有興趣的都是衝擊構面的部分，其實我們一開始在做衝擊構面的時候也很疑惑，因為這個是控制措施裡面沒有明定的，因為財政資訊中心原來就有導入了BS1002○的制度，本來就有PIA的機制在，是一個隱私風險的機制，我們去看了一下大部分去建立隱私風險評鑑的方式不離期望值的概念，有一個機率、有一個損失的衝擊，我去計算出隱私評鑑的結果怎麼樣，不過雖然不管是BS1001或IS2007的機制，坦白說這一些機制當中都沒有被量化，可能我做過PIE之後，我做出來3分或5分哪一些要納入處理？這個是在評鑑制度當中不會被擬訂的。不過大部分導入的驗證機關怎麼做？他們會說我現在的能力還做多少？因為像這樣驗證的標準很重要的概念是持續性的改進，當評估出來的結果比如可以改善三樣，比如今年訂的標準是5分以上就去處理，如果5分處理完再來看，5分以上都解決掉，明年就會把我這個PI評鑑的結果取3分以上訂定改善方法來處理，這個是一般的操作模式。" }, { "speaker": "謝明峯", "speech": "我們也訂了衝擊構面的評分，本來的想法是類似這樣的概念，隨著技術的嚴禁跟相關的工具開發越來越齊全，機關對於處理個人資料能力一定會進步，我們再來處理衝擊構面評分處理的方式。我們也很期待衛福部、內政部定義他們可以實作的方式，這個未來我們也可以參考來改進，以上。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非常感謝。這真的是第一例，之後會不斷持續有新的資訊進來，vTaiwan這個討論區會一直開放到5月19日，之後就看情況了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在這中間有任何新的資訊，很歡迎書面寫到我們的討論區上面來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "最後請蔡政委作結論。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "今天的討論，我想大家可以看到非常專業，確實各行各業都有參與討論。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "我先說行政院推這個部分當然是從Open Data的推動上，我們需要一個機制，剛剛法務部也提了，不是只有臺灣，國外所謂的個資基本上的要件也是去識別化，要識別到某一個個人這才是個資，定義就是這樣的情況。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "當然去識別化本身是一個法律的用言，當時要處理的部分是因為我們有一個個人資料保護法，個人資料保護法裡面有一些法律的責任，包含了刑事的責任，去識別化是法律的用言，同時還有非常多的專業技術層面的問題，所以以這樣涉及到法律的處理，我們有幾種方式，一種方式是我們就用抽象名詞各自處理，我們認為各自去處理的結果，從一個規範的角度來講並不是一個最好的規範，因為不確定的規範本身同時也是讓大家無所適從，因為根本不知道如何做，各個部會說用去識別化找到的方式，這樣的成本是更高的，對於整個社會的角度來講，我們也不認為這是一個好的方向，既然你要有一個規範，我們應該要讓這個規範本身有一個可確定性，一個各自表述的規範，對於整個社會的好方式，所以我想先讓大家瞭解說為什麼我們積極推動這一件事，我們希望有一個規範，這個規範是可確定，大家也可以預期到如果沒有這樣一個可確定規範的話，將來到法院去的話，法官也不是這個專業，個案上又要花很多司法資源再去認定這個到底是或不是。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "所以，我們如果回來從這樣的角度去思考的話，去識別化本身既然是一個法律的條件跟科技、技術層面的問題，我們是不是應該要來思考在當下，因為科技不斷地進步，這並不是只有在去識別化這一件事，不斷有科技進來，我們必須要不斷跟上科技，我想醫療也一樣，有不斷新的治療方式出現，但我們只能從當下最可能、最合理的方式找到去識別化的方式，如果在那個當下，這個機構、這個個人已經做了這一件事，我們還有沒有必要讓他去坐牢？這是我們要思考的問題，我們還有沒有要讓他負法律的責任？如果接下來要不要用其他的方式來處理一些例外的情況，例如它已經盡到我們已經期待他已經盡到合理義務的話，我覺得從法律的規範來講，我們做這一件事有兩個意義，一個是去識別化本身有涉及到非常多技術層面的問題，各個部會去做這一件事不是最好的政策、策略，並不是讓法官無所適從來認定是否已去識別化，這麼高層面的方式一定要仰賴一個機構此方式是否在當下已經合理盡相當的注意義務所採行的方式，因此，我們才會說有一個第三方，並不是各個機關自己說已經做好了，而是由第三方專業學術來驗證說這以當時的技術來講是合理可行，而且從法律的評估上是我們覺得在法律的責任處理上已經可以被接受的方式，所以我想今天我們就在尋找當下是什麼樣的方式，我們認為如果擁有這一些資料用這樣的方式去處理，已經從我們的價值判斷來講，它已經是可以被接受而不需要用法律的責任來處理，但是用其他的方式，大家可以思考，然而就法律的處理上我們應該要有比較清楚的規範，這是我想跟各位說明一下。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "K匿名法是其中一個方式，接下來衛福部跟內政部會去嘗試其他的方式，理論上去識別化也不只是只有一種方式，在剛剛討論的方式當中，不同的DATA BASE應該有不同的方式，如果有第三方認證的機構同時一起在認證的過程裡面驗證這樣的方式，我相信對於將來到司法體系裡面再處理的時候，也應該可以有一個比較好的依循，我希望社會在這個事情上有限的資源、費用及成本上一起來處理這個問題，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "今天謝謝大家，也非常謝謝線上的1,200位朋友，謝謝！" } ]

[ { "speaker": "Stephan Vincent", "speech": "Good evening everyone and welcome to SuperPublic Paris. I’ll just say a few words for some of you who are discovering this venue for the first time. First of all thank you to Personal Democracy Forum for having chosen SuperPublic for organizing this evening and to Audrey Tang who we’ve had the pleasure of spending the day with. Just a few words in French and then we’re going to pass over into English. My name is Stephan Vincent. I direct an association called the 27eme région and with others we founded this place one and a half years ago. The place is called SuperPublic because it’s dedicated to innovation in the public sector and more broadly political innovation and democratic innovation. Some of the people who work in this place are here permanently, others are more transitory. They are all very devoted people in the area of transformation of the public realm. We organize conferences, workshops and trainings here. So we’re very very happy to host this evening and to welcome Audrey. Clémence will now say a few words about the purpose of this evening." }, { "speaker": "Clémence Pène", "speech": "Thank you Stephan I’m going to continue speaking in French for the moment. My name is Clémence Pène and this is the director of La Netscouade Matthieu Lerondeau. Together we organize the Personal Democracy Forum (PDF) in France, a conference that’s taken place for the last 5 years. It’s an American conference that’s organized in New York each year in June that’s been running for about 10 years. I’d like to let you know it’s a conference with people who still believe that the Internet can change the world and in fact in 2016 I have the feeling that in Civic Tech this belief is becoming quite fashionable once again." }, { "speaker": "Clémence Pène", "speech": "As far as this is concerned we will meet you on the 10th of June at the Gaîté Lyrique for the yearly conference of PDF France and this evening we’re going to launch a call for pitches. For the first time we’re going to pitch Civic Tech startups. So thank you very much to SuperPublic!" }, { "speaker": "Matthieu Lerondeau", "speech": "Thank you. I am Matthieu Lerondeau, director of La Netscouade. We support and contribute to the organization of the Personal Democracy Forum every year for nearly 5 years at the opening of the Futur en Seine festival." }, { "speaker": "Matthieu Lerondeau", "speech": "For those of you who don’t know Audrey yet. Forgive me for saying that Audrey pretty much became a star of these days in France. For those of you who haven’t met her at the event “Nuit des Idées” (Night of Ideas) it took place on Jan 27th. For those who haven’t seen the excellent documentary “Tous les Internet” on Arte and Claire Richards paper at the end of September 2015 I will give some very simple and short introductory words." }, { "speaker": "Matthieu Lerondeau", "speech": "Audrey Tang at 12 years old became a a self-taught programmer and pretty much decided to leave school to code. She created her first start-up at 15 and defines herself today as a retired. That is definitely a young retired person. There are other different and interesting other things: She is notably a conservative anarchist. I would like you (Audrey) to explain what you mean by that." }, { "speaker": "Matthieu Lerondeau", "speech": "Also and probably more important for us, people from civic tech in France and all of us civic designers, she is someone who reinvents tools to reinvent democracy. Just to finish up and let you start with your talk I also want to say a few words about g0v." }, { "speaker": "Matthieu Lerondeau", "speech": "You joined this group of civic hackers in Taiwan and definitely played a very transformative role during the year that was defining the new politics in Taiwan. The year of 2014 during the Sunflower Movement gave rise to an entirely new breed - you could say - of open government. So we are very happy to have you here today and thank you for giving us the opportunity to have this conversation." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Thank you so much. I am very happy to be here and to spend more than two hours with you. I love this SuperPublic place because it feels like I am speaking with you, not at you. It’s like I am looking at this screen just like everyone else." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I would like to talk a little bit about the format of tonight. Because this is actually four different talks that talk about g0v and about the g0v way of civic hacking. It also is about the sunflower movement which is how we occupied the Congress or the Parliament for 22 days. We will also talk about the so-called post-sunflower politics in Taiwan. Because I don’t know which of those four or five different topics are actually what everybody is interested in, I propose I just go on with my slides and anybody could just raise your hand or just start to speak out without raising your hand." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You can speak in english or french. I will try to understand french and if needed we have excellent interpreters here. We can use the slides as material for discussion and I will just doodle something on the slides. And when people generally look bored I will just fast-forward that particular part of the slides. Like that people can talk about whatever they would like to talk about. Is that ok with you guys? (General noding.) Cool." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The facilitator wants me to talk a little about the “conservative anarchist”. This actually is a very mundane idea. I joined the internet back in 1992. At the time the political system that defined the internet was the Internet Engineering Task Force. Anyone could join, there were no credentials,… People didn’t have voting, kings or rulers. People just sat together or wrote on mailing-lists and they got a rough consensus of where the Internet is going. This was mandatory for the internet because if people - with my computer and your computer - don’t agree on the protocol with which computers talk with another there is no Internet, right? So people have to arrive at some sort of consensus and you cannot really coerce anybody to do innovation. It’s an oxymoron." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So the idea of the internet is that the people innovate however they like, and then they try to convince their peers or neighbors that this is a good idea. If they convince their neighbors their neighbors adopt the same protocol. Then the internet upgrades with more useful kind of protocols like the World Wide Web. So that is how anarchy is by definition. That is how the early thinkers of anarchy define it und put it into practice around the 70s and 80s." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "“Conservative” also has a very mundane definition. There is a tradition that is generally good and worth protecting. And as the world changes we try to adjust the tradition very slowly to not break what already has worked before but have it adapt to the current world. That is what conservativism is." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So a “conservative anarchist” therefore knows that the anarchism model has worked since the 70s and tried to keep the same anarchist model that defines the Internet and try to keep it working in different areas and endeavors of human history and of human society. So this is the kind of anarchism that I try to conserve. As you can see this is very much an everyday thing. This is not radical, it is just a way of living." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Central to the idea of the internet brand of anarchism is the idea of “fork”. People who are working as coders or hackers may recognize this word. This word means basically that on the Internet it is free to duplicate somebody else’s projects and somebody else’s designs. “Free” is meant in two different ways: First at no cost or at very little cost. Then again when people relinquish the copyright you don’t have to ask permission. We call that “forgiveness of permission”. So if you see a website or an internet protocol that doesn’t work entirely to your liking you can fork it meaning that you take the same program, you run it on your computer and you change a few things so it works differently. That means you don’t eliminate what has come before but you take it to a different direction. If you also make your modifications public, as early Internet hackers always did, then the original people will become the upstream people. The people you get the fork from may decide to take your contributions. This is how science advances." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is how the early internet lawmakers released the internet laws by forking each others programs. When I say law I don’t mean jurisdiction, I mean physical laws because the internet protocols, the laws that define what is possible and what is not possible. That is what physical is. So what I will do is share four or five different stories about how we applied this kind of anarchist internet oriented way but put it to governance which has not been a domain where it has been applied before. So that is about today’s talks and again feel free to interrupt me if I’m talking too fast or with too much jargon. Just interrupt me and we will have a discussion." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So I am @audreyt (referring to the Twitter account on slide 2) and this slide is under Creative Commons and already on my Twitter account. People can download it and join the discussion perhaps on Twitter. I just arrived two days ago to Paris and I came from Taiwan which is seven hours in the future. So I’m literally from the future and I am almost done with the jet lag adjustment. So I am very happy to be here and talk about what I have been doing, as the moderator has introduced already, since my retirement in 2013 which is two and half years ago." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Before my retirement I worked in the IT industry for 20 years (referring to slide 3). It’s not a early retirement really, it is just that I started very early. Then I still do consulting work with Apple. I have been working with the theory team on computational linguistics for the past five years, with Social Text Facebook for the enterprise. I also worked with the academics and the dictionary people in the new OUP (Oxford University Press) and with government sector people in the Taiwan National Development Council. But most importantly I work with them not for them. By working on projects that are located in the third sector which means the voluntary sector meaning that the people I work with choose to donate their time and effort and energy to work on the dictionary which I’ll talk about or the vTaiwan rule-making platform which I will also talk about. The result of those two projects, because they are open source, we relinquish our copyright. That is actually how I prefer to work with them. People in the first sector and in the second sector usually just harvest the outcomes and improve their own service and products." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Also as introduced I learned programming when I was eight. It was 1989 (slide 4) and I got my first computer in June. Some other thing happened in Beijing in June that year. My father actually visited Beijing in his capacity as a journalist for the first time. So he actually covered the protests all the way until I think June 1st. He flew back to Taiwan fortunately." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then he also went on a dispatch to Berlin later that year and again something happened that year (the wall fell). The point here is that in Taiwan we lifted off our martial law that year. The first presidential election was 6-7 years after that. So the democratization began exactly the same year as the internet or as personal computers did which means that digital natives were the first generation who could actually participate politically. This creates an entirely different dynamic compared to what we see in older democracies because (in those countries) digital natives commonly were apathetic to politics or not interested in mobilization or things like that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In Taiwan this is completely the opposite. The first generation who got on the internet are also the first generation who could protest and who were getting arrested. That’s the background. I lived in Germany for a year and a half because my dad was doing his PhD at the time and was studying the dynamics of the Tiananmen movement in Beijing because a lot of people associated with the movement flew to Paris and to Germany. So we did a lot of interviews and debates with them and we talked about how to do democratization in a way that doesn’t end violently. So that’s my childhood." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When I came back to democratized Taiwan I quit school because in 1994 the World Wide Web (WWW) was launched. I discovered that I could work with the scholars and researchers over the WWW. Because they were also new to the WWW everybody was very enthusiastic. So we worked on a lot of projects and they don’t have to know that I’m only 13 years old. So then for the next 20 years I worked on a lot of free open source software projects I think only the most geekiest of the audience will recognize. I think the Wikipedia is what people will know about. Those projects have something in common. They all create a space that is relatively safe for people to experiment, to write and share what they have. It’s okay to fail, it’s okay to do mistakes or fauxpas or whatever. Because it is a safe space and open source people eventually learn from each others experiences and mistakes and eventually get into something very valuable for the humanity as a whole like Wikipedia." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is my colleague Lu Chia Hua (Slide 6) who said: “Behind every technology, there is a set of values informing its pursuit.” Personally (Slide 5) my value was just to build a safe space for people to learn from each other and build something that’s workable. So that is about me." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In Taiwan in early 2013 the usage of Facebook has reached about 90%. People online were using Facebook. People used the internet also around something like 85%. This is a lot of people. There is this prediction that by the end of this decade there will be more Taiwanese on Facebook than the population of Taiwan because some people have more than one Facebook account. So this is a very highly networked place." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So naturally wired I did a report on this and then asked one of the leading political thinker and writer and also heavy FB user Zhang Dachun about his take of FB and if we can improve civic engagement. He said: “No, it just feels as if we have participated. We can very easily get tens of thousands of likes but if you want to mobilize people to go to some place then only maybe10 people will go because people were lazy on FB. Anything that requires more than a minute of your time they won’t do it.” So you have to think of something practical that only costs a few seconds to make a civic impact. So we have to describe g0v with just one short sentence. We are a movement that tries everything to create a way for lazy people to engage in real action. That is the g0v motto." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is a campaign we did a year and a half ago. We made a captcha. I assume everybody knows what a captcha is. It’s a way to prove you’re not a robot. It’s not going to work after last year where a robot solved it better than humans. Until recently it could tell whether you’re a robot or a human. Then we made a captcha where people would just type that they are here and click enter. This maybe takes just five seconds of people’s time. So it’s good for lazy people. But this website that we built said that you’re saving the country by participating in this captcha. That is because those numbers came from the campaign finance records because the taiwanese Campaign Finance Law law was defined in the era of Xerox printers. It says one has to file all the campaign donations and to where the campaign finance has been sent. All this is kept in paper form in this building. Everybody can go in and do a Xerox copy with a watermark to make sure that the tally (record) is not wrong." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But there is no digital download, you can’t download a spread sheet, there is no transparency law because the law was made before the internet. This makes sense, right? But after the internet people keep proposing bills like: “Now we should make it downloadable and digital and so on.” But if there is one stakeholder that will be negatively impacted by this proposed change it is the lawmakers. Even though the bill is always scheduled in the parliament it’s never voted on. It has been going on like that for years. So it is to the benefit of everybody except to the lawmakers." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So we decided to do it ourselves. That means we bring people to the building and make the copies. We used a A4 paper because that is the only paper they have. We printed the records in a 3 to 3 double sided way so on every paper we can bring 9 records out and then we digitally scanned it and then we asked people to digitize it into spreadsheets so that we can do real analysis on it instead of just confirming that the corrective body is doing their analysis correctly which was the only thing they could do when using the paper format." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now if you try to digitize a page, I tried it, it may take you 3-5 minutes which is larger than the so-called natural limit on facebook. So if we call people to help with digitizing nobody we will come. We know because we tried. Then we made it into a game. We used open cv, a computer vision library, to split it into … which is what we call bite-size tasks. Now this one only takes five seconds." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Making it into a game the key in doing this is: If people have played Farmville or Candy Crush or things like that on FB, if you add a countdown timer and a progress bar and badges people will do whatever you want. They will spend the whole night digitizing those single cells as long as it takes them only five seconds and they get an instant reward “Thank you for saving the country”. Also it would mention: You know thousands of people are playing like you. We had designers who designed everything very prettily." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Slide 16: So the first batch that we brought out which is more than 30 thousand records was digitized by 9700 people within 24 hours. Each cell has at least three people looking at it and three people agreeing. So we are reasonably sure that our digitization of the finance record is ok and people feel like they’re saving the country and they are spending less time than posting a picture on facebook. So this is a win-win situation." }, { "speaker": "Question", "speech": "Were all the participants from Taiwan?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Actually no. They were from all over the place. I think 90% were from Taiwan. Because it only requires a very rudimentary OCR processing and you can even skip all the chinese and only help digitize the numbers. So international participants were also among us." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So it’s crowdsourcing but in a very grass-roots way. There is no assignment, there is no personal top-down authority and everything is in the open. So when people from the opposing party questioned this process, we say this is the open source scientific process. You can just download it on your computer and re-run everything to make sure that we are kosher. The corrective yuan, the auditing organ, then issued a press release saying that you cannot be 100% sure because they are bound to be errors. All the three people could have made the same mistake and how do you guarantee that this will be 100% correct. We said okay: “If you pass this legislation you can only release data that is 100% correct.” So this strategy kind of worked actually. They are now changing the rules as of this election cycle." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This changed the dynamic of the civic society with the government. This is not petitioning and not demonstrating. This is demonstrating in a different way. This is a demo, a demonstration of how it may work. And when the government likes it, it just takes it. So now that we have a completely digitized the records of campaign financing we can create tables and correlate their portfolio with the declared donors and the owners behind those donors. Also their is a legislator voting guide (slides 17-20) which correlates all the council members in each district and in each county and their suggested construction budgets and correlates them with their campaign finance records." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So there is a lot of very interesting things that could be done with this sort of raw data when correlated with other data. This actually really changed the voting behavior. The first version we posted had more than half a million people visiting. Under every precinct there is a discussion board so people could just post additional material, they would say something like: There are 22 candidates in my region. After reviewing this website I only have to choose between two. Things like that worked really well. We all see the party finances and so on." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is not only limited to crowd-sourcing politically. After getting help from the international community we gave help back to the international community. There was this earthquake in Nepal. If you look at Google or Apple maps the only street-level maps are around Kathmandu and the connecting roads. The very small roads - the country roads - were not mapped by street cars because cars don’t drive on them. There is a lack of mapping around that area. After the earthquake everybody needs the mapping otherwise the UN and other relief organizations couldn’t send the supplies to the regions in need. The open street map team worked with g0v and the humanitarian teams in other countries. It is a very international effort to digitize in the same way we did for the campaign finance records. They divide the maps into very small map areas. If you are mapping the first time you receive a very small area. You mark one of the circles: o Is the road broken / o Is there a building / …" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then using the satellite images within 24 hours the mapping was completed and experts reviewed it. For the first time the satellite company donated the imagery on the first day after the earthquake. For the next 24 hours people concentrated on the post-quake images. So on the third day when the supplies actually came they had a real map reflecting which roads were broken and where camps were set up. So it really helped the relief. We can do this in Taiwan. We don’t have to fly all the way to Nepal. Taiwan made up maybe 10% of the mappers because we did a lot of outreach and instructions on how to map it. The president elect also helped a lot in promoting this behavior." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This actually points out how g0v works. It is by uniting three kinds of people who don’t actually work much together in Taiwan or anywhere in the world. We started with the free software people who don’t usually care about public matters. Then we just introduce this idea of the hands-on and fix things you don’t approach. That gained our trust with the social activists who share the same value. But then this doesn’t scale. You have to get the message out to make it cool to participate in this kind of thing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So we need the civic media like the bloggers or the Wikimedians. Again those people share something with us because they do trust strangers. The key of doing open source is that you trust random people on the internet to help you digitize maps and things like that. This is what Civic media is especially good at and which the traditional social activists are especially bad at. This is very interesting because these three groups of people each like something that the other two other groups of people could provide. Just by organizing things in a way that lets people learn from each other eventually helped converge into something like the digitizing of the campaign finance records which was started by somebody in the Civic media, a very famous blogger. He has this very cynical way of writing about things because he says the country is helpless and hopeless. Then we brought him to our hackathons and proved to him that if you just trust the strangers we can let the internet to do the job." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "If you just trust the strangers you can get the internet to do the jobs you want done." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "g0v (”g0v”, the Taiwanese civic tech community) has a hackathon every other month that has 100 to 600 people. It’s a very large hackathon. And every OTHER month, there’s a smaller one that’s about 50 people - but still, a lot of people. And then practically every weekend, there’s a smaller one with maybe 5-10 people working specific on a project." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So our large hackathons are just ways for people to start new projects, like an incubator project. We meet at this large venue and when you join for the first time or for any time, there’s a bunch of stickers on a table (slide 25) and you can choose whether you specialize in maybe agriculture or music or a tax jurisdiction or any kind of programming language, and then people take those stickers and put them on their shoulders…." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is about playing musical chairs. At the beginning of the hackathon everybody with an idea goes on stage and presents (sometimes with powerpoint) their idea for three minutes. And they would say, ”I want to make a public finance report website. I would need two coders, one designer, and one storyteller for this task.” Usually there are about 20 projects for each hackathon, many of them new projects that people have never heard before. Then we play musical chairs. With stickers, one can see at one glance that this corner of open space already has their staffing of engineers, so other engineers go to some other groups. So people introduce themselves and just join whatever projects they find interesting that still have vacancies." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "And usually a lot of first timers - those deer-eyed people - would stand around and don’t know where to go. People with the bear badge (experienced hackathon participants) would walk up to them and then walk with them very slowly and ask things like ”What’s your hobby? What things do you care about?” and by the end of the walk, they will find themselves in a project." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So this is a very interesting way for people to discover each other’s project and then participate in it. And then people work for an entire day and sometimes two days and by the end of the day every project takes five minutes to present what they have done that day and usually they have a prototype, and they will say ”Let’s meet online at some Slack or chat room” or ”Let’s meet every Friday” or something to make this actually complete." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So this kind of incubation project means, basically, even if I’m already involved in a lot of long-term projects, for one day every other month I forget everything about my existing projects and make myself available to the opportunity of new projects. And of the 20 projects every month maybe 15 will not survive to the next month - maybe they will prove to not be a good idea or they will lack the necessary expertise. Because all the projects are required to be open source or Creative Commons, all the failed projects then become then materials for the next months’ projects that then build on their basis." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So that’s how a lot of ideas, social enterprises, longterm projects, crowd-funding projects, etc., came about in this kind of open space. And because we don’t have an agenda - it’s an unconference - you can meet people from all walks of life. It used to be more than half engineers and designers but now we’re less than 25%. We now have social activists, lawyers, civil servants, everybody…." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "One of the codes of conduct we follow in the hackathon is called: “Less is more.” This is another way of saying “worse is better”. The worse is better philosophy is especially needed in the East Asian context because people care a lot about face. People don’t really want to throw something that ugly that’s incomplete or that’s shameful or something like that. In g0v we started saying “worse is better”. you don’t think about your face and we demonstrate this as the “zero” (slide 26) in the word hackathon." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The logo of the g0v were designed by two brilliant hackers and top class coders who absolutely suck at design. I am very sure that everybody here can design a better logo than this. They literally only took five minutes or maybe five seconds to put this together. I think this was done with notepad or something. This is a very ugly logo and they had the guts to just print it out on a A1 large sheet of paper and hang it up just like this in the Sinica Academy in an open space for everybody to see. Then a magical thing happened a visual designer Even Wu looked at it and then tweeted that \"looking at this ugly logo hanging here if I don’t work on improving it I will lose my productivity for a day or maybe a week. I become so upset.\" 
(see image: https://medium.com/@audrey.tang/lessons-i-ve-learned-32f5d8107e34)" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I guess it made him furious (laughing). After a day of work he came up with this (middle) which is better, right? This is like talking and chatting and voting. It is a little bit better. But then because he also relinquished the copyright other designers could also improve it. They then decided that this is good on laptops but on phones it is not really identifiable. The small dot is not visible, it is often mistaken for “Q”. So we had to register the gqv.tw domain because went to the wrong domain. Then a better design eventually emerged. We can just use the zero as in g0v.tw as our main and visual identity." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "With not being afraid of losing face bringing up this ugly design and other visual designers involved non of these developments would have happened. Without relinquishing our copyright it is not possible to build on each other’s work. This becomes kind of the rallying cry and the culture of g0v. It is just whatever you have, even it is a hand-writing, a mock-up, you don’t have to know coding, you do not have to know design, you just through it out and people will get upset enough and join your team and improve your work. So that’s what g0v’s organization is about." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Before I go on to other projects is there anything people want to talk about, any comments, thoughts?" }, { "speaker": "Question", "speech": "What do people work on during the hackathons?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The subjects? This is a very good question. Re g0v I think the primary innovation is our domain name g0v.tw. All the government websites in Taiwan end with \"gov.tw\". In France it is “gouv.fr\" It is the same idea. So for example for the environmental agency it is env.gov.tw. Now on your browser if you change the “o” to a “0” (zero) you get into the shadow government. That is g0v version of the environmental agency that shows exactly the same data as the environmental agency but with much better visualization and open data. It is a better version of the environmental agency. The same is with the parliament, the legislative organ of the taiwanese government. If you change the “o” to a “0“ you get into the shadow government site of the parliament. It shows exactly the same bills. It is featured as a progress bar like a shopping cart: where the bill is coming from, who is signing the bill, who are the legislators and then they are cross-referenced to their campaign finance and voting records and things like that. So to answer your question: The topics of the subjects are as diverse as the third level domains of the Taiwan government which is everything. It is agriculture, it is education, … you name it. Whenever people want to do something as alternative to the government website, they can then register a domain that is the same as the government. Nobody has to remember those domain names anymore because everybody knows how to reach g0v you just change the “o” to a “zero”. So I think that’s the first hack that we did." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It also says that we are completely inclusive because the government by definition concerns all the walks of Taiwan life or any people’s life. so people who care about the particular part of the government can do innovation around that function. I hope I answered your question." }, { "speaker": "Question", "speech": "How does the government react?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "My next talk is the one I am personally involved in. It is the educational shadow dictionary. They reacted very slowly but positively. After the Occupy (Sunflower Movement) they reacted very swiftly and very strongly. That will be the other talk. Generally there reaction is a positive one." }, { "speaker": "Question", "speech": "Is it open source? What tools do you use?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We use GitHub Pages a lot for server hosting. For most of these pages even though they have half a million views we don’t pay a dime. There is no cost in setting these kinds of things up. Joining g0v is a way to learn about all the free spaces in the internet. We had to use mostly free of charge services because otherwise when you fork my project you have to pay an additional cost which excludes a lot of people out. So by definition we use only tools that cost nothing." }, { "speaker": "Stephan Vincent", "speech": "Maybe a short comment about trying to compare our local context. Here in Paris and especially across France we have a lot of actors doing bits and bites of what g0v has succeeded to do. I am thinking of names most of you already know thinking of Regard Citoyen who made an outstanding job in forcing the parliament into more transparency and thinking of OKFN (Open Knowledge Foundation), OSM (Open Street Map) and Voxe." }, { "speaker": "Stephan Vincent", "speech": "What strikes me is that they never managed to attain the kind of visibility and the kind of crowds that you’ve obviously managed to gather in Taiwan. So do you have a clue about how you have managed to have so many bloggers and citizens involved?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I think the most important thing is to meet face to face every month in a place that accommodates hundreds of people. This is like a really old organisation tip. Maybe the groups you mentioned already do some of that. But I think the thing was that at one g0v hackathon of 150 people maybe 100 people are the first time there or the second time. They are not very well versed. Basically we went viral very easily by incorporating newcomers every month which essentially doubles the size or the outreach of the existing hacker community in g0v. People who already form long-term projects they would at least send one delegate to the g0v hackathons to both recruit new members and also see what synergies they could play with other people. I think this is really not about Internet but more about just organisation 101. So for 100 people it is Accademia Sinica, a research Institute in Taiwan. For the 50 people people of the smaller hackathons it is someplace very much like the Superpublic (France) actually." }, { "speaker": "Question", "speech": "Who comes to the hackathons?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In addition to the weekly small meet-ups and the monthly hackathons we also do a summit every two years. For the summit we pay for the airfare and flight. Many from across the world joined in 2014. There is …, the Pirate Party people from Germany, OKFN from France, the New Zealand Code For All, all the usual suspects. They come to Taiwan and learn about the local context. I think the most important thing was that they introduced the agenda they had planned for their year and then it becomes part of the routine in your monthly hackathons. So we keep thinking about what kind of ties we can strengthen - usually with tools, sometimes with procedures, and sometimes also with policies we can talk about with other international people. This year on May 14th and 15th is our next g0v summit. Vox will be there, Pandemos and a lot of European people." }, { "speaker": "Question", "speech": "Where do you find money? Do you take donations?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, we do take donations. Our primary cost is very high quality food. A month after a hackathon you won’t remember any of the people or the projects by you will remember the food. If the food is very bad or very good it gives a lasting impression. This is true internationally. I think I read a comparison study about the occupy movement. It makes or breaks based on the occupy food station. I think it is an exaggeration but it is also somewhat true. In any case we spend a lot of money on food. So we do take donations and the donations gets you a guaranteed ticket because especially for the slightly smaller venues like 50 people or maybe 90 people usually the tickets sell out in a matter of hours. So people would have two ask for transfer tickets and things like that. So we keep increasing the value but then if you donate something like €30 you get a guaranteed ticket for the hackathon." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Also we only ask for money that is exactly equivalent to the cost of food and the mandatory infrastructures for the next months. We don’t keep any cash." }, { "speaker": "Question", "speech": "Is it not excluding a part of the population?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The idea of unconference or hackathon or things like that has actually nothing to do with internet. It has its roots in Nonviolent Communication, Open Space Technology,… all these things were pre-Internet things. People were given a space, a timeframe and the option to do whatever they want. This is sort of anarchist self-organization kind of stuff. So our root activist or core activist groups are people of the older generation who did this kind of stuff or at least took this kind of training and learnt nonviolent resistance in the early days of Taiwan where we still had martial law and things like that. I think there were a lot of things that people were not joining because of a lack of familiarity with the tools." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "For example I insist on using something like pen and paper because it is much more familiar with people who are not digital-natives. Also we use very large digital whiteboards but it could be used in a way like people who used to use white boards in their Nonviolent Communication trainings and things like that. We try to transport the same kind of organization that people did in the pre-Internet days but by making the off-line space as comfortable as possible to the paper generation of people. Then because we also organize live video and transcripts and digital representations of everything that’s analog we also make the young people aware of what the earlier generation is doing. This may not be an entirely satisfactory answer but this is our core way of operating." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Let’s move to the next part. This is an example of one of the first projects and the one that got me into g0v two months after its founding. Moedict “Moe” meaning very cute. It is a very cute dictionary with a very cute logo. The dictionary, first published online thirty years ago, has already became the only real tool of the primary school level Chinese education in Taiwan where people and teachers especially in rural or remote island areas where they don’t have the same access to libraries and museums. They take their students to the computer lab and use Moedict to teach Chinese. Chinese as spoken in Taiwan, there is mandarin, there’s traditional simplified Chinese, taiwanese … There are very different ways of talking Chinese in Taiwan. Because of new migrants we have Holo, Haka, Amis, Indonesian languages and so on. We also have aborigines who are enjoying a surge of the rediscovery of their own language. There are other Austronesian languages also because of the large influence of Tibetan Buddhism. We have people interested in Tibetan. It’s a large dictionary with a large cross-reference to all the languages that are spoken in Taiwan. It’s been used all around of Taiwan too. The point of doing this dictionary was very typically for g0v." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When I joined the project which was initiated by 葉平, who was a physics professor in the National Taiwan University and then joined Google. He became the head at Google and Taiwans cloud department and then he moved to the valley to work for Google Analytics I think. When he moved to the valley with his children he found it very difficult to teach his children Chinese in the US. It is a very common problem. Teaching Chinese is hard enough and doing that in the US is very difficult." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When we learned Chinese online we used this gopher site which was this pre-world wide web protocol which I’m sure not many are aware about. We used to use this online dictionary that was built by the Ministry of education. Nowadays his children don’t use gopher anymore. The generally only use the mobile devices and the official Ministry of Education doesn’t really have a mobile friendly website. That makes the job extra difficult. … said “ok, I’ll just download everything from the official dictionary website and will redo it with an open API so that people can use it to make mobile websites or whatever they want to do with it. Actually we have done this over the years personally but because it’s violating copyright we never make public of the fact that people have been doing this individually." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When g0v came about, 葉平 said: “Okay, if the 30 people are doing it together then it is called civil disobedience.” It’s not called copyright violation and then it became kind of a legitimizing movement. Then we called people to download the dictionary which is very old. Since 1945 it has been maintained and is of very high quality. If you want to learn about classical Chinese which is like Latin then this is the to-go-to dictionary. Because its website was built in 1996 and hasn’t been updated for 20 years, it reflects a lot the early web. For example you cannot bookmark the URL because then the idea of bookmarking wasn’t invented yet. For example it used a very old legacy encoding. It is like ISO AA59 with which a lot of Unicode characters just cannot be displayed, so they use pictures. That means copy and paste is not possible. Also it hasn’t been designed for the mobile web because then there was no mobile web. If you view the source especially with IE5 or with Netscape 4.7+ (the plus is meaningless because Netscape didn’t continue after 4.7). So it is a very old website that hasn’t been kept up with times. Also it locks you out after 30 minutes of disuse and something would pop out that says: “You are going to be redirected to the home page”. It is true for all the Ministry application dictionaries ever since. But the catch is that there is no login button. So you can’t login but it logs you out after an half hour. It’s ridiculous." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So 葉平 had a vision and then we had a collaborative tool which is like goodledoc which we call hackpad. So he wrote everything that needs to happen and then went to sleep. We then had our 100 people hackathon. People joined and crowdsourced and downloaded everything. Then I created a spread-sheet to list all the pictures so people could fill in their unicode. It brought down Google’s spreadsheet. It will become a pattern that whenever g0v mobilizes somebody, some project on a new platform, that platform will go down. So we are the scalability testers of new services. We had to create our own spreadsheet which is called Ethercalc 2 to complete this work. Within 24 hours everything is downloaded and made into an open API cross-linked to browser extensions, mobile web, everything. It’s like rough consensus. People just have a general direction and then share whatever they have." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But what about the copyright? A few years before we did this, the creative Commons people introduced a new creative commons devise called CC0. The CC0 plays nicely with the g0v. We were the popularizers of this idea. The zero means we abandon completely the copyright, there is not even an attribution right or anything. So it’s as if it enters the public domain the second we publish something. The reason why we do this is because we used a loophole in the Taiwan copyright law. It says a government publication, if it’s used in a non-profiting fair use doctrine, part of it may be reused without criminal penalties. But the problem fair-use is of course the question: “How much is too much?” We are using 100% of the data so we had to relinquish 100% of the copyright." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We are not doing derived work, we’re technically just converting formats for the government. So a complete reuse warrants a complete abandonment of copyright. We then argue under the Taiwan fair-use doctrine that this is fair-use. We are hundreds of people. This is really civil disobedience. Then we wait for the ministry to respond to your claim. While we are waiting for the Ministry we started to discover that when we make things like the PDF copies of the campaign finance records or the paper dictionaries into you know very fine-grained data we could start to build communities around that. This is the idea we call “social object”. For each word in the dictionary we now have a URL. For the chinese word meaning “data” the permanent link is www.moedict.tw/data\" So there’s no need to remember its web addresses. Its web addres is the word. itself" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "With that we can do what Tim Berners-Lee calls “Five-Star Data”. When you mouse over any word in the definition it would pop out using link data format whatever they could find in the same dictionary or in the wiki dictionary or in the open dictionary, anything that is linked to this word. People started sharing those words on Facebook, Twitter, Google+, and on social media. Now when people start writing something like this it is open data workshop. This is a word yet not found in the dictionary, we see a segmentation that shows the definition of “open” and “data” and “workshop”. Then we generate an open graph image that is a beautiful calligraphy of whatever word the person wrote. This solves a very important problem of Internet social media campaigners because it is very difficult to find a photo that fits your message that is also free of copyright. People usually spent an half an hour looking at the proper image because without an image it doesn’t get the same kind of shares in virality. Now people just type whatever they want and use that as a kind of banner for their message to improve virality. You would think caligraphic is not good enough for your message you can switch to any of those open fonts." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is how we get 7 million visits per month. This is not about people who want to look up a definition in the dictionary these are people who want to use it for creating banners, for protests and for campaigning and things like that. They want to share the message in a very clear way that kind of hacks the Facebook ranking system. A good thing about this is when they click into the definition they can share it again and again on social media. Now with 7 million visits per month we can now call people to action because even though our conversion rate is 0.1% that is still a lot of people. So whenever we put a call to action on the top right corner of the Moe-Dictionary thousands of people come. For example (showing to a slide) this is a aborigine … that was done in the 60s and all we have is this low quality scan. So again we do the same thing as with the campaign finance records. We split things into rows and ask people to type whatever they see. They don’t have to know french or amis they only have to type in Latin characters even if they don’t know the language. Then we finished a thick dictionary very quickly in 53 hours. Then we turned it into an additional dictionary for the aborigine people." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "People take pride saying we’re saving a culture just by typing random words into the internet." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The other project that we did was that the Ministry of Education, before they responded to our legal case, had their own exercise in asking people for corrections to the dictionary. That was a very good chance to demonstrate how we work. We had 18 days in that event. We wrote a program that looks at the citations in the dictionary where two entries site the same source. The fragment of the sentence they cite, the example, differ by only one word. These kind of things usually mean a typo when people were first digitizing it. One of the two citations has a typo. The program knows which one is different but it doesn’t know which one is correct. So we put a call to action for people to click on the search button which looks to Google to see whether it’s being used somewhere else in the dictionary or if it is just a typo. We identified more than 5000 typos this way just by crowdsourcing people to do this work. The ministry had received maybe 6000 typos and maybe 5600 were from the Moe-Dictionary." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This proves that we are not just consumers we are also contributors. We can do proofreading and we can do crowdsourcing. The Ministry of Education can decide if this is totally fair use because if they rule against us this not just ruling against 30 hackers or a 100 hackers they are ruling against thousands of people contributing to this way of reclaiming our language. This is a constituency that the Ministry of Education really cannot alienate. They very swiftly decided that this is a very good idea." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "To recap quickly: The way the ministry and committees in the pre-internet era worked was usually by coordinated consensus. People have to know everybody in the same committee and when a person joins they have to know everybody else also. The problem was the human wetware. After 20 or more people these people stopped having the same egalitarian relationship. Some people become just listeners, you start to have hierarchy and bureaucracy and things like that. The way we fixed this was by rough consensus. As I talked about that re the dictionary. Every dictionary language involves people whose language I don’t speak. So those indigenous groups they all just take whatever I built from Moedict or built from Moe-Dict then use it to apply to their own material. They don’t have to ask for our permission" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "And maybe they try something that is a good idea. Then those ideas become adopted by other language dictionaries. Because everything is open source, it is very easy for us to crosslink our outputs together. If some French dictionary tries something that’s really not a good idea they could still do that themselves. It is just that nobody else merged this kind of change. So this kind of rough consensus moves everybody generally toward the same direction and allows people who are usually enemies like competing for the dialect resources on education like the various dialects of Taiwanese like Hakka and things like that happen all over the world, they can now work not as friends but as collaborators by working on their own language and cherry picking each other’s good ideas and contributions." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So that is how we scale, not only among the dictionary hackers but also among the ministries with the dictionary sources. Because when they finally revised their website after 20 years they could now build on our Unicode mapping, they could build on our interface, they could build on our crowdsourced corrections so they don’t really have to spend that much of taxpayer money on infrastructure because the community has done that for them. They could then merge back our work. After two years after the Moe-Dict the Ministry of Education decided to open up all their dictionary data under creative commons license so we don’t even have to argue about fair-use any more." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Again we did the same thing with the Open Data Portal. We had an open data portal that really sucks. It’s data.gov.tw. So naturally we did data.g0v.tw where you can look at the same data, meta data, but it’s done in a very useful way and it allows contributions, feedbacks and open license. Then the National Development Council who is in charge of the Open Data Portal merged back our open data license which is unheard of in Taiwan. This has never happened in Taiwan, in any level of our government. They changed their open.gov.tw license to the open.g0v.tw license. That’s compatible with Creative Commons." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The net gain of this is that OKFN (Open Data Global Index) raised Taiwan from the 11th place to the first place. Because magically all the data that were not open by the open data definition were now open by the open data definition. That is a simple fork and merge thing again." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "For example the first g0v project was a visualization of the national budget. Using the PDF and Word files of the national budget we show them as a tree map, as a bubble map. If you click on it you can say you want more, you don’t understand, you want a cut, you want a deletion of this project, and people can have a discussion. If you click into it you see the raw details. Now the national government has not adopted it yet but the Taipei city government last year did. They published all their budget in the compatible g0v format. Then when people click on it and use their Facebook credentials to talk about the budget like: You say you build a stadium here, but I don’t see any construction, or my school needs repairing, or problems and things like that we’re just conversing over individual budget items as social objects. And much to their surprise after a month every office replied on this platform. They bypassed the city council entirely. They just replied to all the objective questions, they replied to the general feeling, they replied to the idea explaining why the budget is done this way. This was a very magical moment where the citizens in Taipei saw that whatever they type randomly on the Internet gets an official response from the city government. After this went over the national press all the other five major cities in Taiwan all signed on to this platform. It has now become just a regular thing in Taiwan politics. So that is again another case of merging the g0v with the community’s contributions." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That was again another 20 minutes. Any questions? So let’s go straight to the next section, which is about the other direction." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We have been talking about using civic technology to make government data more open, more transparent and more clear. But that is like only improving the bandwidth of the downloading speed of your Internet connection. So it is now 10 Mb per second. But you can still only upload two bits every four years. That’s voting. It is very asymmetrical, right?!

So the other part is about making citizens voices heard in a much more scalable way. Academically the problem was not that the government doesn’t provide sufficient information. It is that it only provides it to - I don’t want to say it - the lobbyists in the private sector. They are linked together, they have a natural synergy. They have their own industry chain. So any information that is valuable to them is also available to its vendors and its customers. It is very natural, that is how the private sector works. Then the civil society joins this kind of committee with individuals, scholars, committee members and so on." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The problem is that early-stage decisions don’t actually have the same accessibility to the people in the barricades - sorry - in the streets or the larger civic society. First it’s too professional. The scholars and academics are invited exactly because they could understand the jargon, the technical terms and all the the context that has been going on before and so on. These are not very easily understood by the general civil society. The next thing is that this not presented in a way that only cost one minute or five-minutes of people’s attention. It is the same problem that we talked in re to open data." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "If you cannot let be people know how relevant the information is to them in one minutes time then it’s not relevant to them then when they get impacted it’s already passed resolution. There is a fable about this in the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy which I will not repeat here. The idea is that it’s just too far away for ordinary people. This is a case which we kind of demonstrated. We called this the g0v sunflower digital camp because this is a demonstration of direct electronic democracy. People demonstrating to the parliament showed how should we talk about trade agreements. The sunflower movement is a prime example of the citizens not noticing anything until it’s too late." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The political context is this. China wants to sign a cross-strait trade agreement with Taiwan. It has very favorable terms because it has a political agenda and the Taiwan administration wants to sign. Many legislators don’t. There is a disconnect. Usually when we sign trade agreements with New Zealand or Japan or whatever other countries there is a process. The legislation sets up a committee, there is a public hearing,… the usual process. But because constitutionally in Taiwan Beijing is part of Taiwan and we haven’t changed our constitution yet, therefore as per the Taiwan constitution this is more like signing a pact with a domestic local city. And any administration pact with the domestic city government doesn’t have to go through the legislation - of course because otherwise the legislation would have to go through infinite things. So with this constitutional loophole the administration argues that the legislation has no say in this agreement because Beijing is part of Taiwan. Then they could sign whatever they want. The legislation could have a public hearing but after a 30 days of inaction it automatically passes because this is a city level domestic agreement." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now nobody really thinks of things this way, even the pro-unification people. This is entirely a constitutional loophole (J.Y. Interpretation #329). But because of this loophole the legislation is powerless. They said we don’t have the code of law that authorizes us to talk about this trade service agreement. So it becomes automatically passed after a certain number of days." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "On that night in the streets there was a large demonstration and I was supporting the internet connection for that demonstration. But before we talk about that particular night we can talk about a more evolved 2.0 form of that same platform which took place in Hong Kong a few months after that - this is Occupy Central, the so-called Umbrella Revolution. It’s called the world’s politest protesters - the same headline used for Sunflower movement." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I was in Düsseldorf at that time and I was typing into Twitter. There was this projector that projected into this Occupy Central building whatever people tweeted. People could feel that others are there. A journalist deployed in Hong Kong said the website of the occupy has got to be the most technological advanced in history. Then his friends said: Wait I have seen this website before. Then Chia-liang Kao (Slide 39) said, co-founder of g0v, this is forked form our git hub. Basically the logistic systems were forked from the Sunflower Movement, it is exactly the same code with some modifications. It provides the live broadcast, the mapping of the news and the logistics. The map shows in real-time to the barricades the police forces, the gathering points, the first medical aid sites." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There are a lot of rumors and there are the actual facts, there is a time-line, there is geographic information and there are cameras that the citizens have set up. People can watch four cameras at the same time and have a chat room next to each of it. Then there is a spreadsheet. Every column is a occupied place, every row is the supply that they need. Just looking at the spreadsheet you know how the occupy is going and what extra logistics and supply is being needed. This is a really nice system. This is what … called a situation or application." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "None of this is possible if you only use Facebook and Twitter and Google plus. This has been literally coded on the ground and every day we changed the code to adjust to the need of that day and then used it for the next day. During the occupy this entire system got rewritten a number of times. This prototype was first done in March that year (2013) for the anti-nuclear energy plant protest. We worked with the cable electricity radio g0v to provide the protesters a high-speed Internet link because the year before there were a lot of people - almost a quarter million. So we expected a lot of views for the media, for the Internet and so on. Fortunately on that day there was a large typhoon in Taiwan and only 1/10th or less turns up because it was just raining cats and dogs. So nobody used the internet." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So we had a lot of spare bandwidth to use. It occurred to us that we can just channel the SDI connection of the show on the stage and broadcast it on YouTube. YouTube Live was actually just introduced for general consumption only a few weeks before that. So we were one of the first users. Now we discovered that hundreds of people joined. We didn’t even announce this before hand because it was totally in the field. Quickly people because they felt guilty for not going on the streets because of the Taifun they crowded over the chatroom. Eventually there are more people there than people around the stage. We realized that this was something we could work on with exactly the same equipment." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "10 days after that there is the occupied parliament and we didn’t have to change the code. It was just deployed as is. But this is different because on the right-hand side, here (showing a slide), was the original protest where I thought I would just supply the internet connection. Some other people supplied the camera and protested for a night or maybe two days and then wanted to go home. That was the original plan." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "While I was doing this broadcast unbeknown to me the person, the student, lent me his laptop and said: “I’m not going to use my laptop anymore so use it for for the broadcasting station.” You look like an university student. What kind of university students says I don’t need my laptop anymore? Well the kind that climbs over walls. Well, because there too heavy the occupiers only use MacBook Air and anything that was heavier than that was left on the streets. Then they just crossed over the walls of the parliament building and then broke into it and occupied the parliament." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Nobody was expecting that and only one or two policemen were stationed there. They (the crowd) were therefore very successful in occupying. The first hour or so we had the camera crew who previously were supporting the anti-nuclear protest deploying their recording devices to capture the first batch of people who broke into the parliament. That footage proved to be very important because on the next day all the mainstream media said they (the occupiers) are mobsters, they damage things, they were junkers, … the usual mainstream media way of doing things. Because we had the live and the first hand footage it became very easy to show that that was not actually the case. For the next 20 days it became a show of force between the civic media and the mainstream media." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The civic media was based on the occupiers. They set up their own live broadcasting station using Ustream.Tv. The two sides of the streets were using YouTube Live. Using the same logistical system we asked whether anybody who couldn’t come to the protest would listen to one of the three feeds and type whatever they heard into this collaborative type hackpad. Then the people who know French or English or Arabic or whatever other languages then took this transcript and then put their translation work on this spreadsheet coordinating a translation task force. That is how people from abroad knew about this Occupy in real time and they could check with their eyes what is actually happening on the live stream and realize that they are actually doing what they are saying they’re doing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then we used a crowdsourced bookmark to collect anything and everything the civic media pertaining to this movement. The same designer who designed the g0v logo designed the Occupy logo. All this happened in the first 24 hours. The mainstream media didn’t have time. Therefore the first agenda setting power was set by the civic media. They were saying this was constitutionally absurd. We will retreat when the legislative body agreed to talk about this trade agreement the same way we talk about any other trade agreements. Unlike other occupies we had very narrow goal. It was very reasonable to most of the people because it was made very apparent in the first 24 hours. There was very little the mainstream media could do after that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now we ran into the same thing any occupy runs into namely there are a lot of people who spread rumors from people who were already there. Some of them were homeless people, some of them were not exactly homeless people but mobsters and people like that. All Occupy people ran into people like these. The way we fixed this was that when there were rumors spread for example that inside the occupied area they were being attacked by the police. This rumor was designed to get the people on the outside. Or another rumor: They were counter surrounding the police to attack the police and escalate the conflict. Then one of the student leaders had to come out and shout that were not actually being attacked. That doesn’t scale. What we did: I brought 300 meters of Ethernet-line for the CPR experts deploying on the team to make all the three occupy areas a intranet. So this is a very high-tech way of solving a very old problem of spreading rumors. Rumors spread because they were cheaper to spread than facts." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So if we made facts spread cheaper than rumors nobody will listen to the rumors. The way we did this is by introducing very low latency real-time broadcasting equipments and take a projector (beamer) like the one I am using now and project everything on the two walls of the Parliament. Everything that is happening in the parlament was being broadcasted in real time with just 20 ms delay to the two streets. People don’t usually listen to the audio. So we had asked stenographers, people who type whatever they hear, to cover what was said in the occupied area. The live feed of everything that was said was displayed. People could see very easily what is actually going on and people who listened to the broadcast could then correlate this and fact check with our stenographer so that they don’t miss anything. And if they miss anything they could just type it on the hackpad. This is an idea that we call the transparent war. Eventually the occupied area also had two projectors projecting the two streets. I was as if the wars were not there as if the police are not there. The three occupied sites become a single occupy site." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now the way we code, so to speak, is that we repurpose the idea of neutrality. We provide the service to uphold the constitutional right of communication. In the occupied area there are three neutral roles. The doctors protecting the health of both the police and the student protesters and everybody. There are the lawyers protecting the due process and we said we were the ICT people protecting the right to communicate. People were trapped there don’t have access to high-speed Internet and high speed internet is a human right. So we are just protecting that particular morale without having any particular agenda." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "On that day the Supreme Court ruled that flash mobs are legal. They don’t need a permit. Because of that we are asked the telecommunication company to have a 50 Mb high speed fibre-optic link to the streets. This was the first request to the streets that they have received. They granted it because they really also wanted to see the live video. Everybody else was watching the live video. We not only had the live Internet we also had the connection to the outside extranet and that enabled a lot more participation across the walls." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "On the 24th a bunch of students also decided to occupy the administration building which was a very bad idea. In any case they got repelled by the police. At that time we had our first cyber-attack on our subway infrastructures. Fortunately we only used tools that cost zero. All it takes is a name change of the domain to a different IP address. It goes online in an hour. We had a recovery plan. Re the physical occupiers of the administration we have people using an iPad and a YMax connection to take live footage of the entire process just like we did on the initial occupy of the parliament." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now there are two sides of the administration building. On one side all the police moving in here and all the students moving in there was kind of a stand-off, there was shouting, just some breaking of glass, but they were very civilized so to speak. But then this part with no live Internet, no live stream coverage with 1000 of people the police brutality was very brutal. We learned that people behave differently under camera. I’m sure everybody knows about it but we learned very painfully that this is really the case. After that it became a kind of top-priority for us to ensure not only the three occupy areas but practically every street corner in the occupied area and its vicinity that they are being filmed by a least three different angles and cameras. Of course we don’t have that much equipment. You would need hundreds of equipment." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "If you upload your photo and add your name it will print you a badge that says you are a reporter. This is useful because just a couple years ago there was a separate Supreme Court ruling that says the reporter is generally protected under the freedom of speech and then we had a QR code that links the badge to a ruling that says any ordinary people as long as they are covering something that is of interest to the general public must enjoy the same rights and permissions as any media institution. This is a very important Supreme Court ruling for us. Because of this we have hundreds of people just printing this and sticking it to the back of their IPad and becoming a civic journalist. The police couldn’t do anything about it. If they asked or they wanted to stop such people they would just tell the police to scan the QR code and read the Supreme Court ruling. That’s how we got a lot of in the field cameras and how after that date there were no injuries or nobody missing. It became completely non-violent." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "After people calmed down and there was no violence anymore we started to deliberate, to actually talk about the cross strait administration. The rallying cry was that if the legislators deliberate in this building we will demonstrate for them how to deliberate this kind of thing. How did we do this? We first wrote a program. This is a g0v project which has been going on for eight months and was just completed on the occupy day. Basically what it does is when you enter your company’s number or the kind of work that you do it shows with a pop-up with beautiful comics how exactly your company is going to be impacted once we sign this trade agreement - whether the Chinese people can come here, whether their investors can come here, for how long, it is like a three panel comics that everybody can understand in 10 seconds - just the part that relates to them. Because of that we also cross reference the information because we want people to fact-check us. The cross-links to our company registration categories, to the WTO categories, to the World Bank categories and then to the Chinese categories. So it is a lot of work but it is presented in a very friendly way." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Armed with this kind of data people started to deliberate, to really talk about which part of the agreement was good or bad. In the three occupied streets broadly speaking the separatists and independantists, the green people and the environmentalists, and the left people who would care about the worker’s rights - those are the three main concerns about this trade agreement. The trick is that these three people were not friends before the Occupy. They don’t usually talk to each other and there are a lot of schisms between those three camps are people. But because of the common interest and because of this deliberative framework and because whatever anybody said on one street is then transcribed and viewed on an another street people started getting more and more consensus by the end of the day. After the administration refused to meet with the student’s demands there was a massive protest and by that time everybody in Taiwan has seen our live broadcasts and transcripts. So on that day there was a half a million of people on the street - entire Taipei was full. When this many people came we had to find something useful from them to do. Depending on the side of the street they sat down with the environmentalists debating about the environmental impact. The leftist people started debating about the farmland, the farmer or about other kinds of impacts that this would eventually have and so on. And the separatists talked about the Constitution basically." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You can join any part and then just have a discussion which was then captured on the online forum. That’s how the occupy turned people who don’t usually speak to each other into a coherent rough consensus kind of crowd after 22 days. The legislative body - the head of legislative - eventually said: “Okay, we agree with whatever you said” and we just retreated very peacefully. That was the story of the Sunflower Movement." }, { "speaker": "Question", "speech": "About the international circulation of these tools. You mentioned Hong Kong. I am wondering how China reacted to this broadcast? Re Loomio - do you have relationships with South-America and Spain?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I think that there are three different layers. The process and the tools our international by definition. We don’t develop any of these, we just apply them. They got very valuable feedback. For example Hackpad went down five times because of the overcapacity. They had to buy a special cluster for g0v so it doesn’t impact their other paying customers. So there’s a lot of live feedback for crowd-testing like this. That improves the quality of the tools because those tools were just not tested at that scale before. That is the easy part. And the policy part on which I’ll talk about in my next talk which is the Uber-Part I think it has some kind of relationship also with the Europeans cities in particular where some kind of collaboration was possible. It is harder than just the tools. Of course there’s the power structure level which don’t usually collaborate in this manner. The idea of the g0v summit was to just make clear what is the agenda of the civic hackers for the next year. That doesn’t mean that always that aligns with the power level." }, { "speaker": "Question", "speech": "You have been traveling throughout the world basically. Do you have a concrete example about a collaboration with another country?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You mean besides Hong Kong, which may or may not be a country depending on who you ask?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We do have a lot of collaboration with the New Zealand people, the developers of Loomio. They always wanted some way of transforming … and not just having an inner group decision where everybody knows everybody which is a kind of coordinated consensus model where Loomio is proven to work. But it hasn’t proven to work with strangers." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The same issue pertains to the Seattle start-up called pol.is which I will talk about shortly. They’re trying to work with the New York Times to have people deliberate meaningfully on policies, but again with strangers or with celebrities who are effectively strangers. With these two we have the closest collaboration by developing both the theories and also running the experiments that will scale them from the individual uses in civil society to something that would comfortably appear on mainstream media and have people which only have five seconds to still engage in a meaningful way. That’s the main direction. Any other thoughts or questions?" }, { "speaker": "Question", "speech": "Do you know of any other movement that big in Europe?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "On that scale there is Podemos (Spain) which has a very comparable scale. At the beginning the Five Star Movement (Italy) had a very comparable scale especially on the city or governmental level too. I think what’s unique about the Sunflower Movement it is not really about civic technology. It serves only as an amplifier for everybody who is against this kind of policy-making and to show them an alternative. The campaign finance story you don’t see this kind of crowd sourced campaign finance digitization project in the UK or in Europe and in the US because they were already digital. They don’t need one hundred thousand people doing this work because the government is doing what the modern government should do. But on the other hand in say North Korea or other countries it doesn’t take 100,000 people. As long as you have 10 people you get imprisoned. It requires both a very active civic tech population and also a very not so modern stuck in the paper-era just recently democratized county or state apparatus. I think this is actually comparable to Spain to some degree. Unless you have this kind of power structure that is behind in time and you have a government versus a new democratization in civil society, then you don’t get the same mobilizing power as in the Sunflower Movement." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Did I answer your question?" }, { "speaker": "Question", "speech": "Yes." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The Sunflower Movement showed very concretely that as long as we have a mediation space that is built with our ICT technologies, with real-time broadcast, with transcription, with projector, … what we call reflective open space then the private sector can join policy discussions with the civic society in a kind of equal way. After the occupy the Prime Minister resigned, after a watershed loss at the national city level election. The new prime minister is an engineer, his vice-deputy prime minister a Google engineer, so we have technocrats running the country after that election. They know that they only have one year of time because everybody knows the Nationalist party will loose at the next presidential election this year. So they have a year of time and they know they cannot actually take any new directions because they know they are going to lose the next election anyway. So what could they do?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Very wisely they put the goal of open government on their national agenda meaning that all the civic servants, the non-elected people and normal civic servants who are not good yet at listening to the people through the Internet or speaking to people through the Internet must learn this skill. So we have had a lot of training programs and trainings like this one for all the levels of civil servants in the art of using the Internet to speak and to listen." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Because it changes the relationship of the government and its people - one of the primary issues here is the open data policy. Without getting too technical Taiwan’s civil law is modeled after the german legal system. Any contract between the government and its people is therefore actually not a contract. When people want to make the government make everything open data they run into some legal problems because it’s like the government starts giving away its assets. People don’t really want the government to give away its assets because its taxpayer money and so on." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But then because they really want to change to open government they have to change the regulations so that they could legally say that any data that the government produced is open data. Now they have to work with the civil society on it and with lawyers and so on. That became their primary agenda. The new Prime Minister has three agenda points: open data, crowdsourcing and big data. It is a very engineering view of a country. With this agenda they now need ways to engage the civil society largely with the same people who helped the Sunflower Movement to talk about the things that they wanted to change which were not political, that is not affecting the election, or that is not affecting the pro-independence or the pro-unification, those ideological debates." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "All of these things are the things that people would care about regardless whether you are on the left or right. These are the infrastructures of the country. They initially didn’t want to talk about Uber or Airbnb but we eventually did. So initially these are the so-called regulations that pertain to the people in a cyberspace." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That was a g0v project. The Minister came to the hackathon as a normal hacker and took three minutes (presentation time) and said we want to solve this problem of talking about policy with people. We knew and were aware that there were initiatives like the Cornell Regulation Room, the Estonian or Island process all academics have written about. Any rulemaking initiative has a lots of barriers." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In short, there are three barriers:" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "First, normally the lawmakers are not the stakeholders and the stakeholders are not aware of the lawmakers." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Second, people are not used to debating meaningfully online. People are more used to posting cat pictures. That is a fact." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Third, policies are interlinked. If you really want to understand a policy change its overloaded with information. It’s impossible without training in public administration and legal code to know exactly how the change will affect the entire legal system. So these are a very difficult things and this is why most of the e-consultation projects fail." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "A very concrete example: One of the laws they wanted to change was the telecommuting law that pertains to people working at home and people who are early stage start-up founders that want to employ people who work at home and want some guidelines for teleworking. After the election when they set the course of the new government they got some zero people to talk with the Labour Ministry. They said: Okay we have this new agenda and we want to hold public hearings. Usually they invited heads of labour unions, associations and of the industry and so on … so please recommend all the representatives of all the teleworkers in Taiwan. There is no such thing. There couldn’t be such thing. Because the coder who works at home, a designer, a musician are complete different kind of people. They couldn’t really speak for other people who work at home. It is not a trade, there is no trade union for this trade. Again for people who are early-stage kickstarter companies also don’t have a guild or association because they have trouble paying the next month’s salary. Like forming a representative unit is not their game." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They couldn’t hold a public hearing in the usual way. If they just invite scholars and people they know in the usual way one would say this is lobbying and this has no legitimacy. They were very afraid that if they work with the wrong people they would get occupied again. It’s like having something always hanging above their heads. They really want some way that is both legitimate and could talk to the legislation which was deadlocked by the two parties. They were filibustering each other. Without ways to do normal public hearings they came to the zero hackathon." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Minister Jaclyn Tsai who was head of the IBM legal Department Asia, she’s a technology lawyer and it was her first time working in the government under the new administration. She says: “Okay let’s think of this as a coding problem, an engineering problem, we want to reach everybody who registered their companies on Cayman Islands and we want to ask them why do you register on the Cayman Islands. Also we want everybody who planned to register at Cayman Islands to tell us if we change the law in Taiwan what parts of the law should we have to change so you don’t have to register in Cayman Islands?”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is an engineering problem, a social computing problem really. This has a technical solution. I’m aware actually that there is something very similar in France. There is also a shift from the civil law to the US or UK kind of law for these kind of companies. For the scholars and the start-ups people and so on we set up this discussion board. We modeled it after the ITEF, The Internet Engineering Task Force in which anybody who posts anything constructive to this discussion, there are hundreds, are invited to the working group. People who were in a working group are just people who contributed to the online discussion." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We used the online discussion as a way to self select people who would eventually formed the working group committee. After a month we held a consultation. We had like lawyers and academics in both traditions of the law and then the ministries of economy, finance, … and then of all the people who contributed to its online discussion there maybe remained 10 or 20 people. They sat down together and then we used the same Sunflower infrastructure to broadcast everything, to take a live feed and post a real-time transcript. Everything is captured so that the entire nation knows that we are talking about this thing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "A week after the working group formed using input from the ministries and from the academics the tolerance limits were deliberated: How much would they tolerate like multiple votes per share or how much would they tolerate stocks options that are non-capital-based and so on. So using these terms we then made a request for comment, a synthesis document, again in a IETF way that consists of: “We are not lawyers but if the lawyers are going to pass this law it must contain this, it must not contain this, it should contain this, it should not contain this, may contain this, may not contain this, …” - the same habit as we do on the internet." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now all this was very thoroughly debated over a month and a half. By the time we sent this to the Ministry of Economy of Affairs all they did was to translate these recommendations to legalese. Because of the desire of the system they have two cross-relate each point in our recommendation to their translated legalese. So it becomes the first bill in which every statement is cross-linked to the recommendation where it was brought from. The recommendation then was correlated to the discussion and the consultation points." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When that was sent to the - by that time - deadlocked Parliament filibustering everything this was passed in a week. This was like the only bill they would not dare to block because there is already social consensus. Just like the Ministry of Education would agree that our use is fair-use any party who would say “no” does this against thousands of people who have already expressed their consensus on this matter. Unless the parliament can find additional facts or additional reflections that the working group has not considered there was really no reason for them to block this bill. So it was passed and made law." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The way we do work group meetings is again like we did in the Sunflower Movement. We separate the discussion points into the objective of the facts, the feelings of the facts, then the ideas (based on the Art of Focused Conversation by Brian Stansfield). We used a font that has six different bold levels to show the level of consensus of our discussion. With just one glance you can see what the consensus was about. Of the working group members maybe 10 people could participate here, we would take turns speaking for maybe 20 minutes about one section of the law and then we switch to the hackpad to the e-participation because not everybody lives in Taiwan or could travel to Taipei. So whatever they typed then becomes read aloud like an agenda for another 20 minutes. So the idea is that it’s like telepresence. You’re guaranteed to get a sufficient amount of time whether you are in the same place or whether your are on the Internet. Again everything that everybody says was captured with this my-society tool called “Say-it”. You can link any specific utterance to the statements in the bill." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "On the design of the system, it was very important to overcome the three walls of the e-participation by first requiring the Ministry of Economy in this case to create a slide that is viewable within five minutes and we asked amateur people to try and read it and whether they could actually understand the issue at hand. For every specific jargon like “What is a closely held cooperation with a start-up” we provided a definition that was 140 or less characters long like Twitter and then just like in then Moe-Dictionary when you hover over that word you see a definition of the word. This is very important because most of the online-debate was about fighting for the definition of words. When we do a lexicon this way: ”A start-up means different things to different people but for the matter of this law it means this … Please talk in these terms.” This eliminates 80% of trolls (a deliberately offensive or provocative online post) for some reason." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The other innovation I think was that the initial mediator-group who interviewed the academics and stakeholders was designed to be one person from the elected official ministry’s office, one civic servant, who is not an elected official, and then one or two people from the private sector who has a stake in this like the Institute of Information Industries and one or two people from the civil society. This 4 to 6 people team were the initial team who decided the time, the duration, the format, the agenda of the entire consultation and this lends to a very balanced view and lends to the legitimacy of the entire process. Otherwise people would say this is just another way of lobbying or this is another way of protesting. We don’t want either of that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The other thing of course that we do is a mixed reality debate. This is something very very technical but I think the most important of the four. We use our own discussion forum system. Unlike Facebook this allows a moderator to modify and to edit people’s comments. On Facebook when you’re facing a real comment or discussion or any other forum system 90% are good contributions but 10% are ad hominem attacks. All the editors are faced with a conundrum because if you censor that message then people would call you out and then people would be very angry. But if you allow that to continue the next reply tends to be 20% more than usual another attack and then the next one will be more and more toxic because people respond to the toxic parts. Then after five replies people started posting cat pictures and at that point all discussion is lost." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Before it gets to the cat picture point we created first a code of conduct and terms of service pop-up. Anybody who writes something on a site with a creative commons license you agree to not make these sort of comments. So when people post things like that we delete those 10% posts - usually just five words. Because it’s version controlled people could see the original if they want to. It is like Wikipedia. The normal people who join for the first time don’t have to have their mind polluted by that. Because trolls usually are from people who are just craving for attention. They have some gripe. So this is a way to teach people that only by making constructive criticism or constructive input do they get attention. Anything else automatically gets them zero attention." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Even if they write a long paragraph of just fighting words as long as there is one sentence in it that is a contribution we delete everything else and keep that sentence and then write a private message to them saying “Because you violated the code of conduct we deleted these and these words. This part is great, so we thank you for this contribution.” There is an old XKCD comic that says that the YouTube commentary system would vastly improve the discussion quality if the system read aloud back what the person just wrote. This is our way of reading back aloud the trolls. They reform very quickly and we get high-quality discussion. This is a very minor technology point but I think this is the one that made the most impact." }, { "speaker": "Question", "speech": "Could everyone change everything?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Actually no, it is just the facilitators, the initial team of maybe 10 people who built this website. As I explained they come from the three sectors. The logic is basically if you go on this website you have to trust the system operators anyway because it is cross sectoral." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We serve as each other’s peer reviewers. If any editor is going out of hand the other editors will call him out because they serve different interests. It’s like Wikipedia which is very legalistic. These behaviors are okay and these are not and we check based on a long running code of conduct that everybody sees on their first login." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Usually when I talk with civic tech people in other countries the first question they would ask: Is it okay that you are cross sectoral but you are privileging Internet elites. You are privileging people who can make interesting and useful arguments on the internet because that’s your selection of the working group. People having trouble to login into the Internet will be excluded by this process. What right do the Internet people have to decide for the rest of the population?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The usual response which we gave in our very first meeting in the hackathon is that we don’t. We only talk about laws that has Internet users as there only stakeholders. The idea is not deliberative democracy, the idea is a town hall meeting, as if the Internet users are a small town negotiating with the national government about things that concern this town’s development. So basically we don’t take any debate points like “gay marriage”. The jurisdiction ministry very much wants us to talk about gay marriage because they really cannot get consensus on this matter in Taiwan. We refused again and again because there is no correlation with gay and internet use. We cannot say that this is about internet stakeholders. We keep saying no. By the end of the deliberation period a lot more ministries see the power of this model, and we will keep saying no." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The other thing is that of course it is about law change. This is not about rallying things or just raising awareness about things. It has to be something concrete otherwise we don’t have a working group. Then again the ministries when they propose something they have two be open-ended. They cannot just propose a draft and ask the people to sign the draft. They could propose some seed ideas but that is it. It has to allow at least 30 days for a consensus to emerge. So we had a pretty good participation. This is very geeky slide that I usually skip. But we use tools that are mostly free of charge." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The forum system that we built is literally called The Civilized Discourse Construction Kit, it’s for civilized discussions. We asked the ministries to publish their introductory material as a slide and then the draft and other working group materials were kept in GitBook. The lexicon is kept on a Google spreadsheet. Then the entire web page was done on GitHubPages and we used different streaming providers and all the transcripts were kept on a … system." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then just like any other campaign we sent every month the updates to the working group members and then we used pol.is for Uber and Airbnb which I will talk about. The core technology we use is called “The Focused Conversation Method”. This means that we layer our discussion in a way that talks about all the facts. Before we talk about all the facts we don’t about our feelings. And then we talk about everybody’s reflections. And before we complete that round we don’t talk about ideas. Then we talk about ideas and in the final and fourth layer about decisions." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The reason of that is because human beings have a cognitive limit called “the sticky choices”. When you start to think about ideas people lose the capacity to feel objectively about alternative ideas. One would start to be sticky to an idea. This way we always just focus on these two things. The other benefit of focusing on the facts and the feelings is that it avoids the legitimacy problem that other e-participations have. No matter how many people we could involve, tens of thousands or hundred thousands, it is just one person or 2% of the populace. If we do the voting part people would always ask: “By what right do you vote for the other people who don’t show up.” When we say we are just collecting facts and feelings for the people to talk about, for the civil servants to do research, then nobody asks this legitimacy question. So that is another angle of the tools." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So our improvements of the Cornell University Regulation Room format are for:
First all the ministries have usernames. Next they are all in the forum. So like the Ministry of Economy is literally @MOE, the Ministry of Finance is literally @MOF. So they have handles in that forum. They agree initially as a precondition that anybody who mentions them in any of their comments they will reply officially in seven days. So with a month of deliberation period that allows at least four rounds of back-and-forth on which the civil servants discover the peoples ideas on the platform." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "For the civil society this is a way to get facts out of the civil servants. If you write them privately they don’t have the peer pressure of all the other ministries watching. So for some answers that are really face-losing like the one of the e-tax issues (Internet tax), we want to check the custom data for the regular importers and see whether it is possible to build a system that identified a regular importer who evades tax for example." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "People asked: What kind of information do we currently collect to the destination address in the airport and in the seaports. It took seven days for the Ministry of Finance to answer: “Sorry we are just a tax collecting agency really. We are not really the Ministry of Finance. This is for the Office of Import-Export to answer.” We say, okay, so we tag that agency. So in seven days they had to answer: “We don’t have this system. We know Japan has it and Singapore has it too. It never occurred to us to build this system. Sorry.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is not something that you usually get neither from the parliamentary inquiries nor from the individual civic society lobbying or anything. It’s very face losing for them. Because they signed on this platform with this guarantee they will lose even more legitimacy if they don’t answer timely or honestly. So then after one or two times they started to buy in this g0v motto. It’s ok to be imperfect. “There is a crack in everything, that’s how the light gets in.” (Cohen) That creates opportunity for participation." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The working group members are just people who provide constructive opinions and then we focus really on online mixed mode conversation which lends another layer of credibility because a lot of policymakers and scholars and so on they type very slowly online - they are handicapped if you want to do it in an online only form. So we say: “Okay use your pen, use your voice, use whatever way you feel comfortable with and we will deploy sufficient stenographers or transcribers to bring it to the online space. So use whatever you’re comfortable with. So a lot of policymakers really go on this platform by printing every forum post and by writing their answers and have their assistant typing in their answers or turning the recordings back. There is a lot logistics involved but that is how we are getting to be inclusive." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So I think that’s it for Taiwan. The latest news is that they are trying to make this into a really official national all-inclusive supported by the local government kind of facilitation platform which is the agenda of the next administration. So this is how we get the spirit of deliberative democracy into policy-making." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Before I get to the last talk which I have 15 minutes for - which should be sufficient - are there any questions?" }, { "speaker": "Question", "speech": "How did you manage to get ministries involved?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Technically this is very easy. Just fork the GitHub repository. Just add water." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Every ministry is different because we build this platform as a opt-in. So they don’t have to bring everything here. In fact to most of the things we say “no” because it is not about Internet people. So we built this very interesting multi-stakeholder dialogue platform that saves the civil servants time and face. Because the Taiwan civil servants at this time are very disadvantaged because they are not completely anonymous like in the UK. So if something goes wrong they get punished. On the other hand we are a young democracy. So whatever they get right the elected officials get all the credit. So this is a lose-lose situation. If they do something wrong they get punished, if they do something right somebody else gets the credit." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What we are trying to to do here is basically saying: All the impossible tasks that the elected officials assigned to the civil servants and they don’t have the research capacity for you can outsource this research two civil society and to the private sector. Because of the professional responses during the consultative period you as a civil servant get the credit over the elected officials for bypassing the parliament entirely. Then they become much more willing. The other benefit is - when the laws and regulations are done this way - that the elected officials in the parliamentary or the administration are not blocked. In many senses like in the early participatory budgeting in Taiwan the civil servants were the main proposers. I don’t know whether it is the same in Paris. A lot of the proposals were done by civil servants because they know what the city needs. This is a additionally legitimating way for their ideas to then become the public policy. So after opt-in and selling in these three angles we get all the very difficult cases like open data of the civil service know nothing about and so it’s very willing to share the risk and to retain the credit." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Whenever there is an issue the buy-in is instant. It takes a day or seven days at the most. We haven’t been forcing any ministry to use this method or anything. So we don’t know if there is resistance and what it takes but this is the opt-in our platform so hopefully we’ll never find out." }, { "speaker": "Question", "speech": "How do you verify their identities?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The deliberation is actually in the administration building, so first they have to have an email address with gov.tw which is very hard to get actually for a hacker (laughing)." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "And then we always do a multi-stakeholder preparatory meeting with the Ministry people. So we get to meet face-to-face and are confirmed that they are indeed the person holding the email address who wants to propose this thing. It is two factor authentication." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We have 10 minutes to talk about Uber. Uber is a challenge for the entire world. This is putting it lightly. The green dots are legal, the red are illegal but they are operating anyway, the pink are partially legal or in contention. The same applies for Taiwan and France (slide 71). For Uber we discovered that the vTaiwan existing process doesn’t work. The entire legitimacy was built on all the domestic stakeholders showing up, agreeing on the working group, so that nobody in the media or in the parliament could say: “No, this is not a consensus. They could not ignore us.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But if we apply the same process on Uber they will probably ignore us. They are not a Taiwanese company. The don’t even have a Taiwan operation office. Even if we confiscate everything like the French people did in their few offices it would cost them nothing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So a domestic agreement of the local stakeholders, the commissions, and the industry members would mean nothing even though we get all the right people. It won’t make a difference. We saw that happening in other Asian countries. To add insult to injury there is no ministry that wanted to propose Uber as a topic in vTaiwan. The Ministry of Transport who has been fining Uber for more than €1 million now which is a lot of money. They didn’t want to propose this because in their eyes they are criminals. To deliberate with criminals is nonsense. On the other hand the Uber lawyers say the Transport Ministry has nothing to do with this. We are a e-commerce company, they say, and this has got to do with the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Economic Affairs. So MOEA should propose the task. MOEA says: “This is not really our job and we don’t want the flak that comes from the Transportation Ministry.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then Jaclyn Tsai actually thinks that this task belonged to the Ministry of Finance because she cares about insurance and taxation. These two things are about Ministry of Finance but the Minister of Finance has never worked with anything like sharing economy before. They dont’ even want to propose this initial slide that shows the problem definition. The MOEA and the MOTC have a problem definition but they don’t have the willingness to speak it out." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Before vTaiwan got engaged it has been like a year. Whatever happened in France happened in Taiwan too - to a smaller degree. The taxi driver that surrounded the Ministry of Transport there was some kind of occupy going on, there was some kind of strike going on but at a lower scale. People generally think we have to talk about this but none of the ministries wanted to go to vTaiwan to propose this. The vTaiwan deliberators talked about our process and concluded that the consensus making process doesn’t even make a dent to Uber. Those are just the facts." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So what is our strategy? It was to introduce professional mediators that could link together the stakeholders not just domestically and not just the private and civil sector but literally all the drivers in Taiwan. We want to engage all the drivers in Taiwan to the vTaiwan process. This is a very different kind of populace in comparison to other domestic issues I talked about because Uber operates primarily in Taipei and Taichung city. We know that all the drivers basically use a mobile phone. The mobile phone penetration rate is 97 or 98%. So there is less of a representation problem if we would require their participation online." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But the problem with taxi drivers or other drivers is that they don’t really have one minute to look through the slides and make informed decisions or whatever. They were driving or making a business out of driving. So we have two lower the participation threshold. It was one minute but it has to be five seconds or less because otherwise we don’t engage these people. We even had a way of saying it. It must be engaging within a red light of time. So of course we don’t actually encourage people to vote while driving. So when they engage in the vTaiwan process we encourage them to park first. But in any case we want to engage a very different kind people, their passengers, the drivers that own the car that only have the mobile phone. We needed professional mediators and we needed to organize with the association of all the taxi drivers that they send the drivers a sms to go onto the vTaiwan website at the same hour. The same with the Uber drivers and all the other stakeholders they had to all get the same URL on the same hour of the day. The message says: Whatever you say here will become the agenda after a month from now on for all the stakeholders to talk about." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So this actually worked. What they saw when they used their phone on a stoplight were just four very simple sentences saying: “This is bottom up. Everybody wants to talk about Uber and Airbnb and Bitcoin. We have one specific question. Is it ok for private non-professional license people two carry passengers and charge them for it?” So this was a very narrow thing. We didn’t talk about sharing economy. Then we say: “A month from now we will have a national debate. We will invite Uber but the agenda is decided by you guys.” And then the open data is published for independent analysis and we guarantee deliberation." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The interface they see on their phone is this very simple thing. They see one random sentiment: “I feel” or “I think” from their fellow citizens (slide 73) “Passenger insurance is very important” and then they they take one second to press “I agree” or “I don’t agree”. That is all we ask of them. They press “agree” or “disagree” and their avatar changes in this landscape. This is a open space technology simulation online. So basically people stand in their different positions and as you say “yes” or “no” you move in your positions. If you login with Facebook you see your friends hats. Initially there are four different groups. There were drivers taxi drivers, Uber passengers, other passengers and then your task is to convince people neighboring to you to accept your view, Then the system only shows the views with the highest consensus within a group. So this actually worked." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is what we call “dimensionality reduction”. We have two primary dimensions. Based on the “yes” or “no” the two most contentious topics. The one that is most contentious we use as the x-axis the second is a y-axis. That changes as people propose more sentiments for other people to vote with. So it is a very dynamic thing. We said that this would go on for a month. Then we promised to publish independent analysis material." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So what happened on that hour when the four speaking groups formed of equal people. This is very important because if we didn’t get the URL to them on the same hour you would have gone online and would have seen everybody is a Uber driver and that would have turned everybody down. So it was very important that everybody got on at the some time. Then the consensus at that time of the two groups first said: “We don’t negotiate with criminals.” The second says: “Even if there are a lot of taxis in the street I will still call Uber.” They are both very radical." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That is our first primary factor. If you multiply the numbers are both minorities. None of this had majority across all populace. These were actually minority opinions. They were just majority within their small group. The system rewards only arguments to gain support from your group people. People were forced to invent more moderate ideas to gain consensus from people who think like them." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So after about a week the group one then became: “This is not about Uber. This is about the Ministery of Transport which has a duty to fine any unlicensed driver. The fact that they do this to other people and not for Uber is maybe a problem. It is their duty nevertheless.” That was more moderate and gained more support. Group two evolved to: “All the Tsaiwan taxis in the large cities have to join one fleet or another. This is a corporate thing that limits the choice of taxis. Uber provides an opportunity for a driver to join multiple fleets. This is a innovation.” Just by saying this they gained 2% of the populace. Some taxi-driver jumped to this group just by reading this sentiment." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "After a week or so different the four groups started to form into two broadly speaking pro- and anti-Uber groups. Another week has passed before we had what we call a majority consensus which is something that everybody regardless of the 4 or 2 groups agree upon. It starts with some very general reflections because we ask numerous questions like: “The laws will change with time.” Most people who saw that agree with that. Or for example: “Although there are many important topics the security of passengers is the most important one.” Everybody agreed with that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then after another week people started to propose concrete solutions or ideas to garner cross group support. This one from Ivan from Mozilla Taiwan, a Firefox developer, said: “We should introduce the same five-star rating system to order taxis because the thing that ensures Ubers quality is its rating system. It is not anything else. So if the government mandates all the independent taxis and fleets to introduce the same system we can get the same quality and then Uber doesn’t become a problem.” Everybody agreed to that even Uber themselves." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The initial statement: “We don’t argue with criminals” which initially had 70% agreement eventually got less and less support. By the third week most people - over 65% - still thought they are criminals but we should still sit down and talk with them. By the end of the polling period most people think: “Okay, let’s talk with them anyway.” So by the fourth week and this is why we need four weeks because experience tells us on the fourth week people finally agree on something that’s actionable. Before that it is just random reflections or general observations. After trying to convince each other so hard because the system only shows the things with the highest score people started to come up with very nice ideas, actually policy ideas like that: “You should be fair to both Uber and non-Uber drivers” or like: “The taxation is very important. Uber must register, their registration must display prominently on their window, or in their cars” or “This is not just a commerce because like medicine and food this is matter of public safety and if people want to avoid tax, if you really want ride sharing you should insure the people. If you go to work and go back to work they should only ride two times. That is okay to evade tax like that. But if you take more than two routes then of course you are actually making a living out of it and you’re a business person.” So that’s one policy suggestion. And: “The taxi driver should be allowed to join multiple platforms, even existing taxi drivers.” These are the suggestions that had over 80% consensus which is our cut-off point and that became the agenda of our deliberation." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Before we did the deliberation we did a comparative analysis using this data and then showed what other countries are doing based on the six demands. So that was it. We showed all those consensus. We asked each stakeholder whether you want to compromise or not. So it is like a progress bar, it is actually written like a progress bar on a white-board. Uber said eventually: “Yes, we will provide insurance terms to the Taiwan government” which they haven’t done to any other non-us country. The taxi fleet says that if you open search pricing then we will introduce the new class of taxis that competes directly with Uber. Then the Minister of Transport said: “Okay we will do that.” Then the taxi association of independent drivers said: “The main problem is that Uber takes a 20% cut. If they take just a 2% cut we will work with them tomorrow.” So it becomes a matter of negotiation at the table.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So basically the progress bar says: Uber is illegal because of these six things. On that meeting we extracted the promises of 3-4 things. Everybody sees that it’s still illegal because it doesn’t satisfy the other two of the 6 demands that we demand of them. So there is no arguing so the parliament doesn’t do anything. If they agree it becomes a legal company and if it doesn’t it is still illegal." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s how we got the three ministries to be not afraid of losing your face and putting the one thing that they care about into the initial pol.is conversation and deliberation and to let people vote and then we get taxi drivers and the associations and the civil society people into this shared space. The additional good thing about this was that the Airbnb people were watching the live stream all the time, the entire process they were watching very closely. They knew actually before us, we worked with academics on the methodologies of how to set up the pol.is issues. We designed three questions about what kind of people you are whether you have a professional driver license or whether you are a taxi driver, have you taken Uber before and about the thing that each ministry wanted to hear about taxation, insurance and safety. Then we wanted to hear about the things the government could actually do something about. Those were our initial questions, but it was heuristic." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But Airbnb figured it out very quickly. They knew that we were going to use Wikipedia data to show the timeline. They then went and edited Wikipedia or people who had sympathy for them. I don’t have any proof if it was an Airbnb employee. When we started the pol.is again with this idea they sent an email to all Taiwan members saying please show your support for Airbnb on this rulemaking platform. Of all the people who have used Airbnb before in Taiwan there are three groups: One group said it has to satisfy some laws still, one group said the landlord must have duties, and one group said at least the quality has to be guaranteed, if it’s just your home then it has to be said so, if it’s actually a legal hotel chain or one person has 30 different homes and each of them has the same photo then it has to be outlawed and Airbnb must answer to this. People also said: “You know this is the internet, the government should stay out of it.” That is the minority actually." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Airbnb sent an email to all its Taiwan members. Before that we had like 3000 people engaged. Then after that it was like 10 times as many people involved. So this is unfair because most of Taiwan people are not Airbnb members. It is just that they are so good at mobilizing. So we said exactly that saying we respect the people who are Airbnb members but they shouldn’t get more representation than people who are not members just because Airbnb is so good at mobilizing because we have our statistics showing how many people in Taiwan have used Airbnb." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So the other group of people who don’t or haven’t used Airbnb before is at least equally important. So these four merged with those three and they became our agenda. The main contention was that we discovered that most people think of Airbnb as a good idea especially for foreigners visiting Taiwan. But if they themselves are visiting other cities in Taiwan, they will not use Airbnb." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The same day we can go from being super public to exchange our service for money to voluntary sector work and so on. This a way for different sectors to meet somewhere and to extract promises out of each other I think is generally useful. It also provides a … and gives the so-called clicktivists - at the beginning of my talk I said these are people who just spent time to click “like” or “unlike” in the internet - something else to do. If they have 10 seconds more time they can share our deliberation link, if they have more time they can engage in questioning which gets a granted answer and then if they have more time and a laptop computer they could do a meaningful discussion, and then if they even have more time they can do a deliberation. And if they have some time to attend a deliberation for two hours they can participate the agenda setting." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So that’s my talk. Thank you very much!" } ]

[ { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Good afternoon to everybody. My name is Giovanni Allegretti. I am the coordinator of the Centre for Social Studies of the Project EMPATIA, Enabling Multi-channel Participation Through ICT Adaptation." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "As you can see on the website of the project, we are today hosting at the Centre for Social Studies a working seminar of a colleague who comes from Taiwan, whose name is Audrey Tang, and is a civic hacker that we met during a series of other international relation development project is having with different country and parents." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "I had the happy opportunity to meet Audrey, which accepted to explain us a series of interesting movement that have been happening in Taiwan in the past year." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "We thought in the beginning to do like a web seminar, but because it’s a person who has a lot of..." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "...so in person, we prefer to have Audrey here today. Because we had several friends who asked us to be able to follow the seminar without being able to be here, we are transmitting live stream seminar." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "We hope seminar will be the opportunity especially for a large discussion on issue that could be of interest of whoever is interested to EMPATIA project, in terms of cross-cutting issues related to data, open data, to civic engagement and to the transfer of click activists to a stronger commitment in civic issues." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "That’s one of the reasons why I will stop talking here, and I will leave the floor to Audrey, which is doing also wonderful drawings on screen." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Is that you waving behind me? I feel like an aura of something happening. I see people laughing, so I imagine people laughing on the other side of the screen. I leave to Audrey, so I will eliminate the possibility to draw so much. Maybe he’s doing a horn on my head." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "I have been transformed into a cat. Perfect. This is the start. Starting with a laugh, it’s always something wonderful, so we are happy. We’re sure that it will be a wonderful seminar. If I’m not wrong, Audrey opens the discussion in every moment." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "It becomes usually...it’s yesterday? No, two days ago, that you were doing the conference in Paris." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, two days ago." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "That became like sort of collective workshop, so we hope that it will be the same today. I left the floor to Audrey. Thank you very much for being here." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I’m very happy to be here, and since this is a very small room, I would encourage people to just interrupt me at any time. You don’t have to raise your hand, but if I happen to be looking elsewhere, you just wave your hand or something." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The idea here is, that for next two hours or so, I will go through five different talks, and I have no idea which of those five talks are of more interest to you. The five talks in very quick order, is introducing the political context of Taiwan and the Taiwan’s, what we call the g0v civic movement." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I will use one particular example, a crowdsourced dictionary, to illustrate. Then I will talk about the Sunflower Movement. Is there anybody here who have heard of the Sunflower Movement?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We occupied the congress for 22 days, and it’s one of the very few Occupies that is successful, defined in the sense that first we reached our goals, and also, we have a stronger consensus after the Occupy compared to before the Occupy." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then I’m going to talk about the national level politics that changed because of the Occupy. In particular I’m going to talk about how we use the same technology that empowered the Occupy, to talk with transnational issues like with Uber, and with Airbnb, and with the other globalized factors." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Before I begin, I would like to know how everybody prefers themselves to be called or recorded. I’m Audrey." }, { "speaker": "Michelangelo Secchi", "speech": "I am Michelangelo, and I also work in the EMPATIA project. You can call me Mike. My name Michelangelo, it sounds artistic." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure, artistic. [laughs] Great." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "I’m Valdemar, and it’s a pleasure." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Do you come from Mexico?" }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "No, Bolivia. I’m from originally Brazil, so I’m Portuguese." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "I’m Bruno and I’m studying society and social movements." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "I’m Jenna, but if you call me Jenny, it’s OK." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Great." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "I’m Luis. I’m also a member of the project EMPATIA." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "OK." }, { "speaker": "Luis Cordeiro", "speech": "I am also Luis." }, { "speaker": "Luis Cordeiro", "speech": "I’m the technical coordinator of the EMPATIA project. I am very interested in trying to understand from someone who also has some technical background, how this government and citizens’ involvement, how can we handle this in the city? I’m very, very interested in receiving your feedback and your experience." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "I am Andre, not a Luis, but similar." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "I work as a project manager here and I also work with the EMPATIA project with delivery." }, { "speaker": "Sofia Antunes", "speech": "I am Sofia." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Wisdom. You can call her Wisdom." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Ah, Wisdom, yes." }, { "speaker": "Vanessa Duarte de Sousa", "speech": "I’m Vanessa, and I also work on the EMPATIA project." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "I’m Penn, and I’m a researcher here at CES. I am part of the EMPATIA project, too." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Without further ado, I will just go into my talk. At any point, please just stop me if I start using three-letter acronyms, [laughs] or if I am talking too fast." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Have you heard of bill?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, we could have that bill, yes. Also, if people are interested to go more in details into any particular slide, we just stop in that slide and start doodling. If I look at people and feel that you feel bored, then I will just fast-forward that particular section." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Fork, here, means in the ICT context to take something that is already here, not eliminating, not countering, but taking its doing to some direction. We take it to another direction. When we take to another direction, we experiment." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You may fail, you may succeed. But the most important thing about the name fork is that we also are open to the possibility of the original maintainer. This is calling merging back our work, because the way it was made to work in the ICT industry was by people abandoning part or all of their copyright." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is like, this week in Paris is Fashion Week. In many jurisdictions, like in the US and in Taiwan, actually, any fashion designs cannot be copyrighted because it’s a craft. It is something you use every day, so you cannot copyright this design. You cannot copyright a type of sleeve or something." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Anything that shows in the Fashion Week gets copied the next week by other designers, because there is no copyright protection. Exactly because of that, we see a lot of forking going on in the fashion industry." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Anything that catches on, be it a color, a style or something, it becomes experimented in very different ways. Then, if some of the good ideas emerge, then it becomes just part of everybody’s wearing. Not designer clothes is, but it comes the fashion of the year or something. That is how the fashion industry already works." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The open source movement in the ICT industry is trying to use the same model as the fashion designers do to make the open source work, so that people who write programs to do user designs, and so on can also experiment with all different directions based on existing work." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Only the good ideas would be merged back to the next version of its original project. This is a very interesting idea, primarily used in the ICT industry, but the way we work in Taiwan is that we apply this idea to the government, to the society, to the governance procedure." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I’m literally from the future. I’m eight hours in the future, which is Taiwan in this place. Then I’m very happy to be here, jet lag notwithstanding." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The point here is that in Taiwan, because we are a very young democratic country, we lifted martial law in 1989, and then the first presidential election was in ’96. Basically, people only have less than 20 years of experience with representative democracy. They’re not very good at it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When we start to introduce the Fork the Government idea with direct democracy, with deliberative democracy, with participatory democracy, it was not like, “representative democracy has 200 years of tradition, and now we’re introducing someone with 20 years, like a challenger.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s like, “Representative democracy has 20 years, and direct democracy also have 20 years, so they are on par with each other.” We can say, “We take a better idea here,” and the government is much more willing to listen, because they don’t have a long tradition to uphold." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now, something about myself. I’ve been working in the ICT industry for 20 years, and retired in 2013. That means that I started working in 1994 as an entrepreneur. When I retired, I do what retired people do." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I start to work on charities, voluntary work, [laughs] caring about the community, making dictionaries, [laughs] things that retired people do. Because my ICT career was built around open source and free software, naturally, I do also my volunteer work in the same way as I do my ICT work." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This becomes a very interesting factor for me, because then I started talking to the very vibrant community in Taiwan, where we call the voluntary sector, which is people, not based on taxing and redistribution, and not on exchanging of money to services, but just by people donating their time. It’s the voluntary sector." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The magic thing with open source is that when I start making, for example, a dictionary, as an open source project, which I will talk about in the next talk, people in the first sector, academics, could very easily take the product and then make it part of the Oxford University Press Dictionaries, which is a non-profit, academic endeavor." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Or when I make other deliberation platforms open source, then the National Development Council in Taiwan is free to take it. Then this is the subject of another talk, but not only the first sector. The private sector is also free to take whatever research we did as part of this, and make it, too, so that Siri speaks better languages in part of its process, or there’s social text, social computing company." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The idea is that while I work all in the voluntary sector, because my work is free for everybody to use, I was able to build much stronger connections to the first sector, the public sector, and the private sector, as well. That is the basic mode amount of the cross-sectoral partnership." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Is that OK? Am I making sense? OK. That’s great. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I started learning computer programming when I was eight years old in 1989. When I got my first computer as a gift from my dad, he then went to Beijing for the first time in his life, to cover this very interesting student movement that was going on." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We all know how that student movement ended. It’s the Tiananmen Massacre. He got back to Taiwan in time, so I still have a father. He then took a strong interest in civic movement, democratization. He decided to do his PhD in Germany, studying the dynamic of the Tiananmen Movement." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When he finds his professor in Germany, he visited Berlin, and something else happened in the same year, the Berlin Wall fell. Some people say it’s because of the Beijing Massacre that the German people decide not to repeat the same mistake. They were somewhat peacefully democratized." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then I also moved to Germany to study with my father, because that’s his PhD thesis, is about interviewing all the people who were activists in Tiananmen, who flew to Paris, to Germany, to other places, when they continued their study." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They were just really students. They’re studying all sorts of different sciences, but was debate on how to make use of what they learned to help the democratization process. Certainly, the way that they choose to in the first did not work, so we talked a lot about what kind of ways would work." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I come back to Taiwan in ’93. That was a very interesting time because that was the first time in Taiwan when the Internet access was made available to everybody. That is not specific to Taiwan. The entire world was getting on the Internet at the same year." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The thing in Taiwan is that we have an education system that I was never fitting in, but I found on the Internet this very interesting project called the Gutenberg Project. It is a bunch of people typing the books, usually in the public domain, published before the First World War, and they digitized all the books for free for everybody to use and to read. That becomes my primary education." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Once I started to learn this way, the textbooks just lose their attraction to me, because that was how knowledge was being generated. In ’94, when Tim Berners-Lee invented the Web, introduced to everybody, I found that all the researchers who work on those classics, are online the same time as I am." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They were publishing their preprints on the World Wide Web, and had published their email addresses. Because the Web was so young, everybody was very eager to know each other. We worked a lot on all sorts of different things, from linguistics to AI, to all sorts of different philosophy, everything, mathematics." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The beauty of it is, across the Internet, nobody knows that I am a 13-year-old. [laughs] They treated me like a professor to another professor. We just did work together." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That becomes so addictive that I decided to quit school, because school takes 10 years [laughs] for me to reach that level, and also it would take another 10 years for the cutting-edge research to become a textbook to be taught in a university or something, from the preprints to the dissemination of knowledge." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I quit school and I helped to build the World Wide Web, because I took so much from the web, I wanted to give back. I’m sure that only the most geeky people will recognize all the projects that I’ve worked on. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I think this one, in particular, made a lasting impact that probably everybody knows about, is the Wikipedia project where people use the same open source idea, but use it to produce human knowledge." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There is one common thing in all this different project I worked with, is that it’s facilitating a safe space, where nobody could censor each others’ speech or drive a tank, or something, to stop other people from talking. In this relatively safe space, we can learn from each other, and just try one a time and many times, until we have something that’s working." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Before Wikipedia, there were at least 10 different projects like Wikipedia that I participated in personally. None of them worked, but the Wikipedia somehow clicked. It’s OK, because over the Internet, it costs nothing to fail. It is not a scarcity economy. We just keep trying until we get something that is acceptable to the world." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is my colleague, Lu Chia Hua, who is the primary trainer of facilitators of participatory, and also deliberative, democracy in Taiwan. She said, “Behind every technology we should identify the values that identifies why we’re pursuing this kind of technology.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "My value was very stable for the past 20-something years. It’s just this value of the early Internet, that it was built through rough consensus. That’s all about me, is that OK? People are generally OK. The first talk I like to share with you is the g0v story." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In Taiwan in 2013, there’s maybe 90 percent of Internet users on Facebook. It’s the most popular Facebook place in the world. There is a prediction that says by the end of this decade there will be more Taiwanese Facebook users than Taiwanese people. That means that more..." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "We have that problem with cars. We have more cars than people." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly. At least Facebook accounts doesn’t create congestions." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The idea is that people have more than one account. That’s first. Everybody’s on Facebook, and there’s a lot of activists, people, bloggers, civic media people that were very influential, like the author Zhang Dachun here." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Anything that he writes about the politics on Facebook gets any number of likes, shares, and so on. Of course Wired interviewed him, saying, “You are a very famous writer and sometimes a political commentary reaches any number of people, so do you think it will be a catalyst for civic participation?”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "He was very cynical, because he thinks that people who share and like his political writings are not the same people who will go to the streets. When he calls people to the streets, the call to the people to the streets posts gets hundreds of thousands of likes but 10 people came, or something like that. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The conversion rate is really, really, really low. He says that is because people are so lazy. They would spend only, at most, one minute of their time on Facebook in response to any call to action. Calling them to go on street takes more than one minute." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They will just click like, share, and feel as if they have participated. This is what we call clicktivism. He thinks the idea is that we need something practical that allows lazy people to engage in an action that makes a difference. This is called one minute limit." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The g0v is basically a movement that builds ways for lazy people to engage in real action. I’ll take one very concrete example. This example is called a CAPTCHA. I assume everybody knows what a CAPTCHA is." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is the way to tell whether you are a human not a robot, by typing in some random numbers or text from an image. It works until maybe last year, because this year, AIs are better than humans for this. This doesn’t work anymore. It used to be that this tells a human from computers." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What we did was that we built a web site that asks people to just type here whatever they see from the CAPTCHA box, and then click enter." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We say when you do that, you are saving the country, because what this is is the campaign finance record of all the elections that came before in Taiwan, which were kept in a paper-only form in this building the corrective auditing organ." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The law that mandates this kind of sunlight campaign finance record was done in an era with only papers and Xerox printers. The law, the bill says anybody can walk into this building, and require a photocopy of the tape of the campaign finance record, but you cannot download it. You cannot take a USB, disc, or anything." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now, of course, people proposed change to the law, so that we can download it over the Internet. If you think about it, the only negative stakeholder of this change are the parliament legislators. While the entire nation wants this, the legislators, they schedule it, but they never really debate it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It was always the last bill to be debated by the end of the session, so it’s never really actually voted on. It kept that way. Instead of rallying, protesting, or something, we decided to do something. We send people there to print these out, then we scan it, and we ask people to digitize it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "To do what the government would do but do it ourselves, this is the idea of forking the government. This takes only five seconds, and you’re saving the country. Now, when we take the print out like this, A4 paper, I tried." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It would take maybe two minutes or three minutes to type it as a cell or something like a spreadsheet. It’s too much. If we ask people to do this over the Internet, nobody would come. Why do we know? Because we tried." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then we used technology, OpenCV, to cut this in to bite-sized tasks, what we call Tofu. Then for each one, you will just take five seconds. It’s the same amount as a like, a share, or as a comment on Facebook." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Instead of seeing more cute cat pictures, you can feel you are saving the country. That draws a lot of people. In fact, when we built a gamification website of this data, if people here have played FarmVille, Candy Crush, or any of those games, you know that as long as you have a progress bar and a counter, the countdown, and it says how many people are playing with you." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "People will spend all night, not sleeping, doing some very repetitive task, just to see the progress bar reach 100 percent. This is human nature. [laughs] Basically, it became very addictive. People were calling each other to save the country by playing this game." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then we have a lot of designers who made very cute banners of Tofu to call people to action. In the first 24 hours, the first batch that we brought out from the corrective building, like more than 300,000 records, were digitized by 9,700 people in 24 hours." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This kind of OCR technology, we call it the Otaku Character Recognition. Otaku is a Japanese word meaning nerd. This is geeks. Basically, geeks who have nothing to do but just swiping their phone or something help to do the character recognition. Now, we have to complete campaign finance record of the past elections." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now, of course, when we have this data, and publish this data the corrective again said, “This is a not-so-good idea that you do this, because while you can say every Tofu has at least three people looking at it, two of them must agree, and so on, you cannot be 100 percent sure. You cannot be 100 percent sure this is actually what was printed.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What we said was, “OK, so, you publish it. Then you can be 100 percent sure. Before you do this, we will keep doing this civil disobedience, because there really is nothing illegal of this kind of work.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now that they feel the pressure, we started doing a lot of data analysis. Based on this kind of data, we can correlate any legislators with the kind of donation that came, the individual donations, how it correlates to their portfolio, their stock options that they have purchased, the voting records that they did." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Also, when the campaign finance came from large corporations, we also have a network that says the holdings of those corporations. We also, because each legislator in some counties have this recommendation where they could recommend the building and constructions." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We also correlate the building of constructions and the owner of those companies, versus the companies that have donated to the legislator. This became kind of useful, [laughs] so that you can decide what kind of legislators you really want for your city. Then at the election of..." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Excuse me." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes?" }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "I have a doctor on the issue of the timeline. What you were analyzing first was a system of the nation, so the campaign. The other one that you show, this last one, was about during the legislation, what they asked to be done with the public money. You had to take, like, five years’ time." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "That means, because you have to analyze what the legislator did during the mandate." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly, exactly yes." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "You took some years." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, that’s a great question. When we do the voting guide, as Gio said, we could only really do this before and after analysis for people who are going to be re-elected, so that we can correlate their actual performance. For people who are going running for the first time, we cannot do the same kind of analysis, for obvious reasons." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Many people run for legislator, but before they are running for legislator, they are running for the county, a country counselor or city level counselor. There is still a track record on the national level, even if they are running for the first time for the parliament. They also already have a campaign finance record level on the local government before." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "You started backwards from the ones that were candidates?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "You chose the new candidates, and you see how many of them had passed? The lucky ones were those that were running for the first time, because they didn’t have any control on their previous mandate, because there was no mandate." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "On the other hand that also was the more disadvantaged ones, usually, right, when they are running for the first time?" }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Yes." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This kind of oversight is a net negative to peoples’ political capital. Actually, as you said, these people are lucky, but when they are doing their campaign finance planning and so on, they were doing under the pressure that they will be compared with the people they are running with." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "By the end of the campaign, within 30 days, we will publish everything that they have done during the campaign. They must be very careful because otherwise it will look very bad, even if they are elected." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "It’s funny, because what I imagine is, essentially, I think that, because we have a prejudice against the representative politics, I mentioned that somehow you were rebalancing the problems of the newcomers. You were reducing the image of transparency of the one, the previous government." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly, the establishments, yes." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "There were, for example, cases in which you could show that there were, for example, no direct relation between the funding and what they had done. Did someone emerge as particularly honest or not, involved within..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly. That’s a great question. Yes, for example, for the city level voting in the end of 2014, there is a record number of independents running. Even an independent won the Taipei, the capital city, mayor, was a surgeon, who never participated in the politics before." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The environment was such that, when each county or each city click into here -- you see 18 precincts and 87 people running -- when you click into it you will see the analysis, as we talk about, but also a discussion board under every candidate." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "People would crowdsource extra information based on what the public record and things like that. The primary use of this is that there were one legislator who said -- actually the one that I was showing on the photo -- [laughs] who said he is unbiased, he is bipartisan. He is not a party member. He often vote against his party line." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then we go back to the legislative record and found that he never really did that. He was saying this on public television, because before, in mainstream media you can get away with saying anything, because people are not fact-checking it. If people are fact-checking it, it’s already past the news cycle anyway, so some people won’t pay attention to the corrections, even." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "With this kind of technology, as soon as that person starts saying this, the commenter started saying, below, saying that, “But that is not the case.” His office has to issue a correction saying, “Oh, we don’t mean by the previous, because he was five terms. We don’t mean the previous term. We mean the terms before that.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then we speed up the digitization. In the 24 hours after that, we digitized everything in the previous terms and found out he really never voted against the party line in any of the previous terms. That becomes a tremendous pressure on the legislators to watch what they speak publicly about their past records." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Whereas before, you would take days or weeks in a news cycle to correct or to find the flaws in their speech, now, it is a matter of hours or even minutes, and that changed the dynamics." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "People would click into it and say, “My precinct has 22 people running for councilor, and after I see this website I now only have to choose between two.” People become much more informed, and informed in a very quick way, of what kind of legislators they really want. This negates somewhat the mainstream media on a representative democracy." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We can also see which legislator received campaign donations from their own parties. We can analyze the Nationalist Party versus the DPP party. The red one was a, I must say, ex-mobster, because he’s not really a mobster now. [laughs] An ex-mobster who is very rich, so he can finance his own campaign." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The idea is that we make it very clear who is getting how much money from what. This kind of crowdsourcing of campaign finance records, of the news, and so on is not limited to domestic policies." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When we’re doing campaign finance records, we get contributions from outside Taiwan also, because you don’t really have to know Chinese. If you can read digits, you can help us digitizing the campaign finance records." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When the international community needs help, we also help to do, for example, this is working with the Humanitarian Open Street Map Team. Open Street Map is like Wikipedia, it’s a crowdsourced map." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When Nepal had this earthquake, all the major maps like Google Map, Bing Map, or Apple Map only really have the mapping data around Kathmandu and the major city connections. The street car doesn’t really drive to those rural areas, but those were the hit most hard by the earthquake." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What the HOT team did, in conjunction with the local chapters, was that we divided the satellite image that was taken before the earthquake into very small, again Tofu. Then we let people who have never mapped for their everyday lives take a half-hour course." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then start to look at just one tiny piece of the satellite image, and mark the roads and the buildings on it. That’s all we ask them to do. Then again, just like the Tofu OCR project, it has to be two or three people looking on the same grid." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then a mapping expert will do the review cycle, and so on. All this was done in 24 hours. After 24 hours of the earthquake, the satellite company donated the post-earthquake satellite image. That is the first time after disaster recovery we get donation in such short time-frame." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "For the second day, people focused on the post-quake imagery, doing exactly the same thing, but now marking which roads are broken, and which buildings or camps have appeared, whereas there were nothing before on that grid." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "On the third day, when the United Nations, the Red Cross field team came, they have an open street map on their mobile phone that shows which roads are broken, so you cannot enter there, and where are the refugees gathering, so you best deploy your logistics there." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is something that couldn’t really be done with their ordinary helicopter, or any this kind of work. This has to be done on the satellite level. Of those 2,000 mappers, maybe 200 of them were from Taiwan." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Our President-elect, Dr. Tsai Ing-wen -- she was still only a presidential candidate at that time -- she held a launch on Facebook and other social media to call for her supporters to do this kind of humanitarian work." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What I’m saying is that with this kind of tool, the boundary of nations no longer exist. As long as we turn something into a crowdsource project, we can do this kind of crowdsource work anywhere. We can map all the buildings and all the roads that was impacted by the Nepal earthquake." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Using these as examples, I want to say that g0v, this movement, is really way for three different kinds of people to learn from each other, something that they have been missing in their previous lives. The core people, the first of our people who started to register the domain of g0v.tw had a very simple idea." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "All the government websites in Taiwan ends with gov.tw. So, for example, the environmental agency is this. Now if you change in your browser the \"o\" to a \"0\" you get into the shadow government that is built by g0v." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It shows exactly the same data as the environmental agency. But whereas the environmental agency shows just tables, readings, and very boring things, in the g0v environmental agency, you see pretty pictures. [laughs] This is the air pollution level at this point." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "People use that in news broadcasting, in everyday, because it was very useful. It’s a lot of fun. You can see the PM 2.5, the O3, the rainfall, whatever. Because it’s open source, you can look at the data, the code, and if you don’t like the color, you don’t like the font, or if you don’t like the way that the progression was spent, you can contribute very easily." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "You can customize the visual?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly. Yes, you can just click the edit button. It didn’t start this way. It started in a much more geeky way, but then we have professional designers who are very much into this Japanese comics and manga called “Neon Genesis Evangelion.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "He used that font from the Eva, Evangelion fonts, so that it now looks like something from a cyberpunk design. [laughs] That was the idea, anybody who want to make contributions made contributions. This is much cooler than the government website for obvious reasons. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "The data were the same, where exactly by the same source?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, we have web scrapers or whatever to take data from the government, but we present it in a way that’s open data, and that allows everybody to customize." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "While in the previous thing you show us, you created new data. For example, in Nepal. In this case, the data source was not put into that. You were accepting the data, and just helping them to be more clear and visible?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, exactly, and also mashing up it with other sources of data. It works with all the major government organs. For example, the legislation is \"ly\" and so if you change to ly.g0v.tw, you see all the bills being debated, and it’s like a shopping cart." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You can see a progress bar [laughs] of where the bill is, and you can see a difference that shows in red and green, the before and after bill, the way geeks like it. [laughs] That was the initial group of people." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It is not just the geeks, because while we are the open source, hands-on hackers, we were actually not domain experts at civic participation. The traditional NGO people, the traditional mobilizers, organizers, people like that, they were very far from us." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There were very little overlap between people who actually understand environmental campaigning, like the Greenpeace people, versus the people who do this environmental visualization. We actually got a lot of things wrong in our first tries because we were not environmental experts." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We had to make contact. We made contact first with the people in the civic media like the bloggers that I mentioned, who has this very cynical view, because they thought this software cannot really change anything. Facebook doesn’t really motivate people." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then we say, “If you go to our hackathon and present your ideas, we will help to amplify your idea, and then to reach more people into actually make a real impact.” Basically, we teach them this hands-on spirit of not just writing blogs but doing something." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then we engage with the social activists, who are again, very hands-on, very public-spirited, but their main problem was that they don’t trust strangers. This is a fact. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There’s a lot of, I wouldn’t say schism, but doubts of people going to different directions or a misleading data or whatever. The first thing they ask is always, \"How do we know that our opposition movement will not feed us fake data?” or things like that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The way we work with them is showing that, with sufficiently number people and ICT technology, we can build a peer review system that is safe against vandalism, and doesn’t have data that you care about. We teach them the idea of open source, while they teach us the idea of the public spirits, the areas of concern." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Because g0v is using this domain, we are not limited in our projects. For every government agency or ministry, there is some social activists working on that area. It’s not limited to just elections or democracy. It could be environment, agriculture, education, whatever, you name it. There is a ministry for it. There is a g0v website for it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is three very different kinds of people, but because we learn from each other, we generally build something that is useful for all the three different groups of people. The way we do it is with very good food." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We hold every month hackathons and a large hackathon that happens every odd month. Like in March, it’s March 5, the open day that day. We have anywhere between 100 and 600 people in the same building, in the same room." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We use the standard, what we call the Open Space Technology. You’ll be aware that I don’t use three-letter acronyms. [laughs] Open Space Technology, it’s spelled out in full. We have this large room where we invite people from all walks of life to join and to share food with us." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When people ask about, “Where do g0v gets the money?” Well, it’s our campaign finance. We say that we only spend money on really good-quality food. It’s not that much money. We don’t spend money on anything else. We use free software. We don’t buy commercial solutions. It’s all zero or very near zero cost." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We spend a lot of effort and time to think about very good food, because a month after a monthly hackathon, most people forget about all the projects and all the people, but they will remember the food. If the food is particularly good, they will be inclined to join us on the next month. If the food is so bad, they will say bad words about our community. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "You rely on low instincts of man?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, the very basic instinct of people. Very good coffee and so on. We have a special domain called g0v.cafe, [laughs] where you can issue, print, and get this very high-quality instant coffee with g0v printed on it. It’s our souvenir. If you go to this web address, we ask for donations for the hackathon’s coffee and food." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s our fundraising way. When we raise funds and spend it on high-quality food, we spend everything immediately, so we don’t keep capital. When we run another month of the hackathon, we ask again for donations." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "For your donations, the only thing you get is a guaranteed ticket to the hackathon. [laughs] This is purely without commercial interest. Because the hackathons were sometime very popular, they got sold out in hours. A guaranteed ticket to a hackathon is still very valuable. People were willing to sponsor for that, for the good food." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What I’m saying is that with this way of, the thing in common between the social activists, the free software people, and the civic media, is they love good food and good coffee. They come for the food." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When they join us early in the morning, in the hackathons -- as I explained, the large ones every two months. It’s 100 people. The every other month is maybe 50 people or smaller -- you will see a bunch of stickers on the large hackathons. Those stickers -- each one is like this high -- you would take the sticker that describes you." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "For example, maybe I’m good at storytelling, maybe I’m good at making music, maybe I’m good at coding Python, or something. Then you take the stickers that represents your interests and put it on your shoulder. There’s also write-in stickers called “Nobody.” [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "If you have a proficiency that we don’t have a listing here, you can write it yourself. If sufficient people use this, then we’ll print it on our next version of the stickers. This goes through many iterations." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "This idea of the stickers have two issues that could interesting for us. The first one is that in some parts of Germany, people has stickers to declare their belonging to lobbies or potential..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Lobbies, yes." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "For example, membership of an association of shopkeeper, trade unions, and all that. In order that when they speak, when they talk in public, people know from what position they are speaking, if they have one." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "The second issue is that normally Open Space Technology have the Two Feet Law. That means that if you cannot contribute to a self-organized group, you go away in the next one. Here, you can see what kind of people there is there." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "If you think there are too many engineers in that area or too many cook in that area, you can move not for feeling or not a tease in the group, but because you think that the group is too homogeneous." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly. This is a diversifying way of the walking rule. This is not voting. This is diversification." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When you join for the first time you will take a deer sticker. Then, when you’re here for many times, a veteran, you will take a Taiwan bear sticker, and put it somewhere prominent. What are those stickers for?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The process is all day, sometimes two days. In the beginning of the day, everybody who has an idea -- “I want to do campaign financing. I want to do recall campaign. I want to do” whatever -- then I go on the stage, use PowerPoint, or some other tools to make a pitch for three minutes." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "At the end of the pitch we ask everybody to declare how many people of what expertise do they need for this project to function. For example, for a public finance campaigning project, they will obviously need one engineer, and one designer, front-end designer." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They will need one legal people to negotiate with the corrective union, and they will need a storyteller to turn this into a public design for social media. That’s the initial four talents that we need for it to succeed." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now, after maybe 20 projects, each present their ideas, people start to play musical chairs. That is to say, they crowd around the corner where the projects need those declared number of people. You can see it at a glance that this project already has an engineer, as the engineer go elsewhere." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Or that this project doesn’t really have a storyteller, as a storyteller, you will join them. By the end of maybe 10 minutes, 15..." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Sort of markets of talents?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly, yes. Then, by the end of maybe 15 minutes..." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Free markets." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, it is. There will be a lot of a deer caught in headlights, staying in the same position, not sure where to go. [laughs] There will be a lot of bears coming one on one, joining to the side of this first-comer, and start to talk with them, saying, “What is your concern usually? What brings you here? What is your daily life? What kind of issues you care about? Walk with me.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "By the end of the walk, they will find themselves in a project. That is the kind of mentoring that we do. For a 100-people hackathon, usually maybe 40 people or 30 people will be first time in the hackathon." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Currently the demographics is about maybe 20 percent engineers, 20 percent designers, and then other people, storytellers, news media people. There’s a lot of public servants now and people from all walks of life." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then they have a project now, which we call kou, meaning a gap. The reason why we don’t call it a project is that people who are founding projects, in Chinese at least, have this notion of project leader, a project commissioner, a project organizer." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sometimes people just identify a gap, and then they walk away. They just really have an idea, and they work on some other thing. They should not have authority or control on the people who actually fill the gap to do the actual work." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "By rephrasing things this way, by identifying a gap in reality, where we have to hack on, we erase this kind of top two-button function of organization, so anybody who walk into this gap is a contributor. Then we hack for an entire day or two days." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now, after the entire day or two days, every project has five minutes at the end of the closing day to present what they have built over the day. Usually, they will have the prototype already, because they have the right talents." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then their presentation would say what in the next month, what is their participation policy? Some projects will say, “We meet every Friday after next month.” Some projects would say, “We meet in this chatroom in IRC, in Slack.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Some project would say, “This is a long-term project. We just meet again at the next month’s hackathon.” Every project is different, but this is very important because then it connects people who already connect to the project to future meet-ups." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Many projects have this weekly meet-up where it’s just three people, five people, seven people, but they do sprints to make the project actually happen between the large hackathons. When you participate in those sprints or meet-ups, you will meet more people." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then you will tell those people that hackathons are a great place, so they will join the next month’s hackathon and identify more projects. [laughs] This really is a circle, and g0v is not an organization, this is just a way of doing things." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Its just a habit, a way of living. Anybody who come is a participant, and who contribute is a contributor. We don’t have a leader. We don’t have a spokesperson. It’s just space, really, online space and offline space." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "I’m curious of one thing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "My question was quite simple. Just give us some example of projects recently, you came up with this hackathon mechanism, just whatever. Doing this kind of project that has strong ICT content, or there are projects that are completely..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, that was my next slide. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "My question was different. You often say “we,” and so, I was trying to understand the “we” you say, what is referred to. Now, you are talking about something which is a space of encounter, and not a movement. When you say “we,” you talk about what exactly?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In order to be a g0v project, the only requirement is, if it’s a coding project to use a open source license, meaning that other people can use your product without asking your permission." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "If it is a non-coding project, we ask people to use Creative Commons, which again, is a way to say people can copy your work without asking you. When I say “we” and people who agree to this protocol of social...I would still say it is a movement." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "People say open source movement, the Creative Common movement, the free culture movement, but this is not specific to Taiwan, or specific to g0v. It is a global -- not even global -- this is a both global and also on the Internet, mixed-reality kind of movement that is happening all around the world." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "g0v really is like a gateway into this wider, world-wide movement that is defined by the open source and Creative Commons, free culture movements. When I say “we,” I mean the people who see this way of doing things, and is willing to contribute or at least participate under this protocol." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Any other questions?" }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Do you think that others also use “we?” You feel a strong identification with those principles. Do you think that this is spread around, so you all behave in the same way?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, exactly, because we don’t really have a spokesperson. There is nobody who speaks for g0v. This used to confuse the media to no end. They would say, “I would like to interview your leader,” and we were like, “We don’t have any leaders.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There was a very early motto of g0v that says, “Don’t ask why nobody is doing the work. Admit first that you are that nobody.” This is a combination of many different slogans before, [laughs] but this means that it is OK to start doing something imperfect." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When the media people says, “Why is nobody working on the project?” we will say, “Be that nobody. You come to our hackathon, and you start a project.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is a way, what we call, “Worse is better,” which is a core open source tenet. This is an example for you. This is 0th g0v hackathon. We count zero-based, we’re geeks." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "On the 0th hackathon, there is a logo of g0v that was designed by two coders, two friends of mine. I wasn’t joined in g0v at the time. I joined two months later." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They were brilliant coders. They were master hackers, but they sucks at visual design. Anybody here can design a better logo than this. It’s very difficult to get an uglier logo than this, especially with the JPEG artifact." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is so ugly. They had the guts to print this in A1, hang it in Academia Sinica, in open space as a welcome banner, “This is the g0v hackathon. Come and join us.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "For the 100 or so, 90 people joining, it became a very sore spot, because it’s so ugly. One of the visual designers wrote on social media that, “This is so effing ugly that I cannot do anything productive, unless I make a better logo.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We infuriate a visual designer. He just looked at this very ugly logo, feeling completely outraged, and produced a better logo. This is at the end of the day at the hackathon. This is his only contribution, because he is immobilized. He cannot do anything else, so now, he makes something better." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is like discussion. This is actually a lot like your logo. This is a lens that is viewing the society, and then this is melting. It has some culture in it, and it’s much easier on the eyes." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then, because he abandons copyright under Creative Commons Zero, people were free to then iterate, to improve on this idea, which is very important, because this doesn’t look so well on mobile phone. If you look at it in a very low resolution, it doesn’t look like G-O-V or G-0-V anymore." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It will look like G-Q-V. We registered gqv.tw just because of this, [chuckles] because people typed in the wrong way. Then it was iterated. A much better visual design came, which looks like this. On low resolution, we just show the square, which is very identifiable as a zero." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Without the two shameless people who published their ugly work, they would not infuriate a designer. If they do not infuriate a designer, we would not have a better logo. It’s very minor things like this. We overcome the Asian culture of what we call “losing face.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There is nothing to lose while doing something imperfect. There’s this Leonard Cohen song that says, “There is a crack in everything, and that is how the light gets in.” Without this imperfect thing, nobody will come and help, but if you do something a very ugly way, everybody will come and help you. [laughs] That is the basic operation way that g0v works." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s the first hour. Is it OK with people?" }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Yes." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now, a larger project. This is the project that brought me into g0v, and it is a dictionary. It is the Ministry of Education Dictionary." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "It is not the project that was born inside the hackathon?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It was, but it was on the first hackathon. It used to confuse the media, because the first hackathon is the second hackathon. The zero was the first. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "On the first, which is really the second, hackathon, we started this project called the MoeDict. By last year -- actually, this is an old slide -- we have seven million visits per month, and we have half a million Android, iOS, Windows phone, Symbian, Blackberry, or whatever users." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "People really use this to teach in school, Chinese, because Chinese in Taiwan is spoken in many, many different ways. There’s Mandarin. There’s Taiwanese Holo. There’s Taiwanese Hakka. There’s also the Taiwanese Austronesian upper region Amis. There’s also Tibetan, because of the Tibetan Buddhism influence, there’s people from the mainland China, who came to live in Taiwan, and so on." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There’s just a lot of different ways Chinese and Austronesian language is spoken in Taiwan. This dictionary website, this project, integrates everything together. You can type in French, in German, or in English, see the Chinese word, and how the Taiwanese Hakka, Holo, Mandarin people pronounce it, the strokes of how it should be written, and so on. It’s a very useful website." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It started in the first hackathon, by my very old friend Yeh Ping. He was a physics professor, quantum physics, in National Taiwan University, but he joined Google Taiwan, to work on Google’s cloud center in Taiwan. After working in Google for a few years, he moved to the Valley. Now, he works on Google Analytics, I think." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When he moved to the US, he brought his children with him. He found that it’s very difficult to teach his children Chinese when he was in the US. Learning Chinese is hard enough, [laughs] but learning Chinese in a foreign country is very difficult." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The way we learned Chinese in our generation was through the Ministry of Education Dictionary, which was available as a website in the Gopher protocol. Many people here will not remember this, but before the World Wide Web, there was Gopher. There was Archie." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Those were the pre-World Wide Web kind of World Wide Web. That’s how we learned the dictionary, because it was published on Gopher. Of course, after the World Wide Web came, everything becomes the World Wide Web, so it has a website, and that’s how we learned from it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The website was built at the dawn of the Web. Nobody really knew how to do websites at that point, so it was an absurd website, but the content is top-class. It is the definition of Chinese language, in classical Chinese." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Because of Cultural Revolution, Mainland China doesn’t really retain that much material about classical Chinese anymore. It’s like the Latin, or ancient Greek of Chinese. This dictionary has all the citations, all the etymologies, and everything about classical Chinese, and how it’s evolved into modern Chinese. This is linguistically a treasure." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But, because this website was built in ’96, there was no idea of a bookmarking or a permanent link. You cannot bookmark and visit again. It won’t work. Because it was using legacy encoding, there was no Unicode at that time. All the difficult characters were done in 24 x 24 bitmaps, which you cannot copy and paste." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It doesn’t support mobile phones, because there were no mobile phones [laughs] at the time. If you view source, you will see it’s best viewed in IE5 or Netscape 4.7+. The plus here is redundant because Netscape has discontinued after 4.7. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is a very, very old website. I’m just trying to get through this feeling of a ruin, a living fossil, or something of a website. Because HTTP 1.1 has not been invented at that time, the idea of a keep-alive connection is not invented." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It automatically logs you out after 30 minutes of inaction to conserve server resources. The funny thing is that there is no login button, so you will get redirected to the home page after idling for 30 minutes, saying, “Sorry we had to log you out.” But there’s no login button. Why are you logging me out? [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "All the dictionary websites after this took this as the spec, because it then became as procurement as part of the functionality spec. All the modern websites built by the ministry of education in the next 10 years have the same function, even if it makes no sense now. It became an absurd, ridiculous joke of an ICT technology, even though it’s a great dictionary." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Having basically attended a hackathon from abroad..." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Was it a useful function, or?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Switching to engineering mode, as a geek, HTTP was invented in a very draft form where it was not possible to automatically keep the connection between the browser and the server. This is what we call stateless. You make a request, like ordering something from the menu." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then browsers evolved. Netscape 2.0 or something introduced this idea of a keep-alive connection where, when you make a request, it doesn’t close the connection. It will just keep it open in case you want to click somewhere else." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Because the server software were written in ’96, before the HTTP 1.1 spec, it doesn’t know that after five minutes of inaction, I just terminate this browser connection. Every browser connection was consuming one process, one resource on the server." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Because the server cannot auto-disconnect, it will become overloaded if too many simultaneous connections are kept." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "That happens within the agency. It’s called flag searching." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Or something like that, yes. Then, actually, in ’97, most of the modern Web servers has this idea just called, \"keep-alive:closed.\" If a web server says this, the browser will not keep the connection alive." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Because the website was not updated, there’s no budget for it after ’96. A technical problem in ’96 lived on for 20 years, even though all they have to do was to upgrade to the newer version of the NCSA, later Apache web server." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Nobody was around to do that, so the same function [laughs] was there for the next 20 years. It was basically “out of maintenance.” All the staff they have just knows how to buy more hardware, things like that. The programmers, they all went away." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I imagine this is not a Taiwan-only problem. When you contract out the ICT solution, the funding is just for one year or two year, the team disbands, and it’s not open source, it becomes very difficult to get the second team to carry on the work." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sometimes, they just rewrite everything, and if they rewrite everything, they ask for more budget. If they ask for more budget, and the ministry doesn’t have it, what you have is a legacy system that runs for 20 years. That’s it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "With that, Yeh Ping attended the hackathon from the US, and that is when we started to do live streaming for our hackathons, because they had to attend from all over the world, not just Taipei City." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "For that hackathon, we had Taipei, Tainan, and Taichung -- that’s three cities in Taiwan -- simultaneously using this kind of telepresence. He outlined a vision, saying that, “I need data collection, data cleaning, structured data,” and so on, other the requirements." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Within 24 hours, we, the hackers, downloaded everything from the dictionaries and Yeh Ping designed a JSON -- that is to say, structured data -- that matched the HTML. Some other hacker wrote a program that converts the website into the structured data." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Some other hacker converted the relational database, and some other hacker turned it into a website, also an input method extension, also an online dictionary, also an offline dictionary, and also a mobile phone. All of this was done in 24 hours. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is called rough consensus, because we don’t need anybody’s permission. Everybody just works on whatever they need or their children need, with out any niche coordination." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "About those 24 x 24 bitmaps, where we need to identify the Unicode for it, we set up a Google spreadsheet that asked people to look at the pictures, and then using handwriting input method something, to try to identify the Unicode for those characters." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Again, within 24 hours, we had participants all around the world, about 100 people. We thought it was a lot of people at that time. About 100 people identifying all those difficult words from pictures into the Unicode code points, so we can copy and paste the definition in the dictionary." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The fun thing of this is that we brought down Google Spreadsheet, because there’s too many people editing in the same time, and there’s too many pictures. This is going to become a trend. Anytime we try a new service in g0v, we would bring down that service. We’re like the scalability testing team for new services on the Internet." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "For this case, I had to actually build a new spreadsheet system called EtherCalc. EtherCalc is like Google Spreadsheet, but because it’s free software and because you don’t have to sign in, the server overhead is much lower. People can just do whatever they want on it, without incurring the same server load of things." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now, we’ll face the legal problem. The reason why the Ministry of Education, nobody was doing this before, was that they say, “All copyrights reserved” on their front page. It says, “You may not link to individual entries in the dictionary.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Actually, you cannot link to it anyway, but they said you can just link to the home page and “all copyright reserved.” In Taiwan, the Fair Use law says you can use a reasonable part of a government-produced work, as long as you’re using it for non-profiting purposes or for educational purposes." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I imagine it’s the same doctrine anywhere. We’re not using a part, we’re using 100 percent of that data." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Correspondingly, we have to relinquish 100 percent of our claim. At that time, there is an invention firm Creative Common movement called Creative Commons Zero. When people use CC0, they say, “I relinquish even the attribution copyright.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s like it enters the public domain immediately, without waiting for me to die, and the 70 more years. With CC0, we said all our code in the dictionary are CC0. All our data that we converted are CC0, meaning that we’re really just doing data conversion work for the government." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We’re not really claiming any copyright on it. We argue this is a fair use, because it’s proportional to the proportion that we use, zero, 100 percent. [laughs] This is a very interesting legal case." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "While the lawyers in the ministry are debating this subject -- they took a year -- we try to say, because it’s not one individual doing in, it’s 30 hackers doing it, it’s called “civil disobedience.” [laughs] We maintained this fair use, peaceful doctrine by that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now, we have structured data, what we call five-star data, meaning that every word has a URL, has a website address. Data, ziliao, in Chinese, everybody knows its website address in MoeDict, because it’s just moedict.tw/資料." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There’s no need to remember. This is again, the same hack as g0v.tw. You don’t have to remember our website. It’s just government website change." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "With linked data, open linked data, when you mouse over or hover over any word in the dictionary, it will show a cross-reference of the dictionary definition in other dictionaries or in the same dictionary, in a linked data kind of way. This is how we do permanent links." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "People started showing each other definitions of words on Facebook. We did for Facebook, Twitter, and Google+ what we call an Open Graph cover image. The cover image means that anybody who types moedict.tw/開放資料工作坊, meaning open data workshop. Of course, there is no such entry in the dictionary, yet." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Instead of saying, 404 Not Found, we say, this is the definition of open, this is the definition of data, this is the definition of a workshop. Then we use beautiful calligraphic to produce an image that is whatever you have just wrote." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This became the sweetheart of mobilizers everywhere, because on Facebook, this virality is 10 times more than compared to if you just had a message without a picture. If you have a picture that doesn’t match your message, it could be a counter-influence. If you have a really good high-quality image, maybe it’s copyrighted, so that’s another problem." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The mobilizers spent a lot of time searching for high quality images that matched their message. Now with MoeDict, they don’t have to do that anymore. They just say, “Go to the streets tomorrow,” and then you have a banner that says, “Go to the street tomorrow.” It looks like this." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then you can use whatever message you have and, because we abandoned copyright, nobody will sue you. This becomes the preferred banner tool for online mobilizers in Taiwan." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "With this kind of technology, if you think this calligraphy is not fitting you message, we offer you a whole menu of open source or free fonts, so you can tailor-make the font to suit your message, whatever you want it to look, very violent, very peaceful, or very classic, whatever." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "People use this for most mundane things like, “I feel so good today,” or whatever. They just let their friends know their feelings. In a sense, we hack into the Facebook algorithm with this kind of dictionary technology." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When you see people share like this, you can then re-share it on Facebook, Twitter, and Google+. It went viral very easily. Now, with this kind of virality engine, we have seven million visits per month." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When you have 7 million visits per month, whenever we put a call to action on the website, as MOE Dictionary, even though maybe 1 in 1,000 will donate their time, that’s a lot of people. We will start to ask people’s time to digitize old dictionaries made in the ’70s, that we only have very low quality print-version now." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We do a scan and then we ask people, again just like the Tofu, to adjust for the OCR because the OCR of low quality sometimes makes mistakes. You look at the OCR result, you correct the mistakes, and you send it out. Again, we have the progress bar that lets everybody know that you are contributing to preserving the culture of the Aborigines." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "“You’re doing a good work, thank you,” and so on. It worked. The Amis-Mandarin-English trilingual dictionary, this dict, was digitized in just two days and a half by a lot of those people, and then we have an electronic dictionary." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "People who love words spent a lot of time on this, just doing free work, and then digitizing the dictionary that they care about. They don’t even need to know Amis or Français, because it’s just typing in Latin characters." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "While the ministry lawyers were debating our case, they were having an activity where they asked people to spot problems -- typos, errors -- in the MOE dictionary. They’re finally, after 20 years, trying to do a new version." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now, within those 18 days, we started a campaign on our version of the MOE dictionary, saying we use a program to identify two entries that cites the same source, but differ by one word, meaning one of it is probably a typo. A computer knows which one is different, but it doesn’t know which one is correct." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We asked our readers to Google, see which one is correct, choose the one that is correct, and send it out. We collect more than 5,000 erratas from the dictionary this way, and sent it all back to the ministry. They have maybe 6,000 contributions, and a majority was from the MoeDict." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "On the day of our sending of this dictionary errata in this huge spreadsheet, they gave us an award and say, “What you’re doing is fair use.” If they sue us, it’s not against 30 hackers any more. It’s against thousands of language lovers, teachers, high school students. They cannot risk even alienating any of those people, because they’re the core constituency of that ministry." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When we involve all the teachers, all the students, all the linguistics scholars, and academics, the civil disobedience becomes a national thing. Then all they can do is, “I give you an award. This is fair use.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now, we digitized the aborigine dictionary. This is the Amis, slada, meaning a square. The way we do this is not because a project leader like me or Yeh Ping, knows Amis, Français, or Hakka. We don’t, actually." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The way we do is that we work on a language we know, and then we open source everything. Then any other language, just take it, and build their own MoeDict website. This is different from how the ministry used to do things." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The ministry used to do things in a coordinated way. They have a committee of five people, and when the sixth people join, they have to know the other five people, each one representing one language, a community. There’s a lot of fighting of which council member represent that minority." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Some Aborigine will say, “We are actually two tribes, not one tribe, so it’s not fair,” things like that. Committees have a lot of problems, exactly because human beings cannot really know 30 people in the same room, and have the same share of time." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "With the way MoeDict is doing things, which we call collaboration, if we have started something that we share, and then any other language is free to take it in whatever direction. Sometimes, like in Amis, they will have very good idea." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then the Mandarin dictionary will just merge, because everybody relinquished their copyright into the Mandarin dictionary. Then other dictionaries will follow. If some ideas are so fringe that it’s only useful for their community, it’s still OK." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They just fork the project and maintain an independent website, specially tailored to that community. This is what we call a rough consensus. As long as people agree generally on the direction, even people who collaborate with enemies, are able to work together by going on their different ways. That’s another half hour of talk." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "What are we doing? Do you want to have a break?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Let me finish with just one last slide. Yeh Ping registered this domain. Now, you know what it means, edu.tw to 3du.tw." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "After two years, the Ministry of Education finally says, “All our dictionaries, past, future, are released under Creative Commons. You don’t even have to do civil disobedience or fair use. We now join your movement.” It took two years and a half." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Or, for example, we have an open data portal where we wrote an open data license that we will want to see from all the communities in Taiwan. The government, the National Development Council, saw it as a much better license than the license they were using, which is not 100 percent open data definition compatible." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Because they merged back the data portal from g0v, suddenly all the levels in the city level and the national level are in an open definition compatible license. Because of that, the Open Knowledge Foundation Network, OKFN global open data index, Taiwan became, from g0v was first founded, the 36th place, to 11th place, to now, this year, the first place." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That is not because we produce more data, but because all the agencies merged the g0v way of doing open data, including the license and the infrastructure. I think we will have a pause for maybe 10 minutes, but people are still free to talk and ask questions." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Do you need coffee or something?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Coffee would be great." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Eh?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Coffee would be great." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Just a small one." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Just espresso?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Espresso is great. Thank you." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "Very interesting." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Thank you. We are just halfway, so I’m worried about time." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "This is still recording, so keep in mind that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We can go all the way to 5:30 or something? It’s not a limit?" }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "We reserved the whole afternoon." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "I think it’s 5:30. I think, maximum, 6:00. Vanessa, for example, it’s snowing in her village, so she has to go before the snow cover. The majority of us, we can stay here. It’s just to learn some, and I think the next slide is on the budget?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, it’s about PB." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "For us, it’s more..." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "I think it’s very, very interesting. It’s the first time that I see a presentation about egovernment and this type of movement from people who really know what..." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "What they are saying." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "Because most of the people have no clue what these agencies do, like the Clipper chip, and the Web. It’s important to see, also, if you understand that design is also important." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I was there when it was being done. I was reading all the RFCs when the Web was being created. Yes, because the laws on the Internet that..." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "How old were you?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "13 or something. The laws on the Internet are like physical laws that define what’s possible and what’s impossible. In policy discussions, if you don’t have people who know what’s possible and what’s not, it’s very difficult." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "Did you participate in the IETF?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, but that’s in the early 2000s, 2000, I think, ’03 or ’04." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "More or less same time." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "You have the same age, more or less, ’81." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I started coding in ’89." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "I’m ’90. We are the same age, like... I’ve been to several meetings, because I was working in a draft proposal. I didn’t like the way that was. I don’t know what is your opinion, but I didn’t like that much idea, because you have..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Which working group were you on?" }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "I was in Mesos." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "What is IETF?" }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "IETF is a standardization where we, it’s where I grew up, the Internet, basically." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s like the Parliament of the Internet..." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "I was with guys from Siemens, and stuff like that. It pains me that most of them are there only to do work and business, and go forward. You see what, the old guys, the guys with white hair and beard..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right. I think the IETF in the early ’90s is very different from the Millennials." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "Exactly." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When I say to the media usually that I’m a conservative anarchist, I mean that I want to conserve the ’90s idea, spirit. It’s going narrower, but I think we still need to keep that tradition." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "I saw so many stuff going around. I went something like three years, went around to all the meetings. I saw things like people discussing outside the meetings, what they want to be presented at what..." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "Should we start?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, we should probably start." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Should we start?" }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "We continue after the break. The floor is yours. If you need more water, I have it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure. For the people..." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "...our things, our specific things." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It took much longer than we expected, but I was told that we have this floor until maybe 5:30, or even 6:00. The thing is that for the people -- hi, over there [laughs] -- we will continue for at least an hour. In the beginning of the hour, I will start talking about one particular case, that the g0v -- it’s actually the Zeros Project of g0v -- it’s budget.g0v.tw." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The magic about this project was that it was the initial thing that promoted the creation of this domain. It started with a television advertisement. The Taiwan government has, at that time, what they call an economic boost-up plan. It’s like one of those five-year plans." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The plan is very complicated. To spend the budget wisely, they reallocated all the different ways to spend public money on the national level. Now, they filmed a movie, an advertisement -- just five minutes, short movie -- that they broadcast on YouTube." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It was the first YouTube account movie that they published to the netizens in addition to television networks. That advertisement, which I will spare you, is basically showing the economic power-up plan on top and then five people looking very puzzled to this banner." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then the voice-over says, “The economic power-up plan is a very complicated plan. We would like to explain in five minutes, but it is not possible. We will just tell you that we have everything figured out. In the five minutes time, I would ask you to not question the government’s decisions, and just go on with it. To do economy, we don’t need more debates, we just need actions to go ahead and do it.”" }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "So, “Trust us. Trust us, and don’t criticize.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes. Trust us, and don’t criticize. It is a very complicated plan. “You must trust us, and we don’t trust you to understand.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is so insulting that the director of that advertisement was replaced promptly. Also, that sufficient people used this YouTube feature called report as spam on that YouTube advertisement so that the Taiwan government become the first government to be marked as a junk mailer and to be removed the account from YouTube. People were just saying this is spam." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Of course, all it takes is for a letter to YouTube to restore their account but one of the founders of g0v, CL Kao, was at the time in the Yahoo! hackathon. They were doing a very commercial kind of hackathon, where people present commercial ideas." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They were trying to do some eshopping, this kind of hackathon. Because of the YouTube account was restored that day, they feel very much insulted. They changed their topic on the very last minute, and decided to download all the PDF and Word files of the national budget." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Saying, “You don’t trust us to understand it because it’s too complicated, and cannot be explained in five minutes, but maybe the problem is the way you share your data. Maybe the problem is not with our brain, maybe the problem is with the way you show it, with 500 pages of PDF files.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They took those 500 pages and made a website, budget.g0v.tw, that shows the same national budget but in a way that could be explained at the end of the hackathon in five minutes, as existential proof that this could be understood in five minutes. They had to register a domain for it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They registered this domain, and that was the beginning of g0v, because they got some minor award from the hackathon. They used the money to buy very good food for their fellow hackers. That was the creation, so to speak, of g0v. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "No food, no hacking." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly, exactly. Now, from the environmental agency, I will now take you to the budget side. This is the Taipei City government. The web address is budget.taipei. If you type budget.taipei in your browser or something, you will go to this website." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is saying very prominently on the top saying, this is a fork from the g0v central government website. It’s right on the top, and it has any number of Facebook likes." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What this is doing is, it’s saying to you that the education budget is the largest among all the city government budgets. However, it’s getting cut by about two percent, compared to the previous year because of the color. Everybody could see that right?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then the environmental..." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "The pink is the cuts?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, the pinks are the cuts. The red are the severe cuts. The green are the increase, year by year. The one that was a red circle around it, are the maintenance costs. Meaning that this has to happen every year. You cannot cut this. Yes, any questions?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The non-red ones are investment, meaning that it is subject to change year by year. Now, you could see that in a glance, that for example, social housing, social security is getting more and more, and so on. If you want to look at the entire budget, you can also do that. [laughs] The ones that are getting increased float." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "The areas are organized by areas with cuts and area with..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "The color is meaningful?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, that’s what the color is saying. You can see that the top one with the red circle, I have no idea what it is, actually. Oh, it is the pension because Taipei City is letting go of all their private chauffeurs for the city officials, in a way to reduce costs or something and all the benefits that the Taipei officials are having." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They’re now just taking the metro, like everybody else, but they need to pay the pension to those private drivers that were driving for them before. Anybody, in a few seconds, can see what this is doing." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "In the United States, I don’t know if you know. There is a thing called debt-in-taxes, which has been done by a marketing agency. There was a representation of the American budget, which is in the studio of each one of the members of parliament because it is the only way." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "They did an experiment and now it’s a three meters long poster that I have also at home, which is very interesting. It was an experiment of marketing but it became the only way for the member of parliament to understand the budget." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly, to visualize. Now, here what we see is four buttons, meaning that you ask for more of this budget. You do not understand the explanation, you want to cut it or you want to delete it altogether." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Whenever you click that, you will be asked, why? The interesting thing here is -- all this in Chinese, obviously -- I will go to maybe social security, labor, whatever, social. I think labor is more interesting." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "You have to be logged in to do that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "To comment, of course. For example, in labor, where they have a reeducation and whatever, you see a treemap, but you also see the very fine details. You can see, for the labor insurance, for the labor union or whatever, how they exactly are spending the money." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is what they send to the council. This is exactly the same work as they send to the city council. With software, we can highlight the parts that gets increased or gets decreased, and the reason behind this." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When people have a discussion of this, sometimes we want people to understand exactly how this is like. For example, when we switch to the units that is perhaps iPhone 5 -- I don’t know why iPhone 5 is here -- it would tell us how many iPhone 5s is this amount of money and so on. When people..." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Calculate it in iPhone 5." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, exactly." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "You can calculate it in pharma, for example." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "It’s food." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes. You can use very creative units." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "Can I ask just one question?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure, yes." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "Can you show, for example, what is the amount of repaying the debt in this budget?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, sure." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "For example, in Italy we’ll have big, big bubble that is corresponding." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "It’s obviously possible." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s here, actually." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "You can choose several things that you can use to calculate, can you choose here or the iPhone 5 the only option?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No. [laughs] The other ones are in Mandarin." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I will translate for you. These are, in order, yuan, which is just Taiwan dollars, and then this is a lunch, how many lunch there is, the average national salary, how many minutes of space travel. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Business trips." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, business trips. \"How many bubble teas\". \"How many Icelands\"." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Icelands?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "\"How many Icelands\"." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "How many Icelands?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah. I think they’re using the total Iceland’s bailing out money as the unit, I think, when Iceland went bankrupt..." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Ah, OK." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "Iceland, OK." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "[laughs] Yes, as a loan. Yes." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "There’s no loan from Iceland." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "How many ports is that?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "[laughs] Yes, and you can see this, how many relative size and things like that. To answer your question, the debt is here. It’s in the other expenses, which is not that much actually. Also, the pension, and also this is disaster preparation. Then this is like temporary workers actually, which is not so much. It’s OK. Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "So the main issue is it is a multi-level readability. You can adapt to the culture of the reader, different level of understanding?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly. If you are an expert, then you debate on this level. But if you’re just a layperson, you still have a basic idea to what the budget is about." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "In iPhones." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In iPhones. Exactly. [laughs] Exactly in iPhones. Because each of this has a discussion board, people could click on it and say” I want more, I want less,” and so on and have a Facebook discussion on it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "After one month of people pressing like and saying whatever they like or dislike about the budgets, the city government surprised all of them by having all of the office reply to all of the comments directly." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is amazing. We use the focus conversation method to reply first to the fact questions. Like, I see the stadium being invested by. I don’t see the construction what’s going on? Then the reflections. Like, this should be more, this should be less, then ideas." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "People were very surprised when the city government people replied to them in this way. The reason why they do that, as I’ve said, the mayor was an independent. He doesn’t have a party. The entire city council is his opposition." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When he want to do participatory budgets, by allocating some percent of the city investment budget, the council was against that because there was no party backing the mayor. Then it was seen as they shouldn’t have attacked our representative democracy from the direction of direct democracy." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The mayor then said, “We bypass the council. We now recruit people who can make sense out of this information, who made interesting or useful contributions. We send them invitations through their local communities for them to attend classes to educate for them about budgeting.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When they get 12 hours of education, they get a credit card. When they get 24 hours, they get additional training on how to talk with civic servants specialties. Then, if they enroll in another 12 hours of training, they train to become facilitators." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "How to hold meetings, how to take records, how to do cross-sectoral stakeholder analysis, very basic facilitator training, and they call it deliberators -- city deliberators. By the end of the 36-hour training, they get this metro card that has their name on it, saying that this is the biz-B card." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You are now a biz-B of the Taipei city. That is like a civil servant, but from the civic society. When they have completed training of maybe 300 people in three different batches of these kind of deliberators, they now have the same kind of counter-expertise that could rival the budget committee of the city council." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now, they see the same data and they have more or less the same level of expertise and knowledge. Then Mayor Ko could start doing participatory budgeting. Before that, he doesn’t really have the buy-in from the city council." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The city civil servants would be very scared, because then maybe all the budgets gets cut when the participatory budget process runs at the end. It still need a stamp of approval from the city council." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now, with this threat, or carrot on a stick kind of thing, of saying, “You will get bypassed if you don’t buy-in into this process,” Mayor Ko now gets much more buy-in from the city council, which is now their role as the leaders of those civic deliberators." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now, they are much more aligned in value, but this is because we have people who speak the civil service language or the elected council member language through this kind of public education for at least half a year. That’s how Taipei does its PB plan." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s based on the national budget work that g0v did as its Zeros Project. I hope I am making sense. Any questions?" }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "That means that he’s strengthening his weak political position through a program that was matching transparency, civic training, in order to create precondition to have a society that could support externally the lack of political support into him?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes. That’s brilliant analysis. Exactly. Yes." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "That was because you were there to help him with this?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Without your system, it wouldn’t have happened?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right, because then the council would have to approve a budget to buy a system to replace them, which will never happen. [laughs] The fact that we offer this system for free is, of course, critical." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Of course, we are trying to imagine what kind of things EMPATIA can offer. It’s attractive because it’s for free, but at the same time, obliged to a larger level of transparency, of responsiveness by the institution than what exists now?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "We understood that also from your perspective, the fact of offering for free tempting things, although these tempting things included a responsibility, a duty of transparency, they continue to be attractive." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Our discussion is exactly on that, on how we can get attention and try to contribute..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Also, when Taipei City did this, the Taichung City, the southern city, announced immediately that they would also publish their entire PDF in an OpenSpending format to join this platform, because they don’t want to be seen as less administratively progressive than Taipei City. They’re fighting for the capital position, actually. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "All this budget platform relies on the publication of budget data and open data from central and local authorities in all the online?" }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "A. Exactly, yes." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "When you started already, you had this source of open data?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "The platform was also able to, let’s say, activate?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Scrape, yes." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "Because one problem, for example, we met one of another project, which is like a clean or cozy project, also founded by the UN. It’s called Open Budget, and focuses exactly on providing semantic, blah, blah, blah, blah, for analyzing code." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "The point is that it originally relies on the fact that it’s based on a whistleblowing principle, so that citizens will provide this kind of data bottom-up." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "Which somehow, it’s a mechanism that can be enacted just when there is a certain kind of critical mass, I would say, that push other to imitate it with something that exists, but I’m not sure, how does it start? How did it start? What was the original for that?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I’m reminded that I should not write acronyms so I will write Freedom of Information Act. I think most countries have something like that where you can ask your government things, and they must publicize it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The problem is, this act is read-only. The public, in most civil tradition countries, meaning that if they give you an A4 paper, or a PDF file that is scanned, the only thing you can do is to read it. You cannot sell it. You cannot change it. You cannot even put it on your website sometimes. All you can do is to read it, maybe aloud to other people, but that’s the only thing you can do." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then, again, what it gives, is information, meaning, it’s understandable by people, but not necessarily computers. If they give a very low quality scan, there’s nothing you can do with it on computers, without human. The Freedom of Information Act is a start, but it’s never strong enough." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In Taiwan, where we’re pushing for open data, we make a very, very clear distinction saying, “When you go from public read-only to open read-write, you enable people to make things like this because you can now change the way the data is presented.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You can make tabular data into treemaps, but in the original public Information Act, you cannot do that because it was not licensed using an open definition or a Creative Commons license, that enables remixes and creativities of this kind of thing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We sell the idea of open data not through data policy, but through the openness that allows people to do the convincing, the translation, the visualization, everything, reporting, storytelling work for the government, for the civil servants." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "For the civil servants this is very attractive, because that makes their position much more important than the elected officials, because they are the provider of this information, which then gets converted for free to reach more people. This is the first thing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now the next thing as you said, sometimes with whistleblowers or with Freedom of Information Act, all we get is low quality information, but we want to turn it into a machine." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Maybe you are in a certain spot, a specific area, or have good information, but you cannot go over a..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly. It’s not machine readable. If it’s not machine readable in its entirety with context, then it’s not really data. You can call it raw data, but this is very stretching it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "To make information into something that is also machine readable, we rely on the international community like the OpenSpending Community, the OKFN, the W3C, Code for All, the usual suspects to define the international formats." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That we say, “If you convert your information to this data definition that’s being maintained by 27 countries,” which is true, “you automatically get visibility to 27 countries.” Because Taiwan is not part of United Nations, it’s not part of WIPO, all the elected officials are very interested in getting pilot visibility anywhere in the world, [laughs] because it was like a hidden country." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Under OKFN where we were, the first place, they had to change this column. This used to say, “Country,” but now it just says, “Place.” Because of that, that Taiwan is not in the United Nations, they had to change for a multilateralism way of thinking, of sovereignty to multistakeholderism, where Taiwan is 23 million people of a civil society, or some other things like that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The idea is that elected officials buy into this, because when they publish information in a way that it is also compatible with international data, then they get international visibility like the top space on the OKFN index, which is very good for publicly elected officials." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This way, we convince the public servants and the elected. This way, we convince the elected officials. Together, we change Taiwan’s norm from the public information to open data. Now, any information system that costs less than one million euros are open data Creative Commons by default." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They cannot even argue. They cannot even refuse. As long as this is built in under a million euros of total budget over the past three years, they must be open data in a machine readable format, under a Creative Commons compatible license. This completely changes the role of civil servants. I will explain how we get to there in the next slide. Is that OK?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "As I said, all the technologies we worked that I showed so far is from the government to the civil society, and asking for the feedback, but the civil society is not satisfied with that. What we really want is agenda-setting power, is saying, \"What kind of things must the government think about.\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is because the civil society, although it has solidarity, linking, whatever, is never getting the same amount of early-stage decision data as the private sector lobbyists are getting within the government." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Maybe individual academicians, scholars, committee members have some representation in those committees, like the environmental, or budget or development committees. The problem is that they don’t have this natural, what we call the \"industry chain\" connection that the lobbyists have." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "A lobbyist in one industry naturally has affinity with their vendor’s and their customer’s industry, so their natural interests are aligned. Our individual committee members don’t have this kind of natural chain." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The reason of this is because, when they can share a lot of information within the lobbyist network, there is no comparable network for the civil society to share those early-stage decision-making information." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "As a result of that, the protesters on the street, [laughs] even though they could mobilize a lot of people, they’re not really speaking the same language as the lawmakers are speaking. They could escalate however they want, but it’s not the same kind of process. This is a general enough graph. I think this applies to pretty much any democratic country on the planet." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "One of the ways we turn this around is by Occupy. I imagine all of you know how Occupy works, so I will not explain the Occupy or the hand gestures. The place where we occupy is the Legislative Parliament, the Congress. Why we occupied was that it refused to do its job. The background, which could be very easily explained in one minute, is this." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In 2014, Taiwan is about to sign a cross-strait trade agreement deal with Beijing. When Beijing, China agrees on this much better than the World Trade Organization term, they offered cross-strait, very, very good deals about the service agreement, basically giving a semi-domestic monopoly, so to speak, to Taiwan-based companies." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Normally, when we sign something like that with, say, New Zealand, or with Japan, or with Portugal, there is a process. The Parliament must hold a hearing. All the impacted industries must send representatives, and then they debate case by case. They do an impact analysis. This is the same as in any other democratic country." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Constitutionally, Beijing is part of Taiwan in the Taiwan Constitution, because of a loophole in the Constitution, because the government that occupies Taiwan was the government of China. Constitutionally, they consider Beijing part of Taiwan, Mongolia part of Taiwan, Tibet part of Taiwan. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Any agreement that we sign with Beijing is like the national government signing a deal with the Taipei City. This is a domestic agreement, and a domestic agreement is administrative business that is nothing of the Parliament’s business. Because that’s how the things work." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "If all the Taipei City or Taichung City budgets must go through the national Parliament, the Parliament doesn’t have to do anything else. This is too much for them. Because Beijing is a local government, [laughs] a Taiwan institution, this kind of trade agreement is when the president and administration want to sign it, the deal doesn’t have to go through the legislative." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The legislative, when they sit on it for 90 days, it automatically gets passed. There’s no way to not sign this sort of agreement. Clearly, this is against the intuition of everybody in Taiwan. But this is part of the Constitution and the Constitution defined the function of the Parliament." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The Parliament cannot really function, other than saying, “We cannot talk about it. We cannot deliberate about it.” By the date of this automatic expiry, that it automatically goes into effect, there was this large protest outside of the Parliament building, where I was supplying the Internet connectivity for broadcasting." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is what we call the 0th Sunflower Digital Camp, because this is the first time, as a demonstration, it was not done on the street. It was done in the Parliament building." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The protesters were not doing their usual kind of mobilization, where they were just doing counter-power. They were demonstrating in a demo kind of way, “How should we talk about service agreement like this?” They were doing the legislator’s job in the legislative building for 22 days. That was the idea of the Occupy." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "A few months after the Occupy, something very similar happened in Hong Kong. It’s called the Umbrella Revolution or Movement. Again, it’s self-organized. Again it was, just like in Taipei, called by the world’s media as the world’s politest protestors, which do garbage recycling for themselves." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I was in Dusseldorf, Germany at that time. I was joining with telepresence, typing the message which was projected on the Occupy Central walls in Hong Kong." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "I was in Hong Kong in those days." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Really? You saw those projectors, yes. Then, one of the people there tweeted saying the website of the Occupy Central has got to be the most technological advanced in history. Now, one of his friends said, \"I have seen this website before.\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then CL Kao, one of the g0v founders, saying, “Yeah, because that’s the Sunflower movement website on GitHub.” They just forked the g0v Sunflower Movement website." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "For people who have not seen the website before, this is crowdsourced bookmarks here. Everything is crowdsourced. You can add a bookmark here. This is all the live video feeds that is seen here, and this is the real-time map, so to speak. This is newsroom, and this is logistics." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In finer detail, the highlights shows you the medical areas, the barricades, the concentration of police, a war map, basically, that anybody who plays video games knows how to use. [laughs] This is to tell rumors from facts. Any rumors get triaged by on-the-field photo, and it’s done in a timeline map." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is also a time mapper, and again, a g0v export, so to speak that correlates those rumors and news to the place where they happened. Then, this is all the cameras that people brought. In real-time videocasting, you can view four of it, or nine of it, at a time." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You can just correlate those news with real-time transcripting service that people do next to the videos. When I was in Germany, I can see that now there are maybe 12 different places occupied. For every Occupy, this is the last update date." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They say that they need water, Pocari Sweat, drinks, ponchos, towels. We see these places are being gas-attacked, so they need N95 masks, and things like that. Any new supplies, they know where to flow." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This says, “Urgent releases,” and what kind of extra supplies they have, so that they can also repurpose the supplies to other nearby Occupy areas, and so on. This is a very useful application, obviously, but this is what Clay Shirky calls a situational application, a sit app. Because if you use only Twitter, only Facebook, only Google+, you cannot do movements this way." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This way of doing movements requires the hackers go for Hong Kong, in this case, being on the field, changing the software every day, responding to the need of the Occupy of that day, and deploying it in a matter of minutes to everybody on the occupied areas." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Without hackers at the front line of an Occupy, these kind of occupations could never happen because Facebook and Twitter, as great as they are, they were not designed for Occupy. The 0th prototype of it happened in the Anti-Nuclear Force Plant Protest." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "A year before this, in 2013, there was a very large, almost quarter million, protest because that was after the Fukushima nuclear plant event in Japan. Everybody was very against nuclear power at that point. Taiwan was doing its fourth nuclear plant, and people went out on the street to say, “We don’t want that.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When people were on the street, the news media came, and they found that all the cell phones were down because they could not report on the field, because the 3G network just got overloaded with that many people on the street." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "None of the real-time media people could send out their footage. Even though there is very many people, you can only look at those next day’s newspaper, which decreased the bargaining power of the movement." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That year, in 2014, they don’t want to repeat the same mistake, so they searched for experts, that is to say g0v people. I’m not a CPR expert, but I know something about software. We worked with the cable power radio experts in the g0v team to a hackathon that we called the Parade Hackathon. The Parade Hackathon takes place outdoors." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then we issued for a 50 megabit line to a nearby building. We want to broadcast. We expect a quarter million people to come. We would give all the journalists real-time footage. They could stream everything. We had everything planned out." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now, but on that day a typhoon came, [laughs] and it was raining cats and dogs. Not even quarter a million people. It’s maybe 50,000 people, or even less. It became a very small kind of show. People were ready to help and it was raining so hard." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We had a very high speed fiber optic line, but we didn’t know what to do with it because, people could just use their 3G network. There is not that many people. Then YouTube just opened its YouTube Live platform a few weeks before that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We have extra bandwidth and we have a high definition video connection from the stage, where the shows, the protests, the speakers, and those bands were playing. We just repurposed that line connecting to my computer with a Thunderbolt port and broadcasted it through YouTube online." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It was not announced because we did not expect that we’d have bandwidth to do that, but now we have all the extra bandwidth, so we do live broadcasting. Now, people feel guilty for not showing up on that day because of the weather, so they spread the news very quickly, as soon as we posted the link to the YouTube broadcasting." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In a matter of minutes, there are more people watching than people are around the stage and because we’re just broadcasting the camera, the people watching don’t really know that it’s just a few people there. It looks like still a very large festival, event, and whatever." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "People feel like they are in a virtual parade, so to speak, that still has some kind of influence. We worked on the protocol of how to do this kind of live broadcasting on that day, and just 10 days after that, the Occupy Parliament happened." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We set up the same kind of gears here, and we expect it demonstrate for a night, and people would go home. One of the young students, who lent me his laptop, said, “This is my administrator password.” This is a laptop of 16, 17-inch-large laptop. He says, “You can use it as your broadcasting station and I’m not going to use my laptop anymore.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I’m like, “This is a university student. He’s not going to use his laptop, huh?” It turns out that he went to the other side of the Parliament building and broke through the window and occupied the Parliament." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What we learned that day, all the occupiers -- there were maybe 50 or so students -- they are only allowed to carry MacBook Air. Anything that is heavier than MacBook Air they cannot climb over the walls with it, so they have to leave it on the street. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It makes sense, right, and iPad, of course. When they were in the Parliament building, nobody was expecting it, so there were just a few police. There was very civilized. They don’t even have to fight with police, there were no police." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then the video team that supported this g0v live video happened to have this very high quality video camera, with this long stick, and so on. They covered the entire process of breaking into the Parliament building." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Once they are in the Parliament building, they set up this so called sandals broadcasting station, which has been broadcasting whatever happens on occupy area for the next three or so days. We have three video sources at that night." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The police soon came and surrounded this place. But because we already have people watching the live video, people went to take buses, take taxis to support, and they counter-surrounded the police. It was like 10 to 1 ratio." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The police dare not move, and the people were just counter-surrounding the police, so the new the police cannot join the people. It became a very interesting situation, where new people also cannot join the inner occupiers, but they were very interested in participating." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When they do listen to our YouTube views or the students Ustream views, we ask people to type whatever they hear into this Hackpad system that g0v uses all the time. This is like Google Docs. We brought out Hackpad immediately. They bought a new cluster, I think, in EC2 or something, specifically for g0v, because otherwise their other paying customers couldn’t use their service." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then we used this to correlate the transcripts with the translations, which it was at the time, 12 different languages. This is basically a media apparatus that is like any other media, but it was built by civil hackers over the first 24 hours." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is important because the news cycle. We occupied on the night, and the next morning, all the printed papers saying, “These are monsters. There were drunk people. They were breaking things,” what mainstream media do. But the agenda-setting power is done by the civic media already before the morning papers were printed." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "People see on YouTube with their own hand how the breaking in happened, how there were peaceful negotiations with police, and so on. By the time the morning paper printed, people knew these were lies. Like, there were no fights and so on." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then it became we set up the hack folder. That was the prototype of the Hong Kong system that you just saw and then the same designer who designed the g0v logo, designed the main visual identity. Then we crowdsourced all the bookmarks." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "For the next few days, it becomes a war between traditional media and civic media. It’s a war on agenda-setting, on virality, on everything. We easily won that war in three days. Because the agenda setting power when you see it with your own eyes, the transcripts are accurate and the transcripts are translated and broadcast overseas. This is a reach that the traditional media just don’t have." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "On the third day, we run into something that all the Occupies, when they are more than a week or so, run into. It’s the spreading of rumors. Because when there are more than one sites, for example, here we see people rumoring that the people in the Parliament are being attacked by the police, so they want to escalate the fight with the police, for example." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The leader has to come out and say, “No, this is not actually the case.” Because while people could fact check in their phones, the rumors still spread faster than the time it would take to check their phones. What we did was that we brought our own projector, and we set up this temporary projecting screen. We worked with a stenographer in the Parliament building." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "She types everything she hears in the Parliament building, which is then broadcasted to the outside wall on the wall of the Parliament building. I brought to the ICT experts this very long Cat-6 line that’s 350 meters long, and they deploy this as an Intranet to all the three different sites of occupation." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It becomes a LAN party, so to speak, so that we have sub-10 millisecond view of everything that happens in the Parliament. People who don’t have the time to check the screen can see the stenographic transcript and say, “That is correct.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s as if the police that is between the Occupy area and the streets don’t exist. It’s as if we can see straight into the Parliament building. Rumors spread now slower than facts. Because it’s such a good idea, the people in the Parliament building soon set up their own projectors that shows the projection on the streets. [laughs] It really just wired in a lot of people." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We provide this as a neutral role because during the Occupy, aside from the students and the protesters there’s a lot of other protesters on the street representing roughly speaking the separatists from China, independence." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "And the environmentalists who protest against agreements, ecological impact, and the leftists, who protests against the delaying of the trade agreements that would cause the loss of jobs, or the loss of life, quality of labor people." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "These three kinds of people are considered also protesters, but the other three kinds of people were considered neutral roles. They are doctors who upheld the right of health, so they will treat police, protester, or anything, and lawyers protecting the right of due process." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The g0v people used a g0v sticker on their shoulder. We call ourselves, “Upholding the constitutional right of communication.” We were the communication experts. Anybody who has anything to say, we are there to support their right to say anything on the Internet." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is important because it’s only with this kind of neutrality people could trust us that we’re actually representing people inside and outside of the wall in a neutral fashion. This comes to test just two days after we declare ourselves neutral." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "On the training floors, a bunch of students decides from the occupied Parliament building and the streets, three streets near it, to attack also the administrative building. That was just the next street. This is very dangerous because the administrative building is the executive power." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The police went and tried to evacuate the people who went there, and at the same time as the action which was un-pre-announced, we got cyber attacked through our crowdsourced bookmarks and our crowdsourced transcripts." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s like a coordinated attack under the infrastructure of communication. Because we use only free tools, because its open source, because it costs nothing, it took us only one hour to recover on another platform. We just changed the CNAME, and for the DNS provide it, that’s the only time we need to wait." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "On the same time we send people with a WiMAX, that is to say, a high-speed connection, and as many battery packs as we can muster, and an iPad to cover, as a real-time stream, the attack on the administrative building from the occupiers." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now, the police, who went here, and then the students, who went here, behaved very peacefully. Because they know they were being watched by 60,000 people online. There is a counter on Ustream. They broke the glasses, maybe. There was some shouting or something, but they behaved very civilly." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "On the other side of the administrative building, there was police brutality of some degree. It was very, very brutal. That’s because there is no camera filming them. On that night we learned that people behave differently [laughs] under the camera versus not under the camera." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Of course we all know that, but we learned it very painfully. We decided then -- OK. I still have time -- to deploy not only the stationary cameras, which by that time, its numbers is in the dozens but they were stationary." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We decided that we need mobile cameras everywhere, around not just the streets but anywhere with any kind of possibility of escalation. We built a website. This is the Civic Journalism Batch Generator. All you have to do is to write your name here and upload your photo here." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It will print you a batch of your desired size that will fit your phone or the iPad that declares that you’re a journalist. Then we print on the other side of the badge, or the flip side of the badge, this QR code. What is this QR code?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s a link to a Supreme Court’s ruling a few years ago, that says, “Article 11in the Constitution protects not only speech, but also news gathering. News gathering is not limited just to professional journalists, but also protects any ordinary person who gathers information with the aim of providing newsworthy information to supervise the government.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Whenever the police stop a civic journalist, we ask them to scan the QR code and read the Supreme Court’s decision. That says, “Any area where the mainstream media can enter, the civic journalist who printed this badge must be able to allow to enter. Otherwise, we will take you all the way to the Supreme Court.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They assented, because this decision was done in an unambiguous way. Everybody voted for it, all the justices. The thing is that, with this kind of civic journalism badge, suddenly, we have dozens of mobile news feeds on the ground." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "After that day, there is no injury, no fighting, nobody missing. It became a totally non-violent protesting. Now, when people become non-violent, we can actually do some deliberation. Beginning at March, 29 we went public this eight-months-old project from g0v, called, \"Are you Affected by the Cross-Trade Agreement.\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is a website where you can be with your mobile phone. You can enter the trade you’re in. Maybe you’re in the IT industry, or you can enter your company name. Then you will show cross-linking to the company registration database the five trades your company is working on." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then clicking on the kind of work that you do, it will show in a three-panel comic how exactly does the CSSTA affect you." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It will show you a mail-in Chinese coming by person or just the money, whether you can also do it to some province or the entire mail-in China, and how many impact would it have on your neighboring industries. Or if you are not in that service industry, it will show you that you are not affected by the CSSTA." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Instead of reading through hundreds of pages of PDF files, which was the launch we were working with, we correlated it with the registration data, with the UN data, with the WTO data, was the mail-in Chinese laws to show everybody in five seconds how exactly do they affect them, and to show the support of the occupiers on the street." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "On that day when we started the deliberation in place of legislatures, the president said we do not acknowledge the result of this deliberation. We do not think, even though you can convince thousands of students, they are representatives in anyway." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Half a million people showed up on the street of Taipei and says, “This is not right. We must deliberate, and the administration digitalization must accept the result.” Then, what do we do with half a million people on the street?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We group them, again, according to existing streets into the independents, separatists, let deliberation, which talk about in sovereignty or the relationship with China of the trade agreement. Then the ecological, the green people talk about the ecological, the land, the farmland, and whatever impact." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then the leftist people talk about the labor rights and so on. Our own ICT people started using Loomio, which is a specifically designed for the Occupy situation application, where people could share in their local area network how to reach consensus." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "One of our topics here is how do we tell ICT volunteers from people who are just here to use this neutral, fast lane to get a very good view of the Parliament? Because g0v people, because our logo is creative common zero, anybody can print it, and put on one badge. It says that, “We are a radio-powered technology expert. We’re neutral, so please get us in.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What they really want to do is to check in on Facebook. Basically, we need to tell the ICT people from the non-ICT people. There were a lot of proposals being proposed on Loomio, starting from very stupid ideas, like we could ask for their ID card, or something like that, or credentials, or something." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We would ask them to make a GitHub commit to prove, something like that. None of these are very practical in this kind of on-the-field setting. The beauty of Loomio is that we can have multiple stage of straw polls." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Whenever a new idea comes, we can do another stretch of poll until everybody agree, converge on the consensus. Our final consensus was that whenever a new person shows up with the g0v badge saying they are of the ICT team, we ask them what is 2 to the power of 16." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "If they can answer this mathematical question, what is 2 to the power of 16, they’re probably a geek. If they’re not, they are probably not really the ICT team. 2 to the power of 16, that was the consensus. It was really effective." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Using the same technology, we captured the deliberation that was happening on the street in a different part of CSSTA. That was our first encounter with the people doing deliberative democracy or participatory democracy, and to lend ICT support to their cause." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That is how we met those people, and that’s how g0v, as a whole, gained a whole new dimension, that we want to set a mediation space where everybody could trust us, and for the private sector to sit down with the civil sector about the things that government’s not having the entire agenda-setting power." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I think it’s time for another 10-minute break. Are people OK with this story? Any ideas, thoughts, comments?" }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "I actually have a question." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "I was thinking about the participating budget and the website. I am from Turkey. It’s not really a comparison with being how many millions of people we have in Istanbul during the evening traffic." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "Still, I was thinking about the other question that you really need to have a critical mass to be able to affect the politicians. My question is how many people follow this website? Is it really active in the society at large?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, you mean the PB website? The budget in Taipei?" }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "Or any other g0v website?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "g0v website, yes. We have a million people on the street. They show up, but it’s easily 10 times this number online. This is because everybody is concerned about the CSSTA." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now, the Taipei budget, I don’t have the numbers. In the ballpark, the day when the mayor, he said something very interesting. He said, “Without this kind of educational tool, any PB is just populism,” which is kind of true." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then people are voting without knowing what they are voting for. This gets quoted on the national media. On the first day, we get, I think, almost a quarter million people who joined this kind of news cycle, who went very viral because...OK." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Someone want to knock, and a big transparent..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, exactly. Yeah, but I cannot speak Morse code, so we will need an interpreter. In any case, to answer your question directly. The number of people who care about Mayor Ko, the Taipei City mayor, is a lot nationally because there is a tradition in Taiwan that for the mayor of the capital to become the next president." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Mayor Ko was unique, because he have never done politics before. He was a professional surgeon. He was generally seen not a leftist. He was generally seen as somebody who thinks Singapore is a really good idea. Modern, efficient, you know?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Something a surgeon would like. Clean, and things like that. With this g0v partnership of participatory budgeting, he said something very, very important. He contradicted himself just a week ago. That’s another things he likes to do." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "He would say something. Then a week after that, or even a day after that, he will say, “I was wrong yesterday. Sorry.” Now, he admits publicly he is on the autism spectrum as an Asperger’s person. It’s very natural for him to just speak the facts." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "His child was diagnosed as an autist. He has this special quality of not feeling any shame or losing face, of saying, \"OK. I was wrong. Now I think this way.\" Which is great, for a direct democracy." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then, what he said essentially was this, that democracy is very young in Taiwan, but we can either roll back, and go back to the authoritarian Singapore model, or we can go forward. We can bring it to the 21st century, and do something that nobody in Asia has done." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then for participatory budgeting he buys into this idea, exactly because nobody else in Asia is doing PB this way, as the Taipei City is doing it, based on open data and direct participation, bypassing the council entirely, having a counter-expertise to the council, things like building his own council, basically, and things like that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "He sees it as a democratic innovation. When a potential future presidential candidate says that, it gets national attention very quickly. I think everybody in Taiwan knows about this, but people check at his website, only maybe people living in the north region of Taiwan, which is slightly fewer. It’s still a large number of people." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "Something that you said before, it was like, I was seeing all this, which is this idea that...You are saying, “We were able to put cameras on a certain side of the school. The level of violence decreased automatically once transparency was projected in the public space.”" }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "The public was pretty significant and transparent. That’s something that I was thinking about. I don’t know. I was seeing, for example, in Turkey. Last year we had a lot of public demonstration, a lot of cameras on the street." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "Still, the level of violence on the people who was protesting was really strong and really high. I’m wondering, in what measured way...I think, the way in which you frame transparency and attribute a set of political band, entrenched in the concept of transparency, is not completely neutral, with respect to the effect that transparency has on the society, were you to implement it." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "I don’t know if I’m being clear on this point." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes. This a very quick, so, there is two levels. There is transparency, and there is reflexivity or reflectivity. The important thing is not the camera, it’s the projector. It’s the thing that people donated two-story high projectors installed on the street." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Everybody sees everything that is taken by the on-field camera in real-time, as if they’re telepresent in the same space. The important thing is not the nation sees the street. The important thing is the street sees itself through a mirror, knowing that the nation is seeing it. Do you know what I’m talking about?" }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Basically, this is a “Truman’s Show,” so to speak, that we make the space itself a space of mirrors, a reflective space. Without this kind of setting, with just cameras, people are not being made aware that they are inside a panopticon." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "I have a theorem on that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We have an entire social computing theory about this." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "An example of the differences. I think, even if the cams could be used...it always depends about the power relation, where you set it down. I was thinking, for example, the rally of Donald Trump. The other day, they were clearly knowing that there were cameras on a position." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "They used this situation to draw black people away from public space where Donald Trump was speaking. It was a clear political message to the people that was attending, and to the people at home. It was." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes. I have more slides that talk about that." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "Oh, OK." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "[laughter] Yes. Exactly. Yes, I agree with this analysis. This is completely true." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "I’m not saying that you assess that transparency is a neutral plan. It is just that what we make it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, exactly, which is why this is not enough. This setting is not enough, because if the private sector interests are much larger than what I draw here, then the civil society, this becomes a method of exclusion." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Because this becomes what the political analysts say is tokenism. You are here. Everybody can be here, but it doesn’t really matter, because you are still a minority. We evolve this idea in my next slide. Any other thoughts, ideas, questions, comments, tweets?" }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "We have some people at home, they’re now asking questions. We can ask them instead." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "If someone at home wants to ask questions, you can..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You can do so." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "...you can do it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "One of the relay people will relay for you. Now, evolving this idea. After the Occupy, the politics in Taiwan changed completely. After the Occupy, and the Occupy Central, there was this reelection of the city level government." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The Nationalist Party, which was the dictatorship party, morphed slightly into a democratic party, lost completely in that election. I’m glad to say that all the legislator voting guys, and everything that I had mentioned, maybe played a part in this." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "A lot of mayors from the Progressive Party in the independence were surprised they were elected, because their numbers went, like, 10 percent more than they predicted. A lot of the Nationalist supporters just refused to vote." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "After that landslide victory of the counter-power, the ruling cabinet, the prime-minister resigned immediately. Then a new prime-minister came, still working for the Nationalist Party, but knowing that he only has one year, until the election cycle that changed the president and the entire administration and legislation on a national level." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When he was tasked with directing the country’s agenda, when he have only one year left, and he has essentially two bosses. The president that’s going down with an approval rate of nine percent, and the president’s that coming up controlling all the cities, but not yet the national parliament or national administration." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The new prime minister is in a very difficult position, but he is an engineer. The day he went on office he was quoted saying, “An engineer has no right to say no to a technical problem,” which is a very good mentality, which I completely agree with. He then set a completely new agenda for the next year that will not alienate any of his two bosses." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The three agenda are open data, crowdsourcing and big data, because they are infrastructure. All these three things are infrastructure. No politically elected official could be against that. Plus, it is the same agenda the g0v people has already been advocating about, so they know they have natural allies." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "He appointed the vice prime minister, a Simon Chang, an ex-Google engineer, so he knows something about open data. Then Simon Chang recruited Jaclyn Tsai, a legal expert, an ex-judge who worked for IBM Asia, Head of the Legal Department for a few years." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Again, she knows something about the ICT industry and the legal things about it. It becomes, for the first time in Taiwan’s history, a cabinet lead by engineers, or technocrats, if you are against them. [laughs] Then they identify for the next year the topics they want to talk about, that is neutral to any of the left, right, or whatever. It has to happen." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They started with the open data definition. Then, an equity-based crowd funding, and closely held LLCs. Then, taxation, privacy and de-identification, security, telework, telemedicine. Again, none of this is partisan. Whatever ideology you have, this is the bridge between the civil servants and the rest of the Internet. That becomes the new agenda of the year." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The first thing they want to do is to talk with people doing this kind of mobilization on the Internet and saying, “Now, we finally want to treat you as a peer, like face to face. How do we use the social media tools for rule-making? Because we know that you can mobilize any number of people, and we cannot say. How about we start talking about those kinds of things?”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The problem is that a government-initiated deliberation is completely different from an occupier-initiated deliberation. The occupiers knows that the people on the street are already interested in the topic. Otherwise, they wouldn’t show up, but the government don’t really know who the stakeholders are." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The stakeholders don’t know what the government is deliberating about. If they set up a website, people don’t know how to actually comment effectively, even they have all the open data and things like that. They are often trolls, they are often partisan attack, ad hominems." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Even if you have a really good moderator, people were still faced with information overload, because there’s a lot of three-letter acronyms in all of those legal code and things like that. It is like coding. When you change one line, you change the entire system." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "If you are not a legal expert, you don’t know how the entire system will get changed. It’s a very difficult problem. They lost the election here, and then a few days after that, they brought some g0v people, and said, “We now want to start to edeliberation, the way you do in Sunflower Movement.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then we select a topic that concern all of you. It is called the teleworking from the start-up company that don’t have a physical office address, which is a good topic. This is a topic that obviously concerns everybody on the Internet." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They say the way administration do things is to hold a public hearing. When they do hold public hearing, they want representatives from the associations, from the guilds, and from the labor unions. That’s how they do things." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They ask us, “Is there a union for all the teleworkers in Taiwan, who could speak as representatives for everybody who work at home?” This is ridiculous, because a programmer who work at home, a musician working at home, and a designer working at home, is completely a different kind of trade." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Nobody would dare to speak for other kind of people, because the entire work flow, the labor and the company relations is completely different. Nobody would stand and say, “I represent all the teleworkers.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They change course. They say, “OK, but how about the companies, early stage startups who only have an email address. Maybe they go on Kickstarter or some other you know confounding website, registered their company in Cayman Islands, and then they’ll have a physical address. Is there an association of such early stages starters and representatives?”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Of course, there are not. They have problem paying their next month’s salary. Why would they form an association? This is ridiculous. Then, they were faced with a problem because if they ask only the startup entrepreneurs and the teleworkers they know, everybody else will say this is lobbying, this is just closed deal with the people who are so close to administration, and so on." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They were very afraid that they would get occupied again if they do that. It is always this sword hanging over their head around that time in Taiwan. Like, if they do the deliberation wrong, they will get occupied again." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They need a different solution. They want to talk with people who already registered at Cayman Island or work for a company registered in Cayman Islands, and find those people. Ask what kind of loss of teleworking, and of startups, the company loss, will it take for you to register in Taiwan? Why are you registering in Cayman Islands, and why are you working at home?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They want to reach everybody who would do that. This is an engineering problem. The fun thing is that Jaclyn joined the hackathon as a civilian. We call her Jaclyn, not minister. Then, she took three minutes, just like everybody else, showing this design saying, “We want to reach people registered in the Cayman Islands.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The phrase is an engineering problem. We need one editor, a few engineers, and so on, so play it by g0v rules. Then, we gather around the white board, using Open Space Technology, and work on the website that will enable this kind of edeliberation. That was at the end of December." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It took actually only a month for us to build this system and this slide was our first case, the company law change. The way we did this was modeled after IETF in the early ’90s, in the previous century. This is saying we held a mail list, a public forum and everybody can join as long as you have an email address. Then, we welcome discussions." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We are not saying anything about law. We are asking for stakeholders to identify themselves. Are you a startup lawyer? Are you an something, and something? Then any experience that you share is very much appreciated. When people share something useful or contribution, they get marked as being valuable." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We invite those people to the administration building and hold after-hours -- we are not wearing suits or anything, but it’s in the administration building -- with the ministries of economy, finance and something, and with the leading scholars of civil law and case law, and all the local government people working on registration of companies, to talk with those people." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Anyone who contributed on the mail list in a constructive fashion are invited to attend. Then, it was done in the same technology as the Sunflower Movement. It was captured in real time, transcripts broadcasted outside of walls, whatever." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The way this works is that we identify all the concerns everybody have, and then we ask people who make contributions to form a working group. The working group is responsible to produce a document that’s called a request for comment that is a request for commentary on the closely-held companies." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It used the language of the IETF, saying, “If Taiwan must make a law on the closely-held companies, like the Cayman Islands, it must allow multiple votes per share,” for example, and “It must not limit the crowdfunding venues and it should, for example, allow a telecommuting shareholder meeting.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then, “It should not, and may, or may not, or something...” This is language the Internet Engineering Task Force. Now, we produced this, and then we sent it to the ministries to translate it to legalese, to legal code." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They agree when they translate this to cross-link back to this suggestion, so that this is the first bill in Taiwan where every line was annotated with the demand or specification where it came from. They become our coder, and we are like project managers. They have to identify the specification-implementation link." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "At the end, the suggestions were then linked to the specific points in the video feed when and where people brought this topic up. After this deliberation process, when the two parties are in the parliament filibustering each other, they couldn’t pass anything at that time." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The season ends in June the 3rd. This is the only bill where none of the parties want to block. Because first, all their parties have participated already in the working group. Unless they discover new facts that was not covered by the working group, they don’t have any rights to say we don’t have consensus. We have consensus." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Again, if they blocked this bill, they were against the entire startup community, and all the teleworkers who paid attention, thousands of people who viewed this policy consultation deliberation. They are not blocked this. It was passed in record time and signed into effect. Now, Taiwan has this kind of law." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "To go into detail because you are experts in this, we use Focused Conversation Method. We identify all the speech and online mailing list discourse, and we separate it into the facts, the objective layer, the feeling of those objective facts, and the suggestions resulting of the feelings." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We use a font with six different weights of the font, showing the strengths of consensus. Just in a glance, you can see the overall strengths of different options that has the support. We talk about one aspect of the standard law." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Every slide using this pen and paper technology -- well, screen technology -- which is then broadcasted online. People will participate online. We take 20 minutes to talk with face to face with the group members, and then we shift to here, and then see what people online have to say." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We give them also 20 minutes to set the agenda for this particular slide, particular topic, so they can express their consents, their worries or their total support with cat smileys, [laughs] and things like that. There is a lot of non-verbal kind of communication going on." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We have a professional deliberator online, Lu Chia-Hua, who takes care of that online part, and carry it to the offline space. I was the first for the term, offline space, and was using the kind of technology to broadcast it to people who attend from the remote. You don’t have to be in Taipei City, and you’re guaranteed the same amount of representation to working group meetings." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is very effective, and when the whole country is seeing this, either from a recording or from mainstream media reporting, there is no denying seeing that there really is consensus being formed in this deliberative process. That is how we run the working group meetings." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Again, every word, every sentence was captured on SayIt platform, so you can do a link to one specific utterance within context, which the mainstream media people, it saves them work. They don’t have to think of a very contentious title, topic, or something. They just copy and paste, and make reports out of it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The design principle of this system is this. To reduce the ignorance problem, all the ministries who propose things, like the Ministry of Labor, of Economy, they must first do a slide on SlideShare that explains the problem statement very clearly, and we have amateurs trying to read it, and make sure." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then for every keyword -- \"startup,\" “closely-held cooperation,” “telework” -- we ask for a 140-letter definition, because most the online deliberation is wasted on fighting over the definition of keywords." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When we start to define the lexicon the way the MOE dictionary does when you hover it, you see a definition, it saves 80 percent of people’s time. Now, we say, “We know ’startup’ means different things to different people, but for the sake of deliberation, it means exactly this.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then when we do the initial stakeholder interview and agenda-setting, we make sure that one representative from elected official office, from Jaclyn’s office, one from public servant’s, one from the Information Industry Association representing the private sector, and one from the ground zero civil society people." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "At least, four people, but sometimes five, six, or seven people. These people are the people who built this website. We set the term of use together, the license together, everything together." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When we do interview of the stakeholders on some agenda-setting, we lend each other a kind of legitimacy that any other kind of initiation would not have, because everybody knows that all the agenda-setting are being done in balance with each other’s sector’s ideas." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then we ask people’s opinions. We say, “We’re not asking you to vote, we don’t do voting.” What we are asking is an agenda for the face-to-face hearing. When we’re running a public hearing on it, we promise we will only talk about the things that you propose to us online, where you reach a consensus on." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This completely changes the dynamic of the ICP, of the virtual part of the deliberation. Now, it’s responsible for the objective, that is the fact, and the reflective, that is the feeling, parts of the deliberation process. We leave the idea interpretational part and the decisional part to the face-to-face meeting, but we use the eforums or whatever to collect as wide as possible." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When you bring a useful contributory idea, then you are invited into the working group, who do the idea and the decision. This is a self-selecting process." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now, this is a very geeky point, but I always want to emphasize this. It’s a safe space, meaning that when people propose their responses online, sometimes you see 10 sentences, nine of which is very useful, a disclosure, or a useful contribution, but one sentence is an attack, either to the agenda or to other people." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "As a moderator, you’re faced with a dilemma. If you censor this, if you kill these comments, people will say that you’re draconian or something. If you keep this, the next reply is not going to reply to the civilized part. It’s going to reply to this one sentence that’s attacking people." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then you will get another reply that is 50 percent attack, and then the next reply is going to be 80 percent toxic. The next reply is going to be a cat picture, and then [laughs] once you reached the point of cat picture, there is no return. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The challenge, then, is to how you construct a safe space where you can have a discussion before the cat pictures arrive. The way we do this is by editing the comments. When anybody sign on we show a very clear term of use, code of conduct, and say upfront, “Your comments it’s an ad hominem attack, when it’s toxic, it will be deleted.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We delete only that part of the sentence, we keep everything else. We delete may be four words, and then we send a private message to that person saying, “You’re a violation of our terms of conduct. You say public servants are just pigs, wasting taxpayers’ time. This is not OK, this is not constructive, so we deleted that, but we kept your other very useful, sensible contributions.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Because it’s version controlled, everybody who is so willing to do dumpster diving can [laughs] see the original comments. For most people who enter the first part of discussion, and reply to those civilized points." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "So you keep memory of all the original comments?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, sure." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "But you give like visibility to..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "Even if you want to see, the disclaimer posted.." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, it says edited, and it says version three. You can go back to version two and version one, if you have too much time. [laughs] Yeah, exactly." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "For the troll, that is important." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Since people seem disproportionately interested in this, I will go into details. Trolls on the Internet are just people who crave for attention that they cannot get from the real life. For people who..." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "[laughs] I had a problem in the airport of Florence with a bagger." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "[laughs] The important thing is that you must hug the trolls, knowing that even if they say 10 sentences, 9 of which are trolling, just one sentence is useful." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It was not actually, but you can read it peacefully. You ignore those parts that was toxic. You maybe delete or moderate it out, but you respond very enthusiastically to the part that was constructive, because they are just people craving attention." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They learn with seeing one or two exchange that bringing something useful to the table was the only way to get attention. Because they crave attention, they now think of ways to do constructive work. We reform the trolls very quickly with systems like that, by giving them due attention to just a part of it that was of benefit to the community." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The safe space was not just a moderation thing. It was also acculturation. We bring a culture of civilized discussion saying, “If you crave attention, this is the only way you’re going to get it.” I hope I’m making sense." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Just to step back. You said that most of the interaction you bring in-person and online is mainly based on the idea that online, the function which is done online is the agenda setting. You will have the, let’s say, final development of the idea and the decision in-person?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly, yes. We use telepresence to extend what in-person means, of course. That was the principle." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "You never vote, neither in person?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We do straw votes. The way IETF votes, basically, it’s a vote that is never binding. It is a way to see what people feels. People can change their votes anytime. This is not really voting, right." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Wait, you’re talking online or in the final?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Online." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "When you’re go in-person, you’re voting for the final decision, or not? In case the idea is fork, and there are competing ideas which are not easily..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The idea of rough consensus is that the deliberation never ends until we have consensus. If we don’t have consensus, we say we leave it to the next administration. We don’t even vote. That’s the idea." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "I’ve got a question online. Are there examples in other communication spaces of these more measured approach to dealing with toxicity and trolling?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Are there more examples to deal with trolls?" }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Toxics nowadays and trolling?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, sure." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "In other communication spaces, out of this." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, I see that. I’ll show one about Uber in the next slide." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "Show us the next slide, please." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, but I want to stress the idea about safe space. Safe space means usually that anything that’s violating the code of conduct is not tolerated. It means zero toleration, but there is a difference between a safe space enforced by people and safe space enforced by algorithms." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "If you have an algorithmic safe space, the trolls don’t play attrition game with mediators. Whereas before, like in Wikipedia, a Wikipedia editor, when it fights the trolls, or the revert wars, or something, the operators must put in exactly the same time as the people doing the vandalism, even with the help with bots, with robots, like automated tools." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The vandals also have automated tools. You have to put in, when you are playing by the same rule, exactly the same amount of attention. If the trolls outnumber the moderators, then they dominate the attention of other people nearby." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It could only be controlled when the mediator puts in disproportionate amount of time and attention, so that it overrides all the vandals and all the trolls. What our innovation, I would like to say, is that we watch what the moderators do, and then we turn them into code. That is to say, we automate this kind of process of mediating of moderation, so that any number of trolls are now faced with robo-mediators. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They cannot waste people’s time. When trolls see that they are not even wasting the operator’s time, they lose interest, because there are much more interesting ways of wasting other people’s time." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Griefing, that’s how they call it, other parts in the Internet. They go to those other parts of the Internet. I am going to show an example with another automated system in the Uber case. Thanks for the question. Let’s go on, because we’re almost..." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Six." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "...at six, yes. So with the vTaiwan system, we spent a lot of time saying no to the ministries’ proposals. Because the ministries always want to talk about the things, that they feel like hot potatoes. They’re civil servants, and civil servants in Taiwan are in this very unenviable position, as a new democracy." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "If they do anything wrong, because we don’t have an anonymous civil servants culture like in the UK, they get blamed for it publicly. If they do something right, the elected officials get all the credit. The thing is that they’re in a very powerless position. With things like vTaiwan, public servants feel very much empowered." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They offset their responsibilities, but they gain credibility, because they interact meaningfully with netizens as part of deliberation thing. They bring us a lot of very tricky issues, like gay marriage. They say, “Let’s have a national deliberation out on gay marriage.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We say no. We must keep saying no to these kinds of thing. vTaiwan was designed for a town hall. It must affect only people who are netizens as the main stakeholders. We’re like a small town of network-using people, negotiating with the government. This is how we get our legitimacy." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Otherwise, people would say it’s just a technocrats, the elites doing the deliberation, who are so good at typing at a keyboard, or using a pen and pencil online, or something, or showing up with telecommunication, deciding the fate of people who are not so good at this sort of thing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We don’t want that. We must ask all the ministries to prove a very high correlation between the people they are going to affect, and the people that’s on the Internet all the time, the netizens. Because the Ministry of Justice cannot prove there is a strong correlation between going on the Internet and being gay, [laughs] we don’t do that case." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is very important actually. Then it must be something that is codifiable, because otherwise, it doesn’t really work." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "This exclusion was not motivated by a more political issue, related to minority and majority? We are not going to discuss an issue of minority in front of a majority, but was more related to the internal coherence of the system of deliberation?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly. Because, what we are saying, essentially, is that for the parliament, we’re getting all the stakeholders on a multistakeholder dialogue, that gets all the facts, and all the reflections, and give a recommendation. If this stakeholder does not represent everybody that’s going to be actually having a stake, because those people don’t use the Internet, then we’ll lose this kind of legitimacy." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The parliament could very easily find a representatives from other fields of life, saying, “But you’re missing their voice, because they are not on the Internet.” Then we lose the entire basis of this legitimacy, of the vTaiwan system. I hope I’m making sense." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "I understand the issues exactly to the certain stakeholders, or between what’s a stake and in the discussion, and what the participant hopes." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes. Exactly." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "Do you think, progressively, are you able, since you use for example a typical netizen dynamics, to start to introducing a technology, this can include..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "More and more people..." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "...once it shows its effectiveness, and a possibility to actually influence the public relation?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes. That’s three slides." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "Three slides." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "You can just strike that." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "I think that someone asked this, and he was like..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah. I’m very happy actually we get into so much detail. In Paris, I was one minute per slide. Even though it’s taking everybody’s time, I think it’s important..." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "No, we want a space in which to have a discussion. These are ideas that serve to..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s great. That’s great. Then our other requirement is that the ministry must not send us drafts of any laws or regulations. Because by that time the window of opportunities is so close. It’s like we’re building a nuclear plant, but the color of the wall is up for deliberation. [laughs] It doesn’t make sense, right, by that stage." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What we ask is, at least, even if you have a draft, don’t show it. Show your problem analysis. Show your stakeholder analysis. Show your cost-benefit analysis, whatever. For 30 days refrain from making any suggestions as public servants. You now only serve the fact-finding team, the online discussion." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "After 30 days you’re allowed to show your drafts. Everybody in the working group is also allowed to show their drafts, so we can have a competing version of the drafts. If the ministries show their draft first, before we have 30 days to get everybody understanding this topic, then they have an unbalanced power in setting the agenda." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "After 30 days, when everybody knows about these things, more or less, then their alternative draft is going to read at least coherent as the ministry drafts." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then it’s possible to bring them together. Otherwise, it’s impossible. It’s just the public sector dominating the agenda setting. That’s the power analysis we did on that hackathon for this system to work, and it really worked. We have one million visits per month. We have a lot of subscribers." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "As you could see, just like in Wikipedia or flashmob, or anything, this gets progressively down. Like, 10 percent, 10 percent, 10 percent, but this is normal. Yes?" }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "I was thinking that this rule that you describe it now, has a meaning, for example, in the planning system of Tuscany. Traditionally, you had a project, and then you worked with the analysis to justify the project. The analyses were following the project actually." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "In many cases of law happens this, you have a political, ideological idea. Then you do analysis to justify your idea. The fact of inverting, of obliging people to show the analysis, and then each one by its own think about the solution, then you can compare the solution after a certain time, inverts the way in which usually the laws are conceived." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly. This is actually very much empowering the civil servants, but it’s decreasing the power of elected officials and parliament members, who used to do all the initial setting of the drafted law, because they have think tank, the parties, and so on, who know the initial context of doing this thing. This is weakening your mandate." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Because of three independent, non-nationalistic party engineers running the country, it is not a problem for Taiwan at that particular point of time. This kind of opportunity doesn’t really happen all the time everywhere. We have a very good Net Promoter Score, meaning that people want to recommend their friends to go on vTaiwan." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Do you have any idea about...? For example, you have 30,000 subscribers, and 2,000 commenters. Do you have anything to check the degree of attention of the subscribers? Because the risk is, subscribers aren’t a very good number to sell. Then you can imagine that they are completely silent, in the sense that they’re not even reading." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes. That’s the next slide. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It literally is the next slide." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "You got that in the next slide. How long is that?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Let me just go to the next slide. As a trainer, this slide, I can spend an hour on. We don’t really have an hour to spend on this one slide, so I will talk in very brief terms. This is all, either free software, or at least free of charge software, or free under 10,000 users, or something like that. This system is zero cost, is what I’m saying. It costs nothing to set this up." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "To answer your question, we use MailChimp, to send a monthly newsletter to our subscribers. It includes a tracking pixel that tells me how much time they’ve spent reading the email, whether they actually click the links, and whether they engage, in what kind of topics in the newsletter. We do actually AB testing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I can talk for hours, but you do get that idea. Then we do surveys and registrations using Typeform, which is a very mobile-friendly kind of choice-making or voting platform. We vote for things to talk about. We don’t vote for things." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "The issue is that you have a strong analytics part, in order to have an idea of how many subscribers are not just formally subscribing, but they do...?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes. Then we know that people want to talk about Uber, and then Airbnb, and then Bitcoin. Then we know people do not want to talk about evoting or something like that. This is because Typeform has an interesting thing called a randomized...This is like a survey technology." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We show people in random order, and ask them to pick what people think they’re interested in, and things like that. We correlate that with the contributions they’ve made before, and the time they’ve spent on the website, and so on, so that we know, for absolute certainty really, when we talk about Uber, how many people will come in the first day, within maybe 10 percent of margin of error." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Without this data analytics, we would not launch deliberation blindly, is what I’m speaking. This is Typeform. Then the forum software that we use a lot, people use that now actually. The Etalab in France use that. It’s called Discourse." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The company startup, who produced this open source tool, is called The Civilized Discourse Construction Kit Company. This is optimized to have a civilized discussion, where you can edit people’s comment, and where people who contribute frequently automatically are promoted to moderators. They get badges." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When you register, for the first three days, you cannot post anything with pictures. It has very, very tiny rules like this. Taken together, it enforces civility in a way that doesn’t cause attrition on the moderator’s time. We asked all the ministries to publish their statements of analysis on SlideShare as PowerPoint slides." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We ask them always to use a sans-serif black font. The font weight must be more than 300. We put a restriction on the fonts, because people in Taiwan used to use fonts that are more calligraphic. That looks very good on paper, but very bad on mobile devices. That’s how they always used to do things. They do, I think, Times New Roman." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Times New Roman will look very bad on a deliberation space online like this, when people are looking at a phone. We even have a style guide for the ministries to publish their deliberation material." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then all the issues, agenda, and settings were captured on GitBook, which is a way for people to write Markdown, to publish structured data online like a book, where people can download in PDF or EPUB, or something like that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Any three-letter acronyms in GitBook are defined in a Google spreadsheet. With the keyword, the English translation, the description, the cross-referencing, or else. All these are published using this free publication platform, called GitHub Pages, which costs nothing, and scales to hundreds to thousands of viewers, without us paying anything." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then we have YouTube, of course, to keep all the video records and real-time interactions. We use livehouse.in, which experiments with us virtual reality recording techniques. We are not really using it in the early stages of deliberations now, but we have a lot of pilot projects, where in this room, they just throw a spherical camera up here, mounting here." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It captures everybody’s number of expressions in the same time. The company is called TripMoment. We do a lot of pilot projects. We’ve done six like that. It changed the quality of the discussion." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When you see it from the real-time, it’s feels like you’re there on the ceiling, really. Then you can see what everybody’s face looks like when I speak a sentence. It feels less like theatric performance. It puts less incentive to people to speak to the camera, and try to make a very good impression, because they know they’re only going to be capturing this square." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It creates an incentive for people who really get, constantly understanding from people actually around the table, because the spherical camera is capturing this also. If everybody is rolling their eyes, people will see that. That is another important method." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Of course, we have stenographers, who published the transcript in real-time, that’s the Sunflower technology. Hackpad plus SayIt. Then I explained that we use the FCM, the Focused Conversation Method. That says we explore all the facts before we ask people’s feelings." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We ask all the feelings before we ask for ideas. We ask for the ideas before we do a decision. It must be done in this sequence, because ideas are sticky in people’s mind. Once people have an idea, they ignore other people’s feelings. We don’t do that. We strictly follow this." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We follow this so strictly now that when the ministry proposed their problem analysis, we asked them to rephrase it in an ORID form, and in this sequence. What facts do the ministry know? What feelings do the ministry have about the facts, and what ideas they have? Only in this sequence." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is our toolkit, so to speak. I will talk about Police, the robotic facilitator system, is my last talk. This slide really is our entire toolbox of every kind of deliberation system. We did not amend this. Many of this methodology is done by Cornell University Regulation Project. We improved on their methodology." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They had professors and students, post-PhDs as mediators, but we have ministries with their own user names on the forum software. We created a rule that’s shown on the login, saying anybody who tags..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That is to say, who press @ then after that, for example, MOF, meaning Ministry of Finance Or MOEA, Ministry of Economic Affairs. Any ministry that gets mentioned this way will get an email, saying, “You’re getting mentioned.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "By the second they’re getting the email a countdown starts. Within seven days they must provide an official public reply to anything that mentions their username. This changes the dynamic completely." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Whereas before, they could reply privately, they could stall, they could say, “This loses face so we ignore it,” we say, “If you don’t do this the platform will not do deliberation on any of your cases,” so in order to join you must do this." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "With a four-week deliberation period, that means four exchanges with anybody’s concerns about fact-finding about that ministry. For many of ministries they really just print this foreign email, and then they sign it with the initial idea. They send it for approval for the head of the ministry, with a pen and paper and so on, and have another people type it into the forum." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is still OK. We allow seven days for this entire paper-based process to go through. The important thing is that it is still public. They cannot go retract their words." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They were forced to admit a lot of shortcomings that were not possible if they don’t have this guarantee. Whereas in Cornell, the synthesizers are the professors. Here the synthesizers, the working groups, are just anybody who makes an active contribution, IETF style." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then again, any offline collaboration that we meet face-to-face, even the preparatory meetings are kept on record and published online. Any online forum, system, software, whatever, are printed to pen and paper to the ministry’s archives. This is, anything that happens in one space, happens also in another space, in as much fidelity as possible." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is the design principle that we adopt on top of the regular sharing of knowledge. Yes, we are expanding it to the general public. [laughs] This is because the National Development Council thought this such a good idea. They really want to talk about gay marriage. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They set up another website called, Join Government Taiwan, that is government run. I don’t have time to go into a lot of details, but the innovation is where they have a toll-free number, where you can call and have somebody read to you the top concerns currently trending on that website." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You can tell the operator over the telephone your input. They will type it to the forum software and if you’ll please leave your mobile phone or telephone number, when the government will reply to you, they will call you back. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This expands netizens to people with a telephone, which is a lot more people. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "It’s a little bit more costly, also, I guess." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right. g0v, we are volunteers, so we can only run things with zero cost, but this is the government speaking. They can hire telephone operators." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Call center." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "A call center, exactly. [laughs] Yeah, a governmental call center. We only do early consultation. But because it’s government, they also do epetition, which is something we cannot do. It requires empowerment from the administration, obviously. They also do that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Because they extend for anybody with a telephone, I think I am of the last generation who will draw telephone this way. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "That’s my generation." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes. My childhood is also this. Yes, bzz." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "My teenager would have your childhood." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly, yes. [laughs] Yeah, because we expand the World Wide Web to anybody with this kind of phone, they now think they have sufficient legitimacy to talk about gay marriage, because everybody has a phone or something like that. Without going into too much detail, yes, this is being adopted as a national agenda by the National Development Council." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "By this temporary government?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No, by the next government." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Oh, the next." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right, because this is the ending..." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "The temporary government you’re talking about ended? It was replaced?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Well, the election happened in January. That is, to say a month ago. The legislators are already in office now, and the Nationalists kept 30 percent, 20 something percent, a negligible amount of the seats." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then the equivalent of Podemos got five people in the Parliament, which is great, and then the Progressive Party, the main counterparty to the Nationalist government gets 60 percent or something of the Parliament seats." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It completely changes, it flips the seats. The new President of the DPP, she was elected but she’s not in the office until May, May the 20th, because of a constitutional loophole. We have a lot of those things. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now, we are in a waiting cabinet, so to speak, who now answer to the new legislators, but is not answering yet to the president that has already been elected. For those three months, this is a lot of fun. The civil engineer training at MIT, Mao Chi-kuo, he resigned as all the cabinets must do after a national level election." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The new prime minister was the vice prime minister, so we have a Google engineer now as the prime minister. Then the prime minister knows he only has three months of time." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "He says, “I will work with the new government administration team to transfer everything, but I have a precondition. Any meeting that the new administration is having with us, I promise not to destroy any records, any archives, but in exchange I will only do the transfer of power and explanation of the current ministry agenda, and everything under a direct live stream.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "He is basically transferring the power not to the opposition party, but to everybody, so it means that everybody now has the same knowledge as the new president and they can now oversee the new president, in a way." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "He could only do that because vTaiwan ratified this open data policy, this open government policy, saying that anything that the government does must be transparent in a reusable way. He writes on this, and saying, “OK, there must be no secrets between the party that’s losing power and the party that’s gaining power. We are now transferring the power to the general public,” which is great." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It will take three months to do that, and join.gov.tw or vTaiwan, are a very important part of it, because then it allows technical topics to be debated or to be shown to the national populace that the policymaking from now on has a deliberative, democratic spirit and attitude." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is also because the new president, Ms. Tsai Ing-wen, run on campaign platform that says, “Open source policy-making and maker spirit.” To make good of her campaign, she also must agree to this way of transferring power, otherwise her platform means nothing. That’s a lot of fun." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "To end my talk, which I will take maybe another 15 minutes, unless people are so interested, we’ll take another half an hour, I will talk about something that is not domestic. The vTaiwan or the Join process that we design after that, as me as an advisor, are only really good for domestic issues." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "With Uber even if we get all the representatives, all the stakeholders, they sit down, they agree on something, Uber shouldn’t care, Uber wouldn’t care. They don’t even have a physical operating center in Taiwan. If the consensus is to shut down their business, their business is already shut down. There’s an app banned elsewhere." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The thing is that this kind of thing really is domestic, and we are facing what the scholars say post-democracy entities, where they could ignore the entire rule about democracy altogether, because they operate on a completely different domain of human behavior." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Because they are not part of any physical place, they ignore the multilateralism part of sovereignty. Uber, basically, is a symbol of a lobbying power that transcends sovereign power. I will make just one very quick example." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In New York, when the mayor is not even deliberating, starting to think about a law that will limit the quantity of Uber charges, Uber introduced a new button in their app in New York. It used to be UberPOP, UberBLACK, UberX, as some people know something about that. You can call different kind of things, even a helicopter in New York." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Even a helicopter?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, even a helicopter and a boat in Amsterdam. In any case..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Uber introduced a button that says, “Uber with the mayor’s proposed laws.” If you call an Uber, it’s usually saying you must wait for eight minutes or five minutes. If you slide to that button, it shows 50 minutes, one hour, five hours." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s a very effective lobbying tool. It’s telling all the users, “If the mayor’s law passes,” whether it’s true or not, “then you will wait forever for Uber and this is not acceptable.” From a social computing perspective, this is genius, this is wonderful operation." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "From a deliberative democracy viewpoint, this is a nightmare. We now have a non-answerable to sovereign power entity, who could engage or mobilize much more people than public servants could do. All the celebrities were retweeting this, because it was sensational and the mayor has to retract even the idea of talking about this law." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Uber is Uber. It’s super. [laughs] Here are the places. The green means they were legal in those cities. The red, meaning they’re illegal, but they’re operating anyway. The pink, meaning that they’re controversial, meaning that they’re being debated. They’re of questionable legality." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "In some cases, it is regulated at the state level, and some other at the city level?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly. When we did a poll to all the vTaiwan members, of bottom-up topics, not ministry topics, people who want to talk about, that doesn’t have a ministry support yet, Uber is at the very top. Any time we run this, Uber is at the very top." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "For Uber, we had to redesign the entire flow of deliberation, because we know the existing process doesn’t work with this kind of entity. We identified the Ministry of Transport, who at that time has been fining Uber for violating the law, for over a million euros, by that time." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Uber says, “We are not under the jurisdiction. We will take it all the way to the Supreme Court,” which they did, “to fight saying, ’We are really an economy, share-riding, ride-sharing, whatever, platform, so, we are under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Economy. It’s not a transport problem.’”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then the Ministry of Economy does not want to propose their problem analysis, because their problem analysis doesn’t agree with the one that the Transport Ministry is saying publicly. They were afraid of losing face. They will feel like one ministry fighting against another." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then Jaclyn, the Minister who went on g0v hackathon, says what she really cares about is taxing and maybe insurance, and this belonged to the Ministry of Finance. The Ministry of Finance says, “We don’t have the expertise. Indeed, we don’t have the interest to do a vTaiwan problem analysis. We think this is the job of the Economy and Transport ministries.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I think Taiwan is not alone. Everywhere in the world we have the same dynamic, the three ministries playing sometimes against each other’s interests for challenges like Uber. [laughs] This is what we did then, is we think professional mediators are needed. A mediation space is no longer enough." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We must have somebody who connects directly to all the taxi fleets, who already surrounded the Ministry of Transport, as other taxis in other countries did, also Uber itself, and Uber’s competitors, Lyft, whatever." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then, through them, we should reach the individual, like limousine drivers who are in the civil society, but they don’t have an association, which is why they are dotted in this graph." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then, again, some independent drivers have an association, and we have to include them in the deliberation process, because outside of the fleet, they may want to join Uber, they may want to join the taxi fleet. So, we have the association." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Through the association we also reach the local governments policymakers, like the cities where Uber operates in, and also the other for-hire companies that’s already locally operating somewhat like Uber, but in a much more smaller scale, like the mom and pop shops of ride-sharing, ride-sharing companies. Again, they don’t have a representative, which is why they are dotted." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Our power analysis of this challenge, is then to find people who the Association would trust, who the taxi fleet would trust, the Finance Ministry would trust, for those mediators to talk to each other, to design a deliberative process that will please, at the same time, everybody who connects with them and gets a buy-in from the civil servants from the three ministries." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That took us two months. It’s very, very difficult, but we did it. We designed a process that will allow us to reach all these people at the same time. Basically, all the drivers in Taiwan was the stakeholders. Then all the passengers of whatever taxi fleet, ride-sharing, Uber, whatever, were also stakeholders." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We must prove that we can reach all of them before this deliberation starts to have a comparable mobilization power versus Uber itself. It could very easily reach this amount of people, like in New York City. We’d have to reach at least this amount of people, and then more. The process we did for this is, again, we crowdsourced the agenda." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We used this idea called overlapping consensus, that says, “People with different ideologies, they could never agree on ideologies, but if we make the issue specific enough, they would agree on the practicalities.” I think this is well-known in the academic circle by now. We choose a specific." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It says, “What about, you don’t have a professional driver’s license, but you carry somebody as part of your driving to their wanted destination, and you charge them for it?” That’s it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That is our issue. It says nothing about Uber, not about sharing economy, not about transport, anything. It’s says a very specific thing that anybody could do, and people could have a consensus on, that is a very tiny slice of the entire Uber challenge." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then we say, “Everything that we collect from the people on this deliberating process for a month, will be published for independent analysis, as open data.” We don’t do any analysis, because no ministries are willing to do an analysis. Instead, we ask what people feel about this thing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We ask what they think about this thing. We record everything. We publish everything as open data. We ask people from the academic community that they’re not scientists, Uber themselves, whoever, look at this data, and tell us what your analysis is. That becomes the agenda, which we guarantee a deliberation a month from that day." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is the interface that we came up with. This is the designed for drivers, of course, and people on the taxi. They don’t have a minute of time, which was the Facebook limit, of the old vTaiwan process. They don’t have one minute. They have a red light, that’s maybe 10 seconds. We did say, “No voting while driving.” [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The idea was that they could park to the street a little bit, and spend maybe 15 seconds on our deliberation interface. This interface only demands 10 seconds of their time, and then they could start riding again." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This interface is very simple. On your phone, which you will get this link on the same hour of the day, in one specific afternoon, we announce the URL to all the mediators, to those different interest groups, so they get the URL at the same time." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then they spread this URL through whatever channel they have, telephone, SMS, Line, Uber has its own, closed group of instant messaging and things like that, Facebook, whatever. The point is that on same hour of day, when they go on this place, they see people in four or five different groups already. They don’t feel overwhelmed by only one kind of people dominating the discussion." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When they go on it, they see one simple sentiment. This is picked at random from a poll. They just click agree or disagree, and that’s it. When you click agree or disagree, you see your avatar move." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "It’s agree or disagree with the friends, with the sentence?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, with the sentence, yes." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Not with their belonging to the group?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "OK, because the group is based on the sentence." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, we have three sentences that says, “I have a professional driver license,” “I have a driver license,” and “I have taken Uber before.” You can say yes or no on these." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "The groups are created on the cross sentiment of the three sentences?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No, the groups are created automatically based on any number of questions. This is like a survey, except all the statements aside from the nine, which we prepare initially, when you tap nine times, you will have answered all the initial questions, and then you will feel that your interest is not being reflected." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We ask, “What do you think? What do you feel?” Then you can say, “I feel passenger liability is actually very important, and you didn’t actually mention it in any of my questions.” This becomes then the thing for other people to vote on after you. Any sentiment that they write must begin with, “I feel,” or, “I think,” which is the same word in Mandarin." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They become, then, things for other people to agree or consider on. When you agree or disagree on something, you see your position gradually change based on your answers. If you log in with Facebook or Twitter, you don’t have to, or email, then you have the capability of writing new sentiments. When you log in with a social account, you see your friends." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Otherwise, you see people like celebrities, or people with more followers on Twitter instead. The point is, first, you see at a glance that there are four different groups with very, very different views. Your friends are among all those groups. These are not your enemies, these are your Facebook friends. It’s just you don’t talk about Uber usually." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now, for the first time, you know how they feel about Uber. It creates a non-antagonistic relationship. Second, you see people’s positions can change. Third, we use algorithm it’s called dimensional reduction." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In a nine yes or no question, this is like a point in a nine-dimension space. People are really grouped in a nine-dimension space, but we don’t usually think in nine dimensions. As more people contribute, we are now in a 40-dimension space, which is a very large dimension." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When people have a natural grouping on some of the most divisive, that is to say, this is the most controversial on Reddit, some questions will naturally group people as a yes or no that will become the determinant of their other answers to other questions. Those are called “primary factors.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The algorithm could identify the two primary factors that’s currently going on, and using the primary factor as the x-axis, and the second primary factor as the y-axis, so that you can see on your mobile phone, how people really are grouped on those two most divisive issues." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Am I making sense? This is technical." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "How many questions can it take, this kind of system?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Seven, it takes seven to start to do the grouping. Then it could scale to dozens of questions." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "There’s not another...?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There is not a limit, but there is a limit of..." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Still, it focuses on the two most controversial opinions, person’s questions?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah. The thing is that once you answer, because you only start to show up in the group after answering seven random questions. By that time, you probably already know what has been determined before. Especially, you can click into it to see the current consensus." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "People will only write when they have new sentiments to contribute that they feel is not being reflected on this space. This is Open Space Technology with a reflective projection, but it’s carried online. This is our simulation of the Sunflower reflective space, but on the online space." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Whereas we were occupying, people who are leftists joined this street’s deliberation. People who are ecological greenists joined this street of deliberation. They vote with their feet, but it was still reflected through this projection and then captured online." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We’re trying to recreate this kind of experience on a mobile phone, basically, that requires only 10 seconds of people’s time. As they are doing this, the system rewards consensus by only showing within each group the highest agreement." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "People are motivated to convince their neighbors. At any given point, we can run a generalized linear regression, or you can run a primary factor analysis, or run any kind of those geeky words on this data to find why people are voting the way they are voting." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In the first week, we had four groups. Uber drivers, taxi fleets, Uber passengers, other passengers. Then within the group, they now try to convince each other because we show, again, only the top ones with consensus." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Group one initially was under [laughs] consensus saying, “They are criminals. We should cancel their registration immediately.” The other group was united under this sentiment, “When I’m not in a hurry, even if taxis are passing in front of me, I will call an Uber.” As you can see, it’s very polarized." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Initially in the first week, people couldn’t really agree on anything, but they agree on the other side is the enemy. When you do a multiplication, these are minorities." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They convince nobody on the other three groups, and even within the group, when you tie in with the group that represent the overall population, they are not even 50 percent of the entire population. When you click into the majority opinion tab, you see nothing. There is no majority opinion." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Because people compete for the intra-group agreement, they start to propose sentiments that are more moderate. Group one, after five days converged, saying, “This is not about Uber. The Minister of Transport and Communication should fine any unlicensed passenger vehicles. The fact that they are only fining Uber and not other ride-shares may be a problem. But this is not about Uber, it’s just them doing their job.” This is getting much more consensus in that group." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Group two, invented this kind of thinking, saying, “Many of the large city taxis are joining a taxi fleet, because the fleets are capitalistic. They have advertisement and whatever. They have other ways to earn money than the taxicab. There are economic pressures." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "“Now, Uber is a way for an independent driver to join many fleets. It increased their labor union bargaining power against the taxi fleet.” An ingenious argument. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When they proposed this argument, not only did they garner the support of everybody in the Uber sympathizers, but they gained two percent of populists. Some taxi drivers jumped groups [laughs] just by seeing this sentiment." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Uber was not having a good experience with her fleet, probably." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, exactly. They now think, “This makes some sense.” [laughs] They compete for their intra-group. Still, when you time this, it’s still not a majority. This is barely 50 percent." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now, the first majority opinion appears on the second week. That is also the week where the four groups become two groups. The Uber drivers convinced their passengers mostly, and then the taxi fleets convinced the non-Uber passengers, mostly." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This one, everybody agrees, “Laws and regulations should progress.” This is so general. You cannot really act on this. This is a true feeling that the regulations are not set in stone. We show, of the 400 or so people that have seen it at the time, most of it has agreed. Now, once the first majority opinion appears, people now compete for the majority opinion ratio." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now, they try to improve on this score. People now compete like this, “Review is important. We must balance the interest of riders and drivers, but safety is the most important.” Who would disagree with that? [laughs] They get even higher score on the scoreboard. That’s the second week." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "By the third week, we have a winner. This is the highest score that anybody has ever got. This is from Irvin of Mozilla Taiwan, a Firefox developer, a free software guy." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "He said, “The government should leverage this opportunity to challenge the taxi industry to introduce the same five-star rating system that Uber has to guarantee quality, because now if all the taxi cabs, independent or in a fleet, must answer to the same five-star rating systems, where the rider can also rate their passengers, then we’ll get a very high quality,” and so on." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Everybody agrees. It is a very good idea. [laughs] Then this opinion, which was, like, 60 percent for in the first week saying, “We don’t argue with criminals,” basically, started declining on the third week. On the third week more people did not say, “Even if they are criminals, in my opinion we should still sit down and have a deliberation with them.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That number only increases. That is to say, more people are in favor of deliberation on the third week. On the fourth week, we start getting real suggestions." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Our cut-off point is 80 percent consensus in any group, so it has to convince at least four people out of five in all the groups. These suggestions survived this test and most of them only appear on the fourth week when people already are done with competing for majority feelings." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now, it says whatever the law draws up, it shouldn’t be because of Uber, and the taxation. It must have a good story about taxation. This is a new thing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "All the UberX things must register. They must have a U or something on their windshield, knowing that they’re operating for Uber. When inside it, you must check the photo, number, and so on, so that you know that it’s the same person driving than the person that’s showing on the phone. This is also very sensible." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The other sentiment is saying transport is like food and medicine, so it makes sense to be more stringent, because it is a matter of not only just economy but public safety. Everybody agrees." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then some people say some people, “Say private passenger vehicle, when they do ride sharing, they should not be taxed.” It’s OK for them to not be taxed, but if they do that, they should be limited to be two shifts a day, meaning that I go to work, I go back to work, I ride people, ride-sharing platform. Why not?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It should be limited in numbers, so that if you want to evade tax, you can do it as part of business. Even if you do that, passenger insurance should be mandatory and the insurance company should take this kind of insurance." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Finally, people should be able to join multiple fleets. If you join Uber, we must not preclude you from joining Taiwan taxi or some other fleets. As you can see, this is actually very reasonable. Like, this is actionable suggestion." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then we use those suggestions to do a comparative analysis internationally. Then say, for suggestion one through six, this is how other countries are doing it. We show it to everybody before deliberation, and now, we have the deliberation." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We show the consensus sentiments. We show the consensus suggestion, expectations, and the six criteria. We show it like a progress bar. We try to extract promise out of everybody who showed up. This is the scholar’s ministry. The three ministries, Uber, Uber Hong Kong, Uber Asia and also Association of Private Drivers, the fleets and so on." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They all sit down and we look at the consensus. Then we ask everybody, “Do you agree with those consensus? Are you willing to make compromise, accord of those consensus?” For example, the insurance policy. The CEO of Uber Taiwan said, “We will help people claiming their damage if they are by the Uber.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I asked, “How many claims that’s happened before in the two years or one year and a half?” Gu Likai said, “There hasn’t been any cases.” Then somebody asks, “What is the insurance terms? Can you show us the terms?” The association leader says he doesn’t have it with him today." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then their lawyer said, “Just after this deliberation meeting we will send it to Jaclyn’s office, our executor of private insurance, so that is checked.” We asked the minister of transport what kind of legal basis they are on to fine Uber." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then the taxis fleets saying, “If we are allowed to do surge pricing,” that is to say, a higher end of taxi cab, “We can compete with Uber on their own terms.” The ministry says, “OK, we will deregulate that, so you can compete with Uber on that term.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then the Independent Driver Association says, “The reason we are not talking with Uber is that they take 20 percent of the cut. If they are willing to lower it to two percent, we will start driving for Uber tomorrow.” What? [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This becomes a matter of negotiation. We extract promises. At the end, everybody in the nation sees that Uber is checking four of the six marks, but it’s not willing yet to register a local company that pays the local tax and the insurance." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Because of that, the ministry is still fining them. If a local government agrees to take on that registration, it could be made legal. Everybody knows why it’s not yet legal, and there is no need to fight because they are not fulfilling the consensus of all the drivers and passengers in Taiwan. This is what we call an empowered space." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is why we say all the ministries agree, saying, “We share our early stage effects and reflections. Each of us agreed that the agendas that empower does not belong exclusively to us.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then we bridge it out to this cross-sectoral space where we know beforehand, the private sector and the civil society will enter on equal terms on the same day, and then we empower the space to decide the political Uber in Taiwan." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is how we redefined the deliberation process for Uber. The very good thing about this is that the initial nine questions -- “Who is involved?” or they want to know \"How shall we respond?\" -- is then carried verbatim for Airbnb." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The Airbnb people has been watching the Uber real-time transcripts, everything from the very beginning. We didn’t know that. [laughs] They know that we are using a timeline based on Wikipedia." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "An Airbnb sympathizer has edited the Wikipedia page that we were about to use [laughs] to reflect better about Airbnb. Then they sent an email to everybody that has used Airbnb before in Taiwan, because they have their email address, saying, “Go on vTaiwan, and place your opinions in support of Airbnb to keep us legal in Taiwan.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When you see three groups of people, all these people responded after the Airbnb’s call and there are three groups of people. One-third says it has to satisfy for checkmarks." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Another group says, “At least we should ensure that when people say ’It’s their home’ it’s really their home. One must not have 10 homes in the type of city renting on Airbnb, always identical photo. That is not bed and breakfast.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Group three says, “The government, stay out of it,” but they are in the minority. All these groups of people, they came at this point in time. Before that, we have pretty good consensus of people who haven’t used the Airbnb before." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Once the Airbnb sent email to all their members, [laughs] we get an explosive growth in participation. This is why we don’t call ourselves a voting platform, because if we call ourselves a voting platform we will have lost at this point, because it is so unbalanced representation." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Because we say we are just a reflection and objective fact-gathering platform, we were able to say, “We know there is actually not that many people are using Airbnb in Taiwan. Let’s assume that this is their consensus degree.” People have not used should have at least the same importance, and this is their consensus." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We were able to show the side-by-side, not just determined by the sheer numbers but by common sense. [laughs] The main contention, regardless of whether they have used Airbnb or not, is that they are in favor of being an Airbnb sharer, but not a tenant." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "A tenant doesn’t have insurance, but a landlord has insurance according to Airbnb regulations. That’s the main contention. The reflections are generally positive and their expectations are generally positive." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Airbnb is not a troublemaker, because they are really just another evolution of Agoda, booking.com, or something, but still those three points are important. We still did a comparative analysis of the same format." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now, we have the hostel association, the youth hotel association and Airbnb, Hong Kong Airbnb, Korea Airbnb, co-founder even flew to Taiwan and the scholars, the administration, and so on. The magical thing is that the Airbnb people said, “We send things to our members. We are a company who respects our members. We see this is their consensus.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Every point that I show on the screen, they said, “We have discussed this, and we agree. We agree that Taiwan will be the first place where we work with the authorities on ensuring that no people rent 10 identical houses. We will ensure this kind of tenant insurance. We agree with everything,” in short." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There is nothing for deliberation. By the end of the deliberation, the hotel chain association, who was actually protesting before this deliberation process, and went up into the Airbnb with a book of all the thousands of legal hotels in Taiwan and say, “I see you agree with everything, so I think of you as a good guy." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "“Please help us because Agoda and booking.com takes 15 percent cut. I understand that you only take 5 percent, even after taxes, so please help us to bring all your hotels on your platform.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That is how the deliberation ended. This is because we made an example out of Uber. It is like a checkbox, that it doesn’t fit so it is not legal. Airbnb played by the rules. Of course, we thank all our contributors. That is the last slide." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The ideal after this Airbnb is, of course, try to think of not as sectors of people specializing in the public, private, or a civic sector, but think of a fluid kind of role where people, when they share with money, they become the private sector. If they share with volunteer time, they become civic." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They’re texting and redistribution from government, that they can play many roles, even within a day, even within a deliberation because the space was designed by robotic, algorithmic mediators who don’t care where you’re coming from, as long as you can make convince each other of their consensus." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is how we transform people who could only like and unlike to share our links, which takes maybe 10 seconds. To do questions and answers takes one minute, to do real discussions takes five minutes, and with deliberation it takes an hour or so." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Finally, if they make contributions, we invite them to a face-to-face agenda-setting meeting, where they spend two hours with us. This is my last slide. Thank you so much." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No, it’s fine. What about this kind of process? Any other..." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "It’s not easy to answer because there are so many things to digest in terms of the small variation into any other. The general structure seemed to make sense." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "The few knowledge, for example, I have of the tools that you use in each one of these spaces, so the tools are tracing the cluster, does not allow me, at least -- I don’t know about the others -- to judge the feasibility, for example, in a case here." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "It convinced me the idea of starting with feelings and slowly arriving. I mean, the timeline you set for the second, the third, and the fourth week, then the deliberation space, make total sense in relation to the progressive opening of people to the switch of people from one way to the other. Obviously, there are so many questions in my mind that I’m not even able to formulate them." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "Probably it could be used. That plus one combination you use in that kind of setting, which is a problem online collaboration. It would be interesting to test it in a local setting and face to face. That’s something, in my opinion, what is really interesting is that it is on one hand, not gamified for people." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "On the other hand, it also takes you to think a little bit. It’s not so pure gamification. You are not a fake person that gain points and..." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "...over creating a fake identity. It sounds to me what we were talking about, the kind of serious game that takes you in that direction. This could the same. Find a nice way to attract people, at least at in the beginning. Create a stream of opinions, and after that apply more classical maintenance..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, exactly." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "...role of informations." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "I would make free the..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Thanks for staying so late, and also across the Internet. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Maybe the people on the other side of the Internet, they are eating away, like, “We are not doing it.”" }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "...behind the camera. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But for..." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "...pajama may be relaxing in..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly, yes." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "...at least." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "We had 11 people last time we checked, I know." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s great." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "For municipalities, I think it will depend a lot on virtual reality, which is another three-hour workshop, but not for today. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "No. It’s possible that the positive result you had are driven also on the -- oh, what’s it called -- the emotions that are catching around these two issues. The existence of tensions in society, if I think of how many times I got to the station in Portugal and I found the taxi driver protesting against Uber." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "You have also to think about how much the issue you’re proposing intersects the interest of the general population, which can happen in a specific moment. My question is, this method seems also very posed." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "My question is, you have the setting that now you already tested in some cases. Is it possible to decide to apply it from one day to the other, if you have the very hot issue, a hot topic around? Because you did in some time. These two issues it ears that they were, have been discussing in society." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "A sort of instant poll. I don’t know, a fire disco. I’m thinking about a stories that happened in Romania that involved the government, too." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes. We used this tool not in a national empowered space but as a civil society, as a test-drive long before it is Uber or Airbnb. We did a death penalty deliberation with this." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Death penalty?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "After a random killing in Taipei. Taiwan is one of the last countries to still have the death penalty, and a lot of people..." }, { "speaker": "Giovanni Allegretti", "speech": "Last country among the democratic ones. Because in the undemocratic ones...[laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "Do you release also all the data, obviously, all the data you collect?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, of course." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "They are released in an open forum?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, of course." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "You find a place that you would..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, because otherwise we cannot run an independent analysis. That is a basic..." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "...other people who run their own analysis." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, that’s right." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "Was that a non-question?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right, as you can see this differs from the usual vTaiwan ministry proposed, because we asked ministry to provide their initial analysis. For topics like this, nobody is willing to be the one to do the initial analysis, so we asked the entire academic community to do it." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "Obviously, because in Uber case, for example, the level of violence between that cab driver and the Uber driver was a really..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly. If the ministry used one wrong word, they’d get occupied tomorrow." }, { "speaker": "Audience Member", "speech": "I remember in Milan, they follow the whole month the vice director of Uber Italy, after a conference, and they start hanging things outside the home of this person. [laughs] It was really getting a level of...This was the right bottom on your map. It’s just becomes illegal after that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "After we did the Uber deliberation, of course, there is still the Supreme Court ruling and things like that, but we don’t see people on the street anymore. People now know what are left to be done. Before that’s done, the the Ministry of Transport keep fining, and then people generally think it’s a good idea. That’s it." } ]

[ { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "...start. Can you just draw on this iPad Pro?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, and I am going to sit by you so we can be on the same page. Here is your text (Hackers: Au cœur de la résistance numérique), so I can refer back to the text whenever I want. This is how I look." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then, I just make annotations on it. This Goodreads app is not my normal note-taking app. I use this because this works with PDF files. Normally, I take notes with Zen Brush, which is the calligraphic Chinese way of... This is too ceremonial, maybe, but you get the idea. [laughs] Let’s use this. Let’s just start talking... and write notes in the background, on the margin of your book. It’s funny." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "How did you get into code, at first?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I think that was pretty well documented. I got into coding when I was eight, and I saw those programming books. I was very into mathematics at that time, so it looked like an extension to mathematics, except it’s repeatable mathematics. It’s a mathematics that is done outside of one’s mind." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s like a blackboard that does math for you. That was my initial idea. I started to just use pen and paper, which is actually why I always preferred pen-based devices." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Stylus. I started with the very early Palm Pilot, and then Zaurus. Every generation of devices with stylus, because that’s how I started, with a pencil and a paper, and an actual keyboard, and then simulate how the computer would respond before my parents bought me real computer. I was already programming before that with pen and paper, which explained this affection." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "You had, I would say a first career. I don’t know if it’s the good word but as an entrepreneur, and then you got involved in politics. When did you get this sense that maybe there was something to do with code and politics?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That was back in, I would say 1987. I was six at that time. You know the entire Apple II personal computer history. I would not have to tell you that. You wrote this book. I know what you already know." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That was when Wozniak and Gates were doing their work mostly. On the same year, it was the lifting of the Martial Law in Taiwan, so think Spain and Franco. Before that, it’s impossible to have a press like the Libération. Back then, it’s just government-run presses, as well as the presses that walks a very fine line on censorship and self-censorship, and so on. But after ’87, because the Martial Law was lifted, an emphasis on freedom of speech has been going on for 30-something years." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "People started to have the freedom of press, I think around ’88, freedom to make parties around ’89. You know, all those things. They are in the psychology of the Taiwan generation — not just for me — that personal computing and political freedom happen in the same year." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Internet and democratisation, the direct election of presidents, the first one in ’96, happened in the first year. Then the social media, as in both Wikipedia and the other kind of blogging around 2002 or 2003, appeared at the same time as the modernisation of the other election levels. Then it’s further democratic innovations, like referendums, or participatory budgeting, and things like that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They could be discussed now, while as before, it was not even on the agenda because there was Martial Law and the dictatorship. What I’m saying, is that it’s not about me. It’s a very particular timeline." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "It was quite natural for you to get involved, for instance, in open source?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, because the freedom of speech in the IETF coincides with the freedom of speech in the new constitution that took effect after the lifting of the Martial Law. Actually — defined with the exactly same words." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "What do you mean? With the same words." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Meaning that, for example, in the Tao of IETF. I don’t know if you have read this document. This is one of the RFCs that defines the way of the Internet Engineering Task Force. This is where they said, “we reject votes and kings and presidents; we believe in rough consensus and running code.”" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Rough consensus and running code." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then there’s a section in there called security implications, because all the RFCs by that time are required to have a section that says security implications. All the section says is a quote from Laozi, the Chinese philosopher who says, basically, “one who defends with love and care has no enemies,” or something like that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But words from that scripture was quoted in the democratisation slogans, too, because Taiwan is very heavy in traditional Chinese culture. Our written language is literally called “Traditional Chinese.”" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The idea, the Tao of IETF, well, even this quote, is very familiar to the political rhetoric in modern Taiwan. It is the saying that the traditional Chinese culture, which promotes political intelligence, harmony, whatever, must prevail against the dictatorship that has fallen down and so on. A gradual democratisation." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When I say same words, I mean literally same words, that they quote from the same sources." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "When exactly are you getting involved in the IETF?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "As an IETF participant in the working groups, that was very late. That was 2004. It was the Atom WG. But that was also only because W3C before that time operated independently of IETF, and I was mostly working with web technologies." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But I did of course, as an implementer, have to read all the relevant new RFCs and give feedback. At the vicinity of IETF are us implementers, from the very early beginning to the later ones like...I don’t know. WebDAV was developed in IETF I think, and then later OAuth. In W3C there is now OpenSocial, of course. There’s a lot, actually." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Those work were from my career in the private sector, but also from the voluntary sector. So I have to work with the RFC folks. But I wasn’t an editor for anything. I was just implementing, giving my feedback saying \"this draft sucks; that doesn’t work.\"" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "[laughs] You say that very early you had this sense that there was something in common between personal computers and Taiwan’s democratisation. When did you really get practically involved in that?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Practically, as in...?" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "I don’t know how to say that, but trying to promote democracy through technical terms?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now I have to introduce my family, because that was their work. Both of my parents worked in the media. My dad was deputy editor-in-chief for the \"China Times,\" which was the more liberal newspaper that existed in the Martial Law era. My mom was a journalist there, covering politics and later ecology and social movements." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What I would like to say, is the amount of time they could have spent training me to work with the system that existed before, they spent that energy instead to change the system, so I don’t have to adapt to it. Am I making sense?" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Yes, I think so." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Because they were around my age at that time, for example, when my dad helped covering the Tiananmen incident, they were the first generation to use a digital camera and digital modem lines to transfer the images. Before that it was not possible — there was no modem for cameras." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So that’s kind of their work. It’s very difficult to say when did I start, because we talk about this all the time in our family." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "You were immersed." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Immersed in the activities and the work in the extended family. One of my uncles is also a judge who cares about judiciary reforms." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Can you explain what g0v is?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Gov-zero, yes. Ready?" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Should I use the Portuguese slides? I gave workshops and distributed three versions of the talk. Just a second... [switched to French slides] Very, very briefly. So g0v is three groups of people who didn’t necessarily talk to each other. There are two chapters in your book that talk about this: sometimes the NGO moves too slow, because they don’t trust strangers." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The media people are too hands-off, because although they use the technologies to ensure the communication, sometimes is they who sever the deeper link to hacktivism, because they don’t want to get too much into the activist agenda." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That was your argument, not mine... But, of course, you also mentioned that many people in the hacker movement are not necessarily hacktivists. Activists are actually just a small fraction of the entire hacker movement, meaning that most of hackers didn’t actually care that much about public interest." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "I think more and more of them do." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, definitely! What we are saying is that the amount of people who care about this, in the media circles about hands-on concerns, were a minority, and the people in activist circles that cares about open-source is minority, and the free-software people that cares about civic hacking is a minority. That’s what I am saying." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Yes. OK." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So g0v is a way for us to get these three groups of people and to form a series of spaces, with open space technology — online and offline — to become an organism, so that we learn from the activists and the media people what are really in the public interests. The media people learn from us on how to actually make an impact, and activists learn from us on how to trust strangers." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is basically what g0v is, without going in too much detail." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "The idea is to put a global focus on transparencies in it?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There are two things — I made a poem about it. Have you read it?" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "I don’t think so." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It was commissioned by this republican assembly member of yours, Frédéric Lefebvre. He invited me to give a talk to the assembly, but I was in Taiwan so I couldn’t make it, so he asked for a recording. So I only have five minutes or so of time, because of the setup." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That recording was required because I am not in person, I can’t answer questions, so I thought it’s best if I just transmit all my ideas in that single recording. So in this sense, he commissioned the poem." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "It’s a lovely story." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "He commissioned this work. Yeah. Then, of course, your minister of foreign affairs also asked me to do a public performance in the \"La Nuit des Idées,\" the Night of Ideas, which I also read the same poem. The idea here, we will skip the intro, and go to the poetry. It’s this:" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Through radio and television," }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Just a question on the side. Is that Frédéric Lefebvre who got in touch with you?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "To commission this? Yes." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Because that’s an anecdote, but it’s really funny. When he was the spokesman of the government, well, no, he was Secretary of State at that time." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Also at Ministry of Economy, I think." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Yeah, it was years ago, maybe 10 years ago. He made an intervention in the HADOPI law, which was completely against the Internet." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I know. He won the Big Brother award for that. I’m aware of the history." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "For me, this guy is a mystery because I think he really changed, something changed. We had two months ago a big discussion in the parliament about a new law, digital law. He was one of the most precise and aware..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "... and his proposal is on GitHub. That’s for everything that the administration sends to the assembly, he tells the administration to come out with a report about how to make all the bureau-proposed laws go through a national digital platform, like the Digital Public Bureau itself did. It was voted into law. I don’t know how your administration would do this, because there were things with the economy, with the Internet that was just as easy to work. But there was also agriculture, there were also labor issues." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I’m not exactly sure how that would work. I have ideas, but no government so far have made that work. In the US it was done by the White House. They don’t have to answer to the parliament or the senate. In the UK, it’s done by the parliament, so they don’t have to answer to the administration. But if this law that Frédéric proposed works, then this becomes more Estonian than Estonia." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It would create a new assembly below the assembly, between the administration and the assembly and the senate. It becomes this level. I don’t know whether or how it will work. But it’s a very interesting idea." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Can you tell me the story of g0v, when it was created before the Sunflower movement? But it was very active during the Sunflower movement. How did it happen exactly?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The myth of origin is..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No, seriously, the myth of origin is that there’s this advertisement, which I will spare you, about the economic boosting plan that the Taiwan administration did in late 2012. In this advertisement, what it looks like is this huge banner saying this economic plan on top and a lot of people looking very confused under it, and a lot of keywords flying through over their head literally." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then this, which is also broadcast on YouTube for five minutes long, the voiceover says, \"The economic boosting plan is a very complex plan. Because of that we wish we can explain five minutes, but we cannot but the important thing to remember is trust your government. We have everything figured out and as for economy the debate does not do people any good. What’s important is just to follow the plan and do it.\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is like back to the ’80s. Wow! Such a retro advertisement. The director was fired immediately after this for obvious reasons. We are, after all, a democratic country. He has exclamations saying that he actually plans to file upwards more advertisement. This is just to talk to people how complex it is. Nobody listened to him." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When this went on YouTube people used the \"report spam\" button and so the Taiwan administration become the first YouTube account to get classified as a junk account and got banned from YouTube because hundreds of people, thousands of people clicked the \"report spam\" button on this YouTube." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "That was so bad." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "As you can see this is a very insulting advertisement and the central message is that the administration is so complex normal citizen has no chance of understanding it so we don’t even try. This is the core message." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "g0v was founded, not by me but by my very good friend. He was at a hackathon at that time, and they were just already doing some e-shopping, normal kind of hackathon stuff, but because this account was restored on the day before their hackathon and it was aired again on YouTube they got so insulted that they decided to change their hackathon subject at the last time. They build this website instead, which is why I asked for WiFi because if you had WiFi you can go there and check." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What this does though is it used the standard open spending trademark model to show the national, but they improved it showing also the bubble graph, so we can see which is getting cut, that falls down and which is getting increased, which goes up." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They also provide unit converters because people when they hear one million they don’t have an idea, but they convert it to how many iPhone 5s, how many minutes of space travel, how many average national salary, and how many Icelands, because Iceland was bankrupt at that time it was the price of Iceland." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "At a glance, understand what the budget is about. Then they could say they want more or this is not explained clearly, or they want it reduced or they want it cut. They have a discussion thread in each specific item of the national budget. It won some award in the hackathon. They used that money to have their own hackathon, and to register this very important domain name." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The problem with new civic startups is always the website name. People cannot remember so many website names — something citoyenne dot fr — and so on. I say this not with any disrespect to others at the hacking communities in France, but all these websites here ends with citoyenne, and I can sometimes not tell between the senate or the parliament or the other different things that all ends with citoyenne…" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The g0v.tw domain name is important because if you want to go to the environmental agency data in Taiwan is env.g0v.tw. If you want to look at the visualisation of environmental agencies data and open data, GitHub and Fork, you just, in your browser bar, change the O to a zero and then you get into the shadow government. We solved the problem of discovering, because people know their parliament website is ly.g0v.tw. To get into the shadow government, you just add a zero." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Here for example you see all the bills in a shopping cart like a progression. You see the link of all the legislators. Basically what you people are doing here also, but the thing is that every system here is linked so you can link to their donation records, to the companies who donated to them, to the company funding those companies, and triage it with their voting records and so on." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Because there is one government agency doing all this so there is one g0v agency doing that also, except we’re linked using data, and ministries I know linking their data together. This is why call our Fork government. I hope I’m clear." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Completely. This is a way to get more transparency in what you’re saying." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "More reflectiveness." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "More reflectiveness. How do you get people involved in it?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "With food. For every hackathon which we have every month, maybe 100 to 600 people, and then the next month 50 people, 30 to 50, and then the next month 100 people and then the next month 50. Then it’s very regular. Every two years we have a summit that brings all the usual suspect that you have in the book to Taiwan to talk about their agenda for the next year." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then we go back to this rhythm. Everybody knows where and when to finance those first, and then when they go to this open space they see top class food. This is actually our only regular expense. All the donation that we get are transferred into top class food catering. We have a professional catering team, volunteers of course." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The point is that the funding we get by selling tickets after they were sold out to the hackathon because they were very hot. That’s our only funding first, and then we spend all of it on catering. We don’t keep money. Then two months after that we do another round of fundraising, and buy very good food." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Basically, because one month from a open space hackathon you will not remember any of the agenda or the people, but you will remember the food if it’s good enough or if it’s bad enough. That’s how human long-term memory works. It links a fact to the space, to the situation. This is positive effect, and then the procedure." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "After the great food you’re seeing stickers. For example, for you I know you’re a great storyteller, I know maybe you’re a designer, I know maybe that you work in the media. Maybe you care about human right, so then you will take these four stickers. There’s these huge badges you could then put it down your shoulder." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Supposed you’re the first time here, you’ll use this deer button and put it in front of you. If you’ve been here many times you use this bear button, veterans. Then everybody who has an idea goes on the podium, there’s maybe 20 different ideas, and then they announce in three minutes’ time sometimes with slides or PowerPoint saying, \"I want to do a transparency campaign finance. I want to do a recall campaign. I want to do a civic media, whatever, I’ve got a dream.\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then for this screen this is what I have -- usually just some hand-drawn things. I have already solved that I will need two engineers, one designer, one storyteller and one legal people. They can make their HR requirements up front." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then because it’s an open space, all the 20 projects go to different corners, and then you as a participant, you just choose which team you’re interested in but if they’re already full of engineers or designers or writers you go to some other team. You can look at a glance whether they’re full because of the stickers. We have a very even distribution of expertise of projects." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now, of course a lot of the deer will stand there, caught in the headlights, not sure where to go and then the bears will come and slowly ask, \"What do you care about? What do you usually work for? What’s your passion? Walk with me.\" By the end of the walk you’ll find yourself in the project. That’s our way of getting people involved." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now after you discover those through this hackathon, discover these projects which will be called gaps or holes on the ground. We don’t call projects, and then you will meet more people. By the whole day or two days of hacking usually everybody would have their prototype by the end of the day or the two days." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then they go on the podium to take five minutes to present this is what we have built in a day. Then we will meet every other Friday, or we will meet on a selection or something to make this actually work for the public. Usually, people set on a weekly or biweekly schedule." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "After that, that becomes the meet-ups just for that project or sibling project. Through meeting those people, you know more meet-ups or more hackathons, but in that meet-ups eventually people will come up with new ideas. You get involved into more projects and then you meet more people." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So g0v really is not an organisation or a team or anything; it’s just a space of doing this like this. Every time in 100 people we have maybe 40 or so new people. That actually means when a project is mature enough, they would just send one or two people to the large hackathon just to get to know what the new ideas are. Because they are mature sometimes they become a social enterprise or sometimes they become its own movement and that’s great." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is the zero stage, incubator, where you only need to bring your ideas and you need people with very large, diverse professions, and it starts with maybe 40, 50 percent engineers, but now we are 20 percent, 25 percent." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Really?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah. Then 20 percent designers, and the other people are all sorts of people." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "That’s really interesting because, well, most hackathons in Europe it’s mostly coders." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They eventually homogenize, but what we have found a way is that once they form a team they don’t need to go this large hackathon anymore. It’s natural, it’s usual that people from NGOs or any other parties that are interested in working with hackers to come. They are the majority, but there’s still maybe 30, 40 hackers or veterans, in the hackathon, so it’s mostly mixed." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "That’s quite interesting. What did g0v do during the Sunflower movement?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We promote this counter-cultural idea in Asia — because in Asia people care about face. It’s a shame-based culture, not a guilt-based one, if you know the difference. People were very afraid of throwing out something imperfect. The way we counter this culture is by designing, deliberately, very ugly logos, like this was the g0v logo. I’m sure you can do better than that, everybody can do it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is with text editor. It’s just 10 seconds time. I wasn’t part of the movement. I joined two months later but they had the guts of printing it and hanging it on the Open Space. Then one of the designers said, he is paralysed, because he sees something so ugly, he feels powerless, he has to do something better otherwise his face is gone. He spends the whole day redesigning a better logo, which is talking and inspecting and what have you, which is better." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But then, because they relinquished the copyright and he also abandoned the copyright using this device that I’m very glad I don’t have to explain to you...All the other designers then cried out and said, \"Our mobile device just looks like a Q.\" We actually had to register gQv.tw, because some people typed it wrong, so we did a redesign, and now we look like this." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "On a mobile device it’s just this, so it’s very identifiable now, but without the shameless people who do this, this will not happen. This helps explaining the Sunflower movement because this is how g0v does things." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We do what Clay Shirky calls situational applications, meaning that for every day of Occupy, we code just for the next day of Occupy, and then the next day, and then the next day." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s not re-purposing Twitter, it’s not re-purposing Facebook. It’s just doing what the movement needs on that day. That’s the ideological kind of thing. The actual implementation, which we don’t call the Sunflower. We call it the Digital Camp, because it was a demonstration, but a demonstration not as in demonstration of raw numbers, but as a demo in the demoscene — I’m very glad I don’t have to explain that to you." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Because the site we occupy is the parliament, and the reason why we occupy it is they refuse to deliberate a trade deal. The demo is to how to deliberate things like this. That was the goal of the Occupy." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I think something very similar happened in ’68 here: People said that it’s a theatre what the parliaments are doing but in the theatre we do the parliamentary things. But in here, the theatre is the parliament itself — but it’s the same idea. We used, I’m sure you’re familiar with this, Occupy Wall Street deliberation methods to talk about a cross-strait service deal, and demonstrated to the legislatures how we should talk about things like that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is a demo, but not a demonstration, and the system was exploited a few months after that, again with the world’s politest protesters. You probably know Occupy Central." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Yes, and this was another question. The link between people in Taiwan and people in Hong Kong. At that time, I interviewed a developer in Hong Kong, and he said that they were inspired by what happened in Taiwan a few months ago." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah. They re-forked the repository. Yeah, look at this. This is very technological events. His friends are saying, but I’ve seen this before. Then Chia-Liang, one of co-founders of g0v, says well because they just forked the GitHub repository." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You have interviewed Code4HK, so you know their system. It’s crowd-sourced bookmarking, and with the geo-positioning of news and real-time broadcast and the logistics spreadsheet. This is what we built during the entire movement, and they fought it and of course, improved on it. It started with the anti-nuke protest, that was our first test of this kind of methodology. I’ll give you the short version." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is ’14, and one year ago before that, there is a anti-nuke protest that’s very large, 100 million people. I’m sorry, 100,000 people or something like that. That’s because of Fukushima — all around the world people are doing the same thing. Taiwan was considering building its first nuclear plant. People were generally OK with that, but after Fukushima, some people went to the street saying, we don’t want that now, especially if it’s Japanese technology. [laughs] We have earthquakes, just like in Japan." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But the problem is that the journalists who went to the parade could not send their news out because there’s so many people, the entire 3G spectrum was gone." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "That’s a common problem these days." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, yes. We have solutions for it now, but we didn’t have high bandwidth connection at that time. Everybody has to wait until the next day to see the news, which weakens the movement, for obvious reasons. That year, they decided not to repeat the same mistake. They asked the g0v people they met at one of the g0v Hackathons to say whether we could have a CPR (cable-power-radio) hackathon? This is just another g0v project, except that we’ll have the hackathon in the street." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Our project, we need to know our engineers, we need the intranet people, we need a fallback planning, disaster recovery. These experts that we gathered around. We brought our APs, this is typical hacktivism but then we issued a request for I think 50 megabits per second line to the demonstration street. This was all pre-planned." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We did get the fiber-optic line. This is very high speed Internet we have and we plan to share with all the journalists, and as they parade, as they go, we go with the video streaming team, and they have their own 5Ghz WiFi or something." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We had it all planned out, and the typhoon came. A hurricane, and nobody showed up. The turnout was maybe 50,000, not even 50,000, low number of people, because it was raining cats and dogs. C’est la vie, right? [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But we still were there, and the rain was pouring down, and we have a lot of bandwidth but nothing to use it with. Of course, the media people had to come, that’s their job, but they used maybe one-hundredth of our bandwidth. [laughs] We have a lot of spare bandwidth and we don’t have a lot of people. What do we do? Just two weeks before that, YouTube Live was introduced. That is to say, everybody can broadcast on YouTube with live streaming." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We connected those two bits to the SDI in line that was broadcasting on the main show stage, where they have important people doing speaking, rallying, that sort of thing. Then we routed into my computer here, which is conveniently having a fiber-optic uplink. It can then use all the bandwidth. We have nothing to use it anyway but for a real time broadcast to the nation." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Basically, we become a media at that point, because some people feel guilty for not coming out to the rally because of the weather. So they dialled in to this live stream. Even though we did not pre-announce it, and we did not plan it, still, like within minutes, there are more people watching than people around the stage. Because you really want to join, but there’s really raining." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The fun thing is that on the stage, it looks great, because the camera is not taking the empty chairs, it’s not taking the surroundings that shows not many people are showing up, but on the stage it looks just like very eventful rallying, convincing charismatic, environmental activists talking and so on." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "People, through Internet participation, saw it’s a successful, great event through telepresence. This is our first time really intervening in this regard. Then we documented the entire process, then shared it with other hacktivists, but even before we could pack our equipment, the Occupy happened. There was just 10 days between the two rally. That night, there was a street protest." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We thought maybe it was just protesting for one night, or until the next morning. The professional camera crew are covering it and they, because it was not pre-planned, we don’t have a high-speed Internet connection, so I just used my phone to serve as the HD live streaming. The camera crew use this desktop computer that connects to the SDI line, and what I have is just a film, there’s no way for them to use the WiFi signal because their WiFi card is broken." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "A random student just showed up, saying, I have this laptop here and then, you can just use WiFi and I’ll just use Windows Internet Sharing to share into Internet, so that the signal can go out to the country about the protest. I’m like, OK, but are you not using your laptop, you look like a young student. He’s like, \"No, no, this is my administrator password. I’m not going to use my laptop anymore. You can have it as your station.\" I’m like, what?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then it turns out that he climbs over the walls here and break into the parliament. Later I’d learn that all the student Occupiers would only bring Macbook Air. Anything that’s heavier than that, is not possible for them to climb over walls, and break glasses. They’re too, too heavy. His is a 15-inch, it’s heavy, so he just left it there. We have a live YouTube going, but they broke into the parliament and then set up what we call a sandal-mounted live-streaming station." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Because there were no police, maybe two or three police, people were not anticipating this kind of Occupy. It was actually kind of peaceful, and because we have g0v people there filming here already, so there’s a mobile team that took the entire footage of their going into and negotiating the supplies, and so on. Police soon came to surround the parliament, but because we had this going on first, even more people counter-surrounded the police." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "New police cannot get in anymore. This becomes a counter-surrounding situation. Police then try to break in, and they were setting up barricades, of course, but the point is that all the barricades were filmed back here. All these police trying to break into the barricades and so on, were then broadcast to even more people who joined even more." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s impossible then for the police to outnumber the crowd, and the crowd say, we will not attack you, if you stop attacking the students. It was a settlement, and has been like that for the next 20 days. That’s the basic situation of the Occupy. The g0v’s doing is mostly in the first 24 hours setting up two WiMax stations and then broadcast what they have inside — including the original station which was not our doing — into this Hackpad, which is a transcript platform, and we ask everybody to hear those three channels and type whatever they have heard." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Another team of occupiers coordinates translation into 12 different languages based on this text or transcript. This is a spreadsheet that I helped maintaining, well, I coded it, with Dan Brickllin. It was the backbone of a crowdsource bookmark of everything that’s related to the Occupy. Here comes the covert Hong Kong system that you saw. The same designer who designed the g0v logo designed a main learning page so that people can print a bracelet to show their support, for example, our movement." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s what we did the first day. Does that answer your question?" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Yeah, completely. That’s quite fascinating, because this idea of documenting what’s happening in real time, it’s also a way to change the balance of forces, obviously." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is just a transparent part. The reflective part came three days. In any Occupy, by the third day, when things are stabilising, you run into people who are, I don’t know, mobsters, gangs, vagabonds, I don’t know but you know that happens. What they do is that their most effective weapon is not violence, it’s rumours." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In any Occupy, you have a lot of rumours going around. There’s no efficient way because the rumour does this, \"Police is attacking the station,\" is expressed faster than the fact, even though the fact is filmed, transmitted, you still have to check your phone." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But when the person next to you shouts, \"They’re being attacked over there,\" it’s more viral than your phone. What we did then, at that time, because of this kind of rumour start to spread, is we set up on the street, remember there are three streets around the parliament, this street, this street, and this street...We set out on this street, a projection screen. This is very makeshift, as you can see. Yeah, sure. Go ahead." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Yes, I don’t know. [French] . OK. Sorry." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s OK. This is what we did. We set out a projector like this. This is the occupied place, it’s the parliament, but there’s a stenographer, three actually, rotating. There’s a stenographer in the parliament sitting here, typing everything she heard. Here, in real-time, a stenographer. You don’t have to trust what she writes, of course, buy anybody with a phone, or a headphone can check whether she’s actually being factual. She has to be factual." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But because this is projected, any rumour that is about the occupied area, is slower than this, because anybody on the street can check, just by reading, what’s happening." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Because..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It was projected on the wall." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "You just have to look at the projection." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The wall, that is the prototype of the Occupy Central, of this one. Same, same idea. Basically, this then completely eliminates rumour on that street, so the other streets set up the same projection screen. Then the occupiers inside saw it was such a good idea that they also set up two screens showing each street. The walls now become transparent. It’s as if the police are not there. It’s as if people can just talk to each other through those mutually transparent walls." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Eventually, we upgraded our equipment because some IT companies in Taiwan, they donate, they re-synthesise actually, the movement. They donate new screens that are two stories high or something, but that comes a few days later. The basic idea is that we eliminate rumours using this kind of what we call reflective space. It’s not enough that people know that they’re being filmed, it’s that we show people that they’re being filmed. That changed human behaviour completely." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "In some sense, what is public has to be completely transparent. Is that also the idea?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah. The public sphere is by definition transparent, but what is transparent is not enough. Transparency just means that all the raw data are there, but to make sense of the transparency, you have to derive what we call expertise networks. You know all the theory. It’s not enough because you don’t magically have a dialogue, just because of transparency." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You have a dialogue because the experts are able to converge on some kind of blended discussion in a way that the lay people and other experts are lay people in other fields, in the shared social sphere." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is what France does. Frequently, you have those television debates that with smart writers that both know the layperson’s language and the expert’s language. That’s what you do very well. In Taiwan, what we specialise, is on the transparency in the policy level. For example, we have a law that says any information system that is built in less than €1 million have to publish all their data completely open by the government." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s not even a choice. It’s the default. Now, once you have that default, the expertise network start to grow. It’s like participator budgeting. There’s no NGOs in some area, but because of PB it starts to grow around the budget. The same idea because the data is now flowing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s an opt out system, you have to prove this is sensitive data, otherwise it’s flowing out. Then people start to gather around that, and become a gradual ladder of expertise around it, but without that guaranteed source of information or transparency you cannot build reflection outside of that." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "How is it today? What do you do today? Do you have some examples or...?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, I have the interview with Amaëlle Guiton at Libération, literally." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "[laughs] What I do nowadays is, for example, I’m a facilitator, and moderator, and architect to the what we call rule-making, on those topics. For those topics we take opinions of others. Decoders will do a face-to-face deliberation, but powered by Sunflower technology so that the entire nation see it and it has transcript that you can link to any arguments and so on." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Basically, a parliament in the administration. You get this idea?" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But the parliament was built in a bottom-up way, so it’s a bazaar. A bazaar with the cathedral, in the cathedral. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "One very concrete example. We know that this is a difficult thing because most people don’t know they’re being affected, and that most people don’t know how to commentate. They are better at posting their pictures, and most people find loss to be overwhelming, but to deliberate, you really need people who have that experience." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "For example, this is the closely-held company law that you also passed trough a hearing in France a few years ago, about a new company type of company that takes agreements between the shareholders above the law, in a sense, so that it’s limited in the stakeholder amount, that’s more flexible so you could retain multiple votes per share, or something like that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That law was generally seen as — I don’t mean in France — in Taiwan, as something that runs counter to the civil law tradition that we inherited from Germany, because that is a very US thing, a very UK thing maybe, because that’s private agreement above the law, basically, is what it’s saying." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There’s a lot of debate and they were, how do you call it here, ideological sides on this kind of thing, and the problem is that they agreed to never agree." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "[laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You know what I’m saying?" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The civil law people, and the case law people, and the entrepreneurs, and so on, they agree to disagree very, very, very early on, like three years or four years ago, and so this law never even really passed the public hearing because you’re not even sure who to invite to the public hearing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Some people would say, \"If that professor come, I will not come.\" Do you have this problem here? [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Sometimes it can happen, yeah." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Very divided things. Then, the Nationalists lost the election on all its cities, but one, one city, the New Taipei City, in the election here, so basically, everybody knows the Nationalist government has one year to live till the presidential election this year at that time." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The entire sentiment of government changed, and the prime minister was forced to resign because he was the one who refused to negotiate with the occupiers, and was generally seen as the reason why Nationalists lost this election so completely, and why we have a independent, nonpartisan mayor as the Taipei city mayor, the capital mayor." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "He was elected in a very five-star movement kind of way. A hacker-mayor, basically. The prime minister was replaced with an engineer, and the prime minister said, “Engineers cannot choose to avoid problems. We still have to solve it.\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "He recruited his vice prime minister as the ex-Google engineer, Simon, who recruited Jaclyn, who was ex-IBM Asia, head of IBM’s Asian Law Department. What they are, are basically technical savvy and cyber-educated. If you disagree with them, you’d call them technocrats." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But what I see is that in Sunflower movement the demo really worked. They say, \"OK, you say you’re better than the parliament at debating, so prove it to the nation.\" You said that during those 20 days — so prove it. What the parliament could not agree on, you proved it to get us a way to agree." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "For example, for telecommuting regulations or the closely-held company law, like this, usually they invite the union people, the syndicate people, but there is no syndicate for teleworkers, because it’s impossible." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There is no association of Kickstarter companies in Taiwan. There is no coalition of Taiwan companies registering in Cayman Island. These are oxymoron. It’s not possible. The problem is that if they invite just people they know to the public hearing, everybody else will say this is lobbying. This is something that could never solve with the original legislative public hearing methodology." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Jaclyn, she came to the hackathon. She took stickers. Hers was law and text. She went on the podium, take three minutes to explain that they want to reach everybody who want or is already registering in Cayman Islands, and suggest to the government what kind of law are we going to make to make people go back to Taiwan and register. This is a hackathon project. She needed law people, engineers, and designers." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We can gather around this open space. We design the system. The system invites everybody who is a stakeholder to comment. Anyone who commented is marked as constructive, gets invited to the face to face deliberation with all the ministry people and other academics in the civil law and the case law traditions. We extract promise out of them based on the discussion here. It was live streamed and transcribed using the same Sunflower technology." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is the key. We use the IETF-style working groups, meaning that these people are exactly the people who made constructive comments here or here. My role is just the facilitator, the editor for the request of comment. We actually call you that. The RFC document that we proposed are we are not legal people, so we don’t speak legalese." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We go through all the debates points, and said if the nation doesn’t pass this law it’s fine, but if it does, it must include multiple laws per share. It must not limit the crowdfunding in coming." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It should allow telecommunication for the board meetings. It should not, it may not. This is the RFC language. It was exactly the same definition. We are like the editors for RFC. The ministry of the economy are like the coders, the implementers. They coded into legalese, and must answer to us whether they’re conforming to the spec or not. If they are not conforming, they have to justify it saying, \"OK, this outside our scope, or this is up to the local governments. Otherwise, they have to translate very faithfully the RFC into their implementation." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Most after that, it’s sent to the parliament. The parliament at that time was filibustering each other. A party want to change their constitution. They are not passing any bills at that point. They stopped it two days after that. For this particular bill, they have to pass it. Because first, all the major parties, people, have already participated in the process. Second, if they don’t discover any new facts that through their working to process has been discovered, they have no good reason to block this law. There’s already consensus." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Any party that blocks this bill will be seen as the enemy of the entire process. They pass the bill. It’s signed to the law, whatever. The point is that we use this Focused Conversation Method technology that says, \"These are the facts. These are the feelings. These are the ideas.\" We use a font with six different weights to show strengths of consensus." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then we talk about one aspect of their law each time. Then, for 20 minutes, face to face for 20 minutes to the cyber-participation. Whether you’re offline or online, you get the same amount of time to deliberate. All this is standard deliberative technology, where we use it is tele-communicatively. We keep the word of everybody using Hackpad and SayIt." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The idea is that the consensus is built in this way. It’s very difficult for other political power to refute. This is our tool kit. The point here is that we changed our methodology a little bit when we’re faced with a entity that does not even have to answer to the national consensus, even if we could reach national consensus." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Am I going too long or is it OK?" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "No, it’s perfect. It raises a lot of questions." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Because you asked what I do and this is what I do, right?" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This entity, Uber, is very good at lobbying. You know what they did in NYC. They had a mayor’s feel that they were considering, and then they built in the app Uber, Black Uber, Luxury Uber X, and then Uber was the mayor’s loss. Then if you swipe to here, you will see eight minutes, but if you swipe to here, you will see 61 minute." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is their lobbying tool, because then everybody in the city will get the impression that if the mayor’s regulation passes, you will not be able to get Uber anymore, and then of course, the celebrities love it. They were tweeting it, creating a lot of pressures, so the idea had to be rejected. From a social computing perspective, this is genius. From a deliberative perspective, this is a nightmare." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This kind of effect, it’s mobilisation exactly, so they did not usually answer to deliberation — they just showed up. The thing is that they don’t even have an office that’s operating in Taiwan. They only have a PR office in Taiwan. There’s very little our existing process can do with this entity, so we redesigned the process." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now, we want to talk with the transport ministry, which is already fining €1 million from Uber. We talked with the economy ministry, which Uber argues it’s their job, because they’re just a ride share platform on the Internet, so it’s up to the economy." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The Minister thinks it’s actually the finance ministry’s job because it’s about insurance and taxing. But none of the ministries want to take responsibility of proposing analysis and putting a call for deliberation, because of obvious reasons. The same dynamics you can see in any other country. It’s about ideology. It’s about which side of sharing economy, ideology you’re on." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "For them to even just publish a word of analysis, they risk getting occupied and surrounded or like here — burning tires in the streets, [laughs] so they did nothing. Doing nothing is not an option for things like that. It just escalates." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What we did was that we asked people who have connections to the taxi fleets and to have them work with the ministry of economy on what they actually want out of Uber, just one simple point, but internally, the outside doesn’t have to see it. It’s that they reach something here and through the taxi fleets, we get through to the independent drivers. They are not a single organisation, which is why this is dotted, the P means private section and C means civic sector." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then, through connection with the transport industry, we get hold of the local governments, and through them, they own sometimes illegal rights sharing platforms that’s existing before Uber. There’s already right sharing platforms, which is voluntary. They are not really making a profit, and also illegal or grey-zone Uber-like operations. It’s just never raised to the same amount, but this is city specific, so we have to reach the city." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The way vTaiwan surveying works is that we have one elected official representative from the ministry, one civil servant, an elected normal civic people, one or two hackers and then one or two private sector people from the Information Institute. Whenever we do a survey like this, it’s always four to six people in doing a survey." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This means there is minimal lobbying, because each force is counterbalanced by the other two forces and second that people are more willing to say authentic things about them because they know at least one of the people understands the language they are talking about. That’s what we call expertise ladder." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now, we collect what they really care about the Uber case, and then we say, \"We have the entire nations driver talk about this.\" The way we do it is bottom-up, asking what do you want to talk about? Most people want to talk about Uber and the Airbnb. The next one is Bitcoin by the way [laughs] and so we say, \"People want to talk about Uber.\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We talk about Uber, and we have already defined a specific question which is phrased as, \"What if you have not a professional driver’s license that you carry passenger in your car, and by the time they get out your car, you charge them for it?\" This is not ideological. This is very specific." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is what Uber is doing, but also a lot of other people are doing and we say, \"What do the stake holders care about is behaviour?\" We say, \"We will have a deliberation with all the stakeholders that I just described face-to-face a month from now.\" But what we will talk about, the agenda setting power, the most important power in civil deliberation is crowdsourced." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We say that we leave to all the drivers and your passengers to decide what we will talk about, and then everything is open data, so that people can make independent analysis to make sure we’re not cheating. Then we ask people’s feelings are there, what do you think?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is the interface, designed for drivers. We only have one red light time. No voting while driving, but [laughs] they all use mobile phones. They don’t really have computers in their cars. This is a mobile phone. On your phone, you just see one single sentiment like insurance for passengers is important, and then you say whether you disagree or agree." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s it. We just ask for five seconds of your time and when you answer that, your position starts to change in visualisation, which is your friends actually. If you sign in on Facebook, you see your friends belonging to four different groups. They are not really your enemies. They are your friends. It’s just you never talk about Uber over dinner. [laughs] Also that people’s position can change, because all these is crowdsourced." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "People can write new sentiments to try to win more consensuses in their own group and there’s a visualisation of other groups, and this is published. On the first week, there were Uber drivers, taxi drivers, Uber passengers, other passengers, and then a significant fraction of people thinks it’s already illegal. It is on the court already, so it should be canceled immediately." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This group of people says, \"Even if there’s a lot of taxi in front of me, I always call a Uber.\" These are the Uber addicts, so to speak and these are the anti-Uber people, but if you multiply the numbers, none of this is in majority." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "It’s true." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We say only ideas with more than 80 percent in global maturity gets to the agenda. These are not good for the agenda. They have to come up with something to convince more people in their group. Are you taking this?" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "By the end of first week, group one revised their position saying, \"OK, so maybe all their ride sharing platforms should be fined.\" MOTC maybe too specific to Uber, but it’s do their job. This is more moderate so it gets more support." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Group two says, \"But now all the taxis are forced to join the fleet because the capital is an engine used advertisement and more ways to earn money than just the cab. If you don’t join a fleet you don’t get those extra incomes, so the independent driver in union are getting weakened. But with Uber you can join many different platforms like Uber, Lyft, or whatever so it’s a way to strengthen union power.\" This is ingenious argument." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You can see that they convinced most of the people, including group two, and just like saying this they gained two percent of people because some taxi drivers jumped here. They want to present in the global population, but even this is not good enough. This is just 52 globally. This is not 80 globally. We say 80 globally is the agenda. Their job is not only to convince people who think like them but also people who don’t think like them." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "By the second week things start to appear that convince everybody because this is shown randomly. Out of maybe 4,000 people, only 400 people saw this comment, but almost everybody who saw this comment saying that the law should change with time agrees. This is the general, why don’t you agree? For example, the driver everything is important but the security is the most important of course everybody agrees to their reflections." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Somebody from Mozilla Taiwan, actually a hacker, a hacktivist, wins the trophy for the most consensus by saying, \"The government should introduce the same five-star rating system to regular taxis, so that the quality would improve, you can report bad taxis, so that a taxi get the same quality as Uber, and so nobody would have to take Uber anymore.\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This argument convinced even the Uber people. For Uber, when it’s legalised it becomes the first company to satisfy this requirement, so this is a win for everybody. He wins the trophy. His idea was the most consensus." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then this sentiment saying we don’t argue with terrorists started maybe 70 percent plus, but by third week it’s now just 35 percent plus. On the fourth week it dropped again. As the time goes on people says, \"OK, maybe we should sit down and talk.\" Now by the fourth week we start, finally, seeing what we’re looking for. That is both consensus and actionable consensus. It should be fair. It should be taxed." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "If they’re registered, their registration should be visible, like a medallion maybe on the front of the windshield or something and display inside so you know who you’re calling. This is about public safety, like food and medicine so it warrants being more strict, not just economic issue." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The registration is mandatory, but if you want to avoid tax, then you can maybe carry two passengers per day because you go to work and you’re back to work. If you’re using Uber as a ride share then naturally you can avoid tax because it’s ride sharing. if you’re taking 50 passengers per day you’re obviously not ride sharing and so by that time you better pay tax, and do it professionally, registration." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Finally, the drivers should be able to join multiple platforms. These are the six suggestions that has global consensus that are actual suggestions and not just feelings. These become our agenda." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then we did an analysis on all those six things across countries, and then we sit down with everybody and starting extracting comments out of those six things and the three sentiments. What do you feel about that? Would you agree? This is the association for independent drivers, fleets, other fleets, Uber, Uber Asia, Uber Hong Kong, CEO of Uber, the Ministry of Transport and also Finance and Economy and the leading scholars on Asian economy." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When I was deliberating this, for example, the CEO of Uber Taiwan says, \"We will actually claim for insurance if the passenger gets damaged.\" That’s one of the six points. I asked, \"How many claims has happened so far?\" It was two years or so of operation and Ku said, \"None.\" Ben Jai, an ex-Google engineer asks, \"So, which insurance company is that? Can I see the terms? Do people have to fly to Amsterdam to claim?\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then the association says, \"I just checked with the CEO. The CEO doesn’t have insurance term printed with him today,\" but then their lawyer says, \"We will provide insurance terms to the ministry right after the meeting and they can happily share that if they want.\" That’s one checked." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I asked the Ministry of Transport, \"When you said they’re illegal, did you actually run any interview with Uber about their action or their operation or did you just do a legalistic literal interpretation?\" They said, \"We just did a legalistic interpretation. We did not actually talk so we’re happy to learn what their mode of operation,\" so that’s something checked." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The fleet people said, \"We actually just hear about surge pricing. One of the six consensus when they join multiple fleets we are at a disadvantage if we agree to that but they could have surge pricing on rainy days and we can’t. If the government is willing to relax that, we’re willing to compete with Uber on that term.\" The government says, \"Why not?\" They’re working on that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then the independent association says, \"Uber takes us 20 percent cut. If they do two percent, we’ll work with them tomorrow.\" It’s a matter of economics. Basically, what they’re saying if they’re plus tax they’re willing to share their profit then we can have Uber taxi in Taiwan as long as the local government agrees. That’s another point checked." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There is some other points that are not checked. For example, they don’t want to register as a local company to file with the local city government’s tax purposes. It’s like a progress fire. There’s six consensuses and there’s three or four sentiments." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The sentiments everybody agrees and we can see Uber is maybe here, and the government now says, \"It’s totally half the mandate to keep punishing them until they agree on those final two points that is agreed by all passengers and drivers in Taiwan, so once they are here they become just a regular company.\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They could be legalised, but because they are not here yet they could get fined, but no demonstration process will change this anymore because people had a very thorough discussion about this problem already." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "One of the side effects of that is that when we do next Airbnb their people know that we’re using Wikipedia for the fact presentation, so they edited Wikipedia, their sympathisers, I have no proof it’s them, to add more facts." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This Airbnb deliberation, the thee group of people who argue for different kind of strictness of Airbnb are actually all Airbnb users because they send an email to all the Airbnb telling people who have used Airbnb before, saying, \"Go to the Taiwan. Go to your support for Airbnb.\" Whereas we only have this number of participation after they sent this email... [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Of course most people in Taiwan did not take Airbnb, which is why we’re just collecting facts and reflections and not building on decisions. The people who have not used Airbnb before has a very strong consensus already. That’s Group 4. We said theirs are at least as important as the people who have used Airbnb. These seven become the consensus items for deliberation." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We discovered that while people could agree being a landlord is great, people don’t actually want to live in Airbnb because there is no insurance protection Airbnb introduced for the tenants and so on." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Again, we did this analysis but the magical thing is that Airbnb people have said, \"We will study your Uber case. We know exactly what you’re going to do so for Taiwan specifically we’re going to introduce the insurance program that protects the tenants. Also for Taiwan specifically, their co-founder fly to Taiwan saying, \"We change our code to work with the ministry to report people who say that they have 10 different homes, but they all look alike.\" That’s one of the consensus items that people want to prevent that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Basically, for each of the seven items that were shown Airbnb says, \"Yes, we have considered. We agree our program already changed. We were willing,\" so on. There’s nothing to deliberate. By the end of it the hotel, hostel and youth hotel association people said, \"Welcome to Taiwan and booking and all that takes 15 percent cut. I know that you only take five percent and even after the VAT that’s still less than booking.com, so here’s the complete catalogue of our hotels, help us to comment tourism.\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They were able to work together. That’s what I’m doing nowadays basically, is by transforming this kind of lobbying that happened before with ideological sites and try to do some kind of a scene of the mind that gets people into the mental state of seeing each other’s positions on specific terms so they can share those links." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Once they start share those links they could form meaningful discussions by asking first and then by receiving timely replies. Finally, by doing real deliberation like face-to-face one we had before, and if they have a lot of time to go into this general setting power. That’s a very long answer of what I’m doing." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "It raises two different sets of questions. The first one is that maybe because I was entrusted in politics even before spending a lot of time on the Internet I still believe that there are things that cannot be resolved by consensus. Is the idea of what you’re putting in place, maybe there should be a time for trying to get consensus, to have people talking with each other and sharing their point of view, but is there also a time for...?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When you say things can’t be solved by consensus what are you thinking? What’s in your mind?" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "I’m going to take a very French example. It’s the, how do you call that, work law?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Labor law." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "The labor law, sometimes you have to decide whether you, for example, whether you think the legal, the labor week, how many hours, for example? Is it 35?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Work hours?" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Yeah. Sometimes you have to decide between 35 hours a week or 48." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, and also other points in the style like disability claims and things like that. Anything else you have on your mind?" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "One of the question that this label raises is what should come first. Is it negotiation inside companies, or is it the national law?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Correct. Whether the private sector or the public sector should take precedence." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Precisely on this point, you have two different points of view. You have two different stances." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But this is not about work hour. What you were talking about is agenda-setting power and everything related to labor." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "That’s two different examples, because we have a very specific point, how many work hours there are in a week, and what I was saying about, should the law come first? Or private negotiations come first? It’s also something that could be in the law. The issue is about hierarchy." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We have the individual employees or whatever, and they have a labor union or something, or they don’t have a union, but there is some sort of links. What you’re saying is whether the negotiation here takes precedence or, for example, this is the labor ministry, for example, or whether it should be able to set the terms for the negotiation here. Am I getting you right?" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Yes, but the thing is that what is in discussion is this question of norm hierarchy, is also in discussion in the law. There are people who think that it could be good to have the private negotiations come first and there are people who think that we have to keep our national norms first." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, yeah, but we had that discussion actually, in the telework deliberation, because one of the main points here is whether the negotiation between the shareholders and the star up-funders to value their reputation, because reputation cannot be evaluated, not like patents or anything. There’s no reputation certification agency." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "For some entrepreneurs, they would say, just because I am Zuckerberg, I’m automatically worth this many voting power and this many shares. Some VCs will believe that, so they will enter a private negotiation with compatible bonds or something that, in effect, gives all the voting power to this guy who is, or girl with a lot of reputation." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The problem is that from the traditional civil law viewpoint, this is inflating the entire share out of thin air, not backed by anything that has property or insurance or anything behind it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "If you allow this completely, like in Cayman Islands, you will have billion-dollar companies in Taiwan, but it means nothing, but it will be very confusing to the market and also to people. The ministry of economics think very strongly that we shouldn’t allow reputation stocks, because it will violate the norm of the law, so to speak." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We reached consensus, actually, on that point, saying the reputation stock must not be more than 49 percent of the total capital of the company, meaning that they’re not going to get majority voting power just because they’re Zuckerberg." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But it’s OK. It’s like a warrant that’s vouched by the other side of the capital. What I’m saying is that when you’re specific enough, it’s always possible to reach consensus." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "You really think so?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, and if you cannot reach consensus, it’s because you’re not being specific enough. There’s a whole theory about that. It’s called overlapping consensus." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "But on the other hand, consensus also means more moderate opinions." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah. So? What’s wrong with moderate opinions?" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "It’s not wrong per se, but I mean, when you have social movements and there’s an entire movement towards the social movement, it’s not moderate opinions?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But they are." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "One time it’s about occupying a building, or occupying the parliament." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But the Occupy had support by 91 percent of Taiwan population." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Yeah?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It is a consensus." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Maybe it was not at the very beginning." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It was. The mainstream media tried to paint us as mobsters, of course." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "It happens all the time when there is a social movement." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But we have video coverage from the first to second, showing that it was peaceful and non-violent. It becomes a battle between civic media and mainstream media on the first day, and we start ahead, because it was at night. The journalists were sleeping." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "I’m not saying it was violent." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What I’m saying is that agenda-setting power. Once the civic media gets the agenda-setting power from day two, onward, it could be very short that this is what everybody in Taiwan actually wants. The core argument of the Sunflower movement, which has this amount of consensus versus the official presidential and prime minister position, which has nine percent support, is whether Beijing is a domestic city of Taiwan. That was the issue." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The trade law was able to bypass parliament because the Taiwan constitution says that any deal that the administration signs with a local city government, does not have to pass through the parliament, because otherwise parliament won’t have anything else to do. But because constitutionally Beijing is just a city of Taiwan, so any trade deal signed with Beijing are not like signing those forms from New Zealand. The congress has no oversight." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The administration can just pass it, like with any Taipei or Taichung government. This is a ridiculous constitutional view. The things that came back when the nationalists ruled the entire China, but because the constitution was jointly done by representatives of all the province in China, they’re still running in Taiwan, so they consider Beijing just a city of Taiwan." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "On this core argument of the Sunflower movement, this amount of people said, this is not the case, here, now. The Sunflower movement has the entire consensus in the nation, at the very beginning of the day." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "But let’s say, for example, you know there’s a slogan from the American Occupy movement, \"We’re the 99 percent.\" That means there’s one percent with which you cannot gain consensus, because there are competing interests." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is, we \"like\" this opinion. The Occupy Wall Street people are saying, we \"are like\" each other. This is two different idea of representation. One says that, like the president only represents less than 10 percent of people in representational democracy, but this is saying that we are representation of 99 percent of the nation against the one percent." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Always with percentage, it’s very alluring to confuse the units, but these symbols are measuring different things." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Yeah. I see what you mean." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "If you say, “we are like,” you of course never get consensus because this is not a ratio of agreement. This is a ratio of similarity. But if you are instead measuring the level of agreement, then you can have these people join specific issues. But if you’re operating on the \"we are like\" kind of representation, then of course you’ll always have people who are not alike with each other, who can nevertheless, like each other." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "I’d like to try your method on...Did you hear about the digital law, which is a discussion...?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, the République Numérique." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "There is a point that created a very hot debate. Not everyone’s inference was aware of it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In the civic scene." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "It’s the question of common goods. Between people who are convinced that this question of common goods is very important for sharing culture and science and information. There were a lot of people from the cultural industry who were completely against it. They were even against defining the public domain. Here we had completely antagonistic point of view." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I think that the point you passed on that view, was that any scientific or art culture that was funded by the government that was more than some percentage must be released after six months or a period of time." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Six months for hard sciences — I don’t like the expression — and one year..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "One year for the soft sciences. Yeah. That’s what I remember. I actually read that law. [laughs] You managed to agree at least on the parliament level. It looks to me like a very good agreement." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "That came after, also, a hard debate, and a lot of, do you say editors? Scientific editors?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Completely disagreed with that, and we don’t know what’s going to happen at the senate. I hope it will last, but I’m not sure that will be the case. There is no consensus because there is a majority and a minority I would say." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, but that’s because, as you said, there were people who ideologically cannot see from this viewpoint. They were blind, for example." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "That’s part of the answer, but I’m not sure it’s only that. For scientific editors, for example, when you say, after six months or one year, the publications can be released in Open Science, for them it means there are people who will not buy the reviews." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So?" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "For them, for editors it’s a loss." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So?" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "That’s one of the reasons they were against this article." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, but that’s just financial loss. It’s not a loss to their dignity as citizens." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Of course." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So they could be re-compensated. There’s nothing that couldn’t be balanced when you’re talking quantitatively instead of qualitatively, but the problem is whether there is a process of reaching that. With no process of reaching that and then you vote, every time you vote, you create divides in the society. It’s what I’m saying." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "There was also another question. I know that in Taiwan, a lot of people use Internet. In France, a lot of people use the Internet, of course." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "83.5%, precisely." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "It’s always difficult to have them involved in processes like that. How do you resolve the digital gap?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In Taiwan or in France?" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "First in Taiwan, and how would it eventually work in other countries?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Spain and Taiwan, as I mentioned, and Estonia, were lucky, in a sense, because their constitution and the Internet were very close together. In Estonia especially, the constitution was written around the Internet, because it was founded on that time. The thing is that, what I like is to say that there is a paper culture that revolves around paper. If I can take just five minutes of your time..." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Yeah, yeah. Sure." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Before the paper culture, we have the not-so-long-lasting papyrus culture, of course, and a much-more-longer-lasting stone and bamboo culture. The problem with the stone and bamboo culture is that copy is very expensive, and the problem with paper is that it dissolves very quickly." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then paper took the best properties of stone and bamboos and it became the dominating culture. In China, of course, it had much more time to experiment with paper compared to the Europe. In Europe, when paper was introduced through the Arab people, they had some time to experiment with paper but after that a very quickly movable type, or just typing, gets implemented. This is just two centuries or something." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then you have Gutenberg. Then once you have Gutenberg, paper gets into this whole machine-ized thing where you can read much slower than machines can print, whereas you can read at the same speed that people are writing. The point I’m making is that the Chinese culture had a very long time working with this technology that requires some amount of attention of people writing and people reading, because movable type was not invented many, many centuries before paper was introduced in China around 200 BC or something." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The problem with that is that a lot of people in the Chinese language are ingrained with the paper metaphor. We say, the paper gets expensive when a good new idea comes. There’s a lot of language and idioms that center around this. The digital divide, as we like to say, is basically saying that now we have something that is both better and worse than paper. It’s better because it copies even quicker than paper, it disseminates quicker." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The worse thing is that it lose the fidelity of paper. Facebook, for example, or Twitter, we’re blind or handicapped, in the sense that we can transfer only a very small part of the non-verbal information, whereas with calligraphy, all that is imbued with how you write. That was one of the very important criteria in Chinese examination. The examiners in ancient Chinese courts look at how people use their calligraphic pen to assess the character of the person, in addition to the word they’re writing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But if they’re reading from blogs, you don’t know whether they write, this character was five seconds, or? They lose non-verbal information. The second thing they lose is that they lose the complete attention, because to read calligraphy, you really have to put all your brainpower into processing what that ideogram really means in that context." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But to read a Facebook post, you can skim instead of read. That is saying, putting just five percent of your brainpower into reading it, which is not really reading it. It’s trying to see whether there’s something in there that evokes your emotions, and if not, you swipe to something else. With paper it’s very hard because to swipe a paper takes a lot of time. You can’t help, but enter the more rational intellectual part of your brain." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The digital media, they’re good at zero-cost copying, but they’re worse at pretty much everything else, compared to the paper culture. For us to cross the digital divide, is to convince people who are invested and experts thousands of years of experience working with paper, saying there is now in the digital world, the same immersion, the same understanding, the same transmission of non-verbal information, the same togetherness that calligraphy brings you." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Before we can get that, we will never cross the digital divide because the paper people who have thousands of years of observation, can use any of those idioms to say that this is not there yet. This is as close as we get now, but it’s still not so good, but it’s close. The thing is that, in Taiwan, all we have to solve is the technological problem that brings the paper culture entirely to the digital world with virtual reality and everything." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In France, of course, you have a very old republican tradition, so it’s not 20 years of representative democracy versus 20 years of direct democracy. You’re not on the same terms. This is 10 times more, so you have also to solve the priority issue here to change the discourse. I like to say that, I think it was Holland who said that financialisation was his personal enemy, or something like that?" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Yes, absolutely." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "He liked challenging it to a duel, or something. I don’t know the rhetoric, but the thing is that there is no stakeholder behind that word, financialisation, just as there is no real stakeholder behind the word \"representative democracy,\" because it’s a state of mind." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There’s no a thousand people who if they disappear on the earth tomorrow, will put an end to representative democracy or to financialisation. What we really need to do is to get people in that state of mind where they see financialisation as boring, or people to see this kind of evocation, of lobbying, of the way it was doing in capitalism — was boring." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Until people can enter that state of mind, there is no hope of convincing them because people were drawn more strongly through either dopamine cycle or serotonin cycle to this state of mind. What we really need to do is to invest time in theatres, in affection, in movies, in whatever that put people in that state of mind, where it vaccinates against this kind of state of mind." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "What do you mean, vaccinates them?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I will use a very simple example. Before the election, presidential election in Taiwan, before Dr. Tsai Ing-wen was elected, she had a agenda platform running with open-source, maker-spirit, whatever, it’s very progressive — human right, animal right even, because she has a family of cats." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The idea is that everybody knows she will win, but not by much, by maybe three million or less than three million, but the night before the election, there was this campaign that went viral. It came from a Korean company, called JYP. It’s one of the largest K-pop studios. One of the Taiwanese girl, Zhou Zi-Yu, is a singer in one of the JYP’s bands. In JYP, they did a show on a television a couple years ago of all their team members waving a flag, their national flag." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s how K-pop is trying to market into nearby nations. The Chinese people did not like the fact that Zhou was waving the Republic of China — which is Taiwan — flag, and the idea that this appears on national television in their country, in People’s Republic of China." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The Taiwan media reported Zhou as one of the prides of Taiwan, for example. So some Chinese people see it as something separatist and not something very good for Korean people to do. South Korea and the UN officially doesn’t recognise Taiwan, so why is there K-pop people promoting the Taiwan flag?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then, the Chinese mob, on the social Internet created a massive campaign, to boycott this entire show and then JYP itself, which derives a majority of the revenue came from China. The Chinese television said, \"OK, we will not play JYP’s shows, because of this violation of our national pride.\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then JYP did something magic. They have chosen Zhou, the singer, to be filmed in a white room with very grey, dark lights, looking very pale, holding a sheet of paper, looking downward in a very sorrowful emotion state, with no decorations and filmed in 240p, which is...for the pop studio to film in 240p..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "She was reading from the line, almost crying, says, \"I regret my mistakes for hurting the feeling of the Chinese people. Taiwan is a part of China. I am a Chinese. Chinese national pride and the unity of the nation, of course always come before the local interest, and I apologise for the feeling that I caused to the great Chinese people.\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "She read that in exactly the same way as people were already seeing those videos, because those were the Daesh or ISIS videos. There were filmed in the same setting as ISIS were filming their videos, you have seen those." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Not a lot, because it’s really...but I see what..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The same camera angle, same setting, same light. JYP formally did what China or the Chinese public asked them to do. In the same time, Dr. Tsai Ing-Wen and the pro-independence parties, gained, many people say half a million votes, just because of that, because it was the night before the election, nobody had time to respond. JYP won both the favour of Chinese people and Taiwanese people." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s brilliant, it’s great, so sharp operation. They got unbanned, and this entire singer band now enjoys a much better popularity because of this in both China and Taiwan — genius. The problem of that is, before the election night, all my friends, they were ablaze. They were firing, people were ordering train tickets, plane tickets to fly back to vote, to show China that what an unreasonable thing they had did to us, even though it’s a thing and so on." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That was the night when I received this VR gear. I was watching the Earth from the International Space Station. I was watching the solar system. I was on the moon. I was watching the constellations, the Milky Way. When I watched this JYP video, I see all the manipulations in it. I see the low resolution that skips her micro-muscle movements that invites the viewer to project the emotion to it. This wouldn’t work in a high definition, and I see the lighting, and I see the quality of sound recording, and so on." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I see it as an artefact that it is — maybe a craft that to be admired even — but I don’t feel any emotion inside that was evoked by it. That is to say, I was vaccinated, because I was seeing the Earth in three dimensions just an hour before. It appear more real than these two dimensional representatives of national politics. This seemed to be more boring after watching the Earth from the outside." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I’m not saying that watching the earth from the outside is a vaccination against everything, but it is a vaccination against nationalistic evocation of pride and hurt pride. Are you getting what I mean?" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Yeah, completely. Oh my, two hours. I only have a last question." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "I read the interesting portrait of you in Rue89. What you call post-gender, because obviously you don’t like opposition." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Post gender. Actually, I think Claire Richard wrote \"Post-Genre\" which is not exactly just post gender, because genre is also a music genre or a genre of literature, a genre of science. It’s post divisions. It’s larger than just post gender. What do I mean by that? There was a French writer. I’m trying to think of his name. The one who wrote the postmodern manifesto... was it Derrida...?" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Yes, Jacques Derrida." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "He said, I think at the end of the postmodern manifesto. It was a report I think to some university where he ends with, \"It’s open both to fairness and curiosity,\" and that is the definition of the postmodernist agenda, meaning that it’s both open to different possibilities, but also tries to be fair against all of them, not to explore one path at the expense of the other path. I think that explains my position in this post-genre kind of thinking." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s that I don’t know whether it’s useful or not to label people with genres or genders or race or something. Maybe it’s sometimes useful. I’m not denying it’s usefulness, but if for fairness we sacrifice curiosity or for curiosity we sacrifice fairness, I think it’s great loss overall." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "I don’t know how to ask that, but..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s OK, just say what’s on your mind." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "What does it mean concretely in your everyday life?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "My everyday life?" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Yeah. You mean following two paths." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Many paths." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Many paths?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There’s of course fiction and non-fiction, but this is just for books, stories. Everybody knows there’re many genres of literature, so not just two paths. If you think in two parts, you’re in the fiction vs. non-fiction way of thinking." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "To respond more directly, in everyday it means that I don’t try when I see a book to think first whether it’s fiction or non-fiction. I read your book not thinking whether it’s fiction or non-fiction, whether some part was just your opinion or some part it was facts. Of course, you provide citations, but I actually followed the links instead of just trying to say, \"OK, this is in a certain format, so I read it like a paper.\" you know what I’m saying?" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Mm-hmm." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s that I don’t have a redefined framework of defining your work as a paper, report, a blog or something, and just take the text as a text. I do the same with people and with environments, and so on. That’s my everyday life." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "How do you mean you do the same with people? It’s kind of interesting." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I don’t gender people, for obvious reasons. People are taken as what they interact with me and I don’t have a social script that I expect you to follow just because you’re labeled something, a journalist or something. Then the idea is that we have a social program like a code of conduct in g0v, that says, certain fixed kind of social scripts are not welcome here." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "If you judge people, or say to people certain words based on stereotypes — things that they have not said — it’s a taboo, really, in g0v events. It’s something that you could be escorted out of the conference room for. The idea behind this very strong code of conduct, is just interacting people by the way they want to be interacted with. This implies not gendering people, of course. But also not profiling people in other ways." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "I suppose it has something to do with the hacker ethic also." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It has everything with hacker ethics. It is one of the old hacker ethic that says, hackers should only be judged by their hacking. The hacking is something they consciously do, and put into the public sphere. That’s what hacking is. That implies then, anything that is not consciously put into a public sphere, cannot be used to judge the person." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "On the other hand, I also had lots of discussions with hackers from different countries. Obviously, by not wanting to label people, either with racial label or gender label, and stuff like that, it took a long time for a lot of hackers or engineer communities to see that they had been for years only white males." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "The question, of asking themselves, why are we only males, and there are no women in hacker communities? They had to think about it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah. I was of course part of the Geek Feminism Wiki, and then later donor to the Ada Initiative. I know all this rhetoric in western countries. In Taiwan we don’t actually have that. We had in the very beginning, in the IT industry, about 50/50 ratio in IT practitioners." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The open source people in Taiwan that has a GitHub account, there’s at least...in g0v, of the people who are in the core, or we say, the steering community for our biannual g0v Summit, there are more women actually. It’s not even thought about, because it’s not a problem actually." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Yes. I see what you mean." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "[laughs] Not because of ignorance, but we never had this problem in g0v. What surprised me though, when I went on the international hacker community in ’96, I see on IRC channels a lot of nicknames that are obviously male names, by western standards. You know, Bob, Bill, whatever." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But when I start talking with them, sometimes I discover they were women. They were not women performing the male gender. They just don’t want to be harassed." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "They don’t want to be...?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Harassed. Because if they call themselves Audrey, or something, they will get harassed. It occurred to me at that time, in ’96 — I have been already a programmer for a very long time by then, there’s something wrong with this international face of the community, that we probably should fix it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Personally, we were very conscious of that in Taiwan, and so now we don’t really have that problem." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "It varies from one country to another, and from one group to another. For example, you know what the CCC...? Yes, of course you know what the CCC is. In the CCC meetings, there are very strict guidelines on that question. You must not harass people. You must not discriminate anybody…" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Audrey. Yeah. But that’s reactionary, because that used to happen a lot…" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Of course." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I have a friend, Stefanie Wuschitz. One of the early MetaLab people, who did her PhD, called \"Feminist Hackerspaces.\" The thesis went into a long detail about how to run a feminist hackerspace. Because she runs one in Vienna. We talk actually a lot about this. Do you know the difference between taxonomy and folksonomy?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Taxonomy is something that is hierarchical. If you’re in Paris, you’re also in France. OK?" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "OK. Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "\"If you’re Homo Sapience, then you’re a human.\" Folksonomy is hashtags. #Hashtags. If you hashtag something, and then something that has absolutely nothing to do with it, except being tagged by something else with the same hashtag, then they have some correlation. You can then have tag clouds, that have \"family resemblances\" between people who tag differently." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "On Twitter people will sometimes, always tag the same three things together. Just to get the attention of different groups of people. You know that, right? This is called folksonomy. When you’re saying I’m not labelling people, that’s not entirely true. I’m OK with labelling people. But the precondition is, it’s done in the folksonomy style: People choosing their own labels." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Meaning that, they identify with a word like #g0v. Then they were willing to respond to the tweets with the content tagged #g0v. But without saying, \"g0v is a kind of social movement of the leftist veneer that belongs to the 21st Century.\" [laughs] You see what I mean." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So I’m not against labelling people, as long as this is done in an \"open-world web ontology\" — There is a technical definition for that." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Nice. Thank you very much. Do you have anything to add?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We can talk about your book. I have a lot of questions for you to answer. Making it a counter-interview. Let me see my bookmarks. Sorry. All right, yes." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Do you mind if I use my electronic cigarette?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No. Go ahead. Go ahead. Sure. Someday we’ll have to deliberate on that in Taiwan." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Yes. Probably." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s not currently legal… There’s many topics. But let’s proceed in order of my bookmarks. All right. This is, I think, a very, very important observation. First, I don’t really know what’s informing the specificity up here. Maybe it’s a mistranslation of the machine translation." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The text says: “Any political process involving a hacker will slow them down, because the process relies on the existing body of knowledge, and hacker community is to pass — as soon as possible — to the next thing.” I know this is a quote, but this is your word: “To be an integral part of the debate while retaining who’s, what’s, the specificity.“" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "The specificity of the hacker movement. Let me tell you an example. I have done a lot of crypto parties with hacker people, and that’s do-cracy. We think we can meet and discuss a little bit of what you could do and invite people to join, and etc. That’s the way hacker communities work." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "By doing work." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "On the other hand, I really think there should be a public and democratic debate about this question of encryption. We see it with the Apple controversy. There is a big debate in the United States, also in France and in Great Britain and a lot of other countries. For me it’s exactly the point meaning on the one hand you have to be part of the democratic debate because it has to be discussed." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "By the people, yes." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "One the other hand you also have to do things. Not only crypto parties, people who can code they write software." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I see what you’re saying. Richard Stallman is not coding nowadays. He is lobbying 100 percent of his time. What you’re saying is that Richard’s code should still get maintained and basically the idea is that people shouldn’t...the hacker community should still do what Richard started doing, but also maintain what Richard is now doing." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "They have to be part of the political answer to a lot of issues, but they, it’s my point of view, I assume it, they also have to provide technical answers even before having the democratic debate, because sometimes it takes a lot of time. I’m really happy that, for instance, a lot of people wrote software to improve privacy of communications, and after the Snowden revelations, even if the political discussion is still going on through different temporalities." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I see exactly what you’re talking about." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Through different temporalities." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Basically, what you’re saying is that it’s important to have communication with people and particularly in the democratic process but on a firm ground while doing that, while the firm ground is, for example, Telegram or something even stronger than Telegram, like a right to privacy and things that implementing the code of computers, before it was implementing the code of jurisdiction instead. Is that something or am I misinterpreting?" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "No, no. It’s a complicated issue, because there are other cases because I think crowd is too fast and law is obviously too slow…" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "One is not as quickly as something else..." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Uber is good example, you see?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "I think that’s part of the world we’re living in." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "For the Uber deliberation we only took a month. We’re actually faster than Uber." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "That’s impressive." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s possible first of all to be as fast as the Asian companies." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "There are different temporalities in there as well. What I like in the hacker culture is this capacity to address issues, and try to find answers even if they’re not perfect. It’s..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It is warm here as you said." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "It’s also the idea..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Somebody’s knocking." }, { "speaker": "Camille McOuat", "speech": "[French]" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Do you have a lot of questions or it’s just to know if the photographer has the time to go and eat something and come back?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "For the photographer, hi. You said about a projection screening, do you have that ready?" }, { "speaker": "Camille McOuat", "speech": "Yeah, I’ve been waiting." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I’m sorry." }, { "speaker": "Camille McOuat", "speech": "Oh, it’s OK. I just didn’t have phone reception down there so I didn’t know what was going on so I wasn’t sure..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The thing is that I have a counter-interview going..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "How about we do the counter-interview on the place where you have set up, where you can maybe take some photos of me interviewing her?" }, { "speaker": "Camille McOuat", "speech": "I’m super-hungry at this point so if you want to continue your interview here then I’ll just go and eat." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Go ahead and return. We’ll finish in half an hour or something." }, { "speaker": "Camille McOuat", "speech": "Thank you." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Thanks for taking your time, but I really wanted to take you through the text." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "That’s nice. What was I saying? Yes, there is something very, it’s not only that’s fast, it’s also, I don’t know the word. There’s an issue and you try to find an answer and even if it doesn’t work you debug it and..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Redo it." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "That’s something I really like in the hacker mentality because I have spent some time in more traditional organisations..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "NGOs." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "You have to see lots and lots of meetings and you vote and it takes a lot of time and hacking is fast and sometimes more efficient, but you have to... These are two legs, I would say." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "These are two what?" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Two legs." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Two legs." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "To walk on two legs." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes. That answers my question. The specificity, you mentioned, is actually very close to what I talked with Clay Shirky when he visited Taiwan in 2014. He was saying that in the traditional NGOs all the stakeholders must know everybody else in the committee. When they introduce one new person to the meeting they have to spend two-to-four-times, as much time as it’s needed, to know everybody." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Once the committee goes to about 20 people, the wetware restriction enters and nobody can really know each other’s non-verbal expression means anymore. Above that number you start to see hierarchies, but not because they’re bad people, but because humans are wired like that in hardware." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What we talk about then is the way they were in the Occupy movements, not just Occupy Central by the way, but Occupy Central were consciously modelling the sites as gateways — in which they had seven Occupy sites, and each one tried a different approach, and then some of them would erect a statue of Guan Gong the martial god. Then he would block mobsters and police because they worship the same god. Some other site will erect a statue of Saint Mary, but it will only ward off the police, the mobsters don’t care." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "All of this was livestreamed and transcribed, so it evolved. More, better ideas get adopted in more sites. The fringe ideas where they can continue to play by themselves, but eventually the good ideas prevailed and they were able to work something like that. This is specifically something that is very much a hacker community mentality, so thanks for your answer." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "My next bookmark. Just a second. This whole section is very CCC-influenced. When I was reading the text I see a lot of ethos of the Chaos Computing Club getting through this narrative. My question to you is, for example this is obviously a mistranslation, this cannot really be “gold,” but what really was it? The green in the link." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "It’s a mistranslation. I don’t know what the good word would be. Let me check. That’s very funny." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It really means \"gold,\" right?" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "The word is “Or”, which is \"yet.\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yet. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "They translated..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "As the primary meaning in the dictionary." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "It’s the same word, but with two very different meanings." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is actually a known word. So this has nothing to do with the semantics. I was thinking something about Bitcoin or something and I was going to..." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "No, not at all." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "My real question — now that the Bitcoin misunderstanding is out of the way — is this: You said the German people is critical of this ideology, due to it anchoring this way of hacker into politics into the hacktivism, into the politics." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It was relegated — meaning that the digital tools are good for the existing system to broadcast your message to reach more people or something, but the reverse is not happening — or it doesn’t really have a counter-ideology, is the feeling I’m getting from the text. I’m not sure whether that’s the core argument, in the sense that the thing is that..." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "It was about the pirate party which is, well, actually a good example because a party is not only about tools to improve democracy, it’s being part of the political scene." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s representative." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "The Pirate Party was founded on very digital concepts. The question of intellectual property or file sharing, the question of transparency, the question of privacy, but the problem is that when they are part of the political team, they have to be part of parliament and they have to vote on texts about labor laws, or... It’s complicated because as a party they’re supposed to have an ideological core." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is where it comes about, and this has to be something that’s framed in every presentative narrative, not something like the Flying Spaghetti Monster, which is also a pirate party, by the way. It’s a religion of pirates." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But you mean that it has to enter the narrative as serious about political system, and not do anything as Flying Spaghetti Monster narratives?" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "But I think it’s also because I’m quite convinced we are in a transitional period, and the pirate party is in-between. That’s quite interesting to see, but one way or another they have to be a party like the others. If they want people to vote for them. That’s complicated because they are also supposed to be different. But it was quite the same way for environmental parties that appeared in the 1970s in Western United States." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, I see what you’re saying. Yes, it was the same with the Green people. Then there’s still Greenpeace, but there is now the Green Party. For that I have just one word to add. The way g0v works, every time there is a 100-people hackathon nowadays, maybe 12 people or 20 are civil servants. There are a lot of incentives for professional civil servants to participate." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Meaning that, in the current Taiwan system, they get all the blame if they do something wrong, because we are not totally anonymous to public servants like in the UK. But elected officials get a praise if they do something right, because we are a young democracy. Everybody is claiming for the next election. They are in a very unenviable position." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Yes, that’s quite true." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Through joining g0v, what we do is, we have civil servants with practically all the industries because we fork their websites. They join g0v hackathons and propose why they cannot get approval from the electorate officials as a fault against our own ministry. Then lobby through mainstream media, their elective official boss to adopt the agenda." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is counter-power but within the government. This is exactly because of that g0v does not have to be a party because we are not relying on our representative power. We are subverting, so to speak, the representative power from within the administrative power." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "That’s really interesting." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s all done by forking the government." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "It’s a nice hack." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, so instead of the public sector, private sector or the voluntary sector, we say we say we are the boot sector." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Boot sector?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You know what a boot sector is?" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "It’s when you are..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "...rebooting your computer, it first reads a piece of code that tells the computer how to read the rest of the operating system. Without a boot sector, none of the other sectors make sense. It would be just data and not code." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "OK." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Because it just data on the disk, and the boot sector tells the computer, tells the CPU, what the data means in terms of what CPU can understand. We say that we are the bootstrapping sector that links the public, private and the voluntary sector together so that they can understand each other’s language and data. This is the only thing I’d like to add." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Nice metaphor." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Next, trolling. This I think is very original. I don’t see this in the analysis of other hacker narratives. Meaning that people who are exploring the limits or the tolerance of the community, because they want to determine the border of the hacking, so to speak. As if they’re trolling but with a purpose. It’s like gaming with a purpose." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They are trolling you to test how much of... The text seems to say at times it is actually something positive, because it helps to delineate the community’s code of conduct, or standards, or behaviours and the trolls are in a sense like the explorers in a social setting. Is that your message?" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Yes. I am not completely fond of trolls personally. It was interesting to see someone who was...I don’t know if he was really doing it on purpose at the beginning, but by experiencing the..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Limits." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "...the limits of tolerance not only the law because, of course, there were a lot of concerns on censorship, a lot of laws about limiting the freedom of expression, maybe too much. Obviously, yes." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "For me it’s a big question. You really have to repress expression? That’s a philosophical question. By experiencing the tolerance of the community, he had to think about it means. Think about what freedom of expression is. It’s a process of politicisation, and maybe I would say that it’s globally what happened with the Anonymous." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Because at very beginning it was a bunch of people making fun of other people, obviously, on 4chan. One step after the other it began a new form of social movement." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What you’re saying is they are not just testing it at their own community like for a change, but once they build this habit of kind of exploring and negotiating the boundaries of their own community, they start to grow and explore other systems and other communities, which then transformed a narrative or the discourse of politicisation within the outer or external community." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "What do you mean?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I mean that when Anonymous says that, \"We don’t forgive and we don’t forget.\" Whatever they are trolling, whatever that’s happening now in the political and the media agenda. It’s very sensational, but the media again catches up on that and change the narrative by saying, \"Oh! The Anonymous are threatening to reveal the secrets of something because of the human right or something.\" But it had nothing to do with human right, but because of this trolling they become linked..." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Sometimes it has…" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, sure. But it doesn’t have to…" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "That’s the real paradox of Anonymous, because you cannot really separate what is serious and what is not." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, and this is a hacker thing. It’s in the Jargon Files — called “ha-ha only serious.” I know completely what you are saying. It’s the serious way to troll the governments." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I got the idea. I think this is really original and we did not have this discussion in Taiwan, so thank you. I’ll be using it in my talks." }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Oh, Jesus. The card is full." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Oh wow! It took that long?" }, { "speaker": "Amaëlle Guiton", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "OK. My computer is out of battery." } ]

[ { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在會議正式開始之前，因為現在7點了，先跟線上914位的朋友說晚安，很高興大家一起來看我們的線上諮詢會議。我們在等蔡玉玲政委過來的時候，我先介紹會議室的使用方式，我們等一下會輪流自我介紹，在說話之前稍微按一下綠色的鍵，講完之後記得要關掉，不然會有迴音，大概的流程先個別自我介紹以後，我會做一個綜整性的整理，然後請財政部回應，然後再開放大家自由發言，我們再等一下下，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "很高興來到這已經是第十次，在這個地方開了虛擬世界法規調適的會議，我們就按照往例，請大家稍微自我介紹來自哪一個單位，希望怎麼被稱呼、被紀錄，大概是這樣子，一樣就是請我左邊開始，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "各位好，我是行政院蔡玉玲蔡政委，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "吳瑞碧", "speech": "各位晚安，我是臺灣大學食品科技研究所榮譽教授吳瑞碧，各位好。" }, { "speaker": "羅傳賢", "speech": "主席、蔡政務委員，各位老師、各位先進，我以前在新聞局服務，我的辦公室剛好在隔壁，我以前在82年至85年間擔任廣電處長，剛好在這個地方服務，後來外放到美國去，回來以後又到立法院法制局的局長，我在局長任內退休去私立大學，現在私立大學也已經退休，現在在警察大學我的母校兼任教授，謝謝各位。" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "主持人、蔡政務委員大家好，還有網路上的各位朋友及在場的各位嘉賓大家晚安，我是財政部國庫署副署長顏春蘭，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "員旭潔", "speech": "大家好，我是財政部國庫署員旭潔，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "徐偉誌", "speech": "大家好，我是財政部國庫署徐偉誌，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "張秀鴛", "speech": "晚安，我是衛生福利部保護服務司張秀鴛司長。" }, { "speaker": "張峯源", "speech": "大家好，我是經濟部商業司，張峯源專門委員。" }, { "speaker": "吳家林", "speech": "大家好，我是國發會法研中心吳家林。" }, { "speaker": "陳柏宇", "speech": "大家好，我是國發會法研中心陳柏宇。" }, { "speaker": "薛雅婷", "speech": "大家好，我是速錄師薛雅婷，很榮幸今天可以為各位製作同步會議紀錄，歡迎各位踴躍發言，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "跟之前一樣，從我右邊開始，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "大家好，我是臺灣少年權益福利促進聯盟吳政哲督導。" }, { "speaker": "林美娜", "speech": "大家好，我是臺灣酒駕防治社會關懷協會秘書長林美娜。" }, { "speaker": "徐則鈺", "speech": "主席，我是中華民國消費者文教基金會副秘書長徐則鈺，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "林月琴", "speech": "大家好，我是臺灣兒童權益聯盟的副理事長林月琴，同時也是靖娟基金會執行長，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "廖書雯", "speech": "主席、各位先進大家晚安，我是社團法人臺灣防暴聯盟廖書雯，第一次參加這個會議。" }, { "speaker": "林坤正", "speech": "主席、所有與會者及網路上的朋友們大家好，我是代表臺灣網路及電子商務產業發展協會，我們簡稱TiEA，我叫林坤正。" }, { "speaker": "柏幼林", "speech": "各位好，我是中華民國無店面零售商業同業公會的秘書長柏幼林，大家晚安，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "王重助", "speech": "主席、大家好，我是中華民國酒類商業同業公會全國聯合會理事長王重助，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "林怡", "speech": "主席、政委大家晚安，我是林怡，臺灣酒類飲料協會，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "林其樺", "speech": "資策會科法所林其樺，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "請青年顧問這一桌。" }, { "speaker": "彭彥翰", "speech": "各位大家好，政委晚安，我是青年顧問團彭彥翰，同時也是中華國樂團的副指揮，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "趙式隆", "speech": "主席，各位長官及先進大家好，我是學悅科技的趙式隆，也是青年顧問團的顧問之一，很高興今天來這裡跟大家一起學習今天這個題目，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我就不多耽擱時間，我來講一下待會進行的流程，一開始我會把之前大概快一個月左右在網路上徵集大家的意見，包含財政部前導的說明，我會幫忙先作報告，在報告之後，我們會按照四個層次，就是目前事實的狀況以及網路上面大家所提供的一些感想、一些感受來呈現，接下來應該是財政部他們目前的版本作一個回應，接下來是開放社會各界的朋友們來分享，在線上直播也可以在聊天室鍵入你們的意見，我們會按照這個機會來present。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "之前合作在vTaiwan的平台上作徵集，財政部提供的文字是菸酒管理法第30條第1項的規定，「酒之販賣或轉讓不得以自動販賣機、郵購、電子購物或其他無法便是購買者或受讓者年齡等方式為之」是以，目前尚不得以網路等電子購物方式購售酒品。近年來網路及電子購物日益發達，交易方式不斷推陳出新，態樣多元，有網路購物業者及酒類相關業者不斷建議比照國外開放網路販酒。財政部是參考國際做法，規劃在配套管控機制…。一共收到了64則的意見，接近7000票，有整合出比較多的共識是感受上的共識，我稍微報告一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是在我們看感受之前，我們先看一下目前國內網路訂酒的流程及事實，各位有收看這個節目的朋友記得，我們之前有用過這個平台的經驗，一個是Uber及一次是Airbnb，這一次也一樣我訂了一瓶酒，我到了這個網站很有意思，他說他是一個型錄的網站，他只提供酒類的照片跟型錄跟一般的市價，但他不是拿來賣的，他說他是廣告網站，該標示的警語就是在菸酒管理法裡面說喝酒不開車或喝酒不健康之類的，他都有標示上去。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可是上面有一個很有趣放購物車的地方，他說是詢價單，如果按按鈕的話要我填入電話跟地址，但不會說拿了我的電話跟地址做什麼事，所以我就填了，過了半個小時很神秘的打電話給我問我是不是有關心某瓶酒的價格，然後說聽我的聲音像有滿18歲，我說如果沒有滿的話要怎麼辦？他們說會用視訊等方式檢查身份證明。最後他們終於說出目的，如果我願意用宅急便的方式，貨到付款的話，他們會把我關心的啤酒送給我。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以這是不是實質上在網路上賣酒的行為？我跟國庫署有討論過，事實上是的。他是透過遊走在邊緣的方式，以及打電話的行為說有做年齡的確認。然後宅配說今天會送到我這裡，我有問他能不能代收，但他說管理員需要我的訂購的單號，不需要我的身分證。我說包裹會不會一定會標註酒，他說會，現在宅急便有一個專門的「酒品」外包裝貼紙。這個是我目前實際上發生的樣態，基本上是不合法的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果這個狀態要合法化，確認年齡及確定不應該買到酒的兒童及少年之責任應該在何處落實及管制？這個是徵詢的題目。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們徵詢的界面大概是長這個樣子，當要登入到vTaiwan網站的時候，別人所提供一個意見，比如超商販售酒品已相當便利，不需要在網路開放，所以可以選贊成或者是反對，若選擇之後你的位置可以移動，如果贊成的話，會往左邊移動，右上角是比較不贊成的人，這個是網站的基本設計。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "過了大概二個星期左右，很自然跟之前在Uber的狀況一樣分成二個群組，我記得那次是一半一半，這一次的情況是稍微傾斜一點，支持站了八成，持保留態度的人的主要論點是管制方法寫得相當好，但滿懷疑地方政府的執行能力，大概是這樣子；即使是如此，也不是全部的人都同意，只有64％；群組二的人就會想各種方式來落實。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我在運行這個系統的時候都有說有達到一定門檻的意見都會在這個直播上，這一次的門檻設定在90％，連持保留態度的人都同意，才能是共識。所以我們從感受上來看的話，大部分的人都覺得在網路上迅速買到自己喜歡的啤酒是滿方便的事，滿啤酒的事跟酒後駕車的關聯是比較薄弱的，不管是贊成或者是開放大家基本同意。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有一些是共同的期待，這個跟開放是有關聯的，只是想喝酒而不是想喝哪一瓶酒在便商店就有了，所以會認為是從文化的角度來看。另外會講說成癮的事，是家庭與社會問題的事，與網路開放比較保留，以上是網友的看法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "財政部也有把預擬的方案裡面確認不到18歲無法取得酒類，如何才能是實際落實的管控方案，在這三個方案目前相對支持比例大概是這樣子，大部分的人認為是靠線上支付或者是第三方支付或者是別的方式都無法很有效去拿著承認的證件去買。宅配到府有77％認為OK，實體店面是85％的人認為OK。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "線上支付本身是不足夠確認年齡是否已達到。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像特殊的溫控櫃，我沒有喝酒的習慣，所以不知道這個必要的設備，他們知道在便利商店放一天之後再拿，到的時間不確定，所以說會損害酒的品質，我誠實說出網友的看法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在實體的店面有網友說不論是便利超商或者是相對器材的店面會遇到買的人跟拿到的人是不同的狀況，其實在買的時候，不管是從身分證字號或者是自然人憑證等等方式，也沒有去呈現那個人來的重要，所以重要的是誰來買及能不能代表當初訂購的這個人，以上是大致對於網路上達到90％共識的報告，接下來我們就請財政部回應，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "大家好，為了便於大家的討論，首先我們會就開放網路初擬的八大管制措施來作一個簡報。" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "我的簡報大綱可以分四個部分，第一個部分是背景說明，第二個是國際做法，第三個是要談一下研議過程，最後會談到八大配套管制措施的內容。" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "第一部分是背景說明。菸酒管理法自91年開始實施以來，規定酒品不得已網路方式來販賣，以落實兒童及少年的保護，但對於現在交易的方式不斷推陳出新，所以網路業者不斷建議是不是可以比照國外的方式來作網路販酒，所以財政部在104年召開了非常多次的會議研商，而且我們也積極搜集相關國際上的資料來討論開放的可行性。" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "毛前院長作了一個很明確的裁示，在防止兒少在取得酒品的情況之下，我們可以採配套管制機制，先以試辦的方式來作網路販酒，再逐部研議是不是有調整開放的範圍。行政院也指示這個議題是520之前非常重要的政策，應該要持續推動，並且要加強跟各界的溝通。" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "俗話說 他山之石可以工作，所以我們財政部就搜集了40個國家的提議來看別的國家是怎麼做的，整個情形可以分成四大類。" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "第一大類是可以開放網路販酒，而且是沒有管制措施，這個是有奧地利、香港、菲律賓等八個國家，這個比重是20％。第二大類是開放網路販酒，但是有加註一些管制的機制，有瑞典、芬蘭、英國、法國、等等國家，比重是48％。第三類是部分開放，像加拿大的某些省，這個部分的比重大概只有8％。第四部分是不開放網路販酒，主要的原因是宗教因素，比如印尼跟汶萊，他們認為不應該開放網路販酒，像印度、越南、泰國、俄羅斯等等國家，一共十個國家認為不宜開放網路販酒，比重大概是1/4。" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "我們從這個圖表可以看得出來開放網路販酒，開放或者是部分開放網路販酒及管制機制的部分，整個加起來一共加55％的比重，是占比較多數的。" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "接下來我們看一下國際上在管制機制怎麼做？就是在網路業者的管理方面，他們販酒的話必須要登記或者是許可，網路販酒也是一樣的。網路販酒應該要求申購者要輸入身分證字號、年齡及出生年月日等，必須要由申購者來填寫IP、年齡及出生年月日等資料，在瑞典方面是用個人的出生年月日來作開頭，所以可以從ID號碼就可以知道這個人的申購年齡。" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "此外在付款方面是有限制的，以限信用卡居多，信用卡的申購人必須年滿18歲，必須用這個機制來限制購買年齡。在交付上面會在包裝上明顯表示這個是酒品，在簽收人要主動出示自己的身分證明，交貨人必須要檢驗簽收人是不是已經達到法定的飲酒年齡，確定符合才能交貨。" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "接下來，我們可以看到在開放網路販酒幾個國家機制，研究之後我們發現都是採取重罰的機制，像英國在販酒的網站沒有設置年齡查證系統的部分，會處新臺幣100萬元的罰金或者是拘役六個月。在澳洲方面如果對於網站如果沒有加註的話，大概會罰新臺幣5萬元，如果運送人如果沒有驗收收貨人的年齡，大概會處罰新臺幣25萬元的罰金或者是一年以下的有期徒刑。" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "另外，對於賣酒給沒有達到飲酒年齡的部分，荷蘭是可以吊銷執照、在南非是可以罰260萬元等，所以他們的罰責是滿重的。" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "財政部在98年至103年間有召開很多次的會議研商，因為贊成者跟反對的意見對比很鮮明，所以一直無法得到共識，我們在104年參考了國際的做法，我們初步研擬了一個網路販酒管制的配套措施，在去年年底，我們也邀請了內政部、衛福部及金管會有一個初步的共識，包括兒福、消法、四大超商的意見，我們也請大家一起來研商，我們整合大家的意見之後，完成了相關的規劃，我們將循著修法的程序呈到行政院，之後再送到立法院審議。" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "網路販酒八大措施的管制內容，第一個部分是網路業者平台方面，網路販酒業者必須要符合一定資格的條件，而且像縣市主管機關辦理登記並核准，經由連鎖式便利商店或其他符合一定資格條件業者交貨，並依中央主管機關所定管理辦法辦理者，才可以在網路上賣酒。" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "在識別申購者身分，必須要在網站上填寫自己的姓名、出生年月日及身分證字號，有利我們的查核。" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "此外，我們也會希望加註警語，為了避免兒少誤購酒品，而且要保護孕婦免於酒害，所以我們要加註「未滿18歲禁止購（飲）酒」等等的標語。" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "第四點是有關於付款的方式，為了留存交易的軌跡，方便查核，目前的規劃是先以信用卡或者是電子機構來付款。再來在包裝方面我們為了加強檢視的效果，便利商店店員或者是其他符合一定資格條件辯識或取貨的身分，我們要求明顯是酒品或者是誰來買及申購者的姓名。" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "第六點是有關於交貨的方式，目前是限於連鎖式的商店，我們加了其他符合一定資格條件的業者也可以符合這個要件來交貨，這個我再口頭說明及回應，有人有談到宅配到府是不是可以到交易的行列，目前我們鎖定在超商的原因是超商具有網購的經驗，配合舉發制度比較有自律的效果，在宅配到家是只有送貨員跟收貨人，我們是比較擔心的。" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "此外，其實我們在研擬的過程之中，我們的衛福部基於要保護兒少，認為初辦初期還是不要開放太大，以連鎖式的便利商店比較好，蔡政委也建議我們訂法的時候要有彈性，因此其他資格的業者可以交貨，如果開放初期限於在便利商店，如果實施一段時間必須要調整的話，我們可以在管理辦法配合修正，這個是補充說明的部分。" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "再來是取貨者應該要主動出示證明。店員必須要求對方是18歲才可以交貨，如果申購者跟取貨者不是同一個人的時候，店員要驗證皆要年滿18歲才可以交貨，這個是我們比較嚴格的規範。" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "為了增加實務上的可行性，避免很輕易取得酒品，因此我們希望在便利商店或者是其他資格交易的業者，他們必須要張貼如果違規販售或者交付酒品給未滿18歲者，可以打我們的電話，並且有提供一些獎勵金提供舉發。" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "整個法案要落實，最後一道防線一定要在法律跟罰則上面，所以我們就修正了菸酒管理法，將上面的管制措施納入規範。對於違規者我們會處以5萬元以上，25萬元以下的罰鍰，我們是按次處罰。對於違規情節比較重大，而且限期改善，對於網路販酒的平台業者，我們是可以廢止它的登記，經我們廢止的話，一年之內是不可以再登記，其他便利商店或符合其他資格的業者也不能在一年內再從事相關的業務，以上。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有二位在自我介紹之後才到的朋友介紹之下。" }, { "speaker": "王淑芬", "speech": "我是勵新基金會王淑芬。" }, { "speaker": "TonyQ", "speech": "大家好，我是資訊社群參與人，我叫TonyQ，本名是王景宏，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "羊正鈺", "speech": "我是小羊，在網路媒體工作。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個跟大家在之前的討論大致上是符合的。按照之前的慣例，我左邊的教授們有沒有想要先分享一些意見或想法？對於剛才財政部這樣的規劃。" }, { "speaker": "羅傳賢", "speech": "主席、各位長官、各位老師及各機關的代表，我是研究立法的，今天的議題最後要立法，我是從立法的角度來看這個問題，提供一些建議。" }, { "speaker": "羅傳賢", "speech": "今天當然非常好的是在立法的過程當中，一定要透過平等的對話不斷質疑，立法最重要的是要質疑，所以我們今天有看到兒童福利聯盟基金會這個質疑是正確的，看看網友們有沒有對這個議題有意見，這個是很好的，質疑是對發現真相最好的方法，為什麼國外要不斷開公聽會，就是要不斷平等對話及質疑，主管機關財政部要起草之前還要再修正，修正之後才會達到共識，也就是我們對公共利益這一種考量，一定要透過這一種對話及溝通的程序來完成，今天很高興有看到這個會議及這邊的發展。" }, { "speaker": "羅傳賢", "speech": "另外，我是從立法研擬來看，因為現在這種這個是新的科技來臨，我們很難脫離新的科技宰制，所以我們要順著潮流來做。飲酒的部分是一個抽象的概念，現在還沒有文獻說酒是完全有害人體，我們知道有一部法典《菸害防治法》，但卻沒有《酒害防治法》，當然不是酒完全有害，見仁見智。" }, { "speaker": "羅傳賢", "speech": "因為我看到財政部提供的文獻及搜集的資料，發現他們已經把各國的法制經驗都搜集起來，我認為不能太早，不然會預測失敗，為什麼新聞局的廣電管不好，因為我後來被派到國外去，預測的科技發展都不準確，所以預測不準，立法就會錯誤，當時廣電是病入膏肓才處理這個問題。我認為很早徵兆就要去處理，所以我們的人才並沒有這種科技人才，所以對預測是失敗的，因此我們認為立法一定要在徵兆出現的時候就要下手，當然太早預測失敗，太晚會病入膏肓，問題嚴重的時候是在做彌補會很困難，因此菸酒銷售措施來講，外國已經有發現有下這個管制措施，因此我想財政部國庫署已經預測到這個問題，這個時機立法我認為是符合時事性原則。" }, { "speaker": "羅傳賢", "speech": "有一個建議是因為有法制的條文，同樣菸酒的管制不能讓菸不能那麼重，只有1萬到5萬，這裡是5萬到20萬，幾萬到幾萬是沒有問題，問題是在有沒有符合法制的調和，就是不要衝擊到上位階法，相同的違反行為也不能說這邊太高、那邊太低，所以財政部要研究是不是要跟菸的一部分有類似的行為，是大概要抑制化，不要他們太低、我們太高，或者我們太低、他們太高，這個是調幅性的問題。" }, { "speaker": "羅傳賢", "speech": "再來是罰則的部分，我們在講懲罰，獎勵的措施是說鼓勵檢舉，但我認為菸害的做法可以參考，他們是委外，也就是長期委託消基會，有時候聘學生去買，看看超商會不會賣你，測試的結果也慢慢發現有往好的方向發展，等於是行政權去介入市場經濟的情況，比較為難，而且能力也不夠，所以我們可以透過委外，委託相關的團體，像消費者保護團體等等，我們也做一點檢測，派人測試看看有沒有販賣，有沒有說不能賣給18歲的人，看看網站有沒有查證身分，我認為這個是可以再補充的一部分。" }, { "speaker": "羅傳賢", "speech": "另外，其實現在對違反者最大的懲罰是公布，我們現在提出的方案並沒有這一條，違反的是累次處罰，像勞基法也有這一條，對於違反者主管機關可以公布雇主的姓名，食品衛生管理法也有這一條，食品衛生管理法也有說如果違反的話可以把廠商的名稱或者是負責人的姓名、基本資料及違反情節公布出來，我以前有研究資訊公開法，其實我認為資訊公開是發生很大的制裁效果，廠商怕幾萬到幾萬，他都認為是小事，但一旦被公布，有二種方法，假設一般資訊的公開，像新聞資訊的披露是行政資訊的主導，那並不是處罰，這並不是行政罰，法律授權說違法者公布，那個可以訴願，一個是偷偷披露給記者披露出來。另外一個是違反的時候就公布，因為市場經濟的問題殺傷力很大，會比處罰得還厲害，因此這一點我認為財政部可以考慮看看，只有罰幾萬是沒有用的，我認為可以大量在報紙上公布廠商負責人姓名或情節，把你的資訊公開作為最大制裁的方向，我想基本上對財政部今天提出來的配套措施認為大部分可行，因為認為大部分都參考過外國的資料。" }, { "speaker": "羅傳賢", "speech": "在立法上是要參考外國的法制經驗，並不是自己想說要如何管制，正在發生也有後遺症，也不是說我們放著不管，後遺症的部分，我們盡量使它的不良影響進到最低，提出的方案基本上是可以接受的，我想還可以應再討論，使他們做得更好，不要使兒童、青少年受到很大的衝擊，以上謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "財政部我看到有在做筆記，但都不用即時回應，我們請大家發表意見後再綜整回應。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有關廣電法的部分，我們下禮拜三開始，會在同一時間、同一地點討論匯流五法。" }, { "speaker": "林美娜", "speech": "我是臺灣酒駕防制社會關懷協會代表，第一次發言，感謝主辦單位。我們用更宏觀的角度來討論這個議題，飲酒毒品導致使用成癮的有害物質，減少提供並且降低普及率這個是目前的普式價值，也是我們的政策，臺灣要與國際接軌，我們就必須重視世界衛生組織WHO所發布的一些報告，在2014年酒精與健康的全球狀況的報告裡面，他說2012年全球因有害使用酒精造成330萬人死亡，死亡的總數超過愛滋病、肺結核及暴力事件的總和。WHO指出為了保護人民對於飲酒負面健康的影響，各國政府要推動防制的動作，會員國制定了酒害防治法，但臺灣沒有，我們也很高興剛剛羅教授提起了，也許在關心開放網路賣酒之際，也就是要啟動酒害防制法制定的開始，我們希望衛福部應該要扛起保護全國健康的職責來啟動酒害防制法的草擬。" }, { "speaker": "林美娜", "speech": "如何減少提供降低普及率？WHO有幾項建議，特別針對青少年要監管酒精飲料的銷售、限制便利取得性、制定適當的酒駕政策、課稅、教育人員對酒害對人民的認知及給予酒經成癮者治療，更多的是如何倡議對酒精使用之後的倡議，請問一下中華民國對這一些做到了沒有？在這裡我們也透過醫界的研究，大家知道在一份非常有名的醫學期刊2010年指出，酒精對自己跟他人的傷害指數72分，遠大於海洛因65分，遠大於菸草26分，所以我們粗率說菸酒不分家其實是有它的依據，很少成癮的層次是略過菸酒，直接到毒品，直接到更恐怖槍支的持有，所謂對社會暴力的影響，它是有一個漸層的門檻。" }, { "speaker": "林美娜", "speech": "我們還要再提醒醫界提出來的，目前有關因為飲酒造成對酒精依賴的疾病超過200種，直接已經證明因為酒精飲酒而有直接因果關係有36種疾病，家暴事件中有50％跟酒精有關，酒的產業對這樣的代價是全民買單，健保是全民買單。" }, { "speaker": "林美娜", "speech": "我們必須要以宏觀的角度來看這一件事，我們非常希望如果一定要討論網路賣酒這一件事，我們希望同步修正菸酒管理法第37條有關於廣告的部分，不能因為我們沒有酒害防治法第37條現在的廣告，真的是9點30分以後，鋪天蓋地全部都是酒的廣告，這個部分我們要求要作同步的修正。" }, { "speaker": "林美娜", "speech": "第二，到底有沒有秘密客可行動？我們也是存疑的，如果行政院對這一件事這麼熱忠的話，我們會發動高額的獎金，看看有多少店賣給青少年酒的。" }, { "speaker": "林美娜", "speech": "第三，有關於財政部提到有關於罰則的禁止銷售停業，但卻沒有看到刑責，如果賣酒的人違反這一些規定，是要抓去關的；但我們沒有。" }, { "speaker": "林美娜", "speech": "像查核年齡的部分，在其他國家都是由業者制定查核的系統，我們不知道中華民國要政府幫他處理嗎？信用卡無法辨識年齡，怎麼知道跟年齡查核掛鉤在一起？會不會違反個資法種種的問題。" }, { "speaker": "林美娜", "speech": "另外我們還要提到感覺怪怪的，行政院指示在520之前是重要政策持續推動，每一年都520，每一年都國事如馬，為什麼這是今年520之前重要的政策？以上。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非常感謝，有三位舉手。我先稍微整理一下，其中有關於成癮防治及教育的部分，等一下部會綜合回應的時候不限於財政部，所以衛福部的朋友可以回應就直接回應；另外有關於刑責，也是財政部的草案，之前有討論過，也是之後回應就可以了，接下來就請剛剛有請有舉手的發言。" }, { "speaker": "林坤正", "speech": "我們今天來討論網路可不可以賣酒，大概在98年，現在是第30條，這一條從頭到尾都沒有改變過，販賣或轉讓不得以自動販賣及、郵購、電子購物機購買給其他買者或不知受讓年齡者。當時是無法辯識年齡的，但在這十幾年來，網購是蓬勃發展的，不管酒是不是好東西，今天可以不用討論，如果我們今天聚焦的是網路有沒有能力或者能不能正確辨識購買酒的年齡是18歲以上，如果假設我們業者可以用各種方法來說服或者是來證明，這個議題或者這個法規上面就可以放鬆，法令上不能對某一個通路作歧視性的表彰。" }, { "speaker": "林坤正", "speech": "這一位女士問我很多東西可以賣，為什麼一定要賣酒？就不要賣酒。您是從道德問題或者是酒過量的問題來看，我是從通路來看，看深入一點，現在能夠買多少種葡萄酒？可以買多少威士忌？我舉日本的例子，日本有1000多家酒廠，帶動了日本所有的釀酒的產業，臺灣有很多酒廠，但缺乏通路，我們買酒都是在狹隘的通路下，貨架上只能放少數的選擇。如果從酒的角度來看，網路不賣酒就能解決問題嗎？no。我們從google去查，酒全省宅配，搜尋的結果都可以從網路上買到酒，但我們不敢賣，有能力賣，但你們沒有能力抓，但你們可以說他們是合法賣酒，不知道在賣酒，但電視購物都可以賣酒，但這不公平。" }, { "speaker": "林坤正", "speech": "網路賣酒用現代科技我們可以證明在18歲以下買到的機會會比電力商店還低，這個是我們想主張的事。" }, { "speaker": "林坤正", "speech": "為什麼要把520當重要政策，我不是蔡主委，酒對我們來講不是重要的議題，但酒是第一個議題被提出來，臺灣政府數位落差在國際上一直很落後，我們想爭取的是，網路不能賣什麼可不可以少一點？如果可以證明，我們可以辨別18歲以下是不是可以讓我們賣？如果藥師基本上也可以做好管理，而且可以做到府宅配，我們是不是可以做P2P？並不是說酒是重要政策，而是臺灣的政府，依照現在來講，因為我們的數位落差，第三方支付電子條例，中國大陸現在都在用手機支付，只剩下50天，提高你的數位眼光、數位角度，數位落差在輪替執政之前可不可以減少？我們相信酒真的是不好的東西，但我們今天能不能專注討論在網路上可以辨別18歲以下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "只靠線上支付，能不能驗證18歲？" }, { "speaker": "林坤正", "speech": "我在做信用卡發展，但我反對宅配到便利商店，一瓶喝酒連瓶子是6公斤，所以是6至12公斤的酒，你到便利商店還要領回去。酒類的保存，像便利商店沒有這個條件。第三個，條例商店有沒有能力做這一件事？場地太小，沒有辦法接受，或者是必須要加收費用，所以我們希望能夠宅配到府。目前宅配到府的東西再貴都不怕丟了。" }, { "speaker": "林坤正", "speech": "信用卡正卡可以判斷出來，正卡必須要20歲以上，這是第一個。第二個，如果送貨到府的時候，如果要驗證收貨的人是20歲以上，這樣可以說萬一小孩子用偷用長輩的信用卡，我說明一下，如果假設偷別人的信用卡是刑事罪，刑法第320條是屬於普通竊盜，如果偽造別人的信用卡簽名是偽造文書罪，縱使父母親的信用卡被拿去用，小孩子必須要受少年法庭管束等。當你抓到一個小偷的時候，你想偷東西，他說他想搶錢，但在刑法上跟民法上都比兒少法還嚴重，在整個交易的過程中，我們會送上萬元的東西到家裡，都可以辨認身分，酒這部分應該沒有問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "雖然連帶責任你覺得比超商好…" }, { "speaker": "林坤正", "speech": "當小孩子用爸爸信用卡買東西，帳單看得到，為了不在刷卡看到這一筆帳出來，寧願找成年人到便利商店買酒。" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "大家好。我記得第一次會議的結論是不宜參採，當時會議上有提到因為目前不管是便利超商或者是各種實體取得酒這樣的環境，並沒有辦法杜絕兒少無法取得，到今年都有新聞，兒少他們要取得不可以取得的東西，尤其離開台北以外的便利商店都是非常嚴重的。當時會議上這樣決議，但是我們要請問財政部的是，在第一次會議後到第二次之間，這一些疑慮並沒有被消除情況下，為什麼馬上作了很大的改變？" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "2015年報導毛前部長說網路販酒，會議說出網路賣酒是政策，因此如何在網路賣酒的前提下如何不會取得？這二個會議是有很大的不一樣，第一次我們討論到底是不是適合，但第二次之後變成是確定要販酒要如何防止，後面的會議也用這樣的方式進行，我們想問的是為什麼？ 這一些防止兒少的政策並沒有改變。" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "上次的會議有提到主導者是行政院蔡玉玲主委，為何主管衛福及相關的政委都沒有到？我們非常感謝相關主管機關其實做了非常多政策上的研議及提升，認為這樣可以有效防止兒少接觸到取得酒類，但我們想要問的是，如果這樣的政策是有效的，過去也有同樣的政策，是否可以先施行這樣的政策，進行一段專案報告的時間之後，看看是不是可以的確減少兒少取得酒類的產品，這樣的狀況之下，我們再討論是不是可以開放網路賣酒的事。" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "就像剛剛業者說的，酒是第一個在網路上開放的第一槍，開了第一槍之後，是不是有更多的業者？像菸等等的廠商會開放在網路上賣酒，是不是讓兒少曝露於一個更不友善的環境，目前我們的期待是承認可以提供給兒少的環境，確保他們並不會曝露在有害的物質上，剛剛教授提到酒可能不一定是有害，如果酒不一定是有害，為什麼兩公約或者是兒少權法等等都限制不能提供這一些產品給兒少？" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "其實在這一次所開放的便利超商，但我們現在最多人談到兒少取得菸酒等等，或者限制性的產品最多就是在便利商店，因此我們很難想像便利商店能夠有效防止。相關單位報告提供各個人可以舉發或檢舉，請問檢舉之後如何處理？過去的檢舉如何有效處理？或者達到什麼效果？這樣的提出其實在第一次就不斷提出，但相關主管機關只是在各國法令的研議，只是說各國這麼做，在臺灣也是會有效的，因依照過去的經驗，我們對這部分是懷疑的。" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "最後一個補充，如果接下來的政策要決定研議是開放的話，是否會經過立法院研議修法之後才開放？或者是試行的狀況下不需要經過立法院審議的？以上是我的提問。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "我先說明一下剛剛吳督導已經提到行政院網路相關政策，我想我有責任先說明，這個議題為什麼在我們推動網路相關政策的時候，我們會把它當作是一個重要的議題來討論。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "原因是我們在推網路政策的時候，我們在思考的是我們除了會管實體世界以外，我們會不會管網路世界？因為過去我們涉及太多的問題都是因為我們說我們害怕網路世界，我們也因為害怕，所以我們不想要去制定一個可以管理網路世界的規範，所以今天這個議題我們在討論的是實體世界有管制的規範，請問別的國家有這麼多參考的範例，他們會管，我們會不會管？如果我們不會管，為什麼？是因為我們的數位落差比較大嗎？是因為我們比較不懂得如何面對網路世界嗎？所以我想我先說明這個議題並不是拿它來開第一槍，因為我們事實上也處理過網路賣藥跟醫材的問題，我們處理網路賣藥的這一件事，我想各位如果有跟vTaiwan討論的話，會發現以前連紅藥水都不行的，OK繃也不行，醫材、衛生棉都不行，現在很多部分都開放了。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "還有像我們推網路上一些新的措施，我們一開始也都會面對傳統的業者，擔心網路上會有風險，但是我們透過非常非常多的溝通，讓大家放心網路也要學習如何管它，所以今天這個議題因為社會的意見最多也最對立，這個議題就我的理解已經非常久了，所以為什麼我們用這個議題來測試我們對於網路世界，我們有沒有一個更正面去思考的思維，所以我希望我們今天不是在談酒是不是好的東西，我們今天政策上絕對沒有要放寬，把酒賣給未成年，我們討論的問題是在實體世界我們有一套機制如何讓酒不要賣給未成年人，請問我們政策上對於青少年18歲到30歲已經都是在網路上，我們會不會管，就像其他的商品一樣，大部分都是在網路上處理，如果我們一直認為它是很大的風險、很大的黑洞，我們這麼害怕網路的環境，我們認為這是很嚴肅需要面對的問題，因此這是為什麼我們要討論的議題，我們是希望瞭解我們有沒有能力做這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非常快速回應。要修菸酒管理法，當然要送立法院，不是經過行政院會就算了，所以我們現在也等於幫立法委員作一些討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像洪慈庸委員最近就用vTaiwan作為電傳勞動的質詢補充資料，我覺得這個是比較正面的互動，立法院看到我們討論的這一些材料來做。" }, { "speaker": "王淑芬", "speech": "大家好，我想這邊的確在菸酒管理法就已經制定在那裡的情況下，其實我們不太知道為什麼政策可以在違反法令的情況下制定，但剛剛也提到這個還會經過修法的程序，但我們討論的焦點都放在所謂的網路、放在兒少取得的議題，其實不只兒少取得的議題，也討論承認飲酒的問題，就家暴的事件當中其實都有酗酒的相對人及加害人，也都會付出一些代價，像最多關在監所的人已經不是毒品犯了，雖然大家都說可以在任何的通路上販酒，但大家知道做大這樣的通路，只會增加飲酒行為，我不知道最大的利益獲取者是誰？是所謂的通路業者，那付出代價是誰？是全民。" }, { "speaker": "王淑芬", "speech": "我不知道為什麼要去擴大這樣的飲酒行為，雖然我們說其他通路也都在運行，但做大的確就是會增加飲酒的普及性。" }, { "speaker": "王淑芬", "speech": "另外，我覺得剛剛有提到很多配套措施都在舉發、都在罰責，但我們理解罰責從來不是最有效的措施，可以從死刑的前幾天重大案件就可以知道，我覺得事後的舉發或者是罰責也沒有刑責，事實上如果是有錢的話，其實這樣的罰責對於懲處的效果到底在哪裡？" }, { "speaker": "王淑芬", "speech": "網路我們也重視廣告的部分，像在會議當中就有討論網路廣告的主管機關是誰？事實上連NCC都不認為自己是主管機關，我們知道網路的廣告是很遙遠的，我只希望有更多承認飲酒的議題，為什麼臺灣社會要鼓勵或者做大飲酒的行為，是不是未來如果真的開放了，我們可不可以統計三年至五年家暴的案件或者是酒駕的事件，如果增加的話，這樣的社會成本到底誰要來負擔？簡單說明到這裡。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為大家討論得很激烈，剛才 Livehouse 聊天室裡，翁馬克有提到很希望能夠搜集酒癮的數字，並且希望看到這樣的試辦有什麼影響，他也會比較放心，呼應您剛剛的論點。" }, { "speaker": "柏幼林", "speech": "其實我要表達的意見剛剛蔡政委也幫我表達了一些部分，剛剛林總也表達了一些，但我要進開放網路販賣酒，是不是讓消費者更容易買到酒的這一件事，剛剛主持人也有舉自己的例子，你是今天晚上拿到酒，36小時之前訂的，如果到便利商店或者是其他通路買酒，方便性會遠大於網路，所以我的強調是開放網路販酒的這一件事並不會真正讓消費者更容易取到酒。" }, { "speaker": "柏幼林", "speech": "第二，臺灣有很多優質釀酒的業者，其實是農委會在輔導的，但這一些小型的釀酒業者，沒有能力在全臺灣1萬家的便利商店鋪貨或者是在實體店面鋪貨，所以開放網路賣酒對於這一些業者有很大的幫助，他們會降低很多鋪貨的成本，這個也是我們希望表達的，真正開放網路賣酒，對於通路來講或許可以賺到應得的利益，但很大的受益者是受農委會輔導的釀酒業者。" }, { "speaker": "柏幼林", "speech": "第三，我非常贊成蔡政委的想法，當前有非常多的國家在網路賣酒的這一件事，為什麼我們國家做不到？其實我反而不想用「管理」的字，其實政府不應該用管理的角度來看，而是應該引導民間的業者來走向正統。我們隨便在google就可以看到這麼多走在灰色地帶，我們暫且稱非法的販酒業者，如果我們真正把眼睛閉起來不看這一件事，不把它引導到正軌的話，之後的問題會遠比現在的問題更嚴重。" }, { "speaker": "柏幼林", "speech": "而且這個問題絕對不是今年520年之前才討論的，在六年前我們公會都還沒有成立，還是無店面協會的時候就邀請過財政部的官員到我們協會來討論這一件事，大概在六年前就討論過這一些問題，只是當時有一些環境讓財政部國庫署不太願意正視這個議題，很不巧同時也會發生這個問題，因此我很感謝行政院，就算舊政府下台前把這個當作議題，我覺得這個是令人振奮的事，我覺得對通路業者、對網路業者來講，網路行銷只是所有管道的其中一種，為什麼其他的管道沒有限制？反而在網路上限制這麼多？是對網路行銷歧視？我會想說至少是不平等的待遇，難道我們的公務員真的比別的國家差嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛剛有cue我，當然即使6小時到貨，還是比我走去便利商店來得久一點。不過剛剛也有提到網路販售會受到比較多的廣告影響，我想這二點都是必須要權衡的。" }, { "speaker": "王重助", "speech": "網路的問題其實早就應該要開放了，網路是一個原子彈，丟下去就爆炸了，到處都可以看得到，酒到網路，世界上都可以看得到，甚至我們可以看得到世界各地酒的販賣者到臺灣來，像大陸的酒一大堆都到臺灣來，我們不能開放看別人的，網路也是一個生意，以臺灣來講，我們做酒跟世界來比是比不上人家，我們要用網路賣酒的機制往世界去推動，因為臺灣現在自己的市場太小了，我們要把酒外銷出去，要如何爭取外匯收入，把臺灣的酒賣出去，進口的酒比出口的酒還多，所以我們要如何把本土的產業往世界去推，應該要作一個很正確的做法，說不定我們可以把本土的產業往外推，爭取一些外匯，把酒的生意做出來，才能提升酒的產品製造，這才會發揮網路的價值。" }, { "speaker": "王重助", "speech": "如果說酒害，其實酒沒有害，而且剛剛有談到酒跟酒精的問題，其實酒跟酒精是有一段區隔的，酒跟酒精是用在藥品，酒是要喝的，如果要講到酒，有了歷史就有酒，所有的東西都是延續下來的東西，並不是我們今天才創造酒，像家暴或者是任何有害的問題，都是從今天開放網路才產生的問題，這個是以往就有的問題，以往的問題，有酒害防治法、酒駕都有規範，如果法律要如何制裁，我們絕對是贊同的，如果像酗酒我們當然是不歡迎的。如果說到酒害，這個是不一定的，像吃藥進補都不算是很不好的東西，像也有稱「美酒」，所以酒並不是不好的東西，酒用現在來講，我們進口的酒跟外銷的酒差距太大了，應該要如何獎勵本土的酒去往外發展，這其實是我們很重要的課題。" }, { "speaker": "王重助", "speech": "像剛剛講到四大超商提貨的問題，我們作酒的商店是他們生意的一環，賣酒不能再來提貨，那賣什麼酒？所以我建議的是不管四大超商要把菸酒專賣店或者是大超商列在裡面，應該也可以提貨，這個是酒類生態，不能說這邊不能拿酒，那我們怎麼賣酒？請支持一下，讓酒業的生意看作酒來買賣，你說如果不能提酒，那怎麼作酒跟提酒？請各位給我們一些生活空間，簡單到這裡，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "快速三點綜整：剛剛有提到酒文化的部分，經濟部、衛福部有來，文化部沒有來，所以對文化的部分是不是先跳過..." }, { "speaker": "吳瑞碧", "speech": "剛剛有提到酒的文化，這個跟我個人有關係，我個人是未成年飲酒就不少了，那時家家戶戶會作一點酒，我媽媽就拿李子弄糖，就作了幾瓶酒，就放在我床下，我半夜起來就偷喝了，大概小學四年級左右。" }, { "speaker": "吳瑞碧", "speech": "師大附中有一些風氣，到了大學就會喝一點紹興，有時會喝烏梅酒，得意的時候就會跟顧校長報告。所以事實上酒跟文化有一點關係，我們到國外去看，比方去○區域，像很多的酒莊是很漂亮、最有文化的地方。" }, { "speaker": "吳瑞碧", "speech": "我們國內的文化是拼酒，像我剛到臺灣的時候也常跟人家拼酒，晚上都是幹啤酒，一喝個六瓶是正常，好像也沒什麼事，那個風氣不是太好。近年來有很大的進步，因此有想說要如何作好酒、享受，以提升酒文化。很多小廠很努力做，但它的酒很難得到顧客來買，所以他們想網路是很好讓他們銷售的地方，最好也是不要經由四大超商來賺，因為超商賺得利潤太高了，上架的條件根本談都不能談，所以我是希望科技可以達到的情況下，盡量追上這個時代，事實上今天這個會如果沒有網路參與在內幫我們直播的話，我想效果比現在的效果會差了太多，所以網路已經到我們生活中，我們不要理它，但它就是在我們這裡，我們沒有辦法把它去掉，我們就勇敢跟它一起生活，也許我們可以駕馭它，那不是更好嗎？這是我個人的感想。我做酒也做了二十年，酒是正常的食品，看要怎麼使用，當然兒少一定要好好的照顧，不要讓他有這麼多的機會接觸酒，我想不是很多人都能像我這樣出淤泥而不染。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝幫忙表達文化方面和農委會的立場。我幫來現場的TonyQ講一下，因為網路上沒有辦法打太多字，所以下一輪還是會請TonyQ發言。" }, { "speaker": "羊正鈺", "speech": "我不是要看網路開放不開放的問題，因為酒的東西本來就是有好有壞，我是自己到了快30歲才喝酒，有很多朋友國小、國中就喝了，不管是哪一種方式有人是很早喝、有人很晚喝，所以比較大的是，剛剛也有前輩提到我現在看到財政部在規劃這一件事，但我完全沒有看到其他部會，比如往前看，比如我們知道18歲之前是國高中，我們也知道這一些人不管開放不開放就是會接觸到酒，至少在以前我沒有接觸到酒，比如我被帶去像夜店的店，酒要不要離開我的視線等，在我受教育的過程我是沒有接觸到，所以我覺得既然是行政院的提案，跨部會我沒有看到，像教育部沒有到。" }, { "speaker": "羊正鈺", "speech": "針對罰責的部分，當然喝酒不見得是有害，但喝酒所產生的行為是有害的，因為喝酒而造成的行為，今天的罰責也沒有看到，像剛剛有前輩提到酒後防治法，我認為應該要叫醒我的名稱，比如喝酒造成酒駕，類似像這樣的罰責是不是應該要有比較高的罰責？因為這不是特別針對18歲以下的罰責，我不知道這個是法務部、衛福部或者是內政部，我不太確定，大概是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "彭彥翰", "speech": "每一次來這邊都是在學習，我剛剛聽了正反兩邊很多論點，我想幫路人跟我問幾個問題，有部會幫我們整理前因後果的報告，所以我想請問一下財政部做這一份報告的人，我們看到有一些國家仍然禁止網路販酒，禁止有沒有明確的原因？這個是很重要參考的因素。" }, { "speaker": "彭彥翰", "speech": "第二，已經開放的國家有沒有出現現在所擔憂的這一些情況？這也是我們很重要參考的數據，我想有很多人跟我是一樣的疑問。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實財政部有給很多資料，印度、汶萊、印尼等等，在書面上是有資料的。" }, { "speaker": "林月琴", "speech": "我是第一次參加這樣的會議，我之前受邀參加電競產業議題討論。" }, { "speaker": "林月琴", "speech": "我覺得這樣的大帽子扣在兒少關心的議題上不好，回過頭來我們今天要問網路不是焦點，而是長期以來我們很多在執行兒少一些議題的時候，為什麼會走到這樣？因為我認為在一個不信任的機制底下，讓我們覺得今天要有很多的擔心，但今天的會場當中並沒有說服我們所擔心的疑慮，那就會跳到我剛剛講的，像小時候沒有受過這樣的教育，如只有單套要不要開放，我們的家庭教育、學校教育各方面都還是各司其職，擔心不擔心？所以不管是前面的酒駕協會或者是勵馨也好，如果我們沒有下一代的話，我們不用談這一些事。加上這二天發生的事，我相信對臺灣的人民都是一個很大的震蕩，我們提到酒飲對人的傷害。" }, { "speaker": "林月琴", "speech": "今天實體店面都覺得沒有辦法管控好的時候，我們如何放心網路開放？政府執行的力量到底能不能說服我們實體店面執行很好了，7－11的店員也都會按照我的步驟來執行絕對不會販售給18歲以下的小孩子，但是我想酒駕剛剛都有提及勵馨都有提到可以買到，你們如何查？如果沒有辦法讓我們相信的話，如何開放方便大門？應該是說服執行力到位，這時再來看其他的事情，如果一直想到經濟發展的時候，我覺得真正要思考為什麼會有這麼多的擔心，而是有前面的機制走到這邊，所以我希望各部會針對這一個問題，並不是財政部坐在這裡討論，我覺得這樣的說服力太薄弱了，以上謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "很快速回應，其實剛剛持經濟發展看法的幾位，我聽起來都同意不管是酒害防治或者是教育的部分並沒有很針鋒相對，但我同意今天財政部的簡報裡並沒有很強調。" }, { "speaker": "林月琴", "speech": "社會責任並不是只說酒後不上路，而是有沒有更強化把社會責任做好？國家也是一樣。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "這個議題雙方的意見有很多的交換，其實從政策面上我們其實很希望大家多從一個角度去看，比如一個兒少的問題，我們是不是應該要思考我們要跟兒少溝通，是不是應該多透過網路？如果今天想要跟他溝通，如果沒有辦法用網路的媒介去跟下一代溝通，那個溝通的效果是如何？所以剛剛講的是我們今天一直思考並不是從經濟層面推動而已，其實從網路霸凌也處理過了，其實很多父母不見得能夠直接溝通，但網路上是現在他們聚集最頻繁、最容易接觸到的，我相信從兒少的角度來講，大家現在也在思考如何透過網路來做這一件事，所以其實這個議題本身，我們比較從政策面，因為整個網路的政策裡面並不是只有經濟這一塊，也有安全這一塊，所以安全我們處理個資的問題、處理霸凌的問題。真正的問題是網路已經比較很重要的一塊地方，我們必須要學習如何透過網路的機制來跟大家溝通，簡單來講是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "林月琴", "speech": "我認為焦點還是要放在今天並不是只有財政部，今天各部會是要討論如果要針對開放的話，像現在實體店面大家都很擔憂這個問題，有沒有配套措施？像學校教育及家庭教育，並不是聚焦實體店面，因為科技化的時代來臨，孩子要學習，我們有沒有更好的方法來讓孩子瞭解到，到底喝酒對我們有沒有傷害，我就會說我要不要喝，各部會也沒有提出配套措施，以上。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛剛網路上Elysia呼應您的論點，其實提到孕婦飲酒，就像是一個教育的事情，這可以參考法國，其實是用圖示或者是動畫或者是其他多媒體的方式來執行教育功能，比起目前我們在實體對於菸酒的警語，這樣可能更加有效。" }, { "speaker": "林怡", "speech": "我覺得之前的發言好像注意在未成年飲酒及網路販售做什麼樣的規範，但對於食品安全部分並沒有很大的著墨，並沒有保障消費者食品安全的做法之下而作出規範，1月13日我們有參加了財政部召開的會議，我們很簡短具體說一次建議，如果開放網路販酒之後，在實體派送的包裝上或標籤上除了要有詳細的姓名、內容物為酒品之外，還要強調如何讓消費者買到是真品而且是好的商品，從而保障消費者食品安全，我們認為這個是從保障消費者而提出來的建議，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "張秀鴛", "speech": "剛剛多位有提到衛福部的部分，在兒少福利保障法有提到第43條第1項規定，兒童跟少年是不得飲酒，而且也有提到父母及其他照顧兒少的人也要禁止兒少飲酒的行為。第3項強調任何人都不得供應酒給兒童跟少年，所以這三項大概就是為什麼今天財政部要作網路販酒的時候，關鍵是兒少權益保障法對兒少不可以飲酒非常清楚規範，同時也要求家長要禁止，同時也要求任何人不得供應酒給兒少。" }, { "speaker": "張秀鴛", "speech": "同時在第91條裡頭也規範，第1項父母或監護人或實際監護兒少的人，如果違反第43條第2項，情節嚴重者是要處1萬以上至5萬以下罰鍰。對於供應者要處新臺幣1萬元以上、5萬元以下，這個在兒少權益保障法的相關規定跟酒有關的。" }, { "speaker": "張秀鴛", "speech": "所以今天討論網路販酒跟同時兒少權益保障法也不可以觸法，所以今天才會花這麼多的時間在討論。" }, { "speaker": "張秀鴛", "speech": "再回到世界衛生組織在2010年提到有十項的管制措施，我看了一下這一次財政部作這樣的措施裡面，有二項是沒有做到的，是不是也提出來，我們是不是可以再進一步討論。" }, { "speaker": "張秀鴛", "speech": "第一個是管制廣告促銷，我呼應剛剛先進所講的，第37條要處理，是不是在酒品網路廣告促銷的部分完全禁止，否則我覺得太花俏更促使兒少容易因好奇而使用禁止酒的飲用，因此禁止網路廣告促銷。" }, { "speaker": "張秀鴛", "speech": "剛剛有一位提到我們在現行的做法上看不到，建立長期的監測系統，如果以衛福部的立場，我們認為酒的危害性是對我們人、社會，特別是我們做家暴及兒虐是嚴重的，所以我們還是要呼籲如果作網路販酒，這個部分的防治還是必要。" }, { "speaker": "張秀鴛", "speech": "剛剛有一位先進有提到到底酒的成癮在臺灣目前防治作到了沒有，我老實講這一項業務不在我的業務裡頭，但我記得目前所有的防治成癮部分，在毒品是花了非常多政府的資源，但酒的防治部分才開始，在人力跟資源上面非常不足，我想這個部分是將來還要再處理的範圍，以上作一個簡單的回應。" }, { "speaker": "林坤正", "speech": "能不能不要污名，如果要禁廣告的話，全部都禁，不要只禁酒，網路並不是原罪。" }, { "speaker": "林美娜", "speech": "我非常呼應蔡政委所說的，我們要作網路的管理，以臺灣的智慧我們是做得到的，但請政府就放過酒這個品項吧！拜託！就放過酒這個品項吧！因為菸、酒跟毒品會導致使用成癮，這個是既定的事實，這個是全世界認同的，它是因為會成癮，菸還沒有造成暴力種種的社會問題，但是酒跟毒品成癮了以後都造成很大的成癮問題，其實我們防酒駕在這一個系統裡面，我們是最末端最末端的最末端，但我們有機會來關切這一個議題，我們就希望能夠用更宏觀的角度來切入跟探討，所以我們不只是不能同意、不能樂見開放網路賣酒，我們還要就現有的菸酒管理法有關銷售跟廣告的部分都要作緊縮，衛福部啊！衛福部啊！我跟林總經理報告，我是贊成比照菸害防治法第9條廣告，酒的廣告全部取消啊！酒的廣告應該全部取消啊！酒的這個行業，一年有幾個億、幾百個億來廣告，結果拿來作教育、作防治的那根本就是皮毛相比啊！所以酒的廣告要全部取消，我們不能不只樂見網路賣酒，我們還要就銷售跟廣告這二項都要再緊縮，減少提供降低普及率，這就是現在全世界的主流啊！我們怎麼可以在不斷地擴大菸酒毒品的這個普及率呢？菸沒有吧！毒品沒有吧！請放過酒吧！好不好？請放過酒這一項吧！網路要管理、要營運的項目還很多，就不要從酒這邊著手吧！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "您剛剛重申了，應該以成癮性最主要判斷的論點。" }, { "speaker": "TonyQ", "speech": "我支持管制酒，我支持讓這個國家少喝酒。理由滿私人，因為我小時候被灌了一杯酒，不太好喝，所以就很少喝酒。" }, { "speaker": "TonyQ", "speech": "我要問的問題是今天有多少酒在網路流通？這個數字我們知道嗎？我認為我們不知道，為什麼我們並不知道？難道就沒有酒在流通嗎？我認為不少，而且量不小，我認為在這個前提底下如果要管制一個東西，我們必須要瞭解有多少人倚賴它、需要它，我們才知道要如何遊說，我們才能知道把網路買酒的人化成利害關係人陪我們坐在這裡聊這個議題，我們要瞭解這一些人的需求是什麼跟為什麼而來，作為網路時代的消費者，我從15歲開始上網，從小就在網路上買東西，網路對我來講是現實的替代，如果沒有網路我就會在網路買東西，沒有我就會在實體店面買東西，所以對我來講並不是擴大。" }, { "speaker": "TonyQ", "speech": "我覺得是一個既有的管道，防治的部分剛剛有提到罰責，我們就不多說。" }, { "speaker": "TonyQ", "speech": "我舉一個例子，比如一人買一瓶，可以作簡單的估計看到底有多大，那會替代很多現實的購買量，我認為在網路上買一瓶酒，如果有限制開放的話，或許可以藉由這種方式來評估網路的根據有多大，在之後更有機會作進一步的管制或緊縮也好，甚至也可以調查網路上有多少非法賣酒，可以要求大家索取發票或者是索取相關的憑證，讓大家把這一些非法的東西揭露出來，適當的開放可以增加更有效的管制，我希望可以站在這個角度思考是不是要把網路視為敵人，如果把網路的地下交易為敵，我們很有可能是輸家。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "TonyQ的意見是我們先要有規範，才能理解、才能估計。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在他講到網路對他是現實替代的時候，聊天室裡有一位世華，說網路跟菸酒一樣，也是會成癮的物質，這確實也是這樣子，沒有錯。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "廖書雯", "speech": "我想講我們沒有反對網路，我們甚至也覺得中華民國在第三方支付及網路是落後的，我們希望政府大力推展。但今天的問題我們必須要提出來這並不是網路的問題，也就是一個是在菸酒管理法之下，我們面對在實際上運作就已經有非常大的缺失，2013年台大所作的研究已經知道我們在菸酒管理法之下，青少年取得酒已經沒有達到管制的作用，現在要把菸酒管理法之下的一個部分再開放通路，不是單純一個工具的問題，在開放的部分在面對實體都沒有辦法處理好以及我們剛剛所說兒少的部分，這是涉及國家犯罪、家暴的問題，甚至國外有研究，臺灣沒有研究，酒類大量盛行的時候，犯罪率是在提高。" }, { "speaker": "廖書雯", "speech": "政府告訴我們這個最優先的理由是政府有信心，證明中華民國在網路是做好網路管控的，我非常高興聽到這一句話，我相信中華民國有能力，是在這個問題之下我們能夠檢驗整個菸酒管理的問題，也就是今天對民間組織來講，我們真的不想跟網路為敵，我們也更不想跟那一些基層酒商或經營者為敵，我們樂見其成，但其實開放這一項，這一項又涉及到世界趨勢，這個近便性，甚至不是網路的問題，而是整個網路管理在往一個嚴謹的趨勢，因為它的危害是明顯的，不管是國外或者是國內，我們看到，甚至我們提到不是酒有沒有危害，而是酗酒文化，是酒有沒有被濫用，其實是出現的，這個部分如果我們的政府能夠證明網路管控世界是有能力，我非常希望政府在討論這個議題的時候，先把菸酒管理出現的問題，是必須要取得平衡。大家願意用網路的房間及跟民間用網路的方式溝通，我相信不是的，如果可以促進國家經濟發展或者是利益及我們能夠創造更好一個正確的使用文化及管控，所以我必須要說這並不是一個切割的問題，但是近便性及酗酒問題是深遠的，我們希望在這裡大家可以群策群力在這個地方能夠更努力，可以在菸酒這個角度下手。" }, { "speaker": "趙式隆", "speech": "這個調適法規的會在場除了蔡政委之外，我參與最多，除了霸凌那一次。其實一直以來虛擬法規調適的事，其實這一些法規有沒有讓我們變得更好？其實這一個討論並不是網路到底賣不賣酒，我們先從網路賣酒這一件事來看，其實很多網路上已經在賣酒，因為我們主持人已經從網路上買到酒。現在很多遊走的酒商為什麼沒有辦法抓到他們跟處罰他們？我們想要驗證的一件事是我們試著把這一件事規範化之後，我們有沒有辦法抓到遊走邊緣的人，依據法源依據把這一些人抓回來，我們應該是要討論要不要把網路賣酒的這一件事規範化，因此討論是有意義的。" }, { "speaker": "趙式隆", "speech": "第二，網路賣酒到底怎麼管理？其實在網路這一塊之後的下一個段落，其實在后面的這一段跟你平常到超商去買酒，其實是一樣的，我們看到前面這一段，呼應林女士所說的，我們在這裡如何證明驗證這一個人是不是在18歲以上或者以下，如果能夠做到這一件事，說不定這個東西跟直接在超商買是完全相同的，所以如果未來還有後續的會議，我想第一個是我們是不是透過網路來作辯證是一個需要討論的議題，如果我們抓到違規人民怎麼罰？比如透過網路上，我剛剛講了很多舉證，但是並沒有說如何舉證，可能從便利商店這一件事好舉證，如何從網路上舉證？我想這個是未來有在後續討論，這個是必須要再舉證，像違規情節重大到底什麼是違規情節重大？我們需要一些例子才會比較具體，以上是呼應各位所提的。" }, { "speaker": "徐則鈺", "speech": "我是徐律師，不管是兒少的保護或者是家暴的層面我就不重複，因為這也不是我的專業，我想就聚焦到今天的主題，酒類是不是適合在電子商務管道來作這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "徐則鈺", "speech": "我代表消基會到這邊來開多很多次會議，行政院很多官員開放讓業者的政策我很多不贊成，但也都上路了，針對今天的主題我個人沒有太多反對的意見，主要在於我們要怎麼樣去對於18歲以下買酒的人能夠辯識他的身分？財政部已經提出很多了方案，我想財政部覺得很悶，因為大家討論的主題都不是在他的方案可行不可行，財政部的方案非常可行，但一旦上路之後，我想不會有太多人依照這個方案去買酒，一定要信用卡等，這麼麻煩的方式還是在便利商店買。那麼一個可能是在便利商店沒有賣的酒。" }, { "speaker": "徐則鈺", "speech": "不知道便利商店的代表會不會抱怨？比如便利商店會抱怨在賣遊戲點數，有人會抱怨便利商店無負責任，假設是一個兇神惡煞的人來買，你敢不敢叫他來買？比如是不是可以說可不可以在網路賣不要那麼烈的酒？比如是不是有其他更可行的方式？" }, { "speaker": "徐則鈺", "speech": "像會在包裝上註明這個是酒或者是其他的個人資料，我們要考慮這個會不會侵害個資法的問題，就算滿18歲，是不是不想讓人家知道我買酒，可能有很多的問題發生，我只傾向於會議聚焦在如果開放網路賣酒要怎麼做。" }, { "speaker": "徐則鈺", "speech": "至於剛剛社福團體先進剛剛提到的我都贊成，但我不是內行，不是我的專業，所以我就不發表，以上。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在目前試辦的草案裡面，我記得只有姓名跟標注為酒品這二項，因為其實目前宅配上面也是貼姓名跟酒品標誌，所以個資情況和目前是相同的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我相信今天寫了一整面的白板，大部份都是要請部會作綜整的回應，請回應。" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "謝謝大家，問題很多，我重點回答。" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "罰則要跟菸一致化，衛福部說這方面會朝一致來走。另外有提到委外落實這一塊，…我們認為很不錯，我們會來研究。" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "接下來有滿多人問為什麼只有罰鍰而沒有刑責，現在的理由是整個法律的制定是要除罪化，所以我們不太願意給人家加刑責。" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "此外兒少法在訂定的時候是沒有刑責的，所以我們只罰行政罰，但整個罰責依照國際上的體例提高了。" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "接下來有人提到為什麼有人用信用卡，所以我們是用信用卡，但我們也有開放電子支付也可以來申請。" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "有人問到為什麼不能只用信用卡的正卡？這個部分金管會有跟我們說信用卡交易在處理的流程之中是沒有辦法辨識正卡跟副卡的機制。" }, { "speaker": "林坤正", "speech": "可以，我說明一下，金管會在系統上不管制，但是就業者來講，在輸入卡號的時候，輸16碼有核准跟不核准，如果輸16號倒數第2碼不是0就是副卡，如果是0才是正卡，基本上是可以管制的，這沒有問題。" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "這個我們再查證。" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "有關於政策這一塊，在98年至103年間我們開過很多次會，贊成跟反對就像今天一樣非常對立，事情如果這樣下去是不能解決的，我們也參考了國際體例，其實有55％，搜集44個國家，有20多個多少是開放，所以到去年底的時候有得到一個共識，我們開放，但要有配套措施，我們署長也跟各位講說我們在初期是用試辦的方式，試辦一陣子再看要不要調整，因此我們是要跟大家講說現在修法之後是要用試辦的方式。" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "還有人提到如何落實檢舉的部分？目前在私菸私酒的部分，地方政府也有定期專案查緝，如果有接受到檢舉的話，他們都會處理，這個要說明一下。" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "是不是要修法試辦？一定要的，我們在修法的文字訂得很有彈性，不是只有限超商，還有加「其他符合一定資格條件的業者」，這個條件按下去之後，我們試辦，再看成效再評估，所以我們會從管理辦法再做一些細節的調整。" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "還有人說包裝上是不是要有一些原廠產製號碼這一塊，依照菸酒管理規定第32條是在直接接觸酒品寫原產地的證明，但因為外包裝沒有這麼嚴格的規範。" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "剛剛有人提到有沒有請便利超商來開會，這是有的，是104年我們擴大大家的意見，我們有請便利超商來，我們簡單來講，他們認為國庫署擬的配套制度應該是可以執行的，他們可以全力配合。" }, { "speaker": "柏幼林", "speech": "既然試辦在便利超商取貨的話，我認為方式要增加貨到付款，因為已經恢復到便利超商的話，怎麼不貨到付款？" }, { "speaker": "王重助", "speech": "限制在四大超商我們不同意，因為酒是包含生活及商機都在那裡，不能把我們的專業提進去，這是不公平的，我們會抗議的！" }, { "speaker": "顏春蘭", "speech": "現在是試辦，只是先限定在超商。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "白板左下角的「貨到付款」終於有人提到了，不過這個部分兩邊都已經充份表示意見，先停在這裡。" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "在便利超商的部分，如果真的買的人拿不到的話，其實是會出事情的，但如果貨到付款，你付了錢就可以拿走東西，對業者是沒有損失的。" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "便利商店的現況，對貨到付款的驗證比較不嚴格，在線上付款多一道驗證仍有必要。" }, { "speaker": "林美娜", "speech": "我非常同意防暴聯盟的副理事長講的，社會是分工、政府是一體的，財政部回應非常明顯，學的都是半套，是網路開放，人家的刑責是很重的，但回到兒福是除罪的，大家知道新加坡怎麼開放我都贊成，酒駕肇事致人於死有鞭刑，所以我根本不擔心。俄亥俄洲酒駕的車牌是不一樣的，我也不擔心。" }, { "speaker": "林美娜", "speech": "政府是整體的，我當然不忍財政部國庫署，你就管國庫販賣，有蔡政委在場，政府是一體的，衛福部、財政部、交通部、警政署都要來，如果是這樣子，我什麼都不擔心了，如果整體跨部會來正視菸酒是成癮的物質，菸沒有問題，為什麼要拿酒為更大普及率的開放，拜託，跨部會都來，如果外國的話，那整套都學，這樣防治學會都關門。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實今天的直播、速錄，跟立法院是相同規格的，所以立法院委員們看到我講這一句話的時候，請充分把大家的意見列入參考，這當然是跨部會的議題。還有誰有最後一句話？" }, { "speaker": "林坤正", "speech": "我當作最後一句話發言，謝謝兒福及反酒駕團體的關心，1920年美國發布禁酒令，之後又取消掉，其實這九年來發生的是酗酒沒有解決，其實很多假酒沒有發生，包括黑社會的介入，像今天用這樣的角度來看，其實臺灣發生這樣的狀況，我們比較大的網路公司或者是電視購物基本上都不敢賣，但再google包括十八萬條都在賣，主持人都買到了，網路是過程比較透明，包括帳單及流程訊息都可以回抓這一個訊息，科技基本上已經基本上比傳統超商取貨比較嚴謹，要不要適應一下？是不是可以讓整個流程上買到好酒的人，或者是防堵18歲以下的人，或者是讓政府或其他單位讓法律邊緣上加強查緝，總要有一個彈性，不然乾脆臺灣直接像美國禁酒一樣好了。" }, { "speaker": "張峯源", "speech": "其實對於酒駕跟兒少保護的規範下來發言，基本上商業單位跟網路單位有一般的法人格，其實不應該對於它有特別的歧視或者是不同於其他的規範，當然如果有社會上其他的公共利益是另外的，但對於法人的角度是不得歧視。" }, { "speaker": "張峯源", "speech": "想要溝通的觀念是一般虛擬世界的購物跟實體世界的購物基本上是一個取代的關係，就是○，我現在在網路上買會減少在實體店面上購買的量，這會牽涉到二個經濟要素，我有多少人可以買、每人有多少錢可以買，這基本上有一個see？在，基本上是一個取代效果，並不是一個加乘效果。" }, { "speaker": "張峯源", "speech": "第三，我們看到財政部的報告，有接近55％的國家是沒有限制的，因為臺灣對網路上是沒有限制的，基本上國際網路公司是可以賣酒到臺灣來的，這個是一個事實，所以從產業競爭力或者是產業比較的情況底下，基本上我們的網路平台業者相較於這一些可以賣酒的國際網路業者又是差了一截，這個是我們必須要伸張的。" }, { "speaker": "張峯源", "speech": "第四，科技的進步是日新月異的，各位提到18歲人的辨識，其實對於人的辨識、生物特徵的辨識或者是各種法律資料上的辨識，我們應該要保留一條路，讓比較先進的辨識是不是可以用比較科技面的角度來看。" }, { "speaker": "張峯源", "speech": "接下來從產業發展面來看，從規範得宜的情況之下，酒會使設備、系統、原材料等有影響，我們樂觀其成。" }, { "speaker": "張峯源", "speech": "剛剛理事長提到跨境交易的事，電子商務要做到國際才會有效果，在國內只是作取代的效果，因此就經濟部的角度是樂觀其成。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "經濟部的意見（綠色）跟財政部的意見（粉紅色）在白板上，用不同顏色劃分開了。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "二個小時又二十分鐘，我相信這個討論在過去六年應該都有類似的討論，只不過今天的討論是網路直播，所以讓各方的意見可以透過一個平台，今天所有的討論不只是在網路上可以看得到，同時也有逐字稿，所以每一個人講過的意見及理由都會作一個很完整的體現。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "一個政策要推動的過程裡面大家應該都要充分的瞭解不同意見真正思考的方向，我想整個社會透過這樣一個理性的溝通，我們也希望在政策推動上政策能夠更完備。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "幾個議題，像酒害防治這一件事，不是只有青少年，因為這一件事是對如何防治青少年如何取得酒，整體的議題是對酒的部分如果沒有網路，現行也不夠，也不是針對網路而來。我們也不能很鴕鳥認為不核准它，它就不存在，所以這個事實我們是要非常慎重地去面對，如何防治酒害，這個部分可能需要一個全面的檢討，這個檢討包含了現在的實體也做得不好。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "但是通路的這個部分包含實體及虛擬的這一塊也占了非常重要的一部分，我們在整體作酒害的防治我們必須要一起處理這一個部分，在防治的本身我們除了要檢討的，除了要提出來的教育，也就是如何透過教育，讓青少年知道如何在酒的飲用。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "其實我們要特別跟來參與的來賓知道，其實虛擬法規跟指導的平台其實有十五個部會，因為主要是由他們擬的，所以這個議題在討論的時候是有跨部會的平台在討論的。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "今天提出來可能要如何防範青少年這一塊需要教育的部分，如何處理的部分我們會後會跟教育部在溝通要如何推動。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "另外，一般成年人酒癮的這一塊，現狀一般人要如何更落實的這一塊，衛福部這一塊應該也要檢討如何對於酒害的防治如何處理，我想不管是實體層面或者是網路層面，我想我們都需要面對這一個問題。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "另外，今天提到管制的部分，我想剛剛從實際執行面也有提出來一些問題，我想可以再參酌今天的意見來作這部分的處理，不過我想今天這個溝通表示我們社會上對於這一件事的議題是有不同的角度會看到不同的問題，一個問題我想不應該變成永遠找不到答案，已經六年了，我覺得我們可以一起來思考方案，溝通了六年都還沒有找到答案，我們希望透過這樣的溝通，我們可以有一個機制讓擔心兒少跟擔心酒害的先進們作一個通盤的處理。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "對於面對新興的領域，這個領域確實對於我們現在這個社會是非常重要的一塊是要面對的領域，我們也希望大家一起來探索，在這個新的領域裡面如何有一個合適、公平又合宜，大家如何可以作一個國際便捷的環境，讓大家在新的領域裡頭可以跟實體世界一樣有一個很好的規範，而這個規範是大家一起去思考的，所以我想今天非常謝謝大家的參與，我們相信今天寶貴的意見，我們在政策制定上會落實處理，謝謝各位。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "王韻齡", "speech": "請問唐鳳，為什麼要隨身攜帶著這些設備？你想要呈現什麼，還是你在做一個什麼實驗？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這是兩個問題，所以我分開回答。一個想要呈現的，是現在是一個自媒體的時代，每一個人自己就是自己的攝影棚、自己的製作人跟自己的後製，那所以說在我被直播的當下，我也正在直播這個直播的過程，也是要讓大家知道說，媒體它的這個運作是有一個對稱性在的，這是想要呈現的。" }, { "speaker": "王韻齡", "speech": "聽說你是iPhone手機Siri語音互動功能的設計顧問，談談這個有趣的設計跟你的想法吧！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "Siri其實是一個非常有趣的東西，它是第一次讓我們許多不會使用電腦，也不會使用平板的朋友，第一次開始使用他們的iPhone或者平板。也就是說，對於很多尤其是上了年紀的朋友來講，滑動手指或什麼其實已經不再那麼方便了，那在這種情況之下，只要說一聲 「Hey Siri，今天天氣怎樣？」然後Siri就會說，喔今天是晴天或是怎麼樣，對他們來講是最簡單，而且最有效的一個互動方式。" }, { "speaker": "王韻齡", "speech": "我們都知道你很特別，如果家裡也有一個像你這樣與眾不同的孩子的時候，你覺得要給父母什麼樣的建議？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我的建議就是說，這是父母的一個機會：讓自己也體認到自己是一個與眾不同的人。" }, { "speaker": "王韻齡", "speech": "現在很多父母都擔心小孩過度使用電腦或是網路，那你覺得在什麼情況下需要節制，而什麼情況是不用擔心的呢？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "電腦跟網路要分開來談。" }, { "speaker": "王韻齡", "speech": "剛剛我們立刻有網友有一個疑問就是說，怎麼樣鼓勵那些家裡有特殊孩子的家長，怎麼可以讓他們也可以走出一片天？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果你家裡是有特殊的小孩的話，這表示說，你從小到大學習看世界、理解世界的方式會受到衝擊，對不對？" } ]

[ { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "因為你的一些採訪的資料我都看了，這些是我其實自己一直也滿好奇想知道的。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "你在《解放報》的對談裡面講你八歲開始寫程式，可是那時候也是全球網際網路大霹靂的時代，臺灣的民主也是在那時候大爆發，這兩件事如何影響你成為現在的你？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你可能要問得更具體一點，因為這不是兩件事，是兩個大趨勢，它裡面各有一億件事..." }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以你可能要先問得更具體一點。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "我們先從網際網路開始。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好啊！OK！" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "這邊的大洪流裡面，有哪一件事是讓你覺得說你現在做的事情跟它是相關的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實最大的一件事應該是有一個東西叫做NCSA Mosaic，再加上Trumpet Winsock，其實94年大家接觸World Wide Web都是用這二套軟體。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們知道World Wide Web本來在做的時候，其實很像今天共筆的想法，當時Tim Berners-Lee發明的時候，原本的想法是大家都用機器連到網站，你看網站哪裡不順眼就直接改，那個網站的站長可以收到你的改變，他可以決定要不要接受。如果不接受，馬上就自己在架一個網站進網頁裡，其實這有點像Google Docs。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實本來94年設計出來的時候是要做這個，問題是當時能夠玩這個電腦只有NeXT，NeXT是一台黑色、很大、方形的電腦，很貴，而且非常少人用那一台電腦。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以其實我們用Mosaic跟Winsock，其實是Web的縮小版、平民版，基本上只能看，不能編輯，或是編輯很困難，也沒有本來想像的即時互動，我們現在過了二十幾年才開始習慣的這一種東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但無論如何，它一定是比電視或是廣播的樣態還多，可以切換不同的網站等等，所以對我最有影響是那個，其實你問那個年代的人，都會是這樣子的回答。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "那是什麼樣的影響？是技術上的影響，或者是價值（value）上的影響？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "它的影響是以前是每個人自己寫自己的，但現在是自己寫一段，我到第二段的時候就已經是引用別人的了，到第三段的時候乾脆連出去，所以等於是說每一個人都樂於把正在看你的東西給別人繼續帶下去，當時很流行「Web Ring」，就是這一個網站加入一個Ring，然後裡面有十個網站，每個都願意在底下放下游跟上游，在94年很流行的一個狀態，所以那就是又包含空間中間的連帶跟互相結合成社群的感覺，這些都是用本來的FTP、Gopher，反正有World Wide Web以前那個架構都沒有辦法想像的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以前就是一個站、有一個站長，站長就把權力給版主，版主再分給參與者。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "也是像中央集權式的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是中央集權，BBS以前就是這樣子，但一旦有Web之後，突然翻轉。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "談一下民主，比如你八歲的時候，1989年有天安門事件，臺灣也開始進行一系列的運動（如：野百合運動），你那時才八歲——雖然不能瞧不起八歲——但那時候你才八歲，對你的影響或者是現在做的事有何關聯？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實是完全一樣的，跟我剛剛的結構完全一樣的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以前有一個獨裁者，然後那個獨裁者把他的權力給予黨羽，黨羽然後再下放到各地的地方勢力，地方勢力再綁樁，事實上是完全一樣的架構。臺灣在1989年、1990年民主化，很主要的訴求就是要解散掉以前可以代表「全中國」的人，但其實已經沒有這樣的概念了，地理已經變成歷史了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以大家就來想說，我們怎麼樣從下往上翻轉？當時其實總統直選還不在議程上，大家講的都是社群營造或社群培力，或者至少在自己的實務部分、自己產銷的部分、在自己言論的部分，用社群營造的方式，一個個點由下而上做起來，等到我們有公民素養，再想接下來的直選；當然很快，96年總統就直選了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以其實是完全一樣的結構，在我腦裡這兩個是同樣的結構。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "民主從那時走到現在，大家覺得這一種架構會出現很多種問題，有的人會認為你看現在就是不理性，大家都在檢討全世界的民主是下滑的，就是Decay，你怎麼看這幾十年來的轉變？" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "你一直相信這個東西，到現在還是那樣的東西？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我沒有覺得民主在Decay，大部分的擔憂，或是學界的話…" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "你看，像美國會出現川普那樣的人。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實川普也代表一部分的民意，就是說他本來就是民主這個制度設計出來要傳達的民聲，我覺得沒有什麼問題啊！會出現川普這樣的人，表示制度有運作成功。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。如果沒有出現川普這樣的人，反而制度有問題，因為川普真的代表很多人，我覺得受到高度自動化、高度貧富不均，他其實是跟佔領華爾街那一群人是很相似的立場上，其實我一點都不意外。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "而且你說他不理性，他滿理性的，只是一種工具理性，不是批判理性（笑）；但工具理性也是一種理性，他就是把那個當工具，把論述當工具，所以我覺得還好啊！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得沒有什麼太大的問題，因為我們可能預設不太一樣，所以我們可以先回答接下來的問題。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "OK。我也是想說，像你們這個世代，你們很在意「Open Source」、「協作」，比如我們要採訪，你也覺得是這樣？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，包含現在的錄影。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "這種信念對臺灣現階段很重要嗎？或者你覺得它有什麼價值？譬如長一輩的世代會覺得：「什麼東西都Open？我們應該要留一手，給人很快會被抄襲，會把我們會的東西都學會。」" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "為何你會覺得這個東西反而要公開？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你有看過《一代宗師》嗎？" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "有啊！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！留一手的，就跟著他消失了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這是《一代宗師》裡面最基本的一件事情：如果師傅留一手，師傅走了，那個東西就沒有了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "按照自然達爾文的原則，只有不留一手的文化才會留下來，就是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我沒有覺得一定哪一個重要、哪一個不重要，但最後留下來一定是Open的部分，這是事實。好比跟牛頓同時代也有很多人，做出很類似的發現，但他們沒有發表，今天我們就不記得那些人了，就是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "那現在臺灣在這種對於Open Source這個環境，我們在全世界是比較先進的嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你一旦加入這個空間，國界就消失了，我們沒有一種授權——當然如果我說錯的話，旁邊這位（上官良治）可以指正——也就是我們沒有一種「只對臺灣的人Open Source，而排除掉所有其他人」的授權。沒有人用這一種類似限定國界的開源，我們從來沒有碰過，對不對？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以事實上你講的那個狀態，在我們這個世界是不存在的，應該是完全不存在的。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "所以你在做這些所有的你的奉獻也好、貢獻也好，當中並沒有「臺灣」這兩個字。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有「臺灣」這兩個字。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "OK！但我又很好奇，很多年輕的世代，比如說太陽花的世代會覺得很多事情自己來做，不要跟公部門合作，可是我覺得你還滿願意跟公部門協作，不管是從vTaiwan計畫或是課發會，你又很願意跟公部門協作，為何如此？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我並沒有跟公部門協作，是柯華葳來萌典松、是蔡玉玲來g0v黑客松，是他們放棄公人的身份，願意進入私人的領域，然後用私人的身份對話。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就像你一樣，你來這個空間參與，跟空間裡所有人一樣自我介紹。你並不是這裡的記者，這裡並不是你的攝影棚。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣講，就是大家都在同樣的空間，是用這樣的方式協作。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "所以你不是在跟公部門協作？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我不是在公部門協作。我是在跟柯華葳協作、在跟蔡玉玲協作。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "只是剛好最後這個結果，是可以在公部門使用？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為我們拋棄掉著作權的意思，就是誰都可以用來繼續創作。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "你為什麼覺得公開這個東西對現在這麼重要？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我不覺得只對「現在」重要。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "就是開放這個東西在現階段很重要嗎？還是一直都很重要？還是現在格外這麼重要？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得「開放」這個東西從西方啟蒙時期，就是現代文明的標記。我們說「publish or perish」，就是你不發表你就消失了，在全世界都是這樣子的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我其實不太知道——因為我畢竟也沒有在十八世紀生活過——我不知道十八世紀比起二十一世紀孰者重要，所以真的很難回答。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但我知道的是說，這個沒有斷過的東西，從啟蒙到現在已經很久了，然後它的重要性是一直在的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對我來講，我沒有覺得說，它到了這個世代有突然間的改變。最多只是說，你進入這個社群的門檻降低了：你進入科學社群、創作社群的門檻降低了，所以這個社群的人變多，但是我覺得其他並沒有太大的差別。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以前最早拉法葉那個時候，他們只有貴族或者是家裡非常衣食無憂才能做實驗、寫論文，現在是任何人都可以做，就是那個基數變大了，其他並沒有什麼差別。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "因為我前陣子看了一個調查，臺灣政府是全世界最開放資料的，是真的嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那個是最基本的一些資料，比如像橋梁、地圖或是投開票紀錄之類的，其實比較像是有水、有電的程度，並沒有要求更高的品質。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但以這種每一個部分都有的最基本開放，現在確實是最好的。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "你心目中真正的開放到什麼程度？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有特定的設定，我剛剛只是在解釋那個數據的意思。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "我記得上次你說你是一個創新的推動者。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "Connector，聯繫者。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "你想要傳播的創新，是什麼樣的「創新」？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "聯繫者的意思，就是我左邊有一個社群、右邊有一個社群，這兩個社群間本來說不上話、本來不認識或甚至本來有芥蒂。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "Connector並沒有要自身傳播的東西，他要的只是把左邊的東西翻譯成右邊的東西，右邊的東西翻譯成左邊聽得懂、介紹他們認識，然後我就去別的地方了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，其實在化學上這個東西叫「觸媒（catalyst）」，因為你在化學反應結束之後，觸媒是不更動的，觸媒就繼續，比較像這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "你是什麼時候開始？或者是自覺扮演這個角色，還是不小心恰好就在這裡？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我們人活著，都是自動在扮演這個角色。是你決定不跟某些人說話，一直到你喪失這個能力，你可以用的聯繫減少了。一個人只要不要自覺去削弱聯繫，自然就會變成這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "所以你是一直都是這樣子？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "從g0v、vTaiwan的這些經驗，你覺得臺灣由下而上或由民到官的這一種改變在世界上很獨特嗎？比如你後來去巴黎、去葡萄牙講這一些，你覺得這是很獨特的模式嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實還好，沒有特別獨特，像現在g0v的年會我們有十五國的講者，十五國裡面大概有一半比臺灣先開始做、有一半比臺灣後開始。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像這次有緬甸，有印尼等南亞國家，像奈比多也來了，他們確實是在跟臺灣學，他們知道我們有「太陽花」、「監票者聯盟」、「割闌尾」這些東西，他們很想要，所以來學，這確實是有。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是像日本來的柴田重臣，或者是現在在上海的Clay Shirky，北歐也來了很多人，他們是跟我們在比較平衡的位置，他們有自己適合的的一套文化做法、我們也有一套適合文化的做法，我們做得程度差不多。我們有很多可以彼此學習，或者我們這邊做了，他們就不用重新做，反過來也是一樣的，所以在這邊是同等的。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "新的政府上臺，你們這個模式還是會繼續運作？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然，因為我們第一天是張善政（Simon）作結束的keynote，第二天就會是新政府的朋友，其實有一個舊政府、新政府在零時政府交接的意思。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "滿好玩的。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "剛剛一直在問大家，唐鳳是什麼樣的人，因為你從小就被定位是個天才，到現在每個人在講你的時候，還是用這個詞。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "你喜歡這個標籤嗎？或者是你希望人家怎麼定位你？或你自己怎麼定位你自己？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這其實是三個問題。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "對，不好意思（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我要先處理哪一個？" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "你想先講哪一個都可以。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想一下，呃… 其實「天才」這個字是很後來才有的字，它不是一個定義明確的詞，我記得好像是到《三國志》那時候才出現吧！大概西元200年左右。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我是覺得還好，它並沒有特別褒義或貶義，當時有這個字出現的時候，它的意思只是說這個人的才能不錯，這樣子而已，而且當時也沒有社會地位的意思。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就像在《三國志·蜀書》裡面講的是張裕，可是我們現在不是很記得張裕這個人。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "他是誰？（笑）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，所以就是說我是覺得還好，它就是一個形容詞。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "下一個是我希望自己什麼標籤？" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我現在還是一個人，還是希望別人把我當人看。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "有人不把你當人看？喔，是當神看。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當神看沒有好處。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然也有可能，以後不一定只是人類，也有可能會變成和機器結合之類的，但我們還沒有走到那一步。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在此之前，我就是一個人類，我希望大家把我當成一個人。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "如果有人把你當機器看，你會覺得那是一種褒義嗎？" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "像有人就覺得問你什麼都可以得到答案，比較像機器了。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實以前有一種人專門當這個「神諭（Oracle）」，坐在德爾菲神廟裡面，就有一點接近那種感覺，可是畢竟還是一個通道（channel），其實是雅典娜在回答、是阿波羅在回答。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得這種感覺也沒有錯，因為畢竟我不管現在回答你什麼，它其實是後面——大概五千到七千年以來，看你怎麼算——人類文明的匯聚，所以我只是一個中空的管道，然後我講的其實也都是這五千到七千年來到今天的東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "從這個角度來看，我並不排斥大家把我當作一個通道，通往文明裡的其他地方來使用，因為其實我們作知識的人，就是把自己放在這樣的位置上。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "所以作為你現在身為一個通道，那你未來還想做些什麼事？" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "比如你現在辦各種的「松」，未來有沒有什麼想法想做不一樣的事？這件事已經夠不一樣了。" }, { "speaker": "上官良治", "speech": "這是在問生涯規劃嗎？未來十年，Where do you see yourself in ten years？（笑）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是這十年而已嗎？那我可以說 Let’s wait and see，然後我們十年之後就還是坐在這裡。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "我覺得這個問題比較像是說，你覺得有沒有一些事你想做，但現在還沒有做？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有。我每天都覺得今日事今日畢，我如果睡覺起不來也無所謂這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "上官良治", "speech": "你說起不來，是指看不到明天的太陽嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！我今天想做的都做完了，睡前該push的都push上去。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像是EtherCalc要是沒修好，我是會睡不著的。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不睡也要把它修好，凌晨一點多睡著。" }, { "speaker": "上官良治", "speech": "那是我在Slack上面mail給你..." }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！" }, { "speaker": "上官良治", "speech": "Oh my god。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可是那個本來就要修。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我是一直在等Linode的信，但他們的網管大概是快半夜才寄到，反正我們就半夜把它修好了。" }, { "speaker": "上官良治", "speech": "其實我也真的沒有要給你那麼大的壓力。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "所以會讓你焦慮的事是這樣的事，而不是別的事？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可是那個焦慮的尺度是幾個小時，解決就沒事了。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "所以你現在不會為什麼事情焦慮，比如說像我們這個年紀或者是這個行業，常常想說臺灣未來應該要怎麼辦？" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "尤其是我們的發行人，會特別焦慮這件事。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "你現在有沒有為了什麼長期的事情焦慮？有人是焦慮未來下一代的教育。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得都還好，我覺得地球在一個還好的狀態。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "最近的發展，Diane（殷允芃）或許覺得臺灣的發展，有些部分超出他的理解？「無法理解」我覺得是會讓人滿焦慮的，我上次跟他在討論318的時候，我很深刻感覺到這件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但因為318也好，或者後來這兩年的發展，並沒有超出我的理解，所以我並沒有因為不理解而帶來的焦慮。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "其他沒有任何事會比較有可能讓你焦慮，或讓你憤怒？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "都沒有。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "哇，好，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "上官良治", "speech": "氣候暖化？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實只是比較極端的氣候吧。" }, { "speaker": "上官良治", "speech": "臺灣會沒什麼地方可以住人？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有啦！大概剩60％的土地，有人算過，就大家搬到山上，讓台北市的盆地消失。" }, { "speaker": "上官良治", "speech": "你有沒有覺得，人也要變少一點才比較好？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可是我們現在人就很少，還沒有暖化，人就已經少了，你看那兩個趨勢線，是人先少再暖化，不用擔心。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "我在看你在《解放報》的對談中也有講到太陽花學運。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "g0v最早，好像是大家看到政府的一個廣告，經濟部的一個廣告…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "〈經濟動能推昇方案〉，是。當時我還沒有參加g0v。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "你看到那個廣告會生氣嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "要是我會生氣，高嘉良他們當初發起g0v我就會參加了，但因為我沒有生氣，所以其實沒有那麼大的動力參加，我就是在線上幫一些忙，但他們第零次黑客松我沒有去。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我當時是覺得我朋友做了一件很酷的事情，我們都是十幾年的朋友，所以會覺得朋友做事，我就幫他一點忙，但我不會覺得那是我的事。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "喔！有些年輕人就有一種使命感，是要改變這個社會，你有這種想法嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他們是有，我是沒有。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "你很滿意現在社會的狀態嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個你真的要去問高嘉良。（笑）這個問題問我可能意義不是很大。或者你要問林昶佐，他們都是朋友，就是說其實會分享一些對這個土地的想法、感動、焦慮這些。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但因為我首先就已經，怎麼講，就我腦裡面沒有「臺灣」這兩個字，所以我很難對它有焦慮。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "你覺得你腦裡沒有臺灣這兩個字是什麼原因啊？我很好奇，我不是要寫這個，但我真的覺得好好奇。" }, { "speaker": "上官良治", "speech": "是所謂「世界公民（Cosmopolitan）」的概念？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "可是這個東西是什麼時候？你是一出生就這種感覺？你是什麼時候感覺到你是世界的公民，而不只是臺灣？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這裡有好幾個東西。" }, { "speaker": "上官良治", "speech": "身分認同怎麼轉換，從一個民族主義的臺灣人..." }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "謝謝你幫我補充。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "太好了。" }, { "speaker": "上官良治", "speech": "我自己覺得滿有趣的。等於是說，政治覺醒是在什麼時候昇華的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這真的很有意思。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為我都是看我爸、媽書櫃裡的書長大的，我爸的啟蒙其實是看古希臘哲學，所以其實我小時候看的中文書很多都是柏拉圖《對話錄》這一類的，本來就不在臺灣文化裡面，是在很外面的東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外，我小時候還會看《文星》，你知道《文星》吧！是那一輩的吧？" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "對。我比他小一點。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "上官良治", "speech": "是作家的散文嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不是散文。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "或者是鄭南榕辦的一些雜誌，或者是許信良的《選舉萬歲》。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "對，我們家那時候也有這一些。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但都是收在一個抽屜裡面，因為當時還沒有解嚴。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "對。（笑）臺大前面書攤的書的下面那邊。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，對，都在那邊。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以像鄉土文學論戰，我記得我很小的時候就看了，但好像陳映真的《人間》我就沒有看過，後來是看他的小說來補上。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以你要說臺灣，那個是最臺灣的部分吧！以那個年代來講。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "對，很多人的臺灣意識啟蒙是從那時候。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但我看那一些的時候，我覺得我太小了，因為我大概七歲或八歲，我缺少足夠社會化的狀態，去覺得李敖寫的、尉天聰寫的，或陳映真寫的... 他們寫的目標不是我，你知道我的意思嗎？" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "對。所以沒打到你。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像蔡志忠的目標讀者就是我，所以我看他的漫畫會滿有感覺的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但我剛剛講的那些人的目標不是我，是比我大二十或三十歲的人，所以我看的時候是用一種理智的方法，像是去理解另一個文明。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "不是一個情感、感性。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "等到我能夠發展到社會化情感，大概十一歲、十二歲的時候，我已經在德國了，所以並沒有形成具體土地情感帶來的結構。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "所以你會是有臺灣意識的人嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這你要定義一下。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "還是要把臺灣放在滿前面的位置，否則你不需要做這麼多..." }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你知道我在巴黎也做一樣的事情，我到巴黎也投票進參與式預算..." }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我在二十個城市辦過黑客松，其中只有兩個是臺灣的城市，所以其實我沒有特別挑啦！真的。" }, { "speaker": "上官良治", "speech": "也沒有某些國家不希望你進去？" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "有沒有遇到打壓？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "目前好像沒有。當然北韓主動來邀我的機率，其實不是很大..." }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "中國呢？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "中國有來邀，其實很多中國朋友邀我去。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我大概十年多前有去過北京、二十年前也去過北京，四川、西藏都有去過。" }, { "speaker": "上官良治", "speech": "我想要問，其實我剛剛沒有仔細聽，好像沒有一個所謂的從臺灣轉變到世界的過程，像剛剛講的這一些事。" }, { "speaker": "上官良治", "speech": "因為你從小就有在國外的經驗，所以好像是從小就感覺世界的人都是我的朋友，其實沒有敵人？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！" }, { "speaker": "上官良治", "speech": "從國小、國中到高中都是這樣子？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "所以一開始就是以世界公民的概念？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就像是蘇格拉底的概念。" }, { "speaker": "上官良治", "speech": "他是什麼概念？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為蘇格拉底就是這樣，他不隸屬於城邦。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "雅典當時很流行政治演說，然後投票，看誰要去當大將軍之類的，但蘇格拉底不想參加，他雖然有參加伯羅奔尼撒大戰之類的，但他是用一個私人的身分來參加，他在廣場上隨便抓到誰就開始在那邊聊天，也不一定在哪一個廣場，在雅典或者是在斯巴達。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他一直是用這種私人的身分在介入政治，他不是去議會、不是去他們的市民議會，而是在一般人的市場上、廣場上，甚至我們在這邊叫夜市、小吃攤，去進行他的活動。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我從小就是看他的這些對話長大的，所以我會覺得那本來就是在自然的活動空間，這是人活動的方法。" }, { "speaker": "上官良治", "speech": "你不會像蘇格拉底被大家不爽，然後後來被喝毒藥自殺，你覺得差異點在哪裡？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "蘇格拉底當時是在民主派復辟，回來雅典，因為他們不能直接懲罰蘇格拉底的學生，因為他有豁免權，只能流放掉他，所以找了那個學生的老師，就是蘇格拉底，說蘇格拉底煽動年輕人，讓年輕人變成——我也不知道——覺醒公民吧！（笑）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以就有一個被政變的，他們不能直接罰政變的那個人，就罰了他的老師蘇格拉底，蘇格拉底有一點代罪羔羊的感覺。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對話錄裡面有一篇，他有一個很有錢的朋友一直說：「你怎麼不跑？你怎麼不越獄？你怎麼不去斯巴達？」然後蘇格拉底很明確地說：「其實生命對我來講沒什麼差別，我在這邊死、在那邊死，我年紀這麼老了，再多活三、四年有什麼意義？我是要作為貫徹我的原則而死，或我是要作為不貫徹我的原則，像小偷一樣逃走？」" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那個很有錢的人說服他的方法是，大家都知道雅典政變，他們是暴政，確實後來處決他的人也馬上就被撤換、推翻。如果大家都知道這個政府是暴政，你不以暴制暴已經很好了，為什麼不跑？你就已經知道他是不公義的、整個雅典都知道他是不公義的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "蘇格拉底說：「對別人造成傷害，你覺得是一件好事嗎？」他的朋友就說：「當然不是好事。」蘇格拉底說：「那別人對你傷害已經造成，這都是事實，你對別人再復仇都是額外的，你並沒有使世界上的痛苦量減少，你只是再增加它。」" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以報仇這件事，他跟他的朋友討論了很久，說報仇決不是一件好事。他既不要報仇、也不要逃走的原因，就是因為對他來講，他死在哪裡都沒有差，第二個他不要再造成痛苦。" }, { "speaker": "上官良治", "speech": "他覺得他已經夠了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，他覺得不要再造成痛苦。其實這個是有文本的，不需要我在這邊背書。" }, { "speaker": "上官良治", "speech": "我只是很好奇說他後來因為掛掉了，感覺是被迫害的..." }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，他是被迫害的。" }, { "speaker": "上官良治", "speech": "你目前不會覺得自己可能被迫害？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像我昨天晚上才有一個Aaron Swartz的討論會，他把法院的判決書全部都公開，讓大家看到他們很多侵害隱私的這一件事..." }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "他不是自殺了嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "求刑三十五年，然後被逼自殺，那個是滿慘的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以當然我覺得Aaron的問題是，他太不想波及到別人，他律師費都自己出，他去下載的時候也不是呼朋引伴一起做，他是自己一個人去MIT接硬碟，所以所有的壓力都是他一個人承受，他受不了就自殺了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他死後不到兩個禮拜，萌典就開始了，我等於是有一點為了想紀念他。我當時明確的想法是，如果要做就是要四十個人一起做，不是要我自己做，不是要葉平自己做，就變成像公民不服從。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果教育部要提告的話——他們是不會啦！——不過如果他們要的話，是一次得罪四十方的人，就不會像Aaron一人承擔這個壓力。" }, { "speaker": "上官良治", "speech": "的確你也看到一些迫害的前例，試著去修正你自己，比較不那麼容易被迫害及自殺的狀況？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "所以你這個是有意識的邀大家一起來做，並不是什麼事都你自己在做。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，當然是這樣子，因為如果我們這個叫做「Bus factor」就叫做「公車數」，意思是有幾個人被公車撞死了，這個專案就做不下去？所以如果某個專案的Bus factor是3，就是說如果這個三個人坐同一班飛機，那個飛機摔掉，這個專案就消失了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，對，我們非常有意識在增加Bus factor。像我現在快三個月飛一次到歐洲，我飛歐洲的時候，這邊全部都繼續，根本不需要我在才繼續，所以其實跟我的關係已經沒有很大了。" }, { "speaker": "上官良治", "speech": "超級不藏私。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！藏私無益。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "因為我每次想他的時候，我都會想到你是不是上輩子可能沒有喝過孟婆湯，你上輩子學過的知識都還記得，你為什麼還學習那麼快？" }, { "speaker": "上官良治", "speech": "每天都保持運動嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有啊！有花時間，我的運動器材在裡面。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "上官良治", "speech": "是跑步機嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不是，是 Vive。你可以打一趟拳，身體的軌跡會紀錄起來。" }, { "speaker": "上官良治", "speech": "好《駭客任務》喔！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "超級《駭客任務》的。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "你可以拍一下。" }, { "speaker": "劉國泰", "speech": "好啊！上次有戴過了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不是同一套。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "這一套是新的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為上次有提到一支筆，上次沒帶來，這次有帶來，有筆差很多。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "我問得差不多了。你怎麼知道要去《親子天下》那邊拍？" }, { "speaker": "劉國泰", "speech": "在做現場直播，我就去看看。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "我那時候沒有想到找你去拍。那時候我不能去，那一天他也…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他很棒啊！" }, { "speaker": "劉國泰", "speech": "我不小心po了一小段，唐鳳滿喜歡的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "很不錯啊！" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "他很會拍。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他超強的。" }, { "speaker": "劉國泰", "speech": "我們那邊先拍一個，然後等一下我們這個環境再攝影。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "盡量不要打擾我們的工作，其他當然沒有問題。你們先玩一下，才知道我在講什麼。" }, { "speaker": "劉國泰", "speech": "這裡就是你的運動空間喔？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒錯。然後你只是要打一個光照？" }, { "speaker": "劉國泰", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "你這個衣服很有意思耶！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！這個是我們開放源碼年會每年的衣服。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "真的啊？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，這是 COSCUP 2014 的。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "你們那個五月的Summit我沒有辦法來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！你沒有辦法來，很可惜。" }, { "speaker": "蕭富元", "speech": "很想去。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好，第三段錄影先到這邊。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "瞭解。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "很好用吧？" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "好用，好用，可以少講很多話，太厲害了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果要查證（fact checking）的話，有這個想法是2014年4月9日下午3點24分。4月9日應該也是各位最忙的時候（笑），也是二年過去了。所以就這個問題，還有要追問嗎？" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "大概這樣就夠完整了，對，只是想要瞭解一下。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "不過這樣的預設是大家在鏡頭面前都是理性的嗎？或者是比較會顧慮？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不一定理性，也可以很感性，重點是真的在跟身邊的人互動，你不是對著攝影機的那個角度互動，因為2D攝影的一個特點是如果你不對著鏡頭的話，你就會在敘事之外被排除，這是不管照片或錄影都是這樣子，那360（度）的特性是不用特別去想鏡頭，這個是兩個完全不一樣。從攝影師的角度也一樣，攝影師的角度是如果用2D的話，你腦裡要拿掉什麼，那是最重要的，不是要包含什麼，但是360（度）是等你回去後製時候再決定要拿掉什麼，在當場這一件事不用進入你的腦裡，所以把拍跟導播分開來，等於是非同步的二件事。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "你覺得360（度）被觀看的心理跟2D那時被觀看的心理有什麼比較大的差距？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "2D會想說鏡頭後面一定有一個不特定閱聽者，我們要跟不特定閱聽者講話，所以其實有一點腦補的，也就是腦補電視機前的觀眾朋友，因為360（度）因為沒有一個特定的排除（exclusion）在畫面外，所以我現在即使是站起來或跟你有什麼互動或玩什麼東西，不用管觀眾怎看，觀眾怎麼看是我們事後決定的，當時2D是因為很多東西是當時拿的時候沒有拿到，所以事後用那個東西去補，所以講話的人就會試著盡可能被濃縮、進去，但我們不可能360（度）全程4小時，所以一定會後製，可是後製的時候，我們可以再想說要包含什麼，那個東西至少我們現在就可以很自然互動，不用想說離開鏡頭的角度。" }, { "speaker": "蔣金", "speech": "因為所有的東西都被收進來了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，所有的資訊都被收進來了，房間裡的狀態都被收進來了。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "可是這樣說起來，可以比較自在的人應該也是享有最後可以決定要排除、納入哪些的人。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "正確，所以每一個人最後都應該要拿到一份。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "所以大家可以有一個自己版本的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，就這個意思，如果真的有人時間太多，還是可以回現場、整個桌上，重新經歷一遍，我們那個叫做「檢視來源」。像你看網站的時候，你可以看原始碼，或是你看新聞的時候，比較有良心的，像「端傳媒」會附上網址（URL），你可以點了再回去看，就是製成這個新聞的時候，本來原始的東西是什麼，只是說原始檔盡可能非常完整的保存，而不是原始檔已經是詮釋過的，主要的差別是在這裡。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "其實這個用意更是為了讓受訪者，而不是為了要讓大家看看訪問的人現在在做什麼就對了？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個用意是把在空間裡面的每一個人，放在差不多一樣的權力位置。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "瞭解，瞭解。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以（訪綱第一題），「怎麼看待g0v的出現」？" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "沒有關係，我會再加一些，不過基本上不會差太多。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有關係，你就從一開始開始。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "我一開始為今天這個訪問稍微定個調，因為過去跟g0v相關的採訪，因為g0v的專案是跟著社會時事、社會需求一起的，所以通常跟g0v相關的大概都會圍繞著專案的成果走，但這一則會比較希望瞭解現在g0v發展到現在這個樣子的脈絡，以及例如一路走來如何成型、如何變化，因此一方面請你當一個g0v的參與者分享你參與其中的經驗，另外一方面想要請你當g0v的觀察者，給我們看看與國外社群的比較等等，大概是如此。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "首先先問一下你跟g0v的緣分怎麼開始的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我是2013年初第一次參加g0v，我在g0v的第一個專案，當時是g0v的第一次黑客松，所以很多人會以為我在g0v第一次黑客松就加入了，但其實g0v在2012年底是有第零次黑客松，因為大家很宅是從零開始數，那一次我沒有加入，其實我是成立了二個月之後才真的有專案做。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當時在2013年1月時因為葉平發起了「萌典」這個專案，萌典這個專案是因為他搬去美國之後，小孩都不學中文，應該是說比較困難學中文，因為我們學中文其實都是用教育部重編國語辭典網站，但小孩現在都是用智慧型手機，那個網站當時用智慧型手機是打不開的，所以他就想說不如自己把「版權所有，翻印必究」拆掉，變成小孩可以在自己的手機上，等於葉平幫他小孩做一個mobile的字典，其實大家都有這個需求，所以當時大概3、40人吧！就在第一次黑客松，事實上是第二次的黑客松做這個專案。你們呢？" }, { "speaker": "蔣金", "speech": "所以大概是2012年成立之後有機會加入這個專案，那個專案是什麼樣的契機讓你接觸到？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當時是葉平寫了一篇部落格「還文於民」，把文字還給人民，在裡面很明確指出一個主張，政府比較花時間在確保資料可信、核實的正確性，並不是放在呈現這一端，因為呈現這一端技術不斷在進步，當時他們1996年架的網站，其實在2009年就已經過時了，但是民間一定是更知道這一些技術，所以葉平主張應該用開放資料的方式，讓大家都可以取得字典上的資料，但因為當時並沒有開放資料的政策，所以使用公民不服從的方式，每一個人自己下載一些詞條，然後全部拼起來，變成一部辭典。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "所以是更強調在內容的正確性上面？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "政府在內容資訊正確性上，應該負責這個，並不是作呈現，呈現應該由人民來做，這其實也是g0v一開始的想法，葉平當時等於響應g0v，看到g0v的前二個專案，第零個是實價登錄的地圖，第一個是中央政府總預算視覺化，葉平就覺得這二個的精神跟他想要做字典的精神是一樣的。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "當時萌典開始做的時候，有真正讓政府後續有覺得那我們必須要趕快把這個內容重新變成結構化的開放資料嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有，現在政府字典的那個網站其實是先更新結構化、開放資料、CC授權後再更新網站，所以我們民間事實上有時候是比政府還要快，因為我們只要取得結構化資料就可以上線，網站的廠商其實跟我們同時拿到這個資料，現在其實是最好的狀況，他們CC授權，是除結構化Excel的資料可以直接變成萌典的手機版、桌面版、甚至LINE跟messenger互動的機器人版，所有這一些其實都是教育部同意的，而且不只是這樣子，我們找到什麼錯誤、送回錯誤給教育部，教育部馬上就會修改，在一個版本裡面，他們的官方網站也會把我們所有修的字放進去。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "在一開始的時候，他們有質疑過當字典這一個東西因為畢竟有中文的規範性在，有質疑過為什麼大家都可以編修字典這一件事？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實是三級，我們先用自動化的方式，請電腦找出可能的錯字，具體來講如果有二個字的出處是一樣的，引用了同樣一個東西；我想一下這個要怎麼講。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "從電腦可以看二個不同的詞條，他們引用了同一句話，但引用的時候差一個字，這時應該有一個是錯字，所以我們請看字典的人按一下Google，到底是只有字典在用這句話或是別的地方也有，如果只有教育部的字典這一句話，想必是錯字，所以這個是第零層是電腦做的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第一層人力去判斷是都對或都錯或者是哪一個對後送出，然後送出之後也可以留言為什麼這樣覺得，也有人留言說「脫臉是很奇絕沒有錯，但是已經有人拍過這部電影（變臉）」，這就很好笑，不只是字典每一個詞條都有網址、每一個措詞也有這樣的網址，就可以到PTT去分享，說這個多好笑，就會有新的貢獻者去校對別的部分，全部校對完成之後大概18天都送給教育部。第二層教育部的文字學專家們都說5個人說是「脫險」對、0個人說是「脫臉」對，查一下當時出處，因為其實這樣幾乎一定是「脫險」對，所以他們只要按確認就會改了，改了之後我們下一個版本拿到之後就是正確的資料，所以是有分層的，並不是每一個人都可以隨便寫。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "在採訪其他人的時候，關於萌典這一些，像我在訪問Kiang的時候——他的名字到後來很紅——他基本上把萌典及你當成是g0v後來的能見度可以被提高及到現在為止的…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "主要原因嗎？" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "對。你自己覺得你在g0v裡面所扮演的角色及參與主要的是哪一部分？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實要講能見度的話，我覺得中央政府總預算那一個能見度更高一些，當然現在六個縣市都已經採用這個系統，所以最後可以碰到的人是更多的，因為像北市參與式預算整個過程就是用那個來教學。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "萌典是有很明確受眾，就是學中文的人，我們會提出關於萌典的想法或什麼，其實很多，甚至是三年級小朋友及他們的老師，也就是把他們帶到電腦教室上中文課的老師，你說是不是很多人，是很多人，但就是一個分眾（segment），所以我不會覺得一定是觸及到的人最多；但從另外一方面來看，它也是最廣，也就是不管你是否關心政治、經濟或什麼，你都用得到字典，從這個角度來看的話，它面對到的人最不特定，可是這仍然是以華語使用者來講。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以華語不是為母語的人要學母語的人本來不在我們的規劃裡，後來有一位Pierre（阿石）幫萌典加上英文、德文及法語，後來又幫忙了阿美語，阿美語當然是一些族人發起的，後來藏語也有用到他們的一些貢獻，從那時才開始變成華語不是第一語言，閩南語、客家語不是第一語言的朋友也可以用這個來當作語言學習，但那並不是我做的。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "如果以專案的規模或者是所需要的技術來看，萌典算是滿困難的嗎？它所需要用到的技術跟其他專案比？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛剛已經（用 Blupa 架構）分成四圈了，最外面是微小、一點點的參與者，技術門檻僅止於你看到網頁是「脫臉」對或者是「脫險」對然後按下，我覺得那個門檻是非常非常低的，為什麼有國小二、三年級的貢獻者，就是因為不需要門檻，所以在最外圍的，我想那是完全沒有門檻可言。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "再來你開始想要加一個萌典的功能或怎麼樣的時候，其實也不太需要門檻，你只要會在紙上畫圖就好了，很多設計師朋友畫了一張圖，然後就說「可不可以把界面變成這樣」，其實也有一位9歲的朋友說「課本上是這樣放，這邊都是標楷體，可是你們把那個字放上去是正黑體，造成我們寫筆劃的時候被老師覺得這是錯的」，像「零時政府」的「零」是連在一起，變成二橫或四橫，但在課本上一定是四點，不能不寫四點，如果不寫四點是錯字。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "沒錯。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他就說萌典至少應該在詞頭應該要用四點的字形，這已經算是真正參與了，但仍然不太需要技術，只是要很明確講出他要看到什麼。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "再往裡面是實際把正黑體改成標楷體，那就是要會CSS，這個是沒有辦法的事情，但CSS也不是很難的技術，你如果去看網頁的內容，看到這邊寫微軟的正黑體改成標楷體就還好了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "真正難的技術是要加一個新的語言進去，那個非常困難，像每一個語言，如客家語就不能用本來的拼音系統，像四海大平安、南四縣各有自己的發音，台語也有文、白讀——文、白讀甚至我們還沒有做完，我還可以繼續講下去（笑）。最裡面要加一種新的語種進來，那就非常困難，那個困難是要計算語言學（的能力），但外面那三圈都很容易。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "所以在萌典之後，你自己本身在g0v的角色或是你參與的專案有自己特別的偏好或是你把自己定位在一個...？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我具體參與的專案你去爬hackpad就看到了，應該不用列舉，列舉的話太多了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我主要的想法其實就是補位，有什麼地方缺就去補什麼地方，補位的好處是幾乎每一個專案都會用得到是Hackfoldr，Hackfoldr後面是Ethercalc，那個試算表是我維護的，所以等於多人協作的計算表，本來就是我在有g0v之前就做的專案，等於我繼續做那個專案，那個專案現在更多人用更多方式使用了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "同樣的，像g0v聊天室的紀錄器，其實那也不是我寫的，但是我稍微把它改了一下更容易架設，所以變成是每一個參與者都可以架設自己的聊天室紀錄，因此聊天室一開始就有三份不同地方的紀錄，像某一個人的機器人掛掉了，至少其他人還在紀，其實有一點我們這種多機拍攝的味道，就是你在g0v聊天室裡面講的任何東西，你可以還原到幾點幾分講什麼話，而且一定在那邊，因為有很多人在紀錄，那是很早期的事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "後來都是在做一些文字上面的工作，有寫一篇是「零時政府的第一年」，那其實是大家一起共筆寫的，但我們之前的經驗是如果不是先有人把大綱做出來，就像你的訪綱，如果不是先有那個結構，大家共筆其實會修不起來，會變成四散的狀況，就是做這樣的規劃，因此早期就做這樣的事。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "把重心轉到g0v上面，如何看待g0v在那個時間點的成形與出現？這個我還滿好奇的。是在當時開源社群發展到那個時間點以及配合當時臺灣政府諸多問題而自然而然出現的嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "要看跟什麼比較，要跟其他國家比較嗎？因為這個是歷史敘事的問題，我們要說它的必要條件的話，我當然可以唸出很多必要條件給你說這一些都已經具備了。
但你說哪一些加起來是充分條件？其實並沒有哪一些是充分條件，其實既有必然的部分，就是這個東西開始一定會有人來跟且一定會長大，跟偶然的部分，就是有人拍了一支廣告，有人看了不爽，這二個部分是不能放在同一個層次講。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "瞭解。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "如果是必要條件的話，你覺得有哪一些是？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一個當然是解嚴，你不能抽開解嚴的脈絡來看，參加g0v的這一批人是第一批在求學時有言論自由的人，就是說比我年輕的這一輩，你第一次寫什麼字都可以，這是非常非常重要的，比我們再大5歲或者是10歲那一輩，他們在高中或者是大學能夠寫作的時候，他們是要自我審查的，因為還沒有解嚴都還沒有用，所以對他們來講，他們就面臨很多很困難的選擇... 關於這些選擇應該唸陳映真就好，我也應該不用再背書。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但這一些選擇沒有一個選項是，那我們就4、50個人來做，沒有這個選項，大概到40個人就被請走了，所以這個東西有一點像現在中國大陸地區的狀況，你可以做，要就地下做，不然就是檯面上自我審查，這個在80年代臺灣以前也是這樣，並不是什麼特別的，所以g0v當然是成長在我們這一批在解嚴的氣氛底下。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "剛好工具也一起到位了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，像我去法國演講他們也很羨慕，因為他們那裡，專心做社群媒體是很喜歡認識陌生的人，就是很social（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "專心做政治的，因為他們之前大量的200年共和國傳統，在這個共和國的傳統裡面要再做出新政治上的貢獻，要先理解前面所有的脈絡，等到你理解都老了、都40歲了，比如我們要寫文言文，你要先把典故都搞清楚才能寫文言文出來，這種人並不是一天到晚去社交的人，而是深思熟慮的人。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以對他們來講又能夠做社群媒體、又能做政治是極為罕見，他們覺得他們有一個斷層，同樣是大學畢業生會去做社群媒體、會跟大幅動員很認真來做政策，完全二組人，大概不重疊；可是在臺灣是同一組人，所以其實這個我覺得才是真正的必要條件。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "所以是因為有這一組可以同時做這二件事的人出現？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，沒錯。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "然後我們做政策也不用去管之前200年的共和國傳統（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "蔣金", "speech": "我很好奇，因為g0v說起來是起源於廣告跟黑客松，在之前有沒有一些跡象或者是那個社群在醞釀的這個過程？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "之前ETBlue有畫過一個圖，就是g0v是那三個圓圈，就是「自媒體、公民媒體」、「社會運動者」及「自由軟體」，這三組人本來有各自發展的脈絡，在〈零時政府的第一年〉後面有提到，好比：張維志做「OpenData.tw」，是想要把群眾媒體跟自由軟體作結合，本來青平台是有一些社會運動者的連帶，後來發現不是很能hold住，所以後來就不是在青平台裡面，而是往外發展。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "或者像徐子涵做「Code for Tomorrow」的時候，他本來也希望進入政府這一種改造方式跟軟體能夠結合在一起，可是反過來他對於媒體的使用在當時比較是從外面去批評政府，不是到裡面去改造它的想法。也就是說，你看不順眼可以罵或者是指出別國怎麼樣做得比較好，這些都是很有效的貢獻，但g0v很特別，是做一個更好的給你看，這個路線完全不一樣。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "沒錯，ok。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "所以等於在那之前是先有那一些常識，在g0v是用另外一種途徑來參與？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，我們用的是hack，也就是我們直接hack進去。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "OK，延續剛剛的問題，所以g0v在當時對於既有的開源社群或者是對於臺灣的公民科技運動有比較特別的意義嗎？就是它出現的時候有帶給他們這一些已經存在的社群有什麼影響嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "本來臺灣的開源社群本來就非常蓬勃，你去看COSCUP的人數，那是亞洲少見的，但是在開源社群的傳統裡面，其實作政治上的介入是比較少數，大部分的介入是在經濟上、藝術上，但政治上原本真的是比較少。
另外一個開源社群裡面作軟體、作設計的及作創用CC，就是作文字工作或媒體工作的這一些，其實之前很少互為搭配做大專案，之前都是這個專案你一看就知道是設計案或什麼案，其他的人在旁邊支持。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "舉例來說，臺灣的Mozilla社群非常蓬勃，他們開發的東西叫做Firefox，Firefox當然是一套非常重要的軟體，大家都在用的瀏覽器。
可是當我們說現在要在手機上跑這個瀏覽器，或者是這個瀏覽器變成手機的作業系統，這很明顯是一個硬體結合軟體案，所有其他不管是設計、廣宣、媒體，所有這些別的才能，都是在為這個更好的軟硬體服務。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在g0v我覺得比較大的意義是，我們沒有這個誰主、誰從的東西，也就是萌典既是一個軟體上的介入，也是文化上的介入，它也是藝術上的介入——如果你在臉書上開始用九宮格（字圖）的話。它是各種各樣的介入，裡面並沒有哪一種是主或者是從。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "所以沒有誰主、誰從，也會影響到參與在其中人的心態？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是的。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "你剛剛有提到法國的案例，我現在要問國內，如果像剛剛有說到「Code for Tomorrow」、「OpenData.tw」，g0v比較特別的地方或跟它們不同的地方在哪裡？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當時其實我們跟「Code for Tomorrow」的CK（劉嘉凱）有過一次路線上的討論，就是關於到底要不要自己去取得教育部或者內政部的這種資料，用公民不服從的方式自行公開，真的是hack，武鬥派的做法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然違法的部分我們先假設不會被告之外，他主要的考量是如果我們做得太好，公部門會喪失把內部流程結構化的這個動力，他說只要民間做、不告你們就好，等於是整個功能切出來。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "換成民間來做。" }, { "speaker": "蔣金", "speech": "外包。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "長遠看來是不利的，因為最好是政府內部有這樣一種能夠跟民間溝通的能力，也就是真正開放資料（Open Data）的能力，這是一個。
如果民間做得不好，也就是民間做爛了，這樣的話，政府裡面的人又說「你看這個，如果民間自己去作運用的話，還不如我們去找廠商做App的」，所以他覺得這有一點怎樣都輸（lose-lose）的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當時我在路線上有說，可是我們其實可以幫政府做一件事情，就是我們可以幫他把本來那個資料，如用500頁的PDF，我們可以想出不要是500頁的PDF，我們可以先（結構化）變成圓餅圖或者是樹狀圖，進去之後再用細目、然後再作討論，或者是像在萌典可以從一個特定詞條連到別的詞條，或者是透過部首、筆劃什麼東西，同樣部首的字有一些索引。
這一套結構化資料設計，這個東西是我覺得我們可以專注做的，我們做了之後我們拋棄掉著作權，所以政府不會說那只是民間的事，因為我們是說拋棄掉著作權是希望政府下一次續約標案廠商的時候，把這個東西拿去給他的廠商，變成他規格的一部分，說明今天做到這樣，而且他們拋棄著作權，請問你有什麼理由不用？這樣的話，其實就會變成公民合作的一個出發點，但要建立在什麼上？建立在參與的人都拋棄著作權上，這個東西我覺得當時CK或者是子涵也好，可能一下子沒有想到這個做法，這個做法畢竟很基進，但是後來這個做法證明有效之後，他們現在也都回來覺得這樣做是ok的、這樣做也是對的。所以當時最早的時候是有這樣的局面。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "所以除了這一次的路線討論之外，其實g0v算是目前國內已經算是唯一了嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不是啊！還有非常多。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "OK，基本上大家都在做差不多的事？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就像「OpenData.tw」現在仍然弄得非常好，「Code for Tomorrow」後來衍生成「Data for Social Good」，那個東西也是summit的一個議程，他們也做得很好，或者像子涵後來去做「Taipei.io」，就是大家還是持續做這一類的事情。
所以後來g0v變成一種特定介入的模式名字，你如果現在想要做一件事情不適合這個模式，那你就不要叫g0v，但人也還是同樣的人。" }, { "speaker": "蔣金", "speech": "所以這些人有可能是重複的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "都是重複的。你知道，臺灣的社會運動就是這樣，什麼盟的、什麼盟的，他們註冊地點同一個地址。" }, { "speaker": "蔣金", "speech": "一個人有很多件衣服。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但應該說，（例如）台權會現在想要作個人資料保護，就會成立個資盟，即使地址同一個、人同一批，但是這很有好處，是因為這樣可以結合別的事、結合別的人進來，例如覺得臺灣人權不是你關注的，但個人資料是你關注的，就可以去結合，當然是要這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "像剛剛講到g0v是一個特定的介入模式，其實我一直都滿好奇，包括g0v裡，雖然它自己不說自己是一個組織，但確實是有一個很基本的規則。這個東西是怎麼成形的？怎麼開始被大家所用？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "它其實就是空間。
不管是每個月一次或現在每個週末說不定禮拜五，我們現在在這邊的這些空間，實體的空間當然是一個；但g0v很著意線上跟線下，線上的空間跟線下的空間會互相去轉寫，就是說我們在每一次黑客松的開場提案、最後簡報，所有這一些東西其實線上都有一份，不管是錄影、Hackpad或者什麼之類的。
同樣的，線上所有的東西到線下的時候都會被recap下來，變成是線下——比如我們現在看hackpad上寫的字。這一種互相轉寫是g0v的特質，每一個空間只要接上互相轉寫的習慣，它自然就能夠讓聯繫到空間的其他不特定人看到及如果有興趣的話加入，這個是它形成的方式。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果要提出理論化的東西，高嘉良之前有用過德勒茲 《千高原》的地下莖（Rhizome）的講法，那確實我也覺得是合理的，也就是確實是地下莖，就是斷掉的地方還是會長出新的子專案來，專案任何時候不長了，沒有關係，同樣的動能去別的地方長，也就是沒有方向。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "我的想法是因為g0v的整合化成形到一種算是很有它自己的個性了，所以現在變成是想來的人如果沒有辦法適合（fit）這一套就走，大家也不會慰留什麼的，比如一開始原先例如沒有人能代表g0v或者這一些滿代表文化又很基礎規則性的東西，比如由某個人建立的或者是一開始是誰草擬的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果去看g0v網站的宣言就是Manifesto，我記得一開始是ipa開始寫的，如果我沒有記錯的話。但是kirby，好像opop也有（共同討論），其實你看GitHub那個網頁的編修紀錄會列出所有的人，所以其實是你一言、我一語加上去的。
我自己記得的是在最早版本的網頁裡面是說參加g0v的專案一定都要用開放源碼的方式釋出，是我去加了「或者用創用CC授權」，這個目的是把它變成不是軟體主導，而是軟體跟其他的形式的創造是平起平坐的，我記得我只有改這個，其他都是早期許多人一起，一定有超過6個。我現在背不起來了，但查一下就知道了。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "所以是一群人這樣寫？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是你看它不順眼就按編輯加幾個字，就是宣言本身也是共筆出來的。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "如果彼此不同意你提的或別人提的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那就跟維基百科一樣。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "繼續編？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！（笑）就是你把不同意也編成裡面的一部分。其實你剛剛提到你到g0v覺得文化不適合，因為我們除了CC授權或開源其實沒有別的必要條件，所有其他都是常模而已，所以你如果對常模不滿就寫下來，寫下來本身也是共筆的一部分，然後文化就這樣改變了。" }, { "speaker": "蔣金", "speech": "有發生過這樣的狀況嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非常多次，每天每天。" }, { "speaker": "蔣金", "speech": "都是涉及常模層次的意見嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是啊！你們也大量用hackpad，也知道是什麼狀況吧！如果你想要改字就寫字，不然就用留言，然後底下comment發生到一個程度會收歛起來，收起來那個字就改了。" }, { "speaker": "蔣金", "speech": "會顯示是誰改的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，你們應該知道那個環境（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "蔣金", "speech": "不過就是因為有時候像常模這個東西，你可能要更細微去觀察跟深層去體會，其實我很驚訝大家都會對於文化感知的敏感度是很高的，而不是像剛剛珮伊講的就走了，或者是希望改變這個地方。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為很多人第一次進來不是線上，都是線下，就是來黑客松，所以你從覺得哪裡怪怪的，到旁邊開始會有人開始跟你聊，那個是很近的空間。其實這也是g0v的特色，我們如果在線上有什麼東西講不清楚，我們就會說下一次的黑客松來講，所以他們不會有很多…像維基百科社群只用遠端、只用文字做出來的，所以他們建立了一個非同步社群的傳統，就是你每一次講的頁面留言會說幾月幾日、署名，但是g0v大部分的時候是用同步的傳統，也就是我在改hackpad、你也在改，我們就好像是在同一個位置，如果這邊講不到，就馬上約一個時間，不管是下次或者是黑客松見面，我們只是叫線上社會化產出（Social Production），也就是這個社會關係的成果，我們很明確理解那個社會關係是在線下、是在人與人間。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "我想你有引一張圖，是國際社群中 g0v 的位置，可以麻煩你幫我們解說一下嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "行啊！那這題先跳過？" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "對，先跳下一個。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個是從GitHub看到以淨面積來看是數一數二，對不對？如果不是「Code for America」就是「g0v」。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這二個基本上是一樣大的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "中間連帶緊密的程度來講，g0v一定是最密的，你看人跟人中間的距離。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們可以看到在GitHub上哪些帳號跟其他帳號中間有互動關係，作同一個專案，互相彼此follow或怎麼樣的人際網路，你把它想成Twitter或者是Facebook的網絡。
圓圈大小表示有多少時間在GitHub上，所以我們可以看到比較跟國際有接觸的人會在這個圖的外緣。
跟國際（公民黑客社群）比較沒有接觸，但所有人都在用他寫的東西，像c9s會在內緣。像muan其實只有一小部分在臺灣，根本就是GitHub的員工，所以是最外面的，因為是在GitHub工作，所以會有很多的連結。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以其實很多做基礎建設（infrastructure），就是做內部的一些大家都需要的公用建設的人會在比較這邊。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "但是跟彼此的聯繫有特別的多。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "彼此聯繫特別得多。像高嘉良在這邊，我在這邊，所以可以看得到高嘉良跟美國這邊的聯繫比較多，而我是跟歐洲的聯繫比較多，都沒有問題吧？" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "沒有問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以你說特色的話，我覺得從這張圖上面，看圖說故事可以看到幾個，一個是可能因為語言的關係，所以人的語言距離跟地理距離都特別近，我們最遠可能只到香港，然後我們很多做出來的專案是需要經過翻譯才能讓其他文化系統的人使用，所以在這裡語言跟地理距離都很緊密。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個特點就是我們跟歐洲，像英國是「mySociety」、澳洲是「Open Australia」、馬德里、美國，這邊是韓國，韓國比較近，但跟其他差不多是等距，所有這一些社群做的東西我們都使用，然後我們做出來的東西這一些社群也都使用，它就比較沒有像側翼的感覺，像ODI你會知道只跟「Code for America」連結，不會再跟其他的社群連結。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "像彼此互動模式這一些是有辦法比較的嗎？比如跟國外的這一些？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以啊！當然，你要拿指標（metrics）出來，就是你要量什麼，我們就去問資料，資料就會回答你。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "OK，好的。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "像是g0v目前在國際社群上，就是在你跟其他國際社群接觸到上面，大概聽到的評價或者是對於臺灣可以有這樣的社群想法會有聽過哪一些意見？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我記得日本，某一個社群的日本朋友說他覺得g0v唯一最厲害、最創新的就是它的名字（笑），其他的都是別的地方有做過的，但是我們這種就是說立法院的網址是「ly.gov.tw」，你只要做一個「0」的轉移，就可以到零時政府立法院，它是徹底解決了你記不起新創名字的問題。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以這個非常創新，其實不管哪一個社群都覺得這個多好，但這個也是因為臺灣開放二級網域註冊，所以你可以註冊「g0v.tw」，在很多地方是不行的，你一定後面要加「.com」或「.org」，所以這個確實是地理因素。其他的我覺得就還好，大部分都是大家在做的事。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "不過假如把這張圖加上例如地理面積大小或者是人口的話，其實臺灣可以擁有這樣的規模，真的是滿特別的吧？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "為什麼？還好啊！人家愛沙尼亞才那麼大，紐西蘭也沒有很大，這都還好。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "就是說他們在這上面只是沒有把名字拿出來比較？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我只是沒有把它拿出來比。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "而且真的要講，就是說像CFA其實也是以城市為單位，然後像整個這邊的人都在倫敦，倫敦也沒有很大啊！" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "OK，所以不是整個歐洲就對了？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當我們說歐洲的意思，是倫敦做出來的東西，英國所有其他城市都可以使用，這是當然的，但是你問這一些人具體在哪裡，當然在倫敦、當然在牛津或者利物浦之類，但我的意思是說大部分的人都在周邊，所以我是覺得還好耶。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "OK，好，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不會。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "那接下來是要問參與動力的部分，其實大部分g0v的專案不太評估效益或者是說我目前訪問到的，基本上他們沒有一個機制是說這個專案做完之後的…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有做完啊！到底哪一個專案有做完的？（笑）" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "對，而且就是可以完成的也基本上…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也沒有啊！" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "那你覺得這個動力會讓這一些人繼續挖坑跟跳坑的動力是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我看到你訪綱，這個「少數（有完成的專案）」，我腦裡就冒起來，不是「0」嗎？（笑）" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "是「0」喔？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "（笑）這個少數到底是多少？竟然有嗎？我怎麼不知道？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該是說沒有任何可完成的，沒有任何一個可以完成的專案，沒有一個專案敢說它完成了。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "你是說沒有任何一個專案敢說完成，是因為大家覺得永遠繼續在編修嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「完成」的意思是我不需要你了，對不對？我不需要別人了，這樣叫「完成」，可是你這樣講就不是g0v專案，g0v專案的開放性永遠都是說你任何時候覺得這個東西你看不順眼就拿去改，如果哪一個專案說都不讓你改了，它本來就不是g0v了。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "也是。" }, { "speaker": "蔣金", "speech": "就是專案不追求完成？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是追求不完成。" }, { "speaker": "蔣金", "speech": "對，它追求的就是不完成。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，它追求的就是不完成。我們說萬事、萬物都有缺口，缺口就是光的入口，你全部都完成，就是把入口都封住，就沒有光了，也不用溝通了。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "不過如果只是說當然大家還是抱持著可以永遠更好、更進一步的空間，應該是有相較之下有完成…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "...「度」？" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "也不能說完成度，就是說它做到的…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該是說碰到的人，我覺得這個是最唯一能夠量化講，就是這個專案碰到多少人，可是你沒有完成的一天，地球上一直有新的人在出生，這沒有完成可言的。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "好，那如果回到動力的動機是什麼，你覺得？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "Well…其實都有耶！我們從馬斯洛的角度來看的話，金字塔最底下當然是無線網路（Wifi），那是最重要的，對不起，就是網路存取（笑），上面才是食物（笑），沒有得吃沒有關係，但不可以不上網（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然最底下的互相連結，就是有互相通訊的能力，這個是最最基本的，你沒有什麼比這個更基本，這個本身就是很大的動力，你透過這一些坑，你能夠聽到或者是理解到關心某一件事情的不只一個人，這個是最基本的，其他都是疊上去的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你往這個上面當然就有安全感（security），就是說如果不是只有你一個人在關心，你也不用那麼怕說你不在了、你不做了，碰到什麼阻礙了，這一件事情會做不了，這個也是。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然再上面就開始有認同感，你開始覺得大家一起做這一件事，這一件事情本身，這個時候就會有人開始畫專案的g0v、圖片或者是一些符號，就是這一些事很值得做，值得把它做大，即使到這邊都是我們叫做「匱乏需求」，就是它是因為你欠缺什麼，所以你希望有這一些東西，對不對？" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個其實是ETBlue跟IPA接下來會講的Bluepa的內容之一，因為我們簡報都先公開了，所以就先看，而且我今天早上看到ETBlue好像把這個部份移到最後面，我不知道還有沒有要講... 如果沒有要講的話，我覺得無論如何還是要講一遍，我覺得這個做得很好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為再往上的我們叫「豐足（abundance）」，你已經不缺了，你現在想的是你能給出什麼，這個就包含給出你的認知能力（cognitive），你更瞭解這個世界，也讓世界因為你的理解所以更瞭解它自己，這個是非常重要的，就是知識工作。
g0v大部分你說比較成形的專案都到了這裡，就是至少讓社會某一個層面更瞭解自己。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那當然再往上面，就開始有美學上的要求，就是瞭解不夠，要能夠去體會、能夠易讀，至少在介入的時候是快樂的，那就是美學上的一些要求。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那當然接下來，就開始覺得之所以出生到這一個社會上是有一些核心關懷，想要讓它完成，就直接進入自我實現。
這個時候通常不會是一個專案，而是一個更大什麼東西的一部分，像在318的時候很多人要加入，他覺得既然出生在臺灣，希望看到臺灣往哪裡，所以就已經進入自我實現的範圍，並不是只是說島嶼天光這首曲子要譜得更好聽，比那個關懷再多一點。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然最上面 ETBlue 有畫一個超越（transcendence），那就已經跟自我也沒有什麼關係了，它是已經覺得昇華了，我這輩子夠了，既然還活著，那就多做一些，所以都有啦！" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "你自己本身呢？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "都有。因為每一個是建築在前面、上面的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "誰在叫？喔，是它（三台 PixPro 之一），終於沒電了。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "換它沒電？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，換它沒電，三個輪流沒電..." }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有關係，它們互相補位，我們不需要中斷，繼續，所以這一題就這樣。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "接下來滿想討論一下「沒有人」的這一個文化，不只是座右銘（Motto），也是大家受訪必談到的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你除了 kiang 之外，還問了誰？" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "Kirby，之前是陸陸續續有跟ipa稍微聊一下，還有ETBlue他們，他們那時候線上聊滿多的。
然後我也爬了一些之前的媒體文，所以大概會看到對於「沒有人」這一件事很強調，所以這也就是為什麼我其實還是滿想要再回到剛剛那個問題，這一個事情是怎麼達成共識的？就是在g0v在努力促成社會共識之前，他們的共識是如何形成的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "OK，這裡面有幾個，一個是說我們一開始挑的那個空間，我們幾乎是跟hackpad同時開始，hackpad是2013年1月測試版，之前是邀請測試，沒有記錯的話。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在hackpad之前，你能夠用的東西不出MediaWiki、Google Docs這兩種，以做同樣事情的工具來說。
這兩個工具的特點是說有明確的內跟外，你在Google Docs上面一下子就把你分三級，你只能看的、你能夠提建議的，跟你能夠改的——當然還有你完全看不到的。
所以互動空間一開始就問你相信誰、相信到什麼程度。
MediaWiki理論上每一個人註冊都可以編輯，但其實事實上我們來看的時候，會發現因為非同步編輯，所以其實每一個人都會把名字放在他講的那一段後面，尤其是結論一定是這樣在使用，這樣的結果就會變成是沒有共識，維基百科上面所謂的共識是一個非常粗略的共識，你最多只能說「we agree to disagree」，然後說你用某一個措詞大家都不跟你吵，但就是到這裡。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "高嘉良很喜歡舉一個例子，林書豪到底是什麼國籍的什麼人？在維基百科上面就可以吵非常久，到最後大家都收歛到某個... 因為你如果不收歛，所有人都花太多的時間在吵這種... 其實我也覺得滿沒有意義，但是就是很多人覺得很有意義——而網路上只要你覺得有意義的就會發生——所以就會把大家的時間全部都拖到那個上面，但是最後大家都可以同意「台灣裔美國人、美籍華人籃球員」。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "並列就對了？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "把不同的意見都並列就對了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這是維基百科上大家最後不吵起來的結果，你說這算不算共識？它也不算共識，它就是並列，然後並列都已經互相模糊到至少吵不起來的地步，但是這個環境很不適合變成是一個隨著時間過去大家越來越有常模（norm），它會變成是準則（guideline），維基百科會出很多準則，就是你不要越界，否則你的文章會被刪掉。
你不要越界，你的編輯就不會被撤回（undo），在這個程度上他們有社群跟文化，製作得非常好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是g0v在一開始挑的空間是hackpad，hackpad是完全互相信任的，甚至是完全不認識的人可以把你整篇刪掉，就算你只邀某些人，那一些人只要把連結貼出去，他貼的人還是能把你的東西刪掉，是非常沒有權限控制的一個地方。所以我們一開始因為是用hackpad跟Ethercalc，Ethercalc我寫的（邏輯）也是一樣，我們連登入的按鈕都沒有，當然你可以留言說你是誰之類的，但也是無需信任，一個你不認識的人可以把你的東西都清掉。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在這裡面因為這樣的關係，所以大家都很願意讓自己的東西被別人改一點，因為沒有門檻，你只要看不順眼就來改一點，所以你也不用先認識誰。
如果我們一開始用的是Google Docs，就要先認識編輯者，然後給他你的gmail帳號之類的，所以我覺得空間還是決定權利，這個一開始的這兩個空間決定它一開始能夠達到那麼高強度的文化程度，因為大家都在可以被傷害（vulnerable）的狀態下，所以反而能夠趨近於彼此不傷害。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "不過vulnerable這一件事在跟kirby、ETBlue聊的時候，他們會覺得這個是開源社群本身自己就是很習慣被改。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！是啊！" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "所以這個是既有開源社群的一種態度就對了？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可是開源社群之前是這樣，我寫出一個程式，那是我的工藝（craft）可以被改。可是如果連社群宣言都可以被改，那是另外一個層級的東西，也就是很多開源的工作者之所以能夠隨便改，是因為外於他的，他做一個產品出來隨便你改，但這個東西就是文化認同（identity）也隨便改，我覺得還是需要更多一點的東西。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "OK。所以你說更多一點的東西，你剛剛是把這個空間連結在一起？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是的。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "就是因為先進到這個空間了，所以彼此都已經做好心理準備？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然有很多人是有文化衝擊的，就是一來發現陌生人都可以隨便刪我東西，這樣對嗎？（笑）像這幾天有人在hackpad最近的編輯上面多加了一個圖示，有加了足球，我看他的意思好像是一些活動會加星號，然後農地的會加一個有點牡羊座、像插秧的圖示，就是顏文字標記（emoji tagging）。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "是一個分類是不是？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我不確定，可能就看到有一個聯想，這是很ok的，可是對很多人來講，這也許是文化衝擊，就是連標題都有人隨便改了。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "OK。所以如果是像剛剛講文化這一種東西彼此是不同意的，你也是直接改了？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "然後不同意再改？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "直到大家覺得OK？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，因為hackpad有一個留言功能，所以你如果不確定對方是什麼意思，你可以先留言一下。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "曾經有出現過像維基百科那個編輯戰沒有止息過嗎？就是誰也不讓誰？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不太可能。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "就是雙方完全立場不同，就是為了完全否定他的意見？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個我們要進入g0v其實我覺得真正的核心文化，就是叫做分支（fork），你如果同意彼此就是不能同意（agree to disagree），那你就分支出去，把那個pad從頭到複製一份到旁邊，讓他們自己改你的版本，或者像有整個hackpad拆出去。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像當時我記得318剛過，有一些pad是在討論g0v乾脆來組黨好了，但那部分的pad後來被拆到另外一個hackpad去，就是「透明連線」的hackpad。
當時我們討論的是，宣言裡的「無黨、無派」，我們要多認真去看它？它的目標是為了要完全沒有排除性，就是你不管住不住臺灣都可以加入，還是它的意思是說我們跟各黨派都可以有聯繫，但是我們自己也可以組個黨？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "後來雙方並沒有共識，有人這樣想、有人那樣想，所以不同的hackpad會繼續發展；當然後來這邊也有人去綠社盟或者我不確定有沒有人去時代力量，但總之想組黨的人就去組黨了。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "所以大家各自走各自的途徑？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "回到「沒有人」的這一個討論，其實它滿有趣的是，你會先承認你就是那個「沒有人」，這裡隱含著是非常積極的跳坑、挖坑的心態，後來又告訴你沒有人是萬能的。
我的解讀你看看是不是有錯，它同時是在講說其實個人是沒有辦法完成一件太大的事，同時又告訴你說可是你把「沒有人」看作是一個社群，它又是萬能的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "所以沒有人的精神裡面，你覺得是一個「去英雄主義」還是「英雄主義」？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這當然是「去英雄主義」，非常非常之明顯。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "它強調不是個人的表現？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們當然很強調個人的貢獻，所以我剛剛才會說你看某一份文件看到某六個人編輯過，那個是系統自動幫你記的，這跟有資通訊以前不一樣，有資通訊系統以前你沒有像這一種東西，在建立非特定個人的詮釋權，所以你一定會變成是寫黨史的那個人贏，對不對？" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "沒有錯。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是因為有資通訊（ICT）系統在做自動紀錄，所以誰也不能說誰沒有做什麼事、誰也不能說誰有做什麼事，就是憑紀錄上說了算，在這種狀況下，英雄主義是沒有辦法長起來的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "英雄主義的光環效應是因為你明明沒有做這一些，可是你因為做了某些做得很傑出，所以別人以為你也有做那一些，但是在我們這樣子的一種系統裡面，你到底有沒有做那一些你是按兩個鍵就看得到，我覺得那是長不起英雄來。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "不過也同時要你先當那個沒有人嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然啊！每一個人的關懷是不一樣的，當有人問「為什麼沒有人做這個」，他的意思是說他的關懷跟別人不同，他有一個新的關懷，他的關懷是還沒有人看到的，假設這樣講，所以「沒有人」的意思是說，如果不是「透過社會化產出（social production），把你對你關懷的行動放在大家看得到的位置」，不管那個行動多小——那個關懷就沒有意義，那完全就是內心小劇場，並不是在一個公共的位置。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "隨著你把關懷放在公共位置，那「沒有人是萬能的」，因為本來沒有這個關懷的人看到你做出來的東西，他會因此被引發那個關懷，東西就做得出來了，所以這個其實是非常非常基本的，我們就是用一個文字遊戲把這個表示出來。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "好的，接下來要進入到優勢跟限制這一塊。延續著剛剛沒有人討論的話，一方面g0v很積極培力，一方面你也可以說是鬆散的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然啊！沒有人能叫什麼人做什麼。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "很自由（free）。你覺得在這樣子，一方面的文化積極之優勢跟限制？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你的對照組是誰？中華民國政府嗎？" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "一定要對照組嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你單獨一個文化放著，沒有辦法講優勢跟限制... 它一定是跟旁邊的社會去比。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "如果只是在講說它在完成一個專案，或者是說在跟其他人像現在的跨界這一件事上，如果這樣比呢？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果在跟我們不是使用「沒有人」文化、別的組織方式合作、協作什麼的時候，你想問的是這個嗎？" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "對，也不用到跨界，就單就他在完成一個專案的時候。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可是我們已經沒有辦法完成專案..." }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "...那在做一個專案..." }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "...不好意思..." }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "...不會，不會，這樣很好..." }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "...在做一個專案的時候的優勢跟限制？" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "在這個文化下？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想一下優勢跟限制，因為g0v有二個特性：" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第一個是它的任何一個專案在做任何一件事的時候，其實「沒有人」的其中一個很主要的涵義是「不特定人」，就是我不是先限制誰可以來做這個專案。
大部分目前社會上很多的專案，包含Google Docs都是預先特定人，就是這五個人做，第六個人我們相信他再放進來，這個是第一個文化上的差異。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個是分配的方式，就是是有償或者是無償是另外一件事，如果是無償的，像在g0v裡面，大家都知道你做任何貢獻，你的回報就是大家知道你做這個貢獻，沒有比這個多的，就到這裡而已。但是在很多別的社群裡面是有對價的，這個對價我講的不是有錢拿——當然也可以有錢拿——是另外一個對價，就是「你如果不做這個，我也沒有必要來做這個」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是大家好比說我跟你談判，我說你現在願意做這一件事，我才願意，你要是哪一天不願意，我這邊也沒有必要繼續做，很多合作是這樣。
但g0v不是，而是我現在貢獻一些，我就走了，你再貢獻一些，你可能先來問我，但你再貢獻一些，然後你也走了，然後後來的人又來貢獻一些，所以每一步都不再往前面或者是後面的人給出要求，這個時候是沒有對價可言。
所以沒有對價，這個如果畫成象限圖的話，g0v是在非常右上角的位置，又沒有對價、又是不特定人，對不對？" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "很多NGO也好，或綁得比較緊的組織或者是家庭，都是在（左上）這個位置，我們就是說家庭結構，也就是無償、也沒有對價，可是就是那幾個（特定）人了，比這個也沒有更多的。
大部分就你剛剛說的一般組織、一般企業、一般什麼好比是公司好了，就一般的公司是（左下）這樣，也就是你下個月不付我薪水為什麼還要來？但是公司也不是街上隨便誰就讓他開始工作，所以這個是二個都有的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是你出了公司裡面，你到了（右下）市場，那就變成不特定人了。
所以，我剛剛問你對照組的意思是，g0v是要去跟三種型態的任何一種比的時候，他的優勢跟限制才有辦法比，所以我沒有辦法泛泛跟你講這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "蔣金", "speech": "不過這個就很好解釋跟他們三個的對照關係。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，這裡也不一定是公司，公部門也是一樣，就是公務員也是一樣，就那幾個，還要考試院上來，而且你下個月不發錢，我想也不會有誰繼續做... 之類的。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "那如果我們單就例如像專案，像我們一般看一個專案我們就會講到要完成，就是要完成，那「完成」這一個文化應該是比較偏公司跟公部門的想像嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，比較像。至少我覺得它比較偏特定人，當時有一些特定人如果是在公司或公部門，比如股東或者是立委或者是誰，他覺得有一些東西要完成、有完成的那一天、監督的方法，即使是在家庭或者是NGO裡面，不管是家戶長或者是元老們，他們要看到某一個任務，那個任務完成就是完成，這個都是有的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是因為g0v一開始就是不特定人，不特定人決定了他的方向可以隨時轉變、隨時扭轉，這就是為什麼我們叫「挖坑」，而不是叫「專案經理」或者是「專案發起人」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "事實上我對（別人稱呼我）「專案發起人」很感冒，因為這很像是一開始有那個關懷的人，能決定未來有類似關懷的人要把這個關懷做到哪裡去，但並沒有，憑什麼？只是第一個講出來而已。
所以在這個前提底下，「做不完」我覺得是一種創造性的做不完；也許從最早挖坑那個人挖小小坑的角度來看早就做完了，葉平如果只是要他的小孩在手機上可以看字典，他早就可以看了，幾年前就可以了。但那個東西就越長越大，他的小孩可能沒有一開始想學阿美語，但現在可以學阿美語了。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "所以就是說這個挖坑的人根本沒有預設怎麼樣才叫做完？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，是啊！或者他本來的關懷很小的，但很多人透過那個小關懷看到很大的東西。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "OK。所以也就是說大家其實並沒有預設，像這樣的思維真的在跟一般專案比，那是衝擊滿大的事，因為大家就會覺得這樣要怎麼確保可以做到一定的程度，不要講完成好了，就是可以做到一個比較可以運作的程度，因為人來來去去的話。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實啊！" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "是大家連「做到一定程度」都沒有非要不可的意思嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這裡我就可以說在不特定人的對價，也就是市場。總體經濟學有一個宗教性，就是社會的需求可以被那隻看不見的手，只要資訊足夠充分流通的，那東西就會趨於平衡，當然2008年後沒有人這樣講，但當時是有這一種宗教性，大家在金融危機之前多少還是覺得新自由主義有什麼不好？各國間會自己動態調節之類的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果有人的工作條件差，那揭露就好——當時充滿一片這種想法。2008年之後沒人這樣講，但如果各位還記得的話，當時是有這樣的想法：就是你不用作宏觀調控，我們不需要有一個聯合國五年計劃，貧窮還是可以消滅、雨林還是可以保存、氣候暖化還是可以解決，只要把排碳及人權什麼東西都標上正確的價格，然後丟到市場上後就會自己運作。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "2008年後沒人這樣講，但當年是有人這樣子想的。所以你剛剛講的那一個衝擊，我覺得毋寧在新自由主義就是有這樣的成份，就是在說國家這一套不管用了，現在只有「不特定人」才管用，不管是群眾募資、分享經濟等，它覺得不但這有效力，而且因為資訊透明化的關係，不但達標而且超標。
因為如果是達標的話，大家是公務員做到達標就好了，如果是市場是會超標的，因為事實上的需求可能比你想得多之類的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，不諱言說，g0v有一部分所謂的「技術烏托邦」有援用這一套敘事。但是因為我們把對價丟掉了，所以這個敘事變成是別的東西，不是「大家都可以賺大錢」，而是「大家都可以滿足自己的關懷」。
所以是有衝擊，但這個衝擊是有把它講清楚、也有讓人家能夠接受的方法。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "如果我們把這個市場的對價劃掉，變成是所謂的關懷好了，我們稱呼為「關懷市場」..." }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好，隨便，總之就是往上..." }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "這樣子的話，大家會對於這裡面陣亡跟不陣亡的心態是很坦然的嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，我覺得「零時政府」這四個字隨便誰都可以給它各種詮釋，像我記得 kirby 一開始就是說它可能有「零時差的政府」（zero-day government）的意思，就是發生什麼事情馬上就回應，不用等上班，或者是半夜11點地震，零時就有回應（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "蔣金", "speech": "也有「很臨時」..." }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，沒錯。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "其實你們在這邊玩得很開心吧！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "我越來越發現（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，我覺得這個名字真的是太好玩了。像我演講的時候，我會說這個是「零星時間」（spare time）的意思，就是你剛剛講的零碎時間，大家會丟進來的時間都是我們零碎的時間，本來就已經沒有在做別的，如果不來關懷就是耍廢，在這種狀態底下當然不會那麼在意成敗，因為那就是零碎的時間。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "OK，不過假如說今天挖坑的是一個滿希望這個坑可以成功的人，一進來是不是衝擊也滿大？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，是的，是的，會衝擊非常大。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "還是在這個問題裡面，因為g0v它就是強調不是一個組織、也去中心化，你覺得如果把g0v一整個看成是一個專案的話..." }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "...為什麼它可以看成一個專案？？" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "我想要討論的意思是…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "...「你如果把g0v看成一隻貓咪的話，牠是什麼品種？」（笑）..." }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "...好吧！不能這樣問是不是..." }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "...沒有，你可以這樣問..." }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "...我想說的是，如果它今天沒有核心的參與者，它的基礎建設或者是有規模的貢獻，是真的可以持續存在推動嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然可以。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "你相信它可以？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不是相信，這種事發生過好幾次，像有一陣子hackpad爛掉，hackpad當掉過一陣子。我有事沒事會飛歐洲，飛歐洲的時候，像其實summit的（議程組）會議我都不能開，因為時差。
clkao也是，他有一陣子飛很多地方，那個時候其實沒有辦法管任何事情，因為都在飛機上。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "即使萌典好了，萌典松到最後其實跟萌典專案的關係也不大了，就是誰來誰要做什麼就做什麼。
前兩次都是在做吳守禮老師的台語那一部字典，可是那部字典本來跟萌典在做的也不太一樣，不管是技術、基礎或核心參與者都不是同一批人，但它還是叫g0v、萌典松。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得這個標誌（logo）本身，因為拋棄了著作權，你可以隨便用，然後你隨便用，也不會有人怎麼樣，只要這個logo還有人用就會有人用，並不是依賴於你這邊講的是人、ICT的架構及專案，但其實你拿這個logo去用的時候，不一定要考量在裡面，像之前台北市「空氣污染盒子」他們就拿去用，因為他們在做的事情跟之前做的空氣污染專案很像，所以網域就直接叫g0v，確實也很像，這樣很棒，但是其實你說人、基礎建設及貢獻，可能是完全沒有重疊的。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "好。講到公民素養這一塊，因為確實是影響了g0v專案的迴響程度或者是被使用的程度，所以這一題想要知道的是，g0v一方面希望用專案來提升公民素養，可是一方面又被公民素養影響著它的能見度，它怎麼去處理這一件事嗎？或者是你覺得g0v在這一塊要怎麼去？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你形容的是 Giddens 的雙重詮釋（Double Hermeneutics），對不對？我不知道中文怎麼翻... 可是這個詞很老了，它的意思就是說你社會學的東西讓社會知道，社會就改變了，所以你的社會學就要改。本來就是這樣子，所以我不確定你的意思是什麼...
因為怎麼切入？它只有一種切入法，就是去介入。也不可能有別的切入法，並不是說可以選擇大家聊一聊就好，「在g0v聊一聊」本身就已經介入社會，你不可能不介入，我覺得就是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個是如何評估專案是否提升公民素養，我覺得這個問題問得非常好，我們看「碰到多少人」這個是量化資料，非常容易取得，隨便專案列一下或者是Facebook會告訴我們。
但我們怎麼知道，哪一些人看社會的方式因為我們而改變？這個除了每一個專案底下都放一個留言板之類的，就是他們願意來貢獻就知道了、他們願意來黑客松... 但這都是軼事（anecdote）。比那個多的，我覺得我們目前並沒有系統的評估方法，之前有討論過一些，可是後來就發現我們畢竟不是公部門，很難作量化評估，目前的量化評估真的就是人數、待了多久，大概就只有這樣。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "確實多數的專案引發話題，然後後續動能不足？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然啊！誰有那麼多的時間... 本來引發話題，就是希望更多的不特定人開始有這個關懷，他們有這個關懷之後要不要加入，是他們自己決定。
而且很多時候並不一定事後用g0v這種方式加入，我的意思是說所謂的「出關播種」意思是回到本來生活裡，用那個生活裡適合你的方式去介入，而不是後續大家約好每年3月回去佔領一次... 那也沒有什麼意義，你懂我的意思嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以如果只看立法院周邊，一定會說後續動能不足，因為沒有人了，但那是很窄的一個講法，重點是說人跟人之間的關聯因為這樣改變，因為這樣改變之後我們想像擴增了，而且也不只是我們，而是所有看過這一件事人的想像都擴增了。
把那一些人的動能加起來，我覺得後續動能是增加的，絕對不是減少的，所以沒人會說「2014年3月如果沒有發生那件事，我們現在的動能會更強」，所以我覺得後續動能一定是更多，只是它不是在發起的那個點，所以別的專案也是一樣。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "OK。" }, { "speaker": "蔣金", "speech": "這一件事會跟價值中立這件事會相關嗎？" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "我等一下會問到。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "下一個（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "蔣金", "speech": "我知道有一個題材。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有關係，你可以先講，我可以寫在這裡。" }, { "speaker": "蔣金", "speech": "就是剛剛有討論到後續動能這一件事，你讓大家看到了某一些像是空污等東西，後續所需要的是更進一步切入那個議題本身，就是這個東西跟剛剛提到的那個並不是在g0v舞臺上所要處理的事情，就包含在剛剛講的那個？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！是，完全正確。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "問題化（problematization）這件事，是我們這樣三年下來做得特別好的，就是有一個隱而不顯的東西，然後把它問題化，但問題化之後往往是指向一個更大的結構，當你要進入這個結構去改變這個結構的時候，你是當然帶著當年那個問題化的精神進去，可是你不可能只透過同樣佔領或者包圍去做。
我們自己把教育部的字典拆下來了，但如果我們是要改變「教育部不用開放的CC授權釋出他的字典」這個結構，我們勢必除了示威之外還要告訴他們怎麼做，這個是需要陪伴。
這個陪伴的過程裡，我覺得g0v扮演的角色是讓我們有一群可以陪伴的人，所以以致於誰都不會覺得你被抽掉，這一件事就不發生、結構就不改變，而是如果現在教育部想要問說「字典要開放，要怎麼辦？」，g0v至少有二十幾個人可以很詳細跟他說明要怎麼辦，在這裡面陪伴的人數基數的擴大，我覺得g0v目前就是在這裡。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是，你實際進去了，然後結構真的改變了的這一段，目前並不能說是g0v專案所非常專注在做的事情，這就是ipa所說的文化傳染、感染，也就是他們發現可以這樣做事，所以回去結構裡學著用新的方法做事，可是g0v這個標誌就不需要用了... 不用g0v這個標籤，他可以有更多的標籤可以說，可以說比如「群眾外包」或者是「開放資料」，不一定要說是g0v。這樣有回答嗎？" }, { "speaker": "蔣金", "speech": "有。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "回到剛剛那一題，是不是面對公民素養不足，所以我們東西做出來沒有人用的這一件事，按照你剛剛所說的，你也只能繼續做更多的專案來面對這一件事，是嗎？其實你也只能介入社會，是嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！也沒別的做法。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "而且這個公共議題的瞭解及參與，這個是非常大的東西。
你不能改變一個人的素養，你最多只能透過一個事件改變他對某件事情的感情，你改變之後他願意花多一點的時間再去瞭解什麼，除非你是一對一的家教、課輔，不然不可能的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "做教育工作的人都知道，你最多只是告訴他說這一件事沒有你想的那麼可怕，帶著他玩一次，之後他要花多少時間，在這上面這是他的人生規畫。就算你自己的小孩都是這樣，何況是不特定多數人？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我說真的沒有什麼別的辦法... 當然有啦！那就是「最終解決方案」，可是我們不談那種辦法，就是伊斯蘭國那一種辦法，那個不在我們的範圍裡面——自願性非常重要。
對我來講，如果公共議題是建立在法西斯上，那寧可不要。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "g0v本身也不會把自己定位在推動你去再進一步認識這一些？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們用最小阻力路徑（path of least resistance）這個概念，他是說人會耍廢，就是挑最容易做的事情做，所以社會壓力、社會環境及社會空間上，我們是試著讓他做關懷那一件事的阻力變小，比起他被異化來得小，這是經典的社會學。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "g0v能夠做的是讓你找到同伴，讓你呼喚到其他人，不管是技能的學習，或者你一下子學不了那麼多，那找到有這些技能的人，這些阻力都儘量降到零。
這個時候還是要那個人的動機，他如果沒有能動性（agency），他其實還是不會動，所以我不去推動，但是如果你的能動有一點動能（momentum）出來，我們盡可能不要讓你卡住。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "談到立場這件事了。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "你之前的訪談有談到網路中立價值，在跟 kiang 聊的時候，他也說他後來會比較退出核心的社群是因為他覺得今天解決更大的可能你剛剛說的結構性問題，他絕對完全沒有辦法要弄髒手。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "要選邊站？" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "對。就他所說，部分的人會認為當核心人還是要謹言慎行。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有耶！我覺得那是一次誤會，可是那兩個當事人ipa跟kiang你都訪問過，那我不便再評論什麼，但我覺得那是一次誤會。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就有點像這一次阿端其實沒有要我不能回答（議程組相關採訪）的意思，但他措詞上可能有二義性，那個二義性你也不能說我過度解讀，因為也可以讀成那樣... 這個其實是講清楚就好了的事情。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "所以也並沒有說不能有？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有，我覺得沒有（謹言慎行的要求）。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "那個也不是重點。只是想要知道的是，g0v希望自己網路中立勢必是希望可以接納更多的人進來？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個中立（neutrality）其實只是我們說「不特定人」的另外一個講法，就是它不排除，不排除當然就是所謂的「neutrality」，翻成中立好像也怪怪的，反正意思就是「不排除」。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "所以如果今天真的是要去解決結構性問題，必須要選邊站的話？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是要排除另外一邊了？" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "對，那g0v是真的可以迴避選邊站這一件事嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然不是啊！像之前自經區，就是沃草那邊做一個懶人包，讓你真的讀懂自經區的爭議，因為是CC授權，又在g0v平台出現，所以國發會就改成澄清書，讓他澄清自經區的爭議。
比如有一個專案，有一個人想要往不同方向帶、分支又放出去，你看一邊的編輯者是柳林瑋他們，一邊是管中閔..." }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我的意思是有沒有邊？也是有邊，但這二邊可以共享技術環境，所以他們也還是共筆，還是彼此寫了眉批什麼，我覺得這裡是說不要把中立解讀成「沒有立場」，你要把它解讀成「不排除其他立場」，這是完全不一樣的。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "也就是說，g0v的專案基本上不排除碰觸到有特定立場？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他可以有特定立場，但他不能說「別的立場的人不能用他專案的成果」，就是我不能做一本國語字典說「可是講台語的人不能來用」，這是絕對不可以，這個是禁忌（taboo）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你說g0v有沒有堅持？這個就是堅持。並不是說你不能用漢語拼音，但你不能限制想要用通用拼音的人把你的程式拿去改成通用拼音。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "好的。我要再想一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "慢慢來。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "g0v有被罵過嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有啊！在中天新聞龍捲風。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "可以稍微講一下嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以啊！當時好像有一個叫皮皮吧！在場內做庶務管理很厲害的一個人，你們有見過嗎？" }, { "speaker": "蔣金", "speech": "有。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我沒有見過，但當時因為在我們外面有架一個投影機，後來兩個，後來又有人捐了二、三樓設備，裡面有加了投影機，當時因為用有線網路，所以可以完全沒有時間差內外看到彼此的狀況，後來狀況沒有那麼緊張，所以裡面的投影機也沒有一天到晚在播街上的東西，所以就用來播棒球電影，如果沒有記錯的話。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但在播的時候就發現一直跳電，因為投影機需要滿多電的，滿多人會把手機或什麼放在那裡，那個發電機其實是從g0v的青島棚那端接進來，並不是立法院自己的電——因為當時立法院的供電系統是斷的——所以會一直跳電，皮皮就拿著一個紙箱一面寫說「如果你再亂插電，g0v就斷你線」，後來那個就上了新聞龍捲風，大概的意思就是…" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "...g0v控管了所有的資源？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不只是這樣，還說林飛帆、陳為廷想要成立臺灣國的臨時政府，然後還翻拍g0v的首頁，就說什麼是「g0v會斷你線」，g0v就是臨時政府，就是臺灣國臨時政府的替身，臺灣國臨時政府是他們成立的什麼組織，非常獨裁，然後可以看到充手機都不行，會被斷掉之類的。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然我們有反制的方法，因為g0v有新聞小幫手，所以一下子就可以在新聞小幫手澄清，因為外面的發電機是經過g0v的棚拉進去的，所以其實不是g0v斷你線，而是歐姆定律斷你線（笑）。
所以這個名字是被罵過，這個名字本身如果你想要往壞處解讀，也可以讀出很多東西來。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "這個比較偏是被誤解..." }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "...污名化，也可能是故意的..." }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "...有曾經因為g0v的專案呈現，就是一個非常特定立場的這一件事被罵過嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有啊！政治獻金一開始的一整批全部都是國民黨的立委，當時有很多人不高興，當然因為第一批進去印的人關心的就是這一些立委，我們當然就是說第一個你可以做進去印，任何人印出來我們都會處理，第二個處理的過程可以獨立驗證，是因為中間每一個過程都是開源的，所以自己在電腦上跑一下就知道我們有沒有做假；當然後來第二批印出來就有賴清德的。大家發現其實真的就是第一批剛好挑的那幾個人，但是有被罵，就是覺得這個顏色太明顯。" }, { "speaker": "蔣金", "speech": "這也牽涉到一點技術，因為我有進去印過，印還滿複雜的，所以你就要點點點。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒錯，後來還有做標準流程（SOP），要照著那個SOP進入的門檻才會稍微低一點，否則沒有SOP的時候會很困難。" }, { "speaker": "蔣金", "speech": "我去的時候，還說什麼他們已經認識g0v..." }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "...對，都會先排時間，先打給技正還是哪一位，他會先空一個印表機出來。還會說你可以印2×2還是什麼之類的，掃起來比較方便，所以如果一開始感興趣的人剛好是國民黨，當然看起來是有顏色的。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "那這一個有顏色的專案會有人特意來說你應該要更沒有顏色一點，會這樣嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "會啊！你馬上看聊天室就會人說下一批去印賴清德，但是其實後來每一個都印了，所有的市長都印，只是先後順序的問題，所以其實並不是說澄清謠言，就是透過行動去說我們沒有排除，就是這樣而已。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "不過真的每一件事都可以做到沒有排除嗎？或者是當我們今天要去解決一些跟結構性有立場問題的時候，或者是必須帶個某個立場進去的時候？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們用文字已經排除不識字的人，你不可能沒有排除，其實很多g0v的專案是做弱勢的近用（接近使用，accessibility）的東西，包含聽障、文字轉語音這一些。可是你這一些全部都做了，你還是排除掉（人類之外的）動物。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就算你設計給其他動物，你還是排除掉溪流。你要說「完全無排除性」是做不到，但你可以說你腦裡很清楚目前的排除，不是因為價值，而是因為目前的工具只到這裡，然後你下一步走的時候，如果工具有開放起空間來的話，那你的排除性還可以再降低一點，它是一個永無止盡的東西。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "舉另外一個例子來講，例如像g0v替特定的政黨作專案的話，這樣要如何做到…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "...沒有排除性？就是別的政黨也可以用。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "依你近幾年做的vTaiwan跟政問，我覺得相較於其他比較像是工具開發，或者是資訊揭露為主，其實有在進一步拋出議題，而且主動提問的，這一類型是你自己本身為什麼想要做？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "都不是我挖的坑，vTaiwan是蔡玉玲，至少她後天一定會來，你可以直接問她為什麼她要主動拋這個議題，所以我沒有太挑。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "同樣政問是羅申駿（JL）、葛如鈞、張鐵志，還有很多人，寶博士找到我的時候，其實他們團隊已經都組成了，只是沒有人幫他們想一個中文名字（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "所以你是想中文名字？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我的介入很少，我提供一些技術上面的，聊天室介接工具的支持，當然教他們用Pol.is，除此之外沒有做別的，所以政問我並不是主要成員，只是有一起想一些事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得都還好，因為我擅長的東西是「你缺什麼，我就去學那個，然後把它補上」，但我去學那個也就是業餘的，並不是我真的能夠學一個月就比上別人學十年，沒有這種事情。
一開始補上了之後，就是讓專業的來。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "你會覺得g0v的專案，會越來越從原本的只是基礎資訊揭露或者是把資訊變得更易讀，它會越來越走向，或者是它是不是已經走向針對特定議題、或者是特定的立場來做一些什麼？會往這個路線嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得g0v最早的幾個專案，之所以是以揭露資訊為主是因為我們連實際狀況都不知道，你當然更不要談主動介入。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "就是還在一個資料探勘的階段。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，你連現在房價是怎麼樣都不知道，你要說你去做什麼倡議是不可能的，或者是你連現在像各地的土壤承載力或者是污染狀況都不知道，我們說現在介入作國土規劃那個是空的規劃。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "並不是一開始那些人不想做後面這一些，而是足以做那一些的東西都還不在手上，所以我覺得當然有一個演進，可是這個演進並不是大家方向改變了，而是用來支持這個方向最底下的原始資料現在在手上了。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "所以開始從這一些原始資料裡面看到一些問題？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，你可以說有一個趨勢，我們可以怎麼去處理它之類的，但如果現在連這個都沒有，我當然只能專注把這個做出來。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "跟做新聞也滿像的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我一直覺得g0v的三個部分，就是你看到它的運動的部分跟自由軟體的部分是一看就看到，但自媒體左下角的部分我覺得是一樣重要的，而且長期來看可能是最有彈性的那一支。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "自媒體這一塊？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，就是公民媒體（civic media）或自媒體，隨便啦！就是它的媒體部分，因為g0v就是軟體、媒體、團體這三個的交織，軟體是因為之前沒有人把這樣給運動用，所以非常顯眼，但其實媒體的這一塊是一開始就有的，像新聞小幫手就是媒體介入或者是求職小幫手，小幫手系列每一個都是媒體，只是那一些媒體有的是很集中，有的是沒有辦法一開始就有足夠資料支持變成更大的覆蓋。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是等到這些有了，像在318的時候，那完全就是用一個電視台的方式在運行，所以我的意思是說只要底下的東西是足夠的，我覺得g0v裡面的軟體或者團體的這一些部分，它的媒體性是非常強的。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "就你自己觀察的話，g0v從開始成立到現在，你自己有覺得比較特別的現象或者是趨勢或者是變化，是當初沒有想到的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一個是不特定人的「不特定」到底多大？當時萌典覺得可以號召到好比400人來查萬國碼（Unicode）或者是5,000人來做錯字，我們覺得這個數量其實很大，之前我們做那一些專案已經沒有碰到這麼大的數量級了，但到後來會動不動觸及率是10萬來算時，這時候就會發現好像不一樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這裡面當然有幾個，其實比較大的是仲丘那一次，那一次剛好COSCUP在開年會，一開始1985那一些人也沒有想到說隨便約一下就25萬人，就是即使對他們來講那也是出乎意料，你說誰預先想好，也沒有。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個是，當然他們申請路權或者做這一套從1985開始，後來也是用一個開放的Google Docs繼續編輯下來，所以變成是大家對於那一場不同的想像，其實是用線上協作去把它程序下來，如果下一次還有25萬人可以做得更好的地方，後來就50萬人（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我的意思這個東西是出乎預料，就是大家在約好某一個時間同時「共時性的行動」，跟我們叫做非同時性、線上的這種東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們以前的經驗，在做運動的時候，都是這次開一個共識會議取得共識，在上面開始繼續延續討論，討論完還是大家會去忙別的，注意力也會散掉，等到下一次的時候共識已經沒有上次那麼強了，所以下一次又有行動聚會的時候，還要撿起來，還要重新培力，培力之後又不可能記到百分之百，就每一次還要重新再填一點東西上去。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可是g0v最近二、三年不一樣的是，你一次可能做得不好或怎麼樣，在線上檢討或者是加強的時候，是一次次增加的，並不是減少的，然後你下一次就一直是站在這個共識上，所以不但來的人比較多、而且做得也比較精密，所以效果社會影響就比較大，就又會更多人來，因為現在又有收容這一些人、變成有效的貢獻者的一套方法，所以在線上接續的時候又更強，下一次的動能又更大，所以你不需要特別幾個人去加壓，這個節奏本身就越長越多人，我想這個是出乎預料，我想也是出乎很多人預料的。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "累積這一件事的能力？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是放大。就是說你不只是特定同時、同地的行動，有它的擴增（amplification），因為以前的培力理論是要同時、同地，才能放大，你如果是同時、異地它就已經開始散掉了，如果是異時、異地那就散得非常嚴重。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可是因為線上的這套東西，大家保持著同時、同地的感受，所以你可以回到這裡來。回到這裡來的時候，同時、同地沒有散掉，即使人在別的地方，明明是異地，不管是直播或者是線上聊天室或什麼，感覺上是同地。
如果現在忙別的日常工作，明明是非同時、非同步，可是因為逐字稿或者是hackpad的這一種東西，你回來的時候感覺好像同時，所以參與感你回來的時候跟離開的時候是一樣的，或者甚至是更多的，比如現在終於有時間，所以不需要一般的NGO或者是特定關注團體的那種加壓的過程，好像變成是都不會散掉。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "不過像這樣線上的保持同時、同地的感覺，在之前網路出來的時候沒有這樣的現象嗎？就是說既然都已經在線上了，異地的人得以有連結，為什麼是等到g0v？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有，我不是說g0v做，我是說g0v誕生在這樣的一個時代，這一個時代的社群媒體工具有效保存了同時同地的感覺，注意到我剛剛講的hackpad或者是Facebook等，我講的不是g0v，而是說這一些線上空間，其實單純講Facebook即時通（messenger）就好了，就是說其實很難想像318沒有即時通訊而能發生，這是極難想像的一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "整個茉莉花革命，是因為有同時不特定人即時又可以回來累積的那種線上空間，所以才能馬上多佔領區可以看到實際的狀況，人跟人間不用經過大會。
可是這個東西真正成熟是2012年，所以iPhone是2007年，其實2009年以前都不可能想像這一件事，開始有是在2009年、2010年，Facebook（手機）即時通好像是2012年。
之後才能想這一件事，然後g0v剛好是那個時候誕生的。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "那這樣可以說g0v的誕生是因為這些工具而誕生嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然可以，我想如果抽掉這些工具，g0v沒有辦法存在。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "接著講跨界這一件事，其實從這一次年會的議程也可以看到，我自己的解讀是，因為上次也是在講跨界，但這一次多了更多跨界成效的檢討，近年來跨界確實是有這樣的趨勢，是嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "那你覺得這個原因是什麼？是指大家不安於只是做自己的事，而決定要開始佔領或者是進到其他的領域去？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣講好了，就是說跨界的意思，其實我的理解是在這四個不同交換模式裡面的個人，開始願意切換，就是說他以前好比像日本說上班族（サラリーマン），可能一輩子都待在這個位置，不會再移動了，那是他感到安心、安身立命的位置。
所謂「跨界」的意思是開始遊走於這一些交換模式之間，他可能看到Kickstarter下面有一個關心的東西，他突然拿薪水的一部分變成投資者，突然往這邊走。然後看那些進度更新覺得有參與了，雖然我不能自己去做，但我做了很重要的事情，這個是往市場方向。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "或者也願意時間多一點，去做一些志工性質的事情，當然很多人是通過宗教，不一定是宗教，總之是找到一個更大的家庭歸屬感等等。我的意思是說，這一種東西本來就是在你有冗餘的時間時就會發生的，它不是因為g0v。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但因為金融信仰垮臺，大家不再覺得人生就是玩一個遊戲，「把數字盡量弄高，然後就死掉了（笑）」這一件事有什麼意義，真的一點意義都沒有。
因為這個信仰的瓦解，就是說不只是在個人層次上的瓦解，而是在全球層次說，大家這樣玩都沒有變得更好，所以大家就開始鬆動，這是一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一件事是傳統上支持所謂的特定人結構，是因為特定人間的溝通比不特定人間的溝通有效率多了，這個課本上有，所以我就不再說，但是大致的意思就是說5個人之內在同一間房間內比較好溝通，500個人同一間房間裡面沒有辦法溝通，所以這樣就會變成5個人編到一個委員會這樣出去的科層組織，這樣的原因並不是大家黑箱，而是因為這樣訊息傳下來比較快，郵政系統就是這樣做出來的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但因為網際網路，所以現在這個點跟這個點更快，中間的轉接點少一個就是少幾微秒，如果中間有有人要審過才能出去，那更是，而這邊就不用人審。
所以，在這種狀態底下，整個砝碼整個往右邊拉，就是說突然間不特定人的組成比特定人組成容易，而這個至少是人類歷史上沒有出現過的，這時跨界變成是不得不然，因為你不跨界的話，你即使用資本主義、新自由主義都競爭不過，就是都會輸，這時你會看到很多大公司變成開始分一些實驗性質的部門出來，或甚至是組織再造變成內部創業，我可以背一堆，但是我相信你比我熟這個。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我的意思是說，所有這種科層組織，公司、公部門、學校、教會等在面臨同樣的事情，就是不能不跨界，如果不做一些跟不特定人相接壤方法的話，並不是誰去消滅它，而是它基礎的受眾就消失了，因為大家去更容易的地方，在時間更方便、更快速的地方去了。
我覺得這個是大環境，只要有網路的地方都是這樣，g0v我覺得就是這幾年收割這股能量，但這股能量不是我們造成的；像4G網路通以前跟4G網路通以後的組織形態又不一樣，就是這一些非常底下的東西造成的。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "剛剛提到說這群人跑到更容易的地方，這個可以舉個例子嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以啊！我可以想比較更好的例子，OK，舉一個最簡單的例子好了，帶大英百科全書很重，很久才改一次版，而且又很貴，所以很多人是去圖書館看，那就是一個科層，你要登記、借書，附近的圖書館沒有要你的書，你還要搭公車去別的地方看之類的，與維基百科相比，維基百科的特定詞條上可能品質比較差，可能沒有很好的編輯審核程序，但是最大的好處就是可以加入、可以改、可以問為什麼這樣寫，所以在這個狀態下，它一定是立即滿足你的好奇心，在立即滿足你的好奇心這一件事上比大英百科全書好得多。
在別的可能都做得比大英百科全書還要爛，但是它在立即滿足這一件事做得好很多，你甚至連「為什麼這個詞條沒有人寫」，你都可以滿足你的好奇心（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個「不特定人」的意思，就是總是有人可以滿足你的好奇心，在這個狀態下，你一定得跨界，如果不跨界只是用本來的科層方式運行的話，很快就會變成是你除了很窄的科層、最熟的那一件事之外，別的你都不能滿足。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "那像是跨界到政府為例好了，你自己本身應該也有豐富的經驗，像 kiang 自己就覺得橫向溝通這一件事..." }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "...他現在是公務員..." }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "...他覺得橫向溝通這一件事如果沒有解決的話，跨界就只是一個形式而已。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！我剛剛的「跨界」定義就是橫向溝通，就是往這邊，對。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "所以你也認同其實如果今天上位者如果不把橫向溝通的阻礙打開的話..." }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "...下位者就自己去橫向溝通了，一般都是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "但是下位者要等待上面的指令才決定可不可以溝通，他目前遇到的困難是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，我的意思是說他剛進去（笑），說不定同事已經有LINE群組，他只是還不在裡面... 我亂講的（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "瞭解，瞭解。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我不是真的理解台南市政府的運作，但我有接觸到的，都有某些橫向溝通。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "所以即便是資料的釋出，只要是橫向溝通有建立了也就可以了？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，它就是地下跟地上，之前很多事務官來g0v，但是不會讓老闆知道，或甚至我們在錄影的時候會躲著，因為他很想要把他手上的這一些資料拿出來作活化、作運用，然後很想要跨部門協作，可是他老闆擋住他，他就用鄉民的身份把它提供出來，然後接下來碰巧在下一次黑客松碰到他隔壁部門，然後就做出專案了，回過頭來用媒體的力量壓迫長官說「外面都做出來」，其實根本都是他自己做的（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "蔣金", "speech": "我知道有這樣的例子。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "很多這樣的例子。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "很多嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非常多… 最懂的就是事務官嘛！" }, { "speaker": "蔣金", "speech": "這可以寫嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然可以寫啊！有一些是後來公開了，像Liz是做台語字典的事務官，本來就是教育部的人，所以我們一開始要台語資料時，Liz寫的時候還回的很好笑，官方回了一個、私訊又回了一個，總之很有理想的一個人。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "後來Liz就是從gov跳槽到g0v，就在g0v做新台語運動，做台語復興的事情，這裡面有很多竅門是在教育部時做的，而且當時在裡面的時候還要強調「我不是公務員，我只是約聘的」（笑），這種例子滿多的。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "所以照這樣的想法就是說其實也不一定要等什麼由上而下這種權力的釋放，彼此自己就可以？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就拆了，對啊！" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "可是如果要講到一些規模更龐大的或是更結構性問題的話，是不是還是需要再更往上？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像什麼？" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "突然要我舉例…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "...對啊…" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "...可是所有的東西都是可以自己偷偷拿出來？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊，你要舉反例..." }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "...好，讓我想想..." }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "...慢慢來。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "所以像你跟政府合作或者是溝通的過程中，你有覺得哪一部分是最卡關或者是兩者的觀念最分歧的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得你要問Peggy或者TonyQ，我不曉得，他們是有進去的，我沒有，我在外面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我的原則就是說，有政府特定人願意放下他由上而下的身份，用個人的身份協作，我就幫他們，如果他不願意或者是他不願意的那個部分，那跟我完全沒有關係。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好比像柯華葳，後來我們把十二年國教課綱的整個（課發會）過程都公開了，打了逐字稿之類的。柯的工作裡面一定有別的科層的部分，我不會去理那個部分。只要願意把這個部分公開，我就是專門做這個部分。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "同樣的，蔡玉玲也是一樣，就是說蔡的工作裡面一定有很多由上而下的部分，這我不在意。只要願意把決策權在某些特定的題目上面完全交給人民決定，拋棄掉政務官的（資訊壟斷）權力，然後把它分享出來，這個時候我就拿這個做一點事，但前提都是先放掉由上而下的程序。
所以從我的角度來看，這些都是很奇妙，莫名其妙各部門都好配合，想必後面是很多運作，可是我不在裡面。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "都不是你主動去請？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，完全沒有。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "所以目前你在跟政府互動的過程中，因為來找你的應該是很有誠意的，所以應該都不會有什麼流於形式的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "流於形式找我也沒有意義嘛！
應該是說幾乎會來g0v的（政務官），不一定指的是我，但都是碰到正當性危機，每一個都是碰到正當性危機，這是一個趨勢，它可以是小規模的，好比他覺得他的組織卡住他，以致於才沒有辦法說服本來應該要接收到公務員服務的朋友們，他覺得他的科層沒有正當性，他就進入g0v去尋找新的正當性。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大的就是立法院被佔領了、總統沒有正當性，或者是輸到只剩總統府、行政院沒有正當性，都是碰到正當性危機，他們想說都已經沒有正當性了，不如試試看這一種新的不特定人協作方法吧！我還沒有碰到誰的正當性正在高峰，覺得我掌權、大家都聽話、群眾擁戴，然後說把權力放出來，目前還沒有碰到。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "所以會來找你的基本上已經不在高處？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他的位置在高處，可是正當性受到衝擊，像柯華葳，其實本來大家滿尊敬的，可是就是出現青少年反課綱，到冠華自殺了，這時正當性當然是掉到谷底，不管做得怎樣。
我的意思是說這個時候會來找我們，但柯是不是還是國教院院長？當然還是國教院院長。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "ETBlue之前有談到像g0v這樣很鬆散的狀態，在跟運動組織或者是NGO跨界的時候，最大的主要就是剛剛所講的「完成度的想像」上，你自己有遇到過類似這樣的狀況嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "每天都遇到。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "怎麼溝通呢？或者是怎麼把你們的狀態... 因為你總不能跟人家說我跟你們合作，但你不要對我們最後的結果有預期或者是有期待，應該也不是這樣講，對吧？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得這裡面有幾個，一個是要「相信陌生人」，我覺得這是最難的，其他的都容易，就是說有多少力做多少事，其實很多人是會同意的，那個我覺得還好耶！
尤其是你剛剛講的是NGO，而不是企業，企業的話你還比較能跟他說有錢出錢、有力出力，但是NGO有人來幫忙其實很高興，對不對？怎麼可能說你少於50個人，少50個人我們不開心，沒有這種事，所以有2、3個人願意來，一個禮拜願意花2、3天通常是很高興，不會說真的像你剛剛說的「怎麼一個禮拜只來2天」，這種比較少見。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但我覺得最難的是對於大部分的NGO是，當你進入g0v這個場域而你要擴大規模的時候，就會有一堆本來你根本不認識、也不認識你的人，只是因為興趣來幫你一點忙，這裡非常困難。
很多時候只要是運動型的有一個假想敵、敵我意識的時候，那時就會上升到他確定不是來亂的，或者他即使不是來亂、不是來潛伏收集情報之類的——通常沒有設想到這麼糟——但至少也是想知道加了這個人，真的會讓我的使命更往前一步，而不是反而拖累，拖累也是很多NGO會說的，說還要再帶這些人之類的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，我覺得ETBlue講的都是真的、都有，但我覺得「不特定人」對於我們是不特定人，但對於團體來講是「陌生人」，這是二個同一個狀態，但用不同的想法去想。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "所以你預設這一些不特定的人的幫助是正向的，但是運動組織感覺是遲疑的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！說不定10個裡面有1個是有風險，這個有很多，說不定即使你不來破壞也是浪費我們訓練的人力之類的，有很多腦裡的想像。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我是覺得說，因為我們把空間跟專案設計成，你每次來幾乎都只能做貢獻而不能作破壞——如果你花了10秒鐘作破壞，我們只需要花1秒鐘回復，如果有自動化系統0秒鐘就可以回復，這種狀態下沒有人要來作破壞，因為他沒有成就感，他去別的地方比較有成就感。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "修復能力太大了？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "修復能力太強了，就像破壞維基百科，就是有人會試著一、二次，但試了一下就回來了，就很沒意思，你不如去亂別的地方，不要來亂這裡。
我們把空間都設計成這樣，就是有意識的設計成這樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可是，尤其是在純實體，甚至沒有導入資通訊系統時，你跟他這樣講，他腦裡是連想像都沒有，對他來講有一把椅子被搬走就是被搬走，不是按一個鍵回復到本來的狀況，這是完全稀缺性的思維，而這個思維我覺得是最困難的。
這個就是要時間，就是要不斷讓他看到有些地方就是這樣：椅子被搬走（一份複製），其實（原先的）椅子還在。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "剛剛說g0v是刻意把空間意識設計成這樣子，為何剛好有這個意識要這樣設計？是因為看了什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "g0v一開始的時候，我跟高嘉良工作的那個公司就是在做這個，那是我們的工作，那一家公司是要把維基百科、Facebook、Twitter的功能包起來賣給大企業，當時在輔導大企業的時候說如果員工都去Facebook就沒有生產力，不如在內部架一個Facebook，讓大家腦裡的知識留下來，留下來之後你的員工走了，你的新員工只要看這一下Wiki（共筆）或文件、對話紀錄搜尋之類的，你就可以一下就追上，然後你可以省掉很多時間。
所以這些當然都是社會化產出，它不是為了媒體、不是讓你一天卡很多時間看著廣告，而是你需要的時候，在工作流程裡面加這個進來。為了要做這一些空間，我們當然要想很多搞破壞的時候怎麼回復的這個狀況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "運氣很好的，通常在企業內部網路裡面你總是有一個大絕，那就是「如果有人一直來亂，你就開除他」。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為留有最後一招的關係，所以我們系統設計成非常自由，反正你最後總有那一招可以用。我們會覺得所有的破壞都是無心之失，然後我們往那個方向去設計空間，變成是無心之失很容易回復。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "所以一開始是在企業裡面使用？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，所以很多這一些設計的想法，因為外面就是hackpad其實也是一家新創公司，其實我們都是在同一個領域，其實他們的設計決策或甚至他們奠基的程式碼我們都熟，所以本來就是在做這個，我2008年就開始做這個了。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "滿有趣的，然後後來居然就用到了這麼多。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，所以我跟Clay Shirky——因為他是Socialtext早期的顧問，當時其實我們的那一群顧問，就是像寫Cluetrain Manifesto的那幾個人、或Joi Ito，就是網路思想家們，大家其實都對共筆（Wiki）進入大企業，抱著既懷疑，又有「如果這一件事發生多好」的支持感覺，所以我覺得我們繼承了很多早期搞EFF或者是做網路運動的賽博朋克（cyberpunks），還包括維基百科發明人和試算表的發明人。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他們其實都是從很小、很年輕的時候就想做這個，但當時的技術沒有到位，所以他們就會覺得現在到位了，非常好，所以寫當年那一些想法終於可以實現，所以Socialtext是被這些人的願望所誕生的東西。我們自己能做出多少是一回事，但是幾乎每一個在Socialtext裡面工作的人，當時都在這種科技烏托邦主義的環境底下。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "為什麼想要把它推進到大企業裡面？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為人大部分時間目前還是在企業裡，這個是實際的事情。當時2008年的時候，我要換工作時，因為一些個人因素，所以要變成在家上班，我記得好像前後二天吧！我貼出部落格說我要在家上班了，有沒有人要讓我在家上班？
然後Facebook跟Socialtext就同時給了邀請，他們長得非常像，但是差別就是說你要改變你的下班時間還是你的上班時間，但是那個結構是一樣的，就是說後面的那一整套想法都一樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以後來我是選了Socialtext，就是覺得至少在上班時間我們可以看到大家本來在大的科層組織。
其實Socialtext早期到現在都是軍方、國防單位、議會、五百大公司，只有這種他的科層體制才會變成自己的麻煩，小一點的其實自己隨便開個Trello就好了，也不用來找我們，你要導入企業顧問其實是很貴的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你要付得起，又要被自己的科層壓到不能動，意思其實是五千人以上，五千人以上其實跟政府就已經很像了，在這種狀況下要導入這種東西，確實條件都很高，而且都不一定成功，但至少我們在設計這個空間的時候，就可以設想大家都可以有基礎互信的情況，你的跨部門橫向溝通怎麼樣既不會踩到每一個部門的線，每一個部門又會覺得說，同時一萬人下來使用這一套系統是有用的，這個大部分都是設計工作，少數是軟體工作，所以反正我2012年時就是正在做這個。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "所以他一開始是希望把這一群在科層體制下人的零碎時間，拿來作一些有效的產出？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "是有益於公司的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。就是方法還是同一套方法，但至少是回得來的，會變成社會化產出。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "我只是很好奇，大家想要放鬆的時候，為什麼還會想要有這個產出？還想要產出些什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當時（2014）我跟Clay Shirky說，你們當時的夢想是Socialtext出現，但可以看到他還是在公司內，我們有接很大的公司，但即使是那樣子，但他的使命還是由上而下決定， 這個比公部門更困難。
公部門可以說如果是民主體制還可以調整，但如果是大公司那更不可能，（我的工作就）有一點像是在上潤滑劑的感覺，就是部門之間溝通都很順暢之類的，但最後公司的議程，仍然不是由下而上決定。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但也是有由下而上決定的公司，像早期的Valve、早期的GitHub——據說微軟要轉型到這樣，我不知道——像Google這些是很有名的例子，這個東西需要的ICT資訊架構，我們雖然很熟，可是我們沒有辦法去告訴我們客戶說，你就放棄掉你的董事會，我們可能講不出這句話來。
就算他們再相信我們，我們都講不出這一句來，但不表示我們不想做這一件事，零時政府是一個很好的方式，也就是大家想看到什麼就做什麼吧！但是我覺得為什麼我剛剛說的，後面有一些敘事是延續著矽谷式的技術烏托邦（Techno-Utopian），就是因為我們當時整天寫的就是這一種東西。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "這樣聽起來一切就比較有道理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不是忽然冒出來的。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "對，而且確實是到了一個對的位置，沒錯，沒錯。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "最後談一下你對於g0v未來你自己本身還有什麼想像或者是你接下來自己會想要再更如何？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得我最早看g0v出現，我那時候真的是覺得我同事跟他三個朋友、跟他太太做了很棒的東西，然後有什麼我可以幫忙的地方我幫忙，但是不覺得那是我的東西。
我覺得那個感覺到今天還是這樣，所以我其實沒有對它未來的設定，你如果要問設定的話，其實clkao也好、ipa也好，ETBlue也好，可能都會有更多設定的想像。
我這邊就是覺得說，如果他們到那個想像過程裡面缺什麼，我去學，然後把它補上，就是補位，我自己就是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "所以你其實一直都把自己當個比較不是挖坑的人這樣嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，因為我自己覺得是我對社會很滿意。
我有關懷，可是我沒有覺得哪裡不足，但是我理解我的朋友會有很多關懷、他們覺得哪裡不足，我因此就可以去介入，但是回過頭來問我... 我還是覺得還好。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "我想應該差不多，我再看一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "慢慢來。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "你剛剛是不是曾經提都能夠跟立場有關的問題，講到各自去不同的政黨？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，有些想要組黨，然後公民組合，後來無法組合，後來又重新組合（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "對，這件事我們後來都知道（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以你想問什麼？" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "所以大家會覺得我們出去之後就不要帶著g0v？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "還是可以啊！像雨蒼在社民黨做網路政綱討論，它還是在g0v提出專案，但至少社民黨的那個部分不會說這是g0v的主張，我想也沒有人敢這樣講。
權力、政策、程序（power、policy、procedure）三層裡，他可能只有程序會帶出來，權力結構之類的可能就不會再帶進g0v。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "柏瑜來這邊也是一樣，大家幫他想非常多的主意，郝明義還做了很漂亮的一系列，「24歲立委參選人的24小時」，我的意思是說在他的過程g0v都能幫忙，但你不會說g0v挺曾柏瑜。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "為什麼不會有人說g0v挺曾柏瑜？你既然願意幫這個忙的話，就不代表你是挺他的嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不代表，因為我們用來幫忙那些東西是開放的——羅明才要用就拿去用——這是一點。
第二，它沒有排除性，就是曾柏瑜不是來競選總部，而是來黑客松提一個案，說願意拋棄掉什麼（著作權）之類的，這已經是一個標準程序。
所以大家會看到的是就是曾柏瑜這個人，不是作為立委候選人願意認識我們，在某一個角度來看，也不是變成立委落選人，就是單純建立了社會連帶，所以所有這些東西，我覺得他就是一個誰都不代表誰說話，所以甚至（參加黑客松的）曾柏瑜也不代表「曾柏瑜這個參選人」說話，你知道我的意思嗎？" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "我懂。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以「挺誰」已經是一個無意義的東西，因為後面沒有具體的個人，當你說g0v挺誰的時候，你後面還要還原到單一的人來，因為連這個挺的動作都不存在。
我們看到的是曾柏瑜來g0v黑客松提出「能不能架一個網站放政見到網路上？」這個東西歸結成「挺」是歸不到的，你沒有辦法把他歸結到「挺誰」上。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "你們會對這個特別敏感嗎？就是對於這個界線。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "滿敏感的。當然一部分也是因為後來發現只要有排除性，馬上就吵起來，因為沒有內外部之分，所以只要有人吵起來就大家都吵起來。" }, { "speaker": "蔣金", "speech": "有排除性會是什麼樣的情況？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好比像有人投稿（年會）沒有上，就去東森新聞雲投稿..." }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "我有聽 kirby，就說你們那個..." }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，就黑箱什麼的…我已經說了我不評論的，我也覺得那就這樣吧！你說有沒有排除性，是有排除性，因為真的時間就這麼長嘛！但是至少是我們空一個上午出來，他有空的話，他就自己有一個角落，我還是會幫他準備投影機之類的。
後來他是要去什麼慈濟還是哪裡有活動，所以反而不能來，只能報閃電講（lightning talk），我的意思是至少有溝通到，但是那個溝通到就是把涵容性重新講清楚，不然的話，乍看之下一看被退稿就會覺得那就是排除性，所以我們非常敏感，就是覺得每一次只要一出現看起來像排除性的東西，馬上就會開始吵起來。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "這個吵起來，反而自己就已經是把這一件事拿出來講？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，然後就會有人說為，為什麼年會不從頭到尾都是自訂議程算了？為什麼要議程組？要不要解散？那clkao也是說確實，未來也有可能，因為國外有些活動真的是這樣辦，兩整天全是自訂議程（unconference），一開始大家提案，想聽的人聽一聽就開始選講者了，這樣子也有，就是大家看習慣不習慣。
第二個是有沒有人要當坑主，有沒有人要籌備？說不定也有，說不定過二年就看得到... 我覺得這個是我呼應到我剛剛講的，就是我們自覺到那個排除性，然後知道不可能完全免除，但至少是一直在往免除的方向走。" }, { "speaker": "蔣金", "speech": "我知道，好像有提到不是價值上排除，而是有可能工具的限制。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！時間、空間、工具的限制。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "就你自己個人的話，你有覺得g0v還做得不好或者是缺點的地方嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你說這個模式嗎？" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想一下。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "或者我換一個方式問，因為g0v的出現真的帶來了很多耳目一新的東西，我覺得大家把g0v想得越來越偉大，g0v自己把自己定位在哪裡，或者是哪一些是你們覺得那一些真的不是我們可以做到，或者是那一些真的不是我們真的重點想做的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該這樣講，g0v的「不排除」是與任何社群都可以產生連帶，目前可能還沒有，但是未來一定可以有，然後什麼都發表。
這些東西是有一個起點的，就是啟蒙，也就是你在那之前沒有人做這樣的事情，我的意思是說沒有人有系統這樣做事情，但是啟蒙之後有一群一開始是很少數而且也是家境還可以、有零碎時間的人做這種事，那時候叫自然哲學，後來才慢慢出現科學、科學社群及同儕審閱（peer review）之類的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "到了1900年前後，你剛剛講的那一個動態就出現了，就出現了科學宗教，就是什麼賽先生、德先生，就是漢文化第一次翻進來的時候，是用一個我們叫做拜貨教（cargo cults）的那種方式在翻譯這一些名詞，那是很扯。
去看嚴復那個時期的東西，很像你在講的，也有覺得科學很偉大、科學什麼都可以做，但科學說穿了只是大家把自己的東西公開而且不反對別人重現，就是這樣而已，全部就是這樣。
所以，你要在上面加一堆拜貨教的東西是你的自由，我的意思是說，他不改變做科學的人就只是這樣做事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然後來因為計算機出現了、電腦出現了，科學跟技術沒有分那麼開，因為從你有一個想法到那個想法實際上產生影響，之間只隔幾毫秒。
在別的技術領域不是這樣，別的技術領域有非常多的工程，從有想法到你看到，已經50年過去了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但（在自由軟體社群裡）從有具體想法到你看到（發表），絕對不會超過1天，這是完全不一樣的。因為這樣的關係，這裡的科學社群跟技術社群就沒有像理論物理、實驗物理那樣，沒有像「理論程式設計」的分界。很多別的自然科學都有，但我們沒有。
所以對我們來講，理論跟實際是同一群人，所以不是說專門做程式理論的人（就不實際寫程式），只是說時間多放一點在這裡，但你做出來還是馬上有人可以拿出來用。
但這幾乎是魔法性的，就是「從你想到，到社會發生變化，沒有時間差」的這個東西是非常關鍵，你如果沒有這個的話，不要說g0v，整個我們剛剛講的那一大堆不特定的跨界組織形式都不存在，這個是關鍵。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在g0v被放一堆拜貨教的東西這件事情上，我還是想要回到那不過就是羅傑·培根（Roger Bacon）這些人做事情的方法到現在，從他們做到、我們看到，中間時間縮短，你如果要加入這個社群，還是用這一套方法來做事。
這套東西當然有力量，但它的力量完全取決於你進來做了什麼，這還是要承認，不然這一套方法本身不會出現力量。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "所以基本上只要做得出來，也沒有什麼限制？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "好的，不過這一題也不是我剛剛那一題的換句話說，就是你覺得g0v現在有什麼缺點嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得當然坑是填不完的，你看現在目前坑的分布，在藝術上的嘗試還比較少，在實體空間介入上，當然游知澔做了一次很好的示範（眾志成城 - 2015台北數位藝術節），可是也還不是完全由下而上，這裡面牽涉到很多...
另外，g0v的人口分布是以臺灣、北部居多，但是可用地沒辦法哪一天高興就去佔領一塊，這個比較困難。所以在實體的鏈結上當然是有，但比較是已經有實體的社團在那邊開會或者做活動，然後g0v的朋友幫忙直播或者是做逐字稿，那個就是媒體功能。這個媒體功能還沒有被實驗到「那我們覺得這樣做就好了」的程度，就是那個實作模式（best practice）我們都還在嘗試。
另外一個是跟既有的空間、既有的媒體、既有的什麼東西合作，就是 kirby 做的那些事情（零傳媒），現在當然也有整理出一些實作模式，但那個東西我會說是在研究的階段，並不是在開發的階段，開發的階段是大家就覺得實作模式是這樣，我們就可以找五十家媒體，每個都能用這樣的方式來協作，但目前還沒有到這樣。所以也不是什麼缺憾，就是說能用的這些技術都是這二、三年才有，還沒有那麼多時間把它弄熟，等到弄熟就可以做更多事。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "你主要是在講實體的鏈結的這一塊是指？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "往實體空間的，以及透過實體的媒體，不管是紙本的媒體或者是電視媒體、主流媒體，就是在實體空間能夠介入到人的方法。
媒體是一個，因為據說大家都有看電視機——雖然我沒有——但是據說很多人家裡有，或者是說實體的空間，到大家都看得到為止，這些目前還比較少。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "想要在這樣的空間裡面做什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像318的時候，那個空間可以做很多事，那開放空間，誰到那邊都可以做許多事，像游知澔有一個專案是大家都住在同一條船上，那一條船上隨便誰愛做什麼事就做什麼事，就是一個自我調控的生態圈之類的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為其實g0v後面核心去掉資通訊（ICT）的話，它的實體是開放空間（open space technology, OST），整套g0v的實體邏輯都是開放空間，在開放空間裡面我們引進很多別的元素，比如是非暴力溝通（Non-violent communication, NVC）或共識形成方法（Focused conversation method, FCM），可是那個是架在開放空間上。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有開放空間，這一些都架不上去，這個開放空間目前是在特定、實體的——黑客松、年會、小松，我們現在在這裡就是——但是你說它的規模每次有擴大嗎？目前還是以虛擬的部分去作規模擴大，然後把人帶到開放空間來，這個東西本身的規模化實作模式，我覺得還在找。" }, { "speaker": "蔣珮伊", "speech": "好，這樣應該差不多了，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不會，很高興聊了許多。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "顏理謙", "speech": "我們在8月號的雜誌上要做一個封面故事，講的是關於這一個時代的軟體工程師及寫程式的這些人，他們到底在做些什麼樣的事情、對臺灣有什麼影響。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好啊！所以你大概有多久時間？" }, { "speaker": "顏理謙", "speech": "我們大概半個小時，你方便嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然，完全是以你為主。" }, { "speaker": "顏理謙", "speech": "好的，好的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "然後你會錄音嗎？" }, { "speaker": "顏理謙", "speech": "對，我會錄音。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好，那就交給你了。然後等我一下，我看一下。你看得到我的白板嗎？" }, { "speaker": "顏理謙", "speech": "有。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好，OK，那就這樣。" }, { "speaker": "顏理謙", "speech": "對，那我們就一題一題來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第一個是關於務實可靠的工程師文化，你本來訪綱是一個是非題，就是說我同意不同意這樣子的看法，就是臺灣有務實、可靠的工程師文化？" }, { "speaker": "顏理謙", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "為什麼會想問這個？" }, { "speaker": "顏理謙", "speech": "因為正好她（蔡英文）提到這個問題，連帶讓我們想要做這個題目，我們想知道所謂她提到「工程師文化」到底是怎麼樣的一個文化。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以其實你們這個專題就是想問說這個文化到底是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "顏理謙", "speech": "對。然後再來她提到「務實可靠」這四個字是不是足以代表我們現在臺灣的工程師文化？以及這樣的「務實可靠文化」是不是足以帶領未來的產業轉型？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "OK，就三個部分。" }, { "speaker": "顏理謙", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在是非題上面，因為臺灣是一個有多元文化的地方，所以臺灣當然有這個文化，臺灣也有很多別的文化，蔡英文這一個前後文的話，她例如還提到完整的產業鏈、中小企業、創業文化、海洋經濟那事實上都是不太一樣的東西，所以我覺得把它作為五、六種她提到文化，甚至五、六百種之一的話，臺灣當然是有這樣的文化，所以只能是「是」，不太可能「不是」，所以比較是修辭性的問題。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "顏理謙", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你如果不知道就隨時打斷我。" }, { "speaker": "顏理謙", "speech": "瞭解。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一部分還好嗎？有什麼要追問的嗎？" }, { "speaker": "顏理謙", "speech": "這邊還OK。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好，繼續。" }, { "speaker": "顏理謙", "speech": "其實我們會想要問這個問題，還有另外一個原因，因為我們一般聽到「務實可靠」這四個字會聯想到是不是比如做事要一板一眼、遵循這樣的邏輯在做，這樣當然沒有不好，但是不是少了一些創意或創新思考的部分？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你剛剛提到的「一板一眼」事實上是所謂的同質可靠性，大家都遵循同一個標準流程，這如果你不需要跟別人通訊的話，那當然也許這是行得通的；但我剛剛說我們做資訊科學裡，做網路的是奠基在通訊上，只要是在同一個通訊有超過一個人環境的時候，其實這個同質的可靠性，你剛剛講的一板一眼其實是不可靠的，我們會說是脆弱（fragile）的。" }, { "speaker": "顏理謙", "speech": "瞭解。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "下一題的字面是現在很多的業界都以技術作為他們轉型的契機，但工程師卻很少被放在決策的高度，「決策的高度」的意思是什麼，可以多說一下嗎？" }, { "speaker": "顏理謙", "speech": "像我之前有採訪KKBox，他們是說他們的工程團隊在他們公司裡面所佔的角色與地位都是非常高的，所以就是轉型以技術為核心。我不曉得是不是所有的企業都是這樣的狀況，如果讓工程師站在企業的核心帶動整個公司轉型的話，是不是會比其他的公司更好？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以這邊聽起來的意思是，並不是完全以工程師的方式來治理，而是具有決策權或議程設定權，傳統上是董事長或總經理的位置，轉而讓工程師去參與，是不是這個意思？" }, { "speaker": "顏理謙", "speech": "對，沒錯。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想是這樣子的，我覺得當然本來在決策的這一個團隊裡面，本來就是盡可能多元不同訓練的人會最好，這包含不同的養成背景或訓練或社會階層的人。因為你越多元，你的使用者才能越多元，越同質就越無法反應實際上社會的狀況，所以我覺得工程師當然是多元裡面的一元。如果傳統上很缺乏工程師參與決策的企業，當然把工程師帶進去絕對有好處；反過來，如果已是工程師主導了，帶進一些不是工程師的想法也會有好處，所以我覺得重點在於多元性上面，這是一件事。" }, { "speaker": "顏理謙", "speech": "另外一個的話，想請教你就你的觀察，目前國內外有哪一個公司的做法足以作為臺灣企業參考的嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我不是很理解這個問題，臺灣那麼多企業，每一個企業能參考的當然都不一樣。" }, { "speaker": "顏理謙", "speech": "因為現在大家可能有些企業面臨他們想要轉型，但好像有一點轉不過來的感覺，除了剛剛提到KKBox之外，在你心目中，有沒有哪一家公司他們導入工程師、把他們拉到決策高度，這樣的做法還滿好的，可以作為一些想要轉型企業的參考？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為我覺得每一個產業別能夠參考的都完全不一樣，所以這個問題很難輕率地回答。" }, { "speaker": "顏理謙", "speech": "這邊OK了，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好，繼續。" }, { "speaker": "顏理謙", "speech": "對，或是專案外包的方式。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "哪一個是哪一個？微型化是專案外包？" }, { "speaker": "顏理謙", "speech": "對，虛擬化等於是在家上班，不受地理環境限制。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也就是我們叫「電傳勞動（telework）」的工作方式。好的。" }, { "speaker": "顏理謙", "speech": "這邊都OK。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "虛擬化就是「電傳勞動」，我覺得對工作者其實只有一個影響，也就是生活品質變好了，其實除此之外就沒有什麼別的影響，它就是讓大家生活品質變高了；但另外一個好處就是我覺得大家會有一個叫做「發生即典藏」。什麼是「發生即典藏」？如果我們二個今天採訪是面對面的話，我們還要記得把錄音機打開，可是因為我們現在是透過電傳視訊在見面，所以對我們來講，捕捉這個訊號其實沒有額外的成本，因為這個訊號我們本來就要產出了，只是因為典藏變得很容易，因為所有發生的事情都可以典藏的格式發生的，所以這回來到學習型組織這邊去。" }, { "speaker": "顏理謙", "speech": "OK。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那我們往下。" }, { "speaker": "顏理謙", "speech": "這個是最後一個問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我是覺得因為其實這已經限縮了，你把工程師直接限縮到軟體工程師去。" }, { "speaker": "顏理謙", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實軟體工程師是所有工程師裡面，最不像工程師的工程師。我們常常說軟體工程師是「凌空建造，憑空建造」（building in the thin air, from the thin air），我們做的東西完全沒有物理基礎之外，我們制作的材料也沒有物理基礎，完全只使用文字跟數學，不使用別的東西，而這二種東西都完全是符號。在任何別的工程領域，都要受地心引力、受物理法則、受材料等等的限制，只有軟體工程師除了運算速度受硬體限制之外，其他東西都不受限制。所以其實我不是很確定我要回答的，是一般的工程師人格特質，或是特別只講資訊軟體工程師的人格特質。" }, { "speaker": "顏理謙", "speech": "我們這邊比較著重在軟體工程師這一塊。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在軟體工程師上面，其實第一批最早軟體工程師大部分是數學家，像「computer」這個字本來其實講的是作為運算的人，並不是講電腦，而是後來機器做得特別好，才變成電腦。" }, { "speaker": "顏理謙", "speech": "會轉變成什麼樣子？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外想說明的是，我覺得反而不是說你先挑哪一些人適合學軟體工程，我的意思是幾乎任何人能夠聽說讀寫，基本上都能學會軟體工程。所謂當軟體工程師，可能就是你業餘的興趣，就像我們學吉他或學小提琴，裡面跑去演奏廳或組團的人，一百個人裡面有沒有一個人？但這不影響你每天花半小時彈吉他讓自己高興。我覺得從很多角度來看，軟體工程就是一種樂器，只是它的音符可能是文字跟數學，演奏出來的東西可能變成人互動的空間，但從我們在練習它的人的角度來講，跟它跟任何一種別的樂器並沒有什麼兩樣。" }, { "speaker": "顏理謙", "speech": "我有一個滿好奇的是，你剛剛說人格特質會改變，假設一個完全沒有接觸過程式設計的人，接觸之後會有什麼樣的改變？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "要看他本來對於文字跟數學這二件事情的附屬情感。" }, { "speaker": "顏理謙", "speech": "嗯，那這邊，我問題都差不多了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好，那這樣子也快40分鐘了，所以你會把錄音檔寄給我，對不對？" }, { "speaker": "顏理謙", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "然後我再把它轉文字給你。" }, { "speaker": "顏理謙", "speech": "好的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝你。" }, { "speaker": "顏理謙", "speech": "好，今天謝謝你。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好，掰掰。" }, { "speaker": "顏理謙", "speech": "掰掰。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "I’ll go ahead. Is it OK if I record from this end?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, of course." }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "Great. I’ll start by asking you if you could start by giving me a bit of a note about the political context in Taiwan, and then some background about how g0v and why it’s formed." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "How far back should I start? 1988 or...?" }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "Start with the beginnings of g0v and why it was formed. Don’t need to go into too much detail about the historic context in Taiwan." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The g0v community started at the end of 2012 by a bunch of hackers, and one of which is my very good friend, Chia-Liang Kao. They initially started this initiative to build a domain name g0v.tw, that provides an alternate shadow government website for every national ministry, so that it solves the discovery problem." }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "Interesting. I didn’t realize there was such a strong buy-in from government officials themselves. Interesting. Could you tell me a bit...what’s your role in the organization? Are you a volunteer? I know you are probably involved in lots of projects." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We’re all volunteers in g0v, it is not a formal organization. It’s just hackathons after hackathons. Anyone who shows up becomes a participant, and that’s about it." }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "Tell me a bit about hackathons -- how to organize them? I remember hearing that you have 100 to 600 people." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s correct, yeah." }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "A very large number of people. How do you go about organizing the skills, and how do you go about organizing people’s time? How do they work?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure. I’m not involved in organizing the larger hackathons — including the initial one. They are organized by a group of five to seven people now. It’s classic open space technology." }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "I want to also ask you about some of the projects I just discovered within the links and the video that you sent. There were two interesting things regarding informing voters." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure. They were both very well documented, so I would share my perspective on it. The voting one, which is vote.ly.g0v.tw meaning, the \"ly\" being the legislative, then being our parliament. It’s one of the g0v long running projects, and it started when the legislative system was not entirely open sourced." }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Great." }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "The other thing that I’d like to say is that, while mySociety has several similar websites, I think they don’t have as many visitors as g0v does." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right, the gamification is really our main contribution, not anything technical. We’ve made it into a game. That always works." }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "I’m obviously asking to know about the Sunflower movement, and how g0v affected the protest." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure." }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "I want to ask you specifically about if you could summarize the tech stack which the movement is using, and how they’ve been able to use it -- the movement." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s what Clay Shirky described as \"situational applications\". Every day we make applications in response to the demand of that day. Every day it’s a different technological stack. At the core, of course, there’s the parliament itself, industries around it, and because of that on the infrastructure level there needs to be electricity." }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "How did you use Loomio, because I understand there was probably about half million people coming from the streets? How did you use this tool to create great deliberation? How did you use the outputs from those Loomio groups to actually effect some change in parliament?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "While we did provide public WiFi to the occupiers, that was very late in the process. That was the last three days of the occupy. Most of the time, we had a very high-speed intranet, but not such a high-speed uplink as I explained." }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "I’ll get on little more about deliberation now. You mentioned in the beginning the consultations which you do in partnership with the government." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s true." }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "One of the things that we’re interested in is, particularly for Nesta, is how you reconcile the logic of deliberation with large groups and a lot of policy-making. Whatever issue we think about deliberating here, there’s no obvious solutions." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure. We have a two-day curriculum for this, which we train hundreds of public servants in. I can send you the whole curriculum. Just to summarize, the key point is that we work with the focused conversation method pioneered by some Canadians 10 years ago." }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "That’s interesting. Just to clarify, usually at the beginning of the consultation process, is that open to anyone? Does everyone know why you’re doing this consultation?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We identify the stakeholders that we know about. We send them invitation emails. We ask them to fill out the survey. They can recommend anonymously more stakeholders who may be interested." }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "It’s published so that you would see all of the consultations?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes. We also publish the Pol.is data for the reflection stage, that is the feeling stage, the second stage." }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "That was interesting. Is this applicable to everything, or do you think that there are issues which don’t benefit in public deliberation?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure, overly broad issues." }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "What about the idea of consensus? What do you make of the idea that deliberation sometimes leads people to become more polarized? Is that what your methodology specifically aims to try to prevent?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "People are pretty polarized as is. Otherwise, there won’t be controversial issues, right? Sometimes, deliberation, if the time frame is too short, it brings out the worst of people. It’s true. It happens." }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "Do you think consensus is desirable in all cases? You want to know when there’s agreement, but there may always be dissenting opinions. Is it really possible to convince everybody?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The technical term for the kind of consensus we want to reach is called rough consensus. Rough consensus meaning nobody is 100 percent happy, but people can build empathy for each other so that even though I may sacrifice a little bit, I understand that it’s better overall." }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "Is it difficult to keep people engaged over courses around three or four weeks?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s not. People generally find it a very interesting game to play." }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "Can you tell me something a little bit about the user interface of the tool, and how that encourages people to participate, and particularly how you can see views converging and diverging on the matrix?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Certainly. If you go to any Pol.is conversation, you see one sentiment of your fellow citizen. Of course, the first thing that you will see is whatever preparatory materials that we calculated to make it eye-catching for the first five seconds, and then provides just sufficient inform in the next 25 seconds." }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "Can you tell me a bit about how these online consultations improve the legitimacy of decision-making by the government ministry?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It improves the decisions made by civil servants. They would need to inform, that is to say provide relevant information and expert assistance. Whenever they get asked questions, they must answer within seven days." }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "Everyone can see the voting pattern, if they want to?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, of course. Everything is open source." }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "Has it any influence on the way in which the government then takes those decisions and acts on them?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, it’s very hard for them to ignore the consensus made this way. We had an election. There’s a new president, there’s a new cabinet, but whatever consensus we reached, it’s very hard for the new minister to say no, because it’s not the result of the previous ruling party." }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "It seems like public officials have found the g0v as neutral and worthy facilitator in this process. How do you think governments without active organizations, like g0v, might lay directives without this kind of active community?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s easy if they can find someone within the government structure who are not tied to one particular office, or ministry, or agency. The French has the Center of National Debate. At the moment they do it for construction development cases only." }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "It seems like there’s a really active community, and there’s a lot of people and there’s a lot of hunger for participation and activism within the planning context." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Mm-hmm." }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "Also one of the things which I find most impressive in the big context is you have a country, which is basically electrified, and you have all these amazing experiments, and you have the model in place for such an innovation to evolve." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That would be great. Another of our contributions, which I just sent to you, is what we call assistive civic technology. Meaning that, you mentioned people who are on Facebook or Twitter all the time and don’t have a fraction of the mindset to participate in the public space and so on." }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "That’s really interesting. Also, it would be great to have a copy of that. You said there was a kind of consultation curriculum." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes." }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "It’d be great if there’s a copy of that and have a look-through, just to see the methodology you just described in more detail, but also in terms of the practical advice you give the public officials, it sounds really quite interesting." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure. I’ve sent you a link to the curriculum and a brief memo." }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "There’s a lot more to ask you. Let’s say a city wants to do something similar, in terms of encouraging greater public outreach and civic engagement, what are the practical lessons that you would suggest, and what are the main pitfalls that you would argue need to be avoided?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When you say a city that wants to work, do you mean the mayor, the public servants, or the council?" }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "Let’s say, take the lessons from the UK, it’s likely a ministry, or a ministerial select committee, or something a bit of a national level." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In two words: Engage early." }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "In a sense, it’s really important that participants have agenda-setting power." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Mm-hmm." }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "They set the priorities for discussions, set the agenda for discussion." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes. In open multi-stakeholderism, it never works if the agenda-setting is just late-stage, or is fake, or something like that." }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "That makes a lot of sense in the UK, since in the UK case we did have something called the public reading stage, which was where the draft is going out, and then it was read to the public, but they weren’t relating." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The zero option is not an option at that stage, not a real option, so people of course wouldn’t contribute their time, because they don’t get symmetric attention for their time." }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "That’s great. Thank you, Audrey. I’m really appreciative of your time. You guys have got a lot of work to do in the next few weeks, so good luck. I will message you if we do write the blog about some of the stuff that we talked about, and I’ll send it to you first." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Thank you. It’s fun, so we’ll keep it up." }, { "speaker": "Theo Bass", "speech": "OK, bye." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Cheers." } ]

[ { "speaker": "Leila Collins", "speech": "Tell me a bit about yourself — how do you get into this community of civic tech and open data?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I started working with internet tech since 1993, initially with Gopher and then with World Wide Web invited in 1994–95 switched to it. I started a few internet startups and worked as a web tech entrepreneur & also with free software movement for 20 years, retired in 2013, and now works full-time on civic tech as a hobby." }, { "speaker": "Leila Collins", "speech": "Does most of your work focus in Taiwan?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Most of my projects, such as the EtherCalc spreadsheet, and contributions to SayIt/Hackpad/Sandstorm etc., are international in nature." }, { "speaker": "Leila Collins", "speech": "Tell me a bit about what was the problem you were addressing in Taiwan. What was the story of Uber in Taiwan? What was the concern Taipei had? The book needs to address in the format of: problem, solution, and results." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Certainly. The write-up on http://www.shareable.net/blog/open-data-hactivists-help-taipei-craft-regulatory-response-to-uber covered the “problem” part pretty well." }, { "speaker": "Leila Collins", "speech": "Would you like to expand on the decisions?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Ratified consensus 1 — Private cars dispatched through a digital platform should be legal. Cars dispatched through an app should not need to be painted yellow. That said, only taxis painted yellow can pick people up off the street." }, { "speaker": "Leila Collins", "speech": "How can ridesharing be profitable in under-served areas?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "For example, one can use existing forums like LINE or Facebook Messenger to make ride-planning accessible. Through this, and with careful application of differential privacy methods, you can share traffic patterns and allocate the rides better." }, { "speaker": "Leila Collins", "speech": "Are there other ratified plans that are not part of the vTaiwan consensus?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes. The new Administration came up with three tactics to convert UberX drivers to the legal local alternatives." }, { "speaker": "Leila Collins", "speech": "Do you think these tactics will work?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Taken alone, I think none of the three tactics would work by itself — either in Taiwan or in other countries — because the Uber App can just keep operating without being a local company." }, { "speaker": "Leila Collins", "speech": "Are there anything from the Taiwan experience that you would like to share with other cities?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We made it a national issue, not just a city issue." } ]

[ { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "Ok. Let me start. You describe yourself as a \"conservative anarchist\", and let’s start off about what that means." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure. The term \"anarchist\" has a well-defined meaning, meaning nations and countries are very useful illusions, but they’re not always a useful. So we just use it where it’s good to use, and try not to pay too much attention into it where it isn’t." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I guess your are interested in the \"conservative\" part?" }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "I’m interested in both the conservative and anarchist parts, and how they are linked together, actually." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Well, \"conservative\" means very simply that there is a large part of existing ways of how people work on the Internet that’s worth keeping. Conservation to me means keeping what works and try not to install too drastic a change in circumstances. I guess the two words linked together, to me, means to keep what always had worked in the Internet culture and try to bring it gradually to fuse with the rest of society." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "One of the things that you’re involved in and improving the workings of government. What do you say, g-0-v? What is it?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Gov-zero (g0v) is a assembly of sorts, in a few loosely coupled bits of spaces. We have hackathons every month and it’s a bunch of — about 5000 by now — designers, hackers, activists, coders, scholars, who meet every now and then." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The only thing we have in common is that a project we do are in the commons, meaning that we relinquish most of our copyright. We work most on this shadow government website called g0v.tw, that basically takes an existing government agency — like the environment agency would be the env.gov.tw — so that anybody can just change in the browser, from \"O\" to zero, like env.g0v.tw, and get into the zero counterpart." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "And what has this achieved, or what are you trying to achieve?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Well basically presenting you the same information as the government does, but in a much more interactive, visualized, open data fashion, and then offer a way for people to participate. For example in our budget visualization, people are invited to look into one specific part of the city budget or at a national budget and have a real discussion with the civil servants on it." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "There’s a real discussion with the civil servants." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s correct." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "And so the government is complicit and co-operative with your doing, right?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, that’s the part where we relinquish our copyright comes in, because then the government can just cherry pick the pieces that they find useful. For example, the original national budget visualization the g0v people did in late 2012, is now being adopted by six different cities as a way to visualise their budget and have a conversation was their citizens." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "Have you any evidence — I mean, you know one of the concerns is \"clicktivism\" — Have you any evidence that this actually increased people’s engagement in the process?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "\"Clickvism\" usually refers to people who would spend maybe one to ten seconds, like that time you require for a click to interact." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But I think the gap between clicktivism and hacktivism (which requires almost full-time attention) was an arbitrary distinction. What the g0v people is doing, is to build engagement at levels of maybe one minute, maybe one hour, maybe three hours and so on. So everybody can find their useful way of engagement. So yes, we’ve seen a lot of conversions from people who contribute donly a few seconds, to two hours or maybe a few days a month." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "I suppose, more to the point: Have you any evidence that you’re engaging people previously uninterested in democratic participation?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Certainly. For example one of the g0v-facilitated discussions was how the Taipei city — Taiwan’s capital city — distributed its social housing to their people in socially disadvantaged groups. So disaster victims, aborigines, homeless, and mentally and physically handicapped people. So we know as a fact they were not \"clicktivists\", so to speak, and our work is mostly bringing digital tools to them, instead of letting them only participate online. The point is that they would be able to build empathy and consensus, by having those interactions recorded and replayed and summarized over a series of deliberations." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "You’re able to do this, because as far as I can understand it, you were a computer prodigy? You left school at 12 to code, at 15 you had your own start-up, you were into the world wide web actually as soon as it was invented if not before. You are now retired and can effectively do what you like, have I got that right?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s exactly correct." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "And you retired at the age of 33." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah. I found a series of companies, and partnered and sold some companies; it’s just standard Silicon Valley entrepreneurship." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "So you were a prodigy, right?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That would be correct." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "That would be correct. I mean how do you get into it so early? How were you able to leave school at 12, how were you able to see the future and something that actually wasn’t invented at that exact point?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Well I think it was due to the digital equality program the Taiwan government did when I was 12, to make sure that everybody — even the less connected areas — must have affordable ADSL lines for Internet download. I think I was fortunate in that the first web sites that I ran into, was for example the Gutenberg project, which was a digitisation of all the books that fell out of copyright. I learned mostly from the classics that I read online." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "You know, one of the one of the concerns about the Internet, with sites like Facebook, Twitter, etc, is that far from enhancing the quality of civil society — we just talked about getting people engaged in the budget discussion, but in general — far from enhancing the quality of civil society, it lets people get stuck with their own interest groups with their own prejudices, in general. Can you see a way through that?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Certainly. Facebook is sort of in its own league, as their social media is trying to encompass all modes of media and try to basically let people stay on it forever, using machine learning algorithms to tailor-made itself into the kind of media that someone craves — not necessarily needs. So yes, I think outside of Facebook, there’s a lot of different ways: A lot of different ways to build interactions and social sites to encourage people to form a consensus through empathy, instead of just spending so much time on the same arguments over and again. So yes there is a lot of ways out of it." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "How do you do that? How do you encourage people to see the other side of the argument?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "For example one could install this browser plug-in called \"Facebook feed eradicator\". And once you install the plug-in, the social feed goes away from the Facebook website — you can still use its other functions." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In other modes, we also buy Facebook advertise meant to take people out of Facebook, saying that \"maybe you can have your discussions elsewhere, where it has a binding effect on the government\" — either state or a national level. Most people would find this motivation enough." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "What are you doing with Uber? It is controversial around the world. New Zealand has issues with Uber, the government says it’s not playing by the rules and we’re thinking about banning it. I don’t know what the status is in Taiwan, but you’ve done some interesting experiments, with open source software and the Internet, to try to bring people together on that issue, haven’t you?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah. We were sending an interactive online survey, that brings both the legal Uber drivers (UberBlack) and the not-so-legal Uber drivers (UberX) together, along with existing taxi drivers and scholars and policymakers, into a four week interactive discussion." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "People were very split in the first week, and we can visually picture the split, because their groups were dispersed in four corners in a two-dimensional graph." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Over the four weeks, as they try to convince each other, they gradually fuse in the middle, and we basically take the points which more than 80 percent people have consensus, and use that as our negotiation points with Uber." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "So what’s the outcome?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There’s quite a few outcomes. The government pledged to ratify our consensus in a new regulation, slated maybe a week or two weeks from now. It’s basically saying, as long as they register locally as a fleet,as long as it pay taxes, we’re willing to have a different kind of taxi that is not hailed on the street, but through an App." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But the taxi drivers for this new kind of taxi must be protected in the same way the normal employees are. And we also encourage local co-ops to form this kind of App-dispatched taxi fleets to serve under-served areas." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "I don’t understand how the existing taxi drivers can be protected under such a system." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Well, they could join such a fleet. The idea is that existing taxi drivers are still having a monopoly of hailing on the street; and they can also join those dispatch systems, while the Uber drivers would be restricted to only an App-based dispatch system." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "And the taxi drivers happy with this?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Well the thing is that, when we had a deliberation, Uber was only operating in Taipei City, and the drivers were reasonably happy with this compromise. But Uber has since expanded to other cities, now we may have to do the same deliberations in other cities as well." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "You know, when you have that kind of debate online, what is to stop interest groups or stakeholders from loading the debate, stacking the participants and distorting the outcome?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Well, the idea is that, for example in the Uber case, we had two groups identified by a machine-learning program. It’s open data, and presented to everybody. There are roughly 60 per cent for legalization of Uber, and 40 percent for outright banning Uber." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Our formula is: To form a binding consensus. It has to cross the threshold to convince 80 percent of people, which is calculated by the 60 percent the majority group, plus half of the minority group." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "For other cases like online sales of alcohol, we have a 80/20 split, so the threshold would be 90 percent. No matter how many people you mobilize to the majority group, you still have to convince over half of the minority." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "And are you suggesting that, what the government is putting in place in a couple weeks time — the proposal — that would not have happened had this exercise not taken place?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Well it would take longer, I think. Because it’s not the consensus themselves, it is the process that brings the previously opposing or even very violent parties together, so that they could agree to a compromise." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So it’s not that the regulation would not happen without this process, is that it would have a much harder time to convince people that this is where we are going forward." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "And is that is that because you’ve realistically included people in the plan, or is it that you’ve made people feel as if they’d been included? Because that’s two different things, isn’t it?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s a little bit of both, because what we do is not human intervention during the deliberation; it’s just providing a safe space where people can see each other’s — your Facebook friend’s or Twitter friend’s — stance, on this kind of matter." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So it’s up to the people to mobilize, to convince, to somehow rally, or to come to a consensus. What we do is provide a space that is — unlike Facebook — trying to highlight the things that people have consensus on. So I would say a little bit of both." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "What is a \"civic hacker\"?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Well, a hacker is someone who makes new rules out of new situations, instead of trying to retrofit old rules to new situations. A civic hacker is just someone who does this to the public sphere." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "In 2014, you had a big year in Taiwan. You had big social protest, the Sunflowers movement, which as far as I can gather was against the ratification of a trade treaty with china. And you had the occupation of Parliament. I think that you found that very interesting, in terms of what civic hacking could achieve. Could you tell me what happened?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Certainly. So the short of it is very simple. There’s a bunch of students who didn’t like the way that a Legislative Yuan — that’s our Parliament — refused to debate the treaty with Beijing, because their interpretation of constitution at the time was that Beijing is a domestic city of Taiwan, and \"domestic agreements\" doesn’t need legislative oversight." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So they occupied the Parliament. Instead of just demonstrating and protesting, they were demonstrating a different kind of consensus-making deliberation, by going over the suggested trade deal, one line by one line, and have all the people — half million people on the street — participate in this kind of deliberation." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Because of the help of g0v civic hackers, we have made sure that every corner of the occupied area was live-broadcasted online, transcribed, with a real-time translation and logistics team, so it became a safe space where rumors and violence have no place to expand." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In this kind of space, people gradually found each other — people who thought they were in different ideological camps — they cross pollinate with each other, because every day starts with a recap of what got discussed, what reached consensus in the previous day." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The meetings and the deliberations on the street were digitized in such a manner, and this is the first large-scale demonstration that Taiwan has seen, for this kind of deliberative democracy." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "And what was the outcome?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The outcome was that the Parliament — the head of Parliament — agreed that it’s probably not a good idea to ram through the trade agreement the way it were. So the outcome is the occupiers got their demands met. But the other demand, which is have a bottom-up constitutional convention, that is still in the works." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "And so you’re suggesting that, putting it online and having everybody see and be seen in some way — it moderates the dialogue?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That is exactly the case, yes." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "And there was a \"1985\" movement, in which you were involved. What is that movement?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Well, I wasn’t so much directly involved back then. But it was due to a Ministry of Defence covering up of a certain accidental death of a soldier." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "But the 1985 doesn’t refer to the year right? It refers to the help line number." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That is correct." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "And so this was a kind of a whistling-blowing exercise?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It is, and it prompted a quarter million people to the street. I wasn’t involved back then actually, I was involved in the collaborative document they created. Because that was a flash mob, really, by people who were not activist organizers before, so they collaborated on a Google Doc to document every step of the way, basically chronicling a DIY kit of running a quarter-million people movement in the street would be like. So I was mostly involved in chronicling and improving the technologies; we iterated our technologies quite a bit between that protest and a few months later, the Sunflower movement." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "Can you clarify for me what the protest was about?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You mean the 1985 protest?" }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "Yes." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Essentially, it’s an \"accidental death\" of a certain soldier. When people asked what exactly happened, all the CCTVs — the camera recordings — mysteriously disappeared." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So it was basically saying all these cases, which was tried in a military court due to a glitch in our legal system, must be tried in the civil court and with due process. That demand was also met." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "In the long term, do you see what you were doing growing? Or will it always be for activists, and in someway a minority activity?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Well, we have to qualify what is it that I am doing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I mean, listening, scalable listening, and building tools for scalable listening? I think that is a majority, that is what most people would want. And in fact they do jump on it when there are better tools for doing so." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "You know, if most people wanted to listen constructively, then you wouldn’t have to do what you doing. You know what I mean? Surely most people don’t." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "I mean, this is why Donald Trump is able to run for the president, because an awful lot of people don’t want to listen constructively — they just want to shout at each other." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Well, I don’t actually think so..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Before television and radio, there wasn’t a way for people to speak to millions of people, either; it was just one-to-one speaking via telephones at a time, and the society was structured around that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I think it’s just we had the technologies for speaking to millions before we had the technology to listen to millions, that made our current political and media situation like this. Once they become symmetrical, I think it would restore some of the early balance." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "Going back to the original question of what a conservative anarchist is. You describe yourself, I think, as a proponent of \"individual anarchism\". How does — how is that — what does that mean?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Well it means several things. For example, when I was just falling asleep last night, I was wearing this Oculus Rift virtual reality goggles, and looking at the Earth from a satellite of Pluto." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It has a profound psychological effect, to look at the Earth and its surrounding stars and systems like that. And once that becomes my personal reality, existing political divisions have very little effect on my mind. I think that’s what \"individual anarchism\" means to me, personally." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "I’m wondering how that’s compatible with activism. Activism implies that you want to change a system; individual anarchism implies that the system doesn’t matter because you’ve got your own thing going on." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Well, If I want to listen to you, and say if our Skype connection had a glitch at this moment, would I not want to fix it? If I were to fix that, it’s not me wanting to \"change the Internet\", nor to \"change Skype as an application\" — is just to further the goal of me wanting to listen to you." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "I don’t understand." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Ok. What I’m trying to say is that the natural circumstances for me is to have my full attunement, full attention, when I try to listen to somebody or have somebody else listen to me." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The system for that — our existing language and so on — is pretty good for this purpose. But there are, of course, time and space constraints when someone in Taiwan wants to speak with somebody in New Zealand." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Technology for me is — if we are to change the system — it’s just to make up for the time and space differences. It’s not that we have anything against the existing system, we’re just to restore it to its natural circumstances." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "Right. So you’re not actually trying to change the system. You think that if people listen, and talk, and listen, that’s... that’s enough?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes. That’s plenty." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "It seems a kind of moderate aim, given the somewhat grandiose claims for what the Internet could do for the world." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah. I’m never too much into grandiose claims — I don’t think they have much effect." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "It’s very good to talk to you. I look forward to seeing you in New Zealand." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I’m looking forward to visit as well." }, { "speaker": "Kim Hill", "speech": "Good. Bye." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Bye." } ]

[ { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "好的，讓我們現在來歡迎唐鳳！來，我們跟唐鳳招招手。" }, { "speaker": "大家", "speech": "嗨～（招手貌）" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "唐鳳你好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家好。" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "你好，我是「青春發言人」的伃婷，你也可以叫我Judy。" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "最開始想要請問一下唐鳳，你可不可以用簡短、小學生可以理解的方式說明一下，為什麼這一次想要採用這一次VR虛擬實境的方式進行對談？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好啊！其實很簡單的想法，就是說我現在人在巴黎，那我們用一般像Skype或者是Facetime的這種方式，其實都沒有辦法一次呈現六、七個人的影像，然後還有這麼好的通訊品質。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "最一開始的想法就是把我自己的樣子、我的聲音，我的所有這些東西都先傳到大家的電腦裡，我們只需要把我正在講的話，將我頭、手的位置傳過來就好了，用最一般家用的網路也可以讓非常多的人一起，好像面對面一樣彼此說話，這是最一開始、最基本的想法。" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "瞭解，謝謝，我們確實可以感受到唐鳳好像真的人展現在我們的面前。" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "接下來有幾個問題想要請教你，首先我們先讓喆曦來問。" }, { "speaker": "吳喆曦", "speech": "你好，我是中山國中一年級的喆曦。我想要問你的是，為什麼當初會想要當駭客？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你是Schiller嗎？" }, { "speaker": "吳喆曦", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "很高興可以跟你聊天。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「駭客（hacker）」這個字在英文裡面本來的意思是，可以自己運用工具，碰到新情況時能夠打造新工具的人，所以要成為hacker，就要先對於現有的規則、現有的系統非常非常地熟悉，等到你很熟悉一個系統之後，通常有二條路可以走。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一個是你想出一套更好的系統，或你把這個系統改作成你覺得更適合人使用，這是創造性的「hacker」，這是我的專長。因為當時我覺得網際網路有很多可以幫忙的地方，所以才會走上這樣一條路。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一條路不是創造新的系統，而是找到現在這個系統的漏洞，找到漏洞之後，如果幫忙把它補起來，我們這叫做「白色帽子的hacker」；但如果你是侵入它，為了自己的利益去做一些事，同樣是對漏洞這一些動作，我們叫做「黑色帽子的hacker」。不管是白帽或者是黑帽，資訊安全或漏洞不是我的專業。我的目的一開始是先瞭解這個系統，看能不能創造更好的系統或應用出來，就是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "吳喆曦", "speech": "謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "其實現在有很多人會稱唐鳳你為網路天才，喆曦是不是有問題想問？" }, { "speaker": "吳喆曦", "speech": "對，就是大家認為你是天才，你自己認為自己是天才嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「天才」這一個字其實很晚才有，但是在三國（大概西元二百多年）的時候，用來形容一個人認知功能很好，但其實在當時並沒有什麼現在社會賦予它的意思即造神的意思，而且當時被叫做「天才」的人（張裕）其實我們現在也不是很記得了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我覺得這就還好，就是社會上覺得我可能學事情比較快一點，或想事情比較快一點，但我覺得跟別的東西都沒有什麼關係，就這樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們要換一位同學嗎？" }, { "speaker": "旁人", "speech": "不要低頭。" }, { "speaker": "吳喆曦", "speech": "我的頭是抬起來的。" }, { "speaker": "旁人", "speech": "問問題的時候要再大聲一點，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "吳喆曦", "speech": "我是抬頭的。" }, { "speaker": "旁人", "speech": "好，可以繼續，問問題的人可以繼續。" }, { "speaker": "吳喆曦", "speech": "等一下，等一下。" }, { "speaker": "旁人", "speech": "你們講話的時候要有一些手勢，可以動一動。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有，現在看很清楚，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "葉庭瑄", "speech": "那剛才小曦有提到關於天才的問題，就是我有聽說您就是小時候因為特別聰明，跟旁人不一樣，所以有遭到霸凌這樣的情形，很多人收受霸凌後個性變成退縮，會有攻擊性，但您好像沒有這樣的特質。請問您是怎麼走出那樣的陰影，而且還希望讓社會變得更好？" }, { "speaker": "葉庭瑄", "speech": "我忘了剛剛自我介紹，我是北一女中高三的葉庭瑄。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "Tina？" }, { "speaker": "葉庭瑄", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以你剛剛的問題大概就是說被霸凌的經驗之後，是怎麼樣走出來的？" }, { "speaker": "葉庭瑄", "speech": "嗯。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想很重要的就是，除了霸凌或者旁觀或者我們說的加害、被害、拯救這一些角色之外，其實在當年有很多老師他們默默地陪著我，他也不會去說欺負我的人一定是壞人，也不會覺得被欺負的人一定很可憐，也不會覺得一定要誰跳下來馬上去拯救他；反過來講，就是那一些老師們會一一跟我說明說是哪樣子的心理，讓大家會變成會霸凌別人的人，那一些心理的後面會是什麼樣想法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我慢慢可以瞭解那一些想法之後，其實就不會覺得那麼受傷了，然後也會覺得其實有時候不是他們個人，而是在那樣一個高度競爭的環境裡面，人就會被壓力變成那樣子。所以我們應該要解決的是環境問題，而不是覺得誰一定是壞人，大概是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "瞭解。禾于是不是也有一個類似的問題要請教唐鳳？" }, { "speaker": "李禾于", "speech": "唐鳳你好，我是中山女高一年級的李禾于，我叫Nana。" }, { "speaker": "李禾于", "speech": "在上禮拜9月3日的年金改革遊行，網路上面的謠傳說要關掉手機定位，不然你會監控那些公務人員，因為你以後要當政務委員，然後你就會把那一些有參加遊行的人的名單回報給蔡政府。" }, { "speaker": "李禾于", "speech": "像我們高中生也會有「黑特八校」，像這樣子匿名hater別人的版，大家也很害怕會被hate。你覺得如果青少年面對這樣的問題，要怎麼面對？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這是很好的問題，那其實這是二個不同的問題：" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一個是大家在和平地集會、遊行的時候，其實你在街上去集會、遊行，臺灣是一個民主的地方，大家覺得和平的集會、遊行不應該會被秋後算帳，這是非常重要的一件事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你出現在街上其實也會被人家認出來，所以其實大家恐懼的不一定是定位或不一定是網路，大家恐懼的是──我現在出現在遊行的場合，會不會被秋後算帳？這一件事情就是民主制度本身的信心。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "臺灣花了非常久的歷史，接近一百年的歷史，才讓大家覺得上街遊行時，不用擔心會被秋後算帳，我覺得這一個感覺只要能夠持續下去，我們讓大家越來越相信在網際網路上表達自己的意見、集會、結社，在Facebook或其他的地方開社團，不會遭到政府機器的這種秋後算帳，我覺得這個才是最重要的，而不是特定的技術，我自己當然不會做這種事情，這是一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一件事就是你說被「hate」，就是大家覺得找出一些你沒有辦法辯解或讓你覺得很不舒服的一些精神攻擊。對於這一件事，我覺得最重要的是旁觀者的那一個角色，一般來講我們在街上如果看到一個人正在羞辱另外一個人，我們不會袖手旁觀，我們至少會用表情、手勢讓大家知道說有人在看，你不能這樣子欺負一個人，但是在網路上大家要慢慢建立一個習慣，就是說如果有人正在羞辱或攻擊別人的時候，你可以不要袖手旁觀，你可以說：「我在看、你這樣做，太過分了」，或甚至說：「這不是私人的空間，這是公開的空間」，請大家知道說有這樣的事情在發生。這就好像街上碰到這樣的事情，拿出手機來好像要拍照的姿勢，有時候對方就會收斂一點，這一些都是我們要慢慢練習的。" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "瞭解，謝謝唐鳳。" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "接下來10月唐鳳就即將上任政務委員了，對不對？這邊現場年紀最小的喬丰針對政務委員有一些問題想要問。" }, { "speaker": "喬丰", "speech": "唐鳳你好，我是銘傳國小六年級的Joseph。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你好。" }, { "speaker": "喬丰", "speech": "請問一下，政務委員是做什麼事情？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在政府裡面每一件事情有一個部或者一個會來做，在中央政府裡面關於勞動的就是勞動部、關於經濟的就是經濟部、關於財政的就是財政部，每一個部有一個部長負責做這一個部相關事情的決策。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是有些事情不是一個部或一個會的事情，像虛擬實境要怎麼樣應用在開放政府上，這種事情就不是單一部會的事情，有時候要牽涉到三、四個不同的部會，所以政務委員就是部長的同事，我接下來的工作就是在有二、三個部會都對同一件事情想要有貢獻的時候，跟這二、三個部會坐下來好好協調，去決定這一件事是你做、這一件事是他做，就不會做重複的事情，也不會有事情該做而沒有人做，是這樣的一種協調功能。" }, { "speaker": "旁人", "speech": "對不起打斷大家一下，坐在位置上的同學都可以動你們的身體，你想要幹麻都可以移動，只要不要影響大家就好。" }, { "speaker": "旁人", "speech": "輪到你的時候要揮揮手或者是舉個手，就像3D世界裡面大家才看得出來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有，看得到。" }, { "speaker": "大家", "speech": "（試揮手）" }, { "speaker": "旁人", "speech": "動作大一點。再提醒一下，360度的影像有幫我們錄影嗎？可以幫我問一下。" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "唐鳳，不好意思，稍微問一下，請問360度的畫面你有幫我們錄嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有，我這邊一直都有在錄，就是我自己的臉還有從我看起來你們的樣子。" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "好，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "旁人", "speech": "繼續，大家要記得揮手、舉手。" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "好。那Joseph還有問題要接著問，對不對？" }, { "speaker": "喬丰", "speech": "請問你接下來進入政府會做什麼事？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我第一件事會做的事情是把我自己的辦公室布置好，我的辦公室裡面會有跟你們用的一樣一套設備，讓我可以在辦公室裡面就跟其他地方或其他國家的朋友一起開會。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那接下來我會做的事情就是，把我們之前正在討論到一半的、很多關於虛擬世界一些數位相關政策，坐下來跟每一個部會的首長聊一聊說哪一些事情是目前正在做的、做到哪裡，哪一些事情需要民間的意見，我幫忙規劃一些平台，讓大家可以聽到民間意見，也讓民間可以看到政府現在正在做什麼、做到什麼程度，大概是這二件事。" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "瞭解。" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "像唐鳳從小就展露很多天份，從小就很聰明，其實Joseph也是資優班的同學，對不對？" }, { "speaker": "喬丰", "speech": "（點頭）" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "Joseph是不是也想要請問一下唐鳳？" }, { "speaker": "喬丰", "speech": "我在資優班的時候，班上哪一件事做不好，我很討厭別人說：「你是資優班的，你做不好，怎麼可以做不好，你是資優班的耶」。請問你：別人都說你是天才，你進了政府以後，做事會不會有壓力？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該還好。因為我們做事情，像今天這樣的採訪就是在做研究、在做實驗，我們做研究的人，最重要的事情是要對自己誠實，如果你做了九次實驗都失敗、一次成功，你把那九次失敗的過程發表出來，對別人的幫助可能還比你發表第十次來得大，因為大家就可以知道你要調整什麼因素，才不會重蹈覆轍。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我每一次進去做的實驗或著示範，我對自己的要求就是把它很詳細地記下來，記下來之後交給公眾檢視，裡面做得不好部分、可以更好的部分，那就請大家來幫忙一起把它做得更好，這就是我很喜歡的一個歌手叫做「Leonard Cohen」，他說：「萬事萬物都有缺口，缺口就是光的入口」的想法。" }, { "speaker": "廖宸育", "speech": "唐鳳。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有看到你在揮手。" }, { "speaker": "廖宸育", "speech": "唐鳳，我是來自宜蘭的自學生，我叫Vito，今年高中三年級。" }, { "speaker": "廖宸育", "speech": "我有一個關於政務委員旁支的一個小問題，當你在註冊政務委員身份的時候，在表上的性別你是註冊「無性別」，對我來講，我覺得一個人是男生、是女生，其實並不需要特別向別人宣稱。你在寫「無性別」時，你的用意及目的是什麼？可以方便說一下嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "OK啊！你知道南非嗎？以前南非的白人跟黑人是分開住的，不能上一樣的學校，在曼德拉之前，他們有過過這樣的一種狀況，如果你去當時的南非玩，對方說「我是黑人，他是白人，這不是很清楚嗎？為什麼你要特別說你既不是黑人，也不是白人？」你會覺得需要好好溝通，對不對？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是說除了黑人跟白人之外，其實也有別種人，大概是這樣一種想法。" }, { "speaker": "廖宸育", "speech": "好，謝謝，謝謝唐鳳。" }, { "speaker": "吳喆曦", "speech": "唐鳳，那請問您為什麼要變性？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我其實沒有變性啊，我一直都是我自己的樣子啊！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果要做改變的話…怎麼講？如果你去南非，然後對方說你一定要勾你是黑人或白人，你才能入境，那你就勉強勾了一個黑人或白人。接下來你就當然會希望他們的法院去承認還有黃種人，大概是這樣的想法。" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "謝謝。其實關於未來媒體，會不會未來科技的發展，比如現在用的VR或是AR等等，大家其實也都滿有興趣的，禾于有一些問題就想要請教一下唐鳳，對不對？" }, { "speaker": "李禾于", "speech": "我高二想要填三類組念生化科技，然後這科系就是要做很多實驗，就會做很多動物實驗，比如：有一次生物老師跟我們說他們實驗室之前要做老鼠實驗時犧牲老鼠，就很繪聲繪影地描述他們怎麼殺死的，大家都覺得很殘忍。現在科技這麼發達，現在還有虛擬實境這種東西，你覺得未來有沒有可能科技可以發展到取代動物實驗？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實不需要未來，現在就已經很多類似的計畫。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我自己有試著玩過的叫做「OpenWorm」，「Open」就是「開放」、「Worm」就是「蟲」，「OpenWorm」這個計畫就是把秀麗隱桿線蟲裡，九百五十九個細胞、三百零二個神經元這些全部都在電腦裡面用軟體定義，所以可以用VR實際去模擬一個線蟲的生活方式。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個計畫是開放的，意思是你自己也可以去貢獻，幫忙它做得更好。我們目前的硬體只能做到像線蟲，還沒有做完；但隨著硬體跟軟體越來越發達，我們可以模擬越來越複雜的生物行為。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們就是需要像你這樣的研究員，覺得我們不能一直使用現在可能還是必要的，但未來可以改善的這種動物實驗，我們才能投入更多、更有趣的想法，這一種模擬或運算的生物學上面，大概是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "李禾于", "speech": "謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "瞭解，所以未來科技其實對社會也滿多幫助的。" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "像今天我們現場也有三位高中的學生，對於高中生涯選擇等等有很多問題想要請教唐鳳，是不是就讓庭瑄先來？" }, { "speaker": "葉庭瑄", "speech": "現在高中生常面臨到的問題是，明明就要考大學，但卻不知道自己喜歡什麼科系或是自己喜歡的科系，因自己的能力而沒有辦法去念。你如何在十六歲這麼年輕的年紀就知道自己想做的事情是什麼，也具備了足夠的實力去實踐你的夢想？謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我十五歲的時候是網際網路最重要的應用，叫做「全球資訊網（World Wide Web）」，在臺灣開始很普及的時候。「World Wide Web」像現在用瀏覽器打開網頁，在當時是一個全新的東西，你可以從一個人的研究連到另外一個人的研究。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我在剛連上全球資訊網的時候，發現大部分的研究人員在關注的題目課本上都沒有寫，有些課本上寫的東西其實已經被證明不完全是這樣，大概有十年左右的差距。所以我就自己寫email把我的問題去問這一些研究者，問說：「我們課本上不是這樣寫的，那你說做出這樣，你具體怎麼做的？我可不可以幫忙？」大家都很願意我幫忙，他其實不知道我十四歲或十五歲，只是覺得有人關心他的研究，他很開心。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也是因為這樣，我才覺得學校也許是用來教朋友、用來認識老師們、用來如果我寫了一些東西可以跟人們分享，但不是用來看課本，因為課本比起網路上的知識來講，在當時已經是十年左右的差距，我想這個是最主要的原因。" }, { "speaker": "廖宸育", "speech": "唐鳳（舉手貌），我想問一個關於生涯規劃的問題。" }, { "speaker": "廖宸育", "speech": "像我現在高三，我在高中這三年裡面，我有音樂、運動以及中文創作的興趣，可是我現在遇到的問題是，我究竟要選擇哪一個興趣於以後繼續鑽研？或是我三個興趣都可以繼續接觸？我想聽聽看唐鳳您的想法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實因為我是第一次跟你聊，所以我一般不會做出很具體的建議，通常我們可能要聊到大概十個、二十個小時之後，我才會比較知道實際的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是我覺得即使你挑其中一個認真去學，另外二個當作興趣的時候，你可以試著融合另外那二個部分去做創作，盡可能去結合，因為這樣就會變成你的東西，而不是你老師的東西，因為你的興趣是這三個，這三個結合的方式只有你做的出來，所以即使是你最後只挑了一個或二個，我還是建議不要放棄其他的興趣，大概是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "廖宸育", "speech": "唐鳳，我再多問一個問題：你在三十多歲的時候，你就選擇退休，是什麼原因使你有這樣的能力，在三十多歲的時候可以不必為了生活去工作？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「退休」的意思對我來講是，我會比較注重社會的需要或是我自己的興趣怎麼樣結合這個時代需要的東西，在退休之前這一些比較像是興趣，我的工作還是幫蘋果或者是其他公司，讓他們的願景能夠實現，對我來講我就是在那邊學習。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "學到一個程度之後，我就想說我腦裡的這一套東西，適合用退休人士的方式來跟社會互動，而不是只用蘋果的顧問或者是牛津大學的顧問身份來跟社會互動，大概是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "廖宸育", "speech": "謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "謝謝唐鳳，我們現場還有同學，有沒有什麼問題想要提問？Tina。" }, { "speaker": "葉庭瑄", "speech": "您剛剛有提到牛津、蘋果這一些顧問，您在創業於滿年輕時就受到大公司老闆們的關注。請問：您認為您的什麼特質或您的什麼熱情讓這些老闆對您的信任有佳？謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個問題是說為什麼我年輕的時候提出了一些想法，社會上會比較關注？" }, { "speaker": "葉庭瑄", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得那是因為當時全球資訊網是一個非常新的東西，我們這一代叫做「數位移民」，就是我們剛出生的時候沒有網際網路，我到十二歲的時候才在臺灣開始普及，所以我的學習過程裡，就結合了只有書本、沒有網路的這一段，跟慢慢書本、網路都有的這一段，至現在差不多都是網路了、偶爾才看一下書的這一段。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "想出一些方法讓這三段不同的人、不同生命經驗的人，還是可以協作、還是可以分享的這些想法，我覺得是整個社會需要的，所以大概二十年前提出這種想法時，社會各界都覺得這是值得一起想像的事情，大概是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "葉庭瑄", "speech": "瞭解，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "吳喆曦", "speech": "等一下，我跑掉了。" }, { "speaker": "旁人", "speech": "休息一下，休息三分鐘，好不好？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實如果不舒服，我們不一定要持續那麼久的時間，其實我都可以書面來回答。" }, { "speaker": "旁人", "speech": "可是他們還是想問你問題，先休息一下。" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "好，唐鳳，那我們繼續開始了，謝謝你。我們有三位高中同學要發問，對不對？誰先？" }, { "speaker": "廖宸育", "speech": "好，我先。" }, { "speaker": "廖宸育", "speech": "唐鳳，關於像臺灣現在的教育界，其實很多學校都想轉型成體制外或是自學團體這樣的一個學習環境，可是像我覺得臺灣，應該說任何一個國家或任何一個地方其實都並不適合把所有的教育環境都變成同一類，譬如都是學校或者是都是自學團體或者都是非特質內的一個學習環境，我不知道唐鳳對於這個現在臺灣的教育環境變成這樣有什麼想法？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個很簡短的回答：我在當107課綱課發會委員的時候，我的想法是，我們要把體制外（學習）現在已經合法化了，就是「自學三法」通過之後，大家都是體制內的，你有一套想法覺得你一個禮拜三天用學校資源、三天用社區的資源或用什麼方式去搭配，那都是被政府、被教育部所肯認的，所以學校作為一個空間，當然如你所說的非常有幫助，可以讓大家知道一起生活或一起學習或一起創造等活動的這些場域是怎麼樣的；但反過來講，如果我想要一、二個禮拜一、二天的時間很認真自己去校外鑽研，目前的體制也容許這樣的調配。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，最後我覺得還是每一個學生自己、家長及家長旁邊的支援團體對這一個小孩自己的發展能夠提供怎麼樣的協助。我們說：要養大一個小孩須要一個村莊，現在是地球村，整個網路都是小孩的村莊，所以政府能做的就是確保不管使用哪一種資源，那個資源都能夠自由地讓他使用──這就是我們所說「自發精神」，亦是我們在編課綱時最重要的精神，大概就是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "廖宸育", "speech": "謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "下一個要換誰？" }, { "speaker": "葉庭瑄", "speech": "換我先問，現在在講跨領域，據我所知，您很喜歡文學，您在電腦科技方面又非常厲害。請問：您對文學興趣有沒有在電腦科技方面有什麼幫助？一個人有跨領域的學習，對他未來科技整合能力能發揮怎樣的幫助？謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "領域對我來講就很像天上的星座，就是說這七顆星連起來是一個領域，可是那是一個人為的，我們在溝通時比較方便說這是什麼星座，但其實這一些星星彼此間的距離其實都非常地長，而且跟別的星座中間也不一定比較短或比較長，它是完全任意的，就我們現在從地球看出來、約定出來的一套方法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以與其說是跨領域，不如說你對什麼東西感興趣、想解決什麼問題、想做出什麼創造？跟它比較近的星星、那些前人留下來的思路，就會變成你的材料、就會變成你的養份，這時候如果他都在同一個領域就是同一個領域，如果碰巧跨了三、四個領域，也只不過是把三、四個星座很近的星星，變成自己的一個星座，就是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "瞭解，謝謝。最後一個問題，Nana。" }, { "speaker": "李禾于", "speech": "唐鳳，請問對你來說，愛情是什麼？（笑）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "愛情就是願意讓自己的生命跟另外一個人的生命交織在一起，彼此互相影響，就是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "謝謝唐鳳。" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "接下來，我們看Judy這邊，就是網友在直播提出的問題。首先第一個問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好，我們還有五分鐘。" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "好，第一個問題，我覺得他非常有趣，就是VR有沒有可能發展成犯罪工具？比如拿來跨國洗錢之類的？有這樣的風險存在嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "跨國洗錢跟VR沒有什麼關係，VR它是一種新的顯示跟一種新的錄製技術，可以說是直播這類技術的演化，所以直播如果不能用來洗錢，VR也不能用來洗錢，這是兩個不同範疇的東西。" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "理解，要洗錢的人不管怎樣，他還是會去洗錢。" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "第二個問題，網友想要請教唐鳳，你未來會去選總統嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不好意思，我沒聽清楚。" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "未來會去選總統嗎？就是在未來的規劃裡面嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "投票選總統？我每次都有投票選總統。" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "（笑）是大家選你，有這個可能嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "目前沒有這個想法耶，我完全沒有這個打算。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "然後我自己是覺得，未來與其說是總統或者是政委或者是行政院規劃的，不如是說每個人就是各位都有自己心目中未來的維度。如果這些東西彼此之間是很和諧的，其實我覺得總統、政委、部長及行政院能夠做的事情就是，確保像我們現在大家站的這個土地或是環境，這些東西是穩定的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "只有社會上起了衝突，或是大家每個維度的想法沒有辦法調和，這時我們可以扮演一些角色，用一個公平的空間讓大家協商，然後讓大家達到一個可能不是百分之百滿意，但可以接受的程度。但我覺得這不一定是某個位置的人才能做的事情，大家都可以去學習這種引導的藝術，大概就是這樣，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "謝謝唐鳳。" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "其實像現在網路世代資訊來得快、去得也快，唐鳳現在是屬於最紅的一股熱潮，可是也不希望大家只用「網路神童」這樣來看你，你會希望大家用什麼觀點去記得你？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "希望大家用什麼觀點？" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "嗯，或是…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個可能要超過五百字才能夠回答（現場聽眾：笑），而且我希望你有什麼觀點，你也不一定就會用那個觀點。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們能夠影響彼此的，就是創造一些感受，然後讓本來陌生的感受變得比較熟悉，或者本來有距離的感受變得比較溫暖，大概只能到這裡而已，所以我覺得觀點比較不是能夠像這樣直接加到別人頭上的東西，大概是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "瞭解，非常謝謝你。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那今天先這樣囉！" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "可以請你針對我們這一次的對談說些想法嗎？就是我們進行到現在。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得很開心啊！就是這是一次很棒的對談。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那我就先收播了，真的很謝謝、很高興可以跟大家在VR裡面聊天，先這樣囉！掰掰！" }, { "speaker": "蔡伃婷", "speech": "謝謝你，謝謝唐鳳，跟唐鳳掰掰。" }, { "speaker": "大家", "speech": "掰掰～" } ]

[ { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "今天大家好，很高興突然之間多了這麼多朋友來，先解釋一下今天時間跟空間的結構。這個空間其實本來是辦黑客松的，所以待會大概十一點的時候，陸續會有參加我們活動朋友的來，到十一點三十分，其實整個空間會有四十多個來活動的朋友，那個時候就要讓出空間給大家。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "時間結構上面就是說因為今天其實是有兩批朋友，一批是昨天之前已經知道，已經約了時間來這邊對談的，就是坐在前面的；其他的朋友的話，因為是今天才知道，所以我就是架了一個網站也是很臨時的，就是在「slido.com」。這個網站是我平常上課慣用的網站，通常都是我的聽眾們，我一面正在演講或者今天一面在對談的時候，腦裡突然冒起了什麼想法可以直接留言在上面，如果你覺得他想要問的也是你想要問的，幫他按讚就好了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "通常我們在上課時的做法是我會先講個可能二十五至三十分鐘，有五分鐘的時間按照上面的順序來收問題，但因為時間的關係，不太可能都回答得完，請大家見諒，但是下班之前－因為今天大家都是加班，所以下班要怎麼算－五點之前大概會在上面用文字的方法把來不及答到的問題回答完，請大家見諒。" }, { "speaker": "Cheers", "speech": "唐鳳您好，我是Cheers雜誌的記者，我叫竣傑，您好。" }, { "speaker": "Cheers", "speech": "想先恭喜您現在已經當政委了，這是您第一天開始這個工作嗎？還是其實之前就已經開始幫忙？我看之前您就已經幫忙了。想簡單問一下，您開始在做這一件事，就是進入這個體制之後，您現在開始要做的事情是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我現在要做的就是回答你的問題。" }, { "speaker": "Cheers", "speech": "（笑）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是回答的身份就轉變了，以前我可以說我只代表我自己，現在即使我說我只代表我自己，可能那個效力是不一樣的；但除了身份轉變之外，我目前為止還是在做我之前本來就在做的事情。其實你也在網路上可以看到，其實我從上個週末回國之後就已經陸續工作、報到，這些手續都做了，其實感覺也沒有什麼差別。" }, { "speaker": "鏡傳媒", "speech": "鏡傳媒芷筠，您好！我們都滿想問你關於小學的經驗還有後來自學的經驗，我想先問，因為媽媽的書裡面提到是從媽媽的觀點，但她提到小二那一年你回家哭泣什麼的，然後早上不想去上課，可是比如說在學校是一個人吃飯嗎？全部人一起吃營養午餐嗎？你跟同學之間那時候的具體互動是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非常好的問題。其實當時跟同學們滿多互動的，因為在小學二年級那一年，我是班長，其實班長有很多例行性的工作要做，比如起立、敬禮、說「老師好」之類的，其實互動是一定有的，我覺得比較沒有是因為我轉學到二年級之後，一直比較沒有親近一對一的朋友，當時普通班有一些課、資優班有一些別的課，其實比較分開的，所以我一直沒有很完整地注意力在同一群人上，這是小二主要的感覺。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實午餐的時候，好像都是每個人在自己的課桌上吃，所以…" }, { "speaker": "鏡傳媒", "speech": "那後來到直潭國小，就是離開那一個同學欺負你學校的那一天，心情是什麼還記得嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為我後來其實就休學了，其實從休學到找到指南國小可以念—不是直潭—中間其實有好幾個月的時間。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我六年讀六所學校，所以其實心情都很像，都不用做暑假作業的這種心情，按照定義沒有暑假作業需要做（笑），所以那個心情大概就是…嗯…一個closure吧！就是本來東西大概有處理好，那新的完全是完全不同一群人這樣的一種想法、這樣一種感受。" }, { "speaker": "鏡傳媒", "speech": "那個時候應該還是花了滿多時間在跟外界溝通，那你有提到「弟弟」是幫助你很重要的一個信任他人的一個關鍵，可是對你自己來說還是花了一些時間，大概花了多久時間學習溝通？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一輩子嘛！對不對？人一定是一輩子啊！" }, { "speaker": "鏡傳媒", "speech": "好，我先pass給他。" }, { "speaker": "Cheers", "speech": "那個政委…我們還是想問一下關於青年世代的問題，可能從您自身的經驗跟您想要做的事情可不可以跟我們談一談，就是現在的社會不管是數位或者是一些很多新的東西不斷地出來，很多人就是被這個趨勢推著走。以您的經驗，就是說他們在這種時代快速地變遷，您覺得年輕人現在應該要有什麼樣的能力或態度去面對這麼快變遷的社會，就是那麼多不同的趨勢出來，您覺得他們應該要有什麼心態跟努力？" }, { "speaker": "Cheers", "speech": "以您自己的經驗，其實因為您可能算是在之後休學，然後用一個跟一般傳統體制不同的成長方式，有些人會認為這是一種實驗，有些人在工作上也會覺得年輕人創新、創業是一種實驗。您會覺得他們應該要做到什麼樣的程度？您會建議他們有停損點或者應該要繼續往前做，在這種實驗或是創新裡面去嘗試？謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實簡單講，第一個您是問我對於年輕人在面對時代變遷的時候有沒有什麼樣的能力和態度來面對，這個問題是非常有預設（loaded）的。因為我沒有用年紀來刻板（stereotype）人的習慣，所以我也沒有辦法說因為你是三十五歲以下就應該要用一種不同的態度跟能力，其實很難回答；如果說現在是一個具體的年輕人在我面前，那當然我們就可以聊一聊，我知道目前的態度或能力的話，我可能可以做一些建議，但就像我在wiselike上面很喜歡說的，就是這個過程通常要幾十個小時的時間我才能比較認識你，在此之前，我覺得我做任何的建議都不負責任。" }, { "speaker": "鏡傳媒", "speech": "您會花很多時間去告訴，因為你不會以年紀來區分，其實他們提出問題，您都會很願意花很多時間去討論或他們未來的方向嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第二個就是「創新」跟「停損」的關係，停損的意思就是說到自己受不了或不舒服就轉換跑道，或者是就換另外一條路走；我的意思是說，每一個人自己做創新的時候，每一個人都會自己有承載的能力，那也不用我去教導或說什麼，仍然是各自個別（case by case）的一件事，因為停損點這個想法後面還有一個是你在好像消耗燃油的那樣子一個想法，但其實有的時候我們叫做thrift innovation；我不知道怎麼翻，「廉能創新」嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是說你每一次做的事情是剛好可以承載的，所以你就不會覺得你在消耗什麼，那就沒有燒光（burn out）的一天，但這當然是在門檻非常低的特定業別才能做，我才會說它是很特殊（privileged）的一種狀態才能這樣做，但因為其實我從創業以來一直都是這樣做，這是我比較習慣的，因此我就更沒有那個能力去建議正在燒錢的朋友們怎麼樣控制停損點。" }, { "speaker": "鏡傳媒", "speech": "你十四歲創業當老闆，那時候應該還是花滿多的心力在公司的經營上，你第一個寫的那一個搜尋引擎的程式，就是賣掉它賺了多少錢？然後公司第一年賺了多少錢？有沒有辛苦的部分？當年創業還記得嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "記得。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當時是「搜尋快手」，賣了大概一萬套，名字當時是叫「FusionSearch」，那個查一下應該都還是查得到的。我自己其實不太有在管經營，因為我是技術總監，然後當時其實也不能說完全是從零到一的創業，因為其實是本來有家出版社，叫「資訊人出版社」，就是賴明宗跟賀元一些人去辦的，那個出版社我其實並沒有參加，我只是作者。是後來出版社想要轉型成軟體公司的時候，我寫了一個算是business plan過去，賀元覺得很好，所以那邊就拆掉重組，變成一個軟體公司。" }, { "speaker": "鏡傳媒", "speech": "就是「搜尋快手」？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實那個沒有，那個計畫叫「CyberEye」，我寫的比較是說希望透過網路讓不同世代就是剛開始接觸網路、對網路可能沒有那麼認識，及完全不認識網路的朋友用什麼樣的方式做出社區這樣的一個概念，現在我們會叫「社群網路」或「MySpace」或「Facebook」之類，但當時1995年，其實這一些詞還沒有出現，也是盡可能想像吧！大概這樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那實際營運上大部分是賀元跟後來薛曉嵐在負責，你問我損益表，我其實背不出來給你（笑），而且畢竟是1995年的事了。" }, { "speaker": "鏡傳媒", "speech": "那時出版社要轉軟體公司，是有點像現在大家紙本不行了而要轉電子書這種危機感嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實相反的，因為「Word的使用藝術」那本書賣得太好了，大家也在資訊圈裡面有一些公信力，所以就覺得如果用這個想法去做軟體的話，可以觸及到更多人。" }, { "speaker": "TVBS", "speech": "我們想問一下，當你決定走進體制內，家人扮演的角色，據了解，為了利益迴避，父親還請辭教育委員，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "家人扮演的角色其實就是被告知的角色（笑），被告知之後我爸一開始有比較擔心啦！但是他就轉念了嘛！他非常擅長於轉念，所以他到了晚上就轉念，然後傳個簡訊給我說祝福我之類的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以其實是還好，就是他們知道有這一件事，然後也幫我做了一些評估，但其實我已經做了決定才告訴他們，一向其實也都是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "東森新聞", "speech": "想知道選擇進入政府保守體制內的考量是什麼？會不會擔心結果，是無法衝撞、或是做出改變？謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我剛跟這邊的朋友（法國國際廣播電台）說，我就是一個「持守的安那其（保守的無政府主義者）」，那所以「保守」這一件事對我來講是正面的，它表示有一些人跟人之間相處傳統上的價值，它值得在數位時代還留下來，所以政府當然是保守體制的公部門，是這個最基礎東西的工作者之一，所以我加入公部門我覺得還好，並沒有需要心態上面做很大的調整。" }, { "speaker": "台視", "speech": "進入公部門，會不會擔心您的性別問題將會被外界放大檢視，若面臨相關問題，您要如何回應？謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "性別其實不是一個問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得我也不是很確定這邊是問假設性的「碰到相關問題要如何回應」？我看到一個問題，基本上就是這樣子去回應，所以說如果你有很具體的問題，就直接寫在這邊上面，我回應就好。" }, { "speaker": "鏡傳媒", "speech": "我有發現你在網路上比較避談性別這一塊，但我覺得外界對於跨性跟變性這一件事有很多不理解，比如像之前的記者也會說你接受了變性手術，但據我所知是沒有的，沒有侵入性的外科手術，只有荷爾蒙治療，是這樣嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "侵入性要到多侵入性？對不對？打那個…" }, { "speaker": "鏡傳媒", "speech": "就是切除或者是…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "打Botox算不算侵入性？" }, { "speaker": "鏡傳媒", "speech": "Botox是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "肉毒桿菌（Botulinum Toxin）…就是在醫美的尺度上，從完全不侵入到有點侵入其實它是有非常多尺度的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我之前在網路上不回答，是因為這比較沒有公眾利益，但當然我理解滿足大家的好奇心也是一種利益，雖然不是公共利益（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你剛剛講得都對，我都同意。" }, { "speaker": "鏡傳媒", "speech": "原諒我，我必須要問（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有問題，沒有問題。" }, { "speaker": "鏡傳媒", "speech": "為什麼會認同「無性」呢？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我也沒有認同無性，我其實只是在人事表上填了「無」而已，填了「無」其實只是因為旁邊黨籍那個欄，我發現可以填「無」，所以拷過來很方便。" }, { "speaker": "鏡傳媒", "speech": "所以旁邊（空格）是有「男性」、「女性」跟「無」嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有，它其實就是一個空格啊。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這就是我們說「性別開放填空」（gender is an input field），也就是說「名從主人」的意思，就是說應該是以你自己喜歡的那樣子被寫下來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以他給一個空格，我認為是完全正確的，這跟政黨一樣，就是說如果你預設我一定要是某一個政黨的，那是不尊重我。" }, { "speaker": "Cheers", "speech": "我記得你那時回答「無」這個問題的時候，其實很多媒體特別去放大檢視這一件事，它造成您的困擾嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有，我覺得很好。" }, { "speaker": "Cheers", "speech": "（笑）很好？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "能夠對話總是一件好事。" }, { "speaker": "Cheers", "speech": "想問一下，就是說在職場上面，不管男性、女性他們可能都有一些弱勢或者是不管他們需調整的地方，你會不會就這部分去關注性別上面的工作能力，或他們遇到一些弱勢的部分，你會特別去關注這一塊嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實作為一個「性別流動」或者是「酷兒」（genderqueer）好了，我是覺得當然每一個人都有他的難處，我們說「家家有本難念的經」，我對於你剛剛講這種比較像關懷工作（care work），其實一定是在一個人跟另一個人之間發生的──這就跟我剛才不想給年輕人忠告完全是一樣的道理，因為我如果這樣做，其實是在加深那個貼標籤的動作。您知道我的意思嗎？" }, { "speaker": "Cheers", "speech": "嗯。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好，大概就先這樣。" }, { "speaker": "TVBS", "speech": "請問有什麼事，是你上任後，最想要推動嗎？另外可以聊聊冥想的習慣嗎？謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個可以很快速回答，我上任之後具體要推動的一件事，是民間團體如果是針對我個人拜會的話，我有請速錄師會把它逐字打下來，然後在十天之後與會者修訂之後去公開，這個是我一向作業的傳統，就是我自己會留一些紀錄，那這個紀錄未來是可以接受公評，而且不管是人可以讀或機器也可以讀，所以可以做很多分析及文本上的處理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這是我之前在十二年國教課發會（國家教育研究院課程發展委員會）的習慣，現在我從國教院這邊辭了，但這個習慣會保留到院裡，這是一個具體的差異。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "冥想的習慣就是一個習慣，就跟每天都要吃飯一樣。" }, { "speaker": "鏡傳媒", "speech": "請問這和VR有關係嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，在VR的環境裡進行冥想。" }, { "speaker": "鏡傳媒", "speech": "很難想像那是什麼樣子？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，那其實我用很具體地講，它是一個太空模擬的VR，所以你一戴上就是在國際太空站看地球的位置，但你可以去其他太陽系別的星星。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "還不能去別的恒星，因為我們沒有別的資料（笑），所以今天高興的話，可能就是在土星環上工作這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "鏡傳媒", "speech": "瞭解。我很喜歡木星。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，已經有了。其實我們在VR裡就可以參觀了，大概是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "匿名", "speech": "很多年輕人不相信婚姻，你相信嗎？謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們知道尼采說：「你相信什麼，就不會真的知道他。」（笑），就是說我當然覺得…它是一種讓兩個人彼此瞭解或知道的方式，當然不是唯一的一個方式，我覺得每個人就是挑自己適合的方式，大概是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實已經十一點了耶！（笑）歡迎文字的部分繼續問，這邊還有沒有想要追問的？其實差不多了。如果素材差不多的話，我們是不是可不可以請影像這邊先收一下？對，因為我們活動理論上是現在開始，對，不好意思，謝謝。這邊有沒有什麼一定要問的？" }, { "speaker": "Cheers", "speech": "會不會想要在政府網站那邊做一些新的改革或者一些改變之類的？這個工作你會去接續嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "政府網站的這一件事，其實它是屬於執行層面的，理論上我的工作應該是設定原則，網站應該怎麼做的原則，而不是哪一個網站怎麼改。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是具體這個原則是不是應該由我設定，理論上我禮拜一才會知道。雖然我現在正在上班（笑），但我們並沒有一個很快速的方法去確認這一件事；我就是先確定一下我的工作範圍。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好，那今天其實差不多了，對不對？那我們就最後一個問題。" }, { "speaker": "蘋果", "speech": "想要詢問，為什麼面對面還會想要用網路對談，還有使用攝影機拍攝的習慣，是認為公開透明嗎？還是個人習慣？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛剛講了，我們的聲音來源只有兩個聲道（兩支麥克風），而且是同時的，所以如果這麼多人發問的話，我們對談的節奏一定會被打亂。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實這個比較不是面對面還會想要試用，而是因為今天的人數超過預期，所以就是一個分流的概念，那當然就是很感謝大家的協助跟配合。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個是攝影機拍攝的習慣，因為其實我自己會在VR裡面重新造訪現在這個狀態，我很習慣於事後在別人的角度來看我的表現。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為有這樣子的習慣，所以所有相關的攝影器材跟文字器材其實是一個對稱的概念，如果有人正在拍，而且我們沒有事先談好說你要拋棄著作權，讓我可以任意使用的話，那我就自己在儘量不影響到你的前提底下，也拿到一份素材。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好，那就這樣囉！謝謝大家！請媒體朋友慢慢地把這個空間還給萌典松的朋友，謝謝。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "高子羽", "speech": "我是這一個季刊的編輯，我擔任兩位的引言人，是不是現在就開始了。" }, { "speaker": "高子羽", "speech": "我們國家從102年開始陸續推動資料政府開放及公共政策網路參與的部分，希望可以跟國際開放政府趨勢接軌，想請教唐政委及曾副座，您對於政府資料開放跟公共政策網路參與的部分，我國目前的進展是怎麼樣？對於我國未來發展開放政策上有什麼構想？請兩位談一下這個部分。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我也是這兩年多來才比較開始接觸公部門的資料及公共參與，其實我一直都還是在學習，老師已經做了非常久了（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這兩、三年來我們做Open Data的主要方向是在上一任政府由上而下（top-down）的做法，所有5,000萬以下的資通訊系統沒有牽涉到國安、個資及營業秘密，政府產出的資料都要用開放的格式，以不特定廠商也可以打開的方式容許民間改作，比如本來的資料散在好幾個部會或者是局處，但如果要寫新聞或者是做採訪報導，可以用動態的資料新聞學的方式整合在一起（remix）。這個以前在政府資訊公開法是做不到的，後面的重點是開放給授權，供給民間善意使用政府所有的資料，不管像剛剛所講的社會公益的應用或者商業應用等，目前這兩個應用在台灣都非常蓬勃，尤其亞洲各國來講在社會上的應用，臺灣應該是垂範亞洲。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「Top-down」的做法以我個人的理解，也造成事務人員不小的負擔，本來在工作流程之外還要再做一份給機器可讀或者是可公開的版本，以我所知的是在日常作業當中，直接以別的部會Open Data去作為決策依據的，這仍然是少數，這會是我在Open Data想要推動的主要目標。這個是我以前以很有限當公務員訓練的老師及顧問的角度來看，我進來之後會再慢慢看到更多別的資訊，就是以我剛進來一個禮拜的想法。看老師有沒有想法。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "好，剛剛講兩個：一個是政府的資料公開，另外一個是政府公民在網路上參與的部分。基本上這裡講的事情算是在開放政府這個大目標下的工作，意思是說我們的目標是在開放政府，而不只是這個事情，但是我覺得這個是很好的起步，從102年開始，但是我們如果回歸到剛剛所講的開放政府這一件事，基本上是一個思想、態度，特別是把它放在民主發展的過程中，我覺得它是一個階段性的，對於政府角色的重新思考，會從這樣衍生出政府與公民關係是什麼，然後進一步再想政府部會間政府可以多做什麼，可以讓所謂的民主可以做得更好，我覺得這個是放在大的脈絡下來看。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "另外，某一種程度是「填補代議制度不足」，以前是選出民代來監督政府，要求政府做一些什麼事，所以有一部分是在修補或者是填補代議制度不足的部分，我覺得這個是好的趨勢，而且是一個好的起步。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "我覺得觀察這兩、三年的努力，有幾個部分的成果：" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "第一，已經建立了中央機關開放資料的機制，比如要求行政院及二級機關都成立了開放資料的諮詢小組，這一個機制有建立起來，每一個部會都會開會；特別在這個小組都會納進來民間，所以會帶進來一些想法刺激部會，可以做到更好，這個機制是有建立起來。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "第二，確實有這樣的操作，要求各部會從原本不知道如何開放資料，甚至有一點抗拒，甚至開放資料越來越多，各部會的角度不一樣，但是有做到一個成果，就是開放的數量有持續增加。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "第三，剛剛講到公共政策網路參與那一塊，我們也有初步的建立機制，比如有建立一個平台，該平台有提供比如「眾開講」或者是「提點子」，經過這一、兩年的操作，尤其是最近，社會的能見度越來越高，因此就過去的經驗就這三部分有一個初步的成果，我覺得這是目前看得到的。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "我們也會往下有一個展望，希望可以做得更好，也跟剛剛三個成果有關：" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "第一個是建立的機制，原本是在行政院及二級機關，我覺得可以再往下。比如：縣市政府開放資料的部分，我那一天也特別跟台南市政府同仁聯絡，他們說縣市政府機關沒有成立開放資料諮詢小組，下一個階段是不是也要請縣市政府成立，也把民間的人士納進去，把地方政府開放資料做得更好。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "甚至，他們覺得也可以考慮不一定只侷限在開放資料，而是「開放政府委員會」，關於公民參與、開放資料都可以有一個在地方政府的諮詢機制，也就是如何往下紮根，讓地方政府的開放資料做得更好。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "第二個，我覺得滿重要的是提升品質，也就是開放資料的部分，那一個資料是否可以用、是否周全。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為台北市有資訊局。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "對。像台南市就只有六百多；非直轄市的那一群，我看落差更大，像數量差異最高的是嘉義縣，是四百多，連江是零，苗栗跟澎湖只有一或二，所以如何讓大家的數量慢慢提升上來也是一個重點。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "另外一個部分是，如果我們去比較不同部會公布的資料，其實可以看到有一些資料類型是可以公布的，也許在應用上可以比較普遍，比如通用的資料，有些可以公布、有些沒有公布，變成沒有辦法做全國性的分析，因此如何將某些資料檢視之後建議是不是應該要全面公布，因為沒有理由就沒有辦法公布，所以就讓資料比較齊一，有些基本的可以共通做得到，我覺得提升品質那一部分可以這樣做。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "第三個，剛剛有提到開放（公民參與），有一些縣市做得參差不齊，比如像台中市的參與式預算不做了，因此開放這一塊也可以鼓勵有些縣市做得很好，讓另外縣市願意學習，因此我認為可以在前面建立的基礎下往下紮根提升，還有很多努力的空間，這個是我的觀察。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "補充一下，其實參與這一部分我完全同意，「Join」目前的「提點子」，其實最受矚目是全國性的議題，比如兵役法之類的，當然是非常有話題、能見度也高，確實可以讓各部會比較熟悉在網路時代如何跟公民對話，但如果要昇華覺得真的能夠影響我的生活，無論如何還是回到地方去，因此我完全同意曾老師的看法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在相同資料類型的方面，其實碰到不只是土壤或者是相關資料，每一個縣市釋出的精細度不一，或者有些乾脆沒有釋出，有些即使顆粒度差不多，但是格式無法統整或者欄位不一樣，時間、方法也不一，從民間要利用的時候，勢必只能那一個縣市用那一個縣市的資料，沒有辦法整合、也沒有辦法做全國性的東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我現在初步的想法是裡面有一個很根本的原因，在採買那一些資訊系統的時候，裡面並沒有內建開放格式或者是機器可讀的格式，如果採買的時候，廠商已經給它某一種機器可讀的格式而且最好是開放格式的話，其實就有一點像在推無障礙，人可以看得到網頁，盲人其實應該能夠看得懂網頁，機器其實就是盲人，沒有辦法看用圖片做出來的PDF，只能看結構化的資料。因此，我的想法是如果我們在有利標或者其他地方盡可能鼓勵大家在採購下一個年度或者是資訊系統的時候，盡可能把機器系統納進來，在不造成公務員麻煩的情況下，取得互相轉移的資料——這個是我們後來推這個東西的基礎，如果沒有這個的話，都是業務同仁自己弄，換了一個業務同仁，格式也未必一樣，也是需要自動化去做，我的補充。" }, { "speaker": "高子羽", "speech": "兩位對於開放資料談比較多，可不可以多談一下公共政策網路參與這個部分，未來政策上有沒有什麼樣的想法或未來的計畫？" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "這個地方其實剛剛副主委有提到公共政策網路參與的平台其實有幾個方向，大家目前所熟知的是「眾開講」、「提點子」，現在這一個部分已經受到滿多的矚目，我們現在這一個部分還會再繼續加強它的制度化，也就是它有一些工作必須由各部會熟悉，剛剛政委也有提到必須熟悉如何讓公務員或部會如何利用這一個網路跟網路的公民去跟直接的對話、參與。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "副主委在第一點有提到這樣的機制是補足代議機制的不足，我覺得這個是滿不錯的，甚至於如果繼續發展的話，是不是有可能直接做到直接式的民主；當然不是全民，但有一個擴散的效果可以利用公共政策網路參與的機制，可以把代議的制度再把它擴大，變成參與的人數可以更多，並不是選完民代之後的參與感下降。這個是公共政策在網路上未來的發展方向，但還是強調部會之間要能夠跟得上這樣的腳步，透過網路跟民眾做直接的對話，稍微補充。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "不過我們也很高興後來立法院「Join」平台的效果，立法院也提供一個平台，讓民眾對於修法、立法及法案對於這一部分的意見可以到那邊去，算是「眾開講」還是「提點子」？" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "「提點子」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有一個門檻。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "對，也是要有一個門檻來連署。這一件事也是如公共政策參與的一環，牽涉到法令的部分。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "我們之前講到要創制、複決，其實透過網路可以更容易、更簡單，是年底會好？" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "預計年底開始會試辦。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "對，明年就整個公開出來，如果民眾可以善用平台的話，可能關於對法的看法，或者是甚至對於大家過去沒有想到的過去法令可以提出來，或者某些法令缺陷部分也可以透過那邊提出來，大家可以討論，我覺得這一件事影響滿大的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一屆的立法院是特別open的，不管是態度、協商、紀錄這一些跟行政機關，之前是他們都已經匯集完了，我們才收到，現在是他們在匯集的過程也非常願意公開，我覺得不一定代議制度就這樣子被取消，那是不可能的，毋寧是說「增進」，代議跟行政原本好像有點各做各的，但是現在讓中間的結合更為緊密。" }, { "speaker": "高子羽", "speech": "我們再談下一個問題，這個部分想要請教唐政委，您之前有參與零時政府及vTaiwan的部分，之前從公民社會轉到公部門，您有沒有什麼想法及身分上的不同？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我當時和林全院長面試（interview）的時候，他問我是使命還是什麼才進來，我說是出於興趣（笑），是興趣使然的政務委員。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得這個還滿重要的，因為我過去一、兩年其實就是幫著一開始張善政政務委員，後來到部長、副院長至院長，後來有找蔡玉玲政委去進行這方面的協調。我之前參與的部分比較是他們在公民科技上，覺得有一些外面來做會比政府裡面的人自己做比較適合的地方，運用類似「群眾外包」的方式，並不是包給特定的廠商，就是有這一件事需要做，民間有誰需要做得比公部門好，公部門就拿來用的想法；我當時就是群眾外包百萬個群眾之一（笑），也幫教育部及國發會做了一些案子。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得當時「群眾外包」的精神，讓我看到公部門跟公民社會及私部門中間的關係，並不是單向或一年才開一個標案、誰來做、我這邊檢核的方式；相反的，這是持續前進的：政府很誠實說有某些問題，不知道怎麼解決，問民間有沒有更好的解決方式，民間如果沒有的話，也可以問政府手中還有沒有更多的資料提供，我們才可以幫忙想這個事，一來一往是非常雙向的溝通，沒有哪一邊佔據哪一個主導權。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "幫忙在規劃vTaiwan時，每一個議程的設定，如何討論這一件事，必須是要由公部門、私部門及公民社會三方共同組成的小組來推動，這個是vTaiwan當時比較不同的嘗試，「Join」當然是官方的網站，畢竟是由「gov.tw」，必須是由國發會為主軸。vTaiwan是放在民間的伺服器上面，所以我們當時的做法是政府部門只是承諾是公開提供資料及定期回應，但具體這一些資料要如何被討論，完全是由多方利益關係小組的人來決定的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "後來實際試下去後，對於某些議題的利益關係人善於使用網路、文字能力很好，修訂一個法案，律師、會計師都在現場，都可以做得很好，所以公司法很快就修完了；但像利益關係人不一定那麼適用於網路，比如Uber是最好的例子，司機朋友收到了網址，會上來投票、看直播，也會參與，但具體政治學及政策制定的過程與公聽會有無不一樣？其實司機朋友參與也不一定記得這個是什麼樣的東西，這個畢竟跟他們的生活經驗不一樣。因此，我們當時盡力去彌補，我覺得我們做的方式在當時並沒有到達一個很完善的程度。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "反而是後來一些地方政府用「Join」平台像台北市社會局的公共住宅案，或者更之前的飛雁新村案，他們花了非常多的時間，接近是挨家挨戶，把實際如何參與及如何放到網路上的等等方式，並不是像在vTaiwan的Uber案通知一次開會、一次討論及一次的送建議書，而是不斷地有七次或十次或二十次的籌備會來做。因此，未來還是會需要地方政府及實際第一線公務人員的幫忙，我們才能真的碰到利益關係人，我們之前推動vTaiwan毋寧建立一個想像，是可以這樣子做，但是如果要落實的話，還是要回到公務體系來落實，這個是大概的想法。老師有沒有想法？" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "那一部分也是慢慢進展中，看關心的人及議題是什麼，所以沒有一個固定的模式怎麼操作，就是把網路當作一個工具，也許可以讓某一些人近便、用它，但剛剛講的Uber的計程車司機，目前對他們有一些困難；但這個東西也會隨著時代慢慢會改變，說不定十年後Uber的成功率就很高了（笑）——也是階段性的問題。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "我們現在在摸索，但核心的價值是我願意把這一個公共政策開放出來，讓大家來討論它並且共同思考，也許這一個階段大家只能用到這個程度也沒有關係，用心而解決某些問題，隨著工具的進步，能夠參與的效果更好。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "我覺得後面還有一些問題可以談，關於網路民眾參與這一塊，像現在大家很容易講話，但是這個東西跟意見是不是那樣，我覺得還有很多可以談。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我剛剛說出於興趣是因為我加入內閣之前，我的研究主題叫做「ICT-enabled scalable listening」，是使用資通訊技術輔助大規模的互相傾聽。本來平常是一對一講話，後來出了電視、廣播這些東西，讓一個人對幾百萬人講話非常非常容易，所以我們就出現非常會講話的人，像邱吉爾或希特勒（笑），他們都非常會講話，然後世界大戰就出現了（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我的意思是它是不對稱的，工具可以讓一個人對全國的人或者是全世界的人講話，但其實並沒有相應的工具可以讓大家很有效率去聽全世界講話，網際網路出現當然是第一次我們透過雙向的概念——有點像是數位通訊傳播法說的「對等」，當我在講的時候同時也可以聽，或者比如我在看社群媒體的時候，我也是內容的提供者——從這個雙向的概念並不是po一篇文章給幾十萬人看；相反的，可以把幾十萬人的文章收成我能夠用的意見的技術，兩邊的難度是相同的，只是後面願意開發的人跟願意投入研究的人是比較晚期的，因為不能馬上轉換成廣告收益。但是從政府的角度來看，毋寧是後者，如何有效率聽幾十萬人的想法，對政府來講是更有用的，因為政府要通知某一個訊息給所有人，我們有各種各樣的方式，透過戶政事務所或者是警政系統或者各種系統，網路只是一個傳達方式而已，但本來收意見的方式，不管是民意調查或者是電話訪問或者什麼東西，其實都有非常大的侷限，幾乎是設計那個試題的人可以事前設定我想要聽到什麼程度的東西，但如果超出那個設題設定範圍的意見，我們沒有辦法納進來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為這樣的關係，像剛剛曾老師說的在本來立法者、行政者考慮之外的東西，才是我們真正想要聽的東西，在事前並沒有一個很規範的東西去取得這一些大家的意見，所以這是我的研究興趣，所以我就會想說我們透過之後每一個公民參與案去試著跟民間社會、私部門去找出那一案的程序是什麼，每一案就像曾老師所說的不一樣，但討論的過程跟參與的過程跟制定過程是公開的，比如參與式預算，其實每一個縣市的財政狀況不一樣，並不是每一個縣市都可以說5億就變成參與式預算（笑）；但是無論如何台北市做的這個過程是公開的，別的縣市就可以量身打造，不一定要從頭開發、做同套的系統。例如：台南、台中及高雄都有做各種各樣的參與，不一定是預算，這一些參與的程序本身就是一個公有的東西，並不像行政程序或者是法令規章只有特定的人可以修改；相反的，即使是公寓大廈管理委員會可以拿這一些去運作得更好，這個是立即可見的東西，也是我們接下來要努力的。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "問政委這一個問題是從民間進來，我們也要一個期待（笑），確實透過政委過去的經驗及網絡，確實可以幫政府，一個部分是開出一些不一樣的做法，另外一部分是新的事務可以被帶進來。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "我舉個例子：文化部次長的觀察說我們現在提到新南向政策，新南向區塊6億人，事實上有近百種語言，比如印尼、越南都不一樣（語言）。像他們來當外傭，可以發現外傭他們透過手機的聯繫有自己的社群及理解臺灣的方式，甚至是做某些事的方式，他們用他們的語言跟中文間如何介接跟翻譯就變成是一個問題；我們在網路上看到Google開發中文與英文的翻譯年糕等工具，但因為這一些語言的使用人口較少，因此會放在後面，這就是政府我們要多著力的；因為是我們想要面對南方，要跟他們做朋友。因此我們是不是要把這部分的工具提升起來，由政府來做。他提到這一件事，我跟台北李宏文（音譯）講這一件事，他直覺是很大的工程，後來也有一些朋友提到過去唐政委有網路的這一些夥伴。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像 iTaigi.tw 是眾包的台語詞典。我們有處理過中文、英文，原住民主要是阿美語。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "因此類似用這樣的模式，並不是標一筆預算，委託一個公司來做標案，而是一個新的工作模式，有可能的話，就做到一個程度，而且可以不斷地修改。其實我覺得這一件事假設有做起來，意義是很不一樣的，第一個是表示我們政府真的要面對南方，第二個部分是也很希望把一些基本工具解決（溝通、閱讀）。之前我在台南市政府時也有教師提到我們現在有很多外籍配偶的第二代，到台南市政府的教育局去，也拿不到一份用泰語說的相關教育資訊，這個東西只要做一套就好了，教育部可以幫忙各縣市就做出來了，像泰語、越南語，對於這一些外籍配偶要跟她的小孩子瞭解這一些相關的資訊，當下就可以知道滿多的東西，這個事情是要做的，因此我覺得是要表現態度。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "第二，如果臺灣優先做這一件事，這一些地方資訊的資通運用也有很大的幫助，這也是像政委講的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這是在我之前主辦的每兩個月主辦的活動叫做「萌典松」，我幫教育部校對他們資料裡面的問題，但其實不是我校對，而是我做了一個界面，由幾千人來幫忙校對，大家會固定聚會；當然因為我入閣之後，這一些主辦vTaiwan跟萌典松都是交給社群朋友。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得這裡的重點是由阿美族人及研究阿美族的語言學家自發起，並不是教育部的案子，並不是我要他們去做的東西，他們自己覺得需要，我們提供場地跟工具。像老師所講，阿美語及華語、英語有一些貢獻，如果其他南島語系或跟阿美語比較近的（族群）當然可以馬上拿去用，但其實印尼文並沒有那麼相似，還是要修改，但要由他們在地的人做，較不可能是我們自己做，像這個即可大方承認不適合我們做，這個態度是第一步，才會慢慢有人願意進來。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "像現在教育部是希望某些大學招收東南亞的學生，也可以整合僑生，其實這都有可能。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，就是提供他們工具，我說我是「公僕的公僕」（笑），就是這一些公務員朋友們，他們覺得目前需要什麼東西開發，我可以幫忙連結這一些已經在開發的朋友。" }, { "speaker": "高子羽", "speech": "政委，您之前也有協助過Uber跟網路賣酒的議題，您覺得在國內現有法制上，有哪一些需要突破？推動開放政府對於通過這一些環節是不是有什麼幫助？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我很快速講，我們目前雖然有公聽跟聽證等行政程序，但這一些具體如何程序，其實每一個政府、每一個執行方式都不完全一樣。我之前地方政府參與比較少，像台北市政府的公民參與委員會會打逐字稿，因此我會看他們如何檢討公聽會要點，尤其是三井倉庫案的時候，我也有去支援直播和事後的紀錄。我發現同樣的公聽會有這樣的要點、有良好的準備，跟完全沒有就直接上來的公聽會的效果是天壤之別。我們要如何讓這個東西制度化，我們如何讓這個東西制度化？包含要先期準備資料、如何主持，這一種很細節的東西，但其實是形式決定了這個東西的品質，我覺得這個是需要更精細處理，這是第一個。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第二，在進入行政院之前，最後一個教學的活動是在高雄市政府，帶領陳菊市長的市政府團隊討論公民參與如何做，我舉台北市社會局的例子，我請他們在地的朋友建議有沒有什麼東西可以拿來演練，他們建議大林蒲遷村案，那個案子是之前林全院長也非常關心的案子，關係到2萬人左右的身體健康，以及他們的文化、記憶如何保存。但是我們回去看這樣的案子，在實際開發及建設之前，決定這一個東西本身要怎麼做，我們有沒有行政程序來做這一件事？這個是比較缺乏的，也就是通常是公部門訂下來，你的計畫已經開了、錢已經撥下來了，我們再按照行政程序去走，在這個之前問當地的人，我們行政程序怎麼走會比較好，這個東西是目前需要地方首長的意志力才可以貫徹，因為我們並沒有一個規則說這個事情要如何討論，這確實完全是case by case，像飛雁新村是一個程序，南鐵東移是另外一個程序。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以在這樣的情況下，我在中央的想法是，先不管日常的法規的做法是什麼，我們先做一些「優規」的，就是優於現有法規的東西出來，我們來檢討是不是在公務人員的承載力之內。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果是的話，我們盡可能正規化，變成像playbook的東西，讓大家知道按照1、2、3這樣做，可以節省很多成本，也可以減少地方議員跟市長的政治壓力，因為目前會覺得如果做優規不好會賠上政治上的credit，這個我可以幫忙的。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "這個還滿關鍵的，看到最近這半年很多的議題，其實都是在程序上不穩定，並沒有一個比較清楚的程序，像以剛剛講的大林蒲例，這一個東西算是滿前段的，我也滿期待某些政策在更前段一方面可以釋放出來，讓民眾可以參與討論、思考，這個是程序上的改善，像過去都市計畫上有所謂民眾參與，像公開展覽三十天，可以表達意見，那一些意見會送到部委會討論，但部委會常常會說「基於總體考量，不便於採納意見」，這樣對於提案的人沒有參與感啊！也不會覺得意見有被重視，好像總覺得只是個人的小小意見，這樣不對。但如果跟公務員講說在更前端一點，以目前來看並沒有規定要這樣做，可以做跟可以不做，要做的話，也是很有熱忱願意來溝通。像政委剛剛所說的「優規」，也許是不一樣的做法，可以讓大家看到這個可以解決困難，不然按照舊的方式做，顯然碰到很大瓶頸。所以，前面的部分經過這一些階段後，我們應該要多討論這一些程序，既然是這樣子的話，一些牽涉到人民利益的這一件事，到底程序上該怎麼做、哪一些東西，甚至我們要立法規定起來，前面一定要怎麼樣，後面要怎麼樣。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "當大家對於程序比較清楚的時候，很主要的利害關係人會比較清楚、穩定，比較不會覺得要趕快提到抗爭的程序，不然就會被扳過去了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "要不然就是最後一次了。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "對！所以那個程序也可以某種程度把最近發生的事情程序性的概念再整理一下。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "像勞動部一休一例那一件事，也許對勞動部而言覺得很多程序都走了，他覺得就按照這樣來走的，但是為什麼還有那個爭議？大家可以檢視一下以那一個議題為例，那一個程序走怎麼樣，那部分的環節有哪一些還是可以進步的地方。比如現在討論到年金的部分，年金一開始是前面願意花比較長的時間來討論，相關關係利害人都在討論，並不會馬上定案，這就是好的（開始）。像關於程序這一件事應該鼓勵大家從現實面跳脫出來到程序面，也許對這部分慢慢有共識，以後很多事情處理會比較好一點。" }, { "speaker": "高子羽", "speech": "延續剛剛的話題，曾副主委您可不可以談一下飛雁新村都更案部分，從這個經驗來看，如何可以打造公開的開放政府？請談一下當時的經驗。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "飛雁新村這一個案是去年3月，市政府跟市長說拿這個事情當開放決策的事，原本台南市政府對開放政府有看法，認為有三塊：一個是開放服務，很多的服務讓民眾知道，民眾也可以提供想法；第二個是開放資料，follow中央的一些想法，市政府也鼓勵各局處開放資料；第三個是開放決策，當時市長說可以用飛雁新村來當例子。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "當初我接到這個任務的時候也有一點像剛剛的想法，我們一定先把後面程序怎麼走先講出來，當時就由一些對於公民審議較有經驗的人討論（像呂家華），我們前面花比較長的時間討論，把利害關係人邀請過來，大家坐下來討論。第一個當然先組成一個執行委員會，包含建設商，像遠雄、公民團體、當地里長及專家學者，大家組成一個諮詢小組，然後往下的幾個程序，比如前面要先釐清問題，所以有三次的「願景工作坊」，比如有一次次討論不同的主題，討論樹保存問題、開發規模問題、文化資產保存問題，用三次的「願景工作坊」來討論。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "飛雁新村的經驗讓我看到一些事情：第一，只要有好的程序及好的做法，確實可以讓不同利害關係人可以坐下來談。比如公民團體覺得遠雄根本是壞人，而且又有巨蛋（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "它的形象在谷底。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "對。看到它（遠雄）就會覺得很火大、惡質商人，我們讓大家坐下來是儘量要聆聽對方講話，雖然過程中很多次也是很火爆、拍桌子很多次，甚至也此不要談，覺得沒有什麼好談、要走掉，但當天我當主席，所以把他拉下來（笑）。後來慢慢坐下來有一點機會談，坐著幾次後，有一點機會聽到別人講完整一點，不然原本都靠媒體放話，那個東西不能建立一個瞭解的機制（聆聽、瞭解），所以我覺得透過一個過程可以讓這一些人坐下來。其實我們最近有一個會，從早上九點到下午五點，大家會覺得怎麼開這麼久，但是還是覺得值得——讓大家好好坐下來談，找到第三條出路，並不是原本的公民團體跟廠商，而是另外一個，且這一定要透過這個過程才能找出來。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "第二，在這個過程中也搭配著資料開放的這一件事，公民團體常常會質疑一件事很多資料都是在你們的手上，他們都拿不到，可以公布在網路上的不只是會議紀錄這一些東西，包括前面的規劃報告或者是一些調查的資料，比如：樹到底有多少棵，因為遠雄調查的資料跟他們調查的資料不一樣，所以第一次就花很多時間在談這個，既然公說公有理、婆說婆有理，結果下午就一起去點，點完之後就可以確認有哪一些樹，也把很多資訊放到開放政府的平台，讓大家可以拿到資料。而且，可以讓一些沒有辦法成為諮詢小組的外圍人也可以看到資料，因此可以讓資料透明開放建立起大家對政府的信心，覺得這一件事願意繼續走，不然就變成剛剛講的資訊不對等。因此，透過資料開放取信於民、建立信任感，有了信任感，才能往下談。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "第三，從那一個經驗讓我看到的是，很多人會說飛雁新村為什麼不更早談？遠雄都已經投那麼多錢下去、簽約了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有社會成本。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "對。後來我們也體會到到底要怎麼樣讓可能會引發爭論的議題在更前面丟出來；但這個很難，因為公部門要有敏感度，也就是有哪一些事可能會引發爭議的，早一點拋出來。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "第二，拋出來的方式是什麼？甚至有些東西沒有吵一下，大家也不會關注，所以如果沒有拋出來，大家也不會關心它。即使如此，我覺得無論如何還是要想辦法更前面，所以比如最近找了澳門的人來講，他們的經驗是，他們各個部門都會有年度的或未來三年的施政重點計畫，這要寫成一個白皮書或公民報告，白皮書寫出來之後，也規定有一定的參與程序，比如要針對這個白皮書辦幾場的說明會，然後邀請關心這一些議題及跟這一個業務有關的團體來參與，從這個過程中我們就凝聚出幾個問題是比較爭議的。所以，我覺得這一件事我們也可以思考，可以鼓勵部會，因為他們有施政計畫，而且也要用民眾讀得懂的方式，也有實體的東西，然後再以那個為基準，邀請公民來閱讀及討論，我覺得這個也是一種方式，可以在更前端把一些可能問題浮現。當然，也有可能有助於鼓勵部會、單位本身去思考做這一件事是不是民眾所要的，等於是會做自我的篩選，因此在做政策的時候會更慎重。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "第三，如何摸索一個方法讓政策形成在前端就可以參與，我覺得這也是在這一次經驗裡面所學到的事情。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "總的來說，我對開放政府有很深的期待，不管中央部會或者是地方政府都應該更多，願意用各種的方式，用網路把資料公開那個是一個部分，那個是很基礎性的東西。若你願意到相關的關係人去主動說明或者是邀請相關的團體來辦說明會或什麼，我覺得這個也是要學習的，公務員要學習的；他們通常都是比如像有公聽會的程序，這個是法定必要的，非要辦不可，所以心態就是戴著鋼盔進去，然後就結束出來，這好像是完成程序，並沒有溝通的效果，並沒有解決問題的作用，所以我覺得開放政府這一塊很期待有更大努力的做法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我剛剛從老師那邊聽到很重要的是，有一個主持人願意開八個小時（笑），要能夠hold得住那個場面（笑），以我在民間時候的理解，就像老師說的這個是例外，大部分去主持公聽會的朋友，不一定是帶著這樣的心態，加開就加開、開多久就開多久，就是身段這麼軟是非常非常難得的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個是在西班牙也是有類似太陽花運動，他們也是地方執政，他們發現街上學到的社會學不一定跟公共行政那麼快接軌，所以他們也在重新思考公共行政的東西。其中有一位的市議員，也是自由軟體的開發者，跟我比較聊得比較來，像這一類的很小放在桌上可以直接錄影，不用一個人顧著這一些器材，有時會起一些轉變的作用。從他們的經驗來看，像他們處理社會住宅的弱勢朋友能夠來公聽會的人已經篩掉一些人，實際到了市政廳的講話方式、姿態及語態都跟平常在榕樹那邊討論是不一樣的，他會覺得事前可能要準備好，可能問過律師朋友唸稿（笑），要不然就是要很拘謹，不太可能覺得能夠平起平坐跟市議員講話；即使市議員說從民間出身，但那個氣氛不一樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "後來他想出一些方法，好比他實際去那一些即將開發的地方，甚至直接在那邊，但在那邊討論的時候，就用這一類的方式記錄下來，事後不管用VR或者是其他方式去重新進入那一個討論的現場，總之他的目的是，當然第一個是我們要接觸到實際的利益關係人；第二個是讓他們建立一個共感，就是能夠舒服，而且覺得實際看得到，可能有幾棵樹就看得到那幾棵樹的情況下討論，並不是長途跋涉到那個地方，只有一小時的講話機會等等狀況，因此如何讓空間及時間上的延展是做我們資通訊可以幫忙的，但實際要如何幫忙是實際確實是實際做社區的人才會知道。" }, { "speaker": "高子羽", "speech": "政委您剛剛有提到新科技、新器材對於開放政府是有些益處，接著想請教政委，接下來您對於如何運用科技協助政府改善施政有什麼想法？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "分成兩個部分：" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第一，我們說資通訊，基本上就是建立系統，我剛才才在跟潘處長聊到我們目前每一個部會內部其實都有他們請廠商建置的，運作也還滿順利的內部資通訊系統，但通常我們碰到這種公民參與議題的時候，如果剛好只屬於某個部會、某個機關—這個我們運氣好（笑）—但大部分並不是這樣子，大部分不是在同一個部會，是跨署或者不同機關，不然就是跨部會，而且並不一定哪個是主責部會，因此要遇到收集這種跨部會的資通訊系統時，馬上會發生其實不對接的情況，有碰到幾個部會就有那麼多要處理，這個不只是資料的交換，也包含決策過程的追蹤，好比公聽會的紀錄，每一個部會首長要的時候，當然承辦人員都會給出來，可是這一個紀錄的製作過程，別的部會其實完全不知道，是他們自己的一套系統。因此不管是地方或者是中央要推跨單位資訊交換的時候，不得不在民間還要再建置一套系統，其實大部分是Google硬碟，因為是大家最熟悉的，也有人用Dropbox，也有人把它非正式的當作工作群組來用，開一個FB的群組之類的。這樣的問題是，Google也好、Dropbox也好、Amazon也好，這些系統服務的提供者在設計時並不是當作公務系統用的，可能是當作個人傳播媒體或者是社群用的，所以我們每一次在建立這個的時候，其實就要去改它，試著疊床架屋來做，架鷹架出來，然後去開發出來要如何結合這一些系統，重點是很勉強，我們勢必不可能在施行細則或要點說：「你先去Google或Dropbox開一個帳號（笑）。」這個不太可能納入公務體系的一部分，這個在知識管理體系上是只在某些人流傳的情境知識，並不是能夠變成管理的那種知識，因此這一批人換掉這個lore就不見了，這個是很大的問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "每一次引進一個系統，就是增加事務人員要學習一套新的東西，大家知道手機上的通訊軟體，如果裝了三套的話，生活品質會開始受到非常大的影響，因為就要在不同的傳訊軟體上切換來切換去，生活品質下降、決策品質也下降。這一些都是我們做資通訊的人看起來是系統問題，所以我具體認為我們至少可以做的是先盤點公務體系目前如何用第三方系統，試著把他們實際用到的那一些部分，我們透過雲端的建置，因為本來國發會就有一個很可以延展的雲端機房概念，我們就是在雲端重現所有公務體系朋友們目前已經在使用的外部系統功能。好處是什麼？我們在雲端設置好了一套系統之後，沒有去區分是放在衛福部或者是勞動部的主機上，他們的承辦人只要填一張單子就可以copy過來用，如果這邊有一千人、那邊有十人，我們雲端就可以馬上擴展有十台機器來用，在這樣的狀態之下，每一個部會自己的創新，可以很快在資通訊給其他部會去參照，甚至給地方政府去參照，這個是我目前從我們辦公室開始，我們檔案共享、行程、日誌及內部的表單都會直接用國發會的這一套雲端機房來建置，但我們採用的是自由軟體，所以我們在改做的時候—好，我自己就會改—但我請民間朋友或者是廠商改的時候，我不需要再去拜託Google說上一個版本有我要用的功能，但你改版改壞了，可不可以改回來，其實Google不太會理你（笑）。因此在這樣的情況下，我們可以保持我們想要用功能之外，自己要加新功能的時候也可以擴散到其他單位裡面去。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這也是為什麼我稱自己為「公僕的公僕」，資通訊系統若不是增加決策品質，就是要減少他們的時間成本，讓事務官朋友們準時下班，不然為什麼要來用？我們的競爭對手是這一些外面的服務提供商，並不是我們的事務官或者是其他決策體系的朋友，他們用這一些方式是不得不然，如果我們每推出一個，我們可以減少他們的使用時間，比如天災的時候自己內部網站會發布到外部，像緊急災害應變，瞬間湧來非常多人，不要說災害了，一個颱風來了要不要停班停課，網站有可能馬上就當掉了，但在緊急事態上是不可以當掉的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們以前在零時政府裡面會架一個「Hackfoldr」用分散式流量的方式，用雲端系統分流，像氣爆或者是塵爆發生的時候，像318我們看起來也覺得是救災的情況，也就是架一個系統承擔民間去看這個流量。我們之所以會在外面架是，因為目前公務體系沒有一套很方便的方法，是目前現在要發布的這一些緊急災害應變要馬上放在分流上讓大家很輕易存取，因此我們辦公室——開放數位創新空間(public digital innovation space)－—可能會推出的第一個服務就是在這一個禮拜六請g0v朋友一起建置的緊急應變分流系統，我們怎麼直接導入來，網址是「http://pdis.nat.gov.tw/」，系統還是同一套，發布的還是公務的資訊，我覺得一方面可以增進民間的信任，因為看到「hack」這個字，有些人民會覺得這真的是行政院發布的嗎？即使貼在行政院的網站上；因此如果網址是「nat.gov.tw」，信任度會比較高。另外一部分是，同仁就不用學EtherCalc、Google、Github才能架起來這一套系統，可以直接登入國發會雲端系統就可以自己發布這種東西──我講的都是很小的case，開發的週期都是以星期來計算，但是隨著一點一點幫大家省一點點的力氣，才可以慢慢做到每一次發生這一種事，產生出來的資料就是結構化的資料，我們未來可以做管考及額外的利用，這個是我第一個要做的。" }, { "speaker": "高子羽", "speech": "一步步做？" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "對，我覺得運用這一些新的工具真的要對公務員有幫助，也許更有效率、節省某些時間或者是冗工可以被拿掉，不然又增加新的事情。我常常在開玩笑，一個切身案例，以前我在南藝大的學校裡面，公文系統上網，在線上簽公文要有一個帳號，因為資安考慮的關係，我只有在研究室的那一台才可以上去，不能用手機。當時我是所長兼院長，一件事來一定是助理收到那個公文，以前就叫我簽紙本，跟我說電腦裡面有公文，我進去電腦裡面簽，然後再退給他，然後再報到院，院處再通知我，然後再確認，再到學校去。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "以前紙本是所長簽完就簽到院，然後就通知完成，有時我正好下班回家，跑到停車場碰到我就拿紙本簽了，因此這樣公文電子化到底有節省我們的時間會增加效率嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有啊！比紙難用，就沒有人要用（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "對，所以就兩套併行。所以我的意思類似像這樣，我們運用這一些工具，像公務同仁用它的時候，可能初期學習花一些學習的成本，但真的用的時候是幫他解決問題，我覺得這個是要時常想這一些問題，並不是多一個工具的使用，而且原本的事情卻沒有節省。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以剛剛的例子來講，我協助主持vTaiwan開始，我一直是用電子白板，我覺得電子白板是非常好入門的地方，它保留你本來就會用紙筆的習慣，我們說使用者的體驗是最重要的，紙是這樣子的體驗，而你進電腦的時候，那個體驗不一樣，你要找密碼、自然人憑證（笑），你去蓋個印章，自然人憑證插進去、打密碼再出來，然後再跑幾次，跟本來的程序是不一樣的，不是每一個程序都翻譯到電子化程序，電子化程序是久了的程序，而且跟本來的順序又不一樣，這樣把本來學會的東西會丟掉，我覺得那很可惜，因為這本來是人跟人相處的一些作業習慣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家都說「公民科技」，最近公民科技，有些政府採用成「gov tech」，但我之前在民間做的大部分的工作是輔助式（assistive）的科技，不管是輔助式的公民科技或者是政府的科技，後面的想法都是一樣的，並不是為了取代掉人，而是讓人在作業的時候，能夠用他最習慣的方法可以做到更多，而且可以省掉力氣，不改變既有的習慣。像我們現在手上有一個公文系統，好比電子紙上就可以簽完，簽名就可以讀進去之類的，這個東西如果當時公文系統在建置的時候，廠商應用程式的界面（API）是機器可以讀的，不需要開放，只要機器可讀的目錄，就可以請第三方的開發者說有電子紙，可以把輸出端口接到他們的輸入端口，但如果這個端口沒有開放，唯一開放的是制定好那個流程與視窗，除非用很奇怪的方法模擬人按滑鼠跟按鍵盤（笑），也有這種方法，事實上很多替代役會寫這種程式（笑），就是要把它規制化，如果替代役不在，就沒有辦法用那套系統。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "與其削足適履，我們硬接上不同系統，不如在採購時說先把端口開出來，未來接別的系統時，一方面讓廠商更能夠做系統整合案子，以前可能都只接這個，以後可以慢慢往系統整合走，一方面也可以讓新使用者按照習慣，像以前大家也不知道會有電子白板，可以這樣輸入都這幾年的事，甚至未來螢幕都可以捲起來，我們無法要求廠商在開發時先預想四、五年後公務人員要用什麼設備，唯一能夠期待他們把端口開發出來，等新的設備出來之後，我們試著放進去，至少要保有這樣的空間，我覺得這個是很重要的。" }, { "speaker": "高子羽", "speech": "政委剛有提到用輔助式科技來幫助公務人員可以工作更簡單、更順暢，我們聊大一點，對於開放治理政府這部分，科技可以幫政府做到什麼事？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "聊大一點（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我很尊敬的一位研究者－孫中山先生，曾在民權主義第五講講過他的經驗，孫中山坐一輛汽車，好像在上海吧，從別的地方要到某個地方，因為趕路，所以告訴司機說要快開，但司機不聽他的話去走小路，然後繞了一堆捷徑、遠路，他在車上覺得很急，快要趕不上了－我忘了是趕輪船還是什麼東西－但到最後，他發現司機是對的，因為他準時到了，原因是原本要走那一條路會塞車，司機才知道這一件事，他也不知道這些小路其實看起來彎曲，其實可以開得非常快，因為沒有別的車，因此油門可以催到底，然後就到了。這個是很有名的比喻，用來比喻人民跟治理機器與政府間的關係，他認為政務人員就像人民選出來的司機－他沒有說事務體系是那一輛車，但在我的腦裡是那一輛車（笑）－他的重點是要看成專家，治理的專家，人民應該是信任這個專家能夠用最快的方式去達到人民要的方向，但那個方向是人民要用投票來決定的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一幅圖像在100年前，也許是世界上先進的圖示，但我們用現在的駕駛科技來看，會發現有很多資通訊可以幫忙的地方，好比乘客自己身上有衛星導航，或者是司機一開始就設定衛星導航，他們兩個就有共同的證據（evidence），就可以告訴他們說目前經緯度在哪裡、車流量是多少等等，有了這一些資料，乘客就可以知道司機並不是騙他，因為本來按照民權主義的講法是如果司機騙他，四年後就不要選他或者罷免掉之類的，但我們知道這個成本是非常高的，而且是牽涉全民的；相反的，現在的政策是有一些共乘的概念。一些利益關係人想到這裡，另外一些利益關係人想到那裡，如果一開始說到這裡或那裡，看起來是衝突的，利益關係人也許就吵起來了，但我們如果一有證明說先到這裡，再到那裡，大家就可以下車，不用開到這邊回頭，然後再去載一些人。我覺得目前就是這一些回頭、倒車的狀況，對於各級的治理來講都是滿傷的事，花很多事做A、B、C方案，A方案人民抗議就不做，因此改成B方案，但B方案也許有別人的抗議（絕對不是同一群就撤回），然後來做C方案，但C方案是是因為媒體不關注了，所以終於沒有人吵，但C方案是否比A、B方案好也未必見得，因此在這樣的決策過程中，這樣車的磨損率非常高（事務人員的消耗），我覺得是非常快的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "民智未開的100年前是奢求，無法要求所有資料都知道，現在不一樣，現在年輕人或者是小孩都有充分互相連結網路的能力。舉例來講，像在高中生討論課綱案的時候，我們可以看到即使是高中生，同儕團體都可以對於教育部做複雜的政策做意義的討論，並不輸於他們的公民老師，他們本來不是學這個的，而是現在有非常多的公開知識，國家的行政程序是用公開的方式放到網路上，所以小孩一旦對這個有興趣，在1、2個禮拜內，達到跟制定政策的人平起平坐的狀況，不一定怎麼做比較好，至少可以說去的地方跟在做的哪裡不一樣，他們可以做到這點，如果連高中生都可以做到這一點，我們沒有道理覺得連一般成年利益關係人沒有辦法做到。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第一，司機位置看到的資料、如何做判斷，有一點像GPS導航可以分享給乘客；第二，可以讓後座的司機們（back-seat drivers）參與——常常我開車，他們都要我往左或右開——可以先凝聚出自己共乘的規劃，才不會一直折返，這個也是資通訊科技可以幫忙的；第三，治理結構的本身（這輛車本身），像如果我們能進一步了解，我們把每一步像老師說的，如果把它規制化，大家就會覺得這個程序是可以公認的。比如：如果覺得並不像公聽會要點、覺得可以增強的部分，在我自己的公寓大廈管理委員會自己先試試看用新的方法開，開起來覺得很OK，這個紀錄可能就是請主責部會看說如果這邊多加一點會更好。像連車子的本身都可以分支、實驗及加入的，這個治理機器才可能真的變成是大家的。我覺得走到這一步，民主必須要開始往這個方向跨，不然代議民主制確實在某些地方，比起民主集中制會一直被坊間的人覺得沒有效率，或者有各種的批評或民粹等等。不是我們要變成民主集中制，而是要往直接民主的方向再前進一些。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "剛剛講到孫中山（笑），我覺得這個比喻很好。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "這個也是我們看到新時代資通訊技術已經普及化，所以我們現在看到的現象是，以車子為例，裡面坐了很多人，這一些人因為得到訊息很快，所以就做情緒性的反應，比如看到要轉彎的紅綠燈就有意見說要如何走，反正一大堆意見，甚至是很情緒性表達，這個事情是現在碰到的困難。像現在要取得訊息，但訊息也不完整，卻馬上做判斷及價值的回應，那麼就會形成鄉民的意見流；但是政府部門面對這一些意見又太緊張了，好像有這樣講，所以才會跑出父子騎驢，變成我們有部車子坐了很多人及司機，但大家意見太多，結果開不太動，往這邊不對，往那也不對，又繞了很多路，現在問題在這。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "像剛剛如唐鳳所講的，在這樣的過程中，有一個GPS，得到大家的同意，GPS建議走三條路，有一條路會多1分鐘或者是比較長，然後大家來討論，而不是司機走了再看看怎麼樣，反而有機會。因此，在現實世界我們要想透過臉書或者是LINE或媒體或名嘴，表達一些意見一定是有的，而且為了吸引收視率，一定會比較煽動一點，這個是不可避免的；但我們要如何視為程序中哪一段，所以對程序一定要有看法，政府部門搜集意見之後，大家再帶討論過程。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "就像「提點子」，就告訴我們哪一個比較關注，然後再討論它，這個就有實質的討論。像這一個要走到哪一個程度，往哪裡去，我覺得有這個的時候，真的會讓大家穩定一點。包括名嘴也不用講那麼多，因為那個只是階段性的，一個問題不用延燒那麼久，接著會進到另一個程序，所以我覺得我們要思考一些程序，那些現階段要如何運用現在新的工具，我覺得這很好。像我們有機會用無人車？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "（笑）真的，無人車那個就是直接民主。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在無人車之前，是要對無人車本身要瞭解。" }, { "speaker": "高子羽", "speech": "接下來請副主委跟唐政委對未來開放政府有什麼期許？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們剛剛都講這個了。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "簡單來講，我們覺得這個是美好終點的路，就是一直走，希望有更多人對於資通訊是更有信心的，也許過程中會有困難、混亂跟失望，但不要因為這樣就回去以前了，好比回到當初的聯考，所以我希望大家對於開放政府這一條路是有信心的，共同思考如何做更好的，多元討論是關鍵的。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "我想稍微說明一點，今天談到主要的主題是開放，但是我看起來是有兩個子議題：一開始是在談開放政府的部分；後面一個政委有帶到一些技術，像將來應用的技術，我們儘量用一些開放的技術來達成前面開放政府的目標。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "開放政府的部分，當然從前面一直談的是參與式的增加及廣度，這個部分就我在這一個位置上會比較期待，一個是從上到下、一個是從下到上，從這一層就心態及做事方法的調整，像副主委、政委或更高的長官，一定有一個體認是一定走開放政府的路。決心下去之後，如何影響中層？像民眾其實有這樣的需求或行動已經出來了，如何由下到上其實影響中間這一層的做事方法。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "從我的某些理解來看，中間這一層的政府事務官們，可能他們會覺得在以前沒有開放政府的時候，也會辦公聽會這一些，他們覺得對於利害關係人的掌握，我所謂的「掌握」是哪一群是利害關係人，他覺得這一方面的瞭解程度會很充份，可是在現在的社會環境底下，也許當時的利害關係人仍然是利害關係人，可能還有一些不是他能知道的利害關係人實際上也跟著要下的決策、建議可能也是有關係，但在現在的環境，以前可能是那一群人，現在可能是那一群人跟這個有關。像剛剛政委舉例車子的時候，原本只有孫中山坐在後面，現在是很多人都坐在後面，原來的司機只知道孫中山叫他去哪裡，而現在有更多人。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "利用開放政府的技術及做法，讓更多後面的人去參與這樣的想法，也就是利害關係人範圍越來越廣，並不是能完全理解及掌握的，用原來做事方法或原來想法去做的，並沒有聽到另外一邊的聲音。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "通常是決策出來了，突然在街上聽到他們的聲音（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "對啊！" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "最後一點補充的是，服務流程的部分，國發會這邊已經思考我們應該要做整個服務再造，而不是組織再造，組織再造外還有一些服務，如政府對民眾的服務或者是政府與政府間的服務，應該也有再造的空間再做，但這樣再造的過程當中，可能也就不再是整個政府自己做處理，應該有一些民間的力量，像政委或者是一些社群的人可以參與這一些服務再造的過程。像我們已經實際上小規模去做一些測試、嘗試，經濟部有辦「一秒搞懂政府網站」的比賽，這個比賽就是希望看看政府現在網站上的服務有什麼可以去做改善的空間，比賽前幾名做出來的這一些網站，的確跟原網站相比，民間人士所規劃出來的網站，服務流程性非常流暢。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為是實際用的人在設計（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "對。類似像這樣小小的比賽互動，可以讓政府內部的人瞭解引進民間資源之思考方式對於政府服務是有幫助的，這個是我們會持續且慢慢擴大執行。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我補充一下，我完全同意潘處長的講法，而且特別重要的是，從技術的角度來看，我們用的技術是自由軟體，其實在全世界，像促進自由軟體的國家如巴西其實非常早開始使用，像我們Open Document的普及率在全世界來講還不錯。但實際技術的這一種基礎，我們是可以跟全世界的社群一起開發的，這些技術如何應用到公務流程裡面，像「提點子」或者是「vTaiwan」的流程，好比英國工黨的領袖就拿「臺灣既然做得出來，英國怎麼會做不出來」當政見，或者在義大利、西班牙、法國及紐西蘭的朋友們也跟我們說我們這套系統他們用了之後，他們加了什麼東西，我們也可以用，是一個實質雙向外交。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "唯一必須要臺灣使用者自己做的是「服務規劃」，因為每一個具體使用的服務樣式是不一樣的，即便是得過英國網站設計大獎的服務網站，照抄過來不見得可以使用，因為使用習慣不一樣。因此我們要有一個架構式的概念，要把政府具體上跟大家一起互動過程裡面，那個服務去用設計思考的方式，讓他能夠理解這個是服務流程，並不只是機關網站、機關臉書、機關的部落格、機關LINE帳號。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "技術的東西都可以透過國際社群來做開發及實質外交，但「服務設計」這個，是需要透過電子化政府朋友及民間會做服務設計的朋友一起來做，這個是責無旁貸的，因為不可能請全世界的朋友幫忙做。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "內容應該都差不多了，都有了。" }, { "speaker": "高子羽", "speech": "謝謝。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "首先謝謝大家今天能夠來參加電子競技產業方向未來規劃的一個公聽會，今天很高興今天有幾位委員共同主持今天的公聽會，我先來介紹一下。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "在我右邊的第一位，也就是長期在電競運動協會當中，包括在這個產業貢獻很多、很好的意見，民進黨的委員鄭寶清委員，他也是電競協會的理事長；還有Kawlo Iyun Pacidal委員。等一下也會有吳志揚委員及呂孫綾委員來共同主持這一場會議。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "非常高興今天來到現場有我們大家在新政府團隊當中，大家高度重視，當然我們也希望藉由今天，非常誠意今天本人到，也就是我們的唐鳳數位政委，也希望她來參與，長期未來的電競產業有很多不同的問題，希望由唐鳳政委來主導，把相關的一些問題能夠帶領我們儘速釐清。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "因為前一個小時非常重要，大家行程也非常緊湊，等一下政委及Kawlo Iyun Pacidal委員十點會離開，我先不講太多的話，今天在現場關心所有電競產業未來發展方向及現在面臨一些問題，大家可能都很清楚瞭解，我在這邊就不多講。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "從右邊邀請我們的鄭寶清委員簡短地先來談幾句他過去在這一塊產業上看到的一些問題跟他對未來的一些想法。" }, { "speaker": "鄭寶清", "speech": "主席、在座的各位貴賓及好朋友，在講電競協會之前我要先謝謝施文彬理事長，因為我們本來是叫做「台灣電競協會」，但因為要參加國際電競比賽，所以改名叫「中華民國電競協會」，還好「台灣電競協會」繼續由施文彬理事長接起棒子，我想電競協會未來發展很重要。" }, { "speaker": "鄭寶清", "speech": "可以看到MBA在比賽的時候，有1,800萬的人在看決賽，大聯盟有2,800萬的人（看），美國在舉辦「英雄聯盟」S4世界盃的時候，在看決賽的人達到2,700萬。" }, { "speaker": "鄭寶清", "speech": "我們知道產業並不是電競，還會帶來相關產業非常大的發展，包含硬體、軟體、電視轉播及很多產業都會帶動，所以我們看到韓國為什麼把電競當作最重要的體育項目，到現在為止還認為是一個遊戲，並不認為是運動項目。因此，我們知道產值非常大，如果按照教育部體育署自己做的評估，把它改成運動項目，台灣（產值）會超過500億。" }, { "speaker": "鄭寶清", "speech": "現在台灣十三歲至六十五歲玩電競項目的人，在Nielsen做的調查裡面，台灣有740萬人，所以台灣每三個人最少有一個人在玩電競的遊戲，所以我想這個產業很大，我們希望教育部能夠正視，把它變成運動項目，讓選手有更好的出入，可以帶動這個產業的發展。" }, { "speaker": "鄭寶清", "speech": "我們知道現在只要懂高科技產業，如果與電競相結合，那個產業會很賺錢，所以希望由國家來帶動，台灣本來就很穩固的地位繼續向前行，在這裡再次感謝大家及關注，表示最誠摯的心意，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "謝謝理事長，除了電競產業的產值，其實上、下游還有很多不同的產業，未來如何讓新政府能夠帶領領頭羊的角色，跨部會其實需要很多的合作，但我們很遺憾，一直沒有從跨部會當中整合出一個專責的單位來處理有關電競相關的業務，下一位再請Kawlo Iyun Pacidal委員來表達他對於電競產業的想法。" }, { "speaker": "Kawlo Iyun Pacidal", "speech": "謝謝李委員、立法院的同仁、唐政委及現場來賓，大家早安！" }, { "speaker": "Kawlo Iyun Pacidal", "speech": "其實這一個公聽會，我們時代力量有一位委員更想過來，也就是林昶佐（Freddy），但因為電競產業有很多好朋友在裡頭，但因為他要出差，所以他沒有辦法來，我在這裡先代替Freddy林昶佐向大家說聲早安。" }, { "speaker": "Kawlo Iyun Pacidal", "speech": "有關於電競產業未來的潛值相當的無限、也相當大，但現在有遇到很多問題，電競選手很希望能夠加入體育項目的產業，但我昨天花了一段小小的時間去看了體育署長長四十幾頁的報告，前面很繁雜，但最後的結論是沒有辦法列入這個體育項目，主要的原因是會說社會觀感或者是怎麼樣；但我會覺得仍然是我們政府必須正視的問題，我也希望教育部這邊能夠去考量台灣很多的選手其實往往都會在國際上帶來很好的夾擊。" }, { "speaker": "Kawlo Iyun Pacidal", "speech": "其實這個產業有未來潛在的能力，現在也是一個非常夯的產業，我們要如何讓這個產業未來的方向能夠走向正向，而且帶來我們台灣整個經濟的價值，這個是我們必須要正視及面對。所以，我希望接下來的公聽會大家能夠暢所欲言，真正朝向一個有共識的方向走。" }, { "speaker": "Kawlo Iyun Pacidal", "speech": "在這裡還是要強調一下，我代替林昶佐向大家問好，大家一起努力，謝謝！" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "謝謝高委員，我另外再邀請一下今天公聽會的共同主持人呂委員。" }, { "speaker": "呂孫綾", "speech": "謝謝李委員、鄭委員、Kawlo Iyun Pacidal委員及唐政委，以及在座的各位代表大家早安、大家好。" }, { "speaker": "呂孫綾", "speech": "非常高興能夠很幾位委員一起主持這一場電競產業未來方向的公聽會，其實這幾年來非常蓬勃發展，甚至蔡英文總統現身在記者會上給予夥伴們祝福，我們辦公室的幾位助理其實對於電競這一方面是非常地著迷，甚至非常瘋狂。我想今天電子競技產業在台灣非常蓬勃發展，但我們可以看到現在相關的制度與政府角色其實沒有一個明確的方向及主管機關，這也是為什麼我們今天要主辦這樣子公聽會的原因。" }, { "speaker": "呂孫綾", "speech": "我想電子競技產業是一個非常有發展能量的產業，也可以帶動國內整個軟、硬體產業的發展，我相信如果透過今天公聽會的舉辦，對於我們電競產業未來的發展是有非常大的幫助，我想有這樣健全的制度及政府的支持，台灣的電競產業一定能夠和中國、美國及歐美國家的競爭上來說，一定豪不遜色。也要感謝各位在場的代表及委員的參與，我相信我們一起來努力，讓我們的電子競技產業能夠在台灣這部分能夠發展得更好，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "謝謝呂孫綾委員。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "我再一次介紹今天除了共同幾位主持人之外，我再介紹一下今天來到現場所有官員，行政院各個部會，包括幾個重要單位，再一次補充介紹，在我左邊也就是對於這一塊產業未來大家希望能夠跨部會很迅速時間得到整合的唐政委，再一次感謝她。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "再介紹教育部政務次長蔡清華次長、教育部技職司楊玉惠司長、教育部技職司科長張惠雯科長、教育部資料司高級規劃師韓善民。未來過去辦電競活動碰到很多困難，參加國際性比賽，也希望這一塊體育署未來主導及處理，歡迎趙昌恕副組長、體育署王浩祿科長。還沒到，是不是？" }, { "speaker": "教育部同仁", "speech": "另外有公務。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "好的，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "經濟部工業局電子資訊組謝戎峰、經濟部工業局資策會數位內容辦公室蔡育霖，謝謝您們；台北市電腦公會經理楊敏豐、台北市電腦公會研究員胡迪福；經濟部商業司專門委員莊文玲、經濟部商業司專員康明瑋；科技部工程技術研究發展司副司長賴宇亭、科技部工程技術研究發展司助理研究員黃世育；文化部人文及出版司科長陳毓麟、文化部人文及出版司專員簡志維。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "我現在再來介紹一下過去在這一塊產業今天共同來關心很多產業界的人士及電玩選手、玩家，我先來介紹長期在這一塊投入非常多，台灣電競協會的理事長施文彬，歡迎您！常務理事葉哲均也來到現場，還有理事洪梓恆、編輯陳添志、秘書長洪梓硯。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "今天還有很多電競選手來，選手曾鈵元，歡迎您；香港電子競技有限公司負責人鍾培生、陳博一及薛弘偉；Garena的副理陳先倫；香港商動視暴雪有限公司台灣分公司王睿文；微星科技股份有限公司行銷經理蔡菁芬；力麗集團總經理李保健；國立交通大學數位動畫文創學程負責人梁世佑；Yahoo遊戲的責任編輯洪任玄。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "我再補充介紹一下，公聽會的共同主持人吳志揚委員，吳委員要不要說幾句話？我們都說過了，還是您要最後也可以。" }, { "speaker": "吳志揚", "speech": "主持人、與會來賓的早安，很榮幸各黨各派關心電競產業的人一起來參加公聽會。" }, { "speaker": "吳志揚", "speech": "我認為電競產業非常有潛力，我剛好是中華職棒的會長，我仔細檢視了一下產業鏈，比職棒更復雜，但基本上從後勤支援、公關行銷及組隊競賽的規則、聯盟成立、對戰等等，我基本上覺得是職業運動，因此我非常建議教育部體育署當作職業運動來培養，當然沒有人說電競產業變成職業運動以後，上下連所有的軟硬體都要由體育署，當然沒有辦法，但至少教育部、體育署相關的從業人員，尤其是選手、教練或者是這一塊的從業人員，向把他當成是職業運動的選手來栽培。" }, { "speaker": "吳志揚", "speech": "至於後面涉及到軟體、設計，那是另外一個部分，那自然有相關的單位，包括文化部數位內容產業或者是在硬體相關用的一些設備，甚至將來跟AR、VR合作的相關一些技術工程，那應該是經濟部的部分，但從業人員，尤其是電競選手的部分，我覺得應該可以馬上認定為職業運動，因為整個過程是很特別的，但是很不幸地，我看到今年3月出版體育署針對電競是否納入體育運動合適性的評估報告中，還是認為並不是體育項目，我認為「體育」跟「運動」是不一樣的東西，但是運動跟職業運動是Sport跟Game，這兩個的基本原理是有一個競技的規則，大家一起根據這個規則去競技，最後一定有輸贏，這個就是Game。" }, { "speaker": "吳志揚", "speech": "比如自己打電腦或者是自己練網球及跑步，這個是一般的體育，如果到比賽，而且有規則，這就是運動。體育署我看到以前的理由，可能都似是而非，認為電競產業的運動量並不是很大，好像是在玩；另外一個是覺得不適合列為教育部體育上課的內容，我覺得這並不是一個很重要的，因為運動的產業非常多，也不是大家都因為運動產業，所以學校上體育課就列入，事實上並沒有這種規定。" }, { "speaker": "吳志揚", "speech": "第二，我們現在看在運動量的部分，其實電競的產業，因為你們自己玩了才知道，其實動腦跟動手的協調、體能及腦力的消耗是非常大的，其實像圍棋都在這個項下，我相信體育的運動量不低於圍棋，事實上都結合在一起。" }, { "speaker": "吳志揚", "speech": "我們看到體育頻道裡面，不管是福斯或緯來，傳統看起來像電競產業以外，電競產業常常在轉播，像射飛鏢，還有一個德州撲克，這個也是運動，但為何會放在運動的頻道播，我們對運動的定義要做改變。" }, { "speaker": "吳志揚", "speech": "我要鼓勵體育署大大把這個作為運動，因為這個趨勢是沒有辦法擋，將來的人會更跟機器、電腦軟體、AR/VR結合在一起，這個是趨勢，也是未來年輕人喜歡的。" }, { "speaker": "吳志揚", "speech": "如果我們是全世界前面幾個栽培努力的話，像美國MLB清光緒三年成立的，如果我們早期投入的話，我相信台灣各方面軟、硬體及選手的實力，絕對可以在全世界大放異彩，並不是需要身高200公分、體重多少磅，比的是靈巧、策略及合作，這個部分我相信台灣的選手會非常非常有競爭力，我想將來的趨勢是這個，我們早一點進入輔導，我覺得應該是讓整個電競產業成為將來值得驕傲的產業，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "謝謝吳志揚委員把電競產業、電競選手面臨的幾個問題都點出來了，現在話不多說，再一次歡迎今天來到現場的唐政委先講幾句話，等一下再請蔡次長及施理事長發言，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家早，我是練習來聽公聽會，所以其實我不會講太多話，因為我大概只會待到十點，但我們有請合作的速錄師Wendy，一分鐘可以打三百至四百字，她是可以把每一個字打下來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們會用這個方式記錄的原因是，雖然我人在十點後不在現場，但我會希望局處、部會的朋友們，不管現在在現場或者是從網路上關心這一件事，都可以透過從文字轉播的方式來關心這一場公聽會；因為這樣記錄原則的關心，提醒等一下發言的朋友們，如果有講某一句話不想被列入記錄，或者講完之後才發現講錯，那一句話要刪除重講一次的話，要比較清楚說明，不然這一場是會完全公開，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "謝謝政委，她很關注，謝謝各位在現場所有好朋友，面臨到的問題，今天公聽會可以開到十二點，我會陪大家開到十二點，我會拜託大家暢所欲言，把各部會遇到的問題、電競選手所面臨的問題，拜託大家今天儘量提出來。第二位邀請蔡次長。" }, { "speaker": "蔡次長", "speech": "謝謝主席、幾位委員及政委，在座各位來賓（大家好）。我想非常榮幸，因為部長非常重視公聽會，所以指派我帶領教育部的同仁都來出席。" }, { "speaker": "蔡次長", "speech": "我想剛剛幾位都點出了這一個電競活動，是不是納入運動輔導的項目裡面。確實誠如剛剛幾位委員也點出了，我們過去體育署也好，部裡面的立場，因為教育部是全國的教育及體育的最高主管機關，所以我們的思考、想法會比較全面，誠如剛剛吳志揚委員所提到的，我們過去的想法是這個如果納入運動的項目，會跟學校體育、課綱這一些都要聯合、結合在一起，我們就會擔心在學校的課程裡面，我們學校的經費能不能負荷這樣的設備，以及學生從事這樣的活動，是不是跟傳統體育方面要有身體（活動）比較沒有關聯？" }, { "speaker": "蔡次長", "speech": "剛剛吳委員也有提到，我也瞭解到像過去在廣州亞運、東亞運時，也有把剛剛提到的圍棋、象棋的項目這些項目都納進來，比較不會認為是運動的項目，我想在座很多高手都瞭解一定要有非常好的團隊合作及心智方面等活動。" }, { "speaker": "蔡次長", "speech": "所以，部裡面及體育署的立場，大概是從內外來看。第一，在國際上奧林匹克的委員會，在兩百零六個國家裡面，只有中國把它納入是一個運動的項目，韓國在過去的2013年「亞洲室內暨武藝運動會」將電競納入為項目，但明年在土耳其第五屆亞洲室內暨武藝競賽就沒有把它納入。還有，國際上最大電競協會一直要申請納入體育項目裡，事實上一直都沒有被接受，這是體育署從外來思考的。" }, { "speaker": "蔡次長", "speech": "從對內來看，剛剛有幾位委員，包括主席及政委，體育署過去有委託台灣師大、台北市立大學及Yahoo都有做過問卷調查，事實上大部分都有1/3認為它是一個運動，其他2/3都認為它是一個休閒娛樂的項目，這是過去體育署及教育部這樣的立場。" }, { "speaker": "蔡次長", "speech": "我們非常同意像剛剛吳委員所提到的，「Sport」跟「Physical Education」要拆開來看，如果要納入體育署運動的項目，我們建議以目前為止，我們希望在這一方面包括各級學校、家長這一部分是否能接受變成是運動的項目，這一部分再進而推廣。" }, { "speaker": "蔡次長", "speech": "以目前來講，其實教育部對這一方面—司長也在這邊—我們瞭解到國內有六十五所學校，一百九十四個科系在培養相關方面的人才，我們部裡面也補助電競選手出國比賽，六次的比賽也補助相當的經費。因此，這一次部分我們其實很支持，但以目前我剛剛所提到的，從國際上及國內的現實上來看，我們有這樣的考量，我想供各位參考，以上是我的看法，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "謝謝蔡次長對於過去在教育部這一塊有關於電競產業的投入，我想在現場所有的好朋友，包括理事長一定都在想其實我們的優勢應該有能力做得更多、更好，也希望透過今天大家來參與，把這一些問題發覺出來，不管國際上對於電競的產業在哪裡，但台灣對於電競這一塊，我們的政府能不能帶領領頭羊的角色走在最前端，投入更多才是最重要的。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "下一個階段請施理事長對於電競這一塊，您長期投入所面臨到的一些相關問題，包括選手出國比賽、他們的職場生涯非常短暫及產業鏈的問題，請理事長作一下說明。" }, { "speaker": "施文彬", "speech": "各位長官，各位與會的貴賓們，各位媒體朋友，以及所有收看直播，關心台灣電競發展的觀眾們，大家早安！我是社團法人台灣電競協會理事長施文彬。" }, { "speaker": "施文彬", "speech": "首先，我要特別感謝李彥秀委員、吳志揚委員、林昶佐委員、呂孫綾委員、高潞以委員。這五位不分黨派委員們的熱情支持，如果沒有您們的支持，也不可能有今天的公聽會。" }, { "speaker": "施文彬", "speech": "在現在視為時代，台灣有一群孩子在電子競技裡面努力拼命爭取榮耀，然而這一些電競「選手」連選手的身分都沒有，可能還是掛著公司的「業務人員」身分。" }, { "speaker": "施文彬", "speech": "現在我們的兩支隊伍AHQ e-Sports Club跟閃電狼剛結束美國進行世界賽，各位可能不知道，AHQ e-Sports Club隊伍內台灣最強的中路選手西門夜說，他最早是屬於另一家（電競周邊廠商）隊伍，但由於戰績不佳，老闆突然宣布解散，如果不是AHQ e-Sports Club的謝老闆慧眼看上他的天分，極力說服他的家人，並保證會好好對待他，我們現在可能已經失去了這一位世界級的好手，而閃電狼的前身叫做鋼鐵人，他們更是在進行比賽的過程當中，由於戰績不佳，也是被原來的老闆宣布解散的隊伍，後來被台中網銀公司接手，才有現在的閃電狼。閃電狼的中路選手Maple更是被今年ESPN評選為世界十大中路選手排名第三位。" }, { "speaker": "施文彬", "speech": "一個國際賽事，已經是全球產業，我們的選手連身分都沒有，都是假的，怎麼跟人家拼？然而，其他各國又是怎麼對待這些孩子的？" }, { "speaker": "施文彬", "speech": "在韓國「文化立國」政策下，由其文化、體育、觀光部訂定《電子競技振興法》，並由文化產業部門轄下遊戲產業科，管理及推廣，他們除了對網路遊戲產業鉅額投入外，更結合3C產品及科技技術，在政策、稅收等配套方面給予了最大利，塑造出龐大的電子產業。並給予電子遊戲選手一個新身分「職業電子競技選手」通過遊戲賺錢、成名、獲得社會認可，這給予充滿憧憬的年輕人提供一個新的表現舞臺。而中國國家體育總局2003年則是直接在中國數字體育互動平台啟動儀式上宣布：電子競技為正式開展的第99個運動種類後，又於2008年整合現有之體育運動種類，電子競技重新列為第78號體育運動。" }, { "speaker": "施文彬", "speech": "除此之外，電競在台灣如果要與國際接軌，也需要政府的協助，像是前年台灣電競協會極力爭取《英雄聯盟》S4世界大賽循環賽到台灣，中國部分未滿18歲的選手有簽證問題，在當時協會成立未滿一年未能取得團體憑證之下，只好使用演藝工會以演藝專業人員身分邀請過來。而在美國，電子競技選手赴美參加邀請過來。而在美國，電子競技選手赴美參加競賽可申請適用於職業演藝事業從業人員及職業運動員進入美國從事短期活動P1簽證。" }, { "speaker": "施文彬", "speech": "在產業發展上，根據統計資料，全球電競玩家數高達15.5億，估計全球在2016年的電競產值可達到860億美元。電競產業能帶動什麼？只有遊戲嗎？我們不要忽略電競產業能帶動什麼？只有遊戲嗎？我們不要忽略電競產業相關硬體，如鍵盤、滑鼠、筆電、主機板、螢幕等等電競相關設備，而電競電腦廠商幾乎都在台灣！這幾年PC銷量下滑，唯一逆勢成長的就是電競PC。華碩、宏基、微星、技嘉都紛紛加碼投入電競產品的生產。從主機板轉型以電競為主的筆電、桌機與高階顯示卡，同時也積極贊助電競隊伍。" }, { "speaker": "施文彬", "speech": "而電子競技明星選手本身，他關注者是全球的玩家，輕易都能超越台灣目前的職業體育競賽的觀眾，試問台灣有幾個藝人跟媒體平台能吸引全球目光的！根據Nielsen在2014年第一季市場調查，台灣13到65歲的人口中有745萬人是遊戲玩家。2014年美國大聯盟冠軍決戰有2350萬觀眾收看，2014年NBA冠軍決戰的收視觀眾有1,800萬，2014「英雄聯盟」S4世界總決賽共有超過2,700萬名觀眾收看。這些電競賽事跟明星選手能帶動的廣告效益都是現在台灣沒辦法做到，但是卻是有機會創造的。" }, { "speaker": "施文彬", "speech": "電子競技，英文叫做「E-Sport」，其中sport這個英文，在這裡不翻譯成運動，而是競技，其實這個翻譯也比較接近他本來的意思，只是台灣已經很習慣將sport翻譯成運動，不過這其實很容易產生誤解。我們不是希望電子競技一定要納入台灣正式運動項目之一，而是希望政府能協助電子競技進行產業類別的歸類，進一步有一套完整的規範來管理電競產業以及選手，從協會或任何一個指定單位登記註冊的業餘選手，而所有的職業選手都是從此單位認證出去的，現有的職業選手都必須登記在此單位，類似南韓的做法，選手跟職業隊伍的薪資問題，比賽獎金問題，或其他任何問題，甚至糾紛，此單位都可以妥善協助選手處理，電競隊伍的公司與電競選手的勞資方面問題，代言、贊助、廣告等有收入的商業行為，政府也必須有所規範。" }, { "speaker": "施文彬", "speech": "今年7月寶可夢上市，第一個月營收突破50億台幣，手遊已經是世界經濟體系中重要的產業，不過大家可以回想一下，當時媒體怎樣取消這一些玩家，抵制這股風潮。" }, { "speaker": "施文彬", "speech": "不久前里約奧運閉幕式上，日本接續的短片中，許多日本漫畫中的主角出場，最後帶出安倍扮演的馬力歐，動滿已經是日本文化中重要的代表，而且行銷全球，但是我們回頭想想，台灣社會，對待動漫，一向是怎樣的態度？我們這樣一路走來，很不容易的，前幾天，蔡英文總統親自為電競選手授旗代表國家出賽，我們要讓台灣變得不一樣，需要打破很多舊有的觀念，如果已經到達國際規格的電競，已經是國家代表隊的電競選手，都還被當成邊緣人，都還無法正名，那麼改革這一條路，恐怕依然不樂觀，報告完畢。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "謝謝施理事長，從他擔任投入這一塊產業之後，看到、知道及瞭解國際上相關的問題，他剛剛也都有做一些說明。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "剛剛就蔡次長的談話，我們鄭委員也有一些想法，請鄭委員簡要發言。" }, { "speaker": "鄭寶清", "speech": "我剛剛聽完施理事長的報告感到憂心，我們在做任何的突破，大概都是破壞性的創新，要創新要有一些破壞，幾個立法委員支持林全院長，在改革路上一定會造成很多的阻礙，要創新一定會破壞，所以我們現在不要講說哪一個國家有、哪一個國家沒有，我們這樣如何去帶領做一個領導者？我們只能做一個跟隨者而已，人家怎麼做、我們跟著怎麼做，我們知道這個產業對台灣的發展如此重要，而是政府把一大堆的理由帶進來，包含我們學校是不是接受、我們的學生是不是把它變成運動項目，並不是那麼重要，圍棋在學校也只是一個社團，教育部很清楚變化一個運動項目後，讓這一些選手可以安心比賽，名不正、行不順，所以要證明很重要的是，要讓他們能夠很理直氣壯去做競賽的活動，帶動台灣相關產業的發展。韓國、中國懂得趕快把這個列入運動項目，因為他們看到這個未來的前景，觀賞的比NBA、大聯盟的人多這麼多人，有15億以上的人在玩這個遊戲及電競活動，因此我們希望教育部可以重新鬆綁，如果不鬆綁，我們的改革都是假的，我們也不會成功，因此我講說我們要開源、節流、鬆綁、效率及創新，這個是新政府要走的方向，新政府是觀光客的鬆綁、投資的鬆綁及單一櫃台的鬆綁，這個是教育部要走在這個前端，重新思考把這個變成運動項目。" }, { "speaker": "鄭寶清", "speech": "不要把這個項目，像學校的體育課裡面要放這個項目，不一定，主要是要培養選手，有國家給的名氣而參加比賽，希望對台灣的產業會有很大的幫助，希望教育部能夠突破及創新。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "謝謝鄭委員，針對蔡次長的回應，我剛剛一開始先講了，如果政府可以站在前端領導、專法的話，家長很多的疑慮我們可以有很多不同的規範來處理，但是就政府有沒有積極態度來看這個產業，台灣是筆電的代工國、非常多優秀的選手，可惜的是，他們電玩選手的時間非常短暫，因此能不能把握，我們每一個電競選手的時間也非常重要，很多的優勢在政府如果沒有更積極態度，很多的機會馬上就溜走了，因此這一塊真的很希望藉由政委來參與，未來跨部會的主導，教育部、體育署的主導，角色能夠更積極，希望可以有更多的改革。" }, { "speaker": "鄭寶清", "speech": "蔡次長，事情不做，可以找一百個理由，要做只要找一個方法，所以請給電競運動給他們指點，但不要指指點點，不要想說大家都沒有做，我們就不要做，這樣怎麼會進步？而是要做，我們有什麼方法可以解決，你剛剛所說的很多理由都可以解決，只要列入運動項目，像他們去服兵役都很方便，這可以帶動整個國家的產業發展。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "謝謝鄭理事長，高委員。" }, { "speaker": "Kawlo Iyun Pacidal", "speech": "我等一下有一個記者會，聽完施理事長講完，其實心裡很感慨，其實我剛剛質詢 OTT 對台灣產業衝擊的時候，那時跟鄭部長講一句話，科技已經到這個地步，我們再做評估，然後再決定要不要討論、立法及制度化，然後再開始著手研擬，但現在我們的科技進步到這樣，而我們未來的產業已經走這麼快的時候，當你一再再忽視就會變成一個狀況，就像我們的影電視產業，最後萎縮，假設電競產業可以有很好發展的機會，可是我們的政府對於這樣的態度不正視，導致不管是選手出去矮人家一截或者是產業無法擴大時，其實我覺得我們政府必須要負更大的責任。因為我等一下有一個記者會，希望教育部能夠把這一個視野再擴大，速度再加快，正視現在電競產業的問題，他們需要的東西其實是很急迫的，請把他們的心聲放在心上。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "謝謝高委員，三個階段，我們是不是可以來邀請我們的幾位好朋友，包括幾位電競選手鍾先生、丁特，包括我要邀請唐政委共同來玩一下我們今天施理事長好朋友準備2VX2的比賽。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "謝謝，我們今天公聽會的內容非豐富精彩，也非常謝謝所有關心的官員們可以對這一個機會多學習及瞭解，唯有政府部門大家對於這一個產業有更多的認識、瞭解，未來在專法的部分，包括政府資源挹注及家長社會大眾對於這一塊接受的疑慮才有機會慢慢做一些改變。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "接下來是不是可以邀請非常重要電競選手來稍微談一談對於這一塊產業及包括玩家變成選手的整個親自親身經歷過程。謝謝政委要離開，但她透過直播，每講的每一個字都會留下來，包括大家提出來的問題，我都會追著部會官員有問有答，就不耽誤今天會議的時間，請我們的選手鍾先生來發表一下您的看法及意見，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "鍾培生", "speech": "謝謝主席，我是鍾先生，首先作為這一次公聽會的協辦單位，要跟所有的官員、媒體及學者非常開心出席今天的活動，剛剛很多官員都已經有提到什麼是電子競技，也就是由電子遊戲做體育運動，透過虛擬網路的架構來對戰，都要考驗選手們的能力、天分，配合他們的眼睛、手的協調，要有很多訓練單位、分析師去support他們，打電動必須要有這一些元素，電競就是給這一般年輕人很正面的態度，如何可以把他們從現實與遊戲拉開，就像我今天在打NBA，但我打但求，而不是打NBA，NBA有明星的包裝等等，可以把整個環境提高，把這一個謎思帶回去，所以電子競技並不是不正業、逃避現實的年輕人作為一個遮口，我相信教育部推廣可以把這一些東西避免。" }, { "speaker": "鍾培生", "speech": "電子競技有多火？其實可以看到NBA的總決賽，收看人數有3,000萬人去看，《英雄聯盟》已經有3,600萬人去看，報告有說到全球的用戶，其實很多的營收不能算在這裡，遊戲裡面推動電競活動所帶來的收益，還有電競俱樂部為選手們帶來很高的收益，剛剛說的單位都是用美金來算。右邊的圖大家可以看到，大家以為YouTube看得最多是音樂，但其實不是，其實是遊戲，在左上角其實是美國最火的電競節目跟其他傳統的運動比賽，獎金比傳統運動多很多。其實看直播，最多的是在哪裡？也就是我們台北。" }, { "speaker": "鍾培生", "speech": "大家可以看到所有國際大的企業，像Amazon、Yahoo、ESPN、Google、YouTube、FaceBook等等都在推E-Sport，而全球最大的投資基金的provideo都一定會有E-Sport在裡面，電子競技成長越來越快，其實騰訊最近已經把兩家最大的遊戲公司買下來，Garena在今年年初用了1,100億，連米其老師都開始用E-Sport，台灣在面對這麼龐大的市場，台灣還是選擇不理嗎？" }, { "speaker": "鍾培生", "speech": "十幾年前中國、韓國及美國等很多國家都已經在推動電子競技，已經把電子競技列為職業的運動員，身分與待遇與傳統的運動員並沒有差別，選手們可以因工作而去不同的國家，很多有意義、代表性的地方來進行電競比賽，包括e-Sports Stadium、他們的奧運場地，美國NBA、LINE final的stable sensor，我相信這一些大家都知道，在網路上看了很久，不過台灣呢？" }, { "speaker": "鍾培生", "speech": "2001年曾政承已經為台灣拿下第一個世界冠軍，把第二名的韓國擊敗，不過在2012年在訪問裡面說：「我只想要2萬元的工作。」他今天是一個貨車的司機，相較起輸給他的那個韓國人，現在他跟女明星結婚，住大樓，台灣還要把多少的優勢送出去？" }, { "speaker": "鍾培生", "speech": "我現在想要跟大家解釋一下，這個東西背後的來源是什麼？為什麼台灣的年輕人這麼喜歡電競，以上的數據這麼誇張？華人比較傳統，我們都比較內向，過年是跟別人拱手，外國人是握手，這一代的年輕人非常優秀且善良，但社會有非常多的問題，大家都在面對，薪水不夠，別人看不見你，你也看不見前途，很多年輕人覺得根本不被重視，為了生活、為了戴假面具去做人，所以很多人逃避面試，躲在虛擬世界，因為虛擬世界人人平等，可以做自己，其實現在新一代的年輕人都非常聰明，比我、你更聰明，因為他們從小都已經接受到非常多的資訊，學得非常快，他們是台灣未來的棟樑。" }, { "speaker": "鍾培生", "speech": "其實他們比我們更瞭解用正確的態度去面對遊戲，而不是沉迷，會玩電競遊戲是才能，而這個才能應該被認可。" }, { "speaker": "鍾培生", "speech": "很多人很努力，但成績打不好，可能沒有天分，所以他們的正確態度被否定，因此這一些人出來挺電競，因為這一些選手他們可以把努力、精確的東西被硬訂。" }, { "speaker": "鍾培生", "speech": "其實大家可以看到討論區裡面年輕人如何評論一些電子競技選手及不務正業的年輕人差別，其實他們都懂，這一些年輕人可以在網路上鼓起勇氣支持及發言，這一些東西我們不需要正視嗎？" }, { "speaker": "鍾培生", "speech": "當然要感謝很多媒體關注電子競技，不過很多時候大家分不出電競選手及電競愛好者，很多人只聽到獎金、年薪超高，打電動就好了，而不用讀書，其實不是，電競可以發展到現在，不只是選手的努力，而是很多年輕人的支持，要是開發像很多的資金、努力，再配合這一個比賽，其實這一個電競俱樂部的選手，給他們好的宿舍、薪水、訓練及後勤，讓選手們有競爭力，可以把整個東西提升，這個是賽事的體制，有一個直播的頻道，像Amzon等，還有很多賽評等等，廠商支持有很多營銷的推廣，有這個大環境，各位媒體及官員都在關注，因此並不是你打電動強就可以賺錢，大家看到現在檯面上、報導上，剛剛施大哥提到的是多用戶去選出最頂尖頂尖的選手，他們都是從小小的社群比賽開始打區域聯賽，再打區域頂級聯賽，再國際的名額裡面去挑戰世界賽。" }, { "speaker": "鍾培生", "speech": "我相信大家聽了這麼多的東西，都知道電競行業其實可以產生很多的就業機會，由低到高，其實有很多不同類型的人才在不同的功能，不論是幕前或者是幕後，是全球錄用率最低的公司，他們都會請最頂尖優秀的人才在培訓。" }, { "speaker": "鍾培生", "speech": "台灣暫時沒有任何一個政府部門負責電競小組，電競整個產業實在存在台灣當中，但我們如何把電競發展出去，成為台灣的特色？讓這個東西傳出去變成國際化，我們先不要說中國、韓國已經有的東西，我們先不講理想，我們先解決簽證、兵役及教育等等，如果台灣的電競環境原地踏步，之後只會帶來更大的損失。" }, { "speaker": "鍾培生", "speech": "我從小的認識是we near Taiwan，we can make Taiwan break the game。最後如果沒有人可以請曾政承，我們HKE來請，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "感謝鍾先生，也是電競選手，這一份資料非常非常詳細，我們所有的委員也都希望可以有你剛才說明的這一份資料，剛剛部會官員及跨部會都在現場，我跟幾位委員都希望就電競業相關的專法可以儘速訂出來，其實我們立法院也會跨黨派來合作，對於這一部法可以做初步的規劃。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "剛剛鄭委員也有談到下禮拜拜會林全院長，對於這一部專法包括電競業未來的發展方向能夠儘速、不定期會面，也希望有一些進度出來，因此公聽會只是一個開端，並不是一個結束，等一下除了這一份資料，我們希望能夠留下來，希望能夠有鍾先生這一份資料外，也希望跨部會的各位同仁坐在這邊後，我們各自協調各部會該做的事，希望這一部專法有機會儘速出來。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "我們邀請現役的選手，請丁先生來說明一下您看到的這個問題及所面臨的問題。" }, { "speaker": "薛弘偉", "speech": "主席、各位委員及現場與會的所有來賓大家好，我是現役的職業選手，「丁特」是我的綽號，我是薛弘偉。我從亞洲地區的職業聯賽已經是職業選手，一路打到現在，在台灣地區聯賽也是年紀最大的選手，說一下這幾年來選手的心聲及困境，希望現場的長官可以幫忙。" }, { "speaker": "薛弘偉", "speech": "第一件比較緊迫的事情就是兵役及學籍的問題，因為選手年齡比其他運動選手較輕，世界賽的年齡大概是17至25歲，在台灣是面臨兵役的年齡。為了投入這一塊，所以必須花所有的時間在訓練上，自然比較不能一邊兼顧學業，所以多半是靠著學籍卡著兵單，因為所有的培訓及努力都白費了。" }, { "speaker": "薛弘偉", "speech": "我第一年當選手的時候，我是一邊讀、一邊打比賽的，那個過程很辛苦，因為一邊要安排畢業製作，還要一邊訓練那個壓力真的很大，練到一半會想說學校什麼事情沒有完成，是不是會被退學，因為沒有學籍，會收到兵單，所以壓力很大。" }, { "speaker": "薛弘偉", "speech": "台灣職業聯賽在打季後賽的時候，我還要面臨研究所的面試、備審資料等等，甚至到現在還要煩惱研究所的論文，就是沒有辦法專心去訓練，因此我希望有關單位可以幫忙，如果可以讓現役的職業選手有條件延緩徵召的話，不用一邊跑學校又一邊訓練，這樣可以讓我們的訓練得到很大的成效。" }, { "speaker": "薛弘偉", "speech": "第二，有一些具有潛力的選手投入這一塊的問題，因為我遇過幾個很有潛力的選手想要投入職業選手的訓練，但因為家長的反對、阻撓，通常是暑假一、兩個月去試一下，如果一、兩個月可以代表台灣出國拿到很好的成績就允許打，但如果可以在世界上為國發光、發熱的選手，怎麼可能一、兩個月就可以培養出？甚至很多家長依然認為電競是玩遊戲、是浪費生命的活動，所以很多家長對於小孩子要投入都直接拒絕，因此我們認為電競選手需要一個名字及身份。" }, { "speaker": "薛弘偉", "speech": "第三，接著是選手退役後的保障，因為電競選手的生涯比較短，平均都二年至四年而已，跟一般的職業運動來說相對短很多，誠如剛剛所說職業選手的年齡多半在17至25歲，一般年輕人會接軌的時期，所以為了投入電競這一塊，我們相對要捨棄很多的東西，例如是一些就學的機會，甚至是培訓工作能力的那些機會，所以政府如果能夠幫忙，協助一些職業電競選手退役後的轉型，例如轉移到相關的企業工作等等，一定可以讓很多人義無反顧投入這一個產業。最後謝謝大家、長官及媒體願意為電競這一塊發聲，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "謝謝我們丁特所提出來的問題，包括兵役問題、身分問題及退役後的保障，我們都聽到了。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "我們接下來請退役的選手，陳添志。" }, { "speaker": "陳添志", "speech": "大家好，我是退役大概半年的選手。" }, { "speaker": "陳添志", "speech": "很謝謝大家，我看了很感動，其實在電競這個行業是被大部分的家長認為在浪費生命的感覺，我退役大概只有半年至一年，但我完全知道的是我完全能夠體會選手的心聲，他們付出所有的時間及心力在練習上面，可是他們卻從來不知道他們負責這一些東西會不會有結果，因為他們之後的職業沒有保障，就算你已經是一名職業選手的身份，但卻在家長跟學校政府上面都沒有給予任何的（支持），雖說有給支持，但我覺得一點都沒有。" }, { "speaker": "陳添志", "speech": "我從兩年前第一次換隊伍，之後也經過兩、三次換隊伍的時間，在台灣想要當選手，你從一個隊伍退隊之後，你會經歷一個很辛苦的過渡期，這個時間你是一點保障都沒有，你也不知道你該不該繼續，我覺得這邊可以給予這一些選手的幫助是你可能可以給予一個學習的機會，也就是給這一些選手一些設立特別的專班去學校學習，又一邊可以有練習的機會讓他們進入到下一個隊伍。" }, { "speaker": "陳添志", "speech": "我運氣很好，因為有很多人推薦及貴人的幫助，所以在電競生活兩、三年，因為必須保持實力，所以還是要每天練習，然後到進入下一個隊伍之前，這個時間是17、18歲，沒有上課及沒有收入，這個是很慘淡的事情，也是家長會很看衰你的事。" }, { "speaker": "陳添志", "speech": "在各個戰隊的練習生，這個是比後補還要後補的選手，是要到很後面才有機會上場的，他們其實抱持很多不成功下去練習，所以其實都沒有後路，他們知道都沒有成功，那麼就更沒救了。" }, { "speaker": "陳添志", "speech": "所以像剛剛丁特有提到，其實有參與想要認定的選手，如果走選手這一條路失敗之後，你可以有其他的方式參與在電競這一個項目上，比如你可以培育出後勤，去學校學習軟、硬體設備，讓你可以繼續參與在電競的項目，相信當過選手的人，一定都非常支持電競的項目，就算不在選手上面也是一樣。" }, { "speaker": "陳添志", "speech": "在座的各位一定會支持職棒、職籃的某一位選手，比如喜歡NBA的科比，其實臺灣的電境就是這個情況以我自己舉例來講我非常崇拜一個選手，他是西門夜說，是出國比賽世界級的選手，為什麼我會崇拜他？因為他是一個遊戲天才及地才（練習），他就是練習的地才，他無時無刻都在付出，無時無刻都在玩，我想現在電競圈對粉絲的態度也是非常崇拜。" }, { "speaker": "陳添志", "speech": "如果政府能夠支持的話，我覺得最大的問題是可以解決污名化的問題，這真的太重要了，台灣的電競在世界上我覺得可能排得上前十，在各個遊戲及比賽都可以排得上，好的選手只有十六至十八歲，如果政府再不認可的話，家長也不同意的話，這一些有潛力的選手根本沒有機會站上舞臺，也沒有機會練習。" }, { "speaker": "陳添志", "speech": "這個跟以前大家覺得唱歌沒什麼前途，自從周杰倫紅了之後，每一個人都想當藝人、唱歌，不管有沒有成功，就只是因為周杰倫紅而已。其實台灣的電競已經有很多這樣的例子：S2 TPA拿冠軍，拿了好像3,000多萬的獎金；一個星海爭霸的選手叫SEN，拿了好幾個世界冠軍。這一些人是非常成功的例子，也證明台灣的實力是非常堅強。" }, { "speaker": "陳添志", "speech": "學業困境最大的問題是，我覺得現役的選手沒有一個特別的專班，也就是供他們上課，並不像丁特所講的無法兼顧學業，因為選手的時期大概一年有兩、三期，大概是八個月要進行比賽跟練習，你有四個月，大概可以撥一個月至兩個月學習，我覺得可以設一個專班，可以讓他們跟正常的班級分開，讓他們自己去進行一個國英數基本科目的教學，我覺得這方面才會讓家長比較放心，也可以兼顧學業。" }, { "speaker": "陳添志", "speech": "後有後勤方面的訓練，比如剛上高中就可以有那種電競的項目、科目去學習，一出社會就可以到公司去當後勤、教練及分析師什麼的；據我瞭解國外還有一個心理的諮詢師，在比賽之前還有出來打氣的行業，電競的行業是非常多人可以參與的。" }, { "speaker": "陳添志", "speech": "真的非常謝謝來參與這個公聽會，因為這對台灣的電競非常重要，真的希望它變成一個職業運動來證明，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "謝謝添志，剛剛講了很多話，幾位委員都認同，這個產業如果投入夠多、夠支持的話，我相信退役下來的選手，年輕人在從玩家到正式選手的過程當中，其實政府可以扮演更多的角色，投入兩年至四年的時間，即便覺得最後不適合，再回到學業或者是從其他的志育上發展，我覺得也都還好。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "我們現行在校園當中都有體育專班在進行，因此就看政府的角色如何把這一塊特別把它拉出來，未來如何配合大家的想法及如何去做才是更重要的。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "接下來請政治大學的曾鈵元同學，也是現在的選手。" }, { "speaker": "曾鈵元", "speech": "委員好，在線上大家好，我過去是建中電競社的領隊，現在是政大電競社的社長，在我發表看法之前，我有幾個資訊想跟大家介紹一下。" }, { "speaker": "曾鈵元", "speech": "剛剛施理事長、鍾先生及丁特都有共同提到兵役的問題，在過去一個禮拜，有兩名韓國的星海爭霸選手因為兵役而退役，他們兩位其實都曾打過暴雪嘉年華的十六強，都是世界頂尖的好選手，因為兵役問題而沒有辦法繼續下去。" }, { "speaker": "曾鈵元", "speech": "現在進行的是英雄聯盟世界大賽，下禮拜有戰車世界WGL APAC Season 1 Finals，在11月初會有暴雪嘉年華，以上這些比賽都會有非常多的觀眾及選手參加，很多選手他們未來可能面臨到非常多的兵役問題及現在為了這一些事情在困擾，希望官員們可以稍微想一下這一些選手未來要面對這一些問題的時候，我們能夠如何為他們解決。" }, { "speaker": "曾鈵元", "speech": "回到我自己的經歷，我過去在建中電競社的時候，當時創社我們受到滿大的困擾，因為電子競技在2013年TPA才剛得世界冠軍，其實台灣很多人還不知道電子競技，因此我們在創立這個社團的時候，學校要求我們做一件事，也就是所有的入社社員都必須得到家長同意書，我能夠理解學校的困擾，因為學校必須承受來自於家長的意見及壓力。" }, { "speaker": "曾鈵元", "speech": "其實也很感謝學校能夠讓我們成立這個社團，我們在成立這個社團的時候，其實很多人是因為有家長同意書，他們沒有辦法加入電子競技社，他們沒有辦法跟我們一起參與電競社的活動，我們電競社只有兩年，然後電競社就倒掉，我就畢業了，然後我進了政大。2015年大家可以看到更多的電競比賽在舉辦，甚至很多的玩家也開始自己舉辦電競賽事，很多玩家投入心力，因為他們想要讓更多的人參與更多電競賽事成為電競選手，我們過去的電競在職業發展，並沒有向下延伸到業餘，因此過去已經看到很多選手，從業餘到職業中間經歷過很大的斷層，我想未來政府其實也可以多多考慮我們學生的一些賽事。" }, { "speaker": "曾鈵元", "speech": "我相信政大電競社與其他社團都很樂意與政府及相關單位配合及合作學生的賽事，讓學生有機會進入職業或者是未來不一定要成為選手，也可以成為很多幕後的人推廣電子競技，讓它繼續發展；但有一個前提是我們必須先把兵役經濟，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "謝謝鈵元，您剛剛提到幾個重要的資訊，包括參加國際賽事的兵役問題，我剛剛跟幾位委員都有私底下溝通，辦公室會成立一個有關電競產業大家面臨的問題，首先兵役的問題，參加國際賽事到11月底，如果有兵役的問題，我想我們幾位委員聯合辦協調會，以專案方式來作處理，請協會幾位重要的幹部，有這樣的問題私底下協助我們，未來針對於這一塊的專法可以成立跨部會的聯盟來處理相關的問題。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "剛剛幾位選手的發言，我想我們先告一個段落，是不是可以請我們今天來參加的幾個行政官員同仁來做一下簡單的回應，請體育署。因為今天談到最多的問題跟體育署比較有直接的關係，請體育署的同仁來說明。我們直接問題回答。" }, { "speaker": "體育署同仁", "speech": "委員好、在場的朋友們大家好，我們是第一次來參加這樣的公聽會，也代表立法院跟行政部門都非常重視電競的這一塊，當然很多人都會認為只要有一些比賽的話，那就一定會是所謂歸到體育署所主管的範圍，但這一個部分我覺得可以再思考及檢討，這部分剛剛次長之前都已經有報告過了，我們有相關之前的一些評估，就我們體育署這邊在整體上的一個發展跟資源分配上，我們是以亞奧運跟一些世界運動會等的運動上的運動發展為主；這個部分剛剛也有提到圍棋的部分，之前也有提到列為新制運動會的項目，這個是歸國際奧會運動認可的賽會，所以才會有接續的輔導。" }, { "speaker": "體育署同仁", "speech": "有很多的主客觀因素糾結，以至於在目前來講，在體育署這邊很難可以立刻視為運動種類，後續還有很多相關的協調，像委員也有提到相關的協調作業，電競來講可能不是單單列為運動的簡單議題，而是涉及到產業的發展，究竟這一個產業要如何去定位跟因應，我想這個其實才是最重要的要點，相關的部會要怎麼樣去合作，然後讓電競產業可以更好地發展，這個部分我想政府機關跟立法院共同努力合作看要如何處理。" }, { "speaker": "體育署同仁", "speech": "剛剛有提到兵役的問題，我們這邊在替代役上，在體育署主管的是針對亞奧運項目的十種運動才有替代役的適用，其他的部分還有部分的法規，像是有一些其他的規定，這個部分可能不在我們主管，所以不方便就兵役的問題做相關的回應，以上簡單說明，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "謝謝我們體育署的回應，雖然這個是涉及到跨部會的產業，但我覺得就現狀、各單位、各部會可以做什麼樣的事情，我覺得應該主動用更積極的角色，這是我們第一次開公聽會，但我總是希望透過公聽會，在今天各單位、各部會底下，原本應該要主導的，或者是今天通過公聽會後，有這麼多人不同的意見及想法，該是各單位應該處理更積極的角色，你們應該先有想法才對；否則下一次見林全院長、唐政委溝通時，你們還是講一樣的話，這一塊的產業永遠是原地踏步，如果各部會沒有辦法用積極的想法跨出第一步的話，台灣這一塊產業、年輕人們在大家還在自己的部會裡面而因此走不出去。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "現在是不是先請吳志揚委員有一些想法，想要先溝通。" }, { "speaker": "吳志揚", "speech": "很多朋友把電競產業再講一遍，我越來越確信是一個職業運動，整個過程甚至比職棒還復雜，會比傳統的運動更有後續的發展可能性，因此我們從這裡看，包括就學問題、兵役問題、職涯結束以後轉任的問題，這與職棒選手碰到的問題一模一樣；當然你們時間上會更早一點。" }, { "speaker": "吳志揚", "speech": "比如學校體育專班的問題，其實我自己知道以我在桃園縣時，有一些新設學校的科系已經往這個方向走了。甚至學校裡面剛剛講的是體育班，但不一定是叫體育班，都還是基本可以上到高中、高職的基本學科，但需要的練習是足夠的，應該是有這樣的機制。" }, { "speaker": "吳志揚", "speech": "另外有關於兵役的問題，我知道早期職棒的選手也是有碰到兵役的問題，那部分跟體育署合作就是這樣子，那時候有一些國手要當兵，不希望當兵這幾年荒廢掉，但如果等到當兵回來跟技能就已經脫節了，將來有可能打職棒的選手在當兵時，整個委託給中華職棒代訓，其實中華職棒的球隊其實就已經在選秀了。誰是這樣子？大家熟知的林智勝是在當兵的時候被LA NEW選到，當時是還在當兵，是由役政署委由職棒球團來訓練，這個模式大家可以參考。" }, { "speaker": "吳志揚", "speech": "學校的認同、家長的認同，必須先給他們一個證明，必須是在我們的法律體系裡面被承認是一個正式的項目，所以跟家長講也好、跟學校講也好，都不會有問題，看來看去職業運動都是非常非常相同。" }, { "speaker": "吳志揚", "speech": "我很鼓勵以現在年輕人的智慧及衝勁，你們可以發展很多的一些規則，包括聯盟的運作、也許有選秀的制度，你們可能可以自己去發展。但台灣其實真的很可憐，台灣真正的職業運動目前也只有職棒，其他都是半職業，我們的職棒也沒有很興盛，很多的制度都很缺乏，還要跟MLB、KBO、MPB來學習，或者是邊作邊發展，但我相信電競產業加年輕人的創意，可以有很多的規範在裡面。" }, { "speaker": "吳志揚", "speech": "如果有需要的話，我們職棒在相關過去的二十幾年也有相關慘痛的經驗、不錯的經驗，都可以跟類似的制度做一些參考。" }, { "speaker": "吳志揚", "speech": "另外，我特別要再跟體育署講一下，我一直認為體育署一定要升格為「體育部」，為什麼？就像剛剛這一位長官一樣，體育署早期就是以幫國家拿牌子為主，所以會以競技、亞奧運的項目，如果沒有亞奧運的項目，拿的牌子對國家沒有幫助，那就不會發展；後來放在教育部下更糟糕，也就是這個是學校要用嗎？現在放在教育部下就會有這個問題，其實不對。體育署有一個非常大的東西是拿不走的，也就是「運動產業」，現在有《運動產業發展條例》，包括運動、觀光及經紀人，這個並不是在學校裡面教的，因為《運動產業發展條例》其實主管機關是教育部。" }, { "speaker": "吳志揚", "speech": "我舉兩個例子來證明你剛剛的論證是不成立的，台灣高爾夫球是運動，但高爾夫球具的發展－台灣的高爾夫球具很棒－卻是工業局在弄，我跟江啟臣兩個人很喜歡吹薩克斯風，薩克斯風的音樂是文化，但我們做薩克斯風是工業局把它標準化而扶植起來，才能夠成為全世界產量很大的地方。" }, { "speaker": "吳志揚", "speech": "其實電競產業目前碰到的問題，教育部要處理起來；至於後面的產業大家也怕，我怎麼會懂電腦及硬體、軟體，自然應該要有其他的單位去處理，並不是把電競產業納入後，從頭到尾要人家負責，並沒有這樣規定。比如：Uber好了，車子不管誰開，一定是監理單位要做的，這個商業模式是誰要處理的，一定有另外一個單位。" }, { "speaker": "吳志揚", "speech": "所以，不要擔心這一件事，從整個講起來，那就是一個體系非常完整的職業運動，而且所碰到的問題，人才訓練、後勤支援等等，看起來就是一個職業運動，所以我覺得我們應該大膽地列到職業運動的產業裡面，先讓他們做一個證明，我相信對後續選手受到的重視及肯定，在未來的發展都會是很重要的一部分，我補充到這裡，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "謝謝吳志揚委員第三次的補充，公聽會非常精彩，除了唐政委來參加，也玩了現在正在世界大賽比賽的遊戲。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "今天來到現場其實跨黨派的委員非常多，我剛剛提到我們未來會成立跨黨派聯盟修法，立法院的整個團隊之外，下一個星期也希望有機會拜會林全院長對於相關電競產業的後續面臨的問題與未來發展，我們希望成立一個專責單位，專案來作處理。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "包括現階段委員提到的問題，參與國際賽事，無論是身份的問題、兵役的問題，我們要在現階段立即，各委員辦公室會有一個連絡窗口出來，我會邀請他們不定時針對這一個方案，大家來開會，我想跨黨派的委員都這麼多人來參加，我想後續整個電競產業所面臨的問題，應該有機會做更進一步的發展及解決。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "我們今天來到現場還有國民黨立法委員，也就是現在黨團的書記長江啟臣，第二位是電競產業協會的副理事長，林為洲委員。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "我們就請江委員對這一塊電競產業發展及未來想法來作分享。" }, { "speaker": "江啟臣", "speech": "謝謝主持人，現場還有好幾位關心電競產業委員、行政院的政務委員及教育部的長官、先進，最主要的是電競選手、好朋友施文彬先生，我想電競產業在台灣來講是默默耕耘，台灣很多好的東西、好的人才，你會發覺從過去到現在都是民間開始默默耕耘，可能耕耘了一陣子一戰成名才得到大家的重視，其實電競產業一路走來我相信也是如此，大部分是民間的個人、公司，最後可能有一個產業、聯盟，然後在國際上經過重重的考驗、困難、挑戰，最後拿到了世界冠軍或者是很好的成績之後，而得到科技的重視，這個時候當然大家對政府的角色有期待。" }, { "speaker": "江啟臣", "speech": "但其實這個期待的背後某種程度上也是對政府的失望，為什麼這個過程各位沒有看到這個前置輔導、培養，而是讓民間自己來打拼？我想這個是很多台灣之光背後的心聲，所以當電競產業也是同樣路徑發展的時候，像剛剛吳委員所提到的，到底政府的角色、體育署的角色、產業行政部門的角色，我們的政府機構一直會很擔心一件事，今天假設體育署來接手電競產業輔導時，又卡到產業、運動，所以到底是要管運動或者是產業，最後角色釐不清楚。" }, { "speaker": "江啟臣", "speech": "我必須要講的是，為什麼在行政院設置政務委員的角色，當然政務委員可大可小，如果政務委員真的想要管事的話，可以比部長還大，叫做「不管部會的部長」，也就是每一個部會都可以管、都可以去協調，只要院長授予這樣的權力及要求。現在的行政院某種程度上是大政委的時代，體育署要升格體育部遙遙無期，倒不如政委發揮這樣的角色，有效率地跨部會協調，可以讓電競產業納為正式的運動項目，一旦納入運動正式項目之後，國家隊才有辦法成形。" }, { "speaker": "江啟臣", "speech": "現在的「國家隊」是民間代表所組的國家隊，這樣子對於要台灣出去比賽的選手來講，不管是資源上、名義上、地位上都不公平，所以同樣為台灣努力，在國際上爭光，我覺得基本上在行政上、法律上給他們的地位應該是要一致的。因此，把電競的項目納進運動項目，體育署應該要輔導的運動項目，我覺得這個並不是很困難，行政法規上就可以做。" }, { "speaker": "江啟臣", "speech": "至於，納進去之後的配套支援才可以拿得名正言順，立法院要支持相關的預算也才能夠有一個依據。所以，我覺得這個納入運動項目，我們國家隊成形，接下來國家隊成形先不用談職業的部分，過去我們職棒發展都是國家隊，之後才有職業類型出來，因此我覺得如何讓台灣電競國家隊成形，才會帶動周邊的，尤其是相關產業發展。" }, { "speaker": "江啟臣", "speech": "像韓國是最近這幾年我們覺得很多事情、很多東西應該要好好拿來檢討，不要講效法，然後作為改善交流的對象。電競產業的發展，我相信也不是只有電競選手而已，最重要的是涉及到後面所帶動龐大的產業發展，這個對於台灣尋找下一個工業實際上真的是滿重要的，因此我們希望今天的公聽會能夠有一些具體的結論出來，然後是行政部門真的可以來做、願意落實，否則在立法院我們開過N場公聽會，針對不同的事情，我們公聽會最擔心、最不願意看到的就是這一件講完了，好不容易請了很多人來，今天有這麼多的選手來，結果行政部門回去只講一句話「再研究」、「再研議」，然後沒有日期、沒有未來，到底什麼時候可以給答案，因此我也希望今天的公聽會，大家踴躍提出好的建議出來，但行政部門必須承諾哪一些事什麼時候做到，哪一些事情什麼時候以前要給出研究的答案。" }, { "speaker": "江啟臣", "speech": "而立法院站在政策支持跟預算支持上，只要是合理的，大家有共識的，我想立法院針對電競產業是不分黨派，是跨黨派的，我們會全力協助幫忙，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "謝謝江委員，剛剛的談話我們會成立一個跨黨派的聯盟，針對未來整個立法的方向及短期面臨到的一些問題，下一週如果有機會的話，我們希望約見林全院長，也是跨黨派一起來，因此後續持續性的，我想很多委員會共同參加。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "接下來是不是先請林委員，接著要請國立交通大學的梁世佑教授等一下也來發言，先請副理事長。" }, { "speaker": "林為洲", "speech": "很高興來參加今天的公聽會，電競的相關問題是一個活動、運動，歸屬是歸在教育部體育署或者是哪一個單位下面所主管的，當它作為一個活動或者是運動的時候，另外一個議題是產業，它也是代表一個產業類別，產業類別有相當廣泛的復雜性，也就是不是那麼單純屬於軟體、硬體或一部分，所以也需要一些跨部會的整合，這一方面從產業面來推動電競活動，這兩個方向我們都應該要在相關的規定及法律上面去檢討，讓產業或者是讓這一個運動、活動在將來的推廣會減少一些阻力，當然更希望會有法令上的修改而對它產生一些助力。" }, { "speaker": "林為洲", "speech": "我們會跟李主席及鄭寶清委員，還有院內幾位跨黨派的委員可以共同檢討、推動，先這樣子，等一下聽聽大家的意見，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "謝謝林委員。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "下一個階段我們先請一下學者專家，我先請國立交通大學數位動畫文創學程的梁教授，非常謝謝您今天來參與給我們指導。" }, { "speaker": "梁世佑", "speech": "剛剛各個委員及在座官員都有提到如何應變，我以自己的例子為參考，我們在教書有兩個原則，第一個是所有的課程內容是可以在網路上被公開的，所有的考試題目、期末考的作業也會放在網路上參考及批評，所以大家只要在Google打「交大電玩」考題應該就會出現。" }, { "speaker": "梁世佑", "speech": "第二，我在教書的時候有一個感覺，希望大家所學到的東西不要紙上談兵，可以落實到商業及社會層面的運用，所以給學生幾個課題，不管要做電競也好、原創動畫、小說、音樂及劇本，或甚至是桌遊、手遊都可以，組成一個小隊，用崛起的過程中，在期末把作品做出來，而且丟到市場上被檢驗。如果能夠成功最好，如果失敗的話，我會給你分數及學分，如果成功了，就證明這個學期學到的東西不是紙上談兵，而可以落實到在台灣這個社會被應用。" }, { "speaker": "梁世佑", "speech": "過程中有很重要的案例，比如我們的「動畫募資案」或比如桌遊都超過獲得100萬以上的利益回饋，當然也有一些失敗的例子，但這一些過程中可以給學生及年輕人可以實際嘗試、應用還不錯，或面對現實社會挑戰一個還不錯的機會。如果現在法規面對這一些問題，比如很多政策無法鬆綁或者是沒有辦法馬上組成跨部會的小組，可以用一些學程或是靈機應變的方式來解決；我很坦白不諱言跟大家說，我為我們學生所付出的心血，包含辦一些研討會或電玩藝術節所投入的心血比交大付給我的薪水多很多。" }, { "speaker": "梁世佑", "speech": "我用兩個例子來說明：" }, { "speaker": "梁世佑", "speech": "第一，在場的施大哥如果我沒有記錯的話，想要舉辦一場世界級的電競賽事，但是在申請場地的時候遭到了拒絕，因為那個場地過去不能用電競作為比賽的項目，我們的官員高聲呼喊支持電競產業，但實際執行的公務人員或部署不瞭解這一些事情，有一些繁文縟節無法無破，而導致沒有辦法被借用。" }, { "speaker": "梁世佑", "speech": "第二，有一位孫老師在日本做動畫師，有負責新世紀福音戰士新劇場版或者是鋼彈的作畫，但在台灣面臨一些挑戰，因沒有博士學位及論文基礎，很難在大學或相關的學術研究被聘任，這個是條約上的問題。或許這兩個例子說明一件事，包含電競產業的人或者是大家，我們其實並不太需要政府的補助，乃至於實際的援手，只希望給我們一個更開放、友善的透明管道，乃至於相關部會整合，對台灣的電競產業獲得整個很好的發展及用處。" }, { "speaker": "梁世佑", "speech": "最後，我認為台灣是很適合發展電競產業，我們有很好的選手、全世界知名的硬體廠商－所有的電競電腦都在台灣生產－我更感受到台灣面臨到很嚴峻挑戰，不只電競及遊戲，而是整個數位內容及文化的衝突，不管是電影、小說及電視，包含之前的金鐘獎等等，我們所有的數位內容及文化都面對一個不存在及很大的困境，這個對於未來台灣十年及二十年的發展，一定需要一個更深厚的文化根基或台灣自己獨立的數位內容及作品，這個是刻不容緩的問題。以電競為基礎，包含了廣義的流行文化、數位娛樂及作品內容，或許我們希望政府可以提供更完善、友善的配套，可以幫助這個產業更自由地發展，可以為下一代台灣年輕人做出一個更好的作品與機會。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "謝謝梁教授，提到數位文化與電競為基礎，這個是未來幾位委員要進一步瞭解及學習的地方。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "您有特別提到施理事長辦的活動，就是借台北市的小巨蛋，它雖是國際型的賽事，但台北市政府不同意，並沒有定位成一個體育的項目，因此退而求其次，借到其他不太好的場地，我們有機會戰上國際的舞臺，但借了不是很好的場地，下次有機會再輪到我們主辦，其他幾個協辦國會不會想到台灣上次舉辦的經驗。因此，我覺得政府在立場上，真的可以再做更多積極的角色。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "我剛才已經提過了，每一個委員未來會有一個窗口，針對於各個協會面臨到的問題，我們會做一些初步可以處理的先處理，背後或許各部會應該有的一些積極作為，我們後續也會陸陸續續進行。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "下一個階段請產業界的代表，梁教授已經講完了，今天選手也講完了，剛才行政官員也做了一些溝通，幾位委員談了一些想法，下一個階段請Garena的商務合作的負責人陳總經理來說明一下你的想法，在這一塊產業上你覺得我們相關部會協助、立場及現在看到的問題跟我們分享一下。" }, { "speaker": "陳先倫", "speech": "主席、各位立委、各位現場政府官員大家好，我是台灣Garena的商務合作的負責人陳先倫，今天代表遊戲產業，台灣Garena在台灣經營LMS 19聯盟職業聯賽。開始之前我要特別感謝HKE鍾老闆，因為HKE在台灣有八個站點，我等一下會介紹一下台灣目前的現況，大家可以聽到很多在世界上長什麼樣子，在台灣到底長什麼樣子，可以跟大家分享。" }, { "speaker": "陳先倫", "speech": "香港電子競技的HKE也是我們LMS戰隊的其中一員，連香港的戰隊都非常支持台灣電競環境，我們覺得其實是非常感動的。" }, { "speaker": "陳先倫", "speech": "其實在整個台灣電競的規模及發展的過程中，其實不只是《英雄聯盟》而已，有非常多，像有在座的暴雪、智冠、智凡迪及Wargaming等，其實台灣的到底台灣LMS的能量長什麼樣子，我們剛剛提到在2016年剛結束LMS的賽程當中，在台灣觀看的總次數已經超過4,300萬人次，在單日不重複的收看人數是140萬至150萬，這個數字非常驚人，不敢講說跟職棒一樣，但是我想有很多的力量跟職業運動在台灣的發展是很有能量的。" }, { "speaker": "陳先倫", "speech": "台灣電競不只有觀眾基礎，同時有國際的比賽實力，在2012年大家都知道TPA拿下世界冠軍之後，《英雄聯盟》的世界聯盟在2015年開放給台港澳LMS聯盟第二個名額，也就是我們打敗了這麼多的國家，為台港澳爭取到第二個前進世界大賽的資格，很多國家都沒有拿到。" }, { "speaker": "陳先倫", "speech": "在《英雄聯盟》的六大戰區當中，台港澳地區的LMS是地域最小、人數最少，但是有拿下世界冠軍的地區，這個其實相當不容易。" }, { "speaker": "陳先倫", "speech": "在這個過程當中，要如何發展台灣的電競，不管是過去跟遊戲的夥伴們及前輩們討論，有幾個事項跟大家分享：" }, { "speaker": "陳先倫", "speech": "第一，電競的污名化如何扭轉，這個是最關鍵，而且是政府馬上可以做的事。其實應該說在年中Garena就開始跟台中市政府進行了全國的電競比賽，在9月8日Garena也邀請了總統府來參與，非常感謝蔡總統可以撥空出席為台灣兩個前進世界大賽戰隊加油。10月8日與10日也在Y17共同舉辦世界大賽加油的現場直播派隊。這個問題不外乎希望我們的政府、首長可以出席這樣的活動，讓大家知道當我們都支持他們的時候，我們可以扭轉台灣的輿論壓力。" }, { "speaker": "陳先倫", "speech": "我們要知道很多人聽到電競大概會跟一些東西做一些錯誤的聯想，比如說可能對電競選手有一些負面的標籤，例如不務正業、荒廢學業、暴力傾向等等，但大家不要忘記一些事，這其實是完全沒有任何依據及關聯的，就如同我們可以說摔腳是個運動，但他們是有暴力傾向嗎？不行吧！" }, { "speaker": "陳先倫", "speech": "任何的競技都有需要努力及精進的技能，這裡面包含著所有職業選手在養成過程當中、教育的過程，都必須要經過體育項目專精的時間，比如像體育班的同學，有一半的時間要精進體育才能，一半的時間精進學業，我們期待透過政府的支持，對於電競選手的證明，剛剛提到非常多，不管是電競選手的證明或者是體育產業的證明，才有辦法告訴大家，當我們的總統都支持了，當我們的委員也支持了，當我們的部會首長也支持了，大家都支持的時候，我們要扭轉的是這一個最關鍵的時刻，我想這也非常感謝施文彬理事長辦這樣的公聽會讓大家參加，這也是一個契機。" }, { "speaker": "陳先倫", "speech": "第二，有很多遊戲界的朋友，不只是《英雄聯盟》這個項目而已，像剛剛也特別感謝鍾老闆臨時幫我們打了一下廣告，非常感謝。" }, { "speaker": "陳先倫", "speech": "但是台灣的電競項目不只《英雄聯盟》，其實有非常多的項目都在發展當中，遊戲業界最重要的關鍵是如何進入到所謂的校園市場，我們怎樣有一個平台。我舉一個例子，《英雄聯盟》是一個有規模的電競職業聯賽，LMS有八個在台灣的主要戰隊，次級聯盟也有八個，都會透過升降賽來決定是否能夠打進職業賽－其實吳委員也有提到，一個職業運動有整體的規劃與規模－LMS有八個一級戰隊，ECS有八個次級戰隊，往下延伸到學校，Garena的校際盃在去年三千七百大專加高中院校的學生參加，在這樣的項目底下，我們要做事情的項目是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "陳先倫", "speech": "不只是讓一個已經有規模的遊戲繼續成長之外，政府不只支持有這一些職業規模，更要思考的是，其他的項目能不能以官方的電競平台，讓這一些有打算進入電競的項目的遊戲項目而進到學校裡面去。其實我們知道在學校裡面更在乎輿論，要知道學生的家長在台灣會認為讀書是一個要生活、出入的觀念底下－當然現在可能不太一樣了－可能會覺得要有一個很好的工作、很好的出入，要考上大學、研究所，好像讀書是唯一的一條路的時候，在電競這一塊市場要進到校園就更辛苦，因此我們希望在校園主辦由政府主導的電競平台，讓這樣的電競力量，讓校園裡面的校長、主任及老師知道這一件事只要你有正確的舉辦方式、正確的觀念，電競並不是一群愛打電動、不願意讀書的孩子，所有體育班的同學其實都一樣的信仰跟目標，我們想要在自己努力的體育項目裡面，成為世界第一，而台灣有這樣的能力，我們應該要想辦法讓它深入到校園裡面做這樣的事。這個是第一個如何扭轉跟如何在校園裡面平台的建議。" }, { "speaker": "陳先倫", "speech": "第二，跟大家分享一下，Garena一年贊助職業選手的薪資，營運職業賽事聯盟、營運目前台灣應該是唯一職業電信的場館－但我不太確定現在是不是有其他夥伴一起努力做這一件事－包含培訓專業的直播賽評，一年投資金額超過3、4,000萬，台灣能夠獲得企業贊助遠遠低於這個數字。我舉個例子，富邦最近加入了中華職棒的行列，中信好像在去年或者是前年加入了中華職棒，其實我們有瞭解過，為什麼他們不願意支持電競？我覺得有幾個關鍵：" }, { "speaker": "陳先倫", "speech": "（一）最大的關鍵在於社會輿論，他們會擔心支持這一件事會不會讓家長對他們的品牌有一些反感，可是這一件事就要靠我們不斷告訴大家，其實跟職業運動是一樣好的。" }, { "speaker": "陳先倫", "speech": "（二）在於減稅，其實我們知道在很多的產業支持國手或者是支持所謂體育署各項項目規定，如果我沒記錯是如果投資或贊助國家級的選手或者是這樣的比賽也好，其實都可以抵稅，但電競不行，這個方式其實也會阻擋很多的企業願意投資。我舉個例子：以現在來說，Garena過去一、兩年不斷跟各界合作夥伴尋求贊助及過程當中，大概都是以核心，比如電競品牌、台灣雙A，或者是其他台灣很好的電競品牌等等，所謂比較核心跟產業較無關係的；但再往外擴很辛苦，原因很簡單，剛剛那兩個關鍵是很容易主導他們他們進來的門檻。" }, { "speaker": "陳先倫", "speech": "因此，我們希望在第二個階段，包含有支持電競賽事的贊助廠商有一些優惠、減稅的方案。再來是實際執行電競比賽的聯盟方、遊戲公司也好，只要是職業電競聯賽，像後面有八個戰隊，後面有八間公司，但他們現在沒有辦法做這一件事，包含HKE也是。因此這一件事是不是能夠鼓勵台灣及台灣很好的企業來一起投資電競、一起進入電競的市場，像勁酷數位謝老闆都是一些很好的台灣企業能夠來支持，我們希望能夠讓這樣支持的夥伴更多元。" }, { "speaker": "陳先倫", "speech": "這個多元的支持到最後結果是什麼？就是讓選手的福利、待遇、環境越來越好，如同過去大家覺得打棒球有疑慮的時候，出現了王建明、陳金鋒等台灣英雄，因為有足夠的社會力量、社會企業來加入這樣的體系，而這個體系會加入的主要原因，我想不外乎他們覺得這個是很好的東西，對他們的品牌、產品及對社會溝通是有幫助的，這個是第二個跟大家方向。" }, { "speaker": "陳先倫", "speech": "（三）以近期、中期跟遠期來分享，遠期是可以透過政府的力量來制定專法，能夠把電競項目變成一個正式的體育項目，包括剛剛所講的選手簽證、企業減稅、兵役制度，能夠統合一起，讓這一件事變成有法、有依據的方式來操作。裡面包含了剛剛所提到的場地，對於遊戲公司來說、聯盟方來說，剛剛有提到台灣其實沒有這麼多的大型場地，所以最好的方法，能夠有一個專屬於電競的大型場館會不會是一個很好的方式？可能是。" }, { "speaker": "陳先倫", "speech": "如果這個是需要時間，能不能現有很好的場地來針對電競的比賽及電競聯盟來做優惠租借或者是優先租借，這個是我想現階段可以做的事。" }, { "speaker": "陳先倫", "speech": "（四）透過專法能夠透過讓更多的企業、更多的夥伴及更多的電競選手沒有後顧之憂，可以把電競這一件事自以為傲的事。" }, { "speaker": "陳先倫", "speech": "Garena坐在後面我們看得都是現場觀眾的背影，我們常常講看完棒球比賽出去，你會說我支持中華隊、台灣隊或者是支持台灣棒球，你知道或許有一些小朋友喜歡電競而支持電競，是會被壓抑的，如果他今天連親自告訴大家喜歡電競，都要被大家用懷疑的眼光，如「你是不是不務正業」、「荒廢學業」、「是不是透過電競來逃避」，這個是我們必須在台灣現在擁有這麼多電競實力時，應該要想辦法優先破除負面的觀念。" }, { "speaker": "陳先倫", "speech": "最後，感謝理事長、HKE的戰隊夥伴及現場所有的夥伴們、政府長官及檯上的立委願意支持台灣電競，我們期待可以把台灣這麼好、有實力的產業不要被埋沒，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "謝謝Garena商業負責人陳經理。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "這一個階段開始，因為九點我們準時到現在已經進行了二個多小時，開放給所有今天來現場剛才還沒有機會發言的好朋友們，或者是二度發言，包括鍾先生要補充的話，也歡迎您。從今天討論到現在，大家還有沒有希望要補充的地方？或者在現場，剛才只有體育署科長（按：應為副組長）有發言過，除了蔡次長有發言之外，包括技職司今天也在現場。" }, { "speaker": "楊玉惠", "speech": "大家早，謝謝委員來舉辦這樣的公聽會，也讓我們更深入瞭解電玩業目前在台灣非常棒的成果，還有各位選手大家也提供了一些你們所遭遇到的困難。" }, { "speaker": "楊玉惠", "speech": "以教育部目前在人才培育上，誠如剛剛交大梁教授所講的，目前我們各大學的校院（包含技職校院），其實在電子競技產業的人才周邊需求上學校有非常多的科系，例如資工、機械電腦輔助、數位多媒體設計、視覺傳達設計、多媒體語及遊戲設計等等，其實這一些科系所培養的人才就是我們剛剛所提到的，就是電玩周邊產業所需要的人才。" }, { "speaker": "楊玉惠", "speech": "因此，這一方面在大學校院的培育上會繼續支持周邊所需要的人才，我想整個電競的產業，不只是在選手這一端，我們相關的產業所須的人才，教育部在這邊一樣會持續來支持。" }, { "speaker": "楊玉惠", "speech": "至於，後面一些選手們所需要的就學的輔導，剛剛有提到專班的設計，其實目前在技專校院有很多的科系可以跟業界來做一些產學合作的專班，這個都沒有問題，當然這個專班會比較著重在我剛剛提到周邊產業所需要的人才培育部分。" }, { "speaker": "楊玉惠", "speech": "我想也回應一下剛剛交大梁教授所講的，目前教育部各大學有關於藝術設計層面這樣的師資，並沒有說一定要有博士學位才可以聘任，在教育部的法規其實是已經鬆綁了，當然老師的聘任是回到各校的教評會，會有一些考量，是不是需要博士學位或者是怎麼樣，但就教育人員任用上沒有博士學位，但在這一方面有非常棒造詣、非常好的設計能力老師是可以進到我們大學來任教，這部分是沒有問題的，以上先就這樣的回應，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "謝謝司長。還有沒有哪一位同仁你們來到現場，有沒有就你們的業務報告？" }, { "speaker": "蔡承諺", "speech": "        各位長官、朋友大家好，我在遊戲業界大家都叫我「龜王」，我本名是蔡承諺。我跟立委一樣，我住在內湖南港，我是2008年那時期的電競選手。幾個部分想跟各位報告：" }, { "speaker": "蔡承諺", "speech": "這個產業其實不是在今天才被立法院討論，在很久以前，從曾政承拿到世界冠軍的時候，義美的董事長就公開希望陳水扁前總統可以關注這一個產業，但沒有下文。四年前的今天TPA拿到冠軍，那時馬英九總統，台北市長郝龍斌同時致電，當時馬英九也說那一年是電競元年，四年前的下一個禮拜，邀請TPA全部成員到立法院噓寒問暖，問需要怎麼改進，那時就有提到兵役上的問題。" }, { "speaker": "蔡承諺", "speech": "其實選手比完世界賽後馬上離開（因為隔一、兩個月還有比賽），被其他委員說有大頭症。" }, { "speaker": "蔡承諺", "speech": "我們其實在這個產業努力非常久，我為什麼會走這一塊？其實鍾老闆有提到曾政承，在韓國打世界帝國的冠軍的時候，拿著國旗喊「台灣NO.1」，我那時很高興。我一直關注這個產業到現在，我看到的是，每一次一有一個小高潮，例如世界冠軍或怎樣，立法院或者是中央機關說要支持，但過了這麼久都沒有下文。" }, { "speaker": "蔡承諺", "speech": "其實我也有跟一些政府單位合作，以下我有幾個方向並給建議：" }, { "speaker": "蔡承諺", "speech": "第一，剛剛提到的兵役問題，就我所知道的最新回覆是電競選手可以適用「產業替代役」，但有一個問題是產業替代役申請的資格非常困難，除了選手要有一定的資格以外，能申請產業替代役的廠商也非常少，只有台積電那一些有辦法申請，就跟研發替代役的規章很像，基本上是一樣的。這個是我開給你，但基本上選手申請不到，這個部分希望委員或者是各個部會研議如何處理關於替代役上面的問題。" }, { "speaker": "蔡承諺", "speech": "第二，剛剛有講到一個學業問題，我們可以拿其他國家做比較，拿韓國、中國及馬來西亞都可以，因為電競選手被挖掘的年紀非常年輕，常常會覺得國中的時候覺得有潛力，可能要養一陣子，好比到十七歲才可以比賽。這一段時間選手的課業如何處理？大家知道台灣是國、英、數比較優先的地方，其他的國家是跟像網咖合作，第一個先要求網咖的規格、可以容納怎樣的空間及設施等，再者是需要廠商背書，在這樣的條件下，選手可以一邊念書、一邊下課後到網咖去練習，這個是保障的方法，因為我們不太可能讓一個國中生要升高中的人，真的不念書去拚，大家都聽到了，拼了兩年後不一定有結果。" }, { "speaker": "蔡承諺", "speech": "第三，剛剛有提到選手的兵役問題，像剛剛有提到比照體育班的方式去處理，因為選手講真的，一天基本要練習十四個小時是，各位上班的時間都沒有這麼長（笑），而且沒有假日，就是為了出國比賽。這樣的狀態下，是不是有辦法用學校或者是用體育專班的方式？我不要求有學分，但是至少要讓選手可以專心在比賽上。好比：棒球選手只要專心在棒球上，不能讓電競選手除比賽外，要分心處理其他的事。" }, { "speaker": "蔡承諺", "speech": "第四，像剛剛也有提到薪資的問題，剛剛也有提到企業贊助，我非常支持Garena提到電競產業這一塊可以減稅。我覺得納入體育項目真的是其次，重點是要被承認，剛剛其實教育部的一些長官有提到一些問題，也就是社會上的反彈等等，我覺得這個是教育部要做的事，我們需要有一個管道去跟社會溝通，我們需要的管道跟社會說開車跟開F1是不一樣的事。" }, { "speaker": "蔡承諺", "speech": "甚至剛剛有人提到沉迷這一件事，我跟各位報告一下，我國小的目標是Michael Jordan，後來我不要了，因為我去我家社區比賽被打爆了，利用一個政府的力量去舉辦這樣規模的比賽，這樣才可以預防小孩子真的沉迷，我去打一場比賽，知道我的成績在哪裡，該回去念書就念書了。以上跟各位報告，這是我這幾年每天溝通出他們所遇到的問題，委員及各部會的力量都比我們大，在這邊提供一點經驗給大家。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "整個會議進行了兩個半小時，不知道還有沒有哪一位今天在現場關注產業發展的相關好朋友要發言？" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "沒有的話，其實每一位的發言都非常精彩且重要，相關的問題，包括我剛才已經講了，接下來我會在立法院成立一個跨黨派的法案專法的推動聯盟，每一個委員都會有辦公室的主任，會成立一個LINE的群組出來，面臨各個單位所面臨到的問題，包括後續所講的兵役問題、比賽賽事的問題及短期場地及出國的問題，我相信如果政府有專法，後續包括政府有一個平台推動下去，我相信家長能夠看得到、知道且瞭解，後面反彈的聲音會有機會，或者甚至於對於電競產業這一塊，孩子在投入之前，家長有更多的認識，我覺得反而是一個健康的成長過程。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "我也是一個孩子的媽媽，孩子很喜歡玩這一些遊戲，與其是私底下偷偷摸摸玩，不如在政府關注下及很多賽事過程陪著孩子成長瞭解及發展，適合則繼續發展，不適合就投入在其他的智育方面，這都是對的方向。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "我相信今天來到現場所有的委員，不會只是一次的公聽會，包括剛剛鄭寶清委員也講了，陳其邁委員聽到我們要開，也說下一次要來，這個是跨黨派的公聽會，後續包括下星期，我們希望把今天大家的問題很聚焦地整理起來，初步、中部及長期的問題都會整理起來，在拜會林全院長的同時（提出），私底下第一線可以處理的我們都會處理了，中長期的問題都會條列出來，每隔一、兩星期，我會邀請委員在中午開個便當會，把大家的問題整理出來，了解進度怎麼樣，如果下一次有協調會、公聽會可以做後續的準備。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "真的是感謝今天來到現場的每一位好朋友，更感謝行政部門的所有同仁們，也希望透過今天的公聽會，你們對於大家的問題有更進一步的瞭解，政委可能私底下也會找大家來溝通，你們見到她的時候，我希望已經是有答案及方向，因此下一次再請唐政委來開協調會或者是公聽會的時候，她已經可以給我們在這一個公聽會之後處理哪一些問題的答案。" }, { "speaker": "李彥秀", "speech": "我想這個是不定期的公聽會，在今年度很快會有第二次的公聽會，我們會組成一個不定期的聯盟來處理，也特別感謝今天每一次好朋友的參與，你們的寶貴意見我們非常珍惜，包括後續提專法的部分，也希望行政院儘速有一些專法出來，但我們自己在立法院也會成立一個跨黨派的研議小組，把專法儘速處理好，儘速出爐。非常感謝今天會議主持人鄭寶清委員、吳志揚委員、江啟臣委員、林為洲委員共同關注大家，也謝謝大家一起來參與，感謝大家！" } ]

[ { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "特別想要請教你一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是，請說。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "你自己有說過在二十歲之前，其實有兩個人對你影響滿深，一個是維根斯坦（Ludwig Wittgenstein）跟喬伊斯（James Joyce），喬伊斯是我大學時候在唸的《都柏林人》和《青年藝術家的畫像》，所以這部分就引起了我的興趣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "我很好奇，他是怎樣，在你二十歲以前，你覺得他們怎麼思考、正確思考，或者是文學的思考影響到你？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好。不過其實維根斯坦跟喬伊斯是不同時候接觸，維根斯坦是大概十二、十三歲看《邏輯哲學論》，然後接下來《哲學研究》大概是十四、十五歲比較著迷地看，接下來《藍皮書》、《褐皮書》這一些東西大概就是十六、十七歲這樣看下去。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是我大概覺得跟維根斯坦思路比較接近了，那時候才碰到喬伊斯，大概是十八、十九歲的時候，所以這兩個是不重疊的，等於有一個維根斯坦的時期，然後有一個喬伊斯的時期，喬伊斯的時期可能比較短，一、兩年，大概到二十歲左右。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "喔！可是你看，像維根斯坦是每一個時期都在打破自己的邏輯。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "所以你從十二至十五歲？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，所以我十二、十三歲接觸的是早期維根斯坦，然後十四、十五歲開始是比較中、晚期開始做《哲學探索》的那一段，接下來他做一些可能很後面才發表或甚至沒有發表的那些很片斷思路，那一些思路如果前面兩個部分沒有瞭解的話，其實是根本進不去，會完全不知道在講什麼。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為他會拿很多先前的想法，然後把它全部有點像是洗牌掉，然後自己重來一次、重新講一次，他一直解構自己，所以當時大概十六歲的時候，我記得我在政大哲學系旁聽，應該是先聽康德、胡賽爾，然後高達美，當然中國哲學也有聽，等於這些全部整理之後，聽海德格爾到某個程度後，才覺得後期維根斯坦是建立在對這些東西的重新編組上面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "早期維根斯坦，其實我們學資訊科學就是用他的那一套思路在想，包含他使用的「布林邏輯」。像「世界圖式」這個東西，那是寫程式的人必經之路，等於圖靈他們是同時代的人、互相影響的。所以維根斯坦是我工作或我用電腦的時候一定會每天、每天練習的東西，但是後來比較是我跟人相處的時候，想說「我們正在怎麼使用語言？這個語言是不是展演性的使用？這個人到底在扮演什麼角色？其實不用語言也許反而更好？」等等這一些東西時，我慢慢才瞭解的──以十二、十三歲我的心智發展，其實沒有辦法承接後面這個思路，所以大概要到十六、十七歲才比較懂。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "到十六、十七歲有沒有比較簡單的想法？你覺得你跟他的思路合，你覺得有一些觀念跟他有一些共同的信仰？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有幾個，一個是後來叫做「新實用主義」的那個方向。另一個是因為我成年之後去讀佛洛伊德、克萊恩、拉岡，去讀這一些人，他們其實是用心裡面的東西往外去這樣接，維根斯坦比較是從外面，但是其實他們到的位置是非常像的，那個位置就是說我們對於人有一個個體的這件事是一個有用的幻覺，叫做「規範性理念」，就是說如果你不相信，你不可能繼續活下去。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可是那個東西是虛的。絕大部分語言其實是發生在對話中間，然後這個對話本身也許才是主體，也許我們只是承載這個東西的容器。這個東西是精神分析發展到比較晚期－佛洛依德還沒有－可能到比昂那個時期才發展出的這樣一套想法：分析室裡面有他叫作「The Big O」的靈明在作用，這兩個人只是這個東西的容器的這種想法。但是晚期維根斯坦其實已經從外面開始有一點逼近這樣的理念：語言的意義就是在使用語言的過程，完全是從「語用」開始，然後這個「語用」本身是你不用去問語法，你不用去問字典，你不用問這一些人跟人之間的關係，而是先從「用」本身出發，「用」本身才是主體，不用我們現在已經習慣的這一些字詞，還是有一些別的捷徑去達到這個語用的結構。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但當然一開始要有一些最基本的共同的預設，因為沒有這個的話，獅子說出真理，我們也聽不懂，因為是不同界別的東西。但是在這兩個極端中間，維根斯坦試著去試中間各種不同的可能的點，不管是視覺式的，或者是直感式的，或是格式塔式的，或是各種圖像化的認知圖示。所以我覺得他給我的毋寧是一種對於符號運用的彈性，就是我們不一定要按照語法本身來使用語言。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那這個東西在做數位創作的時候是特別重要的，不管是FB或者是我在Wiselike也好，這些東西是文字或語言生活的地方，可是每個空間事實上給它不同的拓樸結構。這個拓樸雖然是必要條件，可是它並不決定語言，它是起到一個空間的作用。這個空間的作用，在維根斯坦之前哲學家比較少處理，就是「容納語言的地方」這個東西，我覺得很難用語言描述，但非常容易用經營這種語言的空間方式去實作，大概是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "所以是放在科技還沒有出現，之前就更難理解？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實啊！我們現在用VR，雖然你帶著同一個VR，我們馬上進入好比太空中看地球，我們可以瞬間有一個捷徑，達到共感，但在此之前要用話來描述的時候，你需要用很特殊的像我們這種文字工作者有的能力，就是你看著字，然後腦裡就冒出建築物的能力，但其實對大部分的人而言，這個其實是很困難的，而且在我們狀態沒有那麼好的時候，可能看的時候，睏起來就是字而已（笑）；所以新的技術、新的科技確實是能夠直接不要經過前額葉，直接碰邊緣系統，其實很多是邊緣系統先產生出這一種共感，然後你的前額葉經過協調，才開始給他一個名字，名字是後來的，但我們現在因為舊的文字或紙張的這種限制，所以常常必須要使用文字..." }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "先形容過一遍。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "先形容過一遍，試著從文字重構那個共感之後，才勉強到達一個對話的平台，可是中間不知道已經打了多少折扣。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "按照你的邏輯，如果表達力差的會比較吃虧，對不對？因為文字表達力強的人，他比較有能力？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以前是這樣子，我們有「輔助式科技」以前是這樣子。但現在我們在推行的東西，有一個叫做「認知式運算（Cognitive Computing）」，「認知式運算」的意思是我們把人眼睛裡面辨認形狀、辨認顏色、辨認這一些東西的迴路，我們試著用機器學習的方法去訓練機器也可以做一樣的事情，而且做得比人還要好。這樣它只要看一個影片或一個圖片馬上告訴你裡面有什麼東西、是哪一些人，所以即使是視障的人透過這一個界面，他跟我們明眼人是完全一樣在使用這一些數位服務。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "同樣的道理，如果你現在只是有一個大略有形（tangible）的東西，但你在樂高或者是Minecraft或者這種你摸得到的東西呈現，有些人是比較擅長的嘛！這樣做出來之後，機器可以直接翻譯成工程師專業的平面圖或者是專業文字的描述，這樣的話，他們才能跟我們在平起平坐的位置上去討論城市要怎麼走或住的地方要怎麼改，我覺得機器是一個促成者（enabler），把大家放到一個可以用自己舒服的模態的對話平台上。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "就像你今天在論壇一直在提說，等於你一直在努力設計的一個東西，是讓…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，讓弱勢者可以說自己的話。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "而不只是設計一些政治系統，讓某個代表替弱勢說話。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "對。我一直在想說，其實就像今天在談的科技設計主導未來的那個。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "其實過去可能科技還沒有那麼搶手，設計師如果他的表達力很好，他建立設計出來的東西就很難為大眾所有，所以他反而比較沒有辦法去造福到一般大眾。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒錯，沒錯，是。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "所以又牽扯到表達力的東西，我本來一直在思考說要如何請教你如果訓練自己的表達力，但是這樣子聽起來，好像其實你已經繞過表達力這個東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個我們就回到喬伊斯，喬伊斯其實他一直試著讓語言—已經不是語言了—是讓聲音，對於聲音的聯想回到紙上，所以他越往後面，他寫的東西越像樂譜，就是說你不唸出來它完全沒有意義，因為它就是樂譜。所以到《芬尼根守靈夜》（Finnegans Wake）的時候，其實我自己對《芬尼根守靈夜》開始理解，就是我聽喬伊斯自己唸他的錄音，我才發現那只是樂譜符號，就是把它當作字，是沒有用的，因為他當時幾乎已經看不見了，他跟世界主要的界面就是透過聲音跟他的耳朵，所以他試著找出一套「記號法」，去記他聽到這一些聲音跟講出這一些聲音的時候，他腦裡發生什麼事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是在看《芬尼根守靈夜》的時候，誠如你說的，他已經跟表達力沒有關係了，沒有人在用表達力在看那一本書了，那已經是天書嘛，如果你要用表達力的角度來看的話。但是他確實非常有效地能夠傳達他當時心理的感覺，就是當你跟著哼、跟著唸過一次，或像我試著翻譯的時候，試著找出中文裡面跟他對應的聲音跟形狀時，你真正可以經歷到他的一些感受，所以這時候幾乎是直觀的傳達，已經不是抽象的再現，而是走進濃縮還原的知識過程裡。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "所以維根斯坦也是在你教這一套，語言這一個東西，他已經叫大家不要拘泥於語言彼此之間的溝通表達？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，大概就是這個意思。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "所以由這個再來看設計，由你在談，重新在看設計這個眼光，他其實是可以起一個新的革命，因為我們一直在設計思考上面在談表達力，可是現在明明科技已經出來很多東西，它其實是一直在幫助很多東西原本要透過傳統的方式，現在是完全，應該是你努力要把它變成一個新的平台，大家都可以不用特別受到傳統的訓練？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對！應該這樣講，像電影剛出來的時候，大家不知道拿它做什麼。當然你可以用來知道火車開進站是長什麼樣子，除此之外，大家不知道這個形式跟本來劇場、照片這些東西到底有什麼不一樣，所以大家花了非常非常多的時間、幾代人的時間，去看這個新的媒體，有哪一些新的語言可以在裡面顯示出來。到現在像李安老師是說他覺得二維電影已經用到盡頭了，再接下來做得更細或者是更好，但不會有新的語言出現了，那所以他就覺得說如果一秒鐘六十幀、一百二十幀拍3D的話，它會有一些新的東西出來，這一些新的東西邊界在哪裡沒有人知道。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "VR也是同樣的事情，VR被大家叫做「最後的媒介（The Last Medium）」，原因是理論上不只是聽覺或者是視覺或者是觸感或者是身體的姿勢跟你肌肉的捕捉，這個是目前的VR科技；除此之外，眼、耳、鼻、舌、聲、意，理論上都可以帶進去，它的核心就是經驗的儲存跟經驗的再現，那這個當然是「The Last Medium」，因為別的媒介都可以放在這裡面去做。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是問題就是說人類在此之前並沒有直接儲存經驗的習慣，對我們來講，時間過了就是過了，然後所以就是有一個電視影集叫做「黑鏡（Black Mirror）」去探討說如果你的經驗像這樣子儲存的話會發生什麼事情，當然每一集都有各種各樣爛掉的狀況發生（笑），但它無論如何仍然是以目前我們這一代的想像去做的，我們事實上並不知道說這種媒體出來了，在裡面會有什麼可能性，我們是連可能性的邊界都不知道。不是我們達不到，而是我們連它邊界在哪裡都不知道。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以當你在講設計的時候，我想到的就是說這個是一個無限的畫布，然後我們現在才幾乎像牙牙學語一樣，試著在裡面確立一個很基本的語彙，但我們所做的這些都可能在下一個新的專案出來，像AlphaGo學會下圍棋之後，所有我們的語彙就要準備好翻新、再翻新。所以這不是「一次革命」，不是說「本來這樣，現在我們要革命」，不是，它是不斷革命，可能每個月都在革命。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "我這樣講我就開始有一點擔心，因為我們在談設計思考這個東西，丹麥跟北歐一直在強調教育最重要。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是啊！" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "所以如果我們一直用這一代的思考，去想說未來的科技，因為它其實是沒有邊界。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "用這種方式去教育現在正準備去起飛接觸未來科技的小朋友，你覺得應該怎樣比較理想？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為我們在十二年國教課發會的時候，其實很明顯，我們把自發放到最重要的價值，之後是溝通，之後是共好。自發放在最上面的原因是，我們覺得教育必須要是服務與學習，以前是反過來，以前是說有一個教育結構，然後學習者是配合這個教育結構去達到教育結構想要達到的那樣狀態，這個會有的弊病其實你剛剛已經講完了（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，我們反過來就是說在設計107課綱的時候，我們問的是說如何引發人對學習的興趣，因為「學」就是新的東西，「習」就是你練習它，「學」、「習」這兩件事情本來就是很有趣的事情，我們人到世界上本來什麼都沒有，就是在「學」跟「習」；只是說如果學習的方向是由外面所強加的，而這個「外面」，就像我們剛剛講的，可能過了一年之後，突然之間完全廢棄掉了，大概就會有一種花了這麼久學了一個東西，可是這個行業消失了，受到未來的衝擊。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "這講到現在大學生的心態。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是啊！整個行業沒有了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那好不容易試著想要去轉型，那我轉型學了旁邊那一個行業，我花了四個月學，而這四個月學的工作被自動化掉了，行業還在，但不需要我了（笑），就是會有一系列這樣的狀況出現。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "對，而且越來越頻繁。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那當然。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "時間越來越短。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那當然！" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "那怎麼辦？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，所以我的意思是說，我想毋寧是回來，就是說我們為什麼要學？學了為什麼要練習？你越不把人當作機器看，也就是越不去強調「有用」這件事情。因為「用」這一件事—回到莊子—就是「用」是人之於要求物的東西，我手上有一把釘錘，錘一錘，它如果壞掉了，我說「它沒有用」，那是因為我本來已經給予它一個用途，它沒有辦法達到這個用途，所以我說「它是一把沒有用的錘子」。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但莊子花了非常多的時間說，可是有一些東西它並不是為了有用而存在的，它只是按照它本身存在，那裡有一棵大樹，你在大樹底下很開心，那個東西就不是一個用途，但無論如何是一個文化。所以，當我們在講設計或文化的時候，我覺得重點是，不要把人看作是一個文化裡面要促使那個文化演進或者什麼文創產業的一個有用的什麼承載的什麼東西，因為你這樣子看就會碰到我們以上講的全部這些事情。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "會一直撞牆？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "會一直撞牆。而且就是你要達成這個用途的東西，可能就不是人類在做的，那越來越多不是人類在做的，或者仍然是人類在做，可是一個人類可以做以前一百個人在做的事情，另外九十九個人就沒有用了，所以我覺得從教育的觀點來看，不要教小孩成為有用的人，我覺得這才是最關鍵的想法。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "對，不要叫小孩成為有用的人（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是的。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "那應該要…我用「應該要教」好像又落入框架。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！就是你先問小孩他想要學什麼、想練習什麼，他自己來定義他自己感興趣的東西，當然我們旁邊的基礎建設還是要在那邊，就是不管他的學習型態是什麼，我們確保說他用他習慣的學習型態，不管是圖像、聲音、語言、文字及操作，他可以碰得到各種不同東西，不要以為是說一定看得懂文字才能夠學法律，也許法律可以用別的不同的模態來學。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，同一個東西引起他的習慣，他用他習慣、他喜歡的那個模態去接近，接近的時候，它跟這個東西自然會產生聯繫，可是這個東西並不是一個用途，學法律不只是要「成為有用的律師」、學醫學不只是要「成為有用的醫師」，是從可能兩百萬年—看你怎麼算—七千年或五千年以來，所有曾經做過這件事的人累積出的一個文明或一個技藝（art），當你加入這個技藝的時候，你就是加入一個比你大的東西，那這個時候你就會有一個「神入、契合」的經驗。那種經驗出現的時候，用途就不重要了，你只是在這個文明的長流裡面做出一些貢獻。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "所以我們太常想…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，可是事實上，好的藝術家、科學家，或任何一個行動者，他在做的時候並不是去想有沒有用，他想的是還有什麼可能性。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "那如果我們把年齡稍微放大一點，給我們大學生跟年輕人講一下。就像你剛剛提到的，像科技的東西，一直設計新的東西出來，把舊有的工作給消失掉，可是我們是按照傳統的教育方式長大，我要怎麼去改變？因為我覺得小孩子心態還比較可以開放。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "比如二十五歲到三十五歲這一個年齡，他們也把你的話當作意見領袖或之類的，你會怎麼去教他們有一個正確心態？如果我們把剛才那種「有用」拿掉，那他應該要怎麼去做？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對於個別的人，我好比花十個小時或二十個小時聽他的生命史，我當然可以做出意見，我的建議說不定還有點用，但是對於所有二十五歲到三十五歲的人，這個範圍太大了，我沒有辦法給出意見，我給意見是不負責任的，這個是一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一件事，因為我覺得「年輕人」這個標籤，因為我剛好三十五歲嘛！所以對這個很敏感（笑），就是說其實並沒有哪一個時刻是你這個標籤突然撕掉了，然後你要貼上另外一個標籤，就是後邁入中年，然後突然從「量變」產生「質變」，沒有這一種事嘛！" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "沒有，完全沒有。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對！（笑）就是說還是一個延續的個體，所以我不太會用年齡去區分人，請你見諒。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不過你剛剛講的很好，就是說任何一個人不管他幾歲，已經受了一套完整的養成訓練，然後他可能自己有一些標籤，好比做這個工作的或有這個技能之類，但現在面臨到這個工作或者這個技能正在被重新定義，我是可以說一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果一個人他沒有覺得說他活在這個世界上有什麼使命，或者是好奇心，他對這個世界想要有什麼樣關聯的話，那新的東西出來的時候，因為觸發的可能是多巴胺迴路，就是它最快把你注意力搶過去的東西，我們當時設計有點像LINE或者是WhatsApp這一類即時通訊軟體的時候—我不知道你用什麼—我一直到上個月都還是矽谷設計這種東西的人。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們在設計的時候，是做一個注意力管理（attention management）的工具，我們希望你最有效率使用你有限的注意力，在手機上面可以處理更多事情；但我們沒有料到的是，當你的手機裡面灌了三種以上我們設計出的這種東西的時候，是像雞尾酒一樣的。就是說對於注意力的攫取，會把人變到甚至你沒有辦法好好看完一則訊息的那個程度，LINE也響了、Mail也響了、簡訊也響了，什麼都響了，所以大家就會落入一個說我永遠處理不完，因為當我正在回這個的時候，那個又響起來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我這邊要講的事情是說，對於新的東西之所以剛剛講的不管是衝擊或焦慮，那是因為一個新的東西並不是難以理解，而是現在沒有一段時間跟它相處、去好好理解它，不然的話，只要有一段時間好好跟它相處，你要學任何東西都很容易的；現在問題是，本來就沒有時間學東西了，又有東西非學不可，這時才會變成是造成非常大的焦慮或非常大的挫折感之類的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好比像我現在進行政院，我換了工作，雖然我工作內容是我已經很熟悉的，但我接觸到的那些材料，跟我以前跟地方政府或跟各局處是不太一樣的材料，因為我要看到很多新的材料，這一些材料是我必須要學習的，所以別的各個政務委員跟政務首長，我都一律是叫「老師」，因為他們都是各方面的專家；我擅長的是資訊處理，但我並不是這一些議題本身的專家，所以他們來的材料我一定要學，而且一定要把它學會。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我發現說如果我手機灌這麼多的通訊軟體，即使每天準時九點上班、五點下班，在行政院裡我其實沒有辦法有一個很好的節奏，去吸收這一些完全新的資料，所以我在入閣之前才會談說禮拜三、禮拜五是遠距工作，我就不在院裡。因為我在院裡即使我手機關機，但同事直接從我門口走進來，我總不能說不見他吧！（笑）如果院長說要開個會，我總不能說我不去開（笑）。所以，我特別說我禮拜一、二、四專門用來跟同事們開會，但禮拜三、五我拿來消化我學到這一些新的東西，這樣子的話，部會朋友給我這一些材料，我才不會突然覺得又有新的東西、新的事件發生了，我要急著反應。可以說禮拜二看到一個狀況，我禮拜三好好地想一天，然後禮拜四說我們要用什麼系統來處理它，這是給自己一個節奏。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "你會建議大家要給自己的節奏？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "每一個人習慣的方式不一樣，有些人他真的很能夠、很快速地切換非常多不同的頻道，可能還受不了專注在什麼無聊的東西太久。這以前叫「注意力缺失」，但現在往往是一件好事，不是一件壞事（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像以前說抑鬱的人，對事情比較不容易有正面情緒反應，但現在社群媒體的東西不斷轟炸的時候，有時候稍微抑鬱反而有優勢，就可以有大局的觀念，不會一、兩句話就被動員帶著走（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，以前本來被認為適應不良的這些特徵，現在可能都有變成適應良好的機會。但我自己既沒有抑鬱、也沒有注意力缺失（笑），所以我只能用一個和許多人類似的心理狀態，去說「可是我碰到新的刺激，我情緒還是會被調動，所以我一定要有時間讓這個情緒先慢下來，我再處理它」。同樣的，有新知進來，我沒有辦法像真的有注意力缺失的朋友一樣那麼快速切換，我還是需要有一段時間才能夠切換進從「傾聽」到「學習」到「理解」到「反應」，我還沒有辦法那麼快切換這四個階段。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，我覺得對任何人都一樣，就是要有自知之明，要知道說你的情感、你的認知、你的注意力中間的頻率是什麼，然後你習慣哪一種模態、哪一種會造成不舒服、哪一種是舒服的，然後再跟環境說：「現在當然有無限新型態的東西出來，但是我的吞吐量就是這樣，然後我一次處理一個，把它處理好。」我想這個部分是對任何人都適用的，尤其是已經成年了，已經知道自己認知模式的人都適用；但到具體、到個案，每個人都不一樣。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "所以我滿好奇，你之前在矽谷設計這些即時通訊軟體，沒想到現在發展成這樣，如果再回到當初，你會這樣設計嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "事實上這個東西很有意思，它像是一個演化的環境狀態。舉例來說：你同時灌了FB Messenger、WhatsApp或者是LINE好了，這些東西只要有人提出一個比較快捕捉注意力的方法，其他非加上不可，不然的話，它就消失了，別人就會直接去用比較能夠捕捉你的注意力的東西，這個叫做「紅心皇后現象」，就是大家都要一直往更短期的東西去跑，即使大家的市場佔有率都停在原點。但是直接結果是什麼？是我們精神衛生變糟了，大家心理的衛生狀況都變得越來越不好（笑），每一天過去都變得更不好一點點（笑）。我們當時在私部門的時候，這是沒有辦法，因為我們如果不這樣做，會直接被淘汰，別人做得更好的就直接取而代之。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那這是我2013年退休的其中一個原因，就是我比較不想再做這一類的事情。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "為什麼？不想再產生這一種更多新的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們當時在做的事情有很多，我可能沒有辦法講細節，所以我講FB好了，FB的這部分是公開的。FB做的事情是它養一支人工智慧，就是機器學習，就是專門針對你的，你給它的訊息就是你在FB上每一次的捲動、你在每一頁頁面停了多久、按了什麼東西，這是它的食糧跟環境，它能不能存活下來完全取決於攫取你多久的注意力，如果這支演算法的參數沒有辦法攫取你的注意力，它就換成別的參數，所以它會一直不斷優勝劣敗、適者生存，一直到它找出跟你相符合的──有點像換秘書，一直換到一個跟你配合的秘書。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "讓你也願意一直用它？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，而且這個決策周期，是以「天」或以「小時」為單位來計算，所以你只要用FB一陣子，它就有你的心理量表，來養一個專門符合你的人工智慧。所以它才會一直問你對這個感不感興趣、對那個感覺怎麼樣，就是要作這個用的。養到一個程度之後，它就會開始看說哪一些東西你會連出去看，你會離開FB，然後這個東西它就會開始去看所有人是不是目前都正在連去某一個別的網站，然後就會開始跟那個網站說能不能把FB內建在這邊，或乾脆把內容直接放進FB裡面，現在叫做「Instant Articles」。它作為一個媒體，是想要把你下班時間都用掉的，而且是用這一套跟人共生的生物方式來做經營。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我在蘋果做的事，或我一些朋友在Google做的事，和FB並不一樣，但後面的技術是一樣的：就是我們當時終於能夠養一些智力差不多比線蟲好一點，還沒有到昆蟲程度的一種新的生命體（笑），然後我們問這些生命體可不可以盡可能達到任務，但這個任務跟顧客的任務是不是完全一樣？可能不是，像FB沒有商品，顧客就是它的商品，所以這個任務就是它的商品，這可以攤開來講。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "Apple當然在隱私上比較有保障，Google又是一種不同的做法，但到最後都是在說，我們現在在養一些新的生命體，它跟人類有什麼彼此共存的方法。做這些事到後來我其實不太舒服，雖然我做得還滿不錯的。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "而且做很久？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是，做了很久。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "你不太舒服，是最後回歸人性的理念？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也不能這樣講…" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "還是怕那種共生者是會被餵養越來越大？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也不是越來越大…" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "其實我光聽你講，我就不太舒服。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得主要是它不夠透明。如果它現在是你的秘書，然後它幫你做了非常多的決定，但是你是老闆，你可以問它說：「你為什麼做這個決定？」它至少要給你一個為什麼，但是我們剛剛講的，尤其是FB這樣子的演算法，你目前是問不了它為什麼的。當你只看到某個品牌的商品或它覺得你對某些廣告有興趣的時候，它旁邊並沒有一個問號鍵，讓你問為什麼給你看這個，它當然有給你一個頁面說：「根據我對你長期的瞭解，你的興趣是這些、你的關注是這些。」可是它並不會告訴你這個決定如何做成。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "為什麼這樣子？因為這個做成的過程是無可言喻的，它無法用人類的語言來表達，它是不同的認知結構，我們叫做「不可共量（incommensurable）」，它沒有辦法翻成人類可以懂的東西。所以即使是我們寫程式的人，我們只看結果，也無從知道為什麼它做出這樣的決定。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "是一開始就不知道，還是現在慢慢覺得？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "都不會知道。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好比說AlphaGo好了，它為什麼那樣子下棋？當然寫程式的人可以問它，它就會說按照它的判斷走這邊的勝率是多少，按照它所認知一般人類下的機率只有多少、勝率多少，但它只給你這兩、三個數字，但更進一步問說：「所以你下了人類都不會下的這一步，為什麼？」這是沒有為什麼可言的。假設它自己跟自己下了五億場之後，認為這樣下會贏，即使它是有一個記憶的，但這個記憶的時間、尺度超過人類壽命的時間尺度，所以如果你有五億年，它也許可以慢慢告訴你，但我們都沒有五億年的時間來聽（笑）。所以即使它願意花五億年的時間告訴我們，我們也沒有辦法理解，這就會回到「獅子說出真理，我們聽不懂」的那個部分，因為我們的生命經驗是不一樣的。而且，這裡要避免把它過度擬人化：它的生命就只有圍棋，並沒有別的生命經驗，它是為了這件事而存在。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為我們設計出這些從外面沒有辦法共量的東西，所以我自己後來比較關注的，或者比較願意花時間的，毋寧是說怎麼樣確保每一個人只要想要，都可以自己有這樣的一些東西，那就是「個人AI」的概念，然後應該要是每個人都可以看到它運作的原理。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "和公平對待？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是的，公平的對待。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "然後你可以選擇給它的東西，就是你實際看到的或者是你用到的東西，而不是所有的人看到跟用到的東西加總之後，然後說「你是黃種人住在臺灣，所以你就是用這一套就對了」這樣去剖繪（profile）你。這個在國際上有一個叫做「OpenAI」專案，就是專門做這一件事，他們希望大家都有一個平等對待這些東西的立足點，這個當然在商業形象上也是有好處。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當你用某一類的資料去做訓練的時候，就會有某一類的偏見。Google之前有一個公關事件，就是說在他們的相簿裡面，剛放這種剛剛講的這種視覺中樞自動去判斷的時候，白人都會標到滿正確的，還可以判斷大概幾歲之類的，但有一個相簿裡面有黑人，被它標成黑猩猩，這個相片裡面有三隻黑猩猩（笑），造成軒然大波，產品緊急下架（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可是確實啊！因為你給它的訓練圖片，可能是比較白人中心視角的研究者拍出來的，他們可能真的拍黑人拍得比較少，而拍動物的黑猩猩可能還比較多（笑），所以在這種情況下，養出來的生命體就會認為，長那樣子的就是黑猩猩；但如果這是黑人社區，社區裡面有自己這樣子的AI，然後這個社區的人向AI提出要求，和這個東西共存或者是共容，而資料並不是先到某個大公司的雲端而回來，而是讓所有這些用的人自己運用、交換。這樣的話，其實這樣就會變成跟任何新的科技出現的時候沒有什麼兩樣，它帶給人的是一些不用自己做的事：它會提醒你眼前這一個人的名字是什麼，但又不會交給你超過個人自由的額外權力，就是一個人去影響十幾萬人的生活過程或生活軌跡的那種權力。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為大概到2012、2013年左右，機器學習的發展開始往一、二個人可以左右十幾萬人生活發展的方式移動了，所以我當時也覺得我繼續待在業界，在良心上面經常會問自己一些問題，所以才會變成往開放源碼，或者是往我本來就在關心的自由軟體社群的方式去做。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "所以你等於是重新去思考設計不一樣的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，或者說基於同樣設計的原則，但變成是由個人自己決定、或群眾共同決定的方向，這是比較民主的。我想不要犧牲掉民主的基本精神，除非哪一天，我們真的全部融合成同一個生命體，不然在此之前，我覺得「自發」還是非常非常重要。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "所以在設計思考上傾向於民主的方式？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "可是談到民主的東西，因為每一個人是個體，就像你早上談的，從劣到夯，中間的過程如果碰到一群沒有耐心等到劣變成夯，作為一個設計者，要如何透過民主的方式讓他能夠眼見到夯？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是。就是說其實我覺得沒有耐心，裡面有一個重點就是說，大家其實現在懂的並不一定比政府少，也不一定比所謂的城市設計者少，現在不是在開「第三屆聯合國住房和城市可持續發展大會（HABITAT III）」嗎？在那個會議裡面，我有寫一篇論文，但我沒有辦法去，所以請我的共同作者去講。我們在講的那一件事就是說，因為現在在HABITAT III都是在講「城市權（The right to the city）」，因為大家都越來越住在城市，超過一半人口住在城市裡，所以去取用城市這一件事，不管你住的是違建、不管你住的不是你登記擁有的地方，即使是難民、遊民，還是應該要有存取這些東西的基本人權，就是我們現在講的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但這裡碰到一個很弔詭的東西，如果我們在意的是那個都市規劃的話，一開始的那個設計者，他設計一個城市，也許根本不是給人這樣子用的，所以設計者的願景，跟實際住在那裡的人的實際需求會開始打架。當我們在說「民主」的時候，我們的意思是讓每一個住在這裡的人，都能夠充分跟他居住地的空間去作對話。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「去對話」的意思是，我上午有講的「延展式的傾聽（scalable listening）」，我們好比把一個這種東西，但可以錄全部的光線，並不只是錄旁邊的聲音，是360度的相機，大概就這麼大，我們是放到隔壁鄰居、放到實際廟後或者榕樹下或者哪一些地方，就是大家自己實際居住的地方，並不只是持有身分證的人可以去公聽會發表一、兩句他的意見，而是盡可能在每一個住的地方的人如何使用、怎麼應用、對這一個空間有什麼期許，完整地捕捉下來，然後我們用一些人工智慧的程式、透過機器學習，把這一個東西翻譯成看得懂的文字，所以這仍然和FB完全是一樣的，FB同樣也把影音的這一些類比訊號翻譯成做決策用的一些文字訊號，只是它的決策是要餵給你什麼廣告跟文章，而我們的決策是要知道這一個區域的人實際使用的方式、對這一個空間的要求是哪一些，但兩者最後出來的方式都是列點。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "你等於把發散的民意，透過科技的力量把它收斂。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，把它收納、聚集。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "然後找到一個真正的共識？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這還沒有到共識，就是共同事實而已。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "事實的聚集？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "完全是在事實層級。就是人們怎麼使用城市，人們對城市覺得哪一些地方缺乏、哪一些沒有的，甚至哪一些人是我們本來透過市政系統接觸不到的，因為他也許沒有身分證，那一些人是誰、是怎麼樣的存在著？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "先有這個事實，我們才能再用下一波的科技工具去幫忙蒐集他們的感受，他們對於空間的感受如何、他們對於彼此的感受如何、他們知不知道鄰居的歷史是什麼之類的。當你有這兩層的時候，大家都很有耐心，大家之所以沒有耐心的原因是之前的決策常常跳過這兩個，就是「事實」跟「感受」的蒐集，直接跳到「建議」的蒐集，所以大家就會有一種好不容易生出一些建議來，為什麼政府還沒有買單？好不容易凝聚出這一里對什麼東西的想法，為什麼政府還是把怪手開到這裡來？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當你一下子從頭經營的時候，等於每一個人只有講一句話或兩句話的機會，我們在做賽局理論的就知道說，好比囚犯兩難這種賽局，只有一、兩局的話，大家都是用最壞的方式做事情，大家都是最激進、最不怕造成別人傷害，因為你不這樣做，下次就沒有這個機會了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實各國都是這樣，像行政程序法或其他的東西，以前都只有定義後期的這個東西，所以大家才會覺得在政府願意辦公聽會之前，還沒有耐心的情況下辦公聽會，在政府辦了公聽會，好不容易收到大家的建議之後，很沒有耐心的情況下希望政府實行，在政府實行的時候，很沒有耐心覺得怎麼還沒有做到當初的那個樣子。這三步都沒有耐心的，這是因為大家並沒有在一個傾聽的過程裡面先去看到彼此的事實、先去看到彼此的感受。如果有這一個過程出現的時候，其實大家都很有耐心，因為在事實確立的過程就知道我們的公務預算就這麼多，某一些東西就是要民間進來做，如果民間不進來的話，就是要五年才會發生，如果進來做的話，兩年就發生，這個就是攤在那邊，用Open Data，任何人自己拿計算機算一算就知道的事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以當這一件事發生的時候，像你在線上訂了一個什麼東西，比如黑貓宅急便會告訴你目前到了集貨所，也會告訴你目前的天氣狀況不好，所以明天才會送貨，這個就沒有什麼好爭議，就是等貨明天來；但中間如果沒有相容的公有程序，或是程序本身沒有透明，或是程序本身可能都還是上面的人說了算的，這三個因素加起來，當然大家會沒有耐心；換成我也會沒有耐心。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果現在反過來，如果這個程序本身大家可以一起來討論，說做這一件事的正當程序是什麼，然後在做的過程裡面每一步是現在做到這一步，然後大家攤開來看就是這一步，然後又能課責，就是說但是現在這邊民間可以進來，現在這一邊可能公民社會可以進來，這一些地方如果進來就要負責做那一部分，但如果大家一起做的話，我們可以提早三倍做出來，這樣當然大家很有耐心，不但很有耐心，而且還願意一起做。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "就像透明一條龍式。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，就是一條龍式，但你就是那一條龍（笑），各位市民就是那一條龍（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "這樣子我就衍生一個很好奇的問題，作為一個設計者，在去平衡民意跟利益間，其實有時會是透明的，也就是早一步看到後果，按照你的方案的話，後果可能會比較好，可是一般人沒有辦法達到你的願景的話，但是一般民意又一直吵另一個方案，你要如何平衡？作為一個設計者，你想要幫城市、群眾設計一個未來的、好的、一條龍式的，但如果大部分的群眾在盲目或沒有那個願景怎麼辦？在榕樹下談到現有的共同經驗，但沒有辦法思考到未來新的東西，因為大家都是過去的經驗。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "或是當下的經驗。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "可是作為設計者，他之所以能夠成為設計者，是因為他有那個願景，他雖然沒有體驗，但他已經可以預想到下一步如何引領，那也是一個困難。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但其實這裡牽涉到說，我們一般分成一個城市的權力層面（power）、政策層面（policy）、程序層面（process）。安那其（anarchist）是看程序層面的，你看我們當代的不管是杭士基或者是格雷伯等人，我們有共通的特點，就是我們都關注程序，而且我們完全不想去獨占政策制定的權力。我們相信，如果你有一個正當程序、有一個透明的程序，大家自己就會決定要去哪裡走。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果我從上面壓一個政策下來，利用我的權力壓政策，再去壓程序，這樣結果仍然不一定正確。我們的信念是：「這樣子的結果，一定比大家自己討論出來的還要差。」" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果你沒有這個信念，不可能成為安那其，安那其覺得人總是可以找到彼此取得合意的方法──所以我即使進了政府，即使是在政務委員這個位置，我還是完全只做程序，但這一件事其實是公務體系非常不習慣的（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "對，不習慣這個決策模式。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家非常習慣說「上面的最懂」，其實心裡可能也不覺得啦！（笑）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但要有一個至少口頭上表示「上面的最懂」這樣子，至少上面的KPI要達成，要轉譯權力者的意志成為政策，然後按照這個政策再找一些程序進來，試著把這個政策做完，以前都是從上而下的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "事務官們其實很不習慣我說「這個個案，我們應該要用什麼程序？」他們習慣的是「政委指示了這個程序，以後就要成為政策」。我說不是，我只是討論這個個案，下一次我們可以用不同的程序，我們是要把這些程序都試到公務人員已經幾乎沒有成本，比本來用的紙本程序更容易、願意自願採用，我們才能真的讓公務系統跟民間、公民社會對接上──就像我在上午說的，這在別的國家發展經驗裡，可能是五到十年的過程，絕對不是一蹴可及，所以我們現在在做的就是一些最基本的打底工作。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "所以你在講的「程序」就是我們未來要適應的概念？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是啊！" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "絕對不是直接去弄一個結果？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，而且這些程序是可延展（scalable）的。如果能夠有效聽十萬人講話的話，同一個技術一定可以有效聽一千人講話、可以有效聽五十人講話，所以同一個東西在社區大廈管理委員會，你也可以使用，不需要等政務委員發布一個什麼東西，這個程序如果是好用的話，應該是在地方層級慢慢長出來。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "如果放在教育體系來看，就像套用你早上講的，其實一個人講，可以五、六百個人聽，是很容易，但如果用傾聽的話，要如何去發明？同樣在現在的教育體制，剛好有很多的改革，所以傳統大概也是老師在上面講，不需要老師去聽個別不同學生的想法跟意見。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是的。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "所以後來有一些線上磨課師（MOOCs）的學習方式。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "你覺得它這樣子發展到現在足夠嗎？還是它應該還有一些什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為我現在比較不管教育了，我只能分享我自己參加課發會的一些想法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像「107課綱」其實有一個特點，就是把之前的小一、小二的那些勞作、美術或是音樂，有一些才藝方面的分科全部取消，變成「生活」。這個「生活課程」，它要求老師不要教小孩任何東西，而是去跟小孩相處、去聽，然後發現每一個小孩個體不同的學習狀態跟這一些東西，然後去鼓勵小孩自己去表達，而且是提供一個很穩定的支持，不管他的表達是好是壞，不要給他分數什麼之類的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這後面的想法很簡單。七歲到八歲剛開始社會化的時候，如果在那個時候已經告訴他：人生是一條跑道，裡面有一些人比較前面、一些人比較後面，對他未來的社會化幾乎是定型的，那他長大之後可能就會覺得要有競爭力、要愛臺灣、要成為臺灣之光什麼的，我覺得這跟小學一、二年級要當班長等這些非常無聊的東西很像（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我要講的是說，在全球社群裡，我如果現在跟你講話，然後一直說：「我很愛唐家，唐家最厲害。」但其實唐家裡面很多人也不姓唐嘛（笑）。出現這種狀況的話，你當然會覺得說我有點反社會，事實上幾乎已經算是自戀了，對不對？但是如果一直嚷嚷著我們要去競爭、要愛臺灣、臺灣一定強的這些口號，從國際上看起來就是很中二嘛。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以在這樣子的培養底下，我覺得以前是因為旁邊的東亞國家的教育制度，其實很長一段時間也沒有好到哪裡去，但是大家慢慢地都在脫離應試教育的傳統，如果我們還卡在裡面的話，慢慢會變成我們只能在同一條跑道上面，然後社會上贏家很少，大部分人是輸家，但是大家還要繼續維護這個體制的這種莫名其妙的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，課發會在規劃「生活課程」時，其中一個目的是讓小孩一開始社會化的時候，不要有贏家、輸家的這種概念，不要有「聽得懂老師的話就是好孩子、聽不懂老師的話就是壞孩子」的概念，而是看到一個成人，他願意花時間去聽你跟別人有什麼不一樣，聽你跟別人哪一些地方一樣，然後慢慢從這裡慢慢找出溝通跟共好的部分來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我很希望這能夠落實，但我現在已經不管教育業務了，我就是繼續很希望吧！但我至少可以在工作上去體現類似的精神，並不是一個政策，符合某些條件的人就是可以溝通的好企業或者是好公民團體，沒有符合的人就是壞企業或壞公民團體。我至少可以在我自己經手的政策上面不要這樣做，試著把它還原到正當程序來。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "我們繞過表達力來談，你現在覺得表達力還是很重要？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以目前的狀況就是說，好比像我們現在是面對面，其實我大部分的表達都是非語言學習，面對面就是有這個好處，完全可以看對方眼神就知道我現在聽這一句話你沒有懂，或者是我差不多該打住。所以其實我覺得這個方面沒有那麼重要，因為其實如果一個人的表達力不好，那傾聽的那一方只要夠真誠，其實雙方總是可以調整到一個能夠溝通的狀態裡面去。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "那是面對面？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，是啊。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "如果我在網路上沒有辦法看到他的五官表情，所以在文字的溝通，還是需要表達力？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這可以分幾個層面：一個是說我們做萬國碼（Unicode），它是網路上所有可以打出來的字，其實到後來有發展出一些表情符號，這一些表情符號，現在大家都很愛用，打一個愛心、打一個什麼東西，所以其實也有一些非語言訊息的。那一個東西的善用，我覺得非常重要，FB後來發現蒐集人的情緒、情感的東西，你與其按一個讚不如可以按六個個東西，FB用來訓練它的那些演算法時，就是你心情好的時候給你看一個東西、心情不好的時候給你看一個東西；事實上他們還試過反向的：給一些東西讓你心情不好，看你會怎麼樣反應（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以在這樣子情感先行的這個狀態下，我覺得就比較沒有那麼侷限在文字表達力本身，而是先達成一個共感，至少知道基本事實在這邊，我對這個什麼情緒、你這個什麼情緒，我們先確認，確認之後再去看，因為感受本身是沒有對、錯、好、壞的，同一件事你覺得舒服、我覺得生氣，你也不能說我應該要舒服、我也不能說你應該要生氣。等這個東西放下來之後，我們接下來再提出具體建議的時候，我就不會想要調動你的情感，你也不會想要來調動我的情感，因為那個在上一個階段處理過了，這時文字才有本來應該要扮演的角色，就是傳達意義，那這就沒有什麼別的，就是用來傳達你具體腦裡的某一個想法、某一個事實、某一些意義，它就不會拿來當作展演性、一定要用來調動情緒那部分的運作。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "你這是把語言都解構了？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是，當然。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "其實這很維根斯坦？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是，當然，小時候就學這個。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "所以到現在都還一直並沒有換？大家某個時期迷這個或者是崇尚，後來可能二十歲以後就換，你並沒有？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有，我會覺得它對我有形成的作用。當我說思路跟他比較相合的時候，意思是我接下來的認知圖式，裡面至少有一個版本，一直都是用這一個方式在理解。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "所以我很好奇你會怎麼使用FB？因為你都知道後面有一個共生者隨時都在關注。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我就不給它資料啊！" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "可以教我們一下嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你如果看我的FB個人簡介的話，會發現說…" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "可是我沒有，我可以知道你的電子郵件嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以啊！就audreyt.org這一個，這個就叫唐鳳。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "喔！我是用你的英文名字。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你如果看我的簡介，就會看到兩套軟體，一套是如果你用Chrome可以灌的，另外一套是你用Firefox可以灌的，這個軟體的作用是什麼？這個作用是當你進入臉書首頁的時候，讓那面牆是空的。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "喔！外面的人進來，看到的也是空的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有啊，只是我自己的瀏覽器開了一個外掛，讓FB完全沒有…" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "就沒有辦法蒐集？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，也沒有辦法操作我的情緒。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "會問你這個，是因為我也用了FB，就開始慢慢害怕社群媒體。但我還是繼續用，只是越用越害怕。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "覺得一直有人在蒐集。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是啊！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像Chrome的這個版本（News Feed Eradicator），一樣，它會把整面牆清掉，但會給你一個名言（笑），就是「善用時間」什麼之類的，起一個勵志作用（笑），超勵志的！每天勵志小語（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是我的FB還是在用，好比像Messenger功能，因為我有些同事就只能用Messenger傳訊息，但這沒有關係。你還是會看到數字會亮，但我就把它當作一般的訊息軟體來用，或者是我今天想要關注某一個事件，好比是「設計之都」，我還是打入關鍵字，還是可以到那個專頁，這個時候我的意向是要看這個，我就看到了這個，看到之後我跟它是一對一的關係，而不是旁邊冒出一堆調動我情緒的東西，所以我是這樣在用FB，別的社群網站也是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "其實我問的差不多了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "差不多了？" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "你從小就是台北人嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "你喜歡台北的設計嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "從小到大都不一樣啊！這很難一概而論。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "你有特別喜歡到台北以外的哪一個城市？有沒有覺得台北哪個設計還不錯？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我最近最喜歡的是國定古蹟「行政院」，但是那是因為新辦公室在那邊（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "因為它古色古香。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "它真的是古色古香，然後我們那一面連冷氣都不能裝，因為就是因為《文化資產保存法》，不能破壞它的外觀，分離式冷氣是會突出來的，所以好像我們到五點就關冷氣。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "即使夏天也是？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，即使夏天也是。因為中央空調嘛！古蹟有很多要照顧的地方，但是因為我都準時五點下班，所以沒關係（笑）；但我要講的意思是說，我真的有點住進去感覺的時候，我才發現後面真的有很多歷史的記憶，而且它在走廊裡面也會放一些解說牌，好比當時窗戶的設計跟窗戶剛好一樣重的懸吊錘子去跟它作平衡，有一些巧思。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我以前當行政院計劃顧問的時候，進去都是匆忙開了會之後就出來，所以是看不到的。這一、兩個星期花了許多時間跟這一棟老房子相處，我覺得它是一個很舒服的地方。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "最後一個，其實我一直覺得你的專注力很強。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "所以你在你的私人領域空間裡面，有特別設計什麼讓你專注？一工作就開始？我可能在我的書房，放了很多讓我分心的事情，讓我一直沒有辦法專注，所以有沒有什麼設計，就是你的工作空間、私人的部分有沒有特別安排讓你可以比較集中？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以前我比較像Steve Jobs，就是家徒四壁，什麼都沒有，真的就是家徒四壁。後來發現因為這樣，所以玩VR很方便，因為不用先把東西清掉（笑），就可以直接玩VR；但反過來講，講比較認真的，VR其實真的很有幫助，就是即使我旁邊是雜亂的東西，但是我戴一個VR，它真的是一個捷徑，就是我一下子就到天王星上或什麼上面，就有一個「總觀效應」，就是回去看地球。真的人到太空裡，頭會不自覺往地球的方向看，我們還是在它上面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是在看地球的時候，地球是沒有國界的。我們一天到晚紛擾這些東西，從太空都看不到，所以就會有一種很強烈的「人類目前都還在同一個地方」的感覺－當然可能接下來到火星，但是現在還沒有－所以人類真的大部分都在同一個地方。有這一個感覺之後，所以其實腦袋裡面很多東西就清空了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣一來，在做決定的時候就會想說：其實這個決定是為了幾百年之後，我們這些人都不在的時候而做的。它的淨效益到那時還會不會存在？如果淨效益不存在，表示做這些都是虛的，所以就會比較願意做長程的規劃跟想像；但是要我完全靠冥想跟打坐達到那個心理狀態，可能要二十分鐘以上。但如果VR的話，可能十秒鐘就到那個狀態，所以真的是捷徑。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "所以就不用禪坐或冥想了？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得那還是有必要。像我用VR時只看實在的東西，好比說地球就是在那裡，你戴上之後它只是把雲朵拿掉，讓你知道說你跟星星中間的關係，但它並不是給你一些假的東西，它還是真的。或者是說我會在裡面畫畫，但那個東西是我身體移動的軌跡，那是真實的紀錄，但我比較不會用VR去一些架空的，地球上不存在或者是世界上不存在的東西，去那個環境裡面去做夢。因為我後來發現我如果玩那一種東西，我晚上就不做夢了，它就把夢的那一些功能替代掉。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我後來用VR都是看具體存在世界的東西，我覺得禪坐仍然很有幫助，是因為它的訓練就是讓你知道哪一些是妄想、哪一些是雜念、哪一些是往語言中樞浮現的這些訊號，然後哪些是比較核心的、人格裡面本來具有的那一些東西，讓你去區分出這些層次來。所以用VR的時候，其實我是參考我自己靜心的這些經驗，然後知道這個位置是相當於這個位置，而不是亂去看，因為VR要讓人走火入魔是非常容易的，只要有一個快速下墜的經驗，就可能會暈眩，一、兩個小時還恢復不了。所以我覺得我是拿很多內觀的經驗，去開發VR這邊的東西。" }, { "speaker": "訪問者", "speech": "好，謝謝你。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "紀純真", "speech": "今天與會單位有經濟部中小企業處、勞動部、本院內政衛福勞動處及經濟能源農業處，與會人員名單請委參考，政委是不是要先跟大家說一些話，還是直接請經濟部和勞動部開始報告？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我先講一下今天的結構，因為我剛才被交派這一個業務，之前我理解上一任政府也有政委在督導這一個業務，這一任的話，目前為止好像都還沒有，所以就變成我剛來就有了這一項業務。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "之前在上一任政府的時候，我跟蔡玉玲政委合作非常密切，但是其實我跟馮燕政委並沒有任何的互動，所以對他們兩位業務的熟悉程度是相差無限多倍—完全不知道—因為我有參加院長官邸的一些活動，所以對那個位置大概還有一些印象，也有一些做社企的朋友。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "今天請大家來這邊主要有兩件事：" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第一，因為今天所有的發言，包含簡報都是有請速錄師，就是有上新聞那一位一分鐘三百多字的速錄師做即時記錄，所以各位在講的時候不太需要特別擔心我聽不聽得懂，我聽不懂的話，就會按照她的紀錄查，趕快搞懂，這是一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第二，以我的理解這個方案是到年底，未來再接下來會做到什麼程度及做哪一些事，因為我覺得做事的人應該是聽各位的意見，如果各位覺得做到這個程度，其實本來願景都已經達成，我們回到日常的工作項目，這個也是一條路；但是如果說覺得之前的方案或推動還有哪一些還沒有達成，我們院裡面要投注一些資源或想法，請告訴我，就像我剛剛講的，我完全不懂，所以我完全聽各位的意見，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "紀純真", "speech": "請經濟部簡報。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "我們先把方案的緣起、內容及目前執行狀況跟政委報告部分，到105年底後的未來工作方案我們等一下討論，順便跟政委報告其實106年已編列一些預算，也繼續執行中，我請蔡專門委員報告。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "簡報的字我都看過了，所以儘量講一些簡報沒有的部分。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "政委、各位長官，我們現在就社會企業方案跟各位說明一下，第2頁跟各位敘述一下方案的緣起，最開始第3339次院會勞動部提報這一個院會報告開始，到後面4月11日馮政委在行政院召開這個會議決議，然後開始創立所謂的社會企業方案，到103年9月我們正式核定社會企業方案，這大概是整個辦理的依據。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "為什麼會做這一件事？我們可能要從簡報第3頁簡單說明，我們可以發現企業發展的過程大概是左邊跟右邊，右邊大概是一般的傳統企業，希望利潤最大、賺最多錢及讓股東利益最大化，這個是我們對於傳統企業的思維；最左邊是希望解決問題、影響社會的極大化。在發展的過程中，其實發現一些困境，純粹追究經濟利益可能沒有辦法滿足社會期待；NPO一直追求社會利益最大化，會發現沒有辦法自謀生計，因此會產生困境，所以開始往中間集中，NPO開始經營一些商業行為，包括賣一些喜憨兒餅乾；企業開始建立起社會責任，除了賺錢之外，可以爭取更多的社會理解及支持。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "所以他們開始往中間集中，開始出現兼顧社會影響力及經濟發展的組織，世界上非常多元，包含合作社、企業等等，這是一個全新的組織，我們叫做「社會企業」，希望能夠賺錢，又是能創造影響力的最大化，大概是在整個社會發展過程中最特別的組織；當然歐美的發展狀況比台灣早一點。但其實很早期就有一些所謂救濟院，在清朝的時候就已經出現了，在後面有些台灣青年人也開始投入社會企業，例如SHOKY犛牛毛發展織品，解決西藏藏民的貧窮問題，那也是台灣人創立的，所以台灣的精神出現其實不亞於歐美，只是起步比較慢一點。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第4頁，大概臚列一下目前主要國家發展的一些政策，為什麼這樣臚列？其實看得出來在國家推動部門略有差異，比如英國是在商業創新技能部在發展，比較透過法案的推動，包含社區利益公司法。美國比較特別的是州政府參與比較多，州政府主動推動不同的州法，包含「B CORPORATIONS ACT 」等，有很多不同的州各推不同的法案，但是目前漸漸趨同，就是「B CORPORATIONS ACT 」是佔主流的方向。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "在韓國是由勞動部去推動，目前是有兩個法案去做這一件事，包含社會企業促進法、社會企業企業育成法。比較重視的是合作社這一塊，也投資了不少錢，比較大的問題是存活率偏低—存活率，共識型只有5％，合作社好像只有8％；新加坡是透過基金，由社會與家庭發展部去推動；日本比較特殊，是厚生勞動省，也就是台灣所謂「特例子公司」，也就是殘疾人僱用法，也就是台灣身心障礙者保護法，裡面推動這一件事（第4頁）。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第5頁，我們綜整比較重大台灣的社企發展議程，一個是民間、一個是政府，我們從1990開始說明。其實NPO在1990開始推動，在921發生重大災情，整個民間的力量匯集起來，開始有一些所謂社區再造組織，做得非常好。開始又有新的國際概念，像國際貿易認證這一些議題（2007年）。民間企業開始發動之後，開始有學界注意這個議題，包括台大、輔大、政大，開始注意這一些發展方向，開始有研究中心，像輔仁大學社會企業研究中心，政大黃秉德（音譯）教授開始有這一些類似的概念。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "年輕人開始投入了，這是新的社會趨勢，開始有社會企業的倡議活動，像社企流，開始有華文社會第一個社會企業資訊匯流平台等等；到了2015年開始做整個社會企業的方案。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "我們也看到從921重建暫行條例開始，勞動部發展署走得很前面，然後就開始注意這個議題；在2007年培力就業；2011年有社會經濟推動辦公室，這在勞動力發展署，目前是在勞動部推動。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "這個概念發展下去之後，政院覺得這個問題開始更有系統組織，所以由政委來組織社會企業方案，包含勞動部、經濟部、衛福部、農委會、教育部推動這一件事，最引起國際注意的將閒置的官邸開放，目前四分之一是作為青創中心，四分之三是作為社會企業那一些相關的運用；例如政委目前有去社企聚落參與VR的活動。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，之前有一些NGO常常在那邊辦演講，其實那一邊我還算熟。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個也算是外交，很好。「公司登記名稱為社會企業者共110家」這個是因為你們有跟他們說如果要做社會企業，名字就要這樣嗎？還是民間自發的？" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "沒有，是自由的。一些是社會企業、有一些沒有社會企業，但在屬性上還是，這個是我們做一些簡單的介紹。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "理解。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "如果社會企業是公司組織的話，是由中小企業處來輔導，但公司名稱不一定要是社會企業的名義。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，我就是在問這個。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "所以我們當初非常疑慮，可是我們在沒有法案之前，已經有人去登錄社會企業，當時已有四十幾家，我們推出方案後又更多，所以現在每一個案子只要登錄社企，商業司就會發文到中小企業處輔導。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以超過藍框的部分，大概估算還有多少？如果名字叫這樣，但事實上並不是主要的業務。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "現在一百一十家公司都是登記社會企業名字，所有的新案都會行文到中小企業處，我們會進行輔導。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "充分理解，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "那時候有疑惑這一個問題。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "簡報第7頁是就NPO的部分做一些整理，這個部分政委比較了解，我們就不特別加以說明。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第8頁開始從方案的緣起，也就是發展社會企業遇到一些問題，有開過幾場座談會搜集，不管是業界或是專案學者的看法，彙整大概有六個問題：" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第一，是「社會企業認知與技能應強化」，因為缺乏法案，所以我們的定義與定位不明。當時民眾對社會企業瞭解不足，聯合報做的報告是17％瞭解社會企業的方向；需要加強宣導與倡議，另因為社會企業大部分是以年輕人為主，因此經營、管理技能是需要去強化。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第二，在資金管道取得有限也是重要的一點，補助不容易取得、信保也不太瞭解它，所以在當時是有困難的。金融機構對社會企業放款是保守的，因為社會企業兼顧獲利與社會目的，所以金融機構對放款會有所考慮，對於投資方則認為回收期需要比較長。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以有一個專有的名詞。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "Patient Fund。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "瞭解，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第三，通路是一個重點，但是因為好產品不一定會獲得市場青睞，所以行銷過程，包含科技運用採購不足或是政府優先採購都沒有特別的規定。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第四，在右邊可以看到其實有一些調適，像法規的問題還要去處理，包含所謂的公司登記或者是財團法人，像蔡玉玲政委當時有做很多的協助。另外，法規不利於社會企業管理者同時追求多重的組織，其實公司法明文規定是營利組織，所以兼顧營利與社會目的，是必須加以考慮的，因此這是法規需要調適的地方。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第五，當然還有一些外部新的議題，包含人才培訓、創新研發都還沒有被普遍重視。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第六，發揮綜整的效果是政府部門應該要考慮。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第9頁，我們彙整這一些問題之後，我們大概把可能解決的方向彙整成三個：一個是提供友善社會企業發展環境、二是強化社會企業經營體質、三則是建構社會企業網路與平台。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第10頁，我們提出我們的構想，願景是營造有利社會企業創新、創業、成長與發展的生態環境，目標當然是提供好的環境、經營網路平台、強化其體質，主要的策略是調法規、建平台、籌資金跟倡育成。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "行動方案我看過，跟裡面重複的部分就跳過。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第11頁是社會企業的廣義跟狹義定義，請政委參考。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第12頁是這個方案推動的機制。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第13頁是把這整個計畫推動的主、協辦單位做一些整理。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第14頁，其實在簡報裡面也有特別說明，針對四個規劃方向的重點。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第15頁是法規調適的部分，因為這個資料比較舊，補充最新的進度。比較重大的方案是，推動社會企業的公司登記，這個已經獲得解決，以前各縣市政府對這個是有疑慮的，目前已可順利登記。第二，社會企業很關鍵的是，上市櫃公司參與社會企業的成果能否納入公司治理評鑑，目前經協調後，已修正相關評鑑標準，納為評估報告加分的項目之一。有些個案包含動態的逃生系統，或者是有機肥料個案的協處陸續做一些解決。財團法人能不能擔任公司發起人這一塊一直是很大的問題，但是目前還沒有很具體。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "case by case。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "可能衛福部比較寬鬆，但是有些部會有所疑慮，因為主管部會個案審查影響較大，法規的問題，影響反而比較少。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "公共工程會的優先採購，這部分沒有辦法很系統推動，因為這涉及到公共採購的法規的限制，因此我們另外透過一個方法，如發行產品型錄給政府部門、國營事業作為未來的採購，屬鼓勵性質非屬強制規範。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "可能未來比較關鍵的問題是，很多的業者在談長照的部分，是否能開放公司參與，老人照顧法是僅限由NPO參與，中國那邊是目前已經許可公司參與、採取比較寬鬆的規範，所以對於有志於參加長期照顧的業者受限於組織態樣，可能是中長期要處理的。包含利潤的部分，目前保留盈餘必須加課10％的稅，其實社會企業盈餘已屬不易，所以10％的部分稅賦壓力有點太大，這個是我們中長期還是要去努力的。另外，要不要訂專法、專章，目前是併入公司法的全盤修正做檢討。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我有看學者們aspect都是在講這個。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "對，這可能是比較中期或長期希望有一些結果，這個是法規的部分。其實除了這個法規的部分，我們也做一些基盤的研究，如第16頁，像重要議題、需求盤點、協處及資訊蒐集。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "比較重要的是研究如第17頁、第18頁，包括做一些B型企業的發展趨勢，台灣已經開始針對B型企業有一些初步的發展，最近有十五家公司，規模大大小小不等，一些新創的如綠藤、也取得認證。像比較小型的研究是社會進步指數初探 (Social Progress Index)，除了台灣有GDP，還有歐美開始注意另外的東西去彰顯這個國家的進步，所以我們去年參加SPI，台灣也嘗試在編制我們自己的指標，希望能夠從另外一個切面去看台灣目前是不是跟先進國家比肩。。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第18頁，更重要的基準是社會影響力評估，因為比較特殊的是case by case，所以由個案去做，雖然今年是朝兩個案子研究，一個是众社會企業一另外個是我們用基金的計畫去做研究，因為那其實要算的滿成本高。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是外部影響量化的東西。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "對，量化非常非常難估算，因為很是滿分歧的，國際上也不太能有一致性的計算基礎。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "另外，我們一直想瞭解目前社會企業整個經營的普查，所以我們今年朝這個方向在做。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "普查的結果是你在問的時候，會告訴他們且公開嗎？" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "原則上不會公開。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們一開始跟蔡玉玲政委有一個題目是，願意具名公開或者是匿名公開或者是不公開，不公開的意思是你們自己內部參考？" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "對，現在目前是內部參考。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "我們一般問卷不會揭露公司名字。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不會去掉公司名字後公開？" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "只會公布結果。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外想問一個，因為通常做問卷的時候，會有一個欄位問他有沒有我們不認識、你推薦的，也就是滾動式問卷。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "這個問題還不錯。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣就可以接觸到更多的人。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "這個我們可以加，因為其實社企很忙，對一般填問卷的意願很低。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "賺大錢也不要跟你講。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒錯，這個也有一些方法。（笑）我們慢慢來。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "簡報第19頁，建平台包含廣宣及社群等等，關於國際的部分可能勞動部會比較多說明。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第20頁是我們比較重大的成果，這兩年都推動了百場的社企小聚，接觸到社群五千多人，每次都有超過一百多個單位互相合作，為什麼這樣做的重點是，我們要標出台灣在地一百個社群，只要標出來做連結，其實自然就會成為社企的網路。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就不用政府。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "循環不息，我們當時是這樣做，其實反應也不錯，目前也開始有一些比較大型的企業參與，像童子賢董事長一個下午都參加流浪動物音樂會，現場有一百多個人參加，而他是全程參與，比較有趣，這一場基隆市市長也有參加，當然各地都有在推動。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "一方面也在做未來可能性的發展，所以裡面常常會說未來社會創新的倡議活動，像循環經濟等等。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這都做得差不多？" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "對，快要結束。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "今年的主要工作。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "像包括青銀共創、科技創新及食農教育等等，這大概是一些參考的數據。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "我們社企小聚辦完之後，大概在11月會辦大會師，會把這一百個社群的人做大串聯，像回娘家一樣，大家再交流一下未來推動的想法。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第22頁，我們也希望為創新找一些新的方向，所以跟一些比較重要的團體，像玖樓、5％ Design Action，希望能夠做一些不同的常識，這個也是今年在做的。像玖樓才剛做完的社區共識，跟在地的溫州街那邊的民眾辦理共食的活動。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我發現新的我比較有聽過（笑），舊的比較不熟悉。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第23頁是針對一些登錄作業做一些說明。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第24頁、第25頁是一些登錄的流程，相關的名單政委可以參考，可以看到簡報附件2。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那個網站我都有看過。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第26頁就籌資金構面做揭露。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第27頁、第28頁，很重要的是讓社會企業跟主流企業結合，所以希望能夠用資源投入社企、合作，及產品採購、對外禮品採購這一些都是社會企業的對象，所以我們這兩年都一直做這樣的努力，到今年10月為止，我們邀有八十七家大型的CSR跟四十五家進行一對一的媒合活動，跟一些動見觀瞻的通路，比如101、SOGO做一些社企的展售。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第29頁，我們來看結果，CSR的活動這其實是去年的數字，大概獲得600萬的合作，投融資就投資的部分7,200萬，融資是390萬，加起來差不多100多萬；今年應該是有一些新的數字還沒有進來，包含「2021社會企業」，是小林村災民的社會企業，順利進入COSTCO通路。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "還有打進去高鐵及7－11。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "打進重要通路的成果，可以多分享。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "（笑）國發基金是國發基金。SIIR是？" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "是服務創新的補助案，是商業司，我們中小企業是SBIR。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「國發天使」那一塊我比較知道，但是商業司SIIR跟SBIR的申請？" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "服務創新類可以走商業司，SBIR服務創新（任何產業如製造業、服務業創新）就可以走SBIR，但是SIIR只收服務業，就是聚焦在服務，因為商業司管服務業。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一稿兩投嗎？" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "不行。我們案子會上資料庫勾稽，我們還有CITD（工業局），所以我們早就已經做勾稽。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但可以這邊投了沒上，然後再到別的地方？" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "可以試，但不能一個案子投兩邊，整個會被勾稽，我們曾有勾稽過。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "瞭解，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第30頁，另外成立一個「社會福祉及社會企業公益信託循環基金 (簡稱：SERT)」，目前大概是由以前101董事長宋文琪主持，裡面的董監包含陳冲前院長、主要推動社會企業投資一方的陳一強先生、奧美的莊淑卿（應為莊淑芬）及創投公會黃翠慧理事長等幾位重要人士，目前大概在10月底召開第一場，可能的投資標的包括「黑暗對話」等。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個系列大概想要花多少錢出去？" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "目前的基金大概是2,000萬，他們的想法其實錢不是問題，因為台灣錢很充份的游資，只要有好的標的，其實他們再找資金都可以去支援。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他們實際在管這個基金的管理人是？" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "應該是透過信託，目前相關基金係信託在凱基銀行。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他們只是把投資條件開出來，瞭解，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第31頁是就育成的部分，包括競賽等等。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第32頁，如果目前強化現在社企經營者的管理，包含定向聚焦、陪伴、鏈結及永續發展等等，這是我們目前做的規劃，目前委託KPMG在做的。遴選十家公司，目前是以這十家做一個嘗試。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第33頁大概推動一些流程，包含要上課的一些要求。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第34頁大概是角色，包含教練、業師及助教等等，這邊操作比較細。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第35頁是包含社企聚落的部分，這個是大家比較重視的部分，當然幾個主要的功能，包含社群交流、諮詢服務、工作空間、資源媒合、社企推廣，社群交流包含不同的議題，其實辦得非常多，像主辦或者是協辦。從農食創新到銀髮到科技等等都有著墨，諮詢服務其實也是諮詢的點，所以現場也是有社會企業行動方案的團隊進入。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "是進入到社企聚落的活動。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "工作空間目前進駐是免費的，但半年一期審查，後面C、D棟就像政委講的，旁邊都已經有開放，所以基本上社企是可以申請進駐的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "又有一個新的出現？" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "更重要的其實是媒合，其實是一個接點的概念，希望有更多的支援，不管是在這裡促成雙方合作的產、官、學、研合作。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "我們推廣是一個重點，不管是社會或者是國際對社企的關注，所以會成為一個新的亮點，大部分的國際的組織來台灣都會到這個地方去參觀，不管是歐美，他們看過，大概都以台灣的社群聚落作為一個重要的參觀地點。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第36頁，今年目前在做一些能力的提升，包含財務、諮詢，也建立一些必修課，找一些業界比較大咖的，像會計師、律師有聲望的企業家，針對這一些社企的人做一些基礎能力的建構。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "除此之外，每一個月都有一次大師會，比較受歡迎的人或者具有影響力的大師跟他們分享目前的一些狀況，當然還有一些round table，這是目前實際的運作。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第37頁大概簡單說明一些推動項目。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第38頁是目前的成果，主辦、協辦加起來應該是四百八十場，很多是有趣的活動，像食農別鬼扯是找鬼王來講。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我有看直播。這三十三家，二期進駐團隊目前是在哪一個stage？都已經進去了嗎？" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "都已經進駐了，已經快畢業了，現在要第三期。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "三期是什麼時候開始？" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "現在公告了。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "11月評選，一次是六個月，但可以renew，可以再申請延續。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不過延續沒有限制嗎？" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "目前是寫一次，第三期可能會碰到第三次，我們要再想一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "規則那邊還沒有完全確定？" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "規則上面沒有特別說，目前還沒有說。主要有兩棟是今年才開放。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以三期大概會有幾家？" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "目前應該可以到三、四十幾家，我們還有虛擬進駐等，還有co-working space，所以其實家數不只。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「虛擬進駐」的意思是登記register在那邊？" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "對，然後他可以來參加我們的活動，會定期收到我們的活動通知，可以跟我們互動。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "因為育成中心本來就有實體進駐跟虛擬進駐，所以我們把這個精神放在社企聚落，本來就是要形成一個social network。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "公司地點能不能在那邊？" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "不行，那還算是政府的，財產權是中小企業處，所以只能辦活動、賣東西都不行。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是啊！所以它的使用是完全以推廣為主，所謂的加盟意思是你們幫他們促進？" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "他們來參加活動，有一些SCR的會議他可以過來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "純粹推廣，瞭解。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第39頁，是目前進駐廠商的名單，包含：B棟的銀髮、科技，C棟的食農；虛擬進駐也有不錯的廠商，IMPCT團隊拿到柯林頓基金首獎的團隊，豐味果品是在大稻埕那邊。誠美這家社會企業背後的股東孕育最多立法委員的建築物，就是金山9號—許毓仁委員、余宛如委員都是從這個建築物出發。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "（笑）" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第40頁是目前一些合作，像橫向及建立有趣的活動，Fuck up night是失敗者的國際聚會，也是在那邊辦。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "第42頁，這是使用前及使用後的一些比較，比方社企的加速成長，原本是四十七家，現在是一百一十一家，成長大概200％多，調整過來的社會企業增加大概一倍，登錄平台以前沒有，現在大概是九十七家；認知有提高，大概是290％；參加SEWF活動越來越多。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "明年在哪裡？" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "紐西蘭。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "瞭解。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "投融資目前累積到2億左右。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "各縣市政府其實倡議也開始積極投入，包含台北、新北、桃園、台中市都有在專案計畫推動，像台中市要有一整棟要做社企或NPO大樓；競賽得獎不計其數，我們是得獎機器人；學校裡面去參與的人也越來越多，以前是輔大、中山等等，現在連台大EMBA都有社企的專班。以上大概是社企方案大致的推動情形。後面有附件，像附件第1頁是整個過程的發展，後面包含了登錄及統計上的資料，請政委參考。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "經貿局有做出一些成績，大家都想要知道就回來登錄，如果在做出任何成績之前，好比剛開始兩、三個月，登錄的意義會獲得輔導嗎？" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "基本上登錄就會輔導，只是登錄對社企的好處是，可以參與那一些活動，但如果不夠大，其實媒合也不會中，所以大概有一點規模登錄（比較好）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "快要到angel round的狀態。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "其實登錄還有一個好處，在討論的過程，像參與的審查及評鑑的委員都是大企業家，他們看了都想要去協助他們，所以某個程度，光審查這一個動作對社企就產生價值了。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "我們的登錄每一家都有自律聯盟看過、溝通過，才瞭解看要不要登錄，我們進入到社企聚落，其實基本上是要登錄進來，像第一期剛剛開始推，還沒有登錄，所以會建議進來以後我們會輔導補登，我們希望建立這樣的制度。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "當初為什麼會用登錄制？是因為我們沒有立法，然後我們看到自律聯盟是一個自律的組織（民間），且資訊透明，我們在政府介紹下接觸，讓他做到第一個把關，以避免名稱叫社會企業，但實質不是社會企業，或者名稱沒有叫社會企業而實質做社會企業，所以我們登錄每一家case都有實際看過、溝通過才登錄。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "之前做社企登錄也開過好幾場共識會議，瞭解他們哪一些資訊願意揭露，哪一些是比較營業機密的，所以有「初階登錄」跟「進階登錄」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "都是用中文名稱？" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "目前中文。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這是規定，或者是看到別人都用中文就用中文？" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "現在目前的公益團體都是用中文。" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "主要的溝通對象目前還在國內。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不管是媒合都是以國內的投資者為主？" }, { "speaker": "蔡宜兼", "speech": "國際的…" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "其實我們去參加國際SEWF論壇都幫他們印英文的，都用英文介紹，部分社企他們自己也有網站，網站有中文跟英文。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不過那等於已經出國比賽，所以已經是選手了。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "只是推廣，我們會集結台灣比較好的社企。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我要看英文，是要在SEWF的網站看？" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "自己的公司網站，有的有設英文網，有幾家有，要看公司到什麼樣的level。但是B Corp的話，因為是美國的，所以全部英文。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是這個意思。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "現在年輕的社企都願意去B Corp，因為B Corp的登錄費很低，用營業額某一個比例來做手續費，因此我們都鼓勵新創的公司，營收的百分比非常小，而且到一個ceiling的時候，公司規模再大，那個ceiling也不會再高。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "B Corp本身是一個network，所以國際性比較有做公益性質的會自己串聯，B Corp是因為我們推社企以後，我們在討論要不要立法，我們發現那個研究以後，我們支持民間兩屆的B Corp活動，其實中小企業處都有支持他們經費費用，從本來三家，到現在有十五家。像大愛感恩本來是屬於社會企業性質了，像綠藤生機都是新創團隊，這一些人英文都很好，所以會看到這一些，大部分都是具有英文能力的才會上去。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "瞭解，非常感謝。勞動部這邊。" }, { "speaker": "施貞仰", "speech": "接下來是勞動部報告，勞動力發展署。" }, { "speaker": "施貞仰", "speech": "跟政委報告一下，照理說社會企業是企業，是屬於經濟部負責的範疇，為什麼會跟勞動部相關？勞動部早期有多元團體及培力單位，我們的目的希望這一些民間團體在接受政府扶植一段時間之後希望走向社會企業，因為這一些NPO團體一般來講是為了解決社會存在的問題而存在，因為政府補助多年，所以我們希望他們朝向社會企業，提供一個發展的選項，這才是為什麼我們會有此角色。" }, { "speaker": "施貞仰", "speech": "重點在於後來在整個社會企業的行動方案裡面，我們的角色是希望把這一些NPO團體帶上社會企業，讓它成為企業的組織，所以我們在整個角色裡面最重要是希望「建平台」的部分。" }, { "speaker": "施貞仰", "speech": "誠如經濟部所談，早期是由我們負責比較多一點，接下來細部的部分就請施主任跟政委報告。" }, { "speaker": "施淑惠", "speech": "剛剛政委提到既然簡報裡面有的資料我們就簡單講。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，講你的經驗跟想法。" }, { "speaker": "施淑惠", "speech": "最早這個議題的確是我們提出來的，就像副署長提到的，我們過去補助這一些單位，補助了三年之後，我們從促進就業的角度出發，從第四年開始要一比一相對補助，我們給他人力補助經費。" }, { "speaker": "施淑惠", "speech": "102年當時我們到行政院報告的時候，我們初步的統計是相對補助的計畫，大概可以留用下來的人大概有一千多人。這樣對於當地促進就業是有效果的，但我們不可能持續補助，即使韓國的經驗也是這樣。韓國當時在發展社會企業的過程也是這樣的經驗，在上一次金融風暴的時候，他們做了很多公共就業計畫，最後也必須檢討這樣的計畫，所以比我們早幾年開始推社會企業。" }, { "speaker": "施淑惠", "speech": "我們開始提這個的時候，成立了社會經濟推動辦公室，當時長官提到的那個時間點剛好在前一次民進黨輪替前(2007年)，說去把NPO未來的發展，想想看下一步是什麼，當時已經有人開始在談社會企業，我們初步做了一個研究，也就是「社會經濟發展」，在社會經濟發展裡面有幾個模式（經濟部簡報第7頁），比如：「社區經濟模式」、「合作經濟模式」、「工作模式」及「微型貸款模式」，在多元或培力的計畫架構下，前三個模式是最多的，現在微型貸款勞動部也有類似的，所以當時在講這個議題的時候，就有一個社會經濟推動辦公室。" }, { "speaker": "施淑惠", "speech": "我們做了一年多，覺得有一點沒力，因為我們必須面對一些挑戰，如NPO本來就是NPO的屬性，是不是一定要變成社會企業？雖然在政策上引導他們往那個方向，尤其在制度設計上會希望他們做的是屬於有社會使命，同時又發展在地經濟模式的那一種，所以我們一開始在推這一件事的時候，其實面對NPO很大的挑戰。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "會覺得「企業」兩個字就黑掉了（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "施淑惠", "speech": "對，也會面對贊助的人說既然是NPO為什麼可以賺錢等等之類的。" }, { "speaker": "施淑惠", "speech": "我記得當時在設計社企行動方案的時候，也有把NPO這一群的組織型態納進來了，這個是很友善也必須做的。" }, { "speaker": "施淑惠", "speech": "後來在這一個過程當中，勞動部的角色，當然是基於過去跟這一些人交流的基礎，大家可以用一種什麼樣新的模式，那個模式在經濟部提出來的社企方案架構下繼續往前走；當然過程當中，經濟部也納入很多新的元素，如年輕人及公司概念等，這部分先補充前面那一段。" }, { "speaker": "施淑惠", "speech": "這幾年推一些倡議的活動和以往不同的是，過去辦工作坊、講座及專案人員的訓練，以前來參加的多是NPO的人，因為我們一年跟五百多個團體互動，從千人到萬人不等，所以找他們來聽講是沒有問題的。從96年開始講這樣的課程，到這一、兩年，來上課、聽這樣議題的人就不是只有NPO那一群人了，開始有社會上關心這議題的人、創投業者及學校老師，這個是這一、兩年很大的轉變，在社企行銷推廣上也是如此。" }, { "speaker": "施淑惠", "speech": "在行銷上也是這樣，以前賣的是NPO的產品，你可能看一看，但買一次、兩次的愛心消費就到這邊為止了，但這一、兩年，其實我們在行銷活動上有做一些轉變，不是只有單純賣東西，也會把政策的議題放到活動裡行銷，並納入一些「社企月」的理念，也會把育成單位納入，也把社企登錄的公司型社企納入，他們如果願意參與這類的行銷活動我們也會協助處理。" }, { "speaker": "施淑惠", "speech": "另外，其實之前經濟部也給我們一些很好的想法，我們在做這一些活動的時候，會跟公司上班族的生活市集或者企業家庭日或就博會做一些連結。今年大大小小場次大概五十八場，營業額接近200萬，如果以過去兩、三年在中正紀念堂兩天下來的金額就是100多萬，大概一百攤，每攤一場活動下來2、3萬的金額，這是跟以往我們在活動上不一樣，當然部分是議題的操作，一部分是大家對這部分的認同度越來越多，二來是倡議行銷的部分，因為每一次辦活動會有一些新聞，因此會讓社會持續關注這樣的議題。" }, { "speaker": "施淑惠", "speech": "另外有提到國際連結的部分，過去以來，很早我們對於這一些補助的NPO，會鼓勵他們出國考察，後來他們都會去看一些國外推社會經濟的概念及作法，那一年去韓國，知道韓國是在勞動部下推社會企業專法，看到韓國界定社會企業時，那個範圍很寬的，回來之後當然會覺得台灣其實也不差，所以我們開始參與他們的這些會議。" }, { "speaker": "施淑惠", "speech": "會去參加SEWF其實是有一年知道那個會議在加拿大舉行，且知道下一個主辦國是在韓國，我們就請外交部幫忙派一個人去那裡，瞭解那個會議是什麼型態、在討論什麼，回來之後也確認那個韓國的承辦單位又剛好是前一年去韓國考察的單位，所以我們積極聯繫對方說台灣多棒，台灣有誰可以presentation這個東西，103年剛好是社企方案行動的那一年，就由政委帶了大家一起去參加，在參與會議上其實台灣的能見度很高，所以才會促成連續三年都去參與這樣的會議。" }, { "speaker": "施淑惠", "speech": "參與會議其實不只是聽演講，而是把台灣社會企業的東西帶出去，就如那一天在院會簡報的東西，是不是要積極去參與之外，也能夠爭取主辦。" }, { "speaker": "施淑惠", "speech": "做國際交流當然不只是把人帶出去，更多的時間是把人請進來，所以這幾年其實都有透過我們的一些活動，邀請國外的專家、學者、實務家來臺，其實我們各地都有這樣的活動，來到當地開完會議之後，就會帶他再去進行兩、三天的tour，認識台灣的社會企業，這個是國際交流的部分。" }, { "speaker": "施淑惠", "speech": "另外，大家比較期待的是，能夠進一步做成實質上的合作，今年我們其實做了一個課程，就是「蘇格蘭學院」社企課程的培育。另外我們早年就有做了社企的雙語網站，其中英文都是同仁自己做的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "編材都是你們自己做的，我知道你們social media非常強，像FB（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "施淑惠", "speech": "自己寫、自己做，很辛苦，但一直沒有promote，也需要持續增加素材，希望可以再加強，這是我們過去在做平台的經驗；當然也希望這個平台可以作為與外界介接的界面。" }, { "speaker": "施淑惠", "speech": "另外諮詢輔導的部分，因為過去對NPO有很多輔導，以前是輔導如何「順利」執行計畫，這幾年會更加強調財務分析等等，或者甚至要成為社會企業登錄的單位，這部分其實我們一直都有輔導團隊在協助。" }, { "speaker": "施淑惠", "speech": "其實過去跟經濟部討論的時候，常常感覺我們就是兩個不一樣的腦袋，會覺得NPO比較強調社會使命的兼顧，賺錢的事是重要，但似乎也沒有那麼重要，所以對於一些財務的規劃、對於訂價可能沒有概念，這部分我們會一直作努力。" }, { "speaker": "施淑惠", "speech": "比較明顯的改變是，這幾年是很多計畫陸續脫離我們的補助；當然我們也面對一個壓力，就是說希望再創造一些新的單位出來，最好是不需要補助的，因為我們的預算也會有一些壓力。我要說這個是一個好處，只是脫離補助之後到底需要什麼東西，那也是我們現在思考的一個方向，也就是我們已在進行計畫的調整。" }, { "speaker": "施淑惠", "speech": "至於社企家育成的部分，今年先做這樣的合作，就是找一個「蘇格蘭學院」，這其實是SEWF前任主席推薦的單位，我們有考慮後續應該由學校來跟他合作，然後政府用其他的方式去合作。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是學校有去開課程？" }, { "speaker": "施淑惠", "speech": "對，如果我們自己做，因為要用一個委辦計畫做，也不能建立一個長期的合作。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "理解，學校你們都有名單嗎？有意願的嗎？" }, { "speaker": "施淑惠", "speech": "有，今年的承辦單位有意願。" }, { "speaker": "施淑惠", "speech": "接著是創新創業競賽的部分，去年我們辦了一個創新創業競賽，兩百四十三件，我們頒了五個100萬獎金，另外還有一個社企育成的獎金，總共獎勵是586萬，其實那個溫度是超過我們的想像；今年我們其實還是會做，只是計畫的招標還在進行當中，但今年各分署還是有做類似像分區初賽，比如桃竹苗有做第一屆的社會企業創新創業。這個在學校的參與其實都還不錯，因為做這樣小型的競賽，在過去的脈絡裡面有，但並沒有標示為「創新創業」，年輕人只是幫NPO做一些包裝、設計的事，現在是更聚焦，希望做一個比較大的改變，也是執行創新創業競賽的想法。" }, { "speaker": "施淑惠", "speech": "地區性的競賽獎金大概是6,000元到15萬不等。" }, { "speaker": "施淑惠", "speech": "過去11月都說是社企月，今年11月會邀SEWF的主席到台灣來，這是我們很早以前就已經想好，只是時間點剛好是11月。另外一個是，我們也希望跟歐盟促進一些交流，這個時間已經訂了，是13日到16日，國際座談會在16日舉行，地點已經確定在交通部的集思會議中心。外賓來之前，我們會安排兩天的參訪，先讓他瞭解台灣的社企，在座談的時候更有東西可以談，這都已經在接洽當中。" }, { "speaker": "施淑惠", "speech": "另外，今年的社企月一樣訂在中正紀念堂11月，5、6日有這樣的市集活動，16、17、19、25、26日勞動部也在地方上有大大小小的活動；經濟部11月也有一個大型的活動，如剛才簡報裡的。" }, { "speaker": "施淑惠", "speech": "後面是歷年的執行情形，其實歸納一下是活動的倡議、國際交流及育成輔導的部分；未來規劃的部分，在社企行動方案架構下繼續推動，不過社企行動方案裡面需要再做一些討論，可以集思廣義。" }, { "speaker": "施淑惠", "speech": "爭取在台主辦SEWF，如果這一件事確定真的要這麼做，依照期程的規劃，現在就要開始做，包含如何成立committee、什麼成員、如何去推等，這一些可能都要開始規劃及展開。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "比如我們要主辦，一定是比較大的團隊，本來這個方案架構裡面，你們跟其他的合作部會，大概多久會開一次會？" }, { "speaker": "施淑惠", "speech": "（笑）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "或者線上有什麼協作平台或者是LINE群組有什麼溝通模式？" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "以前兩個月開一次。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "其實行動方案當初只有經濟部、勞動部及衛福部有編計畫，像衛福部編的錢很少，就200萬做一些調查，勞動部可能經費多一些，經濟部也是爭取預算來做，所以規模不大。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "我們實際在做的時候，教育部會把教育訓練納進去，所以越多的部會進來，包括我記得客委會、原民會，甚至連退輔會都在推。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "106年以後大家怎麼推就不知道了，因為方案是105年的預算計畫都出來，因為現在不知道，而經濟部是有去申請預算跟follow，106年的部分有計畫推動，我相信勞動部應該也有。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一些只要是carry on，不需要一個方案也可以做。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "對，我們已經當成是例行性工作。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣聽起來不錯，我的意思是除了兩個月開一次會之外，好比勞動部要辦一個競賽，經濟部辦什麼，是各做各的意思嗎？" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "就是這個問題，像社企月是勞動部辦的，我們在開會的時候發現這一件事，就變成共襄盛舉，今天剛好也聽到11月有一個社企月，我們剛好11月16日也有活動，像10月有一個叫「中小企業月」，以前也沒有這樣辦過，10月啟動「中小企業月」，也就是10月所有中小企業活動，包含大型活動（10月21日、22日）辦在華山。社會企業的大型活動在平台裡面會討論，像每季會不會有一個主軸性活動，大家共襄盛舉，包括青年創業專案、社會企業行動方案都會討論這一個事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以前對話的平台現在消失了嗎？（笑）" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "因為院裡面沒有開會，所以520之後就停擺，今天應該算是第一次（笑），我們兩個單位第一次。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "而且各位的逐字稿可以提供給教育部或者是其他部會看（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "520之前或1月已經框定的業務分別做，但是所謂新的，我們要爭取SEWF主辦的這一件事，目前沒有一個平台在做這一件事，可以這樣理解嗎？" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "我們當初有分工，像國際平台就在勞動部，會繼續做，我們當初是四個裡面有分工。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我有看到分工，這一些是互相扣連的，做一個的時候，另外一個沒有其他人參加的話，完全是單邊的能量在做promotion，很難做到政策上的對齊。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "可以這麼說。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "但是在國際平台方面，我不知道這一次香港，上次米蘭組隊，那一次聲勢很大，韓國是第一次草創，我們匆促間找預算參隊，我們是非常接近的時間知道這一件事。到義大利米蘭時很有經驗，勞動部做了很好的規劃，那一次人很多，有八十幾個人去（包含政府、業界），香港這一次有政治因素部分，所以團可能少一點，我不知道，因為我們部裡面是一間去。" }, { "speaker": "施淑惠", "speech": "八十二。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "那也很多，只是有沒有像以前一樣官方？因為這一次比較敏感。" }, { "speaker": "施貞仰", "speech": "其實去年那一件事，馮政委花很多心力要求各部會配合，因為勞動部大概都做苦工，聽到名字是勞動部（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "施貞仰", "speech": "在政委的要求下叫我們要注意這一塊，不過那一次是八十七個去到米蘭，是一個很大的陣仗，會讓人家覺得台灣在社會企業是很有能見度的；像這一次是香港的關係，因為政治的因素。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我知道，是民間來帶，即使是帶有政治性（笑） 。" }, { "speaker": "施貞仰", "speech": "米蘭是官方身份，這一次是民間帶隊。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我知道，不過紐西蘭應該還好，其實在接政委之前，在威靈頓開過會，其實他們非常友善，不管對官方的名稱或者是官方的代表團，他們收到我要接政委訊息，對我並沒有因此而改變，所以紐西蘭應該還ok。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，我可以幫大家什麼忙？我不會跟別的政委分業務，我的業務是專門我做的，有一些比較大的業務，我理解是政委之間會互相分，我現在手上是「開放政府」、「社會企業」、「青年諮詢委員會」，但是其實「青年諮詢委員會」跟「社會企業」大部分碰到都是青年，「開放政府」這一邊其實第一批會在網路上參與政策，大家也知道是年輕人居多；比較年長的朋友，他們關心的比如動物保護或者是長期保護都非常local，我說這三個有一些共同點。我想的問的是：" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第一，還需要不需要類似像以前的行動方案之行動方案？我想這個是首先要問的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第二，如果要的話，理念要不要跟本來不一樣？因為本來很好寫、很難做，因為本來都沒有，要讓全台灣知道這一件 事，不要讓「社會企業」這幾個字黑掉，大家都認同，這一個方案就這樣子了，但是做的時候是草創，所以非常辛苦。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是我們現在是不太一樣的狀況，社會企業在某些族群裡面還不是那麼容易接受，但至少就年輕人來講已經知道這一件事，一方面來講可能比較容易，至少不用挨家挨戶說服NPO說可以賺一點錢，那就會變成我們推動方案要做什麼，那個方向上可能就是要按照現在的狀況來進行，不知道大家有沒有什麼想法？" }, { "speaker": "蘇永富", "speech": "兩個建議：" }, { "speaker": "蘇永富", "speech": "第一，剛剛經濟部跟勞動部報告，可以瞭解最早的是從勞動部開始，但有一些瓶頸存在，如果要讓社會企業發展起來的話，就拜託經濟部，因此從這兩個報告看得出來，103年當時的資料跟現在的資料是非常有成效。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是的，做得非常好。" }, { "speaker": "蘇永富", "speech": "我是這樣想，因為事實上社會企業的政策力也許很高，因為從青年創業或者是公共參與的機會部分，甚至到一些NPO、NGO的部分，事實上發展有一些瓶頸，所以另外有一個新的經營型態，甚至讓一些合作社有一些經營型態產生，對整個產業結構發展是有幫助的。" }, { "speaker": "蘇永富", "speech": "因此我的建議是，要有一個整合性，同時也有兩個月的聯席會議，可以把部會之間未來的合作和發展，整合協調。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "至少知道未來要做什麼。" }, { "speaker": "蘇永富", "speech": "事實上透過這個方案、透過聯席會議產生很好的想法，像剛剛有提到106年經濟部持續推動，事實上短期的目標，某種程度已經達成。" }, { "speaker": "蘇永富", "speech": "從資料看得出來，國際上有一些國家是有專法的，當初在規劃時先不談專法的問題，透過方案的方式由行政院推動。現在執行一段時日，我們認為有一些成果，有一些中、長期的規劃部分，因為這一個方案到105年底結束了，過去有執行成果的部分如何繼續維持跟發展，有一些中、長期的部分，不管是在平台或者是在國際交流或者是國內資金部分協助社會企業，可不可以在綜整時，發展第二期的方案出來，這樣讓部會的方向更清楚，在執行上會更有幫助。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我快速綜整一下，本來第一期的方案—現在叫第一期—第一期方案有一個先行政的概念，就是先把一個模式做出來，做出來之後，按照裡面實際可行的模式去推動立法，但因為現在余立委跟許委員都在立法院了，我的意思是說，如果我們需要立法的話，基本上這一邊盤整，他們看過ok，就送立法院了，按照我的理解是很順暢的，因為立法院有做這個的（人）。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "許委員上次有在立法院有開公聽會，開的是B Corp，B Corp某種程度跟社會企業是滿接近的，公司法有分四個小組，我是沒有參與，但是聽說有一個小組在談B Corp的立法。我覺得那個法立了就好了，因為「社會企業」四個字目前的爭議性滿大的，所以為什麼第一期我們會先行政、後立法，是因為爭議太大，沒有共識；至於B Corp美國已經執行，而且是有公部門的法案，或者私部門去參加B Corp的認證，因此是明確的作用法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "並不是宣示性的。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "對，目前有關於公司型組織社企在未來公司法修法，社會型企業的人如果認為可以登錄成B Corp公司的話，那是ok的，所以我覺得長期觀察下來，並沒有社會企業立法的必要。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "經濟部的關聯是說，如果在B Corp—這一個我有follow—目前在民間跟學界，目前還是商業司主管？" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "商業司應該已經進入條文階段了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以在這一個狀態裡面，我們只要願意讓現在現有的社會企業來檢視這一個條文，去看這一個條文是不是跟他們可能80％fit，也不要削足適履，至少把這20％是什麼提出來，我們對於這一些條文，甚至不是條文本身，而是施行細則的立法修正。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "另外一個，公司法最基本的以盈利為目的，現在也在修改，這兩個一動，其實並沒有要立一個社會企業法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "專章或者是專法都不需要？" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "不用。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為這個是院外的部分，院外的部分我覺得就交給學者們來處理，他們處理的過程裡面，我想我能夠幫的忙是當吉祥物吸引一下社會企業的朋友們願意來參與公司法關於他們的討論，我想大概是做到這樣就夠了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個是聯繫平台的部分，如果我們未來要設定不同的方向，捲動更多部會跟更多功能資源的話，有一個方案或者是聯繫會議還是有其必要，大家覺得這樣嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "之前的行動方案是勞動部提出來，由經濟部具體變成條文？" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "方案是我們擬的，但是在擬的方案過程中是召開十次的產官學座談，這個方案看起來很common，但這是大家的共識。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "聯繫平台一定要有，因為520以後這一個東西沒有再開，民間會覺得政府不重視社會企業，從事社會企業的這一些年輕人，即使年紀大一點的，他們的熱情非常感人，且故事也很好，聯合報定期都有報導這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "我覺得聯繫平台會有一個作用，像11月就可以整合社會企業月，可能教育部也有很多，因為他們都是在推社會企業的獎，所以我覺得聯繫平台可以做政策支援的對接，我們可以讓這樣的活動在媒體曝光，讓民眾瞭解更深入；行政院總是要有一些東西讓民眾施政有感，因此政策資源對接及媒體的廣宣讓民眾瞭解政府還是很重視社會企業，這是最基本的。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "但是，以前在開，我覺得是working level跟文件太冗長，每一次開完會大家都筋疲力盡，幾乎都開二至三小時，不管什麼工作都報告，我覺得這個是不必要的，所以要聚焦。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "紙上有的就不要講了。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "每一次開會是不是要聚焦一個議題主軸，然後針對那個議題重點式的，因為政委時間也不多，一到兩個小時趕快把它解決。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "主要要做一件事，其實事前大家都已經有資料了，我開會的習慣是，我知道大家都有別的業務要忙，至少提前兩、三天把書面資料都給出來，大家都看過彼此的書面資料，專門說這一件事誰做的，對大家比較有效率，當然因為有即時速錄的關係，所以如果答應要做的那個人就會答應要做，不會忘記，我們開完會之後逐字稿會寄給大家，我們就按照這個方向來規劃。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第二階段還是你們會先嗎？" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "現在問政委是，需要第二階段方案或者是繼續？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "只要有一個聯繫的平台就好？" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "對，我覺得先不要談第二個，因為要形成第二個方案報院又冗長，可是現階段我覺得先把聯繫平台的會議開第一次，然後第一次我們可能選定要討論的議題，我們可能先選11月社會企業月，剛好跟社會企業有相關的，大家把資料弄出來，我們那一次要如何進行。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是由我們辦公室來聯絡或者是已經知道其他的？如教育部或其他？" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "我們過去都有窗口了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可不可以具體這樣講？你們就說接下來要約一個時間，我們大家一起討論11月的這一件事，你們再給窗口的時候，就cc我辦公室，我辦公室的mail大家都有，在你們聯繫不是勞動部跟不是經濟部窗口的時候，也順便cc我們，我們就已經知道所有窗口的列表，那個窗口的群組有人有簡報的時候就往那邊丟，不確定這個窗口是誰的，請問我們這一位簡任秘書。" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "是由院召開或者是由經濟部召開？" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "院召開，經濟部是幕僚。" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "那還是麻煩參議。" }, { "speaker": "紀純真", "speech": "沒有問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是大家約時間的工作。" }, { "speaker": "紀純真", "speech": "就是按照原來的作業方式。" }, { "speaker": "紀純真", "speech": "昨天有跟經濟部討論，未來協調的平台（政委主持），希望有更好的效能，就像副處長講的，過去花了很多時間在行政處理上，是不是讓行政處理更為縮短，一起思考後續怎麼運作。" }, { "speaker": "紀純真", "speech": "我這邊有幾個建議：" }, { "speaker": "紀純真", "speech": "第一，剛剛有講到法規，不朝向立專法的方式，但是在第15頁的部分，顯然還是有一些在法規上要調適及處理的，推動社會企業在法制面有哪些要鬆綁、需要哪些政策工具，是非常重要的，也是院可以來推動處理的，不論是公司法的研修或其他法規調適，剛才經濟部的簡報有關法規調適這部分，接下來要如何處理、如何到位，要繼續追蹤並且更為明確，這部分建議勞動部及經濟部繼續研處。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不好意思打斷你，我看到這一張表，事實上看起來真正能夠動的是，公共工程委員會裡面優先採購調適，其他在公司法的大修法內有包括進去了，衛福部那一個暫時動不了，所以除了這個之外還有什麼要動？" }, { "speaker": "紀純真", "speech": "公司法是否修正應還在研議程序中，有時立法的過程是非常長，因此我們建議請經濟部持續follow，有時有新的議題出來，就會有對應的法規，或需要檢視相關規定是否適當，因此建議經濟部就法規調適繼續研析並掌握處理情形。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你們跟商業司多常（討論）？" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "商業司這一次的分組會議沒有找中小企業處，連B Corp也沒有。" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "有沒有可能下一次在協調會議的時候，請他們稍微報告一下公司法的修法？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果沒有copy的話，你們也不知道怎麼樣。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "我參加許委員報告的時候，我知道很多老師參與，也許B Corp在下一次會議可瞭解一下，我們在推這個，但他們立的法我們不清楚。像11月的社會企業月如何啟動讓大家比較有感覺，我們會問一下幾個重要的部會，也就是11月想要討論什麼議題，而不是每一個部會都要報告，我們可以縮短時間，為討論議題聚焦。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "公司法下一次不可能討論，下一次是瞭解狀況，我們能討論的是社會企業月的部分。可以嗎？" }, { "speaker": "施貞仰", "speech": "可以。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "最後還有十五分鐘。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "問一下，各部會窗口盤點跟cc都有會做了，剛剛也有提到這一方面在做是各界利益關係人一起參加、一起訂出來的，我想問的是執行兩年半下來，有沒有當初不認識這個圈內的人，但經過這樣執行的過程中，覺得在下一步的推動策略或B Corp，覺得應該要copy的一些利益關係人？像剛剛有聽到一些幫忙的教育人員，像童子賢老師突然間自己對這個很有興趣（笑）。我的意思是說，當我們真的要做跨部會平台的時候，除了像登錄社會企業之外，我也要問經過運作之後有認識到的新的人；也許現在涉入的程度不多，但下一步是會有幫助的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一個人可以寫一、兩張，每一個人都拿，拜託（笑），速錄師豁免（笑），就在上面寫你覺得我辦公室接下來應該要聽取的人—也許現在邊緣都沒有關係—但是覺得未來可能跟他會開始有關係的人名或者機構名稱或者是學校名稱，如果你覺得應該聽他哪一部分的意見，好比像「（法律）」，意思是法律意見我們參考，其他聽聽就好，那就打個括弧，不然就是把人名寫下來就好，盡可能多寫一點，之後再用滾動式問卷去徵詢朋友們，請每一人都寫，也不需要署名，這部分是匿名的（笑），最後公開的部分是已經彙整過的東西，也不需要給我看，留在桌上就好了（笑），請大家接下來花五分鐘左右的時間想一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在這中間有想說的就在十一點前大家提出來討論，不然我們就很有效率地提早結束會議（笑），大家ok嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那就謝謝大家，這一個字條留在桌上就好了。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "我報告一下，我覺得這樣也許是一個方式，但是更具體的方式是過去社企聚落來參與的這一些人，我們應該有掌握到名單。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我知道，現有的名單mail給我們。" }, { "speaker": "林美雪", "speech": "對我們來講很快，而且又很完整，我建議除了這個以外..." }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "...那個請你們整理之後寄過來。現在字條寫的，是不透過常規管道或參加的人，而是你們自己認識的，比如有一些NGO現在還持觀望的態度，還不願意進來，但你覺得拉進來很重要，這我們在學理上是叫 Missing stakeholders，如果用正規管道不會來的人或團體。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "請大家自由離座，謝謝大家。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家好，各位桌上應該有我的名片，我想我們很快開始。" }, { "speaker": "蔣萬安", "speech": "大家好，所有的TiEA好夥伴，我是立法委員蔣萬安，其實今天主要是隨Jamie以TiEA理事長的身份來聊一聊，其實我長期關注新創科技在矽谷也待過，也曾當過律師，在法律方面比較專長，很高興政委來行政院擔任政委的一職，我自己很想了解政委在數位經濟這一塊想要推展哪一些政策，當然我想大可以藉這一個機會談一談，大家在這一個領域也有一陣子了，所以彼此交流一下意見，大概簡單介紹一下到這邊，等一下一一再跟政委好好聊。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "林之晨", "speech": "我今天是TiEA理事長的身份，我跟唐鳳認識算起來有十六、十七年了，我們在臺灣網路跟電商業界過去十幾年都有一個感覺，像在政府裡面是孤兒，碰到問題，每一個部會都踢來踢去，認為都不是他們的問題，現在唐鳳出來，我們有一個數位政委，我想我們大家很興奮，在政府裡面終於希望有一個人可以出。" }, { "speaker": "林之晨", "speech": "這一次其實新政府上來以後，我們排了一輪要拜訪各個部會首長。我講出來不知道是不是大家會吃醋，大家報名最踴躍，想要認識我們的唐政委（笑），大家也都希望能夠有一些過去十幾年來碰到的一些問題，希望未來能夠" }, { "speaker": "林之晨", "speech": "很抱歉，我很早以前今天排了一個晚餐，我等一下會先走，我的任務是把大家帶來，可以把溝通意見的管道開啟，希望未來能夠在政委的幫忙下把障礙排除掉。" }, { "speaker": "陳宜君", "speech": "委員、各位委員大家好，我是KPMG的會計師，是TiEA常務監事，今天可以拜訪委員，是想要談一下網通產業未來的稅務發展方式，想聽聽政委的建議。" }, { "speaker": "顧立楷", "speech": "我是顧立楷，之前政委幫我們主持vTaiwan的討論會，非常謝謝提供那麼新式的討論方式，我們公司其實也滿認同這個方式。" }, { "speaker": "顧立楷", "speech": "當然，如同剛剛Jamie講到的，我們公司在這幾年來跟政府不同部門想找一個適合的方式，但其實碰到一些不同的困境，如：在對應窗口的部門部分，不知道哪一些議題要找誰。所以，我覺得今天藉由這一個機會想要跟唐政委就這部分來討論。" }, { "speaker": "顧立楷", "speech": "像稅務上的議題，也是我們公司非常關心的，如果政委有一些指導的話，之後的部分可以如何更加配合臺灣的情況。" }, { "speaker": "陳明明", "speech": "我是KKday的執行長，我也是TiEA的理事，其實我們是做旅遊的。在旅遊數位化這一塊，我們的主管機關是觀光局，但是觀光局推廣觀光，很多新經濟的思維是沒有的，我希望透過這一次能夠彼此交流，希望能夠讓政府更瞭解這樣的新創業者。我們面臨的問題通常是跨部會，如何能夠透過政委的力量來推動跨部門協調力量並解決一些問題，這個是我們希望能夠達成的方向。" }, { "speaker": "游士逸", "speech": "我在阿里巴巴工作，但是今天不是以這個身份，而是以TiEA的監事與網路產業二十年老兵的身份來拜會政委。" }, { "speaker": "游士逸", "speech": "我的多年感觸是網路產業在臺灣並沒有變成一個協助其他產業發展的產業，我必須要講的是台灣網路產業有過去十幾年的空白，不管從資金、產業政策或法制制度，或者是鼓勵更多年輕人創業，都存在很多空白，也是因為這樣子，TiEA在三、四年前成立的時候，有很多的網路前輩們把問題點出來，也很開心看到這幾年來有TiEA的存在，很多年輕朋友投入這一個產業，也開始跟政府部門有很多的對話，所以我想說今天來是不是也能夠看怎麼樣讓這個產業成為在政府後面的力量，幫助臺灣傳統產業升級或者跟全世界競爭，希望我們可以找出一些方法。" }, { "speaker": "程九如", "speech": "你好，我是TiEA的秘書長，另外一個身份是Jamie的夥伴，我們一起在打拼。" }, { "speaker": "程九如", "speech": "1999年也進入這一個網路的產業，我瞭解臺灣在網路產業的實力，現在全球又在發展數位經濟，看有沒有機會把臺灣營造成一個hub，因為我們不希望「南向政策」是我們的人才跟企業出走，我們希望是我們的價值、服務透過網路可以行銷到全世界；不只是南向。" }, { "speaker": "程九如", "speech": "怎麼把全世界優秀的創新人才、企業及資金引進臺灣，變成是一個很重要的議題，怎麼樣讓這一些創新者在臺灣的團隊把數位的經濟、技術發展，把這個know－how弄到南向產業，因為網路的產業不只新經濟，還有與產業是息息相關，因此想關心及交流，想趁這個機會不只讓臺灣自己發展，讓全世界創新的資金及人才都可以到臺灣來發展，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "王琍瑩", "speech": "政委好，我的職業是律師，也是TiEA的副秘書長，我被賦予的任務是每一場會議都要參加，來這邊做筆記，記錄大家對於產業溝通及交流的意見，同時針對法規調適的部分會認真瞭解，帶回家繼續做功課。" }, { "speaker": "曾薰儀", "speech": "我是Vicky，我也代表TiEA參加這一個協會。我本身的工作是在PChome的露天拍賣工作，我們雖然是在臺灣發展相當久的網路公司，全臺灣各主管機關都走過一輪，卻溝通非常長的時間，過去說體驗，也就是一個法規或者是管理政策的制定，在我們工作的過程裡面都耗費了相當久的時間。" }, { "speaker": "曾薰儀", "speech": "比如：去年才出來的第三方支付的管理辦法，如果我的記憶沒有錯的話，我們從第一次到最後面總共花了八年的時間，裡面的員工從青少女變成兩個孩子的媽。網路時間是很匆促的，我們工作領域跨了非常多的領域，電商、電信等。長期以來的感受是，因為我們事實上是一個協會，但每一家公司的背景都不一樣，有的是產品、有的是服務，但是面對很多都必須要單兵作戰，Uber可能要面對的是交通部，但是我們就沒有。因此，臺灣缺乏的是架構上對於臺灣上來講包含哪一個位置，如果沒有這個策略性方向定位時，延伸到各個行業或者是服務端就變成這個網路服務必須要跟經濟部、交通局、衛生局等等分別溝通，這部分產生過去網路行業當中發生最大的不效率及困難，我認為問題是在這裡。" }, { "speaker": "曾薰儀", "speech": "比如我們所熟悉的第三方支付，少部分的網路公司想要做創新、想要做一些更有效率的服務，但是一次就要面臨到金管會，旁邊會面臨到銀行公會的檢視，因此整個法規出來到最後還是舊架構。臺灣制定的銀行法，某種程度是經過了很長時間的修訂，到現在的這個狀況，從初期發展到成熟期，我們面臨到的困境是各個局處，要求新創公司一開始就要適應一個非常成熟版本的東西，我想如果能夠有這個機會的話，不知道有沒有機會在我們碰到各局處困難時，能夠來想網路能夠幫助臺灣做些什麼，讓社會跟整個架構更有效率或者是更好的溝通方式。" }, { "speaker": "曾薰儀", "speech": "我相信網路是有效的，而且是快速且成本低廉的，我覺得目前的主管機關看待網路的方法會先用管制的方法，將此列為第一個印象，這也是臺灣目前發展比較遲緩的原因，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "曾仲銘", "speech": "我是隆中網絡的創辦人暨董事長，現在是TiEA的理事。數位經濟裡面，大家談到的網路及電商，其實遊戲" }, { "speaker": "曾仲銘", "speech": "是數位經濟很重要的一環，因為我們是做手機遊戲發行，最近也經過資本市場的洗禮，我們上個月剛上櫃。我覺得這一塊一直被忽略，臺灣2,300萬的人口裡面，在全球的Google Play前五大，我們現在發現兩個關鍵的問題，我們其實沒有辦法跟Apple及Google直接溝通，因為人家根本不理我們，因此沒有正式的溝通管道，基本上也透過了電腦公會、櫃買中心，大家找不到一個對口的單位，相比日本，他們要求Google跟Apple落地，這樣才能解決稅務及境外稅的問題；這個是遊戲界碰到的問題。我們並沒有要求政府說要給我們的一個好處，只是要在同一個競爭的立場上來做，這就是最大的favor。" }, { "speaker": "曾仲銘", "speech": "我們現在對數位經濟並沒有一個很清楚的策略跟藍圖，組織再造是否可以是一個解決方案？我們一直沒有辦法找到對口，牽扯到很多法令，常常處於被踢皮球，不管是跟誰溝通，永遠都不會有後續follow-ups。可以請教政委在數位經濟的策略及組織再造是不是可以解決的方向，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "陳建弘", "speech": "大家好，我是巴哈姆特的Sega，今天來是要借筆電。（全場與會者大笑）今天沒有什麼特別的議題，是跟大家認識一下。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "大家好，我是機要之一，負責所有業務架構，包括整個系統間的互動及流程，然後跟政委一起合作。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們好幾個主題，但是時間還夠，我們就來看一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家其實共同提到的一個最大的問題是，還有沒有追蹤系統的問題，這個是不同業別都會碰到的，不管是分案下來哪一個主責，哪一些人協辦，其實大家也追蹤不到，下一次做不同決策的時候的原因跟視野是什麼，所以我常用一個比喻是：政策沒有產銷履歷，七天或者是十四天前公開到手上才突然要調整，其實前面到底怎麼來的你很難去追溯。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一屆的立法院好一點，其實從提案到協商到後面是有一個非常完整的過程，所以從法律層面做出來的改變，其實我們看每一個委員的案去做比對，其實立法院花很多時間在這一個上面。因為這一屆立法院是這樣的關係，所以更顯得行政院這邊沒有一個更好的公開追蹤系統，我覺得這個是重點。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外，剛剛有提到跨部會間，大家對我有一個很有趣的期許，就是不管哪一個部會一體適用，這個牽涉到我對於角色的認知，所以我先做一些期待管理比較好（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我進來之後有一個政委的分工表，大家知道有這一件事，其實本來有很多希望我做一半的，不管是創新創業或者是像數位經濟政策等東西，其實我比較不習慣分案的概念，所以後來跟其他政委老師們討論，如果是我管的就是我主管，如果要分的話，好比像數位經濟；如果是國發會主管的，我現在對國發會只協助一個，也就是資管處做開放政府，那個是我的部分，其實就不會跟其他的政委打架，因為沒有任何別人在做這一件事，我就是專心做開放政府；跟這樣相同的還有社會企業。以上這兩個是主要的。還有一個是青年諮詢委員會，但是青年諮詢委員會目前還沒有召開第一次，所以我想要把它作成比以前青年顧問團（當時還在教育部底下），所以反應的是一些創業或者是求學等東西，雖然他們理論上都可以去每一個部會，但最後focus的東西像是教育部或旁邊的部會，但是這一次青年諮詢委員會提到院級，所以理論上可以有一個比較大的納入更多人的策略。在這樣的情況下，就比較可以讓青年諮詢會扮演不管是觀光、遊戲或者是電商的監管，可以聽到更多不在場的利益關係人的聲音。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "誠如大家所說的，政府的決策架構裡面是法規一面修正，一面有一些照顧比較大的或者至少比較有組織的利益關係人，這一些人會跟著法規的修正而長出跟政府對口的結構，所以理事長們會知道大概的方向是什麼。但是在這個過程裡面中小企業或者是新創產業常常沒有在利益關係人的代表架構裡面，青年諮詢委員會可能是其中一個可能性，這個是我初步的想法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "除了上述三件事之外，任何別的事情，包含創新創業或者是數位經濟或者是蔡玉玲政務委員處理的事情都是陳添枝老師負責，有一些牽涉到科技政策或預算是吳政忠老師等等，所以我扮演的角色在開放政府－－我說過我是「公僕的公僕」，另外的部分是「幕僚的幕僚」。像做財政政策者，都是很專業教科書的老師們－從林全院長開始都是－所以我現在的角色比較像是他們那幾本教科書裡面沒有寫到的東西，好比是區塊鏈，我可能會反而跟他們的幕僚討論，然後跟他們說如果要寫進教科書的話，這一個東西要放在財政政策哪裡去看待，比較像是一種新的材質；但是我自己不做決策，經濟政策不是我的專長，我有什麼想法，相信我是把它提出來，讓這一些老師們判斷，這樣成果會比較好，所以不管是在創新創業的補助、投資及臺灣作為國際交易交換中心的議題上我都不做決定，但是我能夠做的事情是把大家講的話如實記錄下來，確保老師們都有看過這一篇文件，這個是我具體可以做的事情。先把期待管理做一下，我們等一下比較好談。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想先聚焦在分案的機制上，這個機制是我之前在過去兩年左右跟國發會以及跟張善政前院長比較合作著力做的事，我們目前的分案機制大家知道大概有三種，我們現在在講的是不在場的利益關係人（小的利益關係人）進來的分案機制，一個是我們在「Join」公共平台的「提點子」，接下來會有1萬人的「提點子」，所以當跨部會的時候，確實是由我去協調，表示有5,000人表達意見後要有人站出來承攬這個業務，其他的部會當作協調。當然也有人提的案是沒有主管部會的，比如有人提到把民國年都改成西元年，這個提案有道理，但是這個牽涉到司法院、總統府，行政院是很小一部分，還有立法院，並不是任何一個部會說是主管機關，如果立法院的機制出來，我會幫忙輔導看立法院裡面有沒有人願意拿這一個案子出去，再連署從5,000人至1萬人，沒有啦！大概不是他選區（笑）；至少會有比較好的處理，所以從下到上會有一個比較好的分案機制。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個機制是法規的預先公告，有七天跟十四天，因為我們現在從WTO到後來其他的一些國際上的例子，像美國有一個「regulations.gov」，這個有六十天，如果關於貿易或者是經濟，像大家關心的智財法律案的話，IP Law，或者是甚至所有的法規，也許不應該只有七天或者是十四天的公告，因為之前的例子裡面，好比像交通部多元化計程車那一個方案，確實是放在交通部的網站上，也給了十四天的公告期、也給了承辦人跟信箱，但我如果沒有設「關鍵字通知」的話，其實我不會知道這件事，第一個是能見度。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第二個是回應時間，因為十四天很短，如果你很認真回、對方很認真回，其實沒有機會再一輪回，而且是私人的，別人不知道怎麼回。因此我覺得至少七天至十四天擴增到六十天。還有應該要公開，並不是像部長信箱，比如：法規裡面有寫有多少的計程車，這個資料從哪裡來的，大家會講新的問題，才會在一開始的十天、二十天先適時性的回應、建議，有大概四個回合的互動機會，這個是國發會資管處在負責，我現在是負責他們，所以這一個是我接下來會花很多力氣做的事，這是從這個月開始。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外，跟這個相關的是vTaiwan的機制，vTaiwan這個機制相當特別，因為理論上政府只負責去做議程設定，也就是我有哪一些案子想要拋出來給vTaiwan討論，但是其實中間這一個案子是不是適合vTaiwan接是由社群決定，這一個案子要用什麼程序做是用社群決定的，當然我們會請老師們去做法規的聯繫、回應，這邊要有一些經費，但是這個部分也是vTaiwan架構的一部分，是從屬於社群的，如果社群覺得這一個案子不想接，當我還是社群的時候，有很多像我們要討論，比如像通姦除罪化的事，這一個行為在網路上討論與利益關係入是否直接相關？當然沒有，所以我們不適合在這個平台上討論，畢竟這一個平台是以文字跟直播為主，如果利益關係人多數人是沒有辦法看直播，是沒有辦法平衡；其實Uber就有相關的經驗。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以vTaiwan是擅長用文字、網路可以看直播，像公司法是最好的例子，因為公司法的利益關係人都不知道用文字討論多少次了。vTaiwan會有公司法的一部分拆出來討論，就是英文名字登記，公司法每一個大家還有爭議的部分，尤其是很小的公司，因為公司法這一次修訂需要揭露的東西變多了，或者是中型的公司還沒有上市，現在要比照閉鎖性公司能夠有彈性，他如果不知道要運用多少彈性，這中間可能會起一些爭執。每一次商業司覺得有爭執的部分會排到vTaiwan來，如果商業司覺得沒有什麼好吵的話，vTaiwan就不討論，本來要吵的人，至少同意了一些最基本的東西，不可能什麼都同意，這一些最基本的東西，部會這邊要很負責說就把它納入下一個階段的法律或法規調適案例，除非舉證有什麼絕對不可能的理由、違反物理定律之類的，不然理論上這個拘束力是很強調。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "目前我進來之後就不算是社群了，所以vTaiwan目前在分案判斷的部分，一開始還是由蔡玉玲律師與社群協作，真的是數位政委（笑）。他們會去做一個基本的判斷，討論什麼樣的程序合適，之前參與過vTaiwan的朋友來判斷，公部門、私部門都會在裡面，第一場的主持人是請鄭國威，之後會再訓練更多的主持人，因為國威一開始有主持過公司法，所以他比較好上手；vTaiwan仍然是以社群主導，我們是輔導的功能。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所有三個不同的入口，我們在做的事是部會不管是哪一個、不管是主辦或者是協辦，只要有召開過專家會議、研究案，任何關於這一個議題的相關動作，我們會希望它丟到這個平台上，不管它在部會裡面或者是跟立法院辦公聽會的任何東西，就會在這一些平台上看到完整的履歷，所以不管有沒有通過、院會有沒有到立法院，像我們講的從長計議，至少大家留下這個紀錄有走到這一步。有上這一個平台，有一點像神經網路的機制，然後請各個部會來使用，如果有想額外問的問題，我們先聚焦討論這個，沒有我們再跳到下一個。" }, { "speaker": "曾仲銘", "speech": "分案這一件事只是找個現行組織的某一個單位來承接這一個案子，但是如果承接單位只是窗口，這一個案子根本不會被認真對待。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你說七天內都有上來回，但是政策方向跟民間的方向是不一致的？" }, { "speaker": "曾仲銘", "speech": "對，這一個問題並沒有解決，也就是這一個問題並沒有真正被解決，是有一個履歷表，並沒有人真正為這一件事有全面思考，這一件事是不是要回到現有的組織架構裡面條條分明，中間的灰色地帶會不會沒有人關注？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個是兩個問題，一個是既有方向跟一般所謂的常識產生了平行世界的狀態，另外一個是行政院裡面現有的部會分工裡面根本沒有管這個的。一個是有管，但是方向有落差或者是平行的，另外一個是這一個部會或者是司署來管這個是很勉強的，但也沒有別的。後面這一個舉例來講，比如要成立「教育部電玩署」或「文化部電玩署」，因為這中間沒有主管機關，這個比較像你講的情況。前面的情況是路線的不一致，一個是你這邊想要走，剛好部會落在旁邊沒有人承接，差不多是這兩個問題，對不對？" }, { "speaker": "曾仲銘", "speech": "我們做了一些產品，如果現在有一個產品部門，一個產品部門、一個是行銷部門，產品部門找好的產品、行銷部門負責行銷、營運部門是產生營收，我們最好的做法是把產品變成BU，這樣才有辦法解決一個問題，因此從產品的導入到最後產生的營收，他們看的是整件事，如果不做這一件事的話，永遠這一件事會是三個平行世界，因此我覺得這個在現有部會，這一件事每一天都在發生，以我們剛剛談到的稅務問題，談到Google Play跟Apple有沒有一個對口的事情，到現在我都沒有聽到，因為他們根本不知道誰來做這一件事，到底誰是正確的窗口來做這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "您剛剛提到這幾個想要併成同樣的一個營業單位，其實在政府裡面沒有營業單位的概念，一般還是回到主責的單位。" }, { "speaker": "曾仲銘", "speech": "各個單位的KPI不一樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以您的意思是，能不能由某個單位來設計目標，其他的算是配合主管單位來進行？" }, { "speaker": "曾薰儀", "speech": "我分享一下我的經驗，為什麼會花這麼多時間是因為金管會跟經濟部公文寫過來跟過去，最後面的原因是，當時行政院院長江宜樺決定要由金管會來當主管機關，因而才決定下來，但是在那個過程中，行政院院長還沒有拍板前就經過了三年到五年的時間，像剛剛問到分案的決定是如何被決定的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一個我可以回答，但是還有沒有別的問題想要提出來？" }, { "speaker": "林之晨", "speech": "現在的結構設計，網路語言是B2C，也就是跟比較多民眾相關的問題，可以有5,000人、1萬人連署，業者以法人為單位的話，並不是數以千計，後面也代表了數千人的工作，我們不好意思叫我們的員工去連署，員工也不一定覺得跟他們有關係，所以這樣的結構是不是比較不利於B2B的案件，也就是對業者比較嚴重影響，好像連署某一件事這樣。" }, { "speaker": "游士逸", "speech": "業者關心的是產業政策，但是產業政策沒有辦法交由民粹決定，所以剛剛提到決策架構都是由社群出來，的確可以解決很多消費者的問題，但是核心是產業如何發展，消費者不關心，這一件事還是要從大架構來看。前面的問題講的是，其實我們這幾年都在講網路產業在臺灣是沒有一個主管機關的，所以當今天進到分案系統之後，大到第三方支付，小到網路銷售醫材，會落到個別部會局處來負責監督，但是並沒有人從整體產業發展的角度來看這一件事；雖然不是政委的主導範圍，但是很希望這樣的意見到國發會陳主委時，還是希望有一個集中國家數位經濟產業策略的機制出來，這一個機制可能是有更多的業者，甚至政府單位能夠一起跨部會來看未來要如何做起來，現在所有的規則都在防弊，興利這一件事沒有談到。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不過這裡講的防弊意思是說，在制度上覺得創新是可能造成的風險，這裡的防弊意思是在減少risk。" }, { "speaker": "游士逸", "speech": "是用想像的方式來控制。" }, { "speaker": "曾薰儀", "speech": "不然對現有的既得利益者產生衝擊，就不容易發生。" }, { "speaker": "林之晨", "speech": "我認為是既有的結構化非常熟悉，所以要打破的都會有一點怕，因此會傾向是不是可以跟原來一樣，也就是不要改變。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是我講類似共生，任何要改的也會感受衝擊，是這樣子沒有錯。" }, { "speaker": "游士逸", "speech": "臺灣並沒有一個原生的巨大網路公司，像Google, Facebook 或是大陸的 BAT 等，臺灣的新經濟發展過程比較像是強大的舊經濟體系壓抑了弱小的新經濟體系發展，我覺得寧可臺灣有一個共生出來的大平台，有這樣的平台才有能力讓網路產業影響並幫忙其他產業升級，這個是很大的問題。" }, { "speaker": "蔣萬安", "speech": "其實大家談到人才的問題是一個核心，不管是留住人才或者是招攬人才進來，這個是目前政府應該要馬上做的事，所以不管是五大創新產業或者是「亞洲‧矽谷」，不管人才這一塊的具體做法是什麼，比如我們編列100多億的預算在「亞洲‧矽谷」方案裡面，到底怎麼樣才能吸引人才進來。比如VR/AR產業好了，在整個新創產業跟「亞洲‧矽谷」的方案裡面佔了多大的比例，我們如何透過參與式預算，比如在「亞洲‧矽谷」裡面，撇開一些硬體蓋園區等等，應該要聽到新創產業業者的聲音，我們是不是可以框住預算，讓這一些產業來參與討論如何具體落實新創產業的政策。" }, { "speaker": "蔣萬安", "speech": "剛剛聽到vTaiwan跟公司法全盤修正，其實我從去年開始就有接觸，因為其實政大朱德芳老師跟方嘉麟老師去年就有和我談過，很高興他們現在積極在做，大家目前也有看到一個問卷，也就是希望聽到各方的意見，剛剛政委談到由社群來決定哪一些議題放在平台上，我覺得很好，但會不會有掛一漏萬的問題，這個提出來大家討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以很快回答我就回答一下，vTaiwan其實社群是量力而為，因為是一個高度參與的方式，勢必不可能每一案都這樣來做，比較像是優規，就是社群有足夠的理由相信這樣推出去之後，有足夠多人來討論，所以我們之前還在社群的時候有做問卷想問大家討論什麼，Uber、Airbnb、Bitcoin等等，有英文名字的就比較前面（笑）。像數位簽章不是沒有人想要討論，沒有一下子吸引到一些人來關注，可能是過於專業或者是大家並沒有覺得有迫切的必要，但是無論怎麼樣，還是可以放到「Join」平台，大家覺得不是在vTaiwan討論，是議題比較到中後期或者是前期的議題，社群沒有吸引到這麼多人討論，還是會在國發會討論，所以應該是不會有漏掉的情況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "之前「Join」討論版的問題，是議題不足，討論到最後機關會有一個綜合回應，拘束力不足就沒有人來；反過來講，「提點子」反而有正加強，一天到晚「提點子」那邊會有很多人提案子，因為大家看到那邊處理得很好，等於每部會要處理兩、三個議題。我覺得他們的人沒有辦法訓練到一個月處理十個議題，我覺得那樣有一點苛求。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "同樣，在「眾開講」也希望部會量力而為，大家覺得某一些需要討論，像討論內部資訊安全法，希望集中人力好好回應及說明等等，之前因為從520到我進來這幾個月裡面，「眾開講」停辦，後來有恢復辦。至少六十天關於商業及智財的相關法規調適，我會即時回應，雖然沒有公開直播，但我會比較像美國的方式做。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家其實都不太好意思請自己顧客連署的這一件事，其實Airbnb有做－不對，Uber也有－也沒有什麼不好意思，這個是一個可以討論的方式，這個是量的部分；質的部分是像Jamie講的，沒有錯，如果國家、政府討論的大方向是這個有講，但是如果沒有宣示性的話，就會是晚報報什麼，大家會討論什麼的情況，我覺得不算是民粹，只是議題設定權交給主流媒體而已，並不是真正的民粹。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，我完全同意這一個想法，很具體來講，接下來的大方向，我們現在在寫的是數位國家創新這一部分，可是數位國家創新是當初的NICI變成的，之前沒有那麼多的電商創業的部分，也是在場的朋友們花了很多的力氣，應該把更多關於網路及數位的願景放在這一個項目裡面來，這裡面會包含創新的部分，不會完全只有治理的部分跟我們說數位包容或者是數位機會的部分，這個是之前NICI做得很好，創新的部分誠如他們講的比較不是他們管的，這個是他們可以用或者是偏鄉可以上網，這可以變成逐年來檢討，不在這裡面就可以說這不是今年要focus的東西，今年要聚焦的東西我們會儘量寫在這裡面，這個是很具體回答你的問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們先回來這邊，我再花1分鐘處理一下。平行線的部分，我自己比較在意這個。後面是每個主管機關散掉的部分，這裡我真的是安那其，我覺得分散式組織也有能夠運作的方法，這個等一下可以討論。前面這個我覺得這個真的比較困難，如果這一個部會真的是監理機關，而監理機關是要極小化風險，那麼就跟各位站在平行的宇宙裡面，這個是我們怎麼協調都沒有用的狀況。我覺得這裡面具體我可以做的是，先想清楚他們現有的利益關係人們，他們不太可能是鐵板一塊，他們一定還是覺得哪一些東西放出來跟比較小的player一起做，不一定完全不利益，也有可能的利益，也就是裡面還是有願意承擔一定程度的player，如果全部集中到一個理事長的等級，我覺得會採取風險到0的角度跟監理單位說話。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像監理沙盒是一個很好的例子，我們知道金管會一開始是現有被監管的銀行、保險業者使用，這樣有一點像跟各位站在比較平行的立場上，但是在我們充分溝通之後，其實金管會並不是沒有看到某些程度的風險，而是在客觀的範圍內可以量化，還是可以說服自己。所以，像我們之前股權式群募，雖然被人家說討價還價，在一個程度內，即使大的利益相關者也會覺得這個風險可以接受，監理機關至少可以放一點點出來。所以，我覺得不太可能在大方向這邊說監理機關就馬上加入這個陣營，但是可以從這裡面一個小段而試著對接，當然如果成果不好或者是沒有成果的話，這只是實驗，我現在是這樣想，而且這個是政治現實，除了這樣之外，我們並沒有很好的方法來做，我們畢竟沒有Google等級（公司），你講的完全對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不多用大家的時間，我回應到這裡。這一個部分，大家會覺得需要凝聚出讓大家得以遵循的？我現在毋寧是建立一個讓會不要白開的機制，我們之前作為顧問或者是專家被邀來開會，常常會覺得白開，不但紀錄可能記的是我講的要點，字都沒有錯，但是重點並不是放在那邊，那可能做紀錄人員並不是這方面的專業，不能責怪他們；可能又有另外一次比較公開的會議紀錄，但是並不會把這一次的書面會議交付，我開了六年會覺得好像都從頭開，即使到最後公聽會會充分揭露，是每一個點進去感覺會是從頭開，因此這一個程序持續六年了，我想各位已經下降到谷底了（笑），立法院的屆期不續審還有一個續審，這邊（政院）會覺得是無限迴圈的感覺，很像電影裡面一直過同一天的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以在目前我的設計是，至少我們每一次、我協調的會議我都有逐字稿，通常來開會是處長跟副處長，他們下一次開會之前會說什麼，不但mail給他也會給承辦，有時他回去跟承辦講，因為口耳傳難免意思有一點跑掉，在有逐字稿的情況下，大家不一定輕易許諾，因為別的部會在看、自己的承辦也在看。而他可以在這十天內留言跟評論，好比十天的編輯期可以給其他的TiEA會員看，表示有給各位想要講話，但可能發現我講的話跟你講的話有一些事實、物理定律不符的話，他們可以馬上出來評論，可以講出一個公開的版本來，這個是放在所有的相關部會裡面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我的信念是這種機制會比較能持續，我會這樣想是我看著張善政老師用由上而下的方式做了幾個案子，但後來因為政權轉換，也有一些比較難接下去的情況。我具體的想法是，希望不會因為我在這邊才可以推動，我想建立的是哪一天我不在了，也可以推動的狀況；不好意思，佔用大家的時間。" }, { "speaker": "蔣萬安", "speech": "我想補充一點。我看這個圖有很深的感觸，因為會互換，我在立法院一個會期，半年多，一開始會碰到一種情況是產業界提出的訴求，與主管機關的心態，處在平行的時空，例如比較保守的部會是財政部，像我們要推很多的政策要開協調會的時候，都相對保守，所以一些立場是比較以防弊為出發點。之後會變成第二個情況，也就是產業界提出的做法建議，並不屬於任何行政部會所主管的業務，各部會彈開，我舉個例子，我現在在衛環，像之前醫師納入勞基法，會牽扯到兩個部會，理論上來講勞動部只要聽一句話，說ok就法制化了，勞基法的主管單位是勞動部，但衛福部主管龐大的醫院和醫師體系，必須與各方充分溝通、研擬相關配套，所以有一點大家會覺得我就等對方協調。" }, { "speaker": "蔣萬安", "speech": "所以，像剛剛政委講得很好，現有機制每一次開完會有逐字稿，不要每一次重新再來，告訴他們上一次的會議結論是什麼，我會建議，因為我也跟部會開很多次協調會或者是大小會議，每一次的結論都是「研議」，帶回去多久呢？了不起，最快兩個星期，不然給我三十天或者是兩個月，然後常常會拖，研議之後肯定又牽涉到其他的問題，要求再多一些時間，因此「議而不決」。" }, { "speaker": "蔣萬安", "speech": "所以，每一次開會的時候，來參與的人必須是「可以做決定的人」，我們今天的會議就做好決定，不要再等下一次，例如：政委是主持人，這個是很好的建議，我們結論就帶回去研議兩週內可以給予答覆，我覺得理想的狀況是今天的會議就下一個結論。" }, { "speaker": "蔣萬安", "speech": "前提是來開會的人必須是可以做決定的人，而不要無法做決定的人；當然這個有困難，因為大家的時間有限，我只是提一個想法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "每一個都是十天，逐字稿公開也是十天，來這邊的是處長們、副處長們或者是科長們，是可以決定的人，與回去後做的實際決定，是會有落差的，也許回去後承辦告訴他不可行，覺得這個風險比較高的情況下才會說帶回去，但是其實這個承辦在忙別的業務，除非壓下來說這個是最優先事項說要做，不然忙到一個段落才把資料給這個承辦。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得我們現在做的這個方式，至少在這十天內承辦已經先看到主管答應過什麼，不管可行或者是不可行，可行如果需要更多的資料，我們直接有建一個管考的系統，我們現在院裡面的機房建置了相當於Trello、Hackpad等在民間用的所有東西。大家看到在玻璃窗有一些條子，那個是會跟線上同步的，我們在業界叫做一次次開發週期，每一個開發週期以十天為單位，如果我們開會還無法取得的資訊，到十天之後要補上，我們會跟會議紀錄一起公開。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是如果現在看到會議紀錄公開，有答應、做不到，全臺灣會看到答應、做不到，這樣對他們的壓力滿大的，因此我不會要求所有的部會都用這樣的方式作業，只有我做主持人及我督導的業務才這樣子作業，至少有些人開始習慣，不會突然間造成大家的壓力，但是我覺得這樣是要長期來做。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝，如果這一幅圖差不多的話，我們可以討論一些別的事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實監管有稍微討論到，還有國際交流，國際交流又分成我們怎麼樣把國際的人才引進跟讓這邊的人才有更多的國際舞臺，我們到底要如何跟這一些新時代封建領主們打交道，這兩個其實是毫不相關（笑），關係比較薄弱，我們到下一個。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們直接到人才來，人才這邊我想要說的是，我先講一個非常概略的，大家要先知道某一件事可能，然後才能決定去學它，像之前我花相當多時間在錄VR教學的影片或者是請媒體只能到VR裡面找我，一部分想要讓大家看到目前的可能性到哪裡，比這個可能性更多的會有興趣，所以才會促成大家想要學的想法，總是資本密集在玩，這樣子其實一般感興趣的愛好者知道不用錢也可以玩，所以我自己的傾向是用自己示範的方法做操作。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在「亞洲‧矽谷」有一個示範的「校際學院」，並不是每一個都這麼吸睛展示給大家看，亞洲連結矽谷裡面如果不那麼亮點的部分，我們仍然應該要把編列進去的具體規劃都攤在網路上讓大家看到，其實在這一個「Join」平台裡面，「提點子」跟「眾開講」外還有一個「賴監督」，這個是KM Public，每一個月都會填報多少錢。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個在「亞洲‧矽谷」案子裡面有被問到為什麼沒有網址？有一個IP位置，但是沒有網址，如果以後變成IPV6以後就更沒有人記得了，我們具體能做的一件事是起始「亞洲‧矽谷」、創新經濟等，後面只要落實到有計畫，其實上面都有資料，只是現在只有在PDF及Word檔做這一些事，國發會是做這一些事管考，所以我們至少可以把它變成結構化的資料，讓大家能夠放類似儀表板上去。好比像「亞洲‧矽谷」編了這麼多的計畫，就可以有一個標籤說所有的矽谷相關的，點下去就可以展開跟台北市的預算視覺化一樣，那個是現成的，我們要專注取得結構化資料，我們希望在整個預算會期結束之前就準備好，如果預算過的話，我們就會以這個實際狀況來做管考，一年之後我們才會說哪一些計畫的執行程度不彰，我們再做次年度刪減，哪一些計畫跟「亞洲‧矽谷」的關係沒有那麼大，下一年度預算保留，但希望執行項目都到有相關的部分去。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "上一個比較困難的是，五年度的第三年，坦白說那個也是沒有辦法的事情，五年度的第四年經過大家全民的檢視，像「亞洲‧矽谷」包含亞洲的朋友及矽谷的朋友去檢視，就可以說哪一些有連結到、哪一些沒有連結到，下一步我們才可以說有哪一些要重提跟調整，不然我們以自己想像是沒有辦法做到這樣的事，這個是具體回答怎麼樣有參與人才的問題。不知道有沒有什麼想要討論的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "跟Google 、Apple談判，事實上是有這樣的辦公室存在，由鄧振中老師負責。他們目前包含區域整合、TPP或者是未來不管叫什麼名字的東西，其他相關的都是納入在裡面，那它有一個網站，所以這一些談判的機制原則，哪一些可以參與、參與到多少，其實那個網站上我覺得揭露還滿充分的，因此我比較想問的是在這一個基礎上如果大家還有什麼額外希望鄧老師考慮的事，我也可以幫忙跟他們討論。經貿談判並不是我的業務，但我可以幫忙把逐字稿打出來，讓大家知道有沒有在做。" }, { "speaker": "程九如", "speech": "之前接觸過經貿談判的夥伴們，他們都很優秀也很努力，開會也都會請很多相關部會一起商議，很可惜大部分的部會包括智庫，多沒有網路產業的實務經驗，較難掌握網路的商業模式和實際網路技術的運作原理，在部會達成共識與利益談判的拿捏上需要更多的交流和支持" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像「數位兩打（Digital 2 Dozen）」這些？" }, { "speaker": "程九如", "speech": "是啊，特別是在網路產業的領域裡，面對一些文化與技術的輸出大國，如果國家沒有發展數位經濟的清楚戰略和目標，要叫負責談判的人必須談出好的結果相當困難，也並不公平" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以有一個具體的建議，我們更納入多一點的民間比較懂的，如果看到某一個東西想要拉手剎車是做得到的，但是在開的時候，每一天要踩油門，大家沒有時間做，如果談判中間，像你看到會亮紅燈的話，讓不管有去開會或者是沒有去開會的朋友都有一些參與的機會，我覺得至少這個我們可以做。" }, { "speaker": "程九如", "speech": "現在看來有點亂，網路產業發展很快，懂網路的人才多還沒有進到政府體制服務，一些傳統智庫也多對網路產業一知半解，新政府要依賴傳統智庫做出發展數位經濟的重要決策/建議，會衍生出很多後續的問題" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個我瞭解，但是談判者的養成並不是一朝一夕，與其說我們直接聘厲害的網路政策談判者來，他也許到某個程度就去做別的了，不如我們養成一個文化，每一次有利益攸關事情出來的時候，到底什麼叫網路中立性、開放網路、資料再識別化、去識別化等等，像這些我們兩年多之前大家在談服務貿易協定的那一種精神，弄成大家一般都可以懂，這樣我們就多一些未來也許會協助談判的人。我覺得這個還是要往未來想，不太可能是幾個月就可以解決的事。" }, { "speaker": "蔣萬安", "speech": "對外經貿談判主要是經濟部負責，但我認為成員可以是跨部會，不管是科技部或者是國發會，不單是經濟部的官員去談判。就我過去接觸，以前法學院的同學，他在泰國負責泰國的對外經貿談判，他覺得我們的談判代表很厲害，我猜你的建議是，我們對於美國的經貿談判在相關領域的認識上可能就沒有那麼充分跟多元。" }, { "speaker": "曾薰儀", "speech": "服貿談判，大家一看覺得比較有利的原因是，其實前面政策的過程裡面，其實當時的網路業者參與非常非常多，到後面經濟部拿過去的版本是業者都已經看過的版本，所以拿出來的時候，我們行業裡面覺得這個本來是大家應該做的東西，可是我相信為什麼會這麼震撼臺灣的原因是，或許在很多行業沒有經過這樣的程序，他們就被制定了這個東西，所以剛剛講的題目，也就是那個東西對方給了一個清單或有沒有人知道，或者像TiEA有沒有足夠的時間去參與跟理解，然後再告訴他們我們要如何做，這個是比較適合的。" }, { "speaker": "曾薰儀", "speech": "難道其他的行業不是透過這個程序參與的嗎？我覺得行業太多，可能經濟部也沒有那麼多的時間，所以到後面引起這麼多的波瀾，但目前我們也不知道有哪一些。" }, { "speaker": "程九如", "speech": "政府再推數位經濟的前期，很多部會會來找 TiEA，因為 TiEA 是最大的產業協會，可能是因為太常被我們打槍/糾正，很多部會都轉向拿政府預算的公協會去尋求產業共識，我們看到很多很離譜的論調與計畫，都是因為對網路產業錯誤的認知而造成的" }, { "speaker": "曾薰儀", "speech": "其實可以內部討論，我們幾乎整本大綱補進去，但是基本上並沒有太大的問題，我覺得未來這樣的東西會越來越多。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有錯。" }, { "speaker": "曾薰儀", "speech": "像TiEA可能跟政府要有一個默契，協會本身並沒有一個龐大的研究單位，但是政府其實是有的，但是在框架一開始本來就歪掉的話，後面一定會很可怕，我不曉得這個有多少是在進行中的，有可能我們都還不知道。" }, { "speaker": "程九如", "speech": "這也牽涉到另一個嚴重的問題，現在政府制定政策非常倚賴智庫，有些傳統智庫為了爭取國家計畫/研究預算，特別是在數位經濟這方面，編造了很多的產業資歷，可以說是公然說謊的程度，這些資歷對於身在網路產業的人來說，一看就知道是造假，但政府因為不了解網路產業，所以很難分辨虛實。這些說謊的智庫能幫政府制定出好的的政策，我個人抱持很大的疑問" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們知道這次美國大選有一個特點，就是他們一面在辯論的時候，一面開始會有各種評論來告訴大家，某一位候選人講的是平行宇宙的事。所以我覺得要建立這一個事實檢證的習慣是很重要的，特別是在新興的領域裡面，像我最近一直在看世界經濟論壇的報告，因為接下來可能要去達佛斯，那一群人的思路其實我並不是那麼完整的瞭解，我一直本來都是在研究數位社會的協作運用，並沒有討論競爭的這部分，但是世界經濟論壇裡會處理這個部分，這一部分我花很多時間在看。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是在看的時候，我覺得滿好的是會主動要求我們這一些參與論壇的人會去做事實的檢核，其實那些報告也是找大學的教授寫，這一邊寫到了亞洲或者是某一個特定的業別或者是計算機科學，他們知道我是這方面比較懂的，會來徵詢「這樣是不是不對的？是不是跟實際的情況有落差？」我覺得這個是很好的論壇文化，本來應該這樣子，所以逐字稿公開的話，也許就會有智庫的朋友跳出來說不是你講的那樣。" }, { "speaker": "程九如", "speech": "其實我們很歡迎大家，來做實務和政策上的論證。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我在看報告的時候，也覺得要有事實檢核的機制存在，但經濟談判不是我的業務。但是我可以就預算、規劃、參與這邊，做到這一件事，反正系統是一樣的，所以如果別的辦公室想要用的話，我們就會做技術轉移。" }, { "speaker": "游士逸", "speech": "我有幾個問題，雖然前面政委做了期望管理，但是我想在座都是產業同學，我們更想知道後面如果對數位發展政策提供建言或者是交流的話，是要跟哪一位？" }, { "speaker": "曾仲銘", "speech": "我們想要知道哪一個方式是對產業是有效率的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我經手的會議都會公布在這個地方，PDIS的網站快要開張了所以在網站開張之後就會有一個總表，我目前碰到哪一些人、哪一些部會，也會知道目前沒有碰到哪一些人跟部會，那一些溝通方式的頻率跟平台我就不知道，這就很像我最近在玩文明帝國六，一開始的時候旁邊就是一些古地圖，要多走幾步才會知道實際情況。現在我對政府運作的理解，並沒有比各位多。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們實際有端出來的，不管是承諾六十天的「Join」平台或者是vTaiwan，因為民間辦的活動也會被納入，所以我們之前在處理金融監理沙盒時，曾委員、余委員及民間很多辦的活動，其實這一些都跟我們的滾動式問卷一起綜合起來，變成大家可以看得到相關事件履歷的態度，所以未來金管會願意繼續走vTaiwan接下來階段的話，中間其實不需要等主管部會來邀集，你們自己也可以邀集，只要跟我們相容的格式，發生在哪裡、什麼時間是有憑有據的，你邀得到的利益關係人是哪一些，有充分的揭露跟直播或錄影，就可以在完整的vTaiwan裡面，可以確保討論的人是看到各位的意見之後再討論，這個很重要，因為我們不可能完全只靠國發會、法協的力量就辦那麼多次，所以公協會來做是有必要的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "現有的行政程序法裡面並沒有列入這個部分，但是vTaiwan的程序是完全由社群決定的，像公司法是可以做這一件事，公司法之後只要跟網路或者是利益關係者都跟網路有關的，我們都會儘量往vTaiwan走，儘量讓民間共識的活動，能夠有一個空間，在充分揭露跟迴避的前提底下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是這個東西必須是社群有承載力才能討論的，除此之外只能從七天變六十天，在這個管道裡面，我除了確保所有碰到的人都願意具體回應及公開他的製作程序之外，目前我也很誠實講並沒有一個系統性讓大家能夠儘量討論的方法，除了那個留言板裡面多貼一些已經凝聚好的連結之外，好比勢必不可能跟機關有醒目的部分，有連結到那裡的話，我至少可以確保機關是看那個連結，而不是只看這個文字而已，所以盡可能多用超連結，還有多凝聚一些共識之後多列點貼上來，尤其是衝突的利益相關者看到的時候，他們看到也許這六點，四點是誓死反對，但二點是贊成的，這個對監理機關來講是福音，不用特別開協調會，可以四個先過，剩下二個再來討論。" }, { "speaker": "游士逸", "speech": "針對第二張圖的事，是不是有可能用產業基本法或者是類似的東西來做一個大框架的規範？因為畢竟新經濟有太多太多的未來可能發生的新創業態，在產業規模還小、現有法令還不能完善監管時，是需要一個 try and error 階段的，是否需要有一個基本法，或是有跨業別的沙箱監理機制，讓這些還在前期發展進化階段可以有創新容錯的空間？" }, { "speaker": "曾仲銘", "speech": "其實負面表列是大家最希望的狀態，因為這個行業是新的，但是現在遭遇的問題是這一個業務是不是成型都不是很確定，所以像剛剛Jimmy講的在某一些新創的服務，如果規模還沒有到一個什麼樣影響範圍時，基本上任何一個主管機關都可以不要管它。" }, { "speaker": "游士逸", "speech": "也就是能不能擴大到其他部會？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，像金管會之外，有沒有其他的部會。" }, { "speaker": "曾薰儀", "speech": "如果任何一家臺灣的業者的服務金額都不達到現存商業銀行額的10％或20％，金管會需要花這麼多的社會資源管這一個東西嗎？我覺得未來會出現服務面對到這個問題，我不曉得Uber營業額多少，但是目前臺灣交通行業的比例跟人數，是不是達到一個需要大家看它的，或者是要發展一段時間再來看？" }, { "speaker": "游士逸", "speech": "可能是中間的執行方式要大家一起來想，比如第三方支付要有會員制，但是會員制大概只有全臺灣發明這一件事，主管機關想像非常多的管制原則之後，業者還要用自己的資本來試這個市場是不是存在。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是啊！" }, { "speaker": "曾薰儀", "speech": "所以大家希望是在一個狀態下的無政府。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "跨業別的沙箱是立法院的工作了（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "日本有一個一般性的沙箱審核，不太需要哪一個部會主管，你申請之後，那一個辦公室知道哪一些部會要放寬，這個比較像各位提的東西，這個必須要由立法院主導，不太可能是行政院自己來提。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得沙箱這一件事不是所有的臺灣人知道的概念，其實知道的人本來就知道有這一件事，會需要更多的能見度，也許公司法的討論過程當中，就把這個東西的能見度一起提高，或者是我們一開始先從金融業試試看，比較有趣的案子出來了，再看別的業別，也就是這一個東西並不是在圖利特定業者，而是讓政府跟下一波未來中間有一個接軌、串聯的方法，我覺得這個概念還是要更多人聽到、知道，才有可能變成接下來施政的重點，不然會變成很像是束之高閣的東西。像英國跟新加坡也許真的某個業別申請完幾次之後，也會變成要束之高閣的東西，這不是所有的人都看好。我們要推廣這一個概念，並不是特定的支付或者是借貸這一種服務的話，我覺得這個概念要先行。" }, { "speaker": "顧立楷", "speech": "這個是有雞生蛋、蛋生雞的問題，民眾看到這個服務之後才知道這一個東西是在管理沙盒裡面，這個管理的機制對我們有幫助的，如果要把這個政策推出來的話，可是在這個情況，展延沒有辦法先發展的時候，就會變成民眾沒有辦法充分瞭解。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實，我們之前在vTaiwan的時候，有討論過是不是要有一個基本法（笑），所有關於原則性立法的東西是不是要一致的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "後來余宛如立委用複製的方式，針對每項監管性的金融法律裡，貼上同一段沙箱條款，這個也是一種立法操作。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我的意思是如果立法委員先看到這一件事，並且願意向把你們選出來的朋友們解釋這件事對大家沒有壞處、長遠來看可能有好處的話，我覺得就可以解決雞生蛋、蛋生雞的問題，這是一個解決方法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個解決方法是有人先帶頭違法（笑），我想這代價比較高一點。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣好像都有處理到一些，最後一輪有沒有想要討論的？" }, { "speaker": "游士逸", "speech": "政委再把民意的聲音再打開，你用一些比較科技的方式把民眾的聲音有系統性帶進來，讓大家看到很多的進度。在座的這一些都是TiEA的理監事，我們其實不只是要提出需求，我們還是希望怎麼樣參與或者是協助？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們不管是「Join」或vTaiwan，也會有淡季跟旺季，有像Uber跟Airbnb很受矚目的，也有大家覺得還好的案子。我相信公司法裡面受到的關注不會一樣多，像英文名字登記比較少，因為確實有這個需求的，也許各位多少都認識有這個需求的朋友，但是有強烈到組成一股勢力嗎？也許還好。但是公司法裡面有一些別的部分，像在資訊的揭露上或是董事會的組成上，這個就是必爭之地，就會有人跳出來做。我覺得可以具體請各位幫忙，也就是接下來11月10日第一次vTaiwan直播，記得看直播之外，我們會在那邊揭露vTaiwan下一步的界面是什麼，讓大家比較容易使用，也讓可能沒有那麼關注的朋友可以參與，至少讓朋友知道公司法、監理沙盒或者是無實體資產擔保這一些案子如果在上面的時候，就是透過各位的人脈去試著去看到這一些事在討論，這個是很具體的事可以做的事。" }, { "speaker": "游士逸", "speech": "這邊有一個建議，目前vTaiwan的議題是看新聞才知道這一件事，是不是有一些系統性的push議題在一些產業協會裡面傳播？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得可以啊！討論區的RSS系統是有，只是我們沒有強調出來。是有一個訂閱推送的方式，就是有@TaiwanPDIS這個 Twitter，等到新版vTaiwan上線有RSS出來的時候，我們會公告。FB目前分發散的速度太快了，vTaiwan本來就有FB，但是在上面凝聚討論的能力沒有那麼強，我們辦公室現在是在Twitter上，如果之後有專職的社群經理出現的時候，我們再考慮往FB推行。" }, { "speaker": "陳宜君", "speech": "稅務的問題？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有提到國內經營者跟國外經營者不對等的部分，之前在vTaiwan有討論，所以我大概知道脈絡，事實層面都理解，我比較想要知道的是這套推出來，短期之內不會改太多的話，各位的看法如何？" }, { "speaker": "陳宜君", "speech": "現階段全球討論反避稅議題，多數國家對於國內消費者在境內使用境外公司所提供之勞務，多會主張課稅權為該國(消費地國)所有，故而變更當地國法令，以為因應。台灣現行雖已針對境外電商銷售勞務予國內自然人部分，提出營業稅修正草案。然而針對所得稅部分，如果國外公司對台灣境內公司提供勞務，會要求國內公司扣繳。實務上，國內業者因交易約定而無法掌握金流，雖只取得淨額，卻須額外負擔扣繳稅額;或因國外業者要求國內業者負擔扣繳稅額，造成國內業者之稅賦加重。建議政府對於境外電商銷售勞務予境內(公司及自然人)，明確訂定規範，以維護產業發展及租稅公平。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "平台是可量化，也就是大家知道會多這麼多。你覺得這樣課還是太重？" }, { "speaker": "陳宜君", "speech": "既有的繳稅都知道，像國外的。" }, { "speaker": "陳明明", "speech": "我舉個例子，像有一個跨域交易，像Agoda，如果跟臺灣的易遊網訂了一個房子，這樣的稅賦跟Agoda是不同的，這樣會造成臺灣本土的網路公司跟國外的網路公司在稅制上不對等，因此長期競爭會開始出現一些問題，因為稅賦比較低，所以Agoda永遠可以提供比較好的價格在他的網站上，消費者基本上要買Agoda的產品要自己到國稅局繳稅。" }, { "speaker": "游士逸", "speech": "這已經改掉了。" }, { "speaker": "曾薰儀", "speech": "臺灣未來的修法是到達一定的規模，是要去申請，但是如果不申請時候我們要怎麼辦？我相信Agoda那麼大，所以會合法設立。如果不是B2B，而是B2C。" }, { "speaker": "曾薰儀", "speech": "可以要求怎麼樣？可以封鎖網站嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "之前有人提過限制廣告或者是商業活動。業者夠大可能還有一點影響，但是中小型就難說了。" }, { "speaker": "陳明明", "speech": "其實這個執行上是難以落實的。" }, { "speaker": "顧立楷", "speech": "旅遊業怎麼看待？" }, { "speaker": "陳明明", "speech": "我們覺得就是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "曾薰儀", "speech": "你們認為Agoda要繳稅？" }, { "speaker": "曾薰儀", "speech": "從我的角度來看，我覺得3,000元是不好的，我的意思是你不能因為要增加稅這一件事，你設立這樣的門檻，事實上你是阻礙了自由貿易經濟這一件事，雖然有人說對你們的平台上好的，但是我並不這麼認為，交易要流通才有更大的機會，因此這一個法其實對於整個臺灣經濟不見得是好的政策。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是每次2,999元進口，半年超過1,8000元還是要繳稅那件事？" }, { "speaker": "游士逸", "speech": "取消3,000元。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是次數頻繁課稅。" }, { "speaker": "游士逸", "speech": "一個是賦稅公平，一個是國跟國租稅競爭力的問題。我舉個例子，對跨境網購課稅頻次門檻降低的事情，在網路上有人提到這一個東西對淘寶大陸賣家或是台灣買家沒有影響，影響最大的是從淘寶上面批貨進到台灣銷售的小型賣家，他們除了課了關稅之外，因為跨境批貨沒有進項發票可以充抵成本，他們的稅務成本其實更高。" }, { "speaker": "曾薰儀", "speech": "我看到他們從大陸拿的商品不拿進項發票，但是國稅局會根據交易的金額會課稅，所以他們的稅被加了五倍，也就是他不經營網路商店。" }, { "speaker": "游士逸", "speech": "這世界上有太多的商品來自大陸，我們也許不喜歡看到這一件事發生，但是擋不住的，因此要如何有一個租稅政策的策略讓台灣產業更有競爭力？" }, { "speaker": "曾薰儀", "speech": "有太多錢在買海外的商品，所以在課，各國會有這一個東西，臺灣某種程度兩岸貿易這麼多的情況下，有沒有可能臺灣跟大陸兩邊都不要課，所以等於是雙方在一個限度下。" }, { "speaker": "游士逸", "speech": "那個是貨貿要處理的事了。" }, { "speaker": "曾薰儀", "speech": "這個對經濟循環是好的，不然貨品的流通成本是變高的。" }, { "speaker": "陳明明", "speech": "我個人比較悲觀這一件事，過去的思維是我對這一個國土有統治權，所以我對這個國土的人民課稅，但是到了網路世界變不一樣了，網路世界是一個虛擬的國土，要如何對這一個虛擬的國土去課稅，我覺得這個會發生在很多未來數位經濟的這個概念上，就像Agoda是在訂房上可以對這個虛擬王國裡面的人民課稅，網路經濟的強國可以對全世界的人民課稅，只要他的人民屬於他的虛擬國土。所以我覺得這一件事可能若干年後，大家會正視這一件事，因為會有很多網路經濟弱國都課不到稅，這些網路弱國也沒有任何的談判籌碼去跟網路強國談。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可能不是國了，這是新形態的領土。" }, { "speaker": "陳明明", "speech": "對，是新的經濟領主在課這一些稅，可能到時候會意識到這一件事的時候，才會再來談判，我覺得稅務涉及到這個的東西都是談判，所以只有一個方法，也就是臺灣要出幾個數位經濟的強權才有可能未來跟人家談判，這個是我的想法，所以不太需要去禁止Agoda，然後說保護臺灣的訂房網站，其實這是沒解的，到最後是沒有結果，反而會傷害更多，只有一個方法是我們臺灣也可以出幾個阿里巴巴，可以出幾個Uber，我們臺灣相對在未來就會有談判籌碼在數位領域上跟別的國家談判。" }, { "speaker": "陳明明", "speech": "第二，假設數位強權的跨國網路公司落地在臺灣的話，會比較好，稅已經打破過去的領土概念，像數位強權要落地在哪裡，大的網路公司也不見得想要在美國，有很多跨國網路公司總部是設在愛爾蘭，可能當地有好的稅賦，當然有很多是在美國，美國除了數位經濟實力外，還有軍事上的實力，因此我比較悲觀的是，如果臺灣未來沒有辦法建立這幾個數位強權的話，我覺得沒有辦法，其實就是全輸，沒有解。" }, { "speaker": "游士逸", "speech": "如果我們有更積極的數位產業政策，也許我們可以在台灣做出 IoT 的阿里巴巴，跟全世界的用戶收到即使1％的使用費，如果臺灣要針對這全世界的使用費課稅，我相信這一件事不會在台灣發生，但是如果反過來講臺灣宣示鼓勵數位大型平台在臺灣發展落地，我們創造一個讓大平台願意落在臺灣的環境，包括跨境數位服務的租稅減免，當這些平台在台灣落地時，我相信對臺灣的產業生態系、就業等等都能產生很多影響。" }, { "speaker": "陳明明", "speech": "我相信這是一個方法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我對這部分原本並沒有那麼高的興趣，但是進內閣之後一直認真在學。但我不管吸收再快，接下來幾年跟內閣裡的幾位經濟學老師們，我想不太可能在同一個層次上對話。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不過，確保在討論的時候，各位關注的題目有進入議程，我覺得至少我能夠做到這個。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "今天先這樣，謝謝大家。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "很感謝大家具體放在slideshare那一份（http://www.slideshare.net/autang/20160912-66111207），我不知道大家有沒有額外要討論的議題，或者今天以那一份為主？" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "就是以這一份為主。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我就直接投影那一份出來。各位想要怎麼開始？我們要直接就開始討論有利標這一件事嗎？" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "我們這一次拜會，因為開放基金會針對政策提出意見，並不是個案，而是針對體制的沿革是有幫助的，並不會特定哪一個。四個主題都有牽扯到Open，前兩個跟Open Source比較有關的，第三個主題是自然人憑證簽章的問題，我們希望可以更開放一點，如果沒有問題的話，我就一個一個主題說明，大家一起來討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們就直接進主題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "投影畫面就看它高興了，這個是我們第二次在會議室用 Apple TV，我們昨天晚上在用這一套的時候，它還非常聽話，我不確定現在是沒放乖乖還是怎麼樣（笑），我們可能真的要放一些乖乖。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第一個主題：將開放標準、開放格式能夠列入政府採購法裡成為最有利標的評選標準之一。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "我想這個是目前比較容易達到的一個，因為就我瞭解行政院工程會負責目前正在做政府採購法的修法，從年中到現在吸納意見有一段期間了，也有修法草案的一至三版，應該是說我的建議是其實Open Format跟Open Standard可以列到相關的法律上。我最近這幾個月對於美國正在進行，俗稱是「開放資料法（open government data act）」，目前在參眾兩院已經連署討論，一般認為很有可能會成為聯邦法律。立場他們也講得很清楚，他們認為開放政府資料是歐巴馬的政策，以前是用行政指令，他們怕總統換人以後有一些政策更動，所以希望用立法確認。這一個草案也已經把開放標準跟格式直接確認在條文裡面，如果我們比對歐盟公部門資訊再利用指令，2013年的修法也已經把「開放標準」跟「開放格式」列到裡面了，我去觀察不管是英國、德國及西班牙，剛好在2015年都因應directive有做國內修法，都有把這兩個highlight進去，我覺得這個是做數位政府或政府改變跟民間溝通很重要的趨勢，希望至少在政府採購法的地方可以處理。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "我自己了解的是政府採購法裡面，當然以前有所謂儘量去推所謂的「格式開放規格通用性」，但是並沒有被落實－實際上並沒有被落實－所以我這邊的建議是，因為政府採購法原則上有兩個執行面，公務人員比較熟：一個是最低標，也就是採低價；一個是採最有利標，必須要寫出為什麼採取這個的一個理由。今天如果可以在最有利標裡面把Open format、Open standard放上去的話，在實務上會非常有幫助，第一點想提出來討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "首先我很感謝開放文化基金會提前這麼久提供我們書面資料，這樣才有時間去向工程會詢問他們目前採購法的修正情形，以我的理解是10月底－也就是現在－母法已經差不多完成，但是子法（施行細則及配套辦法）會在11月底左右送院會，這個是我理解到的時程。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以目前的採購機制來講，雖然在中央確實如你所說的是推廣有利標，但是有利標我們也知道之前的適用情形及作業程序在每個部會狀況是不一樣的，如果部會都不一樣，更不用提地方政府，在資訊採購的時候是不是真的能夠循有利標來作業，或者是限制性招標準用最有利標，或者雖然是公開取得，但以最有利標精神以複合方法議價，這個其實在地方政府資訊採購的時候都有使用，而且並沒有一個指導性的原則去說怎麼使用，所以剛剛說有利標的部分，還是中央會比較遵循。即使我們訂出來了，在地方上還是有一些執行上的挑戰。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在螢幕上有一個「talk.pdis.tw」的網站。昨天我在twitter上公布時，有人說為什麼不是gov結尾，這是因為我們現在還沒有拿到GCA憑證，等拿到憑證後，就會變成有gov結尾的網站。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果大家去這一個網站的話，會看到有一區是徵求大家的意見，第一個徵求大家意見是「資訊服務納入Open API標準之建議」。這個可以當作辦公室對貴基金會－我好不習慣這樣講－一個正式的回應，在這裡面因為大部分參與這個實際法制作業的是葉寧參事，他會有一些補充，我從大原則來講一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們在考量到這一件事，不應該是區分最低標、有利標或者是準用最優利標的精神，訂不同的條款，這一件事毋寧變成在一個指導性的規範，機關不管是在做評審標準，不管用最有利標或者是準用最有利標的評審標準，變成是盲人可讀的精神去把它變成一個要件。這一個要件並不是一下子就要做到全滿，事實上機關網站很少第一次第一版WCAG盲人可讀做到全滿。我們可以說至少有兩家廠商，一家有提的做得比較好，得予以加減分；另外一個設計出來的東西，一開始沒有開放格式，而且未來顯然也沒有開放格式可能性的話，我們在評審的時候應當予以減分。所以，在最底下的採購配套是關於你剛剛所講的對於採購法修正的部分，這個已經向吳宏謀老師提出，他們已經責成他們的朋友去進行調整，這一個部分我不知道純粹以採購配套有沒有什麼想進一步討論的？" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "你覺得你這樣可以接受嗎？就是聽起來Open Source標準有一點困難，因為11月有一點趕。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是Open Format。那Open Source其實在前一版的資服採購範本已經有處理了，在裡面有一個備註，以前在取得的時候，你跟廠商的智慧財產權歸屬會不明，就是雙方自行約定，現在至少我們有一個在資訊服務採購範本裡面有第五點的附註，如果沒有任何專門為你這個機關量身打造的情況，而是這個廠商看起來是拿一個已經可得的東西，且是有適用於其他機關可能性的時候，我們建議勾選由廠商拋棄姓名權，並且再容機關授權，雖然沒有把Open Source放進去，但是已經達到目的，這個是我這一次專門處理格式，而不處理智慧財產權的原因。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "我直接回覆。資服範本我有看過，也有給過一些意見，以第五點的修正還沒有辦法納入全部的Open Source，因為我們在這一個領域很多年，可以分「可以 relicense」跟「不可以 relicense」，BSD是相容的，copyleft不相容。我有建議， 當然這個是比較好處理，所以應該是說，我的瞭解是，因為10月這一個母法已經抵定了，不好動，但是以後一些實際上操作的另外一些標準是可以再商議的；我覺得可以接受，但是希望儘量努力。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "從法律觀點來看，法律是有位階的，命令不能牴觸法律，法律不能牴觸憲法，但是我們要適用的話，是反過來的，我們是適用所謂的行政命令，再看法律再看憲法（因為憲法抽象），所以政府資訊採購法有公開的標準及尊重的原則，但是被訂為一個抽象的行而上，所以很多政府機關在實際執行的時候，只是按照採購範本來處理，並不會考量到那個，嚴格來說是直接迴避了那個。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "我的建議是在最有利標把開放格式放進去，所有的部採購時，都要過這一關，像唐政委認為把Open API進去做加減分的動作，認為會是有幫助的，但未來希望慢慢把它變成法律的default。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所謂的「相同方式分享（copyleft）」是指「一種特定的方式，如果用這個方式授權你使用的話，你再改的時候也必須用相同方式給別人」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "誠夏的意思是說，我們之前的資服採購範本裡面，其實跟相同方式分享式授權，按照預設勾的那幾項，其實是不相容的，預設唯一相容的方式是我們叫做「寬鬆式的（permissive ）」，你改了之後，你可以決定，機關不再給人家使用，但機關也可以決定改的時候，用更嚴苛的標準讓人家使用，也可以改為用相同方式，要不要用相同方式，寬、鬆或者是更窄完全是由機關決定，這是目前資服採購的精神。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個範本未來一定有修正的空間，只是當我們把相同方式分享放進去之後，也會改變資服業者的生態，衡諸包含南美洲，或者是把這一些東西納入範本的國家來看，其實必須要對資服業者有充分的教育，才能夠做到這一步，並不是我們這一個月就做的事情。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "也跟唐政委報告一下，就我三年來其實資服業者是拿copyleft的解決方式來做政府服務，其實是既定狀態，採購範本也沒有辦法勾選，實際上也會造成契約上的時間有落差。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個完全同意。我們這裡可以講更多的技術細節，很多人改的時候是直接說伺服器裡面可以運行的軟體可以用相同的方式分享，但是並沒有規定伺服器的使用者在瀏覽器端必須要能夠取得程式碼，所以在這樣的情況下，並沒有違反那個資服範本精神，如果租用雲端服務的話，本來就沒有取得程式碼，更遑論重新採用。如果連瀏覽器端都要相同方式的Afferos模式，在我的理解在政府採購裡極少數，我還沒有看過哪個機關官網是用AGPL改的。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "CKAN所有的分流，但不管是台北市的「data.taipei」或者是台南市的，基本上我所了解的都是用CKAN改的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "除了CKAN之外還有沒有別的？" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "沒有，主要國內用是CKAN。其他是小的plug-in。其實CKAN使用者比率滿多的，是AGPL3，但不是主要的程式架構；如果繼續討論這個…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，就不用討論別的了。我們綜整一下，以相同方式分享的授權在目前的資訊服務裡面是實際的狀態，但是我們也理解到真正會造成問題的「瀏覽端相同方式分享」是個案，這個已經用個案的方式解決了。要不要在採購法裡面處理，是下一個階段再來討論。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "我想是這樣子－如果柏鋒有不同的意見可以提出來－因為我個人長期在公部門服務，我大概知道像大船入港，如果10月已經說母法已經差不多底定了，我的期望是我們可不可以儘量朝這個方向，至少未來在實際上採購的時候，有一個機制像唐政委所講的，開放標準、開放格式有一個加項或者是減項，這個在現階段稍可接受，後續母法再朝那個方向、趨勢走，國際趨勢往這個方向走，我們可以儘量走。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一些我都完全同意。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "評鑑上讓加、減分做出來的話，現階段是可以接受的。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "假設目前做不到沒有關係，下一步要做的話，有沒有建議下一步要找哪一個窗口或者是單位？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有。我們在討論這一個案子的時候，除了葉參事幫忙在法律調整之外，我們特別把機器驗證帶進來，我們知道無障礙之所以在公部門推行還不錯，是因為有一套機器驗證機制；當然大家都剖有微詞，但他們已經在修改了，可能要升級到WCAG 2.0。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我的意思是如果我們可以參照無障礙的做法，可以把開放格式、開放API，即使是地方政府不用額外的人力檢證，而是把測試站跑出來是幾分，就換算成加減分，這個對地方政府來講是特別容易的。中央部門當然有專門的人在加減分裡面按照這一個機器跑出來細節再檢核，看是不是有一個開放的格式，實際上點進去跟網頁上長得不太一樣，那個就需要人力了，不太可能要求地方政府每一案都這樣做，這樣負擔太大；我想說至少推機器驗證是一個標準，但是也有人力檢證加減分的空間。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "我們假設要繼續推廣在政府有利標採用這個精神的話，不管是契約方面或者是施行細則，我們應該再找工程會比較好或者是有什麼建議？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個東西還是回到法規，就是法本身。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "看要訂在契約或者是法規？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "葉參事的意思還是會動法規，對不對？" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "我報告一下，我們原來的程序跟你們一樣，一定要在法裡面要有一個根據，基本上有幾個層次，第一個是母法，第二個是母法授權出來的法規命令，第三個是契約。我們不會認為是要記明法，甚至是第56條技術品質還要適應各採購的型態。再者，母法有最大的問題是要經過立法院，那個路非常漫長，而且不太有效率，所以我們在想的是法規命令，只要不牴觸母法，與法律同一效力，其實是最簡便的，所以我們跟工程會溝通的時候，其實是想到施行細則，工程會是採購法的專家，他們也提了一個很好的建議，也就是放在「政府機關採購資訊服務評選暨計費辦法」裡面，這同樣也是母法授權，這樣就OK了，如果這個通過的話，當然全國各機關都要遵守，他們也建議去調契約範本裡面的評審項目，如果這樣的話，包括在執行面或者是法規面都會有根據。" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "目前我們的建議是兩個層次，一個是符合國發會所訂的公務機關規範標準，另外一方面是要求必須透過國發會指定驗證機構才算通過，如果這樣能夠順利通過的話，在法制上面會有很穩固的基礎，這個會經過公開徵詢意見的程序。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "公開諮詢的流程如這一份文件，看完請放在桌上，因為還是草案。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "補充葉參事的講法，如果這個辦法要修正，在院裡面的想法是要經過公開討論期，我們也認為至少要有六十天，因為這個畢竟改變了資訊服務，而且包含外界貿易等等的東西，這個是適用於早期WTO締約國或者是後來TPP，都希望有六十天討論期的概念。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們目前的建議是這六十天的討論期可以集中在「眾開講」的平台進行，也許這一個案子就會直接建議工程會把我們想要改的辦法、改變理由，還有包括今天的會議紀錄全部都丟到「眾開講」上面，請各界來提供意見。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣你自然會認識窗口是誰，他會來回你（笑），也會認識到別的利益相關者。很誠實來說，資服業者在別的地方也聽到別的聲音，所以希望大家在相對公開的地方吵個六十天（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "我們可以公開，但是他們也要公開他們的，公平。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，大家都在上面攤開討論了六十天，如果大家覺得可行了，我相信工程會可以比較說服實際執行機關要點的修正，不會是這邊一壓下去，七天就過了，這雖然容易，首先這不是我執行事情的方法，第二個是之後反彈會更嚴重，希望各位了解。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "是工程會跟「眾開講」？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。就工程會做為「眾開講」的提案單位，應該這樣講。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "因為現在政府單位比較聰明，他們會跟廠商要 Source Code，我們就接到廠商的諮詢，詢問說，是不是有可能不要提供政府放原始碼，我只是提一下而已，這個要解決，不然他們還是會規避。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不過因為你們這一次討論的建言其實是講開放標準、開放格式，所以原始碼跟智慧財產權的部分，未來再討論會比較好。這個就這樣？" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "這個議題我再補充一下，一樣會放在「眾開講」討論？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "我個人的期待是，未來入法或者是入到行政命令，我會期待open format、 open standard，因為我看到國際修改的趨勢是把這個名詞訂進去，好處在於這個是國際性的，可以流通，當然內容不一定，應該是說英國在講open format跟西班牙open format其實另外還有訂，但如果訂了國際的字彙，至少我們之後可以比較好改正、處理。我今天比較擔心的是我們立了一個比較抽象或者是符合我們習慣用的字，怎麼解讀就變成臺灣或者是中華民國獨特的解釋，這個不樂見的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「Open API」是我們的簡稱，全稱是「共通性資料存取應用程式介面」，剛才誠夏說的意思是不管怎麼詮釋，「機器可讀」、「格式開放」、「介面索引」跟「機器可寫」，因為沒有什麼ISO在定義這些字，所以可能被洗掉；像「格式開放」四個字，也許開放的定義沒有很明確定義。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是我這邊想要講的是，目前採購法辦法的修正方向裡面，都是是國發會於幾年幾月頒訂什麼，我如果沒有記錯是把open definition寫進裡面，然後裡面有open format，因為那個東西也有改進，我記得第一版進去的時候，還沒有說兩個以上的自由軟體可以打開，但現在那一版2.0有了，所以我們在制定的時候必須要做快照的動作，以目前的版本，2.0就2.0。那OpenAPI標準如果3.0及時制定出來就3.0，3.0還沒有出來就是用現在的2.0，以那個定義翻成中文來做定義我們的定義，我們理解到這一些國際標準還在更新，我們滾動式檢討，下一次來的時候，如果新的更好，再把標準翻回中文再放回到辦法裡，是這個意思嗎？" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "沒有問題，我個人期待儘量名字跟國際的是一樣的名字，這樣才可以滾動更新。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你現在講的是 Open API 名詞的獨特性？或者是哪一個詞的獨特性？" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "未來在處理的時候，儘量把Open Format、Open Standard儘量帶進去，因為我現在看到英國跟西班牙法律都把這字帶進法律了，所以如果帶進所謂將來行政命令，它不會讓我們臺灣及國際發展的趨勢脫軌。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「開放格式」或「格式開放」國發會已經用Open Definition定義，這個是可以放進去的，但是開放標準這個東西，可能你要提供具體可以參照的東西；開放格式是沒有問題。" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "可不可以再補充一下？工程會跟我一樣是外行人，基本想法如政委所說的，直接refer to國發會所訂的東西，國發會所訂的東西相信一定是與國際規範接軌的，所以如果由工程會來寫的話，反而解釋權在工程會，如果refer to國發會定義的話，那就是在國發會那邊。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個規範具體上來說「共同性資料存取應用程式界面」跟「數位服務設計規範」還沒有出來，這兩個規範裡面如果能夠納入你剛剛所說的定義，那這樣未來就會自動使用。即使現在這一版還沒有納入；其實裡面也有像RESTful風格的東西，如果有未盡妥善之處是會改的，這個規範會改的，這個會跟修法脫鉤，如果這邊頒布的時候，若這邊有新版，那就是會用新版。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "這個會在「眾開講」討論的時候，也許我可以提供一些具體的資料。" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "我們希望用國發會的規範來替補法規命令的空白。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "英國那一個辦公室很早以前就已經發布Open standard的標準，這可以參照，如果國發會認為那樣的方式是好的，自己訂定Open standard的標準，當然工程會就會遵守，我瞭解的是這樣，之後的一些補充資料可以補。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "國發會資管處從陳添枝政委希望由我協助，等於從他手上變成我來幫忙，所以之後如果資管處有任何討論的話，我可以直接找資管處的潘處長。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "這個議題就結束了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "花了不少時間，希望對正在看「眾開講」看逐字稿的各位有幫助（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第二個議題要做簡短說明嗎？" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "非常簡短，就是源碼庫，我知道Open Source最重要的是Source Code可以提供的，這幾年的觀察，很多的資服業者已經用Open Source，裡面也有很多copyleft的性質來Open Source提供政府服務，但是這一些政府單位不一定有取得Source Code，第二點是取得Source Code以後，也不一定能夠做政府之間的交流，所以我們建議是不是能夠起個頭來討論，或者是讓所謂的中央政府、地方政府願意來作籌劃，可以這一個為開端，以後政府採購的Open Source裡面，至少政府與民間是可以可以溝通訊息、分享經驗及資訊。如CKAN是AGPL3授權，就算放在網路服務上只要修改原來的架構，Source Code是要提供出來的。我們知道台北到台南很清楚是用CCan，但是我相信地方政府之間並沒有程式碼的分享，所以我們提的是，如果要讓Open Source的使用在公務機關進入常軌的話，這一件事的話要處理，不知道會從哪一個角度來處理。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "當然這裡有一些政策的出處，最近美國白宮辦公室資訊長簽的一個辦法，大概是聯邦政府以後的軟體會有25％是Open Source，會有網站來分享，所有的公民都可以審閱跟提報。保加利亞最近修改的法案裡面，明訂只要是做公共服務的話，必須要優先使用Open Source，如果不使用要釋明理由。非常多的相關資訊，我想這個跟直接修法沒有什麼相關，是不是公部門現在應該要有概念來進行討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "具體回答你的問題：其實我看了這個「聯邦程式碼」的政策，這個政策裡面其實是一個非常願者上鉤式的寫法，雖然有框訂20％—當然正當理由排除之外—當你把這個東西發布出去之後，並沒有責成機關去推行，也沒有告訴機關說當你採購時，有別的機關發布，你應該要先用它的，而不去往外採購，也沒有說這個機關如果用起來想要改的，哪一個機關有錄影教學或者督導之責任，全部都沒有寫，所以在我看起來比較像是宣示性的東西，並不是採購流程因此有重大改變。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果要說採購流程重大改革，這個還比不上英國採購規範裡面說都要經過採購評估程序，確保真的沒有買到人家已經寫好的東西的內部監督程序。你所引用的，在我看來是宣示性的意義大過實際的意義。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "其實這一個議題跟法律、命令都沒有關，只是我在想可以討論的事情，所以我一直在講「業界知識分享」，在政府機關剛好對於Open Source的採購有所謂的management intelligence，所以我覺得這一個階段如果可以透過一個政策宣示或者是某一個管考單位來做示範例，我覺得對於國內推動是好的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以只是表示做得到，並不是一下子就壓下去，因為不然誰也不知道怎麼做。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "對，這個提案裡面從來沒有說要依法或者是依序要做這一件事，但是這個其實是目前正在發展的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "瞭解。我具體整理你訴求的意思是，需要一個共享的平台，這個平台最好是「gov.tw」結尾的網域，在這一個網域上面，我們容許公務機關（中央、地方），把建置好的取得開放源碼授權的系統在這上面公布，公布之後別人要採用就來採用，是到這個程度嗎？" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "一定要在gov嗎？用現成的不行嗎？" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "也可以。我的意思是說像美國白宮的做法，他們的網站是宣示，有條列，但是他的repository其他的放GitHub是沒有問題的，早期有一些open source跟open data的工具模組是放GitHub，我個人認為宣示的意義是滿重要的，主要讓公務機關瞭解可以、同意做這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "就是說 gov 網站有 official announcement，但實際放哪裡不用管它？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為GitHub從他們來講是國內的公司（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "這個在提案裡面沒有做這樣的判斷，所以滿建議政府機關用最自己認為最合法、適當的方式來處理，只是要有這樣的進步。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好，花5分鐘具體回答。我們現在在院裡面，相信各位已經發現我們自己架了Sandstorm這一套系統，這套系統的特色是把我們開放源碼慣用的系統，不管是EtherCalc等，這一些都是耳熟能詳的東西，把這一些在開放源碼界大家都會使用的一些東西打包成「SPK」的檔案，這一個檔案格式就像是Android的APK，一個網路包含後端執行程式全部整套檔案系統全部打包起來，打包起來之後是在一個容器裡面進行執行，然後根據裡面每一份文件打開一個容器，所以在資安的角度上，這個是比較好的，因為打破了一個容器，也看不到旁邊另外一個頁面內容，所以有「禁用性」跟「安全性」這兩個考量。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為我們在院內自己架設這樣的一套系統，我們在上次黑客松大松的提案：任何mail位置後面是「gov.tw」的人可以直接申請這個系統上的帳號，上來之後就可以看到我們是怎麼使用像源碼儲存系統等。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我要講的是，鼓勵公務機關使用、採用不只是開源軟體，還有包含開放程序。什麼是開放程序？好比進行一場災害演習的時候，從哪裡蒐集到資訊、蒐集到哪一些資料夾，透過彙整的管道給民眾，然後他們內部再做什麼樣的公務流程控管，我覺得這一種程序並不遜於程式碼，而是要在充分被記錄且在軟體裡面被記錄下來，如果願意的話，可以按「Share access」給民間朋友，但是民間朋友只能共同編輯這一份文件跟原始碼的程式庫。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "只有這樣的話，宣示效果才能比美國大，因為美國的宣示效果只是讓看得懂原始碼的入，知道每一個機關正在做哪一些系統，但是這一些人是極少數。我想用這樣的方式，讓他們不只能夠分享原始碼，大部分朋友一開始分享的一定是共筆，或者是像這一種看板，或者是一些共同編輯的畫面，或者是一些聊天室系統，大家習慣分享這一種系統給沒有程式開發能力的朋友，大家才會更知道公務機關之間彼此能重複利用流程，原始碼只不過這裡面非常小的一部分，不過原始碼本來是公務機關非常小的一部分，這個避免過分突顯原始碼的重要性，而把這個重要性還原到過程當中。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我同意這一個共享平台，好比像國發會的雲端中心所認證，告訴所有人說這一個資安上是沒有問題的，應該要發一個憑證告訴大家說在這上面，基本上資安跟用正規採購法採購程序過來的系統在資安上是平起平坐的，我覺得能夠做到這邊開放源碼的創新，能夠打包成「SPK」檔案，可以藉這一個方式，不經過採購程序，而是任何一個公務機關可以使用的話，可以直接利用，這個是另外一套做法。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "這個做法沒有意見。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以源碼就是一個子部分。這邊沒有意見嗎？沒有人要補充？" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家非常快速（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們接著進入數位政府諮詢列表，這個跟採購的專家想必是不同的東西，要不要解釋一下？" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "我先說一下，這個是高嘉良有提案，他剛好有事沒有辦法來，我講的沒有那麼到位，就我的理解先作一些陳述。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "政府本來有政務官跟事務官的體制，事務官代表一個穩定的專業執行力量，政務官代表可以帶進很多不同局勢跟新趨勢的想法。所謂的資訊服務或者是政府資訊結構，這幾年這麼劇烈變更，我的理解是，他們其實有類似這樣的處理，原來一個資訊處理人員可能需要從民間借調一些人才，直接做新趨勢的沿革及變遷，等一下還有人要補充的話，我覺得會很好，你就是身歷其境；等一下也希望柏鋒可以補充。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "不管看到美國或者是英國，他們慢慢有一個比較制式的做法，因為它本來就不是政府正常體制的流程，但是慢慢導成一個流程，我想開放文化會想要知道的，是不是知道這一個部分在民間公益財團法人可以協力的地方？也就是如何協助政府把這一件事做得更常規、更穩定化？因為我們看到時代趨勢就是必須要有這樣的趨勢，唐政委也是類似這樣的狀況，因為你在數位方面的長才，直接用政務官的體制進來，但是目畢竟政委這一個層級的缺是比較少的，還是需要有更多的缺、有實際做事的人來做這樣的調整，因此這個部分想說，我想今天有行政院科技部會辦公室與會，他們對於政府的體制如何調整也非常有經驗，這個部分是不是未來把它正規化、常規化，而儘量減少爭議，讓它可以運作，這個是我們今天想要討論的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個跟科技會報辦公室直接相關，我先講我的理解，要請主任幫忙補充。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以我的理解，剛才提到在數位國家創新經濟發展方案裡面，也就是下一個月會差不多完成到一個程度的方案裡面，其實是特別有把美國「18F」跟英國的「GDS」特別挑出來說我們希望運用公民科技，深化所謂4P的協作機制，建立運用民間專業人士，協助政府進行數位資訊服務改革之機制。這個機制目前研擬的做法有兩個，一個是數位國家創新經濟小組裡面，也許我在裡面也是負責協調的一個角色，我們會有一個「民間諮詢委員會」，我不確定，大概三十至五十人吧！這個委員會裡面會分成「基礎建設」、「數位國家」、「數位經濟」不同的組，會有系統引進民間對這三個分組感興趣的朋友們進來實際跟我們做目標上面的設定，所以我們可以發現說這一個叫做「DIGI+」的小組範圍已經比之前NICI（國家資訊通信發展推動小組）來得廣一點，架構是以前的NICI，現在加上了關於數位經濟、數位人才，關於剛剛創新數位協作機制的東西。當然我們還是要執行落到部會，不管是國發會或者是通傳會都已經開始規劃如何具體落實政策的方法。一方面是在部會裡面，有一些部會已經願意來實驗，另外一部分是在推動小組有民間諮詢委員會，可以有一個名單讓我們至少知道要問哪一些人，會比較有結果。不知道會報有沒有要補充的？" }, { "speaker": "柴惠珍", "speech": "這一個架構原來在「數位國家創新經濟發展方案」裡面，好像原來想排定在10月17日跟院會報告，那時有諮詢的架構，當時有一個很大的點，也就是希望把民間這一些人員，不管是本期或者是短期，可以進來幫政府做短期幫忙或者是長期的顧問工作，這一些還在研擬當中，只要報院會決定通過之後，可能就會有比較詳細的細則。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "現在還是後天？" }, { "speaker": "柴惠珍", "speech": "不好意思，我早上才剛回國，我看到本辦公室同仁在mail中提到原來是10月27日，後來沒有排進去，所以有可能會到11月初。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可能3日或者是10日。因為我們院會也一個進程的，沒有排到的話，就要到下一個禮拜了。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "我們的理解是這個辦法跟規劃是經過院會討論後比較能夠公開？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是的，在此之前方向可能會改變。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "現在的階段是有內部的初議跟討論，之後有機會讓大家提供意見？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然！當然！" }, { "speaker": "柴惠珍", "speech": "大家都知道數位方案裡面有幾個主軸，其中有一個是如何利用公民科技，請很多民間的這一些專家可以進來共創經濟，大家來思考所有的事情。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "對實際如何吸納、篩選進來的條文，有什麼意見嗎？" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "我當然會有很多想法，只是現在的狀況是行政院會內部討論，如果現在全部提出意見的話，是不是不一定適宜？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "它要有一點宣示性，好比「群眾外包」變成「國家政策」的宣示意思。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在這個宣示的東西出來之前，我們當然可以先處理一些細節性的東西，但是總要院會各部會都聽過這一套，而且知道有這一件事存在，才可以公開徵求意見。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "所以等通過之後再來討論嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，當然。這一個方向我們都是同意的，當初在擬的時候，「公民科技人才輩出」有列在SWOT分析裡（笑），我覺得這一個大方向沒有任何人反對。" }, { "speaker": "彭盛韶", "speech": "我只是想問像這樣的委員會是掛在哪一個架構下？" }, { "speaker": "柴惠珍", "speech": "行政院下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為之前NICI的行政工作也是科技會報支援。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "地方政府也需要。" }, { "speaker": "柴惠珍", "speech": "對。這一次主要是覺得中央跟地方其實很多東西都應該要有共同的協調，以前中央都滿強的，地方政府也不能講比較弱一點，我覺得互相的溝通是很重要的。像現在幾大建設還是以地方為主，希望中央的經驗能夠讓地方學習、溝通，比較知道地方需要什麼東西。所以在工業局下設立跟地方溝通之辦公室，也辦了好幾場5＋2政策的溝通會議，激盪中央與地方共同思考方向及作法。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "這一些人才你們希望無給職或者是兼職？你們會希望怎麼樣的方式？是無給職的顧問嗎？" }, { "speaker": "柴惠珍", "speech": "我想天下沒有白吃的午餐。應該是會給的，有一些是比較常態的，現在目前很多是出席會議有出席費，有一些是比較固定的顧問或專家，那是月薪。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "所以有打算一起解決這個問題？" }, { "speaker": "柴惠珍", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "我們比擔心顧問沒問題，顧問大家都願意幫忙—像我還好—但是有些人還是需要一些基本的生活，如果能夠幫他們一起解決的話會比較好，如果有的話是比較好；像小彭或者是以前他們進去都很複雜，就是雙層外包再進去。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "我自己接觸到，因為我之前在中央研究院服務，總員額法控管很嚴密，這會牽涉到員額，我不知道這個配套是什麼，但是現在還在聽起來是討論階段。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "如果方向願意解決就可以再討論，如果又像以前顧問職的話，也不錯，有總比沒有好，但是效用會比較小一點，因為畢竟滿多人需要養家活口的。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "我們提出來的狀況是，觀察國際的做法，目前真的是要找做事的人進來，並不是要找給意見的人進來，因為大家都會給意見，因此意見如何實踐是要有人來做事。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "我們也擔心是不是開了一個漏洞，臺灣關說也滿盛行的，所以我們也不希望開一個漏洞，怎麼樣在合情、合法的情況下來做，開了漏洞之後，大老闆換了後帶一批人進來，我覺得這樣也不好。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "我們聽到的是，不知道行政院院會什麼時候會討論，至少已經列入排程，討論之後有相關配套的內容可以再分享，再予公眾進行協助？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是的。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "這個沒有問題，就看行政院現在規劃主要怎麼樣，我們之後再來提供。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你剛剛提到地方，那個比較像組織改造的議題，這個不是院級可以處理的，在這一個方案可以處理的是部會層次，怎麼樣有類似剛剛講的協同工作者的做法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是在地方這邊，我想特別講的是，地方配合的程度跟接軌的程度，大家其實很清楚原因，是只有一個地方是有一級的資訊單位，也就是台北市，其他的話要先過市長、副市長、研考會，才可以碰到資訊中心的朋友。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然我們理解到台中市現在蕭景燈老師接了數位治理局，理論上「資訊長」會是一級人員。以我所知，其他縣市也有要循這個方式出現，不管叫數位治理長或資訊長或資料長。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "等到別的縣市採用這個模式出現的時候，我們在中央才比較有可能來規劃人員或程序如何在縣市跟中央間調度、協作。現在大部分的縣市，其實沒有一個主要對口的情況下，我覺得我們在中央只能在碰得到的地方做，這個也是實際的狀況，跟大家做一下期待管理。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "會提到這個原因是，我們那時候是找何建明老師，我們問如果學 Code for America Fellowship 要怎麼做，他就建議在中央列一個清單，地方政府看到你們敢做就會跟著做，我只是提一下就對了。我知道地方自治，所以不能管他們，所以就提一下，我會提這個原因是何老師說中央做，他們就敢做，所以跟大家報告。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實啊！所以我們就是在中央儘量做。" }, { "speaker": "柴惠珍", "speech": "提供一個建議給大家參考。我們這一次去美國，有參訪他們的NIST，他們就說是「智慧城市」，幾乎所有的城市都在做智慧城市，但是事實上很參差不齊的，數位人力不足，他們也不知道要怎麼做。因此NIST現在做的是想要做一個架構，只要談到「智慧城市」或者是「智慧交通」，而交通基本的框架怎麼樣，把它做出來之後，很多的城市就可以開始來做。" }, { "speaker": "柴惠珍", "speech": "我覺得像以我們之前在規劃的，也就是像我們的智慧城市原來希望每一個城市就他們想要的城市治理方式先選擇某一些比較好的，比如有哪幾個地方對於交通的部分覺得很不錯，有一些人可能開始環保的空污開始做起，做完後變成一個典範，也讓其他的城市、鄉鎮參考，其實就是慢慢的，我們想要做這樣中央跟地方間的溝通，除了5＋2之外，還有智慧城市這部分的溝通，慢慢就可以把一些城市帶上來，我們的很多資源也不要重複浪費掉，有這樣子的構想。" }, { "speaker": "彭盛韶", "speech": "剛剛的總員額管制其實是一個問題，我覺得地方政府被這個限制得更深，其實中央很習慣突然冒出一個專案辦公室，雖然有彈性，但是地方其實不太會用這個方式，一冒出來就說是黑機關跟政治操作；另外一方面，如果這個人員不是全職在這邊，因為我覺得全職來說，政府的約聘僱的薪資跟資訊人員原來的落差，實在是太大了。但是如果不是兼職的話，有沒有這樣的規定可以允許用兼職的方式進來政府工作，我不知道有沒有有，要就進來不管，我也不管薪資。因為像王景弘最近跟地方政府合作，但是的確要面對薪資的問題，因此不管是總員額管制或者是薪資這一塊，我不曉得這樣子的討論，也許之後要討論到這一塊。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "之前這個議題已經討論很多年了。最近一次，是從台北市資訊局長開始規劃專案辦公室時就在討論了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實像法國來的那位副市長Bassem Asseh一面當Nantes的副市長，一面在GitHub工作，而GitHub給他很多錢，他還是維持相當好的生活水準，目前台灣哪一個副市長能這樣做？這並不是遠距上班那麼簡單的（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "可以兼職嗎？我可以在政府當兼職嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不可能，原則上只能做教學的工作，而且還不能超過一定上限，所以沒有可能性。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "顧問的方式？比如約聘一年？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "只要是公務員，目前以公務員服務法，這些都不太可能。" }, { "speaker": "彭盛韶", "speech": "以台北市府來說，一個是有給職顧問，就是所有的時間；無給職的顧問，就是開會來，沒有中間的空間。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "雖然想要解決，但是是很大的問題。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "這真的是很大的問題。我分享在中央研究院的經驗，其實很多自我設限跟內部的解釋，中研院認為只要中研院的約聘僱有保勞健保就佔缺了，如果用12000元聘一個兼任律師，而他有保勞健保就佔缺了。總員額管制的落實跟現實狀況的落差是超乎想像的，所以我滿期待的是，是不是有一個真正的配套？中央可以先做一個示範，地方政府基於地方制度法有人事自治權，如果中央運作沒有問題的話，我想地方政府也願意來做處理。" }, { "speaker": "彭盛韶", "speech": "人事制度是在地方制度法下面嗎？我以為人事的控管是一條鞭。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這還是要由銓敘部、人事總處來發動。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "對，沒錯。我的意思是，向來我瞭解，中央單位不會直接要求地方政府照他來處理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個是要從人事法規來改的。" }, { "speaker": "彭盛韶", "speech": "對，不然會自我審查。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "現在的框架下，有沒有辦法採購一年的顧問約嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "很少這樣子做。" }, { "speaker": "彭盛韶", "speech": "除非要變成計畫。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果要變計畫，而那個計畫裡面是提供資訊服務，然後又不限制工作地點、工作時數，然後是以責任制的態度來交付，接下來這個計畫出去之後，再把他借調到這個地方一起做事的 fellow，事實上以前王景弘在這個地方就是這樣做的，就是所謂的雙重借調模式。這個很難在地方操作，在中央的操作也會被媒體放大檢視。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "也不是好的方式？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "所以看起來很難？" }, { "speaker": "彭盛韶", "speech": "如果能夠擋得過政治的子彈（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "不太可能。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果忽然之間每一個地方縣市跟部會都冒出 fellow（笑），就能把政治責任分擔掉，但就要約好，讓不同黨派及無黨籍縣市都要用同一套，才有可能擋得住。" }, { "speaker": "彭盛韶", "speech": "或者這個計畫討論的時候，就把地方政府納進來，然後大家一起討論，我有一個共識，我試著編一批人，大家散落一起前進，地方政府也有，各個縣市不分顏色的都有，中央各部會有，大家即便一個程度上同時提升，我覺得比較不會有各自冒出來，然後被地方議員抨擊的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "雖然有一點難，但目前看起來這是政治上風險最低的做法。任何其他的做法，先做的人都有政治風險。就是這樣子，實情是如此。" }, { "speaker": "林誠夏", "speech": "我建議儘量朝這個方向，但是實際上還是要看院會通過的規則來討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然，大家還有要補充嗎？我們其實差不多了，建言主題四是非常技術性的問題。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "對，我本來想要把時間留給他們，時間很快（笑）。這個很技術，但是的確遇到困難，反正我們想要自己玩玩看電子化政府的問題，第一個就卡在自然人憑證，我們去研究自然人憑證為什麼只能在Windows平台使用，我們發現中華電信前面有四個APDU被鎖住，一定要用自訂的 command 去初始化之後才能操作，我們以前跟國發會等都有講過，但是我覺得中華電信沒有講得很清楚，所以我只是想說是不是我們要再回去跟國發會他們講清楚或者是有什麼方法可以push？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你們之前跟哪一位？資管處潘處長嗎？或者是潘處長之前？" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "我們有跟內政部談過，但是事實上最後有轉到國發會資管處楊蘭堯科長，因為官方憑證最上層的法規跟標準訂定是國發會資管處訂定的，承辦是國發會楊蘭堯科長處理，我們有跟他講，但是就停在那一步，沒有下一步解釋。他們有來解釋，但是解釋說他們就是這樣。我自己很訝異臺灣自然人憑證整個都被鎖住，而且還被中華電信鎖住，因為我們如果沒有透過他的API的話—我們這是側錄出來才能存取—其實是要透過他的API，他有一個DLL檔，要有才能往下，我自己很訝異，我就卡關，我不曉得下一步要怎麼辦，我們繼續再找國發會討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我先詢問一下，如果在露天拍賣上面，你們有提供連結，有一位黃先生顯然是透過逆向工程方法，已經成功在Linux、Windows上使用自然人憑證，你們有沒有聯絡到這一位黃先生？" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "沒有去聯絡，但是有聯絡到另一個側錄的朋友，他說那個很簡單，就是前面四道程序以後，後面就跟標準程序一樣，這個問題我們找何老師，何老師有介紹台大的教授，反正我們發現就這四道程序被鎖住，因此我們短期的訴求是中華電信應該要釋出這四道專屬 APDU command 是什麼意思？這個是國家基礎建設，為什麼要用專屬很奇怪的東西鎖住，我不太能夠接受；如果不釋出沒有關係，就公開講不釋出，我們跟大家講說你有做這一件事，沒有關係，就讓社會公評，我希望讓中華電信釋出，讓大家開發，這個是短期的目標。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "長期目標是減少自然人憑證卡片的問題，最終是希望臺灣在網路上身份辯識的基礎建設，不要被鎖在這個硬體上，昨天劉康民（gugod）也有提荷蘭的例子。所以是不是用網站來做身份認證，而不是鎖在硬體上，不過這個是另外一個議題，目前短期的目標是中華電信是不是可以釋出 (APDU 的規格)。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "很快綜整一下，你希望資管處的這一位科長再聯絡一次中華電信，希望他們做出充分揭露，揭露有兩種可能性：一個是仍然希望他們專屬的格式或者是命令來存取，但是至少揭露這一個的原因，或者是他揭露這一個用標準格式、公開格式要如何存取的說明，讓任何不特定第三人都可以在任何作業系統上進行接取，這兩種結果都是比現在好的，按照你剛剛所講的。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "第一，他們要講自訂的command參數是怎麼樣，因為一定有很多參數，這一些參數是如何操作，為何那四道就可以開始初始化，至少告訴我們要如何操作，我們現在是用側錄去猜那個command，他要去解釋這四個。第二，為什麼用這個鎖住，大家想也知道為什麼，他也不用解釋，希望以後如果他們招標的話，不可以用這個，他號稱是符合標準，但是這個標準裡面是自訂格式，每一次都講合標準，我不太接受這一個事，我的希望是國發會在招標的話，不可以採用這一種自訂格式。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "目前的狀況是，在開源的作業系統裡面，你仍然讀得到，只是不能用標準工具讀到。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "對，我就是要自己開發，而且前面要有四道程序才能做。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是。這個其實有一點像驅動程式的概念，你要專門針對中電信的開發方來做一個驅動程式，你剛剛的主要訴求是一個你要特定的驅動程式就算了，但是跟我們解釋為什麼，或者是你釋出一個標準的驅動程式，這個符合國際標準，也讓大家可以使用；這不是在這一年度或者是下一次招標的時候。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "不是。如果是短期內的話要告訴我們如何操作，長期是不能用這一個專屬的格式。因為一個簽證裡面都有讀取都有標準的command，不用前面這四道卡住，不可以，如何措詞我們可以跟國發會討論，以後新的卡片不可以，我覺得不可以，當然我們可以去「眾開講」討論。" }, { "speaker": "彭盛韶", "speech": "還有建議用網站認證。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "我們等一下可以講，我完全不贊成自然人憑證的方法，但是要先解決現在的問題，我們國家已經被自然人憑證綁住了，我們要往前進。" }, { "speaker": "彭盛韶", "speech": "資訊局李維斌局長一直在講這一件事，他想要在議會批公文，但是沒有辦法。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "這個我們等一下可以講，如果還有時間的話。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我這邊具體的承諾，因為我也是上個禮拜才從陳添枝老師那邊知道現在資管處是由我協助，既然是我協助了，我至少能做的就是按照你所說的這一位科長，去瞭解一下之前跟中華電信溝通的現況。但是我沒有辦法承諾說中華電信能因為我而去做任何事，這個權責區分大家都知道。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "沒有關係。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那我們就不用特別提了（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實這邊列的訴求都已經討論完了，你有額外想講的？" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "其實我這幾年也才研究自然人憑證，我不知道其他國家，臺灣自然人憑證資料「私人鑰匙」是沒有辦法讀出來的，那就沒有辦法轉移，只能被綁住，現在都用手機了，難不成還要接讀卡機跟自然人憑證？這個是完全不合理的。好險有位朋友劉康民(gugod)，他說荷蘭並不是這樣，身份認證是去一個網站就可以認證了，認證以後就是等於這一個網站承認這個人做身份認證的動作，只是以前的身份認證是在卡片上面，我們現在有很多網站，很多網站就是跟他作開放式認證 (Oauth)，所以我不曉得李資訊局局長的想法怎麼樣？" }, { "speaker": "彭盛韶", "speech": "首先他很想要行動化，他認為信用卡認證手寫簽名也可以過，為什麼要用實體的卡片。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "而且自然人憑證很誇張，它不能取出私鑰，那麼就不能轉移到手機，我覺得這個很扯，因此我覺得有必要檢討，但是我很怕，他們已經推十幾年了，我怕他們會覺得這個是正確的，因此有必要檢討自然人憑證是不是唯一網路或者是公文的認證方式，其實我覺得好像不太合理。我不知道臺灣為什麼這樣設計，可能有他的理由，但是光是這樣，手機就沒有辦法，難道要接讀卡機嗎？" }, { "speaker": "彭盛韶", "speech": "新北很奇怪，公文系統很妙，可以在外面批，可是還是要回去插卡再全部解掉。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "私鑰是被鎖住的，可以做簽證的動作，但是私鑰是拿不出來的，我也是最近才知道，我不知道其他的國家，所以可能需要再問一下。" }, { "speaker": "張心玲", "speech": "我這邊稍微提供，為什麼會用自然人憑證其實是有歷史典故的，在十幾年前通過電子簽章法，那時國發會會擔任Root CA的角色，但是各有各個CA(憑證中心)，像內政部自然人憑證中心，就是自然人卡，這個是內政部在管，其他的有衛福部在管，經濟部有工商憑證。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "不同的卡片的標準還不一樣。" }, { "speaker": "張心玲", "speech": "各有各的標準。" }, { "speaker": "張心玲", "speech": "像剛剛柏鋒提到自然人憑證為什麼要用插卡或者是什麼的，像中華電信比較鼓吹的標準是GSMA所倡議的「Mobile connect」，這個是一個應用。這是在電信的聯盟底下，我們只要上網去，在底下登錄就可以連結到個人的電信帳戶、銀行帳戶等，一個動作可以完成個人的認證，之後在電腦上做一些電子交易就可以一路暢行無阻，就沒有自然人憑證插卡的問題，這個是GSMA。" }, { "speaker": "張心玲", "speech": "另外一個是FIDO（Fast Identity Online），這個是另外一個國際標準組織，這個標準使用生物辨識，如指紋或者是虹膜或者是臉部的辨識，從個人裝置(device)就可以通過身份認證。我們在FIDO年會回來之後有找金管會討論，我們想到的另外一個做法是，在銀行公會那邊是不是可以在裝置的界面上把認證的東西放進去，所以我們用身上、隨手的mobile，就完成認證了，就可以到CA做完整個身份的認證，這其實都有辦法可循的；其實柏鋒所講的，也沒有非得要用卡片讀卡機不可，以上所說，只是其中一個方法。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "GSMA 是不是 「自然人憑證雲端附卡」的計畫 (所使用的標準)？" }, { "speaker": "張心玲", "speech": "不確定所提是什麼。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "跟 「行動自然人憑證」的計畫相同嗎？" }, { "speaker": "張心玲", "speech": "我沒有研究過這一個計畫。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "我在猜應該是這一個，我回去再研究一下。" }, { "speaker": "張心玲", "speech": "像剛剛講中華電信長久以來是這樣的問題，就我們的認知是沒有錯的，他們有自己的數據分公司、有自己的行動分公司、有自己的電研所，他們可以做很多方面技術的整合開發跟應用，自己內部很複雜，我們看他們自己又更複雜。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "它複雜沒有關係，但是國家基礎建設，他們用這樣的小動作來綁住，我覺得是不好的事情，我覺得以後儘量不要有這一種事。" }, { "speaker": "彭盛韶", "speech": "在討論這一塊，是不是希望內政部一起？" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "這個是國發會的事情，內政部是自然人憑證，但是標準是國發會的，他們就refer來refer去，我也被refer來refer去。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "以前多卡合一的問題我也可以講一下，其實內政部一直想要把自然人憑證放進身分證裡面，其實這樣是不合理的事。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "你說一張卡片是不是可以允許多功能，像我講的例子，那個網站就是這樣，如果來存取我的資料，當然我要同意，那個部會也要同意，所以兩方都要同意，這個就解決這個問題，我還是覺得綁在這個硬體怪怪的。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "我還可以舉例，像銀行的卡片跟自然人憑證是類似的，但他們現在又改一個device。" }, { "speaker": "張心玲", "speech": "現在世界的趨勢不會是綁硬體的。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "對，但是我怕國發會訂出來還是按照以前的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我現在的感覺，我們在資訊安全上面，當然需要兩個因素才能認證，只是並沒有任何人說兩個因素中，其中一個因素一定要是一張塑膠卡片，這個是大家的共同認知。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是每個標準對於兩個因素裡面某一個因素，也就是跟自己相關的因素有很多權衡，像剛剛講的指紋，其實要冒用的可能性比較大；虹膜也許好一點，但是虹膜不能換，如果被複製的話，要換虹膜是做不到的。一個比較強的密碼跟可以廢止的卡片，確實是比較便宜、而且可以滿足那個因素的做法，我想這也是為什麼大家一開始都用這一個當作實體因素的原因。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以我自己的理解，不管是FIDO也好或者是Mobile Connect也好，如果要在我們這邊推行的話，尤其要超過一個部會推行的話，我們自己會需要一個現在叫做「My Data」，未來可能叫做別的名字的一種可攜式資料的架構。這個架構我很誠實說，國發會規劃了很久，本來是在第五階段電子化裡面，是那個計畫的一部分，但是在取得各個部會意見一致上，一直都有一些具體的困難，主要的原因是，這增加了大家的負擔，而並沒有明顯可見的好處。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "通常我以跟歐洲國家的經驗，他們都歐盟有了指令之後，他們在國內說現在歐盟有了指令，我們非做不可，所以來找了一個方法做，所以各大廠商忙著去布魯塞爾去做討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "臺灣的狀況並不是這樣子，以前國發會下指令或者是規範，其他部會未必會忙著非做不可，有時候這個規範就只及於國發會自己的網站。這個是實際的現實，我想各位都非常理解。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，我們能夠做的是，我們提高大家對這一件事的理解，至少像剛才提到的身分證與自然人憑證合一，先不要講別的部會，就是自然人憑證跟身分證憑證合一的這一件事，我們交付比較好的、品質比較高的公眾討論，可能不只是在「眾開講」上面寫東西，可能透過很多面對面審議的方法，這個方法因為不是我的直接業務主管—因為是內政部—但是我會提供內政部所有所需要的幫助。所有其他的例子，我覺得都要參考健保資料庫的經驗一樣，如果一下子全部被綁在很大的議題裡，雙方也會針鋒相對、告上法庭、纏訟多年（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "那是因為他們不理我們才會告。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "理解，理解。我對臺灣人權促進會的老師們都非常尊敬，沒有任何一點一滴不敬的意思。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我當然理解臺權會的操作方式，但這個也會變成後來我們在開協調會時的挑戰，因為同一張桌子上面變成原告、被告跟證人出席，我們要討論別的議題、達成共識，都會遇到一定程度的挑戰。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因此具體我個人希望對於這一些事，從爭議小的部分交給公眾討論，建立起有這一個共識的習慣之後，爭議大、且技術難度高的再一個個去挑戰，大是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "反正卡片已經發出去了，看如何讓大家用最簡單的方式開發出來，當然他公布了，還是不會有人開發，我必須很老實講，但這個是第一步。未來大家想要解決自然人憑證的話，至少質疑自然人憑證的這一個框架可以重新討論一下，大家可以蒐集各國的資料。我知道內政部一直很想把自然人憑證合到身分證裡。這有好、有壞，我相信臺權會反對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他們不是原則性反對，他們是認為不應獨厚特定標準，或讓民間無法自由決定是否加入存取，其實跟你的想法是一樣的。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "這個沒有解決，不要想下一步。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那也要請貴基金會協助。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "沒有，臺權會比較厲害。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "貴基金會跟楊科長有聯絡過？" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那請把你們具體幾年幾月聯絡告訴我，你們也有我的名片，我接下來再進行處理。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "不好意思再麻煩你。" }, { "speaker": "柴惠珍", "speech": "我們跟數位國家裡面，原來也有設定一個網路身份認證中心之建置，可以再討論細節，那個是原則上要做的東西，因為我覺得現在很多應用都是在手機上，卻要拿一個讀卡機存取，甚至我們之前也希望mail可以在外面用手機讀取，但當時資訊處叫我們要弄一個外接的讀卡機。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "我們現在就被鎖著，我也理解，但是那個是十幾年前的架構，那個是沒有手機的年代做出來的標準。" }, { "speaker": "柴惠珍", "speech": "我覺得那是數位國家方案可以再討論的。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "大家分頭研究一下知道各國的狀況，至少不要再被中華電信騙了（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "等一下。我想跟中華電信正在看逐字稿的朋友說：我理解政府雲端服務建置是非常困難的事，每一個機關跟單位都有完全不同的要求。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我滿高興有真的很懂這個的朋友，也就是前資管處長簡宏偉，現在在做資安方面的把關。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "之前是「隱私」跟「資訊安全」這兩個因素出來，而沒有一個明確的標準時，大家會往風險最低、最不方便的方式去設計資訊服務，從有電子化政府以來都是這樣子。我滿高興在資訊安全上有真的能夠衡平考慮到實際使用的近用性，以及資訊安全保障的朋友來做規劃。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這邊再做一次期待管理：凡是密件或涉及國家機密的文件，我都一律不看，我會交給辦公室已經可以涉密的同仁看。也因此簡宏偉處長不是我的督導範圍，但是我相信他的判斷能力。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "資管處的角色？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "資訊安全會由資安處來督導。當然標準驗證的部分還是會請資管處來協助。" }, { "speaker": "李柏鋒", "speech": "簡處長口頭也是贊成要開放前幾道命令，大概就這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "至少如果有人提出資訊安全作為理由的話，他可以作為判斷，我只是要說這個。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "感謝大家非常有效率使用時間，謝謝大家。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們今天的會議，沒有錄音及錄影，但會由速錄師把各位的發言打下來，跟前幾次一樣，我們會把逐字稿會寄到各位的信箱，也歡迎轉寄給院內的任何人，十個日曆天之後，大家最後修改的結果會公開，中間不管講到任何覺得可能會被放大檢視的話，可以當場說希望速錄師改成什麼，我們就會回去改，或者是之後十天想一想要補充的話，再補充回來，反正無論如何十天之後公開，先跟大家講一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們今天就直接開始。" }, { "speaker": "馬榕曼", "speech": "從今天的規劃情形摘要報告，目前的辦理進度，青諮會依循蔡總統的青年政策提到青諮會的層級從教育部提升到行政院的方向，7月19日跟林萬億政委報告過行政院顧問團整體的規劃，依循這一次的會議決議，規劃爾後相關的設置要點及這一次討論的規劃原則。" }, { "speaker": "馬榕曼", "speech": "行政院青諮會設置要點經過8月16日行政院發布在案，原則上青諮會會設計召集人一個人由院長兼任，副召集人兩名…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想書面我們都看到了。" }, { "speaker": "陳良基", "speech": "行政院青諮會的前身是教育部青年顧問團，總統認為青年很重要，所以請唐政委當副召集人，今天報告現況，還有決定第一次開會時間，人數現在跟政委報告的是，二十五位委員現在都到齊，分布政委也都看過。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你都有他們的mail嗎？" }, { "speaker": "陳良基", "speech": "有。" }, { "speaker": "陳良基", "speech": "等於現在什麼都準備好，就等政委說什麼時候開會，事前哪一些議題想要在那邊討論，要給誰準備。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果mail給我的話，明天就開會，我看到他們自己挑分組及互相推選代表的工作，我想不可能在十分鐘或者是二十分鐘之內完成，是要他們面對面，我想工作分組這一件事，其實是每一個人可以事先勾選自己最感興趣的分組，這個是可以在線上完成的。至於推選副召集人這個部分，我不知道之前的做法怎麼樣，但是我覺得至少他們應該事先對於推選方式發表意見，也就是把這二十五個人串起來，也就是變成郵件群組的地方，至少他們可以在上面彼此接觸，因為這一件事也拖了滿久的，至少從要點頒布算也快三個月了（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他們知道他們是委員嗎？" }, { "speaker": "陳良基", "speech": "現在知道。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "什麼時候知道？" }, { "speaker": "馬榕曼", "speech": "徵詢過他們的意願，他們也有回傳同意書。" }, { "speaker": "莊清寶", "speech": "有關「行政院青年諮詢委員會名冊」刻正由本院人事處簽辦發布作業中，公文目前已在文書科，應該今天(11月1日)會發文。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "理論今天發文，國內郵件一天，基本上後天會收到？" }, { "speaker": "陳良基", "speech": "我們可以mail通知，現在已經確定，我們告訴他，他也回應。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "甚至今天發mail也不算有問題？" }, { "speaker": "陳良基", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個是馬上可以做的事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為我是副召集人、院長是召集人，我們也是委員，就副知我跟院長，我的mail，你們有嗎？（遞名片）寫信給所有人，然後放在cc。" }, { "speaker": "陳良基", "speech": "這一件事就可以做完。還有開會時間。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然，這個就變成比較簡單的事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外，開的第一次會的這一件事，我看起來其實是儀式的成份比較大，我看不太足以把建立共識或者是工作分組的事弄出來，這個開完之後又三個月過去才會再開下一次會，所以我不知道本來第二屆青顧中間會做什麼？" }, { "speaker": "吳靜如", "speech": "事實上第一次青顧團會議是在大禮堂，會讓他們依照自己想要的組別分桌入坐，他們可以自己選哪一個組，然後每個組裡面約有4至5個青年顧問；也會安排相關政委及教育部部長在各桌，再由院長逐桌跟他們互動。這個是暖身，暖身之後才會有一個共識營，等於青年顧問團的運作方式是由青年顧問自己形塑出來的，並不是由上而下的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "政委會一起去共識營嗎？" }, { "speaker": "吳靜如", "speech": "會。共識營就是由青年顧問自己去討論遊戲規則，是由下而上的狀況。第2次會議才是一個比較正式的會議，江前院長自己主持，開了四個小時，相關部會也會派員參加。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "年底之前先開第一次會議，讓大家彼此認識，三個月之後再跟院長提出具體的議題，然後大概有三個月的時間形成，可以這樣講嗎？" }, { "speaker": "吳靜如", "speech": "青顧團各組有一個導師，多半是由相關部會的次長或主任秘書擔任；例如青年顧問對社會住宅問題有意願的話，他就會選那一個組，再跟著導師去參與這一個議題的相關會議，青年顧問會在這個過程當中貢獻他的想法，並學到更多，比如了解政策規劃與推動過程，通常會涉及價值的折衝，有時是會遭遇一些困難的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "看起來是分成經濟、勞動及教育三組，這個是本來青顧的三個組別？" }, { "speaker": "吳靜如", "speech": "不是。青諮會邀請經濟部部長及勞動部部長擔任委員，是因為「就(創)業」是青年最重要的問題之一，與勞動部及經濟部最為相關，所以青諮會設置要點裡面有提到教育部、勞動部及經濟部三個部會；而設置要點也提到委員組成要兼顧多元族群等，所以也才會請原民會及客委會推薦青年代表擔任委員。因此，如果要開會，只有已擔任委員的這三個部會首長，其他推薦青年代表擔任委員的部會都不邀請他們出席的話，這樣好不好？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然不好，這個太明顯（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可是我是說他們出席，後面也有一個比較像是，我們也不想欺騙感情，如果他們當初推薦青諮會委員的部會，可是未來其實是以這三個部會為原則，怕會比較不妥，這樣的話最好講清楚「委員如果要跨到其他的組別，我們原則上會不鼓勵」；不然的話，我覺得就可能會開始出現一些衝突。有關以分三組為原則的事，它是在要點裡面嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不跨組？" }, { "speaker": "吳靜如", "speech": "設置要點只規定青諮會「得視需要下設若干工作分組」，以負責處理相關議題，因此並不侷限於這三個部會，應該會跨到其他部會的業務範圍。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我在想「以不跨組為原則」這一句話，不知道會不會有問題？" }, { "speaker": "吳靜如", "speech": "先前青顧團會有一個情況，就是他們有人會投入很多時間參與，有人則只是稍微參與，也就是某些委員可能會比較投入某一個組別；目前我們比較不建議委員跨組參與，因為通常也沒有那麼多時間跨組參與。" }, { "speaker": "馬榕曼", "speech": "其實在第一屆青顧的時候，因為他們當初提出來想要參與的議題有分五個大組，但是後來這個分組到後來其實並沒有再運作，是因為有考量到青年關心的並不是限縮在當時提出來這五個議題的大組，我們會設定以不跨組的原則，就像處長所補充的，其實就focus比較關心的議題。因此第二屆比較沒有強調分組的事，等於是部會會提出想徵詢青年顧問的政策議題，也就是請青年顧問就這一個議題提供他們的想法或蒐集到的意見。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "會議逐字稿應該是青諮會委員們可以看到的東西，所以可考慮把過去第1屆及第2屆青顧團的做法進行公布，由他們考慮是否分組，甚至我們連建議或不建議都無所謂，如果委員想設十五組，或有人最多跨到三組都還好，我們是站在怎麼樣都好的立場，儘量去提供協助。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因此若干工作分組，我覺得不需要由院長或我來指示，這個是直接讓他們在線上討論或會面討論來決定即可。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "具體時間上，我們要講的是，當初推薦他們的相關部會，我們要事前發開會通知給他們，請這些部會一定要指派一定層級以上的人員出席才好嗎？" }, { "speaker": "吳靜如", "speech": "青顧團那時候是有導師制度，通常擔任導師的部會都是由次長或主秘出席。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你們的建議呢？" }, { "speaker": "吳靜如", "speech": "我們會覺得有相關部會的次長或主秘出席是好的。另外，先前也討論過到底要不要有第2屆青年顧問，因為他們第1屆的任期是1年，任期過短，等於才剛瞭解政府運作情況就任期屆滿了，所以後來第2屆青顧團是讓有意願留任的青年顧問再續任1年。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "而且兩年的話，有些人可能已經不是青年了（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "吳靜如", "speech": "第一屆青年顧問會實際參與部會的會議，像有一位顧問就是選擇參與社會住宅的議題，當時他就是由內政部次長親自帶著，這位顧問就說他覺得自己收獲很多，也發現對政策的想像與實際執行是難免會有所落差的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "mail通知裡面可提到說，由每一個青年代表擔任的委員，提出他們需要哪些部會的相關主管來擔任其導師，也就是他們最想要認識的部會是哪一個；或者是我們給委員們三個排序之類的，再讓他們自己去選擇。也就是讓他們自選導師。我們當然不可能一次把所有的次長都邀過來，這個也是不務實的，所以我們也是看一下最多人希望能邀請到的，再以這個對象為主；至於有些部會是比較少人感興趣的，那就不需要特別邀請擔任導師了。" }, { "speaker": "吳靜如", "speech": "三個月一次的大會，其實三個月中間是可以由委員們私下聯繫與互動，凝聚共識後，再將一些議題提到大會上討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "自選導師就是選擇合作的部會，他如果勾經濟部，他就要講說裡面有哪一些議題是他覺得感興趣的，這樣子我們盤點一次收回來的問卷，就知道要誰比較好；例如某一個選擇經濟部的委員，第1次由次長出現來跟他們實際說明，而如果有高達1/3的委員都想要聽這個政策，就可以優先考量。如果該部會沒有人選的話，我們就不用邀了（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "馬榕曼", "speech": "我們在之前的青顧運作上也有請青顧提供他們的專長領域及有興趣議題，我們也會提供給各部會，因此各部會在召開相關會議的時候，也會邀請青顧參加，青諮會的委員參加也可採這個方式？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個方式我記得第一屆及第二屆青顧團都是這樣子，就是他們有這個權利去出席相關部會的會議，而且青諮會設置要點裡面也有，所以我們當然也會這樣子做。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們就進入具體的時間，我11月25日公假自費出國，到12月11日才回來，所以如果我們考慮到這一件事已經拖很久的話，我希望出國前開第一次，因為這樣子聽起來第一次會議並不是實質議題的討論，而是比較程序性的會議。目前看起來青年好像白天都要上班或上學，我們需要挑在下班時間之類的嗎？" }, { "speaker": "莊清寶", "speech": "通常是這樣，多半會利用傍晚或週末的時間開會，出席人數比較能夠過半。" }, { "speaker": "吳靜如", "speech": "第二次是假日，我記得開到晚上六、七點。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對我來講，如果要假日的話，我只有11月13日、19日、20日這三天可以用，如果要傍晚的話就多一些，但是我沒有很喜歡傍晚開會，尤其一天要開三個會的情況下，傍晚再開會會受不了，所以我想我剛剛給了三個時間，三個時間都是全天，理論上要問院長，可能這三個時間，他挑一個或者是兩個，時間一確定，就告訴青諮會委員，好嗎？" }, { "speaker": "莊清寶", "speech": "報告政委，因為上述時間可能會有部分委員因故無法出席，畢竟他們有好幾位都是主管級的，為避免委員出席人數沒有過半，過去通常會先提供3個以上的時間，再透過線上問卷或e-mail方式事先調查多數委員可出席的時間。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果院長不能來，可以嗎？" }, { "speaker": "莊清寶", "speech": "通常這3個時間，都是先登好院長與政委您都可以的時間，再據以調查各委員是否可以出席。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣子大概就會有困難。可能會來不及。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "最簡單的就是我問一下院長機要，等我一下（線上詢問院長機要），如果我們沒有在這一些時間約到，就要等到我12月中旬回來，而且可能要等時差調過後再開會。" }, { "speaker": "吳靜如", "speech": "有關院內任務編組的狀況，就是第1次會議先頒發聘書；至於本次議程中提到要請各業務處花30分鐘介紹行政院部分，其實若以第1屆青顧團來講，當時是由孫前發言人進行行政院介紹。所以，這個部分建議再考慮調整。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得若由徐發言人介紹，應該也會很精彩（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "吳靜如", "speech": "因為發言人都會跟著院長走，與青年會有滿多的互動，因此建議請教育部青年署改一下；如果需要請發言人幫忙介紹行政院，可能需要先跟發言人報告。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果不行的話，可以考量問問看徐發言人是否願意預錄。" }, { "speaker": "吳靜如", "speech": "因為第1次會議就花了30分鐘那麼長的時間來介紹行政院，這樣太占時間，也可能不符合青年的需要。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果預錄，就會事先看過。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以先問一下徐發言人，這三個時間哪一天比較有空，幫忙介紹一下行政院的業務。如果他剛好沒有空的話，看可不可以幫我們錄一段影片；如果他也沒有辦法錄影片的話，這一段就跳過。聽起來是這樣的意思？" }, { "speaker": "吳靜如", "speech": "因為要瞭解行政院，其實上網站看，就會知道了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "完全同意，所以這一段，就要考慮消失了嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "接下來要頒發聘書，那就一定要院長，沒有辦法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "自我介紹，他們也可以考慮用預錄…。沒有啦！（笑）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "推舉的話，我會希望委員來開會以前，已對於推舉程序大致有一個共識，我覺得這一件事不一定要卡在10分鐘內把它完成。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果到11月20日，那就還有三個星期，我覺得他們對於推舉的方式，不管是線上投票或者是什麼的，可能那時候都已經推舉完了，我們要盡可能讓他們完成到一個程度。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "接著是司儀，是由教育部這邊負責嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們剛才的決議是，有關是否有工作分組及分組方式，要先以問卷調查，因此司儀要先唸一下問卷調查的結論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "接著就不一定是分組，而是分議題，會議現場會有某一位部會次長先對那一組做簡報嗎？" }, { "speaker": "吳靜如", "speech": "沒有。以前青顧團都是有比較成熟的議題提案以後，再請相關部會的次長(或代表)針對該議題進行回應說明。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想也不用，等於是一個半小時可以解決。我再問院長看看，能不能撥出一個半至兩個小時的時間，這樣子應該還好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以議程上還有沒有別的？我有看到回應稿，這一份回應稿看起來很四平八穩，沒有什麼地雷，有什麼需要討論的部分？（笑）" }, { "speaker": "羅清水", "speech": "他們希望看到一些網站上的設置要點及人員名單。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你們放在青年署的網站？" }, { "speaker": "馬榕曼", "speech": "沒有，都還沒有。" }, { "speaker": "陳良基", "speech": "如果沒有問題的話，我們就會放上去，建議公開，應該沒有問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "青年發展署是幕僚單位，但是理論上這個是院級組織，所以你的公告，是公告要點本身，還是對於青諮會的各種相關事項，比如網站上有一個看起來像是院級的網站，會不會比較好？" }, { "speaker": "吳靜如", "speech": "可能要請本院資訊處配合，看要不要在本院官網裡做一個連結。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "理論上是拉到院級，不同的是可以從公開的管道來看到這一個程序，可以從「ey.gov.tw」。" }, { "speaker": "吳靜如", "speech": "需要再跟本院資訊處溝通。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "目前本院網站好像只有「政委督導及跨部會政策」，這個是「任務編組」就……（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "莊清寶", "speech": "本院全球資訊網的右上角，有一個「任務編組」的連結，但是青諮會的部分還沒有掛上連結，是因為青諮會的派聘名冊發文作業還沒有完成；據悉院內有一個不成文的作法，就是前述「任務編組」所公告的網頁內容，若是屬於由院內單位(如消保處、性平處)擔任幕僚單位的任務編組，其網頁內容就會直接掛在本院網站上；但若是由相關部會擔任幕僚機關的任務編組，例如本院文化會報，就會直接超連結至文化部的網站。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣很好，可以掛進教育部青年署的網址。" }, { "speaker": "羅清水", "speech": "就不會青年諮詢或者是跨部會的東西，像文化會報的體育單項…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "只要是由機關擔任本院任務編組的幕僚工作的話，就連回該部會建置的專屬網頁。" }, { "speaker": "吳靜如", "speech": "基本上部會那邊就會有一個對口。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "之後會有一個固定的窗口來負責這個業務？" }, { "speaker": "羅清水", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "麻煩告訴我，我們這裡也會有一個專門處理這項事務的朋友，行政事務的工作，就由這兩位朋友來處理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "跟資訊處講的事情，是你們教育科學文化處會做的嗎？" }, { "speaker": "吳靜如", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "教育部預擬回應稿裡提到青諮會的公告方式，是不是需要稍微改一下？有關青諮會的設置要點，在行政院網站，按右上角的「任務編組」，然後看到第54號的任務編組，可以製作一個連結，連回教育部青年署的「yda.gov.tw」，只是行政院這邊還是有個任務編組的網站連結。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其他還有沒有別的？如果沒有的話，其實會議就到這邊，我在收到那一封跟大家打招呼的信件之後，就會把逐字稿當作第一份文件先給大家，就按照大家討論到的，具體問三件事：" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第一個，會有自選導師，委員可以從第1位列到第15位，都沒有問題，我們會根據這個來決定第一次邀請的出席部會次長。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第二個，現在還在詢問院長的時間中，我可以的時間是這三個；但即使院長這三個時間都可以，也不一定相關部會的次長都會來，所以即使不能來的次長，可能也要蒐集一下他的聯繫資訊。例如大家都選了那位次長擔任導師，但是那位次長不能出席會議，這樣就要交換一些聯絡方式，這個是事後的連絡方式。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第三個，希望他們事先透過e-mail或其他適當方式，討論如何產生副召集人及是否需要工作分組，如果他們需要討論任何特定議題，在第1次會議的時候就提出來討論的話，大家也可以先自由討論決定，大概是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "今天會議到這邊，謝謝大家。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "會議開始前，我先講一下今天的記錄原則，今天應該是沒有錄音或錄影，但是我們有請一位速錄師，等一下大家第一次講話之前先講一下希望怎麼被記錄，好比像某同仁、職稱或者是連名帶姓都可以，這一份紀錄只向院內公開，所以我們在這一次講完之後都會收到這個連結，這個連結各位都可以轉寄給院內的任何朋友，我們可以修訂的，在今天開始算的十個日曆天之內，每一個人都可以把自己發言裡面覺得公開了，可能會被放大檢視或者是需要補充脈絡的部分，或者有提到一些研究可以補上相關的連結，都可以做修訂。十天之後就會在網路上跟所有的人公開，這一件事其實是幾位立委邀我去參加公聽會，也就是選手們遭受到的一些問題，比如兵役或者是社會觀感或者是補助的爭點，我們等一下都有逐字稿的紀錄下來，會從我上次去聽到選手們，其實我也沒有待全程，是速錄師待了全場，把所有的訴求帶到。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們並沒有要處理設備或者是國家級投資政策的什麼東西，我想今天聚焦在本來在從事電競活動的這一些朋友們，他們會希望一些兵役上、學業上的肯認，在院這邊有什麼方式在合法的情況下，以及說服大家的情況下做出來，這個是主要的目的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在進入一開始教育部報告之前，我先想詢問一下，因為在公聽會裡面有非常多的朋友提到圍棋主管機關從最早好像從文建會，到後來被納入亞運後，就從文化圍棋出現了競技圍棋的概念，體育署扮演了一度的角色，不管在開哪裡的公聽會，都會把圍棋拿出來講。我希望把文化替代役的部分，也就是圍棋的現況希望有一個全面的瞭解，如果朋友們現在手邊沒有資料也沒有關係，講一些關鍵字，我查資料就是了，這個是一個提醒，接下來直接進入報告，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "何卓飛", "speech": "政委、各位夥伴，先就教育部體育署及技職司的部分來報告。" }, { "speaker": "何卓飛", "speech": "請看到第4頁「運動的定義與範圍」，聯合國教科文有做一些對於運動的定義與範圍，身體活動是指運用骨骼肌，且能產生實質能量消耗的任何身體動作。前面也有提到「凡具有遊戲性質而出之於與他人比賽或自我奮鬥形式之一切身體活動。」這個跟競技好像很雷同，但是比較大差異的是：身體活動界定的部分。" }, { "speaker": "何卓飛", "speech": "第二，我們來談到運動選手的四級培訓體系，從基層的運動選手到優秀青少年選手至職業運動選手至國家代表隊，這個是有一個分級的訓練模式。" }, { "speaker": "何卓飛", "speech": "第三，請看到第6頁「教育證照等級體系」，我們在整個競技體系裡面，教練也是一個很重要的角色，整個證照的體系是非常完整的，也是由中華體總和授權單項運動協會發證，從C、B、A級是很清楚的授證流程。" }, { "speaker": "何卓飛", "speech": "第7頁，是「奧亞運選手升學獎勵及職涯輔導」，分為獎章及獎金、就學輔導、就業輔導及生涯輔導等項目，算是滿完整的。" }, { "speaker": "何卓飛", "speech": "另外一個是體育班的設立，從小學、國中至高中都設有體育班，這個是以奧亞運項目、世大運及部裡面推動的賽會為試辦的原則。" }, { "speaker": "何卓飛", "speech": "剛剛政委有提到圍棋，有部分學校的體育班或者是地方政府所設立的體育班可以依自己的特色，所以會有圍棋專班，如果成績好的話可以升學，而為何會列入到這個競賽體系裡面？因為在那一次廣州亞運，中國將它列為比賽項目，但是其他的國家並沒有全部肯認。接下來是也未獲中華奧會的承認。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "中華奧會？" }, { "speaker": "何卓飛", "speech": "那時是暫時承認一段時間，但是後來如沒有再列入國際競技比賽項目，就不會承認了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們會因為這樣的關係，圍棋專班就不能設嗎？" }, { "speaker": "何卓飛", "speech": "也不會。" }, { "speaker": "何卓飛", "speech": "第11頁，我們可以看到網路使用情形及電子競技納入運動之國內民調，中、小學生可以看到非課業網路的時間，這裡特別提到網路沉迷的部分也請參考。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有逐字稿或者是會議紀錄嗎？或者只是結論？" }, { "speaker": "何卓飛", "speech": "有座談會紀錄。技職司有技藝競賽的做法，我想還是請技職司的同仁來說明。" }, { "speaker": "何卓飛", "speech": "http://www.sa.gov.tw:81/Ebook/Files/附件1_(教育部資科司)104年學生網路使用情形調查報告.pdf" }, { "speaker": "何卓飛", "speech": "http://www.sa.gov.tw:81/Ebook/Files/附件2_(教育部體育署)學校體育推動電子競技可行性評估專案.pdf" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛才有幾個問題想要確認一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第一，我之前在十二年國教課發會的時候，對於網路成癮的部分有討論相當多，一般我們不會把它當作是一種疾患，就是一種癥狀。通常如果小孩會花太多時間沉迷在網路上，表示社會結構或者是家庭結構更深層的東西需要注意，但它本身並不是疾病。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外我想講的是，網路成癮跟電競選手這兩個的相關性，我一直沒有看到很嚴肅的研究，因為其實電競在練習的時候，其實是不連到別的網站的，五個人關在一個房間，只連到電競平台，所以這跟網路成癮要分開看待，我只是先講一下。" }, { "speaker": "王明源", "speech": "技職司的部分是針對技藝競賽規定來說明。" }, { "speaker": "王明源", "speech": "技藝競賽的部分有三方面：第一個是升學，第二個是技藝鼓勵，第三個是表揚。" }, { "speaker": "王明源", "speech": "高中的部分我們強化技職教育的發展，在技專的部分，如果獲得各種技藝競賽的優勝，在入學的部分可以參加保送入學的甄審。" }, { "speaker": "王明源", "speech": "我們也有補助學生參加國際性的技藝能競賽作業要點，補助技專校院辦理全國性相關競賽或研習營，培訓國內技專校院相關科系學生具備參與國際競賽能力，讓優秀的學生參加國際性的技藝能競賽，且出國前會有語言能力訓練及協助。" }, { "speaker": "王明源", "speech": "在參加國際性技藝能補助出國所須的機票及膳宿費，如果表現卓越的部分，我們會納到「技職之光」來表揚。主要這個是勞動部來主政，像技能檢定等等，我們會跨部會研商相關競賽的意義來做深入的討論。" }, { "speaker": "何卓飛", "speech": "我再做一點建議。" }, { "speaker": "何卓飛", "speech": "電子競技準用國體法相關的規定，這個是由立法委員提出的，我們有做一個整理，也就是現階段如果是納在國體法裡面，我們認為不是很合適，但是如果有相關部會準用這一個的話，我們認為是ok的。" }, { "speaker": "何卓飛", "speech": "第一，體育運動有百年發展跟沿革，但是競技運動的產品及生命週期是不穩定的。" }, { "speaker": "何卓飛", "speech": "第二，電子競技運動是由公司來辦理的，那好像也不太相同。" }, { "speaker": "何卓飛", "speech": "第三，體育運動的裁判教練是體制化、法制化，在國內電競我不知道教練有沒有法制化。" }, { "speaker": "何卓飛", "speech": "第四，教育體育的核心理念強調身體的運動，我們在教育裡面又比較不希望小朋友玩電競成癮，這好像有一些理念的衝突；當然它也不符合體育運動特別強調身體運動的內涵。" }, { "speaker": "何卓飛", "speech": "再者，目前的體育預算只占全國預算0.4％，如果納到體育運動，那就會排擠。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個才是最主要的原因（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "何卓飛", "speech": "為了兼顧產業發展需求跟維護教育核心價值，因此如果相關機關在相關法規裡面，由他們主政，準用國民體育法第14條，我們反而覺得這個可行。" }, { "speaker": "何卓飛", "speech": "第二，透過產學合作培育資通訊相關的人才，這個部分教育部可以協助，事實上相關技職學校也已經在做。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想先確認幾件事，國際比賽補助是不是這一張大表？裡面包含了非常非常多。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "螢幕上是「甄選群（類）別及技藝技能優良職種類別對照表」，是不是就是這張表？" }, { "speaker": "王明源", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "全國這邊，有看到教育部學校圍棋錦標賽，這個還有在辦嗎？就是跟科展放在一起的這組裡。" }, { "speaker": "何卓飛", "speech": "目前是由佛光大學在辦，我們有補助。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "得第一名第二名還是準用你們剛剛所講的那一些升學的辦法？" }, { "speaker": "何卓飛", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以其實我自己事前看了一些資料，我覺得圍棋現在處於一個妾身未明的狀況，自從電腦圍棋下得比人類好之後，長遠來看是否還會被歸在個人競賽，這個不無疑問，這個是大家接下來可以檢討的部分。請文化部報告。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "我是文化部的陳濟民，請方衍濱報告。" }, { "speaker": "方衍濱", "speech": "文化部報告：" }, { "speaker": "方衍濱", "speech": "第一，現階段從產業或者是從選手的培育上，本部並沒有相關法規及獎助措施。" }, { "speaker": "方衍濱", "speech": "第二，電子競技有運動成分，主要是透過手、眼的協調能力，屬於競技類比賽，跟體育署職掌的各類競技運動教練選手的選才、培育規劃、執行、輔導及考核等較為類似。" }, { "speaker": "方衍濱", "speech": "電競選手多為16至25歲的年輕人，也許可以跟國民教育、高等教育體系互相結合，又未來電競將成為臺灣年輕人就業選擇之一，所以也與教育部青年發展署有相當關聯性。" }, { "speaker": "方衍濱", "speech": "第三，我國屬於世界電子科技產業大國，產值第四名，發展電競產業有其優勢性，但如果從文創法所規定的十五個文創產業類別中來看，數位內容產業的中央目的事業主管機關為經濟部，但是現今文創產業發展有跨界整合的趨勢，所以如果涉及電競內容產業相關人才方面，文化部也會視個案來補助產業發展。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "每一點稍微講一下，電子競技並不是文化部或者是任何一個部會的主管業務，不然我們不會在這邊開會，這個是共同認知（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第二，大家有一個想法是，像剛剛研發替代役有講到各類遊戲軟體，不管是研發產業裡面關於各類遊戲軟體的部分，或者是文創產業關於數位內容的部分，講的都是「製作」電競軟體，而不是「使用」電競軟體；我們現在講的電競選手是使用者，他們並不是製作者，所以其實之前他們應該沒有人真的能適用文創或者是役政署這邊的條例。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有點像我下圍棋，但是其實對於圍棋棋盤、棋子如何磨製，那都是很重要的技藝，但是其實棋手都不懂，只是下棋而已，因此要分開看待。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我鼓勵臺灣這邊發展更多電競平台，這個東西可能很有幫助，甚至如果抵擋住時間的考驗或者是開放源碼的，可能過了二、三十年再玩，就會變成慢慢像圍棋的東西，但這個並不是這次開會想要討論的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "今天要討論的是有一些使用者們，他們在已經訂好的規則或者是環境底下，他們做的事情在大部分的時候，通常講的表現方式是：我們某一場世界大賽有多少人收看，比NBA還要多之類的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "從我的角度來看，這樣子比較像是在進行表演藝術活動，不像進行數位內容產製。如果硬要說電腦螢幕錄製出來的東西都是數位內容，那也說得通，但是我作為一個觀眾，我覺得還是像類似表演賽的概念，這個是我自己的心證；我在看的時候，是用看表演的心情在看，因此我想把它跟可能未來跟競技關係也會逐漸脫勾的圍棋文化相提並論。" }, { "speaker": "何卓飛", "speech": "現在有一個「國際智力運動會聯盟」，有跳棋、橋牌、西洋棋跟象棋等，所以圍棋也進入了，所以圍棋目前是「國際單項運動總會聯合會(Sport Accord)的會員。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我理解跳棋、橋牌、西洋棋、象棋及圍棋是因為教練、廠商相當穩定，但是我的意思是說電競有一些型態，如果開始符合這邊的定義，而不是最紅的是單一廠商做的，那要如何適用？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "目前制度還不明確，而且很多電競平台可能大家比較沒有聽過的，其實我上次去公聽會有貼出我二十年來玩的電競，那都是非常穩定的，而且是開放平台，並不是單一廠商主導的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我的意思是，你很難只用這些理由來涵括所有的電競樣態。我們當然可以說「這些只要等到世界智力運動會納入了，我們就會採用」，這個是安全的講法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是事實上，我們是存在著有一些非常多人看表演性質的競技朋友們，這些朋友們主要的想法是在發展的過程中，能不能像是某種特定的技藝人員一樣，給予一定的肯認，其實就是「正名」的要求而已。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "抱歉，我一直要回到圍棋這個比喻來。" }, { "speaker": "蔡清華", "speech": "我做一個補充，我記得當天吳志揚立委有提到一個概念，因為他當過縣長，所以他也知道家長跟教育人員端，如果電競納入的話，對於學生的身體健康產生影響。" }, { "speaker": "蔡清華", "speech": "因此他當天也有提到，可以視為職業運動，因此就比較不會牽涉到要在高中以下的課程裡面的體育，因為教育部為體育的行政單位，我們一定要考量到家長跟教育人員的立場。" }, { "speaker": "蔡清華", "speech": "我們一方面又擔心學生的網路成癮，但是如果又把它視為運動項目的話，我們自己立場好像不一定。" }, { "speaker": "蔡清華", "speech": "雖然剛剛政委有提到跟網路成癮沒有關係，但是如果是網路選手的話，會對於視力及身體等方面會有一些影響，這個是家長所擔心的。" }, { "speaker": "蔡清華", "speech": "如果是產值非常高，如果由主管這方面的經濟部來推動，因為是商業表演的活動，而這一些非常厲害的選手，這一些獎勵的措施能夠準用國民體育法的話，這部分教育部是贊成的；但是如果由教育部來推動做這樣的政策，我們擔心沒有辦法得到家長及教育人員的認同。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "理解，所以這邊教育部的擔心，我非常快速綜整一下：" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "通常我們是以18歲作為一個分界，國民義務教育完成後，有些人要做可能傷害身體但是社會關注的活動，基本上是成年人自己的選擇，從教育部的立場來講，職業運動員不管從事什麼運動，那是他作為一個大人的選擇。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是18歲以下，我們不希望告訴小孩鼓勵或者是培養這一種對身體有害的活動，大概是這樣講嗎？" }, { "speaker": "蔡清華", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "分成兩個層次來談：" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第一，目前電競設備已經有考慮到濾光，我想首先不是眼睛，而是滑鼠跟鍵盤的設計，不小心的話可能導致腕隧道症候群。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想隨著VR的普及，戴著VR之後，打了十分鐘網球也是流了一身汗。我覺得隨著時間過去不到兩、三年，也許這一些選手會先用這個來當作練習的方式。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們現在還可以說會傷眼睛、手，不適合小孩來練習，但是這個理由快要不能用了。我不是說現在不能用，而是快要不能用了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是我很同意，任何特定被單一商業主導的東西比較像是職棒，而有很大的企業贊助它的概念。我們也不會從小訓練小孩一定要變成某個企業隊員的感覺，但現在確實電競多多少少會給人家這樣的感覺，現在是有相當大的企業在支持及贊助。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因此，你們提到「感興趣的小孩，在不要太傷眼睛及手的情況下，我們抱著不禁止、也不鼓勵的態度。而長大之後要做什麼選手，這個是個人自由。」這個態度我是同意且贊成的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "至於進入職業運動之後，它算是一種經濟活動，因此完全交給經濟部去做，我瞭解經濟部沒有來，所以很容易被指派任務（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不過，我剛剛有講，所有關於經濟活動的部分，都不是今天討論的範圍，所以還是聚焦在上一次公聽會那幾位電競選手們的意見。我想光是以上的講法，是比較難回應他們的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "（投影公聽會逐字稿）吳志揚委員提到要大膽列到職業運動產業裡面，他認為這個是家長、學校比較簡單認同的方式，剛剛已經有處理到，所以這部分就過去了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外，蔡承諺最後有提到，「能申請產業替代役的廠商也非常少，…但是他們不能來開發這個軟體」，因此基本上選手申請不到，這個是主訴。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第三個主訴是他說學校能不能開專班？第二個是選手在學校上課的時候，能不能在某一個訓練場地裡面進行，有特殊的學程設計，讓他還是兼顧課業？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實有很多技職班，或者是音樂美術的才藝班都有配套，如果學校附近有能夠訓練場所的話，學校同意的前提下，可以在那邊進行訓練。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這我們可以說即使是18歲以下都可以搭配，這目前的適用方式是？" }, { "speaker": "王明源", "speech": "技專的部分沒有開專班，但是有一些合作的案例。" }, { "speaker": "王明源", "speech": "技職校院的目的是培養動手實作及創意思考的學生，因此是以人才培育的眼光來看，目前沒有電子競技的專班，都是相關的電子、資訊、電腦、軟體等相關科系。" }, { "speaker": "王明源", "speech": "目前倒是有單一的特定廠商，比如找某一個科技大學的八個學生，提供金錢給他，也就是認真去打電子競賽給獎金，但是不設人才培育，單純參加電子競賽。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但這已經是科技大學了？" }, { "speaker": "王明源", "speech": "並無整個專班都在打電子競技，還是有列入，但是不列入正式課程。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那技術高中呢？" }, { "speaker": "王明源", "speech": "這個也會考慮到家長跟社會觀點，如果整班是電動玩具班，這個家長不會接受。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "理解，不過圍棋專班當時也有類似的討論。現在的年輕人慢慢會變成家長，「家長能不能接受？」這個觀點五年之後不一定能用。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "尤其107課綱上路之後，會有校定必修跟特色課程。如果學校真的開了電競課，只要能說服家長，理論上教育部也不能說禁止，這個是在107課綱裡面的精神。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，我們可不可以很簡單講說在107課綱上路之後，這屬於學校自行裁量的權限？如果他們要開電競課要變成校定必修或甚至專班，這個是學校的特色。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這句話我們可以講到這個程度嗎？" }, { "speaker": "王明源", "speech": "一般來講，雖然開設專班是從下由學校提出申請，教育部來審核，其實專班還是要有課程的深度，可能不是單純開設一個競技項目課程而已。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然。" }, { "speaker": "王明源", "speech": "所以課程可能是類似遊戲設計。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "或者數位媒體之類的。" }, { "speaker": "王明源", "speech": "對，電子競技頂多安排一個課程。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想圍棋專班也不是一天到晚要下棋，也有教圍棋文化。" }, { "speaker": "王明源", "speech": "一般大專校院課程設計是要有學術的專業度。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "理解。如果他對於電子競技有興趣，其實可以接觸到的是非常多，數位、傳播這一些都可以碰得到，這個跟圍棋專班「學業、棋藝、品格並進」的道理是相通的。" }, { "speaker": "王明源", "speech": "課程並不會設定在電子競技。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "理解，沒問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "關於蔡承諺第三個問題：是不是把它定調成如果在學校的規劃裡面，尤其是技術高中的規劃裡面，有能夠讓他藉由電競的興趣，但是能夠讓他接觸到包括電子傳播、數位媒體這一些相關深度的課程，這樣子教育部採取開明的立場，不反對技術高中往這方向規劃？還是這個還太強，你們要等一、兩年才能這樣說？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們再請國教署稍微研究一下，我覺得這句話還是要講出來，但是講出來的強度讓高國教署來決定，可以嗎？" }, { "speaker": "蔡清華", "speech": "可以。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們回到替代役了，不好意思（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我查了一下從文建會時代的替代役，一直到今年獲得貝桑松的國際指揮，聽起來是在國際上先獲得認可，就可以在文化部的交響樂團服役。" }, { "speaker": "方衍濱", "speech": "83年次之後役男只要服四個月的軍事訓練，或是也可以選擇服六個月的替代役，但是其誘因不高，因為役男可以利用暑假去受軍事訓練，就完成國民義務了，因此要請役政署調查目前82年次前尚未服兵役的役男人數，以及83年次以後需要服軍事訓練的役男人數。" }, { "speaker": "方衍濱", "speech": "再來，剛剛政委有提到為什麼圍棋要列為文化替代役，過去文建會時期召開推廣圍棋活動跨部會協商會議，會議決議：國內職業圍棋士申請服文化役後，以文建會為需用機關及服勤單位，並會同內政部役政署訂出甄選條件，經甄選服役後，指派至中華民國圍棋協會、各縣市地方分會、學校推廣圍棋活動。" }, { "speaker": "方衍濱", "speech": "其實體育署跟文化部預算有限，例如台北市政府與民間合作辦理電競大賽轉播等一系列支持活動，是由產業發展局負責推動的，因此如果可以跟產業鏈結，請經濟部一同加入的話，推動電競會更加順利。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "經濟政策的部分不一定是我負責，應該會由別的政委或者是別的朋友們負責。再次重申，這次會議只處理選手的部分。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想我們今天會要做到的幾件事，其實就是我剛剛白板上最一開始所說的，就是循圍棋的前例。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "圍棋選手在成為選手之前必定有一些訓練的時期，從國中開始有這一方面的興趣，剛才也已經提到這邊本來就有一個類似技職的，剛剛看到木工在電腦輔助的相關辦法，在高中就加入然後得獎，這個勢必是教育部的工作。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因此，具體請教育部做的事以下有兩個：" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第一，本來的這一份，我不曉得是不是最新版的「甄選群（類）別及技藝技能優良職種類別對照表」。根據所謂的技藝跟競賽的這一份大表裡面，可能要見到一下圍棋是不是還分到電機與電子群那一類，如果不要分到那一類也好，我知道這個是按照技術高中的群科來分，是不是可以放到稍微比較像的一類去，這個無關獎助的錢或者是辦法，只是分類而已？不管分在哪一類，圍棋的這一類是不是也可以把電子競技放在那一類？我們只是肯認這件事而已。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第二，專班的適用上，技術高中可能要請國教署同仁來回應。如果現在要講一句話，這一句話是：「在107課綱適用之後，我們本來就鼓勵各校發展自己的特色課程，如果有學校有很好的結合，讓對電競感興趣的學生，能夠因為讀了以電競為特色的技術高中，而接觸到數位傳播、多媒體更多的底蘊...」看要怎麼講說，「在這樣子的前提下，國教署是持鼓勵的態度」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以上我已經調弱過了，如果還有其他的版本，請再跟我說，希望可以衡平家長的感受。這個是我希望國教署能夠協助的部分。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對於文化部來說，你們剛才提到了一個非常妙的，不管是服六個月或者是十個月的文化替代役規則，報到院裡來，文化部直接轉名單給某一個NPO。" }, { "speaker": "方衍濱", "speech": "就是圍棋文化替代役。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "之後再由NPO去進行安排，去那邊想必也是以協助棋界活動為主。所以這個模式在盤點後，看看是不是可以適用？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果適用的話，尤其是法規會這邊，看適法性有無問題，如果適法性沒有問題的話，麻煩評估一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想電競文化，並不只是在國際上拿獎牌。技藝拿獎牌的適用原則，我們剛剛處理過了；相對的，從事者也應該要有進一步推廣這個文化的興趣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因此，從事這樣替代役的工作，而是在民間的NPO或者是相關的地方繼續推廣這樣的文化，有沒有辦法把它當作一種表演形式，或者是多媒體創造的形式，循著圍棋的合法狀態去進行處理？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以文化部是有這個工作，也請跟內政部役政署處理一下。" }, { "speaker": "方衍濱", "speech": "因為歷史悠久了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "希望也把圍棋定位，也就是「選手」前面不管是什麼名字，希望可以放在一起。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "圍棋放在智力運動是可以接受的，現在主管機關說有一個智力運動會，因此請大家想一想如果不說「智力運動選手」，我們要講什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也就是現在如果出現了某種大家很風靡，也有變成國際表演賽的可能性，但是還沒有納進智力運動會的..." }, { "speaker": "何卓飛", "speech": "技藝？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好，所以可以說「電子競技」的「技藝選手」，文化部可以嗎？因為也有一個「藝」（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好的，所以我們可以當作一種技藝文化，假設文化部不反對的話——那就是「電子競技這門技藝的選手」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣一來，就可以跟電子產業的推廣完全切開，讓技藝跟著文化保留下來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好比做木工的師傅們換很多材質，未來也會有很多新的機器幫他們，甚至也有一些人進VR雕刻，但是技藝文化並不完全隨著機器而改變，而是繼續保留下去。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因此我們跟特定的廠商拆開，這樣可能會比較好處理。" }, { "speaker": "吳靜如", "speech": "「運動產業發展條例」第4條提到了運動產業的類別，進一步去看各運動產業類別的內容與範圍，裡面有「運動表演業」、「運動休閒教育服務業」，包括剛剛討論的運動表演、圍棋等都有包含在內，而這些業別的中央目的事業主管機關是前體委會。未來電競是否比照圍棋入法，是否修正「運動產業發展條例」準用「國民體育法」第14條，未來都有許多討論的空間。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "主管機關是體委會？" }, { "speaker": "吳靜如", "speech": "早期是體委會。" }, { "speaker": "何卓飛", "speech": "現在是體育署主管。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為運動表演業的事是排除掉職業運動業之後，所有大家可以現場欣賞的。但是我看起來運動表演業的定義裡面已經加上「（電子媒體）」，因此這個「現場」包含直播在內。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們知道電競很多是透過直播的人觀賞。如果在現場，卻看不到選手的螢幕，說實在沒有什麼意義（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以是從線上居多，因此我同意把它變成是運動表演的話，希望它跟職業運動有一個明確的劃分。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "簡單來說，電競選手到18歲之後要不要從事職業運動是另外一回事，現在既然是在討論18歲左右朋友們權益的話，我們可以說是「作為電子競技這門技藝的專業人才，未來就能從事運動表演行業」，這樣是不是比較容易解釋？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實差不多就這樣。我自己的感覺是，圍棋很有可能也會演變出運動表演業，它會隨著電腦越來越會下棋而轉變型態，也會隨著時代而變化。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們院裡這邊如果找出誰要做什麼事，就不太會受外界壓力的影響。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有沒有什麼動議要提出？" }, { "speaker": "吳靜如", "speech": "今天的會議紀錄，請問是由政委辦公室製作？" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "建議你們還是要做一個正式的紀錄。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是誰要做什麼工作，像剛剛說「這邊要做那個，那邊幫忙做那個」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們的逐字稿會公開，如果十天後大家已經調到各自想要問的資料，就會把各位呈上來的資料一併公開，這樣大家看到的不會是我們坐在這邊還要問誰，而是都有問到。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "十天的時間我覺得是有必要的，但是這邊的會議紀錄可以先製作。" }, { "speaker": "吳靜如", "speech": "還會有下一次會嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "要看這邊調出來的資料，來回應剛剛問的三個問題，包含：1. 役政、2. 技藝能競賽認定、3. 技術高中專班。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果役政署說適用文化替代役合法；而教育部說重新分類加上這項技藝，以及學校「厚植電子競技文化」來「培養運動表演業人才」 是可以的，這些都確認的話，那就不用再開會了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果任何一項需要協調，我們再來開會。" }, { "speaker": "王明源", "speech": "跟同仁確認一下，剛剛甄選技藝的名字是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「甄選群（類）別及技藝技能優良職種類別對照表」。" }, { "speaker": "王明源", "speech": "我們再確認一下，這個是我們公告的或者是勞動部公告的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "都有可能，最後是誰公告的沒有關係。我看一下，看起來可能是你們，好像不是勞動部。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝，如果沒有問題的話，我們就準時結束，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "教育部國教署", "speech": "有關得否將開設電競類課程視為十二年國民基本教育課程綱要技術型高級中等學校之「校訂課程」，回復說明如下：" }, { "speaker": "教育部", "speech": "於105.11.9召開「研商電子競技選手培育及獎勵輔導相關事宜」會議決議後續推動方向事宜會議，達成以下決議：" }, { "speaker": "教育部", "speech": "(一)「電子競技」比賽不適合納入四技二專甄選入學招生群(類)別之採計競賽及技術士職種類別對照表；惟國際技藝競賽部分，則由各考生納入四技二專甄選入學備審資料，由各校視競賽之選拔過程及與學生本職學能之關係自行認定。" }, { "speaker": "文化部", "speech": "(一)行政院前於93年度為推廣圍棋活動，由於圍棋是東亞儒家文化圈傳統四門藝術之一，故有關圍棋士申請服文化服務役之相關作業，係由本部(前文建會)負責邀集內政部、教育部、教育部體育署(前體委會)，於93年2月9日召開協調會議，會議決議以：「國內職業圍棋士申請服文化服務役，以文建會為需用機關及服勤單位，並會同內政部役政署訂出甄選條件，經甄選服役後，指派至中華民國圍棋協會、各縣市地方分會、學校推廣圍棋活動」，故現圍棋專長役男皆依會議決議由中華民國圍棋協會同本部及內政部役政署訂定甄選條件，役男分配至該協會服勤。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "📗 感謝國教署針對特色課程補助的積極回應，也理解私立南英商工將在106學年度開設電競特色班。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "今天的紀錄原則跟大家說明一下，因為我們在上一次開會的時候有請一位速錄師來，在上一次勞動部跟經濟部都有來的會議，我們有留下完整的紀錄，事後也有提供給大家，十天之後有公開，今天速錄師剛好有事，沒有辦法來，所以這一個錄音機算是代表她，是有錄音，但是不會錄到各位的臉；同樣的，我們會請她儘快製作完逐字稿，然後錄音檔就會刪掉，同樣逐字稿在那一天算起來之後十天之內都可以修改，修改完之後就公開。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在修改的過程中，如果各位覺得我們在修改中的逐字稿，你們部會別的同仁意見的話，也歡迎把那個連結繼續連出去，也就是行政院內部的話，大家都可以看、可以改，十天之後再公開，如果覺得裡面有某些會被過大放大或什麼之類的話，都可以拿掉，好，大概是這樣子，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們快速go through一下今天的議程，今天其實是兩件不太一樣的事情：" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一件事情是我們上一次在聯繫會議的時候有講到關於社會企業立法政策，不管叫「共益」還是「B corp」還是別的名稱，其實之前經濟部、勞動部都有做一些研擬的工作，所以這一個工作跟我們目前商業司全盤檢討公司法的工作，有沒有可能有一些聯繫或者是可以分開來看待，這個是我想要聽大家的，因為各位已經做了很多的功課。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外，我們上次開會的時候才發現原來現在就是社會企業月了，我們在社會企業月裡面，勞動部有哪一些規劃、哪一些部分有可能是經濟部或者是其他的朋友幫忙的，就會請勞動部來分享，大概是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一開始請經濟部報告，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "林昱奇", "speech": "經濟部報告歷次聯繫會議辦理情形：" }, { "speaker": "林昱奇", "speech": "第一案，有關社會企業行動方案未來展望及建議，依第九次聯繫會議的決議，為瞭解我國社會發展企業的情形，在短期規劃中在調法規或者是建平台的策略當中，進行臺灣社會企業概況調查，並掌握我國社會企業的家數、資本額、僱用員工人數等情形。另現行國內已經有許多的學術單位從事社企相關的研究或推動，建議也可以與其進行合作，辦理情形經濟部為掌握國內社企發展概況，現階段經濟部已與台經院合作，透過問卷彙整社企型公司的營運態樣、營收情形、員工僱用、經營管理、財務融通、挑戰與需求及未來展望等資訊，預計回收問卷一百份，目前回收九成，在11月下旬將提出報告。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非常感謝，有其他部會的朋友對這個有其他看法嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我上一次開會有兩個具體的詢問，一個是這一次問卷裡面有無滾動的部分，有沒有一個填答的選項是問還有沒有哪一些我們還沒有碰過的人，上一次經濟部的人說這一次還沒有，下一次可以列入參考，還是這樣嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個，在給出問卷的時候有無給問卷的填答人一個選項是匿名之後公開或者是具名公開，當時經濟部覺得這個考量可能比滾動式的問卷考量多一些，所以未來要更精確研擬之後才能夠知道哪一些部分可以匿名之後公開，我記憶是這樣子，有沒有新的？還是這樣子？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好，如果就這樣子的話，這個報告就到這邊。我們就繼續。" }, { "speaker": "林昱奇", "speech": "第二案：有關105年社企選拔表揚規劃及協調事宜。" }, { "speaker": "林昱奇", "speech": "報告單位：勞動部，依上次會議決議，本案涉及教育部、勞動部及金管會等相關部會，後續情況循社企登錄制度討論模式，於工作小組持續規劃研議辦理，另請勞動部研議相關競賽跨部會合作，並與經濟部共商社企選拔表揚活動之可能性。" }, { "speaker": "林昱奇", "speech": "辦理情形：" }, { "speaker": "林昱奇", "speech": "一、為鼓勵社會創新及激盪新型營運模式產生，勞動部刻正研擬勞動力發展創新獎勵作業要點，以周延規劃新創潛力獎及社會經濟獎等競賽活動事宜，並俟前開要點核定後，就競賽相關細節規劃再擇期與其他部會共商合作事宜。" }, { "speaker": "林昱奇", "speech": "二、另有關與經濟部共商辦理社企選拔表揚活動之可行性一節，原係遠見雜誌預計規劃辦理之活動，其曾於本年上旬洽詢經濟部，並擬向勞動部申請活動補助，經瞭解該公司相關活動辦理需求取消，未續辦理與辦理經濟部共商事宜，以上。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "關於勞動部發展的創新獎勵作業要點，因為目前沒有公開資訊，勞動部的朋友（勞動力發展署副署長）可以簡略多說明一下。" }, { "speaker": "施貞仰", "speech": "政委好及其他各部會的同仁大家好，有關勞動部這一個部分，先講第二點的部分，之前在520之前，遠見雜誌找大家，是說要談一個選拔的活動，但是後來這一個活動因故沒有再辦理，因此沒有再繼續執行。" }, { "speaker": "施貞仰", "speech": "但是第一個部分，有關於勞動力發展創新獎勵作業要點，這部分其實是我們希望能夠獎勵現在教育部、勞動部或相關部會登錄的社會企業，因為這部分涉及經費發放的問題，需要比較慎重，這部分要會辦主計跟法務，訂定要點才有依據，有依據才會做後續的處理，當然這個要點之後，會再邀請各部會共享盛舉，在明年度安排一個社企的活動。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我只是想說「新創潛力獎」跟「社會經濟獎」兩個是確定要點裡面會有的？這兩個大概的差異是什麼，可以請您（勞動力發展署主任）先說明嗎？或者是想要獎勵不同階段或性質的公司？" }, { "speaker": "施淑惠", "speech": "向政委報告，這競賽要點之各獎項將來如何選拔還要再跟各個單位討論，去年發了500萬元的獎金，主計單位認為既然要發獎金，不管將來是要做新創潛力獎或者是社會經濟發展獎或者是微創楷模或者是創客競賽等等，這麼多的獎項有競賽要點比較嚴謹。其實我們在這一個要點裡面，可能要處理的獎項不會只有單一的，這就是為什麼會提到將來要跟教育部、經濟部，或其他可能有關的部會合作，謝謝政委的提醒，就是到底將來在這一個獎項的設計上要怎麼樣有差異，我們會再邀請各單位來討論，以上說明。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝，所以聽起來是每一個獎項之間都會有差異，而且按照他的差異，這一個獎項也許是某一個部會，另外一個獎項可能會比較是請另外一個部會幫忙？" }, { "speaker": "施淑惠", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好，謝謝說明。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "還有沒有什麼別的要討論的？關於討論二。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果沒有意見，我們就進入到公司法相關的討論，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "林昱奇", "speech": "報告事項案由二：社會企業立法政策評估說明。" }, { "speaker": "林昱奇", "speech": "報告單位：經濟部、勞動部。我們先請經濟部代表。" }, { "speaker": "方元沂", "speech": "政委、各位首長、各位大家好，我是文化大學方元沂教授，我這一次是代表經濟部來做這次的報告。" }, { "speaker": "方元沂", "speech": "因為我是負責這一次修公司法關於社會企業的部分，大家手上都有簡報，我就不做簡報內容的陳述，我抓四個重點，如果有問題的話，等一下可以直接詢問：" }, { "speaker": "方元沂", "speech": "第一，關於公司型態的社會企業，名稱有很多種。這樣一種類型的公司是社會企業的一種，但是社會企業不等於公司型的社會企業。" }, { "speaker": "方元沂", "speech": "第二，它是一種組織法的部分，我們透過修法的方式提供公司一種新的組織形態，也就是不涉及到用政府的補助，純粹是透過民間的力量，讓他們選擇這樣的方式來投資。" }, { "speaker": "方元沂", "speech": "接著進入到關於功能的部分，像公司型社會企業並不是我們發明的，其實在國外在這幾年滿盛行的，要做到的是結合資本力量跟社會力量，也就是透過公司是以賺錢為目的，可不可以融入其他的利益，其實這邊不只是這樣的概念，希望能夠創造一個新經濟層面的發生，有些資本可能會有想到社會公益的存在，有一些社會公益或者是社會回饋型的企業需要這樣的資本，透過這樣的方式產生新的市場，避免以前有所謂Market Failure的問題。" }, { "speaker": "方元沂", "speech": "在這樣的狀況下就涉及到它的設計，所以我想各國的法律有嚴、寬跟鬆，各位手頭上都有資料呈現，我想這個是屬於政策上的選擇。這類型的公司基本上有三個架構，我以美國的基本例子來舉例：" }, { "speaker": "方元沂", "speech": "第一個，這種目的不再以賺錢營利為目的，而是要兼顧其他的利益，除了營利之外還要設定一個他想要的目的，比如他想要回饋鄉民，比如想要推動農產品，可以用一部分的盈餘來回饋當地（特定社區），也可以結合他想要在教育層面方面，也可以跟長照方面結合，是非常有彈性的空間，在目的方面會是在公司章程第一個要註明的。" }, { "speaker": "方元沂", "speech": "第二個，責任的部分，以往公司的負責人，臺灣是董事，責任就是要幫股東賺最多的錢，但是在這一類型的公司會多了一個使命，必須符合到公司章程裡面所訂的回饋或兼顧其他利害關係人的利益。" }, { "speaker": "方元沂", "speech": "第三個，透過制衡，因為我們讓它有一個彈性的設計組織，所以透過透明化的方式來達成制衡（checks and balances）的功能，用這種方式讓大家來看這一家公司是不是有達到它所聲稱的目的。" }, { "speaker": "方元沂", "speech": "第四個，這個是目前的修法，在臺灣聽到幾個問題或者是大家比較有顧慮的部分。有人認為太早了，可能時候未到，可是這時各國都是在一個發展的階段，也就是大家看待這個法律並不是要解決目前的問題，而是他們透過這樣的法律，進而引誘出新型態的公司，而產生新的經濟，這部分大概是有顧慮的部分。再者，目前已經有一些在進行社企這方面領域的朋友，大家會認為是不是會產生排擠的效用，他們可能顧慮會不會變成大家偏重公司型態而排擠到本身經營的部分，因為這樣子公司型態的社會企業是屬於一種組織法，所以不涉及到政府補助的部分，因此這部分其實影響評估上並沒有他們想像這麼嚴重。以上大概簡單就這四個部分跟各位分享。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我快速綜整起來，聽起來老師的意思是組織法，並不是作用，如果公司法裡面特別說以公司營利為目的，是不是會排除或者是排擠到其他目的，我們如果要把其他目的納進來的話，我們需要不需要這麼高密度說現在有一個專門為了不是為了營利做，或者在現有的框架上，好像衣服踩一下還可以穿。聽起來老師的意思及其他座談的意思目前傾向於這一部公司法稍微踩一踩還是可以穿？" }, { "speaker": "方元沂", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "張儒臣", "speech": "主席、各位先進大家好，商業司報告。" }, { "speaker": "張儒臣", "speech": "非常感謝經濟部中小企業處及方老師的報告，因為方老師這一次參加修法小組第三組，他本身分工社會企業相關議題的研究。" }, { "speaker": "張儒臣", "speech": "與老師重複的部分，我們就不再贅述，現在最主要是將焦點放在到底要不要引進社企公司或兼益公司的部分，我們簡單說明，直接進入簡報第二個部分。" }, { "speaker": "張儒臣", "speech": "其實老師也有提到現行法並沒有限制社會企業的發展，主要大家會有疑慮的部分有兩個條文：公司法第1條，也就是公司是以營利為目的；公司法第23條，如果負責人要負忠實義務。因為第1條是以營利為目的，很多公司負責人擔心在處理業務如果不純以營利為目的時，可能會有違反忠實義務的問題。" }, { "speaker": "張儒臣", "speech": "下一頁，目前問題的主要癥結點是在這裡，這一頁剛剛老師已經有提過，我們就不贅述了。" }, { "speaker": "張儒臣", "speech": "下一頁，現在是整個公司法的修正方向，誠如老師講的，我們不會處理作用法的部分，因為作用法本來就不是商業組織能夠處理的議題，目前社會上大家的共識比較傾向低度管理。" }, { "speaker": "張儒臣", "speech": "下一頁，所以目前大概可能會有這四個方案，比較有可能的是，以A、B案為主的思考方向，如果可以的話，也希望主席或者是各位先進可以給我們一些政策的指示或者是一些想法。其實重點跟老師講得都差不多，目前全盤修正就社企型公司的部分，我們可能的態度是這樣，就教於各位先進，以上報告。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛才其實在修法建議方向這邊，應進一步取得大眾共識那一頁裡面（第9頁），其實這邊有列出一些很細的項目，包含如果有 disclosure 的話，它的編列頻率，包含它的公布方式，是否要經第三公證單位認證，股東可否要求公司踐行公益目的，就把它跟營利目的放到一樣高的位置。這一些東西會被列成進一步取得大眾共識的意思是，是修法小組的老師們是有討論之後有不同的意見，或者是還沒有討論到需要更多的共識，或者只是覺得有共識了，但是希望有大眾共識所以才希望把這一部法推出去？" }, { "speaker": "張儒臣", "speech": "誠如剛才主席及方老師所提到的，目前要不要立法，其實正反意見都有，所以我們各種聲音都有聽到，我們比較傾向於低度，但是這個低度是要不要提交公益報告書或者要有一些查核機制，這一個部分其實老師們希望可不可以直接做政策決定，這樣子就可以直接做條文的研擬跟設計，我們要表述的意思是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好，理解，老師有沒有要補充？" }, { "speaker": "方元沂", "speech": "其實這個部分就公司法學者認為這邊沒有爭議，主要是社會企業的一些朋友有一些疑慮在這邊，我們想說要回應他們的疑慮。就修法條本身我想還滿明確的，目前是朝向低度的方式來做，這樣對大家的衝擊是比較小的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是。剛才不管是A案或者是B案，我們看起來不影響到別的公司的相對利益；第二，即使加了一個專節，那也只是規範它的揭露責任及它的內部責任，至於這一個東西跟外部別的公司會不會有疑慮，這樣聽起來是比較小的，也就是有人願意負這個責任而掛這個招牌，就是這樣子而已，大概是這個意思。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以這樣子聽起來我們已經進入政策溝通的階段，其實大家都已經到了某一個程度。我有兩個具體要問：" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第一，這個東西我理解公司法目前的規劃是全部包成一包來修，但是我去年有參加過閉鎖性公司專章的案子，那一個案子其實理解到未來可能要再動的情況下，先過一部分，我知道實務上造成商業司的朋友一些比較大的負擔，因為配套要做兩次之類的。而且，實務上也造成剛申請第一批的朋友，會覺得他的稅務適用花了很多時間才釐清，因此我理解這一次修法的方向是希望所有的東西都全部做完之後，然後一次過，只要配套一次。我不曉得這是不是也是老師們的看法？因為商業司的看法我理解。" }, { "speaker": "方元沂", "speech": "對，老師這邊的看法是這樣，因為這整個都要調整，要調第1條是，這是目的，第二個是第23條有關忠實義務的責任，因此這樣就變成整體做對應會比較好，所以我們也支持這樣的方式。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，如果公司法其他的地方爭議比這邊大，因為看起來這邊爭議相對小的，在各組裡面；我們有沒有可能爭議小的部分先做一包過呢？" }, { "speaker": "張儒臣", "speech": "跟政委報告，目前公司法整個修正狀況是，這一次是一個全新的模式，也就是由民間組一個修法委員會，跟我們共同合作，也就是第一次採用所謂公司協力的方式來進行整個公司法的修正。目前老師的議題總共提出兩百五十九個修正建議，所以這一次會動到的條文非常多，有可能會超過三百條，所以其實是一個類似像新法的制定。" }, { "speaker": "張儒臣", "speech": "目前初步來講，我們是分成四個小組，就是以「籌資」、「公司組織」、「股東權益」等等作為四個小組的分組，剛剛方老師社會企業是屬於在我們登記組的部分，也就是涉及到整個公司法基本定位及登記組織別等等的一個區塊。目前我們跟老師正積極進行條文合作，所以我們的目標還是以一包，也就是我們以全盤修正為一個目標。" }, { "speaker": "張儒臣", "speech": "至於剛剛政委擔心的是，因為修的條文太多，會不會有一些利益團體反對，我想這應該是等條文都完成之後，我們會跟社會進行溝通跟整個對話，到時候也希望政委能夠鼎力支持，儘量化解各團體的疑慮，因為公司法的利害關係人眾多。例如：昨天記帳士公會說要來路過本部，因為他們覺得一直以來「代理人」僅限於律師跟會計師，他們很有意見。我只是舉個例子說「利益關係人」無所不在（笑），我們知道政委的疑慮，可是目前院裡面的政策就是希望全盤修正，所以大概不會切割議題，我們還是以一包為原則。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想利益關係人當然無所不在，而且公司法接近重寫的做法，不要說2,300萬人，臺灣有任何公司行為往來的人，可以說整個地球都是利益關係人，這樣講也不為過。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我的經驗是這樣子，如果要講政策方向的話，即使我們手上有一個版本的草案，只要寫成法律文字了，我們還要再去拿這個跟利益關係人溝通的時候，他們就會產生一個認知上的困難，好像我全部要瞭解到這幾百條，才能跟你在同一個位置上對話，但是大家已經花了幾年的時間來研究這一些題目，所以不太可能要求利益關係人在幾天內或者是六十天內就達到跟大家一樣的知識水平，我覺得這個也是不公平，因為很多專業領域需要很多時間才能夠理解。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，我們現在的政策方向是這樣子，以前的習慣—不管是七天公告或十四天公告或者是六十天公告—都是部長核過之後，手上的文字才會出去，有點像是給院會版本的簡報，差不多是最後版了，院長點頭就可以做的那個程度，我們才開始跟社會溝通，那樣子跟社會溝通的基本效果都不彰，因為大家就會覺得即使你給我現在六十天，但是大家都已經想好了，所以不管提出什麼建議，其實他能夠被採納的機率微乎其微。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想一部分的原因是，我們自己在討論的時候，已經把設想的利益關係人的觀點，所以其實也沒有什麼我可以說我沒有想到，這個也不太可能，可是這個的意思是，從外面的角度看起來，就是比較沒有誠意的做法，也就是大家都會覺得這一次是老師們願意幫忙，然後花了非常多的心思、問卷上，希望利益關係人能夠在政策方向上就提出意見。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可是，我覺得這中間有一個環節，就是我們方向已經確定，像老師說這個部分我們方向已經大底定，可能有八成了；但對應的具體條文、細節跟配套措施還沒有出來時，就是說方向有了，但是合法化還沒有做完這階段的溝通，我覺得之前一直都比較沒有這個習慣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是我們從公行政學理上面，這一個階段的溝通是利益關係人的溝通是最有興趣的溝通，因為他們有可能在不太需要做太多準備工作，因為大家都幫他做完，以及自己的input又還有可能更改到配套措施的最大影響力，等於他們投入最小，但是可能的影響最高的這個時候來幫忙，這時我們才能真的讓整個社會一起討論這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我的具體建議是這樣子的，國發會目前有一個線上討論的平台，有分成兩個，一個是已經進入立法預告的階段，我們會放在「眾開講」的「Join」平台，所有比這個階段早的，我們都可以請社群幫忙放在vTaiwan這個平台，vTaiwan接下來11月10日應該就會第一次討論公司法裡面關於英文名稱的部分，接下來我們就類似排隊一樣，公司法這邊老師們的方向是確定了，所以社會有所本可以討論，但是商業司這邊的法條跟配套還沒有寫成非常明確狀況時，vTaiwan的朋友可能會願意也把它納入這樣子討論的模式。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得這一部分是公眾教育，也就是算預告，從現在算起半年之後或者是一年之後或者是兩年之後，你們看到這個版本會比較新的規則，不要過了兩年再說為什麼突然間通過然後不適應；另外一部分，讓更多的利益關係人在填完問卷後，還願意看他們填問卷的結果現在變成怎麼樣，然後跟他有一個對話，這個是我想我可以具體幫到大家的部分。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，為了要做這個的話，今天的這一些簡報，除非大家有什麼特殊的考量，不然我應該預設變成是可以公開，但是是以草案的狀態公開；第二，我才能拿這一個去問vTaiwan社群的朋友是否願意以這個為藍本進行進一步的配套階段討論，如果商業司跟老師們都ok的話，這邊凡是列出爭點的部分都可以循這樣的方式解決，凡是沒有列作爭點的部分，我們也才能藉著跟社會討論這個爭點，一方面教育社會說我們經過專業的評估之後，我們目前覺得這樣子做比較好，如果做更多的話，反而會扼殺社會企業的生存，大概是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有沒有其他朋友的意見想討論的？" }, { "speaker": "張儒臣", "speech": "因為我們現在有兩百五十九個議題，如果說篩選重要的，應該三、五十個也跑不掉，如何跟vTaiwan合作，我們後續再跟國發會或者是跟蔡玉玲律師跟您這邊請示。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "蔡玉玲律師在vTaiwan社群，目前會判斷哪一些案子她覺得可能會有社會上許多人討論、哪一些是屬於技術性的，拋出來也沒有人討論的一種社群上的判斷。當然也不只是蔡律師，社群裡面有相當多關心公司法的朋友，每個禮拜六都還是會聚會，一方面是商業司的朋友如果自己大概篩出，可以先分成三個部分：（一）某些是純粹技術性的，討論也不會有用；（二）某些是利益關係人可能還有一些影響，但是你們的方向已經很確定了；（三）已知會被路過的（笑），就是不管用哪一個版本出去都會有人路過你們。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "通常我們是用最熱的這一個來處理，但是這裡面也是有一點技巧，就是我們不會把爭議最大的先處理，我們會先把有爭議，但是爭點比較小，利關係人可能只有三分先處理，先讓大家看到這一個模式是能夠處理的，然後再把利益關係人四方、五方、六方慢慢納進來。像今天在場的人都聚焦在同一個東西上，可是當多方利益關係人出現的時候，大部分的利益關係人會希望不管今天正在談什麼題目，把它拉向他真的想要討論的那一個題目，而那一個題目跟這一個的關係可能非常薄弱，我們為了因應這樣子的情況，我們一開始會覺得越具體越好，但是這個具體仍然必須是有爭點的，如果很具體而沒有爭點，我想就不用討論，那個就直接是法規作業的一部分。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，我想具體上你們先分這樣子，大概先分這三個，分了之後先用mail的方式先提供給我，我會轉知社群，再請社群來挑說在英文名稱之後會怎麼樣來進行。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一個工作如果能夠在11月10日直播會議上做時，它有一個好處就是當時我們會得到相當多媒體的關注，所以如果我們這邊已經挑了一些知道即使是媒體大幅報導洗版都沒有問題，我們是願意討論這一些稍微安全一點點題目的話，我可以在11月7日、11月8日跟主持人團隊討論的時候，就預先告知他們我們討論英文名稱的同時，也預告社會說我們接下來會討論哪幾個案子，7日、8日是第一次的主持人鄭國威會過來，最好7日已經有最熱議題列表的話，我們也可以跟國威討論一下他能夠關心或者是說明的有哪一些，這樣他們就可以拿你們的簡報去跟記者說明，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "方元沂", "speech": "我想政委有提到在條文形成化的過程讓公眾參與，我個人覺得很不錯的概念。但是在問卷設計上，是不是儘量用選擇題的方式，因為我怕問答題可能沒有辦法close，比如要做公益報告書、要不要認證，認證是哪一個部分，是讓他們能夠用一個選擇的方式，因為我怕帶回去又討論到政策的部分，這樣會一直循環論斷。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "vTaiwan會有選擇題，但是選擇題永遠都會有一個開放填答的選項（ 如「以上皆非」），除此之外我們會有一個設計，也就是讓大家彼此間對彼此的感受去投票，也就是我們先把我們的框架拿出來，問大家對這一個感受如何，先不提建議，然後先提可能有人感到擔心，有沒有什麼沒有被考慮進來，有人感到很高興，因為這樣子就不會被高度管制之類的。感受的好處是沒有對錯的，也就是說即使抓了非常多人來，看起來很多數，那不過是相同的感受，因此在那個感受的學理上叫做「Principal components analysis」，就是我們想要找到大家類似的感受，怎麼樣群組起來，但是群組這邊五百人、五個人沒有關係，仍然是兩組合理的感受，所以就不會有我們用線上（如FB）討論的時候，一邊可以動員五百個人，另一邊五個人的聲音會淹沒的情況，我們會儘量營造一個討論空間，而這一個討論空間裡面我們會把爭議特別大的感受，也就是一半人有這樣的感受、一半人沒有，以及共識度特別高的感受，雖然這兩組人吵得不可開交，可是他們對這一個東西是有相同認識的，把這兩個東西在線上類型這樣直播的諮詢會議當中揭露出來，再請老師對於這一些感受進行回應。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對於利益關係人而言，我相信讓他們一步跳到「建議」是有困難的，而我們要求他們用「建議」（如問卷）方案的話會有兩個問題，會排除掉看不太懂這一些文字的人，因此他的sampling本身是有bias。另外一個是，獎賞動員能力高的人，能夠動員五萬個人幫我投票，這個意見看起來非常厲害，但事實上並不是這樣，所以我們才會聚焦在感受的回應，然後是以呈現盡可能多元的程度為主，這個有另外一個好處，有一些部分的人，利益有非常高的不利益，這一些人其實在線上問卷或什麼很容易忽略掉，因為他們是極少數，但是如果一般學理上的不利益高到一個程度，那個也是要照顧的，所以我們透過感受蒐集的方法，比較有可能把少數人的想法感覺出來，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不曉得這一個題目還有什麼其他的？除了我們有一個action item，就是包含社會企業在內比較能夠開放給公眾討論的題目，請商業司先統合目前老師們的工作結果，然後在7日左右提供給我們。此外，還有沒有什麼別的想法？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "法案的部分先這樣，好，我們繼續下個議程，請您（勞動力發展署專門委員）報告。" }, { "speaker": "葉良琪", "speech": "主席、各位長官及在座先進們大家好，以下由勞動部來說明2016年社會企業月規劃報告。" }, { "speaker": "葉良琪", "speech": "勞動部自102年起規劃11月為社會企業月，透過社企論壇、市集、研討會及參訪觀摩等大大小小的活動，促進社會大眾從多元角度來認識社企相關的議題、產品及服務，以實際行動參與、支持，加深社會大眾對於社企概念的養成，並響應發展。同時，我們也藉由社企月向社會大眾展現臺灣社會企業豐碩的經營與效益。" }, { "speaker": "葉良琪", "speech": "我們辦理的目的及預計達成的效益，可以歸納為簡報上的這五點，「行銷推廣」、「國際連結」、「資源分享」、「交流合作」及「社企群聚」，本年度各部會社企月的活動有勞動部七場次及經濟部的兩場次，在此也非常感謝經濟部共襄盛舉，在11月社企月的期間辦了兩場大型的活動，一起倡議社會企業。" }, { "speaker": "葉良琪", "speech": "以下就勞動部的部分說明，勞動部在今年社企月，我們規劃了七場次的系列活動，簡報上有各場次辦理的時間及地點，這是我們在辦理時間來看的話我們每一週都有活動的辦理，等一下再詳細介紹每一場活動。" }, { "speaker": "葉良琪", "speech": "其次，我們從辦理的區域來看，這七個活動在北部辦理的有三場、中部有兩場、南部有兩場，在區域上希望平衡。" }, { "speaker": "葉良琪", "speech": "接著，我們從活動內容的屬性來看，我們概分為三大類型的屬性，包括第一種是行銷市集、第二種是講座論壇、第三種是觀摩參訪，比例上是40％及各30％的部分。每一種場次的活動可能包括一至兩種不同屬性的內容，來增加社會大眾參與活動的興趣，並且豐富活動的多元性。" }, { "speaker": "葉良琪", "speech": "在行銷市集的部分，我們參加展售的單位大多都是常年致力於發展地方特色產業及創造在地就業機會的單位，透過經濟自主的活動，實現照顧弱勢家庭及孩童、身心障礙者或高齡者的社會使命，他們所獲得的盈餘是用在當地社區發展的需求，為了當地的地方文化或者是人才資源保存來努力，所以我們希望透過市集來鼓勵社會大眾他們透過日常選購社企的產品或者是服務來認識或支持社會企業的發展，讓消費購買更添意義。" }, { "speaker": "葉良琪", "speech": "另外，也透過講座的論壇、觀摩參訪，讓社會大眾從多元化的角度及方式來認識社會企業，進一步認同、支持與投入。" }, { "speaker": "葉良琪", "speech": "以下針對七場活動來重點介紹，首先在11月5日至6日在中正紀念堂舉辦的「2016公益x良品，好物市集」，這是規模最大的一場。活動的內容主要有簡報左下角這邊七項活動，除了主題展售有一百攤之外，還有規劃社企活動互動的展館，我們是透過影音播放的案例、闖關互動的遊戲來認識社企關注的議題及社企發展的精神。" }, { "speaker": "葉良琪", "speech": "再來是透過社會企業的講座，我們在講座裡面相關有長照、食安、人才培育、創新創業以及小農議題等等，我們也有邀請多元就業開發方案或培力計畫的執行單位做藝文表演，除了讓活動更加熱鬧之外，也讓這一些單位有曝光的機會，我們也為了促進大眾的參與，有一些社企產品免費的美食體驗、DIY體驗，還有滿額贈送、摸彩贈送等等，我們也歡迎大家到社會經濟入口網下載社企月的活動EDM兌換小禮品，不論活動前或活動中都訂定媒體廣宣的計畫，例如在遠見或大誌等雜誌，或者是透過FB等社群網站。活動中也邀請了廣播、電視、雜誌、網路、報紙等媒體來幫我們宣傳這一個活動，以去年我們整體社會企業媒體曝光的績效來看，總共有三百九十個報導，而且都是正面的報導。" }, { "speaker": "葉良琪", "speech": "接下來我們要介紹的是，我們在11月16日辦理的歐美地區社會企業專業人才來臺交流暨參訪活動，這個活動的由來也是因為我們在10月初第3517次行政院會議中，院長有指示相關單位要積極爭取2019年社會企業世界論壇（SEWF）在臺舉辦，也因此勞動部特別邀請SEWF現任主席David LePage來分享國際的經驗，也邀請歐盟的官員共同分享。" }, { "speaker": "葉良琪", "speech": "我們參與的人數預計有一百五十人，除了11月16日辦的論壇之外，在論壇舉辦之前，也就是11月13日至11月15日我們會先帶外國的講者來參訪我國社企，並激盪一個交流的火花。" }, { "speaker": "葉良琪", "speech": "接下來幾場次都是各地分署舉辦的一些論壇或者是參訪活動，還有市集的活動，這部分就請各位參閱。" }, { "speaker": "葉良琪", "speech": "接下來是有關經濟部的部分，經濟部舉辦11月4日「社企CSR與社會企業交流媒合會」及11月16日舉辦的「社會創新Pitch Show暨百場社企小聚大會師」，另外也在簡報裡面有說明活動的緣起、目的及相關活動議程，更有我們這個活動相關的預期效益，百場社企小聚的大會師也有相關的資料，以上報告。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為剛剛講到每一個，我就稍微查一下在媒體上的曝光，在「社會創新Pitch Show暨百場社企小聚大會師」我暫時沒有查到，這個主要是什麼樣的形式？可以請負責的朋友（KPMG協理）稍微說明一下？" }, { "speaker": "張洪碩", "speech": "社會企業創新的「社會創新Pitch Show暨百場社企小聚大會師」活動，最主要我們也響應聯合國最近在推動永續發展的目標，總共有十七個。這十七個目標在座各位長官都知道其實跟臺灣各個不同階層、不同的地區所面臨到的社會問題都有直接或間接連結，我們也發現在這三年社企行動方案推動，在經濟部推動的過程當中，因為有辦了一百場，今年也辦了一百場小聚，接近兩百場的社會企業小聚裡面，也發覺非常多在地不只是社會企業，可能是已經在推動很多社會創新的組織，所以我們會希望在上半場能夠過去可能沒有看過這一些在做社會企業或者是社會創新團隊，以及不管是在產、官、學、研、創的專家們能夠在這一個場次把他們的創新想法、做法及商業模式，甚至已經跟企業組織或者是國內外組織合作的過程及結果來分享。" }, { "speaker": "張洪碩", "speech": "當然，我們請到一些專家學者，最主要是希望因為做創新這一件事，當然不是一個人做，而是很多人能夠一起來打群架，因此我們希望在這樣的場次裡面，能夠讓這一些團隊不僅是來報告他們的東西，而是透過社群的凝聚及專家學者給的一些方向建議，我們希望針對這九組創新的團隊，能夠為了連結在經濟部或者是各部會相關的資源，讓他們在推動社會創新業務或社會企業的business有比較多的注意跟焦點，以上。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "理解。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以簡單來講就是說會有九組，分別是「生活想像」、「經濟模式」、「科技應用」，然後各有十五分鐘的時間，其實非常創新創業界的做法，然後希望能夠吸引網路合作是其他的人。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我剛剛主要想要問的是，這邊寫得很棒，但是目前還沒有在公開可得的地方看到，是最近才要放出去？" }, { "speaker": "張洪碩", "speech": "對，我們準備要上活動通的報名系統。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "瞭解，謝謝補充。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以是11月16日，離各位看到逐字稿還有七天，所以看到逐字稿的朋友如果感興趣的話，也可以去參加（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以這樣子聽起來，雙方各自做的其實還滿互補的，這邊主要是做一些networking以及跟創創結合，這邊做的是awareness及溝通的一些工作，所以有沒有什麼需要互相幫忙的部分？因為上次開會是說先讓彼此聽到彼此在做什麼，有沒有什麼需要我幫忙或者是彼此幫忙的？" }, { "speaker": "施貞仰", "speech": "這個部分勞動部就歡迎邀請各位大家11月5日、6日我們在中正紀念堂見面，下午1點30分開始，最重要是希望大家有空的話，請幫我們promote跟support。這一次比較可惜的是，因為我們很久沒有開會了，11月16日我們有活動，剛好跟經濟部撞期，很可惜，不然是兩邊都可以互相參與，希望明年會更好，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "至少我們明年會有這個平台，也就是大家可以事前。你們通常是事前會決定這個日期？" }, { "speaker": "施貞仰", "speech": "大概在年初就會開始規劃了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可能我們下一次聯繫會議的時候就可以具體來討論一下在2017年大概會有什麼活動，包含要去紐西蘭，如果我沒有記錯的話，這一件事有存在嗎？" }, { "speaker": "施貞仰", "speech": "存在。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以是勞動部跟經濟部的朋友都會去？" }, { "speaker": "施貞仰", "speech": "勞動部、教育部、衛福部、農委會都會派人。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "中小企業處這邊之前有沒有參與？" }, { "speaker": "施貞仰", "speech": "那是經濟部的單位，也都有派人。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我想我們在年初時，都要開始各自想一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為我之前去紐西蘭，雖然是開放政府，但是他們那邊開放政府跟社會企業是非常非常結合的，尤其是在威靈頓那附近是一個高度結合的區域。上一次邀我去，他們叫做「社會開放源碼」的主辦單位跟「Ākina Foundation」其實是協辦單位，Ākina好像是這一次紐西蘭的主辦，所以應該就不會有我不能到香港的那一種問題（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為我事前已經問過他們，他們是說應該是很歡迎，所以如果我行程排得開的話，我會很願意過去一趟，見見老朋友之外，也看有沒有希望用一些對等的方式，他們那邊參加的朋友，也可以更進一步像你們這一次安排瞭解臺灣的方式去瞭解，可能跟我們2019年的plan會有一些幫助，我們就下一次聯繫會議的時候再來提具體的plan，好不好？謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "葉雲龍", "speech": "非常謝謝政委來幫我們主持。11月16日可能比較早規劃的，我們是不是把政委放進來，政委來對我們來講，就外界的形象，也就是行政院的層級也重視，我舉的第一點。" }, { "speaker": "葉雲龍", "speech": "第二，「社會創新Pitch Show暨百場社企小聚大會師」我覺得可以多邀幾個除了那一些社企團體之外，像青創的相關團隊都要邀，我覺得要推社企大概有三個面，我們稱「生態」，以前發現我們政委在鼓勵企業做創新、研發、設計，結果產品服務好像國內民眾不太買帳，原因不是價格高，不然就是買不下去，所以賣生機水果賣給日本人，日本的消費者會買，但是臺灣的消費者會覺得怎麼那麼貴，所以我覺得GBC，政府(G)、企業(B)企業之外，我想消費者的部分也透過這個，也希望把民眾多找來做教育訓練，這個是必須的。以上兩個意見，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣聽起來完全沒有問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "關於我目前還有一些吉祥物功能的事情，我有看到你們有邀另外一位美國目前正在做這一種區域創新的一個算是ambassador—我不太確定他的抬頭是什麼—目前有邀到嗎？" }, { "speaker": "張洪碩", "speech": "政委跟您報告，現在正在邀請當中，邀請函有透過我們處內發給美國在臺協會，由他們來做正式的邀請，以上。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為他當天早上邀我到另外一個活動，所以我是可以跟他換，如果邀我去的話，他也要來（笑），但是我想也是看他具體的時間安排，因為他們那一個好像叫做「SUP」，就是startup partnership的那一個活動，那一個活動好像只到中午而已，我沒有記錯的話。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，理論上除非他下午會有別的活動，他應該是有空才對，如果你們也ok的話，我想我就直接寫信給AIT，就說我上午來，但是條件是你下午來（笑），我們看一下他具體的時間，如果真的不行的話，當然也不勉強，因為我任何時候都可以錄影致詞，如果時間排不開的話，我至少可以錄個影，好不好？" }, { "speaker": "張洪碩", "speech": "謝謝政委。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "討論事項就是這樣子了，有人有臨時動議嗎？" }, { "speaker": "林煌喬", "speech": "社會企業行動方案是在103年9月4日核定，執行期間到今年12月底，所以我們（經濟能源農業處）要請示政委，105年12月底結束之後，是不是還需要新的後續推動方案來接續？假如需要，不知道主辦機關就整個方案提出時程規劃為何？如果沒有的話，將來這一些工作怎麼運作？還有這整個聯繫會報將來運作的方式。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "上一次的逐字稿裡面，其實各部會的朋友們有提出其實目前這一個聯繫的功能有兩個，一個是固定每月或至少每兩個月聯繫會報的溝通平台，另外一個同等重要的是，像商業司跟老師們知道我們在想什麼，以及讓我們知道商業司及老師們對於公司法的規劃到什麼狀況，所以這兩個會議其實都已經有達成了，所以我們不一定需要行動方案才需要開一些會議吧！只要大家都願意把時間留下來的話，我想這個東西就變成常規性的東西在做。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "現在看起來公司法，尤其是共益專章如果是朝低度管制的做法來做的話，我們不太需要一個行動方案或者是任務編組專門來管這種公司，所以如果這兩個理由都不存在的話，我目前看不太出來為什麼還一定要有一個新的行動方案，除非這邊有朋友覺得很需要，可能要提出理由，不然的話，我們就變成半常規在開這樣子的聯繫會議，一方面在一個公開的平台關注公司法，不管是叫它「共益專章」或者是別的修法進度，但是我們就沒有除了這兩個點之外的別的行動方案，這樣ok嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "還有沒有什麼別的動議？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果沒有的話，我們就非常準時，五十五分鐘結束這一個會議，很謝謝大家，非常謝謝。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們今天想聊什麼？" }, { "speaker": "蔡錦文", "speech": "我今天帶來一個很好的新加坡商Garena，他們在臺灣已經有設了一個分公司「蝦皮購物網站（shopee）」，Garena是以電郵為主的平台，我們今天早上見了鄧振中老師，也跟他談起關於新加坡與臺灣藉由「網路數位平台（Internet digital platform）」合作，我可能想要先讓蔡總把他的公司介紹給您聽，然後我再做補充。" }, { "speaker": "黃偉權", "speech": "我自我介紹，我是Garena集團的政府關係總監，我主要是負責各個市場與東南亞、臺灣的政府關係跟公益活動，我的同事（蔡心斐、朱均祥）是負責臺灣公關的負責人。" }, { "speaker": "黃偉權", "speech": "非常感謝您抽空讓我們拜會，也非常感謝新加坡的代表，他是我們堅強的支持者，也費了很多心思幫我們介紹。" }, { "speaker": "黃偉權", "speech": "我們今天主要是有兩個話題：第一，介紹一下我們Garena集團的故事；第二個是恭喜您剛剛上任，我們來這一次拜會也是想要請教您在政策議程這方面有什麼計畫，我們Garena從企業的角度想要不遺餘力支持及配合，我們兩邊想參考一下。" }, { "speaker": "黃偉權", "speech": "我想講一下我們Garena的故事，我們是東南亞最大也是最速成的網路平台公司，創於2009年新加坡，是土生土長的公司，2009年一開始只有三個員工，也是託東南亞、臺灣經濟繁榮的消費者支持與信賴，我們現在過了六、七年中，差不多近六千個員工，在臺灣員工差不多有七百名。" }, { "speaker": "黃偉權", "speech": "最近前幾個月，我們剛完成Series D，也是由新加坡跟馬來西亞主權基金，這個Series D評價Garena差不多值40億美金。" }, { "speaker": "黃偉權", "speech": "這個評價主要是兩個因素：" }, { "speaker": "黃偉權", "speech": "第一個，目前來講東南亞還沒有一個公司可以在這個市場多元化跟政治複雜的環境中落實。" }, { "speaker": "黃偉權", "speech": "第二個，我們在生意上有三個滿有趣的線軸：（一）電競，這個您很熟悉，我們在東南亞算是市場的領導之一；（二）電商，也就是剛剛代表介紹的「蝦皮」，「蝦皮」這一個故事是滿有趣的，我們可以算是很晚進入市場的，但是在過去的十五個月當中我們很快速生長，目前來講在東南亞可以算是第二或第三；（三）支付平台，跟電競、電商有一個相輔相成的作用，在設計或者是公益上，特別在泰國、越南跟印尼，那邊大部分的人口都沒有銀行跟信用卡，這部分的支付平台有可能包括整個人口方便上網採購或交流。" }, { "speaker": "黃偉權", "speech": "Garena臺灣要補充一下嗎？" }, { "speaker": "蔡心斐", "speech": "Garena臺灣的部分在遊戲跟電競的部分有兩個：第一個是遊戲跟電競，大家最知道的就是《英雄聯盟》很紅，再來是手遊。第二個，我們唯一臺灣做職業聯賽，所以有提供一些職業隊伍固定的費用補助，希望他們可以無後顧之憂發展他們的夢想，也有跟國際的一些地方合作。比如：兩個禮拜後我們有邀請東南亞其他國家，有越南、泰國、新加坡、印尼、菲律賓，他們總共有十所大學來臺灣比《英雄聯盟》，叫做「國際校際盃」，希望在電競這一塊可以升格，這個是最近Garena在電競上的發展。" }, { "speaker": "黃偉權", "speech": "您想要Garena怎麼配合及支持？這當中我們有考慮過，至少有兩個大項目Garena會幫助：第一個是電競，就是由我的同事所講的，我們在臺灣算是已經投資了很多心思培養電競的發展，我們也是第一個公司來開創電競館，在瑞光路。整個電競來講，我們一年有三千個至四千個比賽項目，不論在選手的職業拓展或者是推廣對電競的支持與歡迎率，我們是不遺餘力，政委您若在電競這方面協調，假設Garena有所幫助的話，請儘管開口。" }, { "speaker": "黃偉權", "speech": "另外在數位經濟，Garena也希望可以跟您一起為臺灣做出貢獻。再者，我們在臺灣有七百名員工，如何吸引青年對科技這方面的事業而感到興趣，或者是跟大學去調和，如果有需要，我們會隨時支持。" }, { "speaker": "黃偉權", "speech": "再者，我們做Series D，一位日本公司主席跟我們在討論如何在臺灣跟各個東南亞國家如何設立孵化器，目前來講規模或應該怎麼做，我們還不太清楚，但如果在這方面的話，可以配合您的需求，我們也是很樂意詳談。主要是日本人是很資深的創業者，我們Garena在東南亞有背景及科技上有一定的經驗，希望在臺灣可以啟發創業精神，在支援上或者是輔導上可以有所幫助。" }, { "speaker": "蔡錦文", "speech": "我補充一下，新加坡的大概念是因為蔡總統有五大支柱產業，我覺得數位媒體（digital media）這一塊可以跟臺灣共同來探討的項目，剛才蔡總所說的遊戲是電玩，因為電玩很多國家都有，我們是不是要做一個整合？也就是東南亞跟臺灣比較大型有規模的電玩比賽，這是第一點。" }, { "speaker": "蔡錦文", "speech": "第二，從電商這方面，「蝦皮」是因為他們在臺灣的供應鏈不僅僅是大型或中型商家，還有小型商家，還有個人企業，在臺灣的文創質量非常高，可能可是輸出到東南亞不知道用什麼平台，我覺得「蝦皮」這個平台能夠把臺灣的商品，哪怕是大、中、小到個人的商品，都可以用這個平台輸出到其他的國家。" }, { "speaker": "蔡錦文", "speech": "第三，如蔡總所說的incubation，臺灣在這方面哪怕是電玩或者是digital media或digital economy related這些平台，都可以跟新加坡或者是國際級在新加坡的incubation center擦出火花，這是三個重點。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "快速綜整一下，大型賽事是一個；第二個蝦皮，我不確定你的意思，因為本來臺灣的文創工作者本來就可以登錄，也沒有排除性，可以同時在其他平台。所以需要我們幫什麼忙嗎？" }, { "speaker": "蔡錦文", "speech": "今天跟政委說的是，可能介紹Garena跟「蝦皮」多認識一點中小型商會或者是原住民自己有一些平台幫我們認識，認識比較多這一些原創的地方特色或者是產業特色。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "理解。第三個部分是加速器或者是孵化器間的彼此整合，你們跟臺灣的加速器或者是孵化器還沒有建立關係嗎？" }, { "speaker": "蔡錦文", "speech": "還沒有。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "瞭解。我們一個個來談。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在大型賽事方面，我們目前對於電競的定義，協調會我才剛開過，各位在11日可以看到開會的結果及各個部會具體執行的承諾，在此之前，因為是每一個部會作業之中，我不方便說太多。但是我可以說我自己的立場，是看成一個「技藝」，我們在這邊的《產業文創條例》裡面有一個叫做「運動表演業」，是一個行業，所以其實包含任何由現場大量觀眾願意收看表演性質的運動都是「運動表演業」，跟體育的概念可以脫鉤。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為從臺灣文化的脈絡，體育是德、智、體、群、美，是小孩必須要學習的，因此教育部的朋友列在「體育」或者是「智育」好像有一點怪，我現在的想法是不要想成體育或者是智育性質的東西，比較像是「運動表演」的產業，在學習的過程中，我們予以輔導。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想相關的條例跟其他的東西上一次的公聽會，你們也有派人來，所以那一個逐字稿我已經給所有的部會參考過，他們現在的回應是對於選手在那一場裡面所提出來主要的，我相信是三個，分別是兵役上、出國比賽，第三個是能不能開專業課程的部分，尤其是技術高中上——我想11日大家都會看到具體的回答。" }, { "speaker": "蔡錦文", "speech": "好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們先要有這個才能討論大型賽事，不然連外國選手的簽證都不能發。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得不是不能談，但是要等這三個議題在部會層次有解決之後，我們按照他們解決的實際狀況再來談，可以嗎？" }, { "speaker": "蔡錦文", "speech": "瞭解。" }, { "speaker": "黃偉權", "speech": "這方面，Garena當然是隨時願意跟你們合作，一起促進電競方面的發展。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然，ok，所以大型賽事今天只能先處理到這邊。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在特色文創方面，因為我具體現在負責的項目是三個：" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第一，開放政府：而開放政府包含開放資料、開放API，政府給民間看還有公民參與，比如：參與式的各種各樣平台，有網路跟實體，也就是output跟input的循環為主。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第二，社會企業：我們知道新加坡也很關心社會企業，主要的是企業以營利為目的，但是越來越多的公司說社會上的影響跟賺錢同等重要，這個叫做「社會責任企業」或者是「社會企業」，這個在臺灣也是有特色、文創，比如手作品或者是一些在原住民有想要輔導當地原住民族，自行創業或者是地區特色的東西，他們透過非營利組織的方式去集結，但是非營利組織會需要捐款，所以有的非營利組織也同時要有一個永續經營的可能性。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，在這一個平台上，我相信我們本來就已經有社會企業的公開登錄的平台，如果你看我們的社會企業平台上名錄，自己篩選一下哪一些可以聯絡的，我想你們可以主動去聯絡，上面都有聯絡方式。如果實際上需要我這邊進行協調會或整合的話，再隨時跟我說，但是其實因為這一套系統是從馮燕前政委開始建立，到現在已經相當順暢，所以不管是輔導、評選、登錄的這一些機制上，我們跟經濟部中小企業處及勞動部的朋友都有定期會面的合作平台，所以會面的紀錄其實我們都會公布與今天這個同一個網站之外，我相信你們可以主動去聯絡這一些社會企業。" }, { "speaker": "黃偉權", "speech": "這兩點可不可以讓我回應？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "請說。" }, { "speaker": "黃偉權", "speech": "有關於API，我們Garena計畫中可能是明年要在臺灣開創支付平台，當然應該是透過本地的銀行一起合作，但是支付平台要有充足及豐富功能的話，比如Javascript等，這也是需要跟當地政府或者是市政府聯繫起來，這方面日後希望可以跟你或者是你的一些同事合作，且順利開放這個功能。" }, { "speaker": "黃偉權", "speech": "第二，有關於社會企業的部分，其實我們「蝦皮」有兩個特色，一個是「蝦皮」可以算是民主化的商場，無論是大小企業或者是個人賣家都隨時歡迎；再者，「蝦皮」本身已經是幫賣家負責運輸或者支付等功能，也許在這一方面我們可以幫社會企業減輕負擔，同時也可以幫他們開拓一條路往東南亞各個市場跟消費者介紹一下產品及公益上活動。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "瞭解。其實我從社會企業的發展看來，本來就會有一些比較注重社會的面向，有一些比較注重企業的面向，沒有好壞之分，每一家的想法不一樣；當然會需要更好的服務跟物流上的支援，這個都是很自然的。我主要的想法是，主要你們沒有排除性的話，我當然鼓勵你們盡可能去聯絡，所以這一個題目先這樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們就到第三個新創。我想之前也有來拜會過的是TiEA，其實有一些朋友都已經跟你們很熟了。" }, { "speaker": "蔡錦文", "speech": "很熟了，對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他們自己有一個生態系，包括Demo Day。其實我在數位經濟這一個題目上，我進來之後這個不是我的業務了，我的業務只有在數位的部分提供制定經濟政策及外交談判政委同事們建議，但是那個比較像是幕僚或者是建議性質的工作，所以其實你們去找鄧振中老師是對的，我想他也充分理解到，我們現在需要和新南向的這一些朋友建立關係。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "針對早期的研究工作或者是早期的聯絡工作，我們理解新加坡的私部門跟公部門都做了非常多這樣的工作，所以我相信他們跟你們會有非常多的實質合作管道，你們給他的資訊，如果他需要我的意見，我會提供，但是我不會進行政策上的決定。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我想關於創業以及國際貿易這部分，從我的角度看起來，完全是私部門的事，但是公部門處理到這些議題的話，我是以一個建議的角色。" }, { "speaker": "蔡錦文", "speech": "這麼難得機會見到政委，還有沒有（問題）？" }, { "speaker": "蔡錦文", "speech": "我覺得這樣的整合對臺灣非常重要，所以今天來拜會，想聽聽您的意見，非常謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Hello." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Hello. Keeping busy. How are you?" }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "It is raining out, after all." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Did you just arrive today?" }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Last night. We were in Hong Kong and Tokyo." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Here’s my card. It’s a formality, but..." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Formality still has its place, correct?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, I think so. We’re recording this. Did your people tell you?" }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "With your permission...here we go now." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "How are you finding your time in government?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s been more or less the same. I’ve been working as an adviser for the previous cabinet, but also working on open government. For me, it’s mostly just the cabinet telling me to not focus any other time with, let’s say, Apple consulting or Valley companies, and dedicate full time to the public service." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Otherwise, I’ve been doing more or less the same work as what we call open government." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Hence the recording." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Hence the recording. It’s a closed‑door meeting, as you requested, but then we would want the other ministries who are actually in charge of related policy‑making...my role in this government is a channel, so that other ministries who couldn’t participate in our meeting still has this information somewhere." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "I’m just curious, what areas specifically are you spending most of your time on now?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "My three mandates are open government, social enterprises, and then what we call youth council." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Youth council?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Youth council, and that’s it. With open government, I spend my time working on the output side, which is open source, open API, open data, which as I understand, the US Digital Service also does a lot of the same thing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Just today, they launched code.gov, which is something that we very much are inspired by the White House. There’s this mandate that all the administration has to open‑source 20 percent of their code. This is something that we will want to learn from. Also, the civil participation side, which is the input side. We’re involved in multi‑stakeholder meetings and civil participation, participatory budgeting and things like that." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "The data efforts that have been terrific, I think, just getting more tech talent not to make necessarily the current government, but to apply in a few years, both on data, but also the user experience. To make people’s interaction with government as consistent as it is with the best private sector really can go a long way in building trust, right?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah. The idea is that the government should focus on providing services in the form of APIs, if necessary. Then the private sector and the civil society can design the best user experience they want, using the API provided by the government." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In the previous century, it’s usually the front end and back end are built together. It’s strongly coupled, and people cannot really change that. Now we’re trying to move to decouple that convention." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "I’m curious, jumping into how you see ride‑sharing specifically and some of the debates in government, and how that relates to...obviously, the government’s very clear that they want to have Taiwan be a go‑between, a Silicon Valley of the West, and really be a place of innovation." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "How do you see some of the debates around ride‑sharing, the technology aspects of that, how it fits into the government’s broader goals and ambitions?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We’re not trying to be the Silicon Valley of the West. There is a Silicon Valley in the West, and that’s the Silicon Valley." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "I’m sorry. Silicon Valley in Asia. It’s my lack of sleep." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s fine, but still, we are not trying to be a Silicon Valley of Asia. The plan we had was what we call Asia connecting to Silicon Valley. Taiwan is like a connector that links with Asia and connects with the Silicon Valley." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We’re not trying to “shanzhai”, to copy the Silicon Valley, or be a copy of Silicon Valley. I think it’s unique. Until five weeks ago, I was still working with Valley companies." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Where were you living when you were out there, by the way?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I mostly visited. I visited the Valley from time to time, but I am always based in Taiwan. I was telecommuting full‑time." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In any case, if the idea was to be a connector, a hub if you will, and one of the many hubs that links the other hubs in Asia. There’s many, right? There’s Singapore. There’s Hong Kong. There’s Korea. There’s Japan. So just to build a stronger link." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We’re not trying to be a Silicon Valley, but we do want to connect the talent, the regulatory framework and everything, so that we can connect better towards our peers in the Silicon Valley. That’s the main vision." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Ride‑sharing, incidentally, is not (laughs) part of the Asia connecting to Silicon Valley plan. For this plan, in particular, we are focusing more on the deregulation or regulatory normalization. Of course, from the Silicon Valley side, there’s demands like the digital two dozen, and then Internet neutrality and Open Internet. Those are very interesting things that we need to work on." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "On the Asian context, we also have our original APEC Privacy Framework, and also the EU side of the privacy framework, and we can look at that as well. Ride‑sharing has not yet come up on the agenda of Asia‑Silicon Valley plan. That’s just what it is." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Well, we’d love to do it. If I can give you the elevator pitch, obviously we’re a technology company. Our technology, here in Taipei and elsewhere, is creating economic activity on ground in cities, both on the rider side, so people have a different way to get around, and ultimately a more affordable way." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "That doesn’t compete with...I know the debate here in Taiwan and a lot of places starts with the old way ‑‑ taxi versus ride‑sharing ride. Every piece of data we see around the world suggests that the market grows." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "There’s some competition for a taxi market, but we don’t really talk about the taxi market in our company. We talk about the personal driver market, and how we get people to turn more of those trips into ride‑sharing, maybe in connection with public transport." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Then obviously on the driver’s side, it’s creating a lot of economic opportunity here. Our hope would be that, as many countries around the world have found a new regulatory framework embracing ride‑sharing...because I think it’s important." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Obviously, I’d imagine part of the road map here is autonomous transportation, making cities congestion‑free and emissions‑free. I think this stage is pretty important in getting people used to sharing cars, because ultimately we’d love to bring car‑pooling here, which is two or three people on an Uber ride." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You also want to bring flying cars." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Well, eventually." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Vertical." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Well, right. Our deal is, \"Let’s look at every way to make our cities more local.\" But I think that this is a really important bridge to that autonomous future, maybe flying cars. In understanding that, the way you regulate that, as every law around the world has, understand some of the differences between ride‑sharing and how we’ve traditionally thought of for‑hire transportation." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Basically, the market’s going to grow. The way people get around cities changes. We’re growing a pot. We’re not to dividing a pot. Again, I think that it sends the message of being friendly towards innovation, understanding that this device is so powerful. It’s creating a tremendous amount of work, and in our case, also changing the way people get around." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "It’s really interesting, because our tech’s just not living in the cloud, monetizing from above. So much of the economic activity is staying on the ground here and improving people’s lives." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "I hope that, as you guys think through how to regulate ride‑sharing, obviously you’ll look at what other countries have done, and work out an extension here. But we are really concerned with where the courts are. They’re thinking about doing astronomical fines for people just driving their own car, trying to make a little bit of extra money." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "I think that would be a really damaging both signal to send, but also a terrible thing for those people. They’re retirees, they’re teachers, they’re entrepreneurs, just trying to make a little extra money. Hopefully, that won’t come to pass." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Our hope is we can figure out the regulatory situation, so then we can sit down with legal and development and say, \"OK, let’s think about mobility, transportation, economic growth, your activity, economically, for retirees, for women.\" Those can be the conversations we’re having with government right now in those places, once we get through these core regulatory questions." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "They’re not that complicated. At the end of the day, I would look at ride‑sharing as pretty much a known thing now. They’re just the normal issues that we have to go through." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "To very quickly recap, a year ago I was helping to facilitate a multi‑stakeholder discussion here on the vTaiwan platform, about exactly the regulatory structure that you talk about. We had thousands of participants. It was the Uber drivers, UberX drivers, and also traditional taxi drivers, but also people who are not yet drivers for any one side but want to think deliberately about this topic together." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then we had, of course, a lot of division of ideas, but because we employ a Pol.is platform that takes the principle component of everybody’s ideas and present it in an easy‑to‑understand, two‑dimensional form. People still arrive at some consensus, very strong, like 95 percent consensus." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then we made the regulatory auditory structure based on people’s block consensus, even among people who are divisive. One of the consensus was basically taking Uber as a source of inspiration, saying that it is true that we have a way to help taxis that does not depend on the car having any yellow paintings, any medallions, or any other markers. It really is a new way to call a car. That’s true." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The other innovation that Uber brings is this 5‑star system that let’s not just the passengers, but also the drivers, who can also have their reputation for the clients. I think these are some things that are very inspirational and that we do want to learn from." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Just last month we passed what we call the e‑taxi regulation, or more formerly taxi driver certification regulation structure, so that any company who just want to introduce this non‑painted yellow, non‑medallion fleet can apply to the ministry of transportation, and also operate just exactly like Uber with this 5‑ star and with the app that shows the whole license plate number, the driver’s name, and so on, so that everybody has a transparency and the record of what exactly goes where." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I thank you for bringing the inspiration. I do agree that it is the consensus of, regardless of who they’re working from, that we do have a regulatory structure for this, and now we do have. Of course, if Uber Taiwan is willing to register as one of the fleets, that would be perfect. I don’t know." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "We’re not a taxi company, and no one regulates us in the entire world. We are a tech company, and the transportation that’s provided ‑‑ criminal, and driving checks on the drivers, like insurance, vehicle requirements, all that’s part of the regulations around the world. But understanding the other advancement is not rates, it’s a safety that’s happening on the trip, full GPS tracking, no anonymity..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "These are in our regulations, as well." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Right, but again, to suggest that we should register as a taxi company is not the way it’s been done anywhere else in the world. It will create too high of barriers to entry." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Tell me why." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Someone who just wants to drive their own Toyota Prius for four weeks ought to be able to do that in their own car, as long as they go through the right checks. I think that really the tension here ‑‑ and I appreciate that you guys have looked at this and made some adjustments ‑‑ is trying to figure out how to shoe‑horn what we do into all the taxi regulations, that has never been, from our view, a good outcome or a satisfying discussions." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "It’s more about how do we fashion new regulations. By the way, a lot of people have looked at how to re‑regulate things with the taxi industry. Whether it’s given them more supply flexibility or pricing inflexibility, there’s a lot of things that we think make sense. Our view is this ought to be opened up and barriers to entry reduced for everybody." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We also put surge pricing into the regulation. We really took everything that you did and..." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "But again, to basically say a teacher or a retiree, someone should go through a tremendous amount of hoops to drive their own car for a few hours a week, that’s where I think the tension is." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Well, they just take four hours to get a professional driver’s license. It’s not that much. It costs I think less than $100 US. This is not a huge or a tremendous amount." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Indeed, there’s nothing in our new regulation that says they must drive full time or they must drive exclusively in business hours, or anything like that. I still fail to appreciate where is the hoops." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Well, no. I think getting a professional drivers’ license, I think registering with a taxi company, these things I think are inconsistent with where you see platforms like Uber. It’s not just Uber. There will be other ride‑sharing companies. Ecosystems emerge around it that really are interesting part of creating even a stronger entrepreneurial class here." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "I think that’s where the issue is. We’re happy to share some ideas with you more specifically about what we’d like to see here that would enable what we do, than have this threat of...my understanding is it’s closer to a $1 million US fine for drivers." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "For not obtaining a professional license, yes?" }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "That, from a proportional standpoint, there’s nothing like it in the world. It would be the most extreme situation in the entire world that we’ve ever seen, and we’ve seen a lot. (laughs)" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I think we dialed it down from the France fines, which was more than that. The French, I think it’s slightly higher, maybe 10 percent higher." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "We have a very good business in France, but again, it makes it harder for someone who’s just looking to augment their income. You have all the safety requirements involved. We’re not suggesting that. I think that there’s a misconception that we don’t want to be regulated. We’re regulated in many places around the world and believe that’s appropriate." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right, so the main contention is just to obtain professional driver’s license. You would like drivers to not obtain professional driver’s license, because it costs too much or..." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "For someone who’s just working, they’re not going to make this a career, and maybe they’re doing it just for a period of time...we have a lot of students in the summer time. All over the world, people just drive for a few weeks in December, on the holidays." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "We are doing, as we do elsewhere, criminal checks, driver checks, insurance checks, the vehicle requirements, all things that we think are appropriate. The notion of someone having to then commit to become a professional driver, go to different government offices, that’s something that generally we see as a deterrent." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Again, our view is citizens going out and making a little bit of extra money, while you’re still ensuring public safety, is a wonderful thing. Most people are, all over the world, not as satisfied as they’d like to be with their income situation. In some cases, they just need a little bit more, whether that’s over a period of time or whether it’s episodic." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "That’s where our philosophy comes in. It’s a very strong principle that there’s ways to do the regulations that ensure safety ‑‑ things like insurance, things like vehicle requirements ‑‑ that have lower barriers of entry, so the people are able to...without taking a long time. Within a week, they get on the road." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "As for the Ministry of Transport, from what I’ve been personally through to obtain a driver’s license, it’s really not more one week’s time. There is one exam, I think, one written exam, and that’s about it." }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "Yeah. It’s not required to be a professional driver. We called the taxi‑driver license a free occupation. That’s meaning you don’t have to get full‑time job. You might have a certain specification, that you have met skill..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right, it’s just certifying that you have more skill than a non‑professional driver. It’s a skill‑based examination, mostly about understanding the duties and responsibilities as a professional driver. That’s not a very high barrier of entry, personally speaking." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "If it is, and if it does cause a problem, of course the Ministry of Transport can look into streamlining the process. But, from my personal experience, it just involved going into one single office of the Ministry of Transport. It’s not multiple government agencies. If that’s the only barrier that’s preventing the current Uber drivers from obtaining their license, I’m sure that we can streamline the process." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "I appreciate that sentiment, and we look forward to more discussion about that. I think that’s important, because the model is really based on the ability...again, driving is something most of us can do. The technology has made it even easier for someone to turn on their phone, turn on their car, and make a little bit of money." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "What we see is there’s plenty of people...we only want our platform to work for people, so, \"You know what? This is how I’m going to spend most of my time and this is going to be my major source of income,\" it’s certainly going to work for drivers like that and partners." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "But the real growth comes from people who are just doing this in a very supplemental way and in understanding that there’s ways to provide regulations that give the public confidence in public safety, but also understanding that to have somebody who could be making additional money for a period of time not able to do that, that’s a personal tragedy for them. Their lives will be improved..." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "The other thing is, you want to...and I know this can sometimes be counterintuitive, but the larger ride‑sharing gets, the better effect you’re going to have in terms of reducing congestion. Why? No matter where somebody is in the Greater Taipei area, they know they’re going to be able to get a car in two or three minutes. When they know that’s the case, they use their car less." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Ultimately, we don’t have carpooling yet in Taipei, which we have in many parts of the world, what we call UberPOOL. I think the big public policy benefit is convincing people now not just to leave their car, but they’re willing to share a ride with somebody using technology to match their route..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure, sure." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "That’s the flywheel you want. If, through barriers of entry, you’re limiting the supply, it’s not just denying people the opportunity to make money. The whole system falls apart." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There is already ride‑sharing communities, usually around commutes to universities, and so on, in Taiwan. So far, there’s been no for‑profit operators, because the law was not allowing app‑based car dispatch." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now with the new regulation that was just passed last month, we’re now taking applications. We are now basically saying these are the professional drivers who, as we said, maybe they’re riding on the street and then contributing to congestion, because there’s no planned algorithm..." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "To make that efficient." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "...to make that efficient. We also have local and maybe non‑local technology companies who are willing to work with these fleets, to make e‑fleets that serve those under‑served areas or the areas that have a lot of congestion. That’s already happened as of a couple of weeks ago. We’re now taking our first batch of applications." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We do want to, of course, make the roads congestion‑free and eventually move to a more autonomous or semi‑autonomous cycle, although I think the rides of your Otto line, the long‑haul trucks, with what we call software‑defined rails, will probably happen first. That’s easier and contributes more to the carbon neutral footprint of the whole traffic industry." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "All this, we can agree in principle, and we are already putting them in effect." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "I think figuring out a way to remove this threat of massive fines on drivers who are just local citizens trying to make a little bit of money, but also the notion...we are a technology company, and again we believe that transportation that’s provided, there’s a smart way to regulate that, but to really enable this to flourish." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "UberPOOL is something that only works when you’ve got enough liquidity. Using technology, in some of our major cities now, 50 percent of the people who use Uber are not getting in the back seat by themselves. They’re carpooling, particularly the younger generation." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure. UberPOOL is not in Taiwan though. I knew it from Paris." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "So, you’ve used it in Paris?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I’ve used it in Paris, yeah." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "It’s great, because really since the early ’70s, we’ve talked about how, as a global community, we can approach carpooling on scale, and it’s never really worked. There’s casual carpools, as you mentioned, but we’re starting to see, on scale, a pretty big behavior change around people’s willingness to share rides." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "With technology, you’re only inconveniencing them a few minutes. They get a half‑price ride, and most of them our drivers tend to gravitate towards fuel‑efficient vehicles. Eventually, those will all be electric, if the price comes down." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Again, I think that bridge is important to autonomy, because the autonomous future is going to rely on, obviously, technology being close to perfect, the regulatory structure being in place, infrastructure changes." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "It also is going to have to be behavior of people, that they’re comfortable doing that. Again, that’s where we think what we do, and other companies, is an important bridge." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, sure. I agree 100 percent. I think we’re in violent agreement, here." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Except on the details, because what you’re talking about, I don’t think is consistent with ride‑sharing being able to flourish. What I like to do is get back to you with some specific suggestions." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure, of course. My main agenda is just to listen to your side of the story, as complete as possible. I’m just saying that currently you were comparing a driver, a part‑time driver maybe, applying to Uber for background checks, for everything, and getting an Uber driver’s license, for lack of a better term." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "They have to have a driver’s license, obviously." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure, but an Uber driver’s license." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "...with our driving check." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "And 4.5 stars. Then, we’re comparing it to applying to a local authority of the Ministry of Transport, to go through very similar background checks and criminal records, and then pass a written exam about the responsibility of professional drivers." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I’m saying it’s comparable, but you’re saying that it’s not. I would like to hear more." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Our evidence suggests that things like written exams...again, in the year 2016, with technology..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s computerized, but anyway." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Going into offices...I think recognizing that you can accomplish those same things using technology and a more streamlined process. That’s based on a lot of experience about someone who’s just looking to do this in a very part‑time capacity, and maybe for a short period of time, is willing to do." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "It’s a different set of requirements when someone...although, I think that’s a good opportunity to look at what we could do to deregulate it for the taxi industry, too, to give them more maybe price flexibility, supply flexibility." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Generally, this is good for drivers. Most of the people driving on the Uber platform are just average citizens. They’re not professional drivers. But for professional drivers now, whether it’s taxi, limo, or truck, the nice thing is now they have another option." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "It’s not just choice for consumers who ride it. It’s a choice for consumers who drive." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, sure. When I was in Paris, one of the cars that I went into, I wouldn’t even call it an Uber car, because they have five different smart phones on the dashboard." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It does give the driver more choice. I do agree with that." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "That’s a great point, because really, for ride‑sharing to flourish, what you’ll find is those drivers will have our app open, another ride‑sharing app, two delivery apps open, whoever has work for them at the moment. It’s not an exclusive arrangement. They are not necessarily viewing themselves as a professional driver. They’re just using their app and their phone to make a little bit of money." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Some of that delivering people, some of that delivering goods. As you know, we’re doing food delivery in many places." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This goes back to the open API idea. If we do have an open API of those other ride‑sharing dispatches, for the delivery and everything, then we can aggregate it, so that the driver..." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "So you’re saying you want the government to basically do the..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No, anyone could." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Again, I think that that sense of, I guess the term is multi‑apping, that sense of making it even easier for people to make money on their own schedule, it’s incredibly important to have a regulatory structure that supports that at the foundation." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Without providing the right kind of regulations is...I think what we see here is maybe some adjustments, but it’s basically grafting some things onto existing taxi regulations. Again, we haven’t seen ‑‑ in the rest of the world ‑‑ that work." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "What’s worked is brand‑new regulations that understand what ride‑sharing is and what it isn’t. Again, we’re not suggesting we should not be regulated. We think smart regulation makes a lot of sense. Obviously Taiwan is unique, like every country is, but we’ve got a lot of good examples of how other countries in the region and elsewhere have handled it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We did look at all of it last year, when we were making the civil deliberation about what we call the private, for‑profit driving. At the end of the day, as you said, it’s making some more money, so it is for profit. Otherwise, it’s just a community carpool." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "That’s right, but I think that’s what is required for people to engage in the activity. They obviously want to make a little more money on their schedule, but the societal benefits that come out that are pretty incredible." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "We’re starting to change the way we see people think about moving around in cities. They don’t use us for everything. They use it to fill in gaps. Some people use us three or four times a month, but those three or four times a month, they know, wherever they are in the city, they can press a button and get a ride in two or three minutes." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "They use it in conjunction with public transportation and taxis. It all fits together. But what we do is unique." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I do agree. It’s making the pie larger, so to speak. It is providing people who wouldn’t normally be conveniently calling a taxi a way to participate in transportation, so they wouldn’t then have to drive their own car and things like that, so I agree 100 percent." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is something that we can streamline. I don’t think it’s paper‑based nowadays to take a written exam. When I say written, I just mean written. It can be like e-written." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I think our main difference still lies in the view of the regulation we’re passing the previous month, which you described as grafting it onto an existing law. As far as I understand ‑‑ of course I wasn’t Minister of Transportation, but I did participate in initial sketch of the regulation ‑‑ it is, in our idea, a new section, and it’s not shared with the existing taxis." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The whole idea is not to convert existing taxis or existing fleets. It’s to set up a diversified, a different fleet that doesn’t have a medallion, that isn’t painted yellow, and is exclusively app‑based." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We almost say that it has to be paid exclusively through e‑payment. We have a sunrise period. For initial year or two, they can still take cash, but eventually they will all switch, which keeps their audit trail. That can make your case, also. (laughs)" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I do agree on all the principles. Whether or not Uber wants to work with one of the fleets who did register and become the technology supplier, like you did in China, in the Mainland, I believe, or you want to register a local company. It’s your choice, of course, but it’s the regulatory structure." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "That’s a fleet approach, as opposed to individuals using their own car and using this technology." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Well they can join a co-op fleet." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "That’s where some of the tension is. As we look at it, we don’t think what’s on the books here and this threat of a massive fine on individuals is consistent with scaling. It’s not just for us, but for others. If it’s OK, I’d love to get back to you with a little bit more detail on that, the arbitrage between what’s existing and the issue." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Again, I think that sense of fleets, taxi companies, that has never been part of the regulations that really work well, that really allow ride‑sharing to flourish, and the ecosystem around it. We appreciate your perspective, which is you understand the value of this, but sometimes we have the difference between...because the devil is in details, as they say." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Sometimes very small things that may seem terrible intrusive, our evidence‑based history suggests that we just won’t be able to see the scale that you’re looking for. We have violent agreement I think about the shared goals. I think the means to allow this to happen are still some things we got to work through." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You mentioned fleet size and you mentioned the fines. I think there is no restriction of the minimum size of the fleet in our new e‑taxi regulation. It could be just five cars deciding to share riders among themselves. Of course, I do agree the liquidity and the critical mass in a certain region is important." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We do want to work with regional cities to set up fleets that are designed for maybe the night time, maybe for special needs, maybe for elderly, and things like, like special service fleets, which is why we call them fleets. They are really just individual people who passed the official drivers license and want to serve that particular public cause." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Again, I don’t really know which of these models will work, but we have changed the pricing structure so that they can charge more, even on surge pricing. We think there are some economic incentives for them to participate in this kind of new fleet." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "As for fines, I think this is not something the administration has proposed. If I remember correctly, it’s the legislators. Probably just they decide, and I’m not in connection with that legislator. I just read public information, as you did, but public information says that it’s to be charged proportional to the capital of the fleet company, which is why I think the press called it anti‑Uber. You do have a market cap that is huge, so it’s proportional in the sense of industry proportional." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "I think, rather than putting historically large fines on individuals, let’s find a way to craft regulations that work for our shared goals and more mobility solutions, and ride‑sharing, of course. Again, this is not that complex of an issue." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No, it’s not." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "It needs something, I think, but the principle of making it easy for individuals, and not to think about this from a taxi fleet perspective, is really what is required to have all the benefits that flow from ride‑sharing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure, and I think maybe we all agree, so if you do have other suggestions to the details..." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Absolutely." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "...of how we’re contributing, then we can talk about it here or we can follow up." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "I’d like to reflect on this conversation, and whether it’s as a follow‑up call, let me put some thoughts on paper, \"Here’s what we see in e‑taxi proposal, here’s where the tension is, and some suggestion for how to move forward.\"" }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "I think Taipei, and really the entire country, is going to be such a great example of how ride-sharing can really help. You think about the government goals of stronger economic growth. Ride-sharing surprised me. Six years ago, we wouldn’t have thought we’d be here in Taipei talking to you, that ride-sharing can be a pretty important economic growth engine." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "But also, from a mobility standpoint... as it turns out, there was huge gaps in our transportation ecosystem. I certainly didn’t have a full appreciation for it until you begin to see the service really explode, and you see how it’s changing, in some way, how people move around." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Millennials, if they had their choice, would rather not drive. This next generation, Generation Z, probably doesn’t want to have to learn how to drive, so we have to have enough transportation options, I think, to support those desires." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "And then what you get out of that is obviously what we all want, which is fewer cars on the road, and those on the road, have more people in them, and as many of those as possible be emissions-free or better for the environment." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "But I appreciate you taking the time. It was helpful to hear your perspective on this, and I hope that we can figure out a solution that works for the government, and works for us, and that’s generally what we’ve seen around the world, is this is not a divide that can’t be bridged." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "As a technical geek, I’m more interested in those autonomous long-haul trucks, and really, the flying cars -- the VTOLs in Project Elevate that you’re bringing in." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But these things have a distinctly different theme compared to what you just described, right? We don’t have people who drive helicopters for fun, a few hours or a few minutes during their business hours. It has to be something professional, that there really is no question around that, right?" }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Sure." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "And then for professional truck drivers, we of course established a even more strict regulatory structure, and we’re not saying that people can just hop on a random truck and drive them home as amateurs, like \"anybody can drive a truck.\" I don’t think that’s true, right?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Even for automated truck driving, you’d still have to have the local part of it. Once they finish the highway, there has to be somebody who drives it to the local depot." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Right now, the technology is more for the longer stretches of highway, yes." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right, so at least for the next, I would say, 5-10 years, we have to work on the way to how to switch from autopilot to the local roads." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Again, I wouldn’t really trust it to a random person who just want to drive a truck for fun, even though they may have an amateur driver’s license." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "I think that’s right, but I think there’s a big distinction between that and someone getting in their Toyota Prius, who may be a teacher, or a student, or a small business person and saying, \"Yeah, I’m going to make a little bit of money for a period of time.\"" }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "We need to finding a way to encourage that. There are some distinctions, I think." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right, so what I’m saying is that in the long term, to achieve our emission-free goal, your next steps would be more robotic-based. I do agree, and I think we can come up with innovative regulatory structures to make that happen." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But in that future, actually, the habit that you are now building, in the sense of trusting amateur drivers, is actually counterproductive to the future you’re describing, because at that time, we will need another professional class that can be the interface between the robots and the public." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "But I do think this period, just in terms of passenger transportation, to get people more used to not buying their own cars, not using as much, sharing transportation, getting used to carpooling, that’s clearly going to be an important bridge to autonomous driving." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes. But then, according to your plan, you will still need them to get professional licenses as either robotic operators or augmented pilots at that time." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Well, we’ll see. I don’t know if that’s true or not." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s in your business plan." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "I don’t know if that’s true in cars, right? I think flying cars are a different issue than autonomous cars that are on our surface streets." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So maybe they will become guides, like guided-tour operators?" }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Well, the future’s going to be interesting, but what we know is right in front of us, is let’s make ride-sharing work here in Taiwan, right?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Minister, I appreciate the time." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I’m very happy that we get to exchange our views candidly." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "Yep. Always better than the alternative, right?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, exactly." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "All right. Thank you." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Cheers." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "I do think there are some more details that we can work out. I will ask the local team to prepare materials and send them over to you." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure. Just note that everything you send my way will be made public." }, { "speaker": "David Plouffe", "speech": "That’s fine." } ]

[ { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "觀眾朋友大家好，我是阿娟，陳斐娟，歡迎收看54新觀點，今天54新觀點，特別為您專訪到唐鳳，唐鳳有一個傳奇的人物、傳奇的人生，有個與眾不同的個性，我們等一下好好拷問她。我們來介紹在現場的唐鳳！" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "唐鳳我們一開始，先來做個造句練習，現在很流行做造句，小學生的造句都非常有趣，我們來用「史上第一」來造句，看看你有多少史上第一，我先示範：史上第一個三十五歲的年輕政委，換你。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是用「史上第一」開頭？史上第一個以開放政府為主要業務的政務委員。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "史上第一個只有國中畢業的政務委員。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "史上第一個用VR的方式，把自己做成VR人像今天還在外面演講的政委委員。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "史上第一個在性別欄上填「無性別」的政務委員。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "史上第一個把自己政務委員的辦公室作為開放空間，很多朋友可以來參加的政務委員。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "史上第一個在三十三歲就退休的政委。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "先這樣吧！" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "好，她有很多史上的第一，也有很多人所不知道的唐鳳，我們今天的節目除了在54新觀點的原時段播出之外，在訪問的過程當中，也透過網路直播讓所有的網友也可以餐與，所以我們分三段：第一段是之前透過三立新聞網蒐集到的網友提問，第二段是阿娟想要問她什麼，所以好好問她；第三段是透過網路，包括三立新聞網及三立FB的所有網友都可以在上面留言，您的問題馬上就要問唐鳳。直播一刀未剪，觀眾朋友及線上所有的網友都可以看到最真實一刀未剪的唐鳳。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "先把網友提問做了一番整理，網友很好奇的是你平常有沒有玩手遊，你喜歡或不喜歡玩《英雄聯盟》或者是其他的遊戲？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "之前的寶可夢有玩一陣子，但是它很快退流行，所以後來沒有玩。桌面遊戲的話，其實我都是玩回合制遊戲，像 XCOM 2或者是《文明帝國六》，才剛出，這些我都很喜歡玩。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "這是你平常的休閒活動，你大概花多久的時間？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "每天大概半小時左右。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "很多家長擔心很多小朋友一坐上電腦就廢寢忘食，甚至有些小朋友，家長擔心得「電腦上癮症」還是「網路遊戲上癮症」，怎麼辦？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想大部分的時候就是覺得只理電腦，不理爸爸、媽媽，所以最簡單的方式是坐下來跟他一起打。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "坐下來跟他一起打？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！這樣就…" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "本來有一個小孩被關在電腦前面，接著又有一個老公被關在電腦前面，那不是很慘嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就全家都可以在VR前面。重點是如果大家共享體驗的時候，小孩會知道爸爸、媽媽是懂我的，下一次換爸爸、媽媽約他去爬山或什麼，都是比較容易答應，都是互相的。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "有沒有網路上癮的問題？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然有。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "那怎麼辦？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "    不過它是一種癥狀，它本身並不是一種疾病，一個人在現實生活當中可能沒有人給他擁抱、安慰，他只好到網路上去找，所以這一種癥狀，我不覺得它是一種疾病，但是你發現自己的小孩這樣的時候，當然可以試著在現實生活中找更多的朋友。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "第二個，網友朋友提問是你喜歡iPhone或者是Android手機？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "都喜歡，各有一支，我現在左右口袋各放一個。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "    真的嗎？那你可以拿出來借我們看一下？左右口袋各放一個？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "    是啊！" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "    誰都不得罪！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "（拿出）真的誰都不得罪，所以…" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "所以你有iPhone手機也有Android？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，這一支是iPhone、一支是Android，所以看起來一樣。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "我們可以看一下桌面的圖案嗎？我們好奇桌面到底是放了什麼圖案。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是這樣嗎？桌面的圖案其實就是它出廠的圖案耶！我沒有特別去更改它。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你沒有像一般年輕人擺他最心愛的，比如寵物的照片或者是家人的照片或？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": " 完全沒有，它就是出廠圖案。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "所以你各帶一支手機，你平常怎麼區分什麼時候用iPhone？什麼時候用Android？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "公務用是iPhone，自己私人是用Android。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你留給我的電話是？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "都有耶！我留給你的是公務那一支，所以應該是iPhone。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "    瞭解了，好，第三個問題：網友想問的是，你從政的使命是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我是出於興趣的政務委員，沒有什麼使命可言。但是當時林全院長希望我幫忙的主要是開放政府，所以這個是我的主要業務，但不敢說是使命。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "他是透過誰找你？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他是透過我找我（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "「他是透過我找我」？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "    對，當時有一個「亞洲連結矽谷重新定義會議」，他是約我去開會，在那邊他是說會希望一位數位政務委員，希望我幫忙找人，我就幫忙找了一堆人，但是這一些人都認為覺得我比較適合，所以我到最後就自己進來。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "公親變事主（台語）？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，就是這樣（台語）。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "其實我們漏了講史上第一位「數位政委」，什麼是「數位政委」？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「數位政委」顧名思義就是不只一位，是很多位（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "      是這個意思嗎（笑）？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "真的是這樣子啊！我當時跟林全院長講的是我一個人貢獻有限，但是如果他提供給我的資料全部都可以公開的話，我們就可以讓這個社會感興趣當政委這個位置的人都可以提供他們的想法或貢獻這些東西，所以好比像密件或國家機密我都不接觸，給我的理論上都可以公開。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "意思是你看得到，民眾都可以看得到？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是這意思。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "    所以你扮演民眾眼睛這樣的角色？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "  或一個通道吧！" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "         這些讓我想到，之前我看到新聞說你一個禮拜有兩天不上班？是這樣嗎？還有禮拜三和禮拜五？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我只有禮拜六跟禮拜日不上班（笑）。我每天都有上班，禮拜三跟禮拜五我不在行政院裡開會，其實很多政務委員同事他們都有出外的行程，好比演講或者參加工作坊參加一些實地勘場，我只是把這一些排在禮拜三跟禮拜五，院裡的同事都知道一、二、四一定約得到我，只是這樣子而已。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "一、二、四是在室內上班，三、五在戶外上班？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一、二、四是在行政院裡，三、五是在行政院外。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "對啊！一個是在室內，一個是在戶外？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實這裡也是室內（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "但是是在行政院外上班？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": " 是的。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "說到上班，之前因為你拋出遠距上班這一件事，引起很多聲音，有正面的，也有負面的，負面的說法是「唐鳳有特權嗎？為什麼她可以一個禮拜有兩天遠距上班？」說到特權這一件事，他們還反應說，你去開會的時候帶很多東西，說都不需要帶，你是在彰顯有特別的設備嗎？包括你有一台很厲害的電腦，有一個什麼360度那個東西是什麼？可不可以show給我們看？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是，當然。其實像我今天上午在院裡開會，我同時也用VR錄了投影片，在工研院IEK的研討會（播放），大家只要在當時戴上這個眼鏡，好像就可以進入我的辦公室，聽我預錄的一段錄影。除此之外，我自己也被投影到這個現場，變成一個浮空投影，在那邊進行演講，但事實上那個是我昨天錄到半夜十一點錄的一段東西，他們早上去播放，所有的這一些3C設備其實是同一個目的，就是讓大家不一定在同一個時候做事情，我可以先錄一段在那邊放，或者像現在大家看直播，提的問題可以馬上進入我們的議程，除了把空間上的限制消除之外，時間上更有彈性。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "讓空間跟時間可以重新組合。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是的。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "依據每個人的需要做不同的重組。傢私不是可以透過你的pad看到嗎？它們長什麼樣子？它們厲害的電腦長什麼樣子？可以看一下嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "    可以啊！" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "厲害的電腦在什麼地方？為什麼你走到哪裡，經常都帶那個電腦，那個電腦可以做的事跟我們一般電腦可以做的事有什麼不同？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一台電腦其實是華碩的電腦，這台電腦其實我滿早就買的，應該是剛出來最先幾個人訂的吧！它主要的特性是它是一台水冷式的筆電。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "水冷式筆電？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，也就是電腦當它運作功率很強或者是很快的時候，它散熱會很困難，因為它接了一個水冷器，所以可以把它跑成比一般桌機更快的速度。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "為什麼需要這麼快的速度？主要是兩個用途，一個是我剛才說的虛擬實境，可以使用一個很高階的顯示卡，讓大家戴上去的時候，可以馬上看到虛擬的狀況，當時買的時候，只有微星跟華碩各出一台，都很貴。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "所以那時網友是說開會不需要用到這種配備齊全的電腦，你是為了展示，但其實不是？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那一場其實是電子競技，他們邀我去打 XCOM 2 ，為了要跑XCOM2這個遊戲，所以為了要跑XCOM2這台機器可以跑這個；另外一個用法是機器學習，完全同樣的設備，像我在當蘋果顧問的時候，我們是用這種設備去訓練像Siri這種可以跟你講話的機器人，這種機器學習也都是用同樣的設備在做事。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "Siri是你在做蘋果顧問時的idea？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "相關的一個專案。它本來就已經開發好了，但蘋果把它購併，而購併還不會講中文跟亞洲語言，我是在蘋果的時候幫他們一點忙。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "幫他們透過Siri，有中文跟使用者溝通？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "說到這一些傢私，你揹了這麼多的高科技用具，據說你是為了讓這一些設備服務你自己，讓你的生活可以更清楚地被整理、分類或者被瞭解，我這樣講可能有一點模糊，觀眾朋友可能聽不懂。簡單來講，我看過一篇報導，說你透過一些高科技的東西，把你每天的生活錄下來，錄下來之後，你就會發現你自己有一些不知道的習慣，或者每一天做什麼事，你就會整理、分類甚至做自我反省。我可以瞭解一下一個人每天把自己的生活記錄下來是什麼感覺？為什麼會有這樣的構思？又怎麼達到你想達到的目的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實很簡單講，我們以開會這個動作來講好了，我在院裡面，只要是我主持的會議，我會請一位我們叫做「速錄師」。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "「速錄師」？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "    就是快速記錄的一個朋友，她一分鐘大概是…" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "…有點像是速記的概念。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，有點像速記的概念。但一般我們的速記，我們一分鐘，打字大概100多字上下，這個已經算快的了，但是這一位朋友她可以一分鐘打到300多字，也就是我們講話不過一分鐘300字，她打字的速度可以比我們講話的速度還要快。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "大家都說你講話的速度很快。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "    對，但是她打字的速度比我講話還要快，所以在這個前提下，我在這邊講的每句話，她這邊可以馬上變成文字。然後變成文字之後，我再把文字寄給所有來參加部會的朋友，讓他們看一下在這一場會議具體答應的是什麼，不只是這些處長、副處長們看到，也給承辦的科室看到，如果他的老闆答應一些他做不到的，他可以馬上跟我講。在這樣子逐步確認之後，十天大家提供各種資料之後，我們會把所有人提供的資料在十天後去公開，這樣子大家就不會覺得黑箱或者是覺得我們在內部每次都談不出結論，即使是大家答應而做不到，至少都可以看到我們到底當初怎麼想，然後答應了什麼，因為這樣的關係，所以承辦的壓力都滿大的，所以到最後的協調效率比較高。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "        但是我想問的是另外一個角度，因為我看到的報導是，你連日常生活也拍攝記錄嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有，只有上班的時候。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "因為我看到報導說，你為了讓你的生活能夠更清楚知道你有哪一些習慣或什麼，你會做拍攝，那個只有在工作上？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該是這樣講，我有一個原則，我知道你在看哪一篇了，那一篇我是跟親子天下的記者，他說只要有人在拍攝我，我一定要拍攝回去，如果有人要直播，我也要直播。好比：現在我事實上也在我的YouTube頻道直播，這是「對稱性」的概念。為什麼這樣做？是因為每一次對方取得的素材，好比影片或者是一些錄音的時候，我都要回去跟他談說可不可以公開、轉載或授權，其實很困難，大部分專業製作的朋友，都會有一套授權的方法，所以從我的角度來看，我只要自己取得一樣的，我就不用問過你了，我就可以拿去用了，那個是取得相同授權素材的想法，我們叫做「CC授權」。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "另外，網友還有問過Uber這一件事。Uber你坐過嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然，當然。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你知道它是不合法的嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有，我坐的是合法的。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "合法的Uber是在哪裡坐？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "Uber事實上在臺灣剛進來的時候，用的是合法的租賃車，是R牌的車，當你看到它的車牌是「R」開頭的時候，它在臺灣是有設立車行、有職業駕照的司機在開，而且是有繳稅的；但是在這樣子開了一陣子之後，後來他們忽然間推了一個比計程車便宜的非法車隊。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "所以你坐的是合法的車隊？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你對於Uber現在的普及及它的不合法，其實產生了某種衝突，普及是所有的消費者都覺得它很方便，Uber服務很好、也很便宜，顯然認為社會上真的有這樣的需求，但是不合法又衝擊到體制、法規、制度及納稅，這兩個衝突你怎麼看？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這是網友要問為什麼不合法的部分，因為也有合法的部分，但是那部分我們先不動它。而且我們也會參考合法裡面做得好的部分，好比司機跟乘客可以互相打分數，好比像車子不一定要漆成黃色，好比不一定像小黃要有車頂燈，為什麼當時計程車要設計這樣？是因為在路上才可以攔路招，才認得出來那是一台計程車，但是很多地區可能比較偏遠，本來一定要用電話跟手機叫車，這時漆成黃色或者是車頂燈的意義非常小，在那一些地段的路上也不會有人攔，所以我們在這一些地段，特別是比較偏遠的地方，交通部就規劃參考Uber的做法，不管是打星等、不一定要漆成黃色所有這一些，做了一個「多元化計程車」的電子車隊，這樣的好處是好比像Uber一樣，好比像深夜的時候多收一點錢，好比去程到這邊，但是回程不一定載得到客人就會多收一點錢，但是透過Uber學習，把計程車的品質更加升高，這是好事。 另外一部分是Uber非法那部分最大的爭執…" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "…你覺得政府應該要鐵腕把Uber趕出臺灣嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那個爭執就是他們不願意去取得職業駕照的司機，這一點我覺得還是有一點堅持的，如果本來是做一個營業的行為，我做菜給你吃是一回事，開餐廳是一回事，所以我覺得還是要取得職業駕照，而且以我的經驗，我的朋友去取得職業駕照的時候，也沒有花非常久的時間，他也是上駕訓班、四個小時，去考個筆試跟路試就拿到了，我不覺得這是一個非常不合理的要求，如果Uber執意沒有辦法接受這個要求的話，我當然覺得說按照他們的資本額，課以罰金是合理的。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "有什麼辦法讓數位科技結合地方產業？比如現在有很多年輕人願意回到家鄉服務，但是沒有一個行銷的管道或者是行銷的平台，如何幫助這一些自耕農或小商家，並提升價值？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實在臺灣有很多嘗試，是類似一個合作社的概念，像「社區菜市長」，而這個合作社並不是一個我們想像中合作社很大的建築物還要進去，它像是在LINE群組..." }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "是一個虛擬的合作社？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是一個虛擬的合作社，但是裡面有一些配送方式，讓大家接觸到這一些自耕農，也知道好比我這邊需要多少菜、他種多少菜，哪一些之間互相媒合，或者是他碰到哪一些困難，還可以再請認同他的人幫助，所以真的是合作的目的合作社。這樣線上數位科技做出來的合作社，在臺灣其實從主婦聯盟「共同購買」就已經越來越蓬勃，我覺得我們未來從政府的角度，就是讓食農教育，讓大家更理解到現在有這一些線上的數位合作社在運作，讓他們的價值更加提昇。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "只剩下三分鐘，但是我們的問題很多。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "快問快答。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "全球暖化，極端氣候你相信嗎？為什麼會這麼問？ 全球暖化，極端氣候大家認為是common sense，但是川普不這麼說，他說這一些都是假的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想川普眼睛有一些業障（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "川普的眼睛業障深（笑）？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，可是業障比較深（笑）。我想到臺灣10月底還這麼熱，我想這個是知道的，不是相信不相信的問題，我們就在體會，可以請川普候選人來臺灣一下，可能會比較有感受（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "其實我最想知道這一件事，外星人你相信有嗎？你們有研究過外星人的議題嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我沒有研究耶！但是我對上火星非常有興趣，等到我們上火星，就有外星人了。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "等到我們上火星，我們自己就是外星人了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，我們自己就是外星人了。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "各國棒球總冠軍，他指的應該是「經典棒球賽」剛結束，你有沒有看？有沒有特別喜歡哪些球隊？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我真的沒有看所有職業運動的習慣，不好意思。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "所有的職業運動都沒有看嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "嗯。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你自己平常做什麼運動？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我自己平常是在VR裡面，我有做好比像弓箭（ Holopoint ），也有打球跟繪畫，其實在VR很多運動都可以從事，但那並不是職業的。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "但是仍然是室內的運動？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也是室外，網球就是室外的。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "我聽不太懂，VR運動怎麼做？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是說好比你在裡面打桌球或者是網球，你戴上眼鏡，你的手把就變成球拍，你就在溫布頓或者是其他地方，你就開始打。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你可以在戶外或者是室內做這一件事？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "都可以，但VR的器材目前在室內架比較容，你只要在戶外有接到電源，沒有什麼道理不能用。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "任何地方都可以打高爾夫球、任何地方都可以打撞球、任何一個地方都可以打網球？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，新一代的 VR 電腦，還沒有這種很笨重的水冷器，它還可以直接掛一個背包掛在後面，所以也沒有拉線的限制，它有電池，你就背上去登山，然後在山頂開始打球。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "但那個山是假的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你可以去真的山，但是配合一個高爾夫球場的山上——這個就叫做網實整合。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你去真的山，可是山上有一個假的高爾夫球場？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒錯，這個叫做「網實整合（Cyber-Physical System）」。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "將來的世界難以想像。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "最後一個問題，如果對岸網路駭客發動攻擊，有沒十八套據本應戰？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我沒有十八套劇本，我剛剛講國家機密我不接觸，這個在行政院裡面由資通安全處的簡宏偉處長負責，因為他的業務大部分都是國家機密，我其實是不知道的，但是我跟簡處長，我滿相信他的，我相信他有十八套劇本。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "我比較好奇的是，你是非常厲害頂尖的駭客，你攻擊過什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "駭客分為穿黑色帽子的，為了個人私利而攻擊。跟白色帽子的，看到系統有漏洞試著補強這個漏洞。但我是沒有帽子的，也就是我是看到一個系統有漏洞的時候，我想的並不是利用，也不是補它，而是我做一個新的系統；而這個新的系統沒有漏洞，所以我對漏洞沒有興趣。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你對漏洞沒有任何的興趣？所以你不做任何攻擊？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以是創造性的駭客。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "不戴帽子的駭客？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是的。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "我現在才知道駭客這麼多種，好，這個是網友的提問。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "接著是阿娟的提問，我有好多問題想問：第一，他們說你是180的政委，也就是很高的政委，我們可以看一下你的身材？站起來給我們看一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "（起立）OK，來，這樣還是算高吧！" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "面對鏡頭一下，好不好？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣嗎？" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "真的是滿高的。為什麼要特別讓你站起來給觀眾朋友看？因為很難想像像你這樣的身材、這樣的長相，你作為女裝打扮是什麼樣子？你有做過女裝打扮嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有啊！" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "給我們看一下好不好？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是這樣嗎？" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你有一些照片，對不對？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實…" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "我剛剛要錄影的時候就問唐鳳說「你有化過妝嗎」，她說「有啊」，我說「你有戴過假睫毛嗎」，她說「有啊」，很難想像，所以很想知道她化妝過後的唐鳳跟現在的唐鳳有什麼不同？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我沒有畫濃妝的習慣。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "這個畫過妝嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，裸妝。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "可是看不太出來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，其實我大部分的照片都是這樣子，就是當時他們在法國《解放報》拍了我許多照片。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "我看有什麼差別。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該是沒有。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "有啦！有一點差別，但是很不明顯。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "（放照片）對，對，對，我沒有畫濃妝的習慣。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "髮型也跟現在差不多？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是啊！" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "有女裝扮像的照片嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是其實跟現在差不多，所謂「跨性別」的意思就是不特別太過陽剛或太過陰柔。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你穿過裙子、高跟鞋嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "真的（日語）？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "真的（日語）。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "好想看，有穿裙子的照片，等一下可以看一下嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我 VR 裡面那張就是穿著裙子建模，我早上演講就是那一個模型出去。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "千變萬化、千面女郎（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "真的是。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "我們知道唐鳳的人生到目前為止是三十五歲，你可能經歷過很多人一輩子都沒有經歷過的事情，其中一件事是閉關，閉關觀眾朋友說我也閉關過，但是唐鳳在十四歲的時候閉關，你在哪裡閉關？你為什麼想要閉關？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當時其實主要是說，很具體說不想繼續唸國中，不想繼續唸國中是造成大家一陣恐慌，因為我家裡都很看重求學這一件事，大家會覺得「你國中不繼續唸就要去創業了，接下來的學習怎麼辦，會不會沒有辦法銜接」，像當時如果我要回去唸高中或者是大學，同等學歷還要等兩年，大家會覺得會好像耽誤到就學的進度，每一個人都有非常多不同的意見，上百人想要給我意見，所以我當時覺得不如先靜下來，所以是在烏來那邊，大概待了幾個星期的時間。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "所以在閉關之前決定不要上學？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "引起眾親友的反彈，所以你想閉關想一想這一件事？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，親友、老師、同學的所有人都有話說。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "烏來的小木屋是自己找的嗎？還是？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我母親辦了一個學校叫做「種籽學苑」，當時校地才剛剛確定的時候，剛好那邊有一位林老師，自己有一個小木屋，算是當地泰雅的酋長，就提供這樣子的一個地方。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你在閉關的那一段時間，你思考了什麼？據說出來之後，對你人生最大的改變是：一，你確定不要上學，後來你就走上自學之路；第二件事，你後來確定比較想作女人，這一段時間想什麼？有什麼刺激到你？有一天你突然被雷打到還是怎麼樣？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實也沒有啦！我十二歲的時候才剛上網的時候，其實大部分都是跨性別或者是性別流動的角色，當時其實我就已經…" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "這一句話聽不太懂。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是會取一個很中性的名字，或者是網路上跟別人溝通的時候，不太說我是男生或者是女生。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "那個是十二歲的時候就已經不太彰顯自己的性別？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，就已經是這樣了。所以，到十四、十五歲的時候，我自己覺得沒有太大的改變，但是我覺得差比較大的是，因為不需要再去上學了，所以服裝、儀容這一些是我自己決定，當時就可以做比較多的一些實驗，我想其實大部分的人國中升高中的時候，也都會想要自己打扮看起來不一樣，我覺得這個還算滿正常的。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "但是媽媽覺得你閉關出來比較女性化？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那是她的觀察囉！" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "但是你是覺得你在十二歲的時候，你慢慢覺得有不同了，但是家人從外表沒有那麼明顯的感受？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可能是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你透過什麼樣的方式，發現自己的內心比較想作女生？是你跟同儕相處的過程呢？還是？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實應該這樣講，我內心也不是想作女生，應該說也想作女生。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "這不同，「想作女生」跟「也想作女生」確實有點不同。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！就好像我現在學英語，不表示國語或者是台語要放棄掉。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你認為作女生是一個角色，你也想嘗試？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是另外一種語言吧！對啊！是。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "但你也想作男生？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是都可以，地球上有很多語言。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "很有趣。你決定不上學的真正原因是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "真正原因是我當時學的東西，在課本上跟當時上網看的其實大概有十年的落差，我當時全球資訊網剛開始，我一上網的時候就可以問某些教授正在做這個研究，你說你做出來，為什麼可以做得出來，我是不是可以幫忙，隔著網路，不但不知道我性別，連我幾歲都不知道，所以他覺得是很厲害的一個研究生或同事。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "沒有幫你當作小孩子？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有幫我當小孩子，所以就真的可以一起做人工智慧的研究。但是反過來，我看他寫的這一些東西比較我在課本上看到的，覺得課本上的過時太久了，要的話直接跳研究所或者是不唸，我後來是不唸了，然後跟著網路上的朋友，大概一、兩年之後，我自己回去旁聽了研究所的課，也是旁聽了一年多。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "我們等一下來談自學這一段，我想自學這一段很多觀眾朋友是很好奇的。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "先從性別這一件事來討論，剛剛討論到你說也想作女人，如果也從想作女人這一個想法來思考，你並沒有變性吧！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "因為你一旦變性就只能做女人，不是嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不是啊！也有變性過，但是還是性別流動的，我覺得身體上跟心情上當然會有一些差別，但是並沒有彼此排除。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "但是我看到報導，媽媽說你做了變性手術，或者是報導有出入？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實手術有非常多種，大家想的那一種我沒有做，但是有很多像侵入性比較小的，像打肉毒桿菌這一些是有做的。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "是做那一種啊！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可能大家都做過（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "所以我們看到媽媽說你做了手術，以為是變性手術。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一些也算是小手術。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你有另一半嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有啊！有另一半。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "可不可以大概談一下你的感情生活，大家也很好奇。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是在一起大概超過十年了。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "超過十年了？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "所以在你二十幾歲就在一起了？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "什麼感覺？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是很充分互相瞭解的感覺，就是好像命運交織的感覺吧！大概是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你們住在一起？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你們住在一起也像一般男女朋友一樣，反正跟一般男女朋友談戀愛，一樣會有爭執，以及喜、怒、哀、樂都有，據我瞭解你是EQ很高的人，那天到行政院聊天的時候，你說你是不會生氣的人，你如何讓自己做到不會生氣的人？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我從記憶開始就不會生氣了。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你不會跟他吵架嗎？不會像男女朋友談戀愛吵架嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "比較少。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "有分手過嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "（搖頭）。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "也沒有？所以你們兩個都非常理性？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，我想是這樣，本來一個巴掌拍不響，我當然有我不理性的部分，他當然也有他感性的部分，但是重點還是在，因為我從小有記憶開始，我心臟有先天性心臟病，因為這樣的干系，所以我小時候只要一生氣或激動就會昏倒，而從小就是這樣，整個臉會變紫色，因為這樣的關係，所以我從有記憶開始，就沒有生氣或激動的記憶，因為當時我是昏倒、記不得的。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "所以你不能生氣，會昏倒？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你除了跟你的另一半住在一起之外，你們家裡還養了很多小動物？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，那是另一半的事情。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "那養什麼？可以講嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也不能說養，就是一起住吧！目前兩隻狗跟七隻貓，大概九隻動物。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "是九隻小寵物？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "同伴動物，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "我們稱為寵物，你們稱為「同伴動物」（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "狗跟貓的相處不會有任何問題？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然會有任何問題，跟我剛剛說的會有一些空間，好比這幾隻處得來就住在一起，處不來就住另外一個房間。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "所以空間上你幫他們做一些規劃，能相處的就放在一起，不能相處的就稍微隔開？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，然後互動的時候，人就要在旁邊。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "所以其實人和人之間也是這樣？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "生氣的時候隔開一下，也許讓自己的情緒冷靜是有幫助的。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "我們再回來談自學，自學很有趣，你決定不唸書了，是不是跟你在學校受到霸凌有關？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "完全沒有關係耶！" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "但是霸凌，媽媽講的好像很慘耶！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那是八歲的事情。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "那一件事怎麼回事？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我不去學校的事是十四、十五歲的事，和八歲那個是有六年的距離，毫無關聯。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "當時在學校受到霸凌的情況怎麼樣？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一個是因為資優班，同學競爭非常強，我可能比較早熟，所以很容易冒名奇妙就考第一名或莫名其妙就受到老師很多的欽言有佳或指定當班長這一些等，我當時坦白來講也不太知道如何處理這樣的情況，所以當同學表達出羨慕或嫉妒的時候，我會覺得我沒有當一回事，為什麼你們要當一回事，可能這樣的態度可能更加惹怒對方，所以我覺得雙方都有一些就是要調整的。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "媽媽說因為考試的時候，你寫完之後，小朋友要看你的考卷，而你不讓他看？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，有那一次。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "那一次怎麼回事？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是那一次好像是被絆倒，也不一定是被霸凌或者是被打，其實當時一長段時間…" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "…媽媽說你胸口有瘀青一片，她認為一定有小朋友踢你或怎麼樣，從她的文字描述裡面，她說你在學校裡面被小朋友欺負很慘。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是有被起伏幾次，大概三、四次。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "不是因為這樣影響你後來自學的決定？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，這兩個毫無關係。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "小的時候就展露出非常厲害的電腦天分，包括小一就會解聯立方程式？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "可以講一下，少年唐鳳是一個什麼樣的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "七歲算少年嗎？" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "不然算什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "七歲應該還算是小朋友（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "好，那我們來講小朋友時代的唐鳳。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "七歲的時候，其實當時因為我父親本來很關注我的教育，所以我們就會一直看書，他當時的興趣、嗜好是將所有他自己可支配的收入都拿來買書，所以我們家每幾天都會有新的書，他後來覺得很有趣，他自己來得及看以前，我就會先把它看完，但是我七歲的時候是看不懂的，所以很少數碰到看得懂的是數學跟哲學，這個不依賴外面的經驗，像他講社會學或選舉，我沒有出過門，我根本不可能瞭解，但是他講抽象的東西我可以瞭解，像幾何原本這一些，當時我就會跟我父親討論。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "小一就會解聯立方程式？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你幾歲會寫程式？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大概八歲的時候。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "弟弟說你寫的第一套程式是給他用嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "那是一套什麼程式？那是在幾歲的時候寫？就八歲嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就八歲的時候。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "八歲你寫了一套什麼樣的程式？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我會在螢幕上出現一條數線，從0到1，然後這邊會冒出一個氣球，這個氣球後面是一個分數，好比像是如果這邊是1/2位置的話，這邊可能是3/5之類的，所以玩的人要輸入好比1/2，這邊就會射一個飛鏢到這裡來，就知道比1/2多，如果輸入3/4的話，可能就到這裡來，就知道比3/4，一直試到那個分數所在的位置為止，那個氣球就會破掉，就這樣子，是一個很簡單的東西。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "可是弟弟那時候幾歲？因為他是你弟弟啊！你八歲，弟弟是？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "四歲。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "  四歲你就要教他1/2跟3/4？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他非常小就學數學。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "所以弟弟也是個天才？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他數學上進度比我快很多。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你做過智力測驗嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "小時候當然做過。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "那時候測驗是180還是超過？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有耶！我覺得這個就是訛傳，我覺得「180」這個跟身高混在一起。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "跟身高混在一起？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！因為其實不管小時候做的測驗或者是成年做，成年後做過兩次。其實像成年的測驗，分數到160以上是沒有辦法測的，所以其實我每次測，都是說這個測驗沒有準確度。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "每一次都是超過160？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，可是你說多少，那都不是真的。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "所以可能是165，可能是170？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我不知道，測驗的效度只到這裡。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "所以你的智力測不出來？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以目前魏氏成人智力量表沒有辦法測。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "哇！跟這麼聰明的人談話，我來錄影之前，我的朋友都說「你要跟天才談話，要怎麼談？」我說「跟平常一樣談。」" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！就跟平常一樣。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你很年輕就開始創業？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，大概十四歲的時候開始參加創業活動，真正把學業放下來，專心開公司是十五、十六歲。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你十五、十六歲開什麼公司？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當時跟兩個朋友一起合資，開了一家軟體公司，叫做「資訊人」，它本來是一家出版社，我本來幫這個出版社寫稿，當時還不是合夥人，但是後來解散重組變成公司，當時我加入成為合夥人。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "其他兩個人是不是都是大人？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他們二十五歲左右，是賀元跟薛曉嵐。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "那時候就開始做類似的創業，往後你的公司都是跟網路有關？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大概都是。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你在三十三歲那一年退休，在退休前應該賺很多錢，不然怎麼退休？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實沒有賺很多錢，大部分是確定我繼續做這種開放源碼、分享出給大家都可以做的事，但是還是有人願意付我錢，我就可以一直養自己，又不用特別迎合老闆，所以那時候就退休了。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你從創業的第一天開始就是自己老闆？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是啊！" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你有在外面的公司上過班嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實有當過滿多次顧問。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "我看過是BENQ、APPLE。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "        對，還有 牛津大學出版社顧問，其實有很多家，我越到後面跟聘僱我的人說我感興趣就這幾個題目，如果願意支持就支持；不願意的話，我也不會做你的題目。但是我在一開始創業的時候，可能比較難跟客戶這樣講，是到後面才這樣。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你擔任大公司、大企業顧問時候，他們付你薪水，據說你的pay是時間計算，一個小時多少錢，我覺得最有趣的是，他們付的是比特幣，是不是你要求的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我要求的是比特幣，但是大一點的公司都沒有辦法用比特幣記帳，像牛津出版社直接說「我們的記帳系統只有英鎊，你用別的幣別也沒有」，所以就是以簽約那一天，比特幣對英鎊多少錢，就是以那個來當作後面的計算。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "是以比特幣來開價？但是他們付你錢還是用..." }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，他們沒有辦法付比特幣。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "為什麼想要收比特幣？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有幾個原因，我覺得比特幣是一個很有趣的概念，是一個實驗性的想法，但如果真的付我比特幣的話，中間沒有跨國銀行的轉帳匯兌，沒有匯差的問題，我也不用等兩、三天才入帳，但是事實上大一點的公司都不願意用比特幣付—在目前的狀況—我真正領比較多的錢，都不是領比特幣。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你開價是開比特幣，但是從來沒有收過比特幣？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大的公司都沒有比特幣。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你的時薪，據說是一小時一比特幣？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "一比特幣合我們現在，假設用新臺幣算是多少？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "現在我已經退休了，所以不重要了，現在是1萬8,000多元。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "當時比特幣狂飆的時候，最高有到？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我有2萬多的時候，也有6,000多的時候，也有在1萬出頭的時候，都有。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你有沒有投資理財？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "完全沒有。除非你把比特幣當投資，但是我並不是這樣看。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "我想我們很想知道，你在新政府及在過去的馬政府曾經做過的，比如你在馬政府的時候，就已經擔任他的顧問了，很多人不知道，當時據說太陽花運動如火如荼的時候，馬政府曾經—這個詞不知道對不對—跟你求救過，有過這一個事情嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有耶！" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "但是我看到報導說你特別到了立法院去。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是去立法院，但並不是馬英九政府跟我求救，當時我其實在318那一天的那個晚上，我還不知道有人要翻牆的時候，我其實已經去那邊支援直播了，我跟在場的工作人員一樣。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "跟馬政府沒有關係？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，想要支援我對網路資源的知識，跟馬英九政府沒有關係。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "但是是不是無心插柳柳成蔭？後來你到立法院去做了比較透明化的直播後，對於太陽花運動，年輕人的想法與馬政府的溝通確實有一個比較清楚的管道？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以這樣講，雖然實際上去架器材、設備都是上百位很專業的朋友，我能夠說的是我第一個到場做直播線路的，但大部分的工作並不是我在做，這個要先講。確實是因為太陽花318的關係，當時民間對於黑箱這一件事以前不會放到議程上，現在突然變成非常非常重要的一件事情，因為這樣的關係，所以確實後來就開了一個叫「經貿國事會議」，在那個國是會議裡面，第一次透過直播的方式，讓在場的朋友們可以馬上看到現場直播的人如何回應經貿國事會議裡面的人講話，所以就變成網路跟實際整合的會議，那一場會議的結論之一就是要建立這一種常規性的網路參與平台，也就是國發會的「Join」平台。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "透過這個方式就把黑箱打破了？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "稍微露一點光。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "對年親人認為至少邁了一步，以上是馬政府時代。在英政府時代，外傳93大遊行那一次，也就是軍公教因為年金上街頭那一次，外傳你幫英政府做某種程度的監控，有這一件事嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我當時還沒有上任，我是10月1日上任的，當然沒有這種事。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "當時有幫忙嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "完全沒有，我說既不是黑帽子也不是白帽子的駭客，我雖然有學相關的知識，但是其實第一個，這個不是我的專業；第二個是我的原則絕對不會做這一種事。但是我覺得我現在類似像吉祥物，常常會被說「難道唐鳳不用負責嗎」——臉書現在很流行說這個。好比：出了這個事情，「唐鳳不用負責嗎？」" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得確實社會應該要來討論，好比像GPS如果不能監控，手機的塔台能不能監控？到底誰在讀取這一些資料？誰有權限？是不是有合法正當的理由讀？這些是可以討論的，因為這個關係，整個社會願意討論，我覺得這是好事，但我完全沒有做監控93遊行的這件事。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "大家對於你個人成長的過程很好奇，但是對於家裡有一個像你這樣的小朋友的家人如何面對，我們也很好奇。爸爸、媽媽在你決定要自學的時候，我覺得應該是晴天霹靂，在那個時候—不要說那時—現在也是，家裡有一個小朋友說不上學，那個是不得了的事，那時據說爸爸、媽媽承受非常大的壓力？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們還好，現在有所謂的自學三法，當時不但不合，而且沒有聽過誰這樣做過。其實跟我同時的，好比像有一位下圍棋的朋友或者是曾雅妮，他們是大家比較有聽過，他們確實也在校長肯定之下，大部分的時間不上學，而是下圍棋或者是打高爾夫球，那個是一種特定的技藝；當我說我要創業，這個好像不太一樣的事情。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "父母第一時間的反應？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第一時間的反應，我想大部分是怕未來再學習更高等知識的時候，沒有辦法銜接上，中間會缺一塊。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "我看到有一個報導是，本來你們是三代同堂，應該是跟爺爺、奶奶住在一起，後來因為你不去上學的震撼彈之後，好像爺爺、奶奶不太諒解，媽媽是不是把爺爺、奶奶的什麼路封起來，我不知道你們家有什麼封起來？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那個是八歲的時候。你一直把八歲跟十五歲混在一起。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "好，那來講一下那時家裡的關係，據說陷入了很緊張的狀態？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實。八歲的時候，我小時候是我奶奶帶大的，現在講的是八歲的事情。到了七、八歲去上學，碰到一些霸凌或者這一些事大家都很心疼，但是大家覺得很心疼的應對方法不一樣，有些人會覺得我是不是應該要做一些調適，我覺得我自己確實要做一些調適，但是有一些事像體罰，不應該是我要調適，而是制度本身應該要調適，所以有一些願意發聲的這一邊，認為跟比較聽話這一邊會有非常多不同的聲音，當時在家裡確實很激烈的討論。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "後來媽媽把什麼路封起來？本來你們是住在一起，對不對？那個路是到爺爺、奶奶？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該說兩戶打通，中間有一個門。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "可以開，後來爸爸、媽媽把門封起來？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，不然我會一直去找爺爺、奶奶，想去說服他們我這樣子做或者是體罰應該要廢除這一些東西。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "爸爸去德國是因為這樣嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "爸爸去德國是他去天安門，受到學運的震撼，他認為本來他學的那一套政治學跟新時代是完全不一樣的。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "但是我看到報導說，爸爸曾經講過這麼一段話，他說去德國有一個原因是，那時媽媽決定要讓你試試看，因為你要求不要上學、自學，他可能不願意，他可能是比較傳統的思維，他不願意，但是他為了怕他的不願意會影響到媽媽試著要做這一件事的決心或者是在教養的過程中會產生一些衝突，所以爸爸決定到德國去，暫時避開一陣子，是這個原因嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也不是他不願意，當時的立場並不是不願意，而是因為他的同事、他的父母，所有人的壓力會集中在他身上。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "會問「怎麼小孩會沒有上學？」" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，就是這個意思，所以我覺得他出國也是耳根清凈的意思。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "很多人一直在他旁邊「嗡」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "後來爺爺、奶奶還是接受了這一件事，據說媽媽去創立了一個「種籽學苑」的過程中，爺爺、奶奶做了非常堅強的後盾？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "  是啊！當時主要是為了宗浩，我其實沒有讀過「種籽學苑」。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "弟弟是讀媽媽創辦的學校？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "        是的，而且一路讀到國中，然後再高中，完全中學，我們有開玩笑說他很像一個教改的火車頭，他幼稚園的時候，家長就弄一個幼稚園，小學的時候我媽就會辦一個小學，國中的時候就辦一個國中，到高中的時候國中就變完全中學，就是完全讓他在一個非常自由的狀態底下成長，在這中間爺爺、奶奶需要非常大的支持，因為這是走沒有人走過的路。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "弟弟很幸運，一直在媽媽的學校裡面唸書，他也是被實驗者？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，我覺得比他年紀小的那幾屆幸運，他把該試的都試出來了，是先行者的那種感覺。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "他說自己有這樣的求學經驗之後，一開始就決定讓他自己的小朋友自學？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "所以他的小朋友是自學？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他的小朋友當然是自學，因為他的小朋友不到二歲大（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "但是他已經決定將來要讓他自學？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "家裡的教育方式，對你產生了很大的影響。我曾經看過爸爸或者是你說，爸爸很小就給你上哲學課，是上什麼哲學課？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他會一直買哲學書，我會一直看，像剛剛提到一些柏拉圖的《理想國》或者是《對話錄》，我看了也不一定看得懂，我就會去問他，但是他很願意跟我談。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "臺灣未來有沒有因為你或者是更多人的參與有不同的面貌，包括新政府希望做一個「亞洲·矽谷」。你過去曾經在矽谷工作過，臺灣如果要做「亞洲·矽谷」，臺灣要做哪方面的努力？在你眼中，美國矽谷的年輕人跟臺灣的年輕人有什麼不同？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "先講「亞洲·矽谷」，我是在亞洲跟矽谷中間加一個「·」，這個兩個名詞，並不是臺灣要變成亞洲的矽谷，而是臺灣要「鏈結亞洲、連結矽谷」，所以中間的點比較是連結的意思，我自己都唸成「亞洲連結矽谷」，也有人唸「亞洲到矽谷」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「亞洲連結矽谷」的想法其實非常簡單，我們不能再覺得所有的創新都必須要是政府主導，沒有辦法再說所有的創新都是拿了臺灣拿了政府的錢就一定做得出來，在全世界或者附近亞洲的朋友有非常多創新可以運用。所以現在是說跟以前蓋園區不一樣，以前蓋園區是要把人都集中在這裡，要做出什麼了不起的東西，但是像軟體這些東西，人不一定要在特定的地方，重點是要跟哪一些東西連結，連結的時候，而這個虛擬團隊比園區更重要，這個是「亞洲連結矽谷」最基本的想法。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你認為臺灣的年輕人與你過去在矽谷看過的美國年輕人，他們之間有什麼不同？或者值得臺灣年輕人值得學習的地方？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得沒有差很多耶！我覺得矽谷有一個特別好的地方..." }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "人家認為臺灣年輕人是草莓族？你覺得？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我也不覺得，因為不管是318或者是反課綱的時候，接觸到很多，也不只是大學生，反課綱（者）是高中生，可以自己論述跟想事情，絲毫不遜色，比起任何其他地方的年輕人。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "就是把連結的管道跟連結的渠道做暢通，也許臺灣年輕人就有更大的發揮空間跟舞臺？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "        對，而且矽谷的特點是可以融合各種不同的文化，不會因為你不是我的文化而排斥你，而認為越多元越好。所以這個東西，如果我們未來新南向或者是跟其他亞洲、矽谷連結的時候，我覺得都有這樣的體認會更好。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "而且矽谷多元價值觀，我看到很多矽谷的創業者都是輟學等等，所以臺灣是不是可以用更開放的思維來面對？我覺得是臺灣未來能不能用更開放的思維來面對年輕人，我覺得是臺灣未來能不能連結的重要重點。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "另外就是，我們也很想知道你每天的生活是怎麼樣的生活？你可不可以描述一下你每天的生活大概是什麼樣的情況？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "從來行政院上班之後就很早起，大概六、七點就會起床，起床之後可能會賴在床上半小時，然後我會躺著打電腦，就是把notebook這樣子擺（立起，和身體平行），把mail都回完。再從床上爬起來，這一段時間就花個半小時，之後就是刷牙、洗臉、吃早餐，然後來院裡上班或者是去其他地方上班，我覺得有一個比較不一樣的是，不但mail幾乎隨時都是在沒有帶回的信件之外，我自己的待辦事項的排程，也是一來院裡，馬上就會把我這邊覺得可能我不是最適合做的、可能我的同事們更適合做的事，都會貼到政委辦公室的玻璃牆上，所以你上次看到的時候一大堆便利貼，也就是把我剛醒來的主意，一醒來早上9點15分全部都貼在牆上。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "所以你每天要做的事情，所有的問題你都已經在第一時間做好整理跟分類了？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你每天也花了一些時間，據說四十五分鐘的精神分析，我更好奇的是這一段，什麼時候做？什麼叫做「精神分析」？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實是佛洛伊德當時所創立的做法，一個人躺在長椅上，想什麼就想什麼，有一個人專心聽，通常都不講什麼，這是最基本的設定，只要每一個星期做四次以上，就可以叫「精神分析」。我的分析師是在巴黎，他的時間是下午或者是中午，換算成我們這邊是晚上或者甚至半夜，所以我就是透過Facetime這套軟體跟他連線。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "跟巴黎的精神分析師對話？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，想到什麼就講什麼。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "這個對於你在情緒管理上或者是人際關系上有很大的幫助？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是把你的感受文字化或語言化的過程，常常會安慰太生氣或太傷心的人說講出來會好一點。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "我們通常都會說「不要生氣、不要傷心」，他會說「怎麼有辦法不傷心」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，事實上不可能的，但是重點是你認真去聽它，認真被傾聽的過程是很療癒的，就是說當你充分講出來之後會覺得也還好，而且也有人分享跟分擔，我覺得會好一點。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "所以你每天大概有花四十五分鐘做這一件事？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "我覺得這個可以給很多人參考，也許如果暴怒或者是情緒管理不太好的人，或者經常覺得很壓抑或很獄卒，也許每一天可以找一點時間找一個願意傾聽的人來作精神分析。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "十年後的世界會是怎麼樣？我很好奇，你有想過這一件事嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我們在矽谷常常有一句話是「要預測未來最好的方法就是去創造它」，其實除了我親手做出來的東西之外，我也不知道十年之後會怎麼樣，但是我親手做出來的東西有一些價值，我會希望十年之後的人類來看我們十年之前錄的這一段影片或者是訪問時，還會能夠理解裡面的一些意義，然後還聽得懂——歷史要有意義，不是說過了十年之後完全截然不同的物種，然後整個人類文明在那時就完全結束，這是有一派矽谷的人很喜歡講「技術奇異點」，簡稱「奇點」的講法，我希望不要讓它發生，它隨時快要發生，但是我們不要讓它發生。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "所以將來十年後的世界，你並沒有很具像的想像過？比如十年後可能不用自己開車，十年後可能所有人的工作都是在家裡，你有沒有很具像思考過？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我最近參加一個是「世界經濟論壇」的線上社群，他們有非常多人專門在想這個，我看了他們的工作，其實沒有人可以預測到十年之後，大家的不確定性非常非常高的，你講一年之後也許，但是十年以後，每一個具體場景的可能性都可能不到20％，所以其實我現在說它很可能怎麼樣，其實都是亂講，大概是不可能。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "所以我們完全不知道十年後會怎麼樣？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可是這樣才有意思，這樣才能創造它。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "過去三十年一個世代，現在是十年一個世代，也許將來更快。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "第三階段要接受線上網友的即時問，現在已經有很多即時提問的問題了，問題好像很多，我們簡單回答。你支持川普或者是希拉蕊？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "等我真的變成美國的政務委員再來回答這個問題，臺灣的政務委員不需要回答這個問題。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你覺得川普或希拉蕊最討人喜歡的一點是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "上次辯論會的時候有問過彼此，你知道這一件事嗎？" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "我知道這一件事，所以我要問你，你覺得川普什麼地方討人喜歡、希拉蕊什麼地方討人喜歡？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我就用他們的回答，我覺得他們回答得很好，我覺得川普討人喜歡的地方是他的小孩非常有主見，而且川普看起來很支持也很愛他的小孩。希拉蕊最討人喜歡的地方是，她是屢敗屢戰、不放棄，有堅持的勇氣。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你會擔心川普當選會造成全球金融秩序的大混亂嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "目前沒有這個擔心。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "我們來看下一題，看網友提了什麼問題，大家說你的IQ很高，你有沒有測試？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個我們剛剛回答過了，就是測不到。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "超過160測不到，但是你測過，你超過160，所以沒有精準的數字。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "兩次都測不到，所以我就不想再測了。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "所以「180」是你的身高，搞錯了？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，以訛傳訛。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你跟柯P的IQ比較？誰比較聰明？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "  這個我真的不知道，因為我上次去台北市政會議的時候，我也覺得他反" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "  我現在知道他為什麼說是157了。因為157還測得到。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "  真的耶！" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "   但他真的有沒有被測過或自己想的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "    我知道柯P反應很快，我演講講話快怎麼樣，他完全都可以接得住。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "所以他其實是很聰明的人？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他反應很快。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "外界認為你們最大的不同是，你們同樣都是高智商，但是不同的是，你的EQ比他好很多。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我覺得他EQ也不錯。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你知道他常生氣，他身邊的人都待不住，局處首長已經換了一輪又一輪、一輪再一輪，你對他有什麼建議嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "    我上次去演講的時候，說需要建立一個跨局處的資訊整合的系統，而不是每一個局處真的到不行再請他來仲裁，如果是這樣的話，一定是他講一邊對，另外一邊一定會對他不舒服，所以我當時在市政會議，這個也是公開的，大部分在公開討論的東西，可以在先期，沒有到最後做決定一翻兩瞪眼的時候，就納入民間利益關係人的意見，各局處間的關係會比較緩和。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "會比較和諧，不會到那裡一拍兩瞪眼。下一題：沸沸揚揚的Uber跟美國高層會談得如何？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以一句話解全程都在網路上，但是我可以跟各位朋友說，前四十五分鐘沒什麼內容，可以跳過。最後五分鐘有做逐字稿，他願意做臺灣的監管，但是一定要取得職業駕照這件事上，他們還需要評估，就是這樣，目前談到這裡。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "對於繳稅這一件事？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其他他們都ok。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "只有職業駕照這一件事，他們還有一些堅持？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是的。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "我們再看網友還有提問什麼問題，AI人工智慧的未來？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "現在就是了。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "我那一天看到新聞，我真的想不通，我當然是一晃過去，沒有看到新聞的內容，我看到新聞標示說，將來會有很多工作被機器人取代，我們想像的機器人是做庶務性工作，比如在工廠做女作業員，這樣的工作就可以讓機器人取代。但是我看到那一個新聞不是這樣講，將來最有可能被取代機器人的工作竟然是醫師、教師，還有什麼師，比如建築師或什麼我忘了，但是這個是我們想像之外，那個都是動腦，為什麼連那一種動腦的工作也會被機器人取代？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們有一個技術叫做「深度學習」，最近幾年才出現的一個新技術，這個技術出現之前，大家想像中的機器人都是操作性的，這個技術出現之後，機器人也可以下圍棋，也可以開始做各種判斷力的腦力活動，比如像下圍棋。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "它會自我學習嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "它會自我學習，也就是自己跟自己下了幾千萬次之後，它歸納出一些道理，我們沒有辦法理解，因為相當於人類可能幾億年的時間才能學到的東西，它壓縮在一個精神時光屋裡面學完，未來會越來越多這一種腦力工作，基本上只要人跟人之間的直接情感交流無關的工作，越來越多機器人可以做。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "想不到機器人有可能取代醫生、律師、會計師的工作，還好沒有講到主播。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。但是我的意思是，越覺得一個人要有用或者是學校教育要變成有用的人，那個用處會被取代，現在的重點是要培養人跟人之間溝通、互動、共好的這一些品質、人格，而不是「有用」，因為有用的部分就被取代了。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "那麼以後要做什麼樣的人？從小就被教育要成為一個在社會上的人，將來要如何教育小孩子要在社會上成為什麼樣子？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他們喜歡創作就創作，喜歡做藝術就做藝術，喜歡寫程式還是可以寫程式，但是不是為了「有用」而去做。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "我們再看下一個問題，網友還問哪一些問題呢！請問（笑）你會選總統嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我每次從有投票權之後都有投票選總統（笑）。沒有，完全沒有這個想法。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你會自己參選總統？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "完全沒有這個想法。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "每一次投票都有投？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "嗯。但是有沒有想要參選？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "…在那張票單上。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "總統可能是太侷限的工作了，只有一個人做，你有無想過任何參選？比如民意代表或者是任何需要選舉的事？你有想過嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "目前沒有任何這樣子的規劃。因為其實我在做的這一套，也就是「開放政府」，是要補強代議政治的不足，代議政治當然有其必要，但是透過網路也可以做一定程度的直接民主，我如果去選代議士的話，我自己比較沒有辦法用代議的方式來推行這樣的這一套。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "可是代議士的功能就會越來越被削弱。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有，他就是專業的，鄉民的意見整合起來，好比像1萬人，我們有專業的代議士去做可行性評估、聽他們說話之類的，我們還是會需要專業的代議士，只是前面的準備工作可以由鄉民大家一起來幫他做。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "不再僅僅只是聽到民眾的聲音、來幫民眾發聲？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，並不只是傳聲筒。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "因為民眾的聲音要傳遞這一件事，在現在的高科技，包括網路都可以做得到，其實要做的工作是把民眾的聲音具體分析或整合，甚至於提出可行性的方案？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是的。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "在軍公教體系當中，有哪一些工作是哪一些可以遠距離辦公？自從你說「遠距工作」這一件事之後，我超想，顯然在目前的情況之下，我是不行的啦！但是我超想的，但是我相信很多人想要遠距工作。有哪一些建議？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實軍公教體系裡面，當它還是人事行政局的時候，在2011年就已經發過一個函，就是可以遠距工作的條件，但是其實講穿了只有兩個，一個是跟網路有關係，第二個是首長同意，就這樣（笑），所以目前並沒有一個非常細的區分。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "跟網路有關係，同時首長要同意？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「或者」首長同意。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "目前除了你之外，還有沒有人？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "具體運用過這一個，其實有一些人在比較長時間出差的時候，是有遠距工作的，很多資訊主管其實在出差都是這樣子辦公。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "因為是在空間上沒有辦法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我的政務委員同事們其時也不打卡上、下班，臨時有行程就在外面，就是用即時通訊軟體（LINE、Juiker）來傳工作，其實也是遠距辦公。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我唯一的差別是把它變成固定的兩天，因為這個固定下來有一個時間結構，行程比較好安排，但也會引發在這兩天裡面具體執行哪一些工作才合適的問題，我對這個的具體答案是凡是能夠透過遠距的器材來充分表現的工作，就可以遠距離辦公；如果現在還不行，像要報新聞也許因為虛擬實境的技術還不夠好，等到夠好的時候，你就可以做。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "我們再來看下一題，未來五年內有沒有明確的國家網路發展政策？你有規劃嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "將來會有一個「數位國家創新經濟」的發展方案，本來是NICI，未來會變成新的規劃，剛好是未來四、五年左右的規劃，這個禮拜會跟院長討論，討論完之後，送到院會，大家就可以看到了。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "內容是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「數位國家創新經濟」，在核定之前，我們現在都在整理各部會的想法。但是最主要的想法其實就是我們以前覺得政府自己說了算的事情，現在要更多的納入民間的參與，然後另外在這個參與的時候，注意到不會只要少數很習慣在網路上參與的人來主導所有的政策，好比像沒有用網路的習慣，或者手機只是用來看連續劇，並不是用來討論政策的這一些朋友，我們也要想辦法把網路帶到他們那邊去，並不是讓他們非得上網不可，好比像原鄉跟偏鄉這一些都是非常重要的。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "這一件事我想柯P跟很多人都思考過—我應該再清楚表達—這一件事柯P也有想過，所以當時做了i-Voting，當時要納入民眾的聲音來選一個大家覺得最適合的首長，嚴格來說他是失敗的，因為選出來的局處首長不適應公務的體系生活，或者是民眾給他的評價或工作給了不是很高的分數，為什麼i-Voting柯P會失敗？在整個i－Voting的過程當中，你覺得哪一個環節沒有做好？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個是有預設立場的問題，你假設其別的候選人i-Voting落選的會做的比這個當選的好？我們沒有任何證據證明這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "用這一種制度選出來的人，為什麼沒有辦法達到當初柯P的想法，那麼多人選出來的，不是應該符合這麼多人期待？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "        我想網路適合的是用來選政策，而不是用來選人，因為你對人的瞭解，不管是錄了五分鐘的影片或者是像大家看了一小時的訪談，也都是比較片面的，需要在互動的過程中慢慢理解，才能到達好比像你對你的里長或者是村長那麼瞭解的程度；所以反過來，柯市長做的參與式預算，我覺得是比較好的方向，因為大家投的不是人，而是錢。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "所以你覺得人不應該用片面來票選？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "它要有一個很好的配套，不是一個現有的配套可以立刻做到的，這個是我們研究的方向，但是在選議題上，這個是比較容易的。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "好，還有一題是：你的人生如此與眾不同，如何註解這不同的人生？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛剛有一題被跳過了，「政務委員是不是酬庸的職位？」，我還是回答一下。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "哎呀，為什麼被跳過呢？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我也不知道。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "我們回到那一題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，對，對，黑箱（笑），我的意思是…" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "原來我們的節目有一點小黑箱（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我要講的是說，其實我本來退休之後，只是領顧問的薪水，不太需要上班做事，我的收入比起政務委員還是大概三倍左右，這個酬庸是負酬庸，等於收入砍半，或砍到三分之一，所以這絕對不是酬庸，而且是反過來的。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "反過來的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，就是我本來在當顧問，而且是在退休的情況下。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你本來是在當馬政府的顧問？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有，比如當蘋果的顧問或當牛津大學的顧問，每一個顧問職的薪水相當於政務委員的薪水，如果我當了三個，那就是三倍薪水，但因為我當政務委員，這一些就不能再接了，因為公務人員，不能兼任了，所以絕對不是酬庸，是剛好相反。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你的收入是大幅減少？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是大幅減少。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "所以不能跳過，要講清楚。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "回到「人生註解」，其實每一個人的人生都不一樣，因為從小換太多學校，所以不會有一種幻覺是全班四十個人是一班，大家人生都差不多，很多人是出社會一陣子之後才發現原來我也跟我的同學跟我的同事都不一樣，每一個人都不一樣，所以我的註解是每一個人的人生本來就是與眾不同的。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你的名字是「唐宗漢」，後來改名叫做「唐鳳」，「唐鳳」是自己取的嗎？有沒有算過筆劃？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有耶！" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "或者算命先生算過？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有，沒有。因為是跨性別，「唐宗漢」這個名字是非常陽剛，而且充滿了文化。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "充滿傳承的意味！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，真的！真的！會出現在唐詩裡面的感覺。「鳳」這個字在中文是很合適，我們說龍鳳，又說鳳凰，所以本來就是一個跨性別的字。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "你覺得是跨性別，不純粹是男性或者是女性？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像吳鳳也是男性。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "對，我今天早上也有想到這一件事，如果說唐鳳是一個女性化的名字，其實「鳳」是沒有性別的。你自己取這個名字？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，是的。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "好，謝謝唐鳳今天接受我們的專訪，非常感謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "陳斐娟", "speech": "非常感謝今天有這個機會可以訪問天才政委，謝謝。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "先講一下今天最重要的事情是訓練我們的主持人，不但是直播的時候到底要收到什麼程度跟inform什麼程度先講清楚。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我不知道恩恩自己知道不知道被推坑，可能是未來的主持人，我覺得你參與討論會比做速錄好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "她被誰推坑？好像是被妳推耶（笑）我同意啊！" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "所以應該要讓她討論，而不是讓她速錄。" }, { "speaker": "許恩恩", "speech": "都可以啊！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "未來不一定只是國威主持，因為昨天聽起來公司法系列有四集到五集，如果越往後面越準備好的話，甚至前台也交給你們。" }, { "speaker": "許恩恩", "speech": "我本來想像是頂多到小組主持人。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "目前沒有小組。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為有前台、後台，後台是利益關係人自己再去設一份建議書的主持，那個你可以接，對不對？太好了。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "先讓她知道後台是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "主持人到了。vTaiwan的程序是分成幾個，我們從最早所謂要拋議題出來，永遠都是由部會所發動，但是我們大家都知道部會沒事不會自己找事做，所以這一個部會 所謂拋議題的後面想必有別的政治壓力才會做這一件事，但是這一個政治壓力並沒有辦法寫進SOP裡面，因每一次的政治壓力都不一樣，但是從我的角度，是部會對某一個議題願意交付公眾討論，而且也願意在這個過程中參與到一定的程度，這樣我們會做議題的inform，也就是把議題相關的資訊從部會盤點出來，所以部會具體要交三件事：一個是議題的如院長或部長或次長的簡報；一個是小字典，小字典是vTaiwan這邊比較堅持的，就是所有的專有名詞都要用一百四十個字內定義起來；第三個是利益關係人盤點，這個是新的，也就是我上來之後才有的，利益關係人有一個大表，會有之前頒布的公聽會或者任何其他方式去接觸到的人、職位、名稱、角色、影響力、對這一件事預估利益及立場，之前就是用家華給的那張大表，然後會填到一個程度。所以這三個東西，簡報是對外的，這個是公開的。小字典跟利益關係人盤點是對社群的，這兩個會丟到每一個星期六的小松去，這個是本來就有的機制。星期六固定開小松，有人來就有人來，沒有人來就不開，有些人會前段來、有些人會後段來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "部會準備好小字典跟利益關係人之後，那一個星期六小松來的人會一起討論這兩個東西加上簡報他們能不能承接或者誰能夠承接，這個承接的意思具體來講就是能不能坐下來跟部會進行接下來怎麼討論原則的設定，這個就是有一個討論原則的設定。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "討論原則的設定，裡面通常有三個部分：" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一個部分是時程，通常部會希望的時程特別短，而部會希望的時程都特別長，因此在這裡面都會有強烈的折衝，之前每一案都是這樣，這一案也不例外，想必也不會例外。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第二個，運用的工具，像有一些案子，我們覺得利益關係人都在網路上，且文字裡都很強，我們第一步就直接進入討論區，如果利益關係人現在還不明朗的話，我們通常可能會用滾動式問卷、「pol.is」用哪一些利益關係人去浮現，所以哪一些工具適用或者是哪一些程序，這一些泛指流程的設計。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "最後是跳坑，而意思就是這一個案子真的下來做的時候，誰在某一個階段可以扮演什麼角色，如果我們發現有人角色需要做，好比第一場的主持人，這一個主持人小松的人都沒有，就會有人說國威很適合，所以蔡玉玲就會推坑他推薦的人，我們就會推到有人掉下去為止開始啟動。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然這個過程是在共筆上公開的，最後就會launch，通常分成幾個階段，一開始我們知道可能會有一個滾動式盤點，這個是「第零階段」，這個是感受搜集或者意見徵集，這沒有特別好的中文翻譯。這裡徵集的特性是，我們也不知道會碰到誰，而且我們希望碰到越多人越好，而且也沒有必要搜集建議書，而就是發散，越來越多人接觸越好，當然中間還是有一些設計，比如互罵或者爛掉，說為什麼要用「pol.is」或者是這一些系統的原因。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "結束之後，我們會進入第二步，以前叫做「第一階段」，通常是在discourse討論，我們之前是說至少要四個禮拜，但是其實因為時間壓縮，所以現在會無法壓縮到三個禮拜的都有，所以是三到四個禮拜。當初vTaiwan機制裡面有一個很critical的部分，就是在這裡面凡是有建設性留言的人都會被mark起來，那麼他們會自動參加下一場的門票，也就是線上直播諮詢會議，代表著從第一階段至第二階段的轉銜，這個是第一次前台直播。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "為何叫「前台」的原因是？LIVEhouse.in或者是行政院開麥啦或者是各種廣告會撒出去，這個是最多人看到的，這裡的參與者就是在前面討論這一個階段討論這個題目或者是建設意見的人以及部會所邀請的學者專家、部會本身及任何我們任何覺得他來會對他有幫助的相關利益者代表，這個是所謂的前台直播，當然會生逐字稿出來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "接下來會有第二部分，這就叫做「工作組」，也就是所謂的後台，這個也是直播，而這個直播參加的人比較少也比較專業，是聽完前台直播之後，利益關係人間有沒有還喬不攏的事情，如果沒有的話，就不用新增一個，但是如果還有喬不攏事情的話，就要很擅長喬的人去約這一些利益關係人，說你們在大庭廣眾面前講完之後，聽起來還有一、兩個爭點沒有擺平，大家是不是要講清楚。通常前台直播，包括青顧一定有到二十人，所以大概是20＋的人，但是到後台利益關係人直播的時候，大概是五至十人，這當然是利益關係人。當然包含仍然願意參與的社群朋友，還是可以進來，只是這個就很專業，因為後台直播生出來的是一本建議書，也就是大家都喬到雖不滿意，但可接受的程度裡，他們希望部會可以做哪一些事、不要做哪一些事，但是如果沒有辦法收到共同意見，就不寫共同意見，反正所有的過程都是這樣下來的，所以對於這一個建議書，部會必須做實質回應。以上是vTaiwan到目前為止的完整流程。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有很多案子到前台直播完之後就沒有爭點了，所以就沒有進後台有爭點就進後。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為本來前、後台是拆開的，前台是一群人在做，包括Livehouse.in，後台以前我在社群的時候，我、家華、bookshow團隊這一些人在做，上次在小松跟Jaclyn討論的時候，家華有一個具體的建議，也就是是不是不要切那麼開？" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "沒有啊！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我一直不確定，我在看共筆的時候，你說要讓主持人團隊？" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "就是前、後都知道狀況，不要只有後台，因為如果都不是你，之前是你從頭follow，我是怕…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！我是前台參與不主持，我到後台會主持。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "就變成是後台變成就算只有主持，但是沒有的話，也是知道狀況，因為之前等於都是你在彙所有的東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！所以後台的主持好比是恩恩的話，那恩恩就要在最前面三、四個禮拜，今天把討論意見彙整，爭點整理出來，跟前台直播的時候，你可能就要在，這樣子的話，你去做後台主持的時候，比較能夠理解。如果國威對後台主持有興趣的話，那當然是最好的（笑）。以上這整個流程有沒有問題？" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "這其實就是一個流程圖，我們有沒有類似這個的視覺化圖？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你說不要寫那麼草的版本？" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "就是可以公開的啦！" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "就是一個漏斗，我在想像中那個。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你有認識做哪一個懶人包的厲害朋友嗎？我只認識圖文不符。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "他們很厲害啊！但是他們比較忙。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，非常忙，而且政問已經麻煩他們了。之前社群的朋友有幫忙。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "這有一點一勞永逸，也不用太精美，可能甚至是一個可以在線上再改的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好啊！有人要幫忙畫圖嗎？" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "我畫一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好棒啊！" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "可是我沒有畫漏斗耶！" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "沒啦！我只是一個想像，大家一開始是很多意見，各方意見會在哪一個階段進來，到最後會怎麼用塞出來。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "我應該要跟你彙整一下吧？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！我跟你彙整一下，你會在禮拜四用嗎？" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "這個還滿適合讓大家知道。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，也就是season II，所以講一下season I的流程。好啊！畫一張虛擬的便利貼出來，ok，繼續。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "現在英文名稱登記案的狀況，蒐集的狀況已經過了，蒐集進來的爭點整理就是討論的A1到A幾、B1到B幾的東西，這個大家有看到嗎？我們實際列在vTaiwan網站上，如果沒有的話，也沒有關係，如果現在到vTaiwan.tw，你就會看到這一個東西。為什麼要一直看廣告！這個是「你的名字」，對不起，我用i pad好了，我知道了，是因為門關起來了。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "所以國威你覺得行程是漏斗的，是不是？" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "剛剛已經講像漏斗了，後面我覺得…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "…你剛好來試驗，我們已經訂了兩台這個，而且是大的，再加上Apple pencil，希望禮拜四可以有，但是至少你可以用。你（家華）禮拜四會來嗎？裡面有你的東西，不行，我們還是買新的，這個台才2萬多。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "我覺得這個是意向，就是它一方面是V字形，然後各種意見就從這邊進來。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "但是政治壓力要怎麼畫？就是為什麼那個議題會被選定。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "為什麼這個漏斗一開始會出現？" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "就是在上層啊！（笑）就是一直往上加。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "第一層是政治壓力？" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "就是盤古開天。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "反正重點是閱讀順序是從上往下，政治壓力好比左邊生出這個漏斗來，那個政治壓力的顏色就跟外殼的顏色一樣，然後部會開始第一層。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "議題都是政治壓力產生的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實所有的議題都是這個壓力產生的。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "畫出來之後就會問每一次的政治壓力是什麼。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那很好啊！" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "所以要把它寫出來嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "要。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "就是可以換句話說，那不一定叫做「政治壓力」。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "政治漏斗可以再長胖？" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "我覺得還不錯，可以用一個虛線。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以寬度代表什麼？代表意見收攏程度？" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "對，一個大的開口。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "子維的臉很好笑。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他很認真的時候就是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "子維看起來就是很認真。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "那個表情很好笑（笑） 。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "話題突然被轉換。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "我們回到那個話題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好。你在幹麻？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "鄭國威 ：" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "（試畫）我剛剛把整張紙用完。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "用手撥。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "你和恩恩是父女檔的概念嗎？（笑）" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "我可以把這一張design thinking process 變成導讀？" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "這個是議題的廣度，這個是時間軸，一般會越畫越小。開散，再聚焦。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "有一種是這種的，另外一種是這種，要看議題不同的狀態，就是要看到底這樣或者是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當初林子倫老師在設計vTaiwan大流程的時候，我進來以前，本來想法是線上直播會議，也就是前台來做會議的是中間的那一個，就是把前一階段發散的意見先收到某一些爭點，接下來再交給利益關係人再分散一點，然後再收起來。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "對，差不多是這個概念。現在找一群人來整理意見，所以就是收斂。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一開始是部會只知道某些利益關係人的意見，但是透過「pol.is」接觸到更多的利益關係人，因此就收到更多的意見進來，但是我們還是會邀請他們來開一個線上直播的會議，開完之後我們會蒐集到一個程度，但是沒有蒐集到底，開的過程裡面當然還可以再收攏更多的草案、建議，但是我們最後會請強大的主持人收到這樣子，只要能夠收到這樣子的話，部會就非回應不可。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "最後一步是主持人？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該是說這兩個收的動作，當你看到口徑變窄的時候，通常不是因為各方忽然良心發現，一定是有些人去做收攏的工作，所以這個是沒有例外的。當它變窄的時候就表示有人在做這一件事。收到這個程度的時候，最新版本的講法是對每一個部分去做列點，好比最後做出五個訴求，你就對每一個訴求要說這個是綠燈或者是紅燈或者是黃燈，但是這一些都還是可以滾動式檢討，如果是黃燈或者是紅燈的話，那應該要附理由，差不多這樣的概念。但是如果沒有收到具體訴求最底下程度的話，其實部會也不知道要如何回應哪一個利益關係人，因此要收到這個程度。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有時我們的運氣非常好或利益關係人參與非常少，所以在中間的這個部分就已經收到可以用的程度，這樣部會就會直接回應中間這一個位置，但是底下第二階段後台程序就不跑了，所以之前vTaiwan有做一半跟做到兩階段的，都有。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "剛剛家華是說把各式各樣不同的漏洞都列點表示？" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我沒有讓你畫那麼難，只是補充每一個政策議題的狀態不一樣，然後收的狀態會不同。我沒有要你這麼辛苦。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "所以流程圖可能沒有特別要表示這塊．" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個圖示就是這樣，所以你開場的時候就可以帶一下說之前是這樣做的。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "大致上是這樣的漏斗，依據不同的議題漏斗不太一樣，但是大致上就是這樣的漏斗。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有問題。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "這一次公司法前後都是你，對不對？" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "還有後嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不一定會有後。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "跑出後的時候，這一次還是想讓國威試試看。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果你有空的話。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "如果我還有空。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為我11月25日要出國兩個禮拜，所以其實…" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我們12月3日也都不在啊！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "喔！你也會去，其實我們都在巴黎，對不起。所以如果這一次收回來還有爭點，我覺得機率不大，可能20％吧！這樣的話，要就約我們出國前，不然就是不要管我們了，你就自己去call。因為其實你收到一個程度，你要收到底，其實用的技巧是不一樣的，我們之前在前台都只需要收到一個程度，沒有要收到底，收到底是另外一套技術。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "現在要回到公司法上面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家都有看資料嗎？要看到什麼程度？目前經濟部商業司有一份簡報，大家手上都有嗎？商業司這一份應該就是他們實際直播會議時會報告的這一份。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "上面這個無關。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一定是排版慢掉。不好意思，我再試一次。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "從商業司的角度來看只是說公司名稱是公示效果跟保障效果，公示就是大家知道這個公示是什麼，保障效果是英文名稱是公開的，所以保障交易安全，你跟IBM做生意不會做到旁邊去，現行公司法只有規定中文的部分，他是說公司必須取中文名稱，不得跟公司名稱相同，第370條公司名稱必須譯成中文，但是並沒有說譯成中文之後英文名稱的法律效力，所以有一派的說法是不用修公司法，加一個條例就好，有一派的說法是如果要做同名審查的話，最好還是在公司法裡面修。但是因為現在公司要重寫了，所以本來就應該在裡面處理，就是老師處理的議題之一。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "目前的狀況是，商業司自己的系統跟國貿局的系統是兩個系統，國貿局的系統是專門做進出口廠商用的，但是其實如果不是進出口廠商，也可以去申請，理論上登記僅限於進出口廠商使用，而且這個也可以重複名稱，也沒有任何規範力，也可以隨便自己改什麼就改什麼，這個是目前籌設流程。辦理之後，你可以去左下角那邊申請英文廠商登記，還可以去做許可營業執照，那就是跟各個主管機關。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "目前實務的做法是，如果公司名稱跟其他的權利有競合，好比商標或者是公平交易法之類的話，這一整張要講的並不是我們管的，想要管的人按照公司法提起訴訟，是法院管，管完之後，登記機關就會強迫敗訴的那一方去變更登記，他們是等法院的裁決，不自己作裁決。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "實務的需求是，因為IBM就叫IBM，一定要叫他們「國際商業機器股份有限公司」，沒有人知道那就是IBM，所以在這樣的情況下，很多人說如果我們能夠登記成IBM，然後排除掉其他IBM的話，對IBM比較有利，比較是這個意思。但是每次要改就要維持現狀的方案，其實IBM只是一個商標，所以如果只是IBM的話，其實沒有必要大費周章，這個是為了其他還沒有申請商標的外國公司或者是新創公司。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以可能有解決的幾個方法：第一，政府共識，我們變成選擇性的登記，但是不進行審查。第二，我們給它相同的保護效力，保護效力如果要審查的話，就有幾個延伸的問題，一個是可不可以中英文夾雜，像「Mac當勞」—雖然我不知道為什麼要這樣登記—另外一個是要不要強制登記，一般我們問卷發下去是說登記沒有什麼意義，是說要用英文名稱的時候再登記就好了，混用是另外一回事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "還有一個更強的方案是，我們把公司法裡面把一定要翻成中文的那一條拿掉，這樣臺灣就可以註冊只有英文公司名稱的公司，這三個方案每一個都是疊加的，所以當然會造成一些問題，但是也會有一些好處，也就是可以有全英文的公司。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以在這邊，子維之前有做過爭點整理，這個就是我們之前在vTaiwan的整理，其實細節都不用看，大家說開放英文名稱登記之後會有以下的爭點效力，「A1：便於國貿」、「A2：有助於識別」等，為了達成這一些效用，其實也會有一些不利益，而其實這一些不利益是從A7開始。好比要想一個英文名稱，不可以跟人家重疊，而且還要算筆劃，這要怎麼算筆劃呢？這個是會增加營運成本的事。A8是說不肖廠商會去登記國外知名的企業名稱，雖然國外也有知名的中文企業名稱。最後就是說如果不懂英文的話，你無法分辨，這個當然是一個問題。但是，不利益相對來講，好像不是不利益特定人，而是說英文不好的，或者覺得英文不好還是要取英文名稱的人，我覺得會額外增加他的負擔。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果他覺得這是一件事好事的話，行政機關大概要做什麼，當時在擴大利益關係人徵詢意見時，最強的是說分散在一大堆莫名其妙的機關，才能辦理登記，剛剛列了五、六個，昨天老師們說是多站式服務，他們希望變成是一方式服務，這一件事是B1。B2這邊很多人覺得我們還是要在立法層級去處理，不要自己下一個行政命令就解決了。B3會說其實用的人很多。B4是說命名規則應該要有一些標準拼音的對照表。B5不是重點。B6也不是重點，B5、B6是這個過了，過的版本希望大家都知道。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以這一些是無爭議的，也就是大家會覺得有這一些效益跟不利益，大家也都覺得行政機關要有這一些準備，但是還是要有爭點，爭點就是在C這一階。爭點是在我們這一次的討論範圍，也就是包含到底可不可以全英文，包含你要開放哪一些層，包含如果外國公司同名的話，要先來先贏、法院判決贏或者是裁決贏？如果違反公序良俗的話，要怎麼辦？其他部會要如何配合？這個是我們三十天的討論之後，有收到一些意見。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一些意見志翔也有整理一個情形摘要，還來不及做成PPT，但是文字檔基本上是這樣子，也就是C1有從寬鬆到嚴格，這個事實上是爭點，而這個爭點就有英文為主、中文為輔或中文為主、英文為輔的想法，一個是我們趁公司法修改，往新加坡跟香港看齊，也就是所有臺灣公司都突然要有英文名稱，沒有就用，拼音吧！拼音系統還可以自己挑（笑）。當然也有覺得完全不應該限制語言，不是只有中、英兩種。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "同樣C2也是三種立場都有，也就是全開、政府有能力辨識及合理範圍內的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "接下來同名的處理方式，其實這邊問題不是太多，因為大家覺得司法是最後的保障，可以提出一些佐證，而佐證都是參考用，商業司也沒有量可以審，但是你最後提出佐證的話，你告贏的機率比較高，差不多是這個意思。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "違反公序良俗是說其實沒有什麼關係，反正有人被違反了，就會有人告，然後就處理了。混淆的這個時候，大家都比較相信法院。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "然後另外是說都認為政府應該要自動同步，我們這邊有特別去看一下目前的法規、命令，其實公司法真的是商業的憲法，如果上面有明定其他部會機關要同步，其實別的法不用修，別的機關不管是國貿或者是財政或者是關稅，理論上他們本來就要按照公司法。所以這個爭點已經沒有爭點了，我們在公司法裡面寫，所以這樣看起來這還是要在公司法裡面明文，並不是行政命令就算了，但是公司法明文說，我們就可以順便規定其他機關要如何配合及同意。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剩下來的爭點是我們要不要突然間突然超新趕港，變成以英文為主的登記制度，或者是保留中文為主，英文有也可以，也就是實際問一下各部會能夠承接的，比如日文真的行嗎？大概是這樣，所以剩的爭點就這兩、三個。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "到目前為止還可以嗎？有沒有什麼想問的？" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "當天會出席的人，專家學者不會代表受社群是指在社會上的位置，但是他們對議題的態度及立場，知道嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個是非常好的問題。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "好的，不知道。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "（笑）蔡玉玲覺得這個很重要，而且覺得至少要開放英文。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "但是她的強度沒有到一定要強制規定要英文？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "就是要打開？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，但是同名審查還是要有，其實我也不知道，她上次有講過一次，但是我也不知道她強度有多強。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其他是老師們。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "到達文西全部都是同一個計畫團隊嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好像也不是。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "他們有各自？" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "只有朱老師應該是那個團隊的。" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "還有那個戴老師也是。所以有說朱老師沒有辦法來，就是戴老師上陣。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "所以他們的意見狀態也是一樣嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也不一定。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是這一個案子是很小的，某一個小組裡面千分之二的小事情。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "是不是第三組？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。登記組，所以至少在登記組裡面有某個程度的共識，但是這個程度共識到底到什麼樣，我也不知道。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "林建忠跟顏雅倫是怎麼會進來的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是法協中心那邊進來的。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "是你們找的嗎？" }, { "speaker": "商業司代表", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "知道他為什麼會有興趣？" }, { "speaker": "商業司代表", "speech": "不是我，是專委推薦的。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "這個可以理解，好奇他們對議題的態度立場。他們對議題的態度立場？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "比較年輕、新派的，至少會覺得英文是可以開放。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "有反對英文名稱開放的嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然有啊！" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "滿意外的是，上次在某一個場合裡面，其實新創團隊，大家對這一個議題沒有很熱衷，甚至有派認為不需要改變。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "不需要改變？改變會增加他們剛才講的行政成本嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為他們目前是申請一個logo或者是商標就可以了，如果要保護他的英文名稱。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "如果申請只是同一個動作，紙本作業會增加錢嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實都不會。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "頂多是設計排版。" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "公司的名稱使用中文原來比較像的理由是，要讓一般民眾看得懂，就像強迫「麥當勞」的意思。" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "的確是走兩條線會有額外的成本。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "所以合併的成本是降低的嗎？" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "貿易局的那一個系統，沒有小的，所以你可以任意使用，也可以任意變更，也沒有說不可以叫那個名字，那只是為了進出口。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "而且為了用來做進出口之外的事情都沒有用。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "有衍生很多爭議嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有一些爭議，但是也沒有大到會傷到人。" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "公司主要一部分也是交易安全的問題，如果把KFC註冊的時候，可以確定跟KFC交易是跟那一個，而不是跟另外一個，但是進出口商會假設知道進出口那一邊的，沒有一般交易安全的問題。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "所以有一個可能是學者專家這一列都只是強度的問題，跟大家要如何去處理防堵配套的問題？" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "商業司應該不會反對，但是商業司應該會有一些實務的問題。" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "在我出國前，曾討論過這個議題，那已經是快兩年前了，當初商業司表示這個要委外研究，最少要半年到一年。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個本來是vTaiwan的第一批，後來被刷掉。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "主要是因為商業司這邊？" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "比如要拿來NDC拿來註，但不行，NDC是國發會。就會說NDC他們也在用。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "這樣社群代表嗎？有知道嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有記帳士、理哲等…" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "為什麼記帳士會都跑來？是特別約，還是他們真的覺得？" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "昨天的說法是，因為記帳士公會想要變成登記代理，所以要開始參與所有有關公司登記的問題（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "這也是江湖的問題。我好奇他們對議題態度本身有什麼想法？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！就是記帳士收到英文需求的程度…" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "不是在說這個。" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "他們一定會說沒有問題的，記帳士是要國家考試。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "理哲是做什麼的嗎？" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "他們是社群身份來報名的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "為什麼會叫代表，以前不是說社群這邊要叫社群參與者？" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "好。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "法律事務所？" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "公司不可能是律師，所以不叫理哲有限公司。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "理哲是法律事務所？" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "法律資訊產品開發。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "數位科技公司到法律，還有兩位個別的參與者有訊息嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他們有些是留言嗎？" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "對，他們是從留言來，就去邀請。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以他們的意見光譜就是留言那一些，因此他們會來表示他們的爭點。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "主持人還需要知道面對的人？" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "國發會同仁要發言嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "都不用。雖然自我介紹的時候會講一下，像吳家林專委，可能會說「我是來第十六次」（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "所以現場需要一開始介紹的跟每一位打招呼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "恩。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "那一份簡報商業司自己簡報？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們剛剛是講報告的順序，這個是國威自己要決定的，我們有幾個節目，一個是vTaiwan的總流程，一個是公司法的老師要報告公司法的總流程，而這兩個本來沒有交集，到今天第一次交集，商業司要報告這一個題目，我們手上有社群討論一個月下來還剩哪一些爭點及哪一些看起來有一點共識的討論蒐集簡報，我們有這幾個材料，看國威覺得，包含自介在內，怎麼樣安排時間跟什麼順序比較好。" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "我們原定有一個議程，但因為朱老師報告是昨天加進來的一個新議程，所以應該在什麼時候把她安排進來講一個公司法的修正方向?" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "看國威有什麼想法。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "自介都放在一開始，所以我們一開始先自我介紹一下，講一些話。" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "這裡有一個議程，接著像國威講的，自我介紹完了以後，原先安排的是經濟部報告，但是現在經濟部的題目是公司法修法的一支，所以朱老師在他之前或者是之後？" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "原本經濟部還有報告？" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "就剛剛的那一份。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "我覺得朱老師先吧！" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "理論上你會先介紹說公司法現在大修，大修之後再討論登記公司英文名稱的問題，在問題討論之前，會讓大家有一個脈絡。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "也就是「你的英文名字」。（全場大笑）商業司簡報第一頁就是「你的英文名字」。" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "完了之後就是與會來賓意見分享，也就是原定的橋段，專家學者開始講，然後開始部會回應、討論及主持人總結。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "爭點可能是在商業司簡報前面或者後面都可以，匯流五法我是放在簡報前面，線上賣場是在簡報後面，我忘記當時有沒有這樣做，可以看國威的感覺。這一段爭點整理大概5分鐘左右，但是我們剛剛冒出了一個漏斗，所以看你要拆開講或者是放在一起講，有公司法修法架構也有vTaiwan的運作架構。" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "等到商業司講完之後，大家往下修再做爭點整理，好像比較順，爭點整理完大家知道要討論什麼事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好啊！" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "現在還有一個新的橋段是vTaiwan運作。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "可能自我介紹完之後。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你就幾句話帶過去，然後進入公司法修法架構。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "自介完，vTaiwan，然後公司法，朱老師，然後商業司，然後就爭點整理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "爭點整理五分鐘，vTaiwan架構跟自介。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "自介可能要十到十五分鐘。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以這邊再加vTaiwan架構，就是十五加五，先抓二十分鐘。公司法架構是十五分鐘，如果我沒有記錯的話，商業司簡報好像也是十五分鐘，所以這樣子就會變成是二十五分加三十分鐘，快要一小時過去了，我們只剩下一小時了。這樣有點太久了。" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "自我介紹要用到十五分鐘？大家都只報單位姓名。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "我就把它壓縮到五分鐘。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家一起說「大家好」，就不用個別說「大家好」。這樣vTaiwan架構就可以壓一下，那時間就是「五加二」，最近很流行（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "密碼出現了，這已經冥冥之中。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "公司法修法架構，我覺得如果不講細節，看能不能就是說跟他說大概快到十五分鐘的時候，就可能cue他一下，可能也事前說，我們會剛好抓時間，爭點整理我覺得還是需要五分鐘，這樣是四十二分鐘，好像勉強可以接受。" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "再縮的話，就是兩個簡報各縮。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "再縮的話就要從上次的簡報裡面看slide，這個時間你其實很難去弄。" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "這一個議題滿單純，如果他們知道事後國威會有爭點整理的話，他們應該不會花到十五分鐘。" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "通常有一個方法是先定十，然後到十五分的時候是卡，然後十分的時候開始警告。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "理解，我們就這樣確定了。接下來就開始各自發表意見。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "接下來就是先由…老師或部會？" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "過去都是老師們先講，我是苦場。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不知道來了幾次，已經來了好幾次。" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "來了四場。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "後來大家都覺得merge壓力很大，應該五次，所以四次你都有來？" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "有一些不是我，但是一半以上。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "四次一半以上是三次。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們會先請老師們講的時候，就是講事實的部分，建議的部分我們留到第二個部分再講，但是那是因為匯流五法雙方會吵起來，所以為了降低大家的爭執，所以我們就會說all一部分，這是匯流五法後來沒有吵起來的一個關鍵，但是其實英文名稱不會那麼吵起來，所以好像也沒有必要這樣強迫分，這樣老師們愛講什麼就講什麼，因為人數滿多的。" }, { "speaker": "商業司代表", "speech": "應該除了朱老師講的。" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "之前也不是逐一講，都是自願講。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是從學者專家開始，從蔡玉玲律師（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "來了都會講，那我們就五個人會講。" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "五分鐘就二十五分鐘，而且老師講話很容易超過五分鐘，很難打斷（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "社群呢？之前的狀況？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以前的狀況是老師講完之後，社群就開始回應，然後社群的回應有些是部會可以回答的，部會就會直接回答，有些部會回答非常厲害，講完之後就沒有人想要再接話，就會到下一個爭點，但是部會並沒有立刻回答的義務，所以也可以說部會最後十分鐘綜整回答，這也是一個方式，就看商業司要用什麼方法，可以全部都用陳言博技正（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "報告的人是司長或者是科長？" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "我目前是跟他們講說你們報告的人反正是十分鐘，那一天是司長會來，我猜是李司長報告。" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "也有可能分層次，比如先談要不要，然後再來談要開放到什麼程度，然後再談第三個層次粗的那一些問題要怎麼解決，這樣就有辦法要求與會的人，大家看要不要，如果要的話，看是要進入到二十六個字母或者是什麼語言都可以。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們之前做過一輪爭點了。" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "如果他們同意好收斂，比如英文，接下來還有什麼剩下的問題，比如配套這一些東西，像公序良俗是不是應該由主管機關來申請，或者不能用NDC（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是，所以我覺得一開始請老師把想到要討論的點點出來，但是他們自己的意見可能是一、兩句話，比較不需要引經據典，可以說引經據典的事我們在線上有過了，所以老師們就覺得他們需要關注的點是什麼，不管要不要、開放到什麼程度，以及按照那個程度要做什麼配套，這三個部分請老師分別分享想法，如果跟個別老師想法一樣的話，就自己講額外的想法就好了，這樣也許比較可以控制到一個人五分鐘講完。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好，所以就這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是學者專家二十分鐘，不一定每個人說要講話，有人會說要到最後講話，所以是二十到二十五分鐘。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "最後就cue社群，青年諮議會應該沒有人報名？" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "沒有。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個題目實在太小了，他們關心的事情都是經國濟世的（笑），他我想關心這個題目的人沒有很多，所以我們未來青諮雖然都邀，但是這系列不一定會來幾個，這個要先講，因為這一次的青顧是客委會、原民會這一些的朋友們，他們會自己推薦在裡面做運動或者是做社會企業或者是組織者最active的人，所以其實他們往往是倡議者，這就完全可以看出跟之前青顧團不一樣。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "所以有新的青顧團？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "叫青諮會。以前是教育部，現在青諮是院級的。以前教育部叫別的部會，別的部會不一定要買單，但是現在是林全院長召集，call別的部會時，想必是要買單，因此位階不一樣。" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "反而之前的創業家，像Sega他們都退出了，本來被推薦的都退出了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "還有一個。" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "有，但是沒有像之前那麼多。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "創創的色彩變得很低，幾乎沒有什麼創創的色彩。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以社群自由發言，社群有多少時間？" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "本來的議程，我們只有籠統是與會來賓意見分享給了四十五分鐘。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這包含學者專家？" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好，這邊多搶到，我們是二小時嗎？" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們有試過雙主持人跟單主持人，單主持人就是要一面看開麥啦，又要一面主持，這個很累的，有一個可能性是我們有一個線上彙傳的主持人，每到一個斷落，我們約定一個hackpad，就把要說的東西給你，像之前雨蒼、榮志的時候，甚至還有麥克風交過去，就交給線上的主持人，然後開始被附身，這個也是有的，我們這一次要怎麼做？" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "那時候蔡政委有要求過我們，比如有一些問題，像主辦的，比如NCC主辦先回答，因為有一些只是不瞭解這一個事情，需要有人先解釋一下，說不定要要求商業司說找一個人來，現在人家問你公司法第18條是什麼，就先貼給他看。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像有一個人在線上幫忙。這個可以凹陳言博做嗎？" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "理論上商業司會比較熟。" }, { "speaker": "商業司代表", "speech": "可是他在現場。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們可以給他一台電腦。好比他有一個專員、科長及技正三個人，如果一個人收網路，兩個人收現場也講得通。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "可以溝通嗎？" }, { "speaker": "商業司代表", "speech": "應該可以。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那可能就先跟他們講一下，一隊四個，一個是報告的，另外三個人可能分一個人去回網路，另外兩個人守在現場，讓我們知道誰是誰。抓寬一點的話，大概九十分鐘過去了，我們還剩三十分鐘。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "還有第二輪。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "你們之前中間不會休息？" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "沒有。" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "根據最新回饋的消息，明天報告的人如果不是司長不然就是陳言博技正，如果要派工作給他的話，要提早讓他知道。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "先問他。" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "通常報告完之後，要看主答是誰，司長願意跳出來主答，他就可以當線上主答。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就跟他說需要一個線上、一個線下，我們理解不可能同時做兩個，問他的老闆們有沒有人肯擔，如果沒有的話，那就算了。" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "或者是說他的專員很厲害，一定要一部分戰場，因為承辦人搞不好是最厲害的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "通常是越階層的越厲害。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以應該是這樣講，我覺得主持人的角色是在學者專家這一輪完結束之後，切社群之前，你先highlight一下，看你要用白板是要用筆記，自己最後看一下列點都可以。收完之後，社群會按照你停在白板上的狀況去講話，所以你哪一些東西放在上面就滿重要。社群繼續講，大家繼續寫筆記，最後就是所謂的第二輪。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第二輪其實就開放大亂鬥了，通常部會都會有話想說，所以通常如果部會想發言的意思，我們就會請他們完整陳述，但是如果部會一直不想說，也就是拖到最後剩十分鐘的時候，請部會回應一下。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "請國威主持是習慣寫的？或者是不需要寫？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他有寫，但是電子白板還沒有。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "也不是傳統白板？" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "都沒有。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那個沒有辦法傳統的白板，我們都很想用。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "很好奇，國威以前整理的模式是什麼？會不會讓你不方便？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們寫這個的好處是讓螢幕前的人可以看得到，就跟直接簡報機或者是整理爭點的簡報上寫，所以其實如果可以的話，就整台給你，你字寫大一點都沒有關係，或者一個爭點寫一張，就當作很多紙。" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "要傳統的並不難。" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "沒有電子的，但是傳統的可以幫你處理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可是傳統的沒有不能做在？" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "沒有辦法，要回頭寫。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "根本就做不到啊！" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "之前都是像在這樣的紙上自己做紀錄。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那一個會議室，其實如果寫白板，有的人是看不到的，那一個會議室是很長的會議室，除非這邊的白板還要投到那個投影機，因為其實大家都看得到那個位置。" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "還有一種方法，那個場地也沒有辦法做，我們以前有一種東西是放在像投影片那一種。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "實務投影機，其實都想過（笑），所以我才買這個，後來我們就想說這個是唯一的方法，而且VGA線很長，不需要用Apple TV，所以你可以直接接這個，用一條線接VGA出去，就不會一直看到業配。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "國威還有沒有需要我們支援的？" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "大概就是這樣，到時候唐鳳會在旁邊？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！當然。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "還有誰會在旁邊？就是有什麼會說…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然會在。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "這個部分問題講了很多，哪裡漏掉了…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "Wendy也會在，所以你不用打字。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我四、五在台南。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒問題。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我可能可以遠端看。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "所以國發會可以幫忙管線上的秩序管理嗎？" }, { "speaker": "商業司代表", "speech": "我在小編在旁邊看。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們的小編以前是誰？是姿瑩，對不對？" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "會在聊天室回的，姿瑩這一次會不會來？" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "我們以前是LIVEhouse.in，基本上我們都以匿名的方式上去。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "開麥啦好像可以註冊…" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "院裡面是各部會自己有小編，比如這一場是院會或者是記者會，哪幾個部會被cue到，小編就會等，去打。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "而且這一場小編在現場，而且沒有別的相關部會，所以一般性的維持秩序，要誰？" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "就維持秩序跟幫主持人list東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "哪一些是商業司接不到的球，需要丟給現場的工作。" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "我們看到題目之後，我們會pass給國威跟商業司。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可是我們要怎麼pass？" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "可以開hackpad？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "要嘛就hackpad，不然如果只要pass給國威就是用FB messenger或者是用什麼方式都可以。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "好。" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "最簡單的方式就是遞紙條（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "差別在於你有沒有要公開化，vTaiwan不一定是我，後來都是雨蒼…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以前我們都是放在hackpad底端，我們會把那一則發言從右邊copy到共筆的底端，然後國威或者是我就可以打開hackpad的底端。" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "不然我就把它貼在hackpad底端。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "你可以幫他釐清一下他真正想要問的是什麼。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以把它弄到國威可以想出來的狀態。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "甚至有時候會在上面說已經進入到哪裡了，剛才這個問題已經回答過了。" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "有，以前也有類似這種。" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "那我需要比如在hackpad最下面問題出來了，不需要把陳言博抓回來說要不要給一點提示。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你可以坐在他旁邊啊！" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "可以啊！就坐在對面啊！因為部會一定是坐在那一側，我只要坐對面就好了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好聰明喔！他的意思是同一張桌子，並不是隔著，那就是這樣，所以如果需要cue他的話，就跟他講一下。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "甚至如果你更願意幫助主持人，可以看主持人現場收的架構，然後幫他把問題丟到他收容的架構，他就會更好回應。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有辦法。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "假設已經有架構出來了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為其實架構也要看老師聽哪一些東西，如果沒有拋出來自己硬架架構，也不好，反正最後就是全部丟同一個box。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "可以說暫停五分鐘給我看（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "接下來歡迎…" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "就說接下來歡迎誰。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "只要正常處理好就不用再後面那一場。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實也不用太勉強，收得到就收得到，收不到就再開一場也沒有關係。如果收不到的話，我們就會從逐字稿裡面去挑最不滿意的人，然後把最不滿意的人都一定要約到下一場來，以及看起來這一些最不滿意的人還算服氣的人也要邀到下一場來，就五個人左右在那邊喬，當然是公開的，喬到一個位置，不然大家不要離開那個房間，差不多這樣運作。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "對啊！頂多就是找意見不一樣，但是沒有來。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "好像畫得出來，對不對？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以畫得出來，因為這是老案子了，並不是第一次這樣被研究了，只是第一次被放大檢視。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "會不會有記者來？" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "有發新聞稿，然後也對中外媒體講這一件事，也就是在新傳處那一些記者們都告訴他們了，但是當天有沒有人來我會再問一下，有沒有表達興趣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想沒有人幾乎是零，一定會有人來，只是派什麼線跟層級多高的人來。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "有人來當然沒有關係，因為之前我主持的那幾場是沒有人來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不是有會前訪問嗎？" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "沒有。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "不過，我補充一下，說不定會不會有人對不是禮拜四主要爭點以外的，比如vTaiwan架構，或者是未來公司法就拜託你在拉幾個進來。" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "現場想法…" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我自己的建議是，那天的處理不用馬上回應，可是可以幫大家整理說有哪一些問題，如果部會不必要，那就是後續list要來處理這一個問題，我的意思是他們的意見進來，但是沒有被系統化整理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該就是說我們收的文件裡面，不要是其他類，而是其他類裡面有這個1、2、3、4。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "辛苦了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "今天就這樣，提早結束。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "大家辛苦了。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "我畫完了，你要看一下嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然啊！就投影。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "書漾你真的好好用（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個是illustrator嗎？" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "對啊！然後右邊的字可能要改一下，你們專業知道過程的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "還不錯啊！" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "有小組討論嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有啊！" }, { "speaker": "許恩恩", "speech": "小組討論是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個其實…" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "隨時都可以小組討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這裡是工作組啦！所以講「小組」有點怪怪的。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "工作組討論？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想一下。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "也可以不要有這個東西，這邊有沒有幾個比較（次要）？" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "其實工作組討論跟專家會議是結合在一起的，對不對？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有一點結合在一起，之前工作組討論，按照性質，有的比較像利益關係人，有的像專家會議，所以這兩個都可以放在一個part，可能叫「工作組會議」什麼之類。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "修擬法案會再擴張嗎？之前好像就沒有了，是不是？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "本來vTaiwan設計裡面會出現社群版的草案，草案一、草案二跟草案三，但是事實上並沒有出現過。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "所以草案是往外，對不對？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得送審立法是紅綠燈那邊，不在這個process，是在最底下，然後定案才是在紅綠燈，等於紅綠燈的綠燈要跟定案的底端對齊。送審立法是在更後面的事情，那個已經超過了vTaiwan process，vTaiwan到定案為止。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "到底有沒有要再擴張？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "鋼航其實對於中間的那一個收攏定義在線上諮詢會議，所以線上諮詢其實是收攏第一次的時候，然後接下來是事後會再發展討論，專家會議的位置是對的，意見徵集是這個位置沒有錯，然後接下來還有叫什麼…" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "慢慢收的是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有點像是線上討論區的感覺，意見徵集，我們叫做「互動討論」好了，這個部分是部會要七天上來回，所以互動討論，互動討論其實在最開的，可能要往下一格，大概這裡。然後我們到線上諮詢會議的時候，是…" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "中間還有一個？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有，而是線上諮詢還要再往上提一點。然後專家會議是要再打開一次，但是不會那麼開。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "作用是要把它收起來？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "然後草案是部會對這一個東西的回應，草案會再問細節，但是每問一次細節，就再收更小一點，到定案是收到第二這樣子，這樣子沒有錯，這樣子都是對的。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "到時候會有解釋嗎？還是只有這一張圖？slide是這樣，但是在vTaiwan上面會有？因為這一個關鍵字可以反射我們的理解。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "你說在網站上？" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "我跟你一起把內容打出來，ok。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是什麼叫做「議題形成」、「議題討論」。但是本來vTaiwan設計裡面，按照每一個部分都是可抽換的，所以這只是每一個部分要達到什麼的描述，但完全沒有怎麼達到的這一件事，所以每一個議題怎麼達到都是那個議題挑的人決定，每一個議題都是單獨出來，當然會參考類似性質比較近一點的來決定，但是目前沒有明文化。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "我建議如果是紅綠燈就是橫的紅綠燈，因為整個一直列下來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好聰明喔！綠色在最左邊，然後黃色在中間。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "綠色在左邊，黃色在中間，然後紅色…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "紅色在右邊。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "送審立法就下面？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "還是綠燈在中間？" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "是要正常的紅綠燈？應該綠燈是在最右邊。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我先講本來紅綠燈的概念是說綠燈是政府會買單的，黃燈的是還要再協調跨部會討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是emoji裡面綠燈在左邊。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "紅燈是現在根本沒有辦法處理，除非有什麼樣的新政治影響或預算，所以紅綠燈如果按照他的…" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "黃燈應該在中間。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "其實按照他的影響，買單程度也好，其實是有一個光譜的意思。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "要怎麼呈現出這個？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，我們的黃燈在左邊，這跟駕駛座在哪裡說不定有關係（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好！這不是重點。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "你要查紅綠燈的照片嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我剛剛查過了。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "好可怕喔！" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "沒有關係，只要是一個光譜往左或者是往右都好。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "你剛剛是說漸近式的嗎？" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "現實上也是漸近式的，我看起來是符合邏輯。所以要綠在右邊或者是紅在…" }, { "speaker": "黃子維", "speech": "反正黃在中間就對了。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是我要講的是說，其實送審立法只有綠燈，黃的是不會動，黃的意思是走不下去。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "有沒有可能偶爾有幾個案例是的確不是送修法，但是有沒有解套的其他方式？" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "這個就可以回去變成…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就把紅綠對調好了，因為中文字都在右邊，感覺比較順（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "像網路霸凌也是，網路霸凌不修法，但是可以在行政措施上面怎麼強化。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "綠燈可能是立法或者是其他的解套方式。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "送審立法就改字樣就好了。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "就不要放在vTaiwan的程序裡面？達成共識？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好像也奇奇的，如果要完全technical講就是修改法律、法規、命令或配套措施，是不是差不多類似這樣子？我們有沒有一句話來講這一件事？" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "「make a change」？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "學術名稱是什麼？推動改變？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那就是決策，好啊！沒錯。" }, { "speaker": "黃子維", "speech": "形成對策？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不是，已經完成了。所以是「做出決策」或者是「行政決策」，因為vTaiwan比較是一個行政院的系統，或者是「做出決策」，我覺得很好，那就先這樣吧！" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "那「做出決策」不一定全部送立院的意思？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不一定，可能就是法規會說修法規或者是部會自己發函做完。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "就滿ambiguous把三條路都帶過？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "政治壓力呢？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們需要一個拳頭的（笑），最上面。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我本來想說議題形成會有兩塊，一個是政院這邊有指示等等，會進入到vTaiwan社群，他們就技術考量，所以其實他們兩階段，一個是政治壓力進來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，另外一個是社群願意不願意幫忙消化這個政治壓力，像之前我在幫社會局推的那一個簡報的時候，好比像g0v社群、資訊局、社會局併列，表示這一些湊在一起才能往下做。可是真的要叫「政治壓力」嗎？" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "那個名字要想一下。" }, { "speaker": "許恩恩", "speech": "議（政）題（治）。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "可以啊！這很好啊！我真的覺得很好耶！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那很好啊！不過你要直排注音符號？" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "我覺得好難喔！被考倒了。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "陳言博問我說政委還有指示他們要報告接下來要放在vTaiwan修的改革議題嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們是請老師報告。如果他們有準備好要報告的就一起報告，我沒有指示的意思，可是他們只有10分鐘喔！" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "其實跟他們講說公司法的修法議題，朱老師報告就好了，他們如果要再報告的話，就融入他們的報告就好了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好，就這樣吧！所以那裡面就是公部門、私部門跟公民社群的角色比較不是用文字可以敘述的，不然就是把圖示三個疊在一起，要嗎？" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我比較在意的是，題目的input是政院這邊，因為坦白講input哪一些，政院沒有辦法拉進來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這就很像「提點子」。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "社群比較像是就技術能力，當然要用技術之名去杯葛這是另外一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這也常常做。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我不知道。但是那個階段性，因為有某種的權力關係要知道一開始題目input是部會，再來是處理社群的技術，但是我覺得不一定要畫在圖上，變成是到時候的網站。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "需要有文字講這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "可以放這個，我們要解釋的話。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "國威禮拜四這一段也沒有太多時間講吧？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！我們說只有二分鐘。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "差不多二分鐘可以把這個講完。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以啦！" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝大家。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "今天活水社企陳一強來拜訪，主要是想提公益公司法部分，因為你負責社企這一個項目。我現在有一個workig，我把一些目前有爭議的數位經濟的項目，比如網路媒合業想立一些專章，比如有些國外公司在臺灣做生意，我想要在這一個法裡面可能有一個tax break，我現在跟蔡玉玲律師在合作這一個項目，有一些項目也想丟上vTaiwan，我希望把一個版本先丟給你看，看能不能幫忙echo，另外我也有找吳政忠政委。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "我想解決一個問題是，現在政府裡面沒有一個單位是處理數位經濟，之前有科技會報跟NICI，但是還不到位，是不是在之後的午餐會議可以邀請你，我們現在是兩個禮拜聚會一次，現在都約在蔡玉玲的律師事務所，我們就大概會有一些進度的分享，所以明天會再聚。可能再下一次的時候會有一個beta version出來，也就是雙週五聚一次，再下一次是隔兩週。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我25日就去巴黎了。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "你什麼時候回來？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "12月12日。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "我打算12月底之前送進院會一讀，所以我希望在送進院會一讀前跟你討論一下，我希望那個版本出來之後再開一個公聽會，也希望可以邀請你來參與。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "12月12日已經有一讀的版本回來了，不然你在巴黎我們先用網路確定幾個部分。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你們剛剛拍我嗎？那我也要拍。我覺得這個滿有趣的，我也要拍照一下，你可以看到你們被拍照的樣子也被投影（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有三個人（指許毓仁、其助理、其主任），如果不是光度不夠的話，可以拍到四個人。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我這樣有聽懂，我出國前，其實你們版本要再beta version？" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你們在線上送，其實是公開的嗎？" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "公開之前希望先跟你討論一下，那就等我回來，12日之後，看是用Skype或者是怎麼樣？甚至在巴黎的時候…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "…抱歉打斷你，其實專責機關，不管是之前的NICI，都有提出。NICI之後會變成一個DIGI+，而且DIGI+是院長帶的，所以事實上這個是有的，在院裡會有一個方案。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得這個跟數位經濟法相關程度比較小，最近的題目裡面，其實vTaiwan還沒有過，所以這一個當然可以討論。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "之前vTaiwan盤點的項目，你有一個list嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那個蔡玉玲律師就有。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "那就從她那邊拿？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，就從她那邊拿。現在已經沒有虛擬調適法規計畫了，她手上還有一些在虛擬法規調適方案還沒有做完的東西，那個列表我也沒有。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "是不是vTaiwan上會有？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "目前沒有在任何地方，有的話會再mail給你。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "你是不是沒有參與vTaiwan？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我們做公司法，今天晚上七點就有現場直播，就在隔壁的第七會議室。也是國威主持，其實整個格式都跟以前一模一樣，現在是討論公司法裡面最沒有爭議的英文名稱登記，接下來爭議比較高的就會一個個浮出來，也許下一個就是B corp。本來vTaiwan就會做這一件事，我也當然會參與。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "他們（指助理及辦公室主任）可以來一下嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我們線上有直播。蔡玉玲律師是我們邀的學者專家之一，你們可以看直播，商業司的人都在，你們可以在線上打意見。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們在「政院開麥拉」頻道，本來蔡玉玲律師主持時是找LIVEhouse.in，這次沒有找。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "vTaiwan 功能開發部分我們會協助社群處理。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "你現在主要的業務是？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "開放政府：一個是資訊透明，像之前要的亞洲連結矽谷，計畫執行進度的介面，我們都有在弄。另外一個部分是公民參與，這個包含法規或者是其他命令修正案出去有六十天的公開討論期要如何討論，這個是政府提的；還有5,000人連署，政府就要有所回應的「提點子」，那個機器的督導也是我在做，這個是主要的業務。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "社會企業跟青年諮詢委員會，其實有一點協助開放政府，因為青年諮詢委員會或者是社會企業都是以青年為主，所以本來就是最有能力去或最有意願參與者，傳統的政府方式其實比較資深或者是規模比較大的，才會有講話的管道，所以也不需要我們用另外一個平台，其實是為了中小企業或者是中小型的公民組織或者是很有想法的個人，可是他們並沒有那麼大的能力，現在也讓他們有一個不是被壓倒的管道，其實也是另外一個發聲的機會，這個是我主要的工作。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "社會企業的部分，你具體被交辦或者你自己想要做的東西是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "社會企業其實我們一直都知道社會企業是由社會慢慢走向企業，希望自己慢慢多少活下來。或者是企業慢慢走向社會，希望多負一些責任，有這兩條線。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實之前馮燕政委在管這個事的時候，花了很多力氣讓勞動部跟經濟部有一些原則，也就是不要掛社會企業之名，但是事實上並沒有在做，所以我們現在公司法重寫的這一個過程裡面，當然就有討論到公司須以營利為目的的這一件事是不是適度加以平衡，也就是公司營利是主要的目的之一或者不是主要的目的，這樣子我們是否容許這樣的公司存在，這個我會幫忙，不管是討論或者是想一下政策方向，這個是我該做的。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "你的看法是？社會企業適合立專法嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我的看法是，以前公司法沒有要重寫的時候，大家試著在公司法的架構旁邊找一些變通的方法，最簡單的例子是閉鎖性專章。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "現在公司法要重寫了，剛剛講的那一些專法、專章及專節，不如在公司法裡面一起處理。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "我們直接討論到社會企業就直接討論，原本的社企界有兩派說法，也就是到底要不要立專法，一直有爭議，我希望在過程中去立一個公益公司法專章，好比是「共益公司/兼益公司」，就是目前美國在做的架構底下去做；這一個東西之前提到CSR這一塊，大家會爭論說到底企業…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "…是，一般企業是不是要也負社會責任？" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "可不可以以後公司登記成公益公司，去看原本規定，公司存在的意義是幫股東創造最大利益，但是希望再加一個「社會影響」的衡量，能夠在設計上走這一塊。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "但是目前社會上對於界定社會企業還有很多討論的空間，我們希望先從共益公司法來讓他有一個第三個選擇去做，不知道這一塊委員的看法是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "除了揭露是共益公司，可以達到社會影響以外，會不會想做盈餘提撥？或者是課予什麼責任？或者完全只是揭露而已？" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "這一些公司才剛成立，所以不可能予以提撥，我覺得應該是，就是一個badge，第二個是在社會機制底下，除了極右端私人利益極大化及極左端社會影響最大化的中間是什麼，我還沒有想清楚。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "公司法重寫現在是由一群老師，你也知道，在進行，他們叫「公司法全盤修正委員會」。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "誰在做？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "執行長是方嘉麟老師，他們也發問卷，收回問卷後去分析社會上有哪一些要求，哪一些社會上的要求就改，哪一些是社會的爭議是什麼，他們就想辦法解決，也就是共益公司到底是揭露就好或者是課予一定的責任，或者是責任要重，要有一定的提撥。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "每一個國家不一樣，課予的責任越重，就會給他公部門的獎勵，好比採購的時候用它，因為你說目前的社會企業，是不是可以承接公開採購的能力？如果不賦予太多公部門的補助，同樣的道理就不課予太多的企業責任，就是以揭露為主，這個是目前老師們的想法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "誠如我說的，社會上一直有不同的聲音，所以我們會建議老師提一個案子來vTaiwan，在公司法系列來討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "vTaiwan一向會先讓關係人大概理解，用開放式問卷或者用什麼方式，用「pol.is」蒐集大家的意見，開一次會議蒐集集大家的爭點，如果蒐集到利益關係人有不同意見時，我們會再找那兩、三個人來，「公開」喬到大家都可以接受為止。共益或者是兼益公司看老師們什麼時候可以提出來，不過應該快了。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "vTaiwan的運作上，我有興趣，我可以提案嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "vTaiwan本來是一個社群經營的平台，它可以產出的法規，是送立法院的那一種之類的，因為我們這邊有部會七天內要回應的責任，你要提案的話，你也要想辦法找相對應的部會，那個部會來當作有任何網路上朋友提出問題的時候，他們願意七天內來回應，幫你做懶人包或者是小字典。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果有任何部會承接，其實我沒有挑政治意志從哪裡來的，從vTaiwan的要點來看，只要國發會的法協中心的範圍是法規制定，協助的對象是行政院的其他部會，只要其他部會願意發一個函說希望有一個法規藉vTaiwan來公眾討論，你去請或者是誰去請是一樣的。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "球有人要接。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。如果球丟了不接，這個平台會喪失公信力，會跟其他的平台沒有什麼兩樣。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "社企的想法是？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們有社企的聯繫會議，大概一、兩個月一次。這個是勞動部、經濟部中小企業處、商業司都會來，我來之後第一次有關社企會議的逐字稿有公開，第二次逐字稿是明天或者是後天會公開，逐字稿的位置在「archive.tw」，包含之前TiEA來拜會逐字稿都在上面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒事，看逐字稿就好。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "你剛剛說到有關於揭露還有提撥，到底是一個obligation或者是option？主任，你可不可以說一下立專章的精神？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "或者有書面，我也可以看。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你們這個版本不會超過任何現行公司需要做的事情，基本上。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實社會上的意見有寬到嚴的範圍，社會企業在發展期的朋友可以越寬鬆，可以負一定社會責任的朋友會覺得要越嚴格，我對這兩派的說法大概都理解。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "你們說的「聯繫會議」，我有辦法參加嗎？" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "原則上是政府間溝通時的相關平台。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是如果對於上次的逐字稿有書面意見，我們可以放在下一次的議程。" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "或者主辦的單位想要邀請您來也可以。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "我可以提意見。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我的功能是協調部會，但是要邀誰，我無法決定，你先看逐字稿，才可以對出來。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "下次舉行是什麼時候？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "1月，但是還不知道日期。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "我們先看逐字稿。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可能一些問題你們都想過，逐字稿應該明天或者是後天會出來。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "你現在也有做青諮？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "我之前有看到一份青諮名單，是不是已經確定了？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我進來之前就已經確認了。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "你現在希望怎麼運作？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你之前是不是青顧？" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "對，我是，一、二屆都是，我已經是老青顧（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以我的印象是第一屆比較formal，第二屆比較像聯誼性質，這一屆的組成是跟青年相關的各部會自己找了大部分的倡議者來，所以跟之前focus是創新創業跟教育不太一樣，我覺得那個層級也有差別，之前是教育部所屬的青年顧問團，也就是教育部的要點，教育部辦，所以大家的想法是教育部能夠輔導就輔導，不能輔導的，好比像創新創業上能夠加什麼東西，由教育部來聯繫。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "而這一屆提到院級，雖然教育部是幕僚單位，但是目前所有收回來的青諮委員們關心的東西都是跨部會，並沒有一個是單一部會所關心的全部，這個就很有意思，大家關心的都是很跨部會的東西，不管是資料治理或者是社會正義，都不一定有單一部會來主責。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以從我的角度來看，數位政委的意思，就是不只一位政委，他們也都可以是政委。我的意思是，我負責的事情，應該是說由青諮委員們他們最care的議程是什麼，他們需要一次串到三、四個部會沒有什麼管道，我可以幫他們串，甚至還會請某些特定的部會來擔任他們的次長或者是導師，這部分的逐字稿明天會出來，所以我具體是行政協助，如果跨部會的每一個委員要如何負責他們的議程，那個是他們的事了。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "你比較變成是行政協助？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "你希望他們是bottom up的想法？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是的。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "我分享一下我當時當青顧的一些狀況。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "我們當時被分配到每個人要認養一些部會，三組選一個，有些人就根據自己的時間、投入的程度去參加這一些會議，因為青顧團是三個月開一次會，所以中間當然有很多會議去參加，由於青顧團畢竟是顧問，所以沒有實際的提案權，我覺得這個可能到最後覺得只是開會，然後在會議紀錄上有一個青年的發言，後來因為蔡政委、馮政委這幾個比較有主見的政委—所以後來才會有vTaiwan這一些線上的東西。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "你們這一次選多少人？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "二十五個。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "那時候接近三十個人。所以如果可以做一些unconference等線上作業，可以讓這一些事可以更快？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "還沒有開第一次，但是所有的決策都是在線上就決策了，我覺得滿有效率的。第二，我認為沒有提案權這個，也不只你，所有的青顧都會跟我說要看部會要不要，沒有就不行了。另外我一個業務是5,000人連署的「提點子」，有一些是沒有部會要承接或者是兩、三個部會要共享的權利，也就是跨部會提案之後如何各做各的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我進來之後協調的第一個是幫助教育部跟文化部協調電競選手的定位，包含簽證、兵役及教育這一些東西，這個是我可以幫忙做的，也就是如果有一個案出現，並沒有說我可以吃掉全部，也說對方先做什麼我再做什麼，我可以幫忙切細說某些人做這個、某些人做那個。提案權基本上是部會的業務，大部分部會會認為是超出範圍，我是政務委員，我會以協調為主，不可能強求部會。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "TiEA那一次大家談了什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "蔣萬安委員講了很多，他講了在立法院跟其他部會，其實跟這個是同一件事，他希望部會做一些事，不管是部會覺得本來不屬於他的工作，確實是他們的工作，可是部會的想法跟他的想法非常不一致，他具體講了這兩個情況，及他對行政體系的一些觀察；但是因為逐字稿裡都有，我就不贅述了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其他TiEA的朋友倒沒有提太多具體政策要我們做什麼，可能也是因為第一次，比較瞭解我在行政院做事情的方式跟範圍這樣子而已。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "接下來我想問多元計程車方案，因為那一天Uber有來找我，他們有拜會國民黨團，在這一件事上，我們有沒有一個明確的態度？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有，多元化計程車方案已經核定了。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "是不是有一個公平競爭方式平台？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果他們只用執業駕照的司機，其實本來顧立楷請的謝律師在去年就已經說會輔導他們的司機去取得職業駕照，而且會願意把保險跟繳稅的東西跟我們交代，所以其實這個我想去年8月就承諾的事，這是在多元化計程車方案核定之前，他們的意思是如果不過，他們沒有合法經營的基礎；可是現在都過了，好像對方的理由不是很成立了。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "現在的理由是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他們似乎是希望還是放寬讓司機不一定要取得職業駕駛執照，也許是讓業餘的司機開一下Uber，開一開之後就會因為打星等不夠沒有辦法繼續開，接下來就會有4.5顆星以上是優良駕駛。謝律師在去年認為願意輔導他們去取得職業駕駛，他並沒有說非得取得不可，但是他說願意輔導，這個都有逐字稿。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實他們說先開放營利的營業用車，也就是多元化計程車方案底下的計程車，因為是自由業，並沒有說一天要開六小時或者是七小時，開半小時也是營利，也一樣有賺錢，但是因為這個東西車型、顏色全部都已經放寬了，好比下雨天可以多收一點錢，所以其實Uber並沒有任何方面不符合這個部分。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "唯一的差別是，你要先取得駕駛執照，根據駕駛執照，去挑這個方案裡面的某一個車隊去申請營業登記證。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那如果職業駕駛執照都沒有的話，後面都不用談；但是他的意思是先開放沒有職業駕駛執照的人先開車來營利，這我們沒有辦法答應。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "Uber是不是有一部分非法？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那裡面沒有取得職業駕駛執照的部分就是非法。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "是不是白牌車？" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "職業駕駛執照是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "開R牌的租賃車，如果沒有職業駕駛執照還是非法的。不瞞您說，我也坐過很多次UberBLACK，大部分是合法的，但也有遇到一些情況，比如該台車駕駛者僅有一個人有駕照，但是駕駛者卻是他的親戚等，等於很多人用那一台車賺錢，所以就會有同輛車有時非法、有時合法的奇妙狀況。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "那裡的多元化計程車方案裡面，白牌車是不是ok的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "要先登記成電招車隊，然後就合法了。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "以現在的狀況來說，政府的態度是繼續罰嗎？有沒有一個確認的態度？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "Uber裡面那一些合法的部分，就是合法的。我並不是對Uber這一家公司有什麼問題，如果只是合法的租賃車找到合法的乘客，然後用合法的駕駛把人從A送B，我們祝福他。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "現在的問題是，即使是合法的車，有時是不合法的駕駛在開，即使是合法的駕駛，有時開不合法的車，因此在這樣的情況下，我們很難知道合法或非法，我們只能說非法的部分按照資本額處罰。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "罰鍰2,500萬的精神是按照資本大小比例，如果我沒有記錯的話，但是因為我跟提案的委員沒有討論過，所以我不知道詳細的立法理由，但是我想如果一個小App公司如果不小心觸法了，並不會被課到這麼高的罰金，是持續、故意的話，罰的金額比較大。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "你覺得臺灣有沒有可能TNC的問題？以公路法去管是否是適當的狀況？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想先講的是，不管車子是運貨品或者是人，你剛剛講的媒合業有運各種東西的狀況，不管運什麼還是營利行為，我們覺得這是營利行為，但是你說這個營利行為的特定樣態是不是要比照計程車，這個不一定。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是這個東西是交通部管轄，而交通部並不是我督導，當時David Plouffe會來，是因為我有一個全程錄影的設備，所以比較不是黑箱密談之類的，所以我就可以跟他交換意見。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可是說到底，Uber這個案子並不是我管的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "交通部那邊會希望我幫忙做一些說明，我也答應他們幫忙做一些說明，但是交通部的下一個move並不是我管的。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "上次這樣跟David Plouffe解釋完，他可以接受嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實交通部推共乘推了很久，但是共乘只有在特定地區才有績效，大部分並沒有推得很好，原因是事前的平台比較麻煩，現在有App比較容易。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我也認為我們有智慧型手機之後，你在多元化計程車方案裡面推共乘，這個比較簡單，而且這個跟地方縣市政府合作，他們很願意推油電混合車等，如果再加上共乘，就可以解決偏遠地區沒有大眾運輸的共乘需求——這個對環境是好的，因為大家都很瞭解，我滿在意氣候變遷，我覺得這個是值得推展的方向。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們沒有談攏的是職業駕照，當然營利登記證跟靠行都是建立在職業駕照上的，這個都談不好，後面也不用談了。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "氣候變遷的部分你會做什麼事？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我不會做什麼事（笑），這個不是我的業務，如果過了100年之後，人類文明只剩一點點，那我們在這邊做什麼也…" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "…我剛剛提了三個部分，「永續」在立法院很少被討論到，很少法案是跟PM2.5、碳稅相關，所以這一些東西我有在注意，我可能也會提幾個題目上來到vTaiwan，vTaiwan應該不限制只有談資訊網路的東西吧？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "只要有部會願意承接，我們就可以請法協判斷。法協願意的話，就請社群來規劃。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果法協後來覺得這不是法規案或者跟一般法律沒有關係，是屬於特定的配套措施，或者只是提高某一個罰責，如果認為行政命令，可能就認為不需要提到vTaiwan，但是我覺得都有機會的。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "好啊！我覺得我們正在做的一些有關環境永續，像碳稅，我們很久以前大家一直在談，可是這個跟大企業有很大的關係，這個是很大的工程。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個工程再大，也沒有地球工程（geoengineering）大。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以是要比較的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "逐字稿一樣十天之後公開，這十天之內其實本來要來的那一位也可以給他草稿。" }, { "speaker": "許毓仁", "speech": "謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "準時開始vTaiwan線上會議，大家有沒有什麼問題？沒有問題，感謝搖滾區的各位夥伴（笑），在線上收看直播的夥伴跟你們說聲晚安。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "今天是vTaiwan的線上諮詢會議，很高興能夠擔任主持人的角色，我是泛科學的總編輯鄭國威，如果大家不知道我是幹麻的，我快速用十秒鐘介紹一下。我基本上是局外人，但是大家都知道在那麼多元及複雜的社會，有時需要一些局外人來提出一些問題，我自己一方面在做科學傳播，本身並不是科學家，所以常常也扮演局外人的角色提出各式各樣的問題，希望今天也能夠扮演這樣的角色來提出一些問題，也請在座社群代表、政府代表及專家學者代表都能夠給我們一些深入及重要的一些洞見。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "我先跟大家介紹一下vTaiwan到底是什麼樣的一個活動或者是會議，大家應該可以在線上看到我們的投影片，線上的轉播螢幕有投出投影片的畫面嗎？如果沒有的話，也可以到vTaiwan的網站上看到我們現在的投影片。現在要跟大家介紹一下vTaiwan的流程，其實vTaiwan延續上任政府到現在延續型計畫，可能還是有一些朋友們不太瞭解，所以在這邊快速介紹讓大家理解一下。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "vTaiwan大家可以看到就如這張圖所顯示的，一開始希望把各式各樣在當代政府遇到科技及社會快速變遷時代之下，我們會有很多新的議題發生，我們的法案修訂過去常常落後於時代，現在如果要快速因應時代讓政府更快速往前走協助商業、協助人民能夠適法的話，我們該如何做法規調適，這個是vTaiwan計畫成立的目的，所以一開始我們會有各種面向來獲得大家覺得應該要來討論的議題，這是議題形成階段。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "接下來會徵集各方的意見，針對不同的議題，針對這一些議題有哪一些各種面向跟多元的意見，我們會蒐集這一些意見在網路上進行互動的討論，再來就是到現在的階段，也就是線上諮詢的階段。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "大家可以看到一開始是蒐集議題，所以越來越寬，蒐集越來越多的議題、意見之後會開始收攏，所以會把各方的意見漸漸聚合在一起，到現在這個階段就是希望針對單一的議題來收攏可能還有爭議的這一些點上，看大家能不能把這一些點的問題給釐清，讓我們能夠往下一個階段繼續走。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "如果在線上諮詢這邊又獲得很好的意見之前沒有蒐集到的話，然後專家會議也會再廣納蒐集各方的專家意見，才會進入研擬的草案。接下來，大家看得到紅黃綠類似紅綠燈的概念，這個結論是不予執行或還需要更多的意見或我們應該繼續下去，我們會做出不同的判斷往後推進，這是當代民主社會需要有更多的機制納入更多的公民及社群意見，因此推出了vTaiwan的計畫。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "請看到下一頁，這個是vTaiwan上面的介面，今天的主題是「公司英文名稱登記」，大家可能最近知道有一部很日本的動畫片「你的名字」，我們今天的主題就叫做「你的『英文』名字」。那「你的『英文』名字」大家要怎麼唸？目前在臺灣公司登記，要求要以中文來登記，如果是外國公司的話，也要用中文來登記。為了解決許多這個制度所產生的一些問題及一些公司在運營上的小石頭，看能不能搬開，所以我們來討論公司是否能開放英文名稱登記的議題。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "我們接下來先介紹一下今天的與會來賓，首先是推動計畫最重要的推手，也就是唐鳳政務委員，請唐政務委員跟大家打招呼。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家好，我們之前曾經這個地方討論過公司法閉鎖性專章，我們也在這個地方討論過Uber進入臺灣時，引起的一些法規調適上的問題。很高興今天回到這裡繼續跟大家討論公司法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為公司法現在是在全盤修正委員會的推動之下，英文名稱是其中第一個方面，還有很多別的方方面面會需要大家的意見一起來討論，所以今天特別請公司法全盤修正的老師們先跟我們介紹一下公司法的情況，所以等一下自我介紹之後，想聽一下公司法全盤修正的意見，這部分跟國威一樣，現在才開始學習，很高興有學習的機會，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "因為我們時間要儘量控管，剛才我廢話太久，所以接下來就由我快速介紹一下今天與會來賓有哪一些。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "首先是在我左邊是蔡玉玲律師，蔡玉玲律師之前就任政委的時候推動vTaiwan計畫，我們很高興可以延續開放公民討論的計畫，等一下再請蔡律師發表高見。接著是政治大學朱德芳教授，接著是文化大學法律學院戴銘昇教授，接著是交通大學科技法律學院林建中副教授，接著是成功大學法律學院顏雅倫助理教授，接著是達文西法律事務所盧文祥首席顧問律師，接著是經濟部商業司李鎂司長，接著是經濟部商業司陳言博技正，接著是經濟部商業司張儒臣科長，接著是經濟部智慧財產局商標高秀美高級審查官，接著是經濟部國際貿易局黃靜萱組長，接著是經濟部國際貿易局劉素沫科長，接著是經濟部國際貿易局吳奉珍編譯，接著是經濟部國際貿易局林雅鈴秘書，接著是國發會法協中心吳家林專門委員，接著是經濟部商業司馮茂紘專員，接著是政務委員辦公室賴致翔專員，接著是政委辦公室簡德源參議。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "當然另外還有國發會法協中心的多位夥伴也到這邊來，首先是國發會法協中心的陳育靖科長，接著是國發會法協中心陳柏宇科員，接著是國發會法協中心衛漢君科員，接著是國發會法協中心周皇君科員，接著是國發會法協中心吳佩蓉。因為都是工作夥伴，所以都在幕後。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "當然vTaiwan活動最重要的其實是社群參與者的角色，首先是社群參與者楚曉雯，因為並沒有寫社群參與者的抬頭，所以等一下社群夥伴在發表意見的時候，可以再多介紹一下自己代表的單位等等。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "接著是李健輝先生，接著是王鐙總先生，接著是廖建安，接著是許素琴小姐，接著是張依宸小姐，接著是許恩恩小姐。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "感謝今天來參與的政府單位、學者及社群代表，等一下可以聆聽他們的高見。因為時間有點超時，我們是否先請我們朱教授來幫我們介紹一下公司法全盤修正委員會的相關報告。朱教授您有十三分鐘的時間，我們接下來請把所有的焦點聚焦在朱教授的身上。" }, { "speaker": "朱德芳", "speech": "時間控管一向不是我的強項，不過我盡力而為。" }, { "speaker": "朱德芳", "speech": "公司法全盤修正之前一定要說明的是，去年通過的閉鎖性公司專節。我們可以看到去年7月1日總統公布，9月4日實施，我昨天查了一下到昨天為止有三百三十一家閉鎖性公司，可以這麼說，閉鎖性公司出來符合了大眾的需求，可以說初見成效，非常成功。" }, { "speaker": "朱德芳", "speech": "為何當時要有閉鎖性專節的設置？主要是回應公司法中非常重要的部分，也就是小公司優先，因為我們知道各國的商業組織中，中小企業甚或微型企業是佔絕大部分的，包含PPT所顯示的新加坡跟香港，以臺灣為例目前有十六萬家的股份有限公司，可以稱為大型的股份有限公司，就是公開發行以上，包括上市、上櫃公司，只不過是佔十六萬家的0.03％；換言之，絕大部分的股份有限公司都是屬於中小型或微型的。" }, { "speaker": "朱德芳", "speech": "但是現行公司法股份有限公司專章確實是以大型公司來設置，所以導致中小企業在專法的成本很高，不遵法的情況也十分普通。更有許多的新創公司就遠赴BVI等地來設置公司求取經營上的彈性，當然就會有一些不利影響發生，比如成本增加、引發糾紛、稅基流失，也導致了國內法空洞化。因此閉鎖性公司專節一個非常重要的規範重點，也就是鬆綁、自治、提供彈性、降低企業運營成本。" }, { "speaker": "朱德芳", "speech": "去年非常多的學者專家，包括蔡律師的指導之下，在出資種類放寬、無面額之採用、多元籌資、股東會開放方式的放寬等等方面，提供彈性，同時降低了企業運營成本。" }, { "speaker": "朱德芳", "speech": "我們發現專節非常好，但是仍然有全盤修正的原因是，如果專節有規定的話，就優先適用專節，但如果專節沒有規定的話，依照公司法適用的原則，會回到為了大型公司設計的閉鎖性公司規定，這樣有可能導致閉鎖性公司專節彈性鬆綁目的不大。同時，專節是一個股份有限公司專章下例外，在法院適用法律，或者是主管機關解釋法律的情況之下，都有可能以例外從嚴的方式解釋，也可能導致鬆綁的彈性不大。" }, { "speaker": "朱德芳", "speech": "再者，閉鎖性公司如果運作非常好，有一天想要上市、上櫃，可能必須要先把閉鎖性公司轉成非閉鎖性公司，變成公開發行公司之後再上市上櫃，這邊會增加了轉換成本跟不確定性。" }, { "speaker": "朱德芳", "speech": "我們發現公司法長期以來被大家詬病的問題，專節也沒有時間處理，包括了公司登記制度。我們的公司登記制度其實還要繳交非常多的紙本，沒有充分運用到現在電子科技的優勢，同時我們的登記制度也有一些查詢資料不便利的狀況，同時實務上也存在著公司實際的狀況跟登記的狀況不一致的現象。" }, { "speaker": "朱德芳", "speech": "除此之外，現在公司法下對於自治機關的架構是非常僵化的，比如股份有限公司要求一定要設置三個董事跟一個監察人，但是我們也瞭解有很多公司股東人數非常少，可能只有兩個股東，但是卻要求三董一監，等於公司要找第三個人跟第四個外人來作董事跟監察人，這無疑增加成本及糾紛。" }, { "speaker": "朱德芳", "speech": "接著，我們也常常聽到一句話說「公司的董事不董事、公司的監察人不監察」，如何強化公司負責人究責效益，讓公司可以健全經營？而善用公司的制度，而不是濫用公司制度，這也是我們所關注的。" }, { "speaker": "朱德芳", "speech": "最重要的是多元目標公司，現在全世界現象是貧富不均跟全球暖化，因此導致全世界各國都非常重視員工、環境，因此全世界各國都在討論是否不只為了獲利最大化公司的存在，而只有這一種公司的存在，是不是要允許這一種社會使命型的公司存在？我們認為這可能都必須要透過全盤的修正一起來解決這一些問題。" }, { "speaker": "朱德芳", "speech": "透過公司法的全盤修正，我們要談到這一次公司法的全盤修正是採取不同以往的方式，在一開始成立的修法委員會（產官學的合作），在修法委員會下設了四個小組，第一組是有價證券的發行、會計、審計，第二組是公司治理，第三組是公司登記、兼益公司，第四組是股東會跟股東權，分別代表公司法下四個比較重要的面向。為何在一開始修改委員會跟工作小組一起用產官學的合作角度？是因為我們希望這次公司法的修正，能夠解決實際的問題，同時能夠帶進國際發展的新趨勢，因此這必須要靠產官學、理論與實務界一起合作。" }, { "speaker": "朱德芳", "speech": "跟大家報告的是，從2月份到現在修法委員會做了哪一些事？2月份修法委員會跟工作小組成立之後，產官學一起進行了各種公司法問題的辯識及外國法分析，我們在這一段時間舉辦了四十場次的專家訪談與座談，總共匯集整理出逾兩百個公司法必須要處理的問題。到10月份剛剛經過的是，修法委員會就重大的議題徵求公眾的意見，我們這次也改良問卷的方式，不是簡單問問題而已，而是在問問題之前，先將基本的資料提供給公眾，比如為何問這個問題、其他的國家如何解決這一個問題，修法委員會有哪一些初步的想法，再來詢問公眾的意見。我們這個做法是參考香港跟新加坡的做法，我們認為這種問卷的方式，比較能夠促進對話，能夠產生徵詢公眾的效益。意外的是，這一段時間我們收到超過逾五千份的意見，可見國內的公眾對於公眾議題討論是具有高度熱忱的。" }, { "speaker": "朱德芳", "speech": "未來兩週，公司法全盤修正委員會會將全盤修正建議全文上網，這一份修法建議裡面，除了會包含為何要進行公司法的全盤修正，修正的原則、修正的方法如何不同以往，同時也會將四個工作小組所提出來的具體修法、意見展示給大家，並且提供這五千份的資訊，我們相信這樣一份接近一千頁的資料，未來會提供主管機關修法機關的參考，同時也作為法院判斷的依據。修法委員會也會在未來的一段時間之內舉辦座談會，包含結合vTaiwan非常好的平台跟公眾進行交流，也都可以提供未來主管機關修法的參考。" }, { "speaker": "朱德芳", "speech": "以下為大家介紹這一次公司法修正兩個非常重要的原則，一個是延續閉鎖性公司專節的方向，就是管制鬆綁，另外一個是公開透明，我們認為這好像一個人的兩隻腳缺一不可，缺一就會導致目的不達、增加混亂、增加糾紛。從管制鬆綁的角度，延續閉鎖性公司的精神是採取大小分流，換言之非公開發行公司、小公司我們允許在資金取得、內部組織及公司多元化可以自己透過章程來進行安排。在公開透明的部分，我們希望建構一個便捷的公司登記平台，透過資訊公開，能夠降低交易成本，同時應該也要強化違法行為的究責，讓大家能夠「使用」公司，而不是「濫用」公司。" }, { "speaker": "朱德芳", "speech": "非常快速看一下修法的效益，我們希望能夠透過管制的鬆綁、公開透明可以改善我國經商環境，使我們的產業能夠具有競爭力，同時跟國際接軌跟吸引投資，改變過去政府審查的角色，變成政府只是一個提供平台、提供服務的角色，而降低我們企業的執行成本，同時創造新型的就業、改善企業體質及提升競爭力。" }, { "speaker": "朱德芳", "speech": "最後要說的是，閉鎖性公司去年發布是一個非常、非常重要的里程碑，閉鎖性公司的快速發展，也顯示我國的市場確實有此需求，而且產業跟主管機關透過閉鎖性公司專節的設置跟頒行有一個練兵的機會，大家瞭解原來彈性鬆綁並不是這麼可怕的事情。同時，修法委員會也要再次強調，公司法的全盤修正、彈性鬆綁跟公開透明缺一不可，這樣才能確保修法的效益。展望未來我們希望非公開發行公司可依照自己的需求跟發展的進度能夠設計適合自己的運作規則，能夠讓民間的創新與活力充分展現，但於此同時，參與者也要瞭解需求，並且要適時諮詢專業人士。非常好，今天用的時間非常短。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "聽到我想掌聲鼓勵一下（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "朱教授連我浪費的時間都追了回來，我現在又很想多講一些廢話（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "剛才朱教授跟我們講的是，接下來為什麼要全盤修改公司法，其出發點、之前做了哪一些的籌備工作及接下來會做什麼事，這是非常重要的前情提要，讓之前一季沒有追的人，可以知道這一個團隊做了哪一些事，接下來大家比較知道進入脈絡會發生什麼事。當然在接下來的過程，我們希望保持這樣開放的態度，同時持續蒐集各位的意見，讓這一些意見都能落實到公司法修改的過程當中。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "接下來邀請經濟部商業司代表跟我們談一下vTaiwan上面討論的議題，今天的議題如同剛剛跟各位講到，你的名字是否要引進公司英文名稱的登記？這樣的議題相對於公司法接下來有很多討論來說，是一個比較沒有那麼多爭議的議題，但同樣的也是一個非常重要的議題，所以我們把它獨立出來，希望能夠獲得今天比較完整的討論，接下來有請經濟部商業司的代表，陳言博技正，就麻煩您，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "陳言博", "speech": "謝謝主持人、各位長官、各位先進大家好，就由我代表經濟部跟各位報告一下是否引進公司英文名稱的登記。" }, { "speaker": "陳言博", "speech": "關於公司名稱或公司名稱的登記，不好意思，我們的簡報可能不像教授做得那麼活潑，我們主要介紹一下名稱的意涵及功能。" }, { "speaker": "陳言博", "speech": "主持人一開始提到這個名稱最主要的目的是要彰顯跟辨別，每一個公司在取名非常重要，特別是臺灣的傳統，很多負責人在取公司的名字都要合八字、拜拜跟問媽祖，所以這一個名稱如同取一個自然人的姓名一樣，會關係到這個公司以後是否能夠順利營運，因此這一個名稱非常重要。用於區別跟其他公司不同，除了這個之外，久而久之隨著公司逐漸發展，會做一個認同的標誌，甚至變成是商標或商譽的代表。" }, { "speaker": "陳言博", "speech": "名稱的登記其實政府在管理公司制度裡面很重要的管理方式是登記的制度，登記的制度裡面其中一個非常必要登記的項目是名稱的登記，除了讓市場上資本主義遊戲規則參與者，都能夠知道公司的名稱怎麼樣，就是有一個公示的效果，另外有一個保障的效果，因此政府對於公司名稱要做一個審查的動作，避免混淆或同名公司的情況。" }, { "speaker": "陳言博", "speech": "承接剛剛講的，我們政府要審查，公務員要依法行政，那就要法令依據，而法令依據就是在公司法第18條，如果傷到各位的眼睛，敬請多包涵，因為我們把條文照列上去。" }, { "speaker": "陳言博", "speech": "條文規範的意思是：第一，公司一定要有名稱，名稱可以跟人家不相同，但是因為我們還有標明不同的種類、區別文字，這一套規則有一點複雜，但是在這邊，時間的關係沒有辦法多說。第二，所謂的營業項目這個部分在整個章程，這個其實跟名稱沒有太大的關係。第三，營業項目。第四，這跟名稱有關係，也就是取這個名稱可以，也可以去核八字，但是這個名稱不能妨害公共秩序或善良風俗，或讓人家誤以為跟政府機關或跟公益團體有關，也就是要保護一定的公共利益。第五，公司名稱及業務於公司登記前可以先保留，也就是我今天假設要設一家公司，可能名字核好了，媽祖、上帝也給我一個啟示了，但是公司營運之下還沒有準備好、股東還沒有找好、計畫書還沒有寫好、還沒有跟經濟部申請、補助還沒有下來，是不是可以到經濟部或者是公司登記主管機關先保留這個名字？是可以的。" }, { "speaker": "陳言博", "speech": "依據公司法第18條的規定，經濟部商業司定有「公司名稱及業務預查審核準則」，審核準則會更具體說如何審這一個名稱。第一個，我們強調的是中文名稱，其實我們在公司法第18條並沒有強調是中文名稱，不過約定俗成，所謂的官方語言都是繁體中文、正體中文，所以公司必須要取中文名稱，這是準則裡面的規定。第二個，這個名稱依照第18條過來的：（一）不能與他公司名稱相同；（二）不能被誤認為是政府或者是公益團體；（三）這個名稱不能違反公共秩序、善良風俗，當然善良風俗與公共秩序會隨著時代的變遷而調整內容，我記得以前小時候在念書時不能講「美帝」，因為是「美國帝國主義」，現在我也曉得到底行不行，應該是可以，不過很少公司會取這個名字。（四）外國公司必須將公司名稱譯成中文，因為是全球化的時代，所以很多公司要來臺灣，可能臺灣很多要跟外國公司做生意的臺灣民眾或是本國企業的商人，雖然通曉外文，但對於中文的掌握程度會更好，所以我們希望能夠譯成中文，這個是公司法第370條的規定。（五）外國公司的中文名稱不得與他公司名稱相同，不得讓人家誤認為是政府或公益團體，不得違反公共秩序及善良風俗。" }, { "speaker": "陳言博", "speech": "公司名稱對公司至關重要，在公司內部其實也發生非常重要的效力，因為不僅在外面彰顯區別，在內部更是凝聚所有公司股東所謂具體化的象徵跟代表，依照公司法的規定，也是公司章程必須記載的事項。" }, { "speaker": "陳言博", "speech": "現行有關於英文名稱，剛剛上一頁我們提到在預查準則裡面一定要有中文名稱，但是英文名稱到底行不行？這一個爭議在全球化的時代，早在幾年前就有非常多的業者、朋友、社會賢達人士跟我們提起，那時跟閉鎖性公司一同要來考量的，不過我們現在是再拿出來跟公眾諮詢。現在公司英文名稱在現行法律沒有規定的情況之下，英文名稱到底如何處理？我們認為公司英文名稱的章程本來就可以任意記載，這個是沒有問題的，章程要自己記載，公司決定要記載一個英文名稱，不管是ABC或者是XYZ，但是因為他沒有政府的法令依據或制度，所以目前沒有公司名稱保護效力，也就是所謂的「同名審查」。" }, { "speaker": "陳言博", "speech": "但是，一些目的事業主管機關，也許像經濟部國貿局或交通部，他們依照個別的法令，好比是貿易法，可以針對有辦理進出口業務的廠商有辦理英文名稱的登記，所以目前有許多進出口廠商依照貿易法的規定，向經濟部國貿局辦理英文名稱的規定，特別法有，但是公司法沒有。" }, { "speaker": "陳言博", "speech": "第三，外國認許公司除了中文公司名稱外，亦有對應當地外文名稱登記，於政府統一網站中揭露，目前也只是做揭露，但並不是公司法上所謂受保護的名稱。" }, { "speaker": "陳言博", "speech": "接下來，實務上一般的民眾如果要籌設公司、開公司，也想要幫公司取一個英文名字，到底在哪一個階段會思考到或遇到這樣的問題？其實這一張圖表是公司籌設的流程。" }, { "speaker": "陳言博", "speech": "基本上可以看到第一階段是有一個idea想要設立公司，接著是申請公司的名稱預查，這就會到經濟部商業司辦理名稱預查，這是中文的部分。我們今天要討論的是，要不要開放這個部分也包含英文或者是其他的外文？所以在名稱預查方式，如果今天是特許業務，如果要從事金融業或銀行業，或者如果本身是外資或者是陸資，都要有個別的主管機關許可。第三個是要到登記機關做，現行的登記我們有做權責的區分，以資本額為5億為門檻，各位先進可以參考。最後是公司辦理相關的登記，除了登記外，還要辦理營業登記到稅務機關，也許可能還要幫員工辦理保險（勞保、健保）。最後還有包括相關登記，也就是進出口廠商，在簡報最左下角的部分，依照貿易法的規定，要到經濟部國際貿易局去辦理進出口廠商英文名稱的登記。" }, { "speaker": "陳言博", "speech": "在這個籌設的流程，我們從看到的那一張圖可以知道其實有兩個部分會涉及到英文名稱，一個是經濟部商業司在預查的時候，另外一個是在貿易局那邊，也就是說英文名稱要推動的話，這部分我們要思考調和或整合。" }, { "speaker": "陳言博", "speech": "即便這個名稱的話，如果跟其他權利發生競合的救濟方式？也就是今天名稱叫做「臺灣真好股份有限公司」，但是英文名稱叫做「Lady Gaga」可不可以？目前的做法是，名稱預查跟公司設立名稱如果變更登記的時候，是不是可以看有無同名，是否有其他權利侵害？如果今天有一家叫「臺灣真好」，原則上就不能叫「臺灣真好」，但如果商標有「臺灣真好」，又取名叫「臺灣真好」，這可能就會有違反其他商標法的問題，因此接下來很可能出現公司名稱侵權的形式，如果開放英文的話也有可能。" }, { "speaker": "陳言博", "speech": "但是若無法直接依據公司法提出訴訟？目前實務上公司法還是承認以中文名稱為主，所以如果受權利侵害的人，必須要在法院說主張可能是受到商標或者是違反公平交易法的侵害，取得勝訴判決之後，才可以要求登記機關來辦理變更登記。" }, { "speaker": "陳言博", "speech": "所謂名稱需求的部分，我剛剛也有講到很多新創業者利用電子商務，特別需要英文名稱，而不是中文名稱，因為搞不好主要的市場是在東南亞，或者主要藉由電子商務的客戶群是以英文來作為主要的識別、展示或者是商務交易的主要使用語言，而不是中文。因此，在這樣的營運模式情況之下，公司的英文名稱相較於中文名稱對這家公司的需求性及重要性可能更為強大。" }, { "speaker": "陳言博", "speech": "因此，如果主管機關要登記除了有所謂的中文名稱外，還要開放外文名稱，可能有幾個方案，目前大概有四個方案，以下簡要說明：" }, { "speaker": "陳言博", "speech": "第一，維持現狀：我想各位看一下，因為理由最少。" }, { "speaker": "陳言博", "speech": "第二，政府公示：就是原則上把登記事項多增加公司英文名稱或外文名稱，但不進行同一個審查，所以在所謂的登記管理制度的概念裡面，是一個任意的登記事項，這個法律也不強制要求一定要記載在公司的章程，如果公司願意記載在這一個章程，我們也沒有意見。再來，英文名稱的登記是公示的效力，這並沒有講到兩個效果，一個是公司的效果，一個保障的效果。另外，主管機關不審查有無同名，第一個XYZ登記，第二個XYZ也登記，等到第一個跳出來跟第二個講說「你幹麻跟我名字一樣」，那就是有一個衝突或者來申訴之後，看誰先誰後，就誰先贏，我們會廢止後面的那一個名稱登記。" }, { "speaker": "陳言博", "speech": "第三，同名審查：我們要賦予外文名稱或者是中文名稱，這個還有保護的效力。中文名稱強制採用，但是可以選擇英文名稱跟修改公司章程，這個同樣修改公司法，特別我們所謂的預查準備，甚至在公司法裡面明定有中文跟外文。接下來，因為我們要給他一個所謂的保護效力，因此我們要進行審查，我們要進行所謂的同名審查。剛剛也有跟各位介紹到，像目前的目的事業主管機關，經濟部貿易局也有做名稱的登記，因此這部分也要做進一步的調和、整合跟界接，也就是目前有廠商30幾萬或者是40幾萬有處理進出口貿易業務的公司，他們在經濟部貿易局有登記名稱了，這個部分在資料庫就要做整合跟界接，避免發生一些侵害現有進出口廠商的事。" }, { "speaker": "陳言博", "speech": "接下來要重要處理的是局的規則，也就是說英文是否可以中英夾雜或者是中中英，接著是審查的密度是不是要跟中文一樣？政府機關人員是否有外文的能力達到跟中文的審查標準？" }, { "speaker": "陳言博", "speech": "接著還要再處理強制登記事項，那也就是說前後先後用，但是已經有一些先用了，但是沒有登記，可能被其他公司先登記去了，這一個要如何去判斷處理等等，或者是登記於其他國外知名企業的商標或者是公司英文名稱相同，舉例如果我登記Tesla可不可以？這個是後續衍生的問題，這個方案供大家參考。" }, { "speaker": "陳言博", "speech": "最後一個方案，中英任擇：變成這一個公司一定要有名稱，一定要中文或者是英文，甚至可能是其中的外文，中文不再是標配或者是選配，也就是中、英外文的公司選擇，相關的問題當然對於登記機關而言，我們都會前面前述方案的問題，以上四個方案簡單報告，以上說明，謝謝各位。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "謝謝經濟部商業司的言博幫我們分享，接下來歸納這幾個爭議的重點。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "我們現在看到螢幕上顯示的是，今天這一個討論的主題有哪一些正面的效益及負面的影響，這個我們做了很多的調查，包括產業界人士、專業人士給我們的反饋，我們綜整之後得出了九項。第一個是便利國內業者從事跨國貿易，第二個是強化公司的治理與管理，第三個是有助於公司品牌識別，第四個是提升交易安全，第五個是提升外商在臺營業便利性，第六個是便捷公司命名作業。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "可能也會有一些負面的影響：第一，可能會增加公司的營運成本，像剛剛陳技正在這個方案當中有講到有一些方案可能要增加一些審查或者是一些登記的成本。第二，可能會跟既有公司名稱或商標產生衝突，大家知道在臺灣有很多各式各樣的名稱跟許多國外的公司名稱是一樣的，可能會有一些衝突。接著會不會造成識別不便，畢竟很多人會不會看不懂英文或者是相關的問題，這個是大家提出來的問題。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "下一頁我們看一下「行政機關做出哪一些必要的準備」。第一，要強化行政作業處理效率，如果因為要增加英文名稱的登記而曠日費時，做進出口貿易反而要花很多時間，或者會有很多卡關的話，會有很多問題。像修改相關法律，比如這部分調整了，其他的法令能不能做出相應的調整，不要法律互相打架的問題。接著一併檢討是否開放其他的語文，也就是有人提出要不要必其躬於益，我們知道國際局勢千變萬化，哪一天美國不再是強國，不再用英文作為國際語言了，會不會有這個可能呢？哪一天開始改用克林貢語或各種語言來作為名稱的標記，可不可以呢？這個是大家有提出的問題。接著命名的規則要釐清及說明，不要讓大家取名的時候有很多的紛爭。接著是加強說明與溝通，最後是確立公司新登記英文名稱之使用效力範圍，是只有公示的效力或者是有法律的效力，在商標上有什麼特別的價值等等。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "幾個爭點包括了開放登記的公司外文名稱要包括哪一些字符，聽起來很技術性的問題，但是的確也是很重要的問題。從最左邊來看，是否只開放英文大小寫二十六個字母，或者是開放到行政部門有能力辨識的文字都開放，或者是無限開放，只要呈得上來都開放，也就是光譜上不同的位置。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "外文公司名稱同名之處理方式，最左邊看是任意別名登記，如遇爭議司法解決，接著是英文名稱先透過預審，完成之後才可以視為登記，接著是要採取法律判決。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "公司外文名稱登記違反公序良俗的話，如果要取一家公司叫「FU」什麼的，我們要寬鬆管理或者是由主管機關來公布相關注意的法規，以作為管控。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "混淆公司外文名稱登記之處理，主管機關列不得登記清單，大家看了就不登記，或者與中文名稱採相同審查程序。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "政府其他單位如何配合？各機關應自動同步，不要說商業司登記了，國貿局沒有公布，然後國稅局那邊又不同步，如果各個機關一旦開始施行的話，應該要自動同步；當然另外一邊是說，僅限於公司各機關自動同步。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "公司中文名稱與外文名稱，要不要限制語言，不應該限制語言或者是要以中文為主、英文為輔，或者是英文為主、中文為輔，或者是要強勢併列，只要有中文名就要有英文名，如果想不出來的話，是不是要以拼音的方式來給予英文名，這都是我們今天要討論的一些爭議點，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "因為爭點我們大概先整理了，接下來我們邀請所有的與會來賓來分享，在我左邊的專家學者先跟我們分享一下，針對公司英文名稱，也就是今天的議題有哪一些高見，我們希望專家學者們直接提出來您覺得針對重要的議題，因為前情提要剛才幾位老師們及商業司都講到了，所以各位老師可以直接針對您覺得應該要注意到的重點，就目前還沒有提到一些關鍵來發表高見。首先請文化大學法律學院的戴銘昇教授來分享高見，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "戴銘昇", "speech": "大家好，我直接開始。" }, { "speaker": "戴銘昇", "speech": "因為這一次的修法我自己是負責英文名稱的協助，剛剛那四個方案來講，其實是由輕到重，也就是「維持原狀」、「任意登記但不給公司英文名稱的保護效力」、「給英文名稱的保護效力」及「不要中文名稱，只要英文名稱」。" }, { "speaker": "戴銘昇", "speech": "因為剛剛對議題整個走過，我只講我的看法，依照研究的過程我必須講—我講結論—我覺得除非國內的業界有很強烈引進英文名稱的需求，否則我預計引進之後，我的「引進」是指採第三個方案，也就是公司英文名稱專用權的話，我覺得勢必會產生很多法律上爭議，可能是侵權或者是訴訟等等，不是不能克服，而是需要時間，所以國內如果有很強烈的需求或者是國外企業的話，我們可以想辦法慢慢克服這一些問題；但是假設沒有的話，我覺得要慎重，引進之後不是只有好處，還有壞處。" }, { "speaker": "戴銘昇", "speech": "我講一個例子，日本也有引進公司英文名稱，他們希望可以吸引外商來投資，但是施行的結果是，並沒有外國的公司來日本增加投資的結果，而且最後一些知名的外國企業到日本去營業的時候都是取日文名稱。原因是什麼？因為要賣日本人東西，取英文的名稱看不懂，而且其實日本人對英文的接受度不太高，以上是我的看法，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "謝謝戴教授跟我們分享，接下來請林建中副教授。" }, { "speaker": "林建中", "speech": "我覺得這一個問題坦白講其實是一個商業的問題，也就是為什麼大家會想要做這一件事，我覺得從商業的觀點會有一些他們的想法。法律這部分只是配合而已，坦白講如果要識別清楚，其實每一個人取一串數字的代碼最清楚，絕對沒有混淆的問題。使用任何語言其實都會有同音、同義、近音、近似的問題，因此我覺得把剛剛看到的好處、壞處整理的話，第一個可以看到方便識別，其實我們有更簡單的方法來處理這一個問題。" }, { "speaker": "林建中", "speech": "假設想要增加創意，如同覺得現在的名稱不夠活潑、不夠彰顯你的公司或商業特質的話，其實我們考慮的應該是更多元的東西，但實際上我們在處理這一個問題已經有商標了，所以是不是一定要在名稱上允許更多的空間，其實就是看使用者到底有沒有這個需要。比如名字要五個字好像也沒有不行，也就是你高興，我們身分證有那麼多欄，或許也沒有真的不行，就是看到底需要的人要告訴政府機關做什麼事，我覺得原則上從這兩個觀點來看的話，它並不是一個真正困難的問題，增加的成本到底是不是能夠被正當化的問題。" }, { "speaker": "林建中", "speech": "所以我再補充一點，其實有些人在研究的時候，會提到名稱重複的問題，其實不管英文或者是中文都會都出現，這不見得是一個真正的問題。你在臺灣登記的英文名字，你出國能不能用？是不是真的能用這一個名字，完全是另外一個問題。因此，假設你在這邊登記了一個英文名稱而讓你產生一些好處，可能還是有一些實際上的障礙要克服，或許沒有那麼多如同一般想像的好處，但是就我個人的觀點，這一個案子的負面影響也不大，所以已經沒有問題，是可以做的。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "謝謝林副教授，這邊有兩個方向：一個是本地公司要往外走，可能要設立英文名字，剛才林副教授有提到到底有沒有效益或能不能用；第二，外國公司要臺灣想要維持他的英文名字，本地民眾是否接受、有無用，到底有無吸引外資。整體來說林副教授認為負面效益不大，要做是可以做。接下來請顏教授。" }, { "speaker": "顏雅倫", "speech": "各位大家好，關於前面有一些問題，前面兩位教授都已經說過，我就不再重複，因為我自己本身在專長上有一些部分是包含公平交易法的部分，我簡單說明一下我對於公司名稱的想法。" }, { "speaker": "顏雅倫", "speech": "我基本上的看法是，如果今天要引進公司英文名字的做法，你就是要給他專用權，否則邏輯上跟法制架構上是沒有辦法進行的。如果採用這樣方向的話，接下來的問題是，當然在提綱有很多人提到，比如：外國公司名稱在國內有人拿來用了，類似是這樣子會有一些不管是混淆、誤認，或者是我們所謂說攀附不正當的競爭行為，目前在公平交易法在第22條本來就有一套機制在解決，而且公平交易法在2015年修正已經把公平交易法第22條一些過去學說跟實務上比較有爭議的點，大概做了一些釐清。" }, { "speaker": "顏雅倫", "speech": "目前來講唯一還是會殘留的一個問題是，如果今天是外國著名的公司名稱，它被人拿來國內使用，因為其實公平交易法第22條是可以處理外國的，也就是只要著名的就可以了，不限於國內、國外，這沒有問題。但是公平交易法會限於同一或類似的服務為相同或近似使用。有一個狀況必須要考量的是，比如「Apple」拿來用，但我不是賣電腦，我是做別的，要不要處理這個問題？如果要處理這個問題的話，還是要跑公平交易法的話，會跑到公平交易法第25條，因為第25條是公平交易法的概括條款，但是如果違反公平交易法第25條，是會有行政法的介入，這有滿大的問題，因為如果有公平交易委員會行政處罰介入的話，這是失衡，因為現在看商標跟公司名稱間混淆的問題，其實已經有一套機制在處理了，基本上不會有行政法介入；當然我講的比較細是，這部分已經到了執行層面的問題。" }, { "speaker": "顏雅倫", "speech": "將來考慮這個部分的話，可能必須要再就這一些細節，當然公平交易法第22條已經有一定的機制在存在處理，但可能還是有一些細節的爭議，將來可能必須要做一些統合。如果要給公司名稱專用權的話，基本上一定是各個法規要進行統整，包括貿易法或者是公司法大概都要全部處理。" }, { "speaker": "顏雅倫", "speech": "至於，你要不要開放除了英文以外的公司名稱，到底公司名稱中，中文名稱、英文名稱是否要併用等等，這個主要的點是要看登記主管機關的行政管理，我想主要考慮到這個部分，其他沒有意見。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "謝謝顏教授，等一下可能也要聽一下登記主管機關有什麼想法，現在請盧文祥律師。" }, { "speaker": "盧文祥", "speech": "主持人、兩位政委大家好。" }, { "speaker": "盧文祥", "speech": "公司英文登記名稱現在在公司修法的過程裡面，拿出來討論是有必要的，修法的目標其實有時理想跟現實兩個間要求取一個平衡點，我覺得vTaiwan既然做得那麼好，是不是有可能直接請教全國這麼多登記公司對有無英文公司名稱登記的必要，或許可以從主體來反應這一個問題。" }, { "speaker": "盧文祥", "speech": "我對這個問題的看法（如下）：" }, { "speaker": "盧文祥", "speech": "我贊成商業司所列的四種方案。其中第二種為政府公示的部分，政府公示跟後面的同名審查我覺得有些必須合併，因為英文的公司名稱還是有可能跟我們現在包括商標法、所謂domain name發生衝突的部分，商標法規定得很明確，跟公司名稱是一樣的，是不可以的，剛剛林教授也有大概點到。domain name是採先行主義，誰先登記就是誰的，你必須要用這個名稱，可能用買的或者是協調的等等。再來是公平交易法的部分。" }, { "speaker": "盧文祥", "speech": "目前為止假如商業司在做的話，我個人贊成可以採取漸近式的，也就是增加公司英文名稱的登記，但不給予所謂同名的保護，最主要是因為同名的保護在行政作業有沒有這個必要，這個是第一個問題。" }, { "speaker": "盧文祥", "speech": "第二，它會增加行政機關非常多的行政成本，但是在政府公示的這一個部分，登記機關可能還是必須採取幾個審查的必要，也就是包括了強制法規，商標法已經規定了跟商標一樣的話，不可以取公司名稱。domain name的部分我們沒有辦法強制，但是可以把這個問題告訴登記相同名字的公司。" }, { "speaker": "盧文祥", "speech": "第三，跟國貿局有關的，已經在那邊登記且同名的部分，我們可以通知國貿局轉知已經登記相同英文名稱的公司，以作協調。" }, { "speaker": "盧文祥", "speech": "第四，公序良俗的部分，如果跟公序良俗，甚至於跟國家主體有侮蔑性的文字，恐怕也要審核。" }, { "speaker": "盧文祥", "speech": "因此在這一個方案裡面沒有提到修法的部分，如果有我剛剛講四、五個要審核的部分，恐怕也是要有法令的依據，但是這個法令的依據，在登記主管機關可能只要有些採取告知的行動，有些是根本不准登記，在這一部分可能也要做小部分的修法，但不是很強硬的修法。" }, { "speaker": "盧文祥", "speech": "我自己在公司也擔任公司董事、監察人，以我那兩個外貿公司來講，該兩間公司自己有英文名稱，不在乎在臺灣作英文公司名稱登記與否，至於外國公司來臺灣是會不會有英文名稱與中文名稱衝突的問題，我想要反其道來解釋相關的需求，至少可以暫時解決目前為止公司登記公司英文名稱的問題。" }, { "speaker": "盧文祥", "speech": "至於長遠來看，我們整個國家貿易的程度已經擴及到幾乎各個公司都需要的話，那時候再來採取進一步，甚至於同名審查，甚至於要強制用英文名稱登記都可以，我想我採取的是比較漸近式看法，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "謝謝盧律師。我再理解一下您的建議，綜合剛剛兩個方案，一個是政府公示加上同名審查的這兩個方案？您建議可以登記，但是不保護？" }, { "speaker": "盧文祥", "speech": "對不起，我剛剛可能沒有講清楚，我認為政府公示，原則上任意登記，但是碰到商標法、domain name、貿易法及其他法律衝突的時候，這個是可以排除掉的，因此這裡就要修法，要排除掉就必須修法，基本上採取比較柔性的不審查，但是碰到與現行法律已經衝突的，必須要排除。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "瞭解，接下來請蔡律師。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "我想今天討論這一個問題，那時在修公司法閉鎖性公司時，就已經提出這個問題。其實這個問題有兩個層面，一個是外國公司到臺灣來登記的時候，我們現在要求人家一定要有一個中文名字，中文名字可能全世界就是只在臺灣用。像以前我在IBM工作時就一定要取「台灣國際商業機器股份有限公司」，但是全世界只有臺灣用，有時候名片出去，人家還不清楚「台灣國際商業機器股份有限公司」是誰，但是一定知道「臺灣IBM股份有限公司」是誰。我想公司的名稱基本上是一個識別碼，我們要求一定要翻譯成中文名稱，這個當然是現狀，但是同時也可以保留英文名稱的話，我覺得這個在識別上是讓大家好用。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "簡單來說，我們先不要講說政府到底在處理這一件事會有哪一些額外的工作，我們先講說這一件事對於公司來講，怎麼樣大家覺得方便，基本上還是希望大家在商業的運作上方便。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "再者，本國公司到外國去的時候，其實用的是英文名稱，你如何證明這兩個是同一個？這其實有非常多的地方你都必須證明那是同一個，比如你去開戶、登記商標、在國外登記專利等時，其實你真正在臺灣承認法律的名字只有中文，但是你的英文名字目前在法律的制度下並不承認它是法律名稱，偏偏走出臺灣以外，繁體中文字基本上在其他國家是不太用的，因此從這一個角度來看，我們在法律上是不是可以讓中文與英文都可以，我們可以說一定要有中文名稱，但是同時也可以選擇有一個英文名稱，我想不管從外國人到臺灣來登記公司或者是臺灣的公司到國外，在商業的使用上有一定的便利性。因為我們實務上就碰過你的英文名稱到國外的時候，甚至於在大陸還可能取出一個完全不一樣的中文名稱等等的這一些問題，這個議題值得我們去思考。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "我覺得今天比較重大的問題是，要不要要有一個專用權、是否涉及審查，我覺得這個大家值得去思考。比如你跟商標的衝突或者是域名的衝突，這其實跟中文名稱有一樣的問題，不會只有英文名稱的問題，所以中文名稱如何處理，英文名稱就如何處理，我倒不覺得我們需要為了這個特別開一個因為英文名稱在衝突時有不同的處理方式。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "我們還是有一些公平交易法的機制可以處理、商標法的一些機制可以用，所以我覺得真正的關鍵點是，登記的英文名稱如果要讓它有專用權的話，就有主管機關審查的問題，也就會有現在提出的問題，會不會因為要有這樣的審查，公務員現在目前外文能力有沒有問題？會不會造成審查的時間更久了？因此要設立一個公司更慢了？現在公司法修法希望在網路上很快登記，速度要很快，我老是聽別人講說在新加坡或很多國家一天就可以登記完了，如果要審查的話，是不是會延宕？因此我覺得這一個問題基本上最重要的是這一個專用權涉及到公務員審查的部分，在時效上是否會延宕，這一個部分我覺得需要仔細考慮的議題。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "謝謝蔡律師，您提到一個重點，很多在實務上會遇到如何證明是不是同一家公司，因為國內並沒有英文的註記而造成一些不方便。其實癥結點還是要討論專用權，會不會專用權如果要審核這一件事做下去，而增加了法遵成本或增加了行政成本，而造成行政繁複，我想這一些都是希望藉由今天來討論的議題。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "比如：昨天有看到川普大樓，但是並不是川普蓋的，這會不會有一些關係？會不會美國總統跨海來打官司，這滿有意思。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "請社群參與者來給我們一些反饋，因為社群參與者並沒有作各個單位的介紹，發言的時候，麻煩介紹一下自己，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "李健輝", "speech": "大家好，我本身是冰河森林數位科技的負責人及創辦人，我在網際網路產業已經二十年左右，在這個議題上我個人覺得我們國家在這區塊上的思考沒有那麼前進，我認為應該在2000年的時候，這一件事就應該要連結，因為網際網路的時代跟全世界連結，而這個區塊從美國開始，美國人用英文來作基本的語言，你本身要申請域名的時候，從1997年至今年（2016年）這一件事從頭到尾都沒有變，未來會不會或變成怎麼樣，我個人不知道，但是我覺得我們在改變這一件事的腳步，其實是慢了一點。" }, { "speaker": "李健輝", "speech": "但是對我來說沒有太大的差別，因為國家就是規範，要用中文，我們就用英文來跟全世界連結，但是國家沒有申請英文這一件事，不代表我自己不可以用英文這一件事來跟全世界的人做生意，因此我覺得這是兩回事。站在網際網路的產業界idea來說，我覺得這一件事並不衝突，在邏輯上我先說一下我的看法，我覺得沒有差別，以我的角度來看。" }, { "speaker": "李健輝", "speech": "因為我不一定會申請「.com.tw」，但是申請「.com」的時候，其實全世界會有很多不一樣的網路蟑螂，在定義的時候某種程度上會有一些定位的方向有不一樣的說明，你自然會去設定你的英文名稱叫什麼東西，這個在名字上這是我可以跟大家分享的東西。在其他的部分，我剛剛聽到很多關於行政成本這一個區塊，剛好本身在網際網路我們公司做的是全世界各個國家一些不一樣的同步，我們做的是渠道同步，我們跟Google連跟Expedia連跟Booking來連，我們同時可以透過這一些API來做，他們的訂單、價格在同一個時間內於各個不一樣的平台上變更，只透過一個動作，也就是在網際網路這一件事是make sense，其實目前被允許做這一件事，其實不到三百家公司。" }, { "speaker": "李健輝", "speech": "我要說的是，如果我們能夠用一些科技的方式來解決行政上的困擾，不如可以找一些方式解答，像唐鳳委員有提到，比如開放API，我覺得開放API這一件事是所有事情的解法，尤其是公部門這邊相關的東西，這是我站在立場所提到的結果。" }, { "speaker": "李健輝", "speech": "像剛剛提到專用權的部分，我覺得很多事情不一定要那麼緊張，像我有一個朋友在加州有一個公司，是一個保險公司，把公司名稱叫做「WTF」，雖然很有趣，但是這一家公司也被美國加州政府所承認了，我們想問看待這樣一個題目時，我們的幽默感在哪裡？如果我們缺乏幽默感，我們國家這一個區塊的發展方向是不是也少了一些屬於我們的個性在裡面？這個是我從另外一個角度來提供跟挑戰各位對於這一件事的看法，其他的部分我覺得沒有太大的問題，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "這個是我們李健輝創辦人。他剛剛提到從網際網路的角色來說，他可能更重視的是欲民，如果要做的話，早在2000年就做了。您提一個很有意思，假設科技的方法，會降低一些行政成本，其實我想到FB，現在有很多粉絲頁，也會跟人家撞，他的機制很好，不會覺得有衝突，因為你要幫FB取名，要有獨立的網址，都有一個很聰明的方式來讓你不會跟人家撞到，我想我們也能夠有一個類似的聰明介面，或許能夠降低我們的行政成本，接下來請哪一位的行政夥伴？" }, { "speaker": "王鐙總", "speech": "我是理哲有限公司的負責人，我們公司是軟體公司，但是理哲是法律哲學上的理哲。" }, { "speaker": "王鐙總", "speech": "我本身讀法律，我從大二就想開公司，因此我從大二就開始鑽研組織的相關問題，後來開軟體公司是因為國防部讓我當預官有這一個機會，我到國防部管機房，交接的時候他說「你的機房被中共詐走，請在一個禮拜重建起來」，所以當時的訓練還滿扎實的。" }, { "speaker": "王鐙總", "speech": "回到重點，我覺得公司法修正的主題，以閉鎖性公司與公司英文名稱來講，這個並不是國家的重點，所謂國家的富足應該是債權滿足的多元化。如果忠孝東路上如果今天想要吃麵食類，但是忠孝東路上全部都賣牛肉麵，完全沒有的餐點，今天台北市民在上面擁有1億跟1萬元資金來講的話，這個資產對我來講有沒有意義？我如果今天有1億的身價只能吃牛肉麵，我也是1萬元買得起1、200元的牛肉麵，這個以債權滿足來講，認為不過富有的，這個是心靈上的感受。" }, { "speaker": "王鐙總", "speech": "因此，我覺得公司法修法的重點是回顧企業化，而不是像韓國一樣，而不是寡頭變成財團化，國家的產品上來說不會讓人民感到富有。" }, { "speaker": "王鐙總", "speech": "因為我本身是經營中小企業的公司，其實中小企業的負責人最主要的是資金，我們最常遇到的問題是如何融資，融資的議題重要性，我們來想像一個畫面，在200萬的應收帳款，在12月底才會收得到，但是明天就要付給工程師薪資20萬元，但是我付不出來。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "我們希望討論在今天的主題，如果您要講的是跟今天有關的，歡迎您繼續。" }, { "speaker": "林桔楞", "speech": "不給予支持是因為民事訴訟的目的是解決紛爭，但是公司名稱的專用權是挑起不必要的紛爭，尤其是在修法的過程中及執行過程中是有法律零視察狀態的情況下容易產生網路詐欺，就跟網路病毒攻擊是一樣的。" }, { "speaker": "林桔楞", "speech": "因此我贊成林建中教授的做法是以商標法取代，現在商標審查的執行狀況大概要三至六個月，如果想像一個公司，今天有一個行銷預算1,000萬元，可能年節就要處理掉，可能1,000萬就花了，但是三個月之後跟我說審查不通過，因此我認為行政效率上是有問題的，與英文名稱制度的考量上，不如加速商標法的審查，讓國家的資源花在刀口上。" }, { "speaker": "林桔楞", "speech": "另外，有關於英文名稱制外法權執行力的問題，我們先不要講說英文名稱在其他公司碰觸如何處理，比如中國大陸有一個支付寶來臺灣，就變成歐付寶什麼付寶的就不能公開說用這個名稱，因此我認為在法律的執行意義上是沒有辦法執行的，這就跟企劃上來講，我認為這個是沒有必要討論的議題。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "您認為如果修法其實意義不大，就是說增加英文名稱反而更麻煩？從您的經驗是認為應該要放在商標法審查上，對於作為企業經營者是好的？" }, { "speaker": "林桔楞", "speech": "我認為應該頭住在上面，…" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "接下來請另外一位參與者。" }, { "speaker": "廖建安", "speech": "我是台北市記帳士公會的廖建安，很高興在整個公司法的修法過程中，我參與了第三組的討論，所以大概對於英文名稱，我們自己公司有討論。" }, { "speaker": "廖建安", "speech": "我很支持這一個法案，我們跟客戶接觸的過程當中，像資策會寫軟體的年輕人，或者是新創公司，其實英文名稱對他來講就是一個表徵，不需要實質專屬的權利，也就是需要一個馬上跟國外的軟體或者怎麼樣，需要一英文名稱來溝通，出去的時候就需要英文名稱，而英文名稱不需要印在任何的產品或者是表章服務的標章，也就是溝通的代名詞，對於很多年輕人或新創業者來講是相當需要。" }, { "speaker": "廖建安", "speech": "我參考了新加坡與香港的英文名稱審查的規定，當然他們審查的密度比較高，我覺得我們應該要按照公司法的規定，把中文名稱當作主要的名稱，英文名稱當成次要名稱的登記，也就是公司登記可以選擇主要名稱跟次要名稱，把英文名稱當成是次要的名稱，不需要編在章程裡面。" }, { "speaker": "廖建安", "speech": "為什麼不希望編在章程裡面？因為有些公司修章要全體股東同意，其實在這一次修法裡面，我非常強調公司法修章有關於章程的規定是不是可以簡化？如果把英文名稱放進去會造成很大的困擾，會造成年輕人會認為要花費更多手續跟精力，也就是登記事項卡上加註英文名稱，是不是讓我們的產業或者是我們的年輕人有一些創業或想法，當他想要跟外國做一些交易。" }, { "speaker": "廖建安", "speech": "因為大家想不到，是很多我們要接單才找我們事務所來辦登記，並不是先成立一家公司或者先成立一個辦公室，我再來找生意，現在都是軟體寫得差不多了，我等著人家來，這個很可行，有限合夥的稅法穿透性沒有辦法，他的idea想好了，結果我們沒有辦法用，沒有辦法透過有限合夥的方式，因此我們如果用英文名稱，對於未來新時代的發展，現在已經是網際網路的世代，因此英文名稱只是一個表徵，因此政府用比較開放性的方式、低密度的審查，比如有一些專業人士的名詞，儘量不要放在裡面，或者是一些政府機關的名詞，比如可以列出來哪一些名詞不要放在裡面，做一個低密度的審查。至於，相似度的審查，我覺得那個比較困難，對於目前的審查人員來講是很困難的東西。" }, { "speaker": "廖建安", "speech": "當然我們也有碰到一些人有一些創意，比如台語的發言，像台語的發言會拼得相當好，但是對於一個想要把臺灣本地家鄉的產品推到世界各地去，對於這樣子也有幫助，因此是不是按照第二個可能的方案，也就是政府公示的方式來走，先以這樣為方向，不要給它太多的專用規範，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "謝謝廖建安先生提到個人協助新創公司，特別是以軟體為主的新創公司，他們運營的特殊性，還沒有成立公司，就開始接單有這樣需求的時候，或者是他們有一些特殊想要彰顯自己公司特色的時候，比如想要用類似英文拼音的方式比較沒有辦法，但您是建議我是採取商業司同仁幾種方案中的方案，我們也謝謝您的意見，還有沒有哪一位社群的夥伴要給我們一些建議？如果沒有的話，接下來請政府單位同仁們，包括今天其實有很多經濟部的代表，有商業司跟國貿局，因為登記名稱時，若有一些進出口的需求是跟國貿局登記，有沒有一些同仁要做意見的分享？" }, { "speaker": "黃靜萱", "speech": "剛剛有提到國貿局預查的部分，其實就過毛來講，英文名稱是一定要有的，所以在貿易法會登記有英文名稱預查的動作，英文名稱預查在貿易局可以保留六個月的時間，也就是跟我們預查了以後，可以保留六個月，也就是可以在六個月以內來跟我們登記。" }, { "speaker": "黃靜萱", "speech": "在這裡面各位一定會想說，是不是要同名審查、是否要實質審查，就貿易局在審查英文名稱的部分，因為我們也建了一個系統，基本上我們只是看曾經有登記過，滿兩年而撤銷，不可以重複，重點是在審有無重複或者是類似的名稱，因此不會去對於中文跟英文是不是一樣的，這個是我們目前在做進出口廠商英文名稱的預查動作。" }, { "speaker": "黃靜萱", "speech": "其實現在有三十萬家，針對於登記的家數並不是全部都有登記這個是第三點要說明的。" }, { "speaker": "黃靜萱", "speech": "其實為了進出口廠商，大家也知道依照貿易法，商業司有一個預審的準則，就貿易局會有一個進出口廠商的登記辦法，如果要登記的時候怎麼樣，剛剛也有講到英文名稱預查的時候要注意什麼事，比如我們在審查的時候，像英文名稱大概要載明公司的主體，組織是有限公司或者是獨資的部分，外國公司一定要標明國籍，也就是在審的時候必須要注意這一點。" }, { "speaker": "黃靜萱", "speech": "另外，我們剛剛也有提到其實貿易局在審英文名稱的時候，主要是跟登記的人有無重複或者是相類似，我們這邊也有規定英文名稱類似指的是英文名稱中一般非專業名稱或者是慣詞、縮寫、空格、大小寫等差異，因此在促進辦法裡面有一些比較詳細的規定，因此在審進出口英文名稱並沒有如各位想到要同名審查的規範在裡面，以上簡單說明。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "所以就貿易局這邊，從我剛剛的理解，其實基本上算是一個符號的東西，不一定要跟公司的名稱有什麼關係，基本上就是一個識別的功能，不要造成混淆，基本上就可以用，所以現在也有可能一些公司的中文名稱跟英文名稱是完全勾不上關係的，假設公司法有進行修正，然後可以登入英文的話，那就是有相關看要怎麼配合的問題。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "您這邊覺得會增加很多作業成本嗎？" }, { "speaker": "黃靜萱", "speech": "其實蔡律師也有提到，我們也有做一些溝通了。我們如何跟他磨合的部分都有討論到，因為我們都在經濟部，我們可以把現在所有的資料已經建到電腦裡面，這個是技術上可以克服的，只是雙邊如何嫁接的問題，我們可以把我們的資源分享給他們，之間如何磨合而已。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "聽起來不錯，請蔡律師補充。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "我們今天在談的是公司名稱，即使我們現在到國外去登記公司，基本上也是只就公司名稱的那一個部分去check，並不會幫你check商標或者是在貿易局登記就是負責公司登記的那一個單位，只check data base是否重複的名字。另外，像現在取個名字，很可能你的網域名稱被登記走，那也沒有辦法。所以我們今天處理的應該是公司名字，至於跟國貿局那邊如何處理，我自己覺得不一定要把這兩個混在一起，除非那是給他一個專用權是不行的，如何把我的馳名商標拿去用，這個是法律要處理的問題，因此不需要變得很複雜。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "我要提出來的是，剛剛商業司提到說我們真正在作業的公務體系同仁，對於審查英文名稱這一件事，現在的能力上怎麼樣，會不會因為能力的不足而慢，我現在比較擔心的是，我們現在已經在講臺灣公司登記的時間應該要再縮短，這一點大家要討論一下，是不是開始的時候不是有專用權。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "我再簡單講一下，像以前我們到國外去，人家一個邀請函，明明我的英文名字，當時就寫「Jaclyn」，我的護照上都寫我是「Yu-lin Tsai」，所以我證明「Jaclyn」就是我，因為我們太多人需要在國外用到英文的名稱，有沒有一個法律讓我們承認這個中文名字就是我的英文名字，這個對大家將來使用上會有它的方便性。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "謝謝蔡律師，其實主要就把問題癥結點再拉回來，這樣的註記便於大家在識別上不會有混淆的問題，其他的問題可能在公民法或者是其他法律各有規定。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "中文也有問題，不會只有英文，所以就用原本的方式，不用為了英文特定處理。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "有沒有其他的出席者要發言？" }, { "speaker": "李鎂", "speech": "現況的外文名稱記載在章程上，因此一般人跟公司交易，從登記系統找不到，還要查它的章程，如果英文的公司登記讓社會大眾教一個人從登記系統去看英文名稱，我覺得是必要的，既然是在主管機關的登記系統裡面，要不要審查？我們過去針對這一個議題有很多的討論，基本上大家都很擔心說審查要審什麼？不只是英文對幾個字，好比「Apple」來申請蘋果，這一些對照是很複雜的，因此大家也不希望因為引進英文登記名稱，就要衍生很多很複雜的審查，而當然會延誤審查時間。" }, { "speaker": "李鎂", "speech": "所以，看起來過去的綜整意見是要登記，既然要登記的話，有一號登記就不應該給二號登記，我們應該給他專有權，這個是作用在這裡。既然英文名稱並不是強制要登記的事項，而是公司有需要才去登記的事項，既然是任意的登記事項，我們初步覺得不需要給他太高度的審查或者要負擔什麼義務，因此在跟其他幾個外界的討論當中，今天我們的同仁選出幾個方案，還有很多方案，但是很多方向是不要審查這一件事看起來是比較多數的共識。" }, { "speaker": "李鎂", "speech": "但是都不審查登記上去，如果跟其他的權益衝突怎麼辦？明明是Apple，難道就不處理嗎？所以看起來如果跟其他既有的權利產生衝突就會處理，但是可能是一些商標權或者是表徵等等，被侵害的情況下是法院或者是公平會去處理，如果有很確定的判決，登記機關就可以針對這一些判決需出去，因此我們比較傾向相同就好了。" }, { "speaker": "李鎂", "speech": "因此，我們認為中文已經放款到很款，寶島眼睛跟寶島鐘表是不一樣的，相對登記事項的尺度不應該比照，如果有英文名稱，而且在登記後的事後救濟制度裡面，我們初步覺得處理相同就好，類似不要去處理，如果類似是商標或者是其他的，那在法院判決就會斟酌了，這個是初步的看法。" }, { "speaker": "李鎂", "speech": "事實上會也外文名稱需求的不只英文，也有日文，因為日文跟中文很像，有一些在大陸是簡體字，為何不跟中文長得很像來交易？因為我們排除二、三號，看起來是要先公司法，否則不足以剛剛講的撤銷或者是廢止或者是其他的機制。" }, { "speaker": "李鎂", "speech": "但是如果今天法律條文只提到英文，哪一天會有其他的語言？所以在法律設計上是先用外文。外文是什麼？就是主管機關公告說那是英文，也許有一天是要日文，或者哪一天要用什麼，那就有一個彈性，因此今天的題目是「英文名稱」，但是在法律設計上可以考慮「外文」，這個就可以視全球交易化的發展來看。" }, { "speaker": "李鎂", "speech": "我剛剛看的初步想法是目前為止很多意見看起來是可以朝這個方向來走，確實面向非常非常多，為何現在還有線上的會議，其實還有很多不同的面向考慮到，藉這個機會可以聽大家的意見，可以讓這個制度做得更好。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "謝謝李司長。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "剛剛司長講說要專用，但是偏向不審查，因為增加了很多時間，蔡律師也講到不需要花那麼多時間，近似的不處理，完全相同的再做同名審查。另外也有提到一個重點，如果修法的話，就是以外文，是一個階段一個階段來開放。" }, { "speaker": "顏雅倫", "speech": "我非常贊同司長的看法，如果今天是要讓它登記，讓它有一個文件可以連結，讓它在貿易上或者各方面交易上有一個比較好的狀態，如果一旦讓它登記的話，基本上不可能不考慮專用權的問題，而專用權就是同名審查，因為現在的中文就是同名審查，如果是混淆誤認或者是近似有商標權或者是不公平競爭的問題，目前現有的不管商標法或者是公平交易法的機制，其實在處理中文名稱都可以一體適用，我只是稍微補充一下。" }, { "speaker": "李鎂", "speech": "今天修法小組也在討論這個問題，可以不審查，但是舉一個例子會有一個意見，比如民間有一個人來申請，他的名字就叫做google，不審查就會核准，這麼奇怪，全世界都知道，那為什麼還核准他登記？因此這時我們必須要強烈說明因為不審查，而這樣的說明會不會被外界接受，其實就會有不同的意見。" }, { "speaker": "李鎂", "speech": "但是Google不給他審查，那就會說Google就給他這個名字，但是有些名字是好像很有名、有些又不有名，這個是在意見徵詢中有不同的意見。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "好，剛剛是林教授。" }, { "speaker": "林建中", "speech": "其實在這個系統裡面打「鴻海」就會出現十五個左右的「鴻海」，有些已經停止了，有些是在不同的地方，誰知道哪一個才是你想找的公司。" }, { "speaker": "林建中", "speech": "其實中文的同音字還滿多的，同音字還可以用不同的字來挑開，但光我想到的，比如「常」、「長」、「榮」都想用到Evergreen，所以國貿局剛剛有提到三十幾萬個有先做了，那個是先來後到的問題，如果先開放了，突然那一天假設系統同時湧進，像大家很喜歡Honda，在中文有「洪」、「弘」，像中文跟英文不太一樣，如果開放的話，同時會湧進很多人。" }, { "speaker": "林建中", "speech": "其實中文同義、同音字很多，再加上考慮是不是有同時進來申請的人潮，我覺得這其實是一個考慮的問題。" }, { "speaker": "林建中", "speech": "不過我從剛剛討論到一個問題是這個混用的想法，因為我覺得混 用是一些事情，甚至用一些奇怪的符號，因為顯然剛剛已經有提到外文都已經可以開放的話，假設所有的語言都開放的話。其實我不太贊成，我覺得應該要一步步來，光英文想到的問題就很多了，其他的我們可能會有一點，另外一個想法是開放的機會越多，用的機會就越少，或許上這個操作可以想一下，就是同時湧進來分配的問題。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "林教授提到過去國貿那邊先來先審，一個個增加到30幾萬，假設可能一大堆要湧進來，像搶五月天音樂會搶爆，然後怪政府系統沒有做好，類似的問題。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "剛剛有提到有沒有混用？比如「Jaclyn」混用的處境怎麼辦？" }, { "speaker": "戴銘昇", "speech": "其實今天提到的問題我都想過，只是因為時間的關係沒有辦法一個個談，我針對記憶的部分跟大家補充：" }, { "speaker": "戴銘昇", "speech": "我覺得很多人誤會一件事，公司法是不是一定要有英文名稱才可以有，以我的理解不適合，假設公司法並沒有取英文名稱，還是可以取，法律上還是保障，只是並不是公司法體制的保障，而是透過民法、公平交易法去保障，侵害還是可以救濟，去國外還是可以商業，經商也是沒有問題的，偶爾會遇到一些障礙，透過公示可以解決。" }, { "speaker": "戴銘昇", "speech": "後面提到混用的問題，像日本法是允許的，日文跟英文可以併列，但是有一些習慣的標準，比如取一個外文，然後用一個日文去解釋它，英文跟日文是不同意思，可以組合在一起，也就是不可以加註說明。日本也是允許可以符號，像7－11也是可以的。" }, { "speaker": "戴銘昇", "speech": "關於登記的部分，據我之前提出來的方案是，我覺得登記跟審查是可以分開的，可以只登記，而不審查，如果以目前比較官方的意見是，希望只登記，然後降低審查標準的話，那就要思考一件事，也就是這個登記有沒有排他的效力？如果沒有嚴格的審查就不可以有排他效力，因此這一個地方我覺得要區隔開來。如果不審查，只登記的話，只可以用同名登記，我想「Apples」，就變成多加顆蘋果，並不像中文是相當嚴格的，我們是非常嚴格審查，才給同名保障，也就是別人用不同樣的名稱，別人審查的話，可不可以給，這個地方要注意一下，以上是我想到的一些補充。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "謝謝戴教授，請蔡律師。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "針對戴教授的問題，名字誰都可以取，現在很多人都有英文名稱，怎麼用都可以，但是當你碰到公部門或者是法律文件的時候，你就必須要證明你就是那個人，所以我一直在講的事是，就以護照來講，其實我們在國外碰到的問題是我如何證明「Jacklin」是我，也就是在護照上面是這樣證明，到國外開帳戶如何證明？誰都可以取一個英文名字。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "因此，我們講的是，你隨便取一個英文名字，但是你面對公部門用的時候，你就要證明你就是那個人的時候，你就要回來那一個國家證明你就是那個身分的人。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "我想問一下，剛剛戴教授指出現在的法律就是登記英文名字，是這樣嗎？" }, { "speaker": "戴銘昇", "speech": "以我的理解是，單純登記，不審查。" }, { "speaker": "李鎂", "speech": "現在外國公司會有外國名稱，會翻譯成中文，但是翻譯不跟英文一樣。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "如果是分公司的話是，但是在臺灣本國公司一定是。" }, { "speaker": "李鎂", "speech": "依公司法設立一定要中文名稱。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "所以還是應該要中文名稱，如果又是本國的公司，可能一開始一定要中文名稱？" }, { "speaker": "李鎂", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "所以這個造成蔡律師講說在識別上要有一個那個，在法律上才會有效率。" }, { "speaker": "戴銘昇", "speech": "如果照片蔡律師的講法，我們應該要聚焦是公示就夠了，或者是要專有權？比如很多人跟我同名同姓，但是跟我取同一個名字，所以「志明」很多個，自然人可不可以？我只要證明說這個是官方印出來的文件，我叫這個名字並不是假的，別人是不是跟我同名是另外一件事，是不是只要公示就好或者是審查就好，大家可以思考。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "這的確也是今天討論的重點。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "坦白講，我覺得從剛剛的角度來講，事實上政府從那個地方就證明英文名字就是中文名字，所以對外有一個政府的證明，確實公示就好，但是因為這一個問題是顏教授所提的問題，因為政府出面了，是不是應該有一個效率，這其實我們內部在討論都是這個問題，原來我還在行政院的時候，各個部會在討論大家都有碰到，因為是政府出面，就會說如果不審查，到時候就會Google名字登記上去，到時候就會來怪政府，因此從民間真正需要，我覺得就夠了，因為涉及到政府登記，又會有剛剛提的問題，因此提的這個問題值得大家來討論，如果我們避免現在需要很多人的人力去處理這一個問題，也許先這樣子做，說不定是一個解決大家的問題，但是同時我們也要到處出問題，別去找商業司，我們並不希望因為這樣的事，讓商業司的同仁還要被叫去立法院教訓一下，所以我們希望有彈性、自由度，但是出了事是可以找行政機關。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "希望vTaiwan這個制度在過程中大家都可以參與，不要說這個事情都不知道，或者是隨便就決定，在這樣的情況我們希望可以避免掉，也不要讓行政機關難做事。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "我們先請李健輝補充。" }, { "speaker": "李健輝", "speech": "我補充一點，剛剛有關於教授提到有關於條件上的設定，我們可以提供建議，其實在商業司這邊行政機關內部去設定一套系統，如果各位有使用過聊天室，大家會知道針對部分的關鍵字來做，我們是不是能夠有這樣的東西，在資料輸進去的時候，先設立一個條件，不管是關鍵字或者是過去的資料，我們把它去做篩減，就是把一些初步可以篩選掉的問題來取消掉，在科技端這一件事是很低潛的做法。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "技術端我想完全有辦法做到的，像法律效力或者是蔡律師提出來政府這邊，因為剛剛有提到「我不做近似的審查」，但是要不要「同名的審查」可以再思考。" }, { "speaker": "廖建安", "speech": "剛剛提到混用的問題，公司可以註冊一個英文或者是中文的名稱，但是規定是不可以中、英混用，這個給大家參考。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "可以知道他們不得中英混用的原因？" }, { "speaker": "廖建安", "speech": "因為已經選用了一個英文名稱跟中文名稱了，就沒有必要再選定中文或者是英文，就很像剛剛已經講了主要名稱是中文了，如果護照上的別名是英文，那當然就是英文，會有這個需要是因為有一個外文，但是如果你有外文跟中文，感覺上不是那麼需要的感覺。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "這個是香港的案例提供給大家參考，最後有幾分鐘也歡迎現場的朋友，線上有沒有哪一些朋友有比較值得重要的意見？討論區的意見我們都會再整理起來，同樣也會開放現場夥伴們有沒有什麼意見？" }, { "speaker": "戴銘昇", "speech": "我補充一件事，我在前幾次的座談會上提幾件事，如果是英文名稱有排他性的話會有一個事情，公司法不承認英文名稱，以後開放的話，比如比較多知名的企業是用英文的，以前沒有機會侵害人家，現在變成有英文排他性的時候，就趕快登記，外國的知名企業進來的話，他告我還是可以，等他告贏就訴願或者是怎麼樣。這個跟以前的情況不一樣，會等比級數的嚴重化，以前不承認的問題，以後承認就會發生這個問題，而且是滿多的，這個是我的看法。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "這個是實際上應用上會發生的問題，也就是如果排他性的話有國內企業去搶國外企業的名稱；反之亦然。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "我想今天在座大家的意見應該是傾向於我們接下來修改公司法應該要適度來開放，也有人說維持現狀，但是大部分朋友的意見是希望採取接近政府公示及同名審查這中間的方案，也就是大部分的人認為如果有政府公示，然後有這樣識別方式的話，是有助於企業在對外貿易及行走江湖的一些作用，但是是否要做到審查，這就是今天還沒有共識的部分，剛剛各位都已經有提出一些各方面的concern，也歡迎線上的夥伴來來加入。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "在結束之前，看大家有沒有最後的想法？最後前，我想請唐委員分享。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "很抱歉我電腦沒有電。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有一位提到日本之所以用片假名，有一點像注音符號的方式，其實是非常簡單的，因為IBM就用片甲名寫，但是因為在臺灣這邊，其實並沒有開放使用注音符號或者是任何拼音方法來註冊，因為注音符號不被當成是文字，所以IBM只能翻成「國際商業機器公司」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我從社群朋友聽到一個非常有意思的是，不要說臺灣的台語或者是客家話或者是很多原住民族的語言用國語是拼不出來的，不然聽起來也是跟唸的差非常多。中文用教育部所推行的標準台語漢字或客語漢字的話，其實可以寫，但是國語唸出來並不是那個意思，因此實際上會有用到英文拼音名稱的需要。這些都是一開始vTaiwan徵詢的時候我不知道的事情，很高興大家能夠提出。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "今天聽起來其實六個爭點裡面，只剩下一個沒有解決，也就是在實際做審查的時候到底要不要要有排除性或者是跟護照上的名字，現在護照是寫Audrey Tang，如果要寫Google也不可以阻止我。我們沒有排除性的話，訟爭的可能性就大幅減少，我剛剛聽老師的意思是這樣。當然這有一點覆水難收，如果三個人的名字是同樣的話，那就沒有辦法，等到哪一天要收緊的時候就回不去了，這個是有必要考量的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在國貿局那邊本來資料庫不能完全重複，可以加一個字，比如「Apple」和「Apple Technology」之類的方式去解決，所以用機器完全自動處理的事並不是做不到。我們可以這樣講，完全同名的審查跟容許只是公示的這兩個技術上，並不會造成太大額外的負擔，主要還是選擇的問題，但是如果要求排他性的話，在網際網路的域名上是有一個開放至少六十天或開放更久的這一段時間，所有商標的擁有人或怎麼樣來出具證明或說這這個名字就是我的，不可以是別人的，過了六十天或者是半年之後，等到商標的用人已經提出這樣的聲明之後，就可以進入大家搶的一段時間，我想在國際域名上是有先例的，所以如果提出這樣具體建議的話，我們技術行政上是有配合，如果委員會的朋友提出來的建議是僅公示，為了免得造成訟爭，容許誰都可以取同樣的別名，也就是公示在網站上、到此為止，我想這在作業的行政上也都可以配合。所以還是回到修正委員會的考慮。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你們收了五千份的問卷英文名稱那一題也有五千個人填嗎？" }, { "speaker": "陳言博", "speech": "（搖手）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也有許多朋友表達跟這個有關的東西，以我聽到的消息是一、兩個星期左右，也就是之前問卷回來的結果東西會在你們的網站上公開，所有的數據及問卷的結果，在網站上可能會用800多頁的PDF加以公開，接下來有更多的實證的根據來討論。但是這兩條路各位朋友並沒有非反對不可的理由，我可以這樣綜整嗎？" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "既然有一家公司叫「apple」，其他家公司是不是就要叫「apple pen」或者是「pineapple」或「pineapple pen」（笑）？這個部分我們延伸下去，包括社群的意見或者是包括委員會的討論，接下來也可以公布，讓大家有更豐富的資料來討論。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "其實更重要的是，公司法這只是開始，可能接下來是爭議會比較多的部分來到vTaiwan進行討論，我想最後用30秒再講一下：我們希望公司法，從產業界，包括我自己是新創公司的共同創辦人，我很希望億公司法能夠趕快修，但是如果我們因為很急著修它，然後在過程中，沒有納入足夠多多元的意見而讓它這樣子的話，可能後續會造成問題。過去有許多的法律跟政策推動都面臨同樣的問題，我們有一方覺得這個事情很快要趕快做，然後就直接做了，後續就造成一些紛爭，我們希望vTaiwan這一個機制能夠降低這樣的問題，也希望唐鳳委員協力我們繼續，包括社群、政府及學者專家的力量做更好一點。剛剛有介紹vTaiwan的流程，有沒有覺得什麼部分可以改善，我可以提供給我們，可以讓整個流程做得更好，今天的會議到這邊結束，再次感謝搖滾區及線上的朋友，謝謝大家。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "蔡前政務委員、各位學者、各位機關代表，大家好。今天大家百忙之中抽空來參加會議，在此致至上百分之百的謝意。首先，非常感謝蔡大律師，因為是她明知閣員卸任在即，卻在卸任之前，仍然利用兩三個月的時間不斷加班，擬定了《企業資產擔保法草案》。本研究團隊能在很短的時間內，得以提出這個草案，完全是因蔡政委員把《企業資產擔保法草案》打好了非常健全的架構，我們只是在這個架構上予以增刪，細緻化。這個增刪後的草案當然仍非完足，期待藉由各位的高見而更為妥善。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "對於本草案引進的浮動擔保制度，業界及金融機關等必然有很多的爭議，不過請各位試著站在政府的立場，認為政府已經具有要推行浮動擔保法的政策來看這個問題。換句話說，對於要不要引進浮動擔保制度方面，希望大家能少說點，也就是說也可以反對，但請少說一點！主要是想請各位對本草案不完足的地方多提供點具體的建議，相信各位的寶貴建議，一定會讓《企業資產擔保法》更完備，這是我們最期待的。竭誠期盼，各位除了指出本草案的缺點以外，更希望各位提出具體的建議！這是今天開會最重要的目的。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "在各位發言之前，容我先介紹我們的研究團隊：陳重見教授，張懿云院長、邱玟惠教授，可見除了我較年長外，他們都是青壯、實力派的研究學者！因為他們的加入，使這個草案有一定程度的成果。但由於這草案研究時間非常短暫，所以問題一定很多，請大家多多提供寶貴的意見。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "由於這個草案可能會上vTaiwan，想把各位的意見一併呈現，故在程序上多了填載同意的手續。吳教授有沒有什麼補充？" }, { "speaker": "吳家林", "speech": "各位老師大家好，這個委託團隊的研究在這場會議後會放上vTaiwan，未來會公開草案並徵求公共意見，供大眾表示意見，大概一個月的時間。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "接著就請陳教授做個簡單的報告！" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "各位與會嘉賓，專家學者，大家好，我先做一個開場。近年來世界的動產交易擔保法制為了因應國際間的局勢發展產生很大的變化。個別的國家不看，就從「聯合國」跟「歐盟」來看。聯合國的貿易委員會在2010年制定了《擔保交易立法指南》，在2011年追加《智慧財產權擔保權補編》。今年年中，《擔保交易示範法草案》的最後版本也正式出爐。歐盟從1994年制定《歐洲擔保模範法典》之後，在2009年制定了《歐洲示範民法典草案》，其中第九卷就直接規範了動產擔保物權。" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "反觀我國的動產交易擔保法是在民國52年制定之後，雖然曾被亞洲開發銀行的亞洲擔保交易法律改革委員會，譽為「大陸法系移植英美法系法治的典範」，但從今天來看的話，這部法律似乎已經跟不上世界潮流。譬如說我國現行的擔保法制，不承認浮動擔保，浮動擔保裡面的公示登錄制度也沒有；在可以設定擔保權的部分，又僅限於有形資產及已經存在的權利才可以設定擔保權。我們不承認未來取得的財產，譬如應收帳款。另外像商業模式、具高人氣流量的網站、大數據資料庫這些無形資產，到目前來說也難以設定擔保權。這些結果造成不利於中小企業及新創事業，譬如說網路公司。又如物聯網、綠能、光電這些新興產業，還有影視音產業等文化創意產業取得融資，非常的不利。具體內容，可從草案中找到，就不再細述。" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "有一個具體的指標是，今年十月份世界銀行發布了《2017經商環境報告》評比。這個評比是關於一個國家擔保法制完備與否的調查，評比一國動產擔保法制完備度之「法定權利指數」調查，滿分是十二分，台灣目前只得四分，在一百九十個經濟體中，我國是排名一百一十七名。這類的評比顯示台灣現行的動產擔保法制不僅遠落後於紐西蘭、新加坡、香港、澳洲，還落後於越南、馬來西亞、印度、印尼及蒙古。這評比出現時後謝哲勝教授就在臉書上感概的提到「為了修擔保法制，扁政府時期就開始有動作，但任內幾無成效，馬政府也虛耗了八年，前後各機關四五個以上研究計劃花了近千萬，開過無數會議，結果還是排名如此。」所幸在蔡玉玲前政委員的全力主張之下，在今年五月份一份由各方整合而成的《企業擔保法草案》總算出爐。在本草案的版本中，基本上符合聯合國對於建構現代動產擔保法制「設定、優先權、公示性、實行」的四大要求，總共七章、三十六條。本研究團隊在這厚實基礎上維持其架構不變，只是給予其更細緻的增刪修剪後，新草案維持七章，增加十五條條文，總共五十一個條文。在研究過程中我們發現，要把聯合國的這套法律概念植入到我國的法律以內，有更多細緻的問題要做原則性的處理。否則在我們既有的物權、擔保物權的概念下去運作會發生很多衝突。" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "舉四點做參考。第一，例如說在公示方法上，原來草案我們只規範所謂的「通知」、「登錄」的制度。但企業資產的種類很多，若我們只規範這些方式，把原來特殊的、登記、質權占有、銀行帳戶控制的公示方法沒有去做規範的話，則不管在效力，還是優先權次序的安排上都會很難處理。這方面可以參考法案的八條、九條、二十二條。" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "第二，在採取公示登錄，這個公示登錄跟我們傳統的物權審查是不是有很大的差異？擔保權人自己就可以進行登錄。如果自己就可以進行登錄，又要透過什麼程序可確保他的正確性？如果有錯，擔保權人又如何確保權益？這在草案的十四條、十七條。" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "第三，按照傳統物權的追及效力，在按照有形體物去登記擔保權的傳統登記之下，受讓的前手如果沒有脫離擔保權的負擔的話，繼受的後手當然也不會脫離，這我們不會懷疑。但在採「按人登記擔保制度」之下，縱使受讓的前手不脫離擔保權負擔，如果前手並不是擔保人，由於在按人登記下，繼受之後手，不一定能察覺到這件事情。所以就這件事來看，各位可以看美國的Uniform Commercial Code跟歐盟草案，就有完全相反的安排。在這個問題的處理上，尤其在本草案二十四條、二十六條、二十七條有關於營業常規的善意取得這部分，就必須去完整處理這個問題。" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "第四個，原來的草案對私執行及公執行的部分，私執行採用了很多類似法院強制執行的原則，譬如說在四十二條、四十三條有關於強制執行法「無效實行禁止原則」、「處分所得分配次序原則」，基本上跟強制執行法沒有太大的差異。可是私執行有很多樣的執行，譬如以出租或授權的方式處理執行的話，若是用這個原則就會扞格不入，故這部分也必須做調整。" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "基於以上四個大方向，我們在本草案新增了十五條條文。" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "相信各位政府機關代表、業者，跟這部法案都有很密切的關係。與會的各位教授、專家，也都在這方面議題有深入的研究，有的甚至都接受過政府機關、部門兩次以上的委託研究，參加過的會議次數更是不計其數。今天有幸與大家齊聚一堂共商這部法案，相信這是一次精彩、聚焦的法案討論。以上報告完畢。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "接下來開始今天的議程。我們有個簡單的程序，為了聚焦，希望照著議題來討論。發言的人一定很多，原則上發言一次以五分鐘為限，有時間的話，歡迎各位做第二次發言。請各位提供寶貴的意見，謝謝！關於本草案之「一、總則」請各位給予指教！" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "各位老師、先進，我是經濟部智慧財產局代表。這草案之前跟蔡政務委員、謝老師開過幾次會，這個草案第一章總則部分五個條文。第三條這邊，第一個版本到現在從六款變成十款，新增企業資產、有形資產、無形資產跟擔保權的定義。有三個問題。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "第一，企業到底有無包括工作室、事務所，或非法人團體等？" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "第二，第四款所謂無形資產之定義指「企業現有或將來取得於債權、智慧財產權、營業秘密，或其他具有財產利益之資產」，這是新增的款項。但是營業秘密是智慧財產權的一環，單獨把營業秘密拉出來定義是否有其他用意？" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "第三，以專利申請權來說，不能設定擔保、質權。專利可以申請質權，但專利申請權不行。但因為將來擔保法與其他擔保制度是雙軌併行，所以專利申請權可以申請擔保，這沒有問題。那想請問，專利申請權將來申請擔保是歸類在哪裡？是歸類在固定資產，還是歸類在浮動資產的分類裡？" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "這個議題，我提供三個意見，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "請繼續發表高見。" }, { "speaker": "劉春堂", "speech": "只是要針對擔保的非登錄不得對抗第三人，但這第三人的範圍到底要不要限制？這在日本民法是沒有限制，可是目前學說上對第三人有限制，能夠對抗的、不能對抗的有一定的限制。我們的法律要現在把它定清楚，還是說讓學說去發展？提供這樣的意見請大家指教。" }, { "speaker": "吳光明", "speech": "今天真的是收穫非常多，資料這麼多，短期間就可寫出這麼多意見，真的非常佩服。" }, { "speaker": "吳光明", "speech": "因為時間的關係我簡短說明。我們是大陸法系國家，學美國的《動產擔保交易法》，不移轉占有的公示的問題，及很多的問題.....。在此第一個問題是我們有沒有假設誰是誰特別法？譬如說專利法、商標法或是《動產擔保交易法》和我們今天這個草案，這部分是否有必要討論？我在這邊好像看不太出來。我先提出這麼一個問題。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "請繼續發表高見。" }, { "speaker": "邵慶平", "speech": "關於第三條有先進提到「無形資產」，最後的概括規定文字，可以考慮操作修改。固然現在的條文上可以了解到概括規定會依照前面的例示來做理解，所以應該指的是「無體財產權」或其他「非有形資產但具有財產利益之資產」，而這個部分上是否需要做文字上的修飾或調整。僅供參考。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "請繼續發表高見。" }, { "speaker": "林仁光", "speech": "主持人好，我是台大法律系的林仁光。我想首先要先肯定這麼短的時間可以寫出這麼完整的草案，實在是讓我挑不出任何毛病。今天主要的發言針對自己對草案的困惑，不是因為草案有問題，而是我自己理解上的問題，畢竟我物權法的部分沒有這麼熟悉。" }, { "speaker": "林仁光", "speech": "針對第一位發言的先進提到，在無形資產裡面，營業秘密是否需要另外規定。我想要提出來的另一個事就是，在法律裡面規定的東西會在不同法有不同用語，比方說《公司法》一百二十八條、第三項、第二款以及第一百五十六條、第七項，裡面都有提到公司所需要的技術。在智慧財產權、專利權之外另外提到技術，這個技術是否某種層面與營業秘密有所關聯性。" }, { "speaker": "林仁光", "speech": "第二個問題，這部法的使用名稱是《企業資產擔保法》，我們還是要仔細去看第三條定義的「企業資產」，還得要再看第三款、第四款的「有形資產」及「無形資產」才能知道「企業資產」的範圍是什麼。由於我們要跟世界接軌，所以在結合的部份兩個問題，第一，這部法通過後，與舊有的《動產擔保交易法》的關係是什麼？其銜接及原有的動產擔保交易的登記要如何處理？這個法通過後是否會像澳洲、紐西蘭一樣會有過渡的法律，那要如何去整合既有的權利？在實務上，像澳洲、紐西蘭都在過渡時期發生很多問題，特別是不清楚登記制度而在過渡時期受害產生糾紛的案例非常多。第二，剛剛談到的名稱問題。我們的英文名稱要如何來定？是不是也是像PPRS，還是其他？還是企業資產會用別的名稱來稱呼？會不會看到這個法，使人不知道這與PPRS是有關的？以上是我的意見，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "陳教授，請。" }, { "speaker": "陳榮傳", "speech": "謝老師、蔡政委、各位老師、各位代表，大家午安。" }, { "speaker": "陳榮傳", "speech": "總則的部分，單看法律，應該是美事一樁。若從企業的角度，具有財產價值的資產不能充分地拿來做融資的擔保之用，這個法律即對國家的發展具有重要的意義。" }, { "speaker": "陳榮傳", "speech": "總則的部分有幾個問題請大家思考一下。第三條的用詞定義部分，「有形資產」用了一個概括條款「指企業現有或將來取得之存貨、原料、設備、稻穀、牲畜或其他動產。」因為有其他動產，似乎是所有動產都包含在內。但我的想法是，有沒有必要將稻穀列出來？我們是擅長耕種稻穀的國家，而有必要把它列出來嗎？還是指需要用「農產品」概括即可。牲畜雖然我們不是以幾頭山豬或羊來計算財產單位的國家，但還說得過去。但是稻穀這地方我就不太理解，是否有其特殊含意，或是可能不必這麼突出稻穀這個用詞。" }, { "speaker": "陳榮傳", "speech": "第四款的無形資產，雖然在這裡提到債權、智財權、營業秘密。個人過去在制定涉外民事法律適用法的時候有考慮到智慧財產權。可是其實在法律裡面並沒有「智慧財產權」這個法律用詞。也因此在《涉外民事法律適用法》裡面特別用的是「以智慧財產為標的之權利」的用語。這裡若從智慧財產的角度來看，智慧財產權可能是權利，以這個智慧財產作為標的的權利。若要論資產，這裡是否用「智慧財產」，比「智慧財產權」更好，畢竟我們並未對智慧財產權有明確的法定用語及法律定義，在本草案可能會是首次採用，個人覺得這地方可以再考慮一下。" }, { "speaker": "陳榮傳", "speech": "另外，在本草案第四條、第五條的設計。一個建議，因為第四條的規定已經到了行使權利、履行義務的基本原則，前面總則的規定似乎是先描繪具體權利及義務的內涵。這是我個人的偏好，第四條或第五條的順序做對調，個人覺得在系統安排上似乎是符合我個人偏好。以上是我的建議，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "謝謝，請各位繼續發表高見。" }, { "speaker": "游進發", "speech": "其實看這名字是《企業資產擔保法》就可知道這個擔保權比較是債權面向，而不是物權，沒有物權法定主義，所以我們要配合登記擔保權才能有對抗第三人的效力。從名稱、登記對抗效力來看，是債權結構。既然是債權結構，則不受「物權法定主義」的限制。我想是有助於融資的促成，從本質上我是贊成。" }, { "speaker": "游進發", "speech": "既然說他是突破「物權法定主義」，它就不需要這麼多特殊的抵押權，也不需要這麼多特殊的質權，甚至在既定的物權的結構底下去發展。這樣會造成，社會需要被教育往這方面靠攏，尤其是企業。我想法律的制定是可以載有教育的功能，而不是只是符合現況。即便現行企業不這麼做，我們也可以透過法律去教育他們，讓他們符合世界的潮流，更何況外國的企業本來就是這麼做，企業也有被教育的需求。" }, { "speaker": "游進發", "speech": "他是一個Business-to-Business的大結構，因為企業不太可能跟個人借錢，所以大致上擔保人跟擔保權人都是商人，擔保人極少有可能不是商人。既然是Business-to-Business的結構，這個登記對抗第三人的效力，結合草案二十二條，含有優先次序，基本上我覺得設計良好。因為這是一個Business-to-Business結構，對商人要求會比較高，對自己有利的事情自己要注意到，若不注意到會有法律上的不利益。即便你登錄了，由定於草案的二十二條規定「成立的先於登錄」，一方不趕快去登錄，雙方意思表示一致，擔保權成立早卻沒登錄，時間就會墊後於別人，不真正義務的結構。這部分，我也贊成在總則部分基本上我是覺得非常好。細節部分可以讓它更好。以上是我簡短意見。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "請各位繼續發表。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "今天很高興來參加這個會議，這是我在行政院最後要離開前的未盡之志，所以我也一直掛在心上，離開的時候特別希望國發會也繼續推這個計畫。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "首先感謝謝教授、張院長，各位可能不知道最後這三個月，經常是從下午五六點到晚上十點鐘，每個禮拜都開會。我們都知道這個法已經擱置了很久了，以前我還沒進行政院的時候，我們很多交易最後無法在台灣用準據法，很大的原因是我們的法律不好用，不管是公司法或是擔保法都是，逼得大家都到境外。這個法躺了很久，國發會也很希望能趕快推。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "幾個剛剛討論的問題，當時內部在討論的時候都有特別去注意這些問題，有些細節像營業秘密等等，已經有一個概括規定，前面在列舉會不會反而會有負面的解釋，這邊我們可以再考慮一下。但在基本的架構上，簡單來說未來有太多事情是無法事先定義的。若我們需要一個法律讓大家方便使用，可能真的要少一點事先的定義，因為定義完了以後將來就很難動，尤其我們的立法程序又非常的長。所以當初也是希望從法定變成意定。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "企業資產擔保也是討論過好多次以後才訂的，原來是討論說是否不碰有形的只碰無形的，但後來覺得要企業去各處去登錄是很不方便的。若東西又分別登記後，他的價值也不夠存在。所以後來就認為用一個特別法，讓業界能在一個地方搞定所有的事情，這是當時大家討論後決定的方向。如果未來能讓這個法併進其他法進來的話，也許將來我們就像國外一樣就是一個擔保法，不需要這麼多法來處理這麼多事。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "真的非常感謝各位先進對這個法提出寶貴的意見，也非常謝謝當初的夥伴，我們還會繼續努力、不放棄，謝謝！" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "剛才我漏講一句話，蔡政務委員，她明明知道馬上要卸職，但還是掛心著社會進步、企業經營遭遇的問題，利用下班後的六點，開會開到十點鐘，拼命趕出這個法案，令人非常感動和欽佩。我想政府機關裡，一定不少像蔡政委員這樣負責、盡職的政務官。所以個人對台灣還是蠻有信心的，看來台灣還是有希望。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "剛剛各位提的建議，非常有建設性，非常有意義，個人收穫良多。蔡政委員提到的營業秘密，各位請看草案54頁特別講到營業秘密的實行方法，可見若干問題我們都已經有先注意到。其次，《企業資產擔保法》與《動產擔保交易法》，在適用上應該是平行的。企業既可以選擇《動產擔保交易法》，也可以選擇《企業資產擔保法》去設定擔保權。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "原來認為企業想要做特定資產的融資擔保，《動產擔保交易法》就夠用了，但在討論過程中，企業界反應，認為為企業方便，利用企業資產擔保法來設定企業固定資產擔保權，為何不行呢？所以才把企業固定資產擔保權放進來。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "好，不多做說明，請各位繼續發表高見，拜聽各位意見最重要！" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "如果第一大議題討論完畢，現在討論議題二。對第一議題如還有意見的話，可以回過頭來，繼續發表。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "議題二是關於本草案「設定」的問題，請各位發表高見。" }, { "speaker": "台北市租賃商業同業公會", "speech": "公會代表發言。按照第八條的第二項提到「前項登錄，企業資產擔保權得依擔保標的性質之不同，分別以占有或控制為之。」有個問題是，登錄、占有或控制是擇一，還是登錄的時候須同時具備占有或控制。有這問題是因為旁邊的說明「惟應注意的是企業擔保權若採登錄、占有或控制公示方法之一者，擔保權通常不生公示之效力」在閱讀上面，就會有疑問，究竟是三擇一，還是登錄時要登錄搭配佔有、登錄搭配控制？會有這個問題主要跟二十二條的解釋上面會有衝突。舉個例子，遊覽車業者車體打造時，銀行對其可能做分次融資，讓其完成車體打造，但這車體打造的過程中並無法設定動產抵押。問題在於今天是以簽約在前，將車體設定浮動資產擔保於後，這個遊覽車業者在車體打造完成後在可設定動產抵押時，又設定給另一銀行，會產生權利衝突的問題，則到底是前面分次撥款的銀行之債權優先，還是後面設定動產抵押權者為優先？對此提出一些疑問。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "簡單說明，這是三擇一。但是因為有的企業資產必須以占有為公示方法，必須以占有為公示，例如票據。票據以占有公示方法時，會優先於登錄的擔保權；又如銀行存款，以控制為公示方法時，也優先於登錄的擔保權。故是三擇一，但優先順序原則上不會受到影響。" }, { "speaker": "台北市租賃商業同業公會", "speech": "第九條的部分，之前有討論到金融機構可以跟擔保權人成立控制協議的書面契約。又有銀行反應這部分需要特殊的法律規定，而這邊有規定了。但在實務上面需要比較小心的是，銀行通常對擔保人有債權，其當然會想主張抵銷。由於實務上譬如說在定存單設質，會要求銀行拋棄行使抵銷權，是否可以在這去限制金融機構不可以行使抵押權，因為這樣金融機構可能會因為錢已經在他這邊了就直接行使抵押權，造成保護擔保權人的效力沒這麼好。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "您是金融機構代表嗎？" }, { "speaker": "台北市租賃商業同業公會", "speech": "我是租賃公會代表。我是想說，假設今天我是租賃公司，是擔保權人，我去跟金融機構簽訂了擔保權合約，只要意定就可以了，只要有違約我就主張行使控制，存款條就用租賃公司的名字進去，可是銀行可能不讓我領並主張擔保人另外欠銀行錢，我擔心這樣的問題。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "其實這在第五條有規定。" }, { "speaker": "台北市租賃商業同業公會", "speech": "不好意思，補充一下。呼應剛才銀行公會的說法。在成立金錢信託帳戶時，可能債權人請債務人到銀行開一個信託帳戶，將來若違反合約的時候，會請銀行直接把帳戶裡的錢直接匯給債權人。它比較像是第二款的「特別帳務」的關係。那關於第一款，實務上有問題的是，假設本法要施行的話，我要去行使控制權，第一可能金融機構會問違約的證明是什麼？通常會說必須要法院認定，也就是說法院判定我有這個權利可以收取了，我才可以請金融機構拿著判決書說他有違約的狀況。雖然說前面老師您說他必須按照擔保契約來做執行，但實際上會遇到的問題是金融機構會說違約與否該機構無法認定，他們也怕存款人會向金管會客訴說這部分並未達到違約的標準。我們擔心的是將來在實行上可能會有這樣的問題。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "所以今天業界提供的意見非常重要。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "是否接受控制的公示方法，存款帳戶的金融機關有絕對的自主權。請看草案第十五頁的控制協議，接受不接受這個協議完全取決於開戶銀行，當然接受後，控制協議要寫得很好。先舉個例子說明，擔保權人想要向開戶銀行領取存款，控制協議可以先就此詳為約定，開戶銀行可以要求擔保權人必須提出一定的證明文件，證明已有權領取，故有關問題要在控制協議裡面做很好的規劃。若最後不能解決時，只好到法院解決。請各位繼續發表。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "有沒有違約，不管是在哪一種類型的擔保都有一樣的問題，你說違約，他說沒違約，最後就是訴訟。不會因為它是存款帳戶就會有不同。而且你剛剛提的是過去比較是用信託的方式去做，因為沒有這樣子的制度在，所以用另一個方式、手段在處理。" }, { "speaker": "台北市租賃商業同業公會", "speech": "對，而且因為信託的話，費用真的比較高！" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "是啊，就是因為沒有才會這樣。所以過去像這種不是定存而是其他種類的，實務上多會準用到香港或其他地方的法律去處理，因為我們這邊的法律沒辦法這樣做。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "請各位繼續發表意見。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "專利商標及著作都有規定，如果權利者為共有的時候，設定質權的時候必須其他共有人的同意。將來若以IP設定擔保權，如果是共有的時候，是否有同意的問題？" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "回歸智慧財產權的法律規定。法律怎麼規定就怎麼辦。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "我們的規定是權利之限、設定之限。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "我認為是一樣的，就好像任何財產，法律上有限制不能設定擔保權，都不能設定。這是原則問題。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "可是，將來這個擔保權，跟我們所謂的設定質權，我們一直認定這是平行線，沒有互相交叉的問題。所以這邊有了不能設定質權，另一邊可以設定擔保權；同樣的這邊規定要有其他共有人之同意，另一邊是否需要特別規定此？" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "好，我們會考量！" }, { "speaker": "邵慶平", "speech": "關於第八條第九條的問題，我提供一些自己的意見。有關登錄、占有、控制三者擇一的方式，事實上在說明裡面、《指南》裡面一再提到到底要三者都存在，還是都以登錄為主，有各國不同的立法例。我認為團隊可以再討論看看是否一定要採取三者皆具存的方式，或是登錄為唯一的方式。因為老師剛剛也提到以占有為之的情況主要是票據的情形，在條文的二十五條提到票據也可以用登錄為之，二十五條有提到關於次序的問題，已占有的優先於已登錄的。所以如果同一動產或資產可以用不同的方式來進行，要不要有統一進行或統一登錄的方式為之。或許這個方向更簡便也更易理解，因為如同在說明裡面多次提到本法裡面所針對大部分都是非占有型的擔保情形。如果是非占有擔保之情形我們可以想像占有情況可能會非常少見。" }, { "speaker": "邵慶平", "speech": "另外，老師剛剛提到第九條。我自己覺得託收金融機構的「託收」這兩個字翻譯上可能是不需要的。因此第九條從老師剛才的解釋出發，是對金融機構相對有利的規定。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "謝謝。對不起剛才沒有說明清楚。登錄是最基本的公示方法，任何擔保權的標的都可以採用。再以票據為例，票據擔保權可用登錄為公示方法，但為貫徹票據的流通性，若票據擔保權以占有為公示方法時，他的優先效力會優先於登錄。在控制那邊也一樣，控制的方法效果會比登錄好。所以票據、銀行存款帳戶，都可以用登錄，只是優先效力上，各有不同。" }, { "speaker": "邵慶平", "speech": "第八條第三項文字上的問題。第三項提到「企業資產擔保權非經占有擔保標的不得對抗第三人者.....」想像上可能有一種情況是一定要占有，如果我不占有是不能對抗第三人的。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "占有的公示方法，就必須剝奪擔保人的占有權。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "想請教一下，營業秘密在營業秘密法有規定不得強制執行。這樣第十二條的對擔保契約約定說逕受強制執行之約定，這樣有沒有問題？" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "營業秘密在企業資產擔保權擬定草案的時候有些麻煩。因為營業秘密法規定營業秘密是不能讓與，也不能設定質權，但在這邊是可以設定擔保權。因為他是非常有價值的資產，包含剛才林教授所說的技術，都是非常有價值的。至於草案的文義是否可以表現出來這些意旨？在擬定草案的時候，的確遇到問題，各位提供很多意見，非常感謝。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "關於第十二條第六款，跟營業秘密無關。因為營業秘密好像沒有占有的問題。因為在實行的時候，有形資產要趕快占有。第六款指的是有形資產，因為無形資產無法占有。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "所以第六款指包括有形資產，不包括無形的？" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "所以專利商標也不適用？" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "專利商標不適用，沒有這個問題。" }, { "speaker": "劉春堂", "speech": "我現在看這規定好像是允許在這標的物上可以成立同種類或不同種類的擔保物權，是以這個為前提對不對？" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "游進發", "speech": "我覺得第十條立得很棒，但我有小小的疑點，看起來是善意取得嗎？" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "有這樣的意思。" }, { "speaker": "游進發", "speech": "我完全贊成這法條的內容，有點舉證責任分配的問題，不管是英美法還是大陸法系，實體法規定的性質可以用來分配舉證責任。善意舉證責任，從但書來看，好像是債權人要負舉證責任。但從本文來看好像債權人不用證明自己是善意。換句話說，若本文跟但書一起看，似乎是，營業常規而取得擔保權，是一個減輕善意的舉證責任的規範。如果是這個意思，是不是要訂立另外一項，如果債權人證明自己依商業常規取得，我就不用證明我是善意。我覺得這樣會比較好。基本上這個內容我完全贊成。以上。" }, { "speaker": "台北市租賃商業同業公會", "speech": "補充第十條的部分，就我們在看會比較擔心的是，第二項有排除附條件買賣，而附條件買賣之下所有權人還是擔保權人，但融資性租賃的所有權人也是擔保權人，可是它並沒有被規範在裡面。所以我們想建議是否要改成「企業資產之附條件買賣或融資性租賃等以所有權作為擔保性質之交易。」畢竟所有權是最基本的東西。因為如果是說，我今天是融資性租賃的標的，我放在擔保人的廠房裏面生產，可是我因為它可能因所謂的營業常規，形式上外觀看起來好像是擔保人，所以整批就設定給其他人了，對融資性租賃的權利人其實是很沒有保障的。所以我們是想說，是不是可以排除「以所有權為擔保性質」的交易。這是我們的建議。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "至少現在還沒有想把這個包含進去。" }, { "speaker": "台北市租賃商業同業公會", "speech": "對，但是老師，重點是在所有權的部分，只是說融資性....。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "這方面我們再考慮，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "劉春堂", "speech": "所以照這個規定，信託也沒有包含嗎？" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "沒有。" }, { "speaker": "陳榮傳", "speech": "主持人、各位老師、各位代表好。" }, { "speaker": "陳榮傳", "speech": "在第二章的部分，也許就是簡便或是電子化的方式，所以在第七條第二項應該以書面為之的企業資產擔保權設定，得以電子為之。我是在想說，因為我們有《電子簽章法》，該法內使用的是「電子文件」的術語。在用電子文件時除非我們這裡要變成一個特別的法律，看可不可以突破電子簽章法，其是以相對人同意為前提。但這有點保孚，和聯合國的示範法及公約的規定都不一致，但我們的《電子簽章法》就是這樣的規定。" }, { "speaker": "陳榮傳", "speech": "問題是第七條、第九條第二項的規定所謂的「電子方法」，是否和我們《電子簽章法》的用語是一致？因為就我了解該法是用「電子文件」。" }, { "speaker": "陳榮傳", "speech": "第二就是，這部分是否受《電子簽章法》的限制，以相對人同意才可承認方式的有效性。由於該法的相關規定是不太好的立法，我們在此如何突破？" }, { "speaker": "陳榮傳", "speech": "第三，對於個別資產、財產的占有、控制的方法，和我們現在以企業的總括資產作為標的物擔保標的的情形。個人的想法，個別財產的擔保應優先於總括財產的擔保，因為總括財產擔保是介於債權和物權之間。從這樣的角度來看，第十一條是否有必要特別去排除它可以去做個別擔保的不動產、船舶及航空器。它也許有擔保，但它的擔保還殘餘很多價值，這個價值能不能納入總括資產的框架，以做融資之用？這是我個人的疑點，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "陳教授提的問題非常有爭議性。聯合國建議也好，《歐盟草案》也好，都沒有看到特定資產擔保權會優先於總括財產擔保權的規定。到底應該怎麼做，是一個問題。但由於現在採登錄制度，所以後面提到，智慧財產擔保權到智慧財產局登記的會優先於本草案的登錄，特別說明一下。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "第十一條，究竟要排除到哪個範圍，因為這些排除的都是參考聯合國、紐西蘭等各國立法例。如何做切割，這確是大問題。又如汽車是否納入本法？也是一個爭議問題。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "當時在考慮的還有一點。像船舶跟航空器，常是提到現在已經既有國際上非常成熟的保險等等，排除的話，可能會太複雜。" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "我補充一點，剛剛陳教授固定資產權會優先於浮動擔保權。有一種情形會如此，就是我們所謂的「超級優先權」，例如本草案二十八條的「購置款優先權」，如果是這種情形的話，因此取得的資產，購置的部分，會優先於設定在先的浮動擔保權。其他的部分倒沒看到立法例說固定資產權依定會優先於浮動擔保權。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "我記得英國的浮動擔保，固定資產擔保權在一定情況下會優先於浮動資產擔保權，不知道有沒有記錯。" }, { "speaker": "劉春堂", "speech": "我提個問題。因為現在的法律會特別規定某些東西要強制信託，那這些資產可不可以設定擔保品。譬如說「殯葬禮儀服務業依殯葬管理條例」有規定殯葬業者就生前殯葬服務契約預收費用之百分之七十五要強制信託。強制信託是不是資產，能不能就強制信託的部分拿來做擔保品。因為這是法律上特別為保護消費者，我們協調內政部要以此做強制信託。殯葬業者若以此認為那是業者的資產而拿來設擔保，後又被強制執行，這樣消費者可能會受害。這是我看到第十一條而來，給各位參考。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "剛剛老師有提到，如果同一個標的，假設是專利，有設定質權登記，嗣後又在擔保權作登錄，這時候智財權因為是登記，所以效力會優先於擔保權登錄，對不對？現在有一個狀況，如果專利申請權雖在專利來講是不能設定質權，但專利申請權本草案規定是可以設定擔保。故其先來設定擔保登錄之後，嗣後拿到智財局拿到專利權時再來辦質權登記，這時候效力是誰優先？" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "以《智慧財產權補編》來看，智慧財產權的登記是比較厚實。這邊的登錄只登錄基本的資料，故這種登錄也不代表確保物權存在，只是確定優先權次序與對抗第三人的效力。基本上這一點與大陸法系有差別。我們在後面也是設計專門登記處的登記是絕對優先於本草案的登錄，不管它的先後。按照這樣的話，還是後面的質權登記優先。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "所以是專利權設定質權登記優先？" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "所以縱然它是後於專利申請權擔保之登錄，還是以質權登記為優先。" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "對。這當然也是聯合國《智慧財產權補編》所採取的政策，基本上其並不想去違反一國家的智慧財產權的專法。甚至其也涉及到很多國家都有簽定智慧財產權的公約。故在立法上政策上是遵從聯合國的政策。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "但這樣對擔保權人非常不利，因為專利申請權還沒有拿到專利卻已經進行申請，是一種期待權的概念。事後拿到專利權的時候變成沒有保障，而是後續的人有保障，所以擔保權人很不利。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "這是立法政策如何選擇的問題，已如陳教授所述。智慧財產權的登記與本草案的登錄，何者優先，我們是參照依照聯合國建議定的。適不適合，還請大家發表高見。" }, { "speaker": "吳光明", "speech": "今天果然收穫很多，從各個角度提出的問題，遍處火花。今天討論的幾個問題大概是「浮動擔保的方法」、「當事人協議」。今天才專利申請的時候就願意貸款給他，應該要當事人自己負責，因為當事人可以自己協議。" }, { "speaker": "吳光明", "speech": "兩個問題，第一，整個草案裡面提到浮動擔保、什麼時候確定，如強制執行、扣押的時候就確定，有點像最高限額抵押強制執行債權就確定一樣。但是我們在看英國的浮動擔保制度的時候，他們有一個制度叫「監管人制度」。我不知道我們有沒有提到這部分。因為有監管人制度對浮動擔保制度的債權人而言會比較有保障。" }, { "speaker": "吳光明", "speech": "再來第二個問題，陳教授提到電子方法為之。我博士論文是在民國81年撰寫，剛好在談讓與擔保。後來為了公示問題，我的指導老師請我到德國找專家，我一申請計畫國科會就給我兩年經費。可見這個問題真的非常複雜且重要。我們那時候怎麼會想到書面可以用電子方式，哪裡知道Line、Facebook這麼方便，所以我也不知道將來會不會有更新的方式出來。剛剛在談第七條如果這邊第七條「第一項之書面，得以電子方法為之，其辦法由主管機關定之。」我覺得非常好，而辦法就由主管機關定之。不過如果再加上「以電子或其他類似方式之通訊」，這樣所有類型就能包括在內，感覺上電子業、科技業一直再進步。通常我們就是列舉、再概括。我想到的是這個問題。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "還有別的問題？" }, { "speaker": "游進發", "speech": "我覺得這個還是本質的問題。擔保權既然是債權的結構，勢必先天就要劣後於很多擔保物權，或是它公示手段非常強烈，基本上這不會是個問題，我好像在幫你們答辯一樣！不是啦，我在提供我的專業意見。但是另一角度，期待權在現行法上，即便是在德國法的操作，也只有兩種，一個是「預告登記」，一個是「附條件買賣買受人的法律地位」。換句話說，不是任何的期待都值得保護的。在剛才專利的例子裡，本來這種專利人跟將來專利權作為抵押的擔保權人就有預見這樣的情形，根本不需要特別保護。你想要有一個很強烈的擔保權，必須尋求物權保護。這是一個債權，既然是債權就很靈活。本質上對Business-to-Business就是這個樣子，你不可能什麼都要。所以今天在尋求擔保制度的時候，企業就要想清楚究竟要尋求債權還是物權擔保。這是本質結構的問題，需先予以澄清。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "先補充說明一下。到底是遵循「物權法定主義」，或是把擔保權改成債權結構，草案是開放的，沒有直接規定。" }, { "speaker": "陳榮傳", "speech": "我覺得是物權啦！因為企業資產的擔保權，特別在法律裡面有規定.....。我只是想回應經濟部智慧財產局同仁提出的問題。個人看法認為，先以專利申請權納入擔保範圍之後，又取得專利權的情況。其實專利權就是前面的專利申請權的Process，基本上就是出其產物或代替物，從這角度來看，問題不大。可能還是會回到一個問題，當它被納入企業資產作為擔保權的標誌之後，或之前，它同時又已經單獨地去作為質權的標的物，這時候何者優先？這又回到我們迴避不了的問題。謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "謝謝陳教授的發言。" }, { "speaker": "劉春堂", "speech": "我曾經跟謝大法官說，你定個東西，債權人他比你聰明，會用他就會用，不能用就不用，最後就看債權人要不要用。我們有信託占有，搞了半天有沒有人用？沒有。銀行公會在這邊，他們很清楚，大概從來沒用過，沒幾件。" }, { "speaker": "劉春堂", "speech": "也就是說，這個東西我們訂出來，將來學說上會有爭執，到底是債權還是物權。說白一點，就是想辦法讓企業他想要以這樣的方式提供擔保，他就有這樣的一條路，但債權人要不要，天曉得。所以我們討論法律的問題之外，還要看到他實際上的執行面，像剛剛提到的那些專利問題，他搞了半天根本就不碰、不用，他不確定，債權人就不用嘛。" }, { "speaker": "劉春堂", "speech": "我是想說，變成兩個方向，再定擔保法的方向，一個方向是社會政策的概念，多提供一條路走；或經濟立法的概念，讓債權人的債權能夠得到確保。我是傾向於債權人比誰都聰明，他自己會去考慮利弊，我們就提供管道就好，只要我們自己不矛盾，不要違背現行的規定。所以我剛才會提到法律規定你要強制信託，嗣後又拿去抵押抵掉，那不就麻煩了？其他我倒不是這麼擔心，畢竟債權人比誰都聰明。謝謝，這不成熟的意見，請大家指教。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "我們會議繼續進行。進入議題三，關於本草案的「登錄」，敬請表示高見！" }, { "speaker": "台北市租賃商業同業公會", "speech": "針對第十四條第二款，建議增加擔保權人、債務人及擔保人姓名，少了債務人。因為有時候擔保人不一定是債務人，可能是第三人。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "應該是漏掉了。" }, { "speaker": "台北市租賃商業同業公會", "speech": "對，應該是漏掉了，因為前面的擔保契約是有寫到債務人。" }, { "speaker": "台北市租賃商業同業公會", "speech": "關於關於第三款「擔保標的之描述」，就實務上來看，是最常出現爭議的地方，對此需要比較細緻，可能後續登錄內容的部分要有更多的說明，因為他們可能會要求規格、廠牌、型號、數量。這些是大家最會有爭執的地方，會不會有重複融資、設定，都是在這個部份發生問題。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "請繼續發表高見。" }, { "speaker": "台北市租賃商業同業公會", "speech": "針對第十五條，登錄有效期間部分。按照現行的《動產擔保交易法》，是以契約期間作為判斷。而且是在期間屆至之前，債權人可以單方申請延長，但原則上不能超過一年。我想請問雖然我現在登錄是五年，後面又說當事人能更新之，但當事人其實是雙方。假設今天擔保人現在跑掉了，是不是就無法一起去更新的。所以想說這裡是否可以加但書，「期滿前三十日內，債權人得單方申請延長期限。其效力至原登記期間屆滿次日開始。」我們還是保留債權人可以單方申請延期的空間，否則會造成超過五年者，擔保權會直接消滅，對債權人之保障不夠。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "關於第十五條的期間要長要短，非常需要業界的意見。另外，如果擔保人都跑掉了，擔保權人以後還會借錢給他嗎？" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "不是，我們是擔心因為這條等於是擔保權自動消滅，可能將來就無法去主張權利。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "擔保人都跑掉了，擔保權人會去更新登記嗎？" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "應該是要去實行，他要趕快確保他的債權。" }, { "speaker": "台北市租賃商業同業公會", "speech": "還有，有時候租賃公司會做一些高精密儀器，可能動輒上億，價值不輸不動產。若說五年就消滅，可能對權利的確保很麻煩。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "謝謝您的高見，林教授，請。" }, { "speaker": "林仁光", "speech": "第十四條、第五項，第一個想請教的是生效的時間。理論上是非常同意，載到「辦理第一項之登錄時，於其登錄經依前項編定，可得查詢時起生效。」問題是可得查詢時的時間是不確定的。從紐西蘭的實務，辦理線上登記、繳費繳完，繳完後會有完成登錄的時間，網路上就會顯示何時登錄完成。如果是寫從「可得查詢時起」，是從誰可得查詢開始計算。理論上我知道是說可以開始去查的時候，但這還是個不確定的概念。大概還是要用比較確定的概念，用完成登錄的時間點，主管機關會發給一個時間。但這邊要怎麼樣寫，讓人不會覺得不確定。這是第一個疑問。" }, { "speaker": "林仁光", "speech": "第二就是，第十六條討論變更，「登錄機關應將之傳送於擔保權人及擔保人。」這裡的「之」的意思是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "是「變動」的登錄。" }, { "speaker": "林仁光", "speech": "我了解，但是這樣他是要傳給擔保人及擔保權人哪一些內容。這可能涉及主管機關通知義務的內容跟範圍。是我要告訴你有變動，還是到什麼樣的程度？這往往也是實務上操作的問題。我先講到這邊，有想到再說。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "謝謝，請各位繼續發表高見。" }, { "speaker": "台北市租賃商業同業公會", "speech": "針對第十七條，這部分賦予擔保人可以隨時向登錄機關或擔保權人要求更正。因為在一開始登錄的時候就會檢附擔保契約，擔保人也會簽名於其上，一定是上傳、雙方共同申請。" }, { "speaker": "台北市租賃商業同業公會", "speech": "實務上會有的狀況，今天都已登記完後，租賃公司就會撥款，款項就撥出去了，這是撥款的條件。我們擔心這一條的部分，因為一開始擔保人都已經同意設定，也簽好契約了，但在撥款之後，不斷利用系統拋出請求更正。因為更正，擔保權人要在二十日內回覆他，且單純就單異議之註記，而這註記會一直留在，大家會認為這個標的是有問題的。可是實際上從剛才的說明來說這個標的可能是沒有問題的，只是因為擔保人不斷地想干擾而做出這樣的程序。是不是要回到動產《動產擔保交易法》的規定，既然要為內容的變更，應共同做登錄或修正，而不是只讓擔保人能不斷透過這樣的程序，讓擔保權人疲於奔命做註記。這是在實務上的回饋。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "構想中，不會讓擔保權人疲於奔命。只看擔保人的請求，正不正當，如果擔保權人認為正當，照著改，問題就解決了。如果擔保人的請求不正當，擔保權人有異議，登錄機關為異議的註記，對擔保權原有的效力不生影響，至於後續問題，則循協商、訴訟或其他程序解決。" }, { "speaker": "台北市租賃商業同業公會", "speech": "那這個異議的註記會揭露嗎？因為我們也會擔心......." }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "有沒有揭露現在沒說，至少對擔保權原有效力是沒有影響。舉例說，擔保債權通通都清償了，如不會再發生擔保債權，擔保權應歸於消滅，擔保權應該塗銷登錄，但擔保人請求後，擔保權人偏偏不塗銷，聲明異議，登錄機關只註明這個異議，就可以了。至於擔保權是否應塗銷的實質問題，要經過法院或其他程序解決。" }, { "speaker": "台北市租賃商業同業公會", "speech": "比較擔心的是，擔保權人收受送達通知二十日內，來不及聲明的話，就是直接按照擔保人的請求做更正。" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "補充一下，這也是通知登錄跟現行的文件審查制度最大的不同。通知登錄基本上不要求契約文件一定要附上去。甚至連擔保人的同意書要不要附上去這件事，在立法例上都不完全一樣，甚至聯合國都明確說不需要。因為如果說一個電子的登錄系統，還要經過這樣的程序，那誰來審查呢？是不是主管機關要介入？這種所謂高效、低成本的登錄制度本來就是這樣。第十七條其實就是配合十四條，單獨就可以去登記，但如何確保正確，就要給擔保人這樣的機制。剛剛前面有提過說登錄的效力，可能跟傳統上方式效力不太一樣。不管是效力或是優先性上，可能都跟其他的擔保權來說，甚至於不及於他們。這點的大方向要先跟大家說明。" }, { "speaker": "台北市租賃商業同業公會", "speech": "所以以後是否變成債權人單方就可以申請登錄，不需要債務人同意為之？" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "你看原本條文有說，擔保權人、擔保人跟代理人。現在就只有寫擔保權人單方去登記。如果我們用通知登錄設計，沒有這個條文的設計，任由他自己隨便拿別人的資產來登記，必須有這個制度做配套。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "這地方我也補充一下。當時行政院還在推這個法案的時候，登錄的部分到底由哪個主管機關負責，到我卸任之前都還沒有人認領。因為登錄如果要審查，主管機關會覺得增加很多負擔。原來條文裡面是擔保人、擔保權、跟代理人一起去做這件事，後來一直擔憂，若要審的話會增加很多工作量。若現在設計成債權人單方去登錄，給擔保人可以異議的更正，就可以減輕主管機關的工作負擔。其實這個法也面對了到底誰是主管機關的問題，內部還需要協調。目前《動產擔保交易法》是在金管會主管，這個法應該是金管會還是經濟部負責，這章節是非常關鍵。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "我再請教一個問題。專利權拿到專利後設定擔保，現在設定擔保之後擔保人之專利權權利減縮，像智慧財產局申請更正，也就是權利範圍減縮或拋棄，這是否需要擔保權人的同意？" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "如果是按照智慧財產權特別的法律，例如專利或商標法去登記，當然就不適用《企業資產擔保法》的制度。你一定是用通知、登錄，才用《企業資產擔保法》的制度。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "對，我知道。我是說，現在智慧財產局申請更正登記的時候，我們現在在走專利質權登記，其有設定質權，如果將來這個專利有所減縮、更正的時候，因為會影響質權人的擔保的問題，所以更正申請必須要檢附質權人的同意書。那現在如果擔保人設定擔保後，若有權利減縮的情形，將來是不是也要擔保權人同意書才可以，不然後面會影響擔保權權利問題。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "不會。" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "你是說以《企業資產擔保法》的制度嗎？" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "以這邊的制度，後面如果有異議的話還是要進入訴訟程序，以歐盟的制度就是這樣。原則上，當擔保人提出認為登記不正確....." }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "他不是登記不正確，他是權利更正的問題。" }, { "speaker": "邱玟惠", "speech": "權利減縮。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "假設說他原來有十項，現在他申請更正，可能被他人提起舉發無效的問題。若他更正之後縮減成五項，這個時候該不該要求拿擔保權同意書的問題。" }, { "speaker": "張懿云", "speech": "聯合國的《智慧財產權補編》裡不會處理到這麼細的問題。那個原則其實是謝老師說的，原則很簡單，如果是智慧財產權的法律，就完全依照智慧財產權，不會受影響。故在這種情況下，權利減縮，沒有什麼同意跟不同意的問題，只是要通知。也不是說擔保權人不同意減縮就會怎麼樣，因為權利內容已經被減了。在這種情況下，擔保法裡頭不會處理這種問題，就依智慧財產權法處理。若智慧財產權沒有處理，它只處理質權的減縮。" }, { "speaker": "張懿云", "speech": "這種情況之下，比如說我去設定這個專利，三千萬，專利的內容這麼大，後來被異議之後，權利內容減縮，這事情也由不得擔保權人同不同意減縮，它的權利就已經被減縮了。就是這個專利權，就是設定三千萬。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "因為他這個更正，不一定是有人去舉發，它亦有可能主動來申請....." }, { "speaker": "張懿云", "speech": "我知道主任的意思是，要不要同意減縮或是要不要同意變更登記。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "不是，擔保可以。要不要同意它來減縮申請專利範圍？如果說他同意，我們才能准他辦更正登記。" }, { "speaker": "張懿云", "speech": "那是在智慧財產權的變更登記，跟這邊應該沒什麼關係。" }, { "speaker": "吳光明", "speech": "我想《指南》的意思是其實這裡還是會有特別法與普通法的問題，所以除非專利法立有特別規定，否則就用這個法。由此來看應該還是一樣。本來信用擔保就可以了，政府為了讓企業多一層擔保，所以看起來在這邊並不是這麼好的一個擔保，但是你願意的話，不是比沒有更好嗎？大概是這樣的思考。所以有關於這個部分，應該是專利法有特別規定，就照專利法處理。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "智慧財產權相關法律的規定非常重要。" }, { "speaker": "張懿云", "speech": "專利質權的規定是《專利法》去處理，其設定質權就照《專利法》。若沒有的話，就照這條規定。要登錄就用登錄去處理，需要變更就去變更，不需要同意。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "當時我們研究這個法的時候，就是希望讓企業可以一整包，而不切割處理，也可以把現在跟未來一整包處理。所以可能你訂的時候就說，今天這段時間產生的所有智慧財產，我都全部設定給你。這跟你單獨一個專利要申請，講得很清楚是哪一個，可能是不太一樣。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "但將來這個法，我們認為用得比較多的是一整包，也就是一個企業一整包的東西。現在看到最多的問題是我們把企業資產切割去設定，比如說：愛情公寓，你切了，機房裡頭的設備去登記一個，一個軟體去設定一個。現在能不能整個一體去設定，這段時間所有都去設，這樣可能才有實益，將來對於新創事業要用這個法，可能會是這樣的情況。如果是單獨一筆，就單獨去設定吧。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "我的問題是這樣的。如果將來立法政策是希望會影響擔保權人的權利問題，為了擔保標的穩定性，如果說他有減縮的時候，應該要擔保權人同意。如果有需要，那《專利法》六十四條勢必要配合修改。因為現在《專利法》六十四條是規定，專利有設定質權或授權的時候，若專利權人有更正、減縮的時候，必須要質權人的同意。這樣子的話，必然是修法加一個擔保權人同意，我們才能准他們更正。" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "其實《指南》跟《智慧財產權補編》也是希望各國能做到這一點。但是它基本上是尊重，又希望各國可以因為這部擔保法通過後，大家盡量去配合，讓所有擔保法可以歸流到這部法律內，但又不想強制，只是一直在善意提醒，各國若能配合重新檢討，譬如說在專門登記裡面雖然賦予智慧財產權特別優先的效力，但也希望這兩部將來可以交叉查詢或交叉設定，也就是這邊設定就通知那邊，反之亦然，避免彼此的落差。這種方式不強制，但很希望整合。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "對此議題，如果沒有意見，就進入議題四，關於本草案「四、擔保權之效力及優先次序」，敬請惠賜高見。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "如果對前面議題還有意見，可以繼續發言。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "請各位發表意見。游教授似乎有高見？" }, { "speaker": "游進發", "speech": "既然老師點名我，我主動出擊。" }, { "speaker": "游進發", "speech": "第十九條，債務不履行所生損害之賠償。這好像是說，債務不履行損害賠償，都是擔保權效力所及。但實際上，債務不履行損害賠償之結構很多種，應該只有「替補賠償」才是原來標的的延伸、變形，才具有同一性。例如說在給付遲延的時候，遲延損害之賠償一定是原來給付義務之延伸，給付義務還在。甚至加害給付的情形，給付義務還在。文獻上、德國教科書很早就提出這個，台灣文獻沒有文獻去區別。債務不履行的損害賠償會是原來擔保權所及，僅限於替補賠償，那給付義務會消滅，為什麼會消滅？因為轉進債務不履行損害賠償之債。" }, { "speaker": "游進發", "speech": "所以我建議這裡寫「不履行的損害賠償」，台灣民法典裡面講的不履行的損害賠償其實講的是替補賠償。如果寫債務不履行的損害賠償，會讓人誤以為包括任何類型債務不履行的損害賠償。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "你認為要怎麼寫法？" }, { "speaker": "游進發", "speech": "「不履行的損害賠償」，因為我們台灣民法典在債各裡面，所講到的不履行的損害賠償其實指的是「代替給付的損害賠償」。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "「而生」兩字不要了？" }, { "speaker": "游進發", "speech": "「債務」也不要了，寫「不履行的損害賠償」就夠了。或是立法理由要說明一下。有同一性的只有替補賠償。以上。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "謝謝！" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "請問一下第二十條，擔保標的物如果是IP的話，「其擔保之效力不及於授權他人利用所取得之授權金、因他人侵權行為所得之損害賠償，或因該智慧財產之更新、改編及其他相類事項所生利益」。請教一下什麼叫「更新」？另外「改編」是否是《智慧財產權法》「改作」的概念？為什麼會更新呢？因為專利有專利的延長，你可以延長專利，可以申請延長五年，有沒有包含這塊。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "再來商標有延展的問題，十年到了可以申請延展，這是不是「更新」的概念？或著發明與再發明。在此，「更新」的概念是什麼樣的意思？" }, { "speaker": "張懿云", "speech": "這延長當然不算「更新」。因為在專利叫「再發明」，或在別人的基礎上「新發明」，或在別人的著作上繼續的「衍生著作」，這些其實是《補編》的用語。還在說明裡可以看到「增強」這幾個字，是法條的用語。簡單來說，Win95去設定擔保權，並不表示不斷的改版後Win97、Win XP，擔保的效力不見得會達到XP，如果你要的話，請寫清楚。這個條文就是告訴我們沒有理所當然到。所以你的契約要寫得非常好，不然你以為後續的都是你的，但其實沒有。" }, { "speaker": "張懿云", "speech": "這個二十條，相對於前面的條文來說，在補編裡面是比較特別的規定，因為性質不太一樣，所以我們補編有說明從166、167到241。這幾個部分特別列出來，如果當事人要其一的話，請在契約裡寫清楚。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "剛剛老師提到，這個更新不包括專利的延長，這樣會很奇怪，一個專利要延展，假設他是今年到期，但是因為他要申請許可證的關係，所以它在到期前六個月，向智財局申請延長專利，可以延長兩年。這本來是它專利的延伸，不是所謂再發明之解釋。但專利權的延長是本體的延長，不是所謂在作一個技術出來的問題。還是應該包括專利的延長。" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "包括在效力所及，但是不是這一條規範。" }, { "speaker": "張懿云", "speech": "這一條的「更新」、「改編」、「增強」，不是指這個東西。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "張院長的意見跟你是一樣的。" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "說法不一樣，效力是及於之，但不是這一條去規範的。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "不是這一條排除的，也就是說你剛剛提擔保效力的延長本來就在裡面了，意見是一樣的。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "這「改編」是不是「改作」的意思。" }, { "speaker": "張懿云", "speech": "可以是「改作」。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "也許「改編」的名字可以再想想。" }, { "speaker": "張懿云", "speech": "是，不過沒關係，我們在說明裡頭再講清楚。像專利可能會討論再發明。不過補編裡頭特別講的是著作權的部分，舉的例子是電腦程式等。" }, { "speaker": "劉春堂", "speech": "十九條，現在這個但書很好把它附著於不動產的排除掉。問題在於，混合物跟附合物，還是會有如我的果子跟你的果子混在一起，是整個全部都包括，還是說是其他的關係？因為我是看原來草案第十四條，按照一定價值讓它計算，是不是可以考慮這樣？" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "有，現在在第二項，因為那太長了不好處理，就放到第二項去處理了。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "請繼續發表高見。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "這個第二十一條，有關於IP將來執行的問題。「以實施智慧財產之有形資產為標的之擔保權，其效力不及於該智慧財產」，這個概念上我的解讀不知道有沒有錯誤，比如說，這個衣服上有商標的問題，現在如果執行這衣服的時候，不及於商標；或著說我現在物是有專利的東西，若我以這個物來設定擔保，將來執行的時候，並不及於物的專利技術。相反的，若我以這個專利技術設定擔保，將來執行的時候，我只拍賣這個專利技術，不包括因這個技術而產生的物，是不是這個概念。不知道這解讀有沒有錯？" }, { "speaker": "張懿云", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "智慧財產局", "speech": "那我想請教一下，如果這個專利它是以「方法專利」設定擔保，那有沒有及於方法製成物。" }, { "speaker": "張懿云", "speech": "沒有，它講得很清楚，這是非常少數不變，直接寫成這樣子的。智慧財產權就是無形的，不及於有形物。簡單講就是物歸物，智慧財產權就是無形的。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "應該很清楚，擔保標的是物當然不能及於商標。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "最典型的例子應該是，你有一個專利，你用專利去設質，你用專利做出來的東西，如果擔保品是產品的話，不及於專利；如果擔保標的是專利的話，不及於我做出來的所有的產品。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "因為這個條文在我們局裡面，以他們專業角度來看，每個人講法都不同。" }, { "speaker": "張懿云", "speech": "這條文應該是最沒有爭議的。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "請繼續發表高見。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "第37頁的23條的說明二，這文字是不是寫錯了，是否有寫錯了？其中「但於其轉讓或授權係經擔保權人之同意者，其讓與人取得無該擔保權負擔之智慧財產」，這裡「讓與人」應該是「受讓人」；「至其授權係經同意者，授權人取得之權利.....」這裡應該是「被授權人」。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "對，這裡應該是被授權人，謝謝。請繼續發表高見。" }, { "speaker": "台北市租賃商業同業公會", "speech": "想請問最後面有說到企業固定資產擔保效力所及之範圍，如果是有形資產，適用普通抵押權。所以意思是說準用普通抵押權的規定。如果今天走《動產擔保交易法》，我可以設最高限額抵押權，但我走《企業資產擔保法》....." }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "這跟最高限額抵押權無關，這是擔保標的物所及效力的範圍問題。舉個例子，固定資產擔保權，是否及於擔保標的物的天然孳息？這個要準用普通抵押權的規定。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "休息十分鐘，四點十分繼續開會，謝謝各位。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "議題五，關於本草案之「五、實行」，請各位發表意見。" }, { "speaker": "劉春堂", "speech": "三十五條第二項「擔保權人已就擔保標的依前項第一款至第六款開始實行者，其他債權人不得對之聲請法院強制執行。」這個到底是要當成分配問題，還是強制執行問題。因為直接把它排除掉，會不會跟前面那些優先有衝突問題？也就是說，前面講我有優先順序，嗣後又不能強制執行。我現在還沒想到具體例子。我是想說，前面有個優先順序，原來我是優先的，但另一人已經進行第一項的一到六款，使我又不能聲請強制執行。完全把它排除掉，妥不妥當，提個問題，請大家指教。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "那個規定主要是針對普通債權的設計......." }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "文義寫得好像還包含其他債權人、包含物權的，我們有一點寫太大了......" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "不會。雖然不能聲請強制執行，但是到分配的時候，照樣可以參與分配。本條規定的意思就是要讓企業資產擔保權實行盡量走私實行程序，不要讓私實行在進行中間的時候，法院的強制執行又把它接走了。通常公實行程序效果效力會大於私實行程序，公實行程序一旦介入，已走一半的私實行程序怎麼辦？例如，我們承認可以流抵的私實行程序。在此情況，擔保權人正在走流抵程序時，別人一來聲請假扣押或查封，根據強制執行法第五十一條第二、三項規定，後半段就走不下去了。這個和優先次序，沒有關係。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "請繼續發表高見。" }, { "speaker": "台北市租賃商業同業公會", "speech": "想請教，第四十條。第四十條裡面提到「依第一項實行擔保權者，如為後次序之擔保權人時，先次序之擔保權人得於實行前請求接管其實行程序。」這個部分，不知道這是強制規定，還是只要先次序的人被通知了，要求接管，後次序的就必須被迫退出。如果是接管的話，那次順位的已經進行到一半了，先順位的人到中間才提出，那關於那些費用的部分，裡面並沒有規定到這部分。" }, { "speaker": "台北市租賃商業同業公會", "speech": "分享一下，實務上遇到的狀況。像這種有先次序、後次序的情形，我們在企業資產擔保裡面，並沒有限制企業的資格，如地下錢莊也可以成立公司，也可以是一個企業。會有一個狀況，它要製作分配表、作通知義務，但它裡面規定的其實只是像《動產擔保交易法》一樣，只是一個損賠的問題。也有可能這地下錢莊它成立公司是找一個人頭負責人，最後先次序的人去找這個次順位的人頭，其實對其並沒有保障。建議能不能讓這個程序變成，今天只要不按照上面的程序執行，結果並不是單純的損賠的問題，而是整個實行的措施無效，強度可以再強一些，不然的話一般不動產是由法院幫忙製作分配表，因此可以作的執行公信力很強。可是我們今天在這邊，是讓權利擔保權人自己去製作，其品質及有無通知，這樣比較容易影響先次序權利人。淺見如此。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "謝謝您的高見。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "您特別提到四十條「依第三十五條第一項第六款實行擔保權者.....」，第三十五條第一項第六款的實行是非常特別的，無所不包。剛才吳光明教授提到，到底可不可以像英國浮動擔保那樣，設管理人。也就是說整個企業如果有繼續經營的價值，就不拍賣，擔保權人找個專業經營人接管企業，加以整理後，繼續經營，經營的更好後，或選擇浮動擔保繼續維持下去，或選擇進行變價程序，賣個好價錢，這都在第六款實行程序設想範圍之內。因為第六款實行方法的多樣性、複雜性，對優先次序擔保權人就特別考慮。為何會接管？後次序擔保權人所採的是不是最好的一個實行方法，如果先次序擔保權人的方法比較好，就由他接管。這是初步的構想，但還有很多可以進一步考量的地方。請各位多指教，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "林教授，剛剛休息前您有一個問題還沒講，忘記請您發表高見了！" }, { "speaker": "林仁光", "speech": "我也忘記了，應該是不重要的，要休息。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "因休息把你打斷了！很抱歉！想到了再來！" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "請繼續發表高見。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "44頁第二十七條，這是新增的。這條文我的解讀不知道是不是這樣的意思：同樣的標的可以在智財局設質權登記，也可以擔保權這個軌道，就是平行嘛。但只要你在智財局設定登記的，效力絕對是優先的，不管先後，一律是智財局以登記為優先；第二項同樣這個標的，假設這個標的智財局已經登記了，也有設定擔保，等到標的轉讓的時候，因為其有設定專利權登記，所以縱然它被轉讓了，還是不脫離擔保權，也就是說還是互有擔保權存在的；第三項，你可以辦智慧財產權登記，但是沒有去辦智慧財產權登記，只辦了擔保權登記，將來這個專利轉讓的時候，就只會拿到一個完全脫離負擔、乾淨的專利，也就是關於脫離擔保負擔；第四項，在這種情況之下，再一次的受讓人拿到完全乾淨、完全無負擔的權利，是不是這個意思？" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "那現在如果它有設定質權登記是對抗效力，因為我們說質權登記它只有對抗效力，但事先我們跟別人之間已經辦了智慧財產權登記了，所以不管它，完全是以登記為準對不對？" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "就是說不帶擔保權。已經有一個擔保權，可是我現在受讓以後，我不帶原先的擔保權，等於那個原先的擔保權就不見了。如果用「不受影響」，就是說那個擔保權還在，但次序變成被它取代了，本來是第一次序，變成第二次序，劣後於後面次序的。就是不受影響跟變成脫離他的負擔。現在我們是這樣來處理。而《指南》就是用「不附帶」。這有點配合民法物權篇的用語。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "將來那用詞是不是不應寫「專門登記機關」？" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "應該用什麼？" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "我們是用「專責機關」。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "智慧財產主管登記機關，是嗎？" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "「專責」登記機關。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "改為「專責」，好。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "實行問題很複雜，請各位發表高見好不好？" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "吳教授，如果你想採取英國浮動擔保的管理制度，要怎麼辦，草案要怎麼設計？" }, { "speaker": "吳光明", "speech": "這個部分我沒上過管理。其實我是在想，剛剛在談論的部分，也有提到後次序，我覺得我的這套比較好，就來接管，前面的部分就順便用他有的部分來解決掉。應該這樣的制度是比我們想像的更好啦，因為一個人想要接管，還要跟法院聲請一大堆的程序，來當臨時管理員，緩不濟急。" }, { "speaker": "吳光明", "speech": "所以原來條文不錯，其他的部分就是陳教授剛剛談到的，有擔保的狀況下還可以移轉登記，也就是剛剛提到的不脫離負擔。我覺得原來的條文比較好。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "林教授想到了嗎？" }, { "speaker": "林仁光", "speech": "我剛是想到二十二條的部分。二十二條這邊在談優先順序，其實優先順序類似《動產擔保交易法》。這個草案也是一樣，所有的登記、登錄，所有的規定，到最後就是看看誰有優先順序，施行部分才會定奪誰權利在先。" }, { "speaker": "林仁光", "speech": "特別是在第二項的地方提到，如果同時會有前項一到三款的擔保權，我們看前二十二條第一項的前三款，就是第一款不用登記、登錄、占有、控制、第二款要登記、登錄、第三款占有為公示方法。也就是用這三種方法同時存在在同一個標的上面，都有擔保權的情況下，他的優先順序條文寫的是「依其成立、登錄、登記或占有之先後定之。」我如果照這文字看起的話，好像是在說第一款的最優先，不曉得是不是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "是依時間先後。" }, { "speaker": "林仁光", "speech": "他還是先後，也就是這三款的時間先後？那也就是第一款的部分的話，根據說明內的例子，有民法的債權。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "第一款根本就沒有占有、登記、登錄、控制為公示方法。" }, { "speaker": "林仁光", "speech": "但是他還是可以有最優先的....." }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "它是物權的一種，優先次序就看成立時間。" }, { "speaker": "林仁光", "speech": "我的疑惑是說，第八條特別在強調擔保權的設定，不以登錄為必要，但是登錄的話，可以有對抗的效力。勢必在強調第八條，不管是用登錄還是佔有的部分來強化，他還是有一個比較高的效力，我們才會去強調第八條。那如果無須以登錄的部分，而我去登錄了，那我是不是會比他優先？也沒有，還是以優先順序嗎？" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "如果是二十二條第一款的擔保權，另外去辦理登錄，就看登錄時間。" }, { "speaker": "林仁光", "speech": "所以反而是畫蛇添足嘛。" }, { "speaker": "林仁光", "speech": "另外二十八條這邊講到的是「符合下列情形之一所設定之擔保權.....」我想知道的是PMSI要不要登錄？" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "說明上面有講，要。因為它也是擔保權之一。" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "第二項講說，優先次序要符合下列的情形，不是第一款的占有，就是第二款的登錄。為什麼要特別寫說第一款、第二款的擔保權，因為怕跟第一個浮動擔保權搞混，第一項其實裡面應該有三種擔保權（浮動及第一款、第二款的購置款優先權），所以第二項要有優先次序一定要做到第二項的條件。" }, { "speaker": "林仁光", "speech": "只是理解上有一點點困擾，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "購置款擔保權還是擔保權一種，所以當然要登錄。如果要取得超級優先效力的話，更要符合第二項規定，以免對原來擔保權人的權利造成過大影響。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "「次授權」，是不是指「再授權」的意思。因為在IP法裡面是「再授權」，不是用「次授權」。" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "你講的是「再授權」跟「次授權」是有不同的意思嗎？他是指不同的授權嗎？" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "就是權利人授權給相對人，相對人再授權出去，就是「再授權」。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "記得有說明？" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "所以二十六條您是希望我們是要從「次授權」改成「再授權」？" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "在第二十六條的說明四。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "我再請教一下。第二十六條條文不知道解讀有沒有錯，第二十六條「智慧財產被授權人依授權人之營業常規，取得非專屬授權者，其權利不因該智慧財產具有擔保權而受影響」。相反的如果他是取得專屬授權的話，也就是被授權人是屬於專屬被授權人的話，我的權利就會受到擔保權的影響對不對？" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "對，他就不能夠免除。如果專屬授權在那裏，就不能用營業常規去排除，因此而取得優先順序。如果那是專屬授權出去的話，他要帶原先的擔保權。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "如果我是專屬授權出去的，那麼我這專利權如果有設定擔保，那這個專屬被授權人就要承擔擔保權存在，是不是這個意思；如果是非專屬的就不用承受。" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "張懿云", "speech": "營業常規，通常認為專屬授權有點類似叫你賣掉他的地位。所以在這營業常規這件事情上，《指南建議》特別稱其「非專屬授權」。" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "簡單來說，如果非專屬受剝奪之智慧財產的利益很少，不必去帶原先的擔保權的影響不大。但專屬授權幾乎把權利都剝奪光了，所以應該先優先保護原來的擔保權人。專屬授權幾乎就是移轉，整個財產利益就被剝奪掉了。那原來擔保權人當然優先保護。那如果今天我只是給他用而已，事實上他整個智慧財產權利益還保留很大的價值，對於擔保權人的影響很小，所以才讓他能用營業常規免除。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "因為這是跟我們一般的概念不太相同，一直沒辦法轉過來。因為專利人專屬授權時，專屬被授權人，他取得的權益是非常大的，與一般的非專屬授權來比更大。所以定義上剛好相反，這邊是專屬被授權人，我必須承擔擔保權的不利益；非專屬授權就可以不受這個不利益，剛好跟我們的觀念相反。" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "可是你要從先擔保權人的角度來看，權利在先，效力在先。我擔保權本來就優先於後受讓的那個人。我們講說專屬授權就相當於受讓，如果你把我的財產利益都剝奪掉了，將來我要去執行就很難執行。可是非專屬授權分配出的利益，即其被剝奪掉的利益很小，原來的智財的資產價值還在，所以我還是可以就原來的智財去執行。就是說他還是在保障擔保權人，而不是在從專屬授權、非專屬授權他為什麼可以排除的角度去看。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "就是說你是從保障擔保權人角度來出發就對了。" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "因為他權利在先，他先設定的，要優先保障他。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "那如果專屬被授權人，再專屬授權出去也是一次嗎？他可以再授權出去一次嗎？" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "第二項處理了，第二項就看前手，前手空他就空，前手在他就在。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "謝謝！請各位再給我指教。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "好，如果此議題，沒有其他意見，就進入議題六，關於本草案之「六、罰則」及「七、附則」的部分。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "租賃公會，第四十九條的部分跟你們關係比較大。" }, { "speaker": "台北市租賃商業同業公會", "speech": "我們這邊覺得，融資租賃就是有一個公示登記的制度是比較好的。因為目前的狀況常常是，融資租賃的標的物，被擔保人自己再融了什麼.....，所以我們只能去法院打第三人異議之訴，這樣的登記對我們是很好，很感謝在座的老師。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "這樣就放心了。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "第四十九條，個人認為債權讓與也應該要放進去，因為債權讓與沒有公示方法，債權讓與是準物權行為，沒有公示方法，債權雙重讓與在實務上就發生爭議。可不可以也請各位發表高見。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "關於依習慣成立的擔保權，因為還沒找到動產讓與擔保的實務案例，所以沒講讓與擔保。" }, { "speaker": "吳光明", "speech": "104年才有啊。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "有嗎？是動產讓與擔保，不是不動產讓與擔保？" }, { "speaker": "吳光明", "speech": "他沒有特別寫動產或不動產，但在讓與擔保這一塊是有一個判決。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "可否提供案號？" }, { "speaker": "吳光明", "speech": "法源查一下就有了。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "標的物是什麼呢？是不動產還是動產？" }, { "speaker": "吳光明", "speech": "他沒有寫，他只是講讓與擔保這個制度。" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "再查一下就知道了。" }, { "speaker": "吳光明", "speech": "不動產的有另外一個判決。他認為我們現在的登記，雖然不能登記，但仍有原因關係，契約的原因就是讓與擔保，所以可以。我們劉教授在研究讓與擔保，後來我的博士論文引用他的書，也看到大陸的書也在引用我的書，也引用謝教授的物權，覺得很有興趣。不知道能不能提，我很好奇。第一，大陸的排名到底是多少啊，他們有比我們前面啊？因為大陸的物權就把浮動擔保放進去嘛。但是我們動產讓與擔保於52年立法、54年實施，我們行政機關全力配合，排名還這麼後面.....。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "個人猜測，大陸的排名一定比我們前面，因為他們不用法律直接用命令去做。人民銀行下的命令，全國就是照辦。" }, { "speaker": "吳光明", "speech": "第二個好奇是，因為這個問題很明顯就是英美法系的思考，那德國呢？德國也認為他的法律不會比英美法差。當然我看到德國他們是用讓與擔保的方法，用集合、集合物，或是倉庫的讓與擔保的方法。到最後他不立法，用判決解決他的問題，保持彈性。美國是習慣法的國家卻立法，德國是成文法國家卻用判決解決問題。所以我是覺得說這個社會很多東西、觀念都在改變，就像川普還是可以選上，一定有他的道理。" }, { "speaker": "陳榮傳", "speech": "我想是最後的發言，第一個先表示敬佩。第二，不知道銀行公會有沒有這方面的初估，如果我們可以開辦企業資產的融資，大概會創造多少金額的交易。這是我們需要的，需要更多的流動。接下來我覺得說，如果要這樣做的話，對銀行怎樣會比較簡單。我們現在如果在登錄的主管機關這個部分還不定，最後這會是一個問題。我會覺得，也許經濟部應該趕快把責任扛起來，為了企業融資的需求，為了登錄的簡便，我覺得這會是一個蠻大的點。也就是說因為龐大的企業資產，而我們卻沒有登錄的制度、沒有適當的法規，而讓這些資產閒置在那，沒有配合國家發展的需要，我覺得這是不及格的政府，我必須這麼說。" }, { "speaker": "陳榮傳", "speech": "當然我會覺得，我們幾乎是無所不包的企業的資產裡面，我們儘管這邊有企業資產擔保的規定，但是許多東西還是東扣西扣無法被納入進來，例如剛剛提到的不動產它的這種非常有限的抵押權的擔保之外，還有眾多的價值因為它是不動產就沒能夠納進來，這裡我會覺得不合理。這裡又會涉及到企業資產的評估，最後可能銀行的問題會在這個地方。所以如何讓銀行快速的進入這樣的領域，而且務實的看企業資產評價的機制可不可以拉起來。" }, { "speaker": "陳榮傳", "speech": "也因此我會覺得有一個東西值得在這裡討論，他可能都沒有被包含的，就是「違章建築」。也許我們都了解它的價值之所在，但因為它是不動產而在第十一條被排除。若非得要不動產排除，至少就只排除已登記的不動產。第十一條的地方，就只排除已登記的不動產。讓這些沒有登記，或是不能登記、不可能登記的不動產免於成為動產不包含、不動產又被排除，而它的價值，我們就完全不能夠做為利用。這是我的建議。" }, { "speaker": "陳榮傳", "speech": "對於謝老師所領導的團隊，蔡政委的過去的支持及努力，在這麼短的時間內可以做出這樣的草案出來，我在這表達我的敬意，也希望銀行公會能夠力推這樣的一個產品，也就是說如果這裡是有商機的，可能還是得從業界去表達這樣的需求，我們的企業需要更多的可能性，可是我們把企業的可能性壓縮得太死了，讓他們發展的可能性、融資的可能性，過度被壓抑，這對國家來說是不利的。我做這樣的感想，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "謝謝！會議預計五點結束，請大家盡快發表高見。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "四十七條第二項就是兩罰規定立法例嘛。剛好在立法院在審《洗錢防制法》的時候，就建議說後面要加一個但書，也就是說這個法人的負責人已經盡到盡力防止的行為就不在此限，那時候就有這樣的建議。" }, { "speaker": "經濟部智慧財產局", "speech": "意思就是說，這種兩罰規定的立法例有兩種，一種是沒有但書的，一種是有但書的。像著作權法就是走沒有但書的，《營業秘密法》則是有但書的。剛好立法院在審《洗錢防制法》，在立法院這邊建議有但書的，比較有彈性。就是說這個法人的負責人已經盡力防止這個行為的時候不在此限。" }, { "speaker": "陳重見", "speech": "引進類似盡善良管理人之注意義務就不算。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "請各位繼續發表意見。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "蔡政委要發表意見，其實，蔡政委是《企業資產擔保法》之母，直白的說，就是《企業資產擔保法》的媽媽！" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "看起來今天大家提供很多寶貴意見。由於我們這要上傳到vTaiwan討論。若vTaiwan沒有用過的話，請各位一定要請教國發會吳專委。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "其實最後最難的事情還不是法條，而是主管機關。因為我們這個只是要登錄，從合理的角度來看，應該是經濟部，因為經濟部已經做了公司登記了。如果公司登記的平台可以同時做《企業資產擔保法》的登記的話，大家查詢起來比較容易嘛。因為原來《動產擔保交易法》是在金管會主管，我就協調過非常多次，到底是金管會還是經濟部。但我自己個人認為不要這裡分一塊、那裏分一塊，我認為經濟部是比較合理的主管機關，我們是不是大家一起推動這件事情，我們需要一個主管機關。這件事情很重要希望大家一起推。" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "蔡律師的高見，請大家一起來關切。由於資料送達時間慢了一點，各位的閱讀時間實在不是很充分。所以若大家在會議中來不及發表意見，也非常歡迎會後提供書面意見，這點也特別拜託各位！" }, { "speaker": "謝在全", "speech": "如果各位沒有意見，會議就到此結束，非常感謝各位今天提供很多高見，受益無窮！非常謝謝！" } ]

[ { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "Hi everyone, thank you so much for coming to our livestream. I’m Darice Chang, I’m a writer with Ketagalan Media. I am here today with Ms. Audrey Tang, Taiwan’s Digital Minister. She is the youngest minister without portfolio, and she is also the first transgender minister. Thank you everyone for being with us today." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Thank you, very happy to be here." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "Tell us a little bit about how you grew up. As I understand you were sort of a...child savant." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure. I started computer programming when I was 8, because I was born with a heart defect (that was fixed when I was 12) but I couldn’t really do sports. So most of my interests are indoor interests. So when I was 8 I encountered this \"programming\" thing. I found a programming book without a computer, so I was programming on paper until my parents got me a computer. And then afterwards I was just very attracted to computer science, because that year (1989) was the year of the personal computer, when computers became democratized and affordable. Coincidentally it was also the year of press freedom in Taiwan. Both of my parents work in the press around the time, so they lived through the time when Taiwan really didn’t have press freedom; and enjoying this blossoming of press freedom and expression, our generation really is the first generation to enjoy that personal technology from personal computers and also the freedom of the press and the freedom of speech." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "Oh okay! Thank you so much. Tell me a little bit how you grew up to be interested in the intersection of democracy and technology. What unique educational experiences, or work experiences, have shaped your views?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure! so between 1989 which is freedom of the press, and 1996 which is the first presidential election, Taiwan’s democratization worked slowly but surely. The idea is that instead of a sudden revolution, instead of a sudden change like in many other countries in the Third Wave of democratization, the president at the time Lee Teng-hui orchestrated a very gradual transition to peaceful democracy. I think part of the reason why we have electronic technology and digital technology was that 1996 was also the year that Taiwan enjoyed the World Wide Web in a very accessible form at a very low-cost, so everybody can dial in to the websites of the presidential candidates and see what their platforms are, and so on. So I was actually helping out with a presidential campaign at the time as a way to participate in the democracy for the first through the intervention, if you will, of the web and \"Bulletin Board System\"(BBS). And that’s how I got interested in the interaction between the technology (especially the World Wide Web) and democracy, especially the presidential election." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "Can you explain a little bit how that ties into your views as a \"conservative anarchist?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Certainly! An anarchist is basically someone who believes that people work better if nobody forces anyone to do anything; if people work upon their own volition. I think the long years between 1989 and 1996 basically means that instead of jumping to a direct presidential election and jumping to a direct representation election, people had a lot of time using bottom-up methods. We were doing a lot of community involvement with people at the time, doing a lot of locally based deliberations at the time. So I would say that because of enabling digital technologies, that kind of direct democracy and deliberative democracy grew the same time as representative democracy in Taiwan. This is kind of unique, because in many other countries representative democracy has been around for hundred of years. The deliberative digital democracy only became possible after the invention of personall computers and the World Wide Web. For Taiwan it’s the same, they have the same level playing field. This is why this kind of bottom-up democracy grew with representational democracy. So people in Taiwan naturally believe there is a place for the civil society in the shaping of the political agenda. And this how I define the term \"conservative-leaning,\" meaning conserving what we think is important, like equal access, like human rights, like traditional values, and how they carry into the digital world, that needs to be conserved. Also the freedom of expression that defines the beginning of the internet needs to be conserved into the new century." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "So you would view the freedom of speech, et cetera, as things that are like traditional values, though these were things that we suppressed, for example, at the founding of the Republic of China." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly. I mean traditional values in the sense of traditional values of the internet, because when the internet was invented, it was also a very top-down organization with DARPA of the U.S. Department of Defense. But they quickly saw that its actual value lies in the cross interaction between academia, between the public sector, and also eventually with the private sector. So they opened up the control of the internet to a what we called multi-stakeholder model, which basically means anyone who uses internet gets a say on how the internet is being built. This is what I think is the defining characteristic of what we call \"internet governance,\" which is the idea that you don’t have to be a representative of anyone, and anyone can represent themselves in the internet’s making. So when I say traditional, I really mean within the 40 or 50 years of the internet’s tradition." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "What inspired you to come out of retirement and join the ministry?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Well, I think working as a kind of understudy minister, as a intern minister, for the previous minister Jaclyn Tsai (蔡玉玲) for almost two years now, was basically a collaborative method following the end of 2014. There is a new nation agenda about the cabinet at the time. The new premier at the time, Mao Chi-kuo (毛治國), said the government, the cabinet especially, needs to adopt crowdsourcing as its direction, meaning that traditionally things were all decided by the government, in the government. It’s for the people, but it’s not with the people. So he says \"okay, now we have work with the people, and include all the stakeholders in the early stage agenda setting.\" It is easy to say that, but nobody really knows how to do that, right? So people interested in internet governance were recruited or invited to join this new kind of crowdsource agenda setting, and that’s why I decide to collaborate with the cabinet at the time. But at the time I was really an adviser for the administration and training the public servants; now I’m still doing more or less the same thing but with different title." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "So do you think that they made that policy because of the Sunflower Movement, or they didn’t have to do deal with that at all?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Well, I think the Sunflower Movement showed that it’s possible, right? But then the end of year election showed that it’s desirable. It’s like people have a will to elect the people who respect this kind of bottom-up agenda setting. So of course the prime example is Mayor Dr. 柯文哲 in Taipei city, who explicitly set open government civil participation as this platform. But to lesser degree, also for the other mayors who got elected because they are supported by the occupation or joined the occupation themselves." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "Moving on to our next topic which is about government work. So what projects are you currently working on to increase public participation in government?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "My new role has open government as my main duty. And open government, in my view, includes three parts. One is transparency, making what everything that the government is doing as transparent as possible and make it so that everybody can view it as early as possible. And the other part is civil participation. Now that people have access to what we’re doing, I would invite everybody to contribute their facts and feelings and more ideas into the policy-making process. Finally, it’s accountability. People, after they propose these ideas, they would like to know what actual actions got taken because of their inputs. And again the government, once we publish everything, we also want to know what kind of people are interested, who are the really missing stakeholders that weren’t discovered in the previous processes, so all these things held each other kind of accountable in the sense that everybody knows what everybody’s promises that gets fulfilled." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So what I’ve been doing concretely is to make sure that, for example, all the regulations before this cabinet were announced maybe 7 to 14 days before its passing. 7 to 14 days is very difficult for people to have a good understanding and dialogue with policy makers. So most of the time they don’t say anything, or say a lot of things on the streets, right? So they didn’t say much through the official channels, because 7 or 14 days are really too short. So one of my work is to ensure that now there are 60 days for all regulations, but also within the 60 days the ministry has to make substantial response to the public comments that were collected during the 60 days. And after that, we are working on the transparency of the budget allocation, so that all the national plans, all the ministry’s plans, that use taxpayer’s money now must be disclosed, like how much percentage is completed every month or every quarter and how much did this align with the original proposal, and then we also invite everybody to comment on what exactly gets done during this budget plan and budget execution." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "At your panel on World Design Capital Taipei 2016 you mentioned the need for a tool to “collect more public opinions.” How do you moderate against rampant populism, problems such as “trial by public opinion,” or having the most fringe opinions become the loudest opinions?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We use a combination of strategies. One is that we used this tool called Polis (pol.is), which is a two-dimensional representation of everybody’s feelings on a particular topic. And the idea is that you go to this website, and it shows you one sentiment of the public policy where you can press \"Yes\" or \"No.\" As you press \"Yes\" or \"No\" your avatar (your Facebook profile or Twitter profile) moves in this space to where people who share very similar opinions with you and you can see in the cluster. So it even if 5,000 people get mobilized to vote exactly the same, there would just be one dot in this two-dimensional map. The map speak to the diversity of opinions. So what we’re saying is that we’re collecting how diverse, how differently, everybody views the same facts. And then we show it back to everybody, including the minority and majority, and then we say after a month time, we’re collecting everything above the threshold into our agenda. But the threshold is defined, as for example in the case of the private car dispatch system like Uber, currently we have a majority group with 60% and minority with 40%, so we say now the threshold is 80%---you have to propose any sentiment to convince 80% of a superior majority of the people in order to be included in the agenda of the next decision-making. And that was calculated by taking all of 60 and then half of 40, so no matter how much you mobilize like if you mobilize 80/20, the threshold will become 90. So the idea is that no matter what you still to convince the \"majority of the minority group.\" This basically prevents people from proposing radical opinions but rewards people with eclectic thoughts, so we got very high quality opinions at the end of the 3 week or 4 week period." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "So the system allows people in the majority to give feedback and try to convince people who don’t agree previously that their views are more persuasive." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes. Basically, by the end we have thousands of people participating with hundreds of ideas, so nobody could really read them all, right? So we ranked them by consensus, like if you manage to convince people who are similar to you, then the highest-ranked group opinion gets visibility, and then the cross group consensus gets most visibility. Contrast this with Facebook, in which the most divergent views often gets the most popularity just by the sheer number of shares and the sheer number of comments, whereas one like in the social media it encourage the most divisive, the most divergent view; in our space we encourage the most convergent view." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "Can you explain again how that the cross opinion works?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Basically, the idea is what we call in mathematics the principle of component analysis. The idea is that if you propose some very radical opinions, a lot of people would vote \"Yes\" but also a lot of people would vote \"No\", right? It’s divisive. People who vote similarly, like in Amazon for example, if you shop for a book or for a few books, they learns about your reading habits and recommends the books similar to the books you have read, right? So we do the same but just with the votes on each other’s sentiments, so after you voted for the initial nine questions, you can say maybe none of the these groups represent my true feelings. So it’s like an open questionnaire---it’s like typing, \"okay I think this is in doubt,\" and what you have wrote then becomes a subject for other people to vote on. People are naturally clustered around people who votes similarly, which is how we show your Facebook profile among your friends; and then you may also discovered that your Facebook friends or Twitter friends are actually on the polar opposite of the two-dimensional map; it’s just you never talk about this public policy issue over dinner. But this has two effects: one is that it lets people understand that these people aren’t enemies, they are not just faceless aliens who committed brutal things like we often see in the presidential campaign, right?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So these are your friends, it’s just on public policy you haven’t deliberated over dinner, and now you know. And then the next thing is that it shows it’s possible to converge. At the beginning of each interaction, often you see people clustering in four corners with very little overlap between them. But because the mechanism rewards the opinions that converge people’s views, it ranks to the top. So whereas people vote for the things with 70% consensus, then they would get competitive and think, \"OK! I can prove something that wins 80% consensus,\" and once somebody has 80% someone would want to think \"but I can do it better, I can do a 90% consensus point\" and so because we reward the consensus, people spend their time thinking of how to convince people who host different positions, so we then get much more nuanced views out of this system." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "Taiwanese bureaucracy is known to be conservative and very risk-averse. How would you move them to try to do something different?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I think the most important thing is that people are risk-averse because they really don’t know what will happen when they fail. This is the same as startups: if the cost of starting a company is very high, then it means the cost of failure is also very high. In Taiwan as well as in many other places when we talk about startup policy, the policy makers usually focus on how to lower the barriers of setting up a new company, so that if you set up 10 and fail 9 of 10, you don’t feel much of anything because of the cost of failing is low. But in Taiwan’s public servant system, the cost of failing is unpredictable because it all depends on how the popular media frames it and how the judicial process and finds them, and so on. Because of the unpredictability of risk, most public servants, when they’re making decisions, they overestimate the risk to the maximal amount, right? Like they assume the worst thing that will happen and then choose the minimum course of action that will avoid this maximum kind of risk. So it’s not about minimizing risk really, it’s defining risk. It’s about making sure that if this policy fails, then after another 60 days we can go back and do a revision; and if this policy is a bad idea we have 60 days for people to voice their opinions. So it’s not shameful if you have a draft that doesn’t take care of many stakeholders, because those stakeholders will show up and tell you: \"Hey! You missed our voices!\" and it’s okay to revise, whereas previously because of the old system that only allows 7 days or 14 days of opinion expressing, it has to be almost perfect before it could be announced to the public. Because nobody really has a voice on anything, and once it pass if you forgot some stakeholder, they would let you know on the street and that risk is very high, right? So by basically spreading the risk to the early stages of policy-making, we make the risk containable, definable and also share part of agenda setting power but also responsibility" }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "So basically you guys are putting all of the risk at the beginning when you are making the policy?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "At the moment it’s already at the end, so we’re trying to spread it gradually toward upstream at the beginning." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "Are there concrete programs they’re doing this too? Or it’s just like through po.lis and platforms like that?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There are two main platforms: there is the vTaiwan, the experimental platform that the g0v and other civil society communities are carrying. The agenda setting, the process even, it’s collaborative defined, with the civil society and with the top private sector. But for normal, everyday regulations we have the \"join\" platform, (https://join.gov.tw/) which not only allows the regulations to be debated every day, but also has petitions so that people can collect 5,000 countersignatures and propose that their voices to be included in the agenda of everyday rule-making. This is basically how we install an institutional mechanism for people’s voices to be systematically processed. Again, for the petition we also have 60 days before each ministry have to make a substantial response. So if you go to \"join.gov.tw\" you will see a lot of petitions that was made and was handled very well by the ministries and that has resulted in concrete regulation changes or law changes." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "How is this different from for example \"Change.org\" or more platforms like that people can propose petitions?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is the most similar to \"We The People\" at the White House, right? It was a presidential order that says all ministries has to respond. I think the average response time of \"We The People\" is around a hundred and twenty days. Within 4 months or so they will get a concrete response. But for things like Change.org it all depends on who takes the petition, right? It’s possible that people don’t take the petition, and the petition is just a way for people to make friends to meet similar minded people. But there is not a political mandatory empowerment that says the ministry must respond after 60 or after 120 days. So I think the biggest difference is on the political empowerment of this petition platform." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "Are we doing anything or are you doing anything to get the word out about the availability these platforms?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We’re doing it right now, in the media and on several other places we try. But I think the most important advertisement is really up to each ministry, because once one ministry like the Ministry of Health and Welfare which did really well with the first two petition cases, each petition case they handle well they create trust for those 5,000 people, and those 5,000 people, after they have another policy contribution, they’ll be like, \"okay, they handled our petition very well, so now I’m motivated to propose even more interesting or even more radical proposals.\" I think word of mouth is really the first thing we want to encourage. And the first thing that we want to increase the quality of those responses, and then for the platform participants to speak for the platform. And kind of on the flip side, if the ministry doesn’t handle the petition well, if they just follow the procedure but they really didn’t say much of anything, then 5,000 people may get a disillusioned and so no amount of advertisement will bring back their trust. So we think we ’ll just focusing on the quality of the responses." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "Is there for example collaborating with different media to get the word out about these platforms? Because I know a lot of people when they read the news they look very angry and very impassioned about whatever it is they read, and they want to do something. It seems like it’d be a good platform for that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I mean, at the end of every huge media cycle we always get some kind of petition. Not always 5,000 people strong, but some of them are 5,000 strong. A concrete example, there was one right after one typhoon because some cities have this half-day holiday, like this half-day that people used to have to go to work but in the afternoon because of the typhoon you have to go back home. It creates an issue of coordination. There are actually two petitions, each 5,000 strong, saying let’s do away with this half-day vacation, half-day holiday. So I think this is a very real time response for people to think about repercussions of what will happen if we introduce such a policy. It’s not just something that’s a reaction out of the media taken out of situation, but we invite people to think through as they were petitioning to write down what they think will take for this to happen." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "We are going to move on to the startup environment in Taiwan. \"Go start companies” seem to have become a fashionable trend in Taiwan. As someone who has worked with and founded startups before, what do you think of this trend?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I think it’s a nature part of Taiwan, and as I said already, actually I think the main work that the government should do is to make failing easier. Because if you spend a lot of time and capital to set up a company, a lot of efforts a lot of hoops to jump through, and then you fail, the failure will feel like something that is disappointing. But if it is trivial to set up a company, if it’s trivial to get some initial buy-in to your venture and so on, then it doesn’t really feel like a failure, it feels like some learning experience. And then people can proudly say, \"I failed 9 times and then I am still asking another round of angel money,\" because each of those startups failed in the very early stage; that it didn’t meet the market; that it is not a good fit, and so on. But there wasn’t much to lose in each of those cases, so then people wouldn’t need to spend a lot of time just just starting up, right? People can just develop their ideas develop their networks and so on. This is my main thought." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "There is much talk about how Taiwanese companies need to “go global.” What do you think about that? What’s stopping them from going global? How can our international audience be helpful?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Well, this is a very complicated topic that has a different answer to each industry sector, right? I’m not going to, because of time limits, to go to detail of that. But in the upcoming digital national plan, we try make infrastructure such that no matter what the industry that a startup or an established company looking for digital transformation is in, they will have the same basic infrastructure for them to, for example, have affordable bandwidth; to have an affordable way to communicate to the international audiences; to have affordable chance of getting capital from outside to recruit talent to Taiwan; or simply find all these protocols. So if you’re watching this and interested in joining a startup in Taiwan then the startup visa and all the implementation plans that follows startup visa will make it much easier for the foreign talents to join the startup in Taiwan and vice versa. And I think really once you are in Taiwan, Taiwan is a very attractive place and you will want to stay for the medicare and for the food." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "For these things we don’t have to work too hard or too much to interfere with the public sector, but for the initial point of contact that’s what we can focus on." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "So as a minister without portfolio do you actually have any sway to making this happen, for example, making the entrepreneur visa more accessible or easier?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Well, it is actually the purview of the National Development Committee which is headed by the commissioner but also minister with portfolio Dr. Chen Tien-Jy (陳添枝) and so that is his job, but I’m kind of an advisor on anything digital related, so if there’s something digital related I just advise on these matters." }, { "speaker": "Daniel Lin", "speech": "At our co-working spaces and maker spaces, we tend to attract a very international crowd. I am just wondering about your thoughts on the interaction between virtual communities and physical communities, since a lot of international visitors are digital nomads who can work anywhere they want, as you have done frequently. So I was wondering what your thoughts are between physical and virtual?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Taiwan actually have a pretty friendly teleworking regulation, which the vTaiwan public deliberation project have deliberated last year. So last year when I was still an advisor to the cabinet, we actually talked about exactly how teleworking is going to work in Taiwan for people. Not only that we’re pretty friendly in teleworking at the moment, we’re also working on the implementation as a set for the startup visa, and of all the implementation details in a way that attracts more foreign talents. We understand that a lot of this is actually not about regulation. Even if we have very advanced regulations, a lot of it is in the culture. It’s true that in Taiwanese culture, there is some celebration of diversity in terms of gender and so on; people generally see it is okay. But in terms of languages and in terms of cross-cultural pollination, well, we can still do better. This is why we have a lot of startup events like pitches and all these trade events to facilitate more people to listen to more ideas, not just English speaking but also internationally in any language really; and then we have a lot of cultural events from all sort of different cultures happening in Taiwan. And it is true that it’s mostly around the six major cities, but we’re trying to, as part of the digital nation plan, to have each of the six major cities play a regional development leading role so that they can also help the other town and cities nearby to internationalize and to basically put everything on the web, so that people can still follow from afar, so basically it’s to create a much more friendly environment for teleworkers and people who visit Taiwan, decided they like it, but they don’t spend all their days, every day, every year in Taiwan but still follow up on what’s happening in Taiwan." }, { "speaker": "Daniel Lin", "speech": "I found out that for a lot of these visitors, once they’re here they find Taiwan to be a very friendly place to live, very high value and they want to stay. And then since they’re living here, they want to contribute something to the society, but they find that actually there is a lot of confusion and frustration trying to either get settled here in terms of everyday living, or actually working with the government. I was wondering if the government has any new initiatives or do you have any opinions on how this can be facilitated?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I think the major change is not happening from the public sector, but is from the machine learning sector. As of last month the there is been a major breakthrough in the English Mandarin bi-directional translation quality. If you use any of the online automatic translators, there’s been a new technique where they train the machine learning algorithms so that now it actually gets it right most of the time instead of wrong most of the time, when you do machine learning of our regulation and stuff. I think this is very important, because in my office what we call public digital innovation space, our website, is English first. We only really have English websites, but we’re able to use automatic translation through machine learning to also present a Chinese version of our website, and this wouldn’t be possible even just two months ago. So a lot of machine automatic translation, both in your pocket in the form of-- you can scan a menu and it shows the correct English translation which happens offline, as well as in online translations, I think that’s really going to speed up the communication, so now you see a regulation that may affect you and you have 60 days to comment; empowered with this kind of automated translation we can actually do a lot. In my public dialogue board, I actually get input from Spanish from Madrid and so on, and they also use automatic translation and see that the quality much better nowadays, so that’s actual legible, and that we can engage in serious public policy discussions using our own native languages by the mediation of machine translation." }, { "speaker": "Daniel Lin", "speech": "I’m curious using machine learning do you think is possible to use it to influence policy in terms of having an AI kind of analyze everything and then gives options that the government can use?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Actually the po.lis system I described is a machine learning product. They use machine learning to learn how people cluster together and so on, but I think equally important is that we can’t really make the decisions that are value judgements through artificial intelligence; what they can do is play the role of neutral facilitator, a neutral moderator, or a just a tireless secretary to collect all these opinions. It is also important that its the source code, it’s algorithms, must be open sourced for everybody to inspect and then to modify, because otherwise we have another black box in the regulatory pipeline, and nobody wants that." }, { "speaker": "Daniel Lin", "speech": "Do you think the international community in Taiwan can help in advancing the government’s initiatives?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I’m sure that people here who live here and like the environment in Taiwan are already doing a lot of cultural cross polination of ideas and citizen diplomacy and things like that, so I would say just continuing on whatever they’re here doing and basically bring the same sense of passion and what you experience in Taiwan back home, and maybe attract more people to do more exchanges. Because although social medias and online communities are very good nowadays, it always start with very high bandwidth face to face conversations, which then you carry on part of it online; but it still has to happen with a very high bandwidth face to face meetup. How to engage in this way and make this way happen, how to organize meetups, that is the communities’ expertise and so just keep doing that." }, { "speaker": "Daniel Lin", "speech": "You mentioned before in the government there is a lot of risk assessment going on, and that tends to drive out a lot of creativity because they’re afraid of trying new things. And so how do you think it’s possible to attract more creative people into not just government business and even influence to the culture and so that the attitude would be changed?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Defining risk, which I already talked about, is one thing. And the other thing is to make it fun--I mean I’m officially a minister who work for fun, right? When the premier asked me why am I aiming to join the cabinet, is it out of duty or out of obligation, or out of social mission, or out of maximizing impact--you know the usual reasons; and like no, I’m just joining for fun. It is important because fun really is the kind of reinforcement that doesn’t get tired over time. If you are curious about something and you learn something every day, that curiosity grows and it doesn’t fade with time. If you are empowered with a sense of duty or obligation, once you do the same thing for ten years, it’s going to wear out, right? But if you are still learning after 10 years you’re just a better learner, right? You still have the same passion of learning, so the passion of learning is really what we’re trying to do both in my office where we have people from five different ministries and institutions, and working together to improve their ministry’s missions, but in a way that feels like this ministry is always saying it is doing something, but the other ministry is already doing 80% of the job; it’s just they never talk together. This kind of cross-pollination is by itself very enjoyable, so this kind of learning organizational experience is what I would encourage any large scale organizations, not just governments, to adopt." }, { "speaker": "Daniel Lin", "speech": "In terms of education, how are these digital policies gonna be influencing not just education within the government but overall population with the kids?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There are two things. Before I joined the cabinet I was a member of the \"K-12 Curriculum Committee\" and our main product is a curriculum guideline, which is going to be in effect by 2018. And in the 2018 curriculum, that is the first time that the national curriculum agenda put autonomous and communication and then the common good as our driving values, basically saying that the school are not there to teach things; school is there so the people can learn things. It gives the learning motivation back to the children and to the learners, and this is why we’re starting as early as high school to have people to use the university system to pick their own curriculum, to start computer science and data science education as early as high school, and then infuse all the education tools with digital tools. What we’re trying to get at the curriculum committee is basically saying, nobody can predict when a child enters the public school system at 7, what will the world be like when she or he gets out of the system at 18. Nobody knows, not even the teachers or professors know, so what is the most important thing is that during the 12 years, each learner know how exactly to learn things, and that is the core competence that we’re trying to get at. It’s the same not just for the \"K-12\" people, but for the general populations as well, so it is important to publish as much as possible, like our interview, which is a public education material under creative common license, under open license so that people like me who decided to drop out of school can still see it on the internet and engage or participate in learning." }, { "speaker": "Daniel Lin", "speech": "Going back to the international community; for example within education they are trying to put their kids into school but I found a lot of them are actually trying to home school now, because they’re not sure if the education system is about to be changed. And on top of that, a lot of them are having issues trying to get visas, besides even the ones get married locals they’re having issues with citizenship. So how is the government addressing this?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The issue of citizenship, permanent residence, and visas in general I think is very high on Minister Chen’s list. And so every week I hear what is being done, what’s left to be done, and so on. I’m sure that a lot of these things will be worked out pretty soon. Which is not my job that I care about very much, but what is my job is to communicate the facts that the government takes these issues very seriously, and is working on it. Also, as of a few years ago, actually home schooling is legal in Taiwan. We have three laws pertaining to experimental schools, so it’s either through the community, through some NGOs, or by yourself. Anybody can submit a home schooling plan, and it doesn’t have to be 100% home school; you can spend two or three days at school, and other days at home as long as it passes the review board of your local city, then you can design your own curriculum and apply that throughout the whole K to 12. So it’s really up to each learner to design their own curriculum now. This is news to many people because all those laws and regulations are new, so my job is to make sure that everybody knows that it is there now; make full use of it! And if you find something wrong, we have a system to correct ourselves to making a new revision of it." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "First question is from anonymous: In reply to your recent tweet to @realDonaldTrump about climate change, how do you view climate change and what are you working on, or would like to work on, to help?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Personally I care a lot about climate change; in the past 12 months I spent 4 or 5 of those in Paris. I cared deeply during the time the Paris Agreement on climate change was going on, but I was in my private capacity at the time as an independent expert. Now at the end of the year in early December I’m going to visit Paris again for the Open Government Partnership Summit, and I’m the part of the summits talks about how civic technology, how government technology, can help the civil society organizations to tackle the inevitable problem of climate change. I think after the hottest year (which was last year) and then this year, there really is no any dispute or any questions from the scientist that the earth is warming faster than we predicted, and that the risk defining as 10% of a catastrophe happening may be earlier than we anticipated. So civic technologies in terms of analysis of what energy patterns and so on are going to be instrumental part of it, because we have to act on the data now to tackle it. And as a data technologist, I do whatever I can to help to facilitate the interchange of data between all the different governments because they all collect and make decisions in a very different way, so the harmonization of data formats, not just for climate but for everything, and it is something I care very passionately about, and what I’m trying to do as a part of the open API and open data effort here in Taiwan, so that our data can be shared by international scientific community. Of course the international scientific community cares about a lot of things, but climate happens to be on top of everybody’s priority at this moment." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "Is there any particular data from Taiwan that you feel would be a special importance to the international community?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In Taiwan of course we have a lot of data on biodiversity. Taiwan has 10% or something of all the marine species, and in Taiwan we also have unique measuring points around all the offshore islands and also on the islands itself for regional climate and regional pollution levels. All these things we work very closely with civil society to publish in a way that is useful for our nearby countries and to the global international community. I’m not a climate scientist myself so I can not comment on specifics but I work on the infrastructure and the data formats so that if any of those scientists needs for example hosting or cloud infrastructure and so on then I’ll just do whatever I can to help." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "Are there any troubles you run into in this capacity?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No, so far I think Taiwan really has a very good cloud infrastructure and we are the top of open data index globally. After all, this means that our basic data is open so basically on top of this we are now trying for more international exchange to make sure that not only our data is opening, with the open formats in an open license, but it can be processed by common tools of the international community." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "Do you feel like Taiwan’s exclusion from the United Nations have hampered our efforts to contribute to be international society at all?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "As an anarchist, I respect the United Nations. I submitted a paper, I couldn’t be there, but it was presented by my co-author at Habitat 3, a conference about the right to the city and make sure the process is where the commons decide the city together and so on. I respect a lot of what the United Nations is doing, but then again just like any other organization, it has engagements that it can uphold, engagements that some of the parties may not uphold. So I also participate very heavily in what we called multi-stakeholder organizations, and prime example being the internet itself, and the internet governance forum and so on, that also decided something concerns everybody on the planet, but in the way that is not really representatives of each country talking about their country’s own matters, but also any stakeholder declaring their stakes and participate in this kind of forum. They were economic forums, as one such forum and there is many other forums like this, so my previous engagement before I join the cabinet, was mostly with these multi-stakeholder forums and I intent to continue that which is not hampered by Taiwan’s relationship with UN." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "Would you consider yourself as a feminist? According to you what is the status of women in Taiwan?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Well, we have a women president. I will not comment on other countries; the idea of feminism in Taiwan has gone through the same waves as other places, right? There is equal right, equal pay and equal treatment, and then it’s about not being defining by specific gender roles, and then it’s about a more proactive inter-sectional way that sees many minority groups were in the places women were a few decades ago. So that people who are activists in the feminism movement now contribute their expertise in the LGBT movement and other minority of movement, in Aborigines and new migrants and things like this. So basically the idea of the intersectionality means that the feminism activists understand what is like to be oppressed, what is it like to be suppressed, what is it like to be seen as an \"other\" and now they’re gradually mainstream they can use the same experience they learned to help people still in that position." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "So you would consider that yourself a feminist or?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I mean I learn from some of the great feminist like Judith Butler and so on. So I would say that I inherited part of this tradition. But I also inherited many other traditions." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "How involved are you in the transgender and LGBTQ politics in Taiwan? Have you been able to speak about these issue with the Executive Yuan or President Tsai?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I think President Tsai is unique that she includes LGBTQ and in fact marriage equality to be a very concrete part of her agenda or platform during the presidential campaign. And it was very brave for me, that’s one of the reason why I voted for her. That wasn’t the majority opinion for her party at the time, it was slightly moving toward majority in a tendency but not a supermajority, so she is in a sense setting agenda for her party by declaring this public presidential agenda. So it doesn’t really need my convincing, she is already there, exactly! I think the most I can do is basically be an example of what a transgender person can contribute to policy not because of my transgender status, but because of my training as a computer scientist, as a digital policy maker, and things like that--and that this is normal; this not something people should over-focus about, and being normal, I think it is the opposite of being an other. Most of the suppression and misunderstanding and bullying at everything stems from being an other, right? So just by \"de-othering\" the LGBTQ community I think it’s my existential contribution." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "Next question is \"What kind of music do you usually listen to?\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "My favorite music which is on a loop for the few months now is Hamilton the musical. But Hamilton the musical is not one specification, right? I mean it has hip pop in it but it also has a lot of other musical genres, even things like Beatles was in it. So I think I enjoying this blending of musical traditions and then creation out of existing traditions, like using hip rap to communicate policy is something that Lin did and nobody really did that in the major way before him so I enjoy this kind of creations." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "What is Taiwan’s plan for the future of work in an age of ever improving automated manufacturing and AI machine learning? Could Taiwan introduce a UBI? and we might need to explain to our audience what UBI is." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The UBI is basically unconditional basic income or universal basic income; there are many other expressions, but the idea is a basic income for all. UBI is a very complicated policy issue, people in all spectrum of the politics have propose UBI in one form or another. But the first this is not of any of our national agenda at the moment; we do not think that we have the capacity at this moment to support UBI for everybody. On the other hand, it is true that with aging population and with ever more automation everything, it is true that we have to disentangle the idea of work and the idea of a job." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It used to be that people’s work are their job, but more and more we’re seeing people doing very creative work but outside of their day job. We’re more and more seeing because of the opportunity of teleworking, people have a work-life balance that’s different from people before the advent of internet of teleworking. And we’re more and more seeing the machines are not only taking people’s jobs, but creating the jobs that weren’t there before. So all these are the trends we watch, and is part of the 8 year digital nation plan, we’re trying to make sure that no matter what underlying technology changes, the society itself values innovations, values creation, and values inclusion, defined as getting people were not the part of digital revolution into a position created by those automated tools and so on." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s not that we’re switching overnight to UBI, but creating climate in which UBI would be possible. Whether UBI is to be introduced I think it’s up to political climate of the day; it probably would require something like a referendum and we both know what the previous referendum of UBI went! So there is some time before we can get there. But it is important as part of education system, for example, that we don’t teach people to become machines, we don’t teach people skills that are going to be automated by machines, and we don’t teach children they have to fulfill a job in the society in the sense that all the jobs are being drastically changed sometimes overnight through machine learning. So people still work in a creative way that is to make art, but not this idea of people tying to a job forever. I think we need some disentanglement from our culture before we can move to any direction including UBI." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "What was your initial reaction to the US presidential election and how do you think it will affect your current work as Digital Minister?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I wasn’t very surprise actually. There was an interview in August in which I said, you know, I think there is a lot of similar dynamics of occupy movement and Trump’s campaign, in the sense that they were both master of social media and the way of using social media to mobilize outrage interaction. So I’m not very surprised. I think it will of course change part of my job in the sense of that now I have to work with the realization that the preparations of previous administration in the US is probably going to be changed--sometimes slightly, sometimes a lot, with the new administration, so we have to do our homework and this is just part of my job." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "How does the US administration affect your job as digital minister?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "To take a very concrete example, a lot of my policy work centers around preparation of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). Of course I’m not the negotiation minister that would be minister Deng (鄧振中), but as part of TPP there is a lot of intellectual property harmonization, like the Digital 2 Dozen. All these policies are digital policies that we’re trying to debate on our vTaiwan process, on neutrality and things like that. Now all these demands may or may not be the new administration’s agenda, so we may or may not want to deliberate some of them. Like neutrality, it makes sense, also domestically, so we may still want to deliberate it, some of them were demands from the US that may not be demands any more ..." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "Do you think the TPP will still go through or do you think it’s gone...?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s not really my job to predict this, we just react to the actual realities." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "Why did you think climate change was the most pertinent reason to invite president-elect Trump to come to Taiwan (as opposed to say, tech development or security with China)?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I think again I’m not the climate scientist and I just feel that in Taiwan the new administration really puts a lot of focus on the clean energy and on the new forms of energy that will not only be more efficient and eventually less expensive, but also much more sustainable. And sustainable development I think is something that international community very much want the US administration to still see as a priority, so that was my motivation." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "Do you type on Dvorak?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No, I use speech input most of the time, haha. I mean I type on QWERTY keyboard but nowadays it’s mostly speech input because recognition is good enough." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "What programs are you using for English and Chinese now?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s just whatever is built-in. So on this iPad it’s Siri recognition and my Android phone is you know Google speech recognition." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "What can we do about Taiwan’s critical cyber security weaknesses?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It is the part of the work of the cyber security office, Howard 簡, who is in charge of this, and this is a new unit after this administration set up specifically to deal with cyber security. Part of my role as digital minister in charge of open government is what I negotiated with the premier before I entered the office, is that anything I can see I can publish, of course after consulting the coders and after setting a time. But things like cyber security, they’re often confidential, often national security matters, right? So I set up this policy that I don’t even look at them, so no confidential or top secret information pass through my eyes, which is why also I can not give you an answer, because most of the cyber security really matters are classified, and I don’t even see classified information, but I do trust Howard 簡 and taking care of these matters." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "Was there a reason you decided on that policy like that you want to make everything transparent?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Because in our cloud system we’re building for all the Executive Yuan and all the administration, we have a flag in which we can just switch and make this discussion board public, right? So a lot of these are we want to feed into machine learning. We want to feed into the ways that analyze these materials and so on. So if you mix the secret information with unclassified information and then produce some aggregate results, then it is very questionable whether the aggregate result is classified or not. According to our current interpretation of the law, any system that contains input of classified information has by definition of output as classified information, which will jeopardize the whole effort, right? Which is why we only work with unclassified open data." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "Finally, someone has responded: \"I love your dictionary apps. Can you make their databases available for Pleco? (Primary Chinese dictionary app for foreigners)\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s done already." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "So you can download it on the internet?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, exactly! If you just google Pleco, then you get this extensional pack. I think now they are building at it into Pleco as one of the plugins." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "And my final question just for myself, so I know that some Taiwanese youth are also transgendered and they have trouble coming up to their parents and I was wondering how personally came out to your parents and what advice you would have for youth to deal with parents?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I mean I was like non-binary when I was already 12, so it’s not much as coming out as saying that you know I don’t really want to be a confined into a specific gender role, so it’s with a very philosophical way in which that I came up with my parents and saying that was I just dropped out of school, I get to decide how do I look like everyday how I behave everyday, and there is a lot of experiments I was going to do, and so this is within a large framework of experimentation with not only gender but also identity of language that I speak, of the cultures that I choose to acculturate myself into and so on. I would say that if you framed it as a experimentation as a journey, as a journey to self discovery, then it is easier because the parents would want their children to experience as much as possible within a safe way, and then it also helps to prove there is a safe space, there is circle of friends were tolerant or okay, who sees this as normal. And once you have this group of friends then your parents maybe much more willing let you experiment. And this is true not only for the identity or for sexual orientation, this is true for anything. I think starting a startup, for example, is actually much more dramatic when I was 14 or 15 other than gender or other than any other experiments, because people know most of the startups fail. And for a teenager it could be very traumatic to fail once as startup, so it took a lot of convincing. But after my parents see that I have a group of friends who are also into startups who don’t see failure as something shameful, they feel more comfortable in letting me out — in all the sense of the word." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "So your parents were also quite conservative?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They were expecting me, you know, to go all the way to get a PhD or something like that. I mean the world has changed around 1996 because of World Wide Web, and because of the way that people can access to knowledge, so it is the material fact; after demonstrating the fact my parents they are very reasonable people." }, { "speaker": "Darice Chang", "speech": "Awesome. Thank you so much!" } ]

[ { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Hi! When did you arrive to Taiwan?" }, { "speaker": "David LePage", "speech": "I got here yesterday morning at daybreak. So it was a great flight from Vancouver on EVA, because we leave at midnight and then you get here in the morning. You just have to skip a day." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, so you sleep well on the plane? Any jetlag?" }, { "speaker": "David LePage", "speech": "No, I’m very lucky. I travel a lot. And in Canada, we have four-and-a-half time zones, so you get used to it. So for me to go meet with someone in the federal government, is a three-hour time change. So you get used to traveling to go to meetings." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly. At the time, I’m here in the office only for six weeks, so I’m a new minister here. I’m still getting used to this whole setting. At the time of the announcement of my entering the Cabinet, I was actually in New Zealand and participating with some, it’s called the Open Source Open Society conference and with people from the Akina Foundation, actually." }, { "speaker": "David LePage", "speech": "Yes, right, who are hosting next year’s Social Enterprise World Forum." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Christchurch." }, { "speaker": "David LePage", "speech": "Yes, right, this year was Hong Kong, the Social Enterprise World Forum. Next year is New Zealand. Kind of sad this morning, they had another earthquake." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What I meant is that, before I knew that I would become a Cabinet minister, I’m already very interested in participating in such kind of activities and I’ve already actually registered for Christchurch myself so that Taiwan doesn’t have to pay for my ticket. [Laughter]" }, { "speaker": "David LePage", "speech": "I don’t know if you’re aware but this year, our keynote, one of our keynote at the World Forum was Mark Surman from Mozilla Foundation, because Mark and I have worked together for many years. And I’m actually on the board of directors at a small startup, that I think you would enjoy given your background, called Ethelo. It’s a decision-making thing, so Ethelo Democracy is all about this colleague creating an algorithm that allows group decision making." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Awesome, it’s called Othello?" }, { "speaker": "David LePage", "speech": "Ethelo. Ethelo.org, and from reading your background, it might be something you would be interested." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, I have very close connection with the Loomio team which is working in a similar space. I’m very interested in technologies that facilitate scalable listening." }, { "speaker": "David LePage", "speech": "So it’s kind of fascinating because it’s done as a “for-profit” on one side and a “non-profit” on the other side. And I’m very impressed with all of your social enterprises. We just came from the disabilities building—it’s quite so amazing. You really have to be at the dinner last night with KPMG, so to see the private sector engage the government. People say, oh, Taiwan is behind, as you know, but you really should be very proud of your social enterprises." }, { "speaker": "Karen Yu", "speech": "Yes, but we still have to learn from your experience a lot." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I’m more familiar with social enterprise work a lot because I travel to Paris all the time—five months out of the 12 this year. So I’m actually more versed in the social enterprise theme in Paris or in maybe Madrid or in Portugal than in Taiwan. So it’s after I entered the Cabinet that I knew I will be in charge of social enterprise affairs. [Laughter.] So people like Karen, like KPMG of course, are now my teachers. So like you, I’m learning what Taiwan has to offer." }, { "speaker": "David LePage", "speech": "It’s quite amazing because this morning, it was interesting to see the disabilities community focused on technology development and competing in the market place. And we asked them about their customer, and they said our customers don’t know who works here disabled people." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Actually I know of that BIM contracting house before, and I never really learned that it’s a disabilities social enterprise until I read on the online press about this. So I’m like, oh, this BIM company is like that." }, { "speaker": "David LePage", "speech": "So they were pretty amazing because oftentimes, as you know, social enterprises start by saying you should buy from us, we’re a social enterprise. They are like, no, the customer has no idea. But then when the customer does find out, it’s such an added value." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s such a great model. Right, so, anything I can help you?" }, { "speaker": "David LePage", "speech": "No, I think one of the things that we wanted to encourage, because we know you’re coming to the end of your three-year action plan, that if there’s anything we can do in the next phase, we would really be pleased to share about that. I think that what we can share with other governments is that kind of commitment. As Karen and I were just talking, oftentimes it’s an one-time grant, as opposed to having that multi-year engagement, which we use as a model with other governments. So we would really encourage that continuation of that multi-year partnership." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Definitely. Here in Taiwan, I think, the previous multi-year plan that was led by the minister before me that was really successful, and I’m really feeling blessed that all the important aspects has been covered really from scratch, because at the beginning of that plan there’s no such a recognition of social enterprises and the impact of its importance. But after that plan, by this year, the awareness is sufficient, so much so that we’re talking about changing the Company Act as part of a rewrite that says that maybe companies’ obligations is not just to the financial shareholders, but all the social stakeholders and all the impact must be considered as important as earning value." }, { "speaker": "David LePage", "speech": "One of the things that we have found is, how do we level the playing field? Because governments have been very, very encouraging, using things like tax credits and purchasing to generate incentive. Now we’re saying what happens if governments start to do the same thing with the social enterprise sector? And we start to look at how do we use purchasing and tax credits and services like we’ve done for the last 40 years in the private sector. So level the playing field, not necessarily special, but the same encouragement. Like in Canada, as the economy is where it is, the government has just made a commitment of $176 million in infrastructure to boost the economy. So now, we’re supporting a bill that allows the minister of procurement to add social value onto all our procurement purchasing, especially infrastructure. What it allows is the contractors, who are going to get the bid anyway, to capture some kind of social value, so they may not do it in their main contract, but how do they do it in their supply chain. So like in Scotland, there’s a major construction company that won a big bid to do an arena, and so well you should, you have to do something social. And they said, we’re a construction company, what do we do? So they actually worked with social enterprises to do the food service at the construction site. So now, that construction company says, hey, I could never hire those people with disabilities on the construction site, but now every job site he does, he does with the social enterprises so that he can create those jobs that has a social impact." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Well, that’s great." }, { "speaker": "David LePage", "speech": "And in Vancouver, when they wanted to expand the casino. So we went to the city and said look, you’re going to expand the casino, what’s the social benefit? Because we know it’s not necessarily a social benefit to have a casino. So the agreement was, the casino has to employ 10 percent of all its employees and do 10 percent of its purchasing from the inner city, not just during construction but ongoing, which means they’re getting very creative. So last week I stopped by a social enterprise that does chocolate and coffee around multiple barriers, and they’re getting a big contract from the casino and the hotel to do the chocolates. So it will mean more jobs, right away. So I think that’s the emerging thing that you may want to pay attention to is the use of existing purchasing. Because it’s not more money, some people say we don’t have more money in government, we don’t have to spend more, but how do we get a greater social value out of what we’re already spending? So we start to look at these contracts, and then we help to make it a competitive level playing field. Like in Scotland, they have learned to identify all the contracts that are coming up in the next three to five years so that the social enterprises actually have the opportunity to build capacity. We can’t do all of it but we can do part of it but then they know a contract is coming in three years and they sit down with someone like KPMG and the investment fund, and they say how do we scale up to be competitive? So it’s really, that’s why your government’s decision to do the multi-year action plan becomes so important. [Next sentences inaudible.]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right, we’re working on some infrastructures that makes this possible, I wouldn’t say overnight. The first is the transparency part because I’m also the Digital Minister in charge of open government. I’ve worked with the PCC, the procurement committee here, 工程會, that publishes, transparently, both the procurement that’s about to be bid—all the tenders—and all the tenders that’s won and how exactly they’re allocating their plans. And by early next year we’ll also publish another set of information that how it actually corresponds to the maybe monthly or every three-month’s quarterly reports from all the ministries as part of their plans. Because otherwise we don’t have the connection between what procurements are doing and our three-year plans. Usually each ministry keeps it originally to themselves of which procurement fulfills which plans, and then they of course have to report to the National Development Council, but it’s a kind of back-end internal system. What we’re trying to do is we are trying to publish all this in as transparently as possible on the internet forum. And then people can come here and then comment and say, okay I look at this three-year plan, it’s now in its second year, and this monthly reports says that it fulfils such and such a plan, but I think some social impact may be added to the next monthly or quarterly report." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "LaPage: So will that help? Because one of the issues we have is the silos of all the ministries, and the need to create intersecting lines out of parallel lines." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly, that’s what I’m doing, is mostly adding a new dimension to two-dimensional thinking where they may never overlap, but have a cloud in which that they may actually share all their information. And therefore the interested people, there’s a lot of communities like g0v, like Data for Social Good... these people they can take these numbers and data and then try to figure out which part of it is actually amenable to this kind of addendum that you’re mentioning." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "LaPage: But even for the public service to know what the other ministries are doing, it is important." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly, right, how they’re aligned." }, { "speaker": "David LePage", "speech": "Because we’ve… With the new government, with Mr. Trudeau’s government, he said work on social enterprises, so there is like, three different ministries working on a social enterprise strategy, and they didn’t know. I knew. But how do we get there?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We start with actually just sharing all our meetings. We had two meetings already after I entered the Cabinet with the ministries of economic affairs and with labor, and the idea is that for people who are presenting the meeting, we have a stenographer who types out everything everybody says and then sends it to not just the people in those ministries but also all the related ministries like of interior, of education and so on, and then everybody can provide addendum information as appendix to that meeting for the next meeting to look at. And after 10 days, we publish everything to the public, so the public also has some chance to comment." }, { "speaker": "David LePage", "speech": "Wow, that’s amazing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So at least for the social enterprise part, I think this is working really well. Like in the first meeting we actually found out both ministries independently declared November as Social Enterprise and Small and Middle Enterprise Month, but they never really coordinated. And it’s kind of fortunate that we were able to just coordinate that at the right point—like a week before November, but at least it happened." }, { "speaker": "David LePage", "speech": "And that’s where we find these concerns too, when the purchasing people say we can only purchase what someone tells us, and so how do we instruct the people over here to say, do that? And then your point, how do we monitor and measure the transparency of that. It’s a lot of money government spends." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right, I expect the first wave of comments may not actually be random internet users but ministries, like other ministries and even local and regional governments who will know that they now have a chance to realign their plans." }, { "speaker": "David LePage", "speech": "And to know what’s happening two or three years out because so often we find out after, or 30 days before. I don’t know if you’ve watched, but the Trudeau government is also doing huge amounts of consultation online—very impressive. At one point we’re like how many weeks? But when you think about it it’s the first time that they’re actually doing that and using them so it’s a start." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right, the internet of course has its good and bad, but for consultation I think you dramatically lower costs so people can look at all the information in the same place, and then go to face-to-face meetings, but with the face-to-face meetings recorded and then becoming the material of next meeting and so on. Before which, public hearings, even if it’s happening in maybe 10 different cities over Taiwan—those don’t really network. It doesn’t really scale because every region talks about the issues that that region needs, but there’s no national view or the view of the entire Asia-Pacific region." }, { "speaker": "David LePage", "speech": "Because that just happened with one of the ministries of economic development. They did a social innovation consultation all across the country, but I don’t know what happened in the other cities." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So for all the cases like the Company Act rewrite, of closely-held corporation that I mentioned, I told all the professors working on that to basically keep a recording, taping every single public meeting that they have, and then we work with, there’s a lot of machine speech recognition technology now to turn them into transcripts and so on, so that everybody can just carry on instead of doing very parallel things. So, one final point. We’re just passing at the end of the month what we call the Digital Nation plan, which is a plan of the next eight years. This plan I think it’s the first time, and that’s my main work actually, after entering this Cabinet, is to make sure… We call it DIGI+ and D.I.G.I stands for “development,” that’s the infrastructure; and then “innovation,” that’s the private sector; and “governance,” which is the public sector; and “inclusion,” which is the civil society. And this is I think the first time that the term inclusion with the civil society enters this kind of eight-year national plan. And in the plan we basically say, for inclusion, the public sector and the private sector have to admit that they really don’t have the best answer of what exactly what the disadvantaged people are saying. And instead of saying representing them, we should figure out a way so they can represent themselves. And so I think if Taiwan has a chance to host maybe SEWF sometime in the future, then I would like really to learn from all over the world, how exactly to make this kind of grassroots bottom-to-up consultation work." }, { "speaker": "David LePage", "speech": "And the advantage of that approach is SEWF is also trying to do more than just our three-day event. So how do we use that international network between the events." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right, exactly." }, { "speaker": "David LePage", "speech": "Because right now we have a three-day event, and then everybody goes back to their countries, and then next year we meet and there’s no… So trying to build on your model of ongoing conversation, this is not an event, it’s a process, how do we build the process? Because one of the things for us at SEWF is when we choose where we’ll be is really about the impact it’s going to have, not just… So we start where we started, the first one in 2008 in Scotland, then we said we should do every nation. That was our first objective, to cover every continent. So we got to every continent then we said, now what? And now we’re at the point of how do we use it, the event, as a catalyst, but how do we do more than the event? So I think we’re going to engage the communities. That’s exactly the kind of elevation the sector needs, is to have something that takes all these little pieces that are everywhere, and we don’t connect them very well." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "One concrete action I can do is write the Ākina Foundation and find out what kind of after-event, post-event, like online forums or other kind of continuation of next year’s SEWF they have in mind, and what kind of ICT technology or what kind of process innovations that I can personally help with as a participant." }, { "speaker": "David LePage", "speech": "But also to elevate the discussion at the event." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So that’s before and after." }, { "speaker": "David LePage", "speech": "That’s not like you coming up saying afterwards, but to engage in that discussion during the event." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So make it like the process that’s in common that we can all add in." }, { "speaker": "David LePage", "speech": "Right, so at that event, we say, ok what happened to Scotland on Tuesday? but if we have some discussion of how that becomes a platform to launch something like that, because then 2018 is Scotland and then after that we haven’t decided yet, so it would be great to move that to the online discussion." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, that would be great." }, { "speaker": "David LePage", "speech": "We would be really pleased to work with you on that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "And New Zealand has a very good civic-tech scene around Wellington and Auckland to actually support ICT infrastructures to make that happen. And I know a lot of people there who would be very willing to join such a cause. So I think I’ll just do this today and keep you posted on that." }, { "speaker": "David LePage", "speech": "That would be great, because that would change the whole presence of SEWF from an event to a process." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "And network. So as soon as I entered the Cabinet, I got this internet forum link from the World Economic Forum, which is the private sector part. And it’s very interesting between Dubai-Davos-Dubai-Davos, they have this what they call “TopLink,” an internet platform that links all the agendas together so that they make the most of the days that they meet together and I think it’s something we can learn from." }, { "speaker": "David LePage", "speech": "[Laughter] And steal from the private sector. [Laughter.] They’ve often taken from us!" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "[Laughter] Exactly!" }, { "speaker": "David LePage", "speech": "So I know you’re busy, but I wanted to thank you for your time. It was great." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Thank you, and it’s great. Thank you too." }, { "speaker": "David LePage", "speech": "Okay, cheers! Thank you." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Take care." } ]

[ { "speaker": "徐國勇", "speech": "大家對他有一些好奇，不過經過這一個多月，好奇心越來越低了，但是你們很多人說唐鳳智商180、身高180，其實他不是只有IQ，他EQ也180，大家有什麼問題就跟唐鳳作一些交流，尤其大家知道說她破了跟多的紀錄，這一些紀錄當然有一些是我們想做也做不到的紀錄，比如三十五歲當政務委員，這個是很了不起的一件事，表示她的能力很好。" }, { "speaker": "徐國勇", "speech": "事實上我進到行政院才認識唐鳳，她在開院會的時候就坐我隔壁，每一次開會她坐我對面，那個桌子沒有很大，每次開會坐我隔壁，所以慢慢在一個多月以來對唐鳳有一些瞭解。我可以稱呼她是年輕人，她真的很優秀，跟你們一樣，希望藉由這一個機會大家多多瞭解，我就不再多話，換你講了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實很高興不是透過螢幕見到大家（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛好已經一個半月來，從人事令發布那時我在國外，一直到我回來就任，這中間又多一個月，所以這兩個半月的時間裡，其實我大部分的時間，是沒有辦法跟各位這樣子面對面見面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "接下來我月底11/25日要出國兩個禮拜。本來的想法很簡單，剛好有個空檔，之前是我最忙的這一段時間，接下來又要出國，今天至少跟大家有一個面對面交流的機會。大家想要問什麼就問什麼。" }, { "speaker": "徐國勇", "speech": "各位媒體朋友，大家不用客氣，來這裡輕鬆，有什麼問題想要拷問我或者是拷問唐鳳都歡迎。大家請，我們外面也有點心，大家不必客氣，我們可以一邊用、一邊聊天，比較輕鬆一點。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "之前蔡政委在的時候有請你主持Uber跟Airbnb的座談，我們現在看到Uber似乎沒有任何退讓的跡象，您覺得共享經濟在臺灣應該怎麼樣來處理會是合情、合理、合法？" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "第二，現在跨境數位貿易，也就是其實新型態的貿易形式，可以鑽很多的漏洞，比如德國的設計，到臺灣的3D Printer印出來，等於沒有透過船運、空運的過程，其實財政部是課不到稅的，像這樣的情況，將來要如何因應？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "兩個問題：一個是Uber跟Airbnb；第二個問題是關於新型態的，可以把它叫做傳輸，這個傳輸的過程如何跟稅法加以銜接。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有人要追問嗎？" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "我想問一下唐政委，關於Uber我們目前看到政府處理態度是屬於用打壓的方式，甚至還不惜說要讓他們的App下架，是一個好像用強勢的態度，而不是用一個溝通的方式去談，但是畢竟我們不能否認Uber跟Airbnb，這些在整個全球都非常興盛大家搭車或者是訂房的一個平台，我們應該要怎麼做才能達到政府與人民都可以雙贏的局面？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實Uber是在去年8月我幫忙主持交流的時候，當場不只Uber有來，台北計程車同業公會的理事長，包含臺灣大車隊，也就是各個方向的利益關係人都在那一場裡面有來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "Uber的謝樹藝律師其實在那一場裡，並沒有我們今天看到好像不肯退讓或之類的，當時其實是有說願意輔導他們的司機都去取得職業駕駛執照，所有這一些東西其實當時在線上，每一句話都有紀錄的，各位可以去看紀錄就好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我們也發現，因為這一件事其實是交通部督導，稅是在財政部，所以Uber在全球對每一個國家想要他們立一個跟Uber最像的法令，我們自己在當時因為已經調成了包含Uber乘客、司機及計程車乘客、司機等等，我們有一個很高程度的共識—大概有95％的共識—希望政府來立一個電召計程車的法案，然後裡面應該要有像Uber一樣彼此打五分，也就是乘客跟司機互評的機制。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以我的理解，後來交通部以「多元化計程車方案」這個方向規劃，這個細節其實我並沒有參與，因為有一段時間我並沒有參與這方面的工作，但是後來那個細節出來，其實跟我們當時談論的共識基本上是一樣的，所以按照那樣的方案，Uber願意登記成為運輸服務業的話，只要它願意派的那一些車都是合法的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為Uber一開始來臺灣的時候，是用合法的R牌租賃車來營運的，但後來有違法的事實出現，我們現在是在說違法的部分裡面，某些部分我們說是一件值得鼓勵的事，但是還是應該要滿足這一些條件。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "現在的Uber最主要是希望業餘的人也可以來開營利車輛的事，他們還不願意鬆口。實際上是有在談判的，但是並不是管談判的人，所以上次Uber的David Plouffe來的時候，我們不設定議題去討論，其實我們也討論了關於氣候變遷、關於怎麼樣解決溫室氣體的話題也在討論裡面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我現在並不負責制定Uber或者是談判Uber的政策。去年當時是聽過大家的聲音而且有在討論，並不是加重罰責這樣而已，有完整的研究。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個部分，有關於網路跨境，這個部分因為今天時間的關係，我就不講很多細節，因為這個非常非常細。在之前的臺灣電子商務協會（TiEA）來拜訪我的時候，在「archive.tw」上面有逐字稿，TiEA的朋友就已經提出同一個問題，然後後面有滿詳細的討論，包含跨境的時候化整為零的2,999元課稅的事，以及到底有什麼手段讓公司願意來台登記並且繳稅等等，我覺得這個逐字稿的講法比較清楚。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大致的講法是，我們承認政府對這一件事到底要怎麼監管、到底要如何治理，我們還在做一些實驗，以財政部的角度來看，其實有些是會有效的，我們發現大家願意這樣被納管，有一些也許實際上課責的方式並不一定那麼有效率，這時我們就滾動式檢討再回來討論——再講一次，這個也不是督導，我有一點像是顧問的角色，任何人對於數位或者是這一方面判斷需要我意見的時候，我很願意列席、開會並給意見，但是最後做決定並不是我，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "政委我想請問一下，你搭過Uber嗎？或者你有搭過小黃嗎？兩個這麼拉距好像是民眾自己使用的滿意度來看，好像Uber是比較好。我想問一下，如果有搭過的話，你自己感覺兩者的比較是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實Uber在合法那個階段，也就是UberX還沒有推出的時候，我常搭UberBlack。第一個它是合法的，第二個它收費比計程車稍微貴一點，但是因為其實那一些車子大部分是桃園到台北的車，所以他們就是在等客人的中間去接送，我並沒有覺得這樣子有任何問題，說真的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實跟我比較熟的這一些早期R牌的UberBlack的司機朋友們，在UberX推出的時候，其實他們也並不是沒有話講的，他們也覺得這讓品牌的品質，事實上也受到了一些影響。所以，後來UberX的話，我的經驗比較少、比較缺乏，當然也有聽到一些跟計程車相比，其實是互有優劣，並不一定是UberX比較好。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "我想請教一下，最近同志議題滿夯的，我們也知道你在政院的性別是「無」，我們想知道你的立場？因為現在同志的反同議題吵滿兇的，甚至明天還要去包圍立法院，你上次也有提到你自己個人也有一個滿長時段的伴侶，我想瞭解一下對於同志議題，您自己的立場是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我有看到臉書上轉發的「明天是最黑暗的一天」或者是「明天是最彩虹的一天」，雙方都有，做了很多的圖表。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我自己的想法其實很簡單，其實我有一個「重新創造民主」的這一個逐字稿裡面，我一開始就有亮票，我因為有一些價值，因為蔡英文也有這一些價值，所以當時就是投給她。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在這一些價值裡面排第一個就是性別平權的態度，所以我的立場早就已經非常明顯，這個立場其實並沒有改變，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "會不會希望在臺灣可以推上同性婚姻的部分？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實關於民法972條，之前伴侶盟提過三個並行的法案，那三個共識度不完全一樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們也知道，即使是同樣在推動的這些朋友們，也有各自覺得哪一個應該優先通過等等的想法。這後面的脈絡非常久，即使是同志的運動者，腦中的次序也不一定一樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我覺得這件事，不完全是各方的倡議者、運動者說了算的，最後還是要回到立法院，按照立法委員的正當程序去討論，討論之後通過。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在這個部分，既然已經進入立法程序，我覺得我就是尊重立法委員的排案及討論的程序，我想我自己不方便再說什麼。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "想要請問之前政院有請你做電競這方面的議題，最近有什麼新的進度、他們到底要怎麼發展及歸誰管？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實逐字稿裡面也是有發布。現在大家問我第一句話都是回答這個。逐字稿幫大家摘要一下好了（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "從教育部的角度來看，電競能不能算是是體育，也就是包含教育的一環？或者它是運動？或者它是一門技藝？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "認定成為技藝是比較容易的，因為它真的是一門技藝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "它是不是一個運動？目前教育部的想法是說，如果要成立單項運動協會，應該要先加入國際單項運動總會聯合會，他們的立場其實是滿穩定的，也就是他們在國際上加入，我們這邊就肯認。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "體育這邊，他們覺得不是那麼容易接受的原因是，其實大家覺得這比較是一個智育，而不是體育。我們在講五育教學的時候，硬把智育的東西歸到體育，好像哪裡怪怪的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，後來他們覺得這一件事你可以說它現在是一門技藝，現在如果有學校好比要開設這一門技藝的專班，我們知道在107課綱出來之後，高中會變成像大學一樣是選修的制度，在選修裡面，每一個學校還可以開設校定必修。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一門學校覺得這個很重要，我們說這個是它的特色學校，所以從技術高中的角度來看，也許就會有技術高中說電競是我們的特色—事實上接下來就有一所了—然後我們就開設電競的特色課程，甚至拿這個技藝的特色課程去教育部申請補助，教育部國教署都說這一些完全是OK的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果要把它當作是技藝來培養的話，我們就可以洗刷這一個污名化的狀況，就不是玩玩具，而是在培養技藝的人才，未來可能可以從事運動表演業等等，所以其實教育部的態度，我覺得有好很多。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在兵役方面，我在逐字稿裡面講的是，因為目前下圍棋的朋友是由文化部來負責作替代役，也就是文化替代役推廣文化，如果你有看逐字稿的話，文化部的說法是，因為圍棋是傳統的東亞文化圈的儒家文化之一，所以是值得推廣的文化。而電競是數位文化，是不是能用相同的方式培養？我們還要討論，這個我們明天就會開會討論，大概是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "有關於金融科技，現在金融業都爭相發展FinTech，我覺得這是屬於電子支付的方式。請問臺灣金融業如果大家爭相要用小額支付或者是電子支付，在您認為金融業大家分散的話，是不是會造成一些金融從業人員的失業問題？我們跟大陸支付寶在弄這種東西，對我們臺灣的金融產業是正向的發展嗎？您的看法如何？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個問題不適合由我回答，這個應該是財經政策的問題，應該是問金管會才對。但是前面這一個東西，因為跟數位有關係，所以我還是回答一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "您剛剛提到金融業想要做FinTech，其實科技業也想做FinTech，因為FinTech就是兩個行業的互相結合。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在這樣的結合中間，當然會因為自動化的關係，所以有某些可能臨櫃作業，好比像現在在做無人化銀行之類的，本來的臨櫃作業可能可以由機器來做。從工業革命到現在，其實本來這一種事情就是一直在發生，新的技術發生了，使得某些東西能夠自動化的同時，它讓一些工作消失，但也創造了很多新的工作，這一些工作其實如果沒有機器輔助是沒有辦法做的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好比像我們說雷射治療近視好了，如果沒有雷射治近視的機器，裡面有非常多的機器判斷的部分，如果只是用人拿手術刀，那個手術是沒有辦法完成的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "要講的是，本來就是在機器學習的年代裡面，有的工作會消失、有的工作會建立起來，這一件事我們關心的是它有沒有足夠的涵容性、有沒有足夠的普惠？意思是說，本來在做這一些事的人，有沒有讓他們不會感覺到壓力的管道，或者有一個安全網去學這一邊的工作，甚至在這邊工作裡面還可以用到本來工作的經驗及知識等等，這個是我關心的東西，接下來會有一個「數位國家創新經濟」的方案，這個方案會把這個部分講得比較清楚，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "您當初要來接任政委的時候，曾經有說過希望扮演類似橋梁，加強政府部門對公共社群的一些溝通。但您怎麼看最近政府在處理一些政策宣傳，包括一例一休到現在公聽會都還有一些問題，到最近這幾天日本食品要輸臺的公聽會，您怎麼看現在政府在處理這一些事的做法及節奏，您覺得是合理或者有需要再加強的部分嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個好像是發言人的工作（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "徐國勇", "speech": "你剛剛提到的週休二日，一開始可能用詞一例一休就產生了一些誤會了，所以這一部分的確是政府以後在某一些地方一開始的定性要讓大家瞭解，「一例一休」的「例」出來的時候，引發社會的誤會，例如，有勞工要求比照公務員有二例的休假，但事實上，公務員只有二休，周休二日可被要求上班。可是勞工的「例」是不可以加班的，除非碰到天災地變。那兩個內容有重疊，但是也有不一樣的，因為有重疊了，大家只看到重疊的部分，就想到跟我一樣可以休息，而沒有看到加班的部分，大家說：「他只有兩『例』，我只有一『例』，為什麼會這樣子？」所以整個問題就出來了。" }, { "speaker": "徐國勇", "speech": "我們再說其實每一個政策的定性相當重要，像福島食品能不能進來，其實這不必講當然不能進來，因為福島我們本來就有限制，現在是福島以外的，福島的意義就擴大了，因此這裡面在邏輯上，可能以後政府要思慮這一些問題，您提出的問題我們就要考慮。比如：我請你吃飯，如果你來吃飯，我只有給你一碗白飯，你會覺得我是請你吃飯嗎？可是你如果去買一碗飯，那個飯就是飯，所以那個飯會有擴張的意義，我請你吃飯可能是吃牛排、可能是吃牛肉麵，不一定是吃飯，所以那個其實是代表的意義跟本人字面的意義產生這個誤差，而這一個誤差在宣傳上的確是個問題，因此這部分在邏輯上，以後我們會在這部分的宣傳裡面，讓民眾瞭解溝通的過程中，希望能夠再加強，這部分我也在思慮如何處理。" }, { "speaker": "徐國勇", "speech": "另外一個部分是速度，速度如果不夠快，當一些錯誤的東西進來後再改過來就會比較麻煩，我們希望在一個速度裡面，有積極面與消極面，媒體朋友給我很好的意見，所以明天我們的院會就會向媒體朋友報告，這個是昨天建議的，我立即會把電子檔給大家。明天開始陳述院會前，我就會把電子檔先給大家，我想各位媒體朋友拿到的電子檔很快，譬如工商時報、經濟時報要的比較偏向經濟，因為是專業的，有的是綜合的報紙，每一個人要的不一樣，但是我把這個東西給你們，你們就可以自己去取捨，針對你們要溝通的觀眾群（閱聽大眾），你就自己選擇你們要的東西，這個部分我會改進，我希望我來到這裡能夠做得越快越好，這部分我也會改進，這樣子大家應該還可以滿意吧？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我同意速度很重要。我上任後第一場錄影演講是在錄影時放，放了之後當場記者其實就要發稿，所以我覺得演講沒有講到最後，那個稿子已經上去了，稿子跟我講的字義有一些落差，後來我檢討了一下是我的不好，既然有錄影的話，而且事實上我也有做逐字稿，我其實應該要在各位記者朋友到場前，就把電子稿貼出來，這樣才不會發即時的時候，還必須要聽打狀況。所以，我其實也想要減低大家的工作負擔，才會在前一天或者是當天早上，我不管做什麼演講，現在會把逐字稿貼到FB上，已經成為一個習慣了，從那之後希望可以減低大家的負擔。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外，剛剛講到定性，我自己的感覺就非常強，因為「亞洲‧矽谷」，這一個案子，當初因為這樣子，所以林全院長找我來開會，那時我是第一次見到林全院長。我的一些新創圈或者是科技圈的朋友們，從競選時聽到這四個字的時候，就已經把「亞洲矽谷」的「亞洲」理解成一個形容詞。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "理解形容詞的下一個反應就是「山寨矽谷，這一定會失敗」等等，所以就花了非常非常多的時間寫長篇的文章。但是真的進去看簡報跟政策的話，其實意思是跟新南向一樣，也就是鏈結亞洲跟連結矽谷，但是重點是說大家把亞洲看成形容詞，所以後面的溝通沒有辦法做。當然後來就加了一個「‧」，變成「亞洲連結矽谷」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "除了定性之外，當然溝通的期間也是很重要的。之前每個法規要通過之前，可能只有十四天的時間討論或者是提出意見，十四天其實很短，因為很多人一發現已經是最後的六、七天了，其實也不會有多人對話的時間。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我進來時，法規已經改成了必須六十天前公告。我想要落實的，不只是打電話給承辦或者是寫mail給承辦，明年年初會放在「眾開講」的平台上，所有的法規都會放上去，是讓大家公開討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "從部會的角度來看，利益關係人有六十天去陳述利益關係。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "從各位的角度來看，就是每天會有五個與十個題目預先做調查報導。因為我們知道做調查報導，其實七天或者是十四天是絕對不夠的，光是要把利益關係人各自遇到一遍，其實就兩個禮拜過去了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以前沒有這樣子的時間，其實真的很容易變成新聞標題說什麼就是什麼的狀況。我希望未來所有的法規都有六十天的時間，比較多深度的報導可以做得出來，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "我想再請教一下，你是數位政委會不會從行政院內部開始做改變？像張景森政委也有在用臉書，其實還有很多政務委員還不知道這一些社群或者是臉書這一種東西，根本不再使用，會不會從內部先開始改變？" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "第二，因為我有查過您很多資料，上網您說除了用臉書、Wiselike、Instagram、Twitter，您到底用過多少社群工具？" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "第三，回到剛剛您自己講的同性問題這一件事，會不會希望在臺灣得到一個有實也有名的名份？而不是只有伴侶，但是卻沒有名份？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "後面那一個。我自己其實本來就已經訂一個有公證的民事契約，這個其實是很麻煩，但是做得到的事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也就是說，不管民法裡面怎麼講，你覺得怎麼樣是一個穩定的關係寫下來，然後請公證人去公證，本來就形成民事契約，這個就是名份，那一個名份就是民事契約的當事人，這個不是大問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "即使民法第972條所有修正都通過了，我也不一定會使用它規範的所有權益、義務和限制，因為本來就有自己約定的一份了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "中間那一個問題，是我到底用多少的社群軟體，其實我在行政院團隊前，我一直在矽谷做社群軟體的開發，已經做了八年了，一開始是全職，後來是顧問的工作。這個社群軟體叫做「Socialtext」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當初2001年成立這一家公司的時候，我很多朋友在裡面，他們的目的就是要把維基百科、FB、Twitter這一些東西導入到五百大企業內部使用，事實上五百大企業裡面有相當多是我以前公司的客戶。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們做的事情是，因為對大公司—尤其是橫向溝通比較有問題的大公司—他們很需要一個不是架在外面的東西，如果他們分別上臉書、Twitter等，那個資料是散落的，然後等到重要的人辭職了，他的帳號就跟著他不見了，所以後來的人沒有辦法透過他之前累積的東西去學習、傳遞知識。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，當時在推廣的是，我們在內部架相當於臉書、相當於Twitter，所有這一些東西，然後把它變成工作流程的一部分，這樣的話，任何人走了、新人進來的時候就可以稍微捲動一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果各位有在用Wiselike的話，大概應該可以瞭解到這一些東西的運作方式，所以我把完全同樣的精神，其實回到你第一個問題，進到行政院之後，我在國發會行政院及所屬委員會雲端資料中心，架了這樣子內部的社群軟體，所以我們自己辦公室的朋友都是在上面做共筆及每天管理，都放在有點類似內部的FB上面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們並不是強推，我們絕對不會由上而下去推，但是任何跟我們開會的人，都會收到他們會議紀錄的逐字稿，他們有十天的時間來上共筆的平台來修，修完之後我們就會公布出去。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以有點像感染性的：只要跟我來開過會的人，就會自動獲得一個帳號，所以目前其實包含地方政府、各級政府單位都會問說：「是不是不用自己架了，是不是可以用你們架的站就好了？」其實我們是說任何人有「gov.tw」結尾的帳號，也不一定是哪一級的帳戶，都可以來使用我們在架的內部社群網路，目前推行到這樣。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "會不會哪一些地方政府或者有一些人不會用？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實最一開始共筆就跟Google Docs一樣，Google Docs其實跟Word一樣，不會用Word的公務員可能比較少。我的意思是說也許還要教，但是不用從如何用滑鼠教起。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "共筆編輯文件這一件事基本上是不用教的，因為就是有一個打字框，跟Word唯一的差別是現在有好幾個游標，可以看到別人的臉，在旁邊跟你打字，就跟Google Docs一樣，這個並不需要你操作上的任何修改，還是用跟Word一樣的方式，只是不用按存檔了，因為你在打每一個字，隨時都在存檔。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以其實，除了把存檔的反射動作拿開，其他都不太需要教，特別講共筆這一件事，其實沒有什麼學習成本的。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "我們知道Google跟FB在臺灣的廣告營收據說是佔總體的七、八成，這樣的趨勢一直下去的話，可能包括對媒體在內會有很大的衝擊或造成失業，政府是不是其實很難介入？或者應該調查這是否涉及到市場壟斷的問題？" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "第二，我們看臺灣軟體產業發展不太起來，造成臺灣資訊軟體人才出入很多最後還是進到代工廠、電子業裡，不知道這與過去政府政策長期以來都是以硬體製造思考所造成的後果嗎？將來政委進來之後，是不是可以協調一些新的政策或者是法規調整來獎勵資訊軟體，使其更好的發展？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "再take一個問題好嗎？我要想一下你的問題。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "我知道「數位國家創新經濟方案」最近要提出來了，這一個創新方案跟之前「亞洲‧矽谷」的創新方案有什麼不一樣？或者這一個方案是著重在開放政府這一塊？這個東西是另外一個科研計畫或者只是一個開放平台？" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "您作為一個網路社群領導人來說，您個人對民主的體認是怎麼樣？社群軟體的興起對於全球民主來說，到底是有進一步達成所謂solidarity，或者讓整個社會分化更嚴重？您既然已經進入政府體制，要怎麼透過社群軟體或社群網路去促進社會的和諧？或者是有些對話在網路上是根本沒有辦法做到的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實這兩個問題可以併在一起回答。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我先講一下網路的特質好了，網路的特質是冪次定律（power law）。什麼是「冪次定律」？可能有10％的營運商，像剛剛提到的Google或者是FB，會把大家90％的時間佔有進去，但是其實在power law的尾端，90％的營運商，事實上10％的人是分散在非常非常多的分眾裡面，我們從網路社會的角度來看，這兩個是同時存在，既不會因為這10％太強，導致90％的其他小眾或者是分眾的東西難以存在或者是無法興起，反過來講也不會因為這一些分眾的存在，所以讓這一些大的連接點一下子喪失主導地位。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "之前MySpace被Facebook整個群眾取代時，也並不是好幾個公司組成聯盟之類的，跟我們想像中地理上的聯盟跟結盟是完全不一樣的概念。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "雖然在網路社會學上，我們畫這一些圖表是非常非常容易的事，但是事實上對大家來講，這個確實是造成一個困難，少數幾個大平台決定了大部分人對網路的想像。其實網路是非常非常大的，你送email也是網路，它其實是非常大宗的網路使用，所以全球資訊網（WWW）只是網際網路裡面的一個部分。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "FB或者是Google，它是全球資訊網的一部分，你從流量或者是從其他東西來看的時候，其實它並不是一般意義上的托拉斯。它擋掉的不是其他人的發言機會，而是把大家的注意力、時間、選擇的偏好，也不能說壟斷，就是大家會習慣花非常多時間在上面，大概是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以從這一個角度來看的話，政府能夠做的事情，我覺得是一種調和的工作，我最近一個半月來都是在做這一件事，好比像我在FB上面有示範FB的方式，我是把整面的動態牆拿掉的，如果大家去看我的FB「關於」我的話，我甚至還有提供兩個連結，你一裝的話，那個瀏覽器插件，就會幫你把FB的訊息牆拿掉，所以FB就只剩傳即時訊息跟看群組的功能，在這個時候就沒有辦法佔用許多的時間，就可以比較有效使用臉書。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想講的是說，本來在網路文化上，可以參考當時社群對垃圾信進行管理的歷史，其實所有的發送跟接送的人並不是不對等的地位。不要把臉書想成電視塔台，把我們只想成電視機。所有的接收人跟臉書一樣，都同時有接收跟傳送的能力。但是很多人可能不記得這一件事，或者沒有辦法充分運用這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們在這邊，是起一個示範的作用，就是除了FB這一種發散式的用法之外，FB也可以做收斂式的用法，或者是Wiselike這樣子的平台，本身就是一個收斂性的平台，在裡面可以做比較有深度的討論，這個是我具體可以做的事，也就是做示範。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個想要講的，就是「DIGI+（數位國家）」。這個是在「5＋2」產業創新底盤的作用，所以它是一個統合性的方案，這個統合性的方案是把數位國家的土壤做好，上面再長出「5＋2」產業的創新，所以並不是像「5＋2」再加幾的計畫，而是讓這一些東西發展出來，自然帶有數位的素質。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以這一個方案的召集人是院長，然後會由幾位政委來當副召集人，在下面會有四個不同的方面。記法其實非常簡單，也就是「DIGI」這四個字：「D（Development）」是最基本的頻寬、頻譜這一些近用的東西；「I（Innovation）」是關於創新、私部門、如何做新創經濟，包含剛剛所講的FinTech這一些東西；「G（Governance）」是政府內部要如何開始運用這一些東西跟外部溝通，包含我們現在在推的Open API，或者把所有的政策公開給大家討論等等，都屬於這一個部分；「I（Inclusion）」我覺得特別重要，也就是涵容，也就是我們在承認公部門、私部門在照顧到弱勢或區域發展上，可能都沒有地方政府，包含六都和一些公民社會的NGO們，那麼能夠碰到最後一哩。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我們這次在數位國家裡面，特別再把「Inclusion」加進去，不是只有公部門跟私部門協力，也包含公民社會的朋友能夠去做「Inclusion」。我這個基本想法很簡單，並不是大家誰來代表弱勢發聲，而是我們推廣這些涵容的政策，讓弱勢開始能夠有發聲的方法跟管道。即使每一個人只為自己發聲，這個發聲是可以匯聚起來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個是大概的想法，在院的定位是由院長督導的基盤，大概八年左右的推動方案。" }, { "speaker": "徐國勇", "speech": "我們那邊有餐點，不要太嚴肅，大家可以一邊用餐。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實大家說不定都在wiselike上問完，我也回答完了（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "政院未來有打算成立資訊長職稱？目前說最適合當資訊長的人是您，就目前為止，您覺得您當政委就已經夠了，如果願意的話，會願意更上一層樓？或者是覺得這樣進來政院就夠了？" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "另外之前有網友問你為什麼英文可以唸這麼快，你說你都聽rap，可以稍微示範一下嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是這樣嗎？今天是才藝表演就是了（笑）？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "CIO這一件事政院這邊沒有對案出來吧，目前還沒有嘛，對不對？你指的是Karen的方案？" }, { "speaker": "徐國勇", "speech": "有人提過，現在行政院沒有在研擬這一方面，也沒有討論，這個還在討論中與研議中，現在沒有這方面的概念，因為牽涉到組織基準法整個要變更，是個大工程，所以沒有那麼容易。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "Karen的公聽會我沒有出席，所以其實我不太知道完整的脈絡。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你剛剛講的東西，如果行政院人事總處還沒有對案的話，其實我們從院的角度是無法評估的，大概是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家真的要聽我唱rap？" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "你平時的休閒時間會去唱歌嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實就是在家裡放這一些帶子，然後就跟著哼。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "你自己唱的時候也是這樣文靜嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實開場這一首本來就是比較文靜的，就是一個比較大器的曲子。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然在後面就會有開始非常多的表情跟動作，但我們就先到這邊（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "你練這一首練了多久？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實從剛開始出就有在唱了，所以其實也不只這一首。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果不是現在大家在拍我相當緊張，其實可以更順的。這張專輯裡面的大部分歌都有在唱。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "你有沒有當過兵？如果現在有人利用不當兵的理由攻擊你？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個我在Wiselike上有回答過，其實我有先天性的心室中膈缺損，本來我在十二歲就動了手術，我現在胸前還有一道傷疤。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實動過任何心臟血管的大手術都是不用當兵的，這個是免役的體位，不是我自己可以決定。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不論我想不想當兵，他們都會拒絕我，所以把他看成我現在在服替代役，也是可以（笑），還是有一些為國家貢獻的機會。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我並不排斥服役的這件事，但當時我去役政署的時候，他們很明確跟我說因為我動過心臟手術，所以我即使想要當兵都不能當兵。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "所以你想當兵？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我去役政署問過，因為當時大家都知道我國中念到一半，那時候很有意思，我們政府非常會照顧我們這一些中輟生，我國中去創業開資訊公司，就一直收到資策會、各部會送來的一些文宣，要我去學Excel等等一些輔導中輟生的方案，當然我是沒有去（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我的意思是說，各部會是很關心我們中輟生的。也因為這樣的關係，很早就收到了體檢通知，但是裡面馬上就跟我說這一件事跟我沒有關係。所以我後來確實是去他們臨櫃，問過這一件事是不是真的跟我沒有關係，他們當然說這個是丁等免役的體位，所以他們就說，就按照通知書上寫的，什麼都不要做。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "所以就不必當兵？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，我想當替代役都不行，想當什麼都不行，所以這一件事跟我沒有關係。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "有沒有覺得可惜？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "比較不是可惜的感覺。其實在上一任政府蔡玉玲前政委，其實也都是說她進來服社會役的，這個是她常常會講的一件事，在業界本來薪水非常高，但是進來可能一個零頭的薪水，她覺得沒有問題，因為是幫大家服務。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我當然沒有像她說的一個零頭，但是可能也是剩1/3的薪水，所以從我的角度覺得這個是有機會幫大家貢獻，不一定當成服役的心情，但是覺得是一種服務吧！" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "你對立法院關於兵役的提案有沒有意見？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我沒有看過議事逐字稿，你要不要寄給我？你可能要先寄給我。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "你有沒有崇拜的偶像？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有，成年之後就沒有。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "有沒有去紐約聽Hamilton演唱會？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實，因為票都訂不到，黃牛票的情況非常嚴重，我直接打消這一個念頭。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是他們會巡迴演出，也許哪一天可以碰得到。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "所以Lin-Manuel是你的偶像之一嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你說Lin-Manuel嗎？其實也不是。他確實是我們很多在做這種新的音樂類型創造的朋友，有把他跟莎士比亞相比。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為莎士比亞當時是用一個常民的語言，讓它承載了完全新的意義。所以Lin-Manuel對rap做的事情，確實很像莎士比亞當年對英語做的事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "即使是這樣，因為我沒有崇拜莎士比亞，所以也不會崇拜Lin-Manuel。他當然是非常非常有能力的一個創作者，可以去欣賞他。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "你在行政院工作會不會不習慣？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實差不多，跟我本來在做的事情也沒有什麼不一樣，起床有稍微早起床一點，但是除此之外，因為我跟公部門各級的朋友一直在做開放政府的教育訓練跟設計，所以我現在進來，不管像我們這邊重大方案的進度在網路上公布，公布到「來監督」這一個網站，或剛剛講六十天的法規放到「眾開講」這些，都是之前過去一年多來，本來就在跟國發會合作的事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "雖然我現在角色不是國發會開放資料諮詢委員，而是行政院的政務委員，但是我在做的事情、方法、投入的心力，幾乎完全都是一樣的，所以其實是還滿習慣的，並沒有什麼差別。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "你覺得這一個半月有達到你想要做的事？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我是做興趣的，我沒有什麼目標（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "只要每一天都有在學習新東西，那個動力就可以維持，所以其實就跟學語言或者什麼一樣，那個是一輩子的事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "幕僚有幫我列了七個亮點，進來六個星期做了一大堆事情。但是我覺得我在這邊自賣自誇，沒有什麼意義。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我比較想說的意思是，我們本來比較沒有一個常規、制度化跟大家做公開討論的平台，不管是法規、預算、執行、API相關、公司法修法、內部跨部會協商，以上講的事情，我們都在建立一個常規性，而且不管我在不在辦公室，都可以繼續運作的數位系統，因為這樣的關係就可以變成同仁作業的一部分，這個我想才是具體的成果。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是這個成果，全部開放出來之後，民間會怎麼回應？以及按照民間的回應如何繼續修正政策？這個是大家一起學習的，本來我的興趣就是跟大家一起學習，所以沒有熱情燒光的問題。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "所以還是會有固定在辦公室的時間？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然，這樣會議比較好排。因為其實本來行政局2011年就有一個函，跟網路相關且經過主管同意，不管是時間或者是地點都可以任意調配，本來公務員就有這樣的函。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "勞工是去年制定那一個原則，就是所有的媒體工作者（各位）也可以用這樣的方式來捍衛自己遠距工作的權益，並且要求勞動檢查等等（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "你會不會覺得當政委，與伴侶相處的時間比較少，或者是陪伴寵物的時間比較少？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「同伴動物」，謝謝（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "和同伴動物花的時間可能稍微少一點，但是其他方面其實都還好，因為我以前當顧問的時候，大部分他們會找我的時候是半夜，也就是矽谷剛醒來的時候，所以其實半夜開會的狀況還滿多，在行政院作息變成比較正常，也就是時間比較好排。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得大致看起來，事實上跟親友或者跟伴侶相處的時間，總的來講是變多。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是因為現在是住在宿舍，而不是住在花園新城，所以我的感覺其實隨時都在上班，因為宿舍是新的、辦公室也是新的，所以其實我即使是所謂的遠距工作，或下了班回宿舍，我的感覺還是在上班，因為那個地方布置得很像辦公室，完全是辦公室的感覺，所以其實大概只有禮拜天才可以回山上跟同伴動物相處，但是也還好，這樣也還算適應。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "有抱怨過嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "同伴動物比如我不在的時候，就會去空門那邊抓一抓，如果跟動物相處過，你們也會知道，他們也會分離焦慮或者是很黏等等，但是我是覺得到現在都還好，六個星期之後目前都調適得不錯了。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "伴侶會抱怨嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該是沒有啦！畢竟是一起住，所以其實是有相處的時間。不是全部的時間，但是有一些時間。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "你會要求辦公室的同仁不要加班嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不能說是要求，因為他們有些時候需要加班還是會報加班。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我之前接觸的公務同仁會跟我，說如果首長待到晚上八、九點的話，同一個辦公室的人會不好意思提早離開，我相信這是公務體系非常常見的狀況，所以我自己的做法，因為我很難改變各部會借調來的同仁習慣，所以我就準時五點多就走了，他們看要待到什麼時候就他們自己決定，至少不會有一個壓力，覺得老闆九點還沒有走，我們只好待到九點。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "發言人您都待多久？" }, { "speaker": "徐國勇", "speech": "因為我以前在律師事務所，後來在媒體，後製工作沒有做好，都不敢走，有時候不加班不行。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "平常會掛在電腦或者是宅在家裡嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我運動都是在VR裡面做，我回答過很多次了。你戴上就是戶外的感覺了，真的，會流一身汗。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "你在VR裡面做哪一些運動？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有一個是Holopoint，也就是射弓箭，對方也會往你射箭，你也要躲，這大概不到十分鐘就一身汗了。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "可以在路上抓到野生的唐鳳採訪嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有辦法，不好意思。但是我整個VR的建模都已經上傳了，所以你要把我擺在怎麼樣就怎麼樣。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "畫成箭靶也可以？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就有一點像動新聞，可以弄成任何樣子，未來是我講話的聲紋模型可能也會放出來，所以你就打字，愛讓我講什麼就講什麼（笑），我對這一些看得很輕。你如果要合成什麼景象、照片，或者合成我講什麼話，儘量去做就好了，我對肖像權這一些都是拋棄掉的，所以就隨便你們用，大概是這個意思。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "所以如果反同的人拿你的肖像上去合成，你會擔心嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然不會，這個到底跟我有什麼關係？完全沒有關係。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "家長對臺灣的教育其實不太有信心，你自己對於國家的教育有什麼看法？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我們做107課綱的時候，本來就是覺得學校不應該再是灌輸性的教小孩，未來是小孩自己決定要學什麼。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在實驗三法通過之後，其實小孩本來就可以說兩天在學校、三天在家裡，或者是都不去學校，但是要到社區或者是其他地方去共學團體，其實只要自學的申請表送出去，地方政府的審議委員通過，這一些都是合法的，而且整個從小學到高中都是合法的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因此在這個通過之後，我覺得從教育者的角度來看，其實能夠用的資源變多了，不一定要變成像我一樣完全輟學或者不需要完全脫離體制，可以用體制裡的資源，但是自己組織他自己的學習規劃。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "整個107課綱的目的，就是讓小學低年級的小孩可以建立這樣的習慣，透過這樣的生活課程去學到「學習是自己的事情，未來要自己決定學習規劃」等等。從低年級就建立這一個習慣，我覺得到中高年級要用哪一些資源，就是小孩自己跟他的家長討論後去規劃，我覺得這個是比較長遠的做法。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "家長對孩子的教育權越來越無法控制？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也不一定是家長，而是給他的社區或者是任何旁邊支持性或者是終身學習的單位等等，我還是回到小孩，小孩對於自己要負的責任會越來越多。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為以前小孩七歲進去到十八歲出來，七歲進去可以預測十八歲有哪一些行業，但是現在七歲進去，沒有人能預測十八歲出來哪一些行業還在、哪一些行業沒有了，所以這中間小孩自己學習的功能非常非常重要，因為沒有這個的話，到十八歲出來學那一套是沒有意義的，所以我們整個107課綱都是往這樣自發的精神來設計。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "你會把同伴動物當成小孩嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "只是不是人類，對不對？其實已經回答了，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "還會想要對自己的、人類的小孩特別有感情嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我其實沒有這個想法，對我來講，脊椎動物都是有感情的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然毛小孩的生命歷程跟人類是不一樣的，而且經過那個悲歡離合的強度也不一樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是我心裡想要有這一個關係的需求完全被毛小孩滿足了。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "共享服務平台在網路上有很多，現在的法令好像沒有辦法具體規範，還有一段落差。邀請您進來當數位政委，行政院是不是希望您可以在這邊多加著墨，您有什麼想法？覺得最困難的地方在哪裡？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "最困難的地方，是我們跟大眾媒體之間的關注焦點可能不太一樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我記得多元化計程車服務方案推出的時候，也有公告期，之前也有一些討論等等，但是其實每一次討論裡面，好比像去年8月那一場稍微有收出共識，還是有版面，各位也是會報導，但是那個版面可能比較小，但是每一次討論可能比較沒有共識或者有人上街頭了，版面就比較大。這個當然是我可以理解的事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是結果就是其實明明多元計程車方案、配套出來，各地也都在接受申請等等，但是其實很多人的印象會停在之前最火爆的那一刻上面，但是那一刻已經過好幾個月了，已經過兩、三個月過去了，現在是有一個法規，並不是沒有法規，而且也已經上路了，並不是沒有接受申請，別的車行也興趣做電子車隊。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "Uber其實對這個非常敏感，否則David Plouffe也不會飛到臺灣來。這一些比較稍微有收斂的東西都有在發生，這一些事可能不是因為我來才發生，本來交通部的同仁跟財政部的同仁就已經研擬這一些東西，我至少可以做的東西是把它翻譯成大家比較容易懂的語言，跟發言人合作把一開始的定性做好，如果不是這個定性做好，我覺得很多人都會停在還吵成一團的印象裡。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "您覺得在全亞洲數位程度到幾名？您的未來預期目標可以多高？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個事實上是「數位國家創新經濟方案」裡面第三張簡報就是在講那個，等那個東西推出後可以直接看簡報，我們用的是WEF資通訊整備度等等的排名，臺灣事實上如果你去看分項圖的話，其實各方面是相當高的，但是唯獨在一個分項，也就是法規的是這上面是非常低分，而且每一年過去又更低分一點。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一個的原因我覺得有很多，當然其中一個是之前我們的立法碰到這樣子事情的時候，稍微比較慢一點，但是因為我現在進了行政，我至少協助把院案做到比較有準備，其他還是要交給立法委員們審慎討論。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "你覺得一到十會在中間嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果去掉政府法規影響的話，WEF絕對排前十名沒有問題，但是如果加上政府法規與影響，現在是中高了。" }, { "speaker": "徐國勇", "speech": "所以我們的法規要再加速，包括數位匯流相關的法令。這一部分唐鳳政委很努力在推，我們希望可以看到這部分未來的排名可以再往上提昇。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "數位落差談了好幾年，你覺得偏鄉教育在數位落差上有哪一些地方可以看得出來成效？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實國發會關於數位落差，一直有一個數位機會的調查，這個調查其實從智慧型手機普及，之前跟之後可以看到非常非常大的差別，從4G開臺、智慧型手機普及，其實到現在我們有4G可以用，其實也才兩年，甚至有些地方還不到，但是我們看到一個非常非常大的差別，自從這一些東西普及化之後，已經比較少有偏鄉在說他們沒有辦法進行接取的這一件事，基本上4G的訊號差不多都可以達得到。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "並不是沒有設備，也不是沒有網路，而是你能夠使用花在網路上的時間。如果大部分工作的時間事實上是花在最基本生活的維持上，或者甚至連水、電力這一些最基本的東西都沒有的話，從整備度的報告上面看到他們有100Mbps，那個是沒有意義的，因為實際上並沒有使用它。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我覺得為什麼接下來數位國家裡面，特別把區域創新和六都一起來做，就是因為我們從中央規劃者的角度，真的很不容易碰到、告訴大家說使用這一些數位工具對自己的生活，有什麼能夠很切實幫助這個地方，這個東西確實是地方治理才能夠碰到的部分。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "之前一直都有中央的規劃跟地方的最後一哩，有時甚至不是市政府或者是縣政府做，而是一些NGO或者是一些關心的團體在做，這一些的銜接一直都是很大的問題。我之前當顧問的時候，其實這個問題也反覆聽各地做地方治理的朋友們提出過。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然最近有一些比較好的趨勢，除了台北市有資訊局之外，其他縣市政府也開始想要設類似數位治理局或者資訊局或者數位治理辦公室等等的這些東西，我覺得隨著越來越多的橋樑出現，才比較容易跟中央去對接，我們比較容易看得到這一些最後一哩到底長什麼樣子，不然其實以本來這樣一種這邊規劃、那邊執行的方式，確實很容易有落差，這個我完全同意。" }, { "speaker": "徐國勇", "speech": "先跟大家報告，我們本來預計十二點要外面開記者會，現在記者朋友都進來了，我們就直接到兩點十五分結束，因為我兩點半還有一個會議，唐政委也有其他的活動。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "還是回歸於Uber的這一個議題上，因為其實他們在臺灣慢慢開始發展了，很多人也在用，您自己的看法，您覺得他們應該繼續存在在臺灣的市場裡面或者是像現在政府的態度一樣，希望他們被消滅？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當我們講到Uber的時候，它其實是一個branding，然後它也是一家公司，它也是一個App，我們要把這一些東西稍微分開來看。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "Uber一開始進入臺灣的時候，它是使用合法的租賃R牌車，只進行載客的服務，而且這一些租賃車隊收取的是比計程車多的錢，通常是跑機場來載客，這一個行為其實交通部沒有認定是非法的，本來是一個合法的活動，但是這個原因是什麼？因為所有參加的這一些車子、車行、進行的活動，當時都是認定為合法的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "Uber之所以爭議那麼大，是因為從這之後，他們開始使用沒有營業登記證，甚至連職業駕駛執照都沒有的司機，來進行載客服務，並且收取的費用低於計程車費用，才造成這樣的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可是並不是因為他們推出了這一些不合法的服務，就把合法的服務停掉了，我想我們不會一句話來講Uber到底都是合法或者是都不合法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「多元化計程車服務方案」的推出，是希望Uber好的部分，可以用合法的方式，讓合法的業者用合法的方式經營，他們如果願意登記成為交通服務運輸的服務業的話，我們就按照合法的方式、遊戲規則來處理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是，如果連最基本的「只使用職業駕駛執照司機進行營利的行為」，連這一個承諾都不願意給的話，這樣我們當然希望別的合法電子車隊，能夠在多元化計程車方案推出之後，能夠讓Uber知道不只有他們能夠做電子派車這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "徐國勇", "speech": "我補充一下，Uber這一個問題要向大家說明，行政院並不是要消滅他們，因為他們一開始租那個車是合法的時候，就像一棟房子是合法的建築物有建築執照、使用執照，我們怎麼把它拆掉？" }, { "speaker": "徐國勇", "speech": "問題是它在合法的房子外面加蓋了違法的違章建築，Uber就是這個狀況，在合法的外面擴充到非法的部分，而且最讓政府不能接受的是，連一個基本商業登記都不願意做，不但不願意做基本的商業登記，而且還在沒有任何登記，告訴他是違法的時候，他繼續擴充更大的違法，也就是最近的送餐服務。" }, { "speaker": "徐國勇", "speech": "所以我再次強調：政府沒有要消滅它，一再輔導他們希望能夠全部合法化。大家覺得就讓他做有什麼關係？大家要記住一件事，造成了不公平的競爭，因為用不公平的競爭，導致其他的計程車業或者是其他送貨、送餐合法業者遭受到不公平的競爭，包括稅等等的這一些問題，所以我們必須要瞭解，我們並沒有要消滅他們，我們對於任何創新產業歡迎他們在臺灣發展跟存在；尤其共享經濟是我們的重點，因此這一個部分必須要澄清。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "之前美國大選川普當選，大家都說這個跟社群媒體及大數據的一些調查結果是相反跟失準的，政府也會常常利用數位媒體的聲音或數據去看一些民意，會不會其實也是有失準的可能？沉默大多數的聲音沒有辦法反映在外界上或者是政府可能會忽視？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "最簡單的回答，是任何的統計本來就是會有把本來資料丟掉的狀況，不然就不叫統計了。任何的統計方法都有適合跟不適合的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我現在具體進來做的，好比像國發會公共政策參與平台，我們接下來會把政府的重大施政計畫、進度、花了多少錢等都公開出來，把所有的法規修正在六十天內，在上面登出來，登出來的可能是草案，甚至還沒有定案，在討論六十天之後，我們才進行綜合的回覆，而且這個是所有部會的所有法規。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣的目的是，我們不需要再去猜大家在想什麼，有六十天的時間，包含民間的提案，大家都可以上來告訴政府說每一個人單獨在想什麼，這樣子的話，唯有所有的利益關係人在這樣子的透明平台上，彼此可以揭露關於這一件事有什麼利益、希望政府具體回答什麼，政府才能夠綜合做一個具體的回答，就不需要說：統計上有100萬的人看起來這樣想、有20萬的人看起來這樣想，而是有這樣的綜整、有具體的回應，這個是我們努力的目標。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "我們知道北美自由貿易區的加拿大禁止Uber在他們國家營運，我不瞭解既然加拿大離美國這麼關係密切的國家都能夠禁止，為什麼我們做不到？" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "我們剛剛還有問到Airbnb的部分，您也有開過協調會，這部分是不是也說明一下？因為我法立法院法制局有做過報告，他說可以輔導新興產業的業態，甚至會有更多的產值產生，這個部分您是不是也可以說明一下？" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "最後，現在是IoT，萬物可連、萬物可駭，是不是將來駭客無所不在的情況下，包括政府與民間的資安成本會大幅提高？我們政府策略應該如何因應？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你剛剛講的特定情況我就不一一評論了，但是當時在討論時，vTaiwan所有這些外國的這一些案例都有參考，也有在研究報告裡面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "呼應剛剛發言人的說法，所有現行合法的業態，我們並不會只是做了一些非法的事情就莫名其妙的是說合法的東西變成非法，我想也不至於到這樣；但是也不能因為有一些合法的業態，所以非法的部分，也就是要課罰金的部分，我們就說因為做得跟合法看起來像就不罰你，也不可能這樣子講。所以，我覺得就是用這樣子的實事求是的態度去處理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是確實如你講的，確實有時候法規並沒有規定到新出現的東西，既很難說合法、也很難說不合法，這個時候就要做多元利益相關者的討論，確實之前沒有一個很固定的架構來做這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們舉一個例子，就是金融沙盒的事情，一定會有這一件事是不是算銀行業務一部分的討論，這也是為什麼許多立法委員們都有在討論沙盒的概念，一個你不確定是否合法的新東西出現了，你讓他先對特定的人在特定地區、特定時間試驗一段時間，先看在這個土地上運行起來怎麼樣，為了他要調整法令，或者這個其實不是好主意，我們就不用再調整法令，可以認定它就是非法的這一些東西，都是有系統的方式去實驗它的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然這一件事具體結構上如何做，目前在立法院還在討論，所以我就不去做評論，但是我同意這個確實是在數位時代會一直一直需要面對的事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有關於IoT，其實目前有兩個層面。一個是你剛剛講的資安層面，資安的層面當然非常重要，資安層面因為非常重要，所以院裡面有一個資通安全處負責。我當時進來時，預先就已經談好了一件事，因為我作為開放政府的通道，所以理論上我看到的東西大家都可以看得到，所以我不看任何密件及國家機密，在這樣的前提底下，你剛剛提到關於目前駭客如何進入臺灣IoT的所有這一些東西，其實我都不知道，那就是要請簡處長來回答你。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是IoT所有這一些系統間的互相介接，也就是Open API的部分，是我可以幫忙的，這個是我現在在跟工程會，在採購法上讓至少每一個廠商跟每一個廠商之間，透過開放格式的協定對接，這一件事是我們可以在採購時加以確保的，這樣的好處是大家至少在相對透明的方式，並不是只有這一個廠商說了算，而是任何人都可以獨立說這一件事真的如他所說的這樣，他的API真的是如他所宣稱的這樣子，至少這在公眾對這一件事的信任上，我覺得會起到一定的作用，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "徐國勇", "speech": "其實人民的工作權憲法保障，這一些工作權只要不違法，你任何的工作都可以做，我們基本憲法的原則是這樣，我想從這裡又提到剛剛Uber的問題，談到這一些可能新興其實比較小型的沙盒監理問題，現在是英國跟加拿大都已經立法了，我們臺灣其實相當進步，就這一方面也在注意，而且也準備要修改相關的法律，但是因為這一些相關的法律裡面，因為基本上會違反一些相關的法律，我們這些要改掉，但是相當多，好比銀行法、保險法、證券交易法等等，如何不改這一些，然後改其中另外一個法律，讓它直接合法化，其實現在有立法委員提出來了，可能就是從消費者保護法，也許動個一、兩條就可以把其他的八個法律動出來，這個我們正在考慮。" }, { "speaker": "徐國勇", "speech": "我要提到的是，任何行業如果法律沒有規定，那它不是違法的，其實工作權是要保障的，我再次強調。Uber的問題是因為違反了公路法、違反了法律，因為違反了法律就不能做，所以Uber才會說這個好像跟大家都在做不影響，但是事實上它是違法的，所以法律沒有規定，而你的工作只要不要違反公序良俗的話，其實我們國家是不會禁止的，我再一次強調這一點，所以你要賣臭豆腐、牛肉緬，國家不會禁止你這個食物，但是這個東西是不能違法，不能違法食品安全相關的法律，你要做出什麼樣的食品、怎麼賣，我們不會管你，Uber也是這樣子，我大概跟各位說明，這也可以提到沙盒監理裡面的相關問題，這裡面至少要修改八個法律，所以我們現在嘗試用另外一個方式解決掉，因此其實我們在這一方面應該算是滿快、進步的。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "您覺得您工作一個半月，您現在對於這一個工作還有熱情嗎？您覺得您的熱情可以再維持多久？你手上有iPhone、iPad，是不是還包括裡面有更多隨時要用到依賴的3C產品？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第一，我再次申明，我不是出於熱情或者使命或者義務或者責任來當政務委員，我是出於興趣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "出於興趣的意思是：不是一時的熱情，而是我對於開放政府、對於怎麼樣讓公部門、私部門及公民社會中間有一個常規性彼此能夠更好互相管道，設計這樣的東西我是有興趣的，這個興趣不但沒有削減，反而因為進來之後，實際碰到各部門的朋友，然後各部會來我辦公室支援朋友一起集思廣義之下，每天都是非常非常有興趣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在這一個過程裡面，其實我說我是公僕的公僕，我後來發現其實我的工作主要是發言人的公僕，也就是說從很多角度來看，有一點像建立神經系統，讓內部橫向溝通這一些東西，能夠更即時呈現到發言人及各位媒體朋友的手中，也讓各位看到報導出來的民眾朋友們，能夠更順暢、有系統反應進整個行政院的決策過程裡面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想這個事情是會一直有興趣做的，不會隨著時間削減。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "你這麼依賴3C產品，沒有的話會不會很不習慣？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我沒有依賴，我今天從頭到尾都是在用紙筆，我這一次是用鉛筆，因為就是速記，因為大家如果要問到一些需要開畫面，才會用iPad跟Apple Pencil，我其實平常大概是用這兩個，都是有筆的設備，因為我非常習慣用筆，從一開始學電腦就是用鉛筆在紙上，到後來所有有筆的設備，像Palm Pilot、Zaurus都有買。現在是用Galaxy Note跟Apple Pencil在做記錄，大概這兩個是最多。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "主要有提到航運業的部分，他們現在是有提交最新的紓困方案到行政院審查，其中航運的部分有600億的紓困案，行政院的態度怎麼樣？如果給航運業600億紓困的話，其他的行業有沒有可能跟進？" }, { "speaker": "徐國勇", "speech": "我所瞭解的是，長榮賠了90億左右，我們的陽明每一年賠160億，這個是很可怕的數字，我們看到韓國韓進倒閉了，大家知道其實航運對我們來說是非常非常重要的產業，尤其在我們的國際貿易，所以遭受這麼大的國際上因為經濟不景氣的損失，政府要不要紓困一定要做，但是怎麼做，是不是600億，這個牽涉到交通部跟國發會必須要整合。這部分他們在研究，整合完的結果還沒有到我這裡來，所以我不能回答你，但是有關於這一部分會從貸款各方面，包括利息等等應該都會去處理，所以我們可以看到去年萬海還有小賺一點，但是幾乎都是相當艱困的行業，這個部分政府一定會去處理的。" }, { "speaker": "徐國勇", "speech": "至於幫忙的話，要回答到很細節的話，我可能會再問交通部，不過你講的這一個部分，因為我不知道多少錢，因為我碩士是讀海商法，所以這一些關於航運的官司我相當熟悉，所以我也瞭解，可以回答你我所瞭解的。至於，交通部那個部分我還沒有問，我還不知道，不過我會找機會告訴你。" }, { "speaker": "徐國勇", "speech": "600億是媒體寫的，是不是真的600億或者真的是因為他所紓困出來這一些產生的乘數效益那就不知道了，事實上因為賠也沒有賠600億，怎麼可能600億就紓困？因為我所知道的陽明大概是160幾億，一開始去年是130億，給立法院的資料我有看到，如果陽明來講，大概是89億及90億左右，加起來也沒有300億，怎麼可能紓困600億？所以我覺得數字怎麼來的，到底如何分配或者不只是航運，可能包括航運周邊的這一些產業，這個部分我想要瞭解，因為我沒有看到這一方面，這個是交通部的，所以我沒有辦法完全答覆你，但是我一定幫你找資料回覆你，並問清楚告訴你。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "可不可以安可曲好不好？可不可以找發言人一起唱PPAP，幫我們做完美的尾聲。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如同我剛才說的，我的VR模型已經上傳，未來連我的聲紋模型其實都可以傳到網路上了，所以各位回去可以自己合成。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不管要我說什麼、擺什麼姿勢跟什麼東西、合照，我相信以各位電子數位的能力，應該都是做得到的，如果在操作上有任何困難，歡迎看我錄的教學影片，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "徐國勇", "speech": "感謝大家！" } ]

[ { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "現在剛好一點三十分，我們準時開始。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非常感謝大家，在上一次逐字稿出去的時候，都有提供非常具體的書面資料，出去之後民間的反應也相當好，昨天在媒體茶敘上，已經將「可以把它當作技藝，而不是體育」的想法傳達，在網路上及所有的利益相關者的社群上都獲得很好的迴響，這個是很好的第一步。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "今天是就細節執行上請大家稍微來報告討論一下，如果大方向大家覺得沒有太大的問題，可能不需要開第三次會，其實我也沒有很喜歡開會。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "進入報告的議程，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "王明源", "speech": "政委、行政院長官及各部會代表大家好，政次有其他會，請容我先報告。" }, { "speaker": "王明源", "speech": "上一次的會議，政委有請我們回去再確認在技藝競賽跟技術士的最大表裡面有圍棋的部分在機械群(類)裡面，請我們釐清為什麼放在機械群(類)，是不是在電競這部分也可以同時比照，我們把了解的情形跟各位報告一下。" }, { "speaker": "王明源", "speech": "各為手邊有我們簡報的大綱，我們回去查了一下，也就是「甄選群（類）別及技藝技能優良職種類別對照表」是屬於技專甄選入學的，不在一般大學，是在技專方面；不是只有機械類，其實有很多類。當時放進去主要是其為中央主管機關主辦的，細項的部分請容我做簡要的報告。" }, { "speaker": "王明源", "speech": "我們回去後把電子競賽是否納進去當作優待加分的議題，提到技專校院的招生聯合會作討論及處理，我在這邊跟各位報告。" }, { "speaker": "王明源", "speech": "第一項技專端甄選入學的部分，四技二專的部分會舉辦統測，學生依照統測的成績可以申請學校，至多可以申請三個校系科組，再報名各個四技二專的甄選，所以是先進行統測，再進入甄選入學。" }, { "speaker": "王明源", "speech": "第一項兩個階段：第一個階段是採入學測驗的成績倍率篩選，依各校所訂的篩選科目來進行篩選。第二個階段是由各甄選的學校來辦理指定項目的甄審，這時考生要繳交一些備審的資料，包括學生在學的成績、證照及技能獎狀等等，這個就跟今天的電競議題有關，未來電競技藝的競賽，比如得獎的部分可以當作備審的資料，但是主要各個學校在甄選的時候，如何採計是由各校的規定自行來處理。" }, { "speaker": "王明源", "speech": "依照中等以上學校技藝的辦法規定，需明列於辦法中的各技能競賽，這個是第一項，或者是參加其他由中央各級主管機關及直轄市政府主辦全國性技藝能競賽獲得優勝者，都可以參加績優甄審入學；如果沒有明列在那一些表的競賽，則需由當年度的招生聯合會來認定。" }, { "speaker": "王明源", "speech": "下一頁請看到「教育部全國各級學校圍棋運動錦標賽」，這個部分圍棋可以列為甄選加分的項目。" }, { "speaker": "王明源", "speech": "我們也瞭解一下為何圍棋可以放進去，在96年以前，圍棋還沒有列入，在96年11月時當時的體育司，有建請技專校院列入當年的加分，所以在11月15日招生委員會有開會，把它納入當年度採計中央各級機關直轄市政府主辦的全國性競賽，從此開始加進去，且並不是只有在機械群(類)，而是全部的招生群(類)，總共二十一群都有新增圍棋的項目。" }, { "speaker": "王明源", "speech": "上次會議回來以後，我們也馬上跟技專校院的招生委員會聯合會討論，在11月8日時也有召開會議討論，採計之競賽優勝項目原則如下四點：「（一）屬中央各級機關或直轄市政府主辦之全國性各項技藝競賽；（二）是為常態性競賽；（三）競賽性質與關鍵能力與本職學能相關；（四）具備逐級選拔過程之競賽。」討論的結果認為電子競技現階段不宜納入到甄選招生簡章正面表列認可的競賽，主要是在第一個項目，並不是中央級的主管機關來主辦，而是由廠商主辦的；但不是說以後都不准，如果未來電競的比賽符合上面四項原則，還可以再提到招生聯合會來討論。" }, { "speaker": "王明源", "speech": "雖然經過11月8日的開會討論沒有正式列入績優加分項目，但是招生組第二階段有一些備審的資料，這個部分學生還是可以把電競比賽的得獎優勝的成績列為備審的參採加分使用，我們可以跟各個學校來做宣導，這是我們可以處理的，以上報告，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有任何的同仁要補充嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非常感謝，尤其是在之前招生委員會做了這樣的釐清，其實上一次會議的時候，說列入電子群科是因為我事前不知道有這個清單的存在，所以我們在討論圍棋的時候，當場在搜尋引擎找的結果。我事後去看，是有疏漏，謝謝委員指出來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "電子競技，我想目前確實智育的成分多於體育的成分。如果打電競打到一個程度，他的頭腦事實上是滿好的，跟各個群科都有相關，我覺得很適合。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "技專校院招生委員會開的會議裡，我想與電競是否有年度或者是有常態性競賽、有無逐級選拔及本職學能，這樣問題都不大，關鍵應該是第一個「中央各級機關或直轄市主辦」的部分。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "之前的六都聯賽，唯一的差別是雖由六都支持，但不是叫「市長盃」這樣的主辦名義。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果有某一個六都的市長不只出來辦，而且願意每年都辦，這樣子就都符合了，招生委員會就願意再看，大概是這個意思嗎？" }, { "speaker": "王明源", "speech": "現階段還看不到直轄市政府主辦的性質。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他們目前多是以支持為主。" }, { "speaker": "王明源", "speech": "未來可以再討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以做初步的結論：每一個學校自己要多重視這一件事，當然不是教育部能夠統一去指定的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是，如果有某一個直轄市的政府，願意重視這一件事到他願意舉辦常規性的錦標賽，或者是這一類的競賽，那我們就以那一個競賽的名稱，也不一定叫「電子競技」，只要符合這四個條件，我們再請教委員會針對那一個錦標賽進行認定，是不是這個意思？" }, { "speaker": "王明源", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣處理非常好，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "下一個議程。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "今天代表文化部把我們的立場說明一下。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "上一次的會議裡面政委有裁示文化部役政署來瞭解一下文化服務役具有圍棋專長者的條件跟適法性，因為現在圍棋的選手是服文化服務役，政委想要讓我們進一步研議一下從推廣電競文化的角度，研議電子競賽的選手是不是可以比照圍棋來辦理文化服務替代役的可能性。當然這個時間點很抱歉，我們原本要邀集役政署、相關的遊戲產業公司、廠商及公協會來開會，但是開會的時間很抱歉是訂在明天，在今天會議之前；不過我想役政署今日也有來。我們內部研議了一陣子，因為我們對於電競產業相關的單位並不是太熟悉，所以在聯繫上稍微花了一些時間，不過沒有關係，明天的會議還是照開，我們的立場就稍微表達一下。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "第一，我們認同政委認為跟圍棋一樣，都是一個技藝文化，朝這個方向的話，一些技術性的細節及配套措施可以解決的話，文化部也願意把電競競賽的選手來納為替代役，以下稍微講一下要解決技術性的細節及措施。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "因為既然比照圍棋，我們把圍棋為何會服文化替代役的背景稍微跟大家說明一下：琴棋書畫是傳統的四門技藝，所以距離十二年以前，行政院責成文化部辦理有關圍棋士來申請服文化替代役的相關作業，當時邀集了內政部、教育部體育署召開，會議的決議是職業的圍棋士申請服務文化部替代役的時候，就以文建會為需用機關，當時就是用文建會為需用機關，當時役政署去訂出如何甄選這一些圍棋士及分發的訓練作業，每一年都有好幾位的圍棋士服文化部的服務替代役。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "大部分都是在公部門的相關單位服役，但是圍棋的替代役比較特殊，是訓練完了以後，然後再分發到中華民國圍棋協會或者各縣市地方分會去推廣活動，當時行政院希望分到這一些單位，現在實務上每一年都是五位，因為人數不多，所以分發到中華民國圍棋協會，等一下有一些技術性跟配套的問題要就教於各位。這個是當時的背景。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "第一，當時圍棋甄選的條件有兩種狀況：第一個是領有職業圍棋士證書，這有一定的標準；另外一種是業餘的段位證書，業餘必須要有七段以上的段位證書。如果是職業圍棋士，只要是由中華民國圍棋協會所認證者，就可以服替代役。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "電子競技選手現在有沒有相關的能力認證？因為我有點年紀，對這個狀況不是很清楚（笑）。還有，他們的選手是不是個人的比賽，或者是團體比賽？我們現在瞭解相關的比賽都是團體的形式，如果下士配兩個上士拿到冠軍，是不是都可以服替代役？因此如何訂甄選的條件，這個是第一個關卡。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "第二，服勤單位，替代役如果在公家服務，像現在文化部的替代役在永和有宿舍。如果分發到圍棋協會如何做？他們也有提供一些宿舍、也有一些管理人員，文化部受訓完就送到那邊去，他們就負責管理、設備，文化部雖因沒有經費再給他們，但我們並不是丟下去就沒有責任了，還是有一些相關的問題及狀況向文化部報備。我們文化部專門負責替代役的大營長翁世澤，相關單位及細節的問題也會補充說明；如果我們要把電競業的選手培訓沒有太大的問題，在通案的課程也要培訓，等一下世澤可以補充說明一下。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "我們知道的是臺灣只有一個電競協會，是否願意提供設備？這個是我們要解決及克服的問題，這個是電競協會本身的意願及相關設備、經費的問題。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "接著是要解決的第三個問題，替代役等一下役政署也會補充。也就是替代役的實施條例，服役期間不能從事兼差等的營利行為，電競選手有時出國拿到的獎金，這個是不是有替代役實施條例第24條第5款不得從事兼職、兼差及其他營利行為，如果不能讓選手出國跟營利，選手可能也不想服文化部的替代役也不一定，所以要說明文化部的立場；我們基本上不反對，我們也很樂意，就是配套的技術細節跟措施能夠解決的話，我們很樂意。如果今天現場能夠解決，明天的會議也可以不用開，我跟政委一樣，很討厭開會，以上是文化部簡短的立場。等一下遇到細節的時候，大家再討論，以上簡報。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非常感謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為其實我們現在講的是國際比賽的部分，從十幾年以前圍棋的時候都有碰過，好比像一開始我有看到一位文化替代役國手林至涵有代表台灣前往韓國參加「第八屆中日韓亞洲青少年職業圍棋對抗賽」，所以出國比賽這一件事沒有什麼問題，因為它是發生過，至於的獎金能不能叫做「營利行為」，這個是細節要如何認定了，是要捐回哪裡、不能從事營利，我想只要是合法就去做，這個是屬於比較細節的東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外，我想這個不能叫兼職、兼差及其他營利行為，在國內進行教練的服務或者是參加國際比賽，我相信還是在發揚文化的一部分裡面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然不能一面服文化替代役還去別的廠商上班，這個是不可以的。但是，在替代役的過程裡面我們有定義基本上就是跟圍棋一樣，是在推廣圍棋或做相關的事務工作或者是出國比賽，這個還算在服務的範圍內。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "您剛剛提到的是不是役政署？因為它是法的主管機關，請他們表達一下。" }, { "speaker": "沈哲芳", "speech": "政委及各位先進大家午安，基本上替代役實施最主要的目的是讓有專長的役男不因服役而中斷他的專長，所以我們不希望役男在服役的期間而荒廢，這是替代役制度很重要的宗旨。" }, { "speaker": "沈哲芳", "speech": "現在電競選手有這樣的專長，尤其在現在的世代，電競是國家競爭力很重要的指標，所以有關於電競這部分要來服替代役，役政署 (主管機關)是樂觀其成。" }, { "speaker": "沈哲芳", "speech": "現在指定的需用機關要用哪一個，我們尊重政策的指定，比如要教育部、經濟部或者是文化部，這個政策指示之後，我們役政署的立場一定會來協助指定需用機關把相關的管理、相關的措施、配套的做法把它完備、規劃。當然有些法令，尤其是在法的位階上碰觸到的，對於這一些問題我們要共同克服，剛才政委也談到了這一些問題都已經思考到了，後續的就是看怎麼樣來解決。比如：剛剛談到的出國問題，只要是在政府機關裡面，我們就能夠以需用機關來派出，出國就沒有問題。獎金的部分政委也提到了一定能拿這個獎金，如果屬於職業比賽獎金是不能拿，但可以捐給國家；政府(機關)對於役男表現好的話，可以核撥獎金，比如出去比賽拿了10萬，然後就捐回來給國家，因為是代表國家出去的。我們的獎懲、管理辦法，核給團體獎金是5萬，個人獎金是1萬，是有這樣的規定。" }, { "speaker": "沈哲芳", "speech": "至於兼差的情形，因為現在是在文化部服務，剛才政委特別提的很好，就是指派去協助瞭解，但是瞭解的情況是指派去的，權責當然是文化部，這一些廠商或者是競技的環境裡面去瞭解、協助及輔導，這個在措施上都沒有問題，只是不能去做兼差、兼職的營利行為。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "就是禮拜六、禮拜日要去公協會兼差就不行。" }, { "speaker": "沈哲芳", "speech": "這個部分就先做這樣的報告，後續辦理的相關條件、規範，我是不是請李科長簡單跟大家報告一下，這個區塊裡面有一些程序，當然文化部很清楚，我想藉這個機會也讓與會的先進瞭解。" }, { "speaker": "李定謙", "speech": "大家午安，依照規定，役男申請服一般替代役的役別跟員額我們會在每年2月底、3月初公告，我們依照替代役實施條例及役男申請服替代役辦法規定，專長資格錄取順序由國家考試及格證照優先錄取，錄取後有餘額的話，再依各部會指定的中央證照，如果再有餘額就開放到學歷、經歷及專業訓練。" }, { "speaker": "李定謙", "speech": "原則上役男的專長是契合機關的需求，因此各個需用機關依照勤務的需求將專長條件給內政部辦理公告。依照兵役法的規定，役男有服兵役的義務，如果說是屬於常備役體位的話，要服常備兵，這一個部分我們配合國家募兵政策受理常備役體位役男申請服替代役。" }, { "speaker": "李定謙", "speech": "依照替代役實施條例第3條的規定，替代役是在政府機關從事公共服務工作，回到剛剛所講的，服役期間兼差跟兼職營利的行為是不被允許的；電競選手要納入替代役範圍，下一次辦理的時間預計在明年4月5日至18日。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "聽起來我們的作業時間還有滿多的時間，還有兩個月左右？" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "但是先前還有一些細節，因為2、3月就公告了，如果要提出來的話，我們什麼時候要提給役政署？因為公告是2、3月，還要內部作業，恐怕要往前推，所以最近就要政策決定。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我稍微釐清一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我剛剛回應的是關於選手資格的認定，因為舉例來說雖然這個是智育並不是體育，但是體育的籃球其實也是團體的運動項目，我們每年體育替代役還是有九位左右的籃球選手，我看了一下，去年同一隊的也不多：台藝、裕隆、璞園各有兩位。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想本來就會有一套機制去決定誰比較適合，申請簡章裡面看起來比較有發展或者是培養的潛力，其實每一個也別都有自己認定的方法，主管機關尊重那一個方法就可以了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我知道的是，電競協會本來自己就有在做電競職業選手認證的規劃，也包括後勤、戶外轉播的這一些工作等，都有以非營利方式進行協助認證的工作。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我的具體建議是，因為我自己希望把這件事看成是洗刷污名化，所以我才會希望文化部協助辦理。如果是放在經濟部的話，意思會變成說這個是要促進產業發展，恐怕會造成社會上，一方面覺得是拼經濟、一方面覺得是教壞小孩的聲音，只會更撕裂，不會更趨近。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們上次講說是類似運動表演業，我相信對於大家都是一個比較能夠接受的狀況。上次的決議是學校可以開課，決議出來之後其實就是雙方都覺得滿可以接受的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "甚至在PTT的八卦版上面有一位網友「PeterJackson」開玩笑說，未來可能會變成「學生抗議整天打電競壓力太大 ，需要念書紓壓」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我的意思是，現在有污名化，所以有些次文化的叛逆行為很酷。但慢慢變成社會文化的一部分，也就不需要那麼酷了。我希望把這個文化變成日常，所以會需要文化部的協助，大概跟文化部說明。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我相信細節都可以在明天那一個會處理，如果需要逐字稿支援的部分，可以約我們的速錄師有沒有空，用同樣的方式去做紀錄。如果來不及安排紀錄的話，至少要有會議摘要，也希望我們從現在算起大概十天，也就是這一個會議紀錄要公開的時候也一起給我們，比照上次的方式，同時公開。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "現在就不太需要處理細節的東西，因為至少現在看起來，在法令的遵循上是還好，只是來不來得及明年作業的流程而已。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "要的話就是明年，所以有即時性，不然會太晚，明天會朝這個目標往前推，除非他們也拿不出具體的標準，要不然他們有的話，他們說了算，將來這個可以滾動式修改，今年是第一年的標準，不然明年逐年來修正，這個是好事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為他們也是第一次承辦，所以馬上要分成像圍棋的段位比較困難，但是以他們有過的競賽或者是當教練的經驗來論資排輩，應該還是做得出來的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "未來我們鼓勵他們有更精細，不管是參與國際賽事也好或者是認證的系統，今年就看他們做到什麼程度，我們就試試看。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "比較大的問題是意願，就是假設人數多，如果一、兩個還好，如果五、十個要如何區分，像第一次要多少位、要多少的房間，及他們要睡在哪裡的管理，這個是比較大的問題，明天問問看他們的意願，是分發到電競這一個單位，說不定還有外圍地方，是不是也有意願開放，這個也要細節跟他們洽談。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在地方政府鼓勵的情況之下，如果有人願意派到地方政府，地方政府可能也會把這個當作擁抱電競文化的代表，但是我們就不幫地方政府揣想。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他們有沒有宿舍的經費？我相信他們不缺經費。在這樣的情況之下，一切是按照實際的需求，我們就是在合法的範圍之內跟他們合作。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "我們再跟役政署請教一下，就這樣定調，明年招攬電競選手的替代役。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我相信這兩個時程都有了，還有沒有動議要報告的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有的話，我們就非常非常有效率完成這一個會議，大概只花了三十六分鐘，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "教育部", "speech": "若未來電子競技比賽由中央各級機關或直轄市政府主辦，且符合下列採計原則：" }, { "speaker": "文化部", "speech": "本部105年11月18日電子競技選手服一般替代役諮詢會議會議紀錄1份。(連結如下)" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "📗 感謝教育部的補充。未來類似「TPC 台北盃電競大賽」的活動，若符合常態舉行等三項條件，就請招生委員會循程序再次討論，不需跨部會協調。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "各位觀眾，我是陳雅琳，我們今天要來進行臺灣新聞史上第一次的VR專訪，所以我現在其實是個虛擬人來到這個地方，哇！好漂亮喔！這裡仿佛像是世外桃源一樣！" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "哇！好多的山林，甚至還有櫻花耶！這個是一個日式建築，很漂亮，這誰的家呢？這是我們臺灣第一位跨性別的政務委員，我們的唐鳳的家。進去喔！唐鳳你好！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "很好！很高興在這邊遇到您！" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "是啊！我也好開心喔！而且是在虛擬的環境裡面碰到你，哇！你們家很漂亮耶！可不可以幫我們介紹一下？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以啊！這邊它的名字就叫做「Home」，它是「HighFidelity.io」這一套開源的、自由的VR軟體，它一進來就是這樣子的設定。但是這個地方跟我就是實際住的地方，就是花園新城它也滿像的，它就是好像不是家裡有一個花園，而是家就在一個很大的花園裡的感覺，所以我常常進來這一個VR的時候，心情就會比較平靜。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "哇！到花園新城心情平靜喔！那你看這個地方，是日式建築，那這是你特別喜歡的風格嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，它其實裡面像鋪這個榻榻米，因為小時候家裡也是鋪榻榻米，所以會覺得滿親切。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "而且還有很多的竹子。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "嗯。還有櫻花，還有一些別的，大自然。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "到這個地方，你就會覺得比較與世隔絕，然後心情可以平靜一點，對不對？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "嗯…對啊！其實與其說與世隔絕，不如說比較安靜吧！因為它地方很大，所以同時二、三十個人進來也都是能夠容納得下。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "真的啊！可以這麼多人啊！那我們可不可以再高一點來看一下看它多大。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好啊！可以啊！我們現在就可以到空中喔！" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "（跳）哇！跳起來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們就可以看到整棟房子，有沒有？" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "哇！可以在我們虛擬世界裡面，我們可以跟你這樣子飛行。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "而且不用吊鋼絲（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "不用吊鋼絲，對，對，對。所以這個空間高掛了什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "目前這一個空間裡面它就是有一個主要的這一個房子，然後如果你再升高一點的話，它就會一下子從白天變成晚上，就會變成夜空。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "好，那我們變晚上。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好，那就請再往上。再高一點，好，你轉一圈就可以看到月亮、海面啊！" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "所以我現在已經到了夜空了。對不對？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，它不受物理空間的限制，而且不管我們離得多遠，你看我們現在聲音都還是聽得非常清楚。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "嗯，旁邊有一輪明月，是不是這一次的超級月亮？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，是超級月亮，而且它永遠都是這麼圓的，不會改變的。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "哇！從小的夢想就是想擁抱月亮，把天上的月亮摘下來，這回可以把它摘下來吧！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "嗯。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "還可以再升到外太空嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，它其實外面的這一個場景，它隨時都可以改變，好比像說我們現在是在夜空裡面嘛！但是我們也可以一下子就突然變成跑到沙漠裡面，或者是說跑到其他的地方，那其實都是稍微按一個鍵就可以改變的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我覺得滿有意思的就是說，你現在想要怎麼樣的心情，它就可以給你這樣的心情。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "其實我跟你可能隔著十萬八千里，對不對？你在地球的另外一端，我都可以跟你在這邊相會。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，就可以一起看日出啊！一起看沙漠啊！看大峽谷啊！" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "哇！那這樣旅遊產業慘了，不用坐飛機去，我只要用VR的方式就可以環遊世界。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不過，說不定你看過一次，就更想去啊！這個都是很難說的。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "對，對，對。所以呢，其實大家會很期待你加入這一個政府的團隊，就是對臺灣VR產業的發展，那我們現在太空談這個事情好了，在環遊世界過程當中來談這個事好了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "那我們臺灣VR的產業，現在像蘋果、臉書他們這一些大廠都在積極發展這一塊，那我們臺灣有優勢嗎？還是其實我們滿多困境的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我想優勢跟一些困境、挑戰都是有的，那我先講優勢好了，其實臺灣最大的優勢就是資通訊的這一個基礎建設其實是非常好的，這個是為什麼我們現在可以用這麼高的頻寬，來跟大家就是作對談，像我現在住在宿舍，也是有300Mbps的光纖。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實臺灣100Mbps的光纖的整備率是非常非常高的，除了少數偏鄉之外，有98%的家戶，只要他們願意裝都可以裝到100Mbps的光纖，所以像這個就是發展VR產業非常有利的部分。因為大家如果想要的話，都可以接取到這樣子的頻寬。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "哇！就是我們的基礎建設做得很不錯。那困境呢？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個想要講的不錯的地方，是我們的硬體設計跟硬體製造的能力很強，所以像是我正在跑VR的這一台電競的筆電，像是我正在戴的這個VR的頭盔，然後以及周邊的所有這一些影像擷取卡，所有這一些軟體、硬體，其實都是臺灣設計的，所以也可以說裡面的每一個零組件都是有臺灣的技藝的精神在裡面，我覺得這個是很重要的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不過當然也不能只講好處嘛！對不對？" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以講一下我們目前碰到的一些情況好了。我覺得比較重要的問題是，我們的教育，以及我們產業訓練的一些制度，常常會有一個各做各的情況，就是做硬體、做軟體、做錄音、錄影，做其他的周邊，像現在做建模的這些朋友，其實並沒有一個非常完整的產業聚落或者是產業鏈的概念。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以其實每一個單點都做得很好，但是你說要像你說的這一些國際大廠，因為他們最厲害的就是說，有一個很大的想法，然後缺的那一些拼圖，透過併購或者是透過產業聯盟的方式，去把它組成，在臺灣我們比較沒有這樣子做的一些經驗；當然有一些個別的企業也做得不錯，但是這個比較不是我們的習慣，因為之前還是以代工比較多一些。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "對，所以這一個就是產業轉型的情況。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "所以就是我們現在上下游的鏈結，還有跟整個產業的昇級。那請問為什麼要用 VR 來進行訪問呢？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為其實用VR我可以很方便的，好比像說我剛才講到一輪明月，或者是講到雲或者是海洋，馬上我們就身處在同一個地方。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果我們是用電話訪問，或者即使是用面對面訪問，我都沒有辦法那麼快的去把我提到的這一些東西呈現在你的面前，那接下來如我們提到的一些網站或者是之前製作的一些逐字稿，在VR裡我可以把它馬上開出來，那在真實世界裡面，我手上的手機滑一滑，我還要把手機拿給你，其實就沒有那麼方便。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "那唐鳳我們先講一下喔！因為其實，最近其實觀眾朋友都還滿關心新政府的發展，因為現在剛好也是在總統執政滿半年，可是民調那麼就是一直掉，然後現在不滿意度還比較高，不曉得以你的立場，你怎麼看這樣的發展？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為民意調查這個部分比較不是我負責的，我負責的是開放政府，我相信開放政府是這樣子的，就是說我們先把政府裡面具體運作的過程讓大家知道。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那大家知道之後，其實常常並不一定是知道的時候就很高興，因為畢竟政府的內部運作確實有很多不盡如人意的地方，所以其實我們一開始的開放政府，並不一定大家都是很滿意的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是我覺得更重要的是公民參與，就是在大家給我們批評指教之後，大家就會來看說我們行政部門，是不是真的有因為大家所提出的這一些意見而有所調整？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得就跟人跟人之間互相信任一樣，你要很多次來來回回之後，這個信任才可以建立，對話才可以展開。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "對，所以這個公民參與，那我最近看到其實也滿憂心的，因為有好多團體都上街抗議，你看不管是核災地食品輸臺，還是說反同志婚姻等等，每天都有這樣，在新聞上看到一堆衝撞、抗議啊！這整體感覺可能會讓觀眾朋友覺得說現在好像很亂的感覺，就這個問題該怎麼辦？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我覺得就是大家表達訴求的這件事情，我覺得是民主社會很健康的一個狀況，那但是從另外一個方面來講，重點是說大家要覺得有充足的時間可以表達訴求，以及表達了訴求之後，能夠被完整的紀錄下來，變成政府施政的參考。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在這兩個情況下，我覺得大家就事實去做討論，或甚至有一些陳抗，我覺得都是民主社會正常的一部分。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想大家最主要會覺得挫折的是，像我以前在進政府以前，最覺得挫折的比較是說我好好講一次，好好講兩次，但是其實這些它並沒有產生實質的效果，那從公部門朋友的角度來看，常常會覺得是說公聽會開了一次、開了兩次，可是每一次好像都是在講一模一樣的話，那我覺得這一個不管是對民間社會的朋友還是公部門的朋友，都是感到特別挫折的事情。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "所以就是你覺得還要再溝通就對了？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得重點是「會不要白開」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "每一次的公聽會，每一次的研討會，每一次的焦點座談，應該是要建立在前一次，前兩次，前三次的基礎上，這樣子有接續的時候，我們每次即使不能達成共識，我們下一次共識又要好一點，又要好一點。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那如果他開的這個方式是每一次都要從頭講的話，那我想當然是慢慢、慢慢會比較沒有耐心。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "對，不過我覺得你看公聽會根本還沒有開始就打起來了，根本就沒有辦法好好的講話，即使民眾想要聽也聽不到。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，當然我們這邊就有一些方式，好比像我們現在這樣子的對談，它其實是也可以直播出去的。我們現在都隔著螢幕，我即使想要打你也打不到，那除了我們好好坐下來講之外，也沒有別的方法，它可以透過一些空間、時間的規劃，來讓溝通變得比較有效。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "真的是唐鳳耶！意思就是說我們透過很多很多不同的平台、載具、科技的方式來達到政策上的溝通。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "好，不過我們看到這一次其實那一天在立法院修法的時候，像反同志婚姻的這一個抗議規模還挺大的，那因為你本身也是國際間很矚目，因為身為中華民國第一位跨性別這一個高階的政務官，那你會怎麼看？那麼多反同志，而且力量還那麼大，你自己本身的力量、觀點是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們可能把立法的這一個階段，跟我對這一個議題的個人看法，我們分開來看。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我在行政院工作，我當然是尊重立法委員們，他們用任何程序、任何立法的方式，只要是能夠進行實質討論，我覺得都樂觀其成。行政跟立法本來就是分權的，我也不可能再去說什麼。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那但是反過來講，就是你剛才提到說，因為國際上面跨性別的閣員，我應該是第一位minister，所以確實我的國際友人都會詢問我關於這件事的個人看法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我其實一直的概念都非常簡單：平等當然是非常重要的事情，但是落實平等的方式，必須是大家充分討論之後才能完成的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我這一次覺得很有意思的事情是，兩方都引用了我上次在媒體茶敘的時候所說的話，那當然可能一方會引用前半段，另外一方會引用後半段，當然這也是民主社會討論很好的過程。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "兩個半段，我想要再講一次，都是我自己個人的想法。它不代表政策、也不代表我對立法的節奏有所干預。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "我知道就公部門來說，應該本來就是尊重行政、立法之間的一個溝通跟最後的決議，但是你個人應該也滿贊成這樣，是不是會覺得說臺灣也要走向跟世界趨勢比較符合的潮流？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我倒不覺得只是為了世界趨勢，具體的想法我可以講得更清楚一點。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得大家在步入婚姻之前，可能都要想清楚說，婚姻事實上是此之間當然是有一些權益，這些權益是國家所特別給這些配偶們的。按照我們之前的盤點，有非常非常多的權益是只給有結婚的人；但反過來，結婚這一件事情裡面，也包含彼此要盡很多的義務，這一些義務同樣也是配偶才有的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有理解到這樣子權益跟這樣子的義務再進入婚姻，我覺得會比較好，婚姻也可以持續比較久。這一件事我覺得跟性別沒有關係。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，大家上一次在茶敘問我，自己要不要走入婚姻的時候，我很具體在講的意思是，我覺得大家都可以先仔細想一想婚姻的意思是什麼，然後再決定進不進去。這一件事情我覺得無論是同志或者是異性戀，我覺得都是要好好思考的。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "如果像你的話，你有沒有想過有一天要結婚這一件事？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為我自己個人的決定，它跟公共政策比較沒有關係，所以我覺得比較不適合在這邊表態。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "而且另外一件事情就是說，這也不是我一個人的事情。剛才我們有提到說配偶的權益有四百九十八項，這是專屬權益，這不是我們訂一個契約就可以有的。同樣的，配偶之間互相負有的某些法定義務，也不是我們訂的契約裡能向彼此課以義務的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以對我來講，如果我要結婚的話，就是我跟我的伴侶都要先對這四、五百項的權益、義務都有非常充分的瞭解，並且都同意，才會走入婚姻。現在應該還沒有到那一步。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "OK，好。那我們在這個過程當中，因為你自己進來這個公部門體系，其實你三十三歲就已經選擇退休，那三十五歲進到公部門體系，其實你本來希望做的就是公僕中的公僕，帶給臺灣社會有一個不一樣的改變，你覺得你進來到現在，應該也差不多一個半月了，你覺得你帶來的改變是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得我帶來一個很主要的改變，就是建立了一套讓會議不要白開的機制。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為其實之前在行政院裡面常常會有一個狀況，就是說我們碰到一個有爭議的、大家不知道要怎麼定位的問題，舉例來說像電子競技，那算不算一種運動、算不算體育署主管的這一件事情，在我們旁邊的一些國家，可能是2006年—最晚到2010年—都已經討論出一個結果，可是臺灣卻一直都連它是什麼，每一個部會的想法都不一定一樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像電子競技選手他們就沒有辦法知道說，好比像說服兵役的時候，有沒有可能去服替代役，或者是說他們能不能像下圍棋的選手一樣，如果下得好的話，就可以有一個專門的課程，或者是說也可以在正式入學的時候也可以加分，因為這連是哪一個機關主管，以及每一個主管對它的定位都不確定。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我們中間其實開過，在我進來之前開過非常非常多次的會議，可是每一次的會議，我有看之前的調解的這一些紀錄，都是一樣的簡報，然後每一場會議好像都是回到原點這樣的方式來進行。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在我進來之後的這一個半月裡面，我們具體只開了兩場會議，以及我參加了一次立法委員們開的跨黨派的公聽會，這三場會議下來，我們就把電子競技的定位、定義及主管機關所有這一些都已經確定了，它就是建立在「每一場會議接續上一場會議的結論跟逐字稿」上面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為我們每一場會議開完之後，就把逐字稿公開，所以說就像PTT上面的LoL版、八卦版這一些網友都會去看我們開會的逐字稿，並且提出建議，他們的建議就會變成我們下一場會議的材料。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以這樣子就可以跟整個社會對話，然後非常快速地就可以收斂到一個結論：那就是說電子競技是一門技藝，然後電子競技的選手是這一個技藝文化的表演跟傳播者，這樣子各部會都同意這一件事，我們就可以往前走。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "所以也就是說效率比較好就對了？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，可能就是五、六年比較難解決的事情，我們可以在一、兩個月的時間就把它解決了。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "那這個跟你引用的這些科技、新進的東西直接上有什麼關係？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然有關係，我們現在看旁邊那一個牆壁，裡面有一個我的頭像，這一個頭像就是我逐字稿裡面所講的那一句話，所以說那個就是在我們第一次電競協調會議的時候，我所做出的一個具體的結論。那這個具體的結論是所有人都可以看得到的，也就是說大家不用再重新放一次公聽會的錄音帶或錄影帶，大家也不用重新再去揣摩上意，因為有時來開會的人，有時候回去跟他的部長跟他的下屬說的，可能在他會議裡面講的也不可能每一個字都一樣，所以說有這樣子的逐字稿把它釋出的時候，大家一下子就可以捲到最後面說我們開完這個會：" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「綠色」：一、國教署已經願意針對電競特色課程加以補助，私立南英商工在106年學年度已經會開電競特色班；二、教育部也同意各校把國際技藝競賽的名字納入甄選入學，所以這兩個我就標成了綠色的愛心，大家就知道這一件事已經解決了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「黃色」：教育部會希望「國際單項運動總會聯合會」先納入國際電子競技聯盟成為成員，他就願意在國內把它當作單項運動，黃色就是要等別的天時地利人和，我們才會做出決定。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「驚嘆號」：什麼叫驚嘆號？驚嘆號就是還有爭議，我們還需要開會來解決的。那是因為第一次在開會的時候，文化部會覺得說電子競技的這些商業同好們都是經濟部管，為什麼我會希望選手是由文化部來當作文化替代役？這個時候我就會把它解釋說其實我們寫遊戲、做遊戲的這些產業開發者跟我們打電競的選手是兩種不同的人才，前面是科技的開發人才，後面比較類似競技表演業，對不對？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以其實是完全不一樣，後面既然是一種表演、一種數位文化，那就應該是文化部來做。那這一件事這個逐字稿部長就會看到，他就可以做出一個裁示說他們願意做這件事，所以我也可以跟大家回報說，在第二次的時候，文化部就願意說好，那我們現在願意來當文化替代役、電競替代役的一個需用單位，當然接下來還有很多配套在討論，但是至少不會每次大家開會的時候，都回到原點。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "可是就我長期，你看我在新聞界，也差不多二十五年，長期跟公務部門交涉的結果，常常會覺得說他們其實有些因為礙於規範、礙於文化、礙於傳統，其實很難推得動，所以像你這樣一個很特殊的角色進來，我覺得會是體制上的衝撞，他們都能夠接納你的意見，然後真的完全改變，真的就效率上完全突破了嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得這裡的重點是說，並不是我的意見；也就是說，我其實只是類似一個通道的角色，什麼意思呢？因為我是一個通道的角色，這些意見其實並不是我個人的意見，我個人對這件事情並沒有什麼意見。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我的意思是這樣子的：上一次他們各個立法委員開過公聽會，我請了一位速錄師，每分鐘打三百多字，把每個選手的意見都記錄下來，我只是一個「把這些意見帶到文化部跟教育部的朋友們面前」的一個通道，所以他們都是看了公聽會的逐字稿才進來的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是，又因為他們知道說不管我們說了什麼話、有什麼交互的討論及辯論，這些又會用公開的方式回到所有對電競感興趣朋友的面前，所以他們就會很認真去準備，因為只要答應了，基本上就沒有辦法撤回。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那如果他們覺得有任何法規上困難的話，網友就會幫他們找法規：像是其實圍棋在五年前就有某個規定了，或好比像籃球的替代役在幾年前就有某個規定了，網友就可以幫公部門一起來思考。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以等我們第二次開會的時候，我甚至還有引用八卦版上面網友的話，然後來當作我們討論的依據。有一位網友「PeterJackson」開玩笑說：「我們現在電競可以設立專門的特色課程，可以開放招生了，覺得未來可能大家打電競時，就會有學生抱怨說打電競太累了，可能需要看書來紓壓。」這個很好笑，但是這個也有一個意義，就是說我們本來會覺得很叛逆、很衝撞，那是因為社會對它有一個污名化的概念，所以變成次文化，現在既然教育部都已經發函可以通知全國的中小學說電競是一門「智育」的文化了，那這樣子其實就沒有很叛逆的感覺了，他就變成是正規教育的一部分，我覺得這對大家都有好處，整個社會就不會一再地撕裂。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "唐鳳，我們聊到這裡，其實我好想在你家繞一繞，我們一邊走一天聊好嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "其實我覺得在你身上給我一個很大的啟示是教育的問題，尤其像你自學，尤其你八歲就有辦法編寫程式，我覺得這個是一個好令人驚艷的事情喔！從你自學的經驗來看的話，你會鼓勵學生都自學嗎？或者是你覺得這個是一個什麼特殊的經驗？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不過我想先講一下，我真正變成自學是十四歲以後的事情，我從八歲到十四歲其實都一直或多或少有到學校。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得滿關鍵的讓我在十四歲那一年不到學校的原因是，因為那一年有「全球資訊網（World Wide Web）」，就是有網站、網頁這一件事，所以我才可以在網路上很自由去看到一些經典，或者一些教授們他們錄的課程，就是線上的這一些東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我現在想講的是說，從電信總局當時，還不是中華電信的時候，他們就有一個要推動的政策，就是要讓各地都能夠普及...（後來是）用ADSL上網。當大家還是在撥接的時候，政府就很注重說，任何人都應該要用付得起的錢去上網。如果不是有這樣子政策的話，那其實光電話費這件事情就會受不了了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當時還要撥接，等於電話隨時都在撥的情況下，我還記得最早十二歲，當時候還沒有那麼普遍網際網路的時候，那時候就是因為靠撥電話的方式來上網，一個月下來好像五、六千元的費用。那其實是沒有辦法負擔得起，對大部分的人，包含我們家來講。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我的意思是說，像我現在進來參與一個叫「數位國家」的方案，我們裡面一個很重要的精神，而且是之前臺灣比較沒有提出過的，就是寬頻上網應該要是基本權利，等於是一個基本人權，那我們希望在三、四年之內做到所有的弱勢家戶有一個保障頻寬，就是至少有10Mbps，然後我們這樣VR或者是看這一類的線上教學，基本上都是夠用。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為如果沒有這個的話，我們很難說做的是「數位政府」或「數位國家」，因為這樣會排除掉非常多的人沒有辦法來參加。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我覺得要自學或者是要線上資源自學，最重要的一件事情是，所有的人都有平等的寬頻上網權利，從這一個當作基礎，我們才能再來談說你是要一個禮拜兩天去學校、三天在家裡或三天去學校、兩天在家裡，還是用什麼不同的方式結合你旁邊的社區或者是其他的這一些資源。因為現在「實驗教育三法」通過了，所以我剛剛講的這一些狀況，不管是個人自學、團體自學、機關辦學什麼的，其實都已經是合法的，所以還是要先讓網路連上，大家都可以看得到這一些資源，再讓學生跟家長去想說怎麼樣去運用這一個資訊其實是最好的。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "所以使用寬頻也是大家基本人權這樣的觀念，所以那時你躬逢其盛，剛好時代演進到這一個程度，所以你剛好可以透過這樣的時代演進來完成自學？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，這個是在技術上的，另外一個是很重要的是文化上。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我記得當時我的長輩們或爸媽的同事們，當時都覺得說所謂的有出路或者是好學生，他其實程式可能不一定要很會寫，或者不一定很會彈吉他，但他每一次都可以考九十幾分或者是一百分，就可以一路升學或者是出國或者是在國內拿博士，當教授或者是當什麼別的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那我的意思是說，其實這樣的結果是什麼？只有10％或只有5％的小孩會覺得現在我們叫做winner，那其他的小孩就會在整個過程裡面是挫折，他會就會覺得自己是輸家或者是loser—也就是在網路上看到「魯蛇」—就是看到很多人說他是魯蛇，他是在考試制度沒有辦法考到九十幾分或者是一百分。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是事實上這一些朋友，就像我們剛剛講的電競選手，你如果電競要打到很厲害，其實腦袋要非常、非常好，你要同時能夠掌握很多地方的資源，做調度、調配，有點像是以前帶兵打仗的那種能力，其實這一種能力跟背書考一百分當然不一樣，但是你說是不是要鼓勵？當然要鼓勵呀！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是我們以前沒有說某一方面的技藝很好，這一部分跟你考試考很高分應該是等量齊觀的這種看法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我小時候說我要寫程式，可是其實大人不知道寫程式是什麼，他們就覺得這個好像只是枝微末節的小技術、小技巧，可是如果大家當時就已經理解「不管是哪一門技藝，只要練到好，都是值得尊重的」，這樣子我當時自學就不會受到那麼大的壓力。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "因為家長的反對，傳統的壓力。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "不過這個過程，像你剛剛提到的魯蛇，你從小到大都沒有當過魯蛇，你即使在學校也是資優班，而且還是會讓同學覺得你怎麼那麼厲害，很討厭的這一種資優學生，對不對？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實不一定耶！我有很多年的時間，好比像我剛到德國的時候，因為我德文不好，然後也才剛開始學，而且當時我同學不但學德文還學法文，所以地理、歷史、國語文（他們的國語文），然後因為我身體不好，也不能運動，所以我在這一些所有項目上面，排名都是排在中後段的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣子的經驗其實也讓我看到說，雖然我數學很好，可是他們那邊很注重均衡發展，不是因為數學很好，所以資優生就別的什麼都不用學，你還是要踢足球、還是要跟人好好相處，還是要學會所有這一些生活上為自己負責的這一些能力，所以當時我一開始有這一種魯蛇的感覺，可是慢慢會覺得說，我們當一個完整的人要均衡發展。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "等到我回臺灣之後，其實接下來就開始，你也知道到了小六或國一就會背一些地理、歷史這一些東西，因為這一些東西我沒有什麼興趣，所以其實我也沒有考高分過，所以我也並不是資優學生就什麼都會背，我只有有興趣的東西才學得比較快。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "喔！所以像你史地不好的話，爸爸媽媽會對你怎麼樣嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，所以當時大家就會覺得說這樣子行嗎？尤其是我念的那一個國中，其實是一個測試用的制度，叫做「自願就學方案」，是不考聯考的，所以分發到哪一個高中完全是靠段考來決定。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "對，所以就會很擔心？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，就會很擔心，這樣子的話，可能就會分發到不怎麼樣的學校。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然因為我後來有參加中小學科展，也得了一次全國第三、一次全國第一，所以就有保送的這個制度，我當然可以直接保送想要念的高中，就沒有這個問題。接下來我就全部交白卷，因為我不想要把同學的分數往下壓，這樣他們都可以分發到比較好的高中，因為對我沒有差別了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在這樣的情況下，我就看到說其實我們還是有除了考試之外的管道，像有點像甄試或特殊技藝這樣子，在當時只有數學競試，只有物理、化學競試跟科展，這一些還是比較像學科性，現在當然有很多技能性的，所以希望未來當然慢慢電子競技或者相關的東西，也可以變成這一些參採的考量。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "所以就是其實每一個人都有他特殊的才能，希望透過我們的教育方式可以去發覺這一些特殊的才能。不過在你身上，我很好奇的是你為什麼可以這麼聰明？" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "這個聰明是很多的自學，因為一般人在成長發育的過程可能不會想，因為我們被長輩、體制安排好的道路去走，你是在什麼樣的情況下想到：第一個用自學的方式？第二個是想要跨性別？因為可以作男生也可以作女生，這樣自學的過程，總有一個什麼點觸發了？所以有這樣的一個想法，而且落實它？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為事實上我小時候，相信大家現在有聽說過，我有先天性的心臟病，有心室中膈缺損，所以其實我一直到十二歲為止都不能做劇烈的運動，就是連跑步都不能做，所以我的興趣仍然是比較智育方面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然十二歲開刀有動手術有治好，可是我還記得在動手術完的那一年，其實是在復健，不太能夠做什麼事情，也是那一年用撥接的方式有連到網際網路，當時其實全球資訊網—我們現在講的瀏覽器這些東西—都還沒有被發明，它們當時都還正在被發明的過程中，所以大家大部分做的事情就是上BBS，就是一些文字模式，像PTT這樣的東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有一些文字模式的空間，他們叫做「MUD」，其實也是像跟我們現在一樣，在一個虛擬空間裡面，也是有櫻花、榻榻米，大家也是可以穿不同的衣服，也是可以嘗試各種不同的表現，可是唯一的差別就都是文字，好比像說在文字介面就會看到「你現在踏入了一個和室的房間，你現在看到這個窗上有柱子的影子」，但是這一些必須在腦裡面畫出來，因為當時還沒有VR的技術。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為當時這樣的關係，我學到兩件事：第一個，我想要學什麼，差不多都可以找到這樣子線上的社群，有老師願意一對一教我。我第一次寫比較大型的程式，就是由一些我記得是清華大學和交通大學的研究生，在這樣子的虛擬世界裡面教我去寫，所以等於是有家教一樣的感覺。接下來就變成同事的感覺，因為這樣的關係…" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "…而且還免費？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "而且還免費，因為我也是幫他們的世界開發東西，大家彼此之間都沒有好像要收錢或者是換錢這樣的概念，可是他們就會教我很多我一個人看書學不到，像是團隊寫程式，怎麼做品質測試、做品管，怎麼做所有這一些規劃，這一些東西都是在十二歲的時候，這一些朋友們教我的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "很妙的是說，這一些朋友們其實都沒有性別可言，因為我們從線上都只能打字，所以說一個人他說他是什麼性別就是性別，我們在這一個空間裡面，也有一點像是我現在隨時也可以穿上你的模型、你也可以穿上我的模型，就是說它是非常流動的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，我們就可以在上面試著用各種不同方式來表現自己，這個時候就發現說，其實不一定只有男生、女生，大人、小孩、winner、loser，這一些社會的角色，你喜歡的話，也可以用各種各樣不同的方式來進行溝通，那別人也是都會尊重你，所以在這樣子的過程裡，我就慢慢發現說其實一個人他要表現出怎麼樣的氣質，是旁邊的人接受、旁邊的人覺得安全，這樣子就可以了，所以有一點像是一個實驗場這樣的感覺，大概都十二歲的時候有這樣子的一些價值出現。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "所以你當時在跟這一些大學生或者是研究生溝通的時候，他們一定不知道你竟然只有十二歲，對不對？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，我在某些地方會說我十二歲，然後還有人說：「我不相信，感覺你很成熟。」什麼之類的，所以我的意思是說，當時我就發現說我要表現成什麼樣子，完全是我自己決定的，那我如果表現得很幼稚，別人當然就會把我當小孩，我如果表現得很成熟，別人就會把我當大人。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "那時候大半都以為你幾歲？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我一開始的時候，我有很誠實地說我只有小學六年級，但是大家都不相信，所以後來就是把我當作可能喜歡裝小孩的一個大人吧！有一段時間是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是因為當時有很多虛擬空間，所以我接下來在別的虛擬空間裡面，我可能就會不特別去講說我是男生或女生或者我幾歲，大家就是心裡看到覺得我是什麼就是什麼。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實當時除了這一些人類之外，也有人扮成精靈、矮人、半獸人，這些不同的種族也都是很和睦地相處在這個線上的世界裡面，那就不只是性別或者是年齡，就連物種都是可以去扮演，然後可以去彼此體會的。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "哇！所以非常amazing耶！就是跨性別、跨年齡、跨時空、跨物種，重點就是把這一些框架都拿掉的話，我們就可以看到真正的內涵是什麼，對不對？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，就是你覺得重要的這些價值是什麼，就可以看得比較清楚。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "我如果真的要講說，因為畢竟我們還是人類，就是你覺得自己在哪一個形象底下的唐鳳是最comfortable的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實現在這樣子我最comfortable。就是說我現在是在宿舍，然後我有相當舒服的一個椅子，然後我的身體是在一個很放鬆的姿勢，我又是透過VR的方式，所以我知道說我只要專注在我說的話上面，我不用特別去管說麥克風有沒有別好，或者是說收音有沒有什麼別的問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們把技術的這些問題都解決了，那就能夠當自己，我覺得這樣子就是把我們人跟人之間互相交流，不要受時間跟空間的限制，越不受限制，我就覺得越自在。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "可是我從這裡看到你，畢竟我在虛擬的世界看你，你是留著長髮，穿著紅衣服，然後紅色的外套跟裡面的功夫裝，現在在宿舍的你是這樣嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我現在在宿舍是穿紅色的T-shirt，但是沒有穿成跟虛擬世界裡面一模一樣，虛擬世界的這一個是我去巴黎的時候，我就穿這套衣服，然後他們用360度相機拍我，把我做了一個模型。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那你現在也是一樣，你也是被環繞的相機拍過，那在那樣子的一個模型裡把它建模，所以我覺得你穿這樣很棒。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "我覺得你穿這樣很棒啊！你這樣走路腳開開的不至於像我這麼難看，在虛擬世界裡，那你是長髮嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "（笑）對啊！我現在的頭髮跟建模的時候差不多一樣。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "OK，好，那我們再走到外面，好不好？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "我看你的後花園挺有意思的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "來。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "看一下，這個是後花園。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，而且這邊還有一個傳送門，一個有發出白光的地方。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "那個是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你如果走過去的話，就會進入一個類似外星世界的地方，在那個世界裡面，就是所有用這樣子一個軟體在溝通的人可以聚會，有一點像是個大會堂，所以我們去可能會碰到很多在地球各個地方的人都會在裡面。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "真的啊！那我很想去。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好啊！我們就進去。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "到了嗎？進入整個白光。哇！那個是什麼人啊？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們就看到…" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "不是人嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有機器人。對不對？" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "機器人，對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好，然後這邊就有一位這個專門來歡迎我們的人就出現了。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "我可以叫他什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他叫「greeter」。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "他也有名字啊！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！他上面有寫「I am a greeter, I can help.」，而且他還向我們招手。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "是，那我可以向他招手嗎？Hello！可以跟你握手嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "Hello！應該可以啊！你就往前，然後你就扣住你的手把，你就可以跟他握手了。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "他一直退後，他可能怕我了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有，他要拿一個板子出來。有沒有看到？" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "OK，他拿板子做什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他可能想要拿一個東西出來給我們，這個板子有一點像是shopping的板子，他就可以從裡面變出各種各樣的東西。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "他飛起來了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他飛起來了，對，還跟我們招手。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "所以其實他們也挺友善的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，沒錯。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "我對你的助理比較有興趣。這個精靈，我可以叫他精靈嗎？還是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以啊！沒問題啊！" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "你都叫他什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我都叫他什麼？他叫黃子維，是我的機要秘書。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "因為看起來很像那個… 那個電影叫什麼？阿凡達。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "阿凡達，對，因為他還沒有建模。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "那我要跟阿凡達手指通一下，可以嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以啊！你可以去跟他握手，事實上他是另外一個人（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好，你可以跟他稍微握個手。好，我也可以跟你握個手，等我一下喔！我切換到那個VR裡面，等我一下喔！" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "無法從外觀上去辨認。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，就跟我十二歲那個時候的狀況就是一樣的，就是你只能用他的實際講的話跟他做的事情來認識他。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "等我一下喔！我現在把我的手把拿出來。這樣高度應該是？沒問題了吧？" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "好，握手。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好，來。有握到嗎？" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "OK，我們在虛擬世界也可以做這樣的接觸！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，對。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "可是我覺得還是有體溫比較好，有溫度會不會比較好一點（笑）？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那當然，未來其實除了視覺跟聽覺之外，我們還可以穿一個衣服，那個衣服就可以把觸覺或擁抱這一些東西都把它呈現出來。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "好，那我可以握手，那我可以跟你擁抱嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以啊！可以啊！" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "好，來。你好高喔！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "真的。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "你從小就長這麼高嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，我大概十幾、二十歲就這麼高了。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "180了，我才164。不過這樣還挺有安全感的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "（笑）好。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "OK，那我可不可以跟外星人來一段跳舞呢？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "跳舞啊？其實這個都可以事後錄的，我可以變成外星人。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "啊！你可以變成外星人？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你看喔！對啊！我們每一個人的模型都不是固定的，所以我任何時候我就可以，我只要按一個鍵，然後你看我突然間我的樣子就突然變成外星人了。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "哇！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有沒有看到？" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "有。一位發光藍色的外星人，像阿凡達又來了，這樣我就沒有辦法跟你的助理作辨識了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，沒錯。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "啊！我也變了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "（笑）" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "天啊！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你看你也變成阿凡達。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "你平常都做什麼運動啊？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我通常在VR裡面會打球跟射弓箭，這一些都是運動量很大的運動。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "對，身體關係還是不要太劇烈，我們在VR裡面做一些就是肢體上的動作就可以了，對不對？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好啊！" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "那我們來一段什麼呢？PPAP（笑），來1、2、3！這好像是功夫喔！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！這好像功夫喔！" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "那有無限的可能性，好。那我最後問一下政委，在臺灣未來的虛實之間的世界，它的發展會是一個什麼樣的情況？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得最重要的，我們現在在做的這些東西，它比較像是實驗性質，這個東西要落實變成實際在地方應用，好比像你可以想像一下如果一個地方要為了某一個火車站要擺在哪裡，或者是說地方有一個建設，或者要蓋一個圖書館或者要做什麼，大家都可以戴這樣子的一個眼鏡，或者是到某個3D電影院，然後一起來討論說，我們這裡有一個公園，怎麼樣規劃它是市民都可以接受的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們如果要落實這個的話，就不是我們中央的人在這邊只是做實驗就說了算，我們能夠做的是建立起一些具體可行的一些，而且是開放的一些做法，但是實際上要把它落實，還是需要六都的朋友，以及每一個六都為它旁邊的縣市來負責任，然後讓第一線的資訊人員有這樣的能力去落實我們現在推的這一些開放的東西、所有這一些不同技術界接的東西，也才能夠落實。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這也是我們在「數位國家・創新經濟」理面，會是注重區域治理的概念，就是說每一都的朋友們到我們數位國家方案裡面，變成我們的委員。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在這樣子的過程之中，我們也可以規劃說最後一哩要怎麼落實，這個落實就可以變成我們政策持續檢討的基礎，那當然這所有的過程都可以把它公開在網路上面。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "所以將來我們所謂的公共場域就不再那麼侷限了。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "好，唐鳳你的，我看你的眼球我比較看不習慣，請你變回來，好嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好，好，我現在變回來。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "扭曲一下，哇！變！還要蹲下！哇！你的助理一直在看我，我不好意思。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我回來了。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "回來了！唐鳳回來了！Hello！" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "那我們共同面對鏡頭，今天非常感謝唐鳳帶領我們來看他世外桃源的家，也帶領我們游歷這樣的一個VR世界，也完成了我們臺灣新聞史上第一次的VR專訪，期待觀眾朋友會有一些感觸，將來可以有無限想像的虛實的世界，那期待可以讓我們的人類的生活更美好，對不對？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "謝謝，我們跟觀眾朋友say bye-bye。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是的，謝謝，謝謝大家，bye-bye。" }, { "speaker": "陳雅琳", "speech": "最後還是扭動一下，跳個舞吧！謝謝唐鳳，下一次再來喔！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好，bye-bye。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我的想法是說我們所有講的話都會做成逐字稿，雖然我們不會公布錄音，但是我們會把錄音請打逐字稿的朋友打成逐字稿，再跟各位確認內容之後，應該是十天之後我們會發布在網路上，但是如果中間任何人提出的問題或覺得這一句話其實不應該記錄，或者剛剛講錯，應該用什麼方式記錄的話，直接說明就好，我們製作逐字稿的朋友都會按照大家的意思來製作。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "所以我們現在依舊直接進行提問的部分，因為唐政委英語也非常流利。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家還在想問題的時候，因為前面沒有一個換名片的程序，如果大家之後對我今天講的話或者有任何follow up，可以用email連絡。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "我想請教有關於Uber的事，Uber因為違法的問題，這樣有沒有解決的辦法？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "Uber在一開始剛進入臺灣的時候，其實並沒有被認定成非法的，用的是R牌的租賃車，收的比計程車多的錢，主要從事給機車接送的業務，這一些營業成本本來也都有自己成立公司或者是投保這樣子，所以在剛進入臺灣的時候，爭議並沒有那麼多，其實當時我也常常坐UberBLACK，但是後來他們推出了UberX，其實也沒有共乘的功能，用沒有取得職業駕駛執照的司機，然後並沒有登記的車，也收取比計程車司機稍微低一點的錢，但是如果下雨的話，會突然比計程車高一些的錢，在這樣的情況之下去進行營業。從去年我還在當行政院計畫顧問的時候，就已經做了多方關係人的會談，當時有請到他們在營業台北地區計程車商業同業公會的理事長跟臺灣大車隊、交通部、經濟部及財政部所有的朋友，當然包含Uber跟他們的律師，我們有一次的多方會談。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一次的會談是建立在一個幾千人參與的網路感受的普查上面，vTaiwan的普查當時有95％，不管是Uber的司機或者是計程車司機，都認為政府應該要立新的規則，這一個規則是專門用來處理電召車，就是不是在街上攔車，而是用電召車，大家的共識是應該要學到好的朋友，包括司機跟乘客可以交付打五顆星。因為其實不是在街上攔，所以也不用漆成黃色，用黃色是因為要區分可以攔的車，但是如果沒有網路叫車或者是派車的話，是否漆成黃色沒有差別，所以可以不要漆成黃色等等。還有如果有一些比較偏遠地區，過去之後跳錶，回來之後其實是載不到人的，業者有反應，所以其實這一些電召車只要事前有一套透明的機制，其實應該可以收比跳錶更多的錢等等，在那一場裡面其實都已經蒐集到這一些共識。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "同樣的，我們包含應該要使用這一些有職業駕駛執照的司機，其實你是從這一個上面才能夠建立更多包含車輛營業登記證、納管、納稅這一些東西，但是基本上在納管這一件事上，職業駕駛執照這一件事是基本的，沒有這個其實別的很難談。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在去年的時候，Uber所請的謝樹藝律師其實是有充分表示說他們願意來協助他們會取得這一些還沒有職業駕照司機來取得職業架駛執照，但是在今年他們的David Plouffe來的時候，在這一點上突然間表示不能沒有辦法取得共識。當然因為我不是主要跟他們談判的人員，其實那是交通部負責，這一案不是我在案，這一案是只有去年多方利益關係的時候，我有協助主持，所以其實我也覺得有一點奇怪，怎麼去年看起來好像可以做的事情，到今年態度上有一點改變。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我們具體的成果是，我們在上個月頒布了「多元化計程車服務方」，按照這個方案，任何跟Uber做類似行為，但是當然有納管、納灌、使用職業執照這一些新的電召車隊（多元化計程車車隊）都是可以做核發的申請，在交通部審核、標準之後，明年1月就會開始上路，所以不管Uber當時是否願意使用這一套「多元文化計程車方案」來進行被納管，但是基本上做類似行為合法業者可以合法營業，當然可能在經營上可以給Uber一些不是只有他們才能做這一些事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然，我對這一件事因為我不是督導政委，但是以我的理解，交通部的立場還是希望Uber像上一次發言說一個合法的房子，外面蓋了違建，違建裁罰，並不是要把合法的房子拆掉，不是違建莫名其妙就變成合法了，而是願意用新制定出來的方式，願意落地納管，變成一個合法的經營樣態。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "Uber也是可以直接參與這一個平台嗎？需要申請之後才可以嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個叫做「交通運輸服務業」，也就是本來有一個業別的，當然需要登記成交通運輸服務業者，這個是很明確的事情，但是滿足了這個之後，就可以按照「多元文化交通計程車方案」來組織電子車隊，只是說目前使用沒有使用駕駛執照這一些朋友們的司機，可能沒有辦法在合法的樣態來進行經營，認為非法的部分，其實交通部針對非法的經營按照資本額加以裁罰，而不是覺得這一家公司本身，因為本來就有合法跟非法的樣態。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "我想請問一下，現在行政院要推動所謂「數位國家、創新經濟發展方案」，是不是可以請您談一下這個計畫的規模、內容是什麼？希望達成什麼目的？對臺灣的經濟會有什麼樣的影響或助益？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我如果沒有記錯的話，明天發言人跟我一起會有一個行政院的院會，因為我現在講的任何話還是在做草案，是要經過明天院會核定之後才會變成真正院會的方案。當然它已經非常非常接近了，因為只有二十四小時的差別，所以我可以講一些概念性的東西，所有具體的部分是以明確核定的版本為準，包含數字或者是期程。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「數位國家、創新經濟發展方案」是從2017年開始，會取代本來的NICI的方案，變成一個新八年的方案。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "（投影「數位國家、創新經濟發展方案」PPT）封面頁因為沒有任何政策的具體數字，所以明天之前封面頁應該是不會改的（笑）。封面頁其實大家可以看到這如果把它跟本來資通訊NICI的方案相比，其實在方向、規劃跟範圍上都有相當大的改變，我們本來的NICI的資通訊發展方案比較屬於現在DIGI＋的第一個「D（Development）」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「D（Development）」：這個部分是非常重要的，包含蔡英文總統在競選時有提過一個政見，希望弱勢的家戶都可以接取寬頻，這個是寬頻基本人權，這個是她的政見，這個東西本來就沒有在NICI「Development」這一個方案裡面，在DIGI＋裡面我們就把它加了進來，也就是變成如果是弱勢家戶的話，我們希望從這個方案啟動的三年內都可以用一定的頻寬，有一個基本保障的寬頻接取。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們有短、中、長期，當然希望這個方案發展到中、長期時，希望這一個頻寬能夠支援即時的視訊、串聯及未來要做虛擬教室這一些東西，應該是弱勢家戶的基本權利。像我自己從十四歲開始就沒有去正規學校上課，就是因為當時有網路接取關係，我才可以看線上的課程直接跟教授討論，這一些不應該只讓中產階級或者是優勢階級的朋友來進行接取，應該是要讓所有的人進行接取。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「I（Innovation）」（簡報第3頁）：這一個部分如果大家有看世界經濟論壇（WEF）對臺灣綜合資訊國際評估的話，他們有畫八角型的圖，那一個圖臺灣事實上在整備率在可接取的範圍這一些方面都還滿高的，但是有一塊像缺角，而這一個缺角是法規，我們的法規在WEF評比裡面，不但沒有名列前茅，而且是每一年落後的狀態，從WEF來看我們資通訊的一些最基本法規，不管是從數位匯流到數位經濟創新，好比像資產擔保及公司法這一些東西，其實修改的速度都可能比八年還要長的期程來計算。當然隨著每一年世界情況的改變，這一些法規必須要進行修正，所以在數位經濟裡面很重要的一個是，我們必須要跟立法院的朋友合作、司法院的單位合作，儘快對這一些新的樣態東西可以更加具體、快速產生出法規上調適的方法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「G（Governance）」：如果創新經濟是回應私部門要求的話，Governance就是回應公部門。很多地方政府自己的要求，在臺灣以前常常會發現中央是策劃而地方是執行，中央把經費撥下去，而地方要落實，可是我們很少把Governance這一件事，當作跟造橋鋪路一樣程度的這種公共建設預算的想法，常常在地方政府的層級裡面，資訊單位是從屬於研考或者是從屬於一些可能三級的機關，台北市是一個特例，台北市是有資訊局，那是一局的局處，而台中現在是數位治理局，我想六都是比較容易的，量能比較充足，但是其他縣市的話，常常發現中央撥了這一些東西，希望他們落實，但是像我昨天才剛去澎湖，連澎湖那一條線都快要滿了，所以不管規劃什麼機房或者什麼東西，其實很難連到本島再回來。所以他們就必須安排一些他們在各地直接用回撥跟highlight，直接做點對點的方案。可是你們說他們是不是有很專業的人力去落實這一些，其實是不一定的有的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以在在「G（Governance）」這邊有兩個具體的規劃：一個是用開放政府的方式，我們把所有重大建設，包含「亞洲‧矽谷」及這一些其他的方案，在研考單位可以看到一個執行管考的介面，不管是每月更新、每季更新、花了多少錢、執行進度多少、發包哪一些案子、執行到什麼程度、誰承包的，所有非常細的這一些資料全部都公開在網路上。不只公開在網路上，明年年初還提供一個大家透過國發會的平台能夠提問，能夠自己提出一些經費看起來有編到這邊，但是為什麼住在這邊沒有看到的即時回饋機制進去，唯有這樣的機制出現，我們才真正能夠看到地方的治理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外，我們會邀請六都的副首長直接加入數位國家的團隊，也就是每一都的副首長現在要扮演一個類似統合的角色，把旁邊的縣市好比像每一次要做資料的普查、資料的盤點，常常六都回來的資料其實欄位很齊全，也都很多，有一些縣市限於人力或之類的，盤點出來我們明明在網站上看起來可能已經有三十項，但是回來只有三項的情況，時常會有發生，我們以前在中央，真的很難一個個去走訪，但是現在可以把它落實到離最近的都，請那一個都的資訊中心統一他的欄位或格式，或者至少在基本調查這一方面能夠給我們一致的東西來給中央參考——治理方面一方面結合民間力量，二方面結合區域治理力量。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「I（Inclusion）」：結合公民社會也是新的，我們之前在講公私部門合作（PPP）時，經常指的私是產業界或者是經濟的這一些朋友，但是事實上在臺灣也有另外一群朋友，他們比較可能是NGO或者是一些公民團體，這一些公民團體看到我們釋出的這一些資料時，想的並不一定是怎麼賺錢，想的是如何監督政府、如何讓政府更透明、如何幫助政府一起做決策、如何怎麼樣結合地方的地區發展或者是更新。這一些東西從我的角度來看，也就是讓整個社會都能夠參與這個數位國家的last mile，last mile在很多情況下不一定是私部門跟公部門就能夠做到的，很多時候這一個last mile必須要結合公民社會跟NGO的力量，這也是為什麼我們除了公私部門委員會之外，也會有外部的委員來參加數位國家、創新經濟，也希望結合公民社會力量來結合last mile的部件及反映每一個社區實際上的情況。這個是大方向，實際的細節會落實到各部會的執行，我想明天由發言人統一發布，我不適合在這邊講，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "我看到數字是說八年要斥資1,500億元，這一個數字目前是這樣嗎？另外，有一個說法是希望能夠在2025年將數位經濟的規模衝刺到6.5兆元，這個是什麼樣？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你只要提到數字，我就不適合在這邊講了，那一個數字其實我們每一個版本、每一個禮拜都按照實際的情況再修正，所以對於草案裡面提到任何具體的數字，我就比較沒有辦法評論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外，數位國家、創新經濟裡面，我之前幫忙規劃的部分，比較是數位國家的部分，也就是「G（Governance）」、「I（Inclusion）」部分，之前的基礎建設跟經濟的部分其實之前比較不是我在幫忙看或規劃，當然未來這一個東西實際成軍之後，我們一定會需要一個通盤的溝通，在此之前尤其是經濟規模並不是我的專業，我是進來當了數位政委之後，才加入世界經濟論壇（WEF）這些線上的組織，然後跟全世界的朋友們去學習經濟方面的東西，所以我自己現在還在學習，也很難告訴你說這個東西是怎麼估出來的。但是估的這一些單位，好比像國發會及科技會報，他們有自己的專業團隊，那部分的工作，明天也會在院會裡面進行具體的報告。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "我想問一個比較簡單的問題，您之前在國外擔任過高科技公司的顧問，應該會賺很多錢，為什麼要來這裡？政務委員的生活是什麼樣的生活？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實我在三十三歲，其實兩年多前就已經退休了，我從十四歲開始出社會，其實也是工作了二十年，也創過幾次業，也帶了好幾批年輕人，其實我現在心態上雖然看起來可能三十五歲，但是事實上比較五十五歲，因為大部分的人創業是完成他的高等學業才創業，我只是提早個十幾、二十年出社會，但是其實我在這一個過程當中，我在加入政府前其實本來就是美商蘋果公司、牛津大學出版社及矽谷的Socialtext三家公司的顧問，這三家公司（分別）每個月給我的薪水差不多就是政務委員的薪水，而且還不用上班（笑），所以我進來之後當然負酬庸，薪水砍到不到一半、工作時間也增加，這個都是真的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是我既然已經退休了，所以並沒有在計較這個收入，其實我平常也沒有什麼很奢侈的花費，所以其實薪水這一個部分我倒是覺得比較無所謂，這個是一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一件事，我之前在矽谷這一些公司當顧問的過程當中，我的工作很多部分是幫前五百大公司，一些非常非常大的公司，有些甚至是政府部門去導入一個讓他們之間部門破除本位主義而可以做成橫向溝通的系統，我就叫做「Enterprise Social Software」或者最早會叫做「Wiki for Enterprise」，我們拿民間的這一些維基百科、Twitter、FB這一些我們民間用來協同合作的開放工具，我們試著在公司內部—尤其是大公司的內部—加以導入，它就是具體會讓他們的HR、各地方的分布，能夠有一個橫向溝通的方法，從檔案共享、事務共享的這一些東西都是用開放的方式來彼此協作，所以我從2008年擔任這樣的企管顧問角色，其實一直到入閣之前都是在做這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不管是哪一國的政府，都可以看做是非常非常大的NPO，並不是為了賺錢，所以問題也非常非常大，問題也非常類似，也就是內部的資訊流不通常，大家自己覺得很懂，但是那個是用專業語言表述的，所以用專業語言發到別的部門時，別的部門也不一定那麼懂。所以在跨部門中間怎麼去做一個從資訊上、資料上、人這一些東西橫向的整合平台就變得非常重要。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "事實上，現在在臺灣目前政府體制裡面，一些比較年輕的同仁們早就已經使用各位都會用的工具，LINE、Dropbox、Google Drive、Trello等，以上並不是為特定的企業背書（笑），我的意思是說我們已知大家都用這一些第三方服務，即使排除資安的顧慮不看，它都有一個問題，它是非常依賴於個人的，如果這個聯絡人慣用這一套系統，他走了，新的人慣用另外一套系統，本來的搜尋紀錄跟累積的這一些東西就不見了，所以一個部門最懂的那一些人員，因為比較低階、比較年輕，而且沒有辦法整個部門決策時的東西，要決策的時候還是要印出來變成一張A4，然後再拿去給他的副首長跟次長看，次長看的永遠不是充分橫向溝通過的版本，而是印成一張A4的版本。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以目前在院內做的事，我們首先是要用自己的辦公室示範及借調朋友來示範我們怎麼樣讓不同部會在某一些題目上，比如電子競技選手應該要怎麼歸類，就牽涉到文化部跟教育部，教育部裡面也不是只有教育部，因為教育部有三級單位，還有國教署、體育署，當你這樣子真正下去看的時候，就會發現每一個都有自己內部決策的習慣—我們用「習慣」講比較不會有問題（笑）—因為他們參與了這一個案子，我會請他們來開一個會，把會議打成逐字稿，所有書面的簡報都上網，而且在十天之內公開出來，在這十天之內的過程中他們可以去調任何的資料，三級機關看到二級機關的朋友來開的逐字稿，就知道他的長官到底承諾了什麼，他就不會一回頭突然間覺得交辦的東西跟當時談的東西不一樣，因為討論的紀錄都在那邊。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "三級機關有了回應之後，我們就會具體說哪一些亮了綠燈，表示當時電競選手的訴求有做到。比如：哪一些亮了黃燈，也就是表示我們在等一些國際上的形式；哪一些事實上是一個驚嘆號，好比像文化部在第一次開會的時候，本來是覺得兵役應該交給經濟部解決，但是後來我說不是，寫電競程式跟做電競文化表演的是兩群人，不應該混在一起談，因此要開第二次的協調會，但是第一次跟第二次協調會的中間，第一次協調會的逐字稿放在網路上，所以在「PPT的八卦版」、「PPT的LoL版」、「巴哈姆特」、「Yahoo！電競」等所有曾經關心過電競的—以上都沒有特定為某一個平台背書的意思—所有以上這一些朋友們都看到逐字稿就會看到非常多的意見湧進來，就會說圍棋選手已經解決過這一個法令問題，其實不是問題，好比說籃球國手已經解決這個問題，並不是這一個問題等等，我們就會收到很多民間具體這一些建議。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然其中有一些建議是比較文化性的，好比像第一次在規劃的時候就有說教育部以後107課綱實施之後，有一個電競的特色課程，讓喜歡電競喜歡的選手因此可以學一些傳播、媒體的工作，這個東西一出來在八卦版上面的一位網友就說：「這樣子以後小朋友會不會覺得打電競壓力太大，需要念書來紓壓。（笑）」這就變成我們第二次會議的Agenda，也真的列入第二次會議紀錄中，教育部的朋友聽到這一個，就覺得現在看起來很酷、很叛逆，那個是次文化的原因一部分是原本被污名化，如果現在把它變成正常的東西，可以跟課業有所結合，他們也比較沒有那麼擔心、也比較知道如何跟家長溝通，如此透過一次次這樣的示範。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實這本來就是我在當企業管理顧問時幫大企業做跟建立的事情，現在只是把這一套想法移植到中央政府來，然後透過讓大家越來越習慣這樣的工具，希望在每一個部會慢慢這樣子的文化就可以延伸開來，當然在軟體上，我們就有把剛剛提到的溝通軟體，在院裡面自己政府雲裡面透過資安的確保，讓這一些東西可以用院裡的系統來做，也因為這樣的關係，不管是人換掉、部會資訊長換掉，這一些東西永遠都是存在政府雲裡面，並不會待在外界的系統。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "以您二十年的工作經驗，您怎麼看未來的產業是哪一些？臺灣有沒有在這一條道路上？臺灣在這一些未來產業佔有的立基、優勢及劣勢分別在哪裡？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "相信「產業」兩個字太大了，包含傳統產業及「5＋2」的產業創新，「產業創新」的意思是本來就有這一些產業，但是我們透過導入一些數位化、導入機器學習、新的接取方式及萬物聯網這些東西，加進去之後每一個東西都展現出不同的面貌來，當然有一些工作就高度被自動化，但是反過來講，自動化也創造了很多新的可能工作機會。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一些東西在臺灣這邊，我覺得當然也有很多好處。第一，像我自己對VR很有興趣，我本來就是VR的開發者，所以我就會覺得要做VR的開發者，從硬體的零件到電競專用的那一台筆電，到接取VR服務所使用中間旁邊軟硬體補助的專注這一些，都是由臺灣設計的，我可以直接在臺灣這一些把尖端研究的朋友們工作整合在一起，變成我做好比像記者在VR裡面訪問的這個解決方式，從建模到截取到硬體到所有這一些搭配，全部都可以在臺灣，以臺灣自己的廠商來滿足，這其實放眼全球其實很難有一個地方可以說完全不需要別的其他國家來import這一些硬體上的技術，他們可以自己完全掌握這一些技術。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以上歌功頌德完畢之後，我們還是要說這個例子是建立在我對這一個東西有一個很明確的應用想像上，才可以說這幾個整合在一起就好了，但是其實有一些矽谷的公司根本不是說自己建立，像我之前的那一家公司，特別在最初的一本書叫做「Designed in California」，它根本不是去做製造，它也根本不是做最基本的東西，它雖然也做，但那並不是最主要做的事情，最主要是形成那個Design，而且那個Design也不是我們一般認為硬體畫面或者是軟體的設計，Design的是一整個提點，所以是有這樣的Design之後，透過外包、購併及隨便用什麼方式，然後就把這個experience湊起來，大家會覺得用那一家公司的產品，經驗是非常smooth、一體的，那用這樣子經驗方式來設計並整合上下游的這一件事，在臺灣比較看不到用這樣的方式，尤其是公部門來做所謂一站式、經驗式及體驗式的規劃。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我接來之後會協助公部門朋友做這一件事，這個也牽涉到我們對自己產業定位的想像，到底我們是只做branding或者是代工或者是做什麼，這一些都非常重要，可是在這個上面能不能對experience能有再更多的想像要去引領底下的產業鏈。我們在數位國家也有提出一些願景、想法，但是就如剛剛所說這個是我們自己手上有的資料做出來的，我相信在八年推動方案裡面，更大的部分是要靠公民社會、媒體朋友及私部門的想像，慢慢再把它加進來，這樣才有可能去定義出產業的願景，比較不是用今天的技術可以去想像。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "您怎麼看到政府在「5＋2」及「亞洲‧矽谷」議題上，政府與民間新創界的溝通？您覺得這一塊蔡政府目前算是會溝通的政府嗎？" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "因為之前有提到「亞洲‧矽谷」的用字問題，中間「‧」一點，現在溝通起來有沒有順利一些？可不可以幫我們舉例子？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像上個禮拜在這裡，徐發言人說名實如果不符的話，其實後面的溝通是非常吃力的事，這個確實是這樣。當時還叫做「亞洲矽谷」時，大家都以為「亞洲」是形容詞，就會以為我們要在亞洲複製或者是山寨矽谷，大家覺得這個是不可能的事，新創界一片叫壞，我自己都覺得不合理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是其實如果你實際去看各部會編進來那一些計畫，「亞洲‧矽谷」方案中的那一些計畫，其實並沒有哪一個方案是說我們要在亞洲複製矽谷，完全沒有這一種東西，所以如果名實不符，我覺得後面的溝通很容易白做，這個是事實，但是當然並不是名實相符就自動被溝通，絕對不是這樣子，所以我加「‧」，那個「‧」念作連結，它只是為了要大家不要把它以為是我們要在亞洲複製矽谷，而是說我們要「鏈結亞洲，連結矽谷」，不管是資金、人才、技術這一些東西做一個充分的鏈結跟連結，如果實際去看每一個部會編列的東西，其實是比較接近這一個東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好比像現在的名實相符了，我們還是要溝通，在溝通的時候我覺得有三個特別要注意的事，其實電競我覺得已經解決到選手們多多少少還是覺得政府有一點希望的程度，當然我也不敢說解決到非常非常好，但是以電競這一個具體而為的例子來說好了，當中有三件事非常重要：" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第一，議程設定：在一開始要討論哪一些部分，也就是議程設定的部分，就應該先讓所有社會利益關係者都進來，那一次我們用來討論的影子是因為在立法院三個不同黨派的委員都聯席開了一次公聽會，在那一次公聽會裡面，他們也邀了教育部相關朋友、文化部朋友、實際電競選手們，本來還要邀我去一起打某一款遊戲，但是我不會打那一款遊戲，所以後來就沒有這樣做（笑容）。在那一次公聽會裡面我覺得很重要的是，所謂的多利益關係人的模式，並不只有協會的代表，不只有教育部或者是部會代表或者是立法委員這一些人民的代表，還有利益相關方即電競選手，這個是非常非常重要的，不然很難充足覺得說某一個協會的會長，能夠代表所有他底下所有利益相關方來說話，我們還是要聽到利益相關方本人的聲音，這個是一個很重要的事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第二，逐字記錄：我覺得很重要的是，在公聽會的過程裡面我們有請專業的速錄師去作記錄，而這一個逐字紀錄的重點跟以前公聽會不一樣的是，以前的公聽會常常只記到結論，而那一個結論其實是雙方各執一詞，那個結論是非常抽象且模糊，所以那一個會就有一點等於白開，因為下一次再開的時候，還是要從頭開始，但是因為這中間雙方彼此攻防的過程，即使有一方根本沒有在聽對方說話，但是因為有逐字稿及確認逐字稿的動作，事後必定還是要把對方的論點再看一次，這一件事我覺得很重要，大家至少對於彼此第一手的經驗、分享出來的事實，事實確認的部分不要有任何的異議，而且不能假裝沒有聽到，真的社會、世界上的事實，就是有這一些正方去提一些有利的事實、反方也去提一些對他們有利的事實，但是這一些都是事實、都是加起來的，如果沒有一個好的紀錄原則，其實這一個事實很容易就掉了，然後下一次公聽會的時候，就從頭從蒐集事實開始，然後就不能移到感受確認的階段。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第三，專業主持人：在感受確認階段部分，我們有專業的主持人在作協助，專業主持人所做的事情，讓大家雖不滿意的部分，各自表述完之後，歸納出一些尚可接受的部分，這一個工作其實以我所知，好像內政部在聽證會主持的部分，他們已經開始要訓練一些專業聽證會的主持人，這個的意思是，以後的主持不一定是次長或者是主管機關的主管主持，可能跟他偕同主持的是受過主持訓練的主持人，他的目的就是除了各執一詞之外，這一場公聽會開到最後，還是試著收斂出一點點粗略的共識，好比像七個爭點裡面，最後有一個亮綠燈，大家都覺得這樣處理是可以的，另外六個還是吵得要命，那個是沒有關係的，但是至少我們解決了七個之中的一個，那一次會議我們就只有六個Agenda了，就不是七個Agenda，再下一次就只剩五個Agenda了，這三個技術從一開始多利益關係者在早期參與到紀錄技術、到主持技術，這三個單獨都沒有辦法達成高品質的討論，但是當這三個一起引進的時候，我們就可以保證那一場會不會白開，至少往前邁一小步，大家覺得會不會白開才會願意來開會，不然如果會是白開的，其實過兩、三次就只有時間最多或者是最想要抗議的人來開會，那這樣會議的品質也不可能每次開會品質都更高。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，當我們說「最會溝通政府」的時候，我相信我的意思是，除了最會溝通是說有這一個意願去溝通之外，也願意去投注一些行政上的資源及心力，去把這一些正當程序加以建立。但是這一個東西並不是政務體系說了算，必須是事務體系知道說這樣做並不會耽擱額外政治上風險、這樣做並不會每天需要加班，這樣做可能還可以早一點下班而少開一點會，並不是增加他的業務量，唯有事務體系真的體認到這一件事，政務體系上面講的這一些溝通才真的有可能落實，這個是我接下來很具體要做的工作，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "會議溝通政府的議題，我們知道政委您主要負責督導數位經濟跟開放政府，剛剛您也有提到希望能夠利用你的企業管理專才來幫助中央政府改變其文化，希望能夠有橫向溝通來強化政府與人民間的對話與合作。我們知道的是蔡政府要推的一些政策，搞得焦頭爛額，比如像勞工休假的問題、婚姻平權、日本食品輸臺的問題，我想請問一下政委，您覺得這一些議題跟政策是名實相符的政策或者是名實不符的政策？您覺得政府目前為止到現在最大的問題在哪裡？您會建議他們怎麼樣來推這一些政策？如何跟人民溝通？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實這個在interview的時候，因為您一開始提到我的業務，林全院長本來確實希望我做開放政府跟數位經濟，但是我自己其實能夠接的只有開放政府，其實數位經濟已經不歸我管了（笑），如果大家看政委分工表的話，我的工作是開放政府、社會企業、青年諮詢委員會，數位經濟很大部分是回到陳添枝老師、龔明鑫老師及相關各部會的朋友們督導，當然吳政忠老師在科技的部分會繼續進行與科技會報的討論，當然有些公共建設的部分，可能也是請曾老師，所以其實「數位經濟」這四個字無所不包，現在很少有經濟裡面沒有數位的成份，所以我們會每一個政委按照自己擅長的部分去take care那一個東西，但是我們在政務會議上會有一個統一討論，所以這個先講，因此數位經濟現在不但不是一個業務項目，而且也不是我的業務項目，這個要先講清楚，接下來要作期待管理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛剛講到勞動部案、衛福部案，以及我不知道要不要叫法務部案，因為這個是立委提的，好像法務部2月才會提案，而且不一定2月完成，所以我不知道這個是不是叫法務部案（笑）。你剛剛聽到這一些各部會的案子，我們常常在開放政府裡面，我們會講最上層的process、policy，但是裡面有一些小的實際執行操作部分，在大的政策議程設定部分，包含名實相符、提早通知、讓利益相關者在早期充分能夠被告知、進場的所有這一些東西，這個東西是首要，我剛剛講小的procedure部分，包含紀錄原則、主持原則、通知原則，這一些東西要變成類似要點的東西去進行處理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實也不瞞大家說，我進來不到兩個月，大部分做的事都是在底下這一層，也就是所需要的數位工具、所需要的紀錄、所需要的要點進來一個速記師的規則，把這一些東西加以建立，但是你說是不是每一個部會的人都知道我正在做這一件事，而且有這一些資源，他們在討論這一些重大案件的時候，他們可以過來使用，還沒有到這一個程度，因為現在這一個東西，連我們建的數位平台其實都還在請資安處作資安認證，所以我們這一些東西都是需要時間來建置的，等到建置好之後，當然會比較好用，但是在我們建置的過程中，你很難一個半成品就去強迫每一個部會來使用這樣的東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是我可以具體講的是，我們確實會請每一個部會有公共溝通能力的專職朋友，來跟我們進行橫向的協作，也就是未來在有任何法規要修正的時候，就要在六十天之前通知利益關係人，就要在六十天之前在網路平台上發表意見，就要把有異議發表、有意見的人在那個平台上作具體回應，對沒有使用網路習慣的人要透過傳統媒體及任何其他電子或者是挨家挨戶地方政府的方式進行溝通，所有這一些東西都變成是每一個部會派專職的人來跟我們一起落實，還有包含他們自己的資訊長要invole進來這一件事，這個編組我覺得才是未來這一些案件能夠落實的要件。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "亡者已矣（笑），一開始在設定的時候，比較沒有滿足到這一些要件的時候，你在事後的時候當然要追趕上或者是要說服大家有溝通誠意這一些東西，當然要花額外或者是加倍的力氣，但是因為這一些案件在剛開始設定的時候，不像Uber在去年還有多利益相關方參與的經驗，尤其是勞動部跟衛福部這兩案，我完全沒有任何參與的經驗，所以本著我的職份，我不應該評論，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "想要請問政委現在上任兩個月，您現在過得開心不開心？跟原來預期的生活是否一樣？到目前為止遇到最大的困難是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "還是很開心，我常常說我是出於興趣的政務委員，所以我每天來上班都還是滿有興趣的，這個是不用擔心。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外，其實我本來對工作型態的預期沒有特別的設定，因為我們之前幫大企業做系統整合的時候，每一家大企業的文化都不一樣，我們是不會帶著任何預設立場進去，我們是按照實際的狀況跟他們協作，在這樣沒有預期的情況下，我對自己的另外一個要求是，我不會用由上而下的方式去強迫任何人做任何事，這一個事是我個人的信念，因為我是「安那其」主義，「安那其」的意思沒有人應該強迫別人做任何事，那就是「安那其」的核心信念。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是，這個東西跟政府組織由上而下的運作是完全兩套不一樣的邏輯，所以我的事務同仁們也花了非常多的時間習慣，當我提一個問題或者是想法是，並不是他要揣摩上面，並不是我要有什麼指示，我真的在問他的意見，這一件事其實大家都花很多時間調適，還包含稱呼，比如我說：「你叫我唐政委我不一定應，因為我不知道你在叫誰，可以叫我唐鳳就好（笑）。」所有這一些東西現在慢慢跟我協作的同仁都開始習慣了，我就是某一些方面非常非常專業，某些方面我真的完全不懂，完全不懂我願學也學得很快，但是並不是因為我的官階是特任官，我就莫名其妙比他懂，絕對不會有這一種事，我也不會莫名其妙因為我的官階是特任官，我就覺得我不要跟他學習，完全也沒有這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實政務委員同事們心態非常開放，也非常願意學習的老師們，所以我也是跟著他們學習，就是說他們本來就跟各部會及地方的朋友們學習到很多東西，所以每一場政務會議都是在各方面有非常非常多的學習，我是很喜歡學習的人，因為這樣的關係，所以我每一次上班都還是很高興。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然最後因為禮拜五就要出國了，出國之後會花兩個星期的時間會跟歐洲的西班牙、英國與法國朋友們交換一些開放政府的意見與經驗，我本來就經常在做這樣的事情，但是因為進了政府之後，我覺得做起來就更方便，一方面是說我要跟他們跟我同等職位的人談的時候，比較不用排對方的時間（笑），就是可以比較用對等的方式去做雙邊討論，二方面是我對臺灣開放政府的全貌有瞭解，以前是我當顧問的那幾個委員會比較瞭解，其他的比較不瞭解，現在即使是我沒有第一手參與的，我至少也知道大家在其他地方耕耘到什麼程度，所以我們在做實質這一類外國交流的時候，我比較有完整的說法外，也比較具體說這還沒做好，我真的需要國外的朋友們有什麼幫助，這個也是我特別有興趣、特別想做的。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "我回到一個已經嚴肅的話題，您既然沒有負責數位經濟的部分，您長期有參與在數位經濟的發展與新創的朋友有比較多的交流，所以想要就這一塊想要跟您請教一下，您剛剛有提到「亞洲‧矽谷」的願景的部分，臺灣現在比較危機問題在於川普2016年要上任，可能2016年之後因為第一個是說TPP不要了，他在這禮拜講法裡面有一個很重要的宣示是他要bring jobs back to America，這對亞洲整體的供應鏈及臺灣的科技產業還是很大的衝擊，短期上面臨到比較大的挑戰，長期您跟政院裡覺得數位經濟可以變成我們未來的願景，可是短期有這麼重大的挑戰，您覺得我們要怎麼去處理可能未來世界走向比較保護主義，尤其美國作為我們最大的外交市場會採取什麼保護主義的狀態，我們要如何處理與面對？" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "另外，是不是可以談一下雖然您對數位經濟有很大的信心，但是目前以整體環境來看，看不到有什麼樣的契機，是不是可以提您實際觀察的點，也就是未來您覺得在比較數位或者是軟體或者是App或者是AR/VR這一塊，到底未來比起其他的國家面臨這麼大的挑戰，會有什麼契機？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實有一組的同事們去了APEC，他們在APEC上基本上就是聊這個，當然也有聊很多別的，就是對於所謂新保護主義這個題目，其實大家都非常非常關心，也做了非常多具體的討論。但是APEC回來的討論，其實我也還沒有參加，所以我現在如果跟你講什麼的話，其實會根據我在pre APEC（會議）的資訊跟你討論，這個也是會有偏差的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我具體能夠說的是，不管TPP到最後變成什麼樣子，也許改一個名字也許不同的架構在進行，我相信最主要的部分仍然是我們自己對於自己資訊國力有非常全面的瞭解，如果對自己資訊國力的瞭解都沒有的話，其實我們在談論的時候就非常容易變成是流行什麼或者是提出什麼樣要求，在沒有充分評估的情況下，就會希望人民去接受。但是其實臺灣有一個特性，政府不管希望人民接受什麼，人民永遠先去檢證，我覺得這個是好事，這表示願意跟政府一起想事情，但是另外一部分也表示出政府必須公開出更多的東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像你剛剛提到「亞洲‧矽谷」，我就拿那個當例子，其實新創界的朋友最常批評的，裡面看起來框列了許多經費，這一些經費很多是部會裡面五年期的經費第三年期，前一、兩年根本不叫「亞洲‧矽谷」，可是第三年期，因為裡面某些部分跟「亞洲‧矽谷」有所重合，所以就編進「亞洲‧矽谷」的預算，但是當然會希望下一個預算會期的時候就會希望更接近「亞洲‧矽谷」，而不要完全只是做80％那個部會本來要做其實不相干的事而切開等等。但是，以前是沒有任何方式去把這一個東西做一個公開揭露，所以這是為什麼我進來之後要做的事是，把包含「亞洲‧矽谷」在內這一些大的旗艦型的東西之執行進度及具體錢到底花到哪裡、哪一些是業務、常規及預算，用視覺化的方式讓大眾可以接取；尤其是作調查報導的朋友可以接取。因為調查報導朋友的resource其實是國際性的，這一些國際性的resource才能讓我們知道在其他的國家在類似的plan裡面，哪一些合理的、哪一些不合理的，這一些是我們完全只看國內的數據或國內的執行進度只用管考的角度看是看不到的，所以我們真的覺得願意做調查報導的朋友們，不管是正規執業的媒體或者是公營媒體是我們最好的朋友，這就是因為我們把這一些東西攤出來之後，我們會希望大家告訴我們說：哪一些東西我們雖然在這一個PPT上面看起來充滿希望，但是事實上早就不可能了，或者是哪一些東西我們雖然在這一個PPT上面看起來是劣勢，但是其實做調查報導或者是在業界的朋友們說現在有一個新的技術出現了，這個在臺灣有等等。這一個是我們從這一個簡報的Level是看不到的，所以我再次強調的是DIGI＋裡面「G（Governance）」的部分是要跟外面結合，「I（Inclusion）」的部分是要跟政治公民團體結合的目的是，因為我們希望議程設定至少從明年開始不是只有我們說了算，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "提問者", "speech": "我還是想要問一下性別的問題，可不可以講一下您對於自己性別如何認知？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "基本上這一個問題在上一次的記者會已經充分回答過了，你不管要說跨性別、性別流動或者是我的性別攔填「無」，其實國際上的講法是「酷兒」。其實它具體的想法非常簡單，我在認識你的時候，我其實並不是覺得你是某一個性別、某一個年齡、某一個國籍，就希望你用某一個方式來溝通，我是以你講出來的話，覺得什麼重要、有價值，以那個東西來認識你，所以反過來我也希望這樣子被認識，所以不管我今天是在VR裡面用一隻小白兔的方式出現，今天這樣的裝扮是非常正式，但是也有可能沒有正式的方式出現，不管在哪種方式出現，我內心的價值是穩定的，我是希望大家是用這一種方式來認識我，如果大家會覺得一個特定性別的人一定只能用某些方式表現自己、一定不能用某些方式來表現自己，我們就叫做gendering的動作，而gendering這個只是stereotype小分支而已，除此之外還有很多，比如age discrimination、racial discrimination，有非常非常多的discrimination。我認同我是後類別的時候，我其實不是在講性別的類別，我也是在講所有的以貌取人、以什麼取人的那個類別，我覺得最後還是要回到你覺得哪些價值是重要的，然後願意做什麼行動。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們還有1分鐘的時間開始，先講一些客套話：非常高興今天大家來到這邊，其實開放資料跟開放政府我們知道其實在上一任的政府裡面，其實做了非常多的、很好的基礎，我們是承續這個基礎再往前做。也不諱言，上一任政府做這個的時候，是由上而下的方式造成相當大的壓力，這個是短時間之內可以提出一些成績來的，但長期來看，也會造成部會的困難跟反彈。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "為了速錄師的方便，先稍微自我介紹一下，就是先停在這一頁，您是其中的哪一位，不如就是從我自己開始，我是唐鳳，我應該是唯一一個沒有列在PPT上面的（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "我是開放資料會長彭啟明，我是氣象的專業，因為氣象平台關係，這幾年參與比較多，我扮演的有時候是烏鴉，有時候又跟政府合在一起拓展一些國外或者是市場，多重的角色，希望未來可以多參與…" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "也不是競合啦！為了台灣好，就是為了臺灣好，做這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "黃彥男", "speech": "我是黃彥男，我是前行政院科技會報副執行秘書，在我任內有推動協助政府推動Open Data，關心這個發展，所以希望來這邊交流一些想法。" }, { "speaker": "林俊秀", "speech": "我是林俊秀，在工業局負責推動Open Data於產業應用方面，跟國發會這邊指示負責推動產業應用。" }, { "speaker": "林宜樺", "speech": "我是台北市電腦公會林宜樺，負責承接工業局資料服務產業推動計畫，同事這邊也有我們的秘書處。" }, { "speaker": "高莉雅", "speech": "我是台北市電腦公會高莉雅，我跟宜樺一起執行這個專案。" }, { "speaker": "張心玲", "speech": "行政院科技會報辦公室張心玲，從100年開始朱敬一政委任內開始做Open Data的研究跟推動，到101年院會通過這樣的策略，到目前為止就一直都在裡面。剛剛彭會長提到是「競」或「合」的關係，其實大家都是生命共同體的關係，你好、我好，大家都好（笑），謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "莊盈志", "speech": "你好，我是國家發展委員會莊盈志，其實我主要的任務是，剛剛心玲也有講到，生命共同體是大家一起合作推動，我這邊所處理的部分，當然就是在資料開放的大前提下，如何讓政府的資料開放更加往前邁進，另外一部分是跟工業局配合，資料開放在產業界有什麼樣應用的效果。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "我是國發會資管處潘國才，資管處最重要在Open Data扮演的角色是行政方面的推動，所以在行政院諮詢小組的幕僚其實是國發會資管處來扮演，所以我們在這邊會協助大家或者是接受大家的意見，然後把它轉化為讓行政機關可以推動、執行的一些策略或者是方案等等，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "直接開始嗎？" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "直接開始。我們還有一位，等一下是陳昇瑋會到，他等一下會到，他是資料科學協會，我本身是他的理事，他是理事長。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "謝謝唐鳳政委可以有這一個時間來談這一些內容，最主要是昇瑋有提到這一些問題。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "（投影簡報）其實Open Data在臺灣的發展，成績不錯，大家也很努力。我們也看到一些坑出現，這個坑不是g0v的跳坑，而是我們未來發展的瓶頸充滿了很多不確定性。我舉個最簡單的例子：像公務單位其實是被逼的，有時候他們還沒有這個素養，就來做這一個事情，很多單位要一些敏感的。比如：我到教育部，他們請我談開放資料，談了半天，我舉了一個日本的例子，日本把學校地震危樓都公布了，我問教育部的負責人說有沒有這個資料，教育部說：「有，但是不能公布，公布了之後，我們教育部的危樓，萬一新聞紕漏出去，會馬上問我們到底危樓有多少棟，為什麼沒有馬上解決這一個問題，所以不能公布。」公布的話，主管或者是主管的主管會遭受到各界為難，因此現在開放資料的確有很多會遇到這樣的問題。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "（簡報第3頁）開放資料大部分是業務單位在做決定，並不是有一個單位共同來決定，因此過去產生Open Data的瓶頸最主要是從「資料素養」、「資料治理」、「資料導向」、「資料經」濟脫鉤在做。資料經濟做得不錯，我們在亞洲其實還有這一個機會，的確過去這幾年，包含上個月我們去西班牙開資料研討會，我們受到的尊重是很高的，全世界的人都認同臺灣這方面做得很好，我們亞洲各國可以讓日本、韓國，或者是泰國都主動想跟臺灣學怎麼推動，所以我們在這一個立基是有的；但是我們如果沒有趕快把它整合在一起，我覺得到最後很快輸掉，因此這個是為什麼我一直要談這一個問題。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "資料素養是在前端，例如過去由上而下，是個命令，可是我們要從基本上公務人員的運作型態開始做起，像資料治理到導向資料，你做的工作是治理跟導向工作，但是基本的素養跟到最後資料經濟的串聯是很重要的工作。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "（簡報第4頁）另外，我們覺得資料經濟的門檻很高，不能等。為什麼？我也看到很多的國家的資料公司其實都知道要投資，他們一直在問怎麼進去臺灣的市場？有沒有什麼資料？如果我們沒有趕快扶植很多年輕人，不管是做App—App只是一小部分而已—可是資料科學家資料夠多可以用，其實任何一個國家，因為Open Data的關係，很容易進到臺灣來做；就像Uber進到臺灣很容易，所以臺灣本地就沒有競爭力了。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "因此有很多的案例，如果本地人沒有趕快建立起來，政府趕快建立這樣的環境可以用這個資料，美國、日本其實很多的公司很快就可以進來了、可以做了。比如：我是氣象公司，如果臺灣沒有一個好的環境讓我可以發展，我只能靠著是臺灣人比較瞭解臺灣這樣的立基生存，這個是很危險的事，我做不大、也沒有辦法走出去，因此我們應該讓我們有一個很好的環境，讓年輕創業人在這個地方發展、創造工作機會，這是新政府想要的東西。所以，我覺得這個是很大的門檻，我們不能說等到國際開放再開放，我們必須要有這個眼光來看未來的事實，如果我們沒有開放的話，臺灣就變成是國外資料公司的殖民地。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "（簡報第5頁）我現在提出第一個目標，我們在上一次行政院開放資料諮詢小組會議我有提過，我覺得還是要回歸到「法」上，因為有「法」才可以建立素養，我們現在沒有法令，當然這個法是困難的，我都知道，也可以理解，但是沒有在法的辯論過程當中，我們釐清一些問題，我們素養都是空談，所以我們建議就是說未來幾年內我沒有說一年內，這個太難了，但是基本法開放資料的法令還是需要的，不然現在是原則，開放為原則、不開放為例外，因為可以發現要的資料，這個不能開放，這個誰來決定？可能一個科長在做決定，這個是很大的問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不好意思，本來不應該打斷，不過因為法協的朋友也在。剛剛提到這是基本法的性質，我們知道在基本法及作用法上面，其實一個是在定義說所有的部會都應該負的基本責任，這是所謂的基本法，那作用法的才具體說哪一些事要做什麼或者是有什麼法律效力，我想要問一下這邊提到的意思是，保證部會裡面有足夠專職人力，比較像是人力或者是組織法的東西，或者這邊是講說我們把5,000萬以下的所有東西都變成開放資料，現在是一個行政命令層級，但是同樣的只是提到法的層級，你講的是哪一個？" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "我覺得它是屬於資料治理方面。像韓國就有這一個法令，大家可以去研究一下，韓國其實是要有一個機制，我強調的是說開放的機制，我們現在開放是由業務單位每一個部會主管的處室、業務單位自己來決定，你要給我開放五百個或者是一百個來決定，他會覺得開放比較容易、開放輕鬆的，達到你們的需求就好了，但我們有一個法令，只要有資料就應該要公開，所以是一個比較大的概念，不見得是涉及到什麼…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "…比較是基本法的概念。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "比較是基本法的概念。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "請繼續。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "因為上次在行政院開放資料諮詢小組的功能，每個部會都有，這個制度不錯，這個制度一開始是讓各個部會納民間的能量進去，所以並不是讓一個部會自己關門進去。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "但每個部會的開放資料諮詢小組很好，開很多次，有的部會卻只開一次，像我是科技部的諮詢委員，這兩年只開了一次，裡面最有意見的就是我，我抱持著我有意見就說，以後就不會請我的只做一屆委員的態度，常常就是踢到鐵板，我覺得司、處首長沒有這個認知，高階長官沒有這個認知，所以諮詢小組的用處在什麼地方？我覺得時代的發展應該要過去了，我們應該要重新省思這個諮詢小組到底要做什麼？因為每個部會應該要有一個單位主動去盤查或接收各家說到底要不要開放，像我們現在完全不知道，我們現在問一些部會有多少的資料集，他說會再盤點，但是以盤點的資料庫項目到底是多少給我看又答不出來，有時候我覺得也不見得願意拿，拿了之後也是麻煩，因此到底有多少個資料集、什麼該開放，或者是很簡單如美國、日本及英國他們開放的，我們有沒有，我們來做比較，就可以朝著研議可以資料開放的角度去走。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "因此我覺得資料集應該是這樣子，而不是每一次你講一句、我講一句，每半年開一次，一點效用都沒有，所以我們建議各部會開放資料小組未來在行政院須重新定義。像經濟部有小彭在那邊，那個小組又遇到台電開放的事情，所以就主動把國營事業，包括台電跟台水其實都開放得很不錯，但是這個是有人在裡面，但有些是沒有這個人，也找不到這個人，所以也沒有相關的計畫，頂多只是委辦的方式在走，那個效力是不彰的！因此我們是不是可以協助一個很好的制度與機制，讓每一個部會都有這樣的能力，他的資料開放制度才會好，資料才會開放得出來，這個是第二個建議。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "（簡報第5頁）第三點，因為開放資料之後，馬上就面臨到很大政府的施政跟民間參與的溝通。坤助等一下可以補充，坤助做了很多App，他拿很多政府的App，過去沒有開放資料的時候就會去扒資料，隨時會被政府斷掉，那有開放資料之後，政府不會去斷它。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "但是看到坤助做得好，就再做一個，或是政府弄一個標案，就說跟坤助做的一樣的，灌上政府的名字，變成政府的施政績效變成，跟他競爭，他是要賦稅，而政府編預算就可以做的，這就變成很不公平、合理，因此政府民間到底如何區分，如何建立公私夥伴關係就很重要。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "我覺得這在未來服務滿重要，這個會創造產值，但是政府做的，沒有人界定，韓國有界定，雖然現在韓國總統民調很低，但是他們其實有做清查，政府這一個工作不要做、要做，其實是有一個專門的單位在做這個事情。" }, { "speaker": "陳坤助", "speech": "這一塊，就是這一兩年內，大家比較會去提到的「公私協力」的這句話，在這前我遇到的問題大部分是我去做了這樣的末端應用，提供給大眾，大眾在使用的時候，前一陣子是遇到政府看到這個東西不錯，直接聽到我們這一個東西看到人家做得不錯，所以請他的標案廠商做一模一樣的東西交回來，那就等於說，他一手在做開放資料要給民間使用，那民間使用（的目的）很多是透明、課責，但有部分其實是商業運作，商業運作其實就可以提供一個新型態的公共服務出來，比如現在看到的公車、鐵路的東西，那是之前土木的基礎建設，但這邊是資料基礎建設出來的延伸應用。" }, { "speaker": "陳坤助", "speech": "我們是一般商業公司在做這一件事的時候，我們可以考量到是，商業的永續性跟風險，我們也得繳稅、賦予國家有更多的稅金收入，但我們看到這樣的東西之後，公部門卻做出一模一樣的東西出來之後，我們很困擾。因為他其實內部還有自己的私資料，做出來的東西一開始沒有贏過我們，可是之後漸漸會贏過我們，主要還有一個原因是，因為民眾對於公部門、政府的品牌是信賴的，就用公部門的東西就好了，為什麼用民間的東西？但是用公部門的東西出去，只有一個（成果會回來而已），像剛剛會長有提到，我(公部門)可以拿到政績，第二個是，他其實不會收到更多的稅金，他其實在花錢，營造的商機或者營造的整個生態是只有標案的生態。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不好意思打斷，問三個程序性問題：" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第一，政府新推出的這一個案，可以直接講名字嗎？" }, { "speaker": "陳坤助", "speech": "我之前有花一段時間，整理行政院底下二級部會所有App的排名，這個工作其實在國發會也有在做，我也有跟潘處長稍微聊一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以他有清單？" }, { "speaker": "陳坤助", "speech": "對，但是這個清單是在各級部會裡面自己去盤點的，我發現有一些部會、單位到第三級比較皮就沒有上報，這一塊，在上一任張善政副院長的時候，其實跟資管處應該是簡處長說，如果要做App的話，必須要提財務計畫，也必須要檢驗KPI，比如要訂下載數、使用數或者到底有沒有需要。這一個東西有訂出來，我有看到那個表格，就是說必須填報這個東西回來，我有去整理，也就是把這一個東西去排名，大部分的KPI是訂在預算、下載數，可是後面其實應該問說，為什麼要做個東西，或者民間已經做了，為什麼要作重複的事情？你的用意是什麼？或者我們已經著手做開放資料了，目的是可以讓民間來參與商機或者是公眾參與，為何右手要做這樣的東西來競爭？" }, { "speaker": "陳坤助", "speech": "我的想像是，當民間已經做這樣的東西出來了，雖然是一個小應用，但是我看到的是，這個應用之後會升級成服務，變成服務之後，如果公部門想要做這樣公眾服務的時候，是否可以對他做服務的採購？而不是自己用傳統的標案方式出去，因為只有一家廠商得利，當這個東西如果不再做App之後，這個廠商就萎縮了或者業務就萎縮了，但是如果原本去拿開放資料的東西，或者是商業公司的商業資料做應用，這個是他自己決定要做出商業產品，做出商業產品就會評估商業的永續性以及風險才會去做，而且必須得賺錢，但是當遇到一個不需要賺錢競爭對手時，其實是很困擾的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第二個問題：好比這個競爭對手並沒有收使用費，對不對？也就是完全沒有任何你跟他做價格競爭的可能性，因為一邊你要回收你的成本，但公部門這個標案出去之後，使用者不用付費，是這樣嗎？" }, { "speaker": "陳坤助", "speech": "以App的生態來講，我們的收入可能有幾種，一個是廣告，或者是下載付費，或者變成服務付月費等收費方式，公部門這邊是大部分是免費的。另外一個論點是，如果是這樣的話，為何私部門跟公部門的競爭，私部門會輸給公部門？而是因為公部門進來之後，因為臺灣其實是一個很小的島嶼，其實算是城市國家，民眾在使用這個東西，比如使用網路或者是App，都集中在這幾個大城市，比如大台北、高雄、台中這幾個點，民眾會信賴公部門的品牌，比如我們要作行銷的時候，我們是花自己的資金下去作行銷、廣告預算，但是公部門可以拿公家預算來做這一件事，其實在同一個商業場域裡面是競爭的；比較荒謬的是，我得繳稅這一件事來支持你做這一件事，來跟我作競爭。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第三個問題：我們說這一些公部門推出的，剛剛已經澄清是免費，而且有高度重疊性的這些App或者是這些應用，這一個得標廠商是否有使用要嘛開放源碼的方式，要嘛是開放應用程式介面的方式，把他用到你所提到私有或者專有的這一些資料集或API予以開放？" }, { "speaker": "陳坤助", "speech": "之前是沒有，後來慢慢變成說，他們在這一塊會把資料或者是API也開放出來。因為我們之前盤點資料的時候有遇到一些問題，不知道有哪一些資料應該該開放出來，我們有給他一些建議，你去看WEB，你去看App，後面一定有資料，既然開放給大眾末端運用，這一些資料是不是可以開放出來？有沒有把原始碼放出來，我好像還沒有看到這個例子，但是資料有放出來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "至少進來的資料及出去的API有慢慢放出來。" }, { "speaker": "陳坤助", "speech": "有看到資料（放出來），API這一塊，有看到一些部會，他們在整（整理）。但是看到一個情況是，放出來的資料一定是開放的資料，但是公部門裡面一定有一些私資料，等於說跟商業公司一樣，我有開放資料但是我也有私資料，就是在做這樣的競爭，但我覺得在這一塊的競爭，初步起來的，比如創新者、創業者一定贏不過公部門。" }, { "speaker": "陳坤助", "speech": "另外還有一個東西，也就是品牌效應，我會信任公部門所做的東西，同樣的題目、同樣的應用，甚至不管是商業公司抄公部門或者是公部門抄商業公司也好，介面一樣，如果是一般大眾，我寧願下載公部門，因為我覺得比較安全。在這樣的對比下，其實我們就站在劣勢，我們比較期待的是公部門或者是政府單位應該協助我們，或者幫我們打基底讓我們站上去，而不是互相競爭的角色。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "我再補充說明，我是氣象，氣象是Open Data全球範例之一，我以前不講氣象，因為我覺得會涉及到利益迴避，我拿開放資料來對抗氣象局，但是這幾年我覺得有一點看不過去，為什麼？因為美國的氣象產業或是日本，他們政府定義要做什麼，就是保衛大家的生命安全，其他民間的，政府就讓民間去做，在日本看到的氣象是日本的民間在報，並不是政府在報，這是很大的差別。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "像臺灣我們做了很多民間的服務，因為氣象局的長官很喜歡騎車的戶外活動，他就弄了一個騎腳踏車的網頁特別針對這個作服務，以前他們會想辦法找我們，我們會考慮有一些做公益，有時候會覺得他有在收費，所以我們也覺得他應該要付一點費用給我們，我們靠這個生活，其實也還滿成功的。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "我們知道Open Data這個趨勢，其實早就做準備跟調整，但是要跟各位講的是，Open Data的氣象部分，臺灣Open Data的資料品質不好，很多人扒資料，Open Data的網站會變慢，但是政府的網站絕對不會變慢，Open Data的資料是二流的資料，有一點像私生子的資料，對一般人來說，當然是扒元配的比較好，不要扒私生子，如果流量很大的時候，Open Data會先被犧牲掉，他們常常會遇到這個問題，因此我們用起來會覺得很慢。但是我如果用美國的Open Data很快，全部就不在臺灣做了，全部在Amazon、Google去作應用。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "所以Open Data第一個是政府完全沒有公私夥伴關係的概念，他覺得這個是我的服務，你跟他講了半天，他還是覺得從這個部會的利益、施政的效益去著手，並沒有考量Open Data完了以後可以創造的機會。像美國Open Data，政府會說這一些所有的App都是開放資料的成果，陳坤助做那麼多App，是政府的成果之一，政府會很記住這一點去promote陳坤助跟政府單位自己，但是臺灣卻沒有這個習慣，這是我們看到很大的問題。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "所以，我覺得這個部分如何去調整這一個東西，也應該在每一個部會裡面檢討、思考，我覺得這是比較上位的，不見得是Open API技術上問題，這個是實際上在發生跟衝突的問題，這如果不趕快解決，這個會變成很大的阻礙。這個可以嗎？還是跳下一頁？" }, { "speaker": "陳坤助", "speech": "我補充一下博士講的這一塊，也跟跟政委剛剛提到API的這一件事，我們跟公部門提說如果要開放資料的時候，如果要盤點找出來，App後面一定會有這個資料，剛剛有提到API，後來，覺得要他們直接叫他們下架他們的App，其實不太符合現在目前已經上架的東西，因為畢竟是預算已經發了、做了。" }, { "speaker": "陳坤助", "speech": "另外一個解法是，做這樣的App跟我們是做一樣的東西，如果要用API也沒有關係，跟我們拿一樣的 ( API ) 來源，這樣的話就會比較避免，你可以去把能量再更集中往開放資料那邊去，也就是建構基礎的東西，覺得到一定的程度之後，再把末端的應用撤下來。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "那我就繼續。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "其實另外一個是因為去年Open Data得到世界第一，國發會都受到很大的鼓舞，我們大家都受到很大的鼓舞，國際上也都很認同；但是老實說，「第一」表示是國發會很認真，都會找出第一的項目，我看起來會覺得因為臺灣人很會考試，也就是題目是什麼，我們會趕快去找答案，所以就做得很好。但是，如果整個環境做Open Data做得比美國或者是英國好嗎？我們知道還有一定的落差。但這個評比對於整個政府或是以臺灣的外交處境來講，其實還是很重要的，我覺得未來一定會往下降，我們都應該有這個心裡準備，因為拿到第一，永遠不可能第一，會被人家超過去，因此未來的評比還是要持續互動，甚至讓國際有能見度。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "我也非常高興有唐鳳政委，因為我們參加西班牙或者是亞洲的活動，他們每個人都問我們唐鳳政委，因此你的知名度其實對未來Open Data臺灣推展是很有幫助，因為國際這行業的人都知道。" }, { "speaker": "張心玲", "speech": "我們跟他們討論跟餐敘的時候就講到這一句話，他們說：「你們有一個新的minister？」我問說是誰，那時候是9月初的時候，他們就說：「明明就有一個，他要幫你們做Open Data。」我猜一猜是唐鳳，他就說對，然後他就說要去幫忙到行政院裡面做什麼東西，我說：「是的，連你們都知道。」他說：「在我們這樣一個領域本來就很有名，而且我們非常受到振奮、啟發，你們臺灣可以做這樣的事情。」以上報告（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "我覺得可以趁這個趨勢再起一波。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "（簡報第6頁）另外IODC，像我們去年去西班牙會的時候，我禮拜五會再報告成果，其實我們有很大的期望，當然有很大的困難度，我們希望未來如果到亞洲舉辦的時候，臺灣可以拿回來，當然很難啦！我覺得很難，因為後面有一些Word Bank及UN的系統在裡面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這是多邊系統吧？這樣我們真的能夠主辦嗎？" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "我認為國際的活動對臺灣雖然有壓力，但只要有努力就有機會。我有主動嘗試和主辦人說台灣有很大的意願，持續保持聯絡跟注入資源，大家都有這個機會，尤其我們很需要國際的舞臺，這個是第一個。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "第二個是OGP，我們去年也有提過，但是國際現實很難突破，但是我覺得還是可以用成績去表現，所以可能大家是不是有一個很好的策略，未來找外交部來協助，畢竟這是屬於國際的活動，大家一起來努力，我們有一個目標來統合共識與參與突破；不然現在不做，再兩年後就完全沒有機會了，因為這在亞洲，畢竟目前還是大家都在看我們，還算是受到很大的矚目。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "另外，亞洲開放資料夥伴有一定的成效，我禮拜五也會報告，其實因為我們發現歐盟DG Connect G3，我兩年前有拜訪過他們，歐盟做Open data有法律專業的人先擬訂釐清這一些問題，並不是像臺灣由上而下要幹就幹，他們先把問題訂出來，然後先訂好一個策略目標，把產值跟效益說清楚之後再來做。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "像我們去西班牙的時候，他跟我們介紹說他們有歐盟的Open Data，歐盟整體來看Open Data裡面有二十四個語言、二十八個國家一起來做，我們後來跟這一夥伴談的時候，其實有談到亞洲是不是可以建立一套？像我嘗試要用韓國的資料，我發現並不會用，我要寫信給韓國人，這個很奇怪。韓國最早的Open Data還要實名制，現在已經開放了；日本也很奇怪，日本喜歡用PDF跟EXCEL在裡面，所以其實我們有提到或許臺灣未來可以多承擔一點，幫亞洲各個國家，我們服務大家，可以多投入一些資源，可以弄一個跟歐盟合作建立一個亞洲Open Data的 portal，這或許是我們還可以趕快做、趕快領先的機會，所以未來像亞洲的資料夥伴，我們剛剛有講到六個國家，再加上印度，希望唐鳳政委跟行政院給我們一些協助。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "另外，有人知道我要來，所以提到一些建議，因為明天要公布「DIGI+」，他們其實提到未來的建置都要有開放資料的概念在裡面，像物聯網及智慧城市，其實英國或者是芬蘭的赫爾辛基那幾個地方，都有開放資料的元素在裡面，讓民間有很大的參與在裡，並不是從事政府的標案在裡面，這可能要調整一下。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "採購的部分我相信您是專業，包括怎麼樣開採購、如何做，及用什麼資料平台做，像我覺得臺灣如果有這樣的方式，我們都應該可以類似像product或者是都有資料公司的平台，我們應該以這個為目標，扶植幾個臺灣的資料公司或者是資料平台，其實以前工業局的計畫都有在提這個東西，如果從工業局單方面去鼓勵與補助，其實很難有一個規模出來，因此很難有一個更好的策略。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "最後，大家很關心OPEN API，我覺得那個是技術上層次的問題，我們覺得很重要，所以很想多瞭解進度如何，大概是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有問題，所以在剛剛的那一些點我們會逐點討論，以議程設定來講，還是想請在場的朋友們，看看有沒有剛才彭老師沒有提到的？如果沒有的話，我快速綜整一下：" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第一，開放資料法是否有類似基本法層級的作用？而這一個作用是否能夠讓各級的政府派出相當層級，而不是基本承辦人員的那個層級來注重資料治理這一件事？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第二，從高階長官的角度來看，尤其是資深事務官的角度來看，承辦開放資料越積極，遭受到媒體、民意代表及其他民意代表壓力的風險就越高，因此在內部產生一個抑制性的作用。老師關心的是，我們能不能拿一些比較好的案例，好比：之前國營事業的案例作為參考，讓其他的部會都能夠理解，其實開放資料能夠削減政治壓力，不然就是確立在院裡能夠抵擋政治壓力的方法，不然很難主動開放任何會造成政治風險的資料。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第三，有很詳細提到與民爭App的狀態，剛才釐清了，裡面最主要的問題是，第一個有自己私生子的資料集或是相同的資料集，但是是近用性、穩定性比較高的接取方式，不管哪一個，都會造成跟人民不公平的競爭，即使我們把這個競爭變成公平了，因為目前採購並沒有像這一些已經建置好一些基本Open API的採購，而是從應用做起，因此在消耗公共資源的同時，會造成已經投入的成本沒有辦法回收在民間的情況，然後希望這一個有具體改善，這個是第三個。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第四，我們目前在IODC跟OPP比較接近聯合國的多邊架構，每一次在多邊架構就碰到參與上的阻力。我們以前都是用論壇的形式或是雙邊的形式進行國際上的討論，彭老師希望看我們能不能在多邊架構裡面衝出一些空間來，聯合亞洲的朋友，或者在這些多邊架構裡面對我們比較友好的單邊，來做一些實際外交上的貢獻。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第五，老師也關心在明天即將透過—希望透過—數位國家方案裡面，具體對於IoT、萬物聯網這一些裡面的開放資料，是否有一個路徑表這一件事來揭露。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "最後，我們目前在技術上有推Open API，想要解釋Open API跟開放資料間的關係，及希望如何銜接，大家才比較知道細節的東西，怎麼樣在比較大的藍圖上扮演起作用，差不多是這一些？" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "除了這些議題之外，在進入會議之前，還有沒有朋友要提出討論的？" }, { "speaker": "黃彥男", "speech": "針對第三點，我記得這一個問題很早就有了，那時候就有想法，也就是政府不應該要做App，如果要做App的話，要提出理由，我是不曉得那時候執行上怎麼樣。我瞭解各部會都想做App，但這個其實是很簡單院內的決定，各部會要做App要提出理由，因為當初開放資料很大的目的是因為要推經濟，如果要做這一些東西，完全會影響其發展，所以這一個事情要解決，應該是在院那邊有一個決議、政策，各部會就會在預算編列時很小心，大概是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "黃彥男", "speech": "另外，剛剛有提到Open Data這一塊，因為其實很多推動講很少，過去在推動的時候，由上而下會有很多要求，某方面來講沒有講，也就是基本上我可以做什麼事情，比如哪一個單位，像假設這個單位有評比，這個單位會獲得什麼樣的獎賞，如果有評比的話，各部會也許會更重視這一件事，以上分享。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝，還有想要補充嗎？" }, { "speaker": "陳昇瑋", "speech": "我看到第5頁的投影片非常有感覺，因為剛剛有提到韓國的部分。我跟彭博士也有協助行政院推動資料，以現在的形式來說，真的是很難發揮。" }, { "speaker": "陳昇瑋", "speech": "其實讓我想到一件事，也就是像私人企業，像阿里巴巴是非常有名的，他們有「數據戰略委員會」，他們的功能其實比這個還多，我認為像這樣的「數據戰略委員會」會有什麼影響？" }, { "speaker": "陳昇瑋", "speech": "第一，以阿里巴巴來講是「提出建議」，也就是這個東西應該要拿出來，並不是你拿出來後，我來看o不ok，其實是有更積極的建議。" }, { "speaker": "陳昇瑋", "speech": "第二，因為有時不同部會間的資料互給也是有困難的，有沒有可能也包含建議這個部會的資料可以提供給另外一個部會，這就是不同的Open Data，並不是對外，而其實很多時候內部分析也需要，但是現在並沒有這樣的委員會來作建議，然後由該委員會來授權，因此我覺得這個也非常重要。" }, { "speaker": "陳昇瑋", "speech": "之前新新聞有一篇文章提到張前院長的政策，那個新聞下的是當時有七項分析資料的專案，包括原住民、高中職畢業生就業，這七項專案的政策是不准外包，各個部會都要去分析，我不知道這七個專案的運作狀況。" }, { "speaker": "陳昇瑋", "speech": "某一些很特定關於政策的資料分析專案，我認為不准外包是一個很正確的原則，如果要做這一件事，如跟剛剛所講的跨部會關聯是非常非常重要，目前好像沒有一個委員會在協調這一件事，其實都是P2P，我剛好需要幾個，就看這個部會有沒有認識的人，然後再跟他談。" }, { "speaker": "陳昇瑋", "speech": "第三，其實回應剛剛陳理事長講的App問題，我認為它可以比較一般化，也就是對於Open Data開放形式的政策或原則及個案制定，因為開放資料其實要開放row data或者是personal data，像交通部有一些監理資料是個人才可以查詢，如果要用Web下載或者是App等，這一些都是形式的一種，包括要不要付錢、SLA，或者是你剛剛講的，這一個data應該要在什麼樣的SLA下面，否則全部都可以歸納在這一個開放資料下，我覺得這都很好。" }, { "speaker": "陳昇瑋", "speech": "另外剛剛有提到跨國Open Data的聯絡及獎懲，我認為也是委員會可以處理的。" }, { "speaker": "陳昇瑋", "speech": "另外，張前院長有提到企業專案比較不是常態性的，是不是有可能讓這個委員會下面有一點執行能力，比如提供或整體或分析，且長期性支援院方政策的資料。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "簡單來講，要有一點開發能力。" }, { "speaker": "陳昇瑋", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "這是我們在西班牙遇到美國商業部（經濟部）首席資料科學家，他是臺灣孩子，是第二代在美國。他做的就是昇瑋說的，資料科學家，美國本來白宮就有一個CDO在裡面，以前我跟張院長辯論好多次，他說：「有啊！我們都有副首長，也就是資訊長，資訊長就是資料長。」辯論很多次，但是我覺得他有他的用意，但這還是不一樣的，「資訊」跟「資料」還是完全不一樣的內容。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果張前院長在看紀錄的話，逐字稿不會呈現大家的表情（笑）…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們其實現在在討論的是說，如何昇華本來已經有的機制，但是其實剛剛陳昇瑋提到除了剛剛補充的點之外，還有提到新的點，目前的這幾朵雲或者是內部開發的程序，其實在這些部會間並沒有橫向流通的。比如：把其中一個專案建置出來累計了一些經驗，不管是資料分析或是其他的經驗，但是這些經驗在部會裡面，比較不容易跨機關傳遞了，在別的部會要做一樣的事情時，除非剛好有認識或是加到G1V群組裡面，不然其實沒有任何別的方式，要讓另外做同樣事情的部會，有一個辦法去累積這樣子的技術能力或者技術訓練，所以剛剛昇瑋的具體建議是，希望一個比較中央層級、有開發能力，並不是真的幫部會寫系統，至少要知道需要哪一些東西及部會缺什麼東西，來做系統分析的工作。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好，還有什麼別的議程？在我們進入回應之前。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那我就一個個來了：" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們從基本法的這個部分開始，按照順序。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "基本法並不是行政院說了算的。之前在國發會的「提點子」平台，曾經有過高達三成重疊的提案，也就是資訊基本法的立法，這一個立法事實上我們現在在院裡面，任何關於動到組織架構的部分，那一個法裡面跟現有組織架構重疊，以及您剛剛提比較不重疊的部分，目前都是處於暫緩的情況。這是一般可得的資訊，我們就直接講了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是對於資料的格式、資料開發、資料審定及建議的這一些東西，這是我們可以用不管是國發會層級或是院層級來做的事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們現在面臨到的一個實際政治情況就是：只要是需要一個新的處、新的小組、新的辦公室，這就比較不容易達成，但如果是結合現有的人力，在不增加新組織的情況下，用一個聯席會議或者是調配方法來做的話，這就有可能做得到。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "透過這樣的聯席會議，我們邀請外部專家來制定大家需要遵循標準的開發資料流程、判斷方式，乃至於剛才昇瑋提到服務層級、精細度、顆粒度這一些東西，這些是屬於正面表列。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我剛進來的時候，我先做了排除表列，我有跟國發會資管處——因為我目前沒有督導任何部會，但是有協助資管處——我很具體希望他們在數位國家裡面KPI中，把資料集數量的這一個KPI拿掉，原因就是因為我們看到前一任的做法，現在其實已經有一些部會在量能不一定那麼足夠，但KPI必須逐年增加的情況，把資料切細，來使資料集發布數增加——我就不講哪一個部會了——就可以任意達到我們隨便想要多少筆資料集的KPI，這變成完全沒有任何意義的事；既然沒有意義，就不應該再訂定。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "雖然目前這一期的管考還有指標，但在數位國家裡面已經把它拿掉了，而且未來也不會再有這樣的編列，相應的我們這一些去管考人力的朋友們，會放在網站服務、資料集本身品質，以及這一些跟民間資料是否真正有做出界接或者是應用的質性評量。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然也希望大家理解，質性評量從量化評量過來，其實沒有辦法一下子就像量化評量一樣，做到像國際很亮眼的東西，這長期來看對資料的體質是有幫助的，接下來不太可能發新聞稿說資料集又翻倍的新聞，請大家體諒，這讓負責管考的朋友們更有心力去做更有意義的事，這個是很基本的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "國發會有補充嗎？" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "其實剛剛政委提得都很完整。我有一個問題是想說，如果我們要訂法規跟現行的制度差異性在什麼地方？假設因為現行有什麼不夠，然後去訂一個開放資料法，這個法訂出來之後，可以補足現行不足嗎？我從這一個角度出發的話，其實個人一、兩天在檢視現行的制度到底有什麼可以補強的地方？就是剛剛政委提到的部分。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "但是也的確有彭會長一開始所提到的一些事，我們在PCA的機制上雖然有這樣訂出來，但是是不是有足夠要求。我舉例子：我們有訂應該每三個月要開一次諮詢會議，我記得有發公文出去，我很訝異聽到彭會長說並不是每一個部會都這樣子。如果沒有這樣子遵循的話，我們是不是有其他的方式可以去push部會去做這一些事？我覺得現階段從這一個角度來切入會，也許對於改善有幫助，比去推動這個法規，這個法規可能是長期性的角度。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "所以我比較建議的是，如果有機會可以討論的話，可以從改善現行制度機制的切入點，會比較可以立竿見影看到一些效果。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "什麼資料該公開，什麼不可以公開？這個事誰來決定？基本上要有那個機制。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "因為法都是比較上位的東西，什麼資料該公開、什麼資料不該公開，光訂法這一件事，就會花很長的時間要釐清這一些事。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "回到現在目前機制的話，我們會設計諮詢委員會及request的機制，是不是可以補強request機制，可以順利運行下去，比如有些民眾需求提出來的時候，我們也接到一些需求，也就是部會要回應這一些資料不適宜公開。我們也正在研議，因為有一些民眾說，接到部會這樣的回應之後，因為還不滿意，他認為部會可能打太極拳，我們是不是有一個複審的機制，讓這樣的部會回應了，然後民眾覺得部會的回應不符合他的需求或是他的理由不是很充分，我們再到上一層行政院的機制裡面來討論，以確認部會的回應是ok或者是不ok的——經過這樣子的程序，其實也等於增加部會的壓力。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我再補充一點，首先當然我完全同意處長的說法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為剛剛彭會長是舉歐盟的例子，為什麼歐盟可以把所有的資料全部整合起來，並且把所謂該開放、不該開放有一個齊一的標準？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我去法國的時候，其實有跟CNIL執行長有深入討論過，大家知道CNIL是歐盟大的DPA（資料保護授權單位）之一。歐盟這整個架構，包括即將推行的GDPR架構，他們希望在歐盟內的每個國家甚至每一個公司，只要在處理跟個資有關的資料，他們要判斷什麼能開放、什麼不能開放的時候，他都必須要找到歐盟裡面某一個DPA，而這一個DPA的組成，其實為了說服社會各界，不只是學者、行政院各部會信任的專家，而是包含各級司法人員、經社環委員會、上下議院立法委員，全部都要進來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以台灣現況，我們自己在行政院裡面，可以透過資通安全會報裡，個資保護及法制推動組的努力，法務部與各部會建立機制，使處理個資有所依循，但出了院會之後，我想各位都不會覺得是行政院講了就算數。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因此之前一波在推個資法，而個資法之前沒有適用的，現在也都適用了，我自己看起來一個主要在落實上的困難，就是它的判定是回到每一個部會自己的資訊長去進行個資的判定，我們也知道每一個部會的資訊長，在處理這件事的量能是不一致的。在這樣的情況之下，變成是一個開放諮詢小組裡面，如果剛好有懂個人資料保護的人，會審視比較嚴密；不懂的人，審視的嚴密程度會打一些折扣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣出去的時候，當然會造成民間的不滿，有一些還告上法院，在這個情況下，被告的那一個機關，未來就會在開放任何資料上，其實明明跟個資沒有關係，也會有非常大的保留，因為本來不知道有政治風險，現在竟然冒出了這個政治風險。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一件事其實在新政府裡面，我自己覺得很高興的是，至少在資訊安全的判定及關鍵國安機制的判定上，我們有一個專門院裡面，也就是簡宏偉老師所主持的資安處在處理這個事情。資安處是資通安全會報的幕僚，但是目前資安處的業務並沒有DPA的法定職能，所以個人資料保護法的解釋單位，並沒有因為資安處的成立而有任何的改變。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我自己在組織上的想法是，我們如果要立一個類似像開放資料法來判定資料是否能夠釋出的話，有一個跨機關或是跨院資料保護機關，是非常非常重要的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果沒有這個的話，我們在內部不管建立任何院裡的機制，一出行政院馬上會被挑戰，只要前一、兩個例子鬧上法院，院裡面組織判定的公信力就會下降，下降之後，不管怎麼判定或寫多少的判斷規則，都沒有用。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是這一件事因為是跨院的事情，所以必須要跟比較理解這一件事的立法委員們，以及新任司法院的朋友們進行討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "目前我也有積極在跟司法院的朋友們進行資訊方面的意見交流，但是這一件事畢竟茲事體大，我建議可以培養內部各部會的量能開始出發，等到哪一天覺得可以跟其他院做這方面的討論，我們再做DPA出來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一件事跟國際的外交也有關係。如果我們沒有DPA的話，就是每一個部會分頭進行外交，每一個部會按照它的性質，本來在開放資料上，就會偏重社會公益功能或是偏重產業價值功能，國際朋友們接到的訊息也許是相反的訊息，這時候其實也會有口徑不統一的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在歐盟都是透過這一些DPA之間橫向的交流，所以如果哪一個國家在這方面沒有方法的話，也可以說平常就套用我隔壁那一個比較強DPA的國家，讓我這邊的大公司去註冊。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我不講特定國家—但是就去法國或者是英國，用DPA的那一套標準來做，我們如果要變成別的亞洲國家能夠參考的一套範例的話，我們自己要有這樣的量能，未來我們才能在國際談判的時候說，我們這邊的DPA所認證出來的東西不遜於歐洲認證出來的東西，這樣我們才能跟歐盟的標準，以及亞洲想要賣到歐盟時的個資保護有一套說法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們現在如果還要回到各部會的話，我們仍然只能處理內政的事情，很難用這個當作外交的籌碼，這是我的理解。這一件事有沒有還需要補充的？" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "我覺得沒有那麼複雜，例如警政署的犯罪資料要開放到某一種程度，如何解決？他說不能開放就是不能開放，台北市及有些縣市有開放，但是有些縣市就是不開放，這個怎麼解決？這個誰來決定？是國發會可以跟他說要開放嗎？我之前也有要過，像高雄氣爆時，我也去要過管線資料，工業局說有些是我的、有的是地方的，我的是國家安全考量，所以不能開放，而這一個事情誰來決定？" }, { "speaker": "黃彥男", "speech": "我有一個想法，各部會某方面來講，他們有沒有能力作判斷？另外是是否願意負這個責任？最後的結果是，像剛剛政委有提到DPA，一定是院級的單位有疑問的或是有問題的，會在那個單位作決定，但是他要負責，就像部會很多事不用負責，並沒有哪一些專家學者。" }, { "speaker": "黃彥男", "speech": "但也並不完全是，如果DPA從很保守的角度來看是不一樣的，所以委員會一定是要各式各樣人，有的人是比較push、有些是比較保守的人，大家一起來討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "而且辯論過程是公開、可受公評。" }, { "speaker": "黃彥男", "speech": "是否能夠開放的情況，我們也可以參考歐美，像歐盟的犯罪資料，像美國很少有那個，如果在哪個地方發生什麼案件，在那個地點不講，但是地點跟案件都有講，而這個資料其實對很多人很有用，比如哪一個地方不能去，但這在臺灣開放早先會有困難，有人會說影響房價或什麼。" }, { "speaker": "黃彥男", "speech": "但是我的重點是，比如我們最擔心是隱私權的問題，但是如果在國外能夠開放，我們要找出有什麼原因不能開放，隱私權當然是一個問題，比如去識別化或者是很多方法可以做，並不是資料敏感性都不能開放，而是風險評估之後可以做。" }, { "speaker": "黃彥男", "speech": "所以我會覺得政委講得沒有錯，也就是要有一個委員會幫各部會解決資料是否開放，如果不敢決定就由諮詢委員會來做，經過辯論之後來共同決定，這可能民間、政府，大家會比較願意接受。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我具體就是覺得說至少立法、司法兩院的朋友，要嘛人進來，至少他們要有人全程參與檢視。" }, { "speaker": "黃彥男", "speech": "對，他們已經講到意見，已經決定的事，那就達成共識，這樣就不會有像各部會怕出事，然後就不敢做。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是，當然以目前的政府體制，甚至監察院也要參與進來，因為這也包含了圖利或瀆職的可能性。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我剛剛有提到「PET（隱私增進技術）」這一個關鍵字，其實我們之前上一波推去識別化的時候，我們的模型是拿現有全部的資料，然後想辦法用最小統計區及一些概略化方式，做可識別風險，那個計算方式其實就是我說的，我們內部可以說服自己，但是拿到外面不一定能夠說服所有人的計算方式，因為裡面也有質性判斷的權重，同樣會需要各界的參與對話，才有可能建立信任。" }, { "speaker": "黃彥男", "speech": "因為我的團隊在做隱私權的研究，這個領域是有很多技術在發展，不管是K匿名化，也就是最小區K個人為準，但是發現不夠完整。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為有間接識別。也有案例是「歐」會覺得這個有風險，「美」就會覺得還可以開放。" }, { "speaker": "黃彥男", "speech": "現在有很多技術，用各式各樣的方法來減少被識別的方式，事實上發展技術的時候，一個資料給我，我可以判斷這個資料的風險多高，當然你可以想像出來很多駭客在這方面如何識別，可以做自動的工具掃一圈，來認定哪一些資料會有風險、開放，這個風險是可以被評估的，比如某一些技術的發展，像技術的資料開放，比如開源工具可以輔助、判斷及識別，即使結果並不會百分之百不會被識別，那個是機率問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "至少是一個固定值。" }, { "speaker": "黃彥男", "speech": "對，也就是永遠有十個有這樣的特性，所以1/10可以被辨識出來，大家就可以接受這樣的指標，而資料就可以開放，所以有些是可以靠技術面去解決，即使有一些問題沒有辦法回到技術面的問題。隱私權是Open Data最大的障礙，也是各部會的隱憂，我們可以從很多面、法規面來研究，可以看到類似技術的層面，而這一個技術是可以發展的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以個人來說，在入閣前我和蘋果公司合作了六年。該公司目前採用的PET技術主要是差分隱私。它是合成資料的概念，並不是把原始資料原封不動開放，而是加入一些雜訊之後，跟雜訊做合成，並且可以證明辨識回去的機率是小到某個程度。這個加雜訊的過程，以我的理解有兩個方式可以做：一個方式，比如是正在用瀏覽器，不管是蘋果或者是Google Chrome都會問你願意不願意回報你的使用資料給公司，可以在蒐集端就加入足夠的雜訊，以至於任何人的瀏覽習慣都不可能被逆向識別，這樣子的話，因為蒐集端就充份加入了雜訊，後續任何處理都不可能識別回特定人。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果我們在使用端要加入雜訊，這很難用開放資料的方式出來，如果真的要開放資料，只開放一批的資料加入足夠多的雜訊，那除非資料量非常非常大，不然可用性是非常非常小。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "而我們能夠達到這麼大量的資料集，其實看整個政府就那幾筆而已，所以我們通常的做法其實是在API存取的時候加入雜訊，也就是研究者把要做查詢的Query提供，在查詢的過程中加入適當的雜訊，回給地的是跑過迴歸分析、平均值的任何東西的結果，保證那個結果沒有什麼大誤差，但是如果要個別的資料都要不到，會有雜訊，這一個東西其實是非常技術密集的事，而且牽涉範圍很廣，不只技術而已。如果沒有一個專門的機關來做這一件事，我相信各部會的資訊中心或許可以自己操作，但操作出來的東西，未必人權、消保、法律學者都會同意。" }, { "speaker": "黃彥男", "speech": "有一些工具可以處理，像剛剛講differential privacy是可以跟其他的技術結合，像可以K匿名化，K不需要那麼大，也就是資料會讓你不能有本來有價值的資料，加上跟某些混合技術之後，還是有一點準確性的。我剛剛講的是，政委講的沒有錯，要各單位去做差分或者是K匿名化…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "或混合式。" }, { "speaker": "黃彥男", "speech": "對，但是那個都很難。但我覺得這個是可以自動處理，不管是加在前一端或者是後面的data base在放出來有加上在裡面，我覺得這個都可以處理，所以就是說，我覺得技術的發展，這是很重要的問題，大家都針對這個研究，這個匿名化的方法將來會變成有很多新工具被發明出來協助，也就是可以減少大家對資料的疑慮。" }, { "speaker": "黃彥男", "speech": "不過回過頭來說，誰做這一個決定？一個資料放出來，假如會不會有風險，要用什麼方法做，有些人去評估這個風險，我可以跟你說這個風險是千分之一跟萬分之一是否能夠接受，如果可以直接技術上的處理，大家也覺得很放心；不過還是要到我剛剛講要到「院級」的單位，這裡面可能有一些技術，有一些是法規、有一些是產業來討論，要各式各樣的數據大家可以看，到底有沒有價值去開放或者是開放資料會造成什麼風險，都可以提出來。" }, { "speaker": "黃彥男", "speech": "我很支持剛剛政委講的，也就是要成立一個院級的Open Data委員會，包括剛剛講的產業的人、技術的人；一定要有技術人才在內，各式各樣的人都要在內，而法規的人也要在內，瞭解出了問題會發生什麼事，所以我覺得各式各樣的人都要在裡面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實「開放台電」並不是沒有造成經濟部政治上的風險，只是因為如果不開放，當時政治氣氛底下風險更大，是拿一個風險去抗衡另一個風險。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個不能當作常態，這樣子下去幾次，事務官體系對這件事，我們用鄉民的講法就是會「黑掉了」（笑），所以禮拜五的諮詢小組會議，我想很具體把這個列入議程。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為之前，不管是在國發會，或者是之前也有人提過是否在NCC，也有人提過是否在資策會或之類的，其實與各部會是平行或者是下屬的關係，要他們做最後的政策決策，或者是擔負政治責任，其實是不實際的，所以這一件事我們在禮拜五這個會議上在組織上看能否討論，今天可能只能做到釐清，這樣可以嗎？所以這個案子先這樣。" }, { "speaker": "陳坤助", "speech": "資料法的部分我補充一下，我分長期跟短期來看：" }, { "speaker": "陳坤助", "speech": "短期的話，我可以理解在政府這邊如果要立法會有很大行政、立法及社會輿論的問題，但是長期對直接拿這些資料來用的人是非常重要的東西，因為必須在開放基礎穩定下，才能長出來這一些東西。現在開放資料政策其實就是一個行政命令，雖然它是一個法，但是它的位階非常低，如果短期要做這一件事的話，是不是強化行政命令的力量？比如：行政院層級有諮詢小組，二級部會也有諮詢小組，但是二級部會的諮詢小組所做的事情是否有上報到行政院的這一個諮詢小組來，比如三個月要一季開一次的會，有沒有人監督？我現在看到的是院級這邊專注於院的大方向做開放資料的東西，但是確定並沒盯到二級部會做的事，這個是要報上來，就我的想像應該是像唐政委所說的。" }, { "speaker": "陳坤助", "speech": "我提到一個直接的例子，比如像現在二級部會直接要做開放，現在開放資料裡面有分甲、乙、丙三級，開放為原則、不開放為例外，必須要講出不開放的理由是什麼，這一些東西回來之後，可能是否會回到行政院這邊來看不開放的理由，你自己先看，否則像剛剛提到民眾提的東西說會在那邊打來打去，現在有這個情況，我建議到第三級的單位，有列入丙級的、不開放的東西，有時看到的理由也很奇怪，我建議他們要趕快把認為不開放的東西以後是否開放的理由要想清楚，因為我會希望二級部會要來盯第三級部會（局、處、司），不開放的理由這樣子講對嗎？行政院再往下看，比如二級部會的東西，不開放的理由是否是合理的，短期希望這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我進來以來或者是我召開的每一場會都有逐字稿，這一個逐字稿在 https://sayit.archive.tw/ 上都看得到，像電子競技那一場，我們在開會的過程中，當然各個部會會各自分別承諾一些事，他們回去之後承辦所有人都會收到院內共筆協作平台裡面的逐字稿，所以承辦就會看到他的長官到底答應什麼，並不會一轉頭交辦時突然間意思就跑掉了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為逐字稿是大家可以修訂之後十天才公開，十天內就會發現從會議結束到各機關補充，可以看到每一個部會跟三級機關（如國教署）就出來面對，我們三級機關對於我們在二級機關的會議裡面所承諾的事，事實上我們做到什麼東西，只要十天內提出，我就會在發布的同時一併發布。我們最後會做「紅綠燈」的綜整：裡面達成共識，三級機關有做到就感謝他們；如果有一些國內、外的政治情況要滿足，他們才做，就亮黃燈列管；他們做的事在決議裡面相反就會亮紅燈，其實是用驚嘆號，在這樣的情況，我們就會在下一次的協調會處理，事實上以這一個為例子，他們在下一次協調會就處理好了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我有一個具體建議，我們在院級的會議，一樣用逐字稿的方式開，這一次也許來不及，下一次開始就納入所有二級機關的會議紀錄，如果會議紀錄是沒有的，表示他們沒有開會，那逐字稿上面就會宣讀「某某部會議紀錄為空白」，但是我們有給他十天的時間敘明理由，所以我們在會議裡面的檢視就包含了他們對三級機關的要求、我們對二級機關的要求，所以這一些東西都有十天辯白的機會，十天出來的東西就會在院級開放資料諮詢小組後十天予以給國人檢視跟國際朋友檢視，這個是可以公開的，如果覺得可行的話，這個禮拜五已經來不及了，因為作業的關係，我們從下一次開會的時候，具體要求所有二級機關開放諮詢小組會議紀錄及判斷理由都事先敘明。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "我覺得很難做，臺灣政治文化的會議紀錄會讓各長官來看過，政治文化上沒有這一個東西，例如以前會議中我曾提了一些建議，到最後的結論都是很簡單的，都被刪掉。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是。不過我們現在在院裡已經建立了一個文字播報的人才庫機制。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "只有你（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不是只有我，未來是各部會都可以使用。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好，這個我們馬上進入下一個議程，高階長官認知。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "明天院長如果這樣裁示的話，我們這一段就可以公開，如果最後院長沒有裁示，這一段是要剪掉的（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "具體會有這樣的裁示，而這一個裁示的重點是在後面，也就是說每一個部會的次長，當然大家提到他們有資訊量能不一的狀況，但是現在會請他們裡面挑對公共溝通的這一件事，不只要懂資料或網路工具，還要會能夠解釋為何這個部會做這樣的事，必須要是幾乎全職來做這一件。如果目前已經有業務的話，接下來兩個禮拜就要開始慢慢交接。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然我們理解不一定職位能像專委這麼高，因為他們常常要忙別的。但即使是科長或者是組長這一個層級，只要被empower，他的資訊長、次長說：「從今之後專門做這一件事，直接對資訊長報告。」這樣子每個部會的某個同仁，才有可能在部會裡面去組成這樣子一種被empower的小組。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "任何這個資訊長及同仁及他們所推薦的人，都有使用PDIS所建立的，不管是共筆平台、寫作平台或者是逐字稿，或者是所有目前開會實際技術工具的權利，我覺得在這樣的情況之下，第一個可以持續發展下去，就是他跟他的開放資料諮詢小組建立一個默契，看是否會議紀錄就開始用新的方式製作；當然每一個的速度絕對不會一樣，但是我要講的是說，現在至少是他的資訊長，即使完全不懂，可以充分授權給一個懂的專職的人來做這一件事。其實我們在三樓已經有一個開發的小組，除了我們這邊一樓是屬於決策性的朋友們，大概有六位，三樓有九位都是做程式設計、資料分析等所有開發的team，這一個team會具體在數位工具上，對每一個部會挑出來專職聯絡人的同仁去進行建置。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然目前其實經濟部的彭專委及衛福部的羅機要兩位朋友，其實在內部已經有類似的小隊組織，但我們不能永遠靠小彭跟Peggy（笑），他們畢竟還是政務層次的朋友。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們會有這樣裁示的目的是，希望真正選出來的是常任的事務官，他們扮演的角色當然就是像小彭跟Peggy的角色，但不會有隨任期進退的情況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因此具體來講，我們這邊當然是做示範跟實驗，但是未來是要落實到各部會去進行，如果有院長這樣裁示的話，我一回國就會聯絡每一個部會的次長或主秘及他們推薦的這個專人來做這樣的編組，到時候紀錄會是公開的，也就請各位幫忙檢視看有沒有可以加強的地方，或者是哪一個部會實際上的表現，你覺得應該可以找更適合的人，我們都可以滾動來檢討，具體回答這一個議案的問題——絕對並不是辦公室十五個人才可以用這個工具。" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "不過這個同仁的名稱？" }, { "speaker": "陳昇瑋", "speech": "他被empower，他應該要被entitle。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，他還要有一個title。目前我們是說他是所謂的「開放政府聯絡人」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果這個名字你可以想出更好的title，我們就把這個稿子抽換掉，因為明天就院會了，可能要在今天之內給我一個更好的名字，我明天才能講。" }, { "speaker": "黃彥男", "speech": "我覺得這樣子很好，立了這個方式很好。" }, { "speaker": "黃彥男", "speech": "回到剛剛我一開始講的，最後這一些人某方面來講是兼職，因為有他的其他工作在部會裡。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們就要把他的工作交接掉了。" }, { "speaker": "黃彥男", "speech": "再來將來年終獎金或者是考績是誰打的？我覺得最後的關鍵在這裡，也就是獎懲的問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "既然是往資訊長回報，理論上是資訊長決定的。" }, { "speaker": "黃彥男", "speech": "資訊長是在各部會？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "黃彥男", "speech": "我們需要一個類似資訊總處，也就是所有的獎懲考績、resource是生出來的，才有辦法控制這一些，假設考績還是由各部會的資訊長去打，依我的經驗，就不見得會跟某個政策績效掛鉤，會有這樣的問題，因此在這個過程中，還是回到剛剛那個問題，政委您將來跟部會講時要講清楚說，這一些人的考績將來是由…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "…這一個橫向聯絡的這一個小組來決定。" }, { "speaker": "黃彥男", "speech": "對。而且他所做得好不好，會由委員會來決定，像剛剛講的委員會，就是這一個Open Data做得好不好會由客觀的委員會來決定，如果做得很好，就給他們考績優等，就是至少會有這樣的影響力，這樣對他們有直接監督的效果。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這要變成常態，我們之前都是第一次，好比像第一次處理連署案，衛福部的人主動公開資料而且主動做成這一些懶人包，他們確實也有記嘉獎。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但這就像老師說的，不可能每一次都是要做計嘉獎，必須要變成常態性的東西，這個我完全同意。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "至少在院的層級，在目前的政治氣氛只能刪委員會，而不能加委員會的實際情況下，我們可能要砍掉一堆編組，在這個情況下是不能加的，但是長遠看來，我們至少已經有懂的人，到這個部分可以嗎？" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "所以Open Data以後，諮詢小組就由這一個人把所有的資料速記在裡面？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，而開放政府包含參與、透明化及課責三個。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這三個以「開放台電」中好的部分跟慘痛部分的經驗加起來的想法是，其實每一個資料開放都是要回應社會回應的需求，可以是經濟的需求、可以是公益的需求、可以是政治的需求，但是這個東西必須要有一個單一的聯絡人，如果回應政治經濟或社會需求是一個人，而實際做社會開放揭露透明是一個人，進出這兩邊而這兩個人又沒有橫向連結，我們會產生一些可能上直播才能講清楚的政治狀況（笑）。為了不要再有類似的狀況，我們現在說開放政府是同一的事情，包含資料及資訊的揭露（透明部分）、包含了恰當參與的程序（參與部分），以及包含像剛剛打了「紅綠燈」的部分（課責部分），也就是包含紀錄原則，這三個會統一有單一的聯絡人，他一定會吃不消，所以會開始在部會培養支援的人，至少我們會先有資訊長、次長給他充分的授權，這是目前我們在政治上的處理方法。討論的「高階長官」部分就到這裡。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第三，其實剛剛已經提了非常多具體的建議，包含我們實際在進行App建置，而且未來也不一定只有App，現在對話機器人也非常夯，接下來也會有對話機器人，未來可能VR是下一個了（笑），所以不管接取端是什麼，我們應該要秉持一個平等的精神，這是Open API納入採購法的最基本想法，也就是我們通常在採購的時候，以前是前後端同時採購，會以當時最流行的接取端。像：最早我有參與的國語辭典，最早是gopher，因為www還沒有被發明，gopher是最夯的接取端，當時是以gopher這一個技術作為建置的方法，我當時也是看gopher查字典。但是我們知道接取端技術的更新是非常非常快的，現在沒有人在用gopher了，因為這個關係，我們具體希望且跟資管處充分溝通過了，像後端的採購（像鋼筋水泥的骨架），要就單一進行，不然就把某個示範性的前端，把那個前端直接接取API作為後端，也就是API-first design的想法。而這樣想法的具體結果是，首先可以把標案切小，每一個標案可以接取別的標案來處理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第二，可以把「開放格式」跟「開放授權」切開來，以前要同時決定「開放授權」、「開放格式」這兩件事才叫做「開放資料」，但是其實開放格式是以前在採購的時候，就可以用機器檢證的方式做，是否開放授權，我們可以到最後，給剛剛所說院級的委員會審定完之後才決定是否作為開放授權，好比有個資隱私、營業秘密、成本回收的所有這些考量，但至少在內部機關互通的時候，就已經是用開放格式來近用，並不會變成是現在有一個私有格式，可能還放在特定的廠商裡面—O開頭的資料庫裡面（笑）—但是我們用的那一個部分，我們用CSV或者是JSON－LD事實上私生子的情況，所以如果它斷掉的話，部會的朋友其實第一時間也不知道，所以我們要等國發會下一次檢查週期的時候，才知道它斷掉或者是變成亂碼或變成奇怪的主機點碼，但是如果他們的前端都必須使用這一個API作為接取，現在是沒有講到必須，而是說採購的時候可以加減分，以及如果有API使用必要，就像無障礙一樣，必須至少要提供相等程度的API，但是隨著這個東西落實，我們就可以說部會自己建置的不管是APP或者是網站，所有這一些接取端都是要跟民間能夠使用一樣的格式，至於是否要開放給民間使用及個資的疑慮，這是政策的後端再加以檢視，但是至少這邊檢視完之後，不用再擴大規格請廠商再多加一些為了Open Data的feature，我們可以拿直接有的API來變成Open Data，如果有人覺得應該要加雜訊，這一個API就可以直接接到加雜訊的這一台盒子裡面，不用直接要求廠商在P開頭或者是M開的資料庫裡面加上雜訊處理的機制，把前後兩端脫鉤比較容易解決這個問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "至於優先採購已經有Open API建置的朋友，以我所知，目前國發會有一個資訊採購相關的研究案，但是那個研究案目前的狀態還沒有真正發包出去，所以那一個東西有具體回應的時候，我們用書面的方式回應各位，但是以我所知，那個是裡面很重要的採購流程及跟各部會，包含輔導的機制都已經在裡面，今天可能只能回答到這一個。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「多邊架構」部分，這個我可能只能花一分鐘，因為這並不是我們自己講了算的問題。我這一次去巴黎參加OGP，之前他們很樂意邀請我，不管我投什麼稿都會上，但是這一次出現一個問題，我的稿子先上了，然後再變成一級官員，這是聯合國底下的多邊架構，如果我實際進場演講的話，在別的國家裡面分領團體（音譯）的OGP的會員國會講話，因為這樣的關係，我們採取一個折衷的方法，因為在多邊架構裡面，雖然對於一級官員的出席有所限制，但是對於一級官員的機器人出席並沒有限制，在馬德里的朋友們有幫我做一個VR的機器人，我就是用搖桿，他有一個360的相機，我帶著VR，我就好像人到馬德里一樣，用虛擬致詞的方式，跟他們的市議員交流，如果他們市議員受到某些國家打壓，他可以辯稱在看一場互動式的電影，並不是跟任何人有所會面（笑），所以這一次在巴黎也會使用虛擬投影的方式去參加他們的議程——這一個東西，我們目前沒有大張旗鼓跟國內的媒體說，但是這一件事馬上就要發生了，各位也不應該要被瞞在谷裡。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們透過一些技術上的方式，可能在「多邊架構」裡面可以爭取到一些出席的方法或官員出席的方法，但是絕大部分九成九還是要靠各位在公民社會及私部門透過多利益相關者的方式、透過這一些積極參與的方式，在非多邊架構裡面以多利益相關者的方式去出席。像我明年1月會去世界經濟論壇，那就是多利益相關者的模式，誰出席都沒有差，因為不是聯合國架構，我覺得這個是要兩者併進的，我們在多邊裡面用一些技巧性的方法試探一些空間，在多利益相關者論壇模式裡面，我們儘量積極爭取主辦，這一件事我會全力來幫助。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有看過DIGI+簡報的朋友，在場我可以統計一下嗎？點頭就好了，已經看過的，可不可以點頭？" }, { "speaker": "彭啟明", "speech": "很早的草稿。" }, { "speaker": "吳家林", "speech": "我看過草稿。" }, { "speaker": "黃彥男", "speech": "我看過草稿了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "（投影DIGI+簡報）我進來之後的具體貢獻是把封面頁重寫了（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這畢竟是八年且非常上位的計畫，所以我具體的建議是，這一個計畫除了大家都同意的寬頻是基本人權的弱勢接取，這些沒有人會有任何意見的東西之外，接下來可能有任何意見的部分，我們就分成私部門主導、公部門主導跟公民社會主導的這三個部分進行治理架構的討論。這個東西這樣子切出來的好處是什麼？我們不是政府在每一個地方都說全部是我們要做的，包山包海去做，以前很容易是只看到「經濟」這兩個字，這個方案是出現在最後兩個字，已經好很多了（笑）。各部會會用各自的想法去拼那個部會想要做的事，當然因為中央是編列預算的，每一個部會本來就要爭取預算，但其實有很多事情是由私部門及公民社會的朋友來主導才能做得好，不然我們在中央做再多都是做好看的，這個是封面頁具體的貢獻。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外，大家可能會比較關心的是它的架構（簡報第21頁）。它的架構跟之前NICI不一樣的部分，我只講不一樣的部分，花兩分鐘的時間跟各位簡報。第一個是院長召集，所以跟其他的「5+2」或加幾並不是平行方案，而是「5加2」或加幾的基磐方案。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "（簡報第18頁）另外一件事，因為在編列預算的時候，所有這一些比較接近造橋鋪路的，不管是公民參與或是開放政府的事，我們希望在下一個年度裡面，把它不要當作科技研發，把它直接當作是公共建設，而這個公共建設的意思是不管地方政府需要什麼機房、雲端建置、人力訓練什麼東西，就當作造橋鋪路來講。但是我們也理解，除了六都之外，其他別的縣市，碰巧好像很懂的人要去之外（笑），除此之外比較地方性的縣市，即使公共建設經費撥下去，像我昨天才在澎湖，他們就會說連到臺灣的那一條線都有問題了，所以換成gigabit的結果是，他們要發展P2P，等於在regional內網的聯線視訊系統，因為如果去本島再回來的話，那個城市就已經吃不消了。他們能夠發現問題，但是要說他們馬上建立一個P2P系統，他們的資訊中心不可能去做這個開放，不管是用Adobe Connect現成的solution，一定是去彰濱機房或甚至去日本再回來，所以公共建設經費實際上要有效果，目前的做法是——區域聯合治理。也就是每一個地方政府的副首長，也就是在DIGI+架構裡面的當然委員，我們把六都的人拉進來之後，我們去課予他們照顧附近縣市（包含離島）的責任，這個經費編列下來之後，他們的機房的所有這一些綜合效果是要由離他們最近的副首長來回報、負責任，我們自己覺得公共經費下去，又有地方首長負責任，我們才有可能盤點為什麼中央跟地方為什麼資料格式不一樣，好比發布的頻率不一樣及好比像資料的精密度一比較甚至還有錯誤的情況，也就是地方資料在統計上有錯誤，中央看出錯誤，但是中央沒有辦法跟地方講的事，可能透過這一個協調性的小組來進行。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "除了程序的NICI的架構之外，當然有兩位政務委員或部會首長來當副總召之外，我們也會對於這次的分組再請民間諮詢委員，民間的諮詢委員並不是像之前的什麼都管，而是可能挑一個分組，裡面一個你最care的部分，對那部分往外串聯並進行實質的建議，這樣才有可能像彭博士剛剛提到列管的可能性，不然一個太抽象的東西，大家講完之後，沒有一項可以列管，這樣就很可惜了；不管我在裡面擔任什麼角色，我會盡可能落實我們所設計出來的這樣一種架構。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣子具體在執行上，除了只是部會編列預算之外，我們還會有這樣子的一種服務型數位政府的東西，像我們剛剛講的民間專業人士如何進來的管道，我們講了非常多；另外一個比較少講的是在採購或者是在汰換資料庫或者是文書作業軟體這一些東西的時候，我們在院裡，因為三樓已經有九位已經可以開始開發及進行實測者，這個東西其實可以做示範性的作用，我們做完之後，當然不可能真正維護，維護還是要回到資管處，至少資管處的朋友們可以證明給各個部會，各部會至少有一位聯絡人實際上有在做開源的solution，使用的過程裡面，也可以把業務做到，也不遜於私有的團體，而是在這樣的情況下，我們才可以說服在採購的時候，建立在開源上面再加值，並不是在本來低層勞力密集的部分從頭開發，我覺得本來的做法是很可惜掉的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外，去聯合治理我剛剛講過了，剛剛也有講到各單位的資訊部門如何透過資訊主管聯席會及培力的方式，還有連結到上面院級不管叫資料保護機關（或未來編組），這是目前最弱及未來最需要加強的，因為這個東西未來才有可能「一站式智慧雲端政府服務」，否則這四根柱子哪一根沒有，那就是口號而已，這個是非常清楚的事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "（簡報第18頁）我們剛剛後面也有具體實際的做法，還有非常多的行動計畫，這個東西的細節不但會用PPT的方式釋出，我們在接下來每一個部會、每一個月或者是每一季的列管平台（政府內部管考網路），我們會用開放資料、開放API的方式來界接國發會的「來監督」平台。國發會的「Join」平台裡面，除了大家提案的「提點子」及「眾開講」之外，還有一個「來監督」，為什麼它的存在感這麼低？甚至比「找首長」還要低，為什麼呢？因為目前只有一個省水的案子，目前沒有任何東西丟上去，所以我當時跟國發會朋友規劃出來我們自己內部是用API跟Open Data界接的方式，把所有這一些「5+2」加幾以及DIGI+的大型旗艦計畫，可能從「亞洲·矽谷」開始，具體看每一個部會看實際撥下去的錢，每一個月執行進度多少、花了多少錢、做了什麼，所有這一些data其實在網路上都有，叫做KMPublic的系統來做這一件事，KMPublic這個系統是用iframe的方式，去嵌入在國發會網站上，這一個網站其實什麼都有，但是沒有網域的，一個沒有網域的網站，它的能見度比較困難（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是在這個沒有網域的網站裡面，其實現成的就有每一個部會、每一個重要的施政有哪一個大的作業計畫，目前是一個月或者是一季去管考，每一個月的執行情形，甚至這一個執行情形實際做了什麼事，然後事實上都知道承辦人是誰及具體發包、決標作業的所有這一些東西極為詳細的資料，目前都已經公開資訊。第一個它不是結構化的資料，第二個是它並沒有網域，就只有IP，所以我看了一下，只有PTT的一個鄉民跟一個調查報導的記者曾經使用過這一份資料，其他人根本不知道這一個東西存在，我們具體做的事，是透過「來監督」平台，給社會各界—尤其是調查報告的記者以及做資料分析的科學家們—這一些raw data跟structured data，有這個才會知道DIGI+、「亞洲·矽谷」每個月真正做了多少，做的東西跟實際上當時的東西有沒有接合，如果沒有接合的話，我們下一年度在審預算的時候，我們就可以統合，因為「來監督」裡面都可以留言，我留言還可以附超連結跟書面資料，都可以責成部會來做回應，只有這樣子，我們下一個年度編預算的時候，才知道哪一些東西是做白工，哪一些東西是真的有把這一個計畫往前推進，這也是DIGI+很具體要做到的另外一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "Open API剛剛其實已經講過了，我另外再講一件比較技術的事，也是回應網友的call in，因為在Open Data的臺灣群組裡面，張維志這位朋友，他具體講說Open API是比較細節的東西，是在資料發布端去進行規範。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實我們從外面可以看到的資料，辦公室畫出來的資料，確實大家如果看的話，三樓幫忙的小組幫國發會現有的一些規範用Open API方法，變成機器可讀的說明文件，這個當然是有意義的，好比：這個年是西元年或者是民國年，到底是OID或者是什麼組織編號，到底是怎麼去檢查，他說不能大於50，真的不能大於50嗎？以前是放在相當厚的PDF去規範，這個結果是廠商並沒有真正按圖施工，我們在製做的過程中，確實發現有些參數帶進去並沒有什麼效果，至少我們有一個機器檢查的方法，可以知道說他說有Open Data或者是Open API，我們每個月去跑一次機器檢查，至少知道這一些接取端沒有斷裂，以及有回到這一些看起來形狀至少像這個東西的資料，當然這一個東西並不只是在發布端使用，我們具體在Open API之所以要列入採購是，因為我們希望機關跟機關界接也可以用這個方式來使用，並不是開放授權、接取，甚至不是開放接取，甚至是只有同一個部會的A機關、B機關間可以彼此接取，在這樣的情況下，我們也希望他們做機器可讀的API說明，也就是Amazon就說：「你們之間互相讀資料庫，從明天開始就不能再讀彼此的資料庫了，一定要用機器可讀的方式在內部界接。」他從講這一件事到Amazon真正用EC2方式把內部的各種東西開放出來，中間沒有記錯的話，是經過了六年（2002-2008），Amazon是私人公司，都花了五、六年時間，把內部所有的資料庫互相讀取、每天用FTP上傳的東西變成API導向，何況是政府？當然這一個工作不可能在接下來的一、兩年看到結果。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是這個東西比較像是神經系統，我們知道成人的腦神經會長，只是長得比較慢一點（笑），所以我們就是透過這一個想法，像是reinforcement learning一樣，來刺激神經元往旁邊長，至少在下一次採購或更新時就從旁邊多想一點，Open API這個是非常持續、緩慢的，但如果一旦做了，就不可能再往後退步的工作。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，我們絕對不是用Open API來取代掉跟民間對話、Open Data及公民參與的這些東西，我們做Open API的目的，只是為了當政治、社會、經濟需求要產生Open Data的時候，承辦的同仁不用擔負回去跟廠商重新議價的壓力，承辦的同仁也不需要去跟長官說目前的格式只有某一個廠商可以讀，還要多花一筆錢轉成開放格式，承辦的同仁不用往下、往上管理，而是可以說「目前雖然沒有開放接取、授權，但是格式就已經準備好在這邊，只要DPA同意就可以開放出來，就沒有政治責任」，才可以在同仁不要加班的情況下做到整個社會對Open Data的期許。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我們一向覺得愛沙尼亞之所以能夠一頒布就做，是因為他們是電子化之後才成立的政府，他們不需要去電子化政府，" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "  接著是有開發能力的Data Task Force，三樓有九位朋友，我畢竟是寫程式為主要專長，我現在是帶內部新創團隊的方式在帶" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個有兩個好處：第一，他們有內部系統，他們只可以開放給內部部會的同仁，但是他們借調來還是那個部會的同仁，所以他們就有權限去做內部系統並規劃。第二，我們實際建立起整合工作之後，不管我們引進再多外部的專家，其實農委會的朋友也有引進一些朋友跟科學家的朋友來規劃，所有的這些功勞都是回歸到農委會，因為我們不是新的任務編組跟新機關，我們最後發新聞稿的時候，一定是說：「農委會的同仁結合了外部的專家，進行新的資料盤點，做出了農委會的系統。」如果不是這樣的話，他歸建之後就沒有地方容身了（笑），所以所有的功勞會回歸給各部會，因此不會看到PDIS小組或數位政委有任何的政績，我們如果做出這一個開發式的東西，到最後政績一定是回到各部會——像剛剛講的那個也是會回到國發會的功勞。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們可以越來越引進更多有開發能力，不管是大家之前曾經提過「微外包」或者是這些顧問等形式我們都可以儘量嘗試，但是做出來的功勞一定要回到各部會，這個是我目前的方向。以上每一項都有回答到，有沒有額外的問題？都沒有，我們非常非常有效率，我們準時結束會議，如果大家沒有額外問題的話，明天我如果沒有記錯，應該是明天DIGI+就要送院會了。" }, { "speaker": "張心玲", "speech": "明天早上，絕對是沒有錯的。剛剛看到的都是草稿。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然因為這兩個稿子我也不預期在二十四小時之內還會有大幅度的刪修，所以大家看到的應該就是明天的版本。如果明天沒有任何意外的話，剛剛看到的這兩份都會生效，如果有任何意外發生的話，我們再用書面的方式更新，但是九成五機率以上都會是我剛剛講的方式，明天這兩個會成為正式行政院的政策，那如果沒有問題的話，我們就散會。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "會議正式開始，為強化青年參與公共參與及公共機制，並提供青年在政府政策形成過程中的參與管道，行政院特別設置青年諮詢委員會，聘任三十位委員，並在今天舉行第一次的會議及頒發青年委員聘書，我們首先邀請院長來為我們致歡迎詞，掌聲歡迎院長。" }, { "speaker": "林全", "speech": "本院陳美伶秘書長、唐鳳政委、教育部潘文忠部長、勞動部郭芳煜部長、經濟部楊偉甫次長、各位青年代表擔任的委員、各位來賓、各位媒體記者朋友們，大家好！謝謝大家！謝謝你們參加這一次青年諮詢委員會第一次會議，我目前是這一個委員會的召集人。" }, { "speaker": "林全", "speech": "唐鳳政務委員是副召集人，本來我認為唐鳳委員作召集人比較恰當，但是他們認為要增加委員會的重要性，所以要掛一個人頭在上面（笑）。我也很開心有這個機會跟各位有一個交流的機會，所以我很高興說好，我就來當召集人，請唐鳳政委作副召集人。" }, { "speaker": "林全", "speech": "另外當然還有一個原因是，唐政務委員在過去工作特色還有一些國外的邀約活動，所以她有時候不能在場的時候，我也可以在場主持，雖然我是召集人，她是副召集人，但是我希望就會議部分希望她多扮演一些實質的功能。" }, { "speaker": "林全", "speech": "主要的原因是，希望她代表行政院的行政團隊出席這個委員會與青年朋友最好溝通或交換意見平台，在我來看，我覺得是非常有意義的事。我記得在2012年年中時，那時候蔡總統是小英基金會的董事長，她找我去小英基金會幫她做有一些關於公共政策工作時，那時我們也有交換意見討論，那時有一個感慨與感觸，覺得好像年輕人對公眾事務不太關心，第一個原因是年輕人投票率太低，第二個原因是我們在談論公共政策時，好像找一些專業人士時，不容易看到年輕這一輩出來，因為專業人士都是找在學校裡面學有專長的教授、有學問的人，但是我發現他們都忙在論文，不太願意花太多時間在公務上，那時我心裡覺得有一點焦慮，好像臺灣的下一代為什麼不關心公共事務，這對國家不是好的現象。" }, { "speaker": "林全", "speech": "但是這個情況很快就改變了，這個是在太陽花學運前後，我們發現網路形成及在網路上看到很多年輕人可以透過網路表示很多不同的聲音，而且我們看到太陽花學運之後，年輕人對公共事務的參與與熱衷，其實讓我們受到許多鼓舞。我覺得這個是非常重要的，因為政府所訂的所有公共政策都是為了社會未來的永續發展，可是一個社會未來的永續發展為的是下一代，如果我們今天所訂的公共政策沒有下一代的參與，公共政策顯然失去了主角，因此我覺得政府需要訂定公共政策一定要有年輕人的參與。" }, { "speaker": "林全", "speech": "我們臺灣政治結構可以看得出來，臺灣在過去也許政府組織或過去政治運作方式，讓我們的政務官培養的管道是非常少的，因此我們在找政務官的時候，也不容易從年輕人找到可以馬上做政務官的年輕人，我覺得這需要一些磨練，一時之間很難處理。即使如此，我們很期待年輕人願意用他的熱心、熱忱來參與公共事務，甚至於透過不同的管道，最後磨練成優秀的政務官，來推動公共事務，這個是我們所期待的。" }, { "speaker": "林全", "speech": "因此，這是我們今天希望成立青年諮詢委員會的原因，希望透過各位來開拓出一個平臺，讓我們更能夠接觸年輕人對公共事務關心的重點，讓我們擬訂政策時有更多諮詢的對象，想到更貼近社會未來的需要，所以我們今天嘗試從不同領域來邀請各位作為我們諮詢委員，也希望各位在這方面能夠扮演更多協助政府功能，讓未來公共事務的推動能夠符合青年期待；當然我也瞭解，這樣委員會的運作非常重要。" }, { "speaker": "林全", "speech": "今天請的各位委員，我應該幾乎都不認識，所以我前幾天有空的時候才看一下各位的背景，可是今天我已經不是年輕人，我以前記憶很不錯，現在的記憶很不好，所以看了東西也不容易記得，所以各位的領域我需要再多學習。我們嘗試把每一個領域有見解、有想法的年輕人請來，希望大家提供意見，但是你們的意見不用為公共政策背書，因此不是請各位來為政府的政策背書；不用，因為你們是「諮詢」性質，也就是到底各位的看法是怎麼樣，可以儘量大膽地嘗試把它說出來，踴躍提出各位的想法，讓我們能夠從這裡面知道我們在很多地方要重視什麼政策，或者修正什麼政策，我想這個是我們很期待的；因此，各位不用背書，也希望各位能夠持續保持熱忱，這也是我們希望能夠看到的。" }, { "speaker": "林全", "speech": "為什麼要關心、熱情？因為公共事務很容易讓人有挫折感，公共事務的最大特色是不管大家有什麼不同的意見就只能選擇一個意見，我記得我在大一的時候，念了一年的經濟學之後，我覺得經濟學不能唸下去，為什麼？因為我後來才發現經濟學習是談經濟政策及公共政策，政府聽了這麼多的公共政策，只能選一個經濟政策，聽了你的，就不能接受他的；聽了他的，就不能接受你的，所以公共政策最大的問題是只能接受一個政策。聽了一個政策，你一定要知道頂尖的經濟學家，其他的人就只能靠邊站，因此念經濟學就太辛苦了，後來是因為對經濟學有興趣，所以繼續唸下去，因此這裡面給我一個心得，我現在也在公共場合講，也就是年輕人「要追求興趣，不要追求名利！」只要是你有興趣的事情，你一定做得好；做得好，名利自然而來，所以名利並不是追求而來的，名利是靠得興趣才得到肯定，也才會有成果。" }, { "speaker": "林全", "speech": "當然我相信各位都是在追求興趣，才有今天的成就，各位都是年輕人的表率，我也期待各位有這樣的熱情、關心，繼續追求公共事務上的一些成就，但是中間一定會有挫折，公共政策最後不一定能如各位及我所願，因為我們每個人都是公共政策的一份子，但是我們抱持著開放的心胸，不斷地有樂觀態度、期待向社會大眾遊說跟說明，只有我們的想法影響社會大眾的人士，我們的政策才有可能變成公共政策。" }, { "speaker": "林全", "speech": "各位期待的公共政策若不能實現，那就是需要我們更進一步落實我們的想法，能夠讓社會大眾認同，今天這個諮詢會議，就是從這樣的精神出發，希望能夠得到各位的幫助與協助，找到最好的公共政策出來。各位知道這樣的運作是要花比較長的時間，但是我們也不可能天天碰面，各位有各位的工作，我們也有我們日常行政事務要處理，運作的方式目前初步規劃是三個月召開一次會議，我們希望開會的時候能夠交換意見，有什麼想法在工作之後思考一下，每三個月會請大家來，聽聽大家的心得，把以前講的東西延續下來最好，因為任何一個工作政策、或者是意見討論，都要持續溝通才會有意義。" }, { "speaker": "林全", "speech": "今天除了我擔任召集人之外，還有唐鳳政委擔任副召集人；我們還要再選出第2個副召集人，而這個副召集人是希望由各位青年代表中選一個出來，你們彼此間不知道是否熟識，如果不熟識的話，如何選出來是一個很高深的技術問題，這個技術問題我就交給我們的唐鳳副召集人（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "林全", "speech": "其實我今天的行程很滿，因為碰到昨天復興航空的事，行政院又臨時安排一些事情，所以我被迫必須提前離開，因此我不能講太多話了，等一下我至少會聽完各位的自我介紹，後面議程討論我能聽就會儘量聽。至於未來如何選副召集人及後續行政運作事宜，就麻煩唐政委接續處理，希望下一次我們開會時，我們不會再有復興航空的事情，就有比較有長的時間跟各位談久一點，今天也跟各位致歉一下，希望我們的會議未來能在一個非常充裕的時間中，大家可以以開放的心情作很好的溝通。" }, { "speaker": "林全", "speech": "我覺得唐政委應該可以在這邊扮演很多很好的角色，因為她在網路上也可以跟各位隨時視訊，雖然我們的會議三個月開一次，但是會議是持續進行中，謝謝大家！" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "謝謝院長對青諮委員的勉勵與期許，我們請院長先行留步，我們要請院長為我們頒發青年委員代表的聘書，今天聘書的頒發將分兩梯次進行，請各位青諮委員依唱名的順序到前方受理聘書，並與院長合照。" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "非常謝謝各位長官及青年委員，請各位先行回座。" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "現在大合照結束後，將由青年委員自我介紹並進行後續的提案討論，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "接下來是委員自我介紹的時間，稍候我們會請各位委員進行自我介紹，每一位委員自我介紹的時間為1.5分鐘，1分鐘時工作人員會響鈴一次作為提醒，1.5分鐘時會響兩次，我們請委員能夠掌握時間，讓大家能夠認識您，您可以自我介紹並說明有興趣的議題。" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "首先我們邀請李欣委員。" }, { "speaker": "李欣", "speech": "在場各位好，我是李欣，我目前就讀於臺灣大學政治學系國際關係組，之前看到名單的時候有一點惶恐，因為我應該是裡面最有幼齒的（笑），雖然年輕並不代表一切，但是相對於各位的資歷來講，其實我還有很多不足的地方，希望以後大家可以多包涵，並向各位學習。" }, { "speaker": "李欣", "speech": "我自己比較有興趣的是，因為我之前高中社團的關係，我有參加一些志工服務，再加上我母親是教職，因此我對於教育、偏鄉或資源分配議題比較有興趣，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "我們邀請林文攀委員。" }, { "speaker": "林文攀", "speech": "大家好，我是林文攀，我英文名字是Peter，大家可以叫我「Peter 攀」，這樣比較好記。" }, { "speaker": "林文攀", "speech": "我是真程旅行社負責人，是帶外國人在臺灣旅遊，是做國內旅遊的，我創業已經五年了，現在持續經營。" }, { "speaker": "林文攀", "speech": "我自己比較有興趣的議題是跟創業有關，因為我在創業初期時有得到一些政府的資源、補助，且不斷輔導我，因此我對於政府在創業輔助這一方面非常有興趣。" }, { "speaker": "林文攀", "speech": "另外一個有興趣的地方是臺灣的觀光發展，是吸引外國人進來臺灣，希望未來可以跟各位有更多的交流與學習，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "接下來邀請許瑞福委員。" }, { "speaker": "許瑞福", "speech": "院長、大家好，我叫許瑞福，我之前是臺大電機系畢業，現在是臺大電信所碩士班一年級的學生，我現在也是在網路學生媒體叫做「維京人酒吧Viking Bar」擔任營運長，同時也在Intel實習。" }, { "speaker": "許瑞福", "speech": "我自己最關注的議題有三個：" }, { "speaker": "許瑞福", "speech": "第一個，跨領域的人才培育：因為我自己在大學的時候，曾經有雙修哲學系（最後沒有完成學位），所以對於任何學科，特別是人文學科與科技如何結合及其重要性滿有興趣的。" }, { "speaker": "許瑞福", "speech": "第二個，國際人才流動：我現在擔任臺大哲學系一位德國教授的研究助理，我現在也與UCLA電機系的教授一起研究、合作，所以對於國際人才，不管是臺灣出去或者是更多國際的人願意在臺灣工作的議題，我是滿關心的。" }, { "speaker": "許瑞福", "speech": "第三個，學生職涯發展：也就是我現在在網路媒體維京人酒吧在做的事情。" }, { "speaker": "許瑞福", "speech": "希望未來可以跟大家多多學習，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "接下來邀請黃敬峰委員。" }, { "speaker": "黃敬峰", "speech": "大家好，我是「阿峰」。" }, { "speaker": "黃敬峰", "speech": "我先宣導一下，那張是投票，不能做任何記錄，要用白色的紙做，要方便大家記錄誰是誰，不然那麼多人，你講完二十號，我忘記三號「阿峰」是誰。" }, { "speaker": "黃敬峰", "speech": "我是「阿峰」，大部分有些朋友已經認識我了，我們公司在做的是讓年輕人有舞臺可以分享，我從2012年5月5日做到現在。創辦這一間公司的原因是我在當兵的時候，被霸凌得很慘，然後那時我很想要自殺，很幸運我沒有自殺成功，我離開軍中沒有當完兵，相信有當過兵的人有聽過「818」，我在「818」那邊住四十二天，我被判定重大憂鬱症認退，雖然很幸運有機會出來創業，創造一些影響力，我希望可以把這個影響力帶給學生。" }, { "speaker": "黃敬峰", "speech": "因此，我有感興趣的議題是，並不是國防，我的議題是我比較喜歡教育，因為我深信教育才能改變一個國家。" }, { "speaker": "黃敬峰", "speech": "第二個議題，我對於經濟部的議題感興趣，因為我對於微型創業、微型企業非常有興趣，因為這才是最多年輕人會參與的地方，在臺灣超過80％的都是中小型企業，而現在年輕人創業更是更低資本的創業，可能在經濟部的統計裡面是屬於微型企業，已經不是中小型企業了。" }, { "speaker": "黃敬峰", "speech": "所以我對上述這兩塊是最感興趣的，以上，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "接下來邀請吳馨如委員。" }, { "speaker": "吳馨如", "speech": "大家好，我是成大臺文系的馨如，因為考量語言關係，好像有人聽不懂台語，所以我只好用中文（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "吳馨如", "speech": "我過去的經驗大概是從2014年「323行政院事件」之後，然後回到成大「零貳社」，過去兩年來是在做成大校園民選議題主要的夥伴。" }, { "speaker": "吳馨如", "speech": "比較有興趣的議題大概是在高等教育的整個結構面、勞動力部分，希望有機會跟大家在未來兩年相處愉快，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "接下來邀請黃偉翔委員。" }, { "speaker": "黃偉翔", "speech": "大家好，我是《技職3.0》的黃偉翔，長期在做獨立記者，我們深度耕耘技職教育跟職業訓練議題，但是基本上就是教育部、勞動部業務—教育部部長就坐在我旁邊（笑）—大概還有經濟部跟國發會。" }, { "speaker": "黃偉翔", "speech": "其實技職議題需要大家關心，除了正面的報導以外，更需要討論結構性的議題，畢竟技職是跨領域的。" }, { "speaker": "黃偉翔", "speech": "過去可能關心很多比如技優生、技優領航計畫，或者一些技職國手的經費、兵役配套，諸如此類都是需要有人去關心，基本上這是我過去幾年都是在做這件事。今年年底才二十七歲，我學經歷職校新北高工，大學在臺科大，碩士在臺大，所以剛剛看到很多學弟妹，剛剛也有人介紹。" }, { "speaker": "黃偉翔", "speech": "我覺得進來最大的一部分是可以瞭解政府的運作、政策制定的價值判斷，我覺得在裡面可以有更多的學習，當然也要提出一些跟技職、職業訓練相關的建議，我是黃偉翔，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "接下來邀請陳乃綺委員。" }, { "speaker": "陳乃綺", "speech": "大家好，我叫陳乃綺，院長好。" }, { "speaker": "陳乃綺", "speech": "我是上尚文化公司的執行長，我們公司最主要做的是科學教育的推廣，聽起來好像是在教室上課，其實不是，我們是把科學教育結合設計、結合生活，所以我們公司跟電視媒體合作，比如像兒童節目或者是你們看得到新聞或者是吳宗憲的節目，他們會請我們幫他們設計有關有趣的科學議題，如何讓民眾可以瞭解。因為民眾要看的話，一定是要有趣為前提，所以把科學作為有趣是我們公司最主要的責任。" }, { "speaker": "陳乃綺", "speech": "大家進來第一句話喊的是「讓孩子愛上教育是我們的責任」，教育部不應該只是課本，所以我們公司專注做這一塊，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "接下來請吳宗保委員。" }, { "speaker": "吳宗保", "speech": "院長、各位委員大家好，我叫吳宗保，我現在任職於台塑企業，我本身產品工會運動的，所以我跟各位可能比較不一樣，我跟部長坐在一起，還屬愉快（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "吳宗保", "speech": "其實今天來參與諮詢委員會，一開始我也不知道到底來能夠聽到什麼跟看到什麼，但是來了之後真的不一樣，看到很多我們國內青年不容易，因為我本身很早的時候就進入到職場，進入到職場的時候，跟外界的接觸其實非常非常少，有接觸的是單純的工會運動，我今年三十三歲，在二十八歲就參與工會運動，很多人懷疑工會運動應該是老前輩快退休者才會參與，應該會有年輕人？沒有辦法，因為我們那個工廠都是年輕人，是一個電子產業，願景比較不同，今天非常榮幸能夠過來這邊，最主要是關心勞工部分的議題，有關於工資、工時及未來勞工權益，像復興航空這一件事也是非常非常重要的，謝謝各位。" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "接下來邀請吳政哲委員。" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "各位大家好，我是吳政哲，台少盟是一個青少年的NGO。一直以來我們都期待以轉大人的角度來看待青少年、青年這一個族群，我也期望擴大行政團隊對青年的想像，讓政府能用世代正義和投資的眼光來看待青年。" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "我比較有興趣的議題是，剛剛發言人跟大家介紹蔡英文總統參選時的競選承諾的其中兩項，在落實與充實青年權利的部分，我希望校園中的學生人權要被落實，全面檢討相關法令政策，校園可以不再是一個法外之地。都能夠降低公民權利門檻，至少到權利義務平等，像是18歲投票權，讓更多的青年，可以透過選票還有公投、參政、集會、遊行等積極公民權利，讓他們為自己發聲。還有，我們可能很多人都有發現，我們之中並不是真的那麽多元。過去培力青少年參與政策機制的經驗告訴我，在過程中盡量能納入多元的聲音更為重要。降低參與的門檻，使更多元聲音的公眾能夠參與，青年諮詢委員會才能反映更真實的青年聲音，才有機會改變現在資源分配不均勻的現況。" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "（會後提供參考：青年好政 http://iing.tw/posts/438）" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "大家很關注的勞工權益，我更在意許多弱勢的青少年，他們在勞動就業市場上是否可以得到很根本的，包括最低工資等基本勞動條件，及安全的工作環境。而且職安教育及勞動權益意識的議題，是不是可以從他們學習的過程中，更小的時候開始紮根。再加上行政團隊的積極作為，才能讓我們翻轉慣老闆的文化，讓勞工、每個年輕人都能夠成為有尊嚴的年輕人，為什麼這很重要？因為國家的未來掌握在這一群人身上。" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "接下來邀請廖泰翔委員。" }, { "speaker": "廖泰翔", "speech": "大家好，我叫廖泰翔，我二十九歲，是兩個小孩子的爸爸，我有一對雙胞胎，我現在在經濟部擔任研究員的工作，我曾經做過一些比較特別的事，我本來臺大畢業後在國外念研究所，後來回來在一般外商公司擔任資料分析顧問，突然想不開，那時柯文哲要選舉，就去報名海選，不小心真的選上了，就當他選舉時的發言人，後來我在悠遊卡公司，接著到經濟部。" }, { "speaker": "廖泰翔", "speech": "我剛剛介紹我是兩個小孩子的爸爸，所以我知道年輕人要養跟生小孩是多麼困難，要養家是多麼地困難；院長，真的很難。人口政策是臺灣很重要的一塊，臺灣的人越來越少、勞動力越來越少，老年人越來越多的情況，會很不平衡，所以我個人在關注這一塊。" }, { "speaker": "廖泰翔", "speech": "另外，我進了政府後，我目前推的是政府有很多的委外計畫、委辦計畫，但是內容是什麼，其實很多人都不知道，只有承辦的科員知道，一年上千億的經費，我希望未來這一些委辦計畫的內容如果可以公開的話，我相信大家對於監督政府或者是彼此溝通會更有效率。" }, { "speaker": "廖泰翔", "speech": "另外，我覺得政府政策行銷可以透過資料分析的方式，讓對的資訊給對的人，不然一般政府有什麼資訊，一般人可能都不會知道，資料分析的方式，因為政府有大家的資訊，就把對的政策資訊傳遞給對的人，這樣就可以節省很多溝通成本，以上，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "接下來邀請黃薇齊委員。" }, { "speaker": "黃薇齊", "speech": "院長、大家好，我是黃薇齊，很多人叫我「Momo」。" }, { "speaker": "黃薇齊", "speech": "我畢業於國立交通大學，不過我是人文社會學系，又輔修管理科學，基本上我周遭都是在講程式語言的人，所以就社會企業我們做的就是用科技來改善，作為智慧的工具。大家可以想像智慧或科技好像都是很冰冷的東西，但是你可以知道有兩個可以給各位參考的分享點：第一，人口老化我想大家都知道，我們都覺得他們是少數族群，但是包含剛剛廖委員所講的，身障者、老人家在這一個環境中，他們不會只是少數，在未來的幾十年，他們的人口是20％至40％，其實我們今年會變成少數族群。" }, { "speaker": "黃薇齊", "speech": "我們現在所有硬體的設備、軟體的設備基本上都是為我們在服務的，我們有沒有考慮到他們？所以我們用了很多長照或者是被動的方式補足，但是那個會浪費更多的資源，所以科技在裡面的角色其實是補足的，對大家來說，你的手機對只是接電話跟聽手機，但現在透過科技，我們坐在這裡就可以看到菜單，或者透過科技可讓爸爸、媽媽找到有婦嬰友善，找到有尿布檯的餐廳、有輪椅可以進去的餐廳、有老人家的老花眼睛可以去的餐廳，而且在過程中讓店家也知道要如何服務，這是科技與人文的結合。" }, { "speaker": "黃薇齊", "speech": "再來，當初因為我帶著我阿嬤出去吃飯有這個困擾，所以才開始做這一件事，其實可以知道未知的未來，手機對他們來說是輔助的工具—手機現在可以報讀—所以視障朋友現在有手機，不需要任何人，自己可以走出去吃飯、導航。老人家也是，可不可以做到跟他講話的時候，我要去吃飯的時候帶我去，不要每一次都要叫我的小孩來接我，我覺得科技要做到這方面，因此第一個除了科技以外，我關心的是公開資料，因此很開心唐政委在這邊，很多資料都在政府地方，而我們做得非常完整，像我剛剛提到婦嬰友善的這一些東西，像補乳室的控制與資料，其實政府有最精確的資料，這比起我們Google來講的話，Google落後，那個資料我不能確保，但是政府的資料是可以確保的。" }, { "speaker": "黃薇齊", "speech": "第二，我關注的是女性的問題，我在工科學校，然後我又創業，我今年二十五歲，所以我有很多選擇，但是我覺得蔡總統給我們很多機會，希望可以跟大家多學習，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "接下來邀請游適任委員。" }, { "speaker": "游適任", "speech": "大家好，我是游適任。因為學生時代的時候，開過兩間公司：一、Sharing Wheels，也就是提供校園公共自行車給學生使使用；二、一間設計公司，2014年設計公司賣給國外一間比較大的設計公司。" }, { "speaker": "游適任", "speech": "現在我負責這間顧問公司叫做「Plan b」，其實是提供各種解決方案的服務，如果大家知道IDEO的話，其實跟他們沒什麼不一樣。" }, { "speaker": "游適任", "speech": "但我們主要是針對SDGs的幾個關聯議題，也就是永續發展目標，永續發展目標的議題很寬，大概有十七項，從氣候變遷、環境保護、平權教育等等，所以大家剛講的一些東西，我們都應該engage才對。" }, { "speaker": "游適任", "speech": "我們現在的客戶單位主要是國內外一些大公司，以及國內外的非營利組織，此外我們會有自主性的案件，因為這樣的關係，所以其實我們有把中山足球場的西側租下來，改了大型的辦公空間，然後因為這幾年做的領域比較寬的關係，所以這幾年突然跑出很多很酷的詞彙，包括「共創」、「青創」及「文創」，好像都跟我都有關。" }, { "speaker": "游適任", "speech": "加入委員會後，我比較想關心的議題，是行政院一直有一個永續發展的委員會，好奇這幾年在做的時候的實際成效及針對過去MDGs所謂千禧年計畫的目標與方向。當然青年創業也會好奇想知道，就像剛剛廖委員講的，一些公開的資訊，其實政府都有，我們是不是可以透過這一些資訊可以有更好的瞭解，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "接下來邀請林筱玫委員。" }, { "speaker": "林筱玫", "speech": "各位先進、院長及政委大家好，我是瑞德感知的創辦人，我是林筱玫。" }, { "speaker": "林筱玫", "speech": "我畢業於清大資訊工程所，是清大資工大學直升，碩士唸完之後創業，我原本還有進修博士班的打算，想深入研究機器學習 (Machine Learning) 的相關研究，當初想要到美國去唸PhD，跟我先生去。我們在求學過程中，創業並不是我們第一個想要做的事，為了申請心目中的學校，我們得多做些事來加分，我們參加了微軟的潛能創意盃，主題說要「用科技改善現在世界的難題」，報名參賽那一年(2010) 8月5日發生了智利礦災，隔年發生日本的311海嘯，後來又發生臺中阿拉夜店大火，所以我們就用了這個科技「物聯網」的概念做了一個室內逃生導引，告訴人該怎麼樣疏散避難。" }, { "speaker": "林筱玫", "speech": "有人說這件事做好了是慈善事業，說服我們創業。這一件事原本覺得科技切入建築裡面，然後去做防災是一件合理且實作簡單的事，很簡單就可以把這個概念做好，prototype做得容易，但是做商品化難，做完商品化又進入通路也難，現在發現這一個議題是進入到「國土防災空間規劃」議題中，從環評就要開始進入到公共政策的承包流程中，讓這件事難上加難。我跟我先生是白手起家，我們在做這一些事的時候，全部經濟部所提供出來的青年逐夢創業啟動金、青年創業貸款全部都用過了，一路辛苦走來，沒有因為是女生在科技業然後進消防業而吃香，遇到問題和關卡還是得想辦法解決，因為跨領域有太多細節問題需瞭解，所以後來再去唸建築博士班，所以我現在是建築的博士候選人。" }, { "speaker": "林筱玫", "speech": "這一路的辛苦只為了要把這一件事完成，將所有既有的傳統產業消防器具全部升級，做自動防災應急處理。我們遇到什麼問題？就解問題，幸好幾次在死亡邊緣的我們遇到貴人相助。因為女性創業經濟，而我有參與一些公益活動和軟體系統開發經驗，無意間被拉到APEC PPWE group去幫忙做一些產出，請我把女性經濟和ICT(資通訊)串聯，所以今年被派到APEC於秘魯利瑪去發表，去年也有到菲律賓去APEC發表。我想再次說明，那一個女性創業遊戲設計不是我們公司的主業，但是這方面的議題及防災教育議題是我們公司希望茁壯之後可以用科技教育來讓下一代過得更好議題(我打算40歲以後才正式去做)。 我現在得先處理國家經濟建設的問題才行，這是我的創業初衷我給自己十年先把這件事做好。" }, { "speaker": "林筱玫", "speech": "但是這個救災初衷的構想常常會被踢皮球踢來踢去，横跨經濟部、科技部、交通部、內政部及消防署，各部會都說這一個議題非常地困難，因此以一個沒有背景的人來說，這一個問題是難中加難，如果不是貴人的幫助加上信念我不會活到今天且可以站在這裡。我跟我先生結婚了七年，但是我跟我先生的感情現在非常不好，是真的，因為創業過程當中，友情撐兩年，聘請來的只能撐一年，所以我們曾經經歷過初期隊友大家都離開的時候，我們也因此不想跟對方講話，我們都用message(簡訊)溝通，到現在都是這樣。但是我還是相信他，所以我會支持他做一樣的事情，也就是用科技解決現在社會的難題 (成就彼此的夢想，希望能做慈善事業)，謝謝大家 (點點頭 & 笑)。" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "接下來邀請邱嘉緣委員。" }, { "speaker": "邱嘉緣", "speech": "大家好，我是嘉緣，我跟珮綺都來自於臺中，因為珮綺今天不在國內，所以只有我出席。" }, { "speaker": "邱嘉緣", "speech": "我是學社會學，她是財金系，我們因為學了一堂課，所以決定回到臺中創業，創立的公司叫做「好伴」，主要是在臺中火車站附近的舊城區，主要是做舊城再生的行動與創新的推廣。我們營運的空間是一個兩層樓的共同工作空間，透過共同工作空間分享精神，號召中部地區年輕人關注舊城議題。" }, { "speaker": "邱嘉緣", "speech": "經歷三年的時間，也成功推動很多舊城再生，不論是市政府的關注或者是上萬名年輕人的關注，更是從原來只有五組的公民團體，現在有十幾組，原來只有十家在地的青創，到現在也是二十幾家。" }, { "speaker": "邱嘉緣", "speech": "我關注的議題主要是跟社區有關，分兩個部分：一個是文化面的，包含社區再造、文化再生、青年返鄉的議題。第二個，社區關注的議題是社區福利，比如現在開始在推長照的政策也有人的這一些事，如何把這樣的獨立落實在每一個人生活的最小基本單位裡，把這一件事做好。" }, { "speaker": "邱嘉緣", "speech": "另外，幫珮綺介紹一下她關注的議題，因為珮綺同時有在參與臺北玖樓共生公寓的組織，所以她同時也關注社會住宅及都市青年居住的議題，一樣是文化資產再生、青年返鄉及地方學等等，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "接下來邀請方克舟委員。" }, { "speaker": "方克舟", "speech": "大家好，我是Mata Taiwan的創辦人方克舟。" }, { "speaker": "方克舟", "speech": "「Mata」是一個南島語言的同源字，意思是「眼睛」，其實我們平臺的目的是要服務像我這樣子的人，也就是我不是原住民，但是對於原住民的議題應該要關注，所以這一個平臺希望透過管道，然後用比較適當的方式，也就是用一般民眾也可以接受的方式，把原住民的議題推廣到世界上面其他角落。" }, { "speaker": "方克舟", "speech": "一開始我們只有關注文化這一塊，因為其實我對於文化跟語言是很有興趣的，其實後來發現各種社會議題，包含原鄉的議題，並不是只有文化就能解決，舉例來說我們說要傳承族語，這個就會包含跟原鄉政策及產業都有關係。" }, { "speaker": "方克舟", "speech": "我們的內容是除了從文化擴散到其他的議題之外，我自己過去兩年也開始投入固定跟北、中、南一些部落合作，關注部落產業及部落文化活動這一塊，希望找到一個方式可以讓部落產業有其自己發展方式且永續，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "接下來邀請邱裕翔委員。" }, { "speaker": "邱裕翔", "speech": "院長、部長、政委及各位在場的委員大家午安，我是瓜瓜園邱裕翔，我本身學打鼓的，後來學食品加工，現在來扛鋤頭、種地瓜。" }, { "speaker": "邱裕翔", "speech": "我們算是一個產銷班團體，也是一個合作社、同時也是農企業，目前配合的班員將近有六百位的農民，每一年要管理差不多兩千筆的農場。其實有感而發，我們農業在過去三十年，其實在農法跟第一線勞動力的事情一直沒有被克服及解決，因為這樣子，衍生了很多農業服務來服務我們的班員； 當然這個是屬於過去式。" }, { "speaker": "邱裕翔", "speech": "當然希望政府在推動農企業，我希望有機會在這邊參與討論的話，我們希望農委會跟經濟部對於農企的這一件事歸誰管把它講清楚，不要大家覺得這個是他的就是他的。" }, { "speaker": "邱裕翔", "speech": "另外，我8月份有去一次荷蘭，荷蘭跟臺灣差不多大，它是全世界第二大農業輸出國，如果同樣臺灣農業的話，為什麼我們不行？為什麼他們的農場裡面都沒有人？因為他們的農業機具非常先進，所以我覺得這個是我未來幾年我們一直在說無人化、科技化、智慧化，我們一直在轉型，也希望可以協助農民解決他們在耕作的問題，因為農民應該賺的是管理財，而不是機會財，因此我們必須要確認這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "邱裕翔", "speech": "最後，我們立下一個比較遠大的願望，2020年是東京奧運，臺灣的食物供應鏈能不能打進去，我們希望能夠讓臺灣的地瓜在東京奧運發揚光大，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "接下來我們邀請陳建翰委員。" }, { "speaker": "陳建翰", "speech": "各位委員大家好，在座裡面大概是我從最南部來的，我們力佳綠能生技有限公司主要從事石斑魚的生產。" }, { "speaker": "陳建翰", "speech": "大家聽到力佳綠能可能會覺得怎麼好像再生能源產業的公司名，會取這個名字主要是因為我們的生產的理念，我們的初衷就是以環境友善、資源永續與食品安全的出發點去從事優質水產品的生產，所以才會以此命名。" }, { "speaker": "陳建翰", "speech": "早期我父親從事養殖的時候只是以自然人的身份在經營，在經歷過八八水災之後，我們才成立力佳綠能。就跟邱委員剛剛提到的，我們現在面臨整個農業的從業人員老化問題非常嚴重，我們要如何導入自動化的系統，建立核心技術。讓臺灣的農漁業可以真的在全世界有立足之地。" }, { "speaker": "陳建翰", "speech": "很早期臺灣有「草蝦王國」的美譽，但其實現在整個東南亞，我們自己覺得別人比我們還落後的國家，其實他們的養蝦技術已經比我們精進很多，當然我們還是有一些技術領先其他國家，所以我們自己要去思考到底有什麼東西可以贏過別人。我覺得我們臺灣不要真的把自己侷限在亞洲地區，或者把市場真的侷限在中國大陸，我們要跳脫這個思維，因為我覺得臺灣的技術、經驗與產品真的可以行銷到全世界，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "接下來邀請張郁珮委員。" }, { "speaker": "張郁珮", "speech": "大家好，我是郁珮，我來自花蓮鳳林，我最近才在臺科大任職行政人員。" }, { "speaker": "張郁珮", "speech": "其實我在鳳林從事社區營造的工作大概八、九年，鳳林真的是平常在座很多人都沒有聽過鳳林，我們其實在社區的時候，開始思考是不是有一個長久的計畫在這個鄉鎮有一個比較遠大的目標執行，那時我們發現「慢城」國際組織，很適合鄉鎮發展。" }, { "speaker": "張郁珮", "speech": "在2013年我獲得客委會築夢青年補助，讓我有機會到「慢城」總部及歐洲幾個城市去瞭解什麼是「慢城」，在隔年幫我自己家鄉鳳林通過這個國際認證。藉由這一個國際組織的平台，鳳林在這個地方在荷蘭年會或者是去年義大利米蘭世界博覽會，在國際上有機會被看見。" }, { "speaker": "張郁珮", "speech": "「慢城」跟社區營造的議題很廣，文化資產保存、自然資源及公共議題等等，我比較希望能夠參與的議題是國際合作、組織及INGO的部分，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "接下來邀請徐健智委員。" }, { "speaker": "徐健智", "speech": "各位長官、各位委員大家好，大家可以叫我「徐小智」。" }, { "speaker": "徐健智", "speech": "我是位視覺設計師，同時也是返鄉青年，現在在新竹縣峨眉鄉做社區營造，主要是活化在地銀髮族及推動青年的社區參與，並透過輕旅行與貼近生活化的方式去推廣禮物經濟及無條件基本收入。" }, { "speaker": "徐健智", "speech": "我比較關注的議題是社會企業、社會創新、社區營造、青年創業與青年返鄉，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "接下來邀請洪簡廷卉委員。" }, { "speaker": "洪簡廷卉", "speech": "（卑南族語自我介紹）" }, { "speaker": "洪簡廷卉", "speech": "大家好，我是洪簡廷卉，我剛剛是以我的族名用卑南族語跟大家打招呼。" }, { "speaker": "洪簡廷卉", "speech": "我是來自臺東卑南族建和部落，我現在是在原住民族電視臺服務，擔任國際新聞記者，我也是主持人、主播。" }, { "speaker": "洪簡廷卉", "speech": "我覺得很重要的一件事是，加入到這樣的團隊，我相信在場的委員們也都會有這樣子的想法跟信念是，青年是我們自己面臨議題時的專家。的確我們很多時候把專家跟學者劃上等號，可是現在這個世代，我們其實一直不斷透過不同方式讓大家知道，我們對於自己在面臨的議題其實是非常瞭解，我們手上也掌握解決方案，只是需要舞臺、需要資源、需要更多的支持可以讓我們做更多的發揮，在青年的部分是這樣，在原住民族所面臨的挑戰也絕對是這樣，所以希望透過這樣的機會，去促進在跨部會上的議題合作與瞭解。" }, { "speaker": "洪簡廷卉", "speech": "其實我自己是從體制外，現在算是半隻腳踏入了體制內，所以基本上其實我之前在原民議題的工作上，其實一開始是從聯合國原住民議題長生論壇開始，我們的組織生根原住民議題長生論壇有十年的時間，一直到現在我自己本身也是臺灣原住民族政策協會的理事，也是法扶基金會的原民董事。" }, { "speaker": "洪簡廷卉", "speech": "其實想要做的事就是從各個不同層面去推動族群主流化的這一件事，這也是小英總統參選時的政策之一，我覺得很重要的一件事是，從這一個委員會開始，我們就可以來做族群民主流化的事。" }, { "speaker": "洪簡廷卉", "speech": "我所關注的議題是，如何讓我們每一位原住民的孩子在成長的過程中是非常自信、可以有各種機會讓每一個人可以成為真正的人，比如我是真正的卑南族、真正什麼族群，我的文化、我的語言、我的環境、我的土地都是按照我們的方式可以去運作，那這個運作絕對不會害怕，我們跟大家絕對是同盟國的關係，所以希望透過這樣的觀念、概念可以透過此委員會讓更多人知道，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "接下來邀請林彥孝委員。" }, { "speaker": "林彥孝", "speech": "院長、各位委員大家好，我來自高雄，我現在就任於高雄市機車修理業職業工會，擔任秘書長一職。或許大家對職業工會沒有那麼多瞭解，可能在這個委員會上，我跟台塑理事長算是少數民族。" }, { "speaker": "林彥孝", "speech": "我踏入職業工會的領域參與工會運動，差不多參與了十一年，記得在二十六歲時就接觸工會運動。" }, { "speaker": "林彥孝", "speech": "我所關注的議題，當然跟勞動部比較有關係，也就是勞保、健保及職業訓練，我比較關注這一些，畢竟我在我們工會執行下，年輕人有斷層，都不去學技術，因為學技術很刻苦耐勞，像年輕人要學機車修理，早上八點半要上班，像我們老一輩在學技術的，早上九點開始上班，到晚上差不多九點、十點才下班，當然現在不可能，因為勞基法不准這樣子。大致上這樣，謝謝各位。" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "現在邀請胡哲豪委員。" }, { "speaker": "胡哲豪", "speech": "大家好，我是Valagas Gadeljeman，在我身分證上可以看到族語名字跟中文名字的並列，這是原住民在1984年參與社會運動爭取得來的權利，所以很希望未來在公文上可以看到Valagas Gadeljeman跟胡哲豪並列在一起，代表我的族群、也代表我的家族。" }, { "speaker": "胡哲豪", "speech": "因為家族的身份是貴族家族（屏東瑪家Vavulengan頭目家族），所以我從七歲開始就參與家族的政策與討論，在旁看著大人如何處理部落或是家族的大小公共事務。我是屏東的排灣族，從小就被迫接受參與討論、傾聽跟決策一些事，也因為這樣的身份，讓我覺得未來在團隊裡去聽不同領域的年輕人如何討論一些政策，進而採納一些想法。" }, { "speaker": "胡哲豪", "speech": "2009年我的部落遭受莫拉克風災，我們家被迫遷去另外一個社區，也因為2009年的遷村政策讓我更深體悟到進入專業領域念書的想法。我從國小、國中及高中都在原住民完全中學裡求學，我是到研究所、博士班才到台北唸書，目前就讀臺大城鄉所，是城鄉規劃的領域。我進去唸書的時候才發現專業是其次，重要的是如何跟不同專業者溝通，若你聽不懂別人在講什麼，很多事情沒有辦法討論，也是因為這樣的關係，亦是自己的興趣，所以我特別喜歡聽別人講事情（故事）。我代表臺灣出國參加一些國際會議，像是UNPFII（聯合國原住民議題常設論壇）。也因為原民會的關係，我有幸到斐濟去參訪，過程中接觸到很多族群，讓我知道族群跟文化這一件事在今天的主流社會裡需要多一點聲音，性別的議題也是。這也是我未來在政策建議上可以投入的部分，我所說的性別包含很多種性別類型，像在我們原住民社會裡的性別就包含很多種，不是所謂主流社會定義的這些。因此未來政策我將集中在方面，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "非常感謝委員的自我介紹，院長因為後續有接續的行程，再一次以熱烈的掌聲謝謝院長！" }, { "speaker": "林全", "speech": "今天討論的議題，因為四點安排復興航空的會議，希望下次有機會跟各位討論，先跟各位致歉，先請唐政委主持後續的會議，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "接下來是提案與討論時間，我們的時間預定到四點半，共三十分鐘，這一段時間我們會開放各青年委員主動發言並與我們現場各位大家進行互動式的意見交流。" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "為利讓青年委員都有發言的機會，所以每一位青年委員發言的時間約三分鐘，三分鐘到時我們會以鈴聲響一聲作為提醒，四分鐘到時我們會以鈴聲二聲作為提醒，也請委員能夠掌握時間，我們現在就開放現場委員能夠自由進行發言及謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "我們在會場旁邊備有咖啡與綠茶，大家可以自行取用，我們剛剛也在會場有發送相關的餐盒，等一下會送到大家的桌上，請大家稍候自由交流時，其實都可以自己取用，以上。" }, { "speaker": "黃敬峰", "speech": "大家好，我是「阿峰」，因為之前投票，我得三票，現在是暫代副主席，跟大家講一下黃色右下角有寫請勾選一位，等一下投票的概念是一個人至多可以選三位，也就是跟政委討論完的一個結論。現在選出來的副召集人會先暫代這兩個禮拜政委出國的時間，但是之後分議題後開始會分不同的team，也就是自己類似小組長的概念，依去年的經驗是三至四位，因此大家可以選擇三位。" }, { "speaker": "黃敬峰", "speech": "建議大家可以選擇的目標是，我這邊認識的人比較多，我怕大家都選我，所以我覺得可以選擇分組組長，可以對什麼議題感興趣，例如對經濟部的議題感興趣，像剛剛很多人分享經濟部的人就會選經濟部的，可以找一個主要副召集人，也就是你剛剛覺得分享不錯的，你可以找他。再者是你也覺得他很棒，覺得他有經驗，所以可以投給他，一個人有三張票，我們選出票數最高的。請劃定清楚，不要做其他的註記，請認真勾三個。政委要先跟大家講幾句話。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "叫我唐鳳就好（笑）。剛剛非常高興聽到大家的想法，我們的Apple TV現在正在設定，不然已經可以投影上去了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我剛剛初步聽了一下，其實大概分成六個，創業（農企、社企、募資）、永續（環境、科技及其他生態性）、勞動（工會、人群教育、職訓及其他人權上加強），除了創業、永續、勞動之外，我聽到的是文化，而文化比較多的是包含原住民、文資保存、多元性別這一些東西，都是廣義的文化，這一些都有相互交織的關係，我暫時把它叫「文化」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然還有教育，剛剛聽到大家主要是針對高教、技職教育及人才斷層都有非常深的瞭解。因為我在進政府其實也沒有早大家多久，我也曾經來不到兩個月，在此之前我在107課綱的委員會，所以我對教育非常非常關心。當然107課綱除了某個歷史課綱交不出去，其他都交出去了（笑），所以算是完成一個階段性的任務，因此可以過來這邊跟大家一起工作。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "除了創業、永續、勞動、文化及教育之外，我剛剛還有聽到一個很有趣的是公共參與，有幾位朋友他們特別提到不是某一個單一項目感興趣，而是希望透過資料分析的方法提供更多公民參與技術的方式，讓更多有興趣的人，而不只是在場的朋友，任何不在場的青年朋友都可以透過公參的技術來進入議程設定，好比像十八歲還拿不到投票權，可是可以用某些方式來參加政策設定東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不瞞大家說，其實前兩屆的青顧，我其實多少也有接觸，我之前是他們召集人蔡玉玲委員的顧問，他們當時其實比較是在那三組，而且那三組比較是跟經濟有關係，所以漸漸可以看得出來大家都是…怎麼講，組織者嗎？就是已經有非常多自己參與的經驗。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我先把我自己在院裡面的實際工作先跟大家稍微說明一下：我現在在院裡面，就像大家看到的三件事情，負責「開放政府」、「青年諮詢委員會」、「社會企業」。開放政府大部分就是我怎麼樣把東西變得更透明、把大家的意見收進來及如何課責，課責這一件事是我特別在意的，也就是如何把大家關心的這一件事，如果有部會說他該管的話，他到底有沒有管，在十天內要有一個答案出來給大家。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我才會用三種主要的技術：" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一、一種技術是「多利益關係方會議」，任何一個人相關的會議，我們就把跟政府最對著幹的朋友邀過來，然後大家一起開會，像之前電競的時候包含了電競選手會進來。為什麼？因為他們是利益關係方，並不是協會理事長、公會理事長講了算，而是真正收到這個政策即將被影響的人，他們說了算，那就是stakeholder。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "二、另外一個概念其實我覺得也很重要，也就是主持技術的概念。剛剛有很多位朋友講的，我非常同意一個傾聽的技術，如果沒有一個傾聽技術的話，就會變成我們所有人公聽會講完之後，比如七個爭點或者是九個爭點，然後就開花了，再多開二十場、三十場公聽會也不會有什麼好下場。所以這就是有一個主持的技術是非常重要，也就是雖然大家不滿意，但是至少大家可以同意某一點，我們就把那一點當作這一場會議的結論，所有人確認之後，就這樣子了。接下來剩六個、五個、四個，再慢慢這樣子去看，這個是主持技術，我知道內政部已經有在訓練跟培養專業的主持人。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "三、我覺得大家之前比較不看重的是記錄技術，我自己覺得相當重要是因為我們如果已經好不容易把利益關係者在政策早期，我們現在是說六十天以前就要把利益關係人都邀來，再加上有一個主持團隊或者一個主持人能夠收大家的共識，至少收到一個列管的程度，但是到最後卻沒有討論過程的紀錄，而只有最後的決議，結果是什麼？結果是回去之後，利益相關者都會翻桌，然後都會告訴他們說：「我在會議裡不是那樣講的（笑）。」等於這一場的會議白開，所以我自己在院內在推的是，我們會建立一個專門負責記錄的專業人才庫，這樣子接下來每一個部會未來要辦公聽會、聽政或者是開放平台的確認會議等等，我們就會把怎麼達到那一個結論的過程，把它非常詳細記下來，任何人看到這一個過程就知道並不是因為黑箱、並不是因為政治壓力，而是大家真的充分聽過彼此的聲音之後，真的到達這樣的狀態，所以這個是我目前在院裡主要推利益關係人、主持人及紀錄者的這三套制度。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果大家沒有反對的話，其實我們所有人的發言，我們也會做成逐字稿，也會寄給大家確認，也會十天後公開，也就是我在院裡的任何其他會議是用相同的方式在處理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我也不耽誤太多大家的時間，大家先提出來我們今天大概要討論哪一些事項，大概哪一些事項決定起來比較好，這個其實就包含像我剛剛提到的分組，也包含之後大家願意用多少的時間在committee上，或者是用什麼樣的方式比較comfortable，這兩個是最主要的，如果有任何跟部會相關或者是跟任何行政事務相關的，因為我只有三個業務，所以各位可以拿掉，我最多一個禮拜最多1/3的時間（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我基本上是兩距兩例（笑），就是說至少我三天在院裡面的時間，可以有一天專門來跟我們interning這一位副召集人、以後的各組召集人去進行實質的溝通，當然在線上我隨時都在，其實大家都在FB的群組裡面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "接下來的時間交給任何人，如果想要發言就請舉手，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "大家都投好了嗎？現場的工作人員會跟大家收選票回來，我們會把投票箱移到您的身邊，然後請您把您的票投到投票箱裡面。" }, { "speaker": "黃敬峰", "speech": "再宣導一次，至多選三個人，不能投四個人。" }, { "speaker": "黃敬峰", "speech": "因為時間還滿多，我們到五點，所以這一段時間如果任何議題，因為泰翔有準備簡報，如果你也有簡報的話，看用什麼方式再投影出來，或者有什麼議題，可以跟誰報名好了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實如果有簡報的話，直接寄給我就好了，基本上有任何簡報寄給我，我就直接放上去了。" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "如果委員有要簡報作討論議題的話，可以寄給我們的政委。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果要口頭報告的話，再拿去用。" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "我們請哲豪跟薇齊一起來幫我們唱票及計票。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實剛剛滿具體說，這一次這一位副召集人算是階段性的任務，我們具體來講要處理的是，除了處理今天的提案之外，也在我接下來出國兩個禮拜的時間裡面，跟我們辦公室的同仁首先先熟悉一下辦公室裡面協作的這一些系統，以及這一些系統之後跟各位的業務會開始對接的東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們事實上已經做了手冊給各部會朋友們，那畢竟是寫給公務員的，所以這一位副召集人的第一件事就是看我們的文字有沒有過於八股（笑），讓朋友們沒有辦法理解，如果確定這個是大家可以理解的話，我們這一個東西就會發到所有委員的FB群組，大家就可以在線上直接去進行協作。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一位副召集人在接下來的兩個星期之內還要做一件事，也就是我們從現在開始到結束中間所有的提案可能要做列管的動作，也就是如果有提出的提案是具體的部會要回應或者是回答，或者如果這邊有一些分組，進來就已經組成的話，我們的同事會幫忙，這一位副召要直接去建立這幾個，像勞動、文化及教育，這三個是有特定部會的，基本上就是有那一個特定部會，是跑不掉的。永續是分散在永續會跟環保署，當然還有其他的內政也有關係；創業這三個其實大部分仍然是經濟部與國發會為主，公參目前雖然是以國發會為主導，但是接下來會變成院級的一個小組。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們可以看到右上角那三個是稍微比較跨部會一點，下面這三個基本上會有幾個部會，所以如果有具體提案的話，我們這邊就會請幾個部會在下一次開會之前，就會對於大家的提案有一些回覆，慢慢這樣子就會做成習慣，這樣OK嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛剛有一位要報告的是？直接就進來吧！手指是捲頁，然後筆是可以直接寫的，請。" }, { "speaker": "廖泰翔", "speech": "大家好，我是泰翔，我自己在經濟部待了快半年，所以其實花了很多時間瞭解政府這一個機器怎麼運作，所以像剛剛委員提案，我覺得最開始要正確瞭解政府如何其功能跟如何我們可以協助各部會的，這樣才有辦法提出一個可執行的案子。" }, { "speaker": "廖泰翔", "speech": "（投影簡報）因為我們的理想很多，但是我進來之後才發現政府的機器這麼大，要做結構性的改變，並不是一蹴可幾，但是至少我覺得我們在第一年的任期內，我們要給自己訂下目標，我們每個人都要改變一件事，不論是事大事小，但是我們都要改變一件事，累積起來的話，這個改變就會越來越大。" }, { "speaker": "廖泰翔", "speech": "我提的這個概念其實也滿大的，也就是「政府委辦計畫公開」。我在進政府之前，我根本不知道什麼是委辦計畫，我根本不知道法人在幹什麼，像資策會、工研院、船舶中心，完全不知道他們在做什麼。" }, { "speaker": "廖泰翔", "speech": "後來我才知道委辦計畫其實是政府非常重要的執行媒介，政府的政策不管是執行或者是研擬都是透過計畫的方式去委外執行，跟中經院、臺經院及資策會等等，包含趨勢研究、政策研究、產業轉型、技術開發或蔡總統提出的「5＋2」產業計畫，或多或少都會透過委辦計畫委由法人去執行。" }, { "speaker": "廖泰翔", "speech": "一年的經費我還是沒有統籌過，因為大家沒有一個好的方式去加總，我估計有上千億，大約是3億3,000萬噸的營養午餐，可以創造四百六十五場的夢想家，如果沒有這一些計畫的話，我們每天都可以開一場夢想家。" }, { "speaker": "廖泰翔", "speech": "政府關鍵的問題到底是方向錯誤或者是成效不彰？因為我在政府之後，我常常會把業界的聲音帶回來，然後我可能到了承辦單位，他們會跟我說：「其實我們政府現在有A、B、C、D，都已經做過了。」通常都會回到這樣的結果，如果跟政府打過交道，應該也會得到這樣的結果，其實政府有那麼多的政策工具，因此原因不在於政府有沒有做，而是做的東西大部分的人都不知道、看不到，所以在執行端出了問題。" }, { "speaker": "廖泰翔", "speech": "PPT上的這頁是我從政府研究資訊系統抓的資料，光研究計畫不管其他的補助計畫或者是委辦的執行計畫，105年度的研究經費有700億，因此我初估所有經費上千億應該非常合理。" }, { "speaker": "廖泰翔", "speech": "民間對於委辦計畫的理解困難會造成什麼結果？因為我們不知道委辦計畫在幹麻、我們不知道政府怎麼執行政策，所以間接降低我們民眾對政府政策的執行或者是研擬的理解。" }, { "speaker": "廖泰翔", "speech": "即便我真的很想知道，我上網看了公開資料、預算書裡面，其實我們獲得的只有各部會的計畫名稱、摘要，我常常無法瞭解實際內容的執行狀況。這個執行狀況由誰知道？可能是法人的執行單位、各審查委員會或者是科級承辦，可能只有科員知道，可能連科長、組長都不會知道，或者是被補助的廠商會知道細節。所以政府研究政策不公開，其實會導致我們無法理解政府政策設計的意涵，然後加強政府跟民間的對立。" }, { "speaker": "廖泰翔", "speech": "事實上現況怎麼樣？其實這一件事在104年就有人提出來了，有民眾在網路上提出開放政府委辦計畫資訊的需求，提的幾點非常清楚，也就是希望未來可以開放計畫的名稱、委託機關、受委託機構、執行期間，最重要的是金額跟報告書，所以做出來的結果到底是什麼。今天假設由川普當選好了，照理說某些部會應該像國貿局可能有找一些法人去做研究、對未來是否有影響，這一些東西是否應該要公開，讓全民更重要說政府可能獲得什麼資訊、我們應該要如何面對未來的環境等等。" }, { "speaker": "廖泰翔", "speech": "政府當時如何回應的？104年不是現在的政府，當時政府是說政府已經有建立一個資訊系統，但是因為很多計畫會事涉機密，所以到底要不要公開是各機關自行設是否公開為主。我真的有去看，我點了上百個，到目前為止還沒有看到有一個實質內容的公開，但是我沒有辦法說全部都沒有公開就點完，所以我只能說多數只有列出那一些到處都找得到的公開資訊，實際上的實質報告內容是沒有的，甚至連摘要都沒有。" }, { "speaker": "廖泰翔", "speech": "另外一塊是非研究類的計畫，比如我們要說「5＋2」，比如今天要做「亞洲‧矽谷」，就會產生出很多的計畫，底下有誰去執行、給哪一些廠商、個別做什麼事，那幾個其實都不會知道。" }, { "speaker": "廖泰翔", "speech": "所以我的建議是，希望未來委外委辦計畫，像剛剛提到的名稱、機關、受委託機構、執行期間、金額及報告書，包含電子檔、PPT、書面檔及受輔導、計畫主持人是誰，這一些完全公開。" }, { "speaker": "廖泰翔", "speech": "當然我們也會遇到跟國家利益相關，這個可能會發生，比如國安會或者是外交部等等，他們有國安需求，比如要保護技術或廠商的專利，這一些理由我相信人民百分之百會接受，所以應該是要公開，但是有不能公開的，才要個別提出延期公開或者是不公開及其理由，由主管機關審核，再來公布計畫的名稱及為何不能公開。" }, { "speaker": "廖泰翔", "speech": "到底這樣子有什麼好處？事實上做這一件事對政府來說很難有好處的，因為有更多的資訊被揭露，更容易被挑戰為何要這樣做。作為外部的民眾來說，當然希望政府揭露資訊越多越好，因為我們希望去監督政府，看我們的錢他們如何花的。" }, { "speaker": "廖泰翔", "speech": "以效益來說，假設今天一個行政政策的研究，公開研究這一些資訊，其實可以墊高我們全民的知識基礎，並且也加速瞭解政策的設計內涵及降低溝通成本。比方一例一休，照理說我們的想像，應該有請很多研究單位做了很多的研究，也開了很多場公聽會，可能有一些研究報告，有一些各方stakeholders的資料，這一些東西我希望照理說在政策公開的時候，把這一些資訊同步公開，我們才可以知道政府在這一個時間點獲得什麼樣的資訊，導致決議這樣的政策，並不是開了之後大家回去討論說跟誰討論，因為我們根本不知道政府到底跟誰討論、到底做了什麼樣的研究計畫，也不知道政府的資訊跟我們的資訊哪裡不一樣；當雙方的資訊不一樣，那就沒有辦法對話，而沒有對話，政治就會越來越對立——但我們希望國家越來越好。" }, { "speaker": "廖泰翔", "speech": "假設一例一休的政策如果同步公開的話，我相信在政策溝通上會越來越好，當然有一些政論節目就讓他去吧！那些東西也沒有什麼好討論。" }, { "speaker": "廖泰翔", "speech": "另外，一些非研究計畫的期末或成果報告公開，可以藉由全民檢視來確保政策執行是否符合人民期待，我提這個的原因是，我自己在看部內一些計畫，看起來寫得很漂亮、很智慧，但是實際去看的時候，我跟承辦要資料時才發現，其實離計畫名稱跟摘要距離非常地遠，當時其實就知道可能達不到這樣子的結果，原因在於上面希望很多智慧、漂亮的東西，下面可能換一個名稱就兜進去，所以實質上我們並沒有達到這個智慧摘要或者是名稱想要達到的結果，但各方看起來我們的計畫都有在做，而且做得很好，因此我們希望實質的內容有更多的公開。" }, { "speaker": "廖泰翔", "speech": "其實藉由公開資訊，包含金額跟資訊內容，我覺得可以提高政府的決策品質及委外單位的執行品質，這一塊其實一直以來在政府內是很少被討論的，因為這一公開的結論就會被牽扯到非常廣，因為達到上千億的預算，我們先找幾個部會做這一件事的話，我覺得這一件事對於國家來說會有好幫助。以上，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "廖泰翔", "speech": "但是其實我也不夠瞭解計畫或者什麼，所以在場的部會首長如果對於我剛剛有講錯的地方，也麻煩多提出指正，因為我們年輕人不夠理解公務系統或者是國家機器如何運作，所以我如果有講錯或者是不懂的，我覺得大家彼此溝通才能更增進彼此的理解。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "感謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在部會首長可能會想要回應，我先跟大家分享一下，這個是非常有趣的網站，「117.56.91.94」，這個是國家所建置的網站裡面極少數沒有網域名稱（笑）。它就是用一個內嵌的方式包在國發會裡面某一個名目見經傳的網站裡面，但是這其實是叫做「知識管理平台」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一個網站非常妙，因為我自己用web archive這一個工具去看歷史上到底有誰曾經用過這一個網站，除了某一個PTT上面的網友及某一個調查報告的記者之外，幾乎沒有人知道這一個網站的存在（笑），你要知道是「117.56.91.94」才進得去（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個網站其實是政府內部做管考的時候，一個叫做「GPMnet」。先跟大家介紹一下，剛才這一位委員所提到的委外出去或者是重大計畫，或者是部內自己做的，或者是研究案，不管是中長期或者是所有的東西，其實在國發會的管考處都有一個叫做列管的動作。而這個列管的意思是什麼？重大的話，每一個月要上來填做什麼事、做到哪裡、錢花到哪裡，如果不那麼重大，至少三個月要填一下這個事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好比像推動青年壯遊計畫、臺灣小飛俠計畫，我們就可以看到這個算是滿重要的，所以每一個月都有人上來填執行情形。到底打開這一個執行情形檔案本身附件的時候，你就會發現其實它非常非常細，它包含一開始為什麼要制定這樣的政策，這一個政策是受哪一個重要的計畫去授權，以至於這一個年度到底要花多少錢、計畫期程、管制級別到哪裡、年度目標多少、聯絡人的電子信箱、傳真、電話，每一個人到底在做什麼事，以及目前到今天計畫已經執行九個月之後，已經完成了八十六的事，可是卻已經花了百分之百的錢，想必不太花錢就可以做到的東西，全部已經揭露在這個網站上。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是「117.56.91.94」的這一個網站，其實去搜尋「KMPublic」就比較容易找得到，「KMPublic」就是「Knowledge Management Public」。我想研究報告本身因為有時候著作財產權是那個研究團隊所有，我們現在推動的是請他簽一個CC授權，我們目前合作的老師基本上都願意簽到「非營利、相同方式分享」，最多要提出到這裡，你還是可以做改作，但是不能拿去賺錢，如果你拿去改作的話，你改作的授權也要分享出去，至少簽到這裡大家是ok的。比這個要求再多，好比可以拿去營利什麼的，那一些研究計畫的老師們不一定同意了，這個先跟各位委員報告我們目前喬到的狀態（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "能夠碰到這個知識管理平臺，要知道這個本來就是公開網站，其實就已經沒有國安、機密、敏感這一些問題了，因為這個是部會願意主動公開的，剛剛看到承辦人的電話，基本上這個就是公開的部分，所以我現在具體跟國發會做的，我可以調查一下知道國發會有一個「Join.gov.tw（公共參與平臺）」的人舉手嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「Join.gov.tw（公共政策網路參與平臺）」基本上是國發會的單一入口，所有大家對於公共政策想要參與的時候，都可以來做這一件事。它有四個分區，我花兩分鐘介紹一下：" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第一，「找首長」：跟大家想像的一樣，所以我就跳過了，就是每一個首長的聯絡信箱。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第二，「提點子」：「提點子」是任何人只要願意想出一個點子，然後找到5,000個人跟你連署，然後機關就要像立委質詢一樣那麼認真來回應你，然後六十天之內要給一個具體的回應。所以之前「月亮杯比照衛生棉條合法網購」這個東西就是因此而提前審查，舉例來說像「癌症免疫細胞療法」的法案就因為這樣關係而開放了人體實驗，以及醫生可以回收成本，而不用自己付全部的錢。當然還有非常狂的議題，像二級毒品大麻調降至三級，我就不要找太好了（笑），總之我的意思是說不但可以看到附議名單，甚至還可以看到他們為什麼附議，我覺得這個很重要，不只是5,000個人覺得這一件事值得討論，這5,000個人裡面每一個人對這一件事的利害其實是不一樣的，等於是讓利益相關者主動揭露自己利益的過程。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "目前我在行政院裡面工作就是在輔導這一個部會在接到這樣回應的時候，他們弄一個有系統的方式，比如：法務部接到這個之後就說七天內一定會跟衛福部共同聯繫原始提案人去聽他的訴求，然後打成逐字稿，我就會提供目前的資料。因為事實上很多人援引外國的例子，他們的實際狀況跟我們的實際狀況不一樣，進行盤點。接下來他們就會召開一個委員會，去審議這個提案是不是有可能，然後就會開一場會去各自做一個研商辦理，然後就發現把所有人都調來，沒有任何一個人認同，把大麻改列為第三級毒品，所以不太可能。從衛福部的講法裡面提供了很多額外的東西，這個並不是因為連署到5,000人就一定要做這個政策，但是至少為什麼不做這個政策？將問題釐清、相關資料及所有研究案的公開資訊大家還是看到了，所以這個並不是一個負面的例子，我這樣提出來並不是法務部有做到、衛福部沒有做到，而是說不管有沒有接受，至少在上面可以去進行一個討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第三，「眾開講」：有一些不是人民提出來的，有些是部會自己想要討論的，好比像「全國水論壇」、「青年赴東南亞發展」、「僑委會如何號召國內師資」、「國民體育法修正」，都有人討論。「土地善良管理人注意義務，您做到了嗎」，最後這個可能過於專業，以至於目前沒有任何人發表意見。但是理論上大家多多少少都會發表一些意見，譬如澄清或者是補充說明。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以「提點子」跟「眾開講」其實有滿多人在用的，唯一一個沒有人在用的是上「來監督」，只有一項「你/妳今天省水了嗎」，而且已經run了一百三十幾天，「來監督」只有這一個題目，所以大家一般都不覺得「來監督」是有任何意義的，除了可以討論省水的議題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我具體會做的事是，在明年2月左右，我會把每一個在「KMPublic」會看到的計畫案，所有的執行進行、所有的進度，這邊只要看得到，「來監督」上都可以看得到。在「來監督」上面就可以根據裡面每一個子項目，好比像「亞洲‧矽谷」，一定底下有非常多的分項，那個分項裡面有子計畫，然後裡面有一個子議題，就可以點進去那一個子議題裡面去看，這一個月執行的狀況之後，在底下做實質的討論跟分享。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得至少第一步先讓單一一個計畫案有網址，也就是這一個網址是我們在臉書或者是在別的地方可以分享，我們可以繞著它討論的，並不是去「KMPublic」沒有網域的地方，還要下載檔案，然後在臉書上要看檔案第5頁，我相信大家都做不到這一件事，至少這一件事做到。抱歉，佔有大家的時間，至少研究計畫書的內容還在談，但是至少它的分項我們會具體把它完成，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有部會首長有補充嗎？如果沒有的話，就看別的委員有沒有提案想要討論的？" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "麻煩唐鳳幫我放提案的部分。" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "基本上從剛才的分享裡面我們看到跟青年相關的政策與需求是滿多元的，我們發現一件很奇妙的事，在臺灣目前並沒有專責的法律，去確定青年的政策包含哪一些範圍或者是跟誰有關，所以常會互踢皮球或各做各的。" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "舉大家剛剛都有提到的勞動權益的教育，其實是和勞動部和教育部都有關。個別也有和勞動部有關的青年作為一個勞工的權益議題，和教育部有關的落實校園中的學生人權。我們會發現有很多部會協調機制其實在目前並沒有很完善，透過這樣的委員會，也許可以把這樣的一個專法討論當作我們第一屆共同的一個重要的任務，我們透過兩年的時間，也許第一年要確定青年的發展上以目前的角度來說，到底哪一些部會跟這一個議題有關。還有，國家是不是有需要一個專責的機構定期作研究，這樣國家才知道接下來的政策到底是要投資在哪裡，不要只是誰跟決定者較好、講話比較大聲者拿，或者是我們今天有機會被選到坐在這邊，我們所關心的最容易被看到，我想大家很多人可能跟我一樣，並不知道為什麼自己為什麼會有機會坐在這裡。但是其實我過去在協助類似的參與政策機制經驗發現，最重要的並不是著重組成的成員表面、形式的多元，而是怎麼樣可以讓更多元的聲音進來，因此我希望在這一個任期內多關心這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "其實臺灣至少在94年開始到現在，有三個不同的青年發展法的研究，在不同時期的青輔會跟教育部的青發署，其實都有做過不同時期的研究案，但是那個研究案最多到立法院公報就結束了，在國會裡面沒有討論過，我覺得這個是導致目前青年政策沒有預算且各部會間很難合作的最重要的原因，因此我自己很期望，如果大家同意的話，我們可以溝通努力把相關的機制、相關方向擬訂出草案，我覺得這個是很重要的成果，所以除了大家關心的議題之外，應該會有助於後續相關的監督等等，不會踢皮球說我做我的部分，或者是把一個政策分崩離析，部會間的合作很難在委員會，在沒有法律支持的情況下產生的，歡迎大家可以在接下來的部分有更多的想法，類型可能也不只是這一些，也請各部門提供過去至少這三次的相關研究案，可能會發現其實這三個時期滿不一樣的，我覺得好不容易有機會讓這一個多元的聲音進到這個地方來，應該要留下一些更實質的東西，並不只是短暫的施捨。" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "因為其實政府體制之前曾經有過以青年為主或者是青少年為主的跨部會平台，但是很容易在一個任期結束或者是政黨輪替就解散了，我覺得應該政策的落實才有可能持續發揮功能與角色，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這三個研究案都是教育部青年署？" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "青輔會。" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "（會後補充）" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "第一個研究案相關線索：" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "第二個研究案：" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "行政院青少年事務促進委員會，青少年政策白皮書-綱領，2005年。" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "https://www.cyut.edu.tw/~rtchang/youthpolicy.pdf" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "針對12~24歲的青少年，制定「青少年發展法」，落實國家對於「投資青少年、投資國家未來」的承諾，並 明確宣示政府支持青少年發展以及全力推動相關政策的決心 制定「青少年發展法」，並在其中明定：" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "綜合盤點之後就會提供給各位委員。" }, { "speaker": "洪簡廷卉", "speech": "大家好，其實我有一個疑惑，我在想這一個委員會可以做到的是什麼？像我也擔任過青年署的青年諮詢委員，其實會發現那直接的溝通管道並不是這麼直接，那這一個諮詢委員會是比如有相關的青年政策會找我們諮詢之外，如果我們提出的建議外，我是否也可以主動提同性婚姻討論，我們是不是也可以做一點什麼著力？" }, { "speaker": "洪簡廷卉", "speech": "又或者像之前政哲也很理解，我們之前在參與很多不同公約的審查、落實，其實表面上好像NGO提的東西，政府、各部會都要回應，但是也僅止於書面的回應，實質後續到底怎麼做，其實我們沒有那個監督的力量，所以我想要知道這一個委員會到底可以做到什麼？我們可以關切程度、深度、廣度，以及實質的成效可能會是什麼？雖然剛剛院長不斷強調我們不是來為政策背書的，但是這還是會一種擔心，會不會說這個是經過青年諮詢委員會同意而誕生的政策，也許就比較抓不到痛處，這個是我的疑問。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實只要不投票，就不會有背書的問題（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我充分理解大家其實各自不是創業者、就是組織者，就是被摸頭的狀況，不要說各位，我也是（笑），也一直有聲音說進來是不是幫政府當吉祥物（笑），我非常瞭解。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一件事其實我覺得是這樣子的，剛才我說我專門做三件事，第一個是在政策早期，像剛剛「Join」平台外，另外一個推的是明年年初開始，所有法規修正案，不管跟任何東西相關的，至少六十天之前就要在上面進行公共討論，以前是十四天，我進來以前就已經改成六十天，可是那六十天仍然是可以打電話給承辦，並不是可以進行公眾討論，這兩個意義是完全不一樣的，承辦一樣接了電話六十次，但是每一個人打電話進來的人還是不知道前面打電話進來那一個人到底講了什麼，所以那其實並沒有達成一個利益關係人溝通的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是承辦跟長官可以說已經有十五個利益關係人都打來，也口說無憑，也不知道是不是真的說服他們，到最後就會那十五個打電話，可能看到新聞稿出去就會覺得被摸頭之類的，這一種事情都時常發生，並不是哪一個政府的問題，這就是本來公共體系運作的邏輯。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們如果想要改變這一個邏輯，我有兩個具體的建議：之後我所主辦或者是我經手的每一個公眾諮詢，在利益關係人確認的這個階段，我就會寫mail或者是在FB所有人知道。我們舉一個最簡單的例子，也就是接下來vTaiwan要討論「企業資產擔保法（下稱企擔法）」，企擔法非常簡單的概念是我們目前只能用汽車、房子這一些智慧財產去設定跟銀行借錢的擔保，但是不能用你目前所有的這一些存貨或者是其他無形資產來設定這一個東西，這個對創業家其實很重要，可是我們每次在調研究案的時候，大部分借研究案的老師們不一定有抽過菸，或者是抽過菸可能是二十年前的事，所以這一件事就會去要實際的利益相關者發出聲音。我會寄mail大家的時候，就請大家開始用滾雪球的方式，去做類似對這一件事提出想法的人。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然，我完全同意說等我們看到青年發展法這些研究報告，這一些東西也應該讓大家不只是在這邊的人，而是所有的利益相關者知道我們即將要討論這一件事，然後用某種方式讓每一個利益關係人揭露說我對這一件事也是關心的，之後也要納入我的聲音。我們在前面這一邊做的越廣，越不會有我們坐在這裡的人政策背書問題，因為這個是第一個可以做的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第二，我還是會建議如果我們這邊要有產出的話，我參考一些國外的經驗，其實大概是五至六人左右的小組，比較可能寫得出來，如果每一個人都要二十個人開會的話，其實那個進度會比較慢，大家約時間的進度比較小。所以除了剛剛這一件事外，也就是有委員提案，我相信有感興趣的委員就可以自己組織了，大家都是組織者，也不用我來組織大家。所以任何其他大家會想要寫出具體建議書的案子，麻煩就開始用自己習慣串聯的方式或者是FB，開始做一些盤點，我相信我們的部長設立一個比較合宜的門檻，三個以上的委員對這一件事願意投注一定的心力下去，然後我們有一個明確的範圍，就可以組成一個工作組，而這個工作組要產生的是一份建議文件，我們希望建議文件的拘束力比一般的文件高，這就表示在一開始組成的時候，就要把至少或者是各部會承辦的朋友們，所有這一些相關的聯絡人能夠包括進來，大家才知道我們正在討論這一件事，不然產出這一份之後絕對只能書面回應，因為不知道討論的過程是什麼，這中間的紀錄跟主持，我們辦公室會儘量支持，接下來就是有一個很容易到達門檻連署的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果有單位跟影像的朋友對哪一個工作組感興趣的話，另外一個具體建議是至少大家委員會一個禮拜一次，不要比兩個禮拜一次長的時間，還是要有各自meeting或者是至少線上的meeting，然後那個meeting我們一樣會支援速錄師，讓所有沒有辦法參加還要忙別的事情之委員們知道這個工作小組會議在幹麻。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "至於工作小組的數量、議題，我覺得就大家自己決定，我不會去限制，希望有回答到你的詢問。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "還有沒有別的提案？" }, { "speaker": "林筱玫", "speech": "既然大家踴躍發言的話，我這邊有一個提案，舉我的例子來說好了：因為我其實大概從102年才開始去跑Open Data的會議，跑會議提案都是跟消防相關，因為消防的東西都不公開，然後又連動到營建署，營建署的東西也不公開，直到高雄氣爆案發生的時候，大家才在討論該不該公開的事，你知道它有多重要嗎？我們做一個運用面的東西，但是我接建築物的點位困難重重。舉個例：我們要做一個商場百貨，那個商場有三萬個探測器的點位，這個點位是環境資料，你說戶外空氣盒子這個東西可以Open Data出來，但是在室內這個人家不Open出來，這個就會變成一個問題，我們有一個創新的發展，但是源頭掌握在這一些既得利益者手上。" }, { "speaker": "林筱玫", "speech": "這樣就會造成一個問題，我說所有點位的資料，只要給我一條RS232或RS485的線訊邊接過來就可以運算了，結果他就說要加一個轉接卡，然後算每一個點位看看共有幾點，一點1,000元(因為3萬點打過折了，我們已求過降價)，這樣子3萬點就要付3,000萬，還沒有做成一筆我的買賣，然後我整個系統才賣多少錢，你就跟我要3,000萬的資料點位費，這真的是暴利，所以我們希望把這個資料開放出來。" }, { "speaker": "林筱玫", "speech": "我一開始推開放資料，從公共建築是否為「不合法建築物」開始，後來有土壤液化的問題，之前一直不公開，到了臺南維冠大樓倒塌之後才開始開放這一些土壤液化的問題，因為這一些問題，其實重點都是因為「人為因素」不能公開，所以我們去敲公部門找解決策略的時候，其實過去也有國發會的委員說這是國家在意的議題，然後我又去經濟部開會，經濟部就說這個是另外一個部門即國土防災議題，要再找其他單位的人一起來開會，因為我們這邊沒有辦法處理，所以這個安全層面的問題之前沒解，但是其實最後受到影響的人都會是民眾，因為民眾若進入了不安全的公共場所，最後損失賠償的會是誰？除了業主外，如果你進入國家單位，其他所有負擔就會變成國賠的問題，所以如果你有一些議題平常就不公開，然後有一些是OT案，然後OT案又給民間業者營運，資訊不透明的情況下斃端很多。又像是之前CCTV採購曾遇的問題，里長就可以選購這一些攝影機，然後拿這一些費用買更廉價的攝影機，導致於解析度不夠，所以攝像出來攝影機的解析度不夠，原本是要防災、打擊犯罪，然後民眾報案後什麼都打擊不到，因為霧霧的，可是中間過那麼多的費用，費用到哪裡去，這就是因為全部的過程中都沒有公開讓大家瞭解，所以也不會抨擊，只要常去那位里長他家泡茶的就可以拿到那個案子。" }, { "speaker": "林筱玫", "speech": "我們現在做一個產品設計，我們沒有那麼多的時間、那麼多的人力、財力去跑一個地方，然後去塞這一些錢，塞了錢之後呢? 更何況，也不是說找到人就可以塞錢，也就可以解決問題，因為不熟，有在收的也不敢收你的錢，我們新創也沒那麼多錢，沒在收錢清清白白的公務員也會覺得你這個廠商心術不正!! 當政府鼓勵新創，而新創企業遇到這樣的問題，是否將所有的資料公開、透明作為建築物的生產履歷，像有一個建築資訊建模(BIM)，你就可以在每一次的環評中，公共工程開標、招標及決標，到後來的營運更新、設計，你可以換不同的廠商，這樣才不會被既有的廠商用破爛的產品賣一輩子，國家浪費公帑的把全民納稅錢花在不該花的地方上，這個是民眾難以發現的問題。" }, { "speaker": "林筱玫", "speech": "不知道這應該放在公民參與的資料分析裡面，還是應該在永續環境科技裡面，因為這個其實都會環環相扣互相關聯，如果是跟這一個議題有相關、有興趣的組員，我們就一起把這一個group成立，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "林彥孝", "speech": "因為這一個議題我持續研究很久，立法院議案當中，院總第1121號委員提案，委員提案第17651號這裡有一個勞動教育促進法草案，我想要去瞭解的是這一個草案到底推行得如何？因為我覺得這一個草案滿不錯的，把一些包括勞方、資方應有的概念與觀念注入教育當中，我不知道這個是屬於教育部或者是勞動部，如果深耕下去對於日後雇主和員工都有很大的幫助，例如像最近復興航空倒閉，倒閉之後造成底下兩百名員工急著加入工會？為什麼要急著加入工會？因加入工會才有權利發言；依我的看法是，員工對工會的屬性不瞭解。" }, { "speaker": "林彥孝", "speech": "在職業訓練方面，證照制度是否能推「技術回訓」？比如機車業界有證照分丙級與乙級，你考了乙級之後，N年後的相關產業技術都改變了，以前的引擎是化油器，現在是噴射，這方面就可以透過工會來作技術回訓，以上是這兩點，謝謝各位。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家的提案都會有逐字稿，我現在只是簡單紀錄。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛才的勞教促進法，我看起來是2014年9月勞動部自己研擬了草案，2015年葉宜津委員、陳素月委員也提過版本，但是勞動部的這個版本好像也沒有進院會，立法院這個版本也沒有進二讀，如果我沒有搞錯的話。在這樣的情況下，確實如你所說比較像無疾而終的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "立法院那邊我們比較難做什麼，但是勞動部這邊，我不知道有沒有什麼具體的想法？" }, { "speaker": "黃秋桂", "speech": "政委、各位委員，有關勞權教育部分具體回應如下：" }, { "speaker": "黃秋桂", "speech": "第一，勞權教育並不是以委託研究方式辦理，而是透過各種管道，包括到國中小、高中職及大專校院等，宣導正確的職業觀念、尊嚴勞動及勞動權益相關議題，使學生都能有所瞭解，因此就勞動部來說，我們是經常性在辦理勞動權益方面的宣導。" }, { "speaker": "黃秋桂", "speech": "第二，關於勞動教育促進法，我們確實認為有訂定的必要，但草案送到立法院後，因屆期不續審，所以目前退回勞動部。原草案內容需再重新檢視或檢討，完成後再依立法計畫進行。" }, { "speaker": "黃秋桂", "speech": "第三，剛剛提到透過各種管道加強宣導勞動者的權益意識，勞動部期待未來如果可能比照環境教育，將勞動權益的議題納入課綱，如此從中小學開始就有勞動權益的概念與教育，以上說明。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非常感謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實關於剛才不管是列管進度或者是在一般推廣教育的部分，如果之後會有書面資料，因為我們逐字稿是十天後公開，我們這邊收到的任何資料會附在逐字稿裡面，然後一併公開，社會各界也比較知道我們關心的事情、目前政府手上的資料是什麼，也就是附件隨時公開的狀況，非常感謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實時間有一點超過，還有沒有其他想法？" }, { "speaker": "吳馨如", "speech": "抱歉，我是成功大學臺灣文學系的吳馨如，過去長期兩年來在做大學裡學生、助理間的議題，剛剛聽到勞動部及前一位委員的說明，我比較好奇的是，因為勞動部的說明是經常性進到各級學校去宣導，可是至少在大學教育這一塊—部長不在場了—我只是很好奇的是，教育部跟勞動部這兩個部會的跨部會合作與討論進行得如何？像我們自己成大，我們的老師其實是沒有勞動觀念的，那面臨像這樣的狀況，勞動部經常性宣導，是跟誰宣導？是跟大學宣導或者是跟大學教授宣導，是跟大學學生宣導嗎？期程、步驟在哪裡？因為我們過去兩、三年來針對大學兼任助理的這一件事，有沒有後續書面的資料可以提供給我們作理解？" }, { "speaker": "吳馨如", "speech": "另外，面對像現在這樣大學兼任助理議題之勞動權益困境，不管是學校大學裡面、教授，乃至於學生，都是各方利益人僵持不下的狀況，勞動部這邊有沒有積極的作為或者是處於比較被動或者是消極的狀態？教育部的立場跟想法又是什麼？大概是我想要詢問或者是想要聽意見的。" }, { "speaker": "羅清水", "speech": "我想非常感謝唐政委與兩位委員提出來關於勞動教育的部分。" }, { "speaker": "羅清水", "speech": "事實上教育、經濟及勞動三個部會有一個次長級平臺，三個部會都為了勞動教育的議題非常努力，有關勞動部所提到將勞動權益的議題納入課綱一節，因課綱主要涉及是高中職以下學校，其業務主管之國教署會作適當的研處，以上。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "聽起來是兩個次長中間，那個平臺是多久？是線上的平臺嗎？那個平臺長什麼樣子？" }, { "speaker": "黃秋桂", "speech": "報告政委及各位委員，因為部長去處理復興航空的爭議案，所以提前離開會場。" }, { "speaker": "黃秋桂", "speech": "我是勞動力發展署署長，今天談的議題不在我的業管範圍。" }, { "speaker": "黃秋桂", "speech": "就我所知，次長平臺是希望一些共通性的議題能夠在平臺上有充分的討論，因此經濟部、教育部及勞動部有一個次長平臺，由三個部會輪流辦理。另外，勞動部與農委會也有次長平台，有一些共通性的議題要處理，就會提到次長平臺討論。" }, { "speaker": "黃秋桂", "speech": "剛剛委員所提到有關勞工教育部分，因為不是我業管，希望能夠尊重業管單位意見，由他們來說明比較妥當，也更精準。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "作為前課發會的委員我講一下，其實我們在進行教育裡面已經有特別把勞動權這個部分（放入），主要是技術高中的部分在107課綱加進去。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們之前在做107課綱的時候，其實有一個叫做「重大議題融入教學」的概念，有列非常多的重大議題，包含原住民族教育、多元文化教育、防災安全、能源、資訊、科技、生命、法治、人權、性別、平等、環境及海洋，所有這一些東西都是每一科的課綱都必須要說這個跟這一些東西有什麼關係，然後我們在教學的過程如何融入這一些素養進去，雖然沒有特別講勞動權，但是其實跟勞動權有關係的放在人權教育融入裡面，它是有寫的，但是有寫跟有沒有執行、有沒有編進教材及老師到底是否看重它？我們事實上做課綱是有的，課審會幫我們審，107課綱推出去之後，到底事實上教科書及教師手冊，那裡面的內容才是真正學生看到的版本，那個部分也要請委員多多關注，差不多107課綱大概一、兩年會上路了，編課綱花非常多的心思，我自己也會擔心在實際落實的時候有沒有辦法真的落實，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是不是有一個大會報告？" }, { "speaker": "黃敬峰", "speech": "大家可以看到自己的文件，或者會丟訊息給大家，因為並不是大家直接組團，直接丟議程出來，像泰翔的議題，我就直接丟在LINE群組，全部放在次長文章裡面，所以如果對剛剛任何議題都可以丟出來，像題目、部會是哪一個、連結在哪裡，然後成案了，就可以丟到政委辦公室這邊。這樣速度會比較快，大家可以主動，而不是被動捲到那邊去。" }, { "speaker": "黃敬峰", "speech": "另外，剛剛也有夥伴提到運作方式，事實上因為我們這一屆跟上一屆的諮詢委員會是沒有什麼重疊到的，像經驗上有點可惜，我之前也有講這一件事，因為跟上一屆諮詢委員會的青年顧問團很多夥伴滿熟的，上禮拜遇到其中一個夥伴，上一屆的夥伴希望可以找時間跟大家吃個飯、聊聊天，很不官方，這個是私底下，不會有逐字稿（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "黃敬峰", "speech": "在這個過程當中可以瞭解到，因為像泰翔講的，政府是一個很龐大的機器，如果還沒有學操作一家機器，就要讓它變成跟阿斯拉，如果阿斯拉推動渦旋的話就爆炸了，所以我們要瞭解怎麼樣推動這一台跑車，這個是很好的機會，我覺得這個很開放，很樂意交流，接下來我也會跟上一屆的夥伴們約個時間，請大家把時間留下來參加，大會報告結束。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "每一個任務編組，我只需要主要對口的負責人跟可能會碰到的部會，我好約部會這邊的聯絡人，以及你們想要具體闡述的那一項政策或者是法規的名字或者是大概的描述是什麼，我只要這三個資訊，只要有這三個資訊之後，我就可以去聯繫跟平台。那當然有一些其實可能大家提完之後，就會發現那個部會已經做三年做完了，這樣大家也不要灰心喪志，這樣大家就會瞭解政府有做什麼；反過來講，也許政府會講說也許從來沒有想過這一件事，連這一個任務編組都沒有，沒有該管的署、局、處，沒有地方可以承接各位的東西，這個時候大家也不要灰心喪志，因為本來就是需要長出人員來的，我們在不動總員額的情況下，我們總是可以找出一些任務編組的方法address大家關心的事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第二，各位其實在認領群組的同時，其實我知道每一個人在外面都可以動員滿多朋友們的關注，part-time也是一種關注，在這樣的情況下，其實有很多研究工作這一些東西，如果這邊開了研究案的話，來審核那個研究案的人是否合適，或者寫出來的東西是否真的是大家所關心的東西，至少這一個監督跟早期規劃這個工作，相信大家是能夠想辦法找到朋友來做監督的，這樣從部會的角度來看，從他們的角度來看，其實沒有任何一個列管單位懂這個東西，他們仍然可以去派計畫案出去，因為由懂這一個的青諮委員幫忙審視，我覺得這個對部會來講很重要，因為部會並不是很願意去派一些自己不懂業管的東西出來，我們就看實際的議題再來決定如何結合是最好的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "今天大家有沒有別的動議就先到這邊？" }, { "speaker": "廖泰翔", "speech": "剛剛其實提到提案，在提案的前提已經知道怎麼解決了，但是到那個時候要如何解決，我們是針對某一個議題…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "寫出問題就好了。" }, { "speaker": "廖泰翔", "speech": "比如剛才有委員提到永續發展有意願，是否後續的會議通知就可以比如CC給委員，未來相關的通知也可以讓青年委員參加？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實永續會非常包山包海，應該這樣講，當然我們也有一種執行方式是大家去認領特定的部會，那一個部會開的所有會，一個禮拜大概其實七十場左右，你們都會收到開會通知，這個也是一個做法（笑），如果大家寧可用這個做法的話，也可以讓我們副召知道，你願意什麼都收到的人，我們就會請那個部會盤點哪些會是青諮委員都可以任意出現的，這樣的話，就是請大家自己挑。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是這樣子當你沒有一個訴求的時候，你想要旁聽或者學習的話，雖然很容易累積到你去開會的那個人身上，但比較不容易針對大家去看這一個訴求小組所產出來的東西，大家透過你的學習也可以跟著學習。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是我對於旁聽會議這一件事也很ok，我覺得這個是併行的。你想要改變東西，然後怎麼改無所謂，但是我們想辦法找出一個改變的方法，這個是剛剛副召提的。另外一個是你並沒有改變什麼，很願意學習跟旁聽。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "上一屆的青顧是mentor的制度，這個東西我們也要部會由次長或者是一定層級的長官願意對帶我這個部會有議題感興趣的委員們當作mentory students等概念，他就是只要有他出席的會議，就是跟著那一個人，而不是跟著這一個部會的所有會議，因為這個部會連下署三級機關就不是七十個，而是七百個，那個是開不完的，也就是等於這一個人或者次長在的地方，你就可以跟他一起開會，不過這個同樣也不是單一的業管單位可以承諾的，這個必須要是次長等級的朋友才可以承諾的，如果對後面這一個有興趣的話，你就具體列出部會，然後就具體進行媒合，如果某一個部會的兩位或者是三位一級主管們都說：「對不起，他們真的沒有辦法這樣做。」我們就如實告訴大家他們真的沒有辦法這樣做，但是如果他們願意這樣做的話，我是非常樂見其成，我也很喜歡藉由這樣的方式讓大家做，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "還有什麼別的動議、想法？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果沒有的話，我相信今天只是一個第0次會議，我們在三個月之後面對面會議的時候，我們可能就是用類似的方式來盤點一下，大家不管想改變或者是想要學習的，哪一些真正改變了、哪一些大家可以經驗交流與分享，但是日常事務或庶務性的工作，可能就是回到線上的平臺來做，比較不會有面對面一直開會的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在我接下來出國的兩個禮拜，就會請剛剛被選上的副召來負責聯絡的工作，但是任何時候、任何人有對這一件事的有想法，歡迎寫mail給我，非常感謝大家，謝謝！" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "在這邊再次跟大家提醒一下，會前有請大家填一個願意揭露給各部會邀請參加會議的個資同意表，如果你還沒有交給我們工作同仁的話，請會後交給我們的同仁，會後將把願意揭露的個資提供給您有興趣參加，也就是行政院所屬的相關部會，也會提供之前想參加部會及有興趣的議題，讓他們在召開相關會議的時候，可以邀請你們去參加與會。" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "再來，委員們如果是長程來的話，麻煩在會後將搭車的票根可以寄回給工作同仁，相關的回郵信封可以到我們的報到處跟我們的同仁索取。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有錄影，我們只公開錄音。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "大家很好奇我們將來打算的運作，政委您的想法與運作會是什麼。有幾種可能性，各部會派來的人是一個窗口，也就是單純的窗口性而已，這個是一種可能；另外一種可能性是具有實質的某一個功能在部會裡面，把一些議題拿回去之後，他具有分派這方面的功能，我當然希望是後者，可是怕的是會是前者的情形。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我先跟螢幕前的觀眾朋友說明一下，因為會有這一個目前名字都還沒有訂，我們暫時把它叫做「各部會開放政府聯絡人」的這一個機制，其實是有一個政治脈絡在那邊的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為我們本來的國發會處理開放資料、處理連署及接下來處理預算透明化，這三個其實跟各個部會接頭是不同的人，相信處長、大家瞭解這一個狀況。除此之外，在院裡面進行主持專業（聽證或者是公聽），或者是紀錄專業（文播或者是速錄或者是新傳的直播），以及一開始轉譯的這一個專業（做懶人包、調用Open Data、資料分析工作），這三個在院各處的層級也是分散在不同的處，所以會變成國發會開發資料跟公共政策參與這兩個平台，公共政策參與又分成提案跟部會討論這兩個平台的這三項業務與院裡面的這三種人才，目前是屬於高度混搭的情況，在每一個個案的時候，都沒有辦法有效找到院裡面的資源支援之外，部會跟部會之間的聯絡人是不穩定的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們之前在「Join」的工作坊及開放資料諮詢小組的運作上，也發現開放資料資訊小組報告及協調的同仁，及每一次不管是「提點子」或者是「眾開講」來負責業管的同仁，其實重複率非常低，也就是我們在一次工作坊裡面或者是一次開放資料小組裡面達成的決議或者做出什麼具體的訓練，到下一次的時候，其實是另外一個人的情況，所以每一次好像都要從頭再來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為這樣的關係，我們在上一次「Join」工作坊的時候，綜合各部會實際聯絡人的意見大致有兩個：" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第一，他們希望能夠對於次長或者是資訊長的層級進行一次工作坊的訓練，告訴他們開放政府裡面：（一）透明：拿Open Data做成大家能夠理解的論述；（二）參與：把大家的意見收進來；（三）課責：有充分紀錄及協調的東西，會不要白開。以上這三個必須是同時看待，並不是由三個不同的副首長或者是三個不同層級的業務單位來看待，這是當時各部會同仁們的具體建議。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第二，很多同仁們都說他們沒有辦法用全部的時間來管這一件事，他們只有1/10左右的時間來管這一件事，如果把這三件單獨的事情又綁成三倍事情，還要他一個人管的話，沒有任何一個部會的人有量能去同時處理這三件事的協調。因為這樣的關係，他們具體的建議是說盡可能有專職的朋友來負責開放政府的事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是我們本來想要做的方式，也就是針對這一些不同的業務去成立院級的小組，在現在的政治現實，也就是人事總處通盤統整及人事組改案完成前，我們沒辦法在院內再加任何的辦公室或小組，因此就會變成跨部會協調聯絡人的情況，來做成這樣子的一個PDIS各部會聯絡人的運作，所以他們都算在PDIS空間裡面的朋友，我們發的文會是「院臺數位字○○號」的情況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "會變成這樣是最近七十二小時才出現的政治現實，所以我也跟螢幕前觀眾朋友跟包含兩位道歉，我們沒有足夠的時間先問過大家的意見。因為我是今天出國，如果我出國前院長裁示稿不發下去的話，這件事就沒有辦法在這個月解決。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "接下來想問大家的是，其實我們現在只有這一個框架，裡面要填的內容，是由我們下一個禮拜實際往各部會發文，請他們推薦次長或者資訊長跟聯絡人的時候，對他們的角色會具體界定，我們同事正在寫一個草案，這個草案會在Sandstorm開一個共筆，絕對會邀處長、國發會及任何stakeholder來參加，我們是大家一起把它寫到滿意的程度，我們文才會發出去，下個禮拜才會發。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我自己的初步想法是，如果要有協調功能的話，在公務員的職務鏈裡面，至少要是簡任官，而且簡任官還不夠，本來就應該要在內部跨機關，不管擔任專委或者是曾經當過協調者的朋友，而且對這一個東西有熱忱的人才能勝任的。但是我們如果一開始就說我們要簡任官，例如像簡任秘書。這樣的話，部長機要理論上也夠大，但是部長機要的一個問題是機要人員，機要人員是隨部長進退的，就會變成我們好不容易訓練他，而訓練也都有一些效果，等他的部長不在了、他也不在了，我們剛剛的那一些聯絡效果，除非不斷交接給同部會的朋友，不然這個事很難做。所以，與其說是簡任，我更想要找的是常任，如果現在是薦任的話，他就必須要獲得充分授權，等於他的考績應該是這一個次長來決定，本來不管是在做什麼工作，他應該就要交接給他的同事。他仍然是薦任官，並不因此而升等，但是變成是類似次長機要、常任文官附隨人員的這樣地位，只有這樣子的地位才能夠以全職的身份去進行協調的功能。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是當然，我們並沒有要求他對第一步的資料發布及資料轉譯的素養、第二步會議主持素養，及第三步課責與記錄素養，以上三種能力集合在同一個人身上，這個是做不到的。可能不存在這樣的人，連我都沒有，我做資料、主持還行，但是我記錄不行，不然也不會請Wendy打字了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我的意思是說，我們一方面在做這個的另外一部分，是我們在院內成立一個速記的人才庫，如果這個聯絡人不具有記錄的能力，他隨時可以用公道價一小時1,200元至2,400元去請記錄人才庫的人來幫忙。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "同樣的道理，主持人才庫，乃至於資料轉譯的人才庫，未來都可以陸續建置，這樣就會變成每一個部會的聯絡人除了跟別的部會聯絡人跨部會進行一些合作之外，如果這兩個部會，好比跨部會案牽涉到兩個部會，而兩個部會碰巧缺乏某一種人才，至少在院處的角度或秘書處或人才資料庫可以去補上這個人才去具體進行工作，這個是目前的規劃，但是這完全不是final，這是我今天的想法，也想聽兩位的意見。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "剛剛聽完構想之後，我大概有幾個想法跑進來。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "所以我們未來在一個禮拜或者某一段時間之內，會把人的條件訂出來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "希望是七到十四天之內。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "就是訂出一些條件。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "所以目前還沒有確認這一些人的條件，要經過我們這些人的討論之後。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "然後訂出這個條件之後，會以院函的方式請各部會針對條件選擇他們的…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "…我們會發一個院數位字的函。我們會先發院數位字的文，就是把院長那個裁示稿原封不動全部先送到各部會，但是接下來下一個文，院臺數位字第二號，就是說有這一個條件，請大家提報人員。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "還有一件事，以前工作坊所反映出的問題，比如您剛剛聽到的次長或者資訊長，我們有要做這一方面的事嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "我們要做次長或者是資訊長給他們作一些教育？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想分成兩個層次來看：第一次其實就跟「vTaiwan」那一次的首長誓師大會，也就是在剛剛那一個會議室開的一樣，當然我們在第一次約集的時候，一定是次長或者是資訊長的層級就會來了。當然某些部會的資訊長是常次、某些部會資訊長是政次，某些是委員制，也沒有常次、政次這一件事，我想每一個部會的狀況是不一樣的。所以不同的部會，我們需要給他的支援與訓練也不同，所以我會希望分批，除了第一次開會宣示性，或者是該有的說明、懶人包等簡報資料給予外，我們可能要分批給當時國發會提出來「Join」要點裡，大的那幾個部會，分門別列把他們的聯絡人或次長或資訊長進行一次比較精細的討論跟教育。我具體會希望那一次的精細、討論與教育，我們叫做「次長工作坊」好了，就不是二十二個或者是二十三個部會，剛好是那有空的三個或者是五個部會，但是那一場就要全程錄影與逐字記錄，而且我們會發函其他別的次長或者是什麼，把它當作類似翻轉教室的方式，把他們自己內部的討論跟參訓之後，有任何問題或什麼之類的，在下一次的會議裡面進行討論，也就是翻轉教室的概念。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "比較細節的未來運作，可能會做什麼樣的方式？PDIS是要解決什麼問題？是要解決溝通性的問題？以「提點子」來說的話，該聯絡人是處理各部會踢來踢去的問題，還是「Join」上面的問題都拿到這邊經過討論後，再放回國發會作後續的處理？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個牽涉到下述單位的聯絡關係：資管處、開放政府聯絡人、PDIS，以及如果是 vTaiwan 的話，那還有法協。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我具體的想法是，有很多外界的朋友，有些因為我們之前有一些交情，所以他們會用具體建議的方式。但是如果本來沒有什麼交情的話，就會用「唐鳳不用負責嗎？」的方式來提供意見。但是其實我在當政務委員，我對政務委員能夠做的事情有非常明確瞭解，就是院長想做的事情，我協助院長去進行跨部會協調，我除了做這一件事之外，我並沒有任何授權，這個是政務委員唯一依法行政時能夠做的事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然這個跟我個人特質很合適，我是一個「安那其」，也就是絕對不會強迫別人做他不想做的事情，所以當我進來的時候，我說我是「公僕的公僕」的意思是，如果現在缺乏一個協調機制，資管處或者是法協中心具體說需要PDIS來進行幫忙協調平台，我們就會去承接這一個協調平台，但是資管處，或者是法協中心，或者是經濟部商業司，或者很多別的司處，如果他們覺得自己來處理反而效率比較高，而且不一定每一次都要到院級、每一次都讓政務會議都聽到，這樣子我們絕對不會主動干涉。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因此我要講的是，我們這邊涉入程度，完全是以那一個承辦部會覺得自己的量能不足，而且明確列示哪一些部分不足，我們拿那一些當作補位的題目，而這一些補位的題目，也是靠各部會借調來的朋友，好比像「菜價看板」的同仁是農委會借調來的、「電子發票」的同仁是財政部借調來的、「Join」跟「Data」相關的同仁是國發會借調來，最後做出來的這一些功勞當然是歸於各部會，我們就是一個窗口的概念，我們先試著把協調機制做出來，最後還是會回到每一個部會，並不是永遠在PDIS處理。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "瞭解，我也非常認同。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "不管資管處或者是未來協助任何一個部會，政委這邊我有一個建議：不是把常規的負載放在這裡，而是有一些所謂疑難雜症再送到這個地方來處理，這個對大家都比較好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是的。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "理解，將來就用這個方式來運作。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "但是有一些制度面的東西，是不是在這邊討論？具體來講，我之前也跟政院徐發言人討論過一件事，那時候還沒有提「眾開講」法規六十天討論期。我們希望除了法規之外，不一定是法規，但是也希望能夠放到「眾開講」來做一些政策性討論的東西，有跟徐發言人報告過，目前都沒有各部會的東西放進來，發言人是說由新聞處選擇一些比較具有爭議性的問題可以請部會丟過來，我們也想說是不是應該要建立起一個制度，只是那一個制度還沒有建立，而且也不知道在什麼地方討論，因為那個牽涉到很多。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "是不是像這樣的制度也可以在這邊討論？因為這邊組合起來的其實是各部會的聯絡人都在，我們也建議這樣的宣佈、討論也是滿好的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個是非常好的建議。新傳處的朋友們非常認真，但是我們在輿情蒐集上，當時之所以說六十天的法規預告都提出討論，原因是希望防患於未然，也就是在他還沒有變成輿情的時候，我們就先把資料進行揭露。議題我們在部會裡面會說是「發爐」，某時候突然「發爐」的時候，我們就可以說二十天之前我們把相關的資料都已經公開在這裡，大家請就實際的資料進行討論，而且我們已經有一個討論彙整區了，並且開在哪裡。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "等到新傳接到輿情，其實常常是已經「發爐」時，就不是我們能夠結合第一階段資料專家、第二階段主持專家及第三階段記錄專家可以處理的事，這時是這三種專家要同時跑到第一線，在街上開始進行類似公民審服貿的動作，才有可能在「發爐」的階段上收回來，那個是非常非常花力氣的，而且我們目前在院處專家量能還不足的情況之下，我們沒有辦法對於已經發爐的議題去作這樣的收斂討論，這個也是必須講在前面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是我同意說如果新傳這邊能夠提一些，不是看報紙才知道，而是自己透過數據、輿情系統或者是另外的先期警報系統，像黨團區域立委會先反映說某些事在一個月或兩個月後可能會成為問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "舉例來說，之前電子競技是三個黨團的立委同時聯合開公聽會，說如果行政院再不處理，兩個月之內這個問題會燒起來。像這一種不管是立法委員，或者是地方別的民意代表，或者是其他院的南部辦公室或北部辦公室的朋友們都有一些先期警告系統，他們在上媒體以前都會知道如果再過六十天不處理，這一件事會爆炸，這一件事如果我們能夠收到PDIS來的話，我們會希望各部會預做「眾開講」，但是如果等到上報的話，我們沒有量能來處理。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "像討論的制度是不是也可以在這邊？比如我們可以規範就由新傳處去勾選議題的話，各部會就必須要送到「眾開講」去討論，假設這是一個制度建立起來是好的，我們要不要建立這一個制度？這個制度要如何運作？我們是不是也可以拿到PDIS這邊來討論？建立制度的這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是「關於制度的制度」的這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "對，當然可以討論，任何事情都可以討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想他們目前以發言人跟輿情蒐集這兩個部分，不一定那麼有政治上的授權，即使PDIS和小組聯絡人們一致同意新傳出來的東西，我們應該交付公眾討論，但是其實從院長的角度來看，這一件事的討論節奏，跟現在府院協調會議的那一個討論節奏，可能不完全一樣。我指的是新傳處的節奏跟執政決策協調會議節奏的銜接。當然徐發言人都有copy到，可是他的設定跟新傳處自己主動蒐集輿情時不同：一個是由上而下給徐發言人的，一個是徐發言人自己覺得這個應該要討論的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對於前面、上面的那一種，新傳處的指示是沒有太大的用處，通常都要在政務會議由院長勾選，然後院長直接指派負責的政務委員，並請該政務委員督導那個部會放上「眾開講」。當院長這樣講的時候，我們PDIS可以馬上承接，然後去做跨部會、跨機關的協調，但是如果由下而上，新傳處覺得應該討論的話，我們如果不先集中到政務委員或者院長看得到的這一個平台，就直接放上「眾開講」的話，這一個節奏上面，其實跟目前的政務議程設定節奏是有違背。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "要開新傳處議題的話，例如我以今天我們開會當另外一個議題的話，我們開會的時候，討論的一些東西，對不起，我自己認為有些是屬於比較細節性的，比如開放資料諮詢委員要求在七天或五天前提供會議資料，這個有一點細節。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "不管是七天或者是五天，其實我為什麼會在天數爭執，是因為政府運作的邏輯，今天這幾個發言的是不是就代表全部的人，這也是可以討論的事情。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "可是政委這邊將來有PDIS平台存在的話…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "…就可以加資訊長和聯絡人。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "對！我的意思是說問的範圍比現在的範圍更大。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "可是我的想法是，PDIS變成這一種像今天會議的前置作業，或者是變成幕僚單位。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，開放政府相關會議的幕僚單位。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "然後經過了政府部門，那時民間還沒有參與，是政府跨部門的參與，然後變成一個意見之後，再到今天這一個會議上，是不是可以這樣說？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是，可以這樣說。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該這樣講，凡是跟剛才講的那三項，最基本的開放政府業務，也就是開放資料提請討論、公民參與、透明課責，不管是資管處或者任何新傳處之類的，只要想要詢問所有部會到底是否做得到這一種調查的性質，很適合提到PDIS來。因為第一個只有建議權，我們並不是投票，也不作決策，我們只是發出一個問卷，然後實際把結果給你，所以我們變成「幕僚的幕僚」，你們作為幕僚單位再提到這一個會議，並不會是有一個部會說怎麼樣、另外一個部會說怎麼樣，我們就展示出一張圖表，然後說這些部會各自這樣講，然後大家要怎麼樣，就變成講證據的決策。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得這個很合適，剛才講的那一個功能我之所以保留的原因，是因為它是有決定權的，如果這裡沒有決定權，也就是所謂「幕僚的幕僚」，我覺得是非常適合在這邊做的。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "瞭解，我想也沒有問題，大概方向滿清楚。我一直覺得我們在訪談，然後我是記者一直在問問題（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有，這整套東西坦白說到現在才不到七十二小時，是因為那一個小組沒辦法設立，所以我們臨時想了一個變通的方法，院會又是昨天，我們院會前一天一定要寫出一個東西來，所以我們就寫出了很抽象的版本，現在才開始把它具體化。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "其實剛剛會議裡面提到機關業務分組我覺得有點少，現在這個聯絡人如果是在二級單位，例如內政部業務分組非常複雜，所以其實我覺得這個方式也是在搭一個架構，實際上要怎麼調整我覺得業務上是要深入那個業務才有意義，因為基本上內政部來開放資料，大部分都是資訊長，所以他們會管比較多自然人憑證或者是國土資訊的相關業務，我們講到行政相關，我們又隔了一層，而且他們其實對指導的權限有限。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "我剛剛其實第一個問題是，這個人到底只是窗口，即使不管他的位階到了次長，或者警政署他可以自己決定。即使是簡任到了那個層次的話，要把他定位在哪一個層次？可能一來是一個窗口，可是到了簡任，他可以去請警政署或者什麼人，我們是不是也可以依個案的方式，今天要討論的是警政署，這一個簡任層級的人就知道警政署要找什麼適當的人來，而不會每一次都很多。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，我完全同意，當我們教育訓練大部分完成之後，每一個個案本來就只會牽動那一個個案的聯絡人回來，這個是一定的，並不是每一次都複本給全部，但是事後的逐字稿會複本給給全部的這一些聯絡人，我們現在PDIS本身也是這樣在運作。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個，就好像我們剛剛速記的那一個小組或者未來別的人才庫，每一個人都可以自己再建議任何人才進來，變成特定議題的聯絡人。之所以當時沒有要求複數人進來，是因為我們前面加了「專職」這兩個字，這個其實是非常強的要求，會要把他手上無關的工作交接掉了，所以跟各部會要超過一個人，我相信一定會反彈。但是在那一個業務所處理的時間，好比「提點子」是六十天或者是「眾開講」是六十天到九十天之類的，他在二至三個月內去進行一個工作小組，然後這一個工作小組也可以是跨部的，至少在他的部裡的協調性質、次長授權的簡任，至少他的三級機關也應該要調得到，至少在那一個工作小組裡面，他就再加人進來，但是那個僅限於那一案，但是那一案結束之後這個就解散，本來就應該要有這樣的權限。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "這樣可以解決你剛剛提出來的問題。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "不過有一點我不知道要不要提，沒關係我就講，專職這一件事在行政機關有很多不同解決的方式，當然您的解決跟我們的解決是一樣的，要有一個名單在這一個事情上，可是現在很多行政機關只有…" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "…一個人負責這一件事？" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "不是，他連一個人都不是，常常我們會去問他說我們要求的是要專職人員，他說對你們是專職，但是還可以做其他的事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我如果改成「全職」會不會更好？" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "恐怕會太強烈。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "我以「資安」來講，我們也要求資安一定要各部會，尤其是二級單位部會一定要有專職人員，可是他沒有辦法完全做這一件事，他可能是管機房其他的工作，當然也做資安的這一件事，可是是不是純粹只做資安。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不過其實開放政府這一件事，他即使本來在管機房，他仍然可以說在執行開放政府的相關工作，因為這是有關聯的，但是如果他有無關業務，那個無關業務應該要交接掉。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "我個人的經驗是看他的負載會有多大，我們會討論出一個條件，既然如果我們討論出來一定是簡任以上或者滿高職等的話，他會依照自己的條件，也有足夠跟長官或次長有溝通能力時，他自己會去調整，比如他覺得光是忙這邊就忙不過來了，他就會去反映是不是只做什麼事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們在這兩個中間是不是可以加一個平衡？比如「主要業務」或者「首要業務」？也就是在「專職」跟「全職」間？" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "可以。這個滿彈性的，因為有的人能力也滿高的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以他本來就可以做很多事？" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不過我也要講的是以目前「提點子」排隊累積的狀況，以目前如果未來法規六十天全部要丟上去，然後所有重大計畫案都要丟到「來監督」的那個情況，部會如果沒有一個幾乎是全職的人來管的話，其實他腦裡的圖像很容易散掉，一開始真的需要花他的很多時間。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "我從結果論往前推，我們希望最後的結果，「提點子」或者是「眾開講」或者是「來監督」，希望最後能夠做到什麼樣，當然如果只是照現行的方式，也就是稍微回應一下這一種，而不是回到部會很深入針對議題去作討論的話，現在的情況就是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，可是現在已經有一點黑掉了，尤其是「眾開講」有一點黑掉了，我們做開放政府的目的，當然不是說形式上有一個人在這邊負責，可是「眾開講」每一次都還是黑掉，這個是不合理的。「提點子」現在是黑、白各半，但是做得好的那一個，每一次工作坊都反映說那是他加班、熬夜及週末犧牲跟家人相處的時間才能做到一定的程度，詳細情況處長也很瞭解。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "所以我們要往好的方向，最後的結果是，我們希望「眾開講」、「提點子」、「來監督」是要達到一定的條件，回過頭去要求你要怎麼樣，然後我們又有配套措施。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你專職，但是不用有全部的能力，你沒有能力我們就幫你補起來，但是你的心思要花在上面。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "對，對。透過這一些配套措施之後，這個人也許會說反映差不多一樣的事，還是花了很多時間，有額外的工作或犧牲假日什麼的，我們到時候再看看怎麼樣回到他的部會裡面去盤點。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，就是更多的支援系統。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想一開始次長級的工作坊，佈道內容裡面也會包含從國際的角度來看，這本來就是一件一開始一定是吃力不討好的事，也就是期待管理要做到。這個是循環，如果一開始一、兩案做得好，那個部會就會接到各種莫名其妙的案子，卻還是非得做到好不可，因為前面已經做到那麼好了的那個要求，所以你如果開始擺爛的，民眾對你不期不待、不受傷害，長期以往大家都往擺爛的方向走。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "舉一個很具體的例子，就是We the People，它有一陣子是被叫做鬼城的，因為在上面的提案沒有辦法實質回應，而因此有人架了一個監督的網站說平均卡了幾百天，才會回覆一個議案，到那個時候已經黑到谷底了，他們才趕快來整頓，也建立了一個類似我們這樣子的東西，然後成功救回在一百二十天內能夠有具體回覆；我的意思是說我們現在並沒有黑到We the People當時那麼黑，所以我們現在救也不用花那麼多力氣，可是也要花一點力氣。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "我們在推動這樣事情的時候，因為你剛剛有提到一件事，我們要不要訂所謂的KPI，但是不要想成一般政府機構的KPI，而是想出幾個點很快能夠看到成效的一些？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實比較像檢核表，就是說有一些案子進來了，我們用這一種新的模式來跑，比如：他是否有真實跟提案人有接觸、這個接觸是否有跟他部會裡面內部既有政策討論的設定議程有勾連跟盤點，及是否有充分揭露相對應開放資料及轉譯的方式，讓提案人藉以充分瞭解。這一些雖然一部分是質性評估，可是如果用檢核表的方法去做，尤其是有其他的部會互評，其實是做得到的。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "我沒有批評的意思，我的意思是說，可是有些—不是有些—我們對外還是要找一些處理這一件事的成效，例如我想的像今天開會的時候，政委問我們一個問題，Open Data有沒有比較…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "…亮點？" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "對，亮點。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像之前的實價登錄。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "對，類似像這樣。我們現在在推PDIS，是不是要先想一、兩個這樣的目標，當然一剛開始先蒐集一些案例，然後選出一、兩個案例，就讓這個可以完全成功。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這是非常好的原則，這也是為什麼當時Peggy在處理第一案把其他的生活時間都拿過來，我們當然也全力幫助她的原因。這是不希望第一個連署案做壞，這確實是這樣沒有錯。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "首先我同意這一個提議，這個東西我們從12底開始第一次教育訓練，從1月開始量能進來，可能從2月初的連署案就可以用新方案來處理的時候，我們確實需要挑一些亮點的案子。可是那時我們現在手上案子都已經過六十天了，所以我們現在無法預想當時會有什麼題目可以做。但是我確實同意在接近目前爭議非常非常大的這些案子苗頭冒出來的時候，我們就要開始跟府院政策協調會那邊問說，有沒有什麼你們覺得快要爆炸，我們來拆一下的，這個確實需要做的，可是那個必須要等實際1、2月有量能的時候再來問。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "我建議我們要先從那個方向。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "至少「來監督」已知會有亮點，「來監督」就是預算「亞洲連結矽谷」這一些「5+2」的計畫，立委實際審過之後，我們就可以變出預算視覺化，以及實際對於逐筆預算的討論，這時候對於逐筆預算的討論一定要回到部會，所以部會的聯絡人一定有事做。這個很容易操作成亮點，柯文哲市長已經操作過一次了。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "不過那是用科發基金的錢，跟一般的預算編列不太一樣。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "其實我覺得那部份的錢沒有很多。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該是這樣講，按照管考（GPMnet）的原則，我不確定「5+2」的「+2」，但是那個「5」全部都會進GPMnet。只要能進GPMnet，不管是拿科發基金或者是拿常規預算來簽，GPMnet裡面都會有紀錄，所以我們都可以放進來「來監督」。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "GPMnet有連結到10％發包出去的標案嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不但有標案、執行進度跟這一些都有，但是標案內容沒有，他的說明欄位會說這個已經委託某某進行什麼案。你拿那一個標案的系統不一定調得出。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "你是說PCC？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "PCC是一個，研究案是一個，都有可能，兩種都會出去，細節是只有他結案的內容會寫在月報跟季報裡，但是中間的過程不在GPMnet裡。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "我們覺得不見得對得起來。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "對，應該對不起來。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "甚至現在其實有到GRP，都已經結案之後。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好像有些期中也會更新；不過這個是細節了，這不重要。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "對，但是我覺得應該盡早，現在核定之後這一些東西可能就要。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想具體的是，因為現在立委還在審，也許有一些預算被砍掉，所以我們現在不管發任何清單，那上面只能寫「草案」或者是「送立法委員審議版」。數位國家我已經要求他們這樣做了，也就是立委正在審的時候，但是不包含金額，因為金額可能被砍，但是至少名稱清單這個東西要出來，然後我們用這一個去串未來的研究案或者是發包案的名稱，這個我們可以先做；但是還是要等立法委員回來，我們才能真的把它上線變成「來監督」的一部分。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "因為提案內容，因為其實項目跨越得非常非常多，所以會變成如果整包委託出去，全部都在雜項裡面，也不再人事費，所以如果是用現有的這一個…" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "你想要知道的…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，你想要的欄位是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "原來的提案計畫內容？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那個有啊！" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "對啊！那個有啊！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那個是GPMnet的一部分。來，這個是非常神秘的網站，我又要開那個神秘的網站了，（打開網站）這是很強大的網站。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "這個網站已經公開了嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "已經公開兩年多了。潘處長當時非常訝異他的存在。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "簡處長那時候要開，後來也沒有開。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "簡處長不一定知道它的存在。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "他有受訪過，說這個要公開。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個一直都是公開的，只是他們不一定知道。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "政委跟我說這個一直都公開。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個是隨時、隨地都公開的一個網站，我直接接HDMI，比較穩。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一個網站非常非常神秘，是我見過最神秘的網站。是在「亞洲·矽谷」審查會議找到的，網站叫做「117.56.91.94」，是一個了不起的網站，它唯一曾經被發現過是一個記者調查報導跟一個PTT的鄉民發文，除此之外沒有人知道它的存在。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一個網站為什麼只有IP？因為是用頁框內嵌在國發會另外一個計畫檢視平台（KMPublic）的附表裡，作為輔助性資料的API伺服器。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "你講了之後，我回去看才知道。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "而且你直接連過去，是一個IIS的錯誤訊息，所以大部分的人到這一步就停了（笑），但如果後面加「KMPublic」，這個其實是有界面的（笑）。這個界面可能沒有人看過，這基本上是一個機器可讀，後面應該像是ElasticSearch或者是Solr，它是一個文件導向的東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "首先你可以看到，每一個管考的作業計劃在每一期都會先提報一個作業計劃，而這一個作業計劃其實非常非常細，接下來當時核定的，包含簽核的人及承辦人的資訊，全部都在上面，然後這個細的程度跟我們在審計畫時細的程度是完全一致的，只是HTML的格式不太一樣而已。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "接下來當他審完之後，按照他重大的程度，他會按月或者是按季提報他的進度，但是像這個格式多漂亮，且什麼都有，在什麼都有之外，還會分月的摘要及進度，這個是在預計的狀態。接下來你用相同的計畫名稱進去的時候，你就會進入他的執行，執行叫什麼？叫做執行情形。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "同樣的，我不知道你們平常叫什麼？科技部好不好？我們就會有所謂這一些東西，像是這個「建置矽谷創新創業…」" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "這個是舊的計畫，也可以開那個，這個我審過的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛好你懂。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "首先他會先把最新的這一個狀態變成一個HTML檔出來，這一些都是公開的資料，出來的時候，同樣會先去把它本來的那一個計畫目標重新寫一次之後，就會開始說目前年累積到哪裡、實際進度到哪裡、百分點位到哪裡，預算已經拿到93％，但是實際執行進度目前是 75% —進行整體說明。但是本來會對年度目標有一個KPI的勾串，拿這一個勾串才可以量化，本來都是質性的東西，這個案已經寫得算粗了，我看到有的寫到非常非常細，是連每一場的說明會有誰來都會填到這一個表格裡面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我要講的是，按照我們的理解，跟管考在內部看的GPMNet幾乎沒有什麼差別，幾乎都是公開的，至少在最近三、四年都是公開的。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "這個是誰維護的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "國發會管考處維護的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他們當初只是在建立整合的視覺化界面的時候，需要一個後端伺服器，所以他們就把內部的系統也開了一個API伺服器、文件導向的東西出來，用來支援外面的API。這一個API伺服器剛好有一個HTML的介面，可能他們自己在維護的時候比較容易，所以就可以這樣子去看。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外還有一個在講的是先期作業，我覺得這個也很重要，這就比較少了，但是這一個東西的中程計畫，我們在「亞洲·矽谷」之類的，要開研究案或發包出去的時候，我們會先分短、中及長程，在短、中及長程機關的執行過程中，不管績效評估這個好像還沒有結束，所以績效評估還沒有進來，但是至少列管跟執行進度應該是按季或者是按月提報，這個東西是絕對有進來的，而且有些是給的非常完整…就是不只給標準格式的HTML，而是連支持那一個HTML的函跟附件都有進來，那個都是標準格式。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "這個也都不知道？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，沒有人知道。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "那就把它公開，就解決很多事情了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！是啊！" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "我有一點小問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是的，當然會有政治問題（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "現在就是因為很少人知道。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "現在沒有人知道這一件事（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "如果一旦報到了「眾開講」，變成眾人皆知的事情的時候，他們會反彈。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，他們會反彈。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是其實這個本來法源、個資都已經清過了，能夠放到公開平台的意思是說，不會有適法性的問題，但是絕對會有政治的問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們當時有一個盤點，這個是我們PDIS的朋友做的。我們中間看到而沒有人知道的那個是KMPublic，它跟左邊的KM用的Index DB欄位幾乎毫無差別，少幾個小的，但是基本上沒有什麼差別；但是我們有另外一個Open Data，是每一天產生CSV檢視平台，就少非常多欄位。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "目前「來監督」功能規劃裡面，跟本來那一個完整欄位其實是有對齊，但是我們檢視平台CSV掉了一堆欄位，所以反而又對不齊了，所以GPM的內容，大部分的內容是以附件呈現，因此我們一開始變成結構化資料的，確實也只有HTML表格裡面的部分，其他用附件，我覺得沒有人會反對的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以依序遞減：我們KM跟KMPublic這兩個沒有差很多，基本上是一樣的，只是從關連式資料庫，變成文件索引式資料庫。到檢視平台就掉了非常多，到CSV又掉快一半，所以如果「Join」往現行的CSV接的話，什麼都沒有用，所以我們目前就是說至少把施政主題、重大計畫、管考週期跟累計進度，這四個CSV裡面沒有的欄位，要補上去。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "接來的接法有兩條路，一個是我們自己在寫API服務，用API service型態上data.gov.tw，另外一個型態是我們說服廠商、同仁，讓他從GPMnet開一個跟KMPublic欄位相同的view出來，我們從這一個view直接界接進「data.gov.tw」，我們就不幫他從RDB生service，而是他往KMPublic寫的時候，每天順便寫一個CSV出來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你知道我的意思嗎？這兩個是完全一樣的，因為本來就是以天為週期，不需要做成即時的API服務，所以到最後能夠達到的結果是一樣的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是處長講的也沒有錯，如果我們一開始什麼東西都丟到「來監督」的話，政治上太過龐雜，所以我們要丟到「來監督」的一部分原因，是讓大家不用直接接取KMPublic，而是從「來監督」來監督，這是第一點。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第二，我們優先要來監督的一定是「五大產業創新計畫」成果，這個東西有能見度，而且立委每天都在盯，所以大家不會有疑義，但是我們看到剛剛的一大堆跟五大產業創新計畫無關的，也許一開始不會上「來監督」。以上簡報完了（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "我覺得滿合理的啦！先放現在有的資料，之後那一些所有相關的都要放進來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "至少「5+2」，數位國家要看情況，因為數位國家比較不是5+2重大計畫的部分。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實數位國家在立法院的層級，不算是5+2這樣的重大計畫，我們先從重大計畫開始做。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "數位國家那個可能到時候也是類似國家計劃，要讓各部會去申請一些事情，如果這部分都要做到的話，其實那一個經費運用的這一個過程，其實應該要更公開。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然，不過那個系統就不是GPM。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那個是另外一套。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "那個是沒有紀錄的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "TDM，這個我知道。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "如果是科技計畫的話…因為基金模式，可是如果是科技計畫的話，還是要進去？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "那個是審完之後？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "提案的過程呢？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "提案的過程是在科技部的另外一個TDM系統裡面。現在沒有要去碰TDM，我們不能一次開兩個戰線（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該這樣講：亞洲連結矽谷方案裡面，本來就跟DIGI有所重合的部分，我們用他的專案名稱來串，我們是串得起來，這個是沒有問題。同樣的，智慧機械等四個，如果跟DIGI會有重合的部分，我們拿這一個逐項清單，就可以知道DIGI+裡面跟它重合的部分，哪一些可以從GPMnet取得。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "凡是能夠從GPMnet取得的，我們都可以自己加標籤，就知道至少DIGI+的部分，跟這五大計畫重合的部分，能有另外一個view。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是跟這五個不重合的部分，或甚至TDM專有的部分，如果要請廠商未來再開放，我們目前沒有辦法一次開兩個戰線。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "但是其實旗艦計畫跟DIGI+是相關的大計畫，所以並不是有什麼細項的，我在想可能也是到各部會再來申請。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個我同意啊！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "申請完還是要列入年度的管考，只是等三個月第一次填報的時候再拿到，我覺得目前這樣是合理的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們在做的事，都必須讓公務員是早一點下班，並不是晚一點下班。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這裡感謝處長，我們接下來再另開一個會。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "開始，請。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "好，還是你先？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "各位觀眾，大家好（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "我也不知道是不是觀眾..." }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "大家好，我是高嘉良，今天剛好有空檔，就想跟唐鳳聊一下上任到現在的這一些，主要關於開放資料的事。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "因為過去推動她其實有很多的參與，現在到了這裡面，現在接下來想要進行哪一些打算跟規劃。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "你應該有當過我老闆跟同事，現在換我當你老闆（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒錯，公僕的公僕嘛！現在你是我老闆的老闆（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "主要是這樣子，你大概來了兩個月，其實大家就科技社群來講的話，其實對於你在做的事情都很好奇，尤其Open Data這一部分，但是其實基本上主流媒體能夠揭露地非常有限，大部分是花邊新聞。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "我想說也許趁這個機會，我們可以談一些實際跟Open Data、Open Government相關的事情，包括昨天剛好Open Government新的跨部會機制要開始運作，這個跟之前的關係非常大。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "我想Open Data運作到現在稍微有一個架構，有一個民間的諮詢機制，跟政府的諮詢機制一起運作，基本上有資料需求（data request）進來，都有一個固定方式的去處理。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "大家現在看到比較缺乏的，是一個比較大方向的，就是我們什麼一定要開放？基本上現在就是大家看看要不要開放，但是從政府本身，我們好像並沒有看到就是「這三個資料要開放，然後接下來下一期也要開放」，比較少看到這樣。通常是進入一個救火的情況，比如是用電的時候，才會有比較強烈的需求。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "我想在一些新的做法上，是不是有一些調整，所以我們來檢視一下，這是大概兩年前的時候，稍微跟社群大概列了一些資料，有些當時還沒有開放，當然因為兩年，也稍微開始有一些進展了。我想很快看一下它們現在的情況，跟每個各自不能開放或是卡住的情況，能用什麼方式去解決。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好，沒有問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我先回應一下花邊新聞這件事，這也是我個人非常困擾的事情。對於各位有訂閱我Wiselike的朋友，已經看到最近連我用什麼牙刷都開始問了，我相信佔用大家許多認知的頻寬，在此向大家表示歉意。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們協調的會議，以及高嘉良所說對政策的執行等等，其實都放在逐字稿平台；但是我也理解，要求大家都去看逐字稿是不人道的。我們在逐字稿後面，現在大概會具體列出每次的列管項目，但我相信仍然沒有用現在這種對話的方式，就上位方向的討論來得重要，這我非常同意。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個也很同意的是，確實目前為止這一任的政府看起來，因為上一任政府把最基本的資料都已經開放了——也是在要交國際考卷的關係的前提上——因此我們這一任政府，確實目前為止開放資料，看起來都是為了回應民間提出來的一些政治上壓力，或為了要解決問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得本來開放資料用來跟人民溝通、解決問題，並不是一件壞事。現在的問題常常是浮現到後期、非得處理不可，好比有某部機組要啟用或停用，或者是跳電，才回過頭來想：「對，開放資料對這個非常有幫助」，而不是長期、多年期的計畫說：「我現在就知道三年之後要做這個，所以現在要準備開放資料來揭露。」" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "多年期的計畫具體來講，就是昨天啟動的「數位國家・創新經濟」方案，所以高嘉良的一些提問，我會使用「數位國家・創新經濟」方案裡面的路徑圖來回答。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "好的。因為開放資料涵括的內容非常多，今天先討論一大部分：政府與治理相關部分。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "我想這個部分，原來政府比較希望多做一些經濟面向東西，新政府看來有很多希望政府體制更完整的一些打算，所以我想很快來檢視這一些部分。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "這可以分成三個部分，越前面越跟政府本身運作有關的，越後面是越跟人民服務相關，所以如果我們來看最前面的立法的話，第一個是「立法及法律」。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "這個在法規資料庫已經有了，但是他們在今年上一季的時候，把原來使用開放授權條款，又改回使用法務部自己使用的條款，當然還是沒有限制使用，但是其實就已經不符合開放資料了，因為裡面有要求說「如果用他做App的話，你必須放一個橫軸的banner」，這個部分你覺得？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是的，我這邊先做一個具體政策上的回應。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實本來在開放資料的要點裡面，本來機關就有把甲類資料跟乙類資料，直接互相進行切換的這種可能性存在，所以我們並不能說法務部這樣做是違法的，他也沒有違反那一個要點。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們在討論那一個分類的時候有一個精神，就是一旦分為甲類之後儘量不要切換，除非有非常好的理由，告訴大家說這個資料釋出，於公益上面不再具有公益，或者是侵犯到第三人的個資隱私或者商業秘密。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "必須有相當好的理由，才可以把甲類資料轉為乙類資料或者是把甲類資料下架，這在我們今天上午的討論有一個具體的結論，我覺得這一個結論相當重要：我們每一次在做這樣資料判斷的時候，首先必須要先出具這樣的理由。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個理由必須要上升到二級機關，包括開放諮詢小組委員會、資訊長或者是副首長，那一個副首長必須批示這樣的轉換確實是符合公共利益，才能再做這樣的切換。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想往者已矣，沒有辦法回溯適用今天所講的精神，去法務部的個案。但是反過來講，我們確實應該要再去檢討為什麼之前做了這樣的判定，有沒有可能回到本來標準的開放資料授權去？這是第一個回應。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第二個回應是，原本在擬資料開放要點的時候，因為上一版的要點，把甲類資料跟乙類資料有一點混在一起，沒有寫「開放授權」這四個字，而是寫了「開放格式」這四個字。所以在進行適用的時候，如果是按照資料分類原則，就知道要「開放授權」；但如果按照資料開放要點的話，因為開放授權沒有寫，他可以說沒有看到。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "今天有另外一個具體的決議是，把後面的要點具體加上「開放授權」這四個字。這樣的話，至少未來在進行開放的時候，就必須要以開放授權為主，如果不行的話，必須要出具理由，我覺得這也是具體的進度。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "再講最後一個，目前PDIS小組會做的另外一件事是，我們會把現有甲類，目前以JSON-LD或者是一般JSON所開放出來的API，用機器可讀的方式去作描述。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第一個描述的，當然是國發會自己的「共通性資料存取應用程式介面API」，也就是「data.gov」自己界接用的的API。當我們把它寫出描述後，我們會說服該管的機關在這裡是國發會的資管處，直接把 YAML 檔放到「data.gov.tw」底下，也就是說它變成網站的一部分，受網站的使用條款規範。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果未來有更改的話，也必須要公告、通知，那就不是放在網頁上好看，而是會變成具體往民間的承諾之一，這樣一來，要改授權跟改格式這兩個都要經過正當程序：改授權要次長同意，改格式必須跟進行檢核的機關解釋。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然民間的朋友很快發現，原來有這樣的一個地方，所以確實也有朋友馬上把法規列表、單一法規的所有修法版本列表，所有這些都用機器可讀的方式，提議了一個API進來，我們未來才能拿這個跟法務部談說：「請問有什麼原因，你不能把你的資料用這樣格式、用開放的授權進行？」" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在以前常常會碰到的是，跟他談好開放授權，但他說他的廠商無法支援開放格式。你跟他談好開放格式，而他說因為限於什麼原因，不太容易開放授權。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "現在至少開放格式可以先談好，然後去談授權的時候，就可以說：「請不要再用開放格式作為理由，格式已經準備好在那邊了。」授權只要一簽定、次長一同意，資料就再也不可以撤回了，也不會因為換了廠商，所以莫名其妙就被撤回。這個是通案性的原則，跟大家討論。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "所以像法規的API，是假的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "它不是假的，是事實上民間自己爬了資料去使用的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們一向都有「拆政府原地重建」的想法。當初教育部的字典也沒有API，當時是葉平所設計的，這也不是假的，而是我們抓下來之後，實際按照葉平所設計的API去提供服務。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "現在的做法程序，仍然是承續我們在g0v的做法。如果我們已經可以證明用這個API，可以提供跟這個相等程度的服務，為什麼機關下一次改版或重新採購的時候，不用這個方式來具體釋出？這個方向跟路線，與我們以前在g0v是一樣的。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "你的意思是說，以這一個案例來講的話，PDIS把資料抓下來，然後用API的方式提供，然後現在要說服法務部，接下來就用API來進行？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然，廠商必然還是會有廠商提出的要求，只是至少從完全不懂資料格式的高層管理人員來看，至少這是兩個可以相提並論的東西，並不是一邊是空想，另一邊是現有的系統。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "好。如果回到授權問題來講的話，你覺得我們如果要再跟他溝通使用一個真的開放授權的話，會建議說政委辦公室可以協調嗎？還是說民間持續去關照法務部？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該這樣子講。我們剛剛才開過的院級開放資料諮詢小組會議，仍然可以建請特定部會在他們的開放資料諮詢小組裡面，去討論這個事項。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然我們現在也理解，未來不一定三個月開一次，說不定半年才開一次，我們剛剛才講過這件事。因此處理的週期比起以前長，可能沒有辦法用一種隨時檢討的方式來處理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是我覺得，除了用正規開放資料諮詢小組的程序之外，就回到我們剛才說「資料是要為開放政府服務」。如果從民間的角度，能夠去看說現在有某顆未爆彈或某顆地雷，需要有這樣子開放授權的東西，我們才能把法務部的草案，好比說是關於民法家屬的部分，用機器自動做成懶人包...（註：這只是舉例而已）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在提出一個恰當能回應社會問題理由的時候，我們就可以用那一個理由，專案去跟法務部討論，這也沒有問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以上只是舉例，我並沒有要介入個案的意思。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "瞭解。今天講這幾個非常非常基礎的開放資料的意思，其實是想說這一些東西能不能作為一個比較強的推動，不用等到開放資料諮詢小組，或發生事情，就可以說這是國家認定非常非常基礎的資料。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "國家運作、機關間彼此要引用資料，不要透過私相授受或某種方式，機關間引用都是互相開放資料的話，這都是非常基礎的，如果今天政府有這樣認定的話，可以直接去推動這些東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我必須跟各位朋友做個期待管理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「以兩個以上開放源碼軟體可以讀取的格式」，這是國際上對於開放格式的定義。這一個定義我們已經有政治意志，可以說所有的機關之間互相界接，應該要不用專屬軟體就可以開啟，而且必須要機器可讀、可以處理，這部分是沒有問題的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不管是國際上政府對政府，或是任何國際的協約，要作資料交換，都是這樣子做。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但其實在國際上，對於資料的授權，是有完全不同想法的流派存在。目前所通過的國家資料的授權條款，它是屬於寬容式授權（permissive license）。這個意思是，你既可以做社會上的運用，也可以做商業上的利用。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以法國為例，他們所適用的授權會兩個併行，想要鼓勵產業的才會去用寬容式授權，如果不是想要鼓勵產業的就會加以限制，限制條款裡面就包含比較像「相同方式分享」的東西，如果拿它做了應用、對資料的改做，跟它相混合的資料也必須都要用相同方式分享，也是有這樣一派的想法存在。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然「相同方式分享」跟「禁止商業利用」又不一樣，但也有人說希望禁止商業利用。也就是說，本來CC授權架構裡面，就包含了對資料六種不同的想像。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在資料格式這一部分是沒有問題的，但在授權裡面，是不是一下子就要全部開放到CC BY的寬容式授權？這在各國都還有爭議。我們在中央各部會裡面，目前並沒有形成非常統一的見解。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "瞭解。這裡面有兩個問題，第一個是如何認定某一些是「非常非常基礎，政府本身運作需要的資料」，再來是這些資料的授權。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "我想如果以現階段的話，如果在準備資料時，是自由可以取得的情況之下，我想目前都還可以接受，只是說就第一個問題，我們如何認定哪一些資料是基礎？我想我們有進一步討論。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "修訂紀錄的部分，法務部目前好像沒有在裡面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "修訂紀錄在我剛剛展示的那個API裡是有的，應該是去另外一個系統拿，像是立法院議案文書。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "但是行政機關本身，因為各部會自己的命令可能有一些版本修訂，其實並沒有一個共同的地方去管理。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "因為你展示的那個部分只是法律，命令的話不會在系統裡。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實這個是有的。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "有啊！但它是在報告事項，通常是備查，所以不會在立法院的法律系統裡面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個時候就要看沒有人知道的系統。我們不斷給大家看沒有人知道的系統..." }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "這個是行政院公報？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在我上任之前，9月的時候，行政院本來就已經把所有的法規修正的預告期間，從十四天改成六十天。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以當他最後通過，也就是六十天過了以後，它會有一個「自即日生效」的PDF在這邊出現，但是在這個生效的時候，你回推六十天，還會看到另外一個公告、預告修正的同樣一個格式、名稱的東西在這裡，所以從前六十天前的跟六十天後的這兩個部分，在這裡一定有資料的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個資料屬於公報資料，所以是不可能主張著作權的東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以現在的問題有兩個：一個是使用PDF格式，它的結構性可能有待加強，但至少不是圖形檔，我們目前看到的通常都是文字檔。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個是，並沒有一個有系統的方式，把它加上一個部會的標籤，然後去界接到一般人民可得的開放資料集裡面。這一個工作，我們具體會在明年大概2月的時候，透過行政院國發會開放資料平台，把這上面所有這些看到的資料，都轉換成「data.gov」上的開放資料集。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "為什麼要這樣做？因為我們想要把裡面每項公告時的文件，全部都轉成結構化資料，來放進公共參與平台裡面的「眾開講」這區裡面，每天會上十個、二十個這一種公告進去，這中間的界接，當然是透過開放資料。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "但這回到前一個問題了。公告在修正的時候，會有一個現行版本，現行版本沒有在公報裡面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有啊！會三欄的。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "那是修正對照表，但沒有舊的全文，這時就要回到法規資料庫。其實我們是有這一個需求。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是。我想我這邊具體可以做的一件事是，除了用三欄之外，也許我可以跟他們說不只是三欄，而是本來的全部、後來的全部及修正的三欄。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這三套資料同時提供，這個需求是可以去談的。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "好吧！但是理想上，還是想透過法規資料庫，用開放授權的方式來界接。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對我來講，最後只要進入「data.gov」，就是一樣意思的東西。具體哪一個部會阻力最小，我們就從阻力最小的那部會去取得。請繼續。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "修法提案主要是在立法院，所以關係比較不大。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "第二，「政府架構與人事」，機關架構目前是有一個OID的資料格式出現，但其實在各個不同公務系統有不同的表現方式，包括預算裡面，預算也有機關的代號…還有什麼系統？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "工程會。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "工程是OID。然後在國庫署實際支出的時候，跟主計那一個比較像，但又差了一個欄位，因此各種使用機關的代號，可以怎麼樣整合的一個機制？甚至每一個機關提供的服務與對象，有沒有一個結構化的方式去表達？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好，這是非常好的問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想首先就是說，在機關的認定、設立上，本來就會有一個OID的編制，這個是由國發會資管處維護，有一個類似於LDAP、不斷更新OID的資料庫。這個資料庫裡面，本來就設立地方、地址、主要聯絡入，所有這些基本資料都在那裡，而且我沒有記錯的話，是公開可得資料。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "已經在「data.gov.tw」？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，不需要用eGov login，你可以直接去「data.gov.tw」裡面拿。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然，如果這一個OID編得不夠細，或者是裡面的資料欄位有缺，我們應該是回「data.gov.tw」的標準程序，希望把OID相關資料加以擴充，加上OID所連到的描述性資料，這個是爭議性最小的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好比像服務對象，如果想要求每個機關都填報其服務對象，這件事應該是回到OID資料庫的維護來做。如果維護另外一個關連式資料集，從OID到服務對象，我想這是比較疊床架屋的做法，最好還是要回到OID的基本資料集。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外你剛剛提到比較大的，有時在系統建置的時候，只用機關的全名，而不用OID當作主要索引（primary key）。或者是用OID，但並不是在全部的地方使用OID，而是用和它關連的某個特定索引（unique key）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這時，我們其實可以用一個宣示性的方式，去希望只要任何地方用unique key作為primary key，又能夠透過某個開放資料集，往OID完全對應，那麼在開放資料產製的時候就應該要反查OID的欄位，然後一併釋出。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但如果我們實際進去清點，發現反查失敗了，例如像把臺灣的「臺」寫成台灣的「台」的話，這就是屬於資料品質不良的部分。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這件事，其實本來國發會就有對「資料欄位不符合資料實際內容」這件事加以檢查，而且檢查下來，我如果沒有記錯的話，初步抽查高達65％的資料集有這樣的問題，因此我們剛才開會的時候才討論說，如果一發現有問題就要下架的話，「data.gov.tw」就會瞬間下降35％的資料量。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因此，跟各位朋友在這邊說一聲：我們絕對沒有要把資料下架的意思，只是提醒說你的反查是有問題的。好比說欄位是寫西元年，但資料值用了民國年等等的狀況，這是要一視同仁看待。並不是OID對不上，我們就特別看待，而是說如果寫西元年，但是用民國年，或者是反過來的情況話，我們就是在資料檢核機制裡面，如果有人反應的話限期七天回應，用這種方式去責成處理。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "我可以補充一下，國發會的檢測，你剛剛提到是欄位跟內涵有無符合的部分，這不會在即將上路的檢核裡，而是明年才會做這一件事？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是有抽查。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "所以還是人工做？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是，至少抽查結果的柱狀圖一定是人工做的。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "所以基本上要往語意檢核的方向去做的話，可能還有一段需要努力的空間。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然啊！我的意思是說，其實人工抽查一段時間之後，某些試誤規則（heuristics）其實可以寫成半自動化的程式。一定沒有問題的就放過，看起來有問題的用人工複查，這都是屬於資管處的權限。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我是協助督導資管處，但我一般不會微距管理（micro-manage）到這個程度。但如果他們中間碰到任何問題，都可以來找我幫忙。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "接下來是行政區的劃分，這兩個算是比較有進展的。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "其中一個比較大的問題是「連續邊界圖資」，因為這個主要是國土測繪中心來負責，它其實是從各地方政府來收圖資，所以他們彼此間的邊界會重疊。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "當你要做一些地理應用的時候，比如地圖上有一個點可能同時屬於兩個縣市，或是一個點不屬於任何縣市，過去溝通的情況，他們好像沒有權限告訴各個地方政府互相要合作。所以這部分有什麼辦法解決？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有的。目前處理的方法，是在「數位國家・創新經濟」方案裡。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這兩件不完全重疊的事情，在行政院級會有一個推動小組，接下來在四個不同的單位會負責四個推動的分組，另外還有一個民間諮詢委員會，民間諮詢委員會的召集人會上升到上面的推動小組，但是副執行秘書會去管底下這四個的建設分組。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個編列的架構，跟之前NICI的架構，有一個非常大的不同，也就是六都的副首長是DIGI+上層推動小組的委員。在每個具體的分組裡面，好比像高嘉良講到的事情，它可能比較屬於數位國家分組，包含智慧城鄉、數位政府，乃至於網路社會這些事情。當然這件事比較不需要做資安判斷，但是如果有資安判斷的話，院資安處也是要進來的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當數位國家分組發現這個議題的時候，是可以透過民間諮詢委員對這一件事的提醒，到上面的推動小組，讓六都副市長知道存在這一件事，並且希望在下一次數位國家聚會時列入管考，或用某種方式向科技會報辦公室的執行秘書，對這件事進行報告。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當郭執秘知道一件事的存在和重要性之後，他會回去科技會報，也就是DIGI+的協調分組。協調分組在這邊，並不只是每半年或每三個月一期的管考，而是直接跟中央、地方開會，然後盡可能把這件事解決掉。在解決之後，也會提回到當初所提出分組的副執行秘書，請這諮詢委員進來，來確認這個地方真的有協調掉。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果真的沒有問題的話，在下一次上層推動小組開會的時候，就會解除管考，這是跟地方協作的具體做法。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "具體來說，重疊的部分比如是花蓮跟南投，會不會六都覺得這個不重要？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "六都在DIGI+裡面，每個都要認領他們附近的非六都縣市。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然我們也瞭解到資訊系統絕對不可能馬上整併，但至少可以做到格式一致。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有時院級往所有的縣市進行某個資料普查，通常會交一些試算表上來，欄位的名稱不一樣就算了，好不容易弄到一樣，也可能比較有資訊量能的那些回來的資料很詳細，但比較沒有資訊量能的縣市，就可能出現明明從網頁上看起來就有三十五筆，但回報回來只有三筆的情況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "之前的問題是，不管是國發會的管考處，或者以前的NICI，沒辦法下到這些地方縣市去協作。像我前兩天才去澎湖，其實我沒有辦法每天跑這些地方，跟他們的資訊中心進行協調。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "未來這個工作，就會落到六都的列管範圍裡面，所以這一都就要負責，跟旁邊各縣市至少回來的資料欄位要統一。這件事我們期待台北、台中，以及以我所知其他都，慢慢都有開始比較懂資料的朋友進入一級協調的情勢下——這個要用非常和緩的方法講，不能講成組改——我相信六都慢慢都會開始有這一個量能，去協助附近的行政。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "我好奇問一下，金門、馬祖負責的六都是誰？苦主是誰？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我如果沒有記錯的話，高、屏、澎是在一起的，但金、馬因為是不同的省，我相信福建省政府主席，也就是另外一位政務委員，對這件事有裁量權。這不是我的業管範圍，我不會幫景森政委表示任何意見（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "行政區邊界劃分的部分，可以在這一個機制下，讓它的品質…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "…從明年開始運作的時候提出討論。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "接下來下一個議題是「人事」，機關年資及年齡的部分，其實銓敘部有公務統計，但並不是用開放方式釋出？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒錯。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "再來是約聘僱的比例，我想目前並沒有看到，我想這是更大的問題，現在因為員額法的關係，有很多實際上進來機關工作的，可能是透過標案綁定一個駐點人力的部分，這並沒有一個完整的統計。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果用雙重計畫轉包借調的狀態，那從來源端跟結果端統計，會產生不一樣的數字。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "是。但是這個問題，我們要知道是很嚴重或者是不嚴重，因為員額法的關係，必須用這樣的方式繞過，大家才能去檢討。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "但是我們現在沒有任何證據，說中央機關進來的有多少人，它不是實際的政務官或事務官，也就是借調過來的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在人事總處，其實每一次有外面機關借調進來的時候，會在行政院內部的系統裡面發一個公告，這個公告是「某某機關的某某人，因為某某原因，從即日起借調到某某單位任職」。但這樣發完之後，其實我從院的內網也沒有看到資料庫去查詢這一件事，這就變成是紀錄剖析（log parsing）的工作。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果你把所有公告的自然語言加以剖析的話，想必把調職、復職互相對消之後，就可以得到從使用端這邊目前實際的人數，甚至連人名都會有。但從借調端，從計畫那邊拿的話，我們院裡也沒有這個資料，這個是說實話。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "但是你剛剛講的借調，是比如說學術單位？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是的。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "但是我剛剛講的比較是外包案，像國發會「data.gov.tw」其實有一個外包駐點，這個不在任何的統計裡，但他有識別證可以進到任何政府單位？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個應該不在剛才的統計裡。因為那個識別證只是能夠進門的意思，並不是忽然有一個員工編號的意思，這個是兩件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以那個門禁卡的制發是否有上網，它和講的那一個公告系統或者是任何其他系統有所串接？以我的理解是沒有，但說不定有，只是我還不知道。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在沒有界接的情況下，既然沒有主要索引值，那唯一的做法可能是在那一張卡制發的時候，留個副檔上傳到某個空間，但這裡馬上碰到個資法，這條路我覺得比較走不通。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "不過我想至少這是一個問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我也同意這是一個問題。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "不過還有滿多想法，我們可以另外再討論這一個議題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，我另外一個補充：人事總處目前在2017年度對於整個組織改造，還有包含組織改造前繞過規範的借調、外包、駐點及約聘僱等等，其實正在整理一個通盤的想法，包含大家之前一直很關心的，資訊相關人力或相關人力怎麼配置，或者新科技要不要有專門辦公室等等這些東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我完全尊重人事總處的總規劃，相信各界的需求都有收進去，但在他們有一個通盤規劃進來之前，我以政務委員的身份不適合發表意見。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "PDIS運作有沒有辦法稍微跟這一個結合？在做這個檢討的時候，是不是有更多的資料讓大家可以同時參與討論？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這是非常有趣的組織法的狀況了，因為理論上院的處是協助部會去聯絡，所以像人事總處、資安處、教科文處，都沒有開放資料諮詢小組的原因是一樣的，因為理論上他們本身的業務不及於跟第一線人民，去進行資料上的界接或說明。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "才怪，人事總處最重要！公告放假。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我知道（笑），我完全同意。但你講的是不特定人，要放假就是不特定人都要放假，我這邊講的是，像內政部的櫃台，來申請服務的一個人。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以當他制定的是通則性政策，要做證據導向討論時，那我們剛剛講的「給予解決社會上特定人民問題的政治壓力」這個渠道比較走不通，我只是想要講這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "瞭解。最後一個是公務人員的人事異動資料，這個目前其實大家要花非常大的力氣從總統府公報去剖析出來，不知道人事行政總處有沒有辦法，做至少比較高階的事務官任用紀錄資料？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "總統府是一個比較特殊的單位，我們沒有辦法直接請求他們去建立任何系統。人事總處以我所知，所有的這些派令他們都有一份複本。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但現在的問題是，這還是需要剛剛所講的紀錄剖析。如果要做剖析的話，需要有個政治意志出來說，我們去清查之前所有的派令，然後衍生出一套穩定的事務紀錄（stable transaction log），而且是只能添加（append-only）的紀錄…" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "區塊鏈（blockchain）!" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，這個結構很適合用區塊鏈來存，但以上不代表政策指示（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為要做紀錄剖析這一件事，它需要的量能跟你拿一個特定、專屬的資料庫，你只是讓它出CSV，需要的資訊人力是不一樣的，可能是十倍以上的量能。要有十倍以上的量能，就必須要有十倍以上的政治意志去支撐。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就像我剛才說的，要先問：這件事你解決了社會上哪些特定族群的什麼問題？我們才能在政務會議提出來。提出來之後，院長認為真的要解決這個問題、指示人事總處進行辦理，我們才能從政務委員的角度，去幫助院長協調他覺得需要解決的問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這件事如果是院長並不覺得需要解決，民眾也沒有聲音是覺得需要解決的問題，那我自己無法去做這樣的建議。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "意思是請大家給壓力。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我沒有這樣說的意思，就是邀請大家一起做。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "接下來是「司法及判決」，比較多是司法院的部分，但是檢察機關還是有一些。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "像偵查的統計、起訴的統計，這目前在年報裡面其實有一些，但非常地粗。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "因為我同事擔任中選會的開放資料諮詢委員，其實我非常非常好奇他們對於選罷法的樣態有沒有統計，其實並沒有，這一個法規是他們主管，但實際上最後違法的分布跟統計，原來主管法規其實不一定會去追蹤它，這可能需要一個共通的資料集。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實從偵查、起訴，甚至中間警察去進行訊問、製作筆錄，到所有能夠呈上法庭的所有這些紙，目前按照現行的作業內部法規流程，都必須是紙本，所以就會變成不同的機關，從警察局到偵查，所有這些東西進行資料交換，是用他們自己的電子系統印出來，印出來之後厚厚一疊送到下一站，那一站用掃描機，再把它掃描回JPEG檔之後進行OCR的讀取。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在中間除了克漏字的這個情況之外，好比像我在第一個階段有結構化資料，但必須要印成A4掃過去，所以裡面表格的線段，除非像 @ronnywang 那麼厲害，能夠用OpenCV把它還原回來，不然的話就又回到純文字，最多PDF變成Word檔，進Word改完之後再出去。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，可能在來源是有結構化的，但是經過兩、三層出去之後，在司法體系裡面就變成圖片的資料，必要時還要用OCR。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這件事我也有跟司法院的資訊處進行討論、協調。聽起來，他們需要法務部進行一個函釋，好比我舉一個例子：在進行訊問的時候，其實取證的時候是用錄音，可是上法院的時候很少聽錄音，大部分是看稿子，也不一定看全部的逐字稿，而是看某一段的稿子，這時就需要一個函釋說「這段稿子的有效性，相當於那一個錄音的有效性，除非有人提出質疑。」" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但這個稿子是建立在聽錄音打字的人屬於公務人員，本於職權、符合所有相關法令，而且有認證的人來做這一件事，這樣它的產出，才會說跟本來的紀錄具有相同效力。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果這個紙本，好比能跟光碟同時遞送，這邊的結構化資料在上一層才能進行匯集分析，這時能把紙本跟光碟等同的函釋，必須是要準備光碟的人是具有特定的身份、公務及專職做這一件事等等，目前法務部還是要先做出這個解釋。如果沒有這個解釋的話，即使中間結構化建立再好，在最上面判決看起來的時候，仍然是A4掃描的結果，這是實際情況跟大家分享。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "不過法務部有建立一個量刑的系統，" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是的。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "所以是判決之後的結構化？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是判決後。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "所以如果我們真的要去看選罷法某哪些條的過去三年比例怎麼樣，其實照理來說是有這個資料。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "正在上訴的先不去管它，就是判決確定？" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想就判決確定是公開資料，這我們可以專門來檢討。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "判決部分確定是公開資料，但那是在司法院。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我知道。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "剛剛說的，是法務部有整理成一個內部的系統使用，給檢察官作量刑的建議系統。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但當時是給特定人，以特定目的為利用。這個東西要轉成甲類資料的時候，我們還是要按照正當程序來處理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "同一個想法，也就是最小阻力路徑的想法：如果司法院資訊處的格式比較友善，就從那裡下手，如果比較不友善，再回來法務部。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "判決書其實現在是公開的，但結構化並不是很好，有時還會自動關機，但是這就可能持續跟司法院溝通。判刑與執行統計，執行的部分應該是在矯正署？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒錯。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "這個執行統計有一個非常粗的統計，但是因為什麼原因進去，其實好像非常粗。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好像是多選一？我不記得了，好像是有一個欄位。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "如果大家有更細需求的時候，再來討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "開放資料只要確定有了，那就不能收回，後續任何對顆粒度的要求就是循正常程序討論。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "最後這一個項目是行政機關的適用。包括函釋，大部分的部會都會建立一個他們自己的法規系統，應該是同一家廠商提供的，但並沒有API的方式提供出來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不一定是同一家廠商，地方政府的行政規則就是另一套。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "OK，我有看過，很少，大概只有兩、三個版本。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，兩、三個版本。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "這個函釋，或是其他各自命令如果現在法規資料庫並沒有開放授權的話，各機關自己的法規系統，有沒有可能請他們使用Open Data的方式來提供？或者是他們這一個系統直接是Open API？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們還是回來看，法規命令草案當即日起生效的時候，剛剛已經講了因為「眾開講」的關係，這將會變成Open Data。函釋不在裡面，而且地方政府的行政規則也不會在裡面，這邊包含了也許40％、50％左右的量，但是確實有一大塊黑的地方，確實也是真的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想要說的是，我們之所以挑公報網的原因，是因為要整理一個API是相對容易的，因為格式相對齊一，如果是函釋跟行政規則的話，除了一定有送達目的機關、日期幾號、發文字號外，所有其他的欄位都是任意文字。這跟法規命令不一樣，法規命令還有一個格式，但如果是函釋的話，那個格式是任意的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們會先從這一種半結構化文字開始，目的就是先建立起跟它相對應的API，然後我們接下來再說那一些比較不結構化的部分，裡面的這一些結構有的，我們就比照辦理。結構沒有的部分，就是加一個欄位叫做「任意文字」，那就隨便本來填什麼就填什麼進去，甚至用PDF附件，我也沒有辦法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但如果一開始不建立結構化系統的話，大家都會選那個「沒辦法」，然後把PDF附件上去，所以在這邊整理出來至少好比訂了九個欄位，行政規則、法規解釋，這九個裡面如果有三個，至少這三個用結構化方法提供；如果這六個不適用，那也沒有辦法，也就是PDF附件，我們是用這個策略來進行。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "所以就是亦步亦趨？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "下一個是行政罰的相關統計，好比是環保署主管或者是勞基法相關的，最後是由地方政府去裁罰的，其實我們並沒有一個跨機關、跨地區的整體統計；其實應該是有的，主管機關會掌握各個地方的統計。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是設一個入口頁面，點二十三次就都看到了？" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "這個可能跟前面這一些司法相關的，就是讓大家看看訂定的這一些，我們今天有一個行政命令，有三、五項罰款的東西，最後實際的效果是什麼，我們才能去檢討這一個法規到底效益是什麼。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我同意啊。這就是為什麼我今天在上午的開放資料諮詢小組，具體提出兩年之後要做國土計畫，它是要基於每一個地區去進行國土的使用討論，這時農地工用、工地不知道誰用的這些現況，無論是裁罰、行政檢查，或環境資訊這些東西，都會變成討論的題目。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當有這一個理由出現的時候，才比較容易告訴六都及其他別的縣市說，現在要用某一種方式提出，否則國土規劃沒有辦法進行討論；但當然這種裁罰會限於國土不當利用或這些部分，比較沒有辦法把所有的行政、交通罰單這一些東西都放進來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果要把這些所有的東西放進來，我覺得一下子也並沒有政治意志可以做得到。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "好，將來在2018年開始做這一件事？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "2018年之前會準備？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "2017年數位國家開始運行後，我相信這會是國發會數位國土裡面，很重要的一部分。當它進入這部分的時候，就會開始請地方資訊首長，包括還沒有資訊首長、但是快要有資訊首長的地方，來加以處理。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "再來是相當相似的東西，比如是訴願相關的東西，其實這整個是串在一起，好比過去在做各地違反勞基法的時候，有一些地方政府會提報。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "其實這個在訴願中，環保署有建立一個系統做類似的事情，所以我想這整個是串在一起的，將來要再做這些各個地方的政策的時候…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可是訴願本來就有系統，不是了嗎？" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "是跨所有的議題？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！就是中華民國行政院訴願系統查詢。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "但它有一個關於粗略的統計嗎？好比是關於環保裁罰的訴願？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該是這樣子講，當有決定的時候，當然就是會有一個決定的發布，但訴願進行中的時候，我這邊看到的是，各級機關訴願業務統計是在分年度來做的，就是每年發佈，而不是每天、每季這樣子，後者要評估他的人力負荷情形，包含量能到底能不能處理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像這種東西是存在的，但是他存在的時間區間或是顆粒度，是不是大家覺得有用，或者是需要加強的，這個是另外一回事。但是至少以逐年年報的程度，剛剛講的那一些欄位都在裡面。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "好，我想我們可能只能討論一個大的主題，這是法治政府組織相關的東西，也許我們可以找其他的時間用閒聊的形式，來談比較大的主題。希望講到最後一個主題的時候，前面就有一點進展。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然，我相信是這樣子。因為數位國家現在的大方向確定了，我作為「幕僚的幕僚」工作告一段落，但各個部會的行動方案目前還正在提報中，是年底第一次DIGI+會議才會有最終版本。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "事實上NICI那時候還在執行，它執行到12月31日，所以我們現在用這個架構做任何決定都不適當，因此當然是從明年1月1日開始，剛剛所講的這些話題，就開始變成DIGI+可以處理的東西，從那時候再來算週期，我想對所有部會都比較沒有壓力。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "現在很多部會，都在計畫還沒有最後版本的情況之下，也不知道如果現在處理了，會不會被列入新的管考項目裡面。大概是這樣子，就是從1月1日開始起算。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "其實我們可以感覺到，政府的運作其實非常複雜，有些事情需要非常多的外部力量，我想我們需要凝聚這一些共識，到底哪一些是關鍵的資料集，這些東西我們藉由比較新的、大力的推動機制去推，希望有一些成果。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然，沒有問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "最後再次申明，以前我們在推Open Data的時候，我們可以說臺灣是世界第二十幾名或者是第十一名，鄰國都已經做到了，為什麼我們都做不到？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是現在我們第一名了，這時說「大家本來有的，為什麼我們沒有？」部會絕對可以說：「可是我們也有人家沒有的東西。」（笑）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "現在再說「人家有，我們沒有」，這個本身不太構成政治上的壓力了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們現在在政策上，我覺得反而不要給壓力，而是要讓我們幫助部會，讓部會進行常規業務的時候，透過怎樣的資料交換，可以在先期就不要引發民怨，或者在先期就知道跟其他部會有什麼關聯。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是盡可能用「大家早一點下班，而不是晚一點下班」的理由來推Open Data，我覺得這樣子也比較推得起來。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非常感謝觀眾朋友的收看。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "掰掰。你是三點的飛機嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "三點要出門到機場。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "好，來走了。所以工作愉快嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊，超愉快啊。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "有到超愉快？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "超愉快。因為有十五個人，真的是超強的。九位寫程式，其他六位做規劃，都比我專業。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "所以那九個人是用什麼計畫來的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是直接借調來的，現在院裡成立了一個可以發文的小組。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "「數位字」？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「院臺數位字○○號」。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "那是什麼小組？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是「公共數位創新空間推動小組」，簡稱PDIS小組。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "好吧！該走了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "Take care。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "該走了，那就巴黎見了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "OK，掰掰。" }, { "speaker": "高嘉良", "speech": "祝你順利。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "目前還滿順利的。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "李文雄", "speech": "各位社會企業的前輩們及各位長官，今天這場公司法修法的焦點團體會議即將開始，我是余宛如委員的助理。因為余宛如委員今天甲級動員，沒有辦法到現場，實在遺憾。其次，今天這一個座談會會全程錄音，然後會做成逐字稿，然後我們會公布在網路上，這個是為了取得共識，所以今天我們很慎重舉行這一場座談會，是要傾聽市場聲音，來完善臺灣社會企業生態圈的建構。謝謝大家的合作。我們首先會先請公司法全盤修法的第三組負責人黃銘傑老師，先介紹一下。" }, { "speaker": "黃銘傑", "speech": "謝謝這次余委員的邀請及舉辦這一場座談會，我坐下來好了，這樣比較容易進行（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "黃銘傑", "speech": "因為這一次公司法的全盤修正總共分為四組，我是第三組工作小組的召集人，我這一次負責除了社會企業之外，還有公司登記、關係企業及總則篇的相關條文修正。在社會企業的檢討過程中，也跟我們這一次公司法的修正之議題息息相關，因為這一次公司法修正的最重要目標第一個是大小流，第二個是我們要放寬管制，讓各類型的企業可以配合其組織、架構，隨著目的及各種不同營業種類可以作最自由化的設計。" }, { "speaker": "黃銘傑", "speech": "在檢討過程中，我們也發現有些國家甚至公司體制都可以作公益團體，像新加坡、英國有所謂的「Economic by Guarantee」，這樣一個「Economic by Guarantee」就會類似我國財團法人的組織，純粹是作公益事業，甚至受主管機關的監督，是比一般公司更為高的。" }, { "speaker": "黃銘傑", "speech": "我們在修法過程中，我們慢慢認識到雖然過去傳統是以營利為目的，但是其他國家對於公司的種類，公司可以實踐的目的其實是更為廣泛，我們利用公司組織這樣更為彈性及企業家精神的方式，來實現各種社會所要求的營利社會、公益目的，好像也未嘗不可。在這樣的情況下，我們就慢慢與社會企業接觸。我們也思考到最近臺灣社會企業發展非常蓬勃，在蓬勃發展的過程中，對於社會企業的定義，到底如何思考？如果要讓社會企業發展，我國是否應該要有一般性的組織法律，讓社會企業可以藉由所謂的公司概念或者公司的組織來實現他們的目的，這個是我在思考過程中第一個要去解決的問題。" }, { "speaker": "黃銘傑", "speech": "當然在這樣解決的過程當中，我們也思考過一個問題是，是否一定要針對所謂的社會企業來定義公司的類型？我們現在公司法是說公司是以營利為目的，而這一個營利為目的的很大調整為營利在法律上被解釋為不只是必須要所謂獲取利潤，而且必須要把利潤分配給股東才叫做「營利」。" }, { "speaker": "黃銘傑", "speech": "從這樣的觀念出發的話，似乎未來社會企業要以利益分派作一定的限制，是否可能會導致社會企業希望對他的利益分派時，反而會違反公司法的相關規定。甚至於營利為目的也可能被解釋為必須要顧及股東的利益，其他利害關係人的利益並不是主要考量的重點，但是很顯然的是，社會企業所顧及的利益並不是單單股東的利益，而是一般社會大眾，甚至服務對象的一般公共利益都是可以的，因此我們今天還是談公司法的公司治理之營利為目的所組織的社團法人法，可能會跟我們現在所要推動社會企業的一些方向會有所牴觸，在這樣的情況下，公司法全盤修正小組就思考出兩個不同的解決方式：" }, { "speaker": "黃銘傑", "speech": "第一，我們並不對社會企業訂定特別的公司類型，我們在這時第一最少修正兩個條文。第一個條文是公司法第1條，我們現在仍然維持公司法第1條為公司是以營利為目的之組織登記成立之法人，但是在這一條我們就增加第2項，換句話說，「除前項之營利義務外，公司得同時追求社會及公共利益」，我記得條文是這樣列的。換句話說，我們未來所謂的「公司」特質一定還是有營利方式或目的存在，只是可以在追求營利方式外，可以實現營利以外的一般社會或公共利益。所以未來如果大家要以一般公司來做社會企業的話，營利的方式跟模式是不可或缺的，而且完全不可以只追求公益，因此我們才會說「同時兼顧」社會或公共利益，這個是我們現在公司法的設計。" }, { "speaker": "黃銘傑", "speech": "除此之外，有關於公司負責人、董事之責任規定裡面，我們會說公司負責人並不會因為考量股東以外利害關係人的利益，或促進股東以外的利害關係人的利益，或促進股東以外的利害關係人利益，而被認為他就是違反對公司應盡的終止與注意義務。我們認為修正這兩條之後，未來一般社會企業也可以利用一般公司型態比較沒有障礙地來實現社會及公共利益目的。換句話說，我們並沒有強迫一定要營利分配或不營利分配，那個是章程自治的概念，我們讓社會企業或者是公司型的社會企業，營利還是它很重要維持其永續發展的營業方式或組織之運作模式，只是運作的模式是營利為模式，而追求還是在於社會公共利益，這個是我們當時所設想出第一個公司法的修法方式。" }, { "speaker": "黃銘傑", "speech": "第二，我們參考有關於美國「Benefit Corporation」的撰寫專章，在他們的公司法裡面制定一個專章或者是專節，只是「Benefit Corporation」應該怎麼翻譯有一點困擾，過去有人翻譯成「共益公司」，有人翻成「公益公司」，有很多用詞。我們經過討論而且突然被助理觸及靈感之後就寫「兼益公司」，因為我們是兼顧公司追求，因此我們儘量用「兼益公司」的概念來統稱，如果公司法要放類似社會企業的組織放入公司法規定的話，首先我們暫訂先使用「兼益公司」之名詞。" }, { "speaker": "黃銘傑", "speech": "只是「兼益公司」還是要跟大家報告一下，它的規範還是依循這一次公司法修正的理念，是以低度利益法，也就是我們政府機關不會作過度的介入管制，我們只對它的組織架構做最低的規範，在這一個規範裡面，我們可能會要求這樣的「兼益公司」公司裡面一定要講明除了營利外，還追求怎麼樣的一般社會利益目的或特定社會目的，我們可能會要求你要設立至少一位公益董事，我們會賦予其他股東，讓他們投資這一家公司，讓公司追求社會目的時，而公司的執行業務方式，只想到如何獲利或營利時，我們會賦予股東一個公益執行訴訟，最後我們稱之一年為期或兩年為期，要求「兼益公司」必須要提出公益報告。" }, { "speaker": "黃銘傑", "speech": "大家很關心的公益報告，公益報告是否一定要經過會計簽證？或者依照一定公益報告之準則來編制？甚至這一個公益報告是不是有人來監查？這是我們的想法還是在於我們認為你必須要提出一個公益報告，這一個公益報告我們不會要求一定要經過會計師簽證，只是我們未來期待有一個是評鑑社會企業的社會企業出現，或者是評鑑兼益公司的兼益公司出現，現在很多社群網路對於論文發表有一個自治的機制，看哪一些學者是否有不正當的掛名行為或者不正當的學術行為，同樣未來也期待也許未來有一天會有所謂的「評鑑兼益公司公益報告的兼益公司」出現，因此我們儘量還是把它交給兼益公司或者社會企業來做自律或自己評鑑自己的規範。這個是我們在整個思考過程中所想像的，假設未來沒有兼益公司專章，我們還是會把公司法設計讓想要讓公司型態來實現社會目的的社會企業也可以以公司型態來架構其組織，並運作其獲利及營運模式。" }, { "speaker": "黃銘傑", "speech": "未來我們設立「兼益公司」的話，既然你是「兼益公司」，而且未來只要是「兼益公司」，名稱裡面就必須要有「兼益股份有限公司」組織名稱時，必須要比一般公司受到較為嚴格或高度的管制，這個是我們現在的想法。" }, { "speaker": "黃銘傑", "speech": "我們現在給大家的簡報裡面有兩份，一份比較小的也是橫的，另外一份比較大的，因為我們的助理非常認真，只要有新的資料就會開始增加，但是直的其實是我們上禮拜才傳給唐政委跟余委員，但是我們助理又做了一些修正，因此又增加了一些內容，因此橫的跟直的不一樣，我們會增加第7頁、第8頁及第15頁，請大家參考一下，這裡寫得非常詳細，今天主要的內容還是希望傾聽社會企業界的意見，我們就不再依照這樣的大綱來報告，因為大家都是專家，在專家面前班門弄斧，有點過分浪費時間，因此以我剛才的方式來說明。" }, { "speaker": "黃銘傑", "speech": "請大家發言之前我可能跟大家說明一下，過去好像有一些對於我們公司未來是否建立「兼益公司」或者是「兼益公司」有一些誤解，我可能要跟大家澄清幾個觀念。第一，大家很擔心的是，這樣的「兼益公司」或者是現在財團法人把其資金或資產移轉到「兼益公司」的問題，這與「兼益公司」修法是完全沒有關係的。財團法人還是在於各目的事業主管機關，「兼益公司」只是說可以依照「兼益公司」來實行一定的社會使命，並沒有說財團法人就一定可以投資，我們不做這一種價值判斷。財團法人未來可否投資「兼益公司」，還是要依據各個目的事業主管機關對於財團法人的監督，也不會因此說設立建議公司專章，就一定會成為財團法人轉換資產或者一定可以全額投資、全力投資「兼益公司」的工具，我們倒是沒有這樣想。" }, { "speaker": "黃銘傑", "speech": "再者，有人會擔心說未來這樣一個「兼益公司」是否在資金籌措會得到政府特定的補助或優惠，我們再跟大家特別強調不會有這一件事。我們一直跟大家強調「兼益公司」只是有關於公司的組織架構，至於各個目的事業主管機關及政府各個部會，如果想要針對特定的社會企業給予特定補助或特定租稅優惠的話，這是他們自己的政策決策，要接受政府的補助、政府最新優惠，必須要符合政府各個機關的規定，也許政府機關會要求如果要得到補助，那麼盈餘分配就不得超過50％或70％，「兼益公司」如果想要取得各個部會或者是特定事業主管機關的補助，那麼章程就要符合政府機關的規定，我們並沒有要求所有的「兼益公司」一定要有所謂盈餘分配的限制，「兼益公司」如果想要跟政府合作、推動社會使命的話，那你就必須更要符合社會及政府的要求。" }, { "speaker": "黃銘傑", "speech": "同樣的，今天國發基金也有出席，國發基金可能會要求說未來如果要推動社會企業要投資社會的話，他會要求社會企業必須要符合特定的資格，而特定的資格也沒有在我們的兼益公司裡面規定，或者要接受國發基金的投資，你的章程要符合國發基金的要求，這個是我要跟大家報告的。所以如果大家理解我們這樣設計的話，就知道這一次的「兼益公司」其實跟英國的CIC是完全不同的模式，英國的CIC如果在我們的法律上，可能是包含作用法加組織法，但這次公司法有關「兼益公司」的規定是完全有關組織法，作用法是由各個目的事業主管機關來制定；英國其實現在也有準備在類似美國「Benefit Corporation」，所以英國在原有的CIC法律之外，未來也會訂我國「兼益公司」的法律。" }, { "speaker": "黃銘傑", "speech": "最後，大家會一直質疑「社會企業」與「企業社會責任」到底有什麼不一樣？我個人也一直在思考這一個問題，企業社會責任好像企業做社會責任很偉大，是不是恩惠性、額外性的一種獎勵，而且所謂的企業社會責任好像需要得到社會的讚美、掌聲，所以這個是企業社會責任。最近CSR的概念並不是企業為了得到社會的讚美或者稱讚，所以做CSR，而CSR本來就內化在企業裡面或者是公司體制裡面。只是我們對於一般公司並沒有要求一定要實現一般公益目的或特定的公益目的，但是對於未來社會企業就像報告的，在章程裡面已經講說可能要符合一般社會公益目的，而且要追求特定的公益目的，如果是要做長照的話，整個營運模式就應該符合長照，因此這時我們剛剛所講的公益執行訴訟才會實施。換句話說，在章程裡面是用特定社會公益來運作社會企業，但是並沒有依照規定來做，所以股東可以要求董事之業務執行一定要符合章程的規定才可以，這個是如果未來大家對於企業社會責任或者社會企業覺得好像不是同樣一件事—雖然我覺得這還是不同一件事—社會企業已經把整個社會責任內化到其組織及運作裡面，而所謂的社會企業社會責任還是比較屬於附加性的企業所實現社會責任，這兩者還是不一樣。" }, { "speaker": "黃銘傑", "speech": "以上是我個人針對這一次公司法修法過程中，對於所謂社會企業是否可以用公司型態來運作，或者我們是否應該訂立「兼益公司」專章，或者是制定「兼益公司」專章時的基本理念跟大家報告。我們法的全盤修正小組其實對於要以哪一種模式是制定專章或者不制定專章，我們並沒有先入為主的見解，我們並沒有說一定要「兼益公司」的專章來執行，我們還是希望聽聽社會各界的意見，希望多多辦類似今天這樣的焦點座談，可以讓我們知道在思考上有哪一些盲點沒有發現到，或者我們太過於從學者的觀點來思考社會企業，可能會跟我們具體在執行社會企業的各位先進之思考邏輯上有一些出入，很希望聽各位的意見，以上是我作的簡短報告，以上多多指教，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "李文雄", "speech": "謝謝黃老師，我們再一次強調今天的座談會會錄音並製作逐字稿，逐字稿會請唐鳳政委辦公室來處理，然後再上網公開給大家，所以為了方便後續，今天發言的每一位貴賓，希望你們在第一次發言的時候，請報上自己的組織、名稱及姓名，第二次發言的時候，你只要報名字就可以了，方便記錄。今天的重點就是社會企業界的先進，先請王理事長。" }, { "speaker": "王秉鈞", "speech": "各位好，我正好坐在這裡，所以我第一個發言（笑）。我現在已經不是理事長，我已經卸任了，我是常務理事。" }, { "speaker": "王秉鈞", "speech": "我們的組織參與、非營利組織管理及社會企業相關的活動已經滿久了，所以這方面的議題我非常關心。我記得在2005年吧！那時社會企業也是滿風行的概念，我記得當時商業司在2014年剛修過，因此就不想修了，不想花那麼大的修，我在這裡面發言有特別提到這一點。" }, { "speaker": "王秉鈞", "speech": "他們提到第一個理由是，公司法第1條規定，我們今天非常高興聽到黃教授有提到要改這一條，其實實際上我也覺得如果改了這一條以後，如果能夠讓商業司不再堅持不修法的話，我想應該就改掉了。為什麼？其實社會企業本身的概念，我覺得非常先進，而且也符合世界潮流，尤其所謂社會企業的概念甚至是我們人類在面臨所謂資本主義過度發展下一個很重要的解套行為，所以我們把它放在公司法裡面，我覺得是有一個領導性的作用，可以使得我們整個社會的力量朝一個正向的發展去發展。" }, { "speaker": "王秉鈞", "speech": "我們講現在的科技發展及整個商業發展使得財富非常集中，未來不太可能像郭台銘白手起家而成巨富，因為未來的機器人可以幫郭台銘生產了，郭台銘的且可以永遠持續下去，而郭台銘也掌握了機器人，因此從這一個角度來看，財富的集中是不可避免的。如果一個公司組織還沒有一個這樣比較先進的概念，或者說公司本身如果有一個社會目的在公司裡的話，會使得分配比較公平、比較照顧到一般大眾，而不至於過度集中，因此我認為這個是社會企業非常重要的一個歷史意義。臺灣如果能夠把這一個東西放到我們的公司法裡頭，變成一個引導性的立法，我覺得對我們臺灣未來是有一個非常大的幫助。應該怎麼看待社會企業？社會企業應該是優等的公司且是理想的公司，所有的公司都應該以發展成為社會企業為其目標。" }, { "speaker": "王秉鈞", "speech": "中國人講有能力的人服務十個人或百個人或千個人或萬個人，當然社會企業應該是服務千萬個人的企業，它有這樣的規模，本來就是服務千萬個人的企業，而利潤分配當然就要能夠掌握到社會大眾，所以從這一個角度來講，如果公司法裡頭列了一個社會企業專章的話，對於社會企業是有一個引導的作用，而且我們希望所有的企業能夠做得好，也能夠來做社會企業，因為社會企業並不是一般的企業，而是可以做得到的，把很大一份的利潤回饋社會，有其特殊的社會目的。" }, { "speaker": "王秉鈞", "speech": "因從這一個角度來看，社會目的不僅不要政府的補助，或者不應該以逃避政府稅收為目的，反而是在負擔該有的公司負擔後做額外社會服務，這樣的話，實際上這樣才是未來社會企業很重要的發展現象。剛剛黃教授提出來的部分，剛剛有提到倒數第2頁第5項修法建議第3頁，他說不建議以組織性規範無涉於政策優惠跟稅務相關的作用規範，我覺得這個也非常贊成，社會企業本來就不應該擁有所謂的「優惠」；尤其很多的非營利組織會反對社會企業出現，因為會認為社會企業如果跟他一下，非營利組織就很難募款或者爭取社會資源，很多公司都在相對搶了他們的生意。" }, { "speaker": "王秉鈞", "speech": "還有一點，「兼益企業」的名稱要再商榷，我知道花了不少功夫，但是這一個「兼」字就跟奸詐的「奸」是一樣的唸音，因此我認為會被污名化。" }, { "speaker": "王秉鈞", "speech": "我覺得叫「社會企業」其實沒有衝突，「兼益企業」其實就是「社會企業」，何苦要找新的名詞？就用「社會企業」，其實我們在法庭上有定義什麼是「社會企業」？也就是要有規章，我覺得很重要的是，章程裡面要有訂定的目的，所以在一開始不會有公司負責人用這個說：「我是考量其他關係人，而做了一些決定來脫罪。」我覺得公司負責人應該還是要按照章程去執行，而章程裡面是有社會公益目的的，所以並沒有規避他的責任或者背信的行為，我覺得應該是滿重要的規範。" }, { "speaker": "王秉鈞", "speech": "其他的部分像公益董事、報告及評鑑組織這一些我都非常贊成，所以根據這樣的話，我覺得訂定社會企業辦法的話，我覺得導正所有相關的行為。" }, { "speaker": "王秉鈞", "speech": "而且我記得當時2015年之後我滿悲觀的，因為我們政府機關商業司非常堅定的立場，所以我覺得可能很難動，但是現在正好逢潮流或者是新政的新行為，我覺得是不錯的！我覺得畢其功於一役，實際上在修改公司法把這個加進去，然後我們就可以變成非常好的一個典範，以上是我的建議，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "陳琬惠", "speech": "主席、各位與會的先進大家好，我是台灣公益團體自律聯盟秘書長陳琬惠第一次發言。" }, { "speaker": "陳琬惠", "speech": "聯盟過去做的是公益團體的責信，全臺灣大概450億一年的捐款裡面，聯盟的盟友佔了1/3，比較中小型的組織之責信工作都在聯盟這邊展開。我們所謂的「責信」是指財務報告跟工作報告，也就是大家每年捐款人捐的錢跟公益團體從政府拿的錢，我們原先做了十幾年，也就是透過一個自律的機制，讓大家自我對社會大眾做一個對外揭露的動作。" }, { "speaker": "陳琬惠", "speech": "三年前行政院開始推社會企業行動方案時，也發現聯盟之民間自律機制，因此當時委託我們來辦理這樣的機制，希望社會企業在發展之初，在行動方案剛開始推的時候，社會企業就可以透過自我規範跟對外揭露的模式，跟社會大眾交代到底社會目的是什麼、他們想要解決的社會問題是什麼。" }, { "speaker": "陳琬惠", "speech": "經過兩年多的時間，今天列席者有很多，包括經濟部中小企業處，勞動部、教育部、衛福部、農委會其實都提了非常多的建議名單給聯盟。這兩年看到大家所提出來的名單中，其實大家認為的社會企業是要解決一個社會問題或改變一個社會現況——利用商業的模式。這個裡面有包含三個不同的組織類型，如下：" }, { "speaker": "陳琬惠", "speech": "第一，大家原來熟悉NPO在做其服務時，像今天代表的喜憨兒有所謂社會事業的部分，也就是因為服務而產生營利的行為，推薦給我們的名單裡面會出現一種NPO型的社會企業。" }, { "speaker": "陳琬惠", "speech": "第二，是在內政部主管的合作社型，臺灣的合作社發展非常好，透過互相運用，有一個共同的目標，要解決食安的問題，像大家耳熟能詳的「主婦聯盟」，這也是推薦過來的名單。" }, { "speaker": "陳琬惠", "speech": "聯盟這邊被委託做最多的是中小型企業，也就是公司型的社會企業登錄，我們做最重要的工作是作辯識的工作，我們先去理解，因為臺灣的社會企業也剛開始發展，去理解什麼樣類型的公司，我們可以稱之為「社會企業」。講到「企業」也講太大了，通常都是新創公司，都是剛開始的幾個人而已，他們有一個很明顯的方式如剛剛老師所講的，新政府對於公司法在修訂的時候，願意把一個公司的社會目的跟其社會使命在公司運作當中，自起始點的第一天就願意把這一件事放在心上，或者從頭到尾只做這一件事來解決他所看到臺灣的問題之外，還能夠自給自足活下去，這樣的精神，如果立法之後，我覺得是非常進步的一套法律。" }, { "speaker": "陳琬惠", "speech": "黃老師在說明整個公司法在研擬小組的思考脈絡下，其實我們本來想在公司法的定義裡面，就給公司一個新的解釋，我們也接受社會目的，這個是很好的一個方向，也就是像剛剛黃老師所提到的，我們希望未來的最好狀況是所有的企業以人民為念，在營利之餘，絕對每一天都想到其實我們是在為人做這一件事，把社會目的放進去，那我覺得這樣更可以彰顯臺灣公民社會發展的一個進步歷程，也可以呼應到新政府的態度，我是從這一個角度去看。" }, { "speaker": "陳琬惠", "speech": "第二，我也非常感謝在新的公司法修法裡，在思考上也把自律的精神放進去，也就是不管以後是不是會出現一個所謂的評鑑公司；我們其實不太贊成（笑），我說不太贊成是從自律的立場來看，還沒有到上市櫃公司之前，本來上市櫃公司就應該要繳交的那一些資料，因為要公開募資。還沒有上市櫃之前，因為我們做社企登錄，一開始要叫大家交報告時，就召集了全部的社企來討論，我說：「既然要做自律，你們可以做到什麼程度？你們都還不是上市櫃公司？」（他們說：）「我願意去寫一份報告書跟社會大眾交代，我的公司社會目的、社會使命是什麼，我解決了什麼問題、改變什麼狀況，用什麼樣的方式讓自己活下來，產生什麼樣的社會影響力，不管是對我的社區、社群或者對我的環境。」這個部分清楚交代，我覺得揭露基本是非常好的精神放在這裡面。再次感謝公司法在修法當中，我看到幾個覺得滿好的點。" }, { "speaker": "陳琬惠", "speech": "目前今年以公司型登錄已經破百家，國外有一個數字是一百四十家就成了產業可以產生力量的組織類型。我們回來看，如果只是放進去這兩點，但是我覺得已經非常棒了，我覺得現階段要讓大家思考公司是不是要有所謂的社會使命跟目的，這個是非常好的。另外，是不是要成為一個專章，我覺得目前看起來沒有一個絕對的必要性，這個是我的意見。" }, { "speaker": "陳琬惠", "speech": "第二，如果以目前「兼益公司」的部分，我跟王常務理事的意見是一樣的，我們已經有一百家都認為自己叫「社會企業」，我們對外的宣廣，包含行政院長期推動的名字也叫做「社會企業」，突然之間搞了一個叫「兼益公司」，有一點品牌行銷要從來的意思，也就是整個更混亂了，什麼是「兼益公司」，我要重新跟大家解釋與討論，我覺得會產生更多的混淆概念在內，我已經看到這個說明書裡面已經有說到掛羊頭賣狗肉。所以，「兼益公司」大家各自解釋的時候，會不會讓整個市場的擔心會更多，我覺得要跟CSR區隔時，我覺得如果要把一個「兼益公司」這樣的名詞或概念或專章，要出現這樣的名詞，我的意見跟王常務理事是一樣的，就是放「社會企業」，就是直接說「社會企業」要怎麼樣，簡單報告，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "吳佳霖", "speech": "大家好，我是社團法人中華組織發展協會秘書長，也是臺灣社企發展聯盟的常務理事吳佳霖。其實在討論社會企業部分的時候，這中間有很多很有趣的現象，因為臺灣真的是多元發展，就像剛剛陳秘書長所提到的。" }, { "speaker": "吳佳霖", "speech": "像黃老師剛剛提到很多國外社會發展企業脈絡在臺灣都可以找得到，這個是很特別的，這個也是國外一直認為社會企業是獨一無二的發展土壤，而且這一種多元性，以目前來說我們連續曾經兩年的SEWF，像David LePage都認為臺灣的社會企業可以作世界標竿。" }, { "speaker": "吳佳霖", "speech": "可是我們還是有很多困境，尤其這幾年商業司一直被討論如何界定一個社會企業的公司設立，我想NPO那一塊先不提，先提公司型的社會企業。其實這幾年一直有很多夥伴或者很多政策立法者一直在討論是不是要設專章或立法，其實我今年年初對社會企業有做調查，其實61.29％的夥伴不需要立法、專章，他覺得政策比較重要，他覺得環境土壤比立法、專章有用多，這個涉及到立法程序時程等方面，因為立法第1條一定要界定何謂「社會企業」，可能界定完後，對於NPO型或合作社型或儲蓄互助社型的社會性怎麼辦？就因此被排除了，可是這又不符合國際社企多元化發展之過程。所以其實這一個過程還滿有趣的，大家覺得政策推動有利於立法，可是不可否認的是，公司型的社會企業第一條就被卡住了，我覺得黃老師提的第1條跟第23條是剛好卡住NPO公司組成的夥伴，第1條公司以營利為目的，第23條是要顧及利害關係人的權益，要善盡管理人的職責。" }, { "speaker": "吳佳霖", "speech": "其實我跟很多公司型社企夥伴去討論這一塊的時候，我覺得真正的癥結點都是在第1條，其他都不是大問題，因此我們曾經討論過說如果第1條以營利為目的後面增加「另公司章程訂定與社會、公益利益為目的者，則以公司章程為依據」，會不會因此增加空間？因為所有的公司治理還是以章程為主，在公司法之下，公司成立的章程裡面，已經訂定了社會目的、營運分配及各方面運作模式之後，其實所有政府部門要管理，第1條以章程來作為依據，第2條來看法令上的議題。" }, { "speaker": "吳佳霖", "speech": "因此我們在這一段時間不斷討論這一個議題時，其實也發現沒有那麼複雜，也就是社會企業並沒有大家想像那麼複雜地難管理或者是掛羊頭賣狗肉的問題，回到公司章程來看這一個組織到底要幹麻，其實NPO在成立的時候，公司章程會被主管機關會被審定很嚴格的狀態是一樣的，我想商業司在審定，所有的公司成立也會看章程，並不會不看章程就讓它註冊。" }, { "speaker": "吳佳霖", "speech": "因此，這一個過程反而我們應該如何讓商業司在審定社會企業之公司章程上如何有規範，這可能比較有助於承辦人員在做一些事，這個也就是內部作業要點，並沒有那麼複雜。可能比例法專章簡單容易多了，我覺得在操作上必須有一些讓大家立即可以感受及運用的東西，這個對於所有社企夥伴來說是一個很重要的要點。" }, { "speaker": "吳佳霖", "speech": "其實提這一個東西的過程來說，辦法、要點其實在英國社會企業委員會中，其實用的是這一個要點來鼓勵社會企業設立，評估哪一個是社會企業、哪一個是慈善組織。我之前也提了一個建議，我們在看國外為什麼是公司型態的社會企業？尤其是英國。那是因為英國的社區組織全部是用公司註冊的，是用慈善委員會來管理到底是不是社區的組織，社區組織其實型態是公司的，所以等同NPO組織、慈善組織，因此作為社會企業是很簡單的，也就是社區小型公司，也就是慈善組織轉成社會企業——香港其實走的與英國是相同的法令。" }, { "speaker": "吳佳霖", "speech": "因此從這樣的背景、脈絡來推論臺灣的社會企業都要符合公司型，其實不符合臺灣的文化與發展的土壤，因此我覺得在公司型的社會企業，其實比較要瞭解的是，我們如何判定章程裡面所謂的社會使命與社會目的為何，這個是比較困惑的。今年協會也接了衛福部另外一個研究計畫，也就是做社會需求的調查，為什麼要做這一個調查？因為當我們把各種族群的社會企業需求調查做出來的時候，它跟社會企業間社會使命的關係，其議題就會很清楚明確。" }, { "speaker": "吳佳霖", "speech": "最近大家也都在討論聯合國社會發展指標這一塊東西，發展指標某程度也是社會議題，這個反而是我們應該要思考的東西。" }, { "speaker": "吳佳霖", "speech": "另外，有關於稅法的部分，其實我們很多社區夥伴，連公司型的夥伴都不認為要免稅，因為有一些夥伴要去倡議NPO可以免稅，社企也要免稅，因為我做社會議題的；但我說的是少數部分遊說。可是去思考一個問題，今天是一個公司型態，到最後還是有利潤分配，對不對？如果你有利潤分配，為什麼你享有免稅？NPO組織很特別的是完全沒有利潤分配，所以才享有免稅，我想基本上從稅法角度的公正性、公平性及正義性來看的時候，我們要看最後回饋那一塊到底是什麼。因此，基本上並不是我們認為減稅就可以促進，減稅某些程度也會造成國家的負擔，因為公共利益被毀損。而從社會企業最高標準的社會使命來說的話，公平正義是不是就被破壞，因為精神價值就被破壞，因此這值得我們去思考的東西。" }, { "speaker": "吳佳霖", "speech": "促進社會企業發展有很多模式，你可以透過補助、各種方法，或者各種政策，但是我想稅法這一塊是一個最基本的門檻，基本上連聯盟裡面在討論這一個東西的時候，我們並不認為是免稅，繳稅是國民與組織應盡的社會責任，我有收入、也繳稅，國家就會有公共政策，以促進公共利益，這個是天經地義的事。社會企業就該免稅，我想之後所有公司型的社會企業也不用做利潤分配了，因為要免稅，相對地責任、義務要如何分配，這個反而應該要思考清楚的。" }, { "speaker": "吳佳霖", "speech": "剛剛其實琬惠秘書長跟黃老師有提到社會影響力報告書的部分，我們這一次的調查也有這個，其實有54.84％都認為應該要有這一份的報告書。需要有報告書的這一群夥伴（67.74％）認為應該透過平台組織來協助，並不是透過第三方來協助他們完成這一份報告，自己寫的比較少，當然是22.58％的社企夥伴認為可以自己寫，這跟我們在看國外的組織規模大小一樣，會影響他們寫報告書的能力。不過，有38.71％組織認為其實社會企業影響力報告書依據組織規模大小去訂定範圍，並不是全部都一樣，小的組織要寫一個萬字報告書，有時還滿辛苦的，除非有一些公益組織或者是平台組織願意協助他完成這一份報告。在座經濟部或者是國發基金的夥伴們，其實你們都知道小公司求生存為第一，報告為第二，真的要寫出報告還要有時間與本事，社會企業在初創的時候卻要求一堆報告跟報表，他們是要與市場競爭而存活下來或者是要交報告？這個都要思考，很多都要循序漸進做的，並不是一下子用高標完成，如果我們都用高標完成，那麼臺灣的社會企業會死掉大部分，因為要因應很多報告，我們可能就做不下去了。" }, { "speaker": "吳佳霖", "speech": "我覺得社會企業，公司型就回到小型企業在創設的那個狀態去思考就好了，只是它比較特別，它有一個很強大的社會使命跟目的而已，不代表它不跟市場競爭、不代表不需要去做很好的服務或產品，一樣也是要做這一些競爭與產品，它其實很辛苦，因為兩邊要平衡，理性與感性的平衡對人來說是非常大的功力，等一下可以請崇偉老師大概講一下他們的心路歷程（笑），因為他是非常典型的案例，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "林崇偉", "speech": "主席、各位夥伴大家午安，我是林崇偉，我是众社會企業的創辦人。我覺得今天這一個討論其實很有意義，剛剛前面幾位的分享，基本上我都是支持他們的觀點。" }, { "speaker": "林崇偉", "speech": "不過倒是想一個很有意義的笑話，這個是有意義、我想過的，我知道有這一個版本，而且我也把不適宜的族群拿掉，總之各位都知道牧師或者任何一個宗教的廟宇，每一天都做好事、照顧社區裡的人，不管是香油錢或者是奉獻箱，大家都會投錢進去。這一個負責的廟公就考慮到有一些要拿來照顧信徒、買米，並照顧他們社區發展，另外也幫助一些弱勢的人，當然還要負責廟宇的維修或教堂的發展，最後也要照顧自己，錢總是收進來，就有分配的問題。好像有一些版本，但是我的瞭解是，後來大家研究，A建議：「我把錢往上丟，掉下來如果是人頭，那就是給教堂跟社區居民用；掉下來如果是字，那就可以給教堂及服侍人員一起使用。」B建議：「我們往上一丟，如果神明跟上帝拿走就拿走，剩下的都是我們使用（笑）。」" }, { "speaker": "林崇偉", "speech": "剛剛這一個案例具體而為展示了所謂社會或公益型或社會使命企業的重點——也就是分配。按照最早倡議社會企業的尤努斯來講，他是百分之百不分配，當然各國有一些其他發展，我自己一個簡單的看法是，我想如果是從鼓勵跟推動更多的人與資源及組織投入以社會型目的為主的社會價值創造，我想應該是儘量不要管制，儘量多用鼓勵的方式去進行。" }, { "speaker": "林崇偉", "speech": "特別是在以公司型社企為主的領域，這一個部分我就比較支持應該要制定相關的專章或者制定相關的法條，我覺得如果開辦社會企業隨著家屬越來越增加，在相關的區別度上、相關盈餘利潤分配使用上，甚至我今天看到黃教授所領導的團隊裡規範很清楚，還有一些公益訴訟相關機制等等，我想這就是一個我認為應該要設置的門檻。這裡面倒不是要掛羊頭賣狗肉或者魚目混珠，我的看法是因為要從事各種不同型態社會服務目的，事實上可以自己選擇或者以NPO的方式來進行，或者是開公司做社會企業的責任。某種程度上來講，如果真的是要以社會企業的方式進行，其實是背負著十字架，那是你自己選擇的。" }, { "speaker": "林崇偉", "speech": "所以剛剛佳霖有建議的項目裡，比如以我們公司來講，我們在我們的章程裡就制定了50％的盈餘部分，我們到今年創辦要三年，我們每一年其中50％是盈餘轉增資，表示沒有離開過這個公司，另外50％都徹底執行並進行分配，我們使用的方向在我們所倡議的身障者自立、科技技能培訓、社會參與活動及身障相關創新服務，我想這部分應該要明確地予以規範。" }, { "speaker": "林崇偉", "speech": "今天提供的書面意見裡面，王秉鈞老師有特別提到，我剛剛也有提到「如果要成立社會企業是要想清楚」—雖然我現在有點後悔（笑）—公司名字還鑲嵌進去（笑），如果假設後悔到一個極限，結束營業，就另起爐灶。但是如果選擇已經要成立了，在稅賦的優惠上，我倒覺得分三個面向來參考：" }, { "speaker": "林崇偉", "speech": "第一，我認為社會企業就是依法要納稅，因為是公司，所以應該做這一些事。" }, { "speaker": "林崇偉", "speech": "第二，通常稅賦有分成兩種，一種稅賦是這樣的，因為我們保留50％盈餘不分配，這不分配的盈餘得先被扣一次稅，然後再捐出去，這個部分有人認為應該取消，另外一種我也覺得可以當作社會企業捐，既然我選擇了這一個方式，我就配合稅法。" }, { "speaker": "林崇偉", "speech": "第三，另外一種所謂的租稅優惠，這一點其實跟過去不管是商業司或經濟部在推動各種產業發展時，一定會有的政策推動措施。也就是說，我可能是把它設計成在研發、創新或社會影響力上達到具體成果，或者每一年都會辦，我增加多少聘僱，我們現在也有聘僱獎勵租稅優惠的部分，在應繳所得稅、企業營所稅應該予以減免，這個我想是鼓勵企業持續成長很好的方式，基本上我對於稅賦的看法大概就在這裡。" }, { "speaker": "林崇偉", "speech": "當然政府在推動社企上有很多努力措施、輔導的機制或推動身處的社企聚落等等，我認為應該要持續。" }, { "speaker": "林崇偉", "speech": "另外，有關於公益報告書及自我機制部分，我想自律聯盟都做得很好，一開始為了保持其多元及多元性，不過我會建議是不是模仿B corp的方式，現在公益自律報告是各自表述—原本我很不願意寫—為什麼要寫行銷文件？我覺得是這樣。但是後來琬惠鞭策我們寫，我們就很認真寫（笑），也許我們設定一些是必填問題了，但是剛剛講分不同level的社企，像剛剛佳霖講得很有道理，其實很多公司剛開會遇到很多困難。我的意思是儘量不要讓它停在各自表述，第一年這樣做沒有關係，慢慢地設定一些資格在裡面，告訴他比如一年內或三年內必須要提高什麼，比如第一年簡單登錄，就像B corp，其實B corp已經填完所有的問題，有三百多題，也回答一堆，但像這個東西，臺灣人不可能、做不出來的。" }, { "speaker": "林崇偉", "speech": "其實這個也是做一些限制，是在不同的level做，將來自律的登錄可以好上加好，一開始是有初階的，還有一個level，也不用給他分數，好比不可能叫兔子跟烏龜比賽游泳，按照自己的track去走，該NPO還是會停留在NPO，我倒覺得政府政策有一點值得顧慮地方是，鼓勵NPO轉型社企，這其實應該尊重他自己的意願、能力去作選擇，有一個論述說因為政府財政無法負擔，我覺得這個不合理。真的啊！你接觸很多NPO，你問他委員去訪視的時候，都會說要發展社企，如果變成朋友跟他聊天的時候，他就說：「因為長官說要變成社企企業。」我覺得這個是我們一起往前推動時可以思考的方向，簡單跟各位報告，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "黃銘傑", "speech": "這是我們的助理，我們這一次都是依靠助理有效的協助。" }, { "speaker": "黃銘傑", "speech": "在助理發言之前我再解釋一下，我剛剛的用語可能不佳（笑），剛才一直講「評鑑社會企業」，「評鑑」兩個字我真的覺得不好，我心裡想的並不是「評鑑」二字，我想的是公眾審查的概念。換句話說，我們一直思考的是公益報告要一定格式或不一定格式或不要格式，就像大家所講的，如果未來社企發展的話，規模大小及種類都不一樣，同一個報告會妨礙阻礙他們的轉型、創業，甚至我們是不是一定要他們寫報告寫得洋洋灑灑（笑），像崇偉剛剛所講的痛苦感覺。因此，我們一直在思考的是，我們儘量不要規定規格，如果自己要做社會企業，你要怎麼寫、怎麼呈現就自己呈現，這一個公益報告最大的原則是揭露原則、資訊公開原則，我們未來會設計一個系統，把公益報告公開給大家來看，自然社會公眾大家會去審查。" }, { "speaker": "黃銘傑", "speech": "這其實跟未來公司登記系統的理念是一樣的，我們希望公司登記也不需要商業司再介入審查了。另外有一個理念是，商業登記是電子化，也就是公司人可以自己用自然人憑證等等就去變更其公司登記，商業司怎麼審查？本來不可能的事，可是登記錯誤的時候，很顯然我們希望社會大眾的交易相對人之任何其他競爭對手，甚至任何社會大眾覺得有問題，大家可以隨時向主管機關檢舉登記內容是錯誤的，不應該讓錯誤的登記內容繼續下去，而要求其更正。同樣的，我們希望公益報告藉由社會大眾的力量一起來審查，並確保不會做假。所以我說未來也許會有一個社會企業幫我們，是集合大家的力量或成立一個族群，大家有事沒事就一起來看公益報告的感覺。" }, { "speaker": "黃銘傑", "speech": "在這種情況之下，未來章程不會被審查了，像佳霖所講的，原來商業司就是要好好嚴格審查章程，所以要章程符合什麼規格，我們可能會跟一般公司章程，讓你章程自主、章程自由，但是大家一起會監督跟審查，這個是我們的理念，也不希望商業司在設立公司的時候就挑剔說這個不符合、那個不符合，這樣就跟公司法的理念不太一樣，這個是我們修法的一個思考方式。" }, { "speaker": "陳琬惠", "speech": "不好意思，第二次發言。因為老師講到公益報告書的部分，崇偉剛剛也說要搶先，免得等一下忘記了（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "陳琬惠", "speech": "我其實是支持老師剛剛的講法，因為我知道這一次公司法的立法精神是以低度管理，前面鬆、後面嚴，如果出事的話。我是認同的，這個是符合自律精神，現在公益團體的揭露也是這樣，所以我覺得分兩個部分來講：" }, { "speaker": "陳琬惠", "speech": "第一，從法面、低度管理來說，他只要講到這一件事是我們在意的，好比上市櫃之前，我在意這一件事，我覺得這樣就可以了。" }, { "speaker": "陳琬惠", "speech": "第二，再來進入自律機制，這個是要由第三方，像美國的watchdog，或者是要用認證，或者是採取聯盟的方式（類似公會組織）。" }, { "speaker": "陳琬惠", "speech": "我們公益團體怎麼做？我只知道他們，他們都是盟友。我們基本上的自律公約是採取共同討論的方式，我們想要怎麼揭露最好，大家一起來討論。再者，就像老師提到的，大家會各自寫出不一樣的版本之後大家會去看，像去年有二十家社會企業，像崇偉他們第一波寫出來，事實上很痛苦的，大家想一想，一個公司那麼大了，還要請一個事務所來幫忙寫CSR報告書，或者有一個CSR部門來寫，社企就這麼多人，要拼事業又要被我們逼迫，雖然很痛苦，但是他們願意花時間來寫。我自己看到的成果是，在這件事發生的一開始，我們找大家來討論到底要寫哪一些項目，這一些項目也是大家共同討論出來的。大家覺得這一個方向大致可以有一個框架，然後大家可以一起撰寫，我覺得這樣的過程當中，我覺得確實也會如佳霖提到的，像這一個公會組織或者是其他的可以產生的效果是可以自動分級，像聯盟公益團體也有分級，你叫1億元的去check自己的項目，跟1,000萬check是絕對不會一樣的，因此我們有分所謂的「初階」跟「進階」，當然未來要分更多級，而這個未來也會再討論。" }, { "speaker": "陳琬惠", "speech": "所以我們的guideline裡面就有分，是多少規模就自己check這一些項目，如果這1,000萬很想check進階，為什麼不可以？當然可以。但是我認為最好長這樣，自己可以再去學習。所以我覺得這個分兩個部分來講，在公益報告書裡面，我覺得語法的部分，我們就用低度的方式來揭露就好，但是如果回到外部未來一些細節或者像行政院經濟部中小企業處繼續支持社企這一個生態發展時，從政策面就可以有一些鼓勵的機制，讓它成立自己的公會也好，大家可以自己討論，或者有其他的所謂組織跑出來做這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "江永楨", "speech": "我先解釋一下這一份提議跟簡報，我是永楨，這次公司法修正的助理。我是代方老師來，因為方老師出國了，方老師跟黃老師主要負責處理這一個議題。" }, { "speaker": "江永楨", "speech": "前面有問到為什麼不稱「社會企業」立法？因為社會企業是很大的傘，下面有各式型態的社會企業，如果訂了一個法是社會企業立法的話，就會依照韓國經驗，他們訂了一個認證型的立法，只有他認證才是社會企業，重點是要在第1條寫說社會企業是為了要降低勞工失業率，這樣就完蛋了，社會企業就只有一種類型了。社會企業是繁花盛開的景象，因此我們不稱為社企立法。" }, { "speaker": "江永楨", "speech": "至於我們為什麼要稱為「兼益公司」？主要是針對G8工業國所做的報告，野心可能比社會企業更大，而是一個profit with purpose的企業，可以從社會企業孕育而出，可是不僅僅只是社會企業，以我來看，更像是一個社會企業創新，可以吸引更多資源，創造更大的社會影響力，比較像是大圓包小圓的社會企業關係，各位可以簡報第7頁、第8頁。" }, { "speaker": "王秉鈞", "speech": "你這樣講不就矛盾了嗎？" }, { "speaker": "江永楨", "speech": "我會跟您解釋。" }, { "speaker": "江永楨", "speech": "G8跟歐盟等國家成立一個社會影響力投資小組，在2014年的時候發布了一系列關於社會影響力的投資報告，其中有一篇比較重要的篇名叫做「社會影響力投資」，它是一個看不見的市場心臟，要如何駕馭創業、創新、資本及市場力量來投入公益，而其中一個支柱就是兼益企業。" }, { "speaker": "江永楨", "speech": "我們可以看到投影片第7張，大家知道社會企業這一個名詞除了臺灣、美國，全部都是限制於分配的，是一個偏向於NPO的概念，所以G8按照這一個脈絡，將社會企業定義為一個擁有社會影響力目的，而且具有部分鎖定資產的企業。可是它同樣也承認另外一種企業，也就是「兼益企業（profit with purpose）」，它跟社會企業是並立的，它有什麼資格可以跟「社會企業」併立？G8提出三個要件，這個是最低可以成為社會企業或者是兼益企業的要件，這個是社會使命的鎖定機制，這三個要件：第一，章程社會目的；第二，負責人有考量利害關係人義務；第三，定期揭露報告。這個是社會使命的鎖定機制，而在這下面可以包含社會企業與兼益企業，而兼益企業是沒有分配利潤的企業。" }, { "speaker": "江永楨", "speech": "所以，剛剛林創辦人不是說有一點後悔了嗎？如果新修法有通過的話，真的可以利用這一個組織，其實社會企業的廣義跟狹義概念，廣義會認為邊做好事、邊賺錢，狹義的是要將部分的利潤回歸於社會，像英國的CIC立法就是偏向左邊的框架，而美國的公益公司就是偏向於右邊的框架。這兩個框架可以混在一起看，就變成下面這一個脈絡，也就是大圓包小圓的概念。" }, { "speaker": "江永楨", "speech": "如果分開看的話，他們也不矛盾，因為剛剛英國有說到，除了CIC立法之外，也有一個想要推動Benefit Corporation的立法，這個是市場脈絡，我們覺得不矛盾，所以我們才會說這一次的野心更大。" }, { "speaker": "江永楨", "speech": "剛剛有考慮到為什麼想要寫出這一份立法建議？因為我們覺得臺灣的社會企業有一點亂，每一個人心裡都有一套社會企業定義，你可能覺得它是廣義或狹義。如何確保社會企業可以鎖定他們的使命？" }, { "speaker": "江永楨", "speech": "再來，經理人變動或者是所有者變動的時候，社會企業還可以一直從事他們的社會使命下去，所以我們覺得引入一套國際標準的最低標準——就是GE所認定的社會使命鎖定機制。" }, { "speaker": "江永楨", "speech": "我們的研究建議其實就是依照這三項再上去疊加一些要件，這一些要件都可以討論的，但是我們認為社會目的負責人考量利害關係人義務及定期揭露報告，這是最重要的三要件。" }, { "speaker": "江永楨", "speech": "至於社會公益報告書，就跟前面先進討論的一樣，我們討論的是希望依據組織規模大小的發展階段來訂定。之所以拋出兼益企業是因為它可以分配利潤的企業，而社會企業想要做的是將你的盈餘幾乎在大部分的投入回去社會使命的話，也可以利用兼益企業組織的章程中訂定。" }, { "speaker": "江永楨", "speech": "為什麼我們要分配利潤？主要是要吸引雙重投資人，如果可以分配利潤的話，政府就可以不用補助，等於建構了一套市場機制，讓市場驗證社會企業o不ok，因為有一個透明的標準，也是處於社會跟投資可能性的交接口，也是吸引了雙重方面的投資人。" }, { "speaker": "江永楨", "speech": "我們最後認為兼益公司可以為這一種具有使命的公司提供一個缺口，因為它有一套最低的明確標準規範，它是一個平台，打開了一個開口，讓民間資源自行流動，大家看到公益報告，就可以判斷到底誰才是真的社會企業，是才是真的有符合社會使命，主要就是這樣，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "楊琇雁", "speech": "我接著崇偉有意義的笑話（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "楊琇雁", "speech": "其實我們更早以前，大概五年前就有看過，希望可以修公益公司法，也就是整個新的法，並不是專章或者是單純公司法修法，因為其實它很指標性；然而我們自己內部講說是箭靶，其實也不是指標性（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "楊琇雁", "speech": "其實我們董事長去參加的時候只問了兩個問題，直接問主辦單位說：「你直接告訴我喜憨兒如果轉成社會企業，到底跟現在有什麼不一樣？」也沒有說有什麼好處，而是直接說有什麼不一樣。" }, { "speaker": "楊琇雁", "speech": "在內部的時候，董事長會直接跟我們說，像剛剛佳霖講到，對NPO來講是完全不分配，社會企業跟目前喜憨兒坐在哪裡？相對於喜憨兒來講，我們甚至部分可以拿來做盈餘分配，對NPO來講其實是相對容易的，因為我們本來是盈餘不分配，本來可以變成部分拿出來做更多的職工福利，或者是回饋到原本身心障礙的員工身上。" }, { "speaker": "楊琇雁", "speech": "我覺得當我們去考慮社會企業立法是不是影響NPO，我常常覺得它是一個迷思，常常討論會有一點倒果為因了，本質上去看真的對NPO不會有影響，因為NPO本來就是做社會使命，它的主要資源是來自於社會捐款，就本質上來看。" }, { "speaker": "楊琇雁", "speech": "就像喜憨兒來講，我們每一年大概有4億的營業收入，如果今天立法之後，我們有部分的事業做了不管是兼益公司或者其他任何型態立法下，對於喜憨兒有沒有不一樣的影響？就目前的法令來思考是沒有的，但是我們有更多需要可能因為公司法要去處理的一個部分。" }, { "speaker": "楊琇雁", "speech": "如果暫時不去思考NPO的型態，單純思考整個社會企業如何在臺灣發展的話，我其實一直強調一個問題是，我們得先很認真思考，尤其在座其實都是政府單位，我的政策目的到底為何？因為一定沒有一個法是完美的，一定有一個到底想要藉由這一個法，是讓更多的年輕人進來，或者讓更多的資源可以進來，來成就我的目的？所以我們要先撇開NPO會得到什麼或者是現在的社會企業可以得到什麼，因為涉及到立法，而政策目的就非常非常重要，因此我每一次都會問：所以政策目的到底是什麼？我到底要把我的資源放在哪裡？" }, { "speaker": "楊琇雁", "speech": "目前的修法其實就像剛剛黃老師所講的，如果我只涉及組織法，我其實動得不多，基本上就是一個象徵性的意義，因為剛剛所講到所有的作用在政策上要開放多少，讓這一些被組織所涉及的單位受益，就會回到後續的政策上配搭。但是就這一個法本身，如果只修第1條跟第23條，而沒有任何政策的配搭、對於現況沒有任何實質上的改變，但仍然有象徵性的意義，也就是開放公司並不是單純只是以營利為目的。" }, { "speaker": "王秉鈞", "speech": "如果立法是立社會企業法，是要引導所有社會企業往社會發展，這個就有政策目的。" }, { "speaker": "楊琇雁", "speech": "我的意思是，它就促進我們的企業去思考。" }, { "speaker": "楊琇雁", "speech": "這裡會回到第二個問題，是社會企業或者是企業社會責任，就會回到實質上為什麼需要有社會使命的鎖定機制，這個就鎖定哪一些的條件符合這個政策所要去作用的地方。" }, { "speaker": "楊琇雁", "speech": "剛剛佳霖提到比例資料，我會覺得本身作為NPO來講，去恐懼社會企業立法的這一件事是假議題，因為本身就是兩個很大不同的區塊跟領域，就算NPO來做營業事業，我對外訴求的目標還是在於今天我的服務目的、社會福利目的，但是社會企業要競爭的時候，一定得從產品，我相信還是佔一半以上的目的；只是就喜憨兒來講，我們在產品上，市場機制為我們自己本身的標準，在這一塊上我們去學習與想辦法跟上市場機制。因此，我會希望NPO的這個部分大家可以先區隔。" }, { "speaker": "楊琇雁", "speech": "再者，如果回到社會企業本身，如果今天王老師這邊提到的，我希望能夠讓更多的企業可以去回應或去思考社會使命，我覺得立法很簡單，也就是修這兩條，重點會回到其他相關部門要怎麼用政策部分去促進跟作用，這一塊其實就很多元化了。在社會企業這一個名稱上，我理解永楨這邊的意思，如果未來我是用社會企業立法，也就是我的專章是社會企業的話，未來喜憨兒基本上就不能稱為社會企業了，因為立法在公司法裡面，所以不會是一個概念性的用法，會變成是一個法令性用法，這一次名詞被訂在法裡面。就像我們自己常常講到「庇護工廠」這四個字，之前其實是管放性的用法，社福單位也可以用、勞政單位也可以用，後來被立法在勞政單位的專用，其他就要想出另外一個名稱去區隔庇護工廠，這只是大家在思考上，如果要把社會企業拿來作專章，勢必喜憨兒會再叫「NPO產業化」嗎？也就是會有各循出路的思考方向。一樣回到政策立法是什麼？只要政府想清楚了就去做，因為沒有一個法是完美的。" }, { "speaker": "江永楨", "speech": "剛剛有提到社會企業跟兼益企業，他們可以統稱為「社會使命型企業」，這個是歐洲狹義脈絡下所出來的兩個概念，如果臺灣用最廣義的話，就變成第8頁的圖了，每個人心裡都有一套社會企業，看你怎麼想。" }, { "speaker": "江永楨", "speech": "社會企業本來就是一個括弧，營利要與社會併行或者營利要服膺於社會目的？在此先不談NPO型態。我們現在談的是公司型態的社企，要profit with purpose或者profit for purpose，而他們可以在裡面選擇定位，就像第8頁的圖，所以這個法案比較像是…" }, { "speaker": "王秉鈞", "speech": "…你講的我們都很清楚，不需要重複。" }, { "speaker": "楊琇雁", "speech": "我想先提一個部分，因為你只從G8的脈絡去看這個，你沒有回到原始社會企業的定義，OECD的脈絡，其實G8是追隨這一個脈絡去訂為了國家經濟發展所訂出來的東西，所以會偏向社會創新。我想所有的創新是促進社會經濟發展很重要的東西，但是不代表真正具有社會企業的真正精髓與價值，這個是第一個要釐清的東西。" }, { "speaker": "楊琇雁", "speech": "現在再看狹義跟廣義，其實已經被社企行動方案框架框住了。如果今天要真正討論社會企業，其實我們要看全世界的脈絡，包括OECD研究報告裡面所提到的，OECD對於社會企業有十一項指標…" }, { "speaker": "王秉鈞", "speech": "所以實際上，剛剛講邏輯上有問題，最大的是你講的兼益企業，你現在講說如果我們訂法的話，你把最大的框拿來作定義的話，那就會有問題啦！實際上社會企業如果被你定義在裡面框架的話，那其實還不如用社會企業來使用會比較好，這個名詞定義，我們剛剛已經講了，很多人都已經講了，你要提一個新名詞，你要花很大的成本，而這一個新名詞就會像助理提的一樣，很難說服很多人，還不如用原來的社會企業，你給予一個明確的定義，其實就是兼益企業，然後要臺灣其他人來接受這樣的定義，我覺得也都可以接受。" }, { "speaker": "王秉鈞", "speech": "現在主要的問題是，實際上在過去的研究裡面也有，我們也曾經接受國發會的前身做了一個研究，題目是「臺灣非營利組織社會企業化可行性分析」，結果最後我們的結論是：臺灣非營利組織根本就不需要做社會企業化。為什麼？因為現在用NPO的身份就可以做他所做的事情，他何苦來做社會企業？他不需要去做。" }, { "speaker": "王秉鈞", "speech": "但是臺灣有沒有需要去推動社會企業？其實社會企業還是有需求的，就像剛剛執行長提出來的，實際上是我們的政策目的希望提供臺灣社會一個鼓勵的方向，我們希望所有的企業都變成社會企業，因為社會目的其實太重要了，而資本主義發展到末期，會變成美國的樣子，會造成社會非常大的對立，而且是沒有解的；反而社會企業是一個解，因為它可以回饋社會，可以變成正向的活動或發展，而且讓所有人都注意到這個，因此這個才叫做政策目的。" }, { "speaker": "王秉鈞", "speech": "之前為什麼大家會想說前任政府有提出幾個口號，如「先緩立法」，為什麼？我覺得最大的根結是不要去修法，如果新政府有心想要修法的話，其實之前在所謂緩衝期已經夠了，有三、五年了，其實要放長一點的話，也很久了，臺灣的社會企業也發展滿久了。因此，所謂的自由發展已經有了，現在更好是可以做結論的時候，而且把力量重新集中起來，我們可以輔導社會企業發展，我們也就可以比較清楚的定位，所有的社會企業也可以想要做哪一些事，就比如在那邊混淆或者在那邊做其他的遐想，所以我覺得這應該是滿重要的想法。" }, { "speaker": "林志憲", "speech": "其實這一個部分，確實我之前有接觸到社會企業當初成立的部分，我知道那時是馮燕政委在主導，事實上念法律的人會覺得公司不能只「以營利為目的」，因此就有這個概念。" }, { "speaker": "林志憲", "speech": "後來參加修法小組，委員都研究得很透徹，也很認真，我們對業界需求並不是那麼清楚，很感謝今天委員都辦了這一個活動，我想概念的釐清，其實後續行政部門會更聚焦，以上說明。" }, { "speaker": "李文雄", "speech": "在商業司中小企業處對相關意見的回應以前，我簡單整理一下剛剛社會企業界先進們的意見，基本上，。。。如果我說錯的話，或者語意上有問題的話，麻煩指正我。" }, { "speaker": "李文雄", "speech": "如果我們現在單從修第1條、第23條的法條來看，這樣修正基本上是不會有意見的，但是前提是，如果修這個法，政府的政策目的在哪裡？也就是我們現在修這一個法必定是我們有政策目的，希望有一個明確的目標來建構社會企業生態圈，但是現在我們有什麼方向？比如像王老師剛剛說的，我們已經發展了很多年了，可能必須要在這個地方進行下一個階段，但是我們政府方面已經準備好了沒有？我們現在準備的配套措施是什麼？我們想要努力的方向是哪個方向？如果明確的話，修法就有它的政策目的。修法法條是沒有問題，但是政策目的在哪裡？" }, { "speaker": "李文雄", "speech": "所以我現在要強調的是，在中企處跟商業司發表意見之前，我先整理一下剛剛社會企業界先進們的意思，沒有錯吧？" }, { "speaker": "黃銘傑", "speech": "我補充一下，我還是要再強調一下，如果只修第1條跟第23條，我覺得政策目的沒有那麼強，我只是解開原有社會企業跟公司利用的桎梏而已，本來要用公司型態來從事社會企業，那是很困難的，未來會有一個政策目的。如果真的要訂定專章的話，我們要問是什麼樣的政策目的？換句話說，現在政府要全力推動社會企業，就像剛剛王老師所講的，我們訂一個專章是象徵性的作用非常地強，現在我們對於公司的思考模式跟過去資本主義是不一樣的，而政府也樂見往這個方向發展。因此要說清楚，如果只修正第1條跟第23條政策意義沒有那麼明顯，過去很多社會企業與公司來設立，可能會不小心，會有違法之虞，我們不要讓社會企業從業者有這樣的問題，但是如果真的要訂定專章，才會有很大的政策意義及象徵性，真的並不是規範社會企業必須要怎麼樣做，而是配合國家整體在廣泛推動社會企業的政策，我們在公司法裡面訂一個基本的組織法，原來政府的政體其實是有在關心社會企業這一塊。這個是我的理解，這樣可能會比較好一點，不然第1條、第23條修正的話，好像賦予它太大的政策意涵。" }, { "speaker": "胡美蓁", "speech": "王老師跟在座很多先進今天給修正公司法很多指教，像林崇偉老師在我第一次參加會議時，給我一些期待（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "胡美蓁", "speech": "商業司負有很大的職務，一個是公司登記，一個是公司法的法治，躬逢其盛我都有參與這兩個業務。" }, { "speaker": "胡美蓁", "speech": "我首先要說明的是，當初在配合社企行動綱領的時候，商業司在公司登記這一塊，完全比照現行一般公司的登記審查，並沒有特別去做一些規範，因為當時主要的方向還是要多鼓勵、多輔導。但是如同黃老師所講的，大家一直會有一個疑問是，修第1條大家好像會存疑，有人很擔心又多第23條，因此老師們在疑義修公司法的時候，有提出低度規範、中度規範及高度規範，並參考國外的立法例。我想最終所有的法還是要配合實務需求，也很高興今天有這一個機會來聽聽大家的意見，如同黃老師所講的，第1條跟第23條只是把現行做法就大家疑慮的部分作明確的釋疑，讓大家這一條社會企業其實是ok的，在公司法架構下是ok的，這個是最低度給大家很好走向的路。如果有更多期待的話，我們就想要瞭解一下。" }, { "speaker": "胡美蓁", "speech": "就剛才主持人問政策目的的部分，我們也要請教中企處在輔導方面有沒有一些想法，但是其實我們以公司法現在研議階段的立法政策，我們也想聽聽大家的意見，因為各位站在最前線，對於講的政策目的有沒有什麼樣的期待，也可以提供我們作為一個未來思考跟立法政策上的參考，我想現在政府很強調大家彼此的溝通，很感謝余委員提供這一個機會，雖然在其他的場合有跟各位先進有一些接觸，既然今天大家一起在這邊討論，希望可以有更多的收獲。" }, { "speaker": "胡美蓁", "speech": "看中小企業處有沒有要再補充，因為他們接觸的機會比我們多很多。" }, { "speaker": "林昱奇", "speech": "主席、各位先進大家好，我是經濟部中小企業處政策規劃組科長林昱奇，今天很榮幸能夠跟本處創業育成組的黃科長共同參與這一個座談會。" }, { "speaker": "林昱奇", "speech": "中小企業處在配合行政院推動社會企業行動方案到現在已經三年了，對於怎麼樣去營造有利於社會企業發展的生態環境，我相信我們已經展現初步的成果，未來我們也可以繼續推動有利於營造社會企業發展的政策。" }, { "speaker": "林昱奇", "speech": "關於今天討論的主題，其實在今年11月1日由唐鳳政委主持召開社會企業行動方案第十次的聯繫會議，也是唐鳳政委第一次主持的聯繫會議，事實上對於這一個題目已經有所報告及討論。" }, { "speaker": "林昱奇", "speech": "公司法的主管機關，尤其是商業司的長官在會中就社企型的公司在公司法全盤修正的過程中之相關立法政策與評估有一些說明，那一次的會議決議有提到要把相關的評估方案放到「vTaiwan」平台上再討論。主要的目的是希望再廣徵各位的意見，基本上中小企業處對於社會企業的立法政策來講，我們認為只要有利於推動社會企業發展的政策方向，我們都樂觀其成，而且我們也很開心、尊重各界能夠對於這一個議題的討論；公司法主管機關商業司之立法政策方向，中小企業處原則上也會予以尊重。以上簡單報告，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "吳佳霖", "speech": "其實我有一點想要反饋黃老師，公司法第1條修正有很大的政策利益，其實是在鼓勵所有新創、想要改變社會的年輕人，可以用社會型態去做社會改革，我覺得這是很重大的意義，當然也解套崇偉老師或夥伴，他們成立公司之後，其實第1條跟第23條是相對應的東西，第1條是營利為目的，第2條是善盡保管的職責，要守護股東的權益。當營利分配上不符合股東權益時，我可能就違反第1條及第23條，這一些社企單位就會被告，尤其當它大到可以公開上市、上櫃，現在在創櫃版還是有股東的部分。" }, { "speaker": "吳佳霖", "speech": "其實第1條的政策意義也是解套現在很多公司型社企一個很重要的政策意義，並不是代表沒有意義的，其實我個人覺得專章反而造成的政策意義未必正向，我們可以去評估，其實國外現在有立法的國家或區域都面臨了困境，如果去研究的話，甚至於他們都要調整掉。法學老師及參事在這邊，所有立法第一個要定義清楚與明確，要清楚知道主體為何？請問在座有誰可以把社會企業這一個主體解釋清楚跟定義清楚？" }, { "speaker": "吳佳霖", "speech": "既然很難定義清楚，再加上國外這麼多元性與國際性的定義，不管OECD或EMES的定義，這兩個研究單位其實是引領全世界各個發展國家經濟發展、社會發展很重要的東西，連聯合國都要強調要依照這兩個研究機構的研究報告做一些事。" }, { "speaker": "吳佳霖", "speech": "各個國家都在參考這兩個國家的定義去做政策或社會企業或社會創新發展依據時，我們好像把它給丟了，本題的精神及價值，我覺得才是需要思考的東西。早些年曾經跟一些法學去討論一些相關立法的東西，對我們來說，立法最根本的就是要明確清楚界定那個到底是什麼，在現階段如果這樣繼續爭吵界定，對社企的發展一點好處都沒有，甚至於我們跟國際接軌都是很重大的議題。" }, { "speaker": "吳佳霖", "speech": "老實說我們期待之前的行動方案第一個「調法規」，其實我們期待調的是公司法，真的是解套第1條，新創的這一群社企創業家，他未必要創立一個基金會或協會，老實說我們現在鼓勵很多社區產業協會去註冊公司，為什麼？社區產業就是發展社會企業的一環，產品已經夠成熟、服務夠成熟，如果繼續用社團法人的協會型態，其實會造成很大的問題，因為社團法人最多兩屆就要改選，有了利益組織裡面的合作，社會資本就會被破壞掉，就會失去我們所謂社會價值、公共價值與共同利益的問題。" }, { "speaker": "吳佳霖", "speech": "所以公司法如果沒有調，我這一些夥伴組織要去註冊一個公司時，當然我們目前都有找到解套方式去處理第1條及第23條的議題，但到底這樣的方式是再教我們如何在法規上求生存？或者我們應該正大開放社會企業友善發展的空間？" }, { "speaker": "吳佳霖", "speech": "我覺得基本上社會企業的政策發展，並不是僅限於國發會或者是經濟部的事情，如果以英國來說，是在國務院的工作，也就是行政院院級的工作，如果依照這一個角度去思考政策我們有哪一些可以改的，其實王老師提到當初協會做這一個報告，我們當時還被審查委員說我們太勇敢了，從來沒有人做政策研究報告，第一個竟然提不立法，以政策取代立法。從全世界發展脈絡去看的話，法並不是這樣訂的，從政策上可以友善環境，自各個面向去包裹這樣的東西，符合社企在每一個階段發展過程的需求及協助，臺灣的社企會很漂亮，甚至走到國際型。" }, { "speaker": "吳佳霖", "speech": "像我們這一次去香港參加的時候，發現我們很多社區夥伴的東西都可以跟國際接軌，甚至於走到國際化的部分，但是我們有哪一些政策支持他們國際化的發展？其實我覺得我們的社企夥伴很辛苦的一件事是，可能還小到不到中小企業處可以幫忙的階段，所以他們在專業發展、品牌設定各方面很多都要自己土法煉鋼，自己想辦法去做一些事。其實臺灣有很多很棒的東西或產品值得跟國際接軌，我們在國際接軌上協助的是什麼？如何讓我們的產品走到國際？" }, { "speaker": "吳佳霖", "speech": "我覺得這一點反而是在整個政策上，我一直很反對設法，我連在課堂上對外發言全部都反對設專法跟立法，原因是我們很明確知道，法就明確定義就可以吵翻天，而造成的問題是內耗，也就是我們社企夥伴彼此間跟NPO間吵翻了，但是吵翻的意義是什麼？大家不如把吵架的時間拿來做事情，把我的組織發展更好，讓國際看到臺灣的不同、多元性與發展性，這才是我們想要的東西。" }, { "speaker": "吳佳霖", "speech": "在這樣的過程，其實我想大部分很多社企夥伴不太喜歡出來參與政策的討論，因為有時會被學者的一堆名詞搞混了，像剛剛一提到「G8」，我們的社企夥伴就傻住了，什麼是「G8」？我們還搞不清楚什麼是「G8」。不可否認我們很多社企夥伴真的沒有那麼多時間去管這一些東西，因此他在這一個場合就很難發言，我們的學術名詞太深了，要不是我自己本身的論文研究、這幾年做社企研究，及社會企業個案研究，今天討論的東西也未必有真實性的。" }, { "speaker": "吳佳霖", "speech": "我想今天如果討論公司法的部分，就回到公司型的社會需求是什麼？我如何滿足這一個需求？在政策上給他的好處是什麼？如果我們下一步要討論的是，整個臺灣社會企業發展上的想法與需求，我想那就是另外更廣泛的部分，就不會侷限於一個修法的部分。好比要修庇護工廠的法，我覺得我們就要去調整了。還有優先採購法也需要調整，現在大家都說社會企業可以納入優先採購，基本上優先採購的真實性，我們在座都很清楚，並沒有想像的美好，既然沒有那麼美好，那就是美麗的謊言，既然是美麗的假象跟謊言，這都是很值得討論的東西。" }, { "speaker": "吳佳霖", "speech": "Ffocus回來公司法調整，我覺得第1條具有政策宣示性，我鼓勵目前新創社會可以考慮走社會企業的方向，而不是永遠在營利思維，老實說現在所有的組織成立，哪一個沒有社會目的？企業成立也有社會目的，也有看到社會需求去做改變並成立公司，只是最後最終目的是賺大錢，在個人利益的小我部分。社會企業跟NPO是追求大我的部分，那個精神價值要抓得很準確，不然我覺得不管立法或者是修法上，只要這個精神價值不見了，我們後續的政策走向全部都會偏了，彼此間將來要如何討論下去，我覺得都要好好思考一下。" }, { "speaker": "陳琬惠", "speech": "因為佳霖講得很好，所以我要給她讚聲（台語）一下。" }, { "speaker": "陳琬惠", "speech": "基本上她講出我們的心聲，講的非常實在。今天有逐字稿，這也非常好。" }, { "speaker": "陳琬惠", "speech": "我原先的立場跟佳霖是一樣的，我並不贊成在現階段要討論社會企業要入法的這一件事，包含大家討論混淆的部分，CSR跟社會企業，我覺得一家公司願意為社會好的事，程度從一分到一百分都很好，就在公司法下。所以剛剛前面幾位前輩都有提到，我們所謂政府政策在立法上想要宣示的意義是什麼，這一件事我覺得是我們會看重的。" }, { "speaker": "陳琬惠", "speech": "剛剛黃老師一開始就講了，我們希望社會企業良善的進步樣貌可以變成一種指標性的引導，如果從這樣的方向來看，我們希望未來公司在利己、利他的比例上開始移動，過去到底是先利己或者是利他？可能有一些錢之後拿出來利他。如果從第一天就要開始利他的時候，我覺得從立法上修第1條，在這個部分可以做非常好的引導性，管它是社會企業或者是公司要多少比例拿出來去做利他，因為現在很多企業的CSR比例也非常高，台積電也做得非常好，也沒有人說台積電做得不好。一放進去這個部分之後，我覺得公司整個對社會的開闊性跟思考性是展開的。" }, { "speaker": "陳琬惠", "speech": "剛剛佳霖也有提到，以世界趨勢來說，韓國是最早立法，就圈住，因此死得很慘，所以韓國的社會企業存活率，他們每一年修法，修到想要把法都撤了。英國的講法是他們做了十幾年才能思考立法的事情，老師也提到時間夠久，其實真的還不久，我自己接觸社企兩年，跟大家報告，其實沒有一套標準，我們有一個諮詢委員會，也是反覆討論，我每一次都像在口試一樣，我去認識這一家社企之後要非常清楚他的社會目的、解決社會問題是什麼、改變社會現況是什麼，及社會創新是什麼，我用非常多項目去找出。還證明他真的能夠活下來，並不是今天你來之後，他一個月之後就倒掉了，然後送進委員會之後，大家反覆交互詰問問到底他符合不符合社會目的。" }, { "speaker": "陳琬惠", "speech": "如果從這樣來看就會有佳霖所講的，我們現階段用專章下去，就把它箝制住的時候，我認為是箝制，未來可以討論，如果那個樣貌已經非常確定，我現在覺得臺灣社會企業的樣貌還不確定，因為它是一個滾動式的企業，我們常常會說社會企業是動詞，像崇偉的產品已經不知道拉了多少條，不同的帳別出來、不同的餐廳，已有非常多的產品，因為他因應社會的改變，從第一天就一直不斷在變。因此我贊成佳霖的部分是，因為社會企業的樣貌非常創新，在這一個階段發展並不是那麼成熟，因此如果以政策上宣示來說，我贊成先從第1條給他社會的字樣性，在整個思考上，管它在公司的哪一條線，也就是為社會好利他的部分，可以思考一分至一百分，也可以像歐萊德那樣，做一做之後往回做，所以歐萊德很難辯識到底算不算社會企業，他原來就做那樣的產品，突然做一個產品是純天然思考，那麼它屬於在哪一個項目裡面？所以在這一個階段，就我的意見，我希望先在第1條的部分。" }, { "speaker": "王秉鈞", "speech": "我跟她的意見不太一樣，佳霖反對設專法，現在講了以後，連專章都不願意設的話，那就連名稱都不需要提所謂的社會企業了，這樣的修法就非常地簡單，但是就沒有所謂政策性及指標。" }, { "speaker": "王秉鈞", "speech": "我們講社會企業，其實如果現在不訂一個專章的話，下一次再回來訂一個專章的機會，其實是沒有的，不知道什麼時候會再訂。像各位看我們的執法單位一開始堅決不能動的，現在假設有機會動，放一個專章在裡面，指導意義是比較清楚的。專章為什麼黃教授說反對？放進去其實就把這幾個章程，公益董事、公益報告及評鑑審查組織放進去，在這裡規範會比較清楚。" }, { "speaker": "王秉鈞", "speech": "而他並不是要規範一個你要如何做一個新創公司，他是給你一個架構，這本身是一個組織架構，如果可以從組織架構上擺出去的話，我們就可以曉得社會企業要如何做，如果立法沒有立這一個東西進去，這整個改革就沒有所謂社會企業的意義在裡頭了，你只不過放寬營利為目的，就放寬其他為目的，就解除其他人的那個，但對於所謂引導性的作用就沒有了，我覺得這樣滿可惜的。" }, { "speaker": "王秉鈞", "speech": "佳霖引導說我們做那個報告是不要立法，那是在整個當時氛圍下說不要立法的，但是我覺得如果我們要有一個政策的話，那就需要立法，如果沒有社會企業，那就不要立法，現在在做的這一件事，其實本身就是在做立法行為，就算改變那幾個字，也算是立法，而不是不立法，只不過要改革的程度有多大。臺灣的社會企業目前到一個地步是，做了很多形式，像喜憨兒的NPO，很多人說它是社會企業，一百多個符合社會企業的，其實有公司登記的沒有到一百多個，最多二、三十個就很了不起了。像生態綠照理講應該是社會企業，結果登記成農產公司，是有自己的考量。" }, { "speaker": "王秉鈞", "speech": "在這樣的定義下，如果沒有清楚定義，臺灣社會企業發展就不會有一個清楚的政策方向，除了我們說做一些規範之外，立法還有一些引導的作用，如果我們有一個專章出來，那就引導社會企業發展的作用。至於會不會是箝制所有立法的方向？剛剛也有提到說韓國箝制了，是因為增加勞工的目的之下，當然就箝制其作為。如果我們現在定義的話，因為公益本身就沒有很清楚定義，我們只是定義結構化，對於新創企業的影響，應該並沒有那麼大，因此我認為如果真的要做這個的話，專章考量，我覺得還是應該要加進去，也就是這樣的話，那才是完整的立法。其實不管怎麼樣，修法其實也就是一種立法行為，並不能說不要立法。" }, { "speaker": "王秉鈞", "speech": "另外我再強調一下，是在當時那一個氛圍底下，大家認為很難改，因此才認為不要立法。" }, { "speaker": "黃銘傑", "speech": "我這邊補充，有時國內會講社會企業立法失敗的例子很多，我記得那時我還在國外，但是在國外的時候，非常憂心國內的發展，因此我還是會在國外看國內的一些報導，那時剛好也在講說千萬不要社會企業立法，否則會箝制社會企業發展，甚至印度社會企業立法也失敗了。" }, { "speaker": "黃銘傑", "speech": "我一定要跟大家強調一次，他們所謂的法跟我們今天所討論的法是不一樣的，換句話說，我們一直在強調所謂韓國的社會企業法，根本不是非常純粹的組織法，作用法非常強勢，而且政府已經在法律裡面把社會企業發展的方向給僵住了，這一種法我們當然不能加以肯定，甚至我們也不主張一定要引進國內所稱的印度社會企業立法，即跟政府的政策做就對了，我覺得這一種思考模式是不對的，我們本來就是在非常多元化、創新的社會理念，政府其實要培養友善社會企業很容易發展的環境，而不需要跟社會企業講說要如何發展。" }, { "speaker": "黃銘傑", "speech": "因此我們在思考社會企業立法時，一定要講清楚，我們並不是設作用法，而不是讓政府很明顯介入跟社會企業要如何發展的那一種法，我們真的很簡單只有一個組織法而已，因此大家可以看出來組織法並沒有什麼成功跟失敗的問題，這個是我個人的認為。有沒有專章都一樣，有人可以用專章來成立公司，但是縱使有這一個專章的時候，仍然有很多公司可以不利用這一個專章，以億一般公司來成立並實現他們的社會目的，因此這一個專章未來並不會有成功或不成功的問題，因此剛剛說這一個專章設與不設，其實是政府的整個大方向，我跟王老師思考是同一個方向，這一個專章如果要設立的話，政府要給我們一個很大的願景，也就是營造一個很大的社會企業空間，而這一個專章只是一個象徵性、指導性的引導作用，不會因為這一個專章訂了之後，社會企業就規模發展，必須要有各種不同政策的配合。" }, { "speaker": "黃銘傑", "speech": "我們真的不堅持要立不立法，不立法對我來講更好，我不用思考未來如何協調（笑），因為立法組織法並不會有成功或失敗，並不會像各位所講的會不會重現外國社會企業立法失敗 的現象，只是多一個選擇，你多一個選擇要用我們社會專章的企業或者是用一般公司也可以做社會企業，這個是完全自由的，以上是我想跟大家補充的。" }, { "speaker": "林崇偉", "speech": "我還是要強調一次，自律聯盟的報告在這一個階段很重要。我也要呼應秉鈞老師，我覺得過去三年是必要的，我跟王秉鈞、黃老師的看法一致，我認為這個立法是劃出路徑，簡單來講，我們也知道以前入軍校的時候，貪生怕死、莫入此門。你應該是要往這邊走，後面所有的支持性行動才可以起來，我覺得當我們思考臺灣社會面對的時候，大家都會把問題糾在一起，我們要不要支持創新創業？一定要啊！但是創新創業有很多種，有科技型的、網路性的及社會性的，這一個東西我覺得我們所謂多元，不應該多元就亂七八糟，而是讓它擁有多元的路徑可走，這一個路徑是非營利組織，也就是按照既有的非營利組織，社會企業選擇的就是社會企業，大的公司也只要是社會企業，因此也是分得很清楚。" }, { "speaker": "林崇偉", "speech": "在這裡面歷經過去幾年來的努力，我們也許為這一件事劃一條道路，正因為我們看到其他國家，如韓國，看到他們立法的局限性，各位也不要認為我們用外國人的角度去看它，就認為它是失敗的，在當初寫條文的時候，一定有其政策願景跟什麼，比如社會企業就是推動它的勞動力，因此在過程中，我記得早年去勞動部參訪的時候，也看到很好的成果，所以還是一樣，我分幾個問題的結構：第一，劃出明確的路徑；第二，稅捐的部分按照王秉鈞老師的講法，應該以這一個為榮，至於被收去的稅要怎麼做，那可以再討論，如果可以證明這50％全部用掉，不收你稅才可以，也不能說這50％要捐出去結果沒有捐，然後又不收稅，這樣怪怪的，這就去抵。所以，對於我們看到很美麗的狀態，我們可以用其他的輔導機制去支持青年或農業領域，但我還是要跟各位說，牧師的笑話是，上帝的歸上帝、凱撒的歸凱撒，這個是很清楚的。" }, { "speaker": "林崇偉", "speech": "如果我們繼續以現在方式往前進，有可能因為操作不當，把整個產業就毀掉，這個是很有可能的，尤其越來越多。各位記得第一間成立的社會企業，如果沒有錯的話就是「光原」，它被寫在社會企業的牆壁上，我自己做夢沒有想到第一間倒閉的社會企業關閉的竟然是我們傳播界的「新頭殼」，其實我那一天看到滿驚訝的。" }, { "speaker": "江永楨", "speech": "還有天水茶？" }, { "speaker": "林崇偉", "speech": "比他更先，後來他掛了。還有四方只是轉組，也許可以試試看劃路徑，但只是討論，大家的想法是要靠討論去溝通，我只是提供我的意見供各位參考。" }, { "speaker": "江永楨", "speech": "我想跟大家分享，為了真正寫出這一份建議，主要是蒐集了很多的意見，其實初衷就是想要知道怎樣的公司是好公司，希望引入國際性的最低原則標準，讓它變成一個標竿，讓全部的人都看見，鼓勵投資人及創業家投入，甚至鼓勵所有的人都可以看齊，希望我們的公司都是好公司。" }, { "speaker": "江永楨", "speech": "我再回到我們當初蒐集到的意見，第一個主要是資金來源，像昨天是社企行動方案的成果發表…" } ]

[ { "speaker": "曾依璇", "speech": "你上任已經兩個多月了，有什麼心得嗎？或者是跟原來預期不一樣的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我上任之前一整個月的時間其實是在跟社會各界討論，我透過公開回應的方式，雖然人在巴黎，但是我一方面跟巴黎做開放政府的朋友們討教，但是一方面也正在跟國內的記者們以及跟國內的公民社會朋友們討教。因為所有人都可以來wiselike上面問我問題，然後我又跟g0v有開一個共筆，因此這兩個夾雜之下，我會很具體說我能夠做什麼、我的能力能夠到哪裡，整個社會都會給我期待，也就是用問題的形式提出期待，甚至還有收到公務員的爆料。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以在一整個月的切磋下來，其實我對於我進政府能做到什麼，以及一開始應該要做什麼、最後要做到什麼程度，其實跟整個公民社會及媒體界都已經有類似社會契約的東西出來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "而我當然也是拿這個去跟院長討論說，我能不能只做這些事，別的事情不需要我做？院長也是很支持，所以我覺得我當時入閣的那天，兩邊的社會契約寫出來的東西，跟我進去實際做的完全沒有任何差別，就是因為我覺得有一整個月的時間準備，包含想要加入我工作團隊朋友們的組成等等。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果沒有這一整個月的準備，我覺得一定會有意料之外的情形，但是因為準備了一個月，所以到目前都跟兩個月前設想的狀況幾乎完全相同的。" }, { "speaker": "曾依璇", "speech": "我把比較薄的筆記本拿出來，而且等一下其他的問題比較嚴肅一點。" }, { "speaker": "曾依璇", "speech": "刊登時通常我會修，因為不是每個人都像你講話那麼有條理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然，你最後刊載的時候，可以用任何方式來調整。" }, { "speaker": "曾依璇", "speech": "那首先還是要總結一下這三天會議的收獲，然後有什麼是可以立即應用在臺灣的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "事實上，我自己的特質是我比較關心能夠貢獻什麼，而不是能夠擁有或者得到什麼，所以其實臺灣這幾年來做開放政府的經驗，非常多人喜歡去使用，那尤其像零時政府註冊了一個叫做「g0v.tw」的網址，能夠讓政府網站以及公民社會所做的對這個替代網站並列，他們覺得很有趣就是：公民社會幫台北市或者是幫中央政府寫了預算視覺化，可是台北市政府又會把它的網址轉指到公民社會，這一件事他們覺得是新的創造性的公民協作的模型。不管是羅馬尼亞或巴西的朋友，他們都說回去看能不能做類似一樣的事情，那這個是一個具體對臺灣大家的貢獻。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "還有就是沒有人跟我一樣，就是在政府裡面做這種我們叫做「基進式透明（radical transparency）」，就是我每一場採訪、每一場會，所有的東西都逐字公開。之前只有在地方政府，或者是少數小規模的會議，或者是大型的國際會議，才會這樣做。國際型的會議做這樣是標準配備，但在這兩個中間的一般行政事務，很少人這樣做，所以大家都很有興趣，也很想瞭解我用哪些人工智慧或者哪些電腦跟專業者的輔助，才能做到這個程度，所以中間用的一些工具也非常多人感興趣、非常多人分享。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，其實我這一次來，臺灣同時有接近二十位公民社會以及各界、各部門的朋友們來，他們自己會去分散去每一個議程，所以其實現在我們正在講話的同時，他們正在做報告，就是每一個人把聽到的、學到的東西跟其他人講，所以我覺得要說學到什麼的話，在那一個場合發聲的才是真正整個公民社會跟公部門學到的東西；我自己的話，真的是以分享為主。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我學到的，比較是各國政府在裡面進行公部門內部創新時，他們碰到的挑戰，好比像英國GDS、法國的Etalab、美國的18F及USDS，以及義大利的一些經驗分享。像澳洲也有一個跟GDS一樣的組織。他們都是為了開放，在政府內部組成了大部分是年輕人這樣的新創團隊，但是每一個的取向是不同的，所以兩、三年下來，差不多是每個獲得成功、失敗一些經驗可以分享的時候，所以這個我就學到非常多，因為臺灣才剛剛開始。" }, { "speaker": "曾依璇", "speech": "為什麼會失敗？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有很多原因。像GDS的朋友就反省說他們一開始太注重開放資料，而不夠注重開放API。API就是把電子服務，例如把網站上提供的服務，用不是只有人能操作的方式，而是透過機器也可以操作的方式來把它開放。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "具體來講，好比我們要填一個表單，一定要上網站，一定要填十五個欄位，可是它把API開放出來，好比像對話機器人一樣，有一點像Siri，知道你的部分就會幫你填了，問你對不對，不知道的部分，他再問你，你再回答，就是一種對話式的方法。" }, { "speaker": "曾依璇", "speech": "API？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，GDS的朋友就反省說，如果早五年重來的話，一定會用API的方式先做，而不是只做資料。因為API真的能夠讓各部門之間的服務互相串接，我們叫「一站式服務」，你到這邊申請，它幫你問後面的系統，而不是像你在台灣要開公司，你要跑到好幾個地方登記，像關務、稅務，也就是公司登記所有的這一些東西，它可以被整合到一個介面就把它完成。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "GDS是說如果讓他們重來的話，他們會優先建立結構化的API資訊服務，再去規劃開放資料。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "資料當然對做報導、做研究很有幫助，但是對人民有感覺，要等到研究人員，或者是有創業家，或者有記者把它變成具體的東西，它比較像是一個基本土壤。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以大概是這樣，也不能說是真正失敗，而是如果重來的話，怎麼可以做得更好。" }, { "speaker": "曾依璇", "speech": "在臺灣推動開放政府、開放資料這方面，作為第一個數位政府，你的角色有什麼？跨部會協調？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！我唯一的角色，就是各部會之間在做開放政府相關事務的時候，需要培力、或者需要幫助、或者需要一些技術或任何支援，那我就可以應部會的要求或應院長的要求來幫忙協調，就是這樣，因為我並沒有督導任何部會，所以這些必須是自願的。" }, { "speaker": "曾依璇", "speech": "你剛剛講到的Etalab，是2011年成立的？是附屬在總理之下，負責開放資料的政策？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是的。" }, { "speaker": "曾依璇", "speech": "還有跨部會協調工作？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是的。" }, { "speaker": "曾依璇", "speech": "臺灣沒有相應的？你就是擔任Etalab這樣的角色？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實法國很有意思，就是他們除了有Etalab之外，還有經濟財政部底下的「數位事務局（digital agency）」。在臺灣，國發會是自己一個跟大家平行的會，而數位事務局還是在「經濟、財政、預算」大部底下，等於我們的經濟部底下，他們做的事情比較基本，像如何弭平數位鴻溝，如何把光纖或行動寬頻去牽到最後一哩，如何讓連電子郵件都沒有的中小企業能夠至少用電子郵件，如何去開一輛巡迴車讓大家知道說有哪些線上的服務可以用，就去做很多數位弱勢的關懷及最後一哩的工作，這些其實在臺灣各部會都有相關的計畫，在國發會有一個綜覽。這個工作不是Etalab在做，Etalab在做的比較是政策性，就是說我要哪一個部會去Open Data，或者去做服務，Etalab就會去跟那一個部會協作把它做出來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們在臺灣並沒有跟Etalab一樣的常規編制。PDIS的這個小組，我常常開玩笑說我是「公僕的公僕」，PDIS比較像是「幕僚的幕僚」，完全是一個支援型的角色，那如果有任何部會做出任何東西，那就是那個部會的功勞。我們就是一個等於是跟國際所有的這一些平行組織都有接軌，他們用的最新工具或我們用的最新工具或方法，我們大家都是共享的，但是我們不是拿著這個工具去要求臺灣的部會使用，而是他們現在有什麼我們能夠幫忙或協調的，我們可以幫忙找到這一個東西就可以解決你的問題，所以反過來還是部會提出需求；Etalab是為了達成總統的某些政見來做事，我們目前比較不是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "曾依璇", "speech": "我們剛剛有聊到死刑議題跟同性議題，還有一例一休在臺灣社會討論得非常熱烈，但是在政策的形成跟討論的過程中，好像很少人利用現有開放資料，像有一個「vTaiwan」平台，好像沒有看到這一些工具被使用，你怎麼解釋這個現象？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「vTaiwan」是部會主動拋出要討論的政策，而且通常是有跨部會性質的，所以「Join」的是有一個可以提案連署，5,000人以上部會才要回應，所以其實「Join」比較是由下向上的連署機制，所以你剛剛講的這一些在「Join」應該每一個都被提出過，所以它其實不是沒有那麼管道。我會這樣覺得就是說，臺灣的一個特性是公共討論是非常鬆散地發生，在可能某人的FB上或者是某些主流媒體或談話性節目上之類的，中間有一個很鬆散地串聯結構。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在政策形成的前期，就是我們還沒有決定政策方向的時候，其實大部分的人是不知道的，是已經等到可能快要通過才突然之間警覺到這一件事，所以剛才講的從公部門的角度認為有辦過公聽會、請專家學者做過專家調查或詳細的東西，但是當時議題的熱度很低，所以會來參加或關心的其實平常就在關心的這一些學者、專家們，在學理上稱為「缺席利害關係人（missing stakeholder）」，也就是很多人跟這個利益相關，但是他們並不知道政策正在往這個方向討論，最後可能剩七天或十四天了，突然之間大家發現到這一件事，突然之間公共討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因此我覺得有兩個：（一）我常常拿攝影機出來的時候，是跟開會的人說：「這一個攝影機代表著今天不在場的利益關係人」，意思就是說等到他們事後猛然警覺的時候，我們至少把所有討論的紀錄結論要點及形成的過程加以充分公開，所以大家可以接力在這個基礎上討論。（二）另外一件事是，大家要養成隨時看有哪一些東西六十天之後就要通過了，在那時就要開始做一些告知、議題設定，公民社會一些意見不同的人，可能就要開始去互相討論這一個東西會怎麼樣影響我們，而且這個是在還沒有燒起來的時候，我覺得這樣才比較常規化；不然的話，誠如你說的，整個社會公共討論的精力跟社會成本都放在少數的三個案子或四個案子上，但是其實有非常多別的也值得討論的事情，因為大家被這一些吸引，所以更沒有時間會去關注那一些問題。所以，我覺得大的案子實在的、有誠意的公共討論—而且先期討論—當然很重要，可是小的案子也要這樣做，大家才會養成公共參與的習慣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他們這邊講的都是說：開放政府是政府重新獲取人民信任的方法，可是我覺得信任是雙向的，人民會信任政府的程度，剛好會跟政府信任人民的程度相等，政府要先展現出他願意信任人民到什麼程度，大家才有可能跟上來，而不是說我操作一些方法就要單方面要人民信任政府，這個是絕對不會的。" }, { "speaker": "曾依璇", "speech": "好像今年大會的開幕致詞我忘記是哪一位，他也有提到我們講到開放政府、開放資料的時候，也會講到改變少數政治菁英操控政治的一個方式，他有提到今年正好有兩個民意反撲政治菁英很好的例子，一個是英國脫歐、一個是川普當選，當然這兩個結果是好、是壞，我們現在還不知道；但是至少很多媒體也提醒這個是民粹化的先兆，而且很可能持續在歐洲、亞洲與美國。開放政策是源自於草根民主的理念，我們如何避免開放政府、開放資訊，但是不要走向極端？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實開放政府是三支柱：「透明（Transparency）」、「參與（Participation）」、「課責（Accountability）」。「透明（Transparency）」是政府的運作要大家都知道；「參與（Participation）」是而且還要讓更多人一起加入作設定；「課責（Accountability）」這樣的東西到底有無真的執行、到底是否真的如大家當時參與的方式，這個部分要有一個很清楚的權責歸屬，大家必須知道自己的參與結果，這個叫做「closing the loop 」，不然東西收回來，但是其實並沒有真的做，或者做了，但是實作的方法不對，所以雖然方向對，但是實作爛掉了，這個東西就是課責。因此透明、參與及課責是一個循環，一個程度做到好或不好，你把這個東西充分讓大家來監督，這樣才有下一次透明，在修改政策或者是做更好決策的基礎，下一次的參與才會覺得上一次的參與真的有被接納，下一次的參與才更有意義；不然的話，你一次參與回來，發現沒有課責，事實上都沒有做，那這個就斷掉了，你下次再要大家來參與，就沒有人要來了，這個是loop。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實國際上除了這三支柱之外，通常還會再加「涵容（inclusion）」或「多元（diversity）」，兩個是差不多的意思。為什麼？如你剛剛所講的，一直在講透明、參與、課責，說不定也很能運作，但是可能到最後對法律、對程序、或對某些技術最瞭解的這些人變成能夠參與政府、做決策。雖然可以有更多的菁英加入，但事實上對於一般人民的參與，還是沒有幫助到，所以為什麼到了今年大家都說「涵容（inclusion）」或「多元（diversity）」，就是要讓本來沒有參與習慣的人也沒有參與，而不是有參與習慣的人更能參與，這個是兩層不同的事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我不會覺得這是草根民主，大部分OGP國家也許基本的行動方案做得出來，但到弱勢都能參與的這一個部分，並不是大家都做得很好。" }, { "speaker": "曾依璇", "speech": "你說「沒有參與習慣」的人是平常沒有上網的習慣？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不是，不需要上網，好比像法國有很多社區事務協會，或者是有各區的公聽會，或者是每一個區都有區議會之類的，所謂的「參與」是覺得公民社會不是只是大家盲目去接受政府的政策，而是說跟我利益相關的事情，我想要知道，而且我不太想知道我願意貢獻一點時間出來，讓它變得更好，這個就叫做「參與」。法國有非常歷史悠久的這一種社區層級的公民參與的傳統，不管是關心哪一件事，基本上都有那種事務協會能夠讓你去參加，而且讓你真正在公民的聲音進入不管是區層級、市層級或者是國家層級有一套這一種方法。所以，我自己覺得本來有這一種參與習慣的人，當然把更多的資料、詳細解釋給他，在政策更早期甚至是預算編列的時候就做參與式預算，有參與習慣的朋友就更有力、更願意去做參與的事情，因為發現有效果；但是沒有參與習慣的朋友，平常就沒有在做這些事的人，如果我們沒有把這個東西帶到這些人的頭上，實際上他們還是很容易聽到誰、罵了誰，或者是誰講了兩句煽動的話，就突然做出某個很奇怪的決定，因為平常也沒有在注意，一注意的時候，一定都是被最極端或最被挑起的部分引起注意，所以可能很激烈；然而事實上在此之前，沒有關心過這一件事。所以，我們現在說「涵容（inclusion）」或「多元（diversity）」，是指平常沒有這一些參與習慣的朋友，跟是否在線上沒有什麼關係。" }, { "speaker": "曾依璇", "speech": "有興趣參與公民政治，但是對於開放政府、開放資料沒有什麼概念的人，你有什麼建議？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "最簡單就是瞭解到開放資料其實是一個類似造橋、鋪路、蓋下水溝的東西，讓討論的時候可以就事論事，大家不會指鹿為馬或者是對基本事實有錯誤的見解，但是前提還是要大家關心這一件事，不然資料放在這邊也沒有用。所以我覺得不要把開放資料或者是開放政府這一種上位政策性的東西，當作一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我自己最不喜歡喊口號，所以還是要回到「你在意什麼」？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像我自己很在意動物福利或動物權利，對我來講收容所實際資料的狀況，每一天他們怎麼樣處理的方法，這些資料開始對我有意義，因為這關係到每一個地方的流浪動物、動物政策等，但是我不是因為喜歡開放資料而看這一些東西，我是因為關心這一些事，所以去看這一些東西──因此我建議還是關心什麼，去找出那個關心的東西。" }, { "speaker": "曾依璇", "speech": "我的問題改成：每一個人都有自己關心的事情，如何讓他們意識到有這個工具可以使用？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非常好的問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有幾個：剛剛講的5,000人連署，這個是全國性大家都很關心的事情，但是比較地區性的就是地方政府，因為像很多地方政府都有參與式預算，或者是參與式的審計，或者是都市計畫，或者是都市更新，或者各種參與式的線上論壇，或者是一些培力的工作，這一些工作其實是大家比較每天會關心的，很少人莫名其妙關心全國性的政策。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我覺得先去看附近不管是區公所或者是市政府，有哪一些協作的可能性。有一些地方當然有制度化，像台北市有公民參與委員會，他們的會議紀錄也是這一種逐字稿上網跟直播的方法，當然很多地方政府也有實際去每一個不同的村里或者社區中心所做的這一些參與跟討論，所以即使是從大廈公寓管理委員會開始都可以做透明、參與及課責，不需要是全國性的。所以如果有興趣參加社區管委會，或者是參加社區協會的話，其實我剛剛所講的這一套「透明」、「參與」、「課責」、「涵容多元」，其實完全可以在管委會的層級就去做，因為管委會其實是有能力去跟政府要資料的，也是有能力去跟社區要資料的，因此我覺得就是從離自己家最近的地方做起，等你的關懷上升到這一件事還是需要不只里長，可能區長來協調了，這個時候你就會上升到那個區參與式預算的程度，就是從自己最近的地方開始。" }, { "speaker": "曾依璇", "speech": "我問完了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好。" }, { "speaker": "曾依璇", "speech": "有要補充的嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有。那你就把錄音檔給我，我們就做逐字稿。" }, { "speaker": "曾依璇", "speech": "二十四分鐘。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "劉致昕", "speech": "第一個問題：你事前就知道今天會給閉幕演講嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有，我本來其實只有投一個稿子，就是昨天的民主之夜（Democracy Night），那一個稿子是講「運用虛擬實境，達到公民審議」（Virtual Reality for Civic Deliberation）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "很有意思的是，因為我是在入閣前、不知道自己會入閣的時候就投了，然後事先就知道應該有上，算是通過初審（shortlist）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "上了之後我才入閣，這就造成政治上面的一些狀態。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是昨天最後那個處理方式我覺得很好，就是我預錄，然後有出席，又在台下看自己的VR分身，就當作一個示範，大家都說很有意思。" }, { "speaker": "劉致昕", "speech": "大家的反應是？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得很多人真的覺得VR確實比較能夠涵容（inclusive），尤其是對小孩來說…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為你知道識字率並不是那麼絕對，我們做公共參與，很多人其實是看著字，腦裡沒有辦法浮現出形狀，這是一種專業的文字運用能力，而且跟一個人認知的模式有關係，有些人就是要聽跟講才能瞭解事情，只看讀跟寫是沒辦法的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我們現在做的，其實就是一個比較是輔助式的工作，就是讓不是以書寫為主要認知方法的人，也能夠用平衡的方式來參與，我想這個各國都碰到這樣的狀況，也就是無論識字率如何，還是需要強化、適應其他的認知模式。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我們就是想要讓更多的、不同認知模式的朋友，都可以用他們喜歡的模式來參與，我覺得這個有引起共鳴，就是非常多人不但感動，而且事後也有寫信來問具體的做法。" }, { "speaker": "劉致昕", "speech": "有其他人在做的經驗？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然，其實面對面的這種審議民主其實有非常長的歷史，從我們說「非暴力溝通」或是我們現在用的這一套「焦點討論法」，其實在臺灣或者在各地都有非常多的調整。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想我的具體貢獻就是：把這一個東西跟線上試著加以整合，在以前並沒有這一種方便簡單的方法，同一個東西，然後丟到這一個桌上，就把實體的東西完全數位化，這一套又可以再接到人工智慧，直接轉逐字稿或者轉成其他的模式。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以其實從一個審議空間，到下一個審議空間，中間的銜接，這個部分是臺灣之前比較少做的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但在各個審議空間裡主持、轉譯或者是紀錄，這個都是專業，這些專業程度並不是我能靠研究就能達到的，已經有很多研究者在做，但實際上像我們這樣子研究做到一半就投入實務的比較少，臺灣是一個比較特殊的環境。" }, { "speaker": "劉致昕", "speech": "所以你多了一場大會致辭（keynote）？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個閉幕致辭，是因為我本來除了投稿之外，我還會參與他們另外一個叫做「Toolbox hackathon」，就是「工具箱黑客松」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "本來的場地是在我可以來的場地，後來改成我不能去的場地了（法國總統府），相信大家都覺得那個場地很特別。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不確定是不是出於補償還是什麼原因，後來對方就說加開今天這場。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我在馬德里待了一個星期，對於黑客松的東西，有相當多可以貢獻的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我在西班牙也是類似像導師的角色，當然那都是在入閣之前就約好的。現在是入閣之後，而且這邊場地又換了，所以就不能去。" }, { "speaker": "劉致昕", "speech": "那個場地實在太敏感了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，那個場地實在太敏感，而且又是在他們總理辭職、新總理組閣的這個時刻，我如果去觀禮就太有象徵意義。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我可以體諒主辦單位的狀況。這一場是臨時的調動安排，但我還是有空間，他們是說換一個場地，到這一個最不敏感的場地（巴黎市政府）來做。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這裡是相對不敏感的，因為這邊的地理位置，而且事實上這不是我第一次來市政府，我本來就是類似國際顧問的角色，所以他們市政府的人對我都相當熟，也比較信任。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個就是說，今天這場在OGP裡面，叫做「subnational」，所以本來就是給地區政府，其實也不一定是地區，因為英文是country，中文也不知道要翻譯成什麼，總之也是有像蘇格蘭（Scotland）這樣的地方來的議程。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "主辦單位是說，臺灣從國際的角度來看，說跟蘇格蘭類似，這是比較容易的。" }, { "speaker": "劉致昕", "speech": "所以這一個邀約是在入閣之前？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，我其實就是講我五月在馬德里，以及在巴黎這邊經濟部，都講過一場，和待會上台是一樣的題目。" }, { "speaker": "劉致昕", "speech": "和五月的版本一樣？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實之前也有發布一篇網誌：「重新創造民主」，這基本上就是原來那一份，但是改了一個標題，現在叫做「運用數位創新，改造公共服務」（Digital Innovations in Public Service Transformation）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個標題並不是我取的，而是我辦公室的架構師，林書漾之前給的演講，但是我們有互相交換簡報的習慣，我就是把她的簡報混搭進自己的簡報裡。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我會認識巴黎市政府的Julien Antelin，他是副市長室辦公室主任，是因為他來臺灣講巴黎式參與式預算，我是他的口譯。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他的簡報是英文，然後我翻成中文。我們翻完一場之後，我就等於被他附身，接下來就直接代他講他的中文簡報，他也很開心。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以就會變成說他坐在那邊，我講他的簡報，講完之後有人問問題，我再翻給他，請他回答。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以這次就是兩個部分，一個部分是「重新創造民主」，裡面大家都耳熟能詳的故事，一直到Uber的David Plouffe來找我，那這個部分是大家都知道的事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "下一個部分其實就是我們在PDIS裡面，就是在行政院我們組成的一個小組裡面，是一個叫做「公共數位創新空間（PDIS）」的地方，我們怎麼每天做工作，以及這一些工作怎樣試著把它能夠傳染，給其他不管是公部門、地方政府或者是私部門的文化傳染，後面這部分的簡報就是書漾做的，就是PDIS的故事，這個部分大概花三分鐘左右講。" }, { "speaker": "劉致昕", "speech": "三分鐘講得完嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我就盡量講。然後最後有一張新的簡報，就是在講說這次OGP subnational government的宣言裡，有province、region、country。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實，從歷屆中華民國政府的角度來看，臺灣也曾經指稱過一個province、之後是region、到現在是整個country。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以目前來說，我們在WTO是叫做「臺、澎、金、馬」的separate customs territory。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "至少臺灣作為territory，這不管是在國際上或者是在政府裡，都是說得通的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "之前OGP有些朋友，如果覺得因為一些國際上的運作，不適合讓我們以別的名義加入，我們或許可以作為TPKM territory來加入。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "談判還是要交由我們外交部來負責，也是要留給OGP的執委會討論。" }, { "speaker": "Aaron Wytze", "speech": "你覺得福建省政府會有意見嗎？（笑）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "景森政務委員也不在這裡，他是福建省主席。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "無論如何，我這邊並沒有說臺灣應該是怎樣。我只是說，國際上把臺灣看成province或region或country的都有。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "至於是不是能算成full-fledged nation state？我覺得至少在這個階段，我自己沒有想強求這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "劉致昕", "speech": "所以重點是實質參與？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，我覺得今天的subnational議程，其實是真正很多創新開始的地方，像蘇格蘭他們，其實跟大英國協的方向會不完全一樣，然後事實上還有很多subnational，像巴黎其實也是，他們的議程跟全法國的走向其實也不完全一樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以這就是為什麼OGP會把subnational當作先驅（pioneers）案例。也就是說，雖然已經有些在整個nation state範圍在做的事情，但是也有一些在subnational territory比較容易做的，所以先從這個交流開始。" }, { "speaker": "劉致昕", "speech": "所以你的想法是？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得先不管臺灣被當作什麼看待，事實上我們在開放政府，作為先行者或者是發展者的角色上，並不輸於蘇格蘭政府。" }, { "speaker": "劉致昕", "speech": "臺灣會不會有人覺得刺耳？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "到底誰會覺得刺耳呢？對於制訂《憲法增修條文》的朋友來說，臺灣屬於「自由地區」；從WTO的角度來看，臺灣和澎湖、金門、馬祖並列。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我相信把「臺灣」當作nation state的名稱，也就是法理獨立的這件事，並不是現況。即使是想要制憲建國的朋友，也沒有認為目前已經是這樣的情況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在這個前提下，我覺得我們先去討論，各領域都有人會發聲，全世界的朋友們可以一起討論臺灣加入的名義。我覺得這是可以討論的事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對我來講，我自己沒有那麼在意特定的名義。" }, { "speaker": "劉致昕", "speech": "我覺得我們人在國外的時候還好，但國內會很敏感。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實是這樣，我也不能幫台北市決定。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果要以台北市加入OGP subnational，我也非常歡迎啊！或者台中或者高雄，對不對？或者其他的三都，也都很重要，六都都要講到（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我的意思是說，當然在區域治理上，我們也可以說，不管是高雄、台南、台中、桃園、台北、新北都有做開放政府。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是要不要以城市名義加入OGP，這也不是我說了算，畢竟我並不在六都有任何職務。" }, { "speaker": "劉致昕", "speech": "臺灣在全世界的位置？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "Open Government傳統上說三大支柱，就是透明、參與、課責。到了今年，很多人都會把涵容或者多元拿出來，逐漸變成第四個支柱，因為發現前三個運行了一陣子，就只有少部分的人可以參加，所以一定要把多元（diversity）或涵容（inclusion）放進來，不然就會變成菁英主義（elitism）或者是技術專政（technocracy）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這兩天有人講三支柱，也有人講四支柱。我自己覺得第四個非常重要。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像世界經濟論壇去做資通訊的那一份整理報告，你就會看到臺灣的資通訊網路整備工作，就是說大家如果想要申裝100Mbps的寬頻，是可以租得到的。在整備度綜合評比上，芬蘭、臺灣、冰島，是世界前三名。所以非常有趣，因為地方基礎建設這麼好，但是你如果回去看說這樣子的資通訊基礎建設，它是不是真的能夠有配套的法規調適程序？或者能夠讓政府實際的施政是透過網路去做？就會發現說其實一些很基本的，像數位通訊傳播法，都還沒有通過。而且問一般人民說你是不是都會上網辦理政府的服務，而不是去臨櫃辦理？這些東西其實排名就是中高而已，在全世界來說並沒有特別高。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以這個對比回來，像透明這邊，像我們的開放資料評比，當然是因為由上而下的關係，所有完全都符合考題，所以就是基本的項目有水、有電的部分，幾乎每項基本的資料都有開放，因此在OKFN拿到排名第一。但是這個東西，並沒有說明大家是否真的有去取用這些資料，或者這些資料是否以解決社會問題為目標的前提來釋出，這些都沒有講。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這並不是說沒有做。事實上都有做，只是說目前並沒有很好的量化方式，來評估這一個東西。" }, { "speaker": "劉致昕", "speech": "無法量化？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，因為這是很難測量的，而且非常需要脈絡，所以其實本來就不應該讓國家之間互相這樣子評比。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該是說：臺灣在做臺灣做的事上，可以做的比大家都好。可是每一個國家在做他們做的事，也都可以做得比臺灣好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得這真的是難以評量。我們能夠做的就是把做得好的部分，讓它盡可能傳染給其他國家，然後大家都可以把他們最好的部分傳遞給臺灣，我覺得這個才是實質參與的目的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那拚排名，我個人從小就覺得沒有意義，長大後也不覺得有任何意義。" }, { "speaker": "劉致昕", "speech": "所以開放政府的具體內容是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛剛那四大支柱，其實各有各自不同的倡議社群。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好比像說，如果只是從政府部門的角度來看，只是要單純地說要透明，以工具性的透明為主，而但是參與跟課責只是為了表示這個透明是有意義的。其實這個我們在國際上常見，就是把開放政府當作工具來使用。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這就好像一把口琴（harmonica），直譯是「和諧琴」，你吹了它就有聲音、不吹它就沒有聲音（笑），所以只要有重大政策，你吹一下它就很和諧，但是沒有的時候，議程設定絕對不開放給作參與或者是作課責的朋友，有些人是這樣想。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然從參與的角度來看，就是民主運動的工作者，常常會覺得說你有一個恰當的、正當的民主程序，即使他一開始程序不是完全透明、完全課責，但是他總是捲動更多人參與，只要捲動更多人參與就是好事。可是這派其實也不是主流，大家也會覺得跟你捲動更多人參與，而你沒有課責，你怎麼知道不是一個新的中心，然後這個新的政治中心因為年紀比較小，取代了這一個舊的中心，但是他真的有比本來的制度更課責嗎？透明性也更增加嗎？不一定嘛。所以如果是把參與當作主要目標，然後其他兩個支柱來支撐，那其實也會晃。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然另外也有人說課責這一件事是基本人權，人就是要有知道自己的政府在做什麼，如果政府做得不好的話，那要能夠隨時公投、罷免，甚至推翻政府。那這樣子的機制，其實在我們國家也是有，所以對我來講，OGP其實是成立在一個這三種不同價值的動態平衡上。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "臺灣能夠有貢獻之處，是我們社會上也有這些不同聲音，但是至少在臺灣，沒有人反對「涵容」或者「多元」是重要的價值，所以雖然有各種各樣不同的思潮在臺灣成立，但這個過程是可以做到，我們並沒有「讓旁邊的人硬是不能參討論」的這種設定。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然線上的公共空間，目前是在境外公司臉書，或者境外公司LINE或者是境外公司Twitter上面，所以其實政府也很難去查緝不同的聲音。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為這樣的關係，所以各門各派對於開放政府的討論，在臺灣都完全沒有查禁。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我們至少具體能有貢獻的是，我們綜合大家意向的過程裡面，學到什麼、做錯什麼、做對什麼的這些經驗，至少我們可以如實學到、知道這個，而不會像某一些成員國，會變成來的是講一套，但是他們國內會說我們之前其他的想法被消音。我們至少會把實際的狀況帶到。" }, { "speaker": "劉致昕", "speech": "但不是統一口徑？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒錯，就是說每次拿哪一個支柱的時候，就可以請做那個支柱的人，實際到台上跟大家講那方面的經驗。臺灣本來就是非常多元的地方。" }, { "speaker": "劉致昕", "speech": "多元對你很重要嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，這也是個人信念，多元的交流本身，我覺得就可以幫助大家想清楚很多事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "OGP的這個架構的好處是說，全世界大家都在想同一件事情，特別是年輕人，但不只是年輕人，已經不再相信民主，我們該怎麼辦？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "臺灣在2014年之後，至少大家對於民主其實已經不是單純的信任與否，而是大家要知道、大家要實際參與民主的過程，「信任」兩個字已經被推到旁邊去了，大家就是要親手參與。如果不能親手參與的，就一律當作黑箱。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實這個趨勢在全世界都是一樣的：那麼多年輕的朋友，他們不只是去關心，而是願意去投入民主進程，嘗試找出以目前的程序做到哪裡是極限。如果到了極限之後，怎麼樣回頭來更新那個程序？如果不能更新，那至少也試過，知道這個是極限了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個工作其實在全世界有很多地方在做，這是我們具體可以分享的東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在分享的過程中，很有趣的例子像馬德里，他們也是占領者進了市政府，他們實做的過程裡面，也是拆市政府、非常基進，做得也不比臺灣差。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在一個很大的占領運動之後，大家彼此之間的信任是繼續增加，而不是消失的，然後他們也在市政府做了非常非常多的公民參與，然後事實上Decide Madrid的研究者做了許多量化、質化分析，告訴大家說Consul系統散播到各個城市之後，對程序願意怎麼改，如何對社會有幫助。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "透過比較研究，讓大家明白哪一些地方這樣、哪一些地方那樣，真的進入這些進程，包含參與式預算這些，他們都是以非常科學的精神在分享這一些東西，但是你說要整個西班牙過來做，那範圍並不一樣，這是為什麼我覺得分享特別有趣。" }, { "speaker": "劉致昕", "speech": "好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "差不多了喔？" }, { "speaker": "劉致昕", "speech": "是的，不好意思。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不會，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "劉致昕", "speech": "等一下我們可以直播你嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以啊！都可以。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "現在3點我們準時開始，先跟大家道歉一下，因為我們別的會議室借不到，所以只好在內廂會議室。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個是因為我還在調整時差，而且感冒了，等一下思路或講話會比較緩慢，如果有講錯的話，請隨時提醒我。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一開始請文化部說明。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "政委、與會的先進，文化部報告一下，因為上一次唐政務委員開兩次會議之後，有請我們文化部再召開會議，就產業協會及相關的單位，我想在座很多代表在文化部召開的兩次會議當中有參與，我們綜整了這兩次的會議及上次政委要我們釐清的事項，我們做一個綜合性的報告；如果裡面不夠精確的話，等一下請先進幫我們指正一下。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "我們在11月18日及12月2日有分別開兩次會議召集大家，我們研議如果以電競選手服文化替代役之進用跟服勤模式是不是可以跟協會、遊戲產業組成聯隊，協會代表是電競替代役的役男，而且可達到團隊練習效果討論。這裡面有幾個議題，我們先將這兩次會議議案的重點跟大家報告，讓大家瞭解狀況。然而這幾個方案沒有十全十美，也沒有太省力的方法，等一下我們把研議的幾個方案跟大家報告，各都有優、缺點，有一些可行性比較高，有一些要花很大的力氣，大家指正之後，文化部會全力配合。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "我們在會議當中有幾個議題、重點，如果這一些電競選手循著一般替代役的模式，由文化部寄訓或代訓的方式讓遊戲產業的公司代訓服勤之可行性為何，這個大概會有幾個狀況：第一，文化部委託這一些遊戲產業公司來代訓這一些電競選手服替代役的時候，可以代表公司，但還是屬於我們公部門，只能領替代役的薪水，但是不能領電競產業公司的薪水（6,000多元），只能參加業餘的比賽，不能參加職業比賽，這一種方式就電競選手的意願部分，以我們的理解，一個電競選手薪水是2萬6,000元至10多萬元不等，以國際賽事的話，獎金就我得到的（消息），薪水是美金100萬元，由五至八人分得，而且獎金一直攀升，所以如果以文化部的方式，若不能參加職業比賽跟業餘比賽的話，這一些頂尖電競選手不願意參加，像A咖、B咖會比較沒有意願，可能參加的是C咖跟D咖，這在政策上是否容許，我們等一下可以考慮一下。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "電競選手十五至二十五、二十六歲當中，如果用各種方式緩徵兵役或學籍保留的方式，將生涯拖到高峰，年紀過了後再服兵役也可以，所以意願的部分可否達到效果，像A咖、B咖沒有辦法來，而是C、D咖來服替代役，就政策上是否容許，這部分如果文化部來辦的話，會有這一種結果。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "這樣做還有一個問題要考慮，如果是要代訓的話，因為代訓變成文化部要跟遊戲產業公司訂合約，萬一過程當中－我們部裡諮詢會議公司代表也有提到，如果電競選手的能力下降，他是不是要被淘汰掉？會對文化部跟公司產生困擾，是不是要放到文化部來打電動玩具，我想是不行的；但如果現在代訓的話，依現行規定是服六個月或一年，等於我們跟這一個公司簽的話，一次簽六個月或一年，不管是能力下降或者攀升，這六個月都要在產業公司裡面，用訂定合約的方式進行，也值得我們考慮一下。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "當然這裡面還有一個問題我反映一下，與會有一些代表，大家也可以表達一下，應該要先確定電競產業的主管機關，唐政委也知道電競產業是文化部或者是經濟部管，現在還不確定，因此他們（公司代表）建議，如果可以確定電競產業主管機關的話，對於推動電競產業或者是電競選手才是比較完整及長遠的，我們在前幾次的會議，唐政委也有說先切開來，將產業的部分與電競選手的部分先切開來，但是他們認為這兩個有一點關係。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "另外，我們也有得到另外一個訊息，即便這一些電競選手的生涯高峰就算慢慢走下坡的時候，還有一個收入，也就是網路直播平台，在直播上也許還可以有一些不錯的收入，一般服務替代役的話，在這當中，服務期間就不能做直播的工作，這可能也涉及到違反替代役的規定，也就是違反兼職兼差及營利的行為，這個是這兩次會議當中所得到的訊息。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "綜合起來有幾個方案，如大家手邊的幾份資料。循產業訓儲替代役模式，這個方案的可行性比較低，這個會涉及到修法，這個我等一下再講，如果政策上要推最快的，也就是文化部循一般替代役的模式分發到公協會、電競協會或政府單位去服勤，這個是最快的，快速的原因是我們部裡面只要訂定相關的資格，通過後就可以為文化部的替代役。但是薪水只領6,000多元，不能參加職業比賽與業餘比賽，對於A、B咖來講，服勤的意願很低，只有C、D咖來，政策上是否容許這樣的狀況發生？如果可以的話，這是可以考慮的。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "另外，當初會要文化部來辦理電競選手替代役的時候，當時是依照圍棋專長模式，圍棋專長役男大約每一年有五個選手，但是分發到圍棋協會的時候，圍棋協會必須要提供住宿及相關配套的設備，等一下要看電競協會是不是有這一個意願來提供住宿或者是相關配套？這個就要看看大家有沒有這一個意願，因此服文化替代役就要看電競協會是否願意提供宿舍；而且提供的並不是頂尖的選手，對他們來講是否有誘因？這一些選手也可以到學校培育，但要考慮到文化部是否會遭受到一些人的質疑。這是第一個方案，我們在兩次的會議當中都有提到，雖是比較快推動政策的，但這裡面還有一些不完美的地方及配套的因素要考慮。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "另外，像剛剛提到由本部寄訓、代訓到產業公司的模式，這種方式變成我們跟企業簽委託代訓，但是這個要支付代訓的費用，這要跟主計總處看看文化部經費是否編列得上去，這個還要跟主計總處那邊討論看看。立法院在編科目預算的時候，像立委就會覺得應該要編在哪裡，怎麼會編在文化部，因此立法院在審預算的時候會遇到這一個問題，也就是訓練費用的部分。還有一個問題是，文化替代役對於電競可以編訓練費用，為什麼其他的如文化藝術相關產業不編？分發到機關去，為什麼沒有編列一些費用？這個也會被質疑。代訓的方式薪水也只有6,000多元，因此也會涉及其意願度的問題，這部分就文化部直接訓練分發到電競協會不太一樣。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "第三個，如果役政署的產業訓儲替代役－等一下役政署會報告－這會牽涉到修法，這個是條例的問題，要送到立法院會很麻煩。第二次諮詢會議的時候，立法委員李彥秀國會助理同仁提出來說最快就是這一個，但是修法並沒有那麼容易，裡面的資格必須要副學士，但是電競選手聽起來部分是沒有，所以如果要修法就很困難，這部分等一下役政署會報告。我先作簡要的報告，如果這裡面講得不精準或者是不太正確的話，請各位先進幫我們指正一下，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非常感謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在進入役政署之前，我先確定一下我聽到的這一些部分。在主管機關方面，其實我們第一次在這邊開會時，就已經討論過我們要如何認定電競這一個產業，當時有提出「運動表演業」，在運動產業發展條例裡面的說明。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是運動表演業就我當時沒有記錯的話，教育部體育署是說因為電競沒有加入國際單項運動協會，所以先不把電競認為是運動。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果目前不是運動的話，也不是運動表演，這應該是很清楚的事情；反過來講，如果哪一天加入了國際運動協會，變成了運動，就也可以變成運動表演，這也是很清楚的事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以目前不是運動、也不是運動表演的話，我們上一次在這邊開會的時候，有說可以視為技藝文化。如果我沒有搞錯的話，這是文化創業發展法裡面的表演藝術產業，等於是落在文化部，所以當時才會說文化部當作需用機關，至少在被認定成運動產業之前。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個是我們第一次在這邊開會的時候，就有確立的事情，這個想要跟大家說明。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "我的理解是，上一次的會議是說從電競選手這一件事上是技藝文化，但是這邊講的是說另外產業的部分，就是開發遊戲的。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "等一下可以聽一下各位先進的意見。這兩個東西是有關聯的，我們把它切開來看，也許不見得是最好。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "在文化創意發展法裡面有一個數位內容產業是經濟部，但是經濟部也不認電競產業，所以他們說開發電競產業的主管機關要先確認，這個跟選手培訓，因為他專門打這個遊戲是有關聯的，所以他們現在反映的是這個問題。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "這個是我的理解，如果我的理解有錯誤的話，請各位先進幫我們指正一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "文化部主管表演藝術，像扯鈴就是一種藝術，但是製造扯鈴就不是表演了，而是一種製造業。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "從事電競是表演，這應該沒有問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "製作電競遊戲這一件事，是否在這一次討論的範圍裡面？這是要請各位先進指教的。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "接下來請役政署。" }, { "speaker": "沈哲芳", "speech": "政委、陳主秘及各位與會先進，針對剛才文化部的說明，內政部役政署來補充說明，我先請科長來跟各位報告，事後我再來補充，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "李定謙", "speech": "修法的部分我們會配合辦理，但是現在的問題是時效性的問題，修法可能需要一段時間，在時下可能沒有辦法符合實際的需求。" }, { "speaker": "李定謙", "speech": "文化部從薪資結構來談，依照憲法及兵役法的規定，中華民國男子有服兵役的義務，因此服兵役就要摒除民間的產業標準，薪資的部分就不能太計較，如果要計較的話，就沒有辦法釐清。而電競選手當兵的話是看哪一個(常備兵、替代役)對他們比較有優勢，我想當初政委的想法應該也是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "李定謙", "speech": "另外一個問題，在座男孩子的想法是當兵役期越短越好，產業訓儲替代役82年次以前是要服三年，83年次以後是服一年半，時間上也相當長，因此電競選手如果要服產訓替代役，基本上可能要考慮這一些役男本身的意願，以現在法定役期來比較，我在猜應該會覺得役期太長。" }, { "speaker": "李定謙", "speech": "另外，我們瞭解公司是要一個產量高的選手，萬一有一段時間衰退的時候，為了公司的形象跟生存，而必須要更換，如果用產訓的話，要綁三年或者是一年半，可能對公司也會有困擾，以上報告。" }, { "speaker": "沈哲芳", "speech": "我再補充說明，很抱歉，有關於電競選手來討論兵役的問題，好像兵役的規定堵著電競選手發展。" }, { "speaker": "沈哲芳", "speech": "現在徵兵跟募兵並行制度在運作，在兵役相關的法規裡面，我想分三個面向來跟大家說明，在現在的兵役規定，對於役男就學緩徵的部分，只要你符合相關條文規範，是可以讓你讀到三十三歲，這一點我想大家都很清楚(當然是需要有一些條件)，例如：高中畢業就不能再讀高中；大學畢業就不能再讀大學，然而在就讀大學未畢業的狀況下(像很多藝人就是這樣子)，可一直讀到三十三歲，這個是大家所知道的規定。現在電競選手聽說最優質的年齡是在二十五歲以前，假如一些公司或者是電競選手就兵役問題可以適度在現行規定及法令的條件之下，是可以去做一些人生的規劃，這個是第一個面向。" }, { "speaker": "沈哲芳", "speech": "第二個面向是，剛剛提到研發替代役是要碩士以上，現在放寬到副學士以上，就可以到產業訓儲替代役從事生產技術層面，今年是辦理的第一年，坊間也有一些聲音，像把兵役放到太low－當然我不能講電競low－現在放寬到副學士，在運作上對於兵役最起碼的公平、正義及嚴肅性已經有一些質疑了，是否要再放寬到高中、職要再思考，如果政策或者是民意願意朝這個部分開放，立法委員也願意這樣修，役政署也不會抵制、不配合。" }, { "speaker": "沈哲芳", "speech": "第三個面向是，回到一般替代役運作模式，我們之前有提到體育役的模式，臺灣最優秀的國手，在人生最精華的時候，也有來服體育替代役，在之前的運作模式沒有窒礙難行，如果願意循這樣的方式來做的話，役政署是支持的。以上報告。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "很感謝。請協會的朋友們發言。" }, { "speaker": "齊大均", "speech": "政委、主秘及各位長官大家好，我是臺灣電競協會秘書長第一次發言。" }, { "speaker": "齊大均", "speech": "理事長因為今天沒有空來，本身是藝人的身分，所以沒有辦法過來。" }, { "speaker": "齊大均", "speech": "站在我們電競協會的立場來講，我們可以做的事是希望有電競人才以培訓的方式進行。協會有許多會員跟非會員，其實很多人在我們的粉絲團或者是信箱留言，希望協會來規劃開立電競培訓專班，在文化部召開第一次會議時，有提到我們可以開設這樣的專班，但是這個叫做「培訓」，這個培訓有可能會關係到現在在討論的議題，比如一般替代役要分發給協會，在第一次會議當中我們也有發現到這一個部分，也有長官建議如果要開班、招收學員是不可收費的，但在不能收費的情況之下，就人才培訓部分，我們國家勞動部有個方案；雖培訓這個東西一定會有費用產生，但政府也會補助。" }, { "speaker": "齊大均", "speech": "替代役的選手分發到協會以後，不能兼差或者是兼職營利行為部分，是不是可以當電競培訓專班的訓練講師？可能替代到我們這邊來，讓其有一個作用？或這一些選手還是要回歸到戰隊裡面繼續訓練比賽，協會是不是可以指派替代役男到原來的戰隊去繼續服役？法規上是不行的，所以可能有很多對於替代役議題的反推上，我們想到很多方方面面會阻擋住電競替代役的相關法律問題。" }, { "speaker": "齊大均", "speech": "我們希望政府能有一個真正的主管機關或主管單位，比如像經濟部的數位內容「產業推動辦公室」，由一個專門的辦公室來管理電競產業相關的部分，以上。" }, { "speaker": "洪梓硯", "speech": "我們是中華民國電子競技運動協會，是國際電競聯盟IeSF的六個創始會員協會之一，與IeSF跟韓國KeSPA持續在做交流，我想這個月有一個很令人振奮的消息，12月6日芬蘭的奧委會通過電競變成運動項目，這個是最新加入，目前有四十七個國家加入IeSF裡面。" }, { "speaker": "洪梓硯", "speech": "對於今天的內容有個冒昧的說法，雖然政府設計一套很漂亮的東西，但是沒有人會來申請，因以現在一線的選手來講，多半會循藝人的方式，打到電競生涯沒有了之後再來服役就好，這個是目前這一套方式最大的問題。在上一次開會之後，協會內部有自己討論過，以循產業訓儲替代役的方式，在不考慮到修法這一件事會需要很多時間之前，我們覺得這一套方式是最好的，其實不會對選手有太多的限制，當然修法這一塊也不是我們在座說了就算，但是這對一線的選手會比較有幫助。" }, { "speaker": "洪梓硯", "speech": "另外一個想要討論的是，現在也許不需要太糾結現在要比賽的選手，其實有很多選手會在退役後才真正需要用到替代役，就像我剛剛講有比賽生命的人絕對不會來申請，除非產訓儲替代役過了以外。" }, { "speaker": "洪梓硯", "speech": "剛剛提到職業選手退役，另外一個是非職業選手，但是績優這部分也要討論，上個月在馬來西亞，之前在瑞典，臺灣有兩個去參加比賽，也算是績優的選手，因此可以列入考慮的範圍之內。" }, { "speaker": "洪梓硯", "speech": "歸納下來，第一個要討論的問題是有誰需要當替代役？第二個問題是有哪一些單位需要替代役？像剛剛有提到學校這一塊，將來也是會有非常多需求的地方。以我們協會在做在地推廣，我們現在有五位教練直接到學校授課，學校用的方式跟之前討論過的東西有一點像，我們將這一些退役的選手聘到學校裡面來，其實要進入學校去授課是需要資格的，學校是有限制的，他給我們的方式是如果是協會成員的話，就可以擁有授課資格，這個也是方式之一，在服替代役的狀況之下，他們也可以做這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "洪梓硯", "speech": "我們協會在跟各個學校接洽，目前有二十幾家學校會有授課的需求，以協會的立場，我們設定的門檻會比較高一點，不希望他去教遊戲，而是教電競產業長什麼樣子，不要誤人子弟，去學校跟學生講說電競選手僅是千中選一，但事實上還有很多從業人員有很多工作機會可以做，因此覺得如果替代役人員配額，除協會或者是戰隊之外，其實可以再增加一個──學校。" }, { "speaker": "洪梓硯", "speech": "再者，在產業的部分也是可以考慮的範圍之一，像我剛剛舉的Zowie例子，或者是股價很高的MSI在做電競經營的團隊，都是電競選手出身的，我們認為有能力留在業界的人，他們雖有役期的關係，我們可以讓他到產業去，期滿之後，產業要不要再聘，當然是由他們來決定，這個是我們給予選手福利，感謝他在青春年華為國家付出、電競付出，我們之後可以提供一個比較有後路的發展，這個是可以考量的範圍之一，以上，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "陳瑮莉", "speech": "我們是全國電競產業發展協會的常務監事陳瑮莉，我們覺得在電競替代役在資格認定上，或者將來電競替代役資格認定後到什麼單位去服役，在資格上可以確定。換言之，服役的單位是協會代訓或企業培訓，我覺得都是在電競替代役資格上的認定，可能要先認定這一件事，才知道這一個替代役是怎麼樣來執行。" }, { "speaker": "陳瑮莉", "speech": "第二，在協會的立場，就代訓這一件事上，我們在行為上是非常樂意來配合選手訓練的角色到協會來，只是協會在代訓契約的簽訂方面，協會要盡到哪一些訓練、推廣、學術及管理，必須要有相關的配套規定，協會在立場上是非常樂意協助，但是我看文化部建議的有一個疑問，我們放到企業去，會編列預算去協助，但是放到協會，這一個問題就沒有提到，其實企業是營利單位，或許要有經費來培育這一些選手，像臺灣現在整個的產業，都是靠企業在支撐這麼大，臺灣整個周邊產業有1,000億的產值，都是靠企業給協會贊助及支持，皆是企業的力量。如果協會協助電競替代役代訓這一件事上，我們是可以執行的，因此費用的問題，我們也很關心如何來達成這一件事；協會畢竟是非營利單位，我們很需要政府的協助。" }, { "speaker": "陳瑮莉", "speech": "因此，第三點我認為主管機關的認定，主計處編列預算這方面，在執行上我們可以全力配合，在費用上我們也會很需要支持，以上是我們這一次會議的心得，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝。還有朋友要補充嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果沒有的話，我綜整剛剛提到的：電競協會朋友們的意思是，如果是一線選手的話，其實即使是我們把產訓儲替代役設計出來，也未必會使用。一線選手最簡單的選項，是想盡各種辦法到三十三歲再入伍，所以這些設計都已經排除掉一線選手了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "產訓儲替代役的問題，是排除掉沒唸到大專的選手，而不管是以績優或其他資格來看，聽起來這些朋友都是佔多數。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "除此之外，也有綁約時間的問題。而且事實上需要修法，只要需要修法，就不可能讓我們坐在這邊決定。" }, { "speaker": "沈哲芳", "speech": "我再進一步詮釋，不好意思，再補充政委的意見。" }, { "speaker": "沈哲芳", "speech": "我們剛剛提到的部分可以再分三個層面來思考：" }, { "speaker": "沈哲芳", "speech": "第一，第一線的選手不可能來服產業訓儲或者一般替代役，如果願意以緩徵方式，可到三十三歲後再服役，一線的選手以這個方式這樣解決。" }, { "speaker": "沈哲芳", "speech": "第二，退役選手部分，剛才政委有提到，如果願意來服產業訓儲替代役的話，因為他已不是一線的選手，應該有時間去讀書，取得副學士以上學歷，這可在不修法的情況下來解決。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "產訓儲替代役，目前排除掉沒有唸到大專的朋友。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "役政署認為：於對已經不是第一線選手的朋友來說，如果要投入開發的話，也許念一個專科的學位，並不是太過分的要求，因此我們似乎並沒有因為這一些人，來修正兵役相關辦法的必要？" }, { "speaker": "沈哲芳", "speech": "對，因為要修法，如果放太低了，就會被人質疑。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "理解，現在放寬到專科已經被質疑，如果放寬到技術高中，更會被質疑。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "役政署的意思，是底下這一條路（降低產訓儲替代役門檻）先不考慮。如果大家沒有意見的話，那就是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那就剩上面，一般替代役的部分。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我這邊聽起來，主要的爭點有兩個：一個是要走公司代訓的話，其他表演藝術是不是也會要求相同的待遇？目前如果我們推出這個方案的話，事實上是否已知會有這樣子的要求？" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "比較難預期。會覺得文化部去補助電競，因為文化界的人是否認同電競文化，將這個推出去，我們很難預期，因為替代役之間都會互通消息，電競選手還有代訓費用，而文化單位及文化部其他業務所轄領域都沒有其他的代訓費用，他們也許會有這樣的聲音，這個是我們比較難預期的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以這樣聽起來還是要推出才會知道。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果我們不推出的話，其實我們沒有辦法知道其他表演藝術，對於電競作為一種表演藝術的想法是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "有一種方式，如果我們要做，我們可以先試辦一年。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以啊！" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "有時候試下去問題才知道在哪裡。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第二次跨部會協調的時候有說，第一年一定是試辦性質，這個是絕對沒有問題。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "有一些問題還要再釐清。與會先進說一般服役可以有代訓費用，像委託契約，一般協會也可以代訓，不過這個涉及到須與主計總處溝通，下一次可能是主計總處要來才會有共識，部會才能編預算。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然，理解。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你們有粗估過每位選手要多少費用？" }, { "speaker": "陳瑮莉", "speech": "還要有一些管理，這個費用可以再抓一下再提給文化部，我們回去抓一下費用。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不管你們要請他們去教通識課，或者是培訓專班，或者是跟公司研發合作，這些你們協會有一定的收入，不一定是完全免費義務做這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是在這一些進來之後，如果你們覺得成本還是沒有辦法攤平，或者仍然需要額外的錢的話，請提供文化部一個概算的表，因為主計單位並不會盲目編預算或盲目不編預算，其實有一個好的理由就可以做出來；尤其我們只是試辦第一年，所以實際做下去才會發現跟原本預估有一些超過或不足，我們第二年來檢討這一件事是否還要繼續，及如果要繼續的話，實際經費跟我們本來想像的一不一樣。好不好？" }, { "speaker": "陳瑮莉", "speech": "好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那就請協會幫忙。" }, { "speaker": "陳瑮莉", "speech": "好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們就請協會預估。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就代訓的部分，還有人覺得我們請公司代訓？或者就往協會走了？" }, { "speaker": "洪梓硯", "speech": "這裡指代訓是要比賽的意思嗎？" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "我的印象是一般沒有辦法直接分發到公司，變成要簽代訓合約，到那邊就是培訓打比賽，當時是想不要中斷比賽的生涯，他的戰隊還可以結合在一起，只是用代訓的方式沒有辦法領公司的薪水，獎金還是可以領，只能領6,000多元。但是到協會就不是走去參加比賽的模式，所以要用代訓的方式才能參加比賽。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是剛才已經排除掉一線選手，我們知道一線選手不會來，這樣參加比賽是否還有意義？" }, { "speaker": "洪梓硯", "speech": "一線跟二軍都不會來，雖然沒有掛名字。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也就是說，排除掉職業選手之後，代訓的意義就變小了。" }, { "speaker": "洪梓硯", "speech": "講明會落到這一個位置的狀況，選手通常都是從十五、十六歲觀察，通常走到這一個位置是在二十幾歲時，發現其才華沒有辦法走到國際舞臺，所以就退役或轉幕後，不是年紀到、不然就是技不如人，才會走到這一個狀況，不會有人佛心辦這一個階級的比賽給他們打，是否需要再代訓也是同一個考量，所以我覺得比較難。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當初我覺得要做這一個，是跟專班加在一起做的。全部的政策目的，就是正名、主流化，也就是讓大家知道電競跟其他任何的技藝表演一樣，是正當的表演業，並不是打電動玩具讓小孩走入歧途的東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有績優但是不能走到國際水準的朋友加入，也可以協助提升社會的觀感。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為第一線的選手不能來，所以公司代訓部分可以排除掉，就剩到協會這條路了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "還有沒有可以補充的？" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "剛才先進有提到是不是住宿費用補助跟代訓費用補助由文化部編預算，這還會引發效應。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "如果電競領域可補助的話，圍棋協會我們一毛錢都沒有給，圍棋協會可能也會要求比照辦理。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "目前文化部替代役分發到各縣市的政府也沒有補助，將來他們也可能會通通比照，大概是這樣──講來講去是錢的問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我這邊有一個詢問，也不是裁示，我很少裁示什麼。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為我們現在試辦一年，也是用這邊所提出費用的概估，也就是這一些選手貢獻的功能，協會也可以回收一些錢，這能不能cover住宿也不一定，也許夠或不夠用。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是至少在試辦一年之後，我們可以知道你們的估算到底有沒有道理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果那樣子估算出來之後，等這一年都結束了，我們再跟圍棋協會朋友們商量。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是說我們這邊實際算出來，也許發現配套之後，文化部乾脆就不用出錢，這樣就不會有雜音了。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "試辦一年，就變成比較低調。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "公協會是一個還是好幾個？有意願的是？" }, { "speaker": "陳瑮莉", "speech": "目前我們有意願。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "公協會的話，是要分發到誰？是不是要甄選？這個也是要考慮的。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "第一年是多少選手？上一次頂尖選手說僅個位數字。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是現在不是頂尖選手了。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "如果一個公協會沒有辦法承擔，是不是要兩個或三個公協會？第一年要試辦多少選手？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果公協會所需補助款，計算出來是0的話，就不造成文化部的負擔，是這樣嗎？" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果不是0的話，那估算出來就如實給文化部。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "文化部跟主計及相關單位去看怎樣撥到某一個程度的預算，不會惹到其他民怨的情況下，將總額除以計算出來的單位成本，我們就得到人數了。是這樣嗎？" }, { "speaker": "陳瑮莉", "speech": "（點頭）" }, { "speaker": "沈哲芳", "speech": "然後再開條件。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有意願的協會先估算成本及收益，估算完之後，文化部以這邊所估算到的來調配人數，如果人數調配到之後就開始談條件。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "條件必須要跟協會這邊，實際上好比像教課、到學校訓練、協助產業等等，這些資格要符合，是嗎？" }, { "speaker": "陳瑮莉", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好。還有什麼別的要討論？" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "那這樣時程上，是不是以明年作為目標？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們只是說試辦一年。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "明年的2月要甄選？" }, { "speaker": "沈哲芳", "speech": "專長資格的甄選條件，需用機關是要在2月份就要來做了。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "我們回去跟主計單位討論，如果有問題的話，還要跟院裡面的總處來瞭解一下科目o不ok。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "因為我們的預算今天在立法院審，我不知道估算出來的額度，會不會讓額度容納得下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "基本上剛剛講的順序是先把錢確定，然後再確定人數，再確定條件。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果錢確定之後，文化部這邊完全沒有科目可以動支，那今年就沒有辦法試辦，必須要等一年再試辦，就這樣。" }, { "speaker": "陳濟民", "speech": "106年要編的話，就要再延後一年（107年）了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也就是說，如果估出來每一個人需要的錢，遠超過文化部能動支的，這一件事就沒有了，就要等文化部先確定預算，也許是一兩年後，我們再來討論試辦。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我並沒有一定要馬上開始試辦。全部的目的只是要各界知道，我們目前在這個狀態裡。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有別的動議嗎？跟這件事沒有關係的也可以（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果沒有的話，我們就很有效率，五十分鐘結束這一個會，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "📗 感謝與會者同意，在電競活動的「智力」成份大於「體育（Physical Education）」成份的前提下，無論未來是否認定為智力運動（Mind Sport），我們都可以用「技藝文化表演者」來為電競選手正名。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "📗 感謝文化部願意比照圍棋替代役，作為需用機關，規劃一般替代役分發至電競協會服勤，於試辦一年後，視實際情況調整做法。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "Hello唐鳳你好，聽得到我的聲音嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你好，聽得很清楚。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "Hello你好，觀眾朋友，你現在看得到跟我一樣看得到的東西嗎？唐鳳，我現在看得到你的臉，然後你穿了一個黑色全身的套裝，然後外面有一個暗紅色的大披肩，但是這個並不是真實的影像，對嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，沒錯，然後我們現實生活中，身高有差多嗎？可以再小一點點。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "（笑）我如果站起來的話，沒有關係，因為可能節目上面…喔！唐鳳現在還不斷不斷地縮小、放大、縮小、放大中，因為我們現在開了大小框，我現在是坐著，希望大家看到、觀眾朋友看到，哇！真的好酷喔！我今天真的第一次透過這個方法跟唐鳳打招呼，我自己已經瞠目結舌，觀眾朋友跟我一起跟數位政委唐鳳打招呼，在下面留下你的留言跟提問，我接下來會花這樣訪問的時間把你的問題一一請教一下數位委員。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "政委一開始我們先玩玩這個小教室好了啦！因為您最近常常在PTT上面出沒，所以我們準備了一些鄉民小用語想要考考您。「BJ four」？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "BJ four，有人這樣唸嗎？不是唸「BJ四」嗎？" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "（笑）立刻就被政委嗆，好「BJ4」意思是？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不解釋。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "不解釋，觀眾朋友聽得到我們委員的聲音？Cona（音譯）說不解釋，好，戴宇廷（音譯）說好。另外還有「魯蛇」？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「魯蛇」跟「溫拿」是一對，就是一般人生中說是失敗者或成功者。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "好，委員，我現在聽到你在講話的時候，你的手勢也會有一些更動，這個是原來程式就設定好的嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，這是搭配我的聲音去配上嘴形跟手勢。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "我覺得非常地自然，在你講話的時候，它可以隨著聲音起伏。好，另外在PTT上面我常常看到「新警察」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個其實是比較最近才有的這樣一個想法，是2003、2004年左右才開始，就是菜鳥的意思，剛新來的人。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "好強喔！目前一路過關斬將。「UCCU」政委知道嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「UCCU」通常要配表情符號，就是「你看看你」的意思。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "好強喔！真的是！好，政委，我之前聽到一個異聞奇事，就是好像PPT上面有人在討論您的事情，然後您忽然用自己的帳號回文了，這是真的事情嗎？您到現在還常常在PTT上面看大家討論什麼事嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實，因為我非常非常早就參加臺灣BBS的文化，之前還有自己架過BBS站，然後PTT它其實是一個開放的軟體，所以裡面多多少少也有我們那一代人的貢獻，所以其實我有事沒事都會上PTT，應該登入次數還滿多的。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "還滿多的，是不是？最後一個問題想要請教，「富奸」？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「富奸」就是出外取材，然後暫停更新的意思，現在已經衍生東西做到一半，就不知道跑到哪裡去了，就是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "好可愛，我們今天在現場整理了像這一些「新警察」、「UCCU」、「盧蛇」、「溫拿」、「BJ4」，結果委員每一個都已經成功破關。好，委員因為現場技術設備的關係，可能要麻煩您在鏡頭上面說話的時候聲音稍微大聲一點，因為現場的人有一些反應聽不太清楚您的聲音。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "收音不太清楚，這樣有沒有好一點？" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "這樣好一點。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好的。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "觀眾朋友可以留言，告訴我喔！Cona說是版主嗎？獵人作者，然後育庭（音譯）說版主出來啦！現在陸陸續續都有加入我們，線上將近有3,000多位的網友在現場來看我們現在LIVE直播，所以我們準備了一些專門跟著唐鳳量身打造的問題。接下來要請教你們，你可以告訴我們一下你在哪裡？這個可以說的嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我現在在哪邊嗎？" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "你現在在哪裡？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我現在在這一個和室的房間裡面（路怡珍笑），它叫做Plurality，它是在Google彰化的一個機房裡面。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "Google在彰化，非常特別。您打算以後都用這一個方式跟媒體朋友見面、採訪嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣的採訪主要的差別是我們腦裡有一個類似的畫面，講話的時候比較不會尷尬，大概是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "可是我現在對你有很多、很多的想像，我就會想像你在做什麼、心裡在想什麼、現在穿什麼衣服，反而會讓我對你有更多的注意力，你有觀察到這個VR的特點嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有的。因為事實上我們如果是電話訪問的話，很容易就被旁邊跳出一個訊息或者是什麼其他東西的注意力被搶過去了，可是如果是戴著VR的話，其實不可能注意力被搶過去，因為它完全把你的眼睛遮住了。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "而且我還會一直很想看你的手勢，接下來還會怎麼樣接近你的身體或者遠離你的身體。今天在Yahoo TV同時線上人數觀看有1萬3,000名的網友，大家都是衝著您的名氣而來的。所以一開始先請教您六個鄉民用語，您都聽過了，而且完全都知道分別是什麼意思，所以如果用「資深鄉民」來形容你，是對的形容詞嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "完全沒有問題啊！我從1993年就是鄉民了，應該很久了。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "很久的時間，1993年到現在，哇！閱歷很深。因為我常常在報新聞，知道你做了一個破天荒的舉動，就是在PTT上面為了政府來徵才，完全沒有想到徵才跟政府人才與PTT可以連在一起，怎麼會有這一個想法？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實這不是我的想法，而是我辦公室的一個同仁Smart Lai的想法，我基本上就是幫忙。Smart Lai之所以會有這一個想法是因為他是公務人員版開版的版主，所以說那根本就是他幫忙建立起來的一個空間，所以他就是在那邊問說有沒有人對開放政府有興趣，大概這樣。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "政委，因為我們現在這是一個直播的節目，所以隨時會cue網友的問題來請教您，當然我們這邊也會作一個初步篩選。像這一個問題我就覺得很好，像Spring：有什麼人生名言是你的生活守則，可以跟我們分享嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個就是最近剛離開我們的Leonard Cohen，他說：「萬事萬物都有缺口，缺口就是光的入口」，這個想法。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "非常、非常好，Spring你有聽到嗎？我非常受感動。政委，您私底下的個性是怎麼樣的啊？可以跟我們分享您一天當中大概會做什麼樣的事，讓自己開心嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我的個性是有趣的事情就做，然後沒有趣的事情，會想辦法把它變有趣，而不是勉強自己做，這個大概是我最主要的個性，那不管是上班還是下班我們在這邊進行採訪都是一樣。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "一天當中您以政務委員的身份，什麼事是讓你覺得有趣，你會一直一直想做的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為我在政務委員辦公室裡面是用一種共同編輯的方式，也就是共筆的方式，大家一起來寫，不管是演講稿或者是對談或者是一些政策，所以看到各個不同學有專長的朋友們，好比五個人同時編輯一份文件，然後大家各自互相challenge、然後互相彌補彼此的不足，一、兩個小時一整份文件就完成了，這其實真的是滿有趣的事。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "共筆是我在大學的時候，每次期末考都唸不出來了，在上面要求大家的共筆，現在被政委帶進政府裡面，大家一起完成一件事。今天我們是用VR的方式跟您進行採訪，您第一次接觸到VR是什麼樣的情境？還記得嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "記得，那個就是在1月總統大選前一天，然後大選前一天我剛拿到Gear VR。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "1月15日，我記得，16日是開票的時間。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，就戴到眼睛上，剛好我第一個選的是Star Chart VR，也就是在國際太空站看地球的VR經驗，就覺得非常、非常感動。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "所以第一個拿到的device是Gear VR，是Samsung的，然後第一個體驗的是遊戲？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是星圖，是Star Chart。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "就是從外太空的角度看地球看的星圖？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，也可以去火星或者太陽系其他的星球，別的因為我們沒有資料，所以暫時還不能去。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "那時給您的感覺是什麼？您第一次看VR，然後沉浸在內容裡頭的時候，帶給你什麼樣的衝擊？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為從外太空看地球的時候，其實你看不到國界，所以其實是一種很平靜的感受，然後另外一種感受是原來地球這麼小，其實我們平常在地上因為被雲層遮住，其實很難感受到我們其實是在許多星球中間的一個小星球而已，所以在這樣的情況下，就比較強烈感覺到說，任何問題都是全球的問題，比較不會有分你的、我的這一些，就是比較狹隘的想法會從腦裡消失。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "我現在有一種比較特別的感覺，因為我很多很多經驗是面對面的訪談，現在透過這一種VR的方式跟您進行，一開始我覺得非常驚奇，我會整個人盯著您的形象，然後一直一直在腦袋裡面有很多小劇場，但是隨著我慢慢習慣VR的訪問，我反而好像回到了廣播的時代，好像會非常非常專注在你的聲音、用字跟你想要陳述的內容，這也是對於受訪新聞產業還有訪談者一個非常非常新的刺激。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "我就接著問了，因為在1月15日大選前一天，您接觸了這樣子的技術，所以您是一接下數位政委這個職務，就決心要把VR帶進政府體系裡頭嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是的，我從那個時候接觸這個技術的時候，其實我之前在一個叫做「第二人生（second life）」，已經有過相當久的開發經驗，那個是很久以前的多人線上系統，它也是跟這個很像，但是它不是VR、它是二維的。High Fidelity就是我們現在正在裡面的這一個系統，它是「第二人生（second life）」的作者，後來針對VR做的另外一個開源的作品，所以我本來就在開放源碼界參與這一個東西的應用。後來發現我人在巴黎，然後全臺灣的媒體都想要訪問我，然後我在巴黎的網路頻寬又沒有特別好，其實只能語音通話，其實搭配這個東西，至少你有我的形象可以看，我們可以比較專注在彼此上面，大概是這樣的想法。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "我完全感覺，而且打破了時間、空間的限制，可以直接知道第一時間的回饋。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "現在網友陸陸續續有很多問題進來，我這邊篩選我覺得非常有趣的，像曉雲問說：互動裝置對您的科技生活當中，您使用頻繁嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "互動裝置？" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "像人機互動界面，或者打遊戲也會的互動裝置，體感操作的東西…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該沒有哪一個東西不是互動裝置吧！就連我用電子紙或者用iPad、Apple pencil或者其他的也都是互動裝置，只要不是貼在牆上，然後就是你看它或戳它，它都沒有反應，那個才不是互動裝置，現在應該全部都是互動裝置。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "好，小雲你再把你的問題再重新整理一下，打得精確一點，我再來追問委員互動裝置的想法。另外也會有人問說，請問您會上GGC打魔獸嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有耶！我通常是玩回合制的遊戲，所以會玩XCOM2，會玩文明帝國，文明帝國從一開始到現在都玩，但是即時的遊戲就玩得比較少。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "好，沒問題。這個問題是我非常想問的，因為現在資訊跟媒體都是處在爆炸的狀態，為什麼還需要一種新型資訊體驗的方式？就是VR，為什麼我們需要它？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實你剛剛已經回答了這個問題，就是它讓我們回到廣播這一種我全神貫注聽你說話、你全神貫注聽我說話的這個最純粹交談情境，它另外一個好處是好比像我們現在如果有十個人都在這個房間裡，你可以知道另外八個人的注意力現在在哪裡、在誰身上，他們也可以用一些手勢等等來參加我們的對話，所以毋寧是說他回到我們人跟人之間面對面的這樣一種溝通方式，然後試著去模擬它，就比較不會有資訊爆炸的感覺。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "我覺得是非常好的回答，解決了我在過去一直想要接受VR時，有一些覺得可以再更加把勁的地方，其實是帶回感官上面更純粹、更專注的一個力量。每次直播跟VR這一件事都會講在一起，都會覺得說2016年對於直播跟VR來說都是一件很新的事情，對於政府應該怎麼借用這兩股力量，你有什麼想法？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我覺得政府現在已經非常廣泛地運用直播，因為直播的門檻實在是太低了，所以好比像說我們開一個公聽會，場地只能容納兩百人或者一百人，但是透過直播，線上就可以有上千人或者是上萬人一起進來，發表大家的想法，這就是打破空間的限制。但是在VR上面，我當然覺得有一些額外的好處，也就是我們同樣是直播，但如果我現在想要拿出一個模型來開一個網頁、做一些互動式的操作，比耳語的方式更容易操作。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "明白。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "我知道您在出席公聽會的時候，其實常常會帶一些…像上次帶了一個水冷式的電競筆電，讓大家很吃驚、也很好奇，過去跟媒體也常常會問他們要一起玩VR的東西嗎？接下來您在數位政府相關的倡議裡面，還會想要介紹什麼新的趨勢嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實就是隨著科技變成一個大家能夠接受的程度，我就會自然地去使用。舉例來說：雖然我在臺灣的時候，有一位機要秘書幫我安排行程，可是我之前兩個星期在歐洲，其實不太可能靠臺灣的秘書來幫我安排行程，所以我在那兩個禮拜裡面，就是用一個人工智慧的程式，任何人想要約我的時間，我就回信，然後就CC給那個人工智慧，請幫我預約三十分鐘的時間跟某某人見面，它就會幫我把約時間、地點、確定要用什麼方式會面，甚至對方改時間等等都跟它約好了，最後再加到我的日曆上，這等於是所有秘書需要做的工作，都是用人工智慧把它做完，大概是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "我認為非常好奇，因為過去大家對於政府的刻板印象是比較慢，然後對於新資訊、潮流、接受度比較低，然後要推動事情的時候，感覺都會用最保守的做法，就是我們對於政府的刻版印象。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "您入閣之後，現在在推動相關的政策，您的語言跟想要做的事情，跟政府原來體系上的文化，會用格格不入來形容它嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不會啊！我目前碰到的公務員都覺得開會可以用電子白板，而不需要只讀PPT很酷，而且現在都學會了，其實在iPad上面寫字跟紙上寫字也沒有兩樣，其實共筆跟開一個word編輯器其實也沒有兩樣，我覺得這個傳染力滿快的，不管年齡、環節等等，只要看到一個可以讓它早一點下班，而不是晚一點下班的工具都還滿好推的。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "不知道政委最近有沒有在看Yahoo TV系列節目，不論是我們在討論Uber、Airbnb這一些新型的共享經濟或者是新型的科技公司進入臺灣的時候，其實網路上非常非常多人關注臺灣未來的數位環境、產品及服務，大家也很期待您接下來的作為。您如果有一件最想改變的事情，或者您任務一定要做的，您會覺得是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我是做興趣的啦！但是我想這樣子，我希望可以讓政府裡面的朋友更信任大家一點、更信任人民一點，我想信任是雙向的，就像一個雙人舞，政府有多信任人民，人民才有可能多信任政府，總要有一邊先邁步來，所以我相信就是說具體可以做的貢獻，就是讓政府裡的更多朋友，能夠學著更信任大家一點點。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "政府多信任人民？是這個方向？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "意思是人民的訴求、人民想要的東西，及人民覺得需要更暢通、更開放的政府應該要授權完成？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。其實想法就是我們叫「collective intelligence」，就是把一個東西拋出來，然後讓大家一起去想、集思廣益，通常只要你拋出來的東西是大家看得懂的、有興趣的、有利益相關的，其實最後即使像PTT這樣子完全不能用互動式的方式來進行討論的地方，其實反而大家會專注在內容上，然後常常討論出非常好的結果來，就是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "問您會不會覺得跟現在的政府在文化上、語言上不太相同，及您最想要做的事情及任務是什麼的原因是，我接下來想要問：您到現在如果目前要給內閣團隊科技上的適應分數，你會打幾分？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為內閣團隊裡面絕大部分的朋友，我就是在院會跟政務會議有見過面，但是其實並沒有一起密切地合作，所以我要打分數是不負責任的。但是所有跟我實際有面對面溝通或者開過會等等朋友的話，剛才已經說了，大家的適應力都是非常好的，我同樣也在適應大家講的一些可能比較專門或者是我還需要學習的東西，這都是雙向的，所以我覺得我適應得多快，其他人對我的感覺就是院能夠跟我講一些實際的事情，所以都是雙向的。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "所以沒有要打分數的意思？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，並沒有打分數的意思，我從小就不喜歡別人打我分數，所以己所不欲，勿施予人（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "接下來這一個問題有一點硬，但是因為在網友的討論上，我們偵測到這一個問題，是網友想要提問的：因為現在蔡英文政府希望可以放寬白領高階人士來臺，如專業經理人或有專業知識門檻的人，不容易被取代的相關政策，希望臺灣更面向世界。是不是代表臺灣原來沒有競爭力？或者是相關的產業被滅絕了，您會有這樣的擔心嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該沒有耶！這個其實是一個整體的配套措施，不是他一個人來，而是對於他的家人或者是有不同語言或者不同文化的朋友們，一些在生活上面怎麼樣比較便利等等的東西做一個全盤的調適，只是變成一個比較多元、友善的一方，而不是說完全是要針對特定的產業或者是說要什麼蓋臺之類的，我不是很確定後面這個想法（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "您也同意讓專業、高階份子來臺灣工作，讓臺灣的就業環境更開放這一件事，您是支持的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該是這樣說，如果我們現在的法令裡面有不合理的，造成人家來臺灣的一些困難或者麻煩，然後其實也沒有任何實際的效益，就是說造成他的困難並不是為了保護主義，而是當時訂法規的人沒有想到，這個東西當然可以優先調整跟解除，我想這個部分至少沒有問題的。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "明白，有適度性的，至少在法令上有困難的地方，可以優先處理。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "接下來這個問題是我自己很想請教政委，您長時間推動的事情比較像是幕後，不論是公民駭客的身份或是g0v裡面帶領大家技術上發起的角色，但是現在所有媒體聚焦關注在您身上時，您有不適應的感覺嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是還好啦！因為我從小大概八、九歲的時候，當時還是兒童日報的時候，我父母親就每個禮拜在專欄上報告我的成長進度，所以我們在心理學上這個叫做「減敏（Desensitization）」，就是本來可能覺得有壓力的，可是你每個禮拜、每個禮拜這樣子慢慢就習慣。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "我想追問這件事，怎麼可能真的習慣呢？因為包括您的私領域，包括您的選擇，包括您跟誰的交往程度、交往多久時間，您對特定議題上的取向，在報紙上、Google都可以search得到了，這種開放…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "包含我用電動牙刷還是一般牙刷都可以搜尋得到。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "我的問題是開放到這一個程度了，您還是覺得開放跟自由的資訊是一件重要的事？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那當然，而且其實你搜尋得到，你不會問我一樣的問題，所以總的來講，我的時間是有節省的。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "（笑）好，整個新聞製作團隊噗嗤了一聲，原來時間有節省，聰明！乾脆自己寫自己的維基百科，下次有記者朋友來問，去看就好了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實維基百科不能自己寫。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "完了，被噹了（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "它必須要是有第三方可以查證的來源，我作為政務委員不能教壞大家數位文化。所以從某個角度來講，維基百科只能放第三方的資訊。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "好，現在在Yahoo TV上面總共有1萬7,000名同時在線的人數跟我們一起觀看現在數位政委用數位VR的方式接受數位新媒體的訪問，這個在每一個角度上面來說，其實都是非常非常有科技元素的。您為什麼對科技這麼情有獨鐘？可以是藝術、畫畫、做菜或者是任何其他領域，為什麼開放、coding，甚至改變現狀這一件事，這麼燃燒著你的熱情？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實技術是藝術的基礎，技術問題解決才有藝術，如果技術問題不解決的話，完全沒有創作的空間。所以我相信我做的事情其實比較像是把一個畫布準備好，你不會一筆畫上去，然後它好像沒有留下痕跡，你也不會一筆畫上去然後就黏住了，而是在這樣一個數位的世界裡面，把它準備好，讓所有的朋友們都可以自己揮灑出自己想要創造的東西。之前如果有當過版主或甚至自己架過BBS站的話，其實都會有這樣子共同的經驗，就是我們一開始第一代的站長們都是這樣子的想法。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "我也是在第一代站長們努力之下，在PPT上面度過了非常非常多歡樂的時光（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "委員，這一個問題我也非常有興趣，我會覺得這個是很困難的問題，所以我想請教您：我們知道現在美國是一個在科技領域上面非常前緣的國家，有專業的科技顧問，打選戰會用數字的方式、社群媒體的新操作。您在很多國際場合上都會遇到這樣的問題，如果國外的人們不瞭解臺灣現在政府的數位環境跟數位努力，你會如何形容現在臺灣在數位版圖上的位置及定位？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "臺灣很有意思的，我們這一代是有言論自由的第一代，只要比我們年紀大的人其實都經歷過解嚴以前沒有言論自由的狀況，我們有言論自由的那一年就是88年、89年，剛好就是個人電腦出現的同一年。同樣的，總統直選1996年是全球資訊網走入大家生活的同一年，所以我通常會跟國外朋友說在臺灣民主、自由與電腦、網路並不是兩件事，我們是同一代人，這兩個都是同時發生的。這個有什麼結果？所有不管是政府或者是私人企業，只要任何想要讓言論自由收回去的，我們這一代都不同意，甚至只是「聽說」可能要在電信上或者什麼東西對言論自由出管制，大家就會軒然大波擋下來，這是很特殊的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一件事，我們的朋友們對於透明、參與及課責的這一些要求，遠超過國際上一般其他國家或者是老牌的民主國家，我們怎麼樣做都不夠好，可是這樣的意思是我們盡力做的時候，我們可以做出很不錯的成果。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "更棒的成績。委員，在聽你講話的時候，所有的網友都在下面認真地推文、中肯，說聽委員受訪很享受，聲音很清楚、邏輯思維表達很好。所以接下來我想要把鏡頭跟發言權還給網友，網友問說：接下來有沒有VR技術拍電影的打算，風涼問的（笑）？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我覺得有一些大型的電影製作會做一些set，然後裡面有很多那個時代的道具這一些東西，但是拍完之後，往往不會因為再維護的關係，所以那一些就不見了，我一直覺得說如果能夠把它數位化的話，未來在還原上面，不管是我們把整個set移到VR裡面拍，或者是再用3D列印或其他東西重新重現的話，你就不用重新再做調查一次古物還原的工作，因此拍續集的時候，可以省非常多的力氣；我個人沒有拍電影的計畫，但是知道有一些朋友往這一個方向去規劃。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "政委，我昨天跟朋友聊天的時候，臺灣現在有兩千家的製作公司，你可以相信嗎？兩千一百萬萬人口裡面有兩千家的製作公司，每一間導演都是自己一間公司，希望臺灣可以有一些前緣的影像產出，試圖可以影響整個華文文化，所以政委如果推動跟任何與影像有關的數位政策，要把很大的人才考量進去。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "另外威成（音譯）問：在創造跟設計上，人工智慧如何帶來一些新的刺激？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "舉例來說，像各位現在看到我的這一個模型，它其實就是用攝影機拍出來的，我實際走出一個攝影棚拍出來。用拍出來的影像知道我的關節在哪裡、手指頭在哪裡等等的工作，本來是要3D建模的老師們一點點起來，但是現在這一個工作已經被一個叫做Mixamo的人工智慧所替代了，我們這邊有一個簡單的趨勢想法，就是只要你花不到一秒就可以做的事情，然後它的輸入跟輸出格式是固定的，舉例來說你看到我的模型，你不到一秒，就可以指出左手在這邊，現在這樣的工作全部都可以用人工智慧來做。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "很多人會覺得這是反撲，美國很多矽谷大老會覺得人工智慧是未來的敵人，您在這一個議題上是傾向可以全部發展人工智慧？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該是說如果不假思索就可以做的事，本來在工作的時候，做這樣的事情就是很麻煩的事情，我們叫做「冗事」，就是讓人覺得不舒服，你在工作的時候做一些很瑣碎，然後跟你的價值或者創造都沒有關係的事，從我的角度來看，當然把這一些事全部都自動化掉之後，大家就可以專注在比較有意義的創作上，也可以減少勞動者的異化，我覺得整體來講並不是一件壞事。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "因為時間的關係，我有最後一個問題想要帶著所有的觀眾朋友一起請教您：在這一些數位變革還沒有發生之前，有人會覺得人跟人之間的互動比較真實，現在因為所有的資訊，像我訪問您，我看不到您、摸不到您，也看不到您真實的表情，會不會反而覺得人跟人的距離跟真實的定義被數位取代了？接下來我們邁向的是一個空虛的數位時代？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這是非常好的問題。確實，如果我們就習慣說這樣子就夠好了，那就像電話剛發明的時候一樣，但是事實上線上的東西可以用來取代線下，就是你覺得這樣就夠好了；可是反過來講，我現在看到你這樣子，我們也聊天聊得很開心等等，這樣子在實際空間裡面，下一次的見面其實是非常有幫助的。舉例來說：我三個禮拜前曾經用一台機器人的身份在馬德里指導了大概八個國家各種不同團隊開發了一個星期的程式，因為大家覺得我是一個機器人——我就是開機器人走來走去——大家對我很熟悉、有印象，我對那個空間也有感受了，過了一個星期之後，我就搭飛機實際去馬德里，完全無縫接軌，我既已經在那邊有一個禮拜的感覺，他們也覺得這不是陌生人的感覺，事實上我們更善用彼此的時間在實體交流裡面，這完全要看怎麼去運用它。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "也有可能我們現在的交流，對於下一次實體見面，反而是打下基礎的基石。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "大家非常好奇現在委員都在做什麼事，也有人會覺得說委員入閣對於新政府來說只是一個裝飾品，我最常在PPT上面看到大家這樣形容你，現在開放資訊很厲害，因為委員有一個自己的網站叫做「sayit.archive.tw/speeches」，所以我們的小編也在我們今天的留言上貼下了這個網站，委員一天生活、想要做的事、達成的任務，全部在這一個開放的空間上面記載了詳詳細細，是不是裝飾品，我想所有的人心目中都有一把尺，是不是真的一樣愛臺灣跟希望臺灣越來越好，希望唐鳳政委跟所有關心數位科技的網路民，我們可以一起期待臺灣會有更新、很更好的發展，謝謝接受這一次讓所有製作人腋下很濕、非常緊張，然後兩個禮拜睡不著覺的新聞訪問，謝謝委員（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非常感謝。最後再回答陳如如這位網友的問題：其實我們為了要準備這一個採訪，我們是完全在語音上面這一層做出來。事實上我們都可以穿上穿戴式裝置，可以把手勢這一些東西帶進來，但是為了不要再增加製作人的麻煩，所以說我們先測試到這邊，可能未來會更有一些非語言訊息的傳遞。" }, { "speaker": "路怡珍", "speech": "所以這一位網友是陳如如，是不是？可以來Yahoo攝影棚，來，給你看現在有多少人、多慌亂為了做這一次3D的訪問，謝謝唐鳳。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝，晚安。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們就正式開始。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家好，大家早安，真的很高興今天大家在繁忙的公務中撥冗來這邊，這一次非常感謝各部會的副首長們及主委親自出席，今天在這邊主要想要討論的事情是行政院接下來推動「開放政府」這一項工作，希望透過今天的討論來凝聚出一些共識，對於內容、策略及目標有一些一致的理解。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "要先說明的是，這一次的會議跟我進行政院之後主持的任何會議一樣，都會請速錄師在這邊當場製作逐字稿，會會議結束之後提供各位與會者閱覽及修改，十天之後會公開上網，任何人包括在看直播的朋友們，都可以在十天後於「公共數位創新空間（PDIS）」的網站上可以閱讀這一份會議逐字紀錄提出看法及建議，不只是資訊透明，也可以在下一次討論「開放政府」議題時，建立在今天大家集思廣益的基礎上，這個是透過「開放政府」來健全民主的其中一個方法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "回到主題，從國際的觀點來看，「開放政府」的概念在民主制度中是相對新鮮，也持續演進，但是成為全球的趨勢。舉例來說：我上一個星期人在巴黎參加2016年的OGP開放政府夥伴聯盟年會，會中有大概2,500位朋友分別來自一百多個國家，二十幾個國家的總統、總理及部長與會，德國的部長Thomas de Maizière表示，未來人們不會把國家分為左派或右派，而是用開放與封閉來區分。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "很高興的是，臺灣並沒有在「開放政府」的國際浪潮中掉隊，事實上在數位科技應用的領先及網路社群的發展，臺灣在開放政府的舞臺上，具有相當的國際上能見度。在法國廣播電臺報導中也提到：「明天的臺灣，肯定有賴於零時政府的公民—那些hackers。」但是「開放政府」是政府與民間的協力，用民間的熱情沒有辦法成事，政府機關才是開放政府不可或缺的要角，如果沒有政府的投入與推動，開放政府的實踐，勢必會事倍功半。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "蔡英文總統在這一個月1日曾經表示希望政府持續盡hacker的精神，推動開放政府與數位國家，林全院長也在兩個星期前的行政院會裁示：「『開放政府』是當前政府的基本理念與政策目標，如何透過資訊透明公開及擴大公民參與，建立政府與社會各界坦誠對話、相互信任的夥伴關係，政府各部門都必須重視。」" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們稍微討論一下，以我的理解開放政府的內容是什麼？歡迎大家補充。就我的理有三個最核心的要素：是透明（Transparency）、參與（Participation）及課責（Accountability）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「透明」其實是包含政府的資訊公開，把專業的術語轉化成常民的語言，讓關心議題的每一個人，都能夠盡早瞭解政府討論的議題內容。而當公眾已經有常規透明化的程序，瞭解政府規劃中的議題後，我們在決策過程中，就可以邀請公眾盡可能對於自己利益關心或有關心議題提出感受及想法，在這個參與的過程中，政府除了傾聽之外，我們更可以主動凝聚誤解、焦點，然後整合出可行的方案。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "透過公眾參與之後，每一個參與者最關心的是，想要瞭解提出的這一個意見，未來會獲得什麼回應。所以後續也必須規劃協調個放意見的完整紀錄，讓各方觀點都接受公評，也讓公眾瞭解此項議題在討論後有哪一些爭點，以及協調出哪一些具體結論、承諾，方便大家持續關心，這就是課責的精神。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "首先讓政府運作讓大家理解、讓更多人加入，然後在檢視權責歸屬及執行成果，這是「開放政府」的基本架構。這個還是在發展中的概念，上週巴黎OGP的大會中，有很多朋友提到「涵容（inclusion）」與「多元（diversity）」的元素，意思是原本沒有關心公共實務習慣的民眾，也想辦法讓大家瞭解到參與的重要性，才可以用離自己家最近的地方，比如社區管理委員會或這樣的層級做起，這樣才是民主升化的方式，公民才不會受到煽動性言論的挑撥，而養成難以就事論事的惡性狀態。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "再提到開放政府想要達成的目標。我們想要做的是希望擴大公眾在事前以及決策過程中的參與，讓公共政策的思考、更周延及平和，同時降低公眾因為不瞭解覺得被排除，講了也沒有用，對公共政策所產生的疑慮及不滿。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "現行制度雖然在政策法規的制定過程中，也有公告、舉辦公聽會等各樣的作為，但有時好比限於時間、硬體及場地，其實常常的與會者不足以涵蓋所有的利害關係人，相信大家都有經驗，因為利害關係人不信任政府，就乾脆缺席的情況發生；在某些情況下，也不能否認有時我們會「已讀不回」或是「有公開、沒有對話」、「只有參與、沒有回應」，這樣「開放政府」的形式情況下，比較容易傷害人民跟政府間的互信基礎。我一向認為是，政府多信任人民，人民才能夠多信任政府，如果現在有些人民對政府不信任的話，我們可以先從自己做起，再想想說如何可以更信任人民一點。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "各位或許已經注意到投資貿易相關法律及所有法規命令，從9月5日開始，在行政院公報公告周知的時間，自十四天延長到六十天，行政院進一步要求，從明年1月開始，這一些需要公告六十日的法律或法規命令，都必須在國發會的「眾開講」，不只是單純的資訊公開，而是所有法規要修正之前，都有六十天的時間傾聽與回應各方的意見，這是逐步建立互信的方式。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然，第一個大家想到的可能是工作量增加（笑），並不會覺得開放政府的工作繁複，而變成公務同仁不可以承受的負擔，因此我具體可以貢獻的是：透過數位科技、資訊系統、人工智慧及機器學習的工作，來彌補現在系統與制度的不足。當然，目的仍然是希望「缺席利益關係人」能夠進場，建立更完整的對話管道，讓我們知道每一個政策推行的時候，實際上會受到影響的 是哪一些人來成就更全面的包容與共識。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "個人一向的想法是機器可以做的事，人就不用來做，因此我一到行政院之後就推動Open API，讓政府龐雜的資訊變成機器可讀、更容易自動化及運用、改做及整合，很感謝國發會跟工程會的幫忙，初步的方案包括採購法的修改已經放在「眾開講」的平台上，也已經收到業界、其他資訊服務業者的意見。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「開放政府」的策略是，我想強調的是各部會才是主角，我們在院裡面—尤其我的辦公室只是扮演政策統合及後勤支援的功能—PDIS這一個小組是行政院內部推動開放政府的幕僚編組，也就是各位幕僚的幕僚。我們的工作是協助各部會建立開放政府的處理能量，提供技術上的支援。舉例來說：我們在院裡面簡化了內部溝通、強化跨部會合作的協作平台，它是可以線上共筆、共享一些資料夾等等—叫做「Sandstorm」—透過資訊整合的串接，目前跟農委會及財政部的合作，建立部分品項的「菜價看板」，希望藉由資訊對接跟透明，讓各界充分掌握當下各環節間農產品價格、供給運銷，而能消弭人為的炒作跟疑慮。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "國發會在「開放政府」的領域已經有相當的基礎及經驗，未來仍是「開放政府」主要的幕僚部會，將持續帶領各部會推動相關的工作。例如：像剛剛提到「眾開講」的「Join」平台，以及大家有聽到越來越紅5,000人的「提點子」，這個都是國發會公共政策網路參與平台的一部分。「Join」平台其實已經涵蓋了基本的「透明」、「參與」及「課責」，未來會持續強化它的功能；還有已經推動一段時間的「開放資料（Open Data）」，各位是兼任資訊長的副首長，一定也不陌生。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「開放政府」如果真的要落實的話，要內化於各部會的組織當中，用適當的人力制度作為基礎，因此兩個禮拜前，林全院長在院會的提示是：「開放政府的工作，各部會應該有專人來負責整合、聯繫與協調，請各部會指派具有公眾溝通熱忱、熟悉政策業務與網路工具的同仁全職擔任，且由各部會資訊長或副首長，（也就是在座的大家），直接督導。」換句話說，我們希望各部會都能夠指派開放政府的專責人員，而且是相當層級以上，獲得充分授權，來協助發揮整合、聯繫與協調的功能，否則如果專責人員在機關內部比較難溝通協調的話，其實很難期待對外與民眾的對話協作。為什麼是希望專責人員？如果各位回想一下臺灣民主的進展，其實政府更重視民意，在當時各部會都有必備專責的國會與新聞聯絡人員，對於國會及媒體的聯絡朋友。其實在民主化之後，行政院跟各部會國會與新聞聯絡人，他們之間也建立了一套SOP，彼此間也有緊密合作，這一套的想法就是從這樣的想法脫胎而來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "隨著網路社會的發展，民眾有更快捷的管道來參與公眾事務，要能保持與民意緊密結合的話，就像我講的德國內政部長所說的，「開放政府」是不可回頭潮流，而且是長期持續培力的工作。基於同樣的理由，我會希望以常任人員來擔任，也就是常任文官—當然國防部可能是軍官—以便工作的接軌與經驗的傳承，雖然我理解有一些部會的機要人員在「開放政府」工作已經有很突出的表現，但也仍然希望他們可以跟常任的朋友繼續合作。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "至於專責人員可以看一下專業的技能，除了善用網路與實體整合的工具，瞭解公共參與的文化之外，大體上來說的是轉譯專業語言至常民語言、主持會議收斂爭點及紀錄，有一些我們會提供資源，比如：前面提到的「速錄人才資料庫」，也會建立跨部會網路協作平台，方便每一個部會聯絡人橫向溝通、經驗分享，以及有任何案子的時候能夠彼此支援，絕對不會讓各部會的專責人員感到孤單。未來幾個月會陸續請國發會辦理培力的工作坊，協助各部會的專責人員一步步上手。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然我繼續這樣子講下去，就變成佈道大會，可能跟開放政府有一點違背，其實我只想一個觀點：我們之前常常會覺得要政策、草案都寫到非常完整、完美，外界可能沒有罵的空間，然後再公開出來。其實從民眾的角度來看，參與空間因此是縮小的，我覺得我們不需要等到方案面面俱到才跟民眾開始對話，方案越不完美、越可能有爭議，及越在政策初期還沒有一定要用哪一些法條來運行的時候，其實民眾才有參與的動力，這時候我們提供清楚的資料，就可以召喚民間的協作，未來的施政阻力就越小，其實民眾就會有一個感覺最後制定出來的草案或者是定案，哪一些部分是提出來的看法或者是意見。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以接下來就請各位首長及副首長對於上述「開放政府」、專職聯絡人說明提出看法及建議，或者是毫不留情的質疑；同時也跟網路上的朋友們說一聲，今天是測試直播，在這邊告一個段落，關心的朋友們回到PDIS的網站，就可以看到這一次的會議，大家發言的全貌，可以留言、繼續提問，並分享心得，今天的直播就到這裡。請新傳處收播，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "今天的議程非常簡單，就是只有兩項：第一，「開放政府」的政策目標及工作架構；第二，專責聯絡人的職責。大家手上都有我們初步擬出來的書面資料，其實今天主要想要聽大家的意見，盡可能去討論一下這個事實上是否可行、有無什麼我們沒有想到的地方；我想一定有很多，其實各位也一定之前有參與過公聽會、說明會或網路上的公共政策參與經驗，有任何想到或想要問的，我們就直接討論，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "討論議題一：開放政府之政策目標與工作架構。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "我想先呼應一下政委今天開這一個會，然後也希望一方面傳達相關訊息，能夠共同思考如何有效推動，我先分享一點經驗。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "我個人滿幸運的，有機會參與到跟民眾互動，長期以來強調民眾參與這一塊的經驗，又有機會在公部門裡面工作。我想分享的是，一般來講，我們可能會覺得政府部門好好做就沒有問題了，或者是民間看起來好像可以監督，但現在真的是時代不一樣。我就用一個比喻：如果我們邀請大家一起來煮飯，而不是讓一部分的人等著開飯的話，其實整個狀況是不一樣的，開飯的人也許會抱怨飯怎麼煮得怎麼那麼慢，端出來又說不好吃，但是如果一邊煮飯的話，他並不會焦慮，他知道哪一些過程正在進行中，他又參與做菜的話，那個煮出來的東西，也是他做的，所以也會津津有味。所以我們要盡可能把心裡面的一些擔憂先卸下來，讓大家一起參與。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "資料開放是一部分，決策的開放是更重要。有一點想法的時候就試著拋出來，不要想說這一個想法是否不完整；（想法）當然是不完整，但反而拋出來有一些意見可以加進來，而且其實重點是態度，也就是讓大家有那一個誠意及願意開放出來，整個討論的過程就會很不一樣，所以鼓勵大家，這個部分請不用擔心。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "另外一個部分，我想各個次長都很忙，不一定有機會能夠充分瞭解到這一個事情要做到什麼程度，有一些部會的精彩案例也不一定大家都知道，政委也有說希望未來可以辦一些工作坊讓大家瞭解，但要想辦法有機會可以讓次長級的副首長們有機會瞭解，雖然時間很有限，但也許有機會，可以安排兩、三個時間讓他們選，雖不一定第一個時間可以到，但下一次的時間也許可以到，也許辦一、兩次這樣的深度會談（會更清楚）。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "今天有深度會談的機會很好，如果今天意猶未盡的話，也可以再辦一、兩次，忙的人從兩個時間當中選一個時間參與，這樣才比較有效，將這個理念與政策傳達下去，讓次長們聽得懂並瞭解清楚，我相信部會就會找到操作的方式與執行，以上分享——我真的覺得我們應該要努力來做這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "詹婷怡", "speech": "大家好，我是通傳會，我大概分享一下我的經驗及接下來通傳會可能會有一些什麼做法。" }, { "speaker": "詹婷怡", "speech": "我來自民間，而且長期在網路跟社群，包括大家很熟悉的「vTaiwan」，過去就是資策會科法所跟g0v一起合作，所以我要呼應剛剛唐政委跟副主委提到的部分。" }, { "speaker": "詹婷怡", "speech": "「開放政府」其實是很重要的國際發展趨勢，最重要的其實是資訊技術有效運用，也讓我們應該要採取這樣的方式，這裡面有一個非常重要的關鍵點，也就是所謂的「multi stakeholders」。其實現在所有資訊科技有效應用帶動的政府、生活及產業各方面的面向有非常多的利害關係人參與在內。過去通傳會的做法，我相信各部會其實也都差不多，也就是針對草案其實之前就有剛剛政委所提到的公告一定時間，當然從十四天再延長到六十天，這東西其實是可以開放有不同的人可以參與，但未來其實我覺得有一個很重要的關鍵點，即如何有效應用科技來支持剛剛談到的那一個過程，讓更多人的意見放進來，尤其是一些創新改進。" }, { "speaker": "詹婷怡", "speech": "比如針對特定的議題，其實通傳會在上上禮拜就有針對Open Internet的概念，那個效果滿好的，現場有官員、業者及不同的利害關係人，線上也有參與的機會，所以其實關鍵的重點就如同剛剛曾副主委提到的multi stakeholders，在這樣開放的環境裡，這就是公私協力效果的呈現。" }, { "speaker": "詹婷怡", "speech": "我要再談到網路治理的概念，如果現在是資訊科技有效應用帶動，其實從數位匯流、通訊傳播環境的改變，以及政府決策、產業創新的研發、新商業模式及ecosystem系統重建，另外還有每一個人日常生活、食衣住行的方式都改變，其實都建立在一個網路治理所打造的概念之下。" }, { "speaker": "詹婷怡", "speech": "剛好也藉這一個機會跟各位稍微說明一下，過去行政院有推動匯流五法，大家都耳熟能詳，其中有一部草案是「電子通訊傳播法」，通傳會新的委員會把「電子通訊傳播法」作了一個調整，也就是轉化成為「數位通訊傳播法」的草案，其實院長也會希望我們在12月底之前將草案提出來，這一個草案其實跟各部會都有相關，我剛好藉這一個機會跟大家說明。" }, { "speaker": "詹婷怡", "speech": "「數位通訊傳播法」很重要的概念是，通訊傳播的環境已經改變了，除了我們過去所熟悉的電信與有線電視融合之外的匯流是關鍵點，網路上可以做很多不同的服務，而且重點是，接收服務的人未來也是提供服務的人，所以改變所有思維模式及運作模式非常重要的基礎，同時過去我們所熟悉的產業是相對封閉，但是未來都是開放的，所以會發現未來國際貿易談判最大的關鍵點是在data flow或跨境傳輸或很多新的議題，所以「數位通訊傳播法」大家不用擔心不會規定新的東西，而是把網路治理的概念在這一個法裡面宣示。在這裡面就會把multi stakeholders多元、自由及平等概念在這邊宣示。" }, { "speaker": "詹婷怡", "speech": "最重要的立法關鍵點在於剛剛政委提到資訊公開、公民參與及權利救濟，這個是既有的機制裡面有的，只是宣示在網路的世界裡面並不是沒有法可以管，而既有法規，比如：智慧財產權或言論侵害或個資的保護，如果沒有的時候，那就是基本的民事關係，那就由資訊通訊傳播法在這裡資訊平台服務提供者做民事關係的界定。" }, { "speaker": "詹婷怡", "speech": "但是非常重要的是，在這裡面會導入公民參與的機制，也就是政府針對特定的議題或者是針對新型態產業或營運模式，比如Internet跟某一個domain產生一些關聯，這時我們的看法並不是開放或不開放的問題，而是如何有效把multi stakeholders作一個管理也好，或者是大家在這裡找一個方法，讓各個不同的關係人都可以在這裡面往前走，因此這裡面會有一個參與機制的建議，政府的各部門針對創新的議題或者是因為網際網路產生新型態的業種，都希望建立公平參與的機制來討論新的積極、有效之管理模式。" }, { "speaker": "詹婷怡", "speech": "因為大家知道網路會影響到各部會、各個不同的產業，所以通傳會願意做這樣法案的草擬，但這絕對不代表網路通通都是通傳會管，所以像國家發展、財政、金融、交通、衛福、資安各個面向都有，而應該是各部會的事，所以未來會有一個輕度管理的數位管理傳播法，然後會提供各部會在既有的法規跟網路治理的概念裡面界接跟處理是一個「數位轉換」(digital transformation)的概念，希望各部會都動起來，這個某種程度會呼應到剛剛政委所提到的部分。" }, { "speaker": "詹婷怡", "speech": "在這一個基礎上，Open Government或者是產業的創新或者是每個人日常生活的轉變，使用者自己就可能做服務的提供者，也希望「開放政府」在這一個基礎之上繼續往前走，以上很簡單分享。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非常感謝。其實我們知道輕度管理所花的心思是遠大於重度管理（笑），重度管理只要排除掉就好了，所以接下來真的很需要各部會的支持。" }, { "speaker": "花敬群", "speech": "政委、在座各位首長大家早，內政部從這兩百天來的經驗先跟大家分享與討論。" }, { "speaker": "花敬群", "speech": "剛剛曾副主委提到的個案，確實個案會引導大家摸著石頭過河很重要的學習過程，所以如何建立個案的形式，真的是大家會比較篤定的參與過程，要開放政府，要先開放公務員的心，真的才是第一點。" }, { "speaker": "花敬群", "speech": "我們在部裡面常常跟同仁溝通一個概念，我們面對很多事情的轉變其實是在很奇蹟下的發生，才有辦法做這樣的轉變，我跟他們說必須要用真愛，才會發生奇蹟，沒有真愛，不會有奇蹟發生，這是從卡通學到的觀念。" }, { "speaker": "花敬群", "speech": "真愛或者是真心，其實從透明、參與及課責，我們認為是把事情弄清楚的概念，不管是政府要弄清楚或者是社會大眾弄清楚，這個當然是滿重要的意涵，參與的背後希望多掌握各方的意見與觀點；即使我們過去對課責的概念是比較負向的，但是我始終認為是更積極的，其實背後是有一個對應的課責。" }, { "speaker": "花敬群", "speech": "這裡面我會比較進一步思考的是，在開放政府這一個議題底下，某種程度上如果剛剛的方案裡面提到要建立專責的聯絡人，我覺得這個是很重要的基礎。甚至我的感覺是，其實是一個新時代高階公務員培育的過程，因為沒有經過這樣的淬鍊，其實我們越來越難跟專業議題作更深度的對話，所以這樣的人才並不是擔了一個責任，而他可能就是一個站在下一個時代浪頭底下的這一些人。" }, { "speaker": "花敬群", "speech": "而我們如何挑選出適當的人選？我們看到這裡面對於人才的要求，其實是一個超人，不僅要專業，又要負熱忱，對新科技技術又有一定的掌握能量，在我們現在公務體系裡面的人才，經常是分散在不同人身上，如何把這樣的人挖掘出來，或許我們是不是要讓他們經過一番競爭，而不是要去拜託他？就像剛剛提到的煮飯，是要讓他們去搶，而不是去拜託，因此應該要如何設計這樣的歷程，我也從我們內政部開始思考，到底誰是擔任起或誰適合被培養的人才，我不曉得，但我心裡面是漂浮的，還不確定這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "花敬群", "speech": "另外一件事，在「開放政府」當中如何做風險控管？這一段時間大家也很清楚，我個人嘗試「開放政府」，但是遭到很多的壓力（笑），像風險控管這一件事，如我昨天跟部長在討論建築物的耐震度評估，事實上我也對自己做耐震評估（笑），看看能夠承受得起多少的地震，才能知道可以做什麼事。所以這個是對風險控管的介面及建構，這可能是大家心裡面另外一種擔憂，如何讓大家放心，我想這一件事推動起來才會更順暢。" }, { "speaker": "花敬群", "speech": "類似的過程是，我們一直被強調法律正當程序，不管從大法官的釋憲、都市計畫、都市更新都是我們內政部的議題，最近的釋憲案都是針對內政部，背後強調的是正當程序，其實正當程序某種程度上跟開放政府是一種上位的邏輯概念，其實是相呼應的，意思是我們在開放政府展現的方式底下，可能除了大家比較熟悉的從資通角度來思考，但是從比較法治單位過去做的事，設計到的可能會比較是從法律正當程序，因為我們做的一些事其實是涉及到專業或者是政策上的判斷，像這樣的事情就比較不容易，因為一旦過度開放，大家很容易開花，我現在很怕開花這樣的事情發生（笑），所以我剛剛強調風險控管或者是介面，就這個部分真的需要更多的經驗或個案讓我們有多一點參考的依據，不然會有一點擔心。" }, { "speaker": "花敬群", "speech": "我們對於什麼樣的議題適合優先操作？哪一些類型的議題確實比較不宜，要等到全面比較順暢，看要部分開放或者怎麼樣，這一個部分也需要大家再多給我們一些建議，我先說到這邊，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非常感謝，這都是非常重要的關鍵點，請說。" }, { "speaker": "陳良基", "speech": "非常支持政委提的構想。" }, { "speaker": "陳良基", "speech": "大家都知道去年課綱爭執的過程中，我就上了頭版，其實進來教育部第一件協助部長的事是，當時新政府能夠進入政府，事實上街頭的協助是很重要的，如果把街頭的聲音納進政府體系，這是關鍵。當時課綱學生在教育部前面紮營時間，新政府上來當然就是把他們請進來並納入他們的意見。講起來容易，但是在政府體制，幾個政務官要做這樣的推動是有相當的難度，所以大家對於面對未知恐懼，真的做起來，也不會怎麼樣。" }, { "speaker": "陳良基", "speech": "我們在520進來後的一個月裡，於6月18日就把教育部課綱的抗爭學生請到部裡面來，我們也請到部長室參觀，原本當時是要衝進去，現在是邀請學生進去，而當時部裡同仁非常緊張，我說：「不然我來主持這一個會。」後來部長也非常放心，因為在籌備的過程中就用開放的方式，報名也是在網路上開放，當天也網路直播，本來部裡面擔心會很多人來，結果來的人不到一百人，你越開放，他們會越放心，所以利害關係人有沒有參與的概念，真的是非常重要的，不然他會在外面產生更多的問題。" }, { "speaker": "陳良基", "speech": "所以教育部的經驗是—當然課綱還沒有審完—但是我們把這一些聲音納進來，甚至包括當天在討論的時候，就有一些年輕的學生提到：「小學生可不可以審課綱？」之類的問題，現場國教署的同仁都非常緊張，事實上我在台大處理過相關學生的經驗，我認為就不要限制，反而不會出事，所以我當時覺得這沒有關係，讓學生自己來選代表，如果選出來是國小，如果有一個很厲害的人為什麼不選？所以我們全部完全接納所有同學的建議，我當時建議連怎麼選擇的方式就讓同學自己來決定，教育部不要想一個辦法出來，結果後來整個處理都非常順暢，後來學生都沒有怎麼樣。" }, { "speaker": "陳良基", "speech": "我們也將漲學費的情況用同樣的方式，大家也都有看到漲學費那一些團體當時在教育部開會時，把一樓的鐵門踢破，但後來的現在幾次開會都把他們請到教育部來。其中有一個很重要的原則是，所有的相關資訊會儘量公開，因此希望透過這樣的經驗，知道利害關係人關心的議題其實很簡單；即使如此，那一些議題卻是最重要跟最正確的，因此新政府要以「開放政府」為原則。" }, { "speaker": "陳良基", "speech": "我也有做相關資通訊的研究，像剛才有提到，通常人性是面對不知道的東西會有不知的恐懼，不太敢往前走，所以如果讓我們參與相關人有學習分享的機制，這可能還是要麻煩政委看用什麼方式，包括各部會的聯絡人、專責人員有一個將來的適當訓練，甚至我在部裡面推說有一些公務人員學習的課程裡面，其實應該要與時俱進，課程應該是要協助整個進展，而不是放時數要求，因此剛剛有提到系統上的Open API，有些同仁可能都不清楚是什麼東西，也許政委可以安排一些適當的方式，能夠讓大家有一些學習及分享的機會，越瞭解就知道善用這樣新的科技發展需求，對於整體社會的進步是很重要的，非常支持，也希望將來學習跟分享的機制能夠用開放的方式，讓更多人來參加，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非常感謝。" }, { "speaker": "蘇俊榮", "speech": "主席、各位副首長及同仁大家早，我想新政府嘗試的新實驗，把資訊專才丟到非資訊處，我在人事總局。" }, { "speaker": "蘇俊榮", "speech": "「開放政府」有一個非常重要的觀念，如同花次長提到的要開放的心態，如果沒有開放心態，那就沒有「開放政府」。現在的問題是出在哪裡？現在大環境的氛圍在防弊的氛圍，應該要思考如何建構允許犯錯的文化，如果沒有這個文化，如同公務人員提到跟剛剛幾位先進提到的，有一些議題是非常政治性，如果沒有操作好的話就會開花，那個花是「花次長」的花（笑），所以如何保護這一些同仁，這個是非常嚴肅的議題，我相信公部門的那一種能量被釋放出來。" }, { "speaker": "蘇俊榮", "speech": "至於剛剛人選的選擇剛剛花次長有提到要找那一種有熱忱的、有溫度的，最好是採主動報名方式，再來從裡面去挑選，如果沒有溫度的人，會被事情玩到死，因此本身的動機非常重要，如果沒有的話，最好不要找他來，本來議題很熱，但是會被他做到冷（笑），所以最重要的是態度及溫度，以上請主席參考。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "李連權", "speech": "文化部一點分享。" }, { "speaker": "李連權", "speech": "我想從歷史來看，一般公務人員的心態在1987年解嚴之前，要應付的人是兩個，一個是他的長官、一個是上級機關；在1987年解嚴之後要面對的是三個，一個是媒體、一個是國會、一個是社會力，在這時已經開始有一點複雜了；在2000年以後再加上一個重要的議題進來，也就是藍、綠對抗；在2010年開始出現網民，甚至我們說的人民。以上這對公務人員都是很大的挑戰。" }, { "speaker": "李連權", "speech": "我提到第二點，從目前的現實上，一個部會如果沒有危機處理能力，那就沒有掌握議題的能力，更談不上敢「開放政府」，這個是現實，所以越有危機處理能力的部會，就越有掌握議題的能力，也當然就越敢「開放政府」，所以這變成更有能力的政府才敢更開放，更開放以後就更能夠吸納議題的能力，這個政府就更有信心與開放。" }, { "speaker": "李連權", "speech": "這個問題邏輯是如此，但是我同意政委的看法，其實直接開放面對老百姓，然後有一個運轉的能力，但是這個鑰匙跟秘方目前各部會並不是很清楚，意思就是：如果你要學習到危機處理能力，有掌握議題的能力，才敢開放，我想推動這一個事情會困難，所以這一件事政委一定要面對，應該要有一個論述，怎麼樣直接開放就可以使這個部會有更大的危機處理能力、更大掌握議題能力。" }, { "speaker": "李連權", "speech": "我提一個經驗，現在有一些事情講得太高空，其實目前的部會連掌握危機處理能力都不足，原因出在哪裡？因為大家都只看到報紙或電視媒體，文化部的經驗是這樣，一個議題已經稍微在網路上非常非常次微在討論著時就抓到，然後就要進行處理，是這樣的經驗，使得我們敢更開放，當然這個經驗可能目前許多部會還沒有這樣的經驗，也就是議題都等到上了報紙、上了電視再處理，說實在話，這個時候已經來不及了，以上。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝，非常中肯。還有哪一位先進詢問或者是分享？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果沒有的話，我快速綜整一下。其實大家提到的是我們過去兩年左右，我們跟國發會「Join」平台，之前確實有幾個案例，我不知道大家是否知道衛福部處理癌症免疫細胞治療法連署的案例，5,000人提議開放人體實驗的部分，那個是第一個連署案－如果我沒有講錯的話－也是處理得相當精彩，那一個是第一次把這邊講的，包含多元利益關係人、部會的利益、連署5,000多人有不同的看法跟爭議等等都進行收攏，這個是具體可以分享的案例。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在「Join」平台有另外一個地方政府案例，台北市社會住宅的分配案，我覺得這個案子很有趣，因為我們都是從網路的角度來看，那一個是柯文哲市長希望社會住宅20％是給租不到、而不是租不起的人，好比像單親家庭或者是弱勢之身份被歧視者，希望這一些可以讓利益關係人來決定。但不可能架一些網站上來，像原住民這一些朋友，他們是以生活為主，而不是上網來表達意見，因此開網站的話，就會非常偏頗，因此在那個案子的操作過程一個最基本的利益觀念是靠利益關係人主動推薦更多的利益關係人，把網路拉到他們的面前，但不是要他們上網，而是在市政廳或是離他們家近的地方去開公聽會（公示會議），有一些人像腦性麻痹沒有辦法出門的人等等，可以用直播參與的方式，並不是一個個收意見，我們之前常常操作的方法是知道有七個利益關係人的團體，因為怕開花，然後就一個個去收意見。但是在那一個案子，這七個利益關係人會彼此爭執，因為分配額的關係，好比弱弱相殘，但這個是事實，事實上在瞭解彼此的處境之後，大家會互相同情，甚至還有一位原住民的媽媽說聽到像身心障礙者或者是自閉症者，因而願意放棄機會等等，當時台北市社會局的朋友發現他們在跨部會的協調上，其實因此變得比較容易，因為他們不用跳到第一線擺平原民會或其他的朋友，可以由利益關係人出來看到彼此的處境，網路在這邊的效果是充分記錄下來，讓任何人回來的時候，都不需要從頭開這一個會，而是可以開到目前爭點剩幾個跟問題怎麼樣，這個是關於案例分享，很快速跟大家說一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "允許犯錯的文化是很重要的，任何實務性的政策，現在有一種只要媒體哪一天一高興就會變成政策性的議題，好像並沒有所謂的常規政務跟民意政務，只要媒體一高興就可以操作成高度性的議題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們的想法是「不要恨媒體，要自己做媒體」，其實現在的媒體這樣子，一部分的原因是市場在改變，媒體在搶即時報導，做調查報導的比較沒有市場，所以會比起以前看到長篇的調查報導—雖然這兩年有復甦的趨勢—但是整體來看是往短線操作移動，所以會希望幫各部會聯絡人培育我覺得滿重要的，也就是發第零手報導的概念，讓調查報告的記者不會遜於即時記者，可以把手上已經轉譯好的資料都已經提供給做調查報導、深度報導的記者，他們在兩個報導期間可以發出比較真正有意義的稿子。良幣也是可以驅逐劣幣的，只要製作良幣跟劣幣的時間是一樣的，我相信慢慢大家可以提出部會提出的資料是可以實質討論，這樣才不會被標題殺人，如果點進去都是一樣空洞內容的話，那就是下聳動標題的人贏，如果我們連標題都已經想好了，其實一定程度可以有討論的主導權。這個東西是我之前比較常研究的東西，之後也會盡可能讓各部會的專責聯絡人理解這樣的情況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "接下來，要如何去進行適合參與跟比較沒有那麼適合參與的一個專業判斷？我相信這個牽涉到議題，有時是我們覺得它是已經知道會爆炸跟開花，也不一定真的能夠討論，也不是不去參與，像日本的四縣輸入的案子，其實如果大家聽到四縣想到的東西跟我們聽到的不一樣，因為這個議題已經爆炸了，食安現在花非常多的力氣收回來，但是越往後面越收回來的專業程度越高，如果一開始拋出來，稍微發散一下，還不急著決定，大家想講的都講完了，再來收，只要中間的時間不是很趕，不要讓大家覺得講完之後，再也沒有講話的機會了，這時候就比較不會起衝突。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們自己在民間的經驗是，通常這一次講完沒有機會就排版了，這個時候大家最激烈的，甚至這個時候沒有排到發言的話，像教育部講的情況，就是會衝進去也要發言的程度，如果中間有六十天討論期的話，其實可以瞭解到不是僅有一次性的發言，而是有四、五次發言機會的話，我相信願意坐下來好好講是比較多的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "最後一個是危機處理，我接下來會請國發會辦工作坊，我們以稍微有一點燒的議題就收起來，我想之前都有一些經驗，部會聯絡人不一定一下子就是這個超人，他若有熱情，別的部會聯絡人會補上（其需要協助的部分），我們這邊也會幫忙培力，不曉得有沒有要追問或者是其他的問題？" }, { "speaker": "司儀", "speech": "討論議題二：各部會開放政府專責聯絡人職責。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "專責聯絡人的職責，其實每一個部會的狀態都不一樣，其實我們有稍微溝通一下，每一個部會目前正在處理的經驗，如同花次長剛剛說的，目前做透明、參與、課責揭露的這一些其實是分散的，不一定是集中在相同的單位身上，當然有一些部會有研考或者綜規朋友，其實多多少少是有一個作用，即使不是他們在做，他們也知道這一些事是哪一些。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我具體的想法是，不一定是要有一個人，而是部會裡面這一個人專門跟其他的部會聯絡或者是參加工作坊，但是每一次出現的議題的時候，都可以做編組，通常這一種專業語言很難轉成常民語言，通常會燒起來的議題是內部都還沒有溝通完畢。距離來講：像之前「提點子」的時候，常常民間會連署一個議題，其實一盤點是三個部會都有相關，誰主責或誰協辦，可能沒有來開會的那一個就會變成主責，其他部會就會變成是協辦（笑）；長期來看並不是很健康的情況。不能協辦認為漏接球的話，最後還是會回到主責的身上，長期下來，彼此的信任不一定有了，也不能讓人民信任。所以其實跨部會的專責聯絡人是一個小組，不一定是丟到哪一個範圍裡面來，在議題裡面出現的時候，如果那個聯絡人不覺得是最適合的，那就這一個議題找最適合的人來擔任或參與，這個是我初步的想法，不知道大家有沒有別的想法？謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "目前部會專責聯絡人，因為院長也特別提到是希望某一個人全職擔任，我們找到某個人之後，希望把原本的任務卸除掉做專門的事，我不曉得各個部會有沒有困難？" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "第二，這一個人未來的工作狀態內容可能會跟PDIS互動，同樣各部會的聯絡人彼此共同形成一個群組或網絡互相支援及學習。我剛剛提到希望全職，所以希望政委可以多談一下對這一個人想像中未來的工作狀況，大家也許在選人及督導上會比較清楚。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這邊「全職」的意思其實並不是完全別的事情都不能做，而是主要工作裡面可能就是針對我們開放政府剛剛講的那三個，包含對於議題的理解、轉譯，以及參與時知道如何去約利益關係人及主持，這個紀錄其實已經包含自媒體的部分，也就是這一個部分如何公開及做設定的東西，當然這個我理解部會裡面並不是都在同一個人身上，不管各位最後挑誰，他的工作只要跟這三個有任何重疊，他的工作還是繼續做，並不是就不做任何的工作，只是說他的工作性質裡面，如果跟這三個毫無關係的，就希望多少可以這樣走。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外，比如目前負責進行網路溝通，這樣子我們一方面可以培力本身具有實體像公聽會的主持能力，如果培力還沒有到什麼程度之前，我們也會有人才庫，或者是第三方的專業主持人。其實就是主持專業、記錄專業以及一開始的資料轉譯專業，都不是一朝一夕的事，所以如果同仁只要三種能力的一個就可以了，我們會幫忙培力，我們也會引進外部或者是其他部會互補的專業者，我們不可能每一天所有的部會都有議題在燒，這個大概是不可能的，所以在比較沒有在燒議題的部會時，那一些聯絡人是可以來支援正在處理比較需要收斂議題的朋友，這樣另外一個好處是不會造成單一部會人力的負擔，只要有兩個議題正在燒案子的時候，內部的人力就會開始出現調度上的困難，這個也是橫向編制的概念，可以調動比較沒有那麼正在燒的部會朋友們來幫忙，大概是這樣子，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不曉得還有沒有想要提出的？" }, { "speaker": "花敬群", "speech": "接下來的執行期程有什麼預計？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果有候選人的話，不管是一個人或者是兩個人，希望下週五（23日）左右，加入橫向網路是有一個內部協作的系統，我們要至少知道行政院的mail帳號，然後再加到群組裡面，一些基本的培力資料跟這一些東西才可以交給這些人。希望下週五可以有名單，如果後來發現需要抽換，或者後來看的時候，發現真的不是很適合的話，當然之後都有再調整的空間，但是至少希望每一個部會都有一個聯絡的窗口，大家可以比較實際知道我們之前在做這樣橫向網絡操作的時候，知道怎麼做的，至少每一個人都可以體驗到工作的環境，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "李連權", "speech": "政委，不好意思，我還是說一下我的顧慮。" }, { "speaker": "李連權", "speech": "新政府上來以後，議題開放得非常大，不管一例一休或者是福島食品等，有一些態度是希望透過開放政府的方式讓它開放討論，假如今天的運作每一個部會都拋一個議題出來，這個議題不痛不癢，也不會有人關心，如果這一個議題是大家關心的，同時會有很多議題的運作，所以怎麼樣在這中間取得平衡及控制議題，我也想請政委大概能夠在這個機制上予以考慮，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非常感謝，我澄清一下我對KPI的管理沒有經驗也沒有好感，所以絕對不會有各拋一個議題的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果在「Join」平台上，看大家連署比較熱的議題，其實不用等我們拋，其實有一些未爆彈已經在那邊了。另外一個，我自己覺得我們其實主動設定議題這一件事，是要培力到一個程度，就像您講風險控管能力到一個程度，我們再來主動拋出一個議題，不會是拋了接不住，然後民間又會罵等等。其實我們現在並不缺民間由下而上希望部會比較能夠認真討論的議題，像之前高中生延後上課等等，像這一種議題說大可大、說小可小，如果很認真處理的話，很多人滿高興的。我的議題是：果實比較飽滿、離我們比較近，踩下來比較不花太多力氣，我覺得這個是滿好的練習題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一部分，我們在一開始雖然危機處理的這一些案例是會分享的，並不是一下子這一些朋友們在橫向的連結還沒有做很好的時候，就跑去做危機處理，所以具體來講有兩個需要做的工作，一個是連署案當中我們挑一些看起來可以收斂得了，不太會開花，像高中生延後上課，其實大家人民有感，我們好好處理好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個是各部會法規六十天公告期裡面，是部會裡面覺得是亮點的法規，或者是在推行的時候應該不太會社會上有高度的質疑，但是我們希望利益關係人盡可能早一點瞭解，這樣的話，大家才知道如何因應或者是才能真的比較有感，這一些東西我們重點宣傳，說不定利益關係人會有額外的想法，至少不是一下子就分成兩邊對立，我們還是會從挑戰度比較小的關卡開始練，絕對不會有像一開始之前蔡玉玲政務委員說每一個部會都拋一個議題，我沒有要這樣子，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "李憲章", "speech": "非常感謝政委在百忙之中跟我們傳一些心法。有關於聯絡人牽扯到內部機制的部分，種子的師資是極少數，我們單位的特殊性又比較強，因此人力是一大問題，如何運作機制跟通曉這樣的同仁很重要，裡面訂的資格像外交部的外領人員，不然就是外聘，但階級都偏低，所以會與政策有一些扞格的部分。" }, { "speaker": "李憲章", "speech": "除政委下禮拜到我們外交部授課，與各部會同仁可以上工作坊自己師資培訓的種子培訓之外，是不是可以在政委的能量範圍之內，請現在既有的師資人才到各部會授課？像我們外交部特別需要，可能需要少數的種子人員之外，各部會的同仁更需要打開心，如何瞭解開放政府的概念及核心運作及竅門、重要性，這一些恐怕都需要師資到各部會來宣講，讓我們更能夠掌握到核心的精神，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非常好，我具體回應一下。其實過去一年多快兩年的時間，所有上「眾開講」的「Join」網站，其實我們都有一個輔導工作坊的機制，其實現在這一批講師約三十多人，之前在人力訓練中心也有開過課，我直接授課的大概也上千位朋友了，也有到地方政府去講課，所以本來就有開放課程，開放課程從線上錄影或者只做一些練習題，好比像同性婚姻議題等等，在練習的時候，因為知道這個其實沒有政策的風險，所以可以練習到一個程度，但是我還是希望以具體的議題。像我們實際在上課之前，先挑外交部事實上有哪一些接下來的議題確實要看起來可以提到公眾討論或者是已經在討論了，我們針對那一個議題去請師資，實際上去上稿跟準備。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們舉一個很實際的例子，我在入閣前幾天去跟剛剛提到國發會工作坊的師資有到高雄一趟，到市政府研考，有跟各局處去研討大林蒲的議題，開放及收斂的原則，各局處的朋友們雖然非常戒慎恐懼，但是也是全力投入，大家知道這並不是練習題，而是馬上會到來的東西。因此接下來的工作坊會往這一個規劃，大林蒲接下來的事是專業朋友們的事，但是至少從高雄市政府已經準備好，甚至已經預備好需要直播、主持、收斂及設定議題等等，這一些從市長到各局處的朋友，已經在心裡走過一遍，這個是我們接下來的方向，感謝具體的建議。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "我再補充一下，剛剛政委提到那個平台，尤其是「眾開講」，火一直在燒，民眾對於「眾開講」這一個事情的能見度越來越高，透過一些案例，大家知道原來這邊也可以、那邊也可以，只要曾經幫忙連署某一個案子，就知道，因會越來越多，我擔心各部會會不會抱怨我們去搞這個，然後火這樣燒，我想應該不至於（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "曾旭正", "speech": "接下來的想像是可能會越來越多的部會有一些議題，像你們部會必須要回應，有一些部會甚至有兩、三個議題都必須要回應。以現在的設計來看，部會裡面找出一些聯絡人，可能配合資訊長就處理那一件事，在初步回應的過程中，其實是可以找PDIS談，並不是限於你們部會內部燒腦筋，而是透過政委來幫忙瞭解，我想這一個機制是好的，也就是對部會有一些幫忙。部會同時有兩、三個案子在燒，而且是部會不同單位在負責，搞不好要思考一下要不要有一些先後順序，變成PDIS能夠對部會這方面有很大的幫助。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實人民連署，不管是美國或者是英國，事實上全世界二十幾個國家都有類似的機制，確實一開始都造成滿大...尤其是專業事務官，像「with the people」排隊排了兩、三百天都沒有回應的習慣，但我們這邊有限制六十天的回應，大家可以看到「Join」上就可以看到每一個回應品質是不一樣的，有一些部會並不準備跟提案人溝通與瞭解，在這六十天中間並沒有任何聲息，而到六十天其實是很完整的回應，意思是您的意見我們收到了，後續會參考，大概是這樣。我們參考各國的經驗可以理解，因為部會的同仁真的不習慣用這樣的方式去跟民眾直接溝通，最直接習慣溝通的人可能就是部會裡面管部長信箱的同仁，就可以看到自然語言的方式跟回覆部長信箱的方式是一樣的，就是用回部長信箱的方式在回。這件事本身沒有好或不好，我想講的是既然這個是連署案，部長信箱寫回來的是一個人，回信過來的也是一個人，所以這樣回，等於是一個人影響，但是每次的連署案都是5,000或6,000人提的，而且其中甚至可能會把反對的理由也寫上去，最後是有論點的，會把裡面比較好的論點提出來給各部會的聯絡人，過了六十天之後，就像回部長信箱說「大家的意見都收到了」，接下來要參考的話，確實會讓這5,000多名朋友會有一種為什麼要花時間寫這一些的狀況；反過來講，像曾老師說的如果同一個部會尤其是同一個三級機關同時有兩、三個案在跑的話，當然量能不可能每一個在實質處理，可以經營一個排隊的想法，如果主責單位重疊的話，我們會希望介面上顯示因為正在等同一案，所以希望這一案處理完再換另外一個，我想大家比較可以專注在單一連署案上。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當連署案實際上有實質處理且處理好，最後的結果是讓大家都滿意，這個其實才是大家負擔的開始（笑），因為這5,000多人食髓知味，知道因為政策有所影響會有所討論，不管是範圍跟討論的具體程度會更加增加，因此我們這邊的培力必須要與時俱進，等大家對我們期待更多的時候，我們要更知道如何借力使力，讓各方利益關係人談出一個想法，並不是靠我們每一次中間把A講的話翻成B聽得懂的狀況，希望在一次次的連署案裡面準備好的能力，大概是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "陳良基", "speech": "我還是提一個，最近大家都在審預算，但是教育部的刪減預算案的提案有八百多件（笑），各部會怕說有一些危機處理或者正在燒的事情。剛剛提到利益關係人的事，如果他的事情沒有被解決，早晚會被爆出來，早一點處理，讓事情可以順利做完，其實也是各部會的最大期待。開放政府剛剛也有提到不瞭解、不知道怎麼應用，其實會很害怕，但是這個在資訊業已經非常頻繁的事情，其實越早處理，人力的聚集會更早疏散，所以其實可以建議真的不用那麼擔心；因為網路也不是那麼不理性，在一個開放的環境底下，資訊的匯集在我們判斷對錯時會比較容易。" }, { "speaker": "陳良基", "speech": "像暑假的時候我們也被逼著在各地辦幾次—那個是立法院辦的—只是那個議題沒有燒起來，像大學學術倫理的問題，我們在暑假被逼著開七場高校改革論壇，面對這一些公民審議的時候，也沒有那麼可怕，他會覺得他講的東西你有在聽，聽完之後他就知道，不會有太多的意見，只是他的立場跟看到的東西，我們真的沒有看到，把那一些意見納入之後再作決定，會更周密一點，教育部面對那一些議題，其實真的是他們可以幫我們做，選擇在正確的時間做對的事情，把那一些事做對，真的有幫助，只是如果一開始大家善用這一些工具並應對，像以前我們在推這一些，政委有提到處理主管信箱，那個人幾乎是用同一個人在回，這個不但沒有滅火，而是加柴油。因此，工具的使用與部會裡面在用這個溝通，還是需要學習，我們如果知道這樣的好處，就會把那一些障礙排除掉。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非常感謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實剛才老師有講到一個重點，我們覺得時間充裕的時候，我們會分成四個階段，先蒐集事實、蒐集大家的感受、蒐集大家的想法、最後做出決定，但是這一個東西在網路上其實常常會混在一起，大家只要看到我們在發問卷或者邀請民意的話，就會跳到建議這邊去，而且看大家的意見，就會直接說教育部應該怎麼樣，但是並不會揭露說後面對這一個感受是什麼或者是對這一個東西的利益相關在哪裡，所以其實我們在六十天的時間裡面，之前有發展出一些方法論，我們會先花一段時間，先去蒐集利益關係人的利益是什麼，在這一個階段都會提出客觀可檢證的事實，第二個階段是問對這一些事實的主觀感受，這個沒有對錯，一個人可以很高興、另外一個人可以很生氣，在沒有對錯的情況下，大家充分抒發完感受，能量釋放完也沒有那麼討厭政府，至少他的感受有被聽進去，這時再請專家學者來集思廣益有哪一些方案，好壞就是以照顧到最大多數人的感受為判準，並不是專家各持己見不肯妥協的狀況，這樣子時間如果足夠，操作的過程中，我們很省力，我們只要到最後決定拍板就可以了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "之前很多時候是因為時間不足，所以大家一下子就跳到有什麼具體建議的狀態下，其實當然就很容易吵起來或者是打起來，這個是接下來可以幫忙規劃的，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不曉得大家還有沒有要補充的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非常感謝大家的參與，原則上希望23日有聯絡人朋友名單，我也理解各部會對於這一個部分還有要調整的地方，這個並不是很硬性的規定，而是大家覺得您有覺得怎麼樣適合的人，一個以上或者是兩、三個人搭配起來比較好等等，都沒有問題，就給我們的賴諮議，他的聯絡方式有在開會通知單上，謝謝大家。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "先非常感謝，我的第一個問題想要問你一下，很多現在世界IT企業或者是很多政府，現在很關注臺灣的IT政策，由於您當了臺灣的長官後，更關注現在臺灣的IT政策，您是不是可以介紹一下IT的政策價值觀或理念？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以，當然。我在行政院擔任數位政務委員，我們在接下來的八年發展裡面，其實理念在（簡報第1頁）就可以說明，就是我們在接下來八年的時間裡面，我們過去花了很多時間去做我們叫做「資通訊整備度」，我們知道臺灣的整備度是做得非常好的，不管是頻寬的普及率或者是家戶的近用率這一些基本的東西，我們會持續把它做成穩定的基礎建設。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在這裡面我們加入了一個很重要的元素，如果比較弱勢的家庭，平常即使有可支配的所得也不會拿去買光纖的話，政府應該補助最基本通訊的權利，所以可能在接下來三、四年之內，所有的家戶是弱勢的話，政府就會補助10Mpbs的所有基本頻寬。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "接下來三個部分其實是要加在一起看的，也就是說innovation，通常在國際上都會說private sector，要訂charge，其實我們也知道說亞洲各國其實都已經放棄了政府來主導創新的想法，因為我們每一次看到政府主導什麼創新，可能每一個單點很強，但是可能沒有ecosystem，所以我們這一次很果斷地說放棄，創新就是要讓來立。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們做的事情是什麼？就是做一些deregulation或者是sandbox，或者是做一些相對應這些創新所需要法規的調整，然後保證整個社會都理解到創新帶來的後果是什麼，大家都可以live with it，這樣創新就可以發生。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "通常大家對於政府的不信任，其實在各國裡面也非常常見的，相信您非常瞭解這個狀況（笑），就是對政府會有相當多的懷疑，不管我們講出什麼，（會覺得）第一句話可能就是騙人的吧！所以覺得互信都是雙向的，政府要先信任人民，人民才有可能信任政府，不可能不信任人民，要求人民來信任我，這個是沒有道理的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "政府要如何信任人民？因為大部分的時候，政府裡面的官員想到general public的時候，腦裡浮現的是social media ，可能是在LINE或者是臉書上傳的那一些貼圖，你說要信任這樣的東西，確實在人類的情感上有一點難度，所以我們現在在做的是一些「Governance Technology」，具體叫做「ICT-enabled scalable listening」，就是說可以延展、傾聽。什麼意思呢？好比我聽你說話、你聽我說話，這個是對稱的，但當政府用廣播或電視發送的時候，其實看的人是沒有辦法回應的，這個是不對稱的。那看的人怎麼回應？只能用四年一次，然後每一次投票可能一、兩個位元的方式來回應，這一個上傳跟下傳是非常不對稱，所以如果問我理念的話，就是儘量讓它對稱，我們透過machining learning或者一些principal component analysis，其實我們在業界已經用過很久的一些技術，你就可以把大家signal收進來，讓政府真的能夠傾聽大家的意見，而這一個意見給他一個biding power，也就是政策的走向或者是是給大家我的政策走向或者是priority是由人民來設定的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們在行政院經常有一句話是說：「要進廚房，就不要怕燙。」，意思就是說在行政院做決策的時候，很容易受到各方的（壓力），但是我們的想法就是邀大家來cook，從食材的選擇，到所有這一些東西，都是納入人民的意見，這個時候大家就不會覺得只是等著菜上桌、敲碗，而是知道有一些hard choices是必須要做等等，所以是一個governance的概念，這樣才能做到所謂的smart nation的概念，而smart nation的意思不是說放一堆sensor，而是大家在做公共政策的過程裡面，都更瞭解這些政策的來龍去脈let off learning的概念。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "最後是last mile，也就是「Inclusion」，因為我們不管政府做得再透明、innovation做得再好，我們知道所謂disruptive technology的意思，按照定義就是極少數人才懂，因為它發生的時候，其實大家都不知道它會發生，不然就沒有叫disruptive了。但是disruptive technology出來之後，其實它的stakeholder，就是會被它影響的人，像哪一些人失業、哪一些人的工作需要受到調整及哪一些人的生活型態受到改變，這一些人平常是沒有那個習慣去參與這一些公共政策經驗，所以不管我們前面做得再好，只要沒有辦法碰到last mile，總有一些利益關係人是很晚才發現原來生活被影響到了，你們都被決定好了，為什麼我還不知道的這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這裡的重點是「Inclusion」，也就是讓大家在每一次可能影響到大家的生活東西出來的時候，不管它是技術的或者是資通訊或者政策的，都盡可能讓last mile的利益關係人，甚至於用很多元的方式，讓他們知道且進行有意義的討論。這個工作並不是政府能夠做的，這個必須要是公民社會的朋友，那一些最care human rights，那些最care excelsis ability、equality的這一些朋友，所以我們同樣的，就好像我們把創新的主導權交給私部門一樣，我們也把inclusion的主導權交給公民社會，這個毋寧是政府自己決定說我們把治理做好，但是innovation我們不帶領業界，而inclusion我們也不帶領公民社會，我們是跟大家一起合作，整個邏輯就是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "下一個問題以前，我想要問你一下，您說的是跟大家一起做這個政策，對吧？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "我總覺得這個是很好的一個邏輯，而且我覺得方向完全對，可是您剛才也提過了這樣的話會需要很長時間，以及我覺得費用也會非常、非常大，您覺得把大眾的意見有效地以這個方式，現在有沒有一個成功的例子？比如我是臺灣人的話，我有一個意見可以給你們，而政府真的把我的意見納入？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有很多個例子，我們挑一個簡單的來講。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "好的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "漢字沒有問題？" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "完全沒有問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們舉一個很簡單的例子。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "這個可以拍照嗎？（指投影在牆壁的畫面）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以，沒有問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一個例子以韓國來說的話，應該有見過很類似的過程，對不對？就是Uber這一個案子，其實Uber剛進入臺灣的時候它是合法的，它是用R牌的租賃車，也收高於計程車的錢等等。但後來他們也開始用私家車，開始逃避租稅，相信您也很熟悉。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "對的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實重點過程裡面是這樣子的，重點並不是如何制訂法律，而是這一部法律必須讓現有Uber司機都理解說我們為什麼這樣子做的，原因是如果我們排除掉他們的話，其實Uber有點像是「思想流行性感冒」的東西，如果你被infect，覺得unregulated algorithm要比regulation的dispatch要來得efficient，只要種了這一個想法，可能就會幫他開車，然後可能還會推薦新的司機，因為會傳染。可能你開了一個月，也發現並沒有真的比較賺——就很像我感冒好了，可是已經傳染出去了，只要繼續傳染，永遠都還是會有人幫他開車。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "為了要解決這一個問題，其實我們的想法是靠我們剛剛講的審議（deliberation），也就是大家互相去確認一些基本的事實關於Uber這一件事的事實是什麼，大家把感受充分地表達出來，然後再一起做出決定。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們經過這樣的一套想法之後，其實大家就會粗略地看，那麼就不會陷入好像說這樣子是扼殺創新，或者是說貼標籤的狀況，因此我們先請各界——包含Uber——把所有關於自用車載客的facts提出，因為facts是adjectives，接下來用機器蒐集的方式，去蒐集各界對他的感受，因此對於相同的facts，你可能覺得生氣，他不會，這個沒有什麼問題。然後我們把大家的感受集合在一起，我們再請大家提出一些想法，而一些想法的好壞取決於address the majority of people skills，所以這樣子就會慢慢集合這一些idea，有了這一些idea， 就拿這一些做成決定。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以實例來講：比如我們以前政策制訂的時候，我們可以看到private sector的朋友，他們自己有一些的產業供應鏈，所以他們可能自己會keep一些不一定想要跟政府分享的資訊；他們當然會跟政府分享一些。當然也有一些公民社會的朋友與學者專家，但是這一些朋友共同用的特點是專家的語言，那跟街上朋友們用的語言是不一樣的，所以只要中間沒有轉譯，我們越討論，往往連基本的事實都沒有辦法聚焦。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在這種情況之下，本來是一個想法，好比像你如果現在說要討論一件事，你在social media上大家會說我的idea是什麼，但是並不會停下來看我的idea是建築在什麼feeling上，而這一個feeling建築在facts上，慢慢就會變成ideology，因為大家的事實認定都已經不同了，所以不管新的事實怎麼、別人的感覺怎麼樣，就是blind people，不管新的情況怎麼樣，怎麼樣就是好的、怎麼樣就是壞的，這樣當然就沒有辦法討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "為什麼要從事實端開始？我們政府要承認手上客觀的數據並不是一切，而是要private sector、公民社會去process這一些facts。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "接下來我們就要run一個online facilitation，這一個系統是任何人都可以上去，然後用你的手機就可以看到一個…" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "…這個是一個系統？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，這是一個系統，是一個Open Source的系統，我們有參加開發。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一個系統你剛進去的時候，你就會看到某個人的陳述，好比有人說：「真正共乘的精神是選擇可以去哪一些地方一起達成，不然只是白牌車的包裝車罷了。」，你可以同意或不同意，隨著你按贊成或反對，你的圖像就會在這邊移動，然後它就會幫你自動蒐集到跟你意見相似的人。這個有兩個好處，一個好處是你會看到你的FB跟你的Twitter朋友其實就這一個議題是在很多光譜不同的地方，他們不是anonymous，他們就是你的朋友，我們沒有講出來而已，所以你就不會妖魔化對方。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個是讓大家的立場可以慢慢折衷與改變的，我們說我們的政策制訂是要有supermajority threshold，也就是說大概說服80％的人才會納入議程，而我們要討論的那一些東西就是靠這一個東西來決定。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "舉例來說，我們第一個禮拜的時候就分成兩組人，我們可以看到上一組意思就是他們就是犯法、註銷掉就好了，但是第二組人的陳述是如果不趕時間，即使面前有計程車還是會叫，但是這兩組都不夠，因為我們要80％，可是你看乘起來這兩組人才20％至30％，所以他們就必須要做出更eclectic、compromise，不然不能進入議程。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以到第二個星期的時候，第一組人的時候就出現一個新的論點，這不是針對Uber，取締白牌車就是政府的責任，所以他的贊成度就增加了。第二組人又演化出一個想法，其實傳統計程車現在都要加入flit，但是政府真的要做一個電子化的flit，而不是綁在這個裡面，而Uber是顛覆這一件事，這一組人有93％的人同意，而且提出這一個只有2％的人跳出來，就跳到群組二，因為這個是convince argument ，但是即使是這樣子，你乘起來還是只有50％，還是沒有到80％。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以到了第三個星期終於開始出現超過80％的，但是一開始都是一些比較弱的（建議），好比是科技時代，法令應該要與時俱進，我想沒有人會反對；但是在臺灣的特點是如果有人考了91分，就會有人想要考92分，所以有人會覺得consensus possible，這時候大家就會開始勇於提出一些讓大家更能接受的意見，我覺得這三個都很重要，但是安全更重要。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "到了第三個禮拜快要結束的時候，有一個就提出說我覺得政府應該立一個E taxi flit的法規，然後比照Uber，好比像乘客互相評分，在這樣的前提底下，其實大家就可以把Uber合法化，但是還是可以繳稅等等，而這一個東西其實連Uber的司機都贊成。所以說這個之後那一些別人覺得說不要跟他們談判這一些就下降了，大家還是覺得談一談比較好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "到了第四個星期我們就收了超過80％的六個共同建議，好比像fairness principle、然後它是一個mater public of security，然後如果你是上下班的share riding，這個要for profit分別看待，以及要如何display driver info。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實這一種我們叫collective intelligence出來的東西，當然是比較粗糙，並沒有你請專家學者去寫一百頁的報告那麼厲害，但是好處是這一個菜是大家一起炒出來的，所以大家都同意這一些東西，我們拿這一些就可以實際上跟所有的人坐下來談。因為之前已經有幾千人都有參加過這一個consultation，所以我們在直播及後來的點閱人數就上萬人，大家等於就用live screen看著我們拿這個去跟這些人談判，然後come off something that we can all the brave。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "全部都是live？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，全部都是live，一講完之後逐字稿就登在網路上。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "很透明、很公開" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，非常透明，這個是回答你的問題，一個是沒有花時間，只花了三個多星期的時間，第二個是完全沒有花成本，因為這個的moderation是要自己做moderation，所以我們沒有派版主、也沒有派人去管，我們是harvest最後的opinion，所以最開始是完全自動化的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在這一個前提底下，你做任何多次、任何議題，而且不一定要政府做，好比像我們最近在臺灣有一個爭議滿大的議題，而不是政府做pol.is，而是民間來做的，也就是我們要不要從日本福島旁邊的一些食品。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "我看過，今天早上也看過一個報導了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是的，這一個議題就是g0v的一個朋友，他不是代表政府，他自己做的pol.is，我覺得臺灣政府除了出示日本資料，如果可以提出開放的國家，好比像韓國或者是其他國家的檢測資料作為政策，也許會更為說服力，（問）你同意或不同意？你如果同意就往左邊走一點，然後就會跑出下一個說不能跟國際脫軌，假設我反對好了，我就往底下走了一點；我隨便回答，我就亂案。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我按了一陣子之後，我發現我歸隊了，我跑到底下這一隊。而底下這一隊是什麼？這一些人覺得：政府必須向民眾說明非得在此刻開放的背後理由。我們可以看到這一群人都同意，右上角的人不同意。上面的這一群人是說：臺灣政府不一定要到日本做實地檢測，我們應該要trust。有一點像針鋒相對，但是雙方都有共同意見，你只要按共同意見，不管大家的立場，所有人都覺得「核災食品」這四個字不應該用，大家覺得應該要參考其他國家的做法，以及培養臺灣民眾對輻射指示的正確認知，媒體需要要有專業的指示、風險跟劑量的認知，而且其實大家覺得這個跟背景輻射不一樣，有一些流言可能因此破解等等。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因此在這一個過程中，大家一開始是壁壘分明，在這四個角落的，現在才討論三天，我們再過一、兩天，大家就慢慢集中。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "我確認一下剛才Uber的那一個實驗是去年8月份？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是去年8月份的實驗。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "政府是這麼做的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，這個是民間，因為這是Open Source，任何人都可以開立。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "這個是什麼時候開始用的？這一個Open Source什麼時候使用的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們第一次使用的是去年7、8月，那時候還不是Open Source，我們當時是試用，因為我們是collaborate developer，但是後來我們Uber跟Airbnb都有一定的效果之後，各國好比像馬德里，其實有些韓國的朋友也表示有興趣，這時我們就聯合施加壓力，請這一個開發者開放出來，不然我們要自己寫一個，所以他們就Open出來。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "我覺得在韓國做這一種的話，也有很大的一個政治上的效力，我覺得這是非常非常好的意見。我剛才想的是時間跟費用會很多，但是實際上時間也節省下來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為我們開這種會很容易每次開都是從頭開起，等於群眾幫大家把事實確認、感受確認了，我們就不用從頭開會，我們就focus想法的可行性上，其實是省時間的。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "真的是謝謝你。我可以繼續問嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "請繼續。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "現在臺灣的IT行業，我覺得臺灣的IT行業的競爭力很強，是世界級，你覺得哪一部分有優點？哪一部分是以後要改善的？有的話，您可以告訴我們嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好啊！其實我們的工作都已經寫在這邊。等我一下，我換一下電池。" }, { "speaker": "黃子維", "speech": "大起，每天你們訂閱的報紙是多少人看？" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "對。每天訂120萬，我們還送80萬到90萬，我們送家或者是要訂的人，因為有的人買我們的報紙，我們要分送。所以最多是120萬份，雖然更多，但是一般來說平均一天印出100萬份。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "（換完電池後）好。我想我就簡單談一下。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "您說。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這邊所謂的優勢，這四個優勢其實是長期以來臺灣的一些很既定的，我們叫做「國家型資通訊建設（NICI）」的計畫成果，我上任之後我才加入「世界經濟論壇」的社群，從他們的角度來看，臺灣資通訊的整備一向都是很高的，今年按照順序是芬蘭、臺灣、冰島這樣的順序，但是同樣的regulatory跟impact上面，其實分數都比較低，意思就是說我們的硬體跟網路層建設得很好，但是政府不一定很好去用它，所以您剛剛問到挑戰，而這個挑戰就是我們有這麼好的，好比像98％除了一些離島的家戶之外，還有1Mbps申裝的可能性，但是真正去申裝的人不到一半或者是四成多。為什麼？就是因為並沒有運用需要1Mbps，所以可能用ADSL就好了，所以我們這邊想要做的第一個是affordable，但affordable之後，要讓它可以可以運行，不然事實上我們都鋪到了，但是沒有任何意義。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個是電子化政府其實是非常好的，就是說我們在推開放資料政策的時候，有一個主要陳述說只要建置費用不到新臺幣5,000萬的系統，所有的資料都必須是開放資料，但是當然我們就是對隱私或者是個人資訊會把關，然後每一個部會都有他的資料開放諮詢小組。在這一個前提底下，當然一方面我們在國際資料排名是世界第一，意思是最基本的民生資料等等都有，但是最重要的一件事是表示我們所有的公務資料庫是準備好的structured data，並不需要靠人工去做等等，所以就是說我們在電子化政府的internal process是ready的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是同樣的問題是開放資料都擺在那邊，但是有沒有人去用，以及社會現在想要討論某個重大議題，想要evidence時候，我們目前就需要很好的data journalist，又再配上一些investigate journalist，再配上一些研究團隊跟科學家，可能才會在這一個拼圖裡面拼出一個故事，我覺得政府不能說我資料都丟在那就好了，但因為事實上是要到十五、十六個proto，然後將全部piece在一起，才能做出報導，這個仍然我們說time to report，實在還是太長了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我覺得我接下來想要做的事情是，因為我自己進入政府是一個很特殊的狀況，我只做開放政府，這個是我最主要的一個業務，而且我是嘗試極端透明，包含我現在的講話，十天之內一定都會有逐字稿或錄音、錄影上網，因為這樣的關係，所以我就不能接觸到任何密件，或者任何國家的機密。也因為這樣子，所以我從很多角度來看，我就是一個幫大家做investigate journalism的人進了政府，幫大家去關心大家關心的話題。如果大家關心，好比像說我知道韓國對電子競技非常熱衷，臺灣也有很多喜歡電子競技的朋友，但是在臺灣一直沒有一個主管機關，教育跟兵役一直沒有辦法解決，這一部分韓國領先我們六、七年，所以在這個情況之下，我們一進來就協調教育部、文化部、內政部役政署的這一些朋友，對於電子競技到底是什麼，誰要主管、怎麼定義這一些東西，只開了三次會我們就做出了明確的結論，然後就往前走。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "（訝異口氣問）只…開了三次會？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得關鍵就是說，因為我們是連協調的過程都轉譯，所以我們第一次開會列出幾個爭點並公開，第一個來開會的長官，他的承辦其實就可以看得到長官到底講的是什麼，而不是最後的結論或者指示，所以承辦就可以provide rich information給他的長官。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個部分是電競的stakeholder，這一些選手可以用自己個人的經驗，因為以前都是要等一些協會的代表或者是一些公會的代表幫他們說話，可是因為我們現在逐字稿都放在網路上，我又有一個任何人可以問我問題的wiselike的平台，所以第一次放出去之後，就有一個電競選手叫做「龜王」，這一位選手就用Google Docs寫了很長自己的故事，然後去說這一個逐字稿哪一個部分從他看起來怎麼解決、有什麼問題，這個東西再加上網路上面的意見，就變成第二次會議的參考資料，我們就具體解決，所以到第三次就完全解決了，這個就是collective intelligence 。我們的政府E化程度，我覺得就是系統已經準備好了，可是如何去靈活運用，這個是我可以示範的。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "很好的技巧，我想問一下，除了您以外，其他的長官也是這樣子都一起公開？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個是非常好的問題，現在行政院是三個主要院中最後引進這一種逐字紀錄的，完全radical transparency，立法院在這一個會期他們把自己做成radical transparency，我們之前在朝野協商或者在一些特定的委員會的時候，其實並沒有全程錄影公開，但是這個會期他們全部變成全程錄影公開，所以說應該是說這一個會期立法院終於跟上。當然司法院本來就是公開，這個是沒有問題，因為裁判大家要信任，判決書一定要公開。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "行政院我們雖然落後立法院一點點，但是我們正在已經跟立法院一樣聽打的人員，做caption或者是做stenography的這些朋友，在引入這一些朋友之後，就像你剛才說的，部會才會覺得這個成本是affordable，不然每一次都要靠部會自己的承辦聽錄音、打字，那個是不可能的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們運氣很好的是，今年剛好是機器翻譯跟機器語音自動轉文字都有重大前進的一年，就是說他們切換到一種新的機器學習架構之後，翻譯的品質幾乎跟人類很接近了；聽打的話，英文已經到98％，中文的話，現在如果錄音品質很好的話，Watson是可以到95％、96％了，那個已經非常、非常高了；而且是speaker independent。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為我在兩個多月前入閣，我是在蘋果的Siri，所以這本來就是我的工作，那當然就是說我不會覺得一定是Siri團隊做得最好，確實現在AI研究各家都有長處，所以我們並沒有特別挑，因為這樣的關係，我們可以預期至少這一套制度推行之後，到了明年，聽聲音轉成文字，人只要校對就可以了，不太需要再做聽打的打字。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "很好的示範。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "IT越來越發展，所以可以為人們帶來很好的生活，可以越來越豐富，可是總覺得人類有一個心理有個擔心，就是關於保安的問題，這個問題開始越來越嚴重，我今天開了好像是…face recognition的那個技術特別特別好，所以比如拍一張照就可以很容易找到人，這個怎麼說呢？就認定裡面某個日本人寫的，interview好像是第三人，好像一個人就說這樣子的世界，他總覺得afraid of this brave new world kind of situation。您覺得從保安的問題怎麼看？還有以後臺灣政府跟海外政府，或者是臺灣企業跟海外的企業關於保安的問題有沒有合作的那一種空間？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實臉部影像辨識這個技術成熟是兩、三年的時間，確實造成了非常多的，我們說有一點Sea Change一樣，就像我剛剛講的，當一件事成本還不是0的時候，你只有針對某人才會去做，但當成本已經是0的時候，你就可以對所有的人都做，這一件事確實是我們在治理上的一個雙面刃，一方面當然有非常多的application，好比像看臉不太記得你的名字，但我的眼鏡就可以直接告訴我名字，這是非常方便的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是反過來講，如果這一個computation並不是在我的眼鏡裡面做，而是在某一個雲端裡面做，大家都會怕說我看到的東西，雲端也看得到，不但我看得到的東西，雲端也看得到，而這一個雲端是所有的人都看得到的東西，所以哪一天出了一個問題。我就不講特定的公司，舉例來說，我就不講特定的公司，但是之前有某一個公司，也就是去用他的人工智慧，因此他在這一家公司做相片電視的時候，白人都辯識得很好，但是黑人就辯識成gorilla，就會造成PR crisis，然後就緊急下降跟調整，你要怪人工智慧嗎？其實好像也不是，因為你在訓練他的時候，給他看很多動物圖片，但是因為ImageNet可能納入黑人的社交圖片比較少，所以就往那邊去判斷了，所以我自己覺得就是說，在這裡我想請教一個概念，software freedom這一個概念，這個概念是Free Software Foundation的一個hacker，freedom的意思就是說，能夠做主要只影像你自己事情的能力，叫做「freedom」，如果你自己做的事情超過你的很多人，那個就叫做power，就不叫freedom，我覺得這個在AI上是特別有意義的，如果是我們是personal computer的話，所有這一些profiling、identification，應該都是local，就是在我的裝置、眼鏡上，就不要再跑到雲端了，是只有我自己控制，如果別人要使用，要先經過我的同意，達到informed consent，並不是說我不說話代表同意。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以說這一種東西的重點在於能夠track然後能夠有accountability的這一件事上，其實歐盟在很長時間討論之後，已經有推出一個GDPR的架構，這個架構就是希望每一個國家有一個data protection agency，然後他去定義所有的大公司、所有的人在處理個人隱私資料的時候，怎麼樣是可以接受的，因為其實整個社會一起討論，像我之前拜訪法國的DPA，他們就是包含上下議院的議員、法官，還有所有的這一些，然後也有行政部門的人，所有學界都加進來，大家都一起做溝通。因為如果不是整個社會一起找出可以接受的價值，技術本身不會幫大家找出這個價值，而我們如果不做這個討論的話，到最後就是是哪一個技術成本低，哪個就進入主流，那這個是特別危險的，因為它會形成一個常模，就是大家會覺得好像怪怪的，但別人都在用的情況，所以我覺得還是回到說整個社會對這一件事要有所討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得特別是在隱私這一件事，它的定義會隨著每一個科技的出現，都會轉變，有照相機以前、沒有照相機的時候，隱私的定義是完全不一樣的，所以我們每一次新的技術出現的時候，整個社會就要重新再討論一次這個技術。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "新技術一直發達，政府或者是某一個影響非常大的working出來，由它變成一個商品，你覺得這個有可能嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然是有可能的。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "因為很多建言就考慮這一個問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這裡面當然要分成兩個，我們如果要回到1984年那一本書的話，它其實Big Brother裡面結合了非常多的意義，其中一個是包含知道所有的人正在做的所有事，透過電視裡面隱藏的攝像，在監視的時候，這個就是surveillance，但是1984年裡面還有別的，還有塑造思想的功能，所謂Newspeak。除此之外，在1984年之外除了surveillance跟discipline之外，還有國家的暴力，這三個其實是要分開來看。其實從surveillance的角度來看，其實臺灣附近就有一些致力於開發金盾工程的朋友，所以在GFW，我們匿稱「功夫網」的防火牆開發過程中，我們非常明確看到，以機器學習為基礎的審查是在怎麼樣的發展。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然在Snowden之後，全世界都理解到我們早就理解到的這件事情（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以當我剛加入網路的時候（1993年），上面大部分是研究人員，而且其實彼此之間是很坦誠互信的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是到了今年，其實很多人要做社會運動的時候，他們不上網際網路的，他們會覺得一上網路，不管用什麼通訊軟體就會被監控，所以這一個狀況要看作已經發生的，並不是未來式，現在就已經是了，而且已經有好幾個了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對於這一件事我們能夠做什麼？當然舉例來講，好比像說最常用的WEB這一個系統HTTP，我們就可以insist說一定要加密，http secure，這個就是我們在做自由軟體的朋友有做secure by default的這一些東西，讓所有的網站可以傳資料給你看的這個瀏覽器的時候，傳的只有這兩邊知道，中間的人沒有辦法接聽。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "有這樣的技術？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，有這樣的技術，這樣的技術以前的成本比較高，只有電子購物跟銀行的網站，一定要裝，現在是post-snowden，所以我們希望所有人都可以用這樣的技術來降低它的成本，那當然這個是比較legitimate的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "接下來就是可能作為hacker而不是作為政務委員可以講的（笑），在通訊軟體上面，舉例來說有一套是telegram的通訊軟體，除了也是點對點的加密之外，還是有時把我傳的給你的訊息存在伺服器上，從另外一個電腦端也連得到，其實就是WhatsApp跟Messenger一樣的什麼功能，但是telegram就是挑了我忘記是九個還是十幾個，彼此之間甚至是看不順眼、沒有合作的國家，把你的訊息切成九片放到這些國家的伺服器裡面，所以除非這九個以上國家的執法單位破天荒準備合作，不然他們不能監看你的通訊。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "明白。比如有一個大的東西要打開它的門口話。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你要九把鑰匙。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "我們幾個要一起。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，就是這個意思。所以我們也可以用一些技術的手段去確保每一次解密需要投入的成本都很大，但是並不是真正的點對點加密，所以盡可能分散式的可以降低這一個風險，但不是完全杜絕這一個風險，大概就是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "也許有一些人或者是企業或者是國家想要當big brother，我覺得也有那種可能性，您覺得防止他們的那一種ambition，各個國家怎麼樣合作比較好？比如說把談到全世界的主題或者是論壇上公開比較好，或者是各個國家，像臺灣跟韓國或者是臺灣跟其他國家，把這一個問題要如何做？鄰近的國家當中，開始想這怎麼想辦法，這樣子比較好呢？您覺得怎麼樣開始考慮這一個保安的問題？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實你剛剛提了兩個模型，一個是多邊模型，一個是雙邊模型，我覺得都是必要的，而且也是互補的。因為你靠多邊模型，才能對其他不同的國家，好比像一些比較小的國家，才能聯合起來讓大國能夠也做出一些concession，但是我們反過來講，我們也知道多邊的協議比較難談，而雙邊很快可以達成合作，所以我覺得這兩個模型都要參與。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是過程除了雙邊跟多邊之外，我還特別提出了multi stakeholder，其實當然世界經濟論壇本身就是一個這樣的模型，但是我想要特別講的是在COP21的時候，在巴黎的時候不是就簽訂了一個協議嗎？他們當時就引進了多利益關係人模型的精神，這個意思是說什麼？像氣溫升高一度或者是兩度，有一些海島國家就沒有國家了，這是一個可能性。另外一個是某個很大的國家，沿海的少數居民，他們的居住地會被摧毀，但因為這一個國家很大，覺得遷到內陸就好了，這一些受到影響的人跟那邊受到影響的人其實state是一樣的，所以他們才是聯盟，並不是這邊的國家代表他、而這邊的國家不代表他，所以同樣一個技術出現的時候，我覺得全球受到類似的威脅會有類似好處的人應該要橫向串聯起來，成為公民社會，這時候把他們的意見納入，我覺得我們從國家治理的角度，才不會miss掉這一些利益關係人的聲音。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "你剛才聽到氣候變遷，美國川普當選以後，我記得他說美國以後不想跟世界合作？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有，那是他競選的時候說的。當選上了，世界各國都給他一些勸告，他不到一個星期，他就說會keep an open mind，不一定要退出了。我覺得這個也是滿具體的國際上的對話。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "我為什麼會說這個？比如說您剛才說是像這個情況，各個國家比如強國，他們的影響力肯定比較大，我們互相談這一個關於保安的問題，也許協商的時候、談判的時候，那種秘密可能會代表那個強大國家的秘密可能性，也有，所以就問您，您覺得這一種合作的過程當中，有沒有這一種強大的聲音？而這一些聲音因而有一些危險？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實美國是合眾國，是許多國家，並不只是一個國家，所以像你剛剛講的這一些policy裡面，有不同的看法。所以我覺得是當然如果我們把它看作是一個0，也就是一定要有concession，這邊輸多少，那邊就贏多少，這是談判最常見的狀況，強國能夠動用的籌碼多，所以很容易拿到一些concession。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是我們剛剛講的這一些多利益關係人的談判，不管是security或者是氣候，如果最後問題不解決，那個是全世界的問題，並不是一邊贏了、一邊就輸了，這一種東西都是短期的，如果地球的氣溫升高三度，其實沒有任何一個國家可以倖免，除非已經可能殖民到火星的之外（笑）；因此從這個角度來看，短期的輸贏沒有意義，因為從五十年之後來看的話，不是整個地球贏，不然就是地球輸。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "同樣的，security是一樣的，如果我們今天因為實驗性質的技術，然後沒有讓大家能夠信任的機制，造成您剛才所說有一個單一的利益控制方決定一切，那我們就已經沒有人類文明了，到最後就會變成一種別的狀態。這個是整個文明輸，並不是你剛剛講的國家輸贏，所以在你剛剛講的那幾個國家裡面，那個國家輸是很短暫，可能是五年之內的，你如果放到五十年來看，那個是整個人類文明的輸贏。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "我們看到一個報導，您在巴黎說利用VR可以進行審議，可不可以給我們給我們一些建議韓國的領袖利用VR來推動政府政策？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我自己對於VR，VR今年是元年，所以都還是在試用的過程。你有用過VR嗎？" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "有用過，有一點暈，以後技術慢慢提升的話，我覺得那個問題會解決。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "Sure，我覺得VR最大的重點是實際上不在同一個空間裡面在同一個空間裡，就是這樣的用法。像現在在直播或者用其他的方式，你還是盯著墨鏡，裡面呈現出一個形狀，人腦其實不會覺得這個是一個人，它只會覺得這個是圖片，所以說其實我們實際在做審議的時候，你很難看著這個專注幾個小時並進行有意義的討論，也許會分心或者手機響了，專注力就比在上面了，很少有人能夠很專注看自己的螢幕看幾個小時。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "尤其是我們在討論的時候，有很多語音並不是像好萊塢電影這樣子，每一秒都在catch你的注意，所以你很難維持長時間的注意。像我昨天晚上才跟臺灣的媒體，叫做Yahoo TV有一個VR的採訪，我們就是用幾乎是0距離，雙方都沒有帶VIVE，我只有帶一下子眼鏡去感受空間及直播的長相，之後我們完全是用語音在訪問，等於已經準備好了，但我們的軟體可以透過我們的語音自動把我的人偶配上手勢、表情、講話及動作，所以在這樣的情況下，對方就可以看著我的影像，然後就有一種我真的在跟他講話的感覺，所以雙方都很省成本，但是又可以維持彼此的注意力，然後又不會被打斷，但是事實上所有的頻寬都非常低，只有傳語音跟最多傳頭與手的位置而已，所以你問建議的地方，我希望大家往social VR的角度。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我用的那一套程式是High Fidelity，特點是設計的人是當時設計「第二人生」的人，大家知道在有VR以前就很有名，所以把「第二人生」裡面很多元素放進來，他的重點就是free expression，並不是要遊戲，跟一定要贏與輸，而是要把realistic High Fidelity的現實反映，像眨眼跟一些小動作或光影都模擬得很好，只要在VR裡面養成大家到一個共同的空間，而這一個空間裡面你其實可以看得到彼此，甚至都可以抱彼此都可以，但是你又傷害不到彼此的話，除了好好講之外，也沒有別的辦法，這樣就可以養者好好聽別人講話的情況。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "政府的管理人員戴這個工作，在那個空間，我、政府官員跟一般的人來，可以互相這樣談，也是一個很有效的方式？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實，我們之前有一個過一個實驗，並不是在政府裡面，我還在外面的時候。當時請一個喜劇演員，在VR裡面進行表演，但是同時有5,000人來聽，這個時候我們就知道如果是在小巨蛋，其實大部分的人是沒有辦法真的看到他，看到都是一個大螢幕上面，等於是一起看電影，但因為這樣的技術，叫做front row的關係，你只要用VR登錄進去之後，你就會被安排跟另外五個人在一個小房間裡面，就像現在小房間六個人坐著，然後戲劇演員就出現在這邊表演，隨著更多人加入，系統就開更多房間，但是房間裡面就六個人，但是因為它可以分身，所以只要一表演就可以出現在所有的一千個房間，然後一千個房間裡面的人一面看表演就討論，因為五個人跟六個人是最能夠討論的人數，所以可以一面看表演跟一面互相social，這就是很好的方式。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "剛才說的，我覺得採用到www的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒錯，就可以有深度的進行討論。然後我們討論出一些結果或意見，這一個正在表演的人就可以透過剛才pol.is或signal的方法，把大家的consensus一次收到他的眼前，他再跟彼此對話，這個我們也有一些技術可以這樣做了。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "臺灣？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有啊！我可以demo。像這一個是Remesh，有一個活動叫做「personal democracy forum」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他的想法其實非常簡單，它像是一個chart，主持人可以問聽眾問題，聽眾可以用自己的手機去回答這一個問題，他回答完之後就會有一個限時，比如三十秒的重要，你把一個想法打進來，然後手機會跳出其他另外兩個人的想法，然後你選哪一個比較好，接下來就會不斷讓你選其他兩個人的想法，最後大家的consensus會蒐集起來，等於一萬個人或者是一千個人會回那一個想法，那一個想法是大家都支持的。這個主持人過了這一分鐘之後，他好像在聊天一樣，根據這一個再接下來追問問題，所以等於是他是一次跟幾千人講話，但是最後收回來只有一句話，好像可以在messenger繼續去追問。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是當然如果你按一下並不是只有一個回答，所以你就可以看到education and participation雖然是最高分，但是Informed populations, transparent policy, accountable governance幾乎同等重要。我們就可以看到短短兩分鐘之內，由於一百三十八人的collective intelligence，最好的都已經浮上來了，我們可以看到哪一些比較支持的，哪一些是大家都不支持的，像voting只有34％。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個值得令人高興的是，對「remesh-like technology」的支持度只有20%，大家對於這一個技術本身是覺得說你不能只靠技術，重點還是最前面的那一些，所以我們可以看得到所有95％的人都可以覺得不能只靠這個技術達成民主，大家最重要的是education participation、open responsive government，這個技術可以用來輔助，因為沒有這個技術很難一次聽一千人講話，這樣就變得可能。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "這種技術韓國可以用嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "都可以。其實只要是Open Source技術，大家都可以用。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "我們在韓國好像沒有看過這一種技術，也不太瞭解這一個東西。因為很多東西現在不公開，我總是覺得這樣子，所以現在的公開想法是跟大眾一直溝通的想法，我覺得很真的值得讓韓國的讀者瞭解。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有問題。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "我有最後一、兩個問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然，請說。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "有好的新技術，一定肯定要培訓IT的人才，您覺得以國家政府的角度來看如何培訓IT人才？現在韓國也是一樣，IT跟其他學者融合起來，那些人現在比較重視，您覺得這種觀念培養IT人才，您有什麼看法及準備的政策？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這邊當然其實就是我們「DIGI⁺」的重點目標，這個是放在第一項，我們覺得這個是最重要的，所有接下來的三個重點目標可以說是為了支持這一個重點目標。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們在這邊可以看到的是，其實IT人才是泛稱，其實後面是非常多不同的人才，而且中間的overlap是有限的，我覺得最重要的是國民教育，我們在國民教育階段，因為我在入閣之前我是「十二年國民教育課程綱要」委員，我們當時很基本的想法是以前我們在做課綱的時候，我的前輩們，就是之前的課綱在小學一年紀進去的時候，可以創造高中三年級出來的社會，多少人學那個、多少人學那個，也就是分流的概念。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們做107課綱的時候，我們放棄這個想法，小孩七歲進了小學，我們沒有辦法預測十二年之後社會會有哪一些職業跟人才，這個不可能預測，所以我們在問自己的是，我們如果放棄掉要把小孩培育成有用的人，如果我們把這一個想法拋棄掉，並不是說十二年之後我們就到了post-work society，只是說當時的work是什麼，現在已經無法預測。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在這一個情況下，我們問小孩哪一些是還能教育的？我們後來就歸納出三個：一個是自己要去規劃能夠學什麼；第二個是不管正在做什麼或者是學什麼必須要講清楚，也能夠聽得懂別人說；第三個我覺得最重要是common good，在做任何事，都要理解到不是為了自己的而已，而是我們有一個common good是需要守護的，不然大家各做各的，然後就沒有人類文明了，我們比之前任何一個世代都更接近這樣的情況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因此，在這樣的情況下，我們希望教出來的小孩是要有IT的知識，要知道演算法跟電腦，更重要的是對自己有什麼興趣，而且自己能夠規劃他想要發展什麼，也就是他的人生目標必須他自己訂，達成這一個目標，他中間要做什麼，我們旁邊可以給他支援。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "奠基在這個上面，我們才能說大學擴大跨域人才，這個是interdisciplinary 的意思，因為我們現在隨著數位科技的發達，我們本來在field、field及industry、industry有分界，比如像輕工業、重工業、製造業及服務業這一些，但是這一些分界事實上從資本論的年代，機器不一樣，所以你的track都不一樣，但是現在幾乎什麼東西都是機器差不多快要變成人一樣了，好比說報紙、廣播、電視原本是不同的領域，但是我們移到網路上的時候，它可以做任何事情，所以這個領域跟領域中間的界限本來就在消失，如果小孩有自發、溝通、共好的能力，大學又關回科系裡面，那個是不make sense，並不是你進來就要讀資訊科學或工程或管理，而是進來之後，你想要結合人類以前哪三、四個計畫，你想要做出專門自己的計畫，這時IT可以幫忙，我們可以確定你有很多線上課程跟實作課程可以參考，並不是繞著IT來設計的；相反地，IT是繞著智趣跟想法在設計裡。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "我下一個問題可能是stupid question。比如我是高中學生或者大學一年級，我其實是經濟系，您想想看二十歲跟二十一歲，還有以前沒有學過的IT，現在發現IT這麼活，那時開始學IT，覺得很晚了，我個人覺得很晚，可是像現在是一個IT社會，您覺得現在IT是一個必須每一個人都要學的領域嗎？或者只學IT而沒有IT，也許這個是笨問題，很多韓國的大學生是法律或者是經濟的學生們，現在很難找工作，所以很多人問記者們可不可幫他們問，他們總覺得十年後IT人才的需求越來越大，而現在二十七、二十八歲要開始學習IT問題的人很多，您的看法怎麼樣？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實IT這一件事，並不只是computer science，這兩個要分開來看待。computer science 是一種science，它是有research community的。任何science當然都要投入五年、十年才能成為科學家，這是一定的。但是我們並不是希望大家都變成科學家，我覺得更重要的是要理解說我們現在正在一個文明轉捩點，接近一個新的生命體還不是生命體的東西，它是一個intelligence，這個大家沒有問題，但是是不是alive是另外一回事，現在的一種machine intelligence或者是人工智慧，我們覺得就像瞭解一種新的物種一樣，您對它要有一個基本的認識，很快會跟人類社會是共生的關係了，所以在這樣的情況之下，我相信沒有人能夠免於說…舉例來講最近有一個很有趣的說法，任何不假思索做的判斷，只要一秒中之內能夠做出來的，其實人工智慧就會可以做了，只要輸入跟輸出就可以定義好了，它就幫你做好，這個並不是未來，而是現在就可以這樣了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家可以檢視一下我們接受我們的專業訓練裡面，哪一些部分把我們做出很快速，但是做出一些不假思索的判斷，而哪一些是需要思考，然後做出屬於你自己的判斷。好比唸法律的，如果你背法條或者只是做資料整理，或者是做判例蒐集，這個很快機器都幫你做完了，但是你如果要做一個價值判斷，要跟社會對話，然後要做一個法官想說這一個判決會如何影響到社會，這個東西機器沒有辦法幫你做。所以我覺得是說IT是要讓大家能夠分清楚哪一些部分是屬於能夠自動化的部分，哪一些部分是人類的部分，後面可以自動化的部分，你要懂到一個程度，你就可以跟更懂IT的朋友去說這一個部分幫我找一個工具去寫——沒有人自己去寫——或者更瞭解Open Source，就可以知道其實很多工具是現成，其實也不用買，在這樣的情況之下，其實比較像是literacy，看得懂書是重要，但是並不是每一個人都需要成為作家，這個是兩回事。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "明白。您是說二十一世紀要肯定要像唸書一樣的語言感，我可以說一般的年輕人要有一個IT感？可以這樣說嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "重點並不是技術，我們在臺灣的說法是「資訊素養」，我覺得這一個講法比較好，因為並不是關於技術，而資訊素養的意思是資訊到底是怎一回事，到底是怎麼被聲稱跟放到面前的，如果沒有「資訊素養」的話，很容易會有一些預設。有一些朋友們會認為印在紙上都是真實的，報紙之前是一個事實的來源，但是您現在印到紙上非常容易或者是傳到手機上非常容易，而排版用跟報紙一樣的字體，很多人不假思索就會相信了，這個就是「資訊素養」，大家要理解到導演是怎麼產生的這一些東西。" }, { "speaker": "金大啟", "speech": "太謝謝你了。起碼我想問的問題，我跟你的面試過程當中，怎麼說呢…得到了很多lesson，特別感謝。因為我來拜見您，所以我用國語，如果不是很順的部分，我用小小的心意，我真的太感謝你了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那就請開始吧！" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "我們稍微介紹一下Fusions360，我們今年4月成立，我們家董事長王可言博士之前是在資策會當副執行長，我之前是在資策會數據科技與應用研究所當組長，與王可言博士出來開這一家公司。公司到現在有二十個人，我們有一些願景跟服務，我稍微說明一下。" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "我們其實想要做一個融合的數據平台，透過這一個數據平台focus金融科技創新的生態圈，這個是公司的想法，其實我們短期已經著手一些大數據的蒐集——其實也沒有到大數據——因為我們要做金融科技相關的服務，所以我們有意識地在蒐集一些data，比如一些金融的交易、期貨交易、總體經濟數據指標等等之類的，長期則是希望我們這一個平台可以變成是臺灣所有新創產業或是做金融服務產業的共通平台，此為平台長期的目的。" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "我們平台有一些核心價值，我們認為這個平台能提供給金融機構來加速調整事業模式跟創新，為什麼我們會這麼想？因為這一個平台現在所有的數據資料是透過API的方式取用，API的好處是使用方式統一、一致、快速、有彈性。以臺灣現在發展FinTech的新創產業與團隊，目前取得數據資料有一定的難度，比如蒐集、處理、儲存資料等等這些事。他們應該把核心價值放在核心服務業務發展上而不是作蒐集或整理這些data，因此我們希望透過這一個平台可以幫助平台上的事業夥伴" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "剛剛提到我們有意識地在蒐集一些data，我們data現在有幾個主要的來源，一個是證交所每一日的交易歷史資料，接著是像提供企業風險管理與分析「Dun & Bradstreet 鄧白氏全球商業數據和專業分析」的數據，也有跟TEJ台灣經濟新報、cnYES鉅亨網、時報資訊、Systex精誠資訊合作，而其實這一些數據來源，對我們來說，來源不同、license授權方式不同，還有這一些格式也不一樣，除了必須處理多重資料蒐集、彙整及處理的基礎工作之外，前端仍有很多的工作，像是我們花了很多時間在設計取得data的API。所以從4月到現在，有一些data現在已經已經透過API開放出來，所以在我們服務的前端，看起來是一個API Store，在這個Store上我們有依資料集的內容作比較細緻的分類，但大方向是分成\"數據服務的API\"，再往上一點是提供\"分析服務的API\"，這個分析服務的API其實是去呼叫一些\"數據服務的API\"來提供分析服務的。平台不管是數據本身或者是服務本身也好，我們都將其API化，所以平台上只有一種方式可以取用服務，也就是透過API。" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "剛剛提到已經開放的一些資料，像在data API這一層，我們現在有超過80個DaaS APIs(Data-as-a-Service)，20個AaaS APIs(Analytic-as-a-Service)，API Store可以看到有一些公司分析、個人分析、交易策略及財富管理等等的分析，這些分析並不完全是我們公司自己做的，但因為我們公司是利用API Store來做到API交換平台，我們把API當作是電子商務的一種商品，所以API store交易的是API，因此，可以透過其他的夥伴讓他們自己把他們的服務上架，真是針對平台上目前有這麼多的API，但為什麼並不完全是我們自己做的原因所做的進一步說明。" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "今天來拜會主委主要是因為看到一些報導，瞭解到政委其實對於開放政府、開放API的想法，我們認為我們的平台其實跟政委的目標和計畫要執行的方向是一致的。再回頭去看金管會最近提到要做金融資料協作中心，都是一樣的概念，但我們回去看政府的公開資料網站，資料其實還是散布在各個不同的政府單位，在取用這一件事情上，還是有很多種資料模式——依然還是很多資料模式——因此希望在這一個議題上，希望能跟政府、政委這邊有一些合作或者一些交流的部分，這個是今天來訪的主要目的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非常感謝。" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "謝謝（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "我現在看一下「政府資料開放平台」，我站在使用者的角度來看還是有一點困難使用，因為並沒有統一一致的資料取用方式，或者是現在資料提供出來的格式也不同，我們在想說因為我們自己其實也是需要蒐集這一些資料，因為政府的開放資料跟發展金融科技是有蠻大的關聯，事實上我們沒有這麼多資源去做完這一些事。" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "剛剛提到因為我們的平台是可以讓夥伴自己把他的API上架，這一件事對於整個生態圈的夥伴而言，我覺得這個是可以讓大家去共享、共創的平台，因為我們畢竟還是一間公司一家私人企業，當然說這一個資料也許從政府公開資料的角度而言是沒有要收費的，但是在這個平台上的資料，如果經過使用者取用、做了使用跟分析，所產生出來的價值可以再回到這一個平台上架，這一個價值是他創造的，所以可以變成在這一個平台claim這一個API的收費方式，這個會變成對於資料取用或者是使用的人有另外一層incentive，這個對我們而言也有好處，因為我們也減少蒐集資料和發展分析服務力氣，我們雖然正在做，但也沒有辦法這麼多人都在做這一件事，如果全公司只做這一件事的話，我們公司就會先完蛋（笑），所以得透過一個共創平台與社群朋友或是政府這邊協力來發展平台上的服務，希望透過共創、共享的方式把平台越滾越大，這個是我今天來的主要目的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果你捲到左下角還有一個機器對機器專區——「M2M」——你們現在從政府資料開放平台是選擇特定的抓或者是用這一個M2M？全部都有，然後從那個索引下抓？" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "我們沒有直接對這個方式抓，我們還是選某幾個特定的檔案做。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為其實我們這邊PDIS剛開始做的——差不多第一件事吧——幫忙把機器對機器的部分盤點，包含本來界接規範裡面其實有一些文件跟它的實作不完全一致的地方，還有把它的文件從給人看的PDF檔改成機器也可以看的描述檔，也就是Open API，是他們（右側辦公室同仁）所做的工作，未來政府進行一些開發案的時候，目前有兩個方向：一個方向是拿既有的系統，在不改變既有系統的前提下，把讀取跟寫入的部分盡可能訂出機器可讀的Open API來，因為這樣的關係就可以把兩個其實不同廠商，甚至在不同部會的系統去進行自動地界接，而界接的開發可以由第三方，包含我們或者是其他的業者來開發，這是我們目前實際在進行的工作。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個正在進行的工作是，也就是你剛才所講的新聞裡面說的，公共工程委員會正在應我們的要求修正資訊服務採購的相關辦法，這一個辦法具體條文是在說政府機關在評選廠商的時候，可以增列共通應用程式介面的開發評分項目，有得分的話，得標機會增加。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在寫資訊服務裡面寫的開發或增修的話，把應用程序介面寫出來的過程裡，同時也要出一份Open API的描述檔，這是直接寫在採購契約範本裡，如果政府只是採買網站，那就無所謂，但如果開標案的那個人如果知道API這一件事網站之外還說要有應用程式介面，那麼履約的廠商就應該要使用Open API的方式來說明API，並不是用word檔來說明他的API。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以結合這兩個我們達到的目的，是隨著各個機關的系統，汰舊換新或者是更新，可以變成前後端分開採購的狀況，也就是當採購完後端，而且當後端訂下API的需求之後，就可以直接產生機器可讀給前端用的API，前端的API可以與時俱進，甚至可以有好幾個不同的前端或者是沒有前端專門只是為了別的服務站臺所使用的，這一個東西具體的說明可以看「join.gov.tw」有一個說明，不然「http://pdis.nat.gov.tw/」也有說明。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然這個不是一蹴可及的事情，這個規範下去之後，當然我們也知道政府機關編列預算的方式最快也是明年年底才會看到第一批用這樣方式的政府內部服務開始建置完成，而且很多Open API的意思是機器可讀、可寫，但並沒有說要開放給不特定人給外面使用，所以如同你說的，API可以收費，或者不是收根本只有內部網路的人可以用，那就符合API的精神，因為API只是格式上的開放，並不包含授權上的開放。所以等我們覺得哪一些已經準備好了可以作為開放資料或者是公眾可讀的開放API來釋出，我們才會轉成所謂的開放資料或者是公眾可以讀取的開放API，這個跟採購是拆開來的，這個是我們目前實作的方法。" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "現在這一個平台是host在哪一個單位？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們現在有兩個平台，對不對？（詢問辦公室同仁Mark）一個是我們網站本身，是host在國外的一個Github廠商（笑），我們可以隨時移回院裡面。我們平常作業的平台是「iss.nat.gov.tw」，它是國發會跟應該是中華電信的採購的一個雲端資料中心，之前的用法大部分是把後端的電腦整台變成虛擬機器，然後上傳到這一個中心去，也就是省一台電腦運行，但是我進來之後一直在推輕量級的包裝容器，所以我們現在是用容器的方式來使用，其實沒有幾台，但是在上面跑了上百或者是上千個小容器，這個是任何機關都可以申請的。" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "一開始提到處理檔案的事，像PDF，我們也自己在做這樣一個文件擷取，所以像這一些句子和關鍵字的斷、截、群、類也都做了，可能很多單位都在做類似的事，我在想說要怎麼去把大家的能量集中，而不是大家各自再做一套自己的系統，透過這個平台便能節省重覆開發類似功能的資源浪費，這才是我們認為平台自己該有的角色跟價值。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛才我看到你有開到某一位人事的FB，所以我們直接看一下他的作品好了。「SheetHub.com」這個你們有看過嗎？" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "有。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這兩位朋友所做的事情就是把剛才所說的開放資料平台的機器可讀介面裡面每一筆資料都全部下載下去，而且已經用半自動化的方式做了資料清理跟擷取的工作。依我所知，他們並沒有做按結構化到結構化的轉換，如：PDF到Excel。但是他們有做結構化的清理，比如Big5的資料集或者是欄位有不全的地方，他們用機器自動清理比對，而且把資料格式，好比像日期格式都做的這一種規劃，你們這一種有使用嗎？或者是？" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "我們自己做了類似的自動化服務來加速我們做資料清理跟擷取的動作，但這是平台上的使用者看不到的基礎工程。在包裝發展這一個平台，我們比較希望它走的是服務化或者是商業化的概念，節省使用者做資料清理跟擷取惱人的基礎工程，只管如何在平台取用資料，在這個API Store裡面取得資料有JSON格式跟CVS檔等等的輸出，我們想做的是把像這樣的功能和服務綜合起來，變成比較像是國外類似的服務網站，比如說Mashape的網站。順帶一提，我們公司自己的服務在12/22(四)在君悅飯店有一個Service Launch Event，那時就會把API store開放出來，使用者可以進到這一個store裡面查閱搜尋有什麼API、怎麼用、如何取用。我們現在只有一種使用方式就是呼叫API，但我們比較強調的是API Store的概念。所以API Store裡面的API看得到也不見得能用，平台仍需要用Access Key去做存取控管，目的是希望大家使用或參與這平台服務並同時兼顧存取權限、使用紀錄與帳務管理——但產業環境現況實在是太發散了——事實上大家還是重複做別人已經做過或者是正在做的事情，這其實對每一個產業的每一個參與者都不是很好的一件事；即使如此，我們這個平台的特性是能透過共享、共創、共榮來解決產業現況，即便我們的服務目前並不是那麼完整，所以需要結合政府或者是業界的力量共同來做這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有聽懂。所以隨著我們推行Open API在政府裡面越來越多，你在「data.gov.tw」上面慢慢看到不只是一筆筆資料集，而比較多的是可以開放存取的API服務，當然對你來講，這個你就省去了資料清理的工作，因為等於系統不但先清好，而且有機器可讀的描述檔。以我所知，我們現在用的是Open API的標準，這一代的標準裡面還沒有好比像觸發式服務的概念，但是下一版就要有了，所以理論上政府的服務慢慢轉到API裡面，我瞭解你們的跟我們的一樣，有了，應該是可以對接過來才對。" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "假設我們用政府做好的API，我們變成繼承這個license的許可，是這樣嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們一定提供政府資料的開放授權，那個其實是非常開放的授權，只要註明出處，其他要改做或者是販賣都可以，所以基本上就是你只要註明來源什麼事都可以做。" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "講到這個授權，其實剛剛的網站上是英文授權的license跟中文的license字有寫錯；不過這個小事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個小事。（閱覽網站後說）其實不是啦！那個是切換的意思。" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "喔！我瞭解。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當看到英文的意思是跑去英文的部分。" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "原來是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是我同意理解，它是方括號，是按鈕的形狀，如果是圓括號，是註解的意思。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「data.gov.tw」，你把node拿掉，直接打入「data.gov.tw/政府資料開放跨平臺介接規範.yaml」，目前我們做到只有如果你剛好能夠讀它的話，這個其實是不需要用猜的，也就是「data.gov.tw」json裡面就有了，我們是跟目錄裡面有一個「data.gov.tw/apis.json」就會列出這一個政府網站裡面的API，其中一個就是你剛剛看的那一個，其中一個是給各地方寫入的，我們目前短期的目標是跟我們合作的一些網站只要開始做出了API描述檔之後「data.gov.tw/apis.json」就要宣告，目前政府是這兩個平台。以這樣的格式，你們有可能做自動挖掘或者是探勘嗎？" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "有可能。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那這樣子的話，未來即使是政府網站分散在十七個，只要都遵循「data.gov.tw/apis.json」規範，其實也不是大問題。" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "瞭解。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣授權跟格式大致都有提供了，如果你們平台需要我們做加值服務之前需要我們幫忙再跟我們說，但是至少這邊跟你們所用的技術標準格式是完全相同的？" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "再來一點是，我們以站在業者的角度，其實我們很難要求政府做一些資料的開放。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "為什麼？不是有一個「要資料」這一頁嗎？" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "（笑）比如說我們會希望臺灣的徵信單位這樣的資料開放，這一件事我們就一直遇到很大的困難，我不曉得這邊能不能協助？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是同一個網站的底下是有一個討論區，看「data.gov.tw」下面有一個「我想要更多」，我看到有人說要開放聯徵信用評分的線上查詢，我不確定這個跟你們要的是不是同一個。" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "應該是同一個。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果你打「聯徵」的話，應該可以看得到。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一個（問題）是說個人信用評分，聯徵已經說沒有要提供了；各信用評分區間於銀行各產品別，他說授信信用卡相關資料選項，目前還沒有辦法開放，恐將對既有系統效能造成不利影響，所以目前看起來是有這樣的回應，我不確定你們要的是哪一些欄位。" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "其實我們在取data這一件事，如果可以的話，我們希望是整個資料源都取得，這樣會讓我們做資料分析這一件事會比較精準。" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "困難的是，這一些資料源是不是能就這樣開放出來？因為我們也有一些自動化的服務來加速我們做資料清理跟擷取的動作，只要讓我們接上第一筆，我們就有辦法把它變成API，這個也是我們希望在政府單位各個不同單位去介接資料源。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你們希望做是你們要捐助這樣的技術嗎？" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "我們可以把這一個技術…你說捐助，可以啊！但是重點是我們要接到我們需要的DB。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "理解啊！就是有一個對價關係在。" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那我們開始問細節，我知道大部分最多的是微軟的、Oracle跟比較小的，你們都可以接嗎？" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "對，像我們接了精誠是SQL（音譯）Oracle…DB2…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，因為你們執行長，所以DB2一定都可以的。" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "IBM（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "老實講DB2還沒有在data provider partners之中遇過，我想也許政府有，但是我們並沒有接觸到。也許將來有機會，我們是可以做這一件事，其實對我們而言是該發生的，例如說有一個需求進來的時候，觸發我們發生，也許不在原本公司計畫的roadmap裡面，但是data的來源就是它，所以就是得做，就是這樣的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我剛剛的對價我可以講得更清楚一點嗎？就是說貴公司現在有可能我不知道幾十個標的上面覺得如果拿得到完整資料會比選擇性的開放資料還要好的標的，然後針對這一些標的你們並不反對一種很有趣的採購，就是說這個標的的主管機關單位不付你錢，但是是導入你的技術，但是代價是說把轉換過的東西公開資料、公開API，然後不得讓人取用？" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "代價是他的資料要匯到我們的數據庫裡面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "放到開放資料平台，也可以到數據庫裡面，所以你們並不是排除性，而是說其他包含你們在內的人可以用就可以用？" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "對，我們的平台就是希望人家把資料拿去用，他可以拿去做他的數據分析、解決他自己的問題，也許這個資料來自於政府，也因為我們繼承政府開放資料的license，這個是不能收錢的，但他創造出來的價值或服務之後，服務可以再回到這一個平台上架，這個時候就是他可以自己去claim這一個API的收費方式，平台可以幫忙處理帳務和金流的部分並與之分享利潤。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以現在你直接從資料庫裡面的那一些描述欄位，你就可以直接生出Open API的描述檔嗎？" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "我們自動產生API描述檔其實已達七、八成的自動化，還沒有到完全，剩下的就得花工程師的時間下去調整。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我們那一個DB…" }, { "speaker": "戴君翰", "speech": "不確定，但是背後是關聯式資料庫。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是他們的意思是關聯式資料庫都要做到八成，其他是要再清一下。" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "ETL的部分我們基本上都全自動化了，但在產生API描述檔的時候只有七、八成是機器寫出來，由於前面那一段ETL像我們已經接過精誠、時報、TEJ等等的資料，ETL自動化這部分算是蠻成熟穩定了——您提到的關聯式資料庫，我不確定能不能做——我們的狀況其實是他的資料源讓我們接進來之後，因為我們平台是在Amazon上，我們其實是把他的資料匯入我們的平台，然後存在DynamoDB裡，由於他的資料源原先並沒有API取用模式，但匯入我們的平台後便有了API的取用模式，整段歷程直到API完成上架提供訂閱服務已達七、八成自動化，雖然如此，但我還是不確定能不能做，還是得實際對接看看才能確定。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以你們現在用的是哪一個機房？" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "Amazon的日本機房。" }, { "speaker": "戴君翰", "speech": "為什麼不考慮Google的彰化機房？" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "我們一開始在選擇的時候，Amazon的入門門檻比較低，也就是計價方式對我們從4月開幕到現在，是比較低的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "比較友善。" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "（笑）這個字比較友善。" }, { "speaker": "戴君翰", "speech": "資料是不是都不能出臺灣？" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "確實，也有資料不能出境的情況，所以我們也花了很多時間在做Database abstract那一層，所以我們也不完全依賴於Amazon、Google or Azure，所以我們實際上花了很多時間做打底的基礎工程。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "…這樣聽起來的意思是如果你們哪一天要用Google雲端資料儲存或者是Big Table，也不是不可能，如果客戶極力要求你們的話。" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "就必須。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個是屬於你們工作的優先順序，其實跟我們的關係不大，大家只是學這個的，好奇一下（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "這個必須，沒有辦法。畢竟我們target的客戶有一部份是finance institute，特別是當他們願意將部分data匯入我們平台的話，我們就一定得這麼做，若只是單純取用平台上的資料就另當別論了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們自己的開發機器是在彰濱機房，在Google，但是那個是開發時用的，我們部署用的時候一定要用放在中華電信的政府雲，有各種各樣的原因。如果你們的軟體並不完全依賴於Amazon，未來談的東西會變多，如果要放到日本的話，我們至少從開放資料做起，因為沒有授權問題，但是如果是政府裡面自己對接的話，那就沒有辦法用日本的，要移到國內運行，這個是很明顯的事情。" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "瞭解。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "至於你們剛剛有興趣的資料集，如果可以給我們清單，這個就可以跟會議紀錄一起發布，我們才可以做媒合的工作，當然這個媒合也要看金管會跟其他部會的態度，並不是我們說了就算，至少你們這邊是有一個很明確的說法，這一些資料沒有被結構化資料方法的話，你們願意無償提供關聯式資料庫轉結構化資料的服務，只要願意用開放資料的方式放出來，可以這樣說嗎？" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "可以。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那就是這樣。麻煩給我們清單。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果一開始有一、兩次成功的實例，我相信就還可以再跟別的部會談，也許是他們覺得你們會感興趣的，但是你們可能還要再評估；當然反過來，一些可能不一定依賴於Amazon的，可以移到臺灣運行，可以再談政府對接的這一個部分。" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "我們的平台如果移到政府雲的單位裡，可以這樣嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那個就是屬於採購了，如果那個是常規系統的一部分，當然該做的審核、滲透測試都還要做，當然那個就不是開放資料，就不適用於剛剛講的對價，這個東西只是屬於第一步。" }, { "speaker": "黃建霖", "speech": "瞭解。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那今天就到這邊，謝謝。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "非常感謝大家蒞臨「Mix Taiwan」品牌啟動論壇，在活動開始之前我先跟大家分享我們為什麼要做「Mix Taiwan」，到底什麼是「Mix Taiwan」？" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "大家都知道「亞洲四小龍」，很久沒聽過，對不對？1960年代經濟起飛，臺灣、韓國、香港、新加坡有這一個稱號，如果我們去看一下這二十年的狀況，臺灣是最下面的那一條線，Y軸是我們的人均GDP。可以看到臺灣穩定的成長，但相較於其他的國家，南韓是藍色那一條線，從落後我們到現在超前3,000元，新加坡跟香港到現在已經超越了工業大國日本，其實以臺灣這樣子工業比較吃重的國家來說，我們要找到下一個趨勢或者是下一個產業，相對新加坡、香港而言其實更為重要。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "如果我們看整個產業的脈絡，從一開始工業電腦的開始，再來是個人電腦PC，再來到智慧型手機、筆記型電腦，這些破壞式的創新不只是改善了我們的生活，產業鏈的發展也造福了許多國家與人民。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "對於臺灣來說的話，下一個趨勢或者是世界趨勢到底是什麼？如果我們最近看新聞或者是看一些報章雜誌，可以發現趨勢多的不可勝數，不論是AR、VR、Cloud Computing、Big Data、FinTech、Software as a Service、Blockchain、Bit Coin、AI及IoT等等，趨勢的文字一直跑出來，但是時間跟蜜月期反而越來越短；間接代表大家對於未來的焦慮、不確定下一個趨勢到底是什麼。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "但是我們回過頭來看，現在的趨勢跟現在的產業基礎非常相關，如果以我比較熟悉的Big Data為例，如果沒有統計學的發展、演算法的發展、data mining的發展，及沒有硬體技術的增長，讓我們的儲存成本越來越低，其實也不會有現在的Big Data，因此在看趨勢的時候，我們要回過頭來看我們有的基礎是什麼。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "這是我們在構思「Mix Taiwan 創意 X 技術知識分享沙龍」的初衷，我們希望可以去反思臺灣的基礎，奠基過去，找出既有的優勢，讓當下正在執行的新創企業或者是技術業者有一個平台可以彼此理解，希望把我們的趨勢帶進來展望未來，我們在第一季的趨勢是AI的觀點，因此未來的「Mix Taiwan」是創業沙龍，讓創業業者來分享遇到的問題，來跟大家說他們的技術優勢、技術是什麼，這兩個平台很難對話到，因為創新者是比較年輕，但技術業者是比較年長的，溝通的平台本身是不一樣的。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "我們希望把第一季帶到AI的技術觀點，讓這三個人彼此互動、分享及激動出新的火花，我們希望讓分享成為日常、讓知識成為臺灣的基礎建設，因此「Mix Taiwan」其實就是讓技術、創意對話，因為創意不能少了執行、技術需新的想像，讓大家看到彼此共享知識來減少我們的風險。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "所以這是分享跟合作的機會，我們每兩週一次、一次三個主題，創業、技術跟AI趨勢，每一個主題二十分鐘，每一季六場，我們希望可以一直持續下去。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "除此之外，除了實體空間，我們在網路也會同步直播，把所有的影音放在Youtube開放，簡報放在Slideshare，未來的文播會在兩天後把所有的文字放在Hackpad開放，大家可以一直看到我們累積下來的知識有哪一些，找資料也不會忘記。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "知識分享的目的是希望可以創造更多的可能，分享就創造了機會跟合作，也不一定要怕被剽竊，因為其實技術跟know-how是要滿足很多條件才可以執行，風險並沒有想像中那麼高。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "這個是未來「Mix Taiwan」的場次表，直播的各位或者是在座的各位，不論實體的方式或者是網路的方式一同來參加。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "品牌的啟動論壇也是以「Mix Taiwan 創意 X 技術知識分享沙龍」的架構，第一部分由創業者，因此請部長來分享制度的創新；第二階段會請簡總經理分享世代合作與軟、硬整合；第三階段請唐鳳政委來分享AI的觀點。很榮幸邀請到三位貴賓。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "活動開始之前先介紹今天創新創業跟中小企業發展的長期擔任推手的長官及嘉賓，首先是政府的代表，行政院唐鳳政務委員、經濟部李世光部長、中小企業處葉雲龍處長、工業局呂正華副局長；產業界代表Google簡立峰董事總經理、Fitmily創辦人詹益鑑先生、愛卡拉創辦人程世嘉執行長；工協界代表的中華民國工業協會張文龍秘書長；我們要特別感謝提供我們那麼漂亮場地的台北科技大學李達生產學長；另外我們要特別謝謝Livehouse.in，因為有他們才可以贊助全程直播，讓我們的知識可以無遠弗屆分享，以上是工商時間。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "接下來在部長上臺之前，我們其實部裡面也設計了一個快問快答，讓大家更認識部長，讓大家知道部長跟創新、創業的關係到底是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "接下來我們就用最熱烈的掌聲，歡迎我們的經濟部長李世光，他將為大家帶來創新、創業滿滿的「大．平．台」（笑），謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "你（指主持人）不是要幫我講「大．平．台」（笑）？大家知道經濟部長不太好當，不是因為被記者問話拿mic，而是被這一些人快問快答（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "今天準備了三個任務跟大家談一談，到底經濟部在想這一件事，我們有technology、也有idea，怎麼樣往前走？我們正在規劃說產業要去哪裡、要做什麼，可是我們又不是計畫經濟，我們要往前走的時候，我們需要大家一起思考這個產業到底怎麼走，而只有實踐才是真理，在這樣的想法當中，我們要怎麼想這一件事？" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "下面有兩張投影片大家可以看到幾件事，我們常常都說：「臺灣的人寧為雞首，而不為牛後。」，天天又聽到人家說年輕人喜歡舒適圈，不喜歡創業，統計數字指臺灣2015年早期創業的活動是7.3％，也就是一百個人有七點三個人正在做從事或者是投入早期的創業活動，媒體非常關注這一件事，創業被認為是一個好的職涯，成功的創業家有高的社會地位，我們偏偏又非常害怕失敗，臺灣覺得自己的創業能力不夠好，會覺得成功的機率也許1/3而已。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "在這樣的數字當中我們又看到幾件事，創業初期的投入降低，但是投入後的存活率增加，所以其中一個解釋的方法是：我們臺灣的產業不錯，投入進去之後並沒有大家想像這麼容易倒掉，但我們故矽谷的人看，他們說表示投資太保守，所以才有這麼高的存活率——看起來不同的想法也有不同的做法。可是我們需要high risk，才真的會有high return，所以在那個架構底下，前面那一頁的投影片是我們害怕失敗，或者是我們的社會認為不失敗是一個重要的里程碑這一件事其實不對的。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "我們對新創事業抱著高度的期待，我們排名第二名，全球僅次於哥倫比亞，大家會認為他們是全球創業最好的國家嗎？如果大家想到哥倫比亞，大家會覺得應該是想到我在想的那一些東西（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "我們的創業動機在東南亞當中是佔很高的百分比，大家覺得創業是不錯的事情。尤其覺得有這麼多怪老闆的話，真的創業會比較好嗎？但是自己就變成老闆。在這樣的想法當中，我們怎麼樣看這一件事？" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "我們一直談這一件事，我們在過去這一段日子，事實上過去十五年一直說我們要從效率驅動，到創新、創業驅動，過去我們都說創新驅動，現在著是創新創業驅動，以前是說產官學研要一起合作，產官學研真正一起合作是沒有這麼好的，所以我們認為應該有一個新的協作網路出來。我們從學術界的人看這一件事是學術界的人是看論文、找論文跟寫論文，寫論文是看別人在做什麼、而我們做什麼，但是另外一批的說法是，這樣不是替其他的國家做研究嗎？接下來有一批人告訴你說如果你要做臺灣本土的研究計畫，這一種論文就登不出來，產業界的研究計畫就登不出論文出來，這個是迷思，因為在全世界最好的公司裡面，永遠都做自己的研究計畫。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "我在IBM的時候，我們寫研究的題目，做出來的時候，矽谷人這樣說的：「IBM做這一件事、發表論文登出來了，一定可以做，表示IBM做一大堆失敗的，這個是可以做的。」，做老大最大的困難是決定哪一個題目、哪一個方向是對的，老二比較簡單，跟著前面那一個人做就好了。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "我們跑去問矽谷的同仁說：「你們怎麼登路？」，他們說：「做一百個，九十九個失敗，一個成功，絕對不寫那一篇，另外九十九個才會拿來寫論文，這樣大家才會跟錯路。」，大家知道九十九個不要做，再找找看有沒有其他的路。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "所以協作平台全世界都要重新想，臺灣有沒有例子？也許經濟部的研究法人可以想這一個問題。通常說高技術，工研院會想到台積電，四十年前的事都還在說，難道四十年工研院只做了台積電出來嗎？答案是不是的。有沒有比較小的題目可以做？工研院會舉個例子說：「沒有聽過果子狸咖啡？」，我說：「什麼是果子狸咖啡？」，我們推咖啡，大家知道麝香貓咖啡？大家知道很貴，一鎊6,000元以上，從某一個地方跑出來的，泡起來真的非常香，但要先克服是從哪裡跑出來、撿回來的（笑），但是工研院說：「不對，我們種咖啡的時候，果子狸跟麝香貓人是同樣的，從腸胃道的細菌拿出來，再用生物科技做一做之後就變成新的咖啡，變成全新的思考跟做法。」那樣的東西產生新的價值與創造，可不可以再往前走一步？" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "2002年的時候，我去美國參加全球奈米會議，美國的商務部長，他們說全球的代表知道創新跟發明有什麼差別嗎？想說這個不是正常的嗎？還要問嗎？可是商務部長是這樣回答的：「發明就是把錢變成知識，innovation就是把知識變成錢。」，我說這個好，標準的資本主義清楚的思路，他說這樣子要形成一個循環，而這一個循環希望是正向回饋的，錢投資進去變成知識，知識回來變成錢，又有更多的錢可以傳授更多的知識，從這個角度來看就有意思了。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "經濟部做什麼？經濟部也投資前面那一段invention的部分，可是我們更希望看到的是innovation的部分，因為那是經濟部做的，也許科技部要做比較多的invention部分，不過科技部今天也說invention重要。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "我們做這一件事的時候，要讓這一個網絡真的成形，我們需要幾件事——至少從過去這些年來的經驗或是教訓。我們說創新、教育要育成、新的法制要改變及科專法人要重新思考，我們一年有1,000億元左右的科技預算，在那樣的情況之下，有200億左右是國防預算，那一部分不用考慮，另一部分有800億，但是民間投資是最大的，至少是那個東西的三倍以上，因此在那樣的思考當中，剛剛看到這一張投影片是，我們應該share idea、technology及架構，必須真的需要share，因此經濟部在推動這一個東西的時候，是要讓它有一個discovery space的project環境出現。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "在這樣的結構底下，我們今天的活動是青創基地，今天用的場地是北區的青創基地，產學長其實也在現場。為什麼要用「青創基地」？而不是說「加速器」或者是「育成中心」？過去這一年來我們推了育成中心，一步步往前走，大部分的人都變成租房子而已，在那樣的架構底下，必須要做得更好，換句話說，新一代的思路及想法，剛剛泰翔跟大家分享各式各樣新的思路、想法出現的時候，是要往前看。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "因此過程中，我們說reserch跟development必須跟所謂的商業模式、價值創造一系列、一貫推動逐級推動，讓它可以出來，因此在這個過程當中，我們說SBIR，我們跟很多人談，很多人說：「你們經濟部的案子太難申請了，計畫寫到死翹翹，然後拿到一點錢，被審查又死翹翹，做完計畫後又沒有得到好處。」——至少你們都是這樣講——因此那部分要簡單一點，去跟VC談第一步，也許 就是PPT這樣談一談，經濟部可以作這樣調整，這個部分可以做得比原來更簡單、更好一點。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "在過程當中，我們的產業趨勢跟創業國際化這一塊必須加起來，剛剛泰翔指到一件事，我們說我們要產生獨角獸的企業，我們在臺灣遇到一個問題，我們的軟體同仁沒有這麼多，軟體的同仁跟硬體趨勢在這兩者的結合，其實跟全世界的競爭是有好處的。但是我們從學校及法人這邊去看，發現做軟體看了美國的結構，覺得自己值100萬或1,000萬或1億，同時認為硬體的人就是low 咖，只值10元、100元或1,000元，因此這樣的人在這樣的情況下，整併不起來。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "在這樣的情況之下，國際的人才、新的思路及臺灣的結構，如何產生全新的企業？有一個討論是說SDI的國際上投資到臺灣不多，但是臺灣事實上有大量的牛資存在銀行裡面賺幾％的利息，那一些其實應該要找到一個新的思路。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "因此我們看到幾件事是，創新的平台與企業的傳承。過去我們推了很多創業計畫，用mentor來推，我們跟去跟VC談，他們說太多了mentor，天天都做mentor，那一些人贏了比賽之後，只是拿創業比賽的冠軍去申請研究所，領完獎金後就絕對不成立公司，這樣好像沒有做到真正成立企業的創業結構。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "因此在過程當中，有沒有一些案例？其實我們在與談當中會分享一些結構，讓這一些思路一步步走到變成真正的企業，或者是舊有所謂不管是以前的冠軍或者是第一名的產業，一步步協助新創，一起整合。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "這個有兩個好處：其中一個是舊有的企業找到一條新的途徑往前走；另外一個是新的企業找到過去成功的模式。這兩者之間的互動，我倒是說我們談老年照護，最好的老年照護是老年的過程當中也一起辦幼稚園，因為那一些阿公、阿媽跟小孩講非常開心，阿公、阿媽每一天都講一樣的事，他們的好朋友都跟他們一樣，過去都不記得，每天都是講一樣的事，每天都忘記講什麼。在過程當中，年輕的小朋友來，每一天都有新東西，創業有一點像那樣，但是更先進，因為在過程當中，新的思路那一些真的有generation gap。但是那個generation gap的結構，藉由那一個東西一步往前走，我們可以看到與談人跟我們分享像這樣好的例子，這是我們在談新南向結構的時候，政府一毛錢都沒有出，他們有點像收割，就是他們先成功，就借名字來說他們做得很棒，我們等一下可以看到他們的分享。手工業、達人文化加新技術，可不可以有全新技術的架構？我們也看到這樣的成功模式。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "因此法規制度當然必須調整整個所謂的法制基礎、天使基金、創業修正，這個在行政院也有做各式各樣的修改。公司法今天報紙有出那個東西想起來是很複雜的，唐政委協助把一些想法丟到「vTaiwan」討論。我們最近在推電業法，我們每天看到修這麼條，心裡一陣害怕，我們幾條修了快死翹翹了，那裡有三百多條要調整。在那樣的情況之下，新的公司法思考這一些事，大、小公司分級、去管制化、有效管理及提升透明度。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "最重要的是，股權制度可不可以被更彈性化？換句話說，一股不應該是10元，也許是一毛或者是一分錢，就跟國際上的思路是一樣的，這樣子新創團隊比較容易維持原來的創業理想，在過程中避免失去經營權等等的結構。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "所以新的公司治理、多元的公司主張跟天使基金鼓勵等等都跟這些相關的，因此創新、創業的產創條例都跟著修正。但是跟各位報告修改法規絕對不是一件簡單的事，需要全部的跨部會，需要行政院、立法院及在座的各位一起努力，只有你的聲音才會被整個團隊聽到，當我們開始做所謂的修法審查時，大家的聲音是會經過公聽會，以進入修法程序。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "所以法人改革當然也跟著這個，法人一直在找新的途徑，我們從早期台積電到工研院宣稱實際上有四、五百個上市公司的老闆是工研院的畢業生，其中的首席association是唯一會捐錢回去法人，而不須由原來的組織繼續捐錢，讓它可以維持它的運作。它運作的條件第一件事是：我從工研院離開的那一天就收6,000元，從現在開始變成會員，所以第一件事就要交6,000元，收6,000元之後就開始變成會員、開始接到通知，每隔一陣子變成CEO的話，就會叫你捐錢，像工研院南分院裡面的大鯨魚2億的錢，那是院有投資的。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "在這樣的情況之下，我們看到幾件事，新的科技專案一步步往前走，的確有全新的想法。那一天在參訪工研院的時候，蔡總統也有去，這個是很有趣的技術，腦筋開腦之後，腦會跑出來，要遮住，避免空氣滲透，要做一個膜把它拿起來，因為特殊的技術噴上一個膜，自己會封起來，所以那一天總統在現場實驗的結構，他們並不是拿真的做，而是拿一個假的，塗一塗形成透養膜，讓它做成一個保護，這個通過初步FDA的認證結構，所以做的是修護軟組織的，是非常hightech，根據腦科醫師所需要使用的各種技術。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "所以整個制度，我們希望產學研人才真正交流，這是舊的思路，但是我們認為可以繼續前走，比如我們在這邊看到maker、看到coworking space，原來的想法是如果全球的創新想法在臺灣有一個快速試製的中心，臺灣也可以有，這樣prototype會更可以容易製造，解決了絕大多數像3D列印的問題。臺灣的新創圈加上臺灣的中小企業隱形冠軍，其實有相當多新技術是可以結合的，那一塊值得進一步往前思考。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "我們說：「National System of Innovation and Entrepreneurship」、「Rebuilding the Engine of Economic Growth」，也許才是我們真正重建臺灣經濟成長的基礎做法，我跟大家分享到這裡。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "謝謝李世光部長為我們分享。經濟部一直以來都在做很多事情，我也是進來以後才知道，不論是像部長剛剛提到的簡化SBIR、公司法修正，或者是法人改革，就像部長說的，我們都需要大家的聲音，讓部裡面做得越來越好。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "接下來用最熱烈的掌聲歡迎Google臺灣簡立峰總經理，分享的是世代合作與軟、硬合作。" }, { "speaker": "簡立峰", "speech": "政委、各位先進，我接著部長之後針對內容加強幾個角度，非常佩服部長，因為他是一個傑出學者及科技的領袖，帶給大家產業的經驗，內容包含非常非常多，我用幾個角度稍微提一下不同的觀點。" }, { "speaker": "簡立峰", "speech": "我的工作有一點特別，雖然我在臺灣的101（工作），我常常說為什麼要選在台北101？我們進駐台北101的十一年前是世界第一高樓，我希望找的工程師是在做世界第一的事，事實上他在世界高樓做世界第一，因為他要做Google的任何服務已經是世界第一，必須要有那個心態。大家覺得很困難的地方，往往會覺得我們是小龍，不當大龍，這個世界上不再有小龍，只有大龍，一定只能做世界第一。雖然今天在談創新、創業，我建議臺灣還是可以做很多世界第一，還是有，那個心態還要有，而不是大龍、小龍的問題，我都看得到。" }, { "speaker": "簡立峰", "speech": "我今天談的內容比較是世代合作跟軟、硬整合的邏輯，臺灣有一個跨世代的代溝，這個代溝很特殊在三十歲以上、下降切割開來，三十歲大概是網路的原生代，剛好是民主的第一代，也就是解嚴後的第一代，是臺灣中心思考的第一代，不管是政治、創新各方面的網路都是全新的。臺灣有一個世代，現在大概六十歲以上，原來就是所謂戰後嬰兒潮的時代，從最刻苦走到全現在，從製造業各方面走出來的，因此這個世代很特殊，在全世界絕無僅有，大部分國家的網路世代切割都是中世代，臺灣的網路世代跟民主世代是同一個世代，所以思維完全不一樣的，如同上一個世代來講，喜歡吃苦耐勞所謂製造業的思維、B2B的想法，年輕世代喜歡民主自由、品牌、創新，這兩個其實本來加在一起是非常強的，上一個世代強的是硬體，從代工到創新，這一個世代很強的是軟體，可是剛開始也是創新，我看到所有的元素，但從來沒有擺在一起，我認識臺灣最強的硬體企業領袖，他們看的是全世界，他們已經沒有辦法往臺灣內部看了，因為要看的是全世界，他看到的東西是B2B代工，所以不能把秘密告訴大家，因為代工有一個很重要的前提，也就是不能在網路上告訴人家在做什麼，所以整體沒有創新的氛圍，可是企業還可以撐住，但是年輕人看到所有的資訊不是中國很強、就是美國很強，自己非常退縮，自己想要做一件事，但從來沒有用臺灣最好的東西，臺灣最好的東西在哪裡被用？深圳中關村、矽谷來臺灣使用，但是臺灣自己人並不知道，我要談的是世代合作、軟硬整合。" }, { "speaker": "簡立峰", "speech": "我們現在的信心往往被這些打敗，每一個符號在中國都有代表（笑），也就是網路服務的時代，其實並沒有席捲全世界，要注意，中國中南海的經濟學者告訴我一件事：「網路服務再怎麼好，只能佔中國GDP10％，替代不了中國GDP其他。」，所以一樣的，網路公司在美國是五百大企業裡面的五家，所以我們不要被一個錯覺，好像全世界都往這個方向走，其實不是的。但是再看下去，你看中間這一個欄位就看到兩個國家，因為我們實際上衝突，所以我們會覺得我們受創非常大，其實不是的，在看這一張圖的時候，請大家可以看到世界上十五大網路公司只有兩個國家，我們壓力很大，對不對？不對。誰該壓力很大？因為只有十五家，歐盟不在裡面、日本不在裡面。為什麼我們壓力很大為什麼？因為我們習慣跟中國比，整件事拉到一百五十家公司沒有臺灣的時候，你才要擔心，因為我十一年來，看了網路的上網人口，從8億到現在35億，臺灣的上網人口一直維持1,500萬，如果這樣的話，我們應該看的是當世界上五百大企業裡面，臺灣只有兩家的時候要擔心，三家的時候是及格，四家是不得了，我們應該這樣看事情，我們就知道我們的優勢在哪裡。" }, { "speaker": "簡立峰", "speech": "當我講這一張投影片的時候，第一個來告訴我的是歐盟在臺灣的代表，他說第十六名是歐盟（笑），所以可以看到所有的人對這一件事都有壓力，兩百個國家都有壓力，但是我們要看我們的優勢在哪裡。" }, { "speaker": "簡立峰", "speech": "我還是要從這一個角度來看優勢，我代表Google臺灣跟臺灣企業合作，第一個android phone的HTC在臺灣誕生，第一個Nexus的kaplan是華碩做，第一個Chromebook是Acer做，在臺灣誕生，Android apps現在整個市場，臺灣佔全世界前四名。你很難想像，我們所有Google相關的硬體都跟臺灣的夥伴一起努力，如果世界有兩百多個國家，為什麼Google這一些剛好都在臺灣？我們要有一點信心，這並不是這麼簡單一件事。我每次想到紅色供應鏈要出現這一件事，這一件事我聽了十年，臺灣還在，所以不要自己先喪失自己的信心，如果年輕人要先創業，先看臺灣有什麼優勢，而這一個優勢是很棒的。這個優勢剛剛部長也有提到，某種概念有提到台積電，在某種概念好像已經上一世代了，不是，每一個新的製程對台積電都是一個新時代，他是新的製程而活下來的那一家台積電，它是不得了的，在一個產業裡面做了世界第一。" }, { "speaker": "簡立峰", "speech": "事實上世界上十大半導體公司臺灣現在有一、兩家，這是多麼不容易，有人告訴我們說中國要崛起，那個是他家的事，跟你有什麼關係？它要崛起很好，離你很近，不是很好、更可以合作嗎？你已經在前，十家的兩家，我想告訴大家，六年前日本有六家，你現在去找（找不到），你看一下日本人的壓力有多大？我們要看的是這個角度，半導體是所有的最根本、根本的東西，臺灣有兩家。" }, { "speaker": "簡立峰", "speech": "這一張圖我告訴大家股票過去五年的成長，藍色的線是Google，台積電是紅色的，你又說我又提台積電，可是美國人只提Google（笑），美國只提五家，所以你有一家企業這麼強，這是不得了的事情。我們太習慣，雖然中小企業處長在這裡，我們太強調中小企業，但是所有的大企業加起來也是人家的中小企業，我們要想好五百大企業，臺灣要幾家當國家的目標？我們維持住幾家，其實就不得了了——其實我們已經做到了，我們只是要它繼續活著再加一家。我們再來看黃色（線）代表什麼？Intel，你很難想像台積電在過去這兩、三年來跟Intel的市值在伯仲之間，可是我們社會並沒有（覺得很好），一直覺得那就是台積電。" }, { "speaker": "簡立峰", "speech": "物聯網世界評比，十大最有潛力的公司，聯發科第九家，我們講說半導體重要、物聯網也有，我們有物聯網，你說只有一家，人家也只有十家（笑）。VR很有機會，對不對？HTC在市場上是第三名，你可能會很擔心VR可能不會成功，好吧！如果要擔心那麼多，我們永遠沒有辦法看到我們的優勢，一個小小的臺灣，過去十年來的人口沒有成長，出生的嬰兒一直在下降，每一年最多只有16萬個小孩出生的地方，我們可以維持五百大企業的三家，我們有這麼新的科技產業能夠維持住，靠的是什麼？好多人的努力，因為我們的新生兒並沒有那麼多，甚至如果是張忠謀，我都要擔心，當一個國家出生人口到20萬的時候，要如何維世界第一？" }, { "speaker": "簡立峰", "speech": "我們來看臺灣，剛剛講的邏輯是我們不要低估現在的產業，真的沒有那麼差，如果真的那麼差，我想今天的狀況不是這樣子，我們擔心的地方往往都是新興產業在哪裡？我們的典範轉移之後會怎麼樣？這個是每一個企業都要擔心、每一個國家要擔心的，但是我們要瞭解優勢，優勢在哪裡？大家知道軟、硬整合，但是這一件事並沒有那麼單純，我們再看一下。" }, { "speaker": "簡立峰", "speech": "其實硬體不是不好，只是當你做PC硬體的時候，它已經死了；當你做手機的時候，它已經飽和了。但是如果做智慧型汽車、醫療電子、AI晶片或者是智慧工廠，這個硬體是不得了的，因為硬體門檻比軟體還高，而且大家都知道軟體比硬體還難，軟體只有第一名有機會，沒有人買第二名的軟體，便宜送你都不要，硬體有價差跟區域，不一樣的對象。另外一個是每一個新的平台將帶動新的服務出現，我剛剛隨便一例有智慧汽車、industry4.0、Smart home、e healthcare、Smart city，但是下面這一塊幾乎沒有臺灣扮演的角色，為什麼沒有？可惜了，可以有，但是為什麼沒有？因為我們原來的硬體產業扮演他硬體的角色，這不是他的錯，繼續努力是對的，但是我們要其他的產業在優勢之上串起來，但國家資源這麼少、社會資源這麼少、企業資源這麼少，台積電繼續投先進製程，都沒有餘力再管別的，因此很重要的——還是新創產業、還是投資。" }, { "speaker": "簡立峰", "speech": "但是投資方向不能隨便投，努力的方向也不能隨便，因為在你的優勢之上。什麼是「你的優勢之上」？有一件事在矽谷做得比你好，你就不要做了，在中關村做得比你好，就不要做了。什麼事在臺灣做得比較好，你說一定沒有，錯的，否則Google就不會有那麼多人整天在臺灣出入，要跟臺灣企業合作。可以想到一個很簡單的事情，GoPro當時要做相機的時候，硬體都是他做，如果你一樣要做GoPro，但是如果你可以在臺灣做，或許就有機會，所以當你找到自己的優勢，你才可以繼續走下去。" }, { "speaker": "簡立峰", "speech": "鴻海郭台銘最近有一句話我覺得講得很好：硬體業應該要往上、往前、往外，「往上」是跟軟體、應用服務界接；「往前」接近使用者，要有data；「往外」是指要跨領域。其實這個也是在講硬體的問題，更重要的是一個機會。新創產業並沒有很不強，它只是要等待機會，要有更多人給它機會跟信心。Gogoro在ranked全世界IoT startups第七名，但前兩千家只有這一家，所以問題不在於它做得好不好，就前兩千剛剛的比例當中也不用多，四、五家就好了，所以我們的問題要努力的，並不是像想像中的題目那麼難。" }, { "speaker": "簡立峰", "speech": "很嚴重的問題是Drone，剛剛教授提到可能是中國做的無人機，很可惜，無人機臺灣早期做得最好，臺灣的技術還是很強，但是臺灣使用無人機的應用非常非常地少，在不會做無人機地方的人都知道怎麼用，只有在會做無人機的臺灣不知道怎麼用，紐西蘭拿去趕羊、加拿大拿去做森林火災的引導，意思就是「應用」，我們每一次看到的都是臺灣單線發展、硬體做得很好，軟體想要自己努力，不會在硬體優勢上做，會覺得做無人機輸掉就不做無人機了，但是沒有想到實際上還是很強，你可以上頭結合起來（會很強），因此很有趣，當你什麼都不會做的時候，就會想到應用。" }, { "speaker": "簡立峰", "speech": "我們軟體的人才比大家想像中還強，在Mozilla評比的調查中，臺灣的人才素質是世界第九，還有一個調查是ACM的調查，以algorithm來算的話，臺灣在人才是世界第五，System是前十，這個是很厲害的，那麼少的人，你們想想看一年只有十萬人考大學，把一萬人塞進電子資訊系，出來還那麼厲害——我們卻說我們教育做得不好（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "簡立峰", "speech": "即便是這樣，這一個時間點上很很重大的醫療競賽，世界上所謂的醫療聖盃，全世界三百多家競賽，現在只剩下兩家，其中一家是臺灣的，而且是HTC我以前Google同事張智威博士所帶領的團隊，他現在是HTC的副總，還有中央大學及哈佛的教授，都是臺灣人，他們現在正在搶最後一個勝利，這個是前幾天的新聞。" }, { "speaker": "簡立峰", "speech": "另外，最近一個評比是亞洲科技五百強，臺灣有一家第二十名，叫做榮炭科技，為什麼大家覺得臺灣不好？因為我們的腦袋裡面想的數字都很多，我們希望跟中國一樣多，當五百強有一家二十名都不高興，當世界上三百個團隊比，我們第二名也不高興，我們把人分一分就分到那一些最好的公司去都還不夠，臺灣真正的問題是要瞭解自己，有很大的優勢，即便到現在，但是要如何整合？我們有很多的事情要努力，但是基礎其實到今天還很好，我們有世代整合，年輕的世代優勢、上一個世代都知道，另外上一個世代做過的一些努力最好是結合，軟、硬結合當然是重點，不一定是軟跟硬，更重要的是跨領域的整合，可能是最重要的，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "掌聲謝謝簡總經理對產業豐富的觀察。我自己其實就是解嚴後出生的那一代，我們很高興的是在軟體產業的Google，其實在討論的是臺灣的硬體其實優勢跟優秀，其實我有很多朋友是在國外工作，我們希望看臺灣優勢的聲音，不要讓臺灣對於未來那麼悲觀。接下來邀請唐政委來分享她的AI觀點，我們掌聲歡迎。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家好，因為我接到經濟部邀請的時候，其實是希望我講一個AI概論，我後來想一想，其實之後固定每兩個禮拜會有一場，所以我今天講的其實是大家剛剛有聽到的「智慧機械」跟各種各樣的軟、硬整合，「智慧」二字到底是什麼意思，就是導讀一下我對AI的理解。之後的「Mix Taiwan」會有AI更專長的朋友來講應用。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這邊想要先說的是，今天的簡報是今年年初在巴黎，我和Google的Blaise Agüera y Arcas對談時，當時我講「開放政府」，他講機器學習，因為今天沒有要講「開放政府」，所以用了他的簡報。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他在Google負責的部門，和我之前協助Apple顧問做的是同一個題目，如何讓人工智慧變成穿戴式變成手錶、手機跟身體以後的一部分。在這樣的情況之下，其實我們工作的重點怎麼樣讓他的運算能夠離我們近的地方發生，能夠變成身體的延伸，並不是大家變成雲端跟超級大電腦的部分。當然有一個雲端運算是很重要，我們希望有一些最基本的，好比聽人講話翻成字，看一個圖可以冒出這個人的名字等等，不需要連網路，可以自己在local就發生，這個叫做「分散式去中心化」的可能性，「個人電腦」這個東西從我小時候學電腦的promise，電腦應該是跟著我們自己，每一個人可以以不同的方式使用電腦。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們回到資訊科學的開始，一開始是馮紐曼當時寫了一篇文章，我們對電腦的想像是這邊形成的，是一系列的指令，然後可以儲存在硬碟裡面，當然當時還不是硬碟，可能一些打孔卡片讀進來，可以用很快速的速度去做加減乘除的計算，這個東西現在學習程式的時候，很多時候還是這樣在想像程式設計，也就是一個系列的命令、按照順序並很快執行它，這個是1945年計算機的定義。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是過了幾年，我們的電腦之父圖靈其實寫了另外一個報告，這個報告叫做intelligent machine，他的想法是除了這一種循序漸進作計算機之外，還有另外一個可能性，是在軟體跟硬體可以模擬生物大腦的運作，讓神經元的排列組合在電腦裡面重現，這在叫做電腦，就解釋了為什麼Computer要翻成「電腦」。其實從1940年代資訊科學剛開始的時候，就有算得很快的「計算機」的想法，以這一種模擬生物的「電腦」想法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們所謂古典式的AI，常常是用循序漸進的想法去快速解決某一個問題。我們後來所謂的機器學習，就是後面這一種像生物給它一個環境，讓它自己去學習，以上有兩條進路。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "1950年代時，有一位Rosenblatt想要模擬理解生物電腦的做法，他是心理學家，可以看到當時的電線，直接把神經元的電線做出來，當時對於大腦的瞭解不夠、硬體也不夠強，做的事情是視覺辨識沒有錯，但是只能辨識到三角形跟圓形間的差別。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "而計算機的這條路，每個月就提高速度一倍，大家做出非常非常多看起來很像是AI，如下西洋棋很厲害的計算機。但嘗試要從這個去反推人類的智慧跟大腦的運作，其實就像這一張圖一樣，傳統式的AI，不管算得再快，仍然是解決一個特定的問題，跟我們現在看到各種各樣不同的方式都可以學習的智慧，其實是有相當大的差別。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "舉一個例子，當時NIST為了要辨認手寫郵遞區號的9到底是哪一個數字，請全國中小學生及老師寫了各種各樣的9，讓機器辨識，但用傳統的方式做AI、計算機的方法做，一直沒有辦法做到人類辨識的精準程度，為什麼看起來都是9？並沒有一個很明確的規則描述，一直到模擬生物大腦這個架構重新被發現。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這裡就不多講技術細節，它跟腦的視覺中樞是類似的，看到一個圖片，然後先切成小塊，每一個小塊去試著找到一些樣式，然後再把樣式往上抽，一路像大腦皮質抽到一個9為止，我們如果看實際動物的視覺動物的神經元的話，裡面扣起來的訊息其實跟這一個軟體自己學習出來的訊息是相同的。也就是說，你給它比較一個自由的環境、多層次的方式，讓它自己歸納出一些方式來，你會發現一開始的層是比較細節的，慢慢就會抽象出一些樣式，突然之間就可以辨識出1到9。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家會發現，前幾年要測驗你是不是機器人的網頁，會給你看一些數字，但是現在這個東西已經比較少用了，因為機器做這個做得比人好了，這是最近兩、三年的事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "為什麼最近這兩、三年的事？包含GPU等運算架構，讓我們很快速重現在大腦裡面很多神經元同時併行的計算狀況，像他們去看視覺迴路跟抽象往上那一層的視覺迴路，發現我們用機器學習把訓練出來的神經元，幾乎是同構，而且比原本的視覺還要好，在某些、特定可控制的情況下，看一堆相片，辨認住哪些是人、哪些是猴子，這種事其實機器已經慢慢做得比人好了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "今年11月這篇文章，這個是我們發展到今年年底，要判斷是機器學習可以做的跟不能做的，有一個非常簡單的判斷方法：所謂「不假思索」，也就是不到一秒鐘時間就可以做，不需要大腦裡面更高階的調度功能跟想，不假思索一個固定的輸入跟固定的輸出，好比輸入是一張圖，輸出是一個人的名字，這個就是人臉辨識，好比如果輸入一個英文的名字，輸出中文的句子，這樣就是機器翻譯，任何事只要人不到一秒可以做出來，而且有固定的輸入、輸出的格式，現在就是機器學習可以做出來的程度。事實上這個東西我們可以看到輸入、輸出有各種各樣的可能性，有非常多的應用，但是今天是一個直播的簡報，我們就挑比較討喜的視覺部分。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "舉例來講這邊是一幅圖，現在有用imagenet或其他方式可以訓練機器看到這一幅圖告訴我們說這裡面有鏡子、花瓶跟人等等。但還可以做什麼事？就是它還可以告訴我們說去掉這一些抽象的東西，留下來的是什麼？留下的是這一個東西的畫風，這個畫風也一樣被放在這個機器學習裡面，可以反過來說你在這邊看到老人跟一個杖子等等，會把剛剛那個幅畫的畫風疊加上去，這個東西叫做「style transfer」，當機器學習到一個東西的時候，它可以反過來告訴我們說它學到什麼，就可以變成這樣子。你可以拿任何形式的東西，再加上另外一副圖，它就那個style畫出那樣的圖出來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "同樣的想法，好比辨認是藍天、白雲，你問機器看到什麼細節，請修改這一幅圖告訴我們說看到什麼，它就會加上一些局部的pattern，你就可以再局部強化的pattern，有點像我們盯著做白日夢了，所以隨著一步步強化，其實是在幫圖片加細節，我們可以反覆迭代地操作。舉例來說：像這是一個非常模糊、看不出什麼東西的一個衝浪的照片，但是你可以反過來加上細節。這邊要強調的是，這並不是非常大的什麼大數據資料庫，事實上encode整個imagenet去辨認這是一隻鳥跟猴子等等，這個大腦的儲存量差不多就是跟這張圖片一樣，只用幾Mb，在這樣的情況之下，就可以用許多圖片讓電腦練習。因此Google的朋友覺得很有意思，因為放大圖片的時候是在丟失細節，如果放大之後再用辨認的方式加上去，是添加細節，每一步只要放大的程度跟加上細節的程度一樣，你就讓電腦無限制的去做自由聯想，這是自由聯想的示範，大概是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然在一開始幾個畫面之後，已經跟本來的圖一點關係都沒有了。這個很有意思，會看到很多眼睛，彷彿我們在演化的過程之中，辨認出一個動物的眼睛是非常重要的事情。一路下去的時候，就可以看到整個ImageNet裡面的自我相似度等等，這個是非常有趣的，告訴我們說在機器學習的過程裡面，可以抓到我們去注意自然界的時候，會先注意到什麼細節，會把哪些圖樣看成什麼等等。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以最後一張簡報，我想跟大家討論的是：如果我們現在已經知道我們所訓練、鍛煉的任何不假思索一秒鐘能夠做的重複性操作，都可以交給機器去做，並不是我們傳統上想的藍領手動的操作，反而像白領，好比像看一封信，知道秘書明天跟我明天下午在哪裡等等，從一封信找到約會地點的工作，現在我已經都交給人工智慧來做了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "接下來我們的教育，及如何告訴我們的小孩說「刻苦耐勞」、「要做一個有用的人」？不管要做什麼有用的人，一定都有比人類更刻苦耐勞的機器可以做。當然這是開放式的議題，我並沒有想要講一個標準答案的意思，我們可以想一下我們下一代的小孩，是要跟機器智能一起長大的，我們要如何跟機器相處？如何讓社會一起決定跟機器一些智能相處的價值，如果社會自己不反思去想自己要怎麼樣價值，技術不會幫大家想這一個價值， 謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "掌聲謝謝唐鳳政委，我們要說為什麼要跪著聽簡報（笑）。其實我們「Mix Taiwan」想要達到的目的就是這樣子，大家三方不一樣的觀點，彼此激蕩，大家會覺得很特別，聽完之後覺得獲益匪淺，這是「Mix Taiwan」希望可以達到的事情。我一開始收到簡報的時候，完全不知道要做什麼，謝謝政委精闢的演說，講完之後我有87％理解。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "接著我們要大合照，請大家到台上拍照，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "接下來半個小時，要針對臺灣未來的優勢跟創新做法作panel discussion，其實我們準備了三個子題，第一個會回應到部長所提到目前的創新制度，今天有特別邀請到IC創業業者跟Sega，我想要請教的是，您們作為新創業者來說，公司法已經要修正了，目前制度或者是法規上作為創新業者最需要突破的一環，您的看法是？" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "謝謝部長跟各位的蒞臨，我自己有多重的身份，之前曾經擔任過行政院青年顧問，也參與過公司法閉鎖型的修正，也在AppWorks六年的時間，現在是在AppWorks支持之下創立一個家庭體適能的新公司。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "從我經驗來看的話，在臺灣設公司並不難，需要一點過程，比如現在在檢討新設公司數位化的可能性。可是我覺得幾個核心問題其實還是跨部門，比如公司從預查到拿到公司許可，可能一個月不到，甚至一個禮拜可以完成，但比如身為一個公司的雇主，我可能需要勞動部、衛生署、國稅局通力合作，才可以把身為雇主所需要的完成，不管是稅籍或者是健保或者是勞保。很多規定都規定得很死，比如雇主或者是股東的員工身份就會遇到稅的問題，或者是健保不能通過的問題，在很多新公司的型態上，就像我們現在檢討公司法這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "更核心的是對於市場經濟的認定到什麼事，像合約這一件事，在閉鎖型公司以這一個為出發點，試著設計一套讓股東決定公司的型態及其價值模式。但是對於「公司」二字的認定我認為有更廣泛的可能性，但是現在用比較狹隘的方向去看這一件事，原因回到當初把公司認為營利組織或必須要怎麼樣的樣貌。說到底，說公司法，其實要檢討的是法這一件事跟公司分別代表的是什麼，不免牽涉到「法」這一件事，因為既然叫「公司法」，法在臺灣是一個成文的體制，我們不是以判例（判斷的國家），比較是成文法系的國家，因此做的是框架性的挑戰，但是又必須要挑戰在既有的框架裡面去產生新的可能性。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "問題是世界是往開放性走，我最近在看邏輯思維其中某一本書，為什麼陰謀論在這個時代越來越難成立？因為在top-down很容易被認為是可能性的，不會有人把秘密講出來，但是在這一個世紀要做一件事，需要很多人協作之下，不可能把所有的人的嘴巴封起來，可以暫時騙所有的人，也可以一輩子騙部分的人，但是不可能所有的時間騙完所有的人。這是我們公司法遇到的問題，公司法在過去所謂的權力結構底下設計的思維，可能為了規模化、代工制度所設計的資本形成及公司的結構。我們看得到的是，當然面對各種業態所有問題並不是經濟部所面對到的，這個是對於公司法部分的觀察，再交給Sega。" }, { "speaker": "程世嘉", "speech": "謝謝，大家好我是Sega。我以前唸AI，後來在Google工作，在簡總底下打工非常長的一段時間，後來才自己出來創業，我也跟IC一樣，也待過行政院青年顧問團，我算是產官學界都待過。" }, { "speaker": "程世嘉", "speech": "談到制度跟法規，其實IC剛剛也有談到，我們在過去兩年很努力在修公司法，也樂見公司法持續鬆綁往、往開放的方向來走。對於新創業者很簡單的是，一個是人、一個是錢，錢的問題其實牽扯到很多結構性的問題，我在不同的場合都在主張說政府補助的心態應該要逐漸全部消失，而全部回歸到投資的這一件事，補助會有太多的問題，包括政府要負起成敗的責任，五十年前的政府是冀望經濟，還可以這樣做，但是五十年後，現在政府其實是跟不上營業主，所以應該儘量把資金回流到投資為主。" }, { "speaker": "程世嘉", "speech": "如何回歸到民間？牽扯到如何跟創投合作、如何跟正確的人合作。我覺得臺灣是擁有錢的人需要再教育，世代斷層非常大，大部分的人錢放在手中，還有如部長所講的放在銀行領少利率，主要因為他們看不懂很多事，所以現在的文盲並不是看不懂字，而是不懂數位經濟的人，這是新一代的文盲。我一直很希望如果政府能主辦「總裁幼幼班」的話，你們會把很多資源放在對的地方，有能力再把政府的輔助回歸到民間，政府不太需要負成敗責任，這個是我對錢的看法。" }, { "speaker": "程世嘉", "speech": "我相信臺灣100％新創公司在勞基法定義下全部都是違法的，因為遠端工作、不用打卡、不用計算工時，全部都是違法的，這對於新創公司是非常非常不利，每天都提心吊膽，要如何往開放的方向來走？老實說沒有傳統的答案，因為我們還有傳統的製造業，還需要定義工時跟加班費，但是對於新創公司、軟體公司來做，有沒有檢討的空間、有沒有下一步的作為，這是新創業者很期待看到。" }, { "speaker": "程世嘉", "speech": "剛剛唐鳳講到AI這一件事，這個是我看到臺灣在政府方面還完全沒有討論的東西，白宮在10月底公布了AI的白皮書，大概將近七、八十頁的內容，我全部看完了，講的是要因應未來政府、社會及民間要如何因應人工智慧科技，不只是孩子的教育，而是包括了造成失業跟產業帶來的衝擊，以及我們對於人類道德教育的定義都會改變，這是我看到的制度還沒有在討論的部分，所以我就分人、錢看及得到、看不到的東西，我是用這個觀點來切入，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "謝謝IC跟Sega的分享，其實公司的認定都是基於既有過往的基礎，不管是勞基法或者是公司的設立等等，都是在既有的框架下，現在的趨勢這麼快，政府到底要如何回應，對我們來說，是非常有難度的，我加入政府六個月以來，政府要認清到趨勢及調整既有組織的運作模式，讓所有的人瞭解如何銜接未來可能會變什麼樣子，再到接下來的制度改革、實際的立法程序及落實，整個過程是非常非常長，對政府來說並沒有那麼容易。因此，究竟未來要如何做這一件事？從公司法的改革上提供什麼樣的想法？不知道部長對於這樣的這樣有什麼想法？要如何想像跟政府要如何因應？政府針對現在的公司法、勞基法針對未來的趨勢要如何因應？" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "剛剛提到那幾件事其實是很重要的。上一次修法的時候，在520之前修了閉鎖型公司的條款，可是往前走的時候就有無限多的先進告訴我們說閉鎖型公司法並不是公司法，真正需要全部重修公司法。公司法有四百條——這麼厚一本——像聖經一樣，現在要修的整體思路差不多有三百條，如果以剛剛的討論。下一個部分是我們修法是一步到位或者是逐步到位？大家所提的聲音跟想法，其實就是經濟部站在主管業管的部會是，我們必須要跟大家一起想如何推動這一件事，讓它一步步落實出來。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "我們剛剛跟大家分享的是，第一件事需要跨部會，因為牽涉到不同的認證，一件事是跨到完全不同的利益團體，所謂的利益團體不是壞事，而是關心這一件事，接著會牽扯到院。這一些並不是因為複雜而不需要修，而是因為這麼複雜，才需要一步步往前走，大家的思路跟大家的想法，其實必須跟我們一起分享。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "事實上唐鳳政委的關係，有一部分的法規已經開始進入「vTaiwan」在網路上討論，我們需要大家進去提供建議，比如覺得這樣不好？為什麼不好？內部的修法，在最初520之前就開始討論，希望這一次把修法的過程跟精神都被記錄，有點像這一次的概念，因為「vTaiwan」的結構，所有曾經被討論過的議題都會被留在裡面，等到法條開始修的時候，我們開始做各種溝通時，這一條被這樣討論，因為這樣的原因才變成這樣子，不同的團體都可以有新的發言。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "過去的做法經常都是這樣子，因為法規在修的時候，都需要有各種不同的思路。大家積極參與，不要覺得法規跟大家沒有關係，絕對有關係，因為每一條、每一句話，甚至一個字——「應」與「得」有什麼差別？事實上有很大的差別，一旦變成法條來到行政院的結構底下，一督導的話，所有的文官體系依法辦事，一旦法規出現，就會影響各位，大家的關心不只是在環境上討論，我們需要大家進入這一個平台跟我們一起修。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "就像剛剛談到的法官並不是獨立於社會之外，我們都活在那一個法規裡面，如果能夠修得多完整、修成什麼樣子，大家的參與絕對是重要的。事實上修法團隊跟商業司已經花了非常多的時間在做這一件事，也開始在網路上公告，但是我們需要大家的聲音告訴我們說覺得哪一條根本應該要改成這樣，第一個聲音會進來外，會有另外的聲音進來，這樣互動的聲音才是我們真正能夠聆聽到與針對其修改，這樣會遠比我們辦公聽會大家來舉手，講幾句話然後要我們拼命寫下來，大家如果有參加過就知道，寫完之後，比如以經濟部來講，主管者就是商業司，那就要寫「公聽會各種意見整合回覆」，然後就開始內部討論。大家會覺得政府這樣滿落伍的，為什麼不在網路上寫？因為必須要寫出來，如果等到修法的時候，有十個版本是全面性進入立法院討論的，所以這一些大家的思路及想法，接下來就像剛剛講的，有這麼多的討論會要拜託大家，同時上「vTaiwan」，事實上政委在寫「vTaiwan」這一個東西的重要背後推手之一，大家可以在網路上提出並進一步討論。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "謝謝部長。剛剛部長有提到需要更多大家的參與，因為現在的模式不同，參與的方式不同，其實政府以來一直都有在更新這樣的方式，但是我認為有越多的參與，讓政府知道現在跟過去的差別有多少，然後政府更聽到現在的趨勢是什麼，其實政府會慢慢因應。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "接下來我們看到的是第二點，我們目前要討論的是，我們要如何去銜接臺灣目前既有的技術與產業能量？不論是在簡總分享或者是一開始部長提到的，我們知道臺灣的優勢很強，並沒有被年輕一輩所看到。以簡總的觀察來看臺灣的基礎有這些，在產業界、新創業界或者是政府，我們如何讓這一些人彼此被看待跟做更好？產業內部有如何的合作方式？" }, { "speaker": "簡立峰", "speech": "這個是很好的問題，但是在討論這一個問題之前我回應一下剛剛部長提到的閉鎖型公司。" }, { "speaker": "簡立峰", "speech": "我不知道在過去討論過程中有沒有提過，過去二、三十年來，臺灣一直有新創公司跟成功公司，但是一直沒有閉鎖型公司，他們是如何成功？我所瞭解都是國外控股，才有國際資金、才可以投資，百分之百投資臺灣，基本上就可以做得到。市場就是這樣運作，我們要再創造一個模式改變它，但是又沒有辦法造成國外能夠來投資（的情況），這一件事可能只對某一些企業有用，但是對整體關心的企業沒有太大的幫助；這個是我的感覺，我先提出來（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "簡立峰", "speech": "產業要如何彼此合作？現在的產業跟以前的產業最大的不同是在human captial價值，以前創造的是製造業，台積電時代也是製造業，政府跟企業都丟很多錢，銀行看到的是資本，所以銀行敢投，因為大不了把機器封了，可以拿回一點錢。但是這幾年矽谷最大不同的是，不是政府印鈔票，而是人才印鈔票，臺灣一家未來有可能形成一個unicorn公司，其實很快，現在才兩、三年，我看到崛起的速度很快，也就是human captial驚人，國際創投願意給他的資金如果是X，而相信這一個founder，而這一個founder現在所擁有的share還非常之高，所以擁有乘以十，也是十個X，再進來的人願意再給他，他就會有一百個X，如果有了一百個X之後，所有臺灣優秀的矽谷年輕人都想join、就想回來，這就是最重要的模式——印鈔票的概念。" }, { "speaker": "簡立峰", "speech": "但是不要擔心，這一些創投不笨，一定會有判斷的能力，這個工作並不是政府跟銀行來做，而是這領域最強的人來看為什麼敢這樣投？所以一定要回歸到投資最基本的概念，但是這個跟以前不一樣，製造業時代要先選擇市場，有沒有廉價勞工、資本及技術，現在不是，而當我們在講創意的時候，創造出來的印鈔票要被尊重，我們現在的架構並沒有這一個架構，完全沒有，這個沒有使得連管理學院的教授在臺灣都沒有機會練兵，連這一個概念都沒有出去，銀行家只會說利息，也沒有這個概念，整個臺灣社會的生產鏈從政府到製造業都沒有這個概念，但是人才就在那裡，因此沒有辦法回來，而就在世界各國創業，在深圳有多少人我們希望他們創的業，他們都在創，在矽谷可能少一點，可是矽谷有新一代可能一、兩千位臺灣優秀的年輕人等待回來臺灣創業，但是human capital的概念如果沒有辦法認證，他永遠回不來，因為臺灣上一代的企業家只認定實體資產，如果跟他要100億蓋一個廠房，他可能願意給你，但是如果你跟他說100億就一個人，他會把你殺了（笑），但是不對！這就是時代不一樣的地方，所以我剛剛提的概念是，如果我們蓋一個human capital，這才可以銜接，就是軟、硬整合最難的地方。" }, { "speaker": "簡立峰", "speech": "差別在哪裡？這個是最有趣的，軟體比硬體難在哪裡？硬體的中級工程師可以做refinement，最厲害的當然可以做創造，但是創造的硬體工程師如果沒有中階的工程師生產製造、而由低階的人幫他生產，他不會串起來，但軟體一個人就可以了，一個人就可以改變世界了，如果兩個人改變世界就比人家多了，因為很多是只有一個人（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "簡立峰", "speech": "因此價值是不一樣的，軟體是非常非常難被看懂，當非常難被看懂的時候，就產生十個案子、九個騙子，因此大家就怕了，但不能因為怕了就不尊重human capital，要提高的是鑑別率，鑑別率誰？第一個是Angel，市場的leader願意當Angel，這幾年中國大陸市場成功的是這一些Angel，絕對不是銀行，而是這一些Angel願意過來，矽谷那麼多年成功的經驗是成功者願意再拿錢出來去拉拔未來的明星，這是他的成就，不見得要賺錢，而是要回饋。因此是有回饋機制的，而這一個回饋機制，大家沒有感受到，為什麼？比如尹衍樑先生投資陸學生，那麼龐大的一筆錢。其實郭台銘最近投了很多優秀的年輕人，中生代每一個都6,000萬，我算一算，好像是紅包的意思，他們有在投，但是判斷的標準不一樣，那一個判斷的標準中還是有硬體思維的概念在裡面，因此我們現在要改變的概念是怎麼去看軟體價值、硬體價值加在一起的地方。" }, { "speaker": "簡立峰", "speech": "剛剛的問題中，我先談這一個部分，也就是如果你沒有辦法讓一個新創團隊有能力印鈔票，那麼就沒有辦法人才集中，我們永遠是很多小的中小企業，其實最重要的創業並不是這樣的概念，並不是創一千家，一千個育成都沒有用，只要一家成功就好了，那一家創業起來後，別人都願意聚集，如果我們今天有一個一千個來申請，只要有一個明星跳出來，在九百九十九個中第二個願意加入，那才是成功。如果今天一千家都死不了，那就是失敗，我們現在的狀況是一千個沒有成功，要擴大到一萬家，但是沒有算有多少的出生人口，因此倒過來的地方是集中菁英，而集中菁英並不是誰去認定，而是資本認定你該有價值的人要承認他，並不能用各種方式去侵犯他，而他最後的辦法就是離開這裡——這個辦法已經用了十幾、二十年，我們希望他們回來，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "請回應。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "其實我要接著簡總所講的，我要再從一開始部長所講的創業提起，我們在臺灣談創業這麼多年，還是卡在一個成功率的迷思，你問我們創業出來的人在意成功率多少？你可以問直播軟體這個行業的成功率或者是運動產業的成功率是多少？其實對我們來說，成功率不是1，就是0。關鍵其實不是機率，而是期望值，在我腦海中我們認為我們自己值多少錢，再乘以機率——身為創投是機率——所以關鍵其實是我們一直把機率看的比期望值重要，我們還在研究臺灣有多少的成功機率，如果期望值夠高，那就來自於資本市場。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "我們很害怕泡沫這一件事，因為我們遇過房市、股市崩疊，我們很怕風暴，但是事實上所有的泡沫都有好處，像美國鐵路泡沫等，都讓他們有那個產業。你想泡沫那一些錢在哪裡去？就是資產重新分配，網路公司燒錢就是燒到員工的薪資，薪資養活他們，而他們可以再出來創業。只有一種泡沫不應該，就是政府泡沫，因為政府投資的泡沫，因為不是市場經濟主導的，還有可能變成蚊子館、空樓及鬼城。但市場造成的泡沫有人可能會很痛苦，也有人會自殺，但也有一群人得到價值，而他的殘餘價值會被市場重新分配。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "我們資本市場被高度管制原因是很害怕碰，雖然我們開始開放，但是我們離自由經濟市場還有很大的距離。因此我們在修公司法的同時應該要思考資本市場，我們在談「Mix Taiwan」的時候，不能只有經濟部在，人才是教育部的，技術是科技部的，市場是金管會跟財政部的。這就是為什麼需要政委，因為政委才能跨部會，這個是很嚴重的問題，我們現在碰到的是瞎子摸象，大家摸到這一塊，越看越清楚，後來發現大象很大，而且並不是大象，而是恐龍。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "我們還是要回到資本市場的問題，沒有錯，人才的問題我們正在試著解決，如果資本市場不鬆動的話，如同簡總所講的，不會有好的人才願意回到臺灣。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "我再稍微回應一下閉鎖型公司很重要的事情，我們過去有很多可以用境外控股的方式或者是創投願意投資的公司，對於剛開始的企業來說，那一些境外的成本，可以讓會計師、律師有事可以做，但是我們需要花更多的時間等待，如同在臺灣對創業認知一樣，如果對創業本身不熟悉，那就一定不知道要如何設境外設公司，因此我們希望讓進入門檻降低，這是我的回應。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "其實簡總有提到人才的價值其實跟以前不一樣，其實我拜訪了很多新創業者也都提到為什麼臺灣那麼多的新創業者那麼難找出口？那麼不容易被併購？其實我們在評斷一間公司是用廠房、設備及產值去評斷，但是人的價值這一塊大部分都沒有看到。今天工業局的長官也在這邊，其實很大一塊，工業那一塊或者是既有的產業那一塊要如何重新認知新的企業或者是新的價值，那個其實是可以被重新思考的。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "不知道政委您在作為橋梁跟跨部會的整合，臺灣接下來這塊的產業、技術及人才究竟要如何做，才有辦法讓臺灣突破現在的困境，從舊的模式走到新的模式？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛剛IC唸了一堆部會，現在「vTaiwan」上面剛好有一個法務部提的案子（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "法務部那個案子我覺得滿值得說一下，叫做「企業資產擔保法」，那個其實我覺得有一個文化上的意義，剛剛大家其實都講了，大家願意用來當作擔保抵押，其實因為本來的那一個擔保法裡面是分成不同，車子是車子的擔保、廠房是廠房的，動產與不動產是分別設定，這裡面就沒有辦法用一個人的信用，或者是網站的流量，或者是全部的存貨等等來設定擔保，這個其實是在國際上滿多國家已經往可以從一綑設定擔保或者無形設定擔保的方式，但是大家剛聽到會想到如何估值、有沒有可能騙人或者是泡沫？但是就像簡總講的，如果沒有練習的機會，整個市場也不知道要如何做這一件事，管理學院的人也不知道要如何管等等。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "回到同一個概念，其實政府不太應該再限制什麼東西可以設定擔保、什麼東西不可以，如果整個金融界認為這個東西不可以，那就是不可以，如果金融界找到一套估值的方法，那就是可以。現在「vTaiwan」正在討論的除了剛剛講的公司是不是只能以營利為目的，是不是可以以別的，比如社會使命為目的這種方面的開放，也就是除了往社會使命的方式開放外，我們也透過修企業擔保法及大修公司法的方式，往資本市場這邊加以開放。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我自己進來兩個多月以來的感覺是，每一個部會當然都希望在那一個部會該管的部分盡可能減少風險，因為目前在國內的監管架構裡面，我們訂了一個法就是要管這一件事，很少反過來思考訂了這個法，表示這一個事情不一定是歸我管了。好比：我們現在正在審另外一部法，也就是「數位通訊傳播法」，那個是NCC訂了這樣的法，但裡面完全並沒有監管的部分，而是說網路上發生的行為，相當於民法的這一些行為，所以不同的法官來判會判一樣。但是NCC不負任何的言論管制，大家以為NCC訂了一部法就是要管言論，但並沒有，NCC明文說不管這些東西，這些回到民法的樣態。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "之前我們之前很少有訂一部法是用這種方式來想的，我們之前訂什麼法，就是要管那一個行業，所以公司法大修的時候，我還會聽朋友說社會企業要訂專章，表示政府的黑手是不是要伸進社企做總量管制之類的，但是看公司法全盤修正委員會的想法，其實就是揭露的必要，也就是社會企業，社會vision是什麼，固定po在網上，商業司也沒有要去管它；但是因為大家太不習慣竟然會有商業司出來說現在要立一個法，而這個法的實質內容不是要監管它，而是要揭露就好了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們越多這種公眾討論跟修法的過程中，讓大家看到我們接下來要以揭露及這樣的方式，是透過整個市場、公民社會去幫我們監管，而不是一個少數的處幾個人去作監管的想法，我們每次通過這樣的法，社會就會更習慣開放的文化。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個沒有辦法一蹴可及，但是我自己希望每個相關的部會多少都有一、兩部法出來之後，原本的監理人員才會開始認同現在是輔導、銜接的角色，而不是監管的角色，這個真的沒有辦法一蹴可及，我們就慢慢來，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "謝謝分享，不要說監管角色，政府相對就不會有那麼多的責任跟真的怕出很多事，就我看來政府是滿保守的；因為時間的關係，我們直接到最後一個議題。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "部長您自己少數在產官學研待過，在IBM、經濟部長、台大教授跟研發法人待過資策會跟工研院，在更新那麼快的趨勢，像產官學研的平台要如何建立？如何扮演各自好的角色？" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "你問了一個大哉問，那是過去十五、二十年一直在想的問題，我們先把那個問題丟著，先回過來想我們為什麼要修這些法律？我們能不能訂一個法規說我們不管這一件事？答案是可以的，但是是要一步步的，而大家的聲音才會影響這一件事，如果只有行政部門單純提出這樣的法規，其實是沒有辦法公聽的，必須有大家想法的思路。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "我們剛剛也談到閉鎖型公司及境外公司，我們在修法的時候曾經有一個聲音出現說沒有也不會怎麼樣，大家總會找到一條路，那麼一個大問題就是沒有出現稅金，而臺灣就沒有錢可以投資，那個是背後的思考。所以訂這個法是為了要收稅金？不是的，是要讓臺灣的企業可以投資那一件事，這才是背後真正的思路，全球的趨勢的確是這樣走的。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "我讓大家感覺一下實際的數字，在我們開始談此題之前。因為剛剛有提到總裁幼幼班，我們是不是要有一個比較清楚的認知？像剛剛政委提出來的，舉例來說怎麼看「企業資產擔保」這一件事？傳統上經濟部思考這一些問題的時候，要推動一個產業，這一個產業對臺灣的infrastructure很重要，經濟部依過去情況，下一個問題是問會不會對這個產業做大量投資，因為並不是買一個設備來用，而是必須創造這一個產業出來，經濟部總是先講到這一件事，在內部討論的時候，這個會第一個出現的。傳統上不管金融這一塊，原因是金管會跟財政部的思路。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "經濟部過去幾年一天到晚也有跑到行政院去談綠能投資，不是說找事來管，我給大家一個實際的感覺，好比我們推這一個房間，要改成節電的設施，過去的做法是出錢投資把它改了，現在的做法當然不是，而是去找人把這一些燈都換成LED燈，他不用出錢，因為省電的部分可以做，通常講到這裡，我把下一步講一遍。在這個結構底下，假設我現在把這個改了，假設我投資這一棟大樓需1,000萬來修，接下來的四年的60％、70％的錢是做這個東西的這家公司來投資，40％留給學校，所以法人可以做、學校可以做，都不用出錢，因為有資本市場進來。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "可是接下來就出現一個問題，銀行有沒有被賦予這一個任務？有的，是收1％至2％的利息，但是我們的業者幾乎不向這一些地方借錢，寧可向國際借7％至8％。為什麼？因為我們在做資產的時候，要標這一個案子，而拿到這一個案子的時候，政府garentee是四年，假設是電廠的話，garentee是二十年，以二十年的結構放到電廠來看，中間的利差5％，可是寧可借國際的資金，因為簽到政府約的那一天，那一張像信用狀，就可以借錢了，如果是向臺灣的銀行借錢，就會說要先拿擔保金10％來，結案之後幾個月錢才可以拿回來，但國際資金的時候，先借錢啟動，逐漸可以收錢，最後結束時有利潤，因此路上就已經回收資金了，所以可以標一個案子或一百個案子或一千個案子，只要人力的部分可以負擔得起。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "那5％有多大？5％成立二十年單利計算，完全不要考慮比較複雜的財務運作是100％，投資1,000億，那麼就有1,000億的利差在銀行出現。大家在報紙上看到綠能投資是4,500億至1兆，突然間發現4,500億至1兆的錢，大家會想到1兆有多少？就是半年臺灣的GDP，做到死都不用睡覺，血汗工廠都加起來，整個就是這麼一大筆錢，所以剛剛政委提到企業資產擔保的這件事影響多大，因此除了人力會印錢以外、制度也會印錢，那個牽涉到基本觀念的調整。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "從這個角度再回到產官學研這一件事，我們學界認為我們做研究的話，一定要blue-sky，也有一批人說根本不應該blue-sky，好處應該是這兩者間真正要產生的，因為一些基礎的思路的確會產生重要的結構，重點是找問題的方法必須從臺灣這一個社會，或者是國際社會的下一個趨勢去找，那一件事是有一點難，那個是要訓練。我剛剛在分享IBM的例子，是要訓練的。那個絕對有世代generation gap，如剛剛簡總的說法。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "通常說三十歲以下是數位原住民，三十歲到六十歲是數位移民，六十歲以上的人叫做數位高山族（笑）。我問他高山族如何看？那樣的人站在高山上看著遠遠的internet大海，看到一個很大的海，也看過boundary，從來沒有摸過水，但是說得一口好網路，指點江山。而數位移民是站在海邊走來走去，有看到沙灘、腳有一點濕，但沒有在水裡。而數位原住民是在水裡游來游去，不知道海有沒有boundary，反正悠游其中。那樣generation gap基本思路其實是人才背後大結構，而我們的制度在這一個角度上必須嘗試跟上，但是我們跟得快不快？不夠快，那一件事必須要全民參與。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "其實跟我們自己說是沒有用的，但這一些東西就像我們剛剛提到「vTaiwan」的結構，那一種平台的快速引進，我們今天談的網絡這麼重要，為什麼修法規，並不是這樣的結構。題目是從新一代的趨勢找，回到學界來做相關題目的評估機制。經濟部管的是法人，因此跟著必須被修改，因為基本思路的KPI必須被調整。 但是我們的預算在一年多前訂，十八個月前就開始編，因此必須給更多的自由度，這就是在過程中一步步，下步就是跟企業界真正連結，新一代的事業跟舊一代事業連結點那一塊，這個連結是必須出現的，而那一些事情必須靠我們剛剛講的，不管是風潮、討論。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "但是，過去這一段日子整體的社會氣氛不太友善，我們常說：「The other side is the bad guy」，每一個side都一樣的，因為時代背景成長不同的關係，所以我們要如何一起工作，應該才是要一起想的，否則永遠不會有產官學研合作，其實進一步講是產官學研「跨時代」的真正合作，跟大家分享。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "掌聲謝謝我們的五位來賓。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "其實我們可以看到剛剛部長有提到制度有制度的好處，唐鳳政委有提到有時沒有制度也有沒有制度的好處，其實國家政策並不是0跟1的答案，需要更多人的參與跟平台，讓大家來協作幫彼此找出路。我們九點結束，現在剩下二十分鐘，因為機會難得可以邀請到重要的貴賓，有沒有人對於現場的貴賓有任何提問，我們有二十分鐘的Q＆A時間？" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "各位好，因為其實我今天很高興能夠來這邊聆聽五位的分享，但是因為在事前我就有先提出一個問題，不算是樁腳。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "第一個問題想要問李世光部長，因為今天談了比較多修改法規做法，您覺得政府哪一些做法是臺灣產業加速轉型？因為您提到轉型是很重要的重點。" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "另外想要請問唐鳳政委的是，因為您從非常特別的背景進到政府來協助政務的推動，成為政委您給自己一個特定的目標，那個目標是什麼？您認為在卸任前一定要達成的事情是什麼？因為其實我們大家可以心知肚明，您未來不會二、三十年都在政府服務，所以在信任前會不會有一個目標？" }, { "speaker": "鄭國威", "speech": "最後一個問題想要問的是簡總經理，您一開始分享的時候，有提到Google有很多問題跟臺灣多單位合作，但是想瞭解的是Google對於臺灣創新產業最重要的價值是什麼？Google在臺灣101也算是扎了一點根，像Google出來的同仁，成為臺灣新創界重要的支柱，您覺得更重要的意義是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "謝謝泛科學鄭總編輯，請部長回應，哪一些做法推動臺灣的產業加速轉型？" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "你們的題目有先提出來，但是他們都不告訴我你提什麼，這個比較像快問快答（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "我今天只替經濟部回答，如果今天我是學生，我怎麼答都可以，但是我今天站在經濟部的立場。我們跟國發會配合的是人才的那一塊，基本上是外來的人才留在臺灣怎麼樣能夠快速讓他們覺得在臺灣confortable，我們現在人才流動流出的比流入多，流出去的通常是高素質人力，但流進來的通常不是高素質人力，國發會跟經濟部配合的那部分，法規是需要調整的，現在正在全力以赴調整。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "這個東西當然有很多的討論，到底一步到位或者是逐步到位，任何改革一步步往前走是重要的。像你剛剛有提到多少錢在上面，那個是一部分的做法，下一步經濟部正在思考，其實已經成立一陣子了，也就是法人改組，但是並不是拆掉，而是如何研究法人的能量能夠真正落實回去。大家有一個想法是根據剛剛那麼多的討論，最好就是通通都不要管，所以按照剛剛的解釋，那就是全部的法案解散，有這麼多人流出來，但是我講的是需要一步步往前走，學界訓練出來的人進入到企業界，這個是不是in between的結果，現在的確存在，而可以產生相當多的新成果，中間有一段研究，也許不是新創圈，像腦開刀之後，快速形成腦筋膜保護的結構。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "過去是有企業做，但是早就已經不成立了，那一種思路不成立，但是基礎的研究過程當中，從blue-sky的研究接回到企業界，我們全部都談，我們回去總認為美國跟英國做得很好，我曾經跟英國得第一個產學合作獎的人說，那個東西一旦需要給獎就代表做得不好，才需要給獎。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "因此如果從這一些思路來看，經濟部現在的做法的確還在一步步往前走，但是過程當中我們再談到剛剛的機關法規是在修的，但是修成什麼樣子，絕對不是行政部門獨立可以做成的。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "謝謝李部長。接下來唐政委您給自己的目標？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "要留下什麼我可以很快速回答，因為我從知道要入閣跟實際入閣，我人在國外過了一個月，就是跟各界溝通跟組隊。我們的團隊是臺灣政府裡面，少數使用OKR管理，就是每一個人自行決定目標。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以其實我要留下的，我一進去已經做了，就是在政府內部的政府雲裡面，裝了相當於dropbox、trello、slack、google docs的協作平台軟體。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "即使我明天不當政務委員了，這個東西還在那邊，內部同仁覺得這個比什麼好用，已經慢慢在傳染開了，至少可以不會變成換一個承辦，他的dropbox不見了。讓公部門的程序創新有一個感染性，這個已經變成政府雲的一部分；即使我不在，那一個部分也會留下來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我自己想要做的目標是：希望政府更相信人民。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "說要人民相信政府很容易，但是信任是互相的，如果政府不相信人民，人民為什麼要相信政府？所以政府裡面的朋友相信人民到某個程度，大家也許才可以慢慢跟上那個程度。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實就像剛剛部長講的，把政策開放出來。像公司法全盤修正裡面，最先提到「vTaiwan」討論的，其實是英文名稱別名的登記。我覺得很有意思是，這個問題範圍並不大，當初的專家學者們已經能想的都想完了，為什麼要開放出來討論？但是問題還是提出來討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "真的很好的是，有人認為雖然我的公司漢字是這樣寫，但是希望用臺灣閩南語來唸，所以他的別名不是英文，而是要用臺灣羅馬字拼音，所以這樣子就要修改別名的範圍，不只是英文，而是要留臺灣羅馬字拼音字母進去。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們關起門自己討論，根本不會想到要用客家話或者是台語拼音來當別名，但是我們更相信人民的話，這些想法可以冒出來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個是我希望跟公務同仁們一起學習的。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "簡總經理，您對於Google臺灣的創新產業及價值是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "簡立峰", "speech": "Google也做了非常多的創新，有趣的地方是，只要牽涉到跟硬體相關的創新，一定有臺灣夥伴，我常常說臺灣Google加起來的事情遠遠多過於我知道的事情，101有來自於太多全球Google夥伴，我估計進到Google總部合作的有幾百位，我覺得那個是很重要。" }, { "speaker": "簡立峰", "speech": "外資投資越來越少，同樣的事情對各國都很大，所以湊過來放到臺灣來，東南亞崛起丟到臺灣也不夠，剩下多少錢？如果投到日本也減少，這個是一個共同的問題，但是反過來並不是錢的問題，而是經驗跟知識的問題，代工最重要的價值是讓臺灣二十年來科技率不敗，我們雖然在某些部分賺的是低毛利，郭台銘永遠知道是什麼，連Android跟iPhone都知道，但是我們的社會並沒有轉換成社會的知識跟力量，這個是很可惜的。" }, { "speaker": "簡立峰", "speech": "因此在新的創業跟產業當中，我很信任Google的工作，他扮演這樣的角色，又跟臺灣的產業做一種銜接，也許我天性樂觀，也就是因為我在這樣的平台裡面，我看到很多的臺灣人做很多創新。往往不知道很不幸的是代工業的特質，也許媒體或者是社會力量是去挖掘出這一些，讓年輕人知道的驚人的平台，沒有一個國家像臺灣有這麼驚人的平台，像張忠謀每一次的投資都是很精確的，當晶元生產還沒有做出來的時候，他就知道。" }, { "speaker": "簡立峰", "speech": "你知道一個硬體跟軟體最大的不同是一個硬體從構想開始就要跟你合作，那個是兩年跟三年，而Google要成立硬體這一件事，臺灣的企業跟美國早知道，兩、三年前就知道，這個是形成投資跟人才培育、創新的來源，因此臺灣如何改變？你一直醞釀很好的inside，但是你如何拿出來？為什麼以前沒有這樣的問題？因為以前所有的人都進去，而進去這一個工廠裡面，所以沒有問題，因為也沒有打算在工廠外做事，而現在年輕一代在工廠外做事，但是年輕一代沒有進去工廠過，現在創業做得最好一批人，HTC最近股價掉很多，但是HTC的前同事做很好，因為在創新做很好。" }, { "speaker": "簡立峰", "speech": "跟Nokia一樣，有一群人出來就看到機會，因此當企業有高、低的時候，大家不要擔心，那個是新的機會，但是最重要的是創業要好，讓一群HTC也做得很好，一點萎縮，釋放這一些人力可以在臺灣創業，而不是集體到深圳去創業，這個是臺灣要努力的。" }, { "speaker": "簡立峰", "speech": "這樣的能量還是在的，剛剛總編輯問的，其實臺灣的能量還是在，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "請李執行長，因為您之前也有提出問卷。" }, { "speaker": "李文達", "speech": "您確定相關的法令修改，像法令還有施行細則及各部的規則，到每一個單位的處理及處理原則，修改之後，這一些一併會跟著改嗎？我本身有一點懷疑，就像創業家問的勞基法問題，其實勞基法並沒有規定要打卡，是要保持員工上班紀錄，以免員工訴訟請假糾紛，但是政府就是解釋要有打卡機跟裝置，為什麼要急著修法？而不是改變執法員的觀念？這個不論我在學校跟青創基地都有這個感覺，要把那個修改，修改執行人觀念，是不是就可以獲得改善，這個是第一個問題。" }, { "speaker": "李文達", "speech": "第二，剛剛簡總有提到，其實我可以看到簡報上的硬體跟軟體的綜合，當然你提到臺灣的創投不投團體跟人力資本，我也有問過本校校友跟創辦基金創辦人，也搞了一個3億的資金，搞了好幾年青創基地，好案子、最好的人，但是他都不投，一個都不投，我說為什麼不重視人的價值？他說臺灣以製造鏈比較為主，如果要做一個等比例擴大的創業題目，寧可在大陸跟矽谷做，在臺灣做，因為覺得文化跟網路的差異，所以可能沒有辦法創造那麼大的效益，因此在臺灣投資還是要跟硬體為主。" }, { "speaker": "李文達", "speech": "最近終於讓他投了一個idea，投了2,000萬，但是他說臺灣過去就是以製造鏈為主，是不是結合硬體跟軟體的機會，並不是專門投資在數位經濟上面。" }, { "speaker": "李文達", "speech": "最近跟唐政委問的問題，也就是「亞洲·矽谷」，中間加這一個點，我們要瞭解連結亞洲跟矽谷，但是我們想要更清瞭解，在政策的執行上，如何讓亞洲跟矽谷連結的時候，如何讓臺灣有位置在？或者當今天矽谷想要進去亞洲跟連結亞洲的時候，有臺灣的夥伴在，我想這個部分在政策執行上想要請教政委的意見，以上三個問題，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "第一題是不是可以請部長來回答，針對法規及實際上制度的解釋？" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "大哉問，然後要幾秒鐘思考後回答。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "為什麼不修母法而修施行細則？其實觀念的改變是非常困難的，那個比修法規還難，修了母法才有機會改變。很大的感覺是到底組織可以轉換多快" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "幾年前我們到紐西蘭去，我們談合作，他跟我說今天是禮拜五，我們下禮拜三再來決定簽合作的協定，禮五跟禮拜三有什麼差別？就是差禮拜六、日、一及二共四天。對方又說但是因為明天選舉，我想說明天選舉跟這個有什麼關係？他們說因為三天可以重組部會，什麼是「重組部會」？也就是體育文化部跟，或者科技教育部，或者是教育經濟部，或者是經濟文化部，選三天，最後改組完成。我們修政府組織法修了多久？現在還沒有修完，在我面前還有一條，我們同仁在這邊，那個是我們下一階段必須面臨的。" }, { "speaker": "李世光", "speech": "經濟部最快完成的時間是三天，那一個國家到今天為止，自上次變成這樣花了多久時間？1980年的時候，紐西蘭國家90％的GDP活動跟國營事業有關，因此是退步的，到今天為止是36年，我們的比那個還慢，我們需要一個基礎的思路才能開始轉換，因此修施行細則絕對是枝枝節節修。修母法之後還要修其他的施行細則，如果不到最後一個階段，沒有一個部會會啟動修母法，因為那個工程非常浩大，修完之後才是苦難的開始，修的時候沒有休息、修的過程沒得休息，修完之後才是苦難的開始。這像生小孩，生完之後才變得麻煩，小孩在媽媽的肚裡希望他趕快生出來，但生出來之後跑來跑去，還是希望放在肚子裡面。母法要先修，觀念其實才是最困難修改的，這個是為什麼一直跟大家分享協作平台、觀念改變，我們今天從頭到尾都在談human capital，那個部分才是我們最大的困境。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "謝謝部長，請簡總回答問題。" }, { "speaker": "簡立峰", "speech": "想要投資的人要先想好一件事，為什麼別人要投你？如果臺灣沒有成功的案例？臺灣為什麼要投資軟體？答案就是在這裡，因為過去沒有成功的案例，所以投資者沒有辦法投，如果我們的鄰居有很多成功案例當然會往那邊投，如果你想要做硬體、半導體還是很多人投，做IC還是很多人會投，重點是成功案例。成功案例伴隨著有經驗的人跟有信心的人，你有一個成功案例，也就代表有人曾經成功過，之後就變成那一些人來判斷下一個成功的人，因此滾動上來，如果我可以做，我不會遍地開花設育成中心，我會找一百個人來，把心願放在一起，分成團隊出去，不要認為三個會失敗，你說三很少，所以會失敗，並不是的，而是國家把這麼多人擺在一起，HTC是絕佳機會，把全世界兵是最好的，那個是天作之合，投資者要看到這個價值。" }, { "speaker": "簡立峰", "speech": "所以其實有，他們出去都拿到很多錢，因此有人在投資，想要被投資的人要看到別人怎麼投，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "創業育成組的長官都在這邊，相信都有聽到（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "如何鏈結國家？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "現在已經可以不用打卡，去年 vTaiwan 已經協助勞動部修過「勞工在事業場所外工作時間指導原則」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個就是部長所說的：我們改了施行細則，不表示大家會突然之間知道這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好比我在行政院，所謂「二距二例」每周兩天遠距上班，可以這樣做，也因為是有一個五年前發布的「局考字第1000021834號函」。但這跟電傳勞動的原則一樣，除非我在這裡講，不然大家都不知道明明就已經有法可循。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是公司法重修，說「公司不只以營利為目的，也可以用社會使命為目的」，這樣人盡皆知，社會企業跟別種企業才會有成長的空間。我們確實也可以用解釋來處理，但這樣的話，從資本市場、從公民社會的角度來看沒有人知道這一件事，就跟大家以為還要打卡是一樣的道理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "回到「亞洲·矽谷」，其實「亞洲·矽谷」的「點」我唸成連結，其實只是為了一個目的：「不要以為是在弄園區。」" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "之前大家都以為我們要在亞洲複製一個矽谷，一定要劃地蓋園區，大家就寫了長篇的文章。但是實際上看執行計劃的話，那其實根本不是園區，講的是人才、法令、資金所有這些東西如何流動。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因此當時就加了一個點，也就是代表人才、資金及法規的部分，我們要給予充分的流動，這個是整個計畫的目的。地方政府當然自己要蓋一些建設，但這個跟國家型計畫是兩回事。這個是當時的重新設定。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "您的問題很好，我們現在寫了「鏈結亞洲、連結矽谷」，也確實在人才、法規、資金這些方面，開始進行一些增進流動的舉措，比如像創業家來台的更多搭配措施。周邊各國的政府，也都在做幾乎一模一樣的事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這些是否足夠？會有什麼效果？很誠實的答案是「不知道」。這跟金融監理沙盒一樣，世界最早開始的也是一年前才開始做，沒有人知道這個東西會帶出哪些創新，但是我們知道如果不做的話，連入場卷都沒有了。最先做的也只比我們早一、兩年，沒有人知道會發生什麼事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為這個是敏捷式的治理：去試一個東西，再滾動式檢討哪些施行細則需要修正。像閉鎖型公司我們通過之後，回過頭來再發布核釋，看課稅方式要怎麼修。如果沒有實務界的經驗的話，不會知道要怎麼修。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "明年開始的「數位國家」方案，也並沒有說全部的資源要砸下去到什麼特定項目。我們是把一些空間打開，然後按照哪些新的東西冒出來，再去調整施行細則跟法規命令等等。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因此我覺得最重要的關鍵，並不是去預測明年會流行什麼、最近會流行什麼，並不是這樣做。我們是打開空間，等一年之後、兩年之後有什麼東西，創造出的機會是我們今天看不到的，接著讓我們的法規在很快的時間之內跟上它，讓這一個連結發生。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得這個精神，亞洲鄰近的國家每個都在做，各自會走到各自適合的位置、在新的生態系裡面結合，這個就是「鏈結亞洲」的意思。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "您突破非常大一步，政府從來沒有認為的這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "謝謝大家，論壇就到這裡結束，我們希望大合照自拍。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "Minister Tang, thanks so much for joining us today." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Thank you for letting me joining you." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "In your office, of course, so I would be the one joining you. Thank you for that. Just to start things off, let’s look at how you got here in this very nice office that we’ve found ourselves in the very first place. Of course, your life path brings you through Silicon Valley, the tech sector, and the private sector." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "Quite a history there developing a lot of tech innovation, but then you took a very hard right turn into the realm of governance. That path led you through the Sunflower Movement, and then working with the last government, and now actually into the very halls of power themselves. I’m very curious on your thinking of why it was important to you to actually get involved in all of this." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure, certainly. My work actually has been more or less the same in the past 20 years or so. I was there when the Web was being invented and the Internet society, the Internet community at the time." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We worked very hard on some of those very interesting governance questions like, \"How would we involve more private sector people without sacrificing the early freedom of the freedom of speech, of assembly online? How do we preserve the culture of an urban Internet, of Internet neutrality while allowing each telecom operator and each nation state even to claim their part of the interest in this, and so on?\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The Internet community is, while there is some room for improvement in areas like inclusivity, and so on, but it’s essentially remaining a very multi‑stakeholder, not dominated by any particular state, this kind of governing structure. It is actually the first governance structure that I learned from when I was only 13 at the time." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "From the very beginning of my learning, I’ve always learned from the public domain works, from the early Internet pioneers, from the people working in the Gutenberg Project who digitized the early classical scholarships, classical authorships, and everything like that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "As these are the core of my learnings, I am, of course, very interested in preserving this. Some people would say anarchistic foundation of the governance model that governs the early Web and by extension, the entire digital innovations that have followed afterwards." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It is because of this that I want to preserve, or sometimes conserve, the early tradition of the anarchistic collaboration where people could only convince each other using arguments, using rational lines of reasoning because the Internet community doesn’t have an army. It doesn’t have a navy." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "All we can do is try to communicate with people in the world, to convince people that letting us to become a neutral, collaborative, inclusive entity as to the benefit of the humankind. This is essentially what I am still doing now." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "You don’t have an army or a navy just yet, but you do have a staff. That’s a step up. It sounds like what you’re saying is basically, you feel like there is something in that culture ‑‑ in that early Internet culture ‑‑ that was missing from governance here in Taiwan." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "I’m wondering if you can talk a little bit about what exactly that is, what you were seeing that told you that there was something there that you wanted to add in?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Certainly. This is what we call a multi‑stakeholder model, meaning that when we are working on a law affecting the Internet, we don’t call them laws." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We call them Requests for Comments, meaning that we ask the entire Internet community ‑‑ anyone who would be affected by any of those changes in the code that we are doing ‑‑ to come forward and participate in consultative discussions, be it face‑to‑face or online." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There is three differences. One is that it’s completely transparent. Everything happens something on a list, on online forums, and everybody can see the whole record of how we got here in the first place." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The second part is that it’s participatory, meaning that the Internet really exists as a consensus of people running these computers agree on some protocol. Without the broad agreement of people adopting this protocol, there really is no Internet." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Because of this, every change has to be voluntary. People has to actually sign up on the new version of the Internet protocol before the protocol gets widely adopted. It’s because of this that the engagements of the stakeholder communities are put into the foremost prominence of the governance model. That’s the second part." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The third part, I think and even more importantly, is that everything is accountable, meaning that you can go back and look at every chance in the RFC, and every implementation details, and found who exactly where proposed that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There is the audit trail, of sorts, of all the laws. When I’m talking about laws, this is laws of code. It’s more like physical laws. It regulates what’s possible and what’s not on the Internet. It’s not really legal code, but it carries even more force than legal code in some cases, like in Blockchain, and in other technological mechanisms." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The entire idea is that there is the audit trail to each and every code decisions. Now granted, there could be some technocratic elements in it. There could be parts that only an expert could look at and understand, and so on, which is why we need to work on inclusiveness, and accessibility, and more outreach." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "All in all, I do think there are elements in this radically transparent community structure that a national state government structure can learn from, especially during the transparency and participatory crisis of faith in democracy that we’re currently facing." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "You’ve thrown me a little bit off balance because, honestly, I was going to wait until later in the interview before we got real philosophical about stuff. Since you took us here, anyway, let’s hang out here for a little bit." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "Now that you have an office here, I’m sure that you’re a little bit reluctant to get too critical, too negative, but clearly you’re highlighting this set of values that you have that you think are very positive and should be transferred." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "The implicit statement that you’re making is that that wasn’t here before, and that what was here before wasn’t quite up to the task of what you think the government should be doing. Maybe you could talk about the ways in which you think the government has perhaps fallen short, and why this sort of new thinking, or not super new, but transplanted thinking, is necessary." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I wouldn’t say that it’s fallen up short. I would say that it’s mostly done by the previous generation of technology. Radio and television, they were invented long before the Internet. With radio, and television, as we’re working now on..." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "Let’s not get personal. Let’s not get too personal." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "[laughs] With radio, millions of people can listen to the way we’re talking about it right now, but with this radio technology, there’s no way for both of us to listen to the millions of people who will listen to this talk between us." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In a sense, it’s asymmetric technology. It lets millions of people listen to one or two persons, but it doesn’t let one or two person listen to millions of people." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "With the Internet, of course, this is what we call the mass self‑communication, meaning that people can select who to listen to, but still there is no way for the governance structure to systematically run a millions‑people consultative process and let these people listen to each other." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is what we have done in the Internet community, especially in the Web community for ages now." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In the current political climate, it is not part of a democratic tradition for us to say, \"OK, before a referendum, maybe we should listen to each other for much longer. Maybe before each voting, there should be a much more informative communication between the different parts of the stakeholder community,\" and things like that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "While the multi‑stakeholder deliberations, or deliberative democracy, is always part of political theory, there is not much room for it to grow if you work with only the previous generation of pen and paper, or maybe with radio and television technologies, because then the only way to listen to millions of people is to send millions of people to listen to each other one by one." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now that we have a current generation of technology using machine learning and using a lot of other assistive technical tools, we can actually now listen to millions of people with some degree of success." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s because of this that I’m experimenting with this, as if in a laboratory, on various public governance topics. It’s because we’re early in this new, what I call, scalable listening technologies that we need to tailor‑make it to each different specific policy issues." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There is always room for improvement. It’s always better already than the previous generation of technology." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "Still a place for radio, guys. I promise you, there’s still a place for radio. Maybe our fans can broadcast to us one day, and we can listen in." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "Let’s get even more specific. You’re talking about some of the deficiencies that we see in any kind of democratic system. I’ve been hearing this sort of idea applied to democratic systems around the world." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "Basically, we’re using a 19th century technology, or even an 18th century technology, to fix 21st century problems. It isn’t quite up to the task, given the complexity of the world that we live in." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "Expecting one elected representative to actually understand, and two political parties to actually understand and represent so many people, it gets somewhat absurd at a certain point." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "Let’s get even more specific, in terms of how you think this could change things. Let’s look back to your first taste of getting really involved in Taiwan politics, the Sunflower Movement. Of course, that was sparked by the government’s moves to pass forward a service trade agreement with China." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "Let’s do a hypothetical situation. Do you think that if some of the tools that you’re talking about were at the disposal of the government at the time, would that have turned out differently? Do you think that they would have been more responsive to the concerns of people, and perhaps the Sunflower Movement wouldn’t have been necessary? Is that what you’re getting at?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The Sunflower Movement is a demonstration. It’s not a demonstration only in the protests in the streets sense, but it’s also a demonstration of the technologies that we’re talking about. It is a demonstration because the MPs at those time ‑‑ the Members of Parliament ‑‑ were on strike, essentially, because they said it’s not their job to deliberate that particular trade service agreement." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The occupiers ‑‑ what they did essentially ‑‑ is to deliberated on the MP’s behalf. Because the MPs were on the strike, of course the occupiers could go there and deliberate on exactly the same topic." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What I did at the time was not taking any particular sides, but rather developing the kind of listening technologies that let anything and everything that happened within the occupied parliament, and also in the streets surrounding the occupied parliament, each one was basically populated with people in a very different view of the trade service agreement." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We have the green, ecologically‑minded people here. We have the labor‑minded people there, the left wing people, and also the separated independence people. Each street held their own deliberations. The occupied parliament also held their deliberations." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "As the ICT Geeks, we also built with Eight Mons before. We worked for Eight Mons to build one particular app that lets you enter your company’s name, or the trade that your company’s doing, and look at exactly the part in the cross‑trade service trade agreements that affects you. You don’t have to read through 500 pages of PDF files." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There is these kind of factual, evidence‑based tools that lets you make informed decisions. Now we also, during the occupy, not only videotape all the deliberations that happened, but also worked with stenographic transcript people to type it down to those online documents, which are collaborative edited, and then translated to various other languages." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What this does is essentially a cross‑pollination between all the different occupy side streets so that people begin each day, not over the same topics but picking up of the consensus items that was left the previous day, that was undecided the previous day, and then do a deliberation for entire day, involving as much as half a million people on one particular day. The next day, although it was different people, can pick up where the previous day has left." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is basically the scalable listening technology that we have deployed during the occupy, with help with professional deliberative democracy facilitators to make sure that ‑‑ be it an ordinary citizen, be it someone who feels concerned about democracy, whichever side of the street they went on ‑‑ there is some deliberative space for them to join, and to participate their part in the collective intelligence about the cross‑trade service trade agreement." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It evidently works, because toward the end of the occupy, there is a set of consensus that people could not 100 percent agree on, but at least could live with. These are the kind of consensus items that the head of the Parliament at the time eventually agreed on, which is why the occupiers left the building. It’s not because they were evicted, but their main demands were agreed upon." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "Basically, you’ve just turned my question around on me. I asked, \"Would things have turned out better at that time if this sort of technology, this sort of thinking was available?\" What you’re saying is, \"It was available, and it did turn out better because of it.\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "Let’s move forward in time just a little bit to the projects that you’re working on now. I guess, since we’re on the topic of digital democracy, and how we can communicate better with the public, and how the public can communicate better with the government, let’s perhaps start right there." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "You’ve already outlined a couple of projects that you had going while the Sunflower Movement was happening to help facilitate that sort of process. Maybe you can bring us up to date, because I know that that’s one of the things that you think about, work on a lot here, is ways to make the government in power work better." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "There’s no possible way that we can go into detail in all of the various programs that you’re working on. Maybe if you could, just pick one to highlight and explain A, how it works, and maybe B, how it fosters some of the ideals that you’ve been talking about so far." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I’ll just pick a tiny, tiny case because it’s very self‑contained. It only contains maybe one public hearing, and three meetings. We did get a broad consensus out of it. I’ll talk about very briefly the eSport case." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In Taiwan, for eSport electronic competitions, for a very long time there was no ministry willing to claim the ownership of it. The result being that those large scale competitions of LoL or other electronic eSports cannot, for example, rent the Taipei Dome, or for example, get the foreign visitors an athlete's visa, and things like this." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There’s a broad misunderstanding on the society. It’s almost like a generational gap between the digital natives, who generally understand eSport as contests of skills, and something that’s just a lot of fun, versus people who did not have firsthand experience, and see it as some kind of video games, and waste of time." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "What’s your game?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What’s my game? XCOM 2, and then Civilization, in all..." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "Civilization, yes." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "All its versions. The Battle of Wesnoth and NetHack. I’ve played NetHack for a very long time. In any case, what I’m trying to aim to is that this is a classical issue out of the misunderstanding of the basic facts." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "People couldn’t really agree whether electronic eSport is a sport, or whether it’s physical education, PE, or whether it’s a skill, or whether it’s culture, and things like this. During a public hearing...It’s different from other public hearings, not only because it’s hosted by three different parties and the members of parliaments, but also because it was stenographed." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Everything was transcribed used Sunflower‑like technology. Everybody speaks, knowing that whatever they say will be entered into this binding space, where I would coordinate with all the ministries to look at each of the words the athletes said, and try to find a resolution to some of the issues that they have raised." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Primary around that is, of course, whether they could be...There’s a military draft in Taiwan. If you are a professional athlete, or if you’re a professional Wei Qi Go player, then you can go and serve at alternate draft, working to further your game, basically." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "ESport, because there’s no game status of it, it’s not subject to it. On the other hand, there is also some schools who want to open the special classes, specializing or attracting people who are more into eSport gaming, and then teach them maybe about general Internet media, and communications strategy, and all those related digital production skills." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Before, it could be classified as one trade or the other, there is no such class possible, afraid that parents would probably oppose to it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What I have done is, essentially, do a coordination meeting that assembles all the facts that the ministry have so that we understand eSport is not a physical education, because it’s much more intellectual than physical. On the other hand, it is a skillful competition, and it is a kind of a culture, and the Minister of Culture is OK with it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We release whatever we have at the factual level online, because all the meetings that are held is published in its entirety as transcripts online. Because of this, the athletes, the professional eSport gaming leagues, and so on then went to my public Q&A site to provide me with a lot of information that was missing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "If we are policy makers in this meeting room, even though it’s a pretty good meeting room, we still lack a lot of evidences and hard facts that could be observed by the civil society and by the private sector." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "After their contribution, we held a second consultative meeting between all the ministries, basically just checking those inputs from the PTT BBS, from all those Internet online discussion boards, and fact checking whether these are factual." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "People would say, \"If you follow this kind of regulation, you could have actually an alternate pass for the people getting drafted who are professional eSport athletes,\" and so on." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "After checking this and making sure that people’s feelings are generally covered, we move from the facts to the feelings stage where I ask all the ministries to share their feelings of those facts, and whether they are OK with it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It turns out people are generally OK with it, with this kind of new arrangements with the schools opening up new classes catering for eSport athletes, and having eSport athletes classified as intellectual skill, instead of a physical education athlete, and enjoying the same protection, or the same alternate drafting plan in the military, and so on." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We released that, also, to the public, and then the leagues, the associations, specializing in eSport would join us on the third meeting to work out the details of how exactly they can help in this kind of implementation plan that the government is planning on having, and which we just had. By the time you listen to this, it’s probably also published in its entirety." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "By the end of each meeting, we used the same color‑coding technology we used during those deliberations, by saying, \"OK, this is now green light,\" meaning that everybody can agree with it, \"It’s yellow light,\" meaning that we have to agree on it after some external factor has happened, or \"It’s red light,\" meaning it’s not legally or physically possible." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Fortunately for the eSport case, every yellow light has, since then, turned into green light." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The MPs, the ministries, and the stakeholders behind these ministries, and athletes themselves all contributed to our final decision. It’s done in the open and it’s completely transparent. Now, we have a good classification and a legal basis for the eSport community to move forward." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s a very small case. It’s one public hearing and three meetings, but it shows the essential idea of not having any meeting go to waste by having each meeting recorded, and having the camera representing the meeting stakeholders that couldn’t make it here." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "Maybe to help those of us that weren’t actually a part of all these meetings and all that understand, what would you say is the essential thing that’s really different from the way this issue may have worked through the pubic system before?" }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "Because part of what’s happening here is you, as a minister, see an issue that you care about and you feel like isn’t getting enough attention. You bring in the stakeholders. You get them to talk about it, and you work it through the system." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "Nothing about that is new, but you did highlight a number of ways that you were using technology to move the process along. I’m wondering if you could maybe highlight a little bit, even more clearly, what you feel is essentially new about the way that you managed to get this through that wouldn’t have been possible without the technology or without this way of thinking about digital democracy." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "One main difference is that when I’m talking about stakeholder input, I mean stakeholders that I don’t personally know, because when this is published to the online discussion boards, I really don’t know who exactly is going to provide their input back." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Previously, without this kind of online consultational mechanisms, there is no way to talk to nonspecific people. What ends up is that heads of associations or heads of representatives who claims to speak on behalf of the stakeholders ends up getting all the input into the policymaking process." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Most of the decisions that we make at this iteration of the eSport consultative process are actually the input from individual athletes. Those individual athletes are sometimes pseudonymous. They’re just one nick or one handle on the Internet, but they provide insight that are otherwise not possible or are not going to be represented by the heads of associations, for example." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The only difference here, and the primary difference here, is that I’ve added inputs channel for nonspecific people who don’t have to reveal their real identity, but providing hard facts and their feelings toward whatever process that we’re making." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is a trust to people who does not trust us enough yet to reveal their real identities, because trust, you see, is mutual. If the government doesn’t trust its people, there’s no way for the people to trust the government." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Even if we trust the people fully, there’s always people who don’t trust the government yet to show up in‑person in public hearings. They would rather remain pseudonymous." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Even for those people, if they have something new to say, if they have some constructive opinions, there’s now a systematic way to include their opinions into the final policymaking process, and for them to track that, actually their input has been made into this particular red or yellow light indicator." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This part is new. We wouldn’t have arrived to this workable conclusion this quickly, with this kind of efficiency, if not for the input for those pseudonymous input sources." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "I actually think it’s really interesting what you’re talking about, in terms of the government trusting the people and the people trusting the government, because another area that you’re clearly also very interested in is government transparency." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "That is shown by the fact of all the documentation that goes into the deliberation process. Some people might question the wisdom of making government hyper‑transparent, because sometimes, for very sensitive issues, perhaps, you do need politicians to have that space to make the difficult decision behind closed doors." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "I’m wondering if what you just had to say there about the government trusting the people has anything to do with that dilemma. Perhaps if the government can trust that the people will not freak out every second, perhaps it can be more transparent." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "That’s what I’m thinking about it. I’ll throw it back to you. How do you get past that issue of, on the one hand, the government needs a certain amount of space to make sensitive decisions, and on the other hand, the people need a way to provide oversight." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s not like we live stream all these meetings. We don’t. What we did was we do a full recording, or we do a real‑time stenography, and then we make a full transcript." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We let everybody who participate in the meeting to edit the transcript. If they feel that they have said something that could be taken out of context, they can change it to provide a full context. If they feel like they have spoken something that would violate a third party’s privacy, perhaps ‑‑ although we haven’t yet run into this case ‑‑ they could take that part out." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Of course, all those edits are also seen by everybody else attending the meeting, so you can’t put words into mine, because I would know about it. It also provides a safe space for all the participants to know that they are able to come up with supplementary materials and additional context before it was published, 10 days after the meeting." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It is a kind of a bridge. It’s not completely saying that there’s no closed room for deliberation for the participants. Also, after 10 days, the participant feels safe enough to ask the entire general public, not necessarily people who are stakeholders, just random passersby, for information, for input, for anything." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What this does is establishing a connection between one meeting and the other, because one of the most avid readers of our public records are not the general public. It’s the staff of the heads of office. It’s minister who participated at this meeting, because they would go back and assign those tasks to their staffs." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s very important for the staff to know, not only the conclusion of the meeting, but how we get there, what was the alternate pass that we tried and then discarded during our discussions so they would not have to try it again." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "It’s not necessarily the guy getting off his 9:00 to 5:00 job that’s going to be wading through hundreds and hundreds of pages of notes. You’re saying, even within the government, this level of transparency can also be very important?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right, because it facilitates trust between ministries, between departments, because then every ministry and department see what objective, what key results other ministries and other departments are doing, what are they optimizing for, so to speak, so they could try to find synergies." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In the previous generation, it was pen and paper. Only the key results after each meeting is recorded, but not the entire process. You can maybe reverse engineer between the words a little bit about how we got there, but there is no foundation of trust between the different ministries who would participate in the same meeting." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "Taking the US example, imagine if the Founding Fathers had left that kind of a paper trail. We could finally know what they meant by \"Right to bear arms,\" for example. It could be a total game changer." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "Let’s switch gears entirely right here actually, and look at another area that you’re very focused on, that being more the industry side of things, the infrastructure side of things, making sure that Taiwan has the tech resources that it needs to prosper in a number of different ways." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "Let’s start with a program called the DIGI⁺ program. Am I saying that right, DIGI‑plus?" }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "This is a multi‑billion dollar program that’s going to take place over several years to help boost Taiwan’s digital infrastructure. Here I’m reading from the published material. It will \"Create an innovative, friendly environment for the digital industry and increased Internet usage penetration.\"" }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "It seems like the big idea here is keeping the Internet moving at a faster, and faster, and faster rate. Making sure that Taiwan’s Internet stays modern, stays up to date." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "Interested in hearing your thoughts on how we get there, what sort of work needs to be done to make sure that Taiwan stays on track, but also why this is an area that does need special focus. All of us living in Taiwan, it’s remarkable how good the Internet works already, especially coming from the US." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "I lived for a time in Beijing. There’s no comparison. Taiwan is head and shoulders above everybody else, so why is this still something that really needs to be a focus to make sure that it continues getting even better and better?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We’re switching gears. I was ready to talk about \"Federalist Papers.\" [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "If you want to go into that, we can go into that. Go ahead." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No. About the DIGI⁺ plan, according to the World Economic Forum, what you just talked about, the ICT readiness, meaning that people who want high‑speed bandwidth can get high‑speed bandwidth and so on, Taiwan has been on the second place in the world for two years running now. It’s Finland, Taiwan, and Iceland in this particular rank." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What we mean is that the infrastructure, the broadband, even the mobile broadband, is in a very good shape because Taiwan is a small island with a lot of people. As a small island, it is easier for us than many other countries to get the basic 4G and mobile Internet stations set up. That’s something that we intend to continue." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "As part of President Tsai Ing‑wen’s campaign, what she promised is that we need to make this mobile Internet, or broadband Internet, but mostly just access to Internet as a basic human right." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is saying that if there are more disadvantaged households who would prefer to spend their daily money on something else than the Internet access, we should at least guarantee maybe 10 megabits per second broadband access so that they have a chance to hook into the digital economy." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Also, because the government digital services we’re going to provide, it’s going to be over, not pen and paper, but over the Internet mostly from this point on. It is very important that we don’t create an artificial division or a gap between the haves and the have‑nots in the society." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "Maybe you could tell me ‑‑ this is probably, pretty clearly, a blind spot on my part, because everywhere I go in Taiwan everybody has a phone ‑‑ how big of an issue is that? How big of Taiwan’s population right now is cut out from the kind of Internet, the speed of Internet, that most of us enjoy?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "If you disregard the remote islands, like Taiping Island, and so on, then it is about two percent in Taiwan who doesn’t yet have 100 megabits access. It’s not a lot of places, but it is some number of people." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "As I said, it’s socially disadvantaged households who would not, even given the chance to pay for broadband Internet access, because they have much more pressing needs to pay for. This is subsidizing a certain level of Internet access, more so than getting broadband to all the physical places, which we’re already almost there." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is Dr. Tsai Ing‑wen’s idea. We’re implementing this in maybe three years to get all the socially disadvantaged households some basic broadband Internet access." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "If you look at the World Economic Forum ratings, we are really, really good on the readiness, but not so good at the actual usage and impact. The environment, meaning the regulatory environment, is actually declining." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What this means is that, while the basic ICT infrastructure is pretty good in Taiwan, Taiwan doesn’t have a very good regulatory environment in which that if you do some trade or some activity over the Internet, there is no reliable way for a judge to look at this and connect it to some sort of ruling in the civil code." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Two different judges at this moment may judge differently, because..." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "What kind of case would this come up in?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "A lot, like what kind of speech is infringing on, perhaps the rights of naming what kind of libel it is online, what kind of communication over the Internet is..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "For example, radio. Radio is a very good example because, using the old communication law, there is one broadcaster and there is many receivers. On the case of Internet radio, currently there is some kind of radio environments where you can listen to the radio, but still type something, so that a host can see what you’re typing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In this case, is the person typing this comment also a broadcaster? Is the broadcaster now suddenly the receiver? The law isn’t very clear on this." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When a strictly one‑directional communication mode has switched to the Internet, this is what we call OTT, Over‑The‑Top of the Internet infrastructure. It enables not only a broader bandwidth, but also different kinds of modes of connection." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The listeners are now also able to broadcast not only their own voices, but also provide real‑time connection via a chat room, or whatever, between themselves. Whether they’re now still the audience or they’re also broadcasters isn’t that clear from the perspective of a legal code department." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What this does is saying we need to reconcile what’s actually happening over the Internet through not only the emulation of radio, but also augmentation and supplementing the traditional radio format, and try to make sure that everybody is a peer in this peer‑to‑peer network on the Internet." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "To regulate it in a way that says, \"OK, maybe the government doesn’t want to regulate Internet radio broadcasters the same way as traditional radio broadcaster because, after all, there’s no scarcity of spectrum, and things like this." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "If we try to regulate this, still, in a way that reflects the old regulatory regime when there was a scarcity of spectrum, then we would end up in some very convoluted legal cases that doesn’t exactly apply to Internet radio and things like this." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s important to have a basic, what we call, the Digital Telecommunication Act that defines exactly what it is like to provide, and listen, and interact with radio on the Internet so that people know exactly what to expect from the legal code." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "What you’re saying is I need to find the online forum that you set up for this and start giving my two cents?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly. We did run the Telecommunication Act before, and the new draft is coming up any day now." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "I got to get on that, I don’t know. This is very interesting, because when I look at this bill, this shows the low level of understanding that I’m coming into this with." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "When I look at this bill, I see a big pot of money. My image is that it’s going to all go towards the infrastructure, making better fiber‑optic cables, or whatever. I don’t know anything." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "What you’re saying is it’s actually a whole lot broader than that. There’s a whole range of issues that you need to think about. To not just make the speed of the Internet meet some number. It’s also about making a healthy environment, and that is a tricky thing to do." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "To have a healthy environment, it also helps to bring up people in this idea that the digital economy, the digitization of everything is turning what we call the artificial distinctions between the industries and between the trades, between the fields, all but disappear." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Radio and television was different industries, not because they are naturally different industries, but because they require different equipments." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "Some of our faces aren’t quite built for TV, as well." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There’s virtual reality and you can synthesize your models very easily with your voice, and the mouth and hand movements matches what you have said. This is what I do. When I do video interviews, I send my avatars through." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "I could have Brad Pitt reading the news with my voice?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly, yes. As I said, as everything becomes digital, and the artificial lines between the previous difference in hardware of radio, and television, and all those different communication modes all but disappear." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s now bits over the Internet. How those bits in the Internet are arranged share that same basic infrastructure. If you have a basic infrastructure for Internet TV, you have the same infrastructure for Internet radio. It is the same thing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "People who train for different trades, people who receive different trainings through university or through their high schools are now facing a world in which those arbitrary distinctions between the industries are blurring and disappearing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Another part of the DIGI⁺ plan is what we call DIGI⁺Talent. It’s to get people to think outside of the disciplinary box. It’s not getting everybody into computer science, but with this kind of digital thinking people can major in many different things." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "People can major in majors that didn’t exist four years before. They could create their own trades based on their understanding of the digital arrangements and combinations with any of those creative vehicles that they may want to experiment with, be it fabrication, or clothing, or augmented reality, or whatever." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is a kind of education regime that we had not yet tried before, especially in this examination‑oriented Taiwanese education. Starting 2018, we’re trying to switch track to a new curriculum design where we put autonomy, and communication, and the common good first, and discard everything else, because we stopped predicting what the world will be like." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When the seven‑year‑old enters the school system this year, what the world would be like 12 years in the future, we don’t know. What we think is important is still that they remain autonomous, they were able to learn whatever trade that comes up in the next 12 years, and there they keep communicating and keep working for the common good." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is also part of the DIGI‑plus plan that changes the relationship between the education system and the learners. It’s now mostly the learners dictating what they want to learn, and for the education system and the entire society to provide the resource that they need." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "I want to switch tacks to another program that’s coming up in Taiwan currently, the Asian Silicon Valley project, which is a scheme to build what it sounds like." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "A Silicon Valley in Taoyuan would be the focus of this. What we’d be hoping for here is to see a number of tech startups, potentially with foreign talent, obviously with local talent, as well, growing up in that area." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "This is something that you’ll be advising on, but won’t be directing. I’m sure that there’s a lot of individual complexities to this plan and ways that people are going to try to make it work. I’m interested in asking a broader question, because we hear about Taiwan’s potential for startups all the time. We hear about Taiwan’s potential to foster tech talent all the time." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "We’re still not seeing the kind of explosive Silicon Valley‑type growth that we would like to see. What is it that you think is between Taiwan and reaching that, just in a very broad sort of way?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What you just described, the Asian Silicon Valley as an objective was the 1.0 version of that project. I got invited as the Digital Minister exactly because I redefined that project by introducing a dot between Asia and Silicon Valley, making sure that the program is now called Linking Asia, and Connecting to Silicon Valley." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s not like we’re trying to “shanzhai”, or to copy Silicon Valley here in Taiwan anymore because Silicon Valley is not just a place. It’s not just a place. It’s a connection between those universities and this huge NGO community, who are themselves successful entrepreneurs, who then go forth and mentor the next generation, and so on." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It is impossible to replicate the Silicon Valley ecosystem, and we should not, because it’s a different ecosystem here. Again, our relationship with other Asian, or ASEAN, countries is not a winner‑take‑all thing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s an ecosystem where each place is trying very hard, very similar ways, like a regulatory sandbox, like a much more friendly way for foreign people to enter what we call startup visa, or permanent residence of those people who want to start a new company here in Taiwan, and things like that. Countries all around us are doing the same thing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What we’re trying to aim here is a broader and also a much more tighter connection between all those different Asia places who are also looking toward more or less the same ICT and startup ecosystem and try to find our ways to fit ourselves into the ecosystem as a way to linking with the other Asian countries, and then connecting to the Silicon Valley." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I wouldn’t say that it’s specific to one particular city, or even one particular site. Taoyuan is of course exciting because it’s less densely populated. If you want to try some smart logistics, and things like that, it would provide plenty of trial fields for you to experiment with." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We’re not saying that we’re cloning Silicon Valley in Taoyuan anymore. This is my main contribution before I joined the cabinet." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What I would say, the cultural change that’s needed for Taiwan to have the same kind of culture in Silicon Valley are manifold. The primary one is to not be afraid of failure, not afraid of losing face." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is partly because setting up a new startup in Taiwan currently is a very involved process. We’ve tried to amend that a little bit with the so‑called Closely‑Held Company Act a year before, but still there is a lot of hurdle to jump through if you try to start up, as we like, a startup in Taiwan." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We’re trying to lower that threshold even more because then you can very quickly startup one thing. If it doesn’t work, fold it and start up another thing, and so on, without incurring too much loss to your family network, or to your own pocket, even." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Even with this kind of culture setup, we also need to work on inclusion and diversity, because one of the primary strengths of Silicon Valley is that it’s very inclusive. It’s not hostile to any new contributions from the Asian communities, from different communities, from input of all the different parts of the world." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They go to Silicon Valley and pursue something that they would look, and amplify, and change the world, essentially." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What Taiwan does previously is more of a \"do one thing and do it well\" kind of industry building, There’s less respect for this kind of integration between the diverse cultures and diverse background of hardware, and software, and kind of humanities, even, and so on, and try to make something that really amplifies and changes the world." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Before we get there, we still need to get the cost of staring a startup and hiring some expert foreign workers much easier, before we can get to this inclusive culture. This is also why this is a multi‑year plan. We are not looking at a culture change overnight. We are doing what we can in the first one or two years." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is what we call agile governance. We look at what happens, and then we change our governance structure to try to make things easier for the new startup that then sprouts because of our earlier work. We change our governance structures around the actual ecosystem, change is brought up by the previous stages of our program." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "This sounds like a pretty big challenge. A lot of the things that you’re talking about are pretty fundamental to the way that Taiwanese companies currently operate." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "I come from a fairly small vantage point, because I haven’t worked at too many companies, but I’ve seen a fair amount of, \"We do it this way because this is the way we’ve done it, and anybody who doesn’t want to do it that way...\"" }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "This is not exclusive to Taiwan. You can find this in countries and in companies around the world, but it is certainly the case that this is a view that’s very ensconced in Taiwan in particular." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "You’re up against, as you mentioned, a broad set of cultural norms that are not 100 percent in line with the sort of startup culture that you might want to foster. What do you see your role as in working with that and seeing what works in Taiwan?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "My role is this, I’m actually a pretty good listener. I work with many people who are born before Taiwan’s democratization." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Basically, everybody who was born before me remember how it’s like before Taiwan was a democracy. This, more than access to Internet or to personal computers, which is roughly the same year, shapes people’s habit, as you just described, because if you are brought up in a regime that’s not democratic, of course there’s no payoff for innovation." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There’s maximal payoff to do and work with the system, and follow whatever that has been in the place before you, because that’s the safest and the least risky to your life, perhaps, way of doing things." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What I’m trying to do here is to listen to the wisdom of the previous generation, who worked on the authoritarian regime before, and who has come up with a lot of wisdom on how to run a country very efficiently, and do their industry and their trades, especially like semiconductors, extremely well." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They’re good governors in their respective trades, but what we need to do is to take some of those wisdoms, some of those early, even prescient, reading of the global market, and so on, and share it as open knowledge to the younger generation who thinks very democratically and very innovatively, like the teenagers and tweens in many other democratic countries, but they didn’t have the same perspective." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They didn’t have the same connection to the market as the older generation. What I am trying to do is as a bridge of sorts, who speaks both the language of the older generation, because I was born and I remember the martial law era, but then also connecting to the young generation who is unconstrained in imagination." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They could do, but they could really use some of the wisdom and resources that the older generations have. What I’m trying to do here is more as a channel or as a bridge between those two generations." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "When we look at what a Silicon Valley.Asia would mean in Taiwan, what do you think of that as meaning? You’ve already mentioned the fact that thinking about this in terms of a place is not necessarily the right way to think of it." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "What exactly are we working towards here, if not hyper‑developing Taoyuan and building all that infrastructure as big as can be? As you mentioned, obviously, if you have a Skype connection, you can contribute your ideas from anywhere in the world. That’s not necessarily the way forward." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "If this actually becomes what you’re hoping it becomes, what does it look like, and how does it contribute to the future of Taiwan?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The dot in the Asia.SV, I usually read as “connect”. What we’re looking at is a connection that enables more flow, so to speak, of knowledge, of talent, of those regulatory innovations, and also, of course, of capital between the various parts of Asia, and between Taiwan and Silicon Valley." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Those parts are not strictly under my purview. There’s two other ministers with the portfolio who are in charge respectively, for the national investments, and also NGO around investments of the Taiwan, and Asia, and Silicon Valley funds. I’m not managing that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The other minister with the portfolio is managing the development parts of this. The parts that require some physical constructions to further our, for example, a national exhibition center, or things like that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "These are not, strictly speaking, making a Silicon Valley clone. It is the bare necessities that are needed for this kind of connection to happen internationally." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What’s left for me, it’s mostly two things. One is what we call standard building, because a lot of this connection for the “Asia · Silicon Valley” plan is going to be centered around what we call the Internet of things, meaning that we’re going to have those tiny, tiny computers that’s built into the fabric of whatever we’re wearing, or the watches that we’re wearing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Everything is going to be connected to the Internet, and then share whatever they have on the environment. Of course, this has benefits, because then all the computers and all the devices that we carry have what we call contextual information." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They know where they are situated in this space, so you don’t have to keep talking to your GPS navigation where you are and where you’re going to. It’s going to know. It’s more or less a very good thing if it’s personal computing, meaning that you know exactly what’s being shared and what’s being communicated." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Of course, there’s many different standards and there’s many different cities who are working with different vendors on these kind of technologies. One of my contributions is to what we call open API." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "API meaning the application programming interface, meaning that there’s a basic mission readable language for those things to talk to each other. Those languages, they need to come with their dictionaries, with their lexicons." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This has two benefits. One is that a different vendor can look at the lexicons that this product is speaking, independently improve this communication, so it makes the entire ecosystem more vendor‑neutral and less tied to one particular vendor." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What this does is essentially people in a township or in a city can come up with the demands they want to ask of the technology instead of having technology vendors dictate what is to happen in the city. Having this way to negotiate with technology vendors is very important because if we don’t reflect what we want as citizens, technology is not going to do that for us. That’s the first thing that I’m contributing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The second thing is that there’s one part in “Asia · Silicon Valley” plan related to me. That is what we call a virtual reality academy." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "As you know, there’s already some massively online courses where people teaching maybe physics, mathematics, or philosophy, even history are recording the best speeches they have given and have people who are like me, drop out of high school, to still have some sort of high education by just watching those videos." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "Benson Yeh is one of the best interviews I’ve ever had. He’s obviously the guy who developed PaGamO in Taiwan, and now he has also made some of the most popular ever massive online courses for Taiwan in the Chinese language." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly. We drew a lot of inspiration from Benson’s work, but two dimensional screens has its limits. You cannot really teach the art of motorcycle repairing over a two dimensional screen because, obviously, there’s no motorcycle for you to repair." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Some of those knowledge, especially in the mission maintenance or interpersonal relationships and things like that, does require a kind of face‑to‑face or hand‑to‑device connection. This is where virtual reality comes in." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In the virtual reality, we can already have photo‑realistic models of motorcycles and of you and me to bring our hands and everything basically that we care about into the virtual reality space where we can construct a social circle around a virtual motorcycle in which you can still teach the art of repairing that virtual motorcycle, and so on." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This not only lets us to convene classes in a much more economic way ‑‑ even for people in remote islands to enjoy this kind of participation ‑‑ but also, it makes the lectures much more convincing. When people are looking at screens, they get distracted by their phones, by their whatever notification that happens to pop on their screens." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "If you put on a VR goggle, and start to see Benson speak, and assigned in one of those six person rooms, virtual rooms, out of 6,000 participants...It’s not packed in one 6,000 person auditorium, but rather just six randomly assigned students in one room, watching the same virtual Benson talking." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When he is assigning homeworks and so on, those six persons get to virtually collaborate in this virtual classroom." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "You’re saying fostering this kind of classroom is going to be really important for successful \"Silicon Valley in Taiwan\"?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I’m saying that cultivating this kind of remote collaboration habits, whether it’s through virtual reality or not, is going to be very important for Taiwanese people to learn in the environment where they can draw directly from the wisdoms and the collective intelligence of people around the world, not necessarily just in Silicon Valley." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It just so happens that those VR environments are primarily at the moment from Silicon Valley. From having firsthand access to the technologies behind those virtual reality tools, and so on, yes, I think it is a very important part of the skill‑building to know not only the effects of movie‑like VR worlds, but how exactly it is built, and what open source systems there is to build those components, and to tweak it to your liking." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "We’re going to switch gears one last time, and just take a forward‑looking approach to this next part. Maybe we could just finish some of the thoughts that we’ve already introduced, whether it be about the digital infrastructure, or whether it be about digital democracy, anything there." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "I’m curious to hear ‑‑ you characterize yourself as an anarchist in some interviews. I’ve heard you say that. Now the anarchist is in government, which is a conundrum perhaps we can put off for another day." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "In general, you clearly are somebody with a very different image for what government can be, should be, will be in the future. From what you’re saying, the same goes for the way that industry should develop over time." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "You clearly have a different image for how that could all work. This is just a very open‑ended question. Maybe you could give for our listeners some of the things that you would like to see on any of the various topics that we’ve already covered today." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "What are some of the trajectories, some of the targets that you would like to see in the mid, medium, long‑term in Taiwan. What does Taiwan look like in Audrey Tang’s science fiction version of it?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The best way to predict the future is to invent it. I’m going to list some of the concrete ways that I’m living the change, so to speak. As an anarchist, there’s no dilemma for me. What I mean by anarchism is to not obey commands, nor do I give commands." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is interesting, because during the negotiations that I have with the Premier, I entered the cabinet as a bridge between the civil society, and the private sector, and the government. Meaning that I do not look at confidential information, I do not look at national secrets, so anything that passes through my eyes is, by definition, Freedom of Information Access compatible." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It is on this ground that I can live this autonomous team‑building, that everybody in my team is not really listening to my commands. They decide their own objective, their own key results, and things like this." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is a radial change of the governance because, previously, in many government structures, it is the boss who dictates the key performance metrics, and it is the underling who delivers those results, and so on." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In my office, it doesn’t work like that. It is a collaborative space where anybody is free to propose, to pitch some idea that they see needs doing, and then to call for collaborative help from any of those, 15 now, collaborators, and soon the be joined by the Principal Officers of the open government in each ministry to try to make it happen." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is almost a collaborative syndicate way to run a team. This is not that unusual in the Silicon Valley startups. Many startups started this way. GitHub started this way. Valve, in many ways, is still running in this way." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What is different, perhaps, is that there is now a room in the national administration for this kind of governance structure to happen. What we do is that we share the rules, the playbooks, the tools that we use to make this happen on our website, pdis.tw. PDIS for Public Digital Innovation Space." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What we are trying to do here is to have other ministries to look at the tools that we’re using. They were going to be certified in the government cloud, so unlike Dropbox, or Google Drive, or whatever other external tools, these are safe tools that are open source and free to use within the government cloud." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "If and when they voluntarily, because I don’t give commands, find those tools and this collaborative culture interesting, then they can take it and use it with no cost whatsoever." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is how we’re trying to get this, maybe a meme, a virus of the mind, to spread, that sometimes it is more efficient if you work in a transparent way. Sometimes, it is more useful if you trust the collective intelligence to provide input to your work." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sometimes it is really a good idea to engage machine learning and some artificial intelligence to help you to transcribe your audios, or to schedule your meetings, or to help you in whatever other way, and leave the valuable work to human beings, instead of having the human beings repeat the work that we can now delegate to machine intelligence to do." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "All these are the demonstrations that I’m doing in the administration. I wouldn’t say it’s the science fiction of culture, because we’re living it right now." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What we are not doing is to directly order any other administrative agencies to adopt this because, first, we’re still experimenting. We’re not sure, 100 percent, it’s a good idea yet." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Second, it has to be a cultural change from the department itself. It doesn’t work if we command people to not obey commands. It doesn’t work like this. They have to be a voluntary culture change." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I wouldn’t say it’s something that we would be seeing, it’s rippling out in a few months’ time. If you give it four years, five years, then I’m sure that the new generation of digital natives who enter public service would then prefer to work with the same kind of tools and kind of spirit that they have grew up with." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "How hopeful are you? Obviously, you’re saying that it’s still very experimental. It’s in the mad scientist phase. Hopefully people will see it, and like it, and adopt it." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "Any government, especially governments, are notoriously difficult to reform, and culture runs deep, and all that. We’ve certainly touched on that earlier in this conversation." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "How hopeful are you that you might have the opportunity, or the folks that you work with might have the opportunity to spread this to the rest of the government, and it really could make a significant dent in the way people think about government, and the way that Taiwan’s government operates in the future?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Whenever I talk about this to our international friends, they get very inspired. Part of this is already making its way to the Madrid City Council, of all places. What I’m saying, when I’m talking about the meme, it doesn’t have to be a local thing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s just like a traveling virus of the mind. Whenever some part of our team goes on a conference, and so on, other digital systems counterparts in other governments, here are some of the tools and methods we are using, and then just work it into their team’s culture. There is a very similar team, the GDS team now in Australia, and New Zealand, and Singapore, in every places that we’ve been to. We’re not pioneers on every regards. We learn also our methods from our counterparts around the world." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I would say this is a collaborate network of innovators inside the government around the world. We make mistakes. We sometimes get some success stories. What’s important is that we work in the open, and share the tools internationally, so that people can pick up and run with it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When there are more proven cases from Taiwan of those tools actually effecting a change, then it makes it much easier for us than to work in Taiwan’s context saying, \"You see, these places have already made it work. Now we can work on a much more mature set of construction of technologies.\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Vice versa, there are people in the UK who look in Taiwan and say, \"Hey, they are looking at this process. Even people in Taiwan can do that. Of course, people in UK can do this, too,\" and so on. This is a very good cross‑pollination that we’ve been always working in the society of the Internet and web makers. We’re just trying to do this in the public service context." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "The last question I’m going to throw at you, and this one is very self‑serving, just because I have you right now. When else will I have this opportunity to ask this question? Some of the answers ‑‑ I’m going to be honest ‑‑ that you’ve given me today have made me a little nervous." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "You’re talking about in the future, we can have avatars that can look whatever we want. We can give them voices like whatever we want. We can crowdsource the things that they’re saying. It sounds an awful lot, like you’re saying, we’re not going to need radio broadcasters anymore in a few years. That’s making me a little nervous. Is that what you’re saying?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No, I’m not. I noticed that you’re a very good listener. Machine doesn’t replace listening any time soon. To listen, you really have to be authentically yourself, and merge your feelings and your horizons with another person." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There is always the room for authentic dialog and conversation between people. Whether it’s through radio, or through Internet radio, or through virtual reality, that’s the worries of the medium. This kind of authentic communication between one person and the other, that’s going to be relevant for a very long time." }, { "speaker": "Keith Menconi", "speech": "That helps some of my concern there. Thank you for that point. We have, of course, been speaking today to Digital Minister Audrey Tang. Audrey, thank you so much for speaking with us." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Thank you so much." } ]

[ { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "各位長官、同仁大家午安，歡迎大家今天蒞臨唐政務委員公民科技外交心得分享的演講現場，在政委演講之前，先請國傳司張司長為我們致詞。" }, { "speaker": "張國葆", "speech": "唐政務委員，各位主管、同仁，今天演講是安排由處長主持，但是因為處長今天有臨時突發事件，所以由國傳司來主持。" }, { "speaker": "張國葆", "speech": "首先代表外交部全體同仁歡迎唐政務委員蒞臨本部發表專題演講，政務委員剛剛從法國巴黎參加2016年開放政府聯盟年會進行科技外交，成果豐碩，今天特地在百忙之中撥冗，以公民科技外交心得分享一題跟各位進行專題演講，相信各位跟我一樣充滿感謝跟期待。" }, { "speaker": "張國葆", "speech": "另外，我們為了增進外交部同仁對政府推動公共政策網路參與的瞭解，並且考量外管同仁的學習需求，我們特別委請資策會安排網路公民互動運作模式一系列六堂的教育訓練，包括社群媒體領域、面對通訊科技革命、法規方面探討一些題目，特別感謝政務委員協助推薦網路紅人張嘉玲小姐擔任相關課程的講師，這六堂課讓我們同仁受益良多，利用這一個機會向政務委員表達謝意，我想現在請各位同仁以熱烈的掌聲請唐政務委員來為我們演講，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家好，今天其實有一個線上可以大家發問的地方，如果有手機的話，我不知道這邊有沒有手機上網？有些人不能手機上網，好吧！我折衷一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我剛剛講的過程裡面，任何時候大家想要問問題就直接舉手，或者是不舉手直接打斷我就可以了。老實說，今天其實我並沒有準備特定的簡報，我這一次去歐洲作公民科技分享，但我每一站到馬德里、英國倫敦、到法國，都是有簡報的。我現在的想法是我實際把我在這三場裡面大概講了什麼跟大家分享，也跟大家分享一下當地英國議員的朋友、馬德里市議會及市政府朋友，及巴黎市大概六十個國家部長級及二、三千公民朋友們如何看臺灣所做的這一些事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "本來想說大家可以在線上發問，我不知道資安或者是什麼別的原因，如果不方便的話，我們就實際舉手或者是任何時候開始發問，謝謝。已經有人問了Hello，就是「slido.com」，然後輸入01221就可以問一些問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我自己其實在這一年的過程裡面，十二個月裡面有五個月都在國外，大部分的時間從1月27日法國外交部邀我去他們的「思想之夜」，跟全世界做思想工作的朋友們交換一些意見，接下來去很多不同的地方，像馬德里、葡萄牙或者是紐西蘭之類的，大概講的都是類似的工作，就是我們臺灣在做開放政府方面的工作。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "臺灣在做開放政府，其實承續多年以來各界的努力。我加入行政院的工作是2014年年底，當時毛治國院長要把大數據跟全民參與、群眾外包當作當時的主要目標，請蔡玉玲政務委員以及張善政副院長找了很多公民社會的朋友，一起想說國家的政策怎麼樣讓它變得更透明、讓更多人參與，以及中間的紀錄如何被詳實記錄與課責，以上這三個其實是OGP當時揭櫫的基本概念。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "各位對於OGP理解得可能比我來得多，我是這兩、三年才參加。2011年歐巴馬的OGP是在聯合國的架構底下，當時是跟八個國家的元首以及八個公民社會的代表一起寫了一份開放政府的宣言，從那個時候開始到現在已經長成六十個國家，還有許多所謂subnational member固定定時聚會的地方。在OGP的架構底下非常簡單，每一個國家或每一個參與的subnational，每兩年要提一個action plan，也就是接下來兩年會怎麼樣去增加透明、參與及課責的程度，讓各個其他的member state知道可以如何去互相幫忙，而且還有一些independent的方法去檢驗真的有做這一些事，像土耳其因為2014年沒有真的做到，所以後來就變成observer。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "為什麼當時歐巴馬在推開放政府要推成國際性呢？我們在旁邊看，通常覺得讓他們在援助國外的時候，可以更精準說服他們的state department說過去兩年事實上是變更民主、課責，更沒有corruption的地方等等，其實有一點類似「馬歇爾計畫」這樣的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是在OGP運作了兩、三年之後，慢慢有很多別的，像德國是今年加入，很多老牌的民主國家加入的時候就不只是為了資訊的透明化，我們說freedom affect as information，而是有他自己的外交agenda要persuaded，不管是要對抗民粹主義或者是想要在國際間做得比美國更好的地方加以發揚，所以就出現各種各樣的strategy。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們在臺灣當然雖然一直不是OGP的會員，但是我們透過零時政府等公民社群，也一直有在辦跟OGP類似的事情，時間也跟OGP差不多的，從2012年開始，我們每兩年辦一個大年會，一直都有邀很多國家的朋友來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像在2016年的年會邀了十五個不同國家的講者，大概是六十人，他們city level級的也有，national level級的也有，因為其實在臺灣我從g0v變成數位政務委員其實在國際上來講比較晚的趨勢，在英國mySociety的領導人變成Government Digital Service的領導人，或者在美國進入白宮18F的副執行長，或者是包含新加坡、法國、德國，德國的層級還比較低，但是在很多這一些德國，也就是所謂公民運動的朋友們直接進入政府去做行政改造，這個是已經行之有年的事情，而且是在英國跟美國，所以他們有非常多的經驗跟我們分享說他們引進了這一些數位技術之後，怎麼樣讓他們辦公室變得比較無紙化，跨部門的協作變得比較容易，或者是當要徵詢大家意見的時候，公民社會可以知道政府願意提早到六十天，而不是七天或者是十四天就願意徵詢各界意見等等，請他們來分享。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "g0v的組成跟OGP比較不一樣，OGP一半的member state都是政府官員，通常都是部長級，另外一半是公民社群，OGP當時在establish希望這兩邊有所對話。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "g0v在年會的時候，我們把gov、edu這邊都算起來，大概實際上政府公務人員來參加的可能15%左右，絕大部分仍然是公民科技圈的部分，以及當然在佔領運動之後多了非常多的NGO、NPO的朋友，所以在這個年會裡面，當然都是志工，有非常多的工作人員，也有一定媒體的能見度。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們在媒體能見度這邊，其實可以看得到全世界很關注公民科技這一個議題，這一個東西大概是從佔領運動2008年開始，大家對新自由主義或者是對政府整個運作喪失了信心，對很多國家來講，這個東西是他們重建政府對人民信任的一個方法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們當然佔領比人家晚，我們是2014年才有佔領運動，但是那個之後確實也有一波信任的危機，包含政府被信任的程度，以及政府的整個過程被信任的程度，所以2014年底才會說我們用開放政府的方式來重建公民社會對我們的信任，媒體一向也都很關注。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "臺灣我覺得當然有一些得天獨厚的地方，因為我們的資通訊整備度非常高，全世界排名第二，也就是能夠想要申裝到1Mbps的光纖網路的人是非常容易申裝到，因為地方不大，我們的寬頻建設做得很好。再加上之前以開放資料為目的，所以當時在國際開放資料評比上，他們希望每一個部會最基本的資料都要用開放的授權，讓大家不只能夠下載可以看，而且還可以改做。改做的意思是五百頁的報告，其實很少人會把它看懂，但是當時在佔領運動的時候，我們就把它做成一個網站叫做「你被服貿了嗎」，讓任何人都可以用他的手機收入他的公司名稱或公司的統一編號，就把服務貿易協定裡面跟他有關的那一小部分用可能三格漫畫方式顯示出來，包含自然人可不可以來投資、自然人可不可以去投資等等，這個就是改用的精神，我們不只是把資訊公開，而且我們鼓勵公民社會調查報導的記者們或社群們改成更容易看，這個我們叫做「轉譯」的工作。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個其實是臺灣的公民社群在2014年底之後就積極投入，大家比較有聽過的案子，像實價登錄的網站，你可以上網很容易查到附近地價買賣大概是多少，那個就是用內政部的資料。或者是台北市長柯文哲當時要做參與式預算之前，他有一個網站叫做「budget.taipei」，你上那一個網站就會有泡泡圖或者是樹狀圖的方式，看到台北的年度預算，你可以點進去你最關心的部分，比如我最關心的是動物收容所的預算，當然您可能關心的是附近的公園或之類的預算，您可以直接在上面留言說編這一個預算，為什麼沒有看到實際的建設或者對預算有什麼問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在柯文哲市長號召之下，大概兩、三個禮拜之內具體的事務官就會上來一筆筆回應網友的問題，等於是透過科技的方式，把代議民主多多少少加以補充，他們不再需要透過里長或者是市議員直接在這邊跟事務官進行對話。這樣當然有很多好處，其中一個是事務官的專業就比較被看見，另外一個好處是大家對於政府市政府的運作比較瞭解，在提參與式預算的時候，才不會亂提。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在這樣的情況之下，尤其是其他的華語文地區，他們的公民社會跟政府並沒有這麼密切合作，因為這樣的關係，其實regionally非常被珍惜，政府只要一說好，我們不黑箱，我們就一起做，公民社群是可以去合作的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在端傳媒的五則報導裡面，有兩則我覺得特別值得大家重視。一個是小彭，本來是在台北市政府資訊局的專員，現在是在經濟部擔任專委，他在做的事情就是把所有政府自己不擅長的事情，不管是做懶人包或者是做開放資料應用或者是做調查報導或任何事情，他不是用委託案或者是外包案的方式，而是透過群眾外包的方式。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像之前開放台電的時候，就會讓台電舉辦很多黑客松，黑客松的意思是台電拋出很多用電資料這一些，節電、電費等等的資料，問全民跟所有寫程式或者是有調查報導能力的人，是不是能夠做出一些應用來，是不是可以更省電更有感，如果你要是找廠商或怎麼樣的話，你要半年之後或者是一年之後才看到成果且才能調整，但是透過這樣協作黑客松的方式，等於讓台電的信任度增長之外，台電也可以不用自己花那麼多預算去做宣傳而做其他的應用，這個是他在台北市資訊局就是這一個style，他現在也把這一個想法帶到經濟部裡面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是在另外一方面，這邊是許恩恩，她是公民社會非常活躍的一個年輕人，之前在318佔領議場的時候，在佔領議場裡審議服貿協議，她是主要的兩個帶領人之一。許恩恩這篇介紹在公民社會做的事情，其實就是打字，舉例來講我們現在講這一句話的時候，她們正在幫忙衛福部去進行一個福島旁邊四縣食品在輸入臺灣的時候，有無考慮到風險及風險管理，不管是原能會或者是衛福部委託原能會那一些基本的科學數值，這個在以前是最難跟民眾溝通的，因為第一個牽涉到原子能專業，第二個是民眾很容易一下子就掉入要零檢出，但是事實上是有背景輻射等等，如果是雙方對於基本事實都沒有辦法同意的話，其實你公聽會開再多場都沒有用。這一案裡，公民參與小組主要在研究的方法，就是透過我們叫做「爭點整理」，好比像福島的這一個案子裡面，就先把所有關於科學技術社群不相信原能會或不相信我們抽查方面的這一些爭點先整理成一疊，先不管其他的部分，然後今天的這一場聚會就集中處理這一個。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "接下來會挑雙方或多方都能夠接受的主持人，像今天就是動物社會研究會前任理事長朱增宏，他之前辦過聽證會，民間跟政府都相當相信的一個人，所以就是說要有公信力的主持人來主持，事前把所有的爭點都整理好，現在就是請方儉或林瑞珠或這一些環保團體們，以及原能會、衛福部及第三方專家實際坐下來談。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "而坐下來談的過程，不只是當場彼此說服跟接受，中間他們會不斷用文字轉播的方式，讓我剛剛來的路上看一眼就可以知道他們討論到哪裡、有沒有收斂，本來有十七個未收歛的爭點，今天這一場之後只剩下三個了，這一個過程是至關重要的，因為這樣子我們下一次公聽會開始的時候，就是從剩下來的三個爭點開始，每一個參加的人不能講說沒有講過話，所以說在下一次的時候就比較聚焦，而不是像之前常常公聽會越開越發散。這一種看起來最微不足道就是一面開會、一面把大家講的話打下來的這一件事，或者是開會之前不只是雙方寄PPT給彼此，而是開一個會前會去準備大家都能夠認知到的爭點是哪一些等等技術，就是她們在開發的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "同樣在零時政府的年會框架裡面，從公部門來的，以及民間社會來的朋友，會一起去探討說我們如何去做出更有效、更高品質的公共討論，這一個東西在國際上都是彌足珍貴的，就是很少有像在臺灣做了這樣子之後，那麼好的討論品質，所以我們每一次出去分享的時候，都是用他們實際的例子來分享。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我講下一段之前，看一下有沒有問題？再次提醒一下隨時可以打斷我，我們看到有相當多的網友call in的問題。" }, { "speaker": "提問", "speech": "外交業務多數涉密，請問該如何和「開放政府」概念協調？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第一個問題，其實我之前來外交部之前有跟簡宏偉處長來演講的時候，也有朋友提到。確實，開放政府包含透明、參與、課責，並不是無所限制的，就跟政府資訊公開法一樣，有一些東西我們理解在談判的過程之中，並不一定能夠這樣子公開。但是我覺得這裡面有一些觀念是可以討論的，我們在開始進行談判之前，有一些原則性的東西，那個本身並不是機密，好比像我舉剛剛的例子來講好了，對於福島外四縣，其實各國一直有檢討，我們當時是斷然處置，也就是都不進口，可是在這一個過程當中，從當時到現在，中間一直並沒有跟公民社會對話，要是哪一天要進口的話，你們能夠接受的風險標準等等，也就是那一個部分是可以在我們談判之前先開始做的。當然我理解這個並不是外交部，而是衛福部的業務，但我的意思是說如果沒有先期的溝通當作談判基礎的話，談出來的東西大家就要付出重新學習的過程，所以我自己覺得是說，當然談判的過程不一定要公開，但是為什麼我們要談判或者是談判的原則，或者是我們要爭取什麼，爭取這一個東西對於大家是否有意義，那個是可以讓大家一起來討論的，因為這個東西本身不涉密，它是價值性或者是原則性的東西，惟有我們先談出不是輻射零檢出的這一種結論，我們這邊在外交談判的時候才比較有底氣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以剛剛之前服務貿易協定的例子來講，其實政府並不是沒有開公聽會，而是開公聽會並沒有一個很好的機制去說，如果你來公聽會講了六千字的話，你講的東西到底會怎麼樣影響服務貿易協議的談判，或者是說這個是ECFA的架構，要開公聽會開了就開了，都沒有關係跟差別。我記得服貿公聽會那麼多場裡面，我記得有一場有一位叫做柯文哲醫師（笑），他講了非常多，後來他自己覺得他講的一點用都沒有用，所以就決定自己選市長了，也不是一件壞事。我的意思是還是需要一個機制，讓大家看到自己講的每一句話到底怎麼樣進入政治議程裡面。我相信公民社會裡面並沒有任何人覺得所有政治議程都要由公民社會來設定，但是大家所謂課責的意思是：如果到最後，我們的政策方向因為講的話有所修改，因為哪一句話、經過什麼程序、在哪裡被修改的追蹤機制要做到。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然，我自己進院裡之後，我的協調案都是這樣子在做的。我開的每一場會都是逐字記錄下來，每一個講話的人都確認過，十天後沒有問題，十天後公布在網路上，這個當然不只是防弊，也有非常多興利的效果，最大的效果就是來開的這一些司處長們，他們回去轉述的那一個結論跟我這邊逐字稿做出來到那個結論的過程，對後面來講非常非常好用，因為就不用去揣摩上意（笑），他就知道上意到底是經過什麼來形成的，但是在以前只看到會議結論的時候，你可能每一個字還要猜很久，為什麼最後是要用這兩個字而不是用那兩個字，所以即使對於公部門內部跨部會的橫向溝通這樣一套詳實的紀錄原則，當然也是滿有幫助的。" }, { "speaker": "提問", "speech": "蔡總統上任後曾表示將成為最會溝通的政府 然而上任後仍有如一例一休、婚姻平權等議題，遭到不少反對聲浪。作為第一位數位政委，對於政府與人民溝通這件事有沒有什麼看法？網路社群媒體或新媒體是否/如何在當中扮演更有效的角色？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實是有這個情況。當然其實婚姻平權案這一個是立法院案，行政院的主動權其實滿有限的（笑）。但我們即使在行政院能夠做的部分，確實也都還可以做得更好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我舉一個實際的例子來講，我們最近在跟經濟部商業司合作，公司法要重寫，也就是公司法大修，但是為什麼要重寫這一件事？其實也不是商業司自己說要重寫，而是民眾有非常大的聲浪說公司法已經到了非同盤檢討的時候，蔡英文總統買單這一件事，等於是她的政見之一。因為這樣的關係，所以其實行政院的這一個角色就變得很有趣。這一個全盤修法的委員會，就像在婚姻平權案一樣是外於行政機關的，但是比較好的是，並不是直接進立法院直接提案，而是經過一個廣發問卷的徵詢過程，徵詢了三、四千個不同中小企業主及各方的利益關係人、會計師等等，最後才決定我們要來修公司法，而有這四個大的修法方向等等。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在這一個過程裡面，除跟民間協力擴大徵詢之外，我們現在協助商業司做的事，是怎麼樣把商業司對這一個東西的專業意見轉譯成一般人民聽得懂的東西，這一個東西非常非常重要，像「一例一休」這四個字本身就不是大家聽得懂的東西，每一個人聽到「一例」這兩個字的時候，腦裡冒出來的東西是不一樣的。舉例來講，我入閣之後，有一位網友說我是「二距二例」，但是「二例」的「例」並不是勞工例假，因為每次有活動的時候，好比要去「亞洲·矽谷」中心剪綵的時候，我就得上班，因為公務員的例假裡面是任何時候公務需要就要去。但是在一例一休裡面的這個「例」不是這個意思，而是無論如何雇主都不能要求你加班，除非是了不起的原因，一般來講是不可以的。同一個字意思不一樣，就造成溝通上非常大的困難。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "再加上因為當時曾經有過幾個時間點，是公民社會朋友覺得他們如果再不講話的話，這一個東西就會被硬過，當然後來有擴大徵詢，可是你只要一開始給人這一種硬衝的印象，那一個印象會一直留在公民社會的朋友裡面。信任要破壞是很容易，要重建卻非常困難，因此只要一次或者是兩次這一種好像有誠意要討論，而討論到一半就爆衝的感覺，其實接下來要讓大家願意跟你好好討論是非常非常困難的事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因此，這就是我變成數位政委之後，我請國發會本來就有一個「公共政策網路參與平台（http://join.gov.tw/）」，在那一個平台裡面本來「眾開講」這一個部分是由機關自己提案子，我上來之後請大家把它變成不是挑案子提，而是所有法規的預告都是要在六十天前預告，我入閣前改成六十天，現在就變成所有這一種六十天需要預告的法規，以及關於投資相關貿易、相關法律的修正案，在這六十天的預告期就不是等一個承辦人的電話跟email，而是要在網路上交付公眾討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們覺得這個反而是降低大家的風險，因為以前是大家每一個部會自己提案子，上面就六、七案，所以媒體很關注，但是現在變成你每一天可能有十幾案上去，這一個東西就會變成大家生活的一部分，事實上美國、歐洲大部分的國家都是這樣做，他們已經做非常久了，我們一直沒有這樣的習慣，我覺得只是因為沒有這樣的習慣而已，並不是說這樣做會有太危險的成本。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可是這個從公民社會的角度來看就差很多，如果現在推出一個可能會影響到大家的，我發現還有五十五天的討論期，我的反應當然不是上街頭，上街頭是很貴的一件事，是要付出非常大的時間、人力的成本，而且輿論也不會支持上街頭的人，如果還有五十五天可以討論，而且政府都說方向還沒有確定，是要公眾討論後才確定，實際上也沒有那個合理性，所以與其完全在馬路上進行討論，不如說在網路上先把利益相關者可以保護他們個人人身自由——匿名或半匿名——讓大家的意見能夠進入到我們的意見裡面，接下來再展示出一些信任，好比像我剛剛講到一半就來這邊check，然後就開始實質回答，這樣慢慢就可以形成一種氛圍，等到我們真的要辦公聽會了，公民社會朋友就會覺得我們是玩真的，他願意出席，不會說一定要杯葛。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是沒有前面三十天、六十天一直建立信任週期的話，我們猛然說要辦公聽會，而且辦完之後就要通過政策，那他為什麼要來？來了等於幫你背書。所以等於這中間有一個心態上可以調整的程度。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我是覺得說從最願意溝通的政府，到最會溝通的政府，這中間有培力的工作，這個我當然很願意幫忙做，可是另外一方面是，政府要先展現出他願意信任人民。這個跟教感情、伴侶跟外交一樣，現在我願意信任你，可是之前有一些不良的transaction，對於對方的信任是要花時間才要慢慢跟上來的，所以我們接下來勢必可以看到大部分的案子都這樣拋出來，願意跟公民社會討論等等，但是大家對公民社會信任的程度不可能是一蹴可及可以跟上來，我們願意先到某一個程度，大家才會願意慢慢跟到那一個程度的東西，這一個也需要時間，他們也需要時間去看說我們在這中間突然變成爆衝狀態。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對於網路社群媒體跟新媒體在裡面的角色，確實我覺得這個就是能載舟亦能覆舟，因為網路把傳統上所謂的news cycle這個概念取消掉了，任何時候都可以發報紙，已經沒有晚報、早報這一種基本的概念，也就是任何時候只要有人看到一則新聞，放到某一個線上的媒體，突然之間就會擴大，然後大家就會開始討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當時在2014年佔領運動的時候，我們就是利用網路媒體的特性去進行議程設定，因為不管是當時的主流媒體要如何定位佔領者，他們都有news cycle，他們需要六個小時的時間才能做出回應，我們只要在這六個小時之內就已經先把所有需要討論的東西、需要的爭點等等，都已經製作在網路上很精美，而且有附來源出處這一些能夠說服大家的東西，等到晚間新聞或者是晚報出來的時候，其實看的人事先已經看過佔領者的訊息了，所以基本上可能佔領到第三天以後，都是由佔領者這邊來做設定議程，等於媒體沒有辦法，只能用佔領者這邊的議程。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "整個原因，是因為有即時的直播、即時的文字轉播、即時的爭點轉譯等等，對於做調查報導的朋友們，同樣是在兩個小時之內或者是一個小時之內就發出即時新聞，佔領者這邊的資料比較豐富，而且他根本什麼事都不用做，他就複製貼上，甚至貼一個超連結，連懶人包都是做好的，比起政府這邊，政府這邊可能只有一個新聞稿，而且還沒有辦法轉譯成馬上新聞工作者可以用的部分，只能取一小部分，可能編輯又下一個很聳動的標題，所以兩邊一比起來就會變成有即時傳播能力的這一邊，而且是well founded的即時傳播能力的這一邊，無論如何在同一天就會主導到那一天言論的走向。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以這裡面就有兩個部分，一個是真實性，透過直播、即時文播等等確認這邊講的是真實在佔領地方發生的，以及在這樣的過程裡面，讓看到的人覺得能夠改變這邊的走向，那就不管看到這一份來現場或者是在線上進行一些幫忙資料蒐集等等，總之就是讓閱聽者可以做有一點事情可以做，做的事情可以小到幫忙修一個錯字，也可以大到幫即時中文的資訊翻成十二國其他的語言，當時有非常多朋友幫忙做這一件事，只要他願意做的事情，他就覺得這一個工作有他的一份，在接下來的議程設定裡面會覺得是在這一邊的，因為有貢獻過，所以這一子群眾外包的工作，這個是很確定的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "網路社群媒體或者是新媒體的特點是雙向的，不斷可以很快灑到十幾萬人身上，也可以透過同樣的管道，聽到十幾萬人的意見，十幾萬人的意見收回來了，而且這十幾萬人都有一種感覺是我的意見真的改變了你的走向——即使只有一點點——這十幾萬人對你的信任就加深，大概是這樣的概念。" }, { "speaker": "提問", "speech": "如何透過社群平台包裝「外交議題」，爭取國人瞭解及國際支持？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個我覺得是非常好的問題，因為爭取國人瞭解跟爭取國際支持不一定是相同的事情，我們對內轉譯跟對外轉譯是兩件事。我在國外進行這一些公民科技分享的時候，經常強調的是臺灣的民主化跟臺灣接觸電腦或者接觸資通訊是同一年，也就是1989年個人電腦跟1989年報禁解除是同一年，同樣1996年總統直選與1996年全球資訊網走入大家個人電腦也是同一年，所以對我們來講跟其他民主國家比較不一樣的是，他們去做政治工作或者是民主工作是一批人，做新媒體跟社群媒體是另外一批人，但是在臺灣是同一批人，因為事實上比我年紀小的人，這兩個是同時出現的，也就是第一次能夠在這上面去做。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也就是因為沒有所謂很長期社會抗爭或左翼或什麼的傳統，像巴黎也出現佔領運動的時候，他們很明顯是左派的長老、元老們已經有幾百年抗爭的歷史，他們會對新科技比政府還要保守，所以還要變成國家的創新實驗室還要去教佔領者怎麼用基本數位工具的一種情況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是在臺灣並不是這樣，臺灣年輕人是第一批能夠做民主化，也是第一批能夠用科技的方式來進行政策參與，所以大家都非常有熱情，因為還沒有可能失望，因為這個是第一代，因此在這樣的情況下，我們有非常多的案例是國外看到的會說這個幾乎是不可能做，為什麼還會有人做？在臺灣會有很多志願者願意跳進來說願意成為第一個把它做出來的，之後會分享一些案例，這個是我在爭取國際支持上最常用的angle。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在過去國人瞭解這一邊，其實就要看外交議題本身了，如果是牽涉到專業，像剛剛講衛福部的例子，或者是牽涉到一些事前利益相關的溝通，或者是服貿易協定或者之後可能美豬、美牛這一些例子的話，當然仍然我們多能夠邀對我們最不信任的那一方進入議程設定，這個幾乎是唯一的判準。當時我在支援2014年佔領運動的時候，我是同時支援了「白色正義社會聯盟」與「黑色島國青年陣線」，當時這兩個幾乎是水火不容的兩個團體，看他們的顏色就可以知道（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是從零時政府的角度來看，大家都是有通訊自由的，大家都應該有機會集會、有言論的這一些權利，因為我們把同樣的技術，同時交給這兩個團體。到後來他們在跟各種各樣對服貿討論等等裡面，他們會覺得建立出來這一個「你被服貿了嗎」、「服貿東西軍」，也就是這一些網路上的東西是有公信力的，因為我們並沒有限制他只有反對服貿或者是支持服貿的人才能使用，本身是客觀的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得政府如果能夠採納這樣子的一個客觀或者中立或者是社會上的各界利益關係人一起來討論這一個位置上，這一個位置是比較適合跟大家溝通的位置，如果政府一開始就是踩在加害者或是受害者的位置上，這一個溝通就比較困難，因為最不相信政府的那一批人不會進入一開始的議程設定，會等等全部做完之後在街上來抗議，這個東西當然就會是我們一開始不管多有效的溝通跟我們比較友善的利益關係人，到最後會被取消掉的狀況，這個是最基本的想法。" }, { "speaker": "提問", "speech": "哪一些部會在運用網路工具進行溝通上做得不錯？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我剛剛有提到小彭，小彭進入經濟部之後開始有做一些工作，但是最早從g0v社群進入中央部會的是羅佩琪（Peggy），她是衛福部的管理師，她在衛福部裡面已經有一批做網路溝通的朋友，不管是現在他們把這種四縣食品超級大的未爆彈收進來——不是未爆，已經爆了好幾次——或是之前爭議沒有那麼大的人民請願或者連署案，我覺得她都建立了一個還不錯的系統。事實上我對國外分享的，大部分也就是她所建立的這一個系統，在各個不同的地方政府及在衛福部的操作成果。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然在連署網頁的經營上新傳處或者是我知道的勞動部有一些FB、網站或者是一些大的部會，其實之前多多少少，像路政司也非常會寫新聞稿之類（笑），我覺得都是有案子，大家一開始不那麼熟，可是透過一次次的磨練，慢慢就會比較掌握這一個工具。" }, { "speaker": "提問", "speech": "在公務體系中改革或創新方案的落實與執行有時會在科層政治當中消弭於無形，這是公務體系長久以來的文化所致。您是否意識到此一問題？您是否有什麼具體方法可以使您的理想得以落實？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個其實是一個非常有趣的問題，我會接任政務委員媒體們是在9月1日那時候知道，但是我10月1日才就任，中間那一個月的時間我都在巴黎，除了跟歐洲各地的朋友們交換類似在我這一個位置上的人會需要什麼、行政上經驗等等之外，我就是拿了一個政大公行所的老師，他是電子治理研究中心的陳敦源老師，有寫一本書叫做「民主治理」，他在講的是科層制度要如何跟民主的governance進行調和。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "陳老師當然不是唯一電子治理中心研究這個的老師，但是他是一個用比較像電腦程式碼的方法來寫，用理性選擇理論去算一個公務員決策需要的成本是多少、風險是多少、預期回報是多少，在公文上他自己想要做的事情、回應民代的壓力，付出的成本跟回報是多少。因為我是學資訊科學的，所以這個東西對我才有意義，其他比較是質性的描述。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我爸爸、媽媽跟爺爺、奶奶那一代都是軍公教，可是我自己畢竟沒有第一手的經驗，所以對我來講，其實陳敦源老師這一本書對我來說非常好用，我可以建一些模型，去試著試算出我們引進哪一些leverage，就可以讓大家的動機多多少少有一些改變。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為這樣的關係，所以這邊講的具體方法，我一進來之後就做了幾個，一個是大家已經聽到我所有協調的會議都有逐字稿，十天大家共同編輯，把大家覺得媒體看到一定會放大做文章的部分加以補充之後就全部公開出來，這個東西是大家的政治責任，以及把事情推出去的動機都大幅減少，在這樣的一種透明的狀態底下，也就是叫做「完全資訊遊戲」，有一點像下棋、而不是打牌的情況下，這樣的動機是盡可能開更少的會，在更少的會裡面就先把自己部門的權責確定，然後趕快去做那部分的權責，因為開越多，在這一種情況之下，你要做的事就越多，所以不如趕快把自己要做東西的疆界確定，然後就回去跟承辦說你看逐字稿做完就好了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是如果是傳統科層式方法的話，在這一個中間就會有人希望開更多會，也許他的事情就更能推掉之類的，這樣逐漸可能變成一個「零和遊戲」。這樣的話，其實大家的效率就會受到影響，這個是其中一個。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個，我覺得滿大的差別，在我們自己的辦公室，我都是說我是「安那其」。「安那其」是無政府主義，是一個非常有趣的政治信念：我不接受別人給我的指揮，我也不會去命令別人做不是他自願做的事情。這個東西我進來政府之後還是一樣，這樣是非常弔詭的一件事情，即使是我在國際的公民科技社群，都會人問我進了政府之後，怎麼還會保持不聽別人命令，也不命令別人的這個狀況？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "事實上具體來講不用KPI管理來管理，這一件事情之前據說張善政老師想要推行過，但是非常困難，所以到最後沒有做，還是在做KPI管理，所以我們自己工作小組，現在大概十五個人，未來想採用的是「OKR」管理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「OKR」管理的概念跟KPI是完全不一樣的。它仍然是一個量化管理，但是「OKR」管理是每一季開始的時候，每一個人對於自己那一季想要做到什麼東西的「O」（objective）自己訂，完全由下而上，訂了之後要怎麼樣達成這一個目標，有哪一些關鍵可以量化的結果，表示你達成了這一個目標，這個也是自己訂，每一個objective可能寫三、四個key result下來。這樣訂完之後，一季可能是完成四個。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "部門主管要做的事情是，把這個部門裡面每個想要做到的objective試著加以調和，變成那一個部門的objective，同時可以滿足大家的需求，這中間當然不可能百分之百完全match，但是至少要60%的部分仍然是每一個個人自己當初設定的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當整個部門調和之後，那一個部門就有他的部門目標跟部門的關鍵結果，就會跟別的部門進行討論，這個時候就可以知道，因為這個東西是透明的，包含每一個人、每一個部門，一直到每一個所有business unit，都是跟全公司或者如果在這邊就會跟全政府開放，所以在這一個情況之下，其實很多喬事情就不太需要做，只要看一下隔壁部門的objective，然後去想說有沒有synergy，如果沒有的話，根本不用提，但如果有的話，就試著把綜合的效果管理出來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個管理方式其實在其他國家內部創新政府是常常使用的，這個也是Google、Intel、HP這一些公司目前管理方法，所以其實有一整套的方法論，我們自己試著OKR之外，我們也會在每一次進行跨部會的談判或協調時，去問這一件事想要達到的共同目標是什麼。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "OKR的另外一個好處是，每一次在考核的時候，如果你有做到百分之百，那個就表示訂的太過ambitious，那個是要扣分的，所以最好是落在60%、70%，表示還有自己加強的空間，如果一季檢討下來只做到20%，那並不表示沒有做好，而是這一件事不值得花心力做，下一季再訂別的objective，所以它是非常有彈性的，它會按照每三個月世界的狀態改變，讓你很容易改變目標，就不會有KPI的造假文化，因為造假對誰都沒有好處，所以這個是自我評量這樣的想法。" }, { "speaker": "提問", "speech": "因資安問題，公部門並不同意使用無線網路，請問這樣的限制是否會影響我國的資訊發展？包括使用互動性強的社群媒體的使用，與民眾溝通？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個也是非常好的問題。我一進院裡面牽了一條專線，那一條專線也就是用我們自己的裝置，並不是用公務的機器，一個是連外的機器。這個在新聞傳播處就有做過這樣的例子，目標只是說有一個實體隔離，也就是處理公文機器還是使用內部網路，但是如果是到對外溝通的話，也就是用自己的機器或者是用不相干的電腦去接連外的網路，這兩個中間不要用USB或資訊交換器，這兩個就沒有任何資安上洩漏的可能性，我們自己是用實體分離的方法處理這一個，我不知道在部裡面或者其他地方是不是也合適用類似的方式，但這個確實是一個方式。" }, { "speaker": "提問", "speech": "LINE是很有效率的即時軟體，可是公部門為了資訊安全而禁用，請問政務委員會建議我們怎麼提升公務員的數位化?" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我自己一進來就架了一個standstorm（網址：ey.pdis.nat.gov.tw），這一個東西我目前還在請院資安處進行資安的認證，理論上應該是1月左右會把滲透測試的結果送回來，如果這一個東西在資安認證沒有問題的話，我們後面就會改成「gov.tw」。這個是一系列的開放源碼，不但是免費可以取得的，而且是可以自己任意去改做的一個東西，就包含了聊天室、類似檔案分享（Dropbox）、類似目標結果管理（Trello）、類似共同編輯同一份文件（Google Docs）、類似共同編輯同一份試算表及維基百科，就是所有我們這一些常用的社群軟體，只要是開源的，它就可以包進這樣的政府雲裡面，讓大家直接用自己的「ey.gov.tw」進行協作。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣的好處是，所謂的實體儲存是由國發會資管處管理的政府雲裡面，並不是LINE放在韓國的伺服器或者是Telegram一樣散播在全世界九個或者是十個國家的伺服器裡面，它有一個集中管理的可能性。另外一個好處是，可以自行客製化的，所以看哪一個軟體的哪一個功能不順眼，都可以自己請開發人員把它改成你想要的樣子，現在如火如荼一直在改這一些工具了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "隨著院資安處回來的認證是ok的話，我們會進一步推廣給各部會的開放政府聯絡人使用這樣的一套系統，等於我們不需要請廠商建置通訊軟體，我們所有的協作軟體等等都可以在這裡面進行開發。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個好處是這一些登入什麼的都是整合在一起的，所以任何時候在聊天室傳一個訊息給你、改了一個文件，你在這邊會有一個類似通知，也就是會有一個紅色的、紅色的，上班就不用打FB，因為用這個跟用FB的感覺是非常像的——雖然在上班（笑）——這也可以多少回應大家社交上的一些需求，我們也會盡可能把大家常用的貼圖放進去（笑），這些是資通訊軟體。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然外館可以善用每一個國家人民最常用的社群媒體，可能有專職的人去管社群媒體，不是人或者是對話式的機器人去管社群媒體，這個是非常重要的，之前的講師應該也有講到一些相關的操作，我今天就不講細節了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我對於今天聖多美普林西比的斷交完全沒有任何的意見，這不是我的專業，我之前也沒有聽過這一個國家（笑），所以我是大外行，我在這邊講，任何何去何從，可能都是貽笑方家，我還是不要表示意見比較好。" }, { "speaker": "提問", "speech": "如何觸及非網路使用者？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個是非常好的問題，我們之前在國外演講的時候都會分享一個案例，也就是台北市的社會住宅那一個案例，台北市柯文哲市長當選之後，他說社會住宅並不是10%給租不起的人，他要撥額外20%給租不到的人，什麼叫做租不到的人？好比像災民、遊民、單親媽媽、深信障礙小孩的家庭、原住民族，也就是雖然有錢，但是房東不租給他，所以他就沒有辦法住。但是柯文哲很厲害，他就說：「但是我希望這一個分配的方式，由這一些利益相關者自行來決定。」這個是非常有挑戰性的工作，畢竟你現在架一個網站，請大家上來填寫自己的發言，剛剛講的這一些人裡面有沒有5%的時間上網站分享可能都不一定，所以到最後就是變成具有少數有上網能力，你也不知道是不是真的利益相關者的人，就把整個風向都帶回來了，所以在那一個案例裡面，我們採取的並不是請他們到網路上，而是把網路帶到他們面前，這一段話怎麼講呢？就是先聯絡社工、聯絡第一線去幫助這一些，因為這一些東西在社會局裡面都有一個司、一個組、一個朋友都去connect with他們想要照顧的這一些不管是災民或遊民或傷害者等等，所以他們先做了一個內部的我們剛剛架的聊天室，也就是共享資料夾這一個系統，先確定每一個聯絡人都有，然後他們去推薦這部分的專家或者社工或者實際碰到第一線的人，然後發一個問卷給他們。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "而這個問卷很特別，並不是只問他們對社會住宅的看法，而且也請他們推薦市政府不認識的利益相關者，也就是說災民或者是遊民這一些人本身，只要還群聚在碰得到的地方，請他們推薦，而這不是一波而已，他們持續做了三、四波這種滾動式的問卷，一直到蒐集到每一個具體的家戶的狀況為止，他們調查這一些家戶的實際情況，以及邀請他們來進行討論的時候，會看到很多很容易讓人感動的狀況，好比原住民族的媽媽聽到自閉症小孩家長分享實際上狀況的時候，她主動說：「原住民族不來爭取這20%，因為顯然你的更弱勢，我們要跟漢人用一種比較平等（方式），就是要爭那80%或者更多保留的東西，但是我畢竟不是弱勢，你們是真正社會住宅上的弱勢。」，這個很珍貴是因為如果不是把真的討論搬到最近的地方，然後再透過360度的攝影機或者其他的東西，讓沒有辦法到場的腦性麻痹的一些朋友們，能夠實際上透過螢幕去參與，如果不是當時有聽打員跟手語老師的這一些轉譯工作，讓不同的障礙工作們都可以接到同一份資訊，就不會出現互相能夠體諒的這一個狀況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以前的溝通模式都是我們先去找每一個協會的會長，那一個會長的講法也不一定真的代表他的利益關係人立場，可能只代表某個大部分群體的立場，就會變成每一個去講的時候，通常是那一個群體裡面最大聲的在講話，一個個溝通之後，大家還會很介意那個溝通順序，就跟維基百科一樣，最後一個編輯的人會贏，所以會覺得當你分別溝通的時候，因為大家都會很想要，最後臨門一腳的時候去跟你溝通，可是透過這一種透明多利益相關者，全部湊在一起討論的狀況，最極端的意見會彼此取消掉，大家會願意去聽那些比較願意講道理的意見，因為人就是這樣子，因為這樣的關係，也因為把這一些利益關係者，把整個議程交給他們設定，再加上當時的社會局長事先上Youtube說：「不管大家討論什麼東西，只要跟社會住宅有關都願意買單，不只是分配的原則而已。」，所以他們就討論了非常非常多的東西，像混居的原則，想把很容易製造噪音跟聽障安排成鄰居（笑），這個是社會住宅自己關起門來，可能想不到的意見。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在這些訴求上只要跟社會局業務相關的就亮綠燈，把它變成政策； 如果需要跟別的局處協調，就亮黃燈，表示還要去協調；有些違反物理定律或者是沒有辦法在目前這一年度預算的支應就亮紅燈。這個是課責的方式，也就是所有利益關係人可以很明白看到具體的建議到最後如何處理，後來還說每半年回來重新協調一次，像當時的黃燈，現在因為重新協調已經變成很多綠燈，像都發局或者其他局點頭了，我覺得這個是很好的示範，也就是這樣子討論完一輪之後，大家對於政府的可信心是增加的，而這個增加不是來自於柯文哲拍了一支很棒的形象的廣告片——他現在拍這個的意義也比較小一點——而是大家看得到事務官的專業，也看得到柯市長願意授權給他的事務官去進行第一線的溝通，我覺得這個才是比較能夠長久的。" }, { "speaker": "提問", "speech": "目前民意調查大多是用電訪的方式進行，你建議用網路方式來執行嗎？有無優缺點?" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們用網路方式來執行有一個好處，也就是可以做成開放式的問卷，開放式的問卷意思是答了幾題之後，如果我的意見沒有被充分反映，我可以自己打入我的意見，而這一個又可以變成其他人說我同意與否其他人意見的設計，而這一個設計證明了這一陣子下來，只要持續run了三、四個星期，大家就會收斂出一些大家具有共識的意見，所以在網路上也有形成共識的可能性。" }, { "speaker": "提問", "speech": "若是各方不同意見都有系統爭取主導議題，是否依然回到各說各話？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個就是爭點整理的目的，如果大家討論是非常大的議題，如國家的前途，或像什麼是「共享經濟」，每一方都會想要幫不同方向拉，可是我們把爭點縮小到一個非常小的東西，好比像自用車載客收錢的保險問題研究的時候，其實雙方必須要聚焦在這一個上面，而且不只是需要聚焦在這上面，需要不同的想法跟流派，還有可能說雖然不同意你的價值觀，但是這一個具體實踐上是願意同意的，這個叫做overlapping consensus。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為這樣的關係，我們一開始做的事情是儘量把爭點切細，然後每一個細的爭點給他一個處理的時程，這樣的話，不管各方多各說各話，基本上在臺灣目前的情況裡面，不管是多怎麼樣的公民團體或者是怎麼樣人民的聲音，沒有人會說不應該坐下來談，或者是說我們不應該聽不同聲音的人的意見，通常會講到這一句話已經是逼急了、沒有時間了，但是如果還有時間的話，那多聽一些別人的意見，事緩則圓，這仍然是文化的一部分，但是這個也是我覺得臺灣很值得珍惜的地方，尤其歐洲的國家並沒有文化在，所以consensus這一件事對他們來講是需要重新需要的，對我們來講本來在東亞文化裡面就有consensus 的這個成份，只是本來是少數的知識菁英中間有consensus，我們讓民主化都能夠有consensus而已。" }, { "speaker": "提問", "speech": "開放政府做到極致時，是否可替代立法委員？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "（笑）其實我覺得立法委員還是有他的專業。傾聽人民的聲音、具體訴求，如何轉譯成法條，這並不可能一下子就做到極致，讓所有的人都非常懂法律，以及法律之間互相的聯繫關係，一個「應」改成「得」會影響到幾條法律，這個是不太可能的。所以我覺得開放政府即使做到極致，仍然有專業立法者的空間，而且我覺得他們的價值才更被體現，因為這就表示說人民已經聚集出了一些具體可行的想法，但是他們要轉譯成實際上在執行時不會碰到困難的東西，這樣的專業我覺得是非常值得珍惜的，很多立法委員也是那一個議題部分的專家，他也是自媒體，所以因為他是立法委員的關係，所以他可以把這一個法案的影響、這個法案想要造成的影響，更容易溝通給更多人知道，所以跟代議是互相補強的，並不是一下子就說要取代掉代議制，除非突然之間全國的人對於小學生在填「我的志願」的時候都填「我要當立法者」，說不定可以做到每一個人都有立法技術，但是至少在我有生之年，應該是不會看到這樣子的狀況，還是會需要專業立法者的貢獻。" }, { "speaker": "提問", "speech": "美國新當選的總統川普超愛用推持，你會建議外交部使用推持與美國及其他國家溝通嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我自己用非常多Twitter。事實上在接受某一次媒體訪問的時候，我還發Twitter邀川普到臺灣來感受氣候變遷的真實性，也就是在Twitter上面直接tag他，他當時還沒有當選美國總統。在那個情況之下，我覺得滿有意思的是，我碰到國際的，尤其是外交的朋友，會問我說「你邀川普來臺體驗氣候變遷是什麼想法？」我就說：「就是希望他正視這件事，說不定會更願意尊重巴黎協定。」" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在這樣的前提下，事實上各國的朋友們都在Twitter上表達過程度不一，很多用詞沒有那麼溫良恭儉讓的想法。當然到最後川普在當選後就已經有一點轉彎，聲明不一定要退出巴黎協定，保持一個開放心態，記者去問他的時候，他說：「好啦！其實溫室氣體確實和人類活動有關連。」" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個跟國際壓力不一定有關係，但是至少他在表達這個態度的時候，他是會即時讓他的支持者會知道這一進事，這中間沒有時間差，他的立場轉變了或者是他做了什麼claim，一大堆Twitter帳號就會開始幫他洗，說果然川普是能夠體諒到國際現實之類的，就會開始有非常多美化性的訊息到Twitter上面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我當然覺得在國際上用Twitter進行外交已經是一個實際上發生的事情，我們這邊如果有比較能夠研究social media的朋友用這一個東西去做外交的話，他可以繞過非常多實際上我們在多邊組織，或者其他東西要經過層層堆疊的程序才能跟別人講到一句話的這個狀況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以我們做開放政府的朋友，大部分的部長或者像類似我的政務委員層級的朋友們，其實都是非常活躍的Twitter使用者，我們不管做什麼事，或者有什麼想要跟彼此分享的，我們首選就是用Twitter，我到國際上都是互相留Twitter帳號，我當然覺得以自己個人身份而言是非常好用的一個東西。我們要不要用官方的方式去使用，我覺得這個是屬於外交專業，不是我能幫各位判斷的——但直接跟這一些人通話上是非常非常好用的。" }, { "speaker": "提問", "speech": "理論上，社群網體參與者是平等的，公務系統內握有權力優勢的長官會歡迎這樣的轉變嗎？如何處理「授權」的議題？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得這個很有意思，我們之前在做開放政府的時候，我們都是請部會主動提議題，所以部會拋過來的議題，好比Uber、Airbnb這一些議題通常都是那一個部會自己覺得是跨部會或者是這一個部會自己沒有辦法擔全部政治責任的情況之下，很願意拋出來給全民來進行討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為確實一個開放政府的討論或者是社群網路的討論，它一定重建一個東西的正當性，但是反過來講的是，如果長官或某一個特定部會的人認為其實就很懂了，而且我自己處理這一個就夠了，不需要更多的意見來擾亂我，一部分不相信人民，覺得人民可能民粹或什麼的，在這樣的情況之下，當然也比較不願意拋出來給大家知道或給大家討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是反過來講，如果即使你最懂，最後也做出了正確的決定，最後比較不相信人民的過程，大家是會感覺到，也許這一個政策是正確的，可是人民因為這樣的關係覺得更不被信任，因為最後才知道，這兩個是要互相權衡的，也就是legitimacy這一件事當你在用比較封閉的方式做決策的時候，每一次稍微喪失一點點，也不多，但是這一個一點跟討論的議程受控制的程度是一個trade off，我並沒有想要強迫大家都覺得一定哪一邊衡平、哪一邊比較傾斜，因為畢竟每一個議題的專業程度不一樣，但是我相信很多時候如果去想說這一個legitimacy，你可以因為公開或者是比較透明的方式，稍微把正當性拿回來一點點的話，這個是值得考量的factor。" }, { "speaker": "提問", "speech": "今天分享的內容，多數是希望透過開放政府解決政府的治理及溝通問題。 在國際傳播的業務，能否有可借鑑的概念和做法？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我待會會稍微分享一下其他國家如何做國際傳播，我們再來實際看這一個問題。" }, { "speaker": "提問", "speech": "Government’s responsibilities are different from individuals’ .How to promote norms to make cyberspace safe and responsible ?" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個其實是要從自己做起。舉例來講我自己有一個wiselike的頁面，其實這一個頁面就是類似部長信箱的東西，但是跟部長信箱的差別有三個：" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一、它是完全公開的，也就是有人提了問題之後，別人都看不到這一個問題，只有我看得到；但是我一旦回答了，所有的人都看得到。這樣的意思是，我同一個問題不用回答兩次，因為任何時候後面的人問的時候，只要做全文搜尋，甚至有人問了同樣的問題，我只要貼之前的連結就可以了，那變成一個類似問答的知識庫。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "二、因為它的順序是由我自己來排列了，所以雖然大家問了我這麼多的問題，但是我現在比較想要大家注意到社會企業，所以我就會把社會企業排到前面去，所以來問我問題的人，第一個會先看到社會企業，因為我現在想要跟大家討論這一個，這一個議程設定權是在回答的人身上，而不是問的人身上，如果是用FB的話，是最後一個問的人贏，因此在這樣的情況之下，你可以去做一定程度的策展。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "三、我覺得這一個滿大的好處是，目前有一千五百四十五個人訂閱，意思就是當我回答一個問題的時候，就有一千五百四十五個人的email裡面同時收到這一個問題跟我回答答案，裡面包含絕大部分跑行政院線上的記者。這個好處是，每一次只要可能需要澄清的東西或者是一個未爆彈的時候，我甚至可以自問自答，我可以拿另外一個帳號來問我自己這個問題，然後我趕快把它回答掉。一回答之後，一千五百四十五個人都收到我的回答，這樣也不用炒作新聞，因為我不接受獨家的訪問，所以任何人私訊問我一個問題時，我立刻用剛剛那一個代貼的帳號，幫忙他貼到這裡來，然後公開回答他。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣的好處是，我不可能被斷章取義，第二個是因為我在回答的時候是因為用一種比較生活性平順的口吻，所以對大部分的線上記者來講，他只要複製貼上就可以發新聞。所以從記者的角度來講，完全沒有任何動機去把我的訊息再加工或者甚至再加一個文不對題的標題，對他來講酬勞最高的就是把我回應的全文直接複製貼上變成他發的即時新聞，他比任何人快，他沒有任何成本，且絕對不會被當事人告，因為這個是我寫的，所以在這樣的情況之下，反而每一篇媒體都變成類似中央社的新聞（笑），並不是由於他們跟我感情多好，而是他們的同業也同時都收到了我同一個回答，所以他要是不發的話，就來不及了，他的同業會發，因此是在這樣的情況下重新定義跟媒體相處的生態。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣的好處是，只有真正願意做調查報導的人，願意花時間往下挖跟更深的問題，那些只是想要發即時的人，基本上我寫什麼、發什麼就好了，因此在這一個前提底下就變成比較安全，而且也比較responsible，比較安全是因為大家如果來問我一些根本人身攻擊的問題，如果你是在FB上的話，你還要去刪掉、管版，人家會說言論審查什麼，對我來講不回答就好了，我不回答大家都看不到，這個是safe的部分。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "Responsible的部分，像《風傳媒》有一位夏珍老師，她問問題的時候，後面加上她是幾年幾月幾日幾分幾秒問的，然後就開始按馬錶、開始算說我我花了多久回答這一個問題，然後媒體朋友們發現我基本上一天之內，甚至是一小時之內，只要是重要的問題，我馬上就回答完了，這個也是建立互信的方法，他們知道在目前這一個new cycle裡面，不用再旁敲側擊，只要在這上面提，一定可以得到一個說法。在兩、三次試探下來之後，我非常responsive，而這一個responsive從他們的感受來講，就是我很responsible，也就是我不會閃躲問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果我閃躲問題，所有的人就看得到我閃躲問題，大家就會說為什麼政委閃躲問題等等。所以，在這樣的情況下，我們keep each other honest，每一個記者為了不要丟臉，他不會問沒有做功課的問題，我為了不要丟臉，我每一個問題必須要實問實答，沒有辦法實問虛答，因此在這樣的情況下，加深了彼此信任，就是從自己做起吧！" }, { "speaker": "提問", "speech": "謹請政委也開放現場提問？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然可以啊！就開始提問吧！既然都「謹請」，表示有問題要問（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "提問", "speech": "請問政委有沒有碰到在網路上鬧場的人？常常會有這樣的人來擾亂一切？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "鬧場的人當然有碰到過。我們基本上在網路上我們分成兩種空間，一種是「發散式的空間」，像FB，設計的目標就是讓你在上面停的時間越久越好，所以任何人有提到你或回應或留言或鬧場，該人就會搶掉所有人的注意力，然後FB又多賺一些廣告費。但是我剛剛講的wiselike或者是我可能demo一下討論Uber那一案用的pol.is，這個都是收斂式的空間，也就是來鬧場的人只能浪費自己的時間，不能浪費掉別人的時間。像在我剛剛問答的那一個問題裡面，如果來鬧場的話，很明顯，他只能浪費自己的時間。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像我們這一個空間叫做pol.is，這一個空間裡面是叫做一個開放式的問卷，我當時請交通部、經濟部及財政部各自寫了他們的一些statement，好比像這一位Remi Do網友說他贊成Uber合法化，讓消費者多一個選擇，你可以選擇你同意他或者是反對他，假設你反對他。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你可以發現你的位置往這邊移動一點，覺得「搭計程車是一件要冒險的事，因為車輛品質參差不齊，你也許贊成。所以在這樣回答了一陣子之後，你就會走向到位置的某一個部分，我們就開始看說左邊這一群人覺得「未依法營業搭乘有風險，右邊的人其實不同意」，左邊的人另外還覺得主要是他的車輛沒有認證，而且他的管理制度不同。右邊的人主要是覺得不趕時間的話，他們也叫Uber，或者覺得Uber的人開車開得比較好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是這兩組人的想法不一樣，但是按共同意見的時候，他們有一些東西92%的人是所有的人都贊成的，好比像政府應該要制訂電子招車的新法規，就是我們在高雄已經上線的「多元化計程車方案」，透過類似像Uber打分數的方式，讓電子招車的品質增加。大家都覺得還是要審核人員才能保障乘客跟駕駛的權益，大家都覺得應該要投保乘客責任險及司機意外險，但是這個法規也是要修訂的等等。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一個空間之所以是收斂的空間，因為來亂的人沒有辦法回應，你看到他講這一些話，即使你不贊成，它沒有地方給你回應，你唯一回應的地方就是在這邊寫你覺得怎麼樣，你寫你覺得怎麼樣，太無聊或者是沒有新意的話，很多人就會按掠過，只要足夠足夠多人按掠過，歧視字樣就比較不會出現了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，這個是一個讓大家都分攤一些版主權限這樣的狀況來維護討論的品質，同時讓大家看到雖然大家南轅北轍，但是在這一個南轅北轍中間還是會浮出一些大家都同意的東西來。當時我們是保證任何在這邊分數高於80%的，我們就拿來制訂跟Uber的政策，用來跟Uber進行談判，去年8月的時候是這樣做的。因為這樣的關係，臺灣嘛！有人考80分，有人考85分，有人考90分，最後有人考92分，大家都會想辦法去競爭提出一些足夠折衷的觀點，然後來得到跨陣營共識的高分，好進入我們討論談判的議程裡面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為這樣的收斂式的空間，不管是pol.is或者是wiselike，不管是我們在院裡面也有架一個discourse等等的這一些空間，它是讓來浪費人時間的人只能浪費自己的時間，因為這樣的關係，所以就不是很怕來搗亂的人，如果是在FB，這種來搗亂的人可以浪費掉所有的人時間，你就會需要一些幫忙，不管是全職的朋友或者是替代役（笑），或者是一些人工智慧程式等等，還是有一些方法讓它盡可能收斂，通常的做法是我們在FB回，回一個連結是你在這邊的留言我們收到了，但是要在這邊留言才有拘束力喔！等於是導流。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像羅珮琪在衛福部，她之前會做的方法是，在衛福部的粉絲頁不管留什麼言，她會說已經收到意見了，送到別的線上討論區去，如果有意見或怎麼樣的話，請在那邊提出，在這邊人數最多會定期每兩個禮拜來回應，FB這邊就不會主責回應，也就是可以創造一種empower space，到我現在還是很多記者及民間朋友會在FB傳私訊過來，任何私訊我都會複製貼上到wiselike上面，問我的問題我只會公開回答問題，也就是可以用FB，但是就是用一個導流的作用。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "還有沒有別的想法？" }, { "speaker": "提問", "speech": "這一期的《經濟學人》的cover story，有談到中國大陸正在進行一個實驗，就是用數位來管理，把你個人所有的資料，在公共的網路公布，從另外一個角度來講，從政府的治理的效能上是不是比民主公民論壇更好？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實啊！如果目的是追求最大程度決策效率的話，它當然是更快。這個沒有什麼好講，因為其實同樣的技術，我們這邊講的是網路技術，你放在一個他們叫做「民主集中制」的政體裡面，比起我們的「代議民主制」來講，當然可以更有效往特定方向帶。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們這邊做的民主工具，放在臺灣的目的是要試驗一個讓公民社會的每一個人可以往不同的方向走，我們是把整體環境做到一個大家覺得雖不滿意，但都可以接受的這個狀況，來保持這一個社會最大程度的彈性或者最大程度的活力。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個其實很像KPI的管理跟OKR管理的差別，KPI管理可以設計非常多的東西，可以設計到極致，只要最上面的那一個人有命令下來，你透過KPI管理，讓所有不服從的人都沒有聲音，他只能非常有效完成最上面那一個人的抉擇。所以是看你的價值是什麼，如果你覺得是往特定的方向去做特定的一個政策，它是一件好事的話，你當然透過芝麻信用或者是他們內部佈署的網路工具，可以有效做到這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對於臺灣的朋友來說，至少我覺得「多元」這個價值受重視的程度，高於透明、參與、課責的價值，我也覺得多元是最重要的。因為這樣的關係，我設計出來的東西是往多元的環境去做布署，是讓越來越多不同意見的人還是學到怎麼樣彼此相處在一起，而不是一個意見把其他的意見消音掉。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是我理解很多朋友覺得「效率」這個價值是更有意義的，這是價值評斷。雖然我不做價值評斷，但是我同意，確實中華人民共和國政府跟我們的政府是在做不同的實驗。很多底層網路工具是類似的，未來整個文明會一起看到實驗做出來的結果是怎麼樣。" }, { "speaker": "提問", "speech": "我想請教太陽花事件以來，我們可以發現所謂政府開始注意到比如網路的公共論壇，希望用開放式政府的方式逐漸引進來作制訂政策的工具。同時一方面的輿論是網民的意見是否能夠代表全民的意見？也就是一方面網民的參與等於挑戰了這一些政治上的菁英對於議題設定的能力，同時部分的輿論會擔心網民會壟斷議題設定來主導整個政策的方向。政府運用這一些工具來作為制定政策參考時，有沒有更精準的方法真正抓到這一個社會實際上的脈動，而不僅僅是比較喜歡參與網際網路上的論壇或開放政府活動，畢竟這一些人的想法或者是對某些議題的看法會比較集中？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該這樣講，我們今天一定要開放現場提問，這個是沒有問題，不然就是只有帶手機的人才能問問題，這個是非常明確的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "反過來講，你說這一些問題有沒有代表性？它不需要代表性。我們整個目的是在事實及感受的蒐集，讓我們知道社會上有多麼多元不同的感受。像Uber這個案例，目的並不是讓大家知道目前風向哪一邊多，事實上我們當時用來決定的方法是 supermajority of people，好比現在是五五分，你要說服50%加上另外一邊的一半是75%，如果是六四分，那就是60%加上40%的一半即80%，如果是八二分，你要說服90%，也就是無論如何要說服到少數那一組的一半，加上多數的全部，我們才把它拿來當作談判的adenda，也就是你提出來的意見多能夠說服跟你意見不一樣的人。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以在這個前提底下，我們這一張圖代表並不是社會上這一組人多，所以就聽這一組人多，這並不是投票，所代表的是大家的意見有多麼多元，以及大家雖不滿意、但可接受，我記得這一個調查剛開始的時候，因為我們是同時送給計程車隊、Uber等各種不同的群組，是同時灑下去，一週的時候，人就是這四個角落，這四個角落中間完全沒有交集，然後你就可以看到很明顯計程車司機、Uber司機、Uber乘客跟其他人，這四組人不但完全沒有交集，而且所提出來的意見都是非常激動，也就是為什麼明天不斷水、斷電之類的意見，但是因為大家理解到我們的遊戲規則是，必須提出能夠說服跟你意見不同的人，我們才納入議程，因為這樣的關係，所以這一個空間自己慢慢隨著時間過去，人就開始往中間聚集，表示有人願意改變自己的感受，或者至少聽跟他意見不同的人，慢慢趨近這樣子的一種共識的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我在這邊想要講的是：網路工具不可能取代實體人與人之間的見面，我們實體人跟人見面的頻寬是最大的，因為可以透過你的表情、肢體與手勢。當然大家都知道我非常喜歡玩VR，而VR是可以一定程度上在網路空間裡面重現這一些非語言訊息，但是它永遠不可能取代實體；然而它可以做的是補充實體的不足，好比像實際上像剛剛不可能同時二、三十個人一起舉手發問，實體有一些空間上的限制，但是因為我們用了網路工具，所以可以同時二、三十個人同時發問，在這樣的情況下。發問的人仍然是現場的人，這個並不是公開的網址，所以我知道在這上面提問的人一定是坐在這邊的人，在這樣的情況下就比較沒有代表性的問題，只能讓沒有辦法發聲的人多了一個比較安全的方法可以發聲。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第二，我們在補充實體見面不足的時候，另外一個很重要的是，代表那一些還不願意足夠相信政府的利益關係人。我們在開這一類公聽會或者是諮詢會的時候，我現在有一個習慣，會指著攝影機說：「這個攝影機代表今天不能來的利益關係人。」那這個東西我覺得是很重要的一個事情，並不是因為他今天不出席這一場公聽會就永遠不相信政府，他只是現在還不相信政府，在這樣的情況之下，我們讓攝影機去取代他的位置，然後說至少可以看直播跟錄影等等，在這樣的情況之下，其實這一個利益關係人看到其他的利益關係人有誠意在討論事情，而決定多相信政府一點，所以這個是另外一部分。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "同樣的，這個也無關乎代表性，因此這個我完全同意我們說決策的四個部分：「確立事實」、「確立確立對於這一些提出建議的共同感受」、「建議好壞根據能多照顧的感受」及「最後決定」。大家很容易說透過網路，馬上就往決定的方向跑，這樣對於正當性不一定有幫助。但是如果我們可以多花一些時間讓網路去做事實的呈現、感受的蒐集，不要一下子就跳到建議與決定的話，這個就沒有代表性的問題，我們要知道社會有多少多元的聲音而已，我現在就儘量往前期的溝通這邊做，最後在後期這邊儘量不去追求網路上做電子投票什麼的，我覺得我們沒有這樣的土壤，這個文化也不一定是我們值得去鼓勵的文化，說真的。大概是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "提問", "speech": "因為時間不夠，可以先了解一下政委原本要分享的內容嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我本來要講的是其他國家跟我們也有經過類似的狀況，我這次去西班牙，在馬德里那邊待了大概兩個星期，可是第一個星期是開一個機器人在那邊，我是開一個等身高的機器人在那邊走來走去跟八個國家的團隊進行協作，所以在這樣的前提底下，他們都已經很習慣我作為機器人跑來跑去的事實，然後我再飛過去跟他們待了一個禮拜。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個東西有很多好處，因為我是透過機器人遙控，所以整個過程是錄影的，而且是360度錄影，所以我可以很容易在飛機上review一下我的學生做過什麼事情。另外一個部分，大家都很習慣有我的存在，所以我去的時候，就不會很陌生的感覺。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "為什麼馬德里會變成公民科技的輸出國？當然是因為2011年他們爆發一個非常大的佔領活動，當然他們當時的技術也不是自己發明的，那個是突尼西亞發明的，但這一些技術其實運用網路社群軟體及從頭寫物資調度的這一些資訊都是在網路上公開可得的，所以當時這邊用了，就是去西班牙用了，而這張圖上面（指投影片）這一個人是佔領紐西蘭，所以佔領威靈頓用了，他們用了那一套系統，我們在318的時候用，我們用了也有做一些心得報告，所以他們在巴黎佔領的時候就用了，其實全世界的佔領在網路是不斷地練兵，也就是我們每一次有整理出一些使用這樣佔領工具的心得就會毫不保留寫出來，下一個佔領運動是奠基在這樣的基礎上。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有一位佔領者Pablo Soto，他也是寫程式的，然後他就變成市議員了，他發現我進臺灣政府之後，做了這一種逐字稿，達成極端透明（radical transparency）的技術環境，他就馬上說在市議會要來推，這一些所有技術上的東西是他容易學的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "再來是他們很會選舉，跟我們這邊不太一樣，所以Podemos選舉第一次就變成第三大黨。Ciudadanos，相當於我們的綠社盟，也是拿到了14%。雖然組聯合政府一直有些困難，但是至少在地方層級拿到了相當多的市政權，這一個東西就變成非常重要的一個東西，就包含了連署、參與式預算、即時討論政策、線上投票等等，他就寫了這一個開放系統，在西班牙語系國家散播非常快。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像這一次我去的時候，哥倫比亞或者是巴西，全世界各地的國家都會來馬德里那邊，有一點像取經，也就是他們有哪一些開發出來的工具他們可以使用。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "歐盟本來就有一個叫做「D-CENT」，也就是專門來實驗這一些在街上的工具如何進入政府裡面進行開放政府的應用，他們編了非常多的錢。但是他們最缺的是實驗的場域，因為並不是每一個地方的人民都很歡迎這一個東西，所以我就可以發現說大的實驗場域，像Barcelona、Madrid、Helsinki、冰島的Reykjavik，這四個裡面西班牙就佔了兩個，雖然Barcelona明年有可能不是西班牙了。在這樣的情況之下，他們很容易去可以做這一種萬人連署提案等等的實驗及內容分析等等。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我這一次想要分享的是，馬德里非常有意識在經營這一套工具的公民外交，他們不但客制化，而且會一直去辦這一類工作坊，讓各國都來朝聖，就是帶一些他們會用的公民科技回去，這個是他們外交上滿花力氣做的一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然，同樣這一些工具其實並不只有西班牙語系，英美還是大宗，美國國家民主研究院花了相當的力氣去把常見英語系的這種公民科技的軟體全部串在一起，做成所謂的democracy tools，那這個通常是當他們輸出革命之後，他們就會需要做出一個民主的政權，但是每一次他們輸出革命之後，出現的東西其實也不一定比之前更透明，這個是大家都比我更專業的事情；所以很容易做出反權力，而做出新的權力也不一定更好。因此從他們的角度來看也是一個很困難的問題，你可以輸出佔領或暴動，但是你沒有辦法輸出在那之後的民主體制改革，因此他們花了時間去解決這一個問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "特別為開放中的國家去把我們這一些好比像冰島、臺灣、愛沙尼亞基本上每一個人都有寬頻的國家所做非常精緻的工具，試著把它改成多語系的開發中國家，不一定有網路連線或者基礎建設很差的情況下，也是可以使用的這一個情況，所以是有一點農業輸出的感覺（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以就是挑了很常平常我們就很常使用的開源軟體，當然最大的就是英國的mySociety，當然還有其他軟體重寫給開發中國家使用。當然他們也是同時輸出美國的一些雲端服務商，這裡面就包含了候選人給問，像我們這邊有選前就要求他們做一些政策上的承諾，當然很多人做票是一個問題，其實在臺灣就有投開票所，我們有爭取到能夠即時去攝影、回報任何開票上舞弊的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在臺灣很有意思，其實我們已經很公正很久了，但是公民社會對於這一個要求非常非常高，所以他們一定都要親眼看到，但是其他國家就很羨慕我們有這麼多、這麼好的工具來做監票的工作，因此他們就會拿我們這一些軟體去實際上，他們還真的滿需要監票的地方，保障開票的正確性。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然還有CiviCRM，每一次你要組織一個連署或什麼東西的時候，你要知道上一次支持你的人還是會支持你，讓他們知道有一些具體可以做的事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個叫做FixMyStreet，其實台北市也引進滿類似的系統，很多地方縣市都有，就是一個手機版的1999，如果到某一個道路上發現這邊路壞掉了，你只要拍個照、打個卡，這個東西就會直接接近1999的系統裡面，這個在開發中非常好用，以及資料開放平台及連署案等等。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實DemTools的做法其實跟馬德里不太一樣，馬德里希望做一套工具，然後輸出到所有可能用開放政府的國家，但是DemTools的做法都不自己寫，但是他們把各地做好的拼成一套，然後按照他們被原主國的需要，然後去客製化他們的語言，變成當地能夠用的開放政府軟體，一路也是希望他們援助這一些國家的經費，並不是跑到特定人的口袋，而是在一個相對透明的情況之下被使用，這個是他們的用法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在臺灣是外交上跟這兩個系統不太一樣，我們通常會講的是，我們的公民社會如何實際來幫助議程的設定。距離來講，當時本來想要加入開放政府聯合的聯盟之前，我們就已經參考了白宮「WETHEPOPLE」連署案的概念，所以有五千個人提點子，行政部門就必須要回應。這個想法並不是新的想法，但是在臺灣就做得特別好，其中一個原因是剛好碰到進來做網路溝通的Peggy及她的替代役團隊（笑），所以在那樣的情況之下，我們的規則跟別人並沒有什麼不一樣，同樣是五千人連署跟回應；在很多別的國家，其實回應並不是立刻回應，而是等到六十天或者是美國等到一百二十天才回應，而他的回應也有時是避重就輕。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們這邊（「Join」）的第一案成案是「癌症免疫細胞療法法案在12月底前送入立法院」，你如果只看它的標題這個根本不可能的，因為這是10月14日才成案，這個時間實在是太短了，你要做什麼根本不可能。但是在別的國家也許只要回一句說「不可能」就可以了，但是在我們這邊就很認真去處理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們如何很認真去處理？首先先去見提案人的夫妻，把他們約過來，Peggy自己打了大概一萬七千字的逐字稿，請衛福部的朋友們具體去理解，為什麼要做這一件事？因為連署裡面只有建議的部分，但是我們想要聽到事實跟感受的部分，因為有了這一場的對談，我們才聽到事實對他自己是鼻咽癌的末期患者，自己一直飛日本接受這一個治療，在臺灣確實還沒有開放，如果醫生要做人體實驗還不能收成本，還要自掏腰包，所以幾乎很少醫師在做這一件事等等，這些是事實蒐集。感受的部分，是跟提案者為利益關係的五千人裡面，原來有那麼多人本身就是癌友，很難比這一個利益關係更大了等等。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以在這樣的蒐集之下，就會去說服在這一萬七千字的逐字稿做完之後，他的主訴求到底是什麼？所以這樣子討論之後，就發現不一定要立法，只要讓更多的癌友知道，加入人體實驗、申請流程簡化、大規模開放免疫細胞治療、不是個案申請等等，這裡面每一個其實都不需要立法，每一個都是在法規層級、命令層級，或者是FDA藥的列表層級就可做得到的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是很重要的是，這五個訴求釐清之後是先在14日成案，一個禮拜之內就先公開說我們跟提案人討論過了，而且願意把他的訴求改成這五個，這個也是讓所有癌友知道說衛福部做一個很有責任的可行性評估，提案人也願意做這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "接下來衛福部還做了一件事，我們叫做「轉譯」，因為免疫細胞療法是非常專業的東西，我當時在看到Peggy給的資料的時候，我也不知道那個是什麼東西，就是把每一個訴求，等於是每一個爭點都翻譯成我看得懂的東西，而且還做了很漂亮的懶人包跟動畫的說明東西，在這樣的前提底下，大家才知道我們在問的那一個東西或者是他們在要求的東西，到底有什麼意義？開放之後會發生什麼事？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "接下來衛福部本來就有組成一個再生醫學及細胞治療發展的諮議會，而這一個諮議會的十九位專門委員，其實本來就有排各種各樣的議案，免疫細胞療法這個可能排在滿後面的，但是因為有五千人連署，所以他們願意把這一個提到前面來討論。同樣跟網路提問一樣，並不是真正來決定議程，而可以讓大家知道說這一個東西很多人關注，我們先來討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "接下來他們開了三次的內部諮詢會議及兩次外部的諮詢會議，都是次長及部長主持，該到的都到了，所以在這樣的情況下，其實非常認真在處理這一個可能寫，每一次同樣的做會議紀錄，然後把爭點收攏，收攏之後下一次處理這樣的爭點到沒有爭點為止。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣最後沒有爭點的時候，等於是六十天之後正式回應，而正式回應就是說我們會修訂人體實驗管理辦法，而且醫師可以擬訂附屬計畫，收取必要成本費用，預計1至2月完成。也就是人民並不是六十天之內一定要通過什麼法案或者是通過什麼東西，有一點像是我們在做宅配或者是線上訂購的時候，你要知道貨物送到哪裡。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這裡面有一個很重要的是，成案之後的三天就先預告說我們在10月31日以前會聯繫提案人，15日以前會盤點相關的事實並將資料公開，12月13日會做可行性評估等等，不用一直去猜衛福部要做什麼，只要那一天回來那個地方看、「Join」平台看，就知道他把這一個訴求處理到什麼程度，也是因為這樣可預期性，再加上說到、做到，癌友很願意放心。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然從媒體的角度來看，還不需要到4月公告，1月27日預告出來，報紙都出來了，這就變成是一件非常好的事情，當然更重要的是提案人自己覺得訴求有非常充分地被滿足，然後全部的癌友也都很感謝他們。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外有兩個要提的，一個是當時Peggy自己打了一萬七千四百字的逐字稿，而那個逐字稿是沒有上網的，為什麼？裡面都沒有機密資料，只是那一個來提案的人在講他的訴求而已，為什麼這樣都不能上網？她就問她的同事，她的同事說：「那是因為你打字快，但是我們在建立這樣一個制度之前，下一案如果你走了，我們替代役沒有辦法打這麼快，我們勢必沒有辦法有逐字稿，只能有摘要稿，這樣他們就會抗議為什麼獨厚癌症。」（笑）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以在這樣的情況下，行政部門很在意consistency，我們現在有了，以後就不能沒有，會變成標準配備。後來Peggy有把衛福部的要點做一些改進，所以現在就是變成標準配備，但是在當時這一個成本仍然是有的。我們這邊當然是很感謝科技會報辦公室sponsor我進入公部門之後，一小時2,000元左右的速錄師工作，是能夠用國家的科技經費去cover，但是我會覺得說，如果能夠省一場會議，其實這一個錢就省下來很多，所以這個是常規預算的成本。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一件事，在他們預告之後，我們知道1月27日雖然新政府還沒有上任，但新國會已經上任了，所以新的國會就有一位新的立委說：「為什麼你們可以公告這個，按該法規去修正，竟然來自國發會政策平台一人提案，而且空前絕後。」其實沒有絕後，但是是空前，因為是第一案。「……衛福部馬上組成諮議會，半個月之內竟然開了兩次會議，馬上修改法規，架空醫療法、藥事法規定，影響的權利甚鉅，程序嚴重瑕疵。」當然朋友有提到代議士他的專業性，感覺上可能有一點受到質疑，這裡面當然有一些事實性的，並不是空前絕後，或者諮議會也不是為了這一個成立的，但是即使這一些都澄清了，其實最後是什麼？是有一點踩到立委本來的權力。這個東西是有一點創制權，以前是只有立委才有創制權。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在這樣的前提底下就發了這樣的公文，Peggy就只好打電話給提案人說：「既然有立委要備查轉審查，自己要多開幾場公聽會，我們可能沒有辦法4月announce，可能要延到6月或者7月，先跟你講一下。」，兩個小時之後，這一位立委的FB就被洗版了，就貼病友自己的照片，說每拖一天就有多少個癌友怎麼樣。所以，委員的FB的小編就放棄管理，就遭到洗版，在這樣的情況之下，隔天就撤回了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是這一個東西在癌友圈裡面在傳的時候說是「鄉民的勝利」，我覺得並不是鄉民的勝利，我覺得這個是當時沒有設計好，這確實是第一案，國發會之前也沒有這一個經驗。國發會現在跟立法院資訊處其實已經談了，如果有委員覺得他要接連署案，或是共同設定議程的話，應該要能共同設定。因為其實當時是可以做出貢獻的，就像我講的有立法專業、議題專業、溝通專業，為什麼不讓他一起進來設定？或者現在連署的門檻五千人過的時候，到達一萬人，也許特定的立委或者是黨團甚至願意把它直接轉成提案，如果要改法律的話，不是更好嗎？如果不邀請立委的話，立委也是利益關係人，他一定會說這個是窄化，而且也是求最速解。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "雖然有這兩個未來可以改進的地方，而且提案人在3月就先離開人世，但是在那個情況之下，他至少是知道這在4月的時候會預告的情況，他的太太也一直跟衛福部保持非常好的關係。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以上是有準備的一個formal簡報，最後想要講的是：馬德里Podemos是一個政黨，是透過歐盟的「D-CENT」計畫去傳播到整個歐盟。每一次關係城市要什麼功能，他就請馬德里的開發者加那個功能，然後把那個功能全部都疊到同一個系統裡。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「DemTools」是民主黨跟NDI去做合作，而這一個東西是Scale out，也就是盡可能去串聯國際各個不同的開放政府社群，然後把這一個東西做橫向的連結。我覺得在臺灣很難能可貴的是，我們目前在做開放政府的這一些朋友，幾乎都沒有黨籍。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我自己是無黨籍，之前做的張善政院長及現任的林全院長也都沒有黨籍，所以我們在做的時候，其實跟Podemos或DemTools不太一樣的是，我們並不是在擴大任何政黨的勢力，而是希望「治理」這一件事變成更貼近人民。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "零時政府的操作方法，其實就是盡可能把人送到各個不同的地方去臥底（笑）。在這樣的情況之下，一方面更能夠理解公部門的苦衷，事務官到底怎麼想的、情況到底怎麼樣；二方面是讓事務官更知道說，我們從公民社會及從私部門來的朋友，在之前已經試出什麼樣的模式，在新的協作架構底下，對大家有什麼可以具體貢獻的地方。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以今天大概先分享到這邊，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "主持人", "speech": "非常感謝政委今天生動又有趣的演講，因為今天大家提問非常踴躍，因為時間非常有限，請次長為我們做一個簡單的小結。" }, { "speaker": "張國葆", "speech": "我不敢總結，我今天特別感謝政委開了一扇門及新觀念給我們，希望不久的將來可以請政委再來，也把機器人帶來，謝謝，再次感謝。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "全國電視機前以及網路前的觀眾朋友大家好，我是胡婉玲，現在這一個時間錄影的時間是星期三的早上，那麼透過鏡頭前，你看到我們現在所在的位置是在行政院的一個會客室裡面，我們要訪問政務委員唐鳳，唐政務委員。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "您好、主持人好、觀眾朋友，大家好。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "我們這一次的節目錄製，禮拜六播出，不過我們已經同步在錄製的時候，跟網友接觸，他們可以看到這個節目是同步撥出的。我們約您訪問，趁您上任前開始約，也約了四個多月，一路來看到有一些新聞變化，您自己擔任嶄新的工作，現在在政府單位訪問到您，您感覺怎麼樣？你的工作上做這一段期間以來怎麼樣？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就如主持人說的，其實我在接之前有一個月的準備期，在那一個月的準備期裡面，其實就已經把好比像工作方式、工作時間以及之前曾經媒體朋友們也層很關注過的遠距上班等等的這些事，（及）工作範圍都有跟院長確認，所以我實際上上班的那一天，感覺已經上班一個月了，因為之前都已經密集做準備工作，所以其實那個時候的想像，或者是說我跟大家整個社會透過線上的這一種對話有一個wiselike的頁面，大家一起來確認我進來之後會做什麼、想做什麼、能做什麼，很感謝院長的支持，到目前為止完全做的，基本上都跟10月1日所說的沒有什麼差別，我覺得是滿順利的過程。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "覺得可以適應嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不太需要適應，一進來就是差不多我習慣的工作方式。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "因為我們這一個節目進行之前就先向網友蒐集資料，他們也提出了一個問題，有一位應該是女士，她就說您當官…她寫這樣子當官三個月，會不會覺得自己像誤入叢林的小白兔？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我跟行政院合作，不管是國發會或者是國教院其實到現在已經超過兩年了，剛進來的時候確實是有一段調適的時間，那個是2014年的事情，到現在應該比較接近我原生的棲地，所以即使是小白兔在叢林裡面也是有一個叢林的位置。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "有沒有生活中哪一部分被迫調整改變？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我出國的時間有減少，因為院長以及立法院的朋友們，我們討論之下，我一個月比較不要出國超過兩個禮拜，對大家都比較好，所以我現在通常都是用自費公假的方式來出國，我之前常常出國是一個月、兩個月，這個是最大的改變，其實我們知道坐飛機也是會有很多碳排放、會造成很多溫室氣體，所以進來之後也跟行政院的朋友們合作，大部分的時間都是用VR，就是遠端開一個機器人，像我上個禮拜才在MIT麻省理工學院開一個機器人在他們那邊繞來繞去，再前一、兩個禮拜是在馬德里等等，很多地方現在都會有我的分身，我就不用坐飛機過去，開機器人過去跟他們互動。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "感覺上你還滿能維持自己的。我自己的印象裡面，有一些不是政治界的人踏入政途做了一些改變，即使比方過去是歌手出身的林昶佐，他也最有名，留了很長的頭髮，當了立委以後，他的長髮沒有剪，但是開始紮髮，天天出來都紮髮，你沒有想過改變髮型？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有，也還是長髮，也是刺青，也加入行政院。我覺得現在這個長度不需要紮起來，而且冬天比較冷。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "你說出國少，但是之前從巴黎回來，因為這是代表政府，我看到的是「開放政府夥伴關係聯盟全球高峰會」，但是這個內涵實際是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實大概是六、七十個國家，大家都說開放政府想做的事，這個是成立五年的國際合作組織，它的特性是不只是政府代表，還包括公民社會、監督政府做公民科技，甚至一些私部門，大家這三個部門都會結合起來，大概兩千五百人吧！今年在巴黎。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家在做的事情其實就是重建對於民主制度的信心，現在很多年輕朋友覺得民主制度的反應速度或者是黑箱的程度或者什麼，跟大家習慣的網路上協作有一個距離，所以大家會很願意投入政治，去用一些方式把這個距離試著縮短一點點，全世界的人都是這樣子的，占領運動也是在全世界發生，所以在占領運動之後，特別為了政府要怎麼樣革新自己更能夠跟全民溝通，這個就是國際上的協作。我自己的分享投稿，其實是在我入閣前他們就已經答應了，所以其實我比較還是以公民社會的這個身分去，但是當然後來我就變成政委了，所以是一個雙重的身份。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "他們也知道你是來自臺灣的政委？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，非常有意思，因為臺灣還不是會員國，公民社會入場的卡片，上面其實就是一個公民社會（粉紅色），但公民社會組織的名字並不是什麼基金會，而是臺灣的政府，所以大家也是叫我「臺灣的數位政務委員」，其實在整個對待上跟對其他國家的部長們，也有非常多部長去，是完全相同的，唯一的差別是我們還不是會員國，我們是叫一個「臺灣兩千三百萬公民團體」這一節這樣來處理。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "我們在網路上您用外語發表談話及接受採訪等等，您這一次出國也是用英文嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，大部分都是用英文。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "我聽你的英文在網路上看到的資料是很流利的，您對我們大家印象很深刻的是，您不是走一般正常教育學校出身的人，是屬於自學的案例，語言是多練習，外語是怎麼學的？很多人學一輩子，學了十幾二十年，您的經驗怎麼樣？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，其實英語已經是我學的第五種語言了。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "第五種？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "還有哪幾種？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為我小時候是阿媽帶大的，阿媽是鹿港人。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "你也要說台語？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "這樣差不多，人家說台語會說，很會說國語，這樣就很漏氣。還有什麼也會說？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是因為上學之後國語就這樣練習，不管是演講比賽還是什麼，所以現在咬字就非常像演講比賽的咬字，但是之後是到德國，到德國住了十一歲之後，當時因為我們住在德國跟法國的邊境，所以德語跟法語是一起學的，當時基本上不會英語，英語一直到大概十七、十八歲後回到臺灣，因為工作上的需要才開始學，所以當時其實年紀滿大了——以學語言來說——如同主持人所講的，我跟臺灣的朋友一樣，都是讀、寫英文，非常熟跟流利之後才開始講，我二十歲上下就開始跑國際上會議，大家覺得很有趣，我英文沒有講的經驗，所以就是前面一個講者是什麼口音，我就變成那一個口音，因為我很少講英文，一直靠跑會議跟敢講，講得破也沒有關係，反正對方聽不懂會講，所以就是慢慢去練習。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "會法文跟德文，我們來測試看看好了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "（法語）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "（法語）現在在法語的交談上，我在巴黎的時候，所有的人都很寵著我，所以都是跟我講英語，我現在看跟寫還行，但是這幾年基本上法語跟德語都沒有練習，那是小時候的事情。（德語）" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "很抱歉，多我一種，我不會德語。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "你的經驗給大家一個很多的學習跟參考，這怎麼說？都一定要常練習。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不練習馬上就忘記了。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "也是會跑掉。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "您剛剛講到在公開場合也談了一些比較新的概念，其實你在推的是有一個叫做「開放政府」的事情，你覺得現在怎麼樣？進行怎麼樣？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "開放政府我覺得我們基本上講三個概念，一個是所謂「透明」，也就是政府在做決策的時候，不是到最後一刻告訴大家，而是把決策形成的過程讓大家知道。第二個通常是說「參與」，不是只給大家知道，而是願意聽大家的意見，大家有意見的話，政府這邊願意去修改本來要做事情的方式，可能採納更多利益關係人的想法。最後是所謂的「課責」，什麼是課責？大家提供完意見之後，會想知道這個意見到最後用到哪裡去了，要讓大家知道有這一個紀錄，今天開的這一場會或者是在網路上提供這一意見，到最後執行的時候是如何進入執行，有編預算的話，到底花到哪裡去。這三個東西串在一起，其實只有一個目的，就是讓大家更能夠看得清楚政府在做什麼，從政府的角度是政府更信任人民，我們在做決定的時候，比較不是自己在行政院這邊想了就做，而是在這個過程裡面聽了更多大家人民的聲音。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在這個過程裡面，我覺得信任是雙向的，所以我最近常常說政府要先學會信任人民，人民才有可能信任政府，不是倒過來說我們不信任人民，而要人民盲目信任我們，這個是不太可能的。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "為什麼想要公開徵求鄉民參加？可是要求的是公務員鄉民來投入你所推動的這個活動？為什麼需要這樣的條件？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，確實。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為之前院長有過一個裁示，希望每一個部會在進行這種公眾諮詢的時候，都是由那一個部會自己的常任文官們來擔任，但是事實上很有意思的就是說，在部會裡面負責去做公共關係這樣子轉譯的朋友們，跟負責做主持或者公聽會的一些這樣子朋友們，或者是說做負責紀錄、研考的朋友們，其實中間橫向聯繫的狀況，在每一個部會是不一樣的，因為這樣的關係，院長希望每一個部會至少有一個窗口或聯絡人，能把這三種比較分散的夠能串起來，比較像在解嚴之後會有新聞聯絡人跟國會聯絡人的感覺，這個是往全國開放政府的聯絡人，這一個工作其實每一個部會按照性質，它熟的程度也不一樣。當時我的辦公室有一位同仁有一個想法，他在PTT上面社群裡面曾經開過一個討論板叫做「公務人員版」，他就是創這一個版的版主，他有很熟的版友，他透過半匿名的方式，進行公共政策的討論這一些，所以他們練了十年的朋友，所以各部會在推舉的時候，一下子覺得不確定哪一個人比較適合擔任，我今天收到的消息是已經有兩個部會，跟我們版主公務員問說有沒有可以推薦的朋友，讓大家的口袋名單稍微多一些人。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "觀眾朋友尤其是網友這個時候是搶先傳統的錄製方式，已經先可以看到這一個節目了，赤裸裸完全不能用剪接的方式撥了，如果您有什麼問題，歡迎您隨時問進來，您就隨時告訴我們您有什麼問題想要提出來。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "當然之前我們打了好幾天的廣告，就是通知大家有問題提早問，萬一現場沒有看到的話，免得漏掉。所以也提出了一些，我們把它列印下來。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "這裡面有觀眾朋友在問，其實他們也很注意到你過去跟一般人不一樣，像學歷這一塊，而且是很自然的學習，你有沒有建議年輕人如何擺脫低薪，是不是造成放棄政府繼續升學，而先提早創業，也就是上大學前先創業，這樣的方法您贊成嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "說「放棄」太重了，那個是暫停的概念。確實很多朋友在之前唸完高中或者是技術高中之後，其實還沒有非常清楚知道自己想要做什麼——mission，人生的使命還在找尋的過程。最近教育部在推的時候是，有兩年的時間可以去壯遊或是社會企業或任何大家想參加的東西，在認識更多的朋友及走出去看到整個世界之後，再回來知道說我學什麼東西對人生比較有幫助，不是盲目覺得一定要讀到哪一個學位就好，而選了一個跟自己沒有太大關係科系。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "不過這個是風險，很多父母、長輩很擔心你出去闖蕩一、兩年，磨練一下，就不想回去念書。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實，其實闖蕩一、兩年…像我當時十四歲的時候，從國中就沒有繼續唸了，當時我本來想說出去闖蕩一、兩年創業，可是創業之後後來發現我想做的這一些題目可能在臺灣是研究所的教授們比較能夠做的題目，如果我做到高中的話，很難在高中階段獲得我所需要學習的資源，所以在創業一、兩年之後並不是沒有回學校，而是到研究所去旁聽跟教授合作，所以我放棄的不是受教育的機會，而是學歷這一個東西對我意義沒有那麼大；這個並不是一體適用於所有的朋友，對於大學或者是研究所求學的過程，所有的人可能是更重要的，所以沒有任何人一定要按照我們這一套方法走。只是制度上可以去做一些修正，好比像實驗教育三法，從小學一年級到三年級的過程裡，任何時候覺得我其實一個禮拜三、四天在大學或者是其他地方求學，對我的求學會有比較好的效果，就可以提一個申請計畫書。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我大概十三、十四歲做的那一件事，當時是需要校長支援，等於是瞞著教育局，但是現在是合法的。我們在過程裡面，等於是從七歲、十歲、十四歲及十七歲的任何時候覺得我需要在校外有一些支援，這個東西國家讓你有方法，但是在這樣之後，如果覺得又要回到正規的學校，大家也不應該有污名化或排除的狀況，大概是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "所以其實沒有進校院，其實自學的內容跟過程是很充實的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，而且進校園是直接進研究所。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "所以是很積極去學習的。人家都傳聞說你的智商是180，真的有180嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那就是以訛傳訛，身高確實是180。其實是179.5幾，然後四捨五入。因為智商是成年人的智商，是比較沒有意義的，在測的時候也超過一個程度沒有辦法測，所以其實我也不知道我的…" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "…成年之後有沒有？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "成年之後有測過，但它都是魏氏成人智力測驗，只能測到160，之上是沒有辦法測的。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "只能測到160，你是超過160嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "或者等於，我不知道。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "沒有問答案？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那一個測驗的效度就到這裡。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "事實上180，X（錯），不對，是身高180還要墊個腳尖才有。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "現在有網友進來，這個網友問這麼嚴肅的問題，有網友提問是一位林之晨，應該是女士，四年後的臺灣會是什麼樣的數位國家？這個責任可能完全不可能要唐鳳一個人承擔（笑），但是您自己看得見嗎？四年後的臺灣在數位方面？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "OK，Mr. Jamie是第一次在螢幕上成為女士（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "真的啊？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不好意思，確實啦！因為他扣緊「數位國家」這四個字，他當然問的是我們在明年即將推出的八年期數位國家的方案，但是那一個方案裡面，其實Jamie自己也有提供很多他的意見，他的意見我幫他講好了，他都已經call in了，他覺得教育跟人才應該是放在最重要的部分，確實我們最後的簡報裡面也是把教育「DIGI+Talent」放在最重要的部分。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個部分怎麼講？我們希望說我們這一個方案推行下去之後，大家都可以理解到平常我們有所謂的上學是為了未來的工作做準備，但是我們之前在做十二年國民教育的時候就已經發現說今天好比七歲的小孩進入國小，我們沒有辦法預測在高三畢業之後出來世界會變成什麼樣子、會有什麼職業，因此我們接下來的教育2018年開始是教他學習，而不是教特定的東西，我們是教他怎麼樣自己找到目前的狀況是怎麼樣有用、溝通、跟人組隊，如何共好，是雙贏、多贏的狀況，並不是成為一個有用的人，過了十二年出來之後，就被機器或者是人工智慧完全可以取代的狀況，所以這邊也是延續Jamie對「數位國家」的想法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們希望慢慢推行大家不要特定綁在某一個學能裡面。因為數位化的關係，全部已經混在一起，以前在做廣播、電視、平面媒體都是不同的學問，是不同的產製方式，但是這個東西上網之後全部混在一起，因此這個時候更重要比較去理解要拿這一個去創造、做什麼，做屬於自己想要看到的東西，把帶出來的東西，是要跨學們的，不但要有理解、也要合作，這個在之前大學教育裡面比較少著重這一點，跨域人才我想就是數位國家的精神之一。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "也知道這一位網友常常在追蹤你。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "似乎是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "談到四年後的國家是怎麼樣的國家？能夠預期四年後的你在哪裡？你打算政委這一個工作可以擔任多久？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我相信就是四年之後其實是會有改選，內閣一定會有改組，所以我並沒有特定設定我這一個工作要做多久，但是其實公共服務這一件事情從我退休之後就一直非常感興趣，不管是在政府裡面、民間或者是NGO我都很願意繼續做。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "等一下，你剛剛說公共服務是在退休之後做，你現在指的退休是哪一項退休？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是三十三歲的時候，大概2014年，我在矽谷有參與了一些公司賣掉之後，我就轉成顧問，所以其實已經退休大概兩年多。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "你們把這個定義成退休，而不是轉化？好年輕的年齡，要談退休？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為之前還在跟私部門合作的時候，多少還是要賺錢，好比蘋果，蘋果當然有一些社會使命，但是最後還是要跟股東負責，這一個東西我跟蘋果一起工作的時候，不可能不去想這一個責任，在退休之後比較可以衡平考量社會上各個部門，不會被任何一家特定的公司agenda綁住。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "這裡還有一位劉小姐提了一個問題說，太聰明的人常常會看到社會跟你要看到的點不太一樣，所以相對之下可能比較不可能，不知道你是不是有這樣的困擾？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這很有意思，其實看到社會不同面向，我覺得還是需要一個不只是聰明，需要一個智慧去判斷哪一些東西是可以著手去改變的，哪一些東西是現在著手也沒有辦法改變的，如果是把力氣花在著手可以改變的這一個部分，我覺得每天都很快樂，第一個是真的改變，而且第二個有學到新的東西。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "聽起來其實IQ可能不錯，EQ可能也滿高的，覺得不太會自尋煩惱，也容易把問題排解掉。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實，如果不是把問題排解掉的話，其實會一直累積，我通常的做法是好比收mail，如果可以回就兩分鐘回，所以我每天睡前都保持在空的狀態，這個是一個比喻，能夠做的事情就今天做完，就比較不會累積到明天。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "會不會造成急性子？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該還好耶！因為有另外一個想法，如果今天處理不完的話，我們就等到時機成熟、這些因緣聚集再來把它做完，所以我真正想做的許多事情我都知道可能是我這一輩子也沒有辦法把他做完，因為這樣的關係，反而比較緩，是一個使命感三年要做完、四年要做完，會給自己設一個deadline，這個時候當然就會比較急躁，但是對我來講事情只有兩種，一種是今天做得玩，一個是我有生之年做不完，這樣反而會比較紓緩一點。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "你自己脾氣好不好？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我因為體質的關係，其實沒辦法生氣，所以其實這個可能…就是我沒有辦法經驗到生氣的情緒。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "所以自己也會先克制？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，因為這是小時候因為先天性心臟病，所以如果一生氣的話，會昏倒，所以說我的記憶裡面沒有生氣的記憶，因為那些其實是昏倒的。當然我十二歲心臟動手術之後，其實理論上是有生氣的體質了，可是因為心理作用已經訓練了十二年，就是說沒有辦法生氣，所以其實從那之後很少生氣。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "看起來你也遭遇過一些艱難險處跟挑戰，但是一樣樣去克服了，觀眾朋友我們這個時候LIVE轉播出來，尤其針對網友你可以把一些問題傳進來，可是要快喔！能把握第一時間，也把你的問題跟觀眾朋友在播出時分享。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "我想其實政壇應該跟你過去接觸的東西很不一樣，人家說很多人講科學也好，要講真話、求事實，你過去比方是從理工、資訊這一些東西，一加一通常加起來還是等於二，但是在政壇常常講話、做的事，可能口是心非、心非口是，可能常常不一樣，你的體驗如何？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實之前我在開發網際網路，好比像全球資訊網的這一些工作上，它跟政治工作是很像的，全球資訊網或者是網際網路，其實這一個協譯，是一台電腦跟另外一台電腦不講好要如何溝通的話，是沒有辦法溝通的，跟一般國際政治最大的差別是要講道理跟說服彼此，畢竟沒有哪一家電信公司並沒有洋槍大炮跟武器，必須是在講道理的過程裡面，透過幾乎是純粹外交的方式去推行自己的一種協定跟理念讓全世界接受。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一件事其實比較像是政治工作，因為其實就像主持人剛才講的，它裡面也包含說我明明沒有發展到這麼好，但是為了推廣這一個標準，讓全世界採行，所以就澎風、數字上做假，這個也是有碰到過的。或者是說一些合縱連橫、一些檯面上跟檯面下的交易，這個其實二十年來也碰到相當多。其實這是更純粹的政治，因為中間並沒有比拳頭大小的部分，完全要透過調解的方式，去試著讓大家願意說真話，願意把不同的意向收攏起來才可以成為標準，這樣的工作跟立法者的工作其實滿像的，只是最後做出來的code並不是法律跟法官去執行的，有點像是物理定律，你打開電腦就非這樣做不可了，因為這個是廠商做的。我覺得還有做一些政治工作，但是跟法律解釋語言不完全一樣，現在等於慢慢在學習一些新的語言。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "其實你沒有直接回答現在的處境，但是你講到過去的環境也是跟現在純政治的環境有一些類似之處，有一些特質其實是一致的。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "當然如果回到科技來講，現在社會的一些亂象，其實是來自於科技搶先於經濟模式，所衍生的經濟模式又衍生了人民的生活，而人民的結果帶動最慢的是社會上的法律，因為常常科技跑得比較開，研發出來…包括Uber之類的都是這樣的，先運用科技，但法是違法的一群。所以科技跟法之間是有落差的，我不知道你怎麼樣去彌補或者怎麼樣處理？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實，我剛才講的標準制定的工作，其實也都是落後實際的科技研發工作，當我們要制定一個標準的時候，通常在市面上三、四種不一樣，而且彼此間也沒有辦法交談的東西出現了，所以為什麼願意同意一個標準，原因是因為希望這一個產業繼續往下走下去，而不是大家單打獨鬥，還是不同的利益關係人坐下來談，可以有一個共好（common good），所以同一個道理是現在手機現在新的器具，大家發現GPS可以導航，但不只用來導航，也可以拿來定位，也可以拿來叫車，所以這是技術本身就創造出來的一種可能性，因此這一個東西與其說是違法，不如說法規在制定的時候，根本就沒有想到除了在街上看到黃色的車可以舉手招之外，竟然還有另外一種方法，直接從手機上馬上知道位置在哪裡，並據以叫車，所以法規在制定的過程裡面，我覺得跟標準制定一樣，是把所有可能被這一個東西影響到的，不管是計程車業者或者是App的開發者或者是乘客們或者是其他的交通部、財政部、經濟部的朋友們都找過來，然後大家很誠懇去找到一個雖不滿意，但可以接受的解決方案。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我去年8月做這樣的協調工作，現在變成已經上路的，在高雄好像已經開始的多元化計程車方案，所以現在已經有一種合法的，你可以透過App就可以叫到車的這樣的方法。我當然覺得法規的調適，大家一開始不是很熟練用這一種方式來對話跟收斂成法規，但隨著大家越來越熟練，這樣子工作的效率會越來越高，所以這樣子的話，當科技出現的時候，大家就知道過半年一定會有方式把科技跟現有的法規加以調和。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "你其實現在入公部門超過一百天，已經是四個月，您覺得有沒有已經達成具體的項目？也就是做出成績來了？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "距離新聞發布是三個多到四個月，但是我實際進來才兩個多月。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我兩個多月以來當然有一些東西已經達成了，我們在政府雲，也就是政府自己有一個雲端合作的平台，把我們常常在外面使用的Dropdox、Google Doc，大家協作的Trello這一些工具都帶進來，並不是付給廠商錢，而是自由軟體，不用錢的，而是讓各個政府的機關都在平台上，並不是每一個部門建一套，承辦人換了、帳號又不見的工作，這個是跨部會、跨機關，可以在同一個政府雲的協作，一進來都做了，現在也滿多機關的朋友上來一起做，大家慢慢可以看到可以讓橫向溝通或者是比起本來公文傳遞一個新的方式，可以讓政府因此協作，這個是可以做到；比如像電競選手的正名化，那個也是做出具體的成果。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "唐鳳政委講話非常快，每一秒鐘至少講五個字，她必須要回到我所有問題，我發現其實你講話速度很快。其實通常這樣的人會覺得有一點急性子，但是你也不是這樣子個性，除了你有一個特質是今日事、今日畢。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "在政壇工作其實政務委員，人家說以前是不管部的部長，現在大家覺得是大政委的年代，也就是政委常常高於各部門的部長，是不是還覺得高於部長的感覺？還要覺得常常聯繫、協調其他的部門，你覺得這個部分推動有沒有困難？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非常順利，一部分我覺得協調的方法是公開透明、任何主持協調的協調都會有逐字紀錄，在與會人員編輯之後都會直接放在網路上給所有的利益關係人。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "協調方法是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "跟平常一樣，坐在這邊開會，當然我會用電子白板、iPad把即時大家的想法、意見實際寫在白板上，在大家眼前收攏，確認這個是大家都可以接受的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有點像電競選手那一場協調會，我們在第一次協調會完之後，過十天發布出去之後，好比像PTT的八卦版、LOL版、巴哈姆特或其他網路上的社群，其實朋友們真的會進去看我們講的每一個字，然後會提供給我們一些非常好的意見，因為我有一個公開給大家有問必答的信箱——叫做wiselike。所以就會有電競選手實際上去：「說看了協調會的哪一句話，但是我覺得這一個部分可以比照圍棋選手或者是這一部分兵役問題可以解決怎麼，如果定義成技藝文化請文化部協調，也許也可以借到小巨蛋場地，因為表演。」等等，所以在整個社會利益關係人並不是少數的代表給我們這麼好的意見之後，我們下一次的協調會就不是從頭開始，而是把大家的意見逐一羅列出來，然後問每一個來部會的首長、主秘能不能接受、處長能不能接受，當他們覺得能接受的時候，其實他們的下屬承辦人們也不需要再去猜我們為什麼做出這一個決議，他只要看出這一個逐字稿就做這樣的協議，所以非常有效率，三次逐字稿就完成了。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "感覺上您的協調功夫也很靈光。現在普遍來講，社會大眾常常週六、日遊行抗爭，常常協調不佳，有幾個重大議題引起非常大…都耗動社會都非常久，像一例一休就搞很久，萬一是你，你被指派處理這一件事，你有更好的協調方案嗎？因為像現在這樣的議題是屬於各說各話、各有立場、各互相堅持，大家都有自己的想法，不同角度，勞方有想法、資方也有想法，結果搞到現在勞方、資方不滿意，政府也很為難，你覺得可以有更好的協調方法嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我覺得大家會比較激烈，最大的原因是覺得這個是最後一次表達聲音的機會，如果不表達聲音的話，那就來不及了，是在這種時候大家的聲音會最激烈。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然之前的一些溝通節奏，畢竟是立法院的案子，其實我們在行政院很難多說什麼。我不評論特定的個案，但是在未來，舉一個例子來說，行政院正在討論公司法的全盤修正，如果公司法要全部修正的這一件事，我們不給大家發表意見的機會，我們自己好比像商業司自己從頭寫到尾，做完之後雖然可以影響全國人，但是我們直接交付立法院，希望在最快的時間內通過三讀，說不定即使是公司法看起來爭議沒有那麼大的法令，還是會造成抗爭，大家會覺得再不講話就沒有機會了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是現在做公司法的方式是跟學者們合作，學者們不是接一個研究案，而是老師們直接發問卷，發了幾千份問卷去統計社會上的想法，有些擺不平的部分，像社會企業，我們還會特別開焦點團體，所以這一些東西的逐字稿都是上網的。因此大家就知道說接下來六十天的時間，大家可以花非常多的心力去想這一件事。但是政府並沒有做出一個最後決策的方向，是要把大家的意見全部充分考慮過之後，尤其大家第一手的經驗跟事實都考慮過之後我們才可以去確認各方的感受能不能接受，最後才提出可行的方案，也就是法案，這個時候因為前面的時間拉得比較寬了，所以當你知道還有六十天的時間，你也不會想要上街，上街也是有成本，只要讓大家自己的意見如何進入議程設定，大家就會慢慢習慣講道理的這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但如果隨時行政部門暴衝，比如我們本來說蒐集六十天，結果蒐集六天之後，突然就說接下來不蒐集了，直接送院跟頒布，那大家一定會反彈，隔天一定會上街。我相信這個就是「政府要足夠信任人民」這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "另外一個議題，前一陣子包括你出國期間一直出現的是，反同團體及爭取平權的同志團體互相聲張，反同團體他們的意志也要求不可以進一步開放或進一步法令化，其實同志團體會覺得應該…也甚至很多人支持，現在反同團體的想法也非常激烈，他們也非常支持，你覺得有什麼看法？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們剛剛有說我是我阿媽帶大的，她其實是虔誠的天主教徒，我爺爺也一樣。所以就跟社會上很多爭議一樣，我覺得兩邊其實看起來好像是互相水火不容，可是兩邊想要捍衛的價值，如果你實際看那個價值的話，並不是不相容的。舉例來說：像臺灣其實離婚率滿高的，大家都會很擔心說我們這樣子走下去的話，婚姻這一件事是不是會完全喪失它的意義？但其實從我的角度來看，其實走進婚姻之前，很充分瞭解到他的權利義務四百多項，就是婚姻專屬的權利跟義務，現在因為大家社會上大家都關注婚姻，經過公共討論之後，大家更瞭解婚姻的意義、想清楚再加入，這樣子離婚率就不會那麼高了。也就是說，有一些朋友們他們擔心的是婚姻這一件事本身的價值，但是我實際上覺得這樣子的公共討論，包含對同性婚姻的公共討論，事實上是在鞏固對婚姻的瞭解，也讓願意進入婚姻的人更清楚知道婚姻是在做什麼事，這兩派並不是水火不容，大家真正在意的婚姻穩定的價值，以及平權的重要性，這兩個東西並沒有本質上的衝突。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "現在有插播進來，有一位張佳睛小姐：您覺得政府網路安全嗎？會參與政府網站改善的安全嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實在行政院裡面對這一件事非常關注，所以有成立資安處。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "國際間也常常聽到有被駭進去，政府單位相關資料很怕走失。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實，有一個資通安全處跟資通安全會報處理這一件事，不在那一個會報裡面，這個的原因是當初跟院長談勞動條件的時候，有一個想法是說理論上我看得到的東西是人民看得到的，因為我畢竟是做「開放政府」，我如果看到一些密件，或者是一些國家機密的話，那它按照目前國家機密相關的法令，我只要看到這一個跟別的東西混進來之後，這個合起來平台或雲端的東西，它整份就會變成密件，因為這樣的關係，我不處理國家機密的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在這樣的前提底下，當然您所說的各種各樣不同的勢力，想要駭入國家的這些工作或甚至贖金這些東西，其實當然都是密件。因為這樣的關係，所以我並沒有參與資通安全的工作，但是一些朋友們，不管是國防部或者是資通安全處的朋友們，都會跟我們做一些合作。好比像我們架的平台，在資通安全處的朋友們就會幫忙做一些滲透測試，請一些朋友們去確保這一個平台本身是安全的，我也希望大家多用我們已經證明是安全的平台，比較少去用一些可能第三方的廠商。當然他們有自己的資通安全，但畢竟我們並不能確保他們把伺服器放在臺灣；即使伺服器放在臺灣，也不會讓我們用這樣子的方式去進行白箱測試。在這樣的情況下，我希望創造一個環境，同仁們不管做公文或者是其他公務工作的時候，能夠多用一些我們建置出來不比外面難用、資通安全上又有保障的系統。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "我們又看到了一個問題，可是問題好嚴肅喔！有一個叫陳廣寰的先生，問電競選手的定位怎麼樣？對國家的重要性？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "電競選手的定位就是我協調出來的一個成果，之前至少六年的時間，電競在臺灣是沒有主管機關，而且是沒有辦法給電競選手一個定位的，這裡面有一個很重要名詞上的認清，之前的電競選手常常說是一種體育，但是其實在臺灣「體育」這個字指的是動到身體的一種教育（Physical Education），從教育工作者的角度來看，其實電競動腦的成分可能比動身體多，不是沒有動身體的身分，可是動腦的成分顯然比較多，這就跟圍棋一樣，要成為一個圍棋選手也是要有很好的耐力，體力也是要作鍛煉，但大部分的時間是在動腦。所以說我們現在的想法是，電競不一定要視為一種體育，應該不是一種體育，但是我們可以把它當作什麼？也就是技藝、才能，這種技藝裡面很成熟之後，就會成為一種文化，這種文化會有上萬人、上百萬的人來定義，因此定義為技藝文化的工作者，因為這樣的關係，不管是在小巨蛋或者在其他場地，就是文化部或替代役的時候，也是以文化部作為需用機關，因為畢竟現在圍棋選手的替代役就是由文化部負責。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然未來有一些不是有電競選手，而是電競產業，立法委員們認為雖然不是一種體育，而是一種靜態運動，這樣子可能也要適用一些運動產業的補助條例，關於這一個是立法委員們的想法，我其實沒有意見，我樂觀其成，只要確定不是體育，就不會有世代上跟教育工作者對它的不理解。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "現在很多人生活在手遊當中、網路遊戲當中等各種形式，如果嘗試體會一下，可以讓腦子靈活，其實很多人是沉迷的狀況，一天好幾個小時，如果國人都隨著這樣蓬勃發展這樣去，會不會造成一種國力或者是社會成本的浪費？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不過其實就是說透過網路去認識其他人，跟其他人合作這樣的一種工作，其實接下來在世界上的所有行業，我們都會變成面臨需要轉型，這個就是數位經濟的意思。就是說以前必須要大家聚在同一個房間做的，現在是可以分散在世界各個不同的地方，透過線上協作的方式，來達到一個互相信任的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果是大家自己拿著手機一直玩可能電子機這一類東西的話，你可以說撫慰身心，但是並沒有讓你更認識其他人，但是很多線上的大型多人遊戲，很多人並不是真的上去練功跟打等級而已，是在裡面拓展他的交友圈，可甚至是不太認識的人、陌生的人馬上組團跟協作，我覺得這樣子的練習其實是非常有幫助的。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "最後一個問題：電競正名對發展有幫助嗎？政府有沒有計畫協助硬體廠商去搶這一個電競產業的大餅？這個是政策性的問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "相信電競廠商，大家都知道我用的華碩Republic of Gamers（ROG）系列，以及其他一些朋友們，包括微星，還有很多，其實不需要政府的補助，他們其實自己在這方面已經耕耘得非常久。但是我相信這些廠商期待政府的，是讓大家知道電競就跟圍棋或任何一種表演的技藝文化一樣，是生活的一部分，這個事情才能讓從事電競的朋友們，不會受到長輩或者是他的老師那麼大的壓力。所以這就是為什麼我們一開始協調的時候，是希望教育部發一個函給中小學去說，接下來如果有一個特色技術高中要開設專門的校定課程或者是專班，就像圍棋專班一樣，教育部是樂見其成的，而且願意輔導設立。這樣的效果比我們去補助任何一個產業來得大，我們補助產業只是拼經濟，這個對正名跟社會上兩群人撕裂的狀況，其實是沒有幫助：一邊是要拼經濟，一邊覺得是教壞小孩。因此是技藝文化，跟試辦替代役的朋友們，讓各地去知道文化上、溝通上包含影音、自媒體所有這些都是一整套的，這個如果讓大家更瞭解的話，其實就不用砸錢去補助特定廠商，自然這一塊餅會變得相當大，社會的接受度也會增加。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "好的，我想我們今天的訪問時間就進行到這裡，因為我希望能夠讓電視機前的觀眾朋友跟我們網路上的觀眾朋友看到的內容是儘量接近一點，所以我希望今天錄影的內容是儘量不經過剪輯，儘量讓您的談話是完整地表達出來，是今天網友所能享受到的這一番談話，這裡的談話就到這裡為止，謝謝您。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非常謝謝主持人，謝謝您。" }, { "speaker": "胡婉玲", "speech": "謝謝，我們再會了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝大家。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "大家好，他是我兒子（指小孩）。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "為什麼我要先開始？這一整件事都是我開始的，其實也不是只有我而已，還有我跟Jason，故事是這樣子，在2014年318學運之後，那時我有到青島東路很多趟，我甚至有上過街頭當街頭講師，講臺灣青創的看法。學運過了之後有很深的感觸，我是六年五班的，我的同學都跟我一樣大概可能2/3開始結婚有小孩，已經到人生的中場，事實就是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "我們剛好處在家庭、事業跟各方面壓力最大的時候，我們年紀沒有老到百合花學運，又不夠年輕可以參加太陽花學運，主力是五年級跟七年級，想諒說六年級會不會被晾一邊，其實我們應該算幸運的一個世代，因為我們的父母就是戰後嬰兒朝的世代，就開始有這一個焦慮。大家知道我在六年時間在創投，從2010年至去年，我花很多時間參與一些青創環境跟生態圈的培育，我們也花很多時間跟政府溝通與對談。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "那時Jason在學運後幫江宜樺院長籌辦了一次跟青年創業者碰面的會議，我直接跟院長提了臺灣可能的問題，包括創業生態圈、人才及產業的問題。那時有很深的感觸，當時我開始擔任政府裡面的評審角色，像工研院、科技部、科技會報，我以前又在生技中心所謂法人並不陌生。而那時太陽花的學運是服貿協議，服貿協議的起草單位其實是中金院，如果我沒有記錯的話。我有一場在台北大學跟中金院的學者專家就互相對於服貿的觀點討論，我深深覺得法人實在離實業太遠了，他們當然可能在當年非常優秀的，至少工研院是很優秀，我不知道資策會是不是很優秀（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "所以我跟院長說我們可不可以有一個民間智庫的心態，因為政府的法人有很多資源，但是沒有好好運用，比如很多法律研究（小孩在說：爸爸抱。）（詹益鑑抱起孩子並說：各位以後當爸爸要這樣子喔！有雙胞胎記得帶兩個。）我的小孩從小到大都跟我一起參與各方面的會議，下次帶來，這個是傳統（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "院長聽了覺得很有意思，他覺得什麼是民間智庫或者是法人，這一件事不知道怎麼樣，後來就變成馬前總統宣布成為青年顧問團的一個原因，當然當中有馮政委的推動，並處理程序面。我們當時是用遴選，也就是自己報名，每一個人要填報名表，還要錄影（3分鐘），經過十二位評審的決選，裡面有葉丙成、朱平、蔡政委、馮政委，還有廣播人士王文華跟黎明柔，這兩位都是廣播人士，他們可能跟青年比較接近，所以那時請他們去遴選。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "我其實一開始是超過那個年紀，因為一開始宣布三十五歲以下，這個身份有一點困擾到我，因為我已經三十八歲了，我問馮政委我是不是可以報名，但是她說禍是我闖的，說我應該進去參與一下怎麼回事，我就報名了，然後後來就參加了。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "關於這幾個問題我可以從我的觀點來說，這邊當然還有非常多的好夥伴，包括Jason、Kevin、庭碩跟小羊都在這邊，只是因為我待到8點40分要離開，要接我們家其他的成員。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "青顧團怎麼運作的？其實我也不知道，上一次政府有一個顧問團，其實是在扁任那時有總統府的顧問團，那個是有給職的，其實我以前有碰過類似的型態，至少臺灣第一個由行政院級來發起一個無給職的顧問型態，行政院有很多有給職的顧問，像我們有科技顧問，他們有任期，我們青顧團從一開始就只有車馬費。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "我們就開了第一次大會，第一次大會很盛大在行政院的二樓，至少有三至四位的部長來，教育部長、交通部長葉匡時，當時管爺、蔡政委、馮政委，因為我是隸屬於青發署，所以青發署的署長也有來。我們就這一件事要如何開始做、目標是什麼？主要是要促進政府跟民間的溝通，第一個要發現政府的腦袋很老，意思就是就算很年輕，但是腦袋很老，好比你在一個地方待了十年，你就被那一套制度訓練成那樣子。反而是那時候內閣們腦袋很年輕，就江內閣是我認為非常傑出的內閣，雖然很多是學者出身而被批評，但是我覺得很多都很有理想性，包括管爺或者是葉部長，就像蔡政委也是，蔡政委是有實務經驗，馮政委也有實務經驗。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "所以我們在想我們的核心問題是什麼？政府跟民間的橋梁不見了，過去是法人在扮演這一個問題，因為法人過去就是扮演產官學研的角色，但是又不是像學那麼嚴，而且像工研院跟資策會都已經有speak off，但是因為產業的變動太快了，因為行動網路的出現，所以轉移造成資訊的爆炸，那時我還沒有那麼深的感觸，但是兩年後回頭看過去十年，人類整個上網的能力跟量持續膨脹，就像印刷術一樣。如同現在回想1480年的時候，歐洲在1465年到至1500年的四十五年間只有教庭跟貴族可以看書，突然有了四萬種的書籍發行在全歐洲，那個影響了幾百萬人，過去十年，人類上網的型態已經從2億人至30億人——這一件事就跟臺灣一樣。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "我們想的一件事是，既然今天民間知道的事情的速度與能力不會輸給政府，到底有什麼事政府不能讓民間知道？當時討論的是黑箱的事情，所以我們一方面想要扮演開箱的角色，也就是將民間的聲音傳到政府來，可是雙向的事如何扮演？沒有人知道，因為我們第一次這樣做。目標要怎麼訂出來？我們叫青年顧問團，我們的組成成員都是三十歲以下，我算是老的，接著是麗蟬跟毓仁，我們三位年紀比較大，其他都在三十五歲以下。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "所以我們想說青年們最關心的是自己的未來，還有下一代，因此我們大概就是把教育、兵役的問題、青年創業的問題、外籍配偶與第二代的問題為第一屆主要的議題。人有限、時間也有限，當時知道內閣轉換很頻繁，所以第一屆基本上先把共識形成，然後每一次大會是三個月（開一次會）。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "我覺得重點有幾個特別的地方，第一個是列管，也就是過去到現在參加過非常非常多部會的會議，大概有十個，差別就是在於有列管才會發生，沒有列管就不會發生。這跟公司運作一樣，如果總經理說這一件事誰做、訂下期限、目標，它就一定要發生，如果沒有發生的話，就要檢討。所以青顧團一開始的時候院長就決定要這麼做，我沒有公務員身份，但是我們對話的位階是在部長這一個層級，雖然很誇張，但是事實就是如此，就是跟部長坐在同排的位置上，不然就是跟行政院各個部會的窗口，這個大家要理解行政院各個部門的窗口，我們就開始這麼做，把各個問題列出來。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "譬如：我們那時候覺得在創業有一些問題，比如股權、稅及公司法的問題，我們就開始列了，比如我們有幾位做志工，像庭碩、Kevin，就列了自己產業跟青年出口、人才引進的問題，像Jason提了很多國外借鏡的可能性，我們就把大綱列下來，也有一次共識營，不過那時候我只有半天可以在，我就沒有全程參加。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "各部會是否願意配合？這個回到列管這一件事及推動者是誰的問題，大家知道政務官跟事務官的差異，我想不是每一個人對行政體系都瞭解，我們也是進來兩年才大概知道，所以原則上政務官是行政院帶進來的，也就是閣揆指定、立法院通過，所以原則上能不能帶動底下的人，並不是每一個部會都一樣，有一些部會可能裡面的事務官比較熟悉，像經濟部中企處非常熟悉臺灣，這個是大家都知道的，像工業局跟技術處就不一定瞭解小公司、青年在做什麼，教育部、內政部及科技部都有類似跟青年比較近跟遠的部分，但是青年發生的問題不見得是熟悉的人才可以解，其實像創投是工業局在管的，因為以前創投投資的是大型的工業。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "現在的網路產業到底是誰在管？網路影響的各個產業，像Uber應該是科技部或者是交通部或者是內政部？牽扯的層面非常廣，因此為何要產生青顧團的層次？某一個程度如同政委的角色一樣，我們想要解決跨部會的問題，所以很多問題並不是單部會的。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "各部會是否願意配合？當時有三位政委非常支持，也就是國發會的管主委、蔡政委、馮政委，他們三個分配主管法規，蔡政委是法規，馮政委是青年創業跟社會企業，國發會包括人才跟新創，所以我們在前面第一屆主要就是放在這三個領域，法規的調適，蔡政委提出來是虛擬臺灣的概念，也就是行動網路的教育、醫療、工作型態開始展開後會有遠傳工作、遠距的醫療及教育，這個過去無法定義，因此蔡政委說什麼法都沒有比政府組織法更值得先修，因為框架了所有部會，這是正面表列的概念，第一關是名字跟營業項目，各部會的營業項目被訂死是不能管不管的事，我們又是成文法的國家，如果找到主管機關就完蛋了，就被認為是非法或者是沒有主管機關，這個時候就會出現利益衝突，像計程車對Uber，Uber自稱是資訊業者，但是臺灣在資訊業者要有一個主管機關，這個是主張的問題。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "所以各部會是否願意配合，很幸運的是，政委本來就是一個不管部的主管，所以有跨部會的能力，但是問題是政委能力很有限，就像一個小辦公室的PM一樣，政委的影響力是非常影響青顧團，我覺得在我們那個時候，這一屆就看整個行政院的氣氛跟政治。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "我們共識營有分組，我們內部就有一個Google Doc請大家填通訊錄，我自己訂一個十二個組別，像我興趣比較廣，像創業、教育都有興趣，規定每一個人可以跨兩至三個組，然後再分組去討論出那一個組會有哪一些問題，所以比如像科技部、經濟部兩個部會來說，其實那兩屆算意願度算高的，那時經濟部已經開始面臨到整個創業，應該說第二階段的推動，第一階段是10年到14年的時候，很多年輕人開始創業，但是為何還沒有成功？科技部的問題是如何從學校把人才整合，再來是育成單位。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "簡單來講，（部會）有沒有體驗到嚴重性，及參與的青顧團有沒有非常高的意願，當時我都說我跟Sega及式隆算半個公務員，都有兩至三次的會議，我應該是第一名，應該有一、兩百場，大家都很忙，五十場是基本的額度，所以大家要有心裡準備，你會開非常多的會，你會覺得是不是在行政院或者是經濟部上班。可是開這麼多頻繁會議的結果你會知道哪一些問題誰在問、哪一些問題該問誰，你會開始跟很多這個領域的產管學研碰到，比如在談閉鎖型公司的時候就會先跟商業司、金管會、財政部，因為有牽涉到稅跟登記，然後還有各個地方，因為公司登記是在地方，還會牽扯到會計制度，就會跟一些公協會開始碰面。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "事實上臺灣各個領域都有自己的公部門跟私部門，私部門以外是法人，法人的主要資源，另外一塊是民間的公協會，產業公會或者是公協會，譬如像創投就有創投公會，不然就會有私募股權協會的道理。不見得每一個部門都有這一個東西，但是大部分傳統的產業都會有這一個東西，就像網路產業可以在三年內成立了TiEA，就是為了一群網路產業的組織可以面對政府做lobby，lobby會認為這個是邪惡的字眼，可是事實上沒有lobby就不會有好的法案，所以青顧團某個角色也是新型態的lobbies，我們試著從世代的角度去lobby著，這個是大家要有的認知。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "我有去follow一些人的臉書，像周奕成是去年百合學運開第一槍的人，現在在大稻埕做舊屋翻新或者是新的城市運動，所以他之前曾經是民進黨的發言人，他曾經對美國政治運作有非常深的研究，從他的臉書就可以去觀察臺灣的變動，所以在青顧團任內認識很多，還有藉由朋友與朋友間的接連，我認識的是七級生與八年級，各個領域很有意思的角色，比如我們這一屆還有一個很有名的叫做何培鈞，他在中山創造一個新的資源從外部引進，透過技能換宿，也就是要帶一個技能或者是提案去。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "實際推動要如何改變？比較實際發生是在科技、經濟，內政有一些，比如麗蟬是柬埔寨的移民，所以她對於二代在臺灣的一些教育、身份的問題，她有很多的關注。國防的問題，像式隆自己遇到創業要當兵的問題，我們後來有創業替代役，創業都是從解決自己的問題開始。我們這一屆滿特殊的是有1/3的創業者，我算一半、小光、庭碩跟Kevin都是創業者，小羊算是早期參與新的事業，他也創辦過MBA的網站，Jason是TED x Taipei，有1/3是老師跟學生，像毓庭於那時還是電機系的學生。我覺得教育這一塊推動真的很困難，因為我們的體制真的很大，像國教、高教及技職，他們不一定願意跟對方溝通，而且適能已經很明顯，也就是高教覺得自己高高在上，名字就是「叫教」，而技職常年已經被打壓，不能再被打壓，所以你跟技職說要翻轉，他也不知道要如何翻轉，也就是次人一等，國教也覺得教育部長三十年、五十年都是高教的人在當，現在終於發生這樣的事，非常好。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "我經過這兩年的運作，其實我理解到臺灣跟美國、日本及英國有什麼不一樣的地方，不管法制、規模、人口或產業，不是代表我們不能跟這一些國家取法，他們比我們先進有他們的原因在，可是我們哪一些地方比他們優秀，其實某個角度來講，比如青顧團是很先進的發明，臺灣在亞洲真的很先進。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "第三，我覺得等一下可以由很多人來回答，我自己看到的是，我自己新設的公司就是以閉鎖型公司在臺灣設立，所以我們覺得很有意思，自己用自己發明的東西。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "我覺得有太多我們可以值得做的事、繼續推動，我們那時候遇到三件事，縣市長選舉的時候，下台以示負責，我們理解是以政治的方法來從事政治這一件事，還有這個是政治的應變。接著是王院長，我們也跟王院長共事將近一年，後來是張院長，毛院長自己是技術官出身，還有對於交通跟管理是比較專長的，我們在他的身上也看到很多，我們也花很多時間在處理相關交通問題，比如雪隧。交通背後的問題其實是民生，也就是景氣不好的問題，談交通沒有意義，但是臺灣景氣好還是不好？這個是很難定義的問題，在不同的職業、不同的身份、不同的世代都不一樣。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "因此我們每一個人都看到大象那一塊，如何把大象拼湊出來，我們至少要把年輕人拼湊出來給老年人跟中年人看，好像感受不一樣，但感受不能只有感受，我非常感謝唐鳳跟g0v的夥伴做出來，因為要有數字，而且g0v把視覺化的事做得非常好，也就是這樣子，數據就在那裡，不管是你們給我們，我們看到數據是這樣呈現的，有數據溝通就容易出現，尤其政務官們通常都是學者出身，學者對於數字通常不會拒絕，事務官還會覺得這個跟知道的不一樣，但是政務官通常都會看，所以常常會接受數字。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "因此我們在做的計畫，即使公司法這一件事還有很多事要做所以光是在創業環境下的推動，像禮拜一的「Mix Taiwan」，我覺得某個角度是青顧團的延續，不見得是我們的意志或不是我們的計畫造成的，當然咖啡館也不是青顧團造成的，我其實參與過一、兩次。在之前是「vTaiwan」還是有一個什麼一系列型態的公共議題討論。" }, { "speaker": "吳詩涵", "speech": "是跟院長的嗎？" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "不是，是跟政委或者是跟g0v的。" }, { "speaker": "胡庭碩", "speech": "我記得Jason好像有辦過。" }, { "speaker": "吳詩涵", "speech": "你講的是在青顧團更早之前嗎？" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "吳詩涵", "speech": "那應該是經濟部那時候辦的，類似青創的沙龍。" }, { "speaker": "黃敬峰", "speech": "那個是跟沙龍咖啡…好像是做直播。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "對，另外是辦三場之後。" }, { "speaker": "吳詩涵", "speech": "如果是直播，那個是辦公室另外弄的，就是把所有變成直播，這個是另外一件事。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "青顧團比較像是一系列活動當中一支，這個是面對部會首長、會議的形式去更快速，不能說更實際，像g0v我覺得超實際，他們是用比較協作的形式在做事，可是我們人的領域比較廣，我們聚焦的東西沒有辦法聚焦，所以我自己的觀察是，其實真的很難，因為我們第一屆有三十二位。" }, { "speaker": "吳詩涵", "speech": "二十五位。" }, { "speaker": "黃敬峰", "speech": "先介紹一下，詩涵是上一屆馮老師的小秘書。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "是非常重要的執行跟聯絡者，雖然青發署那邊是發通知，但是通常跟馮政委的通知是透過詩涵。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "我覺得有非常非常多的事情，我覺得大家都可以再討論，像我自己看到的話有幾個問題滿嚴重的，如果要我做臺灣最嚴重的幾個問題，像基本法制，我有基本書推薦給大家看，318之後我買了一本書是《與中國無關》，我買了一百本，但是朱立倫買比我多，我不知道他送給誰，但是我送給在院內的青年及院外的，像青顧團我幾乎一人送一本。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "如果今天要我最推薦今年度最值得看的書，應該是說邏輯思維的三本書都很值得看，《迷茫時代的明白人》、《中國為什麼會有前途》，第三本我忘了。兩百集就要花兩百個小時，你用2/3的時間，還是要花很多時間。大家看書的時間不會太慢，大概一天、兩天，所以三本書就三天看完，看書這一件事是可以練的，自從我開始推薦書開始，我一天有十本書要推薦，要寫文章，所以會越看越快，我覺得很多書值得看，我想蔡總統選的時候也有十本書——《國家為什麼會失敗》這一本書我還沒有看，但是我知道這一本書非常值得看。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "我會覺得除了自己的領域之外，開始研究國家跟政府這一件事，我們不見得未來會進入政府，但是現在我們在這邊就已經做進入政府的動作，每一個都跟政府有關，我舉一個很簡單的例子，像健保，而這一件事的領悟是我有一天騎腳踏車，從至善路下來的時候，我有在騎腳踏車，看我的身材就知道我是在玩鐵人跟跑步。有一次我從劍南路下來的時候，看到有一對夫妻在那邊洗車，洗車沒有什麼問題，是用肥皂在洗車，在自己家門口沒有問題，現在的地下水都有接管下水道，但是在野外是沒有下水道接管這一件事，我沒有下來罵人，但是這一件事其實跟每個人都有關，這個是野外，跟你有什麼關係？環境的污染最後是誰來負責？政府跟國家，總會有們來付這個錢。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "健保是一樣的事，不管是公司或者是年付健保的錢，每一個人都用得到，你生病的每一分錢的一半，將近都是其他人出，可是我們卻沒有一套制度去針對…我唸醫學工程這一件事，所以我對這一件事感受度比較強，為什麼會生病或生什麼病，是三個因素造成的：基因、環境及行為。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "像我們吃一樣的東西、做一樣的運動，有的人得了心血管疾病，有的人沒有，像有人抽菸一輩子，有的死於肺癌，有的活得好好的。像稅制或者是公共制度不是自己在決定，但是行為跟環境應該可以透過制度形塑它、透過誘因去改變它，還有很多事都卡在環境這一件事，我們沒有辦法改變它，但很多事就像我們現在看到的，我貼在我的臉書上，為什麼有人討論幼稚園的性別教育，要用顏色跟玩具來區分。就是他們過去的行為及環境造成的，這個不能去怪他們。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "我們在青顧團的另外一個很深的感觸是，我幾乎已經面對到全臺灣最聰明的腦袋，不管是哪一個世代，年輕、中的及老的，大家的限制都來自於自己的生命經驗。我面對的問題是全世界都面對的問題，我們的上一個世代活得比上一個世代久很多，不管是否願意，這個是事實，因為醫療制度、公共衛生、醫療業發達、資本主義等多因素，我在這兩年讀過了一輩子都沒有讀過的很多問題，我覺得青顧團很重要的使明的問題，因為唯有問對一個問題才會找到那個方向並解決那個答案。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "我們現在找到一個問題，但是沒有找到答案，比如「Mix Taiwan」有兩個問了很核心的問題，譬如修母法或者是改變事務官的觀念，其實都很重要，但是哪一個先、哪一個後，哪一個是緊急及重要的？這當中大家要學一件事是忍耐不會發生這一件事，因為我們要改變的一個定型一百多年的政府，雖然不是一直連續，但是很多事情跟一百多年前的制度、精神上是一樣的，至少上一屆的政府，比如事務官可能在這一個崗位上工作十年、二十年或者是三十年，自然不會理解你跟他講的事情。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "舉例來說，剛上任青顧團的時候，當時有檢討內政部全臺灣的閒置空間，所以選舉完後有二十幾個事務官跟公務員坐在位置上，我們就討論說所謂的政策宣導這一件事，我問他們有沒有看過柯文哲的選舉網站，都沒有人，不管你今天投了台北市政府的哪一票，雖然我支持柯文哲，可是我也看連勝文，要說爛也要說有多爛，我不知道他們是不敢舉手還是怎麼樣，想說怎麼會這樣，而且幾乎年輕人也是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "所以，那個是很可怕的氣氛，我不是說各位，現在越來越多年輕人進入政府這一件事是很好的事，我不知道要如何開始，但是我們做的事已經在改變，所以關鍵是有效push，push的想法去做事情會很累，我覺得應該要用示範的觀念來看這一件事，好的領導人要一直推，其實你會很累，好的領導人應該是在後面，所以我們應該要反過來說我們並不是在push政府，我們應該是要讓民間好的模式被政府看到，光做到這一件事就很不容易了，比如臺灣創業界最大的困難點其實我們彼此沒有成功的案例，數位經濟的案例並不夠多，我相信各位做的不管是農業或文化都一樣，就是你會發現我們現在在這一個圈子裡面已經有被人家注意到，甚至是國外，但是在臺灣資訊分配者或者是權力掌握者他們還不瞭解這一件事的重要性，或者他們覺得根本不重要，因為對他們來說，如何把台積電、聯發科、鴻海留在臺灣更重要，可以有更多人的產值、工作及投資。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "你說這個有衝突嗎？不見得有衝突，所以像禮拜一的「Mix Taiwan」，如果大家有機會的話，我建議大家去聽三位講者的分享，像立峰就講到世代互補性的這一件事，臺灣幾乎是站在世代衝突性最高的地方，臺灣又是文化互補性最強的國家，我最常講的是臺灣是少數會同時追五個國家以上戲劇的國家，我們看中、臺、美、日、韓劇，也會裝LINE跟WhatsApp，但是大部分的國家不會這樣做，日本人裝LINE、美國只裝WhatsApp，中國只裝WeChat，他們只看自己的國家或者是美劇而已，我們是什麼國家的劇都看跟什麼國家的遊戲都打（效），所以臺灣的優點其實某個角度市場很小，但是我們發現其實輸入市場的能力很大，輸出人才的習慣很弱，從我這個時代開始發生，我在大學畢業之後，發生一個國防役的改變，1996年以前國防役只能在研究機構，1998年開始國防役是四年可以到產業服役，這一件事是我的同學們幾乎80％都進了園區，可是這一件事對臺灣的產業影響之大，你把一群本來在十年前應該出國的人全部留在園區了，可能還是會出差，可是跟你去美國野生創業跟就業是完全不一樣的，就像唐鳳在美國野生創業過，那個跟公司派你去不一樣，所以如果要我說，現在臺灣最該做的事，我覺得應該是把年輕人用力趕出去，不管是推的、送的或者是哄的，送出去就對了，因為臺灣不像歐洲，鐵路一搭就是六十幾個國家，我們一定要飛出去，可是現在廉價航空這麼便宜，一張廉價機票就單程出去好了，不要回來，會回來就回來，不會回來也不會現在回來。可是這一件事你說給上面的人很憂心，沒有人要就業了，我們已經在缺工了，所以不缺這一些優秀的工，你把優秀的人趕走，不優秀的人會刺激到，可是這個就是心態的改變——不可否認每一個人心中都有小左跟小右，但是左右不見得是對立的，如何在對的時間點選擇對的方式運作，我們的政府或國家或產業有很多問題很有趣，這個是我很簡單的分享，其他沒有佔用大家太多的時間。不知道大家有沒有什麼問題想要問我？或者有沒有回答到的點？" }, { "speaker": "黃敬峰", "speech": "我想說等一下進行的方式，大家一樣可以問問題，不見得IC，我想還有很多上一屆的夥伴，還有下一頁的問題，我們上一屆的老屁股們想回答就回答。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "我先自我介紹一下好了。" }, { "speaker": "黃敬峰", "speech": "全部嗎？我覺得這樣很浪費時間。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "真的嗎？我再介紹一下我自己，我是AppWorks的創辦人之外，現在做的公司是Fitmily，Fitmily是一個家庭體適能的公司，就是從我小孩開始運動開始，老大七歲，老二是三歲，我們遇到的問題是我們帶他們運動的時候，我們發現大部分的父母都不像我們愛運動，不然就是想運動但是沒有空間跟時間，所以你會發現很多人開始投資小孩，他們投資自己，這個結果是什麼？也就是到了二十年之後，不用二十年，十年之後就發現自己的紅字越來越多，就發現健保費花得越來越多，這一件事如果不能改變健保的話，我本來是要從保險的角度做這一件事，就是改變臺灣健康的概念，後來發現任何事情要有樂趣才會想要做，所以我在做的事是，大人跟小孩在同一個時間點、同一個空間各自運動，顯然就要提供各自需要的，比如吃飯不會吃一樣的，但是基礎是一樣的，比如要經過口味的調適，他不可能像我一樣去玩三鐵，但是可以去玩小孩的東西，三歲、四歲、七歲、八歲，爸爸與媽媽可能都不一樣，所以原則上就是想要創造一個更健康、更運動的臺灣，大家對於這一件事有興趣，或者是對於健康、運動有興趣的話，或者對穿戴裝置有興趣，比如你想要買錶的，想要找Garmin哪一支該買的，或者想要辦一場半碼，或者跑十公里，或者想要在八年內瘦八公斤都可以找我，我可以教你怎麼做到，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "黃敬峰", "speech": "青諮團有沒有想要問的？不見得問IC，問任何一個人都可以，先拿到麥克風自我介紹。" }, { "speaker": "廖泰翔", "speech": "大家好，我是泰翔，我現在在經濟部擔任部長的幕僚，在政策整合評估整合辦公室，我負責的正則是做跟新創產業相關的政策。剛剛提到「Mix Taiwan」，我們看到很多世代的問題，年輕人不甩上一代，上一代覺得年輕人是草莓族，其實兩代都有彼此的優勢，像上一時代有扎實的技術，這一時代有很好的創意，我們就用了一個平台讓新創業者跟技術業者及AI的觀點在同一個平台分享，這個是我們目前有在做的事。" }, { "speaker": "廖泰翔", "speech": "IC我想請教一下，因為你剛剛有提到進行模式，也有提到常常解決跨部會的問題，在解決問題有兩個形式，一個是你們自己先形成共識，有選擇很多題目之後，再看到由政委辦公室對應到那個題目，然後找各部會來開會。是否有另外一種形式是各部會有他們自己在政策遇到很多問題，需要年輕意見的時候，他們是否會主動來找青年顧問團去開會？我覺得大部分的青年不瞭解政府的運作，我也是進入政府半年之後才大約知道他們在幹什麼，所以一開始要由青年們自己找出問題來，然後找出要如何解決，可能不是那麼容易，但是我不確定當時是不是政府會有主動的意願找青年來解決政策有關青年的觀點之類的，以上，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "我看到的時期是至少在經濟部跟科技部有很主動找，我們在後半段第一次、第二屆大會開始，院長會請各部會開始提我們想要解決的問題，所以到後面其實是一半一半，一半是我們提的，一半是他們希望青顧團得到答案，我不知道世隆、Kevin或者是小羊有沒有經濟部或者是內部的經驗？我自己的經驗是經濟部、科技部跟…（有人說：教育比較還好。）" }, { "speaker": "吳詩涵", "speech": "其實剛剛IC講的幾場會議都是各部會，行政院是三個月一次會議，今天有什麼議題，他們覺得想要知道青年人的一些意見或者是剛好配合到各個顧問們的專業或者是領域，就會邀請顧問們去開會，所以很多會議是行政院也不知道開過什麼會，我們是後來才問大家有參加過什麼會議，所以主要是各部會主動。" }, { "speaker": "吳詩涵", "speech": "那時我們有發公文給各部會，所以大家知道有這一群顧問，也有請教育部提供聯絡方式，因此各部會都會自己聯絡。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "這個跟主動性會有關係，各部積極就會。" }, { "speaker": "青發署代表", "speech": "署長今天很想來，但是因為明天青年署被審預算，在準備審預算的相關題目，所以請我跟大家問候。" }, { "speaker": "青發署代表", "speech": "這一屆的青諮有想要參與的部會跟有興趣的議題，還有跟大家確認你們願意揭露給各部會的個資，最近已經彙整差不多了，我們最近會行文給各部會，你們上次跟彙整回來的相關個資及願意參加議題的部分，我們會把這一些資料給各部會之後，就像上一屆青顧一樣，他們會召開相關的政策會議或者是法案研修會議的時候，你們有興趣參加或者是背景專長有相符的時候，各部會都會陸續邀請你們再做相關會議諮詢，一個補充。" }, { "speaker": "吳詩涵", "speech": "其實那時因為一開始大家不知道政府的運作這一些，所以我們最早的方式是讓大家從各自的領域看到問題提案，由行政院分配、寫給各部會，瞭解相關部會（情形），並請他們研擬，找這一些顧問提案，後來有的形式是各部會也有提出他們自己想要解決的問題及相關的議題，請青顧們協助及提供一些想法。" }, { "speaker": "吳詩涵", "speech": "在這一個過程當中，大家會慢慢發現有一些相關的議題，那時不知道是內政部還是什麼議題，那時要臨時開大會的時候，臨時要討論兵役或者是什麼相關的？（有人說：產業替代役。）我們在開大會之前，顧問對這一個議題有想法，所以滿臨時的，我們請內政部長跟負責的同仁在那一次大會的時候就跟顧問們交流，所以會在過程當中大家發現一些議題，有一些是區部會參加相關會議之後進而再討論跟參與的。" }, { "speaker": "吳詩涵", "speech": "像我知道的是，那時民宿跟旅館法規的議題，這個行政院沒有討論過，但是有從事這幾個領域的顧問們去開會，後來有跟顧問們再保持聯絡，看如何再讓相關的法規變得更好。" }, { "speaker": "黃敬峰", "speech": "有沒有其他的問題？" }, { "speaker": "許瑞福", "speech": "大家好，我是許瑞福，我現在是台大電信所碩士班一年級，也在Intel實習，是維京人酒吧營運長，不知道之前青顧團參與部會會議的情形，比方出席的發言跟大家的發言，有沒有人可以分享？" }, { "speaker": "胡庭碩", "speech": "我在坪林這個地方做一些青年空間跟農村議題相關的事。" }, { "speaker": "胡庭碩", "speech": "我想要回應一下，你剛剛問的問題是部會對我們的認知是什麼，其實在我們兩任的會期裡面，我有講政府部門幾乎是我覺得是用超乎想像的禮遇在對待我們，我覺得這一件事要有一個自覺，其實我們都是非常幸運擁有這一個key，然後能夠進到非常高──我不知道現在新的政府──但當時是非常非常尊重，所以可能我們有很多時候是提了一個議題，然後政院就會花非常大量的時間，我不敢想像背後有多少的人力把這一個議題整理很清楚，然後呈上去給你，但就我們的運作，最早開始，因為一開始不知道怎麼運作，只有一個顧問，因此要想兩件事，第一個是青年諮詢這一件事，到底是專門處理青年議題相關的事務或者是讓青年介入各式各樣不同的制度或者是政務的討論，這兩個截然不同。其實我覺得兩條線都很重要，所以那時幾乎所有的人都去找勞動部青年就業相關的會報，幾乎所有的人也被找去…覺得年輕人應該跟社會企業有關係，就找去社會企業的會報，他們能夠理解年輕人跟這個有關；在居住正義這一件事也是年輕人關心，所以也有把我們找過去。" }, { "speaker": "胡庭碩", "speech": "真正很更好的是，讓各種不同的制度面及公共事務的討論都有青年，也就是我們這一群，也就是將代表的聲音放進去，所以我覺得很好的制度是，會先我們的議題，大家個資盡可能寫得越多越好，讓部會判斷我們要召開這一場會議，要邀請一個院級的顧問來與會。那個身份非常驚人，院級的顧問不管內政部或者是什麼署，大家都是高高在上的角色，所以大家要很有意識到這是不可思議的身份——就像剛剛IC講的，我們要做多少的努力來讓自己是對得起這個身份。" }, { "speaker": "胡庭碩", "speech": "我再提一些，像當時是從我們自己出發，離島的老師就會談到關於離島師資的流動，為什麼要綁六年不能流動？像麗禪是移民者，就從自己移民（的議題）；創業者就從替代役（議題），因為可能做替代役之後就會改變，這是一種提法，但我覺得後期的提法反而更好，也就是各個部會有他們所關心，或者是他覺得這個議題可能對青年朋友的影響很重大，像雪隧（國道五號）永遠都會塞車這一件事，他們不知道，想要問大家，也就是長照如何讓大家關心，發出問題，讓對這一個議題感興趣的青年顧問去發表。" }, { "speaker": "胡庭碩", "speech": "我又寫了兩個：第一個，我們這一群人應該去處理青年議題相關的事務，或者是要讓青年如何介入各種制度。第二個，要讓部會自己去邀人，但這個很被動，本來就很擅長於社交或者是遞名片者，這樣就會得到大量的參與機會，我不知道是不是能夠更主動去，比如大家在追什麼線，大家可以寄個信，身為一個院級的顧問寄任何信到任何部會裡面，其實都是非常有影響力的事，所以大家不要小看這一件事，我相信政府的制度沒有改變的話，大家還是非常有身份的人，所以比如你關心文化部或者是關心部落，比如現在地方都在做小旅行，娛樂稅怎麼辦？你就直接寄信去問，會收到難以想像的回報。" }, { "speaker": "胡庭碩", "speech": "大家要多對一點公共行政或者是多花力氣瞭解，我不知道會不會有比較不是跟部長級的，但可能他們的幕僚溝通瞭解，要真的去瞭解一個案子在部會或者是政府裡面如何被執行，若你不理解如何去做…我當時犯的錯，像我們在檢討實習制度的時候，我們會談一個很高空，我們會習慣提一些問題，但是對於那一些部會完全沒有辦法去著墨什麼，所以大家可能在提出一些問題的時候，應該直接把一些解答，也就是再粗糙都好的解答（給他們），才讓他們有方向去想。" }, { "speaker": "胡庭碩", "speech": "剛剛也有一個問題是，有沒有哪一些東西是我們曾經想要追，後不了了之的？我自己個人參加幾個，關於實習的事，現在實習不是大家想像到的是台清交，像「中肯實習」的言論，而是大規模的科技大學有非常低階、一點都不覺得有學習意義的服務業是透過實習來完成，也就是我國實習制度的設計是誰背書？是哪一些人？我講具體一點好了，像觀光科系的人常常要到亞都麗緻當端盤子，我有一個朋友就是這樣子，他在咖啡弄實習跟做鬆餅，我不知道這有什麼眉角（台語）在的，又不是管理者，這樣就被留級一年，我覺得像這一件事應該要在青年就業大規模被檢討，但後來來就沒有下文。" }, { "speaker": "胡庭碩", "speech": "接著是討論長照議題，真正需求的人沒有出現在我們的眼睛裡面，像無障礙公車或者是城市友善之類的，因為這一些失去身體機能的人沒有出現在大家的眼睛裡面，因此沒有出現在大家說我們的社會有什麼東西，每一個人遇到什麼狀況就會跌落，所以關於無障礙的事，如果對於這一個議題有興趣就可以討論。" }, { "speaker": "胡庭碩", "speech": "第三，曾經有很多部會在推動社會企業，比如客委會、原住民，或者是農村，他們就會用舉行競賽的方法，我覺得真的是最低級在推動，我提不出來我們應該改成什麼形式，像嘉緣跟珮綺，她們提到用小規模的錢，如10至50萬，那直接就是執行金，用很小規模的方法，因為50萬就可以養活一、兩個年輕人一年，這一年就會成為很多人的開頭，所以各個部會可以更認真討論我們應該要仿效文化部的青年村落執行，也就是以文化這一件事看待青創。" }, { "speaker": "胡庭碩", "speech": "最後一個是替代役的制度，現在是產業替代役，有沒有什麼社造替代役？或是鄉鎮管理人的替代役？既然替代役已經吵得沸沸揚揚，變得更亂也沒有關係，這個事情是最切身相關的。台南市有一個地方的老鎮，市政府的承辦人員非常有sense，把觀光局的一個替代役送去一個社區，然後帶領那一個社區做一些事，能不能把那一個案例拿出來，然後鼓勵各地，比如社區發展協會申請替代役，或者是讓各個地方的觀光局去領一個。" }, { "speaker": "胡庭碩", "speech": "最後一個是民宿跟旅館，這兩個問題就不講了。但有一個是，現在政府大力在推動，只要講到「社企」跟「社區」就在推動小履行跟辦活動，這個事都要課娛樂稅，但是大家都知法犯法，能不能努力一點讓這一些事變成是合法的；反正剛剛有一題說有沒有很想做，而沒有做到的，我就一次說，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "謝宗震", "speech": "我上一次沒有到，因為我在某一個地方上課。我最我介紹一下我叫宗震，我的背景是清大統計所出來的，我現在在創業，也是政大的老師。" }, { "speaker": "謝宗震", "speech": "狀況是這樣子的，我們做的東西叫做「資料科學」，幫企業做資料科學導入或者是幫政府部門或NPO做資料科學的應用。我最近做的一件事是跟天下雜誌合作，我們做的事情是把全臺灣的農地上工廠找出來，這個東西是我們跟天下雜誌花三個月的事做出來的事，也就是把政府部門裡面其他的一些地理資訊系統上面的紀錄逐一比對，對照google earth，以前明明是農地，再一陣子就越蓋越大，整片都是工廠，用這一個方式把全臺灣找出來，我們做像這樣子的一些事情。" }, { "speaker": "謝宗震", "speech": "剛剛問的問題是，我們在做任期裡面的工作項目分配比例？像一開始也有提案，然後會遇到審議跟建議的事，因為我剛剛也有聽到其他部會的人會找我們一起諮詢。像我之前有另外一件事，我之前在台北市公民參與委員會裡面的資料開放小組擔任顧問。我在裡面做什麼事？大概就是做開放資料，但是我做一年多，一開始主要做的事是，柯P開放資料的自治條例——簡單來講是這樣子（笑）。也就是他要做一些事，要如何把這個平台、架構建起來。但後來我們又遇到一件事，我們這一群顧問到底我要不要by case討論警察局、消防局，也就是這一個資料要不要開放？我們後面遇到的是把模型建好之後，by case這樣子是不是我們這樣身份的人不做的事情？青年的事是不是我們的事？也就是我們到時候的一個工作上的分配比例，我想要請教我們的學長姐你們之前的經驗。" }, { "speaker": "趙式隆", "speech": "大家好，我是式隆。我是一個非常愛學校，一個在台大讀書讀了十三年來還沒有畢業的博士生，之前創立了一間公司大家可能有聽過，叫做學悅科技，另外一個身份行政院青年顧問團，現在有一間新的公司，同時也是臺灣矽谷創業家協會理事長，但是這些都不是很重要。" }, { "speaker": "趙式隆", "speech": "今天把大家拉來這一件事，最開始是我的想法，我就開始「盧小（台語，指鬧，下同）」阿峰說我們來辦，之後阿峰受不了，就把大家找來（笑）。其實最開始是找我的學弟瑞福，然後瑞福就跑去上面po文，好像沒有人要理他，既然有一個不知道為什麼產生出來的臨時副召集人，好像比較厲害，所以就叫做阿峰，我們去馮燕老師兒子的婚禮就一直「盧小」阿峰（黃敬峰說：趕快接到重點，好不好。）。" }, { "speaker": "趙式隆", "speech": "今天把大家找大家找來這裡有什麼想法，剛剛其實IC已經講得差不多了，我覺得我今天在這裡，我沒有料想到，青年署今天也在這裡，因為今天沒有錄影什麼都可以說（黃敬峰說：但是我們今天有打字，你現在講的任何一句話都打在裡面。）有人速記嗎？（黃敬峰說：你剛剛講了「盧小」講了八次，她就打了八遍。）接下來會有很多要麻煩青年署的事，所以等一下留一些時間給青年署掌聲，因為他們真的幫我們很多。" }, { "speaker": "趙式隆", "speech": "其實青年顧問團最開始的時候，我一直覺得是因為太陽花學運，其實馮老師跟院長不承認，但是我覺得一定是。基本上在那個時候的氛圍，我當時很佩服政府在找大家來時的這個勇氣，其實在青顧團一開始的時候，其實很多人進入青顧團相對對政府比較不友善，會被人家認為是鷹派的，像這一位跟那一位（指胡庭碩、詹益鑑）都是，庭碩看起來沒有那麼鷹派，但是每次都說是鷹派。" }, { "speaker": "趙式隆", "speech": "當時直播太陽花學院很有名的Sega，那時我們找來這一些人，看起來滿多是對於政府不友善的人來，其實那時的氛圍也非常有趣。那時候大部分的長官其實對於我們是戒慎恐懼，也就是包含第一次大會行禮如儀，介紹行政院。然後長官告訴他們比較下面的長官說要開始找這一些人開會，第一次會感覺到我們自己也是長官，或者我們比長官還長官，對我們還客氣（胡庭碩說：長官沒有車馬費。），其實我們一開始也不知道要怎麼樣跟長官相處。後來在中間磨合的過程中，逐漸讓長官知道這一些人不是來亂，這些人可能是資源，這些人可能提供一些資訊讓政府更瞭解民間在做什麼，開始讓他們瞭解並不是長官交辦要求我們去，而是覺得我們可以幫他們做一些忙，以真正作為顧問的角色去加入他們，那個時候我們差不多花了三個會期的時間，差不多是第一年3/4在第一次青年顧問團時所花的時間來磨合，但是在前面兩年之後，政府已經比較瞭解我們到底可以做什麼，這一群人如何發揮影響力跟改變政府。" }, { "speaker": "趙式隆", "speech": "今天找大家來是，政府已經準備好了，但大家也許還沒有那麼好，我們要告訴大家說，其實那時我們要如何跟政府溝通跟如何幫助政府。" }, { "speaker": "趙式隆", "speech": "我們就舉兩個例子，一個是bottom up，一個是upside down。我加入顧問團之前有兩個目標，很幸運這兩個都把法案推動，也都非常順利成功。" }, { "speaker": "趙式隆", "speech": "第一個是推創業替代役的事，主要的原因是那時我跟現在的教育次長，當時他還在台大的時候，我們一起做做台大創創學程，我們發現很多學生階段鼓勵他們創業，可是他們真的做了一些東西，一畢業就要去當兵，一年之後整個市場跟產業環境都變得不一樣，他們的努力都沒有價值，為何我們要培養創業？就變沒有理由了。所以臺灣政府既然做了研發替代役這一件事，自己創業這一件事，不見得遜於臺灣產業大公司上班者較小，所以我們覺得自己創業應該也要能夠有類似的待遇，所以我們開始提這一件事。我的目標很明確，就是要讓這一個法案通過，無論用任何的方式。" }, { "speaker": "趙式隆", "speech": "第一次大會時跟我同桌的蔡政委有提，另外一個是役政署的處長，那時候沒有效果，接下來不管在什麼樣的會議，因為那時也不瞭解政府，那時經濟部因為我這一個東西被歸在創業的議題，找了役政署的長官來，不管我怎麼講，當時青年署都說兵役公平，我幾乎要拍桌跟罵他，第一次跟政府的接觸是非常火爆的。" }, { "speaker": "趙式隆", "speech": "青年署在中間著力非常多，我就說是不是可以在開會之外的私底下，也希望有其他的方式可以開會，後來我發現青顧團很有力量，我們要call誰幾乎沒有call不到的，那時一call是副署長等級，他還跑來台大找我，那時就發現其實政府官員他們有一些堅持，因為他們心理上有一些事是不能告訴你，但如果持續坐下來告訴你問題點在哪裡，你就幫忙他所謂的困難點看能否有一些解套的方式，告訴他們在民間如何看這一件事；其實政府長官很重要（需遵循）的事，也就是依法行政，一件事於法無據的時候就會很難做。" }, { "speaker": "趙式隆", "speech": "其實我們在做的事是，他們支持我，我也支持他們，我跟很多人聊這一件事，包含院長、次長，以及後來我也有去創投聯席會議，並跟馮政委講這一件事，他們就用了政府裡面做事情的大招，也就是抓下來列管，抓下來列管之後，每一次都要來，那一次在聯席會議的時候，役政署都不太需要來，但因為這一件事被列管，他們也覺得很煩，所以最後在這一件事取得一個共識，我們有一個共同的目標，希望讓這一件事能夠發生，不見得是在現在，告訴我們說這個要修法很困難，但是是不是有一些方式可以轉，因此共同想出一個方式，塞在研發替代役的底下用一個特別形式，未來這一個東西通過之後，是不是創業可以提出補充兵的形式。" }, { "speaker": "趙式隆", "speech": "所以我覺得這個過程中要設身處地幫長官們想，應該是說他們跟社會相對來說，某種程度與一般民眾思考的方式會有些脫節，心裡所care的事情可能是你沒有想到，你要試著幫他們解套這一件事，事情才會發生，這個是upside down的事。" }, { "speaker": "趙式隆", "speech": "另外一個是bottom up的方式，那時做數位工程師，像唐鳳在虛擬世界法規調適的時候，蔡玉玲政委以前是IBM的法務長，對於推臺灣未來法規這一件事處理非常多，那個是我第二個想要推的事情，因為在進入青顧團之前已經創業一段時間，我一直suffer在臺灣的法規，比如我不能發特別股，有很多事情，以至於我的前公司註冊在塞席爾共和國，我圈不出我的公司在世界地圖哪裡的概念。" }, { "speaker": "趙式隆", "speech": "我發現這一件事是很荒謬，你的公司名字主要在臺灣營運，但是為了要發給你的員工股票或者為了讓公司人投資，卻把公司設在一個聽都沒有聽過的地方，因此花了很多力氣、著力在閉鎖型公司的這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "趙式隆", "speech": "我稍微描述一下這一個專案，蔡政委非常清楚整個事情的狀況，包含法規及如何跟民眾溝通，如何讓事情很快進行過去，所以閉鎖型公司通過時，那個專章是一開始立法最快的法案。從一開始分析出可能是社群領袖，去跟社群領袖的人談，勾出幾個很重要的些議題，把議題放到這一個「vTaiwan」的網站上，讓大家討論網路的社群領袖是誰，就把網路領袖跟可能的社群領袖抓到行政院，大家一起討論並直播。直播有沒有人看是一回事，但是逐漸讓大家發現這一件事跟大家的關係並沒有那麼遙遠，其實某種程度是讓大家對於這一件事有一些民意基礎，接下來就把這一些東西寫下來。" }, { "speaker": "趙式隆", "speech": "我記得當時也額外幫蔡政委做一件事，那時在行政院開會完之後產業界的人太少，明明這個東西就是給產業界的人用，結果來的都是會計師或律師，他們考慮的事情跟我們產業界考慮的事情不一樣，所以我寫法規的時候就跟邵老師說我幫他們開這個會，他就說好，我就在FB上面寫了一篇文章、找了一個活動，哪一天在台大法律系把大家找來，大家一起抱怨現在的公司法到底哪裡不好，結果一找就找了九十幾個人，大家一起舉手說現在公司法哪裡不好，然後邵老師就全部記下來，這就是後來閉鎖型公司民意基礎的部分。" }, { "speaker": "趙式隆", "speech": "其實這一個東西，那時跟IC哥、Sega跟小峰，加入行政院要到立法院之前的攻防戰，我們真的就當作蔡政委的backup，坐在行政院裡面，底下是所有的部會跟地方政府，他們告訴我說現在對於這個草案有什麼考慮，那時從下午一點戰到六點，連續兩天，到最後卡在的是無形資產鑑價，不過這個東西進了立法院，但很快出來，我又再加入了一次戰役，那一次只有我去，那一次是在講無形資產的鑑價的標準在哪裡，最後雖然不滿意、但可接受的結果，但我覺得這就是政府做事的方式。" }, { "speaker": "趙式隆", "speech": "其實在那一個過程裡面，因為我參加超級無敵多會，最大的收獲是你會發現在你的生活裡面到處充滿了各式各樣的官署，你本來不知道，但你後來會知道那是官署。原來某一棟裡面藏了官署，那時我參加很多議題，最多當然是科技部、經濟部，經濟部特別是中小企業處，那時我們也參加一些勞動部的案子，像衛福部的長照等等議題都有，甚至是交通部，我們看到各個部會、各個長官對於事情的不同重視程度。" }, { "speaker": "趙式隆", "speech": "其實我講比較成功的例子是這兩項，其實當時的虛擬世界法規調適考慮很多事情，有滿多的事到現在沒有很完整的結果，包含其實那時我們討論最多的是共享經濟，像Uber跟Airbnb，像網路能不能賣酒，還有勞動跟遠距勞動這一塊，原來有人把資料整理那麼好，那時候的主持人一直都是唐鳳，像電傳勞動這一件事，會逐漸讓你知道政府距離大家的生活並沒有那麼遠，像那時處理一個事情，如果你今天在上班，要跟你的老闆請假，過去的方式可能是要之前講，如果今天突然肚子痛，用LINE跟你老闆請假，到底算不算？如果老闆用LINE回你到底可不可以，或者根本不回你、已讀，這樣到底算請假成功或失敗？或者發一張貼圖給你（笑），這樣到底有沒有請假成功？這個聽起來很好笑，但是都是實際上要解決的問題，這樣在臺灣目前都還沒有，所以我關注最多的是這幾個事情。" }, { "speaker": "趙式隆", "speech": "即使到現在還是持續一直在幫很多政府擔任一些角色，包含青年署辦了很多事，都還是會找我幫忙，雖然兩年之後，我不是青年顧問團的身份，但政府的長官們倚重的是你這個人及自己對於產業的瞭解或學養這一件事，我覺得現在是一個很好開始接觸的機會，也就是讓你們自己被列為是政府智庫的角色，或者是青諮會或者是顧問團的角色，是一個開門的鑰匙，但每一個人投入的程度不一，一方面考慮你自己的資源，一方面是考慮可以投入的程度及希望被重視的角色。我稍微可能分享的是，那時實際上推動兩個例子的一些經驗，如果有可以跟大家討論或者大家有什麼問題的地方，我們可以再聊。" }, { "speaker": "趙式隆", "speech": "我剛剛說最後要留一些時間給青發署，（胡庭碩：你還沒有回答工作分配的問題。）OK，其實應該這樣講，我自己那時算是比較狂熱，可能比一般顧問這兩、三年下來，大概幾百場會一定是有的，因為我自己是公司老闆，所以時間上調配還可以，反正有政府的會，特別有興趣的一定列為最高的優先，這個事情是一定可以高於其他事，如果其他的事情可以排開就儘量排開，把政府的事排在比較前面；相對來說，投資人對我不是那麼滿意。所以下來之後，也許會好一點，但後來也發現沒有多好（笑）。這一件事要自己調整，這個是自己的取捨，我自己覺得沒有處理得很好，因為多多少少產生一些自己的糾紛，所以大家自己看看。IC拿麥克風，IC要講嗎？" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "剛剛那個問題問得很好，我解讀那一個問題的核心比較是，因為每個人參與的時間、影響的層次可能不一，所以在院級跟部會，甚至是事務官以下的層級其實才是比較直接影響的地方。但是因為每一個人目前為止對於政治參與的理解跟認知都不太一樣，所以我覺得第一階段都要花足夠的時間，至少在你在一個議題上有興趣的領域相對也要花足夠的時間，瞭解什麼人、什麼事正在發生，要不然你就是不要做這一件事，如果打算做青諮或者是青顧的話，第一年一定要花時間做功課建立默契，默契沒有建立起來是不會成功的，否則他會覺得知道的事情，為什麼會找你來，我會被找來是因為我的部會跨了很多技術領域，所以往往會跳出框架說如果沒有這一件事的話會怎麼樣，或者是我們從源頭開始想，他們會覺得怎麼沒有問過這一個問題。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "所以當你習慣問很大問題的時候——當然很大問題也要問很大的人才可以回答你——然後你去問執行，他會沒有辦法回答你，所以在什麼場合問什麼問題很重要，以及你問的問題有沒有答案，或者是他的問題沒有答案、你也沒有答案，那就沒有用，我覺得這個是開會角度的訓練，你能不能回答出問題，人家想不到的答案，怎麼執行、找哪一些人，有無資源？可能我本身的背景及我常常想事情的角度是我想要解決問題，因為我是工程師，我解決的不是技術問題，可能是市場問題，如何用社會工程的角度來解決，這個是很有趣——因為我是一個喜歡解有趣的人——不可否認因為這兩年的經驗開始轉變我對於事業的想法，我現在做的事情是社會企業，雖可能還會賺錢，但不會有很快賺錢的這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "但是我相信很多人在做社會企業，但是社會企業也不能不賺錢——事實上，我覺得最有影響力的社會企業是Google，但當然也有人認為Google不是社會企業。" }, { "speaker": "詹益鑑", "speech": "我覺得自己的時間，當然還有你的家人、公司的同事、投資人及溝通，在Appworks會說：不管你跟任何人之間，通常只有誤會，不會有不會，所以要不斷溝通，雖然這一件事是非常困難的。要同時做很多事，比如把小孩帶來開會（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "黃敬峰", "speech": "我的想法是就像趙式隆講一樣，重要的學長姐在各個部會都被列管為重要的顧問。" }, { "speaker": "趙式隆", "speech": "其實我要跟大家講的事情是你在參與政府的過程裡面，你在最開始要花最足夠的時間，我們連在政府裡面「組長」是「科長」的老闆這一件事，我們都不知道，不太有概念，所以一開始你一定要花足夠多的時間去參與整個事情，要不然其實你要發揮影響力，其實也不是那麼容易；但是要提醒大家的事是，大家不要覺得自己算是政府外圍的人而給予政府影響。" }, { "speaker": "趙式隆", "speech": "像大家所在的社企聚落、隔壁的青創基地及背後的青年圓夢網，這個是我規劃的，所以這個其實是大家真的能夠發揮影響力，我要留一些時間。其實在整個過程裡面最辛苦的是青年署的這一群人，不管是一、二屆，接下來也會有很多要麻煩的，給他們一點掌聲（大家現場掌聲感謝青發署）。" }, { "speaker": "黃敬峰", "speech": "未來看到青年署的次數一定會比看到學長姐的次數還多，我們接下來請毓庭。" }, { "speaker": "張毓庭", "speech": "大家好，我叫做張毓庭，我今年是唸台大電子所畢業，現在在竹科當工程師。" }, { "speaker": "張毓庭", "speech": "上一屆參與的議題滿雜的，大部分是由其他顧問提出來的問題，我們去，並給予自己生活周遭的建議。在第二年的時候，其實我發現剛剛有問到時間分配，我覺得比較好可以有時間去參加開會的人是學生跟創業的老闆，像我自己在第二年之後開始在新竹上班，每一次參加會議都必須要請自己的假，從新竹到台北也要估兩個小時的時間，所以變成參與會議的時間滿有限的，因此希望大家可以珍惜來參加政府事務的機會。" }, { "speaker": "張毓庭", "speech": "之後到第二年的時候，我後來有自己向各部會提出幾個案子，其實政委跟事務官們有滿大的差別，政務官其實非常積極想要在自己的任期內做足夠的事，而事務官就像剛剛式隆講到替代役的例子，其實一開始他們大部分的態度都希望不要改變、說服你說現在的制度就可以了，除非你要把這一件事往上鬧——也不是鬧——向政委提出，才會變成列管，各部會才會很不情願來。" }, { "speaker": "張毓庭", "speech": "像剛剛有提出兩個比較相關的議題，一個是跟替代役相關的，像剛剛IC講到的，因為政策的關係有後來的研發替代役，導致很多人為了不想選擇去當兵，選擇進園區去工作，然後可能導致文創或者是其他科系的人才比較缺乏，這個是政府的其中一個政策。雖然現在有開放產業替代役，我當時希望國家級的選手，不管是參加奧運或者是體育類或者是電競類或者是職業棋士可以代表臺灣去比賽，也會有兵役中斷的問題。" }, { "speaker": "張毓庭", "speech": "另外一個議題是跟高中職相關，因為其實我自己也是從國小、國中、高中每一天晚上過著補習跟念書的人生，從自己的經驗來看，這樣有沒有比較好的改善方法，或者大家為何會比較崇尚的上課方式？在他們的國家是比較有像矽谷這麼蓬勃的創業圈，雖然臺灣一直在進行，這個並不是一天或者是兩天的事。" }, { "speaker": "張毓庭", "speech": "在教育方面有沒有辦法從學校開始改變？大家要寫論文，其實是跟大學法的限制有關係，其實跟行政院做的事有限，在高中職的部分是可以做高中職的教師評鑑。我自己的經驗是，雖然當時是唸第一志願，可是學校的老師──大家都知道──所以後來想說有沒有透過期末教學評鑑給老師一定的建議，比如上課的時候太快或者是哪一些地方聽不懂或者是哪裡加強──這個東西跟世隆做的學悅科技滿像──也就是即時的互動，但是學校是單方面聽跟講，很少有跟教師溝通的反應管道，如果大家有興趣的話，我很願意給大家看當時上一屆顧問提出來的企劃，大概是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "林謙育", "speech": "我站來前面這邊，大家比較看得到，我是謙育，我是台北市南港高工的老師。" }, { "speaker": "林謙育", "speech": "我覺得來參與青顧團真的是在學校跟政府之間的學習，我剛開始來參與青顧團覺得很簡單的事，為何政府沒有做，可是來參與完之後會發現很多事情不太好做，真的有它的難度。參與之後才會發現很多從不管是在政委想的跟到最後執行單位所做的，有時確實是會有落差，當然執行單位都很辛苦。" }, { "speaker": "林謙育", "speech": "我當青顧團這一段期間學非常多，有時或許自己提的意見比較急，我建議大家的是：如果要實際上影響到自己的影響力，有時先想好之後，如何把脈絡找出來再建議，建議後讓長官肯定再慢慢執行下去，因此提案的話術非常重要，也就是IC所講的是如何讓提案的部分覺得很可行，而不是只有提出來，我覺得是用比較分享跟建議的角色。" }, { "speaker": "林謙育", "speech": "比如技職教育是非常非常重要，但是在職業學校裡面比較看的是數據跟亮點這一塊。有些職業學校的老師是認真在發展技術教學，而有些現實狀況，讓第一線老師遇到許多挫折，且很多想法無法與產業技術連結在一起（學校太重視升學了），我覺得這個可能是教育體制很多的問題，當然必須要有長官很多的想法去貫徹與執行，這一塊是非常重要的。因為我之前跟庭碩參加某個政委主持的勞動部活動，政委很習慣列管，但是列管後，相關單位每次一定要出席做出回應與提出方案，所提出的方案是否有結果，那就不一定了。" }, { "speaker": "胡庭碩", "speech": "他們會說做了一百項的事，關鍵的事都有做的，他們大部分做的事是這樣，然後瞬間給你大量資料，你不知道他們花了大量的人力，對於我們所關心議題的推動是怎麼樣，大家可能要著墨那個技術。" }, { "speaker": "林謙育", "speech": "青年顧問團這兩年，真的學習很多。" }, { "speaker": "黃敬峰", "speech": "接下來應該會比較快速，因為記者講話比較快。" }, { "speaker": "羊正鈺", "speech": "我在青顧團比較少講話，那時我在媒體，所以入選青顧團，我不希望被人家認為關鍵評論有顏色，因此我很少發言。" }, { "speaker": "羊正鈺", "speech": "問到工作分配？其實這一件事，我在第一屆要接第二屆的時候，有跟Kevin私下討論過青顧團在哪裡，雖然現在無給職，入選到這樣的團體是很多人的想法是要做一點什麼，我們是顧問，而顧問又是要做什麼？也就是不是親自做事的人，而是出嘴的人，因此定位要先想清楚；不論現在從顧問叫做諮詢委員，其實是差不多的意思。我們到底來這邊實際要做到什麼？我們不是立法委員，我們並不推法案的人，有沒有人推法案是另外一回事，但我們可以付出的東西是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "羊正鈺", "speech": "其實我們這一屆這麼多人，每一個人付出的時間跟精力，絕對落差非常大，有開會王，也有人比較少開會的，其實可以看一下身邊的人，可以入選的人，除了我之外，大家都很優秀，也就是大家來行政院做這一件事之外，在各自領域非常忙，所以你的滿腔熱血走出去就沒了，你是學生就會有課業、報告，你是老闆就有公司的營運要處理，每一個人要自己拿捏。" }, { "speaker": "羊正鈺", "speech": "我自己在青顧團快結束的時候，我自己的想法是不管我們這一屆將近三十個，你們這一屆也是三十個，究竟一百個人，我們這一百個人沒有辦法代表全臺灣的優秀青年？事實上部會他們都知道可以找誰進去開會，因為每一屆涵蓋的領域與專長跟面向是不一樣，我們這一屆偏青創、社企，有1/3的是教育；教育比較難撼動，因為比較複雜。為什麼這一屆的成果是偏青創跟社企？因為這一屆的人比較擅長，原因是新創跟社企業政府比較不懂，因為不懂，所以願意問，也還沒有既得利益者，如果今天要弄土地開發，那就很難了，就算找我們去聽，我們真的很難撼動什麼，大家要想好自己的定位，一種定位是知道自己的專長在哪裡、想要做什麼，既然我們扮演的是橋梁，即便這個不是我們的專長，我們能不能帶這一些人進來政府開會或者是給他們意見。" }, { "speaker": "羊正鈺", "speech": "另外一個是，其實第一屆跟第二屆轉換的時候，我們曾經做過一件事是內部結構，像班長還是什麼，想要分三各階層（有人說：還有議題組的組長。），一盤散沙的運作方式也是一種運作方式，後來組織表列出來之後完全沒有落實，我不能說一盤散沙就是不好，但是如果你們有需要內部組織運作的話，你們就要找內部有一個共識，讓這一個東西實際落實，而不是列出來之後，而沒有發聲。那時候詩涵還在。" }, { "speaker": "羊正鈺", "speech": "我們把給政府意見方式可以歸納三個，一進來大家都很熱血覺得要看政府做太爛，要叫他們好好改一改，講難聽一點，在裡面的人不見得比我們笨，大家都差不多，我們可以想到的東西，他們大概可以想了，我們覺得可以做的事，他們也覺得可以做了，提案這一件事沒有想像那麼容易，你們也可以提，但是提案的意思並不是說他們做錯了，而是他們做錯，但是你要提出解決方式，這個才是難的。我們曾經做過這一件事，但到後來我們比較擅長領域是新創、社企，有一部分也是政府真的比較不懂；但是提案比較分專長。" }, { "speaker": "羊正鈺", "speech": "另外一部分是大部分就會偏向開會，相關領域覺得我們可以去就會找我們去開會，到第二年尾端是很常發生的事情，每一個部會找我們開會的頻率不一樣，這個是看部會，也看我們的能力。去開會就不一定是針對我們各自的專長，有些人會針對我們的專長去開會，但是有的不會。第一個是時間許可，第二個是看我自己偏向於我關心或者是我真的懂的才去。為什麼？因為我時間考量。再者是因為車馬費的部分，那個是全臺灣人民付的，我自己覺得不少，所以你自己要去衡量這一個會議拿這一個車馬費的貢獻在哪裡，並不是坐在那邊開會、然後就散會，你沒有講到話或者是你給的意見並不是很有價值，因此這個是你們自己要衡量；開會不一定要是該領域的專長者，因為不是專長的人一樣可以給他們看不到的面向。" }, { "speaker": "羊正鈺", "speech": "第三，我覺得還滿有趣的是到第二屆才發聲，有一些社會上正在鬧的事是我們可以向上反映這個是重要的。像後期好幾次，印象最深刻的是課綱，吳部長還親自跟我們說不知道怎麼跟學生溝通，因為那個時代差異最大，現在跟高中生已經是落差了（有人說：那是你。）。很多社會上正在反映的東西，我們是可以直接跟長官說，因為他們有時離民間有點遠，尤其是這一屆內閣除了唐政委以外，這一屆內閣算是年紀稍長。像以蔡政府來說，第一個就是前一陣子的一例一休問題，26日又有一個法案想要處理，委員都知道吧！（委員們笑）" }, { "speaker": "羊正鈺", "speech": "你們可以用你們的力量讓他們重視這一件東西，要不要討論跟他們如何討論我覺得這個都是後話，但是你們一隻腳在裡面、一隻腳在外面，這個是你們的角色，你們可以傳達聲音，讓他們知道，因為你們某種程度是意見領袖，他們也許在高位，也許民間只是在裡面吵，不是很重要，你們可以讓他們知道這個東西很重要，大概就是這樣子。可以再交給Kevin哥了。" }, { "speaker": "陳聖凱", "speech": "我是以立國際服務的承辦人，主要是做志工旅行，在東南亞。就不要再浪費大家的時間，我直接說。我不知道為什麼要把我擺最後，但是我絕對會很短（笑），我已經變成人家不喜歡的大人了（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "陳聖凱", "speech": "其實我之前好幾次是講比較難聽的話，就算是在行政院院長面前，如果你講恭維的話，你覺得他們這輩子會聽得少嗎？誇讚的話太多了。" }, { "speaker": "陳聖凱", "speech": "我都看很有問題的事情，有一個問題是為什麼要有這一個諮詢委員？像當年為什麼要有一個青年顧問團？我想了非常多，我覺得我們內部有很多討論，其實當時太陽花學院的背景，當政府肯定做某種事，即使是安慰性的也好，政府做某一件事是現在有一群人不要再罵我了，我們有時在想是不是做這一件事，反正大家無給職，大家是熱血，所以順勢被利用一下。我們想沒有關係，就被利用一下，這個也是很難得的可以被利用，在這個被利用的過程中，有沒有辦法被影響傳遞公民意思，我也不清楚是不是要有諮詢委員，你覺得裡面根本有幾個人是暗樁，某個人在笑（笑），我不知道，因為我幾乎不認識各位，我當時就會有這一種感覺，這樣的角色也在顧問團裡面，我認為反而是很值得去想，因為各位的時間都很珍貴，跑進來為什麼？" }, { "speaker": "陳聖凱", "speech": "再來可以牽扯到第二個事，像剛剛有提到定位的問題，我們一開始非常熱血，我上次還跟詩涵講說我們這一個結構要有班長跟副班長，因為有很多人要聯繫，青發署的長官可能不見得做，我說沒有關係，我自己掏錢請一個秘書，一個月3萬5，馮老師說不要，因為馮老師很愛護我們，知道就算我花錢也不會有改變（胡庭碩：可以講嗎？所有的重大議題再做都一樣的。）老師其實早就看透了，越熱血的人也會覺得撞破頭，我自己願意掏出3萬5，馮老師卻說不要，再者說我不是太有錢。" }, { "speaker": "陳聖凱", "speech": "第二點是早就認知到這一件事是顧問性質，而我們太熱血了，第一屆的時候，我自己也是創業者，所以也有一些實驗性質，很多人是請假去的，有人從台中來、高雄來（胡停碩：還有老師從綠島來。），還有人因為颱風被卡住。" }, { "speaker": "陳聖凱", "speech": "第二，為什麼要有這一個事？如果你認知到這一件事根本是一場鬧劇的話，事實上就不用做太多，因為你的生命不是很長，我覺得定位很重要。為什麼是顧問？顧問就是出嘴巴，出嘴巴有沒有意義這個是第二個。" }, { "speaker": "陳聖凱", "speech": "第三個我想分享的是，如果當時我們可以提早知道的話，我想這個是你的價值，我覺得會先瞭解公共行政，不然你其實在高官面前就是死小孩一樣，在這邊大放厥詞，結果連科長跟組長都不知道，所以你根本就是在一群很瞭解遊戲規則裡面的人，然後在講一些就像現在的小學生跑來跟你說你的公司要怎麼樣的話，也許不是不行，也可能會聽一下，會說1億才能開公司，會覺得你連公司都不懂，因此我後來就不敢發言，我後來不想浪費納稅人的錢，我還算是有一些羞恥心，有一些人覺得懶了。我想需要先瞭解這個架構，如果各位有興趣，可以先開讀書會，我說這個是真的，非常重要的，不然根本不知道對誰講話，詩函可不可以開這個？" }, { "speaker": "黃敬峰", "speech": "我們這邊也有專業的委員（經濟部的廖泰翔）。" }, { "speaker": "陳聖凱", "speech": "如果內部沒有先稍微討論一下，兩邊都跑去找了負責單位或者是部門的人，是不是更像死小孩？比如這一個跑來說找部會，連凝聚成共識都沒有辦法的話，那就會讓人家覺得，自己根本不知道在做什麼（庭碩：為了錢。（笑））。這個是我自己認知的。" }, { "speaker": "陳聖凱", "speech": "已經超過15分鐘了嗎？喔！其實只有5分鐘而已（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "陳聖凱", "speech": "為什麼是青諮？其實就代表著現在此時真正掌權的人，你說部長級的政務官或者是事務官，那幾十萬個公務員也就是你現在所要對話的對象，政府部門的概念到底是什麼？是部長或者是院長或者是事務官或者是政府意識或者是公務員意識？所以其實我們那時候沒有搞清楚這一個前提，因此當時很認真跟部長講，然後有時跟院長講，然後發現其實整件事其實我們一開始的前提都沒有搞對，我們到底是在對誰講話？因為我們內部還有熱血，像今天會來的是熱血，今天有車馬費嗎？（胡庭碩：沒有。）所以代表我們是熱血的。" }, { "speaker": "黃敬峰", "speech": "還要佈置場地，還要煮給大家吃（湯圓）。" }, { "speaker": "陳聖凱", "speech": "所以我們到底是對誰講話？十幾萬個事務官，這邊有二十八個超熱血的年輕人，原來有一群死小孩，真的是這樣，基本上我常常有這一種感覺，因為我們撼動不了，你連讓一個人積極一點（都撼動不了），比如你是老闆，像你對同事講一下、你激勵一下，他就熱血起來，他就願意多做了，或者是因為我們共同這個世代的人，你就說青年住宅，很多人就會有影響力，大家就會覺得很重要，公務員是有十萬人，而你只有一個人，你說青年住宅很重要，他們會想說：「我都不知道幾棟房子了。」，他完全無法感受到這一件事，所以就是創業、社會企業（公務員）看起來比較沒有辦法，不然其他人真的很像一群很熱血的人在那邊搖旗吶喊，也就是我們到底跟誰講話？這是我的以上心得。" }, { "speaker": "胡庭碩", "speech": "我真的可以做一句結語：去之前要做功課，節省大家的時間，不要浪費錢。像時間這一件事，我們如果開一個會，就以十個來說就好了，每一個人從平均從台中來，來回的高鐵票錢加上車馬費，就是4,000元，十個人那一場就是4萬，這是很可怕的。" }, { "speaker": "胡庭碩", "speech": "最後，除了往上溝通之外，有一個東西我後來想，很厲害的是把各位在會議上的東西發布出去，因為各位一定都是某個領域的意見領袖，所以把你開會、討論什麼事、發生什麼事，就盡可能對外公布，就用你常用的東西就好了，你再把那個東西剪貼再複製出去，那個就會是雙向的力量，我們只是剛好有鑰匙，我們背後所代表的那一群人比較厲害，謝謝各位。" }, { "speaker": "吳詩涵", "speech": "我很快講，我們當初為什麼要設青顧團跟青顧團所扮演的角色，我的觀點跟他們不一樣，因為我是在政府裡面看青顧團從頭到尾如何發生，包括如何選出這些人。" }, { "speaker": "吳詩涵", "speech": "如果以結果來看跟當初的期待其實有一點符合，青顧團其實是有一個雙向的橋梁，一個是可以讓你們的想法讓這一些所謂部長級的人知道，他們都很聰明，但是不見得有機會跟這麼多的年輕人或網路上的年輕人互動。" }, { "speaker": "吳詩涵", "speech": "另外一個方向是庭碩說政府到底做了什麼，我不知道有沒有聽到跟發現什麼事，上一屆的青顧團跟現在政府在做基本上是肯定的，這個跟兩年前的他們不一樣，透過兩年，他們知道政府有很努力在做事情，不見得如大家所期待。" }, { "speaker": "吳詩涵", "speech": "其實我覺得大家進來之後，雖然沒有辦法代表所有的年輕人，但是這一些公務人員想要瞭解大家，其實老實說所有大家提出來的問題，他們都非常慎重，說白了也會增加大家很大的負擔，像青發署為了這一個業務要加班非常多天，因此要做什麼的時候，先做功課、瞭解一些東西，才會有共識。" }, { "speaker": "吳詩涵", "speech": "執行面上大家要花時間不太可能，大家都有自己的事，一開始不用做得很大，而是最小做的事再做出來之後，如果像政府溝通也可以跟我私下討論。" }, { "speaker": "黃敬峰", "speech": "我們這邊也有高手。" }, { "speaker": "廖泰翔", "speech": "我想問一下，有關公共行政相關的，有沒有推薦的書？我沒有看過，所以我花很多時間找。" }, { "speaker": "黃敬峰", "speech": "入門書，有什麼葵花寶典？" }, { "speaker": "陳聖凱", "speech": "公共行政概要吧！" }, { "speaker": "吳詩涵", "speech": "其實我覺得最重要的是，你要瞭解公務員的心態，你要瞭解他們怎麼做事跟方法。" }, { "speaker": "林文攀", "speech": "上一屆花這麼多的時間，我們再花這麼多的時間，等於花了第一年做他們經過的事情，是不是一開始有人跟我們講說公務員在想什麼？" }, { "speaker": "黃敬峰", "speech": "這一件困難的事就交給政委了（笑）。我知道大家都很想問一些問題，現在也9點多了，身為今天的召集人有一點話。（庭碩：是不是一句話？）沒有一句話，而是一段話。" }, { "speaker": "黃敬峰", "speech": "我自己是新北市的顧問，跟趙式隆、小羊都一樣，最近也是透過新北市的顧問位置做了不少的事情，就如同大家講的，我覺得我們相對於你們所認知的會更有影響力的這一件事，基本上他們看到的不是你，他們看到的是唐鳳政委，所以某個程度有一點帶著敬畏的心在看著你，有一點的壞處是，他們講的話不知道是不是因為副市長的關係或者是我的關係所以多講那一句話，至少我很容易接觸到關鍵的任務，這個是很大的重點，不管我們可不可以撼動這一件事，我們可以瞭解到關鍵任務。" }, { "speaker": "黃敬峰", "speech": "事實上林全院長在發布那一天的時候，他有提到一個重點是讓年輕人真的早一點到行政體系、政務體系做更多的，像泰翔在柯市長跟捷運公司那邊學到非常、非常多，他也是一個非常優秀的人，我相信大家都是一樣的。" }, { "speaker": "黃敬峰", "speech": "我簡短分享的是，大家真的有影響力的這一件事，就像我跟大家分享新北市去開會人非常非常少，整個委員只有我一個人，開會也沒有什麼流程，但是最好的事情是，新北市把這一些委員派到新北市不同的學校分享，我是交點公司的負責人，了不起辦五十個人的聚會，我一年來活動的人六百人，但是政府的力量不一樣，一號召就是一千五百人（淡江大學），這是兩年辦交點成績的事；雖然找趙式隆分享公益服務，我覺得很誇張，我不是要婊趙式隆（趙式隆開玩笑比中指）。事實上他很聰明，如果以他的天分，你要他講劍道或茶道，他都可以講，我說認真的（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "黃敬峰", "speech": "但是我想要跟大家分享的是，雖然我們看到一千五百人只是數字而已，但我看到的是這一些數字背後所代表的是一個又一個下一個唐鳳政委、林全院長、馬英九前總統、朱立倫市長、蔡英文總統，那每一個代表都是一個靈魂，而這一個靈魂是我們能影響的，即便我們在位置上，可能跟一個公務人員、行政體系的長官講話的過程當中，都有可能影響到他們，他們就有機會在他們的單位裡面影響更多人，就像貢丸(政委秘書、參事)，事實上我跟他溝通的過程當中——雖然貢丸是政委辦公室同仁——像詩涵在行政體系裡面在做事，他們都非常認真，但是這一些人被我們外部的人感動的時候，事實上他們真的會改變，當我們一直不斷累積的時候是一群又一群，也許我們沒有辦法馬上做很厲害的事，我們也不是明年很厲害，我們是希望五年跟十年後改變，那一天我是很開心的離開新北市政府，因為我覺得我們做對一些事，這一些事不一定會成功，但是不做一定不會成功，把時間留給政委。" }, { "speaker": "邱嘉緣", "speech": "剛剛講到可以事先閱讀的資料，報導者有一系列的文章，這個是進入門檻最低的文章，報導者只要搜尋「公務員」就會有一系列的文章。" }, { "speaker": "胡庭碩", "speech": "還有兩岸三地的公務員文章。" }, { "speaker": "羊正鈺", "speech": "我想講的是，這一屆兩年做對社企案，最大的原因是因為馮政委是社企的、蔡玉玲政委是新創的，如果你們負責人是唐政委的話，要跟她的互動要非常多，也要很瞭解她可以讓你們發揮影響力，可能是乘倍數，也可能是沒有影響力──應該是說政委很重要。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我剛好是社企政委，如果有社企題目的話，理論上是我主導沒有錯。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "比較特別的是我是開放政府政委，這個是新出現的政委角色。開放政府當然跟我們這邊設計非常像，是雙向的橋梁，剛才也有跟幾位青諮委員聊過，我們其實現在各部會都會有一個主要的開放政府聯絡人，就像是國會聯絡人或者是新聞媒體聯絡人一樣，但是是對全民的聯絡人，理論上。所以不管是連署案或者是其他的公眾諮詢案，慢慢會在公部門裡面培養一個，至少知道如何運用正當程序的入，透過他做出一個團隊出來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我剛剛想要提報導者，很高興有人提了，有一些想要互動跟問題，這邊有非常好的暗樁之外，我現在覺得比起兩年前更好的是，臉書上出現一些很奇妙的團體，其中一個是「台灣公務力量革新聯盟（簡稱公革力）」，這一些跟我們年紀差不多，用匿名或半匿名的方式，有些人具名或者是出書（笑）的情況下去進行一些工作。這一屆青諮會的特點是組織者特別多、公革力的組織者也特別多，他們已經組織到好比像核災附近四縣食品公聽會輸台的大型公眾諮詢都有保留票的程度。公革力的成員，現在在民間跟公共諮詢上有自己的一股勢力，大部分都是專業事務官，而且年紀沒有跟我們差很多，所以各位看到報導者的報導之後，有一些公共行政上想要討論的話，可以去公革力那邊問，當然也可以用具名或者是匿名的方法問。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個是學理，我自己用的是「民主治理」這本書，這個是我知道要接政務委員之後，大概9月在巴黎只帶了這本書，看了一整個月。在政大公行裡面，我必須要誠實說，這本書並不是通說也不是主要的流派，是其中某一位老師的說法，但是我之所以為什麼看這一本？因為我是學資訊工程，它把公務員為什麼會選擇欺上瞞下的一些行為，用理性選擇理論去進行說明，他承擔了什麼風險？但是躲避了什麼別的風險？同樣做一件事，是要推掉或者是承擔，要聽人民的聲音或者是聽特定民代的講法，為什麼？是用理性選擇理論來描述，為什麼公務員作為他們現在在做的這一件事。還有，我們要改變哪一些參數之後，也許公務員做事的動機，就會朝向我們比較想要看到的部分改變？因為我念資訊科學，這樣的理論比較可以建模、才能寫程式，這個是我比較理解的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "同樣在電子治理的研究中心，別的老師有各自不同的進路，看你本來學什麼，跟你比較像的進路，都可以參考「電子治理研究中心（TEG）」，所以看一下名單，就可以知道目前學界對公共行政曾經做過系統性的動機研究的老師們大家是什麼想法，就可以挑到自己比較看得懂的那一個人著作，如果要辦讀書會或者要跟TEG的朋友們協作的話，讓我知道就好了，我入閣之前也是TEG的計畫顧問，可以直接跟這些老師們進行討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我今天學到很多，而且也很高興有逐字稿，會回去慢慢再看大家的意見。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為大家剛剛聽完會發現有一個想要改變的東西，然後透過我或者是林全院長加以列管，一直到部會給你一個具體的答覆，不管是不是真的造成改變，這個是絕對做得到的，因為各位在這一個位置上真的能夠改變這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但如果想要跟事務體系有結構性的對話，一方面要花足夠多的時間，讓他們相信你是作為一個人、而不是作為一個委員的角色，值得跟他們一起對話，我們目前專業的事務官裡面也有一批跟我們一樣從網路世代出來，然後相信開放、協作的這一群人，他們也期待著我們去做一些議程設定的工作，因為他們在內部只能用匿名來做這一件事，但是我們直接可以跟部長對話的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以如果看到公革力要做到一些東西，或者是其他的專業事務官本來就認識了，包括本來就有雙重身分的青諮的朋友，即使只是動一張嘴，但是在講這一句話的時候，已經知道裡面有內應，這個東西落實的機率就高很多。當然如果你講的一句話還不知道在哪裡的時候，就可以透過剛剛講的方式試著找到內應，如果能夠用到我的地方，跟我說就是了。以上，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "黃敬峰", "speech": "接下來沒有回應，我們就請青年署組長，科長上面是組長，組長上面就是署長。" }, { "speaker": "青年署組長", "speech": "很高興今天來參加，青顧團兩年來我們也都陪伴著大家，他們剛剛講的，我們都有同感，特別是這幾位意見領袖，他們後來也成為教育電臺的主持人（趙式隆：這一季還是我主持）。其實他們這一屆的建議案有很多被執行，這一屆我們改成青諮委員，我相信透過這樣的經驗交流，他們又給你們那麼多的提醒，比如要先做功課這一類的，我相信冤枉路會少走一點，尤其相信政委大力幫忙，我們作為一個幕僚單位沒有問題，該幫忙一定幫忙，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛剛要我特別介紹一下開放政府聯絡人第一個確定的（笑），他是貢丸，他是我們辦公室主要會對各位的對口。我們已經合作很久了，他是「vTaiwan」在閉鎖型公司，第一個從蔡政委那邊提出來可以交給全民的，大家一起討論閉鎖型公司法這一案，我記得當時上稿的時候，因為我們當時的想法是法案通過時，每一個字都必須要能夠追蹤到到底是誰講了哪一段話的建議，所以就花了非常多的時間上稿，那時候貢丸還會說這個字事實上是有錯一個字或者多一個字，所以在上稿的時候有非常多的對話，算是老戰友了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "絕大部分的時候，我就是出一張嘴，實際做事的是辦公室的朋友們，貢丸是最資深之一。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "而貢丸會有兩個身分，一個是PDIS小組對各位的聯絡人。接下來的每一個部會都有對於開放政府的聯絡人，他剛好是蒙藏會的開放政府聯絡人（笑），因為他是蒙藏會的公務員，就是在蒙藏會還存在的過程裡面，它仍然是一個會，所以仍然必須要有一個開放政府的聯絡人，我們會有三十二個。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "組成開放政府聯絡人的另外一個好處，是我們等於有三十二個冒出頭來的，等於在他們的部會裡面有一定的位階，直接對他們的次長或者是副主委。這樣的意思是什麼？每一次的部會有一個大的開放政府討論案要做的事，不管是公聽會，或者是公眾諮詢，或者是在街上要爆炸的案子，不一定只動員他們的部內，也有一些沒有那麼多事的聯絡人可以支援，我相信蒙藏會永遠都不會有事情（笑），所以貢丸永遠可以在後勤的角色幫助大家（笑），不管各位未來要往哪一個部會提案，如果一下子沒有辦法提案的話，都有蒙藏會開放政府聯絡人可以幫大家handle，大概介紹一下，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "黃敬峰", "speech": "再補充一下，事實上政委一直在想辦法，政委上任還不到一百天，事實上做的事情已經滿多了，如果大家有時間看「Mix Taiwan」，政委在有限的時間內做哪一些事，我覺得很棒。我們也開始促成政委跟馮老師私底下碰面，跟今天類似的概念，只是他們是更密集的討論，所以很多當初馮老師在做的事情，我相信政委一定會在這邊跟各位多交流。接下來的時間我比較期待大家跟還沒有交流到的平行間的青諮夥伴交流，及跟學長、學姐交流，就把時間給大家，謝謝大家。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I’m the expert now on the visiting protocol." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly, you’re the protocol expert. You’re probably the only person outside our office who has read through the whole thing. (laughs)" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Yes, repeatedly." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Are you coffee’d out? No more coffee for you?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No, I’ve maximized my caffeine intake today." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "No more people? That’s it?" }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Yes, one more, but I think he’s debugging. He’ll join later." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We’re all pretty curious how did you get interested in our..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Here’s the thing. I found a video of you." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "On YouTube?" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "That’s right, or Facebook. It doesn’t matter. I was like, \"All right, this is interesting. OK, Taiwan is doing something very cool.\" I read up on you more, and then something ticked, and I became excited. We share a lot of the values. That was what attracted me to email you. We believe in tech as way to create a more optimal government, civic duties that we have, responsibilities, building trust in the government." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Hi, come in. I was just getting started, how I got to stalk Audrey." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I just saw all these check marks, and I viewed it...You’re a lot more techy than I am, but we all did tech stuff and we usually go towards a vision, or we usually follow a leader that has the equal visions as you, for example, for a start." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "When I started learning more and more and more of what you’re doing, I thought, \"This person has a vision that I can relate to,\" and, \"She’s probably going to need a lot of help.\" I don’t know how, I don’t know where, or how we could do something, but I just wanted to let you know, \"Hey, I’m here.\"" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Some of the things that you said really resonated with me. That’s pretty much how I figured out how to contact you. (laughs) Then I went to your YouTube channel and I just messaged you through there. That’s how it all started. I originally wanted just to..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Have some coffee?" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Since then I’ve been craving this red velvet cake from this coffee shop. (laughs) I almost bought some, but I wanted just to have a sit down and have more casual, but now there so many formalities and so many people here..." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "I think we are very casual here." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "As you can see, it’s like a small start‑up here." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Except for that [points at recorder]... everything is going to be public, except for that." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Anyway, that’s why I emailed you. I don’t know exactly how or where you see someone like me fit in, but maybe an extra eye and ear that could help you brainstorm an idea, or advice in a particular segment, a bridge. You talked about more transparent communication: transparent like glass, reflective like a mirror?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "These are all things that align to what I hope to find in some leader ‑‑ I don’t want to say like that ‑‑ but a movement. That’s what gravitated me to where I am here today. So, I’m here." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You’re very welcome." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We’re pretty transparent, as evidently you’ve probably already read about whatever we’re doing. If you have any suggestions or anything that you would like to contribute, just let us know, or any questions." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Here’s my more philosophical question...where do you see yourself in five years? Correct me if I’m wrong, I feel that now you have this platform, not only technical, but also political, where you could really create this movement that not only changes Taiwan for the better as far as 1) transparency, 2) a bridge to Silicon Valley, 3) a hub of startup, but you could do amazing things. I think that (some Mandarin words)." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No, our English is pretty good." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Oh, fantastic. Even better for me. I was stressing already." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "You have this group of people that could really, you guys could really do something amazing. I don’t know, I feel like it’s brewing... where I could see where it could go. I just want to let you know that I could be of help if you want me to be." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, certainly. Our entire communication strategy is pretty open. In fact, our entire website, the digital copy of it, is kept ‑‑ discussion boards that you’ve been to ‑‑ vTaiwan.tw, of course talk.pdis.tw. If you want to contribute by copy editing or helping us write more English communication materials, which I now have discovered you’re expert in." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "All right, I could do that too." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It all depends on what you want to do. Around here, in the office we practice what we call the objective key result, the OKR kind of management, meaning that instead of me dictating where the office is going, I actually ask these guys where they would like to see themselves not in five years, but in three months time, and what kind of objectives each individual personally wants to see happening." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "My role here is to facilitate everybody’s objectives and make sure that they align in some way. We would then collectively determine our office objective for the next three months or so. We don’t plan for five years. For a minister to plan for five years is absurd, because one term is four years." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "How about yourself as Audrey? For example..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "As for myself..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Go ahead." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No, I promise to be honest and..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "You’ll still be..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "On Earth. I’m not going to Mars in five years. Even Elon Musk is not going to be there in five years." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Yeah, he’ll let somebody else do the testing for it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There will probably be some robots instead. Let’s be fair." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In any case, honestly, I’m pretty much signed up for the public service. It may be in government. It may be in an NGO. It may be in civil society in an individual capacity. I’ve been retired for a couple of years before I joined the government, so as soon as I’m out of this job, I’ll probably be on a similar job doing, still, governance stuff." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "You don’t expect to be in policy‑making for the foreseeable future like your predecessor?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Jaclyn Tsai?" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "No, he was the digital minister before, and then he became the prime minister, right?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Simon Chang?" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, Chang is still doing effectively open government on communication work. He’s now working in the Taiwan Mobile Foundation, still doing a lot of policy thinking, working with the civil society." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Do you see yourself doing that type of career in politics?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Well, it’s not quite a career. There’s no upward path." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Who knows?" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Why not? It could be." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Like in the United Nations?" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Or Senator Tang, then up and up and up. Do you see something like that..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "From a minister to a parliament member, I’m not sure whether it’s a move up or down, but in any case..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "...I harbor no political ambitions. I’m here to do open government work, regardless of whether Taiwan gives me a title or not. I’ve been doing this work for the past few years now, since at least 2012. If you count other sideline endeavors, then it’s longer. I’ve been here for a while doing, more or less, exactly the same thing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now I’m blessed with a much more capable team than when I had to do everything myself, but it’s still more or less the same kind of work." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "So you could only have a four‑year term. What is your goal through that four‑year term?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "My goal is to facilitate everybody’s goal on my team. It doesn’t sound fair, but that’s how OKR works." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "All the pressure’s on us." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I know!" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Well you can declare an objective of nothing. You want to do nothing for three months, I will facilitate it." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I see. I know that you have three mandates: One is open government, social entrepreneurship, and then youth council." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right, but the youth council is actually part of the open government work, because their mandate ‑‑ well, ours, because I’m also a council member ‑‑ as it turns out, is to facilitate open government through direct communication." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s like a subset of the entire open government mandate, but for young people. Social enterprise is something else, of course. It’s a bridge between the traditional NGOs, non‑profit world, and enterprises looking to improve their sustainability or CSR, social responsibility." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That involves some policy‑making, but I’m not an expert in social enterprise. I’m mostly learning from people from both sides and trying to facilitate some things, like the upcoming Company Act rewrite, that takes care of both sides’ concerns. What I’m saying is I don’t have a personal agenda for the social enterprise work." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Most of our office time is spent on open government work, planning particular designs around how to get ministries to talk directly with people, with stakeholders, instead of through proxies like media. The media of course is very important as an ally, but we want the ministry to also be capable of operating as their own self-media." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "All right. Then mostly the work is that is done in this office is towards open governance?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "So vTaiwan?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, like vTaiwan and Join are the two Internet platforms, but there’s also things like Facebook pages and websites of each ministry. There’s also public hearings and city engagement roles in many of the ministries, in particular the Ministry of the Interior." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "OK, side note. I was checking out vTaiwan. What happens if fake accounts start going on a particular..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We don’t vote." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "It’s not voting, because you have some aggregations of people’s voices and opinions. So if, let’s say with respect to the Uber thing, because it’s the easiest to discuss..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Everybody brings that one up...[opens vTaiwan webpage and projects to wall Uber topic]" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Yeah, it’s a beat up subject, but it’s easy. You have Uber, and there’s clusters of people. Let’s say..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Let’s say hundreds of people register fake accounts and vote exactly the same." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Or I’m the taxi driver, so I tell all my taxi driver friends, \"Hey, we don’t want Uber. Let’s skew it.\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right, that’s exactly what happened. When we invited everybody from the taxi, the Uber, and everybody to contribute, that’s what happens. The all voted very similarly in the first week, and they all clustered in the corners." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You can see with your own eyes that people are divided in the four corners, because we take as finding agenda only the consensus items, then manage to convince people we’re different than they are. They have to come up with something to convince at least 80 percent of the total population, regardless of how many people they get through here." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It is dynamic threshold. It was 80 percent, because it was roughly a four‑sixths split. We’re taking all of 60 and half of 40 to calculate the threshold. In the next case, it was 20‑80 because there’s some mobilization on the 80 part. The threshold is now all of 80 plus half of 20, meaning that you still have to convince 90 percent of people." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No matter how many people you mobilize, you still have to convince half of the people in the other side." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "To go forward with your particular..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That particular agenda. That’s one thing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The other thing is that if you mobilize a million people and you vote exactly the same, it’s just one dot on this two‑dimensional plot. What we’re visualizing here is not the weight or the rank between the people’s positions, but rather the diversity. If you mobilize a dozen people, and they vote exactly the same, it’s just going to count only as one point around this mark." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What we’re trying to do is to get a spectrum of stakeholder positions, so that when we’re doing the face‑to‑face deliberation, we can consider everybody’s positions, and it’s regardless of how many people uphold this position." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In fact, the person who wrote this software was a civics teacher who taught Habermas. He insisted that even if there is a tiny fraction, like three people, as compared to thousands here, that holds a peculiar position that’s not share with any other cluster." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "They’ll still show." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It will still show." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "That’s right." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, that’s right. That’s how it was designed." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Let’s go back to the Uber thing. Let’s say we’re crowd‑sourcing policy..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The agenda." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "The agenda, that’s right." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What we’re talking about, yeah." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "We give them the points of this stuff or everybody brings their own points. What happens if, for example, let’s take a famous quote from Steve Jobs, I think he says something like \"If somebody asked the people in the times of Henry Ford, they would have just asked for a faster horse.’" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Would that be applicable here that most people might not see the benefits of having a service like a peer‑to‑peer car sharing?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Maybe." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "So then would that be that we are creating policy based on a..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Democratic institution?" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "No. OK, yes. I see what you’re doing here." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Isn’t that the point? (laughs)" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "That is the point, but the majority sometimes doesn’t see the long term." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s true, which is why we need to have this reflective space, so that the initial minority positions get time to disseminate into this wider population." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You would note that it doesn’t look anything, the four corners now. This is because, after three or four weeks, they started to cohere ‑‑ more eclectic, more nuanced. More thought is being put into the subsequent ideas, so that when people ranked those ideas, they found stuff they tend to agree with things that are more... considered every stakeholder’s position, that is to say, more eclectic." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It is true that, with this process, we can’t count on somebody from the collective intelligence to have the foresight of Steve Jobs, but this is not what this is about. This is about getting something that everybody can live with among controversies." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "OK, I understand." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "OK, you’re welcome, glad to explain. But that was the point, seriously." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "You mentioned one of the things that you wanted to do was not be the Silicon Valley of Asia, but more of a hub." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Linking Asia and connecting to the Silicon Valley." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "So how come we don’t want to be the Silicon Valley of Asia?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Because there’s already a Silicon Valley of Earth." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Do we not want to create that type of innovative environment here?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Probably not that particular type." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Why not?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Because it’s not going to work. Taiwan’s essence and very peculiar culture towards startups, towards innovation, and towards foreigners… I would, of course, love to have some more Silicon Valley kind respect for diversity or getting more talented people from around the world." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is part of linking Asia plan and educational diversification, so we are not caught in one discipline. But still, with all these efforts, we’re still not replicating the Silicon Valley culture at all. Taiwan has its own culture. Branding it as Silicon Valley of Taiwan just dilutes the Silicon Valley idea and also dilutes the Taiwanese culture. I don’t see anything useful in branding it like that." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Ok. So how can we be better than Singapore as a hub?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Well I don’t care. Singapore is very good at being Singapore. Singapore doesn’t have 23 million people. It’s a city‑state that excels in what a city‑state does, because it’s very small and it has a lot of efficiency‑minded policy‑making." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Taiwan is much larger, a lot more people, a lot more respect in this kind of consensus‑making, rather than sheer efficiency. It’s going to be a different path. It’s going to be a different model. Taiwan’s better at being Taiwan than Singapore does, but that’s not saying much." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "OK, so how do you see..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I’m pretty uniquely non‑competitive." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "No, no, that’s fine. I just wanted to see where we’re going as far as Taiwan and the bridge..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We’re going upwards." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Good. As long as it’s that way, we’re good." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Towards the sun, towards the stars." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "That’s right. How are we going to get there, the particular aspects?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Through what we call a convergent boundary between the two tectonic plates." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "When they hit?" }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "We’re technically going upwards." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "You mean physically?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "...we go up a little bit more every now and then." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Like five centimeter every year." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Something like that. It is true. It’s been like that for the past four million years. (laughs)" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "That’s not what I meant though, but I like that..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s what I meant." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Oh, oh." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "You were so happy about it." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I’m was getting pumped here." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "...not trying to disappoint you, not for this meeting." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It is a pretty physical statement, saying that we’re inching towards the sky. It means that we are not competing with anybody else." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "OK, how can we be more unique? Do we have a way of creating this unique Taiwan tech hub?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure, yes." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "OK. How are we going to do that?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "How are we going to do that? By just doing innovative stuff. In the government, we’re trying to find out ‑‑ we have this kind of Agile governance ‑‑ what kind of existing regulations serve no purpose but to block people’s own innovating." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then we’re assessing them on vTaiwan and other platforms, so that we can get everybody a new version that everybody can live with and is somewhat better than the previous version. It doesn’t have to be perfect. Then we do that every time there is someone that says we should review that revision again. This is a recurrent process." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "OK." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We did that for many things." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We’re currently doing this for the securitization of intangible assets, which means that if some company secures a contract with the government, say, that they are going to supply renewable energy for the next 20 years, they could use this government contract to get some loan from a bank, without getting some cars or houses or whatever as tangible assets. That used to be the only thing that could be securitized." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There’s many little, small things like this. Each one, taken together, gets us a better innovative environment." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "OK, so how would you, as in the office of the Digital Ministry, like to create that bridge? You mentioned one of the things you’d like to talk about is creating that bridge to the international community. Do you see certain strategies of doing that?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So far, we’ve just been documenting the tools, the rules, the playbooks, that we’ve been doing. They’re very hard at work on this website. (laughs)" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "You mean vTaiwan?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No. PDIS. [pulls up PDIS.tw website and projects its on the wall]" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "What does PDIS stand for?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Public Digital Innovation Space." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "OK." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But if you look at a website you would think it’s public digital innovation service, which works too." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I see." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It lists our..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "[reads from landing page] \"We incubate and facilitate public digital innovation and service.\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right, and then it highlights..." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "That’s where we need your input." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s the kind of initiatives we’re doing, and if you click \"More about PDIS\" it shows some backlogs of whatever we did. We have interviews, and then there is also a page that describes the tools that we use for our everyday work." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Right, you have that Virtual..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "...Reality stuff." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Yeah, it’s kind of like that \"Black Mirror\" episode, the one where they..." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Yeah, I saw that." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Everybody has an avatar, and they vote. (laughs)." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, I saw that." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Yeah, see someone, vote someone." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right, exactly. We’re all fans of Black Mirror here." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Don’t watch that if you want to sleep. It’s horrible." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In any case..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Moving right on." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Basically, like our counterparts in other places ‑‑ you mentioned Singapore ‑‑ there’s a Singapore government agency, that is the Singapore GDS, which is I think a hundred people now? More people than us, though we’re getting there." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In any case, there’s counterparts like our office all around the world. There is GDS in the UK. There is USDS in the US. There is one in Australia, I think. There is one in Italy." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In many cases, what we’re doing here is just to document the kind of tools that we borrowed from other public sector innovative labs, and also sometimes the private sector, (laughs) then document how we’re adapting it for our purposes, and then share it at the end. We attend international conferences and..." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "See if anyone has a tool that we can adapt." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I’m not here representing the private sector..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Oh, sure, but if you have some tricks that we can adopt in our daily work, just add it here [addresses the site], and we’ll give it a try." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "OK." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What we are trying to do here is to basically be a meme." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "That’s what you practice here?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right, exactly. Be a meme, that is to say to spread ideas that’re worth spreading." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Like TED?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure, with ideas that we hope are worth spreading and..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "That’s our motto, \"ideas hopefully worth spreading.\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We spread hopeful ideas." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "\"Ideas hopefully worth spreading - Digital Ministry of Taiwan.\" I get it. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "\"Hopeful ideas, worth spreading.\" In any case, what we are aiming to do here is to get each ministry to assign a participation officer. Then we work with POs to empower them to face the cyberspace, to face this kind of civic engagement, also to empower them so they get versed into these kind of data tools that we use." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now whether they spread these ideas into their ministries isn’t really our call, but at least..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "At least they’re there and..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "...they’re there, they’re public, and there is some cross-ministry collaboration. That’s what we’re doing this year. There’s not much space left, but that’s what we’ve been doing." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "You have two weeks to finish this up [referencing to the end of the year coming in 2 weeks]." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah. (laughs)" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "So this is something that the ministry will be making public and creating..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Holding workshops and whatever." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Who will be in charge of that?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Everybody." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Everybody here?" }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Everybody here." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, pretty much." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Really? But if everybody’s in charge, then no one is in charge." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Really?" }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "I think it’s the reverse. No one in charge and then everybody’s in charge." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Oh, OK." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Everyone here is pretty much self‑recharging. We’re on renewable energy." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Now we’re just recharging." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "It’s like some kind of blockchain thing [Ethereum], it is self‑funding." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly, exactly." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "By the way you met with Vitalik Buterin. That guy is insane. He’s wonderful." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Are you trying to use some kind of blockchain technology to put behind..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What?" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "...vTaiwan for example, or creating some kind of more..." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "We’re rethinking the new website of vTaiwan, and for that I’d like to hear more input from you as well. So you just..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Stumbled upon this." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "You understand the structure of vTaiwan, but you haven’t use it personally?" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "But it’s in Chinese. I had to fumble my way through it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s something we’re working on, also." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "And you understand Chinese?" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I don’t. I understand context, which is great because Chinese is very contextual. (laughs)" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Seriously? So you read Chinese..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I don’t." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "...as if it’s contextual pictographs?" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "That’s right." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Ah, very handy on a menu." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Right. (laughs) That’s a way that we can figure out the UX. Even if the people don’t really understand, at least you could..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "...see those icons. See, that’s why icons are very important." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "She makes all our icons." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Oh, OK." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "No, I didn’t. Don’t put that on me." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "She made the new ones." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Hey, it got me this far." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "She made the old ones." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I made the old ones. Yes, that’s it..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "It’s OK. It got me this far to understanding that entire thing in Chinese. Anyway, are you guys trying to do something with Ethereum? What’s going on with that?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "If you are, then we are." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "If I am, then you are?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I’m not." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then not for now. Sorry." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Oh, come on. You’re much more technically savvy on this than I am." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s true." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "It is true, yes. (laughs) Don’t rub it in." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What I’m saying is that although I am technically capable of running a blockchain, whatever, I’m not seeing anything in the vTaiwan process that would benefit from a distributive ledger at this point. I’m sure that there will be in the future, if somebody cares enough to do it." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "To try to figure something out?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right. This is the idea that you have three or more parties, and neither trusts each other enough to put their ledgers in the same place." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I don’t know if this is even technically possible, but again we are brainstorming. This is why I wanted to do coffee, really relax. One of the debates that you had with David from Uber..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "David Plouffe." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "That’s right." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Nice guy." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Yeah, he’s great." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "...was that he said, \"So you want the government to have the control of the policymaking over Uber?\" That’s one of his side comments." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No, we were talking about the car dispatch. I was talking about how we’re building an API standard so that everybody who has an e‑fleet car can put it on an open exchange, of sorts. In fact, the Ministry of Transport is working on what they call the PTX, the Public Transport Exchange, for something like that, where they share the open data on the traffic data." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You can consume it very easily to do your own traffic analysis and service..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I understand what you meant. I think maybe the communication did not go through, and then he was like, \"Wait, so you want the...\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The government controlling the entire..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "\"...the platform?\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right, traffic platform. I was like, \"No, I want everybody to share it.\"" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I think that’s where one of the trickeries of communication went through there. But, that got me to thinking. What if that is controlled in the..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Cloud." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Yeah, like in an Ethereum fork. I don’t know. Would that be even possible?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Maybe. It is a very interesting thought. Let’s see." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Then it will be self‑governing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s true. Currently, the airlines, the buses, the city bus here, the inner city bus, registers through machine‑to‑machine interfaces to the Ministry of Transport. What you’re essentially saying is that, \"Well, we use blockchain to collaborate with different storage.\" [ pulls up https://ptx.transportdata.tw/PTX ]" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "That’s right." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I’m sure it’s technically possible, yes." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Would that be beneficial? Would that help? Uber wouldn’t be concerning that it’s a government‑regulated platform, because they’ve never been..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That would be entirely dependent on how the blockchain code is written. The fact that it’s a blockchain doesn’t mean that it’s decentralized. It only means it’s multi‑central, that the initial agreed‑upon rules that can be enforced independently." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Still, there has to be some initial rules, and who gets those rules is...I’m all for redundant backups of these kind of data. Granted, that means that somebody would want to host their own part of this replication. In fact, PTX is already open data." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "By the license, there is nothing preventing you, for example, from starting a blockchain that stores these data, or even makes this without the data. It’s entirely allowed. The fact that there’s nobody doing this probably says that it’s us not knowing sufficient people." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There’s probably already people doing this. They are just not registering themselves or let us in. I’m sure that there’s already plenty of people making use of these data." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Is the ministry open to having outsiders from Taiwan creating these type of apps for the Taiwanese government, to be used in Taiwan?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Not at all. It’s just fine. I work with the Ministry of Education’s Creative Commons data. The largest consumer of that data happens to be Pleco." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "The Chinese learning app. I have it. (laughs)" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I’m sure you have it. Everybody has it. We did get useful feedback from Pleco, so I’m sure there’s already these kind of collaborations also in other domains. It’s just that I know dictionaries better." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You have good ideas. Go ahead and we’ll try and create it." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "(laughs) You mentioned in the email that you wanted to figure out how we could bridge the international community." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Certainly. Now that you know we have a website, it’s a pretty well‑kept secret. We’ve not been advertising it." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "PDIS?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, pdis.tw, which..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "With an O, not a zero this time. [referencing g0v.tw site]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s just pdis.tw, which automatically expands to this pdis.nat.gov.tw, meaning the national government." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "PDIS.nat.gov.tw." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That part is optional. You can just write pdis.tw, and it will get you there. This is just to say that we’re still a government agency, of sorts." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I understand." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In any case, the entire content here is amenable to change. If you find a better way to say something, or you want to see a new page, or whatever, just post it on the forum, and it will be done. There’s a forum talk.pdis.tw, which expands to talk.pdis.nat.gov.tw." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Now that you know the pattern, you can fill in the rest of them. Then you will see a category here that says \"PDIS site\". You will see pretty much the entire website here, what we do, how we work." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "This [site] is in English... and this is...that one [clicks link on PDIS.tw category \"PDIS site\" that opens to another page]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is basically just a link to a speech that I gave. If you see “track”, this is basically a chronological log of what everybody in the office, but mostly me..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Are you @chlai? Is that you?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "@chlai is somebody else." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "@chlai is there...[points to outside of office]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Smart Lai is @chlai." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Oh, OK." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "We have 17 people." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "17 people are doing this?" }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "16, now 17." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Where are they? Are they remote, or do they all fit in this office?" }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "They’re here and upstairs on the third floor." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "On the third floor. There’s nine people up, and seven here ‑‑ counting you, eight." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Join us!" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Yeah!" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "If you register for an account in this forum, you can basically just look here, and then you will see the entire website, actually. This is my talk. Basically, they just transcribed this, added some photos ‑‑ I don’t remember putting this in, then switched to, \"Let’s all keep listening to each other. Thank you for listening,\" and changed that to, \"Thank you for reading,\" which breaks the rhyme. I think it’s more fitting for a website. (laughs)" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In any case, this ends up here. If you click this [click through flow of PDIS.tw site revisions]" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I see. Whatever is there in that admin..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s displayed here. At the moment, it’s instant. You will be..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "It’s instant? If there’s a bunch errors like there..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right, then you will see a lot of errors..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "You’re testing in prod, basically?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That is correct." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Soon, we will have a better pipeline where it was pre‑rendered." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "That’s so good. I see." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "If you happen to not speak English, then you can switch to other languages, like Spanish." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Where’s the Spanish? Let’s see the Spanish." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You speak Spanish?" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Yeah, I speak Spanish." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Oh, that’s great. There’s also Catalan, which is different." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "]Reads spanish text of PDIS site] That’s not bad. Is this Google just translating?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is Google, yes. So we also have the Spanish website." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Very good. Let’s do \"the business talk\". What is the marketing strategy behind the Digital Ministry of Taiwan?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s a very good question. It’s a question that we expected you to ask." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No, seriously. We don’t yet have a strategy. We give some international talks. She gave, what, two...? [Points to Shuyang]" }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Two." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "...just this year. After coming into office, I gave maybe four or five to our international counterparts." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "You did one with Blaise?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, that was earlier though." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "With the eye thing. It has the eye, retina, face recognition?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That was in January. That was before I was a minister. I was just a random speaker at that point. Then I gave his talk in Mix Taiwan in the Ministry of Economy, talking about the artificial intelligence stuff." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Thanks, Blaise, if you’re watching, for these slides." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In any case, what we’ve been doing mostly, using this website [points to PDIS.tw] , is just to bring it to our international counterparts, and say, \"This is roughly what we’re doing.\" It’s a conversation‑starter so far, but it could do much more." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "What do you think?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What do you think?" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "What do I think about the...?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The digital communications strategy." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Wow, all right. I was ready to ask it, but I’m not so sure to answer that question right now." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "For example..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Take your time." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "You can tell us anytime." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We have a Twitter account, but we’re not using it at the moment." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "The Digital Ministry of Taiwan?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No, we call it Taiwan PDIS." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "@TaiwanPDIS." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "How come you call it that?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Because it’s the Public Digital Innovation Space. If you have any suggestions, we can switch." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "That \"digital minister\" name has so much punch. I’m talking branding here, like hardcore..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s great. Go ahead, yes. I totally agree. Go ahead." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "A digital minister, everybody in the planet knows what that represents." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Maybe not everyone." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "You are a minister." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "This one is \"Taiwan’s Digital Minster.\"" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Yes, you are the minister, therefore you have some political weight behind, you have some clout. You have a team. You have some kind of power, and you’re in digital... You are in tech. So you don’t have to educate. You don’t have to spend any time, effort, money in reeducating the people." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "You read it, and you already know what that is. \"Digital minister? Oh, yeah, OK.\" - P‑D‑I‑S is like, \"Oh, P, P‑D‑I, P, OK. P‑D‑I‑S, what does it stand for? P‑DIS? Is it P‑DIS or PDIS?\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "P-DIS." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Exactly. You have to have this debate. \"Oh, and the website is pdis.tw, OK, well, it will redirect you to the nat.gov...forget it\"" }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "What about the GDS in the UK?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Or the USDS?" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "USDS?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The US Digital Service." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "If we want to be a counterpart of them." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "For example, you could have the name ‑‑ let’s take Twitter ‑‑ be \"digital minister,\" and then the \"@pdis\" a the handle. Whatever." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Ah, very clever." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Your handle will always be the same, but this handle represents a connection to the digital minister, or the Ministry of Taiwan. By doing that, you’re already educating the people. \"Oh, Digital Ministry of Taiwan? Yeah, I know exactly what that is. Oh, PDIS? OK, I’ll look it up.\" Obviously, it’s the Digital Ministry of Taiwan." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s great, except we’re not really a ministry, but yes, otherwise it’s..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "It says minister on the top." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, but not ministry." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "We’re not a ministry." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Is this some political stuff? I’m getting confused." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No, in Taiwan there’s ministers with portfolio. They are ministers with ministries. I am a minister without portfolio, meaning a minister without a ministry. There’s no digital ministry, which is why I’m a minister without portfolio who works with 16 people somehow. Anyway. We’re just magical." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "You have no ministry of 17 people?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, a virtual team here..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "See, that goes back to that whole movement that you’re starting here. You are building your portfolio." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s true. Well, the team is building their own portfolio, and they’re just working with me. In any case, yes, it is true. It is fair, if you call it a portfolio of some sort. I do agree that, of course, “digital minister” itself carries much more explanatory power than minister or whatever." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "That’s the first thing I can see." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yay! That sounds very good." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Put it on the issue cards." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "So things like that... To me, it was a bit hard to find out what you were talking about [in reference to YouTube videos and online articles]." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s true." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "A basic way is to link… from the doc… you know that I’m a big fan of linking - I don’t know if you remember when I replied with the doc corrections, I had a bunch of links to outside sources, like, \"Please link to article that you’re referring to, so that somebody could easily know what it is that you’re talking about.\"" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "One key thing is the ministry talks about very important stuff. If you don’t understand, you lose it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s true." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "While you guys are doing that presentation, and since this is all digital, you can upload it. Things that we talk about, perhaps put the links in the YouTube description, or talk about it in the articles themselves. Link to the outside. That also will help in the SEO, right?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes. Always think of the SEO. That’s right." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s affinity, OK." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Also, I wrote one of the ‑‑ going back to SEO ‑‑ I write Audrey Tang, and there’s 10,000 Audrey Tangs, actually." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s not a very SEO‑friendly name." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "If you put all the stuff in there, you put digital ministry..." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Then if you put another keyword ‑‑hacker." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Oh, OK. I’m trying to be the end user. The one that you guys want to influence the most is not hacker, right?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "If you search for Audrey Tang, I think, I’m probably the first five pages." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "You’re up there." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s not that hard to find." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "It’s not hard. I did find you after..." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Digital Minister of Taiwan?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Taiwan? Maybe you’re going to my Wikipedia page. No, it’s the QZ page. Obviously not going there. Seems they have better SEO." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "It’s OK." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We’ll crack on." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Anyway, brainstorming over coffee here. (laughs)" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s good." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Things of that nature." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Somehow getting people googling, \"Digital minister of Taiwan,\" end up in our PDIS page. This is great." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "That would be one thing. It goes back to what it is that you want to achieve as a ministry. What do you want? For example, in a business, I want clicks on the call to action ‑‑ buy, trial, download. What do you want me to do as a user, or as a person engaged in your ministry? What would you like? Do you have an idea?" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I see that Audrey is already..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "...very much getting you to do our work." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "That was the version we were always thinking about trying." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "You don’t have a mission?" }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "I think the mission is quite clear on the website." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The mission is quite clear." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "What’s that?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We incubate and facilitate public digital innovations…" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Oh, it’s in Español. (Spanish words) Oh, this is wrong. Anyway, see, this is the thing with Google. Sometimes it doesn’t get the context right." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "You can also say it’s a very broad mission. We don’t really have a call to action." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "This could be a vision. A vision stays forever." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "A mission changes every quarter." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "There you go. Come on, put your business hat on. A vision is forever. A vision is why I am here, because I agree with the vision that you are portraying. At least, I don’t know that is in‑depth, obviously. Maybe you have some plans that I don’t know about." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No, we don’t." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "No." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "From what I’ve read and what I’ve seen for your guys’ talks. There is a vision there for a more transparent government, a more tech‑savvy populace, scalable, open technology sharing, idea sharing. That’s the vision, but missions are short term tasks, and achievables. (laughs) Why are you so excited?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Let’s say we review our missions every quarter." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "It doesn’t have to be every quarter. It doesn’t have to be every quarter." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "It happens quite randomly." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Oh, OK. This is a well‑known..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, this is a well‑known..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Not the safest thing to do..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s a well‑known phenomenon." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "The mission, you put the time [refering to time of completion]." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Audrey put \"quarter\" there, but it’s up to you guys." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Yeah, it’s closer here." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "The mission is what drives towards that vision. What is your mission? It’s still a little..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I think their mission individually is due end of this month, I don’t know yet." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "We don’t really have that hard a deadline. I’m thinking about the topic of civic participation, as we have in Taiwan enjoyed right now. We have already sprung from this..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "...collaborative community with the private sector and the civil society." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Called g0v, right?" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Yeah. Also, one thing, since you bring this up, I have no idea how to get to that site." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You mean g0v?" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Yes. How do I get to that site?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s just g0v." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "That’s it?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah. Did you Google for g0v?" }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "G‑0‑V." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then you get it." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "You see what you’re doing? You said, \"Gov zero.\" I googled G‑O‑V‑Z‑E‑R‑O, or \"G‑O‑V, dot, number zero\"." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Like this? [pulls up google and searches G-O-V zero]" }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "You can bring that up." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No, it doesn’t." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I tried so many different ways." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "With a dash?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s terrible SEO on our part." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I spent maybe two minutes, but I was like, \"OK, I’ll just ask her, because I don’t...\" Here’s the thing. You talked about it a lot, but there’s no single link anywhere to it where you talked about it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Granted." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Right? (laughs)" }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "So nice to have you here." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s so nice to have you here." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Do you want to say something?" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Little things like this will create a ripple effect on your international perception. People will start noticing, and be like, \"Oh, hey, what’s going on in Taiwan?\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "By the way, if you look at the g0v.asia page, instead of linking to the mostly Chinese page." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "You have to stop saying \"gov-zero\" in your chat, because it’s not “gov0”." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s hard say G‑zero‑V all the time." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "G‑0‑V, Just say G‑0‑V. It’s not hard." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Trying saying that 10 times." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "G‑0‑V G‑0‑V G‑0‑V." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "All right." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "G‑ling‑V, yeah? G‑0‑V? [reference to \"ling\" being \"zero\" in Mandarin]" }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "We say G‑ling‑V, and then for media, they start to remember the pronunciation of G‑ling‑V instead of gov-zero." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Oh, I understand." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then you have another problem, because they would type G‑L‑I‑N, or something like that." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "See, we have to work on your branding here. (laughs)" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s true." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I think it’s catchy, G‑0‑V. It’s kinds hackery, G‑0‑V." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Well, it says \"hack democracy.\" If you look at this landing page, what does it say to you?" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "[reading g0v.asia landing page] \"Ask not why nobody is doing this. You are the nobody.\" Ow." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "That’s harsh. Jesus Christ." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It says you’re a nobody." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s offending, isn’t it?" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Yeah. I don’t want to be on this site." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Too bad." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Is this public?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is public." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I don’t know. I didn’t write this." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "I don’t know, (laughs) but that’s like a wiki page there." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "From grassroots, meaning it’s bottom up, basically." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Then just put that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Ah, OK. It’s re‑writable, so we’ll go and change it. \"From grassroots,\" change that to “bottom up”. Keeps growing. It keeps growing." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "All right. You have to get that “nobody” out, that’s under the... [reference to g0v.asia slogan]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That is too offensive?" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "It’s not too offensive, because we all have thick skin. It’s just the first thing when you land. [reference to first thing seen when visitor enters landing page]" }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "How would you rephrase that?" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "You land on the site, and then you get punched in the face. It’s not the nicest welcoming." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "How would that work better?" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "\"Ask not why...\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "\"You’re that somebody\"?" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Exactly." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "\"You’re that somebody\"?" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Why don’t we say, \"Don’t ask why...\" [starts to brainstorm messages on notebook]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, it doesn’t work." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "There is this paint that you could paint over, and it makes your walls a dry eraser (whiteboard). Did you know this? [pointing to the wall of the office]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s exactly what we did here." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Oh, this is what you could do here? You can..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, yes." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Oh!" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s exactly what we did to this wall." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Yeah? Oh, fantastic. Where’s the pen?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Well..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "If we’re going to brainstorm stuff, we could just..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But you can also write it on the iPad here..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I could. I’ll also do it here." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, and then we’ll all see your writing, but then it’s easy." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Oh, OK." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then you can keep the screenshot. Or you can write on the wall." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "No." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "I didn’t know that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There’s an eraser in the other room." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "You can write on it with a marker? [pointing to the wall]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, we can write with a marker." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "We can write here on the marker. Oh, that’s fantastic. Anyway whatever. Where was I?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "“Ask not why nobody is doing this. You’re that nobody.”" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Ask not...all right. (laughs) \"Don’t ask why.... Don’t ask why...\" What is the page that you have up here? Let’s just center on that. Can we write on top of this? [pointing to projected website on the wall]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, we can. We’re fine." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Oh, What kind? Oh, yeah you copied." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You take a screen shot, switch it back, and then you paste it here. Easy‑peasy." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "\"Ask not why...\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Minimize it." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "\"Ask not why nobody’s doing this. You are the nobody, exclamation point.\" [reading over website banner]" }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "(laughs)" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "OK, the point that you want to say is, \"stop..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "\"Stop pointing fingers.\"" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "\"Stop pointing fingers. Do something yourself.\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Yeah?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "You could do something yourself... If you want change, you could do it yourself." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly, and this is a translation from Mandarin, 你就是「沒有人」, which rhymes very well in Mandarin, but obviously not in English..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Is it harsh in Mandarin?" }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "No." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Not at all." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Because in Mandarin 沒有人 is not a very harsh word..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Oh." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It doesn’t have that...." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "It doesn’t have that cultural stigma of \"You’re nobody.\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right, exactly." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "OK." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "\"Of no importance or authority,\" it doesn’t connote that." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Got it." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "I’m \"沒有人\", it’s OK." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Really!?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "\"Nobody,\" in English, carries another layer of meaning, which is unfortunate." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "It’s very contextual, you see?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s very contextual. By the way it’s now changed. It says “from the bottom up\" [Referencing to intro text of g0v.asia text revision website]" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "OK. (laughs)" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Thank you very much." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "(laughs) Yes." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I did credit you for it." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "All right, yes, please." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "OK, I could dwell on this or we could brainstorm more if you want now. Let’s just go through this. So the point of this G‑0‑V..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s a community where everybody can join. There’s weekly, monthly, and bi‑monthly hackathons. - The university collaborations that we’re doing in the vTaiwan project gets done in such gatherings." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I have a question." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Not to nobody." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Do we really want to do...I’m just..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure, I don’t know. If you think \"nothing\" is lost and..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "\"g0v is a decentralized civic tech community.\" [reading from g0v.asia intro text]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It sounds academic. I think that was the..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "It sounds too academic?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, it sounds too academic. If you take some time to read through it maybe, but we need a catchy slogan." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "OK - you want catchy a slogan of some sort." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "All right, let me dwell on it. I’ll take that as my action item from the meeting. (laughs)" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Is there any other action?" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "OK, we’re digressing. I’m still trying to figure out the missions here. You said one of the missions was clear here, so where is the mission?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s part of that civic participation. The part of, \"build tech solutions for citizens in public affairs.\" By the way, it doesn’t say grassroots now. If you just refresh, it says “from the bottom up.” [pointing to projected website on wall]" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "\"g0v is a decentralized civic tech community from Taiwan. We advocate transparency of information and build tech solutions for citizens to participate in public affairs from the bottom up.\" [reading from g0v.asia’s revised intro text]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The next page is somewhere between a vision and a mission." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "That’s fine." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s what she’s talking about." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Do we want...? Yeah, we do want to say \"Taiwan\", because we want to put Taiwan on the map. How come it’s .asia not .tw? [pointing out to intro text of g0v.asia]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Because the g0v.tw site was in Chinese." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I see." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There’s also the English version, but still most of the pictures are in Chinese, if I’m not mistaken. Click English...Still it’s pretty Chinese‑ish." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Oh, but these are a completely different UI here." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, but if you click \"About\", you get to see mostly the same words. There’s even a manifesto." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Liquid Democracy?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Says we are \"sanguine\" about it." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "What’s sanguine?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Means that’s full of blood." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Oh, Jesus." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Put \"passionate\" instead. ...That’s something, not the worst. [pointing to \"sanguine\" in the text of the website]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I didn’t do this one. What I did was I end up registering the separate domain and put some more effective English text here. Then..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Yeah, and a much better UI/UX." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Somebody else carried on. I didn’t put a graph here. That somebody also put the \"Be a nobody\" thing here. They obviously like the pun, but there it is also kind of aggressive." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "It is." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It shows some..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Are we going to transfer the UI from the English to the Taiwanese site?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I don’t think so." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "I don’t think so." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Why not?" }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "We are not running the website on our own. Actually, it’s a community website." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We can do that also, but not before discussions. There’s plenty of projects here, but then, as you can see, is mostly in Chinese. For someone who’s not versed in Chinese, all these are just pretty pictures." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Is our goal to put exactly what we have in this Taiwanese website into the international website?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That would be useful." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "That’s a goal we want to do?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "that would be useful. If you are signing up, then I’d certainly not say no." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, but this has the gist of information of what the community is about." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "What is the plan to let people know about this site? Do we have a..." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Actually, I didn’t know this site before." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Oh, no? (laughs)" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s not very well-known..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Even within your non‑portfolio ministry?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, exactly." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Even working with her, I didn’t know this." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Surprise! You have more work." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Yeah!" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You were talking about this, and I completely agree, that whenever I mentioned g0v, I should put some link to an English speaking audience. I should at least add this." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Not necessarily English, but at least add that one. [referencing to add a link to at least g0v.asia page]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "At least add that one, which is exactly what I’ll do. Now it says..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Did you give me a..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, I did. I gave you credit in the commit log." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "(laughs)." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "\"From grassroots to bottom up, as per...\"" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Thank you, thank you. (laughs)" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "G‑zero‑V, can you say G‑zero‑V?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "G‑zero‑V. It’s kind of hard." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "G‑zero‑V." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "G‑zero‑V." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Because it’s two consonants, GZ in the beginning. Somebody would hear G‑zero‑V or something like that." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "G‑zero‑V." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "The Z is a little hard?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "G‑zero‑V. You think it doesn’t work? Why don’t we create a slide on your decks with those things then? Then you don’t have to say anything?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s great." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Would that be better?" }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Yes." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Agreed." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "When you’re doing presentations..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We’ll end with the link here." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Just say, \"OK, thank you blah, blah, blah. Here’s what you need to know.\" Thank you." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "A summary slide." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Yeah, I would do that." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "All right." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "How about vTaiwan.tw, what do think about this website or maybe you don’t really read?" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "To me, it was..." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "What is an amazing part for you and what is the part that you think could be improved?" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Where did it go? [referring to the projected website switching to a blank canvas]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That was mine. That was the slide. That was based on Blaise’s slides, by the way. I will take this style from this, and then the content from this, and then the style transfers. [referring to projected slides of Blaise Aguirre from a previous talk]" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Oh." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, it’s very useful. Then probably you can free associate over...[referring to projected slides from revised Blaise Aguirre’s talk on image association]" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Right, isn’t that insane, the video? Do you have that video? Jesus. That is crazy. Isn’t that insane?" }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "This one? [referring to video from Blaise’s slides]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is a computer free associating on images [referencing video playing on projector]" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "...So vTaiwan." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "vTaiwan, yes." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "One thing that I found on the UX, I don’t understand what..." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "This icon?" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I’m just going with UX here. Even if I don’t understand what that is on the top there, why is Airbnb and Uber there? Are these topics popular? [referring to right menu bar on site]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I see. The top one says \"topics\" in Chinese?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Well it says it’s preliminary idea assessment. The second gray bar says \"under discussion.\"" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "OK, so each of those icons is a topic?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s right." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I understand. Because I didn’t get it, but again, I don’t read Chinese. Maybe that’s why I didn’t get it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No, I think it’s because our UX needs improvement." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "You could say that. I don’t want to say that. (laughs)" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s why we’re here... That’s why we were here." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "All right, then yes the UX..." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "...the UX sucks. (laughs)" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "How about some tabs? An easier way to figure this out is tabs." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Tabs?" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "You could translate the tabs using Google again, because these are hard‑coded [referring to current text no prone to automatic google translation]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s right." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Whatever language, whatever I read this...correct me if I’m wrong, it’ll be great if Tanzania or any other place gets to see this stuff and then, \"Look what Taiwan is doing. Maybe we could do something like that.\" Isn’t that the purpose?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Is the mission to spread the word on what we’re doing here?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The mission is to spread missions." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "That’s right. It’s an infinite zooming mission. [referencing video from Blaise’s presentation]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "To me, this is very focused on Taiwan, and even more so because not all Taiwanese people know this." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s true. Including the Airbnb and Uber, there’s thousands, but it still thousands is a small population..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "We’re 27 million, thereabouts." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "True." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Maybe tabs are a more efficient way of translating to any kind of language. When you have the PDIS, P‑DIS." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes. All right." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Something like that?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Why the topics are on the major landing page?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What’s the logic? Why these four here and the others are here? [refereing to vTaiwan’s menu hierarchy]" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Sure." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Because they’re progressing through some steps, but it’s not being made clear that it’s progressing through those steps. Well, I already started fix this step, but we have yet to implement everything." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "That’s fine. I understand. That’s key though. When you asked me about what was amazing. It’s amazing that this is all online and I can read it. That is pretty amazing. But it doesn’t tell me what the benefit of this is. I need to find it out for myself. \"Business here\": Don’t ever let your customer..." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Figure out on their own." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "...Try to figure out what the point of your product is." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, I see that now." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "That’s where we imagine more improvement will be?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, sure." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Do you agree?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I do." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, it is too visionary and not sufficiently missionary." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "It is - \"Who will be reading this?\" and figure it out from their point of view." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Usually stakeholders, people who have something to lose or to gain from the proposed regulation or change." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Are these people tech-savvy? Try to figure out the user persona." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The thing with vTaiwan is that its primary users, aside from the Uber and Airbnb cases, which is kind of an experiment on our side, are mostly people who are lawyers, accountants, professional people who are well versed in using tech to argue their cases." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What we’re are trying to do here is to get all the stakeholders’ sides not represented, but at least on board with what we’re going to change maybe 30 days or 60 days down the line, and then to voice their concerns. It’s true that in another iteration we had an email box here that let people simply click to fire off an email, that asked..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "To who?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "To the public, that at lists publicly their ideas about this regulation." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "You mean fire up a comment?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right, that’s the idea, but using whatever the email client prefer. Literally to..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Where will that email be posted?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It will be posted on the talk.vtaiwan.tw board. It’s like a posting board, but public. [projects talk.vtaiwan.tw website]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then of course we also distill it into chunks, aspects of this regulation. This is about securitization of intangible assets. This talked about what’s the current problem with the currency securitization. When you’re trying to secure a loan, what’s preventing you." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Whether it’s sufficient to just register on the company law or website, rather than having some public servant processing your loans ‑‑ sorry, securitization applicants ‑‑ and so on. This basically distills this proposed law change into four or so aspects. In each aspect, you can... [referring to flow of talk.vtaiwan.tw]" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "You can comment." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, you can click it, and then you can see what’s the existing people’s thoughts on it. Like Jalin says that. RonKuo says that. If it needs some explanatory or expository material, then within seven days the ministry in charge of this has to come here and replay to you as a part of the planning process." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Part of the thing that’s highlighted, seen in this design, is that any comments that’s constructive here will be part of the agenda and the face‑to‑face deliberation that this live‑streamed 30 days every month. This is basically crowdsourcing the agenda of the face‑to‑face deliberation." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "OK, I see." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s the reason." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "All right - so what you just said is what..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, should go the front page." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes and that’s part of her design. It makes it clear, abundantly, the front page, that this is going to TV and whatever..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "You know what would be cool if you want to get people engaged? Have a countdown there." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "A countdown?" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "It could be something fun, well, engaging. Not necessarily fun, but at least people are like, \"Oh, we really have to get people on this thing.\" [referring to time running out to pass the agenda]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It says there’s 22 days left and there’s going to be a face‑to‑face deliberation when this runs all the way to the right." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Is that at the bottom? It’s all the way at bottom. [pointing to vTaiwan’s front page on a cetain topic]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s not at the bottom." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Oh, I thought..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s the page where it came. Oh, you mean the front page like here? We need to have a countdown right here alongside every slide?" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "It’s not necessarily a slide." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s part of the design, also." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "It’s just on every discussion." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s part of the new design, also." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Yeah, it’s all these blocks here. We refer to crowdsourcing websites [referring to benchmarking UI/UX from crowdsourcing sites]" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Right, I was just going to say that, because we’re doing crowdsourcing agenda." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Policy..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "They spend millions of dollars in UI/UX. Just use their UI, open source of course." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Yeah, and it’s open source." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It is open source." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Yeah, so we don’t have to rack our brains to try to reinvent the wheel." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, so put a countdown that when it runs through the right, we have a TV show." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That sounds good." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "I’m not sure if we can say we’re a TV show." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I’m pretty sure the new design is coded out. It’s just not populated." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "You don’t have the mock‑up?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We do have a mock‑up." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Yeah, but I couldn’t open it." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "He’s got it. Wow, look at that page. [new vTaiwan landing page is shown on Marc’s laptop as PDF/image]" }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "That’s the one." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "You have airplay?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, you can airplay it." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Awesome." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "[speaking Mandarin] OK, we’re asking to airplay it." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I understood that one." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "OK, then you understood all of this. That’s all of it." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Nice photo. By the way, you guys should have a professional photographer here to take pictures. [referring to banner in new vTaiwan mock-up]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We actually do. We have a professional photographer upstairs, but then we’re not putting him to much use." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Yeah, put him to use. - What goes in here? [referring to upper banner of new vTaiwan] - Do you guys have a proper site,\"digital ministry\"?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s the PDIS website." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "OK." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But it needs better photos. I get this much." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s true." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "The idea is, on the upper part, on this banner, you’ll see a few key topics we’re talking about. Where the..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right. Basically each of them represents a topic under discussion." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "These are each of the topics? [referring to lower part of site with several images]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I understand." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Basically it’s like most crowdfunding websites, and this says, by the time, 30 days later in Taiwan, this ministry will have a live-streamed deliberation with crowdsourced agenda and participants." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Is it important to the viewer to see who introduced this? [referring to particular issue presented up for debate]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Which ministry? Why not?" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "No, I mean like the person; or no?" }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "A person..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Is it?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s a very good point. If we get all the ministers record or at least take a photo for their face online, I’m sure they will increase people’s willingness to participate. Sure, why not? It’s a good idea." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "It’s just a suggestion." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Yeah, why do you think so?" }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Well just personification of an idea." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, better than puppies." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Sure." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "People engage more with a person than a concept, abstract." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Who are the people they are talking about." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right, so we can get Professor 朱德芳’s photo from her intro on the Company Act rewrite." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Even if there’s not a photo, at least the name. There it just shows the ministry, right? [referring to current UI]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It just shows the ministry. That’s right." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Couldn’t it be..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The minister’s name, why not? Yeah, “the minister wants to have a chat with you.” It sounds good." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Thank you." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Yeah, you’re welcome." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s great." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "That’s why I’m here, to help you out. (laughs)" }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Yeah, we were originally just thinking about how the viewers can actually relate to these topics." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Engage more." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Actually be more familiar with who are the people actually talking about this topic." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Right." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "It’s like talking to people in person. If you know how they look like or how they talk, then you actually have more..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "...in common to talk about." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "If you get to talk and you get to know the person, then you have a better chance of creating constructive criticism." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Previously during, for example, the Uber discussion, we did have everybody’s faces next to the words they said." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I’m not saying necessarily the faces. It’s just more of personifying it with a name, but yeah, faces obviously are a plus." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So we’re already doing this, but we should do it more, especially on the proposal itself, not just the transcripts." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Right... In the meantime: You were in Europe?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, I was in Europe." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Where did you go?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Madrid, London, Paris." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Nice, did you like Madrid? How was that?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It was very good. It was the kind of city I’ve seen in the occupy literatures. Now it’s post-occupy, but anyway. It’s one of the major cities in Europe for civic engagement." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Are you going to go to Iceland?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Maybe my robotic double will do." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "OK." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I sent my robotic double to Madrid a week before." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Is it a physical robot or is it a virtual robot?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s a physical robot." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Do you have a photo of that?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They call it Galatea, which is a very romantic name, the sculpture that actually can come alive. So, it was pretty good. I don’t have a photo here. I’m sure I have a photo somewhere." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "The robot is..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Re-presenting me." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Right." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "So you can be replaced by a robot. Is that what you’re saying?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s right. This is what this robot looks like." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Is it on YouTube?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, it’s on YouTube. It’s called “virtual reality for civic deliberation,” where I talk about..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Maybe you should move it here. This is on medium.com?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is on medium, and it is also on YouTube. Then this is the robot. I was having a chat with..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "You dressed it up?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, they dress it up, literally." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Can I see it?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, it rotates and circles..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "You’re talking? I’m guessing it’s projecting your face?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right, and this is 360 camera outside. You can watch the VR replay. This is Pablo Soto, a city council member. It’s pretty nice." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Who made it?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Local hackers." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Really? That’s great." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, they did it with what they call a turtlebot. All right, so we got a..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Are we in?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, we’re in." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "All right." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "This is a mock‑up of..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Of the next generation of vTaiwan.tw." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Yes, topic here in big groups and topics." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Oh, so these are the topics?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Are these the top hottest topics? How are you going to dictate what goes up in the banner?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Probably the newest. The one that’s up..." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Yeah, that is under discussion, with a status of \"under discussion,\" and something like, \"It’s already delivered to the parliament.” There’s some explanations of what you can do in different stages." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "If it’s delivered to the executive yuan meeting, then why is it in the banner?" }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "If people really care about this topic, they want to know the outcome." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But then it’s not the newest." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "It’s on one level." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It is true that we only have two active topics. Then it describes those three stages." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "There’s search by topic I assume - the topic that I’m interested on there?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The kinds of topics, I’ll say, yeah." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Can I search for a person? I don’t know what the name is (of the topic), but I know that Audrey Tang is...or I know that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We can pass some search suggestions here." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "And your topics." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "And how many days are left. But it doesn’t show a photo of a person." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "No, you don’t have to go for it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No, I think it helps." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Then, for example, what happened to the Uber and Airbnb topics?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’ll be one of those small boxes." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "At the bottom?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "At the bottom, that says it’s finished." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Is that what that says at the bottom?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, sure. It’s different stages." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Oh, all right." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The new design is completely redone. Here, you will see that at the project is finished." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Actually, you can just…" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s saying that we should probably go back home soon‑ish." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Is that what that means? They literally kick you out?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Mm‑hmm. They turn off air conditioning and everything. It’s true." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Preliminary steps, and then here you have topics and categories, which are the key issues on this session." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Our archive and whatever." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Are these tabs?" }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Tabs of the stages." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, but it doesn’t have \"finished.\" I just noticed." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It says \"under discussion\", \"other drafts\", \"about to begin\", but no \"result\"." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Maybe we might want to put that there." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, we might want to..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I will make them big. Look at all this empty space. This is important." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "And with icons, always." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Here are topics, maybe under ministries, like education, labor, culture. or technology." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Can it go here? These are the topics? [referring to bottom part of new mock-up]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, topic areas." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "OK, then introduce me. Or, if this stage is going to be forever long, why don’t we try to get some tab system under the main banner that will split this? All this are lazy-loaded, right? [pointing to long list of images/topics]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "(laughs) OK." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Sure." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I would imagine." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Here is the manual." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "How to leave useful comments. How to make use for contributions. Why are some comments marked, highlighted. That means that they entered the agenda." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "OK, so like a users’ manual here?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right, and then you can also have a petition. This platform doesn’t do petitions, so we redirect them to another petition platform, where they can do a petition." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "It’s Join.gov.tw?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, if you petition, 5,000 people..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "This is a different website?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Platform, that’s right." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I see." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, we don’t do petitions in vTaiwan. We do it in Join." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Here it talks about the purpose..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Why is vTaiwan useful? Why should you care? It’s basically the same text, but presented in a..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "What is the call to action? What do you me to do? Engage on this..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "To subscribe to one of or more topic areas, so you know when there’s a live stream going on, or if there’s a resolution. Or if you care about one particular topic, then you go in and then..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Can I sign up and get feedback? I don’t want to be coming back here all the time to see if my resolution that I’m involved with..." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Resolution notifications." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Do I have a newsletter or sign‑up?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There was a monthly newsletter." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Maybe like an RSS feed?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure. Currently there’s no sign‑up on the new UI. On the old UI, a soon as you leave a comment or you participate in any of those activities, and you consent to get your email shared with our monthly newsletter, there’s an opt‑in thing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We’re still trying to figure out whether opting out is ethical, by default. They used to be opt‑in. The first time you’re leaving something, you consent it to, if you want, further newsletters from us." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Well it’s much better, a huge improvement. [referring to new mockup]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It is a huge improvement." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "These are under review right? These are topics under review. Is that what that says here? [pointing to section of mock-up]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It says it’s \"hot\", but they have to be under this section." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "A feature." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, featured." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "All are able to link to Google Translate, automatically?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, we will do that. Instead of English, you can translate to Spanish. It’s going to be Chinese by default, but with a Google Translate in English that you can translate to English or Spanish. If we’re going to flip it..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I would put these bigger. I would create some divide between each section. Is that our logo, vTaiwan?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, this is our logo: Two anarchies." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "All right. How come it’s V? Victory?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It used to mean virtual." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Virtual, oh, OK." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then it could be interpreted any which way now. It could be venture. It could be whatever." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Virtual is OK. \"Virtual\", that would work. \"Virtual crowdsourcing policy agenda\". (laughs)" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Virtually. This is going up next month or something." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Yeah, we just heard about it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We’ll see. With it, we have better engagement and more people wanting to leave their email so they receive our monthly newsletters. That’s the main idea." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I’m just trying to figure out the more efficient way to do this, because if you have a picture for every..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Proposal." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "...proposal, the idea is to be scalable. We have so many proposals here that everybody’s engaged in each aspect of politics, so you have to have somebody figuring out how are we going to scale up?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Well by having every ministry approve..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "\"Please provide a photo for your proposal by 3:00 PM.\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Well it’s similar. That’s part of their job training, though." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Oh really?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, there’s three core skill sets we’re training. One is what we call translation, meaning translating hardcore proposal, legal text, into something people can understand. A logo and a photo is part of the translation." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The second is facilitation. It could be facilitating useful comments from online also face‑to‑face deliberation and consultation." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Finally, there’s recording which says you need to be accountable in publishing all the video and transcribe every course and every decision they make, and to build an audit trail with proper credit to who suggested the change." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "You’re giving credit to the...?" }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "The person who suggested the change." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Yeah? How does that work? Through the system?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, through the system. You can see..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Like a peer‑to‑peer rating kind of thing?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s not a peer‑to‑peer rating. It’s basically just a thank you, a due credit of sorts. It just says we thank these people for proposing this useful agenda." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I understand. I had the wrong definition of \"credit\"." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Oh, yeah. Credit as in movie credits, not as in..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "I understand. I was like, \"Oh, wow. It’s amazing.\" But no, you mean \"transcribed by Manuel Edghill,\" that kind of credit. Well you have to remember the frame of mind I’m coming from here... [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "All right, different kind of credit. That’s perfect. All right, so how can I help?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You can help..." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "The site and you can..." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Oh, translate. That’s easy." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You can work on the hard part, which is the marketing strategy. Pretty soon, by the end of the year, we’ll have some objectives or missions that we want to get across. Our English or our conversation ability may not be so good that people who look at this website and know immediately what our objectives for the quarter are." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That is something maybe you can help with by just focusing people who find out about PDIS. I’m pretty sure that they have to see \"digital minister\" somewhere on this page now. Aside from that..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "...better techs and photos, better copies and better call to action. Currently our call to action is mostly just linking to vTaiwan and \"Join\", but maybe we want to be more explicit." }, { "speaker": "Manuel Edghill", "speech": "Yeah, goal, mission, vision, I don’t know. See yourself as, I know it sounds awkward, but as a business that’s trying to..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, a start‑up." } ]

[ { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "快樂心聲，你的心聲，我來聽，大家好，我是今天代班主持人，立法委員許智傑，高雄小金剛。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "你現在收聽的是快樂聯播網、快樂心聲的節目，空中立法委員單位，這個節目可以收聽的頻率，大台北地區收聽全景廣播電臺FM89.3，台中、彰化、南投地區收聽望春風廣播電臺FM89.5，台南、嘉義、雲林收聽嘉樂廣播電臺FM92.3，台南、高雄、屏東收聽快樂廣播電臺FM97.5，澎湖地區請收聽風聲廣播電臺FM91.3，今天的節目裡面跟大家討論的主題是「新政府大體檢，數位政委唐鳳提建言」，我們今天邀請的來賓是行政院政務委員唐鳳委員。唐鳳委員你好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家好。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "大家都知道，我們唐鳳委員還沒有來到行政院就很多風聲了，因為唐鳳的生長過程也很特別，也有很多跟別人不一樣的地方，其實很多聽眾朋友對唐鳳很有興趣，聽說你的智商180。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實160以上不能測量，所以也不知道多少。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "我有一個小故事，有一個朋友說他老婆都罵他的孩子說孩子都不認真讀書，他（我朋友）就說：「你不能怪我們的孩子，要怪我們不夠聰明。」（笑）有的人說讀書反映智商，有的學英語、數學或者是語言能夠學得很好，所以我有時跟我們所有的聽眾朋友或者是一些家長分享說不要一直強迫逼孩子，如果要讀到什麼程度，其實也不一定怎麼樣。所以由唐鳳委員就可以看出一個活生生的例子，你好像讀到國中沒有畢業？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，就開始自己創業。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "你的過程為何跟別人不一樣？因為一般的孩子依照我們的社會，好像沒有依照一般的學歷就不太能被接受，這是什麼心路歷程的轉變？決定在讀到國中就不讀了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "1994年或者是1995年有一個WWW（world wide web）發明的時候，我就發現我現在課本上看到的東西跟我在網路上看到的東西大概有十年的差距，所以就是說大部分研究人員直接在上面就會把最新的結果做出來，我們知道說它要進入課本，可能要十年的時間才慢慢編進到課綱跟編教課書。我發現隔著網路，沒有人知道我才十四歲，所以都很願意合作跟回答我的問題，就覺得是臺灣的另外一個研究人員，所以要學什麼就跟做研究人員學，比起課本還要有趣。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "所以十四歲的時候就開始跟一些學者、專家？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，像是人工智慧。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "就這樣互動？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。就是因為這樣，就覺得不要再讀教科書了，讀的也是讀十年以前的（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "這個想法真的很新，你們真的是跑在時代前面，後來你就開始創業？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "就走專業程式設計。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大概做二十年，大概就退休了。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "你現在退休了？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我大概三年前退休。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "錢有賺夠了，人生就是這樣，過不一樣的人生？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，做公共服務。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "對你來說是你個人不想賺錢，這個部分就算可以了，後半輩子有這個緣分請你來當幫大家做政務委員，今天跟你講話我才知道，要掌聲對你感謝一下。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "你這麼特殊的背景，當時新聞有很多爭議，大家也覺得很特別，我現在是說你從10月初來到行政院，到現在已經兩個多月了，我們民眾想要知道的是，你所講的「開放政府」到底這兩個多月大概有什麼簡單的成果或者是有什麼簡單的成績要跟大家分享的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好，「開放政府」就是一種讓政府可以更相信人民的方法。我們之前常常是說我們要人民相信政府，不過信任其實是互相的，如果政府不先表示說我可以相信人民，就是幫我看施政過程裡面有沒有什麼大家一起可以來商量的地方，其實人民沒有必要相信政府，所以我進來之後，其實好比像我開的每一個會，都有人幫忙把每一個字打下來，就像立法院的逐字稿，所以好比像院長請我幫忙協調電子競技。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "喔！我秘書很喜歡玩電競。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有委員很關心六年都沒有主管機關，學業、兵役都沒有人管，我跟教育部、文化部的朋友試著去協調，然後就可以給一個電競正式的名字，用一個「技藝文化」，也就是由文化部幫忙，就兵役這方面給一些解套。我覺得很特別的是，我們只開了三次協調會就解決了，第一次開的時候我們其實不太確定爭議的地方在哪裡，但是因為逐字稿放到網路上，所以有很多電競選手不管是在PTT上面或者是在什麼巴哈姆特或者是Yahoo TV看我們的逐字稿，幫我們出主意，只要把大家的意見加起來問大家覺得怎麼樣，他們覺得網友的建議很有道理，所以到第三次就協調完了，大概三次開會就解決了。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "所以「開放政府」的角度就是把逐字稿公布，所有不一樣的意見就會透過網路進來？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，所以我們說利益關係人，像電競的利益關係人，例如像電競選手，就可以快速提出意見。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "蒐集各方不同的意見？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "像這一個題目，若以土木師傅（角度），你有什麼看法？能馬上加入嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實也可以耶！之前台北市有做一個社會住宅的案子，所有會分配到社會住宅，其實就是單親媽媽、災民、遊民或一些身心障礙者，其實都會有社工跟關心他們的老師願意幫我們去蒐集他們的意見，所以也可以用這一種滾動問卷去用會碰到的社會住宅的原住民族朋友們。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "這樣講得滿有理，不知道聽眾朋友是不是聽得清楚？主要是我們可以透過網路、電腦去快速蒐集大家的意見，這跟我們傳統少數人開會不一樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "好處是可以更快速。但是我舉電競的例子，有人提到電競要用體育項目，我不知道有沒有收納這一個意見？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有啊！體育在臺灣就是「體能教育」，就是德、智、體、群、美的一環，大部分的老師說智育的部分大於體育，跟下圍棋一樣，你體能也要很好，可是大部分的時候是在動腦。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "你覺得圍棋跟象棋是運動項目嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們說是智力的運動，所以也是一種運動。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "電競算不算運動？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們現在的想法，是如果要按照運動產業條例，當作運動的話，可能像是運動表演業，這樣是沒有問題的。但是如果說是體育的話，那一些體育老師就會不太高興。所以我們現在就把體育跟運動拆開來看，它可以是智育跟運動。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "這兩個拆開來看，我可以接受。我要請教的是，如果是運動跟技藝，有一部分的人，可能比較傾向於把它解釋成運動？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "它都是啊！兩個都是，就像扯鈴一樣，運動跟技藝都是。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "像體育署所有關於運動比賽等等，電競現在可不可以列入體育署？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "現在的想法是，如果是租稅補助優惠，我們可以跟電競去談。但如果要去借小巨蛋，若透過文化部發文，就比較好借，比起你說是體育運動來得好借。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "我的意思是說開放政府這個方式，你有沒有聽到這一些聲音、收納進來？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有，各種不同的聲音。因為委員有辦一個公聽會，有三個黨派的委員一起辦，有邀老師跟委員們，我們也都打成逐字稿，按照選手提出來的意見，一行行去看。大家還是面對面開會，但是開會不會白開，你講的每一行字都會變成下一場會議的議程。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "我們要問的是，運動跟技藝用開放政府的方式，也就是蒐集不同的聲音之最大公約數，就是用「技藝」？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，雖然大家不滿意，但可以接受。如果在租稅、產業上，都還可以協調。「體育」就不要提了。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "因此很多問題是可以用開放政府的方式來協調。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "但是我最近想問的是——雖然一例一休跟二例已經解決完了——但是有不同的聲音，像同性婚姻議題，下禮拜一可能也會在委員會要有一個決定，這都是很有爭議性的問題，你面對這一些爭議性的議題，如果用開放政府的角度有什麼比較好解決的嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為是在立法院的案字，我就不評論個案了，我講一些原則。大家會上街頭，常常會覺得這個是最後一次表達聲音的機會，要是不說話的話就來不及了，但是我們現在在規劃一些好比像公司法要全盤修正，我們如果不給大家開放意見的機會，好比像商業司自己從頭寫到尾，交到立法院就三讀，即使是公司法這種看起來沒有爭議的，說不定到最後也會有人上街頭。我們現在的做法是跟學者們合作，並不是開研究案，而是老師們發幾千份問卷蒐集社會上的聲音，有些擺不平的部份，像社會企業還會開焦點團體，每一個逐字稿都會上網，所以六十天的時間行政部門不會爆衝，然後大家面對面調解完之後再送給行政院院案，政府要足夠信任人民，要足夠蒐集到六十天的意見，不能說蒐集六天就收了，這樣人民當然會上街；其實上街也是有成本，如果你現在有六十天，各部門都會考慮的話，其實大部分的人會願意好好講跟溝通。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "有一些爭議性的議題，有些大爭議、有些是小爭議。雖然都是開放意見，有些意見都很多，像這一次同意同性婚姻跟反同性婚姻，兩邊幾乎都勢均力敵。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我是覺得說，有時看起來很像水火不容的議題，其實可以去看後面堅持的價值，我覺得沒有真的不相容。我舉一個同性婚姻的例子，我阿媽是天主教徒，我爺爺也是。我們會討論這個議題，看起來好像水火不容，但其實很多天主教友們擔心的是臺灣離婚率這麼高，這樣下去是不是婚姻就喪失其意義？但是同性婚姻關係，社會上討論婚姻的權利義務四百多項，經過這樣的討論之後，大家更知道婚姻的意義，想清楚再加入，這樣離婚率就不會那麼高。一邊在意的是婚姻的價值、另外一邊在意的是平等，但是這兩個仔細去看，這兩個可能沒有衝突。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "可是現在不管是設民法或專法，都有人反對，天主教徒的想法是這樣，但是並不是全部的宗教都是這樣的想法，他們的意思是整個大自然的繁衍及生命之意義，所以依宗教來說，我問到的大部分都是宗教因素而反對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有錯。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "站在人與人尊重的角度，像一開始的版本叫我簽我就簽，我覺得很單純，我尊重同性婚姻，但是後來兩邊這樣意見一起角逐，我就打給尤美女，我就打說「男女」改成「雙方」，我也不太能接受，是不是「男女」保留變成第二列可以改為「雙方」，這樣等於整個傳統的價值是以男女為主這一些要保留住，後來她說可以。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個是你們的專業。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "當時時代力量的版本，我覺得寫起來對我來講比較誇張，把「父母」、「子女」、「夫妻」改得我真的不能接受，社會不能接受的主要是那兩個版本，其實民法跟專法的差別是，你把它當作百分之百正常，還是說那是大部份人用右手、少數是左撇子，就像95%是異性婚姻，5%是同性婚姻，95%異性婚要尊重5%的同性婚姻，但是還是以95%為主。我不知道從同性婚姻的角度，大家可不可以接受。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個就是立法技術，實際上權益有照顧到、不會讓人覺得有歧視，另外一邊也不會覺得是破壞婚姻價值。我剛剛講了要把婚姻價值保存住，我覺得這個很重要。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "你這樣講有道理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是平權你說互相尊重，也是很重要。這兩個明明沒有衝突，如果現在立法技術上弄成很衝突，就要靠你們專業的來解決。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "你們給我一個很好的想法，這個真的要思考一下，因為我們現在就是遇到雙方面的衝突，但如果還是保留婚姻價值，我雖然比較保守一點，我尊重同性婚姻，但是我認為婚姻價值還是要以異性為主，如何闡述這兩個情況都同時存在？像同性婚姻的部分，有人會反對，這樣就等於歧視。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實啊！其實我是左撇子，像剛剛委員說左撇子是少數人，我也會覺得哪裡怪怪的。我覺得大家要設身處地去想，大家有自己的成長經驗跟價值。我自己就是左撇子，我也沒有辦法，就互相體諒。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "小時候如果用左手寫會被打，但那已經是過去，現在很正常，現在的爸爸、媽媽不會刻意叫你寫字要用右手寫，這個是時代上的轉變。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是你沒有辦法一下子就把每一個人的觀念轉變。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "所以剛剛委員提供一個很好的想法，如何保持婚姻的價值，我們一樣不歧視，而且也是尊重，這個很好，這也算是開放政府。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "資訊社會你算走在我們的前面，這個觀念比我們好。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "我們現在委員也有推動「行政院資訊總處」，這一個感覺你的看法是怎麼樣？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "余宛如委員跟其他委員提的草案，其實公聽會我沒有去，細節我不太知道，我跟人事行政總處的朋友有聊到，對於院內的組織改造要全部一起提，現在是要稍微緩一下，等通盤檢討之後明年再討論這一個案子。行政院至少這一個會期沒有要提對案，我現在很難講什麼，但是我有收到委員的意見，這個是有的。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "其實我剛剛在跟你聊天的時候，老實說數位時代，像在我們五十歲以上的，對於數位使用沒有那麼熟悉，但現在八十歲也有在用LINE（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我阿媽跟我外婆都會用iPad（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "但是一般的人說你當政委的目標是要做「開放政府」，跟行政院設置資訊總處有何關聯？好處與不同？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "開放政府有一點像是我們本來解嚴之後，行政院各個部會都有一個叫做國會聯絡人，就跟立法委員溝通，接下來就有一個媒體聯絡人，跟新聞記者溝通，所以開放政府聯絡人有一點跟這個一樣，就是跟公民溝通。從某角度來看，隨著時代的演進，原本是大家會關注立法院的事，現在大家會慢慢關注行政院的事，不管行政院做什麼，網路上就會討論一遍，大家不會等媒體去討論，如果行政院不給大家很充分的時間或資訊的話，就會變成立法委員跟媒體拿到的資訊是不正確的，但是網路討論的東西是很片面跟片斷，這個其實是行政院的問題，所以我覺得行政院要更相信人民，要把更多的資料在更早期提供給大家。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "你說這個很特別，我再提出一個問題，等一下有時間廣告一下。如果依核災食品（這個議題），要如何讓民眾瞭解？民進黨政府的講法是「美日不上市，臺灣不進口」，輻射的影響多大？比照美國跟日本，「美日不上市，臺灣不進口」？我覺得這樣很簡單。但是民進黨的講法是要進口核災食品，現在很多民眾不知道，剛剛你有講到這一個問題，我想我們休息一下，等一下再聽唐鳳政委說要如何做、如何給民眾如何得到正確的資訊。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "謝謝回到節目現場，我是許智傑。為大家邀請到的來賓是唐鳳委員，委員你好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家好。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "剛剛有提到核災食品，大家都問說民進黨現在到底要做什麼，要拿核災食品給他們吃，我說不是這樣的。以你的專業要如何處理讓民眾更瞭解？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有一個公聽會，大家有聽過行政院其實是要開「準聽證」程序的公聽會，什麼是「準聽證」？就是有一個專業的主持人，並不是行政院的長官，而是社會上各界可以接受的一位主持人，然後事前光是公聽會的名字就討論了很久，這一個公聽會是「日本核災後食品風險危害評估及管理及茨城、櫪木、千葉、群馬食品開放與否公聽會」，名稱好像很有學問。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "很長。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為民間社會在意的是，核災之後有沒有做風險評估的危害管理？以前都不輸入，但是不輸入的時候，我們是不是有再持續評估怎麼樣的情況下可以輸入？這個大家不知道，也很少跟民眾溝通。後面行政院關心的是並不是福島，而是旁邊的茨城、櫪木、千葉、群馬算不算是核災食品？其實不算，因為這些在福島外面。但不能說政府講得就算數、政府最知道，而人民都不能發表意見，那個跟「開放政府」是相反的。所以大家會覺得政府要暴衝，那就不會聽你講，因為覺得講什麼都沒有用。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "我們現在就是這一種感覺啊！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果公聽會討論出來，有一些沒有做好，好比像風險危害評估或者是管理沒有做好的地方，如果不能說服大家，這一個方案就等到能夠說服大家再來推行。這我們在學理上叫做「零方案」，就是不要做。這樣子如果讓大家覺得說「零方案」是一個選項，現在社會上的朋友們就比較願意好好聽。他們願意自己去日本量輻射，行政院也有人去，他們就把手上這一些東西就事論事討論出來。可是以前如果沒有正當的程序，像聽證的程序，那樣一邊在講，另外一邊是覺得沒有地方講話，沒有地方講話怎麼辦？只好上街啊！對不對？所以需要一個充分的時間，不做預設立場，這個是最重要的。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "對，不預設立場，所以這個叫做「零方案」。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "我都跟人家講「美日不上市，臺灣不進口」，你只要相信美國、日本的標準，這樣大家就很清楚。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但這個剛好是日本自己的食品，所以如果有人還是反對的話，可能本來就對日本的檢測心裡有疑慮。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以就看我們這邊原能會、衛福部能不能用我們的實驗室幫忙把關，大家對於這一套的標準能不能相信。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "你這樣講很好，所有的部會好像還沒有都按照你的這個想法辦理？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個要慢慢訓練，不是一下子都有這一個能力，我們先慢慢把這個人帶好，慢慢把這一個想法傳播到部會裡面。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "像之前蔡總統上任至今，包括華航事件處理、遠傳ETC員工處理、同性婚姻、核安食品每一個議題一直來，我們聽到的（處理議題能力的）聲音很破碎，包括Uber到底要管制到什麼程度？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實Uber關於電子車隊明明都已經通過了，高雄都已經有類似臺灣的Uber叫車，其實都會停在計程車還在包圍行政院的印象，後來有方案出來了，大家可能看過也忘記了。這也是我們跟媒體的關係要檢討的地方，常常有衝突的時候，媒體的版本特別大，衝突解決了，媒體可能放在第三版，這個是很多人會停在還有衝突的印象，其實多元化計程車方案早就制定了。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "我也覺得很傷腦筋。媒體可以幫我們，但也可能害我們，如何要把臺灣的媒體處理好？就是能對台灣貢獻。如以商業的角度，媒體希望要夠特別、辣（有爆點），才會有生意，廣告才會比較多，因此這一個東西要有一個平衡點，需要一點時間。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不過媒體現在也在轉型，很多媒體是做即時新聞，現在很多，有什麼事不等到晚報或者是七點新聞，在網路上發一個即時新聞，媒體的從業人員只有半個小時的時間就要做一則新聞出來，所以「開放政府」很重要的是，媒體只有半個小時的時間，如果給他很充分的資訊，他就是按照很充分的資訊去登，他去做調查報導就有這一個基礎，可是如果部會都不給他，或者是給他的時間太晚，這樣就自己捕風捉影。所以我開會當天就會把逐字稿給記者，記者比較能夠有所本，他真的比較知道講了什麼話，才不會說又要去猜，我覺得這個滿重要的。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "這個是很新的觀念要讓政府部會一個個去適應，也要讓他們習慣。像台中也有成立一個「數位治理局」，實施起來是否能夠如期？或者效果能不能跑比其他的縣市更快？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個很清楚，台北市有一個資訊局，但是所有其他的縣市裡面，資訊都是在研考底下有一個資訊中心，因此不管是預算或者是能不能跟別的局合作，其實都比較困難，所以台北市有資訊局之後，我們就看得很清楚推很多「開放政府」、「開放資料」及參與算預算，因為有一個資訊局就比較好協調，所以台中有一個數位治理局，我覺得很好啊！等於資訊方面的人才會有一個跨局處的協調的地方。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "所以是台北市跑在前面了？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "所以數位治理局及資訊局是類似的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "資訊總處如果在國家行政院有一個資訊總處或資訊長，好比有一個主計長，全部都一條鞭，政風也一條鞭，可以看全國各個部會、各個單位這一個資訊有沒有好好統合？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "明年1月1日開始有一個「數位國家」方案，治理的方式就是由院長領軍，我跟吳政忠老師會幫忙，我們會固定跟六都的副市長，和做資訊的朋友們每一季去檢討，六都哪裡有做得好的地方，我們中央可以幫忙的，或者是中央有什麼政策在六都可以推行，不只是六都，每一都是要管旁邊的縣市，所以才會變成比較有這一種一條鞭的感覺出來；雖然人事組改還在討論，但是在數位國家方案裡面，有一點把區域治理一條鞭的概念帶進去。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "什麼時候開始做？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "1月1日。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "所以明年可以先看到的是唐鳳委員先用六都，並帶領副市長，把裡面資訊好的東西帶出來分享？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，就是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "這個觀念很不錯，我們的唐政委——我可以說年輕人，因為比我年輕十幾歲。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "我們輕鬆一點，可能很多聽眾對於新的名詞，不要讓你的孫子或者是孩子在玩這一東西，而我們聽眾朋友都不知道，所以有一些小遊戲，讓唐政委來解釋一下。聽眾朋友可能有的知道、有的不知道，我相信老一輩的不知道。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "「中二生」是什麼意思？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "國中二年級的學生，有的時候沒大沒小，比較自我，不給人家留情面，比較囂張。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "「87分不能再高了」？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們說滿分是100分，網路上再打87分，就是說在罵人，所以重點是「白癡」。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "「藍瘦、香菇」呢？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有一個網路上的影片，有一個人他覺得很想念他的女朋友，他覺得很難受、想哭，咬字不標準，所以講成「藍瘦、香菇」。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "這個很好玩，你知道有一齣電影，像「總舖師」的蛋蛋的幸福？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，就是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "「魯蛇」？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是人生的失敗組，就是很像比較沒有出息的叫「魯蛇」，他就是做不好失敗。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "就是做得比較不好？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，還有一個「溫拿」，也就是勝利組，兩個是一對的概念。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "我還有一個笑話，之前去加拿大，人家說為什麼要住在溫哥華？人家說「加拿大溫哥華」，用台語講是「住起來很快活（台語）」，那「94狂」？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是狂，「94狂」聽起來比較狂，狂就是不管別人怎麼想，比較有表達力。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "不瘋不狂枉少年。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「您XX系的」就是在網路上討論的時候，突然之間很冒出很專業的人來幫忙解釋這一些東西，底下的人就會說你是大氣系或者是數學系，就表示是很專業的人" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "「9.2」？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是前總統馬英九有一陣子支持率就這麼多，所以是在說不管怎麼樣，對他不離不棄都會投給他的人，就叫做「9.2」。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "喔！不是在恥笑他，我還以為笑他「9.2%」？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也是有笑他的意思，但也有人說他當「9.2」很自豪，就是大家都不願意管馬英九的時候，還願意支持他。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "所以另外一個是不離不棄。這一個我知道，「做好做滿」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "朱立倫第二屆當選新北市市長致詞的時候，有說要做好做滿。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "所以現在說做好做滿，是被人家拿出來當笑話。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "做好做滿，其實本來可能是要這樣子，但是在路上遇到淡水阿媽的話，可能就沒有辦法做好做滿。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "（笑）淡水阿媽也是朱立倫？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "朱立倫在淡水碰到一個阿媽跟他說，不需要做好做滿，要他一定要出來選。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "這個是連帶的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "所以是編一個故事。我們可以這樣子猜測啦！「GG」？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "Good game。好比我跟你在網路上打一個遊戲，到最後我贏了，我就會說「good game」，很感謝你打的遊戲打得不錯，但是其實是我贏了。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "所以是你贏的意思？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "跟聽眾朋友報告一下，這很多是你的孫子在玩的，你稍微記一下，你的孫子以後就會說你怎麼這麼厲害。聽說唐鳳的英語很好，有她學習的過程，我們請她跟我們分享一下，先廣告一下，等一下再回來。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "我是今天的許智傑，為你們邀請的是行政院政務委員，唐鳳委員。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家好。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "我聽大家說你的英語很厲害，我在想國中沒有畢業；這樣說比較不好意思——不是讀不畢業，而是不要畢業。所以去做網路、軟體賺錢，因此想英語可能不會很厲害，但是我聽到你唱饒舌歌…" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "…對，是RAP。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "是不是可以請唐委員，要再準備嗎？可以表演一段給大家參考一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "試試看。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "不錯，我都聽不懂（笑），我相信聽眾朋友大部分都不懂（笑）。不過我小的時候也有學一些有趣的（饒舌句），像我聽阿媽說：一隻狗跌到水溝底，狗叫猴子拿鉤子來勾狗（笑）。這樣你聽得懂嗎？我可以翻譯，一隻狗跌到水溝底，狗叫猴子拿鉤子來勾狗（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "瞭解了。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "所以你唸這個有一點像這個。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有一點。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "所以你都是這樣子在學英文嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，都是聽這種在學音樂劇。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "我們英文不好的，可不可這樣學？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以試試看。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "聽眾朋友，我相信你們的小孩子或者是孫子一定都有學英文，這讓我有一點感覺，意思是什麼？就是不要用英文去學英文，像唐委員你是在玩英語，你喜歡它、享受它，這樣子就會有興趣，也會學得比較好，所以我現在要開始玩英語，不過我不知道rap是不是有一點困難，或許可以把英語學得比較好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就要看你感興趣的主題。像我剛剛唸的這個是叫做「Alexander Hamilton」，是講美國開國國父的故事，因為我對政策或者這一些思想很有興趣，所以聽起來就會覺得有趣，所以就看你感興趣什麼，就找那一個音樂劇來聽，有很多音樂劇。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "看影片是一個很好的方式，但是我有試過，比較慢，有時會有劇情，有時久久講一次話，這樣學的角度會比較慢。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，音樂劇大部分都是唱，也有詞，你中間不用等他，就當作聽CD或者是原聲帶，之前有很多，像「悲慘世界」、「阿根廷別為我哭泣」。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "不錯喔！可以給提供給我們朋友們參考。可以用音樂劇學英語，不要用學英語的角度去學英語，自然就會了。所以像我剛剛說的讀書，我那一個朋友說的，我也可以參考，有時不要怪我們的小孩學習力不好，有時是我們怪沒有把他生得夠聰明，這個很無奈、沒有辦法。像學英語就用興趣去學，才會學得更好。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "像現在年輕人也有很多年輕人的思想，所以唐委員你的理想是除了「開放政府」之外，還有一個青年諮詢委員會，這一個青年諮詢委員會已經開過第一次會了，對於這一個諮詢委員會要有什麼樣子結果或者要帶到什麼方向？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們覺得很好的是，其實青年諮詢委員會在這一屆政府是提到行政院級，以前都是教育部或者什麼的。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "對，以前教育部有一個青年顧問團。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在教育部，所以關心的可能是創新或者是社企，或跟教育部比較近的題目，但是我們現在提到行政院這一個層級，其實我們有很多的青諮委員關心比較大的議題，好比原住民族跟社會住宅的東西，這個就脫離了教育部的範圍。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "今天通過住宅法三讀。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "很好啊！這些都是要解決青年人的問題，所以我們讓它在這一個政策制訂的過程裡面，就實際跟我一樣在各部會開會的過程裡面，它就是進來，有什麼想法可以直接跟部長、次長講，這樣子就不會想說要如何發問卷跟如何聽大家的聲音，可以直接讓這一些二十幾歲的朋友，直接進到跟青年有關係的會議裡來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個想法也是很新，像我之前在十二年國教的課程發展委員會，我進去的時候也是最年輕的，大部分都是老教授們。現在教育部課審會是說高中生，如果選出來是小學生也可以，但是這一個重點是說大家在制訂這一個東西的時候，將來要用的時候的利益關係人，並不是都聽他的，但是他的意見要進來，像電競選手的意見都要進來，如果選手的意見不進來的話，只有協會聲音的話，其實會…" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "…隔靴搔癢。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以每一個委員都挑了一些題目，都會慢慢跟部會去學習，會慢慢看到成果。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "你是用視訊嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "之前FB上面有一個群組，好比他們要開讀書會或什麼都會在那一個群組討論，每三個月會聚會一次過去三個月裡面實際做了哪一些東西，哪一些需要我來幫忙協調的，所以還是有面對面開會，三個月一次。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "三個月一次，面對面開會？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是的。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "立法院開會，其實中、南部立委每天都要南北跑，不知道可不可以用視訊？有人說可以將立法院遷去台中，這樣也或許比較公平，但是官員這麼多，要移到台中去開會，我後來想一想這個可能很難實施，所以如果立法院開會要如何調整，要如何把立法院移到台中——但若這樣的話，也不用移到台中，在台北就可以視訊了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個很重要。像我禮拜一開政務會議、禮拜四開院會。禮拜三跟禮拜五在院外，也有面對面跟視訊的會議，其實在做無紙化會議的作業的時候，大家就會學習用無紙化作業，email可以寫比較多，也比較環保。如果我要出差去歐洲或者是澎湖，我還是上班跟工作，其實大家這樣效率也會比較高，並不是全部變視訊。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "立法院的投票，要不要也用電子儀器投票？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "概念差不多。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "有時對立法委員來講，一個個坐在那裡很浪費時間，如果是正當需要，有必要審法案，大家在那裡，那是很有意義的事情，但你想國民黨有可能拿一千個案出來，如果可以電子投票，那就很舒適了（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我之前去歐洲的時候，在英國的Westminster，他們的國會議員投票的時候，還要走到走廊，一個走廊叫做「贊成」、一個叫做「反對」，所以我覺得慢慢來啦！你們跟資訊處討論一下，應該會有滿好的方法。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "我們期待唐鳳委員用你的專業，看有什麼方式可以比較省人工、紙本，讓我們的社會有一個不一樣的角度使其進步，以後還有時間的話，我們再請唐委員就你的專業，診斷對臺灣還有什麼可以調整，我們再一起打拚。因為時間的關係，已接近尾聲，今天非常開心邀請到行政院政務委員來跟大家討論這一個主題，也希望以後有機會再邀請唐委員跟我們解釋更深、更廣的運用，或者是當政務委員以後對臺灣的改變可以講給大家參考，也很感謝唐委員。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "很感謝，謝謝許委員。" }, { "speaker": "許智傑", "speech": "也希望下禮拜一還能與我們聽眾朋友在空中再會。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "我今天這一個主題是這樣子的，我們想要寫一本書，希望年輕世代可以分享一些經驗——我就不講「您」了——你在你的人生中，你覺得你比較大的一個關鍵轉捩點是什麼，當然第一個是什麼樣的轉捩點？第二個是什麼樣的因素，促使你做了那樣的決定？有沒有一句什麼關鍵的話？我想給一些在turning point的年輕人作為參考。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這是哪一個出版社？" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "遠流。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以是蒐集好比一百個？" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "十至十五個（笑），沒有一百個，我想至多就二十個吧！因為太多的話，每一個人其實就只有一千字、五百字，我覺得那樣沒有辦法說太多。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就變成小品文的感覺。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "對啊！沒有辦法說得太多。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "喔，好啊！" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "我自己期待的是，至少每一位的受訪者，我寫出來的稿子可以三至四千字，比較可以把一件事說清楚一點。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好。我們現在就開始了嗎？" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好啊！" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "所以要請你想一想，也許我們可以邊聊，可以促使你想起來（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有，很明顯啊。我確定沒有要繼續升高中的那一刻，這個是很明顯的。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "什麼事情讓你覺得不要繼續升高中？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得最主要的一個影響，是我在做中小學科展的時候。我國中參加過兩次中小學科展，一次是國中一年級的時候，當時好像是應用科學組台北市第一、全國第三，到國二的時候就是應用科學組全國第一。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我自己在國一跟國二的這兩個作品的做法，有非常大的差距，國一的時候我基本上就是用圖書館裡面可以看得到的書、我能夠接觸到的教授，當然課本裡的資訊，再加上我自己的一些創意去做了一個研究，那個研究以國中生來講就還不錯。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是國二的時候，因為有了全球資訊網……在我國一的時候沒有全球資訊網。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "喔！你國二的時候開始有？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "所以一有的時候你就接觸了？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，當然。它被發明的時候，在全球資訊網之前有過幾個類似系統，我當時就都有接觸，後來才轉換到全球資訊網。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為全球資訊網的發明，所以我在國二的那一個題目，就不再是看圖書館裡的書了，而是直接跟實際在做這方面研究的學者，拿他們上論文之前的草稿論文（preprint）討論。當時有全球資訊網，大家都很樂意去發表。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我當然也有看一些原文的作品，對作者有什麼想法或者一些詢問的話，都是直接去論壇上問。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "直接跟他們對話了？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，直接跟他們對話。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他們當然隔著全球資訊網，不會知道我只有十四歲。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "喔！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以也就是覺得只是英文不太好，但是問的問題滿有條理，所以會直接願意跟我互動。雖然我最後科展寫出來是中文的，但是其實中間的研究過程其實已經完全沒有在實體世界進行。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果去比較這兩份科展，就會發現其實程度可能感覺上差個六、七年，也就是差很多的。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "那這個差異是來自於說，你在一年中就有那麼大的變化，還是因為有了全球資訊網？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然是有全球資訊網，等於我不是只能看大專用書裡面收進去的，可能已經過時了十年左右的資料，因為從學者研究進入教科書是十年的過程嘛！後來我有參加課綱制定，也知道這需要花非常多的時間去審定。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是在全球資訊網上，尤其在剛開始，頂尖的學者都願意把他們正在想的東西分享出來。所以我覺得並不是因為我特別厲害或怎麼樣，因為其實也才過一年，我自己的能力並沒有大幅的改變，但是我的第一手資料就差那麼多，所以做出來的研究成果，一個比較像小孩在玩，但是另外一個就開始有一些貢獻。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以當初會覺得，我與其繼續唸高中，看這種過時十年的課本，討論的也是十年以前的題目，我不如就直接開始作點研究，沒有什麼攔著我作研究。我覺得這個是轉捩點，轉捩點的發生就是接觸到全球資訊網。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "你覺得說不必再沿著一般的學制一級級往上，是因為一級級往上接觸的過程中，所接觸到的東西是很舊的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就過時的。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "可是你那時候有把握說……我想因為你做了國二的科展，你有把握那網路上的東西很新的，但是你有能力可以理解？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那當然，理解沒有問題。其實要看懂，對大部分的人都不是問題，就算現在即使不懂維基百科上寫的專有名詞，其實它都會附文獻了，所以你一個個慢慢看懂，只要有閱讀能力的人都不是問題，因為知識在上面是有一個脈絡的——這就是超連結的意思。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "你做了一個這樣的決定之後，等於改變了你後來的求學；不能講求學，你要如何定義後來那一段？如果不叫求學，叫什麼歷程？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就直接進入研究。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "直接進入研究的歷程了。你知道你要研究什麼嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然知道啊！" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "你怎麼知道的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有一些想搞清楚的東西，好比像在我中輟之後去創業……" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "……你把自己定義為中輟啊？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，是中輟沒有錯，就唸到一半。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "你有唸國三嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我國三整個沒有去。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "所以你其實……我這樣講，你正確的學歷是國二肄業嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我在二十歲的時候，內政部兵役系統的學歷是小學肄業，我覺得非常困惑，但是好像是因為我小學四年級唸完之後去德國的時候，可能在內政部登記上出了一些差錯，所以我的資料庫學歷是小學肄業，臺灣有這個學歷的人可能不多了。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "你會不會是學歷最低的政務委員（笑）？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，絕對是。但是其實我國中是因為校長瞞著教育局，告訴教育局說我還是有去上課，所以其實我到最後國中應該是有畢業的，我有參加畢業典禮，但是從國二下學期就幾乎沒什麼去，國三是完全沒有去。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "可是問題是，如果你有參加畢業典禮，理論上你應該有畢業證書啊！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我應該有畢業證書，所以我不知道是怎麼登記的，所以這就是為什麼我要致力進行資訊系統跟公部門資料的盤點。這是開玩笑（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "先為自己的學歷平反一下（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "國中畢業也不是什麼值得平反的學歷（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "你國三的那一年，為什麼就不去了？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為在創業，在工作了。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "啊！就已經在工作了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "對，你十四歲就創業了。然後你要創什麼業，跟你的研究，你就已經很清楚了？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然，是啊！" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "你說你想要搞清楚的事情，這個世界上有這麼多的事情值得我們去搞清楚，你怎麼去選定你要搞清楚的是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該這樣講，我碰到了一個主觀經驗，就是說我聯繫上這個世界上正在作研究的一批人，這一批人在新的全球資訊網上互動。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可是為什麼人們好比在網路上就願意信任陌生人、願意信任一個十四歲你也不知道是臺灣哪裡來的人，問問題，人們就回答了，為什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在實際的學界或者是國際會議上，人們要互相相處很久，才願意彼此相信、彼此一起作研究？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個東西其實當時沒有人有答案，就是說「為什麼人到網路上，行為就改變了？」" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "這個就是你在網路上面開始去接觸的時候，因為你問的問題夠專業好了，所以你就被接受了，這個會不會影響到以後你自己在網路上跟別人交往或跟別人互動，因為你一開始的經驗其實是被信任的，甚至是被重視的，有沒有影響到你日後跟網路上交往的經驗？" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "就是說你也容易帶著正面的角度，不像我們現在很多人對網路其實是覺得很恐怖的，我們會覺得實體世界，面對面知道你是什麼樣子，在網路上會覺得都是假的或者都是騙人的，你如何建立你自己在網路上的人格，跟你有關嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "早期好比像我剛剛說1994、95、96，一直到97年上網都還是用打字為主，其實是沒有什麼影音多媒體的。在那樣的前提底下，如果你的文字能力不夠好，或者是說沒有辦法只用看的就只能理解對方的意思，如果你的認知模型比較是用聽的、用講的或者用觸摸的話，其實在當時是被社群所排拒的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為這樣的關係，所以早期的網路社群確實是有一個自我選擇過的，通常是文字能力比較好的人，因為沒有別的模態可以用。因為這樣的關係，所以我覺得大部分的時候，我不會把它看作是正向或者是負向，而是變成一個我主要認知這個世界的方式，我們說people of letters，就是好像寫信一樣，彼此溝通的方法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "它當然也有正面跟負面的部分。當時網路上都有霸凌，我們現在看到的都有，只是說能夠參與的人是人口裡面的小眾，所以多多少少還是有那個小眾本身所在意的一些次文化，還是有形成的。所以確實可以說我是以當時的次文化被形塑的，這個沒有問題，但不一定是正面或負面。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "可是在網路上面，你已經決定你自己不必再繼續往下唸了，然後你把它認為那是你生命中很重要的轉捩點，為什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為從那一個角度來看，我就沒有再受到學門的限制，因為網路上它不會告訴你說這個是什麼系的，超連結並不只能連到同一個科系。我可能為了解決一個問題，我可能要看七個學門的東西，而且它也不會標注它是七個學門的東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得這個對我的認識方法產生了一個很大的影響，就是我不會看到一個知識，就先去判斷它是哪一個流派或者是學門。我完全只看重它跟旁邊的知識要怎麼互相勾織。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "你的朋友裡面一定也有國三唸完唸高一，高一唸完往大學這樣升的，到今天為止，你對於當年所做這樣的決定，你是怎麼樣去評價它的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當時就只能做這一個決定。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "不是，我說你，你如何評價你十四歲那時做的決定？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那不是我做的決定。我們說下層結構決定上層結構，本來就只能有這個……除非你當時不讓我接觸到全球資訊網，不然我如果接觸到全球資訊網，一定就是這一個決定。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "可是那個也有很多人接觸啊！接觸以後還是一樣走一條建構好的道路啊！因為你走的其實是你自己重新建構的路，不是別人已經建構好的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "很難這樣講。因為跟我一起創業的人也都是因為接觸到全球資訊網，所以輟學的輟學、休學的休學，這個其實是非常常見的一個狀況，我並不覺得我是特別的，當時有一整個世代——也並不只在臺灣——好比Yahoo、Amazon這一些創業者，他們都是看到全球資訊網，所以決定在這裡面作研究跟創業。這比較有吸引力，是一整個世代年輕人共同的決定。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "等於說你們算是被這一個網路，徹底改變你們對於知識的看法跟人生的看法？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "知識的看法這個部分我懂，有關於超過知識的，像人生或生命的看法有被這一個東西影響嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然。因為當時Tim Berners-Lee在發明全球資訊網的時候，我們知道是拋棄掉專利權、著作權及所有智慧財產權，這個跟我們從小到大學到的東西是不一樣的。我們從小到大學到的東西，是說抄襲是不好的、盜版是有問題的，別人的創意不要剽竊，應該要尊重智慧財產權之類的，但是網際網路事實上是建立在一個幾乎是達爾文主義的，有誰主張他的專利權，那一個系統就慢慢沒有人用，而有人願意開放出來，即使開放品質比較差，像全球資訊網，大家還是願意去用。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這是建立在一個我們現在會把它叫做「零邊際成本」，也就是你去使用這一套系統到你推薦給別人用，你不需要付出額外的成本，你去改做它、你去加上它，就像一把椅子你在網路上拿走，本來那一把還在那裡，所以是沒有邊際成本的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因此這樣的情況下，你去捍衛這一把椅子的專屬性，幾乎是完全沒有意義的事情，那個叫做人工匱乏（artificial scarcity），明明可以隨便複製的東西，但是你告訴大家說你就只能複製五份。當然我理解畫家限量供應，但我參加全球資訊網可以讓我看到：限量供應也是合法的，都合情合理，可是這樣做出來的東西，就無法變成網路上的主流文化。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一種開放的文化，從演化的角度來講非常容易理解，因為它的繁衍能力不受限制。當然當時的黑客會說「Information Wants to Be Free」，但是其實並不是「Wants to Be Free」，而是「Wants to Be Valuable」。你讓它能夠自由地傳遞，當然是讓它valuable很好的方法，因為你讓它取得的成本減到零，因此不管發揮了多少價值比起成本，本益比都是無限。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "你這個「Wants to Be Free」的「Free」是指免費的意思嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是自由流通的意思。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "好，所以這一個某種程度，你剛剛講到放棄專利權、放棄什麼權，這一個概念會不會形塑了你後來對很多的東西，你願意把這個所有權或者是專利這一件事拋開？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "這個是讓一個人，特別是研究者有某一種風險，因為後來你又變成創業者，這個是有風險的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是啊！那當然。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "你如何看這一個風險？感覺開放可以促成流通跟創造價值，但是它也有風險。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實，我們看好比像服裝設計業，他們就是一個不能申請專利、也不能申請著作權的一個產業，而這一個產業因此風險就很高，因為你投入一個設計，到下一季，那個顏色、剪裁的所有人都抄過去了，所以就變成這一個產業，不斷在材質及任何東西上去進行創造，本來的設計師發現了一些顏色或搭配，會變成未來新一代設計師去設計臨摹的養分，就是說會變成這一行的創新因此是幾乎被逼著，會非常非常快速。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "你看到的是被逼迫的創新，因為你不創新也不行？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為你不能舊的在這邊一直收授權費，你沒有授權費可以收，你就變成即使是大師、大品牌，也還是要交接給年輕人，年輕人又要自己的創意，不能只抄大師，對不對？" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在別的很鞏固專利權的行業，其實就看不到這一個情況，很容易變成是一個大師做了，然後就收了一輩子的專利費。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "可是服裝業還是有所謂的大師，對不對？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有大師。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "而且一作大師，一樣可以作很長時間的大師啊！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒錯，但是他就必須要教學徒，然後我們現在看到大的品牌，往往首席設計師已經不是當時創品牌的大師了，他必須帶著學徒，讓學徒變成新一代的老師。如果完全只是沿習他做的、收授權費的話，他也沒有動力去帶年輕人。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "對，沒錯。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "你十四歲開始創業，你今年也不過才三十五歲而已，你人生進行的速度都這麼快。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "你有想過你在十四歲的時候做的事情，可能是別人三十五歲做的事情，對不對？你三十五歲做的事情，可能是別人五十歲做的事。你如此快速地運轉，有沒有害怕過？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "為什麼要害怕？" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "咦（驚訝口吻），就過太快了，人家三十五歲的事情，你十四歲就做完了，那以後要幹麻？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一直都有可以研究的、很有趣的事情啊！" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "你到現在為止還是覺得這個世界有很多很有趣的事情啊？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實啊！我們一開始講的那個「人到網路上的行為怎麼改變」，隨著網路演變，現在我們說萬物聯網，已經變成不是只是文字了，它包含擴增實境這一些東西出來，人的行為還是不斷地改變。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "而且這就不只是人了，而是整個生物界、社會界、自然界。不管是學門，或者是我們本來說不同的認知模態中間的這一個界限，現在都因為自動化轉譯的關係，而快速消融。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好比說即使我不會講好比像土耳其文，但是我現在在AR或者是VR裡面，我講中文，然後機器自動翻譯，然後就可以跟各國的人同時交談。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以這一些人類的行為在這裡面的改變，其實這一個題目是研究不完的。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "我一直以為你是一個對人沒有興趣的人，因為我覺得你好像一直活在一個……這是我的誤解。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "因為你超出你同代的人很多，然後你又很快接觸到我們所謂虛擬的世界，結果我發現你從剛剛談到現在都在談人的行為，所以你其實對人很有興趣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然啊！" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "你是一個對人很有興趣的人，一直到現在你都還在研究或都還在感興趣，萬物聯網時代裡頭的人是怎麼行為的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！就是去傾聽，因為我們人跟人之間最基本這一些交流的方式，好比傾聽、說話、形成共識等等，這一些東西其實從我的角度來看，它某個程度是被廣播跟電視的發明所打斷的，因為廣播跟電視變成一個人可以太容易跟一萬個人講話，一萬個人太容易只聽一個人說話。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在我們有廣播、電視發明之前，你必須要是五、六個人聚會說話。到電話、電報發明仍然是一對一的，但是電視發明之後，我覺得大家的行為方式，其實已經脫離了我們語言或者是文明一開始被發明時的對稱性，變成高度不對稱的模式。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "原來從廣播開始就已經不對稱？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，我覺得有高度的不對稱，變成是你如果很擅長用你的聲音去煽動人，那世界大戰什麼的就非常容易去引發的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "而網際網路我覺得只是讓這一個東西回到任何人不但可以講、也可以聽，我們不但有一個人對一萬人講的方法，我們也可以同時聽一萬人說話的方法，就是把這一個對稱性某個程度還回來了。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "啊？你覺得網路是把對稱性還回來了？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是啊！" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "怎麼解釋啊？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以前有能力自己開廣播電臺的人就那麼幾個，所以你要上廣播，它是一個稀缺的資源，只有邱吉爾等人可以整天上廣播，但是一旦有網路的話，等於每一個人都有網路電台。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "尤其像現在有直播的話更是了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，每個人都是直播主，您說的沒有錯。廣播、電視、平面的界線已經消失了，我們可以同時發布這三個，而且我在發布的時候，我還可以挑我要對誰發布，所以不但是受眾、連媒材都是由講話的那一個人自己決定，那這一件事是比較回到我們有廣播、電視以前，我要去找誰說話的這樣一個概念。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "嗯，對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "它是把這一個權力還給大家。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "「對話」你覺得很重要，結果你進到這一個系統來，你覺得對話容易嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是指到行政院嗎？" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "對，公務系統。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得不錯啊！以行政院這方面來說，至少以我接觸到的事務官……" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "……你講的話他們聽得懂嗎（笑）？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以啊！都沒有問題啊！" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "聽得懂啊？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "你說行政院一方面是怎麼樣？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實是有點像我最早接觸到網路世界的人。能夠成為專業的事務官，至少文字運用的能力是很基本的。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "喔！是這樣去看的，嗯。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以至少不需要太依賴非語言訊息，大家看逐字稿，是能夠在腦裡還原回那一個畫面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "作為專業的事務官，這個是最基本的能力。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我覺得這個讓我有一種熟悉的感覺。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "讓你有一種熟悉的感覺，你所謂「熟悉」是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就像我十三、十四歲的時候，剛開始接觸到這一些……" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "…你好有趣喔！竟然會覺得在行政院裡面的對話，彷彿回到了網際網路那個……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以文字為主的社會。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "某一群他們的語言文字能力是比較好的，用文字能力表達的那一個交談的方式。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是這樣子沒有錯。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "你對於我們的總統在《經濟學人》的文章上提到了你，你會不會擔心自己變成政府的樣板？" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "就是說我們政府因為有了唐鳳，所以顯得很數位、顯得很時尚，你會不會覺得自己變成一個樣板的人物？" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "實際上我們的行政院或政府系統沒有那麼數位、也沒那麼進步，但是因為有了唐鳳，大家就覺得我們好像很進步。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "你有沒有想過這一件事（笑）？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我是覺得還好，因為《經濟學人》那一篇文章主要講的是說：政府願意跟一個以前的黑客（ex-hacker）合作溝通。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得它好像也不是在說數位化……" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "……我只是從那一篇文章引到你的處境，你有想過這一個事情嗎？或者是有人跟你講過這一個事情嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實是有人跟我說過，我比較像吉祥物的一種狀態（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "（大笑）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是我覺得這跟樣板也不太一樣。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "吉祥物的說法比較好啦！樣板太難聽了（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也不是（笑），而是說吉祥物至少有能動性，可以走來走去，樣板是沒有能動性的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我是覺得，我確實是有吉祥物的效果，這個是真的，但是我並不擔心這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第一個，就是我不會為我不懂的事情代言。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "哦（理解貌）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以不可能自己沒有搞懂的事，然後我要求社會大眾接受，這個是不可能的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外，當吉祥物有一個好處，因為我在推行的不管是開放政府，或者是做一些數位化治理的工作，其實在臺灣是沒有人反對的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "很少有人會說「政府應該更少溝通」，或者「我們應該積極打壓朋友的意見」，臺灣沒有人這樣講嘛！對不對？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我很幸運，臺灣剛好是我們在取得言論自由之後的這一代，享受到言論自由的好處之後，沒有人覺得我們應該要放棄掉言論自由——至少在我這一輩裡面沒有人這樣講——所以不管是什麼立場的朋友，大家對於促進溝通這一件事上，基本上都是贊同的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "吉祥物當然對大家都很吉祥，但是從另外一個角度來看，這就是在說我做的實際事情，大家覺得無論有多少益處，至少對自己無害。所以當然是很吉祥，這個沒有問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個是，確實我可能是全世界所有minister層級來做「基進式透明（radical transparency）」裡面做得比較徹底的一個——不敢說是最徹底的——但是做得比較徹底的一個，所以全世界的朋友也在看說，這樣到底會有什麼樣的影響？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以它是一個實驗性質，說不定我們實驗到最後，發現極致的透明有壞處，或沒有幫助，或什麼之類的，這我也不知道。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "什麼時候可以下這個斷語？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "任何時候、任何人，這是可受公評的。因為我進來開協調的每一場會議、每一個字十天之內在網路上都有，所以已經很多調查報導的記者拿這一個當材料，或者是國際做比較政治的學者拿這一個去做一些文本分析。看他們的產出，就知道說這個對大家有沒有幫助。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "嗯（理解貌）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個只是最基本的材料。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "你這個靈感哪裡來的？我的意思是說，你決定這樣做的想法是哪裡來的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我本來就這麼做，我入閣前就這麼做。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "可是因為那時候不涉及到所謂的公共政策。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "所以還是有一點，它還是有一些不同。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "理解。其實我們在網際網路上做標準制定的時候，這一種極端的透明是常態，我從一開始1993、94年接觸到的時候就是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家不投票，也沒有什麼委員長，完全是靠共識決，共識決是建立在大家粗略對彼此意見的理解跟同意上，所以它是一個無政府式的決策方法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為這樣的關係，其實我是在這一個文化裡長大的，所以我並沒有覺得說這是什麼特別的事情。一向做政治決定，二十年來就是這樣做。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "所以如果說到政府，你是一個「安那其」的信仰者嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不是信仰者，是實踐者。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "可是你現在在你的層級裡面、在你的範圍裡面，也許你可以作為一個「安那其」，可是畢竟你是在一個官僚系統裡面，可能在你上面的人未必能接受，所以……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "……我上面只有一個人（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "（笑）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以他同意就好了（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "OK。進到政府裡面來做事，你之前有訂過在你的任期內你想完成哪一些事？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有耶！其實我跟林全院長在進行勞雇協商的時候，除了現在大家都知道我一個禮拜兩天要遠距上班之類的事情外，其實我是直接在iPad畫了我正在做的所有事情，然後問他有沒有什麼額外想要我做的？他說沒有，叫我專心做那些。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以從我的角度來看，是行政院付我雖然沒有很高的薪水，但希望我不要再花時間去幫蘋果或者幫其他的公司想事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我現在做的事情，跟我在入閣前的事情，是完全一樣的。除了課發會的工作因為入閣暫停之外，其他都全部是繼續這樣做下去。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我相信到我離職之後，我不管在民間還是NGO還是做一樣的事，並不會因為身份而有所改變。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "這一些事情就是你一路以來在做的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就做溝通、開放政府。這個跟行政院層級合作也是2014年就開始，也有兩年了。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "你是說那個「零時政府」嗎？不是？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是「零時政府」，但「零時政府」社群在2014年的時候，毛治國前院長說要做群眾外包，其實群眾外包跟開放資料就是我們今天所說開放政府的一個前身，兩方面包含「透明」、「參與」。參與就是群眾外包，收意見回來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "開放政府現在還會說要加上「課責」，也就是要逐漸變成常規決策的一部分，還要「多元」讓平常沒有辦法加入議程的人加入，這個是後來加上的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "毛前院長跟張善政前副院長在當時，就已經有規劃幾乎相同的一套方案，當時我不管是技術上作顧問，或者是作為公務員的培力或訓練，或者是幫忙寫系統，我都是從2014年就開始了。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "OK，聽起來都覺得滿按部就班。什麼事情會讓你緊張？你在什麼樣的狀態下會感到焦慮、緊張？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "幾乎沒有。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "啊？你幾乎不焦慮緊張的啊？為什麼？都不會害怕？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有什麼好處。害怕有什麼好處？" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "不是好處，那是一個本能反應啊！比如什麼事情不瞭解的，或者是什麼樣的狀況會讓你感到壓力，你的壓力源是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是這樣子的，我從零歲到十二歲，都處在也許明天就起不來的這一個狀態底下，因為我身體上這樣的關係，所以我養成一個習慣，不能有激動的情緒，不然心臟會受不了。所以那個是本能反應，大概四歲就已經完成的本能反應。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "那個是理智思考的結果嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "跟理智一點關係都沒有，它就是求生本能的作用。因為我心臟可能有50％二氧化碳跟氧氣混流，其實隨時都在類似高山症的狀態——我是說小時候——因為這樣的關係，我只要一激動，據說臉會變成紫色，然後會昏倒。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以不管是生氣、害怕或甚至是運動或者是太高興，都不可以。我覺得這一件事身體自己產生了制約反應，就是我強一點的情緒，但某個程度，身體會自己深呼吸，會告訴自己說不可以這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "不可以繼續……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "……對，不然就昏倒了。這是一個求生反應，我從有記憶開始就是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "這樣不錯，所以你的腎上線素也不會經常那個……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，可能用進廢退，不太分泌腎上腺素了。當然我十二歲開刀之後身體是好的，理論上都可以做了，但是你也知道心理這種東西是已經根深蒂固了。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "剛剛一開始的時候你提到國二的時候就已經決定不要讀高中了，有沒有哪一個人的某一句關鍵的話對你做此決定是有推力或影響的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可能有…（思考），如果真的要講的話也是有啦。我看一下原文，免得我背錯了，（查電腦）就直接抄原文吧！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "\"We reject: kings, presidents and voting. We believe in: rough consensus and running code.\" — David D. Clark" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是說我們不相信國王、總統或投票，我們只相信粗略的共識和能運行的程式。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "所以這一個共識還不是非常地精細？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。因為這一篇文章就是在講「粗略共識」的意思，如果在網路上要達成精細的共識，就是每一個人都完全同意的話，也就是那個rough會變成很粗暴的，為什麼呢？因為網路上很難100%確知螢幕後另外一個人的意思。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以你硬要去追根究柢，往往會變成最有時間的那一個人贏，而不是最有道理的那一個人贏。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "嗯，對！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我們從很早就已經學到說，你如果要做任何事，就是接受粗略、大概的大方向，不要彼此衝突就可以了，雖不滿意但都可接受。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "嗯（非常贊同貌）。其實我覺得你應該要寫一本書，我不知道你自己有沒有時間，我覺得你應該要寫一本從網路上……這個聽起來很庸俗，你忍耐一下，「從網路上學習做人的道理」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是，其實有啊！有寫這樣一篇，很長的文章，叫做「開源之道」，那個有寫，然後後來也有翻成英文、也有發表。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "因為我覺得你剛剛講的一些東西，真的滿顛覆我一些對於網路的認知，因為我們這一代不是網路原生代（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是剛移民來的。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "所以我們很多東西，是後來帶著心不甘、情不願的心情被迫改了國籍的（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "理解，理解（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "所以你剛剛講的東西，我覺得很新鮮。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好不容易翻山越嶺，進入了德國（笑），卻一時沒有辦法領略它的文化（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "對，對（笑）！你剛剛說這一個作者是誰？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個是David D. Clark，他是1992年在網際網路工程組（IETF）……" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "……這一句話對你來說很重要，但是它為什麼會變成影響你作人生抉擇的一個點呢？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為這一句話非常好的描述了「網際」網路。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "網路大家都知道是什麼，也就是電腦跟電腦之間彼此接線，但是「網際」這一個概念很少像他講得這麼好的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "網際網路之所以是「網際」，其實是世界上非常多個不同運營網路的人，用他們的網路無償——後來是有償——連在一起。如果現在沒有網際網路的「網際」這一層，我們就跟以前一樣每一個地方的電信局，或者是每一個地方的私營的AT&T或AOL的這些各自為政。是因為有這一個「網際」，所以大家才能雖然各在各個不同地方或國家，但是你可以在任何地方回來看你的電子郵件，那就是中間每一個網路運營者都願意配合。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是這一些人其實都有各自的利益，為什麼他們要彼此同意？而且後面也沒有國家力量，沒有哪一個電信商有槍炮彈藥，什麼都沒有，所以大家除了談出一個大家覺得都有價值的東西之外，沒有別的辦法，這個就是回到最純粹的外交。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以這邊講的精神，是你對著基本上是陌生人，半年可能才見到一次面，大部分都是寫email，在這樣的情況下，你還要做出有效的政策決策，需要的一些政治哲學。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個政治哲學，我們講的就是「安那其」的基本：每一個人快速信任別人，把自己的利益跟不利益進行整理，然後匯集大家的意見，求取大家基本、粗略的共識，不需要精細、長程的共識，讓大家先做一陣子再回來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，我覺得對我影響最大的是，它是我第一個認識到的政治系統。臺灣當時還沒有總統直選，其實也沒有別的政治系統可以認識。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "不過這一件事跟你決定不唸高中是？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "完全有關啊！" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "真的啊？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為我如果繼續升學的話，在大部份的層面上，我還是要屈就於本來科層式的政治系統，這個系統之前的正當性，是來自於據說這是最有效管理人才、資源的方法之類的，這有很多講法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但在我接觸到網際網路的政治系統之後，我就發現明明就有一個更好的管理知識及貢獻的方法。當年的教育體系……其實到現在我們做107課綱的時候，已經沒有人會說本來那一套「應試教育」是最有效的方法了，做課綱的教授們沒有一個這樣講的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是在當時，我作為第一線的學生，還有很多可能威權時代的一些訓導人員，他們會很堅持按照階級、年齡或者是什麼東西去聽從，這邊剛剛講的kings、presidents、voting三種最常見的樣式……也就是要嘛，一個人講了，他講的算；要嘛，用某一種方式產生定期的領導者，他講了算；要嘛，就是每一件事都來公投，公投講了算。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這三種政治型態，雖然當時公投講的比較少，都各有各的倡議者，其實在學校裡面可能也是……我們知道有校長、有校規，這比較類似「他講了算」這樣的角色，但是當然也有學生會，或者是多數決之類的，中間也是有投票要選班長這些東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是這三種分配資源的方法，我在接觸到這一種新的方法之後，都覺得是無效、或至少沒有那麼有效的方法，所以後來就覺得說，我不需要再花時間在這一些比較無效的方法裡面。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "很早就知道去蕪存菁（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "把無效的東西先……哎，我們都活到五、六十歲了，都還在「無」裡面尋找「去蕪存菁」的「蕪」（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是。那也是充滿了道。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "也是「道」，好。" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "謝謝你，唐鳳，謝謝。可以拍張照片嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然可以啊！" }, { "speaker": "彭蕙仙", "speech": "我再email給你。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "所以接下來簡報要考驗你（指策進會葉秘書長）了，我就講少一點。你就正常自然講。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "反正都還可以編輯。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "策進會過去的績效及未來的規劃有什麼就講什麼。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "……對啊！反正有我幫的上忙的地方或者就是跟大家學習，可以投影。" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "先大概講一下臺灣產學策進會的簡介。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "不投影也沒關係，因為有紙本！他（指辦公室人員）有放投影，是嗎？這樣政委其實比較好看（即看得清楚意思），（笑）" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "方便不方便投影都沒有關係。" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "方便不方便都沒有關係。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以投啊！你是PPT嗎？" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "有一些小的影片。還是我們直接看電腦？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "都可以啊！你有HDMI輸出嗎？" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "有啊！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我看一下線夠不夠長。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "我上次有提醒你們（指策進會人員）說政委這邊每一場會議都會打逐字稿。" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "有。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "大家好，等一下先針對臺灣產學策進會作一個簡單的簡介，讓政委瞭解一下我們這個策進會從以前到現在做的一些事情。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "臺灣產學策進會是一個產官學研平台，我們當初在高雄軟體園區設置的時候，是在沈榮津次長的指導下成立，經過歷屆理事長、秘書長、黃義佑執行長的努力之下，我們把這個平台建構比較完整。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "我們在學界的部分是由南部接近三十所學校的校長所構成的一個平台；在官方方面主要是加工出口處，因為高雄軟體園區是加工出口處所管理的，另外也有工業局所督導的；研究單位是結合了各個學校；在業界的部分參加的大部分都是業界的CEO或者是執行長或者是董事長。（上述產官學研）一起串聯這一個平台。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "不好意思，插話一下，跟政委報告一下，這一個案子大約是六年前開始，那時逸秋剛來，整個team只有三個人，initial提這一個案子的concept的人是經濟部當初加工處處長即現任的經濟部沈榮津次長，以前都由下而上推動，但效果不太好，因為他被派到南部來，他希望南部所有的大學校長級先聚起來，看看能不能整合成一個由上而下的聯盟，校長若同意要發展這一塊，校內就可能會成立一些新的系所跟學院，由校長在推動會比較快，這個是大學聯盟的部分。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "第二個是產業聯盟，那時是經濟部加工處（高軟園區的督導長官）本來就要負責推動園區內之招商，房子蓋好要招商，所以要透過招商的團隊或者是像資策會或者是中山大學在那邊有一個促產中心，一起幫加工處招商，現在招商大概快要90幾％至100％了──園區雖算小型，但卻是一個非常成功的案例。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "後來沈榮津處長榮升當工業局局長，現在又榮升次長，他們（指策進會）這一塊仍繼續在推，也一直在跟加工處及工業局link，基本上現在已算是小有所成，大概是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "大家知道其實大部分高雄當初是以重工業為主，高雄軟體園區是比較好的轉型機會，我們希望給ICT產業能在既有高雄的一些基礎作為一個很好的發展，所以我們是有這樣的平台，誠如執行長所說，我們學校是以校長為主要參與者，所以在各方面的宣傳跟執行方面會比較順利。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "我們這一個單位最主要一開始是有「放視大賞」的競賽，這個是有別於一般學生期末的展覽，我們在這一個「放視大賞」的競賽裡面，我們希望可以由廠商出題，最主要都是廠商在主導，然後由學生來解題，匯集了許多的學子跟人才，也就是當初是以整個南部，現在已經擴散到整個臺灣，在這一個平台上有很多的人才，我們同時邀廠商參與，在人才培育方面或者是人才媒合方面有一點小有所成，可以促進南方人在數位產業的就業率。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "我們一開始是從媒合的部分開始做，再來是由前端的服務，因為我們有跟學校作鏈結，學校方面我們希望推動產學合作，尤其是我們希望推動特色的系所，也就是以廠商的需求來推動特色的系所。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那一個系所的課程跟他有關聯。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "系所就是為他們（產業）設計（課程）。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "像實踐大學我們推動了一個叫做「動畫學系」，他們也希望有一個「動畫學院」，就是特別由廠商出師資，然後規劃特色的學程，這個是在前端所做的一些特色學程跟特色學習。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "後端的部分，在「放視大賞」後的這一些人才，我們還是希望可以留下他們，對於未來在創業的部分有一些幫助，所以我們成立一個叫做「K Square」類似創業育成的場所，讓這一些學童或者是南部一些想要創業的團隊可以承租，大家在那邊彼此交流，這個部分可以建立人才媒合、創造課程、實作工作坊，還有前育成的工作，這個部分我們已經有幾家廠商在「K Square」進行前育成的工作。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "後來獨立創業，我們也輔導他申請國發基金，已經有一些成功的案例，從「放視大賞」、前端的課程、後續的「K Square」一條方式來配合創業。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有，「K Square」我有聽過，很有名。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "我們當初真的是推得很辛苦，簡單講大家知道怎麼做產學合作計畫跟學程，但我們推的學程是為了業界的需要所設計，所以他（業界）願意出錢、出力，但業界希望可以得到他們想要的人，而業界要的人從哪裡萃取？從「放視大賞」中萃取出來，以作品的方式呈現，作品又是由產業界出題目，所以這個作法跟以前是不太一樣的，不是由老師給定題目後指導完的畢業專題報告就丟出來，而是業界出題。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "我們在「放視大賞」也有弄就業媒合會，我記得（擔任策進會秘書長）任內的時候，四天的活動有一千多件作品，一件作品可能由兩、三個學生（製作），差不多這樣，所以參加的學生數大概是三千，現在已經破五千，來參觀的人大概二、三萬以上，大概會有七百個人去參加媒合就業，可能在大三、大四就已經跟業界媒合，也就是不錯的作品，基本上業者有興趣的高達四成，四天比賽或展示完了以後不是就結束了，後續我們還會媒合一些作品的團隊看看有沒有要來「K Square」，繼續從作品走向創業。大概是這樣!" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "這個（指投影片）是我們「放視大賞」的成果，從2011年我還記得是執行長篳路藍縷開創的，當時相當辛苦，因為這一個活動推展的時候，廣邀參與系所，後來近幾年參觀的人數我們已經達到五萬人次，參加的廠商大概有四十間，參與學校的系所有七十所，從這六年來媲美新一代跟四區競賽的規模，變成是學生畢業很重要的產品展示跟就業媒合的場所。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "這個（指投影片）是我們的一些剪影，透過產官學研的轉化動能，我們匯集動能人才、創意跟資源。這也是一些（指投影片）剪影，打造加值型舞臺創造產品的附加價值。這個（指投影片）是我們人才媒合的一些做法，我們通常會在學界做一些人才能量的調查及業界用人的盤點，進行人才篩選，及做企業媒合之面試，然後再聘用追蹤及媒介轉介，獲得企業的聘用，再做新進的培訓。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "這個是「放視大賞」歷年來一些優秀的得獎學員，現在已經任職在各個重要的，包含在國外及國內的一些數位內容產業的公司。這一些學員我們每年都會請他們回來傳承，在「放視大賞」競賽的時候，都會請已經得獎在外面已經有不錯成就的學員來「放視大賞」給後進一些學員鼓勵，講一些目前成功的方式及學習的歷程。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "這個是我們產官學研平台，不只在數位內容產業，還有媒體、資通訊及IC設計，我們每一年大概都會辦理一至二次的高峰會談，請產官學研一起做一些座談，看看官方這邊有什麼資源、學界這邊有什麼問題來做一些串聯。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "照片右邊是不是聶永真？" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "不是，是摩鉅的執行長。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "照片左邊是西基動畫的執行長嗎？" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "總監。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "照片中間那位是新任經濟部加工處長黃文谷，右邊是沈次長，兩位前後任加工處處長，其他大部分都是大學校長或者是產業董事長。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "這個是我們近年來產學的一些合作成功案例，動畫產學是在西基動畫，有一些動畫的專業學程，像南台科大、遠東科大、台中科大、崑山、實踐大學及臺南大學。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "還有一個產學合作成功的案例，包含鈊象電子、群創光電，也就是導入他們一些專業的學程，群創光電是由四個學校所組成的聯盟，有高雄第一科大、南台、崑山及遠東。「卡普空—台灣」是南台所成立的遊戲特色學程，還有智崴資訊、新興媒體的產業，也就是有一些跨領域的學生合作，包含雲林科大、高應大、崑山及長榮大學。這個（指投影片）是產學合作案例的剪影，包含剛才所說左下角的南台的「卡普空—台灣」及西基動畫的一些活動剪影。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "我們在專業人才培訓的成功案例是在動畫方面、視覺設計及新興媒體，新興媒體是智崴資訊，遊戲產業的是樂陞、摩鉅、天下。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "這個（指投影片）是西基動畫在大台南地區的3D動畫人才培訓計畫、種子教師的培訓課程。還有樂陞科技、天下數位、摩鉅，還有思維的部分，我們在這方面都有辦許多的師資培育計畫、專業技術分享，學界還有（提供）一些人力資源。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "還有跨領域的國際論壇，我們常常邀請到國際重要的動漫大師、遊戲廠商，還有一些像Microsoft來進行一些國際技術專業的國際經驗分享。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "我們在我們的「K Square」常經營創客與社群的基地，這個是我們很重要的能量，也就是自創者的技術能力跟創新活動，然後做一個知識累積與交流，激發創業與創意的發展，為南部原本是以重工業為基礎，希望可以成為產業轉型升級的柱子。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "這個（指投影片）是「K Square」的共創場域，我們希望在這裡可以滋養一些能量，有一些技轉與技術的人才，就是把我們在我們的平台「放視大賞」所發覺的一些人才可以留在「K Square」，「K Square」也可以是人才與廠商教學的場域，也是創業者的自由基地。這個（指投影片）是「K Square」的一些活動剪影。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "以上是第一個part，政委，第二個part是不是一起報完？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "把它報完。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "接下來談一下我們希望可以促進南部VR、AR發展的報告，其實VR跟AR在最近興起，包含政委在10月12日於松菸文創園區與11月7日工業院的產業座談會使用VR。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我每天都在用（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "大家瞭解到VR的一些實際運用。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "昨天高雄市政府經發局好像也發布要發展VR。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他們要蓋一個大樓的時候就已經用這個preview，我上次去跟市長講的時候，就說有什麼建圖書館、擺不平的，至少大家先用VR的方式先看到閱覽圖，不然很少人想像得到3.0。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "因為南部在這幾年大家的經營之下，已經有一些數位內容的能量，我們希望可以串接VR跟AR的產業，除了內容及裝置的一些技術能量，覺得在南部是一個很適合發展AR、VR的產業發展基地。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "這一個大綱會談到南部所有產業的推動，AR、VR的群落在南部已經逐漸形成，還有一些發展方案，希望政委有機會可以到南部看一下AR、VR的產業。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "蔡總統在大選後有安排一個高雄新興產業之旅，是由中山大學林根煌教授協助規劃，林根煌教授是這個策進會的第一任秘書長，我是第二任，他（指葉秘書長）是第三任。林根煌教授也有協助過高雄市政府，VR、AR等數位產業經濟方面政委當然是更專業了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有，沒有……" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "我們在2016年有一些重點工作，我們一直期許「放視大賞」並不是一個畢業展，我們希望在這個展覽之中結合、得知一些最新需求來達到人才培育，因此我們不希望它是一個活動，而是希望一個科技復興的革命，更是一個青年創意的招攬運動。因此我們在整個南部地區有一些重點的活動，像「放視大賞」為開端，如：在新創產業是「搖滾創新嘉年華」、在創客是「大港開創」、在音樂是「大港開唱」、在主題樂園是「大港開玩」、在體育是「大港開跑」，以及在電競是「大港開打」，這個是一連串關於數位內容的一些AR、VR一些相關的活動，就是由這樣串接，希望在這一個部分可以發酵，讓整個南部成為一個AR及VR適合發展的基地。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "剛才有show過相關的投影片，近幾年來我們成長的規模有著實的成長，在2016年我們的成長倍數有一點五倍，七十一所大學，規模已經擴散到全台，三天半的展期參觀的人數是五萬人次，報名的件數也成長了近兩倍，總共大概有一、兩千件的報名人數。每一年對於新興技術投入的設備、人才都有更新，包含廠商一些AR、VR，還有IoT的一些新興主題，我們都會在每一次「放視大賞」中更新。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "接下來我們看一下國際展覽的一些片段。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "「放視大賞」主要是由四個面向所構成，國際的經驗傳承，經驗傳承是模仿TED的演講，還有南方熱鬧及人才交流。我們配合國家政策想要推動新南向政策，我們強調與東協與南亞國家的一些人才與文化交流，我們的做法是希望以這一個「放視大賞」作為交流平台，作為增加雙方交流的機會，提供在地的就地、促進國際人才交流與就業流動，有利於新南向政策的推動。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "「放視大賞」今年有許多國外的國家來參訪，包含日本、韓國及新加坡，在當地其實也有許多的媒體報導，可見這一個「放視大賞」已經逐漸成為一個周邊國家來參展很重要的平台。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "在開幕典禮方面，我們想要有像TED這樣的演講，我們邀請了歷年來在「放視大賞」得獎的優秀同學或者是熱心參與的同學來分享成功的經驗，我們希望由歷屆覺醒的新秀經典再現，以故事的經歷來傳承經驗引發一些共鳴。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "在頒獎典禮的時候，我們會呼應數位內容產業的特性，我們希望打造一個類似嘉年華，創造表演的cosplay，以多元創意展示育樂的新體驗。大會每一年會頒發近一百組的獎項，由計畫者這邊跟企業所贊助的獎項，每一年得獎同學的水準在每一年看來有非常大的成長。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "每一年開幕都這樣，照片中只是一半的人，我記得當秘書長的時候，差不多都超過一、兩千名學生在現場。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "在After party方面，我們希望可以打造「西南偏南音樂節」的氣氛，由動畫產業的龍頭西基動畫所贊助，讓青年人感受動畫產業的熱忱，希望營造出有趣好玩的動畫風。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "這個是「放視大賞」的紀錄片。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "2012年有一些重點成果，我們就是媒合了智崴與南台科大共創體感科技的產學合作，智崴也算國際上體感科技重要的公司，智崴一直是高雄軟體園區重要的廠商，我們在媒合之下，智崴捐贈了300多萬的六軸平台給南台科大，希望南台科大可以提供這一個實習，也就是透過南台科大的實習平台，希望可以籌組一些旗艦的計畫，並可以孕育人才及研發內容，整合體感內容與技術。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "我們也促成了中山大學、智崴暨南台科大共同建構這一個體感科技的基地，希望達到專利技參獎，然後可以著重前端技術的研發、關鍵的布局及技術研發人才的培育三方面。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "第二個部分，我們覺得VR跟AR產業的群聚在南部逐漸形成，這個（指投影片）是整個生態系統在應用產業化，應用產業化包含了系統整合服務，還有穿戴式產品跟活動，透過原本的電子、資訊產業、工業、服務及農業，然後有分成兩大塊，一個是系統整合服務，一個是智慧產品的整合服務。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "系統整合服務有原本的一些基礎，在國際電子產業跟內容創制產業，系統組裝跟營運管理，在智慧產業服務方面有大數據穿戴式還有AR、VR這兩個部分，也有一些衍生性的價值鏈在育樂產業，在醫療、商務及節慶活動，包含了觀光活動跟整場展覽的輸出。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "我們也促成中山大學跟智崴成立了科技聯合研發中心，著重在三個部分，第一個是數位內容的技術，還有機構設計的技術，還有系統整合的技術，這個都是整合目前中山大學既有的能量，還有智崴這邊的一些資源。我們的研究展望希望在虛擬實境的部分有一些重要的入門產出，兩年之內可以展示整個場域的大規模體感互動，展示很多人混合的實境遊戲，還有多人自然的行動虛擬世界平台，希望不管是在體感的科技及虛擬高階人才作培育，還有引導虛擬實境的一些內容方向與產學方向。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "這個（指投影片）投影片是說，在南部的部分我們希望整合研發，由產業政策推動群聚的數位產業，在南部的部分，我們有幾家代表性的廠商，包含體感科技、數位遊戲及電腦動畫，電腦動畫是西基、繪聖等這一些重要的廠商在北部經營銷售，在HTC或者華碩或者是宏碁，形成體感科技群聚的正效應。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "這個（指投影片）是韓國的例子，我相信大家都滿熟悉的，也就是政府斥資3,400萬美元，把VR視為數位經濟成長的引擎，有一些推動的主軸，包含一些降稅的優惠。VR包含了很多，包含了文化、體育的一些案例，還有一些成功推動的案例，包含了中和資源中心（音譯）跟一些VR的小鎮，這個都是我們可以作為參考的方向。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "這一個部分我們面臨一些瓶頸，就是由高雄設置的虛擬實境的研究中心，希望可以提供相關的政策協助及優惠，以吸引業者及帶領的人才。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "國內AR、VR硬體廠商提升設備的效能，還有整合國內AR、VR的諮詢平台，鼓勵數位內容產業可以投入AR、VR的相關領域。目前比較缺乏AR、VR的內容應用及推廣，這個是我們覺得還是有一些瓶頸存在。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "南部AR、VR產業的發展方案，我們希望可以由高軟園區整合一個單一窗口，就是由高軟，然後再透過國發會鏈結戰略的推動資源，由經濟部鏈結產業的補助，科技部是負責學界產學資源，教育部是鏈結教育的部分，由文化部鏈結文化政策的資源，整體鏈結在高軟園區的單一窗口。我們來鏈結AR、VR的推廣廠商，像剛剛講過的系統整合服務及智慧產品服務方面，希望在南部可以建構AR、VR的場域，在高雄軟體園區所謂的技術研發，也就是整個是技術先期整合的場域，最後開放給民眾整個釋放場域是在亞洲新灣區的經貿園區。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "這張圖跟政委報告一下，我記得7、8月的時候，那時行政院長有一次到高雄，當時市政府有提出一些既有建設及未來規劃，包含後面的205兵工廠，這邊是亞洲新灣區，這個是高雄展覽館，以後流行音樂館都會在這邊，輕軌在這邊，高雄市政府最近幾年投入很多心力在這一塊，期望港區這一塊能趕快串起來。當天也有提到一些中油、台糖、台電的地還在這邊，那時有再提到高軟園區已經成功了，鴻海也在這邊，智崴也在這邊，是不是有可能在這一區把最新的數位內容產業再擴出去一下？如此就會有比較大的產業群聚效應。我不知道當初為什麼只有框（現在的高軟園區）這一塊地？可能經濟部加工處的地就這麼大，當初可能想說就試試看，沒想到五、六年推下來就成功了，園區內已無土地可再開發，所以現在想要再擴。那裡有一些地是國營事業，或許都可以去談。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "高軟現在四千人已經滿了，對不對？如沒記錯的話。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "差不多已達九成五。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "這是我們的願景目標，希望可以建構一個高軟園區的創新生態企業，也就是由政府這邊的資源投入，推動加碼補助學界的一些要點，引導研發型人才到高軟。在社群的連結要強化產學的連結培育跟創新跨域的人才之集體創意，我們希望可以跟在地的政府做一些鏈結，共同推廣重要的產業，掌握社群創造無止盡的社群創新，預期效益的成果是在人才、產學及高軟實驗場的建立，還有企業活動的扶植與新創。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "這個（指簡報）是我們希望可以形塑高軟園區成為VR跟AR的發展中心，以整個高雄軟體園區的整個發展中心發展所謂的體感育樂跟體感經濟。在創新人才培育機制，建構創新創業的場域，還有打造一系列的活動，籌組產學推動，我們會做一個全盤的考量。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "在數位產業的推動做法，我們希望產官學協力希望可以解決平台分裂的一些問題，使得VR的應用有客製化的調整，導致無法加速VR普及，我們的因應做法希望可以強化VR的API標準劃分。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "這個（指投影片）是幾家重要的廠商支持VR的API標準化，目前應該還沒有，AR跟VR都是device……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "……這個都是宣示。" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有一些共通的，但是每一個都在上面自己加。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "這個我就真的不懂了（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "做法二是成立虛擬實境的研究中心，我們希望可以結合經濟部的產業跟大專院校籌組人才選手村，創新人才的培育、旗艦廠商的培育聯盟，希望高軟可以成立人才的聚落，由這上面這些目前高軟代表的廠商籌組人才培育村，再進一步指導與幫忙之下，希望可以建立整個培育的機制。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "HTC也是高軟？" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "還沒有，但是我們目前正在跟他們談合作，把一些共通標準跟設備導入一些教育的場所，之後可能也會跟他談南部進駐的部分。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "OK，因為在臺灣你也只能跟他談（笑），不然就是微軟。" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "國外嫁接的部分也要靠HTC的實力。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "我們上個禮拜才跟他（HTC）談過。" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "也是希望可以提供服務與應用的產品，也就是包含在技術諮詢開發協助、行銷推廣，及交流活動。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "這邊想要邀請政委，因為我們每一年都有所謂的產業高峰會，在2月的時間，以政委的時間為主，希望政委可以到南部來跟大家作指導跟交流，這個是既定參與的人士、長官的活動。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "我當初在澎湖，陪同政委去演講後，我回來有跟子維聊了一下，基本上政委不排斥我們今天來報告這一個團隊。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "我們想說既然這樣的話，明年「放視大賞」是在Q2的5月，（希望）邀請政委能夠代表中央政府來南部參加有這麼多學子在場的開幕儀式，（放視大賞）之前希望在2、3月先排一個跟大學校長、數位產業CEO們見面及座談的活動，甚至參訪一兩家代表性業界，讓大人們聚一下，我當初的plan是希望2、3月來做這一件事。不知道政委能不能（來）？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "先繼續。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "全部就這樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好。" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "主要也是因為我們現在發現拜訪幾家做AR、VR的國內一些廠商，有發現標準格式跟內容的部分都有一些開發上的困難點。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有產業，沒有產業鏈，就這樣。" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "還有沒有內容的部分也是一個很大的問題點，沒有內容衍生性的應用、需求，也是一個很大的點。" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "其實這一些產業希望有一個可以與政府主要領頭的直接溝通、對談機會。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為我用VR就是用來接受訪問跟開公聽會，我沒有別的要求（笑），其實要開公聽會也有很多公聽會可以開，所以公部門裡面我也只想到開會這一個方式，但是體感那個不是我的專業，這個我要先說，當然很願意跟實際在做……我記得剛剛講的那一個繪聖是不是《少年Pi》的團隊？" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "是的，就是R＆H。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以其實大概他們的工作就paper跟他們的網站我都看過，我只是沒有實際去而已，所以如果你們覺得說你們在跟他們談的時候有什麼我可以幫忙的，或者甚至只是幕僚或者是顧問的角色（笑），我覺得我都很願意。" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "他們會很希望能跟政委這邊見上一面，然後一些意見的部分可以直接傳遞給你。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，但是要講說真的政策設計上面……因為雖然說VR在「亞洲‧矽谷」裡面，全台都可以實驗的一個場域，那個是有特別講VR、AR電商是全國，桃園有無人車什麼的，但是AR、VR電商不限於桃園，所以我覺得至少在政策上有那個buy-in，這個部分是沒有問題；但是因為現在「亞洲‧矽谷」或國發會那邊，其實我就是幕僚或顧問的角色，我其實不會去direct怎麼安排他們，因為那個已經接近agency，那個不是公部門了（笑），講穿了就是這樣，所以其實我能做的有限。我至少是說如果你們跟不管是部會或者是他們可能沒有第一手經驗，或者是在討論上有什麼我可以幫忙協調，這個我當然非常樂意做，就是我以第一手經驗來協調，但是policy design已經超出我的權責範圍，這個要先講的。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "我會建議是不是工業局及加工出口處相關的主管，是不是也可以邀請？" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "有，工業局是謝副組長會來講體感，因為當初……" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "……因為公部門以前也有做了一些努力，但是他們沒有機會跟政委報告現在經濟部工業局到底在數位內容做什麼，其實在部門的關卡，我覺得政委可能比較可以協助。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，我都是看公開可得的資訊，他只要網站上有的，我大概都看過了（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "有些沒有公開在網站上……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "……對，確實我沒有針對他們未來的意向去進行討論，所以這個確實也有可能。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "我跟葉秘書長都是中山（大學）的教授，中山大學的鄭校長知道政委您在澎湖科大的演講十分精彩，他希望我能代為敬邀政委您能不能也給中山的學生們一個talk。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "瞭解。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "到時候所有的座談、參訪、演講活動會排大概一整天的行程。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以你們是有一定要在週幾？" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "沒有，就看您的時間。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "政委決定，我們全部的人動員配合。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "OK，對我來講當然週三、週五比較容易，因為本來就沒有排院內的行程，你問我意向我當然很願意，但是具體哪一天就要問子維（笑），不然我答應可能衝到別的行程。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "過年後學生回來了嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "開學了嗎？" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "我看就延一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就剩研究生。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "妳（指策進會趙執行長）已經約了嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "幾日開學？" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "我也不確定，2月12日應該還沒有開學。" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "差不多2月底。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "我建議學生開學後。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "妳（指策進會趙執行長）也不用過年期間還要忙這一個東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "開學第一週大家都很忙，我知道我作為政委，去哪裡大家事前都要忙個幾天，我是覺得說不應該是開學最忙的時候還要再加重大家的負擔，我記得是2月13日開學，可是開學之後大家真的還要再忙一陣子，可能要到2月底，大家時間比較寬裕，好不好？我們往開學後大家比較不那麼忙。" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "好啊！" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "報告政委，當初策進會雖是中山帶頭弄起來的，但一切努力都是為大家好，所以其他校長們都很挺中山校長推動相關事務。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "瞭解。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "現任中山鄭校長目前剛接下策進會的理事長，也是她（指趙逸秋）的老闆（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "等於有這一個慣例就是了。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "鄭校長今天也跟我一起上來台北，陳副總統頒發教育部國家講座主持人獎，全國只有九位，我們中山有一位前副校長得獎，所以早上去觀禮。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "瞭解。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你們說的主要那一個event是幾月？" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "今年「放視大賞」5月9日開幕。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛剛有談幾個時間，如果2月24日還在忙的話，就會變成3月3日，3月3日比較有可能的，3日我覺得比較有可能。再跟子維確認，也要你們事前比較早一點知道。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "2月20日開學。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們覺得24日還在忙，那就3月3日。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "5月9日真的要拜託政委來一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我可不可以開一個機器人或者是VR來？" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "好耶！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我現在在MIT、馬德里都有開機器人到處晃，所以其實你們……" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "我們其實是像政委這樣領袖級的人物可以用比較符合時代潮流跟學生喜歡的方式來出場。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是啊！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像MIT的Media Lab裡面本來就已經有一台機器人，好像叫做Double Robotics，我就是用iPad去那裡面逛，但是像在馬德里他們沒有，所以他們的自己maker幫我做了一台，那個到最後也都是可以用，所以我第一次去的時候就可以先跟當地確認一下他們有沒有這一種我們學理上叫做telepresence robotics的東西，如果有的話，我覺得在5月活動時我就在台北遙控，這個是最簡單的，也省一些高鐵的費用。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "台北遙控？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！台北到高雄的遙控是沒什麼時間差的。" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "是，這個就是我們最想要的開場方式。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以嗎？" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "你們（指策進會）也要準備好相關搭配措施喔！（笑）" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "我們可以用VR。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，我也用過了High Fidelity，但是遠端機器人（在臺灣）還沒有用過。" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "我們希望用的是未來性的東西，沒有人用過的梗。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，就是臺灣目前還沒有人用過的梗，我覺得比較好。" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家都這麼想，我們就這麼確定。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "哇！這樣會破紀錄喔！" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "謝謝政委給我們這個機會（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "以前很熱鬧了，幾千人的關係，現在又把它變得更火熱。" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "但是以前官方的出場都沒有那麼科技感。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "偶爾確實會太冗長，我擔心學生們會受不了，實在是……沒有辦法，時代在變了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我絕對不會又臭又長（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "我聽過您的演講啊！從頭到尾都很精彩。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該會有一些品質（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "謝謝政委。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "這個活動一定會很經典，屆時可能會有新聞報導。" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "政委不好意思，剛剛時間跟您報告過，是5月10日開幕？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "我就知道你們兩個（指策進會同仁）昨天沒睡，你看。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "辛苦了。" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "因為太興奮了（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "看到偶像了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "Media Lab我給你們看一下，我去的時候就是……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為是數位政委，所以我完全是Digital，我就是在台北開這一台機器人，他們還有帶我進電梯，反正我就是跟著他，他走到哪裡、我就走到哪裡，這個其實就是最陽春的狀態。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "這一台不是你帶的吧？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一台不是，這一台是MIT的Media Lab本來就有的。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "我是說路線是他們帶的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是我帶的，我自己拿上下左右鍵或者是搖桿就可以，它有兩個鏡頭，一個叫腳下，所以我不會絆倒，一個叫做前方，就是任何瀏覽器都可以開，iPad也可以開，開了之後我就是用上下左右鍵控制，就一路這樣走。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "你可以看得到整個地圖嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以啊！其實滿好用的。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "他（指葉家宏秘書長）是做通訊的。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "我也是做VR。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你是做這個的？" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "OK。馬德里那一個是我們自己做的，是用ROS，我找一下影片，這個是我去巴黎的影片，就是在講怎麼用VR開公聽會，裡面囊括了我這一年來做的研究，這個是觀光用、這個是建模，這個你都已經熟了，然後這個就是在馬德里，因為剛好他們的市議員也是寫程式的，因為坐輪椅，所以跟我變成一樣高（笑），他們底下ROS，我也是用鍵盤控制，但是上面這一個cam是360，所以我在臺灣可以感覺到。這樣另外一個好處是，因為像MIT的這一個，我要按左右鍵轉向，它還會等半秒鐘，影像才會回來，有一個latency，但我用這個的話，我可以local轉向，因為是360的光到臺灣來，所以我的rotation感覺上比較好，我這樣子跟他們相處了幾天，再飛去馬德里，他們覺得我已經在那邊幾天了，非常融入。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我9月至10月還有教杭州跟高雄的兩個課，他們就是把杭州那邊的教室跟高雄這邊的教室都建模。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "這個是之前就建模好了？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有，課的一部分就是建模，也請學生自己把自己的model建模，因為這個是open source的，所以他們就自己建模完之後，他們就做proto，然後就傳送到高雄了，所以其實我在高師大藝術學院有教過VR的課，這個是公視的interview。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個是跟陳雅琳有過一個interview，我們兩邊都是戴VR，就是完全是在High Fidelity裡面，這一個我覺得還不錯的是真的把開會的要素，也就是你帶紙本資料出來、互動模型出來的這個部分都做到了，其實非常realistic，訪問在這裡面做到的。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "但是現在人臉還沒有辦法動？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以啊！我的有動啊！她的還沒有，她的facial blend shapes還沒有做完。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "你的facial blend shapes怎麼做？是用深度攝影去照？可是上半部沒有表情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "還是有啊！它用語調去synthesize，好比我講比較大聲，我的眉毛會挑，可是它當然sense不到我的眉毛，所以那個是補上的。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "OK，我是用深度學習用下面去推上面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！本來是同一個做法，用Faceshift，但是Faceshift後來被蘋果買了，所以現在正在把這一個部分補上。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "這樣就很真實，看起來滿真實。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！這個就是我每天都在用，因為只要有人要我給一個演講或什麼，一定要有一個影像的需求，我就直接錄音，然後在這裡面放，他就把手勢跟表情都可以結合，所以其實這已經production了，就是沒有什麼research的部分。她（陳雅琳）的facial blend shapes還沒有做，所以就是空的，我的部分我覺得還滿convincing，大概是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以也可以考慮說出一個這個東西，甚至連這上面都不是用webcam，而是local合成。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "OK。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個的好處是如果你能夠混合成這一個畫面，你的頻寬要求會非常非常低，根本就是跟電話一樣，那這樣的話，其實你同時跑好幾台什麼都不是問題。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "就只有一些特徵點的傳遞。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，它幾乎完全沒有任何頻寬要求，所以技術上這邊是ready，就看你們那邊，我3月去一次，我們可以談一些細節上怎麼呈現，就跟馬德里一樣，我去了一天，帶他們workshop，後來他們就自己做，做了大概兩、三個月之後，我就實際用。要不要試試看？" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "好（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "要啊！一定要啊（笑）！" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "你們（指策進會同仁）好像很high耶！" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "這個好玩（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！之前有一個立法委員有訪問我，然後我們有討論到這一件事情，因為之前好像有說立法院要搬台中這一件事情，他是高雄的委員，就是許智傑委員。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "對，許智傑立委。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為他說他早上要起來趕高鐵到台北，但是有一些婚喪喜慶，非回去不可，所以他又馬上趕回高雄，每天搭高鐵非常累，所以我是想說，當然到台中就比較沒有那麼累，但是行政院去備詢就要整團。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "對啊！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我現在的想法是，至少有一些部分，不是實際討論法案，只是備詢或什麼，我們就用這一種digital double的方法來做，就是說他就想說即使有一千個提案或怎麼樣，他就坐在高雄，遠端投票、遠端備詢。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "而且身歷其境，以前只有用skype。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，不是只有skype，而是帶上，是有到立法院的感覺，我覺得這個其實是可行，這個沒有什麼不可行的。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "又可以省下很多公帑。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！真的！他就不用那麼早醒來了，這個差很多（笑），理論上，論政品質也會提高（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "讚！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這要跟立法院資訊處談，我不是在立法院任職。但我的意思是說我們至少把proof of concept做出來，至少我可以跟他們說我去高雄開會就是這樣開，資訊處不會覺得我在寫科幻小說（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那如果大家都同意的話，我們就這樣，3月去的時候去討論技術細節，等到5月的時候就用。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "謝謝政委。策進會還有什麼要跟政委報告？" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "葉秘書長想要跟您（政委）合照。" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "（笑）" }, { "speaker": "葉家宏", "speech": "謝謝政委。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "所以我們再跟子維約時間。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！沒有問題。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "策進會該講的都講了？" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "有，開心。" }, { "speaker": "黃義佑", "speech": "南部人很老實。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝老師。" }, { "speaker": "趙逸秋", "speech": "期待3月3日。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "現在剛好30分，我們就準時開始，有些朋友入座，今天非常高興大家都能過來，有朋友說要先離開沒有關係，因為我們也有逐字稿，先離開的話，也是可以看逐字稿。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "想先說明一下今天的記錄原則，今天雖然有帶一個攝影機來，但是只拍簡報，事實上是讓我們的記錄人員在事後比較知道我們討論哪一張，比較容易製作逐字稿。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "逐字稿製作之後並不會立刻公開，是會用email的方式把共筆的連結提供給所有參與的朋友，所以如果大家覺得有任何發言可能會被擴大解讀或者是會上報紙的話，這個也歡迎事後再來修訂或者是再提供一些補充的資料，沒有問題，自己的發言都可以修。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們通常是十天之後會公布在網路上給大家看到我們討論的過程，這一個過程裡面也讓各位回去跟部會裡面的朋友們，如果要分享我們今天討論什麼的話，那不用等到十天，其實大家手上這一份編修的稿子已經提供給大家。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像今天的討論是建立在16日的次長會議上，16日的次長會議逐字稿目前也已經在網路上可以看得到了，網站是「http://pdis.nat.gov.tw/」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以我以前作為顧問來這裡開會時，最不喜歡主席開場講很多話，所以我沒有要講很多話。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我今天只是想說，公共政策網路參與平台在最近國發會的努力之下，其實已經變成一個新的媒體渠道，可以看到社會上有任何感覺上擺不平的事情，就會在這邊提出連署，舉最近一個例子來講就是國旅卡不應該圖利廠商，這個案子到了八千多人連署，已經快要超過同性婚姻案了（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "昨天我在政務會議討論這一件事的時候，因為其實這一案在行政院院會說明的時候，徐國勇發言人不但有作比較詳細的說明，也有把他的電子稿提供給第一線的記者們。但是我們看到媒體的時候，其實會挑一些比較聳動或者比較容易激化公務員跟旅遊業的部分來刊登，那立委們也是按照那一個部分來質詢。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "即使行政院提供比較完整的資料，事後要去檢查的時候，其實很少人會調院會的直播來看。與其把所有的責任都放在院會或直播的這一個管道上，不如把Join當作比較好的平台。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為畢竟有八千多位的朋友，我相信有很多公務員的朋友對這個表示關心，我們在上面做任何綜合回應、事實揭露、政策未來空間調整等等，其實在上面只要一放出來，八千多人的email都會收到。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以不管是事實的澄清或者是擴大徵詢大家的意見，很難得大家這麼關心公共政策。行政院好不容易有這個自媒體，我們要學會比較好去運用它。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我就不再多說，我們進入討論事項，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "各位先進、委員，我們有四個報告事項，六個討論事項，我們今天就進行第一個報告事項。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "第一個報告事項是目前公共政策網路參與平台上面所展示的情形，請同仁發言。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "各位主管大家好，第一案是「公共政策網路參與推動情形報告」。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "（簡報第4頁）從去年2月10日至12月12日共有233萬人造訪，瀏覽的人次721萬，目前預估這個禮拜會超過250萬人。初次造訪的比例是70％，30％的民眾會再次使用。兩性的分析中，男性大約佔五成五、女性佔四成五，以年齡層來講的話，四十五歲以下佔了七成三，年輕人二十五歲至三十四歲佔了三成。使用載具的情形，大概是七成的民眾是使用行動載具來參與平台，六成六是使用智慧型手機，三成三是使用平板電腦，使用桌機的只有三成。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "（簡報第5頁）「提點子」的流程裡面，「公共政策網路參與平台」裡面有三項功能，另外一項是找首長，那個要連到部會首長信箱，其他三個服務裡面，一個是「提點子」。「提點子」我們大概去年7月17日有公布一個公共政策網路提議示範實施要點，那只是針對網路連署訂的要點，其實民眾透過手機跟電子郵件認證就可以成案。當初的規劃分兩個階段，第一個階段是十五天，取得二百五十份，通過以後在三十內取得五千份，成案以後機關要在兩個月內回應" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "另外一個，我們在今年8月18日有做一個修訂，我們把原來兩階段整併成一階段，附議期限自四十五天延長為六十天，附議中可以表達意見。我們把政策研訂跟政策執行中可以一起開放討論，也就是在計畫執行中，或者是計畫管考資料，等一下會一起報告，一起開放討論。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "（簡報第6頁）這個是「提點子」流程，8月18日新修訂中有調整，原來是七天內確認主責機關，原因因為很多機關的確認時程會超過這一個時間，所以我們做一些調整，也就是由國發會在三個工作天內確認第一個，這個議題裡面的內容是否不涉及謾罵或違反善良風俗的話，我們就直接進入附議，同時後面就會併同去確認協辦機關的工作流程，大概有做這方面的調整。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "（簡報第7頁）目前統計到20日，成案的比例大概是8％，總共有三十九案，其中交通部成十案最高，另外是教育部九案，其次衛福部六案，內政部四案，法務部四案。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "（簡報第8頁）國發會有兩案，人事總行政總處一案，國防部一案，財政部一案，文化部一案，目前的情況大概是這樣。因為今天可能還有一案，也就是關於核食國民黨主席洪秀柱的提案，應該還差十幾票，應該等一下就會過了。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "（簡報第9頁）另外一個是做類別分析中，大概提案的是以交通建設為最多，大概有23％；其次是「法規制度改革」佔13％，表示民眾很關心交通與法制的議題。成案的部分還是以「交通與基礎建設」及「教育及體育」類最多，有八件，「法規制度改革」是五件。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "我們分析成案的，也就是從去年9月上線到現在，今年11月15日最多，其次是9月有五件。民眾提議五千份的附議裡面，比較涉及熱門的議題，一天內成案的有三件，像「重新檢討宗教團體免稅及從事公益慈善活動相關規定，落實宗教自由」的是十一小時；另外一個是「請路政司嚴苛檢討並執行大型重型機車依法試辦高速公路！」的是十七小時；另外一個是屬於性平的問題，也就是「不得強迫學生接受同志教育」，這個是十九小時。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "以成案日數分析，一至十天內成案有十九件，大概超過50％。在今年10月以後，目前新成案幾乎都在十天內可以成案。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "（簡報第10頁）另外一個是「眾開講」，「眾開講」是我們在政策制訂過程中，政府跟公民參與的對話機制，也就是在規劃中主動拋出規劃的構想跟民眾作互動。到今年12月13日有八十四個議題在臺灣討論，中央有七十七項，目前還有十三個部會尚未開放徵詢議題，討論中有綜整的回應是三十一則、未綜整回應的四十一則，我們建議還是依「公共網政策網路實施要點」第13點，請各部會在綜整回應的時候，依照這一個辦理。地方政府目前有台北、嘉義、花蓮及台東。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "（簡報第11頁）目前還沒有開放徵詢的機關，行政院三十三個部會有十三個部會還沒有開放討論，大概是40％。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "（簡報第12頁）「來監督」最早是從去年3月上旬，開始經貿國是會議的結論，接著是衛生福利部食藥署有一個「獎勵地方政府強化食品安全管理方案試辦計畫」的競賽在上面作討論。經濟部至11月底有一則是省水政策。我們目前上面沒有一些政策的議題，我們今年2月會有比較大的，再上線。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "（簡報第13頁）國發會推動公共政府網路參與，目前辦理相關的工作坊，到現在有辦理九場，協助各部會。另外也有辦理三場北、中、南區的「公共政策網路參與推廣說明會」，也有辦理「虛實整合與公民參與」及「議題經營之種子師資培訓課程」。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "（簡報第14頁）在跨域合作這一邊，我們後續都會跟各部會完全相關，目前跟立法院合作叫做立法倡議，目前他們連署成案的目標是1萬份，明天蘇院長要召開內部的黨團協商，如果確定以後下一個會期就可以上線了，目前的進度是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "審計部12月9日有來函導入，我們上個禮拜四有辦理說明會，因為審計部後面會跟剛剛報告的「來監督」有一點相關，但是他們目前有傾向把查核報告跟施政計畫做一個連結，也就是會有一個發展。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "在跨縣市合作裡面，有開放地方版，有台北、南投、嘉義及雲林。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "（簡報第15頁）參與平台後續的經營方向大概是會增加手機的驗證方式，因為目前的驗證裡面，Yahoo信箱會常常延遲或者是收不到驗證信，另外一個是部分的身心障礙者不會使用電子郵件，他們希望能夠增加手機驗證的方式，我們會一個個開放。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "回應流程標準化的部分，機關成案在上面流程裡面，因為都沒有標準的流程，所以我們等一下會列入討論案，希望流程能夠標準化，讓大家對外發生跟回應的時候，不要讓民眾以為各部會各吹各的調，希望有一個一致性。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "（簡報第16頁）「提點子」這邊會增加不同意見，不是改討論，而是不同意見的表達，事實上有民眾對於目前的連署議題中有不同的看法，可以用一個表達的方式，我們會再增加這一個功能。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "另外一個目前正在推動，從明年1月1日開始，法規命令草案公告在「眾開講」這塊，目前正在進行中。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "另外一個行政院GMPnet這一塊，目前2月份會有一千三百五十項的政府資料月報、年報及季報會直接開放，這個部分會跟審計部直接連結。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "（簡報第17頁）我們後面會有兩個新增的服務，也就是針對特定議題網路投票調查服務，這有一點類實名制，接近實名制的做法，目前還在規劃，最主要是希望能夠比較真正、精確做到人別確認及地區確認的投票回收之意向調查。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "後面有一個「參與式預算網路服務模組」，因為目前文化部、地方政府在推參與式預算，我們會把相關的模組做在平台上，讓各個地方政府或者是相關的部會可以供應，以上報告。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非常感謝，不曉得大家對於這一個報告事項有沒有什麼想要討論的？或者是想要提出來分享的？不然就等一下綜合討論，那就請繼續。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "接著是「二及三」的流程是雷同的，所以我一起報告。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "（簡報第19頁）「法律及法規命令草案預告」這一個部分，9月5日行政院秘書長函有要求「法律及法規命令草案應至少公告周知60日」，除了有特定的緊急狀況或特殊案例可敘明以外，原來由四十天拉到六十天。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "（簡報第20頁）行政院在這個月15日也有一個函，也就是法律及法規命令草案中從106年1月1日起，同時公告在「眾開講」，上個禮拜四有辦說明會，明天下午還會再辦一場說明會；有兩個流程不一樣，因為目前法律是公告在各機關網站，目前是要同時在「眾開講」平台。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "另外一個，法規命令草案目前在公報上，所以目前會自動介接至開放資料裡面，所以這個部分部會的前端作業裡面就不用處理。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "另外一個是依「公共政策網路參與實施要點」規定，在公告周知結束後十四日內要綜整回應。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "（簡報第21頁）目前整個架構是這樣，也就是原來法規的命令草案裡面，成立平台會直接介接開放平台資料庫過來，另外一個法律草案是要由各部會自己以人工的方式增加到「眾開講」這個平台，以上兩個作業模式有一點差異。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "（簡報第22頁）公開方式，參與平台會直接介接開放資料平台的資料，法律草案是要由各部會自己上載。公告期間，請主責機關在公告期間適時回應。公告屆期後，實施要點裡面要在十四天綜整回應。屆期以後，實際上的資料就會到歷史區那邊。我們跟各位報告我們在12月23日及28之辦理說明會。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "等一下簡單示範兩個樣態，一般範例的做法是從介接資料過來（開啟公共政策網路參與平台網站說明），比如一般從公報介接過來，比如衛福部預告的樣態會跟公報的樣態是一樣的。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "（簡報第23頁、第24頁）我們有另外介紹兩個轉譯，像依照剛才一般範例轉過來的時候，若沒有做過轉譯，民眾沒有辦法參與一些討論，因此我們這一次有兩個案例，一個是公共工程委員會目前正在修的資訊服務採購法，實際上有一個是開放API，把它納進去採購法裡面。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "另外一個是著作權法在今年5月有一個修法，事實上我們透過一個工作坊去協助。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "（點選http://join.gov.tw/policies/detail/db44509f-4310-4204-9a7c-1d0298b8e61d）這是公共工程的案子，我們有一些協助跟轉譯，所以有做一些圖形的展示調整，這個是當初他們延續一個過程的資料，實際上就可以把一些延續的過程或者是背景資料比較完整呈現，如果需要的話，就用子議題呈現要討論的內容。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "（點選http://join.gov.tw/policies/detail/70c4cdce-c08c-4a57-a554-99a5168dede6）這是著作權的案子，著作權法修法中會影響到民眾的權利，所以我們有透過工作坊去協助這一個議題。實際上後面有五個子議題，而不是像剛才法規修訂對照表的呈現，讓民眾可以討論。後面就有一個機關的回應，也就是討論完之後，蒐集所有的資訊之後再說明。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "如果法律跟法規命令需要作工作坊或協助或轉譯，實際上我們是有做這一個服務，以上說明。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一個工作其實是所有的法規及涉及貿易這一些法規命令，我們放到「Join」上，其實跟剛剛的「提點子」是類似的狀況，像我自己在看新聞的時候，常常會覺得有一個預告修正，可是後來就不知道跑到哪裡去了，但是通常我們即使做記者的媒體朋友要做調查報導的時候，還要從很多地方去拼湊出這個法規的成效率，這個概念必須要把成效率放在同一個地方，甚至希望以後對這一個感興趣的不認識利益關係人想要表達意見或只是想要知道這一個案子走到哪裡的時候，他只要打到搜尋這一個法規或者是辦法到搜尋引擎裡面，這一個就會慢慢跑到第一頁，大家慢慢就可以學到有一個「jov.tw」的網站可以告訴我這一個政策成效率是怎麼來的，整個設計的目的是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "楊世華", "speech": "上這一個「眾開講」的法規命令，是不是有強制性？也就是一定要上？如果不上，會不會受到一些處罰？" }, { "speaker": "楊世華", "speech": "第二，因為「眾開講」一個是主管機關的回應，一個是民眾的意見，裡面缺少了一塊，其他機關是不是可以運用這一個網站來表達意見？如果不行的話，那以公文來表達，是不是這樣的意見也要把它放到網站上？讓大家可以看到。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝，非常好的問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為按照「105年12月15日院授發資10515016581號函」，要放到「眾開講」就是公告周知六十日的，所以如果有一些法律案是被排除掉，不用公告周知六十日的，當然也不適用這一個，原則上所有需要公告周知六十日的，事實上法規的話，因為登上公報網就會自動被機器接過來，所以並沒有取消發布的這一個方式。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "從某個角度來看，這個可以說是公報網2.0的概念，其實如果看美國regulation.gov這一些網站的話，他們已經很習慣公報發出去的時候，就是會收到民眾的意見，但是機關並不會非常多的一個個主責回應，就像報告所說的，是一個整理之後的綜整回應，整理的工具及轉譯工具，我們這邊當然會幫忙提供，但是主要養成所有公告六十天的習慣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個，因為現在各部會都有開放政府的政府專責人員，各部會的PO之間會有橫向串聯的群組，理論上每一個部會的PO如果對其他部會案子有意見的話，他有兩個方式，一個是可以先透過橫向串聯的群組先確認一下我的意見跟你們這邊法規的意見有沒有不同或者是至少可以讓我表示一下意見之處，如果不是誤會，而是兩個部會的意見真的不一樣的話，當然也可以在這一個討論區以部會聯絡人的身分去提出額外民眾想要知道的法規意見，這個是滿健康的事情——主要是事前有一次我沒有看錯你的意思，他真的是這個意思的管道。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "任何問題我們都可以回來討論，如果沒有問題的話，我們就進入下一個議程，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "現在在場的所有前輩們大家好，不好意思，很冒昧在這邊作一個分享，我們這邊是衛生福利部，今天是由國發部這邊希望我們來作一個關於實際上真的放到國發會連署平台上有成案處理的經驗分享。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "我們想今天會找我們是因為這一個平台連署的功能在去年9月上旬，第一個成案的案子剛好是本部在處理的，以下就一些小小的心得跟大家分享。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "如同各位所知道的，剛剛已經有提過「提點子」這一個連署的功能最重要的概念如果超過五千位網友附議的話，被指定到的部會在六十天之內必須要給予一個回應。當時這一個平台上第一個成案的案子是一位叫Caspar Wang先生，他提出一個案子是關於所謂「癌症免疫細胞治療」的療法，希望可以變成一個修改的法案，他是去年10月提的，希望兩個月之內提出一部新的法案——我們原本沒有這一個法案——而且是在12月底選前的時候，必須要送到立法院去。這一個案子出來因為跟癌友相關，在九天之中就超過五千份的連署。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "這一個案子成案超過五千人是10月14日，依照這一個規定，我們在六十天之中，也就是12月14日必須做好正式的回應。必須要說當時因為沒有前例可以看，所以我們就努力思考了一些方向，覺得最重要的關鍵是一開始不要在最後第六十天的時候才給一個正式回應，而是在中間過程中只要我們有任何進度，就儘量把這一些資訊公開讓網友知道我們的進度，因為不見得所有的朋友耐心很好，而且中間做了很多事情，部會的努力如果可以讓外面知道，或許可以減輕一些部會的壓力。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "所以我們就一個個來看，從成案之後第一步是「釐清訴求」，這一個部分因為國發會有強制規定大家必須要聯繫提案人，而且積極鼓勵我們直接跟提案人面對面，因此第一步做的是在提案後第一個禮拜，就找了提案人的夫妻、同仁，給提案人一個機會是想不想邀請一些信任的專家一起來跟我們討論這一個議題。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "我必須要說很好笑的是，當時在部內沒有人敢當主席，因為覺得第一次碰到網友，怕網友很兇，年紀最小的我就變成一個主持串場的工作，我當時的工作就是不斷不斷詢問，可以畫紅線的地方，這個是我們的逐字稿。我當時不斷詢問的是，希望提案人可以把他的訴求背後故事，到底為什麼想要提出來的原因儘量講出來。這一件事為什麼要這樣做？其實在提案的頁面上就已經寫了九百字的訴求，我覺得這個是非常重要的，因為經過我們之後談了兩個小時，寫成一萬七千字左右的逐字稿之後，會發現非常重要的是，原本我們只知道是要提一個關於癌症免疫細胞治療、12月進立法院的訴求，但是變成一萬七千多字的逐字稿之後，我們把他的訴求可以仔細拆解成以下的五個部分；特別說明一下，我們拆解完的訴求都有再提供給提案人確認逐字稿有沒有正確及我們濃縮後的意思是否有誤解。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "首先在經過這樣面對面談話之後，我們才知道原來自己的背景本身就是一位鼻咽癌末期的患者，所以他本身就是病友。他其實也提了12月底要送立法院，對我們來說是笑話，但是是不可能的，其實對一般民眾無法分別行政進到立法那一段時間的努力有多長，他只是先提出最常聽到要送立法院立法，但是只要是大規模、更快速的開放，其實都可以接受，並沒有僅限於一定要是立法的方式。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "談了之後，我們發現其實臺灣並不是沒有所謂這一種療法，其實臺灣有人體試驗，細節可能不適合談那麼多，但是大概的觀念是，「癌症免疫細胞治療」的關鍵是可以申請人體試驗，但是跟一般的藥物不一樣，背後不太會有藥廠去贊助，但是我們的管理辦法有規定不能跟病人收費，所以等於要做這一個療法的醫生要做人體試驗，要自己籌一筆錢，讓病友進行這樣的實驗，所以最關鍵的是醫師們的誘因是低的，這一件事其實也是在當下透過政府方、民間方及邀請來的專家實務上的分享逐漸釐清出來的。這個是關於訴求的釐清。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "不知道大家聽完是不是覺得這一個議題稍微有一些複雜，與法規等等都有相關？同樣我們也覺得很多病友一開始來附議其實不太清楚實際的訴求是什麼，認為既然對癌友有幫助就來附議，所以其實我們多做了一件事，其實國發會沒有要求我們，我們主動想做的是整理背景的資訊，我們用的方式是這樣子的，這其實是一個類似像簡報或者是簡單圖文的懶人包也可以，把剛剛找出的這五個訴求，上面是他的訴求，下面我們還沒有正式回應，正式回應是在這一路，我先把既有的狀況告訴你，好比有一個訴求是：「到底你們現在關於人體試驗的資訊有沒有再開放？有沒有讓外面的人看到？」，我們回覆：「現況是的，放在哪一個網站上。」，至於可不可擴大開放是等到最後一步跟大家講。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "所以，背景資訊的提供，他的定義是目前既有資訊，也就是我們先談既有人體試驗已經公開的資訊有哪一些，他希望我們去盤點投注在這一個癌症的研究經費有多少，我們也開了一個會議想辦法把手上的資料盤點出來並公開，所以這個是第二步的。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "也跟大家說明，其實每一步的原則都是類似的，在資訊釋出之前，我們不希望提案人看到這一個平台才知道你們公布這一個東西，所以我們在公布之前其實也會先給提案人看過，看有沒有哪一些地方他不懂的。例如這一份背景資訊釋出前也有給提案人先看過，他們也給我們一些具體的建議，因此我們有做一些修正，他還有幫我們找到錯字（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "花最久的時間是中間，從背景資訊提供到最後的正式回應其實就是非常長的研擬期，在這一段期間我們部內其實開了很多會議，就是在思考各式各樣有可能解套的途徑，把不同的路徑花出來。在這一個階段我們內部開了三次高階主管主持的會議，每開了兩次的專家會議，我必須要說的是，這一個案子絕對不是部會直接操作的會議，因為這一個提案的訴求跟本部本來要執行的方向是一致的，所以對部、次長來說，他們投入了很多資源，包含他們自己主持很多次的會議，背後的原因是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "同時，外部的會議也非常剛好，本來是在同一個時間點本部要成立跟癌症免疫治療等等在生醫學相關的諮議會，所以當時做的事情是既然要成立這一個諮議會，我們就把第一案設定是國發會連署的議案，背景大概是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "在中間的過程之中，我們希望每一個進度都儘量公開，但是在這一個部分，一方面是因為時間的關係、一方面是與會的專家可能沒有這一習慣，所以包含會議逐字稿及會議紀錄等等這個部分比較可惜，是沒有公開的。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "最後看到兩個月的正式回應，幫大家放大一下，最重要的是：我們聽到這樣的訴求之後，不好意思，我們沒有接受你的建議，我們承諾還沒有修改、來不及修改，但是承諾去修訂人體試驗管理辦法。這一個辦法裡面我們希望增加一個附屬計畫的方式，名字是什麼不重要，但是最重要的概念是我們用這一個方式讓這一類型的人體試驗是可以跟民眾收必要的成本費用，等於是原本說誘因不足即醫生不能收費，但是在這一點部分放寬，然而卻也不是賺錢，所以只收必要的成本費用。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "整份回應文件，我覺得最重要的關鍵是最後一句，我們承諾要修法，而且點出了時間點，當時12月14日回應，我們承諾大家在今年1至6月間進行預告的動作，同時正式回應的時候，也發布了新聞稿，也有一些電話的聯訪。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "其實後面從成案之後分別一至四部，其實還有一個病理部，其實是這樣子的，因為為了讓大家知道我們後續會做這一些事情，而不是讓大家苦苦等待新的東西拋出來，所以在成案之後第三天就發了期程公告，把會後的這一件事先有一個公告出來，讓大家知道，心裡有一個底，我們幾月幾日之前會走到哪一步，大概會做這樣的事。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "陸續在今年1月的時候，真的有把修法送出去，以及在今年4月的時候有正式公告，在預告公告出來其實新聞媒體上也有一定程度的報導，不過我覺得媒體比較次要，當時的提案人也有額外傳訊息表達他的感謝。以上聽起來都是非常溫馨感人的故事。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "這邊可以講緩慢一點，我必須要說今天國發會在議程上有寫這個是「提點子」的典範，請大家來分享，我接下來就要破除這一個謠言了，有三個原因我認為這一個案子做得還非常不足的地方，也提供大家作為借鏡。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "跟大家分享中間的一個插曲，在這一個提案預告之後、公告前，預告收以前的時候，某一個立委的辦公室來了一紙公文，上面寫：「你們要修的這個預告法規修正，竟然來自國發會政策平台的一人提案（而且空前絕後），你們做了這麼多的事，只為了一個人…該法規的修正程序嚴重瑕疵。」，我必須要說其實我去年3月才進政府，當時看到這一個公文，第一件做的事，我現在有非常極度懺悔，我當時先打給提案人說不好意思，修法進度可能會暫緩一點，因為立法院這邊還有一些疑慮，我們先緩下來。事情就這樣過了，但是心血來潮之後，過兩個小時之後，我上這個立委的臉書看一下，發現這一個立委的臉書在兩個小時後變成像這樣子（如PPT），這個非常顯然是親愛的提案人號召來的，到了這一個立委的臉書上，請這一些癌友po出他們罹癌後的照片，每一則留言大概的留言是：「親愛的○○○立委，請你不要再擋衛福部的立法了，你每擋一分鐘、每一秒鐘就會有五個家人的生命在流失。」，大概的概念是這樣，我不知道居然有網友會為政府說話，我這一次看到。所以整個過程大概像這一位網友說的，這一位立委感覺上惹到一群不怕死人一樣。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "非常戲劇化，這整件事情發生在當天晚上九、十點開始，一路到早上，這一個委員直接再po了一篇貼文說決定要撤回這一份公文，隔天早上我們馬上收到立委辦公室把這一份文收回去了。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "我回去看一下癌友們及我們的提案人他們固定有一個網路上的討論空間，他們詮釋昨晚叫做「是一場鄉民的勝利」，但是我必須要說真的是這樣子嗎？必須回頭看一下當時這一份公文裡面寫的其實並沒有真的要擋，而是覺得有疑慮，所以請廣泛召開公聽會之後再行公告修正。先跟大家說明一下，其實最後立委來的意見有一些是有道理的，我們最後在實際上公告出去的版本，有部分吸納這一位立法委員所提供的建議。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "我在思考的一件事是，我們當初得到這一個連署提案的時候，我們溝通的對象幾乎都是對著這一個提案及背後的社群，如果你要說另有社群有哪一些，絕對不只這一個，這樣的議題是不是應該要找更多醫院方的代表、醫師方的代表等等共同來開會之後再來決定。所以我們當時其實是沒有做的，在那兩個月期間，我們溝通對象除了有專家會議，但是病友圈我們只鎖定這一位而已，所以我不禁要說，因為有這六十天的期限，所以我們在做處理的時候，感覺上很趕，要最速結，不要想修法，而是想六十天內要有一個交代的東西，我們的心態有一點這樣，同時也受限了展化我們溝通的對象，這個是一直以來我們覺得滿可惜的。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "更具體來說，其實我們後面要擴大對象的話，或許在更前面的時間點，我們就會開始與衛環委員溝通，去瞭解不同方的想法，也就不會發生立委臉書牆被灌爆的事件，這個是小小的擔心。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "第二，一個議題兩個月之後是不可能結束的，4月公告之後，一路到現在又發生什麼事？這個是今年11月邱毅委員的質詢，因為邱議瑩委員的質詢，因為已經公開的資訊，她說明的內容也是公開的，快速給大家看一下。我們4月公告這個，她有看到，這個是要加惠病人，但是遭遇下列困難，她說我們從4月公告之後目前有法條，但是沒有施行細則，目前也沒有申請相關的程序跟部會說明，目前對於申請者的相關條件及資格也沒有講清楚，最後是不是可以再做一些細節上的放寬。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "因此，我必須要講連續案程序走得很漂亮，走過去兩個月之後，但是其實最根源的還是回到問題真的有解決嗎？我覺得最關鍵的是提案人後來在今年不幸過世，他的太太持續跟我們保持聯繫，大概每一、兩個月我就會收到她的訊息來關心，例如這邊就有講到進度如何，已經修法了，但她已經講得很委婉，她受到很多病友的求助，他們還是很常常受挫，感覺跟之前修法通過其實是沒有兩樣的。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "甚至更進一步跟大家分享，我最近得到她的訊息是她拍歷史公文給我，因為她覺得修法完之後整體的進度還是有一點緩慢，所以她決定要成立一個NGO，繼續在臺灣為這一件事做努力跟對政府的監督。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "就我的角度我不會去干涉提案人的太太來做這一件事，但是也必須用這一些例子讓大家瞭解到提案兩個月是一個流程的走過，也只是議題的開始，有沒有解決問題，最關鍵的還是回到病友團原本的提案本身有無反映他們的情況真的有感受，這個是第二個檢討，也是我一直很不希望被稱為典範的原因。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "第三，我想跟大家分享一下，細胞治療案，大家可以看到是第一個國內網路連署案，我們要走一個快速通道的感覺，原因是因為算一個新興議題，過去的確沒有相關法規可以處理，所以我們有很高的規格來對待提案人等等，可以用很快速的方式過去。但是這一個方式合適作為所有連署案的處理原則嗎？我個人認為並不適合的。原因可以跟大家分享一下，目前持續在進行中跟本部有一些已經成案、有一些快要成案的案例。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "我們部內第二個碰到的案例是醫療器材，希望可以在網路上販售，但是大家可以思考一下原本當時想像的是，我們同事看到第一案都用超高規格處理，其實我們都想好了，部長一句話我們就直接開放就可以了，因為這個是FDA可以權責決定的。但該是這樣嗎？醫材商有幾千家，只因為一家透過的方式比較特別即網路，就可以給它走快速通道嗎？顯然不是這樣的。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "所以，後來我們做的處理是，醫材可不可以在網路上販售，每一年固定會有會議上去討論的，我們沒有決策，最後的連署答覆並不是承諾對方直接明天可以開始販售，而是我們承諾讓對方的提議也可以變成每一年固定會是否開放選項的那一個會議，品項可以成為其中的討論項目，但是還是要回歸到從其他的管道一樣，也就是回到既有的流程來繼續走。這個是第一個案子所看到的。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "後面兩個案子更明顯了，以最近重要中藥技術士這一個連署案也快要成案了，他們是長期不斷跟本部在fighting，也包含用抗爭的方式、找立委的方式、開記者會的方式、找NGO的方式，所有的方式都走一輪，現在又加了一個網路的管道。當這一些既存的管道都試過，又來一個新的管道，彼此間如果每一個都重新做，尤其網路是高規格方式的時候，這個時候一定跟本來部內處理議題的方向與策略會有一些競合的，所以如果持續這樣做，其實也造成基層的同仁很大的負擔，因此如何將不同管道進來的意見彼此間如何做整合，這個也需要思考，不可以用這麼高規格的方式來對待。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "最後剛剛已經提到了洪秀柱關於日本食品的提案，可以跟大家說明裡面的提問對象並不是政府體系，其實真正在問的是民進黨的政府為何在520之前跟之後對核食政策有一點違背，這一個問題對於事務官或者是文官體制要如何回答？這一類的問題，如果有其他同樣的廠商有公平性問題存在，或者不是網路素人的提案，而是跟你周旋很久的團體提案，以及甚至政治性更強的提案，其實都是存在在這樣平台上的，因此我個人認為處理這樣的連署案不會有一個SOP，一定要by個案要投入什麼資源來用什麼方式來處理。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "所以以上這一邊總結一下，絕對不是典範的做法，還有非常非常多要檢討的。復習一下第一個部分，我覺得很重要的觀念，我現在絕對不是代表全部的民意，所以擴大徵詢是相當重要的。第二個是修法不等於解決問題，走完兩個月很漂亮的程序，被人稱為典範，但是其實有沒有解決問題這才是最根本要問的問題。同時也包含了剛剛看到的你不能走快速門，原本的這一個流程除非是完全新興的議題，你沒有其他既有流程可以走，思考的應該是跟其他管道一樣接回到行政流程，這個才是最重要的關鍵。最後，我覺得不應該有SOP，因為有各式各樣不同的類型，但是都同樣存在在這一個平台上。以上的分享，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "進入綜合討論前，有沒有想要進一步詢問或者是討論有關於她的經驗？可以想個大概二十秒。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家在想的時候，因為這一案其實包含Peggy做這一個簡報，當時我也還沒有進入政府，這一個過程我也不會把它稱為典範，但唯一對我來講有典範意義的，是這個是第一次事務體系對於五千個連姓名都不知道的網友，竟然可以去面對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一件事其實對於傳統上只有媒體聯絡人跟國會聯絡人的部會來講，其實是跨出非常非常大的一步。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為在國會聯絡跟媒體聯絡時我們知道對面長什麼樣子，我們知道之前跟我們有哪一些交手的經驗，我們知道對面懂什麼。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是提案人五千人或者是六千人，在你接觸他以前根本不知道他是什麼人、什麼樣子。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得在「願意接觸不特定人」這一點上，只有這一點我覺得是可以作為後來非常借鏡的部分，後面就如Peggy所講的，我完全同意。不曉得有沒有想要詢問的？" }, { "speaker": "黃秀美", "speech": "第一次發言，我對這個部分理解不多，我想知道的是，一般對某些議題有missionary感覺的人，可能會用一個身分去註冊很多個email帳號（我是有一點小人之心），然而，我想要瞭解的是，一個議題成型的時候，我們可能沒有辦法，或者我們到底有無辦法，對這五千多個附議者的email作查核，來確定事實上並不是幾個人使用帳號產生器的結果？" }, { "speaker": "黃秀美", "speech": "因為我們這一個民意塑造出來之後，政府對他們這樣做的結果，進行相對資源的分配，也影響到對其他人的資源分配，因此這一塊，我們應該要更謹慎，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非常好的問題，有關於身分認證、手機或者簡訊這一些可不可以請資管處這邊處理，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "目前提案者經過手機跟電子郵件認證，附議者實際上是要用電子郵件回傳一個認證碼，目前國際的趨勢都是這一種做法，以上說明。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "取得一個門號當然仍然不是沒有成本，但是確實我們如果在這邊有偵測到好比像一秒之間一百人或者是兩百人，我不知道資管處目前有沒有看到這樣的狀況，我們之前都有跑紀錄分析，也就是上站停留時間等等，所以我們是有資訊科學的方法去找到哪一些人是來洗版的，但至少這一個平台目前還很新，大家也沒有覺得一下擠滿五千人就馬上可以信任成真，也就是沒有真的把它當許願池用，所以目前還沒有看到有人用機器供給的方式來做這一件事，當然不排除未來會有的可能性，我們會請資管處繼續密切留意，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "還有意見嗎？如果沒有的話，我們就進入下一個議程討論案。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "今天的討論事項滿多個，我們就一個個來，我們請國政，第一個是「行政院新聞輿情開放討論機制」。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "今天有六個討論案，第一案是「行政院輿情開放討論程序—研擬」，（簡報第28頁），原則上目前規劃是行政院新聞處電子郵件通知各部會在開放政府專責人員，並副知國發會。新傳處會有輿情蒐集，送給各部會，而各部會就可以評估是否上「眾開講」討論。「眾開講」評估的結果，在下一週的星期五以前，由開放政府的專責人員回覆行政院新傳處評估結果，並副知國發會。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "（簡報第29頁）這一頁是整個流程圖，由新傳處通知各部會，副知國發會。主要有三個，一個是輿情多次反應、一個是議題具有發酵性、一個是政策是否具有延續性。如果認為需要開放的話，就要到「眾開講」討論，當然也可以敘明不開放，後續就由開放政府專責人員回覆新傳處。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "如果需要再做工作坊協助的話，國發會也會協助。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "這個部分再稍微補充一下，我們曾經在10月左右跟行政院發言人報告過這一個平台，發言人說這一個平台可以發揮更大的功能，所以希望新聞處能夠蒐集一週的輿情之後傳給各部會，請各部會自行評估要不要在「眾開講」裡面提供相關的資料，也就是流程是按照剛剛所報告的。當然主動的權利是在各部會，依照當時輿情的情況及內部的評估來決定要不要上「眾開講」，如果要上「眾開講」的話，我們這邊在技術上可以作任何的協助，都沒有問題。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "當時討論的流程是希望一週內，各部會要回覆是不是要上「眾開講」，不上「眾開講」是不是有某些考量，這個流程目前劃在簡報上這一個部分，不知道各位針對這樣的流程或者是整個修法有一些更好的建議？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這邊可以看到這三個原則，我這邊看起來有一點加權，如果已經多次反映，具有發酵性的操作型定義，如果我們不給一個說法的話，很容易會有很奇怪的說法在媒體上出現。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "政策延續性的意思是如果有人在「眾開講」上面訂閱或者表示興趣的話，我們會希望能夠未來直接聯絡到這一些相關的民眾，讓他們可以接到後續的處理方式，而不是一直去刷新聞，可能每一家新聞寫得都不一樣，這個是新傳處希望各部會多多少少如果覺得自己能夠主導議題或者是變成自媒體的話，可以藉由自媒體的方式來多聽到民間的一些聲音，然後也可以作一些實施的對話，這個也是之前徐發言人表示的意見。" }, { "speaker": "游燕君", "speech": "主席、各位先進，關於提這一個案子，我想似乎我們的認知跟國發會有一些落差，我必須要說的是，這一個案子到目前為止，每個禮拜五會提供我們的報告給國發會。可是至於後續蒐集各部會針對議題的反應，這部分似乎沒有達成共識，當然我們會繼續提供一週報告，可是對於彙整這方面，我們目前來講，因為對各部會的政策也不是那麼熟悉，所以不會提供這一項服務，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "理解，所以這邊釐清一下新傳處的意思，新傳處的意思是提供社會上最關注的題目，但是不會建議他是裡面哪一些合適徵詢，這一個建議完全由部會判斷，是這個意思嗎？" }, { "speaker": "游燕君", "speech": "是。由部會來判斷，也就是他這邊列的三個程序，這個部分要請各部會把他們的回復給新傳處，這個部分也沒有達成共識，所以目前辦理實施的部分，就資料服務我們是不提供的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "理解，以這一個圖上來說，新傳處是有結合網路輿情進行巨量分析，因為我都有收到週報，想必是有的（笑），但是哪一些議題適合徵詢這一個，也就是後面這一句話的責任，按照新傳處的意思是如果有自己判斷的話，其實新傳處是單項告知的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "評估結果回到新傳處之後其實並不會做進一步的處理，是這個意思嗎？" }, { "speaker": "游燕君", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "各部會有沒有想要討論的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們稍微綜整一下，其實這邊的意思是新傳處送了網路輿情巨量分析的資料給各部會之後，是各部會的參考，相信各個部會自己也有想要在「眾開講」上面或者是覺得希望進一步擴大徵詢的議題，新聞處想要釐清的是這一個專責人員回復評估結果的這一個箭頭過去之後，對他們來講會知道這一件事，而不會針對這一件事去做額外的處理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有沒有想要討論的？" }, { "speaker": "曾雪如", "speech": "不好意思，我可以確認一下流程嗎？我剛剛的理解是這一個主動權還是在各部會，剛才新傳處的意思是各部會是否要送「眾開講」，是否仍然回覆給他們？看起來他們好像覺得不需要。" }, { "speaker": "游燕君", "speech": "對，我們僅是把我們自己整理各議題的報告提供給國發會，國發會提供給各部會參考，作為他們研擬政策的參考，基本上就是單向的，後續你說蒐集回應的部分，是這樣子沒有錯，所以部會不需要把他們的狀況回應給我們。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以這「3.」這條線的左方就拿掉了，當然國發會是管這一個平台，所以「3.」還是讓國發會知道。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "我想國發會這邊願意接受各位的資料傳回來，現在的重點是如果各部會的決定不上「眾開講」，也不一定要把理由傳送到國發會這邊，我的意思是說因為剛剛會議討論的是主動權是在各部會，各部會決定要不要把某一項的議題放在「眾開講」，如果各部會決定說不要上「眾開講」，我想國發會也沒有必要去蒐集這一個部分，也就是各部會不需要當「眾開講」這一段的文字，也不需要送到國發會。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "潘處長這邊的意思是這邊的副知如果真的要上「眾開講」的話，再讓國發會知道就好了，如果沒有要上「眾開講」的話，其實各部會不需要去利用，意思是這樣，也就是大家收到新傳處之後，新傳處不會建議合適、徵詢有沒有這個東西，但是他們還是會提供一些輿情，而PO還是會收到這一個輿情，收到之後他們還是要評估，但是評估之後當他們用國發會平台的時候，再讓國發會知道，應該很清楚。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "然後發言的時候先說一下，因為我們要做逐字稿，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "曾雪如", "speech": "主席、各單位代表專家，我想我院新傳處剛剛的立場其實表示得非常清楚，也就是只做單向的告知，至於後面是不是要上「眾開講」，基本上完全取決於各部會，如果是這樣情形的話，基本上不上「眾開講」的話，其實很多資訊補充過，也就不需要再回到國發會。" }, { "speaker": "曾雪如", "speech": "不過我只是有一點疑問，新傳處基本上是整個行政院體系裡面輿情最後的研判或蒐集的hub，如果有一些議題有繼續延燒的情況，如果那一個議題基本上已經結束，當然就沒有後續的story，但是如果那一個輿情有繼續延燒的情況，新傳處扮演這樣的角色上，我覺得有一些情況也是可以再給大家作一些建議。是不是完全不回應到國發會？完全不回應到新傳處？這樣是不是讓這一個機制只走到了一半？我覺得是不是可以再思考一下？如果真的有一些輿情繼續發燒的話，即使不回到新傳處，我覺得新傳處或者是發言人辦公室這邊，其實也會主動關切，所以這個時候像這一些部分是不是要回來，其實要再思考一下，不然這一個機制有一點可惜只做了一半。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "綜整一下曾老師的意見，大概的意思是其實網路輿情的巨量分析這邊，因為剛剛新傳處已經把第二行消掉了，不會幫忙判斷哪一個發酵性或者是多處發次反映它的嚴重程度，確實就是我們之前在做企業裡面的crisis control的時候，確實是會有一個排序的優先，哪一些是你一個禮拜內不處理的話，想必會燒得更兇，哪一些是一個禮拜之內稍微處理一下就可以了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "目前新傳處給的那一張表裡面，確實是有請某個部會要妥處或者是採納或者是事實回應，但是這一個事實回應，中間我聽曾老師的意思是說，對於是不是有發酵性、多次反應的這一個訊號其實並不是標明得非常清楚，所以部會很難判斷它的資源應該要優先回應哪一個，大概是這個意思。" }, { "speaker": "游燕君", "speech": "我們這邊提的主要是針對這一個「眾開講」的機制說法，其實是我們跟各部會輿情方面有其他方式的聯繫，比如我們有一個內閣發言人的群組，有一些輿情，不管是現在熱門或者是馬上需要回應的議題，通常都會用那一個LINE的群組即時告知，所以各部會的發言人在議題上都有相當的討論，我想這一個部分應該不是underway提到的事情，所以在輿情方面，應該是說我們的資料都應該能夠做到即時提供，甚至我們針對特定的議題也可以做一些比較綜整的報告，也會提供給發言人，發言人會視情況提供給需要的部會，所以基本上我們跟各部會在輿情方面的溝通，基本上是沒有太大的落差，他們也都能夠根據我們第一時間的需求或怎麼樣能夠做很快速的回應。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "具體回應是說，雖然不是用電子郵件送各部會發言人及開放政府的專責人員，事實上是對於篩選原則相關的一些訊號已經以LINE的方式送到各部會的發言人，當然PO這個是我們才剛有的，當然還沒有加入那個LINE群組。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們的意思是說，從那一個角度來看，他們需要即時回應的部分，至少目前各部會發言人都已經知道了，我們是不是請各部會發言人跟各部會PO中間有某種溝通的方式，以新傳處的角度來看，也就是已經提供足夠多的資訊。" }, { "speaker": "林子倫", "speech": "我想我丟一個情況，基本上我理解剛剛說每週五丟一個叫輿情分析，我只是好奇因為這些人做過相關的回覆分析，可能當然就聲量等等，我想各部會自己也都有輿情的分析，其實有些任何議題、社會關注議題我想可能兩邊差異不大，我現在提的一個情況有一些可能是低聲量，可是社會上長期可能沒有被關注，他也不見得會連署成案，可是這一些東西是隱含著一些，我不知道在這一個情況之下，新聞處如何來處理？不一定達到長期聲量任務，但是在這一個情況下好像一直有一個不平或者是不滿的聲音，怎麼被處理？因為他們沒有辦法到每週五……我記得318，那個已經定期在那裡已經延燒好幾個月了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這是一個具體的問題。它事實上是有發酵性，因為多次反映的時候沒有到達主流媒體的程度，老師提醒如果新傳處只是比較focus在大的聲量非回應不可的時候，就會漏了這一些，我不知道新傳處有沒有這方面的規劃？" }, { "speaker": "游燕君", "speech": "主席，我在這邊再稍微作解釋一下，其實我們平常蒐集輿情並不只限於主流媒體，我們對網路媒體很早就開始蒐集了。其實我們在回應議題的時候，我們通常會視那個議題在網路還有在主流議題，我們不會只關注主流議題跟主流媒體，在網路上有達到一定聲量的時候，就會適度發布在我們這一個平常給各部會的名單，所以其實應該不至於有剛剛那一位先進提到的問題，並不會說有一些議題被忽略，因為我們經常可以滿快接受到資訊，不過當然畢竟我們有時候是以行政院的角度，有些議題本身跟各部會沒有太直接關係，我們就沒有掌握，不過基本上跟各部會有相關的議題，我們第一時間都很快可以掌握到，我自己個人覺得沒有這樣的問題存在。" }, { "speaker": "游燕君", "speech": "以目前的管道來講，我們現在透過LINE或者是其他一些新的管道，我們其實已經把我們的訊息提供（出來），如果其他人有一些建議，比如在哪一些方面可以再補充資料，我們也在我們的能力範圍之內，歡迎大家提供，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我這邊綜整一下，因為網路媒體有一個特性，我確實有看到新傳處從PPT或者是從其他地方來蒐集網路的潛在輿情，它有一個特性是不像主流媒體透過新聞聯絡人去聯絡，網路媒體如果要回應到回應人的話，當然只能透過網路的平台，不然就是回到PTT那一個討論串實際用「開放責任專責人員」的身分去回他，或者至少我們在「眾開講」上面提請討論，請他們從網路討論場域進入我們這一個網路討論場域等等。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "現在在「開放政府專責人員」的工作裡面，我們當然會慢慢培力他去直接跟網媒的處理工作，希望之後的這一個LINE群組，這一個是網路媒體並且我們並沒有辦法透過正規新聞聯絡人，因為還沒有上主流媒體來反映的話，是不是可以有一個標示？我們之後就可以讓「開放政府專責人員」回應這部分的工作，這也比較接近子倫老師剛剛提到的，您不需要馬上回應，只是給新傳處參考，未來是否可以標明哪一些是主流跟網媒都有的，哪一些是在網媒上回應的，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我想要提幾件事：" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "第一，其實政黨輪替前「Join」就有從新傳處傳來資訊，並不是現在才把這一個機制建立起來。但是有一個問題是「Join」也會有民眾因為名稱相關、一時因為輿情突發的臨時事件，比如說廢博愛座或者是像人事行政總處那邊也有提過廢颱風半天假的問題，恐怕還要再思考一個問題，如果「提點子」其實同步在連署的過程中，那個狀況要怎麼處理？" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "第二，很多時候因為輿情而來的，有時是公關、有時是危機，不適合放在「提點子」，其實最根本的問題是，部會有沒有一套綜整的判斷，這個才是關鍵。我不確定政委辦公室或者是國發會要思考如何協助，我的意思是說很難推輿情的系統或者是新傳處要做多少的push，我們不是要部會充量，而是部會如何理解「Join」這一個平台，如果「Join」是我們因為輿情，希望push的話，這個部分真的要避免，因為政黨輪替前有一波「Join」上很多題目就是因為輿情及立委質詢，中間卡了很多問題是我們有沒有辦法真實面對，有些其實講白一點是政治問題，以半天假而言，不是人事行政總處可以回的，因為行政命令、規則的要點就是訂在那邊。可能問題是地方諸侯要處理的問題，我們到底能不能回？" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我不是說這樣的機制不好，我覺得如果新傳處可以提供部會綜整判斷其中一個思考很好，有一些的確是等一下如果其他的部分要提的話，「提點子」越來越多，或者我們要自己放到「眾開講」的話，如Peggy剛剛講的，講白一點是政治問題，包括洪秀柱的問題都不是部會可以回答，就會變成跨部會有沒有開放政府協調人的問題，而是我們這一個業務的督導有沒有辦法向上反應這一個議題要如何處理，這個是一個問題，等一下再談。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我們要拉回來的是，在這一個主問題裡面要處理的是綜整判斷要如何把這一個機制要建立在哪裡，並不是輿情高就要辦，反過來輿情低直接要面對的政策問題、政策表態，誰來做這一組判斷？如何協助這樣的判斷機制產生，這個反而是關鍵，不是SOP。" }, { "speaker": "朱斌妤", "speech": "我想我要附議家華說的，因為我看這一個流程好像討論到最後，原本說「若評估不可開放，應敘明理由」，在剛才討論的過程當中，好像連敘明都可以拿掉，但是剛剛家華提的問題也是我心裡想的，是否該開、已開，及不該開、已開，我覺得單位裡面會有不同的考慮及疑慮，行政部門裡面就最擔心的就是課責，現在這個東西的說明與否，是不是能夠更清楚，以上建議，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好，綜整一下兩位老師的意見。呂家華老師的意思大概是三個：" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第一，「提點子」是連署的部分。我們現在講的是「眾開講」，也就是我們設定議題的部分，連署的部分是由民眾設定議題，其實我們看大部分這一種高度對立性的這一種社會上討論的案子，不一定成案，可是我們可以看到在「提點子」上的反應快的，也就是馬上會有人開始「提點子」，看他的連署數量就知道他的利益關係人的數量大概有多少個。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "從某個角度來看，「提點子」也是一個網媒，跟任何的PTT或其他網路媒體並沒有不一樣，都有自己設定議程的這個能力。所以剛才劉老師提醒我們的是，我們自己在判斷網媒的時候，也要把「提點子」，尤其未來「提點子」還會有一個自由討論的這一個過程，正反雙方的意見會把最精華的意見浮到上面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我們在自己經營的網路媒體上，我們也可以收到包含PTT在內或者其他別的網媒可能沒有辦法收到一些即時的輿情，這個是要納入判斷的，這個東西可能要之後新傳處可以慢慢在「提點子」上面做綜合判斷。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第二，兩位老師都有提到如果有使用這一個平台，然後才需要做工作，而不只用這一個平台，其實不需要敘明理由的話，只是很可能大家都不使用，這個是現實的情況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是我從某個角度來看，這樣也沒有錯，其實各個部會只要判斷目前這一個東西仍然還不適合提到「眾開講」上面討論，必然有一套判斷的方式，老師們在意的是這一個機制本身的建立，倒不是這個理由是不是要讓新傳處知道。這一件事我相信在「開放政府專責聯絡人」這邊會有一個彼此討論的判斷機制，至少我們判斷每一案要不要放上去討論的這一個討論紀錄或者過程，這個東西是會留下來的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然這一個東西是否適合回給新傳處或者新傳處是不是要進一步處理，剛剛新傳處很明確表示沒有想要處理（笑），我相信即使不要放上來的話，國發會的開放政府政策聯絡人員也會在PO的討論串裡面，所以至少國發會這邊會知道我們在判斷的時候，這一些都不上去討論，我們是經過怎麼樣的討論過程，這一個東西是最基本的audit trail，我不曉得老師們是不是覺得這樣是ok的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "綜整剛剛呂老師的意思，有一些議題具有發酵性，可是不處理不是因為部會不想處理，而是超過部會可以處理的範圍，好比像即使部會真的跟我們連署人洪秀柱老師討論了半個小時，釐清了她的爭點，可能裡面只有一個是衛福部可以回應的，也就是要跟原能會確認檢核機制，其他九個爭點當然黨部要回應，而不是衛福部或者是原能會可以回應的，這個我覺得可以如實跟提案人說。好比有人來提年金改革相關的議題或者某些是總統府的權責議題，我們也是如實跟提案人表示這一個範圍不在我們部會能夠處理的範圍裡面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛才呂老師也提醒即使在部會能夠處理的範圍裡面，部會到底能夠討論的空間多大，有的時候還是要院長跟在政治這一個層面去進行判斷，我至少可以做的是，可以就特定的案子在政務會議上至少讓政務委員跟院長們表示好比是國旅卡這一案其實還可以檢討或到2月的時候可以再revise適用的標準等等，適用的範圍至少在政務會議這一層上面進行確認之後，我們可以就這一個範圍跟提案人溝通，這個是我所提到的，大概是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "老師們都還ok？" }, { "speaker": "黃秀美", "speech": "第二次發言，我想要先回過頭來，我們今天要談「Join」這一個平台的mission跟vision是什麼？我覺得今天要處理的是policy agenda的問題，或者是有潛力成為policy的一些東西在這裡匯聚。" }, { "speaker": "黃秀美", "speech": "我在部會裡面負責新聞跟宣傳的統籌，所以長期跟燕君所屬的新傳處那邊合作，可以理解一個新聞輿情處理的生命週期是相對短的，但是這一個平台可能從提案到成案，也許是一、兩個月的時間，剛剛燕君就講說一個輿情處理兩個月，那個根本不可能也不允許，所以輿情與政策議題，本質基本上就是有所差異的。" }, { "speaker": "黃秀美", "speech": "另外，在組織的慣性上，如果我們希望「Join」這一個平台成為政府對於民眾來說，是有吸引力、有公信力的「公共意見交流第一品牌」的話，大家不要忘記，國發會同時又要求各部會在做一件事，也就是配合網路時代的潮流，發展「自媒體」，也因此，有這麼多的部會配合，在做自己的官方臉書。不管怎麼樣，我們做這一件事的時候，其實從組織的慣性來講，一個業務處，假設以我農委會的某業務處為例，一個科了不起七、八個同仁，他同時要去蒐羅網路上這麼多的（人數或許不多，但聲量非常高的）利害相關人團體意見，也就是說，承辦人在平常的業務推動之外，還要再回應這一些。此外，有時如果農委會的臉書上出現業務相關的議題，承辦人必須要趕快做回應，如果是在新聞媒體上，如果把一個議題吵得很大、很負面，又要把這一些重大負面輿情再弄到「Join」這一個平台來，其實對業務組織來講，同仁會覺得整天在處理這一些事就好了，根本沒時間處理業務了。" }, { "speaker": "黃秀美", "speech": "在這一種狀況之下，去年我跟潘處長（還是潘主任的時候），我們一起在農委會會內一直鼓勵大家就業務的部分，是不是提供一些議題放到「眾開講」上面去讓民眾討論，但是業務單位確實非常卻步，因為他們說真的沒有力氣了。因此在這一種情況之下，我們期待大家主動願意把這一個議題放上來，除非是業務單位真正覺得想要藉這一個平台來蒐集資訊，不然他會覺得平常面對或者是在處理的管道已經夠多了，沒有特別誘因的時候，我想同仁基本上會比較保持沉默，而非積極響應，以上報告。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "綜整一下，我們確實在臉書上讓訊息發散確實是比較有吸引力的，我們以經營自媒體的角度來看，在「Join」上po一個東西，觸及的人數不可能比臉書來得多或者群組來得多。但是從另外一個角度來看的是，收意見回來的時候，其實FB是非常不友善收意見的界面，這個是為什麼需要非常多人，你只能收一點意見的原因是，太容易洗版的話，如果各位這幾天有看景森政委臉書的話，就可以發現說裡面確實有一些有價值的意見，但是是淹沒在三、四千字各種各樣的留言裡面——雖然景森政委說他都看了（笑）——從某個角度來說，其實要他花非常多的時間。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「Join」的平台是我們自己所設計的，我們可以不斷加入一些比較適合收斂，而不是比較發散性的一些功能進去，至少大家看到「.gov.tw」的網站，覺得這一個東西是有公信力。但是我覺得後面那一個心裡機制很重要，就是說如果有時候部會並不是真的想要收斂那麼多意見進來，而是把正確訊息發出去就好了，這樣確實從「Join」平台的角度來看，並沒有一定要利用「Join」平台的必要性，這個東西我相信尊重部會的判斷，並沒有讓部會多一件事的意思。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是也請部會可以考慮一下，當你們同時發一份新聞稿或簡報在自己部會的平台上時，如果能夠在「Join」上面也放一份的話，其實是比較大程度上，讓大家搜尋這一個議題的時候是容易找到各位的正式說明。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也就是說，可以只是把它當作正確訊息的發布管道，也就是在政策預告六十天，或連署六十天的週期裡面有一個單一公布窗口。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個是為什麼我希望公報網把六十天的法規預告都放上來的原因，並不是真的覺得每一個法規預告都要收整個社會幾千份的討論，大部分的人並不會那麼感興趣，但至少我們有一個單一窗口，讓大家在搜尋的時候，能夠一次看到部會至少覺得這個放出去是ok的後面想法，並不是在大家管臉書已經很麻煩的情況之下，又回來管版，所以這個是為什麼在設計的時候，是以綜合回應為原則，如果你看到單則覺得應該要回應的，那個是部會自己判斷，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不曉得還有沒有其他的意見？" }, { "speaker": "莊明芬", "speech": "有關於新聞輿情的機制我想在這邊補充一下，我們（國發會資管處）過去也有透過新聞輿情的管道，把議題放在「眾開講」的情形。我舉一個例子為例，也就是開放不利耕作的場地，蓋太陽能板這一件事，這一件事經濟部覺得因為輿情的發酵，他們也是說這樣的政策放任輿情發酵，倒不如在這一個平台上把政府的政策完整說清楚、講明白。過去政府在制定政策有哪一些背景的原因，把背景的資料放在平台上讓民眾清楚瞭解，而不是散在媒體上發散，任由有心人士誤傳，因此將政策及說明的原因放在這一個平台上。" }, { "speaker": "莊明芬", "speech": "在5月16日至5月31日其實時間也沒有很長，大概只有兩個禮拜多一點的時間，就收到七百二十一則的回應，在這七百二十一則的回應裡面，經濟部結束之後做一個綜整的回應，我覺得這個的好處是在於在這上面可以主導自己的議題，也就是政府自己做過哪一些努力，也可以在這個地方做澄清。" }, { "speaker": "莊明芬", "speech": "第二，民眾在這邊也有一個抒發的管道，回應之後我們這個平台還有一個機制，也就是你可以打包所有民眾的回應，你可以打包下載之後做一個質化的分析，所以我想這個「眾開講」並不是強制大家要如何去做，而是大家經過綜整判斷的機制之後，適合放上來說清楚、講明白，而且對於意見的聚焦、收容達到一定的效力之後，還可以打包一些議題下來做質化的分析，然後在最後在上面做一個綜整的回應，在上面做一個完整的論述及交代，要感謝大家一些智慧上的貢獻，我想平台建立一個良性的互動就是在這裡。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝莊副處長。大概的意思是像農地種電這一個議題當然不是只在這一個平台上討論，同時媒體上也有在討論，但是這一個平台的好處是即使是這一個討論期都過了，大家都知道三百人或者是上千人在看，這些人可以隨時回到這邊取得正確的資訊，像FB的黏著性是很低，你發布了三個訊息，他只接到中間的那一個，也不一定再回去看前面跟後面的，也就是這邊的目的是建立一個脈絡，也就是剛剛講的政策的產銷履歷，這樣一個脈絡雖然不一定一開始能夠激發非常多的人肯定政府講的都是對的，但是至少在接下來的討論裡面，我們可以基於事實討論的基礎，政府可以說三個月之前沒有公告這個，請大家就這一個作為討論的基礎，大概是這樣的想法，所以當然並不是強迫大家使用，而是有任何事實性的東西，如果覺得這邊發布新聞稿，而可以接觸到剛剛講的幾百個，你未來可以更容易直接接觸到這些顯然已經感興趣的人。" }, { "speaker": "林季蓉", "speech": "分享另外一種經驗，其實我們（僑委會）的服務對象跟推動的專案都在海外，我們大部分傾聽的聲音都是海外僑民的聲音。這個平台規劃之後我們滿重視的，各個業務單位把他們希望能夠瞭解的議題，我們有做了一些整理跟努力，所以我們從開放到現在總共已經開放了四個議題，明年還有一個議題，藉由這一個平台去蒐集國內民眾的聲音，也就是六個業務單位來講也滿重要，的確過去對國內這一塊民眾的意見，其實是我們需要去積極瞭解跟回饋的。" }, { "speaker": "林季蓉", "speech": "回到今天業務簡報第11頁，今天的資料裡面，會內推動的數目寫成是兩個，在這邊建議更新，僑委會目前開放數已經四個了，藉此也能鼓勵會內的同仁未來能夠把相關的議題更加積極提出來，以上，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好的，馬上修改簡報（笑）。非常感謝僑委會。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實確實，本來每一個部會就有比較熟的利益關係人，這一個平台的好處是他可以跟你不熟的利益關係人至少浮現，浮現之後要如何加深他的連結，是每一個部會自己的工作，這樣ok嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果大家都ok的話，我們就進入第二個。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果大家決定不放上「眾開講」的話，決定至少不討論的結果，國發會這邊會被副知到，新傳處未來可以稍微檢討如果在某些議題只有從網路這邊來還沒有上主流媒體的話，可以標示它的來源，各部會的專責聯絡人在回的時候至少知道可以回哪裡。這樣可以嗎？" }, { "speaker": "游燕君", "speech": "主席的意思是在我們的週報告標示？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。現在只會寫PTT或Mobile01，一個想法是附網址，這個是最簡單的，另外一個是至少在PTT或Mobile01的哪一個版，當部會的專責聯絡人要回去看那一個討論的時候，比較知道要怎麼回得去。可以嗎？" }, { "speaker": "游燕君", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝，那我們就進入第二案。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "第二案是提議檢核作業程序討論：" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "（簡報第31頁）目前的檢核程序裡面，民眾提議以後國發會目前的檢核時間是三天，國發會認為提議的資料裡面有一些疑義的時候，部會與本會的法協去確認這一個議題是不是部會的權責，如果確認以後，那就會直接進入附議。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "進入附議以後實際上請主責部會有一個確認，也就是「主（協）」辦的機關，因為「主（協）」辦有涉及各部會的話，有時部會對於分工有一些意見，一般都不願意當主辦，都是希望當協辦，因為我們希望政府在回應中能夠一致性，對民眾來講感覺是一個單位回應的，因此我們開一個協調會協調，有部分的議題會協調到第二次的協調。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "為了避免常常開相關的協調會，「主（協）」辦一直沒有辦法確認的時候，等到一千人附議以上的時候，我們才會召開協調會，目前的做法大概是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "（簡報第32頁）目前「主（協）」辦會涉及到幾個議題，一個是行政院內部業務處及任務編組辦公室有沒有要納進來這一個單位，目前有幾個議題，像食安也是一個，民眾至餐廳消費10％服務費的這一塊，消保處認為這不是屬於他的業務範圍。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "目前權責機關對於協調「主（協）」辦的機關裡面，目前的方式是全部列為主辦，這個等一下再討論，還是維持目前的做法，也就是要找一個機關來綜整。後面另外一案也有討論到，如果都各主辦的話，實際上還有一些問題。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "另外一個是涉及全國性的提議，但是現階段沒有可以遵循的依據，像「民國改西元年」、「政府機關建築，應取消招牌中政要首長之姓名落款文字」提議。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "最近還有一個議題，民眾建議希望把首都移到中、南部，我們直接退件，因為這個非行政院（管轄），民眾就直接到總統府的首長信箱投書，總統府就直接交辦給行政院，事實上這一個議題是未來不知道要怎麼處理；涉及到一些議題應該都是屬於行政院的公共政策，（但還是）不知道後續要怎麼處理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一個無窮迴圈的狀況（笑）。這其實是三個不完全重疊，事實上是完全不重疊的議題，我想我們一個個來，這邊講到「消保」、「資安」、「性平」、「食安」，那都是因為實際上有提過，感覺上應該是這邊的行政院業務處的任務編組，當然這一些幕僚單位有的還是要回到各部會，但是政策方向的研擬或者決定的話，往往有的時候是在食安辦或者資安處決定，所以這邊一個具體的提議是希望能夠納入他們變成能夠來主責回應的部分，我不曉得這一個單位是不是想要發表意見？他們今天有沒有人來？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以這一個是缺席討論的情況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但這個能夠解決各部會碰到類似這一案時的問題，就是說好比各部會現在被分到一案，這一案你知道它事實上就是性平處或者是食安辦在做決定，如果把性平處跟食安辦掛出來，這樣對大家有幫助嗎？我想我們至少先蒐集這一邊的利益關係人意見，這一些別的利益關係人今天不在場，可能會後要請他們看逐字稿；不曉得老師們在這一案上有沒有什麼想法？" }, { "speaker": "邱垂正", "speech": "第一次發言，剛剛看到「眾開講」，陸委會是其他十三個單位沒有提議的，事實上第一次聽政委解說開放政府，其實我覺得我們陸委會非常意願，也有很多的議題可以大量參與，也很有意義來凝聚社會的共識。" }, { "speaker": "邱垂正", "speech": "我是到上個禮拜才知道有這一個很好的機制，而且我發現陸委會沒有議題在（平台）上面，這裡又看到有一個提議範圍，涉及總統府、行政院以外，其他中央機關各級機關不適用本要點。事實上我們的議題我想跟其他部會很多的國外議題涉及到行政院以外的其他單位，如果被排除的話，我們是不是無法使用這一個平台？因為我也不清楚當初為什麼包括我們及其他的國安單位都沒有加入，事實上民眾對這一些議題很有興趣跟很有意見，我們如何適當來使用這一個平台？謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛剛提到的要點應該是「提點子」的那個要點，剛剛是說民眾提議，如果提到總統的權責，跟行政院已經沒有關聯的，民眾的提議我們會排除它，這個是目前的狀況，我們沒有說這個是好的或者是應該的，這個是目前實際的狀況。但是部會自己要討論的時候，就是放在「眾開講」，也就是由部會mission，這個不會用連署這邊的要點，這是完全兩回事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "陸委會自行判斷之後，覺得這個東西雖然涉及總統權責，但是跟國安會都講好了，我們就是要來討論——這個不能隨便亂講（笑）——我們就來討論某個題目，這樣的話，其實不會完全受到要點的制約，非常歡迎大家使用。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "整個平台的目的是要收斂大家的意見，凝聚共識，陸委會的題目是最需要收斂意見、共識的其中一個單位（笑），歡迎經常使用。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "關於「食安」、「性平」、「資安」、「消保」，像我知道食安辦跟衛福部的比較有關係，如果食安辦不辦的話會落到好比像衛福部或者是其他相關內政部，資安處如果不接的話，就是資管，因為是國發會接，他們說不接的話就會落到誰身上這樣子。我不確定這邊有沒有一手或者是二手的經驗會出現就是要納入資安處或者是食安辦的動機？主要的動機是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "目前食安議題的提議裡面會涉及到經濟部、農委會跨部會，不只這幾個部會，還滿多的部會，實際上需要部會跟機關綜整協調，像剛剛政委有提到是由各部去主責這一塊的話，對其他部會裡面，感覺對各部會工作量會相對重，至少部會跟部會中間還有平等，也就是用一個比較高位階去處理這一件事，會比較完滿一點。" }, { "speaker": "許添明", "speech": "理解，應該這樣講，如果在場都沒有人反對這一案的話，那這樣的話，其實我們應該要充分徵詢直接的利益關係處室及辦公室，所以這樣的話，我們就先備查，然後再以這一個會的權責來講，我們之後就會請資管處去逐一詢問之前曾經有過類似這樣的辦公室，然後提我們的理由。" }, { "speaker": "李文忠", "speech": "很抱歉，這裡面有很多意見我是看不懂，把簡單的東西複雜化，請看到草案第30頁，「提議者得選擇該提議之權責機關」，這很奇怪，食安問題的主責機關為農委會或衛福部或消保會？我們應該要給提議者這麼大的權利嗎？應該是他可以建議，可是這裡寫「得選擇」，他可以提議，但是決定權一定是政府機關，此為我的第一個疑問。" }, { "speaker": "李文忠", "speech": "第二，這裡提到該提議內容涉及了相關政府機關，確認「主（協）」辦，如果有一些爭議就是由國發會處理，接著就看我們的討論事項，如果是全國性的業務如何處理？那就是按照原來的機制，也就是由國發會來提議，有爭議就請國發會協調大家。" }, { "speaker": "李文忠", "speech": "你說權責也就是如果有意見也就是主辦，政府在做什麼的？主辦、協辦是很清楚的，不是這個東西不願意就協辦。" }, { "speaker": "李文忠", "speech": "另外，我的資料上面有寫「協調會協調」，如果有意見，什麼一千個人，那政府是幹什麼的？政府連誰是主辦機關都不能決定，變成大家都可以，在我來看是把簡單的事情複雜化，把政府應該負的責任不能處理，比如三天內就必須檢核，對於政府反而有一些困難度，像這一些地方雖然要要求效率，但也要給（部會）一點時間。政府該決定的，對政府來講很簡單的事，只是部會協調，（應該要就要決定）。" }, { "speaker": "李文忠", "speech": "像是否需要納入，在我來看，也不需要跟他們討論，這就是政府單位，在我來看你的討論事項通通是沒有什麼意義的，按照現在的機制就能過關了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "理解。提議者的「選擇」我相信是一個資訊科學上的說法，也就是會有一個選單讓他選，但是事實上他選了如果是選錯了，或者是我們覺得不適合的，其實國發會跟各部會是可以蓋過去的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個東西如果字樣上需要澄清，我們可以在字樣或者是理由上澄清。其他的部分可能先作綜整說明，就不用簡報了。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "主席、各位長官及先進，我想就兩點來補充說明。裡面所提到「三天內檢核」其實是我們內部的規定，跟各個部會比較沒有關係，這個「三天」是規定在國發會這邊，將一個議題要在三天內確定到底是不是屬於前面所提到的，也就是行政院以外的其他權責範圍，這個檢核的功能是在國發會這邊，並不是壓在各個部會並在三天內處理。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "另外，有關於「主（協）」辦是不是一定要？因為目前所訂的要點裡面，的確規定是一定要有主辦，協辦的數量不一定是規範這麼多。依據我們實務上運作了這一段時間裡面，因為民眾提問題的時候，並不瞭解政府機關內部運作的機制，我們自己實務上所處理的案子裡面，同一個案子是提到很多不同的場域，那麼場域就有分別不同的主管機關。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "我們經過很多次的協調，一定要找某一個機關來當作主辦機關的話，主辦機關會認為其他的場域並不是他所主辦的範圍，因此才會有這樣的建議，如果有內容涉及到不同機關，然後經過一些我們的研判，這一些機關都可以當主辦機關的話就可以。如果各位都同意的話，我們要點會去修正，因為我剛剛強調要點目前規定一定只有一個主辦機關，其他都變成協辦機關。如果經過今天會議的討論同意放寬的話，後面還有最後一個討論案係修正要點，就會把主辦機關的數字修正，以上。" }, { "speaker": "李文忠", "speech": "對不起，我再簡單提一個。如果「選擇拒絕」的話，請問叫做什麼「選擇」呢？文字應該就用「提議」。" }, { "speaker": "李文忠", "speech": "第二，現行的機制就有主辦跟協辦，如果有特殊的情形就可能兩個機關，所以不要類加，各個機關都想說不要，所以大家就是主辦機關，我質疑的是這一個，根本不必有這一條，在現行的機制就可以處理，以上。" }, { "speaker": "蘇俊榮", "speech": "針對這個提案第一項的部分，行政院的一些業務主管處或任務編組單位是否要納入的話，這個部分基本上我們是贊成要納入，像以性平業務來講，其實我們現在很多的業務都已經移到性平處主管了，所以各部會在推動相關業務的時候，有涉及到性平業務的政策或者是管考，其實很多都會涉及到性平處的主管權責，因此，就第一項議題來講的話，我們贊同有一個研擬意見。" }, { "speaker": "蘇俊榮", "speech": "第二點，「主（協）」辦機關，我們有考量如果這一個議題都列為主辦的話，假設在各機關自己各自回答時，意見是不是會出現相扞格的情形，就民眾的立場來講的話，可能民眾認知裡面，我的回覆是政府就是行政議題，所以就這一個部分來講的話，我建議還是要有「主（協）」辦。" }, { "speaker": "蘇俊榮", "speech": "當然剛剛像退輔會代表提到的，如果議題很明顯這兩個以上的機關有特殊狀況，用另外管理的方式來處理，是不是會比較妥當？以上意見。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們一個個來（處理）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛才建議「得選擇」改成「得建議」，反正就再弱化一點，資管處已經點頭了，所以這一個事情就這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個，人事這邊說有些確實是性平的業務，所以如果完全不讓性平回的話，也怪怪的，這個我們會去問性平處。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我們這邊講的都是連署，我們如果是在「眾開講」那邊的話，其實已經是並列的狀況，像「日本核災後食品風險危害評估及管理及茨城、櫪木、千葉、群馬食品開放與否公聽會」，這一定要唸完，不然我們知道會有特定人不高興（笑），這一個名字很長的公聽會狀況，它其實是「主（協）辦單位」的寫法，因為確實它真的牽涉非常非常多的部會，不管哪一個要來當主責的部會去協調其他人，我相信也不一定聽他協調。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "雖然看起來理論上我們也可以說食安辦主辦，但是其他是協辦，但是你要說食安辦去主外交部，好像也怪怪的，因此這一件事就是用併列的方法處理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這邊資管處的提議是說讓這一個東西變成特例，也就是在某些特定的案子才這樣處理，我們直接在要點裡面開這樣的空間，也就是如果開放政府的專責聯絡人都同意的話，這樣大家就列成「主（協）」辦。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我自己這邊看了之後，其實也覺得這邊留了一個「主（協）」的空間，這樣稍微比較好一點，就不是大家都是主辦，而大家都是「主（協）」辦。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "之後各部會的PO會有一個橫向聯繫的機制，我們會確定好比像國旅卡案，交通部的PO跟國發會的PO在任何回應之前，事實上這兩個PO要先處理過，就不會出現左邊回了，然後右邊突然回了一個完全不一樣的情況，所以希望有一個快速彼此橫向聯繫的機制。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在這一個機制建立之後，大家對於被列進去「主（協）」辦的感覺，也就是這一塊政策的餅，我們分到這一塊、你是那一塊，一開始的權責就已經相對明確，並不是通通都落在我的頭上，事實上我又不能管的情況發生。當初會想說有一個專責聯絡人儘量橫向連結就是為了解決這一個問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當初如果大家覺得還ok的話，我們是不是把它在要點裡面，原「均列為主辦」變成「均列為主（協）辦」？我們自己知道還是要在一開始分案的時候就先把各部會能夠回應權責的部分進行確立，這個部分如果當然一併公告給民眾，我覺得這個是公共行政很好的公共教育，所以本來就知道委員會在管什麼。但是如果PO討論完之後，這個部分也沒有回應，我相信是尊重各部會的PO，這樣可以嗎？" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我是附議專案辦公室在行政院層級這一層要拉進來，不過「提點子」在檢核時，不要說跨部會故意踢皮球，有時的確是提案人提案的標題跟內文是不清楚的或是兩邊有衝突，所以有時部會才也很難以回應，或者是其他部會。這不管發生在內政部的議題，或者是教育部的性霸凌或性平法，或者是文化部的「遭遇火災的文化資產及其用地，一百年不得做恢復原狀以外的用途」，可是他實質要談的並不是這一個東西，而是背後要問的，所以關鍵是在檢核的時段有沒有人可以跟提案人釐清到底他的訴求是什麼，這樣子不管接下來這一顆球是PO要接或者是政委辦公室要合力，或者是要丟回各部會去做判斷，需要「清楚」（訴求）。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "這一件事其實是「提點子」的幾次工作坊的「Join」承辦都有提出來，現在的關鍵是我們也很難苛責資管處跟負責這一個科的業務，這麼少人每個禮拜要負擔這樣的業務量，「提點子」如果真的要把品質拉高，從「提點子」的議題放進來的時候就要處理，這在檢核的時候，我覺得這一個程序如果真的要把品質拉高，這個要思考，如果政委辦公室有經費是可以支持每一個部會PO的話，那其實關鍵在「提點子」這一塊有沒有人力或經費可以處理。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我不確定是不是這一個階段要處理，但是我覺得恐怕那才會是之後跨部會能不能實質做判斷的一件很關鍵的事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "先具體事實回應，我沒有什麼經費，但是有十五個人（笑），人力上的支援應該是還ok的，這個是具體回應。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一個案子確實很特別，我剛剛看到的時候也覺得說不定非常有創意，說不定古蹟就不會燒起來了，但是這一個案子直到今天還沒有出現主責部會的少數案子，你往下捲的話，它是沒有主責部會，可是明明剩十三天就要回應了，這個是整個在「Join」平台上也很少見的例子。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然我不曉得當初協調的時候是碰到什麼樣的困難，但是我們之所以要設計PO的機制，當時的想法是可能這一個要牽涉到文化、內政，我不知道還有什麼別的，當時的想法是如果沒有特定問題的話，那就是所有可能牽涉到部會的PO，一起跟提案人釐清訴求，等到訴求釐清之後，好比像內政部突然發現沒有我的事，那就沒有我的事，但至少在一開始成案的階段，不會讓提案人一直覺得沒有主責部會，沒有主責部會就沒有回應期程，而沒有回應期程，這一個連署感覺上就是在玩假的，每一個連署案不一定要處理到好，Peggy就是如實反映就可以了，但是大家最不喜歡看到的是連署成案之後，五十九天完全什麼都沒有，然後到第六十天出了一個文情並茂的作文，可是也沒有解決我的問題，這樣就跟部長信箱（很像），但事實上是與部長信箱是不一樣的，因為部長信箱只得罪一個人，這邊是得罪七千八百五十七個人，這邊是不一樣的，也就是負面的乘數效果也是同樣地高。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "之所以要設計這一個機制的一部分原因是，希望所有可能相關的PO，即使跟他到最後沒有關係，也可以在聯絡提案人的至少這一個階段先去做實質參與，那實質參與之後，大概知道提案人在講什麼，我們才能比較明確回覆權責範圍。老師們這邊ok嗎？" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我只能說那這組PO要非常非常強喔！因為現在聽到從第一案到現在全部都在PO這邊。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是，沒有錯。至於要怎麼樣讓PO變得……現在在座已經有很多PO，讓PO培力的話，其實也要靠老師們的幫忙，我們這邊當然會全力支援。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是至少提案人不會連署通過，看別的案子都已經被聯絡、澄清等等，但是他等了五十九天，不會什麼事都沒有的狀況，這一個在交通部之前的Uber案就有一個效果，因為連署一直沒有作用，所以Uber是拿這個去連署說：「那來我們這邊連署吧！來我們這邊比較有作用。」，會產生一個議題效應上的競合，因為交通部在那一案拖了五十九天才發一份——路政司其實作文能力非常強（笑）——但是在五十九天裡面，正當性是一點點被Uber侵蝕走的，所以我們還是希望可以至少比較快讓PO們有一個期程上的回應，即使沒有實質上的回應，大概是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們先回到這一個討論案，我想前兩案大家都表達滿多的回應，我們也會回去檢討這一個要點加以修正。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第三個部分是府院之間彼此loop的狀況（笑），當然因為今天決策協調程序的朋友們沒有來，所以我們也沒有辦法把他們當作第一關係人來徵詢，所以我們想要問民國改西元年這一些，有一些是我們在未來跟立法院合作之後，我們也許可以請立法委員幫忙處理，但是有些案子立法委員也沒有想要處理，按照目前的這一個狀況，我們就會變成不處理，然後無限制迴圈狀況。如果大家有想到比這個狀況好一點的，那我們都洗耳恭聽，如果沒有在要點上進行處理的話，某些特定這一類的案子就會一直變成這樣的狀況。不知道大家有沒有什麼想法？或者是老師們有沒有什麼想法？" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "主席、各位長官及先進，我想我們自己在做檢核，也就是剛剛向各位報告三天之內要做檢核的這一個，目前心中有一個原則，類似全國性的問題，我們一時可能也沒有辦法找到相關權責機關時，跟各位報告，我們目前的方式都是先用email回給提案人，也就是您所提的這一個問題涉及到全國性的業務，跟平台上的管理辦法所訂的行政院層級是不一定一致，因此我們目前大部分的處理方式是這樣做，也就是不列入到附議範圍去，不知道這一個做法好不好，所以才放在這一個地方徵詢大家的意見。" }, { "speaker": "花敬群", "speech": "我想針對剛剛文化資產被火燒的這一件事說明。聽起來好像跟內政部有關，我也從這邊來作一些討論。" }, { "speaker": "花敬群", "speech": "有一些提案的議題，可能在解讀上，我們必須透過行政部門的經驗或專業，要跟提案人做一些溝通，也就是重新再定義一次，剛剛的議題雖然連署到一定的量了，但是我們很直覺知道的是，希望未來不應該有文化資產被放火燒掉的這一件事發生，這裡面涉及到犯罪的事情，可能連法務部都有（業管權責），不小心把法務部也牽扯進來（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "花敬群", "speech": "其實我們重新定義或者我們試圖去追溯本因，在追溯本因與溝通的過程中，我們是不是可以重新定位這一個議題，當然甚至並不是說一百年那個基地都不可以蓋，那個是懲罰的機制，就是這樣的事情，他們回歸到文化資產保護底下，應該怎麼樣去強化還在走文資過程未正式啟動前對一些資產的維護與協助，其實方向就會被定義清楚。" }, { "speaker": "花敬群", "speech": "當然這個部分確實需要瞭解或者有這方面的討論，其實不單純只是這樣的一個案子，我想任何一個議題丟進來，好像是一個清楚的題目丟到各個部會去，其實他們內部還要另外再定義的內部檢討，當然這樣的事情，其實假設議題開始變多的時候，部會主政的機制，因為我們也都知道從公務人員訓練的過程底下，比較不會以這樣的方式來思考，反正丟了什麼問題就回他這一個問題，而不是他去拆解問題的組成成份，然後再去把它組裝成一個具操作性的另外一個議題。" }, { "speaker": "花敬群", "speech": "最近好像說院長有一個專訪，對方提了一些問題，那一些問題非常呆板，是一對一的，而我們的單位給院長的回應稿就是一對一的問與答，站在行政院院長的高度，怎麼可能如此枝微末節地在回問題，所以重新定義人家的問題來組裝比較高位階的（議題），這背後涉及到的是我們在處理這一件事底下的經驗，或者是處理的人如何往下交辦，將來議題到比較高位階的人來做這一個決定，他可以做這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "花敬群", "speech": "但是我在說各部會銜接這一件事，像國發會在銜接這樣的議題底下，我們也可能要加入這樣的機制，也就是再定義問題，當然再定義可能也會誤解人家的本意，所以我們再定義的過程，其實剛才我覺得衛福部的報告就非常精彩，他會跟對方溝通，當然會經過非常長的冗長程序，終於把他的問題解構成五個次問題，當然我們也不可能每一個問題都這樣搞，所以在第一時間判斷力必須要非常夠。" }, { "speaker": "花敬群", "speech": "可能國發會在拿到這些，每半個月把這一些議題蒐集來之後，或許開一個腦力激盪的會議，大家一起把這一些議題定義完之後再做一次處理，這樣的話，大家往下的follow會比較省功夫，也就是會比較精確命中要害，否則其實接到問題就丟下去，從國發會轉或是往唐政委轉下一個問題，但又不敢不處理，所以耗費一些沒有必要的資源與精力。如果已經很清楚要怎麼走就往下，真的有出現剛剛那一些議題的話，我建議可能會有一些上層的溝通會比較好，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非常感謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "整理一下，確實我們會發現這裡面有一個公共教育的過程，也就是大部分的人提到想要看到的結果，可是看到按照某個人的權能分立理論，他想像中開到那邊的路並不一定是最快的或者是最好的路徑，這個是事務官的專業來協助判斷。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "問題是我們看他提案好比寫了五百字，你也不知道這五百字後面的真意是什麼，所以會希望用email或者是電話，最好是面對面跟提案人、未來可能連署人裡面提供比較好意見的人一起開會，可是問題開了這一個會只能確定他想要看到什麼，仍然沒有辦法確定拆成部會具體可操作政策爭議點是什麼，所以這一個工作確實是之前國發會會辦一個工作坊，也就是請那一期所有提點子裡面比較整理的來，大家集思廣益。我們未來也會請青年諮詢委員們做一些努力，一起幫我們想這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然到最後政策可行性的判斷，很多就像次長所說的，我們還是要回到政務跟事務兩邊來判斷這一件事，這個是免不了的，現在是從民眾的角度來看，並沒有希望每一案都處理到Peggy那個細的程度，通常覺得在綜整回應的時候，竟然已經有幫我想到我的需求，而且已經做了一些分析，我們要看alternative，他的alternative是陳請、上街、找民代等等，我們只要做的比這一些別的管道還要好，而且能夠節省這一些管道金錢、人力，因為同樣的問題不用重複提好幾次，那其實就已經有一個階段性的improvement。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們當然理想上希望每一個都做到非常好，但是這個是要按照一案案大家慢慢來培養這一個能力，所以我們目前雖然被很多朋友說是低標準，但是我會覺得至少比目前現有的部長信箱其他的這一些管道的品質好的話，其實慢慢就會越來越好，這個是具體回應。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然我相信未來國發會還是會辦工作坊，還是會請外界的專家跟專業的事務官做這一個工作。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其他這三個還有沒有想要討論的？如果沒有的話，其實目前國發會這一個mail回應自己不符，然後不進入附議，當然會造成不滿，但是如果有敘明理由的話，這一個沒有包括的，理由也沒有公開。不公開的原因是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "主要是某個個人提，所以還是屬於一對一，還沒有進入到附議的程度。（註：後來確認，其實有公開。）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我的意思是，不免會有因為沒有過這一個程序，所以後來就提另一案？我的意思是說，如果不公開會有這樣的結果，當時的考量是？請確認一下。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我覺得花次長抓問題相當精準，但是那恐怕不是到末端「眾開講」辦工作坊，然後上架題目了，恐怕也不是「提點子」的很後端，應該是要在前端要處理，所以很難只是從現在既有工作坊插入，除非現在既有工作坊的時程要往前拉，如果這個在既有框架下的工作坊，處理不到一開始重新定義問題的階段，這個要請主席思考一下相關配套的問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這裡就有一個脈絡了，我們還是解釋一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為之前工作坊是固定每一個月舉辦，但是我們知道連署處理的期程是六十天——當然可以延期——所以剛剛呂老師的意思是有一些比較不幸即月初成案的案子，沒有辦法在三天前核過，七天就要聯繫提案人的時程裡面完成工作坊的輔導，如果剛好是在工作坊前一個禮拜成案也許還可以，但是如果是前三個禮拜還成案的話，其實從提案人的角度來看，那個時間其實已經過了滿久的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "目前具體處理方式其實是會請那一案感覺上相關的PO先就期程回應這一個部分，我們先自己開一個會，也就是這一個跟工作坊是脫鉤的，至少先確定期程處理，從各個部會PO角度來看爭點可能有哪一些，這個東西還不一定要給提案人看，我們自己先知道。但是從那一個點到工作坊，確實有可能工作坊因此變成半個月需要一次或者是按照特定的案子需要來開，我相信只要在國發會人力可以支援的程度上，我們看到這一種，其實必須在一、兩個禮拜之內處理案子，我們這邊至少人力上的支援是沒有問題的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是一般通案的話，我相信每一個PO大概累積三、四案的經驗之後，至少在處理聯繫提案人爭點整理的這一步，也就是七至十天要做的這一個部分應該是能夠獨立作業，我的期待是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果還ok的話，第三案看起來好像沒有人要給國發會具體的建議（笑），所以如果沒有的話，那就暫時維持這樣的狀況，如果大家有會後想到其他的意見再跟我們說。我們進入到第三個討論案，請說。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "（簡報第33頁、第34頁）「三、成案處理程序及附議未成案議題處理方式」，剛剛大家都有聽到衛福部的報告，依照「公共政策網路參與實施要點」實際上的規定是對於相同或者是類似議題的成案，主辦權責機關得併案處理。另外，主辦機關對於成案之提議，應研擬具體回應，聯繫提議者瞭解提議訴求，並得召開研商會議，邀請提議者列席說明。另外，正式回應說明得以召開記者會、公開新聞稿或其他得使公眾週知之方式，就提議內容說明參採情形及其理由（納入研議、同意參採或部分參採、不予採納等）。另外，對於成案的期間不超過二個月。另外未成案之提議，視需要進行回應。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "（簡報第35頁）我們建議的標準程序是成案後七日先公告目前對整個案子處理的規劃與時程，成案後十日內要邀請提案者來釐清訴求，會後希望有公告會議紀錄及逐字稿，讓大家瞭解整個會議的過程。承辦後兩個月內應該由主辦機關統一正式回應。回應的說明裡面，像剛剛的說明，應該要具體回應說明。另外一個成案的處理期間，事實上以不超過二個月為處理原則。若未能於二個月內回覆，應該要敘明公告原因，但以延長二個月為限。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "（簡報第36頁）這個是整個標準的流程圖示，在處理回應的時候還有進入附議時，併案來處理這一件事。第七天公告處理流程，第十天以前要聯繫提議者（釐清訴求），在六十天期間要召開研商會，在過程中有召開到實體會議，如果有需要網路討論的話，可以到「眾開講」徵詢相關的意見。整個過程的回應就如剛剛所講的，以上報告。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實就是把之前Peggy做的簡易版常規化，而常規化的脈絡上，我們一直說七至十天，但是這邊具體講是七天跟十天要分別做這兩件事，但是如果中間有開研商會議或者是任何額外資料要公布的話，其實本來就是在「提點子」的界面就可以公布。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外想要講的是，就像Peggy所說的，並不是每一案到最後六十天的具體回應我們就要頒布什麼政策，有時我們的政策期程不可能在那時就到那個地步，但是至少大家可以說的是「提點子」進來的，我們已經釐清過變成五個或者是七個的具體建議或爭點，哪一些部分我們有參採、哪一些部分沒有參採，有不同的回應也就是大家願意看到的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "甚至還有一些覺得額外討論，我們也可以進入「眾開講」，這一次就是由部會自己寫議題了，相信經過六十天的研議之後，會寫得比提案人更專業，變成大家可以就後續還沒有釐清的爭點來進行討論，以上是國發會的規劃。尤其要執行這一個的PO或者部會們，有沒有什麼想法？" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "主席，下一頁還有一個討論。（簡報第37頁）討論這一個程序是否妥適，另外如果兩天內沒有辦法回覆的話，是不是延長期限以兩個月為限？目前民眾提議時，如果未成案，實際上依照實施要點是權責機關為事實的回應，目前大概是重要的機關作回應的作業。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "另外，我們過去想要參考各部會或者是中央其他機關對於語音信箱滿意度的調查回溯的機制，我們對於成案的提議者在一週或兩週後，針對曾經參與附議者對於政府機關參與的滿意度調查，這個請各位提供意見。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "另外，在提議的過程中，有少部分的議題透過廣告，因為有一個利害關係，所以透過廣告去推播特定議題的成案處理方式，以上。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "具體的Uber就有用他的App，也就是讓大家來連署，這個是用過的，抽獎也是用過的，其他動員方式，當然連黨主席都來提案了（笑），所以其實我們可以想像到各種各樣的動員方式。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "意思是我們如果知道五千人裡面三千人有領錢，我們就不算他附議，是這個意思嗎？" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "一般附議還是透過推播，只是透過政府講的抽獎方式，是不是有點類似賄選，因為一般在公眾的民意議題裡面，關注的人才會來碰觸議題，另外是透過機制去處理的，特定查明這一件事的話（才做），或者是政府機關在回應的時候要敘明這一個東西？因為這個比較敏感，團體有一些能力可以透過這樣的方式去作推播，讓他的案子可以早一點成案。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實。我是沒有想到這樣，像Airbnb當時也是用推播的方式，讓所有的會員都來，但是其實所有的會員朋友來之後，我們有做調查，其實只有1/3的人同意他的立場，這個也是他們沒有料到的，當然到最後是會有動員幾千人來進入新媒體平台跟我們溝通，然後收到我們的意見，但是也不表示他們都是鐵板一塊，這個也是要敘明的，並不是要影響大家判斷的意思，只是說之前實際處理的看法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有五個要討論的，整個程序就是這一張簡報（簡報第37頁）的程序，如果二個月之內沒有辦法回覆，不管機關還在忙別的，或者是機關真的要認真處理要更多的時間，就是以敘明原因，等於把第一次敘明的原因當作暫時的回覆，但是可以說過二個月再做一個真正的回覆，也就是有一個「加2」的情況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在附議未成案的提議時，目前因為機關可能有成案忙不過來了，所以未成案還沒有回應它，這一件事就是請大家評估。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實「提點子」剛上線時，第一個連署是我發起的，也就是希望「Join」平台用機器可讀的方式下載連署人名單。雖然沒有成案，但當時國發會有回應我。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "接下來也想聽大家對滿意度調查的想法，大概就是這幾個。" }, { "speaker": "蘇俊榮", "speech": "有關於辦理時程的部分，我們在成案七天內有公告處理流程，成案後十天內要聯繫相關提議者去瞭解其訴求。考量這兩個時間點的作業期程只有三天，時程上對機關來講會有點趕，是不是建議說時程上譬如可以修正為「七天之後，成案十四天內跟聯繫提議者召開相關的釐清會議」，這是第一點意見。" }, { "speaker": "蘇俊榮", "speech": "第二，對於附議未成案的提議回應方式部分，我們還是建議可以回歸到我們現行實施要點規定，也就是由權責機關視需要來作事實回應。" }, { "speaker": "蘇俊榮", "speech": "有關於滿意度調查，假設要做滿意度調查的話，是不是由國發會統籌去做平台處理？這個我們也覺得ok。" }, { "speaker": "蘇俊榮", "speech": "至於透過廣告抽獎這一個部分的話，因為光看這樣的文字，其實不是很瞭解，一種是機關發文的，另外一種是對於提案者假設要讓這一個提案成案的話，透過廣告抽獎去動員讓這個提案達到附議門檻，我們老闆特別有提到，會不會跟原來網路參與的利益者相衝突，這個部分我們比較建議用這一個方式，以上說明。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實。因為之前各部會也有說透過廣告抽獎來宣傳「Join」平台，這個也是有發生過，大家說了「Join」平台要不要附議，我覺得最後還是看大家，大部分的動員其實最後只能把它帶到提議的那一頁，至於要不要按下來或者怎麼樣，其實也沒有辦法最後逼著他做什麼。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個東西的神聖性是我們賦予他的，我們如果只是把它當作是有五千個人以上的利益關係人願意進行溝通，而不是直接賦予他政策太大的拘束力或制定權的話，這個東西就跟投票其實不太有關係，比較是前期屬於政策議程設定權，而議程設定權就沒有那麼神聖，因為所有的利益團體都在做這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果我們要明文以廣告抽獎這一頁的話，請按此檢舉（笑），這個是另外一個方式，也就是我們要完全排除掉這樣的動員，我自己是沒有特定意見，只是想聽聽大家的看法。" }, { "speaker": "顏久榮", "speech": "對於這一個流程，有涉及到期間比較短的，建議用工作日來表示，就像七天、十天，我們會建議是工作日，以上，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "具體的建議是好比五個工作日或六個工作日或十個工作日的意思嗎？" }, { "speaker": "顏久榮", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "我很怕我成為千古罪人，所以我確認一下這一段的建議是標準成案處理程序，應該是「建議」，不是「強制」吧？因為我說現在寫的這一個狀態大概是前一、兩案這樣做，但是很多我們後面也很困難，尤其是我們跨部會或者是自己部內跨單位的，如果我們要跑會文，又以跨單位，然後再跑到正規，又要再走到流程內走的話，我們自己也沒有辦法達到這一個日數。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "包含像十日內我們並不是真的把會開完，真的來不及，會議紀錄還要出來，幾乎是一種不可能的任務，所以兩個部分：第一，目前的寫法可能可以再更鬆一點。第二，這應該還是建議的性質。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "我這邊順帶提一下有提到做滿意度調查的部分，因為我們有很多案子都需要做滿意度調查，問是否滿意一至五分，我不確定現在有沒有哪一個單位做的，是由國發會做或部會做？但是無論如何務必拜託，絕對不是一個你是否滿意最後回應的結果一至五分的選項。一定會是更重要包含跟部會之間的回應過程之互動，還有對於程序上的處理等等，一定要這樣的面向，而不是用傳統滿意或不滿意這一種打分數的方式，我覺得可以看出真正的效果。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "具體綜整一下，Peggy的意思是我們要有更多的signal，並不只是一至五分的方式，因為只有一至五分，我們也不知道要如何調整。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個，我們以工作日來做好了，Peggy的意思是公共處理流程也需要這麼久，你指的主要是聯繫提議者？" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "我覺得都有很多不確定性，每一個案子只要是跨部會的時候，光是寫未來會變PO，但是我們還不確知PO協調的狀況，所以我覺得這邊日數都可以寫的，但是最重要的是大家要認知到這個是建議的日數，不要把它寫死，變成是大家一定要照做，因為我們自己也做不到。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "理解，我們這邊寫的建議，當然目的是希望提案人心裡可以有一個底，也就是以後儘量不要有到第五十九天才出現期程，而那個期程是第六十天要回應的情況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然在五十九天跟七天中間，我覺得我們可以找到一個折衷，我們可不可以就是說他的建議性是如果你碰到特別困難的，我們可以不用那麼快處理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是我滿care的希望能夠在五個可能最多七個工作日，至少第一步讓大家知道接下來什麼時候再回來這一個網站看，不然就會一直回來刷網站，然後沒有看到任何回應，然後就去別的地方吐口水，就是這個平台事後要建立公信力是比較困難的，這個建立期程我覺得是很需要的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "聯繫提議者跟公告會議資料這兩步其實按照Peggy的說法其實是可以拆開來處理的，可以先用email或者是先用電話聯繫，聯繫之後可能要滿久的時間，也許要等提案人有空等等，才能蒐集到有效的資料，這個時候可能已經十五天或者是二十天過去了，這個部分就是按照實際的狀況來回應。好比在十四天或五十天的時候說我們已經在聯絡聯繫人，但是沒有約到十天等等，其實大家苛責並不是要馬上看到結果，而是知道沒有在做事，如果以這一個為原則的話，不知道Peggy？" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "上述都同意，我還是提醒一下，我們十日內是一定可以完成聯繫，不管是打電話或什麼，但有時為了配大家的時間，有時可能會議開到一個月後，這個是有很可能的。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "另外，我知道今天有很多PO，我這邊有一個很重要要跟大家分享的是，成案後七天內，要把公告放出來，要照著行政流程走也很長，所以我們親自要拜託長官才改得出來的，因此這一個部分我們目前部內處理是如果有案子快要成案之前，我們其實就會先追蹤，先跟業務單位開會，請他們可以先把文字，如果變成工作天會更好，但是七天內老實說也滿硬撐的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "綜合剛剛兩、三位的意見，我們寫成七個工作日跟十四工作日，可以這樣講嗎？仍然是以這一個為原則，碰到例外就例外了。" }, { "speaker": "顏久榮", "speech": "謝謝主席，是不是可以把相關的字改變，「應」少寫一點（笑），以「建議」為主，後面很多文字都是「應」，應該是鼓勵各部會才對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我其實care的只有一開始的回應期程。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果到最後機關發現沒有辦法按照回應期程來做，其實應該是在七個工作天之後就告訴提案人說，因為某個原因，所以要四十五天後才能跟您討論這一個案子，我覺得這樣講清楚大家是可以接受的。但是不應該到第四十四天才來處理這一個案子，所以我一開始對於期程應該是「應」，其他的東西我覺得把它弱化是沒有問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家還有沒有什麼想法或意見？我iPad沒電了，可能要跟處長借（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "林子倫", "speech": "針對剛剛提到的透過廣告，我不知道這樣的原則是會公開寫還是會內部處理？基本上我比較支持的是，如果只要能成案，行政機關不要再檢討，我也可以理解這一個廣告等等，但是如果增加太多行政成本，因為基本上後面還有其他很多的檢核程序及議案，我覺得只要提進來，還有很多方式（處理），如果每一個都要檢查上面是不是有廣告，其實也會耗費很多的成本，比如什麼叫做「廣告」？這個也會有很多成本，這個是不是會訴諸文字？當然我也很擔心效果，如果真的訴諸在外面，就一篇廣告進來？或者這個只是內部處理程序？如果是內部處理程序，我基本上是支持比較開放來處理，以上。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "我們針對兩個部分來補充說明，剛剛有提到滿意度調查，應該是由國發會針對民眾對於各機關處理的問題是否滿意，我個人的想法認為其實滿意度調查也許可以分成兩個部分來處理，一個是比較簡單的滿意度調查，也就是剛剛Peggy比較不太贊成的一至五分，對民眾來講打分數比較簡單，可以很簡單做一些是否滿意的回應。但是前提先講，這個是在我們內部參考，並不會說在每一個題目上分別呈現滿意度是幾分。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "另外一個，我認為可以做深度的滿意度調查，這一個部分就如Peggy剛剛所提到的再做進一步拆解，也就是哪一些部分的滿意怎麼樣，在座有滿多的老師，我相信很多老師對這一個題目也滿有興趣的，我們到時候可以再廣徵大家對深度滿意度調查的相關研究，我覺得這個可以拆成兩個項目來看。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "在廣告的部分，其實那個最主要像剛剛主席也提到的，有一些議題拋出來的時候，尤其是提點子拋出來的時候，它是有一些特定的團體，這些特定的團體可能用一些各種的方式，我覺得怎麼樣算是廣告、怎麼樣不算是廣告，這的確在判斷上會有一些難度，所以在現階段，是不是針對因為廣告而造成議題超過五千人而成案，要做怎麼樣的處理，如果經過判斷是因為廣告而造成他變成五千人以上的提案，要求他撤案或不准怎麼樣之規定，我目前認為訂這個規定是有一點困難，因此我個人並不認為現階段因廣告而使案子得以成立。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "綜整一下，滿意度的調查，基本上一開始一定是國發會這邊來做，也同意只調查一至五分比較侷限，其實這一個資料，也就是到底有多少人連署跟留言，這個其實是可以下載的，所以老師們如果要做研究，未來可以跟國發會合作，去做更進一步的分析或質化的研究，相信是一個很好的方向。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想要講的是，廣告其實很難定義。這一件事最簡單的做法是我們盡可能讓廣告來的時候，給他多一點的選項，好比像對這一個附議制並不是很滿意的話，也給他表達反對意見或者是不同意見的方法，儘量讓動員來的人不只是算成人頭，這樣的情況之下，不宜一下子就禁止廣告這一件事，不然這個平台的人氣其實也需要廣告來的（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "朱斌妤", "speech": "對於剛才講的這一個流程，我只是想要確認一下，這只是內部建議的流程，並不會對民眾公開，如果會對民眾公開的話，可能各單位壓力會顯得非常大。" }, { "speaker": "朱斌妤", "speech": "第二，對於問卷的這一個部分，相關所謂首長信箱或者是民意網路上的反映，在結束時做滿意度調查，其實這一個研究已經非常久了，我想也有一定的相關機制，但是相對來說，這一個「Join」如果針對附議者做評估調查，其實相對量一定會大，後面會有研究人民的問題，也就是把名單公開，等於學校老師要下載這一些名單去發問卷，民眾其實會挑戰政府，也就是從哪裡拿到這樣的名單。所以現階段我覺得滿好的，但是可能也要建議國發會，在滿意度調查的量跟質中間，可能要做到一個比較好的平衡，不管是國發會自己做，短時間想要趕快知道民眾對「Join」平台的看法跟中長程也許在一年內要做這樣的事，可能需要做比較詳細的規劃。" }, { "speaker": "朱斌妤", "speech": "第三，有關於廣告這一件事，我也建議不要增加大家行政上的困擾，所以如果現在的狀況沒有造成很大的困擾，我覺得不需要做這一些積極的處理，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然這邊在隱私保護上，本來就是除非公務機關或學術研究經過處理或蒐集者依其揭露方式，無從識別特定當事人者為限，絕對不會把PII（個人識別資訊）直接交給第三方的人員，這個是沒有問題的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我剛剛說如果老師想要跟國發會合作的話，就是幫忙設計一些問卷，我知道之前「眾開講」跟整個平台，都很感謝老師們有幫忙設計過問卷。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外，廣告的部分如果大家沒有任何別的意見，我們就不處理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "最後一件事，這一個處理原則雖然不會在網站上公告；但是我們剛才的討論，除非我們把某些逐字稿刪掉，不然其實是公開的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也就是說，我們討論的過程不可能不公開，但是大家也可能可以聽到，也和正在看逐字稿的大家講，我們剛剛講的都是建議的一個處理程序。其實我們也理解各部會還在學習的過程裡面，不可能每一案都處理到做好做滿的程度，在這樣的情況之下，也希望大家多一些耐心，但是慢慢我相信大家都有能力可以建立起來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果沒有問題的話，就下一案。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "（簡報第38頁、第39頁）「四、有關跨機關成案提議之處理方式」，我們大概有提了三個案子，第一個是博愛座的討論，當時博愛座有開協調會協調過，交通部與衛福部當主協辦，一開始交通部的次長直接接受媒體訪問時回應，所以當初在做協調的時候，是在執行面，所以請交通部當主辦。但是實際上交通部在公告時是一個簡單的說明，也就是延續性的既有政策在執行，交通部回應：「交通部已請身心障礙者權益保障法之中央主管機關衛生福利部參考評估，後續本部將配合衛生福利部之檢討結果，再行續處。」" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "現在最大的問題是交通部公告這一個說明的時候，衛福部完全不知道，因為是蘋果日報這邊有刊登，實際上是說後續由衛福部這邊會做一些細部的處理。本案衛福部在今年11月18日再邀請交通部、地方政府，以及民間利害討論，目前決議還是維持現狀，我們在討論這一個議題是要瞭解跟說明政府機關在回應的過程裡面，不管是主辦或者是協辦，在各部會的時候不能單方面處理這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "下一案是在講「推動便利超商保障疏/素食熟食品供應比例規範」，這也涉及到經濟部、衛福部跟農委會，這一個案子成案的時候，原則上希望經濟部主辦，但一直對於承接主辦有意見，縱使有經過協調會後，經濟部還特別表達對於這一個意見，因為後來回應期程已經滿趕了，所以國發會在11月15日就直接跳進去說，為了主協辦協調回應這一件事比較不妥，因此國發會進去調解，向三個部會的提案說明。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "實際上提案者釐清跟文稿裡面寫的是相對清楚，因為實際上訴求是希望到超商能夠提供更好的蔬食環境，但是跟文稿裡面的要求實際上差滿多的。因為這個禮拜是綜整回應，因為有詢問四大超商，而四大超商有善意回應，萊爾富裡面還要再同意5％的比例，實際上也在關注相關的議題，至少目前來講很滿意的，因為我們本來就是邀請提案人跟四大超商當面說明，提案者認為目前已經可以滿足他當初提案的目的，目前國發會還是會續辦。這一個議題主要是突顯在各部會主協辦機關的議題操作如何處理。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "（簡報第40頁）另外一個案子實際上是在講反對國家公園的處理方式，這一個案子負評多於正評，因為整個回應的過程中，可以看外界的報導，實際上目前的回應裡面，因為主要是涉及到中央跟地方，剛好時代力量也在立法院提了一個，因為這一個案子會吃案，但是在回應的過程中我們只處理中央，但地方政府報上來相關的議題，到底有無要處理、協調，實際上一直沒有正面的回應，所以負評比較多。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "（簡報第41頁）我們討論的議題當中，第一案中前面有提到涉及多部會權責機關的部分，可能還是回歸到我們目前的規定。但是目前有一個議題是涉及跨縣市的業務，也就是中央是屬於政策指導機關，跨縣市是否應該還是由主管機關出來協調跟綜整回應，以上報告。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝，所以剛剛用具體的案例來說明其實這三個有一點重疊，大概意思是不管我們跨機關處理之前協調有多困難，其實實際跟提案聯絡人聯絡之後，就沒有那麼困難。反而是我們在跨機關協調的過程裡面花了非常大的力氣，這是一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外，登山活動安全比較不一樣，因為我們本來跨機關協調機制裡面沒有處理到關於地方政府的部分，所以我們自己說沒有要處理地方政府部分的話，對提案人來講，因為政府是一體的，並不會特別管你是中央機關或者是地方政府，所以會跟提案人的期待造成落差，這兩件事不曉得大家有沒有什麼看法？" }, { "speaker": "劉明勳", "speech": "第二次發言，剛剛又提到與衛福部很大的關係，我必須要再回應一下。" }, { "speaker": "劉明勳", "speech": "不管在「主（協）」辦機關，其實每一個部會都會儘量推（笑），所以剛剛講「主（協）」辦的釐清，甚至跟逾期的釐清都不相關，剛剛主席也有講其實很多是在把這一些問題釐清，那麼就可能沒有那麼重要的問題，甚至好像彼此各部會的將來聯繫上都會有一些更進步的聯繫。" }, { "speaker": "劉明勳", "speech": "我想可能在溝通的管道或者是聯繫的方式能夠回答清楚一點，除讓大家能夠遵循，也把這一個問題減少。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "跨部會聯絡的PO，不只是一個聊天室而已，而是有一個很明確類似試算表這樣的系統，大家可以知道每一個議題目前到哪裡，大概可能牽涉的「主（協）」辦有哪一些，相關的權責自己填上去，也就是要有一個流程，而這一個流程我們辦公室有人會來規劃，這個沒有問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "還有什麼其他想要討論的？這裡面其實也牽涉到「協調」的意思是要實際去聯絡每一個縣市主管的局處，如果民眾有這一個期待的話，我們要做到多少？我相信每一個部會PO寫一封信或者是打個電話給地方縣市說我們為了要回應七千個民眾，我相信地方應該不會不理他，所以現在的重點只是要不要當作工作的一部分而已。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家都沒有意見？如果都沒有意見的話，我把它詮釋成case by case，沒有辦法只以一個個案來判斷的意思，但是至少我們可以做到的是如果很明確跟地方縣市加以聯繫的話，我們除非有很好的理由告訴提案人，比如去聯絡提案人，而提案人也不會怪罪的很好理由，不然的話，至少先去作聯繫的這一個動作是可以做的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "至於可以協調到什麼程度，我覺得自己要看個案來判斷，很難一定可以協調到什麼就協調到什麼程度，但是至少著手去做這一件事是可以做的，但是在要點裡面不需要規範到太誇張的程度，就是他可以這樣子處理，這樣就可以了。可以嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果都沒有意見的話，就下一個討論案。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "（簡報第42頁、第43頁）「五、再次提議處理原則討論」針對同一事項的提議，因為前一案已經成案，但是機關還沒有回應的時候，不進入附議程序。另外，對於機關" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，以目前的規定大家有沒有覺得需要修改？不然就這樣。" }, { "speaker": "楊世華", "speech": "考慮事項判斷，也許表達的跟上次稍微有差距，或許十之八九一樣，而這一個誰來判斷？判斷以後誰來通知？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，我們舉實例，好比目前已經連署八千人的國旅卡不應該圖利旅行社，如果又來一個國旅卡不應該圖利旅遊業，這兩個不一定百分之百一樣，但是九成五一樣，這個目前是國發會會判斷，而國發會會判斷的原則，在你回覆提案人的時候，這個也是一對一的，還是會公開？" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "除了排除的六個要點，如果涉及到攻擊人或會影響到善良風俗及其他，那麼回應都會公開的，剛剛有提好幾個案例。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "理解。接下來「當我們政策已經決定的時候，是不是可以以這一個為理由，把還沒有回應的附議案撤案」，希望在會議上面提請討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這兩個是有關係的，所以我們直接放在這一個討論事項裡面來討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "具體來說，有人在「Join」提說國旅卡不應該圖利旅行業廠商。跟這個相關的政策，先不管圖利與否，已經由院會核定，是不是就不用回應提案人了？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們要知道，如果不去回應提案人的話，會有很有趣的乘數效果發生。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "只是這並不是個案，而是通案。如果院的政策在提案的過程中，假設Peggy那一案如果連署，但是還沒有具體回應的時候，人體試驗管理辦法就已經修正通過了。這樣子的話，是不是這一案就不連署？是不是應該要撤掉？可以請Peggy回應嗎？" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "我不能下決策，但是我剛好可以給一個類似的案例，其實我們最近有一案是電子菸，這個是本來本部就有做一些政策上可能想要做下一步的調整，剛好在這一個時間點同步有電子菸的團體來做連署提案，所以等於有兩個軸線，本來一個是本部討論的軸線，本來差不多要到決策那一個點，同時又有電子菸的連署案，然後又是一個新的提案，我覺得這個會回歸到自己部內對於政策的討論，也就是這一個政策可變動性是否真的因為連署案有所調整。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "以這一案的判斷是，我們並不會因為這一個連署案而有調整，這是很確定的。所以我們當時有給的一個建議是：千萬不要還在連署還沒有回應的時候，就先對外發布那一個本來要做的政策調整決定，這個時程上可以做一些調整，不然就是把這一案回應完，然後開始做政策調整宣布，要不然就是我們等到六十天走完之後再做回應，所以時程上的確要做一些搭配。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以綜整Peggy的意見，大概的意思是畢竟就是六十天，所以連署到好比像四十天或者是五十天的時候，我們正要核定一個案子了，Peggy的意見是說寧可等這十天過去，你回應他，然後再來核定這一個案子，不然會造成現在國旅卡的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "更直白是說，國旅卡決定權的這一位長官或者他的業務單位，應該要實際掌握有提案的這一件事，然後兩邊的進度要彼此去作協調。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這邊的意思是說，我們並不是因為政策頒布，所以回來撤這一個案。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "最好的情況下是因為有這一個案，所以政策頒布的期程做一些協調，但是即使是這一件事做不到，應該是當作政策頒布先後另外多一個溝通管道，可以這樣講嗎？" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "可以。我覺得最好的方式，是讓這一個提議真的影響政策，兩件事應該是合在一起。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "理解。以國旅卡的政策，其實也並不是完全沒有影響的空間，雖然看起來試辦一年的這件事不一定能夠完全取消。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是我自己是覺得不管空間有多少，去撤掉一個已經八千人連署的案子，而沒有給很好說明的話，我看不出對政策的益處在哪裡。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不過說不定有？在場的先進可以提醒我（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果沒有額外意見的話，我們可能就是以Peggy的看法為參考：" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "1. 政策的公布期程先參考連署上面的期程，要的話就是連署先回應完，我們再公布；" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "2. 不然至少在公布的時候，要考慮到連署的主要訴求，在公布政策的時候一併正式回應連署；" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "3. 而最壞的情況之下你先公布了，至少你可以回過頭來，去跟連署的人作詳細的說明，而不是不用說明。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是不是大概這三層？" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其他關於這一個重複性的提案，目前是以國發會來作判斷，如果國發會判斷它其實是不一樣的提案，部會目前不能說不，對不對？我們是不是就是要處理？" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "是可以。其實是有兩個程序，第一個是國發會先判斷這一個提案跟之前有沒有類似，所以這個責任並不是由各部會去處理，國發會這邊會做相對應的回應，但是如果國發會認為這一個案子所提的內容跟之前是有不太一樣地方的時候，我們會pass到各部會，各部會這時依然可以回應國發會說這一個案子在之前某一個案子上曾經討論過，所以可以建議不要把它列進去，這個是有兩個層次。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們再釐清一下，也就是連署案不需要過門檻的時候，國發會跟部會就都可以獨立做這一個判斷，只要任何一邊做了判斷，它的連署就停了，是這個意思嗎？" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "如果一個案子目前附議中，再提一個類似的案子，我們會建議民眾併案。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，就併案。像酒駕、性平、同志婚姻的十一個案都有看到過，我們還是往併案的角度去處理，只是如果國發會一時之間沒有做併案要求的話，部會也還是可以做併案的要求，我只是要確認這一個？" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "沒有辦法做併案，因為我們目前就直接進去附議，只是承辦人回應可以併案處理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "瞭解，這樣有聽懂。所以附議完成了，但是部會可以選擇說在回應期程的那一個點上說我對這一個回應期程是到隔壁版回應，這個是國發會可以接受的一個狀況。這樣應該講得滿清楚了，不知道各部會操作上有什麼意見？如果沒有的話，竟然已經十二點二十一分了。下一案。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "（簡報第44頁、第45頁）「六、『公共政策網路參與實施要點』修訂討論」，目前這個實施要點要十九點，目前這一次有修訂到八點，剛才討論的跟報告的部分在上面，各位如果會後有相關的意見請告訴我們，我們希望依照法規命令的時序，我們大概這禮拜可能會公告六十天，各機關有意見請提出。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不一定在這一個會議上面提，也可以用書面的方式繼續提出。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "然後這一個要點本身也會放在「眾開講」上面討論六十天，所以在這六十天是對任何要點的字樣或某些地方——「應」寫太多，應該改「得」——不管跟國發會聯絡或者直接在平台上討論，六十天結束之後，要點才會真正進行修改，是這樣沒有問題吧？" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "最後有沒有不在議程上，而大家想要討論的？Peggy。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "不好意思，我這邊還是想要確認一下，今天第一個討論案，我只是想要確認一下現在的結論是新傳處提供輿情給國發會，國發會寄給各部會的PO，各部會的PO再回信給國發會寫說要不要上，是這樣嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "最後那一步變成是我們自己在PO裡面討論，國發會的PO也是在PO群組裡面，如果要上的話，當然要附上資料，但是不上的話，我記得當時講的是以中間的討論過程直接當結果了，不再寫書面的理由。" }, { "speaker": "羅佩琪", "speech": "這樣我瞭解流程，我只是想要確認一下保留一些彈性，舉例來說，我覺得PO的機制最關鍵的核心是要讓公關的訊息、綜規的訊息、資訊的訊息在同一個PO的身上，他可以看到整個部會的全貌，還有包含部分的業務，這個設計是好的，但是PO跟真正單位的窗口去收信跟回信，我覺得這兩件事不一定這兩件事是在PO身上，所以是不是可以保留一些彈性？比如訊息知會PO的時候，可以例如加幾個email在裡面之保留空間？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我相信應該是要copy到PO，而不是只能copy到PO，我們在之前發通知的時候，其實是有一個複數型，也就是PO一定會被copy到，但是不表示只copy到他；另外一個，PO可以說對於這一個個案，跟這一個個案所有相關的，比如可能覺得哪一個人更適合，所以這案那一個就變成PO了，或者這一案還是要involve，但是一定還要copy另外一個人，也就是針對這一案在那個部會會是兩、三個PO的情況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是我還想要講的是，當然PO也可以說通過來講，只要到我的就一定要copy誰，也就是對於通案，這個部會裡面維持兩、三個PO，一定copy到的情況，我相信這個都沒有問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為我們整個設計的目的，只是要在跨部會討論的時候，不會有像剛剛我們要幫不在場的資安處進行討論的情況（笑）——至少先確定各部會都有人在那個群組裡，當然不限於一個。這個是具體回應。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "還有沒有其他不在議程裡想要討論的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果沒有的話，非常非常感謝大家，今天討論了這麼久，謝謝。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝阿峰幫忙約。剛剛阿峰有提到交接的事情，我們知道這次新舊內閣交接是非常好的案例，有四個月的交接期，有把每個部會做到的事公布在網路上，請新的執政團隊下載，交給全民，所以我雖然晚了執政團隊很多人進來，但是我可以透過這一個過程知道每個部會在做的事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "知道要入閣之後，在實際上任之前，我有先跟蔡玉玲律師、張善政老師、吳政忠老師及張景森老師請教，很感謝老師們的提點。我會接這件工作是在立法院的時候，有委員問院長說數位政委有交接，但社企政委要交接給誰？因而院長希望我來做這一件事，從當時就已經知道會和馮老師有這樣的對談。我之前從青顧那裡也知道在做什麼、做到哪裡，對於青諮的業務是有整理了。今天主要想知道的是社企的「未來式」，也就是本來期許部會做的或者是做到一半，這些是只有在老師腦裡的，請老師不要客氣。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "在我腦裡的東西很多，但是現在大部分有部會文獻或者是像社企行動方案裡面都有記載 。如果說我們今天的重點談社企的話，我想過去式未來式都想談一談。我要承認當時進入行政院推的一些政策裡面，社企是我最鍾愛的一個，因為真的是無中生有的，不像其他法案或方案是將原來的政策作演變、改善。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "我其實當時推的是促進青年就業，發現有一批青年要的不是找工作，他自己想要創業，促進青年就業中有一個是「青年創業」，然而一直沒有受到應有的重視，因為以前大家都比較父母心態，覺得大學畢業栽培那麼多年找一份好工作，剩下的是找「錢多、事少、離家近」的發展，其實忽略了創業或者比畢業更早之前就有可能創業的機會，對未來年輕人來說其實是一個更好的成長或者發展的機會。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "所以，我們開始花力氣去集合部會的資源，把青年創業專案做出來，那個也是我另外一個最愛，從促進青年就業方案中統整的十二個部會、四十幾個案子，我們集中在青年創業的這一個部分，我們了解到大概是一成的人對創業有興趣，而中間可能只有一半的人真正有能力，但是這個是一種希望，我們覺得能帶給年輕人多一點的嚮往跟選擇很好，在那樣的心情之下，我們創建了青年創業專案。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "青年創業創什麼？我們要找目標，所以那時就想到三個，一個是本來就有在推的文創，一個是農委會陳保基主委幾年前就做得有聲有色，風起雲湧相當有迴響的「迴游計畫」栽培的青年農夫，我們就說是「新興農業」。第三個是社會企業；因為我是社工出身，其實我們在2000年左右就在一些國際的社工會議裡面看到談社會企業的事，較近是在2007年開始香港就有社企高峰會議，我自己是2008年和一些社工盟友去幫忙大陸汶川地震做災後重建，2009年回來為臺灣自己的莫拉克風災做災後重建，才我真的去實際幫忙而且有看見，在地方上被破壞的社區怎麼樣用社會企業的概念重建起來，社會企業就是也要讓它賺錢，也要能夠符合社會關懷或者是其他的社會目的。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "在2008年去別人土地的時候是從帶學生調研開始，2009年回到自己的土地上是跟那時慘遭土石流毀村「小林村」自救會一起開始做，我當時覺得社會企業真的是一種方法，是一條路，為在地的人增加自信心，把自己身邊不可能變成可能的一個機會，在那之前我們都是讀文章跟參加國際會議，只是聽別人講跟著拍手，還有複誦一些既有的東西。但我自2009年後陪著小林村、四川幾個社會企業走，讓我真正相信社會企業也許不是賺大錢的事，但絕對是事業，而且是可以解決社會問題，包括就業問題、當地產業發展問題，也包括社區組織和社區發展、公平貿易等問題，最重要的是讓自己待在舒適圈跳不出去的人，能夠抓到一些讓他覺得可及性比較高的機會，因為社企的做生意門檻不是那麼高，很多人在這裡面得到一個新的發展。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "我也看到社會企業可以是個目的，也就是一直走去發展社會企業，可以永續經營，或者是一個過程，歷練創業後增加就業能力。我有一些學生參與社會企業一年、三年，然後又回去就業，可是也心安理得很開心，因為創業過，知道創業很難，也可以體會到老闆不好做，接著面對工作就沒有那麼多的抱怨，我看到這一些有參與過社會企業的人之個人成長，以後再回到經濟市場裡面，對於自己市場角色功能有更好的認知，而且學到一些做事的方法。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "因此2013年我就向江院長請命，並向各位部長遊說，在推青創方案的時候，常在第二會議室開專案會議，部長們是會提出像社會企業產值有多少？到底有多少比例的年輕人有能力做？…等等挑戰。那時我還不知道有那麼多的案例，也真的不曉得如何估計回答，但是說服他們的是應該信任會有年輕人可以勝任，第二個是要給年輕人創造機會，第三個是放手讓有心人做做看，我們需要在旁邊看著，真的有人試過、不行了，我們更應在旁協助如何再站起來。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "換句話說，我覺得我們在政府裡面其實要做的事是給機會，所以先是要把氣氛炒熱讓大家認識這一個概念，我當時一個保證是不用政府出太多錢，社會企業是要讓他們去賺錢的，並不是來向政府拿補助、變成另外一種NPO，甚至鼓勵NPO從手心向上到向下，我覺得很棒的是那時的部會首長，尤其是金融方面的部長覺得有這種可能性，可以試試看，所以我們就促成了2014年行政院會正式通過的「社會企業行動專案」。我覺得有幾個特色，後來在國際會議上報告分享，大家都覺得很特別。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "…我們有看。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "那我就不考你有哪一些面向了，知道你是模範生（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我比較想知道哪一些還沒有做到，不管是調法規或者是建平台。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我從部會收到的意見是，除了調法規還沒有做完之外，其他包括建平台、籌資金、倡育成，他們都覺得已經進入常規業務了，這個是我收到的訊息。這個才是我想要問老師的，並不是背誦行動方案。真的都進入常規業務了嗎？都是勞動部和中小企業處的工作嗎？以及如果他們有進入常規業務，與老師的期許或許還有一些落差的話，有哪一些是我可以問他們的？" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "我真高興他們已經進入常軌，表示他們真的看重這一件事，在政府體系裡面政策是否受重視這個是很重要的，又因為整個文官體系是非常注重行政倫理的，所以長官是否重視很重要。貢丸（指唐鳳辦公室簡德源簡任秘書）可以看看我是否講得對。像擔任政委的人也許不覺得自己有什麼了不起，但是在部會執行面會覺得你是個行政院來的長官，所以你這位長官的態度、作為一個政委，你是否重視這一件事幾乎就決定了這一件事是否存在。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "再說他們認為是進入常軌的這一件事，什麼樣的執行都可以說是常軌，一年過問一次是常軌、每個月也是常軌、每天問也是常軌，就看你認為社會企業是像仙人掌一樣耐旱，或者是每天都要去看的小蘭花草？看你要如何看待這一件事，比如我覺得社會企業才剛開始發展，還是小蘭花草，所以這個專案的常軌恐怕要是對待一個剛出生幼苗的常軌，而不是把它當仙人掌能夠不吃不喝仍然過得很好的常軌。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "目前的常規，像平台、資金、育成，其中比較沒有跨部會的情況，有各自認領的，像經濟部中小企業處或者是勞動力發展署，他們常規的意思是按照一般的執行業務，如果重要的話，可能每月一次管考，如果沒有那麼重要的部份，可能三個月一次。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "跨部會的聯席會議是兩個月開一次，包括法規、平台、資金、育成的部分都會去做檢討。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我沒有說這是否夠快，只是先讓老師知道。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "兩個月一次頻率還好，我比較擔心如果三個月一次，時間拖太長了，如果有些問題沒有即時解決的話，大家會失望或者起疑心，認為社企大概不受重視，他們就做別的事好了。老實說每一個部會都很忙，社會企業在他們的諸多業務裡優先順序都不高。社會企業應該是誰做？這是一個大問題，本來是勞動部在做，後來我們看勞動部做了這麼多年很難突破，勞動部同仁也有無力感。因為勞動部的目的是要促進就業，但是社會企業發展還有很多其他的產業需求；政府發錢也是可以促進就業，所以我們非常清楚要經濟部來主導，因為中小企業處才有創造和輔導產業的經驗，我們既然推社會企業就要給他一個產業發展的可能性，所以是否有交到對的部會手上是很重要的，方向是要對的。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "我非常感謝當初經濟部中小企業處，尤其是林美雪副處長把它認下來了，我進了政府以後，看到整個體系的實際運作情形…相信唐鳳政委也有一些體會。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我體會兩年了（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "相信你也聽前任政務官們說了很多，在政府外面的時候會覺得怎麼各部會那麼本位主義，我現在比較可以理解了。比方說談推社會企業這是，經濟部的人告訴我說那個叫「社會」企業，而他們叫「經濟部」，為什麼他們要去管人家「社會」的東西？所以那時寫行動方案時，裡面一定要有一個定義，如果是我個人馮老師的態度，會覺得幹麻這麼早定義？你現在可以說日本怎麼弄、韓國怎麼弄，但我們的社企才剛開始發展，你就畫一個框框，明確說明什麼叫社企，其他人做的就不算了嗎？這樣怎麼蓬勃發展？怎麼產業化啊？不好啊！對不對？" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "我們這個土地上所發展的解決社會問題的社企，很可能跟韓國的社區合作社和由大企業支持的社企、日本民間社企與政府的關係非常冷淡不同，而歐洲如英國由政府成立推動社企基金，出錢很多，因為是福利國家高稅率嘛！因此政府的責任很大，我們是不一樣的，我們到底是福利左派或者是右派都還不太清楚，但政府還是有可用資源。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "然而我們有一個非常好的社會結盟傳統，是從社會福利的民間團體發展出來的很不錯，像「臺灣公益團體自律聯盟」，真的是由中、小型的NPO結合起來，他們自我要求遵循自律公約，你看世界上其他國家哪有這種的gatekeeper自律組織？大概都是被迫，像我們去參訪美國的時候，他們問：「什麼理由讓你們要做自律？是政府訂法還是爆發了募款醜聞？」，其實我們就是某一馮姓社工教授做了行動研究研議部門自律，而參與研究的組織大家都願意加入發起（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不需要先有醜聞（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "對，因為自律是比較高的道德要求，真的是滿為我們國家自豪的，我們還不錯一直有NPO這一群人很肯做，而且總認為是對的事就要做好。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "話說回來，我想要表達的是，回應唐政委問還有什麼沒做到？如果兩個月一次會議，我覺得你剛剛提到一個重點，也就是跨部會合作的這一件事，是最需要去繼續努力的。我並不是要責備任何人或單位，像社企這樣剛起的新苗子並不是一個部會或者是兩個部會就可以做好的，就像民間組織做事，一個組織出來做怕怕的，如果有好幾個組織聯合站起來登高一呼，新議題的倡議就做起來了，那一種感覺很好。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "我們在社企行動方案開始的時候，率先舉辦的共識營是很好的經驗，如果政委願意的話，可以找人帶一下，這是會很有效果的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是您了？" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "應該還有更專業的人。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "我們那時做社企行動方案的啟動共識營，還找到院長出面，院長出席的場合大家很重視，首長的出席率就會很高，這個是一定的（笑）。應為受到院裡面的重視，各部會該來的相關人員都出席。而出席有什麼好處？兩大好處：第一個，彼此要互相學習、交流，知道這個方案到底要做什麼，自己單位要做什麼？其次就是培養人情，大家認識了以後，往後即使有一些眉角要磨合時，或者是覺得誰踩到誰的線，這樣互相都比較好講話了，也不用政委用太多的權威去壓他們，這個不靈光的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "知道，可能一個Career裡只能用一次（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "會報就是大家互相分享進度作為，重點是來提出問題跟尋求解決，部會間直接討論並自己找出解決的方法我覺得是最好的。雖然我知道大家都很討厭開會，諷刺行政院總是開會，但是開會有開會的功效，也不必計較形式或是很正式的開，像我們這樣開會也很好，比方大家都隨便穿也很好（唐鳳馬上脫西裝外套，笑）。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "最重要是造成一種好氣氛，散會出去之後大家都覺得事情是可做的，我覺得這個就是會議效率，那就在推動整體方案上跨出了很大的一步，所以像共識營這樣的會議，或者是運用其他方法，像open space discussion, world cafe等都很好——我知道你很喜歡線上開會，是數位政委，一定也有它的功效。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們每個月、每周都有open space黑客松，那都是面對面的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我之前學的比較像團體治療，所以後來碰到審議民主這些朋友的時候，我都說自己有一點半路嫁接。他們是在收共識意見，但我學到的引導原則都是培養心理動力。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "所以很適合用社工嘛！（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實。不管從事什麼工作，我覺得開會沒有辦法真的去改變大家的立場或者本位，那個根本不可能，但是可以改變他對某一件事的感受。我覺得對某件事的感受改變之後，自己會找出決定的方法。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "太好了！這樣我就可以講短一點（笑），我們完全有共識。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "我想你應該有看到，在我說明社企行動方案的PPT中比喻，政府最重要的功能是要創造一個生態圈，我簡化成像「陽光」、「空氣」與「水」的重要元素。陽光就是指「育成」，實務上是把它變成經驗傳承和專業輔導陪伴，這個是要給平台的支持，現在民間都在做，像是AAMA的顏校長你一定要跟他碰面，他真的非常知道如何做社企家育成，我覺得他真的是一位很棒的前輩。民間可以做得不錯，政府目前沒有太多需要著力的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我聽到的也是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "我們覺得「空氣」是最重要的生態元素，而社企發展的空氣就是「消費者」，所以政府在這一個生態圈裡面，應要大力推動消費者運動。當然也可以由民間發起。像公益自律聯盟，帶三十多家社企發起的圈客召集令，本來要邀請你去，但是你正好出國，而聯盟同仁有收到你的回信，覺得很開心，因為親自回信的政委很少（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我用email打字，應該比秘書快一點（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "好直白。是不是秘書還沒有走進來聽交待，你自己就已經寫好了（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "我們那一個活動是在幫忙號召消費者，我們發明一個名字，希望大家一起來做 change maker，就翻譯成「圈客」，然後在信義區威秀外面玩套圈圈，老的、小的路人都靠過來問什麼叫做「圈客」，我覺得這個是滿好用的概念。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "你看現在吳念真幫104做「Be A Giver」那一個廣告很打動人心，所以我們呼籲藉由購買社企產品，Be a Change Maker。我覺得政府可以做更多的事情，因為政府手上其實是有很多很明顯且巨大的消費團體，那時我們在努力推動「政府優先採購」，因為有人擔心這裡面有沒有違反公平交易法的問題，當時有請公共工程會研究一下，而工程會有幫我們找到可用法規——你去翻檔案裡應該都還有——公平會是說可以適用的，因為栽培中小企業相關法令裡面有說政府可以優先採購中小企業的產品，所以我們就很高興，社會企業本來就是微小企業，而且中小企業處也在推動，所以我們覺得是可以解釋的；當時法務人員也都認為可以解釋，因此就開始推這一件事，不管是軍中或者是政府單位的採購。但因為社福單位、農委會的產品也都在推優先採購，各單位也反應說太多吃不消，沒有關係，只要有概念就好了，只要把社會企業放到優先採購名單上，大家可以做選擇。常常政府可以做的是「輕推」，你用力太多，會反彈回來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是，這幾天有看到一些實例。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "政府的政策帶頭以後，會讓相關民間團體走出來，政府明確宣布政令或發展方向，把文獻放在清楚的地方，往往民眾會自己來。像2014年、2015年的時候，聯合報的「願景工作室」系列，和我們行政院公布啟動的青年創業專案、社企行動方案就有很多相互呼應的專題。我覺得唐政委也可以多跟他們聯絡，或者是使用那樣子的媒體。網路媒體非常重要，很多人找議題是在網路找，但也有很多人找議題是到主流議題找，像願景工作室就會引起很大社會迴響。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像他們現在做的是「惜食」，接著民間又有食育元年活動，所以拉力絕對是很強的。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "政府先宣示政策方向，說請大家一起來做，民間會做得非常起勁，但政策裡面如果有一些預算會更好，因為民間組織對協助推動政策時，對政府資源的期待其實也滿殷切的，如何做跟這個也是滿有關係的。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "換句話說，我覺得政府在這一個生態圈裡面要提升社企意識，講通俗一點就是幫忙社企創業者去提升消費者的消費意識，做法有很多，比如可以透過社企聚落資助一些有助推廣的活動，像Impact Hub等社企辦的小聚，或者是5% Design Action創作的宣廣動畫；在政府各部會的位階可以盤點一下，看哪一些部會還有可以開發的聲音，行政院去關切並幫忙一點資源，甚至於幫他們找一點外部資源，因為很多企業的CSR也在找對象，提升消費者意識會是現階段對於社會企業最大的幫忙。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "我自己也跟你分享，我看到一件很棒的事，像前一陣子扶輪社談推動社會企業，由3480地區老松社的楊社長主事，我覺得他的想法很好，他要去打世界盃，他要跟扶輪社世界各地的姐妹社連結當地的社會企業，朝向國際扶輪大會發展，這是很棒的一條路，可以得到醒目的關注；另外在談的，就是在台灣推social buy新消費運動，但這一個運動推得不是那麼容易，加拿大推了那麼多年。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "Buy Social Canada 是有一定的成效。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "加拿大的社企主席來台跟我們討論過，覺得在臺灣推會跟在加拿大推不一樣，臺灣推會比較快；臺灣已經進入到一個對於社會關懷議題大家是一聽耳朵會熱起來的，但是加拿大不是，他們個人的日子過得感受很好，所以其實加拿大並沒有那麼大的熱忱，你看一個社會議題就有成千上萬人就上街了；在臺灣一方面電視節目太不好看了（笑），而社會運動是很好的休閒，一方面其實台灣社會中仍是充滿關懷，又願意展現我們的愛心。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "完全同意。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "我覺得是滿有趣的觀察（笑），這個是另外一回事。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "所以我認為可以跟國際社團討論，像扶輪家庭是社會的中堅，他們大都又不缺錢可用，所以如果能獲得扶輪家庭支持新消費者運動，不要太斤斤計較，從這樣的團體出發推動，應該容易達成台灣的social buy，我覺得政府可以支持。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所謂的「斤斤計較」是指仍然是貨比三家，但是不光價格比較？" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "對，不只是斤斤計較看價格，而是看其價值，當然價格也是要看的，但是不只看價格而已。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "這個是現階段我覺得必須要做的事，如果政府願意支持的話，那就會是整個公民社會，包括政府、商業跟第三部門一起來做，中間的交集就是社會企業。所以在這一個社企生態圈裡面，現在要趕快呼喚消費者出來，然後促進公益消費或者是社企消費行為，我覺得是當務之急，如果沒有這樣「空氣」存在的話，再蓬勃的社企幼苗也是會窒息的。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "接下去要談的是生態圈裡的是「水」，就是投資金。社企聚落這一個辦公室，就是社企公益信託循環基金和其他中介組織共用的辦公室，當初行政院協助籌募這個基金，是希望能夠帶出更多的公益創投資金投資社會企業，如今努力了半年，宋董事長帶領的團隊看了不下二十個案子，雖然至今只有兩家簽約——真是很不容易，只因萬事起頭難，我相信這兩家會成功，後面也會讓大家有更多的信心。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "所以這筆錢用完之後要如何接續？短期內尚無法循環怎麼辦？我相信宋董事長是很認真很有心得的，但是政府可以助其一臂之力！這只是一個例子，像這樣專為投資社企的基金還有一家活水，我想負責人陳一強你應也見過，他們也要募基金。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "接著就是回到政府這邊，談資金可以看到國發會，國發會是有給社會企業使用的國發基金，但真的不太好用。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家都這麼說（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "可以改善，政府不是沒有錢，只是要看怎麼用。如果國發會跟民間的VC都一樣是要講究return rate，如果都一樣的話，為什麼市政府做？可以讓民間來賺錢，政府可以不宜與民爭利啊！我覺得這個是有改善空間，希望能再思考如何把這一個國發社企基金發揮更好效能，立意良善的政府基金放在那邊少有人願意來申請，因為很難符合條件。條件如果沒有把握好的話，這就幫助不大了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實，我的理解是國發基金往社企發展，方向是取代補助，但被取代的那一個補助，其實原本也不是非常明瞭。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果想要用投資取代掉補助，要先知道是什麼東西被取代了？如果這個很清楚，那就只是補助形式的轉變，其實並不困難，但是因為這一個標的之前並不是國發基金管理過的，所以在投資標的認定上會需要更多的支援。這個主責是陳添枝老師，我可以和陳老師合作。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "太好了。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "這個是關於這一個社企生態圈，至少有這三樣是政府可以幫忙的。生態圈中最重要的主角是社企青苗，也就是實際的創業家，所以我覺得這裡面就是「教育」的界面了。而這包括學校內跟學校外的教育，學校外已有滿多人在做的，學校內的教育大部分是有用到政府經費，教育部已經管很多，不妨也可再多管這一個部分。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "教育部吳思華部長任內非常鼓勵社企，他讓每一個司跟署去思考如何創新。他原本當政大校長的時候是負責教創意中心的，他雖然部長任期不長，我覺得他把教育部帶得滿好的，讓一板一眼教育體系裡面這一些中層以上的主管官員，活動思考方向帶來創意，他其實目的是希望讓整個教育體系能夠更活潑、更有創意及更有開放的心胸。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "他用的是兩個主題素材，一個是偏鄉教育、一個是社會企業，唐政委絕對有機會，去問教育部目前創意發展跟社會企業進行的如何了，他們曾做了一個2015年的成果發表，我覺得滿有可看性的——現在經過一年了，是進步或者是退步呢？未來怎麼樣是可以問一下的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是這個3月的「新企業．心力量」社會企業推動計畫成果展？（拿電腦螢幕給馮燕看）" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "這麼快，一下就找到了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實剛才老師講一個，我就找一個。" }, { "speaker": "黃敬峰", "speech": "我覺得馮老師歷練很多，但政委動作超快的，不知道的，都很快搜索進電腦裡。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "政委很快，都在她的電腦裡（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但搜尋的關鍵字在馮老師的腦裡（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "上次聯席會議教育部沒有發言，當時我也沒有關鍵字，我也不知道要請他們講什麼。既然他們有自己的方案，而這個方案按照您之前說的，是吳前部長決定出來的，並不是您寫給他的。所以我們可以問他？" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "是的，可以問教育部同仁，因為也不是吳部長他自己一個人決定，而是他讓各司、各署發想的，我覺得教育部這樣的事情很不錯，希望他們可以繼續做。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我可以先問一下教育部的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "另外一個是可以問一下農委會，農委會過去做的真是滿精彩的，農委會本來是陳保基在推青農學院和洄泅返鄉方案、小地主大佃農，還要處理休耕、土地銀行等，做了一堆事，真的是替我們新農社企鋪路。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "對了，還有一個要問的人是王志輝——目前是台東水保局分局長——他從中央到地方的經驗真的非常豐富，而且是把這一些資源集結起來栽培農社企的一個人。他第一年自行報名跟我們代表團去韓國參加世界社企論壇，會前有一些韓國社區社企的參訪，當我們大家聚在一起討論，他講了一句說：「政委，你看一下，我覺得我們農委會做的事情，在鄉村裡面做的原來就是社會企業啊！幫助農村產業化，本來就是我們該做的事情。」，我聽到一位行政體系裡面的事務官這樣講，真是說不出有多麼感動，只差沒噴淚（笑）。我說：「為什麼呢？」，他說「一鄉鎮一產品就是社會企業。」想想我們喊了半天社企創業不太有人熱情答理，但人家王組長覺得就是他們在做的事！農委會也有其他非常優秀的人，像傅科長就是認真參加科長及共識營，而後很投入的官員。" }, { "speaker": "陳琬惠", "speech": "農委會原本在社區裡面是用水保的系統在做，他們有非常多的經費。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "他們有一個農村再生條例，經費好像很充裕，他們做了很多事，老實說跟衛福部的社區發展有關，可是我覺得有一點可惜，各做各的，是有一些重疊，但還沒整合出加成效果。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他們都說是社區企業，其實跟社會企業是非常相近的。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "對，他們是叫「產業」。" }, { "speaker": "陳琬惠", "speech": "他們最近是叫「農社區企業」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為裡面有「社企」兩個字，但是意思是「社區企業」。" }, { "speaker": "陳琬惠", "speech": "跟我們講的「農社企」不太一樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是有一點重疊，經費也是水保系統出去的。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "為什麼要有這麼多的不同方案分資源？其實都是幫助小農，我們可以問一下，他們有這麼多農村輔導經驗跟錢，而且又很有用心的人，如果政委可以給他們一些肯定跟支持，比如救我認識的幾位基層官員，他們並不是決策者，所以發揮的影響力比較有限，如果政委能夠給他們一些加持的話，我覺得可以發揮比較大的影響力。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "老師的意思是，不管是農村社區創業或者是農村創業，這些是最常用的名詞，但只要符合廣義的社會企業定義，也可以作橫向的連結，所以可以問衛福部跟教育部這一些相關的計畫範圍，有沒有重疊，然後可以一起做？" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "對。重疊不一定不好，說不定重疊可以餵飽，然後社企就做起來了，但我們從地方上看到的是，有些人擔心部會說他一魚兩吃。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "理解。所以我們以廣義的社會企業定義，不管是在地方上以什麼樣的名目，都會有類似補助的計畫。現在大方向的目的，既然是要促進消費者的意識，當然是大家對這一件事越理解越好，所以最不希望看到的是各做各的，或者每個部會提出新的關鍵字，反而把這一個概念分散掉，沒辦法像之前「社會企業」那麼有綜合效果，因此希望把之前的規劃，如果有綜合效果、能夠擴大是最好——就像老師所說的，如果各個方面都填滿就起飛了是最好，但至少不要散掉。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "是的。你的聯席會報兩個月一次，其實是很可以請大家來報告的，我那時的做法是請他們來報告，我們那時找青顧團相關背景的顧問，你現在有青諮委，甚至於請民間的組織代表參與。事實上我召開的所有會報，都會請顧問及民間組織列席，請他們給一些回饋，一開始的時候部會同仁會覺得很緊張不適應，其實一、兩次雙方就會習慣，都有成長，包括我也學習良多。但是當時我們沒有全部公開上網，現在你可以考量一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "公開的好處是，有時因為我們不認識，所以無法請他來列席的人，他還是會自己看到。比如說：我們協調電競的時候，就有選手自己寫信來；我們協調社企的時候，甚至還有監察院負責審計的朋友寫信來說，他在審核社會企業行動方案時，發現竟然不用看文言文，可以看大家白話討論的結果——其實審計部也是利益關係人，他也要負責做這件事的追蹤。所以我覺得至少我們有邀得到的，像青諮或者是其他社會上的專業者或者是馮老師，我覺得儘量邀，但是我相信九成九是我們不認識的，這一些只能透過公開的方式，讓他們看到之後自己願意報名。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "事情有利有弊，開放可以讓更多的人參與或者是瞭解。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也不用猜政策如何制訂，可以看到過程。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "這也是好的收獲。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "畢竟社企只怕沒人知道，不怕更多人知道（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "還想再說一個，在這一個社企推展的過程中，經濟部是功不可沒，蔡宜兼現在是在創業青年組，他真的做得很好，希望可以給他升官，請一定要記錄下來（笑）。經濟部出面做社企產業，民間就當它一回事了，跟衛福部及勞動部出面做的效果比較不一樣。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "勞動部從勞委會時代就在運用社企概念推社會經濟，尤其是他們創新中心的施淑惠主任的熱情，也是功不可沒的。勞動部做的社會企業大多是在輔導NPO創業，但他們整個部的使命還是跟就業有關的；他們曾提到希望NPO能夠轉型，雖然我個人不完全認同這個方向，但是還是支持他們長期在社區輔導陪伴地方尤其是婦女創業的努力。我認為NPO不需要轉型社企，NPO是文明社會的指標，NPO發展的越蓬勃越好，不能太鼓勵NPO轉型變社會企業，而少了完全做社會服務的NPO了，我覺得對社會發展不見得有幫助。因此，我認為公民社會中，三個部門都很重要，社企是三部門的交集，是新興的組織，並不是把NPO全部變成社會企業。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果可以選的話，我反而希望私部門能多轉向社會企業。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "那是最好的，但不可能嘛！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這倒不一定（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "有這個志氣，很好！不過目前我還是認為NPO是非常重要的，可以跟勞動部多一點提醒，不要急著turn in社會企業，其實法規鬆綁或者是方向上允許NPO可以投資跟結合就好了，也就是NPO還是需要存在。但是我自己參與一些NPO的經驗，是看到NPO裡面做各種倡導和服務的人，跟能夠做社會企業經營商業模式的人是不一樣的人，所以為了避免NPO內一國兩制的衝突和尷尬，勞動部在培植社會企業的過程中，就是要稍微細緻一點，不要用錢去引誘社區型的勉強做社會企業。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個是各國只要做社企都會碰到的情況，這個沒有問題。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "我們既然做不到英國的CIC的一大筆開放型基金，加上分階段的培植輔導來鼓勵，那就搞清楚，不要只學到一個皮毛，就是只學給錢的部分，而沒有提供真正學到如何獨立創業的機會，本來民間社會的發展就是在每一個社會角落都要有人關懷，將需要找出並提供服務，因為政府不可能萬能，也不可能全部民眾需求都看的到，所以政府不要像那個魔笛手，吹著魔笛把孩子都引到同一個方向去，這個很重要。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也就是說，不要去引誘小規模但可以永續的NPO，因為短期的補助，轉型成社會企業後擴大，但過了五年之後就倒掉。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "太好了，直白說就是這樣（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "傷痕累累的人也許是一個贏家，我想這樣在社企界是要努力的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "每一次嘗試的成本要足夠低，包括從設立一家社企開始，到中間製作CSR等等。這些東西單獨看起來成本沒有很高，但加起來很高的話，就表示之前沉沒了很多成本進去，創業失敗的代價就提高了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我這邊聽到的聲音是好比像接下來的社會企業要在公司法裡面，還沒有確定，修法的老師們是建議至少要有一個企業可以以低度管制的精神，只要願意公開一些東西，我們就讓它把自己叫做「社企型企業」或者是「公益公司」或者是「兼益公司」——老師如果有建議的名詞也讓我們知道。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們要改公司法，就是要讓設立新公司比較容易，不能因為要做社企，而變得比改公司法之前還困難了，這就完全喪失政策的必要性。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣子聽起來我們的方向上是一樣的，也就是整個目的是要讓社會更瞭解這一件事，手段是要讓每一個單獨願意做社企的人的永續可能性增加，不管是從NPO或者是從企業過來，都必須建立在成本不要再提高上。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "對，做了非常好的總結。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也不是總結，就是以目前學到的複述一次。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "最後談到公司法，我完全同意剛剛你講的，我們對公司法的期待，就是第1條跟第23條有所鬆綁，第1條的以營利為目的卡死了，也就是公司營運只能為營利，如果能夠加「…為例外」呢？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "要例外，或者是額外目的？目前「vTaiwan」正在討論，其中一個想法是除了營利為目的之外，另外也可以再納入好比像社會目的、環境目的或者是別的目的，現在是說我們是不是要把目的明確列舉出來？像我們說double bottom line或者是triple bottom line。但如果三個放上去或者是四個放上去，感覺上會有排除性。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "嗯，額外的目的可能更好。我原本就主張先行政再立法，先不要急著立法，讓新興概念的社會企業有機會多元發展一陣子，等蓬勃成氣候了，再來談明確的定義或條件。因為幾乎所有的法規都是在制訂限縮全民的利益跟義務，而且跟人民行為有關的大都是有罰則的，公司法又是比較高密度的管理，比方像是公司以什麼為目的的單一性。（確認電腦螢幕上的公司法）第1條：「公司為以營利為目的之社團法人」，我認為修改這條包含公司也可以有社會目的文字就好，但現在還沒有想好準確的文字。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "現在有「vTaiwan」討論，之後可以去留言。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "就像這裡提到環保、健康、食安，用列舉的方式舉不完，所以如何有一個包含式的？我們當時在想的是社會使命或者是社會關懷或者是社會價值，就英文來說是「social value」，就是兼顧經濟價值與社會價值。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "簡單來講，營利先不拿掉，而是在照顧經濟的同時，也可以照顧到社會上的價值。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也有朋友問說環境算不算在社會裡？" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "應該算。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣就要有一個解釋。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "解釋不用放在母法裡面，我們可以在細則、子法，甚至公告，比方說符合社企的定義五年公告一次，這個解釋如要與時俱進，有很多種政策工具可用。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個是立法技術了。但是老師的意思是營利為目的沒有必要拿掉，我們只是要marker，這個是越廣越好，也有一些是社會價值，只是這裡沒有提的。像社企是照顧弱勢，但有許多動物更弱勢。我是長期關心動保的。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "太好了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以動物權利放在哪裡？每次只要一定義社會，我就會問，這個指的是人類社會嗎？（笑）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為我家裡有七隻貓跟兩隻狗，如果要投票我一定輸。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "你哪有時間養？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "現在是託人來照顧，入閣之後，只有週末會回山上看。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像您剛剛提到的解釋或者是用其他方式包括進來，這樣我認為跟營利並列是有道理的，也就是這兩個同時追求。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "對，我覺得在第一條把公司亦可同時追求營利與改善社會、或說解決社會問題的雙重價值放進去就好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "字樣再麻煩老師幫忙想。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "好啊！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣第23條就不用修了。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "因為股東本來就是贊同社企關懷社會理念才來的啊。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果章程裡面就是說要達成某一個社會使命或者是價值，公司沒有去做的話，還要負損害賠償？" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "對，其實我覺得修法如果能夠動到最少的地方，而且是為增加彈性，而不是要罰什麼東西，這樣阻力會較小。重點是要達到為社企找到定位的功能。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那像名字的部分，像做到這些價值的，要叫做什麼？" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "直接講「社會企業」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是「社會企業股份有限公司」？" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "對。現在已經有六十幾家公司這樣叫了。" }, { "speaker": "陳琬惠", "speech": "不只。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "2014年的時候是四十二家，社企的氣氛炒熱以後，自然有人願意來做，但是你好不容易建立一種概念、大家認同一個名字，再修飾成講「公益」或「兼益」或「B corp」，就要費更多心去區分解釋了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們之前有做一個「閉鎖型公司」，要在公司法裡面叫做「閉鎖型公司」，如果我們這裡叫做「社企型公司」的話，還足以辨認嗎？或者老師認為叫「社會企業」？" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "「社企型公司」也可以。但這個會讓勞動部有失落感就是了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有道理。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "如只提到公司的輔導和管理，那整個是經濟部主管的東西。" }, { "speaker": "陳琬惠", "speech": "因為讓他們推動時，NPO型、公司型等都可以叫「社會企業」。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "而「社會企業」是各種型態都有照應到的名詞，也是這幾年逐漸推展開來的概念。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也就是說，「社會企業」這四個字是最平衡的，不會哪一邊失落。其他不管叫什麼，都會覺得有一部分的人被排除。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "是的，社會企業像是一個公約數的概念，其他概念名有各種不同的擁護者，這就麻煩了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也就是簽名檔的概念。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "對（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有一個marker是重要的，要盡可能廣納是重要的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在名字足夠廣的前提底下，社會價值是呼應到「社會」企業，而社會「企業」的部分是要營利。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣處理的話，也跟第一條是互相呼應的。" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "嗯，這樣差不多了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大概一個小時。謝謝老師！" }, { "speaker": "馮燕", "speech": "好有效率！很高興有機會跟妳聊這個重要的議題。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們準時三點開始。這個會議室比我想像中大滿多的，講話的時候還是儘量用麥克風，按一下講，再按一下是結束。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "今天我們在這邊主要的原因，本來是要討論某個特定的連署案，也就是「國旅卡制度不應圖利特定廠商」案，在場大家都知道這一個案子，我就不再介紹了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "本案在附議成案快四十天之後，我們終於協調出主、協辦單位，離附議期限回應只剩二十天。所以我們想要知道在剩下的二十天內可以做哪一些事，大概是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但我們發了會議通知之後，昨天一天之內又有另外一個案子瞬間成案，這一個案子比較大一點是「配合勞基法修正，政府應取消國旅卡，恢復不休假獎金」，這已經6,744人附議，我們有六十天可以回應後面這個案子，就可以比較按照之前連署的正當程序來走，我想我們先處理前案，但我們在前案的過程裡面，我們也一併把後案的回應期程決定，今天其實主要只是讓前、後案的回應期程讓大家搞清楚每個人要做什麼事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果沒有太多的問題，今天有逐字紀錄，同樣是在十天內大家可以編修，可以把覺得上了報紙會看起來比較奇怪的部分，改成比較和緩的用字，或者是整段拿掉都沒有問題的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在這一個前提底下，因為速錄師要記錄的關係，請大家輪流先講一下自己的名字、單位及在這一案裡的角色。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大概是這樣子，我想就從左邊開始。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "政委、各位長官先進，我是資管處的處長，潘國才。我們在這裡扮演的角色是提供「提點子」的平台，所以造成大家一些麻煩的地方，非常抱歉，但是我想事情既然已經有發生了，我們還是要來處理，所以今天非常謝謝政委能夠召集大家，我們看看怎麼樣去做相關的回應。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "我是負責管理公共政策網路參與平台，有關於公共政策民眾提案的檢核大概是我跟我們處長去做，另外還有一個同仁，是先作檢核，檢核過的話就會進入，有一些比較特殊的案例，請各個單位確認主、協辦，也就是業務權責機關再進入附議，大概有這一些流程，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "劉宗熹", "speech": "政委、各位長官好，我是資管處劉宗熹。" }, { "speaker": "陳明忠", "speech": "政委及各位與會同仁，我們是人事行政總處，第一個案子有關於圖利特定廠商的部分，其實跟我們沒有關係，我們是第二個議題，等到第二個議題我再發言。" }, { "speaker": "徐仲舜", "speech": "大家好，我是人事總處，我是仲舜。" }, { "speaker": "陳漢宇", "speech": "大家好，我是人事總處PO（Participation Officer，開放政府專責聯絡人）。" }, { "speaker": "陳漢宇", "speech": "今天陪業務單位關於第二個提案國旅卡部分的副處長、專員一起過來，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "楊惠如", "speech": "政委、各位長官大家好，我是交通部的聯絡人楊惠如，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "呂世暘", "speech": "政委、各位長官大家好，我也是交通部的PO，我是呂世暘，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "賀麗娟", "speech": "政委、各位同仁大家好，國發會人力處賀麗娟。" }, { "speaker": "徐德宇", "speech": "政委、各位大家好，我是國發會的徐德宇，我是國旅卡的承辦人。" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "政委、各位先進好，我是國發會的人力處處長，現在國旅卡的政策面大概是國發會負責，關於跟公務人員的部分是人事總處，用在觀光這一些產業大概是觀光局，另外還有一塊是經濟部負責一些特約店，比如像商圈的國旅卡的特約店，我們當初的分工大概是這樣子的架構，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "黃子維", "speech": "大家好，我是政委辦公室的子維。" }, { "speaker": "薛雅婷", "speech": "大家好，我今天負責記錄逐字稿，可以叫我Wendy，也可以叫我雅婷，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "賴致翔", "speech": "大家好，我是政委辦公室賴致翔，「窗口的窗口」（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊華", "speech": "政委、各位與會先進大家好，我是觀光局代表。我最主要是（處理）第一個案子，我想與會先進對第一個案子應該都不陌生。國發會在協調的時候，其實我們有提到因為國旅卡的案子牽涉非常廣，是關於政策面，那時的決議是說這個部分針對當初提案人的一些訴求，是不是有圖利廠商就產業面的部分回覆。我一併稍微簡單說一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那我開始做筆記。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊華", "speech": "其實我們是有跟提案人林小姐聯繫上，我們是用電話聯繫，我們也有逐字紀錄她的一些相關訴求，我簡單報告，這個部分我們可以書面提供。提案人的意見如下：" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊華", "speech": "第一，她認為政策制訂時應該要透明化，而且要召開相關的公聽會，要跟公務人員充分溝通，形成共識以後再推動，不要用行政程序來強勢公務人員配合辦理。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊華", "speech": "第二，建議政府要立即停止宣布106年國旅卡新制的措施。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊華", "speech": "第三，政府振興觀光的作業應該要輔導產業提供優惠，吸引公務人員消費，不是用強制這種方法的限制，公務人員修正補助費用指定於旅遊消費的內容。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊華", "speech": "第四，就國發會政策形成的過程有哪一些單位來參與，未來政策形成的透明度，另要請國發會能夠電話回覆。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊華", "speech": "初步來說，感覺上這一位林小姐還是跟其他提案人的訴求大概是一致的，只不過在第一次的提案裡面有提到圖利這一塊，這個是不是要併到第二案討論？其實我們已經是主辦單位了，這一個部分我們也會進行後續的辦理事項，以上。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第四個訴求的具體要國發會做什麼事？" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊華", "speech": "政策形成過程透明度等等內容，要請國發會用電話回覆。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "請國發會要回電，簡單來講（笑）。你們什麼時候打電話給提案人？" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊華", "speech": "其實是今天。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "逐字就做出來？" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊華", "speech": "因為打電話這一位是科長，他從國旅卡一開始產生的時候就全程參與，所以對整個過程非常清楚，因此他非" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他不用問科長，他自己就是？" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊華", "speech": "他自己就是（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊華", "speech": "一方面是他也希望在今天的會議裡面，能夠明確表達這一位提案人的一些訴求，所以就把他講的寫下來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以email給致翔嗎？" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊華", "speech": "可以。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我是說我們一面開會的時候？" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊華", "speech": "現在嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "大家好，我是政委辦公室的書漾，我負責關於工作坊的設計。之後PO們有任何苦水或想要訴說什麼的話都可以來找我。" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "大家好，我是政委辦公室的簡德源，我跟國旅卡滿有淵源的，因為在91、92年的時候就在觀光局，那時參與國旅卡的誕生。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "然後你也是PO（笑）？" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "對，我是PO。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他是蒙藏會的PO（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "大家好，我是政委辦公室的參事葉寧。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "既然大家都到了，我們在等逐字稿的過程中，致翔等一下就email給今天約的所有人，包含我。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在等逐字稿的過程中有兩件事，我想先分享一下我們之前辦工作坊的時候，有講說一般來講「提點子」應該要回復的基本程序，我可能花五分鐘的時間把這個基本的程序先跟大家分享，我們比較有接下來誰要做什麼的分工可能性。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第二，因為我們已經聯絡了提案人，這次比較大的差別是這個具體的訴求，我們接下來只有二十天的時間來回應，所以就會變成是說我們如果要給一個回應期程的話，期程會遭到壓縮。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以今天想要知道的，就是我們到底針對這四項主要的訴求，我們能夠回應到什麼程度以及還有沒有可以做的事情，如果今天把這四項還能做什麼以及需要多少時間都確定了，我相信回應期程應該是今天開完會，就可以馬上可以放在「Join」上面，大概是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "（投影簡報：https://speakerdeck.com/peggybackup/2-xia-wu-yan-lian?slide=2）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一份是衛福部的Peggy處理過幾個連署案之後，歸納出基本上應該要做的事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們現在在做的事情是所謂的「回應期程公告」，就是把這一個案子可能相關的部會，看他的書面還沒有釐清訴求的時候，先從書面先確定大概有誰可能會相關，這就是確認相關單位。期程公告的預備就是要開一次「期程公告預備會」，現在各位就是在期程公告的預備會裡面，這個是一開始要做的事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "接下來的一件事是，因為「提點子」這裡有一個概念要先溝通，所謂政治上的「議程設定權」：五千人連署能確保行政單位認真討論這件事，但不應該能確保任何別的東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好比本來要討論國旅卡存廢，現在已經簽了三年約，可能兩年半之後本來就應該要討論，但因為有第二案有連署成案，所以我們先提出來，看如果要討論的話是要做什麼，所以討論的議程從比較未來移到最近，這個是「提點子」可以做的一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果是提出一個新的點子，好比有人提古蹟發生火災的話，100年之內除了修復之外，不能做其他的用途，之前也許內政部或者是文化部沒有做這一個政策規劃，這個也不一定是最好的政策規劃，但「提點子」可以確保相關的部會有討論這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "要討論這件事必須有一個督導的層級，也就是這件事到底是誰在處理。所以在「期程預備會」的時候，就會確認相關訴求的主責機關及能夠決定的人是哪一些人，當然今天兩位——交通部觀光局、國發會人力處——都在這邊了，所以其實已經確定了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "接下來有確定的長官們，要知道說各個部會的PO如果接下來要發「期程公告」的話，接下來字樣上或簽核的層級是什麼，是PO直接mail給主責，看起來沒有問題就出去了？或者是要會哪一些人？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以第一案來講，人力行政總處說不用副知他們，只要交通部跟國發會都說可以，就會出去了，是這個意思嗎？我只是確認真實的意思，這是第一步我們正在做的事。（人力行政總處表示同意。）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第二，其實就是「聯絡提案人」，因為我們知道提案人即使約了五千人或八千人，仍然只是代表社會上一群利益關係人的聲音。在這個社會上面還有許多群跟他們完全不同利益，或是不盡然相同利益的人。並不是有五千人提案就比其他人大聲，只是說可以來討論這一個案子。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因此，我們要確認訴求裡面的可行程度。如果訴求從字面上看起來，就已經是違反法律或違反物理定律的話，這樣我們沒有辦法處理的，在聯絡提案人以前就要先確認。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "接著要聯繫，聯繫的過程中，就是要找一個真正知道在討論的事情是做什麼的人去跟他聯繫，這次的聯繫人應該是到達百分之百的程度。這個聯繫的過程比較像一個諮商訪談的過程，我們不去推自己的政策出去，也不要求提案人修改他的訴求，只是很完整想要聽到，在提出這一些訴求背後，想要達成的願景（vision）是什麼。提案人有時只是提出一些任務（mission）出來，但其實並沒有揭示他的vision。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外要做的事是，如果提出的這一個vision，我們聽了之後覺得有更能滿足vision的方式，我們也可以一併跟他確認，看是不是更可行的方式是他能夠接受的，這是在提案人聯繫時要做的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另一個要做的事情是剛才正在做的事情，也就是所有相關的機關，不只是去聯繫的PO或者是那一個機關，都要收到非常完整跟提案人聯繫的逐字紀錄，這是正當程序的第二步，我們現在正在完成它的過程中。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果第二步主要的專業是在紀錄或者是一點心理諮詢或者是社工專業上的話，我們在第三步的工作幾乎完全是我們說「新聞學」或者是「調查報導」的專業。我們這邊是叫做「轉譯」，「轉譯」的意思是把一般人聽不懂的，好比國旅卡到底是一種補助或者是獎勵或者是補償或者是加班費還是什麼別的東西，連基本的定標題，不同的發言人跟政委用詞都不一樣了，所以在這樣的前提底下，我們很難要求提案人一下子就知道要的這一個東西在我們內部到底看成什麼，這一個也是非常重要的，我們要先把背景資料弄成不同的認知模式的人，看文字的人、看圖的人或怎麼樣的人都能夠搞得懂的狀態。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是我們必須要有最基本的基本資料，因此以這一個例子來講，如果不應該圖利業者，我們這邊方案的到底哪一些業者可以來，像臺灣觀光巴士或者是什麼審核的，或者像未來需要修改的報帳系統，修改的可能性及尺度在哪裡，這有點像求解範圍的背景資料要列出，並不是今天要列出，但今天要決定的是誰要決定的、列出是交給誰，轉製成一份簡報。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣的一份轉製工作會請PO（開放政府聯絡人，下同），如果PO自己覺得沒有辦法執行新聞學的撰寫或採訪報導的話，可以請跨部會對這個議題或是至少在簡報製作上面能夠幫忙的PO或者是外部的專家來協助，這一件事在我們製作完之後發表之前，通常會讓提案人先看過。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "未來這一個平台裡面我們除了提案人之外，還會有網友投票票數最高支持意見跟反對意見的人，在未來也要請這一些人看過，因為現在只有提案人的聯絡方式，所以先請提案人看過，如果他看不懂，這一個簡報是沒有意義的，所以至少他要看得懂，或跟他類似處境的人看懂，他看懂之後，我們再登在「Join」平台上。這個在回應期程是第一次公開回應，簡報（關於這一件事說明）是第二次公開回應，這一件事也必須要簽到今天決定的層級上，這個簡報才能公布出去。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "下一步是主持的工作，我們每一次當有利益關係團體提出訴求之後，一定會有跟他相抗衡的利益相關團體，我們把他們的訴求，如果評估不要達成，我們覺得這個訴求不可行，我們至少要開一個內部研商會去把它講清楚為什麼不可行；反之，如果認為可行，在我們施行之前，應該先列出這一個東西施行的利益跟不利益的關係團體，請這一些關係團體也進一步跟我們接洽，這就是所謂擴大利害關係人徵詢，讓外面這些有意見的人去說這一件事試行之前，會不會照顧了五千人的利益，但是卻造成更多人的不利益，這是需要主持人的技術，這個技術就是把各種不同利益關係人之間加以調解。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "通常有兩個做法：" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一個是我們如果是用公聽會或者是說明會，或者現在很流行的「座談會」做法的話，盡可能讓彼此不同利益關係人坐在一起討論，然後彼此聽彼此說話，盡可能收到大家有共識。但是如果太火爆或彼此不相信的話，你也可以用單獨面談或單獨說明的方式。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們在這邊想要做的是一個公開的「Join」平台，大家沒有辦法忍受跟某些提案人見面是公開的，又跟其他利益關係人見面是不公開的，因此至少在連署期間所做的內部或外部會議，見了誰、達成什麼結論，至少要到這一個程度，最好有完整的紀錄都能夠公開在同一個平台上，讓大家看到不同利益關係人怎麼想這一件事，這件事就是所謂釋出相關資訊跟進度。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "最後六十天結束的時候，我們就要寫一個正式的回應架構，這一個回應架構其實這邊寫新聞稿，但是記得上次開會的時候，不一定以新聞稿為產出標的，可以是開一個記者會，可以在「眾開講」或者是其他的徵詢平台上把這個東西再轉成擴大徵詢——我忘記還有什麼別的選項——只要讓社會不特定人周知的方式就算是一個回應，而周知回應的網址或者他的聯絡方式就要寫在最後「Join」的回應上，這一個東西同樣也需要主責去簽辦，然後這一件事就結案了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們今天在做的事是先確認回應的期程，接下來要做的事是把已經跟提案人聯絡好的逐字稿整理成具體的訴求及先初步評估這一些訴求可以take到什麼程度。如果這是諮商或紀錄工作的話，第三步就是一個內部的調查報導的工作，要產出一份接近懶人包的調查報導，告訴社會各界說提案人要的東西到底是什麼。第四步是拿這一個資料跟內部的利益關係人，如果我們要採行的話，還要跟外部的利益關係人去進行進一步的徵詢，全部徵詢完之後就把這一個紀錄整個回應過去，這是架構，我花了超過五分鐘，花了十二分鐘，不好意思；但是這個是「提點子」的基本架構。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "關於這一個架構有沒有人想要問什麼問題？在我們開始之前，有沒有什麼想要討論的？如果每個案要徹底執行是非常非常大的負擔，所以在此之前，每一個部會的PO之前都有反應過，如果要同時處理兩案，而且還有別的業務會非常忙不過來，現在PO的規劃是如果有某些部分需要幫忙或之類的話，至少別的部會目前手上還沒有案子，例如像蒙藏會絕對不會有案子的PO就可以幫你處理這一件事（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "針對我剛剛的架構有沒有意見？或者我沒有說明清楚的部分？" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊華", "speech": "提一個小問題，因為國旅卡這一件事，今天中午張政委有開一個會，他有指示今天也要發一個新聞稿，所以我們現在正在處理，這一個部分就變成雖還不在第五階段，但已經在處理了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個是關於圖利旅遊業者？還是你們國旅卡存廢也要發新聞稿？" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊華", "speech": "沒有存廢的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那就說明到這裡。我想說第二案如果要發新聞稿，應該要copy人事行政總處才對（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第二案畢竟還在回應的期程中，所以我們現在的想法是如果你們有新聞稿，想必會是從中央社發出去，所以會給一個網址「cna.com.tw」的網址，在你出新聞稿之前，這個會議一結束，就把回應期程公布上去。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是這個回應期程碰巧剛好訴求釐清是今天做完、資料釋出也是今天做，但是我們可以說明的是關於提案人的訴求，在釐清之後，把觀光局到目前做的事告訴提案人，雖不表示未來不會再製作一個更清楚的，但把他的訴求逐點跟我們正在做的事情加以連結，比較好懂的那一個版本，讓提案人知道。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們至少能做什麼？附議好像已經八千人了，我們希望這些人不是透過第三手或者是第四手，不是看著已經斷章取義過的、不太相干的人所做出來的綜合報導，而是這八千人都可以收到中央社的完整連結以及摘要。這個東西就是為什麼會把第三步看成是新聞工作，部會自己就是自媒體。好不容易有八千人訂閱了我們的報紙，我們把「第零手」的資訊直接放到他們的email信箱裡，盡可能不要讓他們看到報紙才知道。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我理解我們剩二十天，不太可能把這個步驟做到完美的程度，我只是想說先講一下。" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "觀光局有提到提案人希望國發會回電，事實上可能明天發布的新聞稿可以釐清這一個部分已經放寬了，我們已回應各界的意見。因為他有要求，我們也要完成這一個步驟嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該是說，我們要討論。請大家記得，連署五千人只是要確保我們要坐下來認真討論這一件事，不表示一定要照著做。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們要討論的是：回他電話這一件事有沒有造成別的不利益？這是要互相權衡的。像回他電話這一件事，如果已經知道會被不當利用，當然我們就不應該回他電話。但如果已經接觸提案人，認為人還算nice的話（笑），就是要看提案人訴求的性質，如果想要被回電話的話──即使他會拿這個去做某些利用──只要跟他親自說明，讓他心裡感受比較好一點，他也不會拿去做不恰當利用的話，這樣我覺得回一通電話，只是花你的時間。會不會有外部不利益？有哪些外部不利益？是否會有其他人會說，國發會怎麼沒有打電話給他？" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "其實這都沒有問題，搞不好提案人都還不知道確定要放寬的這一個訊息。" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "提案人認為我們應該就這一個部分的政策面講清楚，但是我覺得純粹就以這一個案子來說，我們不認為已經有限制行業了，提案人希望我們打電話是因為這一個部分沒有人跟她說明，但是包括新聞稿以這樣的訊息給她的話，我們事實上有放寬，其實是同樣的內容，有沒有必要因她希望國發會跟她聯絡而做，也就是按照觀光局的意思……" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊華", "speech": "……她的意思是政策形成過程的透明度，為什麼當時是說八千、一半一半，為什麼要參加團旅？" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "這個說不出來，這個是行政院的指示，我不知道怎麼說（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "跟政委報告一下，今年的變化應該是說原先簽給院的是按照原先的制度走，其實有兩股力量，公務人員希望放寬，觀光局還是希望要去focus一些觀光產業，經濟部認為特約商店也要照顧，因為一次推出就會三年期，每一期在推下一期的時候會檢討，人事總處會調查公務員的意見，觀光局也會就旅行業、旅宿業，特約約定也會由經濟部做，因為我們是用信用卡刷卡，包括收單、發卡銀行都會作銀行的調查。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是聯徵？" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "對，所以我們每一年報告都有這一些面向的檢討，也會開會，今年甚至找一些專家學者來給我們一些建議，各個部會有做前置作業，可能提供問卷或者是召開座談會，所以前置作業部會做了很多關於意見的蒐集。" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "國發會因為政策研擬，我們甚至把之前消費的業別，都會做數據分析，由副主委召開會議，再陳報給行政院。" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "而這次的確是院裡面比較強烈的主張，也就是要救觀光，所以我們事實上報院四進四出，我們的建議，院裡面覺得不行，再退給我們，因此這樣的決議，我們真的只是遵照辦理。" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "所以你叫我去說為什麼會變成這樣？我當然只能按照院裡面，現在還是只能配合院這樣的說明；當然現在院長已經有一些政策上的調整、放寬，現在比較好說明的是，因為各界的意見，所以我們有去放寬了。" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "因此我覺得以這一個部分來說，透明度、公開資訊意見這個一定都有。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "人事行政總處被cue到了。這一個問卷你們是什麼時候做的？" }, { "speaker": "陳明忠", "speech": "國旅卡要續辦的時候，總處會先發文給各主管機關，主管機關會按行政程序，問他的所屬，意見收回來後，我們就會把比如贊成跟反對的意見整理，然後再送給國發會。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一個工作，在這一期大概什麼時候完成？" }, { "speaker": "陳明忠", "speech": "7月完成。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個並不是公開的資料？也就是你們給國發會而已？" }, { "speaker": "陳明忠", "speech": "對，但是徵詢的意見是我們給各主管機關。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "各主管機關不會收到統合過的報告，只有國發會收到？" }, { "speaker": "陳明忠", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你們是產製機關，但是你們只給國發會，沒有給別人？" }, { "speaker": "陳明忠", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "觀光局對於調查……你們知道這個嗎？像比如會說觀光產業會問幾個問項，對於產業有沒有提升營業額，最後給我們一個數字是調查多少的業者，還有多少比例認為有助於業績的提升。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "7、8月嗎？" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "他們大概是7月底把報告給我們的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "政策所形成的基本資料，大概到7、8月國發會就收到了。國發會拿這一些資料給學者？" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "我們會完成簡報，所以我們檢討這一期執行的狀況，有一些什麼問題，如公務員反應什麼問題、業者有什麼建議，我們就會把它這幾個變成討論的事項，部會有共識，然後再報到行政院，看是不是要續辦。下一年國旅卡是不是要繼續辦理，辦理的形式有沒有改變，這個報告就是要報院的依據──我們今年特別慎重，我們有找觀光產業有關的專業學者看有沒有什麼建議，這一次的檢討會議還有邀學者。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛剛所提供這一些資料的部會，人事、經濟、交通等等，在你們的討論會上也是都有來？" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "有。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以提供資料，也看得到其他部會提供的資料，最後綜成出來希望變成什麼東西？" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對這一個提案人來說，不管是一開始給你們的raw data或者是你們整理過的簡報或者是簡報討論完之後變成的一份綜整，我的理解是這三份都不是公開的資料，對不對？" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好比像現在已經決定要怎麼做，我們如果回溯用政策產銷履歷的吉園圃概念，說這一件事情是這樣做出來的，這樣過程的東西公開，之前有過例子或者是有任何類似判斷的原則？我們可以公開到什麼程度？都不可以也是一個回答，但這個是提案人的主訴求，所以確認一下。" }, { "speaker": "賀麗娟", "speech": "之前沒有。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我理解之前沒有。有沒有判斷的原則？這個並不是政策徵詢，這個是產銷履歷。" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "不管是問卷或者是座談會的一個結果分析，對我們來說，如果有需要給很關心的人，我們自己覺得沒有什麼問題，當然可能要看行政院那邊覺得這樣的分析可不可以給，因為這個是為了政策是否可以繼續推動做的，而不是這一個報告公布今年執行的狀況怎麼樣，並沒有打算要公開的一個報告。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "理解。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "會這樣問，是因為之前Uber案的時候，我們知道交通部路政司寫了文情並茂的新聞稿，但民間常常會有一個聲音，就是你形成這一篇文稿、制訂政策的論據在哪裡？民間常常會誤解沒有做這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我們後來特別討論這一件事時，會回去調運研所（交通部運輸研究所）的報告，他們在規劃多元化計程車方案的時候，最後有整理一份簡報，前面都是數據，最後有把這一些數據彙整成一份「應該要這樣子處理Uber」的簡報。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣民間的聲音本來說「你們研究都沒有做」的，才能理解到賀陳旦老師的想法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "關鍵是運研所有做這一個報告，所以才這樣處理。那個報告跟最後做出來的決定，只要不互相矛盾，其實對大家來講這個是有佐證的效果。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我知道以前在形成過程中不公開，是因為怕之前突然冒利益關係人出來翻桌、影響最終政策的決定，但是交通部是已經做完政策決定才送出來，因此我覺得我們這一案可以考慮到什麼程度。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果我們願意揭露到任何程度，比如最後的簡報或者是形成最後簡報之前的問卷結果，反正民間學者也有拿到，這樣的話，一定程度上可以用來回應提案人的第四個訴求。" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "這樣的檢討報告跟最後的政策決定是沒有link的（笑），所以我就說我們原先第一次的報院，是我們覺得目前制度ok，所以希望續辦一期，完全是按照之前的遊戲規則做。民間可能就會說當初這樣檢討，怎麼會跑出這樣？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以把最後的具體建議那一張抽掉，只說問卷是什麼、銀行業者是什麼、觀光業回來的意見是什麼，我覺得這裡面還是有一些價值的資訊。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我不是強制你，而是儘量釋出資訊後，也許你回電時就不需要被採訪了。就是告訴提案人我們放了這三項報告到平台上，有什麼問題再聯絡。這樣這一通電話變得很好打；但如果什麼都不放出來的話，會很難打，提案人會想從你這裡拿到這一些東西。" }, { "speaker": "賀麗娟", "speech": "主席我補充一下，其實在觀光局的那一份檢討報告裡面，當初有一些比較具體的問項，比如業者是否贊成異地隔夜，有這一個東西，提案人會認為當初有這一些具體問項，但是完全沒有問團體旅遊這一件事，可是最後的政策跑出團體旅遊，這樣的報告我們頂多可以告訴他們說我們在檢討政策的時候，有做一些對我們來說算是滿公開的一些徵詢了，是可以的，但是問題是裡面的實質內容卻沒有團體旅遊。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當初沒有問團體旅遊的原因是還沒有遊行？" }, { "speaker": "賀麗娟", "speech": "應該是說完全沒有想到這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那是在9/12遊行之前或者是之後規劃的？因為團體旅遊的人抗議過滿多次了。" }, { "speaker": "賀麗娟", "speech": "當初遊行是遊覽車業者。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，在9月初。" }, { "speaker": "賀麗娟", "speech": "那是遊覽車業者，而且我們也沒有link這樣的東西，如果釋出的話，是不是可以口頭跟她說我們有做這個……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "……如果7月就做這一些基本問項，有理性的人就會知道，我們不可能未卜先知，也就是不可能9、10月突然旅行團變成一件事，對不對？" }, { "speaker": "賀麗娟", "speech": "我們其實有做一些徵詢的動作。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是很不幸，我們徵詢是在抗議之前。" }, { "speaker": "賀麗娟", "speech": "補充的是，提出團體旅遊那一個概念，就我所知比較官方正式的是在行政院……抱歉，我講不出全名。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "觀光振興方案會議。" }, { "speaker": "賀麗娟", "speech": "從那之後，我們是9月報院，那時我們就一直協調，國發會提出很多方案，後來一直follow團體旅遊，整個的過程是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "賀麗娟", "speech": "我們跟提案人能說的是，公開徵詢有做過，但是沒有團體旅遊這樣的想法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得這樣是很好的想法。" }, { "speaker": "賀麗娟", "speech": "後面有沒有比較公開？有啊！在觀光發展委員會推動開會，也有利益團體在裡面建議，但是可能會抱怨沒有公務員的聲音。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有關係，那個是第二案，我們馬上就要處理到那一個案子。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為我們如果什麼都不說明，民間就會認為我們是不是只聽一邊的聲音。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是至少我們列出這一個過程中徵詢過誰，你甚至不需要把人名或日期寫出來，也就是看你們做的程度。好比你看我們一共開過第一次檢討會至第四次檢討會，邀哪一些利益關係群體出現，不用講誰出席。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有公務員說沒有問到公務員，是我們習慣上不會問到公務員（笑），這個是可以討論的。但是在第一案，我們可以有效講說，我們真的不是因為特定的旅遊業者，或者是旅行社來了之後，我們決定只圖利這二十三家旅行社──很多人停留在那一個版本──或者更早的版本，說是只圖利特定幾個縣市的旅行社。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們既然好不容易有機會發email給八千多個關心的人，至少我們把這一件事情講清楚，這是我的想法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "至於裡面要講多清楚，好比簡報要不要拿掉一些頁面，或者是開會的時候是不是需要到出席名單，或是只要到會議的日期或次數等等，那個我覺得是你們專業的來判斷；但是我認為不能完全是空的，也就是隨便外面怎麼講，這樣好像也怪怪的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣ok嗎？這比較像是政治判斷，應該是說我們作為協調者或者是作為PO，不會回過頭來要求業務要做無法承載的事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然如果放出手上的資料這一件事，並不是從頭準備資料，只是要做一個政治判斷做什麼程度，這個其實讓PO知道就可以了。" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "我們的做法是，觀光局接下來要發新聞稿，你們會提供上去，對不對？" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊華", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "我們設法先打電話給這一位提案人，因為他看了以後比較釋懷了，我們再跟他講說這一個政策我們都有檢討、開會，先跟他講說我們都有做這一些意見的徵詢，先看提案人能不能接受，她若有進一步認為徵詢的意見在哪裡，提案人需要我們進一步提供什麼。" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "我們先用電話，如果他ok的話……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "……對啊！這裡有兩個層面，一個是提案人本人，另外一個是連署的八千人。你打電話給提案人，她不會告訴那八千人。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是打電話給她，溝通一個她能接受、不會拍桌的，她能夠接受程度的說辭，我們就可以放到最後的正式回應，不管你要不要附簡報資料。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也就是說，我們告訴提案人的訊息，還是要寫進正式回應裡，讓八千人都知道。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們能夠寫到什麼程度，提案人可以像一個試金石一樣：你發現講這一些，才能讓她點頭，因此正式回應裡面就可以講這一些；如果講了這一些讓提案人翻桌，那正式回應最好不要講比較好，不然八千人會一起翻桌。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也就是說，你可以測試看看，如果提案人覺得不需要提供太多的基本資料，就不用放到回應裡。但如果提案人在意你們到底問了誰、我們從哪一些部會拿意見的話，正式部會的回應裡應放入她點頭為止的意見。" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "剛剛聽起來是用電話跟她談過之後，我們也是從電話中訪談中才知道提案人說國發會政策形成過程要透明，在他們連署的過程中有針對這一個部分徵詢，如果提案當中就有這一個議題，當然我們可能就真的需要提供一些資料。但我剛剛聽觀光局說可能她說國發會還要回應這一個資訊，如果在這一個提案上並沒有針對這一點，而附議的人也不是附議這個……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "提案原文是：「請問本案國發會除了開會之外還有做了哪一些溝通？問了幾個公務員的意見？還是根本黑箱？」，她的文字已經有隱含著說都沒有問公務員的意見，不過我們不要幫她猜想。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果只是想要有一個數字，問了幾個公務員的意見，所有來開會的人都是公務員，所以你可以說：「我們有內部會議，我們至少會過這一些部會，這一些都是公務員，至少有問這一些公務員的意見。」，她說除了看內部的研擬會議還有什麼溝通？你提到學者、特約商店、銀行及徵信業者都有做過溝通。" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "他們都會開人事單位的會議，公務員的建議是什麼，他們希望放寬什麼，這個很具體，所以應該是那一些的資訊是從……召開的會議是由那一個人事的代表來開，所以在這個部分也是廣徵公務人員。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣的回答非常好。" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "就把原先的報告給我們，那一個報告如果真的要，我們可以……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "……那一份報告有什麼國家機密，或者是營業秘密，或者是個資的原因不能公開嗎？" }, { "speaker": "陳明忠", "speech": "因為我手邊沒有原案，報告的細節無法清楚說明，大概的問法是，比如今年要檢討了，我們會給服務機關去問公務人員，例如，第一個是贊成繼續維持，第二個是要不要廢止，第三個大概就是open的問題，當初問的時候，大部分的公務員都贊同現行的制度繼續實施。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也就是舊制。" }, { "speaker": "陳明忠", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是現在是說新制。" }, { "speaker": "陳明忠", "speech": "我們還有第三個開放性的問題，也有少部分的機關是認為應該要廢止國旅卡，應該要還我不休假的加班費，但是我們調查的時候，還沒有沒有新的情況出現，大概那時贊成繼續實施國旅卡的比例會比較多，所以我們是把這樣的數據提供給國發會。" }, { "speaker": "陳明忠", "speech": "至於詳細資料是否公開，我覺得比較詳細的數字恐怕不太適宜。應該是說，我們經過這樣的調查程序，而在這一個程序裡面，大多數公務人員也都支持，換句話說，就是贊成繼續實施國旅卡的方向，這樣說明可能會比較合適。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以啊！你們跑過什麼程序，也就是所得到的統計之資料，那一些原始的數據也是要有，不然怎麼會知道如何跑過這一個程序？如果自行寫出來的東西，你們有做基本的質化或者是量化的分析，好比2％的人有寫應該要怎麼樣之類的，你不需要把它break down機關，可以說有看到這一些人的聲音。不太經由統計的結果，而反向推導出哪一個機關寫的程度，我覺得是可以提供。因此這樣的話，第一案是一定要有，但是如果第一案可以在最後的綜合回應，也就是二十天之後一併提供的話，至少調查程序至少有問過公務員，很具體回沒有公務員的這幾個字，看能不能在十九天之內給出一個公開的版本，我們先拿來回第一案。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "至於第二案可能就需要更詳細一點的資料，這樣可以嗎？" }, { "speaker": "陳明忠", "speech": "（點頭）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們就這樣處理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "訴求釐清已經出來了，如果訴求釐清出來的逐字稿，看能不能公開？如果沒有的話，這樣子PO或者是業務單位，一般是PO要寫一封email給提案人說我們即將公開這一份逐字稿，看一下有沒有錯字，這個是最不會有爭議的狀況。如果她自己覺得講的這一句話上媒體好像不太對，她自己會刪掉，我們只是釐清，大部分只是問問題，所以這一邊其實沒有什麼好刪的，也就是請她自我審查一次，自我審查之後沒有問題的版本就可以公開了，那個是訴求釐清，到那一個程度第二步就做完了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一件事如果我們坐在這邊的人都覺得可以授權PO做的話，那就不用再簽，因為這一個事是提案人講了算，不太需要業務單位的意見，我們只是把逐字稿給提案人，提案人就刪掉後公布，所以到第二步的時候就不需要再簽過來，如果可以的話，就請PO做這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "楊惠如", "speech": "以交通部自己的內部權責分工上來講，我們請觀光局來回應。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你已經交給觀光局了？" }, { "speaker": "楊惠如", "speech": "我們是有一個流程，是在觀光局那邊回應的，所以政委提到PO跟提案者聯繫的話，我們請觀光局。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好啊！那就同一個人，就寫一封mail或者是打電話，用任何溝通的方式，跟她說逐字稿整理在這邊，在公布之前給她一、兩天的時間，如果她覺得沒有特定要修正的話就趕快修正，如果沒有的話，我們就會公布在「Join」上；也就是要經過第二步。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為如果沒有公佈的話，我們在第三步回應她在電話裡釐清的訴求時，從外面看起來會覺得提案人本來沒有問這一個，或者是本來寫的文字並不是這樣，所以我們要對齊第二步再做第三步。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第二步要先公開，大家才知道我們在做第三步，不然不公開大家會覺得以「第零步」的提案文字做──但大家對文字的解釋都不一樣──因此要公開每一個過程讓大家知道，因此這一件事可以的話，我們就看能不能週末左右把它完成，至少這一週，如果真的不行的話……" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊華", "speech": "應該可以……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這邊都是原則上，並沒有說沒有發生會怎麼樣，因為接下來就放假了，所以我們盡可能12月30日通知提案人，然後告訴他說3日來上班的時候會公布，如果他都沒有改的話，就以逐字稿的原樣公布，還是要給他一個期限，如果沒有問題的話，訴求釐清的公布，我們就是抓1月3日。" }, { "speaker": "楊惠如", "speech": "不好意思，再打擾一下，因為在權責上面來講，以現在平台的設計，觀光局是沒有辦法上去做任何資料的刊登，所以全部都要到部裡面，但是到部裡面來還是有一定的簽核程序，所以1月3日的話，這個公文流程應該是來不及。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果只是確認提案人的字樣跟上來的話，為什麼要簽核？" }, { "speaker": "楊惠如", "speech": "還是要有一個流程把資料報過來，我們才可以上稿。如果以純上稿的角度。那麼還是要帶公文過來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那個要簽到什麼？是到哪一級？" }, { "speaker": "楊惠如", "speech": "局那邊有公文流程過來。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊華", "speech": "有兩個方式，局裡面簽了，我們在簽裡面已經寫說經過提案人確認，這一個會議大家都有共識，我們就用mail的方式給部裡。第二種方式比較正式，如果要逐級簽核就會比較花時間，我們在這一個會議上……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "……以在這一個會的結論來證明。每一個部的方式不一樣，但是至少提案人電話逐字稿這一件事，我想可以由觀光局這邊全權決定，是以觀光局這邊寫的文字，交通部只是代為上稿，跟決行沒有關係，應該可以用email辦理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果事前預先得到證明的話，今天或者是明天做這一件事──如果是這樣的話，3日做這一件事，PO就確認內容有沒有缺失，所以還是1月3日做這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們要把手上有的資料來盤點，這邊提到訴求釐清之後，主要是明天中央社會有一份新聞稿，明天是不是這一個期程？" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊華", "speech": "今天會發一份新聞稿，我們的做法是把新聞稿以交通部的發出去，中央社一定會有，但是他們什麼時候登……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "中央社什麼時候會收到？" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊華", "speech": "應該是明天。" }, { "speaker": "葉寧", "speech": "部跟局習慣上會放到他們的機關網站，可以連結。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我會說中央社主要的目的是，它是一個公開可得的網站，當然我理解新聞稿也會放在自己的部或局裡面，這個時間比較是我們可以自己控制的，但是這兩個時間差會差很久嗎？" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊華", "speech": "應該不會，局裡面發的新聞來講，當然看新聞性，這一件事應該是即時。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一件事的新聞性滿高的（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊華", "speech": "我們會放在自己的網站。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以明天會放在你們的網站且發給中央社。如果到下班前，中央社有刊，就用他們的網址；如果沒有的話，就用交通部的網址，而這個時間是12月30日下班前。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "從這邊到1月21日還有一些時間，我們就開始做資料的轉譯。我剛剛聽到有幾件事，一件事是人力處會評估之前哪一些報過院，但是我們理解不會有團旅的簡報或者是資料可以釋出，這一件事如果評估到可以釋出的程度，我們就會看一下這一些東西是不是以他的原樣釋出或者需要經過編排或者是轉譯，但那個並不會是部會做，那個是PO來做，如果你們的原樣就可以用，一樣上稿就可以了，這個還需要時間來作判斷，這個仍然變成是具體回應提案人要求形成政策的過程訴求，這一個訴求我們剛剛已知至少人力這邊會有統計資料，那幾個裡面會有一個來源。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以你們的raw data，當然還要給我們一點轉譯的時間，所以看20日之前你們什麼時候可以給出來？" }, { "speaker": "陳漢宇", "speech": "那一份報告是調查出來的意見，蒐集回來一整份的意見，那一份報告已經有包括多少百分比的公務員贊成或不贊成，那是一份報告，直接提供就可以了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大部分的工作是在裡面刪掉太細節的東西，如果不需要做這一個工作的話……" }, { "speaker": "陳漢宇", "speech": "……之前是提供給國發會，或者我們需要摘錄？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有要你們摘錄，如果你們評估是原始資料就可以提供，這樣就直接提供，我們轉譯上比較容易。" }, { "speaker": "陳明忠", "speech": "就是原本給國發會的資料，我們再提供一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就一份，我們就copy給所有人。明天可以做嗎？" }, { "speaker": "陳明忠", "speech": "要簽一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以大概6日左右，大概一個禮拜。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "已經給國發會的報告，所以不用那麼久。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你們按照實際的講，我沒有要追你們的意思。" }, { "speaker": "陳明忠", "speech": "我們初步估計大概4號提供。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那就這樣。1月4日不是資料釋出，而是會開始接到人力這邊的資料，其他就會是你們手上別的資料，包含你們（國發會人力處）自己學者座談這一些，要去評估哪一些可以放出來，如果不能放出來就直接說不能，如果可以的話，我們會再綜整誰看得懂的樣子，我們同樣是1月4日去判斷哪一些原始資料可以釋出。" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "政委是不是可以給我們多一點的時間？6日是禮拜五，我們的想法是就那一次檢討的簡報，我們把它做一些調整。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "看起來不要差太多（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "對，我們在哪一天有開會，我們有就各界的意見檢討，這樣的資料我們把它修剪之後，我們給我們的長官再簽出去。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "什麼時候可以到？" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "下個禮拜五之前。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "很好，那就是我剛剛講的6日。我可以假設觀光局也是一樣嗎？你們在發完新聞稿之後，如果還有任何需要再附帶提出來的，也可以沒有，沒有也沒有關係，我們就是6日收單，如果你有哪一些希望我們在綜合報導裡面進一步呈現的，好比像接下來因為報帳系統的修改，像自由行或者是臺灣好行或者是一些預定期程，或者修改需要花那麼多時間之類的，我也不知道有哪一些，如果有任何新聞稿當中限於篇幅不能給的，但是你們希望越多人知道越好的東西，我們一樣在1月6日收單，接下來就是編輯的工作了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "人事這邊4日可以提供非常感謝，不過大家都是6日收單（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "陳漢宇", "speech": "我們4日應該可以給，最晚則在6號以前給。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "接下來要做的事情是訴求的研議，但是這一個訴求很不幸的，今年已經沒有研議的時間了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在這一件事上，國發會不管是要解釋徵詢範圍，或者是形成政策透明化，其實都是「綠燈（意：可行方案）」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "取消8,000元的限制，在這個年度不可能？還是有翻盤的機會？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以這個是絕對不可能。第三個是有沒有以前的1元現在算成2元，有沒有別的優惠方案？" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "沒有。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所個這個也是紅燈。綜整一下：" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "📗 我們以前有擴大徵詢，只是大家不知道。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "📙 取消這一個限制，至少今年不可能，但是可以放寬。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "📕 額外的優惠，今年沒有談到，所以就這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因此每一個訴求的回應方向，我們現在就已經決定了，其實沒有什麼好研議的，是這個意思嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有的話，剩下就是回應了，如何把兩個綠燈、兩個紅燈寫得比較不傷感情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在這樣的前提底下，訴求研議的工作，我們就會請在拿到1月6日所有人的綜合資料之後，我們開始擬一個回應的稿子，而這一個回應的稿子會建立在這一個資料上，會用轉譯過的資料來去逐點把提案人的主訴求，可能兩個ok、兩個不ok，把它解釋清楚，這一個工作也是觀光局同一位打電話的朋友做嗎？" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊華", "speech": "我們觀光局會負責。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一個資料釋出之後，我們再來看一下時程，我們6日收到。你們最後的正式回應稿，我們假設21日出來，你們內部的簽核流程要跑多久？因為這個就是代表你們部了，所以這個是要簽的。" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊華", "speech": "這個要簽到部嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "要簽到部。" }, { "speaker": "楊惠如", "speech": "這個要正式簽到部裡面來的，所以要留公文時間的流程，估計要一個禮拜的時間。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果20日要回應，表示13日一定要開始送出公文？" }, { "speaker": "楊惠如", "speech": "我們必須要收到觀光局的來文。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果已經拖到16日早上才來文的話，20日就不一定跑得到了，是這個意思？" }, { "speaker": "楊惠如", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以這就表示說13日從觀光局的角度來看要有一個正式回應稿，我們這邊就會跟觀光局的同仁試著在6至13日的時間裡面，把這一些可以用的再綜合提案人的四個主訴求，結合成一篇看起來比較有誠意而不是作文的東西，而這一個協作的工作，就是6至13日做，原則上我們不會再擴大利害關係人的徵詢，但是我們可以預先聲明說各部會在6日提出跟這一個東西相關的基本資料，然後這一個基本資料到正式回應是13日至20日去做簽核，所以網友們會20日看到，但是我們作業時間只有6日至13日的這一個禮拜，這樣大家都清楚嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那麼回應期程今天就可以公告了，這個應該是PO寫嗎？" }, { "speaker": "楊惠如", "speech": "再跟政委確認一下，如果今天所謂的期程公告的話，以政委這邊指示的話，3日的部分把提案人的訴求做釐清之後上去，上去了之後，當然20日是正式回應，12月20日至1月3日之間，還要把什麼時候會蒐集到部會的資料，也要上傳嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不對，不是3日，我們29日會跟提案人聯絡，然後這一件事已經發生了，這個必須要寫進去。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "接下來我們在聯絡完提案人之後，我們按照一開始對他的爭點釐清，我們即將在30日發布一個新聞稿，然後去address提案人一些還能夠放寬或者有沒有圖利的部分，我們會在30日做這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一個預告是29日就預告，這個是最好的，但是如果你沒有辦法今天就上稿，我們就是30日跟著新聞稿一起上稿，這樣的話，我們在30日的期程預告就是說我們已經在29日聯絡了提案人，因為這樣的關係，我們在30日為了平復八千多人的官怨（笑），至少發了一個新聞稿講這一件事的來龍去脈還可以開放的空間；而這一個東西的連結，如果下班前中央社就有的話，就直接附那一個連結，如果沒有的話，就附交通部的連結，這個都是30日回應的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "接下預告1月3日我們會把提案人的訴求釐清，包含以逐字稿的形式放在「Join」上，3日至20日可以說各部會都同意會在1月10日公布跨部會研商的這一個提案過程，也就是我們今天的逐字稿，我們今天是有逐字稿的，這個是中間可以釋出的東西，也就是剛剛各位講的話，裡面提到裡面回去準備，我們是十天釋出，所以1月10日可以放「Join」，自10日至20日不用放任何東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "四個時間點：12月30日跟新聞稿一起發，3日發提案人的逐字稿，10日發今天的逐字稿，20日發最後的回應。期程上會不會有困難？有沒有要調整？1月10日的逐字稿，大家回頭編輯之後，如果你要發的話，就要發這一份逐字稿跑公文。10日是禮拜二，也就是看大家是不是週末的時候改一下逐字稿，可能3日就開始跑公文，然後把我們今天的逐字稿看能不能在10日簽完發出去？如果覺得2日至10日太趕的話，也可以改成11日或12日，看你們。" }, { "speaker": "楊惠如", "speech": "如果可以的話，再多兩天的時間。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以啊！那就12日。這樣跟13日一樣，那就13日好了，所以我們就跑一個今天的逐字稿，大家這兩天或者是週末或者是連假的時候改一改，改完之後大家就拿這一份去簽，看能不能在13日的時候把它拋出來，這樣技術上可以嗎？" }, { "speaker": "楊惠如", "speech": "跟政委說明一下，因為牽涉內部的權責劃分問題。如果要在這個時候公布，可以，內部權責會再討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒問題。因為這個是第一次試，具體建議之後，下次工作坊就可以分享了（笑），所以這一案就這樣了，如果大家都沒有問題的，反正事後會收到逐字稿，如果有問題就改逐字稿。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那就這樣子，我們可不可以中場休息一下五分鐘，再討論第二案。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "為了讓大家準時下班，我就不用再介紹一次架構，反正架構是一樣的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "聽潘處長是說三個方面已經協調過了，這一次以國發會人力處為主要的聯絡人，好比去聯繫提案人是人力處做，需要資料的時候是另外兩個機關在協調、提供，是這樣嗎？" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "我想這一個案子願意把它接下來，剛剛業務會報，我們主委也有特別指示這一個案子，也就是所謂的廢掉之後是不是可以如實發放加班費，這個部分要請人事總處的評估。另外是對觀光產業的部分，刷卡就73億的挹注，對觀光的影響，包括也請經濟部去評估那一些商圈的特約店的影響，這個是跨部會，我們願意做這一個窗口。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一案我其實唯一的目的，是不希望公務員跟觀光業彼此污名化下去，這對大家沒有好處。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在這一案的過程裡面，至少讓連署的這一堆人，不管國旅卡是舊制或者是新制具體發揮什麼效果，如果真的要取消的話，要看到會造成什麼影響。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這裡有個技術問題，我們不是才剛簽了三年的約，可以說取消就取消嗎？現在只是在討論求解範圍，具體的契約是怎麼簽的？" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊華", "speech": "我們有收單銀行跟發單銀行，形式上有一個議價的程序，其實費用應該是沒有……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "……沒有採購？" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊華", "speech": "（搖頭）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以技術上是可行的？" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊華", "speech": "可能還要問一下解約這一個部分，還要問法制的意見，解約並不是完全不可行。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也就是沒有違約罰則。技術上並沒有不能提前解約的狀況？" }, { "speaker": "陳瓊華", "speech": "（點頭）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果不能提前解約，我們在聯絡提案人之前就要先講這一件事，說訴求是要三年之後才能滿足。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "現在既然技術上可行，那就要當成一件事來處理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外這一件事我們叫做「督導層級」，也就是這一件事的檢討目前是落在國發會身上，所以國發會如果好比像這一整個案子六十天之後要擴大徵詢之類的，也是以國發會的名義在做嗎？所以基本上是您點頭就可以嗎？" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "不是，要陳主委點頭。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一案的層級就是陳添枝主委。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果現在要決定回應期程的話，也是本身要讓陳主委知道，這個就跟前一案不太一樣，這個是正當程序在跑。如果大家都可以的話，我就在政務會議裡，和陳添枝政委說一聲：「我們還是要討論這一件事，你是督導層級最高的長官。」" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一案的提案人是王白青，他有留下聯絡電話跟email嗎？有人聯絡過他？" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "目前還沒。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是我們剛剛是說如果陳老師知道且同意之後，聯絡了之後就是國發會PO，但是現在不知道國發會的PO是誰，所以變成自動您去聯絡嗎？或者是等國發會的PO出來？" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "國發會的PO的確目前是在簽核的過程當中，國發會當時簽核的PO並不是一個人，而是一個team，所以我是從這一個角度來回應，因為會依照不同的業務面去作處理，所以如果是這樣的話，是不是乾脆人力處直接跟提案人作溝通、瞭解這一個案子？當然我所謂的溝通也是跟觀光局的方式一樣，不一定是面對面溝通。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你們約他來是一個方式，打電話先聽他講清楚是一個方式，因為我們通常在PO去聯絡的時候，我們會希望PO把這一個業務搞清楚，不然就是連問都問不出正確的問題來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個很重要的是，我們希望提案人講出真正的心意，並不一定真正寫出來的東西，重點是要確定提案人要看到什麼，如果人力處可以做這一件事的話，代表PO不管是誰都是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "有點像交通部的PO，交通部的PO是另外一位，但是那一個案子實際上比較跟觀光局有關，所以觀光局就直接跟提案人聯絡。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣很好，未來要跟提案人聯絡及逐字稿上稿等等，是簽到人力處，國發會至少在第二步的時候只負責協助跟上稿。" }, { "speaker": "潘國才", "speech": "我們會協助，溝通的部分還是麻煩，不然我們問了半天也不知道是不是問到要點。" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "這樣很好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣的話，我們就要知道會議分工及說明會議定位、提供紀錄，你們內部大概會需要多久的作業時間？直到你們聯絡到提案人為止？" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "我們應該可以很快聯絡到他，現在就是要逐字稿，也就是把他的意思變成逐字稿。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果他真的很想見面就再約，不然電話就可以了，至少先打個電話。" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "這個可以很快，應該下個禮拜。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為也要看提案人的時間，我們可以說是大概1月3日做這一件事？" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "他是留電話跟email嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "我們先電話聯絡，如果找不到再用email約。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好啊！我們是1月3日開始聯絡他，但是釐清跟逐字稿上稿這一些都需要作業時間，所以如果說1月3日他沒有回電的話，可能跨年睡比較晚之類（笑），我們會一直試到1月6日為止。我們可以這樣講嗎？" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "可以。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "先確認訴求，然後再做資料釋出的動作。這個比較特別，因為這個是兩案的權衡：一個是留著國旅卡，不管現在的限制是什麼；另外一案不管是單純廢除而沒有配套，都是要先通盤檢討，所有這一些要加在一起才可以討論國旅卡的存廢。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "還有一個是對觀光業造成多大的不利益等等，這一個工作我理解國旅卡剛推的時候是比較認真在做，因為畢竟要知道有什麼效益。" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "我在想說效益的部分，如果繼續推的效益比較ok，就像我們的報告裡面，本來就有評估，比如有增加一些商店的營業額或者是推了之後，觀光業也受惠，這個部分有一些面向，但是現在比較要評估的是如果廢除之後，我們剛剛講的是公務員是不是會恢復不休假的加班費，這個一定要評估，現在是不是回到原點或者觀光業者會覺得有什麼衝擊，當然我們會講公務員現在也會引導他們這樣，但是的確當沒有，如果廢除就已經沒有國旅卡，而是發給他錢，也不一定對他有什麼要求，這樣一定會限縮。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想問的是，因為他的提案提到比照勞基法的新制來計算，這一個東西相比人事總處沒有做過，因為以前沒有新版的勞基法。" }, { "speaker": "陳明忠", "speech": "（搖頭）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以是無從研擬起，這等於是一個全新的案子，如果我沒有搞錯的話。或者以前有類似的評估？" }, { "speaker": "陳明忠", "speech": "有關取消跟繼續執行，裡面涉及到是否改發不休假加班費。目前媒體跟報紙所講的一些，比如他們的爭點其實有的部分是不太正確的，像說取消了以後，好像政府可以結餘80億，那其實可能是有誤的。如果要取消國旅卡的話，勢必要有配套，而配套的方式以我們人事總處的評估，就是落實所謂的休假制度，各機關以後都要排休，但假設機關因業務需要而召回排休假人員，就會產生不休假的加班費。" }, { "speaker": "陳明忠", "speech": "事實上，實施國旅卡以後，國旅卡補助費跟發不休假的加班費金額來講的話，目前是國家佔了公務人員的便宜。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大概多少？" }, { "speaker": "陳明忠", "speech": "假如我們從每人1萬6,000元的補助費來看，以各個職等推估計算，國家要多付出26~27億。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這比李來希老師說的80億少（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "陳明忠", "speech": "目前沒有一個很精準的數字，這個是過去的推估。" }, { "speaker": "陳明忠", "speech": "我的意思是，如果這個要取消的話，也就是政府要完全不支付不休假加班費的話，各機關全部都要把假休完。但事實上這麼多年以來，公務人員不太可能把假全部休完；如果像我講的，你要排休的話，且維持不休假加班費這個制度，政府可能要付出更多的經費。" }, { "speaker": "陳明忠", "speech": "其實目前我們的感覺是，從92年實施國旅卡以來，坦白來講公務人員也逐漸接受這樣的方式，而且大家也比較認同強制休假，再配合國旅卡的部分，一方面比較可以能夠落實公務人員休假的制度，而且也可以同時配合政府一些相關的政策。" }, { "speaker": "陳明忠", "speech": "依據我們過去的調查，公務人員比較能夠接受的是繼續維持國旅卡制度，但他們不太喜歡其他像這一次比較嚴格的限制，也就是如團體旅遊等方式，這一個部分是人事總處針對這一次有做這樣的研析。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你們剛剛提到，大部分的公務員認為舊制比折算不休假加班費也沒有壞到哪裡，他們願意用國旅卡，這個意思是鼓勵休假，因為休假才可以刷，因為這樣子所以休到十四天跟只是休了一天或半天把國旅卡刷完的，你們統計上有任何的平均或者是中位數的統計嗎？" }, { "speaker": "陳明忠", "speech": "這個數字是按照人事資料系統分職等推估的，不是很精確，唯一可以講的是實施國旅卡之後，職等越高的，像簡任或者是薦任的，其實他們是吃虧佔比較多，像低職等的可能有稍微佔到便宜。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好比像吃虧的，有真的因為這樣子就休了七天或者是十四天，或者大部分的人是休一天就刷掉？" }, { "speaker": "陳明忠", "speech": "休假天數各種態樣都有，但中央部會一般來說十四天是休不完的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也就是休到國旅卡刷完為止。還是會繼續鼓勵休假愈多愈好？" }, { "speaker": "陳明忠", "speech": "可能不會鼓勵多多休假。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我今天才知道我也有十四天特休，但是我一天都沒有使用（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實第三步驟能夠釋出的資料，維持原案我們的資料是相對多的，國旅卡的資料部分我們是相對少的，我們不知道相對休假的影響是多少，如果我們開始排一些配套措施，是不是真的能夠有效撙節國庫的支出，好比第一年省到25億，可能以後慢慢好一點，也就是我們是憑著直覺來講話，並沒有拿證據來證明的模型，可以這樣說嗎？" }, { "speaker": "陳明忠", "speech": "（點頭）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們有一個可能，就是如實讓提案人知道現狀，先不用做額外的事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們只需要把剛剛講話的逐字稿，配上各部會手上現有的統計資料，開放、整理之後，來做一些報導。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個可能，我們真的願意因為提案人的關係，來試著做一些排休的預期是怎麼樣？如果最後的正式回應是要擴大利益關係人的徵詢，尤其是要問旅遊業的話，除了既有的不利益之外，要有哪些配套讓公務人員休假可望因此增加，因此他們更願意消費？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在這樣的前提底下，我們何時願意去做這樣具體配套的研究？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然這裡面還有牽涉到，如果新制出來，即使是調整過的新制出來之後，大家使用國旅卡的具體樣態是會改變的，我們取消掉之後，本來的利益都是用新制算出來的，所以其實不知道兩個是否差距一樣大，因為現在新制實行效果也不知道。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有沒有人因為想這樣的話，就多做取消國旅卡的研究嗎？新制上路後，你們有沒有要開任何研究案？或者是任何想做的事情？如果都沒有，也可以老實說。" }, { "speaker": "陳明忠", "speech": "目前沒有規劃，但我們會配合政策辦理相關事項。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那就是這樣子，這樣很好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在資料釋出的時候，我們現有的政策資料，也就是國旅卡的存在上有這一些資料，如果不做額外研究案的情況下，大家手上都是現成的，對吧？在這個前提下，這邊做訴求釐清的同一週，我們就可以把手上所有國旅卡所造成的效益、國旅卡實際使用狀況，以及造成的國庫節省，剛剛是說節省26億──比起廢除來講──在不做額外任何研究的情況之下，仍然可以將所有相關的資料，都公佈成開放資料。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果1/6可以做這一件事的話，我們一個禮拜做轉譯的工作，試著在1/13日左右，拿資料去轉譯成比較是大家看得懂的東西，當然大家就會發現說其實要拿新制算排休影響的話，其實我們手上也還沒有資料，但是這個可以很誠實說我們手上沒有資料。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果1/6都可以給的話，我們就1/13做釋出，這樣可以嗎？" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "針對這一個議題，我覺得有幾個要釐清的，因為這個是公務人員提出來的，可能在意的是要廢除，後面的議題到底直接聚焦於這個部分對於公務人員有沒有配套，然後到底是不是可以恢復他的加班費，以及配套措施是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "像我剛剛會提到的是主委指示，如果國旅卡廢除之後會有更廣的影響，我們是要為了這一個提案，除了這個部分外，到最後因為影響很大，會影響到觀光業等，但是公務員在意的不是那個部分，他們是覺得勞工現在的權益都已經這樣了，所以那個方向是不是要聚焦在那一些？" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "因此我說要請觀光局評估；但當然很難評估，我們如果只能用一個數據，也就是之前國旅卡刷了多少，在旅宿多少產業，我們就是只能用這樣的數據。" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "而這一些資料都要釋出，或者能不能去恢復到不休假的加班費，可不可以回到過去？政府有沒有針對公務人員這部分評估，是不是要比照新版的勞基法？我的意思是，到底要把它層面擴大，或者聚焦在是對這個部分的影響。" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "我們的主委是認為這個影響如果從整個政策或者國家的角度，應該是看更大、更廣的；然而我們現在是要回應的，是要在這一個時間點就講很多嗎？比如說不能取消或者是對於加班費這一個部分沒有辦法恢復，對於其他的業別有影響？到底需要回應到什麼程度？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我一剛開始說這一案處理的目的，是希望觀光產業跟公務員不要繼續彼此污名化，這個是最大的要求；除此之外，我個人沒有別的要求。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為目前確實在特定媒體上他們會隔空喊話，例如有人說國旅卡應該全部用在新制上。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "反過來講，對於台灣觀巴，也有對他們行程的一些不實流言。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我覺得如果不處理這一件事，就國旅卡本身，已經會造成不必要的對立。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實現在的討論，有一些對立出現了，我的整個目的其實是我們在制訂這一種大政策的時候，都是看整體影響，但是對於提案人而言，可能一時義憤填膺，所以看到自己的相對利益或是不利益，或者是名譽上利益或不利益，或者是尊嚴上的利益或不利益。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們希望整個過程，讓提案人可以看到旅遊業、旅行業或觀光業因為國旅卡的關係，有照顧他們的工作；反過來講，公務人員拿這一個東西也不一定是福利，總體來講對簡任以上是虧的，這兩個都是事實層面的東西，如果能夠充分揭露的話，可以讓大家的感受聚焦。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "現在大家都是看到一部分的事實，而且不一定是事實，然後就發表強烈的感受，所以我的具體想法是把資料釋出的時候，把利益關係方所在意的事實都能夠提出，我只在意這個，其他都不在意。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我剛剛問資料是比較廣的，包含旅遊業，廣義的觀光業、主計及國庫等等，在整個國旅卡造成的相對利益與不利益。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然這個是比較大的政策網絡，我們長期以來，一直沒有辦法讓一般人知道整個政策的形成方法，所以這個就是要做轉譯的工作，不然大家就卡在小我的利益上，沒有辦法做公共討論，我的想法是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "資料釋出是各單位都釋出來，然後由這邊去做嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你們只要做最基本的原始資料提供，原始資料提供之後，我們會辦工作坊。" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "我的意思是原始資料，像剛剛講的對加班費或者是能不能排休，要人事總處，我們真的沒有辦法寫。他們先透過我們這邊，彙整起來而提供嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我具體的期待是，我們在1月18日與20日留兩天的工作坊，這兩天的工作坊我們會把所有部會的PO都找來，也就是去演練訴求釐清、研議之關鍵技能，所以我現在的想法是到13日把各部會覺得可以公開，認為跟有相關的，不管是過去的資料或現在的判斷，或者是要不要開的研究案都提供的話，我們會跟開工作坊的老師們花一些時間去編教材，讓PO在練習的時候把這個弄成大家看得懂的東西，是學習主動願意做的工作，都已經願意做工作坊了，不如把這一個東西應該訴求研議或者是這一個東西如何釋出大家看得比較懂的東西，在工作坊裡面進行練習，所以18、20日各練習一次之後，我的想法是我們就可以決定內部跟外部是不是可以更需要聯繫更多的外部利益關係人等等。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "先釐清，釐清訴求之後，我們在13日或之前把大家手上能夠有的相關所有資料，最後不一定會釋出，但是都先集合起來，最後定調、定性或者是溝通規則，延到工作坊的時候來決定，我的想法是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "是我們要蒐集嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "我們要告訴他們說提供什麼給我？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他們也可以主動提供更多。" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "我們擔心如果沒有確定的話，他們沒有辦法提供，我們就傻眼。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "簡單來講本來是國發會的PO team，但是剛剛國發會就已經給你們(國發會人力發展處)了，你們認為要多少資料才能做出總覽，再跟他們兩個部會要。按照實際的狀況，沒有就是沒有，他們連署了八千人或者是九千人只是確認我們坐在這邊開會，並不是一定要去開研究案，那個是完全不同的事，所以大家手上有的就有，如果你認為需要更多的，你就跟他們要，如果大家一個禮拜可以作業為限，不然到13日也拿不出來。" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "我們蒐集好之後……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "……就給PO群組，PO群組會在13日至18日的工作坊中間，試著變成教材的一部分，工作坊的時候，大家就一起來做正當擴大程序的規劃，所以到20日的時候，工作坊結束之後，應該會有一個版本，然後回給你們，你們再自己看一下如果代表國發會這樣子給出去，大家能不能接受。但是這一個東西的判斷，我覺得你們可以花比較久的時間，我也沒有覺得我們這邊出什麼，你們就一定要做什麼，可能在工作坊結束之後，我們就要開一個會，來談說學員們談論出來的回應方式跟議題範圍，你們能不能接受，大部分是會想要縮小，但也有可能想要擴大（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "我們第一次要處理這樣，也碰到這麼多部會，我們當窗口的話，我們在資料整理時，我們可不可以說比如針對這一個部分人事總處分析的狀況？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以啊！" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "我們可不可以把部會提供的經各部會綜整，還有觀光產業的分析？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以啊！我們昨天開完會後的精神，每一個主協辦不用硬分，也就是你可以跨領域，這個是完全可以的。我們只是要討論說不要變成兩邊提供的資料分別上稿，而互相矛盾，所以還是要有一個窗口，而這一個窗口可以完全只是左手進、右手出都沒有問題，現在是要做轉譯的工作，在收到的時候，再等個一個禮拜左右，等工作坊的學員們完成一次轉譯練習，然後再看你們能不能上稿或者還要改都可能，或者至少當時國發會PO team都已經出現了，你可以請他們幫忙，但是就是以業務上來講，所以你不需要做額外二手或者是三手的編輯工作，這樣你瞭解嗎？" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "ok。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果這樣的話，我再複述一次：在過年完之後第一天上班日，林至美就會聯絡提案人，聯絡完之後，我們到週末時間，如果提案人希望見面的話，我們請國發會的PO網絡，以及約青年諮詢委員會願意來的就跟提案人見個面，到那時才會具體把他的訴求跟訴求背後到底想要看到什麼，是想不要污名化軍公教，或者是要多領一些現金──這要看他的職等和單位──我們要確認他的真實意向。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以寫一下回應期程，上稿是你自己就可以上稿嗎？你有帳號？" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "可以協助。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "看明天是不是可以回應上去？如果做不到，那就是過完年，禮拜二你們聯絡到提案人的時候再寫回應期程，但是我覺得這兩個不會有差別，可以先上就先上。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "比較有誠意就明天，我們先寫一個回應期程給處長看一下，這個比較簡單。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是幾月幾日可以看到這樣。" }, { "speaker": "王國政", "speech": "我們會協助這一個部分。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "至少下一個禮拜會有提案人的逐字稿，然後整理好一個禮拜的時間，也就是可能25日之類的，我們會把轉譯過的資料上網，六十天之內會做具體回應，中間可能會有一次以上的擴大徵詢，這個不需要先答應，也就是標準格式，我相信你已經處理很多次了，大概是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "期程是要講到最完整的嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不用，我們有三個時間點，聯繫提案人、公布資料跟最後回應，中間可能會有一次以上的擴大徵詢。" }, { "speaker": "林至美", "speech": "還是不需要排到那個部分？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。如果都沒有問題的話，那就謝謝大家。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "問", "speech": "有關vTaiwan跟Join平臺在機制設計上，你覺得這樣的網路平臺在設計上跟以前你印象的政府機關成立的這種論壇有沒有什麼不一樣？這樣的網路平臺，Join或vTaiwan它有沒有去解決或改善在公共政策諮詢長期以來的一些問題？" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "對我來說，我其實不太知道過往政府在網路這個部份所謂公共政策的平臺是什麼。但我大體可以分兩塊來說，第一個是以vTaiwan跟Join如果也是讓公眾去接觸公共政策議題feedback給政府的話，我以前比較有接觸的大概是公民審議的委託計畫。我覺得就整個背後操作的邏輯來看，我覺得最大的差異是，過往政府委託給學術單位之後，那個計畫會感覺跟政府就比較無關，然後它並不需要不斷的持續性的提供資料，或是持續性的面對民眾，或是最後的回應有很多曖曖昧昧的空間。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "可是在Join跟vTaiwan我看到的是，co-work的情形清楚，跟過去的操作在這一塊很不同。所以，我看到比較像是後臺的事情，但我覺得這個後臺的事情很重要，因為透過這個後臺的事情才有機會去改變或影響公務體系在政策規劃中的一些改變。我覺得這是我認為對公部門來講最重要的一個回饋。當然參與者也會有些不一樣。誠實的說，我並不確定過去的網路平臺在政策的蒐集回應怎麼處理？對我來說，因為我接觸Join的案子比較多，所以它的狀況不一樣，它又回到主責業務單位，所以我覺得去談它的vTaiwan本來就有本質上的不同，但我不知道下一個階段的vTaiwan會變成怎麼樣。因為，不清楚的是在回應這一塊，vTaiwan的背後有幾個議題，也不是全部的議題，是由蔡政委在背後做主導，那其實我記得第一次唐鳳找我去，還有跟科法所，然後跟一些參與g0v的朋友談的時候，我就有提出說我覺得這個問題其實是要好好的揭露。其實現在在promote vTaiwan這件事情，這件事情是被隱藏在背後，它今天都講不出，只提蔡政委弄這一套跟相關的單位，可是它其實並沒有說出它背後的這個角色，我的意思是，這個說出並不是說這個角色沒有被看見，而是這個角色所涉及的部分該全面被看到，尤其很幽微的對政治的影響，這塊是目前沒有被清楚看到的。那我覺得它隱身或是藏在跟社群的co-work裡面，而沒有把這一塊拉出來，我覺得是不OK。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "因為這件事情其實最清楚的就是看早期新創閉鎖型公司的案子，那時候會跑那麼快，當然這個機制（vTaiwan）是有一定的影響，因為的確是比較好的意見梳理機制。可是不代表這個機制梳理完之後，就可以那麼快進立法程序，或者是到行政院內部的爭議。所以其實對我來說，機制是一個東西，所有的公共政策其實都是機制會影響到政策沒有錯，可是背後的制度跟政治性的問題，才更應該要被揭露。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "所以你的意思是說，像vTaiwan它會是因為有一個強力的主導者，而不完全是因為它的運作機制的成功對不對？" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我覺得是。然後我覺得Join這邊其實是有一個轉變期，我看的出來它一開始在衝量，所以國發會本身對很多議題的狀態等等的要求、回應的狀況，一開始只是意識到，但沒有真的花太多的力氣下去處理。可是我覺得到了中期，到現在，我覺得它有開始去思考我如何去做好、做solid。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我覺得最重要想提的其實是說，不管是vTaiwan跟Join都不應該只是在單純在政府的平臺做行銷，如果我要談公共政策。我要看的不是vTaiwan跟Join的一個機制，我要看的是每一個政策議題，它要做的時候，vTaiwan跟Join是在它整個政策形成與社會溝通的哪個部份。我的意思是說，我其實很反對政府是用我有vTaiwan這個機制、我有Join這個機制，卻不是我會去說清楚我每項政策vTaiwan跟Join是去處理我的哪一塊？然後我為什麼選擇vTaiwan或Join？這個道理就像審議民主、公民審議、公眾討論，我有很多個工具，但我不應該是跟人民說這個工具是什麼這個工具是什麼，應該是回到我的政策，這些工具是在哪一個階段、哪一個部份、為什麼、它的功能是什麼？對我來說，問題一我應該是想這樣回答。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "那第二題。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我覺得現在vTaiwan或Join提供的資訊是否足夠，這個問題會有一個很大的前提是，從誰的角度去談？我覺得一般民眾、網民或是習慣在網路上討論事情的人，跟本來關心這個議題的社群，他們需要的資訊量是不一樣的。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "一般的使用者跟利害關係人。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "利害關係人，而且我覺得一般使用者要分，就是他是很悠遊或是很擅長在網路上討論公共事務的人，跟一般看到然後進去他並沒有那麼擅長但是關心，我覺得對他們來講資訊量的要求是不同的。然後，我覺得做到後面不管實體或虛擬，恐怕我們因應這個社會的需求，我們都要做分流。所謂分流是，你的資訊有一些是要給想要看完整資訊的人；有一些是讓他快速就有一個基礎的資料。所以其實反過來不是說夠不夠，反過來是讓看不懂的人可以看的懂的那種簡單的、可以快速理解的有沒有資料，如果他想要更進一步探究有沒有資料。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "對我來說，資訊要處理的就是基本的資料inform、多元的觀點，那畢竟這是政府的平臺，如果你有既定政策方向，你的既定政策方向是什麼？應該是這幾個點比較重要。然後，能否讓民眾了解並參與。因為每個議題的狀態不太一樣，誠實的說，所以我覺得我現在沒有一個評斷Join跟vTaiwan的標準。我也碰過朋友，包括大學教授上去看vTaiwan的資料，他看不懂。我最印象深刻的是，就是跟我說他上去看新創閉鎖型的那些論述他看不懂，那已經是非常專業的。然後，一開始我跟P討論一些議題，她也說對她來講是吃力。所以我要講的是說，其實下一個題目我們可以談，vTaiwan跟Join它們非常的不一樣，那參與者是否有廣泛具代表性？" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "誠實的說，我覺得兩個系統的敘事方式我會講不一樣，所謂敘事是說像vTaiwan我覺得它很明顯就是在專家、社群、利害關係人，那它有沒有擴大，我覺得它的擴大是在，它不是有兩個階段是做實體的會議轉播，其實在前面的政策breifing參與的人看的人比較多，但這是不是一種參與就看你的論文認定，可是它後續審議的那個參與就沒有那樣強。我的意思就是說，大家對前面的議題了解參與，我覺得是vTaiwan能衝大最大的原因，可是後面就還好。那當然它有一些議題擴大，涉及的利害關係人相對擴大的時候，它就會有一些影響。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "Join的話，我不確定以網路參與過去的數字，這個我比較不清楚，大概像臺北市政府大概100多則左右、網站平臺也大概100到200，可是它會發生一個狀況。Join它不是像vTaiwan這種網路使用的人，擅長或是悠遊在裡面的人，它主要就是真的有可能是一般民眾或是稍微對這個議題關心，同時它有另外一種人是長期在社會上就關注那個議題、倡議那個議題、甚至對立面。我要說的是，不管vTaiwan跟Join它都有可能是在線或實體會有的動員，只是說vTaiwan現在選擇的議題還沒有遇到。所以我要講的是說，Join會有這個狀況，可是vTaiwan的議題還沒有，為什麼？因為vTaiwan它本身一開始，蔡政委是處理相關跟網路有關的去管制化，她其實想要鬆綁一些網路參與跟商業的空間。所以，你會看到它選擇的議題是很清楚的，設定的利害關係人也是清楚的，這些議題裡面的確也有部份人是擅長用這種網路溝通平臺。但是我在看這些網路溝通平臺對我來講，我不是從這種方向去看，對我來說，網路參與平臺的確可以補足過去實體，它的擴大。因為實體的會議都是在一定的時間跟空間，可是我的網路有機會拉長，可是反過來我的網路也有可能遇到的問題是，它的東西是fragment斷斷續續的，雖然vTaiwan很想營造出也可以處理，可是你會看到它都只能處理政策比較前端，太爭議性的議題我不覺得真的有辦法處理。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "而且vTaiwan現在遇到的一個狀態，它都是處理網路，可是有很多的政策是政策的某一個部份有網路，它就去切開來處理這一塊，其實我覺得這也會是一個存在的問題。我的意思是說，現在我們要避免的是從工具的本身去反推影響政策的處理，應該要拉回政策整體，然後我來看vTaiwan現在的狀態跟Join的狀態放到哪裡適合，但是我覺得vTaiwan現在已經漸漸走出是網路參與的一塊。所以要談的是，今天我有一個政策，像唐鳳就有跟我說他接下來要處理服貿，但是先處理NCC，因為NCC跟vTaiwan比較有關，但是我要講的是，可是對真的要處理一個服貿政策或是民間在看服貿，它看的是全貌，然後NCC這一塊放進來是什麼關係？因為，有可能不同的政策類別他需要做比較，所以我覺得對我來說我不是從技術平臺，我看的是整體的政策跟你怎麼跟不同利害關係人溝通，你當然可以分割處理，但是分割處理的同時，除非公務員或裡面的承辦或負責這件業務的人他很清楚，他知道會由他做串接。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我不是要全盤否定，我只是說你的那個人要真的很清楚，而不是說我有放vTaiwan就好，或者我放vTaiwan、Join比我辦實體會議成本低，如果心態是這樣的話，我覺得這個工具的存在反而耽誤了，反而有一些負功能出現。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "你剛剛講的這些，其實也是後面我設計的6、7、8，最後整理回來這邊，因為確實現在大家會，首長或民間會認為說我放到Join就好，我覺得我想要從這裡去點出來的也是問題，網路參與這件事在整個公共政策參與的過程當中它應該扮演的角色。其實也是我們那天在工作坊最後在討論的，只是我還是必須從這個點寫，有小題大做這樣，我的想法是這樣。第三個就是說，你覺得在不管是從使用者，我覺得你會比較是從使用者的角度，不管是中介者或使用者，你們在運用vTaiwan或Join平臺的時候，有沒有什麼使用限制或門檻？這樣的運作機制能不能強化政府跟民眾有效溝通？" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我覺得前面那一塊一定有一定的門檻，我覺得vTaiwan的使用門檻又比Join高一點點，我覺得Join以前是比較不友善但是簡單，但vTaiwan的系統比較複雜。但反過來說，另外一種門檻是，除了網路技術者之外，其他人要影響那個機制、改變機制是困難的。舉例而言，像我們那天培訓，有些組別他可以拿了一個帳號進去之後就改他的html，他甚至可以把你國發會的logo弄不見，他可以鑲嵌很多的程式，他就有能力做的更fancy。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "所以我要說的是，使用門檻跟限制有分前臺後臺，前臺是使用者，但是慢慢的會看出來有一些分流，大體上你會看到在g0v裡面相對積極參與的朋友他們對vTaiwan是相對熟悉，為什麼？因為它的開源碼流通，大家都可以一直去改，所以你會看到vTaiwan操作的雛型在後續社民黨或等等，有被擴散。但Join的部份我就覺得，因為這也跟它背後的型式有關，當它是用委託計畫的型式找廠商，廠商跟工程師的關係，跟vTaiwan它就是隨意的大家進去改一改，造成的狀態會不一樣。所以，整個系統vTaiwan走的也比較快。但是那個本身對我來講的確會是一種門檻，它也會是一種界線。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "然後，運作機制是否能強化政府跟民眾的有效溝通？我覺得不會沒有，但是要case by case看。以Join來講要看政府願意跳進來多少，但是我會有一點擔心vTaiwan到最後不是政府跟民間在溝通，是唐鳳或是某些人在扮演那些角色，所以這樣算不算跟政府溝通？或是有觸及到政策就是？那就要看你怎麼界定。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "或者是說，這樣子的一個運作機制，以vTaiwan或者Join來講，它有哪些機制的設計，你覺得它是有助於溝通？比如說以Join來講，我們那天討論到它可以先做票選、意見收斂等等。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "其實對我來說那個機制並不是網路軟體的機制，是小編是政府他願意丟什麼資訊，怎麼把資訊處理到什麼程度，所以重要是在那個留言之後，你怎麼去回應一來一往的關係。所以我為什麼會說其實vTaiwan有花很多力氣在做這一塊，可是我覺得在做那件事情的人不是政府，所以他到底在跟誰溝通？你知道我的意思？我覺得這是一個很大不一樣的點，我覺得小編等等，vTaiwan絕對做的比Join好。可是問題是，那個人是誰？真的在溝通的人是誰？他比較像一個仲裁者在那邊。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "這個等一下第五題的時候我會想要把它拿出來討論。那第四個部份就是，就你的觀察，政府機關或是民眾在整個網路參與的過程，在參與Join或vTaiwan的時候他們會遇到哪些障礙？需要做哪些調適？因為你不見得了解他們已經做哪些調適，可是就你看到的障礙你建議他們做哪些調適？比如說從政府端來看的話。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "政府一定一個是制度，一個是技術面，誠實的說技術我比較不懂。但是以Join來講，對我來說我期待的並不是後臺鑲嵌其他的軟體或技術是要用程式的方式，我以為是選單，直接可以勾選，可是現在只有改到要用程式的方式，那對我來說還是只有某群人可以用，其他我們有想法但是我們沒有技術的就沒有辦法。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "就整個制度來講，國發會很辛苦，但是我希望下一個階段的推動不是去跟部會講Join跟vTaiwan，我的意思是還是可以講，但是可不可以一開始談的時候都是我們下一個階段政府要跟群眾溝通，他的政策在不同環節要考慮什麼，當你考慮到什麼或需求什麼的時候，Join就是你可以用的。就是我希望他在下一個階段的推動，是用政策的思考去鼓勵公部門說，這是你本來就在做的事，只是你本來在做的公聽會等等，如果需要擴大參與，那你可以用網路；或者，你的議題是比較適合在網路上蒐集的時候，你可以用網路。我的意思不是去跟他推Join或vTaiwan。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "這件事我不知道唐鳳會不會說，像法協那邊就覺得他們並不是自己要推什麼議題，可是法規調適這是他們業務，好像vTaiwan沒有動也怪怪的。我的意思就是說，我不希望公部門是這樣。相對的Join我也是有這種想法，不是說上面都沒有人沒有留言，機制不是用這種方式去思考，我覺得民間團體我們也要討論也要push，可是公部門的push應該是在說，我今天都是回到我政策的需求，政策的規劃階段，我在不同的階段都可以拉Join，可是我不要為了拉而拉，而是想我這個議題真正要處理的這些人他習不習慣用Join。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "像之前你們也辦過很多次工作坊，Join上來講，你覺得這些來參加的部會，第一個，來參加的人他到底了不了解他想要幹麻？你看到的這個問題，他們到底來的人或是要把這個議題放上來的人他們到底有沒有想法，內部到底支不支持？或是是他們有想法但是內部不支持，那他回去有什麼困難之類的。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我覺得要分幾類，而這幾類裡面都有三種角色。一個是來的人，通常是1)承辦或2)中階主管，而且3)他們的老大跟行政院或國發會或新傳，其實很少有議題是這三者的態度是一致的。可能有，但是我忘記了，這三者對議題該不該放上來、對Join的了解，很少是一致的，恐怕互相理解的狀態都可以再加油。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "也會有一些誤解，像部會的人就會覺得新傳處丟了一個輿情來我們就要接。可是像那天我們在開擴大會議的時候，新傳處的人來，其實他們希望的是部會可以有一個機制去討論我們丟過來的議題適不適合放上去。但我不知道那個人可不可以代表每一次新傳處說話的人或是窗口，這又是另外一個問題。所以大家好像都在期待對方可以多做一些什麼可以介接連結，可是往往又會有一些誤解。到底他們是不是都理解要丟上來的，其實我覺得，幾次工作坊之後有一些承辦是懂的，他就會跟你說真心話，他就會告訴你說我的長官為什麼要丟上來，他就是知道丟上來Join討論，民眾對這個東西就會有最直接的膝反射，就可以讓我回去堵誰的嘴。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "就是把議題放上來之後，拿網路上的狀況背書。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "對，他其實並不是想說我好好的怎麼樣inform，讓這個議題釐清，他會刻意想要躲在這些曲曲折折曖曖昧昧裡，他不用直接對著真正要處理的根本問題。其實有些部會的長官或承辦是這樣，但是也有一些是想要好好做，但是他的長官不一定支持，比如說他知道丟上來的題目應該要設成怎樣才是好，但他沒有空間。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "我有次在工作坊聽到智慧局他們說他們把著作權法拋上來，是為了希望讓利用人可以出來講話，因為他說之前的聲浪大多是權利人，權利人在主張。不管他那次的議題是不是被逼上來，至少我覺得那天那個科長在講的時候，他希望把議題拋上來可以吸引利用人上來表達聲音，這個立場我還滿感動的。我不曉得他們後續實際運作的狀況有沒有達到，但至少這個出發點我會覺得是好的。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "是，但是他下一步要處理的並不是說我有這些使用人所以我可以怎麼樣，他還是會遇到一個終極的問題是，你用什麼樣的方式讓這些不同利害關係人的意見可以調合，誠實說，我覺得這一端是網路上做不到的。我的意思是說，你如果只是要蒐集意見，要政策有一些互動，或者你政策的回應要整理在網路上，這是可以的。可是你真的要去處理爭議點，要讓不同利害關係人不斷的在一個空間下，在同樣的脈絡互相理解去談的話，網路很難。因為網路是來來回回，你一旦抽離你再回來，那個脈絡會不一樣。其實碰vTaiwan跟Join讓我越來越清楚網路有它存在的需求，但也更清楚的是它的限制在哪裡。所以恐怕我們在想這麼平臺跟機制的時候，都不應該只從平臺機制本身去處理，它對我來講就是一個公聽會，只是它的系統更大，或是一個機制。但我們要想的是，我的政策到底在哪個環節，需不需要它。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "那民眾端呢，你覺得民眾端有沒有什麼樣的障礙？" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "對我來說，民眾知道這兩套都還是很少。其實光是要怎麼樣讓它觸及，就是一個狀態，然後看我們要處理到什麼程度。我覺得光是知道它的就少，下一步是，進來的人他可不可以好好的了解這套系統怎麼按怎麼操作，對我來說他都要有一段學習成本。為什麼？因為我那天培訓我發現，好多人都按不進去該按的地方，要找很久，因為那個介面設計的比較fancy，它有些東西是隱藏的，你要去點它才會拉出來，或者是，怎麼去思考那個邏輯，它其實是需要練習跟互動的學習。所以這個有這個狀況。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "vTaiwan也是有點複雜，雖然它前面有一張圖，可是很多人看完那張圖，看不懂。所以我要說的是，你在實體的討論會有一個人跟你說我們接下來要進行哪裡進行哪裡，那這個階段沒有，但是唐鳳他們可能會說這個可以處理，因為現在很多網站會有一個小機器人告訴你下一步下一步，我不確定這是可以克服的，但是我覺得這個很像可以克服，但是那個狀態也存在著就對了。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "那來看第五題，第五題也是我比較希望再進一步釐清跟了解，在vTaiwan跟Join平臺運作上我們都看到所謂中介者的角色，比如像vTaiwan就是g0v他們；那Join平臺上我會把它定位，像你就是我們的中介者。你覺得中介者他的定位、角色、功能是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "對我來說，我們先不要管vTaiwan跟Join，我覺得要做好的中介者不能只有民間，那個中介者可能是一群人，或是幾個人，為什麼？因為，除非那個中介者有辦法同時串多邊。比如說對我來講，唐鳳他們想努力，可是到目前為止，我覺得他們相對比較缺乏的還是跟議題社群的溝通，他們是有辦法讓政府比較買單他們，我覺得這也跟他們相對所謂技術中心等等有關。可是我覺得有一種中介者是會把議題社群串進來。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "另外，我覺得中介者其實要有一種特質，要能夠看整個局，那個局的意思是說，對我來說，假設我是審議的技術者、有g0v這樣的技術者、有議題的社群，那我有沒有辦法判斷這些議題的社群誰是很重要的key person，他們彼此之間網絡關係，政府局處的關係，那個中介者才知道要怎麼串接。我覺得其實是重要的，但是你很難苛求一個中介者在每一個議題裡面他都有這樣的可能，所以他恐怕需要by議題，by議題之外是需要組合的，可能不一定是一個人可以處理的了，所以我也不會跟你說g0v就適合。我可以理解，每一個位置的人都有想要整合這一塊，但我後來看起來，大抵最後可能都要依照議題，依照議題重組，但是在裡面可能有一些技術know-how或是做比較久的人他會有比較多的機會也就相對會更適合。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "所以其實兩個問題都答了。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "什麼問題？" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "就是哪些人適合？因為其實我們剛剛這樣談起來的話，其實by議題，然後不同的domain know-how的人要進來，所以它可能會是一個動態的。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我覺得會是動態，比如說像在以前在臺北市政府，我一定會抓小彭，因為他做資訊，可是議題的domain know-how我可能會抓不同的人。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "可不可以有另一個考慮，像vTaiwan來講，還是以唐鳳來講好了，g0v他發動去找相關的人。Join平臺我們現在其實是by工作坊在找人。可是未來像這樣的中介者是不是應該是由這個議題的發起人他的機關，或是議題發動人來找出他的中介者。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "如果你想要談中介者，我想跟你談大一點的。其實在歐洲滿多國家，會成立一組，像法國叫CNDP公共辯論委員會（或是丹麥的DPT)，它其實就是在政府要做類似vTaiwan、Join，而且是系統性的做，不是只是網路，網路跟實體它會一併做。它會做什麼？它會看這個政策，有沒有涉及到環評、有沒有涉及到聽證，它是整個拉起來做，但是它只做界定利害關係人、資料處理、審議、寫報告、蒐集資料，因為有可能業務主管單位也是其中一方利害關係人，那它就要請這些不同的利害關係人把資料弄過來，它去驗證資料、整理資料，然後找人來討論，那這個人討論可能是維持三到四個月或半年，它會看議題的狀況，實體跟虛擬的需求，以及既有的行政體制中的參與程序是什麼，把它結合起來。這段其實在法國是一個叫國家公共辯論委員會在做，他們會依照不同的議題再看要不要成立那個議題專屬的委員會，讓不同立場的人一起進來。其實這一段要每個機關來做，機關受不了。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "所以在法國他們叫公共辯論委員會，在丹麥他們叫科技委員會，在一些國家他們則是透過technology assessment叫風險評估來做。當然這些機制背後有它不同的政治形成脈絡，像丹麥科技委員會它會做比較多是跟科技風險有關的議題，然後technology assessment也是；可是法國的公共辯論委員會它是從國土環評切進去，20年前就有，未來它要整合的是醫療、生技、更多的都市計劃。以前都只做大型的、中型的開發案，現在連小型開發案都可以，它也是一步一步走來。我要說的就是，它整個中介者的角色的是這樣成立，而它的三個副主席，三位都是由國家總統任命，選不同的立場來。其實在國外就有一些建置、制度化，我不是說他們就一定做的很好，而是他已經考量到這樣的角色，你要整個行政系統每個政策議題有一種樣態是這樣。而且你知道嗎？它的費用從哪裡來？" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "政府的預算只是維持它中心的運作，每一個會議要進行討論，是每一個開發事業單位要給錢，如果今天開發事業單位是民間的話，也是民間要給錢。因為你要做這些事情一定有成本，這都不會是政府既有預算就撥出來的成本，它大概一個案子都用半年討論，前後要有準備跟後面的報告產出，大概整個是一年。其實你要問我中介者的話，我們現在其實是在那個try的過程，如果當有一天制度化、穩定化，我都不會是從vTaiwan、Join來想中介者，這對我來說很不完整，其實談中介者這個角色，你可以看是不是需要有獨立機關？但這或許是未來的事情，對我來說，我在想這個政治議程可能就算要在小英的任內，也要有可能是在她可以選上的第二屆，不一定可以選上，因為通常第一屆的政治首長不一定有條件做這些。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "像法國的這個公共辯論委員會它是屬於什麼樣的機制？它是屬於民間的..." }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "它是國家的設置。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "它是一個國家的組織啊。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "對，所以它的主席副主席才是總統任命，要宣誓。而且它的設置超有趣，三個副主席，一個是法律人；另外兩個，一個是常年參加綠黨的環保人士，政府的所以開發他都擋；另外一個是常年在做建設的工程師。他就是要讓不同思考的人去碰去抓這些。所以我要講的是，中介者本來就很難是一個人兩個人。比如說我，看起來有一點點這個影子，可是我覺得那個狀態比較像是說，我覺得我跟..." }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "操作面的政治..." }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "對，或者是，我們也在累積民間社會對我們的信任，或者是公部門對我們的信任，可是當它要真的能夠運作整個政策，單靠一個人是不可能的。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "第六個，民眾透過vTaiwan或Join參與的結果，是不是具有可靠性？在政府治理的過程當中會產生怎樣的影響？我比較關切的是網路參與怎麼樣去融入整個公務體系來運作？其實這個是我會希望寫這個題目最主要的發想。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "其實我後來有在反省一些事情，那這個反省是Whisky帶給我的，就是說我們在講的這些理想的參與，不管實體或虛擬或是實虛的結合，我們怎麼去讓公務系統有能力承載有誘因？對我來說，公務系統，這是另外一塊電子治理或其他部份沒有處理好的話，我真的也沒那麼樂觀。我並不是說這件事不能做，對我來說，我就會抱更多的期待或是說我會希望，如果你問我的話，我以前在做審議民主很low的一個目標是，我希望我有生之年可以看到全國審議。我後來覺得這件事情好像有點low，它的可達成性..." }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "比較低？" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "其實算滿高，我真的有把握有可能看到。但是我現在在想的反而是那種制度化、建置化像CNDP那樣，不一定是那樣，可能technology assessment等等。所以我要拉回來就是說，其實我覺得有一個解法，你不是要叫每一個業務單位都要能夠這樣做，因為除非我們的職系要改變，除非我們公務人員訓練整個思維翻轉是改變，我們現在不是，我們現在是什麼東西插一塊插一塊，他們真的會承載不了。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "另外一個是，Whisky會講的那些他的日常作業、業務loading有沒有辦法降低，當我們希望他們不要這麼僵化的依法行政的時候，也要考量他們的保障在哪裡，這些東西節構面沒有處理，不要說網路參與，而是我們講任何的參與是XX。我也會覺得對公務同仁來講，你沒有辦法要求每個人有需要都這樣做，我真的也沒有那麼，我覺得那樣子很naive啦，太天真了。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "第七題的部份前面也有一些說明，vTaiwan跟Join平臺運用在公共政策諮詢上的差異，接下來才談後面的問題。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "我覺得先講前面的差異，現在其實已經很明顯了，就是說，vTaiwan大概就是跟網路有關，但它還是有很多的判斷餘地。其實我滿樂見兩個平臺同時存在，可以互相影響，可是我擔心的是，政府端怎麼看待它在公共政策諮詢上的工具。對我來說我現在看到的都是，政府有一個議題或會議，他同時就會想說我要用vTaiwan或是Join，他就是上去看那個介面好不好用、友不友善，我真的不覺得他是從整個政策階段去思考這兩個工具的定位。他都是上去看那個界面，所以我反而覺得運用上有無差異，我會先問說，不管過去政府也好，或是新的政府，他怎麼想。現在大家都有一種不得罪人，反正就讓它兩套進去，然後它也是主管機關各負責的兩個系統的人在負責那個業務，也會希望KPI或什麼數字正常，我都覺得現在在思考這個系統背後的邏輯跟原因不是我認為很正確的，所以那個運用上的差異，看起來它的宣稱是跟網路有關，但是我覺得vTaiwan比這邊好一點點的是說，因為他們只有一組人，所以他們一次做一個議題，慢慢來排隊，我覺得比較有機會把品質拉起來。我不是說Join一定要這樣，只是說Join恐怕也要想其他的方法，看品質怎麼樣慢慢往上提升。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "那公共政策制定的過程當中，哪個階段比較適合導入網路參與？" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "應該不是說哪一個階段，而是那個議題的利害關係人是不是給定了，他們是不是都是實體的，還是這個利害關係人涉及到不特定公眾？我覺得涉及的利害關係人越複雜越廣，不是只有特定人的話，越適合放到網路上。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "反過來我要說的是，有特定的利害關係人不代表它就不能放到網路上，可是它就會比較像是補充意見，讓利害關係人看到有這些多元觀點。對我來說，你在政策的不同階段你可能都需要持續溝通跟討論，只是你應該回去看議題的類型跟你主要的參與者，如果這個議題設定的參與者就是某些人，而這些人不擅長用的話，我不會說不能有網路，可是網路的比重跟影響應該是這種連動關係。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "我覺得這個觀點滿好的，之前我在想這麼題目原先的想法是唐鳳之前有講過其實是在做最後政策制度決策那段的時候，其實網路參與是沒有辦法去做的，在最後做決定的時候，他覺得還是要回到實體會議。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "那個是不一樣的，我覺得他在講的比較像是說，他已經在他vTaiwan的系統裡面講，vTaiwan他希望是政策的前期，但是他在講的是，已經進來vTaiwan系統，你會看到後面都要透過實體，那個比較像我在跟你說，每一個會議裡面，你前面蒐集意見的人都可以透過網路，可是你實際要有控制的決定的時候，你真的需要透過討論。他在講的對我來說有大P小p，大P都是原則性的東西，小p是進入一個個案，我覺得他在講的是小p這個層次。這個層次我是買單的，如果它已經進入到有網路的系統裡，本來就是很難在網路上形成共識，所以做最後決定，因為我要一個一個確認，彼此理解大家的狀態，你真的需要在同樣的空間脈絡下，所以那個階段會需要實體。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "可是我在談的不是那個層次，不是已經進入到討論，我們是在看整個大的政策狀態，到底網路它的功能是什麼等等。的確有很多個討論的想像，像一種是政策的過程，利害關係人是特定的，所以到中間你可以讓很多透過網路不同的人意見進來，可是最後來是由少數利害關係人決定。可是有一些政策，它是涉及到很多數人，你一開始跟最後讓越多人參加越好，可是中間收斂的過程我們都知道人很多很難有聚焦，可是像這一段要很多人參與，它是要回到網路嗎，恐怕不是，是網路要進來，比如公投是不是也可以有網路遠端公投，其實公投的參與又比起審議更大，可是這個階段已經在做決定了。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "所以，它會有很多條向度要一起思考，政策的階段、利害關係人，你現在要的是已經在做決策了還是只是在蒐集共識，會有幾條線是不同的拉扯，看網路要不要進來，進來的話功能是什麼。多數的時候都不會說網路不要進來，可是我們不能期待網路扮演什麼功能，這個東西比較是我覺得要談的部份，而比較不會是說哪一個階段適合參與。我想這個議題可能會拉比較多層。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "其實你比較從大的政策來看這件事情。我的這個題目原先的想法會是比較像唐鳳講的那個階段，所以我才會最後面的問題是網路參與跟實體會議的區隔跟整合的建議是什麼？我當時的想法是這樣，比較沒有拉到那麼大。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "可是我覺得政策會有大P，審議或任何的程序也會有小p，小p就是一個會議裡面進行的流程，大P是大的原則跟判斷。補充一下，我覺得網路它永遠會有一個類似放在那邊，它就像資料會不斷進來累積的資料庫，這是實體做不到的；但是實體它永遠會存在一個很重要的功能是，它要形成決定共識的時候，如果要一組人討論，除非他是用透過投票。網路它一個很強的功能是它可以蒐集很廣的東西，但是要很深的，恐怕還是要靠實體。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "其實就是我們那天在談的，網路跟實體開始在議題要拋出來討論的時候，我們就要決定要怎麼走。我要用網路做到我哪些功能，怎麼樣的情況下我進到實體，我實體要用什麼樣的形式。這個就不拿Join跟vTaiwan來比了，就是說，未來政府在推動網路參與做法上有什麼建議？" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "第一個，不要停在工具平臺的單向思考，不是從那個平臺技術出發，它還是要拉回到整個政策的規劃，政策的溝通。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "第二個，前一段它很仰賴網路的技術社群，它下一個階段可能要從參與、討論、議題本身的不同多元觀點者拉進來，它上一個階段的局限已經跑出來了。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "第三個，我覺得政府在推網路參與不要再推一個一個機制跟模式了，現在以政府而言的話，要去想過去這些參與模式背後哪些結構的問題，不處理它就會卡在那邊，我真的覺得公務員整個體制運作他們的狀態沒有重新盤點，你要現在這樣的公務員系統去操作這些工具，有那些政策想像，我覺得太為難他們了。我碰這麼多公務員我覺得他們不是不想做，你用那樣的體制去框他，你要他跑成這樣，能跑的那些其實都是從民間這樣彈性的狀態下長出來的，這件事它其實是要先處理的。你要推這麼多東西，可是你的系統承載不了，原有的也沒有做好。" }, { "speaker": "呂家華", "speech": "所以我覺得第一個就是，它不要再從工具平臺思考，我真的覺得它要回歸到政策執行跟溝通，那個根本的問題。第二個就是它對社群的想像不能只有停留在網路社群，它要更擴大，甚至議題、甚至審議，這是兩塊。第三塊是，它如果不好好正視行政體制的結構改變，它要再多這麼多東西進來，其實公務員也被訓練到很會套東西，但那沒有意義。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我試著接一下電子白板，你看一下能不能看到我的電子白板，等我一秒鐘，我切換到電子白板，這樣看得到嗎？" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "有。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "OK。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "你好厲害，這樣也可以畫。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "（笑）對啊！這事實上是iPad Pro，就是我主持的那個工具，有紙跟筆比較方便。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "我想說其實唐鳳對於vTaiwan跟Join平台的機制設計上非常瞭解，您以一個使用者來看，您對於vTaiwan跟Join平台在機制的設計上，相較於以前政府機關成立的政策資訊討論平台有什麼不一樣？我想先就這個部分詢問。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好的。vTaiwan平台跟Join平台的機制，我先講它們相同的地方，再講不同的地方。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "所以從你的觀察上來講，從這些機制上來講，可能強烈代表了某一個部會，可能是部落格或其實是國發會建的一個網站，可是Join跟vTaiwan平台，其實開出了另外獨立的空間出來，讓大家認為可以到這個空間來共同討論，不會有局限於機關名稱的限制？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是原本只是諮詢、幕僚或者本位主義的這個色彩，但這個之所以大家願意相信，是因為國發會在Data平台上有做到跨部會協調。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "下一個問題來看，我想要瞭解的是在這個平台的設計上，對於政策諮詢的這個功能上，這二個平台有去解決或改善一些在公共政策諮詢的一些問題？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個是第一個問題的第二個子題，我覺得這個就是二個平台有不同的地方，所以可能要分開回答。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "OK。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這四件事都建築在最前面的一件事，就是基礎事實的釋出，這一件事其實就是Data平台在做的事情，其實並不是Join或vTaiwan做的事情。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "在vTaiwan的部分？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為vTaiwan在設計的時候是照著ORID法設計的，所以我們特別花了時間在共識這個機制上面，這個機制其實說穿了是非常非常簡單的，就是我們採用專業主持人、聚焦式對話方法（焦點討論法），試著讓所有曾經表示過不同支持的朋友們面對面，或至少用直播的方式面對面，大家看到彼此之後，把大家的感受試著把它聚到一些大家覺得粗略、雖不滿意但可接受的狀態，所以這一件事是vTaiwan我覺得主要的貢獻吧！這也是我們Join幾次工作坊試著帶回Join的東西。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "好，第二個問題，你覺得網路平台可以扮演的角色是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "網路平台可以扮演的角色，基本上我們這裡分開來，同時間（同步）與不同的時間（異步）、同樣的地點（同地）或不同的地點（異地），這個是我們通常在討論網路空間時會用的基本象限圖，這個是通說了。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "如果說vTaiwan跟Join平台來比的話？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這要看跟什麼比，你跟幾年前那四個平台比的話，我想都好很多，但是那後面並不只是技術上面或者是界面設計上，而是因為國發會的相對定位不同了，所以溝通界面的改變，事實上有國發會的因素，而不只是vTaiwan或Join平台，這個要先說清楚。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "那這二個來講的話，在公共政策制定的過程當中，政府溝通對話上的差異點？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "差異點我想是這樣子的，我們知道溝通是雙向的，我覺得特別是「提點子」，它對民眾有一個制度化的管道，甚至不一定連署成案，但大家知道現在民眾關心的這一些議題，這一些事是非常有幫助，而且政府在傾聽的過程當中，就算沒有成案，它也是可以內部討論或去處理，我覺得這個跟vTaiwan滿大的不同，就是我們並不做連署的事。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "第三個問題來講，其實跟剛剛前面有一點小重複，就是說目前在vTaiwan跟Join平台上來講，所提供給民眾的資訊是不是足夠的？我覺得其實這個部分可以從幾個面向我想去探討，就是說我們之前會認為要討論一個議題的時候，政府跟民眾之間必須資訊是對等的，他們才能作共同的討論，但在提供資訊的部分，二個平台的方式不太一樣，就這個部分您來看呢？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "二個平台的提供方式好像沒有那麼不一樣（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "比如vTaiwan會連結到Data平台，實際上要討論的東西，之前也會把原始的資料釋出，您的看法？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，我想vTaiwan在製作的時候有幾個重點，就是盡量提供原始資訊，就是說我們通常的做法是Jaclyn（蔡玉玲前政務委員，下同）收到相關的電子檔，我們就直接放到網路上，然後從vTaiwan連過去。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "回到前面第一個問題，剛剛講的是足夠與否，第二個問題我會想說是不是能夠讓民眾瞭解，而且能夠參與？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實任何文字資訊都是要搭配簡報或影音的，不然如果不是這方面專家的話，本來就不可能一看就瞭解，這個是事實，任何國家做這個都是這樣，所以這就是為什麼要有針對其中的某一項一行文字或是一段文字，你如果對於它的定義，像vTaiwan有做一個小字典，而且如果你對於這個東西不瞭解的話，你當然可以針對這一段去提出問題，然後由政府提出回答。回答它你當然可以追問，政府可以再提出回答等等。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "在前面的部分你已經提到過了，其實目前來講，這二個平台的參與應該都不具代表性。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，都不具備代表性。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "那參與者是不是夠廣泛，這個部分你怎麼看？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該這樣講，就是vTaiwan在議題設定的時候，我們請部會把他們所有想得到會感興趣的人列給我們，並且我們會請他們，接下來就像串粽子一樣，他們又會再推薦人、再推薦人。這我們當然不會覺得夠廣泛，是因為這個圖有一個起點，這個起點就是提出議題的部會，所以除非是部會認識的人認識的人，不然我們還是碰不到。但是某些在Join上面的案子，這一步也沒有做到。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "就您的觀察，政府機關跟民眾在這樣的網路過程當中，他們分別遇到哪一些障礙？並且你認為他們需要做哪一些調適？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一件事我們討論了二天，對不對？（笑）你要我快速綜整也是可以，但這會是非常過度簡化的版本。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "vTaiwan應該有算給予正當性？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！因為它是靠Jaclyn把手上的資料和議程設定權釋出，這件事本身給它正當性。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "所以相較於目前Join上的議題，vTaiwan多做了什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就像我在工作坊裡說的，Jaclyn作為大G的代表，責成旁邊所有的這些部會，都把所有議題的狀況如實提供給這個空間，這是一件事。另外一個東西是，這個空間如果只是作佈達沒什麼意義，那就會跟Data一樣，所以最後一定要收東西回來，當然在vTaiwan的設計上面，會收到一些共識回來。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "下一個，g的部分？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，特定政府機關的部分。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "民眾的部分？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "民眾的部分其實是輕微的，這個障礙其實是越來越小的。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "接下來的話，我想剛剛在討論的過程當中，有包含一些調適的建議。針對下一個部分，vTaiwan跟Join平台在運作機制上都有所謂中介者的幫忙，您認為在這二個平台的中介者的差異點，為了在中介者的定位及功能應該怎麼樣做？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是，這個事實上我在報導者有一整篇文章（2016網路社運者的挑戰），所以請直接打開那個文章。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "有。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "四個P，三個C，就是每一次政府要制定政策的時候，基本上就是互相作為產業上下游的理事長們、個別一些民間人士們，然後一堆人在街上，大概是這樣的形狀。這個形狀的問題當然就是說好比今天在街上的人，可能就會說憑什麼某些人能夠進行政院跟林全討論能源政策，對吧？（笑）" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "如果按照您來看，其實這一個中介者包括針對這個議題的部會跟相關族群間的連繫。但之前在討論vTaiwan跟Join的時候，會有其他學者或者討論的人比如認為vTaiwan的中介者就是唐鳳跟g0v社群，Join的中介者是唐鳳、家華、Peggy等等，您怎麼看這個定義？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該這樣講，每一個社群他能夠碰到的人不一樣，我們直接看這張圖的話，我們如果現在說底下的「C」是g0v的話，能夠看到當然就是有去黑客松的「M」，但並不表示這個「M」沒有聯絡到別的「M」，這是一件事情。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "這樣的中介者會是哪一些人，或者是哪一些組織適合擔任？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "基本上我不確定這個怎麼回答耶！後來這個模型我會希望可以不需要由特定的組織或者人來擔任，這還有第四張圖。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "OK，好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個要分幾層來講。可靠性如果最限縮就是這二個平台的操作者是否有篡改資料？我相信我們都沒有篡改資料，這個程度是沒有問題的。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "好，民眾透過vTaiwan跟Join平台這樣的一個參與，對於政府治理的過程，您覺得會產生什麼樣的影響？就是對於政府的決策上來講有產生什麼影響？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在intra-extranet這個模型裡面，我們先不管這一個模型先不管每一個案子都可以適用，但我們如果用這一個模型的話，它的影響是非常確定的，就是說每一次讓這樣一個參與，中間的這條線就更粗一點，對不對？就是每一次運行一次諮詢，大家就從政府內部獲得越多實際的資訊，每一次運行這樣的參與，政府內部就知道外面的利益關係人們對這一件事實的想法是多少，也就是說他最大的影響，就是這二個不同的中介空間的距離會越來越近，然後互信的程度會越來越高，而這裡面的操作事實上並不是政務人員，而是事務人員，因此就會變成事務人員跟有參與的民眾、社群、私部門朋友間的交情會越來越好，這個是可預測的影響。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "那網路參與要如何融入公務體系？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果你與家華有談過的話，應該會理解到他不認為網路參與跟實體參與是二件事。也就是今天用公聽會的方式做，只是這個公聽會加上直播，或者是今天有一個民意信箱，但這一個民意信箱也可以用線上的方式提供。所以如果從這個角度來看的話，其實網路參與這一件事本身只不過是擴增參與的形式，所以我覺得重點還是在參與而不是在網路上。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但這一個問題就不是參與的問題，而是網路的問題了，你知道我的意思嗎？就是說參與這一件事是政務層次，其實如果政務層次上面已經沒有開出參與的空間，或者是沒有參與準據的話，事務體系不要說網路了，連公聽會都不能開，所以這個問題自然也沒有辦法問；反過來講，如果政務體系說現在要開放參與，我們才可以討論說事務體系在原有的實體參與之外，能不能融入網路的部分？可是這個就是已經非常非常細節的問題 ，所以其實我不是很清楚你問這個問題想要取得什麼？" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "本來跟前面第四個問題是相關，那也是之前在開座談會時，Peggy常常也會提到網路跟實體會被分開來，也就是網路參與感覺到是資訊部門的事，跟整個業務單位的運作上來講並沒有什麼連結。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！其實如果你問的不是Peggy，而是家華的話，他可能會說其實有些公聽會更慘。各地公聽會的實體參與，因為連一個專責的資管處都沒有，所以往往沒有一個請很好的主持人的機制，就會變成是網路參與至少還有國發會幫忙架一個平台，但在實體參與上面就會變成是，長官如果碰巧沒有主持技能，那這個公聽會收到的品質其實也不一定多高。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "或者是說也許這個問題，現在看起來會覺得可能真正在公務體系運作上，就像你剛剛講的，其實最大的問題是參與，我們到底願意讓一個政策制定過程當中讓民眾參與多深，而讓他參與多深的過程當中，有哪一些可以讓網路來做？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！網路我們剛剛講了，其實如果你已經確定你所有需要參與的人會在同一時間、同一地點到場的時候，根本就沒有網路用武之地，網路唯一用武之地頂多就是把直播或錄音錄影公開，這個不是重點，這也不叫網路參與。但如果你的利益關係人裡面某些人沒有辦法到同一個地點，這個時候網路就有用，或者你的利益關係人並不是在同一時間發現，而是隨著政策的制定過程慢慢發現利益關係人，這個時候網路也有用，也就是你在異時、異地二個政策制定狀態底下，網路是有用的。因此，但如果沒有碰到這二個狀態的話，根本就不需要用網路。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "OK，好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當我們在講網路參與的時候，我們的腦裡還是要放在參與上，我們先問我們想要收什麼意見進來，我們再決定是否適合導入，好比像我們還在事實發現的階段，甚至政策方向還沒有擬訂的時候，你當然可以導入網路參與，因為你想要往不特定人去收他們手上有的是什麼。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "剛剛你有提到討論的時間或者是徵集意見的時間，我記得vTaiwan的運作上來講，大概當時估三個月吧！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是每期一個月。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "每一個議題？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "每個議題的每一期。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "分三個階段，然後每階段一個月？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，好比我們是做感受徵集的話，那件事本身就一個月，當然有時因為運氣不好只有三個禮拜，但原則上有一個月。接下來如果是做問題釐清是一個月，草案討論一個月，擬建議一個月，當然定案公布一個月，就是三到四個月可以做成一個結論。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "你覺得這樣的時間夠不夠？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個完全看一開始的準備工作做到多好。如果一開始的利益關係人盤點是非常完整的，我們有滿大的信心這樣的時間是夠的。可是有時候會發生在過程當中，我們原先沒有料想的利益關係人出現了，或者是說一開始的議程設定根本就有問題、需要擴大，這時這個時間就不夠。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "vTaiwan跟Join平台目前運作上vTaiwan有結合實體會議，Join沒有，對於網路參與跟實體會議的區隔及整合的建議是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "Join在社會局例子是有整合的，也用很多了與vTaiwan類似的技術在做，包括360直播等，那也是因為vTaiwan試了很多次，發現其中有某些可以運作的成份。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "最後一個部分，整體來講你對於我國政府機關在未來推動參與的做法上來講，你會有什麼樣的整體的建議？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你要我對政府建議還是對機關建議？（笑）" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "因為你剛剛分成政務、事務，可是以前我們大部分的講法會是同一個政府機關。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，但這個就很困難，因為好比我對社會局作出建議，可是柯文哲不買單，我做這個建議等於白做。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "OK，那我們分二個來談好了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我對政務系統有我的建議，我對事務系統有我的建議，好不好？我們這樣子來分。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "我問一個額外的問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "不管是vTaiwan或者是Join平台，其實我們大家都放議題，中間的討論過程其實都放在平台上，最後的決定我們也放回平台公開時，長久累積下來，您覺得知識庫來講，會有什麼樣的發展？因為我覺得現在把它定位成一個平台，但我覺得它應該會是一個政策制定所累積的知識庫，你怎麼看這一件事？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個我們回到ORID，就是你運行一次諮詢，如果我們說所有的事實都公開了，非常非常有正當性，然後你蒐集到目前當下對這個東西的完整感受，而且也凝聚了共識，最後會變成決策的輸入之一，這個是理想型。如果這整個過程都保留在平台上的話——這個vTaiwan並沒有完全做到，Join幾乎完全沒有做到——但如果假設都做到的話，裡面有幾件事：一個是當你做滾動式檢討，也就是研考的時候，你可以很具體說隨著哪些事實改變，當那些事實改變的時候，政策是否需要跟著修訂的這件事，就可以讓所有人在進入下一次對話時不用重新做功課。" }, { "speaker": "問", "speech": "好，瞭解，謝謝！" } ]

[ { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝大家今天過來，其實這整個會議的目的是希望跟「Join」部會的PO們見面，所以在此之前，國旅卡那一案也有約交通部、國發會及人事總處的朋友們來討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實今天並沒有說應該要怎麼回應，我不會有任何的指示，只是想要瞭解一下，因為大家手上都有性平相關的連署案正在處理，只是想要知道在回應時程上及在聯繫提案人這兩件事上有沒有我們可以幫忙的地方，其實一開始的想法只是這一個而已。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為我們今天一樣有逐字紀錄，也有請青諮（委員）來旁聽跟指導的功能，所以我想最簡單一開始先輪流自我介紹一下，包含部會、職稱及在這一個案子裡面所扮演的角色，好比像協調或者是窗口或者是流程在部內讓我們青諮委員知道，可以嗎？如果可以的話請開始。" }, { "speaker": "劉姵吟", "speech": "我是內政部的PO，我是劉姵吟，因為這一個案子跟我們的業務單位相關，所以會由民政司的代表來說明。" }, { "speaker": "趙建智", "speech": "我是內政部民政司的趙建智，負責第三案提案的後續回應，我們將彙整協辦單位財政部的相關意見，在規定的期限內回應及與提議者聯絡。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果有跟回應者溝通的話，也請一併更新一下到目前為止的狀態。" }, { "speaker": "趙建智", "speech": "這個提議在11月19日的時候成案，成案之後，因為議題涉及許多層面與不同的權責機關，在協調主協辦甚至雙主辦部分就花了許多時間，最後確定是以內政部為主辦單位，財政部為協辦單位。我們在12月的時候已初步跟提議者進行聯繫，那時一開始把問題想得滿複雜的，因為提議的事項涉及許多層面，當然對我們來講，其實今天這一個會議主要針對性平，我們初步上認為這一個案子提議的動機有涉及到性平，但其實訴求完全沒有涉及到這一塊。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你們釐清的時候也沒有講到？" }, { "speaker": "趙建智", "speech": "對，主訴求很清楚，包括免稅的規定、財務監督及從事政治與公益慈善活動這幾個面向，所以在議題的處理上比較單純，跟其他三案不一樣。" }, { "speaker": "趙建智", "speech": "儘管如此，我們還是想得很複雜，也不知道提議者對於整個提議問題牽涉層面的認知情況，還好與提議者聯繫之後，他對於相關法制生態有一定的瞭解，對未來的政策或者是法制的走向也有一定程度的瞭解，因此經過評估我們不會再找提議者來開會，往後的規劃是彙整財政部跟部內的意見，就提議內容來做一個現況跟未來政策走向的說明。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "瞭解，雖然他們能夠找到7,185個人連署，是因為刊了這一個東西（網站show「Join」平台網頁），但是經過爭點釐清之後，發現這兩個並沒有太大的關係？" }, { "speaker": "趙建智", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個是很有意思，通常能夠讓5,000人連署，勢必是讓社會上很熱的東西推的梗，但是事實上並不完全相同。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以你們一開始有做時程上的回應嗎？幾日已經聯絡提案人？" }, { "speaker": "趙建智", "speech": "部內是有一個大概的時程，12月2日電話聯繫提議者的時候，已經大致上跟他說明我們將會在協調相關承辦機關之並彙整相關意見後，在規定的兩個月內，也就是1月20日之前回覆。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "溝通的（管道）是……因為這是行政院的自媒體，有7,000人連署就是7,000人訂閱我們的報刊，但是跟他講清楚，扣掉1,785個的人，（其他人）其實不知道你有打這一通電話，會把釐清的爭議點，自己整理過及跟他確認無誤之後，我們先用一個先期綜整回應的方法，先讓7,185個人知道聯絡過提案人，以及訴求是這些，連署跟實際的訴求有落差，這樣才不會變成兩個月過去了，突然內政部自己歪樓之類的，我們要把權責講清楚。好，全部就是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "胡仕賢", "speech": "我是財政部出席人員，在我左側是聯絡人，與財政部有關的議題是第三個，也就是配合內政部有關宗教團體的議題，其中涉及賦稅業務，我是承辦的科長胡仕賢。這一個議題如同內政部溝通結果，提案的主要訴求是在於宗教團體的相關規定，跟性平比較沒有太大的關係。因為這提案裡面有提到一點，也就是針對機關團體免稅規定，包含宗教團體免" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個跟人民團體法的檢討是有關聯的嗎？" }, { "speaker": "趙建智", "speech": "基本上有一點落差，人民團體法只規範宗教性社團。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "瞭解。謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "楊金亨", "speech": "我是財政部的PO，我是楊金亨，今天第一次來參加這一個會議，希望大家多多指教，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "黃雯玲", "speech": "我是教育部的PO，我是綜規司的黃司長，今天有兩個案子跟我們有關：第一個案子是希望落實性別平等教育法，並依法辦理性別平等教育；第二個是不能強迫學生學習同志教育。（以上）這兩個是截然不同的訴求，這個在我們部裡是由學務特教司來負責，今天科長有出席，請他說明。" }, { "speaker": "郭勝峯", "speech": "有關於這兩個訴求，是不同立場的人透過這一個平台提出他們的訴求，原則上依照《性別平等教育法》的規定，包含推動性別平等教育方式等等，基本上是尊重不同性別差異，教導學生尊重不同性別差異，營造校園友善及性別平等的環境，所以如果回應的話，還是會用原來立法上的精神去回應，來說明在學校裡面教導性別平等教育是要教導學生來尊重這一些不同性別的差異。" }, { "speaker": "郭勝峯", "speech": "因為這一個議題的話，一直以來都有不同的團體提出訴求，剛剛政委有提到這一個提案我們是否會跟提議人聯絡，原則上是沒有的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "兩邊都沒有？" }, { "speaker": "郭勝峯", "speech": "因為在台大這一個案子的時候，我們接獲了約800封的陳情信件，我們疲於奔命，我們也接下近百通的電話，在溝通的過程中，也一直說明性別平等教育推動的精神與目的，目前看起來他們不接受，甚至是因婚姻平權的議題，衍生他們現在來針對我們的教育推動相關的機制跟做法有所質疑。" }, { "speaker": "郭勝峯", "speech": "原則上這兩個提案，一個是不得強迫學生接受同志教育，這在兩個月的時間（內），我們會在平台上正式回應。另外一個是「恪遵《性別平等教育法》，賡續依法辦理性別平等教育及同志教育，保障多元友善校園環境」，這個我們也會在平台上回應。原則上還是會回應說明當初性平法的精神跟目的，政府未來也會依照《性別平等教育法》這樣的精神去落實相關同志教育的推動。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我有看到綜合的時程回覆，也有看到你們有按照時程回覆，同樣回答八成的文字。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你們有提到一件事，因提案人有動員相當多人，所以你們疲於奔命，你們有沒有跟提案人互動過？" }, { "speaker": "郭勝峯", "speech": "他們一直在追蹤台大的案子，因為基本上它（台大）違反《性別平等教育法》，我們按照法令上回應他們，他們也不接受，一直來……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "……都是書面嗎？並沒有電話或見面過？" }, { "speaker": "郭勝峯", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我沒有要指示的意思，我只是確認一下（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一邊提案人也是你們認識的人嗎？" }, { "speaker": "郭勝峯", "speech": "不認識。但知道性平團體私底下有表達意見，所以有一些性平團體也有積極發聲，兩個提案很快成案，尤其我們不只這一個提案，還有其他類似的提案，基本上現行因為網路媒體非常發達，他們一動員，原則上不到一個禮拜就成案了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以你是基於平衡的考量，因為沒有聯絡提案人，所以這邊也不聯絡？" }, { "speaker": "郭勝峯", "speech": "對。雖另外一邊請政府恪遵《性別平等教育法》，這個是肯定我們的，我們也不特別回應說明。" }, { "speaker": "許嘉倩", "speech": "我是教育部的PO，因為我是綜規司的，基本上開放政府這一個案子跟公共政策參與平台原則上是我們綜規司處理。" }, { "speaker": "許嘉倩", "speech": "最近性平案子還滿多的，有關於教育部的部分，跟性平相關成案就有七案了，還有一案在附議當中，我們學務司最近在處理性平這一個案子，就像科長講的還滿疲於奔命的。" }, { "speaker": "許嘉倩", "speech": "像政委之前有說如果一個部會的成案數比較多的話，（是否）可以有一個機制?" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一個是併案、一個是延後處理，這兩個手段都可以使用。" }, { "speaker": "許嘉倩", "speech": "併案我們有案子儘量併案，延後處理？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也可以啊！" }, { "speaker": "許嘉倩", "speech": "有沒有其他更好的機制？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "還有一個機制是求救嘛（笑）！我們有PO群組的目的是希望大家彼此見面之後，有一些比較忙的──像教育部手上可能案子很多──有一些比較沒有那麼忙的，比如蒙藏會的PO──現在坐在你旁邊（笑）──「Join」或者是其他的平台，蒙藏會都沒有別的案子，所以需要額外的量能或者是額外支援的──包含聯絡提案人或者是綜合回應等等──可以在那一個PO群組裡面或者是PO的聚會裡面，或者像現在PO橫向聯繫會議裡面提出來，說你們真的有一點吃不消了，可以看別人能不能幫忙。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然青諮委員願意扮演一些角色的話，他們要自願，因他們是主動過來的，不管是提出意見或者是有任何功能，看青諮委員們怎麼想，但是至少PO之間彼此有支援，這個是沒有問題的。" }, { "speaker": "許嘉倩", "speech": "大概是這樣，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "我是蒙藏會的PO，現在part-time在唐政委辦公室。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他也是性平政務委員辦公室的同仁。" }, { "speaker": "簡德源", "speech": "我也part-time在蒙藏委員長辦公室服務，故而身份比較多元一點（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們尊重多元身份。" }, { "speaker": "羅吉旺", "speech": "我是法務部的PO，莫名其妙被指定當PO，有一點惶恐，因為這一件事過去我之前沒有接觸，我是本著學習（精神）來跟大家學習。法務部今天這一個案子比較特殊，有贊成的已處理了，這一個是反對的，我們會考量兩者的平衡，這一個部分法律事務司的賴科長有來，他是這一個案子的承辦，我請他說明。" }, { "speaker": "賴俊兆", "speech": "我是法務部法律事務司的賴俊兆，目前待回應的案子是反對修民法第972條，這一個訴求相當明確，他有直接做連結，這個有將「臺灣守護家庭」網頁中，六大訴求反對同性婚姻的理由貼上來，這個是滿清楚的。" }, { "speaker": "賴俊兆", "speech": "就像剛剛所提到的，我們成案的速度非常快，11月14日提議，兩、三天就已經超過5,000人了，實際上我們當時在處理一個贊成的，署名「可可」的公民在「提點子」提，這一個案是尊重同性婚姻合法化的「提點子」，必須在12月10日前回應，所以我們實際回應的時間是12月9日，也就是我們在回贊成第一案的時候，其實就已經有這一個反對的目前這一案存在，所以目前反對這一案其實在處理第一案的時候，我們當時就有考慮到所謂平衡的問題，所以第一案當時的處理是這樣子的，因為這一個議題最近幾個月一直在社會上熱烈討論，大家很注意這一個議題，因此變成我們在時間快要到之前，（以）當時最新的狀況去作即時的回應，所以第一案其實是在回應前一週內，我們主動跟當時贊成提案人「可可」聯絡，也在我們後來張貼在「Join」平台裡面提到「經與提案人聯繫」，有特別表明我們程序上有跟他聯繫。" }, { "speaker": "賴俊兆", "speech": "我們知道其實以國發會當時訂的要點裡面，其實是說我們可以比如召開研商會議，請他列席說明等等，但是因為這一個議題是大家比較關注的，當時我們考慮到如果今天我們對贊成的適用比較嚴謹處理的話，相同反方這一邊也是要同樣處理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，甚至同一場處理，壓力就很大了（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "賴俊兆", "speech": "我們考量到量能主軸還是在立法院，除了透過「Join」之外，剛剛還有其他部會提到陳情的量，其實我們這邊的量也很大，已經超過6,000件，聽說在總統府擋掉3萬件，考量到種種的因素，我們採取用電話聯繫的方式。" }, { "speaker": "賴俊兆", "speech": "目前反對這一案，我們接下來在1月17日之前要回應，目前的規劃也是會採類似的方式，打個電話，看看有沒有要再口頭補充，因為他的訴求很清楚，也就是六個反對同性婚姻的理由，以及贊成的立法模式是單點修法，當然立法的模式除了單點修法，立法院初審通過是修民法，之前討論是要訂專法，各種法制模式都有，我們會在回應前跟他電話聯繫，看是不是就單點修法的部分再說明清楚，也把目前為止的最新進度按照時間來回應。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得你們有一個很好的是，這個是你們的回應（投影網頁頁面），他純粹是事實上的說明，你們把所有之前用任何別的管道，曾經開過的立法例、交流座談會，及同性伴侶會議作過「眾開講」，雖然立法院有公聽的辦法，法務部也有做過這一些事，但大家並不都知道這些事，你至少可以讓這邊7,000人、那邊7,000人，共1萬4,000人知道你們做什麼事，我覺得這個滿重要。" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "大家好，我是吳政哲，我現在工作的地方是台少盟。" }, { "speaker": "李欣", "speech": "我現在是大學生，我就讀臺灣大學政治系。" }, { "speaker": "黃偉翔", "speech": "本職是一個技職的獨立記者，接觸廣泛教育議題，今天出席是以政委這邊行政院的青諮委員，我碩士是讀臺大機械，這一件事我們之前就知道。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "喔！你就是台大機械！" }, { "speaker": "黃偉翔", "speech": "（笑）對，但我沒有打爆電話，只是我認為不能透過手段或管道要求學生或者是硬性要求一定要接觸什麼價值觀。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你們有看到那一份考卷？" }, { "speaker": "黃偉翔", "speech": "有，真的有考。" }, { "speaker": "賴致翔", "speech": "大家好，我是窗口的窗口，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "我是書漾，是致翔的小幫手。" }, { "speaker": "林筱玫", "speech": "大家好，我是林筱玫，現在有創立一家公司，是在做防火逃生避難疏散的智慧建材方案消防安全的設備，因為這一個跟消防法、營建與智慧國土規劃管理比較相關，但是有其他的會議跟公民參與相關，所以也過來見習一下。也因為之前有在行政院性平處做一些專案，也有去APEC做過兩次報告，因此覺得性別的議題有一點涉獵，想聽大家的見解，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "綜整一下，有一個可以馬上回答的PO可以做什麼，我覺得這個滿重要的，這個是叫做「Participation Officers」，每個部會可以有好幾個，但是我們當時在設計的時候，其實是希望可以有樞紐的管道，這一個樞紐的具體意思是每一次有跨部會的，好比像分案分不出來，或者是現在是併案進來需要部會跟部會之間討論的時候，有一些跨部會的業務，但是同樣的是，各位都是一定規模的部會，所以很重要的是，因為「Join」這一個平台只是許多進線窗口之一，剛剛也有提到另外3萬件或者是有非常多件會從不同的地方進來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "從這一些不同的地方進來，其實從部會裡面都不一樣，舉例來說，就是以最近的法規預告在「眾開講」上面為例，其實就是各部會的法規會被調訓，之前的業務也許是在綜規──也許跟公關或者是新傳也有關係──當然每一案也有它的業務單位，所以另外一個很重要的是一個對內的樞紐，也就是當時為什麼是請資訊長或者是次長授權各位的原因是，我們希望每一次有這一種可能內部需要，嗯，怎麼講……就是推派或者是分案的時候，有一個固定的人可以知道這一件事，雖然按照目前的分工跟權責，沒有特別知道承辦該做，但是認識非常多的窗口，所以也是窗口的窗口，每一個案子不一定是PO下去做，但是要知道找到誰做，如果找不到誰的話，至少要知道如何求救，其實是這樣子的一個同時是橫向聯繫跟對內整合的工作。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "舉一個很實際的例子，就是各位名片換一換，有需要協助的時候，就可以copy其他人（笑），尤其像法務部已經做了，像別的部會朋友就可以用得到，大部分關心的是7,000人想要收到的是政府對於訴求已經做過哪一些事，這一些事是散落在各部會的，當然內政部澄清之後關係沒那麼大了，如果大家互通的時候，每一個回應的時候，就可以回應之前的回應裡面，你們也（可）少寫一些文章，接著是大家看起來比較豐富，大家比較知道這一件事政府有一個整體的規劃，其實我全部的想法就是這樣，並沒有太多別的想法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以在進入單獨的議題之前，我不知道青諮委員有沒有想要問的？或者是想要進一步釐清？或者對公共行政想要更瞭解的？" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "有一個感覺是，先不管立場怎麼樣，因為對於公民而言，如果他們上這一個平台，一定基本上會對於政府原本做法有不一樣的想法；但是剛剛聽起來是，各部會會先判斷跟我的立場是否一樣，如果一樣的話，就用一個方式處理，如果不一樣的話，好像也沒有嘗試去理解為何這麼做或者去改變原本的，我們還是回到原本就會這麼做。" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "我不確定是不是因為性平議題的關係，在《性別平等教育法》的立場比較明確，但是如果今天是別的議題，比如說教官退出校園，廣泛的想法會跟教育部也許不同的時候，會不會提了之後，教育部的做法依然會是目前正在這樣做，然後就回應了？這樣看起來就會變成行禮如儀的過程，但是對於實際政策的影響，好像沒有太多，目前聽起來會有這樣的擔心。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也就是對於政策影響空間判斷的原則？" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們這邊有豐富的利益關係人群體，我現在才發現（笑），不用特別約。" }, { "speaker": "黃偉翔", "speech": "比如有人想要瞭解台大機械之後的狀況，因為我本身是獨立記者，也就是以線上的記者（身份）去看待，我想這個輿論影響很大的，需要的話是可以的。我覺得跟政哲一樣，也就是政策這一個平台的影響空間大或小，比如前一陣子前高教司長黃雯玲（處理的議題）──我們也關心高教的考招制度──真的有一個人提案跟連署之後，如果部內有一個明確的方向，那調整空間看起來是不大的，就怕跟政哲說的一樣流於形式，不好意思。" }, { "speaker": "黃雯玲", "speech": "的確，就性別平等這一個例子來看，看起來反對方的意見，好像我們沒有辦法接受，但是政府施政會有主軸跟中心思想，比如在對性別平等的部分，最上位是《憲法》跟《憲法增修條文》，我們要排除性別的歧視，依照憲法最上層的法律規範就發展性平法等，如果有最上位的話，就不能動搖，就要以總核心為目標。剛剛講的這幾個議題，包括您剛剛提到性平的議題，像教官退出校園的議題，可能就是最上位的東西已經定案了，很難動搖到最上位的中心要達到的目標。" }, { "speaker": "黃雯玲", "speech": "可是黃偉翔提到大學入學方案，那一個案子其實沒有定案的。" }, { "speaker": "黃偉翔", "speech": "我只是舉例。" }, { "speaker": "黃雯玲", "speech": "有一些是中心的目標已經定案了，施政的方向是如何把我們為什麼要作為中心思想去說服反對的民眾。在政策形成的過程中，像多元入學現在正在討論當中，這樣的意見對我們來講就會有幫助，（會依照）很多元的意見去作調整，像這一個案子教育部是沒有定案的，所以我們才會廣泛徵詢大家的意見，因此透過這一個平台來徵詢大家的意見，非常有幫助。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以看到這個有兩個，一個是政策本身的精神，有基本法或者是憲法已經繩之以法了，但是我們也知道立法跟上的普遍感情有一些距離，有一些是立了以後，社會上有高達三、四成的人還沒有準備好，這邊就是要做一個溝通的程序，這裡的影響空間是兩個，一個是政策本身是否因為連署而改變，我想大家都有一個溝通的想法，也就是這5,000人連署只是保證坐在這邊可以開會，取得認證討論的權利，除了這個之外，並不是5,000人的聲音壓過其他沒有連署的利益關係人的聲音，因此要求於我們的只是有一點像是課責，我們即使這一個已經確定跟執行了，但是這5,000人可以來說要求我們揭露執行的實際狀況或者是我們如果講出一些數字來，而這一些數字是哪裡來的或者是有相關的資料，也許可以開放。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在公開資訊的原則底下是一個很好的窗口，可以讓我們把正確且第一手的資訊，包含國旅卡要如何計費等等，給8,000人知道，即使這個是已經定調的政策。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是在某些沒有定調的政策上，就像剛剛說的是一個很好的方式，讓我們碰不到的利益關係人可碰到，我覺得即使是前面也有價值。" }, { "speaker": "黃雯玲", "speech": "這個平台對於已經定案的政策仍然是有幫助的，因為上位雖然是確定了，但是執行的方法可以不同的，我相信其實反對的那一方，他們可能很多人也不反對所謂的同志教育這一塊，但是他們反對的，像有一些教材可能過於偏激或怎麼樣，這個是執行面的問題，我倒是覺得這個部分其實有一些調整的空間。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "理解。" }, { "speaker": "許嘉倩", "speech": "不好意思，我補充一下，剛剛政哲同學他提到政策對平台的影響，我覺得有耶！像高中生要延後上學的這一件事，可能教育部執政者沒有注意到的事，透過這一個平台的發聲，讓我們有機會思考這一件事，如果我們按照以前那樣行禮如儀說依課綱規定每一天要上課多少小時，就這樣子打發掉的話，就沒有任何的幫助。" }, { "speaker": "許嘉倩", "speech": "像國教署對那一個案子很認真，找大家來開會看要怎麼處理，表示這一個議題是有空間的，各個案子的議題要看該案本身，像剛剛司長所講的，有沒有違反相關的法規，或者是有可以討論的空間，我們可以再作不同的處理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這邊（指青諮）可以理解嗎？" }, { "speaker": "郭勝峯", "speech": "兩位委員有提到性平的部分，我說明一下，因為性別平等教育如我剛剛所說的，當初《性別平等教育法》的立法精神已經講得非常明確，現在的話，因為婚姻平權法案帶出性平教育方式跟內容，我們部內12月發了新聞稿，很明確解釋當初推動性平教育的精神，教材的部分，有一些部分是不同領域的專家學者有不同的意見，有一些比如教學資源手冊的資料有參酌各界的意見去修正。" }, { "speaker": "郭勝峯", "speech": "的確這個涉及到另外一個問題，像今天早上台北市政府家長會有針對台北市教育局有不當的性平教材，小六生教自慰的議題是否適合在小六生教，這個涉及到教師教學的專業跟不同的觀點，有人認為小四的學生已經發育成熟了，(不然)要什麼時候教？這個是涉及到不同的專家團體、民情等意見，這個牽涉到更複雜的問題，性教育要教，但是什麼時候要教？這個是不同的議題。" }, { "speaker": "郭勝峯", "speech": "因此，也不能說我們沒有跟提案人或相關利益團體人溝通，像我剛剛有提到因台大(案子)，有寄出800多封的陳情信，甚至最後罵同仁，同仁已經……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "……覺得沒有實質意義了？" }, { "speaker": "郭勝峯", "speech": "疲於奔命，也快崩潰了，有些已經問候到同仁的爸爸媽媽了，反同團體已經有超出一般人合理理解的範圍，還說人獸交，你跟他溝通，就會一直重覆，因有這樣的問題存在，雖我們之前嘗試溝通，但他們一直重覆問題。但是法務部的案子有說適度回覆，或許我們評估在回應期限前一個禮拜再嘗試跟他們溝通及說明，並讓他們（反同團體）瞭解；但是就我們的瞭解，七案當中有六案都是（關於）我們（部會）的，他們不斷動員連署。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這真的是可以動員的，如果你不方便打給提案人的話，你也可以問說有沒有人比較願意打給他，比如像跟他類似同樣團體的人，比如也是教徒PO之類的，我沒有講特定人的意思（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "現在的狀況是，如果我們的正確資訊在搜尋引擎不是第一頁或者是前三筆，很可能看到的是錯誤資訊，好比像如果民法通過或者是性平法通過的話，一個人就可以任意姓取皇甫、司馬，最近流傳相當多，但是只能父姓，所以父姓選一個，就公文隨便摘一段，然後就說國家沒有救了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「Join」是gov結尾，我們的回應都會寫很大字放在一個官方（網站）上，所以你搜尋找到這一筆的話，就可以找到某年某月某日行政院特定部會的特定立場，而且是官方的立場，所以像國旅卡在做綜合回應的時候，把他們發的新聞稿及所有的資訊一起附上去，至少這8,000人找的到，以及從Ｇoogle瀏覽找到的是完整的資訊，並不是被斷章取義的一小塊，這樣是公布欄，你回過一次雖然8,000人都心悅誠服，但是他們不能假裝只看到一半，他們非得看到完整的資訊不可，這個當時設計的主要目的。" }, { "speaker": "黃偉翔", "speech": "我們補充一個意見，像今天教育部綜規司有發生大專校院護理人員這一件事，有人隨意散播不對的資訊，其實你們的回應很清楚，然而教育部之前在媒體上經常吃虧，不只教育部，還有其他的部會（在媒體上吃虧）。（教育部）可以更接觸一些網路媒體，應該要更緊密跟他們互動，我覺得這個很重要，比如我今天有意，我故意寫一個惡性攻擊的文，然後他在搜尋引擎是排名第一，那真的影響很大。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這新聞我要Google什麼？" }, { "speaker": "黃雯玲", "speech": "校護不能幫學生換藥，有一點斷章取義去寫那個東西，有七、八家電視台來採訪，平面媒體也追了。" }, { "speaker": "黃偉翔", "speech": "聳動報導出來，容易吸引各報蜂擁去追。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，還寫獨家，可能因為只有他這樣想（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "黃偉翔", "speech": "不只日報還要跟網路媒體交流。" }, { "speaker": "黃雯玲", "speech": "對我們來講，比較困擾的是網路媒體比較難接觸，平面媒體是因為在部裡面常駐，電視台是有新聞就跑來，但是網路媒體，我們幾乎很難接觸到，我們很想使力，但是很難使力。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為LINE群組並沒有裝所有的網路媒體，事實上（網路媒體）是對某一個東西感興趣的，而自己組成討論區、專業或討論室等等，他們會自己主動訂閱跟這一個東西的相關來源。像「核能流言終結者」，他們有自己的群組、專頁、共筆，也非常主動參與所有相關活動，建立起共筆式的學習方式。這裡沒有任何批評的意思，只是介紹組織非常完整的網路社群媒體的概念。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我們之前在「Join」這一個平台或者是在「vTaiwan」，我們通常在做利益關係人盤點的時候，我們盤點到國會議員、媒體或老師們，我們都有盤點到，但是跟相關民間的這一種社群，其實部會叫上來，我們好像有聽說一、兩個，但是沒有接觸過，這就是青諮可以幫忙的地方，如果有正確的資訊要第一時間送出去的話，青諮大部分都是組織者，其實都可以碰得到相關的朋友，如果只是事實澄清，而無涉於個人價值判斷的話，這個是沒有問題的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "而且像這一種「獨家」（http://udn.com/news/story/9/2208282），完全是看你的反應時間。如果你的反應時間是在同一個中午出來，在晚間新聞之前回應，晚間新聞就不會抄他的，就會抄中央社，如果到晚間新聞還沒有回，就用這一個當獨家，當然我理解大家隨時on call不可能的，但是如果有第一時間處理的話，我們有一些自媒體的管道是可以散出去的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我自己的做法是用網路平台，是告訴所有要訪問我的記者說，除了在這一個平台之外，我不會回答你，所以你看到「獨家/唐鳳…」那個就是假新聞（笑），大部分的記者都在這邊，所以我只要一回答某個人，這1,000多個人會去收到，他們會有一個互相制衡的作用，裡面的網媒，像報導者、風傳媒、端傳媒，他們會制衡主流媒體，反過來會不要讓他們亂問問題，這是一個可以考慮的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像臺灣也有一個「泛答」，是一個類似的平台，當然這一個東西就跟FB的經營所需要花的成本沒有那麼高，因為只是回問題，回問題之前，別人也不能強迫你怎麼樣，它沒有辦法洗版。好處是你慢慢可以把關心這一個的都收攏過來，大概是這樣子，我覺得這個news cycle還滿重要的。" }, { "speaker": "黃雯玲", "speech": "是今天早上的新聞，我們十點多的時候，六、七至八台到部裡面採訪，平面媒體也有追，我們中午有發一個新聞稿，因為電視媒體報的時候，他們沒有跑教育新聞，怕報導不清楚，所以會提供新聞稿給他們用。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "中央社有沒有發？" }, { "speaker": "黃偉翔", "speech": "有時候在實務現場，其實部會回應，記者是選擇性使用，比如我現在也有看到整個教育部或其他部會的新聞稿，我們就自己挑著看；我覺得重點就是與媒體交流上可以多加強。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "中央社有發，發了一個即時，（看網頁）也有整段抄，剛剛是抄了中央社的，所以這個還好。" }, { "speaker": "黃雯玲", "speech": "今天下午要出門前，其實衛福部司長有打電話來表示希望兩個部會要有一致的說法，不要對外兩個說法不一致，我們也會朝這個方式來走。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個說法很清楚切割，給藥歸給藥、換藥歸換藥，實務上有無那麼清楚不一定，但是至少作了很明確的劃分。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有沒有其他要討論的？" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "像剛剛所提的網路媒體，都是屬於正常的網路媒體，現在其實有越來越多的組織者還會透過媒體的形式來做它想要做的事情，它就不是一個所謂的正常媒體。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我不知道你們有沒有人專門在看這一種東西？" }, { "speaker": "黃雯玲", "speech": "教育部現在除了報紙以外，我們事實上還有一個新聞組，他們以前5點多就要來剪報，現在也一樣，大概是6點30分以前，就會把今天跟教育部相關的新聞給我們，以前我們都要開會，現在都不用開會，就是用LINE來傳相關的新聞。其中還有包括網路的新聞，像您剛剛提到的這一些幾個比較特別的媒體，我沒有看過他們引過上面的文章。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他們不會當作媒體，這個比較像是倡議組織平台。" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "自由時報、聯合報及中國時報在同一件事上，一樣有不同的立場，剛好這一件事的立場是一個跟普世人權的價值是衝突的，因此比較明顯覺得有問題，因此如果拉到政治意識形態或者是跟政府間的關係，其實所有的媒體都有自己的價值在報導" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們畢竟還沒有走到後事實的時代，當我們把資料、論據、新聞稿放出去的時候，至少我目前跟其他媒體交手的經驗，即使是在318的時候，前兩天很多主流媒體都定調成暴動、暴民、襲警之類的，隨著有組織、計畫能夠把理解的第一手資料非常有系統散播出去，其實很少有媒體會堅持前兩天的狀態。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也就是說在謠言傳播沒有實況快的時候，散播謠言的人自己也要平衡其成本，會覺得這邊再打下去沒有意思。" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "剛剛所提到的那類型媒體比較尷尬，只有（固定）一群人看這一些東西，特定的宗教團體看特定的（資料），那就是他認識世界的來源，他會沒有辦法被政委剛剛提的那一個東西制衡。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我才說好不容易2萬4,000人訂了我們的報紙，「Join」平台的綜合回應會送到這一些人手上，我才會說我們如果只有一個機會讓他們看除了這個來源之外的東西，我們可以給他們什麼東西比較完整，我只是這一個想法而已。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然也有可能他們看完之後還是決定回去看這一些東西，說不定裡面1％的人看之後覺得政府講的怎麼樣，未必是全貌，比較像打預防真的概念，好比已經三、四期打預防真沒有用，但也許也有的還沒有中毒那麼深。" }, { "speaker": "郭勝峯", "speech": "像部分色彩媒體，我們有注意到，如果我們發新聞稿，他可能也不會作平衡報導，因為真的可能是有特定的意識形態在裡面，像針對某些議題一直不斷報導，因此我們做更多的說明，其實也不見得有效果。" }, { "speaker": "郭勝峯", "speech": "但我也必須要說明有些其他媒體對於性平議題某種程度來說還算是相當友善的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "選擇性報導。" }, { "speaker": "郭勝峯", "speech": "回到性平法上的立法精神基本上不會有太大的問題，這很難被挑戰與質疑，但是我們發了兩次新聞稿，他們可能還是不接受，可能說他背後有特定的意識形態與想法，因此我們並沒有針對每一則上面所呈現出來的報導進行回應。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然。還在網頁上面的時候，你主動回他，其實很難碰到他的訂閱者，但是我說都已經來我們家了……" }, { "speaker": "郭勝峯", "speech": "我們會在「Join」平台儘量完整說明，讓訂閱者這一些知道部內推動的相關立場，我們回應太多，有時會被挑語病窮追猛打，像台大案並不是講一夫一妻的問題，而是有講考題隱含某種價值裡面，但是後來只圍繞在一夫一妻上面。" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "我們回應的對象，某種程度我們期待所要「教育」或「影響」的人並不是寫這一些新聞的人，那一些人沒有辦法改變，但是看這一些「新聞」（或者說是文章）的人是不一樣的，在光譜不同的路線。像臺灣基督徒大概5-7％──統計比例可能比同志還要少──但是後來這些觀念影響的範圍遠超過此，甚至擴大了整個保守想法或者是一些對於害怕傳統家庭觀念會因此鬆解的人，所以某一程度要溝通的是這一群人，基本上不是很深以教育為出發點，但是害怕的是看到的東西是真的好比爸爸、媽媽不見的事；雖然我們覺得很荒謬，但是還是要回應。" }, { "speaker": "黃偉翔", "speech": "……中間選民的概念（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "也就是廣大的民眾是我們溝通的對象，也就是有想法改變的人。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們有彈藥可以用嗎（笑）？也就是教育部有一個成人教育及家庭教育行動方案的教材嗎？" }, { "speaker": "郭勝峯", "speech": "這一屆立法委員質詢也有針對這一塊有一些建議，未來會加強家庭教育的部分，針對性平教育跟終身教育的部分，也有要求部裡面要強化相關作為。" }, { "speaker": "郭勝峯", "speech": "對於一般中間民眾的部分，部裡面最近有做一個懶人包，也就是針對性平教育推動的精神跟推動的一些作法進行說明，比如在中小學推動的課程目的是什麼，有做一個懶人包來發送，這個部分有找部裡面性平委員來討論，誠如剛剛同學所說的，基本上是比較極端的人，很難撼動他們的價值觀，是針對比較中間溫和的民眾做懶人包進行溝通，希望透過這樣的方式去發送跟說明；效果為何，有做一定有效果。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我可以在哪裡用什麼關鍵字看到？" }, { "speaker": "郭勝峯", "speech": "教育部性平網有放。" }, { "speaker": "郭勝峯", "speech": "基本上現在網路媒體發達有一個問題是，很多團體是在同溫層複製自己的觀念，所以我們才會說先針對比較中間、溫和的民眾去理性說明。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是「gender.edu.tw」。這個是不是剛做的？" }, { "speaker": "郭勝峯", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我在入閣之前，我跟Wendy都在107課發會，爭議最大的問題也是這一個，我們有討論是不是有這一個簡易可讀的東西可以用，但是當時盤點下來……好像還沒有看到，所以這個是新的，我很高興有這個（gender.edu.tw），但是好像打不開。" }, { "speaker": "李欣", "speech": "要跑很久。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個是圖或者是影像？" }, { "speaker": "郭勝峯", "speech": "對，因為當初做的時間滿趕的，請廠商做簡易的、靜態的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有問題，那樣很好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我可以問一些技術問題嗎？好比像第一個授權是開放授權嗎？" }, { "speaker": "郭勝峯", "speech": "這個可以不斷轉傳，政府的新聞沒有版權的問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "根本沒有著作權可言。像我知道衛福部或者是一些其他部會，他們會直接用網路媒體常用的平台像slideshare，直接變成LINE或者是FB上面最容易轉的格式，如果手機傳到rar檔，是做不到，所以這個可以當作素材，因此真正在散播的時候，可能要考慮用一些比較友善的方式。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果你放在slideshare或者其他可以分享平台上，可以在「Join」綜合回應裡面內嵌，也就是來的人不想看也得看，因為已經包在回應的主文裡面，因此有一個同一戰線的狀況，我們之後在PO群組裡面follow up這一件事，看有沒有人願意分享的狀況，或者青諮委員願意跳坑（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "林筱玫", "speech": "（拿著筆電開啟該網頁說）其實還滿快的，我慢了一分鐘才開始載，檔案是可以下載並解開的，PDF檔案大小約102.8M。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "表示行政院網路還滿快的，所以表示要用某一個比較容易分享，至少是PDF，可能很難是rar，最好是可分享的平台，如果有其他部會的PO在回的時候，覺得有用的話，其實也可以直接拿去用。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們的目的是希望盡可能碰到很多人，各位的手上都是上萬人，所以有一定的效果。" }, { "speaker": "黃偉翔", "speech": "我們記得教育部有幾個社群。" }, { "speaker": "黃雯玲", "speech": "有幾個已經停掉，其他因為已經有基本的粉絲在裡面了，所以繼續在運作。" }, { "speaker": "郭勝峯", "speech": "像是不是可以把PDF檔……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "……或者如果有任何需要支援的話，我們在討論群組講一聲，我們就儘量幫忙。" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "目前是PDF檔，我不是從那邊的，我是隨便搜尋「教育部 性平教育 懶人包」，我也不知道怎麼來的，也就是PDF檔，但就是很大，檔案非常大，跑起來很慢，所以手機可能會有一點卡卡的。" }, { "speaker": "林筱玫", "speech": "我是直接用電腦。" }, { "speaker": "郭勝峯", "speech": "我們回去跟廠商聯絡，看是不是可以讓檔小點。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "PDF是內部就可以壓檔，如果廠商一、兩天沒有回你們的話，其實在座非常多會處理PDF的人（笑），所以大家可以換一下名片保持聯絡。" }, { "speaker": "吳政哲", "speech": "等一下就可以處理了。" }, { "speaker": "林筱玫", "speech": "直接用PDF軟體，在文件匯出(Export)時，選 壓縮相關（ ex. Reduce File Size）選項立即壓縮。目前壓縮一次，檔案大小從102.8MB 剩 42.1MB。 因為這是非高清的影像檔，壓縮後失真問題不大！提出建議，謝謝！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非常好，不用找廠商，有自願跳坑的朋友。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們想問的就是這一些，還沒有跟提案人聯絡的，至少在快要回應之前有一個期程的時候，還是跟提案人聯講一下，因為畢竟號召來的7,000人都會收到我們的回應，若附議者看報紙才知道，好像怪怪的，因此還是聯絡一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果聯絡的過程中有提出什麼額外的，像這邊其實是減少訴求的話，盡可能整理起來，整理之後mail給提案人說這個真的是他講的沒有問題，因此在綜合回應或者是期程回應的時候，可以一併附上澄清訴求，有逐字稿當然很好，沒有的話，就爭點整理，這樣都會比當初動員時的版本好，因為至少記者最後抄的時候、我們結案的時候，記者都有可能來抄一次，你可以決定他是整理過的爭點或者是最聳動的題目，我們越衡平，最後的報導就會越衡平，大概是這樣的想法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們沒事了，看大家（有沒有其他問題或意見）？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有的話，今天非常感謝大家過來，也很高興內政部有釐清狀況，事後逐字稿一樣給大家，編輯十天之後公開，謝謝大家。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "當政委後，唐政委的生活跟以前最大的不同是？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "比較大的不同是我以前早上會睡到十點、十一點醒來，因為之前在當顧問的時候，是跟矽谷的一些公司，所以說常常他們剛醒來的時候，我們這邊就接近半夜了，所以我們有一、兩個小時的工作會議。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在那之後我就去睡了，他們繼續工作，他們下班的時候我才開始接力工作，因為這樣的關係，所以我的作息是稍微比較晚睡。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是進到行政院之後，因為星期一、二、四我都要在行政院上班，所以就必須九點到這裡，所以七、八點就要起床，所以我相信作息的改變應該是唯一改變，其他都沒有什麼改變。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "喜歡這個工作style嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我的工作一直都是一樣的，就是促進溝通、促進各界的彼此理解，廣義來講已經做了二十年左右，跟行政院一起合作也做了超過兩年了，所以在這一個前提底下，現在是只做這一件事，但是這一件事是做很久。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "聽說唐政委很拿手一邊做程式、一邊回答媒體的提問，聽說很多工作是一起處理的，我想你應該很忙，所以multi task一起處理，所以是如何處理一邊寫程式、一邊回答媒體的提問？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我比較會說是做同一件事的時候，我可以運用各種不同的方式或者各種不同的人才，好比像你剛剛提到講話或者是打字，或者是一些非語言訊息（如表情），甚至是跟機器學習或者人工智慧有關的一些東西，這個是為了同一件事single task，並不是multi task，是為了同一件事在同一個時候做，只是我可以調動各種不同的能力（faculties）來做。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實因為政務委員就是一個協調的工作，所以我常常會因為需要協調而去學習一些我之前沒有接觸過或者是瞭解不深的東西，所以我覺得傾聽（listening）跟學習（learning），這兩個其實是永遠做不完的工作，但是在這一個工作裡面我每一次很專心學一件事情，所以我不會讓自己同一時間做兩件事，但是我會在某個時間做一件事的時候，用各種方法去做，大概是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "現在問到device，一個是平板、一個是電腦，也有手機？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也有兩支手機，手機也會搭配VR的虛擬實境的眼鏡，其實還有別的（笑）。像我的工作桌可以看到基本上是沒有紙的，其實偶爾也放幾張紙也沒有筆，所以一切都是在數位系統裡面作業，桌上是有一個相機，所以可以把我的一些表情或者是我的一些肢體語言帶進去。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在VR這邊我們也有VR的VIVE手把，而這一個手把可以把我手的狀態帶進去，所以不管是要作主持或者是一些溝通的工作，其實這整個目的是可以突破空間的限制，我可以實際遙控機器人在西班牙或者是在美國或者是其他地方，我們好像就可以跨越了空間的限制對話。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "同樣的，也可以跨越時間的限制，也就是這邊對話到一個程度，但是我戴上之後我就身歷其境，我好像接續著前面那一個會議繼續下去，中間其實相隔了一、兩個星期兩個不同的場合縫合在一起，讓這邊的人先完整經歷那邊的過程，然後再接下去看。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "你什麼時候發現自己很有程式的才能？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "八歲的時候就接觸到程式語言的書，開始看書，因為家裡還沒有電腦，所以是看書。因為我本來對數學很有興趣，所以我就發現這個是我可以不用手算，就可以幫我算數學的東西，可以省很多力氣，因為這樣的關係，所以自己拿筆跟紙模擬程式的撰寫跟模擬電腦會有的反應，當然後來慢慢就有自己的電腦，所以一開始就是把它當作是學數學、教數學、理解數學的工具。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "為什麼家裡有數學書？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我記得當時是小姑丈，他是學資訊科學，當時在資訊工業策進會有一些相關的工作，所以他就會有各種各樣程式方面的書籍，有些會放在我們家。除此之外，舅舅年輕的時候學過程式設計，後來往商業方面發展，也有一些相關的書籍，以及數學的書籍放在我們家。還有二叔在電機工程上的發明，也有數學的基礎。當時因為他們很多書都會互相流通，所以我自然會看到。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "這樣的內容不太適合八歲的小孩子？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "為什麼？" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "很難，因為太難了。普通八歲的小孩不理解。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不會啊！我覺得程式一開始其實是很直觀的，像有一個程式語言叫做「logo」，它就是專門設計出來給八歲小孩的，你就會看到一個小三角形，有一個小海龜畫在螢幕上，你只要告訴他說往上走三步就會看到它往上走三步，所以是說往上走三步。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果你用方括號框起來，好比像往上走三步，然後再往右走三步，好比你讓它重複兩次，它就會到原點。這些東西一個個單獨看起來，都是小孩子可以理解的，而且大了之後，馬上在螢幕上就出現了，這一個想法到現在當然有更先進的一個叫做「Scratch」的程式語言，它也是這一種你按滑鼠動了之後就會有反應，這個對小孩來講玩木頭或者是其他的積木是一樣的，所以我反而覺得從小學操作式的程式設計是比較容易的。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "聽說唐政委的IQ有180？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那個是謠言，就是以訛傳訛。因為我身高是180（公分）。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "喔！對，對，對，身高180。所以有的人以為（笑）？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，因為成年人的智商一般來講到160以上是沒有辦法測的，所以我也不知道我智商多少。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "去年11月的時候唐政委對外媒開一個下午茶，我覺得唐政委給人的感覺非常溫暖。聽說唐政委國小去過九家學校？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "三個幼稚園、六個小學。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "那時候有什麼辛苦的經驗？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我相信每一次轉學的經驗都不一樣，我很難現在一下子馬上講出來，其實我的求學過程是，我大部分的時候是自己知道想要學什麼、自己想要研究什麼，所以在學校，其實老師也會不知道應該要怎麼教我，這個是最常見的一個狀況，因為這樣的關係，其實我花了很多時間去找尋學校之外的學習方法，所以大概從小學一年級開始，去學習一些東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是我特別感興趣的，好比像數學或者是資訊科學，這一些東西沒有辦法在學校裡面學，雖然看起來我轉換很多學校，但是我自己感興趣的部分是沒有轉變的。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "有的報導說小學二年級有很辛苦的經驗，因為唐政委的成績太好，別的同學羨慕你，所以唐政委被……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "霸凌，中文叫霸凌。是有這樣的情況。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "那時你怎麼反應？你是因為也大了，所以接受嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該是這樣講，我當時是覺得彼此間比較難相互理解。你們應該剛訪問過我父親，如果我沒有記錯的話。" }, { "speaker": "吳麗玲", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以他那邊的記憶可能會比較詳細，因為畢竟要您回想八歲完整的經驗並不是那麼容易的，當時他是成年人了，他可能記得比我多。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我記得的是因為彼此之間很難互相瞭解，所以我當時的想法是我打回去，也沒有辦法彼此更互相瞭解，所以我不如去研究說為什麼人在壓力、競爭底下會有這樣的情緒或者是集體的反應，如果我能夠透過一些研究工作，讓臺灣的教育體制變成比較不是大家只能用打一百分這樣的方式來比較，而是每一個人有自己別人難以取代的、因此又可以彼此互相合作的一種環境，這樣就應該比較不會再發生類似的事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我的性格比較不是「別人讓我很痛苦，所以我也要讓別人知道這有多痛苦」，比較是「別人讓我很痛苦，我要想辦法讓這一個環境不要再有人接受一樣的痛苦。」" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "我們採訪過唐光華先生，他說「古騰堡計畫」對您有很大的影響，什麼時候碰觸到的？什麼樣的影響？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我是1993年，十二歲的時候連上網際網路，當時是經由臺灣大學的學術網路，從家裡用電話撥接連上網際網路。當時還沒有全球資訊網（www）的服務。它是1994年進入臺灣，1995年流行的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在這一段時間，大家用的大部分都是純文字，因為我們知道全球資訊網到1995年的時候才開始出現圖片、線上廣播，像RealAudio這些。當時純粹是文字，所以在只有文字的時候我就已經接觸到網路上的一些社區，其中一個很大的是UseNet，當時都是透過類似電子郵件或者是論壇的形式，還有gopher以及ftp，這些是組成全球資訊網的一些系統。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在這些系統裡面，古騰堡計畫做的事情就是大家打字，把所有那一些已經沒有著作權的經典著作，大部分都是1910年以前的作品，都變成純文字檔（txt）上傳到網際網路上，讓任何人都可以閱讀。因為這樣的關係，我當時很喜歡讀人文學科（humanities），就發現我們圖書館收藏的原文書，尤其是經典文本，可能還沒有網路上來得多。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是圖書館要借書的時候還要等，每一次只能借幾本書，如果已經有人借的話，還要去別的圖書館調書，但是透過網際網路，只要按一個鍵，就整本的馬克思、整本的佛洛伊德、整本的達爾文，都可以馬上在自己的電腦裡面閱讀，所以對我來講比圖書館更方便。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "而且如果我在圖書館看書發現有一些錯字，我一點辦法都沒有，但是因為這是網際網路，我就可以修改，修改之後我就可以在社群說：「這邊有錯字，你們改一下。」，明天更新的時候，以後別人就不會再看到這個錯字了。如果在圖書館的話，還要等再刷或者是再版，有時候出版社已經不在了，那更是一點辦法都沒有。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為這樣的關係，我發現知識並不是單向，並不是只能讀，而是可以幫忙。當然現在大家都有編輯維基百科的經驗，所以對於這一代來講這已經是常識了，但是對於當時來講，是沒有發生過的一件事。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "在找到古騰堡計畫的時候，唐政委可以做出貢獻，不是透過書……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "……對，這個我們叫做社會物件（social object），當然object本身也很重要，因為畢竟是經典，但是更重要的是，繞著這一個專案，有一群對他同樣感興趣的人，我們叫做興趣小組（interest group），這一些人因為對這件事都感興趣，就有共通的話題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "而且很有意思的是，在網際網路上，沒有人知道我才十三歲，所以大家都是把彼此當作平等的存在，不會因為看起來很小或看起來長怎麼樣，然後彼此間有一些誤解。相反的，因為我們都是對同一些書感興趣，所以我們在討論的時候，很快可以形成一起工作的一群人。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個也很有意思，因為這個在現實生活裡面，你要相信一個人、到可以一起工作，需要很長的時間，可能一、兩個星期，但是在網路上只要一封email，大家就開始互相合作，等於非常相信陌生人，這個也是很不一樣的文化。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "當時是用英文或者是中文？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "古騰堡計畫是用英文。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "在這一個交流上，大部分的人都是美國人嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我不知道。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "很有意思。不管年輕或者是年老的都沒有關係，這樣的經驗對你來講，應該有很大的影響？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，因為這後面不只是一個學術上的交流，它其實是一個政治上的交流，因為我們以前都會覺得你要做這一件事，一定要有一個很大的組織，這個組織裡面的人要彼此認識，你才能合作，往往會形成樹狀結構。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一個人如果要做一件事，需要很多人幫忙，在以前只能找結構裡認識的人幫忙，大家互相認識很重要；可是在網際網路上，是陌生人也願意彼此幫忙，所以你是不是先認識他們，就不那麼重要了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得這一件事非常有趣，在維基百科出現之前，很少人會覺得像大英百科全書這種很需要一個組織的工作，可以在一群陌生人慢慢彼此認識的過程中做出來。所以對我來講，我認識了一種方法，而這一種方法是你怎麼樣去相信陌生人、如何相信不特定的，甚至連國藉、年齡跟名字都不知道的朋友，但是我們還是可以把這一件事做出來。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "所以那時是讓自己的世界擴大嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，甚至是說，好像我隨時都可以做出貢獻，不需要等到我到什麼位置上、我認識了誰，我才可以做出貢獻。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "那時候應該是小學六年級，每天去學校嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "所以每天去學校，然後用哪裡的網路？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我是用家裡的modem，撥接到臺大的計算機中心。" }, { "speaker": "吳麗玲", "speech": "是利用臺大的學術網路，跟那邊接上？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，因為臺灣最先連到網際網路的，就是學術網路。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "當時在學校有沒有辛苦的情況？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "六年級的時候，主要是身體的心臟剛開刀。不過我們班上也有另外一位小兒麻痹的同學，其實無障礙的空間考慮得滿好的。雖然我不能做什麼運動，因為還在復健，但是同學其實我都滿好的。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "唐爸爸什麼時候去德國？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我在德國一年，他先去德國，我記得他在那邊大約三年吧！" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "你在德國的經驗，對你來說有什麼影響？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我覺得主要的還是教育制度，因為他們很鼓勵小孩去找出自己的特性，然後如果小孩比較不是用文字或者數字思考，比較是做一些操作方面的，或者是一些互動方面的長處，他們不會覺得自己低人一等。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當時在臺灣，這樣的小孩常常要經歷一段自尊心比較低的時期，才發現其實我做工藝、做麵包等等，其實是非常厲害的，但是他還是必須跟小時候被比下去的那個感覺，要做很長一段時間的調適——當然如果是做藝術工作的話，也許成為他創造的養分——也就是走了不必要的一遭，浪費掉年輕時對自己建立自信的這一段時間。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在德國的話，因為他們做技職工作的人，是非常驕傲的，他覺得自己對社會有非常重要的貢獻，這個貢獻並不遜於念書、做研究的朋友，像我同學——即使當時只有十歲——裡面有很多朋友已經知道就是要去做工藝，而且是非常專業的工作，並不會覺得他在地理或者是歷史學科裡，沒有辦法當一個研究者有什麼關係，當然基本的瞭解還是要有。自信心很小就培養出來，在臺灣那個年代，是很少看到這樣子的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "唐政委認識很多不同的人，當時有什麼很驕傲的事，可以跟我們談一談嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然。其實在網際網路上，我剛剛說social object，所以這個東西其實只是一個大家彼此認識的藉口。舉一個例子來講，我在全球資訊網剛出現的時候，曾經參加過一個100-club，是在網路上任何可以把圓周率背到小數點之後一百個數字的人組成的俱樂部。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這有什麼意義？沒有任何意義（笑），但就是說這一些人有一些像的地方，就是都可以去背很長的一串數字，但是在交流的討論裡面，當然也不只討論圓周率，所以就會看到天南地北別的話題，當然都會跟數學、數字、數論及記憶方面的事情有關係。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我舉這一個例子的意思是：那一件事本身並不一定那麼重要，重要的是大家繞著它，然後開始彼此聊天跟瞭解。" }, { "speaker": "吳麗玲", "speech": "您在跟很多人交流的這一個計畫裡面，有沒有哪一句話或者是哪一件事讓你得到很大的鼓舞或者是鼓勵？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想「古騰堡計畫」是我的一個入門，等於是第一扇門，但是那個之後，其實我看到非常多不同的社群，舉例來講像之前有一個「電子前鋒基金會（Electronic Frontier Foundation）」，他們講的是在網路上的言論自由這一件事很重要，怎麼樣讓當時的政府去理解言論自由是怎麼樣的一件事，這一個社群我也很感興趣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "慢慢我就發現，這些社群的背後，有一個更根本的社群，叫做「網際網路工程任務組（Internet Engineering Task Force）」，也就是IETF。我們會有網際網路，是因為不同網路之間彼此願意互相通訊，不然的話，每一個人都只能用當地的電信公司或者是當地大學的網路，是所有這一些網路都同意即使人不在自己的國家，但是你想要收你的email，中間每一個節點都必須遵循一樣的協定，你才能連回自己的機器。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這中間所有的人都願意遵循一樣的遊戲規則，這個遊戲規則叫做「網際網路協定（Internet Protocol）」。到底是誰來做、誰來制定？答案就是IETF，也就是網際網路工程任務組。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可是IETF憑什麼能夠幫全世界的人類，來決定這一些機器要如何聯繫？任何人，你只要對這一件事有利益關係、覺得會有影響，你就可以加入，完全沒有會員推薦制之類的限制。只要能夠發email，你就可以加入開發。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為這樣的關係，所以其實在IEFT裡面，並不是我們平常想像中，一定有很嚴密的組織架構；相反的，即使只有十三歲、十四歲，想要為網際網路做出貢獻，只要寫一封email就可以做得到。因為這樣的關係，我發現這些人的工作，造成了一個新的土壤，然後剛剛講的這一些小小社群是在這一個土壤上面冒出來的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為這樣的關係，後來我的興趣就轉向Web社群，去實作全球資訊網路的標準，以及參考W3C與更底層的IETF社群，去實作網際網路的標準。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外，我也參加了Perl程式語言的社群，Perl當時是架在全球資訊網這一個社群再上一層的，幾乎所有人在架網站的時候都會用到的技術，所以接下來各地開始架網站的時候，所有這一些架網站的，我們叫做Web Admin的這一些人，往往就會加入Perl這一個社群，大家就會互相交流我們可以怎麼樣運用這一個新的媒材。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一些不同的網站，也許看起來是彼此競爭的，但是其實底層這些技術是共享的。因為這樣的關係，願意共享的這一些人就會變成共享的社群，所以我參加Perl社群參加了最多，然後Web社群次之，然後IETF。我大部分的精力都放在這上面。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "你沒有去高中，而自學，然後趕快參加了資訊人網路公司？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當時「資訊人」是一家出版社，這一家出版社在做的事情，是去把學習電腦的資訊、過程分享出來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有一點像是我們現在的「部落格」，他們有架一個BBS（bulletin board system）的小社群，在這一個社群裡面，邀臺灣正在做資訊學習或資訊研究工作的人去寫自己的文章，看大家是怎麼探索電腦的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為他們這樣子往不特定人約稿，所以我也寫了一篇文章說我自己怎麼學電腦。這樣的工作裡面，其實我也不是唯一一個十四歲的，另外還有黃景彤也是差不多的年紀。出版社當時並不在乎我們這一些人幾歲，只在乎文章覺得能不能用，後來訂起來變成一本書，那本書就叫做《我的電腦探索》，所以這一本書是大家自己寫的文章，幾個人一起出書。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這本書前面還有一本是叫做《資訊遊俠列傳》，那是去訪問其他人。雖然體裁不一樣，一個是訪問，一個是自己寫，但是其實都是類似口述歷史的工作。因為這樣的關係，「資訊人」我是以一個作者的身份加入。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但當時因為全球資訊網剛發明，他們就架了一個網站，在網站上可以買書，但我覺得那一個網站不是很好用，所以我就自己架了一個網站，叫做「資訊人非官方網站」，把書的封面弄得比較漂亮，讓人看到之後比較想去買、去認識我們的書。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這對我當然也是有利益的，因為我是作者嘛（笑），所以如果書賣得好的話，我也比較有榮譽感（笑），所以是在這樣的情況之下，架了一個非官方的「資訊人」網站。當時的CEO覺得非官方的、作者自己架的好像比官方架得好，不如就直接變成官方網站吧！所以是這樣加入的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "後來「資訊人」有一次改組，就是從出版社變成軟體公司，我是那個時候才作為股東身份加入的。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "股東加入當時是幾歲？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "十五吧！" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "你另外自己做網站，花了多少時間做一個網站？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在1995年當時我們能夠用的網站，只有最基本的文字、表格跟圖片，所以跟用一個排版軟體的功能是一樣的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我記得當時的非官方網站，我可能一個星期就做完了，那其實並不是一個很複雜的網站。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "當時的公司有嚇一跳嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，因為其實作者自己幫出版社做網站，當時是比較少見的（笑），但是我覺得也是因為全球資訊網當時剛出現，所以大家都在試驗這一個新的媒材可以做到什麼程度，所以從另外一個角度來看，其實我也是想到什麼題目就做什麼題目，因為我就是想要認識這一個新的媒材，所以也不是那麼讓人驚訝的事情。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "在你十四歲、十五歲是不是不能正式的上班？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "十五歲是童工。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "在日本是違法的。臺灣可以嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我本來在架非官方網站的時候，其實也沒有收錢，那並不是我的薪水。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "喔！對，對，沒有上班。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，沒有上班的問題。同樣我作為一個作者，我也不是受僱於出版社，這個都跟全職工作是沒有關係的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我後來十六歲以後，按照法律，就可以做更多的工作。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "我想問一下在美國矽谷的部分，對你的人生上有什麼樣的影響呢？有什麼事影響你去美國矽谷嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第一次去應該是1999年。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "那時候為了工作？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是創業。當時想要認識這樣一個新的運動，因為1998年在矽谷很流行開放源碼運動（open source movement），當時他們的想法，是任何公司在競爭上覺得打不過別的公司，當時最好的例子是Netscape，那是最早做瀏覽器的一個團隊，但是因為當時微軟出了Internet Explorer，把它放在Windows裡面，因此導致Netscape幾乎沒有辦法生存，可能大家還記得這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為這樣的關係，美國法院也處理到底把Internet Explorer跟Windows綁在一起，算不算托拉斯的行為？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當時就有一些人在鼓吹，如果Netscape這樣的軟體已經沒有辦法賣下去了，與其讓它就像絕版書一樣變成歷史的一部分，你不如把它開放出來，讓任何人都可以共享、參加，變成像後來的維基百科一樣，任何人都可以編輯它；當然在編輯的過程當中，你還是要遵守一些規則。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "簡單來講，就是任何人都可以拿它往不同的方向去開發，變成像科學一樣，成為人類的一個創意來源。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，當時Netscape公司就同意了這樣的想法，在當時是非常基進。他們的Netscape Navigator的瀏覽器整個都開放出來，用自由的方式授權，然後誰都不用跟他付授權的費用，任何人都可以拿它做不同的東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "過了幾年之後，就有人拿著這一個程式，也就是Netscape Navigator做出了一套Firefox瀏覽器，其實跟本來已經長得完全不一樣，但是原本的工作都沒有白費。所以如果有用過Firefox的話，它其實是這裡長出來的一個東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以當時我們去矽谷，主要是想要瞭解為什麼之前覺得著作權或專利很重要的這些大型矽谷公司，開始慢慢願意去把這一個東西跟全世界分享？雖然當時有一些公司，像微軟的領導者覺得他們不會用這樣的方式工作，但是到現在微軟已經是開放源碼最大的貢獻者之一，把很多底層基本的技術都開放出來。從當時到現在，經過了十幾年的時間，整個矽谷都同意開源是很好的開發方式。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因此，我當時去創業的時候，就是想要知道開放源碼如何做成一個產業，或者做成一個服務的方法。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "聽說在矽谷做一些新的公司，（之後）參加蘋果公司，在矽谷有什麼樣的活動，為什麼會想要創立新公司？也想參加蘋果公司？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該這樣講，我們是做研究、開發的，所以其實不管是哪一家公司付我們薪水，我們在解決的題目是同樣的題目，這個要先講清楚。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我自己在1999年，就對於對話機器人很有興趣。就是你跟電腦說了一些話，它試著理解你的意思，後再用對話的方法把它想到的一些結果跟你說。當時我記得在Perl這一個社群裡面有認識一個開發對話機器人的朋友，而這一位朋友當時是在卡內基梅隆大學（簡稱CMU），他做的事情就是語音的合成跟識別，也就是電腦怎麼聽懂人說話以及電腦怎麼學人說話，所以我們就合作做了一些專案，當然都是開放的，整個社群都可以使用，所以是從1999年開始跟這一位朋友在網路上協作，但是從來不是上司或下屬的關係。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一位朋友在2009年吧，在蘋果開始處理Siri——當時剛被蘋果收購——因為這樣的關係，所以在2010年的時候，他們正在讓Siri講其他的語言，而不是本來只能講那幾個語言。我的這位朋友當時想要回去唸博士，所以他就去找了當時……從1999年到2010年，我們其實已經合作、認識了十一年，所以他就想到已經認識了十一年的Audery Tang也許可以幫忙他的部門，在他去唸博士的時候繼續一些工作，問我願意不願意，我就說：「好啊！你就去唸博士。」，我就進蘋果幫他帶他部門的一些年輕人。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你可以看到，我沒有面試，也沒有填履歷表（笑）。我們認識這麼久了，他非常清楚我的能力，我也很清楚他做的題目，然後我們做的題目一定程度上是重疊的，所以當他有一陣子想要去唸博士，他當然請最熟的人來幫他工作。所以，雖然蘋果付我錢，但是我做的研究工作跟本來的並沒有什麼差別。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "所以不用去蘋果公司上班？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。我基本上都是在台北，然後透過遠距工作平台、視訊，當時才剛開始有Facetime。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在那一個工作裡面，我覺得我學到的比較是蘋果裡面，沒有一般我們叫做career ladder，沒有說累積年資，就升到科長或組長的概念。對於蘋果來講，就是每個人做自己最擅長的事情，然後在那件事情裡面去跟別的部門找到互相銜接的方法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "很多人在蘋果，一整個career——二、三十年——就是做一個題目，並不會因為做得很好而被promote到一個其實不適合他的位置。這樣的結果是大家都盡全力在做擅長的那一件事，而且是喜歡的那一件事，我覺得這也讓我學到很多。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "當時還沒有新政府的時候……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "……Steve Jobs還在的時候。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "Tim Cook有沒有聯絡過你？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我和Tim Cook沒有直接聯絡。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "Tim Cook剛上來的時候，我自己有一點希望他可以解決專利戰的問題，因為當時蘋果正在跟很多Android公司有一些糾紛，我覺得這一件事花了很多大家的注意力在上面，但是對整個產業的幫助有限。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得很棒的是，Tim Cook上來之後，很果斷地在這方面取得了一些互相諒解，我覺得這件事他做得很好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "然後，蘋果之前對於Open Source，他是每一個部門需要自己去爭取，而且爭取還需要花比較長的時間，但是在Tim Cook上來之後，現在一些做基本的，好比像我最關心及擅長的程式語言研究的這一個部門，他們就在Tim Cook上來之後，比較容易去說我們要開放，我們要跟全世界的研究者一起來做Swift語言。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以從某個角度來看，他是比較願意擁抱這種跟不特定人工作的狀況，這一些事我覺得還滿好的。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "現在大家覺得蘋果公司有一點無聊的公司，你怎麼看（笑）？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "無聊的公司？" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "變得有一點……" }, { "speaker": "吳麗玲", "speech": "……比較沒像以前那麼有意思。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我覺得這個我們叫做complacency，就是說任何創新……iPhone剛出來的時候，大家都不知道原來可以這樣子做東西，但是人類是這樣子，我們每天只會去記這一天跟上一天有什麼不一樣，所以不管上一天的那個東西再新，其實你睡一覺起來，那個腦袋就已經適應它了，這個就叫做complacency。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因此這一件事，我覺得確實是啊！不管它一開始做出來的時候再出人意料，我們再用了一陣子之後，就會覺得這是天經地義的，一個人走在路上拿著玻璃滑來滑去（笑），已經變成是人類生活的一部分；可是你看也沒有幾年，對不對？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我覺得它是無聊的這一件事情，剛好說明了它已經變成了文明的一部分，如果還覺得這是很新鮮的，好比像VR，那就表示說其實它對文明一部分的人是有用的，而對於另外一部分的人而言還沒有那麼有用，這個時候才會覺得很新鮮、要不要用用看，就是early adopter跟late adopter。但是如果這一件事你覺得它很無聊了，也就是對整個人類是有幫助的，而且對大家都很習慣的，我覺得這並不是一件壞事。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "（笑）剛剛政委說透過在蘋果公司的經驗，蘋果公司與現在行政院的組織是不一樣的，政委您覺得對於在行政院工作有沒有幫助？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這兩個當然不能完全類比，雖然蘋果接觸到的人是非常非常多的，但是畢竟它沒有義務去照顧到所有沒辦法afford、買不起蘋果產品的朋友，它沒有這樣子的義務。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是作為行政院，我們的工作是要讓所有沒有辦法上網的人都能上網，或甚至他負擔不起網路費用的人能使用，所以我覺得最大的差別就是蘋果服務的是買得起蘋果的人，但是行政院要服務的是所有人，這個是最大的不同。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "對，對，對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我們當然有一些創新的方法，好比像一個很平等的結構，或者是像蘋果也是學了很久才能夠跟開放社群工作的這一段在內部說服的過程，這個東西對我在行政院是有幫助的，因為我現在也是在說服各個部會、各個首長多相信一點不特定人，其實沒有壞處。這一點是我們在蘋果內部也經過非常類似的過程，我覺得這個是有幫助的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是最後要導向的目的是不一樣的，這一件事很明顯的是，我們這一個東西是公共的服務，是不管喜歡不喜歡政府，或者甚至繳不繳得起稅金，基本人權是大家都有的，而這一件事我覺得是最大的不同。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "很多認識的人都說他們不想做政府的工作，因為太無聊，因此我有一點好奇，原本專心在產業方面後來轉到社會方面的工作？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實因為我一直研究的主題是一樣的，也就是如何透過網際網路讓人跟人之間彼此更能夠傾聽、更能夠彼此理解，也就是我們如何讓同理心（empathy）這種只有在一個房間裡面兩、三個人比較能夠發生的東西，把他帶到網際網路上，或者是透過網路的輔助，然後把它變成有延展性的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "簡單來講，以前你講話給一百萬個人聽很容易，可是你要聽一百萬個人講話沒有那麼容易，你要讓一百萬個人聽彼此講話更困難，但是現在其實技術已經可以幫助我們做到這樣的事情，所以這一直是我研究的題目，可能從十四、十五歲就有研究了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "中間不管是蘋果付我錢，或者是另外一家socialtext付我錢，或者是牛津大學付我錢，或者是任何其他別人，甚至有一些匿名的捐獻等等，這一些都是可以讓我過生活，但是我工作的題目是同一個。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以行政院來講，我覺得有一個很好的位置，行政院現在正是最需要聽大家意見的時候，就是它有一個動機，這個動機就是：如果我們做一個決定，但是我只聽到部分人的意見，剩下來的人我沒有聽到他的意見，那這個決定做出來之後，剩下來的人就會在街上讓我們知道他反對我們的這個決定。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以對行政院來說，任何能夠在決策形成以前，就把這一些未來會上街的人意見納入、減低社會成本來講，行政院是願意的，只是以前沒有一個機制、方式去納入這一些聲音。所以我覺得現在行政院付我薪水——雖然比起矽谷公司是少很多（笑）——但是至少行政院想要做的事情跟我想要做的工作，重疊的部分比較多。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "唐光華先生對我來講非常有意思，因為他自己在中國大陸自己有一段1989年的經驗……他的研究是民主治理，你跟爸爸有什麼討論？爸爸的經驗對你現在的人生、經驗有沒有什麼影響？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我相信他對我比較大的影響是用所謂的蘇格拉底方法，那個方法的意思是我不懂什麼，我要很大方承認我不懂，然後跟別人學習，而不是假裝自己很懂，因為假裝自己很懂就喪失了學習的機會。這也是為什麼我到行政院之後，我對同事們或者是院裡的事務官或者是其他的政務委員都稱呼「老師」，因為我在跟他們學習一些我不懂的事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得這個是他給我很大的影響，也就是不能只跟同一個學門的人學習，而是要跨出學門跟所有的人學習。所以我不會說專門做資訊科學，或者我專門只是做翻譯或者是文學或者是其他的數學，而是任何的學門，不管是學法律或外交或其他朋友，我都很願意跟他們學習，這個是對我最大的影響。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "您對於民主治理的看法是？聽說爸爸買很多書，有很多是跟民主治理有關的，那時特別有興趣的具體內容是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "吳麗玲", "speech": "聽說唐爸爸是自由派的，是非常追求自由民主的，您對於唐爸爸有很多關於臺灣民主的過程等，這其中有沒有特別讓您感到讓您感受特別深的具體內容？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該是這樣講，我還是小時候的臺灣，當時還叫做「黨外」的時候，也就是還不能自由組黨，所以在民主進步黨成立之前，他所說的這一些書籍，其實都是黨外的雜誌或者是黨外的工作者，對於選舉有一些憧憬，或者是對於民主的進程有一些憧憬，或者是對於言論自由有一些憧憬，所以我看了相當多黨外的雜誌，還有一些黨外的文宣結集出來的一些書籍。但是，你說對我印象深刻，因為我當時年紀很小——可能八歲或九歲——所以我當時並沒有在情緒上覺得這些東西讓我很感動。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為其實不管我智力發展怎麼樣，社會化的情感是要到十一、十二歲才發展。所以如果是七歲小孩的話，你很難告訴他說，這一件事是非常感動的，因為腦袋裡面這個區域還沒有很成熟。所以對我來講，是一個比較抽象的方式在理解我們現在正在解嚴、有言論自由，大家正在討論社區自治或者一些培力的工作，你要我背，我都背得起來。但不管是當時看尉天驄老師、李敖老師寫的文章，我其實沒有情感上的感受。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "等到我有情感上的感受，可能是十二歲以後，我看的書籍因為是從網際網路上取得，其實就比魯迅、吳稚暉這些在之前用中文做這些思想工作的人要早，我可能就直接看Kropotkin或Proudhon，思考如果人類之間沒有傳統的科層或君主制，而是到一個完全徹底民主「安那其」狀況時，人與人之間彼此相處，當然從他們的工作，又必須回去看康德、叔本華、黑格爾這些人在哲學上的工作。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實在這一種傳統裡面，其實「臺灣」，嗯（停頓）…不會在我的考慮裡面，因為這個東西並沒有在分國家，當時在啟蒙時討論這一個的其中一個目的，是覺得百科全書這樣的工作不應該是單一國家的，應該是超越特定民族國家的一個工作。真的在我情感上感動比較深的，像康德的作品，其實裡面對國家之間的關係，和臺灣這邊的想像並不完全相同。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "謝謝。臺灣社會看起來disruption越來越擴大的感覺，有錢人越有錢，沒有錢的人越沒有錢，另外像同性婚姻的問題，就開放政府的角度，有沒有方法處理這樣的disruption？因為負面資訊太多，人民沒有力量去處理的感覺，在這樣的情況之下，開放政府有沒有什麼有效的結果？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該這樣說，你剛剛說disruption，但是對我來講是多元（diversity），就是說有一個題目，但是每一個人有不同的感受，每一個人有不同的感受這一件事，我覺得是很健康的。因為如果一件事整個社會感受是一樣的，表示這個社會是一個完全沒有自由的社會，才可能大家的感受都一樣。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "對，對，對，對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "（笑）所以你只要是一個自由的社會，本來一百個人就會有一百種感受，這個是沒有問題的、這個是很好的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得這裡面有兩件事情，一個是我們做開放政府的人，希望大家是對同樣的事實去表現自己不同的感受，而不是說大家只認定一部分的事實，但是卻覺得對方所認定的東西是畫面，所以什麼東西是事實很重要，如果大家一些謠言在傳播，然後說這一件事明明不是事實，但是一部分的人就認定它是事實，他們的感受就很難跟別人的感受對話，因為沒有聚焦在同樣一個social object上，所以我還是回到social object的概念。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好比像政府現在要修訂一個法規，我舉一個例子來講，前幾天看到網路上有散布一個謠言，說政府有一個公文，能夠讓任何人選擇他的last name，而且可以隨便挑選：「因為性別平等的關係，所以說我明天就可以說我想要姓皇甫或想要姓司馬或想要姓什麼東西。」這其實是把公文的一小段摘出來，如果有看前面一段，是說如果你成年了，想要跟爸爸的姓或者是跟媽媽的姓，你可以自己決定，這個是平等的概念，但是他把這一段拿掉，所以就好像把它解釋成你可以隨便姓什麼東西，這個就是事實上不正確的一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是因為之前我們這一種法規修正的全文，可能每一個部會自己放在自己的地方，也很少有人會去作公開的討論，因為這樣的關係，就使得謠言的傳播比起事實的傳播要容易。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因此，在我進來之前，行政院就已經說各部會不能只預告七天或十四天，而是要預告六十天，讓大家有六十天討論的空間，而且討論六十天有一個好處，也就是如果只討論十四天或者是七天，等到知道有這一件事的時候，可能是已經結束了，或者只剩下一、兩天了，基本上草案跟訂案中間不太會有大家的意見進來，但是當你延長到六十天的時候，就會有民間各種各樣的意見，大家就可以繞著它去進行討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也就是說我們這一些所有的法規在預告六十天討論時，我們是集中到同一個平台叫做「join.gov.tw」的這一個開放政府平台，在這一個平台上大家都可以看到六十天以後我們正要改什麼，如果大家發現有問題，要踩煞車，馬上可以在上面留言，留言也不是只有承辦人看到，而是大家都看到，所以大家就可以在上面彼此討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但更重要的是，因為這樣的關係，每一個這種預告都有一種網址，因此當這一個謠言在傳播的時候，你就可以貼這一個網址說：「你到這邊就可以看全文，而且可以看大家彼此討論的過程。」，我覺得這一個對於事實的散播是很重要的，當事實出來的時候，大家的感受可以不一樣，我們當然最後做出來的建議要照顧到大家的感受。要怎麼樣大家表現自己的感受？就是要坐下來談、坐下來彼此傾聽跟理解，所以這一件事也是很重要的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是問題是，以前坐下來談的人只能有一個房間裝得下來的人……" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "……喔（理解貌）！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以這十個人談了兩個小時或者是三個小時真的彼此理解了，不表示外面的人可以彼此理解。所以這一個過程我覺得很重要的是，要讓外面的人很透明看到這十個不同立場的人互相討論達到雖不滿意、但可以接受的過程，可以透過逐字稿、直播，及透過線上即時的call in，你是幾萬人裡面的任何一個人，你可以說這一件事你們十個人（指該會議室內的人）可以討論一下，也就是雙向的，並不是單向的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個很重要的是，如果這一件事最後決策做出來了，我們要能夠追溯哪一個會議的哪一句話造成這一個決策，這個是accountability，有了這一些透明跟課責的紀錄，我們才能說在做的這一件事是正當程序（due process），這件事本身會提高正當性。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是當然我們也理解民間社會的朋友以前都覺得政府不夠透明、不夠當責（accountable），所以即使我們現在做到一個程度，我們信任大家，不表示大家要馬上信任我們。這一件事，我覺得沒有辦法急著做，我們先做到我們能做的，大家願意慢慢加入就加入——我相信只要有相同的事實，以及有讓感受花比較長的時間去聚集的方法，到最後做出來的建議跟決定，就是大家比較能夠雖不滿意、但可以接受的，因此慢慢下來會有一些幫助，但是不可能一夜之間，本來不信任的人，突然變成信任，這個是不可能的。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "臺灣政府對川普贏了美國大選怎麼看？認為有沒有問題？什麼問題？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個就是剛才說我父親教的……不懂的，我就要說不懂。我對美國目前的政治情勢，說真的不是很瞭解，所以我現在講什麼都是很片面的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我只能說在這一次大選裡面，我看到很多人花很多時間去作事實的確認（fact checking），這一方面的工作在此之前沒有受到那麼多的注意，所以這一些作fact checking的社群，因為這一次的選舉而變得比較蓬勃發展，也做了很多相關的工具出來，我相信這個在未來的全世界都有用的。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "現在很難處理這一個問題，他要不要負責這個……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我相信他們當然會使用一些機器學習（machine learning），學到哪些訊息散布出來時，不是為了促進對話，而是為了破壞對話。因為如果大家都在Facebook上面沒有辦法對話，都是一些讓彼此不舒服，大家就會一打開Facebook，感覺今天心情會變不好，長期下來就沒有人要用Facebook了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以當然Zuckerberg會想要解決這一個問題，因為他不想讓Facebook變成一個每天打開來心情就會不好的東西，這對Facebook沒有任何的幫助。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "對，對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以當然我覺得他團隊做這個工作是很自然的事情，我在做程式語言開發的朋友，Haskell這個社群的朋友，也有人現在在Facebook，Facebook付他錢就是做這個工作，他們的paper我大概都有看。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是作為一個研究者，我覺得我們還在很早的early days，我們能不能透過機器學習判斷人這麼簡單、以文字為主的這一些signal背後的真實意思，我覺得這個在研究上是很大的問題；如果今天是虛擬實境（virtual reality），如果有這一個人完整的表情、聲音、手勢，你要推敲他的真實意思比較容易，但是如果只是一個超連結、一張圖及幾個字，你要推敲他的真實意思比較困難。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我也覺得隨著越來越投入virtual reality、augmented reality的研究，就會有更多的signal可以使用，大概是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "最後一個問題，你什麼時候發現自己是女生？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一直都是。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "外界的人都會看你男生的名稱，是自己決定要變女生嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我十二歲到網際網路上的時候，其實並沒有特別說我是男生還是女生，然後在那一個社群裡面，很多人看我用字、詞，或者是交流及討論的方法，他們會自己覺得這應該是一個女生，我相信性別不是只有二元的，其實是一個大家看到這樣表現的人，就會覺得男生應該不會這樣說話，可是那不是我自己宣稱，那是別人對於性別的刻板想像，尤其是在網際網路開發者的社群裡面，在美式文化裡面，尤其是當時，男生常常比較assertive或aggressive，就是講話更武斷。願意很認真聽的，或者願意做一些調解，或者比較溫柔的，尤其在美式文化裡面，他們就會覺得這應該是一個女生。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，我自己其實並沒有覺得自己一定是男生或者是女生，或跨性別（transgender）的意思。其實都可以的，就是你所說的如果對方對我這樣做事情的方法、講話的方法、思考的方法，他形成了一些判斷，那這一些判斷如果到最後，他覺得「這應該是女生」，我就說：「好啊！那就是女生。」，如果他做出了一些判斷認為是男生，那我就是男生，沒有關係的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得社會性別這一件事——尤其是在網路上——其實是完全沒有意義的，一個人宣稱自己是男生或者是女生，在網際網路上是沒有任何差別的。所以我只是回到在網際網路上本來就沒有差別的狀態，如果有人直接問我性別（gender），我就會說「whatever」，所以這比較接近那一個狀態；確實我十二歲在網際網路上的時候，很多人假設我是一個女生，我自己也不需要說什麼，他就是覺得會這樣講話、會這樣聽人說話、很溫柔的，應該是一個女生。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "2005年公開自己是女生，為什麼要公開呢？我自己覺得開放自己是很辛苦的，太辛苦了，壓力太大了，為什麼自己要公開呢？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實是說「也是女生」啦（笑），並不是「只是女生」。我並沒有刻意要弄到大家都知道，其實只是自己的blog寫了一篇〈Runtime Typecasting〉，看這一個標題就知道，只是寫給做程式語言研究的，這是學門裡面的一個梗（in-joke）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當時只是跟大家說明，因為確實從1993年我在網路上的社群朋友，就會有一部分的人，好比打魔法牌的（EFNet #mtg），他們就很陽剛，已經認定我是女生，雖然我們沒有見過面；有些歐洲的朋友（ircnet #perl）覺得我是女生，但是同一個社群裡面，可能亞洲的朋友會覺得我是男生，所以就會造成大家認知的不協調，也就是當你講到唐鳳的時候，你到底是在講誰呢？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得我寫一篇blog只是解釋說「隨便大家」，然後你覺得我是女生，沒有問題，而且我也願意用女生的身份來體驗這一個世界。但是這一件事，我覺得當時只是對已經長期認識我、超過十年的這幾個不同的社群作說明，並沒有要弄到大家都知道。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "臺灣的主流媒體很喜歡這樣報導，所以就自己加了很多詮釋，而且是在沒有經過我同意、也沒有一個proper interview的情況，所以就自己去刊登了。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "喔（理解貌）！這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以那一件事很有意思，也讓我看到維基百科是不能自己修改的，因為維基百科必須是要有報紙的報導，所以我當時的一個好朋友Larry Wall老師，他是Perl的發明人，他說「其實維基百科都是道聽塗說，因為只能放道聽塗說。」" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以在這樣的情況下，就變成沒有採訪我的媒體發了一篇稿子，維基百科可以引用，結果我自己反而不能使用，我不能編輯我自己的條目，這個是非常有意思，這也讓我們看到維基百科文化所造成的影響，就是當事人對於關於自己的條目編輯權，是比一般人還要少的。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "自己的性別、自己的名字，比很多人自己決定很多，比較有想法，自己決定權這是不是非常重要的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得任何人都是自己覺得，如果你很在意別人的看法，你想要遵循大家的牽絆，我覺得這也是你的決定，到某一個程度還是要做一個有意識的考慮，是說哪一些部分是要社會化、哪一些部分是我反過來希望社會，因為我的存在而有一些調整。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "每一個人這一個尺度放的位置不一樣，但是這一個尺度必須是這個人有意識的放下去的，這個就是我們說的成年的過程，也就是一個人在社會裡面找到一個自己跟社會相處的方法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "而這一個過程，我覺得我只是因為小時候換環境非常多，九年九個學校，等於是九個環境，所以我沒有什麼時間讓環境來決定我的性格，因為每一個環境對我施加影響的時間只有一年，所以我沒有辦法有一個穩定的社會讓我適應，因此我必須只能自己決定。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "謝謝。回到上一個問題，在社會上disruption的問題是越來越大、社會民主主義越來越退步，你是否相信臺灣社會民主主義的實踐？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為我是「安那其」，其實我不是很同意有一些marxist，尤其是老的marxist，他們會覺得社會一定是按照一個進步過程，也就是可能先是封建社會，然後資產階級興起，接下來變成社會主義，他們相信歷史有這樣子一個演化的必然狀況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是這樣子的想法其實從最早的「安那其」就已經不覺得事情會這樣子的，他們覺得我們做「安那其」的朋友是在讓大家彼此更能彼此信任。具體來說，我們做的是一些讓彼此基於信任來協作的工具，但是這一些工具在什麼地方發揚，完全看那一個地方的人是否願意去使用這一些工具，也就是說即使現在有最好的制度、有最好的工具、有最好的訓練，但是如果一個地方的人不想要彼此相信，你不能強迫他去彼此相信，沒有這一種事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，一百多年以前吳稚暉老師就寫過一篇文章，叫做〈無政府主義以教育為革命說〉，他的意思是說我們做無政府主義的人不是在等待一個很大的革命、革命之後大家都過上比較好的日子，當時很多馬克思主義的朋友是這樣相信的；相反的，他認為教育跟革命是同樣的事情，如果透過教育，讓大家知道可以彼此信任，一個公寓大廈、一個村莊，或者是一些其他小規模的人，因為這樣子就更能夠彼此信任，這樣子的話，在無政府主義就是小革命，如果透過大的disruption，好比有了手機、網際網路，突然間全世界的人都改變了，不同國籍、不同年齡、不同文化的朋友都能相信彼此，這就是一個很大的革命，但是這一些革命都是透過教育來達成的，不是透過武力或者是暴力來達成的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，我覺得不能框一個範圍在這邊說進步或者是退步，它當然就像漲潮或者是退潮一樣，我們要看隨著時間過去，是不是更願意彼此信任？如果大家更願意彼此信任，整體文明來講，就是往一個有教育的狀況走過去。如果大家越來越不彼此信任，以至於不願意彼此學習，這才是真正的退潮，但是我認為現在並沒有到這一個狀況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得現在只是工具、技術、程序的發展創造速度，已經快過我們能理解的速度。大家現在並不是不信任，而是不理解：大家並不知道這一些新的media會把我們帶往哪裡，大家不知道在這上面，我到底應該表現或者應該表演或者應該說真心話？大家在social media有不同的做法，等於十個人就有十個維度、有一百個人就有一百個維度。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣子的話，怎麼挑一個是進步或者是退步？都不可能，因為它並不是一個single dimension，你在單一維度上才有進步跟退步，你從一萬個人看起來有一萬個維度的時候，沒有進步或者是退步可言。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "OK，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "最後，你最喜歡的句子是什麼句子？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是一首歌的一個歌詞：「萬事萬物都有缺口，而缺口就是光的入口」，這個也跟我們剛才講的一樣，就是說如果整個社會大家都是相同的想法，我們根本沒有辦法彼此討論，因為你也不用討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是因為有誤解、就是因為有不同的想法、有不同的感受，所以才有溝通，因為一開始沒有溝（crack），你就不需要溝通。所以我覺得「光」就是一個溝通的契機，這就是為什麼我覺得做這個工作很有意義，因為隨時隨地都可以跟不認識、新的朋友溝通。" }, { "speaker": "伊原健作", "speech": "謝謝，感謝。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "我本身是做了二十年動畫，我也在學校教書，在台藝大及康寧，也在補習班教課，所以教學大概是十年的經驗。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "我們有發現一些問題，我三年前投入AR，從專利、智財開始布局，我常常跑大陸跟臺灣，因此我知道兩岸的一些差異性，有別於在提VR這一件事，我更憂心於AR的狀況，不知道政委您對於AR這部分？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "還算熟，我之前都是作研究。我自己大概2001年左右開始做AR，我是自己用反射性眼鏡，當時配ZOREX用Linux，做一個類似Google glass，當時其實不叫AR，當時是叫wearable computing，因為當時的眼鏡配當時的相機再搭配ZOREX，其實可以做很多事，我記得當時的專案包含了在街上玩Quick之類的，所以我是從那時候開始做。大部分的時間都是做看到什麼點子，然後試著做，大概技術上比較瞭解，應用上沒有那麼瞭解。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "我偏應用端，因為我做了二十年的動畫，所以在教育市場跟兒童的早教的部分我比較熟悉，當時有幫東森幼幼、Momo，甚至到浙江電視台，幫他們創少兒台，我們做的是content端居多，我從這一個領域看這個東西。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "教了兩、三千個學生，我覺得教育這一塊有斷層，我能教學生沒有問題，但是教完之後他們出來，基本上是沒有工作的，因為在整個設計的環境裡面，臺灣是屬於弱勢，真的很優秀的學生原則上就是外勞，能出去就儘管出去，不必要留在臺灣，出不去的就變成廉價勞工，其實有很優值的這些學生們，但是教育出了問題、市場出了問題，大家搞了沒有飯吃，但是一堆人一頭熱往多媒體、動畫、遊戲這邊轉，現在還是這個狀況，因此我試著找出一些新的平台，想要從臺灣到全球去，我介紹給你看，再說我所看到的東西。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "我的公司是喆奇行銷，我的英文名字是lucky chance，我非常需要很幸運的機會。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "簡單介紹，我畢業於臺灣藝術大學，我剛剛有提到我做了二十多年，然後動畫長片的長度超過一千兩百分鐘，這十年來我帶的學生超過兩千人。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "我相信政委您知道今年是AR、VR元年，事實上應該算VR元年，AR元年是因為寶可夢今年出的……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "去年（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "喔！去年出的，差幾天。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "所以開始大家懂什麼叫做AR，事實上寶可夢只用了一點的AR，就像您講的，您已經研究十年了，但是十年後的現在，仍然存在一個問題，AR並沒有剛性的需求，大家不會為了商品、教育的產品或者是promote東西，而去下載App，因為一百個廠商開發個一百個App，他們有一個共通性的規則，並不像LINE跟FB一樣，今天有AR或什麼軟體，還要下載的話就算了，所以沒有剛性需求。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "第二，AR是一個極大的content所組成，未來配合眼鏡，在做的時候是生活型態的改變，如果當你不帶手機，只戴眼鏡出去，所有東西看到的全部的都是AR，有一個影片叫做「Hyper Reality」，在講的就是這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "（點頭）" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "對，我相信你有看過。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "我找到一個solution，我透過情感的這一件事，我把人的感情連結起來，所以我加上回憶，因此我把AR的東西做在卡片上、喜帖上及紅包上，也就是人跟人的情感連接比較厚的那一塊，就像我家裡的小鐵盒，裡面放著我從小到大的情書，這一個東西就是回憶，沒有辦法丟，我捨不得丟，但是我也不會常拿來看，但是回憶的組成，有可能是遺憾，如果連那個都沒有就是個回憶，只有在腦海裡面。但是現在數位媒介能夠保存的話，是聲音、影像與留言的資料都能保存沒有錯，但是你的這一些媒介就會在公開的平台上，這個是很公開的，但是私密的東西沒有辦法放在這邊，比方我跟我老婆講一些肉麻的話，我不可能放上去，但我還是希望保存，因此我們就創了一個愛炫的品牌，這一個音沒有辦法發出來，我們自己拼出來，為「iShmre」。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "簡單來說，我是一張卡片，當碰到手機的時候可以錄音、錄影，所以可以show出一些多媒體的內容，因此這一塊是無所不能。因此可以錄音、錄影及可以" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "所以我們的商品大概分三項，剛剛跟你講過了，自己看的這一個市場是，賀卡的市場在美國今年就有七十億張的賀卡，所以規模很大。婚禮的市場在中國有一千兩百萬對的新人結婚，市場真的很大。就算以紅包這一個市場，在臺灣來講的話，二十歲至七十歲的人口，每個人每年有消費能力的，都要包紅包，今年每一個人包兩包就好了，那就一千多萬張，市場規模非常大，因此紙張仍然有不可取代的價值，雖然大家現在的習慣用LINE、FB，可是誠意沒有到，像我們現在跟喜來登合作，他們的紅包袋可以依照我們這個去保存。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "這個部分是我給創投看的，您不用太在意，我只是讓您快速瞭解我在幹麻，我是老師，所以我帶著一群學生在做，因此我帶著一群學生在做，我認為這是未來的趨勢，有所機會。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "我接下來講的是看到市場這一個部分，現在手機端，第二代的AR跟MR，Tango已經發布了，從聯想到華碩這一次CS的手機，他們就是要打這一個市場，但我覺得這是過度，以穿戴式來講的話，微軟的Hololens、Google投資的Magic Leap，Apple自己不知道在搞什麼鬼。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "啊？知道啊！我有Apple的device。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "是嗎（笑）？我們沒有那個新的消息。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有嗎？" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "我們沒有那麼新的消息。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有啊！不需要消息就做出來了。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "是嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！（拿 AirPods 耳機）" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "那個是耳機啊！我說的是眼鏡的這一塊。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可是我自己覺得Audio AR比較先，因為你只要帶著一整天，它其實是AR，從各種角度來看，因為隨時在capture你的data……" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "……GPS，穩定一點是手機。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，它有波束成型的麥克風。然後我自己試過戴一整天，其實你不會感覺到它的存在……" }, { "speaker": "陳弈潔", "speech": "是舒服的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，是舒服的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "然後，它也可以作positional cues，就是你到某一個地方就提醒你等等，所以從各種學理上的定義，這是AR device，是沒有問題的。但是請繼續。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "好，我比較care的是glass這一塊。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "知道，視覺的。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "從視覺上呈現，因為我擅長是這個。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "理解。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "所以全球大廠，微軟、Google、Apple、FB，他們研發，或阿里巴巴都在做這一塊，硬體他們在搞的，臺灣我覺得只有代工的份。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "以底層技術來講的話，從Veforia、Vikitude、Metaio，Sony還有一個坊間的Coco AR，印刷廠串了很多；中國因為Metaio被Apple併的這一件事，中國整個大洗牌，大洗牌之後亮風台、視辰Easy AR全部都出來了，所以他們是國家在培植。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "瞭解。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "所以他們的資源是很大的。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "當然國外的平台包含像Coco AR、Realcase找趣（大陸）、視＋（德國）、Aurasma（荷蘭）、Lay AR（法國），大家都在玩這一塊，有的人在建平台，有一些人在建SDK技術。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "臺灣基本上也有這一個優勢，臺灣可以開發是沒有問題的，因為太需要太大的資金投入，原創的能力也夠，臺灣優勢有這個部分，還有我們的文化底蘊夠存強，因為中華文化我們是完整保存。很多大陸的人跑來臺灣，寧可花貴一點要找臺灣人做，因為誠信的問題。而且我們的人力成本比較便宜，這個是事實。再來我們有足夠的生產跟代工的經驗，因為代工很多，所以內容的經營很強。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "因此我認為臺灣的AR若要切入的話，應該是從教育的市場去切入。比方尼奧研發了一塊教具，就是放大鏡的外形，但是裡面其實就是Android的手機，用這樣的方式引起小學生的注意，用這樣去瀏覽搜尋，就不會覺得隨便拿手機亂玩，我覺得這個是很好的概念。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "但是他們遠不及我們臺灣人做的，從教具、教材、師資及硬體規劃能夠切入的，如果今天跟華碩合作，事實上我們也跟他們談了，因為他們發覺Tango手機出來之後，不知道怎麼運用，我們對於市場上比較熟悉，我覺得可以結合臺灣現有的文化底蘊，因此可以把中華文化的教材，在國小、國中、高中及大學的所有課本全部數位化，那就是很大的市場，並且轉換到AR、VR，再變成多國語系，這樣市場就可以吃下來，我覺得這是唯一的機會，我個人看是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "就您在政府這邊的角度，我們希望能夠專注在幾件事：" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "第一個，協助我們做資源整合；" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "第二個，產業鏈結平台，因為我們都是小到不能再小的新創，不像華碩、不像Acer這麼多的資源，但他們即使有這麼大的資源，也沒有在這一塊的專業很多，反而都是我們在找出路；" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "第三個，我們希望引進外籍人才技術移民，我覺得這點可以參考澳洲及新加坡的做法；" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "第四個，外商資金挹注不用講了；" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "第五個，市場推動政府必須配合政策接軌，因為有時是政策礙了我們的事情。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "第六個，AR、MR紮根，教育這一塊必須要提早走，因為因應後來的content很大，必須要從現在高中、大專院校及大學開始培養這一些人才出來，然後簡化貸款的流程，希望是用母雞帶小鴨的策略，我們可以跟華碩、技嘉來配合，由他們來完成我們的know－how，但是確保我們不會被他們惡性併吞走。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "用兩張圖來解釋一下：現在應該是投資腦袋，而不是投資硬體，所以腦袋會比硬體重要，也就是找到賈伯斯比找到鴻海更重要；第二，創意上應該找到宮崎駿，而不是找到motion capture的設備，我相信你應該知道這個點。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "所以在基礎建設上：臺灣的網路速度還是不夠；行動支付沒有辦法走出去；公司法規鬆一點，還是不夠用；創新獎勵配套，我覺得跟大陸、韓國、新加坡比都差太遠。我甚至覺得可以設立產業保護孵化的一部分，這個必須要先走。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "儘量不要做什麼事？再去搞硬體跟設備。不要再花空間說要建園區，那個夠多了，也不要再輔導就業了。舉個例子：以前「兩兆雙星」讓一堆補習班賺了不少，那個一點意義都沒有。然後避免資源不等比的分配，大部分的補助跟貸款都是給大公司、大財團，我們小公司只需要一些，就可以發展不錯；還有避免頂尖相關的人外流，這個我覺得控制不住（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "還有，不要非專業領導專業。舉例來說，我之前申請過天使計畫，當我提出AR喜帖概念的時候，兩個委員把我打回來，一個說建議用QR就好了，第二個委員說婚禮市場沒有回頭率，不值得做，我不值得委員怎麼挑選的，他們這點產業都不懂。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "另外，還有資金嚴重閒置，很多銀行只是配合政策，根本不願意擔保錢會賠掉，所以門檻很高，寧可不發，把錢留下來，不被罵就好了，因此很多計畫就變成閒置在那邊，沒有用到，很可惜。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "另外一個是，強化臺灣優勢：我們的SDK絕對寫得出來，但是由誰來主導這一件事？是工研院或者是臺灣大學那些教授們，我不懂，盡早跳脫硬體代工的思維，因為那是賺毛利率。舉個例子：我之前在汽車產業一陣子，我的老闆告訴我說：「你可以看到華慶集團大工廠賺的還不如旁邊賣紙箱多，豬宰掉拿去賣餿水，賺得比工廠還多。」，這就是賺毛利率的缺點。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "我們有很好的文化，但是我們用文創這一件把文化給蓋掉了，所以文化完全沒有獲得保護，我們的教育也要再改一下，教育有很大的落差。我們希望讓這一些年輕大膽的新創們站在Acer、技嘉大巨人的肩膀上跳躍，才有辦法出得去，他們必須是母雞帶小鴨的概念。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "我們可以學李安的模式，李安在做「少年PI」的時候，把整個好萊塢的技術全部引導到台中來，造就一波人才的興起，他是真的有在做事，這是我們真的看得到的。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "從二十年前傳統產業到大陸，提供了非常好的條件，提供給你人、房子、設備，不用收你錢還給你資金，現在還是這樣，但是全部都回來了，那些高階幹部現在都變大樓管理員，然後產業沒了，電子產業也是這樣子，接下來他們大量吸收新創，您應該知道這一個狀況？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非常清楚。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "中國的政策來講的話，他們鼓勵這一些民間去投資，你只要投資，賠了，沒有關係，政府補貼你六成，而臺灣是你只要這一個投資人滿1,000萬，政府再給你三成去投給別人，我覺得這個是不合理的。新加坡的政策是今天準備好300萬或是30萬，政府貼你70萬，讓你去開辦；第二個政策是「種子輪」，別人投你1,000萬，政府跟著投1,000萬，這種才有辦法做。南韓政策更驚人、價值更高，只要出資10％，預估你的計畫有20％的價值，就給你70％的無償基金；「種子輪」給50萬。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "因此比較新加坡跟臺灣，你可以看到人家是用國際級的熱錢來刺激這一些創業家，是全球，並不只是臺灣而已。第二個是用政府的資源去吸收創業風險，讓民營基金再下手，最後再用資本市場去推動整個新創事業，其實臺灣不一定要留住新創，是新創要從臺灣發芽，因為臺灣我們自己碰到的這一些創業家，大家都有心留在臺灣，但是被逼的不得不出去。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "最後，我希望您能當「教育的駭客」、「創業者的雨傘」、「盲人的拐杖」、「懸涯的柵欄」，這一件事很重要，因為AR、VR我覺得是下一波很大的趨勢，我自己評估可以救到整個臺灣設計圈子的這一些人，大家都有飯吃，然後可以主導一些事，但是現在是時間點，我評估三至五年這個就成熟了，現在大家還在同一個起跑點上，是不是趕快整合一些資源去做一些有價值的事情，大概是簡單的內容。我講完了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "感謝。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "會不會太快？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不會，不會。她打字，比我們說話還快。「懸崖」的「崖」是上面有一個「山」（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "來之前剛打完。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "很好。在我回應之前，你們有要補充嗎？" }, { "speaker": "陳弈潔", "speech": "我整合很多案件，包括客戶的案件，比如傳產的客戶也不少，他們想要轉型，但不曉得怎麼轉型，從政府獲得的資訊他們都不知道，比如做床墊的廠商，想要把自己的東西代工拿到國際去賣，比如說他們要接觸國際，他們本來是做代工而已。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "要做自己的brand？" }, { "speaker": "陳弈潔", "speech": "對。可是當走出去的那一剎那，他們不知道物流怎麼做、金流怎麼做、資訊流怎麼跑？都沒有。而找海外的點其實都沒有，海外幫助他們，最大的大陸的廠商、大陸的區塊，因此對他們來講不知道怎麼著力點，傳產要轉型成國際化，才會有自己的未來，臺灣目前面臨很多狀況是沒有辦法接觸這一塊。透過我們去幫他協助做資訊化或是一些brand建置的過程中，才發現他們的思考又返回另外一塊很好玩的事情，他們想要做這一塊，但是裡面又有人有反對的聲音，他們認為政府不推或政府沒有給他方向，也就是這一個廠商沒有辦法給他一個標準看怎麼做會比較好的標準東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這跟他講的是兩回事，這邊（曜隆）講的是減低創新的障礙，而你講的是政府要給一個方向，讓傳產知道如何轉型。" }, { "speaker": "陳弈潔", "speech": "這是我們碰到很多問題（之一）。包含在這些創新產業，也會發現軟、硬體的整合，比如要找傳產幫忙做東西，可是傳產不願意幫忙做，好比做AR的glass面板，三星有、三星不理我，因為我根本太小單，跑去找臺灣幾個在做眼鏡的廠，但是也不理我們，因為開膜很麻煩，我們出錢，25萬講完了，我們願意付，他們也不做，對我們來講，對產線沒有幫助。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我2010年的時候走過一樣的過程，我也是想要做眼鏡。" }, { "speaker": "陳弈潔", "speech": "對，我只能去找大陸，大陸你只要願意給錢，他們就願意做給你，即使單價比較貴。" }, { "speaker": "陳弈潔", "speech": "其實這個東西在臺灣我覺得都可以做，而且對我來講，在臺灣survey這些硬體的東西是更棒的，就像做拉麵，你應該也知道，其實做軟、硬體整合，也碰到很多這種問題，這個東西能不能由政府建立一個平台，讓新創的軟硬體整合可以更緊密結合起來，AR這種東西是軟體跟硬體跑掉不掉的，AR這一種東西，軟體跟硬體是跑不掉的，包含AR的運用領域很廣，有了運動、生活、任何地方都有。" }, { "speaker": "陳弈潔", "speech": "其實我們有一些未來兩、三年的案件，其實很多都在作討論之類的，硬體的整合變成只能靠他們做整合，對我們來說最大的困難點不是發想、寫程式，反而是軟硬結合這一塊，其實我們是沒有頭緒的。" }, { "speaker": "陳弈潔", "speech": "這個就有點像謝曜隆說的把一些連結到這塊，當作是推手的角色，我覺得可以讓整個產業活絡很多；因為我是從國外回來的，國內、外市場的東西，差異性看的很清楚，06年我就在做跨境電商，那時候還沒有什麼叫做跨境電商，我可以瞭解區域性的差異、差別，在北美需要什麼、臺灣可以給什麼——臺灣最大的問題是在合作這一塊，我覺得這個是非常非常弱的。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "我們之前的東西有委託大廠開發，對方開發時說：「你就代工，請給我你的bussines model、專利、pattern、你的客戶打算怎麼做、你的營利模式是什麼？」，當他問我這一件事的時候，我就不打算跟他合作了，但是如果無知的創業者就給他了、就沒了，這種事會發生，而且是常常發生，因為不只是……" }, { "speaker": "陳弈潔", "speech": "……還有另一個遊戲製作的大廠，是遊戲製作的，到現在能夠領的是1％的營利，但是當初佔了30幾％，然後就被股份稀釋。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "我們想要站在巨人的肩膀上，但是我們很容易跌倒。像有些大廠也找我，希望我們在AR領域的一些know－how，看AR在玩什麼告訴他，他顧名思義是會投資我們，然後並表示後面的Google也會投資，很吸引人，但是把模式告訴他們之後，我剩什麼？這是要拿捏的分寸部分。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "這一些東西我們都接觸得到，我們知道的是，他們沒有方向，他們完全沒有方向在亂闖。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "同樣看中國，再看臺灣，臺灣已經落後了，資金不到位，民間都在熱新創沒有作，但是投資人的態度是完全不同的。" }, { "speaker": "陳弈潔", "speech": "對，投資人最常問我說：「你公司營利嗎？」，我就回答他：「我營利就不用找你了。」，可是實際上我們已經達到平衡的狀態，所以沒有讓他很緊張投資資金這一塊，可是每一次被問這一件事，我就覺得很尷尬，是問我營利，而不是問我這一個東西有多少的未來發展性，這個很現實。" }, { "speaker": "陳弈潔", "speech": "可是我接觸美國、加拿大、大陸，看到很多東西覺得有沒有搞頭，有搞頭就給你多少，我們未來可以達到多少，所以其實是有差異的，但是我覺得怎麼樣培養讓臺灣的年輕人可以跟世界接軌，公司現在也是有用學校的畢業生、實習生做這一件事，也有直接晉用的——今年就有兩個——也許當老闆之後，就覺得自己對社會可能有一點責任，可是政策上其實我們真的到現在都是自己評估，像有一些人拿SBIR之類，我不會去拿，因為我覺得那對我來講，我浪費時間在上面，獲得的資金跟效益都太低了。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "我現在就是正在浪費時間的那個，我現在拿到SBIR，被搞到很累。我自己帶的都是學生，因為從老師轉到老闆是一個很大的門檻，因為老師是有交功課就六十分給學生，但當老闆是做不好就開除。但我認為應該給年輕人一些機會，應該給年輕人有足夠的數量歷練，他們會有火花出來的，因此站在為了下一代好的情況下，我覺得現在就跳出學校，我看到這一個商機先下手，先把市場開出一條路，未來的機會比較大，，不然回學校會太慢；其實是有人才，但是出來之後沒有頭路可以做，現在不管遊戲、多媒體、動畫及設計的領域都在走下波，我們這邊沒有人是好過的，好過的是那1％的人。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！我腦裡馬上冒出一些名字，但那就是每一個industry的一、兩家。" }, { "speaker": "蔡寶德", "speech": "我補充一下，我是做眼鏡的阿寶，我算是剛新創四個月，目前其實有在資訊月，其實就是couple的概念，用一般的手機，加上這個，這樣的應用可以應用在教育上，甚至是應用在旅遊介紹。像這張照片是我認識了一個先生，把這樣的明信片寄回去他們的國家，其實也有推廣到臺灣，這是旅遊的部分。" }, { "speaker": "蔡寶德", "speech": "另外一個，我本身是新竹師院畢業的，我昨天有去仁愛國中，有實際把這樣的東西應用在國家公園的介紹，可以給你們看一下他們的照片（如投影畫面），那是他們實際上的利用，左下角是他們的課本，他們其實透過這樣導覽眼鏡的概念，他們可以很輕鬆觀看圖文之後，可以瞬間跳進國家公園的那種氛圍。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這是搭配他們自己的手機嗎？" }, { "speaker": "蔡寶德", "speech": "對。手機的部分我這邊也要提到，學校要拿到手機這一件事是非常困難的，他們是請學生回去帶來學校上課，我有去拜訪，其實AR、VR推動到教育是非常棒的東西，但是礙於硬體的東西其實沒有辦法進到學校。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "手機這一件事不允許進入到學校，國中、國小。" }, { "speaker": "蔡寶德", "speech": "對，希望有辦法讓硬體去，不管是不是可以用硬體廠商去……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不過我釐清一下，小孩可以帶自己的手機上學。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "老師如果同意，他可以帶來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是變成教具？" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在你這個班級裡面，沒有手機小孩的百分比多少？" }, { "speaker": "蔡寶德", "speech": "這個班級總共二十三個，帶手機來的，只有五支或者是六支。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以是輪流用？" }, { "speaker": "蔡寶德", "speech": "對。後來有再跟其他的學校借十支華碩的手機。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為這個是小孩，他們平常即使在家裡也不一定有手機？" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "家裡應該都會有手機，學校的老師不會允許他們帶手機。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "即使變成是教具，為什麼會只有五支帶來呢？是發生什麼事？" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "家長沒有準備多的手機給小孩。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以這不是個人電腦，而是家裡有手機，但是並不是小孩有手機，我剛剛只是想要釐清。但是還是有五支，並不是零支，也不錯（笑），這樣瞭解。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "所以如果是以教具的方式，比如像剛剛講放大鏡的模式，並沒有其他的功能，就只有上課要用的那些內容，就不會有這個問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "基本上這就類似像iPod touch的那種感覺，其實不是手機，只是行動裝置。" }, { "speaker": "陳弈潔", "speech": "可是這類的東西是沒有辦法進入教育部共同供應契約裡面，因為相關的購買都會是需要跑流程。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "共同供應契約裡面沒有Android的device？" }, { "speaker": "陳弈潔", "speech": "有電腦、server，有一些東西，有沒有手機這一件事，其實我是問號的，因為至少前幾年是沒有看過的。" }, { "speaker": "蔡寶德", "speech": "是非常難得到這樣的東西，法規就綁住，變成是要申請，可是明年審，然後後年東西才會到，我聽到這樣說。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "就兩年過去了（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "蔡寶德", "speech": "這個東西其實是可以輔助在教育上。其實我們現在努力想要把這一個軟體弄起來，事實上學生在教學過程中就有阻礙了，他們只有六分鐘的時間可以觀看，但是還要輪流，實際上裡面的內容是很豐富的，光這樣輪流之後，教學就會打折扣。" }, { "speaker": "蔡寶德", "speech": "我知道昨天這樣的成效之後，發現有很多學生上課會發呆，他們的學校意願提升了非常非常多，成效的部分還有待商榷，可能因為小孩輪著（使用），答題的部分是普通（成績），但是學習意願提高了，為了長久教育這一件事，提升他們學習意願，自主性學習我覺得滿重要的。" }, { "speaker": "蔡寶德", "speech": "像我開發AR to VR的導覽眼鏡App，甚至學生可以回家自己下載、自己觀看課本的這一件事，我們現在思考現在學生回去實際看課本是為了興趣或者是考試，我的出發點是，希望讓學生可以很開心跳進圖畫裡面的世界去學知識，這是我本身想要創AR to VR的初衷，跳進圖畫，找出對知識的渴望。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "半年前，南藝的創辦人所長委託我寫一份「藝術紮根」計畫，希望把除了像maker精神，從2D、3D一直到黏土成型，引進到國中、小學去做，所以我們有作這樣的提案跟嘗試。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "同步在同一個時間，北京教育部想要有一個計畫，那個計畫是讓國小及幼稚園的兒童去看非物質傳統文化的這些東西，用新的媒材來做，因此他們是用正整個像妖怪手錶的形象、動畫、角色去介紹所有中國歷史上所有文創的東西，那個案子他們敢這樣做，而且提很大的預算在做，而且他們是找臺灣人做，因為認為臺灣人才保存這樣的東西，也才做得出來那個品質；然而那一個案子沒有成，因為教育部長被抓，所以所有的立案都砍掉了，所以我們也沒有做成，人在執政的時候就會變成這樣，不可避免。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "即使如此，我覺得這樣的概念很好，因為有這樣的經驗，所以我認為臺灣的底蘊很強，我們應該要好好運用，中國傳統文化，像漢聲百科，我們的團隊就在這裡，這就是我們最強的底蘊，而且很多資源閒置在這裡。" }, { "speaker": "蔡寶德", "speech": "（投影小朋友的課後聯絡簿）他們還滿有興趣的，主要是硬體，包含像有另外一個折疊的廠商，是一個盒子，全部可以折疊起來，其實運用在教具上，一樣硬體這個東西要進去校園裡面，比較麻煩的真的是這件事。" }, { "speaker": "蔡寶德", "speech": "像這個也是（拿起桌上的PhotoShim），您可能有看過，就是只有按的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個我有，我買過，PhotoShim。" }, { "speaker": "蔡寶德", "speech": "對。這個是另外一個合作廠商，它就是折疊的VR，然後可以裸眼去看。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "類似設計塑膠殼的我也有，這兩種我都有。OK，大概有聽懂，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我稍微回應一下。其實三位講的是三個不同面向的東西，當然中間有一些綜合效果，但是它可以說是早期資金取得、硬體產業結合與傳統產業的轉型，及如果大家都同意教育應該是第一個可以切入點的話，目前實務上碰到的困難，上述三個是不同的面向，我一個個回答。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我在入閣之前跟行政院主要的合作與Wendy一起做107課綱，也就是2018年的新課綱。那一個新課綱裡面，我們有一些不同的精神，其中一個滿重要的是「校訂特色課程」，我們知道新課綱的特點是會變成有所謂一生一課表（每一個學生可以有自己的課表），高中提早選修的話，學校可以訂自己特色的必修課，這叫做「本校特色課程」，我們的課綱不再那麼硬性去規範一定要學到哪一些知識，而是培養哪一些核心素養，但是如何培養到那一些核心素養是很大程度上下放到每一個學校自己的課程發展委員會去決定，我們的目標是不會再有像以前覺得每一家高職訓練出來都一樣的狀況，而是他們都是技術高中，但技術高中可以有完全不同的特色課程安排，也許這一個技術高中甚至開了一整個學程就是在做電子競技相關文化、展演，或者後勤，您也知道會牽涉到非常多的東西——包含媒體——同樣AR、VR也可以是某一個學校的特色。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們的想法是，其實我們沒有辦法從中央去指定臺灣的每一個區域要發展一樣的特色，這個是不可能的，所以不如把大學自治的概念提早到高中或甚至是國中就讓他們自己去設計，這是107課綱的特色。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個特色是，剛剛已經提到技術高中，我們希望讓技職這一個方向變成是大家不會覺得一定要去唸科技大學才完成學業，可以在技術高中甚至在國中就可以用翻轉教室的方法去進行自己的專案，而這個專案本身會嵌入課程內，也就是你到技術高中的時候，你知道有一些創意，而這一些創意可以跟產業界合作，也甚至可以跟國外的朋友合作，並且找到興趣，在找到興趣的過程中，並不會考一些科目考不過別人，要先經過一段自卑的過程，然後到科技大學才慢慢找到自己的興趣，我覺得那個非常非常傷，等於是我們一整代的創作者，不管是工藝上或是文化上，要先經過一段大概六至八年自卑的狀況（笑）……" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "壓抑的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，非常壓抑的狀況。對某些人而言，1％、2％的人出來說：「這是我創作的養分，我如果沒有經過這一段過程，沒有那麼刻骨銘心的東西。」，但是事實上很多人在這中間消磨掉，然後就沒有辦法做出作品來，這個是非常可惜的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得每一個人要遭遇到自己的人生挑戰夠多了，不需要透過教育系統來給大家挑戰，所以這些都是當時為什麼我願意投入107課綱的工作，特別是技職、技藝體系的朋友，不要再浪費六年至八年在自我否定上，那個是說不通的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然在教具方面，我自己對於Social AR非常非常有興趣，Social AR是兩、三個人可以看同一個AR的狀態，像這個是zSpace，這個是做得特別好，這一個有看過嗎？（網址：zspace.com）" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "倒還沒有看過。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "概念就是一個平板電腦，然後配上一般電影用的偏光眼鏡，這個是非常便宜的，唯一的特點是觸控筆是三維的，其實就只有觸控筆的感測器這點跟別的不一樣，其他都是現成的軟體。這一家新創一開始也很辛苦，但是後來跟惠普合作，所以現在推得比較好，因為有一些企業的用戶開始出現，但他們本來是做教育的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我要講的是說，我自己在做AR研究的時候，發現到如果看到的東西很難跟別人分享，你在教育場所就很難推，如果大家要輪流的話，老師的負擔太重，但是如果一個桌子有五個小孩可以看到同樣的東西，他們可以自己帶自己，這樣子的話，老師的壓力輕，老師壓力輕，你才有可能推硬體進去，這是目前算是一點回饋。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我查了一下，確實目前共同採購只有七吋以上才能共同採購，特別VR要用的——特別是五吋——這個狀態是沒有的，這個絕對是可以檢討的；但是當然在107課綱出來之後，我們對於什麼是教具的認定標準也會比較下放到學校，所以如果能夠說服學校的課發會，這一點以後不會那麼被教育部一條鞭綁住，這個未來是有空間的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外先回應傳產，這個在部會分工裡面大部分是經濟部，當然你也知道中小企業處或一些朋友們在推這樣子的媒合活動，像經濟部最近辦了一系列「Mix Taiwan」的活動，找一個傳產的朋友、一個新創朋友、一個做AI的技術朋友去作媒合，每一場就會有傳產的人來，因為會找傳產比較有代表性的人物，也會找新創的。上次開幕的那一場我有去，那一場我滿感動的是，我們三個人的世代不一樣，但看到其實大部分的問題是大家沒有同樣第一手的生活經驗。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "是，沒錯。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "製作東西一開始是從1萬piece以上代工，而且從二十歲就是這一個體驗，所以開始跟他說少量、多變化的這些maker的用語，三十年來可能沒有這樣子的第一手體驗，所以變成你講的語言到他的耳朵裡面是被翻譯成不同的東西。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "像我跟食品業作食品模具，然後就把這個東西加綠豆糕。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是，很棒啊！我的意思是，如果大家能夠多透過這樣的平台彼此對話，政府當然接下來會舉辦很多類似的活動，特別是在經濟部。像之前社企聚落也辦過類似這一種媒合活動，其實很多是民間發起的，因此我覺得政府能夠在這邊做的事是，讓大家更知道我們現在年輕人創業的時候，我們在意的可能是社會影響力，可能不是幾年內的ROI，我們在意的可能是賣錢，也就是錢進來，當然如果創業這個方向大致對，中間可能轉好幾輪，但十年之後，你覺得一定可以對非常多人，是全世界，而不是臺灣的某個情況產生影響。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一點其實我們在公司法裡面跟別的國家不一樣，第1條就寫「公司以營利為目的」（笑），所以限制了很多人的想像。因此我們現在做的這一件事是希望可以修掉，也就是加上可以藉由社會目的，但是社會目的不一定是我們想像中社會企業只是照顧弱勢，你的社會影響，好比像iPhone也是有社會影響，事實上改變了社會的組成，所以大家有類似願景的時候，以後在籌資上比較好談，這是我們具體在政策上可以做的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個也是跟這個相關的，我們現在所有的法規調整，以及跟貿易有關的，我們會在單一平台上去進行公開討論，也就是「join.gov.tw」，其實會看到各方面的（議題）都放上來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "像剛剛有談到外國技術移民的這件事，其實政府已經將草案放上去了，而且很有意思的是，會有非常多的外國朋友實際上來討論，所以我們可以看到很有意思的一些見解，甚至還有人說吸引我們的，可能已經不是免稅了，臺灣稅已經沒有很高了——對於外國人來講——可能需要的是更好的、對他的家人環境或這些東西，我們有很多朋友上來實際分享他們的見解，這個的討論其實還有五十三天，如果有想法的話就往上丟，我想這是滿確定的。" }, { "speaker": "陳弈潔", "speech": "臺灣不擔心的是法律，是部會的配套，以新加坡為例好了，新加坡要找我妹妹的老公去移民，一個官員負責跟他聯絡，剩下教育、小孩子學校、房子全部用到好，也就是一個官員幫他，一條龍（做好），而臺灣是自己要跑去跟政府講。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這也是因為之前的公司登記系統本來是分散在各個地方，統一編號就是統一編號，稅歸稅、關貿歸關貿。" }, { "speaker": "陳弈潔", "speech": "可是新加坡也是這樣子啊！每一個部會都不一樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是有一站式服務。" }, { "speaker": "陳弈潔", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是資料只要提供一次，然後他幫你串。" }, { "speaker": "陳弈潔", "speech": "人才到新加坡去是舒服的，也不要說快、慢，而是舒服的，不用擔心我的小孩上什麼學校、住哪裡，一去就搞定了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "外國人才法規也好，這個（投影《企業資產擔保法》）我們正在公開徵詢，《企業資產擔保法》的想法也非常簡單，你剛剛提到銀行不願意提供擔保，那是因為目前按照臺灣的《企業資產擔保法》，本來就是分開擔保，什麼意思呢？就是房地產做房地產的擔保設定，像專利（智慧財產）、動產（汽車），這一些是完全不同的，我們現在在做的這一個《企業資產擔保法》，可以把好比像「將來取得之資產（第11條）」，舉例來說你是綠能的產業，跟政府簽了二十年購電的契約，以前這紙是不能拿來融資的，因此只能向國外9％左右的利率借錢，所以這一個通過之後，就可以在臺灣用比較低的利率取得資金。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "同樣的，你也可以把目前訂閱你用戶的人數或流量，也就是建立你的平台使用者數量去設定擔保，我覺得以前不是銀行不做，而是於法無據，那麼就不會投資在估價上，不投資在估價上就會變成這個不值錢，但這是惡性循環，所以我們做這一個法最主要的目的是，可以是一個浮動資產，可以把所有平台上的用戶打一包，然後說我們就來估價，然後看銀行願意當作多少的擔保，這樣子我覺得如果即使只在擔保權這方面突破，未來在談融資，或者談第二輪、第三輪投資時，你就比較有數字可以用，也就是說至少銀行覺得值多少，投資人一定會再加上他自己的。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "但是像鑑定是由哪一些單位來鑑定？像專利的部分會由專利的公會去鑑價專利的價值。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們就會開始出現專門鑑定這一些無形資產的產業，而這一個產業當然一開始大家會需要練習，但是這個概念是以公共告示，也就是這個東西有什麼東西，這邊設定了擔保、覺得值多少錢，這個在平台上登錄，而這個並不是由官員審核，而是由市場決定；以前是說市場不能決定，就像你說的被封住了，所以我們只是把這一個空間打開。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因此哪一些東西值錢、哪一些東西沒有辦法設定擔保，就會交由市場自己去決定，我覺得這個至少先跟上其他國家的狀況，臺灣這邊資金環境才比較有流動性可言，這個也是我們正在做的。這一個徵詢只剩下七天，所以如果有什麼意見的話，也可以上網問一下，我們之後會開說明會跟線上諮詢會議。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個好處是，你即使事後才看到，你可以很完整看到討論，包含像剛剛其實你提到專利，所以其實專利就是所謂專利跟專利做出來的東西，所以這兩個其實是分別的，你可以拿專利去設置，但是不及於他的產品，或者是可以拿專利做出來的產品去設置，但不及於專利，也就是很清楚的脈絡可以運用。因此，在這樣的前提底下，以前這一種只有看得見、摸得找，及可以住的房子，才算是（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "像Google都不行，連Google都不算。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，這個才可以慢慢在改變，這是我們具體在做的事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外，我還想的講是以AR、VR的產業而言，我完全同意我們自己能夠try的是從教育開始，因為如果連小孩對這一個東西都沒有想像的話，你沒有辦法硬加想像在一個他已經思想狀況都已成型的人，然後你告訴他說AR、VR很好玩，我想沒有那麼容易（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因此在教育上的話，「亞洲‧矽谷」的這個專案裡面，有一塊特別在講AR、VR的實驗場域，並不像智慧物流，智慧物流還要建一個LoRa這一些，因此必須要在特定的台北市或桃園市這一些地方試驗。然而AR、VR的特性是，你在那邊做出一個虛擬學院，在任何一個地方，網路延遲都非常非常短的，所以你做出來了，你等於同時在臺灣做出來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然基本的寬頻環境改善，我們藉由數位國家的這一個方案，我們會努力，而且我們至少會做到不會在偏鄉或弱勢就沒有辦法上網，這個我們會解決。但是等到他都可以上網了，為什麼要上網？因為是要學習，因為學習是唯一一個我並不是想要賺錢才做的工作，我甚至願意付錢去做這一個工作，因為我想要變成更能夠溝通、更能夠接軌整個世界的人，所以我覺得教育很特別。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "而且應該擺在優先。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是擺在優先，這個我完全同意。所以「亞洲‧矽谷」裡面會有關於AR、VR跨校學院的這個計畫，這個計畫目前教育部正在研擬，但至少我幾次跟他們開會下來，我發現他們其實非常瞭解到AR、VR怎麼樣把我們以前叫「翻轉教學」，但是事實上只翻轉了「知識性學科教學」，也就是只翻轉了數學、物理學本來很抽象的東西，但是並沒有翻轉修機車，你看多少Youtube，也修不了機車。你只能在AR、VR，才能是高雄的師傅教台北的學生修機車，這一個工作，我覺得政府非常值得投入資源來做，我覺得政府如果不投入資源的話，民間很難想像說大家突然間修車的師傅們就把畢生的資產投入VR教學，如果不投入這一種教學，不留下他們這些東西的話……" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "……很多技職的傳統技藝就沒了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那一些傳統技藝，其實最厲害的師傅，現在可能都已經六、七十歲退休年齡了，如果不透過這一個方式留住他的東西就沒了，所以我完全同意這樣的做法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "最後我想要講的是，其實政府在這一塊裡面，我覺得我們沒有辦法帶產業的方向，為什麼？這邊有另外一個公開的網站，也就是行政院的科技會報（www.bost.ey.gov.tw），可以看到「數位國家‧創新經濟發展方案」（於首頁「重要政策方案」下拉式選單中），這一邊有大家關心的是傳產如何轉型、如何作城鄉結合（教育部分），其實大家都可以稍微上去看一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一方面知道我們未來發展的方向，另外一方面也是知道我們發展的時候，我們整體的策略什麼。在這裡我自己特別在意的一點是：以前學門的概念要打破，因為當你進入數位的時候，以前是網路歸網路、電視歸電視、藝術歸藝術等，但是事實上上網之後，這是同一件事了，只是不同的閱聽模式，但是製播的時候是同一組人在做，我覺得很重要的是，是要解決什麼問題，以前屬於不同領域的東西，你就要全部都去學。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以以前我們是說，會希望學生有通識的概念，但還是要有他的專長，有點像我們剛剛說每一個學生有自己的課表，每一個學生應該有自己這個人的專長，而是他選一個專長，而是這個人來這邊想做什麼，整個教育體系去支持他，我覺得大部分會是在國際連結、如何透過低成本的開放平台去做，我們也會鼓勵我們的資通訊產業——就像你講的這一些巨人們——多做這一些工作在開放平台上，並不是要跟他關係很好才能用，而是完全不認識的人也可以來用，我覺得這一個很重要；因為如果只有他認識的人，那麼就會變成跟他生活經驗類似的人才認得，如果跟生活經驗差太多的人，我們換位思考一下，其實完全不同語言的人，也沒有辦法跟他有信任的關係。" }, { "speaker": "陳弈潔", "speech": "對，這一件事在我公司是發生的，因為我公司的光譜很廣，從遊戲業到專案到很多領域，包含硬體的接觸都有，但有些人會覺得進來公司是想做遊戲而已，不想觸碰其他的東西，都會發生這一種問題。" }, { "speaker": "陳弈潔", "speech": "教育的養成是個過程，因為國、內外的教育養成基礎就不一樣，尤其我是六十八年次世代的人之認知雖比較正面一點，但比較新一代的人會覺得要做什麼就是什麼，不願意再接觸新的，這個比較頭痛。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我會覺得那真的是教育制度的問題，也就是整個十二年的過程當中，沒有接觸到我們說「完全打破領域」的思考方法，因為這樣的關係，所以出來的時候就已經定型了，我們在107課綱要做的，包含小學一、二年級的美術、勞作跟音樂，其實之前在99課綱就已經打散變成生活課程，但現在會把生活課程更加上自發的部分，讓低年級的小孩不要被老師教東西，而老師是要聽小孩。" }, { "speaker": "陳弈潔", "speech": "翻轉教育。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，就是聽翻轉教育的方式，在這樣的前提底下，我覺得小孩才能長出他的特色來，如果七、八歲最有創造力的時候，就把他綁死了，其實未來你不可能命令一個人去自由嘛（笑）！這個是不可能的事情，所以你一開始不要破壞掉。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你剛剛提到遊戲產業，因為我之前有參加一個節目的製作，我們有訪問雷亞。（投影畫面）右邊是所有看節目的朋友們，透過一個遊戲化的方法去凝聚大家的共識，也就是包含剛才有提到文化藝術的部分，包含社會的意義、包含大家對獨立遊戲的支持；左邊是游名揚的一些觀察（「遊戲產業，盛極一時，現在衰落」、「10、擁有厲害的人才卻沒有聚集在一起運轉過」），但是我覺得這裡面很重要的一件事是，政府要認清我們的角色其實是在那個空間，政府之前太喜歡做太陽、星星、月亮的亮點，就會變成亮點有空間，而且那個空間很小，因為你是繞著特定產業，而那個之外，星星跟星星中間都是黑的，而是沒有空間的（笑），我覺得那個是很不幸的一個狀況。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "而且一旦走錯，像面板雙虎，奇美跟BenQ倒，然後DRAM產業也倒了，這個就是「兩兆雙星」做出來的；然後也沒有半個扶植起來，這真的是很可惜的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "現在的這一個政策走向，我們會講說我們要做的是支援、鏈結跟平台，上面不管長什麼，這個事實上是示意圖而已，就是不管長什麼，沒有在限定的，而且我們把最中間的說是特別不限定的人，才能運用這一個平台，旁邊其實都是支持他，我覺得這個至少是這屆政府滿不一樣的方向；真的能做出什麼我們不確定——因為才剛開始——但是至少我們不會重蹈之前的覆轍。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "太棒了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以如果看了這個（指「科技會報辦公室」的「數位國家‧創新經濟發展方案」）有什麼想法的話，也歡迎聯絡我們科技會報的研究員。這個也是之前科技會報比較少自己在網站上自己去進行這樣子的溝通、說明，未來懶人包及對話都會往上丟，以前這其實是幕僚的工作，只有立委看得到，其他的人都看不到。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "對，是無法參與的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，現在不管剛剛的「Join」平台或者是「vTaiwan」平台，乃至於科技會報本身的網站，我們都會更全面跟社會對話。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得未來真的是要靠大家第一手經驗，我作電競協調的時候，我全部拿來跟各部會朋友們講的，就是電競選手第一手在公聽會上的發言、在wiselike留言給我、以及在PTT的LOL版、Gossiping版、巴哈姆特，大家寫一點一滴的一手經驗，我覺得這一些東西能夠做的是帶到所有部長、次長看得到的位置，但是內容本身就是靠像剛剛第一手經驗的分享，以及未來大家如果看了這一個方向覺得哪一些要踩剎車、哪一些不妨踩油門，就多讓我們知道，我覺得這樣子至少世代間才有對話的基礎。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "總是要拋議題出來先拋出來之後，大家才有討論的空間，所以開放的問題是絕對不會錯的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "從今年開始，所有部會所有預告的政策，從化妝品的成份（笑），到網路基本法的《數位通訊傳播法》，即到底在網路上要如何聯合不同多方的利害關係人一起討論一些衝突的情況，這個東西是我們第一次把所謂的多方厲害關係人，不只有各公、協會的代表或委員們，而是所有會被這一件事影響到的人都必須要進入政策討論，這是第一次把它入法，因此這一件事我覺得大家可以看一下，然後多討論；當然，這一些是特定的厲害關係團體會開始上來討論，大家慢慢養成這樣的習慣，我們以後就不會有大家覺得政府突然決定一個東西，然後產業要……" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "這樣的開放，現在沒有很push出去，因為可以看上面的瀏覽人數，群眾知道的這一件事……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "……因為1月1日才開始。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "所以有一些宣導還是得要……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，今天下午開始，國發會才會開記者會跟發新聞稿，因為這是五天前才上線（笑），這個是剛剛上線的，大概今天先這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "以後隨時有想法，不管是公開的或者是我們還想要約類似的拜會就隨時讓我知道。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "OK，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "陳弈潔", "speech": "學校一些老師碰到的一些狀況，有時是老師們不願意改變，是比較老的師資部分，這個是第一個問題；第二，有些想要改變的老師，但可惜資源不在他們手上。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個就是要組織起來，像之前有「共同備課」社群、「翻轉教育」社群、「在家自學」社群，繞著特定的平台，我覺得如果我是第一線的教育工作者，我不會自己去fight，我一定會加入越來越多這一種組織的社群，然後聯合所有想要改變老師的力量，因為這樣子，我提出來，在我學校課發會的計畫，看起來才是很完整的。" }, { "speaker": "陳弈潔", "speech": "理論上是這樣，我碰到比較多的是大專院校，包含經費（問題），像以前提的是實境教室或者是實境走廊的東西……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "……大學不一樣，大學跟國民教育不一樣。" }, { "speaker": "陳弈潔", "speech": "老師想要進步，可是有時體制或者是上下的東西會造成沒有辦法進入，因為大學有自治法，因為空間跟經費比一般的高中、國中、國小有更多的空間可以應用，可是我反而覺得做起來沒有像國中、高中來得多。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！其實當時社區大學系統的成立，就是覺得即使是在大學的教授們如果能夠進入社區，然後用自己設計的方法來提供學程的話——尤其是在技職方面——這部分其實比傳統的大學更靈活，也更能夠回應社會上的需求，也就是終身教育來帶新的教學方法，而這一個新的教學方法成立了，我們再帶到正規的大學裡面，當然私立的大學又比公立大學又容易調整一點點，但是我覺得從社區大學或者是從類似這一種終身共學團體真的空間比較大，當然我瞭解實務上包含財務的資源或人力的資源這些都是非常辛苦的事。" }, { "speaker": "陳弈潔", "speech": "是有差距的。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "而且老師會被學校一些庶務性的東西，基本上耗掉了大部分的精力。" }, { "speaker": "陳弈潔", "speech": "每年要玩的評鑑我就覺得好累。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "評鑑也有在檢討，也就是包含要拼論文跟拼升等的這一件事，之前因為大家都是用量化的方式在管理，你不能變KPI就不存在，所以不管你在教材、教法很好，或者是你的研究真的解決了登隔熱的這一種社會影響，但是其實在社會評鑑上是無法量化，因為看不到。而我們現在在做的其中一件事是，試著讓這個東西被看到，而這個東西就牽涉到學界利益再分配，這個東西要慢慢來，我很高興吳政忠老師非常理解這一件事，也願意在推動，我現在還是跟他學習，畢竟我沒有唸過大學，我沒有第一手的經驗，但是我覺得這個也是需要改變的方向。" }, { "speaker": "陳弈潔", "speech": "大學的主任他們想要我們的產品，可是我們有時候只能free支持一些東西，他們會介於法規、流程與制度，很多東西沒有辦法用。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣子沒有錯。" }, { "speaker": "陳弈潔", "speech": "所以有時候聊一聊就會聽到他們在arguee這些事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們防弊的狀況太多了，能夠照顧到平等與人權的前提下，把一些沒有意義的防弊機制——事實上也沒有防到弊的機制鬆綁——這個是我們可以做的，但是鬆綁之後，而民間要如何興利，剛剛已經講了，我們不會指定特定的方向，就是靠大家。" }, { "speaker": "陳弈潔", "speech": "像我送學校一批設備，還要寫很多很多報告，認為這個設備是沒有對價關係或者是相關的東西，他們在敢收。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！以前我們甚至邀一個國外的講者來，你要補助他的機票費，他還要回去的那一張登機證還要寄回來（笑），這個是沒有意義的一件事，現在簡化核銷都已經推了，未來都沒有這一些事了。應該這樣講：沒有意義的冗事，在這一屆的內閣，行政院是很願意把它減少的，但是這一些減少之後，會創造什麼東西，真的是靠大家。謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "蔡曜隆", "speech": "謝謝。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "陳明通", "speech": "Slido？台大有也開發Zuvio……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "陳明通", "speech": "類似這一個東西？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是。我們知道教育雲裡面也有類似的，但是這一個的手機上面感覺比較friendly，但下一次如果有先約好的話，也可以用別的，現在這一種軟體非常多。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "請大家花一點點時間連上，任何時候講到任何一段大家想要問或者是想要討論或者一些想法，當然如果有看到別人已經問了你想問的，你就可以按讚，它就會浮到比較上面，每一個段落大概是十分鐘左右，我會稍微看一下這一個段落大家問的問題，依照大家按讚的數量來回答，這樣子ok嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣已經有人連上了。" }, { "speaker": "陳明通", "speech": "大家都有連上嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "至少目前有一個人有連上了，打「感謝今天的分享」，所以如果大家還可以的話…嗯，已經有人按讚了，表示有兩個人了，再給大家一點點時間，兩、三分鐘，ok，我找一下。" }, { "speaker": "陳明通", "speech": "sli.do？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，密碼在左側。" }, { "speaker": "陳明通", "speech": "password是107？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，一進去會要你打一個event code，而那一個event code就是今天的日期，107。ok，那就這樣子，我會時不時更新一下，如果大家新打的，我就可以看得到。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家應該都進來了吧？好，就正式開始，今天很謝謝大家給我這個機會。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛剛講的題目其實是我一直以來都在探索的一個題目，我自己大概是1989年開始寫程式，1992年開始接觸到網際網路，1993年開始做一些網際網路相關的study，1994年全球資訊網發明的時候，當時滿紅的一個題目是為什麼網路上大家都很願意跟陌生人合作，學理上是swift trust，好像到了網路上面，大家比較願意信任陌生人，這一群陌生人竟然可以在彼此沒有見到面或半年才見一次面的情況下去做出對大家感覺上雖不滿意、但可接受的rough consensus，事實上網際網路就是靠著這樣子，我們叫做multi stakeholder consensus making的過程才建立起來的，因為網際網路裡面的「網際」意思是每一個地方運營網路的人都必須要同意我們這一個網際網路的協定，這樣子好比在德國的時候要check臺灣的email，中間的每一個operator都必須要統一這一個網際網路的協定，不然的話就沒有網際網路，只有電信局的網路。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一個協定的形成怎麼做的？並不是聯合國mandate，也不是人push，而是所有的這一些中間的運營者都可以參加，包含使用者跟使用人，只要任何人有任何想法，我們叫做「網際網路工程組（IETF）」的組織，這一個組織是完全沒有領導、指揮的關係，任何人都可以加入，只要有email就可以加入，所以從上面大家也不知道我當時只有十三歲或者是十四歲，大家都是靠著這一種well－reasoned的方式，如果有見面meeting的話，一定可以線上call in跟逐字稿等等，那是1993年、1994年接觸到政治系統。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為這一個政治系統沒有公權力，沒有海軍、陸軍在後面，所以必須要使用這一種完全透明的方式，才可以建立公信力，如果不是有公信力的話，一個新的operator，根本沒有必要加入這一個網際網路的協定，所以網際網路如果要擴充，那就必須要證明給全世界的人看，這樣子讓大家進來做出來的決定，會比大家分別去聯絡其他傳統的多邊或者是雙邊的方式來做事要來的有效。但是這一個狀態隨時都在改變，所以IETF的網路制定方式也不斷推出新的RFC。RFC就有一點像我們立出來的法律，這叫做request for comment，也就是隨時都可以提供意見與修改——我當時其實就是參加這一種標準制定的過程，然後想說我們能不能放到一般的工作上、一般的政治上。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我現在是到行政院當數位政委，換了位置，但是完全沒有換腦袋（笑），所以做的事情一直是這二十年來一直做的事情，大家可以看到我的逐字稿全部都公布在網路上，參加每一個meeting都記錄等等，如果是rule making或policy making，但是以前的公權力比較不需要用這一種很「基進」、「透明」、「課責」的方法來取得公信力，有別的取得公信力的方法，但是在我們這一個時代，公信力可能已經掉到谷底了，所以同樣在以前網際網路取得公信力的方法，現在或多或少可以拿來使用，這一個方法就是所謂的多方利益關係人的資訊，也就是multi stakeholder model，我們正式開始。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "目前上面還沒有看到實質問題，大家都在講早安（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我先講一下今年1月蔡英文當選，我是有投票給她，滿高興她當選，我投給她的原因之一是因為我當時家裡有八隻貓跟兩隻狗，然後非常喜歡動物，跟動物一起住了非常久的時間，當然蔡英文的政見裡面很罕見是把動物福利、動物權利放在前面的，但是另外還有一些價值，我也是非常同意，包含性別平權、原住民族、轉型正義這些東西，這一些東西放在我習慣的那一個context，就是歐洲或者是標準制定者來看這個，就是中間而已，也不一定特別偏自由派，但是在臺灣感覺上當時滿radical的，所以我也滿高興可以這樣子串連下來。第一家庭是長這樣（笑），你很難去賄賂——好吧，拿根貓草就賄賂了（笑）——但基本上牠們不會參加公共政策的制定。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是我去國外演講的時候，我滿驚訝的是這一次的政權轉移並沒有上國際新聞，這個是好事，因為我們以前上國際新聞通常都不是什麼好事，也就是沒有什麼conflict，沒有什麼conflict的其中一個原因是我覺得這一次的政權轉移運用了一些multi stakeholder的精神，其中一個原因是張善政老師本來也是學這一個的，在交接的過程中，他有一些優勢，比如說他沒有黨籍，他不會被說叛黨——因為沒有黨可以叛（笑）——所以在這樣的過程裡面，他希望讓每一個部會正在進行中的政策以及他索引開放資料的source都變成有一點像院會簡報上載到網路上。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他當時本來給林全團隊的demand是說你們只能從網路上下載這一些公開可得的資料，我們再來談交接，然後那一個交接直播（笑），但是那一個交接直播後來好像沒有做了。我們可以看到是有這樣子的想法，也就是並不是單純一個內閣交接給下一個內閣，而是這一個內閣對全民交代做到哪裡，下一個內閣像遊戲接關一樣繼續做。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣有什麼好處？比較不會以人廢言。雖然他的title要換一下，但是當時透過這樣的程序做出來，好比像「ide@ Taiwan2020（創意臺灣）政策白皮書」，換了一些title之後，基本上新的內閣裡面對於有道理的部分，並不會恣意把它刪除或恣意把它拿掉，因為當時contribution的過程，其實已經有結合其他朋友們的idea在裡面，所以我覺得這一個算是prototype，並不是一個很formal，但是因為這樣的關係，所以交接的過程相當順利，而且主要沒有起什麼衝突。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家可能也知道我在Simon（音譯，下同）的時候，雖然沒有實際任公職，但是在當他的開放資料這一個部分尤其是技術上的顧問，這一件事其實我覺得很有趣，臺灣是一個目前還能用top down的方式，要求每一個機關都使用開放授權來做開放資料。開放資料的意思就是建立在公開資訊的這一個前提上，但是要求這一個公開不只是公開，公開是說大家都可以讀，開放是說讀了之後還可以改做，預算是說如果預算書只能看，最後key進電腦，但是如果是開放授權，也就是授權大家說可以做成互動式、懶人包及各種東西，政府保證不告你，這個是不只是只能看，還可以改。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外，公開資訊的資訊是給人讀的，裡面提到數字的地方，大家以前比較沒有留的audio trail的感覺，所以就會看到這個會創造23億的什麼東西，或者是多少的就業機會之類的。但是像在維基百科，上面就可以標這一句話什麼是據以所本，但是之前據以所本的這一個部分都沒有公開，所以當時Simon在推的希望這一些row data在不侵犯個資、營業秘密及國家機密的前提底下，應該盡可能每一次我們政策提到一個數字，然後就release一篇open data去justify這個數字，這一個想法其實我也覺得很radical，因為本來資訊只是說服給別人看，但是慢慢我們就發現其實民間分析資料能力並不遜於政府，我們把raw data丟出來，其實對我們的可信度是增加，而不是減少的，這個也是比FLI再往前做一點，不但是可以改做，而且是要以機器可讀的方式改做。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為這樣的關係，所以我們民間的朋友就幫忙當時做了一個開放資料的授權，是用國際的CC授權去做，這一件事做出來之後，他們又做了一個mandate，就是說5,000萬元以下的ICT系統，基本上沒有任何例外，就是去掉各自的隱私、營業秘密之後，就是必須要做open data，因為這樣的關係，所以我們在國際上的資料開放評比，是一個check point的概念，就是每一個政府部門的最基本資料，好像有水、有電的程度都必須是開放資料，因此我們在英國open knowledge的評比從第十一名變成全球第一名。全球第一名的意思比較像是大家都有水有電，並沒有說這一個資料是不是真的回應大家的需求、並不是今天是不是實際利用，但是至少是用top down的方式給了這一個mandate，所以其實一瞬間每一個point都上了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在其他的國家每一個局處、每一個部會或每一個地方政府要自己去爭取，所以區間就比較這樣子，我們就是這樣子（笑）；我覺得還滿有意思的，就是之前工作的這一段經驗。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛剛提到check point就是公開交接的過程，而這一個過程我覺得自己學到很多，雖然我當時不知道我會入閣，但是我很認真去看了包含交接文件跟蔡英文政見這一些，蔡英文總統在競選的時候，她的競選網站等等都靠零時政府open data這一群設計師在做，也會跟智庫去要row data，為什麼這一些政見這樣寫出來，所以兩邊都這樣publish的結果，雖然我不知道我會入閣（笑），但是我當時做的一些準備工作是任何人都可以做的，就是說不管是在政府內部或者是外部都可以做。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然這一件事我覺得能夠成的另外一個原因是林全在組閣的時候，他是組一個平衡的內閣，內閣裡面無黨籍的是多數，比任何一個黨多，所以剛好4比3比3的比例，所以這個時候就有同樣比較沒有對哪一邊有利益或不利益的問題。這個在臺灣現在其實是被忽略的，因為柯文哲當時作為一個醫學教授，他其實是主打這個而選上的，像陳建仁副總統在主持一些國是會議或什麼的時候，他也是說我是要照顧大家的利益等等，這個已經變成很常用的frame。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一件事當然其實在臺灣政治文化裡面，大家都是相對新的，就是對臺灣來講，這一個東西並不是大家很熟悉的平衡、不特定人、協作、多利益關係方，這一個東西第一次變成報紙上大家都會說我們就是要開放透明的narrative，是我們在2014年3月的時候做了一次算是demo吧（笑）！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一個demo當時的狀況很有意思，因為大家知道是立法委員們罷工，他們覺得某一個特定的題目——海峽兩岸服務貿易協議——他們不願意去進行審查的工作，當然有一些是法上的理由。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為這樣理由的關係，所以就是給了一個正當性的缺口，當學生進去的時候，他們就是可以說我們不是抗議，我們是要代替立法委員做罷工不願意做的工作，這一個東西其實就是正當性的opportunity，因為一般的佔領不能講這一句話，可是這一個佔領可以講這一句話，所以接下來是如何讓這一件事變成所謂全民審服貿，變成一個大家真正感覺到我也有參與審服貿，如果能夠做到這一點，這一個佔領就有正當性，如果沒有辦法做到這一點，大家會覺得只是裡面的二十個學生、三十個學生在審服貿，那就沒有正當性，這個是很有意思的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他們進去之後做的事情，一開始當然直播這一些，後來是用審議民主的方式，想要統合裡面所有佔領者對於服貿的想法，可是這一個東西你會衝進去佔領的，對服貿已經有一些想法了（笑），所以當時說出來的共識很難說是全民審服貿。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因此我們當時有幫忙做了一些專案，其中一個專案是「你被服貿了嗎」，有人有聽過這一個網站的嗎？我開出來給大家看（tisa.g0v.tw），當時架的網站都是「g0v.tw」結尾。「g0v.tw」是一個很有趣的活動，臺灣政府網站都是「gov.tw」結尾，所以像環保署就是「epa.gov.tw」，立法院是「ly.gov.tw」，所以你看到「g0v.tw」網站，其實是一個代用政府的概念，就是我們覺得某一個政府的網站可能可以做得更好、更開放資料、互動性更強，我們就去拿同一個政府的網址，把「o」換成「0」，然後就做成一個魚目混珠、零時政府版本的東西（笑），這樣的好處是你不需要discover，就你不需要記我們的網站，一定跟政府的網站一樣，只是「o」換成「0」，所以像公務人員出國考察網之類的，你只要知道它的官方位置（http://report.nat.gov.tw/），你就試著換成0（http://report.nat.g0v.tw/），可能就可以進入零時政府的版本。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "而這一個版本的特性是一定都是拋棄著作權或者是拋棄絕大部分著作權、留下學名權，這個意思是政府網站下一次改版的時候，那一個廠商沒有藉口不用我們寫的這一個代用版本，以前如果是民間做的，但是保留著作權，廠商可以說還要談授權或怎麼樣，像我們幫教育部，重新format他們的字典——萌典——萌典包含了客家話、台語、國語，以及兩岸對照的辭典等等，全部都編在同一個網站上，因為這樣的關係，最近因為春聯事件，我們又突然紅起來了（笑），每一個月大概都是上千萬人次（瀏覽），已經是中小學教育很常用的工具。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為這樣的關係，教育部辭典在改版的時候，廠商就不能refuse萌典這邊的contribution，因為我們這邊都拋棄著作權了，廠商其實沒有不用的道理，所以廠商都很順利上去用，所以這一個cycle差不多要一、兩年，好比零時政府做出中央政府總預算視覺化到柯文哲用它來做台北市的預算視覺化及現在六個縣市都做了，當然中間過了兩、三年的時間，總之它是代用政府跟代用咖啡一樣，就是等在這邊，什麼時候politically覺得可以拿去用了，甚至不用問過我們——常常都沒有問過我們——就可以拿去用了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以這一個網站是一個類似的概念，當時因為服貿貿易協定非常地長，而且裡面尤其是行業對照表，你要map到WTO的、中華人民共和國政府等等，很少有人能夠一下子就知道說這一個服貿這一件事跟自己的關係到底是怎麼樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是我們做的事情是，我們可以去鍵入好比像隨便什麼關鍵字，它就會去找到公司行號登記系統裡面所有相關的統編等等，在這樣的情況之下，它就會顯示出關於這一個統編你有沒有被服貿，然後可以列出說這個是因為你統編的主責項目，其實不屬於服貿協議的關聯，這個其實就會很難讓謠言傳播，因為任何只要打統編進去就知道其實居住型護理照顧服務之類的，這一波沒有開放等等；如果有被服貿的話，就會用很親切類似三個漫畫的方式，告訴大家說投資可以過來、人可以過來還是可以過去等等的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個東西的意思是什麼？就是每一個人只討論可以跟他切身相關的部分，也就是利害關係人可以判斷這一件事對他的利害關係，這一件事是所謂全民審服貿的地步，因為有這樣的關係，所以當時在佔領那一場之外的三個看服貿不同的方向——基本上是非常多個，據說到最後有二十幾個——從主權的角度來看、從共權的角度來看、從環境的角度來看，所以從這三個角度來看的朋友們都有收到我們的協助，所以這一個的意思是我們先不去談非常大的一邊一國，這一種其實談了22K也不會有共識的東西；相反的，在學理上叫做overlapping consensus，我們挑裡面就是親身相關非常小的一個東西，好比像他對某一個特定行業、某一家特定公司，那一家特定公司看「你被服貿了嗎」，就站上來說我看到這個會被怎麼樣影響，大家就事論事來討論這一件事，這樣子就比較有可能尋求共識，也就是說共識是出現在利益關係人，都知道有利益關係小的具體方面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以，我們後面的ICT infrastructure是我們在街上任何人只要搭起一個牌子，就可以談服貿的事情，就會很神氣地有人拿出手機或iPad，後面還貼上最新出爐的大法官釋憲，說這一個公民記者也有一樣的報導權利等等，我們因為做了這個所謂公民記者證，任何人都可以用iPad去直播任何一場討論，直播之後就會放到我們做的資通訊系統，其他人就會看到這邊多了一場討論，然後Youtube在這邊，因為這樣的關係，所以即時聽打的朋友就會實際聽這一場，然後輪班把這一個東西打成逐字稿。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為同時有四、五場辯論，其實不可能每一場都聽，但是你可以在晚上都review這四場分別談了什麼、收攏到什麼共識，哪一些還是爭點，然後在下一場出來的時候，就先宣讀昨天的狀況、昨天在這一場分別討論什麼東西，我們今天從這邊開始，已經解決了就不用再談了，然後接下來再談這一個東西。所以，跟一般的佔領不一樣的是，一般佔領越到後面，訴求越發散，但是這一次佔領，因為組織者們非常刻意要做成越佔領越收攏，所以到最後他們其實還真的凝聚出對於服貿相當多的具體建議，而且不一定反對，都是inform的一些建議。而這一個東西的正當性就很強，因為你可以看到這一個中間是任何人願意過去就可以參加，而且不管你的立場是什麼，即使是白色正義聯盟，我也提供一樣的網路服務（笑），所以在這樣的情況之下，他的legitimacy並不會因為他有反對或贊成各方的聲音而減少，相反的是因為我們都一視同仁提供一樣的服務，因此這一個正當性反而增加。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以後面我覺得有一些很有趣的東西，因為每一場佔領，不管是「佔領華爾街」或者當時在巴黎也有一場「夜之起義（Nuit Debout）」或者是西班牙「15－M」，其實我們可以看到最後能不能收攏，往往取決大家的感受裡面是否越來越排除人，變成一小撮人在做，或者是越來越inclusive，也就是50萬人都可以進來。是不是inclusive，完全取決於所使用的資通訊的工具能不能很忠實讓不能到場的人也有身歷其境；即使是打一行字，也有可能改變國家命運的感受，也就是是否為雙向的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一套系統是靠上千個志工當時一起做出來的，不管是在宏達電、Apple、Google做的人，我們當時就是集體請了二十天的假，然後去做這一件事，我覺得那個是因為我們這一代——我三十五歲——我應該是記得戒嚴的最後一代，我弟弟比我小四歲，就已經不記得戒嚴這一件事了，我記得這個很有意思的是，我們這一代是剛開始有言論自由，也就是解除報禁這一些東西，但是其實解除報禁的時候，剛好是個人電腦出現的那一年，也就是1988年、1989年，所以我們一開始學電腦的時候，就是在一個好像它是代表著沒有限制言論自由的東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我一開始學全球資訊網是1994年、1995年，一直到普及是1996年的時候，臺灣第一次總統直選，當時我也有當網軍幫助選員拉票、助選跟做一些文本分析等等（笑），所以在這一代的經驗跟感受裡面，並不是有一個很強的代議民主傳統已經存在兩百年，然後資通訊才出現，事實上代議民主跟資通訊是同時出現的，而這一個同時出現，就讓大家覺得我們一開始的這一套代議文明是可以改的，修憲已經修了那麼多次，我們都可以有一些不同的想像，並不會像在其他的國家做政治的是一票人，做新媒體或做資通訊是另外一票人，在我們這邊就是我們一開始學的時候，就是用這一個來學這一個，也就是民主跟網際網路、民主跟通訊是混在一起學的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因此，這個也造成臺灣至少在整個東亞地區是一個很特殊的情況，也就是1990年代所謂自由軟體運動，一直到1998年開放文化、開放源碼運動，到維基百科出現，這些東西後面的free software或free culture，我們在東亞的其他地方一聽到這個就知道不要錢的，但是只有在臺灣，我們看到這個只有先想到的是言論自由，也就是集會結社自由，之所以是自由軟體因為是保障我們自己架設，自己改變，不會因為東西架在什麼地方，所以就被臉書或者是其他人有審查控制的自由；而這一個東西我覺得在東亞整個社群裡面，只有我們每一次辦自由軟體相關年會的時候，也就是幾千人這樣辦，這一個東西算是regionally的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們來看一下線上call in的朋友。" }, { "speaker": "提問", "speech": "人人都能表達不同意見是民主社會最珍貴的價值，但是當前臺灣社會資訊混亂，每個人都搶著當柯南，都搶著當專家，任何政府與社會大眾應該如何能夠有效地過濾調偏激或不正確的資訊，讓每個人得以獲得正確資訊？兩年前的服貿是一例，近年來多元成家的激烈辯論（偏激與不正確也偏多）也是一例。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個題目非常好，我自己的想法其實是我們在當時做了非常多資通訊方面的介入，我自己印象最深刻的是佔領到第五天的時候，裡面盛傳警方正在強迫驅離裡面的學生，但是事實上什麼事都沒有發生，外面的群眾想要衝進去，警察就開始很緊張，當然最後林飛帆就出來說什麼事都沒有，但是不能每一次謠言，然後林飛帆就跑出來說什麼事都沒有，不是都已經有直播了嗎？為什麼還是這樣呢？因為直播到逐字稿傳遞到大家手機上，你要告訴旁邊的人說其實沒事，這一個過程可能要花三分鐘的時間，但是謠言說裡面正在被拍肩膀這樣子，這一件事可能只需要花十五秒的時間，也就是說，謠言的傳播速度比真實的東西容易。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我們當時的介入是兩個，一個是我拿了網路線過去，不需要經過雲端再回到大家的手機上，而是把內場跟外場連成同一個區域網路，所以這樣子內場的攝影機到外場只有不到一秒鐘的時間，而不需要等好幾秒。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外，我們請內場會打字的朋友，他聽到那一場發生什麼事，不用很完整，因為未來會有人按照錄影去打更完整的，他只要簡單打出來，然後把右邊打出來的逐字跟左邊即時的直播放在外場的塑膠布幕上，也就是我們架了一個帆布，然後讓大家可以即時看到裡面的情況，因為你看那個情況，其實是有一個裡面滿平靜的，但是裡面如果講了什麼或者做了什麼，第一時間就可以看字幕，所以也不用去check手機，這一件事就是讓內場的情況變成social object。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "social object的意思是不只是每一個人都可以取得真實的情況，而是這一個真實的情況是可以繞著它討論的，你繞著那一個投影機投出來的那一場狀態，大家就可以說這邊看起來怎麼樣、那邊看起來怎麼樣，那就變成一個social的狀況，這個就很像預防接種，預防接種並不是單純只保護你不被謠言的病毒所侵擾而已，還可以變成一個如果人群裡面有一些人接種過了，病毒到這邊就像防火牆，很難再傳染過去，也就是不只保護你，而是保護你旁邊的人，因為你不會再被傳染了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "同樣的道理，任何人只是路過，可能不是專門待在那邊，只是看了一眼知道裡面很平靜、沒事，然後就去7－11買東西了，其實也不是來佔領的，但是如果謠言傳起來之後，他可以馬上跟旁邊的人說：「沒有啊！我剛剛才看過，一分鐘前什麼事都沒有。」，這一件事我覺得很重要的是，我們並不是要把所謂大家的言論自由加以剝奪，事實上也查禁不完，所以我們要做的是，確保每一個正確資訊都是完整的，每一個東西都有網址，你分享它的成本比起不實資訊的成本不能高，而且只能低，然後讓再次傳播變得非常容易。因此，這一件事是我基本上進入行政院之後，繼續做的事情，我就是繼續做同一個題目。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以關於多元成家，我突然看到這一個題目沒有唸完（笑）。我最近輔導各部會做這一件事，就是說因為多元成家這一個題目基本上是立法院的題目，但是大家會到行政院的連署平台，所以就會很多人上來，五千個人連署，我們就要處理，連署的時候他們（民眾）提議「同志教育應該退出校園」，另外也會有五千個人說「恪遵《性別平等法》」，都是五千個人、五千個人來（連署），所以一共大概到了五案了，每一案都六、七千人，所以加起來即使去掉重複的，也是兩萬人左右。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我就會跟部會的朋友們講說，這一些朋友們平常只看特定的網路媒體，也很少在看不同意見的資訊，但是這兩萬人來連署的意思是他們提供了他們的email，願意訂閱我們的電子報（笑），這個是第一次可以穿透同溫層，直接把正確的資訊分送給大家的email，因為他們來連署了，表示願意收到資訊，所以說我們傳遞出去的這一個資訊，一定不會經過連署帶頭的，好比像特定的牧師或者是特定的朋友們詮釋，而是可以直接把這兩萬人裡面，其實還沒有太多既定立場，可能只是被一、兩句話煽動就來連署的人，我們可以一次把各部會、跨部會正確的資訊，可能用懶人包的形式，可能用一個比較易易懂的形式，把真實情況會來判斷的告訴大家，這個是很難得有一個自媒體的狀況（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一件事其實並不只是大的多元成家，有一些比較是茶壺裡的風暴像國旅卡，我們也是透過這樣的方式，讓大概一萬個連署的朋友第一時間收到國旅卡實際的訊息，本來一些前面流出版本造成謠言的傷害，就第一時間可以平息，大概是這樣子。每一次社會上有這一種互相誤解、互相污名化，或者是按照舊的資訊在討論時，其實大家連署只是反映大家很關心真實的情況是什麼，這個時候當然行政院可以打官腔說這個是立法院的事情，但是我們如果把它當作新媒體來經營的話，其實就可以一下子讓大家都變成疫苗的接種者，就不會散播其他的資訊。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在我講的過程裡面，馬上有朋友繼續call in（笑），果然匿名會有比較好的問題（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "提問", "speech": "政委號召募集熱血公務員，請問您的想法是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那個其實是在PTT網路平台上，有一個公務員版，這一個公務員版的創版版主叫做Smart Lai，我當時當了數位政委之後，這一個版主我當時完全不認識他，他就寫了一封信說他想要被借調過來（笑），他本身是超級熱血的公務員，當時我們還問了一下說政務委員可以借調這麼多人嗎？因為我們辦公室其實已經十五個人了，是一個很詭異的編制（笑），因為一般來講政務委員可能一或兩位機要，可能借調一個參事或一個簡秘過來，這已經是滿編了，但是我在那一個月裡面，公布我要當政委，但是還沒有真的當政委的那一個月我人都在國外，其實我也沒有辦法面對面跟記者討論、說明，所以我就請記者都上我的公共平台，這樣的效果是全臺灣的公務員都知道我要做什麼，而且這個是公開的承諾，我也只能做這些事，因為這個月裡面我們反覆切磋、琢磨我能夠做的部分。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以大家對我的job description，在我上任之前都比我還清楚，所以這樣的意思是，我上任第一天就會接到像Smart Lai的這種email說：「我已經很清楚你要做什麼，跟我想要做的一樣，把我借調過來吧（笑）！」，所以我問了院裡，院裡也ok、院長也ok、秘書長也ok，所以我就開始從各個部會借調朋友。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在這樣的情況之下，他來一下子就說他是公務員版的版主，他在PTT已經有組織了半匿名公務員的勢力，他們都是熱血的公務員，他知道我要做開放政府，所以就帶槍投靠的概念（笑），我（當時）完全不認識他。因為我的性格是我都信任陌生人，所以我就說：「好啊！那現在好比院長希望每一個部會指定開放政府的聯絡人。」，因為也不只一個，可能有兩、三個，如果次長一下子不知道誰來做，（Smart Lai）在Ptt混十年（會知道）那一個部會的公務員可能也滿適合的，如他是自動請調的模式，看別的部會願意不願意用的概念；當然我們尊重部會的次長，我們不會說只塞一個其實我也不認識的人給你，這樣好像也怪怪的。如果部會真的不知道要誰來做開放政府，我們就可以說PTT上面有一個人很熱血，然後主動要求循一樣的模式，還真的有媒合成功的例子（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個想法其實就是如果有人已經準備好，他在那一個公務員版已經有組織過公共討論，表示他對於網路上的不特定人討論是有經驗、有能力的，其實這一個東西就是最好的履歷，因為他已經做那麼久了，所以有這樣子的履歷，然後Smart Lai版主還會看他的登入次數（笑），看起來洋洋灑灑，但是還會檢查登入的次數超過兩千次（笑），這個是真正的鄉民，因為一天只算一次（笑），所以這樣的意思是真的混很久，在這樣的情況之下，就會推薦給部會，真的是有媒合成功的例子。" }, { "speaker": "提問", "speech": "會不會有世代的問題，老人家（普遍五十歲以上）他們不會用科技（也不會想學），可是他們很常受到臉書、line上面奇怪的文章（未經查證、偏激）影響，怎麼辦？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可是如果不用科技怎麼看到臉書跟LINE？就是說它已經是科技了，臉書跟LINE其實就是進入成本最低的資通訊科技，臺灣的一個特性是這種公共討論的last mile都不在臺灣，就是境外公司LINE、境外公司Facebook、境外公司Twitter等等，所以臺灣想要查禁這一些言論真的是有難度的，因為他們都不是臺灣公司。但是這樣的好處是什麼？也就是大家對於言論自由、百花齊放，對於莫名其妙的東西都可以有人講，而且還不會被刪帳號是非常習慣的，所以百分之百言論自由。而這一件事我們要做的事情是，我們要讓奇怪的文章、這一些查證等東西變成是自動化的，只有是自動化的，你才能告訴大家說這一件事是真的或者是這一件事是假的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以像零時政府的朋友之前有做幾個專案，一個專案叫做「新聞小幫手（newshelper）」，這一個專案非常有意思，因為查證是要花力氣的，你在瀏覽器幫長輩安裝之後，每一次只要看到很奇怪的東西，他的界面上面會自動冒出「注意，您可能是問題新聞的受害者」（笑），就是微軟的那個是「注意，您可能是非法授權的受害者」同一個文法。因為以前要查證都很困難，但是現在在like、command、share的後面馬上加了一個回報給新聞小幫手，所以一件事回報就變得跟你轉傳一樣容易，所以就讓少部分願意查證的人當大家抗體的概念。所以每一次有假新聞出現的時候，底下就會開始有什麼像有人夢到核二燃料束破裂（笑），這個才一個小時之前的事情，然後就馬上會說「時間點以及內容錯誤」，因為我們要求要附上真相的連結，這一個東西其實是非常即時的，也就是可以看到每一次發生的事情，只要開始散播，被一個裝新聞小幫手的人看到，他就可以開始當大家的抗體，是這樣的概念。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然，其實臉書已經沒有那麼紅了，LINE bot最紅，所以現在還有另外一個專案叫做「真的假的Line bot」，這一個LINE bot基本上是你可以在LINE上面問它這一件事是真的還是假的，它就會去這個資料庫、Google的其他東西，去搜尋關鍵字後面加上「 真相」（是「空白鍵」加上「真相」二字），這一個東西看起來像是真相的東西在LINE上面回覆給大家。我們現在做的事情是，如果真的不用科技就算了，並不是你用了科技，反而讓謠言更擴散，所以每一次有這一種讓謠言擴散的科技，我們就會到那一個level用同樣相同容易的程度，然後去做事實確認，這個是比較被動式的處理方法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "主動式的處理方法我等一下會說，政府會主動把目前事實性的訊息進行處理，接下來又有一位朋友call in，剛好我回答完一題就會call in一題。我上次在外交部就是這樣子，結果簡報只show了五頁（笑），然後大家就聊天。這個（指簡報）其實是一個live demo，我們希望比較好的政府是他要討論什麼，那個agenda是由大家決定的，至於怎麼討論或者討論的內容是什麼，當然政府是有回應的一套方法，但是不能說大家寫了而不回應，這樣就會喪失正當性。" }, { "speaker": "提問", "speech": "從第九屆立法院開始，大小型會議都要求直播或錄影或上網，而且現在就連黨團協商，之前說所謂最後的堡壘也被這樣子處理了。但是民眾認為還是會認為私下到飯店、餐廳或招待所喬，然後喬完之後再上場演一場戲就可以了，您認為應該如何處理？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個非常有意思，因為你不能禁止兩個人私下喬事情，但是你可以做什麼？你可以說他們這樣沒有拘束力，我舉一個不一定完全符合的例子，像愛沙尼亞的電子投票，因為我們知道愛沙尼亞因為憲法是有網際網路之後才寫的，所以不需要經過電子化的程序，因為不需要進行無紙化作業，在一開始就是電子化政府，當然也造成那一套模式很難輸出，我要講的是愛沙尼亞這樣做了之後，是少數大家都相信電子化投票的國家；即使是如此，他們也規定一件事，電子化投票的時候，你可以投很多次，你可以蓋掉之前電子投票，而且最後可以去現場蓋過所有之前的電子投票。那是因為不知道電子投票旁邊有誰，所以一句話就是這樣子，等於有人逼著你或者是利誘你說你就拿出自然人憑證來投誰一票，最後要有一個蓋掉他的機會，這個意思是只有最後那一次投票有拘束力，前面都是省時間的方法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "同樣的道理，（問題問）他們自己去特定的場所，這三個場所我們都不賦予它拘束力，因為它沒有被記錄，所以沒有拘束力，我覺得這一個習慣要養成，所謂的accountability的意思是，等到你回來看這一個決定怎麼做成的時候，有一個account，哪一個決定是哪一個人、哪一天講了什麼話造成的，在此之前的意思表示或者準備都不應該有拘束力。以前的問題是這兩個混在一起，因為是off the record，一個有拘束力、一個沒有拘束力，那就會變成大家都會搶著有拘束力的閉門會議裡面盡可能壓掉其他的聲音、佔領主席台之類的狀況。我們很清楚有record有拘束力，沒有的就沒有，這樣就可以養成一個很好的習慣，可以事前喬無限多輪，但是你如果到最後要翻牌的話，沒有人能夠阻止你最後record跟有直播的狀態下做，我覺得這個是非常非常重要的，我的意思是我覺得現在處理已經很好了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "果然又馬上多了一個問題..." }, { "speaker": "提問", "speech": "如何看待「網路公民參與時代」與「傳統代議制」之間的關係？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個非常有意思，我說multi stakeholder consultation的時候，我的意思並不是說direct democracy，這兩個常常被混在一起。derate democracy的意思是我們對於這一個機制本身的相信，自動化造成consensus機制本身已經全然相信到我們可以取代整個代議制度的程度，這個即使在愛沙尼亞都沒有到這個程度，沒有人到這個程度；而且事實上我覺得在我有生之年不可能到這一個程度。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "原因是什麼？因為立法進行公共政策、進行宏觀的考慮是一種特定的興趣，並不是大家都有這一個興趣，如果突然間大家都有興趣、都願意成為long maker，那也許直接民主是可以的。但是這個是教育工作，只要我們絕大部分人可能只關心跟自己利益相關的政策，但是跟自己利益無關心的政策不太願意花時間的情況，代議民主就還有存在的空間，因為你總要有一群人花全部的時間去想跟自己利益無關的事情，而跟大家利益都有關的事情，這個是大的概念。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個是，不表示這一些專門在想大家事情的人，不要聽大家的聲音，這個是兩回事，以前的問題是聽大家聲音的時候，國會聯絡人是聽那一百一十三個朋友的聲音，新聞媒體聯絡人就是聽那麼……現在可能一有一百一十三家媒體（笑），但是以前滿少的媒體聲音。所以這加起來兩百二十六方的聲音好像就是全部的聲音，任何人想要他的聲音被聽到，他要就要透過代議或者是媒體的管道，才有可能被行政的人聽到，但是這個東西是有一個大家都很熟悉代理人的問題，就是當你的聲音是透過同時被聽到的時候，你永遠不知道是代表他自己的利益，所以挑跟他利益相符合民眾的聲音跟你說，那是他非常大公無私把所有民眾的聲音聚集起來跟你說，在理性的選擇上前一個會比較賺，所以很少有人會完全不過濾把所有的東西帶到行政體系來，或者是帶到立法體系來討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為這樣的關係，我們現在在做的事情，我常常在開會的時候架台錄影機，然後我就會跟大家說：「這一台錄影機代表今天沒有辦法出席我們會議的利益關係人。」，這一個東西我覺得很重要，即使不在利益關係人的考量裡面，他還不知道我們在討論這一件事，但是如果一、兩天發現好像重新參加這一個會議一樣，回來這一個討論的脈絡，然後再透過開放給不特定的人，像剛剛的連署或者像公共政策討論的平台去in put他的聲音，而不需要被別人代表，所以這只是在國會或者媒體或者其他專家學者這一些管道之外開一個新的管道，而這一個新的管道既不強求代表性，也沒有要代表別的管道，唯一要做的事情是讓這三個管道成本太高的情況下，或者是已經知道不當代表的情況下多了一個管道可以進來，而進來之後只是告訴我們在多元的聲音裡面有這一種聲音，而不是這一個聲音跟別人比大小，不投票也是這一個原因——我們很少在做這一種consultation的時候，在網路上投票。" }, { "speaker": "提問", "speech": "如何看待網路言論跟傳統大眾傳媒的差異？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個非常有意思，因為其實「現在的媒體報導不掩藏其背後的意識形態」這一句話講得非常好，因為意識形態的程度沒有比以前高，而是現在不掩藏而已，以前會花一些時間掩藏，但是現在赤裸裸。這我國覺得這一件事不是我們在跟網路媒體PK，要自己當媒體是一樣的意思。以前的問題是媒體依賴於特定的硬體設備，沒有硬體設備就沒有辦法當媒體，不管是頻譜或者是什麼別的東西或者是channel，現在是大家都不需要硬體設備，就是叫做數位匯流的意思，只要裝一個軟體，而且現在還有免費的軟體、自由軟體，你裝了之後同時是電視台、廣播、可以call in的節目，像大家現在都有手機，我一說大家就到sli.do，馬上在這一個實體空間就建立起一個自媒體，雖然現在只輻射到在場的各位，但是我的意思是這個沒有成本，大家都看到這個沒有成本的，因為這樣的關係，所以這裡的重點比較不是在跟傳統傳媒去搶人或搶注意力，而是說如果已經知道你對這一個公共政策有興趣，我多提供你什麼資料，這一件事就是為什麼我進來做基進式透明跟逐字稿之後，其實很多做調查報導的媒體對我非常友善的原因，是因為他們面臨所謂的即時新聞，他們以前可以花一個禮拜做出一篇調查報導，還有人要看、甚至有人要付錢看，但是研究因為一個禮拜裡面被即時新聞洗版了，所以到最後調查報導做出來的時候，這個題目已經過了、沒有人要看了，這個就是所謂速食新聞的狀態。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是因為我有完整的政策履歷、逐字稿這一些東西，而且是第一時間開完會就出，因為這樣的關係，之前媒體朋友他們發現可以花即時新聞的時間，六小時之內的時間，但是這六小時可以花在調查報導的工作上，因為原始的資料我全部提供出來，這樣就不需要花時間去東拼西湊、捕風捉影，可以把時間花在分析這一個政策跟本來政策異同的事情上，因此在這一件事上，他們跟我們站在同一邊的，我們希望媒體做的是加值，而不是希望做捕風捉影，但是這一個是建立在我們提供他完整資料的前提上，不然他的insensitive一定是去捕風捉影，我覺得是互補的關係，而不是競爭的關係。" }, { "speaker": "提問", "speech": "開放政府有終極目標嗎？離這個目標的進程設計如何？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一件事是我覺得終極目標是我們一個會透過不斷進行，然後大家又會把目標設到更遠的地方，好比立法院現在都線上直播，看起來很新奇，但是保證到下一屆大家會覺得不是本來就這樣嗎（笑）？大家習慣速度是非常非常快的，因為這樣的關係，所以沒有終極目標可言，我們team的朋友，每一個人自己說他們這一屆要做什麼或者是這個禮拜想要做什麼，然後我儘量讓大家想做的事情都做完，我不下命令，也不take別人的命令，就是所謂的「安那其」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣當然是一種在政府部門裡面是很奇怪的狀況，但是因為這樣的關係，我們非常地敏捷，有一個新狀況發生的時候，我們不需要放下手邊的工作，因為我們沒有手邊工作的概念，就是每一個禮拜的roadmap，然後透明給大家知道，大家知道之後就下去做，所以其實我們就回應社會對於開放政府的想像。" }, { "speaker": "提問", "speech": "臺灣政府的「資訊安全」能力，是否能面對網軍跟特定機構干擾侵入？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個是資通安全處的工作，我目前不是資通安全督導政委，後面有一個原因，是因為臺灣目前的國家機密法，裡面說任何系統輸入端裡面只要有一個是密件或機密，這一個東西的密等就會到給這一個系統的輸出，所以我做那麼多的逐字稿、政府雲、自動文本分析，我只要輸入一個國家機密，我的產出就自動變成國家機密。因為這樣的關係，我在入閣前進入協商的時候，就跟林全院長說機密不要給我看、密件都不要送到我的辦公室，我辦公室有一位涉密的參事，所以如果密件有人搞不清楚狀況，真的寄到我的辦公室，就他看，然後回覆說政委真的沒有看，因為真的這樣的關係，所以我沒有辦法去接觸資通安全這方面關於國安或機密的資訊，所以目前是簡宏偉處長及會報的朋友在處理這一件事，不過我滿相信他們，畢竟也都認識很久了。" }, { "speaker": "提問", "speech": "泰國央行總裁Veerathai Santiprabhob在2016年2月宣誓將帶領泰國金融業全力衝刺電子支付系統，並強調FinTech產業的發展將有利於泰國提升國家競爭力，臺灣在這方面不但落後美國PayPal，更落後中國三大支付業者BAT，現在更可能落後泰國，不談超越或並駕齊驅，政委將如何協助臺灣得以接軌國際？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個是非常好的問題，FinTech是大家看得到的那一面，大家看不到的那一面是RegTech（regulatory tech）。RegTech的意思是我們以前是特許行業，只有可以做這五家的業務，乘起來二十五個報表，政府就可以監管，這個是我們非常熟悉大陸法系的原則，但是FinTech的意思是平常沒有在做金融服務的，只是本來是做網路服務的，也要有一套sandbox或什麼機制，也可以來試著做一下服務。為什麼要開這個sandbox給他？因為你不開給他，他一樣做，他只是不讓你知道，像區塊鏈、比特幣這一些東西，事實上實務存在，所以跟既有的金融業是一個實務上競爭關係，如果開一個sandbox，也許還可以冒出頭告訴你說程式碼是長這樣，針對這一些人試著營運，而政府會說針對新的樣態在立法之前技術上能夠怎麼監管它，等到有監管能量的時候，就可以考慮把它合法化，也就是把灰色的東西變白色，如果沒有漂白過程的話，那大家都是直接把它當作黑市，當作黑市，對誰都沒有好處。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "現在一向的問題是，臺灣沒有開發RegTech的這一個環境，因為監管單位不會覺得它是輔導、灰轉白的習慣，因為這樣的關係，我們就不會有FinTech出來的時候，然後政府就撥一組三、四個人去研發關於RegTech的概念，所以我現在在做的事情，其實比較是透過科技會報這樣的渠道去試著把RegTech的想法帶進政府裡面，當然也就是很感謝金管會的朋友們，我們至少先把policy寫下來，至於日常業務，因為我畢竟也不是督導金融會的政委，我也只能把RegTech的形狀描繪出來，看他們有沒有能量去承載，如果有的話，我就比較可以看到比較像是sandbox的概念，在臺灣出現，有人申請、有人可以快速去審，然後可以針對它去研發RegTech。這個其實是通說，但是以臺灣的文化，這個必須要花非常多的時間讓大家習慣這一種新的監管模式。" }, { "speaker": "提問", "speech": "偶爾會被網友捕獲「野生唐鳳」，如小惡魔、PTT等，但網路議題眾多且複雜，您在什麼狀況或標準下會選擇親自回應呢？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "基本上是這樣子的，我能夠有所貢獻的時候，我就會親自回答。像我今天早上出門之前，才有一位開Uber的計程車司機，嗯……他不是計程車司機，我希望輔導他成為計程車司機的朋友到我的Facebook來留言，說他今天就沒有工作了，問我有沒有看過《管子‧牧民》（笑），然後去詢問我對於這一件事的意見，所以我還真的很跟他嚴肅討論了一下。我覺得我稍微有所貢獻，我可以把這一個狀況、政策講得很清楚，並不是寧必死之門，而是開求生之路。它是有一個因勢利導的狀況，今天這一個東西上路是因為多元化計程車方案已經上路，並不是我們莫名其妙把Uber趕出去，而告訴這一些計程車司機說他們考取了駕駛執照之後要去做什麼，還有一個先開一個門，才把這邊關起來的sequence，如果他只看媒體報導，尤其如只看舊的媒體報導，常常會覺得這個門關起來，而窗子其實沒有開，這個是我可以幫忙的地方，因為我可以連到運研所的報告說我們為什麼做出這樣的考慮等等，即使我不是交通政委，我也可以把交通部已經明白公開的東西轉譯成大家比較能夠理解的語言，然後跟特定的利益關係人溝通。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果我手上沒有我懂的資訊，或者是我覺得這一個特定利益關係人其實不需要適時性的回覆，而是需要抒發情緒，我就沒有要回，大概是這樣，其實就跟我回應任何網路上陌生人的判斷一樣。" }, { "speaker": "提問", "speech": "政府開放資訊越多，不就讓敵人或有心人更輕鬆獲取許多資訊？那您會怎麼回應？另外，進入政府體制到目前為止，所遇見的瓶頸是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我們還是要相信國家機密，如果你標的是沒有密等，它本來就是大家應該要知道的，這個是FOIA的精神，這個沒有什麼可以爭辯的，如果你知道被知道會有問題，你應該要把它標上密等，這個是最基本的責任判斷，應該是在資料產製者的身上要判斷，而這一個判斷當然我們慢慢練習可以練習出比較好的判準，尤其是在個資上面，但是這一個過程裡面，我們也可以學到其實很多我們本來以為敵人，或有心人知道會對我們有不利益的，其實不一定那麼有不利益。一些事實性的資料，我們這樣子丟出去之後，有一些有心人就變成有緣人，你也不知道嘛！對不對？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個，如果他的目的是要打亂一般人民對於政府正當性信任的話，也就是所謂的心戰，因為現在在網路上——尤其是自媒體——跟我們的心理現實，尤其是無意識的心理現實已經是非常密合在一起，簡單來講是我們對於一件事的感受越來越多是由不特定人所左右的這一個狀況，因此我們越想要藏資訊，那一些在undermine我們正當性的朋友們就越有可以講的，也就是瞞著自己人民的部分，不然為什麼要黑箱？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以為什麼Uber的David Plouffe來的時候要錄影，雖然是close door meeting，但是是on the record，不是off the record，這樣的原因也就是說如果不是這樣的話，那一些想要undermine政府正當性，可能不是Uber自己，可能是想要按照這一個做文章的朋友們就可以說唐鳳跟Uber密室會談，後面就自己想像了，你越不給他們這一個空間，其實他們能夠操作的東西就少。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外，我沒有遇到什麼瓶頸耶！這剛好跟這一位《管子》的朋友交換意見（笑），＜牧民＞篇裡面提到「不為不可成、不求不可得、不處不可久、不行不可復」，我做的事情雖然是「公僕的公僕」意思是行政體系覺得有什麼我可以幫上忙的地方，我們辦公室十五個人會幫大家忙，但是大家不覺得是問題，我們不會下指令說一定要改，完全服務性質的一種領導，這樣子的想法其實意思是我不會強求大家做大家做不到的事情，這樣的結果就是沒有瓶頸，每天我們處理大家提出來我們又可以處理的事情，每一個禮拜的roadmap，這個是我大概做事情的方法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好，終於到了一個段落了，我可以繼續簡報，我們等一下再回來看（問題）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛剛最後想要講的是，這整套東西其實是移植過來的，就像我說的這個是做自由軟體或者是做網路上的政策制定、協定，大家都沒有彼此的正當性，根本都是陌生人，要贏取彼此信任，又要跟大家說這一個東西給multi stakeholder community管都好，所以這一個網際網路IETF的網際網路標準制定者上面有一個ICANN，ICANN就是網路上每一個數字、網域、不同的文件，類似的標準制定局角色，而這一個角色非常特殊的是，就是用多利益相關方的方式來治理，之前美國政府理論上還有監督權，但是到Snowden為之後，整個世界都不相信美國政府了（笑），所以美國政府就主動放棄了對他的監督權，因為如果不放棄就要革命。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這樣子拿出去之後，好比像中華人民共和國政府，好比像俄羅斯都認為至少要用聯合國的模式，可以放在聯合國的ITU底下，或者不放在ITU底下，直接放在聯合國底下UNICANN這樣多好呢？是由全人類一起治理網際網路。你進入聯合國，當然對我們會有立即的不利益，因為我們就沒有票了（笑）——本來有的——另外一個是進入聯合國之後，就會變成是在那一個聯合國的多邊協定底下，實際上造成不利益的人民就不能再用連署再用這樣的方式去做審議的表達，基本上如果他所在的那一個城市不理他，他在聯合國就沒有票了，這也是不當代表的問題，只是再往上抽一層。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為這樣的關係，ICANN或者IETF花了非常多力氣建立了透明、課責的機制，讓全世界用網路的朋友相信說我們的公信力甚至比聯合國還高，這一件事花了非常非常久的時間。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們這邊就舉一個實際的例子，在2014年底有支持佔領或者是參加佔領的朋友，大部分都選上了市長，有一些還不知道自己是市長的人也選上市長的這種很新的政治氣氛底下（笑），大家都會說公開透明，因為不說的話，是選不上的。在這樣的特殊歷史氣氛底下，當然江宜樺前院長就辭職了，然後就改成毛治國院長。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "毛治國前院長很有意思，他一上來也知道要重建正當性，所以做了不管是所謂的開放資料或者是群眾外包，其實就是我們說開放政府的前半之「透明」、「參與」。透明跟參與的意思是做什麼事要讓大家知道，而且要讓大家有參與設定議程的方法，雖然這樣講說要群眾參與、寫白皮書進行政策，但是事實上大家都不知道要如何執行這一個東西，所以當時張善政前副院長、蔡玉玲前政務委員就花了很多時間跟g0v的朋友一起探討要用什麼題目開始做這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對於部會來講，其實如果覺得能夠處理的事情，他絕對不會找自己麻煩去突然間要做新的公共參與，因為並沒有一個模式可循，這樣的關係之下，所以會丟出來的是部會自己不相關的東西。在當時Uber世界性的、流行性的病毒，是這樣子的，病毒的DNA的名字叫做「共享經濟」，但是其實每一個行業都不一樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "Uber的DNA是說：「我們覺得演算法來派車，比起政府的regulation來派車更有效率。」，然夠要能夠照顧到大家的需求，你如果相信這一件事，你就會幫Uber開車，然後幫Uber開車的時候，你就會載乘客，然後就要散播這一個，推薦司機開，這個司機可能開一個月，發現Uber抽25％，他根本賺不到錢，他就不開了，他就痊癒了，但是在痊癒之前不知道散播多少病毒的東西出去（笑），所以只要一個司機可以帶超過一個司機來，Uber就一直有人幫他開車，這個是他最基本的operating model，他不在意翻桌率，一個司機只幫他開兩個月的車也很好，所以在這樣的情況之下，他的scale是非常全球性的，全球政府都發現到一個殘酷的事實，因為last mile在外面，所以其實……" } ]

[ { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "大家好我是芳睿，今天過來做一個簡單的簡報，想要介紹自己，跟以前做過的一些案例。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "我之前在英國皇家藝術學院讀服務設計碩士，讀碩士之前跟之後都做過蠻多不同類型的設計工作，在畢業之後主要是在英國內閣辦公室做服務設計師，還有另外一間Accenture顧問公司旗下Fjord設計顧問公司做互動設計師，在臺灣水越設計、都市酵母工作時，也是從事設計師的角色。我認為設計師有義務去幫助這一個社會、環境及商業，如何讓這三個領域連結在一起是很重要的。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "我今天分五個類別跟大家報告，第一個是有關於英國政府內閣辦公室(Cabinet Office)，在這個內閣辦公室主要是支援首相的業務，在辦公室下面有兩個比較偏設計的單位，一個是Policy Lab，一個是GDS。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "由於Policy Lab這個單位是隸屬於內閣辦公室(Cabinet Office)，因此可以直接與下面各部會溝通作跨部門的串聯，這個單位主要是做開放政策這一塊，我覺得這塊會跟唐政委這邊……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "……叫我唐鳳就可以了（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "有一點不一樣的部分是要讓政策決策者們，有更開放的心胸去嘗試不同的工具與思考方式，並協助公部門在做政策決策跟執行的時候可以更公開、更開闊，以使用者為中心，我們也會去瞭解各種科技的可能性，為政府設計更好的解決方案。我在這裡擔任服務設計師做跨部門整合及策略，這個單位是創意可以發生的地方，裡面的組成是由設計師跟政策背景的人，會跟Film Ethnographer還有Data Scientist合作，做問題研究這一塊。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "我之後會說一下我在這邊做的一些案子，及我在服務設計這一塊的案子。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "這個是我的網站（fangjuichang.com），我在Policy Lab的案子中，有一個是在預防流浪人口的部分，當時是由DCLG這一個部會所委託。一直從研究到制定…" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "你剛提到Film Ethnographer是什麼樣的？" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "就是ethnographer，但是是用film的方式呈現，所以做研究的時候會拍影片。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "就是像人類學家這樣去看現場的情況？" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "對。那一些data會再交回來，我們去研究那一些個案到底有哪一些問題，然後我們再作紀錄，再分析他們的問題。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "這一塊的部分，當時我參與到的是從設計策略這一塊到測試，一開始有Data Scientist去分析很多各種資料，然後去找出一些比較需要去關注的一些個案，然後再由ethnographer去訪問那一些個案，所以就是有質性跟量化這樣的研究，我們分析出來之後，整理出一些設計策略。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "我做了十二至十五個不同的面向的prototype，當時與一些基層的機關測試，比如像job centre或者是housing options這一類的機構去作測試，比如說有一個部分是宣導的部分，那就會與job centre有關，因為他們會直接面對到目標族群。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "那時候我滿喜歡的一個概念是做typologyies，去分析不同的流浪人口的特徵，那是讓第一線的人員去使用的工具，他們會用這個工具去持續蒐集不同的特徵，也可以用這個工具去瞭解哪一型的人可能比較需要接觸到housing options這一個部分，然後就可以轉介過去。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "另外一個是做終身學習的數位產品，那時有非常多的部會都在開發這一塊，但是他們的發展目標不太一樣，所以當時主要是幫他們作一個workshop去釐清他們的相同跟差異點，然後做出一個報告。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "他們看完報告之後，如果有興趣的話，希望從報告的建議發展出解決辦法，Policy Lab也可以去協助他們。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "Policy Lab的案子，從小型的、中型的，到大型的案子都有，小型的案子如幫助政府的部會去做workshop釐清一些問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以是幾天的workshop？" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "這個是只有一天的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "喔！只有一天？就是六個小時、八個小時？" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那可是你的產出，你剛剛說……" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "……產出就是做出一個報告。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "ok。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "那個報告會分析那一天所有的內容，下一步可以怎麼做，就是現況的問題跟未來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以這個比較不是帶共識營或帶咖啡廳的做法，你收了就是他們目前實際的狀況，然後你寫一份報告書接下來怎麼做？" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "對，但是像做world cafe那一類的，我們會針對那時候的工作坊會需要什麼technique，再去植入，所以有時候也會用到像world cafe這樣的類型，Policy Lab也一直在研究各種不同的方法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在收各種不同東西的方法？" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "對，然後再應用到適合的，比如workshop有時候用的方法也都會……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你都帶過？" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "我帶過大部分。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "帶過各種長度的工作坊？" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "之前在臺灣也有帶過workshop，比如說在「都市酵母」工作時，協助過一個市政府「Design Thinking」的工作坊，我覺得蠻有趣的。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "我快速分享幾個我其他做過的案子，去年的時候，我跟東倫敦Bethnal Green一個當地的社區組織，叫做St. Margaret’s House去提案，因為我對社區營造很有興趣，論文是寫關於「都市仕紳化」的議題，我希望以論文為基礎並實際去解決問題。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "跟當地組織以及社區訪視人員一起做了三個月的research，去訪視當地各種不同族群的人，去瞭解他們的需求，我這邊就整理了那三個月訪談跟做workshop的一些問題，主要發現有很零碎的資訊，因為東倫敦有非常多的事情在發生，大家都很喜歡去那邊，但是因為資訊太多，反而看不到什麼是重點。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "第二，鮮少可以支持當地的人為社區貢獻的方案與平台。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "第三，很多當地的資源都沒有被有效的去利用，如當地有二十六個公家機關的空間沒有在使用。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "蚊子館。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "當時就有跟當地的居民跟外來的訪客去作各種不同的workshop，一開始就是把我跟另外一個夥伴做的這些問題點條列出來，然後找當地居民一起來檢視這一些是不是他們真正覺得是問題的問題，重新檢驗之後，再執行另外一個workshop，也就是跟他們一起去設計，希望未來會是怎麼樣，並解決問題。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "之後執行另一個workshop去做一個檢視及最後的確認，我們再回去把這一個設計修正後，做一個pilot，所以這一個案子最後有做到pilot的程度。當時幫當地做了三個規劃。第一，人們可以在當地的各種空間裡面分享一些在地新聞跟個人的想法，志工將問題和想法蒐集起來後，就會透過社區組織去解決。第二，是建立一個平台，讓人們去辦想辦的工作或講座等等，讓當地的人才可以回饋當地以及互相交流。第三，是一個分享地圖，當地人才知道的一些地方可以透過此平台分享，比如想找好的瑜珈老師，或是祕徑...等等。此服務有線上以及實體的部分，讓各種年齡層都可以去參與。實體的服務空間，除了社區中心之外，還有其他可能性，因為社區中心並沒有和一般人的活動地點重疊。比如跟咖啡廳合作，將部分空間重新利用，放入具有社區活化的想法；也有一個與建築師合作發展的可移動社區中心，也可以到處去巡迴，讓更多人可以參與。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你一個人做的？" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "兩個人。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "哇！" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "做了一年（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "OK，很大的案子。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "對，很繁瑣的工作，但我做的滿開心的，後來這個設計讓當地在做社區活化的建築師去延續，所以我們就把一些資料交給他，讓他繼續去發展。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以他就有繼續做？" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "另外一個是醫療的案子，這個是在前年做的，跟Royal Trinity Hospice合作，我研究所所有的案子都是有實際客戶委託的，所以這樣子很好的，能夠真正去了解並解決問題，客戶如果喜歡我們的提案，就可以直接幫他們執行。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "這一個案子有上英國《獨立報》，醫院那邊也喜歡我們提的概念，這個是當時做的結構圖，當初的問題是因為人們誤解安寧病院是一個人去等著過世的地方，但是其實安寧病院可以提供的照顧是比這個更多的。一般人也覺得要讓他們在各種不同的安寧療護中去選擇哪一些是適合他們的，符合什麼補助，其實都很複雜。再者，人們太晚去處理他們的一些遺囑。那時就有訪問到很多人，他們並不有概念去做這一件事，所以給家人留下很多的重擔。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "我們當時訪問到很多人都覺得這樣在被醫生診斷的時候，只剩下幾個月或者是幾年的時候，他覺得在那一刻起就不是原本的那一個人，他其實很還活著，但他沒有辦法做跟被診斷以前一直都喜歡做的事情，所以也覺得這一塊很重要，希望可以納入我們的設計重點，就是把他喜歡做的事情，還是透過安寧療護去安插在整個療程裡面。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "所以當時做的數位平台，主要是讓他們被轉介到安寧療護醫院的時候，與護士的諮詢中可以使用的工具，那一個工具是個網站的形式，有分三個部分：" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "一般人的可能沒有概念要將很多事情要事先交代處理，等到最後一刻，突然什麼事情全部都要做，希望幫他們安排的是，他現在知道有一年的時間或是三年或是幾個月，可以在諮詢的時候把他們的時間軸畫出來，然後把適合的那一些諮詢部分都安插進去，有各種不同的醫療機構和組織，比如說可以申請醫療補助的機構然，後護士又可以把說你什麼時候要立遺囑，什麼時候把財產過去給誰。你喜歡看電影，我們可以安排每禮拜一次電影時間，讓生命有更豐富的安排。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "最後一個要分享做的案子是，我是那時去參加一個黑客松——我在英國很喜歡參加黑客松——而且是政府辦的，那時參加Transport Systems Catapult，在做無人駕駛的那一個單位辦的。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "那時辦的黑客松找很多人，有設計師、商業人士跟工程師，然後分了大概十組，然後每一組都給一個當前面臨到當前最想要被解決的問題，我被分配到blockchain這一個新的技術被應用的可能性，希望blockchain可以應用到交通這一塊。最後產出的概念是希望可以應用到開放交通資料庫的服務。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "現有交通資料的問題是，資料的來源並不全面，有一些資料被其他機構掌握並有商業行為，人們在使用免費的導航服務時，也沒有足夠的隱私的保障。然後再分析一下blockchain有什麼特色是可以被應用在這一個領域，它是一個非常有安全性的科技，可以用來擷取每個人的交通資料並保護個資。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "概念是一般人可以把開放交通資料的這一個App安裝一次，之後開各種導航軟體，就會在後台去跑。希望把所有交通資料都開放，讓不管是政府或者是其他在開發這一些導航軟體的人都可以得利，因為當所有的交通資料開放，交通就可以更精確去掌控。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "那時候也有幫Policy Lab做一些open policy making toolkit，然後都有放在gov.uk上面。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "喔！所以這個你做的喔？" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "我有做一些，那時候在幫他們修改一些工具。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "我對公務服務設計的興趣，是來自執行政府的委託案與補助案的經驗，每做完一個案子，都很希望可以繼續延續，也希望可以符合國家發展的脈絡，但是最後的結果通常是一個報告書，我在唸碩士之前，就在想說有沒有更有效率的方式，讓這一些被補助下來又很好的議題可以再繼續發展、有更多的延續，又可以回到政府內部去作循環。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "我參加過台灣的GDS讀書會，發現英國政府是把這樣的單位放在內閣辦公室，所以力量是很大的，這一些知識、工具跟案例的累積都是直接累積在政府裡面，而不是委託一個單位，就覺得這樣做實在是太好了，之後也很有幸工作並更瞭解他們如何運作，覺得一個有效率的流程真的很重要。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "另外，我也有看到唐委員這邊……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "……叫我唐鳳就好，或au，或audrey。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "開放政府的想法，我覺得跟我想的很多都滿像，像開放資料、資訊透明這一類的，我個人覺得可以加入的是，「開放合作」跟「KPI成效評估」這一塊。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可不可以把「KPI」拿掉（笑）？" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "我現在講的「KPI」這一塊並不是數字的這一塊，因為我們後來在部門裡面去做，在年底快要做那一個……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "……績效檢討。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "不是在做一個數字。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不是量化管考。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "就是分析我們今年做的這一些案子，然後把它全部貼出來達到什麼，用討論的方式。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那比較接近我們叫做Key Result。因為在臺灣用KPI，大家都往數字想，anyway，那這樣很好。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "我就覺得那是心理的狀態，而不是去把那個數字頂出來。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "還有開放資料的問題，我目前想到的是我個人的經驗，在處理那一些資料的品質，資料開放很好，但是到應用這一塊很頭痛，就要一個個檔案讓工程師重新把格式改好，然後重新匯流，因此我覺得品質這一塊可以再思考。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "另外是有關於應用的部分，也就是英國的交通局，把那一些資料拿來分析地鐵的流量，然後用那樣的資料分析去安排車流與數量。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "最後一個我想講的是，英國在各部會裡面有專門的學習團體，在瞭解每一個公務員真正的需求是什麼，幫他們安排比較有趣跟提昇他們能力的一些課程。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "那時我上過表演藝術中心的演講課，課程結構很完整，是由演員去帶領的，從聲音的練習，一直到如何去闡述一個清晰的概念，這個是一整天的有趣課程，大家就會很有興趣去提升自己個人能力。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "那個是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "那個是補充（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "我想看，可以解釋一下嗎（笑）？" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "這個是我自己畫的，因為英國政府很愛用Design Council的那個Double Diamond，然後我就自己發展了一個Triple Diamond。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "結果呢？" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "我那時候會這樣想，是因為我一直覺得在RCA學習Service Design，我學習最多的是思考，能夠活用並開發自己的工具，針對不同的案件，去設計或修改現有工具。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "大概是這樣子。然後想說今天來聊一聊有沒有機會可以跟大家合作？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "喔，有啊！非常多機會。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "有很多機會，因為我們在剛開始，不過還是讓唐鳳先講。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有啊！你先講啊！這個是你的domain（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "（笑）很高興認識你，剛看了一下我們的Facebook有六、七個共同朋友，都是我從不同的設計學校或者是公司認識的人，所以滿有趣的。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "因為我本身原本是作互動的，所以對於服務設計這一塊，我大概知道是誰來做，但是還沒有真的遇到過真的在做這個的人，你算是比較稀有的存在（笑）。我覺得你對於這一個辦公室會有非常實際的contribution。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "我們現在剛好試圖開幾個案子，只是會感覺design的人手比較不足，我自己會覺得需要一些設計師跟我一起co-work，不過還是要看老闆的意見。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有，我的工作就是協助每一個人達成自己設定的objective，所以她如果覺得這是objective，我就會盡全力……" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "……因為之前沒有遇到你，所以我們開始試圖開了一些比較interactive project，之後有幾個方向，可能你得先瞭解政府多一點，因為你比較多是在英國政府工作，另外一個是我來這邊工作之後，我覺得au工作方式，跟一般designer工作方式有一點非常的不一樣（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "（笑）你講有一點，到底是哪一點？明明就完全不一樣（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "但是她（唐鳳）的結果是好的，所以我覺得designer來說是一個自己心理的文化衝擊，可是會看不出來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果要講很炫的說法，這裡就是做co-create跟co-design，然後我通常co-design的時候，一開始都沒有預設。這個一般的designer會花很多時間去適應。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "所以我的實際體驗是說，我們要來做一個project——對她來說叫做project——這邊沒有brief。Designer還有design brief，可是這邊就沒有brief，這個是co-create的方式，然後看大家怎麼開始，然後就開始了，然後就工作了，這是一個奇蹟，我也不知道這怎麼做成的。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "如果你進來的話，就會漸漸摸索跟碰撞，或許你會發展出自己的一套，就像你自己可以找出自己一套design process一樣，看你進來之後會不會也改了這個Diamond以後，變得很自我衝突。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "我覺得很有趣的是，臺灣多一點的設計師來在做這一塊是好的，只是說因為我在這邊，還在做interactive的走向，你如果來的話，也可以試著去開比較偏service design的policy making，就是往那邊學習。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "她說了算（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "Run完了。子維有沒有什麼想法？" }, { "speaker": "黃子維", "speech": "你對我們有什麼想法？就是說你剛剛說你想跟我們合作，很具體來講？" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "我一開始想的是，可以從流程開始，然後做出一些實際案例，讓人民可以有感，現在有非常多大家會可以自己提議的一些平台，但跟政府的溝通與連接有一點落差，或者是委託案的部分，是否可以更直接連結到政府願景後哪個政策、面向的改善，我希望可以開始做的是整理……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "……政策的產銷履歷？" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "對，核心的議題。然後再搭配公民他們對這一些議題的想法，而不是開放所有的東西都可以討論，無法聚焦。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "最簡單來說我們挑一個Policy Challenge，那一個challenge是政府已經知道說這個利益關係人滿多的，然後畫一個可能同心圓圖或什麼東西，然後試著把這一個story試著是大家聽得懂的，然後才進入討論，是這個意思嗎？" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就是討論前期，我們叫做inform的部分。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "然後瞭解幾個非做不可的議題之後，就像我剛剛分享的一些設計過程，然後我們再一起把它做出一個……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "非做不可。意思是說有政治壓力的意思（笑）？" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "就是急迫性需要改善的。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "有沒有特別對於開放政府、公民參與這一塊有比較實際的想法或者是方向？" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "我想從議題開始，比如說如果今天講教育議題好了，受此議題影響的公民是老師、學生、家長，我會從使用者的角度去了解問題，並不是找很多公民來談政策，並不是每一個人都了解政策政策的方式。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "我覺得可以真的瞭解他們的問題，然後再拿回來府內，用政策理解的方式去轉化，然後再用他們聽得懂的語言再回饋給他們，我覺得讓所有公民都去參加可以知道各個政策的這一些政府很細部的東西雖然是好的，但是我覺得公民好像沒有必要做這一個事情，如果政府跟人民間有信任的時候，人民要信任政府把這一些做好，政府的角色比較像是去瞭解他們的問題、解決他們的問題，而不是我今天做這一個政策，而你們覺得怎麼樣，比較不會偏向這一種。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "很好，我們也是這樣想。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "比較好奇在英國的經驗，因為你在經過待了滿久，也在那邊工作？" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "讀書和工作。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "然後你也接觸英國政治那一塊？" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "不太會參與到政治這一塊，同事們很專注在做自己要負責的內容與任務，也很成熟，不會因為每一個人的政治立場不同而去做文章。" }, { "speaker": "張芳睿", "speech": "就算內部有任何的挫折，都會討論下一次要如何可以更好，是很正向的能量。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這邊也是一個正能量的泡泡……just to warn you（笑），因為書漾當時踏出泡泡的時候，也有不適應過。" }, { "speaker": "林書漾", "speech": "喔！這邊也是正能量滿標的地方。這邊真的很好，然後出去還是要有一個不一樣的presentation，不過你自己想怎麼樣可以自己決定。" }, { "speaker": "黃子維", "speech": "我是這樣想，接下來處理一些比較實際的問題。我們這邊可能要稍微想一下我們用什麼樣的方式，講直白給你一個工作，這個要讓我們想一下，我們要瞭解一下編制上的考量。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也許先請你先來帶我們的PO工作坊，實際瞭解各部會的狀況之後，再挑你覺得合適的專案來做。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "Hello聽眾大家好，歡迎收聽FM91.7「POP Radio」《POP搶先爆》節目，我是節目主持人黃光芹，我們今天有請當事人邀請的是一位特別來賓，我們先前有預告，畫了一個人頭的黑影，不知道大家猜到了沒有？我們歡迎政務委員唐鳳。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家好，我是唐鳳。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "唐鳳，我們是二十一年前曾經因為一個因緣見過，之前您母親有出過一本書，您母親是李雅卿，她過去也是記者出身，是我們中國時報系的記者，她寫了一本書《成長戰爭》，記錄你十四歲以前的生涯，但是我相信很多媒體對那一段報導相當引述、著墨非常多，我們可不可以從十四歲以後的唐鳳來談起，如果維基百科要你寫「唐鳳十四歲以後」，你會怎麼描述？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實維基百科上面已經有非常非常詳細的描述了。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "我已經列印出來了。但是如果唐鳳自己寫呢？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我相信其實本來就是那一本《成長戰爭》，一開始的調查報導工作其實是您做的，我們一開始的緣分是這樣子認識的。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "是。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實你接觸到我的那一段時間，可能是我生命裡面變動可能最大的，因為那一段時間是我決定不要繼續上高中、要創業，是結束在開始創業的這樣過程裡。其實接下來的過程，可以說是倒過來唸吧！可能是「爭戰長成」吧（笑）！" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "喔！Really？「爭戰長成」，非常好！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，其實在十四歲時的這段過程，其實是我生命中變化最大的時候，可以說是一個轉捩點，過了這個轉捩點之後，其實每一步都相當順遂，我一直跟家庭、社會跟各方面起各種各樣的衝突，純粹是因為那個學校體制跟我想要取得知識的方式，越來越不能相容所致，所以一旦我從現在開始不去上學了，好像從現在開始放下一塊大石頭，所有爭執的來源什麼東西都消失了，所以維基百科看到的，大家可以發現接下來我就沒有什麼衝突性或者是爭執性的一些報導，大部分是很順利創業、公司賣掉，再創業、公司賣掉，投入自由軟體運動、帶了幾個專案等等，這一些其實在研究上——如果你是研究資訊科學領域的——當然可能會跟我共識過，我在二十幾個國家有旅行過、待過黑客松等等，我們在資訊圈裡面，我是一個很重要的貢獻者，可是除此之外其實並沒有什麼可以報導的東西，就是很認真在作研究的一個人。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "其實您每一個紀錄，我相信都相當特殊，比如說您雙腳落地了，因為您找到電腦，這個領域真的是很浩瀚，包括我現在坐在這邊訪問你，我都有壓力，因為不是我們這一輩的人，或者就算是下一輩（份）的人，可能都沒有辦法進入您的領域。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "就一個十三、十四歲的少年來講，那時組公司其實已經是一個很特殊的經驗，可能對現在十三、十四歲的少年來講，這一個經驗是他們遙不可及的，您可以跟他們講說：「你現在應該讀你的書，你什麼時候應該走出社會，然後投入職場。為什麼我可以在那個時候做到，及以後如果你們走出來，你們要怎麼做到？」" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實當時我之所以可以用十四歲的年齡去投入研究，後來拿研究的一些成果創業，就是因為從網際網路上面，別的研究者不知道我十四歲，因為你寫一封email或者是論壇討論，其實上面不會附你的年齡。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "你是刻意隱瞞或者是在那個世界裡面很自然沒有標註年齡？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "很自然，沒有人會說我這個研究……通常會寫主要作者、副作者，不會「（二十二歲）」吧！在那個世界裡面，重要的是你的貢獻。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "包括蘋果電腦，您作為顧問，也是這樣嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然，當然。像蘋果電腦顧問工作，邀請我進去的那一位朋友，他是因為自己博士讀到一半，把研究投入蘋果的實務，想要把博士唸完，所以才找了一個當時已經跟他合作十幾年老朋友的我，找我進來蘋果幫他帶他的部門，其實也沒有面試跟口試，因為我們畢竟合作這麼久了，可是我剛開始合作的時候我才十九歲，所以他也不知道我才十九歲，所以我們就是一起做了一些案子。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "所以臺灣不可能出現另一個唐鳳嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "每個人都是獨特的啊！我們常常會在自由軟體社群，臺灣的開放自由軟體社群是非常蓬勃，可能是亞洲最活躍的，所以我們常常會在線上看到一些很積極的貢獻者，然後在年會或其他地方遇到他，知道只有十二歲或十三歲，這是很常見的。因此我們不會特別去管說在我的維基百科條目，大家會看到有好幾個不同的人編輯，但是裡面有一個編輯特別多的KOKUYO，我們也不知道他是誰，是後來維基協會的人說他是一名學生。我們不會問貢獻的人的年齡或歧視的方式。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "為什麼斷然在三十幾歲就宣告退休，如果以您現在又有職業來看的話，而且是投入政府工作，那個退休還存在嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想是存在的。所謂「退休」的意思是不再把蘋果bottom line或者是牛津大學bottom line或者是其他公司的bottom line當作我要考慮的事情，我接下來要考慮的事情就是對整個社會的效益，簡單來講就是「工作服務」。我同樣是做公共服務，當然這一個政府付我薪水，讓我專心做這個，我很高興，但是不管我在不在這個位置、是不是領納稅人的錢，其實我都是做一樣的事情。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "為什麼每一個階段都這麼清楚？意思就是說不可能再重複回頭做先前您在三十三歲前的重複工作嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該是這樣講，當時多多少少還是為了謀生，因為其實在創業上，大家也知道，一開始創業一定是燒錢的，所以大部分實際上的收入，事實上是來自於顧問工作跟資訊工作，這其實跟任何專業人士在一開始出道的時候都一樣的，慢慢帶出幾批年輕人之後才能夠變成夥伴，所以不管我在資訊界或者是後來投入開放政府工作，我同樣的想法是，我來這邊並不是累積我自己的什麼東西、不是為了名利或者是什麼，而是我今天能夠貢獻什麼，我就貢獻什麼。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以在這樣的前提底下，之前因為畢竟還是要支付日常開銷，所以才會跑去創業或跑去當顧問，但後來公司賣了，稍微有一筆比較穩定的收入之後，其實就覺得我接下來專心做公共服務就是了。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "您可不可以跟我們建構一下，在您到政府工作之前，您曾經有跟政治或社會運動擦身而過的經驗，我們這一段先告一段落，我們等一下再繼續專訪唐鳳，來談一談她過去在太陽花學運裡面短短一個小時，以及她如何做出決定，當初林全找她，請她為政府做一些什麼工作項目，我們等一下回來。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "歡迎回到《POP搶先爆》節目現場，我是節目主持人黃光芹，我們今天的特別來賓是唐鳳。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家好。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "剛剛我們談到您先前就業，在三十三歲就宣示退休了，但是後面有一個延伸，就是您進入政府工作。可是在這中間有兩個奇遇，一個是在三十二歲的時候加入零時政府，另外一個是2014年我們知道很有名的太陽花學運，您曾經在裡面待了一個小時，不知道您在幹什麼。可不可以談一下這兩個階段？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好的。「零時政府」其實是我長期合作的一個朋友，他跟他另外三個同學、朋友一起創造的，那個東西是在2012年底，當時我還沒有加入。「零時政府」的基本想法是臺灣有各種各樣政府的網站，有政府提供的服務，有些提供很好、有些提供不那麼好，不那麼好的，其實之前就是罵或者是寫一些比較酸的文章，其實從公務員的角度來看，也不知道這樣真的可以給他（公務員）什麼幫助。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「零時政府」的想法是我們註冊一個網域名稱叫做「g0v.tw」，好比你如果覺得環保署的網站有可以改善之處，那個網站是「env.gov.tw」，我們這一些做開放源碼的人就可以做「env.g0v.tw」，也就是說每一次看政府的網站不順眼，就把「o」換成「0」，自己做一個，有一點像影子政府的網站。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我當初加入是因為我覺得教育部的重編國語辭典已經非常久沒有翻修了——那時在手機上幾乎不能用的——所以我就覺得我們應該要來做一個手機可以用的版本，當時是我另外一個朋友叫做葉平發起，我們做了一個「萌典」，現在也非常多人在用。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也就是說，我們每一次看政府不順眼，不是去罵政府，我們是一個代用政府的概念，我們自己做一個更好的版本，然後把那個網域註冊成一樣，「o」換成「0」，公務員看到才知道說接下來要跟他的廠商要求說：「你看，民間都做出來，為什麼我們做不出來？」，又因為我們做事情的方法都是拋棄掉大部分的註冊權，所以廠商甚至也不能說還要取得授權，因為這個完全是開放的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為這樣的關係，像「零時政府」我還沒有加入的時候，他們第一個做的是預算視覺化，把全國的總預算用泡泡圖、書狀圖就事論事就某一筆預算去跟公務員討論，這一個東西到2012年底柯文哲市長當選之後，他說做參與式預算之前應該先做這個，這樣大家才知道預算要做什麼，所以就推出了「budget.taipei」，那時候已經有六、七個縣市都採用同樣的平台，因為做這一群人是拋棄掉著作權，所以大家都任意利用。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「零時政府」的想法簡單來講是，我們把政府分支出去，提供的一些服務，我們想一些更好的方法去提供，然後我們拋棄掉大部分的著作權，政府任何時候想要合併回去的時候，就把它合併回去，像教育部的重編國語辭典，最近好像還滿紅的（笑），有融合我們萌典計畫大概五千朋友的貢獻。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "唐鳳您講到這一個階段，我就有一個感受，就是說我們政府要制訂政策，源頭是在決策，顯然你們做的是後端，我們用白話文講就是「包裝以後」，其實我們媒體人最愛用你們整理出來一些東西，當然有誰要參選的話，也是很便利，就像快餐車道一樣；同樣的，你現在擔任這樣的工作，你是不是也落入了比較區隔化、片斷式，甚至是比較宣傳式、包裝性的，但你不參與決策？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該是這樣講，我們決策的時候是要納入誰的聲音，這個是有一個機制，我們之前不管是召開焦點座談、專家學者會議或者是公聽會好了，我們能夠約到的人大部分是政府事務官體系已經認識的人，所以我們每次在做一個政策即將推行利益關係人盤點的時候，你會看到很多協會的理事長、公會的代表，會看到很多各行各業專家學者們的理事等等。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是除了這一個之外，真正的利益關係人，有一些甚至沒有組成或沒有加入協會……我印象很深刻，第一次以顧問身份被約來行政院開會時，他們想要做電傳勞動的案子，就是能不能在家遠距上班，其實公務員本來就有一個函，但是勞工還沒有，所以當時想說如果勞工在家上班、遠距打卡，在LINE上請假，而老闆看了沒有回，這樣算不算請假之類的，在這樣的情況下，他們想要召開公聽會的時候，就問說：「臺灣有沒有所有的遠距勞動者的工會？」，當然沒有，因為是在每一個不同的業態，遠距寫程式跟遠距寫歌跟創造的其實完全不一樣，很多新聞工作者也是遠距。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我們不可能是以遠距為名組成一個工會。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "沒錯。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可是在這樣的前提下，其實他們就沒有辦法約到一個有代表性的人物來跟他們討論，所以他在政策制訂的時候，幾乎是閉著眼睛在做，如果沒有一個良好機制的的話，就會變成大家憑空去想，但其實制訂這一些的朋友們有沒有在家上班的經驗是沒有的，在想的過程、開研究案的過程，最後推出的（方案）可能會被罵，這一個被罵的（人）也很可憐，並不是故意去擋住大家，而只是沒有把利益關係人的想法納入進來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想說的是，在2014年底的時候，我們有開始幫忙規劃「vTaiwan」的平台，就是讓所有不特定的利益關係人，只要你在家裡工作過，都可以上來留言，而且我們承諾只要你的留言是有幫助的，你就贏得了一場參加諮詢會議的門票，你就可以來實際跟勞動部的官員討論你的實際需求，大家的反應都還不錯，所以最後真的制訂出符合各界需求的《遠距勞動指導原則》。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "回答您的問題，這並不是在決策的末端；相反的，是在還沒有決策之前最前端。但是這兩端事實上是首尾相接的，因為常常我們說決策出來，好比制訂了一些勞動法令，大家沒有想到可以遠距打卡，還沒有這一個技術，出現了一個新的社會變化，我們從末端必須要檢討，但這一個檢討事實上政府也還沒有說哪一個方向才是對的，因此是政策的最前端，這個時候你要問大家的意見，你當然要先把自己的狀況講清楚，因此講清楚這一個動作是很重要的，但是講清楚是為了要問大家的意見，並不是宣傳而言。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "所以張開雙手先迎接，收攏，你們做出一個綜合性的整理，所以真正的決策應該不是政務委員，而是上到院長或更高層的總統，是這樣的權力分配關係嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該是這樣講，好比以剛剛電傳勞動的這一個案子來講，其實也不是當時的總統或者是院長要負那個政治責任，大部分是單一部會（勞動部）決定要做這一件事，所以當然從證物體系來講是要負政治責任，不管群眾收出來的共識或意見怎麼樣，最後還是要簽名蓋章。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個東西的好處是什麼？知道推出去之後不會被社會罵，因為是整合大家的想法，雖不滿意、但都可接受，所以這個東西不管是行政命令或者是立法院，正當性都比大家關起門來作決策稍微好一點。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "唐鳳剛剛提到兩個事情，她一直提到「遠距」，後來她自己落實在她上班的生涯裡面。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "第二個是比較不會罵，可是經常她在回應網友辱罵聲的時候，她是自己上去的，我們看另外一個徵才的新聞訊息裡面，也看得到，唐鳳其實也有被罵的經驗喔！我們先休息一下，等一下馬上回到現場。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "歡迎回到《POP搶先爆》節目現場，我是黃光芹，我們現場是唐鳳。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "我需要解釋一下，其實我們是在唐鳳政務委員辦公室的現場，因為這次的採訪也是相當特殊的經驗，我們要移駕到她的辦公室，有很多新的嘗試，對我來講是新的經驗，包括我們團隊都是一樣。我們回歸正題。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "雖然唐鳳呱啦呱啦，但我無意間發現你還是跳過兩個問題，一個是你提到柯文哲，他在選舉過程當中，你算是輔選團隊嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "完全沒有參加。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "但是某種程度是連結的，這是輔選經驗嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也不能這樣講。我剛剛提到預算視覺化，那一個工作是我拋棄掉我的著作權，事實上那一個工作絕大部分的工作不是我做的，是高嘉良他們一開始那四個人做的，而他們也拋棄掉了大部分的著作權，而留下了姓名權，也就是柯文哲市長的團隊不需要問過他們就可以去使用，因此這樣的前提底下，並不是合作的概念，因為合作是要認識你合作的人，這比較是協作的概念，就是我們把東西放在那裡。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "柯文哲當選你高不高興？最後的結論？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為其實我不是台北市民啦（笑）！所以也輪不到我高興不高興。但是滿高興的是，他的選舉過程裡面，他花了很多時間發展其實在臺灣之前很少發展這一種廣泛、擴大參與的工作，這個我當然是樂見其成，但整個選戰，包含最後的投票，都沒有參加。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "太陽花學運對你來講有沒有什麼意義？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們在「零時政府」這邊，我有給過一場演講，叫做「第零次向日葵數位體驗營」，意思是什麼呢？意思不是約好的，大家剛好湊到同一個地方，因為當時的立法委員們對於一個特定的議題罷工，他們不願意來討論特定的議題，所以我們對於那一個特定的議題，在現場非常多的人討論，而且從各種不同的角度來討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我當時負責的工作一開始非常簡單，就是幫忙提供網路連線，後來有更專業的線路組的朋友去做，我接下來的工作是試著在整個大會裡面討論的，以及在立法院四周討論的，這一些不同討論的地方，把它結合起來，結合起來的意思就是說，每一個人講的每一句話，我們盡可能留下錄影、逐字稿，逐字稿可能還翻譯，所以這樣的話，每天都會從上一天沒有討論完的共識開始繼續收攏，所以很少有佔領運動是越佔領，到最後大家意見越一致，很多佔領運動是佔領到後來，大家意見就分散掉了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以不管當時對於服務貿易協定有什麼想法，像因為「零時政府」的朋友們有一個專案，好比像「你被服貿了嗎」，你打入統編或公司名稱，就只把整個協議裡面跟你有關的那一段摘出來，甚至是用比較視覺化的方法，讓大家可以就事論事去討論，而不是就一些謠言或沒有根據的懶人包來討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家可以就事論事的討論，而且每一次討論都可以承續到下一次討論的前提下，我們就讓大家體驗了一次，你透過數位科技跟主持技術這兩個東西的結合，大家可以作更有效的討論；當然不敢說我們的討論比起立法院的品質優劣如何，因為畢竟立法院是這一些人，但是當時是五十萬人在討論同一個題目，這個不能相比——我們也不能每一個議題都動員五十萬人來討論——但是至少這個東西所需要的資通訊、主持及轉譯的這些技術，等於在當時非常完整整合試驗了一次。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "如果有人問你是太陽花學運一份子，你承認嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "太陽花當時的學生運動，不只是「黑色島國青年陣線」，我們同樣的技術也有支持好比像「白色正義聯盟」，當你說學運份子的時候，並不表示對服務貿易協定有一個特定的立場，當時有非常多人在運動，所以毋寧我是支援這一些運動者們，不只是我，而是上百個「零時政府」的朋友們，我們維持一個網路的中立性。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "另外，還有一個爭議性敏感的議題：您曾經不眠不休，有人寫四十八個小時、有人寫七十二個小時，後來你昏睡過去，就是課綱審議的逐字稿，您是花了很多功夫在逐字、逐句轉譯或投入，可不可以談一下這一個經驗？柯文哲是一個白色力量崛起，現在回顧太陽花學運或者我們講到課綱審議的這個部分，其實某個程度都有相當敏感性，你覺得嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我是覺得還好耶！我連續不眠不休是創業的時候，所以那個是兩段不同的東西，不要混在一起。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我連續幫忙課發會記錄的時候，確實一開始是記了兩個整天，但是加起來可能最多是兩個十小時吧！最多是二十小時吧！但是也不是不眠不休，中間也是有休息的，所以當時為什麼在幫課發會——而不是課審會——在幫課發會紀錄的原因是，當時正在討論107課綱，也就是2018的課綱，這一個課綱其實跟本來正在爭議的那一個程序很奇怪的課綱是不相干的、是一前一後。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當時因為整個國家教育研究院的公信力已經掉到了最低點，所以基本上國家教育研究院講什麼都沒有人相信，在這種情況下，我們這些想要推動好比自發、自主學習、跨域學習，明明107課綱是非常進步，把這一些東西都已經考慮進去，我覺得比起99課綱好很多的設計，而且更能夠呼應時代的需求，但當時因為99課綱又被微調，所以導致整個過程喪失了我們叫做「可責性」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個意思就是說，國教院說：「即使我們請到多少專家學者，在外面的朋友們是不相信的。」，因此在這樣的前提底下，我願意把裡面發生的每一件事情、講的每一個字試著打下來，而且即時公布出來，在十天之後各方的人，不管是要抗議或者是參加討論都可以看得到，這樣就重建一個正當性，讓我們知道現在在討論的，跟之前那一個已經完全沒有正當性的程序是不一樣的，我們是用正當程序在做課程發展。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "您可不可以建構您一天的生活，或者是一週的生活樣態？可能在您的忙碌生活當中，你還是留白了相當時間給你自己，而且好像有一段時間希望有精神或心靈對話的空間存在。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實每一天都不一樣，因為禮拜一、二、四在院裡面，在院裡面要配合院會、政務會議及其他的協調會議，但是禮拜三、禮拜五是遠距上班的，所以就有可能去不同別的機關或者找一家咖啡廳的情況下工作，所以其實每一天的狀況都完全不一樣，很難有一個typical day，但是每天至少都會睡到八個小時（笑），我想這個還滿重要的。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "你自己屬於對話或是心靈層面的時間，這個故事很冗長，就是說你之前有閉關的經驗，我後來看到報導說，你一個禮拜留多少時數給自己，你需要一個人獨處，現在有這樣的模式嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你講的是精神分析。我之前精神分析的工作是跟一個法國的分析師做的，每個星期四天，每次四十至五十分鐘。但是這一個工作其實我入閣之後就停了，因為我入閣之後試著延續了一陣子，就是完全還是用遠傳、遠端及視訊的方法，但是我們約好每半年以內還是要到法國住一陣子，然後跟他面對面工作，回來再用遠端的方式繼續，我本來以為是可以繼續的，可是後來發現我沒有辦法因為私人事務出國這一件事，即使是自費公假或自費事假，這一件事都非常困難，其實不管到哪裡就是一個外交工作，我不管到哪裡，就是對方的大使或者是當地的代表或者是當地的部長們等等必須變成公務，所以在這樣的情況下，其實我很難延續面對面精神分析的工作，因此在這個前提之下是停掉了。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "曾經有媒體採訪唐鳳，後來寫了一段話，就是說好像有永遠採訪不完的感覺（笑），我現在有這一個感覺，好像永遠覺得時間不夠，我們先休息一下，馬上回來。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "歡迎您回到《POP搶先爆》的節目現場，我們現場專訪的是政務委員唐鳳。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "唐鳳，剛剛一直提到遠距上班，我們其實過去當記者的時候，跑過行政院，雖然沒有進過政務委員的辦公室，但是我沒有辦法接受，我到現在為止觀念上還是沒有辦法就是說，當有一個政務委員說兩天可以不用來上班，我們所謂的「上班」是到辦公室來，是用所謂的遠距，其他人或許沒有這樣做，或許有這個想法而沒有落實，至少就你一個個案，對其他人怎麼交代，我們會有這樣的質疑。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我的同事們都沒有在打卡，政務委員打卡是沒有效果的。其實很多我的同事們，他們也是在各種不同的地方視察，好比像一些建設相關的東西，也是每天要坐高鐵，所以其實政務委員本來不一定要在行政院，除了禮拜一跟禮拜四早上開會之外。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我的做法比較特別，我固定把開會在院裡的時間排在一個禮拜固定的三天，也就是一、二、四，三跟五我說專門往外跑，但是事實上如果去看我其他同事們行程的話，可能每一天有半天在院裡面，另外半天就去視察了，其實我唯一的差別只是把那個時間固定下來，這樣大家約我工作的時候以及約我開會的時候比較好排，去算我在院裡的時間跟不在院裡的時間其實沒有差那麼多。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是我規則化之後有一些好處：" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第一，之前人事行政局的那個函終於有人在政務委員層級用了，別的想要用類似方式的人就可以說：「這個函是有人在用，不是沒有人在用的。」可以作一個示範。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個我覺得很大的好處是，因為我固定，好比五、六、日都不在院裡面，但是我其實都會在線上一個Sandstorm的協作平台都會跟朋友們一起協作，這其實就是讓整個辦公室無紙化，你可以注意到我的辦公桌上完全沒有紙，並不是公文書紅色封面的或別的封面東西堆積如山，然後還要一個個簽，我只透過遠端辦公的這一些時間裡面，大家會學到你要得到我即時的回應，你就真的只能用電子系統，這樣子的話，慢慢大家就發現電子系統即使只是寫email，我兩分鐘就回，大家會慢慢發現紙是比較沒有效率的，但我如果每天都來辦公室跟簽紙本公文，大家會覺得用紙比較方便跟習慣，所以其實從某個角度來看也是慢慢改變大家的習慣。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "你有擴及早就政府文化的一些公務部門改變嗎？有人更瘋嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有的。其實我們架設這一些不同的系統，同樣也是開放源碼，意思就是你不用付授權費，所以其實很多現在公務的朋友——尤其是年輕一輩——會用一些外面的服務，好比像Dropbox、Google Drive、Google Docs、LINE、Facebook，這一些東西都不是設計給公務用的，而且比較糟糕的事情是，如果用自己在外面申請的帳號，而你調職了，其實下一個承辦是沒有辦法接替你的帳戶來使用的，所以也會造成任務無法交接的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們現在在行政院政府內部的「政府雲」裡面，自己架了相當於Slack、Trello、LINE、Google Drive的相同服務，你還是不用學習，但是直接可以用這一些院裡面的服務，用你的公務帳號跟朋友們協作，目前已經有上百位公務員在用這個平台了。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "辦公室您剛剛有提到辦公室是無紙的辦公室，可是我發現有一面玻璃牆上面有用了非常久的黃色便利貼紙，可不可以跟我們講那一面牆是幹麻的？而且我看媒體的報導說，你們在辦公室是沒有分高層跟屬下的，沒有這樣階級的分別？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，大家都知道我是「安那其」，講穿了我不命令別人，同樣的，我也不接受別人的命令，所以在這樣的前提底下，每一次開會的時候，我們每週一有一個工作會議，我們決定這一個禮拜的roadmap，真的就是一張圖，你剛剛走進來有看到，就是畫在牆上的一張路程圖，您會看到這個禮拜大家想做的事就畫到圖裡，自己覺得適合做的人就拿去做，這整個文化是「零時政府」裡面所說的挖坑、推坑跟跳坑的文化，因為這樣的關係，如果一個人覺得他比我更適合的做，其實他就會去做了，也不用我主動要求他；反過來講，如果這一些事都沒有人做，到最後就是我做，所以其實這一件事就是滿有意思的。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "我們慢慢在蒐集你的簡報，在2016年12月2日的時候，蘋果日報曾經報導你們的辦公室曾經有人發文，要徵求鄉民公務員，當PTT的公職版貼文一貼出來之後，還是有一些鄉民不買帳，他們甚至有一些批評說：「你們開放政府有用嗎？想硬幹還不是照樣硬幹。」，而且還註記說明說：「你們徵的才也不過是備用。」，比如說政府高層問到是不是有哪一個人才，因此才推薦，這樣的模式你是不是覺得……其實網友批評有一點道理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "他們當時批評主要兩個：一個是說覺得這一件事如果有事務官報名的話，事實上政務官是不會去使用的，等於就是玩好玩的。但是事實上確實有滿大的部會次長說希望用PTT的鄉民來當開放政府的聯絡人，所以那一位就真的進來了，所以這一件事是發生了。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "所以還是徵得到人？推薦上去了？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！現在就是這一個部會的開放政府聯絡人，我的意思是說它是有用的。另外一個質疑是，我們現在講開放政府其實人民是不相信的，為什麼不相信？因為政府太多自己沒有問過大家意見就作決策。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "那唐鳳你可能要先介紹什麼是「開放政府」？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "理解。「開放政府」的意思其實非常簡單，我們說「開放政府」有四個支柱：" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一個是「透明」：透明的意思是政府正在做哪一些決定，政府做這一決定的基礎、數據等等，都必須要用大家能夠存取，也就是說能夠自己下載下來，甚至還可以自己做一些調查報導、改作這一種開放資料的方式，把它釋住，這個叫做「透明」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一個是「參與」：接下來當大家有一樣事實資料的時候，就可以問大家說有沒有比我們更好的意見，大家可以來討論，這個叫做「參與」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一個是「課責」：接下來討論出來，就像你剛剛講的還是有政務官要拍板，這個變成政策要下去執行了，蒐集大家很好的意見，這個執行中間不一定都是一帆風順，一定要滾動式的檢討、預算有沒有用在刀口上等等，這個部分叫做「課責」，也就是每一次政策執行的結果，你可以追溯這個東西哪裡來的，如果沒有做好，要有一個滾動檢討的機制。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一個是「涵容」：對我來講，最重要的是「多元」、「涵容」的精神，並不是只是用文字或者是用數字很厲害的人才能參加政策討論，我們要盡一切可能讓文字能力沒有那麼好的人，或者是沒有討論公共政策習慣的人，也能夠用他們所熟悉的方法來參加政策討論。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "我們節目第一個小時在這邊告一個段落，這個是我們節目自我接手以來，我們可能要跨另外一個小時了。第一個小時大家聽得意猶未盡，我們等一下廣告回來，第二個小時繼續專訪唐鳳，跟我們聊一聊其他我們想聽的內容，包括數位經濟、手上負責的Uber，她有沒有新的想法；還有其他唐鳳這一個人，她到底繼續怎麼樣走她的政治路，我們休息一下馬上回來。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "歡迎收聽「POP Radio」FM91.7《POP搶先爆》節目，我是節目主持人黃光芹。我們今天很榮幸邀請到政務委員唐鳳，第一小時的專訪我們顯得意猶未盡，接續這個小時，我們想要再請問政務委員，您簡略了介紹開放政府，事實上開放政府那是大架構，開放政府想要達到什麼樣的目的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實剛剛拿課綱的案子已經做了非常好的說明。就是說當一個政府的某一個功能受到大家非常質疑的時候，「開放政府」是重建「課責」程度的一個最好的方法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "簡單來講，就是說政府要人民信任之前，必須先信任人民，如果政府都不信任人民能夠參與的話，其實人民並沒有什麼原因要信任政府。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以以課發會這一個案子當作例子的話，我們要自己先做到完整的紀錄、完整的課責，甚至要做到極端透明，每一個人講的每一句話都完整記錄下來，是建立在這一個立場上，我們讓已經失去掉的信任重新慢慢一點一滴正回來，這個東西是非常重要的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然它也不是防弊而已，而又興利的作用。興利的作用是什麼呢？好比同樣是做報導的朋友們，如果你現在只有兩個小時的時間、三個小時的時間，晚報就要發了或者是做即時等等，我們如果政府提供內容的時候，不是只給新聞稿，而是給一個完整的政策履歷，這一件事是什麼時候開會、什麼時候做出來的，相關的資料都附上，這樣其實就可以在很短的時間內做出比較像是調查報導的工作，並不是只能捕風捉影加上幾個人講的幾句話然後就湊成一篇文章；也就是說，不加深媒體朋友工作的負擔底下，我們希望能夠往更事實性、更接近決策的那一個當下去發展。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以我覺得這一個跟公民社會——特別是做調查報導的朋友們——能夠進一步合作的關鍵，也就是不要等到爆炸了、不要等到大家互信消失了，而是我們在日常生活中，每一個法案、每一個法規，現在就是要修改了，我們告訴大家說：六十天之前就到同一個網站（join.gov.tw），從今年1月1日所有的部會、所有的法規，以及牽涉到所有牽涉到貿易的法律修正案，所有的東西都會公布在同一個網站上，大家公開討論六十天，大家習慣之後、知道這一件事存在之後，慢慢就會知道政策是有參與的空間，不像以前只有七天、十四天就過去了，大家就只能到街上去討論。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "有沒有可能有疊床架屋的情形？比如有人說國發會就有一個「電子治理中心」，其他部會，可能像外交部也搞不清楚，需要協助，內政部有內政部的做法，在整合上，你們有儘量避免疊床架屋的可能性嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實。我剛剛提到「開放政府」政策的平台（join.gov.tw），其實就是國發會資管處在「電子治理研究中心」的老師們協助底下做出來的。這一件事其實我覺得滿重要的，因為以前是每一個部會參差不齊，有的比較願意公眾討論、有的稍微比較黑箱一點。我入閣之前，秘書長已經有發了一個函說，其實所有的部會現在每一個法規要調適的時候，就是要六十天以前要提請公眾討論，這個沒得商量，所以這一件事，我覺得比起以前不一樣的，大家不要覺得這一個承辦想要交付公眾討論，還要擔一些政治責任、還要說服他的長官，其實無分大小，所有的案子就是要交付公眾討論。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "推動的項目當中有一個是「數位經濟」，什麼是數位經濟？又想要達到什麼供銷？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實這個是縮略語，整個方案是「數位國家‧創新經濟推動方案」。「數位國家」的意思是我們讓我們的治理架構，是建立在區域，好比像六都及六都聯合附近的縣市，我們說他們才是真正回應到人民需求的（縣市），但是做規劃的——中央及各部——常常會做一些雲這一些東西，其實能夠照顧到某些在那一個縣市可能還沒有建置到這個東西的人的需求，可是一些都，特別現在開始有資訊局跟資訊治理局一些大城市，他們會想要衝到更前面。但是問題是地方跟中央沒有一個很好的整合機制，地方某一件事做得好，中央就把政策的這個規劃的東西跟地方一起協作，然後把地方做得好的東西去散播到其他不同的區域去，這一個概念其實在之前沒有帶進來的，所謂「數位國家」的部分，我也會幫忙看。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「創新經濟」的部分是，我們建立在這樣一個比較好的網路社會，以及公民社會在網路上發展的環境上時，我們就可以有非常多的加值應用跟服務冒出來；也就是說，我們會把它看成是公共建設，以前我們說高鐵、大馬路或高速公路開到你家，現在包含不管是無限寬頻或是有線寬頻，這應該都是基本人權，但是實際架上去之後到底要如何運用，那就是要交給私部門的朋友們去想各種各樣的方式去想各種各樣的創新服務，政府在這裡不再是引導大家往什麼方向走的這一個角色，而是作為一個肥沃的土壤，然後去看私部門的朋友想要怎麼使用，我們再用敏捷式的治理方法去調整。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "你有負責Uber的政策或解決爭議的部分嗎？你有什麼對策？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我在目前這個內閣沒有負責這件事。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "我們看到唐鳳是8月發布新職的，跨個年，已經快要半年了，在這個過程當中，你有沒有經常有挫折感覺？我想請教唐鳳，您在政府部門待多久？您的deadline是什麼時候？我們會不會哪一天在報紙上或者在網路上發現說唐鳳不想做了，不想在政府任職了，而是轉到另外一個新的領域去？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我相信是這樣子的，我做「開放政府」相關的工作，其實相當多年了，我們把開放文化跟自由軟體算進來的話，其實已經做接近二十年了，所以不管是不是在政府部門掛一個「數位政委」的頭銜，其實我完全都是做一樣的事情，在這一個前提底下，我目前還滿適應的，其實進來實際上只有三個多月，在這三個多月裡面，我覺得就是因為我在發布跟實際進來10月1日，中間有一個多月的時間，這一個多月的時間，我人其實是在巴黎跟紐西蘭，我跟各界做類似工作的朋友交換意見以外，我也跟整個公民社會及新聞界透過公開共筆的方法，去把我到底要做什麼跟整個社會定義出來。我也很感謝林全院長，我在iPad畫一張圖說這個是我一向以來在做的事情，他非常明快說：「好，你就繼續做這一事。」，所以在這樣的前提底下，其實我雖然看起來換了位置，（但是）完全沒有換腦袋。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "ok，今天非常感謝政務委員唐鳳接受「POP Radio」《POP搶先爆》節目的專訪，我們是超時工作（笑），也超時提出我們的問題，唐鳳也超時受訪，希望以後還有機會能夠就其他不同的面向來採訪唐鳳。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "黃光芹", "speech": "今天專訪唐鳳就告一段落，接下來馬上回到節目現場。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "各位同學（笑），各位看起來好年輕喔！我們今天很緊張，我們原本是穿牛仔褲在外面換掉的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是這樣嗎？" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "（笑） 真的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為要來行政院嗎？" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "沒有啊！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們這邊完全是open space。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "真的喔？那我們下次把它當maker space。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "真的。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "那我們道具拿出來（笑），我們沒有帶飛機這一些，飛機有沒有帶（問同仁）？" }, { "speaker": "張育真", "speech": "飛機沒有帶。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "飛機應該要帶的，看要不要請他們送飛機來。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "大家好我是Jackey，我是Tickle這邊主要負責的創辦同仁，這邊是我們的夥伴，右邊是我們的夥伴，棨元、育真跟張玲（音譯），輕鬆一點好了，只是我習慣站起來講話。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有問題。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "我們大部分的團隊都是臺灣同仁，可是我們自己在國外有讀書、工作，在美國的時候開始了這一個專案，因為我們其實主要的另外一個創辦人是現在台大資工系的教授，當初在國外念書的時候，就有創業文化、創業精神，所以在那邊工作了一段時間，我都稱我的夥伴為「老師」。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "老師覺得臺灣的科技跟國外有一個斷層，那時候我們在五年前回來臺灣的時候，跟一些政府同仁或者是民間單位去討論，甚至於AR技術，我們那時在美國做的是幫臺灣做觀光App，我印象很深刻的是，他們問我們說：「這個可以在Nokia phone上使用嗎？」，現在聽起來大家會覺得怎麼會有人問這個問題，但那時真的沒有人去接觸，甚至是去拓展智慧型手機、App的發展，所以老師跟我們決定他要回臺灣從教育開始做起，就回到台大。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "開了全臺灣第一個做App開發的課程，當時全部爆滿，所有的學生也都在各個地方變成臺灣能夠發展App產業菁英的分子。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "在這一個教育的過程中發現除了這麼大朋友、同學需要做這一個computer science的這些發展跟App開發之外，現在很多跨領域的同學是要做business class或工業設計課程的同學，他們都需要做一些實體的東西，或者是實際做一個產品來demo，可能講一下他們的服務或產品內容。但如果要接觸到computer science的話，門檻就太高了，所以老師開始找一些是不是有一些可以讓大家使用的平台。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "當然國外有一些MIT學校發展一個叫做「Scratch」——在座有些同學可能有聽說過——Google也有做一個叫做「Blockly」，這些都是視覺化的語言，我們想說是Java、C＃（音譯），可是它們長得有一點像，但其實都不一樣。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "我們後來研究這麼多的平台之後，發現這一些過去大概快十五年前發展的東西，所以有一些科技上發展的瓶頸，即使如此大家都還在用，因為是Open Source，那些老師們也很熱心在全世界promote。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "我們公司也很幸運有一個小小的經營團隊，能夠在技術上作突破與開發，所以想要自己來開發一個跟未來接軌的，雖然看起來是圖像化的語言，但是未來小朋友是在平板上、iPhone、iPad上，或者看到所有的東西都覺得是無限連結，可以用手機操控這個燈之類的，但現在這一些東西都沒有銜接的管道，讓他們知道我的未來世界應該是這樣子，他們生活的世界是這樣子，如何能夠有這樣的技術從教育開始作一個銜接的橋梁是沒有的，因此我們就開發了這一個平台——這是全世界唯一可以操作這麼多不同廠商的硬體mobile device，從虛擬化到實體法，像我們看到我們家的傢伙們（笑），不是我們出的，全部都是不同全世界上的廠商所出的硬體，包括看到的控制板，大家有聽過Arduino這個新系統，或者是control的processor，其實就是玩具裡面的東西，就是一個控制板，除玩具控制板之外，甚至像智慧家庭的燈或冷氣或電視，這些都是我們所謂IoT的硬體。這一些硬體原本可能只是玩具，沒有教育性質的，可是我們結合起來，小朋友或者是大人可以「玩中學，學中玩」。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "我們開始做這一個專案的概念跟想法，我們實際上看一下，我們主要在美國跟歐洲推行這一個東西，英國把這變成是公訂的，很多國家也把程式教育變成公立學校了，我們沒有預估到亞洲這些國家會這麼快一起推行，在去年的時候，可能有這麼多新立的新生代進來政府的單位一起推動，看到國外這麼重視程式教育，所以去年臺灣也決定在明年開始要變成公訂的課程。我們今天其實原本是要來請益的，我們想要貢獻一些在臺灣教育上，可是據我們瞭解，臺灣的環境需要一個比較明確的guideline——我們等一下可以看一下國外的老師們做的事情——據我們瞭解現在臺灣都沒有，也不知道怎麼辦，我們想說還有什麼我們可以做的。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "我們其實也有中文版本，還是大家看英文的coding也ok？" }, { "speaker": "張育真", "speech": "他們一定ok。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "都ok，我們剛剛有跟一些從事教育單位的前輩們，他們說最大瓶頸是英文這是小朋友跟老師看到就會怕（的部分），其實我們已經有做到中文介面了，所以如果只要讀中文字，能夠讀得懂，然後有一些基礎的數學能力——甚至沒有也沒有關係——就可以直接開始從玩中學習邏輯思考跟解決問題的能力，這個就是真正最終目的，即訓練邏輯思考能力之後，有可能可以實作這樣的軟、硬體。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "我們看到的是，我們做了一個demo的App，如果小朋友沒有這一些傢伙或硬體的話，你可以實際上做一個這樣的App，自己可以創造一個在App store top 10的玩具，可以給你的同學玩及分享給你的朋友，所以真的可以做一個虛擬完整的東西。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "上面我們看到的就是所謂的object oriented的程式語言，所以每一個物體作為邏輯上的code，每一個code就是左、右邊像堆疊積木的概念，如果要把它看到很恐怖的……黑白的（code），其實現在已經不是黑白了，像這一些都會分顏色，所以不是古時候說黑白code，如果要看到背後的思維邏輯其實也可以進階看到code，但是這對一般人來講是很恐怖的語言，像外星語，好比多打了一個，有一些code是大小寫也會區隔，或者是少一個中括弧或是括弧打錯，就要抓蟲（debug），這樣就會造成大家在學習過程中比較大的門檻。所以，我們把難的地方處理了，現在所有的人，不管是小朋友或者是誰，都可以用最簡單圖形化的語言去更改。但這完全是說你的參數可以改變，請你們（同仁）幫我們示範；（示範畫面如投影畫面），好比走的速度跟跑的高度全部一模一樣，可以做這麼完整的東西，小朋友可能拉一拉就開始看，一開始就是按play，因此就克服了害怕。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "我們跳出來（跳出頁面，回首頁），我們來看真正應用到硬體的部分。我們現在實作一個，其實最常做的是……大家認識他嗎？" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "啊？不認識它？星際大戰，你們都沒有時間看電影嗎？BB-8啊！" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那部我有看……" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "其實在開始的時候，國外的廠商是做硬體的，純粹做這一顆球，沒有這個頭跟包裝的時候，其實也不知道做什麼，所以宣傳短片裡面就是只是一顆給狗狗追的機械球，防水、防耐咬之類的，但是想不出運動方式，在還沒有變成BB-8之前，其實就是教材的一部分。很多老師們就變成教具，所以其實從一個純粹是教材變成硬體的教具，所以我們看一下國外老師在做事。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "（播放影片）這是日本的小朋友，他們做一個實體上的迷宮，要讓小朋友控制這一個球，白色的是它的前身，而沒有外形、BB-8的球，怎麼樣讓小孩讓球通過橋，而橋有斜度，所以要調整斜度，太快會衝出去。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "國外最重視的課是STEAM，是每一個科目的縮寫，再早期一點是只有STEM，也就是科學、數學，後來加了A是因為有art進來，（如畫面所示）我們可以看到這顆球，老師就放到油漆桶裡面，讓小朋友去畫成一個圖畫，像畫成一個幾何圖形的作品，像我們有看到他們做一個近看是亂七八糟的圖，遠遠看是love mouth，很多他們非常棒的東西是，當給了這一個平台為工具的時候，他們可以創造出來。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "（投放影片）這是真的一個小朋友自己所做的很令人驚訝的（作品），全部都是他自己做的，像後面那一個摩天輪是利用我們用lego做的機械軸，其實他就把車藏在盒子裡面，他program這個東西，自己做了一個遊樂園，就是利用平台上所提供的一些工具、硬體，今天沒有帶來，我們有小飛機，每個人每次看到都覺得很瘋狂，其實後來發現都是爸爸想要買，跟媽媽講說要用這一個來教小朋友寫程式（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "我們等一下做實體示範，還是現場有人願意來跟我們一起參與嗎？三分鐘學程式，有嗎？" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "這樣就冷場了，不是嗎？我們只好就考政委嗎？政委應該沒有問題的（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "像iPad本身具有非常多的sensors，所以其實它也是載具，我們就用水平軸的感應來控制這個球作前進、後退，我越講越多表示要拉一些code來控制這一個球（笑），這些所有的硬體都是不同廠商去製作的，臺灣有很多硬體廠商跟玩具廠商，如果他們將來要變成其中一環的話，其實也可以放在這裡面作應用，因為大家也不知道這個玩具有什麼玩法，但是當你給了這個之後，這是N×N，大家可以無限發揮，可以用這個當作out－put的硬體載具，它是受控，像我們有小朋友是把它當作搖桿，像我們看到鯨魚或是動畫去控制，就跟任天堂的遊戲一樣，任天堂的Wii好比用搖桿去操縱螢幕上的東西，這就是未來的世界。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "現在這一個世代是每一個人都可以寫程式、寫App，未來小朋友可以寫到智慧家庭的系統，或者是自己Wii的遊戲，或者是設計自己的智慧房間，有一些collection，不同的硬體、不同的玩具要自己創造這一個故事，我們有小朋友用這個寫一個動畫故事，把這些東西分享給別的老師、學生及全世界的人，我們剛剛有看到在國外其實大家已經很喜歡Tickle，我們希望讓臺灣的小朋友或者是臺灣的maker有另外一個新的選擇去接觸與學習，不用這麼害怕程式是很恐怖的東西。但是或許還是需要一些資源，我們可以怎麼樣協助讓臺灣的老師們、教育界的長官們、同仁們可能需要一些東西給他們一些example或guideline的時候，讓他們去瞭解他們需要什麼東西start with。" }, { "speaker": "游棨元", "speech": "我示範一下，我用一個最簡單的（現場一顆BB-8跑來跑去，掉到地下，而且BB-8頭掉了）。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "通常小朋友就瘋了（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "其實就這麼簡單，這個是你已經運用到很多的部分，原本是一步驟，後來我們帶入循環的概念，你要做這一件事一次，然後再轉彎一次是什麼，我們通常都會這樣循序漸進，讓他走方型或者是圓形，要走圓形要怎麼做、有什麼方式，如果一直重複的話，還有什麼可以寫更簡短的code，如果學過computer science的人就知道這是真正在學習的過程，先看別人的示範，然後再變一些參數之後，再開始理解原來是這樣output。（BB-8撞到杯子）拜託！這個（杯子）我們可能賠不起，因為上面印「行政院」（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "我們在上面寫程式的時候，就是要用一個指令「print」，就是這一個做出來的答案是不是對的，但現在看得到滾出來或者是走出來的形狀可以知道真正的結果是否對的，就可以一直調整，我們看到所有的學習過程都是一直在測試調整，然後就開始理解，做完之後其實就完成了一個作品，他們也學會這一個邏輯；當然，這個就是請教各位有沒有什麼建議或想法，或者大家可以試著玩玩看，如果今天有玩的話，我們今天會免費送一張貼紙（笑），玩一百次之後，有機會可以抽小飛機，大家不要怕，我們希望看看大家的建議是什麼，這是我們今天最主要來拜會的目的，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "換我們要來開始有獎徵答嗎？有沒有人要來玩一下？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "除了我們的速錄師之外，每一位都是寫程式的（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "那我只好請速錄……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "Wendy要玩嗎？" }, { "speaker": "薛雅婷", "speech": "那就麻煩你幫我速錄（請右邊的人）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "現在有錄影，可以補打（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "蔡仲明", "speech": "現在只有iOS版嗎？" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "國外是因為1:1 iPad 的教學方式，一個學生在課堂上會被配到一台iPad平板進行學習。" }, { "speaker": "蔡仲明", "speech": "哪一國？" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "美國。英國其實也是，新加坡也是。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "那時我們為了推這個，就先用iOS的，但是他們還有一些小孩子的private issue這一些，那時是這樣子；但如果要擴到別的話，其實我們也可以有能力幫忙執行。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "去年年底之前還不行，因為Swift for Android那時候還沒有那麼成熟，你們既然是用Swift 3的話，要嘛就是你們換到Kotlin，不然就是用去年12月的那個版本。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "不然就是請大家幫忙我們（笑），不是在座都是工程師嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你們要把Android版Open Source出來嗎？我們可以改，我們做的都是Open Source。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "對啊！" }, { "speaker": "蔡仲明", "speech": "怎麼賣硬體？如果要Open Source的話。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "硬體這些是硬體廠商，一樣賣這一個硬體。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你們的商業模式是？" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "怎麼大家都在問這一個問題？" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "其實我們現在就是協助硬體廠商在賣這一些硬體的時候，本來是沒有加值的，它沒有教育的意義，我們就是幫他做教育，他們想要賣的是家長跟小朋友，所以我們等於是協助這一些硬體廠商，變成一個有意義的玩具，在這一個平台，可能直接跟消費者講說這是一個新出來的玩具可以銷售。我們希望做的事情是大家都有利益，軟體、硬體業與真正的使用者都在這樣的生態圈裡面受惠。好，下一個問題（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果是這個定位，你們是類似平台或者是管道，然後在平台上盡可能讓多一點的硬體廠商加盟的話，這一套編輯器本身有什麼想法嗎？因為要維護這個其實是非常花力氣的，你們真的不考慮跟Scratch一樣開放出來嗎？" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "開放……如果我們有政府的協助的話，也可以啊！我們就變成臺灣的MIT啊！對不對（笑）？" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "我們其實在目前來講的話，會因為不同的原因而有不同的開放形式，說實在話，如果是在大陸那邊的話，是完全不開放的形式，他們會有一些可能代理的人去作控管，對他們來講這是一個全部的解決方式；在國外的話，這個開放已經可以免費使用了，這一個開放的形式也是我們很願意做的。如果是要跟各位開放的話，你們幫我們開發Android的話，我們就開放，也是很ok的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "真的嗎？說真的喔（笑）！" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "如果是這樣的話，這個就要講到趕上時事，因為其實我們整個團隊都是臺灣人，我自己從國外回來的時候，有人問：「你們為什麼會想要回來？」，說真的，是想要幫臺灣能夠做一些事情，我們只能盡我們這邊的心力，但我們也希望把臺灣聰明的人集合起來，能夠做一些世界上認同的東西，我們等於花自己過去的積蓄，公司團隊的同仁很年輕，很好、也很棒，這就是臺灣的人才，大家都希望能夠做一些什麼事，讓不是只有臺灣的人看到，而是讓世界的人看到。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "我們自己有一點害怕是，臺灣不管是教育界或科技界等，對於這樣的系統或接受度，甚至要永續的話，這一個東西如果是Open Source，要如何永續？不是維護的部分，而要如何執行，這個是我們在臺灣面臨到的一個挑戰，；國外的話，可能是很容易接受這是服務、產品，如果有銷售的話，都是合理的。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "我們也是想要來請益說，如果今天還是想要繼續回饋跟幫助臺灣，甚至致力在教材或者是教具，但也希望一個永續發展的公司，就像剛剛提到臺灣團隊發揚光大的時候，是一個永續發展的公司，我們如何取這一個平衡跟如何做更好。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "如果大家（指在場工程師）願意作志工的話，我們也是非常開心（笑），因為我們現在真的是靠自己，我們這一群團隊的朋友真的是靠自己，但如果完全Open Source的話，我們就要考慮到後續的發展，也就是大家志工的熱情能夠維持多少，能夠做到多好。" }, { "speaker": "蔡仲明", "speech": "我想問一下，那一台是iPad pro，是12吋，可是一般的iPad或者是iPad mini的話……" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "……都可以，現在都可以下載。" }, { "speaker": "蔡仲明", "speech": "因為螢幕size小，看起來都是字。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "我們有做客製化，所以iPhone版本跟iPad的版本還不一樣。" }, { "speaker": "蔡仲明", "speech": "因為指令很多，像我用類似編輯器的時候，我通常會覺得很煩，找我要的東西，小孩子不會很抗拒說要做的事情要找半天嗎？" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "我們有一些影片，小朋友做真的還好，他們真的很快。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "因為大部分的指令其實很多是習慣，像我們有分類，像有顏色，這邊找到分類，我們甚至有客製化跟硬體的配合，像這個一定沒有飛，飛機有飛跟翻轉，所以跟著硬體做某一些指令上，可能在motion上會客製化，但是其他好比像這一種固定的event就是操作內容。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "剛剛有提到不同介面大小，我們也有作調整，因為iPhone的普遍率還是比iPad更多一點，因為美國青少年很多都幾乎有iPhone，他們就可以帶回家去，這個是iPhone的版本，一定會跟界面調整且不同。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "我們甚至也有幫助弱勢的小朋友，我們也有語音的部分，所以我們在App store，美國有選我們，我們有特別為了視障的小朋友作輔助部分，他們非常欣賞我們，甚至找了一些專門做視障教育的專家去作推薦，然後就說我們真的很用心在這個所有的設計上。我們的創辦人，老師就是讀UX設計的專家，所以在這方面我們是花了非常多的心力。" }, { "speaker": "蔡仲明", "speech": "可以看一下events嗎？" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "最常用的是，我們現在可以控制很多不同的硬體，好比五至八個，這一些events就是可以互相區隔彼此發號司令的媒介。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "像我們剛剛的燈，因為有一個小朋友做的很酷，那時候還不是這一個BB-8，因為有撞擊的sensors，所以他媽媽一開門撞到那個球的時候，就把燈調成紅色且會閃，就當作是紅色警戒，小孩想的跟我們不一樣，但是這個就真的很酷，這就是智慧家庭的雛形，智慧家庭就是這樣子，進來之後有一些相關的東西被啟動起來或調整，所以真正落實了IoT跟智慧家庭的設計。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "請教在座各位都是Android的開發者嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "應該這樣講：有寫過Swift的人可以舉手嗎？" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "原來我們最需要網羅的志工就是……（唐鳳）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不得不說，臺灣寫Swift的人真的比較少，這個是真的。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "而且比較有門檻。可能不是Swift，後來又出一個，光是大家從微軟要跳到這一個的時候，接觸iOS的時候，一直都有新的。" }, { "speaker": "蔡仲明", "speech": "Objective－C有人寫過。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！Objective－C應該就有。" }, { "speaker": "周紹文", "speech": "Objective－C很難寫，那時候就覺得很難寫了。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "對啊！其實我們在做iOS開發的時候，那時其實考慮這一個載具真的做比較完整，所以像我們之前做的時候，所有的人都說你們可不可用windows的方式寫，因為所有的系統、醫院都是windows的，我們有考量到一些衍生性、維護性及真正使用者。像這個地方提供的資源，對使用者來講——不是開發者而已——這一個載具真的很幫助醫護人員。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我在蘋果六年，Swift開放源碼的時候我還在蘋果，我是去年10月到行政院，然後進來之後，也是一直在花積蓄（笑），所以這個狀況非常能夠理解。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "（笑）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "真的是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "蘋果當顧問那一陣子，其實Swift是蘋果第一個用我們叫做「開源治理模型」的大型專案，在此之前都是把別人做到一半的，好比像WebKit或FreeBSD這些東西，蘋果左手拿來、右手用，然後稍微跟開源合作一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "從頭自己研發出來、大型開源出來，Swift對蘋果來講是第一個嘗試——如果Steve Jobs還在的話，不一定那麼順利（笑）——是需要領導層的轉變。但是那一個過程我自己學很多，我不是在Swift team，我是在Siri team，但是Swift team處理的方式，對蘋果其他的team都是一個很大的啟發，我們不一定閉門造車，可以跟全世界一起開發。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "在入閣之前我是107課綱課程發展委員會的委員，Wendy其實有參與課發會後來大部分的大會紀錄，我們把七年級跟八年級開始帶進程式設計，而且在整個學齡中間也帶進去。誠如你說的，在此之前，因為這個並不是國民教育的一部分，所以教具、教材、教法，甚至培訓都是從頭開始，從我們寫下那一個領域的課綱到實際上路的2018年，其實大家有一點摸著石頭過河的狀況；我們至少能夠做的是，你們都來了、也有錄影了，至少（也有）逐字稿，我們辦公室至少可以給一定的能見度（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是因為我現在不督導教育部，所以我現在能夠做的比較具體的是在我們能夠幫忙的部分，說真的你們Android的部分——而不是iOS的部分——有開放出來的話，我當然可以找人幫忙貢獻，這是不會有問題的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "只是在臺灣寫Swift，又用iOS，這真的是比較大的門檻，只有都會地區可能很有錢的學校才比較有可能把這個當作他的教具，如果一般9吋Android平板都可以跑的話，突然之間，我想即使是偏鄉，他們都有相當多這樣子的教具可以用，你們也知道臺灣之前做了好幾波Android品牌（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "蔡仲明", "speech": "很多地方，A什麼的……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們就不講特定名字了（笑），剛好Swift是開放源碼的，所以技術上並沒有什麼說不能在Android上跑，只是需要有人讓它做出來，所以這個是可以討論的。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "我們想瞭解的是，接下來的教學方式是什麼？好比臺灣的老師們我們瞭解到是處於一個比較緊張的狀態，因為就快要上路，但也沒有任何的指導，也有推創新教育跟特殊教育，我們很願意像國外的這一種case就是一種創新教學，打破了所有科目的藩籬，然後整在一個空間跟時間內去做這一種各種不同的課程，像玩或遊戲的學習，我們也很希望能夠把這個帶回來臺灣——當然語言的翻譯是沒有問題，我可以協助——只是怎麼樣能夠正式幫所有的教育單位做一個……也許是研討會或者是什麼樣的方式？讓他們知道（可以從）哪裡開始，這也是我們希望能夠做的事情；我們是一個小小的團隊，真的是非常精簡。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "到底多小？" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "我們像Instagram一樣，少少的幾個人。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "ok。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "Instagram就是做出了這麼了不起的事，精簡的小團隊衝得很快，相信如果要做這一個大規模的推動，一定要跟政府或一些產業一起合作。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你們在臺灣多少人？" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "我們之前在美國，全部移回臺灣。因為全部都是臺灣來的人，再加上原本沒有想到這一邊的市場會這樣開始，或者應該是說這一個教育環境會ready for這一個新的研究，發現現在大家已經注意到這一個subject的時候，我們就想說回來這邊，原本我們做另外一個部分。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你們是在北部還是哪裡？" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "台大旁邊。" }, { "speaker": "蔡仲明", "speech": "台大教授是哪一位？方便嗎？" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "這樣講會不會不好（笑）……" }, { "speaker": "蔡仲明", "speech": "可以講嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不能講就說不能講。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "沒有不能講，因為他就是我們的顧問老師。這是另外一個我們可以跟臺灣反映的文化，臺灣不鼓勵教授去創業或輔導，但是在國外是非常歡迎的，因為他們可以把最新的東西、最好的東西給學生，變成長久經營的服務或產品，但臺灣比較不鼓勵，所以好講了會害怕，可是陳研（音譯）老師從回來臺灣的那一刻就是想要回饋臺灣，所以願意在美國放棄這一些國外的大公司工作與生活，就是想要把自己所學的這些矽谷文化或精神，把看到、學到的帶回來臺灣，我覺得沒有不能講，商業行為就是由我們公司的人來負責，他會當我們的顧問，一直想要把這一個東西當作大家喜歡的，像剛剛有提到要做到視障的學生，這是老師堅持的，這個題目也是老師希望我們公司能夠來做的，他覺得學校沒有辦法做足的部分，希望由產業來幫忙帶動；但是很辛苦的是，這一個產業並不是大公司，我們甚至沒有能力收很多的Android Pad出來，我們不是大公司，但是我們希望有一天可以變成像他們一樣厲害的大公司，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "了不起，辛苦了（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "這樣我真的會……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "……真的會哭嗎？那就哭一下（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你要面紙嗎（笑）？" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "像我最近去國外走一圈，感觸真的太多了，我覺得再不加緊一點，真的會有一點斷層、來不及。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "現在全世界都在變，經濟、文化或科技全部都在變，我們的腳步已經有在加緊，但還是有很多瓶頸，像前陣子我才去香港、新加坡，然後去歐洲及美國，新加坡要做事情就是從頭到尾都貫徹，因為其實民間即半政府機構，因為很多民間單位都是政府入股，經營模式從政府到民間可能都像一個公司在執行計畫，所以也動員得很快。我看到像荷蘭，後來知道跟我們的地是一模一樣大，甚至很多是他們自己造出來的地，他們的生活方式、工作型態，甚至是未來的發展，我相信政委看到非常多，也有很多感受，我們只能做到這麼一點點，我們的能力目前只有一點點，比較辛苦一點，如果大家願意志工的話（笑），又在招募志工……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我們的薪水也是各位的稅賦（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "如果大家一起推動的話，就真的還有一點希望，當然教育不是只有教新的科技還是什麼，我覺得原本的一些東西還是要維持；好，不要講那麼多（笑），我們主要是要來請益，還有什麼可以一起來推動會比較好，這部分再請各位指教。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我想這樣子講，臺灣的中、小學教育在maker這一塊一直有很大的社群，尤其是Arduino出來之後，其實非常蓬勃，你找各地的老師，像之前在這邊的蔡玉玲政務委員也有做過一個vMaker的計畫，就是去盤點全臺灣所有的maker社群，當然當時還是找3d掃描為主的，但是也已經包含了Arduino，或者是可以觸摸的這一種東西，所以其實社群是絕對有的，上vMaker網站或其他相關的平台都可以看得到所有在臺灣用Arduino教學的老師，是有名單的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我相信的是，目前正在用Arduino教學的老師，本來就有一套教材教法，你們不一定要幫他們設計教材教法，他們希望的是你們去解決一個最現實的問題，也就是Arduino內建的那個IDE開放環境在十二歲以上才比較容易用，可能七、八年級還不一定那麼熟悉，可能要到九年級以上，所以你等於把適用的年齡往下拉了三年以上，所以如果你們專注在解決這一個問題上的話，我覺得不需要花很多時間去幫老師做教材，已經有很多的教材在那邊。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實臺灣實際的限制——如同你看到的——其實大家都是在很少的資源裡面把教具做出來，所以會變成所有的教具加起來，都還沒有一台iPhone或iPad貴的這一件事，除非我們在重點地區為了107課綱，然後說就是要用iPad做教學，否則目前現場的老師，真的全部不是用Android或者是Windows，而且還不會是Windows 10的平板；因此，我覺得你們如果專注在你們做的這一塊，我覺得你們做的真的不遜於MIT或任何其他的，所以也不用急著擴張到不相干的領域去，這真的是非常有貢獻的，我能講的就是這樣。看大家有沒有想法或討論？" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "為了因應Windows或者是各個PC，如果是web版本的開發，如果有志工的話，我們也是……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "也可以啊！這邊有很多（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "有一些瓶頸，要跟硬體銜接，這邊是我們主要的技術已經作一些規劃跟開發了，是……我要直接job description，front end跟backend（笑）……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "front end跟backend這邊就是互相教學跟組隊配合，慢慢大家都變full stack（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "好，我們也非常歡迎實習的同學（笑），實習跟正職我們都非常歡迎，我們公司像大家庭，吃、喝、玩、樂，就像美國文化，我最近看商週說要設休息室，我們是到處都可以睡覺，要吃東西我們有廚房，同仁都會煮很好吃的東西互相給大家，所以歡迎到這邊實習（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "還有什麼（問同仁）？這邊同仁（右側）有沒有什麼想法問的嗎？" }, { "speaker": "林宗禧", "speech": "接硬體的部分有開放API之類的嗎？" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "應該實習的話會知道（笑），我們這部分還沒有開放給所有的人做Open Source，因為我們是要接別人的API，有一些甚至不是API，我們要幫他們做API的開發，但是我們就是做在這一個系統裡面，目前來講的話，不算是開放API。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "有沒有人要試用嗎？我們選這個的話，就是不用線接，像別的老師們，他們就需要用，因為我們是做基本上指令下去，馬上就會有反應，像我目前知道的，Arduino是每做完一次，就要燒到上面去接線，這就是當初選擇走無線的Arduino。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以是低耗電的藍牙4.0嗎？BLE？" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果都走Arduino＋BLE了，其實已經滿open了，能接Arduino就可以了，相對上來講。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "錄影是到……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你要講一些off record的話（笑）？" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "你們（問右側的同仁）不是有很多很期待要問的問題？（笑）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有什麼不能在錄影情況下問的？" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "沒有，沒有，開玩笑的（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "那，還有沒有什麼想要討論的？" }, { "speaker": "張育真", "speech": "政委您之前是在科技方面，所以給我們關於技術上的建議，如果我們還想要多瞭解有關於教育方面的話，有沒有辦法幫我們refer到一些？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "現在主要還是你們的策略，你們想要把它變成中、小學基本教材選項的某一個部分，這個部分有兩條策略，一個是你們從外面的，也就是我剛剛講這一些maker，包含自學、家長及教師共學的體制外，這在臺灣也非常蓬勃；但是體制內的話，就會變成要跟教育部談，教育部的話，一下子一定就會問一些很政治性的問題，這個可能要有心理準備。也就是說，如果要變成共同採購一部分的話，那就是共同採購的規則要走，所以你們的經營模型要先確定到一個程度，然後去談比較有可能真的變成教具的一部分，如果這個是你們想要做的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實有很多民間基金會會單點試，或者會跟特定的廠商，像我記得當時每個小孩一個筆記本的時候，其實臺灣也是有一些試點的，這樣的話，其實不一定是跟教育部談，而是可能跟這一些在做偏鄉關懷或是做這一些程式設計的朋友談；我有認識的，當然都可以推薦給你們。但是我還是覺得要先想說你們要專心來作硬體整合的部分，軟體的部分越開放越好，還是軟體的部分變成技術提供者，提供給越來越多硬體商，然後硬體商開放出來，或者兩個都不開放也可以，你們就是專門做consulting，可是從十二年國教的角度來看，可能沒有變成國教的一部分，這是你們自己要考慮的，這比較不是我一下子就可以建議的；但是我覺得這個完成度做得非常高，真的很棒（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "我不能反過來考試（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可以啊！你們接鍵盤的話（笑），接鍵盤寫Swift不是問題。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "好，我們還是會繼續詢問很多各個方面的朋友。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，我們保持email聯絡，我認識的一些開源社群朋友，我就再refer給你們，我覺得真的還滿完整的。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "謝謝，謝謝。我們更想要知道如果在臺灣體制內推動的話，不管是採購法或者是教育部的考量，如果大家有任何的想法跟意見，我們有很多可以配合執行，因為全面性的推動可能更有效率，而且真的能夠普及，我們也希望不管是偏鄉或者是小朋友都有這一個門檻，的確我們真的很需要developer，如果他們有PC或是上網的話，如果可以進階開始試用，到一些試點去用，可以操控更多的東西是我們的心願，謝謝大家。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "OK。" }, { "speaker": "王俞又", "speech": "謝謝大家。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "First of all, I just want to thank you for giving us the opportunity to interview you last time. I think we promoted the video. We actually got a lot of hits. I want to say we had over 500,000 reach and I think over 100,000 views. Best video that we ever had. Thank you. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "I wanted to meet you in person. Last time I think was Darice and Daniel who were handling the groundwork. I just wanted to meet you, of course I had some other friends of mine who have had the chance to meet you and said, \"You need to talk to her, because she’s awesome.\" Since I’m in Taiwan this week, I wanted to do that." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "I wanted to ask you a little bit more, I guess a couple of things. First, just how’s it been working in the government in general? What’s your experience been like? That’s the first thing." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "Second thing is more about... I know you’re a little bit involved with the Asia Silicon Valley project." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "I’m friends with David Wang, we’d known each other in the Silicon Valley. I saw him yesterday and told him I was going to see you today. I just wanted to ask you what is your role? How do you see the startup culture and trend happening in Taiwan? I know there’s a lot of buzz around it, but I’m still not exactly sure what is the health of where that’s going." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "Then the third thing is more about online media. I think a lot of what we have been doing is publishing articles on a website or a mobile app." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "I’ve always felt that’s basically taking a print newspaper from 300 years ago and putting it on somebody’s screen. I think we could do better. I just want to see what kind of ideas you might have. What is your imagination or vision about what news media could possibly be in the future. Those are my questions. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The general experience has been great. I’ve been more or less doing exactly the same thing for many years now. Since I’ve got a staff which is entirely voluntary, basically I don’t have a ministry to command, which is great because I don’t like issuing commands. Which is what an anarchist means. Right?" }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "Right. Or taking commands." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Or taking commands for that matter. I’ve been building a learning circle of sorts, where people of a very diverse background -- interaction designers, policy designers, code makers, and lawmakers get to learn with each other, and supporting what we call the participation officers of each ministry." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We are building a network of people‑facing officers. It’s just like how all the media communication people of all the ministries, though by \"media\" they just mean traditional media. There’s no similar group to face non‑specific people, both online and offline." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "At the moment it’s mostly online, because online we cannot really know who those people are. We still have to talk with them anyway." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "[laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s the main work. We’re just facilitating and doing a lot capacity building with all the ministries who can face the online world as well as non‑specific people, so they can run their own engagements, public hearings and whatever, in a much more efficient way. Also consuming less resource internally, by also asking for help on external experts and so on." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In a sense it’s like running a media studio. All the ministries need to be there in what we call self‑media. We can’t really count on any particular media [laughs] to serve as a proxy of the translational and the engagement work that the ministry really has their own duties to do." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The media of course is our ally. However, we can’t really delegate all the work to the media to communicate to non‑specific people. That’s the main work so far. As of the second question, the Asia Silicon Valley plan, aside from the name and the concept redefinition, I’m mostly involved with the virtual reality arm of it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "One of the deliverables is establishing a cross‑discipline cross‑university online learning platform, which is tailor-made for things that are tangible. That means we have plenty of Coursera, edX, and the Taiwan learning communities on two dimensional videos, and the interactions with chat rooms and whatever." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Those are good to learn just mathematics, psychics, things that are more verbal, more knowledge based. You can’t really learn fixing a motorcycle this way though. For that matter, repairing IoT devices also quires a more interactive kind of education. We really need to charter something that’s based on augmented and virtual reality." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "More hands on." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right. More hands on and much more interactive. You see the whole teacher, or at least their hands and heads." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Not just a bodiless voice narrating on the whiteboard. That’s my main research interest anyway. I’m interested in that part." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The other parts of Asia Silicon Valley are most around investment and regional development. Those are handled out by the ASV agency, which is a semi‑independent entity, not really a branch of government. I’m not directly involved with that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Whenever anyone wants to have some consultation around fintech, around regulation tech, around whatever, I’m mostly just this internal expert who can provide pro bono service. That’s pretty much my..." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "The in house go‑to person." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right. Exactly. I have my most research interest around agile governance and so on, and I do have connections of the external community, which is not at all national or region‑based. We’re just a bunch of cyberpunks [laughs] experimenting with everything." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I think that’s an asset too. I wouldn’t call, we code makers, natural policy makers. I think policy making still has its place. Lawmakers still have their place." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "My law degree still works to something." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly. Just carrying this, what you call, west coast law..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "West cost code into the east coast code. It’s very, very important to have this mutual dialog in this way, so it doesn’t get off track in the ASV project." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The third question, on the new media. During the transition time, like from the January election last year to May, we had an experiment that I contributed to, but not produced by me." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s called Talk to Taiwan (政問). It’s an interactive talk show of sorts. We really put into it a lot of imaginations, as you mentioned, of how the new media can be. Mostly it’s around the idea of an agenda of a media is to be co‑curated or co‑created by the audience." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We had a mission learning based public platform where people ask one specific person, like Minister Cheng (鄭麗君) what her thought about culture is. We crowd‑sourced the interview questions. Then we channeled them through a professional journalist and an anchorperson." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then tried to record in 360 at the beginning of the entire interaction. People don’t feel like they’re talking into this faceless camera, but into an ambiance. You can basically see that they gradually come to understand it." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "I’ve seen someone... Usually when we watch a program like that, the image that we see is us talking. Then we’re looking at it this way. As you said, we’re supposed to be looking at a faceless camera representing the audience." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly. We have an actual audience there. We had a 360 camera in the middle. If you tell a joke and nobody laughs, you actually feels that nobody laughs, because you can turn around." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s a psychological thing. It makes it possible for the person to talk with the anchor, but also with the whole audience, not with faceless people. The feeling that there is a gradual convergence in understanding. By middle of the show we also have online calls in in form of chat rooms." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We also have a curator who takes that and rephrases it into something that they can respond very timely, which is why it had to be a live show. Otherwise I would just watch a recording. Why would I watch a live show, if not for the possibility of influencing the production?" }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "Right. To be a participant of some sort..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right. Exactly." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "...in that process." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Both before and during the show are our main ways just to see it not as a \"content producer\", but as an engagement device. It’s to get a person, like Minister Cheng, to engage with thousands and hundreds of thousands of people." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "Within our media team, sometimes we have these slightly not so workable, or slightly not so realistic, just imagination meetings, where we ask questions like, \"Why isn’t...\" We think of media, we think of medium, like paper, analog waves, or digital transmission." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "Say a convenience store, why couldn’t that be a media of some sort? If we were to present the tenants of the news media to have an informed electorate, to have a civil dialog, can that happen in the medium of a convenience store?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Of course. The Portuguese people are planning to have their participatory budget plan voted through automatic teller machines. That’s a media right there. You see all the PB plans and they have a screen and a drawing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Which is great, because they have a lot of remote people who don’t have good Internet access. Everybody has an ATM card. They can authenticate their citizenship this way." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "Right. That is really cool, actually. I love magazines, but I also love retail shops. Actual brick and mortar. I’ve always been thinking about this idea. What does it mean to have a brick and mortar news shop? It’s not just you sell magazines, snacks, water, and whatnot." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "Something like that just fascinates me. I haven’t figured that out. That’s something that we think about sometimes." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There’s a lot of this community work around, I think, Tainan especially, but also Taichung and other cities where this brick and mortar shop, as you mentioned, just turns into a semi‑public sphere gathering place. Where they host maybe weekly or maybe daily discussions. They make sure that they broadcast this or at least video tape this." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They’re livestreamed so that people who don’t have any way to engage at least can watch it online and type in something, for it to participate into the next agenda of their regular meetings. I do think regular meetings are key. Otherwise a space doesn’t have its own character." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "Sort of to change tracks a little bit. What we do is a little bit more different from say you have a news media in Taiwan reporting about Taiwan issues to the Taiwan electorate. What we do is try to, in a sense, brand Taiwan to the rest of the world." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "I’m just curious if you have any thoughts on how that should or shouldn’t be done. What are some of the better ways or maybe not so great ways that we could do that?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Whatever that you think are fun is the best!" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It really depends on the character and the cognitive mode of the entire team. Taiwan is just this geographic island. Everybody can project whatever they want on it. I don’t really have a preference." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "My approach so far is just to engage people in this huge rich history of Taiwan, which spans for like four million years, if you count from the rising of this convergent boundary of the tectonic plates." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Really it is a useful view. Then you see that it’s something that’s larger than humanity, that there’s living beings here and there’s cultures here. There’s layers of populations, the beginning of the Austronesian population, and so on." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It is one pivotal stage on which the entire Pacific history is taught. I think it is a useful view, but I wouldn’t impose it on anybody else." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s a very geographic view, but it’s my perspective." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "Actually, that’s the first time I’ve heard thinking about it. Taiwan as a geographic feature. When you think about it in terms of Taiwan began when the geographic feature..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah. The tectonic plates started." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "...came into existence." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They are raising 5 centimeters every year." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "Instead of arguing which ethnicity, linguistic group, or which regime’s historical view of when they started..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah. Compared with four million years, these are very short times." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "Right. Exactly. We’re all just coming and going here. Coming back to the work in the government, I tried to ask this question last time too, I hear a lot of people complaining about all Taiwanese bureaucrats. The stereotype is they’re resistant to change." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah. They’re risk‑averse." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "They’re risk‑averse. I think you talked about re‑characterizing the risk for them. How has that been going? I imagine you run into push back on a regular basis." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No. We only work with volunteers. You never run into push back." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "By definition. People who are resistant, they never come to me anyway. I don’t even know them." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s true. I don’t run into push backs because I don’t give commands. That’s true so far for the past few months. Also defining risk, I think especially time-boxing. This 60 days. If you handle it well, well it’s gone in 60 days." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This provides a kind of psychological assurance to public servants in a sense that there is now a time frame, a mechanism. They don’t really have to fight politically to get a proper dialogue or something done in sufficient time. Now, the time is bounded. It’s 30 days to do this, 60 days to this. That provides a time frame which is a great assurance." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "My mental image is a downward ladder (下台階). They have steps where instead of jumping off the cliff, there are steps where they can gradually..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right. It’s much more gradual. It’s less like a waterfall or something." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "Also a lot of people ask me to definitely check in with you on how the Paris meeting...How did you feel about that? How did it go in Paris?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It went well. I got a lot of inquiries afterwards of the methodologies and the progress that we’re making. There’s a flurry of Parisian media. One just came an hour ago." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s definitely got a lot more visibility of the work we’re doing. Also for me personally, more importantly, it convinced a lot more people that this is possible. In many old democracies, things like this has been tried too many times." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "True." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sometimes you just lose hope because of too many previously failed attempts. But really, we are in a convergence of very high bandwidth, real time live streaming, and artificial intelligence that takes a lot of burden away for things like this. We’re now in a time point where you can realistically run this." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s just like virtual reality. It’s been around for decades. Now it’s the first time it’s affordable. This kind of convergent deliberative democracy was always available back to the Greek times, but it’s now finally cheap enough that we can run it as part of standard procedure." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "Even say 100 years ago, in the constitution here, there was the National Assembly, which was almost a technological workaround." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah. It’s like the electorate. Right?" }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "They’re supposed to be representing the people, because technologically they couldn’t go vote in a timely enough of a fashion. There was one question from the interview that we put in that we had to cut because of time, which is, \"If you were to design a new constitution for Taiwan, what kind of features would you put in it?\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There is actually a bill in the Parliament now that talks with this. It’s a bottom‑up constitutional reform law. As I’m not MP, I’m not supposed to talk about the specifics. I do agree with the spirit, in a sense that because it’s the covenant between all the people." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It should definitely take in the technological reality. We’re not in the time of telegraph anymore, so we need to take telecommunication into account. As of what features they would demand out of the constitution, I really have no preconceptions... I can live with anything. [laughs] Whatever people want..." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "As long as the process of it was..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "As long as it is transparent, and most importantly that it’s convergent. What we don’t need is a process that excludes more people out of the way, that more people feel disenchanted along the way, that more people feel that it’s just a few constitutional scholars or a few politicians doing all the process." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "A few lawyers." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "A few lawyers doing the whole process. Worse, a few programmers doing all the process." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It could happen with things like blockchain. You’re end up taking things that were in a law domain and putting into the code domain, which is even less accountable if you don’t put in safeguards into it." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "That makes sense." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Neither code makers nor law makers should monopolize the process. That’s the only thing I would ask for." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "Last thing. We’ve been talking about, at least on the liberal media side in the West, there’s this lamenting of the right rise of the ring wing nationalists. You’re talking about Brexit, Trump, Marie Le Pen, Turkey, and all this stuff." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "Intuitively that seems to run counter of the spirit of open government, transparency or maybe not. I don’t know. What do you think?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I wouldn’t say so. I would say it’s the same outrage that drives both these phenomenon and the Occupy Movement. I would say it’s both. All of them are manifestations of the 99 percent trying to get some more dialogs going." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s just that on the Internet, especially on social media, outrage spreads much faster than any other emotion. Any political movement that can capitalize on that gets an automatic..." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "Boost." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "...boost, or even a privilege in engaging people emotionally. What outrage does best is generating counter‑power. When the counter‑power had its day, something has to fill the vacuum. Then basically anyone who can make the best of the narrative and outrage ends up filling the vacuum, whether they can deliver or not." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I think it’s natural. I wouldn’t say democracy is declining or anything. I would say it’s part of the process, where every region is trying its own experiment, just as we are trying here. Experiments that will end up solving actual democratic governance problem will actually spread in the long run, evolutionary speaking." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "Somehow if somebody could basically build a system where instead of outrage you have thoughtfulness, compassion..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Or you can channel outrage into an outrage against ignorance, which is better than an outrage against one specific person." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "That is very interesting. That is very insightful." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s good." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "That was really quick." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Do you have anything else?" }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "No. Actually I have to run to another thing, as well." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "Thank you so much for your time. That was like a roller‑coaster ride, as one of my friends warned me about. Thank you so much." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Cheers." }, { "speaker": "Chieh-Ting Yeh", "speech": "Good luck with everything else." } ]

[ { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "Can I also access it afterwards if I need go over something?" }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "Yeah, sure. You can access the transcript also if you want to modify anything, in 10 days, and then we’ll publish them." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "Cool. It’s good to be..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Thank you." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is Shuyang Lin, our design architect." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "Thank you..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "All right, set." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "Great. Thanks for taking the time to talk to me. This is a profile that’s going to be published in a French magazine called \"Causette.\" It’s a women’s magazine in France that’s interested in gender issues. I’m going to be asking you questions very generally about your life." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "Maybe we can start with you telling me a bit about your childhood, where did you grow up? Can you tell me a bit about that?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure. I grew up on Earth, still remaining on Earth. I was born in Taipei City. I moved quite a few times. I went to Germany for a year, when I was 11. I went back to Taiwan and then visited Silicon Valley for a while. That was when I was 17 or so...18, actually." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I mostly just traveled a lot in the early ’20s, about 20 countries. That’s pretty much it. Otherwise, I’ve lived mostly in Taiwan." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "Would you say Taiwan is a place you call home, it feels the most like...?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "No? [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I’ve migrated to the Internet around 12. Anywhere that has an Internet connection is home." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "[laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Anywhere that doesn’t have an Internet connection feels strange." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "As a child you lived in Europe for how many years was that? As a child, when you were in Europe, how many years?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It was one year. Slightly more than one year. I think it was one year and a few months." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "That was in Germany?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That was in Germany." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "Why were you in Europe?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "My dad went earlier to Germany for a year pursing PhD studies. Then we moved, because I was finishing primary school education at the time, two years in advance. In Taiwan there’s no way for the high school student to jump two grades. I was left without education." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "My teachers, they all suggested that I went somewhere else to experience different education systems." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "I heard that you decided to stop school at 12, is that right? Why, what was the...?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, I toyed with the idea of stopping school at 12. As to why, it’s just that I got really into this Internet thing, and discovered that anything I wanted to learn, there’s a much larger community. The time that I spend in school is holding me back. It was stale in college. I didn’t actually drop out until I was 14." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "How did you first start getting interested in coding? Did you remember the first time you really found out about it?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure, when I was eight I was reading a programming language book. For me, it was a time saver because I was very interested in mathematics at the time. Computer was a tool to save time and to make what I’ve learned, like formula visible and easy to learn. It was something else, it was great." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I didn’t have access to an actual machine at the time but I simulated with paper." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "Yes, I read about that. You actually drew everything, like all the formulas and what the outcomes would be on paper?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s right, and all the components that they could be. An acquaintance of mine, Linda Liukas, did a children’s learning book called, \"Hello Ruby.\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "She’s been spreading this in all different languages around the globe, taking this idea and having the children having those Paper Mate components computers, and connecting them, and simulating key press and writing where the computer would draw." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It is a very tangible way because for eight‑year‑olds, anything that you can touch is much more familiar with the abstractions that you can feel creates a much more intimate relationship between machines and humans." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "Do you remember what actually drew you to coding initially? What was the appeal for you?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s a time saver as I said. I don’t have to do arithmetics by hand. That’s what computer means. It’s something that computes for you, and then it also makes it much more visible." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "How did you first put into practice, what were first things you created basically?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "My first program is \"Hello World\" as any other programmers are. My first non‑trivial program was an educational game that shows only a line between zero and one, some balloons, and then the user would guess the position of those balloons. For example, this would be one half." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Maybe you would guess that this is one quarter, but then if you type in one quarter, it will show that no one quarter is actually here. You have to guess higher. Bit by bit, you would learn the entire fractional number. This is for my younger brother who’s four at the time." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "How old were you when you did it?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Eight." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "After that, how did you move on from that? You created a startup, right?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Mm‑hmm. I was going to." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "What kind of startup was it?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It was a publishing house, and I wasn’t involved at the beginning. I was the author. They were curating this, nowaday, we would call it a blog. It’s basically people writing about their journey towards cyberspace." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The book is called \"Roads to Cyberspace\". It was on the bulletin board system, which is an online forum. People just pseudonymously submitted their journeys. The curational team at the publishing house, Informationist was the name, curates that into a book." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "After the book was published, I look at the website of the publisher and saw that it was not very appealing and so took a week to code up unofficial web page. It was so appealing that the publishing house decided can we just use this as an official page." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Gradually, bit by bit, I become the CTO of the publishing house. By the time I was 15, the publishing house decided to pivot to change into a software publishing house, publishing a few pieces of software that I’ve written throughout the years. That’s when I’ve become the shareholder, started running the company." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "How long did you stay with that startup?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That was since ’95 to ’97, I think." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "After that, what was the next step?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "After that, I went back to university and attended for a year‑and‑half. A lot of graduate student school studies, trying to understand through humanities and philosophy, and other disciplines, cognitive science helps you understand complex behavior that we’ve seen." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I’m also a consultant for the BenQ Company. At the time BenQ, it was not yet known as BenQ, when I joined. It was known as Acer Peripherals, which means it was a peripheral company to Acer Corporation." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I went to mainland China as well as Silicon Valley as part of the consultant work. Eventually we started a startup in Silicon Valley and then in Taiwan around the turn of the century. That was ’99, 2000." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "Come back to something you were saying when you went back to university. What sorts of insights that that provide you on the behaviors we see online? What did you understand...?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I had a lot of conversations, a mentor relationship with a cognitive scientist and philosopher in a nearby university. His interest at the time was what we call consilience, which means an anti‑disciplinary approach studying a problem without any constraints of any academic fields." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Around the time, these were very vague ideas, like complex systems and anti‑disciplinary research was in its very early days. We had some philosophic predecessors like Feyerabend and so on, but there’s no methodologies, so to speak, in this pursuit. That was when I started charting my research agenda." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That was very helpful, in that that my first mentors there was Tim Lane, as I said, the philosopher of cognitive science, also another philosopher studying Gadamer, the German philosopher the hermeneutic tradition, and around phenomenology and Kant, and a lot of other philosophers of science and around science." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I also studied from the traditional Chinese thought‑process. There are as a classical Chinese teacher, Yu T’ien-ts’ung who was very instrumental in Taiwan’s, what we call the Nativist Literature, the regional grass‑root literature identity. That was also where I drew from." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Of course, computational linguistics and anything I can find locally. That was the main inspirations that I drew from." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "What did it lead you to understand about how people behave online?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "A few things. Online, we are all handicapped in some way. It’s as if we entered a world of people on the autism spectrum. We are forced to be immensely vocal, because other non‑verbal signals, either get dropped, reduced, or somehow changes meaning through this asynchronous communication." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Most people see the cyberspace as something that transcends space, which is true, but psychologically, the most important part, it transcends time. It makes a lot of time‑delayed conversations. It is self‑selecting thing. People who are very good at verbal expressions get disproportionate representation." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "On the internet, culture evolve much more quickly. People tend to trust other people much more quickly, because they use the same words that they tend to use. This is something we do not see in face‑to‑face conversations. It is compressed, but also in a way expanded." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The collaboration is much easier, because across the Internet you cannot harm the other person, except psychologically. We work with that, too. In addition, people become fused in a subconscious way. One person’s emotion, even though the emotion is over, it affects other people when they see, after time delay, this kind of emotional utterances." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Basically it’s like an ecosystem where people post sentiments and affects evolve and compete for the scarcity of attention. We see a lot of emotions that are not dominant in the face‑to face world become easier to dominate in this online world, in particular sentiments of outrage. That’s fascinating to me." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "To get back to the second startup with Acer, how did it move on from that?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I created my own startup as the president of a small company, trying to figure out how open‑source, which was invented around ’98, this moniker, trying to reconcile the traditional free software world and the commercial software world, by creating something that’s a value both to the commercial side and to the civil society. It was fun." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It went from 2000, we wrote a manifesto called, \"Cyberspace Anarchy,\" trying to figure out all the infrastructures it would take for a self‑governing anarchist community to thrive online, and tried to work piecemeal to make it happen." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Around 2002, we started working on this open foundry project which would be sponsored by Academia Sinica from Taiwan, and become the bedrock of the open source community in Taiwan. That took me a little bit out of the private sector and into the academic and the public sector." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Around 2005, I started leading this international effort of hundreds of computer scientists trying to reinvent the programming language that we use to respond to the new hardware situation, which is that the CPUs stopped getting faster, we get more CPUs and get GPUs, and the programming language need to change because of that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s like a rewriting of a constitution. It’s recreating language. That took me to dozens of countries. That took from 2005 to 2008. I joined some Silicon Valley companies around 2008." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "Like which ones?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Socialtext was the first one and then quite a few startups as consultants or as shareholders." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Two years later an old friend of mine ‑‑ we’ve been working together for 11 years, and he’s at Apple working on computational linguistics on Siri ‑‑ and he wanted to pursue his PhD study, so he invited me to help him take care of his department while he went to do his PhD research. I helped him carry that team for six years." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "When did that start you said?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "2010." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "2010. I’ve heard that from 2011 or so, you decided to retire and in brackets. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Mm‑hmm. That was 2014." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "2014." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah. We got Socialtext acquired in 2013 by a very large company, the Bedford Group. People fluent with the HR company, they bought Socialtext. That left me some instant cash. My income was very steady at the time. I was like, \"OK, I don’t have to wait for any company’s bottom line anymore.\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Mostly, the people I gave my time to are the public sector and civil society." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "Could you tell me a bit about that? When was the first time you got involved with the civil society and public sector?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "As I said, back in ’96 or so, I was very interested already in the online civil right movement. Free speech and freedom of assembly online is as much as a movement as is an education because, mostly, people who didn’t have first‑time experience didn’t really know what this is about." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s what I, mostly, worked on is on education and awareness campaigns and then the free software movement, of course, moved into the what we call the free culture movement, which is trying to get more creators to relinquish most of their copyright, so that people who they don’t know can carry on their work." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I was involved very, very early on. There was less entry stuff. There’s no clear point, in which, that I got involved of or of..." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "When the ‑‑ I don’t know how to say it ‑‑ gov‑zero." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Gov‑zero, g‑0‑v." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "G0v. Can you tell me a bit about that? How did that start?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It started by the co‑author of the Cyberspace Anarchy Manifesto, and my co‑founder, in 2000. Chia-Liang Kao, he was attending a hacker film by Yahoo! And they were originally trained to write some ecommerce site, which is very generic as a topic." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then, at the time the Italian’s government ran an advertisement as to whom I had already read. They said, \"Economic boosting applying is too complicated. Ordinary citizens doesn’t have a chance to understand it, such as, ’Follow whatever the government says and trust the government, pliantly.’’ It’s not a very popular advertisement." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It was with outrage that he and three of his friends who would eventually change their hackathon topic to put a visualization of the total national budget, proving that, actually, it’s not an ordinary citizen’s not able to understand a part of budget that concerns them, but that the translation work, the government really haven’t done." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is, basically, what they call forking the government, meaning, taking what the government has to offer but taking it to a different direction. I joined a couple months later, working on the dictionary project. It was early 2013, January." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "The aim here is, really, to take the information that’s there and make it understandable." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes, and once it’s understandable, also create a venue for participation under the original national budget visualization platform, budget.g0v.tw. There’s already for each budget item a conversation for it, where you can write in your opinions and click whether you want this budget item to increase or decrease or to be cut." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This creates a bidirectional mechanism. It’s around specific budget items. People don’t talk vaguely about international budgeting, talk about one thing. It’s also a way for participation to happen." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "Has it had some affects? Has the government taken into account some...?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Of course. By 2014, end of 2014, after the occupy, a lot of mayors won by appealing to this kind of bidirectional Internet‑mediated conversation." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The budget platform became Taipei’s City budget platform, officially, budget Taipei, which the mayor read before the participatory budget effort, because people really have to understand what a budget is about before proposing PB. Then, it’s been spreading to six or seven, I think seven now, different cities, and Taiwan." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "As for the national budget, itself, starting, I think early March, all our presidential promises was there translated into budget items that will be visible in a pretty similar way. That’s a direct result of me being in this ministry, is that we take those proven engagement modes and try to maintain it, so that they become part of the national government’s mechanism." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "Is it focused on the budget, or has there also been other types of policies and things that would explain in this way?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s not just budgets and their execution and their every month or every quarter reviews, we’re publishing this online, making it foreign. We’re also publishing online all the regulations and all the trade‑related laws 60 days before they become in effect for public discussion and maybe changing the directions." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Also, we have a national petition system where 5,000 people can countersign a petition and make sure that the government makes a timely and useful substantial dialogue. We’re introducing mechanisms, basically, all around a policy cycle, whether it’s early, whether it’s proactive or reactive, whether it was government initiated or people initiated, we’re trying to make sure that all these are possible." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "Do you have an example within the budgets of one point that was discussed very strongly and then something has changed?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "For the Taipei City budget, there was a lot of conversation around the construction of sports‑related facilities, people wanted to make sure that it’s useful and multipurpose. There was a very large public conversation around the so‑called large Taipei dome, and it would benefit a lot from this hyper‑radical transparency." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I should note that after the budget of Taipei launched, people got into this conversation online, just like the national budget visualization. For a national budget, because it was a community effort, people just chatted among themselves." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Before the Taipei City won three weeks after this free‑chat thing, people were very surprised to find that every single bureau in Taipei City came and responded to every single topic posted." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s creating a direct line between professional public servants and citizens, circumventing, so to speak, the proxies that usually were between them when they were presenting this thing. We hold to that as a sign, a very authentic goodwill from the city government." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "How do people in Taiwan react to this? Are they very receptive? Just that do they really want to take part or has there been a lot of...?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We are very unique in that. The first generation that got access to the Internet was also the first generation that had democracy, because the martial law was lifted at early ’90s, in ’89, actually, which is also when the personal computer revolution happened, so we have the same generation growing up on the Internet as well as in democracy." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "To what extent do you feel that the philosophy that problems on the Internet is being translated in civic or political affairs through all these kinds of initiatives? Is it the same philosophy that...?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "On the Internet, what we call this is what we call an open multistakeholder governance model, meaning, that we try to get everyone who would be affected by a policy to come and discuss. Of course, this is not entirely applicable, as I said at the very beginning." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The Internet community was able to make this happen, because in the early days everybody who had participation was very good at reading and writing and at imagining things, building castles just by reading words. This is by necessity, because that’s what programmers do. That’s what code makers and lawmakers do." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s also exclusive. People who did not have this skill but have other very useful inputs are excluded from the multistakeholder process." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "For things like the national regional policy, of course, it affects not only people who are good at reading and writing, but also people who are good at number book communication and body language, and also, it’s the children, even, who prefers tangible stuff." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "To do a good multistakeholder processes now, our duty is to make it multimodal, meaning, that we not only need to translate the abstractions to graphical interactive, or all the visual ways that people can relate to that also take as input all those non‑writing sources and make sure that everybody can understand everybody across the different cognitive functions." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It was very expensive to do things this way but, nowadays, with artificial intelligence it’s much easier." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "How can you use artificial intelligence to take inputs that are not verbal? How does that work?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "For example, the words that we’re speaking into this recorder, we’re feeding it to an artificial intelligence that transcribes this into words. This technology was only mature this year, really. If people who don’t speak English, another artificial intelligence can take this and translate it into English, approximating already human translators, that is another thing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Once it is translated into Chinese, another artificial intelligence can take it and create real‑time visualizations of all the topics that we have been discussing, and showing relevant information that may fill in people who are not versed in what the multistakeholderism is." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They could create a translation on memory or lexicon, and then yet another artificial intelligence can take that and try to create some 3D models, pictures and try to find relevant images that corresponds to what we worked on." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Every step needs human curation. However, the mundane work is carried by automated mechanisms." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "What about taking into account people’s non‑verbal expressions?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "If you take a transcript and recording, whether it’s visual and audio, and you subtract the verbal message from it, what you are left, the remainder is the style, the expression. It’s already possible to take a picture of Van Gogh and then a photo of something that Van Gogh has never seen, and ask an artificial intelligence to apply the Van Gogh style to this painting and then create a similar style of painting." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Not only we can transfer concepts, we can also transfer the remainder, which is style. Artificial intelligence at the moment can assign emotional weight to tell irony, to tell the impact of a fact of what people are stressing or putting into words." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yet, other artificial intelligence may direct a facilitator’s attention, if you have 10 people or 20 people in another room, a virtual, maybe, and get emotional assessment. A good facilitator needs to be in tune to everybody’s psychological state, which is very difficult across the Internet." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Even if you have to get the best video conference and stuff, still something is lost. We are trying to get that back. Of course, the facilitator would need to either have a panorama, a view of every other participants, or we can use the cheaper technology, called virtual reality, which is mature maybe later this year." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We are trying all kinds of modalities to bring the number of those signals back to our cognitive systems." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "What about your current post, how did that come about? How were you approached, what was the process?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There was this presidential campaign from Tsai, and I voted for her platform — radical progressive by Asian standards, somewhat progressive by European standards. In any case, one part of the platform was called, Asia Silicon Valley plan. Due to an unfortunate grammatical fact of Chinese, when people see \"Asia Silicon Valley,\" they see \"Asian Silicon Valley.\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "A Silicon Valley in Asia, which is something that’s offensive to people who actually work in Silicon Valley in knowing that you can’t duplicate it here. It is also unfair to Taiwanese culture, which I think have a lot to comment that it is not a part of Silicon Valley, which thrives because of this." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s doing an injustice to both Taiwan and Silicon Valley. There is a lot of resistance, especially around the startups circle to this policy. The Premier at the time, Lin Chuan ‑‑ is still the premier ‑ said, \"Put a hold to this platform.\" Saying that we need to readjust and try a different communication strategy so that people will think that we’re building a science park around the digital economy in the Taoyuan city for no purpose whatsoever." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I was part of that redefinition meeting, and suggested we put a dot between Asia and Silicon Valley, so people would understand that we’re just connecting, we’re linking with Asia and connecting to Silicon Valley, but we’re not trying to be Silicon Valley of Asia. It doesn’t work. It does seem to work, the startup circle seems to understand us." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I did some communication work, and the premier seems impressed, and asked me to try to find a minister for digital affairs to play a similar role, to make sure the misunderstandings like this don’t happen again." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I asked around, I asked a lot of my friends. I think around 10 people. About five of them are more suited to this job than I am. They all refused, each with their own reason, but mostly saying that they would not enjoy this work. They all think I would. At least while I may not be the best fit, at least I enjoy this work, which is kind of important. They all recommended me." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I said to the premier that I cannot find anyone else, but I’m willing to give it a try it. That’s how I got it." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "When did you start?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "First of October." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "What are you main tasks?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Open government that is the main mandate. Reporting, also the use console, which is like an open government, especially for young people and social enterprise, which is mostly around young people and startups, but also carries this social impact and sustainability with mission." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "However, open government is the main one." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "What are your main projects for the next few months? What are you planning to do?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "As I said, there’s this systematic establishment of open government principles around all parts of policy cycle. We are trying to make this happen through regulations, through by‑laws. We are trying passing this Digital Telecommunication Act, which is a fundamental law for Internet. It’s like the Digital Republic law in France." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It establishes this basic engagement rules between existing legal systems and the Internet. An important part of that law is a multistakeholder mechanism. This public commentary period, this public forum for all the policies for us to understand, it was in the original draft of the French Digital Republic law. It was removed by the senate." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We thought we would just look up to France to their implementation details, but it did not happen. Therefore, we’re trying to make this happen. Getting government public servants to trust strangers, to trust us more, and maybe the citizen will trust more in return." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "What is the situation in Taiwan? There was the Sunflower Movement. How is that working out? Is it still ongoing?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The Sunflower Movement was the demonstration, extended for 22 days. The main appeal was this kind of demonstration that people can work with strangers, a million strangers on the street. Help with professional facilitators, fact like fact checkers, translators, and also a way for recording to appear." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "All three skills taken together creates a deliberative reflective space, where people in this occupy, converge every day to work towards consensus gradually. The final consensus that was agreed by occupiers, but also by the head of parliament at the time, was that this is a rethink of the constitutional organization of the society." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That all political decisions from here, ours need to take all the stakeholders into account, not just ordinary associations and their representatives, and that the tool that we developed during those 22 days were all open‑source, and free culture." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They are taking the seats all around Taiwan and the globe to make sure all people understand that it is now that there is another way for strangers in the real space to converge, if they put attention to it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is the promise of any occupier. Taiwan is radically non‑violent. We did this in a very systematic fashion, almost like a case study. I wouldn’t say it’s just in Taiwan. Whatever we did was one model, a contribution for all the occupiers afterwards, which then improved our technologies as we did building on the Occupy Wall Street occupiers." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "Back in Hong Kong, do you feel they are inspired by it?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, they took exactly the same programming and their supported logistics and it’s really an export of the Sunflower technologies to Hong Kong." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "Is this situation still quite tense with some people from the movement and the new government or are they very much behind the new government?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It is a little bit of both. The Sunflower Occupiers would eventually form two parties, the Social Democrats and the New Powers." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The New Powers became the third largest party in the parliament. The Social Democrats still remains mostly on the street. In addition, in the city governments, they got a lot of people into the city governments." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "As a political worker, not as mayors, but then we get people who are independent, like non‑partisans into mayors, like the Taipei mayor, but also into the cabinet. In this cabinet, there is more independents than members of any party, which is kind of rare." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There is a new political climate of independence. The parliament is still partisan, but at least there is this one dominating party, the Democratic Progressives. The New Powers has been vocal, but I wouldn’t say they are behind the Democratic Progressives." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "Could you talk a bit about your decision to change gender? When did you decide that? How did you know that was something you wanted to do?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I never changed genders. My gender is whatever." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When I encounter people of when I was 12 or so, especially people from the US, in these communities, my online interactions, they perceive as decisively feminine. I wouldn’t mind, it does not matter." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "For many communities, starting from ’93, I have just lived as a woman, but for other communities, sometimes I am perceived as a man, sometimes it doesn’t matter. For my startup friends were all LGBTQ people. It doesn’t really matter ‑‑ that isn’t fair, there is one straight person. We are very diverse." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I was raised essentially from adolescence in environments that didn’t care about gender. It’s gender blind, which I think made me gender blind afterwards. It is not really useful, especially online, but also offline to stigmatize people, desperate measures." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "Did you feel that more and more young people think like that? I was living in America before and it feels like it’s a big movement, now. There are lot of people who just decide that gender is not relevant. Is that like that, here in Taiwan?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, Taiwan is unique in Asia in that we have a huge LGBTQ community, very vocal. It was tied to Taiwan’s quest for absolute freedom of expression. It would be a slogan in other countries, especially European countries, but our people took it very seriously." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Any time the government even had an incline to censor speech, people got very outraged, and that never happened. We took as the core of the community building that everybody, no matter of gender or other status must have an equal say. I think that country contributes to this huge explosion of LGBTQ communities." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "This radical demand for free expression, is that something that started after ’89? That’s when it really started to not go back?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s a reaction formation. It was a dictatorship and people died as martyrs as in the quest of absolute expression of freedom." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "What’s the role of China in all of this? How does it try to influence Taiwan and go against this free expression? I know in Hong Kong they are not really allowed to do what they want." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Hong Kong is a very different place. Mainland China — as opposed to Hong Kong, China — is doing a lot of interesting social experiments. At the beginning of the great firewall project, The Golden Shield, Taiwan was very much caught in it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There was also during the years, where there was a lot of commercial flow between Mainland and Taiwan. Post ’89 there was a period when foreign investors didn’t want to deal with China. Taiwan was supplying a lot of talents and ICT technologies in the China’s modernization project." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The Golden Shield is something that affects everyone who travels to China. We were acutely aware of every step of its evolution. We had our Snowden moments, years before it became an international phenomena, knowing that the same technologies that enables opening Internet can also do something more, something very different." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We live with that technology as a neighbor, and the most severe stakeholder outside mainland China for a very long time. It worked out technologies that circumvents the great firewall, technologies that works inside the firewall for a very long time. It’s just an experiment they are running there." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "One last thing. You described yourself in some articles as a conservative anarchist. Could you explain what you mean by that? Why conservative?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "\"Conservative\" has two meanings. One is that I have some values I want to preserve as in conservancy, as in conserving a tradition. A tradition is the tradition that I have been living in for more than 20 years now, the anarchistic tradition of Internet, code making." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The Internet community is the first political system that I encountered. It was run by rough consensus and not by building, not by presidents, not by kings. It was a tradition I was raised in. It’s something I want to conserve. I also mean conservative in the other part which is the approach." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "A conservative is rather than a progressive, wants people to see that they can work with some new innovations, gradually, rather than changing, mandating, or commanding people to change overnight. Everyone who works with me joins on a voluntary basis. They say that goes on a voluntary basis. I try to facilitate it, but I do not give commands." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That was true before I was a digital minister, and it is still true now. I am a conservative in the sense that it’s a very gradual change. Nobody is forced to change if they don’t want." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "Did that create a bit of a clash of culture here? I can imagine there’s some very established ways of working in government." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I think so far it’s just fine. It’s just fine because if I had a ministry, that would be very difficult because there would already be a hierarchical organization. I have an office. I don’t have a ministry." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "From the very beginning, I said this is not really an office. It’s a space. It’s an open space where people are welcome to join. What I said is people are welcome to join, and then some folks like the one over there decided it’s better called a space." }, { "speaker": "Shuyang Lin", "speech": "We’re all volunteers." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah. Basically, it’s a space where people volunteer to join. We’re all like strangers really. I don’t know most of my staff. I suddenly happen to work with any of my staff except over the Internet for just a few months at most." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s really like any other ad hoc group. We started with very simple coordination forums like chat rooms and Kanban boards. Gradually, we had an alignment of compasses, but we don’t have a map. Everybody has their own map, and that’s the culture we’re trying to do here." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The reason why this is possible at all is that it’s not a ministry and I’m not forced to give commands. Of the 15 people, 16 now in this space, and of the 30 to 50 people as our participation offices bring in all the ministries, and of the 25 youth councilors, we’re holding the same interaction engagement pattern. This is because none of them are here because they are commanded to." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "Great. Thank you so much. Can I just ask you your age?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "My age?" }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "Yes." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "35 solar years." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "I take it now you’re based full time in Taiwan or just still travel all over?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I try to reduce carbon emission..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Before I become digital minister, I was working on tele‑presence technology. I would send robots like in Spain, and also in Boston, and other places. I still travel but virtually. I also invite my friends to here through robotic means. I think by next year, at most, that will become much more appealing. It costs around the same as air travel, but you can reuse it. It’s much more carbon neutral." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "I’d like to take a few pictures of you if that works." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure." }, { "speaker": "Julie Zaugg", "speech": "OK, great." } ]

[ { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "線上的觀眾朋友大家好，我是葉思敏，今天很高興邀請到行政院唐鳳政委來進行專訪，這時候正值是唐鳳上任滿一百多天左右，您可能會相當好奇政委在這一段期間做了哪一些事，或者是您有什麼問題想要請教政委，在一個小時，三點至四點，我們的節目是直播的，所以也開放網友進來，有什麼問題，歡迎您來這邊留言，唐鳳政委也會在第一時間幫我們回覆。政委您好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家好。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "我們開始正式問問題之前，先幫觀眾朋友瞭解一下唐鳳的背景，大家對她其實可能不陌生，她有網路神童的稱號，過去在業界、BenQ或Apple曾經做過顧問的工作，不過在三十三歲左右的時候退休，三十五歲之後入閣成為臺灣史上最年輕的政委。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "在這當中，政委負責的領域包括了社會企業、青年諮詢委員會、開放政府，從10月份上任到現在，剛好超過三個多月左右的時間，辦事的手法很新穎，也很貼近到網路的世代。您過去在PTT上留言，跟網友會回覆一些問題，您想要做的目標是開放政府部分。想要問一下，您曾經公開徵詢網路的公務員鄉民，我們先來問一下，開放政府希望達成的目標是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們是在PTT的公務員版，我們徵求的其實他同時具有公務員跟鄉民兩個身份，其實這一個版主是我們辦公室的朋友，他本身就是公務員討論版的創版的版主，所以在那時就已經認識了網路上這一群公務員，他可能找來的人上站次數都超過兩千次，就是在BBS混了快十年了，我們希望每一個部會對於開放政府有一個到三個的聯絡人。什麼是「聯絡人」？這一個聯絡人就是要負責把政府想要講的話，翻譯成網路上不特定人都可以聽得懂各種各樣的形式；反過來講，也不只是網路，也包含網路跟實體各種各樣收進來的管道，這個人也要能夠綜整，包含跟其他部會協調，跟在部會裡面不同局處協調的功能。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "為什麼會想要有這一個想法？最重要的原因是，我們希望徵求來同時具備公務員及鄉民的身份，這個人可以在自己的腦裡可以完成轉譯的工作，轉譯的工作不只是把公文裡面的感覺像八股文這個東西，用很直白、大家一看就看得懂的圖、影音或文字——我們叫做自媒體的——做一些轉譯。更重要的是，反過來大家的意見能夠變成是公務朋友知道聽一千人的意見到底要怎麼回應、應用，所以這是透明的，這樣是參與的雙向管道，就是開放政府最一開始做的事情。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "所以聽起來這樣的人才，您剛剛提到要兩千次上站，又要當過公務員，這樣的人才會很難找嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "要現任的公務員，而且還要自願，因為我進來的特性是，我是不下命令的，所以我也不take命令，任何人來跟我工作，是要自願。我剛剛提到創辦版主的這一位，是我自己入閣之後，他自己寫信來說想要調到我的辦公室，所以他是自願，我之前也不認識他，需要很熱血的精神。因為名單在他的手上，不在我手上，所以我不知道最後是多少人，我知道十幾、二十人，但是我們是在部會的次長、政務官決定說願意來試試看用一個鄉民公務員，我們才會把這一個名單提供給次長，也才會到我的手上，所以目前有一個滿大的部會確實已經用了這樣的鄉民公務員，我們慢慢來媒合，多少還是會有的。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "兩千次是上站次數是誰來（決定）的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實不是我決定的，而是Smart Lai收到熱血公務員來函，他一一上去確認，發現都有上站兩千次，當然也有上站一次或兩次的，那個是來鬧的，那個也是有的，但是我們知道是在中央政府機關任職，知道職等、職稱是什麼，以及知道他真的在BBS上很久了。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "兩千次裡面需要關注什麼特定的議題或發言之類的嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個我們沒有特別去勾稽，其實我們最需要看到的只是之前有回文，或者是有推文，或者是有寫過回了之後裡面，可能會被推爆會很被寫專業什麼系的朋友（笑），只要這樣就好；上站兩千多次，我們知道很多網友是潛水，所以並不是網路上專業的寫手，而是有一、兩篇我們知道大概的文化就可以了。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "進來之後，我們會怎麼樣培訓這一些公務員？目前徵到了多少？有很多人自願嗎？如何培訓？目前達到什麼樣的目標？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "PTT是非常多的管道之一，我現在不只在PTT回文而已，就像你剛剛說的，我不只PTT回文，在mobile01、FB，在每一篇提到我的新聞底下，其實多多少少都可以看到我在回文，這樣的情況下，我們的來源非常多樣，目前是三十二個不同的部會，各自有一至三個的自願者，所以現在是五十人是我們開放政府聯絡人，我們叫做「Participation Officer（簡稱PO）」的小組。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "剛剛在聊天的時候，其實前面聊天也有聊到18、19日好像有一個特別的活動。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "18日跟20日是兩次的共識營，雖然我們的PO們在線上有組成了聊天室跟一般的WIKI工作管理的一些系統一樣，但是畢竟大家沒有面對面去真正認識彼此，所以我們要做跨機關協調的時候，我想最重要的就是彼此的互信，大家對開放政府的想像是不是一致的，如果有一些部會之前沒有接觸過這一種開放政府的事情，就是能夠勇於跟旁邊經驗比較豐富的部會求救，我們在做課程規劃的時候，我們上面寫的字就是說「求救不可恥，求救有用」，尤其是中央部會很少要求跨部會去求支援，這個是非常少見的，我們把求支援的想法——而且是在轉譯上——好比在跨部會的政策，兩邊的懶人包其實對方不一定看得懂，這一件事要變得大家都看得懂，真的需要跨部會的合作。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "數位政委有提到可能在不同的網站上，PTT上或者是臉書上留言。大家不知道的是，您其實早就參與了BBS？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，BBS在最早還沒有網際網路的時候，當時是92、93年左右剛開始有數據機，撥號的時候還會聽到「燈燈燈」聲音，從三百到六百，我是一千兩百開始架站，後來兩千四百及我們在一開始架BBS的時候，就把家裡的電話線開放出來，讓陌生人打進來，留言給下一個打進來的陌生人看到，是一個留言板，有人因為這樣就辦好幾支電話，三、五或七線都有。從那時開始，我關注這樣的人工空間其實是人寫出來的，所以我們當時寫BBS的程式就是希望怎麼樣讓大家有一個最好的體驗，在上面能夠最有效跟不特定人去分享他的心情等等。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "所以一直到現在，我在看PTT或者是有開源的BBS，我還是用一個很像都市規劃、空間規劃的角度來看，因為畢竟是一個新的，不只是媒體，而是大家真的住在那邊，我們會說鄉民的認同是在某個版之類的，我們要如何讓大家暢所欲言的同時，也可以越來越有彼此信任的感覺，而不變成一言不合就解除好友之類的，所以我覺得BBS有留著滿多的人情味。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "您在BBS的時候，就像現在一樣很關心公眾議題了嗎?在BBS當時主要參與的想法是什麼？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為當時剛剛接上網際網路的時候，大家都碰到一個類似的問題，主管這一個網際網路的官員對網路上的認識，尤其對言論自由以及加密跟解密的認識是不太足夠的，是法律先行，我們做code的人去實現這一個法律要求的東西，通常是這樣。但是在網際網路上常常是相反的，是先程式做這一件事，我們再回過頭來看這個不算不算盜版、言論自由跟人權侵害，變成是法律要追著程式跑，我們第一次發現有全球性的法令跟不上code的情況，所以我當時就會加入一些「電子前鋒基金會（EFF）」這一些社群，我們整天就是在討論如何讓沒有第一手經驗的朋友們，可能是法律很專精的人士們讓他們有第一手的經驗，要轉譯到大家聽得懂，挑一個很好的正確比喻等等。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "在這個時間，主持人提問的時候，其實我們也開放網友進來提問；現在已經收到問題了，我們先來看一下問題。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "第一個問題，網友葉李楊（音譯）：您很早就創業了，在求學的過程中不是走傳統的路線，是否給一些創業的年輕人一些建議？唐鳳很早就開始自學了，他想要瞭解的是，你是不是可以給我們年輕人一些建議呢？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實不只是年輕人，任何想要創業的人在現在或者是95年創業時都碰到一個情況，就是我們在學校學的跟創業要用到的兩個程度會有一定落差，學校一定是以學門或者是領域為主，但是我們在創業的時候解決的問題，如果一個學門可以解決早就被解決了，所以我們在創業的時候，通常是要解決大家沒有碰過的問題，或者是大家還不知道要如何解決的問題，因此這個時候我相信任何創業者取向都不一樣。但是有一個共通的是：你要結合很多不同領域的人才，以及你自己要能夠跨越領域，或者是打破領域去用不是你習慣的方式去瞭解一個問題，如果你用你很習慣的方式，我保證全世界一定都有更習慣的方式，而且是做得更好的方法來解決這一個問題，所以真的是跨領域打破領域這個是非常重要的。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "所以沒有說幾歲來創業，好比越早越好，或者是工作到一定程度的時候再去創業，您覺得有一個時間點嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒有耶！如果你觀察到社會上有一個問題要解決，你發現這一個東西沒有辦法用現有的方法解決，這個時候就可以考慮創業。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "ok。第二個問題：如果您現在不是做數位政委，還有什麼想要做的工作？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我一直都是在做開放政府及開放源碼的一些工作，所以其實現在只是說納稅人付我錢專心做這一件事，如果等到哪一天納稅人沒有要付我錢做這一件事，我還是做這一件事，這個比較像是志業，並不是我今天在這一個位置才做這一件事。我在這個位置之前，好幾年來我一樣都是在做這一種促進溝通，讓政府不管是網站也好，或者是一些溝通的方式也好，能夠建立起一個更讓大家有感覺的機制等等，這一些東西一直都是我在做的，所以不管在不在這一個職位都會做這一件事，即使卸任也不會改變。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "這個是目前理想中的工作？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！我不用在工作上應付相關不相干的事，以前在矽谷工作的時候，確實收入高三、四倍，但是蘋果感興趣跟這個有重疊——但是並不是完全重疊——所以我也要花一些時間不是我有興趣的事情，我越來越是顧問，而不是雇員，這個（狀態）有比較好一點，我全心真的想要做這一個題目，我覺得很幸運。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "開放政府是您目前最想要做的題目？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "可能二十年來我想要做的題目就是想要專心做這一個。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "之後的幾十年這個也是您覺得最有興趣做的嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，我們做的研究比較像是ICT-enabled scalable listening，透過資通訊技術，讓我們這一種互相講話、互相傾聽，本來只能發生在兩、三個人中間的事情，能發生在兩、三萬人，這個在學理上是非常難的事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們互相理解彼此的意思，很多是非語言的訊息，你要透過資通訊準確傳遞到每一個人面前，這一件事我相信不只是政府想要決定，任何想要做比較大規模溝通的朋友，這個都是很有趣的題目。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "好。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "我們來看一下，還有另外一個網友提問，邱勇明（音譯）問說：請問「亞洲·矽谷」有沒有實際的數字目標？另外一個，還是目前只有提供發展環境、培植科技人才等等比較空泛目標？有沒有一個實際的目標？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「亞洲·矽谷」它當時是有數字上的KPI，不過這一位網友既然都已經說比較空泛，想必是KPI都看過了，所以我就不背了。我現在的想法是，「亞洲·矽谷」對我來講，我們最重要連結矽谷的文化，不要那麼愛面子，比較願意承認是一個東西，創業失敗了，失敗不是可恥的，失敗這一件事在矽谷是非常常見的，我常常碰到一個創業家，可能失敗三、四次或六次，每一次會寫一個post-mortem，會寫為什麼失敗、原因是什麼，如果是CTO的話，我們踩到什麼技術上的地雷，以後大家就不要再踩了，這個是對整個生態圈是有幫助的，大家對於創業成功跟失敗都可以覺得有實質貢獻。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是在臺灣的創業環境，我們先不講資金、人才及法規，這個都是政府可以幫修的，但是在文化上，創業失敗了幾次，這一件事即使你有寫post-mortem——雖然在臺灣很少人寫——業界也不會覺得這個是光榮的事情，我覺得這一個東西就是文化上要透過讓創業的成本降低，以及讓大家更aware說其實你早一點失敗是一件好事，並不是壞事，這個東西要慢慢來，所以你要我一下子說我們要輔導九千家失敗的公司，這個好像講起來也不知道要怎麼量化；但是無論如何這個雖然不能量化，我們是一年一年看創業環境，就可以知道是不是越來多人願意在沙盒或者是小規模裡面試明知道成功率只有1％的人，還願意去試，其實多一點這樣的朋友，我們就可以說「亞洲·矽谷」文化的部分是有進展的。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "創業的部分有很高的機會會失敗，唐鳳您自己很小就創業過，您自己有沒有碰到什麼挑戰？或者是在失敗的經驗給我的網友一些意見，也就是如何面對這樣失敗的經驗？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "確實。我之前所參加一些創業的計畫，有的被購併、有的倒了，有的稍微有一點回收，無論如何我覺得重點都是一樣的，我們在結束的當下，就像我講說有做post-mortem，有把已經運用不到的著作權或一些資材開放出來，讓下一波要解類似題目的人去用。矽谷不只是失敗的公司是這樣子，成功的公司，像我們知道的id公司，就是做「毀滅戰士」、「雷神之鎚」這些東西，這些射擊遊戲出了一個新版，兩個版本之前那一個已經用不到的引擎就開放出來，意思就是說不只是為了賺錢，是希望我們做研究的朋友一直是在最新的狀態，而不是每一個人解決同樣的問題而要重複解決好幾次，在創業的時候，同時兼顧到營利及對社會正面的影響，我覺得這一個同時兼顧的話，就不會那麼可怕，因為一個地方失敗，另外一邊賺回來。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "以上是網友的提問，我們持續網友在這一個網路上持續來問，我們隨時幫您插播問問題。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "我們要如何培訓公務員鄉民，也就是剛剛有提到公務員鄉民目前在徵，進來之後要如何培訓？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們已經組隊了，已經有五十個朋友整天在聊天室閒聊，大家互相熟悉的過程之中，我們會提一些案例出來，我們會講說政府在這一個案例上的溝通如何做得更好，如何讓大家覺得在政策的先期，比較不需要怕面子的問題就可以徵詢更多朋友的意見，所以我們接下來就會用之前政府溝通的一些例子，在公共政策參與平台上會有很多朋友連署，所以之前有幾個連署案，五千人是門檻，有些已經超標了，七、八千人還在連署，我們會請公務員鄉民在共識營討論一下，七、八千甚至上萬的朋友如何作雙向或者是多一些利益關係人的溝通可以做得更好。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "我們要問一下新創事業，現在科技快速發展，有一些業者認為我們舊的法規讓他們的發展，有一些綁手綁腳的。您作為被期待政府跟業者間能夠作溝通的橋梁，會不會感到一些無力？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不會啊！還好。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "在這過程中有沒有碰到什麼困難？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就像我剛剛講的94、95年在EFF做工作的時候，我們的感覺是，一旦做監管或者是做政策資金的朋友有第一手經驗之後，他們都是聰明人，他們就可以做出比較有意義的判斷，最困難的就是如果沒有第一手經驗，還要去監管沒有第一手經驗的事情，這個就會有很大的困難。因為我算是一個「存在性證明」，你實際來跟我開會，你就會發現我把所有我能夠用到的新科技，從VR到人工智慧，到各種各樣的投影、直播什麼東西都帶到行政院的辦公室裡面來，所以來開過幾次會就開始有感覺，原來這一些技術實際被使用的時候是這樣子，感受是這樣子，直播也沒有什麼可怕的等等，在這樣的情況下就可以做出比較有意義的決策。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "當然另外一個是，我們有很詳實的逐字紀錄，所以每一次來開會之後，不只是來開會的處長、科長們的承辦，第一線的朋友也可以去看這一個逐字稿，然後發現我們原來政策的那個產銷履歷是這樣子來的。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "有一些法規畢竟還是舊的法規，你要適應一些新的新創事業，在這一些法規如何設定這樣的目標？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我相信與其講具體的法規，不如來講有沒有一個機制，這個機制在每次有新東西出現的時候，我們就把所有受到這一個東西影響的人，我們叫做「多元利益關係方」，試著約過來，而且是要開放的，不是只有政府認識的人，而是包含政府不認識的人，可能認識的人、也可能有不認識的人，都能夠納入到政策的制訂來。我們之前有做過一些嘗試，好比「vTaiwan」，因為沒有法律的依據，所以會變成每一次剛好主管這個的政務委員給予這個東西的拘束力，好比大家講出來的意見有凝聚共識的話，蔡玉玲政務委員會說答應，就按照大家討論的東西過，如果不按照大家討論的東西過，我至少願意為我的判斷負責。我現在很高興的是，目前這一個內閣許多的朋友們，包含部長們跟其他的政務委員們，也包含院長也滿認同這一個模式，但是目前並沒有一個非常確定的要點或法律來賦予這樣的多利益關係方的機制在法律上的拘束力，所以每一案還是需要一個政務官出來說願意做這一件事（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是我很高興的是，NCC目前有提出一個《數位通訊傳播法》，這一個法的草案現在也在join平台讓大家討論，在這一個草案裡面討論，如果以後牽涉到數位通訊傳播、數位經濟的事情，我們就依法要做這樣的事情，這個有法律依據的時候，我們再慢慢把法律的機制建立到大家接受，這個會比一個一個單一政務官來做會做得比較長遠。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "您剛剛有提到的是數位經濟，比較有爭議的是愛奇藝跟Uber，這個都是目前面臨數位經濟上的一些挑戰，不知道唐鳳您在這當中如何去作溝通？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實一樣啊！我把一邊講的話翻譯成另外一邊聽得懂的語言或者是多邊聽得懂的語言，如果沒有互信，至少是全程透明的，可以知道我沒有私下跟他們交易。在這樣的過程裡面，我覺得我們慢慢累積到不只是像Uber已經有爭議的，也是像區塊鏈這一種還沒有爭議的，但是未來可能會有的，我就會先跟他的作者實際進行這樣的面談，然後翻譯成我們這邊的監理單位及學術界的朋友能夠懂的逐字稿跟語言——這個是要日常做的，並不是起了爭議再來做，那時再做的話，其實是會來不及的。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "您覺得網路酸民文化對公共政策是利或者是弊？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們說不平則鳴，其實大家打字也是要花時間，所以會願意花時間來打字是兩種可能，一個是為了測試我們公共政策制訂者的玻璃心，這個是有可能，但是大部分的情況下感受到不舒服或不平，想要用某種方式去表達，所以對我來說沒有正能量或者是負能量，都是能量（笑），我們只要有一個機制把這一些能量納入，讓大家知道現在在某一個地方某些有我們沒有想到的東西正在發聲，讓我們想辦法去核實它，我覺得這就是課責的意思，告訴我們在政策整個一直到實行的過程裡面，從一開始的發想、擬訂政策到草案到實行，每一個過程大家都可以輸入。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "之前特別酸，可能是PH值低於0的這種狀況是（笑），是因為大家覺得這個是最後一次講話的機會，不然就要三十秒就過關了，大家就會非常義憤填膺，但是如果我們好比把所有的法規有六十天的討論期，時間拉長，你就會發現本來是很酸的那些人都沒有那麼酸，因為要那麼酸是要付出情緒成本的，所以如果一開始能夠一起好好講或者是多方一起好好講，那個酸度就會有中和度；即使已經爆炸、非常酸的，即使是負面能量也是能量，我們也能夠拿來用的。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "您自己在看留言的時候，有一些是人身攻擊的，您看到這一些資訊的時候，如何吸收？花多少時間接受跟回覆？您的情緒反應怎麼做？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "怎麼樣的人身攻擊，你看到一千次就沒有感覺了（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為我之前是做機器學習，好比像幫助蘋果的Siri的整個字跟句子，我們看到的時候是當作「語料（資料）」，對我來講並不是個人的，我會去想說為什麼他去寫這個，我們用的信號是哪一些，是不是指出這一些事實而我們沒有跟大家分享，但是大家罵我的部分，我只要覺得事實上並沒有什麼問題，我就是用事實回應他，所以對我來講好像沒有玻璃心的問題（笑），我想的是可以從留言的身上學什麼，只要回應裡面真正有建設性的可能那兩個字，旁邊的字就當作沒看到，其實這樣幾輪下來大家也會學習到，你要讓我回應，不管正面或者是負面，你就是要提出建設性的看法，所有其他人身攻擊，我覺得最近已經好很多了。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "就要選擇性看哪一個是關鍵字來作回覆？其他就不要看？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對，酸民有一種是有心裡上的需求，就是希望大家能夠注意他，希望大家在真實世界沒有辦法得到擁抱之類的，既然需要別人的注意力，我們就是要告訴大家說唯一能夠獲得注意力的方法是要提出具體注意力的貢獻，也就是只回有貢獻的部分，其實大家就覺得這樣鬧一鬧沒有人注意，慢慢大家就會學到如何作有價值的貢獻。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "您也是這樣子慢慢練習出來的嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對啊！二十多年了。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "我們持續看一下網友的提問。網友有提到開放政府之後，會不會只造成網友治國，網友的言論其實不能代表整體的民意，我們如何在這中間協調？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這要分兩個層面來講：第一，我們每一次在網路上提出參與方法的時候，要注意並沒有取代掉實體的方法，並不是把實體的方法拿走，我們現在還是開公聽會，但是事前的資料在網路上公示，公聽會可能透過直播或其他方式，讓沒有辦法到場的人也能夠看到公聽會，事後把大家凝聚出的共識再放回網路上的平台上；也就是說，並不是因為我們做了網路上的這一些事，所以實體面對面的溝通就不做了。就像我們並不是因為架了直播就不面對面說話，但是它可以讓我們面對面說話之前先考慮到大家的一些想法，可以讓我們沒有辦法說話的中間，把大家的想法拿進來，以及事後大家可以回去看紀錄、逐字稿，所以是擴充了面對面的量能，但是並不是、而且不應該是取消掉面對面的meeting，這個是一個。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外我覺得很重要的是，讓平常沒有辦法到行政院的朋友，他們可以在熟悉的地方，好比在自己的社區大學或者是隨便哪一個大榕樹底下，可以用同樣的技術進行討論、培力，意思不只是中央政府，好比公寓大廈管理委員會都可以用這樣的方式來開會，大家可以理解到要跟管委會要更多透明的資料，要更課責的這一些精神，然後大家都要能夠參與，我覺得大家離自己近的地方參與，關心到這一個管委會不能解決的事情，才會想要關心更廣的公共事務，而不是很抽象的全國公共事務，我們可以示範，但是希望大家可以離自己最近的地方開始。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "接著回到我們的問題，政府現在正在推動監理沙盒，我們也怕新創事業產業會受到法律過度規範，反而是扼殺了新創產業。在監理沙盒的部分，有沒有哪一些想要優先推動的？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "之前監理沙盒，也就是在「vTaiwan」進行了網路上的意見徵集，當時很感謝創新界、金融界及法律界的朋友都給我們很多實際事實上的需求及對於監理沙盒這一件實的感受，這一件事很棒的並不是網友治國，並不是要大家幫我們寫法律，而是寫法律之前讓大家對事實的狀態跟大家對感受做一次盤點。因此，裡面並沒有代表性的問題，我們要的是多元性，我們要知道社會上有哪一些利益關係人存在。我們這樣子蒐集起來之後，大概可以發現大家的期待除了鬆綁之外，大家最希望的是監管會開始有一些監理的能力，這一件事很弔詭，因為金管會監理很好，怎麼會說希望他們有監理的能力？因為他們現在正在做的事情是在對已知的業者在已知的營業項目可以做非常好的監理，但是在當沙盒開放之後，好比像機器人理財、區塊鏈或者是零成本的小額交易，所有這一些可程式化給小孩零用錢只能花在某些事情上等等的東西，其實都不是本來的監理技術可以照顧到的，如果try過一百人、三個月，金管會要有能力納入正規金管會的一部分，列出要點，或者是真的壞主意而不做了，而要能夠做出這一個判斷，我們叫做「RegTech」，必須跟金融技術的監理技術或者是管制技術。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個東西「RegTech」需要的心態就不是以前一快事劃定界限說什麼可以做、什麼不能做，而是把一個灰色地帶開出來，大家試著做做看，然後再來判斷風險是多少，試著量化，覺得這一個風險可以接受，然後就從黑色變成白的，但是這一個工作當中，需要的技術成份並不亞於新創成分，仍然需要即時的大量資訊處理、AI這一些東西，金管會現在的態度很積極，就是願意再培養一批朋友，用創新的角度來看金融監理，本來的監管業務還是在，我們要慢慢培植出如果沙盒開的話，要如何承接技術的能量。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "金管會可能會找一些新創的人才來參與？來自業界……" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "……或者是學界的朋友。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "目前開始尋找了嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們才看到構想書，還沒有最後的版本。我自己想說如果沒有這一個的話，其實我們如果開放FinTech的沙盒，每一個來的是感謝您的支持，但是我們還沒有要開放這個，這樣沙盒的意義就變得比較少。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "再下來，另外行政院在推動青年諮詢委員會，這個也是唐鳳您主導的，參與的成員包括大學生、公司負責人，希望他們也能夠參與到青年諮詢委員會，我們有沒有是什麼現在推動的重點？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一群朋友是第一次按照蔡英文總統的政見，我們把青諮提到院級，他們之前關心的是跟年輕人有關的部分，因為畢竟授權是來自於可能社企政委或者是新創政委或者是教育部，所以能夠碰到的領域大概是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是這一屆比較特別的是，大家關心的東西是包山包海，可能三十五個部會所有都有青諮委員關心，並不是因為他們選上青諮委員，而是他們本來本來就是什麼盟的組織者，他們可以輕易動員很多朋友，很有意思的是，公務員PO們已經是公務體系裡面最願意跟不特定人對話，但是他們畢竟不是在街上號召一群人，所以我們說這一群做改革溝通方式的朋友跟這一群做組織的年輕朋友，盡可能每一次開協調會的時候，就把兩邊的人拉起來，這樣的好處是，我們就不用去街上隨便找一位年輕人說我們這樣子寫你能不能接受或者是會翻桌，我們有實際在組織的朋友跟教育部或者是文化部或者是內政部的朋友說這個東西實在不能這樣寫，甚至還可以幫忙做轉譯的工作。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "隨著大家組織者、改革者越來越願意彼此信任，我們才有可能做不對稱，並不是這邊找這邊來背書，也不是單一的訴求要另一邊來買單，而是大家變成社群，而是互相信任的，任何雙方溝通的機制都可以這樣開始。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "大學生們在這中間做溝通的時候，有沒有具體的案子？在這當中有沒有擦出一些火花？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "每一個要溝通的案子，像電競，我之前舉電競的例子是真的時間很短就解決了，而且把電競選手的意見納進來。其實最近我們在協調的一些在社會上動蕩比較大的案子，好比像性別平等教育如何在校園落實，在落實的各個之中，同時也要保守那些想要捍衛婚姻價值朋友們的想法——我一向覺得這兩個不是很衝突的——但是這個時候我們很需要實際由在特定信仰裡面，有經驗的年輕朋友告訴我們說他們是怎麼看的，我們也需要作平權的年輕朋友，剛好是整個PO網絡跟青諮網絡都有，甚至也有台大機械系的朋友，所以這樣就多方坦誠規劃，如果大家都可以接受，我們就比較有信心，同時跟幾萬個，甚至有一些是壁壘分明的朋友一起溝通的時候，會覺得政府會有誠意，並不是只照顧一邊的想法。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "像剛剛提到來自各領域的朋友都可以一起加入？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是的。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "現在又有網友的留言提問，這一位網友問說兩岸關係最近比較緊張，臺灣一旦遭到駭客正面攻擊，我們有沒有抵禦的能力，可不可以幫我們回應這一個問題？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們的這一種黑客，並不是黑帽子的入侵系統，也不是白帽子的修補系統，我是做新的系統，所以其實我比較不是資安上的駭客。以我自己的理解，好比像資安會報或者是資安處對資安是有相當縝密的規劃，但是裡面提到國安跟國家機密的部分，因為我專門做開放政府，所以我是不看的、我不知道，但是我很相信做這個的朋友，這是另外一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們覺得比較嚴肅的是，其實資安是建築在我們說心房，其實是比實體的設備，不遜於重要性，而且更重要，因為畢竟如果大家看到一些謠言或者是消息或者是喊話，即使你的帳號都沒有被偷取，但是心裡的感受已經被綁架了，所以這一件事，其實我現在花比較多力氣的。也就是說，如果面臨系統性的，就是要摧毀大家對於政府某一項政策信心的攻擊時，我們有什麼方式去因應，這個東西就跟國家安全或者是國家機密比較沒有關係，這個比較是我們怎麼樣第一時間把正確的資訊，以及把經過查核的資訊放到大家看到謠言的同一個地方，所以如果在LINE上面看到，很快就能澄清，在FB上面就可以很快澄清，在PTT所有的可能性，都要有一些方法讓大家第一時間查證。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "另外一位網友問說，當了政委之後，對於行政院的運作模式有什麼想法？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我已經當行政院計畫顧問已經一、兩年了，在我實際加入成為政委之前，其實我從外面看跟裡面看，其實看起來是差不多的。也就是說，我一直覺得行政院的存在，本來就是讓每一件事都有負責的人，最大的價值就是每一個東西到最後都可以找到主責的那個人或部會，如果問我有什麼東西需要改進的話，就像我剛剛說的，每一個主責碰到這一件事，其實已經跨了好幾個部會跟局處的時候，很少有這樣的機會去平行的，去組成一個任務小組，然後說這一件事是幾個部會一起當爐主，一起同甘共苦，以前是層層上報跟層層下報，上報的訊息會越來越小，然後到最後就會剩幾個字（笑），所以我覺得建立橫向溝通的管道是我最care的事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "臺灣滿得天獨厚，就是我們的資訊環境度是非常高的，因此在這樣的情況下，我覺得是往很好的方向在發展，比起我之前在業界輔導過的大型NPO，我覺得這個NPO已經算是動得比較快的了。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "我們要關心一下公司法的部分，回到行政院這邊，公司法要全盤修正，包括了修法委員會也建議社會企業應該要建立「兼益公司」專章，會有兩方不同的聲音，比較新創的業者他們會認為一開始經營比較困難，所以要揭露財報或者是又要發布社會評估影響力的部分，這個部分可能會讓他們難以危機，但是大公司認為還是應該要立法，您覺得在這中間應該要如何做到兩全其美？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我也邀請網友們到「https://vtaiwan.tw/」（左側選「公司法：社會企業」）就可以留下您寶貴的意見。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實真的各派都有，專法、專章、專節、專條都有，這些不同的朋友想法裡面，很多人看著目前社會企業在臺灣還不是耳熟能詳的東西，如果一下子定義下來，如果課以太高的監管責任，變成只能符合這一個留下來，其他的慢慢就會變成被排擠出去，所以我想大家最擔心的是，自己所從事的那一個樣態被法排擠出去；（但是）我們並沒有這一個想法，我們如果要訂一個不管是專條或者是專章，都是一開始至少都在低度的概念裡面，也就是自己揭露就好了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是我覺得很重要的是，公司法開宗明義說公司是以營利為目的的東西，就會變成是如果股東不是只為了賺錢，他們還想要照顧到社會上的一些社會價值，股東可能會說怎麼不賺錢，公司法說應該要賺錢，因此我們至少要考慮如果要修的話，就是以營利為目的，但是後面加上可以自己宣示說除了營利之外，也有什麼社會目的。至少在這一條上去加以調和，至於要不要專節、準節課責多少，我自己的概念是不要在不成熟的時候就揠苗主張，但是實際上的具體條文是綜合大家的看法而決定，我都ok。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "上任到現在已經超過三個月了，這之間最大的挑戰是什麼？有沒有讓您覺得目前為止最困難的事情？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "最大的挑戰？其實還好耶！我沒有碰到什麼挑戰，我覺得很高興的是，因為我進來並不是要求在一百天內一定要解決什麼問題——雖然解決了滿多問題——但那個並不是我的agenda，那是因為我碰到各部會的朋友們，他們自願來幫忙，或者是他們碰到什麼問題，我進來協調，所以其實我進來是幫大家忙的，因此在這樣的過程裡面，我並沒有要硬性推動什麼東西，但是這一百多天來做了相當多的事情——逐字稿網路上都有——滿幸運的是，我可以用這一種專門幫大家服務的精神來做協調的工作，並不是一來就上任三把火，而大家就要被迫做一些可能我懂的不如實際朋友們懂的狀況，所以正面回答你的問題，我目前沒有覺得有任何碰到嚴重的挑戰，大概跟上任前一個月，在公開的討論的那一個月裡面是一樣的。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "有沒有目前最滿意的？或者是已經達成的？是開放政府嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "最滿意的是，一進來就建立了內部平行橫向的管道，大家不一定需要用LINE或者是Google或Dropbox，在政府的內網裡面，接下來馬上就要通過資安檢測的一些方法，等於在內部有一些共同學習的渠道，而且是地方政府、中央政府跟中研院的朋友都可以使用的。我覺得很滿意的是，即使我明天沒有繼續在這一個職位上，或者是負責做這一件事的mandate改了——好比我不負責做開放政府了——那個渠道就會留在那邊，就會變成政府政務正規溝通神經系統的一部分，在此之前，每一個部會都要分別請廠商，或者是可能要用一些沒有資安認證的第三人服務——承辦人換了它就不見的狀況——至少我們種下一個種子，至少五十位PO們開始實際使用，這一個東西就會變成跨部門溝通的一個很重要渠道。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "我們提醒一下觀眾朋友，現在是只剩下十五分鐘的時間，如果您有什麼問題的話，要趕快進來留言。目前又收到了網友最新提問，他想要參觀您的辦公室，等一下可以請唐鳳介紹您的辦公室介紹有什麼好玩嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "之前已經有用360拍過一次了，如果大家有看之前360那一個影片，在我的臉書上的話。會發現一面的牆壁是投影的，剛才你也有來看，我手上的iPad在辦公室就可以投影了，我的辦公室沒有電腦螢幕，我的桌機是直接投影到那一面牆壁上，不管是VR、開會或者是用任何cam或者是用其他的方式跟遠端朋友進行溝通的時候，其實都是分享出來的，並不是我自己盯著我的螢幕看，而是投影在整個客廳裡面大家都可以看，我們未來也會把這一個模型更廣泛地應用在政府內部協調會的狀況，也就是說大家還是用平常紙筆的習慣作業，紙筆的紀錄是可以分享的，遠端的朋友可以加入，事後也可以保存的，這樣慢慢比起key 鍵盤，比電子虛擬螢幕，大家在協調上，至少在紙本習慣，可能年紀比較大的公務言朋友們轉換過來，要比他們用打字來得容易一些。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "在政院裡面做這樣的改變，會不會有一些人比較不習慣？沒有辦法一開始就接受這樣的改變？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "還好耶！我們都只跟自願的人合作，如果沒有自願的人，顯然我們在推的這一個東西，還不百想要用，因此這一個東西可以完全用有沒有人願意來用，我們在政府內部的雲端，推了非常多的服務，但是後來發現一開始大家願意用的是檔案共享，接著是共同編輯試算表跟文件，這個東西跟大家已經很熟悉、是最像的，用檔案系統或者是用Word或者是Excel是最像的，所以像零訓練成本可以先推，之後慢慢會更習慣更多資訊的服務。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "下一個網友問的是對於Uber罰款跟Airbnb的條款，您有什麼看法？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這些兩個是分開來看的，並不是同一一個條款。罰款的事讓本來已經存在的衝突，提早浮到檯面上，這個是真的。但是我也很高興，今天有看報紙說Uber願意用多元化計程車的方法，開始願意實際作合法性的座談，這一件事其實不管有沒有罰款，都是本來應該做的事情，罰款確實造成大家一開始調適上、心裡上，雙方都有一些衝擊；但是無論如何，我們是已經結合了各界的聲音，去制訂了一個電子化車隊的條款。這個條款並不是永遠不能修，我現在也不是負責談判的朋友，但是這一件事，如果Uber完全試都不試，就說這個並不是一個good fit，我想說是不是試試看，我覺得這一件事正在往好的方向發展。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "Airbnb的部分？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "Airbnb的部分其實也是兩面的，Airbnb當然態度之前在溝通態度上一直比較好，如果有人有十五個家，十五個家都長一模一樣，不一定是他家，所以在這樣的監理技術上，同樣跟金融沙盒一樣，需要我們這邊的監理單位跟Airbnb合作——可能透過API或者是什麼方式——去讓我們的監理變得更容易，這一件事跟罰款也是兩回事。我比較care的是這一個監理技術是這邊交通部或Airbnb的其他朋友是在講同一件事，技術上是可行的，我們真的接得起來，然後雙方是可以合作的，並不是互相放話，然後可能講同一件事，而意思卻完全不一樣——因此我care的是如何合作的部分。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "至於罰款或執法這一些，我說是按照實際制訂出來的法律來做，那個比較不是我的工作。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "網友問：請問臺灣將來有考慮引進美國大學或者是研究所遠距離的這一種線上學習或者是學位認證的方式嗎？因為其實之前哈佛、史丹佛都有提出這樣的做法，您覺得臺灣未來有機會考慮這樣的政策嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實臺灣在高互動性的遠距教學是做得很好的，不管是教育雲或者是各個大學的開放課程之類的，這一位網友比較care的是學歷，並不是有沒有學習資源能不能用，而是唸完之後能不能換到一個文憑。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一件事非常有趣，牽涉到幾件事，我們對於考試有一個很奇怪的執著，如果考試才會取得學位的話，我們希望考試的人能在監考的狀況，也就是如何隔著網路就是確認這一幾時人是在時間之內用類似的狀況作答，如果要在一個考場考試跟拿到學位，我們在這邊對於技術的要求會非常高，因為希望公正性不遜於實際去考場。如果授予認證或憑證，目的並不是要求你的是成績，好比有參加一個專案，有實際做出什麼東西，比較是業師的角度，在認證上比較容易，是用六個月、一年以來實際的工作去計分，並不是兩小時、四小時的表現比較計分，這個在技術上比較容易，而這個比較不是技術上或者是法律上的問題，這個是文化上的問題，我們什麼時候會比較願意去看考試這一個東西能夠判斷的部分，真的有它的侷限，然後大部分應該是用你的參與來評量。什麼時候可以到這個程度？我覺得這一個問題就比較不會成為問題。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "您自己有接受過遠距離授課方式嗎？如何看這樣的授課方式？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實遠距離，通常不是授課，就是實際一起做案子，好比十四、十五歲我就開始參加一些研究案，其他的教授們不知道我才十四、十五歲，就是一個貢獻者，因此在這樣的情況下，確實我覺得我學得特別多、特別快，因為我馬上就要用，我們說學以致用，並不是學了過七年才用到，因此在這樣的前提底下，我當然覺得這樣的學比較有效。但是我也必須要說這個是因為當時的資訊環境，剛好寫程式、語言、數學這一些東西是可以這樣學的，我如果今天感興趣的是如何修摩托車或粒子加速對撞機，就沒有辦法用這一種純粹符號的方式學，這個是為什麼對VR、AR非常感興趣，這個是面對面學的東西，以後變成遠距學，可以帶入更多肢體、表情的語意訊息進來，這個也會比評量還容易。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "您之前有參與過？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "對。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "參加過什麼樣的專案？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "之前有參加過 Second Life（第二人生），它也就是網路上虛擬世界，有一點像BBS，但是可以有一個虛擬的人像，可以在空中飛行，可以把三維模型帶進來。我在裡面有參加過一個搜尋引擎，我們寫一支小機器人，在 Second Life 的世界，看實際裡面的東西，然後就去找說整個世界裡面紅色的衣服到底在哪邊等等，去做一個探索式的搜尋引擎，那一個專案我學到非常多，後來才知道是AppleScript的發明人、資訊界科學界德高望重的教授，其實我們本來在 Second Life 裡都不知道彼此的身份，所以很有意思。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "Second Life的作者後來去做VR了，就是我經常使用的High Fidelity。我想說的是，很多這一種開源的空間，你進去也不用買門票，開發也不需要買一個開發工具，就可以實際去做專案，裡面有很多人願意幫忙，全世界的人都會願意一起幫忙。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "我們只剩下一點點時間，可不可以請唐鳳政委講一下，您在未來的目標，最希望能夠達成什麼樣的目標？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個可能是要大家一起幫忙的，並不是我一個人做得到的，我會希望政府，尤其是專業的事務官朋友們在政策還沒有形成的時候，我們承認還沒有想清楚，要聽大家意見。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我講這一句話講得很自然，但是對於很多朋友來講，這個是要突破很大的心理障礙，大家要覺得幾乎是沒有問題、可以報院會才可以公開給大家進行討論，但是討論的空間真的比較小了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "事實上你問說網路上實體世界的各地朋友，如果我們坦白承認，對於這一件事我真的不太知道要怎麼辦，大家一起來幫忙想，大家願意不願意，其實大家是願意幫忙的；在這一件事唯一卡住的是面子問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我會覺得可能大家可以一起發現人生還算美麗，只要拋開一些面子問題（笑），在這麼早期，其實酸民沒有那麼酸的空間，就大家一起來做。" }, { "speaker": "葉思敏", "speech": "謝謝唐鳳政委接受經濟日報的專訪，期待您在之後有更多的表現，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝大家。" } ]

[ { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We’re recording our conversation." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "OK." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We’ll provide a transcription for you to read it before we publish it." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Sure." }, { "speaker": "Interviewer", "speech": "I was asking..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "She was asking, \"What kind of profile resists like working in VR?\" I’m like, \"No, [laughs] because it really doesn’t take any learning, especially the hand controllers and this generation motion controllers. We were born learning this, so it’s actually easier to teach than keyboard.\"" }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "It’s interesting because I was showing a 360 video yesterday HTC in a Vive and someone had left the controller out, so the ghost of the controller was living inside of 360 video like I kept turning over and I would see the controller in my field of view." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, yeah." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Which made me think just about how the medium is asking to be more and more interactive and more and more immersive. Then in a way, when I started out doing 360 video, there’s a time when that’s just going to be gone when videogrammetry replaces it. Everything’s going that way." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "There’s a real investment and involvement with this virtual space, probably social virtual space." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, I mean last year was mostly about solo experiences, but I think as of last October or so, we have pretty mature social platforms. There’s not a lot of massive adoption but technologically they’re mature." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "I talked to this guy who was a VR journalist about his time in social VR when he was interviewing me and my wife. We asked him how long he had stayed inside the platform. I can’t remember which one it was. It was like, \"I was in there for...\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What was the platform again?" }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "I can’t remember." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "OK." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "But he was like, \"I was in there for 21 hours.\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The only open‑source ones High Fidelity at the moment, or Hi‑Fi for short." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "I didn’t know this one." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There’s a lot of commercial ones as well." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Trying to explain to people like that’s the reason behind Facebook’s acquisition of Oculus..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Uh‑huh, sure." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "...that’s been a bit of a stumbling block because I think at this point, we’re still on the rollercoaster." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right, right, right. This is..." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "That’s you?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, this is me, 3‑D scan and everything, lip‑sync, also. There’s whole social plan face thing. As we can see, this is done by the guy who did Second Life. You see plenty of places with zero people at the moment." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "That’s so interesting. One of my mentors is Nonny de la Peña, who’s a VR journalist, basically, one of the first adopters of the Vive and also one of the first people to bring, or I think the first person to bring virtual reality to film festivals. One of the projects she did called, \"Hunger in Los Angeles,\" her initial work before she got into VR was on Second Life." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "It was academic analysis of Second Life, so it makes a lot of sense..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What in Los Angeles?" }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "It’s called \"Hunger in Los Angeles.\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "\"Hunger in Los Angeles.\"" }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Yeah, so if you look up Nonny de la Peña..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Like this?" }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "No, \"s.\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "OK, \"Hungry in Los Angeles.\"" }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Then Nonny de la Peña is...Yeah, there you go. I think she got rid of Immersive Journalism. She has a slightly more updated website. By \"slightly more updated,\" I mean a Squarespace website. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "This piece was in many ways the beginning of virtual reality as we know it, because she had to figure out how to show this at Sundance. Originally, she was using some like military‑grade virtual reality helmet. This is outside a...it’s modeled after a...How do I put this? Sorry. I just had a moment of realizing that I was being recorded." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We can edit the transcript afterward." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "This is modeled after an incident that one of her researchers went out and recorded at a soup kitchen in Los Angeles where someone went into diabetic shock while waiting for their food. Because hunger in Los Angeles is a real problem, she wanted to figure out a way to actually get people to understand it." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "She essentially created this walk around volumetric virtual reality system that could put people into this situation. Obviously it’s made in Unity. Those pixels are quite blocky at this point, but it was very effective at the time. People bursting into tears when they take off the headsets or what have you." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Her intern was a guy named Palmer Luckey [laughs] who was just somebody who was really into playing with phones in his garage. He helped to build the first system that was not using military technology to make this piece available to people at Sundance." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Is that a glove, or was there a hand‑capture device?" }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "There was no hand‑capture device. The hand is in the pocket. What it’s actually doing...See the cross on the head is what’s...I’m sure...Right? Get it?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right, right, right." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "The cross on the head is the sensor that’s placing you within the virtual context." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Ooh, that’s nice." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Yeah, so she’s done a lot with this as well, this ghosting effect which is also in her piece, \"Project Syria.\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I see." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "When my partner Eline and I, we won an award called the Tim Hetherington Visionary Award that allowed us to basically choose a mentor for the first VR project that we ever made, we chose her because she held her breath for so long and stuck there while nobody was believing in the technology." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Yeah, it’s been pretty amazing to see her life change in the past three years as this has become more and more of a mainstream technology." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is great, this is great. This is like recreating an actual event of a few minutes long and you can just immersively participate into it." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Exactly. She has a very specific methodology with a very specific journalistic ethic behind it. She’ll do recordings, field recordings, or use existing news footage to recreate events. The piece of hers that I think is the most powerful for me is the piece called \"Kiya,\" that’s about a domestic violence situation. Actually, about a murder." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What’s the keyword?" }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Actually, you know what? I would say, instead of going to Immersivejournalism.com, because she’s in the process of closing this one out..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I was just going on here." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "...her company now is called Emblematic." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Emblematic." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Which is very up your alley, I feel like after reading that piece. It’s Emblematic Media, I believe. I don’t even know what it is now." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s it." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "You should be able to find it. Emblematic Group, yeah. [pointing at a Formula 1 VR experience on the screen] That’s a commercial experience. \"Use of Force,\" is a project that was at Tribeca. She produces a lot. \"Kiya\" is the one on the right." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "\"Two sisters’ efforts to rescue their third sister, Kiya...\"" }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "I think that that may actually be available on Steam. I’m not sure." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "OK. It’s loading. I’m not sure what it’s doing. Oops." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Do you want to log into Squarespace?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I think there’s just one screenshot there." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Yeah. I honestly think that Steam may be the best way to get it if they put it up there yet. I think that they must have because that was an Al Jazeera commission and I would assume that they want to get it out there in any way that they can. Yep. You can get it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There we go. Yeah, yeah. It’s interesting. Thank you. That’s great. I wish we got a video." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "But even this. You look at this. It’s puppets. It’s motion capture and then there’s a thin wrap of pixels on top of it. All of this now would be done by volumetrically, like with a volumetric scanner. Sorry, not volumetric scanner but with videogrammetry. Same thing, basically." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Basically, you act one from this menu?" }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "That’s an interesting thing and this leads to a conversation that I’m really interested to have with you, which is about perspective in VR. Because it’s something that has become a pretty recent obsession of mine and I feel like you have interesting thoughts on it, knowing a little bit about what you said about your experiences." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is my piece..." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Yeah, which I’ve read." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah. The relevant part here is the fact that I work with some students to recreate their classroom and connect those classrooms together and had interview with some high school students and finally with some anchor. This is the High Fidelity space that I mentioned and everything. It’s mo‑cap, or whatever Vive can offer as a mo‑cap substitute." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "I like how they’re all just sitting on nothing. That’s wonderful." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, perspectives. What would you like to talk about?" }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "It’s just that I think there’s a capacity in the technology to address perspective and motion in different ways. You can address it from an objective perspective, so you can be...The what do you call it? The Swayze effect, you can be a ghost which is more common in 360‑video. There’s also this idea of inhabiting yourself in a virtual space. There’s the idea of becoming someone else when in virtual space." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Then there’s something that I felt after reading your piece that if you don’t know about it, you should, because, I think, it would be very up your alley and that’s the ability to merge with someone else’s identity through VR. Do you know the piece, \"The Machine to be Another\"?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I think so. Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "\"Gender Swap,\" have you ever heard of that? Have you done it?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure, yeah." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Where did you do it?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I started in Second Life. It was very long ago, actually, 2006, ’07, something. At that time, I was working on a Second Life search engine. The search engine was supposed to send those invisible robots to everybody’s spaces in Second Life and look around just like real robot would do." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Visually, because Second Life the engine only feeds the textures if you can see it, If it’s in your line of sight. It learned to crawl the spaces, literally, and collect all the vision information so that we can build a search engine so you can ask it like, \"Where are all the red clothes, or white necklaces?\" in the whole multi ‑list, so you’re looking in and searching around." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But one part of that led me to basically record the movement of the one real avatar because we want to learn how a person actually cross the space and how to tell which one is the interesting alley here or something or which one is not interesting and so on to save some CPU time." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "As part of that work, I was just recording people’s movement and the ways they look. Of course, it’s not VR, it’s not mo‑cap, but it’s a predecessor of that. As part of that, I could just replay the path and the head position. That’s pretty much it. There’s nothing else in Second Life anyway. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But that also means that I get to immerse it through, at least today, my co‑developers’ viewpoints and lifestyles and everything because we did capture all the visual information that they got. It’s like the Wayback Machine, the Web archives, but for Second Life." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "But there’s also a tagging possibility, right, where you could actually...? Like could you track metadata on the individuals and also track...? You could be like, \"All brown‑haired people are in these spaces and...\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "That’s so interesting. I get it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Basically, recorder but the recorder with depth perception because that’s what Second Life gives us. You can recreate just the part of the experience that’s relevant. You can take all the other persons and their accessories out and just focus on the interaction between two people in a very large part so the other people are just transparent. That’s the technology but..." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "But it’s not in this time, or whatever, right?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly. You can say to it, \"Before entering this discussion, attend this replay of the meeting from the other side’s perspective,\" but only for five minutes or something. It’s like an inform session before a deliberation but it’s actually working on a fact level. That’s the main idea." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Machine to be Another, their piece, \"Gender Swap,\" is a real‑time meet‑in‑a‑world version of that using virtual reality as the interface." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I saw the media." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "That piece, I feel like that’s one of the most powerful applications that I’ve ever seen of virtual reality because it opens up this idea of real empathy. Because I think that people always talk about empathy being [inaudible 18:42] machine and all that rhetoric." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Which I don’t really believe with VR, because I think that there’s an aspect of alienation that’s inherent to the media. That’s not for augmented reality. Right?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right. I understand the issue." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "How come people don’t acknowledge that? Marketing?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I don’t think they had sufficient firsthand experience in both media to tell one from another. Because as you said, it’s clunky. With the WiFi appendage, I think, we’re getting there. Just to let you guys know what we’re talking about." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "I wrote an essay on it as well that I’ll send to you. It’s about who the people are behind the project. One of the interesting things about it is that there a lot of them have these...They’re what you would call \"third culture kids.\" They’re from multiple cultures and therefore have a unique understanding of culture and identity." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "I feel like since we’re all going in that direction anyway, that was one of the most profound experiences that I’ve ever had in the medium." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "\"Library of Ourselves.\"" }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Did \"Library of Ourselves\" actually happen? I feel like \"Library of Ourselves\" is, basically, Snapchat spectacles in a way. See? Oh no, this is a different one." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Oh no. I’ve never seen this one. That’s amazing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Awesome. Awesome." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "That’s amazing." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Fantastic. I don’t know what they’re using now, but when I had that experience in 2014, which was the gender version of the one you just saw, that was using like a Chinese Oculus knock‑off with a low‑quality streaming camera." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, I’m aware of, yes. Just a second. Which was this one, right?" }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "That was, yeah, \"Gender Swap.\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This was the one you did?" }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Yeah. I also had [laughs] another experience of it at Tribeca in 2015, where I did it with my friend and designer Clint who’s my collaborator. It was really funny because we have very similar perspectives on the world, so it didn’t really feel like anything. It just felt like dancing with myself." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure. [laughs] They’re orchestrated to basically perform the same movements just for the sake of recording." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Actually, what’s interesting about it is there is some level of orchestration, but there’s also a Ouija board effect where nobody’s pushing and nobody’s pulling, but obviously, that’s not what’s actually happening. You fall into a subtle..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "So that you dance in resonance." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Exactly. Yeah. A lot of what makes that happen is if they emphasize that you slow down, as you work through the experience, there’s a meditative aspect to it as well." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "In interviewing them, I brought up this idea of the third entity. That’s the term that I used, which was something that’s borrowed from a theater teacher who talked about, \"When person A meets person B, they create person C.\"" }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "There’s this sharing of me and you, and then there’s you distinctly, me distinctly, and they...The funny thing was one of the people who was part of the group that does this, he was like, \"’The third entity,’ that’s the term that we use in our workshop.\" It’s something that’s there in all of our brains that we can reach for the third entity like we all understand the concept." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I work in psychoanalysis, so it’s like..." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Got it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "...part of the setting. This is, of course, a very powerful demo. But I do think the scalable way of doing this is some blend between synthetic and the real, like in‑the‑flesh. Like this, I think, is very convincing." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "I agree." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The hand‑touching part." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Here I’m sending you the essay that I wrote about it. There you go. That also opens up this question of, \"How are you going to get people to buy these devices when they’re most effective in a performance setting?\" I think that there’s been an unhealthy rush to sell the devices to an unwilling public and it’s going to take some time." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The defense is, \"Probably, people are going to find them anyway.\"" }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "That’s true. But how far off do you think we are from room‑scale experiences with mobile VR?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I think Daydream is already pretty much there." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "But there are limitations to Daydream in terms of Z access so it’s still, you’re talking about an X‑Y flat experience on some level." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Oh yeah, you have to be sitting there. But the most powerful experiences so far that I’ve seen involves very little mobility, as far as the Vive and Oculus experience goes." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "That’s interesting. Do you view Tilt Brush as a powerful experience or do you view it just as an amusement?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "[laughs] A lot of my experience is just sitting in a rotating chair. I think the rotating chair is part of the mobile VR experience." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Yeah, it is." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It doesn’t work if you take that out." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "That’s one thing that we played with a lot in our first 360‑piece because it’s a piece where a lot of it is split screen, so you have an opening of two worlds touching each other." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "There’s something about watching the way that people rotate around to be facing front and seeing Kenya and facing at the back and seeing San Diego, there’s something about that, once again, choreography that they fall into when they’re doing that that really it feels magical. It feels like breaking new ground in the medium." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "I think that that’s one of the things that’s really interesting is that it feels, sometimes, working on this specific technology, like, \"I am the ant, and all of my friends are ants who work in the field and we’re all just working on something that we don’t fully understand every aspect of.\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, part of the swarm." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Part of the swarm." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Which you would think would be a disconcerting experience." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Why? We’re social animals. We’re part of the swarm." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "But..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Better than part of the herd." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "But it’s also the identity thread of it, of being part of something larger than yourself at least from the perspective of an American where individualism is supposedly what it’s all about all the time, you feel a little bit like you’re not supposed to be a finger or a fingernail. You’re supposed to be the whole body." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "I guess, the endpoint of that is terrible people [laughs] who are...I’m trying very hard not to say Donald Trump’s name right now." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I think there are symptoms, there are causes." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "The psychoanalysis thing, because you’re very good at listening clearly. Do you actually practice psychoanalysis?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, sure." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "On both sides of the couch?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "A little bit. I study group therapy. I don’t actually analyze people on the couch, but I’ve been doing personality analysis for six years or more. But anyway, it’s a very long time. But I do facilitate groups, group therapy and group dynamics and things like that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s the thing because anyone who works in social working or care worker or psychotherapy knows that it’s not really the therapist doing the healing. We’re just channelers, and a lot of experience doing that humbles us a little bit." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Interesting." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s not an individualist‑collectivist thing. It’s just knowing that personalities, identities, they’re artifacts of communication. If you take the social part out of it that there’s no identities. You can cling to memories and replay and try to confine yourself into identity but it doesn’t have to be like that. That’s the main perspective I’m coming from." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Did you ever read that Neil Gaiman, \"Miracleman\" reboot?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "There’s a race of aliens in it whose form of creativity is changing bodies so they can swap their consciousness into different bodies depending on how they want to express themselves artistically." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Awesome." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Yeah, amazing. But once that’s available to us through this technology or some other technology, what does that mean to a group versus an individual? What does that mean to identity overall?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They’re just false...I do think it’s like ends of the spectrum that you can fluctuate over the course of the day like from being very meditative to very social. I think it’s healthy to explain the phenomenon like this. But it’s not any fixed point in time where you can say, \"This is me and the others are not, the others are just performance.\" No, it’s all us." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "It’s interesting because if you talk about it that way, you have the question of, \"What limits--in terms of what you can put out into the world, how you can improve the world-- are there actually, and what are just the limits that you’ve created for yourself?\"" }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "There is a certain amount of achievement or, I would almost say like, \"help\" that you can offer to other people that you may not be aware you can offer to other people." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "If you say, \"Time box five minutes, 15 minutes, or something to help other people even though they’re complete strangers,\" then, you discover part of yourself that you didn’t already know." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Yeah, but there’s also something like, and this gets back to the empathy mission idea, that how you define help and what actually is help is sometimes hard to really know. Because the idea that these technologies are going to actually help anyone and not just lock us in some strange techno dystopia, that’s a leap of faith in and of itself. Like, are these things going to improve society?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Because I’ve been doing VR classes and everything for 16 years, so for me it’s always about what we ask of the technology, not the other way around." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "But with AR, I feel that’s very right on, because that’s a technology that feels very human and I feel much more in the driver’s seat of an AR experience and I feel like just if you look at the enterprise applications and you look at the social applications, it can definitely benefit people and expose layers of reality that we’re unaware of." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "The idea of augmenting reality is a little bit off. I feel like it’s more about exposing stuff that already exists." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s surfacing." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Surfacing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, surfacing different levels of reality." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Exactly. But VR, the isolation, the sealing yourself off from the world, what is the benefit of that? Do you think that there’s a benefit to that socially, culturally?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "To me it’s also a spectrum. There’s earphones. There’s earphones that have noise cancellation which is the audio kind of a VR and there’s earphones that have pass‑through. I have a pair of earphones that basically have, say, very good noise cancellation but it has a microphone that takes everything from the outside and places it to your ear..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "...if you enable the pass‑through mode. That is actually a lot of where VR is going. I gave classes to students in Kaohsiung and Hangzhou and I teach them to use the Tron mode of Vive, which is this camera in the front of Vive. You can enable it and then you’re in a VR space but you see this blue outline of the world. It’s AR." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I told them to use SketchUp or whatever to draw their classrooms, which are very regular and to the point where if they put it and switch to Tron mode, you see it’s abled but you also see the surroundings." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "That’s interesting. That’s very interesting." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is also AR or mixed reality but coming from that isolation part of it." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "On a technology level, clearly, that spectrum is being acknowledged by the major hardware manufacturers or software manufacturers. In the case of Microsoft, they’re probably not going to be making many HoloLens as compared to other device manufacturers who make the augmented reality glasses that run HoloGraphic." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Like the head of Microsoft’s HoloLens program is a woman named, Lorraine Bardeen who talks about that spectrum, how there’s VR on one side and there’s augmented reality on the other side and a lot of the technology that’s been developed for HoloLens is now being fed over to the virtual reality side." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Which is what Acer and all the other companies that are now manufacturing, or have contracts to manufacture the Microsoft VR devices are using." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What I’m saying is that complete isolation is other than looking at the Milky Way for meditative purposes..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "...that’s probably the very good use of it, but it’s very limited and I think everybody will switch to the social side." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Slowly move down the spectrum." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Probably within a year or two." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "I agree with that. I would say, \"Google agrees with that as well,\" because Tango and Daydream are on a collision course it seems with each other." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We have a product concept now. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Right, and you have the camera going through. You have the Daydream, soft utopian Google Daydream, headset and if you have pass‑through going through the camera with Tango, you basically have like another box..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They just rolled out a phone that has both so..." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Amazing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "... just need a cell phone." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Wait. What is the phone that they rolled out?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I think it’s an Asus phone. ZenFone is a start. ZenFone AR." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "I think my friend, Andy, told me that this was going to happen. When did this come out?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "A couple of weeks ago." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Because it used to only...Tango used to be only on like a giant Phablet." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, this is Tango." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is, actually, pretty well‑built. It’s not heavy. It’s not a giant Phablet. This is the usual three cams. The idea is that you can use Tango to do real‑time modeling and then put on Daydream to preview. It has weird amount of RAM." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "They don’t trust it yet to have the systems fully integrated. They don’t have..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s all software at this point. The HoloLens is ready and the software part is, at the moment, two virtual machines, so you can’t be in the same mode as Daydream as in Tango but it’s a software problem. I’m sure it could be solved, if they came together and joined and promote this." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Didn’t they move Daydream over the VR department?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "To what?" }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Did they move Daydream, I’m sorry, did they move Tango over to the VR department at a certain point? I feel like they did." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I think it’s in a supergroup but it’s not really in the same department. Anyway, this is just the first. I’m pretty sure that there will be plenty of builds like this because it’s proven to work in a phone." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "It’s funny. Look at all those things. [pointing at the Tango and Daydream logos] Do you think the graphic designers are just waiting to push those together?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, probably." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "That’s hilarious. Have you played with Tango?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In its very, very early days but not in expansion. I had those three different cameras [laughs] separately in the software stages." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Hilarious. You’ve developed for Daydream as well?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I did the SDK but I don’t have the Daydream device yet." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "I’ve heard really good things from developers, like my friends who are developing for it. But the thing that’s funny about all this, I’m so not technological. I’ve disengaged from all social media which Jonna thinks is hilarious. I’m not a developer at all. It’s just about... there’s something about all this stuff that really calls to me, like, I’m a filmmaker and an artist." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "All this is just so that people can make art." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "This is literally what the cameras do." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Absolutely. What are you going to do?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I’ve been spending a lot of time with those AR devices." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "This is the audio?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "AR glasses." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "OK. Those are the new ones." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But this is really AR because after I’ve been wearing this for hours, I didn’t really feel that it’s there." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "That’s interesting. Do you know Roundware?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Roundware is interesting. You’d have to have the iPhone in your pocket, but check it out. It’s an audio AR platform that never...It’s called Roundware. It’s open‑source. It’s really brilliant." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Roundware?" }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Roundware, yeah." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Roundware." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Halsey Burgund is the creator. [Audrey pulls up a Roundware link from Google] When did this come out? Did they build this on Roundware?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I have no idea." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Yeah. I saw Halsey’s name in that. Man, you’re quick with keyboards." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It says, \"Costs, game.\" I see. It’s a video game that’s built on this platform." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "He’s an artist in residence at MIT Open Doc Lab. Do you know when this is published? Because I know he wanted to start working with the (MIT) Game Lab. Oh, no. This is old." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, this is old." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "That must’ve been something that he was just playing around with. Basically, you can embed audio using Google Maps or using the Maps API. You can see it behind there. You can tell stories through it. He’s a pretty interesting guy. He’s got a good spirit." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s informed by everything that happens in your vicinity and just maps them to the auditory spectrum." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "You could do something as basic as having multiple drone pieces, drone‑like audio pieces playing in different zones and then as you pass through the pieces, you transition. Or you could just tell a complex story using the real world as your canvas." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "The thing that he’s actually added into it that’s really fun is that there’s the ability for users to tag the spaces as they’re going through the pieces with their own comments. As a user, you can encounter the..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s a participatory form of sounds. In High Fidelity, because it’s got the open‑source platform that’s built, there’s a really good mixer and they wrote their own audio codec for that. It’s basically, it’s been used for things like this, but also to mix real‑time jamming events." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "For example, you have soloist and then...You always start with the drummer, actually. There was this drummer and then the drummer pipelines to the soloist and to guitar and whatever. Everybody adds a layer to the jam and with very minimal latency and the people in the High Fidelity world just listen to the final mixed sound but as they walk towards the different players." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Spatialized?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right. Exactly. Although they’re physically in different places, they could still jam using this kind of time‑delayed technology." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "I teach...There’s a State Department program I’m involved with where filmmakers from the Middle East come to the US and learn about American production methods. I do the immersive and interactive mentoring for them." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "I’ve been trying to explain wwhat social VR is to them and the best way that I can explain it is that you’re always the person sitting in the turning chair even if you are, like in a solitary VR experience, even if it’s very convincing how it shifts your perspective. But with social VR, I can be in Moscow and you can be in Taipei, and you can be a lion and I can be a snake and we believe each other." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I think this has tremendous potential for post‑conflict work." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "As evidence." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "As evidenced by this. Seriously, I do think the more the conflict that they are, the more traumatic it is, the more socially needs for the healing process to happen." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "I see that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In the clinics realm, group therapy or psychoanalysis, we just fix one endpoint form this large traumatic conflict thing. Of course, you hope that this person can carry some of the help or some of the resilience back to their home network. But wouldn’t that be even more effective if the home network can use such a VR to work on their...?" }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Let me tell you something else. Do you know who Skip Rizzo is?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Nope." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Skip Rizzo is another person who works at USC with Nonny de la Peña in a separate area. Skip does PTSD therapy for veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan and now, the Vietnam War as well, through VR. He was one of the first people to adopt VR as a therapeutic tool. It’s interesting because his experiences that he creates...[Finding a link about Skip Rizzo for Audrey] Let me just get this...To my knowledge, he’s not working on anything that’s social." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "But I find what you’re saying very interesting. The stuff he’s doing is AI‑based or immersion therapy‑based. Let me find...I have a video that I’ll share with you." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s great. So far, the proven literature for immersive therapy is mostly around desensitization, which is, of course, an important part, but very small part of it." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Desensitization literally means \"numbing,\" so the question is, \"Are you actually getting to the root of the trauma when you do that?\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly. It’s just scratching the surface so to speak." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "But it can do so much more." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure. Desensitization has its place. An example that worked, like, before having stage fright, anticipate stage fright and use the VR to simulate a huge room. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "I’ve heard about that being very effective, actually." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s a very quick fix. It’s basically, that you engage stage fright two hours or two days before the speech itself." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Have you seen any of the footage of the initial immersion therapy VR programs? \"Fear of Heights,\" and all that stuff?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "There’s a certain camp appeal to pretty much all of the ’90s VR stuff. Especially, older media reports on ’90s VR. It’s really fun to watch how it is." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "What are your current projects?" }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "That’s so interesting. I am here, in a way, because I feel like I need to set the reset button, just press the reset button and look a little bit inside and figure out what comes next. Because I feel like I was barreling along for two or three years and I want to take some time to rethink al lot of stuff and rethink a lot of the work that lies ahead." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "There’s a slate of virtual reality projects that’s developing right now that my wife and I are working on that are just starting to take shape. In addition to all of the work and meetings and everything that are happening here on the surface, underneath the surface, all that work is starting to build up because I never have any time." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "This conversation, an hour packs in all of the sitting back and thinking I get to do in two weeks or a month at home, because I’m always just working, working, working. We’ll see. I can’t give you any definitive answers. But I can say that there’s three or four things that are on the horizon that are just starting to bloom." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s great. We’re in a similar place. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Interviewer", "speech": "But Kel is going to have video shot during this trip, right?" }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "I think so. Yeah. I think so. The best thing I could say about that video that we’re intending on shooting, \"It’s very amorphous right now.\" But essentially, we want to find a place in Taiwan that no one will recognize outside of Taiwan, so there’s a feeling of complete displacement in the environment." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "We want to find a place that has certain cultural signifiers attached to it that send you off in false directions to give viewers a sense that the world is a much bigger place than you can ever possibly imagine." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Expand their minds." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "What?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Expand their minds." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Yeah. Basically. But I don’t know what that means and I don’t know whether it’s going to be documentary or fiction aspects. Do you know, I’m pretty obsessed right now with one‑shot virtual reality experiences? 360‑degree experiences that don’t have traditional editing. I think that that comes from, it’s a reaction to the last couple of pieces that we worked on where I just don’t...I don’t know." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Every time we make something I want to go in exactly the opposite direction. But the odd thing about that is that you start building up enough work, it all start to look alike, no matter how much you’re thinking you’re like pulling the wheel toward another direction, it’s still coming out of you. That speaks to the limits of identity that you were talking about before." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "This spectrum of identity does actually exist. That you are who you are no matter what you’re creating, it’s always going to look like you. It’s always going to come out as you." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "There’s going to be continuity, of course, because we don’t get every day as a blank slate. But I do think that the forms or the experiments or the creations, they are probably just the projections of your dimension through other people’s dimensions. You see what I mean?" }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Yeah, totally." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The thing is to make sense to say that while not entirely open to everybody else’s dimensions, it does make sense to grow your own dimension out of it and, of course, you’re going to be continuous on that dimension of a life’s trajectory." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "If you’re talking about projecting your own dimensionality, there’s certain specificity that is the only key to universality. If I were to go out tomorrow and, say, \"I’m going to make a universal piece of work that everybody is going to understand and it’s going to sum up the world,\" overall it would be the most nonspecific piece of shit ever made." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "But if I say, \"I’m going to burrow into my own perspective and create something that’s very true to me,\" that sometimes feel like the only pathway to..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Universality." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "...universality. Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "My favorite novel, \"Finnegans Wake.\"" }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Wow, look at you." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "You’re like the only person that got through it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I translated part of it, but it’s very time‑consuming." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In any case, what I’m saying is at the same time the vocabulary of experience is private, like entirely specific to that particular person, but because of the execution of not limiting to other people’s grammar, it’s not limited to other people’s language, it’s at the same time entirely universal, so I don’t think it’s two things." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s just being authentic to your experiences, which of course involves interactions with people who are your contemporaries, who carries with them cultures, and everything like this." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s not possible to say, \"I create something,\" without all the embeddings [laughs] in the local culture. But it’s important at the same time to say that, \"But I’m not adhered to that culture,\" or, \"I’m not charged with furthering the culture.\" I think it’s the same thing to say that we’re not limited by identity. Of course every day we’re limited by the limits imposed by the previous days." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Interviewer", "speech": "Though I couldn’t fully follow your conversation it has been so interesting. There are a few things coming into my mind. I have a question for Audrey. You just mentioned that you taught in Kaohsiung and Hangzhou." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, yeah." }, { "speaker": "Interviewer", "speech": "What was that occasion? Are you still teaching now as a minister?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "The class finished a while ago. That was before my visit to Paris, but it was after I had become a minister, so around September and October, last one." }, { "speaker": "Interviewer", "speech": "Is it possible you teach again?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure. Why not? The thing is that when I said, \"I teach in Kaohsiung and Hangzhou,\" I mean that I took a half‑day off in my dormitory..." }, { "speaker": "Interviewer", "speech": "Makes sense." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "...and sent an avatar of me, photorealistic, to Kaohsiung and Hangzhou [laughs] asking them to connect to this virtual classroom. Then I asked all my students to give a VR model of themselves and recreate their classrooms and we staged a classroom together. I’m synchronously there [laughs] but we’re all in this VR space." }, { "speaker": "Interviewer", "speech": "Is it possible...? After our workshop next week, I’m thinking to extend similar meaningful programs for the young students here, so if there’s a possibility I might come and listen to it, to follow, to try to maximize." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I do tour around the world in robotic doubles..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "...giving lectures and everything. Double Robotics is really pretty good for that purpose. Have you ever tried it?" }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "No. It’s fascinating to me." }, { "speaker": "Interviewer", "speech": "Because we are trying to set up a virtual college on digital arts in Chengchi University." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Oh yeah, OK. I thought you meant..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Snowden wrote it. He’s probably the most famous user." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "There’s a really good \"Community\" episode about it." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They have this too." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Amazing. That’s hilarious." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "They designed it so that stitching algorithm will cancel this entire thing out, so you get a floating perspective." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "I’m talking about work that I made a year and a half ago, and it’s like, \"In my day stitching was terrible.\" Now it’s like it doesn’t matter, everything’s..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It doesn’t matter anymore. It is a solved problem." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Solved problem. Literally everything that was published before like April, 2016, has these irreversible stitching errors." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Exactly." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Will we accept that in the future?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Why not?" }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Yeah, I guess. I hope so." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I’m sure some AI will look at those old films and completely patch over them..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "... and fix all the artifacts." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Or just be like, \"This is a terrible film. Make the human slaves fix them.\"" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Seriously, the generative model is..." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You know what the generative model is." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Basically what this does is that it looks at huge amount of bedroom images and [inaudible 56:11] are really just initial few rows and a mission autocompletes based on..." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "That’s amazing." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s very sub‑descriptive. [laughs] All this is synthetic. It’s as of a few months ago, a solved problem. You can very easily teach it to complete and remove the stitching artifacts in a very convincing way. It also generates album covers out of nowhere, out of noise. This is entirely dreamed up but still pretty convincing. Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Isn’t it nice?" }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "On some days, yeah. If you’re wearing the right pair of glasses and you’re looking at it, it’s very nice. I don’t know. The collaboration with technology, you seem to have very healthy attitude toward it. Does it ever feel to you like things are moving too quickly?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "No. Not quick enough." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "What’s your ideal thing that will happen next month with technology?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It’s probably already happened. It’s just not evenly distributed. All these things like the Google Translate team, last October, solved the Chinese‑English translation problem." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "I haven’t downloaded the app, the magic app, yet." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then after they solved it, it only took three or four months for a comparable performance, open‑source technology, OpenNMT, to appear on GitHub courtesy of Harvard University." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "When I said, \"Not quick enough,\" I mean, we had to wait three or four months but it’s, actually, quick enough for most of business uses because people would, of course, take even more time to evaluate and fit into their daily flows. But knowing that Chinese‑English translation is a solved problem, actually changes pretty much everything." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Not to turn this into...Not to take us out of very dark alley, but I remember being in Accra in Ghana and seeing all the smoke rising from one neighborhood and being told later by our camera assistant that that’s where all of the computer waste was sent and lit on fire." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It is definitely a problem." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "The problems though, can those be solved as quickly as...? Can a problem involving real environmental degradation be solved as quickly as a problem like communication? I guess, you could say that the problem like communication, once it’s solved, can lead to the solutions to the problems of the environment and the problems of politics, if we just understand each other well." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah, because then, the entire systematic fault, the systematic shortcoming is before everybody’s eyes and people can’t really go around ignoring it. But just do go back to your question." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I’m happy to appear like this anywhere in the world." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "He’ll send a robot to you." }, { "speaker": "Interviewer", "speech": "My second thought is that, I really enjoy your relaxing conversation. Is it possible for you to have a similar occasion to be on the Google things you did just a few weeks ago, and talking about the VR and try to open the eyes for those in audience who are not very familiar with...?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You’re talking about my speech in Mix Taiwan about artificial intelligence and Daydreams?" }, { "speaker": "Interviewer", "speech": "Yeah. That’s right." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure. I’m happy to share this because I did give a talk in Paris which is what you read." }, { "speaker": "Interviewer", "speech": "You two together, sitting together, have a very relaxing conversation." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s what we’re doing now, right? [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Interviewer", "speech": "Yeah, but try to rebuild it online." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Online?" }, { "speaker": "Interviewer", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "If we start filming then." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "We’re running out of time. I need more coffee." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You need more coffee. I’m sure. Drop by anytime and we’ll get a video recording." }, { "speaker": "Interviewer", "speech": "Is it possible...? [non‑English speech] ." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "I think I’m good for now." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "[non‑English speech]" }, { "speaker": "Interviewer", "speech": "[non‑English speech] ." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "[non‑English speech] ." }, { "speaker": "Interviewer", "speech": "[non‑English speech]" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You’re welcome to drop by any time and just to say that maybe next time, we actually do film ourselves so that it becomes an educational click of some sort." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Can you then set us up as Second Life avatars?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Then it can be broadcast out as our virtual selves talking to each other?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah. That’s what I did, actually, for a lot of interviews." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Nice." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "I just send my audio stream and then my avatar autocompletes the movement and everything." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "How are you doing your photogrammetry scans of yourself? Just with one, two, three detach or are you doing...?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "It is just with regular, a few cameras in a cylinder rim." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Where did you do yours?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "In Paris, somewhere else in Paris. But in Taiwan, there’s a studio, I think, which is a very similar arrangement and they do deliver pretty good scans. That’s where I got Chen Ya-Lin to scan her image in the interview I show briefly of us hugging each other. It’s pretty convincing." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "We could do that." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "We can do that." }, { "speaker": "Interviewer", "speech": "Oh, OK." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah. Or if you have your Adobe Creative CC account, there’s Adobe Fuse where you can very easily model yourself using a Sims‑like...It will be more cartoonish but actually details will be even more detailed. There’s a tradeoff. [laughs]" }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "See, that’s what I’m waiting for in terms of VR capture is just somebody to crack videogrammetry in a way that it’s not this 30‑camera, green screen, whatever. I actually think what you..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Tango’s going to. Supposedly, Tango is going to solve that." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "You know all of the open‑source stuff that James George and Alexander Porter and all the Scatter people did?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Mm‑hmm." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "It seems to me like they’re so closely aligned that all of the stuff that they did with the Kinect scans and the 5D mount and all that, it’s basically the same, right?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah. It is." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "But Tango, you’re still talking about single perspective with this one so if you have three Tango phones, you could do...?" }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Or just one Tango phone on a rail." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "But with movement of subject. If you’re talking about the movement of subject like you’re actually talking about live cap of the subject and then blowing that out into room‑scale VR experience." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yes." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "How would you do that? You just..." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "You just switch two types of phone systems." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "That’s a funny thing about VR, as well, is that we always thought that the more cameras, the better and what we’re slowly discovering is that two cameras are better than anything." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s why Vive is designed this way, firmware update issues notwithstanding." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "But that’s all it takes, really." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "That’s going to be a moment when we actually have the ability to put volumetric scans into space with relative ease and simple authoring tools. That’s when the masters of the medium are going to arise." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Right. I have this sticker here, but it could be a masquerade or something. Supposedly that I wear this. Supposedly, this is Tango phone. Suppose it has a projection of a synthetic rendering of the foveation of where my eyes are looking so that people see a pair of eyes. Not real eyes but where my eyes are looking at." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Suppose that we both wear this, and both of our friends has this Tango mode scan on. Then, actually, we are like sensors." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "That’s very interesting." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Then we don’t have to install anything, as long as the field of view, we stay in each other’s field of view, we’ve got all the information we need." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "I think if you throw area learning into that, specifically through the settings that HoloLens has been playing with, then you have the ability to create this forest style, like world on top of world, on top of world, on top of world that’s psychedelic, to say the least." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "Cool." }, { "speaker": "Interviewer", "speech": "Kel has been talking with me about his idea to have VR festival here." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure." }, { "speaker": "Interviewer", "speech": "I’m going to work that through the pathway of the university. I think that was a good idea. I’m trying to invite Kel and his wife back to set some fires everywhere." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "That’s great." }, { "speaker": "Interviewer", "speech": "I’m expecting to work with you." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Of course, anytime. Drop by. Or I’ll send my digital double." }, { "speaker": "Interviewer", "speech": "OK." }, { "speaker": "Kel O’Neill", "speech": "It’s really, really great to meet you." }, { "speaker": "Audrey Tang", "speech": "Sure." } ]

[ { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "今天謝謝大家在這麼冷的天氣過來，一起思考有關於臺灣政治未來的一些可能。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "我們每次在談到任何歷史現象跟歷史趨勢時，背後都有很悠長的脈絡，但為了敘事方便，會找某一個時間的節點。觀察臺灣這幾年的一些重要變化，2014年3月的太陽花運動，是時空上無法迴避的座標，在太陽花運動之後，確實改變了臺灣的政治格局。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "當時在太陽花運動之後，如果大家還有印象的話──民進黨裡面的黨主席選舉，蘇、謝退出，促成民進黨的世代交替；國民黨則是把幾位地方上的民選縣市長列席為副主席，作為中央的權力重組——雖然這個重組並沒有辦法改變他們的命運；還有運動領導者黃國昌，成為日後時代力量黨的主席。2014年底柯文哲上台，一直到去年初第三次政黨輪替，大概都是太陽花之後所牽動到這些政治格局的改變。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "除了這一些顯象的政治格局，是還有一個更深遠的另外影響是：各種網路科技、資訊科技在政治上的運用，終於受到社會上的廣泛注意。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "如果大家還有印象的話，在太陽花運動的期間，很多媒體開始關注的是一台iPad加兩個夾腳拖鞋就可以轉播。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "稍微近距離的參與者，我不知道有多少人看過，當時（g0v參與者）用hackfoldr寫的一個架構。你進去的時候，可以看到不同地方的直播，包括物資、人員調度的表單，乃至於所有在這些地方的逐字稿及地理資訊，都整合在這裡面。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "更深一層的部分，我不知道在場有誰看過Audrey之前演講的材料──我們想想看兩、三萬人聚集在一個地方，網路怎麼能夠通？經過Audrey的分享，我們才曉得原來g0v這一群人，在2013年洪仲丘事件中，開始思考這一種大型抗爭集結的時候，如何確保網路暢通，所以在3月18日那一天晚上，他們牽了一條光纖，用WiMax等當時比較少用的通訊介面，去建構了很多access point，才能讓現場的網路暢通。乃至於後來反太陽花的人到了現場，g0v也秉持網路中立性，堅持任何人都可以使用，也讓這一些反太陽花的人也使用。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "這些事不見得被社會上廣泛注意。但是至少在我們所知道的是，中央政府從江宜樺前院長、張善政前院長，當時都有注意到，也開始思考如何把網路科技運用到現在的治理、革新現在的治理模式。於是在前政府最後兩年中，我們陸續可以看到：" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "一方面，自2014年開始的經貿國是會議、自經區諮詢會議、全國能源會議，都開始採用了各種不同形式的網路參與。會議主辦者把網路上一些意見領袖找到現場，同時全程直播，再過來是把網路上相關的聊天室，直接投影到會場，讓與會的傳統政商菁英，可以看到網路上的人如何評價他們剛剛在台上說的話。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "除此之外，更進一步我們看到國發會跟Jaclyn 辦公室做的「Join」跟「vTaiwan」兩個平台——我不知道等一下Jaclyn會不會多談這一個部分——在這個部分上，達到在政策規劃前期，透過網路去促成公共溝通。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "另外一方面，許多中央部會開始聘了一些專員，專門負責開放資料或是開放政府這一方面事務。他們開始去嘗試讓臺灣政府可以開放的資料，能夠更容易被公眾使用。所以在很短的時間內，英國開放文化基金會排名上，我們從全世界資料開放上從十八名篡到第一名，這是很多人沒有注意到的轉變。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "蔡前政委剛剛堅持叫我叫她 Jaclyn 就好了，不要叫她的頭銜（笑）──Jaclyn的辦公室就是在裡面，負責擔綱非常重要的責任，我記得第一次見到Jaclyn，是在2014年那時在辦國事經貿會議的時候，我受到他們辦公室的邀請到現場。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "我那時寫了一篇不禮貌的文章，批判會議組織方式。有趣的是，今天中午《端傳媒》有一篇關於唐鳳的專訪，唐鳳在專訪中談到，開很多會議很重要的是，要找到釐清大家的「爭點」在哪裡；對照之下，2014年我對於當時經貿國是會議的主要批評之一，就是綜整寫法列出一百多項，大家各自講東西，但是卻沒有把爭點提出。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "後來 Jaclyn 也算是開政務官之先，到 g0v 黑客松提案做了我剛剛所提到的「vTaiwan」。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "Jaclyn原本是法官，在1991年至1998年期間，她先後擔任IBM臺灣區跟大中華區的法務長，之後自己開了一個事務所，而事務所專長是國際科技法律的部分。2013年11月6日被找進政府，負責的剛好是科技法規的部分，真的是洋洋灑灑非常地多。我本來想嘗試做一點功課，想把她在任期間做的事情羅列一下，但是我後來放棄了；因為如果都講的話，他們等一下就沒有得講了。包括你們知道的Uber、Airbnb，及科技專業人員在台簽證工作的問題，乃至於像公司法的修訂──" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "像在她任內很重要推動閉鎖型公司，新創企業能夠有所依。我今天早上剛好跟幾個朋友討論到公司法的修法，有個朋友提到他最近開了四家公司，都是因為拜閉鎖型公司專章之所賜，要不然他根本沒有辦法這樣開公司。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "像剛剛講的很多法規及數位匯流五法，這一些consultation，都透過「vTaiwan」平台去進行各種意見的徵集。或許你們有人用過或沒有用過，但是這些政策溝通討論的過程後，現在你們可以知道，在網路上有一個「vTaiwan」，將所有的過程當中的所有資料，大家討論的東西都放在這個地方。任何人想要瞭解、研究、倡議這一個政策的話，你現在有一個更清楚的資訊平台在那邊可以見。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "當時 Jaclyn 在做這些事的過程當中，唐鳳以顧問身份在裡面做了許多的協助。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "坦白講，我記得新政府上任的時候，有些圈子內的朋友還很擔心，前朝政府有Jaclyn、張善政都算是科技界出身，他們有點算是中央政府的科技長的角色，可是到新政府接班的時候，那時剛開始出現的第一批內閣沒有科技界背景的人，所以在這一個圈子裡面有一些擔心，會不會這些所作所為就斷掉了。直到後來，出現了唐鳳的入閣。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "唐鳳入閣的時候，有大量的媒體報導，大家或多或少大家都有看過。她的身上，也算是匯集了許多新聞工作者、媒體工作者所熱愛各式各樣戲劇性元素。最廣為人知的是，她在求學路上走出教育體制之外、對於性別傳統框架的鬆動，乃至於到後來，不管是作為一個傳奇的駭客，或是在開源社群裡面所累積的很多事情。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "這一些事看起來很像是分開的，但其實精神是一貫的。舉個例子來說：像「自學」這件事，某個程度上，是教育實踐的開源主義。不再用國立編譯館的套裝軟體，而是自己手動寫程式，去寫出自己的教育經驗。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "我剛剛提到我們今天中午有一篇專訪，你稍微看那一篇專訪，就會發現這個專訪非常不同於過去的各式各樣專訪。過去的專訪，是記者過來做一個面訪或是電話訪問，而這個訪問的進行，卻是在八天時間中，記者可以不斷在一個線上討論區丟出問題，Audrey 若覺得這個問題在哪一個地方寫過或回答過，就丟連結給你，就不再浪費時間重新講一次。我看到這個的時候，我也想說在，自己同樣題目在不同的學校裡講了十場，也太浪費時間了。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "其實不管她在政府裡面做的事情，包括怎麼樣去改革現在很多會議流程，乃至於自己面對公共溝通的實踐上，我常常覺得 Audrey 做的事，就是挑戰很多慣常的做法，重新去定義一種更有效率的資訊傳播跟流通方式。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "就連今天等一下的presentation也是。待會Jaclyn會先講一下從她的角度，關於開放政府跟網路民主的做法，Audrey等一下要做的事則跟過去不大一樣，不是她已經準備好一套東西怎麼講，而是由你們現場每一位來告訴她，你們希望聽到她回答什麼。所以你們看到這有一個網站 slido.com，大家可以打開你的手機，連到這一個網站上，你可以輸入code 0114（傳送門：https://app.sli.do/#0114），你就會進到裡面的點菜單裡面。你可以輸入問題，你也可以對別人提的問題按讚，等到她講的時候，會依照讚數的多寡來決定要先回答哪一些問題，大致如此。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "抱歉，我講得太長，我把時間交給Jaclyn。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "主持人、唐鳳，在座的女士、先生，大家好。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "其實今天來參加這一個座談，我覺得會來聽這一場的大家都是非常關心到底臺灣接下來要怎麼往前，其實我一直覺得我從業界衝撞體制，那時要進去（政府）之前，非常多的朋友勸阻，要進去的時候，如我現在覺得入政府怎麼那麼悲壯（笑），因為真的覺得很危險，所以我印象中那時還跟朋友講說，我保證我會安全回來，我現在真的安全回到業界。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "我交棒了，所以在座我想大家也可以思考我們怎麼樣一棒接一棒，讓我們的國家更好。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "所以我今天其實這一個題目是，開放政府如何實現民意？我比較想先跟大家談一下並分享我進去（政府）看到的一些事情，沒進去之前抱怨坦白講真的很多，進去以後看了一些事情，我覺得值得跟大家分享一下。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "進去政府最大的挑戰，第一個是因為我負責的是網路，在這一些新的領域裡面，本來就跨產業，一跨產業就跨部會，所以我常常在推的時候，最痛苦的是找不到主管機關，當時Uber到底是歸經濟部或者是金管會管，其實就花了很多時間，所以其實我兩年半的時間有一半的時間都在找主管機關。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "這部分其實是涉及到整個組織，政府整個的組織事實上是有很多值得我們去思考的問題，因為這個法令已經規定這樣子，並不是我想要改變就改變，這個是非常僵化的法律綁住在裡面，其實想要做的都滿難的。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "剛剛主持人說我們辦公室做滿多事，很多的原因是裡面還有非常多的人想做事，政府裡面有非常多的人是希望做事的，但是他們在裡面受到非常非常多的牽絆，所以我們如何讓組織可以更符合未來世界的發展，我個人認為這個是非常非常重要的。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "另外，很多東西很慢，很慢的原因是，我們現在這一個社會有太多不同的意見，這個不同意見又有很多不同的管道可以表述，所以一有不同意見，政策就會停掉，這個是我看到非常非常大的問題，因為我自己長期在科技業裡面，科技業的（發展）速度非常快，我自己看起來，政府的反應是非常非常慢。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "即使有了法令，現在日新月異的科技，其實應該要有非常彈性的法令，但是一彈性就要授權給主管機關裁量，而現在主管機關不敢裁量，因為一裁量就有背信這一些（問題），所以當不敢裁量的時候，很多東西就變成沒有彈性，一個好的政策因為沒有彈性，變成很擾民，有時會造成投資上很大的不利因素。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "像我們常常碰到國外的公司到臺灣來投資，但是我們在法定政策上都沒有彈性，因此造成非常多的問題，一個好的方案如果拖個三、四年，其實很容易就過時了，一個好的政策在執行時如果沒有彈性，其實對於國家的影響很大。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "進了行政院的這一段期間，我們要讓大家知道政府這一部機器是複雜到每一個人在這一個機器裡面都管一個按鈕，一個人按，還不會動，要非常多的人一起都按了，才會往前走，因此我們這一部機器非常需要改版。比如：我們都用智慧型手機，但還有人用一般的手機，其實很多東西就真的沒有辦法運作。所以機器太複雜，沒有跟上時代的變化，這其實是滿大的問題。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "我記得唐鳳要進行政院的時候，我曾在我的Facebook上面說，其實唐政委最重要的一件事是，可不可以讓政府這一部機器儘快改版，因為如果不改版，我認為那已經不是人的問題，你罵死了都沒有用，因為那個機器運作起來就是那個樣子。這個是我們大家需要一起努力，我覺得這個是唐鳳最重要的使命。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "另外，我覺得臺灣不需要大政府，真的，我真的覺得臺灣不需要大政府，我們不用要求我們的政府是萬能，因為在新的世代裡面，公務員是跟不上的，太難了，你要要求他跟上這麼快的速度，其實我會覺得這個期待是過高，因此我真正認為臺灣不能是大政府。我們不能期待我們有萬能的政府，我們也不需要萬能的政府，也就是政府少管，什麼事都要找政府負責，就會創造很多的規定出來，事實上這一個規定對我們沒有意義。為什麼？因為不斷地在變，有一個規定以後，反而綁住了執行的公務員要給或不給，但明明那一個東西已經過時了，而要改變又要花非常大的力氣。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "因此我離開政府以後，我只要有演講的時候，我不斷鼓吹我們需要的是小政府，網路沒有國界裡面，其實坦白講，臺灣在地圖上有個位置，而這一個國界代表什麼？代表的是法律可及的範圍，但是在網路上沒有那個國界，因此當我們去思考全世界，在2015年已經有二、三十億的人上網，到了2025年，可能會有五十億的人上網，因此這個時候有非常多的機會，我們有沒有必要在我們的網路世界裡面還去畫臺灣的地圖？我覺得有非常多的政策，我是用「虛擬世界」（處理），因為「虛擬世界」可能跟實體更對應，因此在「虛擬世界」裡面我們更要有新的思維，我非常希望大家可以一起來推動——我們不要期盼一個萬能的政府，因為不可能，我們應該要合理期待。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "你「不要期待政府」的意思就是說，你希望政府不要管，既然要政府不要管，出了事就別找政府（聽眾笑）。我們要透過自律跟其他的方式來做，因此我覺得由民間自己來自律，絕對會比透過政府來管是比較符合將來的發展。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "另外，其實我進去行政院這兩年半最大的收獲是g0v，當我去黑客松提案的時候，發現有這麼多的志工，而且都是年輕的朋友，如果我們這一代當志工就是慈濟（笑），新一代真的就是用鍵盤救國，或者是你在家裡其實就可以幫這一個社會做很多的事情。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "所以其實坦白來講，我滿佩服下一代這麼強烈的志工熱情，而且很多case讓我非常非常驚奇，同時可以動員這麼多人，一棒接一棒，這個人睡覺、那個人繼續做，我們每次在開會的時候，也有很多人一起協作，所以很感動，真的很感動。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "所以我離開gov以後，我現在已經加入g0v了，我問嘉良：「他們是hacker，那我是什麼？」，他給我一個名稱叫做「hacker in law」，我問他：「hacker什麼意思？」，他說：「Somebody has been understanding about something and he solves problem on expected with.」，也就是「對某一個領域非常瞭解，可以去想出一個非常不一樣的方式去解決問題」，我覺得既然當過法官、法務長，又進過行政院，應該有資格可以做這一件事，所以現在我是hacker。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "我也覺得臺灣需要更多的人用g0v hacker的精神，覺得不好、可以改善的東西，在能力可及的範圍，就做吧！我雖然現在離開政府，但是現在行政院一些法案，因為法律是我的專業，所以我覺得我可以用我的專業為這一個國家做一點事，我很樂意，所以我目前其實與唐鳳跟其他的部會有一些部會有滿深度的合作，這個是來自g0v非常深的感受。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "有關於開放政府的這一件事，其實我聽到這一個問題的時候，我在想的是，如果把這一個問題講得簡單一點，如果我們想要探討的是政府跟民意，很容易就想到溝通，但是我真的不覺得只有溝通的問題，就像剛剛講的，政府並不是萬能的，如果你期待政府做不會做的事，溝通也沒有用，因為這本來就不是政府擅長的東西，因此你期待不對，溝通也不會有結果。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "我們如果破題來講「開放政府」，事實上我自己在看「開放政府」，因為在裡面我也是屬於推動政府政策的人，很多人覺得要透明等等，但是我看到open data最值得去推的是，部會間資訊也要分享，我剛剛講的是每一個部會都在自己的範圍裡面，所以資訊也不怎麼流通，一件事可能會重複做，因為資訊不交換，因此我覺得open data的一件事（要做），系統也要整合，整合完之後人力就減少，其實我們在民間就這麼做，所以我覺得政府裡面就應該讓open data整個運作的先做一次改版，因此我覺得把數位的工具（帶入很好），像Audrey每一次都在使用，為什麼不可以？我覺得這個是非常好的方向。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "除了這個以外，我現在談政府的組織也要開放，現在有太多的東西是這一個部會只管這一個，如果只要稍微怎麼樣，部會就說不是他們的事，臺灣這麼小的地方，需要三十幾個部會，而每一個權責都被盯死死的，預算什麼的都被盯在法律下，當然（容易）牽涉到修法。我們應該要有一個方向是，這一部機器要如何改版，也就是如何讓組織是開放的組織，並不是非常僵化的組織——因此資訊分享、組織開放，我們才能談民意。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "其實我自己在行政院工作，我覺得有一件事大家一定要去想，我們是身處在非常自由的國家，我們非常幸運身在超自由的國家，但是現在不同意見太多了，變成一件事眾說紛紜，眾說紛紜的情況下怎麼辦？你丟一萬個意見給政府，我們沒有辦法做事，所以當時其實我們在推「vTaiwan」，「vTaiwan」在當時我提的案是，看大家可不可以建一個平台，讓大家可以理性討論跟凝聚共識，所以當時的「vTaiwan」，我代表政府的窗口，唐鳳代表g0v的窗口，我今天負責的法案，把我看到的資料、我聽了誰的意見，就放在「vTaiwan」的平台，並沒有什麼不能公開的，因此把制訂政策的流程在這一個平台上討論。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "g0v的這一些夥伴們不斷嘗試新的數位工具，希望在這麼多不同的意見裡面，可不可以（從中）找出來；即使丟十萬個意見出來，也能蒐集出top 10的意見出來。「vTaiwan」這個平台是g0v的志工做，因此某個程度具有公信力的原因是夥伴們所制訂的，像當時唐鳳（處理）如何彙整等等，其實我在政府裡面完全沒有介入，這一個平台等於是政府到民間的平台討論，然後政府就是公開透明，並且用數位的工具，讓這一個意見可以作彙整，並且找到重點，讓制訂政策可以參考。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "因此這一個題目，我自己的心得是：我們生活在非常自由的國家，我們可以大聲講不同的意見，但是我們在同一艘船上，老是不動也沒有辦法，我們需要一起協力找共同的方向，並且一起找共同的未來，謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謝謝大家。我們剛才開玩笑，主持人說如果聽眾在Slido 問了他想問的問題，他就不用自己問了；我說他想到什麼，還是可以自己丟上去（slido.com），看大家喜歡不喜歡。目前看起來好像是最高票（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "還滿少（問題）的，九個。（換麥克風）我會按照這一個順序來回答，也歡迎大家繼續追問問題，我就會切換到recent list來回答。" }, { "speaker": "線上提問", "speech": "開源主義「開放、共作、平等、透明」的精神，但人類社會長年累積下來的，卻是「分層access、分層決策、負責」的邏輯，當中需要大量的「保密」－－特別是政府。這兩種思維如何磨和與妥協？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我入閣前，和院長進行勞雇協商的時候，我有一個要求，就是國家機密都不要給我看，密件的部分我們辦公室有涉密的同仁可以看。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我很多工作的方式是Jaclyn先做的，就是她看到的、聽到的這一些東西都往網路上丟。當然我進去之後，也很感謝科技會報辦公室的朋友們，他們提供我一些額外的資源，好比像速錄師這一些，所以我聽到的東西不只能夠把錄音往上丟，甚至也可以轉成文字，讓大家更容易看到。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我一開始就設定了防火牆，國家機密我都看不到，我看得到的東西就是公開資訊，而公開資訊轉成資料，這在法律上就比較沒有問題。因此我覺得最重要的是，一個國家為什麼有一些事情是某一些人都知道，為什麼有密件跟國家機密，這個事情是有明文規定的，既然有明文規定的反面意思是只要不涉及隱私、營業秘密或者是國家機密的問題，那個其實就沒有什麼好講的，就是開放就是了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我進來之後就發現，對公務員他們來說這一件事對他們來講是有利的，不同部門的公務員如何彼此決策做出政策產銷履歷的資料，每一站都不知道前一站什麼東西，也許只有二十五字的會議結論，中間溝通，我們知道資訊的流失是非常可怕的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因此決策據以所本的資料跟完整紀錄下來，首先是對政策制訂的朋友是重要的——還不用講到公信力——我進去之後就做這一些作業系統的嘗試，相關的部會到目前都還滿高興的，沒有碰到磨合的問題。" }, { "speaker": "線上提問", "speech": "您好，想知道您對於目前「跨領域資訊人才 CS+X」潮流、學習路上的建議、以及此項人材未來應用的看法（如：於開放政府中扮演特殊角色？）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個我想要講廣一點，我覺得目前我們在數位國家那一個方案裡面，有一個部分講得很清楚，我們希望以後所謂的跨領域人才並不是A＋B跟A＋B＋C，我們想要問的是你來社會上，你看到感興趣想要解決什麼問題，學校的目的應該是支持你在解決這一個過程裡面，不分學門讓你找到你解決問題的資源。107課綱的最終理想之一，是「一生一課表」。這個再往前推，就是「一生一學門」，每一個人可以打造自己的學門。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個並不是空口說白話。網路時代你看維基百科等，都是沒有學門的分別，學門是造成知識存取的困難，以前沒有資訊科技的時候，像圖書館的分類，讓資訊的蒐集及資訊的組織，只是用筆、紙及借書卡可以管理而已。現在都有超連結跟文本，而且都已經很久了，這個區別是沒有必要的，而且你在解決問題的時候，單一學門沒有辦法跳出框外去解決問題。所以我覺得不只是CS＋。CS作為科學，有作為科學的專業，但是我們講ICT其實可以是底下的這一個作業系統，任何不同學門的貢獻，在這上面可以是共同協作出來的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們實際上在數學社群、哲學社群，在我們以為最只有一個人的腦子可以想的這一種學門，現在都有像Github共創的協作精神，其實是非常非常蓬勃的，越來越多的學門朝這個方向發展。目前這些還是學門，但是我覺得大家要慢慢往這一個角度去想。" }, { "speaker": "線上提問", "speech": "開放政府與新創科技相輔相成，唐鳳小姐您本身也是新創科技的愛好者，但新科技往往難以被中老年人接受使用，跟不上時代的民間企業會被淘汰，政府卻不能淘汰國民。您要如何讓學習新事物相對較難的中老年人不受到新科技、新制度的排擠？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個我覺得不會，如果中老年人不能接受新科技，那個是新科技的問題。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "我可能就是中老年人，但我有在看（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我也三十五歲，快要變成中年人了（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們下一場「vTaiwan」的直播就要考慮用double robotics，是一個自走的機器人，上面放iPad跟360的鏡頭，我到MIT、波士頓是用這一個，到Media Lab Prado是用這一個。當地有很多中、老年人互動，並沒有什麼問題，事實上對他們來講，因為他們面對面看著一個虛擬的你，而且可以很free這樣移動，事實上是比鍵盤跟滑鼠容易用的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "就像VR也很容易用，我們從小就在學如何用頭、手跟身體，所以我的意思是說，如果不好使用，那是人因工程沒有設計好，那是設計師的問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得我們現在已經快要到一個沒有辦法說「中老年人無法接受、使用科技」的這一件事，反而是中老年人對於問題的意識更清楚，更知道要如何來用科技來做一些事。像寶可夢這些東西，我覺得沒有什麼年齡障礙。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是中老年人如果附近沒有這一些共學的社群、沒有學習的動機，這是我們可以幫忙的。如果沒有辦法連上網路跟屬於弱勢的群體，這是政府應該要（協助），讓即使把所有的錢都花在謀生上的朋友，仍應該要給予機會與網路，這個是沒有問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外是要跨世代的合作跟協作的精神，畢竟你從網路上根本不知道對方幾歲，所以其實大家只要在參與網路社群的過程裡面，其實老年人、中年人本來都在體驗年齡不同的情況，大家體驗到這一種快速的情況下，能不能回到實體世界時，不用你多老、多年輕來判斷彼此，這個是要慢慢練習的。" }, { "speaker": "線上提問", "speech": "溝通不只是資訊分享流動，溝通的最後一哩是資訊如何對人「產生意義」。而這裡涉及的不只是知識能力，也不免涉及意識型態、價值預設與世界觀，而這裡有時存在哲學上的不可共量性。特別在社群網路的同溫層逐漸讓社會再度「部落化」的當代，例如近期各種社會爭議所展現的。對此，網路民主如何能面對？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個是非常好的問題，而且是一個哲學的問題，其實同溫層是一種彼此排除的情況——我們先不用管是靠演算法或者是什麼——確實是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一言不合吵起來，這個還是在同溫層裡面，如果看到關鍵字就覺得不要跟這一個人說話，乾脆解除或封鎖掉，那才是同溫層的障壁，如果能夠吵起來，那就表示你們還是在同一層裡面。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我practice很簡單，看到任何我感覺上能夠貢獻一點資訊的東西，我就會去回，不管前面寫什麼跟後面寫什麼，我只是對那幾個字在回，所以可以發現對我來講沒有同溫層的問題，不管你是誰或者是你在臉書或者是PTT或者是Mobile01或者是Twitter，只要覺得是事實上我可以貢獻的話，或者我可以問你問題的，我完全identity blind，完全不管你是怎麼樣的人，我就去回。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一些工作需要玻璃心的強化訓練（笑），但是這個其實習慣了，就把它當作精神按摩的話（笑），真的是精神按摩，如果你一開始回的時候，我們在精神分析上是說resistance，你感覺到有阻抗的時候，就像按摩的時候會酸跟痛，（代表）你有一些不能面對自己的部分。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有一些不急著一分鐘或者是兩分鐘回，你可能花一個小時、深呼吸再回，你回過以後，你就免疫了，任何人以後再用這一種方式來打擊你都無所謂，因為你已經很深刻想過這一件事，這是打破同溫層，我目前是用這一種方式。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「網路民主」的意思是回到每一個人對話的意願上，如果有一個人只覺得在那邊亂罵，然後跑來跟他講話，他會第一個突然收斂很多，早知道你在看就不這麼酸了（笑），下一步就是很願意提出一些很真實的，也就是他的個人經驗。我們不能取代的是，在民主裡面每一個人都需要發聲的機會，因為每一個人都有不能取代的個人經驗，所以你越分享你的個人經驗，而不是你看哪一個很奇怪網站懶人包複製貼上的東西，你就越對公共討論越有提出資訊量。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實做一座橋的這個工作，就是邀請各方來分享個人經驗，也就是我們旁邊的人看不到的東西。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "不管兩、三邊吵起來，突然就變成一座橋，這方面主持人Albert是專家……" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "變成一座橋被踐踏……（笑）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "沒錯。當然被踐踏需要強化玻璃。（笑）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但真的，除了願意一再再用搭橋的方式溝通外，其實沒有別的辦法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我現在教各部會的是，不用 take it personally，因為各方也不認識你 personally。我們可以透過自動化的工具、教戰守則，讓網路上如果貼十則一模一樣的，我們在看的時候只看一次，不會浪費掉我們的時間，因此我們節省下來的時間可以變成「如果你提出這一些我們沒有看過的經驗，我們可以認真回應」的方法。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我的意思是，把這一種鍛煉一方面制度化，二方面標準化，這樣大家慢慢會覺得網路上還是有對話的可能性，這就是民主深化。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們在自己架的平台比較容易，有一些別的平台，像F開頭就很困難，但是即使在F開頭的平台，運用得當還是可以做得到；網路是很大的，不需要被F或者是T開頭的平台限制想像力。" }, { "speaker": "線上提問", "speech": "一般來說，政委的職權、角色與政府組織動態、政院授權高度相關，請問兩位在擔任政委期間，如何進行職權分配、與其他部門互動？ 在政府內有足夠動能（權力）做事嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我進行政院，院長給我的授權是做「開放政府」，但是我不督導任何部會，除了國發會資管處。在這樣的前提底下，很難說哪個部會不跟開放政府相關，除了國家機密之外。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "院長責成我們辦公室，邀請每一個部會的次長，去提出一個到四個PO（開放政府聯絡人）的名單。這一個想法很有意思，我們以前有國會聯絡人，專門跟立法委員們聊天，媒體聯絡人專門跟媒體聯絡，但是事實上跟網路上、不特定的陌生人溝通的這一件事，其實以前事務系統沒有這樣編制的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我進來之後，在工具上提供一些協作的系統，我們把g0v幾乎用到的所有系統都搬到行政院的內網，然後開放這些協作的系統，請部會「需要面對不特定人」的那些朋友來利用。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "感謝各部會首長們的支持，目前有四、五十人左右的一個team，我們平常就是像g0v聊天室這樣，在上面可以聊訂高麗菜很便宜之類的（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但在某個部會有事情發生、需要發生溝通的時候，沒有那麼忙的部會可以幫忙，去進行包含資料蒐集跟網站功能的分享及確認。有些事，像是謠言澄清的功能，衛福部已經做過，勞動部來做做看，這是讓部會之間以半鬆散式的社群模式來協作的橫向機制，並不是由上而下，這些人完全是橫向的，你也知道都是你也跑不掉，這會是長期的關係，所以是發生事情的時候幫我一下，下一次我就可以幫你的關係。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "蔡政委有沒有需要回覆的？（Jaclyn回頭看螢幕）" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "（咳嗽）我不是感冒，我是霧霾產生的過敏，不自覺會咳嗽。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "我在的時候有幾個督導的部會，政委的工作其實坦白講，我很慶幸我是當政委，因為現在有太多跨部會的東西，行政院下面，政委會分工、督導這一些部會，非常重要的是跨部會，只要有跨部會的問題，就會有一個政委出來協調，因此這一個工作其實如果follow剛剛講的，臺灣現在政府的組織很僵硬，因此政委這一個功能，我覺得非常重要，你透過協調，才有辦法讓新的事務可以在政府的體系裡面去運作，因此我自己對於政委職權的分工，我看一下……（回頭看螢幕後答）像以前十大建設就是政委推的工作，政委這一個工作是非常重要的，如果這一個角色能夠好好扮演，每一個部會在特定的領域裡面，如果有跨部會的話，由這一個職務來推動的話，其實對國家是非常好的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "作為不督導部會的政委，有另外一個特色，就是我去立院備詢的時候，不用被叫到質詢台上。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我其實沒有哪一個政策是我簽名、為哪一個政策背書，沒有這一件事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但如果兩個部會說都不歸他們管的時候，這件事就會變成我的事。非常有意思，就像Jaclyn講的，有越來越多事情是當初設計組織法沒有想到的，政委要做很固定督導的事務，因為新科技、新技術已經發展到不要說超過政府的理解，也是超過一般任何人理解的這一個狀態，所以任何新的東西一進來，就是政委在接，因為並沒有哪一個部會設計是接這一個東西，相信Jaclyn也有非常深刻的體會，其實大部分的時間就是在找哪一個部會可以稍微take care一下。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "但是同樣因為政委沒有負責人事跟預算，所以相對的是有事情要推動的時候，你是需要靠部會，所以當然跟部會互動很重要，如果部會都不理的話，事實上也會推不動。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "院長給予很清楚的授權，然後再去推動的話，這個也是有可能的。不過協調部會是一門大學問，所以政委的工作要做好，協調的工作滿重要。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "是的。我九成都是在做協調的事情，另外一成是在當吉祥物（全場笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這一題就先這樣吧！" }, { "speaker": "線上提問", "speech": "當政策制定時，民意與專業或事實證據有衝突時，開放政府如何幫助政府做決策?" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個是三件事。我們有想法，也就是基於事實的討論，我們大家都活在現實裡面，這個是透過經驗，因此在腦裡建構出一個看起來彼此不太矛盾的東西而已，所以當每一次兩個人需要溝通的時候，我們非常需要知道哪一些是除了我們兩個說了算之外，任何第三個人都還是真的東西，這個東西在之前政策制訂的時候，並沒有特別框出來我們討論我們的感受、建議去留一段時間討論哪一些是客觀事實，因為沒有練習的關係，所以會常常覺得對這一個政策，我非常高興，你也許很憤怒，但講了半天，結果是兩件不相干的事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個包含到語言的使用，同樣的兩個字、三個字，每一個人腦裡浮現的是相同或是相反的事實，這個大家一直講的是，媒體會被鼓吹選一邊，或者是對事實片面詮釋——這個不只是媒體的問題，而是整個認知的問題，如果在同溫層裡面討論越久，媒體為了要reach到我們，媒體只能挑那一個，不然我們根本不看。就像跨學門跟跨領域的想法一樣，越能夠有一個適應溫度的尺度越廣，越有可能做實際上基於事實的討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好比像如果現在的氣溫是四十度，我並不會說這是假的，就會說地球在暖化，因此在這樣的情況之下才會討論到底要做什麼？是不是減碳，或者是發射一個窗簾到太空去擋住陽光，可以有各種的做法，這個都是基於事實的討論，就是不同的立場、態度，才會越來越彼此討論越聚焦；如果連一個基礎事實都沒有辦法同意的話，越討論就越有衝突。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因此開放政府這一個原則非常簡單，我們在政策討論的前期，在政策形成之前，政府把資料跟事實的證據顯示給人民，但是並不是只提供給同溫層的人民，如果民間提供給我們的意見是我們收到的是錯誤的事實或者待補充的，我們容許大家可以送傳到開放資料平台或討論平台，政府沒有玻璃心狀況之外，才能邀請大家作多方利益關係的討論——我們現在慢慢做的是把之前實驗性質的東西，列成要點，符合成多方利益關係人希望的樣子，或者是進一步法律，好比牽涉到數位通訊傳播或者是網路治理的東西，我們就要依法的方式來作事實的討論，這個是目前的做法。" }, { "speaker": "線上提問", "speech": "美國大選過後，從臉書對假新聞公開表明反對、德國打算成立「打擊假新聞部門」，世界開始注重假新聞的問題。台灣現今仍在延燒的婚姻平權議題，也出現許許多多的抹黑新聞文字。開放政府對虛假新聞流動的處理，與傳統政府是否會有不同的方式？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個是非常大的問題：「虛假新聞」，從我的角度來看，其實跟318的時候，大家會傳一些謠言，好比裡面被拍肩膀，想要衝進去，傳了大概十、二十分鐘之後，就有穿綠色軍外套的朋友出來說沒事。但其實他如果一直出來，別的事也不用做了。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "謠言傳播的速度在當時快過真相傳播的速度，因為謠言是調動腦裡讓大家覺得憤慨、義憤填膺及被攻擊的那個部分，那個部分調動人的力量是比你滑手機跟看事實還要強。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "透明是指把實際的狀況如實且沒有辦法查禁的情況下傳遞到大家的面前，我們當時針對這一件事就是在街上架投影機跟布幕，把那一場任何的狀況，透過投影跟逐字稿的方式呈現到外場，突然間謠言的傳播比較慢，真相的傳播比較快，大家頭稍微轉一下，大家就看得到。實際的做法是我們會在謠言傳播的當地，好比像LINE上面做機器人，或者是臉書（新聞小幫手）等其他途徑。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我要強調這一些是社群自己好像有一個抗體一樣，覺得需要來處理這一件事，並不是政府突然在培植網軍說要做這一件事，這個是政府在生態圈裡面挑了一個透明，而讓大家看到實際做得多好或者是不好的位置，也就是踩在一個透明的位置上，事實上這個機制是由整個網路社群建立。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "有朋友追問，我有一種問題越回答越多的情況。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "我這裡打斷一下。我們很清楚看到，新的技術會如何打破原本會談模式的破壞性結果，直接產生的結果是，很多原本應該出現在現場QA的問題，也會跑到Slido這邊，然後就都變成Audrey在回答。Audrey你先看很多是哪一些針對你的問題，其他有一些東西，其實我覺得Jaclyn也可以加入。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我有在注意時間。我再三分鐘就超過時間了。我們來看一下，如果是針對我的話...…都沒有，這一些全部都是Jaclyn也可以回答的。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "我有兩題想要回答。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "好啊！那你來吧！請。" }, { "speaker": "線上提問", "speech": "和科技有關的政策需求往後會越來越多，現有法律可能跟不上，必須另立新法，但目前有科技背景的立法委員很少，當行政院的科技政策有法律問題時該怎麼辦呢？ 例如，目前禁止在網路上拍賣酒類商品。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "我先問一下，用slido.com互動，其實我也參與過幾次，我想要問的是，我可以問說這個是誰問嗎？會不會不禮貌？因為我也要知道我們新的模式，到底禮貌不禮貌？因為網路賣酒這一件事，我可不可以看一下誰？" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "我花了好多好多的時間，開了很多會，把菸酒管理條例說服財政部，修好送到立法院，結果我們下來以後（指政黨輪替）就退回來了，我就去打聽、業者也去打聽，聽說他們在立法院的時候沒有業者去支持他們，所以就撤回來。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "他們在立法院被挑戰的時候說沒有業者去，業者也很無奈說根本不知道什麼時候立委去挑戰，所以怎麼去支持。網路賣酒這一件事，我覺得網路要管理其實比實體更容易，實體是去7－11看身分證就可以帶走了，但是網路買酒還要用信用卡，還要校對，你說哪一個比較容易管？你今天看到年輕人拿一瓶酒，你掃一下code，還可以知道是誰賣給他的。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "還有人說我們推政策是因為我們跟酒商掛鉤，酒商是反對網路賣酒的！因為網路賣酒價格就全部都透明了啊！我在負責網路政策的人，臺灣到底管不管網路？全世界除了宗教國家，都可以網路賣酒，有可以非常完整參考的管理機制，你的錢都可以轉帳了，為什麼無法管酒有沒有賣給未成年的人？我們到底懂不懂管網路？臺灣有一群人很怕網路，覺得網路是很可怕的地方。但網路凡走過必留下痕跡，最主要是因為（網路）你擋不住。" }, { "speaker": "線上提問", "speech": "雖然剛剛蔡前政委認為ogd最值得推行的部分，是政府部門之間的整合交流，但目前ogd平台仍是以民眾為開放目標，那麼在政府資料收費原則公布後，機關可以選擇資料是否公開怎麼收費，那麼會被開放在平台上的是哪些資料？可能重複過去政府資訊公開的內容？" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "另外還有一題open government data的部分，卡在規費法，我也協調非常久，有一種是所謂的資訊公開，一種是所謂的開放資料，開放資料原則上是你走進去是屬於行政法的部分，基本上走歸類法，政府有義務讓你知道資訊是透明的，另外一塊data是非常值錢的東西，就像土地、建物，政府有一些資產，本來就可以讓民間用，那就是收錢嘛！所以open data是有價值的東西，如何讓民間來利用？" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "當時有甲、乙、丙三種類型，甲類跟社群討論過，就有一個open data的合約，那個就是誰都可以用，任何人、任何時間，你就變成是公共財；乙類是有限制，人、時、事、地、物可限制，好比這一些資料只有臺灣的公司可以用，或者是要收費，或者是使用的時間有限制；甲類是沒有限制，而且不可以撤回，一授權出去就類似像公共財一樣。乙類有限制，丙類根本不可以開放。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "我們走的時候是把開放資料分成三類，也有結合標準，很多部會在分哪一些是甲類、哪一些是乙類，內部都還在摸索，因此當時都有成立諮詢小姐，先由外面的諮詢小姐協助大家哪一些是甲、乙類，如果這一些資料可以幫我們多賺一些錢，也是可以考慮的，畢竟大家也是花了很多納稅人的錢去建構的資料，因此哪一些是放甲類、乙類，大家可以去檢討。由民間參與的諮詢小姐去協助甲、乙類的分類上可以有更多的討論，這一題有回答到嗎？" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "我相信現場有一些人沒有帶手機，待會可以讓現場大家舉手。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們要照顧到「多元」、「涵容」的精神，也有不習慣打字的朋友。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛剛Jaclyn回答的我都同意，因為有人也有問到衛福部的案子，那一案我們其實在檢討的時候，檢討一個其中的重點是立委可以更早進來，如果早一點進來的話，其實後來會順很多。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實我們在「vTaiwan」都是在行政院的角度去run，跟「Join」一樣，我們一開始設計的時候，確實並沒有考慮到跟這一個相關委員會的委員應該要進來的這一件事，因此在那一個情況之下，就會變成我們最後感覺上各方利益關係人都弄到雖不滿意、但可接受的程度了，但是立委覺得並沒有問過他們，因此在這樣的情況下，確實會跑出這一種已經到了立院，立院說當時並沒有參與討論的情況。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "後來我上任之後——包含之前——8、9月我們重新做一次「vTaiwan」盤點的時候，我們把「vTaiwan」的案子通知那一個委員會的委員，讓他們在第一天就可以進來。現在「Join」也跟立法院的資訊處合作，不要讓代議制覺得說我們搶他們的飯碗，他們還是有功能去聯絡利益關係人等等，我相信未來這一種方式協作的話，狀況會比「Join」的狀況還好。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛剛Jaclyn講的是經濟價值，社會價值這邊，我覺得也是同等重要，一方面是互信、透明度這一些，會講這麼抽象是大家如果每一次質疑政府做哪一個決策，政府把相關的資料開放出來說以此為本，對大家的溝通都有非常好的作用。所以我常常覺得是用議題去反推你是據以哪一些資料，把那一些開放出來，大家是會有感的。" }, { "speaker": "線上提問", "speech": "雖然政府的開放資料逐步增加，但是可以開放的資料其實還是很多。身為一般公民，如何可以了解有哪些資料可以開放？如何加速、倡議這些資料的開放？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果你只是要看就是公開資訊，你就可以提出請求，如果是拿來用或者是單一釋出的話，是data.gov.tw，這個是大家正在要，政府還沒有開放出來，你也可以提說哪一些東西覺得應該要開放出來，你就可以提到那一個諮詢小組去。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "在那個平台上，包含不包含這一些政府原本沒有蒐集的資料？是不是有一些狀況下，部會因為看了這一些資訊要求，就開始去蒐集過去不曾蒐集的資料？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "你可以提出一個資料需求，可以看到這一個資料，部會可以回答說沒有，這個適合由政府來蒐集，另外一個是這個更適合民間來蒐集的話，接下來數位國家的方案裡面，尤其是區域性的朋友們，我們就會討論說有一些是不是請當地的資訊社群、資料社群或當地的設計師去設計，因為政府撥預算跟行動計畫，有時候一、兩年就過去了，如果有一些時間上的需要，像空氣品質資訊的話，有很多朋友就自己開始蒐集空污相關的資料。當然這樣一來，就要解決資料精確度不一的時候，要如何匯集跟對齊的問題，不過我們是學這個的，所以應該做得到。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果民間自己來，做一個不完美的版本，反而可以刺激優化。什麼都要政府從頭規劃的話，其實是比較困難的。" }, { "speaker": "線上提問", "speech": "公民提案網路參與平台在衛福部的癌症療法一案時，打出了漂亮的第一波名聲。但在前陣子，眾多公教人員開始因為一位官員的發言，而開始連署取消國旅卡恢復不休假的補助，迅速突破5000人而提案成功。這時開放政府要如何處理？因為提案已經形成，真的會尊重民意嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個問題我還是特別回一下：國旅卡這一件事，這一件事我們看得非常非常認真，如果朋友們不知道這一件事的話……是之前公務人員有發一張國民旅遊卡，你休假的時候才可以刷，當時公務人員的特休家不能換算成如勞工朋友們的加班費，就是希望你多休假而補助這一件事，在當時推出的時候，其實也有一些反彈，但是因為制度已經很久了，每一年雖然還是有檢討，但改變的幅度沒有很大。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為已經很久了，這一個基本的事實，在大家心裡慢慢消失了，連幫國庫賺80億或者是少80億的這一件事都有歧見。國旅卡正在燒的去年年底，臉書上一群人說政府賺了80億，另外一群人說賠了80億的政策，我們做開放政府就是把來龍去脈跟據以試算的模型，即政府大概省了26億的基礎讓大家知道，我們讓大家知道在觀光上、地方上如何發揮它的價值，這個東西的恰當回應，我們在18、20日開放政府PO們的練習題就是這個，如果這一件事能夠好好做的話，我們應該要如何好好處理，我們會請各部會的朋友們作為利益關係人——因為大家都有國旅卡——來想這一件事應該要怎樣好好處理，這個是我們接下來會很認真做的工作。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "有沒有人在現場想要提一些問題？不管是針對這兩位的哪一位。" }, { "speaker": "現場提問", "speech": "你剛剛有提到臺灣比較適合小政府，不知道你有沒有希望或者是認為有哪一個國家臺灣是可以學習的？臺灣是否適合以菁英的方式來經營國家？" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "有沒有人有其他的問題？我們一口氣蒐集幾個，像你們剛剛有在slido.com上面打了問題，也可以再追問。" }, { "speaker": "現場提問", "speech": "您好，我剛剛有問假新聞的問題。因為您剛剛有提到放畫面，讓民眾自己看到就可以了，我想詢問的是，婚姻平權這一點，有一些人他們其實是很被臉書或者是LINE給影響，就不是放個東西影片讓他們知道就好了，像尤美女出來澄清之後，也沒有對那一些人有造成澄清的效果，開放政府對於這方面的假新聞，有沒有不同的應對方式？這個是我想要瞭解的問題。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "我追著問，Audrey 剛剛提到我們要去區分我們的知覺，或者是一群人所相信的事情，跟真正能夠被verify確定的事實。但是事實上連「什麼是事實」的邊界，都很容易變成許多政治議題當中的點。而且有的時候，所謂「事實的生產」有時在爭議的不同方有一些不對等的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "我舉一個例子，全國能源會議的時候，曾經嘗試做一件事：他們嘗試要建立一些基本的事實，作為討論基礎。但當時擁核方因為有核工科系，有專業期刊，有過去幾十年累積的大量文獻，因此擁核方很容易從各種期刊當中去fight verify確定的事實是什麼；但是反核方面對了一種事實生產的資料戰力不對等。甚至在爭議當中，反核方會覺得這一門所謂的核能科學，本身就已經隱藏一些在價值上的預設偏頗，而這一些偏頗又伴隨著科學本身所擁有權力，集合在一起，而造成這一件事上的不對等，您覺得這樣的狀況如何看待？" }, { "speaker": "現場提問", "speech": "我剛剛有問跨領域人才的部分，我現在是台大跨領域程式設計社的社長。我們剛好針對跨領域的學習程式方面有特別的研究，我想要請問您的是：現在所有的人學習程式是一個潮流，但是您對於零基礎的人開始學程式的時候，有沒有實際的建議？或者舉一個詳細的例子？開放政府在做g0v的過程中，擁有這樣子除了對於程式專業有研究，相對於經濟也有專業研究的人，能夠有什麼不同的火花？謝謝。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "因為我手邊現在沒有資料，但是我記得我曾經查過以臺灣兩千三百萬人，三十幾個部會真的太多，你如果去比對其他的國家來講，這一個部會的數量是多的。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "原因是因為我們是成文法系國家、大陸法系國家，每一個組織法規定很細又很死，像在企業慢慢都需要一個彈性的組織，因此我講的「小政府」是，我們的組織太僵硬；第二個是，我真的覺得不要期待萬能政府。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "另外還有一點，全世界都發生政府失靈這一件事，政府失靈這一件事並不是只有臺灣，過去很可能是沒有網路的時代，所以很難得可以有外面的資料，要透過政府在各個國家的經貿單位蒐集很多資料給我們，現在在網路的世代了，因此我們其實政府的資訊比民間要快了，這個情況之下沒有道理，怎麼給一個比我們不足的人還要來管我們，以我業界的角度，我覺得真的不合理，不管別的國家怎麼樣，我覺得以臺灣這麼需要跟世界接軌的經濟體——尤其是經濟領域——我覺得政府真的不要管。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "像當時閉鎖型公司在推的時候，也說如果不管要怎麼辦，我們兩個人開公司，關政府怎麼事，但是很多思維存在在政府裡面，萬一不管怎麼辦？我們扭（轉想法）一下，我們不要期待萬能政府，（政府）不見得是萬能，也不見得會做得比我們好，這個是我自己兩年半的經驗，跟大家分享。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "大家都知道我是安那其（無政府），所以剛剛Jaclyn講的大概乘一萬吧！" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "我們接棒（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "上一題（新加坡模式）不是cue我的，我自己切割一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "假新聞這一個題目，這一個我們專門辦研討會可以講八個小時，要用幾句話回答是不人道的（笑），我試著回答一下。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「Join」裡面超過五千人連署部會就要回應，「Join」跟你剛剛講同婚的有關，有非常非常多案，四至五案，每一案都是六、七人，你去掉的話，還是有兩萬多人，而且是互相對著提案，一邊說某些特定教材要退出校園、另一邊說一定不能退出校園，也就是對決的狀況，我們能夠做的事情，其實我常常跟部會的朋友們，逐字稿今天也上網了，你可以看到我跟部會朋友們說我們穿透同溫層，如果放在FB上是沒有人要去看。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是現在有兩萬人來訂閱我們的報紙，而且他們願意收到我們直接的email，我們可以穿透同溫層跟中介者，我們寫的任何東西就是給這兩萬人在他們願意的情況下收到，我們可以在兩個月中間發好幾次的新聞報。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們好不容易藉著開放政府的平台，有一個當自媒體的機會，但這個機會是稍縱即逝的。不管是任何媒體，只要是新興媒體，你要非常認真處理讀者要看到的東西，如果讀者有一絲一毫開始覺得你只是要帶風向，這一個新媒體就消失了，這個誠懇是非常重要的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一方面要做懶人包，讓大家很容易瞭解這個東西正反或多方意見，這個很重要；另外一個很重要的是，我們要自己展現出很誠懇的態度，包含公佈協調的過程，請青年諮詢委員會參與，也有台大機械系的朋友，還有其他利益關係人——像臺少盟的朋友——參與，在他們input底下，我就看到部會朋友們比較authentic，因為有利益關係人、新交的朋友在面前，他就對這一些真人，感覺到這五千人、兩萬人並不是抽象的數字，而是一群還沒有完全被洗腦，希望政府有一個衡平說法的朋友，而這一些朋友是大多數。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "雖然我們在網路上常常會覺得最旁邊的、音量最大的1％是大多數，這個並不是事實，而是98％是大多數的人，這些人就是來連署的人，我們要很誠懇告訴他們我們看到的世界是什麼，還有一個個回應他們看到的世界是怎麼樣。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "最終不一定會往行政院想要看到的方向走，我覺得這個很好，是在往社會實際可行的方向走，大概是這樣子，希望有回答到你的問題。" }, { "speaker": "現場提問", "speech": "（點頭）" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "跨領域的事情，我舉很實際的例子來講，在g0v裡面，我們的logo一開始有非常會寫程式，但是非常不會設計的人，拿了一個小畫家做了logo。要設計比它醜非常困難（笑），要花很多力氣才能設計比它醜。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "g0v有一個拋出來跟接棒的文化，因此會有學設計的朋友會覺得渾身不對勁，一張圖惹怒設計師，不改的話，那一天就沒有工作量，就做一個更好的版本出來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得在「vTaiwan」或者是g0v也好，做跨領域的方式是很特別的：明明不懂的也硬做，硬做之後不怕丟臉就丟出來，就會有很專業的人看了，怎麼會容許這一種東西存在，真的是萬試萬靈，就會發現很多貢獻者來跳坑。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "跳坑之後要有一個學習型社群，不是因為我會寫程式的人就高人一等，寫程式的人很容易有這一個幻覺，因為我們是各種工程裡面從有想法到看到東西最短的一門工程，其他人都要等一天、七天，如果是大強子對撞機要等幾十年，寫前端程式是兩、五分鐘的事，我們不是比較厲害，而是device比較responsive。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們帶著這種創造力，但是我們還是等七天、十四天、六十天其他不同領域的腳步，如果願意等的話，他們帶來的貢獻比我們學CS在那邊亂想的，可行性比較高；但是不排除我們學CS的，提出一些感覺上就是不懂的東西出來，或者是提一些很爛的東西出來，然後邀請各個領域的人來填坑。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "CS有一個特性是，只要能夠數位化就能夠保存，即使還不能理解、處理，但是我們可以把不同領域的朋友們的貢獻，集結在同一個地方。這個是從學CS的角度來談跨領域的問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "關於事實的生產，這牽涉到認識論的發展。像我們剛開始望遠鏡發明的時候，你為什麼要相信你看到的東西是星球的實際情況？其實沒有什麼道理，因為當時望遠鏡滿爛的，你不知道那個是不是看到的是星球上的點或者是望遠鏡的點，這個能不能算成科學的一部分，當然隨著望遠鏡越做越好，到最後大家說這個是科學的一部分。每一次有新的儀器出現的時候，整個社會就會吵。我覺得的是，如果學門存在比較久，以前吵過了，現在感覺上很有共識，哪一些是科學的、哪一些不是，如果實際檢視它的科學哲學基礎的話，並不一定比新興的科學好，只是吵得比較久而已。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我覺得我自己要保持比較謙卑的心情，來檢視科學社群的共識裡，哪些是在不加入其他社群的情況下建立的共識。科學社群的朋友最珍貴的是像Richard Feynman、Carl Sagan，已經很熟的這一些人又願意用一般人都聽得懂的語言講一次，而且確定講的時候是前後一致的，很多科學在這樣對話的時候，其實是不一致會慢慢透露出來，因此作科學傳播或者是科學普及的朋友們越跨領域，一、兩個學門越懂、越願意跟其他學門對話，就越不會有你所謂知識生產不對等的問題；反之，越不願意對話，越跟同溫層對話的話，你越沒有辦法去分別到底是一門科學或者是宗教。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "剛才Audrey提到「認識論」這個名詞，不見得大家都熟悉，我簡單作個註解：它是對於什麼是知識，什麼是合法的知識、什麼是我們想要尋找的知識，這一方面的一種哲學。第二輪的現場有沒有想要提出一些問題？還是因為「認識論」太抽象了（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "現場提問", "speech": "在開放政府的運用過程中第一輪裡面，像大麻分級制度改變，您覺得這樣的平台處理高度爭議性的議題，在實務上是不是能夠受到很大的限制？您對於這一個未來是比較悲觀或者是覺得很有希望的想法？" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "現場有沒有其他的朋友追問？這一個問題是類似於：網路溝通平台所適用的範圍，是不是有一個限制？如果有一些事情，若當社會上的爭議衝突太大，大到一個程度時，即便有這樣的平台，都可能是失效的？" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "因為我是法律人，民主法制其實是我的belief。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "現在普遍全世界都碰到的問題是，你在民主的機制，好像都推不動，並不代表民主不好，如果從民主的角度來講，第一個基礎是可以讓大家描述不同的意見，這個是言論自由，因此現在有非常多的工具，可以讓大家表述不同的意見，這個是言論自由的部分。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "但是民主最後還是有多數決的部分，你在公司的部分，是51％對於49％，雖然有49％的人支持你，最後下來還是得依照51％的人決議內容去執行。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "我剛剛講49％跟51％，當變成這麼大的量是非常不同意見的時候，很可能是我們剛剛講的公投，也就是用公投來表述是不是51％跟49％。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "就像公司當中有兩派非常不同的意見，你投票下去49％就只好認了，表決就是按照51％，因此我覺得我們現在用的所有這一些平台，先讓大家不同的意見出來，其實民主的制度裡面，如果先知，你其實是對的，但是你沒有說服多數的人，你還是那個少數人。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "本來讓一個言論表述的廣場，好比像Facebook都是言論廣場，讓大家有機會比以前更容易（發聲），以前沒有這麼多的管道，現在有這麼多方便的意見讓大家表述。不同意見的管道是很好的，經過這一個過程，大家能夠有一個平台，可以讓辯論一下，像「vTaiwan」試著做這一件事，也就是今天的資料都放在那裡，好比Uber的資料都放在那裡，你要討論的時候，如果連資料都沒有看，要理性討論總要看一下資料吧！" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "因此讓一個平台有足夠的資訊，讓大家理性討論，大家討論完以後有一個很明顯多數的時候，就讓大家面對，如果沒有意見的話，那就回來討論。以法律人面對民主的機制，這個也是可理解的範圍。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "剛才Jaclyn提到Uber，這裡面其實有一個重點，你可以看到左右兩邊的人其實分得很開，其實三、四個禮拜run下來的時候，其實已經靠攏到滿中間了，很多事並不是非黑即白，如果給大家足夠的時間是可以稍微靠攏一點，如果一開始問題提得太誇張，一開始會覺得大家好像水火不容，大家如果給大家足夠時間的話，其實到最後是會有共同的意見出來，也就是要做一個「多元化計程車方案」。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個東西你沒有辦法強求，我們如果一開始就要求大家表態、投票的話，我們就不會到最後收得出這一些共識，這一些共同的事實，讓大家充分表達感受，而且確認大家不會表達到一半我們就跑去做決定的正當程序很重要，這個要花時間，可能事實階段跟感受階段要各花三十天，共要花六十天，如果沒有的話，那就大家去翻桌。我們一開始花越多的時間，就可以把重大的議題不同的意見可以收到一個狀態。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "如果今天是實體的審議民主討論，好比二十幾個人或者是三十個人坐在一起連續討論三、五天，說不定真的會有這一個共識；在「vTaiwan」的平台上也是，來這邊持續使用的人，經過三個月能夠產生共識。但問題是：不管是實體的或在線上的審議民主，你不可能真的 engage 社會上所有關心某個高度爭議性議題的那些人。這一些人絕大多數活動的地方，甚至不是在同一個平台，其中你會發現像婚姻平權的爭議當中，可能一群人集中在LINE發各式各樣的消息，另外一群人集中在Facebook上，甚至在平台的層次上就形成了社會上的斷裂。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "這種狀況下，如何還能相信網路民主能夠凝聚共識的可能性？這裡最大的問題是：即便有一個好的，能夠促成共識產生的平台，怎麼樣可以讓大家願意來用？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "學理上其實很簡單，來的人才有拘束力，在外面的發言都不算，一句話講就是這樣子。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但即使是我們賦予一個東西拘束力，沒有來的人，現在就覺得翻桌得到的回報，會比讓你這樣子正當程序走下去來得高，這個是理性選擇，相信各位也有看到一些例子（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我的意思是，這裡面有幾個基礎問題要解決：" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "1. 審議式討論跟線上的場域，你如何辦到如何大家沒有辦法翻桌？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "2. 如何給它很高的拘束力，讓大家願意來參加？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "3. 經過三個星期或者是幾個月的共感過程，如何讓沒有辦法來現場，或者是事後才來追劇的人，參與互相說服的、身歷其境的過程？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "雖然大家都說我是「VR、VR再VR」，但這個真的是VR可以幫忙的。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "現在這一個現象挺亂的，可是各位如果往前看，以前就是公聽會，我們常常會被邀請去，但是你也不會每一個都參加，但是你說公聽會裡面找的專家學者，了不起一、兩百個人，發言很短，發言都是短短記載一下，然後最後跑出一個結論。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "目前這一個方式有沒有比過去好？我認為是好的，所以目前如果視為平台的討論，就像公聽會一樣，這個絕對比以前的這一種，像你凡講過、永遠在那邊，過了幾年之後都還可以再檢視講的對不對。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "跟以前不太一樣，以前傳統意見蒐集的方式，現在已經沒有辦法說服大家，所以我們現在用這一種新的方式，至少表述的意見很清楚，你講得不對，以後人家會來解釋你講的不對，但是至少東西是完整的，任何事後、任何地方，你都可以檢視你講的對不對。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "我認為目前至少比以前的公聽會好多了，以前跑不出這麼多意見，現在有這麼多的裝置可以跑出很多意見，所以現在是不是可以有一個方式是政務官看到這麼的意見來作決定，如果做得決定不對，那就下台，因此不能都去公投，因此是不是找到一個好的數位工具，是不是讓大家發言有一個很好的紀錄，有一個數位的工具可以分析，並讓決策者可以快速往前，最後就是負政治責任。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "像剛剛講的49％跟51％，那就是真的公投。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "剛剛講的公聽會，有一個很好的例子，像福島受災區食品要不要輸臺的問題。這一次本來有預計三場公聽會，我知道還了一個會前會，包含呂家華、杜文苓老師等審議民主的好手都參與，她們也都非常期待，希望讓這一次是真正有意義能夠進行聽證式對話的公聽會，做了很多這樣的工作。結果在第一場公聽會的時候，因為有一些人的動員杯葛，在外面各方面，讓整場對話沒有辦法進行。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "我為什麼要講這一件事？最近在臺灣的一些公共爭議，乃至於在今年可以預見，接下來會出現好幾個爭議——包括年金改革、缺電問題之能源政策。這一些事，在臺灣都慢慢發生出一種，幾乎可以說是像在立場上內戰式的局勢。面對一個場合，可以因為認為對我不利，寧可杯葛，讓它沒有辦法運作。其實我們以前也看過，立法委員做過很多這樣的事情，像衝上主席臺。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "我很好奇的是，像「vTaiwan」的實驗，有沒有碰過一些類似狀況？我擔心的是，在這處理過的爭議，是不是還沒有強大到，會出現大量的trolling 大軍？有沒有辦法想像，在處理高度爭議的時候，會被動員各式各樣的網路殭屍或是小粉紅來癱瘓？" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "說到底，平台能運作的前提，是大家還願意進行對話。但是萬一有一些狀況下，大家覺得對話沒有意義，想要透過對話把對方的聲音壓下去，這一件事你怎麼看？" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "其實「vTaiwan」的網路賣酒那一場就很爭議，像兒福團體跟酒駕是非常激烈在反對這一件事，但是我們從網路的討論，事實上看得出來，因為全世界大部分的國家都已經這樣，所以後來其實我的理解，他們也認為只要有一個配套的措施就可以，那一場的討論其實是很激烈的。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "Uber的議題，當時計程車隊、Uber代表跟計程車公會等等也都有代表來，大家不是都一樣，然後拍手就做了，並不是這樣的情況。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "只是我真的覺得現在即使要開所謂實體審議式民主的公聽會，我覺得直播也免不了，因為沒有那麼多人會參與實體，但是現在已經有直播、網路參與的情況下，本來就有智慧型手機了，現在幾乎沒有人問我家電話了對不對？動不動就是LINE一下，這個通訊已經在那裡，已經回不去了嘛！" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "所以，我說臺灣的民主也需要改版的時候，我覺得不同意見表述的平台，已經必須是新科技展現的平台，我們接下來也要用新科技的方式去思考，如何找到共識，什麼樣的情況下要公投、什麼樣的情況下不用，說不定以後民主公投很方便，但是我覺得要慢慢來，而且我認為這個是擋不住的，如果現在再用傳統的方式是說服不了人。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "Albert你講的那一場（新北連江場），其實下午的品質還不錯。那一場的問題是，上午有非常多來翻桌的理由，這件事變成讓開第二場、第三場時如果沒有做萬全準備的話，只是讓翻桌的理由更加強。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果真的收到了一些共識，那相信對話的人本來就有來參加預備會議，絕對不會杯葛，所以沒有參加會議的人想要破壞程序的正當性，只要還覺得有可能破壞正當性的話，就不會來開預備會議。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "一個人要對話與否並不是人格的問題，而是理性選擇，所以就是說當程序給他的拘束力及這一個東西的正當性、這個東西的穩定性，這三個東西乘起來並沒有辦法在理性選擇上說有意義輸入的時候，當然就是鬧場，就是小粉紅就出來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第二個比較沒有那麼技術，也就是在概念的層面，我們其實318的時候，處理過比這個更誇張的狀況，我們所有從技術到實體到所有的東西，並不只一輪的東西，而是有非常多的人想要破壞整套資通訊系統的正當性，如果混亂就沒有運動了，所以這一個東西是各方都想要破壞。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們採取的方式是，讓每一個人知道這一套系統是怎麼run的，即使我或高嘉良在睡覺，其他任何人都可以幫忙take care。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "另外一個是在每一個層級都可以做，好比你是公民記者，印了一個記者證，後面還有大法官釋憲的QR碼，你就可以自己作直播主跟上載，很容易匯聚到那一個平台，不需要有一個中間的管理，在場裡面的人還願意繼續運動下去的比較多，而這一個運動就會繼續，並不是靠五、六人去把關，把關攻破就沒有了，因此我覺得沒有頭「無政府」狀況，在讓是碰到這一類攻擊的時候，就可以自主處裡，即使當掉了，但這整套程序本身就是open的，任何人都可以在自己的機器上run一次，在這樣的情況之下，其實出現一個有討論場域的事情比較有可能，並不會是有一個場，而把那個場破壞掉，然後就不能討論。" }, { "speaker": "現場提問", "speech": "剛剛聽到一個算是關鍵詞「理性選擇」，大家會在這一個基礎上認知好之後，大家會理性選擇後，選擇「vTaiwan」的平台進行對話。" }, { "speaker": "現場提問", "speech": "就我們觀察最近的社會事件，我們覺得大家都算是很理性，像同性婚姻議題，我們會看到其實是想要推公投，大家就用投票來決定，這個東西是拉到道德或者是正義層次的問題，好像不可以被投票的東西；但是另外一方卻說要投票。" }, { "speaker": "現場提問", "speech": "很多事情好像並不是說談話沒有辦法談完，我們就可以用投票來解決事情，而不是說投票會造成更大的撕裂，或者是大家不認可這一個東西可以拿來投票，這一個東西在年金改革上也有出現過，出現這樣的做法應該用什麼樣的方式去處理會比較好？" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "這個問題其實是講民主的界限。從憲政主義的觀點，如果都所有事情交給民主的話，很有機會會迫害到基本人權。" }, { "speaker": "現場提問", "speech": "我想要問一些有關於兩岸的法律問題，上海自貿區他們有提出負面清單，負面清單的定義好像是提出來的就不能做、沒有講的就可以做，但是只有在自貿區裡面，不論現在的經濟環境或者是有設定什麼樣的區域、港口，或者是新創事業裡面有類似這樣的概念出現嗎？" }, { "speaker": "現場提問", "speech": "不用比太多的地方，我的提問是這樣。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "現場有沒有其他的朋友還想提問？" }, { "speaker": "現場提問", "speech": "如果民眾今天認可「小政府」或者是「無政府」，他看到一個社會問題想要解決，好比交通安全等等，沒有辦法賺到錢，但是又對社會有極大的助益，有什麼方式可以跟「小政府」的合作？或者是除了群眾募資之外，有沒有辦法參與這一個公共議題？但是又可以讓他在這方面的投資，好比要研究需要成本，或者是需要機械成本也可以負擔的？" }, { "speaker": "現場提問", "speech": "我看到g0v 1月份有一個計畫是「沒有人要給你錢」，請大家提公民計畫，如果這一個計畫是比較大的，也就是半年30萬到60萬沒有辦法解決的話，還有沒有其他的方式可以拿到這一個資金？" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "針對那一個議題先講一下，當時「vTaiwan」的「v」是virtual，那時我負責做法規虛擬調適，所以某一個程度讓議題偏新科技的這塊，這個議題我們當時認為臺灣有些事不能等，跟產業有關係的要快一點。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "當時對於事實上有一些議題也覺得還不成熟，也就是社會還不成熟到需要……「vTaiwan」你仔細看，幾乎開完會，政策就出去了，不管你是修命令或者是修法，等於某一個程度討論完以後就做決策了。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "有一些東西還沒有共識，因為這個是實驗，所以就先找一些議題在這邊做，但是爭議比較大的，可能也許還要再有其他的方式來找平台處理。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「vTaiwan」並不是取消代議民主。我們本來就會邀多元利益關係人來溝通，但我們如何把公聽會做得更好？讓事後加入更容易等等。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "第二個是如何讓我們不認識的利益關係人來出現？其實一開始只是解決這兩個問題。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "Jaclyn認識的利益關係人，通常是有網路使用能力的人，所以用這一個網路來做的呈現，正當性稍微高一點，但是當時確實同性婚姻案，法務部也有來問，我們說除非能夠證明利益關係人都有使用網路的能力，不然以目前志工的level沒有辦法take。像台北市在做公共住宅分配的時候，他們是要讓任何弱勢的家戶的利益關係人都可以討論，意思就是平常並不會滑手機跟上網，這個中間就配置非常多，從技術上的手語老師到各種各樣轉譯朋友、即時上字幕及直播等等，還有到離他們近的地方去開，還用好幾波利益關係人的問卷方式，讓實際認識街友去做人物誌等等，那一個案子投入的時間是非常多的，只有那樣的情況才能說，把利益關係人的聲音收進來，大家知道要如何討論。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是這個比較是地方政府，而且是在一個範圍裡面真的能夠去做，我們做中央政策的時候，一下子在全臺灣run這一個東西，有一個前提，每一個地方的社群培力已經好到這個程度，每一個地方都已經run過十幾、二十個團隊才可以去做，臺灣現在很可以慢慢往這一個程度去做，但是這並不是一、兩天就能做到的事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "如果沒有一個社造團隊的話，可以藉由參與式預算，一部分是丟資源，分配資源是大家可以想像的東西，可以培力社群、社造大學的朋友，慢慢就會發現有這一些skill的人，但是在各國都是兩、三年才會有穩定的東西出現，臺灣真的還在很早期的狀況。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "發問者有沒有覺得有回答到？" }, { "speaker": "現場提問", "speech": "今天當我們出現是一種被拉高到道德制高點的時候，他們說：「我們的立場有我的價值觀，你不要說服我，如果要說服我的話，就要請蘇格拉底在世之類的。」這個也不是能拿來公投，這個是很高的價值信念的東西，不是用多數決的東西，有可能是年金改革的信賴意義，或者是同性婚姻之中家庭的價值觀，在這樣的情況之下，我們要如何處理這樣情況？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "即使道德觀幾方都不一樣，但只要議題足夠小、足夠具體，其他都排除掉，只做這一個極小的部分，大家還是會願意就事論事。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "既然你提了專法或者是專章或者是專節，可能到了專條的時候，大家就會覺得聚焦在專條上，是比較能夠討論，因為是在working memory可以處理的字數裡面。我的意思是這個還是牽涉到你在認知的時候，你是傾向於因為實在沒有辦法聚焦，所以全面否定對方，還是這個東西被切掉很小了，我們不討論共享經濟，只討論自用車載客是不是需要納稅的這一個東西，在議題這麼小的前提下，對話成本很低，其實動情緒也是很累的，也就是把對話的成本降到比那個低，其實人是有可能開始討論事情。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是這個有幾個前提，政府要有耐心，第二個是願意花時間把爭點切那麼小，之前整個事務體系沒有這樣的練習。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "有的爭點切不下來，舉個例子像同性婚姻？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "婚姻是四百九十八項的權利義務……我們在法條裡面就是已經切這麼小了，你知道我的意思嗎？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我們現在好比說是專條，在專條的前提下，社會來討論領養小孩這上面是不是可以有差別對待等等，你把它切到這麼小的時候，再把子議題再切更小，也是可以基於事實來討論，甚至一邊可以說「好，我們沒有數據」，那也不是挑戰對方的道德，只是在效益論上去處理。但是如果沒有切到那麼小，就不能處理。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "但可能有人會認為，嘗試將這一整套婚姻的權利來切割討論，這就是形式上的歧視。對於婚姻平權者，有些追求與異性戀完全相同的權益；而對「形式上的完全相等」的追求者來講，甚至你嘗試把事情切割開來，這個動作本身不用討論，這個東西就隱含著岐視。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "這個完全沒有問題，因為我是也這樣想（笑）。但這和接受討論的形式是兩回事。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "這個我倒真的有不同的意見，因為你從法律的角度來講，差異本身要承認，也是一種平等，並不是把所有的東西拉齊才叫做平等，所以不同就是不同，法律有多少東西保護女性要生小孩，本來就有很多不同，本來就要承認它不同，本來要立專法跟專章，這個是同性朋友們的一些權益，大家比較沒有爭議，但是改到所有的部分，就會有不是同性者，因為你的改動，而他覺得受有影響。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "因此我認為像這樣的議題本身，是不是可以把這麼兩極端的東西縮到比較小的大家有共識，民主就不是要說服所有的人，並不是要完全說服，本來民主就有不同的意見，不同意見是正常的，如果有辦法說服是最好的，如果沒有辦法說服的話，那就是民主的機制去運作。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "充份揭露一下，之前我和Jaclyn討論過這件事。一直小到專條的時候我們是可以對話的，在這之前是不行（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "是的，因為不一樣啊！我就是不一樣啊！你不能強迫我們一定要一樣，承認不一樣也是法律上的平等。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "另外一個是有關於上海的部分，剛剛Albert有提，其實我有一段時間在北京上班，非常瞭解大陸是從正面表列才可以做，改到負面表列，我們講正面表列是沒有說可以的，你都不可以，負面表列是我沒有說不可以的，你都可以。這一種轉變，尤其對於外資的部分，你會吸納很多外資的投資，確實政策上的改變是對的。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "臺灣目前如果我們今天講說小政府，這個就是很好的方法，你只要負面表列，你只要管那個負面表列就好了，負面表列沒有寫的，就不用管。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "像最近所講的Uber有多元計程車方案，媒體問我就是負面表列，因為現在的辦法，對不起，我真的要反映一下，現在的辦法是要審議，然後還要送進來，也就是要審是不是夠創新，這個沒有道理嘛！講什麼不可以就好了，既然是要鼓勵創新，那就不要你審啊！應該是底限是哪一些關心的，其他就應該開放嘛！這個就是思維。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "因此我們大家回到小政府的思維，政府管負面表列的東西，沒事不要多管，我們也不要期待萬能政府。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "從監管到審查到備查到完全不管，這個滑桿只能慢慢拉，因為不可能直接跳到這邊來。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我目前碰到各部會，不管是NCC在做數位通傳法，他並沒有要管制，只是要跟民法調和；金管會做FinTech沙盒的時候，也有在討論說一定規模之下是不是就備查就好。這個是隨著時代演變，不得不去處理新的題目，但是並不是一開始就放掉，都放掉的問題是灰色的部分就全部漂白，如果要再修回來，其實是很難做到的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "但是，我們並不是滑桿拉到這個程度就滿足，我們說敏捷式治理，是要按照實際的狀況，這個還不夠再拉一點，一直到大家覺得ok的地方停下來。目前跟各部會的朋友們接觸，大家都慢慢接受這樣的想法。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "對一些公共議題的倡議者或者是發想者，從政府的角度，有沒有辦法提供一些資源？" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "「沒有人」要給你錢，g0v都是沒有人，這個是文字遊戲。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "其實全世界各地都有這樣的，也不是g0v獨創，只是把公民科技特別挑出來，如果這個想法解決別人沒有辦法解決的問題，即使賺不了錢，世界上存在基金會專門放這樣的東西，臺灣這樣的文化越來越健全。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "因為我剛好也是社會企業政委，打廣告一下，有另外一個想法，好比我們現在在討論公司法全盤修正，公司法第1條是以營利為目的的東西才叫做公司，我們能不能在法條或者是配套裡面加一些元素，這一公司除了賺錢之外，這一些公司就是為了解決社會的問題或者是達到社會的使命才存在，不只是扶弱，還有為了達到一些公共政策的達到——其實做懶人包也是社會目的——等到大家慢慢習慣，其實公司有兩、三個不同的bottom line，投資人願意把錢放在比較久才會賺得回來，投資人投資就是為了解決社會問題，也就是完全一毛錢都賺不到，但是有一些永續性，但是就是社會上比較多的發展，一直到我們賺錢的同時，又可以做社會公益的事情，像我參加開放源碼運動一面賺錢，還一面回饋社會，這個是非常有助益的。" }, { "speaker": "唐鳳", "speech": "我的意思是：政府做的事並不是槓桿落在兩端，像可以投資、補助，或者是政策制訂的方向，可以讓大家很清楚每一端都可以做活，我覺得這個是非常重要的。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "關於所謂的公民倡議者所需要的資源裡面，我這幾年觀察一直覺得有一點滿重要的：臺灣社會普遍有很多人會覺得，某些事我們應該要怎麼樣怎麼樣，可是落實到立法層面時，許多公民團體其實非常欠缺「立法技術」的專業支援，就像立法院的法制局的角色。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "因為關於立法技術的討論，即便在台灣公民社會都不普及，也因此，我認為欠缺對立法習慣性做法的反省。像Jaclyn有提到政府組織法規定非常硬；現在有很多法，常常在我看起來規定太硬、太細，甚至連多少金額都直接寫進法條裡面，使得整個法體系因應社會變化及實際需求時，有彈性不足的問題。更不用說，被砍半的國會在立法的能量上的不足，因此常常有很多事都有「合法化的危機」。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "像剛剛談到的婚姻平權，去年底的時候，爭議是專法派跟直接修民法派，好像只能二擇一。如果熟悉立法技術就會知道，這裡面有很多種不同混成的方式，包括直接修民法是直接把「夫妻」這個詞都拿掉，或者是在同一個法條當中加入不同的構成元素，或者是專條，或者是專章。或者是今天修民法之後，法律效力如何延伸到其他牽涉到夫妻或者是父母的法令，延伸出去的法律效力轉接頭怎麼寫？是直接寫進民法，或是簡單的專法去作轉接頭等等，這個討論在臺灣的社會長期是欠缺的。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "Jaclyn從專業的法律角度來看，一方面是立法技術的普及有沒有一些想法？或者是目前一些立法的做法上，在未來有沒有一些要調整的大方向？" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "閉鎖型公司的時候，最早是想要全部修，全部修就是幾百條，困難度明顯是高的，所以後來加一個專節，十四個條文把閉鎖型的概念放進去，前後概念花不到半年的時間，立法就全過了。現在公司法要全修，四、五百條，我們可以瞭解困難度是存在的。確實立法技術某一個程度滿專業的，這個應該有更多的法律人要進來協助。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "這個部分，我想要跟大家討論一個問題：臺灣這一個社會，我們應該要嘗試建立一個彼此信任的關係。因為現在沒有信任關係，所以法條本身就是剛剛講的，明明世界變化很快，很快的話，就是要有彈性。如果沒有彈性的話，就因應不了變局。這個在公司是一樣的，如果今天要改授權給底下的人才會有發揮的空間，但是現在變成彼此都不信任，然後又有立委跟監委的壓力，導致政府運作僵化。坦白講，我滿同情留在行政體系的同仁（聽眾笑），我覺得很多同仁想要做事，但是很多事綁手綁腳。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "立法委員也會找你去問為什麼這樣裁量，動不動被告背信，這個已經影響到國家的運作，因此我認為如果不能建立一個可以彼此信任的社會，因為你只會看到更僵硬的東西，你只會看到大家都不敢授權，一個綁一個、我綁你、你綁我，大家就綁死了。這個是大家共同的責任，這並不是誰的責任。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "因此，我現在只要有演講，我一定主張小政府，只要有演講，我一定主張剛剛講的負面表列，小政府就是負面表列，只有管該管，其他就不要管，還有我們g0v的精神，我覺得應該要讓更多的企業知道，因此我現在其實要到企業演講都會介紹g0v，因為我現在也是hacker（笑）。" }, { "speaker": "蔡玉玲", "speech": "這一次g0v（活動），我除了是贊助者，我也希望企業界多贊助，因為基金會不希望政府的資金，希望是企業的贊助，所以g0v的志工跟企業可以手牽手，真的可以做到一些改變臺灣的困境，我覺得這個是我們大家要一起做的事。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "最後Jaclyn收在這個地方，特別把「信任」提出來，我覺得這個滿重要的。整個現代社會是要靠信任才能運作，在社會內鬥的過程當中，信任也是我們這十多年來耗損最嚴重的事情。如果當社會上沒有信任作為好的潤滑劑，我們用各式各樣僵硬的法條，或各式各樣的規範把這一個東西綁死的時候，整個社會會非常僵硬，不能因應各式各樣的改變。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "今天談這一個題目，我自己個人一直有一個很深的期望。臺灣的科技穿透率算是很高的，我們科技技術在世界上算是前面的，大部分國民對移動式裝置接受度很高，整個社會對於民主也有信心跟期盼，因此我們對於網路民主這件事上，有機會站在全球的前端。現在做的很多實驗，不只是解決自己的問題，包含全球。當前坦白講是民主退潮，有一些人不相信民主——在臺灣我們的實驗，甚至有可能對於一些民主國家，產生一些示範效力。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "我希望從今天或者是未來的討論，能夠有機會大家一起相信去創造一個比較值得期待的未來、比較有合理性的未來。在現場的大家還有沒有特別想要講或特別想要問的？如果沒有的話，我們時間就差不多到一個段落。" }, { "speaker": "曾柏文", "speech": "謝謝兩位講者。同仁有特別跟我提醒，我們在端傳媒有特別做社群性的論壇，有興趣參與測試的，在外面幫我們登記一下，我們可以邀請你們來加入初期的測試，大概就先這樣，謝謝大家來這個地方，希望離開的時候，心中帶著更篤定的感覺，並不是更困惑，謝謝。" } ]