Tag: internet

Categories
Public Talk

Talk on Ethics of Broadband

Public Lecture

The Ethics of Broadband:  Optimizing the Impact of the Internet in Asia

Deepak Jain Hall, Sasa International House, Chulalongkorn University
October 17, 2019, 2pm to 4pm. Refreshments will be served afterward.

Speakers and Their Topics

Craig Warren Smith: “Operationalizing Broadband Ethics in the Era of 5G”

Shenglong HAN, “Envisioning Meaningful Broadband-China:  A Framework for Activating an Ethical Broadband Ecosystem for the World’s Largest Nation” 

Craig Warren Smith is Chairman of the Digital Divide Institute.  In 1999 he founded the international movement to close the digital divide.  After graduating with honors from Stanford University and the University of California-Berkeley, he became a professor of technology policy at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government and also at the National University of Singapore’s Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy.   In  2007, he created an ethics-based paradigm called Meaningful Broadband. It was accepted that year by Thailand’s NBTC and it’s five telecommunications operators.  It has since been activated as a model for closing the Digital Divide by the Republic of  Indonesia. In 2019, this model was slated for deployment to 30 million low-income citizens located in remote parts of the archipelago.

Shenglong HAN, Ph.D. in management science, Associate Professor of the Department of Information Management at Peking University. Funded by Freeman Foundation of the USA, he visited University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign as a visiting scholar from July 2008 to June 2009. From May 2012 to August 2015, he was sent by Confucius Institute Headquarters and Peking University to Thailand to act as the Chinese Director of the Confucius Institute at Chulalongkorn University. His current research interests focus on digital divide and community informatics.

Program

2.00-2.15 pm: Introducing the Program and the Speakers, setting the stage
Soraj Hongladarom, Director, Center for Ethics of Science and Technology

2.15 – 2.45 pm: “Operationalizing Broadband Ethics in the Era of 5G”
Craig Warren Smith

2.45 – 3.15 pm: “Envisioning Meaningful-Broadband China”
Han Shenglong

3.15 -4.00 pm: General Discussion

4.00 – 5.00 pm: Coffee and Refreshments Break, Networking

The public is cordially invited. Please register by sending an email to parkpume@gmail.com before October 15, 2019. Seating limited to 25 only.

Organized by the Center for Ethics of Science and Technology, Chulalongkorn University and the Digital Divide Institute, supported by the Mahachakri Foundation.

Categories
e-government information technology

Michael Geist to give a talk

Public talk on “Intellectual Property Reform and Free Flow of Trade and Information” by Michael Geist from University of Ottawa. This Wednesday, August 14, 2013, Room 708, Borom Bldg., Faculty of Arts, Chulalongkorn University

*

บรรยายสาธารณะ “ทรัพย์สินทางปัญญาในยุคอินเทอร์เน็ตและข้อตกลงการค้าเสรี: คำถามในการกำกับดูแล”
วรรณวิทย์ อาขุบุตร และ Michael Geist

14 ส.ค. 2556 13:00-16:00 // ห้อง 708 อาคารบรมราชกุมารี คณะอักษรศาสตร์ จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย [ แผนที่:http://goo.gl/maps/l75A1 ]

14 Aug 2013 13:00-16:00 // Room 708 Borommaratchakumaree Building, Faculty of Arts, Chulalongkorn University [ map:http://goo.gl/maps/l75A1 ]

## กำหนดการ ##

12:30 ลงทะเบียน

12:50 เปิดการประชุม

13:00 บรรยาย “บทบาทของคณะกรรมการที่ปรึกษาฝ่ายรัฐบาล (GAC) ในเวทีนโยบายอินเทอร์เน็ตสากล”
— วรรณวิทย์ อาขุบุตร* รองผู้อำนวยการ สำนักงานพัฒนาธุรกรรมทางอิเล็กทรอนิกส์ (สพธอ.) และคณะกรรมการที่ปรึกษาฝ่ายรัฐบาลของไทยใน ICANN

14:00 บรรยาย “Intellectual Property Reform and Free Flow of Trade and Information”
— @mgeist Michael Geist, Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-Commerce Law at the University of Ottawa

15:00 แลกเปลี่ยนซักถาม

16:00 จบการประชุม

* อยู่ในระหว่างรอตอบรับ

จัดโดย เครือข่ายพลเมืองเน็ต และ ศูนย์จริยธรรมวิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี

Categories
meaningful broadband

After Licensing, What?

A Keynote Speech by Prof. Prasit Prapinmongkolkarn,

Chairperson, National Telecommunication Commission of Thailand

at the meeting on Meaningful Broadband Research Agenda

Room 707, Boromratchakumari Building, Faculty of Arts, Chulalongkorn University

***

Licensing is only the first step towards meaningfulness.  Now the real work begins.

For many of you gathered here by Chulalongkorn’s Digital Divide Institute from academic, government and the private sector. the challenge is to leverage the new 3.9G technology so that it brings optimal benefit to Thais, particularly to low-income Thais that have not known the benefits of the internet in the past.   We know from the reports of the Meaningful Broadband Working Group that broadband can be used for good or bad. So our leaders must act swifty to assure that impacts are positive.

In my speech today I will touch upon various tupes of innovationsthat will allow a meaningful model to broadband policy to emerge in Thailand.  These can then contribute to an agenda for Digital Divide Institute as it formulates a model for meaningful broadband to offer to the National Broadband Commission for its consideration.

As this audience knows well, the roadblocks are finally being cleared for 3G licensing.  You probably already know that a number of provisions have been included in licensing provisions to encourage and even mandate licensees to “close the Digital Divide”  by requiring them to accelerate the build out of cell towers to bring 80% of the entire Thai population within the short time span of just two years after licensing.  Furthermore,  univeral services innovations are being introduced that will encourage all 45,000 schools to benefit from broadband, and the Tambon administrations will also get a boost in egovernment as well.   As we move ahead to Wimax and other licensing and USO innovations,  we can imagine new and more meaningful forms of access being introduced by NTC.

How Regulation and Public-Policy Reforms Can Complement Each Other

But regulation can only go so far to bring the full benefits of broadband to the nation, particularly the low income majority.  As the various reports of Meaningful Broadband have indicated,  the public-sector challenge to align regulatory innovations with innovative taxation arrangements, public-private partnerships,  actions by state-owned enterprises, and even outright subsidies from government.  In this way,  “carrots”  (incentives) can be combined with “sticks”  (manadated regulation) .  In combination the incentives and restrictions can encourage commercial forces to produce broadband-enabled products and services that bring the full benefit of the broadband to the nation while.   We believe that in the long run,  the ICT can generate a much higher level of investment and profit if they focus their long-term efforts on serving the poor.

It is good that the Thai regulatory agency,  NTC is free from political pressure and government influence.  But we are not free from joining with government in complementary efforts to serve the national interest.   We are very encouraged by the leadership taken by the ICT Ministry and the Ministry of Finance and Prime Minister himself to bring the full power of the Cabinet to bear in the New National Broadband Commission, which is represented here today.  We hope that today’s gathering can contribute to its important mission.

But even combining the full power of all parts of government is not enough to achieve Meaningful Broadband.   Academia, the private sector and even the media must contribute their ideas and know-how. The model of Meaningful Broadband looks beyond public-policy and regulatory innovation to four other kinds of innovation which must be combined and integrated into the work of Digital Divide Institute as is formulates a broadband model for the nation.

We need to carefully consider four other types of innovation:

1) Technology Design is Key

So far, designers of  next-generation software, devices and Last Mile solutions have not provided the answer to how to build demand for broadband among the “middle of the pyramid.”  That is the term that Prof Craig uses to describe the two billion users of 2G who do not yet have a good reason to upgrade to 3G.  At least 60% of the Thai population fall in this category.   In Thailand, the National Statistical Office asked Thai family members who learn less then 12,000 baht per month by they do not use the Internet.  The main reason was not that they could not afford go to to internet cafes.  The answer was “we have no reason to use the Internet.”  Thai technological researchers here today from several universities,  including those from NTC’s own TRDI network of research universities, should take up this challenge.   We must use formulate model data appliations which are “usable, affordable and empowering” to those who had no use  for internet till now. This is how Meaningful Broadband is defined,  according to Prof Craig.   Rather then try to compete with Singapore and Korea, for products and services that serve the saturated markets of the Top of the Pyramid, we could be a hub for “killer apps” that serve the new growth markets.

2) Management Innovation is Also Important.

Thailand can be a hub for innovation in serving the MOP with broadband. So far the big domestic and foreign-based companies that operate in the Bankok Metropolitan Area including those in the ICT sector, are focused on serving the same wealthy consumers in the same way as they do in other major cities worldwide.   Recent rise in SET and Thai GDP are based on their success largely in export markets.  But for the benefit of broadband to serve the nation,  new strategic alliances must be formed with Thai telecom operators that bring the dynamic force of the Thai economy upcountry.  Several vertical markets — from banking to health care could lower their operating costs and increase the meaningfulness of their services in new broadband-enabled alliances.  This is largely a challenge for the voluntary leadership of the private sector.  The SET, the Thai Chamber, the Thai Banking Association and specific market leaders skilled in IT can lead the way.   Our business schools in our best universities must provide management training to help our companies profit by uncovering pent-up human resources in our low income population.  We must move towards more sophisticated management models in which the same companies that succeed with affluent customers also learn to succeed with large numbers of low-income consumers and SMEs.

3) Ethical Innovation is also a big factor.

Both regulators and technology designer need a way to measure the meaningfulness of technologies — a big part of the Digital Divide Institute agenda that you will hear about today.  This event is organized by those who represent the ethical principles of His Majesty the King.  We must bring ethics into the twenty-first century by showing how ethical principles can guide the deployment of broadband ecosystems.  We must find how broadband can help each user find his or her own kind of happiness,  thereby keeping government censorship to a minimum.

4) Finance is the “end-game” of Meaningful Broadband

By adding together all other innovation — public policy and regulation,  technology design,  management, ethics — we finally get to the question of the role of government versus the role of the private sector.   We need to know what benefits can result from the freeing of market forces, and what benefits must be induced by governments who must protect the public’s interest.

The telecommunications industry for the past 100 years has represented a “social contract”  between the interests of business and government.  Now this contract must be redrawn in the broadband era.”   Of course we must look to best practices from other nations like South Korea and Malaysia who have connected most of their citizens to broadband.  But we can look to them for the formula that makes broadband Meaningful.  We must produce that formula here in Thailand ourselves — and then export it to the world.

We at NTC look forward to working with the National Broadband Commission and Digital Divide Institute to that end.

Categories
conference

Call for Papers

AP-CAP’10

October 1-2, 2010

( http://www.ia-cap.org/ap-cap10 )
Wellington Institute of Technology, Petone, Wellington, New Zealand
Conference Chair : Soraj Hongladarom
Local Chair : Steve McKinlay

The Asia-Pacific Computing and Philosophy Conference 2010 (AP-CAP 2010) will be held on the campus of Wellington Institute of Technology (WelTec), Petone, Wellington, New Zealand.  AP-CAP 2010 is part of a series of conferences organised by the International Association for Computing and Philosophy. CAP conferences are interdisciplinary by their very nature; we therefore welcome the submission of papers from a wide variety of disciplines at the intersection of philosophy, computer science and information technology as well as related areas in the social sciences.

Keynote Speakers
To be confirmed shortly.

Research Tracks
Whilst there is no specific theme for the conference papers are invited which explore the following ideas and their related disciplines.

  • Information and Computer Ethics
  • Identity, Trust and the Social Networking Phenomenon
  • Virtual Environments
  • Computing, Culture and Society
  • Computer-based Education and Electronic Pedagogy
  • Computational and related Logics
  • Metaphysics (Ontology, etc.)
  • Artificial Intelligence, Mechatronics, Robotics and Autonomous Agents
  • Philosophy of Computer Science
  • Philosophy of Information and Information Technology
  • Intersections

Please note that the above list should not be a limiting factor.

Submissions
Electronic submissions will open shortly.  A link will be provided from the conference website.  IA-CAP is moving towards full paper submissions however please limit submission length to 3000 words and include a 250 word abstract.  IACAP discourages participants from reading their papers to the audience.  The use of PowerPoint or other presentation software is popular.  However, these need not be submitted with your original paper.
Post graduate students (PhD and Masters) are especially encouraged to submit.

AP-CAP’10  Conference Website
http://www.ia-cap.org/ap-cap10

Important Dates

February 2010 Call for papers announced
April 1 Paper submission open
July 16 Deadline for paper submission
August 14 Paper acceptance notification
August 31 Early registration open
October 1 – 2 AP-CAP’10 Conference, WelTec, Wellington, NZ

Questions and Enquiries
Questions  concerning AP-CAP’10 may be addressed to the following;
Soraj Hongladarom  s.hongladarom@gmail.com
Steve McKinlay   stevet.mckinlay@gmail.com

Follow us on Twitter
http://twitter.com/AP_CAP2010

Categories
meaningful broadband

Final Program, Meaningful Broadband Forum

Date: 26 November 2009

Time: 8:15 to 12 noon

Place: Sasin Graduate Institute of Business Administration, Chulalongkorn University

8:15 Opening by Prof. Dr. Charas Suwanwela, Chairperson of the Chulalongkorn University Council

Master of Ceremonies, Prof Soraj Hongladarom,  Director of the Center for Ethics of Science and Technology, Chulalongkorn University.

8:25:  Welcome by Alcatel-Lucent representative, in which he expresses support for Meaningful Broadband.

8:40 Introduction of Keynote and keynote by Khun Supachai Chearavanont,  President and CEO of True Corp, and Rotating Chairman of Meaningful Broadband Working Group (composed of CEOs of AIS, DTAC, TOT, CAT and NTC, represented by Prof Prasit and Prof Sethapong)

9:15-9:30 questions to K. Supachai from audience.

9:30-10:00  Presentation of the Meaningful Broadband Framework.  Prof. Craig Warren Smith, Director, Meaningful Broadband Working Group Secretariat,  Center for Ethics of Science and Technology,  Chulalongkorn University

10:00-10:30 Interactive discussion with comments by invited by key individuals (NTC Commissioners, World Bank-Thailand lead economist),  Permanent Secretary of Ministry of Finance,  UNESCAP ICT Director, Thai Chamber of Commerce ICT Committee Chair,  Foreign Chambers of Commerce ICT Committee Chair,  key interdisciplinary professors of Chula,  ITU Asia Pacific director,  ICT Ministry representative.

10:30-11 -Interactive exercise for entire audience at tables

11:00-11:15 Conclusions and next steps.

11:30 Media briefing.  Announcements and Q&A from key principals.

Language: Thai (English when speakers are not Thai)

Registration: Everyone is invited. Please register by giving your name and email address at the comment box below. Or call 02 218 4761. Thank you.

Click here for the flyer of the event.

Categories
Craig Smith

Thai Telcos Join With Regulators to Establish “Meaningful Broadband”

(Bangkok July 3)  Some of the nations most powerful telecommunications executives and the regulatory agency, Nation Telecommunications Union (NTC), met yesterday for the first time to formulate a plan for Meaningful Broadband.   The plan calls for interacting with Prime Minister, and a spectrum of Thai ministries to establish the role of broadband in achieving public-policy reforms in the Abhisit government.

The event, held at the Oriental Hotel, was the first meeting of the Meaningful Broadband Working Group, led by Craig Warren Smith, a visiting professor of Chulalongkorn University’s Center for Ethics of Science and Technology.  Sponsored by NTC,  the event released a white paper on Meaningful Broadband.

The report rejects the path to broadband favored by Singapore and other advanced nations which serves affluent citizens who can afford high speed internet.  Instead, it calls for a new “broadband ecosystem” for Thailand, that is focused primarily on the Middle of the Pyramid (MOP), a middle-income group of Thais who make from $2 to $7 dollars per day.  By bringing 28 million of these MOP Thais into subsidized meaningful mobile broadband applicatons,  Smith predicts a “wealth effect” that could bring equity and sustainability to the Thai economy.

Responding to the framework,  Khun Supachai called was one of several members of the group that advocated a follow up study that would prepare for a meeting with Prime Minister Abhsit along with ministers of Finance, Education, ICT and other relevant parties.  “We need to figure out the roles of government, the regulator and the telecomunications operators in establishing broadband that brings optimal benefits to Thailand.”  Supachai, agreed to be host and sponsor of further research in preparation of the next meeting of the Working Group to be held in September.

“Along with painting the big picture of how broadband could serve the nation, we should focus specifically how it can serve education and human resources development,” said Montchai Noosong,  Executive Vice President of TOT.

“Central to the ‘meaningful‘ idea is a new approach to Ethics, said Chulalongkorn University Soraj Hongladarom.  “We want Thailand to develop a way to help users choose broadband applications that will lead them to happiness not addiction,” he said.

For a copy of Meaningful Broadband:  A Manifesto for Thailand, sponsored by NTC, send a request to craigwarrensmith@hotmail.com

Categories
Craig Smith

What is the Meaningful Broadband Working Group?

What is meant by “Meaningful Broadband?”

Meaningful Broadband refers to an innovative framework of broadband deployment for emerging markets.  The term refers to the need for coordinated deployment of “broadband ecosystems” – encompassing backbone, Last Mile options, devices and content – which have meaningful impacts on users.

What is the Meaningful Broadband Working Group (MBWG) in Thailand?

It is a coalition between regulators and telecommunications operators in Thailand.   It is based at Chulalongkorn University and is joint venture between Center for Ethics of Science and Technology and Digital Divide Institute.

Is this coalition common in other countries?

No.  Normally at odds with each other, operators and regulators usually do not join voluntarily into a coalition of this type.  It may be the only such national coalition in the world.

Why is this needed?

Thai government, lagging in broadband deployment, urgently needs to accelerate high speed internet in order to enhance the productivity of government services, and achieve essential public policy reforms.1 The private sector urgently needs broadband for market growth.  But these goals cannot be reached without new forms of public private cooperation and cost sharing with the private sector.

Isn’t broadband, by its very nature, beneficial to society?

No.  Broadband is not a public good.  It is a powerful force for change that can bring benefit or harm to a society (or more likely a combination of both).  Still in its infancy, broadband is not just another medium of communications but a meta-medium which will soon encompass all other media.  Increasingly, broadband does not merely convey information but increasingly it will shape behavior of citizens. Given the consequences of broadband to society, it is essential that broadband be harnessed by leaders to achieve optimal benefits to society – and to anticipate and mitigate any harmful impacts.

What negative impacts could occur if broadband is deployed for no explicit purpose?

If guided by the unsound public and private policies and any ill-conceived regulatory mechanisms, broadband could accelerate gaps between rich and poor, undermine fundamental traditions and values, accelerate urban sprawl while undermining rural economies, and cause addictive behaviors, particularly among poorly educated young persons.

What meaningful impacts can be achieved through broadband?

Meaningful broadband properly deployed and funded, could bring equity to emerging markets, scale up microcredit and boost SME growth, creating a new middle class that could bring stability to fragile economies.  Broadband could shift the locus of economies towards human resources development via lifelong learning, workforce development, and SME growth.  It serves as a trigger for education reform as well as introducing informal interactive learning via edutainment. It could cause a reverse emigration from Bangkok back to rural villages and it could promote eco-tourism (e.g. through broadband enabled English language training) and introduce “smart infrastructures” through which countries can reduce their carbon footprint.   Broadband could enhance the productivity and accountability of government bureaucracies, reducing corruption while strengthening democracies process from the bottom up.  It could enhance the “creative economy” in Thailand, tapping the openness and creativity of Thais to enhance the competitiveness of the Thai economy.  It could enhance the quality of Thai higher education and teacher training as well as cause the academic sector to move towards online curriculum, furthering lifelong learning.  Broadband is essential for extending banking services to the unbanked and in that way to promote savings and creditworthiness among low income populations. Finally, broadband could communicate the ethics advocated by His Majesty the King (Sufficiency Economy.)

Can’t markets, left to themselves, produce these benefits?

No.   Private sector investment and market-development activities are essential but not sufficient to deliver the benefits of broadband.  Market forces must be reshaped through public policy, regulation, subsidy and voluntary practice to enhance benefits of broadband as well as to minimize harm. However, none of these positive changes made possible by broadband can emerge without the coordinated and skillful development of broadband ecosystem.  Perhaps more than any other industry, telecommunications industry is itself constructed as a “compact” between public and private sectors.  This compact needs to be re-drawn in the digital age?

So, is this something that has to be pushed on the private sector?

No. Support for meaningful broadband has come more from business than government. Though mobile supply chains have been able to achieve remarkable cell phone penetration without active assistance from government, they have not had corresponding success with inducing cell phone users to upgrade to internet.   To fulfill their own ambitious goals for broadband penetration, commercial forces must get help from government.   They cannot get this help without establishing broadband as a public good, e.g. Assuring governments that broadband will have meaningful impacts.  To successfully leapfrog into broadband,   the private sector needs to establish policies that move into close alignment with government reformers.

Is that the purpose of Meaningful Broadband Working Group in Thailand?

Yes.  The aim of Meaningful Broadband Working Group (MBWG) in Thailand is to accelerate broadband penetration.  It must do so in a way that fulfills commercial goals while also enabling specific public policy reforms sought by governments.

What outcome are the expected from MBWG?

Once MBWG understand how market forces are planning to introduce broadband to Thai citizens and institutions, MBWG may well consider new public-private partnerships that bring new money to the table in the form of public-private partnerships.   The ultimate outcome of MBWG is a genre of public private partnerships that could support the meaningfulness of broadband.

Who are members of MBWG?

Members currently consist of five major telecommunications operators, represented by their top executives (CEOs or chairmen) and the independent government regulatory agency, NTC, represented by two of their commissioners.

Why is membership so restrictive?

The six members of the Working Group, by themselves, are a core group of motivated stakeholders.  They can make quick decisions that are urgently needed within the time frame that Meaningful Broadband is achievable.  Given the breadth of private sector participation in MBWG, representing a 94% market share, it is unlikely that any single commercial bias could enter MBWG’s formulations.   Furthermore, all of MBWG’s deliberations will be transparent. They will be guided by Chulalongkorn University Secretariat.

What is the near term agenda of MBWG?

The agenda will be set by the first formal meeting of this group in July 2, 2008.  It may well consider spectrum policy reforms, market-development collaborations, technological innovations, and financial innovations, as well as the design of new public-private partnerships which would introduce subsidies into mobile supply chains.   One certain agenda item is to consider ways to alter the formula for universal services obligations, which has to be rethought for the broadband era.   Another agenda topic will be to achieve the economic analysis needed to precisely define the role of broadband in the model of economic stimulus being embraced by the Ministry of Finance of the Kingdom of Thailand and how broadband becomes integrated into the planning of the National Economic and Social Development Board. To this end, MBWG members desire a substantive “sit down session” with the current Prime Minister to determine his vision for the Kingdom of Thailand.

Where and how did the Meaningful Broadband framework emerge?

After 15 years of deliberations and hundreds of conferences on the topic of “digital divide,” held all over the world,  the theme of broadband has emerged as the highest priority among governments,  think tanks, business associations,  intergovernmental agencies,  NGOs, and  leading corporations that have been involved in the discussion about how to harness digital technology for public benefit.  These leading institutions now agree that developing countries cannot compete effectively with advanced countries without an approach to broadband that is designed for their needs.

How did Indonesia set the stage for MBWG in Thailand?

The model we are using was originally formulated in Indonesia.   Republic of Indonesia’s Department of Information and Informatics (DepKominfo) asked an NGO called Investor Group Against Digital Divide (IGADD) to recommend an innovative broadband policy.   This policy, which has resulted from interactions with over three hundred leaders of Indonesia, is being presented in three stages, framework development, through a document called Meaningful Broadband Report, model construction, in which an economic model will address investor criteria for entering new public private partnerships, and implementation phase which will emphasize public/private partnerships.   IGADD is linked to the Meaningful Broadband Working Group through the Digital Divide Institute, and DigitalDivide.org, which is also the web site for MBWG.

How is Chulalongkorn University involved?

MBWG was created on February 23, 2009, in an event at the university hosted by the Chairman of the University Council Dr. Charas Suwanwela. At this event, various CEOs and regulators responded positively to the invitation to join the Working Group.   At the same time, the university’s Center for Ethics of Science and Technology, led by Prof Soraj Hongladarom, accepted the role of Secretariat for MBWG, which is directed by Prof Craig Warren Smith.

How is the Office of the Prime Minister involved?

MBWG has held meetings with the Office of the Prime Minister, and in these meetings MBWG has requested a holistic vision of how this current Kingdom of Thailand government can be served by broadband.  MBWG has formally requested a process of its interface with the Cabinet and the National Economic and Social Development Board.  MBWG wishes the government to clarify how its own goals could be served by broadband and, in this light, to clarify how the costs and risks of delivering these broadband-enabled benefits should be shared with broadband.

Who funds MBWG?

Funding for the launch activity for MBWG was provided by Nokia Siemens Network and Chulalongkorn University.  Next stage funding, for framework development, was provided by the National Telecommunications Commission.  A budget for ongoing operating support of MBWG will be presented for consideration to the members of MBWG in its July meeting.  Additional research funds are requested of NESDB and Crown Property Bureau.

What is MBWG’s international agenda?

A number of intergovernmental agencies with offices in Bangkok – World Bank, ADB, ITU, ASEAN, UNESCO, and EU – have each offered their services to MBWG to provide best practices.  ASEAN has invited MBWG to propose Meaningful Broadband as a framework for the regional cooperation and national capacity building to close Digital Divide in the nine Asian countries.

Categories
conference

มิติทางสังคมและจริยธรรมของเทคโนโลยีสารสนเทศ

การประชุมวิชาการ “มิติทางสังคมและจริยธรรมของเทคโนโลยีสารสนเทศ”
ห้อง 105 อาคารมหาจุฬาลงกรณ์ จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย

15 กรกฎาคม พ.ศ. 2552
******************************

กำหนดการ

8:45 – 9:00     พิธีเปิด
9:00 – 9:45     “พระพุทธศาสนากับเทคโนโลยีสารสนเทศ”
ศ. ดร. สมภาร พรมทา

9:45 – 10:15    พัก

10:15 – 11:00     “Blogging and Thai Society: Unleashing Potentials and Perils in a Troubling Democracy”
ผศ. ดร. พิรงรอง รณะนันทน์

11:00 – 11:45    “Impacts of the Social Network in Thai Society”
ผศ. ดร. ภัทรสินี ภัทรโกศล

11:45 – 12:30    “The Philosophy of Creative Commons and Open Source Movement”
รศ. ดร. โสรัจจ์ หงศ์ลดารมภ์

12:30 – 13:30     อาหารกลางวัน

13:30 – 14:15     “Information Technology and the Threat towards a Surveillance Society in European Countries: Some Lessons for Thailand?”
ผศ. ดร. กฤษณา กิติยาดิศัย

14:15 – 15:00     “การรู้เท่าทันสังคมใหม่ในโลกอินเทอร์เน็ต”
ผศ. ดร. ดวงกมล ชาติประเสริฐ

15:00 – 15:30     “How Data Can Survive Over the Internet World”
นายวศิน สุทธฉายา

15:30 – 16:00     พัก

16:00 – 16:30     “Web 2.0 กับการสื่อสารทางการเมือง : จากแนวคิดสู่หลักฐานเชิงประจักษ์”
นางสาวพิมลพรรณ ไชยนันท์

16:30 – 17:15     อภิปรายทั่วไป

*ไม่เก็บค่าลงทะเบียน*

การบรรยายทั้งหมดเป็นภาษาไทย

รายละเอียดจะแจ้งให้ทราบเป็นระยะๆ

Categories
conference

Social and Ethical Dimensions of Information Technology

การประชุมวิชาการ “มิติทางสังคมและจริยธรรมของเทคโนโลยีสารสนเทศ”
ห้อง 105 อาคารมหาจุฬาลงกรณ์ จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย

15 กรกฎาคม พ.ศ. 2552

******************************************************************

กำหนดการ

8:45 – 9:00 พิธีเปิด

9:00 – 9:45 “Buddhism and Information Technology”
ศ. ดร. สมภาร พรมทา

9:45 – 10:15 พัก

10:15 – 11:00 “Blogging and Thai Society: Unleashing Potentials and Perils in a Troubling Democracy”
ผศ. ดร. พิรงรอง รณะนันทน์

11:00 – 11:45 “Impacts of the Social Network in Thai Society” ผศ. ดร. ภัทรสินี ภัทรโกศล

11:45 – 12:30 “The Philosophy of Creative Commons and Open Source Movement” รศ. ดร. โสรัจจ์ หงศ์ลดารมภ์

12:30 – 13:30 อาหารกลางวัน

13:30 – 14:15 “Information Technology and the Threat towards a Surveillance Society in European Countries: Some Lessons for Thailand?”
ผศ. ดร. กฤษณา กิติยาดิศัย

14:15 – 15:00 หัวข้อจะประกาศภายหลัง
ผศ. ดร. ดวงกมล ชาติประเสริฐ

15:00 – 15:30 “How Data Can Survive Over the Internet World”
นายวศิน สุทธฉายา

15:30 – 16:00 พัก

16:00 – 16:30 หัวข้อจะประกาศภายหลัง
นางสาวพิมลพรรณ ไชยนันท์

16:30 – 17:15 อภิปรายทั่วไป

Categories
happiness

Web 2.0: Toward Happiness and Empowerment through Interactive Technology

Web 2.0: Toward Happiness and Empowerment through Interactive Technology

Soraj Hongladarom

Department of Philosophy and Center for Ethics of Science and Technology

Faculty of Arts, Chulalongkorn University

Introduction: What is Web 2.0?

Web 2.0 is a new development in the World Wide Web. According to the Wikipedia, the term ‘web 2.0’ refers to “a perceived second generation of web-based communities and hosted services — such as social-networking sites, wikis and folksonomies — which aim to facilitate collaboration and sharing between users.” Its use first became widespread in 2004, after the first O’Reilly Media Web 2.0 conference. Actually, ‘web 2.0’ does not refer to any advancement in technological details, but it shows more how the internet and the technologies of the World Wide Web is used so as to reflect social interaction and the ability for users to share information which was not actually feasible with the way the Web was used before. According to Tim O’Reilly, “Web 2.0 is the business revolution in the computer industry caused by the move to the internet as platform, and an attempt to understand the rules for success on that new platform” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_2).

Many websites that we are familiar with today employ the web 2.0 concepts. A clear example is www.youtube.com, which could well be regarded as the very embodiment of the idea. Youtube does not contain any information on its own. The millions of video clips on its website do not originate from the people who designed the site and put URL on the internet, but from the millions of users worldwide who share the clip with one another. We might look at youtube.com as a huge free market where people come in from all corners to share their information. In the previous incarnation of the Web, what we might conveniently call ‘web 1.0,’ the idea is that information is created and disseminated to the users by the content providers and the webmasters, and the users are in most cases little more than passive consumers who can only choose which chunk of information they would like to get and which one not, but they do not have the power to share their own information with the outside world without themselves becoming webmasters. Web 1.0 creates a wall between the webmasters and the users. Webmasters create, maintain and disseminate information, and the public consume it. With the web 2.0 concept, on the other hand, the line between webmasters and the users has become significantly blurred. The function of the webmasters in youtube.com function, not as ones to choose which video clips should be shown on the first page, which ones on the second and other inner pages, and so on, but the role of the webmasters has almost become invisible, making sure that things run smoothly and that the overall look of the website is pleasing and functional, etc. In short, the role of the webmasters changed from that of ‘masters’ to being more like ‘servants’ who stay out of the limelight and are always there and ready to help.

In this brief paper, I would like to discuss how the web 2.0 concept could be conducive to happiness. As happiness is notoriously a difficult concept to pin down exactly, what I am focusing is rather empowerment of the local communities. As a technology that supports social networking and sharing of all kinds of information, web 2.0 will be instrumental in promoting happiness that is a result of such social empowerment. However, before that vision can be reality, many obstacles need to be overcome. These obstacles will be identified in the course of this paper and I will provide some attempt at showing how they can be eliminated.

Open Source, Open Society and Web 2.0

The web 2.0 concept aligns itself perfectly with that of open source. In software terms, ‘open source’ means that the source code of a particular program is publicly accessible and is intentionally released to the public so that anyone who has the expertise can have a look in order to study it and make improvements. The only requirement for open source is that once one revises and improves on a code, one is bound to publish one’s own revisions and announce this to the public. This is to ensure that any revisions and improvements will be fed back to the system so the benefits still belong to the public. The open source idea is diametrically opposed to the normal practice of most software businesses, which jealously guard their source codes as trade secrets. This ‘proprietary system’ or ‘closed source’ implies that the source code, the very heart of software, belongs to the company as private property. Nobody except for authorized personnel within the company who owns it has the right to open up a piece of software and to do anything with it. Once a user has bought a piece of proprietary software, he or she in effect has agreed to be bound by its terms of use, which in most cases involve the agreement not to tinker with the source code, if they do have the ability to crack open the software get to the inside.

Another well known website illustrates this viewpoint very well. Wikipedia.org is a very widely used online encyclopedia in the world today, and its startling feature has always been that anybody has the right to share their knowledge and expertise with the world by uploading their own contribution to it, thus adding what they know to the global community, adding a share of knowledge for the benefit of everyone. The basic idea of the open society is that every individual is equal, and that idea is also reflected in the wikipedia conception. Knowledge is shared among everybody in the world, and definitely it is not the prerogative of some privileged few.

The open source system is much aligned with open society. According to Karl Popper, an open society is one where there is a system of tolerance, accountability and most of all transparency in information management. A government is open when anybody can monitor its functioning and when it can provide justifications and reasons for its action. This is opposed to governments in closed, totalitarian societies where governments are not accountable to the people, nor are they any transparent in its dealings. In this sense, there are a lot of affinities between open source software system and open society. In the open source concept, there is a system of trust and willingness to share the good with everybody in the community. The authority functions more as one who facilitate things so that the good is brought about in the most efficient manner possible so as to ensure that everybody does have a chance to enjoy the good, rather than hoarding the good to a privileged few as is very often the case in closed societies.

What is crucial here is that open source critically depends on open society. This is a point that seems to be much overlooked by software developers. But in a society where there is no freedom to innovate and no freedom to share information without any restrictions, it is very difficult to image how open source software system can even get started. On the other hand, promoting open access and openly sharing systems such as web 2.0 websites could well lead to more open societies, because, as history has shown many times, maintaining a healthy, democratic society requires that information be fully accessible and fully shared. This is precisely the objective of web 2.0

Web 2.0 and Happiness

So we have now come to the central part of the paper. I would like to show that there is a link between web 2.0 and happiness. Let us note, however, that the term ‘happiness’ here is used here not in the usual psychological or economic sense of ‘subjective well being,’ but in a more ancient and more spiritual sense of cosmic order and harmony. Rationale behind this is rather complex, and at least requires a full paper of its own. However, the idea, basically, is that by equating happiness with subjective well being, the moral dimension and the spiritual side of the matter is left out. One can be ‘happy’ when one is only satisfied with the material consumption. But as all religious traditions point out, this is not adequate at all, and there is obviously more to happiness than mere consumption. What web 2.0 can offer in promoting happiness is that, by allowing people to network together and by allowing them to express themselves to their communities, the technology allows for a level of happiness that has hitherto been rather difficult to achieve. Happiness can be achieved here only it is understood as something that arises when one fulfils one’s goal and one’s sense of ‘belonging’ to something that is greater than oneself, something more akin to Aristotle’s ‘good life’ (eudaimonia) rather than mere consumption of material goods. At any rate it is hard to see how material consumption would have anything to do with social networking, so if happiness is equated with the former, then one would indeed by hard pressed to see how web 2.0 can lead to happiness at all.

To put things in more concrete terms, web 2.0 creates a level of happiness by ensuring that information is shared in an open and transparent manner. As happiness is better understood as a harmonious working relationship between the inside (individual preferences, etc.) and the outside (social and physical order of things), web 2.0 does promote it through becoming a lynchpin of open society. Hence there are strong logical connections between open source software (such as web 2.0), open society and happiness.

Web 2.0 in Thailand

There are a number of websites in Thailand employing the web 2.0 concepts. The most successful one seems to be www.pantip.com. This very popular website functions as a forum where members come in and engage with their fellow members of every imaginable topic, ranging from politics (a very heated section) to art and entertainment, to religion (another heated place), and pet care and so on.

Opening page of http://www.pantip.com/

Another interesting website is http://gotoknow.org/, a site that collects a large number of ‘weblogs’ or ‘blogs’ contributed by the members. Both pantip.com and gotoknow.org are ranked among the most popular websites in Thailand:

http://gotoknow.org/

What these two websites share in common is that, firstly they are operated mostly by their members. All the content is provided by the members, and the so-called ‘webmasters’ are in fact facilitators who make things running but impose no heavy hands on the directions where the content is heading. However, there may be some restrictions, especially in the case of pantip.com, as when the exchanges (mostly about politics) tend to get out of hand and when the directions of the discussions might risk offending someone or breaking the law. Otherwise the idea is that any content whatsoever is fair game.

These two websites clearly show that Thailand appears to be heading in the right direction as far as the use of web 2.0 concepts is concerned, but now the problem is how many people in Thailand are actually using it. Considering the statistics prepared by the National Electronics and Computer Engineering Center (NECTEC) showing that the total number of internet users in Thailand hover around 12 percent in the year 2004,1 this is not quite satisfactory. It is indeed true that happiness does not necessarily depend on how many people are getting connected, but without any level of appreciable internet access, it is hard to imagine how happiness is going to be achieved, at least when we consider the kind of happiness that has been the subject of our discussion so far in this paper.

Conclusion

So to conclude. The major question that will concern policy makers in the country for a foreseeable future is: How could Thailand foster the design principles for web 2.0 technologies that actually promote happiness and human development? This question is important because design is indeed crucial if any policy attempt to broaden the people’s participation in the internet world is to bear fruit. I think a first priority for the design should be that the users should be kept in mind from the beginning. Technologies are meant to answer the people’s wants and needs, and anti-technology rhetoric notwithstanding, we in the twentieth century simply cannot leave without it. And I am firmly convinced that the path toward happiness would not be feasible without some kind of ingenious technological design that is accessible to everybody and that allows for the full flowering of everyone’s potential. Web 2.0 seems to be doing its job in this regard, as we have seen. However, many obstacles still remain, as in Thailand only less than fifteen percept of the population are connected to the Internet. And even if we carefully consider the prime examples of Thai web 2.0

Another thing that deserves no less serious attention is the potential clash between local values and the global web 2.0 websites such as youtube. The recent incident between the Thai government and the website concerning the portrayal of the Thai king illustrated that the clash could get downright serious, resulting in the whole youtube.com website being shut down and inaccessible throughout the country for a consideration period of time. This clash in value needs to be fully addressed and deliberated. What global websites such as youtube need to consider is that they cannot take their own system of values for granted. However, this is a very delicate and complicated matter. We have to be well aware of the possibility that local values might trump over global ones, resulting in parochialism and the syndrome that occurs when one country is always arguing against ‘interference’ by outsides (which in many cases are only justifications of brutality inside the country). On the other hand, we also need to be careful that the so-called global system does not fully dominate everything and every local corners, which could result in the same thing.

1 Thailand ICT Indicators 2005: Thailand in the Information Age (Pathumthani: NECTEC, 2005), p. 27.