Artificial intelligence represents a fundamental shift, not just a technological advancement, prompting a re-evaluation of human identity, work, and societal structures, moving us towards a more individualized and potentially more human future.
Mind Map
Click to expand
Click to explore the full interactive mind map • Zoom, pan, and navigate
What impact do you think AI [music] will
have on the workforce? And do you think
we're headed for an identity crisis?
>> And this is the question that's
fascinating about AI. What else can I
become? Very few people have the courage
to ask that question. Why? Because they
look in the mirror in the morning and
they see an engineer or a doctor. They
don't see a person.
>> If they're not looking at artificial
intelligence and asking what are we
going to become with this technology?
Would you say it's the beginning of the
end for them?
>> The fundamental thing we need to
understand in this AI conversation, the
purpose of technology is to relieve you,
the human, of chores. and then of work.
Work in the sense of minor work, not
work to create art, not the work to
create worldliness. If Picasso was alive
today, he would have been the first one
to embrace maturity.
>> There is the fear that we're going to be
in this doom scroll of AI generated
nonsense and we'll just look at fake
lives. But I think that's [music] just
going to be temporary. In a world where
everything is actually about the individual,
individual,
>> the influencer will be gone. So the
influencer influences people to do the
exact same thing. And we are advocating
right now for the opposite. Technology
is allowing you to be you. Social media
may [music] be one of the biggest
casualties of AI. You wrote in your
book, refusing to engage with the tools
of disruption does not make your work
more authentic. It makes it less
relevant. [music] I'm sorry.
Welcome to I've Got Questions, the
podcast where we break down emerging
technologies and what they actually mean
for your life. I'm your host Jane Bll.
Today I'm joined by my friend, my former
professor, professor and strategic
foresight adviser Alexander Manor. For
people who are right now doubting AI's
potential, its its potential impact,
what would you tell them?
>> I will tell them that AI is different
than all the other technologies we we
moved through in civilizations. Most
technology that we created came about as
an answer to a problem like the problem
solution thing. So it was typically an
answer to a question. Um how do I carry
water in a portable container that gives
us the cup? How do I suspend the human
body above ground? That gives us the
chair. How can I solve this problem? So
everything came as a solution or as an
answer. Uh AI in all its forms
specifically now there's a surfacing of
generative AI uh came as a question and
that question essentially when we
transition to a new technology we the
first thing we do by default we adapted
to everything else we do in the past and
then the question becomes what what now?
What else? What else can I do with this?
AI right now is asking us the question,
what do you want to become? What else
can you be?
>> And is that question also pointed at
companies if they're not looking at
artificial intelligence and asking what
are we going to become with this
technology? Would you say it's the
beginning of the end for them?
>> Oh, it's interesting you phrase it the
beginning of the end. I phrase it the
other way. The end of the beginning. So,
um, now everybody has GPT on their
phone. It's the end of the beginning.
Now we can actually start using it for a
different purpose than just asking
stupid questions which we know the
answers to
>> anyway. Right.
>> Right. It's about starting to ask the
questions that we didn't even know we had.
had.
>> Exactly. And starting to ask fundamental
questions understanding that this is a
foundational technology that disregards
all the other technologies because it
replaces them in a way in which it
becomes invisible. Like our work becomes
invisible. our equipment, our machinery
becomes invisible and things just take
care of themselves. And that is a very
hard proposition to to accept as an
organization with an infrastructure
because the question becomes what
happens to my infrastructure? What
happens to the people working for me?
Well, we had the same issue with agriculture,
agriculture,
>> right? Who is your company when we
stream electricity and one day we start
to stream artificial intelligence and
it's that much embedded in the walls.
It's in the homes and we don't think
about it. The question was the same when
we made cables and then we invented Wi-Fi.
Wi-Fi. >> Mhm.
>> Mhm.
>> So what are we doing all the companies
making cables? Well, they didn't have
the vision or the foresight to
understand the cable was a bridge to
another technology. And that's the story
of most technologies. They are a bridge
to another technology. The fundamental
thing we need to understand in this AI
conversation. The purpose of technology
is to relieve you the human of chores
and then of work. Work in the sense of
menial work. work to accomplish tasks,
not work to create art, not the work to
create the Taj Mahal. That is the real
work to create worldliness, to create
signs that we existed. And
>> we're definitely going to dive all the
way into work. But with every new
technology, especially general purpose
technologies, whether it's electricity,
the internet, the steam engine, there
are winners and there are losers. Which
companies that exist today that we use a
part of our daily lives do you think are
most at risk of being disrupted by
artificial intelligence?
>> Whoa, there's so many um so many I would
say not companies but fields of human
activity which turn around to become
organ organized work for people. The
obvious ones are repetitive work. The
obvious ones are advising. The obvious
one are I will even say consulting. any
kind of advisory role uh uses the brain
of a group of people but generative AI
uses the brain of the entire neural
network you cannot compete with that and
not only cannot compete but it does it
in a fraction of a second so now how
many people will be I I don't want to
use that word unemployed because issue
is much deeper than unemployment the
issue is uh the meaning of life the
meaning of their life the meaning of
their professional life as opposed to
what life it is about which is you not
your profession. So the difference
between the me the I the ego the self
all all of those things are getting
right now not destroyed but challenged
by the questions AI is posing. I don't
want to name a company because I don't
want to create a fear because
>> but the reality is with every new
technology the companies that were in
the top 20 change right
>> so the companies that you think you
can't live without at one point
eventually become relics of the past or
they adapt but they aren't central and
do you believe that that's going to
continue that there's no reason why that
line randomly stops
>> no I'll give you an example uh one of my
books I had made a list of the top and
uh back capital market capitalization
companies in 2000 and then the same list
in 2015 completely different names. All
the companies in 2000 were either
financial services or uh energy. Uh of
all those companies at the top banks and
so on, none of them exist today in the
top 10. The top 10 companies in 2015
were strictly in the behavior economy.
strictly companies who produced very
little but gave you space to behave in a
way in which you couldn't behave before.
So they created what I called behavior
spaces. The iPhone is a behavior space.
Some people think it's a product. The
people who thought it was a product and
I don't want to mention the company that
was leading at the time in the market
>> didn't make it
>> right. The company who actually in a
board me in a meeting of a shareholders
called the iPhone a toy. It was
absolutely right. It is a toy and that's
why it was successful. because you it
was a toy for discovery. It was a
magnifying lens to the universe. That
was amazing. The Black Bay was not that.
The Black Bay was just a communication device.
device.
>> So technically, you could look at the
top 10 list right now of the biggest
companies in the world. And it is
possible that we project 10 years into
the future and if history tells us
anything, it's up for debate who will
continue to hold those places. There's
one thing that you wrote in your book.
Refusing to engage with the tools of
disruption does not make your work more
authentic. It makes it less relevant.
And so I think for people that's obvious
when it comes to a business. If you
don't get on the internet, if you don't
pick up the phone, it's over. But there
are many artists or individuals who feel
if I'm a writer, I want those words to
come from me. But you're saying it's not
that it makes you authentic or
inauthentic. It actually just makes you
irrelevant. How? completely look at the
history of uh human communication and
human expression of thoughts and
feelings, right? We depend on what is
available uh wood, uh water, color, uh
paint. So, we start painting, sculpting,
we start making tools to express
feelings. We start going into a cave to
put a drawing on the wall 10 kilometers
in. Like, this is stunning. There's no
light there. Why did humans want to mark
their presence? That's what work is.
when they create you know the history of
who you were at the time and I can see
it 10,000 years after. So we used all
this technology to express ourselves and
every time we have a new technology we
express ourselves in a more deep in a
deeper more complex ways and in a more
transmittable culturally transmittable
way. The transmission of culture with
technology right now is stunning. So now
if I'm an artist and I'm not using the
technology most available to me and
readily available, am I relevant or am I
a relic of the past? I don't want to
answer that question because the answer
is obvious. If Picasso was alive today,
he would have been the first one to
embrace mid journey. And because he
embraced everything with a speed that
nobody else did because artists were
always at the forefront of experimenting
with technology to actually understand
what else can I do with this? What else
can I become? And this is the question
that's fascinating about AI. What else
can I become? Very few people are the
courage to ask that question. Why?
Because they look in the mirror in the
morning and they see an engineer or a
doctor. They don't see a person. They
see themselves as the self created
through education, through being pushed
to do certain things by peer groups,
family and so on. Self-actualization
became an obsession for people without
people understanding what does
self-actualization even mean. You're not
actualizing your your being. You're
actualizing the self society wants of
you engineer,
doctor, professor [laughter]
and so forth. Even in the terms of art,
if you look at the tools a modern-day
artist wants to hold on to, at one
point, those were radical technologies
that people objected to or thought they
were a fad. Even I remember reading
about the invention of of films and
movies and everybody who went to theater
thought that it was a fad because it was
much more accessible uh that it was
cheap and it was a lower art form.
>> Yeah, it was democratizing expression
therefore is not art. All right. So
photography democratized image capture.
I don't have to be a painter to capture
this image. Now the painters had a
choice. Do I continue to paint realistic
images or do I transform my art? And it
actually transformed art.
>> So if paint led to the painter and
instruments led to the musician, camera
to the photographer, video camera to the
filmmaker and now the internet to the
creator economy, what type of artist
will AI invent? Oh, it's fantastic,
fantastic question.
So the question is does the artifact
create the master or the master creates
the artifact? Other words, did the piano
invent Bettoven or the the piano
invented Bettoven? So Bettoven became
actualized through the piano. So I think
you will have right now a mass of
creative people that didn't even know
they were creators. There'll be a
freedom. It will give them an explosion
of potential. I can do this. And then
when people start actually experimenting
with this technology, they stop asking
the question, what happens when I don't
have a job? Well, you would do this
stuff. You will create images of
contemplation for other people.
Contemplation is what we do and other
animals don't.
>> We're seeing so much AI slop. I mean, if
you are to see something was written by
AI, it was an AI generated image. Right
now, for the most part, it's
uninteresting. It's uninspiring. And is
that because we're still fitting in what
we did with the old technologies into
this new frame. So it's when right now
we're driving cars on roads designed for horses,
horses,
>> right? We are still creating with AI
from our imagination and from its
imagination which means from what we
know that exists and from from what AI
was trained on images it was trained on.
And I think at one point we'll move to
another level of creativity which I
named creative generativity in which we
will entrust the eye to create to
generate and that will be a new form of art
art
>> and I think the most unstoppable artist
of the future is going to be the artist
that finally recognizes their taste >> brand
>> brand
>> is no longer is no longer confined to
their craft. And you write in your book,
rather than laboring over the detailed
designs for a house, we articulate our
ideal dwelling and a software system
translates our desires into
architectural blueprints. So does this
theoretically mean if a fashion designer
or a local designer who has really great
taste could in an AI world be the best
person to design your home and the
architecture for your home? Because AI
makes the math make sense and I can take
that fashion designer. I can articulate
what it is that I want to feel in my
home and then that designer actually
becomes the architect.
>> Sure. Because don't forget what
professions are about. They're
mechanical translations essentially. So
a lot of professions are forcing people
to create things for a machine. Right
now because the machine understands only
numbers right now AI can do that faster
and much better than anyone. Why much
better? It's trained on on a wider
spectrum of knowledge. So it's a
perception of what exists is huge. And
then it replaced a lot of professions
which depended on the knowledge from the
past and the skills to create uh a
sustainable framework for a house like a
phys like a that defies gravity and so
on. Well that those are numbers that the
machine can do much much faster. And
then the question becomes so what will
the human do? Well the human will enjoy it
it
>> or articulate what it could be. Of
course that that and then the
combination that you mentioned of
fashion designer designing a house could
lead to an unexpected something really
beautiful which is transcending your
imagination. That's the whole point. The
whole point of AI right now is to
transcend and the whole experience you
have with images created it transcends
anything you imagined.
>> And is this what you mean when you say
we're moving to a narrated economy? So
right now we're in the industrialized
economy. The future will be the narrator
not the creator. the narrator would be
the best articulator of the intent and
happens that the narrator was always the
best articul society that's how we have
Homer Shakespeare you know these guys
did what they narrated right they they
told us a story about something that
might have not even existed we are
dependent on this narrator like that's
why we talk about the narrative arc of a
movie it it is what sustains our
interest in that form of art the
narration part so the creator part is
physical, mechanical, skill-based
3D printing. I don't have to talk to a
3D printer. I have to tell it what to do.
do.
>> Now, the 3D printer might be a
collaborator because at one point it
might have an opinion because it might
have a memory of what was created before
and might tell me you're infringing on
somebody's patent. I already created
that shape. And that'll be a normal
thing to expect. Just like in music, we
code music with uh uh traceable digital
information so we don't uh break uh
royalty agreements. So the same thing
will happen with shapes. Products will
be encoded. The ambient will understand
each product and what its meaning is and
will be able to tell you don't do this
or do this. So you've stated that our
future with AI could become more human
and in the products and in the services
that we design because we will be able
to have things that are designed for us
as individuals. So don't just I don't
want to shop online and get that couch.
I want to design a couch based on how I
feel, what I want, what I'm looking for
in my budget and everything becomes
about the individual. So if I'm looking
at the future of shopping, if we'll even
call it that, the idea that we all surf
on the web and look at the same couch
will be a relic of the past. Whatever I
imagine that's a product of what I feel,
my budget, AI designs that in a custom
way. I just articulate it. Or maybe my
ambient AI systems in my home know it
and the 3D printer brings it to life. So
we get a customized future.
>> Right? I recently worked on the future
of uh marketing in the era of generative
AI. And I imagine uh packaging. So
imagine packaging that has absolutely
zero uh uh design on it. Just an empty
box, but you are embedded. You have
you're an augmented individual. You have
glasses or you have implants or you have
contact lenses. So when you walk into
the store, the packaging becomes what
you want it to become.
>> It has the colors that you like. It's
why because the system, the ambient
system knows who you are and what are
your biases. It even brands it for you.
In other words, the branding becomes
hyper personal. Things will not be
called the same thing. Actually, it's
absurd if you think about it to call the
same thing for everybody. That become
completely customized to you. How's that
possible? It's possible right now. Like
the embedded situation exists, glasses
existed. Every single company is working
on XR glasses. Some declared that do it.
Some are keeping it uh stealth. But
everybody's clearly understanding that
this is the future of displays. Well, if
the future of displays is here, then the
future of packaging is also here.
>> So, if you walk into a store, we will
all see different things based on what
our intent is or what we're looking for.
So, for people who believe, but that
experience brings us in community. Why?
I don't want to see a different couch
than everybody else that keeps this
shared reality that our reality will
become too customized, too
individualized. What would you say to
that? Your iPhone doesn't look like my
iPhone and I don't hear anybody
complaining. So we customize everything
anyway. As soon as we can, we customize
it. So why should I not customize my
life and then we can exchange lives? I
can tell you this is Hey, look at me.
And we have a subject to discuss in that
moment. Right now we have everything is
boring. You you have the same couch as me.
me.
>> It's true.
>> Yeah. I mean ideally not. But
>> it's true though. Why are we all looking
at the exact same furniture when we we
call ourselves individual
>> individuals but we shop in a way that's
for the masses?
>> Yeah. So actually the store is a mass
it's a mass distribution store. So we
declare ourselves I want to be part of
the mass. At the same time we declare I
am completely independent and I have my
own system of beliefs. So that's the contradiction
contradiction
the paradox and that's that's exactly
what will be transformed will become
finally individuals. That's what I when
he mentioned becoming more human. That's
what I meant. Allowing your humanity to
transcend the form imposed to you by
others and you create essentially your
reality which becomes you and then we
can exchange realities. We can actually
have a port an exhibition of realities
if you want. Now people that are
watching this right now might think this
is totally crazy. This is totally out
there. No. every single technology
allowing uh the creation of what we are
discussing here exists right now. So
we're not discussing uh science fiction,
we are discussing what Peter Draer
called what has already happened and has
not yet made its full impact.
>> And this this idea of mass consumerism
where we all see the same thing will
just be a chapter in history. And when
you think about something like fashion,
the whole point of fashion is to express
your individual sense. And we always
look at history where everybody had
their own unique artisian design. In a
future it will be affordable for each of
us to just design the thing we want that
nobody else has and it's an expression
of ourselves that if anything is making
us closer to ourselves but we're using a
technology to do it
>> and it will change society the structure
of society. It will change the whole
idea of uh look at my car and look at my
clothes and look look at my watch. It
will change all that because your watch
will become irrelevant. My watch is
nicer than yours.
>> Status symbols in a world where
everything is actually about the individual.
individual.
>> The influencer will be gone.
>> The idea of the >> sadly
>> sadly
>> and and speak more about that. The
influencer is gone in a world with
customized individual AI first. Why is
the influencer gone? And I don't mean
automated gone. I mean why does an
influencer not make sense in the future?
because the influencer is uniting it's
converging uh aesthetics and desire to a
very specific outcome and that's exactly
the mass outcome. So the influencer
influences people to do the exact same
thing and we are advocating right now
for the opposite. Technology is allowing
you to be you. Now that's a choice you
can make but the problem with the
influencer they exist because of the
numbers that sustain the ecosystem of of
influencer. If that system collapses,
the influencer drops to the earth and
becomes him or herself. Right.
>> Right. So the internet led to the
creator economy and the idea of the
influencer. AI takes that away
>> in a way. Yes. Well, the internet is I'm
not connecting it to the internet. The
internet will still be that distribution,
distribution,
>> but the idea of an influencer makes less
sense in a world where AI makes it so we
will have everything custom. We will be
so individualized and you can afford
your whole individual aesthetic. Well,
it's a very simple thing and actually if
people bother to read mass law for real,
the last thing
>> hierarchy of needs.
>> Yeah. The the last thing or the
so-called hierarchy which is not a
hierarchy. Uh it's not
self-actualization but transcending
self. Transcending self is exactly this
revolt against what society forced me to
become an engineer, a doctor and so
forth and transcend that and become a
person that cares about others and
manifest itself or herself in the world
in a way it's not influencing anybody.
It's a form of the good, right? So then
if you transcend the self, say if you
self-trcendence is the objective here,
then clearly the influencer has no role
because the influencer is about the
self. The influencer is about creating
the self that you are not and that you
are to aspire to be you you're aspiring
to be that person or emulate that
person. So that's a creation of self. I
feel like social media may be one of the
biggest casualties of AI. And here's why
I think that the entire premise and the
entire value proposition of the current
platforms is that they connect us to
real people. Right? Whether that's me
signaling to a potential suitor, a job
opportunity to my friends and family, we
post because other people see. Even if
it's one person,
>> in a world where we don't know if it is
a portion on the other end, or if we are
a human, that entire value proposition
breaks. If you're posting for a bunch of
large language models, the idea of
signaling goes away. And signaling is a
psychological phenomena for millennia.
So, I think social media doesn't make
sense in a world where we can't
guarantee it's a human posting or it's a
human watching. And then I also think
media will still want to connect in some
way, but it doesn't make sense that
it'll be on these in the same
infrastructure. It's akin to the news
stations trying to stay relevant by
posting 60-second Tik Tok clips.
>> We will do something different on
different platforms. And so, I think if
the platforms don't evolve, they will be
the biggest casualty. even though they
are building the tools themselves
>> that will give them a big disruption or
they'll face the innovator's dilemma.
>> Well, there first of all it become decentralized.
decentralized.
Secondly, it will become a social graph.
In other words, we will understand how
many people are involved in what
activity. So, it becomes much more of a
of a real social event and plurality of
people doing this. Uh right now we don't
know right now we have no idea who's
doing what except the people we are
connected with. But when the thing is
passive and I can have a graph in my
classes and I know how many people or a
heat map if you want then I know how
many other people like me are doing this
thing at this exact moment. For example,
listening to the exact same song which
passively is possible then I'm much more
connected to that universe of people
than I am right now. Right now I have to
actively seek it. But if I'm creating a
digital footprint and I allow that
footprint to be followed by ambiental
methods then I'm part of a much bigger
thing and I will feel it in a much
bigger way because in the end we are
social animals. We depend on this
plurality and the plurality doesn't have
to depend on how many people we can
connect with. It should connect with how
many people are engaged in the same line
of or activity or thinking and so that I
am right now. So in some ways a social
media if we'll even call it that it's
actually about the people that are doing
similar things than us. So if I'm
possibly listening to a song a future
social media would be I'm connecting you
with other people that are listening to
the same song and it's not even active.
It just happens. So we're kind of going
back to
>> and I can know their names and I can
know where they are and I can understand
in that moment that hey I am part of a
much bigger thing than I thought I was.
and and and I have friends I have
friends that I don't I didn't even know
I had because we like uh Keith Jarrett
and we're listening at this moment to
the exact same concern
>> do it actually bring us in community
with one another
>> much more
>> and so I think that there is the fear
that we're going to be in this doom
scroll of AI generated nonsense and
we'll just look at fake lives but I
think that's just going to be temporary
and social media will evolve to
something that looks nothing like today
>> anytime we have a new technology the
first moments are play other words we
play we experiment we actually call it gizmo
gizmo
and we give and we tell people I'm
playing on my computer or I'm playing on
my phone and then it becomes more
serious then you start depending on it
then the thing transforms you and then
you start figuring out okay so I'm
transformed but what have I become and
then you start exploring the becoming
part what else can I become and that's
what AI will do
>> and so I guess what else can you become
is the same way we be some people became
podcasters or they became creators on a
platform called YouTube
>> perfect example AI will lead to a new
type of thing we can become.
>> Exactly. Exactly. What we didn't know we
could become after 20 before 2004, which
was the web 2.0. Before web 2.0, nobody
ever thought about becoming a podcaster.
The medium didn't exist.
>> Now, everyone in this room is here
because of that.
>> Yeah. And nobody, you know, how many
kids of 11 years old thought they would
be making $70 million
on boxing?
>> Oh gosh. I think that's something we
might look back and think we might not
be well. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> I want to talk about smartphones, but I
want to start with a few quotes about
the history of the phone. >> Mhm.
>> Mhm.
>> First quote, 1876, Alexander Graanbell
tries to sell the patent for his
telephone to Western Union, which had a
thriving telegraph business. And Western
Union says, "The idea of a telephone
device in every city is idiotic. Why
would any person want to use this
unggainainely impractical device? We do
not recommend its purchase. It is of no
use to us. 1981 telecommunications
consultant Jan David Jubin. But who
today will say, I'm going to ditch the
wires in my house and carry a phone
around. And finally, 2007, a scathing
piece in TechCrunch called We Predict
the iPhone will bomb. That virtual
keyboard will be about as useful for
tapping out emails and text messages as
a rotary phone.
What device do you think is in the
pipeline today or has yet to be invented
that could replace the smartphone that
people today will say it's ugly. I will
never use this. It won't be cheap enough
and nobody will buy this
>> uh XR glasses.
So if you look at Android XR it's introducing
introducing
willby Parker is making the glasses. So
they'll be attractive. uh they're
attractive right now. And uh a
combination of um
fashion companies creating the looks and
and technology companies creating the
technology will give you something that
you will desire. Now that you know
you've been educated and trained to use
technology to swipe to uh multi-ouch to
scale to all all the things we were
trained in the last 20 years by the
iPhone and other smartphones we we will
have to forget them and unlearn them
because now we're moving into a
different type of world ambient world
intent gaze where I'm looking is a
question and it will be answered. So
that is what an XR does. So right now
the technology right now becomes first
of all it's available right now it will
be perfe perfected in the very near
future the price points will go down
might be embedded might be uh uh at one point
wearables are one category but
implantables is probably where we're
going because implantables give you a a
very simple solution I don't have to
worry about it it's in me
>> the airpods were slammed that nobody was
going to wear these pearls the iPhone
was seen as disgusting
So for people who say I'm never going to
wear glasses, what are they missing?
>> Well, they're missing the cultural
shift. They are thinking about it as a
technology and not about a philosophical
transformation of life, which is the
iPhone. What the iPhone did was create a
category for itself and also it created
a segment of of the population that
understood that technology can be
beautiful and also desirable. So in the
moment in which you be understand that
technology can be desirable
there are people who cannot wait for the
glasses just like people could not wait
for the Google glass but it was not a
failure it was a lesson it was a story
it was something that needed to happen
as a bridge towards where we are now
just like the Newton by the way needed
to happen so we get to experiment with
the operating system and get to the
iPhone eventually
>> and I think people are imagining doing
what they currently do on glasses is and
that seems like a nightmare. The idea of
just watching 60C Tik Tok, we're going
to do different things. We're moving to
a different philosophy. So, of course,
we're not going to be bombarded with a
bunch of notifications in our eyes. We
will do something much more graceful
that makes sense for the new philosophy.
>> Well, imagine this. What is a phone? A
phone is a communication device on which
we rarely communicate, by the way, but
we express ourselves. So, what do we
need for that form of expression? We
need an input interface and we need a
display interface. Well, the input is
here. The display is everywhere. So,
right now we are looking at what surface
can become a display.
>> Now, the display could be initially in
the glasses, but it doesn't have to be
in the glasses. It could be on any surface.
surface.
>> Now, intelligent surfaces exist right
now. Intelligent glass surfaces it can
you can project images onto exist right
now. So it's not a question of the
surface having the information itself.
It's us projecting the information to
the surface
>> which totally has been done a couple of
years ago
>> because I'm myself not convinced about
glasses. I see how they can make sense
but I think an AI first device kind of
like what you're saying
anything might become the thing where we
need to interact with. So when you say
that the phone itself is just going to
vanish, we're picturing this some device
that replaces it, but you're saying
there could be a future where if we need
to see something or check something, we
project it wherever it needs to be.
>> The phone right now we have to reach for
in the future we are discussing the call
will reach for us.
>> The information will reach us. The
information will come to us where we are
because that's the whole point of it.
The whole point of it is to come when
you need it in a form in which you need
to see it. Now we have all the surfaces
right now. We have cloud computing. We
are being trained right now by the new
Apple products and operating system to
see translucency in everything. And
right now it's translucent. It it's
going to be transparent.
>> Right. Right now I think we're over our
devices. We want less of them. So are
you describing a future that involves
fewer devices and fewer notifications
and fewer invasions by devices?
>> Yeah. I I describe a future in which the
ecology contains the information and you
are the receiver. So you're an active
receiver of anything you need to receive.
receive.
>> So paint that picture for me. I wake up
and I hopefully don't have to interact
with many things. But if I do need to
interact, if somebody needs to reach me,
what could that be?
>> Bathroom mirror.
>> Any surface that you look at can be a display.
display. >> Mhm.
>> Mhm.
>> Now it can be a display intentionally,
which means I can embed a display in
surfaces. Like 20 years ago, I wrote a
book writing a scenario about a fridge
calling you. afred the fridge giving you
a call cuz you have to buy milk. And
then people said that's crazy. Fridges
connected to the internet that doesn't
shouldn't exist. It exists right now.
And they have displays and they talk to
each other and they now in the ideal
universe the fridge shouldn't call you.
The fridge should order the thing
because what's the point of you doing
the chore, right? So that's what we're
moving towards eliminating chores. Don't
forget what we are about. We are about
the lowest energy state. Every animal
seeks a lowest energy state which is why
we invent machines. So we invent
machines so we don't have to do stuff.
It happens that we invented machines and
we became the extension of the machine.
In other words, a vacuum cleaner doesn't
vacuum without you. Now it does. But 20
years ago you were vacuuming. The
machine was absorbing dirt. But the
active verbal vacuuming was you the
human. And the same thing happens to
every single other technology in which
we keep doing things and we create
professions about the thing and then the
thing disappears and then you see but
what am I going to do? I'm the guy that
used to type. Well, we don't need type
anymore. Now we have to dictate.
>> Oh, so how do I learn that? So all of
these things are part of all the
transformation of bridge after bridge
after bridge towards the lowest energy
state. So we seek that from the
beginning of humanity doing nothing.
Okay. contemplation. But in the
meantime, we had to invent some machines
so we can relieve ourselves from the
work. It happens that in the course of a
couple of thousand years, we had to work
with the machines. Now the machines can
work by themselves. That's a very hard
shift for people to understand because
the whole purpose of the education
system, legislative system, all the
system we created were for machines to
explain to us how we can become an
extension of the machine. And that's
what we we have been for many many
years. And I think we would all stand
for a future with less things. I don't
want something ringing and vibrating and
notifying me.
>> So I wake up in the future and if
somebody needs to reach me and I choose
to be available, maybe my kitchen
counter rings with the call or lets me
know somebody's trying to talk to me.
But if not, I don't need to connect anything,
anything,
>> right? Or maybe I just go like this.
>> Maybe I just go like this and tap my ear
and less things, less booking.
>> And I think, you know, people might say,
well, what if I need to see something?
The only things we see on our phone were
invented in the last 25 years
>> or less. And the only things we see on
our phone are excessive things that
might not even be of interest to us.
>> And so I I want to talk about work
because it's it's obviously an important
subject when it comes to artificial
intelligence. What impact do you think
AI will have on the workforce? And do
you think we're headed for an identity crisis?
crisis?
>> Let's define two things is different. labor
labor
like stuff you do to activities you
undertake to put on the table and work.
So if I'm looking at the definition by
Hana and in the human condition work is
the condition that creates the
conditions for life and work is the
creation of the conditions for
worldliness for signs that we existed
and signs signs that we mean something
to each other. Churches, cathedral, the
things we build, museums, musical
instruments, things that on the surface
of an activity are completely
unsustainable and unreasonable as
expressions. Like what do you mean? You
are making violins. You are creating a
symphonic orchestra. For what purpose?
Well, for exactly the purpose of being
human. All the other professions support
this humanity.
>> They give us electricity so we can
illuminate museums. They give us
electricity so we can make bend wood,
make violins and so forth. So in the
moment in which we understand that this
work environment was a transition
hard to accept clearly was a transition
and society developed around
technologies in pockets of technology
around the world and specialized in in
in geographic places in special
professions which were dictated by the
available technology. Then once a
technology takes care of itself then you
are left as you the human and that is a
profoundly disturbing thing if you don't
know who you are. Why? Why? Because you
were not told who you are. You were told
to aspire. You were told to follow this
influencer. You were told to become
something else uh and something else
from a very limited list in different
countries, different systems, societal
pressures, trending things. you become
something else and in a variety of in a
different periods of time you became
this group of people engineers,
physicists, chemistry, uh whatever uh
bankers and so on. All of these
professions are only needed if the
infrastructure needs people to operate.
A thousand years ago it did not. 10,000
years ago it did not. And humanity
survived and prospered in that
environment and created actually the art
that we are contemplating today. Right?
So the whole point becomes what is my
identity and how do I define myself and
unfortunately uh the discussion about
work always ends up with money.
>> It's not about work, it's about income. Mhm.
Mhm.
>> So it's it's a double uh discussion
about your worth as an individual and
your meaning in life
and what does my father do for a living.
Well, nobody's going to say he exists,
right? Or she exists. He's a doctor.
He's a So people need that kind of
professional uh stature. But in re in
reality, they don't. So, so once we
remove the professional expertise and
capability, we look at the income part
and that's what people are actually
really really fearful of the income the
loss of income
>> because people never contemplate never
complete the question and what happens
when robots take my place in a factory
they don't they don't get further what
can the robot do that I cannot do robot
can make a hundred things faster than
youund a thousand more objects which
will sell at more uh in for a cheaper
price bringing huge amounts of revenue
which can be taxed as a robot tax or a
fund or so forth. There are many
examples. Norway has an example in which
they have a fund the oil fund in which
the government keeps money for the
future and invests the money. So the
formats in which we can have a universal
basic income are very well established
but people did not buy into it. Why? We
still have the influencer culture. We
still have the I have a watch that's
more expensive than yours culture. And
if that disappears gradually, the fear
of the loss of income will become less. So,
So,
>> so what does that economic model look
like? So, you're talking about universal
basic income. And for anyone who doesn't
know, that is a world in which we would
all get a check of some form or all of
our basic needs would be covered at the
very least. But I think what people
don't get about a future with UBI
because right now UBI is from taxpayers, right?
right?
>> Right. all the pilots which have been
very positive companies.
>> Yeah. They're not from companies. So
there's a pilot in Kenya, Finland,
Minneapolis, and they all show people
are happier. I mean, at the very least,
I think that that's worth it in and of
itself. But a future with universal
basic income is one where we tax the
tech giants and the AI companies for
their prosperity that we helped create.
And I think no matter what happens in
the future, one where we all get to ride
along with the companies that succeed is
a better future for everyone. So we
should want it regardless. I think where
people trip out a little bit and I get
it is the idea of I don't want to sit
back uh you floating around in my pool
waiting for my monthly check from Open
AI and I think that's what we're
picturing and that seems like a
nightmare. It feels like the the worst
version of the Truman show.
>> Yeah. But imagine that OpenAI is also a
bridge to another society to another
civilization. So let's push this whole
thing to the ideal scenario to the
extreme. Okay. The extreme scenario in
which things work by themselves is
called nature. In nature, nobody makes
money. Nobody charges anything for
anything and everything seems to work.
So now let's understand something
fundamental about uh making bread. I
don't need money to make bread. I need
flour. I need water. I need east. I need
heat. And you will say heat costs money.
And I will say it doesn't cost money. It
costs money in this system.
But it doesn't have to cause money. The
entire mindset should be let's imagine
for one hour. Just play that game that
money doesn't exist. What do you think
will change in your life? You'll still
if you want to work, you're going to
work. You're going to create things.
You're going to go to the land and and
get some wheat and make the flour. We
come from there as a as a civilization.
We come from a place in which money did
not exist and everybody made bread. the
the the things exists by themselves. So
if I push it to that degree, I'm
excluding open AI from this whole thing
and other companies because essentially
if you look at right now we have a
linear economy, a linear stream of
thinking. I work, I get paid. I work, I
make, I get paid. But think of a
circular thing. I don't work. The thing
works. The thing pays for this. This
money goes here, here, and here. taxation,
taxation,
consumption, any form you can imagine.
And this is where the imagination is
stumbles because we cannot imagine the
thing that doesn't exist. This goes
against every single thing a human being
has learned. People learn that when you
turn 7 years old, you stop playing with
your food and you go to school and you
follow this curriculum. And this was
written 25 years ago by people who
didn't even know this technology exists
or woke up. And then you graduate from
the school and you go further to
university. You're not questioning any
of these steps except in Finland or in
other countries they start questioning
what is the meaning of education? What
is the meaning of literacy? What's the
meaning of writing with your hand? The
deeper you go, the scarier it gets
because people didn't learn these
things. So we have a lot of fear right
now because we have lack of knowledge
and the issues are not properly
explained and articulated and nobody
goes deeper into what is the world about
and life about. Is it about money making
things and where does wheat come from?
Wheat comes from soil.
>> We're so ingrained in this
industrialized society where we are
producers and we are consumers that it
becomes so foreign to think outside of
it. But if you were to ask somebody to
design their ideal society from scratch,
is it one where we learn linearly, where
we work 40 hours a week, where we kind
of live almost like robots, and where
our basic needs are only met if society
values the labor that we do, I think we
would tear it all down. And AI
potentially gives us the opportunity to.
The problem is it puts so much trust on
the AI leaders and the people leading
the AI revolution are laying it with the
bricks of capitalism. We can't trust the
social infrastructure. This is all being
built on. Somebody has to break free
from it. And how do I trust somebody who
is a fiduciary duty to the shareholder
not to me?
>> Right now the people that have the will
to do it have a motivation based in
economic gain. The people who have the
will to criticize us are the contrarians
of that economic reality. They don't
want this to happen because they're
losing their foothold into what they own
right now and that's the majority. Now
uh the only sadly this happens when we
have a disruption coming from the
outside in which is a major disease an
earthquake or an invasion of some
extraterrestrials in which all the
values we hold dear will disappear and
they disappear in one hour. One second
co made us understand that we can rejig
society in one hour. March 18 was in
Canada when we start everything. So it
happened in one hour and all of a sudden
people were receiving checks at home. So
the thing is we need to unlearn a lot of
life in order to be able to move to this level.
level.
>> And I think what co taught us is we can
redesign society in 45 minutes if we
choose to.
>> Sure. Sure. It's a it's a question of will.
will. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> And with any big disruption, I mean AI
is going to be that moment. And that's
why I think it's so important for more
people to get in the game because if
this technology does give us the
opportunity to redesign that society
from scratch, do you want your voice in
it or do you want it to be the seven
people in one small quadrant of the
world and so we can't unsubscribe from
this moment? Yeah.
>> I think there's so much resistance to
using AI for a variety of reasons that
people have opted out from it
altogether. But you can't opt out from a
general purpose technology really
>> and the the more you use it the better
feedback you can give. So if you do have
a lot of criticism, the more you
understand the technology, the better
and more useful that criticism can be.
So it's maybe that jobs go away but work doesn't.
doesn't.
>> What does this
>> and what's interesting is I did a social
media experiment a few days ago with my
community where I asked them what is the
meaning of life and what does it mean to
be human? >> Mhm.
>> Mhm.
>> And I want to read you some of their
answers. So to to be the reason that
another living being can find peace.
>> Oh, very good. to evolve, to witness, to
be have meaningful experiences with
people we care about. Not one person
said to produce, to consume,
>> to work. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> Yet when we ideulate on the prospect of
having a future where AI does more of
the labor than humans, it feels so
terrifying. Yet instinctively we know we
are not here for our jobs. So when did
jobs become a vehicle we think we need
to express our humanity?
uh industrialization probably mid 1800s
when we start we left agriculture to
machines and we had to do something and
we went to the city we became workers we
became employed which meant we became
dependent on the machine because that
was employment for a machine to operate
a machine. So in that moment you become
an extension of that system and you're a
part of that system and to become part
of that system you have to learn the
skills. So that transforms education
into a preparatory
ground for industry and that's the story
of every country and that's why they
organized based on what the industries
were at the time and then you stop
asking the questions because the first
generation is 10 years the second one is
10 years after and they don't know where
they come from and they perform their
duty connected to the machine of the
moment and then you slowly slowly slowly
you create other institutions
to to give this machine certification
to have a you know FCC manage the books
for that institution.
>> Yeah. Is that indexing everything it
becomes a library of a lot of different
components in the system and the system
start to dominate the humanity of who
created it right because it was created
for a purpose but the purpose was never
itself. The purpose was so your life is
better and you mean something to other people.
people.
>> Do you know what I think also scares
people about the idea of having less
work? to say we have a future where we
work 2 days a week
>> and even if it's doing the things we love,
love,
>> the idea of having so much free time.
And I think it's because we technically
have more free time today than
generations ago did. But our time has
been bought and sold and auctioned on
the markets of capitalism that we now
spend the time we have doom scrolling,
being polarized, being sold in
securities by marketers we didn't even
know we had. So we can't even imagine a
future where we get to just be free from
the chains of capitalism with that time
and just be in community. I mean is that
even possible?
>> We need to start challenging this more
and more. We need to start challenging
do I really need this object because
it's all about what satisfying the self
or satisfying your ego or satisfying the
person that you really are which needs a
lot less than the self and the ego. So
then you realize what makes me really
happy. I do an exercise called
presencing and I'm asking people so what
is your major challenge right now in key
opportunity and then you answer and then
the second question is what do you truly
love and that question people don't know
what do I truly love in my profession
what do I truly love in my life and then
you have to make it clear it's about the
simplicity of the question what do you
truly love so then you realize they will
ask exactly like they answered to you
>> no connection to work no connection to
money And you know any anytime you do a
top 10 list of the most important things
in your life, the money is not even there.
there.
>> Love, health, friends, tons of other
things, but not money.
>> There's so much we have to unlearn
>> work. Yeah. We're not going to top that.
>> As you said, the industrial revolution,
it created this hyperconsumerism society
and producers were consumers.
>> Created a reason. Sure. It created a
reason for professions, a reason for
organized marketing of stuff. create
created something called retail, right?
Retail and shopping are totally
different things. Shopping is you
looking for things you need to survive
and retail is people displaying the
thing. Well, it happens that right now
that display part doesn't have to be
physically in a store. That's why we
have street after street after street
with empty stores
in Toronto at least. [laughter]
>> And and you you wrote something in your
book that I think is really important to
read. I want to get to. So, you write
Without moments of reflection, we risk
moving forward blindly, building a
future without pausing to ask, "What are
we building?" Does it align with our
deepest values? And are we building a
world worth living in? Do you think we
are right now?
>> Yeah, right now we are. Anytime you're
moving towards the future, in other
words, the future is a choice, which
means you're designing it. uh you're
designing what you think will be the
future with the elements of the present
because that's ext essentially we are
building from what we know the problem
we have is the framework of our mind
right so we want a new story and we have
to write this new story me in five years
from now but the me five years from now
typically starts from my perspective of
this moment I'm looking at my
perspective which is what I'm seeing
what I know what I learned Now if I do
not change my perspective I cannot write
a new story. I hear people saying what
is the future of education that tells me
they fundamentally don't understand the
idea of the future. There is no future
of education. There is knowledge in the
future. But in the moment in which you
phrase it as the future of education you
are assuming education will remain as a
constant when in effect is a variable.
So most of the things banking is a
variable, finance is a variable,
mortgage is a variable, all of these
things are but we think they're
constant. Society is a variable. So
transformation is a constant. Your
business is the variable. And the
variable is actually always disrupted by
the disruptor, right?
>> And if you and and the only way you
become disrupted is if you allow it.
Which means if you are not embracing it.
So he if you don't integrate a disruption
disruption
>> what what's the point?
>> Yeah. The future of shopping assumes
we're shopping. The future of education
assumes we go to
>> No. Retail assumes you're shopping.
Yeah. Retail assume now what will happen
to the mall? What's the future of the
mall? Well, there is no future of the
mall. Becomes a library. Becomes a park.
>> Becomes a place of communion. Becomes a
place where we dance. It's a dance hall.
No. But right now people pay rent. Yeah.
So we're going to pay to dance. And so
when you apply that to the individual,
you know, the future of education
assumes there's education. If we look at
our careers, they're linear. We have to
get out of that paradigm and take
comfort in knowing we didn't even choose
that paradigm. It was
>> nothing happening to you right now is
your choice. Even even though you think
it's a result of all the choices you
made in life but all the choices we made
in life were actually integrations of
other things from other sources from
peer pressure from parents from whatever
and then you end up here I mean right
now our choice was to be here but uh we
are here as a result of other choices we
didn't make ourselves this technology
that technology and so on and why are we
are here because we embrace this
disruption right? Other people are not
embracing it and they're not here and
here in a sense of contemporaneous with us.
us.
>> And so for my final question, if you had
one piece of advice for somebody who is
scared of the future, they're scared
about artificial intelligence. They feel
like it's moving too fast and that they
have no control. What would you tell
them about the future? What are they not
seeing or what could they be doing to
help shape a future that they would
actually want to be a part of?
I will say start the conversation with
artificial intelligence. Play games with
it. I play 21 questions. It's really
funny. It remembers everything. It knows
what I do. So ask it to tell you a good
night's story. Ask Google Home to tell a
good night story. Try try to humanize
the interaction you have with it and try
to understand it's not a tool. It's a
collaboration. It has an opinion.
Hammers don't have opinions. So the the
moment in which you are confusing this
technology with all the other we have to
call it a technology right but ideas are
also technologies. So it's in the moment
in which you think it's part of all the
other mechanized environments we created
or devices and and instruments you are
making a huge mistake. It's a cultural
transformation of the found
philosophical transformation of the very
foundation of your existence. It's a
it's a not an extension. It's actually
it lives in you. You live in it. So this
symbiosis between you and something else
which you created in a massive scale. If
you think about it, we created this.
This exists because we exist.
Nature doesn't exist because we exist.
So in the moment in which you understand
this transcends a lot of the things that
we did in the past, then you start being
in awe. And that's a very good place to
be. You want to be in awe. You want to
treat it as something that you can learn
from. You want to treat it as the most
knowledgeable other. Ask questions and
the answers that you get back is not
what you expect. So they transcend what
you imagine. The thing the interaction
is completely transcendental in many
ways. So then you realize I can really
become something different if I allow
myself to play with this and to push it
to understand how far can I go. So
despite some of the fear, the
hesitation, take a moment to just be in awe.
awe.
>> Just be in awe and titly use it.
>> Learn from it. Allow it to transform
you. Just like you allowed your iPhone
to transform you, but you didn't
recognize it. This is much deeper than that.
that.
>> And now you call Uber, you call Uber
Eats, your life
>> and you don't even think about, oh, how
many people are unemployed by doing
this, right?
>> Well, Professor Manu, it has been a
pleasure. I can't wait to do it again.
Same here. Thank you so much.
>> I've been studying economics of
technology for about a quarter century
and I haven't observed a period where
there is this pace of change.
>> Is artificial intelligence overhyped or
are we fundamentally misunderstanding
this technology?
>> I don't think it's overhyped. I think
it's very dangerous to not be using AI.
Where we will overestimate is how fast
Click on any text or timestamp to jump to that moment in the video
Share:
Most transcripts ready in under 5 seconds
One-Click Copy125+ LanguagesSearch ContentJump to Timestamps
Paste YouTube URL
Enter any YouTube video link to get the full transcript
Transcript Extraction Form
Most transcripts ready in under 5 seconds
Get Our Chrome Extension
Get transcripts instantly without leaving YouTube. Install our Chrome extension for one-click access to any video's transcript directly on the watch page.
