The Next Decade (Interview)
The first episode of our new livechat series on the next decade A conversation between Futurist and Envisioning CEO, Michell Zappa and L'Atelier BNP PARIBAS CEO, John Egan.
L'Atelier is a foresight business that identifies and contextualises future market opportunities that emerge from technological and societal change.
Transcript
hi Michell, great to have you and
welcome to anybody who is watching us
live at the moment or anybody who
watches this subsequently this is the
first in a series of conversations that
I am having with some of the best
thinkers about the future the most
seamless inform people about technology
that I know will begin this series and
will continue over the next year and the
reason for it is because I believes that
we are at the precipice of a decade of
extraordinary change the type of change
that we typically only see maybe once a
century and that this next decade
between 2020 in 2030 is going to see a
totally different world emerge what's
that in minds I've invited Michelle here
to talk about what his vision of that
future is going to be and what he's
looking out for on the major indicators
and signals that he's considering at the
moment to understand how that future
might manifest Michelle's up ICU of
envisioning one of the best feature
thinkers that I know thank you very much
for joining me well thanks for having me
John I think we've been we could having
these conversations for a while and it's
an exciting used to have it with an
audience and I think I also think that
the role of futurist has changed so much
it's post coltd I think all the rules
the rule looks were thrown out the
window when we realize we needed
ventilators and I think it's almost
pointless to some degree it's become the
role of futures has changed and I think
just reflecting on that it's a it's a
good point because I'm often reticent to
use that term futurist to describe
somebody or the work that we're also
engaged in because I think over the last
few years it has become somewhat suspect
at times but you have always been
somebody that looked at technology and
philosophy and society and the
intersection of those components to
understand how they will actually
converge to produce change and to make
it logically understandable in today's
environment which to me is is the core
responsibility of a future but the term
itself has become somewhat pollution I'd
agree
and but but I mean the reason I select
the technologies because it is fairly
predictable it follows a series of rules
or laws or observations that that seem
to you know that seem to validate
overtime so betting I mean I you can
argue only well that Moore's law might
be you know what might stop in the near
future as people have been doing for a
while but you'd be safer to that that
involved and same thing for other
observations around technologies so and
having that certainty I think helps
because it feels as if we live with a
lot of uncertainty and the world seems
truly unpredictable but I think having
these these syringes to hold on to makes
makes it somewhat more predictable it
makes it so much easier to peer into
what's what's possible now you've said
before as well the role of the future is
not necessarily through rights yeah I
don't think that's very helpful I think
I mean you don't want to be wrong all
the time I think that shows you're poor
yeah for court judgment or for
observational skills but also if you're
right all this time you're only stating
the obvious and you're only emphasizing
the status quo in any one can we're all
futurists and just something we were
always making predictions about what's
wants to come I think the difference
between someone who wears the hat or the
label of the future is those they they
were willing to be the predictions in
public and so further out and I think
yeah I think it's a term charged with
the interpretation than commentation
sure I would I would agree
wholeheartedly with the idea that
technology is for castable like it is
it's actually quite easy to to look at
global university research and patent
registration and investment flow to
begin to assess the pace of development
of a specific technology and predict
within within a period of 24 months when
that technology will become
commercializable it's difficult to
actually forecast is how it'll be used
since the human side that always makes
it difficult though yes that's what
tolerated or decelerate yeah yeah sir
context kills and
and not in large part is pop we're
trying to figure out now are we we know
what is possible in the future we just
don't know how broad those parameters
should be how many different
possibilities actually exists because
you know I think a good place to start
this conversation is the point we're at
now we live at this time of
extraordinary change and I term Drive
been referring to for the last couple of
years this idea about complexity
singularity the world has become so
complex sometime in the last two decades
that is now impossible for an expert in
one field to fully comprehend the
technology or are the advancements in an
adjacent field it's so far it's become
so complex and so when you expect the
average person to consider and
understand the movement of the world and
the movement of Technology and
geopolitics and sociology and climate
and everything else it's beyond the
average person and I think a consequence
of things like conspiracy theories in
make a lot of these things easier for
people to digest but we are exist at
this time of extraordinary change and
extraordinary signals are the things
that you look at at the moment that you
feel like this is a real signal of
things to come and how the world is
going to change over the next ten years
so if we're standing at a point now in
2020 and we're beginning to us we're
moving towards in this conversation a
conversation about what 2030 might look
like are there certain things that you
see now technological sociological
political that you look at and you say
this is going to have deterministic or
this will it is significantly a
comprehensive impact on the world that
we inhabit in the future that I mean you
can argue that the world has always been
this complex but now we're more exposed
to the fact that it is as if we used to
learn about the world we've still
learned about the world in hindsight you
read history and you read how things
were in the past that they seemed
comprehensible to us because that's
that's what's remained it's the history
books it's the whereas in the present I
think it's I think what you're
describing is almost a permanent state
can't understand the fullness of what's
going on we never have we never were
able to do that but now we're more
exposed to it because I think it's
shifting faster because it's
communicating faster so the local truths
as they change I think we'd be exposed
to it a lot more which is causing things
like conspiracy theories or just
challenging what to believe in
it's no longer a parent and it's no
longer obvious and it's no longer clear
who we should be listening to I think
the internet accelerated that over the
last three decades now and giving
everyone a voice has consequences
there's there's some wonderful aspects
to it but but it's also challenging to
not know the holistic to not saying that
the previous model of broadcasting was
correct you know where where it was
cleared in a little listen to you listen
to you know TV one or two you know chat
a lot our child - when I grew up and it
was it was clear that if what the what
the agenda was whereas post internet and
post social media post phones and post
to talk like the more the more of these
channels you have the more unclear it
becomes listen to because because it's
given us all the power of broadcasting
but I think I think I would that's
that's how I would look at them at the
present is I think it's the lack of
clarity stems from the explosion of
these technologies that were that was to
some degree unpredictable how much it
would affect us but I guess it was
anticipated by many I mean what we're
going through now 2016 in particular
that was not me there were people who
were not surprised what had happened and
they have because of the end of looking
at the you know the effects of networks
and technology from that particular lens
but I think so moving into the future it
becomes less and less predictable for
sure because there are so many more
signals there so me or everything
affects everything else and I think
we're being exposed to that natural
national boundaries have a very
different role in 2020 then than they
did in 2010 or 2007 the way we define
ourselves and the way we identify
identified with the network which
whom we've never met in person and how
that's become the norm I think that has
such profound effects that that too
makes it harder and harder to predict
where we're going next yeah I hadn't
really appreciated the relativity point
actually that the fact that regardless
when you're boring you can only exist
within your contemporary environment and
what seems complex to us probably seemed
equally complex to somebody born and in
the 14th century but at the same time I
kind of feel like if somebody who was
born when maybe 40 centuries a bad
example because in plague but
by-and-large somebody born across the
span of five centuries life for twenty
old man or woman would have been almost
identical across that period of time in
a European context for instance which is
which I I think was the core of the
points of where we are moving very
quickly forward now to the extent that
my life is materially different to that
of my parents my father grew up at a
time where electricity in this home and
that's substantially different to to the
environment and also things like pay for
mortality and stuff and quite clearly
population so my parents would have
grown up in a world where population
would have been significantly less than
half of what it is now when every single
person contributes this exponential
growth of complexity and speed of change
and then we add device infrastructure
into it and it becomes even faster but
one other thing which you mentioned
which i think is really relevant is that
what every every new advancement now
with new ways of measuring so therefore
with new ways of understanding is unlike
you said with 2016 forecast like I think
with 2016 in particular just looking at
Twitter you you wouldn't need a
particularly sophisticated tools to
understand that that's the risk of the
two major geopolitical shifts that we
saw were very likely but we're all this
data now we have maybe more ways of
making it comprehensible but then again
only for those who have access to those
two so you have a new capital barrier
that's actually put in place which makes
a which challenges the the way the
social contract is traditionally worked
to some extent but maybe maybe we come
back to that so so we kind of exist in
the contemporary environment now where
looking at this extraordinary world of
geopolitical shifts over the last four
years isn't likely to continue for at
least the medium term or until something
something comes everybody down
unfortunately historically that's
usually mean some foreign conflict
that's only where people have really
learned our massive economic success and
that right now is looking unlikely
everything it looks like we're on the
precipice of the officials of that but
economic collapses is his forward
position one big one for me as well as
population shift so obviously we live in
a world of population is still growing
but there's certain geographies notably
Japan and China where population is set
to decline in an extraordinary rate over
the next 30 years
Europe to some degree you're interested
- yes but I think Europe at a slower
rate I mean obviously the radio it's not
a staggering yeah also with a higher
level of infrastructure or capability
from migration into Europe as well it is
not easy to migrate to China to work
like that is not an easy place to go to
where you can just you know situate
yourself regardless of where your phone
but if China does indeed shrink from a
population of allegedly 1.4 billion -
the estimates of about 650 million over
the next three decades as a consequence
of the one-child policy it has them on
the geopolitics of the region as well
and Japan - a country that's likely to
lose about 50 million in total
population over the next 30 years it
ends up in one of those areas to me we
can look at all the technological
aspects we can look at behavior and
sentiment but ultimately things like
climate population and positioning are
the things an urbanization of migration
or the things that really shape how we
live our lives yeah I mean I think Bruce
Darling has been alluding to an older
and smaller population afraid of the sky
for a while because that's I think
that's what we're moving towards the
megatrends pointed that direction
population that grows older increasingly
urban increasingly worried about the
climate which is the underlying issue
but you know despite all despite all
politics the climate
is is will remain the guard lasat who be
elected
how are you know in all these places
with with with democratic challenges and
I think that's that's yeah the megatrend
points in that direction
but your questions so I think intro to
you know well maybe I jump off it so is
there is there a point historically that
you kind of reflect on and see is maybe
something familiar to what we're
experiencing now can you point to a time
where this combination of factors came
together technology a social change
political change that's an easy no I'd
like I think there is no there's no
document there's no record of precedent
for this and I think it feels like a
singularity I think I think your point
about the complexity clarity is very
violent and I think the issuance of
guarantees is you can't really point you
can't really point to where they started
thinks technological singularity did it
start with Industrial Revolution or with
the semiconductor like 30 because
there's there's no clear line between
when one thing when stopped and the
other began so you could point as far
into the history as you'd like to
indicate when that inflection point
might have or the point of
irreversibility might have happened we
talked about a singularity of something
ahead of us and a point of inflection
but I think that's it always it builds
on these another these inevitability
almost same thing with the power
distribution of technologies but we're
seeing is a replication of existing
systems of power technology and came the
web especially so it grows on a wave of
libertarian independent thinking that I
think is associated with California and
the other aspect of Silicon Valley the
suit of the free thinking false thought
that gave rise to it but it's but it's
effectively
bit echoic economically speaking has
been co-opted by existing power
structures and it's inevitable because
it's who reached there to reach the
amount of people that have access today
of course you need the exist you know
Muni you know the government's
government oversight and but it also I
think replicated
issues that that existed prior to the
web that the web
it was seen as a great equalizer but and
it did to some degree but financially
speaking I think it's just replicating
what we had before which is there - I
see those things like when peering into
the future there's a great principle
which is you-you-you know in order to
anticipate how long something might last
they have to assume that we're at the
midpoint of it so how likely are banks
to be around a century from that will
very likely because they because we've
had them for so long whereas how likely
is tech stocks to be around a century
from out very unlikely because because
of it so I think that that principle
applies when looking at these power
structures and it's one of those
certainties you you you can you can you
can allude to yeah it's and it's a
really useful principle to have
especially as a benchmark when we begin
to misidentify
institutions we we kind of disregard the
time of existence
I think the banking one obviously of
personal interesting what's the use of
them that the levels of which people
have for years now suggested that that
banks are on their last legs and this is
the end of banks for various reasons it
has always struck me as naive thing to
suggest the notion of of replacing our
extra gating banks from an existing
system of society is just not really
feasible in the short term or in the
medium term I think in the long yeah
yeah yeah it's something it's something
to remind although all old crypto fans
and I you know I've shared a sentiment
as well before learning about this is
very useful principle just assume you're
halfway that's a good that's a good
indicator you might be off but you're
not going to be not much off but yeah I
think it's a valid it it's a good
reminder that things will probably keep
looking mostly the same but you have to
identify where the where the more
flexible spots are but I think there's
no precedent of history I think there
has there there is no way to expect it's
irreducible this moment it only were
experiencing it as it's happening and
and I think it has a lot of positive
externalities as well like what well I
mean the upside to having access to any
information is you're free to learn from
anyone the challenge is a discernment
it's like knowing who to listen to and
what listened to but I think there are
many truths that work that that that we
can be exposed to and I think the
internet helps in that regard
so learning from from things that we're
not what we call you know what we call
the mainstream
I think refers to any any mode of
thought I need philosophy and the web
has all the met up it's related to
things like conspiracy theories because
because it's so easy I mean the rabbit
hole is there right there you have no
reason to stop looking things up yeah
I think we've all gone down that route
and realized at some point you know you
stop and you reconsider what what the
likelihood of this this is true but if
either web mobile is that up I think you
know the possibility of many more modes
of thought and it normalizes it too
dangerous degrees with conspiracy
theories but also chip with positive
aspects and you can learn from anyone
you can learn anything from anyone
expose your thoughts to anyone the
construction of long tail communities is
such an enormous T enormous impact on
the world that the idea of us you could
have a hundred villages of a hundred
people and you might have one outlier
thinker in each village about a specific
topic may be more predisposed to
believing in what we see is contemporary
conspiracy theories but once you connect
all those villages now all of a sudden
you have a village into itself
it's just distributed and now where was
one person amongst 100 now we've got a
state where it has a real voice it's got
a hundred people and it's an equivalent
to all these other villages rather than
being one percent of a voice and I think
that idea of a long-term community
construct has had such an extraordinary
impact as well as kind of this idea of
micro generations because now the speed
of change has accelerated so much that
you see these
significantly
a viewer and sentimental sentiment based
changes on people that are four years
apart but they use different devices
they use them differently to use
different social media networks you know
recently I saw there was a kind of viral
piece on Jen's ears talking about how
much they despise Millennials and it was
a fascinating kind of piece of social
commentary to to see there's the gulf
between a group of people are only a few
years part apart
they absolutely diverged in terms of
philosophy and thinking and challenges
and I think that's a really curious
thing to see but the way the internet
amplifies extremities as well I must say
this in a bad way but it's a curious
thing to see that now you've got this
infrastructure of community that used to
provide weight to philosophies and
opinions that previously would have been
disregarded so whether that's Flat Earth
or whatever it happens to be the
chemtrails or yada yada etc etcetera
you've got a situation where all the
sudden there's enough people within this
community construct that a requires
weight to be given to it through the
traditional means of media distribution
and debate that we have because we built
you know we built a debate in a
conversation infrastructure in society
to do two things or a built on it's hard
to be fair and balanced with these
theories
extremely difficult I mean you're the
idea of Mills is kind of free speech
being a kind of a kind instruments of
capitalism that's any opinion in a
market of opinions the best opinions
will be bought and will rise to the top
and those of you hunger really works
when you've got access to money more
markets for that opinion so now the the
mainstream opinion begins not it doesn't
become canon it actually is just
established as the thing that all of the
diverging diverging opinions were
challenged and therefore eats away at
the kind of systemic nature of truth and
Trust that's inherent in it which is
really kind of problematic and maybe a
good jumping off point for moving
forward so okay so if we're kind of
looking for saying this we've never seen
a points in history that resembles that
moment right now in terms of the speed
of
change and the complexity of the change
its geopolitical its climate orientated
there's more people than ever before
technology is accelerating at a pace
that's unfamiliar to everybody
economically were in this kind of
unknown period economically we've never
been we never seen anything remotely
like this and that's that's typically
what bulls will say when justifying
economic positions during the bubble I'm
on the other side of this right now I
was saying that economically we're in
this terrifying moment where a lot of
the infrastructure that we built to
manage our economic system this is now
defunct and we're just we're streaming
down a hill in the darkness without a
break without lights on the car and we
don't know what's gonna happen next now
where we're going to end up so oh go
ahead no it's going to say I think
that's always been true I think that's
the thing is we just realize perhaps
that the slide has been sort of out of
control it's more out of control than we
thought but I think the illusion of
control is part of what has being
shattered and what we're going here and
the excitation that systems can be
managed because you're you're always
managing systems locally but most take
into consideration your allies or your
opponents but you're always managing
like if you're you're a king your
controller that your your your your
state from the top down thinking enough
control but that things happen that are
out of your control and same thing for a
company now it is I think that's never
been true we've learned that they were
so exposed to everything else and to
everyone else that we can't even have
make the assumption that we know where
we're gonna end up please there's
there's this kind of idea of an average
day theory where you can expect on an
average day that a certain thing is
happened and for a long time certain
economically that was the case of
post-war economics because of the social
contract that was put in place across
much of the Western world was reasonably
predictable and there were Black Swan
events that could have created triggers
that created collapses or shocks but
ultimately a person could expect an
average day we're now at a point where
there's no such thing as an average day
anymore we do like every single day
offering surprises and shocks that are
beyond the realms of our imagination so
I ideas that we've never really had
control but before even at a macro level
we understood that in a developed
economy if we saw inflation there was
things that we could do with monetary
policy or the physical policy is that
that could limit that or could restrict
it or it can improve it actually
controllers and once well it's it's
controlled to the extent that you're
trying to push it in a certain direction
hoping that it will go that direction at
least you know you're an active
participant
so at least you know it's like if you're
careening down the hill in this car
you've got some tools at your disposal
that may be able to shift your
directions likely or slow you down we're
now at a point where that's all of those
elements of any sort of control that
gave us the sense of increased levels of
control disappeared and that part of
puts us in this fascinating point where
okay so we if we've identified that
historically we haven't seen anything
like this before going through the very
change
fundamental shifts and here we are
trying to figure out what the future
looks like where do we even begin
so as a futurist where do you begin when
you look at the next 10 years what is
2030 gonna look like and how do you even
begin to consider those possibilities
well I like the shift you described and
in my mind it sounds like the difference
between Newtonian physics and quantum
physics Newtonian tells you that the
world will behave in a predictable way
and if you hit the brakes the car will
stop quantum physics says you know if
you hit the brake it's nothing might
happen the car might fly out you know
might might fly sideways it's not pretty
but it's probably going to stop but it's
not certain that I think we're being
exposed to that faster and faster and
you know at an increasing pace I think a
lot of it has to do with communication
you know the fact that we're sharing so
much more and we're exposed to the rest
of the world to such a degree becomes
virtually impossible
to insulate yourself from from what's
happening everywhere and once I think I
think that's the best that that's the
shirt that I think it's self reinforcing
because the more were exposed to others
the faster we react because we don't
want to feel that we're not just you
know we're not up to speed I think it
affects every I think it affects
everyone equally but how to make
predictions for 2030 I think it goes
back to one of the search engines and
you were talking about the difference
between intergenerational changes and
insures I think again the past changes
happened from one generation to the next
or might be some but within your
lifetime you expect the certain degree
of stability there was no you know no
sudden movements
whereas now the the shifts are happening
with you know from from a day to the
next
the average day perhaps has become non
average as in like you you're to expect
a lot of craziness because that's the
new average because I think young
exposed to the rest of the world we're
more exposed to each other almost
emotionally the way social networks you
know absolutely the way they feel about
things and then amplify certain emotions
more than others it's easier to share
outreach pay done other things on
certain social networks but predicting
yeah back to your question what's buckle
the end of this decade look like I think
it's likely that perspective will still
have devices that we recognize those
smartphones but I think they're gonna be
more distributed and going back to them
to the theme of today I think the notion
of a phone is feels as if it's spreading
out as it is because we're talking to
our headphones we're talking to you are
watching us we're talking to our to our
speakers our televisions like more and
more things surround us are listening so
to speak and the intelligence on the
phone is still listen to driving all of
this or more of it is that the cloud
obviously to become more independent of
the phone but I think the phones still
to some degree it's still the core of it
it's where most innovation hat is
happening therefore it's
more changes happen irrelevant because
there's so much competition for that
market but I see yeah ten years ago
we'll still have it but it's but it but
it becomes more optional you can you can
leave your house without it and it won't
make that much of a difference same way
you can today if you have a watch with
the same shape or Eason and Hanson had
it on so you already feel quite you're
independent of the phone as it is if you
have those devices and I think that's
going to become more and more normal so
do you see so we began the mobile phone
began as a device that allowed us to
speak to one another and then it kind of
evolved into a device that allowed us to
go on the go yeah and then communicate
via text predominantly so I the email or
text forum and then we added new
features to it which allowed us to
consume content and interact with
platforms so now we find ourselves as
it's an entertainment unit effectively
are a it's a tension unit that we spend
a lot of Exile on so obviously was this
enormous need there that we were
probably on aware of in decades past
that people craved in those in-between
moments where you were moving from A to
B or you were static what I would any of
the four stimulus that we were craving
some four stimulus and now the ability
to optimized utility we derive from that
stimulus it has been under to us but how
do we now would you expect that feature
to evolve in a linear trajectory or do
you expect new features being added to
the device that the central device that
we bring with us to allow it to evolve
into another stage that of all is beyond
content because if we don't make many
phone calls anymore that's a small
element of what the phone is used for
but it's the next big I think the phone
I think the the what makes a smart phone
different from any other technologies
but it retains all of those previous
features it's the only is the first good
it is the first ubiquitous multi-purpose
technology most technologies that
succeed do one thing really well a
special-purpose computer that to play
video games on as a console they so much
better than computers because there's
this other focused on one thing a felony
and that's true for most technologies
most ecology will be will finder you
know find their niche or their focus or
their their purpose and double down on
that and that's how they that's how they
grow the smartphone is different because
it has so many complementary uses it's
by the features it's like it's becomes a
camera it becomes a television screen it
becomes anything you wanted to I think
that makes it just things the underlying
intelligence I would separation of the
device itself so I seen the device I
don't see it instead of polarizing in
the sense that in the future everyone
will use it as an entertainment device
exclusively make it because I think it
reaches a certain point certain
threshold and then I might go back I'd
you seen happening now of course you
know faster shorter more immediate
[Music]
immersive experiences I keep going back
to this is a good example of something
that took many people by surprise and
how many you know really quickly with
all of these associated issues but I
think is a good example of faster
shorter or immediate type of
entertainment but I think at the end of
the day the phone will it's gonna it's
gonna it's gonna keep those
characteristics and add more it would
you think it'll be you think it wouldn't
lead innovation or would it be
innovation led by that I mean a lot of
what we've seen in terms of consumer
based companies and technology over the
last ten years has been led by the
smartphone the smartphone exists and
therefore companies have created new
things to reach people through the phone
do you think they'll moving forward that
the phone will begin to respond to the
innovations that are occurring outside
of it or will it continue to be the
platform that leads on there that needs
external or adjacent innovation I agree
that's been sort of fulcrum of the
record for a deflection point of
concentration where almost seems like
all attention software hardware
miniaturization radio networks
everything's been moving in the
direction of making phones smart you're
cheaper more ubiquitous so there's been
and that push is unlikely to go
so the companies working in this basic
thing don't keep adopting because it's
also what's happened is apples
effectively eaten all the profits in
this market on market so you do have
platform competition but not really
because all the money is on one side of
the equation and all the different and
most device are on the other so there's
their stuff this disconnect which which
I think adds a very particular dynamic
to it because you can't really speak
about smartphones in general you can
talk about what you know what Apple
strategy is what Android seems to be
doing if Google will keep you interested
in Android in the long run or you know
what's gonna happen to us because that's
also fractured fracturing so yeah I
think you have to get specific quickly
but I say that the but the role of the
puzzle the role the roles of the phone
will keep multiplying okay so look if
the rules keep on multiplying and it
becomes more distributed does their does
the phone become a notional object you
know do we end up with a situation where
we're using buy augments and implants
that are all connected through private
infrastructure that were how does public
IOT infrastructure interact with this as
well what what you think the phone
actually looks like does it still look
like something you hold in your heart or
is that just a notional concept that you
know maybe there is a screen unit well I
was to consume technology through sites
but actually maybe a lot of the content
that we consume is it's through a
different media I break down the Android
vision from what I think Apple is doing
and what they seem to be doing is
unifying their platforms in a way that
makes that question irrelevant as an the
phone might go away it might remain here
but what do you have access to is always
there and I think you see it I think the
watch with an e service is a great step
in that direction of the fact that don't
worry they're working on AR is is I
think that's it's a common understanding
now it's a matter of when they release
classes I'd start normalizing the
behavior of having augmented so the
division I think that's a matter of time
so and I think what they're doing on on
the operating system from
bring even the max to their own silicon
this is is such as it's a validation of
that theory about this it's it doesn't
matter what device you're on you're
always you're always having access to
the same things they're their
applications or data or whatever you
call it and I don't want to sing a lot
Apple but I think they're very different
from an advertising model but it's
Google that hasn't tried to diversify
for two decades now that hasn't really
succeeded with some very particular
exceptions like YouTube way though but
but generally speaking they're still an
outcome and I think the likelihood have
seen and I think you need platform
innovation together
to pull this off so the devices will
keep you know the screens will get
bigger they'll get smaller the cameras
will pop out or foldout there's going to
be a lot of that I think on the Android
side but I think what vision for 2030
and having things embedded in you yeah
it's the headphones that you check your
temperature
it's the watch that knows your your your
your blood your blood symmetry and your
pulse rate having that having that type
of access I only see one company able to
pull that off where we are right now
yeah you know one interesting thing that
you can see with a lot of the big tech
firms is the desire to create a resource
a kind of a unique competence and that
you can build assets out of so Amazon
you can decide in AWS was the way you
want to go and through a oh but you
asked that gives them this kind of
unlimited potential to create a myriad
new products and solutions and
opportunities and actually they can kind
of be ambivalent to whatever the product
or solution is because he wants to build
this underlying infrastructure I think
with Google it was voice AI it was like
what do we need to do to do voice AI and
the phone was part of that it collect as
much voice data as possible so they can
do leading-edge kind of voice AI I think
the downside of that though is you kind
of understand that they've never really
carried all that much about the phone
thought it was about the data that they
could gather through it that's already
considered whereas Apple are quite
obviously hardware company the carrier
or raison d'etre so I think that that um
that's noticeable you can see that and
III know limitations that out as well
because I don't think Apple are building
the same sort of long-term competencies
that Amazon and Google are when it comes
to respectively AWS and voice AI and
that will create an interesting dynamic
but I do agree with you that in terms of
the actual device infrastructure itself
it's such a it's an extraordinarily
difficult to penetrate like though
obviously it will be at some point but
it's very very difficult to do so you've
also got this kind of nationalistic sort
of defense mechanism which is in the
kind of Western world Apple is
acceptable but the idea of maybe an
Asian competitor is all of a sudden kind
of dangerous what will they do with your
data there are concerns about that and
that goes for Apple as well see you
would be very vocal about this now for
ten years they do not like the idea of
American oil companies owning massive
amounts of European citizen data and
having to sit on the US server so that's
a real problem and I think the EU would
be delighted to see and to facilitate
and the European equivalent of an apple
how but all that to say I agree with you
I think that my view and this is thus
over the next ten years I think we will
see the introduction of kind of what the
first stage of like transhumanism is in
that we will begin to see more
augmentation that were probably hardware
to begin with but it gives us a signal
of what people will begin to do in terms
of bio augmentation over the following
decade that will be everything from coup
sticks to - sighs - whether it's lenses
of truth glasses or ultimately then
contact lenses which are probably if
contact lenses are we've obviously
worked on this recently but they're one
of those technologies that there's a lot
of IP coming through on contact
currencies they're already working demos
I'm not safe an example is of everything
from you've got telescopic contact
lenses that are functional that were
created by EC San Diego very very simple
kind of sea water based contact lenses
that are able with you know
close your eyes twice and you can zoom
on something and then Cosimo's niizuma
you've also got ones that are very
simple ones that are able to give you
directions so you've got a presence that
can give you simple information so they
exist so one would expect in 10 years
time we'll see some evolution for mixed
reality virtual reality augmented
reality our complex complex domains
where III my money right now was much
more on the a rmr side of things or
actuality more generally in the analog
world and it is unvirtuous it seems to
me that that's kind of the the obvious
trajectory that we begin to see the
stratification of digital worlds an
overlay or analog environment that we
can experience to either glasses or
contact lenses that are based on
subscriptions to the first various data
are publicly accessible data that we
have rights to then inform the
environment that we're seeing and
provide data and not just data in terms
of letters and numbers but data in terms
of emphasis color and then a link to you
know acoustic elements that you might
have also in sound so you end up with a
much more interactive and immersive
augmented environment that ultimately
replaces a lot of the dynamics the phone
currently has to allow you to interact
with the world around you in different
ways and the world interact with us I
think this is kind of where this phone
conversation gets positioned because as
we look at the world's emergence in this
new landscape in 2030 and what it's
going to look like and the and the jump
that IOT is going to make over the next
decade and the ability for people to
subscribe to novel data streams it's
such an over the next decade and the
tools to actually leverage them well we
begin to see as a world that interacts
with us rather than us just interacting
with the world around us when the world
interacts with us the purpose of the
phone as we know it now I think changes
orderly it changes totally fundamentally
they do a degree the idea that we we
look at her phone for stimulus may in
part be replaced by the fact that the
stimulus is coming from the buildings
and the windows and the vehicles and
screens around us to Italy so it might
actually be a change that we see
people's vision shift up a layer again
which could be a
same thing to see in the phone itself
then becomes a kind of an operations box
to coordinate a lot of your descriptions
your data your security infrastructure
API access from from third parties or
whatever else that you use it as a and
then I kind of as a last resort sort of
stimulus package of stimulus box for for
a driven content for TV or whatever I
think those the vision for Google glass
I mean as misguided as it was what their
their intention was exactly what you
said about lifting the gates because
they too have been noticing people so
diving into to to smartphones and
realizing not you need an interface that
is higher up and I think it failed for
myriad reasons and I think but I don't
think it's a done technology I think
fairly certain it's going to come back
it's going to be a big Buddhist in the
decade was the rock to be working on it
they are like it's not the first time
we've seen a technology kind of rise and
fall in order to rise again as people
adjusted to it as a concept but I think
for me Google glass was always like I
always refer to it's early-stage
biotechs ultimately like a long term
here what you're looking at is kind of
synthetic eyesight and synthetic
eyeballs and however that works and on a
completely new like we take a step back
and we consider the most formative
technology now we're experiencing now we
will continue to experience over the
next century probably as artificial
intelligence and its various different
forms that it's it's very difficult for
me to imagine an environment or a world
where AI continues to evolve and humans
sit back and allow it what I would
actually introducing the mosaic
components to themselves you know we
will try to augment ourselves as well I
think that feels kind of inevitable
through - we already do what I suppose
but through by augmentation and then the
introduction of AI capacity to our
decision-making process in whatever way
that actually happens but I think from
me that's what Google glass was a signal
to it was this Google and identified and
as Google often do they identify the
need and then totally fail to execute on
the solution but they're very very good
at understanding what the actual need is
and I think what they realized was that
there is this emerging biotech space
where people becoming the compart of
network mesh as the IOT of as IOT
revolves we become very much part of it
and that interactions grow beyond our
five senses to a new range of kind of
digital censorial objectivity that's
facilitated through new augmentation
that gets layered into the body and for
me I think we're going think that's why
they call it I think that's why they
call it a droid as it like I don't think
the name is a coincidence I think like
they they their vision their long-term
vision I never to argue you said earlier
that but Google's but as I became at the
WS and Google is working on police say I
would actually argue that they were
trying to do eight artificial general
intelligence and I think that their
their vision for for computing is is AI
and voice is one of the interfaces and I
think Android the reason it's might even
be called one of the reasons might be
call Android is because they wanted to
be that interface between us and the
data at Google you know the connection
between our reality and their data
stream is the watch you wear the
headphones you have in out of I think
their vision for how to do that don't
with manufacturing wise is proving not
to be ideal they're still trying him
they're still gonna be around in a
decade for sure but I think they're I
think I'd seems as if the companies are
moving in different directions which of
course they have both been very fast and
adopting each other's innovation which i
think is a good is a sign of a healthy
ecosystem but I but I see but and I also
think that AI is it is nowhere near has
the word near the ability and the
roadmap for AI from my perspective the
route the route that we going on for AI
now machine learning and reinforcement
learning doesn't seem to be how you end
up with the artificial general
intelligence you end up with some very
very high-level magic seeming abilities
but it's only but it's reinforcement
right it's reinforcement learning is
decision augmentation
decision augmentation is our good friend
yeah I think it might be that we need
quantum to pull off an artificial
general intelligence I mean we have
quantum is still a black box in terms of
what you can do with it once once you
once we pulled that off
and and I think like it's it's it's
highly highly speculative because
because contras a black box because AI
is another off because we're talking
about consciousness and we have no idea
how conscious even works for us let
alone how to generalize it and simulate
it but but I think well it's an
interesting field to be and that's for
sure no dull days yeah the it's I like
to where you frame that it's got me
thinking but you I think the idea that
um that Google like you know I think the
one thing people often mistake when they
kind of envisions the future because
it's it's typically dumb damn or we we
create these caricatures of what the
future might look like and
retro-futurism it's full of these I mean
it's difficult to give a fully fleshed
out world it's hard to explain that it
goes way beyond the idea of having just
a digital assistant that whispers in
your ear while you've seen hardware
upgrades in the world around you what
for me I think the thing to keep in mind
is that well we look at the human side
of this we're all motivated by this idea
of kind of creating a world of our own
just fine we get up in minds the Bhakra
head were motivated by this idea that
today we're gonna do everything we can
to reduce the friction that we encounter
to create a world of our own design
knowing that it's not it's unachievable
but with the help of this technology it
kind of pushes us closer and closer and
closer to you know the ability to change
aspects of our world and I think what
that's likely to look like is people
begin to totally shift their the
perspective the world that they exist
within and what I mean by that is once
you change the layer of vision that
people see through the frame and that's
editable all of a sudden the world can
be whatever anybody wants it to be you
can use vision you can add in features
you can create the one person will look
up at the sky and you'll see dragons
flowing around because that's what they
want to see we begin to see things like
NFT is allow for the construction of
virtual assets that are unique and
distinctive and can interact with each
other and all of a sudden you begin to
see you know a kind of a appearing or
the strategy
two different layers and that that is a
point of which i think is achievable
within the next 10 years but it totally
then changes the orientation and nature
and use of the phone because if it's
simple stimulation that people are
looking for and they're able to look at
the world around them and tune in to any
of these you know whatever like if it's
imagine a pokemon gold player I think
it's a simple what the evolution of
Pokemon go is and this exists all around
them when they're walking around it
changes the nature of the device when
your vision shifts up like you said
Google I think so yeah I mean my my view
here is that Google are really onto
something in terms of where people will
begin to move or shift into that kind of
transhumanism space and begin to look at
by augmentation more seriously it's
likely to really begin to occur and
earnest over the next decade and kind of
put a layer foundation for the following
decade but it feels like by 20 it will
feel far more normal for people to have
a significant augmentation either
through devisor through implants taking
why some questions I need you so we do
what you think so there's a question
which I don't understand I mean you
think it's what you think of the digital
study you do you think it's better than
all swine study study s T u dy maybe I
think it might be more education so it's
a good place to actually move this now
given that we exist with the environment
it might mean what do we think of the
idea of you've mentioned learning on
YouTube already so I think we're always
learning I think something that's
shifted so something that I can identify
with us having sort of grown up on line
is I'm like to me school was never about
learning learning school was like okay
there here's some basics that I need to
understand but I actually I gathered
either from first night experience or
learning from whatever it was available
online so I sort of grew up with that
regard and everything practical that I
learned how to do I figured out that way
and I think you can generalize that you
can generalize it to the point where
YouTube is probably the
largest educator in the world today in
our education platform in the world and
then you have and I think everyone who's
broadcasting it's what we're doing now
or teach it right over your teaching
whatever we know about these ideas of
the future filler or futurism in general
future studies but at the end of the day
we're I think we're spending a lot more
time learning from each other teaching
each other and I see an increasing
number of companies just moving into
that space like repositioning themselves
as an educational institution because I
realizing what they have is very
valuable we are no exception to that
I noticed that Harvard of announced that
at least for the very I think it's for
the entire year but maybe for the élysée
for the first semester the old classes
will be remote so for all of those
people paying 50 grand and tuition fees
to go to Harvard they're gonna have a
digital experience which you know
fundamentally undermines that the
university but I would I am an advocate
for formal schooling as well because I
think that one of the important things
is that it's important societally that
we all have a systemic grounding in
something common because it improves
communication if we don't understand
each other then all communication breaks
down so what we're really talking about
when we talk about digital education is
adding nuance to perspective and the
Glitter thing yeah the greater the range
of the nuance the more informed of
society is what I think it needs to be
built on a foundation so we teach
everyone fundamental it's like
mathematics and how to speak and how to
communicate to each other and about
history and about geography because
these are the well yeah so history is is
obviously more subjective but a lot of
these things are are they're Friday
sound even your philosophy on helping
people learn how to think once you've
done that to a certain standard and
obviously you're currently schools don't
really do that sufficiently but in
concepts once you've done that to a
certain standard then it allows the
individual to pursue a nuance and
specificity and they're on their own
right and that can be hugely powerful
when it comes to the ability to express
themselves because what we get is far
more unique perspectives in the world
than we would traditionally at heart
that we don't have robots for
getting the exact same rhetoric and the
exact same understanding instead we have
lots of people who unique points of view
and that can only be a positive thing
but for me it's a hybrid it has to be
assembly of both of them you can't I
don't think that digital learning where
our autonomous self led learning will
ever totally replace structured formal
States introduced learning balancing the
challenge really I think much can be
said about self-directed learning and
all your arguments are valid about us
needing some a common baseline
I grew up within a very strong public
school society and system in Sweden I
can I can I can test I can I can vouch
for the importance of having that and
building a sound and rational society
and but I also think that self-directed
learning is inevitable and it's an
increasingly frequent part of how we do
anything and I think so I think learning
how to balance that or even gauging
whether it's something whether whether
are the same whether you're on the same
ground figuratively speaking learning
how to gauge that I think is this
business is important matter because
because we can't close the door to
self-directed learning it's always going
to be there and we kept we can't
algorithmically eliminate fringe
theories they're always going to be
there as well so how do you balance that
I think that's to me that's the
challenge yeah that's a good
conversation to come back to as well how
do you navigate or mitigate some of the
negative externalities of advancement
especially when it's at a pace that's
difficult to consider your legislative
everything else so maybe for another
time but we haven't got much time enough
now so just a quick recap we've we've
kind of identified there were a unique
time in human history we have looked
forward at the future and phone and
identified that the phone itself will
become more decentralized in terms of
its usage and that the world around us
will interact with us more than it does
now and that will change the nature of
the usage that we may see devices that
shift our gaze up again but to conclude
with popular in this future world that
we're considering in 2030 are there
specific technologies that you look at
at the moment and say these are the
technologies that will be fundamental
positively or negatively to the world
that we inhabit in 2030 is there
something you really have your eye on
you said this is really important and we
go back to the pie augmentation that
you've been citing I think that's the
that's a growth area that will look very
different I hope in a decade and I think
it's going to be even I mean I would
going to define knowing more about your
body as one form with augmentation and
and I would go and I would say a decade
from now I think we're still into phase
where you have extremely unobtrusive
ways of knowing what's going on in your
body I think the fit is the counter
example to what I mean that is fun but
it's dumb and it's clunky you know
things thing work here's good it's
gotten better but I think it's a good
it's a good counter example because
that's not what I mean I think what I
mean is for a reason I because they
couldn't really pull off that the
benefit of having were you can we run
for a while you realize actually know
what it's going to tell you by the end
of the day like Africa few days wearing
it wearing it you know what it's going
to tell you it's like if girls jump
after very quickly but the general point
is I think augmentation will take the
form of knowing more about your body in
the shape of unobtrusive devices so it's
the things you're already wearing like
if my phone but I have in my pocket for
X amount of you know X hours a day if
they can tell me a few more things like
my body thought I would you know I would
go for that the watch or the headphones
are more obvious because they're they're
City against your skin I think they will
be the first step towards by
augmentation much more so than say my
two decade show up going to have suit
you know suit the division I think it's
unlikely but I think my glasses will be
pretty to have smart a decade from now
yeah yeah I tend to really think the on
the I was going to mention a different
one but on the the why augmentation
stuff I think the long-term view of by
augmentation is a function of people's
desire to express during dividuals you
know and I think that when
we understand if we look back a stark
you're nobody can be good sure if you're
not always considering the past and
researching the past but what you see
for time immemorial is that people have
fire new ways to express your
individuality it's always been something
humans have being obsessed with and
maybe more now than ever before people
trying to become increasingly self-aware
understand who they are understand their
differences and their nuances and find
new ways to express that and a lot of it
has happened in the last couple of
decades it's very recent I mean now at
the moment we're becoming far more
accepting of people's differences and
how they choose to express themselves
and whether that's something like gender
for instance or whether it's its
sexuality or whether it's philosophy
we're kind of entering a space where
we're becoming more accepting of
people's uniqueness and I think where
that continues to is by augmentation
where people begin and we see lots of
other signals of this in terms of
digital communities and stuff as well
that we begin to see people look at
editing mechanisms and affiliations
based on based on implants and other
forms of bio augmentation which is that
we really fascinating in the longer term
but I think like with google amazon
that's gonna steer a lot of the
innovation that we see that's the way
it's going to lead us people's ability
to you mentioned the first part of it is
ability to assess themselves become more
self-aware to a degree understand their
body more and then as a health mechanism
it ends up being a very effective health
mechanism or preventer of disease but
ultimately I think the other side of
that coin the ability to express
ourselves is going to where the real
innovation in this space happens the one
that I've really been looking at I'm
really kind of fascinated by is
materials so material science
advancements and materials I think at
the moment over the next ten years we're
going to see a significant advancements
and materials a lot of a driven by the
need for solutions to climate and
pollution that we're going to see
significant advancements in material
science and that's going to be
fascinating
changed the way we the world works
around us at the very you know the
longer-term
or so past ten years the nature of the
the infrastructure that we experience
will be different because of
advancements in material science and
well this has always been the case new
materials change the world fundamentally
your people learn to harness wood and in
ceramics and then iron and bronze and
steel and aluminum and etc etc such over
a lot of concrete concrete like material
science changes the world in such a
fundamental way you know we've been
talking about graphene for a long time
now but that's just the gateway drug I
think in terms of material science to a
whole range of new materials are being
developed which I think will totally
change the way we obviously it it
comprehensively reorient eighths and
restrictions the way we interact with
devices like some way you know very very
semiconductors and I've done before so I
think that's the area for me that I
think will have the most comprehensive
impact over the next couple of decades
but yeah I'm particularly expected yeah
I think the sky's the limit of materials
and I think it's a lot has to do with
how you might have not sure it and how
affordably you can make it because most
materials most cutting-edge materials
already exist about their - they're too
expensive to produce and scales and it
has lots of manufacturing as well with
the label industry 4.0 covers how you
automate and make things that scale is
usually the the underlying challenge I
agree with your point about identity at
the back of my mind I kept thinking hair
dye as Salo technology that changed the
personality of a generation
I mean the only particular ways of dying
there but I think artificial hair dye
I've never looked into it but it's one
of those things I think is excelent to
change our ability to identify or to to
to expose our identity in a visual way I
think all the tropes that are
traditionally about blondes and
brunettes or redheads or whatever it is
we've got these kind of caricatures of
people with different hair color and the
ability to be able to
identity through changing your hair
color from one to another is it like
that's such an elegance it's really
elegant example of that the underlying
desire for people to be able to express
themselves differently at different
points in time like humans all want to
be chameleons
what I required characteristics to do so
we want to be able to express yourselves
differently based on that circumstances
we find ourselves in unfortunately we
can't typically do that but for a lot of
people the ability to change shape and
various different ways is super
attractive yeah I think it's it's also
very telling as to how how we categorize
people they because because we're
because we do it instinctively I mean we
we were always categorizing grouping the
moment you walked past one on the street
you assess whether they're a danger to
you or not we're always doing that
intelligence activity and like charisma
all of these characteristics that are
inherently associated to the way we look
and yet to what degree you can affect
that because everyone does everyone is
always tweaking their appearance one way
or another in order to conform to how
they think people want to proceed them
which is very weird there's also an
expression of the way we see ourselves
but I think technology plays a play
plays a significant role in that and I
don't see a lot of research into
technologies for identity particularly
for a definite for expressing your
identity but even gender areas like
gender reassignment surgery is it is an
example of that there are a lot of
technological developments that are
making that possible and what yeah and
whether whether that potential lies was
something that was always there and now
is more plausible or well there's a
chicken or the egg I think it's
impossible to answer but the fact this
is changing our expectations of the
world it's it's it's a complicated area
but like that's that's effectively by
augmentation that is somebody who feels
like they can express themselves more
effectively in a different body and
they're doing what they can to achieve
that and that's like that's such a human
that's such a human thing like everybody
has felt at some point constrained or
claustrophobic in a certain environment
and and the ability to
that environment especially is always
been natural now that environment
sometimes is actually the body that we
inhabit so I think over time there's
also there there's the there's the cost
of phobia sorry to correct the problem
but then there's also the opportunity
side like most people I think would
change something about themselves and
we've seen this massive evidence about
cosmetic surgery how people want to buy
a home it's in a different way to
correct something about themselves
there's this massive signal that tells
us there's a huge industry behind bio
augmentation so you've mentioned things
like you know so hair color but there's
also things like people who have
treatment for skin grafts and I've heard
for bonus and for there are people who
get cosmetic surgery for Murray a
different thing so we see this a normal
signal that technology is constantly
utilized by people to change the way
they feel about themselves are the way
they appear to feel more comfortable or
happier it seems to me that over time
that's only going to become more
significance and it could become more
temporary as well so you might be the
change and change back and then we begin
to experiment feel like things like
obviously cloning technology already
exists I saw a story this morning about
scientists who are trying to comb a 16
thousand year old horse and I'm trying
kind of introduces new stock and like
that is a whole obviously there's ethics
law of not that we discuss change the
nature of who we are as humanity is this
fascinating concept which will likely
not come to fruition in the next decade
it but what's important to remember
about it is that these objectives are
actually what drive the next decade
these are these big ideas that people
are driving towards are what shaped a
decade in front of us because they know
what's achievable and it's possible
within their lifetime so we are my
favorite pieces of science fiction and
transmitter Politan so it covers that
and it's set in this chaotic very
impressive futures it's key like in the
same way that you're describing but
there are no more average days
I think trans meant sort of anticipated
that and what they in one of the
characteristic was you have you have my
augmentation to the
I'm creating new leaks or groups or
classes of people who are there's a
grace they look like alien sites and
it's all by augmentin I think it stems
from by underlying desires like yes
people will use the heck out of
technology to change into how they want
to be perceived tattooing and yeah nose
rings all of that is an example is an
expression of an underlying desire
I think check especially biotech might
open the floodgates for that yeah I
think that's gonna be that that notion
of transhumanism has always existed it
the technology is catching up with the
will at this point that's going to
fundamentally change everything and one
of the interesting things about it would
be that all the sudden people will
become less common our people become
less common their needs for different
products devices solutions also
fractures and that's gonna be a
fascinating kind of environment to
experience conscious that we've got over
time Michelle's so I like to decipher a
recommendation that's a question I'm
going to ask now on 4s Wi-Fi
recommendation I do that but everyone we
interview actually it's one of Morris
their staple questions while hiring and
envisioning is like what's your favorite
signs very telling there is no little
window into but transom ed I can highly
recommend I mean the anticipated logs to
to some degree Trump is in there as well
and not of The Simpsons way a sense of
like of having that particular scene
like the character and the way politics
is treated as entertainment I think was
very it was very insightful yeah
probably 20 plus years ago but this was
an awesome conversation thank you very
much for your time as always very
stimulating thank you grace look I
always appreciate your time
always a pleasure chatting to you thank
you very very much thank you for
everybody who's watching as well or will
watch in the future this is the first in
this series of conversations that I'm
gonna do with people like Michelle who
are extremely well informed about what
the future might look like um hoping a
name for this year you so hopefully by
the time we post recording of this and
YouTube we've got a main story but time
for here and I thank you very much
Michelle tweet your suggestions
suggestions yes what we should call it
boaty mcboatface
thanks a lot never that's never
backfired the history of the Internet
yeah exactly
oh it's a great way to do is cheers
Michelle thank you very much so much ah
good evening
ciao