Welcome to the World Economic Forum Sustainable Development Impact Summit. My name is Rebecca Blumestine. I'm a deputy managing editor at The New York Times and I'm talking to you from our news room today here in Manhattan. This is an important session that brings together top leaders from around the world from both the public, private and civil society sectors to discuss an important topic, how we break silos to achieve food and climate security. We have a lot of topics to cover but I'm very hopeful and confident that we're going to have a most productive discussion. Food has the potential to have an enormous impact on our climate goals. Food actually generates an incredibly high percentage of our global greenhouse gas emissions more than a quarter and the food and climate communities have shared a historic opportunity to come together to strengthen and unite their shared goals by breaking down silos that have traditionally existed between these two communities. The global milestones of the first ever UN Food Systems Summit later today and the COP26 climate conference later this year will bring together international experts, countries and global actors to discuss potential solutions. And today I'd like to introduce my most prominent panel. They're really the top leaders who are driving change. The first is Dr. Chu Dongyu, the Director General of the Food and Agriculture Association. Also joining us is David Beasley, Executive Director of the World Food Program which won the Nobel Peace Prize just in 2020. Ramon Legorta is Chief Executive Officer of PepsiCo and Helena Lorenz is Director General of Consumers International. Dr. Chu, I'd like to start with you. You mentioned today that it's a very important day in China where you actually were born to a rice farming family and have made food your life. Could you talk about why today is just so special both in China and here in New York? Yeah, and today is a very special day because we are going to have first ever World Food System Summit by UN Secretary General and secondly by Lunar Calendar of China. It's a day of the middle of the autumn. So and we just celebrated the middle autumn August festival yesterday. So and also now we are celebrating the first China Farmers Festival since 2018. So as you know, you mentioned I'm a star of the farmers and rice growers. So food is the basic human rights without food, without a human being, without food, without civilization, we are going to carry on. So that's it's a real essential food, no matter how to produce food, how to produce food more efficient, more effective, more resilient, and more sustainable for our future generations to come. It's another topic and definitely we need a lot of efforts as they say, but mention that they bring silos first and we do have a lot of silos across different communities. And we are from the Food and Culture Organization of the United Nations. It was first UN professional entities and running more than 76 years already. So we have a different mandate, different mission during the past 75, 76 years, but the one didn't change, food is for all. And food production, food consumption, always the hard topic globally. Thank you. And David, could we go to you next? How can we change food from from being something that is hurting our and detracting from our climate goals to something that's actually making an impact? Oh, Rebecca, that's a great question, because one of the things when I arrived at the the UN, you've got all these silos and we have really been pushing down breakdown silos, give us more, give us more flexibility. And in fact, when I'm going to speak into the United States and send it to the U.S. House, the U.S. or the Wundersaw in Germany or whatever parliament I may be speaking to, because the systems were designed based in the 50s and the 60s, where it was much different back then. But now you've got protracted conflict, you've got climate change, you've got so many differentials, we need to be flexible ourselves. Because when you're out in the field, a beneficiary, they don't care whether it's a humanitarian dollar or a development dollar. And so we're telling our donors, give us that flexibility. In fact, yesterday, I was speaking with a handful of senators that here in Washington, D.C. And I said, if like with a humanitarian dollar, you want me to achieve ABC with it. But I can also do DEF because the beneficiary not just wants food. They want to rehabilitate their land. They want to make their life more resilient to what they're facing on a daily basis because climate is truly impacting along with conflict, like in areas like the Sahel. And so, Rebecca, working, for example, with FAO and others, let me just give you an example of that flexibility has given us because when you get in the Sahel where the Sahara is moving down a kilometer per year and then the herders are moving down into the farmers in conflict and then you get al-Qaeda or ISIS wants to exploit that and create destabilization, which results in migration into Europe and infiltration by the extremist groups. And we can come in there and rehabilitate the land with old techniques, but they work and give an example with that flexibility. And if we get greater flexibility, it's even better. So we rehabilitated 3.5 million acres of land that otherwise was not arable, was not usable. Well, guess what? Those families living there no longer need our support in many of those places because they're capturing the water. We do water ponds. We have, like, 58,000 water ponds and reservoirs in the last few years, 79,000, 69,000 kilometers of feeder roads. So that smallholder farmers that Chu and I talk about all the time can get their product to the market. And I had a lady and this was in Niger. And it was on the hillside.  It's just like, how do you survive? And so we were doing these half moons, working with FAO and others, rehabilitating the land and she stood there with pride and said, Mr. Beesley, we don't want outside help, but we want you to help us get our feet back on the ground. And so the projects that we were doing were capturing enough water to rehabilitate because of the flexibility of the funding that we otherwise would not have had. She said, I'm not now, I'm not just feeding my family, but I'm now feeding my village and I'm going to buy five more acres of land. I'm going to start selling to the marketplace. Now, when we have that flexibility and then to come on top of it with like school meals programs, Rebecca, let me tell you what happens. Migration drops off the chart. Team pregnancy and marriage rates of 12 and 13 years was dropped off the chart. Recruitment by ISIS and Al Qaeda, who used food as a weapon of war and recruitment drops off the chart. So just do the mathematics of all those. It's a lot cheaper to do it this way, give us the flexibility and then give us enough money to scale it up. So we're not just doing one little area. And this is one of the things I've really been hard on the donors about in the last year, Germany will do a little bit over here and the United States do a little bit over here and the UK will do a little bit over there in the EU. I said, look, we need to come together and be more scalable, more comprehensive so that we can truly in hunger in many of these places around the world. And when you look over the next few years, for example, to 2050, when we're looking at 1.2 billion people being displaced because of climate and a population of 10 billion people, we got to get all right together right now and drive these changes. And so I'm happy that donors are starting to be more fluid, more flexible. We still got to keep pushing and achieving even more.  Thank you. Great. Thank you. And Ramon, this is talking about this regenerative agriculture is a perfect segue to you. Pepsi is one of the world's largest food producers, I believe you have a footprint of more than seven million acres. Can you can you describe why you have made sustainability one of your key goals and why that makes business sense? Yeah, hi, Rebecca. Yeah, listen, we look at this from from two dimensions. One is a is a big business case for us. And I talked to a lot of peers, large food companies around the world. You know, if we want to have successful companies 20 years from now, clearly, we need to change the way we do things and how we do them. And I'm probably more about how we do them. If you think about Pepsi, you said we're, you know, we're sourcing 27 crops from 60 countries, think from tomatoes to peppers to oats to potatoes to oranges. I mean, like really a variety of corn and wheat and everything. You know, for us to, you know, to be successful, 33 percent of our gas emissions are from agriculture. So if we want to be a sustainable company, contributing to net zero, and we made that commitment and net zero by 2040, we have to change the way we do agriculture is critical. And it's important. We see this not only from the climate change perspective, but also livelihoods and some other impacts we can have in the sustainability of the food system. We think we have a unique role in this large ecosystem that Dr. Chiu and David were referring to is that we we connect farmers with consumers. And I think that's a unique capability we have and a unique responsibility that comes from that. So I think our our effort has to people around farmers, helping farmers move to new practices that will have long term a very positive impact in their livelihoods and also in the climate. And that's one dimension. But we see ourselves with our brands. We have twenty three one billion over one billion dollar brands, so large brands that are global in scale. We can educate consumers in in something that consumers don't know, which is understanding their consumer choices. The brands or the products they choose have an impact on the planet. And that is not clear in consumers mind. So it is a big responsibility. I'm sure Helena will talk more about that. But large brands can educate consumers, not only offering different products, but the way we advertise, how we talk to consumers, how we educate them. So we see this as a clearly a long term sustainability of our company, but also a responsibility at both ends of the food chain. Now with farmers and with consumers. And then the other dimension that I see more and more with all our people, we're all parents, we all have, you know, next generations. And, you know, I see this in our associate. We have three hundred thousand associates around the world. They are very passionate about this. And for us to attract the best talent for us to be a company that is, you know, highly engaged for our employees, we need to play in these spaces. And, you know, we all have sons and we will have hopefully grand sons. And we need to build something that is sustainable for them. And that's more of a personal responsibility, but it obviously flows into the business responsibility we have. And Helena, that gets us right to the role of consumers. Do you see evidence that consumers are are are caring more about climate and actually making purchasing decisions and changing the way they eat because of climate? Yeah, absolutely. Hi. Hi, Rebecca and hello to everyone from Geneva, Switzerland. So, yes, the issue is it's not as easy as it should be yet, right? So there are barriers in the way that stop consumers being, you know, being able to make those choices and act on their intent. You know, we see it. There are so many studies about the rising awareness of the impact of climate people's desire to change and even lobby on that topic. You know, point to the one of the recent ones was the Yale Climate Communication Centre, which was very good. I am inspired by our set of next generation consumer advocates around the world. And I think it's really interesting for us to think about, you know, something I heard from Peru, Elizabeth, who says it's not just safety and quality, health and sustainability are wrapped up in that. Patrick in Australia will say, we want to have the fairness imperative embedded in our marketplace, you know, it's that sense is really now deeply rooted in what we want the marketplace to be. The things that then make it difficult in the system. Well, we all know them. And the great thing is there are solutions. There are solutions that can also help us build a really dynamic, fair, safe, sustainable marketplace and economy for us to be in, for everyone. So, you know, for us, the summit was a great opportunity to explore some of those things. Share, for example, with with farmers, you know, as people coming to a people's summit, how do we drive and ask leaders in government for coherent food policy rather than trade and health and environment policy that perhaps undermine each other to talk with business about how do we really drive forward on marketing the extent to which children are exposed to unhealthy marketing, for example. You know, and then to explore, but how do we innovate together? So what are the data and digital models that actually respect people's rights in an online world, but start to address the inefficiencies in the system and start to create totally new business models, which we we looked at. And, you know, there are some great ones, not just in the rich world, but, you know, around the world, which I'd love to share a bit more about. Great, great. And that's a perfect segue to my next question. We have some of the world's top thinkers about food on the on the call. And I'm just wondering what excites you most? What is the most innovative idea or program that you think if there's something we could prioritize? And, David, I loved how you spoke about, you know, the on the ground in Africa, but but what what is the technology, the practice, the back to basics? Is it is it is a plant based meat? What are you most excited about that you think will will have the biggest impact on on reducing these greenhouse gas emissions from food? I might take the flu. And, Robert, thank you. Thank you for your good question. I think you see, if you look at the climate crisis, it's come from a spirit, scope, influence, impact from all sectors, not only a culture of food and also able industry, you look at all these sectors. And then we have to use a holistic design to attack those questions and the challenges. And there is a comment that David recently had a lot of discussion with two years. We change the effort, restructuring effort to more agile, modular management, because, you know, if you don't check, if you don't structure how to feed the new papers, new challenges. Second, I think you need to take the empowerment of a woman use with the innovative way, innovation on the policy, innovation on technology and innovation on the business model. Now we have so many tools, so I'm quite optimistic. Probably is there, but we are intelligent animal. And so we have a more solution than problem. If you are used to you are intelligent properly and holistically and solidarily. And that's, I think, and now come the global 194 members. All the ministers endorsed new strategy from work for next 10 years to transform a system more efficient, more inclusive, more resilient and more sustainable for better production, better nutrition, better environment and the life for even no one behind. And then we come to bad technology. Because we work with the bad coach and the Ramon is here and the Pepsi and other, no matter being a small companies, they are the key players to link with academic people to the farmers to change the way of their health producer, how consumer and how feed. I think that now the private sector like NGO international consumers here, Herana, they have to feed with a new message, scientific message, how to consume more sustainably. So I think that's a big, you know, team work. And that's not only breaking the silos with the organization first. And then we have to create the more coherent and the cooperation with all the key players from the farmers, consumers, from the NGO to the government. But the government should play the leading, the sensible first. That's no doubt because you are leading to game change. And last but not least, scientists should tell the truth. What are we are going to do for the future generations? Because we have more people, 10 billion people by 2050. We need more food. We need high quality food with more diversity food. That's our life to be improved. And so for that, we are prepared to work with all the key partners from the international system agency like WFB for emergencies and others for research for industrialization, for education. And also for private sector and the NGO and the Institute, Academy Institute through the hand-in-hand initiative. So I launched the hand-in-hand initiative as a platform and through also e-commerce, digital FIO. And that's a way to connect all the small holders to the bigger market, no matter you are in New York or in Beijing or in Europe. So let's work together.  Without global value mindset, we need a global value mindset and then work together. And we have a chance to change the reverse. That's kind of a deterrent situation. So you look at all the phenomena during past years. So I don't want to repeat. Solution, be a practical solution, be optimistic and a science-based and innovative way. That's it. So bringing these worlds and silos of food and climate together. David, I'd like to go to you. We're hearing about just how much more demand there's going to be for food because of the pandemic, increased population. It is the increased production of food that has led to some of these increases in greenhouse gases. What are you most excited about to make a dent to make sure that this doesn't get even worse? Well, there's so many different things that we're working on. And I know Young Chu talks about several of those things as well as we're out in the field with better seeds, better fertilizers, better practices, capturing water more strategically, using less water. And that gets into the seeds and the fertilizers. There's so many different issues. But Rebecca, also what we're doing is using artificial intelligence, satellite imagery, the use of the smart phone with farmers now, when to plant, what to plant, all the different things, open up access to markets. But one of the biggest things that we're also concerned about is food waste. You know, in the developed nations, it's mostly at the dinner table. When we look at the fact globally, when you talk about one third of all the food in the world out of 4.2 billion metric tons of food that is produced every year, one third of that is wasted. So think about the greenhouse impact of all that it took to produce that food and it was absolutely wasted. In the developed nations, that's one third. In the developing nations, it's about one third. So do the math. Now, that's about two billion dollars. That'll feed about two billion people. It's about a trillion dollars worth of food. And this is where the private sector really comes very important to help us out in the fields, working with a smallholder farmers that lose their one third, primarily from the farm to the fort or from the farm to the marketplace. And so how can we have better practices? How can we be more strategic? And one of the things, Rebecca, I have seen is that, you know, for years, the UN didn't integrate the private sector, in my opinion, more strategically, and I think we both paid a price for that. But there's a renewed spirit in the UN that we can't end hunger. We can't address global climate change without the private sector being front and center. So how do we move that ball along? And I've also been, you know, I know Ramon probably heard me talk about this before, but the big companies have really got to engage more strategically. And when I think of social responsibility, I don't think of just giving me more money. That's fine. That's nice. But that's not go in poverty and hunger with the issues that we're facing over the next 50 to 100 years. I need for them to be more strategic on the ground with us, partnering with us. How do we empower them? How do we inspire them? How do they work with us more strategically? But they've also got to talk to their shareholders and say, you know, we want to help these countries and we want to do it in such a way that it's resilient, sustainable, so therefore we need to make a little bit less money over a longer period of time. They will create more stability and it will be more comfortable. But it's a longer game than we've seen in the past. And these are the type of things we've got to rethink all come together because I've not met a beneficiary yet. And believe you me, Rebecca, we feed 120 million people and I haven't met one yet that really wanted outside help and that really wanted to leave. They love their homeland. But when they don't have peace and stability, they can't grow their own food because of climate change, a war and conflict.   When you see that 200 years ago, 95 percent of the people, 94 percent of the people on Earth were in extreme poverty and now it's less than 10. But now we're going backwards because of manmade conflict and climate change. We've made so much progress. Let's get back on the game. And if we don't try, oh, my gosh, it'd be catastrophic. Anyway, back to you, Rebecca. Rubon, that's a great opening for for you and the role of private business. Are what are you most excited about? And do you agree with David's assessment? It might be a little bit less profit over a longer period of time. A few things that that I think are the last 18 months we've been working together on this food summit. And I think there's a few really systemic changes. One is what David and Dr. Chu were saying, the realization that this is a private public collaboration and that the addition of the two really makes a difference. So I think that that is a massive move forward. The second one, and David was saying, I think it's true. Board of directors, shareholders are more aware of this and they see the need for companies to be sustainable long term. And that might require a different allocation of resources over time and rethinking some of the business models. I think that's fair. It has been elevated to, you know, the boardrooms and these are a good share of the conversations that are happening in companies. So I'm not so sure that they will accept that we make less money, but clearly they're accepting that, you know, we can think differently about how we make money and there might be some investments required and different ways of doing things. So that's all very positive. That's a very high level at the very low level. The problem that we've identified and everybody would agree is the last mile, the last mile in terms of how do we get all this technology, all this know-how, all these solutions to the farmer in their, you know, in their specific reality and the ecosystem that they leave, they produce, they make money. And that is where I think we've made some good progress. We need to make more, like I give me two examples. One is the, you know, we created this innovation, innovation hubs through the World Economic Forum. And that's a great tool because it puts multiple stakeholders, technology companies, you know, food companies, the private sector, public sector, everybody in a particular country. We already have seven or eight of those innovation hubs. And we understand what are the problems the farmers are trying to solve. And we enable them with solutions that we with Dr. two, they are all available, but they are not there for that particular problem. So that's one, I think, very positive development in the last 12 months. And we'll take them to many more countries. The second is a tool we use and we see it works very well at demonstration farms. You know, one of the things we do is at PepsiCo, we have 400 demonstration farms around the world. You know, we do it very local, very micro, trying to put all the best practices in one farmer. And that farmer has influence over the community. Whatever we say is irrelevant. Whatever the other farmer says is very relevant. And what we're trying to do has a lot of cultural implications because we're asking farmers to change their practices. Sometimes the innovators, the first adopters are new technologies in a farm, in a local community. There are not well received by the other farmers. They see like, why is this guy using cover crops? So why is this guy not using tillage?  So this is reality. We need to help them demonstrate that there is a better way to have sustainable soil health. And that soil health will drive value for their families. So those are small instruments that look like very tactical. But when you put it in the landscape, in a particular area, it really drives knowledge, it drives adoption, it drives output. So these are things that excite me along with what I said earlier about private public, the board of directors and the owners of companies thinking very differently. I think we're in a moment of really an ecosystem transformation that is required to drive the set of multiple, multiple decisions that will be required to make this a reality. So pretty encouraged by all that. And I think we just need to be consistent, courageous and take this to the next level together. Polina, what are you most excited about in terms of innovation? Is there something that's going to actually lead to real change in behaviors? Yeah, so through the process, I think I've really enjoyed seeing examples of and as I think it was Professor Chu mentioned, you know, the innovation and the change has come from all sorts of different places. So, you know, let's take in consumer awareness, France and other countries taking leadership on how do we make sure that labeling is clear for consumers? You know, that may seem obvious, but it takes bravery and taking a specific step or Ethiopia and the way in which they're thinking about innovation and creating a sort of a hub to enable data management and for innovators to work together. I think in terms of business models, it's been great. You know, harking back to David's comments about food loss. How do we think about different ways in which we eliminate food waste in the system? In Chile, an example we saw was Ray de Elementos, which now reaches, I think, in 2020. Yeah, 2020, they reached 260,000 consumers, vulnerable consumers with food that would otherwise have gone to waste. And that's because we can think about different ways of using data and digital pathways. You know, that really is there are companies like Pinduoduo in China that now reach 800 million consumers per month and connect consumers and farmers directly. But frankly, I think, you know, and let's face it, it's been great and inspiring to see people's willingness to listen and explore what inclusive actually could mean. I think the most exciting things are, of course, yet to come. How do you factor in true cost accounting into all of this? The true cost of our system. How do we take into account data rights and transparency? How do we build a system where you can really think about, look at and check and monitor that we are meeting these goals? And then that point about, you know, innovation should never be for the groups without those groups. You know, how are we truly thinking about being inclusive? How do we make sure that sustainability is not just for people who can afford it as a time when we're really in economic distress? So the sort of those ideas and those groups and those coalitions of building it's seeing the progress and tracking that year by year, week by week and keeping in lockstep. So we have these this pivotal meeting today and also COP 26 coming up under their surface. There seems to be a bit of attention between the role of and responsibility of developed countries versus developing countries. How do you all look at this in terms of whose responsibility is this? Should we be hope leaving these forums with private businesses, making specific commitments and and governments as well? And how do we avoid a sense that that is the developing world that really should should bear the brunt of the changes here? David, I see you nodding your head. Yeah, you know, Rebecca, this is one of the biggest arguments out there that I run into. And I run it from different perspectives politically from country to country. That'll say, why should I send my money down to Niger or Chad or Ethiopia when we have road problems, school issues, health care funding issues in Germany or the United States? And I say, well, let me tell you why. Number one, you ought to do it out of the goodness of your heart. But if that's not sufficient, let me give you even another reason. That is, you're going to pay for one way or the other. And it's in your national security interest to create stability and sustainability and resilience in the country. Because we've seen firsthand, for example, take Syria, where the world, the international community and particularly the European community collected to address the problems in Syria in advance. We feed support of Syrian in Syria for about 50 cents. That's actually higher than the normal cost, but it's a war zone. It costs more money to move food in a war zone. That same Syrian ends up in Berlin or Brussels. It's not 50 cents a day. It's 50 to 100 euros per day for the humanitarian support package. And guess what? When you feed 120 million people, we survey people all the time. And in Syria, for example, we found that people did not want to leave, but they didn't have food, didn't have security.  And we also found that they would move two, three, four times and more. I talked to a woman in a refugee camp in Jordan, by the way, who said we moved nine times before we finally left our homeland. So it's a lot more expensive. I was down in Guatemala just a matter of weeks ago. Talking with Guatemala's, the Washington Post had just done an article. Somebody showed it to me while I was in the middle of the field and said, the United States was spending $60 million for shelters along the U.S. border. And it costs, Rebecca, of $3,750 per person per week in the field that I was standing in Guatemala with a resilience program helping the smallholder farmer and their family. It costs us between one and two dollars per person per week. Well, what do you think is a better investment? And I think when taxpayers hear this perspective, you're going to pay for it one way or the other, more migration, more destabilization, conflict, as well as famine. It's best to get out in front of it, do what's right, love your neighbor as yourself, wherever that neighbor may be, because if you don't, you want to pay for it tenfold. Another little thing real quick, I've said this to some of my congressional friends. I said, you know, just like in the ceiling, you've got all these leaking water lines and you're all fighting over where to put the buckets. In the meantime, the carpet's got to be replaced. The table's got to be replaced. The curtain's got to be replaced. It's cheaper just to go up there and fix the leaks, root cause. Let's do some common sense, move away from the propaganda and the politics and do what's best and what's right. And it will be a lot cheaper and it's the right thing to do. Back to you, Rebecca. So you're arguing and I'm eager if my other panelists agree that an investment in the developing world is going to pay dividends really for the for the developed world as we traditionally think of it. Dr. Chu, Ramon, others, don't we also need to make changes in the United States, in Europe and in other places? I think first during the past two years, I had two strongest impressions on the preparation for Fujifilm Summit. First now is ownership, ownership by the country, by the member and by the key partners, civil society, private, public, international. That is much stronger than before. Second, solidarity. Now they look at the cultural food system as a bigger picture. I always, now the push might be through you, Rebecca.  And culture is not only food. Agrofood system is the best in food, of course. Second is the feed, animal feed. Second is fiber closing. We depended on the coating and other fiber crops. And the first is the biofuel. And the last now is talking about the friendly environment. So agrofood system at large is the 5F. So if you calculate, you say at the beginning, agricultural is the contributor, one quarter of the gas emission. You have to be careful because for fiber crops, for forestry, they are contributor. But for animal husbandry, we have to improve. And for the crop, we have to minimize the side effects. So we have to hard scale calculation to find the solution in different nations, in OECD, developed nations. You also, that's why we have any member of AFL have to buy production because you have to improve your own. And even in the big country like China, United States, each province, each county, each crop, each animal sector, you need to improve. So that's, I think, very important. Agrofood system is not only food. Agrofood system is the 5F. And last but not least, I think, during the past 20 years, the biggest deficit in globally because people in the developed countries, in the city, not only developed countries, developed countries, they saw the food is so cheap. But it's a civilization, progress. But somehow, more than people in the city, they have to raise the appreciation to the food production, food processing, and supply chain, and all this value chain. Otherwise, you know, you need the more comprehensive investment on the food, agrofood systems, and also rural areas. That's really the root cause of the displaced people, no matter in Central America or others. And of course, some is a conflict, but more young generation, they didn't have the hope. And that's why they displaced. So I think we have to look at the root cause from agrofood system aspect, what is the contribution to that? Label intensive industry should be located in the town, in the county town, in the small town, and let the young generation of farmers and women have a decent job and the bright future. That's what I expect with my experience with 20 years with Pepsi or others in China. So I think that's a hope for the young generation. Label intensive agrofood industry need more investment. Remeka, if I could add, I would agree with Dr. Chu and David, we don't look at North-South dynamics. We look more about having a sustainable supply chain in every country. For example, we grow potatoes almost in every country that we operate. We grow tomatoes. We grow, I mean, these are not global food chains. They're very local. So we have to find solutions for every specific market that makes sense. Even a country like the US, when you think about the adoption of regenerative practices very low and the farmers need some help. So there you might, we were employing certain tactics, not like we're paying a bit more, we're giving incentives to them for using cover crops or some of the practice that we think we'll get them to a better place. When you go to India or you go to China and our potato farm, we develop the rural areas in a very unique way, because we help the farmers with the seeds and we give them, you know, we help with the best agricultural needs, we help them with irrigation. So we develop the areas, I mean, and Dr. Chu knows from almost desert in some parts of China, we turn them into very productive, beautiful farms. So clearly, I mean, every country needs different interventions to make sure that we create the right ecosystem, the right livelihoods for the farmers. And that's what we are all thinking about. And that's also, if I can represent my other colleagues in the broader food industry, that's how we're thinking about. You know, clearly creating unique solutions for specific supply chains or specific markets that make sense for the farmer. And then we'll figure it out how we talk to consumers to help them understand the different value of food, which is one of the challenges that we have here, is make sure we educate consumers that there are different types of foods that are being created differently, they're being grown differently. And they need to value this and prefer those brands that are using specific practices. It doesn't need to be more expensive. It has to be like they have to choose the brands and the products that are grown in a different way, in a way that is better for them and better for the planet. And that's something that we're trying to figure out what is the best way to tell consumers this story. If you think about the nutritional panels, we've been able to somehow educate consumers to understand, okay, what are the proteins, what is the fat, what are the sodium in particular products? And we've been doing this for many years, they've been educated, they understand how to make choices. How do we do this for what we're talking about? The livelihood of farmers, gas emissions, packaging, waste, it's much more complex. It's harder to measure, it's harder to communicate. We're trying to, as an industry, figure out what is the best way to tell consumers this story so that they can also make choices on the best brands or the products that have been grown in a very particular way that is better for the planet. Still working on it. I think we're making some good progress. Technology will be required and simple communication mechanisms will be required. And Helena, are you seeing big gulfs in a sense or differences in say the awareness of climate and the need for changes to our food system and say Europe versus the US, the North versus the South? I would say amongst consumer advocates, it was one of the first things we talked about with a new council showing not just the state of how things were in our own countries, but recognizing the connection between countries. So the fact that if I don't recycle in my country, that plastic waste ends up on the other side of the planet. We're all connected. I think if we think about the sort of who's responsible, I would love to perhaps flag how many countries are actually meeting the Paris agreement at this point. I think there was something that came out a week ago saying there's one country, the Gambia, which may be on track to meet its targets. There is nobody who is actually driving ahead in the way we need. And as we keep hearing, we have eight years. So I would say there is a great sense of urgency and a great sense of increasing responsibility amongst consumers to act. The opportunity there for raising consumer awareness, but also a bit of a marketing revolution perhaps. A bit of a way in which we increase the level of awareness to consumers about some of these issues in a collective way in which we ensure that consumers are given more agency. People are given more agency into the system. That's perhaps another innovation that we could explore. So I think we're feeling all responsible right now in the world of consumer advocacy. And before we close, this session has gone way too fast. I'd like to ask all the panelists really quite quickly. What in a tangible way would be a definition of success after COP26 and this rush that we have right now where this is all in the headlines and everybody's focused on it. What would be, I'm many obsessed with plant-based meats. Is there, how big of a role will that play? What is going to be a definition of success as we emerge later this year from these talks? Dr. Chu, we'll start with you and we only have about a less than a minute per person. So I think for COP26 and this year is a super year, COP15, COP26 and for the summit and others. I think if global solidarity is there, all the politicians, businessmen, civil society had producers and the consumers, everyone take their own responsibility.  David. Well, I think they need to understand the consequences if we don't act. It's going to be quite severe. You can imagine what happens with people in these years, don't have enough to eat, but what happens when the people in Paris or London or New York. So the world leaders need to come together and understand we have a crisis ahead of us. COVID is just a small snapshot of the devastation we could be facing. When you look at the climate change, the dynamics, the number of people that will be displaced because of climate change and more conflict. So Rebecca, we got to get our act together. There's $400 trillion worth of wealth on earth a day. No one on this planet should go to bed hungry, much left starved to death because of inaction. And so we've got solutions. We just need to drive it through systems around the world. And the leaders need to recognize that, speak out and be together on this issue. And so you're looking for firm commitments by governments, business, and people to take to them. And so it points out. A commitment and an awareness. And this is where you guys have got to help us, Rebecca. Because when you look at the news media, it's like so many distractions today on small things that are important. But we have major icebergs in front of the Titanic right now. We've got to focus on the big things for the future. And this is where I think the New York Times and other major media outlets can help us drive the right messaging for our times such as this. Thank you. Well, we have a very big climate team and a very big initiative also planned for COP26. So we are trying, but Ramon, what was your definition? I think that if we can leave the November meeting with clear commitments from, I would say, the top 100 economies and then the large 1,000 companies in the world to net zero by 2040 and by 2050. But I think 2040 has to be the time that that would be a major accomplishment. And then from there, obviously, we need to go into the details of financing and technology and everything else. But walking away from that meeting with commitments from, I would say, those big groups, countries and top organizations in the world, that would create the demand for the technologies, the momentum that we're looking for. I think we're getting there. I think there's more and more peer talks. And I don't know the country level really. I don't have that visibility. But I know at the private level, there is a lot of commitments and there's more and more a share of voice of this type of topics in the forums that we participate. So I'm very optimistic that this will happen. Now, the trade offs that we'll have to make are pretty substantial going forward. So that's going to be the tough moment when we have to make trade offs, allocations of investments, and business model changes that will drive the real change. And Helena, if you could please close us out. I will try. So first, sufficient investment to end hunger. Two, clear and coherent national pathways from every country. Three, that we think about how we build trust and work with people as we go through a time which will be extraordinary for all of us. That includes safety. That includes transparency. And last, that we track and we monitor and we act and we get there. I'd like to thank all of the panelists. This was the most provocative discussion. I could sit here for many hours and listen to you, but we're sadly out of time. I am going to pass the floor to Borge Brende, who's the president of the World Economic Forum. And he's going to help us wrap up the week, which has just covered so many topics and will help us distill what we both heard today and all week. So over to you, Borge. And thanks so much to the panelists. No, thank you so much, Rebecca. Great moderation and an amazing panel that shows the quality we have had the whole week. And also thank you to our global audience for joining this session on Breaking Salos to achieve food and climate security. But also thank you for joining our altogether 100th session this week. As we just heard and as we discussed also over the past four days, exiting the pandemic stronger than we entered it can only happen if stakeholders work together and we have sustainability at the core of it. And we need to share know-how, partner on innovation and coordinate on advancing global priorities as also was so strongly underlined in this excellent panel of real leaders. It's really the only way we can shape a more sustainable future. And indeed collaboration is the very DNA of the World Economic Forum. It is why we convened the network of 2000 leaders during this week from business, government and civil society. And it is also why we had more than half a million live stream views and 24 million social videos views of what took place during the summit. So all this is testament to the commitment among stakeholders around the world to work in common purpose. So this type of collaboration I feel leads to real impact. We're really walking the talk and that's why I want to share also some concrete examples from this week. We know that climate change is maybe the most urgent challenge of our lifetime when it comes to our planet, our planet is burning. And then that is also why I'm so pleased that the World Economic Forum's friends of Ocean Action launched three new initiatives this week. Oceans are also so committed, so related to climate change. And one of the initiatives that I'm particularly fond of is the Blue Food Partnership to strengthen ocean resilience, but also the blue economy. 150 organizations and industry leaders signed a call to action, urgent garments to enable a full decarbonization of shipping by 2050. This is consequential because shipping is one of the hard to abate areas. Our food systems team are hard at work at the first UN Food Systems Summit today, as you know. And there has been also announced the Digital Food Systems Coalition and the 100 million farmers platform to help develop a more inclusive and a sustainable food system for all. As also as said in this panel, one third of the global emissions come from food production. So this is incredibly important. Our 20 companies have pledged to conserve, restore and grow more than 2.5 billion trees as part of the one t.org global pledge that was launched in Davos in 2020. And the Forum Scale 360 project, which creates products that have multiple life cycles expanded from two to 20 countries. Thank you for joining. Our blockchain team launched a new accelerator to make this technologies energy consumption more sustainable. And the Forum's innovation platform uplink that I think you're familiar with with all the eco-entrepreneurs announced that its innovators helped advance projects that capture 39 million tons of greenhouse gas emissions and brought safe drinking water to 2.7 million people. Protecting our planet is so important and so is empowering people. That's also part of sustainability, as we know. It's economy, environment and the social aspects. Nine social justice lighthouses launched this week to show how businesses can support the planet as well as people. Cambodia established a closing the skills gaps accelerator joining a global network of 11 other countries. Finland joined the global learning network to contribute its expertise in closing education gaps. The Edison Alliance that you're familiar with launched a new one billion lives challenge to bring one billion people affordable digital access to healthcare, finance and education by 2025. The partnership for global LGBTI equality launched a self-assessment tool to help companies identify actions to meet UN standards of conduct. The Forum and the Global Philanthropy GHR Foundation launched a new partnership to advance racial and social justice. Our partnering for racial justice in business coalition no compromises 60 organizations representing over 7 million employees. And the new community forum to encourage millennials and genset to pursue careers in manufacturing with a focus on reducing the environment footprint of the sector was also launched. Finally, the list could have been made even longer but it really shows that we have been walking the talk. We have delivered concrete action also on and during this impact summit. So finally, a little over two years ago the forum committed to developing a set of universal ESGs as you know, these metrics to help companies practice stakeholder capitalism and approach that accounts not just for profit but for developing of people and our planet. And I'm so happy that we announced this week over 50 companies are now using this stakeholder capitalism metrics and our hundred other companies support the initiative. So this week has given me so much hope because it really has been an impact summit. If we continue to raise our ambition and work together I'm so confident we can make even more progress in the run up to COP26 in Glasgow in November and the forums annual meeting in January in Davos. I would like to welcome you there. So before we close, let me also thank the Conrad Hilton Foundation for the continuous support of this summit and for its diversity and inclusion goals in particular. So this concludes the global closing moment at the Sustainable Development Impact Summit but please be sure to join us also this evening. The program starts at 4 p.m. central European time. And again, thank you Rebecca. Thank you to this great panel. Thank you also to my colleagues here in the programming team, the nature and climate systems team and all the people that have made this summit happen. Thank you and see you soon. Bye bye.


Ronny, when you saw that ball float in your direction there, how important was it to grab onto it and make something happen at this point? Make sure I just make the plays that come my way. We practice coming downhill and making catches and interceptions and just make the play. I think, KB, I think that's part of the practice. Just talk about you're going to get one, you're going to get one soon. Did you feel one was coming? And how special was it to get it? For me, I just wanted to keep playing hard. I knew that it became my way. I was going to take advantage of it. And I'm glad it did. It became a good time for us and help the offense get a good field position. Given the way the game had started, how important was it to make a splash point like that and get it all that way? We had to help our offense out. We had to help them. We had to make a stop or find a way to make a turnover. And as far as the defense, he stopped the run really good today. And we ended up having a couple turnovers from Jackrabbe as well in the Red Zone hours. I thought you guys talked about me and then you just kind of create turnovers. Was that an extra big point of emphasis coming into this one? Yeah, I mean, last week we felt like we didn't get any last week. So we wanted to make sure that we came out and we got some. So that was a big emphasis. We knew that we were going to run the ball, but when they did throw it, we wanted to be aggressive if the ball was in the air. What was his team name? We'd get off the magazine, 10-0. There's not much offense going early. What kind of spark would turn around? We just stood together. You know, we're not going anywhere. No matter how many times we get hit, we don't keep getting up. We don't fight to the end. And if you're not going to hang with us, then we're going to come out with a W. I know you trust on us, but can you like actually take us through the process and all that? We're just playing man. You know, I was a post-safety. He rolled out, he looked to the left, and then came back to Debo a little late and sailed on him a little bit. And I was able to come up and make the play and just wanted to make sure I protected the ball and I got him. Where's that ball going? Oh, it's probably a little on my mom. Good Christmas gift for her. I told her I was going to give one for her, so I'm going to keep this one close. We'll tell her tonight. Who would think you might in the moment you grab that ball and you know, I haven't got this in the center. I just, what's going to be your mind? I'll just make sure if there's a question I can try and do a pick six. I've seen people coming around, so I want to make sure I protected it so I can make sure the offense got it.


Welcome, everybody. Thank you for joining us. Yes, welcome. Today we are, we have the great honor to present Avoid Scams and Spies, which will be presented by Daley Barnett from the Electronic Frontier Foundation. If you are interested in more SF Tech Week events, it runs this week, the night through the 15th. And you can call the Tech Week hotline at 557-4388 to learn more. I'm gonna put this information into the chat so people can access it there if they need it. If you have questions as we go along, please put them into the chat or the Q&A feature and our presenter will be answering at the end. Again, I'd like to thank our presenter, Daley Barnett. And do you wanna take it away, Daley? Sure, why not? Let's start. Did we wanna wait a couple of minutes for people to join or am I just free to go ahead? I think you can go ahead. Let me get into, whoop, let me get into, yeah, there you go. Okay, great. Well, thank you for the introduction. Thanks to the San Francisco Public Library for hosting Connect with Tech Week. It's an honor to be here. As mentioned earlier, I'm Daley Barnett, a staff technologist at the Electronic Frontier Foundation. And I'm gonna be talking a little bit about avoiding scams and spies online. It's a little bit of a click-baity title. Mostly I'm talking about digital privacy and security. But a little bit about the EFF, we are a nonprofit digital civil liberties organization. So we do a lot of anti-surveillance work and work fighting for the rights of the users online. So most of the material that I'll be covering is taken from the EFF and a couple of sources, that a couple of projects that we have there. The first is the Surveillance Self-Defense Guide and the Security Education Companion. The SSD or Surveillance Self-Defense Guide is a bunch of tips and tools and hands-on guides for how to use different technologies for upping your privacy and security game. And the Security Education Companion is a similar project, but it's specifically geared for educators and people that are interested in taking those lessons and distributing the knowledge elsewhere. And you can find both of those at sec.eff.org or ssd.eff.org. Or just go to eff.org and look for the projects there. So let's go into a couple of just working definitions as we go into this presentation. What are the scams and who are the spies? What do you have to be wary of online? Scams, generally speaking, are when you're taken advantage of or when you're tricked into handing over something valuable, such as private information, actual money, or other valuable data. And then the spies, it's the working definition that I'm using for spies online is any person or computer program that is sneakily invading your digital privacy. Yeah, and so those two things often co-mingle in different ways online, but it's worth sort of thinking about the adversaries that you might face when existing online. And digital privacy, we're talking a lot about, I like to think of it as your right to control your data. It's your ability, your autonomy to restrict that data, who gets it, how it's shared, where it's stored, who else sees it, et cetera. So as we talk about scams or things that are invasive to your privacy, I think it's important to think of them as these opportunistic events. They can appear in your email, over the phone, in text messages, or in your browser, like on websites that you visit. They're all over the digital and virtual landscape and they're always designed to lure you in in some way and they appear harmless. They're often preying on emotional impulses, getting you to trust them and like them or making you think that something bad is gonna happen unless you act and you click on some creepy link or something. So speaking of which, clicking on creepy links, a type of scam that often takes place is something we call phishing and it's a phishing with a pH. It's a type of scam where the attacker sends a message or an email or passes along some link to you that looks innocent but is actually malicious. These schemes are often used to distribute malware or malicious software or to steal valuable data. And it's usually crafted to appear like it's coming from someone that you might already know or that you trust or just a reputable business. And these can come in all sorts of places, right? Like I said, it could be in a phone text message, it could be in an email or it could be a social media message on a website. And as I mentioned in the last slide, those phishing schemes can be a way to distribute malware. Now malware, as I said, is a type of malicious software. It's a computer program that causes you or your computer harm. And there's all sorts of different species and types of malware that can exist online or offline just on a computer. But sometimes the damage that they cause can be very visible. It can make your computer crash or it will encrypt all of your files and make them inaccessible to you or does something just very clearly wrong with your computer. But other times it can be totally secret and covert operating behind the scenes without you even knowing that it's there but it's secretly stealing all of your data. A lot of different types of malware can be self-replicating. They can be able to avoid detection. They're often capable of mutating and evolving depending on the environments that they're in. They can be really scary. It's a cat and mouse game often with antivirus softwares and malware developers. So as I painted kind of a scary landscape of the internet world we all exist in, full of malware and phishing schemes and attackers and hackers, it can seem pretty daunting to protect yourself. But that's what I want to dispel here. There are a lot of pretty easy things you can do now to up your privacy and security. And the vast majority of privacy and security incidents that take place online are preventable for the average citizen in the virtual realm. So let's cover a few of those. One good thing to keep in your back pocket, especially to avoid scams, is how to spot phishing in the wild. As I mentioned, sometimes these phishing schemes are specifically crafted to prey on emotions. So I want you to be able to look out for any sort of act now or beware messaging that comes in messages that you receive. It could be something like a good thing, like you've won a prize, but you only have 24 hours to claim your prize. So you have to click this link now when secretly that link is doing something bad. Or it could be something like the order that you've placed or there's a police warrant out for your arrest. And if you don't act now and click this link or register this account, then all is lost. If you sense that there's kind of that emotional praying happening and unexpected message that you've received, take a moment to investigate it further before you fall prey to it. Always avoid clicking on links or opening attachments in unexpected messages. If it appears to be coming from someone that you trust, double check with that person that they meant to send it to you. It's a good thing to do. They will probably appreciate that because they know that you're taking your security seriously and that can also be their security too. And if you're not sure who the sender is or if you know them or not, just be free to double check with them. And I mean, in this case, with businesses or just other individuals that would be on a professional level or something, retouch them through another method. You can contact the business directly or ask to speak over LinkedIn or another social media account you might have. Just in general, you want to double check that the reported sender is who you think they are. So on the screen right now, visible on the screen, I've attached a screenshot of the headers for an email that was sent to someone. And in the from line of who is the sender of the email, it says it's from the Gates Foundation. And if you look closely, the email address is from info at GatesFoundation.org. At first glance, it seems legitimate. It's just info at GatesFoundation.org. But if you look closely, the word foundation and that address is actually spelled wrong. And so in this case, they're actually hoping that you just glance at it quickly and you don't read the full email address of the sender because it looks legitimate at first glance. And in the subject line, it says important notice to EFF. And that important notice, most likely in the body of the email, it says something like, maybe you're facing a lawsuit from the Gates Foundation and you have to respond now or also be taken to court. But if you look closely, it's spelled wrong. It's not actually Bill Gates or whoever trying to contact you. Okay, so let's talk a little bit about tracking. When I'm talking about tracking here, I mean web tracking and that's tracking both on your phone or on your computer, just anywhere that you're accessing the web, the worldwide web, the internet. There is an entire industry online designed to track you. It tracks what you do, who you know, where you're going, what you're buying, how you're behaving on websites, the type of software that you have installed, the browser that you're using, where you're located, what versions of operating system you're on, et cetera. It can collect a lot about you. And this industry is designed to collect that and sell it. It's creepy, it's very privacy invasive. Unfortunately, it's also entirely legal. Trackers are hidden in advertisements on webpages, but they're also just embedded on those websites secretly, totally invisible to you under the hood on the website. These invisible, completely legal things are able to gather information about you and it gathers information not just on the one website that you're on, but on all of the websites that you visit. And the same trackers can be placed all over. And so you can imagine that information snowballs and just gets bigger and bigger and bigger. And the portrait of you that it begins to portray is really scarily accurate. And that information, that portrait that they've gathered is then sold to whoever wants it, anyone that's got the money to buy it. And this is all happening behind the scenes without you knowing that it's happening. So when you visit a website and you get an advertisement that is like really creepily accurate, like say you've been thinking about and kind of like doing a little bit of cursory web searching throughout the last week or so about buying a new rug. And then you go on to a random website and suddenly you're just being bombarded with all of these advertisements for rugs. That's because of this. It's because of advertisers that are buying that data that is being collected from web trackers and then making advertisements designed for you, hoping that you'll click on their links and buy their products. And sometimes you might actually want that, right? Like sometimes I like having a targeted advertisement because it might introduce me to something that I didn't know existed, like a cool product that I wanna buy. But the point is you should always have the option, you should always have the ability to opt into that. They should ask you before collecting that data, right? So in the industry, we call this sort of tracking ability your fingerprint, like your unique fingerprint online. And so we've developed a tool at EFF called Cover Your Tracks. It is a browser tool, it's a website that is used to determine your unique fingerprint ability online. Really what that means is it's running all of these different algorithms and special scripts behind the scenes that determine how easy it is to uniquely identify you as a user as opposed to any other random user online. And that paints a pretty good way of marking how these advertisers or these trackers online are able to do the same thing. Now, this tool is really cool because it can give you like a basic sort of score on how uniquely identifiable you are, but also it gets pretty in depth in describing some things if you want to go in depth with it about the actual technical things that it's able to use to identify you and to make a unique portrait of you. And so in that way, you can pick and choose the right tools to mitigate the problems that maybe this has uncovered for you. But it itself doesn't protect you from those trackers. But don't worry, we've developed a tool for that. There's another tool called Privacy Badger and it's also developed by us at EFF. I'm one of the developers for the project. It is a browser extension.  So on your Firefox or Chrome or Opera, Microsoft Edge, whatever browser you're using, as long as they support this type of extension. This runs in the background to identify those trackers on the websites that you visit. So it's working sort of in the same invisible layer of the websites and it identifies trackers based on that creepy tracking behavior, the fingerprint stuff that cover your tracks is able to look at. And it determines what is a tracker and what isn't and then it blocks them. And so it blocks them across all those different websites that you're visiting. It's really cool because it's an install and forget kind of tool that works behind the scenes. And it's not an ad blocker, but a positive sort of side effect of it is that it acts kind of like an ad blocker sometimes because a lot of these advertisements have those trackers built into them. And so they get blocked by Privacy Badger. Okay, so another tactic or tool that you can use to up your security and privacy is multi-factor authentication. I hope you've heard of this, but don't worry if you haven't, it's a pretty easy concept to grasp. It is when you're asked by a website or an account that you hold to provide another form of verification besides just username and password to log in, that's multi-factor authentication or sometimes also called two-factor authentication, 2FA. On the screen, I have provided a screenshot of the menu on Twitter for when you are configuring your Twitter account and turning on two-factor authentication here. This is a really common pattern that they will put two-factor authentication under a sort of security menu that's under your settings. Sometimes it's under privacy, but usually it's under security. And it's not usually turned on by default with the types of accounts that you're holding. So with any of the accounts that you regularly use, you should definitely go into the security menu that they have and turn it on. It's a very, very common security tool that these platforms have and it's super useful. The types of verification that they will provide for you to use when you log in are things like codes that would pass along in a phone text message or an email sent to you or sometimes there are special apps that are made just for this purpose. Like Google makes one, that's an authenticator app.  The point being turn it on for all of the accounts that you have because this particular tactic protects you from having any of your accounts hijacked. So if somebody is specifically targeting you or if an account that you have somewhere on a platform, if that platform is hacked or there's a breach of some kind and all of the credentials for all of the users on that platform are spilled to the public, you can rest assured that nobody's going to log into your account because you have a good multi-factor authentication setup on it. Okay, so another tactic to use up in your security is backups, backing up your data. This is the practice of taking a snapshot of the entire contents of your computer and like all of the files, all of the drives, everything on your computer at the moment and saving it in the event that your data is lost or tampered with. A lot of the times, depending on the operating systems that we use, it's turned on by default, thankfully. That's a good step forward that operating systems have made over the years. In Windows, this type of program is called File History and that takes care of that for you. If you're an Apple user and you're on Mac OS, the same type of program is called Time Machine. If you're not sure that they're turned on or not, it's worth looking for that program, whichever you use in your operating system and looking at the little slider or switch or whatever way that it tells you that it's currently enabled. Now, as I mentioned, backups are just a snapshot, right? It's just like a moment in time of your computer and the files on it. So it's something that you have to keep up. It's a routine, but thankfully those programs can be scheduled to do it like once a week or sometimes once a day or once a month depending on how you want to do it. They run behind the scenes. So I like to do them quite often. In this particular tactic, backing up is especially useful if you're ever targeted with something called ransomware, which is a type of malware, remember malicious software, that holds your data hostage. It will plant itself onto your machine and it encrypts or scrambles all of your data and makes it inaccessible to you. And it will hold it ransom until you pay whoever some amount of money to get access back. But if you have good backups saved and they're saved onto the cloud or in some other place that is not on your computer, you don't have to worry about that. If that happens, hoping it doesn't. If you take the other steps described here, it's a lot less likely to happen, you'll still be okay because you'll have a pretty recent snapshot of all of the things that were on your computer before. Okay, another good practice to keep in upping your privacy and security online are passwords, keeping strong passwords. A good rule to have in all of your accounts is that you should have long, unique and difficult to guess passwords for every account that you use. Every single one needs its own unique password. And when I say long, I mean like 14 plus characters is a good minimum to go with because it's not, speaking from a sort of like hacker point of view, it's not too difficult to get the like encrypted or scrambled versions of passwords and with types of like password cracking software or decrypting software. It's actually not too difficult to decrypt or unscramble those passwords if they're like up to 13 characters. It can be kind of easy sometimes. And especially if they're easier to guess, you should use passwords that aren't easy to guess based on who you are or the account that it's used for or like the season or the year that you're in. You'd be amazed how often people use something like password summer 2021 for an account. And it's like, well, okay, maybe that's a long password but it's actually kind of easy to guess because we're moving into summer, it's 2021 and it's a password. So, you might think having a unique long password for every single account that you use would make it really, really difficult to remember all of them, right? You wouldn't be wrong. It would be difficult to do that. Thankfully, there's a tool for that. There are things called password managers. These are tools that can encrypt or scramble your passwords and store them all into a single place that you access with a main password. So, all you have to do is remember one password. And when you're using something like a password manager in tandem with multi-factor authentication on your accounts, it protects your accounts from being hijacked, as I mentioned. These password managers are super handy too sometimes in that you can use them across different devices. You can use them depending on the one that you choose. You can have the same one on your phone, on your computer, on another computer. There can be a browser plugin or extension for it that is directly on your browser. So, you just have to click a little button and it will automatically fill it for you. They're really good and they're really convenient. Sometimes they do cost money. There are some free versions. Either way, it's definitely worth looking into. They're super handy, they'll make your life easier and they raise your privacy and security up a whole bunch. Okay, so I just covered a lot there. Those are a lot of tools and tips and tactics you can use to raise the threshold of your privacy and security online. But one thing I always like to mention in these types of presentations or trainings is that digital privacy and security is a group effort. It's a shared practice, really, because this is a social world we live in. We interact with so many different people. So, getting help from the people that you know and trust will do wonders for you. These things can be difficult to talk about. So, making digital privacy and security a priority to talk about with your loved ones, it not only makes these things easier to accomplish, but you can get their help and their insight onto raising your own privacy and security. But also, it actually increases the privacy and security overall for you and your community. I think of it as sort of like a principle of networking in that, well, at least in the security world, in networking when you have a node or like a person on a network of a bunch of different people around in a network. If there's one person that is compromised in any sort of way or there's an unwanted security incident on that node, it could implicate all the other nodes on the network. So, you wanna make sure that the people in your network, your loved ones, also have good privacy and security. And so, it's worth talking to each other, setting good standards for each other on how you share data about each other, the types of security protocols you have in place, and you know who you can turn to in the case of an unwanted incident online. All right, and as I mentioned, all of these tools and things that I've covered are gone over in the surveillance self-defense guides and the security education companion on EFF that is at sec.eff.org and ssd.eff.org. I also have my email on the visible on the screen here and if you can't read it or see it, that's daily at eff.org, D-A-L-Y at eff.org. Please feel free to reach out to me if you aren't comfortable asking in this space a question or you just maybe a question pops in your head later after this presentation and you wanna ask a privacy and security person about it. I should say though that I'm not a lawyer, so I can't provide any sort of legal advice, but I do work with them. I work with many lawyers and so I could perhaps point you to someone else who might know an answer for you, but I am a technologist, so I have got answers for that kind of thing. And that's the end of my slides. So I'm, well, I guess I'll leave this slide up for everyone to see, but we can move into the Q and A portion of this. Thank you, D-A-L-Y, thank you so much for that. I was gonna suggest, yeah, why don't we leave this up for a few minutes for, there's quite, there's 92 people here at the moment and another 24 or 25 on YouTube. So, yeah, give folks some time to grab a pencil or we'll take a photo of the screen. And we've got, in just a minute or two, I'm gonna put up the information for taking a survey about how much you enjoyed this program, but while I do that, I'm gonna throw out a couple of questions that we got during your presentation. Why don't ISPs do a better job protecting us, protecting our privacy? Do they have any motivation to do so? That would be the second part is my question. That's a great question. Why they don't can be a bit of a grab bag, right? They're, okay, so why they might not is that it might be in their sort of profit incentive to undermine your privacy. Or they might be legally responsible in some way to provide data, maybe to like nation states or the law enforcement of some kind that are demanding that data for whatever reason and they want to comply. On the other hand, it's also a good business model for some who provide a safe, secure and private internet connection. So there are still some ISPs out there who build a business model off of that. And they're still within the law and they'll hand over logs or just whatever sort of files or data that law enforcement or state agencies might be asking for, but it's all encrypted. So it's like, here's the data, but it means nothing. So all that, I mean, that's a big conversation to have. What I would say though, is that if you have the option to, it's not always an option because often ISPs have monopolies on the districts or the places or the locales that they serve or that they service. But if you do have an option, it's worth looking into ISPs that have good privacy and security standards in place. And if you don't have the option, pressure the ISPs that you do have because you do have a say as a user and as a person online. Great, thank you. I had two questions about privacy badger. Is it free? And does it, will it slow down your browsing at all? Oh, great questions. I should have mentioned that. All of the tools that we make at EFF are free. So it's totally free to use. It's free to download. It's also open source. So if you are a programmer or you know someone who is, feel free to check it out online, the source code for it. And you can look through it and make sure it's doing what it says it is. But yeah, it's totally free to use. As for the speed of it, it actually often speeds up browsing. It depends on like what you're doing and where you're going. Like when you first started up, it has like a hiccup moment because it has to like, you know, run some startup programs or some startup functions that are taking place when it first boots. But it actually often creates like a less noisy and faster browsing experience, which is great. And it's often because it's blocking things like ads and things that are on web pages. That's great. We've got a few questions about how secure are password managers? And if there's a password manager, you would recommend. Sure, it depends on the password manager. And I know it's like I'm not a great answer. I apologize, but it's really true. So it's happened in the past where reputable password managers have fallen prey to a successful attack or a breach of some kind. And that isn't necessarily a bad thing on the password manager itself. What I like to look for in a password manager is how they've handled incidents like that. If there has been a breach in the past, how did they disclose that breach to their users? What sorts of methods or sort of like cleanup efforts did they take after the incident to up their own security? Yeah, so and the security points you might look for when choosing a password manager, there are some that, it depends on where they're located. It's a good one. It's a good thing to think of. Whether or not it is stored online or off, there are some password managers that are entirely offline and that you control the vault on your own machine and you only access it whenever you want to rather than it being like a thing that's plugged into your browser and is always internet connected. Yeah, and as for particular recommendations, I'm not entirely comfortable giving one right now because I wouldn't want, I would be remits if I were to give a recommendation for one that I haven't fully audited yet. But that said, there are some pretty good scorecards online. If you look up like a password manager scorecard, there's like a pretty good one for password managers and for VPNs that other people make. And so I won't make the technology recommendation, but I like those guides that make them. I hope that helps. I hope it's not too frustrating of an answer. We had a question. Do you have any suggestions for a good VPN? Same one for that. For VPNs, yeah, I like to choose, like I think about where their servers are located, what they've done in the, like in how they've responded to security incidents in the past, like what kind of language are they using? Like what kind of encryption are they talking about? And also like, what is their pricing model? I think things should be accessible. And I understand that it costs money to run a business, but security and privacy should be free for everyone, quite frankly. Yeah, and so the same sort of recommendation thing for that, I'm not comfortable giving out a specific recommendation for like a VPN that is good to use, but I will say that there are some pretty accurate or trustworthy scorecards or guides out there that you should use or you should look at. Here's a good question. I wonder if this is coming from a librarian or maybe a student. Any resources you would recommend for digital literacy besides the Electronic Frontier Foundation? Yeah. So I take the, it depends on what you're looking for. Digital literacy, and I might be misunderstanding like the sort of more working definition of it, but in my mind that's a very broad topic. And so if you're thinking about like privacy and security, or like the point of view of the user in a digital space, I think consumer reports is a great resource for both, you know, like thinking about the products that you use or the applications and platforms you engage with. And they have just some really good guides on like, you know, privacy and security or like doxing defense. They're really good with that. I would also look at Herzlala. They have some pretty interesting things happening in like the browser space, Brave. And, hmm, I'm sure I could think of a lot more, but maybe email me, maybe reach out and I'll get some more recommendations for you. I know I'm hitting you like one after the other. This was a question from YouTube. Is there a way to scrub your personal information off of the web? Where would you start doing that? Or I'm sure that's, yeah. Yeah, yeah. It's possible to make a good dent in what's out there, right?  I think theoretically that could be true, but there's so much on the internet that it doesn't really matter sometimes. So like you can do a lot to take control of what there is online about you. I actually wrote a blog post about this a few months ago on EFF. If you look for Doxing Self-Defense or Doxing Guide EFF, you'll find a blog post that I wrote and has some recommendations on how to like sort of scrub that data. But a good starting point to do, especially when you're by yourself, is to just Google yourself or just see what sort of available is already, or what information is already available about you online. Especially doing it private because it can be kind of a triggering exercise. It can be really surprising like how much there is. But once you do that, you have a greater understanding of where, like where you need to do that scrubbing. And then from there, there are like opt-out lists of like different agencies that you have to go opt out of your data being shared through them. There are just of course like taking hold of older accounts you've owned and deactivating them, deleting them, asking the maintainers of the platforms to remove the information about you. And if you're in a pretty high pressure situation that you really need things to be scrubbed or taken care of quickly, there are actually some paid services out there that do this professionally. And you could look up some of those. Yeah. Yeah. And those are like a varying degrees of success. And I've heard some negative critiques of some of them lately, but I've also heard great things about like paying someone else to do it for you. Oh, and of course ask your friends or like trusted loved ones. Like I always want to reiterate that in this situation. You should, you can ask them to help you take care of removing that stuff, but also ask them to sort of be like the buddy in charge for if you are being targeted with any kind of incident. Okay. We had a couple of people ask about the security of two part authentication. Is that, do you see those that security measures sort of become secure? Well, I can talk a little bit about that. I don't see it. Actually, I think because I'm a screen sharing I can't see the Q&A. Oh no, I mean, are you aware of, I should say, two part authentication failing? Yeah. There was actually a pretty interesting happening in the security space. Pretty recently, where it was, there was like a proof of concept that was shown that it's actually easy enough to hijack the multi-factor authentication codes sent through text messages or SMS messaging. And it's just through like paying for a service that can spoof a phone number, basically. So that called into question using text messages or SMS messaging for two-factor authentication. It's less likely that it's going to happen, but it's possible. So if you're enabling two-factor authentication on accounts that you wanna be especially protective of, you might opt for a more secure method. The more secure methods of being something like an application that you have on your device, like on your phone, maybe, like Google Authenticator or Authy. Those are the two that come to my mind that have like a rotating codes that are generated to use as that secondary form of authentication.  And you plug it in to the USB drive on your computer and you use your thumb to activate it. It's cool. I don't prefer that just because I tend to lose things. But I know how to use one and I have it handy in case I need to in like high-intensive situations. We had a question, what was the Scorecard website? It's probably in the, I'm sure it's in the YouTube, but was there a score? I don't know that I have it handy. There's a couple that I've seen. And I haven't, I mean, as I've said a couple of times, protectively or very professionally, I've said that like I can't formally recommend a like a Scorecard or like a piece of individual technology. That's not like officially endorsed by the EFS. But I can say that like if you look for, if you do some web searching, some Googling, something like a VPN Scorecard or a password manager Scorecard, the most popular ones to come up are likely to be pretty reputable. And I can recommend guides like Consumer Reports, which deal directly with that kind of thing and often give recommendations. We have a question. Are cookies, is it safe? Is it really safe to accept cookies? That's a great question. So cookies are horrible. They're really privacy invasive and they're really not needed in like the modern web. So what, when websites do that, when you get those notifications on a website, it says like, you know, accept these cookies and it like it blasts you with a big pop-up that like you have to get out of in order to access the website you wanted to. And you have to opt into your cookies being shared or whatever collected or made on the website for you. I'm not gonna say it's not that it's unsafe to accept them. It's just that it kind of sells out your privacy. However, it doesn't mean that that's actually happening on the website. What is actually happening is that those websites are legally required to ask you for permission because of different privacy laws that are in place. There is like the GDPR law out of Europe. There's the California Consumer Privacy Act, Privacy Act, the CCPA out of California. And it's like these types of legislations that make platforms required to respect your privacy in some way and to ask for your permission to not respect your privacy as much. But as you can see, often when you go to those websites is that they're asking for your permission but they're making it really inconvenient for you to opt out of it. Or sometimes what we call dark patterns is when they kind of trick you into opting into your data being shared or they trick you into like accepting it even though you weren't sure that that's what was happening. Yeah, so all that aside, all of that spiel about cookies that I just gave, you often have to accept them in order to engage with the website you want to. However, there are tools that mitigate that problem. Privacy Badger is one that has specific mechanisms in place to identify when third party cookies are being used to track you and it stops that tracking from happening. So if you can still opt in on the website to having cookies be a thing there but if you have Privacy Badger involved like installed on your browser, you can feel a bit safer about it. This is probably opening a little bit of a can of worms. So maybe in 25 words or less, can you talk about, there were a number of questions along these lines of government surveillance versus commercial entities and you have a sort of a brief take on how often the government is surveilling us online. That's huge. Yeah. That's huge. Yeah, sorry. That's okay. That is like- That's a good question. That is like the blue whale that is like under the surface of this conversation, right? It's very well beyond the scope of what we're talking about. But all I can say is that government and state surveillance is very capable. It is often bigger and more advanced than the technologies and tips and tactics that I've covered here. And I don't mean to instill a sense of like nihilism or that all is lost because of the vast surveillance apparatus that the state has over us but that there are legal productions in place and there are organizations like the EFF that are fighting to prevent that encroaching surveillance apparatus. Great. Thank you. Thanks so much, Daly.