 Rwy'n credu. Rwy'n credu gwrs, arweinydd. Rwy'n credu'n ymgyrch yn y dyma i ystod o gyr 5000 yn adreffydd. Rwy'n credu'n gyrddol fod fod fod gyrdd o gyrdd o gyrdd o gyrdd o gyrdd. Rwy'n credu'n gyrdd i amdangos i chi i fynd i'r wrthoes y briffu ymgyrch. Rwy'n roi'n gydigio cyflwyngsa i gyhoeddirion hyn. Rwy'n credu cyflwyngsa i chi i rwy'n credu cyflwyngsa i chi i'i grwydd. Ysgol yn ydyn ni'n fwyaf i'r fawr i ymgyrch. Y ffifredu ffaith yn ymryd o'r gwbl. Mae'r fawr yma yn ymlaen i gyfnoddiadig sy'n ddefnyddio sy'n gweithio'r ffysgfeydd ymlaen i gael y cyfnoddiadau ymlaen i'r ffysgfeydd. Rwy'n barhau o'r cyfnoddiadau sy'n gweithio'r ffaith yn eu cyfligio'r ffaith sy'n gweithio'r ffaith. Mae hyn yn ymgyrchau sy'n gweithio a'r cyfrydd yma yn y pethau sydd. yw'n gweld i'n gwybod i'ch yn fwy o'r panner o'r cymdeithas yma o'r bwysig i'r du o'r ffordd o'i cymdeithas Cyfrifiadol, cyflawn i'r cyfrifiadol yma, cyflawn i'r cyfrifiadol i'r cyfrifiadol, a'r cyfrifiadol i'r cyfrifiadol i'r cyfrifiadol yma o ran unrhyw ymrwynt yng Nghymru, yn y top 10 listau ar gyfer y cyfrifiadol, yn y ddweud yn y ffordd ar gyfer y blogau most popularol, yn ym 100,000 cyfrifiadol ymgyrch,해서, we are looking forward to hearing your thoughts on next year's lists. Corina Leithan, Chair of the Board of Chief Executive Officer of Anthrotronics USA who is also a member of Robotics and AI Council. Victoria Espin is our President and Chief Executive of BSA, the Software Alliance, member of the newly named GAC on the Future of Software and Society up in a centre I believe you have rebranded over the first year of the term. Let us wait no more time listening to me. Let us talk to Bernie. Bernie, are we ready for the Fourth Industrial Revolution? Yn dwy gweithio, rwy'n dweud. First, it's very important to clarify what the word we means, because there is an incredible diversity of reactions. You've got the 14-year-old kids who think that texting the person sitting next to them on the couch is a normal undertaking. And putting all their information out on the web as something as a parent, you actually try to stop. They're ready, actually, interestingly enough. They've already gone there, fundamentally. But if you ask me as a society, particularly when it comes to governance, are we ready? The answer is not even close to being ready. The thing about the fourth revolution is it is moving really in three ways that make it very difficult to prepare. One, the velocity at which data comes at you is so great, and the velocity at which business moves is so great that the control functions out there at governmental levels have not kept pace and do not keep pace. The second thing is veracity. The veracity of the data, cyber and all the other issues around it, has also been a tremendous impediment to accepting and allowing this fourth revolution to take place with confidence that the data is not going to be misused. And then there's simply the volume of data, which people really don't comprehend. If you really want to understand why this is such a challenge, the statistics are terrifying, roughly speaking, approximately, 90% of the world's data was generated in the last 24 months. Just 24 months, 90% of the world's data, and it's accelerating. So these are challenges which it's not even a criticism to say that we're not ready for it. It's just a reality that the challenge is so enormous that we're going to have to step it up dramatically as governing bodies and as citizens, really, to make way for this revolution, which is happening. It's not going to happen. It's underway. So we don't have a choice. We have to address these challenges. Just to follow up on that, what does your council do to address this? Is the Global Gender Council on Immersion Technologies? We actually have looked in great detail, frankly, at the impact of this revolution. This is something where we call out the emergent elements of this technology. For instance, we call out specifically AI as being something that, over the next five years, will become pervasive and essentially have a material impact on society. What I mean by a material impact is it will move the needle on society noticeably. Now, what we called out, however, is both the good news and the bad news, the challenge, of course, which is the veracity of the data, the misuse of the data. The good news is it makes intelligence accessible. I refuse to call AI artificial intelligence, partly because it conjures up somebody with a very limited IQ. It's not artificial intelligence. It's accessible intelligence. Think about all the times you've had the urge early on in using computing to take your computer and throw it out the window without first opening the window. There are a lot of people who understand that frustration. Imagine, instead, interacting with an intelligence where if you need information, it is instantly available in natural language and it actually just presents it to you with the supporting data. That's an entirely different world and we are getting there. This is really something that we've focused on, in fact, and as I said, we've called it out explicitly in our GAC. Cory, one of the main stories in the news when people talk about robotics and AI is that whose jobs are going to go next. I'm not going to ask you that. You may get asked by the media here, but I'm going to ask you what areas of life do you think robotics and AI will have the most impact in the coming 24 months? Well, thank you for not asking me the question about jobs. I'm not an economist, so I appreciate that, but I do have a lot to say on where AI and robotics technology is and where it's going. It's already a general purpose technology. It's already embedded in our everyday life. The definition of a robot is something that senses the environment and then acts on the environment. The connection between the sensing and the acting is smart technology. Literally, the printer that you've been using for the past two decades is a robot. Your car has robotic technology and more and more embedded technology as the years have gone on. My eye watch is a robot by definition. Solar panels and windmills are all robotic technology, so it's already embedded in everything that we do. Now, if we start looking forward over the next 24 months, it's a continuum. For example, we've heard about smart homes and smart technology in our homes. That's going to continue with the Internet of Things, the ability to control devices within your home, outside of your home, in your workplace, and it'll just be more and more of a continuum. There's great AI platforms out there. There's a voice activation platform called Houndify. It's like Amazon Echo. Those are all AI platforms that are now being embedded in our everyday life, and that's going to continue. So I think self-driving cars, maybe not in the next 24 months, but certainly the more and more prevalent and more and more of the technology will be incorporated into our automobiles. If you look at any robotic startup Qualcomm, just released their 10 startup companies in robotics. The technology was fantastic. It was ranging anywhere from drone technology to look at agricultural applications, to robotic toys, to a solar-powered lamp that automatically oriented itself to the sun throughout the day. Over the next 24 months, we're going to see more and more robotic technology and robotic and AI technology. In my mind, it's really one and the same. It's a continuum. It's going to be embedded in our day-to-day life. Victoria, I mentioned you're on the Software and Society Council, and Professor Swab mentioned some of the findings that the pay for you put out several weeks ago on technology tipping points. Two of those were involved in robotics. I believe robots in the boardroom by 2025, robots in the pharmacy by 2018. I'm not quite sure if those dates are correct. But there are also 21 other tipping points, so let's not focus just on those two. But were you surprised? This is a major survey of 700, I believe, thought leaders and experts in the IT software world. So we're talking a good sample. Were you surprised by the findings of this report? Yes, to a certain extent. So we are the global donor council in the future of Software and Society. Software is dramatically redesigning our world. And we've already heard on this panel a little bit about that. I mean, IoT, big data, AI, and better technology, unlimited storage, that is all software innovation. And it is letting human beings push beyond the boundaries of human knowledge and human limitations and, at the same time, changing the way that we live our daily lives every day in ways that are really dramatic and rapid and exponential in terms of change. And so what we wanted to do in our GAC is try to help our mission is to help society navigate the enormous impact of those changes. And we thought as a first step is trying to help increase the understanding of the chains that is coming. So that was the purpose behind the survey that we did. And there were some surprising findings. You mentioned AI in the boardroom. In fact, that is something that has already happened. There is already, in Hong Kong, a board that has put AIs, one of their board members. And I think one of the things that was interesting about the report is surprising about the report is the extent to which the future is already here. So we're talking that report a lot about when will the future come. To a great extent, the future is already here. Our concern is that that is not well understood or as well understood as it should be by both the general public and by governments and policymakers. And so what we would like to do is try to help increase that understanding so that we are all collectively better able to navigate the impact and allow human beings to realize the full potential of what is out there. And not to jump ahead, but I think what our group is focused on at the moment is trying to figure out is there a way, is there something that we can do inside of our group that will help specifically help governments, institutions and policies be better at and be more agile at norm setting now that the unseen software revolution is upon us. And it's amazing because you think software, but I think your paper does a very good job of making us aware of just how much it's already embedded in every aspect of our life. Is there any best practice out there? Are you looking at some areas of life, some areas of policy, of government that are doing the job right? So we are having that discussion very actively at the moment to see whether or not there is. I mean, one of our premises is that there might be things that we sort of the global community and governments and institutions could learn from technology development or from software development that would be helpful in terms of making the right policy decisions. I think there's clearly a lot of risks out there. I think we could talk more about what they are, but I think one of the main risks out there is just a lack of understanding. And then I think the question where you go from there is if you can increase that understanding, how can you do it in a way that governments who I think want to make the right decisions, they want to do the right things to their citizens, they want to be able, they want in general to empower human beings to be the best that we can be. How can you help give governments a better framework for how to do that today? So a quick pause to see if there are any questions from our audience. Gentleman there at the back, please wait for the microphone so our online audience can hear. I just wanted to ask the panel. Can you give us your name and your organisation? My name is Nick Hill. I work for a magazine called Trends. And I wanted to have a view on this sort of fear that artificial intelligence is going to create this sort of bipolar world of beggars and billionaires where essentially there's even a more accentuation of inequality in the world, because it's a winner takes at all kind of a scenario with increasing power rested with those who actually come up with these technologies while eliminating jobs. So this is an inclusiveness question, Benny. I tend to take the polar opposite view of what you just stated in the sense that you forget. Most companies that are now engaged in this are actually opening up platforms that are accessible for miniscule costs to everybody via web access, which runs completely counter to what you just said, because what you just implied is that it's a winner takes all, yet the winner can't take all because, as you probably know, controlling the internet is a tricky business and in the end fails. It may take a while, but it does break down. People get access. So it's almost like the democratization. In fact, one of the interesting things that's happened is, as part of our global agenda council, one of the top 10 emerging technologies we're finding is what is called distributed manufacturing, where for the very reason that everybody gets access to the web, you can actually bid out a lot of the work that otherwise would be in a winner takes all environment where somebody locks it in in a particular geography, and people can actually access that work. They can bid on it, and they build an online reputation for their delivery of the goods or the services that have been requested, and then actually build a business from almost nothing. The days of winner takes all really conjure up the days of when it was a capex environment, where you needed to invest a billion dollars, build a fab, go do something, but today you've really gone entirely to operating expense, OPEX, where you essentially don't spend, you don't hire a CIO, you don't build a big infrastructure. It's available essentially through a whole series of various cloud institutions. So it has the promise of potentially at least democratizing what otherwise would have been something driven by the access to capital, which is sort of an old concept. It is an optimistic view. I know there are those who would disagree, but that is the direction at least. It looks like the trajectory is headed. And also I can add to that from what I'm seeing from the innovation and entrepreneur community, which is that there's many robotic and AI toolkits that are being put out there. A lot of people, they may put out a product, but they also put it out in kind of an open way such that people can build on it because it's to everyone's benefit to not recreate the wheel. So we're seeing design challenges where people who are very unsophisticated in terms of their technical training can actually build on these things and submit designs and ideas that are actually quite innovative and then get investment to bring those to fruition. In fact, I think design challenges are a great way to spur innovation and entrepreneurship. And in the technical areas of AI and robotics, we're doing that both with the Stanford Center on Longevity for technologies that can help aging and with the Minister Gagawi's office in Dubai, Robotics for Good competition, which is open right now for another two weeks. So if anyone has a great idea for Robotics for Good, how they can help civil society, that competition is still open. Corey, just on that note, and you talked about new opportunities being opened up. What kind of new areas of new industries, new service models, new business opportunities is AI creating? Well, I mentioned one example earlier, like the Houndify and Amazon Echo, like the voice activation, that's becoming a commoditized technology, voice AI, voice recognition. So now imagine that tied in to almost any industry, and certainly, I'm sure Bernie can speak to that as well, but I think that when you start putting out those platforms, it's really just a limit of the imagination what that can be applied to. That's a whole new way of naturally interfacing with your car, with your devices, and it'll be a continuous as we tie that to the internet of things. It'll be when you ask your car about the weather and then you get to work, your coffee maker will already know that you've asked about the weather and will update you and go to the next level. So I mean, I think it's, we're trying to build on the smartness, yeah. If I could just build on that, because you talked about the limits of imagination and I think it's important for people to remember that what we're talking about is human imagination or pushing past what we think are the limits of human imagination right now. So IBM and Watson are doing incredible work in cancer research and earlier today there was a discussion about if you had a disease, would you rather be treated by a human doctor or would you rather be treated by AI, by Watson, by a robot? And I think the important point is that's not, it's not a binary decision, it's not either or. The real question is how can with software doctors do what they do today even better? And I think that we need to figure out how to empower that to happen as best as we possibly can. I think that is one of the fundamental issues we're facing as a society. Yeah, that's really a perfect synopsis. It's a hybrid solution. What people lose sight of, it's not that the computers are magic, but the fact of the matter is that the machine has predigested let's say 3,500 textbooks, 400,000 articles, 100,000 case studies. And so when a physician is faced with a very anomalous case and Bloomberg did a very interesting video on this where Memorial Sloan Kettering encountered a young woman, she was Asian. She had no clear evidence of having ever smoked and yet at the age of 25 or so she came down with lung cancer, which was almost unheard of. But it turns out that there had been a very recent discovery by somebody independent who wrote an article that with this particular genomic distortion, essentially a genomic abnormality, you are predisposed to this particular form of lung cancer. And very quickly Watson came back saying, yeah, here's why we believe at least that this young woman has these symptoms and by the way here are the treatments we believe that would be effective. It's not magic. It's that computer scale and humans don't. The average physician when we surveyed reads about five technical papers a month. Tens of thousands are written. There is no way to remain omniscient to know everything. There is not a magic here, but the difference is you have this assistive technology where hybrid with the human's understanding of the outcomes is incredibly powerful, but it doesn't displace the physician. They still have to make the call by looking at the supporting data which is also presented and making sure that in fact the supporting data that says this genomic abnormality results in this outcome matches what they're seeing because there's no perfection in the computing and software side. Software has its own interesting things. The blue screen of death is familiar to all of us. So you have to have this checks and balances. It's not at this placement phenomena in many cases and that's really where the power comes when you use this very powerful hybrid capability. Fascinating. Type in one question if anybody has one. Sir, at the back. Please, can you give us your name and your organisation? Hi, I'm Adam Boylemoren. I'm a reporter at the National War and Newspaper in Abu Dhabi. So obviously you guys are quite optimistic, but I'm just wondering how this sort of applies to the Middle East where often the tech infrastructure is not necessarily as good. Governments can be sort of bureaucratic or sclerotic or overly regulatory and tech startups can find life a bit more difficult here than they would in Silicon Valley, say. Just wondering how you think many of these changes could happen in the Middle East or how the Middle East presents distinctive challenges to this kind of picture. You know, forgive me, but sitting here in Abu Dhabi and having been involved with the councils in Dubai the prior year, worked with His Excellency Algargawi who runs the Prime Minister's office, I will tell you that I have not worked in an environment that is actually so conducive to driving innovation and so supportive of it as a national endeavour. This isn't just local, this is being driven at the national level. It's just, you win by example. Not every government will leap in and make this possible, but I am seeing just exemplary behaviour by those who govern here and who support this kind of move into a highly innovative society, one that will try to actually lead this fourth industrial revolution. There is no universal acclaim yet for it and you're right, there will be places, it will be much slower than others, there's no question. But the funny thing about success is it breeds other success, it's leadership. There are people who are showing true leadership in this area and we're seeing it here in this meeting. And leadership is exactly what it sounds like. It sets the pace for the rest of the area. I believe that if you have great success, others will follow because they must follow or be left behind. It just takes one person to lead that race to drag others along. There's a tremendous suction that comes with it. It won't be easy and there will be slow areas, there's no question, but I believe in the end there's enough impetus here, there's critical mass being created in the UAE that it will hopefully spread virally. It's like anything else. Cory, do you want to give us a couple of ways on the robots for good as well? I believe it was launched last year. Any updates on that? Sure. Well, just the prior contest, the Drones for Good had about 800 entries and this second year I've been told about 1,600 entries. And a lot of those entries are from the Middle East. And so I think that went a long way changing public perspective on drones. The idea that drones could be used for so many service applications and applications for civil society. And so we haven't seen the robotics for good applications yet, but there's already 600 of them. So I think the ideas and the call was for robots that can help with education, health, law enforcement, rescue. So I think we're gonna see a lot, we're gonna see a lot of investment and interest and inspiration from the robotics for good competition. Thank you. Well, time is watching on and everybody has meetings to get to. Unfortunately, very sadly, we're going to have to call this issue briefing to an end. Thank you for joining us. Thank you for watching online and thank you very much for being on the panel today. This session is now closed. Thanks.