The following are the outputs of the captioning taken during an IGF intervention. 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, but should not be treated as an authoritative record.
***
>> MODERATOR: Whoever is here, thank you for joining us. We'll be starting in a few minutes. We're making sure our speakers online are able to connect.
(Pause).
>> PEARSE O'DONOHUR: Good afternoon, Ladies and Gentlemen. Thank you very much for being here. Thank you to those who are online. This is an open forum session, Number 40, governing the future Internet focusing on Web 4.0 and virtual worlds.
And even though anyone in the room may also need to wear headsets in order to hear us over the background noise and if any of you wonder what's going on online, it's just that it's a relatively open room.
My name is Pearse O'Donohur, I work for the European Commission in DD connect and we're happy to sponsor this open forum on issues which I would just speak about briefly and then we have a great panel which our moderator will see us through.
Over a year and a half ago, beginning of last year, European Commission adopted a communication on virtual worlds. Some of you know that as the metaverse. We didn't want to get into branding issues early on, so for us it's virtual worlds.
But it's very much some of the components which will make up Web 4.0 moving from the on screen or on headphone immersion to full immersion to virtual presence to extended and virtual reality to 3D surround sensory experiences which are not just for entertainment purposes, it's not just people playing very games with 3D masks on. It's of course a massive number of applications in the industrial, social, health, and other areas.
The Commission's very interested in the challenges which these technologies will have, of course, on society and on the services delivered over the Internet, but we also have to look at the impact on the Internet technology, Internet functioning itself.
And that's really what we want today to focus on. One thing which we in the European Commission said we must look at, it's the governments of Web 4.0, the impact of virtual worlds.
What I want to stress from the start is that we want to do so in a multi stakeholder process. We're not in the business of building new fora. We are not in the business of creating new structures. It's rather we could have picked other technologies to have the same discussion, whether it's Blockchain, obviously, or artificial against while we'll all be talking about quantum. How does that impact on the current multi stakeholder process and what lessons can we draw from the multi stakeholder community as to how we need adapt the current processes, including particularly the IGF itself. What will be the impact on ICANN, although they will be leading it as well in those technical discussions and what new stakeholders do we need to bring into the discussion.
That's why we're here launching this discussion here at the IGF. We hope to have good input into the next IGF in Norway, and not as a sidebar, but as part of this consideration in we really appreciate everybody's input into this discussion.
(Lost audio). It's back. We have the WSIS+20 process at the end of next year. And we believe that process should be looking at not only architectures, but looking forward. What are the new challenges that the multi stakeholder process needs to address. What does that mean it terms of stakeholders. What configurations do we need, how does the IGF and others, other fora, need to adapt starting from the technical layer. We have representatives from the ITF in the room, all the way up to the service layer, the applications layer, and then the governance and such with regard to protection of the individual and society and other securities.
So these are issues which we wish to hear from you as it will help us in our thinking. But also we feel should help to give a good input collectively to the WSIS process and build, then, the basis for work beyond next year in these fora for actually working it out.
And here we rely on your input. We, of course, maintain the same values that have driven collectively our work in the past on Internet Governance. Maybe I could say digital governance, but that in itself is a political discussion which we won't get into today. But it is really to ensure that as these new technologies come on, that those principles of open, secure, inclusive and accessible Internet technologies remains the basis for all the work that we do and that we actually are able to anticipate challenges. There will be. Not least the fact that new technologies are moving so fast and we have to keep up with that.
Others may otherwise step in. In the past, we've had various bogeymen in the Internet government's world. At first it was the bogeymen of the huge global company controlling everyone and company. Most recently it's been the governments and states who want to control the Internet and their citizens on the Internet.
Whatever it is about those rather stereotypical extreme cases, what we do know is that the technology is, itself, presenting us with challenges. And we need to talk about it. We need not be afraid of discussing it so that we are actually ahead of the curve.
With that, therefore, I am very happy to hand over to our moderator for this session. Thank you for being with us, Barbora Kudzmanaite, who will present us and the panel.
Thank you so much.
>> BARBORA KUDZMANAITE: Thank you so much, Pearse, for the opening remarks and initiating the session. Thank you for everyone joining us in the room and those connecting online. I hope you can hear us and be with us throughout the discussion.
So we indeed with increasing maturity of technologies, enabling virtual worlds, it's important to kick start this conversation about how we can ensure that this development is based on inclusive, ethical way Heil preserving the open nature of the Internet, as Pearse just reiterated.
And I cannot wait to deep dive in my panel members to discuss these questions around approaching a 4.0, what challenges that faces and what opportunities that faces and what this means for how we approach the governance of the next generation of the Internet and virtual worlds.
So to kick start, maybe a bit of who's who in the room today and with us online. I'm Barbora Kudzmanaite, I'm a research manager and we are supporting European Commission's work on this Web 4.0 initial work governance. If you want to chat more about what we're doing, I'll be happy to talk to you after the session and happy to answer any questions in that regard.
And today I'm joined by a fantastic panel of panelist from across the world. So to start with us here in the room, we have Professor Toshio Obi, who is an adviser for the university, also adviser. Thank you for joining us today.
Online we have Sarah Nicole who is at project liberty where she focuses on technical and academic frameworks.
Next to me I have sitting Mr. Israel Rosas who is the director of partnerships and Internet development at the Internet society.
Across myself, I have director of administrative affairs of Poland. Thank you for being with us today.
And online, let me check if we have joining us, we should have Mr. Raymond Selorm Mamattah who is the founder and president of intergovernance foundation for Africa.
I will just look a little bit of the screen to cross check that he managed to connect and is able to be with us here today. I see some shaking, so in case Mr. Mamattah comes back, we will welcome him. And finally, we have Pearse O'Donohur, European Commission.
I cannot wait to unpack questions going forward. Maybe on format we'll have roughly four minutes for remarks and we have time at the end for questions for anyone in the room. You'll have a chance to speak up, so please reflect as we discuss on any questions that you might have.
I would like to explore the why it's important to talk about 4.0 and virtual worlds and how will emerging technologies that will quite maturing like Blockchain and virtual and extended reality but quantum computing, as Pearse was mentioning, might reshape or implant evolution of the 4.0 governance.
To start, please, the floor is yours.
>> Thank you very much. Thank you, Ladies and Gentlemen, and thank you the host for having me here. It's such a pleasure and honour to be a part of the panel with so many people all around the globe who are really experts in the field.
So very concrete, to the point. From the point of view of the government, I believe any democratic government, Internet Governance nowadays is a kind of staple, but still evolving environment.
We've already well established global institutions, and which is quite important, multi stakeholder model. Kind of strong one. That's why we are all here and this is IGF is just the proof that we are already in the very democratic environment.
So of course, it's nothing new. Like to try the very new occasion to manage your plan, to manage the requirements for the new era of Internet. However, of course, the advent of 4.0 Internet, Web 4.0, it presents both challenges and of course the threats. And of course we have a long list of questions, whether the current system of existing Internet Governance is ready for this new maybe not revolution, but evolution. So the next generation of Internet.
When we consider the previous Internet revolutions we already observed, Web 4.0 can significantly impact, I would believe that most of the aspects of our lives. Lives in terms of daily routine lives, domestic lives, but also in international sphere. So discussing and the urgency to discuss is crucial. It's crucial to steer technology development towards transparency, which is the first. Inclusiveness which is the second. And accountable. I believe those three are the pillars.
So by anticipating technological changes, we should ensure that this evolution of the Internet is guided in a way that it prevents Internet, but of course most of all the users of Internet, from being divided into different categories of virtual users of different words managed by rules imposed by some entities not guaranteeing equity.
And not guaranteeing the equality of all the users and all the governments, all the stakeholders from all around the globe.
So of course, when we think about opportunities, which Web 4.0 can bring to the work, of course first of all, I think about education. So remote learning, even more developed one, training, medicine, entertainment, infrastructure development, and of course which is quite important nowadays, so natural resourcement. It are bring the positive. Of course one of the very most positive opportunities is the creation of virtual twins of real world object, and it can, of course, improve operational efficiency, safety, and skill in development across very sectors with medicine as the priority, I would say.
But there are many factors which are quite maybe not pessimistic, but they pose threats.
So first of all, we should try to make an efficient way to exclude the chance or the risk for any social exclusion. And of course, any disparity in access to information and education. It shall be the priority for all the governments. We should try to establish new set of rules and fighting against crime in virtual spaces with regards to all the new aspects of web 4.0.
Also the use of or misuse rather of biometric data. Mental health issues also should be kind of an important for all the governments and for the stakeholders.
When we think about addressing those issues, those threats, we need to have in mind, bear in mind that it requires multisided approach. So it should it should include ensuring data security and privacy. It should enhance cybersecurity. It should be based on the deep analysis of societal impacts, and of course, which we can't forget, to protect minors.
So underage users.
The evolution of Web 4.0, it will be likely influenced by emerging technologies. It's quite obvious such as AI, Blockchain, virtual, and extended reality, quantum computing, which was already mentioned. So the governments, the governance of Web 4.0, it will need to evolve into even more transparent and participatory model than nowadays.
The example I can give is the integration of AI and quantum computing, which will raise ethical questions about surveillance, data use, and privacy. So governance framework, it will need to establish clear policies for protecting user rights, to ensure transparency, especially of AI systems and to handle ethical dilemmas around automation.
The governance of this new kind of Internet will need to ensure that these technologies can interoperate seamlessly while maintaining user control over the data.
Summarizing, because I wouldn't just to use over my time of three minutes, so Web 4.0 governance will need to be flexible, adaptive, and transparent. It should it should incorporate input from a wide range of stakeholders, and for sure it must balance the potential benefits, benefits of emerging technologies. The one mentioned, the AI Blockchain, XR quantum computing. We have the need, which is the most important, we have the need to protect individual rights, privacy, security in this very complex, new, digital ecosystem.
So I would I would say that's all for now. Thank you. .
>> BARBORA KUDZMANAITE: Thank you very much for sharing your views. It's about creating this immersive real time for the environments. And we're talking about children safety alliance and all of these issues extend to these very much immersive environments.
You alluded to some of the things of the what and how, we'll be coming back to those as well as we proceed on our panel. I'll do a last check whether Mr. Raymond Selorm Mamattah is with us. Just a check if we have him online.
In that case, I will turn to my colleague next to me, Israel Rosas to take a look at the why question, and also why we need to talk about governance 4.0. Looking at evolution of 4.0.
>> RAYMOND SELORM MAMATTAH: Hi.
>> BARBORA KUDZMANAITE: It's difficult to have him with us. So going back to Mr. Rosas. Does the existing core Internet architecture provide a sufficient foundation to accommodate the needs and complexities on Web 4.0?
>> ISRAEL ROSAS: Thanks very much. I want to thank you for the invitation. I think this is the right way of discussing new topics in which we have the opportunity to have a voice in the conversation.
We are following up with a lot of attention on these developments. We understand the general idea behind what it is mentioned as Web 4.0. But we would like to know more details on the specific, like what kind of applications would be deployed.
We've seen that in general the Internet has been developed since the very beginning as neutral. It's more than 70,000 networks interconnected exchanging information.
That core infrastructure has been flexible enough to accommodate needs over the decades. We've seen the different applications, different services being deployed, and that's why we are interested in this debate. Because as of now, it is very difficult to understand and make sense of what are going to be the border cases in which some of these developments we will need to be tackled from a different point of view in technical debates.
In general, what we are seeing is that the Internet has a group of are properties that permit that the Internet exists and thrives. That's the key issue at play.
Any new development, either technological, political, social, business should be assessed to identify whether it impacts this critical properties of the Internet, because in some cases we've seen that there are some unintended consequences when some new proposals are input out there.
So I think this is the right place to have opportunity for our stakeholders to participate.
We see that there are diverse mechanisms within the technical community to address new challenges, for instance, the ITF has opened bottom up processes where all people can participate, propose new solutions, can test new solutions, receive feedback on the feasibility of these developments.
So in general terms we're interested in how these conversations are progressing, just to keep understanding better what are going to be the concrete implications for the Internet. It's difficult to have a concrete answer now, but we're willing to keep engaged in the conversation, keep informed other stakeholders, but also heeding from other stakeholders.
>> BARBORA KUDZMANAITE: Thank you very much. Important to assess any new developments under impacts on the Internet going forward. I will turn now to what I understand that we have Mr. Mamattah with us online. I will ask this why question but maybe more from the global community as well, looking globally, why is it important to talk about the governance of the evolution towards the 4.0? I'm looking forward to hear your perspectives.
Unfortunately, it still seems there's an Internet connection issue, so I will then move on to the what. So talk a little bit about the foundational principles that we can have in mind as we look to the future of the increasing immersion and real life experiences. And we heard a little bit on why we need to talk about this, so I would like to turn to Sarah Nicole.
So what we just heard some of these challenges and opportunities, you must keep in mind also the importance of doing this impact, assessing the impacts on the Internet. What do you see as some of the foundational values and principles that should underpin the governance of the 4.0 and this evolution towards increasingly immersive virtual environments?
>> SARAH NICOLE: Thank you for the invitation. I hope you can hear me well. There is never discussion about the Internet that do not encounter technical problems, so this is just the normal state of things.
I generally agree with everything that's been said, so let me give you my two cents and push this a little bit further.
So while we have hundreds of national, regional, international frameworks, foundational value that are fit for the digital age or that are even prior to the digital age, like the universal [?] on human rights, we have always struggled to apply them effectively. I believe we will certainly do so in Web 4.0 and virtual worlds.
Every time there's a new technology breakthrough, we ask the same question, how to preserve privacy, transparency, accessibility, and so on. This might be because the main issue lies primarily in the business model of the digital platform allowing us to interact online and the like of business model as well.
So I think that adding more values and more principle is not the exact solution, it would not be constructive to this discussion. I'd rather think that there needs to be a shift and rethink of how we're conceiving the place of individuals in the digital world by giving them rights and control over their data.
At Project Liberty, we believe in three things mostly. We believe that we should give people voice in the governance of the spaces they log into every day.
Choice over their individual experience online, expended opportunity to manage also their data.
And the third is a stake in the value created by their own data.
And this might be the first step towards a fair data economy that is characterized by competition, innovation, instead of a few monopolies that are capturing people's data.
In the virtual world 4.0, the data generation will be more important than in our two dimensional digital services, as interaction will need to be seamless, we've said it, and there needs to be actual immersiveness.
So this is therefore crucial to have this rethinking before we get into this very moment of even more extensive data collection.
And for effective governance, we will need to have new business models centered around data agency for individual. We need to think of governance and business model as going hand in hand, and this is the effort that we are leading in the Project Liberty Institute by focusing both on governance and especially the governance of a protocol that we steward, open source and decentralized protocol that's called the DSNP, it's a protocol that allows users to have more control over their data.
We have over a million users on it now. And by focusing also on building a fair data economy, and we did that through a research effort with key leaders, including the latest economy Nobel Prize where we focused on four main areas of action, digital infrastructure solution, new business model, strategy capital location, and policy framework.
So for Web 4.0 and virtual world to truly thrive, they must embrace the shift towards user centricity, separated by innovative business model that enable multi stakeholder, bottom up and transparent governance framework.
But one last thing about this bottom up and multi stakeholder approach. I wanted to always highlight the European Commission on the panel that took place I think two years ago. I was invited as an expert for a full day and talking to over 150 randomly EU citizens that were asked to design the approach to virtual world. It led to recommendation among which I believe there was eight fundamental principles for ethical development of virtual world.
I believe these principles should be kept as they were brut by all of us, citizens that represent us. I believe this concept of the citizen panel is key in the process of making policy and bringing ethics to digital innovation.
Thank you.
>> BARBORA KUDZMANAITE: Thank you, Sarah, for those timely remarks. One note is on the competition in virtual worlds. Maybe if I can summarize a bit that we should focus on end users rather than consumers in these environments and also mention of the citizen panel, you have end users and users and they should drive the principles that shape these environments going forward.
I would also now turn to Professor Toshio Obi to further maybe elaborate a little bit on these principles that can guide this user human centric virtual environment. We heard a lot of mentions of data, the importance of privacy. Could you share also a little bit more from your perspective and research how might privacy evolve in this more immersive environments and how can we further protect the rights of the users of these spaces.
>> TOSHIO OBI: Hello. Thank you very much for the very interesting talk. Frankly speaking, I'm not European, so I'm Japanese and I thank you for your attending total Japan IGF last year.
We are thinking about the next innovation of the Internet. I think we are concerned with the manage stakeholders. My issue is very, very clear. Manage stakeholder have the [?] aspect so called the government Civil Society academia issues. And another one is the more global issues like Europe and Asia and the Africa and some other continent. And I'm talking about the [?]
Because Asia is a very, very vast [?] starting from [?] to Saudi Arabia is Asia.
So what we should do, Asia call the [?] of the GDP, it's almost half of the world GDP belong to Asia. Also population is China, India, Indonesia, Japan, we have Pakistan, they have a huge populations.
So we should cooperate with European Unions. I think the Asia group need brought home to other European Unions.
You did in the total meetings last year. And this year, we have a very interesting talk, so called Web 4.0, 4.0, it's quite an important rendition to [?] metaverse in the future.
So in other decisions, just I listen to AI issues and some other sessions talking about children's human light rights. So multi stakeholder is truly a big one.
So this issue might be so called European Union. EU oriented programs. I think that Japan can or Asia as a whole might be very interested in what you view as the European Unions.
That's one thing which I should say. And the second one is the I'm the policy professor of the Japanese universities, and policy adviser to [?]
So between academia and visionists, we need more cooperation. Some said GDP, that's very good.
And third one is accessibilities and this project or program call to Web 4.0 might continue as the accessibilities for another five, six years to complete our missions.
So please consider the Asia is a part of these programs and I hope we can work together.
That is my comment first. Okay.
>> BARBORA KUDZMANAITE: Thank you very much, professor. It's actually a very timely transition more to the question of how. How we can work together on approaching this next solution of the web and how we can work together to guide and govern these approach governance of these immersive environments.
So I would turn back to maybe Pearse O'Donohur to reflect a little bit how can we work together in this multi stakeholder approach to best address the governance needs of the Web 4.0.
>> PEARSE O'DONOHUR: Thank you very much. Well, first of all, it's by listening to informed speakers such as we have today. Genuinely, this is the process that we have to go through.
So I was actually very attracted to the brief model that is well said, first of all we have to with those who are informed, but with different perspectives, analyse whether a given technology or a given advance is a risk or presents a threat. In other words, presents a challenge to then best assess how we go about addressing it.
And in that context, then, listening very carefully to what Sarah had to is a, taking the user very much into account and introducing I know that these terms have been fought over, but what we would consider to be a human centric approach.
It seems a given that when we are talking about technologies which will be to the point of being invasive, they will surround the individual or have the potential to do so and will not be two dimensional interface but a 3D 360 degree interface where because of the nature of some of the technologies it might not be possible to put on mute, if you wish to have a private conversation and where the sensors are not tracking you.
There will be devices which look at bio rhythms and other bodily measurements as well as being able to hear your environment.
So the nature of that technological advance, while we've talked about protection of data, personal data for a long time, it's a whole new thing. Therefore, the human centricity, given control to the user which I heard from Sarah is very important.
And then it's a question, as I've said, of saying these are the challenges, these are the strong principles which we have to either introduce or in this case with the human centricity strengthen and not design something totally new, but with those challenges look at how we need to develop and advance with regard to the Internet Governance processes that we have.
Are they appropriate? Are they fit for purpose? Do they bring the right people to the table? Do they put the right focus?
And also are we not talking about theoretical problems if the technology is not a problem. Or let's not forget, maybe we already have the solution. Maybe the technical community has provided a solution, we just need to know about it and it needs to be properly implemented.
Or properly mandated. It might be voluntary codes which with the evolution of technology what have to become something that are more [?] in order to protect the individual or protect society. And so on.
So it's that ability to look around what we have and what we need, and I just go back my conclusion at that point is to once again stress that this involves talking with one another. Professor Obi there is not a European centric analysis. This is we are doing a work, because we feel it's very important in Europe, but we feel that every region is challenged. We will need to work together to address it if we believe in the global Internet, we have to have a global solution. And we hope to learn from what others have done.
But I was nevertheless flattered that Sarah referred to the citizen dialogue that we have. That is, again, how we felt from the outset before we even issued a policy statement as to how we were to address virtual worlds going forward, we entered into negotiation with stakeholders and citizens and we will continue to do so. And we hope that everyone will engage in that process as well.
Thank you.
>> BARBORA KUDZMANAITE: Thank you very much for those remarks. I will start a little bit jumping around to kind of explore further this question of how we can work together and how we can harness of us all being here today to reflect on this multi stakeholder approach and position this discussion within that.
Sarah Nicole, I saw you nodding actively.
Jump on that if maybe you have something further to reflect and add on to what Pearse O'Donohur was saying.
>> SARAH NICOLE: I fully agree with one part of your comment, which is about sometimes the technology already exists. It's already available. The problem, and especially when we talk about virtual world and social media spaces, basically, is the problem of network effect.
The big players will keep on having the users because they just have everything already in place. And so whatever is the new digital innovation, we've seen this with AI, these big players will keep on gathering the users despite having some technology that is more privacy enhancing and that could be better for users.
I think this is where policy gets into place. This is where framework gets into place of recommending, for instance, that future digital infrastructure should be based on open source protocols. It cannot be proprietary.
I feel like as a general community, we've given too much importance to self regulation by those big tech. And there was I think in 2023 the White House voluntary AI commitment, and this is essentially letting this company write the exam by which they will be evaluated. And the result is that today most of AI system and Large Language Model are still very opaque. They're black boxes and the audit process is very complicated.
Meta said if you were to be harassed in the metaverse, while we could give you superpower, you could create a bubble so you cannot be harassed anymore. I think this is the kind of comment we need to precisely focus on and find alternative trust and safety framework for effective regulation, because we cannot let those private companies with mostly for profit models be in power for what they define as a power square.
>> BARBORA KUDZMANAITE: Thank you for sharing. The list of things we need to explore, we need to research is growing increasingly long as well.
I will turn to also Mr. Rafal Kownacki to reflect on this, how can we learn together and harness this approach to discuss virtual worlds and Web 4.0?
>> RAFAL KOWNACKI: Thank you once again for the question.
So I like to thank Professor Obi just mentioning that we are not only EU oriented in here in this room, so what I say, it goes European Union and I'm proud to represent one of the member states of the EU.
But what I really believe can answer the question, your question, should be also covering all the possibilities all around the globe from the governmental point of view.
So I believe that this governance framework, we need to establish, it should be based on clear rules. So I would, once again, emphasize how important is transparency, how important is protection of user rights, how important are both of them with regard to artificial intelligence.
So we would like to, by law but also by practice and by collaborative cooperation between all the stakeholders answer to the needs to face some moral ethical dilemmas.
At the moment we have been already facing those issues not only in the EU, but in many states all around the globe. Luckily in European Union we already established some legislation, just say few like, to extent DSA, and others. So we already have regulation online platforms how to moderate their practices.
And of course with regard to moderation, it's really important to emphasize how crucial it is to ensure the users that with regard to artificial intelligence they are not based their situation is not based on the decision of AI itself. But they have got the rights to appeal to the human being.
So of course this is quite important. I believe we should have the same protocol all around the globe that AI is never the last resort. So there is always this right to appeal to the human being.
I wouldn't mention because we have no time, but only say a word that already we have trialed in many countries, not only in EU but also in states of the United States, some procedures with within the judicial system. So we have the countries where you can just sue anybody and go to the court and the courts wouldn't hear you, but AI would hear you on behalf of the court.
But still in all those cases, you have the right to appeal to the human being. I believe this protocol is quite crucial.
The other issue why it's important is the integration of artificial intelligence and quantum computing. And in case of governance frameworks, of course it will it will raise several issues. Like devices which enable access to virtual worlds. They pose a huge threat as a new attack, potential attack vector. So we need to bear in mind that with virtual twins, digital replicas of real world objects, they are quite obviously new potential targets.
So high level of cybersecurity based on private public cooperation. Private public sectors cooperation is really essential for the metaverse's viability.
There's a lack of comprehensive [?] unfortunately on the societal impact of virtual worlds. I would say real life societal impact. But it's really important to continue the works and research to investigate the addictive potential, which is the first. Threat and specifically among vulnerable groups. Minors are, I would say, the target group Number 1.
Which is also important, virtual worlds must be supervised from the outset to protect all the minors for all the kind of usage.
Some study we've already faced with the results of them indicate that existing already existing platforms contain numerous inappropriate contents for users under 18. With another, access restrictions and moderation.
Of course in EU we have most strict rules, but in many places all around the globe, it wasn't still applied.
In case of data okay. So [?] of Web 4.0 governance, we will need to have we will need to evolve towards participatory model because of the technologies and the nature of them itself them self, and building principles that address this risk and challenges of virtual worlds in Web 4.0 requires multifaceted approach.
So let me summarize with once again prioritizing data security, privacy, enhancing cybersecurity, analysing societal impacts, protecting underage users, as crucial steps we need to go and establish all around the globe.
Thank you.
>> BARBORA KUDZMANAITE: Thank you very much. I will also turn back again to Mr. Israel Rosas. You mentioned this important point about Internet impact assessments. Hearing what we just discussing what we just heard on the importance of the participatory approach, how can then the multi stakeholder Internet Governance approach best address the governance of Web 4.0?
>> ISRAEL ROSAS: Thank you. I was pleased in hearing that this is to go and discuss the topics with different parts of the community. Because in some cases, I believe that when we see some tensions and some opportunities, the trend is to jump directly into the solution mindset.
And try to gather all the stakeholders to discuss how to solve a problem and going ahead. But the multi stakeholder approach also includes gathering stakeholders to determine effectively if there's a problem or not, effectively if there is something broken or not.
In many cases, as mentioned, they're already working solutions. Then it's easier to go, for instance, to the ideas and to see what are those building blocks that are working. Why does voluntary adopted protocols and technologies are voluntarily adopted and to have that conversation. That's important.
Because at the end of the day, we are looking at the technical critical properties of the Internet because they are the ones that are enabling the Internet for good. That's available to adapt, to evolve, to accommodate new applications, technologies, services, no matter the name under they are grouped.
So in general terms, we are advocating for optimal processes with collaboration, with transparency, with accountability, with full inclusion of all stakeholders, because all of the stakeholders have specific set of knowledge and expertise that is needed to inform these decisions. The technical community has a concrete set of expertise, but it's the same with the other stakeholders, and that's why it's important that these kind of collaborative, open conversations are happening to assess the way forward.
>> BARBORA KUDZMANAITE: Thank you. Maybe to borrow from what Rafal was saying, let's not jump to revolution when maybe it's an evolution of things and we can work with the stakeholders to discuss and identify approaches together.
I will go back to Professor Obi as well maybe to share a little bit, if lessons, if any, on existing approaches and how we can work, again, to better govern emerging technologies in Web 4.0 and virtual worlds.
>> TOSHIO OBI: Thank you very much and since we have very limited time, seven minutes, just I can say as professor of the universities, we need more attention to so called human resource development for this issue.
Because Japan, China, India, Indonesia, the Middle East, what we call the Asia, quite number of the population is behind already. So European Union so called what you call? Horizontal societies. Very close to lever of the humanities. And we Asia, Japan, Singapore, Korea we see quite a high level of the well beings.
But we have more than ten so called less developed countries. I should not mention the name, but, so how we can [?] transformation to metaverse, all the way is the Web 4.0.
But we are confusing the concept of Web 4.0 simply because you have web 3.0 and you have industrial 4.20. Perhaps they can link to each other for the future Internet societies.
That's Asian people is wondering and I appear my answer very quickly about it. But also I really enjoy listening to how you pronounce, Rafal? Yeah, about the future of the European Union itself. Is the next presidency of the EU, and Norway will be next IGF. So it's really good time for European Union to consolidate or more attention to web 4.0.
So just I can say from Japanese [?] this is the best stage right now subject to Norway of the IGF.
That's my final comment.
>> BARBORA KUDZMANAITE: Thank you very much. We are running shortly out of time, so I would also like to turn to the audience, if there are any questions in the room. Looking at Web 4.0. All right. We have two questions.
>> Hello. I'm from the European IGF. Another question or comment when you talk about stakeholder inclusion, although I'm not anymore, I strongly suggest to involve youth in a meaningful manner. We had a discuss today by involving youth by involving also in drafting policy. I know that it's sometimes hard because they're changing so quickly from one place to another.
But I think it's worth the effort because not because only that it's their future that might have totally fresh look on all this and give a really good input on all these things. It might even come up with creative solutions that others might not think of.
>> Hi, afternoon. I believe what we are discussing so many areas in Web 4.0 in terms of regulations or policies or strategies, I believe the private sector have already moved super forward in so many areas, including academia and research.
So what we need to do is to pay more attention toward what's doing on in industry, capture those things, and then see how can we treat them similar to some other industries like fintech and others.
So Web 4.0 should be driven by innovation and youth and we should capture those things and see how we can enhance the experience for every user.
>> BARBORA KUDZMANAITE: Thank you. So the importance of innovation and youth involvement. Any reactions? And then we have a final question as well. Go ahead and we can maybe respond together.
>> Just a couple comments. I'm very heartened by what I heard in the panel which is this human centered focus on Internet connectivity. But I'll say as a member of the technical community, I have a number of questions, and I think that I'm really very much appreciate the multi stakeholder consultation that's happening here.
And we really need to unpack some of the scopes here about what is the focus of what we're talking about. I'll just observe from the technical community the word web and the Internet are not interchangeable and they mean very different things, and it leaves me wondering, are other Internet applications in scope here or they not.
Because we're borrowing words about the technical community about versioning the web, which is a little bit of a challenge that typically involves breaking changes. I hope what we're not talking about, we have an Internet today and tomorrow we have a different Internet, because typically when we involve the Internet architecture, it's an evolution because we certainly wouldn't want to risk disconnecting the 5 billion users already on the Internet. We want to incrementally give them more capability and protections.
>> BARBORA KUDZMANAITE: Thank you very much. Pearse, perhaps we can start with you.
>> PEARSE O'DONOHUR: Those are we good points. First of all, yes, when I talked about multi stakeholder consultation, we wanted to be inclusive. So including groups. The weaknesses we've identified is particularly the barriers to representation of stakeholder groups from the Global South and from developing countries which we really must work on.
But also then the point was made about industry and innovation. The same thing if there's a solution already, maybe we should look at that and not reinvent the wheel.
We started talking with virtual worlds because there was a large company which had part of the word metaverse in its name and we didn't want to confuse people. We played fast and loose with Web 4.0 because we wanted to differentiate from 3.0 the things that are going to happen which maybe you the technicians will help us understand will be absorbed into that architecture. There shouldn't be a break and certainly we're not trying to break, if it ain't break don't fix it, it's one of the new challenges.
It's just to get an understanding maybe to grab attention as well that we have spoken in these terms.
But we have had serious discussions already over a number of years about even though we thought it was part of 3.0, what hasn't been delivered on web 3.0. But that's another conversation. Very happy that we've got your attention, because we really need your participation.
Thank you.
>> BARBORA KUDZMANAITE: And the organizers of the panel will not send angry stares at me, I have a final question I would like to ask from the chat that was raised from the academic community. The existing Internet Governance system is not sufficient to respond to the policy issues related to data, domain name, safety health, common infrastructure, standards and content and requires adoption of the comprehensive approach. And a new architecture.
The smart combination of a governance model be appropriate here? Could it be a good example to ensure this legality, health, and security in cyberspace of the new generation of the web? Any takers on this reflection? Maybe Israel, I'm looking at you.
>> ISRAEL ROSAS: Just quickly. I don't know the primer that this person is referring to, but I think the innovation to discuss whether the framework is working or not, because in general, governments are part of the multi stakeholder approach.
I think it's like a longer conversation.
>> BARBORA KUDZMANAITE: It's a longer conversation, I think a lot of which we're hearing around this week at IGF as well.
So thank you very much for your responses. I see we are out of time, maybe I'll hand over to Pearse on a final future looking remark on the road ahead.
>> PEARSE O'DONOHUR: Thank you, Barbora and thank you to you will at speakers. Part of a process of consultation and one which we hope to continue. So we look to your forward participation.
And on that piece of unabashed publicity, but taking this (broken audio) do see as are you hearing me? Okay.
How is that is now is that working? (Broken audio) the conference on the 31st of March and 1st of April in Brussels which is on this exact theme. And we would really like to have as much participation as possible. We'll be examining the possibility for off site participation as well. But it is really to continue and dig deeper on some of these issues. One hour is not enough time. Some big questions have been asked, so we really need have a full discussion which we plan to feedback into the IGF in Norway. This is not building new paths, it's to feedback in. So with that, just to say that we've put the issues on the table, but we need to listen to what others think as to whether they are the right issues and what are the possible solutions to them as this technology rolls out.
Thank you to everyone. Thank you to the speakers and thank you, Barbora, for your time and I hope that everyone has a great IGF.
Thank you.
>> SARAH NICOLE: Thank you, everyone.