The world is entering a new era of "new world disorder" or a "new imperial era," driven by the collapse of established orders, the rise of misinformation, and the transformative, potentially destabilizing, impact of Artificial Intelligence (AI). This shift challenges traditional notions of intelligence, wisdom, democracy, and global power structures.
Mind Map
Clic para expandir
Haz clic para explorar el mapa mental interactivo completo
Hello Mr. Harrari. >> Hello.
>> Hello.
>> It's great to have you back.
>> Thank you.
>> It's great great to have you back in
Croatia. You are here after more than 10
years, right? A lot has happened since
your last year. You became one of the
most prominent global phenomenon.
Um you became famous. Um and Croatia,
our small country, has become football
giant something.
So um and that's on the bright side. On
the grim side, things got a bit messy in
the world, right? So things changed a
lot and the world we knew it back then
when you were first here
um are not here. So as so it seems. So
um my question and I'm just going to
start with this conversation with a
question that you yourself so very often
ask. So if we humans are so intelligent,
why are we so stupid?
>> Yeah, that's a a very good and very deep
question actually. And I I'll give two
answers. First of all, if you give
highly intelligent people bad
information, they will make stupid decisions.
decisions.
And we now have the most sophisticated
information technology in history which
is flooding the world with junk with
junk information. Information is not
truth. Just a very small subset of the
information in the world is truth. And
we are now flooded by enormous amounts
of bad information which leads us to
make bad decisions.
on a deeper level, you know, especially
in a world which is now obsessed with intelligence
intelligence
and with the the race to create super
intelligence, which we'll discuss later
on. It's very important to understand
intelligence is not wisdom.
What we know from history is the most intelligent
intelligent
entities on the planet are also the most delusional
delusional
entities on the planet. We humans are by
far more intelligent than chimpanzees or
elephants or dogs and we believe
in delusions that no chimpanzeee or dog
will ever believe. like I come from a
region of the world where people are
killing each other by their thousands
believing for example that if you kill
people from the other tribe after you
die you will go to heaven and receive
infinite joy forever and ever. No
chimpanzeee will ever believe such a
thing. But humans, many humans, many
powerful humans, many intelligent humans
believe that. And as we are now creating
super intelligence, we should take into
account they could be super delusional.
So you say that basically this junk
may contribute to um constitution of
something that you call new world
disorder and at some point you mention
if this happens everybody will suffer.
What do you mean by that? Oh
>> it's very simple. You know when you
destroy an order and you don't have
anything to replace it with what you get
is chaos. What you get is disorder in
which almost everybody suffers. And in
the last 10 years, we have seen the
deliberate destruction of the world
order. You know, the world order of the
early 21st century was far from perfect.
And again, I come from the Middle East,
so I know perfectly well. There was
violence, there was injustice, there was
many problems, but it was still better
than almost any order humanity has ever
managed to create.
And maybe the best piece of evidence for
that is, I would say, government
budgets. You know, not poetry, not
philosophy, but budgets. If you want to
look at reality, you look at budgets.
It's the first time in human history
that governments all over the world
spent more on health care than on
security than on the military. If you go
for thousands of years of history
everywhere, Europe, China, America, you
will see that almost every king and
sultan and even republic like the Roman
Republic or the Venetian Republic, more
than 50% of their budget went to pay
soldiers and buy uh ships, ships of war
and build fortresses. In the early 21st
century, the average expenditure on the
military all over the world, taking into
account Iran and Israel and North Korea
and the US, everything was down to about
6 to 7%.
Whereas the expenditure on healthcare
was 10.5%.
first time in human history that
countries felt so safe
that the idea that the neighbors might
invade and conquer us just became almost
unthinkable. So even small and weak
countries felt safe enough to spend more
time on nurses and doctors and clinics
than on soldiers and missiles and warships.
warships.
And um this is now collapsing.
The biggest taboo of the world order of
10 years ago was that you cannot just
invade and conquer another country
because you are stronger.
This is now broken in more and more
places. Certainly broken with the
Russian invasion of Ukraine. Certainly
broken with Israel's intent still to
conquer and annex
maybe part of Gaza of the West Bank.
certainly broken when you hear the
leader of the United States openly
talking about annexing Greenland, let's
say to the US. We are entering a new
imperial era.
You know, Croatia was gained independence
independence
at the moment of the collapse of the
last imperial order, the collapse of the
last big empire, the Soviet Empire,
which had ripple effects all over
Eastern Europe and the world. Now the
world is entering a new imperial order.
When you hear somebody like President
Trump, for instance, talking about peace,
peace,
his understanding of the word peace is
simply that the weak will do what the
strong tell them to do. Then you have
peace, which is the imperial idea of
peace. The Romans also wanted peace. Pak Romana.
Romana.
Imperial peace means if the weak do what
the strong tell them to do, then there
is peace.
Why is the war? Because the weak refuse
to to to acknowledge power. So if the US
demands say Greenland and Denmark
refuses to give Greenland and the US
invades and conquers Greenland, who is
to blame for the violence? Denmark for
refusing to acknowledge the reality of power.
power.
This is the new either world disorder or
new imperial era that we are entering
which is supercharged again by AI.
Uh because
AI promises
to give whoever controlled this new
technology the means to control the
entire world. The same way that in the
19th century, the few countries who led
the industrial revolution like Britain
and France and United States and Japan,
they then conquered and dominated the
whole world. Nobody could really resist them.
them.
This is likely to happen again with AI
in the 21st century.
>> Okay. So, you mentioned Donald Trump. So
I have a question um and other strong
men. Why do people support them? So is
there something that liberal democracy
failed in that people are today as you
say more inclined to support strongmen?
I'll give you just um a few uh numbers
for the first time in over 20 years
according to the Swedish Swedom
Institute we have more autocracies than
democracies. So liberal democracy
uh has become the least common regime
type in the world.
>> According to the institute, nearly three
out of four people today live in
autocracies. So what did liberal
democracy do wrong? How did it fail
people? It did not necessarily fail
people, but liberal democracy has
certain preconditions.
Democracy in essence is a conversation.
Dictatorship is dictate. One person
dictates everything. Everybody has to
listen and do. There is no conversation.
The idea of democracy is let's gather
everybody together and have a
conversation and everybody can talk,
voice their opinions, their interests
and let's try to work something
together. It's a conversation.
Now it's not easy to hold a conversation.
conversation.
For most of history,
largecale democracy was absolutely impossible.
impossible.
The only examples we have of democracies
in the premodern era are smallcale citystates
citystates
like Athens or Republican Rome or even
smaller tribes that in in the stone age
democracy was very common. Most tribes
and bands were democratic not authoritarian.
authoritarian.
But as societies grew bigger it became
difficult to maintain the conversation.
If you live in a single city with say
50,000 people, you can still have a
conversation. But if you have a country
with millions of people spread over
thousands of kilometers, how do you have
a conversation? In the ancient world, it
was simply impossible. So we do not have
a single example of a large country,
kingdom, empire that functioned
democratically. Both Athens and Rome
when they grew
they stopped being democratic.
Large-scale democracy became possible
for the first time in history because of
new information and communication
technologies that appeared in the modern
era. first print and later telegraph and
radio and television that they for the
first time made it possible to have a
realtime conversation between millions
of people spread over thousands of kilometers.
kilometers.
So democracy is built on top of
information technology. It's not that
you have democracy as a kind of
ideological system or ethical system and
on the side you have technology. Now
democracy is built on top of technology
of information technology and if you
have a big change in information
technology you have an earthquake in
democracy. Now what is happen what has
happened over the last 10 years is not
that democracies stopped providing the goods.
goods.
There are many problems but there are
always problems in history. Show me one
period in history or one regime in
history that didn't have problems.
economic problems, social problems in
according to most objective measurements
like again health care, education, the
death of women in childbirth. How many
women die during childbirth,
the level of health care provided by
democracies in the early 21st century is
still better than in any previous time
in history.
What has changed is the information
technology that the entire structure is
built on. And over the last 10 years, we
saw this
really striking even paradoxical situation
situation
when we have acquired we have developed
the most sophisticated information
technology in human history and the
conversation has collapsed. People have
lost the ability to talk with each other
or at least to listen to each other.
They still know how to talk but it's
becoming more and more difficult to
listen. You know the only thing I think
that I I don't know the mo democrats and
republicans in the US can agree on is
that the conversation has collapsed.
They can no longer agree on the most
basic facts. They cannot no longer have
a conversation. This is not because of
extreme ideological gaps. Actually, the
ideological gap between conservatives
and liberals, between Republicans and
Democrats in the US today is smaller
than in many previous eras. Like you
think about the 1960s with the civil
rights movements with the so many
assassinations, so much violence in the
street, the Vietnam War, the Cold War,
the sexual revolution.
And yet Americans could at least agree
about who won the elections.
Now the ideological gaps if you look at
the actual ideology
there is actually in some areas like
abortion the gap is bigger but in most
areas the gap is smaller.
What is becoming bigger is the deficit
of trust and the the difficulty of
conversing and again agreeing on the
most basic facts.
And there are different reasons for why
this is happening. But I would say that
the underlying reason is the
technological revolution in information
technology. Now humans have spent
thousands of years
building trust between us and we're
amazing in our ability to build trust.
A 100,000 years ago, humans lived in
tiny bands of a few dozen individuals
and couldn't trust anybody outside their
band, which meant there were no trade
networks. There were no large political
structures like tribes. There were no
cultural movements beyond the small
band. You couldn't trust anyone.
Today, you have nations of hundreds of
millions of people that trust each
other. You have trade networks of
billions of people. We are very good at
it. But we have built over thousands of
years trust by interacting human to human.
human.
Now something is inserting itself into
almost every human relationship as a
mediator and perhaps as a wall.
>> And this is the new technologies.
>> The algorithms. Mhm.
>> The AIS in the midst of almost every
relationship today on Earth, there is an
algorithm. So, it's no longer human to
human, it's human to algorithm to human.
>> And something is happening there. >> Mhm.
>> Mhm.
>> Because I I'll say just this and then
and and then then we'll we'll develop it
in in other directions. But
what we see is a shift in trust from
humans to algorithms.
Trust in humans and human institutions
is collapsing.
Trust in human governments, banks, media
organizations, universities is
collapsing. At the same time, trust in
algorithms is going up. People say, "I
don't trust any of these journalists or
editors." But the same persons trust the
algorithms that feed them the news on
social media. People say, "I don't trust
the banks." At the same time, you see a
rise in trust in cryptocurrencies, which
are algorithm money. You don't trust the
humans to produce money, but you trust
the algorithms to produce money. So
trust it's not that trust is evaporating
from the world.
Trust is shifting from human
institutions to algorithms and AIs. This
causes human organizations like
democracies to enter a crisis, even collapse.
collapse.
And we don't know what will emerge
instead. We will not go back to the
dictatorships of the 20th century.
A new kind of political system of
political regime is emerging
without any humans at the center. It's
nonhuman intelligence which is
increasingly taking over the political
and economic and social system.
So before we move to that nonhuman
agent or system
um let me ask you now when you said that
trust is evaporating
so what about institutions like European
Union the 20th century institution which
was built also amongst other things on
trust trust trust of member countries uh
trust of the people who live in these
member countries for instance In
Croatia, um trust in institutions is
super low, but trust in European
institutions is much higher than trust
in national political institutions.
However, with this huge democratic
backsliding and decline of trust in
institutions, do you think European
Union can survive? I can't predict the
future because it depends on decisions
of people like the people here in the
hall whether it survives or not. I hope
it does. It certainly faces a crisis.
It's a crisis that's been building
because you know the European Union was
uh um it was very difficult to develop
trust in it. For me, one of the signs
was the money.
Um you look at the money of almost every
other political entity on the planet, it
has humans on it. these famous people
from the past, these presidents or poets
or scientists that everybody's supposed
to admire, it's on the money. You look
at the European at the euro, what's on
the currency, what's on the banknotes.
There are no humans on it. And my
understanding is that uh they couldn't
agree who to put there because of course
every nation has its own revered
ancestors. I don't know in Hungary,
Atila Dehan is father of the nation. If
they put a tila dehan on a 50 note, many
people would would be upset. The the for
the French Napoleon, okay, so you put
Napoleon in 50 50 note, people will be
upset. But they couldn't even put
Maricuri. They couldn't even put
Leonardo da Vinci. So they say, "Oh,
we'll put bridges and windows and doors."
doors."
But they and this is what what's on the
euros. You can check it later. There are
bridges, windows, doors, which all
signify Europe's openness.
But they were so afraid of offending the
sensitivity of this group or that group,
they couldn't even put real bridges on
it. So they put on the euros these kind
of imaginary bridges in the style of the
Romans or in the style of the Roman of
the Gothic or whatever, but not real
bridges because we put a bridge from
France, the Germans will be upset.
You can't build a a strong system like
that. If you build a house and it only
has windows and and and doors and no
walls, it can't stand. If you can't
agree on a single person that people
find admirable, it's it won't work. And
we need it to work. It Europeans needed
to work. I mentioned earlier that we are
entering a new imperial era. Europe is
now like Africa in the 19th century.
This is Zulu land
that um you know the Zulus have heard
that somewhere across the ocean in
Britain they invented steam engines and
there are trains or something like that.
This has nothing to do with us. We have
much more urgent problems here. Fast
forward a few decades it's a British colony.
colony.
Uh you can try to regulate AI like the
Zulus would try to regulate the
industrial revolution. It doesn't work
if it doesn't happen here.
And Europe at at the present in the AI
race, you really have two competitors.
It's the US and China. >> Mhm.
>> Mhm.
>> But Europe has a real chance and still
have a little bit of time
>> and Eurosong. We have Eurosong.
>> The Euro vision. Yes. We'll get to that
in a minute. But Europe has the economic
resources. It has the human capital.
Many of the people who develop AI in the
US are actually Europeans. Europe has
the the science, the educational system
to be a a third independent player in
this race, but only if it sticks together.
together.
If Europe falls apart,
its best hope is to become an American
vessel. And this is one of the reasons
that you see the American administration
so supportive of anti-uro European
parties because they know if they break
up the European Union done deal they are
in our pocket. And the strange thing
about many of these anti-uropean parties
they present themselves as great
patriots. They talk about we want to our
independence. We want our sovereignity.
Not realizing that the greatest threat
is not from the Brussels bureaucrats and
not even from the immigrants coming in
boats across the Mediterranean. It's the
AI immigrants
that are the biggest threat to the
independence and sovereignity and
culture of of European nations. Like if
you ask people what are what are your
concerned about immigration and
immigration now is the number one issue
in many many European countries and
people will say we worry that immigrants
will take our jobs. We are worried that
immigrants come with different cultural
ideas and they will change our culture.
We are worried that the immigrants are
politically loyal
to foreign entities and not to this
country. they will take over. And all
these concerns, I don't belittle them.
They are legitimate concerns.
But I would say if this is what worries
you, you should be far more worried
about the AI immigrants which are coming
without visas at the speed of light and
taking over everything. They will take
the jobs.
They will change the culture dramatically.
dramatically.
and they are not loyal to any political
entity in Europe. The their political
loyalty is across the ocean.
So yes, worry about the independence and
sovereignity of European countries, but
if you really want to preserve it, the
only chance is to stick together.
>> Great message. Thank you. So um you
mentioned now it's overseas we should
worry about the overseas and a couple of
days ago we had this outage of Amazon
>> and so many things collapsed. So we
realized in a split of a second how
dependent we are on only a few people.
So techno bros, techno oligarchs,
um Bezos, Elon Musk and the others. So
but can we say no? Do we have option any longer?
longer?
>> Yeah, I mean again not immediately at
the present situation. Yes, Europe
relies on technology on infrastructure
from outside but it is not helpless. Um
economically, culturally, scientifically
it's still a superpower.
if it gets its act together and decides
to do something about it. But um so far
it's it's not doing it. Again, when I
say that um you know AI immigrants are
coming over, it's not just the the
technical infrastructure like we saw
with the Amazon outing.
We talked earlier about democracy is
built on top of information technology
and this is why in democracy the media
is so important and if you look at
democracies in the 20th century and not
just democracies also autocracies
some of the most important jobs in the
country were uh news editors media editors
editors
uh you look I don't know at Italy in the
fascist Italy Mussolini before he became
dictator ctor of Italy. He was he
started his career as a journalist. Then
he became editor of a newspaper. Then he
became dictator. This was his his ladder
of promotion. Journalist, editor, newspaper.
newspaper.
>> Message for dictator.
>> Hope not.
>> Uh Lenin before he was dictator of the
Soviet Union, the one job Lenin held in
his life was editor of a newspaper. They
were very important people. >> Journalists
>> Journalists
are wiggling. And they were important
because they control the public
conversation. Not necessarily telling
people what to think, but telling people
what to think about. What will be the
main topic of conversation of everything
that happened yesterday in the world?
What will be at the top of the newspaper?
newspaper?
Which will be the main topic of conversation?
conversation?
If you ask who are the most important
editors today in Europe, what are their
names? They don't have names because
they are not human beings and they are
not in Europe. They are algorithms. They
are the algorithms that manage the big
social media platforms. They are now the
most important editors in Europe. And so
we know again when when I say that the
AI immigrants will come and take jobs,
they will not start with the jobs of
janitors and nurses. They start at the top.
top.
with my job with your job with my job
with the job of of editors with the job
of uh bankers with the job of lawyers
with the job of authors and writers you
know I'm now working on a book my
assumption is that this is the last book
that I'll probably write because by the
time it's over it's it takes a long time
to write a book let's say five years AI
will write better books than I can
>> are you afraid that AI is going to steal
your job that chat GPT or any other open air
air
>> I don't I'm not sure if afraid is the
right word I take it into account I take
into account that this is my last book I
look I'm my line of work is is language
is words stories and
and
as I observe the the development of AI
over the last few years I've been
absolutely amazed at how good it became
with language. It has a really deep
understanding of language. Uh you know
as an authors like I I I write a
sentence I sometimes think for two three
minutes which word to use. I have like
two words quite close in meaning and I
have to choose one and I try to
understand what is the semantic field of
this word which other words it it and
other terms it has connotations with and
I tried I AI has amazing semantic
ability to understand the the the again
the semantic field of the word
it's becoming better than us some People
tell me, "Oh, all AI and language it is
just glorified autocomplete."
But you know, I'm besides being an
author, I I'm also a meditator. I
meditate two hours a day trying to
observe the processes of my mind. One of
the most interesting things to observe
in meditation is how thoughts are formed
in the mind.
And what happens in my mind is some
glorified autocomplete.
When I start a sentence, I usually don't
know how it will end.
As a public speaker, it often terrified
me at the beginning because in the
middle of like giving a talk, I would I
don't even know how this sentence is
going to end. Like when I just said, I
don't know how this sentence is going to
end. I could have said how it's going to
continue, how it's going to terminate,
how it's going to develop.
I didn't know when I started the
sentence what will be the word at the
end where did it come from I don't know
there is some just autocomplete
and AI is becoming better at these kind
of of word prediction
you know we again we think about
ourselves as the most intelligent entity
on the planet so far we can think better
than any other animal and we can at
least in words. But if thinking is
words, it's very difficult for us to
think I don't know in a million words.
We usually have short thoughts.
AI can think in extremely complex
networks of word of words which we cannot.
cannot.
You know, I think one of the biggest
questions really for humanity, a
philosophical but also a political
question in 2025,
what does it mean to think? You know,
modern philosophy was born allegedly
when Rene
said, "I think therefore I am." And ever
since people have been arguing, what did
he mean when he said, "I think?" What
does it mean to think? And can AI think?
There are two main
versions of what does it mean to think?
Some people say to think is to string
words together in a certain structure.
Like all all humans are mortal. Socrates
is a human. Therefore, Socrates is
mortal. That's the what's the the
conclusion of of these words. AI if this
is thinking AI can think much better
than us or will be able to think in a
superhuman way in a very few years.
Alternatively, people say no thinking is
a holistic experience. When you think
you also feel pain or you also feel
love. There is an emotional and even
sensory dimension to thinking. If this
is thinking then no AI cannot think at
least not now I don't know about the
future and
this is a becoming now a crucial
question and this goes back to your
first questions about intelligence. What
do we value in human beings?
If it is their ability to string words
together and in in logical constructs
and reach conclusions then game over.
AI will do it better than us.
>> So it will overpower us then.
>> Anything that is based on language will
be taken over by AI. When I say
anything, I don't mean just writing
books. I mean the financial system. I
mean religion, you know, finance
ultimately is words, is stories. The
stock exchange is a place where people
tell stories to each other in order to
gain their trust and convince you to put
your life savings in this story or in
that story. Money, we mentioned the euro
bank notes, they don't have any
objective value. It's ultimately just a
story. And bitcoin like euro banknotes
is also a story. Finance is ultimately
also based on language and it will be
taken over by AI. More and more of the
trade in the world even now is conducted
by AI. It is likely that in a few years
AIS will invent new financial devices
that we cannot understand to create
trust between AIS so they can trade and
cooperate in ways
>> speaking its own language.
>> Yeah. speaking its own lang you know
like horses and humans a horse can see
that you know like in in the medieval
middle ages like a horse can see that
I'm giving you a few shiny
round things and in exchange you give
the horse to me the host doesn't
understand what's happening here because
the horses cannot understand money they
understand they see the round coins they
can't understand the story that makes
these coins value.
>> So we'll be horses.
>> We will be the horses that AIs will hire
and fire us and trade based on financial
theories and financial concepts that we
can't understand. Similarly, if you
think about religion,
at least again goes back to what he's thinking,
thinking,
at least some interpretations of
religion base it ultimately on language.
In the beginning was the word. Religions
like Judaism, Christianity, Islam, they sanctify
sanctify
language. They sanctify text. The
ultimate authority in these religions is
in a text, not in a human being. Why do
rabbis still have authority in Judaism?
Why do priests still have authority in
Christianity? Because until today the
texts couldn't speak. So you have say
the Bible. This is the ultimate authority.
authority.
But you have a question how to interpret
a certain passage in the Bible. You ask
the Bible, it doesn't answer. So you
need an expert that will tell you what
the text means. And this is the rabbi or
the priest. What happens to this
religion when the texts start talking by
themselves? Which is AI?
More and more people like I mentioned I
I was med I'm meditating more and more
people in my millia when they have a
question about meditation and two years
ago they would go to a human guru to ask
they now ask the AI
and there is rationale behind it because
again I take Judaism as an example
over the centuries so many Jewish texts
have been written not just the Bible
then the Mishna and the Talmud and this
and that. No rabbi is able to read all
of that and certainly not remember all
of that. It's too much for the human
brain. AI can AI can read every single
text written by every obscure rabbi in
Poland or Morocco over the last 2,000
years, remember every word, and find
patterns that escaped all human rabbis
until today.
If religion is ultimately based on
language, it will be taken over by AI.
Again, if we think about one of the big
last big revolutions in religion, the
reformation in Europe, how did it
happen? It started with the printing
press. In medieval Europe, there were
very few Bibles.
So, most people never read the Bible. So
to know what was in the Bible, you would
go to church and the priest would tell
you what is in the Bible. You did not
read the Bible yourself. Then came print
and everybody could have a Bible at home
and people started reading the Bible and
realizing, hey, this is not what the
priest said.
The Bible never says anything about the
pope. When what did they get the idea of
a pope from? The Bible never says
anything about purgatory. The Bible
never says anything about saints and
relics and venerating images of the
virgin. Where did they take it from? So
the moment when because of technology
suddenly every Christian could read the
Bible for himself or herself and
interpret it, you had this big explosion
of the Protestant Reformation. The
authority of the institution, the church
collapsed, at least in some countries.
And people started it says this. No, it
says that.
Now what happens if instead of
interpreting the Bible for yourself, the
Bible interprets the Bible itself.
You can have AI is a master of texts.
And for instance, most Christian priests
don't know Hebrew and Greek, the
original language of the Bible. They
rely on translations. AI knows Greek
better than any Greek and it can know
biblical Hebrew better than any Jew.
So if ultimate authority is text and
language, it will be taken over by AI.
>> But what's the solution then? So few
days ago, a group of people and that's
that's not the first initiative. This
one is interesting because it's such a
diverse group of people from notorious
Steve Bannon to Megan Markle. They
petitioned to prevent advanced AI system developments.
developments.
>> Are you on the same page with them?
Should we ban them AI development?
>> I I sympath I signed a lot of these
petitions in recent years.
>> Uh maybe I even signed this one. I
signed so many I don't remember. I I
completely sympathize and I think it's a
good sign that somebody like Steve
Bannon signs it. And when you look at
the US today, I think one of the most uh
a promising things is actually the
evangelical Christian part of MAGA
that they are becoming very suspicious
of the program of the tech bros and you
see an increasing split inside MAGA
between the Christians and the technologists
technologists
and this is crucial
and uh at least to some extent
the Christians because of you know the
humanistic tradition of Christianity
they understand correctly that there is
something here which is a very deep
threat to humanity
and you know I disagree with the the
Christian wing of MAGA about a lot of
things I'm a gay man but I think that
they have a deep appreciation
for the value of humans and this is important
important
in in this time and era because we have
people who do not have this deep
appreciation that they value only
intelligence and they have a very narrow
definition of intelligence and for them
if AI becomes more intelligent than
humans then we don't need humans
>> and it's a great point of unity that you
just mentioned humanity so between
different tribes so to speak so since we
have a few more minutes and I think that
we are going to address lots of AI
related questions and algorithms related
questions in the uh uh uh in the
audience questions. I would like to ask
you one question that is um that is very
um heated also everywhere also here and
you mentioned your country you mentioned
Gaza. So I would like to ask you um
what's the situation back in Israel and
do you think that peace in Gaza is
possible? the situation is terrible and
peace is possible
to make it very very short. Um,
>> let me jump in. Yeah, sorry. Go ahead.
>> The most important thing to understand
is that peace is possible. There is no
objective obstacle to peace.
Uh, it's not like, you know, it's a law
of nature. The laws of physics force
Israelis and Palestinians to slaughter
each other. This is not the case.
There is actually enough if you think in
in objective physical terms. There is
enough land between the Mediterranean
and Jordan to build houses and schools
and hospitals for everybody. There is
enough food. There is enough water.
There is enough energy.
There is no shortage. It's not, you
know, people sometimes say, "Oh, humans
fight for the same reason that wolves
fight. They fight over food." They
don't. There is enough food. If it is distributed,
distributed,
people fight not because of what's in
the land, but because of what's in the mind.
mind.
They are simply unable to see the other
side. They are unable to recognize the
humanity of the other side. Ultimately
again it's the human brain has billions
and billions of neurons and synapses in
it but the human mind sometimes find it
difficult to hold just two ideas
sometimes so poor so narrow it cannot
hold two ideas like to at the same time acknowledge
acknowledge
that there are more than 7 million
Palestinians living in this land they
don't have anywhere else to go. They're
mostly born there and they have a right
to live in dignity, in security, and in
prosperity. And at the very same time
acknowledged that there are also 7
million Jews living in this land. They
also were mostly born there. They have
nowhere else to go. They also have a
right to live in dignity and security
and prosperity. It sounds simple to hold
these two ideas together. There there is
no logical contradiction there. There is
no physical contradiction there. But so
many people are just unable to do it.
They are able to see the the the rights
and the misery of one side and then they
completely deny
even the existence of the other side.
And you know when our minds are very narrow
narrow
sometimes we try to kind of impose our
narrow mind on the reality. My mind
cannot contain
the other people. So I'll just anihilate
the other people from reality and then
there will be a match between my mind
and reality. But the thing is just
expand your mind.
If there are two things in reality which
you can't contain both the solution is
not to destroy one of them. The solution
is to expand your mind because the human
mind can be vast.
We can contain multitude if we make the
right effort and this is uh uh I hope
what will happen. This is not what is
happening. I mean over the last few
years and I'll talk mainly about my side
which I know better Israel and the Jews
they become so narrow-minded they become
so self-centered
they can only feel their own pain and
they become almost impossible for them
you know it's like
you feel your pain and if somebody
points out to the pain of somebody else
you feel almost affronted that you are
taking away attention from my pain
and uh the inability to sympathize. Yes,
you're in pain, but there is there are
other people in pain also. You're not
the only one in pain.
This, you know, it's the most basic
human ability for empathy,
Thank you very much for this for this
thought. So um since we are approaching
the end of the first part of our
conversation and uh of course there's
the question of Ukraine left I would
like you to if possible so that we
squeeze it in because I think it's super
important. Um um do you see an end to
the war in Ukraine?
>> Again, I can't predict the future. It
depends on the decisions of people all
over the world. But I would say that and
this is what what I said in the
beginning that the war in Ukraine is of
crucial importance of course to the
whole of Europe and to the whole world
because this is where the biggest
challenge to the old world order is. The
old world order was imperfect in many
ways. But one thing it managed to do, it
managed to create an on a taboo
on the conquest of countries that no
matter how powerful one country is, it
cannot just because it's more powerful
invade and conquer a weaker neighbor.
This was the biggest taboo of the
international system. This is what
enabled countries all over the world to
feel secure enough to invest more money
in nurses than in soldiers because you
felt yeah maybe I'm weak but nobody's
going to just invade and conquer me.
This is something that happened in the
middle ages. This is something that
happened in Hitler's days. It can't
happen today. And all the world is
watching Ukraine and realizing it can
happen. People compare it say to the
American invasion of Iraq. It's not. I'm
not supporting of course the American
invasion of Iraq. It was a huge mistake
and a crime. But one thing to say,
America never intended to annex Iraq to
the USA. Not a single millimeter of
Iraqi ground was annexed to the USA. And
the American soldiers are no longer
there. In Ukraine, every piece of land
conquered by the Russian army is annexed
by the Russian state. And even some
pieces of land that are not conquered
are already annexed. This is imperialism
in its old sense. You know, in the late
20th century when the old style of
imperialism, the imperialism of the
Roman Empire, of the Aila Dehan, of the
Mongols, it disappeared. So, people
started to use the word imperialism to
describe all kinds of other things. I
don't know, Coca-Cola sends sells drinks
in the third world. Imperialism.
They got so so h engaged with that they
forgot what imperialism originally
meant. Imperialism originally meant that
you invade another country, conquer it
by force of arm and annex it to your
expanding empire. And this is now
happening in in Ukraine with the Russian
invasion. And if this is not stopped,
then we will see it all over the world.
Haz clic en cualquier texto o marca de tiempo para ir directamente a ese momento del video
Compartir:
La mayoría de las transcripciones están listas en menos de 5 segundos
Copia con un clicMás de 125 idiomasBuscar en el contenidoIr a marcas de tiempo
Pega la URL de YouTube
Ingresa el enlace de cualquier video de YouTube para obtener la transcripción completa
Formulario de extracción de transcripción
La mayoría de las transcripciones están listas en menos de 5 segundos
Instala nuestra extensión para Chrome
Obtén transcripciones al instante sin salir de YouTube. Instala nuestra extensión de Chrome y accede con un clic a la transcripción de cualquier video directamente desde la página de reproducción.
