---
tags: vTaiwan小松
---
# 1122小松
參與連結 / Links：https://meet.jit.si/vTaiwan
參與者簽到 / Participants：peter, eli, sky, weijen, pexing, 宛真, shu,
本週議題 / Issues：
上次分享成果
司改會合作
以色列團隊討論

## 自我介紹 self introduction
- Peter: legal background
- Eli: sociology
- Sky: CS undergrad
- Shu: long-term contributor
- Amir Dotan: CS background
- counter-polarization
- witnessing that the polarization has created lots of problems in Israel
- start to study polis and vTaiwan
- want to gain insight by meeting people in Israel
-
- Shachar Peretz: CS background, social entrepreneur
- Weijen: g0v contributor, indepedent researcher on institution design, focusing on open-source design
- interested in TttC
- Pexing: g0v contributor, indepedent researcher on institution design, focusing on open-source design
- interested in TttC
- Tzu sheng Kuo: PHD on CS in CMU.

## 以色列團隊討論
- Q: How does the process work
- Issue
- Important part: leading the direction of the discussion, agenda setting.
- Choosing the stakeholder
- Important part: to make the discussion really responding to the critical stakeholders.
- Citizen Assembly.
- Q: Why design it like that
- Open
- Diversity
- Responsive to the stakeholder
- Even when the tool is open to the entire public, it might still be helpful to think about those who do not have access to the tools or the capacity to engage in discussion. [name=tzu sheng]
-

- Q: Why always assume there is a particular stakeholder
- Q: Comment and discourse importance

- Issues: Israeli government created the Constitutional problem recently
- Gov and the Supreme Court
- The critical issue: no formal Constitution in Isreal
-

- maybe start from your main objective, e.g democracy legitimacy, quality of decision?
- Create a better environment of discussion [name=amir]
- digital tools along won't solve political polarization, and if your goal is to sway people from polarized discussion whether its on social media or on mass media, vTaiwan don't really ever did that before, we focus on specific issues.
- Maybe it is possible to start from little issue, to build the consensus-based culture.
- Right now, people won't protest on the street everyday, but more and more paricipatory atmosphere is created. So maybe creating a consensus culture is good.
- > Amir if you can type down your answer in the chatroom then I can copy that to this ntote. Or you can do it yourself if you can. [name=peter]

- Technology to leverage the power of the public to start some way besides the traditional social movement.
- Representative problem: people can not have effective way to supervise the goverment official.
- Some other tools might have the effect to create a new form of discussion. Threads is a new trend for soical media. Besides physical

- Q from Taiwan: Is there any civic-tech community or other community focusing on soical issue in Israel?
- It is critical to have this community to make social movement and campaign work.
- Some hubs have potential to help.

- Do people really want to sit down and have discussion?
- It is the foundamental problem [name=josh]
- polis is an important tool to make the consensus, and the point of view reflection and the process itself have the value.

- The complex political situation and context is the very problem to the people. How to make people compromise when using the platform?
- Create the parallel parliment
- Making parallel decision / point proven
- find allies in moderate to fight hardliners

- Some useful articles shared [name=tzu sheng]
- [Join.Love: A Sociotechnical Genealogy of the
Legalization of Same-Sex Marriage](https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/98836128/3313831-libre.pdf?1676759530=&response-content-disposition=inline%3B+filename%3DJoin_Love_A_Sociotechnical_Genealogy_of.pdf&Expires=1700657040&Signature=Pv3xRQ~XHu53DyYEGZZzIBBCC9byQPHzNkoPNN0NjiLp2CZsbgMZITIqmyJiMA2RugQ~sTmf8AFINvsrL2jRpzPaW7iVRQz-3pLnkFYfu1Cm304vV419ZDoB99ccNsxnWQr9ZxcbepRLgf6wEvPoz4EffgIEsgzKidPxSIv2qsidg4J8pxr1av8JYGbEki4zMqR8-51nCfUzH-7~HyDnjdCE0y6H8CCEtUPvesm0-8hYU~02fMyg09OL0UMH5N~V67b3QyTlPKpOlmhWHpfLAGIvmBoRUOxCZ6pNZnPgI3wwh23vUausWjaT3AXpNYT5iEYAZ1qikxH7SFmCdNfEcA__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAJLOHF5GGSLRBV4ZA)
- [Be Water: Technologies in the Leaderless Anti-ELAB
Movement in Hong Kong](https://kowym.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Paper505w.pdf)

## 行政資訊
目前已經把 ly 代墊的伺服器費用匯款給ly，目前剩下主持人的部分。

## 上次分享結果
- GCTF 數位研習營分享圓滿結束
- 接下來想要試著問問看 jesse 博士聯繫，看看是否能夠取得合作。
-

## TttC

- TttC 似乎有點違反 public input [name=tzu sheng]
- 因為你就是train 一個 model 來當作代理人，跟 deliberation 的概念不符。
- 目前的能力是否有達到那個標準？
- 問題：是否會成為 excuse 來逸脫相關的 delibration obligation?
- 問題：是否符合程序正義？

- LLM 能不能 resolve representation 的問題
- 目前所有的LLM 都會有主流的 bias 的問題
- 會有主流聲音的意見

- 結論：可以測試看看這個工具，以既有流程來測試，來指出他們的問題。

## 與司改會討論

- 司法院 12/11 要提出所屬機關生成式人工智慧利用指引公聽會
- 背景：司法院9月時提出要使用人工智慧撰寫判決，應用在人頭帳戶與毒品。
- [司法院新聞稿](https://www.judicial.gov.tw/tw/cp-1887-929494-8a9fb-1.html)
- 後來民間團體出新聞稿，擋下來
- 民間團體主要訴求：先有相關指引。

- 司改會有合作的誘因
- 可以協助收集意見，讓司改會可以討論
- vTaiwan 目前沒有跟公聽會對幹的經驗？

- 美國有許多的組織需要做相關的人工智慧的指引
- 如何讓組織內的大家一起決定人工智慧的指引機制？
- 生成式人工智慧要 interact 比較簡單
- 可以擴展到其他的法規上

- 個資政策寫得不夠清楚的話，確實會產生問題 [name=宛真]
- meta

- 假釋用AI科技是否是不正當的？人的判斷就一定贏過人工智慧嗎？ [name=宛真]
- 可能可以以自駕車加以類比，需要規範 [name=tzu sheng]
- 指引很多時候是一點幫助也沒有，因為這些範圍與邊界也都有相關的問題。[name=宛真]
- 人工智慧相關的指引可能會生出一些case，

- 要確認民間團體的態度 [name=eli]
- 同意

## 國科會討論

- 阿甘那邊的寄信還沒寄信
- 跟國科會約一個開會，討論合作的可能性
- 國科會＋vTaiwan，借助國科會的資源來辦相關的審議與工作坊。
- 邀請他們上來小聚來看看
- 在社會學年會與國科會DSET朋友稍微交流，邀請他們有什麼想提的都可以直接來參加
- 有分兩個組，一組是資安與人工智慧
- 目前的范菁文博士跟張仁瑋是資安