Audrey Tang, Taiwan’s hacker minister who has reinvented democracy: “AI puts humans in a loop, like a hamster in a wheel”

When I was only 4 years old, Audrey Tang (Taipei, 1981) she was diagnosed with a rare disease that could kill her if she became overexcited. She could have surgery to repair the hole in her heart, but she would have to wait until she was eight. His chance of survival was 50%. Instead of sinking, little Audrey, educated in Taoist containment and spirituality, chose to display her curiosity, exercise her precocious ability to think and enter the world of literature and mathematics to emerge as a prodigy of computing. At eight she learned to program, at 12 she underwent successful surgery, and at 14 she abandoned traditional education to dedicate herself to programming code. Its vital mission would be to democratize knowledge and make the world a better place.

Tang is today one of the most respected voices in the world in software free. In 2014, at the age of 33, he actively participated in the protests in Taiwan known as the Sunflower Movement, when hundreds of students occupied parliament for 24 days to protest a secretly sealed trade deal with Chinawhich claims sovereignty over the island of Formosa. Tang created digital tools that helped “build bridges” and consolidate peace, he explains with the calm demeanor of a monk.

Between 2016 and 2024, he put his skills at the service of the Taiwanese Government and used the technology to reinvent the democracy in the country. The last two years she was digital minister, the first minister nonbinary of the world, an identity that reflects their unwavering faith in pluralism. In that period, he adopted the radical transparency of culture hacker to the State to promote a series of reforms that established what he describes as a “digital democracy“, a system in which citizens use technology to establish which laws are prioritized and approved. The experiment, unique in the world, has been an unprecedented success.

Digital democracy is listening to people so that they can participate in the political debate

In December, Tang’s work will be recognized with a Right Livelihood Award, a prize known as the alternative Nobel. Before, he will participate this Saturday in the Mozilla Festival 2025a reference conference held in Barcelona. On the occasion of the meeting, this world leader speaks with EL PERIÓDICO.

What does the digital democracy model that you implemented in Taiwan consist of?

In 2014 in Taiwan, President Ma enjoyed a 9% approval rating, meaning that in a country of 24 million people, whatever he said, 20 million people opposed him. Part of the reason was that social media first shifted from the source of following, where we follow the same people and see the same world, to the source for youwhich triggers polarization by amplifying our differences, what I call antisocial networks. Digital democracy is, for me, doing the opposite: listening to people so that they can participate in the political debate.

How did that translate in your country?

With the protests, civil society debated for three weeks and agreed on a basic set of principles that no one was very unhappy with. That differs from the traditional way of aggregating votes, which leaves 60% of people very happy and 40% deeply unhappy. This new way of listening to the people led the President of Parliament to say that the people’s ideas had to be followed because they were better than those of the deputies.

Once in Government, we created systems to replicate this process without occupying parliament again, but digitally. The Internet is not only a dissemination platform, it is also a broad listening platform. Anyone who collects 5,000 signatures online can start a public debate.

The Internet is not only a platform for dissemination, it is also a platform for listening (…) That led the president of Parliament to say that we had to follow the people’s ideas because they were better than those of the deputies

Wow.

We turned the Taiwan model into something like a geothermal engine. The more conflict there is, the more energy for co-creation. So instead of turning away from conflict, like putting out a fire, we like the magma. For example, around marriage equality, there are very heated debates. One part says that people who get married should have the same rights and obligations. The other side says that family lineage should not be broken. And so we legalized the common ground, showing that it is possible for people to marry and enjoy better rights, but for their families not to form kinship ties. And so, this type of geothermal co-creation model became a generalizable philosophy.

Does this method reinforce citizens’ trust in politicians?

In six years, the approval rate went from 9% to more than 70% under President Tsai Ing-wen. This is how we rebuild trust through broad listening and digital democracy.

In the 21st century, is there real democracy without the Internet?

In Taiwan, broadband Internet is a human right. Whether you are high in the mountains or on the islands, your access to the network is guaranteed. The Internet enables the formation of tight-knit communities beyond the immediate hyperlocal physical realm. Before, if your concern was not shared by your neighbors, it was very difficult to find your voice to connect to a community across distance. But now, with the Internet, you can form a community that is not defined by proximity in miles, but by the proximity of shared values. And I think this is really the basis of democracy in the 21st century.

The Internet allows us to form a community that is not defined by proximity in kilometers, but by proximity in shared values.

Could this model be exported to Spain?

Yeah.

What steps are necessary for this?

Two things are needed. The first is the commitment to listen to people. It would be as simple as searching for common points on the internet and adding them to the agenda of each town hall meeting. The second is that there is a shared urgency for transparency. For example, in Taiwan there was a problem with Uber with which both people who are in favor of the collaborative economy and those who ask for better working conditions saw the need to reach a common understanding. That kind of shared urgency exists on issues like climate, housing, or immigration. There are endless issues that people want clarity on.

How to deploy it without widening the technological gap between young and old?

As with local tools like Decidim, the objective is to expand participation without replacing face-to-face meetings, where a true relationship is established between people with different political options. This is what I call technocommunitarianism: it is not about people adapting to technology, but about putting technology at the service of the community.

He has advised Gavin Newsom in California and Japan. Have they asked you for advice from Spain?

Yes, I have had many conversations with civil society organizations. And, now that I’m in Barcelona, ​​I’m looking forward to working more with local leaders who want to try this method.

I really want to work more with politicians and organizations in Barcelona who want to try this method

China threatens to invade Taiwan, an island it claims as its own. Are we close to that scenario?

Taiwan has been, for the past 12 years, the world’s top target when it comes to polarization attacks. This is not disinformation, the attackers find a real social division and amplify the extremes. We already saw it with the pandemic.

We have learned that denying rumors does not work in this case, because it is not something strictly false. So, instead of refuting them, we need to debunk them beforehand using what is called “rumor humor.” In Taiwan we turned to memes to debunk those attacks and it really calmed the conversation. If they laugh about it, they can no longer fall into polarization again. He vaccinates them. This approach is already being replicated outside of Taiwan.

Taiwan turned to memes to debunk polarizing attacks and calmed the conversation. Laughing inoculates you (…) But even if we manage to depolarize conflicts, if the world’s democracies retreat towards authoritarianism, Taiwan will not be able to survive

She has gone from being Digital Minister to Cyber ​​Ambassador. What did you leave out that you would have been able to achieve?

I don’t think there is anything in particular in Taiwan that I would like to have solved in my time, because I have great faith in the people, as a superintelligence, so that the conflicts that are coming can be resolved.

Now, no democracy is an island, not even Taiwan. So even if we manage to depolarize all conflicts and convert them into energy, if democracies around the world regress toward authoritarianism, Taiwan will not be able to survive. That’s why I’m traveling the world, to spread this idea of ​​depolarization through co-creation.

Meredith Whittakerpresident of Signal, sees generative AI as another surveillance tool for big tech. Does it match?

Yes, I distinguish between addictive and assisted AI. The first places the human in a loop, like a hamster in a wheel. The hamster may feel great because it really needs to exercise, but it has no control over where it goes. It’s not really going anywhere. The only real result is greater polarization. In a surveillance capitalist regime, AI design maximizes participation through outrage because it can extract more data.

In a surveillance capitalist regime, AI design maximizes participation through outrage because it can extract more data

Even so, Silicon Valley promotes the idea of ​​a hypothetical superintelligence superior to humans.

I think that is due to a lack of imagination. That idea is like having a car that only has one pedal to accelerate and one brake. What it would do is lead us to the precipice. Accelerationists and those who see the end of the world in AI make good headlines, but, for me, the important part of the car is the steering wheel. And that should be in everyone’s hands. We, the people, are already the superintelligence.

But there is also positive AI, such as that used by Taiwan to collect opinions from citizens and make politicians act accordingly.

Assistive AI can help communities communicate better, build healthy relationships by building bridges between people. Our algorithm allows you to summarize the topics raised by citizens so that they can see the points they have in common with very different people without having to read all the articles. It is an open source project that runs on your computer, so we do not depend on the cloud. In this type of self-hosted infrastructure, there is really no way for us to become addicted.

Is open source the best ally of this new democracy?

Of course, because it allows you to carry the software from a centralizing or colonizing use to another that empowers. But by itself it is not enough. There have been alternatives to private social networks such as Mastodon or Bluesky for some time. The problem for most people is that if they change from a proprietary platform to an open source platform they lose their community. In Taiwan, the law requires that if you change from one telecommunications company to another because it offers better reception in your area, you do not lose your number. We need that for social media and also for AI services.

The EU is already trying to boost that interoperability.

Yes, the Digital Markets Law does it for instant messaging apps and now it is being studied to extend it to social networks and, hopefully, also to AI.

Subscribe to continue reading