IGF 2016 - Day 4 - Main Hall - Shaping the Future of Internet Governance


The following are the outputs of the real-time captioning taken during the Eleventh Annual Meeting of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) in Jalisco, Mexico, from 5 to 9 December 2016. 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. 


>> YOLANDA MARTINEZ:  Good morning, everyone.  My name is Yolanda Martinez.  I'm the head of the Digital Government Unit for the Ministry for Public Administration.  It is my pleasure to be here with you today in the fourth day of activities of the Internet Governance Forum 2016.  This is a space for dialogue to share ideas, and it is very important that we all understand what everybody is sharing with us.  Therefore I would like to invite you to use the interpretation services available for all of you, and you could get a headset in the foyer.

I would like to remind you that all sessions are available through the YouTube Channel and please help us to disseminate the link to this Forum.

I would like to invite you to participate actively throughout the sessions.  All ideas, your concerns and thoughts contribute to this discussion, specifically to generate innovative solutions to connect with stakeholders and projects with whom you can create alliances to fill the gaps, especially in a digital world, and no one should be left behind of the benefits of the ICT based society.

This morning we will participate in an informational and substantive dialogue on the feature of Internet Governance.  In 2003 while the first phase of WSIS was held in Geneva, only 11% of the world's population had Internet access.  During this session, international leaders acknowledged the need to have better understanding of Internet Governance.  In 2006, the first Governance Forum on the Internet was held in Athens.  Internet had one billion users back then.  Today we have more than 3 billion people who can follow the IGF activities online due to the Internet.  Internet access is growing worldwide.  It is transforming how Governments, business, and citizens interact and it also offers new ways to face the challenges presented by development.  We are part of the knowledge society, but a lot of people are still unconnected.  The United Nations have included universal accent to is Internet in the 2030 Sustainable Agenda for development which has an elective objective to eliminate all forms of poverty to promote health and education, to fight inequalities and to fight Climate Change.

Internet offers opportunities.  It stimulates Economic Development.  It creates quality jobs.  It improves productivity.  It enables people to make their own decisions, and also helps them to participate in governance.  Internet has become a common asset.  All involved actors, as well as all of those involved in the future of the Internet should have an opinion in terms of how they're governed.  IGF has become throughout the years in a platform an important and inclusive platform to promote dialogue and to give an answer to the challenges that Internet Governance entails.

Welcome once again to the future of the Internet session.  I would like to thank you for joining us this morning in the shaping the future of the Internet Governance session and I would like to recognize our distinguished speakers for joining us and we expect to hear from all remote participants.

Now I have the pleasure to introduce our Moderators, Hartmut Glaser, Executive Secretary of the Brazilian Board from Brazil and a great support in the transfers process to organize this IGF.  Hartmut, thank you very much and join me in welcoming Hartmut Glaser, please.

Also with us supporting us by co‑moderating the main session, Thiago Tavares, Founder of SaferNet Brazil.  And Nathalia Sautchuk Patricio.  The session is open.  Thank you very much. 

>> THIAGO TAVARES:  Thank you very much, Yolanda, for this opportunity to have the floor to say some background words to introduce this main session last year during the IGF the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee and CGI.br, and the ISOC launched together an initiative called LAC youth at IGF and selected 127 Latino American youths for a capacity‑building program on Internet Governance issues.

After a rigorous selection process, 73 youths were selected to travel to Joao Pessoa, and attend the IGF for the first time.  The huge participation of the young people during the last IGF was an innovation widely recognized by all stakeholders.  This year, the youth at IGF program became global.  CGI.br and ISOC received together more than 800 applications from all over the world.  After very hard selection process, 79 youths from 27 different countries are here at this IGF in this beautiful and historical city of Guadalajara, Mexico, a country where 40% of the population is below 26 years old.  There main session was designed to provoke a conversation between different generations about the state of the Internet ecosystem, exploring the different generational perspectives of pioneers and youngsters, newcomers, and younger leaders.  We'll have the opportunity to discuss with historical Internet actors five policy questions as you see on the screen.  Pioneers have represented all continents in stakeholders groups.

Young Leaders also come from all continents.  Each question will be addressed by one pioneer and one young leader.  The two generations will have the opportunity to debate some of the Internet Governance challenges and share ideas on policy issues that affect 25% of the Internet users worldwide that are under 25 years old, especially regarding youth engagement on Internet Governance ecosystem and the future generations.

I'm absolutely convinced, Madam Chair, that the energy, the enthusiasm, and the fresh ideas of the young people, mixed with the experience, leadership and deep wisdom of the invited pioneers will make this main session and unforgettable moment for all of us.  Thank you very much.

[ Applause ]

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  In short words, the goals of this panel is to enable the dialogue between younger generations, newcomers, and historical Internet stakeholders, and point two:  Foster the conversation between different generations on Internet Governance, challenges, and the State of art of the Internet ecosystem, proposing a virtual agenda for this environment.

We will start with five couples of a pioneer and a young person.  Every one of them will receive one question and they will have 10 minutes together to discuss between them, and later we will ask the audience for participation.

I will start with number 1, Vint Cerf is one of the Fathers of the Internet, sharing his title with TCP/IP, co‑inventor.  Among other things, Cerf was Manager for the United States defense advanced research projects Agency known as DARPA, funding values group to develop the technology.  He was instrumental in the funding and formation of ICANN, where he served as Chairman of the Board of Directors.  Currently he works as Google's Vice President and Chief Internet Evangelist.

And together with him, we will have Grace Abuhamad.  She is from the Government.  Grace has got started in the field of Public Policy Manager at ICANN, where she staffed the community Working Groups for the young stewardship position and the enhancing ICANN equitability process.  She works on emerging technologies at the U.S. Department of Commerce, National Telecommunication Administration, NTIA.  She is 24 years old.

Please, Vint and Grace, you can start as you agreed to do it.  10 minutes together.

>> GRACE ABUHAMAD:  Thank you, Hartmut, thank you.  We're going to disrupt the main session structure and we're not going to do 5 minutes of prepared remarks by speaker.  We're going to have a conversation and we're going to provoke a conversation amongst the youth and the pioneers.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Let me interrupt you.  Question that you need to discuss is, what lessons learned by pie nears and youngsters in their historic involvement with Internet Governance are relevant to inform discussions between generations?

>> GRACE ABUHAMAD:  Thank you, Hartmut.  So, Vint, have ‑‑ we're disrupting this session now.  In your experience in Internet Governance, have the young people been troublemakers?  Or have they been helpful?

>> VINT CERF:  The real answer is they've been troublemakers but that's what I thought I was.  I was young once.  I know you probably don't believe that.  But in fact, the people who made the Internet happen were young people way back then and the whole idea was to try something new, something different.

The thing that I love about young people and they're often too young to know you can't do that so they go out and they do it.  And that's the value of having young people be part of this environment.  That's why it's so valuable to have people like Grace and the rest of you here participating in the IGF.

>> GRACE ABUHAMAD:  So, Vint, one of the things that I studied history in school.

>> VINT CERF:  Uh‑oh.

>> GRACE ABUHAMAD:  I was very excited when I found out the Internet was what you consider living history, right?  It's something that has been invented in our lifetime and that you can talk to the people who invented it.

And so one of the big lessons I learned in getting involved in Internet Governance was that you have to know the history and you can ‑‑ it's something accessible and you can learn from the history in these governance processes.

What are some of the, for you, what were some of the big inflection points in the history?  And how do they affect what you see as maybe future inflection points today.

>> VINT CERF:  Probably the most important inflection points come when something actually works, and so there were periods of time as the Internet was evolving where we were testing our ability to connect multiple nets together.  November 22, 1977, the first three‑network test was successful with mobile vans, satellite base networks and the pre‑assisting ARPANET.  So that's a big one.  There are many.

But the next big thing for me comes around 1983, when we actually turned the Internet on.  Then comes 1988 when I realize:  We have to turn this into a commercial activity so that it will be self‑supporting.  Otherwise, the general public will never get access to it.  And my colleagues said:  Are you out of your mind?  Why would you let the great unwashed hoi polloi have access to our sandbox?  And my response was:  We want them to be part of the sandbox, so there are many other milestones we could talk about but probably the most important one with regard to IGF is the recent transition of ICANN from a contractual relationship with NTIA, where you work, Grace, to an independent arrangement, where the multistakeholder model is fully in charge of the operation.  So those are some big milestones.  And there are some young people who were involved in making that happen.

>> GRACE ABUHAMAD:  So, Vint, one of the other things in the ‑‑ in lessons learned on the Internet Governance processes is that we've come up with these stakeholder categories.  We have the technical community, the Government, Civil Society, the business Sector.  And maybe for involving youth, these are not the best categories.

We don't have very many examples of young Government stakeholders who are attending conferences like these, and have the ability to engage.  We sometimes may be pigeonholing young people into categories too early.  When I worked at ICANN, I was considered maybe technical community, and now that I work in the Government, I'm considered Government.  And as a young person, maybe that's a normal movement, and maybe we shouldn't be asking young people to structure themselves within stakeholder groups, or should we?

>> VINT CERF:  So don't you like this fresh new thinking?  I actually would draw attention to the Internet Engineering Task Force.  First of all, you can't join.  All you can do is show up, and if your ideas get traction, then they'll proceed.  If they don't, they won't.

Second, there are 100 Working Groups that are going on all at the same time in IETF.  If you go to an ICANN meeting you see activities along those lines as well but they're often structured around particular stakeholder groups.  In the case of IETF you go to the group you think you can contribute to.  I kind of like that idea.  I'd even argue we should take your point and try some experiments.  Instead of pigeonholing people into particular functions and categories, why don't we take problems and organize a multistakeholder discussion around the problem?  And see what everybody ‑‑ that's what multistakeholderism is supposed to be about.

So, you know, having categories is a form of ontology.  I hate ontology.  What happens is you argue about the definition of things.  I'm much more interested in solving problems.  So let's try that experiment.  That's our next disruption.  You got another one?

>> GRACE ABUHAMAD:  Actually, you're quoted as saying that the Internet is a lab experiment that escaped the lab.  And I guess, we have the opportunity like I said earlier, to talk to you about the future of Internet Governance.  Do you think that the pioneers have it right?  Do you think the vision ‑‑ are there times whether you've questioned whether or not some of these processes that you've been involved in have gone the right way, or could there have been another option?

>> VINT CERF:  Well, you know, the egotistical answer is:  We got it exactly right.  Everything is happening as we predicted.  In fact, in about 15 minutes ‑‑ well, no, I won't tell you.  I'll let you be surprised.  In fact, we probably didn't get everything right.  I'm sure we didn't.

On the other hand, when you're trying something new and unpredictable you can't be sure what's right and what's wrong.  That's why IGF is so important.  It's also why it's so important to have young people be part of this.  Sometimes I think:  This is like a one‑room schoolhouse where we have all the grades in the same room, and depending on your skill in mathematics or reading or writing or something, you end up in a different group, depending on your capability to contribute and to learn.

I think that we shouldn't be thinking about generations at all.  I think we should be thinking about this collection of people, with skills and experience of various kinds, all trying to tackle different problems.  We didn't get it perfect.  You won't get it perfect either.  But it's okay, as long as you learn from the mistakes that you make.

So there was another comment about history?


>> VINT CERF:  You know that expression?  People who don't know history are condemned to repeat it.  It would be a really good idea if we make sure to document the story of IGF and the story of the Internet to make sure that we don't make the same mistakes that we made before.  We'll just make new ones.

>> GRACE ABUHAMAD:  Thanks, Vint.  I think one of the big points that we would like to share with the audience is sort of the value of the historical context in these moments.  But one of the other ones I've been thinking about is how you ‑‑ you can't necessarily have technology, policy‑neutral technologies, or policy‑neutral design.  And one of the reasons we like the multistakeholder model, one of the reasons we want to get more young people involved and people across generations is because as we're designing technologies, they're infused with a certain ideology or policy, and we can't necessarily separate the two.

Do you agree with that as a lesson in that sense?  Or do you have another perspective on that?

>> VINT CERF:  No, I think I agree with that.  Let me get you a metaphor.  It's often thought that the generals are always preparing to fight the last war, when they should be trying to figure out what's the next one going to be like.  I'm sorry to bring this sort of military analogy to the table, but it's very close to what you're saying.

What should be happening is that we should be trying to look forward, avoid the mistakes of the past, but try to anticipate what the needs of the future will be, and the young people who are living in this environment much more intensely than old folks like me are the ones who are closest to understanding what the good and bad side effects may be.  And so your insights are important because you're young.

>> GRACE ABUHAMAD:  Right, and also possibly the cross‑sectoral side, right?  So if you're not necessarily a coder, or an engineer, you still have good insights to bring to the table as someone who is a humanist or sociologist or anthropologist, et cetera, right?

>> VINT CERF:  You know, we haven't had any anthropologists that I know of who have been part of the IGF.  Maybe we should.  I think we would be an interesting group for anthropologists to study in any case.

>> GRACE ABUHAMAD:  Thank you.  So, Hartmut, I think our time is up soon.  But we'd like to value the historical context and we believe in sort of involving more people across sectors, across ages to come up with policy designs or technological designs that are infused with good policy.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  An open dialogue between pioneers and Young Leaders.  Thank you, Vint, thank you, Grace.  Now let us go to question 2.  Can we have this light, please?

Question 2 is:  What are the perceived challenges, obstacles, and possibilities for meaningful youth engagement, participation and impact in IG events and related initiatives?

And we will have the dialogue between Anriette Esterhuysen.  She is Executive Director of the Association for Progressive Communication known as APC, and international network of organizations working with information and communication technologies to support social justice and development.

And Florian Daniel.  He is 20 years old student from Austria, where he is working with the local community to set up youth IGFs.  Before going to University, he worked for Kaspersky lab and was engaged in safe network where he still is part of the youth Ambassador program.  Please, Anriette, please, Florian.  Floor is yours.

>> FLORIAN DANIEL:  Hi, everybody.  So I wanted to start with a rather simple possibility for good youth engagement, just copying from Vint, it's the possibility to shape the future.  Probably going to be for quite some time for planet earth and the Internet's going to be around probably until we die.  That's quite a big possibility and that's a lot of years where we can attend IGFs and set up projects and we can do quite a lot.  I think that's a rather easy one.

And another one probably, which is a challenge but also a possibility, is the knowledge part.  So when you ‑‑ my first IGF was last year, and I thought, okay, let's go to open Forum ICANN.  It was quite a little bit overwhelming.  Lots of abbreviations I couldn't follow most of the part but now one year later it seems a bit easier so the challenge is:  Get the knowledge and try to understand it, and the possibility is to get an expert and on a topic whatever you like because there's so many different ones in quite a short time.

So, yeah, Anriette, maybe you want to chime in here.

>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN:  Thank you, Florian.  You know, this is very challenging.  Some of us pioneers might still think of ourselves as being young.

[ Laughter ]

But in my country a pioneer is someone with an ox wagon who ventured into the interior of southern Africa in the 19th century, grabbing land and cattle and causing general distraction.  So...

I think this is a great topic, and I think it is really actually quite challenging.  I think the primary challenge is substance versus process.  I think we've made great strides in bringing young people to the IGF.  But I feel that still it's about getting them here, rather than getting them to actually influence the process.  It's almost of the whole modality is to expose them to event, to have them, to add diversity, in some ways maybe even to make our multistakeholder, inclusive Internet Governance processes look a hell of a lot better than they actually are.

So I think that's the challenge, is how do we take that ‑‑ bring people here that represent different views, different experiences, and keep them in the process for the longer term, make sure that their participation is about content, and give them the opportunity to learn, because as Florian just said, it's incredibly overwhelming and there's a lot of quite arcane and specialized knowledge needed to be effective in this space.

So I think we need to keep the same people in the space for long enough so they can make that journey from learning to influence.

I think the other challenge is the global‑local dynamic.  I think if people are already, young people are already, involved in some kind of local action or local activity or some social change campaign or in development, they're going to have more focus and more direction when they come to the global space, and they're likely to benefit and influence in a different way, but it can also work the other way around.  Florian and I were discussing this.

Coming to a global space like this can actually provide the inspiration and impetus for someone to go back home and do something interesting so I think that's an amazing opportunity. 

I think it also overlaps with what I said about substance but it's also about politics.  I think it's important that we don't depoliticize the participation of young people in the IGF.

Now, Internet Governance, it's about policy, it's about different interest groups coming into a Policy Forum, trying to learn and dialogue obviously, but also trying to influence outcomes and trends in ways that will serve the sectoral interests.  So business does not like to be regulated.  Business people will participate in a place like this to try and minimize the legitimacy of increasing regulation.

So I think it's important for young people to be aware of that, and to be aware of those trends, and try and analyze and understand them, and assume positions on them, as well.  So I think I find that sometimes some of the programs that brings young people to the IGF, they're very generic.  They encourage, they orient them.  They orient them towards the content and the topics of the IGF, but not necessarily to the politics and the potential conflicts and interest differences in the IGF.

>> FLORIAN DANIEL:  So I can totally agree with all the points, and maybe I can start with the programs that you mentioned.  So I don't know if somebody has an overview of how many different youth, IGF youth at IGF projects there are right now, and how many participants, youth participants, we have from the different projects right here in the room.

Certainly more than one or two, and so for the programs, I think it's really essential to make an impact, because it doesn't make sense to use a lot of resources ‑‑ money, time, and also the people who need to organize all that stuff and coordinate ‑‑ and then bring a couple of young people to an IGF which is a one-time event for one year, and, yeah, the young people are there, but they're more like a placeholder so as we heard before it looks all very nice but it doesn't make an impact.  So for a project to be really successful, you'd have to make the clear goal that the young people get involved into the process but then switch from the process orientation to the content based impact, so to pick a topic where they want to live and slowly get an expert in it.

So with the programs, also I guess another important part, it's really about creating a better infrastructure I will call it.  So I don't know how many of you know the Youth Coalition on Internet Governance.  It's a mailing list and a rather small group for young people to exchange views and work together on projects.  All the other stakeholders usually have quite a big mailing list and a lot of events and stuff you can do, but for young people to get involved, this is oftentimes quite complex, so it helps for young people to have a starting point, for example, the YCIG, where the content is for people who don't know all the organizations.  There's a document that explains what CCWG is.  That's something young people have to do for young people, because I don't think it's the job of the other stakeholders to create that.  I think it should be young people who know the stuff created for young people who don't know the stuff yet.

>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN:  Thanks.  So maybe we need to also wind down.  I think the challenge of dealing with acronyms is an intergenerational intersectoral challenge.

Vint and Grace ended up their input on talking about intergenerational relationships, and I agree completely.  I think that's the real power of bringing younger people to the IGF.  I think it's not about being here as a young person with other young people only.  It's about being here as a thinker or as an activist or an entrepreneur or a young civil servant, and about trying to discover what is your agenda?  What is it that you want to achieve?  What do you want to change?  And then finding other people that you can engage with on that journey, and they'll come in all shapes and sizes, from north, south, all ages.

And I think we mustn't take away that unintended consequences, the dangers, the risky, the unpredictable journey from young people in how we facilitate their participation in our spaces.

>> FLORIAN DANIEL:  I have some points here written, I did some preparations at least a little bit.  I have another point I want to mention and it's co‑management.  As far as I know I'm the youngest member of the MAG right now in history sitting somewhere over there.

That's also something quite important.  It's not only about getting invited to a panel, it's also about being part of the organization because you need to evolve around the job, you need to get started.  You need to have guidance as a young person but then as soon as you're ready, you can manage it your own but then you already should take another young people who don't know how to organize projects.  That's also something that knowledge can be passed on to younger generations because it would be quite a waste if we wouldn't do that.

So we have 50 seconds left, maybe you want to do a closing remark.

>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN:  Something I thought of earlier.  I think a lot of, it relates to the point about history that Vint had made.

I think a benefit of getting people involved in this space early on at the beginning of their careers is that there's this capacity to learn and then to apply learning, and I think that is immensely valuable.  I think there's a lot of discontinuity, particularly among Government.  Government officials often change I think far too quickly.  They just kind of begin to get it and then they leave.

And I think that's a fantastic opportunity, as a community, for us to have people that are in this community, that stay with it, that learn, that analyze and understand it from a broader and more diverse perspective and that can then apply that in the policy making process over the longer term.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Thank you.  I'd like to make a small reference to Vint's observation in relation to maintaining the history of the Internet.  I have white hair and he has a white beard, so we need some help because the history is running.

But I can tell you that we have a project and the name is:  Friends of the IGF.  I don't know the exact reason but CGI.br, we take over this project after some consideration, and we tried to put together every workshop of all the former IGFs that we have in the past, all main sessions, all material that is available will be in one archive that will be on a platform available for everyone.

So, Vint, no concern.  We will have the history, okay?

[ Applause ]

Thank you.  An open dialogue between pioneers and Young Leaders, question number 3.

What are the desired and needed modes of documenting the historic record to better inform technical and policy decisions in the future?

Both who will be discussing will be in dialogue.  It will be Professor Hiroshi Esaki.  He is Professor in the Graduate School of Information Science and Technology at the University of Tokyo, and Executive Director of IPv6 promotion Council, Vice‑Chair of the JPNIC, and Chair of IPv6 ready logo program run by the IPv6 Forum.

In '87 he joined the research and development center Toshiba Corporation, where he engaged in the research of ATM systems.  He has proposed the CSR, which is one of the origins of the multiprotocol label switching to the IGF and to the ATM Forum and with him, we will have Ephraim Kenyanito.  Is a legal researcher, policy analyst working on the connection between African ICT and media law, Human Rights and intellectual property rights, and International Development.  Based in Nairobi, Kenya, he has been working as the Sub‑Saharan Africa policy analyst on accessnow.org, and he's also an affiliate of the Internet Policy Observatory, IPO.  He's at a School of Communication from the University of Pennsylvania.  He's a member of the UN Secretary‑General's Multistakeholder Advisory Group on Internet Governance, among other roles.

Please, Professor, Hiroshi, please, Ephraim, start your dialogue.

>> EPHRAIM KENYANITO:  Thank you for this.  It's an honor to be in this panel with really great people that I look up to.  Just building onto the point that Vint Cerf had mentioned about documenting the history, how this is something we want to address with our Professor here, and Hartmut has mentioned about the Friends of IGF.  That's a good project that we need to continue supporting, and that's my ice‑breaker, I would allow Professor Hiroshi to speak.

>> HIROSHI ESAKI:  Thank you for invitation.  I'm Professor of the University, so I have a privilege to talk with younger people as daily work.  That's a real privilege, indeed.  They gave me a very native, strange, sometimes odd question, or sexy question.  That's always my source of the new idea, or new challenges.

So I really want to work with the student or younger generations.  They provide me very strange sometimes naive questions that's always hard to give answer, if that's a very detailed or technical question, that's easy to answer.  Though when it's a naive question, it's always a bit tough.

And also in order to work with them, the first step is capability building of them, say about 6 months or so after the graduation.  Then they are not a student anymore.  They are our colleague, collaborators to then the very interesting output we can make.

So that would be the direction we want to create to document, looking for the future, how we should do, what the direction, what the shape in the future.

Also, at the session of the cybersecurity, because of this multistakeholder, a lot of persons coming together, there's no common language, common terminologies, or common issues we want to say, we want to discuss, so that is the same as student, same as younger generations.  So you may want to have shared common language, very simple document based on the past experiment.  For example, when I talked with Master Vint Cerf, he's a kind of Master Yoda, in the "Star Wars."

[ Laughter ]

So any question he gave us, they're very quick, very good question and answer.  So that process would be very interesting to making the documentation not only about the history of the document, but also that including essence of the past, or history, that based on that, then the student, the younger generation, could realize the meaning of that.

That is the quite important direction, when we have documentation.  For example, I have a Japanese very old great person, economy ethics without moral is a crime.  Ethics moral without economy is just talk.  That's the same as the Internet.  Implementation without theory is trouble.  Theory without implementation is silly talk.  That always Internet is respecting.

Thank you.  This is the slide I want to share with you.  Actually he completely agrees with the point.  This is the slide made by the Jimurai, a master working a long time in Japan.  So this is a saying that 90% of the Internet or digital economy is supported by the Internet infrastructure.  Top on that, now we have a lot of service, FinTech, IoT, big tech, or artificial intelligence.  Those new, sexy applications can run over the Internet.  In other words, without Internet, they never work.  So we very respecting those infrastructure at the beginning.  You or we making those infrastructure.  That is the, we want to share, I actually spontaneously he agree with this, this quite important thing.

Then based on that, we learn history, how Vint or the other person making infrastructure in the future, you will make.  Could you go into the next slighted?  That is yet another meaning of bottom‑up.  Basically the other meaning of the top‑down, so this is I always share with you, bottom‑up meaning important thing is end users, or societies, or engineers, or operators of these service providers.  Leaders is supporting them.  So that is yet another thing, the why the IGF or Internet is respecting engineers.  As Vint said, he didn't say anything now at the IGF.  He's supporting them, so that is the long history of the Internet.  That would be a very core part of the Internet.

>> EPHRAIM KENYANITO:  Building on to that about the bottom‑up approach, this is now where we, as young people, request and appreciate the support from the older generation with their support, for example, building on, for example, building on to movements such as was mentioned about mentorship, not just being there, and this documentation of the historic record shouldn't just be ‑‑ it should involve this young people being mentored.  I'd like to give a shout out to our mentorship program under the ICANN mentorship program.  You're paired with a pioneer in the ICANN community and follow them around for that one week and you learn a lot.  That's how the kind of building historic record and effort, that's where the reports are curated and this offers a future for reference to learn in the future for our successes and our failures and our experiences from this.

So to answer, to summarize, my points in this question, what are the desired and needed modes of documenting the historic record to better inform technical and policy decisions in the future?  One thing, building the capacity of the young people so they are involved in documenting this history, for example work with processes such as the ICANN wiki, those sorts of collaboratives so people feel involved documenting their own history.  We have Wikipedia, we have people curating content for future records and building on to the work of the friends of IGF these kinds of initiatives.  They are greatly encouraged and need to be supported so that young people getting into this space who are new can learn and see what has happened, what have been the politics, and how to be involved.

Something else, just to mention, over the last two years, being on the MAG with Bianca Ho and Ida, among the young people there, working on for example the IGF ABCs, it is our web site to introduce young people to the basics of IGF, the acronyms.  We can't fully document all that, but these are some of the ways in which we're trying to document the history and over time, you can maybe see acronyms evolving or words not being used anymore, because the policy discussions have changed.

For example, let me give you an example from my daily work, zero rating.  Five years ago, that term wasn't in any IGF transcripts, going through the records.  But over the last two years, that has been there, so documenting these kind of processes so that people can know this is what happened, this is how to be involved, is important, and is highly encouraged, and we would encourage sustained effort to build capacity of young people for them to be involved in the process of making and documenting their own history in this process.  Thank you.

>> HIROSHI ESAKI:  And also you be able to share in those ideas online.  That's completely different from the past 10 years.  So that's very productive, interactive discussion can be done online.  Of course, without the face‑to‑face meeting.  That is your age already experience so I always, excuse by my students:  Professor, you cannot use network.

Yeah, that is only the new age can do it, the new way of collaboration with us.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Thank you, Professor Hiroshi Esaki, thank you, Ephraim.

Let's go to question number 4.  Can we have the slide?

Question number 4 is:  What are the desirable modalities of capacity development for the empowerment of future generations to join Internet Governance discussions and policy making processes on an equal fatting with senior stakeholders?

And the dialogue will be between Raul Echeberria.  Raul Echeberria is Internet Society's Vice President of Global Engagement between '98 and 2002, he was a member of the Board of Directors of Latin American Network Forum.  He was one of the founders of LACNIC, where he served as Chairman of the ad hoc Board between 2000 and 2002, and later as CEO between 2002 and 2014.

And we will have Bianca Ho.  She is the Director of International Relations of DotKids Foundation.  She started an Internet Governance field as a net mission Ambassador.  Since attending the first IGF, she spread the creation of youth Internet  Governance Forum within the Asian Pacific IGF.  She currently serves on the Multistakeholder Advisory Group, the MAG, advocating for enabling youth.  She is 26 years old.

Raul, Bianca, the floor is yours.

>> BIANCA HO:  I love how I exposed my age right there.  It's a dear issue to every woman, but I'm glad I still have that chance to say:  Oh, I'm under 30 and I feel like a young person right here.

So this is a dear issue to my heart.  I've been starting IGF involvement since 19.  This is my 6th IGF, although I must sound younger but I've been to quite a few IGFs and part of what I do, and when I feel the best and most important to me is to empower others and I would like to share a Facebook post by a girl who is very active here and actually we met a few years ago at the Bali IGF and she was very reserved.  She's Filipino in Hong Kong which means she's minority.  She doesn't like to speak up then, but now today she's part of the youth at IGF program, which I thought was an amazing initiative to enable people not only from the Latin America region, also from other parts of the region who are really active in Internet Governance to participate.

So she posted this picture of us on Facebook, at the Facebook event that happened a few days ago and she said ‑‑ I didn't know what I did, but she said I helped her to be who she is today so I think that's really important for pioneers, myself I'll call myself an older IGF attendee, to do that, because that is part of our community.  That's how we bring new people, new voices to this, and how they also feel empowered to talk about the Internet.

And part of what I think is really important is the equal footing in this question, because young people often feel like they don't have the authority, so for example for the IGF ABC, we recently had a couple people sat together, thought it was important and we pulled it off in one week, and we didn't need official approval from anyone, but we posted on the Internet available for anyone to contribute, and right now, it's still a living document.  So last year was the first year.  This year, we had Michael, who was really helpful on doing the entire revamp, and adding more to the IGF ABC to it's a living process.

So with that, I would like to say, talk about what are the problems I have faced so far attending IGF when I first started.  And I would like to ask Raul how he kind of like overcame that process and became a pioneer.

So one of the things that I struggled earlier was the lack of information and topic and I totally agree with Anriette where she said for youth participation it was quite generic so I wanted to ask Raul how he came to understand a particular topic and how he expanded that and became much more involved with that.  I thought that would be useful for young people here to kind of know what are the next steps?  How do we engage going forward.

>> RAUL ECHEBERRIA:  Thank you, Bianca.  I'm sorry, because my voice is not as good as it was last Monday.  But I think that what you mentioned, the youth programs that we have, the one that is run with The Internet Society and the Government of Mexico this year.  There are others that are very good and I think that this is, the approach is very good, because it's ‑‑ we are not just bringing people to IGF.  We bring the people, but we offer a course of four weeks before that.  We mentor the participants.  In fact, I'm a mentor of one of the participants this year.  This is something that I like very much, it's one of the things that I do that I enjoy more.

I think this is a way to help out.  It's not just dropping the youth in the middle of the meeting.  It's really supporting them to have meaningful participation.  Obviously, the information that we need is much more, is huge, but some projects like the ones that were mentioned, but I think that's the right way, is to work together in order to learn about all the things that are needed for being engaged.

But one of the things that I will put two questions for you, because I think that one of the interesting things in this experiment is that engaging youth is not about engaging the people that is young today.  It's about creating virtual cycles so you have also a huge responsibility, because as Vint said before, we all were young, and to be honest, I never realized when I stopped to be young and this is a key thing, because you have to ‑‑ and you do that ‑‑ but how we do as a community, that we continue engaging and involving the youth that are coming behind us.

The second point is that I think this is very worrying for youth to be honest.  I think the efforts we are doing are very good but are not enough because we are not asking the youth how they would like to be engaged, what would be the format of the meetings or discussions so we are inviting the youth to be part of our world.  It's not that what we should expect.

Somebody said I think that was read before is how to get them really big influence from them and this is really an important point.  In May this year during the WSIS Forum in Geneva, there was a panel that were forcing your people, Senor Ming, that's like me for example and one young lady, and when I look to the faces of the guys, they were not feeling comfortable.  So I think that this is something that we have to work all together, how we really create avenues, but for the participation of youth, but where everybody feel equally comfortable.

>> BIANCA HO:  Thanks for the great comments, Raul.  So to answer a question, how do we kind of pass on this knowledge to other people, this is an open call for anyone who's here.  You don't really need to be an expert in a particular area, because I think everyone knows something better.  I know youth engagement and then probably you know better on net neutrality or other topics which I think is more interesting for youth and they have a different point of view per se and then it's very valuable to listen to them.

I think it's also that anyone can as an example I go to lunch break and I often see youth sitting with youth and pioneers sitting with pie nears and they probably have specific topics they want to discuss.  I agree IGF is an open venue, I would appreciate what if you walk to the next table and say, hi, and start engaging with them and just sit together?  I'm sure they would bring new perspective to what you're discussing or you know particular youth is interested in different topics which helps build the topic understanding of the youth and the interacting with them like Raul, like all the ones on the panel here, I've learned a lot about other topics I don't know.  That also opens up because they're so new and malleable.  As Grace has mentioned they might be working in your field in the future and that's quite important.

So the other thing that I thought was important is to make them feel that their voices are valued.  So for the workshop proposers or Moderators, I've heard there are particular workshops who didn't allow youth to speak up.  And I would very much, this is a very saddening thing but I would very much hope that anyone who's at the workshop would say:  Oh, I saw youth putting up their hands.  Let them speak and I think that it's important because the fact that they can speak and they know and having open questions and guiding them towards what they need.  Because oftentimes they don't have a very good idea on what they should expect, or how they should participate but they have a lot of great ideas in their minds.  They're very innovative, they can get their hands dirty and get it going.  So the final point is on the online participation that I think is important because not every youth have the opportunity to come.

And I think by respecting the remote participants, sometimes there's an awkward silence in the room when they're waiting for them to speak but that's fine.  I think that's also part of them learning how to speak.  They're probably more comfortable chatting and respecting chat logs, which are in the WebEx room and I think that is also very important.

So with time running out, Raul, I'll ask you to make a final point on this.

>> RAUL ECHEBERRIA:  My only ask for you all is that:  Don't try to be politically correct here.  We need more disruption, because we have to deal with disruptive things.  So come.  I'm very glad to see that all of you are Members of the MAG.  We need that energy in the MAG to be ‑‑ for ensuring that we receive those energies but don't try to behave like the rest of us.  Try to bring your really your expertise, your young perspective, and don't forget the other people, the other youth that is not there.  This is what's really important.  You have 10 seconds.

>> BIANCA HO:  Again, I want to thank you all for coming to this main session.  I think it's a significant improvement from the first year I'm in MAG and second year I already see a MAG panel on youth, which is significant improvement.  So I would like to congratulate all the workshop organizers.  Thank you.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Thank you, Raul.  Thank you, Bianca.

Only to remember, open dialogue between pioneers and Young Leaders, and we don't finish the discussion here.  It's only the beginning of a discussion, and we are very happy to see that the dialogue is going on.

Question number 5 reads on the screen ‑‑ what sorts of synergies between different generations are necessary to enable an inclusive Internet as a means for Sustainable Growth and development around the world?

And the dialogue will be between Stefano Trumpy.  He was the administrator of the Italy ccTLD since its inception in 1987 until '99.  Then he was the delegate for Italy in the GEC.  The Advisory Committee, the Governmental Advisory Committee of ICANN, from 1999 to 2014.  He brought the CNUCE Institute among the founders of The Internet Society, ISOC, '92 in Italy, and is the Chairman of the Italian Chapter of The Internet Society.  Currently he is a member of the Promoting Committee of IGF in Italy.

And he will have a dialogue with Kimberly Anastacio.  Kimberly is a Master's student in political science at the University of Brasilia in Brazil.  She was part of the second class of the CGI, the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee, Internet Governance code that we organize every year.  She is a member of the Youth Observatory and is affiliated to the better Institute of Internet and democracy.  She also is very young, only 21 years.  The floor is yours.  Stefano and Kimberly, please.

>> STEFANO TRUMPY:  Okay, thanks.  I'm so excited to start this conversation with Kimberly that in Italy we consider these people digital natives.  And so people that when started to enter into the world, Internet was already something very relevant, while for us, for the pioneers, we had to invent everything, and then it is very important to exchange views with the young generations in order to let them to understand how we arrived at this point now.

And on the 30 April of this year, we had an important anniversary in Italy.  It was the 30th anniversary of the first connection via satellite with the Internet, and the journalist asked to me:  You have been a pioneer.  You understood at the time what was happening and what the perspectives.

I say:  No, because at the time, it was simply an effort to provide an instrument to the researchers and to the people of Academia to collaborate better in their work, and to help the collaboration, international collaborations.

And I realized that I have been a pioneer of some weight when in '95 I followed a project of the G7, and it was a pilot project for Information Society.  And this was the change, the really important change, because from this point on, Internet as a network was quite less important than the information that was connected to the information.

So now I want to ask Kimberly something about how she sees and how much the evolution of the Internet in all the sectors of the community and also the multidisciplinary Sector that is so important, including collaboration with industry, collaboration with the lawyers, collaboration with sociologists, and so on.

>> KIMBERLY ANASTACIO:  So, hey, all, hey, Stefano, I'm glad to be here.  I guess overall during this panel we've been seeing that there are many synergies between generations and as you said, you didn't know exactly what you were doing back when you were young, and I guess many of us here from the youth, we don't know either.  But still we are here. 

And I guess it is important for us to talk about synergies, because the youth, it's very common for us to stress the differences between generations, and I guess this happens because we precisely have to identify who we are and begin to recognize as a group, and this is already very difficult, because as a friend of mine says, Louisa says, we represent one youth among many others so it's quite difficult for us to state exactly what we are personally, as you were saying.  I last year had no idea I'd be here and I did not think I would be working with an organization dealing with Internet issues, an issue I really like.  I didn't know I would continue to be welcomed in this environment and, well, here I am, so I see a pattern here since the pioneers said the same, you stated the same. 

I guess the difference then seems to be that not only the experience of being young is different but our whole experience and perspectives are different.  I don't know actually how you feel about the place you are today compared to the one you were in the beginning.  Maybe you could talk a bit about it later but for my part what I think we need to understand here is where we are, and what are our perspectives, because one thing that caught my attention once I interned the Internet Governance environment was how easily I could talk to people and that people told me were very, very important.

So, yes, during the last IGF I took quite a lot of photos with Vint Cerf even though I still wasn't sure about exactly what he created.  I just knew he was very important.  But as the year followed, I started to see that the Internet Governance environment actually welcomed us, but I also saw that this doesn't mean exactly that everything had been easily or that we are now completely integrated.  So right now, I think we can follow the path of many brilliant people like you and Vint Cerf and so on.  We may exchange ideas with you and build collaborative the Internet Governance environment, but there is one thing I think we got as youth have in mind, that is we as youth have identified what is wrong in many Internet Governance fields.  We talk about it and I guess the challenge for us right now is not to confront that.  If we see something we disagree regarding the way the things work here, our objective has to be to change it, not ‑‑ discourses and power relations so on, things we discuss a lot among youth.

We're receiving a lot of opportunities to actively engage in Internet Governance projects.  The thing is once we are here we have to keep in mind the ideas we nurtured when we were still outsiders and have to change it from the inside and redefine spaces.  So I'd like to know from you:  How do you see who you were back then and how you feel right now.

>> STEFANO TRUMPY:  Okay, two considerations.  One is that the opportunities that the young people have right now are ‑‑ has been growing continuously, and there is a proliferation of new definition of jobs, and so this is very, very important.  And that you have the chance, and I would say be inventive as much as possible.  And then ‑‑ but I would like to give an advice in the final consideration.

It is good to be specialized.  We have a lot of offers about you should also try to consider the importance of understanding the complexity of the system, and then ‑‑ so to create this multicultural, multidisciplinary culture about the Internet, so you could be able even to invent solutions for the problems that are in the realm for the new generations.

>> KIMBERLY ANASTACIO:  I degree and think this is already happening especially in the Brazilian youth group and the Youth Observatory.  We're offering the Internet Governance space other possibilities.  For example in the main session last ‑‑ of yesterday, one member of the Youth Observatory talked about the youth like IGF was an initiative I'm very much proud of, and we from the youth group have already made a statement to help the BPF on Gender, writing young women Declaration, so we are providing solid content in many workshops here during in IGF.  We are now ‑‑ many of us are employed in Internet Governance organizations and maybe companies, many proposed workshops, many were speakers so I guess we are already now trying to change the system from inside, and this is a good thing.

And I guess this is also very nice because I recognize that many people from the youth group will be representing ‑‑ will be in importance spots from different stakeholder groups in the future and for us to be connected right now once we are still like with baby steps moving to these places, it's nice because we create this sense of community that is important.

So I would conclude my ‑‑ this moment just saying a bit about where we are as the youth.  We are here together with the pioneers and older people in this environment because both of us are part of the Internet Governance model, and because our different perspectives matter and because we are affecting the Internet right now, each of us in our own places, recognize that.  Because we the youth will also occupy the future spots as well in the future.  Now I guess we have the double challenge to include more people, include more young people, to engage in the things that we like most but also not confirming to what we see and not being molded into what we think is not the ideal and that is not that inclusive and things like that.

>> STEFANO TRUMPY:  Okay, very good.  This intention, and so I am from Tuscany, Italy, and I could say have a good renaissance.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Thank you.  I need to correct my pronunciation.  Stefano Trumpy.  Before, one asked me if he's related to new elected President of U.S.

[ Laughter ]

And, Kimberly, thank you very much for this dialogue.  Now we will change the way that we work.  We have a half hour.  We have an extension of 15 minutes approved by the United Nations, by the organizers.  We will have interaction with you.  One minute for one question to one of the people.  We have a half hour so we can repeat but please no discourse, no speeches.  Clear questions.  You have one minute and then you can answer in one minute.  Who will start?  No one, okay, please in the front, mic here.

Say to whom you like to have the question.

>>  To the whole Forum.  Okay.  My question is regarding coming from the Civil Society, and this was addressed yesterday in some workshops regarding lies in the Internet.  There's a big demand of definitions regarding that this year has been influenced by lies in the net.  So I think the next generations need to understand how can they limit or segment the lies in the Internet.  That's my open question.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Thank you.  Who will answer?  Vint?

>> VINT CERF:  I would like to point out that there are also lies found in newspapers, magazines, movies, television, shows, radio, and from your friends.  So let's be very careful about treating the Internet especially with regard to this problem.  I'm not trying to minimize anything but let's not go overboard.

There is a problem, the Internet creates a kind of positive feedback loop and it can make a lie look a lot more real just because too many people seem to be supporting it.  Please be careful not to go overboard.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Thank you.  Stefano, you like to comment?

>> STEFANO TRUMPY:  Very briefly.  This is a problem that is not seen of the Internet, but is something that is coming from the users of the social media, and the fact that the traditional media like newspapers and televisions in any case when they see some notice that it makes room, or let's say think that they, it will repeat or they expand, possibly.  And this is in any case a problem that should be addressed, and I know that in Facebook they are starting something but it would be difficult to have something accepted, and that infringe freedom of expression.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Someone from the young?  You are not younger.  You are the same age as myself.

>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN:  That's your view.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Okay, I respect you, please.

>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN:  I think people lie, institutions lie, companies lie, and I think the amazing thing about the Internet is we can use it to help understand those lies and why those lies are being told and we can do that as a community, there's counter speech.  There's networking.  So in fact I think rather than try to stop lying on the Internet, let's use it to contextualize it, understand it, analyze it and respond to it appropriately.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Thank you.  Next question?  Please.

>> Hello, my name is Yesle Kim, and I'm from South Korea, and I'm with TISA, but I'm speaking on behalf of my own.  My question goes to all of you both the fathers and mothers of the Internet and also to the youth of IGF.  My question is because now as I participated, as I have participated all these sessions, especially focusing on cybersecurity and all some kind of like new regulations and new legal systems coming from this, so I see some kind of like compartmentalization of Internet is somehow going on, and I want to know if there is some kind of like effort from Youth IGF and all other part of Internet to, like, make or keep this Internet Society open to all.  Thank you.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Thank you.  Who will answer it?  Who will comment?  Professor Hiroshi and then Vint.

>> HIROSHI ESAKI:  As I mentioned, the older people don't know the Internet well, current Internet well.  The younger generation knows well and knows the different use the younger generation making so that kind of practical experience input to the discussion of the IGF is really, really important, to realize what is going on in actual Internet.  Not only the senior person know about Internet.  Internet is used by multiple generations, multiple users.  That is an important thing, so we will welcome your practical input.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Thank you.  Vint?

>> VINT CERF:  Sometimes I hear:  Old people don't know how to use the Internet.  And my response is:  I have news for you:  We invented it.

[ Laughter ]

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  The next question there, please.

>> Good afternoon.  My name is Sebastian.  I'd like to ask this question to the youth in a personal capacity.  Do you feel your academic careers have prepared you adequately for participation in discussion on Internet Governance?  Or is there a possibility for more education, both at the high school and University level to help youth get more active and participate in the dialogue?  Thank you.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Let's start with Florian and then Grace.

>> FLORIAN DANIEL:  Right now I'm at University but before that I did a school for software engineering 5 years.  You could expect a school for software engineering which is dealing with the Internet to explain what Internet Governance is.  I'm pretty sure I haven't heard the term Internet Governance in the five years in my school ever so no they're not preparing at all, at least in Austria, it's very Regional in school or academic based.

>> GRACE ABUHAMAD:  Yeah, so very good question.  We had a little bit of this discussion in the digital economy and future of work session yesterday, but like I said at the beginning of the session, I was a history major, and I specialized in Middle East genocide policy and things like that so I was not involved in the Internet stuff until very ‑‑ until after school.  And I often have this conversation with Vint about:  What do you study if you want to go to graduate school and you want to be in this field?  What do you do?  What are the topics?

I think the interesting thing that came out of the digital economy session yesterday is that we often are pushing people to get the technical skill, which is important, but there also is a space in this community for people who have the soft skills, or who are interested in other parts of the policy.  And as much as we need people to build the future of the Internet and to design it, we also need people to think about how the policies are going to affect the future of the Internet and think about sort of the humanist aspect as well.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Nice.  Thank you.  Bianca?  Please.

>> BIANCA HO:  Okay, so I have a business degree and I'm in a startup.  That has nothing to do with Internet Governance, and sometimes I am in, like, a paradoxical mode in my mind because here people talk about rights and all that.  In startup you talk about pace.  So I don't think academic background is a good ‑‑ it's obviously a good platform, but I think in University you actually learn how to learn, not too much specifically on the topic.

And on University, on high school, I definitely think so.  I feel like Internet has more parts and also a much younger generation now.  Myself as youth is not really qualified as youth.  We had a session today with 12‑year‑olds, 13‑year‑olds, which I thought, their thoughts were much more interesting than mine and I'm already kind of considered old so I totally agree that there's outreach in the University or high school that should be done and actually part of my recommendation was to include that in the curriculum.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Thank you.  There's a question, but before you, we have others.

>> RAUL ECHEBERRIA:  I don't know why the question was only for youth.  But I just wanted to point that for us, also, we were not prepared, our careers didn't prepare us for doing what we did 20 years ago.  And ‑‑ but I think there is something interesting there.  When you feel that your University career has not helped you enough, it's surely because you are doing something interesting.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Remote participation?

>> NATHALIA SAUTCHUK:  Sure.  Bruno Santos from Brazil sent us here a question for Vint Cerf.  Whenever there's a youth in any of the discussions regarding Internet Governance, he/she is often seen as a newcomer and lacking specialization from the older Specialists.  Therefore, I would like to know if you acknowledge the situation, and if yes, what do you think is the solution for bridging this gap between generations?  And also, if there should be anything such as exclusive stakeholder for the youth.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Vint Cerf asked for excuse.  He has another appointment so who likes to step in in Vint's shoes?  Let's start with Anriette and then if Bianca likes to have a comment, please.  Anriette, please.

>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN:  I think that it's really challenging ‑‑ 

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Madam Cerf.

>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN:  Don't call me the mother of the Internet.  I think it's interesting because knowledge, terminology, experience, it really does matter.  I think what I did when I was young was to take risks including the risk of looking stupid, and I think that's important.  And I think it's also important for those that have the knowledge to be open‑minded.  I think this whole notion of who's an expert and who's not an expert is very flawed and very unhelpful, and in fact I was just saying to Grace, I've met Grace in other IG spaces, I never think of her as a young person.  To me she's somebody that's in the space, that has knowledge, that has interest.  Otherwise she wouldn't be here.

So I think that that ‑‑ that's important for me I think and that's I suppose why I have some discomfort with this notion of youth participation.  For me it's about participation.  But I do think for those of us that are learning, and when you come into a space, however old you are, ask questions.  Don't be afraid to show that you don't know.


>> BIANCA HO:  I just wanted to comment quickly.  I think there youth holds a lot of hats and shouldn't be seen as exclusive stakeholder so they should be seen as a whole so just that quick intervention.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Anastacio?  Excuse me Kimberly.

>> KIMBERLY ANASTACIO:  It's fine.  I like to quickly say I agree very much with what Bruno said.  It's also true these other experts, Specialists always say the same thing and have the same arguments over and over throughout the IGFs so maybe a way for us to break the separation is for youth to using Raul's word to disrupt and maybe propose new stuff during the discussions.


>> RAUL ECHEBERRIA:  Okay, Kimberly say that.  This is exactly what I say before.  It is true.  I saw that last year in Joao Pessoa, because it was a new experience.  There were a lot of youth going to the mic.  The first two already welcomed but when it's the third, the fourth coming to speak, I think that the temperature in the room is not exactly the same.  It's oh, who are those guys that come to tell us what we have to do?

And I think that, yes, this is the answer, is don't be afraid of that.  It's our work to support them to come and say what they want to say, and give the right environment, the appropriate environment, for that.  And be disruptive, please.

With regard to the other part of the question about the creation of new stakeholder group, I have no idea.  And this is exactly the question that we have to ask to them, and Grace already said something at the beginning on that regard.  Grace, please again.

>> GRACE ABUHAMAD:  Thank you.  I like the question that the remote participant asked because I think there is a little bit of a legitimacy issue with young people participating.  When I started, I was lucky to have the backing of an organization.  I worked for ICANN, I was there as an ICANN staff and that helped me as a young person have legitimacy in the space and I was also mentored by a lot of people in this audience and I think I guess the question or the request to people in the audience is:  If you do see a young person and you're questioning maybe their legitimacy in the space, especially if they're still in school or they haven't come ‑‑ they're coming as volunteers, not necessarily coming always with sort of an organization supporting them, I think it's on the older people in the community to help give them legitimacy by talking to them and engaging them in the conversation.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Yolanda?

>> YOLANDA MARTINEZ:  Thank you.  I think diversity adds a lot of value to that community and relating to the questions about different measures, and I also think that this is a community, and the more young people that we engage, the better.  Some new things that everyone has been telling me is that you really like the volunteers.  Well, the volunteers are from many majors, many different universities, and part of the objective of the volunteer program is not to just be welcoming you, but to learn.  We have a lot of volunteers helping you get to the workshop that know the program very well that had to take a course on Internet Governance because their job here is also to learn and to participate, and to be aware, and maybe to apply for a youth scholarship on the next IGF.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Thank you.  The next question, please.

>> Good morning, good afternoon maybe already.  I'm from Pariba State University in Brazil.  We see an experience that many decision‑making processes are of huge semantic content and hard implications for politics.  They are mostly or partially automated.  The question for the youth is are you comfortable with that degree of automation in the decision‑making processes projected to the future and for the pioneers, would you have been comfortable if that degree of automation were projected to your future when you were pioneers?

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Who starts?  Pioneers, young?  Stefano, you are the oldest, please.

>> STEFANO TRUMPY:  If we are comfortable about this automation and the procedure to keep decisions, no, but I don't think that this is a problem of the Internet, but there are many aspects that are more in the sociological criteria, and evaluation that we should do.

And, of course, if there are classes of people that wants to keep advantages of any sort, then there is also the possibility of making part of movements that try to discuss about this maintaining power or things, that this is so valid.  But even for the all the questions that are regarding the public Administration in the countries, apart from everywhere in the world, I mean, the automation is something that gives in any cases some resistance in those that are ‑‑ that have certain powers.

And democratization may be helped by the Internet, although we found also some negative effects on the false information as it was the first intervention we had here.

But this is something that brings to study psychology, sociology, okay, even psycho analysis.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  One from the youth.  Grace?

>> GRACE ABUHAMAD:  So I'll challenge you a little bit, because I don't think the decision‑making process is automated yet.  If you've been into the multistakeholder system, it's like a very ‑‑ it's a very grueling, long process, and it's very difficult to actually say it's automated.  I think one of the advantages of the multistakeholder decision‑making model, policy making model, is that it's uncomfortable.  It makes people uncomfortable.  And as long as you keep people uncomfortable, the decisions, the brainstorming, you get an interesting result and something that I think is very valuable.  The advantage I guess of being a young person in the space is we're naturally uncomfortable.  We're around all these people who have invented the Internet or done a lot of things.  We're still trying to figure out who we are so we're always uncomfortable so I guess in the multistakeholder model maybe that's an advantage for us because we're used to the lack of comfort.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  I like to announce we'll have another half hour from 3:00 to 3:30.  Have a half hour after lunch so we need to stop now.  I see another question is there but please from 3:00 to 3:30, we will have another half hour, only for interaction, dialogue with the audience.  So a pleasure and welcome to be back. 

I'd like to recognize this youth program was supported not only by some entity that we mentioned as the Brazilian Steering Committee and ISOC and to the Government of Mexico, but we have the full support coming from companies.  We have money coming from Intel, from Microsoft, from Verizon, and from Google, and they support the travel and the expenses related to bring this 100 and so on young people this time to Guadalajara, last year to Joao Pessoa.

So we have the support of companies and other entities, and we'd like to thank you for the support that you are giving to this program.

The panel, thank you very much for the wait and the Chair has the final word, please.

>> YOLANDA MARTINEZ:  As Hartmut said, the session isn't closed.  The session will continue at 3:00 p.m. so we invite you to keep with us and invite you to participate actively.  We will see you back here at 3:00.  Thank you.

[ Applause ]

[ End of session ]






>> YOLANDA MARTINEZ:  Good afternoon, thank you very much for joining us right on time.  Let's move on with our session about shaping the future of the Internet Governance and I would like to give the floor to our Moderator, Hartmut.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Thank you, Yolanda.  I'm going to switch to English discussing Shaping the Future of the Internet Governance, an open dialogue between pioneers and young leaders, and in the morning session, we have five pioneers and young people discussing five different questions, and then we start to go over to the audience, and we have some questions already waiting for discussion.  So I will start again.  If you are ready to have a question, you have one minute to express your intention, your question, your doubt, and then we will discuss with the panel.

And we have a half hour, because we need to stop sharp at 3:30, so please, we have one remote, I think so, yes?  Was waiting for the morning?  Not now?  Okay.

>> YOLANDA MARTINEZ:  Let me remained you that we have interpretation services.  You can get a headset at the foyer, so we can understand what every participant will share with us.  Thank you very much.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Thank you.  Who will start?  We are in Mexico, and Mexico sometimes is well known to have a siesta after lunch, but we don't have siesta.  We need to work.  Really, yes?  Okay.


>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN:  Thank you, Hartmut.  I have a question for Florian.  I don't know if you know he's actually been doing Internet Governance since he was 15 years old, working specifically on the area of Internet safety.  And has since then been involved in various discussions in different places around that.

So I want to ask him:  How has that been?  From you, I understand that you believe in an approach which is more about empowering children and young users of the Internet, increasing their capacity to respond to harmful content and harmful practices.  But yet whenever I talk to a Government or a policy maker, all I hear is child protection this and child protection that.  So do you feel you've been effective in influencing that?  Or not really?

>> FLORIAN DANIEL:  So maybe to quickly clarify:  I was doing a lot of work with the NCEF project, which I was ‑‑ so I didn't know about Internet Governance even though I was working with NCEF because I was young and nobody told me about it and I did not know about Internet Governance.  Any time I went online I was working with child safety, and there was nobody telling me okay there is a whole broader aspect to the topic, Internet Governance.  It took me a while to vague that out for myself so your actual question, if I was affecting something.

So the problem with policymakers is that usually, I don't know if there's this unwritten rule, the older you are, the more speech time you get, but something I seem to witness more often than I would like to.  Time is really short.  I'm pretty sure that I did something but I cannot prove how effective it was.  I was trying to talk to a lot of policymakers, and people who are in the project, but it could certainly have been more effective.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Thank you.  Professor Hiroshi?

>> HIROSHI ESAKI:  Regarding that question, Japan had a discussion about whether the ISP or Government should have the filtering policy of filtering, you know, mandating for the ISP.  I don't like that.  I asked to my daughter, who is about 15 years old, she mentioned, she went to meet:  Why people have to make up the filtering by someone?  She has a good skill to smell by the contents, so that is a very first the action by her.  And also, you know, when we discuss the high‑level, the Japanese Government, one of the interesting things was say the filtering should be able to control by parents, not by Government, not by ISP.  Probably parents could ask, could use those ISP filter by their choice, though some parents would not like to apply those filters.

That is, you know, providing the alternative, or opportunity, to the individual.  That was our discussion at the time.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Thank you.  Vint, please?

>> VINT CERF:  One small observation:  I think the best filter in the whole world is the one that's up here, so if we're going to teach our kids to think critically about what they see and hear, that will help them regardless of whether they're seeing and hearing it on the Internet or in newspapers or in radio or television, or from their friends.  And I'm not suggesting that means that we don't need to take any steps to consider some filtering, as Professor Esaki suggests, but I think the best filter in the world is the one that you build into your head, and that's what we should teach children to do.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Question from the remote participation?

>> NATHALIA SAUTCHUK:  Yes.  Mr. Williams, Civil Society Santa Lucia, said:  Online no one knows how old are you, so this may be a very good way of becoming engaged.  However, the perception of the multiparticipation needs to be changed.  With the proper organization, you can participate effectively online.

Luca at NETmundial.  We need to use the technology, not just talk about it.  A few and very silent remote participants this year, are several of those who spoke identified themselves as young.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Who is willing to comment this question, this concern?  Vint?

>> VINT CERF:  I think it's ‑‑ I think it's really hard for us to figure out how old people are.  You can see where that's heading, I mean, where you have to have personal identification in order to use the Internet.  I don't think that's a good idea.  There's the other side of this coin, too:  Sometimes it's good not to know.  Young people often have better ideas than you would expect them to, and you don't want those ideas to be discounted just because they happen to be young.

And so I kind of like the idea that there isn't any evidence as to age when I engage in dialogue.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Thank you.

>> Yes.  I'm a teenager from Hong Kong and I'm 16.  I have a question.  IGF is not coming in Hong Kong.  Most of the people in Hong Kong do not know there's a Forum for us to express our views about the Internet.  I think the Government in every country should raise the awareness of the Internet and also, I don't know if there is holiday in other countries, but in Hong Kong, we have to take leave to attend this Forum, so I think when should IGF be held is one of an important matter.  Thank you.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Thank you.  Stephan?

>> STEFANO TRUMPY:  Yeah.  In this case, a girl of 15, the problem is in any country, also to involve the school and to make the Ministry of Education to invest in this, and so this is something that has to be done starting at the school, and of course, also the family should encourage things like that.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Thank you.  Kimberly?

>> KIMBERLY ANASTACIO:  If I could just say a quick comment:  In Brazil, we are now starting this young initiatives made by young people and for young people, so maybe if governments don't pay attention to the necessity about speaking about Internet Governance issues or Internet issues in our schools, you can as a young person start small groups and talk about this and spread the word about Internet Governance and we have some initiatives in Brazil and in Latin America and in many other countries that are already based on that.


>> BIANCA HO:  I really appreciate that there's more and more young people from Hong Kong who are coming.  One thing I want to ‑‑ obviously you're taking holidays to come, which I think everyone is really appreciative.  One thing if you can come next year is to participate remotely and perhaps organize a hub at your school, so I think those are concrete next steps that you can take in order to continually participate.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Florian?

>> FLORIAN DANIEL:  So I really liked that question so for myself I'm also always struggling with that.  Right now I'm just skipping University and not attending the courses.  That is easy because in University you can do it.  You have to catch up in your own time but in school I was lucky enough to have a headmaster who gave me leave but probably not every school is going to do that.  There should really raise the question is the beginning of December the right time to maybe an IGF?  Maybe it can be found a way at least in the hosting countries the holidays right now so young people from the Host Country can attend more easily.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Thank you.  Thiago, I liked you used one minute to explain the program you're doing with children and teachers in Brazil.  One minute.

>> THIAGO TAVARES:  Okay.  Thank you very much Professor Glaser.  We have a project we're developing together with the prosecutor services in Brazil where together with the Brazilian Steering Committee and we organized that.  It's a program that is developed all across the country.  Over the last two years, we have more than 3,000 teachers and teenagers directly involved in that capacity‑building program in 16 different cities and the outcome is really inspiring.

We have the opportunity to discuss issues like ethics, citizenship, Human Rights, democracy and civil framework for Internet in Brazil, and also the principles for Internet Governance in Brazil that was at CGI.  It was a very good experience and I can share more information afterwards.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Thank you.  And only to remember the NETmundial Conference we have 2014 in Brazil, we bring in 40 hubs from all over the world, and they live participate in the discussions and in proposals so we can use more technology to bring young people in.  It's a reality.  We can do it.  Question here in the front?  Please.

>> Hello.  My name is Charda.  I'm a Research Fellow at the University of Pennsylvania but I want to speak in the capacity of a former Fellow and as a newcomer very much so in this community.

One of the things that I realize is that when I speak about Internet Governance in the community that I belong to, or the community that I did belong to until very shortly before I graduated, Internet Governance is often perceived as esoteric, and often perceived as something that is not within the control of the people like us, but often in close decisions that are being made.  I feel like that perception needs to changes specially amongst youth and I wanted to understand from the expertise on the panel what are the ways in which we can change that perception beyond just word of mouth?  Which is what I had to rely on, to say that this space is a lot more open than other spaces that I have had experiences in.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Thank you.  Who would like to answer?  Vint?

>> VINT CERF:  Let me suggest a couple of things.  The first one is to continue the disruption that Grace was proposing earlier today to re‑form the IGF activity to integrate young people into it better.  But the second thing would be to also urge others where policy making is being discussed.  That could be ICANN on the technical side, IETF in the social domain, The Internet Society, and urge them to find ways of bringing young people into the discussion, so we can have a more direct effect, your opinions, on the policies that are proposed.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Comments on the panel?  Yes, please, Anriette?

>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN:  Yes, I think that ‑‑ Charda, the thanks for that question.  I think it is true.  I think these processes are more open to participation than many other processes.

I think actually influencing them can be quite hard.  Also, there's the relationships, the IGF is really about discussion and dialogue and debating issues so it's a fantastic space to learn and build confidence but I think it only really works well as a space if you then participate in the actually policy spaces, as well, so I think mapping your participation is important, so that would be ICANN which has its own processes, for example, and also national processes.  What can sometimes happen is people are very discouraged when they go back to the national level and there's less openness, less opportunity to be influential than there is at the global level so we need to change the systems but we need to carry on testing them and pushing the boundaries.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Remote participant.

>> NATHALIA SAUTCHUK:  Yes, Alex, a student.  Should parents always filter for children?  What about when children need to be protected from their parents and family?  What if the parent that block about LGBT, sex, sexual education and child abuse?

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Who would like to comment?  Professor?

>> HIROSHI ESAKI:  Basically the engineer working on the kind of filtering technology so they were providing some in a good or appropriate filtering for persons based on the profiling.  That is the technical part that's being worked on.  Also, the parents has their own principle or idea which contents should be filtered, should be transparent.  Once again, that is the rights of the parents to live with the kids.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Thank you.  Stefano would you like to comment?

>> STEFANO TRUMPY:  A very short sentence:  This meeting is very, very interesting because we are global here, but now we listen from some question like one of the girl from Hong Kong, and so we need to invest in this kind of interaction.  With this criteria, think globally, then act locally.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Good, good.  Florian?

>> FLORIAN DANIEL:  Yes, as a child, you're obviously very reliable on the parents making the right decisions.  In Europe, they're trying to educate parents that blocking and keeping children away is not the right way to go, but more to discover together, and in the end, that's a big I would say social problem if parents are just not open to what the Internet offers, and try to block everything from the children, but I don't see really a point what we can do besides educating parents and reaching out to parents is really hard because children, you get them at school.  Students get it at University.  And like out of stakeholder groups, you find them in businesses.  But parents, they don't work at the same company, so you need to find a way to reach out to all the parents.


>> VINT CERF:  Well, I remember when I was 15 and if my parents tried to keep me from learning something, we found ways around that.

[ Laughter ]

And I'm pretty sure most of the kids I know are capable of that, too, Internet or no Internet.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Anriette?

>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN:  Yes, I think it's challenging, because it's difficult.  Younger children are exposed to content that one feels is inappropriate for them, but I think that blocking is not the answer, and filtering is not the answer.

These are social changes, they're bigger changes, and I think parents use the software to avoid having to talk to their children, having complex and difficult conversations.  And it's just not an effective substitute.

And I think as the remote participant pointed out, often there's more real harm getting to children from their parents than there is from the Internet, in terms of child sex abuse and other patterns in child abuse.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Bianca, I saw that you was ‑‑ yes, please Bianca.

>> BIANCA HO:  So I think there's a balance between the rights as well as, you know, the overprotection, so I think there is a lot to discuss.  But I think it is also a learning process, so I think parents ‑‑ again, as Vint said, I'm not that mischievous as a young person but I still got away with things that if they block me from doing, and I think part of it is I have learned those lessons myself and I have come to realize that oh, I shouldn't be late.  Or, oh, I shouldn't stay up all night and have an exam the next day.  So these are things that we gradually learn through these processes of exploring.

And again pointing back to Vint's point is that your brain is really your best filter and as parents it's important and most important to have these difficult but important conversations with your children.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Ephraim?

>> EPHRAIM KENYANITO:  For me, these are my comments.  I believe parents should be more involved in raising awareness about child online safety.  I encourage adoption of technologies for the protection of children online that respects the rights of children.  Blocking of content does not make children and young people 100% safe online.  May solution is improving the safety of children and young people online would be to empower children, parents, guardians, educators to identify and delete harmful content through education, and how to use ‑‑ and teaching them how to use technology safely and responsibly and making available the easy to use adjustable tools to manage their access to this content.  That is for the younger children that were mentioned.

>> HIROSHI ESAKI:  I take from the technical point of view, scientist point of view, common filter does not exist.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Thank you.  Question here?  Mic for the auditorium?

>> Hello.  My name is Rampero.  I come from Portugal.  I'd like to go a little bit back and speak about the stratified concept of Internet Governance.  Because it's really easy to sometimes the message like as has been said not reach the National level or even when it reach the National level, maybe sometimes it just stays over the capital.

I come from Portugal.  It's a small country and even there it's difficult to address these situations and go to the rural areas.  So my question is:  What actually can be done at a global level so that the message can go down?  And whether the message ‑‑ and when messages have to be also from each specific context, how can they really come up if sometimes they're not addressed?  Thank you very much.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Thank you.  Before we answer, let's see, we have another question here, and one remote.  Let's have all the three questions together.  Then we can answer together.  Please.

>> Thank you.  My name is Tony.  I come from Uganda.  Mine is not a question, but is something that I want to share.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  One minute, please.

>> Looking at what we're discussing, personally I see that the content filtering would not help but what I would advise is that if we can come up with a strategy that addresses the cultural norms within our community, definitely we'd be able to accept the technology changes that goes to the rural communities, mainly to the young children.  Even the school that we normally approach to provide our services, we need to let them accept the culture of the new technology.  That would be the last point.  Thank you.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Thank you.  And then the last will be the remote.

>> Thank you so much.  My name is Haoran.  I am from China, and I come here at this time as an ISOC Youth IGF Fellow.  So during the past days, there's a very hard topic to discuss about how to engage more young people to Internet Governance process, and the decision‑making events, so my question, I have noticed that APrIGF the multistakeholder Steering Group they have already opened their seats for young people.  And my very good friend, she already ‑‑ she's just 21 years old and she had already become an MSG member.  So my question is:  Is there any young people around 20 to become a MAG member?  If they do not is it possible to open a seat for young people to join.  Thank you.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Thank you, this question is not related to the panel but we will send this to the MAG.  Remote?  No?

The last one in the corner there.

>> Hello I'm from Zimbabwe, and I a quick question about initiatives for the youth.  Are there any initiatives to make sure that the youth are content producers and not just consumers of the Internet?  Thank you.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Okay, we have two minutes to answer, very short answers.  Florian, please.

>> FLORIAN DANIEL:  So a very quick answer to the first question:  I think it's really about ourselves to go from the global level, take clear and simple messages and use them in local projects.  For example National Youth IGFs to communicate also in rural areas because myself I'm from a town of 3,000 people, you have to go by yourself and try to educate people.  They're not going to check it online all by themselves.  We as participants already on the global level, we have to take it down with us.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Thank you.  Bianca?

>> BIANCA HO:  To address quickly the third question on the content producer versus content consumer.  So I would like to list an example for example for the YCIG we came up with the IGF ABC web site and that is a really good project to prove that we are content producers instead of consumers only and obviously you have a lot more consuming in the beginning but once you have understood that enough, age really doesn't give you a boundary as to whether you're able to produce or not.

So feel free to participate in that process.  Thank you.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Kimberly, very, very brief.

>> KIMBERLY ANASTACIO:  A quick comment on the third question.  Some people from the Youth Observatory are already creating capacity‑building courses on Internet Governance and things like that to apply to local schools and this kind of stuff, so there actually are many initiatives we're doing regarding youth participation and initiatives that come by the youth.

>> HIROSHI ESAKI:  In order to participate from all over the world, you asking, to requesting to the local Government or global people:  You need transparent, good network.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Thank you.  Perfect.  Vint?

>> VINT CERF:  I'll try to answer several quickly.  With regard to access to the Internet especially in rural areas there are a number of technologies being explored.  One Google calls loon.  Balloons at 60,000 feet that circulate around the world.  We're experimenting with that commercially in Sri Lanka.  Regarding filtering based on cultural norms, that's really attractive but I'd like to reinforce the idea of putting the filter in the head rather than on the net.  And with regard to youth production of content, we see some of the most popular YouTube producers are in fact young people who really get that particular medium and they're pretty spectacular.  Some of these kids have 10 million people viewing their videos.  That's 4 or 5 times larger than some of the most popular television series.

So there's very good evidence here that the youth are terrific producers.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Thank you, Thiago, final remarks.

>> THIAGO TAVARES:  Thank you, Professor Glaser.  I don't have a summary but one very brief concluding remark.  This main session was very innovative, well balanced, and strong in substance.  I'm sure we're just starting this very productive dialogue between the pioneers and the Next Generation Leaders.  The session also gives a clear management of the IGF commitment to shape the future together with the Next Generation Leaders, highlighting how the young people and newcomers are fundamental for Internet inclusiveness and Sustainable Growth.  Congratulations to all the session organizers.  Congratulations to the moderator, to the speakers and participants.  Let's keep this dialogue open, active and engaged.

>> HARTMUT GLASER:  Back to you, Madam Chair.

>> YOLANDA MARTINEZ:  Thank you very much, everyone.  I believe that the biggest challenge that we have in Internet Governance is to remember that this is a community effort, and in our community, there is space for everyone.  It doesn't matter your age, it doesn't matter your training, doesn't matter where you come from and whatever we learn from this day we've spent here and the people you meet it has to be translated in initiatives that would allow us to provide more value to each one of our activities locally.  I'm very grateful to all of you for your enthusiasm.  If I could describe this session, it's passion for what we do.  Passion for what made us be here, and being 3:31, I declare this session closed.  Thank you.

[ Applause ]

[ End of session ]