Revitalizing Europe, a roadmap tuned to the 21th century ... · Section 2 - Mapping the Roadmap to the 10 Commission priorities for 2015-195. 2.1 Jobs, growth and investment At the

Version Date: 3 March 2018

Security: Confidential

Page 1/12

Revitalizing Europe, a roadmap tuned to the 21th century

and the cost of not doing it.

Rob van Kranenburg (Council #IoT, NGI Move) [email protected]

Working paper: Task force on subsidiarity, proportionality and doing less more efficiently.1

Abstract: We thus envisage an efficient 500 million zone that operates much like Estonia does now. The Estonian e-card is embedded in a personal wallet (a device that can be a smartphone, a glass, a wearable...). That wallet talks to EU Clouds, platforms and set of (intranet) protocols only. In that way data-lakes necessary to port AI and creating added services and value remain under collective control of those citizens that pay taxes to ensure their immediate wellbeing and economic stability. The first operational strategy that delivered the ‘euro’ took around 35 years from inception to concrete implementation. It was brokered by a generation of politicians that could not see individuals as systemic actors, quite logical as the Internet needed the www (90s) to become a game-changer. As the euro becomes part of a financial toolset that organizes in e-wallets it is quite common sense that these e-wallets become tightly linked with identification schemes and replace the current passport with a set of federated traceable and accountable identities. Europe needs a moon shot; constructing a possible future landing zone in 2030. We posit a living ecosystem of the best possible balance of extreme centralization (on infrastructure, protocols and identity management) and extreme decentralization (on data, applications, services) focussing on resilience and self-healing properties as radically new concrete functionalities of a digital ambient infrastructure, and legible interfaces to those properties that matter for citizens - stability, solidarity, reciprocity, fairness - in an inclusive sustainable ecosystem. The Juencker presidency can pave the way for this and be seen in retrospect as the Presidency that found a positive and revitalizing narrative and roadmap that inspires the younger generations to build on top of European enablers. In Digital Transition privacy and security are always distributed aspects of all the actors in the ecosystem, the user, the objects, the environment, the ecosystem.

1 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/priorities/democratic-change/better-regulation/task-force-subsidiarity-proportionality-and-doing-less-more-efficiently_en#managementandmembers



Page 2/12

Focusing on one aspect is irrelevant. The new terms must be ‘privacies’ and ‘securities’. Privacies are levels of accountability that are for 99% automated by setting profiles. Security is impossible in tcp/ip that is fundamentally flawed and can only be built as a service in a system approach with a strong foundation - block chain- and a roof over your head - your own Cloud. Data generated by people through their wearables, behavioural aspects in the home, mobility patterns in cars and public transport and actual actions in the smart city should stay with them and they entitle service entrepreneurs to enrich these. All other data should be in public EU hands – open to entrepreneurs but only serviceable within the public Cloud and platforms.

Section 1 - Opportunities and urgency ........................................................................................... 2

Section 2 - Mapping the Roadmap to the 10 Commission priorities for 2015-19. ................................ 4

2.1 Jobs, growth and investment ........................................................................................... 4

2.2 Digital single marketBringing down barriers to unlock online opportunities ................... 5

2.3 Energy union and climate ................................................................................................ 5

2.4 Internal market .............................................................................................................. 5

2.5 A deeper and fairer economic and monetary union ........................................................... 6

2.6 A balanced and progressive trade policy to harness globalisation ....................................... 7

2.7 Open trade – without sacrificing Europe’s standards ...................................................... 8

2.8 Justice and fundamental rights ........................................................................................ 8

2.9 Migration ..................................................................................................................... 10

2.10 Democratic change........................................................................................................ 10

Section 3 - The solution ............................................................................................................. 11

Section 1 - Opportunities and urgency

Picture the current situation as a table full of delicacies, linen as white as snow and beautiful cutlery. You invite your friends to dinner. Everyone is happy and deep in conversation. All realize, however, that nothing on that table is yours. You only (still) own the house in which you throw the party. Google, Amazon, Ebay, Microsoft, IBM, Apple, play on that table and they get richer every minute from our very own feedback. They build new services on top of that. You realize that at some point soon they will take over your house. They already offer to pay the rent of the patio, and do you really need the attic? You are in a bad war. You have no tools to fight of the invaders as your toolset only now, when it is too late, begins to realize these friends you have invited are taking reality itself, what is ‘normal’ to another level. And as the peasants learned how to tumble the Knights from their horses, the world was never the same again.

The hegemony that used to enable authorities to facilitate the continuity of peace in Europe is at breaking point. Political populism, lack of digital agency (vs Google, Amazon, China gov+industry, Industrial Internet of Things, IIoT), lack of aligning techno-reality in any kind of domain and service with its full absence on the most important decision-making level: the political model of voting representatives once every four years organized in the format of ‘parties’ (paid to be an organizational form by the same state structures), lack of long term visions on jobs vs robots, lack of education on generational issues of having grown up in commercial connectivity, the erosion of trust in the current financial toolsets vs strong moves towards and adoption of central authority-less crypto-currencies, further regionalization (Brexit, Catalunia, Poland, Hungaria..) it all points to immanent breakdown of the current economic, social and political toolsets. One must not forget that the only reason for actually having an Estonian example is the Wall coming down. It was thus relatively easy to build something new, fresh, radical, on top of…nothing.

The outcome looks like this



Page 3/12

We will explain this model later. The cost of not doing what is outlined in this Roadmap is fragmentation, breakdown and civil war.

It is your, our, job to broker the transition from the current ways of organizing EU decision making into a pragmatic cybernetics in full daylight, without interrupting the current organizational political models and maintaining mission critical security. After Meltdown and Spectre it becomes clear that this is the least of our worries, as the current EU dependency on the old ARPA- Internet is compromised. New system thinking on security as a process that demands equal agency over the actors, the objects and the environment is necessary, not just from the need for a new model, but because the current situation is broken and will require an endless and pointless array of patches.

As members of the EU Expert Group2, IERC, AIoT-i, FP7 and Horizon2020 projects on #IoT3 and Future Internet, we witness the struggle over concepts ‘Internet of Things’ versus a ‘horizontal approach’, becoming really political. There are billions to be made for those able to front their schemes for naming and addressing ‘objects’ and ‘things’ into successful business models. Lobbyists for old industry models based on patents and making money from selling hardware downplay and try to forestall the disruptive qualities of ever growing connectivity and transparency by offering both the dying democratic structures and the dying real world economy companies some hope that yet again they might sail over these rough seas without going under.

Yet their analysts and intelligence officers cannot believe that anymore. No wonder, they are at the forefront of the data tsunami and realize there is no way to secure at item level as people walk out of the room with data on

2 “The next great technology problems to solve are out there in rail yards, power plants and farm fields. If Silicon Valley is going to drive this "Internet of things," it needs to build closer ties with companies in established industries, says Chris Murphy in Techworld. Kevin Voigt, CNN, claims China looks to lead the Internet of Things.2 So where is Europe? Why is Le Monde or the Guardian not saying Europe is leading IoT? Does China or the US has an R&D history of i3, Disappearing Computer and Autonomous Computing? IERC cluster, projects EBBITS ELLIOT IOT-A IOT.EST IOT@WORK IOT6 OUTSMART Hobnet Butler FI-PPP, industry that pushed AmI, etc, open FIRE test beds, EU sponsored Fora? The reason is simple. Neither Neelie Kroes, nor Barroso, nor Oettinger, nor Juencker think or thought it is important enough to talk about. And if they don’t, it does not get that vibe and urgency that sparks big industry, SME and grassroots soft and hardware makers to look at it as investment opportunities beyond the first line of profit: cost-cutting, efficiency, and optimizing. 3 Enabling Things to Talk, Designing IoT solutions with the IoT Architectural Reference Model Bassi, A.; Bauer, M.; Fiedler, M.; Kramp, T.; Kranenburg, R.; Lange, S.; Meissner, S. (Eds.) Springer Open. 2013, VIII, 331 p. 131 illus., 116 illus. in color.



Page 4/12

their t-shirt, nor is there any more agency in securing the levels of political formats that make up national states. Rob van Kranenburg received an invitation to talk about Internet of Things from the GFF 'and the Italian Intelligence community', Transformational Technologies #4: Implications for an Expanding Threat Environment September 17-18, 2012 Rome, Italy. In the afternoon five breakout groups (senior intelligence, police and military) came back with five scenarios of major threats: one was military, two were about DIY Bio and two were about the 'total breakdown of society', because of the inability of current institutions to deal with the digital.4

Section 2 - Mapping the Roadmap to the 10 Commission priorities for 2015-195.

2.1 Jobs, growth and investment

At the Inspiring Leaders - Executive Summit, Milano, December 1, 2016 on Forecast 2017: megatrends for the next year it became clear that there is no more vitality and no more financial incentives (negative interest rates) in the old system.6 Patrick Lenain, Head of Country Economic Studies, OECD, highlighted the low productivity, 17% of bad loans, intricate web of banks and predicted a potential 0.1, 0.5, 1 % growth. Nothing to get excited about. In fact, a very dreary foresight for anyone with enthusiasm, hope and plans in Italy (and by extension Europe). Franco Bruni, Economist, Vice President & Director, ISPI- Institute for International Policy Studies, highlighted Rodriks trilemma that shows that democracy, national sovereignty and hyper globalization cannot go together: “So I maintain that any reform of the international economic system must face up to this trilemma. If we want more globalization, we must either give up some democracy or some national sovereignty. Pretending that we can have all three simultaneously leaves us in an unstable no-man's land.”7

The reality of this trilemma was foregrounded in the next round of presentations, by Romeo Orlandi, Economist and Vice President, Italian-Asean Association, Cecilia Piccioni, Italian Ambassador to Vietnam, and Michelangelo Pipan, Past Ambassador to Filippine, Thailandia, Laos and Cambogia, on the stable investment climate in Vietnam, mainly because of the single party, (and sometimes single layer of government like Singapore) rules in Vietnam and in the region (China). What is worrying is that Italian funders and business men are going to consider moving assets to Vietnam because of a stable system instead of negotiating with new stakeholders building such a stable environment themselves in their own region.

Logically, it is easy to move new capabilities to new situations. It takes a strong mental effort to realize that it is your own situation, the very model that supports you needs changing instead of looking at a pristine situation that looks more suitable. Even more difficult is to realize that it is possible to build a similar pragmatic cybernetics and to start working towards that with likeminded people. Franco Bruni describes the shocks & inefficiencies from globalization and technology, combined with demographic effects (cities and general growth), and lack of governance, resulting in populism and growing interconnected debt (too much credit to enterprises). He points to the fact that the EU was created to avoid war and conceived with a mission of vision to become a single architectural entity through protocols like the euro. The plan most convincing to him now is to concentrate on European (strictly) public goods, migration management, safety and a scenario of defence, to regain public support. Such a line of action could, as he says, “bounce us up to plan a”: strong integration of a 500 million people zone.8

4 See Chapter 14 by RVK. "Cyberspace, Malevolent Actors, Criminal Opportunities, and Strategic Competition" has been published on the SSI and USAWC Press website. It can be accessed at http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/display.cfm?pubID=1319.

5 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/priorities_en

6 See van Kranenburg (IOT Council): Italia non perda il treno digitale, di Aldo Mafusa – 02 dicembre 2016, http://bimag.it/_internal/primo-piano/italia-kranenburg-internet-cose-digitale_393320/ 7 http://rodrik.typepad.com/dani_rodriks_weblog/2007/06/the-inescapable.html

8 Rolf Riemenschneider The analogy is the industrial data space which responds to the need of delivering products to market with more and more shorter innovation cycles and the need to cope with an increasingly complex management of the supply chain.



Page 5/12

2.2 Digital single marketBringing down barriers to unlock online opportunities

The Vietnam experts in Milan implied a correlation between a single party (Vietnam) or single layer (Singapore) of government and stability, claiming that democracy as we understand it as a political multiple party process is not productive at this moment in history. Instead of disagreeing with them outright we should consider that they are voicing realistic assumptions.

We are living in the age of the combined Internet and Internet of Things. This means that the territory is hybrid and political agency must be on hybrid territory that is both online and offline as objects start talking to each other.

In times of perpetual innovation not at the edges but at the core of developments, populist movements on the rise, people worried about their jobs, pensions, everyday expenses, untenable inequality gaps, energy uncertainties, it seems that the Asian tigers are finding more productive political answers to ensure a balance between centralization (on infrastructure and sustainable policies) and decentralization (innovation on applications and services). It is not the best balance. They need to engineer a move towards more decentralization that is incompatible with their political heritage and mind set.

There is a strong tendency to also want to control data and information on top of owning media production capabilities. We, however can envisage ‘Brussels’ as a centralized protocol of coherent actions that can be executed in a full decentralized way. We move away from democracy as we know it to a new political democratic system that is tuned to the reality of what is happening in every domain of human activity; to live together and alongside real time data streams of sensor input, to bring big data and analytics into the heart of decision making and to eventually run territory (not ‘country’) as a service for all.

2.3 Energy union and climate

Energy sovereignty can only be achieved in a federated system. This requires a balance of centralized renewables and decentralized p2p block-chain solutions bridging top down with bottom up strategies monitoring household appliances (with advantages for all stakeholders, citizens foremost). Zero-Entropy systems (energy harvesting, energy conservation, energy usage) will be a major technological challenge in the next five to 10 years, and research must be conducted in order to develop systems that are able to harvest energy from the environment and not waste any under operation. (RvK, Alex Bassi)9 One third of water in London in spilled every day. About 50% of food is spilled. This can be addressed in a coherent way and ported to CO2 goals.

2.4 Internal market

The EU internal market is no market is it does not own all data of its 500 million people, its processes and its machines. Bringing the current existing initiatives aimed at integration into a coherent narrative:

- The European Cloud Initiative will strengthen Europe's position in data-driven innovation, improve competitiveness and cohesion, and help create a Digital Single Market in Europe

- https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/european-cloud-initiative - A European Open Science Cloud (EOSC) will offer Europe's 1.7 million researchers and 70 million

science and technology professionals a virtual environment to store, share and re-use the large volumes of information generated by the big data revolution,

- https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/european-open-science-cloud - This will be underpinned by the European Data Infrastructure (EDI), deploying the high-bandwidth

networks and the supercomputing capacity necessary to effectively access and process large datasets stored in the Cloud.

- https://eudat.eu/european-data-initiative

9 Erin Anzelmo, Alex Bassi, Dan Caprio, Sean Dodson, Rob van Kranenburg, Matt Ratto (Internet of Things. Discussion/Position Paper. Institute for Internet and Society, Berlin. October 2011.



Page 6/12

- The European Cloud Initiative calls for the support of EU Member States to develop a High Performance Computing ecosystem10 based on European technology, including low power chips, setting an ambitious European exascale High-performance computing strategy. The goal is to have exascale supercomputers based on European technology in the global top 3.

- https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/staff-working-document-implementation-action-plan-european-high-performance-computing-strategy

Europe was leading these developments in the 90s and lost because it did not have the computing and processing power. It has now. The first and second wave of EU research into building some kind of 'total connectivity' (the research programs I3, Disappearing Computer and Convivio) showed that philosophical questions about what it means to be 'human' in Ambient Intelligence, Ubicomp or Internet of Things are fundamental and need to be addressed by the highest political echelons in precisely this way as IoT is setting forth a new ontology, a new relationship between men and the environment, that cannot be addressed solely in the issues of privacy, security, safety, nor can it be addressed with in legal framework that does not engage in the new agencies and relationships that are generated by IoT. As such we find ourselves in a transition period where our old legal, policy and economic tools are stretched beyond their productive capacities and new ones cannot yet be validated or tested as the new terrain is not yet clearly visible. In times like that it is the task of any elite (and the IoT community is an elite) to discuss as openly and as honestly as possible what the consequences are of technological and social developments it has funded, fostered and facilitated are.

2.5 A deeper and fairer economic and monetary union

Nick Appleyard, head of digital at the UK Technology Strategy Board believes IoT will lead to new “processes and innovative business models.” According to Alessandro Bassi, one model could be based on the idea of borrowing and lending objects instead of buying them: “Take the example of a drill”, he said. A drill can be pretty expensive, so given the fact that you may in total use it for about 10 minutes in its lifetime makes for quite a high price per minute. Renting one in your local DIY store is quite a hassle, so imagine embedding a chip into the drill and being able to track it and borrow it through some kind of community service instead.” In fact, he adds, we need to get away from the idea of adding something to objects to enable interconnectivity. A key area of research lies in building procedures and protocols for decision making that are not based on the premise of speed. In a real-time world there is no longer gain being the “first” to have the data. Instead, the internet of things favors a daily situation of full traceability. There is so much contextual information about what you are wearing -- this jacket or this pair of jeans -- that neither the customer nor the merchant, require a Point of Sale/Point of Transaction as a “closure”. And yet “closure” is of great importance to us as human beings, as it signals the “right” kind of feedback in a procedure enhancing levels of trust. It may be the case that IoT will favor a situation where different forms of currencies, standards of banking and money will exist together.

Europe has recently opened a Blockchain Observatory and is sponsoring through DGCONNECT innovative projects like DECODE (decodeproject.eu) Eva Kaili will be championing a very open legislation around block-chain and fintech in the European Parliament. In this Roadmap these new technologies are embraced in a coherent way through backend agency and proactive alignment such as an European ICO.

It hit me last evening at a crypto meeting at BitBelgium in Gent. The room was packed. And no hipsters. At all. Jimmy Two Button MiningKingsz spoke wisely of biosmodding and overclocking to get more hash power, the small time grafters looking so smart from the Muide and all over were talking alt coin, Federal Police in the house ( I guess with the obvious photographer :), David doing a fantastic political intro with heart as he called the impressive youngster from Gent4Humanity http://gent4humanity.strikingly.com on stage to talk about the refugees in Calais and how we should have more solidarity simply because we are able to be at home. On my left a guy who wanted out as all his money (including his children savings) was locked on Kraken, to our left a lady who had bought 200 euros bitcoin early. A talk on DAO, Settlemint and real applications on the blockchain. The miners

10 It is also important to note that Europe today accounts for only about one-quarter of the worldwide market for HPC hardware systems and parallel software. This means that Europe-based HPC vendors generally cannot thrive and continually fund world-class innovation unless they can match the investments of competitors who have fair and open access to the larger worldwide market." https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/staff-working-document-implementation-action-plan-european-high-performance-computing-strategy



Page 7/12

mine in rigs these days switching from coin to coin in pools. IoTA came up a lot. Ripple, NEO , Ether and ... no hipsters! There was an energy in the room. Somebody mentioned May 68. Really? Yes. And well, I guess, it made some sense.

Revolutions are strange creatures. There must be something in the air.

Even Lévy in History of Magic speaks of this. There is real tension between bodies and literally we feel there is something in the air. Electricity.

The most difficult achievement in any upheaval, mayhem, revolution, whatever we choose to call it is to bring a coherent core of diversity and variety together in a temporary focus.

Ideologies, religion, at least here in Europe, big visions are no longer able to bring such a core into effect.

This time, this time it is about a very mundane, the most mundane issue: money. Your pay, your paycheck that you once (I remember) could be paid in cash (in an envelope). The fees you pay to a bank and then it still takes three days to have your own money appear in a bank account in another country. The fact that I cannot go on coinbase with a MasterCard. Let's even not mention the obscene bonus policy of banks. We forget that we bailed them out only three years ago. They lend cash that the EU prints for free somewhere. Our money in the bank is making us nothing and even costing us, while we still pay fees to be able to pay for transfers in infrastructures that are paid for twenty times over. Let's just abstract from all of that.

What is becoming very obvious to everyone in that room and everyone involved in crypto is that every currency is a hack. The dollar was built with violence, blood and hardcore power as it had to wipe out all the local currencies of the states, cities and villages running their own ICO's.

2.6 A balanced and progressive trade policy to harness globalisation

There will be no trade if you do not own your own system. You will be a buyer or a seller, but you do not set policy. You drift.

The Carré and Strauss roadmap defines governance as: “The collection of control mechanisms that a society adopts to prevent or dissuade potentially self-interested stakeholders from engaging in activities detrimental to the welfare of other stakeholders.”11 “The key issue lies in developing policies for redistributing extra profits arising from the efficiencies generated by automation. However, the issue of who should benefit from the results of automation is a political and social question and lies outside of the scope of this article. Nevertheless, this issue should be raised and debated before the widespread effects of automation will affect us.”12 Political agency requires digital hegemony. The EU lacks this fully. It has no social networks, no coherent Cloud, no IoT platform procurement policy, no integrated Identity Management. It can never lead an internet based on tcp/ip. This protocol, pass on the packet – cannot function as the backbone of digitization and therefore – like China is doing at this very moment – it must break with tcp/ip and start building its own pragmatic cybernetics on block chain.

There is a deep urgency. Integrated iterations in the network are under 10 years, business models change with each use case. The EU is not a hybrid territory if it has not agency over data of people, machines and processes. These are in the hands of American OTT players. In terms of war, and this is war for it is about economic and mental model (FB, Twitter, Instagram…) dependency, you are colonized. Aggregated data leads to new combined services that generate and produce more data. This cycle leaves full innovation capabilities outside of your direct response (regulation is a weak response that cannot be a basis for a de jure situation). The same is happening on national levels. Already these no longer exist de facto: no more agency on money, law (EIU) and instruments (privatized).

Why should citizens keep paying taxes to these non-delivering levels of organization already 30 years in crisis? We predict that they will stop within five to ten years. That is the timeframe to take agency back into a zone of 500 million people with the only lever left: the passport. It is the device – wallet - talking only to a EU Cloud, through EU IoT platforms fully serviced with all current available data making the environment instantly rich. In time citizens move their data onto these sets of federated Clouds that is in effect one set of federated databases.

11 Value Chain of the IoT. „Source: Roadmap for The Emerging “Internet of Things” Mark Fell, Managing Director, Carré & Strauss with a foreword by Hanne Melin, Policy Strategy Counsel, eBay Inc. (forthcoming)

12 IT-Driven Automation: The Next Wave Alex Tuzhilin IOMS Department Stern School of Business New York University November 2004



Page 8/12

2.7 Open trade – without sacrificing Europe’s standards

You can only set or even have standards if you own the gold of your day, which is not money or territory, but data. Alignment on culture, values and ideas requires cultural hegemony before you can build political will. That takes time. As Europe is squashed between abundance of OTT data-lakes with integrated AI capabilities and Chinese full country as a platform ‘politics’; it does not have time. Having, hosting and mining data from the people, machines and processes must be part of political and economic agency, else there is no ecosystem at all. Stressing European values that can only legally be backed up (GDPR) is counterproductive (see Brexit, Catalunia, Hungary, Poland…) It must therefore be understood that currently cultural hegemony means – is equal to – technological hegemony, the two are intertwined and interlinked and cannot be separated.

ü Focus on EU unity through values is necessary but dangerous, witness Catalonia. Further fragmentation into smaller regions acting as ‘states’ is not productive to EU agency as a 500 million zone of action.

ü Passports have been for sale in Cyprus and other countries potentially. This erodes public trust in the political elites that have built current identity management further.

ü Current Cybersecurity is compromised daily because of unfair advantages of certain players that have built the ARPAnet, and clever hackers that exploit protocols like tcp-ip and ipv6 that were never meant to be supporting more than data chances and websites, not mission critical services.

2.8 Justice and fundamental rights

The main and basically only benchmark that we address in hacking into a zone of normality when the arguments to do so are not shared by a majority, is to prove that such a systematic approach would potentially lead to less evil. We cannot prove that it will lead to a better distribution of wealth and value per se, or that Climate Change could be harnessed by full traceability of energy from consumer to industry to resource gathering, nor that direct democracy on all local decisions would lead to better resource allocation, nor that full traceability will eradicate corruption, nor that the IoT as a new ontology will bring out more naturally the talents in people and the resources to develop them.

But we can set up an argument on the main reason why we would want a system that feels more just to dealing with diversity in species – animals, plants, humans, machines - allocating resources for specific purposes, identifying the side effects of specific materials (plastic, nuclear waste…) early and finding alternatives, in short, a system that redistributes uncertainty and violence in such a way that all actors share equally its burden.

We prefer such a system to the current state-of-affairs and believe such a system would systematically lessen the very potentiality of evil occurring.

John Kekes defines evil as follows: “The evil of an action consists in the combination of three components: the malevolent motivation of evildoers; the serious, excessive harm caused by their actions, and the lack of morally acceptable excuse for the actions “. (Roots of Evil, John Kekes, Cornell University Press, Ithaca and London, 2005, p. 2) He continues to say that the explanation of evil has the following general characteristics: it is

• “Mixed because it involves the combination of internal-active, internal-passive, external-active and external-passive conditions;

• Multi-causal because the conditions that jointly cause it vary with individuals, societies, times and places;

• Particular because it involves the detailed consideration of conditions that differ from case to case”

It is important to realize this complexity can never be addressed in any systematic cybernetic scheme, but even more according to Kekes: “Coping with evil depends on meeting these requirements but meeting them will not make evil disappear once and for all because human motivation and the contingencies of life make evil a permanent threat to human well-being.”

The explanation of evil has the following characteristics:

• If evil is unintentional, the explanation must identify the particular motive (internal-active condition), failure of misunderstanding (internal-passive condition), circumstances eliciting response n(external-active condition), and weak prohibitions of evil (external-passive condition) that jointly are the causes of evil;

• If evil is intentional, the explanation must identify the motive and the circumstances eliciting response, but there will be no failure of understanding, and prohibitions of evil may not be weak



Page 9/12

Given this explanation, coping with evil has the following requirements:

• The cultivation of moral imagination because it changes the internal conditions and makes evildoing less likely

• The enforcement of strong prohibitions because it changes the external conditions and may deter evildoing;

• Enforcement by threatened or actual punishment for violations;

• Holding evildoers responsible for both their intentional and unintentional violations, provided they have the capacity to foresee the readily foreseeable consequences of their actions; or excusing them if they lack the capacity.” (242-244)

We argue that a cybernetic system of give and take 500 million people in a federated (privacies- build) platform would have a better chance of enforcement, prohibition, and responsibility upholding. If this is the case, the combination of these three requirements will lead to less evil and how can one not be for such a situation?

In New Instruments of Governance for our Societies van Kranenburg and Gluhak argue for ICT technologies to play a more prominent role in supporting the governance of our society and explore the vision of how a pervasively deployed Internet of Things together with recent advances in social signal processing and persuasive technologies can enable new ways of decentralized governance. (PerCom Workshops 2012: 191-196) The smart city projects all demonstrate a level of control over situations, domains and infrastructure. The very nature of the drivers of IoT, RFID and Ipv6 embody authentication, friend-foe, traceability and accountability. We can then safely state that IoT and the proposed cybernetic system meets three out of four requirements that Kekes holds to be crucial to cope with evil: enforcement of strong prohibitions, enforcement by threatened or actual punishment for violation, and holding evildoers responsible.

If we can argue positively that this Roadmap and the proposed scheme is instrumental in identifying personal talent as well as offering potential assistance in nurturing these talents, in giving feedback on physical and mental health in a way that is unmatched by current medical facilities, and in creating social cohesion because of the transparency and balance in providing resources, then we also have a positive match with the first requirement: the “cultivation of moral imagination because it changes the internal conditions and makes evildoing less likely.” It is then no coincidence that key elements coming from tco-creation workshops with citizens and developers in the context of smart city workshops in FP7 and Horizon 2020 projects13 were:

• a mentality change: “How can we all (ourselves included) make the switch from ‘This is their building’, to ‘This is our building, our street, our park?. This is a mindset change and extremely complex. Pretty much a lot of citizens are depressed. Youth unemployment is very high, much to high. There is a sense of togetherness that is missing.”

• mixing public and private responsibilities: The funding should come partly from the government and partly from crowd funding and private donors as ownership must be taken by citizens and it should not feel as if everything is already decided. A business model could be on some basis of vouchers: I can donate time, money or can I buy a plant or tree? I have certain skills, can you use them? In exchange of what?

• not inventing the wheel: use for example taskrabbit.com in the idea for the portal where citizens can log in and subscribe to donate a gift – time, money, a tool to a problem or cause in the street or neighborhood.

They are basically reiterating the requirements of Kekes but are not aware of the deep level of human intentionality they are basing their preferences and urgencies. To speak in terms of ‘good’ or ‘evil’ needs a specific context that is difficult to situate in everyday practices, yet the three requirements that citizens feel to be key in shifting into a connected world match the requirements of Kekes: a mentality change that can only be fuelled by debate, 13 One of the key elements that runs as a thread through the ideas in the first IoT and Smart City workshops that we held in Novi Sad and Santander as part of the EU project Sociotal.eu was the notion of exchange and facilitating exchange. It built on the fix my street and smart gardening where the idea is that incentives drive behaviour: “As the area gets cleaner, all the people in the street benefit. As you have helped to make the street cleaner or water the plants you feel more part of the process, you get a feeling of self-satisfaction and maybe a feeling of ownership, like in I did that! This feeling of ‘pride’ and being recognized for having done what you did in the street can give more motivation then money. And from these small steps we have to work on the mentality change that is needed. Positive feedback is essential for everybody in the process to stimulate self-organization and a sense of community.”



Page 10/12

discussion of alternatives, thus in stories and in the imagination, and managing external conditions by mixing public and private responsibilities. We want to argue that to not invent the wheel, points to the proposed passport-wallet-device plan. Simple, elegant and easy to implement in our current connected world.

2.9 Migration

The issue of Migration must only be seen in the light of EU demographics. Europe will be the museum of the world in the 21th century if it does not welcome and educates millions of young resilient youth from the South. In order to make this work in the current cultural climate, economic stability in terms of basic income must be a key building block of the Roadmap. Economic instability and insecurity is a key driver for everyday exclusion of newcomers.

2.10 Democratic change

It takes a strong mental effort to realize that it is your own situation, the very model that supports you, that needs changing instead of looking at a pristine situation that looks more suitable. Even more difficult is to realize that it is possible to build a similar pragmatic cybernetics and to start working towards that with likeminded people. A successful Digital Transition is the best possible feedback on our physical and mental health, the best possible deals based on real time monitoring for resource allocation, the best possible decision making based on real time data and information from open sources and the best possible alignments of my local providers with the global potential of wider communities.

In his 1930 text The Revolt of the Masses Jose Ortega y Gasset elaborates on the “one the fact which, whether for good or ill, is of utmost importance in the public life of Europe at the present moment. This fact is the accession of the masses to complete social power”. This social power is for him determined by actual presence, corporeal visibility:

“Perhaps the best line of approach to this historical phenomenon may be found by turning our attention to a visual experience, stressing one aspect of our epoch which is plain to our very eyes. This fact is quite simple to enunciate, though not so to analyze. I shall call it the fact of agglomeration, of “plenitude”. Towns are full of people, houses full of tenants, hotels full of guests, trains full of travelers, cafes full of customers, parks full of promenaders, consulting-rooms of famous doctor’s fun of patients, theatres full of spectators, and beaches full of bathers. What previously was, in general, no problem, now begins to be an everyday one, namely, to find room. That is all. Can there be any fact simpler, more patent more constant in actual life?”

For Ortega y Gasset, social power is asserted through physical presence, citizens asserting themselves as individuals, not behaving according to certain socio-cultural rules of genre forcing them into not being there, or at least not seeming to be. As they become visible in the streets, their very presence can be offensive. What will happen if citizens apart from simply be, now also start to act instead of consume? Mapping their own street infrastructures, energy supplies, pollution levels? Making their wireless networks (see The Things Network), open source washing machines, cars and satellites? And why not, making their protocols for living together, too? What would stop them? This movement of digital technology agency on our everyday life and our daily encounters in the streets, which are themselves becoming a digital territory, a hybrid space made up of services and communication protocols, is happening as we speak.

There is a simple reason for this emancipation and agency: Internet. Psychologists specialized in the behaviour of larger groups of people try to explain the relative ease with which one is able to exert influence over masses by assuming "a causal force which bears on every member of an aggregate, and also for each individual there is a large number of idiosyncratic causes (Stinchcombe, 1968: 67 -68n) He continues:

"Now let us suppose that the idiosyncratic forces that we do not understand are four times as large as the systematic forces that we do understand.... As the size of the population increases from 1 to 100, the influence of the unknown individual idiosyncratic behaviour decreases from four times as large as the known part to four tenths as large as the known part. As we go to an aggregate of a million, even if we understand only the systematic one-fifth individual behaviour as assumed in the table, the part we do not understand of the aggregate behaviour decreases to less than 1 percent (0.004)."

This shows how top down power works and why scaling itself has become such an important indicator in such a system of 'success'. Imagine you want to start a project or 'do something' with your friends or neighbours, say 5 people. This means that to take into account before you do anything - state a goal, negotiate deliverables, or even a first date on which to meet for a kick-off - that all five people relate to huge idiosyncrasies and generic forces



Page 11/12

that have to be aligned or overcome before you can even say 'Hello'. This shows how difficult it is to 'start something'. It also explains why you are always urged to get 'bigger' and why you need to 'grow'. It is only then and through the process of getting bigger itself that the management tools can operate, lying in waiting for you to 'discover them'. To be decisive, to make a difference, to set about a course for change, is in no need of 'growth', nor in ‘scaling’.

Understanding the nature of these social relations in the above terms show how difficult it is to script moments of systemic change, as hierarchical systems by the very fact that they are top down can concentrate on managing systematic forces relatively effortlessly. That which they cannot predict, or control remains lone dissident, strange or abnormal voices, or 'sudden events'. With the Internet these idiosyncrasies have been able to organize and raise their weight in the ratio, and the Internet of Things will allow these even further, bringing the sensor network data sets individuals can handle to them on their devices. This acceleration of weak signals into clusters, organized networks and flukes cannot be managed anymore by formats that are informed by and that inform systematic forces as the nature of these forces has changed.

Policy can never again talk to people. It must develop a conversation with people and re-negotiate on equal footing the balance between accountability and anonymity and entitlement versus identity. The funds are there. The 6 billion of NGI can be spent in a coherent way. The NGI CSA, NGI Move paves the way starting this conversation in Salons all over Europe. (ngi.eu)

Section 3 - The solution

All things tend to disappear, and especially things man made. 'Ephemeralisation' was Buckminster Fuller’s term for describing the way that a technology becomes subsumed in the society that uses it. The pencil, the gramophone, the telephone, the CD player, technology that was around when we grew up, is not technology to us, it is simply another layer of connectivity. Ephemeralisation is the process where technologies are being turned into functional literacies; on the level of their grammar, however, there is very little coordination in their disappearing acts. These technologies disappear as technology because we cannot see them as something we have to master, to learn, to study. They seem to be a given. Their interface is so intuitive, so tailored to specific tasks, that they seem natural. This was the conjuring trick played by Silicon Valley. We now know there are actors and this transition is not magical and must be managed. Serious times call for serious measures. You realize that you may not own anything on your table anymore, it is still your table. You define the very nature of the table. In human terms you still decide what numbers a person gets when they are born and the act of citizenship you still perform through the instantiation of the passport, a ‘document’. This is your last man standing. You realize that as a ‘document’ it is of no use. You also know that ID2020, Uport, WIN and a few other are beginning to offer identity management schemes. I could buy that as a service and travel as WIN negotiates this travel-as-a-service with entities that are still ‘countries’ but actually a privatized set of services. You also realize in a flash that citizens could stop paying taxes to old dependencies (the ‘country’) as they get more services from other actors. All jails are full over Europe. You have no more stick. You might have a carrot. Why not turning the document into a ‘wallet’? A kind of smartphone running the Estonian e-card, talking only to EU Clouds and #IoT and #IIoT platforms (fully available in FP7 and Horizon2020 enablers, complete with IOT-A Reference Architectures14), gradually building 500 million zone data-lakes and really building on top of your own infrastructures? Could it be this simple? The euro was a simple idea. It was meant to tie the back-ends of financial and economic varieties of countries together in such a way going to war against each other would be too expensive and too difficult even to plan. The wallet is the next logical step towards integrating the EU into the 21th century hybrid reality where it does not suffice to have a printing press that prints money, or land that has borders, but a datafied plane that you need to own to take advantage of the coming synergies of quantum, bio, nano- and crypto potentials.

The journey we have to undertake resembles that of people going into exile. For ‘people’ read our particular kind of embodied intelligence. It has a tremendous idiosyncratic variety, we are all ‘different’ and ‘unique’, yet we also share characteristics that make us part of the human species. Foresight and planning as part of collective decision-making have been until now solely our domain. As we see another kind of foresight intelligence (we call ‘artificial’) evolving and working in distinct domains (BAN: wearables/health, LAN: smart homes/retail, WAN: connected and electric car, mobility in general, planning patterns, and VWAN: the smart city and large grids) and horizontal services such as fintech and ICO’s competing and co-evolving with traditional financial tools), Over The Top Players on everyday (leisure) activities and mundane tasks (AirBnB, Amazon Prime, Uber…) it is only a matter of time before it works its ways into public decision making on a large scale. We have to prepare for this situation.

14 http://www.springer.com/gp/book/9783642404023



Page 12/12

History has seen many botched revolutions and would be patches to bring political reality in line with mental models, new business modems and emancipatory trajectories of individual human beings. One of the most interesting and relevant in the current crypto-craze context is the 1825 Decembrist uprising against feudal Russia. It was not planned well. The officers had fought to free France alongside their French officers only to return to see their soldiers they fought and died with to go back into serfdom. It was more of a romantic then strategic uprising. The Czar found it hard to hang them, so he sent them to Siberia. And as they went they formed artely, artels, just like any other convoy before them had. In these artely the convicts organized themselves through all kinds of self-organized ‘smart’ contracts. It was possible to change name (and punishment), to buy and sell goods, comfort, and protection. The artely leaders made deals with the wardens and officials. They were in chains in the cities and villages. In the open fields, as they marched they took them off. It is well documented that prisoners who escaped during such a deal, were flogged harsher and longer by their fellow inmates then the officials. After all, they had broken not just the social contract with the state but with their own ‘family’. This betrayal is always worse. This tactical leadership – temporary smart contracts – this coming together in ‘artely’ is what we have to do along every stretch on the journey from here to the EU as an integrated zone of operation. Against our grain at times, against our very own wishes, simply chained together in the belief that breakdown of the current and early integrators is far worse. Let’s build a new smart contract for Europe. It will bring hope and hope is what drives real change and people smiling in the streets. European poets and politicians have always been aware of the modularities of implementing ideas. Alphonse de Lamartine’s keyword, of which he never tires, is peace:

“The people and the revolution are one and the same. When they entered upon the revolution, the people brought with them their new wants of labour, industry, instruction, agriculture, commerce, morality, welfare, property, cheap living, navigation, and civilisation. All these are the wants of peace. The people and peace are but one word”.

Now, in 2018 to the people bring with them their new wants of labor, industry, instruction, agriculture, commerce, morality, welfare, property, cheap living, navigation, and civilization. Little has changed in human needs in 300 years in living alone and living together in families, communities, regions, nations and United Nations. But the keyword has. It is not peace that seems to drive us. We too have “fifty years of the freedom of thought, speech, and writing”, after WWII engulfed Europe. But what has it produced? Have “books, journals, and the internet accomplished that apostolic mission of European intelligence, reason”? No. They have produced fear.

Let’s produce o p p o r t u n i t y.

Documents

Revitalizing Europe, a roadmap tuned to the 21th century ... · Section 2 - Mapping the Roadmap to the 10 Commission priorities for 2015-195. 2.1 Jobs, growth and investment At the