IGF 2018 - Day 1 - Salle IX - WS311 Has it become a luxury to disconnect?

The following are the outputs of the real-time captioning taken during the Thirteenth Annual Meeting of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) in Paris, France, from 12 to 14 November 2018. Although it is largely accurate, in some cases it may be incomplete or inaccurate due to inaudible passages or transcription errors. It is posted as an aid to understanding the proceedings at the event, but should not be treated as an authoritative record. 



>> MODERATOR:  Hello, everyone.  We're just going to wait two more minutes because there is one panelist searching the room.  It is not that easy, but we'll get started in a sec.  All right.  Hello, everyone.  As soon as he comes in, he will free style and join the conversation.

We will talk about the luxury to disconnect.  It is basically a conversation about privacy and how to retain an element of choice in a world where technology is basically around us everywhere.  So how can we still have a choice and that's my thesis and I've invited panelists to challenge me on that and share personal stories.  It will be a journey around the world.

I invite you to say a story you have for how you protect your privacy and what strategies and mechanisms you have in order to challenge maybe the cost of protecting your privacy because we're going to talk about the economics of that and how commencive it might be these days to actually get better protection both security and privacy wise.  Then do feel free to give me a sign and do jump in.

Weighing being joined today ‑‑ we are being joined today.  Sol anais the health re‑‑ sol anais stepping in and noble was too sick to travel to Paris.  So soLanna kindly stepped in.  She's around us and she will take a perspective on basically use and children's education and how to look at from a privacy and technological change point of view.  And then we have Shashank that works in India.  He's a delhi based who is going to share a lot from his work.  In India, we have already started this conversation.  We just can fill it with this alone.  We will try to have stories from around the world.  But frameworks for ARTICLE 19 and Kenya recovers all of east Africa is also going to share some of his work on privacy and data protection from that angle.

So with that basically, I will hand it over straight to soLanna to kick it off with her story.

>> SoLanna:  I thought I would started with a personal story of how I am navigating the field of technology with my daughter.  I'm a mother and I have a 6‑year‑old daughter starting to ask when she'll get her cell phone.  I am sure many of you in the audience face those challenges.  If you happen to be the part of your family that is the most aware of the Internet, you get asked a lot about what should I do?  What's too much?  What's too little.

When I think about this question about the right to diss connect, I always worry about those parts of sort that are most vulnerability for the context.  We think about women.  We think about the poor and children.  Children are vulnerable whether online or offline.  And increasingly how much we choose to connect our children is something that determines how much they are at risk for different bad actors and different companies and different kinds of data sharing that we might not know the extent of the risk of until they're older.

Some of the studies that have been coming out on this topic to me closely resemble the ones that used to come out on access to television.  People who are poor and maybe don't have access to as much education or resources can't have money to have a nanny or somebody to entertain their children let their kids watch more TV than somebody from an affluent household who has the means to entertain children.  You see similar dynamics with who has most access to technology, at least in wealthy countries where technology is ubiquitous or people have cell phones.  Often what we're finding is that in poor urban neighborhoods, the kids will be spending more time with video games and cell phones than they would in Silicon Valley households where parents work in technology.

So those reverse digital divides are an interesting example, one of many, of how this issue shows up in different societies.

>> MODERATOR:  Great.  What we're having is outside of the geographical divide, we also have a divide.  You want to give your opinion on this?

>> SHASHANK MOHAN:  Yes.  I would like to start by ‑‑ if any of you don't know biometric collection program, it's called the adhar.  I will mention that so that everyone knows what I'm talking about.

So the project was initiated by taking information from each and every person living in India, which is fingerprints, eye scans and provide them better services and targeted subsites.

My personal story starts and I would like to disclaim I am a privileged member of Indian society, but it associated me.  Back in 2017, the Indian government previously made it manned story for tax filings to be linked to your adhar.  When I was filing my taxation documents, up until then, I was avoiding linking my information to other project.  So that's one way of how I was coerced into getting into the adharproject and how it was linked with my tax documents.

On another story, one of our clients was recently denied arbiter certificate for his child because they didn't own an adhar.  So this justifies what level.  There is no law.  So we're challenging this.  But this goes on to explain how the Indian government is using adharto depend to each and every citizens life.

Quickly, recapping two years of the past two years in India where we've had a large debate on privacy and after that adhar.  Back ‑‑

Last year, we had the privacy, the supreme court declared privacy as a fundamental right for all Indians which is to say the pivotal point in the privacy point in India.  The supreme court said that privacy is a matter of dignity, integrity and bassic human right which was much applauded by Civil Society organization and the society back home.  But a couple of months back, the same code legit myselfd the project as it was challenged constitutionally on the BASIS of privacy saying that the government can make adharmandatory for giving access to services, benefits and subsidies and also legit myselfing and linking with taxation documents.

You look at India with most of the country being poor and relying on subsidies from the country, they are linked with ‑‑ they are covering the entire population with adhar.  Having said this, the Indian government does have a back of going back on his own decisions.  They will scrap adhar, so to say.  What is important to also code is the privacy judgment was in nine judge banks of the supreme court which is very high.  It had a very wide gamut.  It affected LGBT rights and subsequently after the privacy judgment.  The homosexuality was made legal in India.  It targets freedom of speech T. targets freedom of food, what you want to eat.  The privacy judgment has very large rules and it's very important judgment for all of us.  It is very using that to probably challenge adharand subsequent methods of many things.  So yeah.  I will stop there.

>> MODERATOR:  It's a very personal story, but also a very bleak one do.  We still have a choice and is there a way to opt out?  I'm not sure that's the case in India.  We try to identify things.  What we want to you get is the power of us having the chance to change something because sometimes we need to be able to put ourselves in the mind frame where we can imagine it to get there.  We will try to get there afterwards, but now that Ephraim told me he came from the airport, that should climb atize to the Parissian weather.  Ephraim I'm sorry I'm rate.  I made it here.  So my personal story comes from around 2010, 2011 when in Kenya, we passed a new question.  That is to be registered.  For the party to be registered.  It is by citizens from all over the country from every county, every word, every constituency.  So how did they do this?  Some parties for them to be registered?  They had to get data from Teleco companies.  This was a big fight I used to have back then with the legal team.  But back then, the books had your name, your number, your ID, your address, the amount you withdrawn.  Just basically everything about that transaction would be on that transaction.  They didn't have a special code they later changed after pushback.

So you found yourself registered for a political party which maybe you don't sign up for the value ‑Z because you had registered to Teleco to access mobile money.  Mobile money is for every 20,000 ‑‑ it is around 20,000 ATMs in Kenya compatientd to 6,000 mobile money agents that.  Tells you how big financial inclusion is linked to privacy data protection.  This for me was a wake up moment that hey, we need to walk something around this.  We tried having pushback around privacy.  That is that hey, maybe your family and people were asking you how do you go about it.  So you need to ‑‑ people are asking what should we do about it?  So that was the personal story and coping a lot from India from the penal code and we also copy things there India.

If 2014, the government gave a contract because they provided a subsidiary.  And the contract was for them to link surveillance cameras across and provide police with a communication network.  So one of the pushbacks we did then was Access Now and before moving touch, we tried to make them try and insure the systems were secure and they don't use the same network for the other common users.  But then it's been that pushback then as compared to now.  Back then there was pushback.  This is a conversation and common to talk about should only be in government to talk about security and stuff like that.

So that's the attitude in the parts of the world too.

In 2014 around the same time, there was the snowedden leaks.  That's the time when this conversation started becoming more mainstream.  They put surveillance and data protection.  At least we got more from 2010 and 2011.  You started getting more analyzing and people were understanding what you were Tajing about since 2010.  When the contract was given in 2014, there was an amendment and the law is ‑‑ the act was passed.  For those who have seen that YouTube video, our MP sports and even to each other's clothes in parliament, which was very, very funny, but it was very serious.  We went to court with a human rights commission and ARTICLE 19.  We won against that and attempted amendment at that which made it ‑‑ made the police by passed judicial authority.  Basically any rank of any police service I would survail you without going to court.  It is a chief inspecteddor and those rounds people have different expertise and you have to go through judicial authority.  So that was strapped.

Late last year, there was a law that was adopt.  Parliament at last minute, the majority MPs changed the closest and by passed judicial authority again.  So we're going back to the same fight you are having in 2014.  The same concerns you are having.

So we are back in court for the same act law.  We'll be presenting to the high court of Kenya in December just about that law.  That's a personal story.  For those who most of us who are to be in two and the laws being drafted and policies, but in our part of the world, those opportunities to pass judicial authority and to create a constitutional challenge.  Sorry I have gone too legal.  But that's a personal store.  Yeah.  Thank you.

>> MODERATOR:  I find it fascinating because immediately you went into strategies for how to fix the problem.  We have one power of judiciary and you might be able to truck about that too.  We discussed that was everywhere and it is our go‑to mechanism.  Before we go there, I have one question on the definition of privacy.  I'm a German citizens.  So for us, German had a reputation for being and fierce, but we remember what it was not to video any.  Even me, I was very young when the world came down.  My family grew in the system.  There's a trajectory why university being used.  So I always felt that need where ‑‑ freedom of expression means nothing if I am not free within myself to think.  That's the cultural tradition in Germany.  It's a human right, but I would be very serious to think how you reflect that back in your region and your personal contact.  You want to start?

>> SPEAKER:  The privacy judgment last year, what the code did is we had a provision which guarantees a right to life and liberty.  The code is that privacy is an integral part and it is said that it emanates the from the dignity of an individual.  The auto mommy to make decisions and be creative.  That privacy judgment is alreadiy ‑‑ gives a large noble to privacy itself.  It guarantee bodily privacy, informational privacy and what PC is that it is very important definition of privacy back in India.

>> I can say something about it, but I think in terms of perceptions and especially perceptions related to Internet, perspectives owe whyo Yo.

At the moment, I feel people are concerned about security and more knowledge and transparency about who they're talking to.  More affirmation about where information comes from in respond to this information and I feel like right now, people are extremely confused about how much privacy they want and whether privacy is a good thing or a bad thing.

We did a public call for proposals on the project they work on where we were asking people what are they most concerned about?  Every year you can see how people's perception shift T. goes hand in hand with a lot of media coverage typed on this project.  So we had so many people saying I want to be 100% sure I know who is sending me the E‑mail.  I want people to be registered with finger prints and biometrics so we can be sure who we're talking to.  That is one half of the responses and then the other half was I want more encryption.  I want more Anoonimous.  I want safety and freedom of movement on the Internet.  We're at odds about what privacy means, how we value proposition along with other things and how we assessed risks.  They're so great that people don't know what to say or what to do.  We want connectivity and we want people to be connected.  It is urgent that societies be connected and we keep remembering about life with the Internet and with online education and all the opportunities, but at same time, we're also trying to find a balance and help decision makers navigate to space without falling into the trap of overly suring or over sensorying and limiting movement and freedom of thought and speech.

>> Give the legal definition.  Because how these Internet services are designed to be free.  People ask questions that this really benefits my life.  Why should I care about privacy?  I'm sure thereure large corporations.  They're take care of my services.  So the general perception might be different on the ground, but the legal definition is we have that now.

>> Ephraim:  Because of the laws, it has been used as a justification.  We need to give all your details to fit your ID.  But for you to leave your photo ID some somewhere downstairs.  Collect all the data and ask different questions where you're coming from, who are you going to see.  People are getting use into that envision, people don't really question much.  All your data was in the Teleco books.  Part of this problem is the names there were and all the details and that can be send to you to get information and put in certain databases.  We had elections last year and at that time, some political candidates sent you messages telling you please come and vote in this specific poling station.  Please come on this date.  They knew where you are and that personal information.  That made people question these.  The fashion that hasn't been draftd after the public consultation is good, but depends now what happens next.  That's where things get messed up.  So that's the situation.  Jeepedda, we don't talk about a low, but they have a profiction that privacy should be expected and the code judges ‑‑ for example, last year communications reg pitch ‑‑ they calling a device management system on their networks which is the quote/unquote to tell if they were fake funds and devices in thes.  They reached out and say that this divide and be able to look into text messages and look into the calls and make the logs.  The deanery revenue authority tried or has been trying to have this noble that we feed to have all the call records for us to get the actual toxicity that is required.  Some people would be okay with that, but then given the legal institution is only a concern or profiction.  It's noting that that protects privacy.  That's what you are working on at the moment.  But several position ‑‑  .

>> MODERATOR:  There's also these private actors driving it which might come with convenience and you can sort pay for certain protections or is it the public sector and do we still have a choice to opt out if they for us to be part of that system.

If we can exercise our rights as citizens unless we are connected, what does that mean for us pushing back?  I think you mentioned some of this in cort because you still have a strong push ‑‑ how the judiciary works in India.  Speak speak couple of months back, the supreme court did legitimize the hard use and sometimes it is economical that the to ‑‑ I don't know how demographic is minimal data.  What we've seeing is that citizens and Civil Society of the organizations, lawyers ran to the court based on private moment.  It is non‑recognition of actual privacy by the judiciary and the executive and I would like to ‑‑ I would like to say there is this sort of attitude of the government in India about, you know, how the government keeps saying data is the new old?  Do you mean you own everything?  You own our data?  This attitude is signing into debates around technology whether AI or data protection.  We do have a data law.  It talks about we call it data localization which means that the government wants to keep certain data on servers only in India.  They had the prerogative to say what data this will be.  Most of the society organizations have been up in arms for the open ‑‑d government also brought in a draft program of social media hub, which was basically monitoring of social media.  Monitoring of everyone's activity on social media.  It was scrapd off in code.  So we have been seeing this attitude.  And the point I wanted to mention about the luxury of disconnecting.  It's not just on the software side of things.  There has been information that a lot of manufacturers.  Some mechanisms and hardware chips they use.

Coming back to the point.  K. we protect that privacy policy?

>> SPEAKER:  I think this attitude if you wanted to call it that, I think you see elements of it in the commercial that is everything you do and everything I have access to your data, you should be money.  I never try to say data is the new oil, but it has become for what people understand as the commercialization of data.  So people have tracking devices to tracking what ‑‑ whether they sleep, how long and if it sees in ‑‑ who are we friends with and who do we talk to and what are fantasies are that we use?  Those kinds of things.  This expectation of being tracked and monitors all the time exists both in the corporate sector and in the government sector and I think it is something that we should be pushing Goldman Sachs against and creating spaces where we're disconnected.  The gap years that some teenagers are able to take after they finish high school maybe needs to be a technological that would be something to try, but how do we size a Civil Society and software engineers and government representatives, how did we create those spaces where you can really be offline when you load to be.  I don't think we have that opportunity at all.

>> MODERATOR:  That's perfectly right.  Even if you look at, I just remembered from the side lap in try, if you just read the way it is advertised, it is an amazing craft of story telling.  It sounds beautiful and quite Utopian.  But the implementation has veryd quite a bit of pushback.  There's the question of how do you challenge of powerful story telling that keep selling us these visions of where to go?  That would be interesting to hear what others are saying.  If I look at current sayify, it is all dark like 1984, but ten levels up.  Anything on black mirror is really dark and bleak.  It's really terrible.  But why don't we imagine a future that's bert and then try to back step what we need to do because it makes it easier to say this ‑‑ in order to get their to something more positive, this is what we do now.  Imagine this is a lot harder you now have 10 days of vacation where you get to be offline.  It's a strategy, but is that the only strategy we have.

>> Ephraim:  For my, my part of the world and I mentioned this partly in my previous intervention the building of allies because sometimes you just need to make people care because they don't have that nudge and they're not aware.  The person around in your neighborhood who maybe is aware of these things, that is the first step.  Even among lawyers, not everybody on the law specifically.  You are very few and you know each other and so it is not just you yourself always going to talk about those issues or yourself doing that.  The buildingy ‑‑ in some parts of the world of the world where each analyze and some places like those, you don't have to to rely on the judiciary.  You have to figure out other mechanisms such as international oppression.  That's kindf international.  And solidarity is important and pushes countries.  They're proposing.  It is out to David Kay.  He's been supportive in our walk.  Peace been very supportive in our walk.  He attends governments sometimes and asking them to pass looted loads.  There are individual rights and building that international pressure and for example, this week they are writing the government among other interventions.  Those are some allies and the networks that have been very, very supportive to our work.  And that ‑‑ some places the noble doesn't fully exist and sometimes some new commenters are brig forced under the new primein ester.  Really taking off those networks and relying with the political transition in Ethiopia.

>> SPEAKER:  From what you are saying, people don't know where to started.  Who do you trust to identify what is a good way to go forward.

>> (speaking)d.


>> you can raise your hand any time you want to jump in.

>> I would love to hear if there are any reflections in the ‑‑

>> Thank you very much.  I just got ‑‑

>> Would you mind briefly saying who and are where you are from?

>> SPEAKER:  I'm from Brock University in Canada.  Right down the street from cyber of ‑‑ as being hugely controversial because especially around the sidewalk labs and waterfront Toronto project, data localization has been proposed as a way for Torontoians to have some control over there are privacy lull.  There's a situation where different platical battles equals different approach to that.  It can issue a useful thing to happen in his context.  Is one of the answers maybe outlying certain types of data protection?  Then there's also the issue of whether or not certain types of data shouldn't be commodified and business models shouldn't know allowed to exist.  We're in a knowledge‑driven society.  People have been commodified, but we put limits on that.  Is that an answer to limit the mart place in data.

>> SPEAKER:  Thank you very much.  We give a lot of usual training and things through our network.  We found that we get a lot of mobile penetrations for 200 7 to 2012.  So we have to do a lot of training.  Policy is one of the main issues we are falling.  People used to sopo ‑‑ even some of the houses are robbed.  They put online that the whole family is gone and there is nothing left.  So these things happen.  They go together with the University of Washington on we call it mobile information literati.  It has been doing very well.  I want to ask what sort of ‑‑ Kenya or order countries, we have been doing ‑‑ education like schools and several things.  Do you have any experience or not?

>> I'm from para guy, south America.  I am a youth from an internal society and also a cyber psyche ‑‑ on how psychologist has an impact on our behavior.  My question goes to connectivity and of the youth and childrenex especially on the dynamics of Sharoning.  They share pictures and videos almost every day.  Almost compulsively sometimes and social media and I was interested in knowing ‑‑ again, these cases, what is your opinion about this?  Especially since there is an ongoing debate on working the right to share content, but also the concern's right Taoists.  Let us taking the three before we take the next two that are already raising up.  Do you want to start?

>> So on data localization, the government says that if you keep your data in India, it will be more security.  There are notice historical records stating that.

So what we feel is data localization because India doesn't have strong survailiance, it might need to higher surveillance.  It will create a hone pot situation where a lot of sensitive data gets cons traded in India and it only resides there and we don't have encryption laws and encryption standards.  We don't have anti‑servants laws.  Still be easier for hackers to access this data.  I can say more or less also.

On child rights, which is something I was talking to even the panel before that, um, we need to balance children's right to privacy also and with the children race right to information.  If any of you feel differently ‑‑ authority‑‑ I feel this is problematic and we are defining the age of a child to be 18 years and below.  So that's very high thresh hold in the way children are growing up.  At what age are they getting access to the Internet.

That's something I would like to mention.  Informal education needs to be a curriculum today on literally.  I think people are acting with new technologies who are not ‑‑ don't haves sayic literacy.  I worked in Ed policy and I see that how children pen fit from learning and especially in India where we don't necessarily have good teachers and good schools.  It becomes this bridge to quality education.  We need to balance the right to privacy and the child to information.

>> MODERATOR:  I'm very happy brought up the point of sharing.  I don't care images of my daughter online and I have some friends who do.  You berken people who work in privacy rights and digital rights do it.  You can't people how to pen and I think it's one we have overlooked in the rights of the child.  People do not want photos of themselves sitting on the toilet available for everybody in the whole world to so.  And I think there has been at least one court case of a child suing parents that I've seen and I believe it was in France.  I believe we're going to see man, many, many more types of these types of back badge of ‑‑ back lash of what parents posted.  I think it is an area that's really ready for better regulatory guidelines and protections of children.  In terms of libraries, I've seen many people, this near especially.  We have an important part of digital ‑‑ I'm doing digital security training in New York City public libraries.  It's an area where libraries are very much showing up as helping people navigate both how they use technology and how they say safe online.  I hope that trend continues all over the world.

>> SPEAKER:  Adding to the points, I think there's a cultural win.  We can't forget the social media sharing is 10 years old.  We're still getting used to the norms.  What I noticed is that people are only starting to and even as adults say please do not share that picture because you just share whatever, but having a Group photo and make sure that everybody consents to the photo is not Atimeia.  Then the parent thing that least we have ‑‑ we will see that and it's going to happen rather quick because they ever just about to come out of age.

>> Social media is just now of it ‑‑ there are telephones that we can talk to and listen to us.  So a slowing of mine make the analogy that there is ‑‑ if somebody has an Amazon echo or a Google machine that listens, what are the mentions in which someone comes into your munch much ‑‑ how do you navigate this online all the time relationship to technology and children I think are at risk here as well where they may say things or do things that may be embarrassing to them when they're grown ups.

>> Absolutely.

>> SPEAKER:  Absolutely.  What would do you to change the ultrasocial firms.  I was thinking of the rooftop film vest valthey had it dedicated.  And some of them were like that.  What is dating behavior.  To your own in Alexa or whatever, if you do, maybe I top want to go home with you.  And try and make something tangible that seems strange because we need to question our societal impact because they're places for quiet.  So learning to reflect and what you want to do is something to go forward with.  The DQ Institute is something they work a lot in the whole region.  They're based in Singapore and early ‑‑ there's also the business aspect of this.  If it needs to be localized, you are harming the market because it is expensive to have servers everywhere.  So outside of security risks, there is something to be considered there and maybe a better way of thinking about this is what do I as an individual maybe own on my particular device so that I can take advantage with my device, but I can take it with me and it's not stormed to ‑‑ to whatever region.  So there are block chain technologies and down sides to block chain because of electricity or whatever, but there are ways to make it more individual and less regionally adviced.

>> Yeah.  So just to build on to the previous interventions.  This is the same ‑‑ the government has this one lap too much projectba students are supposed to have laptops from as soon as ‑‑ what grade?  Class one.  I don't age ‑‑ Kenya is still picking up that.  But then one thing that has been missing in that project, which is funded by some of the funding partners in this space has been building on privacy, teaching them as part of the click what.  They're getting this device.  You're being told, hey, get on the computer.  They must mean ‑‑bi something ‑‑ I think it's a good intervention, something you have been trying to.  Another intervention that's been working a bit is I didn't know if you have ‑‑ sorry?

>> (low voice)



>> SPEAKER:  Over the years, we have gotten high level, but from ‑‑ from the U.S. governments and this year we had the presidents and the commencer to enable to speak to young people about it.  So over the years, you are trying to get high level attention to these issues through the significant date and through ‑‑ give age Internet days like a global movement, we need to maybe support this kind of mechanism for more awareness with a question it shall be responsible use for technology and not fear mongering.  That helps people when you say don't connect to the Internet.  Just moving from fear to possible things.

>> SPEAKER:  Let's collect your questions to give a 30‑second pitch.  Why don't you started.

>> Hi.  My name is E‑‑ Elio.  I've heard a lot of case specific issues or context specific experiences, things that are obviously very important and are practical in nature.  And they're also often instrumentally framed, often dicomommous market versus state, me versus you, us versus them.  Since we're nearing ever of today's discussion, I would like to ask a question about future problems.  And are a bit more ‑‑ what does all this mean for being a human rather remaining human?  My generation went from being sometimes relatively excluded from quote/unquote inclusion because of financial reasons or simply technological limitations.  Nowadays I ask myself the question:  Do we and will we Ehave the right to be excluded these things.

If we think it is normal to allocate time for medication or go to yoga classes, will we perhaps in the future be forced or compelled to allocate an area to be disconnect Friday rampant connectivity and 5G.  Just to be able to remain human or not.  And yeah.  Thank you.  That was my question.

>> Thank you.

>> SPEAKER:  Hi.  I am from Japan.  So my question is this session was built as a right to disconnect, but from my view point, I think we are talking about a light not to be categorized.  I believe this is a light, very important.  But rhyme not sure as other people you think ‑‑ I think people opting out.  So my own strategies are making sure and creating new identity, new identities to use on my activities.  So I think it's kind of easier to achieve.  So I appreciate your comment on this strategy.

>> SPEAKER:  Thank you very much.  The next session is already lining up here.  If you can keep it to senseconds and ten take your answers outside so we're not blocking from coming in.

>> AUDIENCE:  I wanted to ask the panel if they're raid to look at situations where there are competing rights especially in the area of child protection and cybersecurity.  What we see in the region is a host of cybersecurity laws, framed and protecting children, but trespassing on order rights.  The categorization of what ariled is.  An 18‑year‑old as a child involves the ‑‑ certain content cannot be made available and then it mixes the rights of others.  I wanted to hear your reflection on that.  Thanks.

>> SPEAKER:  Thank you very much.  I'm afraid we don't have time to answer because we really need to move on, but we can meet right at the door to answer those last questions because they were all very good and very interesting and I'm so sorry that not everyone got to speak.  Thank you for joining and let's continue the conversation outside.