I tend to agree on this: because of the global nature, it is already difficult for any single nation to put pressure on big tech, let alone for NGO’s or other pressure groups. Only big market authorities have the necessary leverage over big tech.

This is even more the case in Belgium where the competences for “digital” are not only spread between different ministries but also between different regions of the country.

Internet has also contributed to the development of English as the new Lingua Franca. However, multilingualism remains important, also within societies to promote social cohesion.

One could also add that access to education widens the gap between different socio economic groups: good online education can be expensive and only be available for the more advantaged groups of society.

I do believe so. In Belgium, for publications, the publisher can be held to account for the content of the publication (fe. if defamatory, against public order or morals). A publication on the Internet is not different from a publication on paper and should be treated in the same way.

A main barrier for private citizens to have their rights enforced is the cost and certainly the complexity of Internet related cases where the defendant could be on the other side of the world. Such low cost, fast procedures are helpful to create confidence and protect citizens’ rights.

In the sense that a secure e-commercial environment is important for international e-trade to happen, the JSI on e-commerce can give an important impetus for governments to apply minimal rules when it come to give these assurances to e-shoppers be it regarding consumer protection, privacy protection or others.

Indeed, the private sector makes up for the lack in specialised resources some governments might lack and might supplement government efforts or signal attacks. However, ideally, such efforts would be done by public institutions.

Because of the highly technical nature of cyber attacks and the fact that many of them are perpetrated from abroad, law enforcement agencies and judicial authorities might lack the personnel and resources to effectively prosecute perpetrators. In this sense, a feeling of lawlessness might prevail, especially if cyber attacks are government sponsored.

Because of the critical infrastructure nature of the Internet and the open Internet being a critical part of a liberal society, free countries should consider insisting on localisation of part of the infrastructure, not to control it but to protect it and guarantee its independence, perhaps acting in the future as a Radio Free Europe.

This might also reflect a liberal “laissez-faire” view versus a more autocratic system.

Rightly so, since more and more commercial and other transactions move online, “real” artillery is supplemented by online attacks which can disrupt systems as much as by traditional means.