Welcome to this conversation, advancing digital cooperation. Something that's very dear to most of us sitting on this stage and I'm sure to all of you in the audience as well. Increasingly, our futures, political, social, personal, individual, are going to be shaped by technology. And how we align, individual states, companies, enterprises, is going to be the single most important decadal initiative, imperative, and indeed a challenge in the times that we live in. The UN, of course, wants to assign an ambitious 2023 digital compact. And of course, the compact lays emphasis on a multi-stakeholder model for governing this domain. And we are going to try to, in this particular discussion, ease out opportunities, challenges, and thoughts of four fantastic leaders in this particular domain who cover between them literally everything digital, from the regulation to platform to service provision to the hardware, and indeed to the ideas that will define the world of tomorrow. So please welcome Madam Josephine Teo, Minister for Communication and Information of Singapore. Mrs. Sunil Bharti-Mithul, Chairman Bharti Enterprises India, Chuck Robbins, Chair and Chief Executive Officer, Cisco, and Brad Smith, one of the most famous faces from Microsoft, the President and Co-Chair, and a cyber diplomat for many, many years. So we are going to quickly move into the conversation and then bring you in in the last 20 minutes to pose your queries to these fantastic people. Minister Teo, Singapore is a unique ecosystem, like most other ecosystems. It has been committed to a multi-stakeholder model of managing the digital domain. It is engaging with different sorts of stakeholders with their own specific interests. What has Singapore's learning been in trying to bring people together to manage? Well, first of all, thank you, Sameer. And also to my fellow panelists, it's great to be here with you. You know, the whole experience of multi-stakeholder collaboration, I think has overall been a very positive one in many respects. So let me start with an example in cybersecurity. We've always thought of it as a team sport of global dimensions, which means that it has to involve, you know, not just the government, but also industry, academia, and indeed international organizations. And doing so has, in fact, strengthened our effectiveness. Then if you think about, you know, even in a crisis situation, at the depths of the pandemic, we engage with industry partners. They included companies like Microsoft, Salesforce, and as well as our own, you know, local unicorns, Grab, C. And what we were trying to do was to prevent employment scarring. And what these companies were able to bring to bear was their enormous hiring capacity, but which was, of course, threatened during the pandemic. But with government resourcing, they created traineeships as well as job placements, and this helped to prevent, you know, long-term effects in the labor force. So that was also a very useful experience. Now, we've also found great value in crowding in the private as well as people sector to engage on important issues to do with digital inclusion as well as digital safety. So in fact, just before I came up to Davos, we launched a initiative in Singapore called Data For All. I mean, we are fortunate that computer access is 89% of households and broadband access is 98%, but we know that even with this kind of internet penetration, access to data is not quite the same, and so the breadth and depth of digital engagements doesn't, you know, isn't homogeneous for everyone. So the telcos decided that they would donate 30,000 mobile data lines to benefit people from the vulnerable segments that will be identified in partnership with social service agencies. Likewise, when it comes to things like online harms, which affect women and girls disproportionately, we have a stakeholder group in Singapore of about 300 people. You know, we call it a sunlight alliance for action. And right now, we are, you know, ready to take this industry cooperation, this multi-stakeholder approach in a very important area of promoting trustworthy and responsible AI. Now, some of you in the audience, I believe Brad might remember that in 2019 at Davos, Singapore had launched a model AI governance framework, and since then, this model has served as a basis to develop sector-specific frameworks for healthcare as well as financial services. Now, since then, we've continued to work with industry as well as our international partners to identify common principles for AI trustworthiness and try to develop a way in which testing can be done. And so today, we are very happy to launch the international pilot of AI Verify. It is a Singapore AI governance testing framework as well as Toolkit. It is intended as a practical resource that businesses can self-assess voluntarily. It gives them a way to assure their stakeholders of what their AI system actually does, promotes transparency and hopefully will help to also build a level of trust in the AI that they use. So with this international launch, although it is a minimum viable product, we've already engaged with about 10 companies. This includes AWS, Google, Microsoft, Meta, as well as our banks, Singapore Airlines, and even a few startups to provide feedback on this tool. And now we will be progressing to interact with our international audiences as well as regulators and policy makers to share experiences to make sure that this initiative on AI Verify is really going to benefit the end users. So that's the kind of experience that we've had, industry cooperation, international collaboration, all of which have been very rewarding. I'm going to come back to you on one of the ideas around safety by design. I'm going to speak to you on that. But let me first turn to Mr. Mittal. Your passion and experience has been different. You have, for the last multiple decades, been determined to give every Indian a mobile phone and a digital connection, 1.3 billion Indians today. That's the scope of the challenge or the journey that you undertake. What have your learnings been in terms of bringing people together, governments, international partners, communities? And what is the next generation Indian challenge? Once you have connected everyone, now how do we make them create value around this particular connection? So what is your journey, Sunil? Well, you know, I operate, as you know, in countries which are woefully inadequate on infrastructure, and it'll take a long time to build physical infrastructure, be that in India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka is having other difficulties, and sub-Saharan Africa. The only way we could have done this in an accelerated way to bring people together was by way of a digital highway. And that, thanks to our friends like Chuck here, the kit that they provide has become more and more efficient and powerful over the years. And we have then put in billions and billions of dollars as an industry put together, maybe over a trillion dollars by now across the globe, to build digital highways. And what that has done is remarkable connectivity and bringing people from the margins into the mainstream of society, into the mainstream of economy. And more needs to be done. Advanced world, of course, now enjoys the benefits of connected world on the internet. Countries like Singapore or the US or the advanced world.  And the developed world was there 23 years back. So it's taken us so long, and still we have not been able to do enough. Even developing countries are only 57% connected. So it's a long way to go. Telecom industries estimates are about $430 billion to be spent by 2030 to create more highways. And now, intervention is coming from space, is coming from 5G, is coming from all sides. Yet it looks like even by 2030, there will still be a large part of the world which will remain disconnected from the advantages of being on the internet and the world economy. People who are on it are reaping the rewards and accelerating their growth and their careers. And people who are out there not connected are suffering immensely. And that's why you're seeing the disparities are all going up. So the mission for all of us, and that's the Addison Alliance discussions, that's the discussions on the UNGA charter on SDGC and all that, we need to accelerate this process. And we need participation beyond just the telecom companies. Now, what is it doing? Look at what happened in pandemic. My god, if we would have not been able to manage the networks, shifting from urban to rural centers, from offices to homes, I'm afraid the world could have been in flames. We seamlessly moved the traffic. We seamlessly provided people connectivity. Their lives kept on going on. They could buy stuff which was required at the homes and emergencies, medicines, care, all sorts of things, financial transactions. Nothing stopped for a day. And that power, if can be recognized by a political leadership all across the world, can help in accelerating and bringing almost everybody onto the internet in the next 10 years. So I would say the world lords, what we have done, they do appreciate what is being provided by these digital highways. But there is still too much load on this industry in terms of spectrum auctions, taxes. And somehow, you hear all the right things, but in the end, you don't see the action from the governments going in the direction of taking a multiplier impact on societies or economies by way of more digital highways. So celebrated, but not necessarily collaborative. I think that's the point you're making. Let me ask you a quick follow-up, though. Being now from an Indian enterprise, largely, which has a global footprint, how do you navigate this political moment for the access mission that you just described, moving from 57% to 100% in the next decade? How do you manage a world which has very sharp political positions? You have a bipolarity in terms of US-China. You have multi-polarity with many others joining the political conversations. How does a business like yours navigate this political moment? Well, I think the world has become much more difficult. We didn't imagine that suddenly the supply chains of the world will be disturbed to a level that we are seeing today. And it's just not my industry almost everything from food to technology. Everything is in some kind of disruption in supply chain. Chinese equipment was being supplied at a very great pace and fantastic prices in decent technology as out of the equation now. The space industry, which was very largely dependent on Russia, is out of equation now. You're not going to see Roscosmos launching anything for the Western world or the rest of the world for long years to come. So there has been dislocation of supply chain to a very high degree. Smart business people, companies which are agile, have tried to shift and move, but at very heavy cost. Today, the silicon is 30%, 40% more expensive than where we are. Devices, which we thought will start to get cheaper so we can put more smartphones in the hands of poorer people, is getting out of reach now. Devices are 30%, 40% higher now. It's gone into another side. So I really hope that we can bring back the supply chains of the world back to calm and sanity where we can service our customers and our constituents. But we are into a serious conflict at the moment. And that's a good question for Brad. Then I'll come to you, Brad. But before that, let me just go to Chuck Robbins. We heard about the access challenge and the access benchmark, but that is not the only ambition we must have. We are also seving to create inclusion and bring people into the digital economy, digital society. And for that, various digital divides need to be overcome, not only the device and the infrastructure, but also, in many ways, the frameworks that are available to others to participate in. So from your experience, and you've been working on this particular front, Cisco has been working on the inclusion agenda. What has your learning been? And what have your success stories been or some models that you think should be replicated at scale? I wish I had a lot of examples for you of successful models, but I think just to reiterate what Sunil was saying, I think as we look at part of the narrative here was about public-private partnerships and how we solve this problem together. And it's incredibly ironic, and I've had so many discussions, particularly in Washington DC, that governments are yelling at the telecom industry to be first with 5G, get everybody connected, all these things that they want them to do, and then they say, and by the way, we want you to spend billions of dollars on a spectrum. We want to regulate you like crazy, and we want to limit what you can charge for your service at the end of the day, and we understand that everything that you're buying is now in an inflationary environment. But hurry up. It's just illogical. And so that's just a fundamental problem that I think is going to have to be dealt with. Even the US now, we have 20 million or so households that were highlighted during the pandemic as these children who couldn't learn because they didn't have broadband. So even in advanced developed worlds, we still have communities that are suffering in the same way. And so we're issuing funding now for broadband, and then we come out with a policy that says all the equipment that is connecting those devices has to be, X percent has to be sourced from the United States when 60% of the cost is in semiconductors that we know are all built outside of the United States. I mean, these are the kind of things we have to figure out. Now, onto your question around it. Our purpose statement as a company is to power an inclusive future for all. And we believe that's through our technology and our beliefs and what we believe in in our community actions. And the thing that the pandemic showed us was what Sunil was talking about, was the power of what's possible when you have the appropriate technology and the appropriate connectivity and the appropriate device at the end. And then you have to have the appropriate services on top of it. But what I hope we will come out of this with is, A, we need governments to be more rational and be realistic if they wanna really solve this problem. And then we need to remember from the pandemic that we actually proved, it may not be the optimum way for you to receive services, but we proved that when you have broadband connectivity, you can be educated. You might prefer to be in a classroom, but you can be educated. You can receive certain aspects of healthcare. You can actually interact in the financial systems and do financial transactions. And the other thing we learned is, you don't have to move to a metro area to get a job. So now we can educate these people, we can connect them, and we, as an industry, can now hire them. So if you're trying to really figure out how you give people opportunity, all of those things together, I just hope you don't lose the learnings because I believe that's what we need to do, but we're gonna need the government first to come in and help and get some of these challenges out of the way. And how does Cisco, being a U.S. company, see its role in some of the emerging geographies that Sunil serves, for example, and how do you bring price points to compete with what the Chinese used to offer Sunil earlier? Oh, we're super cost-effective, right, Sunil? We actually, I mean, our pricing is fundamentally just is reflective of the market. We're never gonna be the cheapest. But if you think about why are the Chinese products more cost-effective is because it's a public-private partnership, whether you like it or not. Correct. And the Chinese have been supporting their companies very effectively, and when they say we have a mission to be the first to deploy 5G, they're gonna come together and deploy 5G. May not like how they do it, but they're gonna do it, right? And that's just, I think we need more of that mental approach within, obviously, Western norms and standards, but I think that's what we need to do. So I think both of you made a strong pitch for a renewed public-private endeavor to sustain the sector in the days ahead. Brad, let me turn to you on cyber diplomacy. Microsoft has been the champion of the multi-stakeholder model of bringing different voices into global discussions. Why is multi-stakeholder important for us today? The multi-stakeholder approach important for us today? Well, I think it starts with building what I truly believe is one of the greatest advances of the 20th century, multilateralism, and then recognizing that for it to be effective in the 21st century, it has to involve multi-stakeholderism. It's got to do it, still grounded in the recognition that we quite rightly live in a world where governments have the sole authority to enact laws within their territories, but especially digital technology spreads around the world. So starting with the Paris call in 2018, we really were very supportive of President Macron, the notion of having a multi-stakeholder declaration to establish principles around trust and security in cyberspace and then make it concrete, make it real with practical projects that would bring people together. And when you just think about what it takes for the world to move as fast as say the pace of technology, it takes, I think, bringing people together from different sectors and it takes working together in new ways. And I think it's just worth pausing and just reflecting for a moment on just what I would regard as almost the historic significance of what we heard a minute ago from Singapore. Just think about this. Instead of a government saying we have decided here is a law, here is a regulation, everyone must obey, they've said we're bringing people together, they had a process for dialogue, here is a standard and people go start to implement it but let's have a feedback loop. The notion of having a minimally viable product can transform the way we all work together. And then of course as we get more experience I think we're all gonna find it that we're effective, consensus is easier to achieve, it is easier to move ideas around the world and across borders. So I think it's all about bringing more people together and working together in new ways. Brad, some would argue that today technology is no longer apolitical. You've seen the mobilization of American companies to align with the western position on Ukraine, for example, a country has been canceled on certain platforms and I'm not going to the merits of it, I'm just saying that it has happened, which tells you that companies eventually respond to their sovereigns. Now how do you further the cause of being transnational corporations, global platforms, when at the heart of it, we still respond to sovereign positions? How do you manage this contradiction? I think it is always to be principled, to ask yourself and then define for yourself and be clear with the public the principles for which you stand and on which you will run your business. For a company like Microsoft, we didn't start defending Ukraine in 2022. We started in 2017 in the wake of the not-petia attack and we did it on a principled basis, both with our endorsement of what we called a digital Geneva convention and then the formation of another coalition, in this case, a tech industry coalition around what's called the tech accord and it has four principles but the two most fundamental are we will defend any nation against a cyber attack from another or fundamentally in the business of defense. When we build the data center in a country, we basically take on the proposition of helping to defend that country from attack. Even if it means as it has in Ukraine, moving data outside the country as we did for 16 of the 17 Ukrainian ministries so they can continue to operate even while the Russians are directing cruise missiles against the government's own data center. But we also said we won't help any government attack, say, innocent civilians in another. That is not a principle that is confined to one country or the West. And I would say we think about this principle even when at times it may put us a little bit at odds, not with the law because obviously we follow sanctions laws and the like. But we take so seriously this principle of supporting innocent civilians that in Russia today we'll still provide security updates for the 600,000 computers that are in Russian hospitals and in medical clinics. We could turn off the ability to keep people alive. That itself I think would violate one of the most important fundamental principles to emerge from the 20th century. So fundamentally, yes, it's all about aligning support for governments with a conviction around principle. And how likely or how robust can we expect a digital compact in the future to be in this highly polarized world? Is your job tougher today? Well, everybody's job is tougher today. I mean, look, we've got a pandemic, we've got a war, we've got climate. I mean, it's like living in the most challenging time that one could almost imagine and yet knowing that it can still always get worse. But I still think that when you look at something like the global digital compact, you look at where the UN Secretary General is trying to take things. I look at that in part as the only private sector representative among the 16 SDG advocates. Nothing is ever perfect. Things are always under stress. But you just have to ask yourself, is the future gonna be better if we pull together or whether we pull apart? The world is more divided. But ultimately, if the people who believe in the great principles that I think are the principles that offer the most help, look, we've got to keep pushing forward. So I'm gonna bring all of you into this conversation at this stage, and while you can raise your hands and you get the mic to you if you wanna pose the question, but Minister Teo, maybe I can ask you one more follow-up question. Sure. How does a country so rich with ideas like Singapore? Make sure that you have the corporate buy-in from the West Coast, from companies in different parts of Asia. How do you bring the businesses to respond to the safety concerns you outlined? You talk about women's safety. We also have cultural contexts that can create situations which are incidentally, which can catalyze grievances in certain societies. How do you get different corporations around the world, Singapore, to respond to some of your concerns around your society, your digital society? Thank you, Samir. It's a really great question. And I was also reflecting on Chuck's comments as well as Sunil's comments about governments and the kind of difficult pressures that governments may end up putting on you. I can't profess to speak on behalf of all governments, but I can certainly say that in every country they have their own political pressures and the leaders have imperatives of their own to attend to. The approach that we have taken in Singapore is to chuck points about carriers and telcos being relied upon to do the heavy lifting and yet not being able to do things like charging with a free hand. We do all the nagging too, but in Singapore I think we adopt the approach that prices are best set by the market. And the way in which we would deal with it is that recognizing that you would set prices on the basis of what is necessary to make a return and also then that would also have to attend to affordability. It's the government's role to step in, to look after people who find whatever prices are charged is not affordable. So that's the philosophy that we take. So when it comes to, for example, digital connectivity, most people will be able to afford the mobile data plans, but we accept that a certain group that will find it very difficult and the way to deal with it is not to ask you to set prices, to cater to them, but for the state to step in, to close that gap. So that's the approach that we've taken. But it goes back to the broader issue of how to get corporates involved in this process. And especially the international corporations. Yes, and I think it starts by having the philosophy of not villainizing any particular stakeholder and to try and bring people in, work towards a common purpose. Now this sounds really quite, you know, cliched. It's been said many times before. And the real hard work is in establishing a common purpose and in identifying in which specific areas people can make a contribution. We've done this for digital inclusion. We created a movement. We call it the digital for life movement. Most of the companies are involved in it one way or the other. So for example, Google contributes by helping little children become more savvy in terms of protecting themselves from online harms. Then we've got other companies that are, you know, looking at the issue from different perspectives. For example, getting women more involved in the tech workforce or also having the opportunities to get back into the landscape of work when they have had to step aside, you know, because of caregiving responsibilities. So not villainizing anyone, but also then finding the opportunities to work together. So that's the way in which we approach it. The other very important thing is that, you know, Abrad has talked about it in his book before and which is that the role of government ultimately also involves regulations. The question is that in digital domain, regulations are still so new. There is no playbook that you can easily copy from any other country and say, you know, we adapted to our own purposes. And I think in this domain, the approach that we have taken is also then that to work with the companies themselves. And you have to let us know whether a particular set of regulations, you know, is going to be viable. You can actually implement it. And as a result, the government can enforce upon it. And we like to keep this dialogue going simply because the purpose of regulation has to be to achieve some level of effectiveness. And to do so without understanding how the technology actually works, I think we are putting ourselves in a very difficult position. So minimum viable product applies to testing frameworks, toolkits. Minimum viable products probably applies to regulations, too. Yeah. Great. Bullgang, you want to come in? Yeah, thank you very much. My name is Wolfgang Klein. Next time, we will try out Professor from the University of Aarhus. It was a member of the ICANN Board. You know, I take this regulation as the starting point for my question because Brett, you argued with principles as the starting point. So principles are not legally binding. So it's at our voluntary norms. And what we have seen over the last 20 years is that there was always, you know, a mix of, you know, calls for stronger, legally binding regulation or general frameworks. And we have moved now in a moment where the European Commission comes with more and more strong, legally binding regulation.  So what is the way forward with regulation? So we have called this smart regulation a combination of legally binding and voluntary norms because with voluntary norms, as we have seen, you know, this works partly. But then at the end of the day, you'll have monopolies or some things, you know, which has to be, you know, channeled in a way that it, you know, works for all stakeholders and not only for one stakeholder. So mighty stakeholder means you have to take into account the interests of all. Wolfgang, I had the question. And not only of one. Thank you. Oh, that's okay. So do you want to come in, Brett? Sure, I mean, I look to me, the answer here is to have a toolbox with more tools in it. And I think that's what we're all trying to build together in part with the multi-stakeholder initiatives, in part with the creation of new norms, new initiatives that help us learn from each other. But at the end of the day, I would absolutely sort of salute the flag that says we do need laws and we do need regulations because the public needs to have confidence that everyone's accountable. And especially in democratic societies, that I think is what gives the public trust and confidence. I absolutely think that there's a lot to be said for minimal viable regulation. That's actually a concept that we wrote about a little bit and endorsed in our book. And I was very interested just to see the reaction from people around the world. Some people like it, some people don't. The people who have been critical of it have said they don't like to have a minimally viable regulation because they fear that once a government acts once, it will never act again. And the fundamental key, I think to having minimally viable regulation is frankly to have something that is more narrowly scoped to something that people actually understand. So one of the examples to put it in concrete terms that I think is among the most interesting is there is so much in the world of AI, but at least starting with some laws around facial recognition. And there have been some state legislative activity, some other national legislative activity where I think things have advanced enough to say, you know what, we can have a law and a regulation in this space and then we're all gonna learn from it. But I think that's one way to learn. I think what Singapore is doing is another way to learn. I think there's a lot of importance in what the European Commission and Union are moving forward with. And yet I do think there's probably a little bit more risk that if one goes broad and fast at the same time, the likelihood of mistakes begins to increase. So I wanna pose a follow up question to all the panelists and I'll invite you to join in if any one of you have a question. But let us go down to the, Sunil, maybe I can start with you and then ask Chuck to comment as well. When you are discussing regulation and regulatory design in India, in Africa, in other parts that you work in, are the impulses completely different? Is the conversation that is happening around regulation in many of those societies of a very different nature and texture? Is multi-stakeholderism that Brad is espousing and most of us vote for, does it capture voices from the global South and are they given space in the design of the future? Or are we still seeing a largely developed country conversation designing the digital future? Well, I would say it's a mixed bag. If you really look at it, even very advanced countries have not had the perfect regulatory regime from day one. It's evolved over a period of time, things have got better, but not because of superior outcomes of deliberations and discussions, but hard outcomes of businesses out there. So almost every government felt that if you give a new license for a mobile phone, you can make a lot of money, sell more spectrum, create more competition. Now this gap went on for a very long period of time and lots of countries including India as you know, give 12, 13 new licenses. Now for every business or every sector, there is a point of inflection after which more competition hurts. And especially where you have very large amounts of capital expenditure, I mean, our industry spends over 25% of its revenues on new capital expenditure every year. That's a very large, it's a very, very capital intensive industry. And second is you replicate a lot of assets. People are building fiber lanes next to each other, people are building towers next to each other. So you just keep on replicating, wastefully deploying a lot of infrastructure because everybody wants to have stranglehold and make defenses of their power of balance sheets so they will not share infrastructure. But over a period of time, where are we? India is down to two and a half operators. Africa mostly where our operators down to two operators. They're barely one or two countries where they are three. Yet, we saw in Singapore, small country, three operators, a fourth license has been given. Inexplicable, why would you give a fourth license when for a small nation's island state that you have in Singapore, three would have been enough? So it's back and forth always the government wanting more competition for the customers or wanting to cash in more money for spectrum or licenses. Yet, we end up in the same place that one or two people will consolidate and die. Look at Europe today, they've been fighting a battle for the last seven years, eight years now, that they want to consolidate. And regulator after regulator have been rejecting it. Ofcom rejected a merger, EU rejected many mergers, but now finally I think it's being allowed because they've realized if you want 5G, if you want solid, robust highways around the globe, you need to have two, three very strong operators rather than fragmented, weak, half-baked operators which are many. So I would say there is no one conversation anywhere. Outcomes are defining regulation and I really feel we need to start to define outcomes from the regulation, the other way around.  That should be the principal way of dealing with it. Look at Indian digital policy. Every year, whenever the policy has been made every five, seven, eight years, revenue maximization is not the objective. That is a highlight of every policy. Yet that's exactly what happens. So that's, there's a conundrum there. Chuck, you wanna come in on the... Well, when I talk to the regulators, I think the first thing we have to acknowledge is that the technology world is moving so rapidly. I mean, I don't know how these guys feel, but I live in it and I've been in it since I got out of college. And I have to work hard to keep up with everything that's going on. So first of all, I'm very empathetic to government regulators who don't live it every day, trying to figure out how do I regulate this at the pace it's moving in an effective way. So I have great respect for your comment that you're trying to engage with the private sector and test it because I think that's what I've always believed needed to happen is we need to have proactive conversations up front where the governments may ultimately make a decision that is counter to what we may believe they should, but at least having the conversations so that we can describe unintended consequences because there are a lot of them. I was talking to some of the European commissioners yesterday about this current state of countries in Europe where each individual country wants their own data sovereignty. They want you to build data centers in each country. And the unintended consequence of that is it's gonna cost all the companies so much more money to get there, which means your services are gonna cost more than you really are thinking about which is going to make you less competitive on the global stage. So I mean, it's a simple example, but I mean, those are the kinds of things that we try to talk through with the regulators and where you have governments that really wanna have that interaction on partner. I think you get comments into regulation and where you don't, you know, where the government is saying we don't trust business in the first place so we're not gonna have the conversation. I think you get regulation that is generally not constructive. Okay, so I'm gonna now begin the last round of questions. Okay, the lady, hand back. Please go ahead. There are a couple of questions there. Hi, Samir. I'm Julian McGrant. I'm Australia's E-Safety Commissioner, a regulator for online harms. I spent 17 years working for Brad and at Twitter and Adobe as well. So I guess I'm a poacher turned gamekeeper. I think Samir was alluding to safety by design. Very excited to hear about your AI tools because we built interactive tools working with 180 companies over a four-year period so that they can assess their risks. But when we think about these major technology shifts but also paradigm shifts to the metaverse and to the decentralized Web 3.0 world, I'm seeing shades of the open source movement in the late 1990s. There's a lot of techno utopianism about what this might look like. So how do we anticipate, harness the benefits but anticipate the risks and build the safety, privacy, and security into these platforms and technologies instead of just retrofitting them after the damage has been done and once we arrive? Thanks, Julian. There's another question that we can take that as well and then we'll come to the... Sure, yeah. Hi, Chuck. My question is for all of you but it's based on what you just talked about. I'm with Boeing. I'm the Chief Information Officer. So my question is around data sovereignty and just kind of what you all think about that, the regulations and kind of back to your point is a little bit about how does that make us better as a united nation? So we have the question on how do you anticipate harms going ahead? Like you do three rounds of testing before you allow the vaccine into your body. Can we do that? Something like that for technology as well. That's the first question. The second is around data sovereignty. And the third. And the third. And then we'll go around the final round. The third is around civil society. We keep using this term civil society in everything we write but I basically heard a conversation of government and enterprise today. Right? What does civil society mean? How are you investing in actually engaging with voices that are different who are not looking at the outcomes that you mentioned, Mr. Mittal, but maybe seeking a certain other self-actualization outcomes which are very different to businesses. So Brad, let's start with you and we'll end with the minister. In three minutes and 34 seconds we see the timer on the back. Let me just say we live in a world where data does need to reside within a country and needs to be governed by its laws but data also needs to move in order for business and the world to move forward. And we're trying to work through that balance. It's a very complicated thing. I think one of the keys to making this work is to invest in informing each other, listening to each other, learning from each other, Julie's point, trying to anticipate earlier the problems that we're gonna need to solve so that we're not arriving too late. But the last thing that I would note and it goes back to your point about the global south. Yeah, two months ago I was in Ghana, Nigeria, Egypt and Kenya and in every country met with the head of state or the prime minister and the ICT minister. These people are amazing because what you see are two things in the global south. One is they're leapfrogging in some instances, governments in the North because they're not bound by administrative or bureaucratic structures that were put in place in some cases in the 1980s or 50s or 20s. So you see ICT ministries with broad authority. The second thing you're seeing is frankly a lot of people that are very similar to Julian McGrant in Australia. You're seeing people leading ICT ministries who started their careers in tech. And they are not advancing the tech sector's agenda, that's not their job. They are advancing their country's agenda. But they are doing it with a level of practical understanding that frankly I think benefits their country and benefits everyone. Thanks, Matt. Chuck. Well, I think on the day to sovereignty front, I agree with Brad, I think what we need is it's almost like the regulatory discussion. We just need to come together and really talk about what you're trying to achieve and how do we do it together. And we need more consistency across countries, I think. And I think we're getting closer to a political world where we could at least have that conversation versus where we were say four years ago. And I think on the final thing on the civil society thing, I think it's just important for us in today's world we all have the obligation to actually work deeply with communities and people and everything like that. And I think we're all doing it. I mean, I know all these folks so it's just, we do that too, we just didn't talk about it today. 30 seconds to you, Sunil. Well, I think data localization is led by data sovereignty every country, however small it is, we are now dealing with them. Small tiny countries in Africa want data localization. Data sovereignty has become a huge issue. This is going to increase exponentially the cost of operations, but there is no choice out of this now. This is a hard fact. It's impossible for us to host servers in India for Africa, they were not accepted. Same will happen for other places. And the last is data privacy. That's the civil society part. Customers want their data to be secure and kept private. And these are the three features of data which are very important. And finally, customer wants great value, great pricing and want to be connected on the network. And that is what we are discussing today. Minister Teo, you have the final word. Well, I fully agree with my fellow panelists that when it comes to data, it's a really important area for us to get right for the future. But if we dig a little bit deeper and ask ourselves, what exactly are we trying to achieve with data management? It's actually to have a good system of governance that can assure individuals of their privacy and that when businesses are able to use the data for innovative purposes, it should be promoted in a helpful way. So how to get to a system where data governance is assured and where data flows, especially across borders, can also be held up in a secure manner. I think those are the practical things that we should work on. We must make a serious effort to really not try to politicize this whole process. That would be my take. So, less politicization, more optimism. We are closing this session because many of you have to run to the next. Thank you so much for joining us and please join me in applauding the wonderful panel. Thank you.


Thank you very much, Camilla. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. It's a great honour and privilege to be invited here today and to do this valuable award lecture. In many ways, Camilla, I think you kind of planted the seed in me because I saw you in September in New York. And I was wondering about what would make a reasonably intelligent lecture. And you said to me, just think about something strategic. Not necessarily something normative but something strategic. And I think that's really planted the seed in me to talk about Africa's climate change action. But more in terms of what is Africa doing and how important it is that we look towards writing a new narrative on climate change. So in many ways, I feel that I do not need a better compass than that reward to guide me through this discussion. And to use the foundations of human security, social justice, equity to help shape my talk. As for the principles of justice and egalitarianism, there was no better champion and indeed better visionary advocate than bad reward. So let's turn to Africa. Throughout history, Africa has been actively upside, writing and rewriting different narratives of its development trajectory. Climate change, I would say, provides another compelling opportunity to scan through these narratives and to rewrite parts of it. I've deliberately chosen the title, Rewriting the Narrative on Africa and Climate Change, a case of standing needy in the river and dying of thirst. Cos I do feel that Africa's situation is very often a paradox. It's a continent of plenty, but then there is so much poverty. This is also precisely because I'd like to argue that the time has come for Africa to write a new narrative, but to use climate change as a business opportunity, a business opportunity that will come with sustained growth, new technologies, job creation in climate sensitive sectors such as agriculture, water and energy. Climate change has been called one of the most defining challenges of the 21st century. But here, it is interesting that part of the narrative, we tend to hear a lot of discussion about Africa being the least contributor to Grimhouse gas emissions and Africa having the least capacity to adapt to climate change. What's interesting in this case is that climate change does provide one of the greatest opportunities that we have to draw up a social contract. This is a social contract that will unite the interest of current generation as well as the needs of future generations. Body would be best today to anchor a good part of my discussion on the element of human security, because I think human security would give me a number of strands that I think would be fundamental for this discussion. Human security, because it contains issues of governance, environmental risk threats, as well as opportunities. All of this is intricately designed within the rich tapestry of development. Now I wonder what that would have made of all this. She envisioned a new humanism that was predicated on morality and one in which our collective survival is tied to the notion that we survive as a human race. Human security must be part of our collective DNA, or we will become imbued with an extreme sense of self, and without any moral compass we will self-destruct and perish together. In fact, Barbara Ward remarked and I quote, our physical unity has gone ahead of our moral unity. Barbara Ward talked about the irreversible geophysical unity of one sheared and single planet, and she concluded, I quote, We cannot change it, it envelops us, provides us, sustains us. Our only choice is to preserve it in corporate adventures or to do, or to end it and ourselves in a common ruin. Ladies and gentlemen, rewriting the climate change narrative in Africa must be done with history as the main rationale, balanced with a sense of purpose. To get this sense of history I'm going to journey through three-time horizons. The first-time horizon is the pre-colonial and formal colonial period, and I hope that this will help us understand just how important natural resources were in shaping the economies of Europe. The second-time horizon is the post-colonial period, and in this way I would like to scan very briefly the last 20 years of climate negotiations. And in the third-time horizon I would like to look at Africa post-2015 to ask this question. What will enable the management of Africa's natural resources to promote and sustain growth? And how does climate change help or hinder? Scanning through my first-time horizon and the colonial period I would like to perhaps just share with you the words of Madame Zuma, who, as most of you would know, is the chairperson of the African Union Commission. And this is what she said. The importance of natural resources to Africa's history and to its future cannot be overemphasised. We were colonised because of our natural resources. Our current status in the global economy is defined by our natural resources, and our future will be determined by the way in which we utilise our natural resources. End of good. So if we look back in time from the 1600s to the early 1800s, the wealth of nation was based on mercantilism, and political influence was tied largely to the size of nations' merchant fleet and its accumulation of tradeable goods. By the end of the 1700s, some nations were already shifting towards protectionism while attempting to improve their infrastructure. And towards the end of the 19th century, Western Europe was experiencing the long depression. Markets were saturated by the outputs of new industries, springing all over Europe, hungry for cheap labour and raw materials. With high and ever increasing inequality, Max was predicting that oppressed working classes of Europe would rise and overthrow the owners of industry. Africa was divided up by colonial powers to provide raw materials for the industries of Europe. And in so doing, Africa was buying off urban discontent in the Metropoles and funding the political administration, social programmes and economic development. By the end of the independence era, Africa was a net exporter of food. From independence throughout to the 1990s, most of Africa was characterised by high dependency on natural resources and weak growth. Africa has been deficient in many of the growth indicators, whether these be openness to trade, public infrastructure, provision of health services, etc. In recent times, there has been an upturn in terms of trade due to higher commodities with East Asian demand. But Africa's growth remained mainly export-led and this can be observed in the continent's natural resource depletion. African agriculture is poorly integrated with other sectors such as manufacturing. Africa did fail to industrialise quickly and produces remain on the lower ranks of the global value chain. This was partly as a result of the exigencies of structural adjustment and insistence by international financial institution to focus on the so-called comparative advantage. Today, the continent imports one-third of its grain. This dependency will greatly increase its vulnerability to fluctuate in terms of trade and variations in availability of imported food stuff. Most of us witnessed and saw headlines of the food hike of 2008. Today, Africa is battling against climate change impacts and these impacts are already resulting in agricultural losses amounting to 2% to 7% of GDP. Given the importance of agriculture as a revenue earner and as the biggest employer in most African countries, the livelihoods of millions are at stake. Ladies and gentlemen, food insecurity is largely due to unstable food systems. Yet Africa has no choice but to become more food secure. Otherwise, how will it feed a population of 4 billion by the end of the century? The only way it can do that is if it's able to take agriculture with it as a high performing sector. What would this mean? It means that this will become a sector that will be able to utilise critical sectors such as energy and water and become the basis of industrialisation. It also means a sector that can realise potential from wealth of raw materials that are available. Yet, as you know, economic growth in South Saharan Africa is rising. We've growth forecast to exceed 5% in 2014. The performance is boosted by rising investment in natural resources and infrastructure and stronger household spending. Indeed, ladies and gentlemen, most of you would recall that 10 years ago the economies had a title that saved Africa the hopeless continent. And now 10 years down the line, we've seen a lot of titles, a lot of headlines about Africa rising. Indeed, a wall bank report claimed that Africa could be on the brink of an economic take off much like China was 30 years ago. And the paper noted that in both cases the mass population of young workers stood at the ready to boost growth. So it's important to understand that Africa was very much a participant, however unwilling in the development of today's globalised world economy. And whether we agree or not, this globalised economy is one in which Africa finds itself in the periphery. And this is as true for the agricultural industrial revolution as it is for the enormous rise of the tertiary sector in the latter half of the 20th century. So Africa has also been witness to the concomitant growth of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to the extent of almost 400 parts of million today. And this growth will lead to inevitable loss and damage if it's not stemmed. This participation, as well as constantly evolving nature of the now globalised economy would help to explain why Africa cannot produce similar patterns of development. Now, Africa cannot produce an industrial revolution nor can it produce the kind of agricultural transformation that we've seen in the industrial world. I think partly because we know that there is a problem of atmospheric space, so much of the atmospheric space has been taken up already. But more than that, Africa was also part of this peripheralised economy and stayed in the periphery basically looking in. So how does it move from the periphery? Africa must seek new avenues of low-carbon innovative growth. A low-carbon growth trajectory that features new technological economic processes. This new road will increase Africa's primary sector base growth and will also surpass the performance of the much rehearsed millennium development growth. This is not to say that Africa can turn its back on primary extraction nor can it seek to expand its secondary and tertiary sectors however mobile the latter sector has become. What I'm proposing here is a new paradigm of development for Africa. The new narrative needs to be written in ways that understand the finite nature of natural resources. So as custodian of so much of the world's potential raw materials, Africa can manage these resources whilst engineering its pathway to sustainable development, particularly in the domain of food production and security. And at the same time also mitigating emissions while adapting to enhance African and world human security. And I guess in so doing Africa would open the door as well to its own transition out of the periphery by exploiting the benefits of growth in primary commodities. And by applying the science that describes and defines vulnerability of the world to the ever-growing impacts of extreme weather and climate change, Africa can channel and promote new green and blue low-carbon development. So there are vital sectors that Africa must look into and these sectors are energy, information technology, microelectronics that must connect to one another and becoming more coherent and more compatible. So Africa will embark on a new path of sustainable development and it's a path that will align Africa with world demand and would help it also in promoting the most modern practices and aimed at reducing social inequalities in Africa. And these actions will also help in reducing the risk of conflict and building social ecological resilience in the interests of both Africa and the global community. The word new is key here. It recognises the inescapable fact that Africa can only write a new narrative, a new climate compatible narrative of development for itself in relation to the rest of the world by accepting its past role in history. And in short, Africa can fashion its own contrary of wave, but one that does not succumb to the boom and boost cycles that historically have characterised economic development and brought the world to the brink of environmental catastrophe. So in pursuing such a development path, Africa can become a leader in the climate debate and action post 2015. So what does it need to do? What are the key chapters that are important for this new narrative? I will say that the first chapter will be on governance. The new narrative means that the governance landscape will need to fundamentally change. The policy space must be enlarged and it must be enlarging in ways that would accommodate other actors. The state and the urgency of climate change assign central responsibility to the governments as designers and implementers of adaptation responses. But the global architecture to manage climate change, including financing of climate adaptation and mitigation, cannot be left in the hands of the state alone. It needs a complex web of multilateral and bilateral mechanisms that depend in turn on a properly functional and capacitated state, a state with appropriate national and subnational institutions to function. In that the state has been very absent in some cases in the development and the management of many adaptation strategies. Privatisation of many services such as water and sewage, energy generation, transportation and agriculture has led to the state withdrawing from the sectors in which adaptation will be key. So a new narrative can reinforce the importance of public-private partnerships. Climate change governance in Africa called to renew public engagement in formulating national responses, a review of the quality of growth and development processes and greater emphasis on equity. In such a scenario and given the challenges of foreign direct investment and market expansion for climate governance, a key governance question is how can the capacities of the states and by extension regional institutions be strengthened and connected to subnational levels where adaptation takes shape to ensure the emergence of a robust climate governance that would support Africa's development. And the second chapter of this new narrative I think will be on leadership. So as we're looking towards post 2015 and especially towards Paris, how can we start building a compelling case for a new narrative that emphasises opportunities rather than constraints? What do we need to place Africa at the centre stage of the agenda setting debate? And in the past Africa has been unable to surmount the barriers that have prevented it from making an entry point into key negotiations instruments such as the clean development mechanism. Now some countries in Africa have done this already. I think Ethiopia is a very interesting story and case because bold leadership has really provided and produced some very good results where Ethiopia has decided by 2022 it wants to decarbonise its economy. And it took a very clear vision and clear rationale to be able to get there. So Ethiopia's climate resilient green economy was developed to insulate the country from the impacts of climate change by identifying environmentally sustainable economic opportunities that would hold the key to accelerating Ethiopia's development. What else was needed? I think I've already mentioned that it took bold leadership through the person of Prime Minister, former Prime Minister Melisyn Aiwi. It also took a clear governance strategy and so the government was able to design a number of fast-track initiatives which have the potential to propel economic growth, capture large abatements as well as attract carbon financing. Let us also turn to another country in Africa, Mozambique. That's another champion which is also taking proactive steps to become carbon neutral. And we have seen other countries that have identified opportunities in the context of climate finance to sharpen their leadership in climate policy. Benin is an interesting country as well, an interesting story. Benin has launched a very ambitious reforestation programme which it has 10 million inhabitants in Benin and the government of Benin has decided to plant one tree for each inhabitants. So they called it Demillion Dam for Demillion Dam. So very, very ambitious as well. And what's exciting about such stories is that in the case of Benin, through this reforestation programme, they're trying to see how they can join the dots of both adaptation and mitigation. So where climate action must be anchored and equity based on common but differentiated responsibilities, the reality is that many of the climate policy instruments reinforce a symmetry between annex one and annex and non annex one countries. Climate finance, as you know, has been one of the most intractable aspects of the negotiations. And with the unveiling of moneys, we've heard today that we think should expect roughly about nine billion dollars, I think, in the green climate fund. As you know, a lot of the moneys that we're going into the fast start finance, the African Climate Policy Centre, for instance, have done a study and it's an interesting choice of war because we were saying that we're talking about fast start finance but it happened very slow in coming. And the study that the ACPC did mentioned that a lot of these moneys were actual pledges. So there's this whole debate about what is new and what's additional. I think, however, given the fact that many of these finance and funds that are available are talking about mitigation projects, that it's also now time for Africa to align itself on that mitigation avenue, that mitigation pathway. I would say it's been 20 years that Africa has been talking about adaptation, adaptation, adaptation. And whilst we know that adaptation is an imperative, Africa can and should also mitigate, not for emissions reductions but mitigate for development. A low carbon development will develop its energy and agricultural sectors and this will help in reducing emissions in deforestation and agriculture as well as enable Africa to launch ambitious climate smart agricultural initiatives. Indeed, most Africans and most Africans in the negotiations actually would say that the negotiations have been painfully slow and this has actually prompted a number of Africans to call for an alternative space. What does an alternative space mean? It means that you will take the most progressive countries who can pull their resources and they can talk about some of the parts of deforestation that have not gone fast enough. They can invent if you like your own fast lane and talk about issues related to agriculture, red and red plus. The third chapter in this narrative is energy. Across Africa climate change provides the sphere for countries to invest in renewable energy technologies to turn agriculture into a booming industry and to build human and institutional capacities geared towards a knowledge economy that will support innovation, research and development. There must be also investment in climate services so that climate services can act as a credible resource for funds and a range of people that are dependent on natural resource assets. I think we all know that without climate science, which is the very basis of any good adaptation and mitigation initiative, then a lot of the management of climate impacts would be shortleaved. So we really do need climate science as the catalyst to drive any adaptation and mitigation initiatives. Unlocking Africa's agriculture would release the potential to reduce poverty and increase the current growth rate. Most industrialised nations have achieved growth accompanied or preceded by agricultural transformation. Agriculture employs about 70-75% of African population. It contributes about 30% to the African GDP and it constitutes 50% of total export value. Yet agricultural productivity averaging around 1.5 tonnes per hectare is the lowest in the world. Indeed, less than 10% of African arable land is currently used for food production and only 6% of arable land is irrigated. So Africa needs stable, full systems to be able to grow sustainably. Therefore, leveraging the continent's agriculture is critical given Africa's grain population and ever-increasing demand for food. The continent's agricultural sector is yet to be capitalised as an engine for propelling economic growth and transformation. Indeed, some countries have been moving towards practices that can integrate climate change strategies to increase food production and sees all developmental benefits the sector has to offer. Uganda, for instance, thanks to being one of the lowest users of artificial fertilisers, has been making great strides in the organic food market. Uganda's certified organic exports have increased from 3.7 million to 22.8 million in less than four years. In Zambia, the sales of surplus crops that apply ecosystem-based adaptation grew from 26 to 69 in recent years. So, in the next 20 years, Africa's demand for energy will increase in line with its population and economic growth. The continent's current energy supply is characterised by unpredictable and insecure power sources. But the strong correlation between economic growth and energy consumption, Africa should move towards sustainable and renewable sources of energy. Today, the continent accounts for only 4% of the total energy consumption, but it represents 15% of the world's population. And I'm sure you would agree with me that this in itself is a big mismatch. Africa has the world largest potential for renewable energy power generation through its vast solar biomass, wind resources, as well as geothermal and other sources. So, this potential could drive economic growth with significant job creation and environmental gains. And there are examples also across the continent. Cape Ver, for instance, has a target to generate 50% of its energy from renewable energy sources by 2050. It has one of the largest wind power projects. And Kenya is also the first country in Africa to generate electricity from geothermal sources. South Africa has 64 energy projects, which will add around 3,900 megawatts of wind, solar, photovol type and concentrating power to South African energy mix. So, setting clear goals and establishing a dedicated and authorised agency responsible for promoting, initiating and financing renewable energy projects by African governments could assist in creating private investor confidence in renewable energy. And governments also, by guaranteeing the purchase of electricity from renewable energy sources at a predetermined attractive price, could also stimulate new private investment in the renewable energy sector. In addition, feeding tariffs could be an effective policy instrument to stimulate investment in renewable energy generation and can also offer long-term contracts to renewable energy producers. So, my first chapter, I'm almost there, is the importance of investing in people. So, Africa's richness do not only come from natural resources, but from its people. This is something I've said before, but I believe that women and youth remain the single largest on-tap potential that the continent has. We have seen a report from UNICEF, which talks about just the population in terms of shared demographics, how this is going to increase by 2050. And the report mentions that the future of humanity is increasingly African, and it shows massive shifts in the world's child population towards Africa. The number of Africans under 18 may swell by two-thirds to reach almost a billion by 2050. So, again, in terms of shared demographics, and I think this is not a foolish or reckless statement to make, but I believe that Africa may well end up being the custodian of the world. So, not investing in the African youth can really constitute a blessing or a curse. The youths constitute an unlimited potential to expand Africa's workforce, as well as promote job creation and entrepreneurship. We must invest in the right skills, training capacity and access to technology to take advantage of emerging opportunities. And this is why my institution, UNECA, through the Clean Day Initiative, would be launching a one million fellowship programme that would help build a critical mass of young African climate scientists. My final chapter is on science and technology. Africa cannot win the climate change, cannot win the fight against climate change rather without taking science and technology along with it. Innovation, as you all know, plays a central role in building a transition to a low-carbon economy. Innovation and technological progress are by far the most important drivers of long-term growth in productivity and output. So, African governments fully recognise the role they play in endogenous and self-sustainable development. And interestingly, in 1980, the Lagos Plan of Action laid out a very clear strategy for deliberate deployment of science and technology. And here again, there are visible champions. Rwanda has revolutionised its information and communication technology, ICT, and demonstrated that it's possible to live for dirty and inefficient technologies and products. In few African countries, climate science and information services have become transformative tools for African farmers. So, a deliberative move to mitigate poor development, as I've said before, rather than for emissions reduction, will keep the African kite rising against the wind. In conclusion, ladies and gentlemen, Africa has tremendous wealth of human and natural resources. And yes, we all know that if this is properly coordinated, the world will offer a unique set of chances to overcome climate change challenges and turn risk into opportunities. The very fact that Africa has 54 countries, imagine 54 voices on the international forum, and if they're all stinging from the same hymships, that would be very much a force to be reckoned with. We're counting down to Paris, and Africa and the world is preparing for a successful treaty. The space for Africa to resolve its problem is shrinking, and the pace of the negotiations I've said is denying farmers, pastoralists and fishers their opportunity for a reasonable chance of arriving at a sustainable livelihood. So, African communities need not spend the next 20 years asking why a continent that has 60% of the world's arable land remains the only region where people still die of farming. And African youth cannot also wonder whether Africa will continue to rise with as few as 35 scientists and engineers per million inhabitants. The principles of self-interest and common but differentiated responsibility calls for a shared vision across the world, one that allows us to manage climate change impacts for the benefit of humanity and for the sustainable growth of Africa and the world's children. Full compliance with the Convention, as we know it, will not prevent dangerous interference with the climate system, but we must act to seize the opportunity for international cooperation. We need to produce a strong enough current that would lift all the boats, like the metaphorical river that I referred to in my introduction. In spite of the flows, the bends and the turns, Africa has limitless potential to win the fight against climate change. And in the words of Bible Ward, I quote, the first microorganism must have been minute enough in the wash of primitive oceans, yet it had within it the seed of life. Let us at least be bold enough to hope and where we can begin to act.


So my beauty for people we are back, and I am back with ombules Ombules to get the known hunger again You may have watched my video last time I opened probably 30 plus ombules, and I still didn't get the known hunger I also wanted My warlock's got the lock. I hope my warlock's got the lock.  I'm gonna go three Three is an unlucky number to many many people Today it's gonna be lucky for me. We are gonna get known hunters for days Two out of three ain't bad two out of three ain't bad Now one that roll now one that roll The enemies of humanity out to meet you in the arenas and cause My last video I opened so like 30 in grams ombules. I'm looking for rampage and Come in whatever perk is but anything Subsistence subsistence rampage stability masterwork and stability everywhere else That's what I want or dynamic sway reduction rampage. Well, maybe even what's the other one called? What's the one Zen moment? Rampage I'm not too keen and tap the trigger on page. I mean I've got one of them Doesn't do it for me. I Won't be broken hearted if I get killed clip. I've got kill clip. I've got subsistence kill clip I've got stability on that. I haven't got Zen moment kill clip.  So yeah, I'm looking for them to this one comes with some mud Wow, my look is so bad My look is so bad. I wouldn't be on it. That would not be on there. Anyway, definitely don't need these two to get in this Mud I'm not gonna hang on to these things. I'm not gonna fill up my space because I just don't need them I like that because You know, I look at them out another day another day eight more eight more P pop Eight more people Eight more or seven more of three. Yeah Don't know. I've got a few my Postmaster two so Yeah, that's three. That's three. Don't worry. I'm tired. I am tired One all my life this game take these crappy perks out of it, please Stability kill clip. I mean this game just really does hate me. It really does hate me My luck's just so bad My luck's just so bad. I mean, I know so many people out there got the perfect role of this I mean a couple of my mates have as well They're smashing it with arrows Smashing it with arrows me the only other hand we go for four this time. We go for four this time Scream machine and give me I know hunger. That's the worst of the worst. Wow I don't even know what to say. I'm just gonna Go to my postmaster then get back here people. I'll cut the video. So yeah, yeah, I'm gonna run. Okay, so we are back I don't know what it was fast travel up there and if I always run up there. I don't know why I do that fast traveling so much quicker So much quicker. Okay, so we got ten. This is the last time I've got So I Better get one this time people. I better get one this time because this will be literally 50 plus now 50 plus without one 50 plus without one. Let's go five first. Go five first My luck on my wall. I can't good, you know honestly Geez pay poor Yes Yes Yes Yes people I Have it multi-kill clip and Rampage or both at the same time be ridiculous, but still You're getting all over now. Yes, you are you're getting leveled up now You are gonna be my goal to in that pay by pay This is why I want it This is what I needed Back up mag or Let's see what is it rampage what rampage Becky's it's your life back up my grand page specter. I need it can't bounce stuck No, we go with kind about a stop for now. I'll try that. We'll see we'll see you are now getting a pretty shade upon you Where's my best shaders for you? That's my best shade for you Because it's that good. I don't think everything this looks I mean, where's the gold? You go with that. We'll go with that. What people actually happened. I Have I got five more, you know, we're going to try and get the code denial Haven't got one of them there. I've got the one out this season plus. That's it. That's it people So this is what we're gonna do. Where are you you're in this one? I believe No, that says it on there. That's not it. It's one of these. Is it that one? No, you should probably read That's the one third one across Cold dinner was stability on this too. That's all I want. I just want stability.  I do believe it is. Let me just quickly move stuff from my From my inventory and I'll zoom the video in a quick second kill the bed in fact to look at now people The actual one called denial of God is this one here shows you I think I used to throw a game in PVP. I mean It's good But I know this bear out there and we're gonna get it today. We're gonna get that today We're gonna get that today Code denial no, no No Code denial so we've got to work to that's not bad And I had to go into bad either more kill clips quite good that drops down. Oh, man Pure range on it though Plenty of range on it though people shames handling. No, I'm gonna keep that because I'm gonna try to use it much I'm gonna keep it. What's in this one then moment and unrelenting Know what if that was handling though, that's not to write because that was stability That would be great That would be good. I'm keeping that to so not too bad not too bad under called denials Swords Whatever sorts of swords Don't yeah, I'm actually quite happy. I'm so happy got my known hunger. I'm so happy. I got it Yes Yes, yes, yes, but guys that's it. I'm gonna go play PVP with it now See what it's like if anything's good. You may see a live gameplay from me on it You never know you never know but guys, I do hope you enjoyed the video If you did leaving a like really helps out if you're new and I want to see more destiny Be sure to subscribe and if you never want to miss a video upload you can turn notifications on by hitting that bell button But guys thanks as always for stopping by hopefully enjoyed the video and hopefully I'll see you on that next


This paper presents a novel approach for assessing the safety of buildings near tunneling works. It uses NSAR technology to measure the deformations of the buildings over time, and then calculates a non-uniform settlement index to analyze the safety status of the buildings. This approach has been validated against static level and manual investigation data, showing good agreement. This article was authored by Yu Zhou Lu, Wen Siqiao, Zhong Qishu and others.


Alright, say you are behind an electric jump kit and you can't reach Blender. We have a Blender app that you can just open up. What you're going to do is hit the Bluetooth button on Blender. It's going to send out a pairing signal and you can connect to Blender. Once one person has connected to the app, multiple people can connect. They just need to join a network option after the initial person has connected. So we're going to go ahead and connect to Blender. It's going to pair and voila, we have your individual monitor mix right on your phone. That is slick. So there are six different channels for the six different inputs that we have on Blender. And you can actually tap the one. And I can go ahead and assign vocals on there because I'm singing and I've got a guitar. Oh, you can give it a name. Yeah, you can put a little icon on there. So Tom's number four. We can give him the guitar. And we've got five. We've got a drum machine. So I'm going to put the drum icon on there. And that way I can just quickly reference and remember which one's which. I don't have to think about which number and which input people are into. But it essentially works the same way. You can just hit your headphone and adjust the levels. You can also hit Tom's headphones. Don't you mess with my headphones. You can mess with his levels as well. So if you want to mess with someone else in the band, you can do that too. Another great feature is you can also hit the talk button and activate that as well. We'll talk about the talk button a little bit more later. And you also have access to the mute, mute all. You can hit your compression and you've also got your room mic or the talk mic as well. So that's Blender app. Cool. Definitely it's free download from your iOS or Android app store. Very useful.