 Thanks. So great pleasure to be here. Also, great pleasure to be part of the book, which I think will have a lot of impact. I'm very excited about this. So, first of all, I want to say that the future is not something that happens to us. As my friend Van Heemstra says, the future is something that we create. We're not just sitting here and waiting for technology to run us over. Or for somebody in Silicon Valley to invent a simulation that we can live in. Which they already have. It's called Google. But we're actually making choices about the future. We made the choice of nuclear energy, which we invented, unfortunately. We invented nuclear bombs, and now we make the choice that not everybody can have one. We make those choices. And I think it's crucial that we think about what this means for our future. As of half a year ago, I kind of shifted focus of my work a little bit away from the future of business. You know, IE, making more money with technology. Moving to the future of humanity and technology. So I made a movie about this called Tech vs. Human. And you can watch it on the internet. Just go to this web address. Tech vs. Human dot com. Tech vs. Human dot com. And I also have a TV show called The Future Show. All of that stuff is available. And, of course, I will make this slide available. And also, from today's show at the London Business School, FutureWiseGirl.com, you download the old PDFs and all that stuff. If you want to download about 5 gigabyte of stuff, you can go to Good Cloud. Which is a joke, really. But it's a Dropbox folder. It has lots of movies and all my free books and about 550 presentations. Don't print. Don't print. Alright, so first, when we talk about artificial intelligence, let's forget about Hollywood. Okay? If you watched all the stuff coming out of Hollywood, this is entertainment. It's the lowest possible denominator to make money. I love those movies. I watched them. Anything from Blade Runner to a Blurdy Young 2. Transcendence, you know. It's interesting. But this is not what we're talking about here. We're not talking about real scenarios in the next 20, 30 years. We're talking about scenarios that are much further removed. So let's forget about that stuff for a second, if you've seen some of those. Most importantly, at this curve, and I'll tell the story because I think it's a good story. Some of you may already know. Exponentiality. There's a story about the invention of the chessboard. Five years before Christ in the multi-period in India, a wise man went to the ruler, to the emperor, and said he brought the chessboard along. The emperor loved the chess game. And one day, that said, we'll make a bet. If you win, what do you want? The emperor said to the wise man. The wise man said, all I do is I want to feed my family. So at that point, he said, well, if you put one rice corn in the first field, and then twice as much in the second field, and twice as much in the third field, that's all I need. Just rice corn. And the emperor said, well, that's cool. You're a modest man. We'll do that, right? As it were playing, pretty quickly it turned out that he was going to lose the emperor to the wise man. So half the way to the chessboard, the wise man had earned as much rice as all of India would produce in one year. And by the end of the game, on the 64th field, it would be enough rice to cover the entire earth in one meter of rice. Because it was exponential. So, of course, the wise man was beheaded because he turned out not to have been modest. But the lesson is, yeah, we are now in the second part of the chessboard. We're at the part where it really takes off. The difference between two and four isn't very much an overall scale, but the difference between, you know, 50 trillion and 150 trillion is a lot. And we're now in the second part where they're placed to work and safely say, the innovation that's happening is absolutely mind-blowing. I mean, we're living our science fiction age. Possibly defeating cancer, Alzheimer's, solving the energy problem. I mean, the stuff that's really science fiction. I mean, just using a thing like an app called Say Hi, you may know, Say Hi is an app for $2, allows you to translate in real time 34 languages through an app. So I was in Japan three months ago in a sushi restaurant. I'm speaking into the app in German, regular German, not Swiss German, those kind of aberrations, right there. And the guys being back to me in Japanese through the app, right? We had a real good chat about it. It's not about anything deeper than that. Pretty simple stuff, right? It worked great. I had science fiction moment right there, right? It's actually working on it. So exponential technology, humanity will change more than the next 20 years than the previous 300. Ever since the industrial revolution. All people are saying, oh, yeah, yeah, this is because exponential, it is truly going to be a big deal for your kids, for example, even if we don't get to live to the point where it can be 150 years old, our kids will. Because this is truly a mind-boggling moment. And there's two things about this, I don't know why I went all the sudden, but anyway, there's two things about automation. Everything that can be automated will be. Whether it's delivery of movies or motion pictures or books or whatever, and everything that can become intelligent will become intelligent, right? So our mobile phones have become intelligent, they know us, in fact, they act on our behalf already. Mobile phones have become our external brains. And this is nothing yet, just give it five years, right? I mean, this is really what companies that sell those boxes want, right? They want us to get rid of our brain and give it to them because it makes millions of dollars. So we're thinking in the true sense, right? So here we have the biggest strategy, of course, artificial intelligence, which essentially is emulating human intelligence, copying it, essentially. In some way, where we can do things, you know, any single technology company in Silicon Valley has major initiatives or artificial intelligence. Google has acquired over 20 companies, including two companies that make military robots using artificial intelligence. Google is no longer a search engine. It will become the biggest global brain in the world. Google is going away from searching on the internet to searching us. That is really Google's mission, now, searching us. And basically running a simulation for us. So when you use Google, you don't have to do much thinking. Google will tell you where to go, who to talk to, who your friend is, where you are, where you should be going, and eventually whether you should have a baby or not, for example. Then we have trends that are the reverse of this, really, is intelligent assistance. That is really a great business application to look into and that sort of, you know, making more money next month. This is where you start. Intelligent assistance basically means using technology to make life easier, assisting people. For example, this is a persistent car system. The ball of a road train is not self-driving. It's a bunch of cars connected on the highway. So that's the idea of how I turn this around. IA, intelligent assist. And that makes lots of money. Lots of stuff will happen in that trip. And then we have the more ambitious part. That's artificial intelligence. Driving in a car while it drives itself, like a plane that will fly itself, man, that is a little bit further away. It is actually extremely difficult for the car to drive itself, like truly drive itself. You know, the moment, for example, when we drive a car and we have to make a decision about something that's on the road, it takes about one thousandth of a split second for us to decide to do this or that. It's extremely complicated for a computer. This is called the Moravec paradox, which is what is really hard for a computer is easy for us. And what is hard for us is easy for the computer. And that is still prevailing. So you can see that, of course, prevailing here with Siri. This is a technical teacher where we are looking at a situation where years ago, this was two years ago, but he was asked Siri that he had alcohol poisoning who told him to drink more. Just like you and Google translate, you know, basically sucked for a long time. But now, exponentially improved, if you've seen the stuff two weeks ago from the Apple event, you could say, this is really my problem. I would go and say, fetch the pictures with me and my wife on the beach in India while I'm wearing the blue hat. If I had one. It would surge it. Or maybe put one on me retroactively. So what's happening here, the afternoon show, this is, you know, if you're interested in business stuff, this is the place to go. Intelligent assistance everywhere. What we do on Google Maps, on Gmail, all the other stuff will absolutely explode in every single part of society. We have a ranking. Intelligent assistance augmentation. That's kind of the obvious part, right? And then we have the very tempting part, the numbers. This is a study from Tata and also McKinsey. They put potential economic impact of all the disruptive technology, automation, robotics, vehicles, internet of things, mobile internet, 30 trillion dollars. And we talked about the huge amount of money. Now you can, you don't have to wonder why so many companies are going into this and saying, well, we're not even mentioning that technology. This is a mind-boggling shifting. And then, as a result, we have the so-called unicorns. You heard about the unicorns. Unicorns are companies that are worth over a billion dollars that are privately funded. No stock market, no banks, 86 of them. Unfortunately, only three in Europe. The rest of the U.S. and China. 86 companies. And a lot of that stuff is happening in California. Unicorns are extreme money makers for the investors, of course. And here's what Peter Diamantus has to say. He was one of the founders of many companies and once a single American university. I got this email from him yesterday. He started a company called Human Longevity Inc. This is not satisfactory. This is actually real. To whether they want to end agent or at least delay it. This is what he says in his email. The astonishing part here is that it should give us pause to think, right? He's basically saying, okay, we have six to seven trillion dollars a year spent on healthcare, people over 65, and these people hold something of the order of 60 trillion dollars in wealth. And the question is what would people pay for an extra 10, 20, 30, 40 years of a healthy life? It's a big opportunity. In other words, it's about money. If you're rich, if you're old, you can be happy. You can buy all the stuff you need and buy a new liver and everybody else can go and bugger off. So, that makes a question. When we have exponential digitization, optimization, virtualization and robotization, I call this the Asians because there's so many of them, society changes. That media is first. As you know, I come from the music business. Media was first robotized essentially. They were completely superfluous and now it's coming to logistics, transportation, telecom. In the telecom business, hundreds of thousands of people are working to run the network. Well, the future is, yeah. Robots will run the network. I mean, this is not about emotions. It's about running a network. If you're running a container ship, you have unmanned container ships. You need two people to be on the boat. Now you have, what, 400. You know, this is happening pretty much. Financial services is lawyers. Legal discovery. Legal discovery already done by software. Can be done by smart robots. Not all of it, but a very large term by paralegals. Don't be a paralegal. In the future. Fray and Osborn last year said 58% of financial advisors will be replaced by robots. And I think that's a lie. It's actually only 80%. Anything that can be automated will be. And so we're moving up the food chain to a place that cannot be automated. Creative lawyers, right? Creative. Creative lawyers, yeah, they exist, yeah. People who can actually make up stuff, you know, who have human capacity. So, I would not say for some of what's happening if we don't need lawyers. Of course we need lawyers, right? But the low-hanging fruit of figuring out what's what can be done by software. Just like a call center will be 95% of software in the future. I mean, what's a call center then? Just speech recognition, basically. So in this world, the complete convergence of man and machine. That's what's happening today. And I would agree with Gray on this that this is what's happening and if we cannot go back and say, can we unmerge man and machine, right? But we have to decide what we want to do here. How far do we want to take this? Do we want women not to be able to have a body made inside their body and have natural birth because it is cheaper, less dangerous, faster, cleaner to have a baby outside of their body. It would save a lot of money if we were not to do things that make us human, like lying, making mistakes, get drunk buy the wrong food, smoke cigarettes. Yeah, it would be cheaper and, you know, it would best turn us into a giant machine. Do we want to go down this way? This is your house. This is a film about Gigo, the first family robot. This is a real proposal funded on Kickstarter. Well, I think 2 million dollars. This is a robot that sits in your kitchen that you talk to and the pinch of the founder, this is not a robot. It's a family member. And there is 14 companies that are doing this, including Amazon, I think, called the Echo. So, as my good friend, Sophocles said, just recently, not in English, however, nothing else enters the life of mortals without a curse. All these things are becoming possible that I can have a robot in my bloodstream treating my cholesterol. I have high cholesterol. But all the unintended consequences of this and the possibility of saying, yes, you know, I can stop Alzheimer's by genetic engineering, I can also design a baby. And who would get to do that? So here we have issues that are basically like this, right? You can make nuclear power with nuclear energy. If you consider that good, I would consider that positive, possibly positive, right? If it works, it doesn't grow up. It grows. Technology is 98% the same. So artificial intelligence has the same potential. Has the vast potential of positive kinds of efficiency, optimization, and which company would not like to fire half of their employees, right? I mean, for practical reasons, it saves money, right? I mean, that's what companies do. They save money, maximize profit, pay themselves more shares. So that leads to the thing that we've seen in many movies like Minority Report. And then our good friend Mark Zuckerberg who we know for a weird respect to privacy and personal rights on Facebook he started a new company called Viterious where he's saying, we're building software that learns like a human. That's the headlight of this company, right? Of course, all the investors in Silicon Valley are salivating with excitement because we can copy humans with the software. That's apparently software that thinks like a human. We want to retain super intelligence using technology, right? That's the promise. So rather than having 500 people do now CRM or so or ERP or WCOL companies, we have two people. It's possible. Because we can use IBM Watson to decide who gets what and who gets fired. IBM has a chip called the neuro-synaptic chip. It's a chip that is mirrored after the human brain. This is already happening. Schwab is using a new thing called the intelligent portfolio which is a Volvo advisor. Schwab intends to swap out tens of thousands of people working for Schwab to advise people on financial investment with an iPad with something that lives on the network. So here's the problem with all of this stuff we have to discuss. Technology does not have ethics. And you know, if I speak in America people say, well, so for what? Ethics is nice to have. If we can afford it we can afford ethics these days. If I speak in Switzerland they say, oh my god. Sorry, this is important stuff, right? If technology doesn't have ethics would you trust a robot to take care of the social contract or the dorms or the values? How would a system like that even know about values? I mean, if it knew it it would have to be programmed into it, right? It's way too mushy for that to a federal to actually be done in this way, right? Everything's important to you. So moving into a world that is this on one hand completely digital and I would read with great it's inevitable, right? It's happening. There's not much we can do about that. On the other hand, we have this, right? That's what makes us human. And I'm not going to talk about religion or any of those things, right? I'm talking about just practical matters. Standards, codex, social contract. And those two things have to merge. Somehow. All these things. Will we let those companies that have invented the tech that makes $22 a year decide on what is good for us on a social level, right? That would not be a good idea. I mean, we already know that Facebook wants to be our government, right? Basically, replace the government. And that Google wants to be the OS that we live in. So what about consciousness and body? We do have a body, some of us. This was the problem, of course, in the movie Her. That's why it didn't work out, because it turns out if you see the movie Her, the computer was having sex with 484,850 other people at the same time, right? That's kind of a problem for the guy. But anyway, embodiment, awareness, sentiment, purpose, right? All those weird things. Human lives exist. 95% of that stuff. The rest is algorithm. The rest is algorithm. Upload in our brain? What a crazy idea, right? I mean, I can upload if I could do that. The pictures remain in my memory, right? But then we like saying, okay, I go to TripAdvisor, and everything that's good on TripAdvisor, I just go wherever it says it's good. You know TripAdvisor can be good, but mostly it's just a tiny slice of reality. It's useful, but it's not real. When you stand in front of the restaurant, you're looking inside, you're smelling the food, you see the people, you have 100% of reality in four seconds. Do you get that on TripAdvisor? No, it's useful, but it's not real. It's not the actual thing, right? Having sex with a cyber robot is not the same as having sex with your wife. And even though some people want us to believe that. So we're going to move in a world like this, a world that is machine things, something like this. What will our kids do? Will our kids be making the keyboard for the robot? I mean, that's not Kino's house, right? This time, it hasn't set me back full. But this time, technological unemployment is real. Very real. Because it's not just the stupid people who are doing like assembly stuff or sweeping the lawns or picking up on our machine, or the morning and fruit jobs. My color job is our jobs. In fact, this is for the first time this year, at a tech talk, there's going to be a robot giving a tech talk. Well, I don't think there's much of a difference. The other guys are robots as well. So, I mean, at a tech talk, after all, you just have to have a safe role and make money, then you're fine. But this time it's real, right? So Martin Luther King already said a few years ago, what's the difference? The basic income guarantee? That sounds like socialism? Maybe. Do we have a choice? When 50% of our kids aren't working, because there are no lowering improved jobs, and not everybody can be a designer, or a therapist, or a cook, or a carpenter for them. So the future of work related to this, will we write on top of technology or will it crush us? And I maintain that if we don't watch out, it will crush us. We need to take a look at this and say, what do we need to do to write on top of technology? Who will control this? Should it be the ones that make this? Not really. These companies are more powerful than any oil company, any energy company in the world. Data is the new oil. We should not allow those people to be unregulated. They won't be like saying, we PNX or more, but I don't have to regulate. It's about this, our future. This is going to happen. Actually, there's too many humans in the future. This will happen. Our future is this. What else is going on that is going on over here? What makes us human in terms of work? Everything that can be automated and everything else will explode in value. Can we automate understanding and we automate negotiation? Intuition? Imagination? Empathy? Some of it maybe. You can emulate, right? Sooner or later. Do you really want to live in a simulation? And that idea is, I think that matters. I mean, to voluntarily want to do that. Sorry. Isn't that causing of that? Don't animate that. About the future of work. This is 50 years ago or something. He says he doesn't want to be a speed reader. Somebody that can do this becomes super great. He wants to be a speed understanding. Our only chance in the future is to be speed understanding. Because that's what we can do, right? Understanding stuff. If you have a tough person in court, a business challenge, an environmental challenge, you need people to understand stuff, not just store stuff. Most interaction between people when people are speaking is not about what I say. It's about what I don't say. What do you see in between the lines? I mean, that's the important part. That's how you would know you can trust me or not. Of what I don't say. So how much do you believe in technology? You know, the Holy Grail is technology can solve all that stuff. We have to sign up and say, yes, I agree with the terms of views. I think human existence is a lot more than that. A lot more than turning it into what I do. Now, this has precedent. This cart held in 1662. That basically an animal is a machine. And can't be copied to be like a machine, right? So people have built animal ducks. Unfortunately, the original one got lost by Hopesong. There's a bunch of other ones that are actually not that you can feed. It goes to Kamzath Yavan. It's a machine, right? That has been referred to as reductionism. Reducing apparatus into the most essential part. Can't the duck eat it? Yes, so it's a duck, right? That is stupid. I mean, think about that for a second. And we are people because we can set up an engine at once. We weren't downloaded. We were born. For the time being. And guess what? There are people who won't have to be downloaded or uploaded, right? That is a very bad idea. I mean, works both ways, right? Project ourselves into this and then everything that we do is mediated and shared in some way. Think about this for a second. When you're watching a clip on video on YouTube or wherever and you look at this and it's quite nice to see stuff like that. We can see everything now, really. It's 5 to 10% of that reality that we're watching through a mediating object at the screen. When you're on the beach in Goa, like I was just a few days ago in Kerala, on this very beach here, I get 100% of what it actually is. The mediated experience is not the same as the actual experience. It's not. It's nice to have. It's useful. But it's an approximation. And technology has the potential of saying we can use it to self-inforce itself to actually amplify itself. That will be a very, very tough choice. I mean, look at this. What about this, the social contract? We don't need a social contract for artificial intelligence. It says, why do we do this? How can we do it? Who is it for? Who benefits for it? It's just as important as nuclear energy. I'll be talking very soon. This little bubble thing here shows basically what I think is the future. We have two bubbles. We have the technology bubble and then we have the human bubble. And what we need to do is figure out a way that it fits together. We cannot stop technology. We don't want to stop technology. We want to become technology because, you know, it makes money. It works for some people, but it would not work for me. We have to think about what I call the human imperative. The ultimate goal of business is happiness. It's actually not to make money. I mean, make it money is the result of happiness, right? Or the other way around. The state of Bhutan has a principle of gross national happiness. They're defining it as GDP. So what we need to think about is, what is that imperative? Where does it go? Because things are now disrupted, like Uber is disrupting the taxi industry, right? They also have to construct stuff. They also have to come up and start and fit. So I'll try to slide here. This is a key question, right? Who would believe humanity because, you know, it's cumbersome. It's wetwear. It's complicated. You know, it's not efficient, not productive, it's not, you know, optimized, whatever, right? Or do we make it do this? No one should do this. Deliberate us to do what we could do best. Not myself. Thanks very much for your time.