The following are the outputs of the captioning taken during an IGF intervention. Although it is largely accurate, in some cases it may be incomplete or inaccurate due to inaudible passages or transcription errors. It is posted as an aid, but should not be treated as an authoritative record.
>> RAJENDRA PRATAP GUPTA: Hi, good morning, everyone.
>> Hello. How are you?
>> RAJENDRA PRATAP GUPTA: Hello, good morning, everyone, and welcome to the session on responsible Internet usage. I welcome you at the UN's Internet Governance Forum meeting. IGF is one of the most impactful forums with membership of 193 countries and in this forum, the 17th IGF in Ethiopia, Addis Ababa, we have 170 plus countries with 4,000 delegates. And we are hosting this ‑‑ welcome to my panelists.
So we are hosting this forum here at Banquet Hall A and I want to give you an idea of the Dynamic Coalition that is hosting this. Before we get into, that the Dynamic Coalition on coalition of health and Dynamic Coalition of jobs was found in 2019, to leverage with the goal to create jobs. We launched yesterday with the UN tech enjoy, the project, which is to collaborate, realize employment and entrepreneurship for all through the technical ecosystem. And the Dynamic Coalition on health was founded this year. Our is to have continuum of care across the world.
Two of our founding members, the digital health academy and the health parliament are very active on this and digital health academy, with IM which is in countries premier and student environment has launched both radio program on digital health, which is going live, and we also launch frontline health workers across the world because they are the one left behind and without them, we cannot have digital health across the world.
Now, coming to why we are doing this forum, the fact is that responsible Internet usage is today a very important topic and that's ‑‑ we have taken it up at the UN IGF. Our lives revolve around the Internet. I think today it's not a question of how many of you don't have a mobile phone or how many of you didn't use Internet today. I think the last one hour, probably everyone around would have SMSed, would have sent an email or browsed an Internet or uploaded a photograph on the net.
I just give you a sense of what it means as an impact to the environment. So a single text SMS is .08 games of carbon emission. A single tweet you do is .01 carbon emission. And if send an email, depending on the size of attachment, it will be .03 to 50 grams of carbon emission. And if you have a Zoom, which we are doing, and so it's between 2 to 50 grams of carbon emission.
The fact is that digitalization is becoming integral to our lives, but the digital footprint has also has a carbon footprint. We are trying to understand the current life cycle and the way we lead our lives. So taking the average life span of 70 years if we take around 8 hours of sleep per day, we probably sleep 24 years in our life, if you look at the 6.9 hours of time we spend on the web, we are actually almost 21 years of our life on the Internet. The majority of our time, we will be on the net in terms of our work hours, and it will have an impact on the carbon emissions.
If you look at the last year or so, deserts have been having floods and the rain areas have been facing drought. That's one the impacts. We thought we should look at this issue from an environment standpoint, but also from the societal piece and cohesiveness standpoint. And the report that we are releasing "The Responsible Internet Usage Report." We will discuss this also today.
And with me today, I have global experts with me, Mr. Gunjan Sinha, who is bases in Palo Alto, California.
Even Pooran Chandra Pandey who is a senior visiting fellow at the institute for democracy at Taiwan in Taipei and he was on the board of Nobel Prize winning World Food Program and he also served as a former CEO of ‑‑ and Mr. Dino Cataldo Dell'Accio, and the amazing work of the Secretary General Award. And Osama El Hasan who works on smart health at the Dubai health authority. And my colleague Smriti Lohia who is also a coauthor of the report. Mr. Erik Solheim who could not be here. He's on a flight.
So I'm getting straight to my panel and the first question is to the tech pioneer, Gunjan who is joining me. I guess it's midnight at your place. I don't know what to greet you with but thanks for taking the time.
You have seen the growth of Internet over last three decades and being a pioneer. Do you think where we reached is very responsible usage of the Internet? If not, what are the things we should be doing? Over to you.
>> GUNJAN SINHA: Yes, thanks Professor Gupta and a real pleasure to be here on this panel and especially discussing the kind of topic that is absolutely timely for us to be discussing.
And I, you know, have been closely involved with the Internet since early infancy in early '90s, when Internet was still a research network, and from there to get to where we stand today, you know, with the advent of the early search engines which had I had personally participated in and launched a search engine called WhoWhere back in 1995, to all the evolutions that we have seen, web 1.0, 2.0, and 3.0, I think the Internet has become foundational to our lives, to the society and, you know, the nations globally.
And as you rightly pointed out, Professor Gupta, the bulk of our waking life is Internet enabled in many, many forms.
So with the positives comes a lot of challenges that Internet itself has caused and going beyond just what's obvious to a lot of us, you know, it's ‑‑ it has, on one hand, brought a lot of opportunity and it's also brought a lot of risks and downsides. So the environmental, social, governance of the Internet itself is something that has to be thought through very carefully at a policy level, but also at an individual level. And I also think the technologies of the future, there's going to be a significant intersection of the Internet and the ESG principles, environmental, social governance.
And let me kind of speak to the concept of environmental social governance. A lot is being said about that, the three‑letter acronym of ESG, but it has to be foundationally tied with newer technologies, which are actually looking at the common footprint and the intersection with the digital footprint and how it provides Foy a better environmental social governance. The environmental word focuses on the carbon side. And the social focuses look at how the Internet is used for narrowing the digital divide and not accelerating the digital divide and that will be the challenge.
There are technologies emerging, there are efforts emerging that can actually narrow the ‑‑ the divide and actually focus on a better enhanced environmentally conscious Internet. And I will give you just a sample of that, in terms of if you look at the recent turmoil and I will use the social media as an example of what you have seen at Twitter. A large number of users have thread to Twitter which are called more distributed paradigms of social media, as opposed to centralized.
I believe the Next Generation social media is going to be more decentralize and when you decentralize Internet, it creates more empowerment and more local governance as opposed to the reliance on single large networks like Facebook, Twitter, or whoever else is controlling the social media.
So we have to get towards more decentralization, more localization, and more governance, which is at the local levels, even though Internet assumes to be a global network. So the beauty of it is as you get to a federated mole, you will create a lower digital footprint. You will actually, you know, build Internet that's more scalable and at the same time, more conscious in its power consumption and digital consumption and that's how you go to the vision of better governed, better environmentally and socially governed Internet of the future.
>> RAJENDRA PRATAP GUPTA: You made a very important point of ESG. I think that should be the mission of everyone who is involved with Internet.
Do you think there is time for us to also draw framework for self‑regulation? You know, as a part of ESG, for everyone involved, given that it will be federated now?
>> GUNJAN SINHA: Yeah, and I think that is exactly, you know, where it goes. So if you go away from the world of what I call massively centralized Internet that we have seen rise of mega, you know, empires like Amazon or Google or Facebook and I have nothing against those platforms. They are amazing. They serve a critical function, but as you go towards localization, and when you actually decentralized and then get to your point, Professor Gupta, where you take it down to personalization, where an individual level you create self‑regulation, and governance, and tools that shows you metrics of your usage, just like, you know, you see when you go buy a carton of milk. You can see the calories you consume. You see the fat and the protein. It regulates your behavior.
Today, I have no standardization. There isn't a standard body that says that every tweet I make, you know, here's my carbon emission. And I think those kinds of common vocabulary and taxonomy at a personalized level has to be boxed in just like you see it on food product labeling, and I see it as taxonomy standardization and common voluntary vocabulary as opposed to global centralization that has been the norm so far on the Internet evolution.
>> RAJENDRA PRATAP GUPTA: Thank you, Gunjan. A very good action point that I'm sure will feed in our session's actions and key takeaways. Based on what gun gentleman, you have been doing fantastic work at your organization which has also been saving the carbon impact on the work that has been done. And you have been a recipient of the award. Would you like to share what your views are on responsible Internet and how organizations should be taking awe cue and acting on that.
>> DINO CATALDO DELL'ACCIO: Thank you very much, Professor Gupta and thank you very much for being a part of this distinguished panel. Indeed, the experience at the United Nations was exactly based on an analysis of how technology could have improved the organization in making something that for 70 years had been conducted on a paper base into a technological manner.
So we, indeed, applied the concept of digital transformation and involved manual intervention and printing paper, archiving and storage. So in so doing, what we did, we first and foremost looked at the process itself. And the process helped us identify the key elements of the new solution, which in our case was based on the creation of a digital identity.
By creating a digital identity, we were finally able to have an interlocutory to have a counterpart that was reliable. By having that level of reliability, we were able to design around that digital identity, a process that by using the Internet allows us, enables us to achieve economy, and to achieve value.
Economy in the sense that we actually went live with this application during the pandemic period.
>> Armenia, we have like you are saying are back to normal. We use a lot in the pandemic in COVID ‑‑ the telemedicine. But now, let's say, everyone is back to normal. That meaning also the doctors don't accept it to have ‑‑ but from my opinion, it's back to normal.
>> Excuse me?
>> It's not okay. The private sector, they are still working on digitalization.
>> Sorry, just one moment. There is an overlap in our audio system.
>> They are making more software, making more access and they are working good in that direction. That's my opinion.
>> And probably from the European perspective, indeed, we have seen a ‑‑
>> DINO CATALDO DELL'ACCIO: Thank you.
So apologies, there was an interference that was just resolved.
So I was describing the seedings that we were able to achieve. Deceivings where even more obvious and evident in our case. Since the fact that we went live just before the pandemic. And in our case, we really appreciated the value of having a technological solution for individuals that were distributing ‑‑ we are talking about more than 80,000 people in 193 countries, that notwithstanding that occur as a result of the pandemic, they were still able to conduct their process and to certify, in our case, vis‑a‑vis the digital identity solution, that they were still alive because our system, our solution was intended to provide a proof of existence and identity and transaction and proof of location.
And just one last comment, today, we ‑‑ when we are talking, when we are referring as my previous co‑panelists indicated, when we were talking about web 3.0, we are talking about Internet of value. And this concept of value is being referred to the fact that using the Internet technology and using the new application that has been developed on top of it, we are able to exchange value directly without the use of intermediaries. But I think that this concept of value should be revisited and not seen only about the ability to transfer value and asset but also about how we can make this transfer happen and what are the implications as what alluded to before from the point of view of the cost and ‑‑
>> RAJENDRA PRATAP GUPTA: The societal impact, that we should discuss with the people in the room, and now I move to Dr. Osama El Hassan who has joined us from the Dubai Health Authority. You know while we keep spending time on the net using devices, the health hazards are happening. How do we mitigate the risk associated with using digital technologies.
>> OSAMA EL HASSAN: There is no doubt that a lot of studies that correlate the exclusive use of Internet and related devices to the health of people. And these are either psychological or well‑being or even physical health.
So these consequences can vary from different perspectives, but I would like to focus more on two groups of I can say Internet users because their excessive use of Internet will last for so many years, and it will affect their psychological and physical abilities for so many years, which will cause damage to the economy, to their health, to their families.
So one example for that is when we talk about the ‑‑ the clear physical pains that people will have normally, like back pain, for example, even we see that even there's some sort of anomalies on the postures of young people because of their sitting on the Internet for so long or for using the mobile for so long. So this will affect also their size and cognitive abilities. So these are very important issues.
When we talk about the ‑‑ also one of the key health issues that are clearly associated with the excessive Internet use is the high blood pressure and obesity, and obesity for sure. You know, sitting for so long, or focusing on Internet devices for so long, especially with people who are addicted to gaming, for example, this for sure will impact their blood pressure, they will have high blood pressure for so long, and it will be difficult to treat. This is very clear.
When we go to the psychological side. So we see anxiety is becoming more and more prevalent. We see that especially with children, with adolescents that now they have more difficulties with ‑‑ with interacting with will real world. And that's becoming a very big issue now for people who want to be independent and interact with their societies or they can have a good job or good training or education, all of this requires the abilities to interact in a better way with your surroundings.
Focusing so much on the Internet and Internet‑related devices will for sure diminish or at least minimize these abilities. So this ‑‑ this area needs a lot of consideration and we need to have a lot of governance issues around it. This governance issue should be applied to the Internet or Internet‑based I can say companies or businesses, that they need to have some sort of a cap on personalized activities related to their applications, for example. I think maybe a good example for that, besides the governance on the global level, and this could be also related as well to the usage of Internet, there is an organization called Health on the Net that was specifically used to govern the contents around healthcare in the websites or the Internet. So it was an independent authority or organization that looks into the data, any data that was put in the Internet around, for example, diseases or treatment or whatever. And most more than factors that they touched, that they will bring to the Internet, dependable data, data that has kind of research evidence, that when people consume it, the researchers for the health problems, whatever they will go to a confident place, they will get confident data that they can rely on.
I think we have to have certain authorities or organizations at the global level that looks even into the interaction, how they can cover their interaction whether they are games or social media application or whatever.
Another part that I also want to tackle which is also around responsible use of Internet is we need to have some legal governance also around misbehaviors around bullying or shaming. This could be at the low global level, the regional level and the country level.
We need a framework to make sure that these kind of interactions will not psychological impact users. Thank you very much.
>> RAJENDRA PRATAP GUPTA: Osama, it's very confusing when you see the way this domain is evolving. I will still say despite three decades. And Gunjan was very early years on this. There has been, like, you know, very confusing thing. And I will give you specific with health, 2018, ICT 11 made gaming a disorder.
It listed gaming as a disorder. In 2020, USDA actually used gaming to treat a disorder called attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, now is there an oversight besides self‑regulation that we need so that people don't have misinformation, or they understand that this domain is evolving pretty fast what was a disorder two years back is used for treating a disorder. Is there something in the thought process?
>> OSAMA EL HASSAN: Is this question for me?
>> RAJENDRA PRATAP GUPTA: Yes, Osama, that's for you.
>> OSAMA EL HASSAN: As per my knowledge, I haven't seen any activities in this direction. Because of that, I said that maybe following Health on the Net would be an appropriate approach to tackle these issues. Smriti, what is your response on healthy Internet usage.
>> SMRITI LOHIA: Hi, everyone, firstly, it's an honor to be at this conference, and it's indeed a privilege to speak at this platform and Dr. Gupta for giving me this opportunity to speak on this document. And now as I work on this document, as we all know being like Internet has done so much positives in our lives. Communication has become easier. It has given a lot of job opportunities to us, but this is something that is in front of us, right?
But at the back end, there's something happening that is negatively impacting us and the environment. So how many of you, when you go to sleep, how many of you switch off your WiFi?
No one. Okay. That's why data is very scary.
So when any invention happens, you know when Internet was coming up, did we ‑‑ like, we talked about its positives. Did we talk about its negatives? Did we map its journey until today? Did we do that? I don't know if we did that or not, but the point here is 30 years down the road, we shouldn't be seeing the same thing. We shouldn't be saying we didn't know it was negatively impacting us or we have the responsibility to act.
So I sincerely believe that every step, we should know our responsibility towards our environment and the planet. And today people emphasize ‑‑ youngsters, people of my generation and I'm not talking about people before my generation. So people are getting concerned about environment. And they are talking about its.Al issues like climate change and they are talking about its causes like, for example, images westerly cutting down forests and things. We are not talking about one thing. We are not focusing on one thing, which is the digital carbon footprint, right?
So like, the extent to which Internet has taken over our lives we are not realizing that how it is impacting us and the environment. And globally, the number has increased, like from millions in early part of the century, to billions in today. And the number is not increasing like year by year. The number is increasing day by day.
And soon, Internet is going to become a basic human necessary. So in this report, we have like, talked about all of this, and we recommended some actions. How to responsibly act. And the point is ‑‑ the question is do we really know our responsible Internet usage?
And even if we do no, do we really implement that? Thank you.
>> RAJENDRA PRATAP GUPTA: Thanks, Smriti, we have to be cautious of what we do and what is the impact on our lives and society as well and so I want to go to Dr. Pooran who I have known and fairly involved in the future of how it will impact through economy, you know, what he's currently working on. So Dr. Pooran, would you like to give us your responsible Internet usage on education, our jobs and what we can do about being responsible?
>> POORAN CHANDRA PANDEY: Thank you very much, I'm very honored to share my thoughts. Let me pick up from where you started. Our daily lives we end up using technology, whether it be one, two, or do we don't really want to use it. There are systems and architects in what we do to using the laptop, to sending text and also sort of entertain ourselves as when we can, and therefore, the whole technology becomes important not only in standalone, but it gives dimensions to various inter‑sectoral ‑‑ and we are passing through technology which is both inclusive and noninclusive and in some cases, they know what they are doing and in some cases, it creates the pleasure of how we use Internet and technology.
And that is one of the serious problems of any technology when we really go beyond and we begin to really use it without really knowing the consequences that we are going to have. Both on health, also on climate, and also on society and also on how we end up destroying ourselves and one of the panelists prior talked about sitting, postures, how it happens, how we use it, and many times, we are not really aware of the consequences which we are really passing on to society, to environment, to CO2 emissions and so on and so forth.
So let me give a brief ‑‑ of the kind of scale and impact that we end up creating by doing very small things ‑‑ if you like to really look at one email size which produces roughly about 20 grams of CO2 and its life cycles which is equivalent to lighting a 60 Watt ‑‑ I mean an old bulb which is burning for about 35 minutes.
One mb and you could really then calculate the scale and the impact and really cover about 60, 65% of humanity, using technology. If you really collect and collate, you can imagine the kind of scale and impact of CO2 footprint that we were creating out of the technology usage, one of the ‑‑ by using one mb of email. This is a very small example, but I think that suffices to highlight the kind of ‑‑ of activities that we undertake without knowing what it does and therefore, knowledge is something that is very, very important.
Many of us, the majority of us don't know the kind of impact with mb of an email, data that is created in its life cycle which is about 20‑gram and just add it up and you will probably get a better sense of scale and impact. Now, let me move forward and you open by saying we send a text. We write the email. We entertain ourselves on mobile, the user of data and therefore, if we were to really look at what is really happening, on an aggregate level, we as each one of us, we have been probably contributing more than 300 million tons of CO2 annual, which goes from sending email to text to what we do on Internet and how we play games and do a whole lot of things which we are not really aware in terms of kind of impact, the negative impact we are really creating, both for the people around us and also on the environment which is an intrinsic part of life. And if we don't really correct it, there will be a problem.
Let me go to the research studies that are ongoing at Harvard, which have been experimenting with people who are rendered mental and how these people have been rendered menial by excessive use of technology and how could they better rehabilitated. And this is where the whole area that you have been handling the health, it comes into play.
And therefore, technology is not a technology that we use an abuse, but really how we intersect it at the cusp of health, at the cusp of mental disorder, at the cusp of environment, and climate change, and our own individual responsible behavior, which is very, very important and I really attribute it to a very large extent to that sense of knowledge and not ‑‑ and not being told to many of our kids, because we still are better off, because we began to use technology and Internet when we were probably, you know, 30 years old.
What is really happening now is a child sitting, they are given a handset and the child will be watching something, maybe a game or some comic film. I mean, that's really going to be pretty messy, and not too far away from now, because when these kids grow, by the time they are 20, by the time we started using the Internet and technology, these guys will be on. We have to consider the following.
The first thing is that we have got to educate our children right from the school that, look, these are the kind of good things, but you have got to be pretty careful in terms of how ‑‑ it is how which is more important, not what we have. It is very, very important that we tell them.
Second thing, it is very important that companies which are producing technology need to really come out and not only through ESG, but ESG has been, you know, a very truncated kind of an idea, but what really needs to happen to begin with is that we need to really report in terms of what they are doing, in terms of the sustainability report, in terms of how do we really embed the value that they have been creating not only by selling technology, but also being aware of how they affect people in the state of well‑being.
And the other thing that I personally believe and I have been part of last year and this year as well, there's a big talk now through the COPs, both 26 and 27, at how well technology either enable what we have been doing as human beings or how does it disable us in terms of the progress that we will miss out because we are too deep and too deeply embedded with what we have been doing with technology?
And therefore, there's a call to action by the UN and since I have been a part of the UN myself, which I headed in Delhi, two things are happening. One, that the UN has been asking companies through ITU to cut down their emissions by 20% by 2030. While the companies will be roughly about 14% of CO2 by 2024.
And I would like to say, that technology is very helpful. But we have got to be very much aware of how technology could spoil the whole game and begin to create people who might not be able to remain conscious of their own personal health, their own personal care and then it will continue to contribute, to carbon footprint which is only going to take a very fresh bit of air out of our society, and the biodiversity and so on so forth: And therefore, individual responsibility is very, very important, but I think an equal praise around companies need to be put on where the need to probably use more renewable energy.
Even today, we are talking about technology, and more than 80% of technology producers are working with positive people. How do they bring in bringing in clean energy? And that could be the solution, but we have to be very much careful and aware about how we do what we have been doing and therefore, we can use technology not as a master, but as a slave.
So I will pause here and be happy to answer any question which might come from you or from the audience. So thank you very much.
>> RAJENDRA PRATAP GUPTA: Thank you. A very important point that you raise and we have been aware, the kids are busy with their own self and not disturbed, but this is creating in them the formative years a psyche where they will not be able to stay away from, you know, the mobiles.
You also made the point about small things mattering big in our small steps. So our offices we switch off the WiFi. It's not at our homes. I don't know if everybody does. Smriti asked everyone, but it's very difficult. It's become a part of our lives, you know, where we think it's on. There's nothing going on. So if you look at this report, it's just a ten‑page report and it will be on the web of IGF. We have put some check lists of things that you do. There are apps on your mobile phone that are actually working in the background, consuming still data and there's 7.2 million data centers across the world and some of the data center emissions are more than a small countries.
We also ended by saying that companies have a big role to play, and Gunjan, we couldn't have you yesterday for our time mismatch but a very important point that is being understood by people is what essentially technology is doing is shifting the power from the governments to private sector. And I will give you a perspective on this.
The market gap of big 5 tech companies is equal to 157 nations. So cooperations are now powerful than nations. And now given that you are the only person who I know, you know, who has been a pioneer in the Internet space, much earlier than Google.
Now the vision with which you saw the Internet at that time, has it really realized the potential in delivering what it was supposed to and secondly, is the industry responsible. One of the things that came out yesterday in our sustainable automation session was that profit at any cost doesn't have a business model which effectively means we are screwing up the environment, and looking for the profit. So is the industry responsible and is ESG enough or what would be your check list for the industry, you know, to be more responsible to reduce the inequities which are stronger. Over to you, Gunjan.
>> GUNJAN SINHA: Well, thank you. And this is clearly a topic that is very near and dear to me, you know, having seen the Internet and the promise of Internet from the early days. What was supposed to be a network that would actually, you know, bring kind of opportunities to all and actually narrow the digital division, it's accelerated the divide, as you noted 5 or 6 corporations now, you know, are bigger than 150 nations put together in the overall value.
So I believe that one of the things that we have to look at, and we have to draw a parallel from how things have worked in some other industries. When I look at the health care, you know, and especially in drugs and food, there's been a very specific focus to actually have proper labeling. Labeling is an important concept, if we think about it.
You know, you can go to a grocery store, you can buy something, and you can see what you consume.
And it's properly labeled. When you get into the digital world, there is no labeling. And the labeling standards have to come out so that it is not very hard for me to at the bottom of the email to be able to see a label that what impact does an email have. And if that becomes a standard regulation, then I know that, you know, when I drink a cup of milk, I know how many calories I'm consuming or what protein I'm taking or if I take a drug, there's specific regulations on labeling.
The similar concept from the digital health has to now move into the Internet. We have to label our digital activity properly, because as you label those, it starts to create awareness. That awareness leads to the right change of behavior, which then leads to a more ESG‑centric Internet, and I think that is the part which I think has been missing in our ‑‑ in our overall architecture of the Internet of the future. So it requires governments to come together. It requires standard bodies like what we are talking about in this forum to come together, to create the labeling standard, what FDA has done in the US, for example, we can take a chapter of that book and apply that into the digital Internet or the future.
So I would leave that part, because I have been thinking about it and I feel it's long overdue and has to be taken out as an initiative with urgency.
>> RAJENDRA PRATAP GUPTA: Very important action point and I think it will have an impact on our generation and I think the team at Health Parliament that is watching this, should work on these standards.
I think all of our cell phones has the screen time notification. You can see your screen time this week is either more or less than last week, or month and so on and so forth. Same way I think we could actually quantify that as the carbon footprint and if we draw out, like, what do you call, the average life span based on your usage, you know, this could be an impact on footprint and it could lead to this, and I think we would be conscious enough to say we don't want to leave the planet which is for mass extinction. I think it's a very important point that you have brought out.
And the current things we are seeing today is when 2.7 billion people are not connected to the Internet and Metaverse is still in the works. I'm not sure how much impact we can have and probably this is the right time to trigger a debate and to come out with certain things, and I think at this time, I will pass on to Dino to talk about the importance of sharing best practices and creating guidelines for this.
>> DINO CATALDO DELL'ACCIO: Thank you very much, Professor Gupta. Yes, I believe this is the perfect segue to what the previous panelists had just mentioned. Personally, most of my career at the UN was in auditing. I was responsible for the office of internal auditing in the UN. When I became the chief information officer and started this project the digital identity and deployed the solution that make use of new technologies such as biometrics and blockchain, one of the first questions from myself, given my background, is now that I have implemented a system, using new technologies, how can I provide assurance about the reliance of these technologies to my governing bodies, with the oversight bodies, to the stakeholders at large.
And here I believe has the distinguished panelists before we alluded to, I don't think that we are mature yet in having a set of standards, a set of indicators, our best practices to provide that level of assurance.
I think technologies ‑‑ new technologies such as facial recognition and biometrics, such as blockchain, do not yet have generally accepted criteria, a standard that can be used, for example, to provide the labeling that was alluded to before by the previous speaker.
So I think a lot still needs to be done in order to make sure that who is going to use this technology can do that in accountable manner, in order to provide criteria, in order to provide assurance, about whether and how one of these technologies it's used, this is being done by taking into consideration all the important implications of each one of these technologies.
Whether it's about environmental sustainability, whether it's about social responsibility, whether it's about energy consumption and so forth. So I believe this is definitely an area where more collaboration should come in between all parties with the government, the international organization, private sector, professional association, working together and create a start ‑‑ start creating a set of standards in order to provide assurance and reliance on the responsible use of these technologies.
>> RAJENDRA PRATAP GUPTA: Gunjan, you wanted to make a point here?
>> GUNJAN SINHA: Yes. A feel like the standard that was alluded to here, that's exactly what I mean by the labeling. The interesting thing is that the technology, if you look at the Internet, you look at the HTTP protocol, you look at the web protocols, they are very easily taggable. You can tag things. You can create a common taxonomy, a vocabulary, is taggable. I think we need to look at it transnationally, but look at it regionally and look at the geographic nature, independent of nations and definitely independent of the mega corporations which are controlling much of the, you know, internet power.
So UN is in a great position to be able to spear head an initiative to create a standard and embed that standard into the HTTP protocol and the browsers and the technologies of the future, the social media. I think they will be in a very good place to adopt it because as consumers would embrace the labeling that this brings out, it will start to change consumer behavior.
Today, we do not have ‑‑ you know, yes, we get notifications about our usage, but we don't have a labeling just like what you see in the drug industry ‑‑ like the way you see in the food industry, and those are creating change behaviors.
So we have to take the regulations and standards and apply that and have the companies be held accountable to quality of the digital world as such, just like we care about the quality of what we see in the world of food and drug, and healthcare, we need to raise the quality of the digital footprint to the next level.
>> RAJENDRA PRATAP GUPTA: Thanks, Gunjan. I think as the United Nations, we will take this up, and hopefully, we will reach out to you over the next few weeks to, you know, get a formal shape to what this framework should look like.
I know you have been championing data philanthropy and other initiatives and I hope we will get your support on this.
And now moving this to the next level, I was looking at the data. We do our annual report called "Internet and Jobs." I was looking at the current study, how many hours do you spend on the Internet? So the last part, 10 plus hours on per daily basis, the number is 20%. So 1 out of 5 actually spend more than 10 hours on the Internet. And if you really look at the data of how many photos get uploaded on Snapchat, on Facebook, on WhatsApp and stuff, it's 14.1 billion. 14.1 billion photographs a day. And if I look at people spending time, average of 6.9 hours on the internet. And I think Smriti alluded to the fact, the younger generation. The older generation spending more time. Probably we need to study that as well. We call them generation adults.
Do you think we do Internet fasting for planetary health and now we have four days a week coming up. Should we do an Internet holiday, will it be feasible for the younger generation to consider that? Maybe time to draw, as Dino said, we need to come up with framework or the labeling in embedding the IP protocol. Do we need to come up with an Internet etiquette about how it means and how we use Internet on a daily basis?
>> SMRITI LOHIA: I think we should come up with a report of Internet etiquette. I think as you said regarding youth, I think we ‑‑ what we need to consider that ‑‑ like, on net, while using Internet, what is necessary and what is not necessary. Like, what necessary stuff we are doing and what not ‑‑ what unnecessary stuff we are doing on Internet, right?
So we need to consider, like, for what purposes we are using the Internet.
So like, we need to see what kind of platforms we are using, what kind of content we are accessing. And suppose, for example, we are talking about Internet etiquette, like for example, there is a lot of fake news, fake information, it's out there, right?
So if I, you know, access information blindly, I go and spread that information, right? So what if that information is fake information, disinformation? I am, again, spreading it and I am again ‑‑ I mean, I'm contributing to digital carbon footprint. So at that minute level, we need to consider our responsibility. So, yeah. That's it.
>> RAJENDRA PRATAP GUPTA: And you made that important point of how we get carried by things that are there and how we contribute to it. And I remember last year, I wrote a paper with the center for international relations which is a Poland‑based European think tank, it was democracy. Mr. Pandey touched on that. Earlier what happened, the democracy at the institution was created hundreds of years ago where you saw a leader working and then you actually elected them. And now in the age of Internet, democracy was created for servant leader. You actually saw them working and you elected them.
Now what has happened is you get bombarded by messages, and I'm alluding this for the fact that we are still having an angle of responsible Internet usage. So someone whom you don't know has now parachuted into the age with too many messages coming, creating a positive image to elect that. So servant leadership is celebratory leadership. I mean, that's very different dimension of responsibility on the Internet, but I would ask each of my panelists if they wish to comment on this, starting with Gunjan.
>> GUNJAN SINHA: Yeah. No, and I think you raise a good point here. I think what social media, digital media is doing, there's a lot of way for people to propel themselves and get into the center of attention, which is completely an antithesis of servant leadership, where the role is focused on supporting and being the force to help drive change and support your team, support society, and all of your organization.
And when you get into the world where celebrity notions become more important than the agenda, the passion, the impact, I think you start to see the wrong behaviors. And I think we have to change the role model and we have to celebrate people who are behind the scenes as much as people who are in the scene or in the social media. I think is part of the problem of the new media is that it accelerates what I call more celebrity worship and we ‑‑ we are not able to distinguish between fact and fiction and it leads to more responsibility for those people who are in celebrity positions to be more responsible, but it also means we have bring out stories that illustrate the servant leadership and people behind the scenes doing real work and not just the people in the limelight.
>> RAJENDRA PRATAP GUPTA: Thank you, Dino, would you like to add to this?
>> DINO CATALDO DELL'ACCIO: Definitely. I think especially looking at the outcome of this excellent report, that was produced, on the responsible internet usage, and, again, usage the hat, my previous hat of internal auditor. One the main principles of auditing is that you cannot manage or you don't measure, and two is you cannot responsibly govern when you don't know the risk.
So I think this report highlights exactly the key component of these two concepts. One, it tries to quantify, tries to measure what is the impact of using this, the new technologies. And two, what are the risks?
So I think with these two very meaningful inputs, we can now start creating on top of this, for example, risk assessment criteria. And provide organization that in hand, that plan, to make use of this technology to conduct an analysis and be aware of what are the costs, the benefits and the risks of engaging or adopting or implementing these kind of technologies in their internal processes.
So while, of course, we will never be able to mitigate all the risk, but at least we can start demonstrating that we tried to be accountable and responsible in the use of this technology, about you first and foremost identifying the risk and where possible trying to mitigate those risks.
>> RAJENDRA PRATAP GUPTA: Thank you, Dino. Osama, your view?
Osama, are you online?
Okay. I don't think we are able to have him. So Smriti, over to you on this.
>> SMRITI LOHIA: So I think there are two parts of Internet, like, two sides of the Internet, like, first is the influence it generates and second, how we receive the information. Like ‑‑ and for what ‑‑ and for what purpose we are accessing it.
>> RAJENDRA PRATAP GUPTA: Dr. Pandey, your views on this.
>> POORAN CHANDRA PANDEY: I think have one or two things to say. One is about democracy and how democracy insects with Internet usage, whether it comes to being on social media or LinkedIn. There's a tendency and since I have now been working on this whole notion of how technology intersects with democracy and how does that really take us into the post era.
That's one of the things that technology will do, which means many of our leaders in democracy. The moment they survive three times, four times, five times, then the only thing to perpetuate the leadership and bring back to power is to a very large degree driven by how you present yourself. So there is nothing like servant leader. It's all about getting people in any democracy in the post truth era which means given while you are not doing anything as a leader, you will try and use this media as a technology, in such a way that you take democracy to a point when it becomes populism. So that's one crisis that we are seeing across the world, mostly in Africa, fairly deep influence in Asia and there's also playing out in a different way all together in transatlantic.
So that is a kind of downside that technology will bring in, whereby it will really put people in post‑truth era and when we say it will happen five years down the line, 10 years down the line, 20 years down the line but not now.
The second thing, when I came to, I went through the sustainable report of Google, they both mentioned that the usage of technology by an individual is about 229 kilograms of CO2. So therefore, the first thing is before we go into applied notion and concept of how companies need to behave and conduct themselves, it would be a very good idea to sort of put some kind of incentive through regulation and also probably tell them, look, what you have been doing, you need to run this report through your sustainable compliance reports in terms of what you have been doing and what is really needed to be done because it is not only what somebody has done, but there has to be a part way, for companies, and all the work we do, for five years, seven years, ten years and 20 years.
And finally, I'm a great believer of the knowledge that we have, how do we really utilize that knowledge to educate, for that knowledge to sink in teacher in the younger generation. And I think more than check list or anything else, it will be a very good idea to figure out as to how could NGOs, civil sow site, including the governments could reach out to schools, colleges, because I can see a very distinct possibility of counseling centers being opened not far away from now, but in about five to seven years where people are being treated or they will need the treatment for getting through the post‑truth scenario that they will get into, where the excessive use of technology.
So I think it's parenting, companies and then the governments who really need to be very careful in terms of what they do and how they project what they have been doing and not really following up. So not really be a regime but a system. Technologies will really help us.
>> RAJENDRA PRATAP GUPTA: This is such an engaging discussion on a topic. I think we still have not scratched the surface of the Internet of technologies, but we are still seeing the impacts. I will bring you the Bustmaster. I'm not sure if you are aware of it, the rate of doubling of information has increased to such an extent that around 1500 was in 500 years and then it 250, and then 50, 25, and in 2021, it was 12 hours. Every 12 hours we were doubling information. But despite having so much information, I think we have not come ‑‑ I won't call it knowledgeable. We are not even wise enough, because we are seeing kind of conflicts that are happening, the way degradation of the planet is happening and this is being said.
I think Gunjan also made this point, and Dr. Pandey highlighted about 250 kilograms of carbon emission per individual. I think we should be on our way in carbon for sure. There's nothing free, either you or the product. It's worry is not we be the product. My worry is the planet being the product. I think as a panel, we will stop talking but we would like to hear from the audience on this topic of being responsible towards humanity for using Internet, and even people who are online and offline in the room, please shoot your questions an let's also learn what your perspectives are on this issue.
Okay. There's a question in the room.
>> AUDIENCE MEMBER: Thank you very much for this develop exciting, illuminating discussion. I have two comments. One is that I think we are focused more on the general and global impact and the effects. I haven't had discussion around issue of digital dementia, because we have become so connected to technology that we are not able to remember things, you know? We trust that any information that we have, we will have to keep on our handsets to help us remember. We now don't care about spelling words. We trust that the computer will help us to do so, and we also lose our sense of grammar because computers will always do that.
So I think that's leading to loss of analytical skills among the people and I think this is something that is very difficult to quantify, and therefore, perhaps not so visible as the issue of carbon emission and so forth.
My other point is that I think we have to be a little bit careful about generalizing propositions. I come from Africa.
I know that majority of Africans are digitally excluded and therefore, they ‑‑ they have no access to the technology, the devices for them to even be addicted. Right now I think our concern is how do we ensure that the vast majority of Africans are digitally included?
Now, if we focus the discussion, which is very good that we are creating environmental sustainability challenges, exclusively on that, without providing attention to the need that people actually have a very, very critical need for digital access, we would fall into the hands of unaccountable governments in developing countries who say, okay, there's so much concern about carbon emission, we don't have to do much about including our population. I think we will be saving them, and we will be contributing to addressing the carbon print and so forth.
And so that sort of narrative could actually further deepen the digital marginalization of certain people in the Global South. Thank you very much.
>> RAJENDRA PRATAP GUPTA: I think very important point you make, sir, and I promise you won't have digital dementia on your point. We will make sure that this is raised, and I think yesterday in our discussion, it came out. I think this was some other panel that I was on that in Africa, there is no hardware manufacturing. There's no software. Only thing that is done here is repair and probably reuse. So it's on the other end of the digital economy. Now my worry for nations like Africa and mine like India, we are still not the developing countries. Probably lower to middle‑income developing countries and if we put carbon emissions on that, and not denominating by per capita we will be at the wrong end of political spectrum where people will ask us to limit emissions, and not become developed. That's a different discussion, what is the roadmap for that?
Having said that, I totally understand that this is an issue that we cannot generalize either statements or our policy papers. It's a very, very divided role, yes, I agree.
Any other questions?
>> AUDIENCE MEMBER: Thank you so much for the presentations and the talks that have come through. I'm very excited to understand that there is effort towards writing something about responsible Internet usage. It has been spoken about in various platforms, but there's no scientific documentation that has actually come to enable users to be able to make conscious decisions whenever they are engaging with the Internet. So the tools that you are proposing here, I think will be important that they be looked at at all levels of society, including governments and even civil society and I think it even breaks down into social and personal lives, where parties can now be able to look at it and see there's a criteria that we move online. There's many reasons to move online for socioeconomic development. We have to remember that the global woman is here with us. And there's also an effort or an input that you can do at individual level and at corporate level.
I come from an entity where we have been educating consumers on responsible Internet usage but we do not have specific tools that we can give them and tell them that operator so‑and‑so, you can use this criteria to evaluate yourself and be able to know that out of the mass of communication that you have release every day or receive every day, this is the carbon footprint that you cause.
So if that's ‑‑ if that tool can come, including the equity, or the label, the digital labeling that you refer to, it will go a long way and help in decision making.
So as many other people have recommended, this is a progressive journey, but as we double information, let's also double the effort in terms of responsibility, because again, we have allowed Internet to be for celebrities and yet the net was meant for rejuvenating our economies. Can we classify that this is professional use of Internet and for those on social or entertainment platforms, this is the responsibility metrics that you need to apply?
And perhaps if that cost of posting entertainment stuff could be a little bit higher than posting professional work production, with such a difference, I believe that we will drive purpose clearly to say Internet was meant to help the office or the production move this much. Do we want to take it for entertainment, welcome, but this is your effect on the environment. Because we cannot all bombard the net, make it poisonous with information and content that was not meant to move to the next front.
You talk about the photos allowed on Snapchat. They can be allowed to run. But give them a price. And then taxing. When you are doing taxes for a country, there is what we call syntax. You can still enjoy your drink, but you will pay slight slightly more as compared to those who are perhaps producing food. They will pay tax, but at a level that is affordable.
I think I like the progress with this and I look forward to enjoying the print out that you have done, the report that you have released and please make it available and let us work together to get this one done. Thank you so much.
>> RAJENDRA PRATAP GUPTA: Thank you. It's a very important message and I take it that as the information is doubling, action should also double. And I think we should denominate the responsibility metrics, and below that we should dominate that by purpose behind that. You should do anything but it should be with a purpose and it should be responsibility.
I think that will help people inculcate that feeling of saying every step I take it either going up or taking me down. I think we should work together. I will definitely give you this report and this should be on the Dynamic Coalition of Internet and jobs website at the IGF shortly. But really appreciate your inputs and we should work together. Any other questions? Smriti, do you have online questions? We will take questions. We will take few online questions and then the room.
>> SMRITI LOHIA: So we have a few questions. So I will start one by one. As we moving towards automation and our dependency on Internet has increased many bounds especially in the wake of COVID‑19, followed by remote working, how feasible it is to use Internet responsible?
>> RAJENDRA PRATAP GUPTA: Gunjan, I will pass this to you, the pioneer of the Internet.
>> GUNJAN SINHA: Can you repeat the question for a second, just so I make sure I got it right?
>> SMRITI LOHIA: As we are moving towards automation and our dependency of Internet has increased about bounds especially in the wake of COVID‑19, followed by remote working, how feasible is it to use Internet responsibly?
>> GUNJAN SINHA: It's facilitating remote work which is naturally socially distanced by its definite that you can work from anywhere and the mobility creates that.
I think the Internet has been in many ways been an enabler for a lot of ways in which we were able to handle the COVID‑19 crisis, and I think that's the positive side of what Internet has brought, and I think I come back to the question that, you know, as we think about automation and AI and machine learning and all the future technologies, we have to think about a very important point. I think Professor Gupta touched upon it. It is the profit and the purpose have to be married together. That has to be an important agenda, and technologies like AI is not just to create billions for future people. It should be what I call AI for billions where A I. creates value for billions of people. So ‑‑ so what has happened in our first version of AI is that it is actually creating an accelerating wealthy generation for a few corporations and leaving a lot of people behind. I see it in a much more distributed in a federated world and that's where labeling and other things have to come into place to orchestrate this decentralization and contributed architecture and as we do that, I think what Internet can do in crisis like COVID or other, you know, human health crisis or social emergencies, it will actually be a force, much more than it ever did even in the wake of the COVID crisis.
>> RAJENDRA PRATAP GUPTA: Thank you, Gunjan. Even as we speak here, it's not that everything is wrong. You have islands of excellence and you have islands of ignorance. And I will give you an example, like I think very important point has been raised in the question, how do we, you know, be responsible? So we have examples of corporates. We have examples of countries where after office hours you are not supposed to send email or bother to respond. We have corporations that are moving to a four‑day workweek. We don't know how it will pan out. And we have seen corporations saying 48 hours a week. You have islands of ignorance to islands of excellence.
On the automation part, we should not be indiscriminate, we should be discreet. You don't know the panelists like us, they will tell you a response to everything because the information that you are developing and you won't have people coming all the way to attend the IGF at all, probably in the next five years. It will all be done virtually. Thank you.
>> GUNJAN SINHA: Yes, and there's one point I would add here, if you don't mind. You know, a lot has been talked, about you know, how we audit, you know human ‑‑ as humans what we do, the governance and the audit, all of that is very well formulated but we also have to now start thinking about how do we govern AI? Because algorithms can make biases, can make, you know, discrimination, can create challenges in the society, you know.
In a self‑driving car is moving, you know, and an accident happened, who gets affected is it the driver that gets affected? How is the algorithm designed? So there's some major societal issues. So we have to come out with a framework to govern, you know, AI itself and these are standards and best practices related questions that I think organizations have to start to address so that corporations and individuals can adopt these things moving forward.
>> RAJENDRA PRATAP GUPTA: Thank you, Gunjan. That makes a solid can case for ethical AI.
Thank you. We will go online and then to the room.
>> SMRITI LOHIA: How important it is to incorporate environmental digital responsibility in the education system? Is something being done for the same?
>> RAJENDRA PRATAP GUPTA: So anyone from the panel want to respond?
>> DINO CATALDO DELL'ACCIO: Yes, I can try to give an answer, not really from an educational ‑‑ I don't ‑‑ although I ‑‑ I did have some experience in academics. What we're trying to do, for example, as I mentioned before, vis‑a‑vis my quest to be able to provide assurance on the use of new technologies. I started partnering with another not‑for‑profit professional association, and we build a capability maturity model for blockchain usage. It's called the BMM, blockchain maturity model and this was done in collaboration with the blockchain association of Washington, D.C.
And so this is for me, an example of an initial effort to start creating that framework that the previous panelist, Gunjan was alluding to. We try to create a model, within which we could include all the aspects that, for example, have been mentioned today, and been alluded to in the report.
So we included 11 elements, such as governance, such as security, such as privacy, such as sustainability. So I think this kind of tools, if I can call it like that, can help this discussion and can help create awareness in younger generation to be used also in educational curricula, in order to provide those criteria that, for example, we alluded to before, to have an holistic assessment. Thank you.
>> RAJENDRA PRATAP GUPTA: I will mention one of the initiatives that I did during my stint as advisor to the health minister of India, we created a pamphlet. We have designed in Twitter, where there's 250. And there was a small pictorial booklet for school children and what are the good habits you should have. And it was done in coordination with the Ministry of Education. I think every country we should focus on primary education and let the ministries of health and education work together to, you know do something locally, because this could be provincial subject, or state subjects rather than at a national level, because things widely differ.
With this, I would like to take questions from the room, before we wrap in the next five minutes. Yes.
Can you please get the mic over to him?
>> AUDIENCE MEMBER: Thank you, sir. Regarding the responsible Internet usage, what I wanted to ask was that this responsibility by itself, it's ‑‑ we have to see from many vantages. This may reach to the social, economic, at certain times cultural background. Culturally, that society has to be more aware about their responsibility and the accountability for what they just did.
Now what I wanted to ask straight was that how do we just see, for example, regarding usage of Internet at the same time, there is content out there. That content has to be manageable I mean. So to what does that, content‑wise, how do you just see that, the localization means, bringing some content that is related to the Internet in terms of the cultural aspects that the content has to be more ‑‑ to be viable to the culture of the existing society. What I mean, for example, in developing country, and developed country, some aspect may be, and some parts they would allow those content. And as a part, the contents may be just, it is allowable.
So in that case, how do you just see the response ‑‑ the responsible usage of Internet in relation with this content management and localization? That's my question.
>> RAJENDRA PRATAP GUPTA: I think you would have very deep insights to ask this question. I would say look at the cultural policy of a few African countries and I ‑‑ I would credit them. I just had drafted the culture policy for India to adopt. And the point that came out is a good learning. I have quoted the country's culture policy. In the age of Internet where people would look at everything in the world and forget their own culture. So the content and the other things should be aligned to the local culture. It's a very important point and I think, like, that country expert, it's Zambia. It's their name in the country culture. I will be happy to send you the detail about that.
Every country while we need to be connected but not get our culture. The moment we forget our culture, the humanity will be gone. That's one of the important issues of responsible Internet usage. Thank you for that.
>> AUDIENCE MEMBER: Thank you very much. I'm from Uganda. I work at the African Union. It's more of a suggestion, but still I will ask a question at the end. Internet usage is all about someone's perception. The data they want to access online, it ‑‑ actually, the data is open to everyone, depending on the kind of Internet you are using. If it is my personal data, I can access anything. And also depending on the data protection law in the country, or ‑‑ yeah, in the country you are, in the morning, I had the chance to attend data protection session, like improving data protection laws.
So I think if it is in an organization, then the technical people can limit whatever you are accessing their Internet. When someone is using his own data. And then the question is, you know, different countries have different challenges on the data. There is a way that maybe ‑‑ is there a convention which can maybe govern the data charges in different societies?
>> RAJENDRA PRATAP GUPTA: I will let Dino and then Gunjan and then I will.
>> DINO CATALDO DELL'ACCIO: From my point of view, I don't think there are specific terms and conditions on the ‑‑ on the usage specific for this kind of technologies. Although, as I alluded to before, I think that, again, it will be useful to reach a level of consensus, using a top down and a bottom up approach so that issues are not considered only coming from one way. Usually from the top, but are part of a collaborative process where every member, every stakeholder has an opportunity to give an input and then do not define terms and condition for the usage and for the charges in a way that is an imposition. But it actually reflects the collective, if you will, understanding and enable.
>> RAJENDRA PRATAP GUPTA: Gunjan?
>> GUNJAN SINHA: I would echo the same sentiments here. So when Dino mentioned that well, you know, we've got to understand this much more in a spherical way, not top down, understand it from all angles because part of it is, you know, I'm a big believer and I think I mentioned that we have to take the concepts of global networks and now the next way has to be more distributed, more federated and more personalized so that, you know, whether it's the regulations that we create, whether it's the understanding of how we leverage the data and I think the Internet has become too centralized. You know the power is sitting with two few corporations that controls what happens.
I think it behooves all of us to come up with an Internet architecture and through policies and regulations and self‑regulations, you know, change that paradigm.
>> RAJENDRA PRATAP GUPTA: Thank you, Gunjan. And I will say the practical access. It says essential cookies take other data. We don't know what essential data, what essential cookies they are asking. This is a 13‑page document. No one will bother to read all of that. Can we simplify it to five lines so that people understand what data they are sharing and what will happen to their ‑‑ you know, what do you call ‑‑ when people start snooping their data or leaking or selling it. Not the five corporations deciding and going on forums I have a 13‑page document that you will never understand. That as the level of simplicity, what am I sharing. So we need to get to that level of simplicity. The last question you raised is the most important question that is a very good way to end the session and I would like each of my panelists to give a 30 second action item that thinks we should start with.
Starting with Gunjan obviously.
>> GUNJAN SINHA: Thank you. I think you said it right. No one understands a 30‑page document. It doesn't take us anywhere. Let us look at what is already working. You know, when I go to the grocery store when I buy something I can see what I'm consuming, how it is impacting me as, you know, a person. When I go to a website, I need to see that. And it needs to be in a simple way. This is the carbohydrate and the fat and the content, and if I see that, then I decide whether I want to consume a lot of it or I want to consume a little of it or none of it.
I think Internet needs to get to the same level of simplicity and labeling and it needs to be top down and consensus‑based bottom up. We need to create the architecture and the future generations to get the best out of the Internet potential that has not yet been realized.
>> RAJENDRA PRATAP GUPTA: Thank you, Dino.
>> DINO CATALDO DELL'ACCIO: To my point of view to summarize some of the comments that have been made during this panel, I think that the next step to be very practical should be to make sure that there is an adequate level of inclusion. Of all the parties, all the stakeholders, that should contribute to the building, the development, of this ‑‑ generally, let's call it generally accepted criteria for responsible use of Internet and create fora where all these parties can come together and agree on simple terms to explain and to provide framework for practical implementation around this subject.
>> RAJENDRA PRATAP GUPTA: Pooran, 30 seconds to you.
>> POORAN CHANDRA PANDEY: Schools are a key. There are 30 million people in schools and colleges around the world K. we really educate them about advantages and disadvantages and make them a part of this advocacy so they become part of the solution tomorrow?
Second, we have to incentive individual behavior. If I get some incentive, that would probably go a long way to further drive that message down to last single person in my home and my society and my community. And finally, I would really like to see some kind of a broad based regulation do could be either in terms of taxes or incentives so that companies begin to really behave in a way that ‑‑ I mean I don't really mind companies making money but they need to create more value because when value is created, you can distribute the value but if you are looking on the profit part of it, then profits will go only in a few hands or the few pockets.
These are three things, hold people and companies accountable, give them incentive, and make this 1.23 billion starting in schools and colleges as a part of the solution and they are the ones who will change the things because tomorrow they will get married and come out and have a different kind of society.
>> RAJENDRA PRATAP GUPTA: Thank you. Smriti, your view.
>> SMRITI LOHIA: I would encourage everyone to read this document and we need collaborative efforts for it and for that we need individual actions. Thank you.
>> RAJENDRA PRATAP GUPTA: I thank my expert panelists joining and making very important interventions, giving us action items for the future and those who asked us very important questions giving us the dimensions that we need to still complete this document to make it more comprehensive and I look forward to each one of you working with us at the Dynamic Coalition of Internet of jobs. A big round of applause for my expert panelists. Thank you.