 Please have a warm welcome to Goethe. All right, thanks very much. Great pleasure to be here. Always great to be in London. I live in Switzerland, a neutral country. I was born in Germany, but I've lived in America for 17 years. So if I speak too quickly, please just wave. I was thinking while you were introducing me that I'm the author of five books and probably 30,000 tweets, which one matters more these days? I don't know. But you could be the judge of that yourself. So I'm very active on Twitter. Gee, Leonhard is my personal handle. And then Future Feed is for the future of this stuff. And of course, we have today's hashtag, right? Hashtag Online 12. You can ask me anything. I'm looking at my iPhone here occasionally while we run a video or something. So you can ask questions through Twitter. And of course, you can actually ask in person afterwards as well. I do have a personal hashtag that's askgird, that you can also use to ask pretty much anything, anytime, within reason, of course. So many of you may be wondering what a futurist is. It's actually quite popular in the Anglo-Turf, not so much in Central Europe or so. But I deal with four sites. And my company's motto is it wasn't raining when Noah built the ark, trying to look ahead of the obvious. What I don't do is predictions. I don't have a magic crystal ball or something. We deal with what's called four sites. And that's what I want to share with you today, give you some four sites about what's coming and what's already here in many ways. Very important, of course, for my work is what I call pattern recognition. And there's a great science fiction novel with that, by the way, from William Gibson with the same title. We work with hundreds of companies, technology companies, content companies, publishers, governments, brands, and so on and so on, to reinvent what they do in five years. I mean, clearly, the world is going to be quite a different place in five years. Just think about that for a second. In five years, we'll have all of those countries that are currently not really connected, Brazil, Russia, India, China, Indonesia, and so on, connected to the internet and to mobile devices. The first thing that people want after they've covered the basic needs, food, shelter, and other needs. First, they have that coverage. They want a mobile phone. And that's a global trend. We're going to see about five billion people connected to the internet, mind boggling. And all the things that will come out of that, the change of politics that we're seeing already. It's a global world, a global village, as Marshall McLuhan says. And here's one of my four sites. Here's the iPhone X. Clearly, my pattern recognition is that it's going to get larger. And I really love Siri, also. It's very intelligent. If I ask, I'm going to jump off a bridge and die. It will show me the bridges, which is good. And some of those are stores as well. So that's quite helpful. So my preview of technology is that technology is still fairly dumb. But it's getting very, very smart and very addictive. 40% of American kids, kids between 15 and 25, when they wake up at night, they check their Facebook status and they make an update. 90% of people have a mobile phone. Sleep with a mobile phone. Not in the bed, but I'm sure you know what I'm talking about. Right next on your nightstand. So what everybody's talking about these days, apart from mobile, of course, is social local mobile, which I think you have a session on in the afternoon. Social networks, local services, and mobile devices. And what's called big data. Okay, big data clearly is an outcome of the internet. But we're seeing an explosion in data, which is truly mind-boggling. Now data is becoming, as a European commissioner for consumers has said, already in 2009, personal data is the new oil of the internet. And the currency of the digital world. This actually goes back to something that Clive Humby said from the American Marketing Association in 2006, which is shamelessly so called data is the new oil. As Bob Dylan says, a good artist copies a better artist steals. So big data, right? Also, of course, Zook's Law. Next year, people will share twice as much information as they share this year as Zook's Law and Moore's Law. Sharing information. If you look at your Facebook profile, I downloaded mine the other day, it was five gigabytes of stuff. I spent 24 hours cleaning up my Facebook profile, kicking out my kids and my wife and my holiday pictures, just to be trim. When you look at your Facebook profile, it will be very easy to make a map of who you are, how you're going to vote, where you're going to live to predict what you do. And in fact, the FBI is doing just that. I don't know if that's good or bad, right? But our data there is so deep, as Corey said yesterday, it's quite mandatory that we pay attention to what happens with our data there. So data, we have different kinds of data, and you may have seen the study. There's a study from the World Economic Forum called Big Data that you can download. It's really a great study. It's talking about the different kinds of data that we have. We have volunteered data that we give away ourselves. We have observed data, and we have inferred data. Inferred, for example, when you're searching on Google for a baby clothes or something, then you're very likely to have a baby or already have a baby, right? That's inferred data. So inferred data is really quite interesting. When you think about that, Google knows our darkest secrets from our inferred data. We're looking for diseases, or we're looking for whatever. Other people may not even know that, but Google knows that, that we've searched for this data, inferred data. The rise of data is mind-boggling, the explosion of throughput, and stuff that we do when we sit somewhere and we say, I like this, or rate a restaurant, or pass on information, and it's basically like that. We're in this ocean of data, and that is increasing. Absolutely mind-boggling what happens, mainly with social, local, and mobile, that this data is increasing by the minute. So there's a great slide show by Kleina Perkins. Mary Meeker comes out every year, it's called The State of the Internet. You can download it, Mary Meeker with two E's. She does a great report every year, 200 pages in the future of the internet. And she's saying in the last show from 2012 that we have to reimagine just about anything is being reimagined. Money, television, music, iTunes, Spotify, YouTube, production, publishing, magazines, education. The internet and big data, and this huge wave of information, this ocean is making us reinvent stuff. This is very exciting if you're an entrepreneur, it's a huge pain if you're a big company, because every time you turn around, someone's gonna take a shot at you. And look at the publishers, look at the record labels. Does anybody remember record labels? Okay, the reimagine of everything. It's absolutely mind-boggling what we're seeing here in the next three years. And here's the problem with that, right? Is that we can always do something else than what we're currently doing. Some people are actually saying that you can speak to them better on Facebook than sitting next to you in the restaurant. I mean, this is a very strange trend here with all that stuff that's happening at the same time, you know, we're sort of out of a body at many given times. And big data is becoming a new natural resource that's much more powerful than oil, because unlike oil, it doesn't kill us when we use data. There's a huge difference here. Of course, you can create wars on data. In fact, we do have wars on data already, right? Cyber wars, cyber attacks. As Corey has pointed out yesterday, the value of data, right? But data is growing so fast, it becomes a new natural resource, and basically that being the new oil is completely obvious. Just give it another five years. All the discussions that we'll have, there won't be anymore about who's getting oil from where, but what data we can use, and how we can make sense of it. Because just having data is as pointless as trying to put new oil that comes out of the ground into your car, right? It won't work. It has to be refined. It has to be filtered. It has to be analyzed. It has to be beefed up and changed to actually work. So data is the same thing. We have to create value out of this, but here's a question I have for you. Where are we going to be like the oil companies? Are the data companies going to be like oil companies with big disasters of released data and with record profits at very little cost and with being able to get away with murder? That is a huge issue for data. Of course, clearly, if we're looking at data-driven companies, Google, Facebook, QQ, Tencent, eBay, Amazon, Skype, and so on, will they get away with murder with record profits while they use our data? That's something we should think about. Big money is being made and will be made even more with big data and that creates a huge temptation. Facebook is very tempted to give everybody that will pay enough access to us through Facebook, which I understand they have to make money. But think about that temptation. I mean, if you're looking at this mapping and we'll publish a PDF later, you can see it. This from McKinsey is the size of the information economy, how quickly you can get it, how much potential you have, and how quickly you can get it to look at up here, computers, healthcare, finance, insurance, transportation. Some people are saying that data economy is going to be worth a trillion dollars in three years. And of course, oil is still quite a bit more than that for the time being. So I think with big data, we must do better than we did with big oil because clearly there is a temptation to say, you know, we can use this data, we can make lots of money and get out quickly and ruin our resources. Now, that shouldn't happen with big data. I think it's very important that we create an ecosystem, a true ecosystem, which actually pays the actual cost, right? What's called the externalities in the oil business. I mean, all companies don't pay, now the airlines don't pay for the actual costs of redoing the atmosphere when they're flying, and they're taking out the carbon, the carbon tax that's been proposed for this. But anyway, we must do better than that. I think the music industry, which I worked in for a long time, I used to be a musician producer and then an internet guy. Great saying by Tim O'Reilly, American publisher, that says, if you take out more than you put in, then the ecosystem eventually fails. And that's what the record labels did. Not all of them, of course. Many good ones, like local ones, like beggars and others. So I don't want to put them all into one basket. But by and large, what have the record labels put in to create an economy for the musician or never mind the user? I mean, think about that for a second. If you're an iTunes user, let's say you rent a movie, you get to watch it for 24 hours, and then it says, you know what? It's been nice knowing you, but it expires for some bizarre reason. I'm sure you've been through that yourself. Taking more out than you put in won't work. So we have to create an ecosystem around data and information that replenishes stuff, and you know where this is going to happen. You know where all the action will be in the future. It won't be here. It won't be in Switzerland, it won't be in America. Will be second or third, because the action and the growth is all in developing countries. I mean, look at those huge numbers. In Brazil, where I do lots of work, you're going to have 74% of people connected to the mobile internet in 2015. Can you imagine that? In the country where you have 40 million people starving. How are they going to do that? I don't know, but maybe the forecast isn't correct. In any case, I mean, you know, the growth and all that stuff will happen there first, and the rules are being rewritten in India and Brazil and China and in Russia, and we'll have to follow those rewritten rules. We're not going to be the ones making the rules for them as we used to. And that is thanks to the information economy. So if you're sitting here today, having a startup or having a venture or offering anything online, let's get ready to become a truly global brain. We're going to have to think global in whatever we do. Our competitors are not going to be next door. They're going to come from New Zealand or from Vladivostok or from, you know, far out places. Well, they've always been from New Zealand. So here's another question, right? Looking at these interesting charts. GDP, GNP growth in Brazil, right? You know, Brazil is booming, of course, right? US more steady, much bigger, or pretty much the same size actually, right? But great saying by the economist Joseph Stieglitz, he says, if you don't measure the right thing, you don't do the right thing. This is crucial about data. What are we measuring? And why does it matter? The music business, going back to that for a second, they measure unit sales. Can you imagine that? Unit sales? What is a unit sale? Like a CD or a download or... So if you measure unit sales, then anything that happens on YouTube is irrelevant. But the reality is the other way around. Everything that happens on YouTube, and Twitter, and Facebook, and Groove Shark, and Spotify, that is the thing that really matters, right? It's the reverse metric. So we have to think of the right metric when it's about information. And when we talk about information, I think it's important to figure out what is the purpose of information. And I think Spock and Captain Kirk can help us with this. And Captain Picard has been a role model in my quest to be more human. Can you turn this up a little? More human. Let's start again. And Captain Picard has been a role model in my quest to be more human. More human? Yes, Ambassador. Fascinating. You have an efficient intellect, superior physical skills, no emotional impediments. There are Vulcans who aspire all their lives to achieve what you've been given by design. You are half human. Yes. Yet you have chosen a Vulcan way of life. In effect, you've abandoned what I've sought all my life. The purpose of information, emotional impediment. I mean, I think about that sometimes when I use a service like cloud or peer index, I feel like any emotion would be an impediment. I think if we get to that point where the algorithm is more important than what our emotions are, our actual human factors are, then we're gonna have a major problem, right? I mean, this conversation kind of mirrors this. So in this world, we have this huge funnel that's sucking up everything. Everything is going from stuff to bits. Records, music, films, television, education, money. We're not gonna have real money in 10 years. I mean, if you're gonna have coins and bills, then you probably have some intention to use it in a way that can't be tracked, right? Which would be reasonable. But in general, we're gonna have cash and we're gonna have credit cards. We're not gonna have plastic to pay. I mean, we're moving to bits. And that is changing the entire machinations. You know, the business models, everything. You know, we're going to be living in the cloud because everything that we do is gonna be in the cloud. I mean, there's some huge advantages. For example, if you have a car crash in Brazil, you know, right now, nobody can pull up your information on their smartphones in five years, it's gonna be possible, right? Because your information about your medical records is in the sky. And what happens first with media is now happening with stuff. Have you heard about 3D printers? So-called fabbers, makers. Corey from yesterday is also an expert on this. You should read his book, Little Brother, and the new one that's coming out about the same topic, right? First, we get now stuff. These devices can print a tennis shoe. They can print a cup. They can print the Eiffel Tower. They can print whatever. Pretty soon they'll print an organ. I don't mean the one you play on, mind-boggling. Data, design, and how do they print it? They use data, right? They use a file to print this. What happened to the music industry? What happened to Nike? And the shoe can't be quite printed in the same way yet, right? But very soon, data, design, and emotions become the real assets. And I say data and emotions, even though that's like saying water and fire. But that belongs together. And brands now have to think about this and say, okay, basically, brands are all about the intangible. Why do I buy a VW or an Audi or a Mercedes? Not because they go faster or are cheaper. Because for some reason, I've decided that's the brand for me, right? The Lyconomics, as people call it. I like the brand. I like what I'm getting. So it's all gonna be about lies, about love and parenthesis, and about sentiments, right? There's a real art on sentiments using data to find sentiments, right? And there's already a mechanism that's called tweet stock that allows you to get sentiment on stocks so that you know you can predict what's gonna happen with the stock market tomorrow using Twitter. You think that's far-fetched? Predicting what people do using their Facebook profiles or Twitter? I think that's actually very, very close. Here's a brand called Kraft. This is how they say thank you to their Facebook friends. It was Tuesday night and Brian D was at home. He was on Facebook, browsing alone. Hungry for a change when he stumbled upon our page. But basically, brands want to be loved, right? Politicians want to be liked. Can you imagine a more interesting dichotomy? Banks want to be liked. Banks want to be forwarded. You have to sign up for the YouTube channel and so on and so on, right? I mean, this is Lyconomics. There's a book with that title. I'll show you later. Not my book, but still a good book, right? I mean, what's happening here is the intangible becomes stronger as the data becomes stronger, right? Because all of a sudden, we're making decisions based on these kind of things now. And liking is a lot more complicated than this. I mean, we can't dump our brain into another body. And the liking is a much more difficult process. If you read this book, Lyconomics, for my friend, Rohit Bargaba, you'll find out it has a great slideshow on slideshow as well. But touching data is really what is changing us. All of a sudden, using mobile devices, we can touch data. We can go inside, like a minority report, we can dive into the data, take it out and take a good look. And of course, this is a very fruitful tour for technology companies. Making data visible, making sense, and just like taking the oil out of the earth and bringing it up and making it so it can go to a car, touching data, is really changing us. And of course, we're going from having mobile devices to Siri, to Google Glass, to Iris, enabled internet on our eyeglasses, to implants. Mobile devices are becoming our external brain. It's funny, I think, when I say this, it says, yes, yes, totally. I have an argument with my son sitting somewhere on the park and he says the capital of Kazakhstan is not XYZ, problem solved, Wikipedia. Our external brain. Imagine what would happen if instead of a cultural earpland or an Alzheimer's earpland, you have a Wikipedia implant. That's going to be our reality in a very short time. Why not? It's the same thing. I mean, I wouldn't do it, but it would be an advantage for me to speak to you and having the knowledge of Wikipedia in central. So that's what's going to happen with that information and the question is, when is this going to happen, right? When are we going to interface what Ray Kurzweil calls a singularity? Now, mind you, I'm not a great believer in the singularity as you may have noticed. But the overlap of human machine and data in humans is a very, very powerful place. And you guys are all in the data business or information business. We have to think about how this works, right? Now I have a question for you. Do you agree or do you disagree? We will be able to re-engineer ourselves, you know, our data structure and the planet by using things like geo-engineering, which has been proposed, you know, seriously proposed, that we don't have to care what we blow out into the environment. We'll take it out with a huge suction machine or we'll make a space elevator that gets energy from out of space. In other words, technology will fix all of our problems. So let me see some hand signs. Do you agree that we will be able to re-engineer ourselves and possibly the planet or do you not? So let me ask, who agrees? I will be able to do that. Interesting, yeah? All right, I'm not gonna ask you other question because it's kind of obvious and I don't want to force you to have to take a position, you know, being Swiss, diplomatic. But here's the question, what purpose should amazing technology have? I mean, that question we have to ask ourselves today because the data that we use and the information that we're giving is making this technology possible. We're getting to use Google and don't pay because Google is using our data. Google is reading my emails and that's why I get Google Docs, simple as that. And very soon YouTube will be able to give me free movies because YouTube is using my information to provide ads. So this is Google Glass, you've heard about Google Glass, augmented reality project where you can see information on your glasses. Now this is sort of a mock-up of something that could happen when you use this. So where in these glasses you can see information on top? That's right, that is of course an all-knowing purpose of Google. Where is the music section? This is it, music, stop. You want to say something cool? Yeah, sure. Is that it, really? Of course, this is not made by Google, this is a mock-up, right? But what purpose should amazing technology have? Should be the purpose of technology that I can always see all data that surrounds me no matter what. Is that the purpose of technology? It could be useful to sell stuff, but is it all going to be about selling? I mean, imagine doing this for a week, you'd probably be ready for the madhouse, you know? But this is sort of like Google Glass 1955. I mean, I think it's interesting, but is that the purpose of technology? I mean, clearly, of course, we're not on the business of sense-making, right? Because as we're sucking in this data, human-to-data and back-to-human interfaces will be absolutely huge and mind-boggling opportunities for entrepreneurs and for science. And, of course, for lots of gains as well. But how is that going to shake out? I mean, this is a machine that allows you to control things by using sensors, and clearly, there's already quite a few accomplishments by having a quadruplegic walk with an artificial skeleton, right? I mean, this is, that's great. But how will that work in the future? What is the interface? How will human interface, how will we interface with very smart and fast and friendly and powerful machines and data? Because it's all about the interface, right? Jeff Bezos says from Amazon, which is kind of interesting, he says, when it comes to the really important decisions, data trumps intuition every time. This is the guy who made the Kindle, right? Did anybody ask him to make a Kindle? What data did he use? I don't know. Jeff spent $8.5 billion on building something that he didn't know anybody wanted. What do you call that? Intuition. But anyway, I mean, it's kind of interesting that he says this. But, you know, real machine intelligence is coming within reach, you know, rather than the stuff that we know from Siri. It is coming within reach, right? Clearly. Real machine intelligence. What will define a human five years from now? My wife already says to me, this isn't human that you're looking stuff up like this all the time. My kids are saying, why not look on this up? So what is human? Here's Michio Kaku, the famous physicist and futurist. The future. The internet is going to be in our contact lens. When the internet is in our contact lens, you blink and you will go online. And if you meet somebody at a meeting, a conference or a classroom, and you don't know who they are, your glasses will identify who they are and print out their biography in your contact lens. Okay, yeah. Well, that's interesting. Will that define human communications in five years? Will it be a fabricated me where you can pick a head that fits you today? Because that's really what we're already doing, right? I mean, some people say there's no difference between having a cholesterol pill in their contact lens, right? I'm not sure. But fabricated me is, you know, will it be like this fake, this is not from Apple? And the I think, is this science fiction? I don't think it's really science fiction a little bit now. But I think that's where we're going with data. Clearly the internet inside will be three to five years. Internet inside of us. Data. So that's, I think, one of the key questions in language barriers are pretty much I mean, we already have devices like the Samsung and others. Microsoft has a project on Google that can do simultaneous translation in real time. Translation app. And so this actually translates audio, spoken word in real time. So we can speak to it in English and we'll translate to Japanese. And you can, in my situation, you can translate Japanese into English. This works with up to ten languages. So the sound is pretty bad on this. But anyway, you can speak to it in English or Chinese in this case. No, Japanese. So real time translation. In two or three years do we have to learn languages? I can speak in German. It comes out in Mongolian. Very useful. So will that become a thing of the past? I think we have to reimagine this human data relationship. This Ying and Yang relationship. Reimagine what it could do and what it should do. This of course is a business opportunity and a very large social question. But we're moving into a world where control moves from the nodes, from the network, like say, MTV, the network, YouTube, the networked. Universal music and over here, online network like Machinima. This kind of idea of being networked from centralized to decentralized is following the path of technology. Our technology is largely decentralized and we're seeing in this networked sociality graph that we're moving into a world that's basically from locked, centralized to loose, decentralized to liquid. And you can see that pretty much across all technology and television and music. For example, Universal Film Studios to Spotify the Tumbler. We're seeing this trend. For example, in cars, Henry Ford, electric cars, shared electric cars. And it will all be in parallel, of course. We will still have regular cars, but the future is not going to be in more centralized cars. It's going to be in decentralized. It's the same in media and information. APIs we're moving from the idea of empires to the idea of networks. I think by and large, this is a very good trend, right? Because a network cannot live without participation of all the pieces in the network. Which makes us more interdependent, and that's good. We're probably going to solve those larger problems only because we're like this. Not because of Facebook, but because we're a network. Because we use APIs to talk to each other. The Guardian, the biggest, the most important English-speaking newspaper, as some people would say, has been built through APIs. Never mind that I'll make lots of money. Clearly, they have achieved something using APIs. Instead of interrelating, that goes on because of the Internet. And I think it has very large social consequence, political consequence. Not a single politician in the world can refuse to look at this trend that everybody knows what goes on at all times, all over the place. I mean, in America, to be elected president, Obama could not mention the word climate change. Can you imagine that? The most important problem there is not being mentioned in the election. But now, right afterwards, this is becoming a top-level discussion point around the world, the new interrelating. And here's a great video that shows you what's happening, what I call the Rise of the Global Village, which is a term by Marcia McLoone. We are truly becoming a global village. But here's the thing. If you're not a group player, if you're not a player in the village, but you want to run the castle, you want to have your own castle and your own rules, you're going to be in deep shit. Right? Because it's a village now. You have to actually talk to people. You have to actually collaborate to solve a problem. One of those guys that I really admire is Ai Weiwei, a Chinese artist who has a fantastic movie that just came out called Never Sorry. It's a Chinese, the only really the guy in China that you can watch and say is amazing that he gets to do this in China. That's what he does about the Global Village. You can watch this on YouTube, but this show is that we really have a global village right after this. Guess who was the next guy to do this? The United Nations General Secretary, Ban Ki-moon. Learn how to do the Gangnam style Korean dance at a conference. And he was also taped on YouTube. So the Global Village is here. I think Helmut Schmidt from Google also did it. It was like a wave that's still percolating around the globe. So clearly now we have a global village. And this picture shows how the global village of information exists only because our feet are stuck together. It doesn't exist because we're all disconnected and we're all different places but we create something together, we create an ecosystem. And this is the challenge for us. We have a new data ecosystem, an energy ecosystem, a money ecosystem, an education and a media ecosystem. In other words, without collaboration, creating this together ecosystem will fail. So the future of information, the future of data, the future of software, the future of the internet is about being networked or die. You can see that right now most companies are not networked with the exception of one big player, this box over here, Apple. You could say the same about Apple with the apps system and so on, but they're generally not considered open. It's about the network business model, that or none. That is the future of the internet. And basically moving into what my book describes, my upcoming book into an era where we started with an ecosystem, centralized, top-down, all invented insight, owned and closed, hypercompetition to a world of ecosystems. Not eco in the sense of green. Don't get me wrong. But eco in the sense of an ecology, of a biosphere that interconnects to build something. Our future on the internet and our future, of course in general, will be more like a biosphere or there'll be a noosphere. Because we can't live in an ecosystem that we had carefully built in the industrial economy. There's a great movie by Tiffany and she's talking about how everything is becoming interdependent. You can look it up yourself on YouTube. I'll have to skip this for time purposes. So, since this is information conference, let's get back to this topic. What does the society of big data look like? I mean, how we're going to do this, how we're going to figure out what data is of interest and when we should share it, where augmented reality expose our data while we're driving or while we're dating as is common practice in Japan, government requests from around the world to get content removed from Google has been flat for a while but it's now exploding. That is because of social local mobile because of the social internet, because of the real-time internet and this is totally just the tip of the iceberg. I mean, Google's request to hand over user data. I mean, this is just give it three years and it'll be another two million requests. Clearly, that is a major topic. Facebook knows what we're saying and Google knows what we're thinking. There's a huge difference here. And this is quite useful. Knowing what you're saying is useful for a lot of reasons but what you're thinking Google knows because you're searching for it. You're thinking about going to Thailand so Google knows that but you haven't told your Facebook friends. There's quite a difference. Google is already inside of our head. Every thought in the open? Is that the future of information? Perpetual WikiLeaks of every person, every company? I'm not so sure. I think there is some benefit, of course, to transparency and there should be transparency but if the television knows who we are would you watch TV if someone else was watching you? Intel is reportedly planning its own television service. Insiders say it will be a chop-down version of your standard cable service and it will come to you through a camera equipped set-top box that knows who's watching. Okay, so it's not going to scan your eyeballs but it will use proprietary Intel chip tech to determine the gender and age of its current audience. This television has a scanner on top that looks at your face and says this person is a woman and she's angry. And they're going to change the ads to fit your profile. That's the idea. Intel and Samsung are working on this and they will give you free movies, free sky or whatever you want. If you put this box on top, they can scan who you are and give you better ads. That will pay for the television. Television that knows who you are. Clearly we're going from a world that has layers of who we are and our personal data. There's a little bit more inside and then getting way inside of our secrets. Tracking in our data footprints, this is a huge discussion. Do not track. If your data wasn't tracked on the Internet, there'd be no advertising business. And because all of the advertising business is moving on to the Internet, what's going to happen with a trillion-dollar budget for advertising? $650 billion to spend to pitch us stuff. If people can't track us, then everything is dead. That's the future of advertising. And keep in mind, advertising is about 70% of the entire content industry is paid for by advertising. So there's a relationship there. Radio, television, print. I mean, this commercial sorry I have to run through this again here, kind of skip this, but this is very important to see. This is the number one business model on the Internet now. It's free, but they sell you information. I think it's a fair model if we are in control what that process is. Of course, that is hard to say sometimes what that means. But data spills are becoming increasingly likely. You can expect Facebook to be public information, basically. That's why you should clean it up. Like Twitter. This is what I like about Twitter. So these kind of things are becoming obvious and I hear the question for you again. Do you agree or disagree? Statement would be we can rely on algorithms to measure most of who and what matters. You guys know cloud, right? It's a social peer indexing idea that gives you a rating depending on what people think of you on Twitter. Just that again is the most bizarre approach to this. I won't get into comparison here, but anyway, I put it here only for fun purposes. But do you think that we can rely on algorithms to measure on what matters and who matters? Who believes we can rely on algorithms? I actually believe we can. So I'm going to lift my hand. Who does not believe we can rely on algorithms? The other ones are neutral. That's also good, right? This is an interesting question. Clearly, this is why we have what is referred to in my friend Andrew Keane's latest book, Digital Vertigo, as a hedonic treadmill. You know, the constant feeding of stuff into those networks so that they become important. And that clearly is going to get old. I mean, the feeding of the mechanism to get a better rating. Now, that can't be the purpose of this technology. And the publicity default, as Jeff Jarvis says, you know, we're not living in a public world. Every single one of you, I swear, I would estimate, is on LinkedIn. Because when you go to a meeting, what people do, they look you up on LinkedIn before the meeting. And it's great information to see that you went to West Point Academy or something. So the publicity default is accelerating. We can't afford not to be on this. It's like Minority Report. You'll be on the grid or be off the grid. You're going to be off the grid and you're dead, basically, as a business person. I mean, Richard Branson doesn't have to be on LinkedIn, but he is. I see a future where we are very likely going to start paying for privacy. It's kind of bizarre, you know, only 10 years ago and 20 years ago when I was a musician, I paid for to be public. I paid to be seen. Now I'm going to pay not to be seen. And that is our future. Clearly, there will be a myriad of products that allow me to be seen only when I want to be seen, otherwise be not seen, depending on my privacy settings. We have to watch out for, you know, the bleeding of data and the Golden Goose Syndrome. If you run a company that deals with data, don't do any of this. This is certain death, right? Killing the privacy of your users. Whatever you're in government or if you run a public service or an NGO or whatever, these are the two big things to watch out for. You don't want data to bleed and be BP of data or have people feel like a Golden Goose. I'm going to wrap up and then we'll have some questions. I think what's most important about information and technology is the sense-making. Is the curation, is the filtering. Yes, it's important to have technology that finds it and dredges it and does cool stuff with it and visualizes it and so on. But the human-making of it, the sense-making, that is the pride, for example, just like journalism. Why do we need journalists? It takes too long. It's not good enough. We need curators. We need people who can actually do this. So a quick summary. Data is the new oil. This is the business model for the next 25 years. In fact, if you're in the oil business, get out. This is the next. Re-imagine your business based on big data. What happens with data in your business? How do you use it? The illiterate of the 21st century will be those, not those who cannot read or write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn and relearn. We have to relearn, reimagine our business. Every single one of us. Futurist or NGO, we have to reimagine our business based on what's happening with information. Social, local, mobile, clearly that is a topic for this afternoon. The networked society, every single business model will be set up out of a series of wheels. If you want to be this guy with no other wheels around, then go to Apple. There's no other business model with this. Every single company, every single organization is moving into a networked model. Into an ecosystem, a biosphere of interest. This is very important about data. Data needs to be an ecosystem and not an oil economy. So that we can actually derive benefit from every person on the line. The humanization of technology made us, in my view, more than technology itself. The internet going inside of our body, that's a trend that we're going to see, and that's real. Something we have to think about. The shift towards a distributed economy, that's our business model right here. If that's the battle plan for your business, if you're going to start a locked business, good luck. It's all about being distributed, whether it's news or liquid. The global village and the global brain, sometimes I think we have a lot of things, discussions about global things, but our attitudes are very narrow towards our own objectives. Clearly, all the action will be in developing countries. So more flying for all of us. New ecosystems. These ecosystems are right now being built in media. Publishing, music, films, Netflix is building this ecosystem. Spotify is building this ecosystem. But that's going to happen with money, with education in the cloud. I mean, great opportunities there. I want to thank you very much for your time. I have an app you can download. It's 400 pounds, no, it's free. You can download it. It's just called Futureless. Just Google for it. And here's my various websites. Thank you very much for listening and I hope we can take some questions. Really insightful and interesting. And I'm not sure whether I now feel really excited about it or quite worried at that time. Now I have got some of my own questions, but I think first of all I'll open up to the floor. Anybody have any questions? We'll go on what they've heard today. Yep. If you could just say who you are as well, please. The Herald Tribune. Did you hear that? It's Jim Connell from The Herald Tribune. I was just wondering if you had seen any studies or had any good insights on how many people are dropping out of networks like Facebook because of the fear of, you know, the oil company mentality. That's like the same question how many people drive an electric car? If you could drive an electric car it would actually go longer than 100 miles. We'll all have one. And there was a gas station to fill up the electric car. We'd all have one. I think in the process of what you're saying we are going to start picking services where these things are not an issue. But at the same time I don't see an accident from this because as has been described aptly in the Matrix and Minority Report it has a benefit to be on the grid. And the benefit of being on LinkedIn and on Facebook and Twitter and YouTube and QQ and Orkut and whatever you have is the benefit of connectivity. So it's very hard to sacrifice that for the benefit of privacy as you have the luxury not to want to connect. So I don't really see much of an accident there. I think that there's going to be new products like App what you call this project from the States where you pay to be part of a network. I think that's going to be alternative. That should be interesting. I don't see much of a trend there really. I think that ultimately we have to get used the fact that if we're in business we're public. And we have to buy back little pieces of our privacy afterwards. How are we going to do that? I don't know. I'm struggling with that myself. But it's a little bit of a chicken on the egg problem. Any other questions? I'll be shy. I'll turn to Twitter here to get off the stage. How can you tweet that? Hi there. This is John Baker from Digital Artsy. Can you hear me? Where are you? Hi, I'm over here. Okay, speak a little bit about it please. I was just wondering what your view was on the semantic web because that seems very poignant to a lot of things that you're talking about. It's been a long time in gestation but maybe the maturity of that is starting to become a bit more real and a bit more solid. I just wonder what your thoughts were on that. Clearly the time of where we got excited about web services that are basically technology driven that just work in a basic data and give us more noise and more download and that time is over. I think we're now turning to the question of what makes more sense, human sense and the semantic web clearly is a big component of that. So I think anything that really combines human intelligence with machine intelligence has obviously a great future. Not to say that it's trivial. I think that it's very much like if you're listening to a service like Pandora which is an online radio service and you're quite happy with it because the choice is good but if you know much about music you wouldn't be happy with it. This is the same problem with the semantic web. So I think that those products will become a standard very much like what Google is now a standard. Much more also social intelligence woven into this. Good morning, hi. My name is Bonnie Chuk. Question about we've got a lot of information professionals in this room for a long, long time. So I'm just curious what do you see as the future of people in this profession? How do we play a role in this big data world you're talking about? Well, I'm a believer that the role of people is increased to the role of technology not the reverse. And there are some people who would argue differently but clearly some menial jobs have already been replaced in computers and there will be more jobs replaced by robots, for example. But the real job in the future isn't going to move stuff from A to B or to do something that machines can easily do. If you want a glimpse of that you should watch the movie Frank and Robot then you can get an idea of this. Another good movie is called The Jonasis which talks about the future of marketing very similar idea but I think that the future of human participation this is really about creativity and pattern recognition and intuition it's the reverse of the calculating part and I think anybody who has that skill in the future will do really well because I don't think the technology will be able to replace it for quite some time and when it does it will become very scary. So for the next 100 years I think we'll be rather safe but you know this is within our if we take vitamin pills we can all live that long. Good morning, hello. I'm Janik Reynolds I work for ClearBlue yes the pregnancy test makers ClearBlue so in the world of health connectivity is obviously the way that we're moving forward but there's questions about the sharing of medical data medical records a lot of doctors in the US already have iPads and use them regularly on rounds so do you think that this trend towards open data is going to continue in places where privacy is more of an issue? Well let's put it this way I think for furthering a common goal there's nothing better than open data. So the thing is that of course that participants in the current more closed system are not necessarily having the same interest is to open that data and commoditize it to some degree because it creates transparency and it creates pressure of better performance. So you know the travel industry for a long time refused to make flying information and the same you know dashboard that agents had available to the public now we have that and has it killed them has not killed them it made them actually powerful in a different way. So I think being open having open APIs and open data systems will be absolutely crucial at the same time you know I call this open AMAP you know as much as possible or as much as necessary there are some things that you need to maintain value you know as Tim O'Reilly says basically open is how it gets going but then if you can narrow it down or in some ways create a new environment then you can monetize. But it's completely different this is again going back to the record labels record labels did not want artists to distribute on the internet they did not want streaming services they did not want you to or MySpace or Spotify now we have it anyway and they have to adapt the model to create new value. So you'll see doctors and universities and institutions create new business models based on data based on new generative just like you do with the newspapers it's a similar scenario. So I'm a great believer that without having open systems you really can't make it work because it becomes subject to different rules than those of the marketplace because those rules are essentially your own rules that keep your own position and that always results in disconnect. So I think I'm actually quite confident that we will not have a data economy like we have an oil economy. Because there's too many of us involved there's too much transparency and there's too much watching each other we did not have any of this 50 years ago when the oil companies started building their empires. From Germany I run a company, Euro patent I don't want to advertise myself but I want to tell you a phenomenon I'm a guy who is not I was not for a long time and I went in LinkedIn and went in and I realized one thing I have 2,000 visitors on my profile and they are not looking at me I know I'm ugly but they didn't know it before they look at my friends they look at my contacts and at the same time I get people being involved which I have no chance to reach them patent attorneys is extremely difficult to reach them I click there I send a message and get something back I think it's a way and they look at my vita and see how they are looking so this is a way of mixture what is being done I look at you I clicked 100 women to see what comes back they clicked back but not at me in my contacts I take that as a question Marshall McLuhan said in 1971 the global world is not a world of peace, harmony and quiet it's a world of considerable chaos and intervention and that's what we have now you want a world of peace and quiet you go back to the Roman Empire it's basically in this world with others it creates noise it creates a little more friction it creates more risk but I think the reward of that is that the overall outcome is larger we just have to find a way as Clay Shurkey says it's not really overload it's the filter failure we have to find a way for better filters better technologies we have to be more responsible in a way social media is both like cocaine I mean we can literally blow ourselves up on social media so we have to learn how to be responsible with this medium we have to learn how to be responsible with data and I think the government needs to support our efforts to be responsible with that as well not in the sense of necessary regulation but with helping us understand of what we're getting into and how we're going to go forward I'll answer them later I'm going to be here for a while so at the end of the questions then I'm sure you can find Gert on one of the breaks wonderful presentation thank you very much Gert and thanks for your time here so please give a warm round of applause to Gert