 The cable car dilemma and self-driving cars Good evening Will come into these often and for Welcome to the open forum Life in 2030 I'm Zanni Minton betters from the Economist Delighted to be back here Moderating another one of these terrific open forums and this is an extraordinarily important and interesting subject Life in 2030. I think you don't need me to tell you that we are on the brink of a revolution Technologically, I believe the World Economic Forum likes to call it the fourth industrial revolution It's the convergence of many things artificial intelligence Genome editing big data all manner of things together and what we're gonna talk about tonight We're gonna do a little futurology. We're going to ask this extraordinary distinguished panel What are they going to be? What do they think will be the game-changing technologies? How precisely will these technologies change life? What are the if any social moral ethical concerns? We might have and how do we make sure these technologies change life for the better, but before we do that I wanted to get a sense of the Optimism or pessimism about technology in the room So I wanted to know show of hands to see whether you think life will be better or worse in 2030 Will you raise your hand if you think life will be better in 2030 than it is today? But I would say that's less than half. What do you think? Good crowd, okay. Good crowd Well, we'll see if we can have every hand raised by the end or whether then no have no hands raised but to answer these questions a Really fabulous group of people here, and I'm just gonna introduce them all very briefly Eric Anderson chairman of planetary holdings USA. Eric is a space entrepreneur He is for example a founder of a company that does asteroid mining I'm sorry And then next right we have Jennifer Doudna professor of chemistry and molecular and cell biology at the University of California Berkeley Then Neta Farahani professor law and philosophy at Duke University Then we have Thomas Hendrick Ilvers President of Estonia, but also a man who learned to program at 13 I gather and then Andrew Moore Dean of the School of Computer Science at Carnegie Mellon I'm sure you will agree that this is an extraordinarily distinguished panel and if that any group of five people can tell us with some Confidence what the world will be like in 2030. It is this group So what I thought we'd do to start with is just literally go around the five of you and tell me what you think will be the most important game Changing technology or technologies and Jennifer. Why don't we start with you? well, I would say that The things that come to mind with that question are genome editing and genome engineering Which is what I do and I'm sure we'll talk more about that That means being able to change the DNA and cells very precisely, but I also think things like energy storage data sort of big data manipulation Sustainability figuring out how to have more sustainable sources of energy and chemicals are all also going to be equally game-changing All right. What do you think? Well given my background in space, I would say The advent of ultra low-cost highly reliable space travel It will open up the solar system it will Look in order for humanity to prosper, you know for for for If we want future generations to have the same levels of growth and prosperity and quality of life that we've had We need access to more resources. We need to use energy from space. We need resources from space We need to live in space and that's going to be enabled by low-cost space travel, which will happen by 2030 Neeta we're going to come back to all of these. Don't worry. We're just getting a sense of where everybody is I'm still stunned by that, but yes So I think two things one is the quantified self So many people here probably are already wearing different kinds of fitness trackers and other ways to measure Information about ourselves, and I think that kind of access to our self And learning about our self and empowering us to take control of our health and to understand better What's happening is going to be incredibly powerful and particularly on that front I think some of the abilities to decode what's happening in our brain through the quantified self like the consumer-based EEG devices that enable you to read the activity in your brain and the second I think is getting an understanding of the microbiome so you know most of what we are is actually Made up of the bacteria that we cohabitate with and understanding the relationship between our Bacterial selves and the rest of ourselves. I think is going to be incredibly powerful Thomas, what are you? What do you think it will be? Well, I think that well first and foremost anything that is based on the digital revolution if we have eight iterations of Moore's law between now and 2030 which means basically you every chip for the same cost will be Two to the eighth times more powerful than it is today Figure out what to the eighth is you can do it You'll be part of the future if you can't figure out two to the eighth you're gonna have a harder time In the countries in which people can figure out two to the eighth. I mean sort of in their head Will be way ahead of the countries where people generally can't and I think this will lead to a reordering of power relationships in the world And I think in fact Europe Europe if it doesn't get its act together both in education and in also its legal system and approach to digital issues digital single markets Or becomes protectionist will fall behind in countries like India have huge potential To become major players not in the traditional military sense as we've had up till now But in fact as a primary source of innovation The last addition to me just that and big data to be together with the genome I should also say I think we'll have a huge role as well Andrew, what's your Well, firstly, I have to agree with each of these Panelists so far and that's not fun by the way. We're kind of find a way to disagree with each other later one of the I come from Carnegie Mellon University where we have 500 faculty and students spending their entire careers working on artificial intelligence so we spent a lot of time thinking about what the introduction of artificial intelligence means to the world and For 2030 there's one prediction, which I'm fairly confident about and this is a branch of AI a lot of us called cognitive assistants, which is basically the little Speaker on your shoulder giving you advice all the time. So one thing I've noticed that Davos has been the big CEOs and the statesman wondering around often are accompanied by assistance with clipboards and calendars on the phone and checking ahead to make sure everything's ready for them and if you look at how Things like Apple Siri and the Google search engine and other systems like that are evolving more and more They're helping with these kinds of cognitive assistants. So by 2030. I expected an elementary school teacher It will be as though he or she walking into the classroom has a bunch of experts around them reminding them you know what Betty was looking miserable last like lesson see if you can find out what's going on or Watch out. There's a warning that the weather is going to get bad and the kids might be alarmed so I'm imagining a world where we all have a bunch of Cognitive assistants helping us and that's not just a convenience. It will be very transformative in how we work Well, alas, I don't have a cognitive assistant helping me right now. So I'm going to try and pull these together Without that help, but this is an extraordinarily broad range. So we have genome editing. We have Ultra cheap and reliable space travel. We have the quantified self We have the broad big data digital revolution and we have cognitive assistants now I want to ask each of you because I think you're and you Thomas you you mentioned this one question is how These all interact and how these all come together and so for the two of you who and I think genome editing and the quantified self are in the sort of a health Biological side of things are we going to have Jennifer designer babies by 2030? Yes What does that mean? Can you can you explain what it would what will the process of will we be able to choose our Offsprings, you know eye color and so forth and because that will then raise lots of questions Tell us what life will be like in 2030 in terms of genome editing Well, that's 14 years away and right now, you know, we have the technology to make very precise changes in essentially any kind of cell including in human embryos and it's actually already been done by a group in China and and so that you know, what's coming I think in the future is is the the Potential to make changes to the human genome that will give us, you know Cures for disease as well as potentially what one might term enhancements. However, you want to define that I think something that I think two things really hold us back right now One is ethical challenges figuring out how to how to deal with that societally and the other is frankly just our Lack of knowledge about the genome We don't yet know enough to be able to really make the kind of program changes that that you're talking about But but it's coming and I would like to just add that I actually think this connects very importantly to to what what Eric said about About space travel because I think that if you want to have humans traveling in space We're clearly going to need to have genome editing to protect ourselves from the radiation damage and all sorts of others Things will come up in in a in that unique environment of space and we can talk more about that Eric I'm gonna come to you and whether we need to have a genome editing for space travel in a second But Nita what's your take on that? Do you think Jennifer's right that we'll be there and does that how does that fit with the? Quantified self. I mean we also going to have people living for you know forever because they are able to monitor their health Well enough, right, maybe they won't need to if they've already been edited, right? So I agree with Jennifer I think we will certainly have The ability to create so-called designer babies. We already do have that ability not Yet doing it aside from in non viable embryos For gene editing, but what we already do is a lot of different design, right? So we start by choosing the person that we want to have children with and that's already Choosing some selection about what their genome will look like We already have pre implantation genetic selections So people who do in vitro fertilization that is they go through a means of extracting an egg from a woman extracting sperm from The male putting them together can then screen those before they're actually transferred and people are already doing that I think the question is how What concerns should we have about that and one of the concerns we should have right now about doing it on a scale with something like gene editing is How safe is it for the future generations? What does it mean to be? Manipulating our genomes rather than using a process of selection And what does that look like for the next generation and the generation after that? What does it look like to the human genome and to the kind of broad process of evolution? Are we gonna get to the point by 2030 where we feel comfortable enough that that could be used in our germ line? Something that's passed on in future generations as opposed to gene therapies, which would just affect the current generation And we have to wonder what that society looks like. So What kinds of things are gonna be okay to select and edit? So, you know, is it gonna be okay to pick first, you know Very serious diseases that are just one point in the genome the answer is yes, probably will probably very be very comfortable with that Then is it okay to choose some treats like for example? If we could quantify and understand the many different things that contribute to intelligence, can we start to manipulate that? And what does that look like and does that trade off with other traits that we might have? Does it trade off with creativity? Does it trade off with diversity? Does it create a kind of super? Elite that is more competitive than the other groups of individuals and who's doing it? so if we have individual parents and couples making choices about Things that they want to enhance in their children that might be very different than state-sponsored choices where Governments are making decisions about what kinds of things need to be edited and what kinds of shaping of the population might look like and so The kind of broad concern about eugenics would come into play depending on in whose hands it's in that all plays in with the Quantity of Health because in part we may live a lot longer life expectancy has already increased just in our lifetimes But what does it mean when you take the kind of data that you get from the genome? starting from the time that a person is an embryo and You have that now fully quantified so before the person is ever born, you know everything about their genome all of the Predispositions that we know to date How does that affect how we interact with that person what opportunities we give that person what? Limitations we put on what kinds of things that person to participate in these are all issues We're gonna have to grapple with They are and you've raised an enormous number of them and it will be societies that grapple with that So I was gonna turn to you Thomas because I think of everybody here you you you are in the political system How will societies and politicians cope with this and and you know need to raise the huge number of very fundamental questions And if she's right they're gonna be facing us in the next decade or so well, I think the the first concern would be just With social Luda ludicism Which would be sort of being a ludic or sort of anti-technical approach In some of the most modern societies, which you don't see in a lot of other countries And this is I think especially a problem in Europe I mean sort of basic stuff. I would say that if we don't get a digital single market in Europe We will fall behind very quickly and very badly That if we don't if we don't understand the nature of security of computers Which basically I think is on a bad model today Because if they are insecure Again, we will see far more Devastating attacks third of all, I think one of the crucial issues that will come up Is it up till now most of our fears when it comes to computers have been associated with? Privacy, I think this will be overtaken it should be overtaken by the Fears about data integrity and the difference would be that I don't really Would not like it or someone knows for example my blood type But if my record of my the record of my blood type is changed by someone that will have devastating Consequences now thinking ahead that we when we see more and more of our industry being run By computers talking to machines and to other computers and and so forth data integrity someone changing those data can have disastrous disastrous effects Stuxnet was probably the first sort of well-known case of actually Changing data. I mean it affected data integrity, but if we think of a world which in 14 years will be So computer-based as it is today So it based and we think of the security issues that come up with this We will probably have self-driving cars and trucks Quite a bit on the streets in 14 years. I mean we already have basically computer-based cars. I mean it's already an issue but when they are Automatic driving cars Data integrity again will become the one issue. So I think that's where the And I'm gonna ask you about data integrity in a second But I just wanted to push you a little bit further because some of the things that Nita mentioned Were choices that the societies make do you ban for example? the editing of germ cells Societies can choose to do that Or do you say actually this is a good thing on balance for humanity? What do you think the role of the of politicians is should they be embracing this or should there be a kind of precautionary principle when it comes to the Bio-side that we've been discussing But bio I don't know. I mean it's Because I Mean it really if you look at even in the European Union for example attitudes towards abortion across the European Union I think that they will correlate highly with attitudes towards genetic manipulation I mean I assume that would be the European Union has a pretty tough attitude or precautionary attitude was to Dementically modified food. So it's not everyone but it's the majority does But I think we will see other kinds of issues. Well, I mean we see a Difference in the European Union towards sort of completely Well new technologies that have will have tremendous economic effects uber which should be called uber But it's called uber I mean is is to represents one case of a huge revolution in the way Taxi or transportation is being done. I mean taxis Have worked basically on a 19th century economic model and then now we see in countries uber being banned Now well, I don't know if you have that kind of protectionist attitude I think we will be some countries will start falling quickly behind and those are that those are the issues where Where our politicians will have to resist? populist populist Reactions that one is relatively easier the tough one. I think is is is the human genome and and let's call it just to be Simple designer babies. Let's see what the audience thinks how many of you think governments should allow The gene editing for enhancement very few that's interesting But isn't correct follow up to that just to see so Assume that there is at least one major country that allows it and So that country May gain a significant competitive advantage Sure If we want to name a country So in that case then how many people would want your country to also allow it Okay, right. How many will be against I'm sorry How many would you how many of you would allow the editing of genes for the enhancement of children to make them more? Intelligent to all of those things. How many of you would allow that? But what if you what if you what if you had identified a disease that you could fix by gene editing Well, I'm asking This is this is very interesting the light there are more people putting their hands up there. Let's let me um I I'd like to jump in with a quick comment on this discussion One of the things that's happening and this this transcends between artificial intelligence large data and genomes is when we have discussions a lot of us and my faculty and many of the scientists working with thinking about How do we deal with Alzheimer's? How do we deal with hunger? How do we deal with first many big problems in this short-ish term and it's We're so interested in solving these sometimes I feel it's a shame if we spend a lot of time projecting Like the extreme science fiction versions of these things before we've dealt with it so I wouldn't want to see the European government or some Senator in the United States saying you know what it's possible that we could have really weird Human babies around so don't even look at Dealing with Alzheimer's or cancer using gene editing very similar questions with artificial intelligence and frankly as you've rightly pointed out if If one government or even most governments do try to stop one of these things It won't work any way because someone in the world is going to use these things if there's a big benefit That's a very important point and I'm going to get to lots of I know lots of you have comments and questions You want to make and we'll get to that in a second But I just want to push you a little bit more on another area that is if you look at the combination of big data and These areas does that mean that? The traditional notion of privacy is essentially dead that we the privacy is a something that we should just forget about now What's going to be happening and we actually see this going now is that different companies are offering different services And the market will decide some people offer a very privacy Protecting thing where your personal data is known as encrypted at rest on your own device Which you have physical access to and all the times you want convenient things like here Get me a get me the Swiss version of the drug that I need to take That will be very hard because there will be lots of layers of encryption other people will be sort of lazier and actually say I'm okay with my data being in the cloud. Please make sure you have systems preventing Telemarketers from getting hold of it But I love the convenience and people will vote with their feet on this I'm expecting that the youngsters will put it on the cloud and we'll have convenience us Krabby oldsters will probably have it encrypted at rest on our devices and it will be a natural thing rather than a force thing Which way we go except these standings. So haven't encrypted on the cloud So That I'd written down privacy actually one of my my points. I think it even goes beyond that and and I'll even say Every single problem that we've identified here is actually a digital Problem every company is a software company now Problems that used to be mechanical like space travel for example are actually software problems now Biology is a software problem It's all about the information and in order for us to live in a society where where we can best use that the entire model of data and information ownership will change and So while it's absolutely true that Some of us will choose to give up privacy in order for convenient services We should still have that choice and right now we don't We don't and so I think that I think that one other big change is going to be that we will have to embrace a method of controlling of Allowing individuals to know what data what you know all the digital parts that define them whether it's the giant their DNA or Where they spend their money or whatever it is and What part of that they want others to have access to how they would have access to it what they would use it for How long it would live all those sorts of things There's gonna there's gonna be a whole new legal structure that needs to get set up And maybe it'll get fought out as you say but eventually it will it has to happen that way Because otherwise it's not gonna be a very good world. There'll be a lot of a lot of problems if we don't do it right Well, I think that the privacy debate has to also focus on the real issue. I mean after the Snowden revelations I mean everyone is paranoid about Big Brother if I mean if you have even one Free app you've downloaded on your smartphone You you've already given up your privacy because these are not good Samaritans developing these These wonderful apps. They are they are monetizing your data And so if you download even one free app, whatever it is I mean they're making money off it those data are going up to some are going out to someone and You know, especially if you're doing a health care App, you know your private data They're all out there and someone's making money from it So I think we have to realize where the problem lies and then sort of adjust who and what we're criticizing well Tom if I may call you Tom the He said it was okay in the back room. So Mr. President but It is already becoming a massive problem because every week we read about another hack where 25 million US government employee Applications with all the things that could be used against them by foreign governments were compromised Where you know this company in the next company now is not able to even control the data that they've collected And so that's gonna get worse It's gonna be we have to find a way to fix that model. We're not gonna fix the model by you know Preventing all hacking, but we need to find ways and I do actually think it involves a legal and policy framework I'll answer that. Yes. Sorry. Sorry. Okay. I'll just say that I mean the problem is that the whole internet thing Which began with a thousand geeks communicating each other over bit net. I mean today we have you know Two-thirds of the world commuting on the internet. We have to get over the single address password model We already have the chip-based technology for two-factor identification. I mean you we solve that problem It's not it's just implementing it. It's not even legal. I say if you have it it works There's no reason but that will have to happen by 2030 because otherwise I mean, I don't know how big an accident will have to have to do that But I don't know. I hope the US government starts using two-factor and Identification and Yeah, you wanted to jump in yeah, so so I think beyond two-factor identification is Authentication is using neural signatures past thoughts. So it turns out every person Thinks quite differently about maybe the same thing So you could think a song a little diddy in your head while you are wearing a consumer-based EEG device And then that which has a unique neural signature can be used as your passcode and turns out that's an incredibly Effective and incredibly safe almost impossible to replicate passcode. And so there's discussion about using past thought And this is just one of the many different ways in which I think we will ultimately end up Adopting things like consumer-based EEG devices that we're wearing all the time And then you've got to really talk about privacy, right because now when you are not just Because you're interested in your data wearing an EEG device that reads your brain activity at all times But you're sharing it with your computer and with software and with apps And it's all now part of the free apps that you are sharing with not good Samaritans We have a lot of information down to decoding what you're thinking What your mental health is the progress toward Alzheimer's that you may be experiencing in the cloud and being shared And so the question is What do we do in that world and I think the idea that law is really going to help us is Not likely and the reason I think it's not that likely is I think the flow of information is very difficult to stop I think the way in which law can be helpful is Starting to think about misuse rather than the flow of information and we can't possibly know every way in which Your data will be misused against you But it will be collected it will go into the cloud Tremendous amounts of information already is and so instead of trying to stop the flow of information Which I think is impossible we should be thinking about what does the world look like in which there's a tremendous amount of information about all of us out There how do we control against certain kinds of misuse and how do we accept that our society looks very different in a transparent world Then it did in the more cloaked world But if you have that even if you have a past thought and I have to say I'm still getting my head around the idea of having a past thought and we just recorded that Presumably in the in the world that you're laying out You're gonna have so much ability to collect Information and data about the other person whether they've given you the past thought or not that the Individuality of data is going to be much less relevant because there'll be so many other ways of collecting information and maybe Jennifer isn't that particularly true of Biometric data too. I think it is I mean I think what's coming You know there's you hear a lot of talk about personalized medicine and I think that you know What's coming in the not too distant future with the price of human genome sequencing dropping is that people will have You know have their their genetic data on a chip or maybe it's in the cloud or maybe it's both and and furthermore they will have increasing access to other anonymized Data from from others so that that it'll be possible to really map out You know genes and populations that are clearly giving people a predisposition to certain types of diseases And then furthermore with genome editing then we then we have a technology that allows action on those genes And so I think the combination of those two things together Really big data big sort of challenges with data analysis that come up The whole privacy issue that you're talking about is huge and and then of course the ethical question of you know When when is it okay to act on that information and then when is it not I? Tell you why I agree with some of what you're saying, but I think that there there has to be a Policy framework that emerges because you don't understand how much already And I'm not picking on Facebook, but I guess I'll pick on Facebook They know so much about you It'll be soon to the point where because of what you put on Facebook and your preferences and things like that They can predict how you vote they can predict how you will React to an advertisement that might make you vote in a certain way and affect a political process And so at some point something bad Hopefully not too bad, but something bad will you don't hopefully Get us to the point where we recognize that we need a new model of data ownership It should be the individual's choice if you want to share share share it all if you don't want to share So then can I jump in because yeah some of these are Technology problems some of them are policy problems. I want to be clear on the technology The large internet companies at the moment are really trying hard not to associate your your cookies or other Telemetry with an individual, but they are trying to use it to help derive what they think is useful to you there's the The problem of data security preventing hackers that's very serious. I really like the idea of past thoughts and Actually just good software design a main problem in cyber security right now is lazy software engineers such as myself There is that there there are platforms and the big companies are really working on this to not have those kinds of holes What's really frightening to many of us who've actually come out of the internet company world is that people are going to be faced with a Very difficult dilemma. Sometimes it's useful to reveal something. It really helps your safety to reveal that You're allergic to some particular Food in a restaurant. So you want to release that to the right people? I've heard many people Worried about privacy, especially this kind of elective release of information about yourself there's a Presentation here at Davos this this time around from Laurie Craner about technology which Actually helps educate the users to give permission via their cell phone to what kind of person is going to have what sort of Privacy available to them and educates the user back because I can't understand all the apps and what they know about me And I do need some kind of assistant who's going to tell me hey you can share this It'll be useful, but make sure you understand that this other person will know about you But let's be honest whenever we go to a new website you want to buy something You have to register you get an account. There's that little box. It says check the box. Otherwise, you can't buy it Does anybody ever read that? No Well very few people read it and they should and and they're you know, it's just too easy now to do that At this point because we've raised an awful lot of clearly very contentious issues particularly about privacy But also about the ethics of gene editing at the beginning. Let's have a first round of questions Or comments from the audience, but keep them relatively short because I'm sure a lot of you will want to get involved Yes, is that a lady at the back there? Do you know what I need I need genetically an enhancement very very early. I'm very short-sighted So I will now put my glasses on So yeah, my question was I made a serious mistake My question was back to the these designer babies Let's say you somehow fail to produce a super elite child I mean the chance is low, but you somehow fail it will have some sickness or it'll be autistic or something like that How do you justify or who do you give the responsibility to to take care of this child? Would it be your company or would it be the parents that did not actually wish for such a child? What what would you do? I mean you can't just kill a baby or it's at least a very unpopular opinion So that's a wonderful question And you know believe it or not we already have seen some of these types of legal cases in cases where Not through designer babies in the way that we're talking about it today with gene editing but through in vitro fertilization things have gone wrong and What's happened? Of course is that the parents who are the intending parents have the responsibility for the child Just as they would have the responsibility for any child that they bring into existence and yet They also have been bringing suits legal suits cases Against the doctors who got it wrong the companies who got it wrong because it can be enormously expensive and far more Expensive than the parent expected now it'll be really interesting when instead of producing an unhealthy child or producing a child that is not actually the Father who wanted to be the father's sperm that and it's somebody else's sperm that you're using if what instead you're talking about It is a perfectly healthy child But a child who isn't as competitive as another child and interestingly there was a very controversial case in the u.s Not too long ago where a couple Had gone on to the internet and this was a lesbian couple had gone on to the internet and it ordered some sperm and they expected the sperm to be of Caucasian Backgrounds and it turned out instead that it was African-American and they lived in a very Prejudice area a very racist area and the claim that they brought was that They had given birth to a child that they thought we're gonna have was gonna have Significant and competitive issues in the society that they faced and this didn't go anywhere because it was such an unpopular Kind of claim to be making but it's certainly of the nature of the kind of claim that you're suggesting Which is how are you gonna deal with those issues where you have a perfectly healthy child just a child Who might be less competitive than other children and I think they will sue the company They will sue the doctor and we as a society will have to decide if those are suits that we're gonna hear and if we're going to Compensate them or if instead that's simply Something that we think is too distasteful to be actually litigated Too distasteful to be awarding a parent who says I wish that I had a smarter better more competitive child Of course the u.s. Is far more litigious than much of the rest of the world What would happen in Europe? It really depends on the individual jurisdiction in Estonia. What would happen? They might win but they wouldn't get much The u.s. Is extremely litigious which brings up a larger point that There the rate of technological advancement you've heard about here. Everything is turning into an information technology Countries better keep up the law better keep up Way faster than it's been keeping up so far Very a very clear example which is troubling to a lot of the roboticist at Carnegie Mellon right now Where we believe that from cars that are smart about Accidents can save a huge number of lives and very smart cars Autonomous cars or just cars with smart crash avoidance We introduced them. Maybe maybe we dream of getting Deaths on the road down by a factor of 10 that will be awesome But when we write the software and the president of Estonia will appreciate this We have to specify everything that this car is thinking while it's trying to save lives some parts of that software will have will have to make a decision such as Do I protect the driver or do I protect the mother and child that are in front of the car? That's really hard. We computer scientists don't want to write that code But we also feel we have a responsibility to because once we've written it and it's out there We'll save huge numbers of lives. So this is where I Don't want to say it's alarming because of these terrible edge cases because if we do that we're accepting the responsibility for Maybe of maybe preventing the saving of tens of thousands of lives in each country every year through extra safety But as we do this technology as in the case of these very difficult decisions about genetics and these very difficult decisions about how you actually deal with human life In an autonomous situation, you have to face the questions my big pushes. We have to face these questions We can't just say these are really hard. Let's not bother with using technology to improve our lives Can I tell you how are you doing that? You clearly have a lot of your colleagues are writing this code We don't have legal clarity on this. What decisions are you making? We are absolutely not Releasing autonomous car technology from Carnegie Mellon into the actual use until you're writing the code so you're making the the the decisions Right now, even if you're not releasing the car Our faculty are exploring these things and so of course in the code We we actually try out these one of our faculty has spent the last two years devoted to the question of an animal is in front of the car should the car be Valuing the animals life at all. I think half the people in this room would say the human life trumps everything But when we release that piece of code and the number of animal deaths in Europe and the United States goes up by a Factor of ten and the number of human deaths goes down by one. I'm not sure that folks will be pleased with us This is an ethical problem of every sort of ethics one-on-one class And it has to do with cable cars in San Francisco and they can end the sort of who's in front and who dies But but I would recommend if you're interested in these issues things MIT Journal had a wonderful write-up of this It is the this issue becomes very big with autonomous cars And of course then we can add to that what I started out with is that if the data are corrupted by some means that are in that the Autonomous car uses then then we're in a whole different realm So a few years ago we started my partners and I started an asteroid mining company Now one of the questions is well if you're gonna go to an asteroid and mine it and take the materials and do something with it Who owns it right? What right do we have to do that versus anyone else? So we started building technology at the same time we started working with policymakers, and if you can believe this Not withstanding all my good friends in that wonderful institution of the US Congress It's pretty dysfunctional, but we managed to get a law passed signed by President Obama just two months ago that lays out the legal framework for the rights to mine asteroids and So you've got to address those things together. It has to be done. So how did it turn out? How do you Yeah, I'm sure this will generate some debate Fascinating subject, but it is going to quickly switch into one about you know, US hegemonic tendencies. So let's just There's a gentleman here with the question all within the context of the 1968 outer space treaty and any other country can do the same thing Read the law it's good Quick question. It's very optimistic, and I'm very optimistic, but the elephant in the room artificial intelligence good bad some People like gates How can's other have raised alarm and the word that you're describing is a fantastic word if What is the if and how what's your view? And we start with you is that is that is the and there it's not there are a number of big names of worried about you know The the outer reaches of artificial intelligence will be run by by nasty robots It is something which comes up frequently and there's two separate problems. There is the Problem that maybe someone comes up with a computer which thinks for itself None of us have any idea how to do that But I would put it up there with the danger that by shooting probes into space and alien civilization will see us or wash us out Or that nanotechnology will leads to gray goo which destroys us these are real risks There's even if we wanted to do that hopefully no one's mad enough to want to do it. No one's going to get to that within decades Right now and this this does face the AI researchers all the time right now We have people trying to use the power of machine learning and computer vision to actually help people's lives right now in the Audience there is Maya Pancek who's being worked using computer vision to really help Autistic kids learn to function and help to actually train people how to help them It's a wonderful use of artificial intelligence right now for many of us in the field it is sort of frustrating that we're trying to do so much for the now and Getting damaged by something which is just a complete Technological question mark no one knows how it would happen if it did happen and none of the computer programs we write at the moment Have any kind of awareness or sense of self they are very large complicated calculators So I'm I like you I'm an optimist so I am a technological optimist And I think that there's great promise of all the technologies we're talking about today including artificial intelligence We already live with a tremendous amount of artificial intelligence and it's improving our lives in a lot of ways But I'll raise just a few concerns that I have about it that we really have to address So one I want to echo the issue of data integrity It isn't you know that it isn't just is the data right but can it be hacked into so we don't need Artificial intelligence that thinks for itself. We need In order to have some sort of danger or concern if it is hackable It can be controlled by somebody else and so one of the big fears with self-driving vehicles and Autonomous vehicles is what happens when it's hacked And so this is what the program right now says to do which is to choose the human life over the animal or To choose the mother and child over the driver vice versa But what happens when somebody goes into the program and changes it all in a single day Uses it for an act of terrorism uses it To cause significant mayhem and that can happen because we're not that good yet a data security and protection It raises the question of what it means to be human how much of the brain computer interface and how much of the cooperation between human and Machines do we get to before we start to lose something that is what we think the essence of what it means to be us today? And I don't have a good answer to that question because we've already incorporated so much technology into our lives And we have we evolve what we think it means to be human and again I'm an optimist who believes that we will find a way but Can you get to a point where you end up taking away so much of humanity that the Subjective compassionate pieces that allow us to interconnect as a society get traded off for efficiency and other types of calculations that diminish the flourishing of being a human well Society society humanity is becoming more and more powerful First we had fire it burned us we learned how to use that You know many generations ahead. We figured out how to harness the power of the atom It's both our most destructive force But it's also a force that keeps people warm and powers, you know half the world whatever the number is the same is true of all these other things they require rules and Again, the rules better be there pretty quickly because we're reaching the point where the acceleration in all of these areas of technology Is on morse law when hardware problems become software problems when all companies are software companies It's all accelerating at morse law and who should make the rules Well our government should make the rules Let me push you on that because you are you are the person who says that very soon We're gonna have cheap interspace travel and we're gonna do it because it may not be so nice here We're going to need other other planets to live on Actually, that's not what I said. I said I didn't say that we were gonna do it for that reason We're doing I did I said we are gonna have You need more resources. We're gonna need more resources to ensure greater prosperity on earth But also and I so I could see how you could interpret that that way And I maybe should have communicated that better, but my the other major thing which will be one of the Great moments in the history of life on par with a single cell organism becoming a multi-cell organism Is that we will become a multi-planetary species? Okay, well, let's take as given we're going to within 14 years start to become a multi-planetary species You more than anybody on this panel have focused on the need for legal frameworks How are we going to create a legal framework for a multi-planetary species very carefully who's gonna do it? It's a great question. I'm not saying I have the answer. I'm an engineer. I'm an entrepreneur Please maybe she has the answer I'll just I mean this is a serious problem even today not to mention 14 years into planetary travel No, the legal framework to deal with modern technology And as I said in we we see within the European Union today an unwillingness even to Allow cross-border digital services and no I mean if you can't do that because there is no legal possibility there was a result of the safe harbor court or the court decision safe harbor all data Protection goes back to 28 nation states where the national data protection agency then becomes responsible We haven't had any disasters yet But it could be that you know one country decides that no we won't send that data out and if you happen to be driving a Mercedes The automatic car soon you might finally get to the Swiss border and you can't cross it because the data can't be transferred to you Now this is all hypothetical but the point is our legal system is so far behind our Current level of technology not to mention future levels and this comes down to I often I mean Expand a bit there was one of the crucial essays I think of today was actually written 1959 by CP snow called the two cultures in which CP snow was a physical chemist Who was also a literary novelist at at Cambridge? He was I mean he said he was the only person who could talk to the physics physicists chemists and Other people at one table eating and then and also go and sit with the poets and the novelists and the Shakespeare scholars and drink The problem of it he wrote about the problem of the university Today it is a problem writ large at least in democratic societies where you have geeks who don't understand the ethical implications of what they're doing Designing all kinds of new wonderful things that may intrude in your privacy And then you have lawmakers who at the current level of Science and math education probably couldn't do a simple Euclidean proof from that We used to be able to do at age 12 Yeah, so So being in the rarefied position of being a legal scholar with a science background as well I hope that I can address some of the scientific issues for a moment and say I As a legal scholar want to say yes, the answer is in law that we can solve all of these problems but law doesn't keep up and I'm not sure that it should be the solution so I sit on President's commission for bioethics in the US and we've been spending some time thinking about a lot of these complex issues and Emerging technologies. What is a system of governance? So on the one hand you could take an approach that's a precautionary approach and simply say you don't bring anything to market until you Know all of the risk and you can deal with them that isn't the approach that That we've taken or that I personally take because I think technology will progress and it's a good thing for it to Progress and you can't know all the rest you have to be able to act in the face of risk And so how do you do it? And I think part of the way you do it is through the process of deliberative democracy That is engaging far more of the stakeholders to be part of the conversation Rather than leaving it up to the government to decide and to tell us what the answer should be so you know while 500 faculty and students are working on these problems on artificial intelligence and far more worldwide I hope that what they're doing is engaging stakeholders in conversation rather than just programming For themselves to figure out how do you make the trade-off? And I assume if somebody spent two years doing that that part of the reason that they spent two years doing the question of the animals And the human lives is they're engaging people in a broad process of deliberative democracy So the question of do we want designer babies? Do we want artificial intelligence has to start by having a Large societal conversation across the globe maybe across the planets And in order to figure out what we as a people want And to have that govern rather than simply then having law because law will lag behind It has to be a partnership between the public and the government the government can't decide for us It has to inform those choices. I'm gonna take you at your word and then conduct a little bit of Participatory Conversation into this conversation now because we have been hogging the floor a lot. Yes gentlemen there seven rows back Yeah, I wanted to dig into the space mining a little bit asteroid mining. Sorry I mean fascinating clearly all the molecules that are on this planet came from outer space So it makes absolute sense, but there's the problem of gravity And the difficulty of reentry. So could you expand a little bit more? What you're gonna mine is that mainly for to stay in orbit to construct things in orbit or maybe to bring it to the moon where Entry is a little bit easier than bringing it back down to earth. I mean how far Developed are your plans around that pretty far developed? I'll give a quick answer. So there's there's lots of different Things that we mine for on earth and there will be lots of different things we mine for in space The first thing we'll do is turn ice on asteroids into fuel fuel is what lets you get around and essentially create the gas stations in space to put Satellites and place them in different orbits and do it much less expensively To go places to bring that cost way way way down We also bring materials back that we need platinum group metals platinum group metals came from space There are no platinum group metals that exists on the earth surface that didn't originate from an asteroid impact We've been mining asteroids for centuries. We've just been doing it on earth And by the way the point I wanted to make about the legal structure is in 1968 Everybody in the world was worried about who was gonna get to the moon first The Soviet Union or the United States and guess what? They got it together and they made the outer space training and the outer space treaty of 1968 said that whoever got there first Couldn't claim it as part of their country So that was a problem. You know it took some rocket launches and some demonstrations of a threat to figure it out But they did and now the problems are accelerating faster So my whole point in that whole thing was just that we need to speed up this parallel technology development with Rulemaking and policymaking and things like that There was a gentleman here. Yes Could you just wait for the microphone? Thank you. If artificial intelligence exists one day How could we as a society resist to the temptation to give them the key of government? because it would be better than human and other question if we can defeat disease and Defeat death. How could we resist the temptation to live? 300 500 1,000 year and what will happen to society in this case? Wow? There's two questions that I suspect are about the world beyond 2030, but who'd like to have a crack at them Thomas? Oh, I thought you were saying I want to bring things down to earth You want to bring things down to earth? I mean they are both very big questions But you Andrew you made the point that there is we're a long long long way from that So so they again the idea of a another kind of cognitive being is is one thing We are going to face your question though, which is if Some of the computer scientists in this room or elsewhere start to build systems which can Optimize things for us such as move food around the country or the world more efficiently or farm They are always going to need the programmer to answer the question. What do you really want? So the more we automate we still have to be the people saying what do we want and Sometimes that means we have to say question answer questions, which are uncomfortable to us And so that's the problem you're going to face is we won't be handing over the keys to the AI But at some point the AI might ask us a question like you know what if you guys all just had crappier or slower cars You could actually Save 500 people's lives a year through the savings on kidney transplants. They'll give us trade-offs like this Which we'll find uncomfortable. That's what's going to be interesting We're going to have to get much more explicit about Implicit decisions that we as a society have made and I think Neeta's Approach is the only thing that's going to keep us going while we're going through that period Yes What I wanted to say is that I keep coming this is we're talking about 2013 not 21 Let's think about 2013 and the kinds of things that we can see with we have already demonstrated with with with a tremendous increase in transparency with open data of Governments you dramatically decrease the major cause of poverty in the developing world or Which is Corruption now we can see and when you and we can see as a result of e-governance that countries can dramatically improve their the state and quality of life and We will see countries that implement Transparency rules which were not possible before having data available to everyone to anyone who was interested a dramatic rise in the quality of life in the Quality of the wealth of the country and I predict in 14 years the current picture we have of who's who's doing well who's doing badly will change in a Very significant way and the countries that do not adopt the kind of transparency that is possible through e-governance will fall behind and We have seen it. We saw it in my country by implementing this and we had a very dramatic increase in Transparency and we're the least corrupt country of all the post-communist world We're also in the better half of the European Union Which includes a lot of countries from sort of old Western Europe that are too much significantly worse than we do So I think that we will see countries take off We'll also see countries fall behind that ice that I'm certain of for 2014 and it won't be as a result of the kinds of things we've had in the past someone evades somebody or Or something else, but rather just using technology. Well, we will see an improvement You to perhaps put the and you raised the question of essentially of immortality, which is I think well well beyond 2030 But where are we likely to be in terms of life expectancy and kind of You know, what what will the reasonable expectation for a human born in 2030 be? well, as you know, there's a you know been an active effort to understand what the genetics of aging really are and So so the you know the short answer to your question is that it's going to depend on that depend on Gaining that knowledge right now today. We don't know the cohort of genes that would be necessary to extend life in humans That kind of research has been done on other organisms, but it doesn't always transfer directly to humans So I think you know there's a big research piece there and for me that's kind of a big unknown Will we be there 14 years from now? Not sure We'll certainly have a lot more more data You know related to that. That's right. And then there's the question of who who who gets access to that, right? Gosh lots of questions Yes, gentlemen, that's six rows back So my name is Michael Berger. I'm a theology student um, I Might put a damper on this but there's Wednesday. We had a quite interesting panel about the refugee crisis here in Europe and Now we're hearing about all this technology and to be honest I'm slightly confused and Unsure how to integrate these two sides into my world view. I'm the question I'm asking is Who are these technologies being developed for and like? Is there a chance that technologies might actually Also be used for for those crisis situations and those people who are Have completely different problems and different questions in life then Where are the resources coming from or am I going to be more at the someday? Thank you That's an extremely Important question and if I may can I amplify it a bit because I think in implicit in a lot of what you've been saying is The question of whether these technologies will actually widen disparities in the world or whether they will narrow them, Andrew So Unfortunately, especially for artificial intelligence research a great deal of it has come from I know if it's unfortunate, but the big investments are from from For-profit companies many who've announced intentions to hire Thousands of AI researchers over the next few years one of the things I'm dealing with that She's Dean of a computer science department is I'm trying to push some of these genius computer scientists out into Other areas the world where they're needed The good news is so the bad news is this is being done for the market primarily. I would claim there's plenty of Researchers who are doing it for the good of humanity the good news is even when it's done for the market We're seeing cases where data transparency as Tom Mentions really help nowadays you can actually see on YouTube videos perpetrators of Violence and actually identify them Actually show the fact that violence is going on and there's actual there's some degree of accountability there It's frankly a side effect, but it's helping Similarly if people who are illegally chopping down forests or parts of forests They can't hide anymore because they are being observed Or the earth is being observed and you can notice that a piece of forest which is sitting in some obscure part Of the Congo is no longer there. So I really like the fact that this is bringing us Transparency so that the rest of us can't just ignore something and say hey, it's happening in the other world part of the world I didn't even know what it is Need to is it is it likely to widen inequality or narrow it? maybe initially and It's certainly possible a lot of technological advances Particularly when they're developed for profit are accessible by an elite when you talk about genetic engineering, for example, if you look at in vitro fertilization, that isn't something that a couple who suffers from infertility right now could take advantage of if They are poor Because they simply can't afford the technology and that's likely true for designer babies and when that becomes the Preferred method of procreation it'll become a bigger problem And so maybe you're able to create and widen the gap in a much more in transient way than we currently have But here's what I'll say it really is a question of policy And here's where policy can make a difference because if we care about those issues Which to some extent it seems like we do and to some extent it seems like we don't we have to decide as a society Then it's a question of how you distribute those resources what incentives you create for distribution of resources certainly certain governmental funding of Scientific research across the world requires disclosure of scientific findings if you receive public funds And a lot of incentives are created in a way to try to make Data and journals and accessed information much more widely available Which is more of a democratization of information and democratization of technology? But we'll have to make public investment in those technologies and create public incentives for the distribution and dissemination of those Technologies if we don't want it to become a problem of a widening gap Thank you. Now the question. Yes, gentlemen there at the back in the middle So if it comes to genetic engineering, I think the discussion is always about those super babies And I think that's a shame because as far as I know There are a lot of other applications for this amazing technology. For example, you could Genetically modify pigs such that for example their hearts or other organs are compatible with the human body and so organs in a Defected human body can be replaced and So I would like to ask whether You see other applications for this technology Because really those super babies I think they are still quite far in the future because we barely know anything about our brains Leave alone the genetic Background of this. So yeah, I would like to know What other applications you think are possible until 2030 You bring up a great point. Thank you for saying that because I think you're absolutely right the the immediate impacts of Genetic engineering genome engineering are going to be exactly the kinds of things that you're talking about I think the pig example that you got that you just gave for Creating better donor organs for people is a great one as you probably know that kind of research is already underway But I think the you know the other kinds of things that we'll see I think we're going to see better animal models for disease to study human disease and Come up with better therapeutics that you know, but through understanding what the real genetic basis for disease is But I think there's also exciting opportunities in agriculture and in what I would call synthetic biology what if we could you know use genome engineering to introduce pathways into fungi that allow us to generate chemicals much more cheaply or Sustainably biofuels that sort of thing, you know that again that kind of research is already underway as well So, you know, I think I think those are some very exciting opportunities that are They're going to happen and they will definitely have a very positive impact on our societies without raising the kinds of ethical Issues that come up with human embryo editing Eric to make a To make a meta point on the whole conversation here the truth of the matter is it is scary But it's always been scary when we have new technology. Okay, but history has shown us That life has gotten better life today there is less poverty than there's ever been the standard of quality of life for the average person on this planet has gotten incredibly Improved over the last 20 30 40 years. It's a fact read read the book Abundance by Peter Diamandis And and what we see on the news is not reflective necessarily of reality because bad news sells better than good news And so we see these horrible things that happen, but we've we're less at war now than we've ever been We're healthier. We live longer. There's a lot of great things that come and we're only talking about, you know, 13 14 15 years from now The the chances are that all of these technologies just like everyone has said are gonna make people's lives better more than they're gonna Make people's lives worse. Now if we're talking a hundred years, we don't even know what kind of we may not even be humans anymore Right, we might be computer or human mixes or have Discovered extra extra terrestrial life or had an asteroid hit the earth Who knows but over the over the term period that we're talking about which I think we need to confine ourselves to It's gonna make our lives better more than likely Again to talk about concrete things I'm also an optimist I mean one of the things that I think will happen is over the next 14 years the death of statistics because we will be I mean Sacrilege Which is that through through analysis of big data? We will have real-time Will real-time figures coming in and the kind of predictive power of statistics, which is basically based on models We'll be replaced by looking at real-time processes and we're already doing our Boring things such as VAT returns in real-time in my country, which is again adds to transparency reduces Crime and all these other things, but I mean when you start modeling economic When you start thinking about what we will be doing with economies will become far more flexible because we see some things happening Long before we see it's something is diverged from a prediction line because we sample that every six months or per quarter if up to now everything we look at economic progress or Anything on a quarterly basis. We'll be looking at it at we know. What is it at quarter to eight? And that that will lead to tremendous efficiencies and that I think will again because of technology we will be living better There are a lot of you asking questions there. We've had a lot of questions from gentlemen. There are any women who'd like to ask a question Hi my appendage Imperial College London, so thank you Andrew for mentioning my work So I'm actually professor of artificial intelligence and I would like to just say a couple of things on discussion here so I Don't think we should worry very much about data integrity That's a very good point and I think this a lot of people worry about that And that's a real worry much bad much more and better than privacy because if you think about privacy We all use this by this you lose your privacy because it tracks you everywhere It knows with whom you are what you eat how much you walk So this is privacy, but integrity something else and that is how you can actually Temper with the data and I think the idea of having double identity or triple identity on which we work is actually a very good point Because you may be able to Falsify one or even two but having certain things are simply not easy to falsify such as for example blood flow in your face So, I mean you simply cannot do it, right? So another one which you mentioned is EEG which is an excellent idea, right? So I think we should not worry about that about the democracy which you might mentioned as well I really love this idea because this is one of the things We think about and I believe internet would lead us to these democratic more democratic Environments and societies in which we would be able all to vote So in on different issues, and I think this is very important and this we do not have now. I mean Mr. Anderson mentioned actually that That that Everything is in software and this I agree and currently that we actually do not have the way to control Where we give the data and this is also true. So In any case, I believe we should not worry about the future AI as such as consciousness We don't have the models for that. So there is no chance. We will have these models So I don't think you should worry about that and about the jobs because the whole Davos is talking about Losing five million jobs ridiculous because actually there will be millions of jobs five ten fifteen Born through the new technologies. Thank you. That's a Extremely optimistic and compelling view. Thank you. Now, you have been extremely patient sir. So it's your turn next gentlemen in the front row Thank you, I am Alberto Cervantes Well, we have heard that technologies will help us to have a better life But I'm just wondering if this panel is concerned about all this technology getting hold of the wrong people raw states and Actually, two thousand forty disappearing entire civilization with very powerful weapons Would like to hear your opinion. That's when we have to move to another planet, Eric I could describe ten ways to you that the human race could be threatened in the next hundred years That would scare you badly from super viruses to asteroid strikes to volcanoes to Pandemic, you know nuclear war, whatever Again, there's always the potential for bad and it's going to happen There will be bad things there will be bad users But the technology itself and the policy coming together at the right time I think will converge as time goes on to a better and better place But that doesn't mean that bad things won't happen. Of course they will it but overall if you integrate the whole curve Life gets better on average for more people with better technology more transparency All the things that have been talked about here So we should be pretty optimistic about the future. Can I just add one thought which is um, I agree. I'm also an optimist but I think one way in which things get better is with much greater transparency and So rather than reassurances From us from somebody who wonderfully knows a great deal about the artificial intelligence I think we need to open up the information much more significantly and enable people to understand the risks and benefits of technology So Jennifer mentions quite a few of the extraordinary promises that can come with gene editing Which I think are great promises But I would say each of those also do have some ethical concerns We don't for example know with synthetic biology whether or not there's a risk of bioterrorism Could somebody create an organism or create a virus or simply change slightly Things that are already within our bodies and then precisely target populations or take out water supplies or destroy You know different types of food crops that would be incredibly devastating for certain populations and so Understanding that when science is progressing it comes with risk and it comes with extraordinary benefits and promise and making that Transparent to the people to be able to decide. What do we wish to fund? What do we wish to support? What do we wish to enable? What do we wish to try to put greater safety? And safeguards and controls around I think is what we need to do we have to crack this wide open It can't be just reassurances from the top It has to be something that we're all part of the dialogue about so we are coming to the end of our time So what I'm going to do is I have one more question And then I'm going to ask each of you in one minute to paint a picture of life in 2030 And then we're going to have the vote. So the last question here gentlemen That's actually no lady here. I'm sorry because we have a lady here blatantly I'm a long drivers Dean at the School of Architecture at Columbia I mean, it's great that everybody is so optimistic. It's been an incredibly anthropocentric discussion in the age of the Anthropocene and I'm wondering, you know, do we just improve life for people because in fact the earth has not kept up with the speed of Our lives improving as human beings and I'm wondering whether are we assuming that technology will also improve the health of the planet of other species Andrew are you are we going to improve life for for humanity only or more broadly? We can we definitely can use this technology to to improve life for everyone else firstly For most of us, even if we're purely selfish, we know we want the rest of the world to be there none of us wants to live in a concrete jungle and so Even now with sensing technology and especially with predictive models that you can come from the sensing technology We can help with local flora and fauna checking There's wonderful things happening at the moment with using autonomous air airborne and land-borne vehicles for helping make sure that crop situations and biological Situations are being dealt with properly so we certainly can but it still comes back to the point that we Technologists we can provide a way to achieve the goals that society wants It's up to you guys to make sure that you that we're all clear on what we want I'm really repeating Neeta's main comment here because that answer was ready to be quick And because I feel guilty the gentleman you get to ask your question Miracles happen. I am an optimist on the other side lots of people and businesses that they are scared about the Digital revolution what advice do you have how to master? This revolution is it just tools technology you were talking a lot about or is it maybe a Certain kind of leadership mindset and so what kind of leadership is it? so very quick answer Education as the basis of democracy if we're gonna have mass transparency The people who are gonna help make these decisions need to understand as much as they can and so we need to have the best most incredible improvements in education over the next 15 years that we possibly can and then people will make the right decisions Or they'll make more of the right decisions than the wrong ones and in the whole at least if we believe in democracy But that's what it's based on and so We can't avoid technology. It's there. It's coming the progress is coming Everyone needs to learn as much as they can about it learn what the issues are understand them Then you can make the decisions that will guide The policies that will control them That's a powerful message indeed right now you'll paint paint a picture of the world in 2030 in one minute Andrew let's start with you. Okay. It's the end of the day for me before I go to bed My cell phone or probably it's in my ear by then we'll say Andrew Was today a good day? And I was like actually was except boy I was on this panel and I really got thirsty in the middle of it And a little stressed out. Ah, by the way, I really enjoyed this panel, but as an example and I actually expect I Actually do expect that along with this the the digital self-identity and bio biometrics about my life I Hope that I Actually spend more time Living a better or more meaningful life and that my cell phone actually gives me a really hard time if I blow a couple of hours Playing Candy Crush and reminding me at the end of this year. I'm going to ask you was it a good year and You're responsible with my help So to make sure it is a good year I think it would be fairly good for those that are capable of adjusting And those that are not it will be worse That there is there will be Unless you are a very talented musician painter poet You better learn something about how to operate computers Because no, I mean I mean that seriously I mean teach if you if kids learn to code If you start giving joint JD IT degrees joint public administration IT degrees which we do in my country by the way That means those countries will be doing better than those countries which go for populist politics Protectionist politics keeping out companies trying to put restrictions on data flow those Companies will do worse At the end of my day when I remove my wearable devices and clothing that's been able to sense Everything that I've done throughout the day everywhere that I've been How my blood chemistry is doing how many steps I've taken in a day How active my brain was in different regions of the brain? I get a set of suggestions for tomorrow I need to drink a fruit smoothie and please add a kiwi and potentially a banana because your potassium levels are low You really worked out this area of your brain But you need to listen to some Mozart tomorrow because that area of your brain has been neglected And to improve your brain health you need to Maximize that and then I'll get a few messages that pop up with coupons from my favorite My favorite suppliers that will provide me for the cheaper version of the kiwi that I need to add to my smoothie and the banana Because all of my data has been shared in a fully transparent world Thank you, Jennifer. It kind of sounds like the nanny state to me. I don't know Well, you know, I think to come back to the theme that we talked about earlier, I think we'll see I think we'll see things like bananas that are resistant to a fungus that is currently wiping them out in various parts of the world I think we'll see I think we'll see better Ways of detecting cancer and and I'm actually very excited about the merger of a technology called cancer immunotherapy With genome editing that might allow programming a person's immune system to target particular kinds of cancer I think a very very exciting opportunity there and if those of you that heard about the cancer moonshot I think this is one of the one of the pieces of that vision is to try to try to bring those technologies together And then I think we'll see really exciting applications in synthetic biology frankly, you know Thinking about how we can harness Organisms in the environment to do work for us to make chemicals for us to make materials for us potentially So I think those are all things that are very likely to happen over the next 10 to 15 years. Thank you, Eric on July 29th 2030 the first Human being will land on Mars Maybe before probably before honestly probably before and and They will have brought with them on a chip the entire digital history of their life from their DNA to every financial transaction that they've ever made to every book they've ever read to What their calendar has been and the contacts that they have and all the little digital pieces of our life they could carry with them Maybe maybe even be in their brain by then. I don't know but for for many people it will be an inspired world Will there be bad things that happen? Will there be wars? Will there be countries that lag? Absolutely, but those that embrace those that countries people All of us at an individual level will become more empowered if we choose to roll with the tide Figure it out and and it's going to be an amazing place It's going to be an amazing place. We live in an amazing time and if we just embrace it. It's gonna be great So there you have it. That's the world in 2030. How many of you think that is better than the world today? I think the numbers have Gone up slightly, but I didn't know my glasses on so that's entirely unverifiable. Thank you all very much