 We the topic for today is the ethics of progress and so this whole day this whole conference is about free market and environmentalism and climate policy and this stuff are all really technical issues, but we also thought it's not just about techniques, but also about ethics and Morality and we realized that I'm in personally at least I would like that my generation was becoming more and more pessimistic about the technology Innovation and progress and people tend to think more and more that it's bringing it brings more Troubles than actually that that it solves and so that's why we asked you to deliver a speech on The the ethics of progress and how we could defend innovation on moral grounds. So now with the floor is yours Thank you for inviting me. I apologize for not after Studying French for years not knowing any French. So this is all gonna be English I think one of the One of the most depressing things in the world right now Even more depressing the COVID is the fact that your generation is so depressed You live in amazing times you live in times of You know of incredible success For the human species We live longer We live healthier We live in a sense easier lives than we've ever lived before We have access to Values and to both material and spiritual That our ancestors could not have even imagined would exist never mind be as prevalent as they are today You know from your phone You have access to every piece of music ever written in human history at a marginal cost of zero You have access to all the great literature. You have access to movies to every work of art almost ever produced that it's two dimensions or in I'm not sure what dimension music is in three dimensions. I guess You have access to instantaneously at a marginal cost of zero life is amazing We drink the cleanest water. We've ever drunk as a human species We can you can open a tap in almost any country Anywhere today and drink its water without thinking twice We breathe some of the cleanest air We've ever breathed particularly in the West We don't have to deal with the stink of Ross manure We don't have to deal with the You know stink of agriculture of the stink of fires of the stink of living in Hudson and in Primitive primitive type of lodging. We live in beautiful apartments homes life is amazing and It it seems there's an entire generation growing up believing somehow That their lives are horrible That progress is bad for them that we need to slow down we need to stop we need a Value we need to change our values completely and and I think this is unbelievably tragic And it is if there is a cause for slowing down a progress if there is a cause of slowing down a press in Technology it is this attitude this attitude will bring about a Stoppage in progress of stopping in technology and stopping in the betterment of human life So why are people so depressed? Why are people so? Afraid because you see everywhere Fear fear that the climate is gonna kill us all fear that the air we breathe is getting worse not better Fear that somehow technology is gonna dominate us. I mean just just a couple of years ago I remember every second story was about AI artificial intelligence Was going to take over our lives and kill us all or replace us or do something horrific to us That the future was bleak I mean, it's almost like Human beings have this need to believe the world is going to come to an end Right, we have in religion what are called millennial cults cults that every Few decades rise up and say okay, it's the end of the world now That you know this decade the end is gonna the world is gonna end Jesus is coming back and we're all gonna have You know, whatever happens when Jesus has come back. I I'm not up to my scriptures but This idea of end of world this idea of disaster this idea of we're killing ourselves is somehow Something that serves some psychological need that human beings have but it is counter To the fact counter to reality again life has never been better on planet earth and there's no reason to believe If we do the right things The life will not be better 100 years from now life won't be even better a thousand years from now human life progress is Movement Towards greater values Movement towards greater life movement towards better Greater when it comes to human life Progress is the recognition That human life Is the standard of value To evaluate something as good or evil when asked to have A standard by what standard? We are human Each one of us is is on standard. My life is my standard Rand. I ran teaches us The morality is not about sacrificing dying helping the humanity Morality is about living the best life you can live for yourself. It's about achieving your own happiness It's about discovering The values that are necessary to live a good life a successful life as a human being It means using your mind To choose the values. They're going to lead you towards success as a human being Spiritual material values the values necessary for you to thrive So morality is about the individual But if morality is about each individual pursuing his life making his life the best that it can be if morality is about each individual pursuing their happiness then progress in a in a social context is Individuals Making their lives better What is progress after all if not making my life better? And what we think about ethics in society Then what is what is it if if all individuals are pursuing their life pursuing their values trying to make their life better? As a group, what are they doing? Well, they're enhancing human life they're bettering human life And from a societal perspective what we need is to create a political system That enables people to pursue Their happiness that enables people as individuals to pursue the values necessary for them to live a good successful life so that which makes It possible for individuals to pursue a good life is the good That which damages it that which holds it back that which suppresses the ability of individuals to pursue their values to pursue their happiness is evil progress Is the manifestation of individuals pursuing their values? It's a manifestation of people wanting their life to get better It's not a decision we make Our responsibility as a as a you know group as a if we will Is to facilitate individual freedom? It's to facilitate the ability of individuals to live And the result of leaving individuals to live we've seen this time and time again all over the world everywhere is progress progress is the outcome the outcome Of leaving individuals free The outcome of individuals trying to make their lives as individuals better the outcome Of not trying to dictate to individuals what values they should pursue and how they should live freedom will always result in progress because human beings cannot stand for stagnation Stagnation when do we stagnate when is the time we're most stagnant or when we're dead Life requires an active process life requires constant engagement life requires The pursuit of values the constant pursuit of values so To be anti-progress It's to be anti-human life To be anti-progress It's to be anti-human freedom To be anti-progress progress It's to be on the side of death and destruction Which aren't necessarily immoral Life is the standard of morality human life is the standard of morality individual human life is the standard of morality and To advocate against progress is to advocate against individual human life It's to advocate in the against individual human progress Now many environmentalists Would argue that human beings are destroying the planet We're creating havoc You know in the environment, but what does that mean? Are we destroying the planet? Yes, absolutely Absolutely Everything that we have as human beings Has come from us reshaping our environment reshaping our planet Human beings are not neutral when it comes to survival We don't just accept the environment as it is and figure out How to live within it What do we do? We chop down trees and build huts We Take away grasslands and forests And plants agriculture We demolish Hills to use the the the you know the gravel the rock to make cement to build skyscrapers We pave roads From point A to point B when we need to get somewhere Human beings Change the environment It's how we survive It's how we progress It's how we live If we stop changing our environment We die as a species We cannot compete At the material level there eight billion people in the world today The only reason eight billion people can stay alive is because they're constantly reshaping nature around them They're constantly remaking the planet And they're constantly As we do this improving human life 30 years ago about 30 percent of the world Lived in extreme poverty Today eight percent of the world lives in extreme poverty. Hopefully within 20 years Zero percent of the world will live in extreme poverty The only way to do that is to change our environment The only way to do that Is to reshape The planet why do we care about the planet? Why do we care about the environment? Well, I care Only In the sense that it affects human life The standard is still the same The standard is human life If changing our environment is good for human life, then great If changing the environment is bad for human life, we need to solve the problem But the burden Needs to be to prove the changing stuff hurts human life because so far We've been changing the planet for the last I don't know how long have human beings been around but suddenly since agricultural revolution and even before that For 10,000 years and light keeps getting better human life keeps getting better We keep living longer longer healthier And cool. I mean look at this. I'm giving a lecture in france But well, unfortunately, I can't actually be in france Using a technology that just 10 years ago didn't really exist A company that most people around the world never heard of until recently called zoom In spite of authoritarian government shutting us down at home We are still communicating. We are still running conferences. We're still engaging in exchange Why because we've changed nature Turned it into a fiber optics put cables under the ocean with satellites into space So that we can communicate in spite of being thousands of miles away so The standard for environmentalism the standard for what Is good or bad Is human life not the state of the planet not some people's fears But what is objectively good or bad for human life? It's clearly if you're engaged in activity that is hurting other people that is literally destroying life And you and people can prove that then it is the role of government to stop you from engaging in those activities but We don't need you know Big government. We don't need large institutions whole agencies To tell us that that's been around in common law for hundreds of years so human being survived by changing their environment Environmental change is necessary for human survival and for human thriving progress Is necessary for human survival and human thriving When we stop progressing in history we decline in life generally not just when you talk about economic or social progress in life generally You either movement you're either moving forward Or you're moving backwards Standing still is not an option Living beings move they act It's either towards life Or towards death Progress is life. That's white small Progress is what individuals do when they live free That's white small Progress is pro success Pro happiness pro human values. That's white small And anybody trying to stop us Is advocating for death and destruction advocating for poverty We've seen this we've seen civilizations Where progress has stopped When that happens People don't just stay at where they are Things get worse and things can get worse fast So environmentalists Who are claiming the progress is bad Don't understand what it takes To keep human beings alive To keep human beings to allow human beings to achieve happiness and success Environmentalists who advocate for the environment They think the environment has some value Beyond its value to us as human beings But when talking about value, Einwand always asks a very fundamental important question Value to whom And for what? To be a value it has to be a value for something There is no values external to human beings Unless you believe in aliens and god Then maybe there's a value to god and values to the aliens But the only thing we know out there that exists Is life on planet earth. You have to have a living thing that values something. Otherwise, it's not a value It's a value to somebody And for a particular purpose And the end of that purpose, the purpose Is your life Your successful life So the environment is a value to me because I breathe the air, I drink the water I live within it But it's also a value to me because it has the resources I need to consume It has the rare earth metals that make my iPhone possible It provides me with The trees that I need to chop down to build my house It provides me with all the resources I need to make my life better. So the environment is a value because I can exploit it. It's a value to me to the extent that I exploit it The idea of stopping the exploitation of the environment Is the idea of giving up on human life So to fight this I think there are two important points morally We have to understand that the standard of umbrella is human life And human life requires achievement It requires challenges It requires values And if for human life Requires progress The number of human beings on planet earth is probably going to grow at least for a while That acquires growth Necessitates growth If we care about poverty that necessitates growth if we care about Any individual being able to make the most of their life Then we value growth and progress So point one is Human life acquires progress and human life is the standard of value Therefore progress is small and second The consequence of progress are wonderful for human life I mean it's inspiring to see the technology It's inspiring to see the architecture It's inspiring to see the technology That that The modern world is comprised of It's inspiring to be able to be in my home in Puerto Rico And deliver these remarks to you Wherever you may be some of you in France They might even be some people on youtube from all over the world That's progress Life is pretty amazing Your life is pretty amazing if you take it seriously If you choose to make the most of it Don't let the The fear mongers depress you Into not wanting not striving Not pushing yourself to live to the max So live Progress is about life if we value life. We must value progress. Thank you Thank you very much Aaron for this inspiring speech. We we have some questions, but I'm going to start Maybe one for the being in this one very basic question about the maybe definition of this because we You talked a lot about progress But what is the relationship of progress with technology and innovation is Innovation and technology always a progress Or is it the same thing or can you have like a technology which is actually not a progress in the ethical sense And because you also say that the standard of morality is human life in other words, can we have Progress in like technological feeds fields, but which constitute a threat to human life I mean to the extent that a technological advance is a threat to human life Over time people will stop using it over time people will abandon it So to the extent that we value human life. Sure. I mean if you think about nuclear energy nuclear energy is Potentially immense progress and concrete immense progress, but it can also blow the world up and destroy all the human beings To the extent that it is has the capacity for destruction this technology It is so far being limited in its use We are not A suicidal species if you address people rationally and say look Technology x is suicidal. It will kill you Then people will stop using it But all evidence suggests That the overwhelming the overwhelming Technological progress that we have seen in the world over the last 250 years has been pro-human life Has been enhanced human life And not regressed it and the one technology that we are That has the potential to destroy human life, which is nuclear power. We have at least so far managed to Not use it in ways that are destructive We haven't used it in ways that are To its fullest potential. It's a progress either because of fear again. I mean Germany and much of europe is deep nuclearizing which is an Insane which is insanity right the united states hasn't built a nuclear power plant since the 1970s That is insanity, but that is driven by statuism not by the choices of individuals So the fear here is that if there is going to be a technology that is destructive to human being It will be brought about by status not by the marketplace And I know the obvious next question is I don't know. I'll let you ask it I don't know if that's the obvious next next question, but my next question was But the thing is technology now is getting so complex so much complex that it was in the past But do you think that we can completely control it? Is it possible that we actually lose control over technology and innovation? No Not if we're smart about And and there's no reason to think we're going to lose control over technology and innovation I mean, I know We all grew up with I mean you guys maybe this is even before your time with the terminator movies, right and where The technology wakes up and destroy decides it doesn't need us as human beings Even if that were possible and i'm dubious We're 100 with decades and decades and decades away from that kind of innovation. I mean ai Is really really good At fairly simple tasks We're still far away from the kind of conceptual thinking that human beings are capable of We're far far far away From even the the think about how we move just how I'm moving my hand. No robot can do that it can do that But it can't move it can barely stand if you've seen robots walk they can barely manage walking They can't get in and out of a car not yet, right? So we're way Way way way far away from this idea That the technology is going to become so amazing that somehow It's going to decide they don't need us now. Remember technology needs to be able to decide A decision requires consciousness A particular form of consciousness which we as human beings have that is capable of free will There is no indication That a computer is capable of consciousness And there's no indication and there's certainly no indication that we're anywhere near anywhere near Getting close to the ability to create such a computer And by the time we get to that point, I mean Now i'm speculating right now. We're talking about science science fiction At some point things will change that is at some point Will you be able to separate the technology from human beings? I mean when we get to the point where computers are that sophisticated Will we not also be bioengineering ourselves? Will we not also be making ourselves in a sense smarter? We will now then at that point integrating The technology the external technology chip technology with our own bodies and our own minds Who knows what the future has in store for us? I'm excited about it And to me it's bizarre to be scared of it to be afraid of it We as human beings control it Control the path that we're going to head towards it We are going to determine our future. What scares me is not technology What scares me is authoritarian Statism communism fascism, that's what scares me But if you leave it a visuals free to live and free to develop technology I mean good stuff happens every example in history is good stuff happens and believe me Every generation like your generation has been afraid of the future But stop it Learn from the past learn from what you see in front of you Technology is life enhancing So no, I I don't see technology turning against human beings and uh and and destroying us Uh, it just it just makes no sense if you want a more optimistic view of the future Think uh, Isaac Asimov's foundation series, uh, you know, which is I think a much healthier view of the future But look we're hundreds of years probably away from any of that. So stop worrying be happy Okay, but maybe uh apart from uh AI and uh Robo's taking over the world There's also the problem that there's so some technologies are also complex that we don't know We don't know all the implications and they can have some side effects and the question is So do we decide to use them to take the risk to reuse them? Why we don't know what may be all the all the implications Even though it might bring some good But also many bad side effects. Give me an example Uh, well, I was thinking about GMOs are fragmented for example in china that we used on uh on newborn babies uh, I think uh one scientist in china transform um the DGNA engineering on feed on on uh, you know on basically on fetuses. So so they yeah, exactly Which well he was targeting. I think uh one specific gene, but the thing you realize now We don't know what will be the oil implications and maybe the only way to know Is to figure it out the idea that we can come up with certainty about complex phenomena in advance without experimenting Is bizarre right so The precautionary principle is a death knell this idea that until we know it's a hundred percent safe But you never know something's a hundred three. I mean you wouldn't leave your home if you Won that premise Do I know a certainty? I won't get run over today on the in you know, I won't get into an accident with my car that'll kill me No, I don't know a certainty because I don't know what the other drivers are going to do I can't control what the other drivers are going to do on the road I and I live in Puerto Rico. Believe me. I can't control what the other drivers on the road are going to do That was a joke that didn't work. Um, so life is about life entails uncertainty And it entails trying to assess with the best available knowledge that we have What what are the risks involved? but just But there's no There's no point And there's no conceptual validity to the idea of Anything new? Oh They might be dangers. I don't know what the dangers are. I can't predict what the dangers are I have no evidence that there's any danger But they might be there. So look bioengineering Is really really tricky and it's not that we as a species it's dangerous If you screw up engineering a child's gene and let's say you cause them to be deformed or you cause them great pain That is a tragedy So you better get it right And to think that scientists and doctors don't care Of course they care They want to get it right And and the chinese scientists got it right There's no evidence that anything bad happened, but he's gone to jail. We'll never see him again. Right china has made him disappear But what exactly did he do wrong? He was a little ahead of his time. So was gala leo So was anybody who advanced human knowledge? Nothing there were no bad consequences as far as I know the babies born were fine Um, you cannot you cannot live Under the fear of something you have no evidence for So I mean imagine a world in which we can bioengineer diseases away If you have an inclination to Alzheimer's disease dementia We can we can change that gene so you never have to suffer from dementia Imagine if we can bioengineer so you don't have cancer I mean wow That is fantastic. That is so amazing And if we can today bioengineer food to have more vitamins and to to be more nutritious Fantastic and there's zero literally zero evidence The gmo in food is harmful to anybody So we use arbitrary statements arbitrary assertions about the danger of things In order to stop progress. That is anti-life All right, so if I understand well, I mean that for the question of how we handle risk we should just rely on the individual responsibility principle and not states our collective Regulations, well, I mean you could have collective regulations in the sense of if you're doing something that is clearly risky But for the state to get involved There has to be significant evidence of harm But as long as there's no significant evidence of harm the state has no role It's individual responsibility Markets responsibility you as a market participant should not buy a product. You know is harmful to other people It's the same as coven right now, right? It's your individual responsibility To figure out How to stay healthy The government cannot has no right to lock you up To tell you you can't live leave your home Because you might There's no evidence. You might be risky to other people now if you test positive Then the state has proof that you're dangerous Right because you could infect other people it can tell you to stay home But as long as you have not tested positive this state has no role the state can only act When it have positive substantial evidence that you are Dangerous that you are going to do harm to other people That makes sense. Yep. Thank you. Bob has a question on the chat here. Should I quickly answer this? Yes, of course Scary is not hostile AI but AI in hostile human hands. That's absolutely true And you can see that in china right now that's scary. So it's not the technology that's scary It's the hostile human hands that are scary. So again, put the responsibility where it belongs The responsibility for example for the use of AI for bad uses In china is on the chinese government that too is responsible. It's not the AI in and of itself Absolutely. Now, I am not that scared of it long term for this reason I believe that authoritarianism destroys innovation Authoritarianism makes progress technological progress ultimately impossible and as china returns to being more and more and more authoritarianism Technological advance will shrink and their ability to use technology. Well, we'll go away. So I don't believe in 1984 Not because I don't think there are bad people who would want it But because I think all world's depiction of the state Is of a state that's too efficacious too successful government Is not that good at what it does and it cannot co-scientists to Create the kind of technologies that can be that helpful. There's a reason uh soviet the nazi weapons were not as sophisticated and not as good as weapons made by free countries Under freedom people innovate and people create and people make stuff In ways that you cannot have Under authoritarianism. So I'm not that afraid of authoritarian governments As a threat to me. I'm afraid of my own authoritarian government. That's the case that jesus out of me But not because of the use of technology, but because of the ability to use force against me So, yes, I agree with you Robert. That is the fear But again, let's focus on what they and who the enemy is the enemy's not progress The enemy is authoritarian governments All right. Thank thank you very much. Um, I will move to another question from the public What what is the field where we could be much further in term when we could go much further in terms of progress And what would be do you have example of policies that should be banned today to a little more progress? So, uh, do I have examples of what should be banned? Uh example of policy, uh, of policies that should be banned today or policies or regulations That should be banned today to a little more progress Yeah, I mean almost all the regulations I mean, all right All the regulations that are in the books today in the european union in the united states of america, uh, holding back progress It's not an accident That the only progress real progress we see today is in technology is in the field of technology Because technology is not very regulated. There's almost no regulation of technology But we don't see a lot of progress in automobiles because it's been heavily heavily regulated We don't see a lot of progress in Airflight airplanes because they've been very very regulated We're seeing some progress in space travel Because people like elon musk and jeb bezos are pushing the envelope against Regulations we're seeing it in automobiles a little bit because elon musk is pushing the envelope Against regulation there, but even there he's cheating because he's getting government money a lot of it in order to do it It's very difficult to innovate in regulated industries And therefore the only way to progress the only way to innovate the only way to move forward as a species as a human beings Is to get government out of the way across the board You know Just any name pretty much any regulation right now That that the european union has on industry on You know with the exception of the only regulations that government should have these days And these are really laws that protect individuals You know if there's something that that that is is emitted into the air that clearly harms people Then you shouldn't do it. That's just you know, that's just Was protected under common law, right? Don't poison the water don't poison the air other than that, you know, what regulations do we need? So I would abolish almost all of them Okay Thanks, uh, but or but uh, you also say that the role Of the other government was to stop activity that do destroy the environment as you just actually, uh, just No, I I don't the whole concept of the environment is a is a bad concept. I wish you I wish I there's no such thing as free might get environmentalism because environmentalism is not a legitimate concept Environmentalism is the idea that the environment Independent of human beings is what's important. The environment is not important What's important is human life So clean air is important in human life. So we're pro clean air clean water is important for human life So we're pro clean water. There are other things out there that might be important in human life But the standard is human life not the environment the environment does not exist You you you have to ask who's environment? And I would argue that the environment for human being the environment for human life is the best It's ever been in all of human history Yeah, I get your point the idea that it's always a relationship between us and the environment Uh, but again, what I wanted to say is there is no such thing as the environment, but yes us in nature I think that's that's that's a concept. That's a notion. This is it's not really precise But we still it's still really helpful like to talk about what's around us and also because this is where basically where we live And that does have an impact On our own lives our environment, right? So it's not the environment as a thing out there It's our environment. It's something that is ours So nature is out there nature is a thing Environment is not a thing environment is somebody's environment my environment. What's my environment like? What's your environment like? What's the environment for human beings? but Words matter And the environmentalists are very good at creating this notion that there's something out there that we need to protect That's independent of human beings No, there isn't It's again out so but but I'm sorry. I stopped your question in the middle Yeah, but that's quite linked. Oh, I think I can use another word for environment. Just what I mean, just I mean How do you protect? The place where you live because you know if the the place around you becomes Dirty is also Danger for for your health. So that's what it's all about when we talk about free market and environmentalism Even though might might not be the best work. They didn't use the word environmentalism I know I have a lot of friends who are free market environmentalists and but I I wish they'd use a different word How do we protect it from getting dirty? Well, we know how to protect it from getting dirty. It's very simple It's called private property The more private property we have the cleaner the world becomes If I own the river You don't throw your garbage in my river Just like you can't throw your garbage in my backyard If we found a way to privatize the oceans the oceans will be cleaner If we found a way to privatize the oceans, we wouldn't run out of fish Just like we don't run out of cows. We have more cows than we used to have why because we eat them The more cows we eat the more cows they are The same by the way with trees If you privatized all the forest if you privatized the amazon you would probably have more forest not less forest because There's value in having a forest whether it's to chop down the trees and replant So that you can use the wood or whether you want to preserve the forest But the way best way to preserve the forest is to own it because if you own the forest You could do whatever the hell you want with it including preserve it so This solution to cleanliness of private property and the idea is you can't dirty my property So you can't destroy my water and you can't destroy my air And if we understand if we have a concept around a proper definition of private property and how it applies to water How it applies to air how it applies to the oceans how it applies to all these things Then all of these so-called environmental problems go away Yeah, but that's a problem because I agree. I completely agree with you in theory But it's way more it's way harder to privatize the ocean or even the atmosphere and to privatize just the forest It is. So how do we actually do do it? That's that's what we should be focused on now Privatizing the ocean we might not privatize it in the same way as we privatize land For example in iceland they privatized fishing permits so that so that they privatize the fishing stock Which is an original way in a sense to apply property rights to fishing and to the ocean You're not going to privatize the air in the same way you privatize land. It's more You can't put stuff into the air that I breathe that damages me I have a lawsuit against you if you do. So it's not that hard. This is the problem. The problem is That starting about 120 years ago 30 years ago late 19th century early 20th century in america We started looking to government for solutions for all of our problems And we stopped innovating when it comes to private property So for example, I give you an example in the in the in the um The wild west in america There was a whole body of law being built up Around water rights and how to deal with water if your cows pooped Up on the in the stream and I drank the water. How do we resolve that dispute? And all of that there was a whole body of law built around that through common law All of that was stopped when the government Took over ownership of the land and of the rivers and of the lakes and of all this stuff So then it all went through regulations and controls and and topped down rather than bottom up Figuring out the issues of property rights. So the solution is freedom The solution is getting the government out of the way. We me and you can solve the problems I have no doubt in my mind The problem is when politicians don't allow us to solve the problems They interfere they intervene with regulations and controls and definitions and tell us what we can and cannot do So if we allow markets to function And if we allow common law and the legal system to properly function These problems that are associated with A filthy Property Can be solved. I have no doubt in my mind and some of them will be hard to solve And for example, one of the beauty in america a federalism each state being different Is that one state might solve them in one way individuals might solve them in one way in one state they might solve it in differently in another state and then We'll figure out what works better and we might adopt One method versus the other All right. Thank you very much. We have one last question if you have time Sure, I but I have to do it quickly. Yeah, go ahead. All right So what what do you think about the idea that resources are limited to me resources a resource Only as a consequence of somebody understanding how to use it There is no limited on as long as we have people thinking and the unlimited resource is the minds Yeah, so I encourage everybody to read julian simon He's an economist who wrote the ultimate resource Where he explains why resources are unlimited The only thing limited is our own Imagination right our own ability to to think to to conceive and the more people thinking The the the less limited resources are because there's more people trying to solve problems So no if the resources energy We will always discover new forms of energy even if one form of energy Uh, it goes it is limited Energy is not limited energy is unlimited. We will always innovate and discover more the same with food the same with everything So there is no such thing As unlimited is limited resources resources are unlimited In a sense that human ability to think is unlimited to innovate as unlimited to progress as unlimited All right. Thank you. Thank you very much My for for your time. I was really pleasure to have you Thank you inviting me and hopefully next time we could do it in person. I'd love to I'd love to be in paris right now Um, but this is uh, this is second best. It's it. Yes We hope the situation will be better than it. All right. Have a nice day. You too. Bye everybody. Bye. Bye