The following are the outputs of the captioning taken during an IGF intervention. Although it is largely accurate, in some cases it may be incomplete or inaccurate due to inaudible passages or transcription errors. It is posted as an aid, but should not be treated as an authoritative record.
***
>> I can see clearly now. So good morning dear colleagues. I'm glad to is see everyone here today. We'll have a.
>> I would really recommend and urge everyone to sit closer to the presidium as I think this format better realised a genetic form of exchange of ideas rather than speakers speaking their prepared reports. But keeping this in mind we still will have several speakers with prepared reports. On topics of the development of the metaverses on the future of metaverses. On ethical reasons behind development of such technologies and general views.
Some of our speakers are representatives of the civil society. Others are the academia. And we also have several people who are involved in NFC and metaverse development projects.
Hopefully this session will be interesting e involvement, and I really urge participation from everyone.
Our first participant of the discussion is the member of the Russian orthodox church. I think he has joined us online.
Can you hear us?
I can see that he is online, but maybe he has some technical issues, and we should start with another speaker. Daniil Mazurin, who is also online. Almost all of our speakers are currently online. This should say something about the development of metaverses.
Daniil, are you with us?
Okay. I can see. He has joined us. Late at night at Moscow. But thank you very much for joining IGF.
>> Good morning dear colleagues. Thank you so much for my need this forum. And first of all I would like to start to say that it is quite natural for the Russian orthodox church to take part in such discussions about metaverse.
Because technologies nowadays so developed that actually religious communities cannot just stay aside of this discussions. And particularly, this is true about metaverse. What we can see the metaverse to be? Metaverse as I think is a man made world that is controlled by ‑‑ by man, actually. But however, the problem is with this world is that it claims to be, you know, perfect.
We religious people actually get used to living in imperfect world. And actually religions and Christianity, at least, tries to find recipe to overcome sin. And the very fact that this world is imperfect.
However, metaverse is a parallel world. And this parallel world sometimes turned to put your allegiance aside. Saying that this world is circular. And values which are actual in this world have nothing to do with the religious values. Which widely ‑‑ widespread in our contemporary, not virtual, but real world.
First of all I would like to say that imperfectness of the real world that we have around us. And everybody can actually test this imperfectness of his own skin. Actually goes to the metaverse. To virtual world which has been established by us people. As we believe just to the opposite, the real world is created by God, as we believe as religious people.
So the, I would say the way how we combine these two worlds in our mind is very crucial and important for us.
My main ideas about values. How can we support values in real world and try to bring them to the virtual world, to the metaverse? It is not a simple task. I would like to stress that our church actually tries to involve all technologies and particular in virtual world actually for Christian testimony. However it is very difficult to go through to the hearts of people.
And of course metaverse is very material world. And as you know even better than me, this world is actually directed by material value and material income. So it is very difficult to religious communities to testify about values.
Here during your session you are going to discuss not only advantages but also disadvantages of the metaverses. And particularly you will discuss crimes that are being committed there. And I would like to say that these crimes, if we charge by the consequences of these crimes, are very severe. Because people sometimes can be actually deprived of their privacy.
Our church throughout its history actually testified that privacy is very connected with freedom. If you are deprived of privacy, sooner or later, you will be deprived of freedom. And freedom is a real value of the humanity that would be saved and protected everywhere.
This is one thing. And the other thing for you to discuss is that our real humanity, I would say. Humanity which is used to living in the real world, not virtual. Throw its history found a way to produce values and produce love. The most important value is love. And love is not a simple value to create and to establish. Love is always grows in the context of family and the context of relatives. In the context of religious sacraments, if you are a religious person.
All that is very, I would say, questionable in the world of metaverse. So I think that here, that this state of development of human rights, we should think about values and how these values would be protected. And that should be our good will to go on the path of protecting these values.
The other thing I would like to stress is that sometimes ‑‑ and we all see that ‑‑ people are being obsessed by virtual world, by metaverses. And this obsession I would say is very detrimental to the freedom and well‑being of human personality. Again, we, humanity, are very well acquainted with possessions of different kinds. And possession in virtuality is a new kind of possession.
So if you want to find a way to just fight this obsession, you should elaborate new approaches. And this is not a simple task.
So with that said, I would like to thank all organisers of this forum and wish you good luck in your discussions. If it is possible, just, I am open to the questions that could come from your side. So thank you very much indeed.
>> Thank you very much. Thank you also that you had time to join us. And we would really encourage also our participants to ask questions to engage. And hopefully you will stay with us during the whole discussion.
I muscle must also tell a little bit about the organisation I represent and host for Center for Global IT Cooperation, think tank which deals with digital development, transformation. Digital economy, internet governance and all sort of things digital. Recently we have contributed theme report on metaverses to T20 with the format of G20. It was also dedicated to the ethical issues can arise during the development of metaverses during the usage of metaverses. Possibilities of crimes, abuse. Also opportunities which metaverses can provide in terms of education, in terms of health care. And all sort of things which come with it.
And I think that best way to elaborate on the positive side of metaverses would be to give a floor to someone who deals with them directly. Works with projects connected to metaverses. NFT technologies and metaverse enabling technologies. Today we have our dear friend Daniil Mazurin. A young interpreter ‑‑ Entrepreneur. Businessman. Start upper. Our guru. Daniil is everything all right? Do you have.
>> DANIIL MAZURIN: Awesome. Thank you so much. Long time no see. Pleasure to be here. Always grateful for opportunities that UN and you give us.
So I would like to from the technologies point of view and coming from the private sector. I would like to start with the one test. And test is we are living and looking at one of the most, if not the most interesting period of human history in terms of technological integration into our society. And our daily lives.
And I'm specifically talking about the artificial intelligence that we have to talk about today. Because metaverse and AI is extremely connected.
I don't know about technologies that we had in the ancient Egypt for technology. But in the modern society, I believe that AI, you know, plays a very big role. And we've ‑‑ we are already seeing a lot of users of ChatGPT. Right? AI model developed by development of AI. There are more than 180 million users daily. Sorry, monthly. And stats in August.
And metaverse technology as I said is very connected with artificial intelligence. Because we cannot develop a proper metaverse or virtual world or augmented reality world without AI integration.
So that's, I would like to say, you know, we're living in a very, very interesting period of human history. And already, you know, we've already tested on ourselves how ChatGPT influences our lives. And same thing I believe with metaverse technology.
Right now what we have on the market and the market is not very bright right now, of course. Because, you know, lot of corporations and what's stated in the description of that agenda, lot of corporations are stopping to develop metaverse tech.
Why? Well, it is I don't know about the directors of the corporations. But I can see what start‑ups, especially in the third world countries developing metaverse projects and they are pretty successful. And they are being bought by many businesses and corporations. APIs are being used in terms of AI technology, for example, on the ‑‑ in the start‑up industry.
So we're seeing a lot of things going on. But we don't see a real integration. Why? Well, personally, I think that modern metaverses are not what metaverse should look like. Metaverse should combine not only virtual world with VR hamlet, VR glasses, by meta and other corporations. Metaverse should combine real life too. And we can combine real life with virtual world using AR technology.
You have probably heard and seen recent use about ray ban and ‑‑ AR glasses. One of the biggest AR and metaverse products for integration into the society. You know brand new Ray‑Ban and very good for youth and it's very cool. So I believe by making such mass adoption products, we'll be able to integrate this tech into our society.
Why? Well, yeah, regulation is a must. Right? We've seen what happens. In the crypto industry. For the past two years, lot of scams. People lost a lot of money. So such industries, innovative industries, should be regulated, of course.
I'm not talking about the U.S. regulation when you have to ban a lot of companies. I'm not saying about Chinese regulation, where you just ban every ‑‑ every technology to develop by your own. I'm saying about good regulation, where you give an opportunity for businesses to thrive. Give an opportunity for start‑ups to properly make money and improve the technology.
And this tech like metaverse technology, VR, AR, AI, should be regulated first of all in the third world countries. Where this tech, innovative tech, gives opportunity to increase GDP. To increase quality of people's lives. And overall just make very cool implementations and make a future. In this countries.
So yeah. Not a long speech. Overall I would like to say that the metaverse that we'll see in the upcoming years is not the metaverse that we have. Like what Mark Zuckerberg is building or what we have in the space like central box or Centralland. These are not metaverses that will be mass adopted. Metaverse will be combination of VR, AR and AI technologies. And specifically if we're talking about AI, it's already being used for, for example, in integration of AI into NPCs. Right? In gaming and virtual worlds.
Or gps mapping and creating immersive experiences automatically with artificial intelligence for AR glasses. Or just AR applications on our smart phones.
So yeah, I think this is it for me.
>> So Daniil, I have a brief question for you. So what do you think about such a thesis that of course taking into account all the positive sides, metaverse and technologies can provide. For instance, in corporate education format. Even in space like in the sphere of auto piloting, et cetera.
Could there potentially be some structural disadvantages? You have talked briefly about developing countries. And I can clearly see the problem that of course metaverse enabling technologies are amazing. They are very aspiring and great. But we should acknowledge that they are developed only in countries with high rate of IT development, GDP and et cetera. Mostly western European countries. Could there potentially be a situation with structural disadvantage where the developed world already has access to such technologies and uses it and the developing world once again has to try to reach the level of technology cal sovereignty and metaverse connectivity. And is unable because of the structural differences.
What should be done about it? Should this question be addressed at well.
>> DANIIL MAZURIN: Absolutely. A great question and great statement from you. There is an absolutely structural disadvantage in terms of the technology. Creation from the west. And from ‑‑ from China. And that is why I said that, you know, first countries that should properly regulate and give opportunities for start‑ups to thrive and to build products should be third world countries.
Yeah, of course that there is a big advantage of the United States and Europe in terms of technology and in terms of technological resources. But, you know, a lot of things are changing nowadays. And that's why third world governments should regulate innovation first. While other countries are trying to regulate and they have other interests in their hands.
So yeah.
>> Thank you very much. So maybe there are some ideas from the audience. Or I'll also see that we have some, quite a number of, around 20 people online. I would really encourage anyone to raise their hand and ask a question. Or maybe propose a certain idea of their own. Yeah, I clearly can see a gentlemen over there.
Do we have a mic in the? Oh. You do have. Yeah. There is a microphone.
>> Thank you. So just a few things that during covid it acted as a catalyst for so many different digital platforms to come up. And it showed us some of the value proposition of metaverse.
But as you know that the standardisation process is still going on. The interoperability issues are there.
There have been certain projects like digital immortality. People have been trying to if you have a digital avatar and it can basically learn about a certain real life person. And if that person is no longer there, then the avatar lives on and how accurately it can mimic a certain person. Real person.
So there are certain advantages of using metaverse. My question is that for example. Now we have generated AI. And talks about regulation and how AI content is going to be taken for example. Whether it will be acceptable in certain areas or not. There are so many different platforms chuck use ChatGPT. You can create so many different types of content.
In the metaverse, my question would be that how important the rule of regulation would be to ensure that the value proposition of metaverse is so much so that it continues to grow and it offers lot of opportunities for people in different countries.
Thank you.
>> Can I take a word first. Now I will take your word for you, Daniil. Actually I have very good thing about regulation here. There is a big reason why metaverse not regulate. Because we are not understand which jurisdiction they actually operate. IT companies made metaverse. So where do they actually exist?
Basically some think metaverse first step to digital state. Can they afford digital citizenship to person actually in the metaverse. And if person are in many metaverses like has double citizenship or of three countries? So the question is do we need to regulate metaverses or the IT companies? And maybe create some kind of a framework for the whole metaverse conception. And digital technologies. Because we don't have still when they have regulation even on financial markets. They still exist somewhere. Internet, without jurisdiction, without country, without everything. So we can't ‑‑ we actually not decided if the IT companies just operating social networks have regulations apart from the country they are registered in. And this is of course very difficult question.
Maybe we're just in the first step of this. So apparently, metaverse can give you the digital immortality. Because it is kind of a digital prison for people that are not longer with us. I can ‑‑ so actually you are right in point. But I don't think that there is a answer yet for the question.
>> Thank you. Just a couple of other things that I would like to mention. Since you mention digital citizenship. That also raises question of privacy related issues. Jurisdictional issues. Which law is applied on whom. That is also a big problem that needs to be resolved. So thank you.
>> DANIIL MAZURIN: May I ‑‑
>> Sorry. Just to contribute to that. I think there is also a partial answer to some of these questions. Depends on the use case in the metaverse. If anything related to personal data, it is actually regulation that already applies around digital identities, electronic signatures, payment, interoperability standards.
But that is a public sector use case.
Again, also with the hosting of data, as soon as it is personal data there is regulation that governs that. Whether or not it is cloud or the metaverse, that doesn't matter. So there are actually pieces of legislation that are already applicable to the metaverse, depending on the use case.
Yes there is some wild west elements around NFTs and gaming, etc. But if you look at it from a U.S. context A Chinese context, or European Union context, there is actually legislation in place that governs key element of the metaverse. Whether or not you use it or not. So just a little bit.
>> Thank you for the brief contribution. I should just give a word to Daniil Mazurin and then a brief word to ‑‑
>> DANIIL MAZURIN: I would like to add to Alena in the question. That, you know, there is no problem with regulation at all. Like Alena said, I kind of disagree with that, because most of the companies and start‑ups building metaverses. They are incorporated in some countries. Even crypto companies, they are incorporated, usually like in Hong Kong right now or Seychelles. So that is not the problem of regulating and really coming to these companies.
The real question I think how we should really regulate them. Do we need to give them a full freedom of actions? Or do we need to really look after them and see how it goes in the crypto or AI or metaverse because they can influence you know gen Z and, you know, destroy the world, et cetera, et cetera.
I think ‑‑ so, and the question that was asked is how we should regulate properly AI in the metaverse?
Well, I think that, you know, AI is already being regulated. And all the companies that are building AI, they already make their out of regulation by their own. Because if we're talk about AI T biggest right now company, they essentially make their codes regulated. So you cannot, for example, generate 18 plus contact using their generative AI. Or you cannot ask certain questions or get answers on certain questions that are related to some specific topics.
But that could go wrong. Right? So they can essentially delete this auto regulation of the AI. And that is the real problem. That is why governments should properly regulate them. Because AI is dangerous. We have to realized that. It goes beyond the open AI servers or something else, then could turn into a big issue to, not only the company, but the humanity in general.
>> Thank you, Daniil. Let's give a brief word to him as well.
>> Thank you so much. It is very remarkable that there are people here who actually raise question about digital immortality. And here being a representative of religious organisation, I would like to say that we should be very careful dividing religious issues and technological issues. If at some stage of development of technologies, religious issues such as immortality and non religious issues, like, you know, technological progress are being mixed.
So I think it is a big danger. I think such a big danger for humanity. Of course you know, if people believe in immortality, it is a good thing. If they can as they think get this immortality now and just do some technological procedures, I think it is a very big challenge. Because we cannot just bring space of dogmas to the space of technology.
In that case, I would say the whole, just, structure of human personality could be endangered. Because at some stage, a person will not understand whether he or she has body or doesn't have it. It is I think a very crucial issue to, just to see a difference between real world and virtual world.
And sometimes, and issue of immortality shows it. I think a good sense, this just mixing is very seizable.
Thank you so much. PV.
>> I'm not a ‑‑ I don't know much about metaverse. I was wondering. What is the bottleneck for the ‑‑ let's say, the spread, like, the growth of metaverse right now. If it is technical. And if it is technical. Would it be like lag or delay in the connections one of the big challenges or not?
>> Daniil.
>> DANIIL MAZURIN: Yeah. That is a great question. And I actually wanted to say one very important thing. And answer this question. The real bottleneck in the metaverse creation and expansion are essentially processers. Because you cannot really download a crazy world online and to live in it. And to communicate with other avatars, other people in the downloaded online world.
Right?
So there is, this is the main technical issue. For example, if you open right now such a metaverse as the central land and you don't have an MSI computer for example, gaming computer, your notebook, your computer will be very, very I would say hard to process things, and it will be very low.
So this is one of the issues. And if we're talking about the VR, for example. This VR classes. It is also very low. And it is very connected to the development of unreal engine and unity engine. So lot of things. So the matter depends on this infrastructure. And right now you can see a whole new upgrade from unreal engine on how you see things with. With using unreal engine for example, you will be able to literally see every and each detail that was animated. Right?
So yeah. There are bottlenecks. But sooner or later we'll see development from these engines. We'll see development from computer processer. So yeah. Sooner or later, it will happen.
>> Good morning.
My name is Claudio Gusti. And I'm a platform auditor. Although I am ‑‑ regulation. I also believe they cannot be seen that the solution that will guarantee us safety. Because regulation is output of lobbying. Because regulation ‑‑. Why regulation is more concrete and precise.
And in the past years we saw that the only way to investigate when platform misbehave was to have researcher that were developing their own technology to collect evidence. Study the algorithm and the platform. And then keep accountable. Auditor to reporting or government reporting.
So the question that I believe is more for Daniil is, would you allow, for example in your tool, that every user is having an experience can save a log of what is happening? And would you accept that this log will be used to actually keep yourself accountable? Or at least to raise question on why a system behave a certain way? Because at the end, all the experience that a person get is individual. Depends from the algorithm that will not repeat their own behaviour in the future. Depend on other context that will never be repeated. So only having an evidence of what is happening, a log A video. Can allow to a person suffered with something to ask for explanation or for retribution.
Thank you.
>> DANIIL MAZURIN: Could I ask a question to the question? Is this the question related to would I allow my platform or tool to be audited or regulated?
>> That is normally regulation. If your platform need to run sand box or if you need to document if it is high risk, if it is low risk. That is unavoidable. What I was asking is something more. Normally regulation can let you certify your tool. But then the problem is never in the tool itself, but in the experience of your users.
Are they the ones suffering information or suffering harassment of, et cetera. And if there is a log. There is a log of the experience that at least can allow the user to ask further questions or also offer you feedback to improve the tool.
>> DANIIL MAZURIN: Yeah. Absolutely that is a great question. And I've personally communicated with lot of auditors, platform auditors. And smart contracts auditors in the space.
Yeah, that is a question of UI UX. It is always better to skip the Q&A during the on boarding process to your tool. It is always better. But you will never know the data of your users. Right? It is always better to skip, I don't know, authorisation of the user because it is long and it is not very useful for the user. Because the user wants to get in touch with your product as soon as possible. He or she doesn't ‑‑ you know, users don't want to essentially register and go through all this process.
So yeah, it's ‑‑ you know, it's essential nowadays. Even in the crypto space right now. You know, it is essential to know who is your user or what wallet is user has, right?
You essentially collect the information. The real issue how you use this information. Because you can get rid of frauds on your platform when you know your users. Or you can use user data to manipulate users and sell this data. You know, it is ‑‑ it is the issue of how you use users data rather than "do you need to collect data?" Yeah.
>> We have one more question.
>> Sorry for talking. I'll just ‑‑ I just have two questions actually. One from Daniil. And I just need to know religious perspective, since we've already discussed digital immortality. I'll start with digital immortality. What happens right now is that we have a lot of con content on the internet. And everybody on line digital footprint even after content remains on different platforms.
Take example of YouTube. There are so many different lectures available from so many people. There are so documentaries. You can see so much content about people. The only difference that I see with metaverse is that with digital immortality, that kind on content. If there is a digital avatar of somebody, you can interact with that digital avatar.
With the content we have right now it is not interactive. If there is a video on YouTube, you can't really interact with that person. So from the religious point of view, let's also consider AI regulation. AI should not be discriminatory based on religion, race, all those factors.
So when the regulation is there, and when you talk about digital immortality and somebody's digital avatar lives on. So I just want to know that, why can it be considered a bad thing, it can have so many advantages for the people who are related to somebody whose digital avatar lives on?
The second question is from Daniil, regarding the value that metaverse has to offer. So let's talk about for example digital assets. There was an article from MacKenzie which estimated by 2030 the metaverse is going to, you know, be worth $5 trillion. And there were so many reasons. One reason was scarcity in the real world.
So you have limited resources in the metaverse. Digital assets, there is no limit virtually.
So with generative AI, now we can compare that in the real world we have scarcity. But in the metaverse there is going to be abundance of everything. Now with generative AI you can generate digital assets that are so many tools to which you can generate digital assets. And a lot of people are doing that.
So won't that reduce overall value of digital assets? Because you have scarcity in the real world, but you have abundance in the metaverse. Which in economic terms, abundance, basically in some cases is not good. It reduces the value of assets.
So these are my two questions. Thank you.
>> Daniil, go ahead.
>> DANIIL MAZURIN: Yeah. I can also add a little bit about the immortal thing. Immortal avatars or your digital persona. But let's start with the second question.
So first of all you have to realise that in the metaverse, in the ideal, let's say type of metaverse, you will essentially own your items and assets. So they will not be an unlimited supply of items and assets. What can be produced, of course, if we're talking about the generative AI, right now let's say the utility and the price of 3D rendered artworks, you know, have been recently declined. Because right now you don't need to hire a 3D artist. You can go just to, you know, a generative artificial intelligence and make your own art.
Right? But it is still, you know, you can consider this as something that creates unlimited supply. But also you can consider it as a tool. Right? Because right now a lot of 3D artists for example, they use a generative AI to generate pictures. And then they add their art onto it. And it becomes even prideful and more beautiful.
So yeah, back to the metaverse thing. There is still will not be unlimited supply of assets and items. Because, you know, it is supply and demand. You have to sell NFTs, for example F we're talking about block chain based metaverse. You have to sell NFT or NFT lands or clothes or avatar. So there will always be limited supply in order to create the demand.
So yeah, that's in short.
In terms of immortality issue, I strongly support this question. And I believe that there is a future in that. I truly believe that creating an AI for your relative who has died unfortunately is ‑‑ can be a good thing. But we essentially we cannot go too far with that. Because I don't think that in terms of religious point of view that's a moral thing to do, right? So there will always be such issues.
But in terms of people who are willing to do this and who don't have any religious, you know, bottlenecks or who are not religious or whose religion allows them to do so. Then why not do this? Right? Because you can always communicate with a person who is very important to you. And you will be able to do that. Right?
So yeah.
Thank you so much for your questions. Very, very interesting questions.
>> So thank you very much, Daniil. Dear colleague, I think that time is running out. I think thank everyone for involvement in discussion. And also would like to invite to discussion after session. If you have any questions, we'll be glad to talk in private.
Also a small notice. Tomorrow our organisation organises soiree, and we would also like to invite all of you to partake. We'll give more precise information after the session.
Yeah.
Thank you very much all of you.