@@psycronizer .... Yes he hated non Aryan races .... But then he hated communist thugs all the same .... But Russia was an ally ... Until he betrayed them .... But he did helped neta ji subhash chandra bose with prisoners of war .... POWs turned against British rule .... Making confusion among the ranks .... Leading to naval revolt of 1946 .... Please Google the last statement ..... Naval revolt of 1946
@@himanshut114 did that..interesting....there must have been some pretty appalling conditions for some of the Brits themselves to support the mutiny ! mind you, that does not surprise me, the Brits back then were even more polarized than any other oppressor...some had strong views on how people were people and should be treated as such, and others, unfortunately, viewed the Indian's as nothing but a cheap form of labor ...a slave basically....Isn't it astounding that no oppressors ever learn that if you treat people badly they will rebel ! basic human nature....
I want to tell you, I am impressed with the level of transparency you put into your work. A real value added; shorting the time needed to get around things, allowing to access sources. Thank you.
"Altered Carbon" is a book I read years ago being wonderfully realized on Netflix (I've not yet finished the ten episodes ) keeps coming to mind as I read through these comment threads.
It seems Peter is using "demonetize" interchangeably with "decrease the cost of". But even if the cost of things is going down, that won't necessarily mean that cost of living will go down. Somehow even as technology has improved people are finding the need to work more hours. Technology doesn't fix all these issues, it may just rearrange who we work for and where we pay money to.
Capitalism keeps pulling us into th medieval ages where material Feudalism keeps making sesrfs of those who can't keep up with the graft and corruption from the top down.
@@Nahulanham Innovation, Opportunities, Improved quality of life, Improved Infrastructure, Better Technology, Less hunger, Less Poverty. Yeah Capitalism really resembles medieval times, except that it is exactly the opposite.
Jacque Fresco, who envisioned the 'Venus Project' and a resource based economy has been calling this for decades, that an inevitable evolution towards demonetization, followed by the abundance that technology can offer us, have the potential to free our species. I would highly recommend anybody interested in this topic to read his books for an early idea into what the world may look like under these conditions. This was an amazing talk as always from Peter Diamandis.
Only 1 problem with TVP, resources will be limitless... RBE doesn't make any sense in a limitless universe but his analogies of humanity and decoupling from traditional modes of thought like love or needing a purpose still ring true.
Hi, We'll said Peter . Jacque Fresco has definitely struck my attention and his work TheVenusProject.com has taken into account the many problems that where said and not said. The lecture absolutely opens the door for discussion on an intelligent approach to a new and useful system. Cheers
Here is the link to The Venus Project website www.thevenusproject.com and the latest documentary for your convenience ua-cam.com/video/Yb5ivvcTvRQ/v-deo.html
Immensely heartening to see potential abundance on the way. We will just have to make sure that these technologies and industries are either decentralised across individuals/businesses, or that they are largely in public ownership - the last thing we need is hugely powerful corporate monopolies acting as gatekeepers to basic goods and services.
I agree. We need a world more like Star Trek. But a postcapitalist society could also be Technofeudalist. A technofeud could be virtual in nature. A good example is Facebook or Amazon.
The deepest issue with all of this is what people will do when meaning is removed from their lives. Having virtually all of your needs fulfilled immediately at marginal cost sounds nice on paper, but it ignores billions of years of evolution wherein the very struggle to survive has been the core motivation of every living organism.
Yeah it is kind of terrible postcapitalism future we are heading into if it leads to few monopolies rather than open public platform. Big global corporations ruling the world and having all the control over the internet or various aspects of it... (making devices that access internet and operating system for them, or running services that everyoen is required to use).
I totally agree w you, the problem (one of...) of demonetization is the governs, how will they survive without taxes? Since it doesn't produce anything (goods) only burocracy. Either they will became totalitariam dictating what people can have (at the time for "free") much like communist governs, or seize to exist.
Bobby Frazier, every customer with dollars gets a vote :) It was govt funded NASA that disrupted the status quo of no space rockets. Capitalism is useful in breaking up the government monopoly on these innovations, and taking them to a wider field but it's just one mechanism in the whole complex machine.
Yeah, but do you really need to live in metropolis, own a car, or send a kid to kindergarten? You can have pretty much the same life much cheaper. Probably even healthier.
Most people will live in metropolis, we basically all should to avoid the sprawl and that obfuscates the need for a car, and without kindergarden there will be no liberation of women, and greater poverty through total inefficiency of each parent looking after only one child.
Let's see scenario 1: you still have a job. Do you really need to live in a metropolis? Yes Own a car? Probably not Send a kid to kindergarten? Yes. Or who will take kare of the kid while both parents work. Scenario 2: you don't have a job, but you get some kind of minimum income Live in a metroplis ? No Own a car ? no Send a kid to kindergarten? No.
His point is that the burgeoning demonetization of transportation and the rapid expansion of telecommunication jobs is going to trivialize the need for populations to concentrate in metros.
Beep Beep corporations also do that already. The solution is not just "less government" it is to overthrow and replace the corporate state with a libertarian socialist society where the people who do the work own what they produce
As alluring as the idea is I don't really believe post-scarcity is a realistic condition we will arrive at. Everything will still have a cost no matter how cheap it gets, just because it always trends towards zero doesn't mean it will ever get there, things will get cheap but I imagine that there will still be incredible things out there that fetch a gigantic price tag due to their extremely high level of desireability
There is no point of money, when goods and services are provided by technology at the cost of free energy. If there is a cost, it is because we are too stupid to get rid of it.
Great presentation. He is a good motivator about the future. It's hard to feel sad, when he talks about his version of the future. Let's be part of that !
Not sure if you watched the whole thing, but the Q&A session was pretty sad, scary. What happens when we get replaced by AI? What role do we have left in the world when we are outsourced from our jobs and creative arts?
But singularity, is that not destroying the world ? And is he not actually, the one who was promoting this, and now he realizes, that he has been making a mistake - so he realizes and see the consequences of his own and his buddy actions - and standing there - kind of asking for mercy and help ?? Demonetizing ? How would that be possible ? he was the one, who evangelized that the world would be abundance, but now see, that he created scarcity instead and make from a fertile land turns it into a dry desert, with no water left, for us to be feeded.
+Raven Knight I do IT so I would continue doing my job getting payed or not, I do it everyday, it's a part of my everyday life. And I am a doctor for future machines, the world will need more of us.
He's espousing ideas that do not have any connection to reality. Remember, piracy is a crime ! You wouldn't download your dinner would you? Of course you would. That's why the world is run by the corporate police that will kick in your door and shoot you in the head if you do. That's a joke, but not really. The world is not an egalitarian place. Living creatures all strive for dominance in their environment. That applies to us as well as every other living thing. The structures of our modern society which is right in front of our eyes shows us this every day. You don't even need to look to the unknowable history of our species. The people who have economic power have always been the ones too rule the world around them. In what future does it come to pass that this structure will be allowed to move to one where this power dynamic no longer exists ? Maybe it's just me, but I don't see any chance that Utopia comes to fruition without a horrific struggle.
This was very informative: lots of data to support his analysis, lots of insights into the past trends, lots of links made between different sectors/areas. I still think the BIG thing that is missing is the social factors. I'm not talking about socialisation and psychology. I mean the simple fact that people have different aspirations for themselves. I don't see the world being streamlined into a "unique" life style made of Uber taxis, solar powered houses, automatic cars, digital money. On the contrary, I see the world exploding into different little worlds/communities. This is already evidenced when you look at regions/states within Countries asking for independence (Kashmir, Cataluna, Québec, Flanders, etc..). I believe that people are going to make it DIFFICULT for businesses to "collect" and "trade" with their data by coming up with their own legislations (censorships, mal/adware fighters), by breaking down the national policies (special or autonomous status, hacking) and by claiming new identities/affiliations (Transgender, indigenous, tri-national rights). We often look at the big picture and project so much in the future, but he fact is that it is only a PERSPECTIVE out of many others. Most of those who share those perspectives in the public sphere (i.e lectures, Ted Talks, etc.) have their own vested interests in promoting a one-track-future. But as viewers, we should make sure that we keep an open mind and avoid the pitfalls of taking these perspectives as prophecies. Ultimately, we should come up with our own perspective on our future, but this doesn't happen unless we ask ourselves and eachother the heavy-weight questions beyond the "What job do you do? Are you married? Do you have children? Do you own a house?" These are totally irrelevant question for today's under 35s, let alone the Under 18s...
+Nachannachle I'm half agree with you. I think your right because people will want to pursue their own dreams but at the same time I think you're wrong, not entirely wrong just partially, because I think that with this technology the average person will become better educated as well as have time to think about what they've learned meaning that many people will have a common view of reality instead of just making speculations about the possibilities for what can be and/or why things are... So while I can agree with you that many people will want to separate themselves from each other I don't that it will be so dramamtic. I think laws will change to accommodate their needs. So while a large majority of people will move out of the cities they will remain relatively near the cities because our way of life revolves around people relying on each other to provide for each other (made possible with trading/currency). If the individual was self-sustaining then what your saying would become even more true. Not necessarily a bad thing but in a world engulfed in greed and anti-intellectualism it certainly would be a bad thing.
Amazing! This is possible, people should change this way of life where many are being destroyed...there are so many things that people can do to live happy...and there many solutions to many things...good people are going to win...the world will change...the good people are going to take over like is always meant to be.
Devil is in the details. Peter seems to have all the answers. "It is an important and popular fact that things are not always what they seem." -Douglas Adams
The real question is how to escape all the humans unable to put aside there cultural/religious baggage they like to refer to as ethics, cause you know this gives them a great reason for a crusade in the name of those ethics's
IMPORTANT here is the simple solution: just pull the bolt! ua-cam.com/video/hAQuspvIMIM/v-deo.html ps: if i too stupid and too little useful to the society for the justification of my existence, then it should be so. I stay with the other idiots in the back waggons. its ok.
For those curious about how the genome sequencing price trend has continued over time: "The cost of a human genome sequence decreased from an estimated $1 million in 2007, to $1000 in 2014, and today it is approximately $600."
So why are the latest technologies such as iPhone's and Galaxy phones the most expensive they have ever been? The gap between rich and poor is getting wider, Just here in Australia you can see the country moving into a nation of renters, Housing has become a joke. Investors have destroyed it, Buy up and rent them back out to the next gen. Every new generation has to study more and work harder and compete harder than the previous gen for the fewer high paying jobs just to afford a house. We are going backwards. Renting and paying off someone else's mortgage then leads to less disposable income to spend at shops which in turn stuffs the economy, Shops then have to lay off employees. It is a vicious cycle! More stress and suicide now than ever before, Humanity has tipped past the balancing point. What sort of future will there be? Will they have us all living crammed like sardines living in small box like apartments. I see far too much reliance on services these days which to me is a huge national security threat, Even more so than some loner suicide bomber. If the service is down everyone is affected. We should be moving towards more self sustainability in every house, So if some go down at least everyone else is still up and running and can lend support until theirs gets fixed. Where as now lets say there is a power blackout, everyone in the neighbourhood is back to the stone age until it is fixed. Houses should have backyards to collect water for use, also grow some food. If there was an emergency now, The supermarkets would be raided as everyone panics for supplies. If we are not careful, Then in future we are all going to be slaves to a few big corporations that have bought the others out. You can tout UBI but once again you are relying on handouts, If they stop what happens? Or what if they say we can't give you that next payment as you don't agree with our policies/agenda? Cut payments just as they do now with social welfare. End up becoming a slave to the system.
Without counting inflation the motorola StarTAC was $1,000 in 1996 and is complete dogshit by today's standards. It made really expensive calls, that it. If you adjust for inflation today that would be $1,562.27. That was probably the most expensive phone ever other than Satellite phones.
too late.....we already are. Most just dont get it. "End up becoming a slave to the system." "Banking was conceived in iniquity and was born in sin. The Bankers own the Earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create deposits, and with the flick of a pen they will create enough deposits to buy it back again. However, take it away from them, and all the fortunes like mine will disappear, and they ought to disappear, for this world would be a happier and better world to live in. But if you wish to remain slaves of the Bankers and pay for the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create deposits." Sir Josiah Stamp, President of the Bank of England in the 1920s
I never wanted a mortgage (deathpledge). Home owners still rent. They pay their taxes , and for many in this country it is 600 a month.. And if you dont pay your taxes, house is sold and you are on the street.
I've always thought we, as a society, have been focused on the wrong solution. Instead of focusing specifically on increasing everybody's income, why not focus on reducing everybody's basic costs by using technology that brings inexpensive energy, food, medical care, etc. to the masses?
A great talk regarding the upcoming 20 years in technology, and the profound shakeups resulting from their roll out. The next 2 questions that come to my mind are: 1) Are we even discussing the mindsets that are needed to cope with the possibilities that are brought by these new technologies "coming online"? (i don't really doubt they're upon us, but the social structural changes and the individual mentalities required to adapt to the new context are quite different from what we currently have). This is nothing short of a worldwide cultural shift, and the old structures might not take it easily. 2) How do we make sure all of humanity benefits from the new possibilities (ie. free energy, free water and food, ...) instead of a just a few? Thanks to +Singularity University Summits for stimulating the conversation.
The ones who are going to feel it the most are the people rolling it out who think they will control it. once they are plugged in they are the robot dead and when the order comes to hit the reset button.....
Super excellent presentation of the state of the art in relation to the democratization of applied STEM that brings ever more abundant innovation to solve problems that mystified mankind previously. We are unlocking unimaginable progress and prosperity with AI!
If we as a society own these technologies in common, then we can govern ourselves without professional politicians who work for billionaires. Gotta get rid of the corporate model.
I partially agree with the autonomous car part. If you own a Maserati, it's partially for 'status' and partially because you love to DRIVE a fast & smooth car. There is something nice about the tactile feel of actually being in control of a fast-moving vehicle.
Programmable matter (or as he said: Nanotechnology that could create anything you want) won't happen anytime soon yet because it requires many decades of research on biotechnology and AI fields. The nearest technology that we have now is 3D-printing and we're still in childhood terms
That was a fantastic presentation! It is great to see that even Peter Diamandis is starting to talk about Post Capitalism and a future that sounds an awful lot like a Resource Based Economy! He makes it clear that this is the direction technology is leading us to.
It's interesting how human endeavor comes full circle. From trading pigs and sheep to trading intangible resources. One wonders why or if currency was ever a necessity.
WHAT? In the 50s a man could raise his family on a single income. Now everyone must work (man and woman) with a few exceptions. Everything is more expensive not to mention the greedy rich would never allow such a thing as a demonetizing of everything. What about medicine? Cost is what separates the haves from the have nots (iPhone X for example... price just hit $1,000 for the basic model). The wealth gap is increased by 500 fold. Are we talking about EARTH?
To be fair, you don't actually need that child-labor made phone. You do need fresh, organic, local vegetables though, and that shit is over-priced because the U.S. doesn't subsidize them for shit.
@Strider Most people in this country rent and most who don't just don't have time to do something a gigantic automated farm could do far more efficiently. The price for veggies may be higher per lb. than everything else except shit like truffles and caviar, but it's still more efficient to rake in money from most jobs than it is to farm them yourself. The concept is called 'economy of scale'. Anyway, the crazy ass 35% obesity rate would probably drop if veggies were better subsidized and all the toxic garbage wasn't. But then, who would big pharma sell pills to? They want you sick, because sick people can be shackled in debt forever, while healthy people usually can't. Blackmail them for their very lives.
7 років тому
@manictiger Actually, a lot of people are into and adopting the farmer, homesteading, and permaculture lifestyle. And to say that a big farm will be more efficient isn’t exactly true. sure bigger farms can churns out greater amount of goods, but most of them are processed with chemicals and the cattle and lifestyle, often reared in terrible conditions. There is a market for pasteurized, clean, non chemically treated produce and meats and the market is strong, people have gotten rich from their private family run operation. Aside from that, it’s really easy to do, I've seen entire families become self sustaining at least in terms food on just a few acres. And tons of people live off grid, refusing to live in the city or even work a city job. A lot of them sell excess produce for capital because thats how effective modern day techniques are. it can be lucrative too if you play it right, selling honey, or poultry. Some people even do it right there in the cities, in their backyards. Trust me, agriculture is on a revolution right now and you’ll see in the near future, cities adapting vertical farming, office spaces with produce, and isolated greenhouses in the cities. I know so many successful people, who’ve opted to become a homesteader. I myself may even consider it, being free of corporate America and providing for yourself must be empowering. the option is enticing even when you consider you get a bunch of acreage, produce and meat with a minimal carbon footprint, where everything is essentially run on clean energy.
hmm, asking good questions, sure, i can do that. so regarding the talk: * How do we handle resource-shortages? * How do we handle the loss of power of violence-ready elites when demonetization hits? * How do we avoid destroying even more habitats by air-traffic and widespread settlements? * How do we teach AI and Robots healthcare, when we are stuck in a reductionist symptom treatment system? * How do we handle the loss of identity which comes with being "free" from your job? * How do we decide which systems to implement and which not? * How do we brace ourselves against technical immunisation? One EMP and the bright future becomes a darker hell than all ages before. I find not mentioning these critical discourses (and there are much more for sure) when hailing the brave new world to be rather frightening to death than sparking hope...
It is clear Peter Diamondis owns Tesla shares and he is short in traditional car manufacturers. In his broad and wise view, the world only consists out of Tesla, Alphabet (Google) and some other big US tech companies. There is no way in his mind that traditional manufacturers are also anticipating on trends, while they are nicely profitable today (unlike Tesla). The story of Diamondis is flawed on many sides. Some products come down in price, sure. Because they deliver data in return. How is that with energy? How is that with food? How is that with cars? The sun delivers more energy than we can consume, but we still need technology to capture that energy. This won't be for free. The same counts for cars. People want to transport themselves around. Therefor cars will always be needed. Unless we can teleport ourselves. No hyper loop of Musk can fill that gap. When cars are being utilized more intensively, the wear out faster and need to be replaced more often.
You need to watch Ramez Naam's speech on Exponential Energy (was just before this speech). Technology becomes cheaper with scale. Food will become cheaper once resources currently used to generate dirty energy (certain biofuels, coal) are no longer needed. This gives us more land to plant food crops on. Food is cheaper than it was 100 years ago because we have GMOs and tractors that make farming easier. Developing crops that require less water, or ways to reduce water lost (look at the tree t-pee) will save money and free up water to be used elsewhere, so tap water might become cheaper. Replace farmers with robots, have AI's monitor the crops at incredible detail that isn't possible for humans, these will save costs and bring down prices too.
I have to agree, just because prices fall doesnt mean they necessarily become zero. I think we see the gap between rich an poor increase before we see a free for all society.
Food is cheper because it is so much cheaper to store it long term and transport it from far away and because governements pays tons of money for agriculture. Good food is getting more and more expensive, if not entirely unavailable, while there is oveeraboundance of cheap processed food that is culprit of many civilization deseases. Not to mention the current prefferred farming methods that waste water, soil, chemical (pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers)... And yes, GMOs, chemicals and so on make food cheaper, but it is not the same food. And what is sad is that government regulations and subsidies result in food that only appears to be cheaper, but it is not. In fact it can be rather expensive but somehow nobody pays close attention to it.
that's why the goal is to dumb our interests down & get us obsessed with VR. Who wants to go outdoors & do REAL stuff like drive around & visit natural scenery...when you can just plug into your laptop & live out the rest of your life pretending to fuck 10's while dressed like an elf mage while riding dragons & farting blue fireballs
"but we still need technology to capture that energy. This won't be for free|" of course it can be. Technology can NOW create technology, replicate itself, and think better than most Americans....no point of money when goods are created by technology with free energy.
what about rich and poor countries, different systems, different values, different mentalities? will the technologically advanced countries generously share this abundance with the poor, technologically unsophisticated regions losing all their power and influence? will theocracies dissolve into democracies, just because people can print everything they need and education is free? somehow I find it hard to believe in this utopian world, at least anytime soon...
Yeah it can quickly change into dystopian nightmare if people with power (CEO of global corporations and rulers of nations) happen to have their own interests in mind. I find it hard to believe they will do the best for the collective good with my data. I am sure they will do best for themselves, and I see fewer and fewer ways how to ensure that it is good for them to do what is good for me. Theree is less and less open systems, just fewer bigger and bigger companies.
Anytime you hear someone hinting around some form of "everyone's needs will be met in the near future" stab that person... Struggling to fulfill our needs is a huge part of what makes life worth living, I can't see anyway in his description of the future everything doesn't suck...
People are already so lazy and entitled, especially in developed countries (and part of the reason why undeveloped countries aren't developed). Just providing them with everything will make people useless and depressed, why progress and exist? As the saying goes, you can give a man a fish and feed him for a day or teach him how to fish and feed him for a lifetime. Of course there are those that need immediate rescue. Why is feeding wild animals a bad idea? Because they will become dependent.
Demonetization of real estate because of VTOL (Vertical Take Off and Landing) electric jet propulsion system is a perfect example of how the laws of economics show a shift in where money goes based on perceived and actual value. Real basic, but notice he still compares the education of a poor kid and a billionaire kid, they will be educated the same. So, my question is, how come you still have rich and poor if our society has demonetized every aspect of our basic living needs? The answer is deceptively simple: Because wealth is a concept of power, but power is reality imposing its will. Understand this, and you will see that no matter how far back you go, or how far ahead you can imagine, there have always been, and will always be elites. Controlling technology, engineering, design and most of all, raw natural resources. A.I and robotics are already here. Universal basic income will have to been decided and distributed by a central entity, be it government or otherwise. Who we are, what we do, as a species in large, I believe, to discover how to access our own personal power. What won't demonetize is data. Information is the new petrol. Remember, nothing is created, nothing is lost. Everything is transformed.
Maybe Diamandis has mentioned it but Ray Kurzweil has an interesting claim that there will be both free open source products and commercial products competing with each other. That will be a powerful combination I think at least for a transition phase.
This presentation is only speaking with powerpoint and pictures telling me things that already was discussed 30 years ago. 60 years ago robots was discussed. Nothing happened that was not only a scaling during the last 60 years. Since than it was said that in 10 years we will have "real" AI, robots, Nuclear Fusion, etc.. It did not happen. Show me prototypes and no powerpoint. Make it like Elon Musk: show the new things and do not speak about it ... in 20 or 30 years means for me: never ... with my 55 years I have no time for fairy tales!
Google X-prize foundation. He is a cofounder. The medical tricorder, that's a real product that's resulting from X-prize. Cofounder of Singularity University: an attempt to educate and train people regarding exponential tech. To name just those two. It's easy to take pot shots from the audience, but what have you done? :)
hallnuts33 umm... This guy didn't say he did more for the world than this guy; he was saying most of this is conjecture & fails to take account of political groups aimed on disallowing robots, especially for labour. Think the international brotherhood of trade unions will roll over and hire robots over men & women?
Raimund Scheucher Nuclear fusion is a suppressed technology, undesirable for the current heads of energy production. It would NOT take advantage of the production of (nuclear) fissionable materials, but instead REDUCE the need for them even further. Also, A.I. Robots doing work requiring critical thinking is about 30-100 years away from today (2017), depending on how much financial interest is generated over that period. For example, making a decision where to put a nail & how to best support a (wooden) structure are not in the scope of an inexpensive robot. What will be MOST likely is that labourers will be able to get a helper bot, so a "gopher". We can use them to assist in holding materials, obtaining specific tools, drawing lines & cutting lumber. Not everybody/every country will be able to afford completely robot built, non-traditional material homes. There will always be homeless, if not without shelter, those without work. Also, some people live in cabins & use no electricity at all. The best case scenario is one where robots are employed alongside a human who owns & controls them. We can give them humanistic attitudes other qualities which will foster relationships between the two "workers". The benefit of this system, is that when doing dangerous work, we will always be able to quickly replace the unit & recover their data (including local relations & memories).
Demonetizing everything seems possible, but currency itself is still useful. I empathize with Marx regarding his dislike of rent seekers. Those people in the middle who's only 'job' is to skim a coin here and there as product moves from the producer to the consumer. The other hurdle will be eliminating interest-seeking. As Einstein is quoted as saying: "The most powerful force in the Universe is compounded interest." Right now, so much productivity is going to pay compounded interest to those who do little to nothing productive. I mean one single bratty billionaire pretty much caused the Greek economic crisis when he refused to take a loss on his risking investment, and threw a temper tantrum in EU Central Bank board meeting about Greece. These people will not let go of interest-seeking quietly.
Holli - true. Companies that want to increase shareholder profits have shipped jobs overseas. Those workers, often in near-slave conditions (or even slave conditions) produce the products sold. The shareholder just sits there and collects that dividend off the backs of a poor labor force.
I agree. Currency, as imperfect as it is, in capitalism does a decent job of rewarding and quantifying contribution to society. If there is some better system, we haven't discovered it yet, and all prior attempts have been massive failures.
Eventually the global economy will equalize and labor will be about the same cost (given additional overhead of transportation and such) throughout the world. The solution certainly isn't to abandon the system that brought most of the world out of poverty. Plus, it turns out people work for their health. Yes, they work for their health. Without work, people wither away. And people in the US work as hard as those in most foreign countries, you should visit some manufacturing companies some time.
He is predicting things based on projects that are currently in place for the most part. Projects that have been exploding in number over the last handful of years. How that is going to affect individuals lives is very much an unknown and is shown in his answers to the Q&A. People and especially men I think inherently gain a large part of their self-worth from what they do and how well they can provide while doing it. The next 10-20 years is going to become VERY interesting. As the curse goes; "May you live in interesting times".
Wow - I love Peter's vision and optimism. The psychological implications are very interesting, and its already happening. Simon Sinek has some very interesting content talking about the effects of cell phones and information overload on our brains. Great stuff, great talk, I really enjoyed it!
I'm not giving up ownership of my means of transportation, and neither will many people. The concept of a corporation, or a government owning one's means of transportation, and people not having this very important ability in their own hands, will be enough to stop many people from accepting the "death" of private vehicle ownership.
Don't be so short sighted child ("fuck fanny fiddlefart"): Where do you think new technologies come from? Coffee house arguments between SJWs??? It is important to have goals that are just out of reach to drive research.
No discussion on AI is complete without discussing its downside (particularly cost of maintenance, continuous software upgrades, social dislocation etc). This talk focuses only on the economies of scale achieved so far...
I mean, this is interesting and all, and as a supporter of a RBE, I really wish to see the 'demonitization' of large segments (all) of our economy. However, the way that the market is structured, with cyclical consumption at the forefront of our appraisals of our economies, there is little hope that our species will somehow suddenly, miraculously, become self-sufficient, conservative in the most literal sense (sustainable), or allow for the decentralization of government force and coercion. Seeing as how the government is today merely an extension of business, and vice versa, I think it's fair to assume that we're going to have our dreams dashed again by the richest.
You cannot create a top down authority in a market economy that is based on liberal values. The only way a new system will arise will if it is better than what currently exists and replaces it in peoples lives as it gives value and is so much easier to use.
I disagree. UBI (THOUGH ABSOLUTELY WONDERFUL) and the like will not be the answer to it but rather a product of it. The future is coming fast and it is going to change everyone and everything in the blink of an eye like magic. Anyone who don't want to be part of something extremely fantastic, better hurry up and go find a hole to hide in, because tech blockers can't stop it now.
I have BAD news for you - higher productivity of labor means less workers, lower salaries. So if you're not an owner - forget affording even decent food! Just a fact going on from the 70s now!
The idea of an Unconditional Basic Income has now become inevitable and mandatory from a socioeconomic point of view : if not applied, technological and demographic factors will create a social massacre of unseen proportions. Yet, it represents a double edged sword at least from an ecological, and thus more essential point of view : as much as it would lift or even eradicate poverty for millions, if not billions of victims by today's structural violence, we will have to ask ourselves : can we afford throwing vast amounts of additional money upon a human enterprise already putting its own survival at stake through severe ecological disruption caused by mindless mass consumption ? No matter how powerful this idea has become, the larger evolutionary challenge for humanity remains the same : to outgrow the counterproductivity and inbuilt insanity of an obsolete and life threatening monetary system.
You are all wrong. A universal basic income means people don't have incentives to help one another. A job is a person asking another to help them with something. There will be jobs as long as there are human needs to satisfy, and human problems that need the input of other people are never ending, no matter how technologically advanced we get. Unemployment is caused by governments restricting the labor market with increasing regulation, nothing more. Farming machines wiped 80% of all jobs, and further automation has wiped 80% of jobs time and time again. We will be just fine, increasing the standards of living and making all products cheaper as a consequence of automation, although you don't see cheaper products due to governments inflating currency. +yoo, do you know what happened starting in the early 70s? Massive inflation. Tech is not to blame for stagnant salaries in the middle class, but the expropriation of savings to fund bailouts and the like. Ultimately, devaluating currency in order to fund govt programs will only kill fiat and give wings to the Ethereum/Bitcoin AI economy. An AI cannot open a bank account, but machines can operate in cryptocurrencies any time.
I have a sneaky suspicion that this utopia described will come at a cost. We're in the middle of this technological change currently and I still see poverty, food banks, wars, diseases and corporations doing handsomely out of it.
Lindenic10 Your comment stuck out, very salient, I think a very important thing for us to think about. I see intelligent conscious life like Humans in some ways as a heuristic, adaptive mass of metabolic pathways throwing responses at the perceived "wall" of reality, so to speak, and "seeing what sticks." Like the idea of an infinite number of monkeys typing away on typewriters, in principle, would produce "Hamlet", say. We know better. We know only 1 "monkey" was needed, really, to produce _all_ the works of Shakespeare. In all the billions of lives who never had access to a typewriter, how many Einsteins, Shakespeares, Marie Curies, your favorite artist or musician, etc... how many of their potential input to the collective wellness of conscious life has been lost - simply because they didn't have access to the means to actualize it? Right now we have a situation. Wealth is the typewriter in this scenario. Right now a tiny fraction of the population has all the typewriters. And they're not even using them. They're stroking their egos to how good they are at keeping everyone else from getting typewriters. And if someone builds her own typewriter, it's confiscated, or destroyed. These are fitness adaptations. The "king of the mountain" game doesn't work. Most of the species that have lived have gone extinct. That game was the one they played, all of them. We Humans supposedly have the capacity to avoid that. I hope we do.
Exactly. Couldn't answer the questions! this shows that some millionaire techs that are defining the future are far from wise. 1. 22:47 Q1: I wonder if you could talk about the social dislocations that may be created by the introduction of all these technologies? A: Not worried about the terminator (hypothesis) i am worried that we are going to have a disruption of jobs from AI and robotics...it's the speed at which this is going to happen... i don't have an answer for that...people might have psychological problems related to losing their persona, i'm working and talking to Tony Robbins about this... 2. 24:56 Q2: What won't demonetize? A: Great question don't have easy answers for it 3. 26:50 Q3: What do you believe to be the critical skill of the future? A: To ask great questions (and not answer them?) and curiosity and creativity =>haven't these always been critical and important to survive? 4. 28:42 Q4: So do you see a problem in all algorithms being created by males? A: No idea
Completely agree with the star trek type of society analogy, have been saying this for years but most people seams to fail to comprehend that the type of society we see in star trek is the most important idea Roddenberry came up with. We´ll live in a kind of techno communism
Exactly. All he had to state was that in his vision of the future the world will be ruled by Communism. Which of course isn't as pretty and lovey dovey as he is painting it out to be.
James O but it’s not communism at all. In fact it’s actually quite the opposite. Instead of government controlling the means of production, in the future individuals will control the means to produce everything they would need. All you need is a 3D printer to be able to copy itself. In that case you own all the means to build your house, make your clothes, grow your food, etc. This technology on the horizon will destroy the idea of centralized governments as we know them.
Just when I start learning and understanding monetization for my music. All that gold I spent searching. The bitcoins and stock market unstocked? What an inert systematic change in our times. It's such an economically breakdown. It's exciting and scary. 3dprinting body parts? Thank you!
Kinda, but the compononents of labour will end up being replaced. The energy goes from carbon to renewables; the medium goes from us to robots; the information goes from us to AIs. Raw materials will remain a limiting factor, though with advanced AIs we''ll be able to find cheaper solutions for most items. Won't quite be zero-cost, obviously. But could be close to it, for our standards. Depending on reproduction... if we get a trillion people on the planet, nobody's gonna have much ;).
I'm saying nothing will cost zero and you're saying things will get cheaper. We're really describing the same progression. The problem is Peter there is using the fall of prices to as smoke and mirrors to say "Let's have more socialism". Which is really his one and only message and in reality has nothing to do with prices going down.
I believe that's the direction we should be going in, but I'm not so optimistic we'll get there. Costs of production is already lower for companies, and they're always looking for ways to lower it further, meanwhile the costs of things for consumers, they keep increasing. While costs go down, the current economic structure demands constant growth in profits and thus constant price increases while searching for ways to charge for more things. If they could produce something free, they would, while still charging us as much as they can and controlling the means of production.
All I see is a smooth talker who says we should all get rid of our money he then goes and cashes in his pay check for that speech he just gave the irony in that do you not see it if this guy lived by what he preaches some one should pay him in carrots.
This is his passion. He would be doing what he is doing regardless of whether it's for money or not. Would you still be doing what you're doing if it wasn't for money?
This type of barter labor economy is essential i believe for a space based welfare economy. Sadly the only reason why this base type of philosophy style is the most prevalent is strictly based upon the fact that no one has figured out an alternate system other then the realistic idea that people in space will be mining resources worked liked slaves but potentially come back millionaires with tons of health problems. In capitalism like in sports people will risk life and limb if you give them a chance at millions . In a welfare economy you take that desire away to reach those goals because the income is the same wether dishwasher or president or space miner.
Hmm makes sense makes me wonder about the medieval times when they threw vegetables onstage was it really a bad thing if you could clean it up and eat it and it might back then be considered appreciation totally changes the meaning of the term starving artist feels more literal.
One way of seeing it is "Everything is free, we can all be like billionaires". As an Economist the other question is "What will be John's job? John will be able to live like a king for only 5 thousand dollars a year, but how will he gain those $5k if all jobs are done by machines that program themselves? Will it not polarize society between those who have and have not? Let me reductio at absurdum: Things are made by 3 rich entrepreneurs and 1 billion robots to sell to nobody because nobody has a job.
If doctors can largely be automated, I see no reason why electricians can't also be largely automated -- especially at the rate that robotics is advancing.
He is talking about the near future. "Hands on" jobs which requires manipulation with real life objects in a lot of different situations are probably the last jobs to go, this is why a doctor will be replaced before a surgeon, it's easier for a robot to diagnose someone than to physically remove a tumor. From a robotic perspective tho, removing a tumor is easier than fixing wires in a house, since the the environment is more homogeneous on the surgery table than in some random persons house, and you can have specialized robotic arms and tools for task specific to surgery while electricians have a more disordered environment to work with. Granted the environment is simpler, but more disordered, it has to physically navigate around the house, move objects to get to places, possibly interact with the home owners or other strange obstacles places in it's path. No where near impossible, but if you look at the DARPA challenge and compare that to the latest tech in surgeon bots you'll see what I mean. ua-cam.com/video/0XdC1HUp-rU/v-deo.html ua-cam.com/video/wX0KagJ1du8/v-deo.html I'm pretty sure the surgeon robot is controlled by a human tho, but as you can see, the surgeon environment is a lot more sterile and homogeneous.
Open Source hardware will bring this to reality: A bunch of engineers sit together, invent something good, go to public and release the bluprints, asking for crowd funding. The crowd funds the project, blueprints go to a manifacturing fab, product is released and on shelves. No patent crap, no copyright BS. You pay for the product and for the cost of living of the engineers, that's it.
Thanks Peter. What is patently true for the future is the current mish mash of economics and politics is unsustainable and will vanish - the developments you speak of will continue to be the catalyst for the change.
To be quite fair, comparatively, we are economically and politically sound.
7 років тому
I like his speech and I agree with a lot he has said but for the demonetization to have any effect some sort of non-job based income for everyone needs to be put in place for example a universal income. The reason why he mentions pretty much every commodity is coming down in price most people still need to work the same to survive
@19:00 speaking about diagnosing health issues; With all this gentleman's forward thinking his paradigm for health care is still back in the dark ages! The focus has always been to diagnose a problem as opposed to preventing problems! When we adopt a plant based diet we will begin to see REAL change in the world.
The biggest question I did not hear was what will happen to the old mentality of acquiring wealth? I doubt whole entities like bank corporations are going to go quietly into the night. And will there be a war on this?
It’s ego that forms an identity around our jobs- careers. This will actually be psychologically healthy to drop the ego identity & accept , love , approve of, value our inner being ( beingness )- over doing ( external attachment )- such as job- career identified. This will be psychologically evolving to a healthier state . Also spiritually evolving as well- by turning inward- to our true selves ( inner being )- instead of externally focused- attached to ego identification to feel of value ( job ). Human - beings instead of mere human- doing. I’m optimistic this will lead to positive change & evolving. 👏
How do people make a living in this coming reality? How do you mitigate the human impact to control the logical outcome of this progress? For instance, in The U.S. today, we have surplus food, yet many people still go to bed hungry.
So based on some of these theories, our culture's ability to obtain things and own more stuff will expand. The ability to build bigger and better will also become more equal amongst more people. We might live longer and healthier. So my questions are: what happens to finite resources like WATER for example? It seems that this boom in tech will co-relate with a boom in population. Space will be at a premium then. But ok, maybe we will have proper filtration systems to turn waste water and salt water into drinkable/consumable water. But the space situation... that will continue to be a problem. It seems to me as if "land" will be the most valuable possession/currency. This also pushes me to think more about SpaceX and their huge initiative to explore and reach mars (and other planets). Again... land. A safe place to call home. To build a house for your growing family. That is a question I would have asked at the end. This topic is fascinating to me. I am extremely curious as to what foresight there is in this regard. We can't all fit in one country or a whole planet.
A lot of breakthroughs may take quite a long time... I do like the fact that he starts out that Star Trek's optimism is due to the fact that they have a matter replicator and abundance already...nanotech may provide that eventually but I'm not so sure it will be able to compute and self replicate any time soon or have an internal power source of consequence. This is a crucial step. Don't get me wrong; I've been with Ray since Spiritual Machines came out. I just think that there are certain things that are harder than we expect them to be and they are critical and worrying if they do not happen.
Decreasing the cost of the things because of robotics doesn't necessarily mean that would decrease the price of things because someone is still going to own the robots and own their output.
the record high per day in germany was 64.2% and not 85% renewable energy production ... whilst that is a very missleading number .. it's close to or slightly beyond 40% per year
Bravo, bravo, bravo! You have led the cattle in a path that will surly ensure a larger bank account for you and your associates. Predicting the future in such a matter-of-fact manner will surly garner you followers who will invest in whatever program or course you are selling. Markets collapse,and others take there place - nothing new. Predicting rising markets is priceless if you're correct.
"Demonetizing Everything" - UA-cam has already started this process.
But they have their own interests and biases
@@himanshut114 The CIA and DARPA created UA-cam.
@@himanshut114 how did Hitler help India.?...I thought he despised non Aryan races....
@@psycronizer .... Yes he hated non Aryan races .... But then he hated communist thugs all the same .... But Russia was an ally ... Until he betrayed them .... But he did helped neta ji subhash chandra bose with prisoners of war .... POWs turned against British rule .... Making confusion among the ranks .... Leading to naval revolt of 1946 .... Please Google the last statement ..... Naval revolt of 1946
@@himanshut114 did that..interesting....there must have been some pretty appalling conditions for some of the Brits themselves to support the mutiny ! mind you, that does not surprise me, the Brits back then were even more polarized than any other oppressor...some had strong views on how people were people and should be treated as such, and others, unfortunately, viewed the Indian's as nothing but a cheap form of labor ...a slave basically....Isn't it astounding that no oppressors ever learn that if you treat people badly they will rebel ! basic human nature....
I want to tell you, I am impressed with the level of transparency you put into your work. A real value added; shorting the time needed to get around things, allowing to access sources. Thank you.
"Altered Carbon" is a book I read years ago being wonderfully realized on Netflix (I've not yet finished the ten episodes ) keeps coming to mind as I read through these comment threads.
It seems Peter is using "demonetize" interchangeably with "decrease the cost of". But even if the cost of things is going down, that won't necessarily mean that cost of living will go down. Somehow even as technology has improved people are finding the need to work more hours. Technology doesn't fix all these issues, it may just rearrange who we work for and where we pay money to.
Please look at this TED Talk - How To Multiply Your Time | Rory Vaden | TEDxDouglasville
ua-cam.com/video/y2X7c9TUQJ8/v-deo.html
I don’t think he knows what demonetization means...plus they spelled it wrong at one point :(
Capitalism keeps pulling us into th medieval ages where material Feudalism keeps making sesrfs of those who can't keep up with the graft and corruption from the top down.
@Drake Yeah The United States.
@@Nahulanham Innovation, Opportunities, Improved quality of life, Improved Infrastructure, Better Technology, Less hunger, Less Poverty. Yeah Capitalism really resembles medieval times, except that it is exactly the opposite.
Jacque Fresco, who envisioned the 'Venus Project' and a resource based economy has been calling this for decades, that an inevitable evolution towards demonetization, followed by the abundance that technology can offer us, have the potential to free our species. I would highly recommend anybody interested in this topic to read his books for an early idea into what the world may look like under these conditions.
This was an amazing talk as always from Peter Diamandis.
Only 1 problem with TVP, resources will be limitless... RBE doesn't make any sense in a limitless universe but his analogies of humanity and decoupling from traditional modes of thought like love or needing a purpose still ring true.
Hi,
We'll said Peter . Jacque Fresco has definitely struck my attention and his work TheVenusProject.com has taken into account the many problems that where said and not said. The lecture absolutely opens the door for discussion on an intelligent approach to a new and useful system.
Cheers
Here is the link to The Venus Project website
www.thevenusproject.com
and the latest documentary for your convenience
ua-cam.com/video/Yb5ivvcTvRQ/v-deo.html
lee maitland R.I.P. Jack
Really decent video by Joe Scoot, who reviews the ideas held by Fresco ua-cam.com/video/nYodgWapmgc/v-deo.html
Immensely heartening to see potential abundance on the way. We will just have to make sure that these technologies and industries are either decentralised across individuals/businesses, or that they are largely in public ownership - the last thing we need is hugely powerful corporate monopolies acting as gatekeepers to basic goods and services.
I agree. We need a world more like Star Trek. But a postcapitalist society could also be Technofeudalist. A technofeud could be virtual in nature. A good example is Facebook or Amazon.
The deepest issue with all of this is what people will do when meaning is removed from their lives. Having virtually all of your needs fulfilled immediately at marginal cost sounds nice on paper, but it ignores billions of years of evolution wherein the very struggle to survive has been the core motivation of every living organism.
yeah like those unhappy very wealthy folks.
Must have decentralized and distributed public ownership of these technologies or we'll all become slaves to these techno monopolies!
that's where the blockchain technology comes in.
Yeah it is kind of terrible postcapitalism future we are heading into if it leads to few monopolies rather than open public platform. Big global corporations ruling the world and having all the control over the internet or various aspects of it... (making devices that access internet and operating system for them, or running services that everyoen is required to use).
or murdered by them.
I totally agree w you, the problem (one of...) of demonetization is the governs, how will they survive without taxes? Since it doesn't produce anything (goods) only burocracy. Either they will became totalitariam dictating what people can have (at the time for "free") much like communist governs, or seize to exist.
Bobby Frazier, every customer with dollars gets a vote :) It was govt funded NASA that disrupted the status quo of no space rockets. Capitalism is useful in breaking up the government monopoly on these innovations, and taking them to a wider field but it's just one mechanism in the whole complex machine.
Housing costs in metros reaching millions, a basic average car costing $30k, rich sending kids to kindergarten costing $20k. What demonetization?
Yeah, but do you really need to live in metropolis, own a car, or send a kid to kindergarten? You can have pretty much the same life much cheaper. Probably even healthier.
Most people will live in metropolis, we basically all should to avoid the sprawl and that obfuscates the need for a car, and without kindergarden there will be no liberation of women, and greater poverty through total inefficiency of each parent looking after only one child.
Let's see scenario 1: you still have a job.
Do you really need to live in a metropolis? Yes
Own a car? Probably not
Send a kid to kindergarten? Yes. Or who will take kare of the kid while both parents work.
Scenario 2: you don't have a job, but you get some kind of minimum income
Live in a metroplis ? No
Own a car ? no
Send a kid to kindergarten? No.
His point is that the burgeoning demonetization of transportation and the rapid expansion of telecommunication jobs is going to trivialize the need for populations to concentrate in metros.
Yeah, I call BS too. His vision is right, but the oligarchy will starve the whole world if they have to to stop it.
Anyone else watching this just wondering, "Great, amazing, sounds good. When can I stop working?" Or is it just me?
Eh, retirement will make you die younger.
Beep Beep corporations also do that already. The solution is not just "less government" it is to overthrow and replace the corporate state with a libertarian socialist society where the people who do the work own what they produce
So u all work to do me over
As alluring as the idea is I don't really believe post-scarcity is a realistic condition we will arrive at.
Everything will still have a cost no matter how cheap it gets, just because it always trends towards zero doesn't mean it will ever get there, things will get cheap but I imagine that there will still be incredible things out there that fetch a gigantic price tag due to their extremely high level of desireability
Alex Smith Agreed. But what if the only things that cost anything were super edge case luxuries? All life and comfort requirements were abundant.
MARS - The New Vegas
What happens on mars, stays on musk
Notmi Relnam I like this idea. And to pay for these luxuries you would trade labor, intellectual property or some other agreed upon service.
There is no point of money, when goods and services are provided by technology at the cost of free energy. If there is a cost, it is because we are too stupid to get rid of it.
Everyone should watch this video! Thumbs up! They will see where we are headed, clearly! Thank you!
Great presentation. He is a good motivator about the future. It's hard to feel sad, when he talks about his version of the future. Let's be part of that !
Not sure if you watched the whole thing, but the Q&A session was pretty sad, scary. What happens when we get replaced by AI? What role do we have left in the world when we are outsourced from our jobs and creative arts?
But singularity, is that not destroying the world ? And is he not actually, the one who was promoting this, and now he realizes, that he has been making a mistake - so he realizes and see the consequences of his own and his buddy actions - and standing there - kind of asking for mercy and help ?? Demonetizing ? How would that be possible ? he was the one, who evangelized that the world would be abundance, but now see, that he created scarcity instead and make from a fertile land turns it into a dry desert, with no water left, for us to be feeded.
QuickMix Do you love the work you do now? Would you work at your job that you have even if you didn't get paid to do it?
+Raven Knight I do IT so I would continue doing my job getting payed or not, I do it everyday, it's a part of my everyday life. And I am a doctor for future machines, the world will need more of us.
He's espousing ideas that do not have any connection to reality.
Remember, piracy is a crime ! You wouldn't download your dinner would you? Of course you would. That's why the world is run by the corporate police that will kick in your door and shoot you in the head if you do.
That's a joke, but not really. The world is not an egalitarian place. Living creatures all strive for dominance in their environment. That applies to us as well as every other living thing. The structures of our modern society which is right in front of our eyes shows us this every day. You don't even need to look to the unknowable history of our species. The people who have economic power have always been the ones too rule the world around them.
In what future does it come to pass that this structure will be allowed to move to one where this power dynamic no longer exists ?
Maybe it's just me, but I don't see any chance that Utopia comes to fruition without a horrific struggle.
He's a representative of an elite that runs this world and I don't believe a word of his soothing presentation.
technocratic elite. his goal is data collection. Plain and simple
This was very informative: lots of data to support his analysis, lots of insights into the past trends, lots of links made between different sectors/areas.
I still think the BIG thing that is missing is the social factors.
I'm not talking about socialisation and psychology. I mean the simple fact that people have different aspirations for themselves.
I don't see the world being streamlined into a "unique" life style made of Uber taxis, solar powered houses, automatic cars, digital money. On the contrary, I see the world exploding into different little worlds/communities. This is already evidenced when you look at regions/states within Countries asking for independence (Kashmir, Cataluna, Québec, Flanders, etc..).
I believe that people are going to make it DIFFICULT for businesses to "collect" and "trade" with their data by coming up with their own legislations (censorships, mal/adware fighters), by breaking down the national policies (special or autonomous status, hacking) and by claiming new identities/affiliations (Transgender, indigenous, tri-national rights).
We often look at the big picture and project so much in the future, but he fact is that it is only a PERSPECTIVE out of many others. Most of those who share those perspectives in the public sphere (i.e lectures, Ted Talks, etc.) have their own vested interests in promoting a one-track-future. But as viewers, we should make sure that we keep an open mind and avoid the pitfalls of taking these perspectives as prophecies.
Ultimately, we should come up with our own perspective on our future, but this doesn't happen unless we ask ourselves and eachother the heavy-weight questions beyond the "What job do you do? Are you married? Do you have children? Do you own a house?" These are totally irrelevant question for today's under 35s, let alone the Under 18s...
+Nachannachle
I'm half agree with you. I think your right because people will want to pursue their own dreams but at the same time I think you're wrong, not entirely wrong just partially, because I think that with this technology the average person will become better educated as well as have time to think about what they've learned meaning that many people will have a common view of reality instead of just making speculations about the possibilities for what can be and/or why things are...
So while I can agree with you that many people will want to separate themselves from each other I don't that it will be so dramamtic. I think laws will change to accommodate their needs. So while a large majority of people will move out of the cities they will remain relatively near the cities because our way of life revolves around people relying on each other to provide for each other (made possible with trading/currency). If the individual was self-sustaining then what your saying would become even more true. Not necessarily a bad thing but in a world engulfed in greed and anti-intellectualism it certainly would be a bad thing.
Amazing! This is possible, people should change this way of life where many are being destroyed...there are so many things that people can do to live happy...and there many solutions to many things...good people are going to win...the world will change...the good people are going to take over like is always meant to be.
Devil is in the details. Peter seems to have all the answers. "It is an important and popular fact that things are not always what they seem." -Douglas Adams
Sooo Greatfull for this talk #PeterDiamandis 🙏🙏🙏🥰
The real questions about the future are not technological or economic; they are ethical.
Lucas N exactly
actual all 3
The real question is how to escape all the humans unable to put aside there cultural/religious baggage they like to refer to as ethics, cause you know this gives them a great reason for a crusade in the name of those ethics's
what have you done for society that is so great? leech to grab their money? don't be pathetic capitaltrash
IMPORTANT here is the simple solution: just pull the bolt! ua-cam.com/video/hAQuspvIMIM/v-deo.html
ps: if i too stupid and too little useful to the society for the justification of my existence, then it should be so. I stay with the other idiots in the back waggons. its ok.
For those curious about how the genome sequencing price trend has continued over time: "The cost of a human genome sequence decreased from an estimated $1 million in 2007, to $1000 in 2014, and today it is approximately $600."
So why are the latest technologies such as iPhone's and Galaxy phones the most expensive they have ever been?
The gap between rich and poor is getting wider, Just here in Australia you can see the country moving into a nation of renters, Housing has become a joke.
Investors have destroyed it, Buy up and rent them back out to the next gen. Every new generation has to study more and work harder and compete harder than the previous gen for the fewer high paying jobs just to afford a house. We are going backwards. Renting and paying off someone else's mortgage then leads to less disposable income to spend at shops which in turn stuffs the economy, Shops then have to lay off employees. It is a vicious cycle!
More stress and suicide now than ever before, Humanity has tipped past the balancing point. What sort of future will there be? Will they have us all living crammed like sardines living in small box like apartments.
I see far too much reliance on services these days which to me is a huge national security threat, Even more so than some loner suicide bomber. If the service is down everyone is affected.
We should be moving towards more self sustainability in every house, So if some go down at least everyone else is still up and running and can lend support until theirs gets fixed. Where as now lets say there is a power blackout, everyone in the neighbourhood is back to the stone age until it is fixed. Houses should have backyards to collect water for use, also grow some food. If there was an emergency now, The supermarkets would be raided as everyone panics for supplies.
If we are not careful, Then in future we are all going to be slaves to a few big corporations that have bought the others out.
You can tout UBI but once again you are relying on handouts, If they stop what happens? Or what if they say we can't give you that next payment as you don't agree with our policies/agenda?
Cut payments just as they do now with social welfare.
End up becoming a slave to the system.
Without counting inflation the motorola StarTAC was $1,000 in 1996 and is complete dogshit by today's standards. It made really expensive calls, that it. If you adjust for inflation today that would be $1,562.27. That was probably the most expensive phone ever other than Satellite phones.
anglekan Thanks.
too late.....we already are. Most just dont get it.
"End up becoming a slave to the system."
"Banking was conceived in iniquity and was born in sin. The Bankers own the Earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create deposits, and with the flick of a pen they will create enough deposits to buy it back again. However, take it away from them, and all the fortunes like mine will disappear, and they ought to disappear, for this world would be a happier and better world to live in. But if you wish to remain slaves of the Bankers and pay for the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create deposits."
Sir Josiah Stamp, President of the Bank of England in the 1920s
I never wanted a mortgage (deathpledge). Home owners still rent. They pay their taxes , and for many in this country it is 600 a month.. And if you dont pay your taxes, house is sold and you are on the street.
I've always thought we, as a society, have been focused on the wrong solution. Instead of focusing specifically on increasing everybody's income, why not focus on reducing everybody's basic costs by using technology that brings inexpensive energy, food, medical care, etc. to the masses?
That is a beautiful argument and I agree.
A great talk regarding the upcoming 20 years in technology, and the profound shakeups resulting from their roll out. The next 2 questions that come to my mind are:
1) Are we even discussing the mindsets that are needed to cope with the possibilities that are brought by these new technologies "coming online"? (i don't really doubt they're upon us, but the social structural changes and the individual mentalities required to adapt to the new context are quite different from what we currently have). This is nothing short of a worldwide cultural shift, and the old structures might not take it easily.
2) How do we make sure all of humanity benefits from the new possibilities (ie. free energy, free water and food, ...) instead of a just a few?
Thanks to +Singularity University Summits for stimulating the conversation.
The ones who are going to feel it the most are the people rolling it out who think they will control it. once they are plugged in they are the robot dead and when the order comes to hit the reset button.....
true evil robin
I should think so many would fight tooth and nail.
Super excellent presentation of the state of the art in relation to the democratization of applied STEM that brings ever more abundant innovation to solve problems that mystified mankind previously. We are unlocking unimaginable progress and prosperity with AI!
Will this work in politics? In other words can we do away with politicians?
If we as a society own these technologies in common, then we can govern ourselves without professional politicians who work for billionaires. Gotta get rid of the corporate model.
Politicians serve their purpose. They're basically all bark and no action.
Probably the best and most interesting UA-cam video that I have ever seen. Well done Peter!
What we will still need humans for .... is to Groove!!! Groovism will proliferate us!!!
Lord, I hope you are right.
@@CNPdubyagirl All we need do ... is Groove
I partially agree with the autonomous car part. If you own a Maserati, it's partially for 'status' and partially because you love to DRIVE a fast & smooth car. There is something nice about the tactile feel of actually being in control of a fast-moving vehicle.
Programmable matter (or as he said: Nanotechnology that could create anything you want) won't happen anytime soon yet because it requires many decades of research on biotechnology and AI fields. The nearest technology that we have now is 3D-printing and we're still in childhood terms
That was a fantastic presentation! It is great to see that even Peter Diamandis is starting to talk about Post Capitalism and a future that sounds an awful lot like a Resource Based Economy! He makes it clear that this is the direction technology is leading us to.
It's interesting how human endeavor comes full circle. From trading pigs and sheep to trading intangible resources. One wonders why or if currency was ever a necessity.
WHAT? In the 50s a man could raise his family on a single income. Now everyone must work (man and woman) with a few exceptions. Everything is more expensive not to mention the greedy rich would never allow such a thing as a demonetizing of everything. What about medicine? Cost is what separates the haves from the have nots (iPhone X for example... price just hit $1,000 for the basic model). The wealth gap is increased by 500 fold. Are we talking about EARTH?
You need an IPhone X? How much do you think it would have cost in the 50s?
To be fair, you don't actually need that child-labor made phone.
You do need fresh, organic, local vegetables though, and that shit is over-priced because the U.S. doesn't subsidize them for shit.
its not the 50s man, capitalism= competition.
@Strider
Most people in this country rent and most who don't just don't have time to do something a gigantic automated farm could do far more efficiently.
The price for veggies may be higher per lb. than everything else except shit like truffles and caviar, but it's still more efficient to rake in money from most jobs than it is to farm them yourself.
The concept is called 'economy of scale'.
Anyway, the crazy ass 35% obesity rate would probably drop if veggies were better subsidized and all the toxic garbage wasn't. But then, who would big pharma sell pills to? They want you sick, because sick people can be shackled in debt forever, while healthy people usually can't. Blackmail them for their very lives.
@manictiger Actually, a lot of people are into and adopting the farmer, homesteading, and permaculture lifestyle. And to say that a big farm will be more efficient isn’t exactly true. sure bigger farms can churns out greater amount of goods, but most of them are processed with chemicals and the cattle and lifestyle, often reared in terrible conditions. There is a market for pasteurized, clean, non chemically treated produce and meats and the market is strong, people have gotten rich from their private family run operation. Aside from that, it’s really easy to do, I've seen entire families become self sustaining at least in terms food on just a few acres. And tons of people live off grid, refusing to live in the city or even work a city job. A lot of them sell excess produce for capital because thats how effective modern day techniques are. it can be lucrative too if you play it right, selling honey, or poultry. Some people even do it right there in the cities, in their backyards. Trust me, agriculture is on a revolution right now and you’ll see in the near future, cities adapting vertical farming, office spaces with produce, and isolated greenhouses in the cities. I know so many successful people, who’ve opted to become a homesteader. I myself may even consider it, being free of corporate America and providing for yourself must be empowering. the option is enticing even when you consider you get a bunch of acreage, produce and meat with a minimal carbon footprint, where everything is essentially run on clean energy.
hmm, asking good questions, sure, i can do that. so regarding the talk:
* How do we handle resource-shortages?
* How do we handle the loss of power of violence-ready elites when demonetization hits?
* How do we avoid destroying even more habitats by air-traffic and widespread settlements?
* How do we teach AI and Robots healthcare, when we are stuck in a reductionist symptom treatment system?
* How do we handle the loss of identity which comes with being "free" from your job?
* How do we decide which systems to implement and which not?
* How do we brace ourselves against technical immunisation? One EMP and the bright future becomes a darker hell than all ages before.
I find not mentioning these critical discourses (and there are much more for sure) when hailing the brave new world to be rather frightening to death than sparking hope...
when his idea of demonetizing is, what air bnb is doing to real estate, then I'll pass.
V exactly
I think Airbnb has made housing about 1/3 more expensive in Toronto over past few years. Now the hotels have to turn into seniors residences
The inevitable future is coming but the experts have no idea how it will work. Very comforting.
It is clear Peter Diamondis owns Tesla shares and he is short in traditional car manufacturers. In his broad and wise view, the world only consists out of Tesla, Alphabet (Google) and some other big US tech companies. There is no way in his mind that traditional manufacturers are also anticipating on trends, while they are nicely profitable today (unlike Tesla).
The story of Diamondis is flawed on many sides. Some products come down in price, sure. Because they deliver data in return. How is that with energy? How is that with food? How is that with cars? The sun delivers more energy than we can consume, but we still need technology to capture that energy. This won't be for free. The same counts for cars. People want to transport themselves around. Therefor cars will always be needed. Unless we can teleport ourselves. No hyper loop of Musk can fill that gap. When cars are being utilized more intensively, the wear out faster and need to be replaced more often.
You need to watch Ramez Naam's speech on Exponential Energy (was just before this speech). Technology becomes cheaper with scale.
Food will become cheaper once resources currently used to generate dirty energy (certain biofuels, coal) are no longer needed. This gives us more land to plant food crops on. Food is cheaper than it was 100 years ago because we have GMOs and tractors that make farming easier. Developing crops that require less water, or ways to reduce water lost (look at the tree t-pee) will save money and free up water to be used elsewhere, so tap water might become cheaper. Replace farmers with robots, have AI's monitor the crops at incredible detail that isn't possible for humans, these will save costs and bring down prices too.
I have to agree, just because prices fall doesnt mean they necessarily become zero. I think we see the gap between rich an poor increase before we see a free for all society.
Food is cheper because it is so much cheaper to store it long term and transport it from far away and because governements pays tons of money for agriculture. Good food is getting more and more expensive, if not entirely unavailable, while there is oveeraboundance of cheap processed food that is culprit of many civilization deseases. Not to mention the current prefferred farming methods that waste water, soil, chemical (pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers)...
And yes, GMOs, chemicals and so on make food cheaper, but it is not the same food. And what is sad is that government regulations and subsidies result in food that only appears to be cheaper, but it is not. In fact it can be rather expensive but somehow nobody pays close attention to it.
that's why the goal is to dumb our interests down & get us obsessed with VR.
Who wants to go outdoors & do REAL stuff like drive around & visit natural scenery...when you can just plug into your laptop & live out the rest of your life pretending to fuck 10's while dressed like an elf mage while riding dragons & farting blue fireballs
"but we still need technology to capture that energy. This won't be for free|"
of course it can be. Technology can NOW create technology, replicate itself, and think better than most Americans....no point of money when goods are created by technology with free energy.
Q&A: every question is answered with "I don't know". Brilliant!
what about rich and poor countries, different systems, different values, different mentalities? will the technologically advanced countries generously share this abundance with the poor, technologically unsophisticated regions losing all their power and influence? will theocracies dissolve into democracies, just because people can print everything they need and education is free? somehow I find it hard to believe in this utopian world, at least anytime soon...
Yeah it can quickly change into dystopian nightmare if people with power (CEO of global corporations and rulers of nations) happen to have their own interests in mind. I find it hard to believe they will do the best for the collective good with my data. I am sure they will do best for themselves, and I see fewer and fewer ways how to ensure that it is good for them to do what is good for me. Theree is less and less open systems, just fewer bigger and bigger companies.
Anytime you hear someone hinting around some form of "everyone's needs will be met in the near future" stab that person... Struggling to fulfill our needs is a huge part of what makes life worth living, I can't see anyway in his description of the future everything doesn't suck...
People are already so lazy and entitled, especially in developed countries (and part of the reason why undeveloped countries aren't developed). Just providing them with everything will make people useless and depressed, why progress and exist? As the saying goes, you can give a man a fish and feed him for a day or teach him how to fish and feed him for a lifetime. Of course there are those that need immediate rescue. Why is feeding wild animals a bad idea? Because they will become dependent.
Seeing this during the pandemic🖐 100% virtual interaction has come true.
Demonetization of real estate because of VTOL (Vertical Take Off and Landing) electric jet propulsion system is a perfect example of how the laws of economics show a shift in where money goes based on perceived and actual value. Real basic, but notice he still compares the education of a poor kid and a billionaire kid, they will be educated the same. So, my question is, how come you still have rich and poor if our society has demonetized every aspect of our basic living needs? The answer is deceptively simple: Because wealth is a concept of power, but power is reality imposing its will. Understand this, and you will see that no matter how far back you go, or how far ahead you can imagine, there have always been, and will always be elites. Controlling technology, engineering, design and most of all, raw natural resources. A.I and robotics are already here. Universal basic income will have to been decided and distributed by a central entity, be it government or otherwise. Who we are, what we do, as a species in large, I believe, to discover how to access our own personal power. What won't demonetize is data. Information is the new petrol. Remember, nothing is created, nothing is lost. Everything is transformed.
Maybe Diamandis has mentioned it but Ray Kurzweil has an interesting claim that there will be both free open source products and commercial products competing with each other. That will be a powerful combination I think at least for a transition phase.
This presentation is only speaking with powerpoint and pictures telling me things that already was discussed 30 years ago. 60 years ago robots was discussed. Nothing happened that was not only a scaling during the last 60 years. Since than it was said that in 10 years we will have "real" AI, robots, Nuclear Fusion, etc.. It did not happen. Show me prototypes and no powerpoint. Make it like Elon Musk: show the new things and do not speak about it ... in 20 or 30 years means for me: never ... with my 55 years I have no time for fairy tales!
Raimund Scheucher good point!
Google X-prize foundation. He is a cofounder. The medical tricorder, that's a real product that's resulting from X-prize. Cofounder of Singularity University: an attempt to educate and train people regarding exponential tech. To name just those two. It's easy to take pot shots from the audience, but what have you done? :)
hallnuts33 umm... This guy didn't say he did more for the world than this guy; he was saying most of this is conjecture & fails to take account of political groups aimed on disallowing robots, especially for labour. Think the international brotherhood of trade unions will roll over and hire robots over men & women?
Raimund Scheucher Nuclear fusion is a suppressed technology, undesirable for the current heads of energy production. It would NOT take advantage of the production of (nuclear) fissionable materials, but instead REDUCE the need for them even further. Also, A.I. Robots doing work requiring critical thinking is about 30-100 years away from today (2017), depending on how much financial interest is generated over that period. For example, making a decision where to put a nail & how to best support a (wooden) structure are not in the scope of an inexpensive robot. What will be MOST likely is that labourers will be able to get a helper bot, so a "gopher". We can use them to assist in holding materials, obtaining specific tools, drawing lines & cutting lumber. Not everybody/every country will be able to afford completely robot built, non-traditional material homes. There will always be homeless, if not without shelter, those without work. Also, some people live in cabins & use no electricity at all.
The best case scenario is one where robots are employed alongside a human who owns & controls them. We can give them humanistic attitudes other qualities which will foster relationships between the two "workers". The benefit of this system, is that when doing dangerous work, we will always be able to quickly replace the unit & recover their data (including local relations & memories).
They already have ... it's insidious and current.
Wow! Blown away by this lecture!
Demonetizing everything seems possible, but currency itself is still useful. I empathize with Marx regarding his dislike of rent seekers. Those people in the middle who's only 'job' is to skim a coin here and there as product moves from the producer to the consumer. The other hurdle will be eliminating interest-seeking. As Einstein is quoted as saying: "The most powerful force in the Universe is compounded interest." Right now, so much productivity is going to pay compounded interest to those who do little to nothing productive. I mean one single bratty billionaire pretty much caused the Greek economic crisis when he refused to take a loss on his risking investment, and threw a temper tantrum in EU Central Bank board meeting about Greece.
These people will not let go of interest-seeking quietly.
you have literally no fucking idea what you're talking about
Holli - true. Companies that want to increase shareholder profits have shipped jobs overseas. Those workers, often in near-slave conditions (or even slave conditions) produce the products sold. The shareholder just sits there and collects that dividend off the backs of a poor labor force.
One"bratty" billionaire pretty much caused the Greek crisis????
You are an IDIOT!
I agree. Currency, as imperfect as it is, in capitalism does a decent job of rewarding and quantifying contribution to society. If there is some better system, we haven't discovered it yet, and all prior attempts have been massive failures.
Eventually the global economy will equalize and labor will be about the same cost (given additional overhead of transportation and such) throughout the world. The solution certainly isn't to abandon the system that brought most of the world out of poverty. Plus, it turns out people work for their health. Yes, they work for their health. Without work, people wither away. And people in the US work as hard as those in most foreign countries, you should visit some manufacturing companies some time.
He is predicting things based on projects that are currently in place for the most part. Projects that have been exploding in number over the last handful of years. How that is going to affect individuals lives is very much an unknown and is shown in his answers to the Q&A. People and especially men I think inherently gain a large part of their self-worth from what they do and how well they can provide while doing it.
The next 10-20 years is going to become VERY interesting. As the curse goes; "May you live in interesting times".
Wow - I love Peter's vision and optimism. The psychological implications are very interesting, and its already happening. Simon Sinek has some very interesting content talking about the effects of cell phones and information overload on our brains. Great stuff, great talk, I really enjoyed it!
I'm not giving up ownership of my means of transportation, and neither will many people.
The concept of a corporation, or a government owning one's means of transportation, and people not having this very important ability in their own hands, will be enough to stop many people from accepting the "death" of private vehicle ownership.
If we demonetize housing how will people sell their houses to pay to move to Mars?
let's hope this idiotic Mars bullshit stops and we decide to make this planet livable.
Sell their house? What is the value of houses if they are demonetized?
Don't be so short sighted child ("fuck fanny fiddlefart"): Where do you think new technologies come from? Coffee house arguments between SJWs??? It is important to have goals that are just out of reach to drive research.
Moving "the rabble" to Mars is a better narrative than eugenics was.
Dont demonetize, just make sure it does not expensive. This should be a mandate.
No discussion on AI is complete without discussing its downside (particularly cost of maintenance, continuous software upgrades, social dislocation etc). This talk focuses only on the economies of scale achieved so far...
Amazing Talk. I totally agree, everything is heading really fast towards a really advance tech civilization.
Carlo Villanueva a great time to be alive!
Carlo Villanueva nothing about this talk is amazing you pleb. He's advocating solar freaking roadways and hyperloop, nuff said
of a MUCH smaller size....
not realy , everything is heading toward a big crash
Amazing. I hope his predictions come true. I want a longevity escape velocity achieved in my life time ✌
This great lecture reminds me of The Venus Projects proposals :)
Michael Bressler The Venues Projets is a bunch of nonsense it doesn't account for human nature.👽👾🤖
Oh my god what a great talk. A quick review of all the current technology trends, well-explained and groundbreaking...
"Healthcare heading towards zero cost"........hmmm okay then
Robots are already better doctors.....surgeons...
great! Peter Diamandis; Singularity University!
This Teach Your Child AI was brought to you by... Coka Cola
TW0T0M aka common core
I hope to live to see these things come to fruition.
Why people hang on this guys words is beyond me.
So self defeating, so short sighted .
Way more people need to see this! Thanks.
I mean, this is interesting and all, and as a supporter of a RBE, I really wish to see the 'demonitization' of large segments (all) of our economy.
However, the way that the market is structured, with cyclical consumption at the forefront of our appraisals of our economies, there is little hope that our species will somehow suddenly, miraculously, become self-sufficient, conservative in the most literal sense (sustainable), or allow for the decentralization of government force and coercion.
Seeing as how the government is today merely an extension of business, and vice versa, I think it's fair to assume that we're going to have our dreams dashed again by the richest.
You cannot create a top down authority in a market economy that is based on liberal values. The only way a new system will arise will if it is better than what currently exists and replaces it in peoples lives as it gives value and is so much easier to use.
I live in Rio de Janeiro and here is very hot in the summer. If we cover the city with solar panels, will the temperature drop significantly?
I don't know whether to be optimistic or scared out of my mind about this.
very inspiring. we are marching towards a utopia for sure. Our ancestors knew of this time coming
UBI is the answer to automation. we must prepare for this.
Learning how to function properly in the world is the answer to it all, regardless of subsidies, embedded costs, or transitioning.
I disagree. UBI (THOUGH ABSOLUTELY WONDERFUL) and the like will not be the answer to it but rather a product of it. The future is coming fast and it is going to change everyone and everything in the blink of an eye like magic. Anyone who don't want to be part of something extremely fantastic, better hurry up and go find a hole to hide in, because tech blockers can't stop it now.
I have BAD news for you - higher productivity of labor means less workers, lower salaries. So if you're not an owner - forget affording even decent food! Just a fact going on from the 70s now!
The idea of an Unconditional Basic Income has now become inevitable and mandatory from a socioeconomic point of view : if not applied, technological and demographic factors will create a social massacre of unseen proportions. Yet, it represents a double edged sword at least from an ecological, and thus more essential point of view : as much as it would lift or even eradicate poverty for millions, if not billions of victims by today's structural violence, we will have to ask ourselves : can we afford throwing vast amounts of additional money upon a human enterprise already putting its own survival at stake through severe ecological disruption caused by mindless mass consumption ? No matter how powerful this idea has become, the larger evolutionary challenge for humanity remains the same : to outgrow the counterproductivity and inbuilt insanity of an obsolete and life threatening monetary system.
You are all wrong.
A universal basic income means people don't have incentives to help one another. A job is a person asking another to help them with something. There will be jobs as long as there are human needs to satisfy, and human problems that need the input of other people are never ending, no matter how technologically advanced we get. Unemployment is caused by governments restricting the labor market with increasing regulation, nothing more.
Farming machines wiped 80% of all jobs, and further automation has wiped 80% of jobs time and time again. We will be just fine, increasing the standards of living and making all products cheaper as a consequence of automation, although you don't see cheaper products due to governments inflating currency. +yoo, do you know what happened starting in the early 70s? Massive inflation. Tech is not to blame for stagnant salaries in the middle class, but the expropriation of savings to fund bailouts and the like.
Ultimately, devaluating currency in order to fund govt programs will only kill fiat and give wings to the Ethereum/Bitcoin AI economy. An AI cannot open a bank account, but machines can operate in cryptocurrencies any time.
I have a sneaky suspicion that this utopia described will come at a cost. We're in the middle of this technological change currently and I still see poverty, food banks, wars, diseases and corporations doing handsomely out of it.
So cool that basically, the skills of the future will not be answering great questions but asking great questions.
Lindenic10
Your comment stuck out, very salient, I think a very important thing for us to think about.
I see intelligent conscious life like Humans in some ways as a heuristic, adaptive mass of metabolic pathways throwing responses at the perceived "wall" of reality, so to speak, and "seeing what sticks."
Like the idea of an infinite number of monkeys typing away on typewriters, in principle, would produce "Hamlet", say.
We know better. We know only 1 "monkey" was needed, really, to produce _all_ the works of Shakespeare.
In all the billions of lives who never had access to a typewriter, how many Einsteins, Shakespeares, Marie Curies, your favorite artist or musician, etc... how many of their potential input to the collective wellness of conscious life has been lost - simply because they didn't have access to the means to actualize it?
Right now we have a situation. Wealth is the typewriter in this scenario. Right now a tiny fraction of the population has all the typewriters. And they're not even using them. They're stroking their egos to how good they are at keeping everyone else from getting typewriters. And if someone builds her own typewriter, it's confiscated, or destroyed.
These are fitness adaptations. The "king of the mountain" game doesn't work. Most of the species that have lived have gone extinct. That game was the one they played, all of them. We Humans supposedly have the capacity to avoid that.
I hope we do.
I hope so too.
Exactly. Couldn't answer the questions! this shows that some millionaire techs that are defining the future are far from wise.
1. 22:47 Q1: I wonder if you could talk about the social dislocations that may be created by the introduction of all these technologies?
A: Not worried about the terminator (hypothesis) i am worried that we are going to have a disruption of jobs from AI and robotics...it's the speed at which this is going to happen... i don't have an answer for that...people might have psychological problems related to losing their persona, i'm working and talking to Tony Robbins about this...
2. 24:56 Q2: What won't demonetize?
A: Great question don't have easy answers for it
3. 26:50 Q3: What do you believe to be the critical skill of the future?
A: To ask great questions (and not answer them?) and curiosity and creativity =>haven't these always been critical and important to survive?
4. 28:42 Q4: So do you see a problem in all algorithms being created by males?
A: No idea
Leon, I prefer someone to admit they don't know the answer than inventing it only to show how clever they are
really just settle for that? :S
Completely agree with the star trek type of society analogy, have been saying this for years but most people seams to fail to comprehend that the type of society we see in star trek is the most important idea Roddenberry came up with. We´ll live in a kind of techno communism
This could have been summarized in 30 seconds.
kefsound it was kind of rambling
Then he wouldn't be able to justify how much charges for his presentations lol.
Exactly. All he had to state was that in his vision of the future the world will be ruled by Communism. Which of course isn't as pretty and lovey dovey as he is painting it out to be.
James O but it’s not communism at all. In fact it’s actually quite the opposite. Instead of government controlling the means of production, in the future individuals will control the means to produce everything they would need. All you need is a 3D printer to be able to copy itself. In that case you own all the means to build your house, make your clothes, grow your food, etc. This technology on the horizon will destroy the idea of centralized governments as we know them.
The singularity is coming! Der takn er jerbs! No but serious, great video compiling a bunch of industry's together.
"That's your woman" love the progressive tokenism. MGTOW!!
I don't see a demonitization happening. I see a re-monitization. What will be of value in the future?
Demonization.
Just when I start learning and understanding monetization for my music. All that gold I spent searching. The bitcoins and stock market unstocked? What an inert systematic change in our times. It's such an economically breakdown. It's exciting and scary. 3dprinting body parts? Thank you!
This guy _knows_ he's spouting nonsense. There is no "zero cost", everything takes work to produce. The entire talk is based on baloney.
Kinda, but the compononents of labour will end up being replaced. The energy goes from carbon to renewables; the medium goes from us to robots; the information goes from us to AIs.
Raw materials will remain a limiting factor, though with advanced AIs we''ll be able to find cheaper solutions for most items.
Won't quite be zero-cost, obviously. But could be close to it, for our standards. Depending on reproduction... if we get a trillion people on the planet, nobody's gonna have much ;).
Note that I don't nearly share his optimism, and I do think he's filled with quite a bit of baloney :)
I'm saying nothing will cost zero and you're saying things will get cheaper. We're really describing the same progression. The problem is Peter there is using the fall of prices to as smoke and mirrors to say "Let's have more socialism". Which is really his one and only message and in reality has nothing to do with prices going down.
You haven't given this enough research...your comment seem counter to what is widely discussed. Rethink your assertion.
I believe that's the direction we should be going in, but I'm not so optimistic we'll get there. Costs of production is already lower for companies, and they're always looking for ways to lower it further, meanwhile the costs of things for consumers, they keep increasing. While costs go down, the current economic structure demands constant growth in profits and thus constant price increases while searching for ways to charge for more things. If they could produce something free, they would, while still charging us as much as they can and controlling the means of production.
All I see is a smooth talker who says we should all get rid of our money he then goes and cashes in his pay check for that speech he just gave the irony in that do you not see it if this guy lived by what he preaches some one should pay him in carrots.
This is his passion. He would be doing what he is doing regardless of whether it's for money or not. Would you still be doing what you're doing if it wasn't for money?
His passion is making money.
This type of barter labor economy is essential i believe for a space based welfare economy. Sadly the only reason why this base type of philosophy style is the most prevalent is strictly based upon the fact that no one has figured out an alternate system other then the realistic idea that people in space will be mining resources worked liked slaves but potentially come back millionaires with tons of health problems. In capitalism like in sports people will risk life and limb if you give them a chance at millions . In a welfare economy you take that desire away to reach those goals because the income is the same wether dishwasher or president or space miner.
if it was true and important for humanity, he should pay me a dollar to listen and THEN i should repay him in carrots.
Hmm makes sense makes me wonder about the medieval times when they threw vegetables onstage was it really a bad thing if you could clean it up and eat it and it might back then be considered appreciation totally changes the meaning of the term starving artist feels more literal.
One way of seeing it is "Everything is free, we can all be like billionaires". As an Economist the other question is "What will be John's job? John will be able to live like a king for only 5 thousand dollars a year, but how will he gain those $5k if all jobs are done by machines that program themselves? Will it not polarize society between those who have and have not? Let me reductio at absurdum: Things are made by 3 rich entrepreneurs and 1 billion robots to sell to nobody because nobody has a job.
Electricians will still be needed, thank baby jesus... Lol
If doctors can largely be automated, I see no reason why electricians can't also be largely automated -- especially at the rate that robotics is advancing.
Jesus was a moron, he didn't even know what electricity was!
Does anyone, really?
What makes you think there won't be intelligent robots that can do that job?
He is talking about the near future. "Hands on" jobs which requires manipulation with real life objects in a lot of different situations are probably the last jobs to go, this is why a doctor will be replaced before a surgeon, it's easier for a robot to diagnose someone than to physically remove a tumor.
From a robotic perspective tho, removing a tumor is easier than fixing wires in a house, since the the environment is more homogeneous on the surgery table than in some random persons house, and you can have specialized robotic arms and tools for task specific to surgery while electricians have a more disordered environment to work with. Granted the environment is simpler, but more disordered, it has to physically navigate around the house, move objects to get to places, possibly interact with the home owners or other strange obstacles places in it's path. No where near impossible, but if you look at the DARPA challenge and compare that to the latest tech in surgeon bots you'll see what I mean.
ua-cam.com/video/0XdC1HUp-rU/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/wX0KagJ1du8/v-deo.html
I'm pretty sure the surgeon robot is controlled by a human tho, but as you can see, the surgeon environment is a lot more sterile and homogeneous.
Open Source hardware will bring this to reality:
A bunch of engineers sit together, invent something good, go to public and release the bluprints, asking for crowd funding. The crowd funds the project, blueprints go to a manifacturing fab, product is released and on shelves.
No patent crap, no copyright BS.
You pay for the product and for the cost of living of the engineers, that's it.
ahaha! communism done right. LOL
I wish you are right about all of this... Specially timing.
Maybe reality in the year 2500.
Thanks Peter. What is patently true for the future is the current mish mash of economics and politics is unsustainable and will vanish - the developments you speak of will continue to be the catalyst for the change.
To be quite fair, comparatively, we are economically and politically sound.
I like his speech and I agree with a lot he has said but for the demonetization to have any effect some sort of non-job based income for everyone needs to be put in place for example a universal income. The reason why he mentions pretty much every commodity is coming down in price most people still need to work the same to survive
@19:00 speaking about diagnosing health issues; With all this gentleman's forward thinking his paradigm for health care is still back in the dark ages! The focus has always been to diagnose a problem as opposed to preventing problems! When we adopt a plant based diet we will begin to see REAL change in the world.
The biggest question I did not hear was what will happen to the old mentality of acquiring wealth? I doubt whole entities like bank corporations are going to go quietly into the night. And will there be a war on this?
your thoughts on alternatives such as tvp ? Would ideas from such things be implemented ?
awesome speech this vision of the future is what we should aim for
The word singularity is becoming common in discussions about the future, I would like to hear someone talk about a moral consciousness singularity.
What about the Usurers? How are you planning on getting them out of the way.
This is one of the most fascinating futurology videos I've ever seen.
It’s ego that forms an identity around our jobs- careers. This will actually be psychologically healthy to drop the ego identity & accept , love , approve of, value our inner being ( beingness )- over doing ( external attachment )- such as job- career identified. This will be psychologically evolving to a healthier state . Also spiritually evolving as well- by turning inward- to our true selves ( inner being )- instead of externally focused- attached to ego identification to feel of value ( job ).
Human - beings instead of mere human- doing. I’m optimistic this will lead to positive change & evolving. 👏
What is the best video that argues against this idea ?
great talk, thanks from Queensland Australia
How do people make a living in this coming reality?
How do you mitigate the human impact to control the logical outcome of this progress? For instance, in The U.S. today, we have surplus food, yet many people still go to bed hungry.
So based on some of these theories, our culture's ability to obtain things and own more stuff will expand. The ability to build bigger and better will also become more equal amongst more people. We might live longer and healthier. So my questions are: what happens to finite resources like WATER for example? It seems that this boom in tech will co-relate with a boom in population. Space will be at a premium then. But ok, maybe we will have proper filtration systems to turn waste water and salt water into drinkable/consumable water. But the space situation... that will continue to be a problem.
It seems to me as if "land" will be the most valuable possession/currency. This also pushes me to think more about SpaceX and their huge initiative to explore and reach mars (and other planets). Again... land. A safe place to call home. To build a house for your growing family. That is a question I would have asked at the end. This topic is fascinating to me.
I am extremely curious as to what foresight there is in this regard. We can't all fit in one country or a whole planet.
A lot of breakthroughs may take quite a long time... I do like the fact that he starts out that Star Trek's optimism is due to the fact that they have a matter replicator and abundance already...nanotech may provide that eventually but I'm not so sure it will be able to compute and self replicate any time soon or have an internal power source of consequence. This is a crucial step. Don't get me wrong; I've been with Ray since Spiritual Machines came out. I just think that there are certain things that are harder than we expect them to be and they are critical and worrying if they do not happen.
Decreasing the cost of the things because of robotics doesn't necessarily mean that would decrease the price of things because someone is still going to own the robots and own their output.
the record high per day in germany was 64.2% and not 85% renewable energy production ... whilst that is a very missleading number .. it's close to or slightly beyond 40% per year
If a network is censored, is it really "connected"?
Bravo, bravo, bravo! You have led the cattle in a path that will surly ensure a larger bank account for you and your associates. Predicting the future in such a matter-of-fact manner will surly garner you followers who will invest in whatever program or course you are selling. Markets collapse,and others take there place - nothing new. Predicting rising markets is priceless if you're correct.