A Scientific Breakthrough That Could Transform How We Produce Food | David Friedberg | TED
Вставка
- Опубліковано 29 сер 2024
- Agriculture fundamentally changed the way humans live - but at a cost, using up huge tracts of land and wreaking havoc on the environment, even as millions still go hungry. Entrepreneur and investor David Friedberg paints a picture of the evolution of agriculture and introduces a scientific breakthrough - "boosted breeding" - that might just transform how the world produces food. (This conversation was recorded live with head of TED Chris Anderson.)
If you love watching TED Talks like this one, become a TED Member to support our mission of spreading ideas: ted.com/member...
Follow TED!
X: / tedtalks
Instagram: / ted
Facebook: / ted
LinkedIn: / ted-conferences
TikTok: / tedtoks
The TED Talks channel features talks, performances and original series from the world's leading thinkers and doers. Subscribe to our channel for videos on Technology, Entertainment and Design - plus science, business, global issues, the arts and more. Visit TED.com to get our entire library of TED Talks, transcripts, translations, personalized talk recommendations and more.
Watch more: go.ted.com/dav...
• A Scientific Breakthro...
TED's videos may be used for non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons License, Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives (or the CC BY - NC - ND 4.0 International) and in accordance with our TED Talks Usage Policy: www.ted.com/ab.... For more information on using TED for commercial purposes (e.g. employee learning, in a film or online course), please submit a Media Request at media-requests...
#TED #TEDTalks
What a great example of educational TED talk. This is kind of Entertainment I like.
more animations would have been 💯
I think farming should be a civic compulsory service. If conscription is happening more and more in some country, so should mandatory farming service. There is SUCH a disconnect between knowing basic food production of a society vs picking up food at the local store and listen to my favorite social media/ celebrity telling me what to and what not to eat.
Even transplanting a fruit tree to schools might get people more interested in farming. Another useful skill schools don't focus on (not that we force kids into a full day's work on a farm, that's probably too far 😅)
Compulsory conscription? Let's perhaps include it in the education curriculum, maybe have gardens at the school. If you force it, you create resentment.
@@Ribberflavenous no, I mean what I said. Compulsory civic farming service. You live, breath, eat and sleep like a farmer for 3-6 months. What is the point of education if it's just gonna be more paper work/ homework/ academia to say "I learned what farming is like" when you ARE the farmer. Infact, for those that don't want to do farming they can go do the compulsory military service. Yes I like compulsiveness...
@@l01230123 I don't care about kids going into farming how's that gonna be realistic in learning anything? I'm talking about teens. Your do-nothing 16-20 year olds. Japan is doing it.
@@RTEducatorsHonestly not a terrible idea when we literally have summers off in school because we used to be farmers.
As long as my seeds can regenerate plants every year in my backyard, i’m interested.
Kudos for growing your own!. Please note that hybrid seeds don't always grow true to seed, you may lose some of the properties of the original plant. Look for Heirloom if you want to do seed saving. Hybrids are great for addressing disease/pest issues but you have to buy the seeds every season. The big thing is KEEP ON GROWING!!!
@@sgalla1328 whoa there big fella... Only GMO seeds can be regulated. Hybrids are not GMO. Home gardeners can't not even access GMO seed, there are contracts involved. Hybrids are king for human food production.
@@sgalla1328 That is interesting. So I cannot go online right now and order from dozens of different seed providers? Sorry for the gender confusion, wack jobs are traditionally male. My mistake, I forgot about the psycho hose beasts.
Project NEON national Science Foundation.. lidar bio tracking of animal insect and plant life with bio barcoding of species "for tracking purposes".
The solution is indoor vertical farming and lab-grown meat
This is so exciting. The potential is unbounded. Thank you, David Friedberg.
Science corner from the All-in podcast! Plus no dad jokes from JCal & Chamath 😅🤦♂️
You dont like Uranus jokes?
David, your insights into the historical evolution and future of agriculture are incredibly valuable. It's great to see such a comprehensive approach to tackling environmental challenges through technology.
Love Friedberg . Love science corner
Either these boosted genetics plants yield seeds that are uniform or they don't. The farmer comes back to the company each year because the boosted plants s/he grows will produce seeds with natural variations in genetics and will not repeat the productivity year on year. It works in a similar way to F1 hybrid varieties.
Bestie on Ted channel!
26:36 I stopped watching 15 seconds atter he said this.
This shows the worst of humanity, _"it doesn't solve our problem but you can create businesses."_
What's even the point, then ?
Money & Greed & More control !
This isn't a *Ted Talk* this is an investment pitch.
I'd love to see someone try to grow downwards using Earth's gravity to water the plants below on the lower levels of the greenhouse, with reflective materials all throughout to focus more light where needed most down below. I think the way forward is a balanced approach. Maybe we should approach this issue in a similar fashion to how they approached designing Earthships, which are luxury self contained & sustained homes that runs completely off grid on the cheap. Say if we were in invent a battery grid that could run long enough to pay for itself from the energy the home owner can sell back to the utility company. Where it's free in the end.
I encourage you (TED and this speaker) to move beyond the technocentric viewpoint you're oozing. It's so limited. If farming was our first technology, then it was preceded by our social fabric and recognition of humanity in others and our abiotic environment.
The productivity equation ignores the input of marginalized groups (often women, children, and vulnerable individuals) on a local scale. The mention of the Haber process without acknowledgement that it was initially used to generate explosives for the Soviet Union is testament to the idea that progress at any cost is destructive, and that's equally true for agriculture today. Technology isn't the only solution needed.
The idea that there isn't food is completely false, it is political agreements like the US-Canada-Mexico policy that requires the productive country (Mexico) to export it's crops at lower prices while the bigger players flood their market with cheap imported crops, like in the case of corn (agricultural dumping). It is these political regimes that keep productive countries from breaking out of their debt on a global scale - for Nicaragua there were attempted and failed coups by the US government when Nicaraguans nationally rejected the incumbent neoliberal government.
Productive countries do not owe the tech hubs of the world anything, and they are not interested in commerce that reduces the existing biodiversity and indigenous knowledge they possess. They are interested in improving their systems - but not in a way that makes them reliant on a global market that relegates their contribution to pennies, as in the case of the potato seed mentioned.
And yes smallholder farmers care about their livelihood, it is what sustains them. But they are not made aware of their rights and the global market interests of others nor the reliance they inhabit through GMO seed cultivation. I'm not against GMOs (they're necessary to adapt to climate change on a human scale), I'm against the concept of making someone who already understands local ecology and agriculture feel less than because of factors out of their control (commodifying crops, supply chains, extractive global policy).
During an era where geo-political economy was being formed into a stable multi-polar system, as argued by Huntington in his "Clash of Civilizations," the technology that arose that unlocked the greatest productivity also had to do with the establishing the geo-political economic stability. What if, as Huntington suggests, the next era that we are currently in will result in a similar multi-polar stability of a cultural nature, and the tech that will unlock the greatest productivity will be about cultural stability? Do you see what I mean? If technology serves to unlock productivity, and the population requires productivity that will resolve the cultural conflict rather than economic, then we are in an transitional era where engineers are looking for a new location of the greatest potential energy and productivity that can be unlocked by new technology. I propose that it is in matchmaking. At the time of Shakespeare, only a small percentage of the global population was able to marry a soulmate or someone with a high degree of love, and we are only now beginning to see the effects of a mere couple generations of marriages based in higher degrees of love than ever before possible in human history. I am not saying that there is a soulmate out there for every single person, nor am I saying that there is person each of us is 100% compatible with to marry, but I am suggesting that just like during the time of Shakespeare, the % of the global population who are able to find a mate who they are able to achieve a high measure of love, is a fraction of what it will be in the future. This means that if current technologies like social media and AI unlock this productivity, the values within the free market system will change such that meritocracy will actually function, giving us the stable cultural multi-polar system Huntington's work implies will happen. Not only this, but our reality that we seem to be locked in to is the result of us living on earth up until recent history in marriages based in a degree of love that is a mere fraction of what we have discovered that it can be, and therefore, it is no wonder that we know of other realities that are possible, but this one that we have is akin to marine mammals gaining the ability to walk on land; it is very lonely for early adopters because everyone else is still underwater. Naysayers, may argue that a reality with such a high degree of compatibility is a utopia, and I argue that in a reality where we have such a drastically lower amount of conflict over values, we still have conflict/competition of abilities/fitness; which by the way, a meritocracy, not a utopia. And we will all be very surprised to find that undesirable properties were emerging properties resulting from objectively false marriage practices leading to symptoms of disease, and many desirable properties other cultures have that we are not yet aware of are the result of objectively true marriage practices that we may then decide to adopt.
Boosted breeding sounds like a tag on R34
Poi naturally doubles (dry land sweet potatoe) can you quadruple it?
The solution is indoor vertical farming and lab-grown meat
yes, now get to it
I’ve noticed it’s possible to stimulate growth with AI & resonance; sound waves.. no toxic stuff, no disruption from dna-modification unbalancing ecosystems; only more growth and food
That's very interesting. What research have you done on the topic?
Links to evidence or it didn't happen
I was trying to ask in good faith, but it seems like you're just making stuff up for attention or some other gain I couldn't care about.
"dna-modification unbalancing ecosystems" is not a scientifically verified phenomena, and using the word "toxic" so vaguely makes little sense.
Legend
The answer to "is x scalable" is, if you eliminate human labor, yes. Each human represents a minimum wage.
Not related to your subject, though I am very interested, Don’t know if ever been told,but David you could be the twin or brother to Tim Ballard. Your speech mannerisms sound extremely similar, even your appearance is similar 😮to
USA has 40 percent of its population in Obesity and Overweight .
Europe has 50 percent of its population in Obesity and Overweight .
food production is not the problem .
distribution is the problem .
USA and Europe will be better of with less food ; population heath wise and medical aid .
Africa will be better of with more food .
There is no food shortage, only inequality of distribution. A small percentage of the world's population has the luxury of throwing away good food. A larger percentage has the luxury of wasting empty calories. And then there are those who have no control over the means of production or access to nutritious food. You speak of the amount of land given over to growing crops to feed livestock and neglect to discuss in detail the land given over to growing cereals and grains for the industrial giants who dominate the food industry, and for seed oils. There is no discussion, either of the commercial and industrial interests which are driving small farmers into the ground. Improving productivity will not level the playing field.
Modern arable farming, with the application of vast quantities of nitrates, pesticides, herbicides and fungicides, destroys healthy soil and ecosystems. The runoff poisons the streams, rivers, lakes and oceans. The vast herds of animals which once roamed the plains of Europe, Africa, Asia and America did not create global warming. Their passage fertilised the land and ensured that it was healthy.
Nature has a nasty habit of adapting to control, and history has some unfortunate lessons about the consequences of reliance on monoculture and inbreeding.
Why was there no mention of regenerative farming, or the democratisation of production? Is not biodiversity, even in agriculture, the best safeguard against crop failure?
With all due respect, technocratic solutions work well for those who control the rights and the facilities and not so well for those who do not. They are unlikely to address the inequalities or fix the climate. And indoor farming, on a scale which would be sufficient to feed the entire population is a preposterous idea.
As for calories: the focus on carbohydrates and seed oils to provide substrates for ultraprocessed products has contributed to the epidemic of obesity, cardiovascular disease, dementia mental health and other diseases, the root causes of which are mitochondrial and metabolic dysfunction.
❤❤❤
Waiting your hands
is that why you're kyllan all the naturally harvestable renewable food krytters?
so you can "boost" it for yourselves. then leave the ones that were hopped up on "boosters" in their place, so we can be "boosted" without our say so?
*Googles environmental impact of beef*
Who's killing nature now? The people here who are for using insects, biologicals, etc. to make farming more efficient, or is it the industries and people who point fingers while ignoring their own impact and working solutions? 🤷♂
@@l01230123 I'm talking about all the perfectly healthy animals they Kyle bc they rig up a pea sea arr to say what they want. IE to run magnified and express something that's only there bc of excessive magnifying
@@l01230123 Industrial farming has severe negative impact, absolutely. Animal production using sound management of the land is a benefit across the board. Demonizing animal husbandry as a whole because what industrialized farming does is short sighted.
If applied to hemp plant that has 100% genes required , reassuring non production of unwanted substances, the world can benefit from its other stunning usefulness to the environment, soil, etc...think of it
appeling
I do not give him good credibility when he equates AI to chatGPT. AI is already hugely considered in agriculture.
Nice point!
He is upset that *other people* do that. That's what he was trying to say. Other people think AI is just chat bots.
He mentions how *statistical modeling* has been used for ages.
AI is just the latest rebrand
There's a lot of content on his opinions from his podcast (All in Podcast)
Quite sinister and puzzled when you portray agriculture in a negative light..
34:45 Look I bet this comment won't get pinned or liked, reply and I'll do absolutely NOTHING
I feel my IQ growing a tiny bit every time I listen to smart people …
…especially if I learned something new in unknown subject, like farming.
I have ZERO interest in listening to you run your mouth
ALL I need is the pertinent information
They are trying to sell a product that fixes no problems and harms the environment.
Did you ask god if he is interested to learn your great, highly profitable, solutions? God seems to be very patient with guys like you. I wonder when you guys will go too far, experiencing the lightning in your neck? I only can say - sayonara!
🤦♀️🤦♀️🤦♀️
What?
As far as it's the food production process not genetically modified, then it's worth listing to but worthless otherwise
Another shill video talking about eliminating meat. Yes farm factories and monoculture farming is bad, it breaks away from the natural cycle. Take a look at what is being done in regenerative farming and rotational grazing. Not all soil will support crops, and chemical fertilizer feeds crops, not soil. You have to look at the food system holistically as a wheel, not just parts.
Chemical fertilizer is a potential part of soil, and I think it's pretty clear they are considering soil. They are considering the parts, because they are pat of the system: you only seem to be criticizing your own semantics.
@@l01230123 You are very wrong. The chemical fertilizers, such as Ammonium Nitrate (it is a salt) will feed the plant and kill the microbial life in the soil. Every year you will need more fertilizer. Just like your own gut, it is the symbiosis of microbial content that makes it possible for the plants to flourish. Google 'Regenerative Farming' and it will go into detail how you need living soil that provides the nutritional plants that support food production. It is hard to wean off the chemicals, but the expense of fertilizer is finally causing farmers to look for a better way.
@@Ribberflavenous I'm not criticizing/complimenting a chemical fertilizer: I think it's common sense there are many bad ones/uses, which is mentioned in this video...
You sound like you didn't listen to the whole video if you think this against what they are saying, and it's pretty clear you aren't listening to me. This video discusses multiple alternatives to chemical fertilizers. Peace out, you're arguing with yourself like me/TED aren't here. ✌
@@l01230123 You are correct that I didn't watch the whole thing. I bailed the second they started on the anti-meat agenda. Livestock is part of the food cycle and has always been. Organic processes do not work as well without the manure generating animals.
The solution is indoor vertical farming and lab-grown meat
God loves you and cares for you so that this message reaches you. God is the one who created this large universe and controls it completely. The greatest loss a person loses in this life is that he lives without knowing God who created him and knowing the Messenger of Muhammad, the last of the messengers, and the Islamic religion, the last of the heavenly religions. Great intelligence, before you believe in something or not, is to read it, study it, and understand it well, and after that you have the choice to believe in it or not to believe in it. I advise you to do this now, before you no longer have time to do so. Life is very short. It is just a test, just a passage to eternal life. Great advice to those who... Understands