test.en

you know , one of the intense pleasures of travel and one of the delights of ethnographic research is the opportunity to live amongst those who have not forgotten the old ways , who still feel their past in the wind , touch it in stones polished by rain , taste it in the bitter leaves of plants .
just to know that jaguar shamans still journey beyond the milky way , or the myths of the inuit elders still resonate with meaning , or that in the himalaya , the buddhists still pursue the breath of the dharma , is to really remember the central revelation of anthropology , and that is the idea that the world in which we live does not exist in some absolute sense , but is just one model of reality , the consequence of one particular set of adaptive choices that our lineage made , albeit successfully , many generations ago .
and of course , we all share the same adaptive imperatives .
we 're all born . we all bring our children into the world .
we go through initiation rites .
we have to deal with the inexorable separation of death , so it shouldn 't surprise us that we all sing , we all dance , we all have art .
but what 's interesting is the unique cadence of the song , the rhythm of the dance in every culture .
and whether it is the penan in the forests of borneo , or the voodoo acolytes in haiti , or the warriors in the kaisut desert of northern kenya , the curandero in the mountains of the andes , or a caravanserai in the middle of the sahara -- this is incidentally the fellow that i traveled into the desert with a month ago -- or indeed a yak herder in the slopes of qomolangma , everest , the goddess mother of the world .
all of these peoples teach us that there are other ways of being , other ways of thinking , other ways of orienting yourself in the earth .
and this is an idea , if you think about it , can only fill you with hope .
now , together the myriad cultures of the world make up a web of spiritual life and cultural life that envelops the planet , and is as important to the well-being of the planet as indeed is the biological web of life that you know as a biosphere .
and you might think of this cultural web of life as being an ethnosphere , and you might define the ethnosphere as being the sum total of all thoughts and dreams , myths , ideas , inspirations , intuitions brought into being by the human imagination since the dawn of consciousness .
the ethnosphere is humanity 's great legacy .
it 's the symbol of all that we are and all that we can be as an astonishingly inquisitive species .
and just as the biosphere has been severely eroded , so too is the ethnosphere -- and , if anything , at a far greater rate .
no biologists , for example , would dare suggest that 50 percent of all species or more have been or are on the brink of extinction because it simply is not true , and yet that -- the most apocalyptic scenario in the realm of biological diversity -- scarcely approaches what we know to be the most optimistic scenario in the realm of cultural diversity .
and the great indicator of that , of course , is language loss .
when each of you in this room were born , there were 6,000 languages spoken on the planet .
now , a language is not just a body of vocabulary or a set of grammatical rules .
a language is a flash of the human spirit .
it 's a vehicle through which the soul of each particular culture comes into the material world .
every language is an old-growth forest of the mind , a watershed , a thought , an ecosystem of spiritual possibilities .
and of those 6,000 languages , as we sit here today in monterey , fully half are no longer being whispered into the ears of children .
they 're no longer being taught to babies , which means , effectively , unless something changes , they 're already dead .
what could be more lonely than to be enveloped in silence , to be the last of your people to speak your language , to have no way to pass on the wisdom of the ancestors or anticipate the promise of the children ?
and yet , that dreadful fate is indeed the plight of somebody somewhere on earth roughly every two weeks , because every two weeks , some elder dies and carries with him into the grave the last syllables of an ancient tongue .
and i know there 's some of you who say , " well , wouldn 't it be better , wouldn 't the world be a better place if we all just spoke one language ? " and i say , " great , let 's make that language yoruba . let 's make it cantonese .
let 's make it kogi . "
and you 'll suddenly discover what it would be like to be unable to speak your own language .
and so , what i 'd like to do with you today is sort of take you on a journey through the ethnosphere , a brief journey through the ethnosphere , to try to begin to give you a sense of what in fact is being lost .
now , there are many of us who sort of forget that when i say " different ways of being , " i really do mean different ways of being .
take , for example , this child of a barasana in the northwest amazon , the people of the anaconda who believe that mythologically they came up the milk river from the east in the belly of sacred snakes .
now , this is a people who cognitively do not distinguish the color blue from the color green because the canopy of the heavens is equated to the canopy of the forest upon which the people depend .
they have a curious language and marriage rule which is called " linguistic exogamy : " you must marry someone who speaks a different language .
and this is all rooted in the mythological past , yet the curious thing is in these long houses , where there are six or seven languages spoken because of intermarriage , you never hear anyone practicing a language .
they simply listen and then begin to speak .
or , one of the most fascinating tribes i ever lived with , the waorani of northeastern ecuador , an astonishing people first contacted peacefully in 1958 .
in 1957 , five missionaries attempted contact and made a critical mistake .
they dropped from the air 8 x 10 glossy photographs of themselves in what we would say to be friendly gestures , forgetting that these people of the rainforest had never seen anything two-dimensional in their lives .
they picked up these photographs from the forest floor , tried to look behind the face to find the form or the figure , found nothing , and concluded that these were calling cards from the devil , so they speared the five missionaries to death .
but the waorani didn 't just spear outsiders .
they speared each other .
54 percent of their mortality was due to them spearing each other .
we traced genealogies back eight generations , and we found two instances of natural death and when we pressured the people a little bit about it , they admitted that one of the fellows had gotten so old that he died getting old , so we speared him anyway .
but at the same time they had a perspicacious knowledge of the forest that was astonishing .
their hunters could smell animal urine at 40 paces and tell you what species left it behind .
in the early ' 80s , i had a really astonishing assignment when i was asked by my professor at harvard if i was interested in going down to haiti , infiltrating the secret societies which were the foundation of duvalier 's strength and tonton macoutes , and securing the poison used to make zombies .
in order to make sense out of sensation , of course , i had to understand something about this remarkable faith of vodoun . and voodoo is not a black magic cult .
on the contrary , it 's a complex metaphysical worldview .
it 's interesting .
if i asked you to name the great religions of the world , what would you say ?
christianity , islam , buddhism , judaism , whatever .
there 's always one continent left out , the assumption being that sub-saharan africa had no religious beliefs . well , of course , they did and voodoo is simply the distillation of these very profound religious ideas that came over during the tragic diaspora of the slavery era .
but , what makes voodoo so interesting is that it 's this living relationship between the living and the dead .
so , the living give birth to the spirits .
the spirits can be invoked from beneath the great water , responding to the rhythm of the dance to momentarily displace the soul of the living , so that for that brief shining moment , the acolyte becomes the god .
that 's why the voodooists like to say that " you white people go to church and speak about god .
we dance in the temple and become god . "
and because you are possessed , you are taken by the spirit -- how can you be harmed ?
so you see these astonishing demonstrations : voodoo acolytes in a state of trance handling burning embers with impunity , a rather astonishing demonstration of the ability of the mind to affect the body that bears it when catalyzed in the state of extreme excitation .
now , of all the peoples that i 've ever been with , the most extraordinary are the kogi of the sierra nevada de santa marta in northern colombia .
descendants of the ancient tairona civilization which once carpeted the caribbean coastal plain of colombia , in the wake of the conquest , these people retreated into an isolated volcanic massif that soars above the caribbean coastal plain .
in a bloodstained continent , these people alone were never conquered by the spanish .
to this day , they remain ruled by a ritual priesthood but the training for the priesthood is rather extraordinary .
the young acolytes are taken away from their families at the age of three and four , sequestered in a shadowy world of darkness in stone huts at the base of glaciers for 18 years : two nine-year periods deliberately chosen to mimic the nine months of gestation they spend in their natural mother 's womb ; now they are metaphorically in the womb of the great mother .
and for this entire time , they are inculturated into the values of their society , values that maintain the proposition that their prayers and their prayers alone maintain the cosmic -- or we might say the ecological -- balance .
and at the end of this amazing initiation , one day they 're suddenly taken out and for the first time in their lives , at the age of 18 , they see a sunrise . and in that crystal moment of awareness of first light as the sun begins to bathe the slopes of the stunningly beautiful landscape , suddenly everything they have learned in the abstract is affirmed in stunning glory . and the priest steps back and says , " you see ? it 's really as i 've told you .
it is that beautiful . it is yours to protect . "
they call themselves the " elder brothers " and they say we , who are the younger brothers , are the ones responsible for destroying the world .
now , this level of intuition becomes very important .
whenever we think of indigenous people and landscape , we either invoke rousseau and the old canard of the " noble savage , " which is an idea racist in its simplicity , or alternatively , we invoke thoreau and say these people are closer to the earth than we are .
well , indigenous people are neither sentimental nor weakened by nostalgia .
there 's not a lot of room for either in the malarial swamps of the asmat or in the chilling winds of tibet , but they have , nevertheless , through time and ritual , forged a traditional mystique of the earth that is based not on the idea of being self-consciously close to it , but on a far subtler intuition : the idea that the earth itself can only exist because it is breathed into being by human consciousness .
now , what does that mean ?
it means that a young kid from the andes who 's raised to believe that that mountain is an apu spirit that will direct his or her destiny will be a profoundly different human being and have a different relationship to that resource or that place than a young kid from montana raised to believe that a mountain is a pile of rock ready to be mined .
whether it 's the abode of a spirit or a pile of ore is irrelevant .
what 's interesting is the metaphor that defines the relationship between the individual and the natural world .
i was raised in the forests of british columbia to believe those forests existed to be cut .
that made me a different human being than my friends amongst the kwagiulth who believe that those forests were the abode of huxwhukw and the crooked beak of heaven and the cannibal spirits that dwelled at the north end of the world , spirits they would have to engage during their hamatsa initiation .
now , if you begin to look at the idea that these cultures could create different realities , you could begin to understand some of their extraordinary discoveries . take this plant here .
it 's a photograph i took in the northwest amazon just last april .
this is ayahuasca , which many of you have heard about , the most powerful psychoactive preparation of the shaman 's repertoire .
what makes ayahuasca fascinating is not the sheer pharmacological potential of this preparation , but the elaboration of it . it 's made really of two different sources : on the one hand , this woody liana which has in it a series of beta-carbolines , harmine , harmaline , mildly hallucinogenic -- to take the vine alone is rather to have sort of blue hazy smoke drift across your consciousness -- but it 's mixed with the leaves of a shrub in the coffee family called psychotria viridis .
this plant had in it some very powerful tryptamines , very close to brain serotonin , dimethyltryptamine , 5-methoxydimethyltryptamine .
if you 've ever seen the yanomami blowing that snuff up their noses , that substance they make from a different set of species also contains methoxydimethyltryptamine .
to have that powder blown up your nose is rather like being shot out of a rifle barrel lined with baroque paintings and landing on a sea of electricity .
it doesn 't create the distortion of reality ; it creates the dissolution of reality .
in fact , i used to argue with my professor , richard evan shultes -- who is a man who sparked the psychedelic era with his discovery of the magic mushrooms in mexico in the 1930s -- i used to argue that you couldn 't classify these tryptamines as hallucinogenic because by the time you 're under the effects there 's no one home anymore to experience a hallucination .
but the thing about tryptamines is they cannot be taken orally because they 're denatured by an enzyme found naturally in the human gut called monoamine oxidase .
they can only be taken orally if taken in conjunction with some other chemical that denatures the mao .
now , the fascinating things are that the beta-carbolines found within that liana are mao inhibitors of the precise sort necessary to potentiate the tryptamine . so you ask yourself a question .
how , in a flora of 80,000 species of vascular plants , do these people find these two morphologically unrelated plants that when combined in this way , created a kind of biochemical version of the whole being greater than the sum of the parts ?
well , we use that great euphemism , " trial and error , " which is exposed to be meaningless .
but you ask the indians , and they say , " the plants talk to us . "
well , what does that mean ?
this tribe , the cofan , has 17 varieties of ayahuasca , all of which they distinguish a great distance in the forest , all of which are referable to our eye as one species .
and then you ask them how they establish their taxonomy and they say , " i thought you knew something about plants .
i mean , don 't you know anything ? " and i said , " no . "
well , it turns out you take each of the 17 varieties in the night of a full moon , and it sings to you in a different key .
now , that 's not going to get you a ph.d. at harvard , but it 's a lot more interesting than counting stamens .
now -- -- the problem -- the problem is that even those of us sympathetic with the plight of indigenous people view them as quaint and colorful but somehow reduced to the margins of history as the real world , meaning our world , moves on .
well , the truth is the 20th century , 300 years from now , is not going to be remembered for its wars or its technological innovations , but rather as the era in which we stood by and either actively endorsed or passively accepted the massive destruction of both biological and cultural diversity on the planet . now , the problem isn 't change .
all cultures through all time have constantly been engaged in a dance with new possibilities of life .
and the problem is not technology itself .
the sioux indians did not stop being sioux when they gave up the bow and arrow any more than an american stopped being an american when he gave up the horse and buggy .
it 's not change or technology that threatens the integrity of the ethnosphere . it is power , the crude face of domination .
wherever you look around the world , you discover that these are not cultures destined to fade away ; these are dynamic living peoples being driven out of existence by identifiable forces that are beyond their capacity to adapt to : whether it 's the egregious deforestation in the homeland of the penan -- a nomadic people from southeast asia , from sarawak -- a people who lived free in the forest until a generation ago , and now have all been reduced to servitude and prostitution on the banks of the rivers , where you can see the river itself is soiled with the silt that seems to be carrying half of borneo away to the south china sea , where the japanese freighters hang light in the horizon ready to fill their holds with raw logs ripped from the forest -- or , in the case of the yanomami , it 's the disease entities that have come in , in the wake of the discovery of gold .
or if we go into the mountains of tibet , where i 'm doing a lot of research recently , you 'll see it 's a crude face of political domination .
you know , genocide , the physical extinction of a people is universally condemned , but ethnocide , the destruction of people 's way of life , is not only not condemned , it 's universally , in many quarters , celebrated as part of a development strategy .
and you cannot understand the pain of tibet until you move through it at the ground level .
i once travelled 6,000 miles from chengdu in western china overland through southeastern tibet to lhasa with a young colleague , and it was only when i got to lhasa that i understood the face behind the statistics you hear about : 6,000 sacred monuments torn apart to dust and ashes , 1.2 million people killed by the cadres during the cultural revolution .
this young man 's father had been ascribed to the panchen lama .
that meant he was instantly killed at the time of the chinese invasion .
his uncle fled with his holiness in the diaspora that took the people to nepal .
his mother was incarcerated for the crime of being wealthy .
he was smuggled into the jail at the age of two to hide beneath her skirt tails because she couldn 't bear to be without him .
the sister who had done that brave deed was put into an education camp .
one day she inadvertently stepped on an armband of mao , and for that transgression , she was given seven years of hard labor .
the pain of tibet can be impossible to bear , but the redemptive spirit of the people is something to behold .
and in the end , then , it really comes down to a choice : do we want to live in a monochromatic world of monotony or do we want to embrace a polychromatic world of diversity ?
margaret mead , the great anthropologist , said , before she died , that her greatest fear was that as we drifted towards this blandly amorphous generic world view not only would we see the entire range of the human imagination reduced to a more narrow modality of thought , but that we would wake from a dream one day having forgotten there were even other possibilities .
and it 's humbling to remember that our species has , perhaps , been around for [ 150,000 ] years .
the neolithic revolution -- which gave us agriculture , at which time we succumbed to the cult of the seed ; the poetry of the shaman was displaced by the prose of the priesthood ; we created hierarchy specialization surplus -- is only 10,000 years ago .
the modern industrial world as we know it is barely 300 years old .
now , that shallow history doesn 't suggest to me that we have all the answers for all of the challenges that will confront us in the ensuing millennia .
when these myriad cultures of the world are asked the meaning of being human , they respond with 10,000 different voices .
and it 's within that song that we will all rediscover the possibility of being what we are : a fully conscious species , fully aware of ensuring that all peoples and all gardens find a way to flourish . and there are great moments of optimism .
this is a photograph i took at the northern tip of baffin island when i went narwhal hunting with some inuit people , and this man , olayuk , told me a marvelous story of his grandfather .
the canadian government has not always been kind to the inuit people , and during the 1950s , to establish our sovereignty , we forced them into settlements .
this old man 's grandfather refused to go .
the family , fearful for his life , took away all of his weapons , all of his tools .
now , you must understand that the inuit did not fear the cold ; they took advantage of it .
the runners of their sleds were originally made of fish wrapped in caribou hide .
so , this man 's grandfather was not intimidated by the arctic night or the blizzard that was blowing .
he simply slipped outside , pulled down his sealskin trousers and defecated into his hand . and as the feces began to freeze , he shaped it into the form of a blade .
he put a spray of saliva on the edge of the shit knife and as it finally froze solid , he butchered a dog with it .
he skinned the dog and improvised a harness , took the ribcage of the dog and improvised a sled , harnessed up an adjacent dog , and disappeared over the ice floes , shit knife in belt .
talk about getting by with nothing .
and this , in many ways -- -- is a symbol of the resilience of the inuit people and of all indigenous people around the world .
the canadian government in april of 1999 gave back to total control of the inuit an area of land larger than california and texas put together .
it 's our new homeland . it 's called nunavut .
it 's an independent territory . they control all mineral resources .
an amazing example of how a nation-state can seek restitution with its people .
and finally , in the end , i think it 's pretty obvious at least to all of all us who 've traveled in these remote reaches of the planet , to realize that they 're not remote at all .
they 're homelands of somebody .
they represent branches of the human imagination that go back to the dawn of time . and for all of us , the dreams of these children , like the dreams of our own children , become part of the naked geography of hope .
so , what we 're trying to do at the national geographic , finally , is , we believe that politicians will never accomplish anything .
we think that polemics -- -- we think that polemics are not persuasive , but we think that storytelling can change the world , and so we are probably the best storytelling institution in the world . we get 35 million hits on our website every month .
156 nations carry our television channel .
our magazines are read by millions .
and what we 're doing is a series of journeys to the ethnosphere where we 're going to take our audience to places of such cultural wonder that they cannot help but come away dazzled by what they have seen , and hopefully , therefore , embrace gradually , one by one , the central revelation of anthropology : that this world deserves to exist in a diverse way , that we can find a way to live in a truly multicultural , pluralistic world where all of the wisdom of all peoples can contribute to our collective well-being .
thank you very much .
what i 'm going to show you first , as quickly as i can , is some foundational work , some new technology that we brought to microsoft as part of an acquisition almost exactly a year ago . this is seadragon , and it 's an environment in which you can either locally or remotely interact with vast amounts of visual data .
we 're looking at many , many gigabytes of digital photos here and kind of seamlessly and continuously zooming in , panning through the thing , rearranging it in any way we want .
and it doesn 't matter how much information we 're looking at , how big these collections are or how big the images are .
most of them are ordinary digital camera photos , but this one , for example , is a scan from the library of congress , and it 's in the 300 megapixel range .
it doesn 't make any difference because the only thing that ought to limit the performance of a system like this one is the number of pixels on your screen at any given moment . it 's also very flexible architecture .
this is an entire book , so this is an example of non-image data .
this is " bleak house " by dickens . every column is a chapter .
to prove to you that it 's really text , and not an image , we can do something like so , to really show that this is a real representation of the text ; it 's not a picture .
maybe this is a kind of an artificial way to read an e-book .
i wouldn 't recommend it .
this is a more realistic case . this is an issue of the guardian .
every large image is the beginning of a section .
and this really gives you the joy and the good experience of reading the real paper version of a magazine or a newspaper , which is an inherently multi-scale kind of medium .
we 've also done a little something with the corner of this particular issue of the guardian .
we 've made up a fake ad that 's very high resolution -- much higher than you 'd be able to get in an ordinary ad -- and we 've embedded extra content .
if you want to see the features of this car , you can see it here .
or other models , or even technical specifications .
and this really gets at some of these ideas about really doing away with those limits on screen real estate .
we hope that this means no more pop-ups and other kind of rubbish like that -- shouldn 't be necessary .
of course , mapping is one of those really obvious applications for a technology like this .
and this one i really won 't spend any time on , except to say that we have things to contribute to this field as well .
but those are all the roads in the u.s .
superimposed on top of a nasa geospatial image .
so let 's pull up , now , something else .
this is actually live on the web now ; you can go check it out .
this is a project called photosynth , which really marries two different technologies .
one of them is seadragon and the other is some very beautiful computer vision research done by noah snavely , a graduate student at the university of washington , co-advised by steve seitz at u.w .
and rick szeliski at microsoft research . a very nice collaboration .
and so this is live on the web . it 's powered by seadragon .
you can see that when we kind of do these sorts of views , where we can dive through images and have this kind of multi-resolution experience .
but the spatial arrangement of the images here is actually meaningful .
the computer vision algorithms have registered these images together so that they correspond to the real space in which these shots -- all taken near grassi lakes in the canadian rockies -- all these shots were taken . so you see elements here of stabilized slide-show or panoramic imaging , and these things have all been related spatially .
i 'm not sure if i have time to show you any other environments .
there are some that are much more spatial .
i would like to jump straight to one of noah 's original data-sets -- and this is from an early prototype of photosynth that we first got working in the summer -- to show you what i think is really the punch line behind this technology , the photosynth technology . and it 's not necessarily so apparent from looking at the environments that we 've put up on the website .
we had to worry about the lawyers and so on .
this is a reconstruction of notre dame cathedral that was done entirely computationally from images scraped from flickr . you just type notre dame into flickr , and you get some pictures of guys in t-shirts , and of the campus and so on . and each of these orange cones represents an image that was discovered to belong to this model .
and so these are all flickr images , and they 've all been related spatially in this way .
and we can just navigate in this very simple way .
you know , i never thought that i 'd end up working at microsoft .
it 's very gratifying to have this kind of reception here .
i guess you can see this is lots of different types of cameras : it 's everything from cell phone cameras to professional slrs , quite a large number of them , stitched together in this environment .
and if i can , i 'll find some of the sort of weird ones .
so many of them are occluded by faces , and so on .
somewhere in here there are actually a series of photographs -- here we go .
this is actually a poster of notre dame that registered correctly .
we can dive in from the poster to a physical view of this environment .
what the point here really is is that we can do things with the social environment . this is now taking data from everybody -- from the entire collective memory of , visually , of what the earth looks like -- and link all of that together .
all of those photos become linked together , and they make something emergent that 's greater than the sum of the parts .
you have a model that emerges of the entire earth .
think of this as the long tail to stephen lawler 's virtual earth work .
and this is something that grows in complexity as people use it , and whose benefits become greater to the users as they use it .
their own photos are getting tagged with meta-data that somebody else entered .
if somebody bothered to tag all of these saints and say who they all are , then my photo of notre dame cathedral suddenly gets enriched with all of that data , and i can use it as an entry point to dive into that space , into that meta-verse , using everybody else 's photos , and do a kind of a cross-modal and cross-user social experience that way .
and of course , a by-product of all of that is immensely rich virtual models of every interesting part of the earth , collected not just from overhead flights and from satellite images and so on , but from the collective memory .
thank you so much .
do i understand this right ? that what your software is going to allow , is that at some point , really within the next few years , all the pictures that are shared by anyone across the world are going to basically link together ?
yes . what this is really doing is discovering .
it 's creating hyperlinks , if you will , between images .
and it 's doing that based on the content inside the images .
and that gets really exciting when you think about the richness of the semantic information that a lot of those images have .
like when you do a web search for images , you type in phrases , and the text on the web page is carrying a lot of information about what that picture is of .
now , what if that picture links to all of your pictures ?
then the amount of semantic interconnection and the amount of richness that comes out of that is really huge . it 's a classic network effect .
blaise , that is truly incredible . congratulations .
thanks so much .
i 'm going to talk to you about some stuff that 's in this book of mine that i hope will resonate with other things you 've already heard , and i 'll try to make some connections myself , in case you miss them .
i want to start with what i call the " official dogma . "
the official dogma of what ?
the official dogma of all western industrial societies .
and the official dogma runs like this : if we are interested in maximizing the welfare of our citizens , the way to do that is to maximize individual freedom .
the reason for this is both that freedom is in and of itself good , valuable , worthwhile , essential to being human .
and because if people have freedom , then each of us can act on our own to do the things that will maximize our welfare , and no one has to decide on our behalf .
the way to maximize freedom is to maximize choice .
the more choice people have , the more freedom they have , and the more freedom they have , the more welfare they have .
this , i think , is so deeply embedded in the water supply that it wouldn 't occur to anyone to question it .
and it 's also deeply embedded in our lives .
i 'll give you some examples of what modern progress has made possible for us .
this is my supermarket . not such a big one .
i want to say just a word about salad dressing .
175 salad dressings in my supermarket , if you don 't count the 10 extra-virgin olive oils and 12 balsamic vinegars you could buy to make a very large number of your own salad dressings , in the off-chance that none of the 175 the store has on offer suit you .
so this is what the supermarket is like .
and then you go to the consumer electronics store to set up a stereo system -- speakers , cd player , tape player , tuner , amplifier -- and in this one single consumer electronics store , there are that many stereo systems .
we can construct six-and-a-half-million different stereo systems out of the components that are on offer in one store .
you 've got to admit that 's a lot of choice .
in other domains -- the world of communications .
there was a time , when i was a boy , when you could get any kind of telephone service you wanted , as long as it came from ma bell .
you rented your phone . you didn 't buy it .
one consequence of that , by the way , is that the phone never broke .
and those days are gone .
we now have an almost unlimited variety of phones , especially in the world of cell phones .
these are cell phones of the future .
my favorite is the middle one -- the mp3 player , nose hair trimmer , and creme brulee torch .
and if by some chance you haven 't seen that in your store yet , you can rest assured that one day soon you will .
and what this does is it leads people to walk into their stores asking this question .
and do you know what the answer to this question now is ?
the answer is " no . "
it is not possible to buy a cell phone that doesn 't do too much .
so , in other aspects of life that are much more significant than buying things , the same explosion of choice is true .
health care -- it is no longer the case in the united states that you go to the doctor , and the doctor tells you what to do .
instead , you go to the doctor , and the doctor tells you , " well , we could do a , or we could do b .
a has these benefits , and these risks .
b has these benefits , and these risks . what do you want to do ? "
and you say , " doc , what should i do ? "
and the doc says , " a has these benefits and risks , and b has these benefits and risks .
what do you want to do ? "
and you say , " if you were me , doc , what would you do ? "
and the doc says , " but i 'm not you . "
and the result is -- we call it " patient autonomy , " which makes it sound like a good thing , but what it really is is a shifting of the burden and the responsibility for decision-making from somebody who knows something -- namely , the doctor -- to somebody who knows nothing and is almost certainly sick and thus not in the best shape to be making decisions -- namely , the patient .
there 's enormous marketing of prescription drugs to people like you and me , which , if you think about it , makes no sense at all , since we can 't buy them .
why do they market to us if we can 't buy them ?
the answer is that they expect us to call our doctors the next morning and ask for our prescriptions to be changed .
something as dramatic as our identity has now become a matter of choice , as this slide is meant to indicate .
we don 't inherit an identity ; we get to invent it .
and we get to re-invent ourselves as often as we like .
and that means that everyday , when you wake up in the morning , you have to decide what kind of person you want to be .
with respect to marriage and family , there was a time when the default assumption that almost everyone had is that you got married as soon as you could , and then you started having kids as soon as you could .
the only real choice was who , not when , and not what you did after .
nowadays , everything is very much up for grabs .
i teach wonderfully intelligent students , and i assign 20 percent less work than i used to .
and it 's not because they 're less smart , and it 's not because they 're less diligent .
it 's because they are preoccupied , asking themselves , " should i get married or not ? should i get married now ?
should i get married later ? should i have kids first , or a career first ? "
all of these are consuming questions .
and they 're going to answer these questions , whether or not it means not doing all the work i assign and not getting a good grade in my courses .
and indeed they should . these are important questions to answer .
work -- we are blessed , as carl was pointing out , with the technology that enables us to work every minute of every day from any place on the planet -- except the randolph hotel .
there is one corner , by the way , that i 'm not going to tell anybody about , where the wifi works .
i 'm not telling you about it because i want to use it .
so what this means , this incredible freedom of choice we have with respect to work , is that we have to make a decision , again and again and again , about whether we should or shouldn 't be working .
we can go to watch our kid play soccer , and we have our cell phone on one hip , and our blackberry on our other hip , and our laptop , presumably , on our laps .
and even if they 're all shut off , every minute that we 're watching our kid mutilate a soccer game , we are also asking ourselves , " should i answer this cell phone call ?
should i respond to this email ? should i draft this letter ? "
and even if the answer to the question is " no , " it 's certainly going to make the experience of your kid 's soccer game very different than it would 've been .
so everywhere we look , big things and small things , material things and lifestyle things , life is a matter of choice .
and the world we used to live in looked like this .
that is to say , there were some choices , but not everything was a matter of choice .
and the world we now live in looks like this .
and the question is , is this good news , or bad news ?
and the answer is yes .
we all know what 's good about it , so i 'm going to talk about what 's bad about it .
all of this choice has two effects , two negative effects on people .
one effect , paradoxically , is that it produces paralysis , rather than liberation .
with so many options to choose from , people find it very difficult to choose at all .
i 'll give you one very dramatic example of this : a study that was done of investments in voluntary retirement plans .
a colleague of mine got access to investment records from vanguard , the gigantic mutual fund company of about a million employees and about 2,000 different workplaces .
and what she found is that for every 10 mutual funds the employer offered , rate of participation went down two percent .
you offer 50 funds -- 10 percent fewer employees participate than if you only offer five . why ?
because with 50 funds to choose from , it 's so damn hard to decide which fund to choose that you 'll just put it off until tomorrow .
and then tomorrow , and then tomorrow , and tomorrow , and tomorrow , and of course tomorrow never comes .
understand that not only does this mean that people are going to have to eat dog food when they retire because they don 't have enough money put away , it also means that making the decision is so hard that they pass up significant matching money from the employer .
by not participating , they are passing up as much as 5,000 dollars a year from the employer , who would happily match their contribution .
so paralysis is a consequence of having too many choices .
and i think it makes the world look like this .
you really want to get the decision right if it 's for all eternity , right ?
you don 't want to pick the wrong mutual fund , or even the wrong salad dressing .
so that 's one effect . the second effect is that even if we manage to overcome the paralysis and make a choice , we end up less satisfied with the result of the choice than we would be if we had fewer options to choose from .
and there are several reasons for this .
one of them is that with a lot of different salad dressings to choose from , if you buy one , and it 's not perfect -- and , you know , what salad dressing is ? -- it 's easy to imagine that you could have made a different choice that would have been better . and what happens is this imagined alternative induces you to regret the decision you made , and this regret subtracts from the satisfaction you get out of the decision you made , even if it was a good decision .
the more options there are , the easier it is to regret anything at all that is disappointing about the option that you chose .
second , what economists call " opportunity costs . "
dan gilbert made a big point this morning of talking about how much the way in which we value things depends on what we compare them to .
well , when there are lots of alternatives to consider , it is easy to imagine the attractive features of alternatives that you reject , that make you less satisfied with the alternative that you 've chosen .
here 's an example . for those of you who aren 't new yorkers , i apologize .
but here 's what you 're supposed to be thinking .
here 's this couple on the hamptons .
very expensive real estate .
gorgeous beach . beautiful day . they have it all to themselves .
what could be better ? " well , damn it , " this guy is thinking , " it 's august .
everybody in my manhattan neighborhood is away .
i could be parking right in front of my building . "
and he spends two weeks nagged by the idea that he is missing the opportunity , day after day , to have a great parking space .
opportunity costs subtract from the satisfaction we get out of what we choose , even when what we choose is terrific .
and the more options there are to consider , the more attractive features of these options are going to be reflected by us as opportunity costs .
here 's another example .
now this cartoon makes a lot of points .
it makes points about living in the moment as well , and probably about doing things slowly .
but one point it makes is that whenever you 're choosing one thing , you 're choosing not to do other things .
and those other things may have lots of attractive features , and it 's going to make what you 're doing less attractive .
third : escalation of expectations .
this hit me when i went to replace my jeans .
i wear jeans almost all the time .
and there was a time when jeans came in one flavor , and you bought them , and they fit like crap , and they were incredibly uncomfortable , and if you wore them long enough and washed them enough times , they started to feel ok .
so i went to replace my jeans after years and years of wearing these old ones , and i said , you know , " i want a pair of jeans . here 's my size . "
and the shopkeeper said , " do you want slim fit , easy fit , relaxed fit ?
you want button fly or zipper fly ? you want stonewashed or acid-washed ?
do you want them distressed ?
you want boot cut , you want tapered , blah blah blah ... " on and on he went .
my jaw dropped , and after i recovered , i said , " i want the kind that used to be the only kind . "
he had no idea what that was , so i spent an hour trying on all these damn jeans , and i walked out of the store -- truth ! -- with the best-fitting jeans i had ever had .
i did better . all this choice made it possible for me to do better .
but i felt worse .
why ? i wrote a whole book to try to explain this to myself .
the reason i felt worse is that , with all of these options available , my expectations about how good a pair of jeans should be went up .
i had very low -- i had no particular expectations when they only came in one flavor .
when they came in 100 flavors , damn it , one of them should 've been perfect .
and what i got was good , but it wasn 't perfect .
and so i compared what i got to what i expected , and what i got was disappointing in comparison to what i expected .
adding options to people 's lives can 't help but increase the expectations people have about how good those options will be .
and what that 's going to produce is less satisfaction with results , even when they 're good results .
nobody in the world of marketing knows this , because if they did , you wouldn 't all know what this was about .
the truth is more like this .
the reason that everything was better back when everything was worse is that when everything was worse , it was actually possible for people to have experiences that were a pleasant surprise .
nowadays , the world we live in -- we affluent , industrialized citizens , with perfection the expectation -- the best you can ever hope for is that stuff is as good as you expect it to be .
you will never be pleasantly surprised because your expectations , my expectations , have gone through the roof .
the secret to happiness -- this is what you all came for -- the secret to happiness is low expectations .
i want to say -- just a little autobiographical moment -- that i actually am married to a wife , and she 's really quite wonderful .
i couldn 't have done better . i didn 't settle .
but settling isn 't always such a bad thing .
finally , one consequence of buying a bad-fitting pair of jeans when there is only one kind to buy is that when you are dissatisfied , and you ask why , who 's responsible , the answer is clear : the world is responsible . what could you do ?
when there are hundreds of different styles of jeans available , and you buy one that is disappointing , and you ask why , who 's responsible ?
it is equally clear that the answer to the question is you .
you could have done better .
with a hundred different kinds of jeans on display , there is no excuse for failure .
and so when people make decisions , and even though the results of the decisions are good , they feel disappointed about them ; they blame themselves .
clinical depression has exploded in the industrial world in the last generation .
i believe a significant -- not the only , but a significant -- contributor to this explosion of depression , and also suicide , is that people have experiences that are disappointing because their standards are so high , and then when they have to explain these experiences to themselves , they think they 're at fault .
and so the net result is that we do better in general , objectively , and we feel worse .
so let me remind you .
this is the official dogma , the one that we all take to be true , and it 's all false . it is not true .
there 's no question that some choice is better than none , but it doesn 't follow from that that more choice is better than some choice .
there 's some magical amount . i don 't know what it is .
i 'm pretty confident that we have long since passed the point where options improve our welfare .
now , as a policy matter -- i 'm almost done -- as a policy matter , the thing to think about is this : what enables all of this choice in industrial societies is material affluence .
there are lots of places in the world , and we have heard about several of them , where their problem is not that they have too much choice .
their problem is that they have too little .
so the stuff i 'm talking about is the peculiar problem of modern , affluent , western societies .
and what is so frustrating and infuriating is this : steve levitt talked to you yesterday about how these expensive and difficult-to-install child seats don 't help . it 's a waste of money .
what i 'm telling you is that these expensive , complicated choices -- it 's not simply that they don 't help .
they actually hurt .
they actually make us worse off .
if some of what enables people in our societies to make all of the choices we make were shifted to societies in which people have too few options , not only would those people 's lives be improved , but ours would be improved also .
this is what economists call a " pareto-improving move . "
income redistribution will make everyone better off -- not just poor people -- because of how all this excess choice plagues us .
so to conclude . you 're supposed to read this cartoon , and , being a sophisticated person , say , " ah ! what does this fish know ?
you know , nothing is possible in this fishbowl . "
impoverished imagination , a myopic view of the world -- and that 's the way i read it at first .
the more i thought about it , however , the more i came to the view that this fish knows something .
because the truth of the matter is that if you shatter the fishbowl so that everything is possible , you don 't have freedom . you have paralysis .
if you shatter this fishbowl so that everything is possible , you decrease satisfaction .
you increase paralysis , and you decrease satisfaction .
everybody needs a fishbowl .
this one is almost certainly too limited -- perhaps even for the fish , certainly for us .
but the absence of some metaphorical fishbowl is a recipe for misery , and , i suspect , disaster .
thank you very much .
you know , i 've talked about some of these projects before -- about the human genome and what that might mean , and discovering new sets of genes .
we 're actually starting at a new point : we 've been digitizing biology , and now we 're trying to go from that digital code into a new phase of biology with designing and synthesizing life .
so , we 've always been trying to ask big questions .
" what is life ? " is something that i think many biologists have been trying to understand at various levels .
we 've tried various approaches , paring it down to minimal components .
we 've been digitizing it now for almost 20 years ; when we sequenced the human genome , it was going from the analog world of biology into the digital world of the computer .
now we 're trying to ask , " can we regenerate life or can we create new life out of this digital universe ? "
this is the map of a small organism , mycoplasma genitalium , that has the smallest genome for a species that can self-replicate in the laboratory , and we 've been trying to just see if we can come up with an even smaller genome .
we 're able to knock out on the order of 100 genes out of the 500 or so that are here .
when we look at its metabolic map , it 's relatively simple compared to ours -- trust me , this is simple -- but when we look at all the genes that we can knock out one at a time , it 's very unlikely that this would yield a living cell .
so we decided the only way forward was to actually synthesize this chromosome so we could vary the components to ask some of these most fundamental questions .
and so we started down the road of : can we synthesize a chromosome ?
can chemistry permit making these really large molecules where we 've never been before ?
and if we do , can we boot up a chromosome ?
a chromosome , by the way , is just a piece of inert chemical material .
so , our pace of digitizing life has been increasing at an exponential pace .
our ability to write the genetic code has been moving pretty slowly but has been increasing , and our latest point would put it on , now , an exponential curve .
we started this over 15 years ago .
it took several stages , in fact , starting with a bioethical review before we did the first experiments .
but it turns out synthesizing dna is very difficult .
there are tens of thousands of machines around the world that make small pieces of dna -- 30 to 50 letters in length -- and it 's a degenerate process , so the longer you make the piece , the more errors there are .
so we had to create a new method for putting these little pieces together and correct all the errors .
and this was our first attempt , starting with the digital information of the genome of phi x174 .
it 's a small virus that kills bacteria .
we designed the pieces , went through our error correction and had a dna molecule of about 5,000 letters .
the exciting phase came when we took this piece of inert chemical and put it in the bacteria , and the bacteria started to read this genetic code , made the viral particles .
the viral particles then were released from the cells and came back and killed the e. coli .
i was talking to the oil industry recently and i said they clearly understood that model .
they laughed more than you guys are .
and so , we think this is a situation where the software can actually build its own hardware in a biological system .
but we wanted to go much larger : we wanted to build the entire bacterial chromosome -- it 's over 580,000 letters of genetic code -- so we thought we 'd build them in cassettes the size of the viruses so we could actually vary the cassettes to understand what the actual components of a living cell are .
design is critical , and if you 're starting with digital information in the computer , that digital information has to be really accurate .
when we first sequenced this genome in 1995 , the standard of accuracy was one error per 10,000 base pairs .
we actually found , on resequencing it , 30 errors ; had we used that original sequence , it never would have been able to be booted up .
part of the design is designing pieces that are 50 letters long that have to overlap with all the other 50-letter pieces to build smaller subunits we have to design so they can go together .
we design unique elements into this .
you may have read that we put watermarks in .
think of this : we have a four-letter genetic code -- a , c , g and t .
triplets of those letters code for roughly 20 amino acids , such that there 's a single letter designation for each of the amino acids .
so we can use the genetic code to write out words , sentences , thoughts .
initially , all we did was autograph it .
some people were disappointed there was not poetry .
we designed these pieces so we can just chew back with enzymes ; there are enzymes that repair them and put them together .
and we started making pieces , starting with pieces that were 5,000 to 7,000 letters , put those together to make 24,000-letter pieces , then put sets of those going up to 72,000 .
at each stage , we grew up these pieces in abundance so we could sequence them because we 're trying to create a process that 's extremely robust that you can see in a minute .
we 're trying to get to the point of automation .
so , this looks like a basketball playoff .
when we get into these really large pieces over 100,000 base pairs , they won 't any longer grow readily in e. coli -- it exhausts all the modern tools of molecular biology -- and so we turned to other mechanisms .
we knew there 's a mechanism called homologous recombination that biology uses to repair dna that can put pieces together .
here 's an example of it : there 's an organism called deinococcus radiodurans that can take three millions rads of radiation .
you can see in the top panel , its chromosome just gets blown apart .
twelve to 24 hours later , it put it back together exactly as it was before .
we have thousands of organisms that can do this .
these organisms can be totally desiccated ; they can live in a vacuum .
i am absolutely certain that life can exist in outer space , move around , find a new aqueous environment .
in fact , nasa has shown a lot of this is out there .
here 's an actual micrograph of the molecule we built using these processes , actually just using yeast mechanisms with the right design of the pieces we put them in ; yeast puts them together automatically .
this is not an electron micrograph ; this is just a regular photomicrograph .
it 's such a large molecule we can see it with a light microscope .
these are pictures over about a six-second period .
so , this is the publication we had just a short while ago .
this is over 580,000 letters of genetic code ; it 's the largest molecule ever made by humans of a defined structure .
it 's over 300 million molecular weight .
if we printed it out at a 10 font with no spacing , it takes 142 pages just to print this genetic code .
well , how do we boot up a chromosome ? how do we activate this ?
obviously , with a virus it 's pretty simple ; it 's much more complicated dealing with bacteria .
it 's also simpler when you go into eukaryotes like ourselves : you can just pop out the nucleus and pop in another one , and that 's what you 've all heard about with cloning .
with bacteria and archaea , the chromosome is integrated into the cell , but we recently showed that we can do a complete transplant of a chromosome from one cell to another and activate it .
we purified a chromosome from one microbial species -- roughly , these two are as distant as human and mice -- we added a few extra genes so we could select for this chromosome , we digested it with enzymes to kill all the proteins , and it was pretty stunning when we put this in the cell -- and you 'll appreciate our very sophisticated graphics here .
the new chromosome went into the cell .
in fact , we thought this might be as far as it went , but we tried to design the process a little bit further .
this is a major mechanism of evolution right here .
we find all kinds of species that have taken up a second chromosome or a third one from somewhere , adding thousands of new traits in a second to that species .
so , people who think of evolution as just one gene changing at a time have missed much of biology .
there are enzymes called restriction enzymes that actually digest dna .
the chromosome that was in the cell doesn 't have one ; the chromosome we put in does .
it got expressed and it recognized the other chromosome as foreign material , chewed it up , and so we ended up just with a cell with the new chromosome .
it turned blue because of the genes we put in it .
and with a very short period of time , all the characteristics of one species were lost and it converted totally into the new species based on the new software that we put in the cell .
all the proteins changed , the membranes changed ; when we read the genetic code , it 's exactly what we had transferred in .
so , this may sound like genomic alchemy , but we can , by moving the software of dna around , change things quite dramatically .
now i 've argued , this is not genesis ; this is building on three and a half billion years of evolution .
and i 've argued that we 're about to perhaps create a new version of the cambrian explosion , where there 's massive new speciation based on this digital design .
why do this ?
i think this is pretty obvious in terms of some of the needs .
we 're about to go from six and a half to nine billion people over the next 40 years .
to put it in context for myself : i was born in 1946 .
there are now three people on the planet for every one of us that existed in 1946 ; within 40 years , there 'll be four .
we have trouble feeding , providing fresh , clean water , medicines , fuel for the six and a half billion .
it 's going to be a stretch to do it for nine .
we use over five billion tons of coal , 30 billion-plus barrels of oil -- that 's a hundred million barrels a day .
when we try to think of biological processes or any process to replace that , it 's going to be a huge challenge .
then of course , there 's all that co2 from this material that ends up in the atmosphere .
we now , from our discovery around the world , have a database with about 20 million genes , and i like to think of these as the design components of the future .
the electronics industry only had a dozen or so components , and look at the diversity that came out of that .
we 're limited here primarily by a biological reality and our imagination .
we now have techniques , because of these rapid methods of synthesis , to do what we 're calling combinatorial genomics .
we have the ability now to build a large robot that can make a million chromosomes a day .
when you think of processing these 20 million different genes or trying to optimize processes to produce octane or to produce pharmaceuticals , new vaccines , we can just with a small team , do more molecular biology than the last 20 years of all science .
and it 's just standard selection : we can select for viability , chemical or fuel production , vaccine production , etc .
this is a screen snapshot of some true design software that we 're working on to actually be able to sit down and design species in the computer .
you know , we don 't know necessarily what it 'll look like : we know exactly what their genetic code looks like .
we 're focusing on now fourth-generation fuels .
you 've seen recently , corn to ethanol is just a bad experiment .
we have second- and third-generation fuels that will be coming out relatively soon that are sugar , to much higher-value fuels like octane or different types of butanol .
but the only way we think that biology can have a major impact without further increasing the cost of food and limiting its availability is if we start with co2 as its feedstock , and so we 're working with designing cells to go down this road .
and we think we 'll have the first fourth-generation fuels in about 18 months .
sunlight and co2 is one method ...
but in our discovery around the world , we have all kinds of other methods .
this is an organism we described in 1996 .
it lives in the deep ocean , about a mile and a half deep , almost at boiling-water temperatures .
it takes co2 to methane using molecular hydrogen as its energy source .
we 're looking to see if we can take captured co2 , which can easily be piped to sites , convert that co2 back into fuel to drive this process .
so , in a short period of time , we think that we might be able to increase what the basic question is of " what is life ? "
we truly , you know , have modest goals of replacing the whole petrol-chemical industry -- yeah . if you can 't do that at ted , where can you ? -- become a major source of energy ...
but also , we 're now working on using these same tools to come up with instant sets of vaccines .
you 've seen this year with flu ; we 're always a year behind and a dollar short when it comes to the right vaccine .
i think that can be changed by building combinatorial vaccines in advance .
here 's what the future may begin to look like with changing , now , the evolutionary tree , speeding up evolution with synthetic bacteria , archaea and , eventually , eukaryotes .
we 're a ways away from improving people : our goal is just to make sure that we have a chance to survive long enough to maybe do that . thank you very much .
last year at ted i gave an introduction to the lhc .
and i promised to come back and give you an update on how that machine worked .
so this is it . and for those of you that weren 't there , the lhc is the largest scientific experiment ever attempted -- 27 kilometers in circumference .
its job is to recreate the conditions that were present less than a billionth of a second after the universe began , up to 600 million times a second .
it 's nothing if not ambitious .
this is the machine below geneva .
we take the pictures of those mini-big bangs inside detectors .
this is the one i work on . it 's called the atlas detector -- 44 meters wide , 22 meters in diameter .
spectacular picture here of atlas under construction so you can see the scale .
on the 10th of september last year we turned the machine on for the first time .
and this picture was taken by atlas .
it caused immense celebration in the control room .
it 's a picture of the first beam particle going all the way around the lhc , colliding with a piece of the lhc deliberately , and showering particles into the detector .
in other words , when we saw that picture on september 10th we knew the machine worked , which is a great triumph .
i don 't know whether this got the biggest cheer , or this , when someone went onto google and saw the front page was like that .
it means we made cultural impact as well as scientific impact .
about a week later we had a problem with the machine , related actually to these bits of wire here -- these gold wires .
those wires carry 13 thousand amps when the machine is working in full power .
now the engineers amongst you will look at them and say , " no they don 't . they 're small wires . "
they can do that because when they are very cold they are what 's called superconducting wire .
so at minus 271 degrees , colder than the space between the stars , those wires can take that current .
in one of the joints between over 9,000 magnets in lhc , there was a manufacturing defect .
so the wire heated up slightly , and its 13,000 amps suddenly encountered electrical resistance .
this was the result .
now that 's more impressive when you consider those magnets weigh over 20 tons , and they moved about a foot .
so we damaged about 50 of the magnets .
we had to take them out , which we did .
we reconditioned them all , fixed them .
they 're all on their way back underground now .
by the end of march the lhc will be intact again .
we will switch it on , and we expect to take data in june or july , and continue with our quest to find out what the building blocks of the universe are .
now of course , in a way those accidents reignite the debate about the value of science and engineering at the edge . it 's easy to refute .
i think that the fact that it 's so difficult , the fact that we 're overreaching , is the value of things like the lhc .
i will leave the final word to an english scientist , humphrey davy , who , i suspect , when defending his protege 's useless experiments -- his protege was michael faraday -- said this , " nothing is so dangerous to the progress of the human mind than to assume that our views of science are ultimate , that there are no mysteries in nature , that our triumphs are complete , and that there are no new worlds to conquer . "
thank you .
i am a writer .
writing books is my profession but it 's more than that , of course .
it is also my great lifelong love and fascination .
and i don 't expect that that 's ever going to change .
but , that said , something kind of peculiar has happened recently in my life and in my career , which has caused me to have to recalibrate my whole relationship with this work .
and the peculiar thing is that i recently wrote this book , this memoir called " eat , pray , love " which , decidedly unlike any of my previous books , went out in the world for some reason , and became this big , mega-sensation , international bestseller thing .
the result of which is that everywhere i go now , people treat me like i 'm doomed .
seriously -- doomed , doomed !
like , they come up to me now , all worried , and they say , " aren 't you afraid -- aren 't you afraid you 're never going to be able to top that ?
aren 't you afraid you 're going to keep writing for your whole life and you 're never again going to create a book that anybody in the world cares about at all , ever again ? "
so that 's reassuring , you know .
but it would be worse , except for that i happen to remember that over 20 years ago , when i first started telling people -- when i was a teenager -- that i wanted to be a writer , i was met with this same kind of , sort of fear-based reaction .
and people would say , " aren 't you afraid you 're never going to have any success ?
aren 't you afraid the humiliation of rejection will kill you ?
aren 't you afraid that you 're going to work your whole life at this craft and nothing 's ever going to come of it and you 're going to die on a scrap heap of broken dreams with your mouth filled with bitter ash of failure ? "
like that , you know .
the answer -- the short answer to all those questions is , " yes . "
yes , i 'm afraid of all those things .
and i always have been .
and i 'm afraid of many , many more things besides that people can 't even guess at .
like seaweed , and other things that are scary .
but , when it comes to writing , the thing that i 've been sort of thinking about lately , and wondering about lately , is why ?
you know , is it rational ?
is it logical that anybody should be expected to be afraid of the work that they feel they were put on this earth to do .
you know , and what is it specifically about creative ventures that seems to make us really nervous about each other 's mental health in a way that other careers kind of don 't do , you know ?
like my dad , for example , was a chemical engineer and i don 't recall once in his 40 years of chemical engineering anybody asking him if he was afraid to be a chemical engineer , you know ?
it didn 't -- that chemical engineering block john , how 's it going ?
it just didn 't come up like that , you know ?
but to be fair , chemical engineers as a group haven 't really earned a reputation over the centuries for being alcoholic manic-depressives .
we writers , we kind of do have that reputation , and not just writers , but creative people across all genres , it seems , have this reputation for being enormously mentally unstable .
and all you have to do is look at the very grim death count in the 20th century alone , of really magnificent creative minds who died young and often at their own hands , you know ?
and even the ones who didn 't literally commit suicide seem to be really undone by their gifts , you know .
norman mailer , just before he died , last interview , he said " every one of my books has killed me a little more . "
an extraordinary statement to make about your life 's work , you know .
but we don 't even blink when we hear somebody say this because we 've heard that kind of stuff for so long and somehow we 've completely internalized and accepted collectively this notion that creativity and suffering are somehow inherently linked and that artistry , in the end , will always ultimately lead to anguish .
and the question that i want to ask everybody here today is are you guys all cool with that idea ?
are you comfortable with that -- because you look at it even from an inch away and , you know -- i 'm not at all comfortable with that assumption .
i think it 's odious .
and i also think it 's dangerous , and i don 't want to see it perpetuated into the next century .
i think it 's better if we encourage our great creative minds to live .
and i definitely know that , in my case -- in my situation -- it would be very dangerous for me to start sort of leaking down that dark path of assumption , particularly given the circumstance that i 'm in right now in my career .
which is -- you know , like check it out , i 'm pretty young , i 'm only about 40 years old .
i still have maybe another four decades of work left in me .
and it 's exceedingly likely that anything i write from this point forward is going to be judged by the world as the work that came after the freakish success of my last book , right ?
i should just put it bluntly , because we 're all sort of friends here now -- it 's exceedingly likely that my greatest success is behind me .
oh , so jesus , what a thought !
you know that 's the kind of thought that could lead a person to start drinking gin at nine o 'clock in the morning , and i don 't want to go there .
i would prefer to keep doing this work that i love .
and so , the question becomes , how ?
and so , it seems to me , upon a lot of reflection , that the way that i have to work now , in order to continue writing , is that i have to create some sort of protective psychological construct , right ?
i have to sort of find some way to have a safe distance between me , as i am writing , and my very natural anxiety about what the reaction to that writing is going to be , from now on .
and , as i 've been looking over the last year for models for how to do that i 've been sort of looking across time , and i 've been trying to find other societies to see if they might have had better and saner ideas than we have about how to help creative people , sort of manage the inherent emotional risks of creativity .
and that search has led me to ancient greece and ancient rome .
so stay with me , because it does circle around and back .
but , ancient greece and ancient rome -- people did not happen to believe that creativity came from human beings back then , o.k. ?
people believed that creativity was this divine attendant spirit that came to human beings from some distant and unknowable source , for distant and unknowable reasons .
the greeks famously called these divine attendant spirits of creativity " daemons . "
socrates , famously , believed that he had a daemon who spoke wisdom to him from afar .
the romans had the same idea , but they called that sort of disembodied creative spirit a genius .
which is great , because the romans did not actually think that a genius was a particularly clever individual .
they believed that a genius was this , sort of magical divine entity , who was believed to literally live in the walls of an artist 's studio , kind of like dobby the house elf , and who would come out and sort of invisibly assist the artist with their work and would shape the outcome of that work .
so brilliant -- there it is , right there , that distance that i 'm talking about -- that psychological construct to protect you from the results of your work .
and everyone knew that this is how it functioned , right ?
so the ancient artist was protected from certain things , like , for example , too much narcissism , right ?
if your work was brilliant you couldn 't take all the credit for it , everybody knew that you had this disembodied genius who had helped you .
if your work bombed , not entirely your fault , you know ?
everyone knew your genius was kind of lame .
and this is how people thought about creativity in the west for a really long time .
and then the renaissance came and everything changed , and we had this big idea , and the big idea was let 's put the individual human being at the center of the universe above all gods and mysteries , and there 's no more room for mystical creatures who take dictation from the divine .
and it 's the beginning of rational humanism , and people started to believe that creativity came completely from the self of the individual .
and for the first time in history , you start to hear people referring to this or that artist as being a genius rather than having a genius .
and i got to tell you , i think that was a huge error .
you know , i think that allowing somebody , one mere person to believe that he or she is like , the vessel , you know , like the font and the essence and the source of all divine , creative , unknowable , eternal mystery is just a smidge too much responsibility to put on one fragile , human psyche .
it 's like asking somebody to swallow the sun .
it just completely warps and distorts egos , and it creates all these unmanageable expectations about performance .
and i think the pressure of that has been killing off our artists for the last 500 years .
and , if this is true , and i think it is true , the question becomes , what now ?
can we do this differently ?
maybe go back to some more ancient understanding about the relationship between humans and the creative mystery .
maybe not .
maybe we can 't just erase 500 years of rational humanistic thought in one 18 minute speech .
and there 's probably people in this audience who would raise really legitimate scientific suspicions about the notion of , basically fairies who follow people around rubbing fairy juice on their projects and stuff .
i 'm not , probably , going to bring you all along with me on this .
but the question that i kind of want to pose is -- you know , why not ?
why not think about it this way ?
because it makes as much sense as anything else i have ever heard in terms of explaining the utter maddening capriciousness of the creative process .
a process which , as anybody who has ever tried to make something -- which is to say basically everyone here --- knows does not always behave rationally .
and , in fact , can sometimes feel downright paranormal .
i had this encounter recently where i met the extraordinary american poet ruth stone , who 's now in her 90s , but she 's been a poet her entire life and she told me that when she was growing up in rural virginia , she would be out working in the fields , and she said she would feel and hear a poem coming at her from over the landscape .
and she said it was like a thunderous train of air .
and it would come barreling down at her over the landscape .
and she felt it coming , because it would shake the earth under her feet .
she knew that she had only one thing to do at that point , and that was to , in her words , " run like hell . "
and she would run like hell to the house and she would be getting chased by this poem , and the whole deal was that she had to get to a piece of paper and a pencil fast enough so that when it thundered through her , she could collect it and grab it on the page .
and other times she wouldn 't be fast enough , so she 'd be running and running and running , and she wouldn 't get to the house and the poem would barrel through her and she would miss it and she said it would continue on across the landscape , looking , as she put it " for another poet . "
and then there were these times -- this is the piece i never forgot -- she said that there were moments where she would almost miss it , right ?
so , she 's running to the house and she 's looking for the paper and the poem passes through her , and she grabs a pencil just as it 's going through her , and then she said , it was like she would reach out with her other hand and she would catch it .
she would catch the poem by its tail , and she would pull it backwards into her body as she was transcribing on the page .
and in these instances , the poem would come up on the page perfect and intact but backwards , from the last word to the first .
so when i heard that i was like -- that 's uncanny , that 's exactly what my creative process is like .
that 's not at all what my creative process is -- i 'm not the pipeline !
i 'm a mule , and the way that i have to work is that i have to get up at the same time every day , and sweat and labor and barrel through it really awkwardly .
but even i , in my mulishness , even i have brushed up against that thing , at times .
and i would imagine that a lot of you have too .
you know , even i have had work or ideas come through me from a source that i honestly cannot identify .
and what is that thing ?
and how are we to relate to it in a way that will not make us lose our minds , but , in fact , might actually keep us sane ?
and for me , the best contemporary example that i have of how to do that is the musician tom waits , who i got to interview several years ago on a magazine assignment .
and we were talking about this , and you know , tom , for most of his life he was pretty much the embodiment of the tormented contemporary modern artist , trying to control and manage and dominate these sort of uncontrollable creative impulses that were totally internalized .
but then he got older , he got calmer , and one day he was driving down the freeway in los angeles he told me , and this is when it all changed for him .
and he 's speeding along , and all of a sudden he hears this little fragment of melody , that comes into his head as inspiration often comes , elusive and tantalizing , and he wants it , you know , it 's gorgeous , and he longs for it , but he has no way to get it .
he doesn 't have a piece of paper , he doesn 't have a pencil , he doesn 't have a tape recorder .
so he starts to feel all of that old anxiety start to rise in him like , " i 'm going to lose this thing , and then i 'm going to be haunted by this song forever .
i 'm not good enough , and i can 't do it . "
and instead of panicking , he just stopped .
he just stopped that whole mental process and he did something completely novel .
he just looked up at the sky , and he said , " excuse me , can you not see that i 'm driving ? "
" do i look like i can write down a song right now ?
if you really want to exist , come back at a more opportune moment when i can take care of you .
otherwise , go bother somebody else today .
go bother leonard cohen . "
and his whole work process changed after that .
not the work , the work was still oftentimes as dark as ever .
but the process , and the heavy anxiety around it was released when he took the genie , the genius out of him where it was causing nothing but trouble , and released it kind of back where it came from , and realized that this didn 't have to be this internalized , tormented thing .
it could be this peculiar , wondrous , bizarre collaboration kind of conversation between tom and the strange , external thing that was not quite tom .
so when i heard that story it started to shift a little bit the way that i worked too , and it already saved me once .
this idea , it saved me when i was in the middle of writing " eat , pray , love , " and i fell into one of those , sort of pits of despair that we all fall into when we 're working on something and it 's not coming and you start to think this is going to be a disaster , this is going to be the worst book ever written .
not just bad , but the worst book ever written .
and i started to think i should just dump this project .
but then i remembered tom talking to the open air and i tried it .
so i just lifted my face up from the manuscript and i directed my comments to an empty corner of the room .
and i said aloud , " listen you , thing , you and i both know that if this book isn 't brilliant that is not entirely my fault , right ?
because you can see that i am putting everything i have into this , i don 't have any more than this .
so if you want it to be better , then you 've got to show up and do your part of the deal .
o.k. but if you don 't do that , you know what , the hell with it .
i 'm going to keep writing anyway because that 's my job .
and i would please like the record to reflect today that i showed up for my part of the job . "
because -- in the end it 's like this , o.k. -- centuries ago in the deserts of north africa , people used to gather for these moonlight dances of sacred dance and music that would go on for hours and hours , until dawn .
and they were always magnificent , because the dancers were professionals and they were terrific , right ?
but every once in a while , very rarely , something would happen , and one of these performers would actually become transcendent .
and i know you know what i 'm talking about , because i know you 've all seen , at some point in your life , a performance like this .
it was like time would stop , and the dancer would sort of step through some kind of portal and he wasn 't doing anything different than he had ever done , 1,000 nights before , but everything would align .
and all of a sudden , he would no longer appear to be merely human .
he would be lit from within , and lit from below and all lit up on fire with divinity .
and when this happened , back then , people knew it for what it was , you know , they called it by its name .
they would put their hands together and they would start to chant , " allah , allah , allah , god , god , god . "
that 's god , you know .
curious historical footnote -- when the moors invaded southern spain , they took this custom with them and the pronunciation changed over the centuries from " allah , allah , allah , " to " ole , ole , ole , " which you still hear in bullfights and in flamenco dances .
in spain , when a performer has done something impossible and magic , " allah , ole , ole , allah , magnificent , bravo , " incomprehensible , there it is -- a glimpse of god .
which is great , because we need that .
but , the tricky bit comes the next morning , for the dancer himself , when he wakes up and discovers that it 's tuesday at 11 a.m. , and he 's no longer a glimpse of god .
he 's just an aging mortal with really bad knees , and maybe he 's never going to ascend to that height again .
and maybe nobody will ever chant god 's name again as he spins , and what is he then to do with the rest of his life ?
this is hard .
this is one of the most painful reconciliations to make in a creative life .
but maybe it doesn 't have to be quite so full of anguish if you never happened to believe , in the first place , that the most extraordinary aspects of your being came from you .
but maybe if you just believed that they were on loan to you from some unimaginable source for some exquisite portion of your life to be passed along when you 're finished , with somebody else .
and , you know , if we think about it this way it starts to change everything .
this is how i 've started to think , and this is certainly how i 've been thinking in the last few months as i 've been working on the book that will soon be published , as the dangerously , frighteningly over-anticipated follow up to my freakish success .
and what i have to , sort of keep telling myself when i get really psyched out about that , is , don 't be afraid .
don 't be daunted .
just do your job .
continue to show up for your piece of it , whatever that might be .
if your job is to dance , do your dance .
if the divine , cockeyed genius assigned to your case decides to let some sort of wonderment be glimpsed , for just one moment through your efforts , then " ole ! "
and if not , do your dance anyhow .
and " ole ! " to you , nonetheless .
i believe this and i feel that we must teach it .
" ole ! " to you , nonetheless , just for having the sheer human love and stubbornness to keep showing up .
thank you .
thank you .
ole !
last year i showed these two slides so that demonstrate that the arctic ice cap , which for most of the last three million years has been the size of the lower 48 states , has shrunk by 40 percent .
but this understates the seriousness of this particular problem because it doesn 't show the thickness of the ice .
the arctic ice cap is , in a sense , the beating heart of the global climate system .
it expands in winter and contracts in summer .
the next slide i show you will be a rapid fast-forward of what 's happened over the last 25 years .
the permanent ice is marked in red .
as you see , it expands to the dark blue -- that 's the annual ice in winter , and it contracts in summer .
the so-called permanent ice , five years old or older , you can see is almost like blood , spilling out of the body here .
in 25 years it 's gone from this , to this .
this is a problem because the warming heats up the frozen ground around the arctic ocean , where there is a massive amount of frozen carbon which , when it thaws , is turned into methane by microbes .
compared to the total amount of global warming pollution in the atmosphere , that amount could double if we cross this tipping point .
already in some shallow lakes in alaska , methane is actively bubbling up out of the water .
professor katey walter from the university of alaska went out with another team to another shallow lake last winter .
whoa !
she 's okay . the question is whether we will be .
and one reason is , this enormous heat sink heats up greenland from the north .
this is an annual melting river .
but the volumes are much larger than ever .
this is the kangerlussuaq river in southwest greenland .
if you want to know how sea level rises from land-base ice melting this is where it reaches the sea .
these flows are increasing very rapidly .
at the other end of the planet , antarctica the largest mass of ice on the planet .
last month scientists reported the entire continent is now in negative ice balance .
and west antarctica cropped up on top some under-sea islands , is particularly rapid in its melting .
that 's equal to 20 feet of sea level , as is greenland .
in the himalayas , the third largest mass of ice : at the top you see new lakes , which a few years ago were glaciers .
40 percent of all the people in the world get half of their drinking water from that melting flow .
in the andes , this glacier is the source of drinking water for this city .
the flows have increased .
but when they go away , so does much of the drinking water .
in california there has been a 40 percent decline in the sierra snowpack .
this is hitting the reservoirs .
and the predictions , as you 've read , are serious .
this drying around the world has lead to a dramatic increase in fires .
and the disasters around the world have been increasing at an absolutely extraordinary and unprecedented rate .
four times as many in the last 30 years as in the previous 75 .
this is a completely unsustainable pattern .
if you look at in the context of history you can see what this is doing .
in the last five years we 've added 70 million tons of co2 every 24 hours -- 25 million tons every day to the oceans .
look carefully at the area of the eastern pacific , from the americas , extending westward , and on either side of the indian subcontinent , where there is a radical depletion of oxygen in the oceans .
the biggest single cause of global warming , along with deforestation , which is 20 percent of it , is the burning of fossil fuels .
oil is a problem , and coal is the most serious problem .
the united states is one of the two largest emitters , along with china .
and the proposal has been to build a lot more coal plants .
but we 're beginning to see a sea change .
here are the ones that have been cancelled in the last few years with some green alternatives proposed .
however there is a political battle in our country .
and the coal industries and the oil industries spent a quarter of a billion dollars in the last calendar year promoting clean coal , which is an oxymoron .
that image reminded me of something .
around christmas , in my home in tennessee , a billion gallons of coal sludge was spilled .
you probably saw it on the news .
this , all over the country , is the second largest waste stream in america .
this happened around christmas .
one of the coal industry 's ads around christmas was this one .
frosty the coal man is a jolly , happy soul .
he 's abundant here in america , and he helps our economy grow .
frosty the coal man is getting cleaner everyday .
he 's affordable and adorable , and workers keep their pay .
this is the source of much of the coal in west virginia .
the largest mountaintop miner is the head of massey coal .
let me be clear about it . al gore , nancy pelosi , harry reid , they don 't know what they 're talking about .
so the alliance for climate protection has launched two campaigns .
this is one of them , part of one of them .
at coalergy we view climate change as a very serious threat to our business .
that 's why we 've made it our primary goal to spend a large sum of money on an advertising effort to help bring out and complicate the truth about coal .
the fact is , coal isn 't dirty .
we think it 's clean -- smells good , too .
so don 't worry about climate change .
leave that up to us .
clean coal -- you 've heard a lot about it .
so let 's take a tour of this state-of-the-art clean coal facility .
amazing ! the machinery is kind of loud .
but that 's the sound of clean coal technology .
and while burning coal is one of the leading causes of global warming , the remarkable clean coal technology you see here changes everything .
take a good long look : this is today 's clean coal technology .
finally , the positive alternative meshes with our economic challenge and our national security challenge .
america is in crisis -- the economy , national security , the climate crisis .
the thread that links them all : our addiction to carbon based fuels , like dirty coal and foreign oil .
but now there is a bold new solution to get us out of this mess .
repower america with 100 percent clean electricity within 10 years .
a plan to put america back to work , make us more secure , and help stop global warming .
finally , a solution that 's big enough to solve our problems .
repower america . find out more .
this is the last one .
it 's about repowering america .
one of the fastest ways to cut our dependence on old dirty fuels that are killing our planet .
future 's over here . wind , sun , a new energy grid .
new investments to create high-paying jobs .
repower america . it 's time to get real .
there is an old african proverb that says , " if you want to go quickly , go alone .
if you want to go far , go together . "
we need to go far , quickly .
thank you very much .
i want to start out by asking you to think back to when you were a kid , playing with blocks .
as you figured out how to reach out and grasp , pick them up and move them around , you were actually learning how to think and solve problems by understanding and manipulating spatial relationships .
spatial reasoning is deeply connected to how we understand a lot of the world around us .
so , as a computer scientist inspired by this utility of our interactions with physical objects -- along with my adviser pattie , and my collaborator jeevan kalanithi -- i started to wonder -- what if when we used a computer , instead of having this one mouse cursor that was a like a digital fingertip moving around a flat desktop , what if we could reach in with both hands and grasp information physically , arranging it the way we wanted ?
this question was so compelling that we decided to explore the answer , by building siftables .
in a nutshell , a siftable is an interactive computer the size of a cookie .
they 're able to be moved around by hand , they can sense each other , they can sense their motion , and they have a screen and a wireless radio .
most importantly , they 're physical , so like the blocks , you can move them just by reaching out and grasping .
and siftables are an example of a new ecosystem of tools for manipulating digital information .
and as these tools become more physical , more aware of their motion , aware of each other , and aware of the nuance of how we move them , we can start to explore some new and fun interaction styles .
so , i 'm going to start with some simple examples .
this siftable is configured to show video , and if i tilt it in one direction , it 'll roll the video this way ; if i tilt it the other way it rolls it backwards .
and these interactive portraits are aware of each other .
so if i put them next to each other , they get interested .
if they get surrounded , they notice that too , they might get a little flustered .
and they can also sense their motion and tilt .
one of the interesting implications on interaction , we started to realize , was that we could use everyday gestures on data , like pouring a color the way we might pour a liquid .
so in this case , we 've got three siftables configured to be paint buckets and i can use them to pour color into that central one , where they get mixed .
if we overshoot , we can pour a little bit back .
there are also some neat possibilities for education , like language , math and logic games where we want to give people the ability to try things quickly , and view the results immediately .
so here i 'm -- this is a fibonacci sequence that i 'm making with a simple equation program .
here we have a word game that 's kind of like a mash-up between scrabble and boggle .
basically , in every round you get a randomly assigned letter on each siftable , and as you try to make words it checks against a dictionary .
then , after about 30 seconds , it reshuffles , and you have a new set of letters and new possibilities to try .
thank you .
so these are some kids that came on a field trip to the media lab , and i managed to get them to try it out , and shoot a video .
they really loved it .
and , one of the interesting things about this kind of application is that you don 't have to give people many instructions .
all you have to say is , " make words , " and they know exactly what to do .
so here 's another few people trying it out .
that 's our youngest beta tester , down there on the right .
turns out , all he wanted to do was to stack the siftables up .
so to him , they were just blocks .
now , this is an interactive cartoon application .
and we wanted to build a learning tool for language learners .
and this is felix , actually .
and he can bring new characters into the scene , just by lifting the siftables off the table that have that character shown on them .
here , he 's bringing the sun out .
the sun is rising .
now he 's brought a tractor into the scene .
the orange tractor .
good job ! yeah !
so by shaking the siftables and putting them next to each other he can make the characters interact -- woof !
inventing his own narrative .
hello !
it 's an open-ended story , and he gets to decide how it unfolds .
fly away , cat .
so , the last example i have time to show you today is a music sequencing and live performance tool that we 've built recently , in which siftables act as sounds like lead , bass and drums .
each of these has four different variations , you get to choose which one you want to use .
and you can inject these sounds into a sequence that you can assemble into the pattern that you want .
and you inject it by just bumping up the sound siftable against a sequence siftable .
there are effects that you can control live , like reverb and filter .
you attach it to a particular sound and then tilt to adjust it .
and then , overall effects like tempo and volume that apply to the entire sequence .
so let 's have a look .
we 'll start by putting a lead into two sequence siftables , arrange them into a series , extend it , add a little more lead .
now i put a bass line in .
now i 'll put some percussion in .
and now i 'll attach the filter to the drums , so i can control the effect live .
i can speed up the whole sequence by tilting the tempo one way or the other .
and now i 'll attach the filter to the bass for some more expression .
i can rearrange the sequence while it plays .
so i don 't have to plan it out in advance , but i can improvise , making it longer or shorter as i go .
and now , finally , i can fade the whole sequence out using the volume siftable , tilted to the left .
thank you .
so , as you can see , my passion is for making new human-computer interfaces that are a better match to the ways our brains and bodies work .
and today , i had time to show you one point in this new design space , and a few of the possibilities that we 're working to bring out of the laboratory .
so the thought i want to leave you with is that we 're on the cusp of this new generation of tools for interacting with digital media that are going to bring information into our world on our terms .
thank you very much .
i look forward to talking with all of you .
yes , hello .
i 'm happy to be here .
yes , so , what is biohacking ?
i 'll have to provide some background information here , biohacking deals with modern molecular biology .
i study molecular biology and have been doing research into biohacking for a few years now , i started doing this because i simply wanted to have more detailed knowledge and especially wanted to put what i 'd learned theoretically into practice .
so these were my prime motives .
so it was curiosity and i somehow wanted to get closer to the material , that was it .
i think that molecular biology in general , so generally speaking biotechnology , everything that can be included in that , like synthetic biology , etc .
is of extreme importance today is already extremely important today and will become much more important in the future .
there are controversial topics such as all those genetically modified plants in the fields .
now there 's craig venter in the usa who 's trying to produce biofuel , biodiesel fuel made from algae .
and then there are things that have already become part of everyday life , although most people are not aware of it , such as washing powder enzymes , which allow us to wash clothes at forty degrees , which are also genetically optimised enzymes .
and the list can go on forever .
and so because of my interest in the in this technology , i went delved into it more .
so what why hacking ?
most of us know most people have heard of this in the context of software .
computer hacking , and then in the media it 's yes , hackers break into a place and steal data and so on .
that 's rather sad for the hacker community , because it doesn 't at all fully describe what they actually how it actually all started and what 's behind it .
software hackers started building computers in the seventies and eighties and this gave rise to the internet .
and it deals with problem-solving in a playful , creative , original way .
and a problem , so not only a technical problem , it can also be a social problem , it can also just be an access problem that simplifying things , so any way of looking at a problem , of posing a question , asking how you could do something differently or better .
and it was it developed in the area of software , but it 's also found in the electronics sector where you also find a whole tinkerer scene , which makes all sorts of crazy things with electrical circuits .
and so now you find it in biology , and i 'd like to take a metaphor from synthetic biology , biology is actually an information science because the dna code is an abstract code that yes , it 's not exactly like a computer , because it 's more dynamic , because it 's material , i mean real material , and not just cybernetic .
but it 's also a code , and you can program that and so you can also hack into it , that 's it , and i thought think it 's incredibly fascinating , and i just wanted to really delve into that .
these these networks didn 't really take form until two thousand eight .
there 's hackteria dot org , which originally comes from switzerland , and it 's a network based in europe with a cooperation in india , but it has members and active people all over the world by now .
those are it has a more arty character , so it 's many artists and philosophers are working , together with scientists , on examining these technologies and asking questions and processing the knowledge creatively , there are museum exhibitions and , well , all sorts of things .
but the point is to always find a a really loose approach to it , to deal with it playfully .
and then there 's do-it-yourself-bio- dot-org , diy bio .
that 's a network from the usa , that 's more of a kind of a forum , where you where people can meet and discuss things online .
they are geared more towards the technical as well as the business aspects of it , and so you see more , well , practical questions being asked .
based on these networks , which made the whole thing popular , a scene came into being , which i 'd like to briefly describe .
this picture on the left is of biocurious , that 's a hackerspace , so a kind of school , a private school , a non-profit organisation institution , where anybody can go to .
children , elderly people , all sorts of people go there to simply examine this in a different kind of way , they 've set up a laboratory and look at what can be done there , if at laboratory protocols .
here in the bottom left there 's a group in indonesia , house of natural fibers it 's called , but they 've been around for quite some time .
for a longer time than these other two networks .
they look at biological materials in an artistic way and , yes , also electronic tinkering , and combine this in a very outlandish way .
a group from ankara , that i came into contact with a while ago , they have they are a student group that wanted to inform the public more about what what they learn about at university , and they organised these these little actions at street festivals and tried to explain dna to people .
and in this other image at the top i have a lecture in in copenhagen at the medical museion in combination with an exhibition on the topic .
and that 's , well that 's these are usually really young people , but the only thing that that one that really unites everybody , is this fascination with technology .
and what you can do with it and approaching society very targetedly and asking , right , okay , what do you know , what what do you want to get involved in , are you interested in getting involved in this way ?
so , okay , to hack into biology , you need material .
you need biological materials , but you also need tools , and that 's a laboratory .
or what you would normally understand to be a laboratory , so some cool machines , extremely expensive ones , extremely distant ones , for professional staff , trained academics with a doctor 's degree etc. only .
and our approach was to say , okay , that you don 't actually have to do that .
that 's not necessary in fact , because every every every coffee machine actually uses more advanced technology than most laboratory devices , that 's really true .
and so with this premises with this premises , brian degger in england , for example , tried to set up a mini-laboratory , took a pressure cooker , a hot plate and , yes , soup stock , and bred bacteria with it , working like this .
so anybody who 's ever had a soup gone go bad , because they left it standing for too long , has already done this .
i then tried to expand this at my laboratory back home , and so i bought some secondhand equipment on ebay and did a little dna analysis , and tried to do a paternity test , so dna fingerprinting in other words , at home again .
that 's not supposed to be a joke , but here in the image below you can see there 's the laboratory , in quotation marks , so a closed up garage with all this laboratory equipment that the university got rid of , a group in paris that set something set up something and is very successful with it and does some really interesting things there . i 'd like to briefly mention a project .
that here is biocurious , the hackerspace i mentioned just now , this yes , basically a kind of adult education centre for for molecular biology .
and yes , so you can see that it 's a relatively relatively heterogeneous thing , so from some people who do it on their own from home , to big i mean , larger organisations , who are doing this more formally in an institutionalised form already .
but always always with this this approach , that it should be simple and accessible .
the first project that we did as an international group , when we became aware of ourselves , you might say , okay we exist as a real “ scene ” , and we 're online , and we we know the people who are always chatting there and everything .
and then the founder of do-it-yourself-bio dot org came and said : okay
we really need to meet up now , meet up personally , and he organised two events , one in london , in two thousand ten , and shortly after that in the usa , in san francisco .
and , the focus there was on , so okay , who are we , what do we want , what do we also want what do we want to talk about ?
and what what are our values and what are what are our objectives , our fundamental principles ?
and then we worked on writing up a kind of code of conduct .
that was really intuitive , i mean , everyone expressed their wishes , their and things that move them .
then , in my opinion , a really good code was created .
and that was then it 's not binding , but it 's yes , i think it has managed to become accepted quite well , people are quite convinced about it , yes .
and then we even tried to bring it back into the academic world , but somehow it wasn 't really well received there .
so i think we from the biohacker scene have , in that sense , gone a step further than the the academic world .
yes , what sort of projects do we actually work on ?
a project i set up myself with the hackteria network in switzerland , was one in which we wanted to create a so-called optical trap or optical tweezers .
this is when you focus a laser beam on a in a space , and then you can catch little particles in the air with it or in in liquid and then move them in this focus , so , they 're then trapped in there , so it 's basically like a tractor beam .
that really works , it 's done in an academic setting , and then we thought , okay , we might manage that , and took a webcam , dismantled it , took off the lens , turned it around and then we have a microscope , which has a four hundred fold magnification approximately .
you can see this at the bottom .
and then we took apart a dvd burner and took out the burner the laser and then tried to focus on this camera .
and unfortunately that didn 't work , but we learned a lot in doing so anyhow .
another project , that came from from the french group in paris , did work , and that 's pretty cool .
he took one of these well , one of these one of these devices that measure brain waves , an eeg or something like that , so he was working with neurobiology , his his nickname is sam neurohack .
he then made this this this helmet , and it took place in in cooperation with the museum .
visitors could go into the room , sit down on this chair , and put on this helmet .
their brain waves were then measured , and depending on what they thought about or how they thought , different lights in the roomwent switched on .
was a very a very fancy project .
another thing from the usa that also had to do with paternity test thing , is the the pcr , the polymerase chain reaction , a complicated term .
this is about the copying of genes , replicating genes , dna , fragments , so that you can make them visible .
so when i now that 's what the what profilers do at a crime scene , they go there , collect some hair samples , and then they make these implement this method , and then they can say , okay , this hair belongs to this person , like that .
and the machines that do that are rather expensive , the ones you buy commercially , they start at about four thousand euros at the least .
and that 's not within the range of amateurs , but it 's a really cool technology , which is capable of a lot .
so that 's just one application among many that you can use .
and they have there were two two tinkerers who went to work on it and said , okay , we can make this easier and cheaper , and put together this this piece of equipment from open source stuff , so freely available hardware and electronics and they 're now the they 've now managed to make it ripe for the market and are currently the the cheapest providers of these devices worldwide .
i think the price lies at about six hundred dollars or so .
it 's certainly now it 's that 's still not cheap , but it 's certainly within a range that makes it much more accessible .
so that was a very successful hack in my opinion .
a project i recently started was the building of a gene gun .
a gene gun is , well , a kind of air pressure gun , which shoots about this far , two centimetres or so .
you charge gold particles with dna and then put these gold particles into this air pressure gun , and then i shot at onions and made them light up and stuff like that .
so the device you see here didn 't work .
but that 's my my prototype , which looked pretty wild though , on a branch and that , that thing on it , put the electronics into it and connected pressure to it and that was but the pressure was too high , and the thing broke .
then i took a whipped cream dispenser and connected it to that .
a whipped cream dispenser , when you fill it up with water , it has enough pressure , i think about forty to sixty bar .
and with that you can accelerate the particles strongly enough and then they enter the onions .
and the commercial device for this starts at about fifteen thousand euros or so , whereas whipped cream dispensers cost about fifty euros .
so the it 's not as efficient , but it 's basically doable .
so that 's currently the the core objective of the scene , making the technology more available and increasing the information and comprehensibility , so that that more people can get involved .
because as i said in the beginning , it 's an extremely important technology and most people know relatively little about it and also have no chance of educating themselves really well on it .
because if you just read about it in secondary literature , that 's not the same as when you 've done it yourself or have seen it being done .
and i think technology is becoming increasingly important in our modern societies .
and if , as an informed citizen , you wish to make useful choices in society and want to take part in the discussion , you need access to the knowledge and the technology .
and and you need to do it and understand it if you want to do it and understand it .
and this trades under the names open knowledge and citizen science .
so as a citizen you are put in a position where you can look into these scientific technologies .
and that 's that 's the core concern of of biohackers .
those are the people who are at least officially registered on the website , the diy-bio-dot-org-website .
there 's already a rather impressive number of people worldwide .
and it 's also interesting that they 're also represented in south-east-asia .
that is i think they are less people have registered than actually exist .
i know of some people who haven 't registered .
and they are just the biohackers , individuals .
some of them are also registered together with the hackerspaces , those places .
and that 's just the beginning .
like i said , it all just started in two thousand eight .
and hackerspaces , so computer hackerspaces , c-base in berlin was the first , in nineteen ninety-five .
and that 's become a gigantic network of very good , well , infrastructure centres , which are being represented all over the world .
and of course we hope that we 'll expand in a similar way and also be similarly networked , so that more people can get involved .
and i would like to invite everyone to work on it and event try something yourselves .
it 's not that simple , but it 's also not impossible , and if you 're curious enough and put enough energy into it , you can go far .
thanks for listening .
that was all .
yes , hello .
how do we humans actually function ?
this is a question that really moves me as a designer , but is also of relevance in the area of in the research area usability and especially in the area user experience .
there , the focus is on how to approach people in interactive media , so that they can use interactive media and can come to the most satisfying result possible .
i think that interactive media address archaic , cognitive models in us , in other words thought patterns that were programmed into our biological memory a very , very long time ago and can be elicited through interactive media .
and this is really incredible , because people actually believe that this advanced technology which you come into contact with there , that it transports you into the future , but in fact the future is in us , in our archaic roots .
so what are archaic models ?
i wrote down four keywords and would like to explain them briefly .
archaic models are models that we adopted in pre-industrial times .
intrinsic to these archaic models is the fact that we have a principally natural relationship with virtuality .
that might sound unusual at first .
i will clarify this in a moment , however , and will attempt to prove by an experiment , that you , too , do have a natural relation to virtuality .
and the second aspect is that since we because of these archaic models , we are certainly able to talk in a very , very visual manner , although we use a codified language today .
and the third area speaks for itself really .
we all know that interactive media is , by definition , non-linear , which involves the negation of linearity , and which of course tells us that we consider linearity normal today .
the fourth point is that we see history as a place where information is passed on .
but how is it with with virtuality , which is actually the most natural thing in the world ?
i would like to prove that to you .
how many doors does the house you live in have ?
we you wouldn 't be able to answer that spontaneously , but the following would happen and is happening at this very moment .
in your mind , you are walking through the house where you live , and are seeing how many doors there are .
that is exactly what you are doing .
you are virtualising the reality without a computer .
fantastic , isn 't it ?
at the media campus , for example , we are attempting to render virtual reality in our virtual reality laboratory , but we have actually always been capable of this .
and this this ability to virtualise the virtual reality was something that people in pre-industrial times bitterly needed , because they didn 't have anything .
they didn 't have books , after all .
and they didn 't have photolithography .
they didn 't have mass media .
the only thing they had was their mind .
and in this mind they had memory .
in this mind knowledge was retrieved , and with the help of these virtual images , the imagination , knowledge was was passed on too .
and that 's why it is so strongly rooted in us , this ability to deal with virtuality .
the interesting thing about this is that i can make a short trip .
yes , that 's possible .
the interesting thing about this is that at this moment the human was simultaneously the media producer and medium .
now let 's take that a step further .
what is the media today ?
you will notice that a change has taken place .
but i 'll come back to that in a moment .
a crucial tool in information brokerage has always been stories .
shamans , priests , so-called keepers of knowledge , were specially assigned to preserve knowledge in stories .
and today we are still very , very dependent on stories .
according to the author of the book the storytelling animal , jonathan gottschall , we still spend one thousand nine hundred hours a year on the reception of stories .
that means that once a child has reached the the the age of legal majority , it has spent most of its life receiving stories .
now we think that our love of stories is based on the fact that we sat in the lap of our parents .
no , no , that 's way off .
that goes back a lot further , to the pre-industrial cultures .
what is particularly impressive in the area of interactive media is the fact that we 've anchored the ability to think in a non-linear way in our biological memory .
i brought along an example of the north american tribe of the nootka indians .
they live lived in the coastal region of british columbia .
and as you can see , this is an area that is full of islands and so the people had to somehow navigate through there , from island to island , to find food .
and they did this using so-called lead maps .
perhaps you 've heard of that already , if you have any interest in that , in connection with the australian aboriginals .
they have similar principles .
they don 't have lead maps , but used so-called songlines , or dreampaths
and the interesting thing about that is that the navigation and the topography of regions could be depicted through songs .
and for them language had inferior importance .
that means they navigated through the use of sound and rhythm .
and these sounds and this rhythm depicted the geology and topography of a region and that of course also made it possible to defragment these songs and rearrange them so that you could move to the left and the right and could also return to the starting point .
why do we no longer sing to get from a to b from above ?
at least not to navigate .
what what happened there ?
what happened is the the so-called machine age .
before this , we were in the so-called age of feudalism .
then the machine age happened and the book and then we had photolithography .
and what happened is that we transferred the responsibility for our memories and the the production of our individual memories to external media .
to the book and to the image .
the consequence of this is that we 've unfortunately lost a good deal of our ability to virtualise .
virtuality has suddenly become something alien to us
and has nothing more to do with reality .
bruce brown , a famous design researcher at brighton university , went so far as to say that mass media and he means books and images , not tv , the internet etc. which is what we would define as mass media today that these mass media have turned our memories to stone and have eroded our ability to virtualise .
let 's make a short provisional appraisal .
from the age of feudalism to the to the machine age .
what has an influence on our on our thinking and our ability to remember ?
those are the declining influences of the pre-industrial cultures .
and they will they have been increasingly overwritten during the course of the centuries by the influences of the machine age .
that means that instead of having individual memories , we have standardised , widespread patterns of memories , onto which we can attach our personal memories .
we no longer produce .
we have an abstract an abstracted language .
we no longer imagine the thing in images things in images , but codify them through language .
we 've got used to things happening in a linear fashion .
and we 've accepted linearity as the law and there are only exceptions , such as non-linearity .
what 's left is storytelling .
we 're still extremely attached to storytelling as a method of information brokerage .
the question is , what will come next ?
we had the age of feudalism , we have had the machine age and we are now stepping into the so-called cyber age .
that sounds very spacey and like science fiction , i know .
but the concepts of the cyber age , they are returning these these possibilities to rediscover our abilities .
this is about virtuality , about non-linearity , about storytelling .
i 'd like to explain that a little more .
there are technical concepts such as “ augmented reality ” .
so if you think of the google glasses for example , then that 's one of those concepts that allows us to combine the virtual world with the real world again , and so that means our affinity for virtualisation , of experiencing the virtual as something normal and natural , is being addressed again .
another example is so-called virtual reality as crazy as that may of course sound in the context of my presentation , we are physically moving in non-existent , virtual worlds there , according to the example of the holodeck .
and other another example are the ambient , intelligent systems .
those are spaces that are able to react to a human intelligently .
all that calls for the ability , our fundamental ability to accept virtuality as a real living space .
to finish , i brought along , and i hope the video works , a very , very beautiful project , which are the final bachelor 's projects by michael burk , ann-kathrin krenz , joris klause and jan-moritz müller .
the last two mentioned are also present today .
perhaps you could just briefly stand up , so people can talk to you about the project during the break if they want to .
i brought this project along as an example to illustrate how these archaic , cognitive models are being addressed again .
the whole thing is a game , i must add .
which of course very much accommodates for storytelling , and it 's a computer game .
and when i say " computer game " , you probably are imagining a number of persons people jumping around in front of some game consoles or perhaps you see yourself playing about with a some game console .
in any case , you imagine it happening inside .
this is a game for outside .
and it was expressly designed to enable me to discover the outside world , to rediscover the real world .
and this game connects the virtual world , so the data the data space that we produce , with the real world .
i 'm sorry i have to keep this so short .
you can explain this much more elaborately later on , as there 's more much more to this .
the point of the game is that i discover a city by looking at which places have been mentioned positively or negatively on twitter .
and so i can have a very different view of the city , a very different impression , because i see negative and positive zones of a city and , in this way , have a very different , virtual map of a very real city .
we can take a look at that now .
ah , what you can see here , sorry , is a short explanation of what we 're about to see .
of course this virtual world exists within the walls of our cities , that 's obvious .
using a kind of torch , we can make these virtual worlds visible .
right , i 'd like to summarise my my presentation by stating that the characteristics and abilities that we acquired during the age of feudalism , and which went a little lost during the machine age , that they can be reactivated with the help of the so-called cyber age and so that we can , in this way , actually go back to our roots rather than the future through complex , technological , new products .
thank you .
yes , i 'm very happy to be here .
i was just asked whether this sack is a talking sack and will talk for me .
it won 't .
i 'll be revealing what 's inside of it in a moment .
but for now i 'll just keep up the suspense .
yes , children are or should be naturally curious , and so are designers .
i 'm a designer from birth , so of course i deal with the subject of curiosity and how curiosity in turn transforms our thinking , and why we perhaps lose our curiosity and need to give it a jolt et cetera .
that 's a whole series of things you 're concerned with besides your existence as a designer .
when professors become curious , they are often shoved into a research semester .
and that 's happened to me these last six months .
a research semester on the topic natural user interface design .
now you 'll be asking yourself why all these designers are starting to concern themselves with such natural , archaic prototypes of communication , interaction , etc .
and now i 'll hold up one of these little devices , because things are supposed to become increasingly intuitive , increasingly natural , more user friendly , and then you have to look at what we humans consider natural , what we consider user friendly or intuitive .
and against that background , within the area of natural user interface design , so the next generation of the interaction between humans and computers in the i mean in the relationship between humans and computers , i looked into how our tools , or how the computer has successively transformed itself from a calculator to a digital assistant .
so i looked into when things are natural and intuitive .
perhaps we should take another look at this .
why does this happen in the first place ?
so if we look at the development of our society , summarised briefly here , we are moving from the third to the fourth social generation , or social form .
from the modern to the computer society .
each society is characterised by one primary medium .
in the beginning there was the tribal society , characterised by language .
that means people related to each other because they spoke the same language , they were able to communicate with each other , move into the same cave or another place together , build cities and villages and basically created this tribal society .
but the primary medium was language , something very natural , and very lively .
it was something you had to learn , as no small child can naturally talk , but we learn it successively and relatively naturally .
that was then replaced by the classical age and the first type of abstraction .
that was a massive outcry at the time , because of course it was when the lively language started to manifest itself in writing , meaning that i took something fluid and alive and started to carve it in stone and so manipulate it .
depending on how and when i carve , a very different kind of coverage comes into being compared to when someone expresses it in a lively form , so to speak .
but gradually the written form became the primary medium , and gained a foothold .
then the next generation came , which is where we 're still primarily at .
that 's the medium of print with gutenberg and others .
that was also an affront at the time , where the gentry , clergymen and others said : have you gone mad , if the people start to read , they 'll want to have something to say and that would be totally fatal of course .
and now we 're going into the next generation and the exciting thing about it is that a transition into a new generation only happens every few hundred years and so we 're really in this in this phenomenal phase at the moment , the fact that we 're experiencing it .
of course it totally confuses us , because on the one hand we 're seeing this new media , socil social media , facebook etc .
with its complete transparency , which is the new kind of thinking that clashes with the old kind of thinking : don 't say that there 's now horse meat in the lasagne and not beef or other phenomena , because i want to cover that up and not confess to it .
and these two worlds , the old and the new ways of thinking , are clashing with each other at the moment .
the exciting thing about this is that when you look at it , this new society , this computer society , you can see that many mechanisms , principles and archaic patterns of thought have been taken from from the tribal society .
but now it 's not on the local level , but on the global level .
we 've understood that weather is global .
that the theme of ecology is a global theme .
not , if i am environmentally aware here on the local level and the neighbour is less environmentally aware , the whole thing will no longer work .
that means the local village has turned into a global village with the same principles : as natural as possible , as intuitive as possible , but also with complete transparency .
just like when people in the village used to know who is having an affair with whom and when , now it 's happening with the extension of ourselves through mobile end devices on a global level .
we 're accumulating our knowledge on a global level and we 're accumulating it increasingly quicker and better , for example .
just like it used to happen in the village .
against that background i looked into what this means , what is still natural to us , what have we perhaps forgotten , and what is instinctive for us , so what difference does it make ?
because people often come and ask , can 't you make it more user friendly , so that anybody can use it ?
so you have to examine what that means , and not only change it so that it 's different , because it needs to be improved too .
and to see when something is intuitive of course and how i , as a designer , can have influence on this and design things in such a way that they are a user friendly , so as intuitive as possible , because then the things are fun and easy to use .
so even while studying , you deal with the topic of perception and perceptual psychology .
and of course that 's something where you start and look and say , okay , let me look into the inner self .
and how does it look in there ?
and how do we function , when we look in there ?
and what does intuitive mean and how do our channels of perception work and how does cognitive processing work ?
like steve jobs once said : you need to dig deeper to understand how it works .
so you really have to go into detail , if you want to make something user friendly or intuitively manageable , and what does that mean fundamentally .
and there you see that , that people a our seven senses , most people think we only have five , but today there are seven officially recognised senses , and in the near future the next , the eighth sense will probably be added to it and as an extension of ourselves again .
and to see how we process information , how do we absorb information ?
and just to say , what is information ?
information is every difference that makes a difference .
many people use the word but don 't know what it means in detail .
but i have to have a fundamental understanding , to essentially understand when information becomes information , when data becomes information and when , in turn , information becomes knowledge , so that i know how to later make things as intuitive or naturally manageable as possible .
and of course how design affects perception .
we can see that here , when i design things , then i can design them in a confusing way , as you can see here on the right , where i can 't tell which one is salt and which one is pepper , or i can basically design them intuitively , by showing things .
so a lot more naturally , and though they 're in a container , i can directly see which one contains salt and which one contains pepper .
and if i say to someone , pass me the salt or the pepper , they 'd have to first think about what 's in what with the right one .
with the left they 'd just intuitively grab it and then pass me the salt , as it hopefully won 't be sugar .
but our perception , how it deceives us too .
for example perception in this context .
the right circle looks bigger than the small one , even though it isn 't at all , they 're actually equally big , and yet our perception changes , depending on the context we place things in .
does anybody know what this is ?
come on .
pattern recognition should also work .
here here it 's more likely to turn into my glasses .
so it 's a circle .
a second circle is starting to correlate or associate a certain similarity .
and if i then place a half oval next to it , we suddenly no longer just see a unit , which is the circle , the circle and , yes , we see a unit , and no longer three parts , one circle , one circle , another .
this is called a law of design or gestalt psychology , which in turn affects our perception .
for the designers it is important , they usually have it in the first term , those great laws of design .
the law of proximity , the law of of continuity , etc .
they are usually forgotten by the third term .
but it 's an essential component , if you want to design things as intuitively as possible .
the next phenomenon that is also very interesting is sight .
that might sound mundane at first , but it 's exciting , once you take a closer look at it .
so we have our eyes at the front and now you think we see from front to back .
that 's wrong .
first you see from back to front .
because you project an assumption that you 're seeing something you recognise to the front , such as a circle .
that means we first project what we see before we actually see it , then we bring that to the back into our seeing machine , and then we say , okay ,
i have this cognitive feedback , you projected something you want to see .
and that 's what 's there , and comes back again .
then it goes back to the front , because the back doesn 't trust the front and says , now take another look and make sure that what you see is also what you want to see .
and then it goes back to the back and it 's not until then that whatever it is is actually seen .
so it 's a very , very exciting process , how the sequence of certain things is and the span of milliseconds in which these things happen .
i don 't know if any of you know this image .
the same thing that i just described is now happening .
everybody is now trying to recognise something in this pattern .
i don 't know who recognises what .
does anyone see anything specific ?
a dalmatian , exactly .
once you 've seen that that that you can see a dalmatian in this , you know it .
you 'll never forget it again , because i 'm showing where the dalmatian is .
now you see the dalmatian .
and , what 's more , you 'll now always see it .
that means i 've corrupted you to the effect that you no longer see patterns in it , and i 've conditioned you , within a very short time , to keep seeing this dog in this obscure image .
and that 's the projection of seeing , feedback , seeing .
now i know it and project the fact that i 'm seeing a dalmatian to the front .
then i see the dalmatian .
so these are really exciting processes , which take place accordingly in this , well , it 's not really a grey area , but in this rose-tinted area .
does anyone know what three seconds are ?
a long time , yes .
that 's our present .
so it 's always interesting to know as a designer .
if i know something takes three seconds , until i slide from the present into the past so to speak , then i am well capable of bridging waiting times , in that he in that i keep someone occupied for three seconds .
he will have to process that as the present .
then it will turn into the past and , in that way , i can bridge waiting times at the computer for example in a very elegant way , if i know this phenomenon .
what takes twenty-five milliseconds ?
yes , milliseconds .
another very exciting phenomenon .
it 's the time it takes to fall in love with someone .
that means , attention , now you know that , pay attention to how long you look at someone , because i will not be held responsible for what might happen .
and sixteen milliseconds , also a very exciting phenomenon .
that 's the period of time it takes to form most perceptions we have .
that means the first impression comes to us at an extremely high speed , the way we perceive things .
and the way we see things , what we pay attention to and how we guard ourselves against our environment so to speak , so that we can consider it accordingly .
of course designers don 't only look at the topic of perceptions and neural processes or cognitive ergonomics , but primarily at the topic of the relationship between man and object of course .
so how do humans deal with certain objects .
on the one hand there are the practical functions in terms of product language , so formal aspects or formal aesthetic aspects .
there are indicator functions , where i know exactly where i have to look .
but there are also symbolic functions ; why does someone spend such horrendous sums of money on such a little bag that you can hardly fit anything into , even when it 's not very practical ?
we 're more on the symbolic , on the semantic level there , something we designers are also preoccupied with .
going back to my actual topic natural user interface and the topic that 's behind that is usability of course .
usability always means how can i reach a goal as soon as possible or how can a user reach a goal in a certain user context in an as effective , efficient and satisfying way possible .
that 's what the norm says .
how can i make something as user friendly as possible ?
can i handle it directly or do i need a manual or a correspondent training .
and then it 's less usable or user friendly .
making it differently or prettier doesn 't mean it 's easier to use .
that 's something we have to understand .
and if you look at some of the software in those terms , then you 'll understand why ninety-nine percent of today 's software is less intuitive or not instantaneously usable , including the ipad in many areas or the iphone , although it 's already a lot more intuitive than classical software .
intuitive usability didn 't start to become an elementary economic factor , an elementary success factor , when apple appeared on the scene , if i wanted to make technological devices usable for people .
why ?
because , as a rule , we can reach our goal five times faster on average , for example , through this new type of usability , so natural user interfaces .
you need to imagine that in the following way , if you do something with classical software and take five hours to do it , then you 'd only need one hour to do the same thing with this new type of natural software .
that probably doesn 't mean that you can go home four hours earlier , but that your employer or whoever will think of something else you can do with those four hours .
but what i want to say is that for us it is of course accordingly an increase in efficiency , to manage to do certain things .
if we go back to the area of software , here you see the first command line interfaces , which were very abstract , and it took months to understand how to handle these systems .
then came the next ones , which already worked with a neural model or mental model , as software ergonomists say , because you 'd have a conception of something , a metaphor , a metaphor of a desktop , to make the computer usable .
so no more zeros and ones with cryptic codes , but a metaphor .
that made the whole thing considerably more user friendly , but of course it could still be a lot better .
the next generation of graphic user interfaces already works with behaviour a lot more .
so , as a designer , i design behaviour much more much more often than appearance .
that 's also a paradigm shift .
that i can suddenly that the appearance is becoming increasingly irrelevant for success , and usability is becoming an application .
and if i go a step further in these natural user interfaces , where i can control things via voice , speech , touch and gesture rather than a mouse and cursor , then i am even faster and more immediate .
but that also takes me to the question as to at what point things become more intuitive ?
if they become more intuitive and then i have to rough-handle my little friend here again and see what that means from the point of view of cognitive ergonomics , when is something really intuitive ?
and that 's for us humans , something is intuitive when there 's an as little as possible a need to think about it .
so apparently humans don 't like to think very much , they want to make things relatively simple for themselves .
the less i think about something so to speak , the more intuitive it is .
and what does that mean to a designer ?
it means that when we can see that we can transfer existing performance models onto something else , for example the metaphor , then i can make use of that as a designer .
that means i can transfer an intuitive , human performance model onto a software and can so make the software considerably more user friendly .
that poses the question as to what is actually the most intuitive performance scheme that we humans have and now i 've already given it away .
it 's the so-called osit model .
we all use it , and osit is an acronym that stands for orient , select , inform , transact .
every one of you is doing this the whole time , but you 're doing it unconsciously and , well , pretty intuitively and also instinctively in part .
the model already takes shape while you 're still in your mother 's womb and it 's intercultural , so it functions worldwide among young and old , and is used by us the whole time , without most people knowing that this model is present .
osit in itself is used by us fifty to seventy thousand times depending on the activity , it was ascertained that when you sleep it is strained less than in the day .
i can transfer this performance model orient , select , inform , transact to an interaction system .
and this kind of transferal , much like the metaphor of the desktop , but no longer a metaphor of a physical object , but a metaphor of a pattern of action , a principle of action .
and that 's on a higher grail of user friendliness than the transferal of a classic metaphor , which is the one of the desktop .
and if i now transfer this , if i let orient take shape as an overview , select as a selection , inform in the case that it comes up close to me , and i can look at in detail , and yes , transact means i can put it somewhere or send someone or do the shopping , etc . ,
and then i can transfer the whole thing .
i 'll try to do that using an example .
everybody was having some cake earlier .
overview : i 'm interacting with the object so to speak , can zoom back out , zoom in .
i get the entire overview , can filter this and can say , now show me all the things with chocolate , for example .
and suddenly i have an interface that is considerably more intuitive and natural .
because the fact that i can grab hold of things like these little pieces , that i can touch them and they come to me , is considerably more natural than when i am able to make these things accessible via hierarchically organised websites or other mechanisms so to speak .
imagination is more important than knowledge , and i 'd like to close on that sentence a and again give the advice that designers must also think differently to arrive at new solutions , and so i thank you warmly for your attention and please .
i 'd like to reintroduce you to a particular aspect of curiosity .
firstly , when you are growing up as a child , as a baby , the thing you are interested in is which what sort of excretions you have , right ? and depending on whether your parents have allowed you to more or less play with your potty and stir its contents , your curiosity is of course awakened .
and curiosity can 't be learned .
that 's why all the people who are here are actually people who have a characteristic that can 't be learned .
my objective is to transform this entire discussion about the environment , the end of the world , forty years of the-club-of-rome , into quality .
and there 's one central point here .
and that has to do with phosphorus .
give pee a chance .
every day you release + you release in the region of two grams of phosphorus and every day you have to absorb two grams of phosphorus .
otherwise you couldn 't have teeth .
and you wouldn 't be able to save energy .
you wouldn 't be able to have bones .
we 'd only be able to float in the earth 's seas as amorphous molluscs .
if , in fact , we couldn 't absorb and release phosphorus .
incredibly enough , we we are dealing with something here that would be a matter of course , but isn 't at all .
because everybody 's talking about energy , but nobody 's talking about the phosphorus problem .
the phosphorus problem is much more critical .
we are dependent on two countries .
we only have phosphorus for two years and phosphorus mining worldwide is already emitting a lot more uranium into the environment than the amount that is used in all nuclear plants .
in the last twenty years alone , fifteen thousand tonnes of uranium was put onto our fields in germany .
and we absorb all of it .
it causes leukemia in children .
and we think we 're protecting the environment when we do a little less damage .
so , for example , protect the environment , drive the car less .
protect the environment , produce less rubbish .
protect the environment , consume less energy .
but that 's not protection .
that 's like saying , protect your child , hit it three times instead of five .
it 's just a little less destruction .
if that 's our thinking from from the cradle to the grave , then our our entire planet will become a cemetery sooner or later .
that 's why we need to think from cradle to cradle .
and the most important thing is to look at is the soil first of all .
the ground stores over sixty percent of the planet 's carbon .
at the moment we 're growing corn and losing between eleven and thirty kilograms thirty tonnes per hectare , if you were to calculate it per square metre .
that means we 're losing five-thousand times more than what is formed in the soil .
of course we can look at the issue of waste first of all .
and everything is either the packaging or the contents .
in offenbach , for example , twenty percent of the amount of waste produced by households consists of nappies .
and as we get older , the nappies get bigger .
+ that is they 're all in the pre-nappy stage , so to speak .
right ?
one a baby needs about six-thousand nappies .
we can reduce that by ten percent of course , but what difference would that make ?
china can make up for that in one second .
it 's entirely insignificant .
so the question is , how should we deal with nappies ?
here we have a the proof , by the way , that humans are not pigs .
i 'd like to tell you why .
because with pigs , phosphorus is released in their solid components faeces .
with people , it is released in the urine .
yes .
so humans can 't be pigs .
that proves it , doesn 't it ?
traditionally , in the discussion about the environment , there is the belief that there are too many of us on this planet .
and if you deny people the if you deny people their existence , if you say , it would be better if you weren 't here at all , people become grabby and hostile .
and so you have someone like al gore , one of our great heroes , saying : there is nothing more important than stabilising the human population .
in israel people say , if you save a human life , you 're saving the world .
on our end we say , the more people you get out of the way , the better .
yes .
the first question is , are there really too many of us ?
if you look at ants , the weight of ants on the planet , then ants weigh four times as much a people .
i could also mention termites , but in the usa nobody likes termites , although they 're vegetarians .
so ants weigh more than we do .
and because they work so much harder physically than we do and only live for three to six months , their weight , their energy consumption amounts to that of thirty billion people .
that means there are not too many of us , we 're just too stupid , you see ?
and when you see how far removed we are from what we wanted to and could achieve , and how sad we are to be on this planet in the first place , you can understand why offenbach , for example , has a program to be climate neutral by twenty forty , right ?
you can only be climate neutral if you don 't exist , you see ?
that 's your only chance .
have you ever seen a climate neutral tree ?
have you ?
just one single one ?
that means our entire intelligence amounts to us wanting to be more stupid than trees , you see ?
you see ?
there is not one single tree that is carbon neutral .
thankfully , right ?
there 's no problem with overpopulation among trees .
there are still six hundred billion trees in the amazon forest alone .
of those have you ever heard of overpopulation of trees ?
so all of our intelligence amounts to us wanting to be dumber than trees .
and then you see that even something like demeter , the strictest organization for organic yes agriculture , doesn 't allow for our own metabolic waste to be returned .
every year we lose about three tonnes of phosphorus , which should really be circulated .
and so there are too many of us .
just because of that .
that means we feel so guilty on this planet , that we say , there is no organic agriculture , no bioland , no nature-et-progrès or whatever they 're all called , that permits our own excrement to be put back into the cycle .
isn 't that sad ?
and that means there are too many of us .
it certainly makes sense to cause less damage when it comes to the use of oil .
but where are we of use ?
we try to minimize our ecological footprint , but the point is to have a big footprint that 's of use .
we want to be good for society , we want to be good for the economy , but when it comes to the environment , the most honourable thing for us would be to not be here at all , right ?
zero emissions , you see ?
you can only have zero emissions if you don 't exist .
even if you were to shoot yourself now , you 'd still have emissions .
so you can 't solve that .
we can do it differently .
we can win back our nutrients .
with the agriculture we practice in brazil in which we win back nutrients .
this is a very direct way to get back nutrients in agriculture .
we do it in china for example , where we directly take the waste produced from it .
in in china a a chamber pot is still called a honey pot , you could say , right ?
and in our western world we were always too stupid to bring back our nutrients .
this means that the entire history of western civilization is characterized by the city always just taking , and never giving anything back to the farmers .
so the cities had to keep on growing , as the farmers were moving into the cities and the cities had to get their nutrients from increasingly distance places .
that 's why all western empires just kept on expanding until they couldn 't manage the infrastructure anymore and then they imploded .
you see ?
it was different in china .
they managed to have a civilization for five thousand years on end , as they were always able to return the nutrients .
even today , if you get invited to dinner in china , people expect you to stay on after the meal until you need to use the toilet .
because it 's unfriendly to go and take the nutrients with you .
you were you were invited to dinner , not to steal nutrients .
that means you can see how to win back nutrients on the internet .
the nice thing about that is that when you do that , so when you practice agriculture , generate biogas , on one hectare of land with five thousand inhabitants in the favelas , a farmer can earn about one thousand five hundred dollars and maintain the plot with it , raise chickens and pigs and ducks and grow vegetables and farm fish .
and the great thing about it is that the crime rate in the favelas goes down by over ninety percent .
so we don 't have to keep an eye on the people to make sure they do as little evil as possible .
we can support them in doing good .
that 's high-tech agriculture of course , but the plots take care of themselves .
the side product is clean water .
and they 're designed in such a way that a farmer can farm them easily .
that means the rate of crime goes down .
and none of these plots , and we 've built over one hundred fifty of them in the last twenty years , none of these plots was every sabotaged .
it would be easy to just throw a litre of waste oil onto it and the plot would be ruined for years .
that doesn 't happen .
that means we do not need to keep an eye on people so that they do as little evil as possible .
we can support them in doing good .
so we must get the phosphorus back .
and by the way , if you want to get active , write this down , in germany the most suitable purification plant is the one in frankfurt .
unfortunately not the one on offenbach , but perhaps you can give the frankfurters a hand .
because the plant in frankfurt would be the best at winning back phosphorus .
and it must go back .
we can see that phosphorus is really critical .
and we can see that it can be done .
in holland we 've been working on this for over three years now .
the dutch government has stated that it will be the first country worldwide to win back phosphorus .
but we need this everywhere .
you see , there are two countries that control almost seventy percent of the phosphorus reservoirs worldwide .
there 's the opec , a a bunch of amateurs .
it consists of twenty-six member countries that control forty percent of all the oil deposits .
and oil will be able to be replaced by other energy sources .
but phosphorus will not be able to be replaced .
that 's why the point is not to to make what already exists a little less bad , but to do something right .
and it 's the first question to ask is what is right .
so it 's about effectivity , not efficiency .
in holland it 's easier to understand this , because holland built the country on flowers .
you see ?
imagine your your wife is sad , because you upset her , and you turn up with fifty roses .
totally inefficient .
but totally effective , right ?
or take lipstick .
a woman in germany swallows about six point three kilos of lipstick in her lifetime .
whereas .
and that scientifically speaking , that 's not not exactly correct , because because we don 't know how much is kissed away .
but i can tell you , even in this light , that lipstick is totally inefficient , but very effective , you see ?
a all the beautiful things in life are inefficient .
so that 's why we 're not talking about resource efficiency , but effectivity .
to ask yourself , what is the right thing to do ?
not burning the biosolids a little more , storing them and losing all the materials for the cycles in the incineration plant , but asking oneself , how do you close cycles ?
imagine mozart being efficient .
right ?
if i invite you over for dinner and i say : yes , we 're having a pill with offenbach taste and a glass of water to go with it .
wonderful , right ?
that 's efficient .
everything that 's nice in life is not efficient .
when you fall in love with someone , efficient ?
yes ?
that means that everything that counts in life is not about saving , avoiding , reducing .
the whole environmental discussion .
we tell people , oh well , you people in the south are not environmentally aware .
no , throwing away is exactly the right thing to do , right ?
everywhere where you throw something away , from , well , you create new living potential .
but the wrong things .
if you throw the wrong things away , you have a waste problem .
to what we 're thinking from a northern perspective .
every footprint is disadvantageous there .
when you go running , right , every footprint destroys the ground .
because the soil will the moss dies and the the wind and water wash away the soil .
but if you 're in italy , every footprint means the water will remain in the field for longer .
so it 's about leaving leaving a large footprint , which will turn into wetland .
not guilt management .
we say sustainability in germany .
right ?
but if i would ask you , how is your wife ?
what would you say ?
sustainable .
then i would say , my warm condolences , you see ?
that 's just about the minimum .
so not saving , abstaining from , avoiding .
every bit of waste is a nutrient .
and a pleasure too , if you look at how people in italy throw out a can of coca-cola from their car window .
that 's a funny occurrence , you know .
it 's a type of territorial behavior , right ?
you can show that you were there .
but with the right design , please .
we 've designed an ice cream wrapping , for example , which turns into liquid at room temperature .
you can throw it anywhere you want .
in two hours it 's biodegraded , wherever it is .
and it contains seeds of rare plants , so that when you throw it away you 're contributing to biodiversity .
that means that in doing so , we are being useful , not harmful .
so two cycles are created .
of course not everything should be compostable .
a tv or a washing machine , those are things you just use , you don 't expend them .
only things that are subject to wear and tear , such as shoe soles , brake coverings , car tyres , they have to be made in such a way that they go back into biological systems .
things that are only used go into technical systems .
but today we 're just talking about biological systems .
right ?
let 's take sneakers for example , right ?
direct advertising , and not necessarily for the company puma , but to help this company make these products successful .
because we don 't we no longer make things free of stuff .
right ?
so if i invite you to dinner and say , this is free of chicken , that doesn 't help you at all .
no , we define what 's inside .
positively .
so not like a detox .
there 's nothing poisonous in it .
everything that 's inside can be utilized .
these are the first shoes with which you make a jackrabbit start at the pedestrian lights and the rubber sole can go into biological cycles , okay ?
it 's all compostable all of it .
and if we manage to do it , we 'll of course manage to do it for adidas , for nike , for hennes and mauritz and the whole textile industry .
and half of the wastewater problem worldwide is caused by the textile industry .
so you 're helping out there , just ask the people .
hey , puma , do you are you really serious ?
because they changed their chairman of the board of directors twice now .
and i 'm not so sure they 're going to stick with it .
so give me a hand here .
it is possible though .
yes .
that which i just presented to you .
it 's possible .
today we can make things in such a way that when they show wear and tear , when they break , they can go into biological life cycles .
there are also technical cycles .
there 's the a direct returning system for this .
it 's the first biological rucksack , truly , that was made to be returned into the life cycle .
that too , so you can get back those things in any shop .
if you think about it , right ?
remember those nappies again ?
if at the moment they 're waste .
these nappies are everywhere practically .
in those countries where people have money .
they 're on the rubbish tips , but also elsewhere in the landscape , right ?
if we change the plastic , so it can go into biological systems , if we change the water tank , inside , so they can go back to a cellulose base , you 'll be able to plant one hundred and fifty trees in israel or tunisia with one baby .
right ?
if you just take these these nappies , shred them , sterilize them and take the powder to plant trees with it .
that makes the baby carbon-positive for its whole life , right from the beginning .
so we don 't need to be climate neutral , we can be climate-positive .
it 's about making a beneficial poop print .
yes , so to speak .
right ?
we can do that .
we can re-invent things all over again .
i founded an institute with this in mind .
today , it has many employees and they can all get involved .
there 's also an extra association , the cradle-to-cradle-institute , where everybody can get involved .
so no more saving , abstaining from , avoiding , reducing , no more guilt management , but intelligent waste .
does that make you curious ?
thank you .
the work of the interpreter .
music as language .
in the description of my presentation , it is written that i , as an interpreter , see myself as a translator , in the english sense of the word .
interpreters are translators of the written notes in resounding music .
everybody who has anything to do with foreign languages knows that a translator can 't just simply render a text in another language word for word , but must also understand the deeper meaning of the words and the context in which they appear , so that a meaningful translation can occur .
translating from german into english can already demand more knowledge , especially if it if one has to if it 's the translation of literature or even poetry .
what we musicians do with our musical language is very alien to non-professionals .
as an interpreter of a piece of music i only have the musical notes at first .
now you probably think that the composer , when writing down the notes , already includes everything they 've thought of .
in reality the notes are very vague and imprecise .
these notes are about as precise or imprecise as the verbal description of a landscape , even if that might seem extremely precise .
because you can 't smell the flowers in the verbal description of a landscape , you can 't guess the shade of green , you can 't hear or feel the whispering of the wind .
this means that the interpreter must translate these imprecise indications in the language of notes into a different , which is to say an audible , concrete , non-verbal musical language .
today i 'd like to verbally translate what i usually translate into music , or interpret .
so you could call it the translation of a translation .
that 's why i prefer to do it all in german , because if i 'd have to translate it into english , that would be like the translation of the translation of the translation .
the so , music functions a lot like spoken language in my opinion .
the annotated notes have the function of the letters of a language .
so it 's not enough to just be able to read notes and find the according keys on the piano or the right position on a violin string .
those would just be the letters you learned to write .
you don 't recognize the sense behind the letters until you know the language .
so you need at least as much time to learn a music musical language as you do for a spoken language .
there are different grades here , for example if you are just learning it for use at home , whether you only understand it passively or whether you can also actively speak it , all the way to the musical native speaker .
the work of the interpreter starts off much like the work of a theatre director .
once you 've selected a piece to play , because you love it , you first look into the background of the composition 's creation .
you collect information about the piece in secondary literature .
you read letters , diaries , notes , whether any words or thoughts were expressed by the composer themselves .
you study works that have been composed before or after .
you make comparisons .
the reasons for writing it .
how and what did they feel ?
what were their life circumstances , how were the society and the politics of the time ?
all that interests me .
you imagine the time by looking at images or reading literature from that period .
after a while , you already have a vast reservoir of knowledge surrounding the composer as an interpreter , and you listen to them regularly , and so it becomes easier and easier to understand and feel with the composer .
the composer increasingly becomes like a friend you 're living with .
their desire to write the piece increasingly becomes my own desire to play the piece .
as the note is anything but a precise indication of the desire of a composer , and is , rather , a framework , i will now utilise this framework to fill it with sense and meaning .
then i will say , in my own words , what could be written within this framework .
i play to explain what these tones might have meant .
what they mean to me now , what they meant to the composer at the time and what they might have meant to them now .
every note , every phrase is thus given a sense , because i feel it myself , because it comes from what i 've personally experienced .
it has to make sense in the here and now , otherwise i won 't convince my audience that this is my desire .
it always makes for a happy concert when i have the fortune to experience the piece anew , even though i 've been working on it for so long in advance .
it 's like experiencing a happy new day afresh , even though you go through the same rituals , getting up , having breakfast , going to work , i experience the same piece anew again and again .
i 'm a day older , the seasons change , my pulse is slower in the evening than it is in the morning , in a concert hall it takes longer for the reverberation to return than it does at home .
i 'm aware of the breathing of the audience , consciously or unconsciously .
all this influences me and influences my experience of the composition .
it 's also really wonderful when i 'm on stage with my musical other half and we 're on the same wavelength .
then the same thing happens as when you have a good , stimulating conversation .
you introduce a new idea and this is answered instantaneously with a reaction .
it 's exciting , because things happen that we didn 't practice and we aren 't able to practice .
it 's great fun to make music in this way , and you as the audience experienced how music communicates in a lively way .
in this way , every concert is a different concert .
i will never again play as i did in this moment .
i won 't be able to play like i do today in twenty years .
i will have more life experience than today and so my musical palette will have many more nuances of color , of emotions and feelings than it does now .
sure , i will have thrown some colors away too , but i will have added new ones to take their place .
i have a nice , concrete example to illustrate this .
it happened at a piano course for music students given by my beloved old teacher professor jürgen ude , a well-known beethoven specialist , concert pianist and longstanding professor at the conservatory here in stuttgart .
i was much too young at the time unfortunately , so he had already retired before i finally started studying .
but i had the good fortune to meet him at a very young age , when i was thirteen , and so i always attended his courses while i was at school .
i was seventeen when i took part in a course of his and played the last of chopin 's four ballads , one of his later works .
he asked me what the preamble to this ballad was in my opinion .
it 's a solemn part .
and , being young , i said , expectation .
he smiled and said , oh ?
that must be our difference in age .
because to me it means memory .
he was over sixty at the time .
well , at seventeen you still have dreams , but no significant memories .
today , i play this piece every few years and it 's always transformed for me , even though not a single note has changed .
it 's exciting every time , because i read something new in it every time .
another example from a very different field . monet painted his waterlilies an infinite number of times .
it 's always the same garden , but at a different time of day , in a different light .
he translated the waterlilies differently , the way he saw them , the effect they had on them at that particular moment .
his personal impressions of the waterlilies .
a piece of music that is interpreted for the umpteenth time is comparable in this way .
now i am also older than chopin when he wrote the piece at thirty-two .
he only lived until the age of thirty-nine .
and it 's important to me to always take a look at the notes , even if i think i know them by heart .
to maintain the dialogue , directly with the composer .
because the notes are the only direct connection to him .
especially if he 's already dead .
so how do you start speaking the language of music ?
like i said , you need about as much time as you do for a spoken language .
usually you first learn to read notes in music lessons .
you practically first learn to read before you speak an a word .
you learn to find the tones on the instrument that go with the notes .
when you then move all your fingers at the right time and in the way the way it is written in the notes , then tones come out , which , together , sound like music .
once it 's played free of mistakes , the student gets their next piece to learn , which is slightly harder .
beginners ' classes hardly talk about interpretation .
well , so it says presto at the top , so that 's a fast piece .
lento , slow .
the loud and soft symbols , f and b , etcetera .
most people here have heard of them .
but even if you implement these indications , it still just remains something technical .
and it still isn 't an interpretation .
i 'm surprised .
i 'm surprised that people often forget something very elementary .
which is that to make music on an instrument one 's own musical action and feeling needs to be there in advance .
which is singing .
a child who has not learned to sing , because the parents never showed them how to , will not start singing on its own .
it 's like learning to speak .
it 's necessary to have one 's own experiences and idea of music to then make it resonate through a further possibility , which is an instrument .
people who have never sung consequently never directly felt with their own body what it 's like to create a tone .
to form a phrase with one 's own breath .
the music instrument is an extension of our own body .
we use our vocal chords to to sing , and our hands and feet to dance .
so the hammerheads in the piano are the extensions of my fingers .
the melody is created through what 's being sung and rhythm is created through dance .
the constant flooding of music today is not very beneficial there .
you no longer need to make music yourself when you 're bored .
you no longer need to whistle or sing a song .
all one 's own music is destroyed because you 're constantly being bombarded by music from outside of yourself .
sure there are some of you who will say , yes , but what do you do if if you can 't sing ?
then i ask you this , can you not sing , a , because you think you can 't sing ?
or b , because you didn 't learn how to sing ?
in both cases , it 's not too late to start , to find out whether you might not after all be able to sing , or to learn how to properly use these little muscles that attune the vocal chords .
because you can train that .
or c , because you were told that you aren 't suitable .
then my question is , how professionally competent was this diagnosis ?
did you get a second or third opinion , as people call it so nicely nowadays ?
or d , you simply don 't like music and therefore want nothing to to do with it .
which i would very much regret , because music is a lovely , communicative thing .
but perhaps someone just needs to change your mind .
well , but this shows you , in any case , nobody has to be hopeless candidate .
but please don 't say , i don 't understand a thing about classical music .
i can 't say whether it 's good or bad .
then my answer is , but i 'm sure you can say whether you like it or not .
because i don 't think anyone will say , i don 't know whether i like the taste , because i can 't cook .
so , you don 't abstain from food just because you can 't cook .
so you don 't need to abstain from listening to classical music because you don 't play an instrument .
listen consciously and say whether you like its taste or not .
whether the music is too peppery or sweet for your taste .
say what you feel .
with time , you will have demands and will want to have more spices in it or will even be able to notice certain fine details .
why do i demand from my audience that they listen actively ?
because music is a language and music is there to communicate something .
a work of art that is never looked at will never gather the strength to have an effect .
one should eat the food that is lovingly cooked by a cook , not just look at it or pass on the recipe for it .
so please listen when music is played .
it is not only a nice wallpaper made of noise .
when a child grows up in an environment where the adults actively make music or at least actively listens to music , it 's very easy for a music teacher to ask , what color is your flower ?
can you play it in blue now ?
and the child will play , after thinking for a moment .
and it will sound completely different from before .
that would be the very beginning of their own musical expression .
so the first step towards an interpretation .
and what happens when you play a piece today that was originally written a hundred , two hundred or even three hundred years ago ?
instruments have developed .
there was no keyboard instrument such as the piano in bach 's time .
it just hadn 't been invented .
i think bach would have been very enthusiastic if he 'd had the tonal possibilities that today 's modern pianos have .
i can make bach 's tonal ideas sound on a modern grand piano in such a way that a baroque harpsichord was not able to .
of beethoven we know that he listened more once he 'd already gone deaf .
today a modern orchestra can play anything that was rejected as unplayable at the time .
that 's why composers depend on us interpreters to reinvent the pieces again and again .
so that what they had only conjured up in their minds becomes listenable .
and also anything they would conjure up in their minds today .
or anything that i imagine because they might have thought .
thank you .
do you know what envy is ?
were you ever envious ?
and how did you feel ?
terrible .
i have a friend who drives a passerati .
when i turn up in my little vw clunker and park next to it , i get this feeling .
something shoots through my head .
i say , ulf , why do you need such a big car ?
it will lose half of its value in one year .
and anyway , you work a lot less than i do .
why do i have to get such a small car ?
and then it comes to me straight away , it 's unfair .
it goes against justice .
and when i say the word justice , this feeling disappears .
our organism has come up with an excellent method to make unpleasant feelings like envy simply disappear .
you can also try it with words like revenge or acquisitiveness and the like .
i would like to explain this mechanism to you today and make it a little more accessible to you , though you 're probably quite familiar with it on an unconscious level .
the mechanism comes from the lie .
but don 't think of a lie you might have heard when people say , nobody has any intention of building a wall .
and then they start piling up stones so your view is blocked .
a lie like that shows you that the liar himself doesn 't believe what he says .
and it 's easily proven that he has something entirely different in mind .
he 's only deceiving you and not himself .
no , the lie i 'm talking about is one where you 're deceiving yourself .
you need this lie to keep this sham , this self-deception , upright .
this is harder to check or bring down .
you need time .
an anecdote you might know talks about this time .
the spanish painter pablo picasso once painted a portrait of a woman .
the woman then complained that the portrait didn 't look anything like her .
picasso 's answer , just wait and see .
it will start to look more and more like you .
at this point and if you 're laughing , you 'll recognize how important this lie is and how much time you need to experience what artists are very good at telling us .
because artists have a distorted relationship to the lie .
the artist tells you something , and especially this woman , that she can 't see if she just looks in the mirror .
the artist is conveying something you can only get to know once you 've looked at the work of art again and again .
then that unpleasant feeling that it couldn 't look anything like you and will start to look more and more like you .
here you have this mechanism , with which we can use the lie as a grandiose invention to stabilize our living conditions .
and this turns up not only in art , but also in folktales , folktales , in in mythology , in stories .
perhaps you know this idea of the lady who looked at herself in the mirror every day and said , who is the fairest of them all ?
one day this mirror says , yes , there is someone fairer than you .
over the hills and all that .
and you also know how much hostility arises from this piece of truth , for the mirror can 't lie , from this piece of truth .
but we should just realize that you can 't tell a woman that there 's a more beautiful one somewhere else .
it 's necessary to always use what you would call political correctness here .
we need this lie here , to keep the deception upright , without which we wouldn 't be able to go on living .
we don 't only have such amazing lies in art and folktales , but also in science .
and here there 's this story about the wife of the bishop of worcester .
she heard about this book by charles darwin , the origin of species and the descent of man .
that humans are supposed to have descended from apes and that , yes , there is at least one ancestor shared by both humans and apes .
then she ran ran to her husband and said , surely what charles has written is not true .
that the human descended from apes and we have a shared ancestor .
no , no , that 's not possible .
and if it is , we should prevent people from finding out about it .
why do we need to prevent people from finding out something that is true ?
because we can 't live our lives without this lie .
because we want this self-deception , this feeling of being brilliant , descended from the highest beings , not from that natural level , from something as unpredictable as an organism that exists much like a stone and other such things , that 's unbearable for us .
so we can 't bear these things .
we have to prevent people from finding about things , especially when they 're true .
to show you how slowly this mechanism disappears and to illustrate the traces it leaves , which lead to something other than this grandiose image of ourselves , i would like to share another story with you .
a particularly nice story , in my opinion .
my wife told me it .
one day she came back from her school , she 's a teacher , and she told me about one of her pupils .
an autistic pupil .
she likes him a lot , because he has the tendency to be forthright .
and she asked him , so what are your hobbies ?
and then he said , well , i 'm with the fire brigade .
and because i 'm with the fire brigade , i 'm interested in pyrotechnical things .
yes , you 'll sense it if you 're feeling a little nervous at this point , something is not quite right .
i told my wife , whenever a person uses the word because to morally justify something , we should try to replace it with the word although .
you do this and then you 'll see the sentence , although i 'm with the fire brigade , i 'm interested in pyrotechnical things .
you sense that that ‘ s the actual truth behind the sentence .
a young lad like that , he 's not interested in putting out fires .
he 's interested in setting fires .
but there are no associations to look for where you can learn how to make a fire .
there 's only the second best option , which is the fire brigade .
that 's where he signed up .
and moreover , you don 't tell your teacher that you like to set fires and are happy when the fire flares up .
no , it simply looks a lot better when we show that we 're responsible for removing the danger that others create when they set a fire .
here you have this little mechanism .
this this hint at the fact that the boy knew , deep within , that his connection is really with the fire , but that he can 't say that out loud .
here you have the censor between the unconscious and the conscious , which switches on immediately before you can do anything about it , and which shapes things you know look very different in such a way that they might sound a lot better for you and others .
in this way certain words come into being that we also use again and again in the language of political correctness .
we know that something else is really true .
but we know that if we were to say that out loud , social relationships will be sensitively disturbed .
we can 't just do that .
it is impossible to present such things in a society that is supposed to function .
i 'd now like to present to you what we found out at our institute .
according to which logic do we disseminate this deception , this self-deception , this willingness to present a reality that 's different from the reality we know is valid in our unconscious minds ?
i would like to present to you two , perhaps three examples to illustrate this .
the first example works with the presumption of something many of you know and some of you value , and only very few of you don 't need at all .
i 'm talking about the soul .
what is the soul ?
the soul is something mental , leibniz said .
it does not have a tangible , material nature .
and when you are with people who are firmly convinced that you have a soul , or , you might say , who believe that the soul brought us to life , then imagine something along these lines : the soul is an incorporeal framework around you , and it 's not material , and you are just made of flesh and blood , are solid , so to speak , bound to the earth , ephemeral , subject to decay , insignificant , dead really .
and now you see the soul as having something of a cloud like nature , an airy nature , it 's called anima in latin , being like a breath of air .
and when this breath of air pours out onto a human , the human is filled with dignity , with mind , with nature that can only live with a soul .
and then it can leave you .
that 's how people imagine the soul works .
that it comes to the human from outside .
we are supposed to view it as something that must be present in our lives .
and if you think of this condition , then you 'll understand the logic behind the joy we feel when we can improve the world through a lie .
because now you can implement a rule of three .
you 'll remember the rule of three from school .
this is a rule of three , which describes a logic to us .
this , by the way , is the most complicated part of my presentation .
you 'll need some logic here , but also the willingness to lie .
namely to lie in such a way that you can simply implement this logic in the wrong way .
this rule of three contains three theorems .
the first theorem is , klaus claims there is no soul .
the second theorem is thus , if klaus is right , then he doesn 't have a soul .
now we have the third theorem .
i highlighted it here .
a third theorem which will turn up in people who have a strong attachment to the idea of a soul .
they will say , a person who has no soul is dead and can 't claim anything .
so you sense it already .
here this logic is expressed in this deceptive discourse .
you see it straight away .
the first two theorems are logically correct .
i can claim anything .
logic does not make any statements about reality .
i can say , the german chancellor is a man .
and if i 'm right , then the chancellor is a man .
if i 'm not right , then the chancellor is not a man .
logic does not make any statement about what is valid .
i can claim anything .
what is decisive , if i 'm right , then it 's valid .
so when klaus says , there is no soul .
secondly , if he 's right , then he doesn 't have a soul .
these things are logically correct .
and now our deceptive consciousness immediately senses , i can do something with this .
so it attaches a third theorem to it , that has nothing to do with the first two theorems and only acts as if the opposite of the first theorem had already been proven and given priority .
because we 'd really have to prove whether the soul exists or not .
but with this logic , which just uses the fact that two theorems are logically correct and attaches a third one , which looks like it has something to do with the others , we can save our lie .
so we act as if it were impossible to live without a soul .
and we 're very happy about it .
we can apply these things to other examples .
at present at we have a very modern example , which is repeatedly an item in the daily newspapers .
here you have to keep another philosophical theme , a philosophical slow-burner , close to hand .
that has to do with us going back to the fourteenth
century .
there was a scholar called jean buridan , and buridan 's ass was named after him .
buridan 's ass is an ass that is made purely of nature .
it doesn 't have this soul .
it 's a natural thing .
and if you put it exactly between two equally big haystacks , it will starve .
because it doesn 't know which haystack it should go to first .
so it 's right in the middle .
that 's how things of nature are imagined .
two equally large forces with opposite signsnatures will cancel each other out .
nothing will happen .
only if you come with a different example , so as soon as you make one haystack bigger than the other , then he doesn 't need any sense or anything else .
he 'll automatically go to the right thought .
if you imagine this , that in nature you are somehow driven , determined by the larger haystack that immediately attracts you , you will also quickly have the feeling that there must be something like a free will .
and as we 're here in frankfurt am main , i 'll remind you of the max -planck-institute for brain research .
there 's a scholar there , his name is wolf singer , and sometimes people say , wolf singer claims , there is no free will .
now we can come up with the second theorem and say : if wolf singer is right , then he has no free will .
these theorems are absolutely logical and correct .
and now the thing you can almost read daily in the papers is what you find in this third theorem .
it looks something like this , somebody who does not have free will cannot be held responsible responsible for his actions and claims and is thus of unsound mind .
here you have it again .
really , you 'd have to prove , first of all , whether there is something like a free will .
but the logic of deception allows us to act as if the first theorem were false from the start , so of course you 'd have accept the opposite without any proof .
and now you can simply , if you want to test something for yourself and especially if you want to make people happy , practice this courage to lie .
practice it when you meet a person and then say , there are no predictors .
and don 't use the german word for predictors , which would be prophet .
you mustn 't say that , because that would be a little politically incorrect .
say , there are no predictors .
you 'll immediately hear the following from someone who thinks it 's a matter of course that there are predictors , you can 't prove that .
and you 'll have a problem right away .
because while you are busy telling yourself that you can 't prove that there are no predictors , your counterpart will be very happy .
he 'll be very happy because he 's deceived you .
because he led you down a path he 's not on himself .
because this person is not interested in evidence at all .
he 's only interested in keeping himself free of the necessity to prove that there are predictors .
so through this mode of passing on the burden of proving something you are experiencing the brilliance of the lie .
and if you have another opportunity to enact this rule of three with another person , do it , because you will make other people happy when , in doing so , you don 't remind them of their self-deception .
thank you for your attention .
yes , hello .
i took the liberty i asked lilly , if it would be okay to mention her .
she 's one of the organizers of this wonderful event and asked me to hold a presentation and present my idea .
i must honestly say , and you witnessed this , i found it hard to talk about my idea at first .
and she said i should perhaps present my island project , which i will try to present to you .
but of course it 's the sum of a whole load of ideas .
i probably belong , are those two friendly girls still here , i probably belong to the generation that created this bad ecological image , because i already started to study engineering at the technical university in karlsruhe in nineteen seventy nine , i think it 's called kit today .
and then i went to berlin in the mid-eighties because i wanted to study renewable energies and they didn 't have that in karlsruhe .
there was the leopoldshafen nuclear research plant .
they were all called kfas at the time , the place in jülich was also called a kfa .
today they 're called project executing organizations .
because a good engineer either built great cars or nuclear plants .
but something stupid like a solar pendulum , which has an output of something like one hundred watt per square metre , that was a toy .
and in berlin there was this crazy engineering collective .
i 'm grateful to the person behind premium cola that he rehabilitated that word again , because after the wall came down nobody was allowed to use that word , because everything left-wing was bad .
but it wasn 't like that in the eighties .
at that time , there were self-governing companies and one of them was in kreuzberg in mehringhof , where people thought evil took place .
a terrorist place , but it was was called wuseltronik and it made wind and solar power and that 's where i started out in the mid-eighties .
and yes , a lot of what is said today really moves me , because many , many nice statements were made , which i also was part of .
i worked in the collective for eleven years , it was based on a grassroots democracy .
we were a group of twenty people .
if one person said no , there was the veto principle , which was totally demoralising , for ten years , i i had grave doubts as to whether i was perhaps really wasting my great engineering degree on something ridiculous , also because all my father 's colleagues had told him , you wasted your money on your child .
he 's wasting his time on nonsense .
and that was really very , very bitter and then you end up in one of these phases just now you saw that image with don 't give up written on it , where i asked myself after ten years , whether the one thousand deutschmark it was at the time , the basic pay , a uniform pay in the collective of course , whether that was really such a great thing .
and then i stuck to it until nineteen ninety six and then i became the co-founder of the company solon together with friends , which then became one of the biggest cell manufacturers in the world together with the spin-off q-cells .
a huge success story , but there too we have the problem of a growing company and then in two thousand and six , we , a small group , decided that we would start small again and go back and would dedicate ourselves to the next topic of the future , which , in my opinion , and in our opinion , and it 's crazy again , it starts with people saying , what 's this nonsense about , that won 't work . i 'm talking about storage .
i 've brought along a project i 'd like to introduce to you .
the title of the presentation was , how to reach one hundred percent renewable energies .
and we started asking with a relatively simple and crazy story where you could implement a reservoir wisely today .
on this island , that 's the island graciosa on azores .
yes , here is the data .
four and a half thousand people live there .
they have a renewable energy share of fifteen percent at the moment .
the question is , why don 't they have more ?
because technologically it 's just not possible .
if they use more wind power and start building everywhere , the system will start to fail .
that 's what i always tell the politicians , when they look at our plant in berlin-adlershof .
they then also say , why ?
we have twenty percent in germany .
that can 't be a problem .
but that 's not true , we have seven percent in europe and our network is , if you look at it physically , the european one .
if we had twenty percent in europe , we 'd immediately have the same problems the people on that island have .
the question is just , calculate that was in two thousand and six , the first contact started with the island , so just work that out .
how big would a battery like that actually have to be to get to twenty , thirty , forty , fifty , maybe even seventy percent renewable energies .
and yes , i 'll move on a slide .
the conventional system looks like this all over the world .
by the way , about one hundred gigawatts electrical output on diesel fuel basis is added in the world per year .
that 's equivalent to the output of one hundred nuclear power plants , because it is converted particularly quickly .
the world 's hunger for energy that we are seeing is relieved with diesel fuel , because you don 't need a license for it .
it goes fast .
you put a box like this over there .
and that generally looks like this .
in it , there are always three diesels running , two are always maintained .
yes , that 's what a what you see at the bottom is the load .
we were given very accurate data .
and the wind power plant or the solar power plant or whatever it is is generally a back-up system , or a system that can only feed into the network in small quantities .
our objective was to simply say , okay ,
the diesel will be the back-up and the wind , the sun will serve the load in such a way that they can form the bigger part .
and if you want to exceed twenty , thirty percent renewable energies , you have to switch off diesel .
that means that at that moment you have to see to it that the renewable energies can take over the entire network .
of course you can only do that if you 're being managed here somehow .
nobody on this planet has done that in this way .
it exists on a small scale , so you can use your shaving machine in the car via a small power inverter .
people always ask me , what are you researching in adlershof all the time ?
that is doable .
but if you want to hook up several of these power inverters and they are supposed to construct a network , it becomes highly complicated .
and our aim was , we wanted to reach seventy to ninety percent renewable energies and then this remainder is still here , the last remainder , the last ten , twenty percent renewable energies with , that will will be very , very expensive and generating this from batteries won 't work either .
that will definitely be an energy carrier which will be hydrogen methane , power to gas you know alr , that 's what it will be .
you will then rather have to go to a seasonal reservoir and balance out winter to summer and not only day to night .
we just wanted to know what would happen with a normal , run-of-the-mill electrochemical battery .
how far would you get with that ?
and then we tried out a whole load of simulations .
and we simulated wind and sun and the load , and the result , a very exciting result , was that compared to the conventional system , which needs a medium electricity price of about fifty cents per kwh after twenty years , you 'd arrive at about forty-four cents .
those were the first calculations six years ago .
and then we said , okay ,
that 's great , then we have a business model .
we 're cheaper than the diesel system , if the price of diesel rises by five percent a year .
and then we started negotiating with the islanders .
what needed to be done ?
we negotiated with investors , i looked for new shareholders .
we were only a group of five people at the time , that could that could rebuild the organisation .
and here you have the graphic again .
the brown bit is the conventional system so to speak , the green bit is our system .
the fact that our system has an increase in price is due to the fact that we still use twenty percent diesel fuel and a control of the price increase doesn 't break through to the other things .
and the power utility , which which the electric utility on the island , said they think it 's great .
they said , we want to support it , but we don 't think you can solve the technical problem .
and that 's why we decided to build a hall in berlin , where we could precisely reconstruct , so to speak , the electrical ratio of the island on a one to three scale .
that means we first looked for the biggest battery in the world .
here it is .
naturally it 's from asia , in this case from japan .
and funnily enough it was developed at the bbc mannheim , called abb today , in the seventies , and was then licensed to the japanese .
it is you can see that it 's a very , very big battery .
it has a megawatt output and can keep up that output for six hours and it 's the battery that we came up with in the technical simulation .
and then presented .
we also brought one of these diesel aggregates to the hall , in the same size as it is there , for the complete dynamic behavior of this network to actually be , so in the hall it looks like this now , the diesel is behind it , here 's the big battery , here are all the converters , with which we simulate the network .
over here we simulate the entire transmission guidance system , the cable 's kilometer physics , to illustrate the vibration behavior , so to speak , in the network .
and here can you see the whole thing again .
we can also add a photo voltaic output of two hundred kilowatt + to the network .
we can see it again here we can see the diesel again here , and all the individual aggregates here .
and what we did , the hall was completed in two thousand and nine , and until today , two thousand and twelve , we developed practically everything that could be developed electronically and in terms of software between the individual systems .
so we 're not battery manufacturers , but define ourselves as a company that stands between the theme of the battery and the theme of the network and everything else that lies between the two .
you have to be able to cater for the battery of course , and for the network , and that is very complicated .
the nice thing about this topic is that on this island , you can basically anticipate all the problems we will have if we want to increase our share of renewable energies .
so this whole discussion as to how things will be moved , the energy revolution , how to bring that about , on the island , for example , we have twenty-five-thirty percent excess energy , so we have to limit the wind and sun .
of course this lends itself to a smart grid .
smart grids are a hot topic at the moment everywhere .
we can start integrating electro-mobility on the island already , and to ask around whether the load can be managed .
that means that if you 're at seventy percent renewable energies , then you won 't be able to do that without a reservoir .
you can heed the share by using one of these smart grids , by developing the networks , yes , that should definitely be done , but you 'll never be able to do without the reservoir completely .
and that 's kind of the message .
that 's why many people come and look at it , because you can see what problems will arise .
if we turn off the diesel , then you will no longer have this rotating mass , which causes a certain amount of idleness in the network .
and our european energy grid basically consists of rotating masses of large power plants , where the axle always revolves around the whole of europe .
we look into this network , see the fifty hertz , and if it turns into forty nine point nine hertz , we start to open a few small valves , then a little more steam can enter , and then it goes up again .
that 's the system .
and of course that 's incredibly slow .
if you put that down somewhere , it takes a while .
the spinning reserve has at least ten seconds to keep the network stable .
and in that time you can react differently .
if you don 't have this rotating mass anymore , then you have to replace it with power electronics and electro-chemistry .
and with this battery we can switch it on and off once for two milliseconds .
so you see what enormous potential for speed there is here .
and so the message is this , we have to make do without these rotating masses , if we actually want to reach our goal of twenty , twenty , twenty percent , twenty , thirty , thirty percent etc .
and then we have to decrease our must-run capacities in the network .
must-run simply means the power plant is running too to keep up the frequency .
yes , this is a huge debate at the moment , additional construction of coal-burning power plants , because otherwise we wouldn 't have , or gas turbines , because that 's not possible .
and we 're just trying to demonstrate that we can decrease the capacities , the must-run capacities , by putting electrochemical reservoirs in the network too .
thankfully many studies are being carried out on this topic .
and to this purpose people always come and look at our experimental equipment on the , basically our testing equipment on the island .
and yes , the discussion always revolves around how much of the future you can anticipate .
and many discussions i had in the last six years were similar to the discussion i had in the last thirty years regarding photovoltaics .
you can 't do it , it 's nonsense , a plaything for kids , we calculated everything , it will never add up .
we have thirty gigawatt of photo-voltaic power in germany .
that 's exemplary .
and i simply assume that we 'll have the same capacity of electrochemical reservoirs in the whole world for the next thirty years .
it 's simple , that 's what will happen .
there will be a whole load of resistance and arguments .
the nice thing is that i 've experienced that scientists have been joining my side in the last couple of years .
we 've been given over ten million funded projects , also to attach a ten-megawatt battery to the german network .
that will take place next april .
so you 're noticing a change is taking place , from a defensive attitude to to well , to the idea , one hundred percent renewable energies is right .
and when you have one hundred percent renewable energies , then it 's like a self-sufficient system .
up till now the following is always argued in discussions , these islanders are becoming self-sufficient , they have their own little network , which has nothing to do with our joint network .
the the question is simply , if they become completely independent from whatever fossil or nuclear fuels which are drilled out somewhere on the planet and are brought to them , then they 're an island .
then they 'll only be using what is available in terms of sun and wind where they live .
and that is kind of our vision of sensible energy use and i am grateful to the cradle to cradle institute that they said , use solar power .
and that 's what we 're doing , and so in this sense we 're coming together , also if you look at the presentation by premium cola , that it 's okay to be a collective and use solar power .
and yes , well , i 'd just like to motivate you , in the sense that it 's fine to be a bit crazy and have a vision .
and you really have to stay pretty firm while doing so , but i think it 's it 's possible .
thank you .
one day , los angeles times columnist steve lopez was walking along the streets of downtown los angeles when he heard beautiful music .
and the source was a man , an african-american man , charming , rugged , homeless , playing a violin that only had two strings .
and i 'm telling a story that many of you know , because steve 's columns became the basis for a book , which was turned into a movie , with robert downey jr. acting as steve lopez , and jamie foxx as nathaniel anthony ayers , the juilliard-trained double bassist whose promising career was cut short by a tragic affliction with paranoid schizophrenia .
nathaniel dropped out of juilliard , he suffered a complete breakdown , and 30 years later he was living homeless on the streets of skid row in downtown los angeles .
i encourage all of you to read steve 's book or to watch the movie to understand not only the beautiful bond that formed between these two men , but how music helped shape that bond , and ultimately was instrumental -- if you 'll pardon the pun -- in helping nathaniel get off the streets .
i met mr. ayers in 2008 , two years ago , at walt disney concert hall .
he had just heard a performance of beethoven 's first and fourth symphonies , and came backstage and introduced himself .
he was speaking in a very jovial and gregarious way about yo-yo ma and hillary clinton and how the dodgers were never going to make the world series , all because of the treacherous first violin passage work in the last movement of beethoven 's fourth symphony .
and we got talking about music , and i got an email from steve a few days later saying that nathaniel was interested in a violin lesson with me .
now , i should mention that nathaniel refuses treatment because when he was treated it was with shock therapy and thorazine and handcuffs , and that scar has stayed with him for his entire life .
but as a result now , he is prone to these schizophrenic episodes , the worst of which can manifest themselves as and then disappearing for days , wandering the streets of skid row , exposed to its horrors , with the torment of his own mind unleashed upon him .
and nathaniel was in such a state of agitation when we started our first lesson at walt disney concert hall -- he had a kind of manic glint in his eyes , he was lost .
and he was talking about invisible demons and smoke , and how someone was poisoning him in his sleep .
and i was afraid , not for myself , but i was afraid that i was going to lose him , that he was going to sink into one of his states , and that i would ruin his relationship with the violin if i started talking about scales and arpeggios and other exciting forms of didactic violin pedagogy .
so , i just started playing .
and i played the first movement of the beethoven violin concerto .
and as i played , i understood that there was a profound change occurring in nathaniel 's eyes .
it was as if he was in the grip of some invisible pharmaceutical , a chemical reaction , for which my playing the music was its catalyst .
and nathaniel 's manic rage was transformed into understanding , a quiet curiosity and grace .
and in a miracle , he lifted his own violin and he started playing , by ear , certain snippets of violin concertos which he then asked me to complete -- mendelssohn , tchaikovsky , sibelius .
and we started talking about music , from bach to beethoven and brahms , bruckner , all the b 's , from bartók , all the way up to esa-pekka salonen .
and i understood that he not only had an encyclopedic knowledge of music , but he related to this music at a personal level .
he spoke about it with the kind of passion and understanding that i share with my colleagues in the los angeles philharmonic .
and through playing music and talking about music , this man had transformed from the paranoid , disturbed man that had just come from walking the streets of downtown los angeles to the charming , erudite , brilliant , juilliard-trained musician .
music is medicine . music changes us .
and for nathaniel , music is sanity .
because music allows him to take his thoughts and delusions and shape them through his imagination and his creativity , into reality .
and that is an escape from his tormented state .
and i understood that this was the very essence of art .
this was the very reason why we made music , that we take something that exists within all of us at our very fundamental core , our emotions , and through our artistic lens , through our creativity , we 're able to shape those emotions into reality .
and the reality of that expression reaches all of us and moves us , inspires and unites us .
and for nathaniel , music brought him back into a fold of friends .
the redemptive power of music brought him back into a family of musicians that understood him , that recognized his talents and respected him .
and i will always make music with nathaniel , whether we 're at walt disney concert hall or on skid row , because he reminds me why i became a musician .
thank you .
bruno giussani : thank you . thanks .
robert gupta .
robert gupta : i 'm going to play something that i shamelessly stole from cellists .
so , please forgive me .
so , i 've known a lot of fish in my life .
i 've loved only two .
that first one , it was more like a passionate affair .
it was a beautiful fish : flavorful , textured , meaty , a bestseller on the menu .
what a fish .
even better , it was farm-raised to the supposed highest standards of sustainability .
so you could feel good about selling it .
i was in a relationship with this beauty for several months .
one day , the head of the company called and asked if i 'd speak at an event about the farm 's sustainability .
" absolutely , " i said .
here was a company trying to solve what 's become this unimaginable problem for us chefs : how do we keep fish on our menus ?
for the past 50 years , we 've been fishing the seas like we clear-cut forests .
it 's hard to overstate the destruction .
ninety percent of large fish , the ones we love -- the tunas , the halibuts , the salmons , swordfish -- they 've collapsed .
there 's almost nothing left .
so , for better or for worse , aquaculture , fish farming , is going to be a part of our future .
a lot of arguments against it : fish farms pollute -- most of them do anyway -- and they 're inefficient . take tuna , a major drawback .
it 's got a feed conversion ratio of 15 to one .
that means it takes fifteen pounds of wild fish to get you one pound of farm tuna .
not very sustainable .
it doesn 't taste very good either .
so here , finally , was a company trying to do it right .
i wanted to support them .
the day before the event , i called the head of p.r. for the company .
let 's call him don .
" don , " i said , " just to get the facts straight , you guys are famous for farming so far out to sea , you don 't pollute . "
" that 's right , " he said . " we 're so far out , the waste from our fish gets distributed , not concentrated . "
and then he added , " we 're basically a world unto ourselves .
that feed conversion ratio ? 2.5 to one , " he said .
" best in the business . "
2.5 to one , great .
" 2.5 what ? what are you feeding ? "
" sustainable proteins , " he said .
" great , " i said . got off the phone .
and that night , i was lying in bed , and i thought : what the hell is a sustainable protein ?
so the next day , just before the event , i called don .
i said , " don , what are some examples of sustainable proteins ? "
he said he didn 't know . he would ask around .
well , i got on the phone with a few people in the company ; no one could give me a straight answer until finally , i got on the phone with the head biologist .
let 's call him don too .
" don , " i said , " what are some examples of sustainable proteins ? "
well , he mentioned some algaes and some fish meals , and then he said chicken pellets .
i said , " chicken pellets ? "
he said , " yeah , feathers , skin , bone meal , scraps , dried and processed into feed . "
i said , " what percentage of your feed is chicken ? "
thinking , you know , two percent .
" well , it 's about 30 percent , " he said .
i said , " don , what 's sustainable about feeding chicken to fish ? "
there was a long pause on the line , and he said , " there 's just too much chicken in the world . "
i fell out of love with this fish .
no , not because i 'm some self-righteous , goody-two shoes foodie .
i actually am .
no , i actually fell out of love with this fish because , i swear to god , after that conversation , the fish tasted like chicken .
this second fish , it 's a different kind of love story .
it 's the romantic kind , the kind where the more you get to know your fish , you love the fish .
i first ate it at a restaurant in southern spain .
a journalist friend had been talking about this fish for a long time .
she kind of set us up .
it came to the table a bright , almost shimmering , white color .
the chef had overcooked it .
like twice over .
amazingly , it was still delicious .
who can make a fish taste good after it 's been overcooked ?
i can 't , but this guy can .
let 's call him miguel -- actually his name is miguel .
and no , he didn 't cook the fish , and he 's not a chef , at least in the way that you and i understand it .
he 's a biologist at veta la palma .
it 's a fish farm in the southwestern corner of spain .
it 's at the tip of the guadalquivir river .
until the 1980s , the farm was in the hands of the argentinians .
they raised beef cattle on what was essentially wetlands .
they did it by draining the land .
they built this intricate series of canals , and they pushed water off the land and out into the river .
well , they couldn 't make it work , not economically .
and ecologically , it was a disaster .
it killed like 90 percent of the birds , which , for this place , is a lot of birds .
and so in 1982 , a spanish company with an environmental conscience purchased the land .
what did they do ?
they reversed the flow of water .
they literally flipped the switch .
instead of pushing water out , they used the channels to pull water back in .
they flooded the canals .
they created a 27,000-acre fish farm -- bass , mullet , shrimp , eel -- and in the process , miguel and this company completely reversed the ecological destruction .
the farm 's incredible .
i mean , you 've never seen anything like this .
you stare out at a horizon that is a million miles away , and all you see are flooded canals and this thick , rich marshland .
i was there not long ago with miguel .
he 's an amazing guy , like three parts charles darwin and one part crocodile dundee .
okay ? there we are slogging through the wetlands , and i 'm panting and sweating , got mud up to my knees , and miguel 's calmly conducting a biology lecture .
here , he 's pointing out a rare black-shouldered kite .
now , he 's mentioning the mineral needs of phytoplankton .
and here , here he sees a grouping pattern that reminds him of the tanzanian giraffe .
it turns out , miguel spent the better part of his career in the mikumi national park in africa .
i asked him how he became such an expert on fish .
he said , " fish ? i didn 't know anything about fish .
i 'm an expert in relationships . "
and then he 's off , launching into more talk about rare birds and algaes and strange aquatic plants .
and don 't get me wrong , that was really fascinating , you know , the biotic community unplugged , kind of thing .
it 's great , but i was in love .
and my head was swooning over that overcooked piece of delicious fish i had the night before .
so i interrupted him . i said , " miguel , what makes your fish taste so good ? "
he pointed at the algae .
" i know , dude , the algae , the phytoplankton , the relationships : it 's amazing .
but what are your fish eating ?
what 's the feed conversion ratio ? "
well , he goes on to tell me it 's such a rich system that the fish are eating what they 'd be eating in the wild .
the plant biomass , the phytoplankton , the zooplankton , it 's what feeds the fish .
the system is so healthy , it 's totally self-renewing .
there is no feed .
ever heard of a farm that doesn 't feed its animals ?
later that day , i was driving around this property with miguel , and i asked him , i said , " for a place that seems so natural , unlike like any farm i 'd ever been at , how do you measure success ? "
at that moment , it was as if a film director called for a set change .
and we rounded the corner and saw the most amazing sight : thousands and thousands of pink flamingos , a literal pink carpet for as far as you could see .
" that 's success , " he said .
" look at their bellies , pink .
they 're feasting . "
feasting ? i was totally confused .
i said , " miguel , aren 't they feasting on your fish ? "
" yes , " he said .
" we lose 20 percent of our fish and fish eggs to birds .
well , last year , this property had 600,000 birds on it , more than 250 different species .
it 's become , today , the largest and one of the most important private bird sanctuaries in all of europe . "
i said , " miguel , isn 't a thriving bird population like the last thing you want on a fish farm ? "
he shook his head , no .
he said , " we farm extensively , not intensively .
this is an ecological network .
the flamingos eat the shrimp .
the shrimp eat the phytoplankton .
so the pinker the belly , the better the system . "
okay , so let 's review : a farm that doesn 't feed its animals , and a farm that measures its success on the health of its predators .
a fish farm , but also a bird sanctuary .
oh , and by the way , those flamingos , they shouldn 't even be there in the first place .
they brood in a town 150 miles away , where the soil conditions are better for building nests .
every morning , they fly 150 miles into the farm .
and every evening , they fly 150 miles back .
they do that because they 're able to follow the broken white line of highway a92 .
no kidding .
i was imagining a " march of the penguins " thing , so i looked at miguel .
i said , " miguel , do they fly 150 miles to the farm , and then do they fly 150 miles back at night ?
do they do that for the children ? "
he looked at me like i had just quoted a whitney houston song .
he said , " no ; they do it because the food 's better . "
i didn 't mention the skin of my beloved fish , which was delicious -- and i don 't like fish skin ; i don 't like it seared , i don 't like it crispy .
it 's that acrid , tar-like flavor .
i almost never cook with it .
yet , when i tasted it at that restaurant in southern spain , it tasted not at all like fish skin .
it tasted sweet and clean , like you were taking a bite of the ocean .
i mentioned that to miguel , and he nodded .
he said , " the skin acts like a sponge .
it 's the last defense before anything enters the body .
it evolved to soak up impurities . "
and then he added , " but our water has no impurities . "
ok . a farm that doesn 't feed its fish , a farm that measures its success by the success of its predators .
and then i realized when he says , " a farm that has no impurities , " he made a big understatement , because the water that flows through that farm comes in from the guadalquivir river .
it 's a river that carries with it all the things that rivers tend to carry these days : chemical contaminants , pesticide runoff .
and when it works its way through the system and leaves , the water is cleaner than when it entered .
the system is so healthy , it purifies the water .
so , not just a farm that doesn 't feed its animals , not just a farm that measures its success by the health of its predators , but a farm that 's literally a water purification plant -- and not just for those fish , but for you and me as well .
because when that water leaves , it dumps out into the atlantic .
a drop in the ocean , i know , but i 'll take it , and so should you , because this love story , however romantic , is also instructive .
you might say it 's a recipe for the future of good food , whether we 're talking about bass or beef cattle .
what we need now is a radically new conception of agriculture , one in which the food actually tastes good .
but for a lot people , that 's a bit too radical .
we 're not realists , us foodies ; we 're lovers .
we love farmers ' markets , we love small family farms , we talk about local food , we eat organic .
and when you suggest these are the things that will ensure the future of good food , someone , somewhere stands up and says , " hey guy , i love pink flamingos , but how are you going to feed the world ? "
how are you going to feed the world ?
can i be honest ?
i don 't love that question .
no , not because we already produce enough calories to more than feed the world .
one billion people will go hungry today .
one billion -- that 's more than ever before -- because of gross inequalities in distribution , not tonnage .
now , i don 't love this question because it 's determined the logic of our food system for the last 50 years .
feed grain to herbivores , pesticides to monocultures , chemicals to soil , chicken to fish , and all along agribusiness has simply asked , " if we 're feeding more people more cheaply , how terrible could that be ? "
that 's been the motivation , it 's been the justification : it 's been the business plan of american agriculture .
we should call it what it is : a business in liquidation , a business that 's quickly eroding ecological capital that makes that very production possible .
that 's not a business , and it isn 't agriculture .
our breadbasket is threatened today , not because of diminishing supply , but because of diminishing resources .
not by the latest combine and tractor invention , but by fertile land ; not by pumps , but by fresh water ; not by chainsaws , but by forests ; and not by fishing boats and nets , but by fish in the sea .
want to feed the world ?
let 's start by asking : how are we going to feed ourselves ?
or better : how can we create conditions that enable every community to feed itself ?
to do that , don 't look at the agribusiness model for the future .
it 's really old , and it 's tired .
it 's high on capital , chemistry and machines , and it 's never produced anything really good to eat .
instead , let 's look to the ecological model .
that 's the one that relies on two billion years of on-the-job experience .
look to miguel , farmers like miguel .
farms that aren 't worlds unto themselves ; farms that restore instead of deplete ; farms that farm extensively instead of just intensively ; farmers that are not just producers , but experts in relationships .
because they 're the ones that are experts in flavor , too .
and if i 'm going to be really honest , they 're a better chef than i 'll ever be .
you know , i 'm okay with that , because if that 's the future of good food , it 's going to be delicious .
thank you .
if i can leave you with one big idea today , it 's that the whole of the data in which we consume is greater that the sum of the parts , and instead of thinking about information overload , what i 'd like you to think about is how we can use information so that patterns pop and we can see trends that would otherwise be invisible .
so what we 're looking at right here is a typical mortality chart organized by age .
this tool that i 'm using here is a little experiment .
it 's called pivot , and with pivot what i can do is i can choose to filter in one particular cause of deaths -- say , accidents .
and , right away , i see there 's a different pattern that emerges .
this is because , in the mid-area here , people are at their most active , and over here they 're at their most frail .
we can step back out again and then reorganize the data by cause of death , seeing that circulatory diseases and cancer are the usual suspects , but not for everyone .
if we go ahead and we filter by age -- say 40 years or less -- we see that accidents are actually the greatest cause that people have to be worried about .
and if you drill into that , it 's especially the case for men .
so you get the idea that viewing information , viewing data in this way , is a lot like swimming in a living information info-graphic .
and if we can do this for raw data , why not do it for content as well ?
so what we have right here is the cover of every single sports illustrated ever produced .
it 's all here ; it 's all on the web .
you can go back to your rooms and try this after my talk .
with pivot , you can drill into a decade .
you can drill into a particular year .
you can jump right into a specific issue .
so i 'm looking at this ; i see the athletes that have appeared in this issue , the sports .
i 'm a lance armstrong fan , so i 'll go ahead and i 'll click on that , which reveals , for me , all the issues in which lance armstrong 's been a part of .
now , if i want to just kind of take a peek at these , i might think , " well , what about taking a look at all of cycling ? "
so i can step back , and expand on that .
and i see greg lemond now .
and so you get the idea that when you navigate over information this way -- going narrower , broader , backing in , backing out -- you 're not searching , you 're not browsing .
you 're doing something that 's actually a little bit different .
it 's in between , and we think it changes the way information can be used .
so i want to extrapolate on this idea a bit with something that 's a little bit crazy .
what we 're done here is we 've taken every single wikipedia page and we reduced it down to a little summary .
so the summary consists of just a little synopsis and an icon to indicate the topical area that it comes from .
i 'm only showing the top 500 most popular wikipedia pages right here .
but even in this limited view , we can do a lot of things .
right away , we get a sense of what are the topical domains that are most popular on wikipedia .
i 'm going to go ahead and select government .
now , having selected government , i can now see that the wikipedia categories that most frequently correspond to that are time magazine people of the year .
so this is really important because this is an insight that was not contained within any one wikipedia page .
it 's only possible to see that insight when you step back and look at all of them .
looking at one of these particular summaries , i can then drill into the concept of time magazine person of the year , bringing up all of them .
so looking at these people , i can see that the majority come from government ; some have come from natural sciences ; some , fewer still , have come from business -- there 's my boss -- and one has come from music .
and interestingly enough , bono is also a ted prize winner .
so we can go , jump , and take a look at all the ted prize winners .
so you see , we 're navigating the web for the first time as if it 's actually a web , not from page-to-page , but at a higher level of abstraction .
and so i want to show you one other thing that may catch you a little bit by surprise .
i 'm just showing the new york times website here .
so pivot , this application -- i don 't want to call it a browser ; it 's really not a browser , but you can view web pages with it -- and we bring that zoomable technology to every single web page like this .
so i can step back , pop right back into a specific section .
now the reason why this is important is because , by virtue of just viewing web pages in this way , i can look at my entire browsing history in the exact same way .
so i can drill into what i 've done over specific time frames .
here , in fact , is the state of all the demo that i just gave .
and i can sort of replay some stuff that i was looking at earlier today .
and , if i want to step back and look at everything , i can slice and dice my history , perhaps by my search history -- here , i was doing some nepotistic searching , looking for bing , over here for live labs pivot .
and from these , i can drill into the web page and just launch them again .
it 's one metaphor repurposed multiple times , and in each case it makes the whole greater than the sum of the parts with the data .
so right now , in this world , we think about data as being this curse .
we talk about the curse of information overload .
we talk about drowning in data .
what if we can actually turn that upside down and turn the web upside down , so that instead of navigating from one thing to the next , we get used to the habit of being able to go from many things to many things , and then being able to see the patterns that were otherwise hidden ?
if we can do that , then instead of being trapped in data , we might actually extract information .
and , instead of dealing just with information , we can tease out knowledge .
and if we get the knowledge , then maybe even there 's wisdom to be found .
so with that , i thank you .
i grew up on a steady diet of science fiction .
in high school , i took a bus to school an hour each way every day .
and i was always absorbed in a book , science fiction book , which took my mind to other worlds , and satisfied , in a narrative form , this insatiable sense of curiosity that i had .
and you know , that curiosity also manifested itself in the fact that whenever i wasn 't in school i was out in the woods , hiking and taking " samples " -- frogs and snakes and bugs and pond water -- and bringing it back , looking at it under the microscope .
you know , i was a real science geek .
but it was all about trying to understand the world , understand the limits of possibility .
and my love of science fiction actually seemed mirrored in the world around me , because what was happening , this was in the late ' 60s , we were going to the moon , we were exploring the deep oceans .
jacques cousteau was coming into our living rooms with his amazing specials that showed us animals and places and a wondrous world that we could never really have previously imagined .
so , that seemed to resonate with the whole science fiction part of it .
and i was an artist .
i could draw . i could paint .
and i found that because there weren 't video games and this saturation of cg movies and all of this imagery in the media landscape , i had to create these images in my head .
you know , we all did , as kids having to read a book , and through the author 's description , put something on the movie screen in our heads .
and so , my response to this was to paint , to draw alien creatures , alien worlds , robots , spaceships , all that stuff .
i was endlessly getting busted in math class doodling behind the textbook .
that was -- the creativity had to find its outlet somehow .
and an interesting thing happened : the jacques cousteau shows actually got me very excited about the fact that there was an alien world right here on earth .
i might not really go to an alien world on a spaceship someday -- that seemed pretty darn unlikely .
but that was a world i could really go to , right here on earth , that was as rich and exotic as anything that i had imagined from reading these books .
so , i decided i was going to become a scuba diver at the age of 15 .
and the only problem with that was that i lived in a little village in canada , 600 miles from the nearest ocean .
but i didn 't let that daunt me .
i pestered my father until he finally found a scuba class in buffalo , new york , right across the border from where we live .
and i actually got certified in a pool at a ymca in the dead of winter in buffalo , new york .
and i didn 't see the ocean , a real ocean , for another two years , until we moved to california .
since then , in the intervening 40 years , i 've spent about 3,000 hours underwater , and 500 hours of that was in submersibles .
and i 've learned that that deep-ocean environment , and even the shallow oceans , are so rich with amazing life that really is beyond our imagination .
nature 's imagination is so boundless compared to our own meager human imagination .
i still , to this day , stand in absolute awe of what i see when i make these dives .
and my love affair with the ocean is ongoing , and just as strong as it ever was .
but when i chose a career as an adult , it was filmmaking .
and that seemed to be the best way to reconcile this urge i had to tell stories with my urges to create images .
and i was , as a kid , constantly drawing comic books , and so on .
so , filmmaking was the way to put pictures and stories together , and that made sense .
and of course the stories that i chose to tell were science fiction stories : " terminator , " " aliens " and " the abyss . "
and with " the abyss , " i was putting together my love of underwater and diving with filmmaking .
so , you know , merging the two passions .
something interesting came out of " the abyss , " which was that to solve a specific narrative problem on that film , which was to create this kind of liquid water creature , we actually embraced computer generated animation , cg .
and this resulted in the first soft-surface character , cg animation that was ever in a movie .
and even though the film didn 't make any money -- barely broke even , i should say -- i witnessed something amazing , which is that the audience , the global audience , was mesmerized by this apparent magic .
you know , it 's arthur clarke 's law that any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic .
they were seeing something magical .
and so that got me very excited .
and i thought , " wow , this is something that needs to be embraced into the cinematic art . "
so , with " terminator 2 , " which was my next film , we took that much farther .
working with ilm , we created the liquid metal dude in that film . the success hung in the balance on whether that effect would work .
and it did , and we created magic again , and we had the same result with an audience -- although we did make a little more money on that one .
so , drawing a line through those two dots of experience came to , " this is going to be a whole new world , " this was a whole new world of creativity for film artists .
so , i started a company with stan winston , my good friend stan winston , who is the premier make-up and creature designer at that time , and it was called digital domain .
and the concept of the company was that we would leapfrog past the analog processes of optical printers and so on , and we would go right to digital production .
and we actually did that and it gave us a competitive advantage for a while .
but we found ourselves lagging in the mid ' 90s in the creature and character design stuff that we had actually founded the company to do .
so , i wrote this piece called " avatar , " which was meant to absolutely push the envelope of visual effects , of cg effects , beyond , with realistic human emotive characters generated in cg , and the main characters would all be in cg , and the world would be in cg .
and the envelope pushed back , and i was told by the folks at my company that we weren 't going to be able to do this for a while .
so , i shelved it , and i made this other movie about a big ship that sinks .
you know , i went and pitched it to the studio as " ' romeo and juliet ' on a ship : " it 's going to be this epic romance , passionate film . "
secretly , what i wanted to do was i wanted to dive to the real wreck of " titanic . "
and that 's why i made the movie .
and that 's the truth . now , the studio didn 't know that .
but i convinced them . i said , " we 're going to dive to the wreck . we 're going to film it for real .
we 'll be using it in the opening of the film .
it will be really important . it will be a great marketing hook . "
and i talked them into funding an expedition .
sounds crazy . but this goes back to that theme about your imagination creating a reality .
because we actually created a reality where six months later , i find myself in a russian submersible two and a half miles down in the north atlantic , looking at the real titanic through a view port .
not a movie , not hd -- for real .
now , that blew my mind .
and it took a lot of preparation , we had to build cameras and lights and all kinds of things .
but , it struck me how much this dive , these deep dives , was like a space mission .
you know , where it was highly technical , and it required enormous planning .
you get in this capsule , you go down to this dark hostile environment where there is no hope of rescue if you can 't get back by yourself .
and i thought like , " wow . i 'm like , living in a science fiction movie .
this is really cool . "
and so , i really got bitten by the bug of deep-ocean exploration .
of course , the curiosity , the science component of it -- it was everything . it was adventure , it was curiosity , it was imagination .
and it was an experience that hollywood couldn 't give me .
because , you know , i could imagine a creature and we could create a visual effect for it . but i couldn 't imagine what i was seeing out that window .
as we did some of our subsequent expeditions , i was seeing creatures at hydrothermal vents and sometimes things that i had never seen before , sometimes things that no one had seen before , that actually were not described by science at the time that we saw them and imaged them .
so , i was completely smitten by this , and had to do more .
and so , i actually made a kind of curious decision .
after the success of " titanic , " i said , " ok , i 'm going to park my day job as a hollywood movie maker , and i 'm going to go be a full-time explorer for a while . "
and so , we started planning these and we wound up going to the bismark , and exploring it with robotic vehicles .
we went back to the titanic wreck .
we took little bots that we had created that spooled a fiber optic .
and the idea was to go in and do an interior survey of that ship , which had never been done .
nobody had ever looked inside the wreck . they didn 't have the means to do it , so we created technology to do it .
so , you know , here i am now , on the deck of titanic , sitting in a submersible , and looking out at planks that look much like this , where i knew that the band had played .
and i 'm flying a little robotic vehicle through the corridor of the ship .
when i say , " i 'm operating it , " but my mind is in the vehicle .
i felt like i was physically present inside the shipwreck of titanic .
and it was the most surreal kind of deja vu experience i 've ever had , because i would know before i turned a corner what was going to be there before the lights of the vehicle actually revealed it , because i had walked the set for months when we were making the movie .
and the set was based as an exact replica on the blueprints of the ship .
so , it was this absolutely remarkable experience .
and it really made me realize that the telepresence experience -- that you actually can have these robotic avatars , then your consciousness is injected into the vehicle , into this other form of existence .
it was really , really quite profound .
and it may be a little bit of a glimpse as to what might be happening some decades out as we start to have cyborg bodies for exploration or for other means in many sort of post-human futures that i can imagine , as a science fiction fan .
so , having done these expeditions , and really beginning to appreciate what was down there , such as at the deep ocean vents where we had these amazing , amazing animals -- they 're basically aliens right here on earth .
they live in an environment of chemosynthesis .
they don 't survive on sunlight-based system the way we do .
and so , you 're seeing animals that are living next to a 500-degree-centigrade you think they can 't possibly exist .
at the same time i was getting very interested in space science as well -- again , it 's the science fiction influence , as a kid .
and i wound up getting involved with the space community , really involved with nasa , sitting on the nasa advisory board , planning actual space missions , going to russia , going through the pre-cosmonaut biomedical protocols , and all these sorts of things , to actually go and fly to the international space station with our 3d camera systems .
and this was fascinating .
but what i wound up doing was bringing space scientists with us into the deep .
and taking them down so that they had access -- astrobiologists , planetary scientists , people who were interested in these extreme environments -- taking them down to the vents , and letting them see , and take samples and test instruments , and so on .
so , here we were making documentary films , but actually doing science , and actually doing space science .
i 'd completely closed the loop between being the science fiction fan , you know , as a kid , and doing this stuff for real .
and you know , along the way in this journey of discovery , i learned a lot .
i learned a lot about science . but i also learned a lot now you think director has got to be a leader , leader of , captain of the ship , and all that sort of thing .
i didn 't really learn about leadership until i did these expeditions .
because i had to , at a certain point , say , " what am i doing out here ?
why am i doing this ? what do i get out of it ? "
we don 't make money at these damn shows .
we barely break even . there is no fame in it .
people sort of think i went away between " titanic " and " avatar " and was buffing my nails someplace , sitting at the beach .
made all these films , made all these documentary films for a very limited audience .
no fame , no glory , no money . what are you doing ?
you 're doing it for the task itself , for the challenge -- and the ocean is the most challenging environment there is -- for the thrill of discovery , and for that strange bond that happens when a small group of people form a tightly knit team .
because we would do these things with 10 , 12 people , working for years at a time , sometimes at sea for two , three months at a time .
and in that bond , you realize that the most important thing is the respect that you have for them and that they have for you , that you 've done a task that you can 't explain to someone else .
when you come back to the shore and you say , " we had to do this , and the fiber optic , and the attentuation , and the this and the that , all the technology of it , and the difficulty , the human-performance aspects of working at sea , " you can 't explain it to people . it 's that thing that maybe cops have , or people in combat that have gone through something together and they know they can never explain it .
creates a bond , creates a bond of respect .
so , when i came back to make my next movie , which was " avatar , " i tried to apply that same principle of leadership , which is that you respect your team , and you earn their respect in return .
and it really changed the dynamic .
so , here i was again with a small team , in uncharted territory , doing " avatar , " coming up with new technology that didn 't exist before .
tremendously exciting .
tremendously challenging .
and we became a family , over a four-and-half year period .
and it completely changed how i do movies .
so , people have commented on how , " well , you know , you brought back the ocean organisms and put them on the planet of pandora . "
to me , it was more of a fundamental way of doing business , the process itself , that changed as a result of that .
so , what can we synthesize out of all this ?
you know , what are the lessons learned ?
well , i think number one is curiosity .
it 's the most powerful thing you own .
imagination is a force that can actually manifest a reality .
and the respect of your team is more important than all the laurels in the world .
i have young filmmakers come up to me and say , " give me some advice for doing this . "
and i say , " don 't put limitations on yourself .
other people will do that for you -- don 't do it to yourself , don 't bet against yourself , and take risks . "
nasa has this phrase that they like : " failure is not an option . "
but failure has to be an option in art and in exploration , because it 's a leap of faith .
and no important endeavor that required innovation was done without risk .
you have to be willing to take those risks .
so , that 's the thought i would leave you with , is that in whatever you 're doing , failure is an option , but fear is not . thank you .
i 'm going to talk today about energy and climate .
and that might seem a bit surprising because my full-time work at the foundation is mostly about vaccines and seeds , about the things that we need to invent and deliver to help the poorest two billion live better lives .
but energy and climate are extremely important to these people -- in fact , more important than to anyone else on the planet .
the climate getting worse means that many years , their crops won 't grow : there will be too much rain , not enough rain , things will change in ways that their fragile environment simply can 't support .
and that leads to starvation , it leads to uncertainty , it leads to unrest .
so , the climate changes will be terrible for them .
also , the price of energy is very important to them .
in fact , if you could pick just one thing to lower the price of , to reduce poverty , by far you would pick energy .
now , the price of energy has come down over time .
really advanced civilization is based on advances in energy .
the coal revolution fueled the industrial revolution , and , even in the 1900s we 've seen a very rapid decline in the price of electricity , and that 's why we have refrigerators , air-conditioning , we can make modern materials and do so many things .
and so , we 're in a wonderful situation with electricity in the rich world .
but , as we make it cheaper -- and let 's go for making it twice as cheap -- we need to meet a new constraint , and that constraint has to do with co2 .
co2 is warming the planet , and the equation on co2 is actually a very straightforward one .
if you sum up the co2 that gets emitted , that leads to a temperature increase , and that temperature increase leads to some very negative effects : the effects on the weather ; perhaps worse , the indirect effects , in that the natural ecosystems can 't adjust to these rapid changes , and so you get ecosystem collapses .
now , the exact amount of how you map from a certain increase of co2 to what temperature will be and where the positive feedbacks are , there 's some uncertainty there , but not very much .
and there 's certainly uncertainty about how bad those effects will be , but they will be extremely bad .
i asked the top scientists on this several times : do we really have to get down to near zero ?
can 't we just cut it in half or a quarter ?
and the answer is that until we get near to zero , the temperature will continue to rise .
and so that 's a big challenge .
it 's very different than saying " we 're a twelve-foot-high truck trying to get under a ten-foot bridge , and we can just sort of squeeze under . "
this is something that has to get to zero .
now , we put out a lot of carbon dioxide every year , over 26 billion tons .
for each american , it 's about 20 tons ; for people in poor countries , it 's less than one ton .
it 's an average of about five tons for everyone on the planet .
and , somehow , we have to make changes that will bring that down to zero .
it 's been constantly going up .
it 's only various economic changes that have even flattened it at all , so we have to go from rapidly rising to falling , and falling all the way to zero .
this equation has four factors , a little bit of multiplication : so , you 've got a thing on the left , co2 , that you want to get to zero , and that 's going to be based on the number of people , the services each person 's using on average , the energy on average for each service , and the co2 being put out per unit of energy .
so , let 's look at each one of these and see how we can get this down to zero .
probably , one of these numbers is going to have to get pretty near to zero .
now that 's back from high school algebra , but let 's take a look .
first , we 've got population .
the world today has 6.8 billion people .
that 's headed up to about nine billion .
now , if we do a really great job on new vaccines , health care , reproductive health services , we could lower that by , perhaps , 10 or 15 percent , but there we see an increase of about 1.3 .
the second factor is the services we use .
this encompasses everything : the food we eat , clothing , tv , heating .
these are very good things : getting rid of poverty means providing these services to almost everyone on the planet .
and it 's a great thing for this number to go up .
in the rich world , perhaps the top one billion , we probably could cut back and use less , but every year , this number , on average , is going to go up , and so , over all , that will more than double the services delivered per person .
here we have a very basic service : do you have lighting in your house to be able to read your homework ?
and , in fact , these kids don 't , so they 're going out and reading their school work under the street lamps .
now , efficiency , e , the energy for each service , here finally we have some good news .
we have something that 's not going up .
through various inventions and new ways of doing lighting , through different types of cars , different ways of building buildings -- there are a lot of services where you can bring some individual services even bring it down by 90 percent .
there are other services like how we make fertilizer , or how we do air transport , where the rooms for improvement are far , far less .
and so , overall here , if we 're optimistic , we may get a reduction of a factor of three to even , perhaps , a factor of six .
but for these first three factors now , we 've gone from 26 billion to , at best , maybe 13 billion tons , and that just won 't cut it .
so let 's look at this fourth factor -- this is going to be a key one -- and this is the amount of co2 put out per each unit of energy .
and so the question is : can you actually get that to zero ?
if you burn coal , no .
if you burn natural gas , no .
almost every way we make electricity today , except for the emerging renewables and nuclear , puts out co2 .
and so , what we 're going to have to do at a global scale , is create a new system .
and so , we need energy miracles .
now , when i use the term " miracle , " i don 't mean something that 's impossible .
the microprocessor is a miracle . the personal computer is a miracle .
the internet and its services are a miracle .
so , the people here have participated in the creation of many miracles .
usually , we don 't have a deadline , where you have to get the miracle by a certain date .
usually , you just kind of stand by , and some come along , some don 't .
this is a case where we actually have to drive at full speed and get a miracle in a pretty tight timeline .
now , i thought , " how could i really capture this ?
is there some kind of natural illustration , some demonstration that would grab people 's imagination here ? "
i thought back to a year ago when i brought mosquitos , and somehow people enjoyed that .
it really got them involved in the idea of , you know , there are people who live with mosquitos .
so , with energy , all i could come up with is this .
i decided that releasing fireflies would be my contribution to the environment here this year .
so here we have some natural fireflies .
i 'm told they don 't bite ; in fact , they might not even leave that jar .
now , there 's all sorts of gimmicky solutions like that one , but they don 't really add up to much .
we need solutions -- either one or several -- that have unbelievable scale and unbelievable reliability , and , although there 's many directions people are seeking , i really only see five that can achieve the big numbers .
i 've left out tide , geothermal , fusion , biofuels .
those may make some contribution , and if they can do better than i expect , so much the better , but my key point here is that we 're going to have to work on each of these five , and we can 't give up any of them because they look daunting , because they all have significant challenges .
let 's look first at the burning fossil fuels , either burning coal or burning natural gas .
what you need to do there , seems like it might be simple , but it 's not , and that 's to take all the co2 , after you 've burned it , going out the flue , pressurize it , create a liquid , put it somewhere , and hope it stays there .
now we have some pilot things that do this at the 60 to 80 percent level , but getting up to that full percentage , that will be very tricky , and agreeing on where these co2 quantities should be put will be hard , but the toughest one here is this long-term issue .
who 's going to be sure ?
who 's going to guarantee something that is literally billions of times larger than any type of waste you think of in terms of nuclear or other things ?
this is a lot of volume .
so that 's a tough one .
next would be nuclear .
it also has three big problems : cost , particularly in highly regulated countries , is high ; the issue of the safety , really feeling good about nothing could go wrong , that , even though you have these human operators , that the fuel doesn 't get used for weapons .
and then what do you do with the waste ?
and , although it 's not very large , there are a lot of concerns about that .
so three very tough problems that might be solvable , and so , should be worked on .
the last three of the five , i 've grouped together .
these are what people often refer to as the renewable sources .
and they actually -- although it 's great they don 't require fuel -- they have some disadvantages .
one is that the density of energy gathered in these technologies is dramatically less than a power plant .
this is energy farming , so you 're talking about many square miles , thousands of time more area than you think of as a normal energy plant .
also , these are intermittent sources .
the sun doesn 't shine all day , it doesn 't shine every day , and , likewise , the wind doesn 't blow all the time .
and so , if you depend on these sources , you have to have some way of getting the energy during those time periods that it 's not available .
so , we 've got big cost challenges here , we have transmission challenges : for example , say this energy source is outside your country ; you not only need the technology , but you have to deal with the risk of the energy coming from elsewhere .
and , finally , this storage problem .
and , to dimensionalize this , i went through and looked at all the types of batteries that get made -- for cars , for computers , for phones , for flashlights , for everything -- and compared that to the amount of electrical energy the world uses , and what i found is that all the batteries we make now could store less than 10 minutes of all the energy .
and so , in fact , we need a big breakthrough here , something that 's going to be a factor of 100 better than the approaches we have now .
it 's not impossible , but it 's not a very easy thing .
now , this shows up when you try to get the intermittent source to be above , say , 20 to 30 percent of what you 're using .
if you 're counting on it for 100 percent , you need an incredible miracle battery .
now , how we 're going to go forward on this -- what 's the right approach ?
is it a manhattan project ? what 's the thing that can get us there ?
well , we need lots of companies working on this , hundreds .
in each of these five paths , we need at least a hundred people .
and a lot of them , you 'll look at and say , " they 're crazy . " that 's good .
and , i think , here in the ted group , we have many people who are already pursuing this .
bill gross has several companies , including one called esolar that has some great solar thermal technologies .
vinod khosla 's investing in dozens of companies that are doing great things and have interesting possibilities , and i 'm trying to help back that .
nathan myhrvold and i actually are backing a company that , perhaps surprisingly , is actually taking the nuclear approach .
there are some innovations in nuclear : modular , liquid .
and innovation really stopped in this industry quite some ago , so the idea that there 's some good ideas laying around is not all that surprising .
the idea of terrapower is that , instead of burning a part of uranium -- the one percent , which is the u235 -- we decided , " let 's burn the 99 percent , the u238 . "
it is kind of a crazy idea .
in fact , people had talked about it for a long time , but they could never simulate properly whether it would work or not , and so it 's through the advent of modern supercomputers that now you can simulate and see that , yes , with the right material 's approach , this looks like it would work .
and , because you 're burning that 99 percent , you have greatly improved cost profile .
you actually burn up the waste , and you can actually use as fuel all the leftover waste from today 's reactors .
so , instead of worrying about them , you just take that . it 's a great thing .
it breathes this uranium as it goes along , so it 's kind of like a candle .
you can see it 's a log there , often referred to as a traveling wave reactor .
in terms of fuel , this really solves the problem .
i 've got a picture here of a place in kentucky .
this is the leftover , the 99 percent , where they 've taken out the part they burn now , so it 's called depleted uranium .
that would power the u.s. for hundreds of years .
and , simply by filtering seawater in an inexpensive process , you 'd have enough fuel for the entire lifetime of the rest of the planet .
so , you know , it 's got lots of challenges ahead , but it is an example of the many hundreds and hundreds of ideas that we need to move forward .
so let 's think : how should we measure ourselves ?
what should our report card look like ?
well , let 's go out to where we really need to get , and then look at the intermediate .
for 2050 , you 've heard many people talk about this 80 percent reduction .
that really is very important , that we get there .
and that 20 percent will be used up by things going on in poor countries , still some agriculture , hopefully we will have cleaned up forestry , cement .
so , to get to that 80 percent , the developed countries , including countries like china , will have had to switch their electricity generation altogether .
so , the other grade is : are we deploying this zero-emission technology , have we deployed it in all the developed countries and we 're in the process of getting it elsewhere ?
that 's super important .
that 's a key element of making that report card .
so , backing up from there , what should the 2020 report card look like ?
well , again , it should have the two elements .
we should go through these efficiency measures to start getting reductions : the less we emit , the less that sum will be of co2 , and , therefore , the less the temperature .
but in some ways , the grade we get there , doing things that don 't get us all the way to the big reductions , is only equally , or maybe even slightly less , important than the other , which is the piece of innovation on these breakthroughs .
these breakthroughs , we need to move those at full speed , and we can measure that in terms of companies , pilot projects , regulatory things that have been changed .
there 's a lot of great books that have been written about this .
the al gore book , " our choice " and the david mckay book , " sustainable energy without the hot air . "
they really go through it and create a framework that this can be discussed broadly , because we need broad backing for this .
there 's a lot that has to come together .
so this is a wish .
it 's a very concrete wish that we invent this technology .
if you gave me only one wish for the next 50 years -- i could pick who 's president , i could pick a vaccine , which is something i love , or i could pick that this thing that 's half the cost with no co2 gets invented -- this is the wish i would pick .
this is the one with the greatest impact .
if we don 't get this wish , the division between the people who think short term and long term will be terrible , between the u.s. and china , between poor countries and rich , and most of all the lives of those two billion will be far worse .
so , what do we have to do ?
what am i appealing to you to step forward and drive ?
we need to go for more research funding .
when countries get together in places like copenhagen , they shouldn 't just discuss the co2 .
they should discuss this innovation agenda , and you 'd be stunned at the ridiculously low levels of spending on these innovative approaches .
we do need the market incentives -- co2 tax , cap and trade -- something that gets that price signal out there .
we need to get the message out .
we need to have this dialogue be a more rational , more understandable dialogue , including the steps that the government takes .
this is an important wish , but it is one i think we can achieve .
thank you .
thank you .
thank you . thank you .
thank you . so to understand more about terrapower , right -- i mean , first of all , can you give a sense of what scale of investment this is ?
bil gates : to actually do the software , buy the supercomputer , hire all the great scientists , which we 've done , that 's only tens of millions , and even once we test our materials out in a russian reactor to make sure that our materials work properly , then you 'll only be up in the hundreds of millions .
the tough thing is building the pilot reactor ; finding the several billion , finding the regulator , the location that will actually build the first one of these .
once you get the first one built , if it works as advertised , then it 's just clear as day , because the economics , the energy density , are so different than nuclear as we know it .
and so , to understand it right , this involves building deep into the ground almost like a vertical kind of column of nuclear fuel , of this sort of spent uranium , and then the process starts at the top and kind of works down ?
bg : that 's right . today , you 're always refueling the reactor , so you have lots of people and lots of controls that can go wrong : that thing where you 're opening it up and moving things in and out , that 's not good .
so , if you have very cheap fuel that you can put 60 years in -- just think of it as a log -- put it down and not have those same complexities .
and it just sits there and burns for the 60 years , and then it 's done .
it 's a nuclear power plant that is its own waste disposal solution .
bg : yeah . well , what happens with the waste , you can let it sit there -- there 's a lot less waste under this approach -- then you can actually take that , and put it into another one and burn that .
and we start off actually by taking the waste that exists today , that 's sitting in these cooling pools or dry casking by reactors -- that 's our fuel to begin with .
so , the thing that 's been a problem from those reactors is actually what gets fed into ours , and you 're reducing the volume of the waste quite dramatically as you 're going through this process .
i mean , you 're talking to different people around the world about the possibilities here .
where is there most interest in actually doing something with this ?
bg : well , we haven 't picked a particular place , and there 's all these interesting disclosure rules about anything that 's called " nuclear , " so we 've got a lot of interest , that people from the company have been in russia , india , china -- i 've been back seeing the secretary of energy here , talking about how this fits into the energy agenda .
so i 'm optimistic . you know , the french and japanese have done some work .
this is a variant on something that has been done .
it 's an important advance , but it 's like a fast reactor , and a lot of countries have built them , so anybody who 's done a fast reactor is a candidate to be where the first one gets built .
so , in your mind , timescale and likelihood of actually taking something like this live ?
bg : well , we need -- for one of these high-scale , electro-generation things that 's very cheap , we have 20 years to invent and then 20 years to deploy .
that 's sort of the deadline that the environmental models have shown us that we have to meet .
and , you know , terrapower , if things go well -- which is wishing for a lot -- could easily meet that .
and there are , fortunately now , dozens of companies -- we need it to be hundreds -- who , likewise , if their science goes well , if the funding for their pilot plants goes well , that they can compete for this .
and it 's best if multiple succeed , because then you could use a mix of these things .
we certainly need one to succeed .
in terms of big-scale possible game changes , is this the biggest that you 're aware of out there ?
bg : an energy breakthrough is the most important thing .
it would have been , even without the environmental constraint , but the environmental constraint just makes it so much greater .
in the nuclear space , there are other innovators .
you know , we don 't know their work as well as we know this one , but the modular people , that 's a different approach .
there 's a liquid-type reactor , which seems a little hard , but maybe they say that about us .
and so , there are different ones , but the beauty of this is a molecule of uranium has a million times as much energy as a molecule of , say , coal , and so -- if you can deal with the negatives , which are essentially the radiation -- the footprint and cost , the potential , in terms of effect on land and various things , is almost in a class of its own .
if this doesn 't work , then what ?
do we have to start taking emergency measures to try and keep the temperature of the earth stable ?
bg : if you get into that situation , it 's like if you 've been over-eating , and you 're about to have a heart attack : then where do you go ? you may need heart surgery or something .
there is a line of research on what 's called geoengineering , which are various techniques that would delay the heating to buy us 20 or 30 years to get our act together .
now , that 's just an insurance policy .
you hope you don 't need to do that .
some people say you shouldn 't even work on the insurance policy because it might make you lazy , that you 'll keep eating because you know heart surgery will be there to save you .
i 'm not sure that 's wise , given the importance of the problem , but there 's now the geoengineering discussion about -- should that be in the back pocket in case things happen faster , or this innovation goes a lot slower than we expect ?
climate skeptics : if you had a sentence or two to say to them , how might you persuade them that they 're wrong ?
bg : well , unfortunately , the skeptics come in different camps .
the ones who make scientific arguments are very few .
are they saying that there 's negative feedback effects that have to do with clouds that offset things ?
there are very , very few things that they can even say there 's a chance in a million of those things .
the main problem we have here , it 's kind of like aids .
you make the mistake now , and you pay for it a lot later .
and so , when you have all sorts of urgent problems , the idea of taking pain now that has to do with a gain later , and a somewhat uncertain pain thing -- in fact , the ipcc report , that 's not necessarily the worst case , and there are people in the rich world who look at ipcc and say , " ok , that isn 't that big of a deal . "
the fact is it 's that uncertain part that should move us towards this .
but my dream here is that , if you can make it economic , and meet the co2 constraints , then the skeptics say , " ok , i don 't care that it doesn 't put out co2 , i kind of wish it did put out co2 , but i guess i 'll accept it because it 's cheaper than what 's come before . "
and so , that would be your response to the bjorn lomborg argument , that basically if you spend all this energy trying to solve the co2 problem , it 's going to take away all your other goals of trying to rid the world of poverty and malaria and so forth , it 's a stupid waste of the earth 's resources to put money towards that when there are better things we can do .
bg : well , the actual spending on the r & amp ; d piece -- say the u.s. should spend 10 billion a year more than it is right now -- it 's not that dramatic .
it shouldn 't take away from other things .
the thing you get into big money on , and this , reasonable people can disagree , is when you have something that 's non-economic and you 're trying to fund that -- that , to me , mostly is a waste .
unless you 're very close and you 're just funding the learning curve and it 's going to get very cheap , i believe we should try more things that have a potential to be far less expensive .
if the trade-off you get into is , " let 's make energy super expensive , " then the rich can afford that .
i mean , all of us here could pay five times as much for our energy and not change our lifestyle .
the disaster is for that two billion .
and even lomborg has changed .
his shtick now is , " why isn 't the r & amp ; d getting more discussed ? "
he 's still , because of his earlier stuff , still associated with the skeptic camp , but he 's realized that 's a pretty lonely camp , and so , he 's making the r & amp ; d point .
and so there is a thread of something that i think is appropriate .
the r & amp ; d piece , it 's crazy how little it 's funded .
well bill , i suspect i speak on the behalf of most people here to say i really hope your wish comes true . thank you so much .
bg : thank you .
several years ago here at ted , peter skillman introduced a design challenge called the marshmallow challenge .
and the idea 's pretty simple : teams of four have to build the tallest free-standing structure out of 20 sticks of spaghetti , one yard of tape , one yard of string and a marshmallow .
the marshmallow has to be on top .
and , though it seems really simple , it 's actually pretty hard because it forces people to collaborate very quickly .
and so , i thought this was an interesting idea , and i incorporated it into a design workshop .
and it was a huge success .
and since then , i 've conducted about 70 design workshops across the world with students and designers and architects , even the ctos of the fortune 50 , and there 's something about this exercise that reveals very deep lessons about the nature of collaboration , and i 'd like to share some of them with you .
so , normally , most people begin by orienting themselves to the task .
they talk about it , they figure out what it 's going to look like , they jockey for power .
then they spend some time planning , organizing , they sketch and they lay out spaghetti .
they spend the majority of their time assembling the sticks into ever-growing structures .
and then finally , just as they 're running out of time , someone takes out the marshmallow , and then they gingerly put it on top , and then they stand back , and -- ta-da ! -- they admire their work .
but what really happens , most of the time , is that the " ta-da " turns into an " uh-oh , " because the weight of the marshmallow causes the entire structure to buckle and to collapse .
so there are a number of people who have a lot more " uh-oh " moments than others , and among the worst are recent graduates of business school .
they lie , they cheat , they get distracted and they produce really lame structures .
and of course there are teams that have a lot more " ta-da " structures , and among the best are recent graduates of kindergarten .
and it 's pretty amazing .
as peter tells us , not only do they produce the tallest structures , but they 're the most interesting structures of them all .
so the question you want to ask is : how come ? why ? what is it about them ?
and peter likes to say that none of the kids spend any time trying to be ceo of spaghetti , inc . right ?
they don 't spend time jockeying for power .
but there 's another reason as well .
and the reason is that business students are trained to find the single right plan , right ?
and then they execute on it .
and then what happens is , when they put the marshmallow on the top , they run out of time and what happens ?
it 's a crisis .
sound familiar ? right .
what kindergarteners do differently is that they start with the marshmallow , and they build prototypes , successive prototypes , always keeping the marshmallow on top , so they have multiple times to fix when they build prototypes along the way .
designers recognize this type of collaboration as the essence of the iterative process .
and with each version , kids get instant feedback about what works and what doesn 't work .
so the capacity to play in prototype is really essential , but let 's look at how different teams perform .
so the average for most people is around 20 inches ; business schools students , about half of that ; lawyers , a little better , but not much better than that , kindergarteners , better than most adults .
who does the very best ?
architects and engineers , thankfully .
thirty-nine inches is the tallest structure i 've seen .
and why is it ? because they understand triangles and self-reinforcing geometrical patterns are the key to building stable structures .
so ceos , a little bit better than average , but here 's where it gets interesting .
if you put you put an executive admin. on the team , they get significantly better .
it 's incredible . you know , you look around , you go , " oh , that team 's going to win . "
you can just tell beforehand . and why is that ?
because they have special skills of facilitation .
they manage the process , they understand the process .
and any team who manages and pays close attention to work will significantly improve the team 's performance .
specialized skills and facilitation skills are the combination that leads to strong success .
if you have 10 teams that typically perform , you 'll get maybe six or so that have standing structures .
and i tried something interesting .
i thought , let 's up the ante , once .
so i offered a 10,000 dollar prize of software to the winning team .
so what do you think happened to these design students ?
what was the result ?
here 's what happened : not one team had a standing structure .
if anyone had built , say , a one inch structure , they would have taken home the prize .
so , isn 't that interesting ? that high stakes have a strong impact .
we did the exercise again with the same students .
what do you think happened then ?
so now they understand the value of prototyping .
so the same team went from being the very worst to being among the very best .
they produced the tallest structures in the least amount of time .
so there 's deep lessons for us about the nature of incentives and success .
so , you might ask : why would anyone actually spend time writing a marshmallow challenge ?
and the reason is , i help create digital tools and processes to help teams build cars and video games and visual effects .
and what the marshmallow challenge does is it helps them identify the hidden assumptions .
because , frankly , every project has its own marshmallow , doesn 't it ?
the challenge provides a shared experience , a common language , a common stance to build the right prototype .
and so , this is the value of the experience , of this so simple exercise .
and those of you who are interested may want to go to marshmallowchallenge.com .
it 's a blog that you can look at how to build the marshmallows .
there 's step-by-step instructions on this .
there are crazy examples from around the world of how people tweak and adjust the system .
there 's world records that are on this as well .
and the fundamental lesson , i believe , is that design truly is a contact sport .
it demands that we bring all of our senses to the task , and that we apply the very best of our thinking , our feeling and our doing to the challenge that we have at hand .
and sometimes , a little prototype of this experience is all that it takes to turn us from an " uh-oh " moment to a " ta-da " moment .
and that can make a big difference .
thank you very much .
let 's pretend right here we have a machine .
a big machine , a cool , ted-ish machine , and it 's a time machine .
and everyone in this room has to get into it .
and you can go backwards , you can go forwards ; you cannot stay where you are .
and i wonder what you 'd choose , because i 've been asking my friends this question a lot lately and they all want to go back .
i don 't know . they want to go back before there were automobiles or twitter or " american idol . "
i don 't know .
i 'm convinced that there 's some sort of pull to nostalgia , to wishful thinking .
and i understand that .
i 'm not part of that crowd , i have to say .
i don 't want to go back , and it 's not because i 'm adventurous .
it 's because possibilities on this planet , they don 't go back , they go forward .
so i want to get in the machine , and i want to go forward .
this is the greatest time there 's ever been on this planet by any measure that you wish to choose : health , wealth , mobility , opportunity , declining rates of disease ...
there 's never been a time like this .
my great-grandparents died , all of them , by the time they were 60 .
my grandparents pushed that number to 70 .
my parents are closing in on 80 .
so there better be a nine at the beginning of my death number .
but it 's not even about people like us , because this is a bigger deal than that .
a kid born in new delhi today can expect to live as long as the richest man in the world did 100 years ago .
think about that , it 's an incredible fact .
and why is it true ?
smallpox . smallpox killed billions of people on this planet .
it reshaped the demography of the globe in a way that no war ever has .
it 's gone . it 's vanished .
we vanquished it . puff .
in the rich world , diseases that threatened millions of us just a generation ago no longer exist , hardly .
diphtheria , rubella , polio ...
does anyone even know what those things are ?
vaccines , modern medicine , our ability to feed billions of people , those are triumphs of the scientific method .
and to my mind , the scientific method -- trying stuff out , seeing if it works , changing it when it doesn 't -- is one of the great accomplishments of humanity .
so that 's the good news .
unfortunately , that 's all the good news because there are some other problems , and they 've been mentioned many times .
and one of them is that despite all our accomplishments , a billion people go to bed hungry in this world every day .
that number 's rising , and it 's rising really rapidly , and it 's disgraceful .
and not only that , we 've used our imagination to thoroughly trash this globe .
potable water , arable land , rainforests , oil , gas : they 're going away , and they 're going away soon , and unless we innovate our way out of this mess , we 're going away too .
so the question is : can we do that ? and i think we can .
i think it 's clear that we can make food that will feed billions of people without raping the land that they live on .
i think we can power this world with energy that doesn 't also destroy it .
i really do believe that , and , no , it ain 't wishful thinking .
but here 's the thing that keeps me up at night -- one of the things that keeps me up at night : we 've never needed progress in science more than we need it right now . never .
and we 've also never been in a position to deploy it properly in the way that we can today .
we 're on the verge of amazing , amazing events in many fields , and yet i actually think we 'd have to go back hundreds , 300 years , before the enlightenment , to find a time when we battled progress , when we fought about these things more vigorously , on more fronts , than we do now .
people wrap themselves in their beliefs , and they do it so tightly that you can 't set them free .
not even the truth will set them free .
and , listen , everyone 's entitled to their opinion ; they 're even entitled to their opinion about progress .
but you know what you 're not entitled to ?
you 're not entitled to your own facts . sorry , you 're not .
and this took me awhile to figure out .
about a decade ago , i wrote a story about vaccines for the new yorker . a little story .
and i was amazed to find opposition : opposition to what is , after all , the most effective public health measure in human history .
i didn 't know what to do , so i just did what i do : i wrote a story and i moved on .
and soon after that , i wrote a story about genetically engineered food .
same thing , only bigger .
people were going crazy .
so i wrote a story about that too , and i couldn 't understand why people thought this was " frankenfoods , " why they thought moving molecules around in a specific , rather than a haphazard way , was trespassing on nature 's ground .
but , you know , i do what i do . i wrote the story , i moved on .
i mean , i 'm a journalist .
we type , we file , we go to dinner . it 's fine .
but these stories bothered me , and i couldn 't figure out why , and eventually i did .
and that 's because those fanatics that were driving me crazy weren 't actually fanatics at all .
they were thoughtful people , educated people , decent people .
they were exactly like the people in this room .
and it just disturbed me so much .
but then i thought , you know , let 's be honest .
we 're at a point in this world where we don 't have the same relationship to progress that we used to .
we talk about it ambivalently .
we talk about it in ironic terms with little quotes around it : " progress . "
okay , there are reasons for that , and i think we know what those reasons are .
we 've lost faith in institutions , in authority , and sometimes in science itself , and there 's no reason we shouldn 't have .
you can just say a few names and people will understand .
chernobyl , bhopal , the challenger , vioxx , weapons of mass destruction , hanging chads .
you know , you can choose your list .
there are questions and problems with the people we used to believe were always right , so be skeptical .
ask questions , demand proof , demand evidence .
don 't take anything for granted .
but here 's the thing : when you get proof , you need to accept the proof , and we 're not that good at doing that .
and the reason that i can say that is because we 're now in an epidemic of fear like one i 've never seen and hope never to see again .
about 12 years ago , there was a story published , a horrible story , that linked the epidemic of autism to the measles , mumps and rubella vaccine shot .
very scary .
tons of studies were done to see if this was true .
tons of studies should have been done ; it 's a serious issue .
the data came back .
the data came back from the united states , from england , from sweden , from canada , and it was all the same : no correlation , no connection , none at all .
it doesn 't matter . it doesn 't matter because we believe anecdotes , we believe what we see , what we think we see , what makes us feel real .
we don 't believe a bunch of documents from a government official giving us data , and i do understand that , i think we all do .
but you know what ?
the result of that has been disastrous .
disastrous because here 's a fact : the united states is one of the only countries in the world where the vaccine rate for measles is going down .
that is disgraceful , and we should be ashamed of ourselves .
it 's horrible .
what kind of a thing happened that we could do that ?
now , i understand it . i do understand it .
because , did anyone have measles here ?
has one person in this audience ever seen someone die of measles ?
doesn 't happen very much .
doesn 't happen in this country at all , but it happened 160,000 times in the world last year .
that 's a lot of death of measles -- 20 an hour .
but since it didn 't happen here , we can put it out of our minds , and people like jenny mccarthy can go around preaching messages of fear and illiteracy from platforms like " oprah " and " larry king live . "
and they can do it because they don 't link causation and correlation .
they don 't understand that these things seem the same , but they 're almost never the same .
and it 's something we need to learn , and we need to learn it really soon .
this guy was a hero , jonas salk .
he took one of the worst scourges of mankind away from us .
no fear , no agony . polio -- puff , gone .
that guy in the middle , not so much .
his name is paul offit .
he just developed a rotavirus vaccine with a bunch of other people .
it 'll save the lives of 400 to 500,000 kids in the developing world every year .
pretty good , right ?
well , it 's good , except that paul goes around talking about vaccines and says how valuable they are and that people ought to just stop the whining .
and he actually says it that way .
so , paul 's a terrorist .
when paul speaks in a public hearing , he can 't testify without armed guards .
he gets called at home because people like to tell him that they remember where his kids go to school .
and why ? because paul made a vaccine .
i don 't need to say this , but vaccines are essential .
you take them away , disease comes back , horrible diseases . and that 's happening .
we have measles in this country now .
and it 's getting worse , and pretty soon kids are going to die of it again because it 's just a numbers game .
and they 're not just going to die of measles .
what about polio ? let 's have that . why not ?
a college classmate of mine wrote me a couple weeks ago and said she thought i was a little strident .
no one 's ever said that before .
she wasn 't going to vaccinate her kid against polio , no way .
fine .
why ? because we don 't have polio . and you know what ?
we didn 't have polio in this country yesterday .
today , i don 't know , maybe a guy got on a plane in lagos this morning , and he 's flying to lax , right now he 's over ohio .
and he 's going to land in a couple of hours , he 's going to rent a car , and he 's going to come to long beach , and he 's going to attend one of these fabulous ted dinners tonight .
and he doesn 't know that he 's infected with a paralytic disease , and we don 't either because that 's the way the world works .
that 's the planet we live on . don 't pretend it isn 't .
now , we love to wrap ourselves in lies . we love to do it .
everyone take their vitamins this morning ?
echinacea , a little antioxidant to get you going .
i know you did because half of americans do every day .
they take the stuff , and they take alternative medicines , and it doesn 't matter how often we find out that they 're useless .
the data says it all the time .
they darken your urine . they almost never do more than that .
it 's okay , you want to pay 28 billion dollars for dark urine ?
i 'm totally with you .
dark urine . dark .
why do we do that ? why do we do that ?
well , i think i understand , we hate big pharma .
we hate big government . we don 't trust the man .
and we shouldn 't : our health care system sucks .
it 's cruel to millions of people .
it 's absolutely astonishingly cold and soul-bending to those of us who can even afford it .
so we run away from it , and where do we run ?
we leap into the arms of big placebo .
that 's fantastic . i love big placebo .
but , you know , it 's really a serious thing because this stuff is crap , and we spend billions of dollars on it .
and i have all sorts of little props here .
none of it ... ginkgo , fraud ; echinacea , fraud ; acai -- i don 't even know what that is but we 're spending billions of dollars on it -- it 's fraud .
and you know what ? when i say this stuff , people scream at me , and they say , " what do you care ? let people do what they want to do .
it makes them feel good . "
and you know what ? you 're wrong .
because i don 't care if it 's the secretary of hhs who 's saying , " hmm , i 'm not going to take the evidence of my experts on mammograms , " or some cancer quack who wants to treat his patient with coffee enemas .
when you start down the road where belief and magic replace evidence and science , you end up in a place you don 't want to be .
you end up in thabo mbeki south africa .
he killed 400,000 of his people by insisting that beetroot , garlic and lemon oil were much more effective than the antiretroviral drugs we know can slow the course of aids .
hundreds of thousands of needless deaths in a country that has been plagued worse than any other by this disease .
please , don 't tell me there are no consequences to these things .
there are . there always are .
now , the most mindless epidemic we 're in the middle of right now is this absurd battle between proponents of genetically engineered food and the organic elite .
it 's an idiotic debate . it has to stop .
it 's a debate about words , about metaphors .
it 's ideology , it 's not science .
every single thing we eat , every grain of rice , every sprig of parsley , every brussels sprout has been modified by man .
you know , there weren 't tangerines in the garden of eden .
there wasn 't any cantaloupe .
there weren 't christmas trees . we made it all .
we made it over the last 11,000 years .
and some of it worked , and some of it didn 't .
we got rid of the stuff that didn 't .
now we can do it in a more precise way -- and there are risks , absolutely -- but we can put something like vitamin a into rice , and that stuff can help millions of people , millions of people , prolong their lives .
you don 't want to do that ?
i have to say , i don 't understand it .
we object to genetically engineered food .
why do we do that ?
well , the things i constantly hear are : too many chemicals , pesticides , hormones , monoculture , we don 't want giant fields of the same thing , that 's wrong .
we don 't companies patenting life .
we don 't want companies owning seeds .
and you know what my response to all of that is ?
yes , you 're right . let 's fix it .
it 's true , we 've got a huge food problem , but this isn 't science .
this has nothing to do with science .
it 's law , it 's morality , it 's patent stuff .
you know science isn 't a company .
it 's not a country .
it 's not even an idea ; it 's a process .
it 's a process , and sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn 't , but the idea that we should not allow science to do its job because we 're afraid , is really very deadening , and it 's preventing millions of people from prospering .
you know , in the next 50 years we 're going to have to grow 70 percent more food than we do right now , 70 percent .
this investment in africa over the last 30 years .
disgraceful . disgraceful .
they need it , and we 're not giving it to them .
and why ? genetically engineered food .
we don 't want to encourage people to eat that rotten stuff , like cassava for instance .
cassava 's something that half a billion people eat .
it 's kind of like a potato .
it 's just a bunch of calories . it sucks .
it doesn 't have nutrients , it doesn 't have protein , and scientists are engineering all of that into it right now .
and then people would be able to eat it and they 'd be able to not go blind .
they wouldn 't starve , and you know what ?
that would be nice . it wouldn 't be chez panisse , but it would be nice .
and all i can say about this is : why are we fighting it ?
i mean , let 's ask ourselves : why are we fighting it ?
because we don 't want to move genes around ?
this is about moving genes around . it 's not about chemicals .
it 's not about our ridiculous passion for hormones , our insistence on having bigger food , better food , singular food .
this isn 't about rice krispies , this is about keeping people alive , and it 's about time we started to understand what that meant .
because , you know something ?
if we don 't , if we continue to act the way we 're acting , we 're guilty of something that i don 't think we want to be guilty of : high-tech colonialism .
there 's no other way to describe what 's going on here .
it 's selfish , it 's ugly , it 's beneath us , and we really have to stop it .
so after this amazingly fun conversation , you might want to say , " so , you still want to get in this ridiculous time machine and go forward ? "
absolutely . absolutely , i do .
it 's stuck in the present right now , but we have an amazing opportunity .
we can set that time machine on anything we want .
we can move it where we want to move it , and we 're going to move it where we want to move it .
we have to have these conversations and we have to think , but when we get in the time machine and we go ahead , we 're going to be happy we do .
i know that we can , and as far as i 'm concerned , that 's something the world needs right now .
thank you .
thank you .
for some time i have been interested in the placebo effect , which might seem like an odd thing for a magician to be interested in , unless you think of it in the terms that i do , which is , " something fake is believed in enough by somebody that it becomes something real . "
in other words , sugar pills have a measurable effect in certain kinds of studies , the placebo effect , just because the person thinks that what 's happening to them is a pharmaceutical or some sort of a -- for pain management , for example , if they believe it enough there is a measurable effect in the body called the placebo effect .
something fake becomes something real because of someone 's perception of it .
in order for us to understand each other , i want to start by showing you a rudimentary , very simple magic trick .
and i 'm going to show you how it works . this is a trick that 's been in every children 's magic book since at least the 1950s .
i learned it myself from cub scout magic in the 1970s .
i 'll do it for you , and then i 'll explain it .
and then i 'll explain why i explained it .
so , here 's what happens .
the knife , which you can examine ; my hand , which you could examine .
i 'm just going to hold the knife in my fist like this .
i 'll get my sleeve back .
and to make sure nothing goes up or down my sleeve i 'm just going to squeeze my wrist right here .
that way you can see that at no time can anything travel , as long as i 'm squeezing there nothing can go up or down my sleeve .
and the object of this is quite simple .
i 'm going to open my hand , and hopefully , if all is well , my pure animal magnetism will hold the knife .
in fact it 's held so tightly in place that i can shake it , and the knife does not come off .
nothing goes up or down my sleeve , no trickery . and you can examine everything .
ta-da !
so , this is a trick that i often teach to young children that are interested in magic , because you can learn a great deal about deception by studying this very -- even though it 's a very simple trick methodologically .
probably many of you in the room know this trick .
what happens is this .
i hold the knife in my hand .
i say i 'm going to grab hold of my wrist to make sure nothing goes up or down my sleeve , that is a lie .
the reason i 'm holding onto my wrist is because that 's actually the secret of the illusion .
in a moment when my hand moves from facing you to being away from you , this finger right here , my index finger is just going to shift from where it is , to a position pointing out like this .
nice one .
someone who didn 't have a childhood is out there .
so , it goes like this , from here , right .
and as i move around my finger shifts .
and we could talk about why this is deceptive , why you don 't notice there are only three fingers down here , because the mind , and the way it processes information , it doesn 't count , one , two , three . it groups them .
but that 's not really what this is about . right ? and then i open my hand up .
obviously it 's clinging there , not by animal magnetism , but by chicanery , my index finger being there .
and then when i close my finger , same thing , as i move back , this motion kind of covers the moving back of my finger .
i take this hand away . you give the knife out .
there is a trick you can do for your friends and neighbors . thanks .
now , what does that have to do with the placebo effect ?
i read a study a year or so ago that really blew my mind wide open .
i 'm not a doctor or a researcher , so this , to me , was an astonishing thing .
it turns out that if you administer a placebo in the form of a white pill , that 's like aspirin shaped -- it 's just a round white pill -- it has some certain measurable effect .
but if you change the form that you give the placebo in , like you make a smaller pill , and color it blue , and stamp a letter into it , it is actually measurably more effective .
even though neither one of these things has any pharmaceutical -- they 're sugar pills .
but a white pill is not as good as a blue pill .
what ? that really flipped me out .
turns out though , that that 's not even where it stops .
if you have capsules , they 're more effective than tablets in any form .
a colored capsule , that 's yellow on one end and red on the other is better than a white capsule .
dosage has something to do with this .
one pill twice a day is not as good at three pills -- i don 't remember the statistic now . sorry .
but the point is ...
... these dosages have something to do with it .
and the form has something to do with it .
and if you want the ultimate in placebo , you 've go to the needle .
right ? a syringe with some inert -- a couple ccs of some inert something , and you inject this into a patient ...
well this is such a powerful image in their mind , it 's so much stronger than the white pill .
it 's a really , this graph , well i 'll show it to you some other time when we have slides .
the point is the white pill is not as good as the blue pill is not as good as the capsule is not as good as the needle .
and none of it has any real pharmaceutical quality , it 's only your belief that makes it real in your body and makes a stronger effect .
i wanted to see if i could take that idea and apply it to a magic trick .
and take something that is obviously a fake trick and make it seem real .
and we know from that study that when you want reality , you go to the needle .
this is a seven-inch hatpin . it 's very , very sharp , and i 'm going to just sterilize it a tiny bit .
this is really my flesh . this is not damian 's special-grown flesh .
that 's my skin right there . this is not a hollywood special effect .
i 'm going to pierce my skin and run this needle through to the other side .
if you 're queasy -- if you faint easily -- i was doing this for some friends in the hotel room last night , and some people that i didn 't know , and one woman almost passed out .
so , i suggest if you get queasy easy that you look away for about the next 30 -- in fact , you know what , i 'll do the first bad part behind it .
you 'll get to see , you can look away too if you 'd like to .
so , here is what happens , right here , the beginning of my flesh at the lower part of my arm i just make a little pierce .
i 'm sorry , man . am i freaking you out ?
ok , and then just through my skin a tiny bit , and then out the other side like this .
now , essentially we 're in the same position we were in with the knife trick .
sort of .
but you can 't count my fingers right now can you ?
so , let me show them to you . that 's one , two three , four , five .
yes , well ...
i know what people think when they see this .
they go , " well , he 's certainly not dumb enough to stab himself through the skin to entertain us for a few minutes .
so , let me give you a little peek .
how 's that look out there ? pretty good .
yeah , i know .
and the people in the back go , " ok , i didn 't really see that . "
people in the satellite room are starting to move in now .
let me give you good close look at this .
that really is my skin . that is not a hollywood special effect .
that 's my flesh , and i can twist that around .
i 'm sorry . if you 're getting queasy , look away , don 't look at the thing .
people in the back or people on video years from now watching this will go , " well yeah , that looks kind of neat in some sort of effect there , but if it were real he would be -- see there 's a hole there and a hole there , if it were real he would be bleeding .
well let me work up some blood for you .
yes , there it is .
normally now , i would take the needle out .
i would clean off my arm , and i would show you that there are no wounds .
but i think in this context and with the idea of taking something fake and making it into something real , i 'm just going to leave it there , and walk off the stage .
i will be seeing you several times over the next few days .
i hope you 're looking forward to that . thank you very much .
everybody talks about happiness these days .
i had somebody count the number of books with " happiness " in the title published in the last five years and they gave up after about 40 , and there were many more .
there is a huge wave of interest in happiness , among researchers .
there is a lot of happiness coaching .
everybody would like to make people happier .
but in spite of all this flood of work , there are several cognitive traps that sort of make it almost impossible to think straight about happiness .
and my talk today will be mostly about these cognitive traps .
this applies to laypeople thinking about their own happiness , and it applies to scholars thinking about happiness , because it turns out we 're just as messed up as anybody else is .
the first of these traps is a reluctance to admit complexity .
it turns out that the word " happiness " is just not a useful word anymore , because we apply it to too many different things .
i think there is one particular meaning to which we might restrict it , but by and large , this is something that we 'll have to give up and we 'll have to adopt the more complicated view of what well-being is .
the second trap is a confusion between experience and memory ; basically , it 's between being happy in your life , and being happy about your life or happy with your life .
and those are two very different concepts , and they 're both lumped in the notion of happiness .
and the third is the focusing illusion , and it 's the unfortunate fact that we can 't think about any circumstance that affects well-being without distorting its importance .
i mean , this is a real cognitive trap .
there 's just no way of getting it right .
now , i 'd like to start with an example of somebody who had a question-and-answer session after one of my lectures reported a story , and that was a story -- he said he 'd been listening to a symphony , and it was absolutely glorious music and at the very end of the recording , there was a dreadful screeching sound .
and then he added , really quite emotionally , it ruined the whole experience .
but it hadn 't .
what it had ruined were the memories of the experience .
he had had the experience .
he had had 20 minutes of glorious music .
they counted for nothing because he was left with a memory ; the memory was ruined , and the memory was all that he had gotten to keep .
what this is telling us , really , is that we might be thinking of ourselves and of other people in terms of two selves .
there is an experiencing self , who lives in the present and knows the present , is capable of re-living the past , but basically it has only the present .
it 's the experiencing self that the doctor approaches -- you know , when the doctor asks , " does it hurt now when i touch you here ? "
and then there is a remembering self , and the remembering self is the one that keeps score , and maintains the story of our life , and it 's the one that the doctor approaches in asking the question , " how have you been feeling lately ? "
or " how was your trip to albania ? " or something like that .
those are two very different entities , the experiencing self and the remembering self , and getting confused between them is part of the mess about the notion of happiness .
now , the remembering self is a storyteller .
and that really starts with a basic response of our memories -- it starts immediately .
we don 't only tell stories when we set out to tell stories .
our memory tells us stories , that is , what we get to keep from our experiences is a story .
and let me begin with one example .
this is an old study .
those are actual patients undergoing a painful procedure .
i won 't go into detail . it 's no longer painful these days , but it was painful when this study was run in the 1990s .
they were asked to report on their pain every 60 seconds .
here are two patients , those are their recordings .
and you are asked , " who of them suffered more ? "
and it 's a very easy question .
clearly , patient b suffered more -- his colonoscopy was longer , and every minute of pain that patient a had , patient b had , and more .
but now there is another question : " how much did these patients think they suffered ? "
and here is a surprise .
the surprise is that patient a had a much worse memory of the colonoscopy than patient b .
the stories of the colonoscopies were different , and because a very critical part of the story is how it ends .
and neither of these stories is very inspiring or great -- but one of them is this distinct ...
but one of them is distinctly worse than the other .
and the one that is worse is the one where pain was at its peak at the very end ; it 's a bad story .
how do we know that ?
because we asked these people after their colonoscopy , and much later , too , " how bad was the whole thing , in total ? "
and it was much worse for a than for b , in memory .
now this is a direct conflict between the experiencing self and the remembering self .
from the point of view of the experiencing self , clearly , b had a worse time .
now , what you could do with patient a , and we actually ran clinical experiments , and it has been done , and it does work -- you could actually extend the colonoscopy of patient a by just keeping the tube in without jiggling it too much .
that will cause the patient to suffer , but just a little and much less than before .
and if you do that for a couple of minutes , you have made the experiencing self of patient a worse off , and you have the remembering self of patient a a lot better off , because now you have endowed patient a with a better story about his experience .
what defines a story ?
and that is true of the stories that memory delivers for us , and it 's also true of the stories that we make up .
what defines a story are changes , significant moments and endings .
endings are very , very important and , in this case , the ending dominated .
now , the experiencing self lives its life continuously .
it has moments of experience , one after the other .
and you can ask : what happens to these moments ?
and the answer is really straightforward : they are lost forever .
i mean , most of the moments of our life -- and i calculated , you know , the psychological present is said to be about three seconds long ; that means that , you know , in a life there are about 600 million of them ; in a month , there are about 600,000 -- most of them don 't leave a trace .
most of them are completely ignored by the remembering self .
and yet , somehow you get the sense that they should count , that what happens during these moments of experience is our life .
it 's the finite resource that we 're spending while we 're on this earth .
and how to spend it would seem to be relevant , but that is not the story that the remembering self keeps for us .
so we have the remembering self and the experiencing self , and they 're really quite distinct .
the biggest difference between them is in the handling of time .
from the point of view of the experiencing self , if you have a vacation , and the second week is just as good as the first , then the two-week vacation is twice as good as the one-week vacation .
that 's not the way it works at all for the remembering self .
for the remembering self , a two-week vacation is barely better than the one-week vacation because there are no new memories added .
you have not changed the story .
and in this way , time is actually the critical variable that distinguishes a remembering self from an experiencing self ; time has very little impact on the story .
now , the remembering self does more than remember and tell stories .
it is actually the one that makes decisions because , if you have a patient who has had , say , two colonoscopies with two different surgeons and is deciding which of them to choose , then the one that chooses is the one that has the memory that is less bad , and that 's the surgeon that will be chosen .
the experiencing self has no voice in this choice .
we actually don 't choose between experiences , we choose between memories of experiences .
and even when we think about the future , we don 't think of our future normally as experiences .
we think of our future as anticipated memories .
and basically you can look at this , you know , as a tyranny of the remembering self , and you can think of the remembering self sort of dragging the experiencing self through experiences that the experiencing self doesn 't need .
i have that sense that when we go on vacations this is very frequently the case ; that is , we go on vacations , to a very large extent , in the service of our remembering self .
and this is a bit hard to justify i think .
i mean , how much do we consume our memories ?
that is one of the explanations that is given for the dominance of the remembering self .
and when i think about that , i think about a vacation we had in antarctica a few years ago , which was clearly the best vacation i 've ever had , and i think of it relatively often , relative to how much i think of other vacations .
and i probably have consumed my memories of that three-week trip , i would say , for about 25 minutes in the last four years .
now , if i had ever opened the folder with the 600 pictures in it , i would have spent another hour .
now , that is three weeks , and that is at most an hour and a half .
there seems to be a discrepancy .
now , i may be a bit extreme , you know , in how little appetite i have for consuming memories , but even if you do more of this , there is a genuine question : why do we put so much weight on memory relative to the weight that we put on experiences ?
so i want you to think about a thought experiment .
imagine that for your next vacation , you know that at the end of the vacation all your pictures will be destroyed , and you 'll get an amnesic drug so that you won 't remember anything .
now , would you choose the same vacation ?
and if you would choose a different vacation , there is a conflict between your two selves , and you need to think about how to adjudicate that conflict , and it 's actually not at all obvious , because if you think in terms of time , then you get one answer , and if you think in terms of memories , you might get another answer .
why do we pick the vacations we do is a problem that confronts us with a choice between the two selves .
now , the two selves bring up two notions of happiness .
there are really two concepts of happiness that we can apply , one per self .
so you can ask : how happy is the experiencing self ?
and then you would ask : how happy are the moments in the experiencing self 's life ?
and they 're all -- happiness for moments is a fairly complicated process .
what are the emotions that can be measured ?
and , by the way , now we are capable of getting a pretty good idea of the happiness of the experiencing self over time .
if you ask for the happiness of the remembering self , it 's a completely different thing .
this is not about how happily a person lives .
it is about how satisfied or pleased the person is when that person thinks about her life .
very different notion .
anyone who doesn 't distinguish those notions is going to mess up the study of happiness , and i belong to a crowd of students of well-being , who 've been messing up the study of happiness for a long time in precisely this way .
the distinction between the happiness of the experiencing self and the satisfaction of the remembering self has been recognized in recent years , and there are now efforts to measure the two separately .
the gallup organization has a world poll where more than half a million people have been asked questions about what they think of their life and about their experiences , and there have been other efforts along those lines .
so in recent years , we have begun to learn about the happiness of the two selves .
and the main lesson i think that we have learned is they are really different .
you can know how satisfied somebody is with their life , and that really doesn 't teach you much about how happily they 're living their life , and vice versa .
just to give you a sense of the correlation , the correlation is about .5 .
what that means is if you met somebody , and you were told , " oh his father is six feet tall , " how much would you know about his height ?
well , you would know something about his height , but there 's a lot of uncertainty .
you have that much uncertainty .
if i tell you that somebody ranked their life eight on a scale of ten , you have a lot of uncertainty about how happy they are with their experiencing self .
so the correlation is low .
we know something about what controls satisfaction of the happiness self .
we know that money is very important , goals are very important .
we know that happiness is mainly being satisfied with people that we like , spending time with people that we like .
there are other pleasures , but this is dominant .
so if you want to maximize the happiness of the two selves , you are going to end up doing very different things .
the bottom line of what i 've said here is that we really should not think of happiness as a substitute for well-being .
it is a completely different notion .
now , very quickly , another reason we cannot think straight about happiness is that we do not attend to the same things when we think about life , and we actually live .
so , if you ask the simple question of how happy people are in california , you are not going to get to the correct answer .
when you ask that question , you think people must be happier in california if , say , you live in ohio .
and what happens is when you think about living in california , you are thinking of the contrast between california and other places , and that contrast , say , is in climate .
well , it turns out that climate is not very important to the experiencing self and it 's not even very important to the reflective self that decides how happy people are .
but now , because the reflective self is in charge , you may end up -- some people may end up moving to california .
and it 's sort of interesting to trace what is going to happen to people who move to california in the hope of getting happier .
well , their experiencing self is not going to get happier .
we know that .
but one thing will happen : they will think they are happier , because , when they think about it , they 'll be reminded of how horrible the weather was in ohio , and they will feel they made the right decision .
it is very difficult to think straight about well-being , and i hope i have given you a sense of how difficult it is .
thank you .
thank you . i 've got a question for you .
thank you so much .
now , when we were on the phone a few weeks ago , you mentioned to me that there was quite an interesting result came out of that gallup survey .
is that something you can share since you do have a few moments left now ?
daniel kahneman : sure .
i think the most interesting result that we found in the gallup survey is a number , which we absolutely did not expect to find .
we found that with respect to the happiness of the experiencing self .
when we looked at how feelings , vary with income .
and it turns out that , below an income of 60,000 dollars a year , for americans -- and that 's a very large sample of americans , like 600,000 , so it 's a large representative sample -- below an income of 600,000 dollars a year ...
60,000 .
dk : 60,000 .
60,000 dollars a year , people are unhappy , and they get progressively unhappier the poorer they get .
above that , we get an absolutely flat line .
i mean i 've rarely seen lines so flat .
clearly , what is happening is money does not buy you experiential happiness , but lack of money certainly buys you misery , and we can measure that misery very , very clearly .
in terms of the other self , the remembering self , you get a different story .
the more money you earn , the more satisfied you are .
that does not hold for emotions .
but danny , the whole american endeavor is about life , liberty , the pursuit of happiness .
if people took seriously that finding , i mean , it seems to turn upside down everything we believe about , like for example , taxation policy and so forth .
is there any chance that politicians , that the country generally , would take a finding like that seriously and run public policy based on it ?
dk : you know i think that there is recognition of the role of happiness research in public policy .
the recognition is going to be slow in the united states , no question about that , but in the u.k. , it is happening , and in other countries it is happening .
people are recognizing that they ought to be thinking of happiness when they think of public policy .
it 's going to take a while , and people are going to debate whether they want to study experience happiness , or whether they want to study life evaluation , so we need to have that debate fairly soon .
how to enhance happiness goes very different ways depending on how you think , and whether you think of the remembering self or you think of the experiencing self .
this is going to influence policy , i think , in years to come .
in the united states , efforts are being made to measure the experience happiness of the population .
this is going to be , i think , within the next decade or two , part of national statistics .
well , it seems to me that this issue will -- or at least should be -- the most interesting policy discussion to track over the next few years .
thank you so much for inventing behavioral economics .
thank you , danny kahneman .
i 'm jane mcgonigal . i 'm a game designer .
i 've been making games online now for 10 years , and my goal for the next decade is to try to make it as easy to save the world in real life as it is to save the world in online games .
now , i have a plan for this , and it entails convincing more people , including all of you , to spend more time playing bigger and better games .
right now we spend three billion hours a week playing online games .
some of you might be thinking , " that 's a lot of time to spend playing games .
maybe too much time , considering how many urgent problems we have to solve in the real world . "
but actually , according to my research at the institute for the future , it 's actually the opposite is true .
three billion hours a week is not nearly enough game play to solve the world 's most urgent problems .
in fact , i believe that if we want to survive the next century on this planet , we need to increase that total dramatically .
i 've calculated the total we need at 21 billion hours of game play every week .
so , that 's probably a bit of a counterintuitive idea , so i 'll say it again , let it sink in : if we want to solve problems like hunger , poverty , climate change , global conflict , obesity , i believe that we need to aspire to play games online for at least 21 billion hours a week , by the end of the next decade .
no . i 'm serious . i am .
here 's why . this picture pretty much sums up why i think games are so essential to the future survival of the human species . truly .
this is a portrait by a photographer named phil toledano .
he wanted to capture the emotion of gaming , so he set up a camera in front of gamers while they were playing .
and this is a classic gaming emotion .
now , if you 're not a gamer , you might miss some of the nuance in this photo .
you probably see the sense of urgency , a little bit of fear , but intense concentration , deep , deep focus on tackling a really difficult problem .
if you are a gamer , you will notice a few nuances here : the crinkle of the eyes up , and around the mouth is a sign of optimism , and the eyebrows up is surprise .
this is a gamer who is on the verge of something called an epic win .
oh , you 've heard of that . ok , good , so we have some gamers among us .
an epic win is an outcome that is so extraordinarily positive you had no idea it was even possible until you achieved it .
it was almost beyond the threshold of imagination .
and when you get there you are shocked to discover what you are truly capable of . that is an epic win .
this is a gamer on the verge of an epic win .
and this is the face that we need to see on millions of problem-solvers all over the world as we try to tackle the obstacles of the next century -- the face of someone who , against all odds is on the verge of an epic win .
now , unfortunately this is more of the face that we see in everyday life now as we try to tackle urgent problems .
this is what i call the " i 'm not good at life " face , and this is actually me making it . can you see ? yes . good .
this is actually me making the " i 'm not good at life " face .
this is a piece of graffiti in my old neighborhood in berkeley , california , where i did my phd on why we 're better in games than we are in real life .
and this is a problem that a lot of gamers have .
we feel that we are not as good in reality as we are in games .
and i don 't mean just good as in successful , although that 's part of it .
we do achieve more in game worlds . but i also mean good as in motivated to do something that matters , inspired to collaborate and to cooperate .
and when we 're in game worlds i believe that many of us become the best version of ourselves , the most likely to help at a moment 's notice , the most likely to stick with a problem as long at it takes , to get up after failure and try again .
and in real life , when we face failure , when we confront obstacles , we often don 't feel that way .
we feel overcome , we feel overwhelmed , we feel anxious , maybe depressed , frustrated or cynical .
we never have those feelings when we 're playing games , they just don 't exist in games .
so , that 's what i wanted to study when i was a graduate student .
what about games makes it impossible to feel that we can 't achieve everything ?
how can we take those feelings from games and apply them to real-world work ?
so , i looked at games like world of warcraft , which is really the ideal collaborative problem-solving environment .
and i started to notice a few things that make epic wins so possible in online worlds .
so , the first thing is whenever you show up in one of these online games , especially in world of warcraft , there are lots and lots of different characters who are willing to trust you with a world-saving mission , right away .
but not just any mission , it 's a mission that is perfectly matched with your current level in the game . right ?
so , you can do it .
they never give you a challenge that you can 't achieve .
but it is on the verge of what you 're capable of . so , you have to try hard , but there 's no unemployment in world of warcraft .
there is no sitting around wringing your hands , there 's always something specific and important to be done .
and there are also tons of collaborators .
everywhere you go , hundreds of thousands of people ready to work with you to achieve your epic mission .
that 's not something that we have in real life that easily , this sense that at our fingertips are tons of collaborators .
and also there is this epic story , this inspiring story of why we 're there , and what we 're doing .
and then we get all this positive feedback .
you guys have heard of leveling up and plus-one strength , and plus-one intelligence .
we don 't get that kind of constant feedback in real life .
when i get off this stage i 'm not going to have plus-one speaking , and plus-one crazy idea , plus-20 crazy idea .
i don 't get that feedback in real life .
now , the problem with collaborative online environments like world of warcraft is that it 's so satisfying to be on the verge of an epic win all the time that we decide to spend all our time in these game worlds .
it 's just better than reality .
so , so far , collectively all the world of warcraft gamers have spent 5.93 million years solving the virtual problems of azeroth .
now , that 's not necessarily a bad thing .
it might sound like it 's a bad thing .
but to put that in context : 5.93 million years ago was when our earliest primate human ancestors stood up .
that was the first upright primate .
okay , so when we talk about how much time we 're currently investing in playing games , the only way it makes sense to even think about it is to talk about time at the magnitude of human evolution , which is an extraordinary thing .
but it 's also apt . because it turns out that by spending all this time playing games , we 're actually changing what we are capable of as human beings .
we are evolving to be a more collaborative and hearty species .
this is true . i believe this .
so , consider this really interesting statistic ; it was recently published by a researcher at carnegie mellon university : the average young person today in a country with a strong gamer culture will have spent 10,000 hours playing online games by the age of 21 .
now 10,000 hours is a really interesting number for two reasons .
first of all , for children in the united states 10,080 hours is the exact amount of time you will spend in school from fifth grade to high school graduation if you have perfect attendance .
so , we have an entire parallel track of education going on where young people are learning as much about what it takes to be a good gamer as they are learning about everything else in school .
and some of you have probably read malcolm gladwell 's new book " outliers . "
so , you would have heard of his theory of success , the 10,000 hour theory of success .
it 's based on this great cognitive science research that if we can master 10,000 hours of effortful study at anything by the age of 21 , we will be virtuosos at it .
we will be as good at whatever we do as the greatest people in the world .
and so , now what we 're looking at is an entire generation of young people who are virtuoso gamers .
so , the big question is , " what exactly are gamers getting so good at ? "
because if we could figure that out , we would have a virtually unprecedented human resource on our hands .
this is how many people we now have in the world who spend at least an hour a day playing online games .
these are our virtuoso gamers , 500 million people who are extraordinarily good at something .
and in the next decade we 're going to have another billion gamers who are extraordinarily good at whatever that is .
if you don 't know it already , this is coming .
the game industry is developing consoles that are low energy and that work with the wireless phone networks instead of broadband internet so that gamers all over the world , particularly in india , china , brazil , can get online .
they expect one billion more gamers in the next decade .
it will bring us up to 1.5 billion gamers .
so , i 've started to think about what these games are making us virtuosos at .
here are the four things i came up with . the first is urgent optimism .
ok , think of this as extreme self-motivation .
urgent optimism is the desire to act immediately to tackle an obstacle , combined with the belief that we have a reasonable hope of success .
gamers always believe that an epic win is possible , and that it is always worth trying , and trying now .
gamers don 't sit around .
gamers are virtuosos at weaving a tight social fabric .
there 's a lot of interesting research that shows that we like people better after we play a game with them , even if they 've beaten us badly .
and the reason is , it takes a lot of trust to play a game with someone .
we trust that they will spend their time with us , that they will play by the same rules , value the same goal , they 'll stay with the game until it 's over .
and so , playing a game together actually builds up bonds and trust and cooperation .
and we actually build stronger social relationships as a result .
blissful productivity . i love it .
you know there 's a reason why the average world of warcraft gamer plays for 22 hours a week , kind of a half-time job .
it 's because we know , when we 're playing a game , that we 're actually happier working hard than we are relaxing , or hanging out .
we know that we are optimized , as human beings , to do hard meaningful work .
and gamers are willing to work hard all the time , if they 're given the right work .
finally : epic meaning .
gamers love to be attached to awe-inspiring missions to human planetary-scale stories .
so , just one bit of trivia that helps put that into perspective : so , you all know wikipedia , biggest wiki in the world .
second biggest wiki in the world , with nearly 80,000 articles , is the world of warcraft wiki .
five million people use it every month .
they have compiled more information about world of warcraft on the internet than any other topic covered on any other wiki in the world .
they are building an epic story .
they are building an epic knowledge resource about the world of warcraft .
okay , so these are four superpowers that add up to one thing : gamers are super-empowered , hopeful individuals .
these are people who believe that they are individually capable of changing the world .
and the only problem is that they believe that they are capable of changing virtual worlds and not the real world .
that 's the problem that i 'm trying to solve .
there 's an economist named edward castronova .
his work is brilliant . he looks at why people are investing so much time and energy and money in online worlds .
and he says , " we 're witnessing what amounts to no less than a mass exodus to virtual worlds and online game environments . "
and he 's an economist . so , he 's rational .
and he says ...
not like me -- i 'm a game designer ; i 'm exuberant .
but he says that this makes perfect sense , because gamers can achieve more in online worlds than they can in real life .
they can have stronger social relationships in games than they can have in real life ; they get better feedback and feel more rewarded in games than they do in real life .
so , he says for now it makes perfect sense for gamers to spend more time in virtual worlds than the real world .
now , i also agree that that is rational , for now .
but it is not , by any means , an optimal situation .
we have to start making the real world more like a game .
so , i take my inspiration from something that happened 2,500 years ago .
these are ancient dice , made out of sheep 's knuckles . right ?
before we had awesome game controllers , we had sheep 's knuckles .
and these represent the first game equipment designed by human beings .
and if you 're familiar with the work of the ancient greek historian herodotus , you might know this history , which is the history of who invented games and why .
herodotus says that games , particularly dice games , were invented in the kingdom of lydia during a time of famine .
apparently , there was such a severe famine that the king of lydia decided that they had to do something crazy .
people were suffering . people were fighting .
it was an extreme situation , they needed an extreme solution .
so , according to herodotus , they invented dice games and they set up a kingdom-wide policy : on one day , everybody would eat , and on the next day , everybody would play games .
and they would be so immersed in playing the dice games because games are so engaging , and immerse us in such satisfying blissful productivity , they would ignore the fact that they had no food to eat .
and then on the next day , they would play games ; and on the next day , they would eat .
and according to herodotus , they passed 18 years this way , surviving through a famine by eating on one day and playing games on the next .
now , this is exactly , i think , how we 're using games today .
we 're using games to escape real-world suffering .
we 're using games to get away from everything that 's broken in the real environment , everything that 's not satisfying about real life , and we 're getting what we need from games .
but it doesn 't have to end there .
this is really exciting .
according to herodotus , after 18 years the famine wasn 't getting better , so the king decided they would play one final dice game .
they divided the entire kingdom in half .
they played one dice game , and the winners of that game got to go on an epic adventure .
they would leave lydia , and they would go out in search of a new place to live , leaving behind just enough people to survive on the resources that were available , and hopefully to take their civilization somewhere else where they could thrive .
now , this sounds crazy , right ?
but recently , dna evidence has shown that the etruscans , who then led to the roman empire , actually share the same dna as the ancient lydians .
and so , recently , scientists have suggested that herodotus ' crazy story is actually true .
and geologists have found evidence of a global cooling that lasted for nearly 20 years that could have explained the famine .
so , this crazy story might be true .
they might have actually saved their culture by playing games , escaping to games for 18 years , and then been so inspired , and knew so much about how to come together with games , that they actually saved the entire civilization that way .
okay , we can do that .
we 've been playing warcraft since 1994 .
that was the first real-time strategy game from the world of warcraft series . that was 16 years ago .
they played dice games for 18 years , we 've been playing warcraft for 16 years .
i say we are ready for our own epic game .
now , they had half the civilization go off in search of a new world , so that 's where i get my 21 billion hours a week of game-play from .
let 's get half of us to agree to spend an hour a day playing games , until we solve real-world problems .
now , i know you 're asking , " how are we going to solve real world problems in games ? " well , that 's what i have devoted my work to over the past few years , at the institute for the future .
we have this banner in our offices in palo alto , and it expresses our view of how we should try to relate to the future .
we do not want to try to predict the future .
what we want to do is make the future .
we want to imagine the best-case scenario outcome , and then we want to empower people to make that outcome a reality .
we want to imagine epic wins , and then give people the means to achieve the epic win .
i 'm just going to very briefly show you three games that i 've made that are an attempt to give people the means to create epic wins in their own futures .
so , this is world without oil .
we made this game in 2007 .
this is an online game in which you try to survive an oil shortage .
the oil shortage is fictional , but we put enough online content out there for you to believe that it 's real , and to live your real life as if we 've run out of oil . so when you come to the game , you sign up , you tell us where you live , and then we give you real-time news , videos , data feeds that show you exactly how much oil costs , what 's not available , how food supply is being affected , how transportation is being affected , if schools are closed , if there is rioting , and you have to figure out how you would live your real life as if this were true . and then we ask you to blog about it , to post videos , to post photos .
we piloted this game with 1,700 players in 2007 , and we 've tracked them for the three years since .
and i can tell you that this is a transformative experience .
nobody wants to change how they live just because it 's good for the world , or because we 're supposed to .
but if you immerse them in an epic adventure and tell them , " we 've run out of oil .
this is an amazing story and adventure for you to go on .
challenge yourself to see how you would survive , " most of our players have kept up the habits that they learned in this game .
so , for the next world-saving game , we decided to aim higher : bigger problem than just peak oil .
we did a game called superstruct at the institute for the future .
and the premise was a supercomputer has calculated that humans have only 23 years left on the planet .
this supercomputer was called the global extinction awareness system , of course .
we asked people to come online almost like a jerry bruckheimer movie .
you know jerry bruckheimer movies , you form a dream team -- you 've got the astronaut , the scientist , the ex-convict , and they all have something to do to save the world .
but in our game , instead of just having five people on the dream team , we said , " everybody 's on the dream team , and it 's your job to invent the future of energy , the future of food , the future of health , the future of security and the future of the social safety net . "
we had 8,000 people play that game for eight weeks .
they came up with 500 insanely creative solutions that you can go online , if you google " superstruct , " and see .
so , finally , the last game , we 're launching it march 3rd . this is a game done with the world bank institute .
if you complete the game you will be certified by the world bank institute , as a social innovator , class of 2010 .
working with universities all over sub-saharan africa , and we are inviting them to learn social innovation skills .
we 've got a graphic novel , we 've got leveling up in skills like local insight , knowledge networking , sustainability , vision and resourcefulness .
i would like to invite all of you to please share this game with young people , anywhere in the world , particularly in developing areas , who might benefit from coming together to try to start to imagine their own social enterprises to save the world .
so , i 'm going to wrap up now .
i want to ask a question .
what do you think happens next ?
we 've got all these amazing gamers , we 've got these games that are kind of pilots of what we might do , but none of them have saved the real world yet .
well i hope that you will agree with me that gamers are a human resource that we can use to do real-world work , that games are a powerful platform for change .
we have all these amazing superpowers : blissful productivity , the ability to weave a tight social fabric , this feeling of urgent optimism and the desire for epic meaning .
i really hope that we can come together to play games that matter , to survive on this planet for another century .
and that 's my hope , that you will join me in making and playing games like this .
when i look forward to the next decade , i know two things for sure : that we can make any future we can imagine , and we can play any games we want .
so , i say : let the world-changing games begin .
thank you .
i 'd like to share with you a discovery that i made a few months ago while writing an article for italian wired .
i always keep my thesaurus handy whenever i 'm writing anything , but i 'd already finished editing the piece , and i realized that i had never once in my life looked up the word " disabled " to see what i 'd find .
let me read you the entry .
" disabled , adjective : crippled , helpless , useless , wrecked , stalled , maimed , wounded , mangled , lame , mutilated , run-down , worn-out , weakened , impotent , castrated , paralyzed , handicapped , senile , decrepit , laid-up , done-up , done-for , done-in cracked-up , counted-out ; see also hurt , useless and weak .
antonyms , healthy , strong , capable . "
i was reading this list out loud to a friend and at first was laughing , it was so ludicrous , but i 'd just gotten past " mangled , " and my voice broke , and i had to stop and collect myself from the emotional shock and impact that the assault from these words unleashed .
you know , of course , this is my raggedy old thesaurus so i 'm thinking this must be an ancient print date , right ?
but , in fact , the print date was the early 1980s , when i would have been starting primary school and forming an understanding of myself outside the family unit and as related to the other kids and the world around me .
and , needless to say , thank god i wasn 't using a thesaurus back then .
i mean , from this entry , it would seem that i was born into a world that perceived someone like me to have nothing positive whatsoever going for them , when in fact , today i 'm celebrated for the opportunities and adventures my life has procured .
so , i immediately went to look up the 2009 online edition , expecting to find a revision worth noting .
here 's the updated version of this entry .
unfortunately , it 's not much better .
i find the last two words under " near antonyms , " particularly unsettling : " whole " and " wholesome . "
so , it 's not just about the words .
it 's what we believe about people when we name them with these words .
it 's about the values behind the words , and how we construct those values .
our language affects our thinking and how we view the world and how we view other people .
in fact , many ancient societies , including the greeks and the romans , believed that to utter a curse verbally was so powerful , because to say the thing out loud brought it into existence .
so , what reality do we want to call into existence : a person who is limited , or a person who 's empowered ?
by casually doing something as simple as naming a person , a child , we might be putting lids and casting shadows on their power .
wouldn 't we want to open doors for them instead ?
one such person who opened doors for me was my childhood doctor at the a.i. dupont institute in wilmington , delaware .
his name was dr. pizzutillo , an italian american , whose name , apparently , was too difficult for most americans to pronounce , so he went by dr. p .
and dr. p always wore really colorful bow ties and had the very perfect disposition to work with children .
i loved almost everything about my time spent at this hospital , with the exception of my physical therapy sessions .
i had to do what seemed like innumerable repetitions of exercises with these thick , elastic bands -- different colors , you know -- to help build up my leg muscles , and i hated these bands more than anything -- i hated them , had names for them . i hated them .
and , you know , i was already bargaining , as a five year-old child , with dr. p to try to get out of doing these exercises , unsuccessfully , of course .
and , one day , he came in to my session -- exhaustive and unforgiving , these sessions -- and he said to me , " wow . aimee , you are such a strong and powerful little girl , i think you 're going to break one of those bands .
when you do break it , i 'm going to give you a hundred bucks . "
now , of course , this was a simple ploy on dr. p 's part to get me to do the exercises i didn 't want to do before the prospect of being the richest five-year-old in the second floor ward , but what he effectively did for me was reshape an awful daily occurrence into a new and promising experience for me .
and i have to wonder today to what extent his vision and his declaration of me as a strong and powerful little girl shaped my own view of myself as an inherently strong , powerful and athletic person well into the future .
this is an example of how adults in positions of power can ignite the power of a child .
but , in the previous instances of those thesaurus entries , our language isn 't allowing us to evolve into the reality that we would all want , the possibility of an individual to see themselves as capable .
our language hasn 't caught up with the changes in our society , many of which have been brought about by technology .
certainly , from a medical standpoint , my legs , laser surgery for vision impairment , titanium knees and hip replacements for aging bodies that are allowing people to more fully engage with their abilities , and move beyond the limits that nature has imposed on them -- not to mention social networking platforms allow people to self-identify , to claim their own descriptions of themselves , so they can go align with global groups of their own choosing .
so , perhaps technology is revealing more clearly to us now what has always been a truth : that everyone has something rare and powerful to offer our society , and that the human ability to adapt is our greatest asset .
the human ability to adapt , it 's an interesting thing , because people have continually wanted to talk to me about overcoming adversity , and i 'm going to make an admission : this phrase never sat right with me , and i always felt uneasy trying to answer people 's questions about it , and i think i 'm starting to figure out why .
implicit in this phrase of " overcoming adversity " is the idea that success , or happiness , is about emerging on the other side of a challenging experience unscathed or unmarked by the experience , as if my successes in life have come about from an ability to sidestep or circumnavigate the presumed pitfalls of a life with prosthetics , or what other people perceive as my disability .
but , in fact , we are changed . we are marked , of course , by a challenge , whether physically , emotionally or both .
and i 'm going to suggest that this is a good thing .
adversity isn 't an obstacle that we need to get around in order to resume living our life .
it 's part of our life .
and i tend to think of it like my shadow .
sometimes i see a lot of it , sometimes there 's very little , but it 's always with me .
and , certainly , i 'm not trying to diminish the impact , the weight , of a person 's struggle .
there is adversity and challenge in life , and it 's all very real and relative to every single person , but the question isn 't whether or not you 're going to meet adversity , but how you 're going to meet it .
so , our responsibility is not simply shielding those we care for from adversity , but preparing them to meet it well .
and we do a disservice to our kids when we make them feel that they 're not equipped to adapt .
there 's an important difference and distinction between the objective medical fact of my being an amputee and the subjective societal opinion of whether or not i 'm disabled .
and , truthfully , the only real and consistent disability i 've had to confront is the world ever thinking that i could be described by those definitions .
in our desire to protect those we care about by giving them the cold , hard truth about their medical prognosis , or , indeed , a prognosis on the expected quality of their life , we have to make sure that we don 't put the first brick in a wall that will actually disable someone .
perhaps the existing model of only looking at what is broken in you and how do we fix it , serves to be more disabling to the individual than the pathology itself .
by not treating the wholeness of a person , by not acknowledging their potency , we are creating another ill on top of whatever natural struggle they might have .
we are effectively grading someone 's worth to our community .
so we need to see through the pathology and into the range of human capability .
and , most importantly , there 's a partnership between those perceived deficiencies and our greatest creative ability .
so it 's not about devaluing , or negating , these more trying times as something we want to avoid or sweep under the rug , but instead to find those opportunities wrapped in the adversity .
so maybe the idea i want to put out there is not so much overcoming adversity as it is opening ourselves up to it , embracing it , grappling with it , to use a wrestling term , maybe even dancing with it .
and , perhaps , if we see adversity as natural , consistent and useful , we 're less burdened by the presence of it .
this year we celebrate the 200th birthday of charles darwin , and it was 150 years ago , when writing about evolution , that darwin illustrated , i think , a truth about the human character .
to paraphrase : it 's not the strongest of the species that survives , nor is it the most intelligent that survives ; it is the one that is most adaptable to change .
conflict is the genesis of creation .
from darwin 's work , amongst others , we can recognize that the human ability to survive and flourish is driven by the struggle of the human spirit through conflict into transformation .
so , again , transformation , adaptation , is our greatest human skill .
and , perhaps , until we 're tested , we don 't know what we 're made of .
maybe that 's what adversity gives us : a sense of self , a sense of our own power .
so , we can give ourselves a gift .
we can re-imagine adversity as something more than just tough times .
maybe we can see it as change .
adversity is just change that we haven 't adapted ourselves to yet .
i think the greatest adversity that we 've created for ourselves is this idea of normalcy .
now , who 's normal ?
there 's no normal .
there 's common , there 's typical . there 's no normal , and would you want to meet that poor , beige person if they existed ?
i don 't think so .
if we can change this paradigm from one of achieving normalcy to one of possibility -- or potency , to be even a little bit more dangerous -- we can release the power of so many more children , and invite them to engage their rare and valuable abilities with the community .
anthropologists tell us that the one thing we as humans have always required of our community members is to be of use , to be able to contribute .
there 's evidence that neanderthals , 60,000 years ago , carried their elderly and those with serious physical injury , and perhaps it 's because the life experience of survival of these people proved of value to the community .
they didn 't view these people as broken and useless ; they were seen as rare and valuable .
a few years ago , i was in a food market in the town where i grew up in that red zone in northeastern pennsylvania , and i was standing over a bushel of tomatoes .
it was summertime : i had shorts on .
i hear this guy , his voice behind me say , " well , if it isn 't aimee mullins . "
and i turn around , and it 's this older man . i have no idea who he is .
and i said , " i 'm sorry , sir , have we met ? i don 't remember meeting you . "
he said , " well , you wouldn 't remember meeting me .
i mean , when we met i was delivering you from your mother 's womb . "
oh , that guy .
and , but of course , actually , it did click .
this man was dr. kean , a man that i had only known about through my mother 's stories of that day , because , of course , typical fashion , i arrived late for my birthday by two weeks .
and so my mother 's prenatal physician had gone on vacation , so the man who delivered me was a complete stranger to my parents .
and , because i was born without the fibula bones , and had feet turned in , and a few toes in this foot and a few toes in that , he had to be the bearer -- this stranger had to be the bearer of bad news .
he said to me , " i had to give this prognosis to your parents that you would never walk , and you would never have the kind of mobility that other kids have or any kind of life of independence , and you 've been making liar out of me ever since . "
the extraordinary thing is that he said he had saved newspaper clippings throughout my whole childhood , whether winning a second grade spelling bee , marching with the girl scouts , you know , the halloween parade , winning my college scholarship , or any of my sports victories , and he was using it , and integrating it into teaching resident students , med students from hahnemann medical school and hershey medical school .
and he called this part of the course the x factor , the potential of the human will .
no prognosis can account for how powerful this could be as a determinant in the quality of someone 's life .
and dr. kean went on to tell me , he said , " in my experience , unless repeatedly told otherwise , and even if given a modicum of support , if left to their own devices , a child will achieve . "
see , dr. kean made that shift in thinking .
he understood that there 's a difference between the medical condition and what someone might do with it .
and there 's been a shift in my thinking over time , in that , if you had asked me at 15 years old , if i would have traded prosthetics for flesh-and-bone legs , i wouldn 't have hesitated for a second .
i aspired to that kind of normalcy back then .
but if you ask me today , i 'm not so sure .
and it 's because of the experiences i 've had with them , not in spite of the experiences i 've had with them .
and perhaps this shift in me has happened because i 've been exposed to more people who have opened doors for me than those who have put lids and cast shadows on me .
see , all you really need is one person to show you the epiphany of your own power , and you 're off .
if you can hand somebody the key to their own power -- the human spirit is so receptive -- if you can do that and open a door for someone at a crucial moment , you are educating them in the best sense .
you 're teaching them to open doors for themselves .
in fact , the exact meaning of the word " educate " comes from the root word " educe . "
it means " to bring forth what is within , to bring out potential . "
so again , which potential do we want to bring out ?
there was a case study done in 1960s britain , when they were moving from grammar schools to comprehensive schools .
it 's called the streaming trials . we call it " tracking " here in the states .
it 's separating students from a , b , c , d and so on .
and the " a students " get the tougher curriculum , the best teachers , etc .
well , they took , over a three-month period , d-level students , gave them a 's , told them they were " a 's , " told them they were bright , and at the end of this three-month period , they were performing at a-level .
and , of course , the heartbreaking , flip side of this study , is that they took the " a students " and told them they were " d 's . "
and that 's what happened at the end of that three-month period .
those who were still around in school , besides the people who had dropped out .
a crucial part of this case study was that the teachers were duped too .
the teachers didn 't know a switch had been made .
they were simply told , " these are the ' a-students , ' these are the ' d-students . ' " and that 's how they went about teaching them and treating them .
so , i think that the only true disability is a crushed spirit , a spirit that 's been crushed doesn 't have hope , it doesn 't see beauty , it no longer has our natural , childlike curiosity and our innate ability to imagine .
if instead , we can bolster a human spirit to keep hope , to see beauty in themselves and others , to be curious and imaginative , then we are truly using our power well .
when a spirit has those qualities , we are able to create new realities and new ways of being .
i 'd like to leave you with a poem by a fourteenth-century persian poet named hafiz that my friend , jacques dembois told me about , and the poem is called " the god who only knows four words " : " every child has known god , not the god of names , not the god of don 'ts , but the god who only knows four words and keeps repeating them , saying , ' come dance with me .
come , dance with me . come , dance with me . ' " thank you .
how would you like to be better than you are ?
suppose i said that , with just a few changes in your genes , you could get a better memory -- more precise , more accurate and quicker .
or maybe you 'd like to be more fit , stronger , with more stamina .
would you like to be more attractive and self-confident ?
how about living longer with good health ?
or perhaps you 're one of those who 's always yearned for more creativity .
which one would you like the most ?
which would you like , if you could have just one ?
creativity .
how many people would choose creativity ?
raise your hands . let me see .
a few . probably about as many as there are creative people here .
that 's very good .
how many would opt for memory ?
quite a few more .
how about fitness ?
a few less .
what about longevity ?
ah , the majority . that makes me feel very good as a doctor .
if you could have any one of these , it would be a very different world .
is it just imaginary ?
or , is it , perhaps , possible ?
evolution has been a perennial topic here at the ted conference , but i want to give you today one doctor 's take on the subject .
the great 20th-century geneticist , t.g. dobzhansky , who was also a communicant in the russian orthodox church , once wrote an essay that he titled " nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution . "
now if you are one of those who does not accept the evidence for biological evolution , this would be a very good time to turn off your hearing aid , take out your personal communications device -- i give you permission -- and perhaps take another look at kathryn schultz 's book on being wrong , because nothing in the rest of this talk is going to make any sense whatsoever to you .
but if you do accept biological evolution , consider this : is it just about the past , or is it about the future ?
does it apply to others , or does it apply to us ?
this is another look at the tree of life .
in this picture , i 've put a bush with a center branching out in all directions , because if you look at the edges of the tree of life , every existing species at the tips of those branches has succeeded in evolutionary terms : it has survived ; it has demonstrated a fitness to its environment .
the human part of this branch , way out on one end , is , of course , the one that we are most interested in .
we branch off of a common ancestor to modern chimpanzees about six or eight million years ago .
in the interval , there have been perhaps 20 or 25 different species of hominids .
some have come and gone .
we have been here for about 130,000 years .
it may seem like we 're quite remote from other parts of this tree of life , but actually , for the most part , the basic machinery of our cells is pretty much the same .
do you realize that we can take advantage and commandeer the machinery of a common bacterium to produce the protein of human insulin used to treat diabetics ?
this is not like human insulin ; this is the same protein that is chemically indistinguishable from what comes out of your pancreas .
and speaking of bacteria , do you realize that each of us carries in our gut more bacteria than there are cells in the rest of our body ?
maybe 10 times more .
i mean think of it , when antonio damasio asks about your self-image , do you think about the bacteria ?
our gut is a wonderfully hospitable environment for those bacteria .
it 's warm , it 's dark , it 's moist , it 's very cozy .
and you 're going to provide all the nutrition that they could possibly want with no effort on their part .
it 's really like an easy street for bacteria , with the occasional interruption of the unintended forced rush to the exit .
but otherwise , you are a wonderful environment for those bacteria , just as they are essential to your life .
they help in the digestion of essential nutrients , and they protect you against certain diseases .
but what will come in the future ?
are we at some kind of evolutionary equipoise as a species ?
or , are we destined to become something different -- something , perhaps , even better adapted to the environment ?
now let 's take a step back in time to the big bang , 14 billion years ago -- the earth , the solar system , about four and a half billion years -- the first signs of proto-life , maybe three to four billion years ago on earth -- the first multi-celled organisms , perhaps as much as 800 or a billion years ago -- and then the human species , finally emerging in the last 130,000 years .
in this vast unfinished symphony of the universe , life on earth is like a brief measure ; the animal kingdom , like a single measure ; and human life , a small grace note .
that was us .
that also constitutes the entertainment portion of this talk , so i hope you enjoyed it .
now when i was a freshman in college , i took my first biology class .
i was fascinated by the elegance and beauty of biology .
i became enamored of the power of evolution , and i realized something very fundamental : in most of the existence of life in single-celled organisms , each cell simply divides , and all of the genetic energy of that cell is carried on in both daughter cells .
but at the time multi-celled organisms come online , things start to change .
sexual reproduction enters the picture .
and very importantly , with the introduction of sexual reproduction that passes on the genome , the rest of the body becomes expendable .
in fact , you could say that the inevitability of the death of our bodies enters in evolutionary time at the same moment as sexual reproduction .
now i have to confess , when i was a college undergraduate , i thought , okay , sex / death , sex / death , death for sex -- it seemed pretty reasonable at the time , but with each passing year , i 've come to have increasing doubts .
i 've come to understand the sentiments of george burns , who was performing still in las vegas well into his 90s .
and one night , there 's a knock at his hotel room door .
he answers the door .
standing before him is a gorgeous , scantily clad showgirl .
she looks at him and says , " i 'm here for super sex . "
" that 's fine , " says george , " i 'll take the soup . "
i came to realize , as a physician , that i was working toward a goal which was different from the goal of evolution -- not necessarily contradictory , just different .
i was trying to preserve the body .
i wanted to keep us healthy .
i wanted to restore health from disease .
i wanted us to live long and healthy lives .
evolution is all about passing on the genome to the next generation , adapting and surviving through generation after generation .
from an evolutionary point of view , you and i are like the booster rockets designed to send the genetic payload into the next level of orbit and then drop off into the sea .
i think we would all understand the sentiment that woody allen expressed when he said , " i don 't want to achieve immortality through my work .
i want to achieve it through not dying . "
evolution does not necessarily favor the longest-lived .
it doesn 't necessarily favor the biggest or the strongest or the fastest , and not even the smartest .
evolution favors those creatures best adapted to their environment .
that is the sole test of survival and success .
at the bottom of the ocean , bacteria that are thermophilic and can survive at the steam vent heat that would otherwise produce , if fish were there , sous-vide cooked fish , nevertheless , have managed to make that a hospitable environment for them .
so what does this mean , as we look back at what has happened in evolution , and as we think about the place again of humans in evolution , and particularly as we look ahead to the next phase , i would say that there are a number of possibilities .
the first is that we will not evolve .
we have reached a kind of equipoise .
and the reasoning behind that would be , first , we have , through medicine , managed to preserve a lot of genes that would otherwise be selected out and be removed from the population .
and secondly , we as a species have so configured our environment that we have managed to make it adapt to us as well as we adapt to it .
and by the way , we immigrate and circulate and intermix so much that you can 't any longer have the isolation that is necessary for evolution to take place .
a second possibility is that there will be evolution of the traditional kind , natural , imposed by the forces of nature .
and the argument here would be that the wheels of evolution grind slowly , but they are inexorable .
and as far as isolation goes , when we as a species do colonize distant planets , there will be the isolation and the environmental changes that could produce evolution in the natural way .
but there 's a third possibility , an enticing , intriguing and frightening possibility .
i call it neo-evolution -- the new evolution that is not simply natural , but guided and chosen by us as individuals in the choices that we will make .
now how could this come about ?
how could it be possible that we would do this ?
consider , first , the reality that people today , in some cultures , are making choices about their offspring .
they 're , in some cultures , choosing to have more males than females .
it 's not necessarily good for the society , but it 's what the individual and the family are choosing .
think also , if it were possible ever for you to choose , not simply to choose the sex of your child , but for you in your body to make the genetic adjustments that would cure or prevent diseases .
what if you could make the genetic changes to eliminate diabetes or alzheimer 's or reduce the risk of cancer or eliminate stroke ?
wouldn 't you want to make those changes in your genes ?
if we look ahead , these kind of changes are going to be increasingly possible .
the human genome project started in 1990 , and it took 13 years .
it cost 2.7 billion dollars .
the year after it was finished in 2004 , you could do the same job for 20 million dollars in three to four months .
today , you can have a complete sequence of the three billion base pairs in the human genome at a cost of about 20,000 dollars and in the space of about a week .
it won 't be very long before the reality will be the 1,000-dollar human genome , and it will be increasingly available for everyone .
just a week ago , the national academy of engineering awarded its draper prize to francis arnold and willem stemmer , two scientists who independently developed techniques to encourage the natural process of evolution to work faster and to lead to desirable proteins in a more efficient way -- what frances arnold calls " directed evolution . "
a couple of years ago , the lasker prize was awarded to the scientist shinya yamanaka for his research in which he took an adult skin cell , a fibroblast , and by manipulating just four genes , he induced that cell to revert to a pluripotential stem cell -- a cell potentially capable of becoming any cell in your body .
these changes are coming .
the same technology that has produced the human insulin in bacteria can make viruses that will not only protect you against themselves , but induce immunity against other viruses .
believe it or not , there 's an experimental trial going on with vaccine against influenza that has been grown in the cells of a tobacco plant .
can you imagine something good coming out of tobacco ?
these are all reality today , and [ in ] the future , will be evermore possible .
imagine then just two other little changes .
you can change the cells in your body , but what if you could change the cells in your offspring ?
what if you could change the sperm and the ova , or change the newly fertilized egg , and give your offspring a better chance at a healthier life -- eliminate the diabetes , eliminate the hemophilia , reduce the risk of cancer ?
who doesn 't want healthier children ?
and then , that same analytic technology , that same engine of science that can produce the changes to prevent disease , will also enable us to adopt super-attributes , hyper-capacities -- that better memory .
why not have the quick wit of a ken jennings , especially if you can augment it with the next generation of the watson machine ?
why not have the quick twitch muscle that will enable you to run faster and longer ?
why not live longer ?
these will be irresistible .
and when we are at a position where we can pass it on to the next generation , and we can adopt the attributes we want , we will have converted old-style evolution into neo-evolution .
we 'll take a process that normally might require 100,000 years , and we can compress it down to a thousand years -- and maybe even in the next 100 years .
these are choices that your grandchildren , or their grandchildren , are going to have before them .
will we use these choices to make a society that is better , that is more successful , that is kinder ?
or , will we selectively choose different attributes that we want for some of us and not for others of us ?
will we make a society that is more boring and more uniform , or more robust and more versatile ?
these are the kinds of questions that we will have to face .
and most profoundly of all , will we ever be able to develop the wisdom , and to inherit the wisdom , that we 'll need to make these choices wisely ?
for better or worse , and sooner than you may think , these choices will be up to us .
thank you .
i want you now to imagine a wearable robot that gives you superhuman abilities , or another one that takes wheelchair users up standing and walking again .
we at berkeley bionics call these robots exoskeletons .
these are nothing else than something that you put on in the morning , and it will give you extra strength , and it will further enhance your speed , and it will help you , for instance , to manage your balance .
it is actually the true integration of the man and the machine .
but not only that -- it will integrate and network you to the universe and other devices out there .
this is just not some blue sky thinking .
to show you now what we are working on by starting out talking about the american soldier , that on average does carry about 100 lbs. on their backs , and they are being asked to carry more equipment .
obviously , this is resulting in some major complications -- back injuries , 30 percent of them -- chronic back injuries .
so we thought we would look at this challenge and create an exoskeleton that would help deal with this issue .
so let me now introduce to you hulc -- or the human universal load carrier .
with the hulc exoskeleton , i can carry 200 lbs. over varied terrain for many hours .
its flexible design allows for deep squats , crawls and high-agility movements .
it senses what i want to do , where i want to go , and then augments my strength and endurance .
we are ready with our industry partner to introduce this device , this new exoskeleton this year .
so this is for real .
now let 's turn our heads towards the wheelchair users , something that i 'm particularly passionate about .
there are 68 million people estimated to be in wheelchairs worldwide .
this is about one percent of the total population .
and that 's actually a conservative estimate .
we are talking here about , oftentimes , very young individuals with spinal cord injuries , that in the prime of their life -- 20s , 30s , 40s -- hit a wall and the wheelchair 's the only option .
but it is also the aging population that is multiplying in numbers .
and the only option , pretty much -- when it 's stroke or other complications -- is the wheelchair .
and that is actually for the last 500 years , since its very successful introduction , i must say .
so we thought we would start writing a brand new chapter of mobility .
let me now introduce you to elegs that is worn by amanda boxtel that 19 years ago was spinal cord injured , and as a result of that she has not been able to walk for 19 years until now .
thank you .
amanda is wearing our elegs set .
it has sensors .
it 's completely non-invasive , sensors in the crutches that send signals back to our onboard computer that is sitting here at her back .
there are battery packs here as well that power motors that are sitting at her hips , as well as her knee joints , that move her forward in this kind of smooth and very natural gait .
i was 24 years old and at the top of my game when a freak summersault while downhill skiing paralyzed me .
in a split second , i lost all sensation and movement below my pelvis .
not long afterwards , a doctor strode into my hospital room , and he said , " amanda , you 'll never walk again . "
and that was 19 yeas ago .
he robbed every ounce of hope from my being .
adaptive technology has since enabled me to learn how to downhill ski again , to rock climb and even handcycle .
but nothing has been invented that enables me to walk , until now .
thank you .
as you can see , we have the technology , we have the platforms to sit down and have discussions with you .
it 's in our hands , and we have all the potential here to change the lives of future generations -- not only for the soldiers , or for amanda here and all the wheelchair users , but for everyone .
thanks .
back in new york , i am the head of development for a non-profit called robin hood .
when i 'm not fighting poverty , i 'm fighting fires as the assistant captain of a volunteer fire company .
now in our town , where the volunteers supplement a highly skilled career staff , you have to get to the fire scene pretty early to get in on any action .
i remember my first fire .
i was the second volunteer on the scene , so there was a pretty good chance i was going to get in .
but still it was a real footrace against the other volunteers to get to the captain in charge to find out what our assignments would be .
when i found the captain , he was having a very engaging conversation with the homeowner , who was surely having one of the worst days of her life .
here it was , the middle of the night , she was standing outside in the pouring rain , under an umbrella , in her pajamas , barefoot , while her house was in flames .
the other volunteer who had arrived just before me -- let 's call him lex luther -- got to the captain first and was asked to go inside and save the homeowner 's dog .
the dog ! i was stunned with jealousy .
here was some lawyer or money manager who , for the rest of his life , gets to tell people that he went into a burning building to save a living creature , just because he beat me by five seconds .
well , i was next .
the captain waved me over .
he said , " bezos , i need you to go into the house .
i need you to go upstairs , past the fire , and i need you to get this woman a pair of shoes . "
i swear .
so , not exactly what i was hoping for , but off i went -- up the stairs , down the hall , past the ' real ' firefighters , who were pretty much done putting out the fire at this point , into the master bedroom to get a pair of shoes .
now i know what you 're thinking , but i 'm no hero .
i carried my payload back downstairs where i met my nemesis and the precious dog by the front door .
we took our treasures outside to the homeowner , where , not surprisingly , his received much more attention than did mine .
a few weeks later , the department received a letter from the homeowner thanking us for the valiant effort displayed in saving her home .
the act of kindness she noted above all others : someone had even gotten her a pair of shoes .
in both my vocation at robin hood and my avocation as a volunteer firefighter , i am witness to acts of generosity and kindness on a monumental scale , but i 'm also witness to acts of grace and courage on an individual basis .
and you know what i 've learned ?
they all matter .
so as i look around this room at people who either have achieved , or are on their way to achieving , remarkable levels of success , i would offer this reminder : don 't wait .
don 't wait until you make your first million to make a difference in somebody 's life .
if you have something to give , give it now .
serve food at a soup kitchen . clean up a neighborhood park .
be a mentor .
not every day is going to offer us a chance to save somebody 's life , but every day offers us an opportunity to affect one .
so get in the game . save the shoes .
thank you .
mark , mark , come back .
thank you .
i just came back from a community that holds the secret to human survival .
it 's a place where women run the show , have sex to say hello , and play rules the day -- where fun is serious business .
and no , this isn 't burning man or san francisco .
ladies and gentlemen , meet your cousins .
this is the world of wild bonobos in the jungles of congo .
bonobos are , together with chimpanzees , your living closest relative .
that means we all share a common ancestor , an evolutionary grandmother , who lived around six million years ago .
now , chimpanzees are well-known for their aggression .
but unfortunately , we have made too much of an emphasis of this aspect in our narratives of human evolution .
but bonobos show us the other side of the coin .
while chimpanzees are dominated by big , scary guys , bonobo society is run by empowered females .
these guys have really worked something out , since this leads to a highly tolerant society where fatal violence has not been observed yet .
but unfortunately , bonobos are the least understood of the great apes .
they live in the depths of the congolese jungle , and it has been very difficult to study them .
the congo is a paradox -- a land of extraordinary biodiversity and beauty , but also the heart of darkness itself -- the scene of a violent conflict that has raged for decades and claimed nearly as many lives as the first world war .
not surprisingly , this destruction also endangers bonobo survival .
bushmeat trades and forest loss means we couldn 't fill a small stadium with all the bonobos that are left in the world -- and we 're not even sure of that to be honest .
yet , in this land of violence and chaos , you can hear hidden laughter swaying the trees .
who are these cousins ?
we know them as the " make love , not war " apes since they have frequent , promiscuous and bisexual sex to manage conflict and solve social issues .
now , i 'm not saying this is the solution to all of humanity 's problems -- since there 's more to bonobo life than the kama sutra .
bonobos , like humans , love to play throughout their entire lives .
play is not just child 's games .
for us and them , play is foundational for bonding relationships and fostering tolerance .
it 's where we learn to trust and where we learn about the rules of the game .
play increases creativity and resilience , and it 's all about the generation of diversity -- diversity of interactions , diversity of behaviors , diversity of connections .
and when you watch bonobo play , you 're seeing the very evolutionary roots of human laughter , dance and ritual .
play is the glue that binds us together .
now , i don 't know how you play , but i want to show you a couple of unique clips fresh from the wild .
first , it 's a ball game bonobo-style -- and i do not mean football .
so here , we have a young female and a male engaged in a chase game .
have a look what she 's doing .
it might be the evolutionary origin of the phrase , " she 's got him by the balls . "
only i think that he 's rather loving it here , right ?
yeah .
so sex play is common in both bonobos and humans .
and this video is really interesting because it shows -- this video 's really interesting because it shows the inventiveness of bringing unusual elements into play -- such as testicles -- and also how play both requires trust and fosters trust -- while at the same time being tremendous fun .
but play 's a shapeshifter .
play 's a shapeshifter , and it can take many forms , some of which are more quiet , imaginative , curious -- maybe where wonder is discovered anew .
and i want you to see , this is fuku , a young female , and she is quietly playing with water .
i think , like her , we sometimes play alone , and we explore the boundaries of our inner and our outer worlds .
and it 's that playful curiosity that drives us to explore , drives us to interact , and then the unexpected connections we form are the real hotbed for creativity .
so these are just small tasters into the insights that bonobo give us to our past and present .
but they also hold a secret for our future , a future where we need to adapt to an increasingly challenging world through greater creativity and greater cooperation .
the secret is that play is the key to these capacities .
in other words , play is our adaptive wildcard .
in order to adapt successfully to a changing world , we need to play .
but will we make the most of our playfulness ?
play is not frivolous .
play 's essential .
for bonobos and humans alike , life is not just red in tooth and claw .
in times when it seems least appropriate to play , it might be the times when it is most urgent .
and so , my fellow primates , let us embrace this gift from evolution and play together , as we rediscover creativity , fellowship and wonder .
thank you .
i want you to imagine two couples in the middle of 1979 on the exact same day , at the exact same moment , each conceiving a baby -- okay ?
so two couples each conceiving one baby .
now i don 't want you to spend too much time imagining the conception , because if you spend all that time imagining that conception , you 're not going to listen to me .
so just imagine that for a moment .
and in this scenario , i want to imagine that , in one case , the sperm is carrying a y chromosome , meeting that x chromosome of the egg .
and in the other case , the sperm is carrying an x chromosome , meeting the x chromosome of the egg .
both are viable ; both take off .
we 'll come back to these people later .
so i wear two hats in most of what i do .
as the one hat , i do history of anatomy .
i 'm a historian by training , and what i study in that case is the way that people have dealt with anatomy -- meaning human bodies , animal bodies -- how they dealt with bodily fluids , concepts of bodies ; how have they thought about bodies .
the other hat that i 've worn in my work is as an activist , as a patient advocate -- or , as i sometimes say , as an impatient advocate -- for people who are patients of doctors .
in that case , what i 've worked with is people who have body types that challenge social norms .
so some of what i 've worked on , for example , is people who are conjoined twins -- two people within one body .
some of what i 've worked on is people who have dwarfism -- so people who are much shorter than typical .
and a lot of what i 've worked on is people who have atypical sex -- so people who don 't have the standard male or the standard female body types .
and as a general term , we can use the term intersex for this .
intersex comes in a lot of different forms .
i 'll just give you a few examples of the types of ways you can have sex that isn 't standard for male or female .
so in one instance , you can have somebody who has an xy chromosomal basis , and that sry gene on the y chromosome tells the proto-gonads , which we all have in the fetal life , to become testes .
and so in the fetal life the testes are pumping out testosterone .
but because this individual lacks receptors to hear that testosterone , the body doesn 't react to the testosterone .
and this is a syndrome called androgen insensitivity syndrome .
so lots of levels of testosterone , but no reaction to it .
as a consequence , the body develops more along the female typical path .
when the child is born , she looks like a girl .
she is a girl . she is raised as a girl .
and it 's often not until she hits puberty and she 's growing and developing breasts , but she 's not getting her period , that somebody figures out something 's up here .
and they do some tests and figure out that , instead of having ovaries inside and a uterus , she actually has testes inside , and she has a y chromosome .
now what 's important to understand is you may think of this person as really being male , but they 're really not .
females , like males , have in our bodies something called the adrenal glands .
they 're in the back of our body .
and the adrenal glands make androgens , which are a masculinizing hormone .
most females like me -- i believe myself to be a typical female -- i don 't actually know my chromosomal make-up but i think i 'm probably typical -- most females like me are actually androgen-sensitive .
we 're making androgen , and we 're responding to androgens .
the consequence is that somebody like me has actually had a brain exposed to more androgens than the woman born with testes who has androgen insensitivity syndrome .
so sex is really complicated ; it 's not just that intersex people are in the middle of all the sex spectrum -- in some ways , they can be all over the place .
another example : a few years ago i got a call from a man who was 19 years old , who was born a boy , raised a boy , had a girlfriend , had sex with his girlfriend , had a life as a guy and had just found out that he had ovaries and a uterus inside .
what he had was an extreme form of a condition called congenital adrenal hyperplasia .
he had xx chromosomes , and in the womb , his adrenal glands were in such high gear that it created , essentially , a masculine hormonal environment .
and as a consequence , his genitals were masculinzed , his brain was subject to the more typical masculine component of hormones .
and he was born looking like a boy -- nobody suspected anything .
and it was only when he had reached the age of 19 that he began to have enough medical problems actually from menstruating internally , that doctors figured out that , in fact , he was female internally .
okay , so just one more quick example of a way you can have intersex .
some people who have xx chromosomes develop what are called ovotestis , which is when you have ovarian tissue with testicular tissue wrapped around it .
and we 're not exactly sure why that happens .
so sex can come in lots of different varieties .
the reason that children with these kinds of bodies -- whether it 's dwarfism , or it 's conjoined twinning , or it 's an intersex type -- are often normalized by surgeons is not because it actually leaves them better off in terms of physical health .
in many cases , people are actually perfectly healthy .
the reason they 're often subject to various kinds of surgeries is because they threaten our social categories .
or system has been based typically on the idea that a particular kind of anatomy comes with a particular identity .
so we have the concept that what it means to be a woman is to have a female identity ; what it means to be a black person is , allegedly , is to have an african anatomy in terms of your history .
and so we have this terribly simplistic idea .
and when we 're faced with a body that actually presents us something quite different , it startles us in terms of those categorizations .
so we have a lot of very romantic ideas in our culture about individualism .
and our nation 's really founded on a very romantic concept of individualism .
well you can imagine how startling then it is when you have children that are born who are two people inside of one body .
where i ran into the most heat from this most recently was last year the south african runner , caster semenya , had her sex called into question at the international games in berlin .
i had a lot of journalists calling me , asking me , " which is the test they 're going to run that will tell us whether or not caster semenya is male or female ? "
and i had to explain to the journalists there isn 't such a test .
in fact , we now know that sex is complicated enough that we have to admit nature doesn 't draw the line for us between male and female , or between male and intersex and female and intersex ; we actually draw that line on nature .
so what we have is a sort of situation where the farther our science goes , the more we have to admit to ourselves that these categories that we thought of as stable anatomical categories that mapped very simply to stable identity categories are a lot more fuzzy than we thought .
and it 's not just in terms of sex .
it 's also in terms of race , which turns out to be vastly more complicated than our terminology has allowed .
as we look , we get into all sorts of uncomfortable areas .
we look , for example , about the fact that we share at least 95 percent of our dna with chimpanzees .
what are we to make of the fact that we differ from them only really by a few nucleotides ?
and as we get farther and farther with our science , we get more and more into a discomforted zone where we have to acknowledge that the simplistic categories we 've had are probably overly simplistic .
so we 're seeing this in all sorts of places in human life .
one of the places we 're seeing it , for example , in our culture today , in the united states today , is battles over the beginning of life and the end of life .
we have difficult conversations about at what point we decide a body becomes a human , such that it has a different right than a fetal life .
we have very difficult conversations nowadays -- probably not out in the open as much as within medicine -- about the question of when somebody 's dead .
in the past , our ancestors never had to struggle so much with this question of when somebody was dead .
at most , they 'd stick a feather on somebody 's nose , and if it twitched , they didn 't bury them yet .
if it stopped twitching , you bury them .
but today , we have a situation where we want to take vital organs out of beings and give them to other beings .
and as a consequence , we 're stuck with having to struggle with this really difficult question about who 's dead , and this leads us to a really difficult situation where we don 't have such simple categories as we 've had before .
now you might think that all this breaking-down of categories would make somebody like me really happy .
i 'm a political progressive , i defend people with unusual bodies , but i have to admit to you that it makes me nervous .
understanding that these categories are really much more unstable than we thought makes me tense .
and it makes me tense from the point of view of thinking about democracy .
so in order to tell you about that tension , i have to first admit to you that i 'm a huge fan of the founding fathers .
i know they were racists , i know they were sexist , but they were great .
i mean , they were so brave and so bold and so radical in what they did that i find myself watching that cheesy musical " 1776 " every few years , and it 's not because of the music , which is totally forgettable .
it 's because of what happened in 1776 with the founding fathers .
the founding fathers were , for my point of view , the original anatomical activists , and this is why .
what they rejected was an anatomical concept and replaced it with another one that was radical and beautiful and held us for 200 years .
so as you all recall , what our founding fathers were rejecting was a concept of monarchy , and the monarchy was basically based on a very simplistic concept of anatomy .
the monarchs of the old world didn 't have a concept of dna , but they did have a concept of birthright .
they had a concept of blue blood .
they had the idea that the people who would be in political power should be in political power because of the blood being passed down from grandfather to father to son and so forth .
the founding fathers rejected that idea , and they replaced it with a new anatomical concept , and that concept was all men are created equal .
they leveled that playing field and decided the anatomy that mattered was the commonality of anatomy , not the difference in anatomy , and that was a really radical thing to do .
now they were doing it in part because they were part of an enlightenment system where two things were growing up together .
and that was democracy growing up , but it was also science growing up at the same time .
and it 's really clear , if you look at the history of the founding fathers , a lot of them were very interested in science , and they were interested in a concept of a naturalistic world .
they were moving away from supernatural explanations , and they were rejecting things like a supernatural concept of power , where it transmitted because of a very vague concept of birthright .
they were moving towards a naturalistic concept .
and if you look , for example , in the declaration of independence , they talk about nature and nature 's god .
they don 't talk about god and god 's nature .
they 're talking about the power of nature to tell us who we are .
so as part of that , they were coming to us with a concept that was about anatomical commonality .
and in doing so , they were really setting up in a beautiful way the civil rights movement of the future .
they didn 't think of it that way , but they did it for us , and it was great .
so what happened years afterward ?
what happened was women , for example , who wanted the right to vote , took the founding fathers ' concept of anatomical commonality being more important than anatomical difference and said , " the fact that we have a uterus and ovaries is not significant enough in terms of a difference to mean that we shouldn 't have the right to vote , the right to full citizenship , the right to own property , etc . , etc . "
and women successfully argued that .
next came the successful civil rights movement , where we found people like sojourner truth talking about , " ain 't i a woman ? "
we find men on the marching lines of the civil rights movement saying , " i am a man . "
again , people of color appealing to a commonality of anatomy over a difference of anatomy , again , successfully .
we see the same thing with the disability rights movement .
the problem is , of course , that , as we begin to look at all that commonality , we have to begin to question why we maintain certain divisions .
now mind you , i want to maintain some divisions , anatomically , in our culture .
for example , i don 't want to give a fish the same rights as a human .
i don 't want to say we give up entirely on anatomy .
i don 't want to say five-year-olds should be allowed to consent to sex or consent to marry .
so there are some anatomical divisions that make sense to me and that i think we should retain .
but the challenge is trying to figure out which ones they are and why do we retain them and do they have meaning .
so let 's go back to those two beings conceived at the beginning of this talk .
we have two beings , both conceived in the middle of 1979 on the exact same day .
let 's imagine one of them , mary , is born three months prematurely , so she 's born on june 1 , 1980 .
henry , by contrast , is born at term , so he 's born on march 1 , 1980 .
simply by virtue of the fact that mary was born prematurely three months , she comes into all sorts of rights three months earlier than henry does -- the right to consent to sex , the right to vote , the right to drink .
henry has to wait for all of that , not because he 's actually any different in age , biologically , except in terms of when he was born .
we find other kinds of weirdness in terms of what their rights are .
henry , by virtue of being assumed to be male -- although i haven 't told you that he 's the xy one -- by virtue of being assumed to be male is now liable to be drafted , which mary does not need to worry about .
mary , meanwhile , cannot in all the states have the same right that henry has in all the states , namely , the right to marry .
henry can marry in every state a woman , but mary can only marry today in a few states a woman .
so we have these anatomical categories that persist that are in many ways problematic and questionable .
and the question to me becomes : what do we do , as our science gets to be so good in looking at anatomy , that we reach the point where we have to admit that a democracy that 's been based on anatomy might start falling apart ?
i don 't want to give up the science , but at the same time it kind of feels sometimes like the science is coming out from under us .
so where do we go ?
it seems like what happens in our culture is a sort of pragmatic attitude : " well , we have to draw the line somewhere , so we will draw the line somewhere . "
but a lot of people get stuck in a very strange position .
so for example , texas has at one point decided that what it means to marry a man is to mean that you don 't have a y chromosome , and what it means to marry a woman means you do have a y chromosome .
now in practice they don 't actually test people for their chromosomes .
but this is also very bizarre , because of the story i told you at the beginning about androgen insensitivity syndrome .
if we look at one of the founding fathers of modern democracy , dr. martin luther king , he offers us something of a solution in his " i have a dream " speech .
he says we should judge people " based not on the color of their skin , but on the content of their character , " moving beyond anatomy .
and i want to say , " yeah , that sounds like a really good idea . "
but in practice , how do you do it ?
how do you judge people based on the content of character ?
i also want to point out that i 'm not sure that is how we should distribute rights in terms of humans , because , i have to admit , that there are some golden retrievers i know that are probably more deserving of social services than some humans i know .
i also want to say there are probably also some yellow labradors that i know that are more capable of informed , intelligent , mature decisions about sexual relations than some 40-year-olds that i know .
so how do we operationalize the question of content of character ?
it turns out to be really difficult .
and part of me also wonders , what if content of character turns out to be something that 's scannable in the future -- able to be seen with an fmri ?
do we really want to go there ?
i 'm not sure where we go .
what i do know is that it seems to be really important to think about the idea of the united states being in the lead of thinking about this issue of democracy .
we 've done a really good job struggling with democracy , and i think we would do a good job in the future .
we don 't have a situation that iran has , for example , where a man who 's sexually attracted to other men is liable to be murdered , unless he 's willing to submit to a sex change , in which case he 's allowed to live .
we don 't have that kind of situation .
i 'm glad to say we don 't have the kind of situation with -- a surgeon i talked to a few years ago who had brought over a set of conjoined twins in order to separate them , partly to make a name for himself .
but when i was on the phone with him , asking why he was going to do this surgery -- this was a very high-risk surgery -- his answer was that , in this other nation , these children were going to be treated very badly , and so he had to do this .
my response to him was , " well , have you considered political asylum instead of a separation surgery ? "
the united states has offered tremendous possibility for allowing people to be the way they are , without having them have to be changed for the sake of the state .
so i think we have to be in the lead .
well , just to close , i want to suggest to you that i 've been talking a lot about the fathers .
and i want to think about the possibilities of what democracy might look like , or might have looked like , if we had more involved the mothers .
and i want to say something a little bit radical for a feminist , and that is that i think that there may be different kinds of insights that can come from different kinds of anatomies , particularly when we have people thinking in groups .
now for years , because i 've been interested in intersex , i 've also been interested in sex difference research .
and one of the things that i 've been really interested in is looking at the differences between males and females in terms of the way they think and operate in the world .
and what we know from cross-cultural studies is that females , on average -- not everyone , but on average -- are more inclined to be very attentive to complex social relations and to taking care of people who are basically vulnerable within the group .
and so if we think about that , we have an interesting situation on our hands .
years ago , when i was in graduate school , one of my graduate advisers who knew i was interested in feminism -- i considered myself a feminist , as i still do -- asked a really strange question .
he said , " tell me what 's feminine about feminism . "
and i thought , " well that 's the dumbest question i 've ever heard .
feminism is all about undoing stereotypes about gender , so there 's nothing feminine about feminism . "
but the more i thought about his question , the more i thought there might be something feminine about feminism .
that is to say , there might be something , on average , different about female brains from male brains that makes us more attentive to deeply complex social relationships and more attentive to taking care of the vulnerable .
so whereas the fathers were extremely attentive to figuring out how to protect individuals from the state , it 's possible that if we injected more mothers into this concept , what we would have is more of a concept of , not just how to protect , but how to care for each other .
and maybe that 's where we need to go in the future , when we take democracy beyond anatomy , is to think less about the individual body , in terms of the identity , and think more about those relationships .
so that as we the people try to create a more perfect union , we 're thinking about what we do for each other .
thank you .
i 'm jessi , and this is my suitcase .
but before i show you what i 've got inside , i 'm going to make a very public confession , and that is , i 'm outfit-obsessed .
i love finding , wearing , and more recently , photographing and blogging a different , colorful , crazy outfit for every single occasion .
but i don 't buy anything new .
i get all my clothes secondhand from flea markets and thrift stores .
aww , thank you .
secondhand shopping allows me to reduce the impact my wardrobe has on the environment and on my wallet .
i get to meet all kinds of great people ; my dollars usually go to a good cause ; i look pretty unique ; and it makes shopping like my own personal treasure hunt .
i mean , what am i going to find today ?
is it going to be my size ?
will i like the color ?
will it be under $ 20 ?
if all the answers are yes , i feel as though i 've won .
i want to get back to my suitcase and tell you what i packed for this exciting week here at ted .
i mean , what does somebody with all these outfits bring with her ?
so i 'm going to show you exactly what i brought .
i brought seven pairs of underpants and that 's it .
exactly one week 's worth of undies is all i put in my suitcase .
i was betting that i 'd be able to find everything else i could possible want to wear once i got here to palm springs .
and since you don 't know me as the woman walking around ted in her underwear -- that means i found a few things .
and i 'd really love to show you my week 's worth of outfits right now .
does that sound good ?
so as i do this , i 'm also going to tell you a few of the life lessons that , believe it or not , i have picked up in these adventures wearing nothing new .
so let 's start with sunday .
i call this " shiny tiger . "
you do not have to spend a lot of money to look great .
you can almost always look phenomenal for under $ 50 .
this whole outfit , including the jacket , cost me $ 55 , and it was the most expensive thing that i wore the entire week .
monday : color is powerful .
it is almost physiologically impossible to be in a bad mood when you 're wearing bright red pants .
if you are happy , you are going to attract other happy people to you .
tuesday : fitting in is way overrated .
i 've spent a whole lot of my life trying to be myself and at the same time fit in .
just be who you are .
if you are surrounding yourself with the right people , they will not only get it , they will appreciate it .
wednesday : embrace your inner child .
sometimes people tell me that i look like i 'm playing dress-up , or that i remind them of their seven-year-old .
i like to smile and say , " thank you . "
thursday : confidence is key .
if you think you look good in something , you almost certainly do .
and if you don 't think you look good in something , you 're also probably right .
i grew up with a mom who taught me this day-in and day-out .
but it wasn 't until i turned 30 that i really got what this meant .
and i 'm going to break it down for you for just a second .
if you believe you 're a beautiful person inside and out , there is no look that you can 't pull off .
so there is no excuse for any of us here in this audience .
we should be able to rock anything we want to rock .
thank you .
friday : a universal truth -- five words for you : gold sequins go with everything .
and finally , saturday : developing your own unique personal style is a really great way to tell the world something about you without having to say a word .
it 's been proven to me time and time again as people have walked up to me this week simply because of what i 'm wearing , and we 've had great conversations .
so obviously this is not all going to fit back in my tiny suitcase .
so before i go home to brooklyn , i 'm going to donate everything back .
because the lesson i 'm trying to learn myself this week is that it 's okay to let go .
i don 't need to get emotionally attached to these things because around the corner , there is always going to be another crazy , colorful , shiny outfit just waiting for me , if i put a little love in my heart and look .
thank you very much .
thank you .
good afternoon , everybody .
i 've got something to show you .
think about this as a pixel , a flying pixel .
this is what we call , in our lab , sensible design .
let me tell you a bit about it .
now if you take this picture -- i 'm italian originally , and every boy in italy grows up with this picture on the wall of his bedroom -- but the reason i 'm showing you this is that something very interesting happened in formula 1 racing over the past couple of decades .
now some time ago , if you wanted to win a formula 1 race , you take a budget , and you bet your budget on a good driver and a good car .
and if the car and the driver were good enough , then you 'd win the race .
now today , if you want to win the race , actually you need also something like this -- something that monitors the car in real time , has a few thousand sensors collecting information from the car , transmitting this information into the system , and then processing it and using it in order to go back to the car with decisions and changing things in real time as information is collected .
this is what , in engineering terms , you would call a real time control system .
and basically , it 's a system made of two components -- a sensing and an actuating component .
what is interesting today is that real time control systems are starting to enter into our lives .
our cities , over the past few years , just have been blanketed with networks , electronics .
they 're becoming like computers in open air .
and , as computers in open air , they 're starting to respond in a different way to be able to be sensed and to be actuated .
if we fix cities , actually it 's a big deal .
just as an aside , i wanted to mention , cities are only two percent of the earth 's crust , but they are 50 percent of the world 's population .
they are 75 percent of the energy consumption -- up to 80 percent of co2 emissions .
so if we 're able to do something with cities , that 's a big deal .
beyond cities , all of this sensing and actuating is entering our everyday objects .
that 's from an exhibition that paola antonelli is organizing at moma later this year , during the summer .
it 's called " talk to me . "
well our objects , our environment is starting to talk back to us .
in a certain sense , it 's almost as if every atom out there were becoming both a sensor and an actuator .
and that is radically changing the interaction we have as humans with the environment out there .
in a certain sense , it 's almost as if the old dream of michelangelo ...
you know , when michelangelo sculpted the moses , at the end it said that he took the hammer , threw it at the moses -- actually you can still see a small chip underneath -- and said , shouted , " perché non parli ? why don 't you talk ? "
well today , for the first time , our environment is starting to talk back to us .
and i 'll show just a few examples -- again , with this idea of sensing our environment and actuating it .
let 's starting with sensing .
well , the first project i wanted to share with you is actually one of the first projects by our lab .
it was four and a half years ago in italy .
and what we did there was actually use a new type of network at the time that had been deployed all across the world -- that 's a cellphone network -- and use anonymous and aggregated information from that network , that 's collected anyway by the operator , in order to understand how the city works .
the summer was a lucky summer -- 2006 .
it 's when italy won the soccer world cup .
some of you might remember , it was italy and france playing , and then zidane at the end , the headbutt .
and anyway , italy won at the end .
now look at what happened that day just by monitoring activity happening on the network .
here you see the city .
you see the colosseum in the middle , the river tiber .
it 's morning , before the match .
you see the timeline on the top .
early afternoon , people here and there , making calls and moving .
the match begins -- silence .
france scores . italy scores .
halftime , people make a quick call and go to the bathroom .
second half . end of normal time .
first overtime , second .
zidane , the headbutt in a moment .
italy wins . yeah .
well , that night , everybody went to celebrate in the center .
you saw the big peak .
the following day , again everybody went to the center to meet the winning team and the prime minister at the time .
and then everybody moved down .
you see the image of the place called circo massimo , where , since roman times , people go to celebrate , to have a big party , and you see the peak at the end of the day .
well , that 's just one example of how we can sense the city today in a way that we couldn 't have done just a few years ago .
another quick example about sensing : it 's not about people , but about things we use and consume .
well today , we know everything about where our objects come from .
this is a map that shows you all the chips that form a mac computer , how they came together .
but we know very little about where things go .
so in this project , we actually developed some small tags to track trash as it moves through the system .
so we actually started with a number of volunteers who helped us in seattle , just over a year ago , to tag what they were throwing away -- different types of things , as you can see here -- things they would throw away anyway .
then we put a little chip , little tag , onto the trash and then started following it .
here are the results we just obtained .
from seattle ...
after one week .
with this information we realized there 's a lot of inefficiencies in the system .
we can actually do the same thing with much less energy .
this data was not available before .
but there 's a lot of wasted transportation and convoluted things happening .
but the other thing is that we believe that if we see every day that the cup we 're throwing away , it doesn 't disappear , it 's still somewhere on the planet .
and the plastic bottle we 're throwing away every day still stays there .
and if we show that to people , then we can also promote some behavioral change .
so that was the reason for the project .
my colleague at mit , assaf biderman , he could tell you much more about sensing and many other wonderful things we can do with sensing , but i wanted to go to the second part we discussed at the beginning , and that 's actuating our environment .
and the first project is something we did a couple of years ago in zaragoza , spain .
it started with a question by the mayor of the city , who came to us saying that spain and southern europe have a beautiful tradition of using water in public space , in architecture .
and the question was : how could technology , new technology , be added to that ?
and one of the ideas that was developed at mit in a workshop was , imagine this pipe , and you 've got valves , solenoid valves , taps , opening and closing .
you create like a water curtain with pixels made of water .
if those pixels fall , you can write on it , you can show patterns , images , text .
and even you can approach it , and it will open up to let you jump through , as you see in this image .
well , we presented this to mayor belloch .
he liked it very much .
and we got a commission to design a building at the entrance of the expo .
we called it digital water pavilion .
the whole building is made of water .
there 's no doors or windows , but when you approach it , it will open up to let you in .
the roof also is covered with water .
and if there 's a bit of wind , if you want to minimize splashing , you can actually lower the roof .
or you could close the building , and the whole architecture will disappear , you know , these days , you always get images during the winter , when they take the roof down , of people who have been there and said , " they demolished the building . "
no , they didn 't demolish it , just when it goes down , the architecture almost disappears .
here 's the building working .
you see the person puzzled about what was going on inside .
and here was myself trying not to get wet , testing the sensors that open the water .
well , i should tell you now what happened one night when all of the sensors stopped working .
but actually that night , it was even more fun .
all the kids from zaragoza came to the building , because the way of engaging with the building became something different .
not anymore a building that would open up to let you in , but a building that would still make cuts and holes through the water , and you had to jump without getting wet .
and that was , for us , was very interesting , because , as architects , as engineers , as designers , we always think about how people will use the things we design .
but then reality 's always unpredictable .
and that 's the beauty of doing things that are used and interact with people .
here is an image then of the building with the physical pixels , the pixels made of water , and then projections on them .
and this is what led us to think about the following project i 'll show you now .
that 's , imagine those pixels could actually start flying .
imagine you could have small helicopters that move in the air , and then each of them with a small pixel in changing lights -- almost as a cloud that can move in space .
here is the video .
so imagine one helicopter , like the one we saw before , moving with others , in synchrony .
so you can have this cloud .
you can have a kind of flexible screen or display , like this -- a regular configuration in two dimensions .
or in regular , but in three dimensions , where the thing that changes is the light , not the pixels ' position .
you can play with a different type .
imagine your screen could just appear in different scales or sizes , different types of resolution .
but then the whole thing can be just a 3d cloud of pixels that you can approach and move through it and see from many , many directions .
here is the real flyfire control and going down to form the regular grid as before .
when you turn on the light , actually you see this . so the same as we saw before .
and imagine each of them then controlled by people .
you can have each pixel having an input that comes from people , from people 's movement , or so and so .
i want to show you something here for the first time .
we 've been working with roberto bolle , one of today 's top ballet dancers -- the étoile at metropolitan in new york and la scala in milan -- and actually captured his movement in 3d in order to use it as an input for flyfire .
and here you can see roberto dancing .
you see on the left the pixels , the different resolutions being captured .
it 's both 3d scanning in real time and motion capture .
so you can reconstruct a whole movement .
you can go all the way through .
but then , once we have the pixels , then you can play with them and play with color and movement and gravity and rotation .
so we want to use this as one of the possible inputs for flyfire .
i wanted to show you the last project we are working on .
it 's something we 're working on for the london olympics .
it 's called the cloud .
and the idea here is , imagine , again , we can involve people in doing something and changing our environment -- almost to impart what we call cloud raising -- like barn raising , but with a cloud .
imagine you can have everybody make a small donation for one pixel .
and i think what is remarkable that has happened over the past couple of years is that , over the past couple of decades , we went from the physical world to the digital one .
this has been digitizing everything , knowledge , and making that accessible through the internet .
now today , for the first time -- and the obama campaign showed us this -- we can go from the digital world , from the self-organizing power of networks , to the physical one .
this can be , in our case , we want to use it for designing and doing a symbol .
that means something built in a city .
but tomorrow it can be , in order to tackle today 's pressing challenges -- think about climate change or co2 emissions -- how we can go from the digital world to the physical one .
so the idea that we can actually involve people in doing this thing together , collectively .
the cloud is a cloud , again , made of pixels , in the same way as the real cloud is a cloud made of particles .
and those particles are water , where our cloud is a cloud of pixels .
it 's a physical structure in london , but covered with pixels .
you can move inside , have different types of experiences .
you can actually see from underneath , sharing the main moments for the olympics in 2012 and beyond , and really using it as a way to connect with the community .
so both the physical cloud in the sky and something you can go to the top [ of ] , like london 's new mountaintop .
you can enter inside it .
and a kind of new digital beacon for the night -- but most importantly , a new type of experience for anybody who will go to the top .
thank you .
as an artist , connection is very important to me .
through my work i 'm trying to articulate that humans are not separate from nature and that everything is interconnected .
i first went to antarctica almost 10 years ago , where i saw my first icebergs .
i was in awe .
my heart beat fast , my head was dizzy , trying to comprehend what it was that stood in front of me .
the icebergs around me were almost 200 feet out of the water , and i could only help but wonder that this was one snowflake on top of another snowflake , year after year .
icebergs are born when they calve off of glaciers or break off of ice shelves .
each iceberg has its own individual personality .
they have a distinct way of interacting with their environment and their experiences .
some refuse to give up and hold on to the bitter end , while others can 't take it anymore and crumble in a fit of dramatic passion .
it 's easy to think , when you look at an iceberg , that they 're isolated , that they 're separate and alone , much like we as humans sometimes view ourselves .
but the reality is far from it .
as an iceberg melts , i am breathing in its ancient atmosphere .
as the iceberg melts , it is releasing mineral-rich fresh water that nourishes many forms of life .
i approach photographing these icebergs as if i 'm making portraits of my ancestors , knowing that in these individual moments they exist in that way and will never exist that way again .
it is not a death when they melt ; it is not an end , but a continuation of their path through the cycle of life .
some of the ice in the icebergs that i photograph is very young -- a couple thousand years old .
and some of the ice is over 100,000 years old .
the last pictures i 'd like to show you are of an iceberg that i photographed in qeqetarsuaq , greenland .
it 's a very rare occasion that you get to actually witness an iceberg rolling .
so here it is .
you can see on the left side a small boat .
that 's about a 15-foot boat .
and i 'd like you to pay attention to the shape of the iceberg and where it is at the waterline .
you can see here , it begins to roll , and the boat has moved to the other side , and the man is standing there .
this is an average-size greenlandic iceberg .
it 's about 120 feet above the water , or 40 meters .
and this video is real time .
and just like that , the iceberg shows you a different side of its personality .
thank you .
i have had the distinct blessing in my life to have worked on a bunch of amazing projects .
but the coolest i ever worked on was around this guy .
this guy 's name is tempt .
tempt was one of the foremost graffiti artists in the 80s .
and he came up home from a run one day and said , " dad , my legs are tingling . "
and that was the onset of als .
so tempt is now completely paralyzed .
he only has use of his eyes .
i was exposed to him .
i have a company that does design and animation , so obviously graffiti is definitely an intricate part of what we admire and respect in the art world .
and so we decided that we were going to sponsor tony , tempt , and his cause .
so i went and met with his brother and father and said , " we 're going to give you this money .
what are you going to do with it ? "
and his brother said , " i just want to be able to talk to tony again .
i just want to be able to communicate with him and i said , " wait a second , isn 't that -- i 've seen stephen hawking -- don 't all paralyzed people have the ability to communicate via these devices ? "
and he said , " no , unless you 're in the upper echelon and you 've got really amazing insurance , you can 't actually do that .
these devices aren 't accessible to people . "
and i said , " well , how do you actually communicate ? "
has everyone seen the movie " the diving bell and the butterfly ? "
that 's how they communicate -- so run their finger along .
i said , " that 's archaic . how can that be ? "
so i showed up with the desire to just write a check , and instead , i wrote a check that i had no freaking idea how i was going to cash .
i committed to his brother and his father right then and there -- i 'm like , " all right , here 's the deal : tony 's going to speak , we 're going to get him a machine , and we 're going to figure out a way for him to do his art again .
because it 's a travesty that someone who still has all of that in him isn 't able to communicate it . "
so i spoke at a conference a couple months after that .
i met these guys called grl , graffiti research lab , and they have a technology that allows them to project a light onto any surface and then , with a laser pointer , draw on it , and it just registers the negative space .
so they go around and do art installations like this .
all the things that go up there , they said there 's a life cycle .
first it starts with the sexual organs , then it starts with cuss words , then it was bush slanders and then people actually got to art .
but there was always a life cycle to their presentations .
so i went home and was having dinner with my wife and was telling her about this , and we were like , " well wait a second . if we know that this technology exists where you can use your eyes to control things , why don 't we figure out a way for tempt to control a laser and he could do graf again ? well that would be awesome . "
so that started the journey .
and about two years later , about a year later , after a bunch of organization and a bunch of moving things around , we 'd accomplished a couple things .
one , we battered down the doors of the insurance companies , and we actually got tempt a machine that let him communicate -- a stephen hawking machine .
which was awesome .
and he 's seriously one of the funniest -- i call him yoda , because you talk to the guy , you get an email from him , and you 're like , " i 'm not worthy . this guy 's so amazing . "
the other thing we did is we flew seven programmers from all over the world -- literally every corner of the world -- into our house .
my wife and kids and i moved to our back garage , and these hackers and programmers and conspiracy theorists and anarchists took over our house .
a lot of our friends thought we were absolutely stupid to do that and that we were going to come back and all the pictures on the wall would be removed and graf on the walls .
but for over two weeks , we programmed , we went to the venice boardwalk , my kids got involved , my dog got involved , and we created this .
this is called the eyewriter , and you can see the description .
this is a cheap pair of sunglasses that we bought at the venice beach boardwalk , some copper wire and some stuff from home depot and radio shack .
we took a ps3 camera , hacked it open , mounted it to an led light , and now there 's a device that is free -- you build this yourself , we publish the code for free , you download the software for free .
and now we 've created a device that has absolutely no limitations .
there 's no insurance company that can say " no . "
there 's no hospital that can say " no . "
anybody who 's paralyzed now has access to actually draw or communicate using only their eyes .
thank you .
thank you guys very much . that was awesome .
so at the end of the two weeks , we went back to tempt 's room .
i love this picture , because this is someone else 's room and that 's his room .
so there 's all this hustle and bustle going on for the big unveiling .
and after over a year of planning , two weeks of programming , carb-fest and all-night sessions , tony drew again for the first time in seven years .
and this is an amazing picture , because this is his life support system , and he 's looking over his life support system .
we kicked his bed so that he could see out .
and we set up a projector on a wall out in the parking lot outside of his hospital .
and he drew again for the first time , in front of his family and friends -- and you can only imagine what the feeling in the parking lot was .
the funny thing was , we had to break into the parking lot too , so we totally felt like we were legit in the whole graf scene too .
so at the end of this , he sent us an email , and this is what the email said : " that was the first time i 've drawn anything for seven years .
i feel like i had been held underwater , and someone finally reached down and pulled my head up so i could breathe . "
isn 't that awesome ?
so that 's kind of our battle cry .
that 's what keeps us going and keeps us developing .
and we 've got such a long way to go with this .
this is an amazing device , but it 's the equivalent of an etch a sketch .
and someone who has that kind of artistic potential deserves so much more .
so we 're in the process of trying to figure out how to make it better , faster , stronger .
since that time , we 've had all kinds of acknowledgment .
we 've won a bunch of awards .
remember , it 's free ; none of us are making any money on this thing .
it 's all coming out of our own pockets .
so the awards were like , " oh , this is fantastic . "
armstrong twittered about us , and then in december , time magazine honored us as one of the top 50 inventions of 2010 , which was really cool .
the coolest thing about this -- and this is what 's completing the whole circle -- is that in april of this year , at the geffen moca in downtown los angeles , there 's going to be an exhibition called " art of the streets . "
and " art of the streets " is going to have pretty much the bad-asses of the street art scene -- banksy , shepard fairey , kaws -- all of these guys will be there .
tempt 's going to be in the show , which is pretty awesome .
so basically this is my point : if you see something that 's not possible , make it possible .
everything in this room wasn 't possible -- this stage , this computer , this mic , the eyewriter -- wasn 't possible at one point .
make it possible , everyone in this room .
i 'm not a programmer , never done anything with ocular recognition technology , but i just recognized something and associated myself with amazing people so that we could make something happen .
and this is the question i want everyone to ask yourself every single day when you come up with something you feel that needs to be done : if not now , then when ? and if not me , then who ?
thank you guys .
you know , what i do is write for children , and i 'm probably america 's most widely read children 's author , in fact .
and i always tell people that i don 't want to show up looking like a scientist .
you can have me as a farmer , or in leathers , and no one has ever chose farmer .
i 'm here today to talk to you about circles and epiphanies .
and you know , an epiphany is usually something you find that you dropped someplace .
you 've just got to go around the block to see it as an epiphany .
that 's a painting of a circle .
a friend of mine did that -- richard bollingbroke .
it 's the kind of complicated circle that i 'm going to tell you about .
my circle began back in the ' 60s in high school in stow , ohio where i was the class queer .
i was the guy beaten up bloody every week in the boys ' room , until one teacher saved my life .
she saved my life by letting me go to the bathroom in the teachers ' lounge .
she did it in secret .
she did it for three years .
and i had to get out of town .
i had a thumb , i had 85 dollars , and i ended up in san francisco , california -- met a lover -- and back in the ' 80s , found it necessary to begin work on aids organizations .
about three or four years ago , i got a phone call in the middle of the night from that teacher , mrs. posten , who said , " i need to see you .
i 'm disappointed that we never got to know each other as adults .
could you please come to ohio , and please bring that man that i know you have found by now .
and i should mention that i have pancreatic cancer , and i 'd like you to please be quick about this . "
well , the next day we were in cleveland .
we took a look at her , we laughed , we cried , and we knew that she needed to be in a hospice .
we found her one , we got her there , and we took care of her and watched over her family , because it was necessary .
it 's something we knew how to do .
and just as the woman who wanted to know me as an adult got to know me , she turned into a box of ashes and was placed in my hands .
and what had happened was the circle had closed , it had become a circle -- and that epiphany i talked about presented itself .
the epiphany is that death is a part of life .
she saved my life ; i and my partner saved hers .
and you know , that part of life needs everything that the rest of life does .
it needs truth and beauty , and i 'm so happy it 's been mentioned so much here today .
it also needs -- it needs dignity , love and pleasure , and it 's our job to hand those things out .
thank you .
imagine a big explosion as you climb through 3,000 ft .
imagine a plane full of smoke .
imagine an engine going clack , clack , clack , clack , clack , clack , clack .
it sounds scary .
well i had a unique seat that day . i was sitting in 1d .
i was the only one who could talk to the flight attendants .
so i looked at them right away , and they said , " no problem . we probably hit some birds . "
the pilot had already turned the plane around , and we weren 't that far .
you could see manhattan .
two minutes later , three things happened at the same time .
the pilot lines up the plane with the hudson river .
that 's usually not the route .
he turns off the engines .
now imagine being in a plane with no sound .
and then he says three words -- the most unemotional three words i 've ever heard .
he says , " brace for impact . "
i didn 't have to talk to the flight attendant anymore .
i could see in her eyes , it was terror . life was over .
now i want to share with you three things i learned about myself that day .
i learned that it all changes in an instant .
we have this bucket list , we have these things we want to do in life , and i thought about all the people i wanted to reach out to that i didn 't , all the fences i wanted to mend , all the experiences i wanted to have and i never did .
as i thought about that later on , i came up with a saying , which is , " i collect bad wines . "
because if the wine is ready and the person is there , i 'm opening it .
i no longer want to postpone anything in life .
and that urgency , that purpose , has really changed my life .
the second thing i learned that day -- and this is as we clear the george washington bridge , which was by not a lot -- i thought about , wow , i really feel one real regret .
i 've lived a good life .
in my own humanity and mistakes , i 've tried to get better at everything i tried .
but in my humanity , i also allow my ego to get in .
and i regretted the time i wasted on things that did not matter with people that matter .
and i thought about my relationship with my wife , with my friends , with people .
and after , as i reflected on that , i decided to eliminate negative energy from my life .
it 's not perfect , but it 's a lot better .
i 've not had a fight with my wife in two years .
it feels great .
i no longer try to be right ; i choose to be happy .
the third thing i learned -- and this is as your mental clock starts going , " 15 , 14 , 13 . "
you can see the water coming .
i 'm saying , " please blow up . "
i don 't want this thing to break in 20 pieces like you 've seen in those documentaries .
and as we 're coming down , i had a sense of , wow , dying is not scary .
it 's almost like we 've been preparing for it our whole lives .
but it was very sad .
i didn 't want to go ; i love my life .
and that sadness really framed in one thought , which is , i only wish for one thing .
i only wish i could see my kids grow up .
about a month later , i was at a performance by my daughter -- first-grader , not much artistic talent ...
... yet .
and i 'm bawling , i 'm crying , like a little kid .
and it made all the sense in the world to me .
i realized at that point , by connecting those two dots , that the only thing that matters in my life is being a great dad .
above all , above all , the only goal i have in life is to be a good dad .
i was given the gift of a miracle , of not dying that day .
i was given another gift , which was to be able to see into the future and come back and live differently .
i challenge you guys that are flying today , imagine the same thing happens on your plane -- and please don 't -- but imagine , and how would you change ?
what would you get done that you 're waiting to get done because you think you 'll be here forever ?
how would you change your relationships and the negative energy in them ?
and more than anything , are you being the best parent you can ?
thank you .
the idea behind the stuxnet computer worm is actually quite simple .
we don 't want iran to get the bomb .
their major asset for developing nuclear weapons is the natanz uranium enrichment facility .
the gray boxes that you see , these are real-time control systems .
now if we manage to compromise these systems that control drive speeds and valves , we can actually cause a lot of problems with the centrifuge .
the gray boxes don 't run windows software ; they are a completely different technology .
but if we manage to place a good windows virus on a notebook that is used by a maintenance engineer to configure this gray box , then we are in business .
and this is the plot behind stuxnet .
so we start with a windows dropper .
the payload goes onto the gray box , damages the centrifuge , and the iranian nuclear program is delayed -- mission accomplished .
that 's easy , huh ?
i want to tell you how we found that out .
when we started our research on stuxnet six months ago , it was completely unknown what the purpose of this thing was .
the only thing that was known is it 's very , very complex on the windows part , the dropper part , used multiple zero-day vulnerabilities .
and it seemed to want to do something with these gray boxes , these real-time control systems .
so that got our attention , and we started a lab project where we infected our environment with stuxnet and checked this thing out .
and then some very funny things happened .
stuxnet behaved like a lab rat that didn 't like our cheese -- sniffed , but didn 't want to eat .
didn 't make sense to me .
and after we experimented with different flavors of cheese , i realized , well , this is a directed attack .
it 's completely directed .
the dropper is prowling actively on the gray box if a specific configuration is found , and even if the actual program code that it 's trying to infect is actually running on that target .
and if not , stuxnet does nothing .
so that really got my attention , and we started to work on this nearly around the clock , because i thought , " well , we don 't know what the target is .
it could be , let 's say for example , a u.s. power plant , or a chemical plant in germany .
so we better find out what the target is soon . "
so we extracted and decompiled the attack code , and we discovered that it 's structured in two digital bombs -- a smaller one and a bigger one .
and we also saw that they are very professionally engineered by people who obviously had all insider information .
they knew all the bits and bites that they had to attack .
they probably even know the shoe size of the operator .
so they know everything .
and if you have heard that the dropper of stuxnet is complex and high-tech , let me tell you this : the payload is rocket science .
it 's way above everything that we have ever seen before .
here you see a sample of this actual attack code .
we are talking about -- around about 15,000 lines of code .
looks pretty much like old-style assembly language .
and i want to tell you how we were able to make sense out of this code .
so what we were looking for is , first of all , system function calls , because we know what they do .
and then we were looking for timers and data structures and trying to relate them to the real world -- to potential real world targets .
so we do need target theories that we can prove or disprove .
in order to get target theories , we remember that it 's definitely hardcore sabotage , it must be a high-value target and it is most likely located in iran , because that 's where most of the infections had been reported .
now you don 't find several thousand targets in that area .
it basically boils down to the bushehr nuclear power plant and to the natanz fuel enrichment plant .
so i told my assistant , " get me a list of all centrifuge and power plant experts from our client base . "
and i phoned them up and picked their brain in an effort to match their expertise with what we found in code and data .
and that worked pretty well .
so we were able to associate the small digital warhead with the rotor control .
the rotor is that moving part within the centrifuge , that black object that you see .
and if you manipulate the speed of this rotor , you are actually able to crack the rotor and eventually even have the centrifuge explode .
what we also saw is that the goal of the attack was really to do it slowly and creepy -- obviously in an effort to drive maintenance engineers crazy , that they would not be able to figure this out quickly .
the big digital warhead -- we had a shot at this by looking very closely at data and data structures .
so for example , the number 164 really stands out in that code ; you can 't overlook it .
i started to research scientific literature on how these centrifuges are actually built in natanz and found they are structured in what is called a cascade , and each cascade holds 164 centrifuges .
so that made sense , that was a match .
and it even got better .
these centrifuges in iran are subdivided into 15 , what is called , stages .
and guess what we found in the attack code ?
an almost identical structure .
so again , that was a real good match .
and this gave us very high confidence for what we were looking at .
now don 't get me wrong here , it didn 't go like this .
these results have been obtained over several weeks of really hard labor .
and we often went into just a dead end and had to recover .
anyway , so we figured out that both digital warheads were actually aiming at one and the same target , but from different angles .
the small warhead is taking one cascade , and spinning up the rotors and slowing them down , and the big warhead is talking to six cascades and manipulating valves .
so in all , we are very confident that we have actually determined what the target is .
it is natanz , and it is only natanz .
so we don 't have to worry that other targets might be hit by stuxnet .
here 's some very cool stuff that we saw -- really knocked my socks off .
down there is the gray box , and on the top you see the centrifuges .
now what this thing does is it intercepts the input values from sensors -- so for example , from pressure sensors and vibration sensors -- and it provides legitimate program code , which is still running during the attack , with fake input data .
and as a matter of fact , this fake input data is actually prerecorded by stuxnet .
so it 's just like from the hollywood movies where during the heist , the observation camera is fed with prerecorded video .
that 's cool , huh ?
the idea here is obviously not only to fool the operators in the control room .
it actually is much more dangerous and aggressive .
the idea is to circumvent a digital safety system .
we need digital safety systems where a human operator could not act quick enough .
so for example , in a power plant , when your big steam turbine gets too over speed , you must open relief valves within a millisecond .
obviously , this cannot be done by a human operator .
so this is where we need digital safety systems .
and when they are compromised , then real bad things can happen .
your plant can blow up .
and neither your operators nor your safety system will notice it .
that 's scary .
but it gets worse .
and this is very important , what i 'm going to say .
think about this : this attack is generic .
it doesn 't have anything to do , in specifics , with centrifuges , with uranium enrichment .
so it would work as well , for example , in a power plant or in an automobile factory .
it is generic .
and you don 't have -- as an attacker -- you don 't have to deliver this payload by a usb stick , as we saw it in the case of stuxnet .
you could also use conventional worm technology for spreading .
just spread it as wide as possible .
and if you do that , what you end up with is a cyber weapon of mass destruction .
that 's the consequence that we have to face .
so unfortunately , the biggest number of targets for such attacks are not in the middle east .
they 're in the united states and europe and in japan .
so all of the green areas , these are your target-rich environments .
we have to face the consequences , and we better start to prepare right now .
thanks .
i 've got a question .
ralph , it 's been quite widely reported that people assume that mossad is the main entity behind this .
is that your opinion ?
okay , you really want to hear that ?
yeah . okay .
my opinion is that the mossad is involved , but that the leading force is not israel .
so the leading force behind that is the cyber superpower .
there is only one , and that 's the united states -- fortunately , fortunately .
because otherwise , our problems would even be bigger .
thank you for scaring the living daylights out of us . thank you , ralph .
i have spent the past few years putting myself into situations that are usually very difficult and at the same time somewhat dangerous .
i went to prison -- difficult .
i worked in a coal mine -- dangerous .
i filmed in war zones -- difficult and dangerous .
and i spent 30 days eating nothing but this -- fun in the beginning , little difficult in the middle , very dangerous in the end .
in fact , most of my career , i 've been immersing myself into seemingly horrible situations for the whole goal of trying to examine societal issues in a way that make them engaging , that make them interesting , that hopefully break them down in a way that make them entertaining and accessible to an audience .
so when i knew i was coming here to do a ted talk that was going to look at the world of branding and sponsorship , i knew i would want to do something a little different .
so as some of you may or may not have heard , a couple weeks ago , i took out an ad on ebay .
i sent out some facebook messages , some twitter messages , and i gave people the opportunity to buy the naming rights to my 2011 ted talk .
that 's right , some lucky individual , corporation , for-profit or non-profit , was going to get the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity -- because i 'm sure chris anderson will never let it happen again -- to buy the naming rights to the talk you 're watching right now , that at the time didn 't have a title , didn 't really have a lot of content and didn 't really give much hint as to what the subject matter would actually be .
so what you were getting was this : your name here presents : my ted talk that you have no idea what the subject is and , depending on the content , could ultimately blow up in your face , especially if i make you or your company look stupid for doing it .
but that being said , it 's a very good media opportunity .
you know how many people watch these ted talks ?
it 's a lot .
that 's just a working title , by the way .
so even with that caveat , i knew that someone would buy the naming rights .
now if you 'd have asked me that a year ago , i wouldn 't have been able to tell you that with any certainty .
but in the new project that i 'm working on , my new film , we examine the world of marketing , advertising .
and as i said earlier , i put myself in some pretty horrible situations over the years , but nothing could prepare me , nothing could ready me , for anything as difficult or as dangerous as going into the rooms with these guys .
you see , i had this idea for a movie .
what i want to do is make a film all about product placement , marketing and advertising , where the entire film is funded by product placement , marketing and advertising .
so the movie will be called " the greatest movie ever sold . "
so what happens in " the greatest movie ever sold , " is that everything from top to bottom , from start to finish , is branded from beginning to end -- from the above-the-title sponsor that you 'll see in the movie , which is brand x .
now this brand , the qualcomm stadium , the staples center ...
these people will be married to the film in perpetuity -- forever .
and so the film explores this whole idea -- it 's what ? in perpetuity , forever ?
i 'm a redundant person .
that was more for emphasis .
it was , " in perpetuity . forever . "
but not only are we going to have the brand x title sponsor , but we 're going to make sure we sell out every category we can in the film .
so maybe we sell a shoe and it becomes the greatest shoe you ever wore ...
the greatest car you ever drove from " the greatest movie ever sold , " the greatest drink you 've ever had , courtesy of " the greatest movie ever sold . "
so the idea is , beyond just showing that brands are a part of your life , but actually get them to finance the film ?
and actually we show the whole process of how does it work .
the goal of this whole film is transparency .
you 're going to see the whole thing take place in this movie .
so that 's the whole concept , the whole film , start to finish .
and i would love for ceg to help make it happen .
you know it 's funny , because when i first hear it , it is the ultimate respect for an audience .
i don 't know how receptive people are going to be to it , though .
do you have a perspective -- i don 't want to use " angle " because that has a negative connotation -- but do you know how this is going to play out ?
how much money does it take to do this ?
1.5 million .
i think that you 're going to have a hard time meeting with them , but i think it 's certainly worth pursuing a couple big , really obvious brands .
who knows , maybe by the time your film comes out , we look like a bunch of blithering idiots .
what do you think the response is going to be ?
the responses mostly will be " no . "
but is it a tough sell because of the film or a tough sell because of me ?
jk : both .
... meaning not so optimistic .
so , sir , can you help me ? i need help .
i can help you .
okay .
awesome .
we 've gotta figure out which brands .
yeah .
when you look at the people you deal with ..
we 've got some places we can go .
turn the camera off .
i thought " turn the camera off " meant , " let 's have an off-the-record conversation . "
turns out it really means , " we want nothing to do with your movie . "
and just like that , one by one , all of these companies suddenly disappeared .
none of them wanted anything to do with this movie .
i was amazed .
they wanted absolutely nothing to do with this project .
and i was blown away , because i thought the whole concept , the idea of advertising , was to get your product out in front of as many people as possible , to get as many people to see it as possible .
especially in today 's world , this intersection of new media and old media and the fractured media landscape , isn 't the idea to get that new buzz-worthy delivery vehicle that 's going to get that message to the masses ?
no , that 's what i thought .
but the problem was , you see , my idea had one fatal flaw , and that flaw was this .
actually no , that was not the flaw whatsoever .
that wouldn 't have been a problem at all .
this would have been fine .
but what this image represents was the problem .
see , when you do a google image search for transparency , this is --- this is one of the first images that comes up .
so i like the way you roll , sergey brin . no .
this is was the problem : transparency -- free from pretense or deceit ; easily detected or seen through ; readily understood ; characterized by visibility or accessibility of information , especially concerning business practices -- that last line being probably the biggest problem .
you see , we hear a lot about transparency these days .
our politicians say it , our president says it , even our ceo 's say it .
but suddenly when it comes down to becoming a reality , something suddenly changes .
but why ? well , transparency is scary -- like that odd , still-screaming bear .
it 's unpredictable -- like this odd country road .
and it 's also very risky .
what else is risky ?
eating an entire bowl of cool whip .
that 's very risky .
now when i started talking to companies and telling them that we wanted to tell this story , and they said , " no , we want you to tell a story .
we want you to tell a story , but we just want to tell our story . "
see , when i was a kid and my father would catch me in some sort of a lie -- and there he is giving me the look he often gave me -- he would say , " son , there 's three sides to every story .
there 's your story , there 's my story and there 's the real story . "
now you see , with this film , we wanted to tell the real story .
but with only one company , one agency willing to help me -- and that 's only because i knew john bond and richard kirshenbaum for years -- i realized that i would have to go on my own , i 'd have to cut out the middleman and go to the companies myself with all of my team .
so what you suddenly started to realize -- or what i started to realize -- is that when you started having conversations with these companies , the idea of understanding your brand is a universal problem .
i have friends who make great big , giant hollywood films , and i have friends who make little independent films like i make .
and the friends of mine who make big , giant hollywood movies say the reason their films are so successful is because of the brand partners that they have .
and then my friends who make small independent films say , " well , how are we supposed to compete with these big , giant hollywood movies ? "
and the movie is called " the greatest movie ever sold . "
so how specifically will we see ban in the film ?
any time i 'm ready to go , any time i open up my medicine cabinet , you will see ban deodorant .
while anytime i do an interview with someone , i can say , " are you fresh enough for this interview ?
are you ready ? you look a little nervous .
i want to help you calm down .
so maybe you should put some one before the interview . "
so we 'll offer one of these fabulous scents .
whether it 's a " floral fusion " or a " paradise winds , " they 'll have their chance .
we will have them geared for both male or female -- solid , roll-on or stick , whatever it may be .
that 's the two-cent tour .
so now i can answer any of your questions and give you the five-cent tour .
we are a smaller brand .
much like you talked about being a smaller movie , we 're very much a challenger brand .
so we don 't have the budgets that other brands have .
so doing things like this -- you know , remind people about ban -- is kind of why were interested in it .
what are the words that you would use to describe ban ?
ban is blank .
that 's a great question .
superior technology .
technology 's not the way you want to describe something somebody 's putting in their armpit .
we talk about bold , fresh .
i think " fresh " is a great word that really spins this category into the positive , versus " fights odor and wetness . "
it keeps you fresh .
how do we keep you fresher longer -- better freshness , more freshness , three times fresher .
things like that that are more of that positive benefit .
and that 's a multi-million dollar corporation .
what about me ? what about a regular guy ?
i need to go talk to the man on the street , the people who are like me , the regular joes .
they need to tell me about my brand .
how would you guys describe your brand ?
um , my brand ?
i don 't know .
i like really nice clothes .
80 's revival meets skater-punk , unless it 's laundry day .
all right , what is brand gerry ?
unique .
i guess what kind of genre , style i am would be like dark glamor .
i like a lot of black colors , a lot of grays and stuff like that .
but usually i have an accessory , like sunglasses , or i like crystal and things like that too .
if dan were a brand , he might be a classic convertible mercedes benz .
the brand that i am is , i would call it casual fly .
part hippie , part yogi , part brooklyn girl -- i don 't know .
i 'm the pet guy .
i sell pet toys all over the country , all over the world .
so i guess that 's my brand .
in my warped little industry , that 's my brand .
my brand is fedex because i deliver the goods .
failed writer-alcoholic brand .
is that something ?
i 'm a lawyer brand .
i 'm tom .
well we can 't all be brand tom , but i do often find myself at the intersection of dark glamor and casual fly .
and what i realized is i needed an expert .
i needed somebody who could get inside my head , somebody who could really help me understand what they call your " brand personality . "
and so i found a company called olson zaltman in pittsburg .
they 've helped companies like nestle , febreze , hallmark discover that brand personality .
if they could do it for them , surely they could do it for me .
you brought your pictures , right ?
i did . the very first picture is a picture of my family .
so tell me a little bit how it relates to your thoughts and feelings about who you are .
these are the people who shape the way i look at the world .
tell me about this world .
this world ? i think your world is the world that you live in -- like people who are around you , your friends , your family , the way you live your life , the job you do .
all those things stemmed and started from one place , and for me they stemmed and started with my family in west virginia .
what 's the next one you want to talk about ?
the next one : this was the best day ever .
how does this relate to your thoughts and feelings about who you are ?
it 's like , who do i want to be ?
i like things that are different .
i like things that are weird . i like weird things .
tell me about the " why " phase -- what does that do for us ?
what is the machete ? what pupa stage are you in now ?
why is it important to reboot ? what does the red represent ?
tell me a little bit about that part .
... a little more about you that is not who you are .
what are some other metamorphoses that you 've had ?
... doesn 't have to be fear . what kind of roller coaster are you on ?
eeeeee ! no , thank you .
thanks for you patience .
yeah . all right .
yeah , i don 't know what 's going to come of this .
there was a whole lot of crazy going on in there .
the first thing we saw was this idea that you had two distinct , but complementary sides to your brand personality -- the morgan spurlock brand is a mindful / play brand .
those are juxtaposed very nicely together .
and i think there 's almost a paradox with those .
and i think some companies will just focus on one of their strengths or the other instead of focusing on both .
most companies tend to -- and it 's human nature -- to avoid things that they 're not sure of , avoid fear , those elements , and you really embrace those , and you actually turn them into positives for you , and it 's a neat thing to see .
what other brands are like that ?
the first on here is the classic , apple .
and you can see here too , target , wii , mini from the mini coopers , and jetblue .
now there 's playful brands and mindful brands , those things that have come and gone , but a playful , mindful brand is a pretty powerful thing .
a playful , mindful brand . what is your brand ?
if somebody asked you to describe your brand identity , your brand personality , what would you be ?
are you an up attribute ? are you something that gets the blood flowing ?
or are you more of a down attribute ?
are you something that 's a little more calm , reserved , conservative ?
up attributes are things like being playful , being fresh like the fresh prince , contemporary , adventurous , edgy or daring like errol flynn , nimble or agile , profane , domineering , magical or mystical like gandalf .
or are you more of a down attribute ?
are you mindful , sophisticated like 007 ?
are you established , traditional , nurturing , protective , empathetic like the oprah ?
are you reliable , stable , familiar , safe , secure , sacred , contemplative or wise like the dalai lama or yoda ?
over the course of this film , we had 500-plus companies who were up and down companies saying , " no , " they didn 't want any part of this project .
they wanted nothing to do with this film , mainly because they would have no control , they would have no control over the final product .
but we did get 17 brand partners who were willing to relinquish that control , who wanted to be in business with someone as mindful and as playful as myself and who ultimately empowered us to tell stories that normally we wouldn 't be able to tell -- stories that an advertiser would normally never get behind .
they enabled us to tell the story about neuromarketing , as we got into telling the story in this film about how now they 're using mri 's to target the desire centers of your brain for both commercials as well as movie marketing .
we went to san paulo where they have banned outdoor advertising .
in the entire city for the past five years , there 's no billboards , there 's no posters , there 's no fliers , nothing .
and we went to school districts where now companies are making their way into cash-strapped schools all across america .
what 's incredible for me is the projects that i 've gotten the most feedback out of , or i 've had the most success in , are ones where i 've interacted with things directly .
and that 's what these brands did .
they cut out the middleman , they cut out their agencies and said , " maybe these agencies don 't have my best interest in mind .
i 'm going to deal directly with the artist .
i 'm going to work with him to create something different , something that 's going to get people thinking , that 's going to challenge the way we look at the world . "
and how has that been for them ? has it been successful ?
well , since the film premiered at the sundance film festival , let 's take a look .
according to burrelles , the movie premiered in january , and since then -- and this isn 't even the whole thing -- we 've had 900 million media impressions for this film .
that 's literally covering just like a two and a half-week period .
that 's only online -- no print , no tv .
the film hasn 't even been distributed yet .
it 's not even online . it 's not even streaming .
it 's not even been out into other foreign countries yet .
so ultimately , this film has already started to gain a lot of momentum .
and not bad for a project that almost every ad agency we talked to advised their clients not to take part .
what i always believe is that if you take chances , if you take risks , that in those risks will come opportunity .
i believe that when you push people away from that , you 're pushing them more towards failure .
i believe that when you train your employees to be risk averse , then you 're preparing your whole company to be reward challenged .
i feel like that what has to happen moving forward is we need to encourage people to take risks .
we need to encourage people to not be afraid of opportunities that may scare them .
ultimately , moving forward , i think we have to embrace fear .
we 've got to put that bear in a cage .
embrace fear . embrace risk .
one big spoonful at a time , we have to embrace risk .
and ultimately , we have to embrace transparency .
today , more than ever , a little honesty is going to go a long way .
and that being said , through honesty and transparency , my entire talk , " embrace transparency , " has been brought to you by my good friends at emc , who for $ 7,100 bought the naming rights on ebay .
turning big data into big opportunity for organizations all over the world .
emc presents : " embrace transparency . "
thank you very much , guys .
so , morgan , in the name of transparency , what exactly happened to that $ 7,100 ?
that is a fantastic question .
i have in my pocket a check made out to the parent organization to the ted organization , the sapling foundation -- a check for $ 7,100 to be applied toward my attendance for next year 's ted .
my name is amit .
and 18 months ago , i had another job at google , and i pitched this idea of doing something with museums and art to my boss who 's actually here , and she allowed me to do it .
and it took 18 months .
a lot of fun , negotiations and stories , i can tell you , with 17 very interesting museums from nine countries .
but i 'm going to focus on the demo .
there are a lot of stories about why we did this .
i think my personal story is explained very simply on the slide , and it 's access .
and i grew up in india .
i had a great education -- i 'm not complaining -- but i didn 't have access to a lot of these museums and these artworks .
and so when i started traveling and going to these museums , i started learning a lot .
and while working at google , i tried to put this desire to make it more accessible with technology together .
so we formed a team , a great team of people , and we started doing this .
i 'm going to probably get into the demo and then tell you a couple of the interesting things we 've had since launch .
so , simple : you come to googleartproject.com .
you look around at all these museums here .
you 've got the uffizi , you 've got the moma , the hermitage , the rijks , the van gogh .
i 'm going to actually get to one of my favorites , the metropolitan museum of art in new york .
two ways of going in -- very simple .
click and , bang , you 're in this museum .
it doesn 't matter where you are -- bombay , mexico , it doesn 't really matter .
you move around , you have fun .
you want to navigate around the museum ?
open the plan up , and , in one click , jump .
you 're in there , you want to go to the end of the corridor .
keep going . have fun .
explore .
thanks . i haven 't come to the best part .
so now i 'm in front of one of my favorite paintings , " the harvesters " by pieter bruegel at the met .
i see this plus sign .
if the museum has given us the image , you click on it .
now this is one of the images .
so this is all of the meta-data information .
for those of you who are truly interested in art , you can click this -- but i 'm going to click this off right now .
and this is one of these images that we captured in what we call gigapixel technology .
so this image , for example , has close to , i think , around 10 billion pixels .
and i get a lot of people asking me : " what do you get for 10 billion pixels ? "
so i 'm going to try and show you what you really get for 10 billion pixels .
you can zoom around very simply .
you see some fun stuff happening here .
i love this guy ; his expression is priceless .
but then you really want to go deep .
and so i started playing around , and i found something going on over here .
and i was like , " hold on . that sounds interesting . "
went in , and i started noticing that these kids were actually beating something .
i did a little research , spoke to a couple of my contacts at the met , and actually found out that this is a game called squall , which involves beating a goose with a stick on shrove tuesday .
and apparently it was quite popular .
i don 't know why they did it , but i learned something about it .
now just to get really deep in , you can really get to the cracks .
now just to give you some perspective , i 'm going to zoom out so you really see what you get .
here is where we were , and this is the painting .
the best is yet to come -- so in a second .
so now let 's just quickly jump into the moma , again in new york .
so another one of my favorites , " the starry night . "
now the example i showed you was all about finding details .
but what if you want to see brush strokes ?
and what if you want to see how van gogh actually created this masterpiece ?
you zoom in . you really go in .
i 'm going to go to one of my favorite parts in this painting , and i 'm really going to get to the cracks .
this is " the starry night , " i think , never seen like this before .
i 'm going to show you my other favorite feature .
there 's a lot of other stuff here , but i don 't have time .
this is the real cool part . it 's called collections .
any one of you , anybody -- doesn 't matter if you 're rich , if you 're poor , if you have a fancy house -- doesn 't matter .
you can go and create your own museum online -- create your own collection across all these images .
very simply , you go in -- and i 've created this , called the power of zoom -- you can just zoom around .
this is " the ambassadors , " based in the national gallery .
you can annotate the stuff , send it to your friends and really get a conversation going about what you 're feeling when you go through these masterpieces .
so i think , in conclusion , for me , the main thing is that all the amazing stuff here does not really come from google .
it doesn 't , in my opinion , even come from the museums .
i probably shouldn 't say that .
it really comes from these artists .
and that 's been my humbling experience in this .
i mean , i hope in this digital medium that we do justice to their artwork and represent it properly online .
and the biggest question i get asked nowadays is , " did you do this to replicate the experience of going to a museum ? "
and the answer is no .
it 's to supplement the experience .
and that 's it . thank you .
thank you .
this is a representation of your brain , and your brain can be broken into two parts .
there 's the left half , which is the logical side , and then the right half , which is the intuitive .
and so if we had a scale to measure the aptitude of each hemisphere , then we can plot our brain .
and for example , this would be somebody who 's completely logical .
this would be someone who 's entirely intuitive .
so where would you put your brain on this scale ?
some of us may have opted for one of these extremes , but i think for most people in the audience , your brain is something like this -- with a high aptitude in both hemispheres at the same time .
it 's not like they 're mutually exclusive or anything .
you can be logical and intuitive .
and so i consider myself one of these people , along with most of the other experimental quantum physicists , who need a good deal of logic to string together these complex ideas .
but at the same time , we need a good deal of intuition to actually make the experiments work .
how do we develop this intuition ? well we like to play with stuff .
so we go out and play with it , and then we see how it acts , and then we develop our intuition from there .
and really you do the same thing .
so some intuition that you may have developed over the years is that one thing is only in one place at a time .
i mean , it can sound weird to think about one thing being in two different places at the same time , but you weren 't born with this notion , you developed it .
and i remember watching a kid playing on a car stop .
he was just a toddler and he wasn 't very good at it , and he kept falling over .
but i bet playing with this car stop taught him a really valuable lesson , and that 's that large things don 't let you get right past them , and that they stay in one place .
and so this is a great conceptual model to have of the world , unless you 're a particle physicist .
it 'd be a terrible model for a particle physicist , because they don 't play with car stops , they play with these little weird particles .
and when they play with their particles , they find they do all sorts of really weird things -- like they can fly right through walls , or they can be in two different places at the same time .
and so they wrote down all these observations , and they called it the theory of quantum mechanics .
and so that 's where physics was at a few years ago ; you needed quantum mechanics to describe little , tiny particles .
but you didn 't need it to describe the large , everyday objects around us .
this didn 't really sit well with my intuition , and maybe it 's just because i don 't play with particles very often .
well , i play with them sometimes , but not very often .
and i 've never seen them .
i mean , nobody 's ever seen a particle .
but it didn 't sit well with my logical side either .
because if everything is made up of little particles and all the little particles follow quantum mechanics , then shouldn 't everything just follow quantum mechanics ?
i don 't see any reason why it shouldn 't .
and so i 'd feel a lot better about the whole thing if we could somehow show that an everyday object also follows quantum mechanics .
so a few years ago , i set off to do just that .
so i made one .
this is the first object that you can see that has been in a mechanical quantum superposition .
so what we 're looking at here is a tiny computer chip .
and you can sort of see this green dot right in the middle .
and that 's this piece of metal i 'm going to be talking about in a minute .
this is a photograph of the object .
and here i 'll zoom in a little bit . we 're looking right there in the center .
and then here 's a really , really big close-up of the little piece of metal .
so what we 're looking at is a little chunk of metal , and it 's shaped like a diving board , and it 's sticking out over a ledge .
and so i made this thing in nearly the same way as you make a computer chip .
i went into a clean room with a fresh silicon wafer , and then i just cranked away at all the big machines for about 100 hours .
for the last stuff , i had to build my own machine -- to make this swimming pool-shaped hole underneath the device .
this device has the ability to be in a quantum superposition , but it needs a little help to do it .
here , let me give you an analogy .
you know how uncomfortable it is to be in a crowded elevator ?
i mean , when i 'm in an elevator all alone , i do all sorts of weird things , but then other people get on board and i stop doing those things because i don 't want to bother them , or , frankly , scare them .
so quantum mechanics says that inanimate objects feel the same way .
the fellow passengers for inanimate objects are not just people , but it 's also the light shining on it and the wind blowing past it and the heat of the room .
and so we knew , if we wanted to see this piece of metal behave quantum mechanically , we 're going to have to kick out all the other passengers .
and so that 's what we did .
we turned off the lights , and then we put it in a vacuum and sucked out all the air , and then we cooled it down now , all alone in the elevator , the little chunk of metal is free to act however it wanted .
and so we measured its motion .
we found it was moving in really weird ways .
instead of just sitting perfectly still , it was vibrating , and the way it was vibrating was breathing something like this -- like expanding and contracting bellows .
and by giving it a gentle nudge , we were able to make it both vibrate and not vibrate at the same time -- something that 's only allowed with quantum mechanics .
so what i 'm telling you here is something truly fantastic .
what does it mean for one thing to be both vibrating and not vibrating at the same time ?
so let 's think about the atoms .
so in one case : all the trillions of atoms that make up that chunk of metal are sitting still and at the same time those same atoms are moving up and down .
now it 's only at precise times when they align .
the rest of the time they 're delocalized .
that means that every atom is in two different places at the same time , which in turn means the entire chunk of metal is in two different places .
i think this is really cool .
really .
it was worth locking myself in a clean room to do this for all those years because , check this out , the difference in scale between a single atom and that chunk of metal is about the same as the difference between that chunk of metal and you .
so if a single atom can be in two different places at the same time , that chunk of metal can be in two different places , then why not you ?
i mean , this is just my logical side talking .
so imagine if you 're in multiple places at the same time , what would that be like ?
how would your consciousness handle your body being delocalized in space ?
there 's one more part to the story .
it 's when we warmed it up , and we turned on the lights and looked inside the box , we saw that the piece metal was still there in one piece .
and so i had to develop this new intuition , that it seems like all the objects in the elevator are really just quantum objects just crammed into a tiny space .
you hear a lot of talk about how quantum mechanics says that everything is all interconnected .
well , that 's not quite right .
it 's more than that ; it 's deeper .
it 's that those connections , your connections to all the things around you , literally define who you are , and that 's the profound weirdness of quantum mechanics .
thank you .
in 2007 , i decided that we needed to reconceptualize how we thought about economic development .
our new goal should be that when every family thinks about where they want to live and work , they should be able to choose between at least a handful of different cities that were all competing to attract new residents .
now we 're a long way away from that goal right now .
there are billions of people in developing countries who don 't have even a single city that would be willing to welcome them .
but the amazing thing about cities is they 're worth so much more than it costs to build them .
so we could easily supply the world with dozens , maybe hundreds , of new cities .
now this might sound preposterous to you if you 've never thought about new cities .
but just substitute apartment building for cities .
imagine half the people who wanted to be in apartments already had them ; the other half aren 't there yet .
you could try and expand the capacity by doing additions on all the existing apartments .
but you know what you 'd run into is those apartments and the surrounding areas have rules to avoid discomfort and the distractions of construction .
so it 's extremely hard to do all of those additions .
but you could go out someplace brand new , build a brand new apartment building , as long as the rules there were ones that facilitated construction rather than getting in the way .
so i proposed that governments create new reform zones big enough to hold cities and gave them a name : charter cities .
later i learned that at about this same time , javier and octavio were thinking about the challenge of reform in honduras .
they knew that about 75,000 hondurans every year would leave to go to the united states , and they wanted to ask , what could they do to make sure that those people could stay and do the same things in honduras .
at one point , javier said to octavio , " what if we took some of our empty land -- what if we just gave it to an embassy -- give some to the u.s. embassy ; give some to the canadian embassy -- and then if people want to go work under the rules of canada or under the rules of the united states , they can go get jobs , do everything they do on those embassy grounds that they would otherwise have to go to canada or the u.s. to do ? "
in the summer of 2009 , honduras went through a wrenching constitutional crisis .
at the next regularly scheduled election , pepe lobo won in a landslide on a platform that promised reform , but reconciliation as well .
he asked octavio to be his chief of staff .
meanwhile , i was getting ready to give a talk at tedglobal .
through a process of refinement , trial and error , a lot of user testing , i tried to boil this complicated concept of charter city down to the bare essentials .
the first point was the importance of rules , like those rules that say you can 't come in and disturb all the existing apartment holders .
we pay a lot of attention to new technologies , but it takes technologies and rules to get progress , and it 's usually the rules that hold us back .
in the fall of 2010 , a friend from guatemala sent octavio a link to the tedtalk .
he showed it to javier .
they called me .
they said , " let 's present this to the leaders of our country . "
so in december we met in miami , in a hotel conference room .
i tried to explain this point about how valuable cities are , how much more valuable they are than they cost .
and i used this slide showing how valuable the raw land is in a place like new york city : notice , land that 's worth thousands of dollars , in some cases , per square meter .
but it was a fairly abstract discussion , and at some point when there was a pause , octavio said , " paul , maybe we could watch the tedtalk . "
so the tedtalk laid out in very simple terms , a charter city is a place where you start with uninhabited land , a charter that specifies the rules that will apply there and then a chance for people to opt in , to go live under those rules or not .
so i was asked by the president of honduras who said that we need to do this project , this is important , this could be the way forward for our country .
i was asked to come to tegucigalpa and talk again on january fourth and fifth .
so i presented another fact-filled lecture that included a slide like this , which tried to make the point that , if you want to create a lot of value in a city , it has to be very big .
this is a picture of denver , and the outline is the new airport that was built in denver .
this airport alone covers more than 100 square kilometers .
so i was trying to persuade the hondurans , if you build a new city , you 've got to start with a site that 's at least 1,000 square kilometers .
that 's more than 250 hundred-thousand acres .
everybody applauded politely .
the faces in the audience were very serious and attentive .
the leader of the congress came up on stage and said , " professor romer , thank you very much for your lecture , but maybe we could watch the tedtalk .
i 've got it here on my laptop . "
so i sat down , and they played the tedtalk .
and it got to the essence , which is that a new city could offer new choices for people .
there would be a choice of a city which you could go to which could be in honduras , instead of hundreds of miles away in the north .
and it also involved new choices for leaders .
because the leaders in the government there in honduras would need help from partner countries , who could benefit from partner countries who help them set up the rules in this charter and the enforcement , so everybody can trust that the charter really will be enforced .
and the insight of president lobo was that that assurance of enforcement that i was thinking about as a way to get the foreign investors to come in and build the city could be equally important for all the different parties in honduras who had suffered for so many years from fear and distrust .
we went and looked at a site .
this picture 's from there .
it easily could hold a thousand square kilometers .
and shortly thereafter , on january 19th , they voted in the congress to amend their constitution to have a constitutional provision that allows for special development regions .
in a country which had just gone through this wrenching crisis , the vote in the congress in favor of this constitutional amendment was 124 to one .
all parties , all factions in society , backed this .
to be part of the constitution , you actually have to pass it twice in the congress .
on february 17th they passed it again with another vote of 114 to one .
immediately after that vote , on february 21st to the 24th , a delegation of about 30 hondurans went to the two places in the world that are most interested in getting into the city building business .
one is south korea .
this is a picture of a big , new city center that 's being built in south korea -- bigger than downtown boston .
everything you see there was built in four years , after they spent four years getting the permits .
the other place that 's very interested in city building is singapore .
they 've actually built two cities already in china and are preparing the third .
so if you think about this practically , here 's where we are .
they 've got a site ; they 're already thinking about this site for the second city .
they 're putting in place a legal system that could allow for managers to come in , and also an external legal system .
one country has already volunteered to let its supreme court be the court of final appeal for the new judicial system there .
there 's designers and builders of cities who are very interested .
they even can bring with them some financing .
but the one thing you know they 've already solved is that there 's lots of tenants .
there 's lots of businesses that would like to locate in the americas , especially in a place with a free trade zone , and there 's lots of people who 'd like to go there .
around the world , there 's 700 million people who say they 'd like to move permanently someplace else right now .
there 's a million a year who leave latin america to go to the united states .
many of these are a father who has to leave his family behind to go get a job -- sometimes a single mother who has to get enough money to even pay for food or clothing .
sadly , sometimes there are even children who are trying to get reunited with their parents that they haven 't seen , in some cases , for a decade .
so what kind of an idea is it to think about building a brand new city in honduras ?
or to build a dozen of these , or a hundred of these , around the world ?
what kind of an idea is it to think about insisting that every family have a choice of several cities that are competing to attract new residents ?
this is an idea worth spreading .
and my friends from honduras asked me to say thank you , ted .
do you know how many choices you make in a typical day ?
do you know how many choices you make in typical week ?
i recently did a survey with over 2,000 americans , and the average number of choices that the typical american reports making is about 70 in a typical day .
there was also recently a study done with ceos in which they followed ceos around for a whole week .
and these scientists simply documented all the various tasks that these ceos engaged in and how much time they spent engaging in making decisions related to these tasks .
and they found that the average ceo engaged in about 139 tasks in a week .
each task was made up of many , many , many sub-choices of course .
50 percent of their decisions were made in nine minutes or less .
only about 12 percent of the decisions did they make an hour or more of their time .
think about your own choices .
do you know how many choices make it into your nine minute category versus your one hour category ?
how well do you think you 're doing at managing those choices ?
today i want to talk about one of the biggest modern day choosing problems that we have , which is the choice overload problem .
i want to talk about the problem and some potential solutions .
now as i talk about this problem , i 'm going to have some questions for you and i 'm going to want to know your answers .
so when i ask you a question , since i 'm blind , only raise your hand if you want to burn off some calories .
otherwise , when i ask you a question , and if your answer is yes , so for my first question for you today : are you guys ready to hear about the choice overload problem ?
thank you .
so when i was a graduate student at stanford university , i used to go to this very , very upscale grocery store ; at least at that time it was truly upscale .
it was a store called draeger 's .
now this store , it was almost like going to an amusement park .
they had 250 different kinds of mustards and vinegars and over 500 different kinds of fruits and vegetables and more than two dozen different kinds of bottled water -- and this was during a time when we actually used to drink tap water .
i used to love going to this store , but on one occasion i asked myself , well how come you never buy anything ?
here 's their olive oil aisle .
they had over 75 different kinds of olive oil , including those that were in a locked case that came from thousand-year-old olive trees .
so i one day decided to pay a visit to the manager , and i asked the manager , " is this model of offering people all this choice really working ? "
and he pointed to the busloads of tourists that would show up everyday , with cameras ready usually .
we decided to do a little experiment , and we picked jam for our experiment .
here 's their jam aisle .
they had 348 different kinds of jam .
we set up a little tasting booth right near the entrance of the store .
we there put out six different flavors of jam or 24 different flavors of jam , and we looked at two things : first , in which case were people more likely to stop , sample some jam ?
more people stopped when there were 24 , about 60 percent , than when there were six , about 40 percent .
the next thing we looked at is in which case were people more likely to buy a jar of jam .
now we see the opposite effect .
of the people who stopped when there were 24 , only three percent of them actually bought a jar of jam .
of the people who stopped when there were six , well now we saw that 30 percent of them actually bought a jar of jam .
now if you do the math , people were at least six times more likely to buy a jar of jam if they encountered six than if they encountered 24 .
now choosing not to buy a jar of jam is probably good for us -- at least it 's good for our waistlines -- but it turns out that this choice overload problem affects us even in very consequential decisions .
we choose not to choose , even when it goes against our best self-interests .
so now for the topic of today : financial savings .
now i 'm going to describe to you a study i did with gur huberman , emir kamenica , wei jang where we looked at the retirement savings decisions of nearly a million americans from about 650 plans all in the u.s .
and what we looked at was whether the number of fund offerings available in a retirement savings plan , the 401 plan , does that affect people 's likelihood to save more for tomorrow .
and what we found was that indeed there was a correlation .
so in these plans , we had about 657 plans that ranged from offering people anywhere from two to 59 different fund offerings .
and what we found was that , the more funds offered , indeed , there was less participation rate .
so if you look at the extremes , those plans that offered you two funds , participation rates were around in the mid-70s -- still not as high as we want it to be .
in those plans that offered nearly 60 funds , participation rates have now dropped to about the 60th percentile .
now it turns out that even if you do choose to participate when there are more choices present , even then , it has negative consequences .
so for those people who did choose to participate , the more choices available , the more likely people were to completely avoid stocks or equity funds .
the more choices available , the more likely they were to put all their money in pure money market accounts .
now neither of these extreme decisions are the kinds of decisions that any of us would recommend for people when you 're considering their future financial well-being .
well , over the past decade , we have observed three main negative consequences to offering people more and more choices .
they 're more likely to delay choosing -- procrastinate even when it goes against their best self-interest .
they 're more likely to make worse choices -- worse financial choices , medical choices .
they 're more likely to choose things that make them less satisfied , even when they do objectively better .
the main reason for this is because , we might enjoy gazing at those giant walls of mayonnaises , mustards , vinegars , jams , but we can 't actually do the math of comparing and contrasting and actually picking from that stunning display .
so what i want to propose to you today are four simple techniques -- techniques that we have tested in one way or another in different research venues -- that you can easily apply in your businesses .
the first : cut .
you 've heard it said before , but it 's never been more true than today , that less is more .
people are always upset when i say , " cut . "
they 're always worried they 're going to lose shelf space .
but in fact , what we 're seeing more and more is that if you are willing to cut , get rid of those extraneous redundant options , well there 's an increase in sales , there 's a lowering of costs , there is an improvement of the choosing experience .
when proctor & amp ; gamble went from 26 different kinds of head & amp ; shoulders to 15 , they saw an increase in sales by 10 percent .
when the golden cat corporation got rid of their 10 worst-selling cat litter products , they saw an increase in profits by 87 percent -- a function of both increase in sales and lowering of costs .
you know , the average grocery store today offers you 45,000 products .
the typical walmart today offers you 100,000 products .
but the ninth largest retailer , the ninth biggest retailer in the world today is aldi , and it offers you only 1,400 products -- one kind of canned tomato sauce .
now in the financial savings world , i think one of the best examples that has recently come out on how to best manage the choice offerings has actually been something that david laibson was heavily involved in designing , which was the program that they have at harvard .
every single harvard employee is now automatically enrolled in a lifecycle fund .
for those people who actually want to choose , they 're given 20 funds , not 300 or more funds .
you know , often , people say , " i don 't know how to cut .
they 're all important choices . "
and the first thing i do is i ask the employees , " tell me how these choices are different from one another .
and if your employees can 't tell them apart , neither can your consumers . "
now before we started our session this afternoon , i had a chat with gary .
and gary said that he would be willing to offer people in this audience an all-expenses-paid free vacation to the most beautiful road in the world .
here 's a description of the road .
and i 'd like you to read it .
and now i 'll give you a few seconds to read it and then i want you to clap your hands if you 're ready to take gary up on his offer .
okay . anybody who 's ready to take him up on his offer .
is that all ?
all right , let me show you some more about this .
you guys knew there was a trick , didn 't you .
now who 's ready to go on this trip .
i think i might have actually heard more hands .
all right .
now in fact , you had objectively more information the first time around than the second time around , but i would venture to guess that you felt that it was more real the second time around .
because the pictures made it feel more real to you .
which brings me to the second technique for handling the choice overload problem , which is concretization .
that in order for people to understand the differences between the choices , they have to be able to understand the consequences associated with each choice , and that the consequences need to be felt in a vivid sort of way , in a very concrete way .
why do people spend an average of 15 to 30 percent more when they use an atm card or a credit card as opposed to cash ?
because it doesn 't feel like real money .
and it turns out that making it feel more concrete can actually be a very positive tool to use in getting people to save more .
so a study that i did with shlomo benartzi and alessandro previtero , we did a study with people at ing -- employees that are all working at ing -- and now these people were all in a session where they 're doing enrollment for their 401 plan .
and during that session , we kept the session exactly the way it used to be , but we added one little thing .
the one little thing we added was we asked people to just think about all the positive things that would happen in your life if you saved more .
by doing that simple thing , there was an increase in enrollment by 20 percent and there was an increase in the amount of people willing to save or the amount that they were willing to put down into their savings account by four percent .
the third technique : categorization .
we can handle more categories than we can handle choices .
so for example , here 's a study we did in a magazine aisle .
it turns out that in wegmans grocery stores up and down the northeast corridor , the magazine aisles range anywhere from 331 different kinds of magazines all the way up to 664 .
but you know what ?
if i show you 600 magazines and i divide them up into 10 categories , versus i show you 400 magazines and divide them up into 20 categories , you believe that i have given you more choice and a better choosing experience if i gave you the 400 than if i gave you the 600 .
because the categories tell me how to tell them apart .
here are two different jewelry displays .
one is called " jazz " and the other one is called " swing . "
if you think the display on the left is swing and the display on the right is jazz , clap your hands .
okay , there 's some .
if you think the one on the left is jazz and the one on the right is swing , clap your hands .
okay , a bit more .
now it turns out you 're right .
the one on the left is jazz and the one on the right is swing , but you know what ?
this is a highly useless categorization scheme .
the categories need to say something to the chooser , not the choice-maker .
and you often see that problem when it comes down to those long lists of all these funds .
who are they actually supposed to be informing ?
my fourth technique : condition for complexity .
it turns out we can actually handle a lot more information than we think we can , we 've just got to take it a little easier .
we have to gradually increase the complexity .
i 'm going to show you one example of what i 'm talking about .
let 's take a very , very complicated decision : buying a car .
here 's a german car manufacturer that gives you the opportunity to completely custom make your car .
you 've got to make 60 different decisions , completely make up your car .
now these decisions vary in the number of choices that they offer per decision .
car colors , exterior car colors -- i 've got 56 choices .
engines , gearshift -- four choices .
so now what i 'm going to do is i 'm going to vary the order in which these decisions appear .
so half of the customers are going to go from high choice , 56 car colors , to low choice , four gearshifts .
the other half of the customers are going to go from low choice , four gearshifts , to 56 car colors , high choice .
what am i going to look at ?
how engaged you are .
if you keep hitting the default button per decision , that means you 're getting overwhelmed , that means i 'm losing you .
what you find is the people who go from high choice to low choice , they 're hitting that default button over and over and over again .
we 're losing them .
they go from low choice to high choice , they 're hanging in there .
it 's the same information . it 's the same number of choices .
the only thing that i have done is i have varied the order in which that information is presented .
if i start you off easy , i learn how to choose .
even though choosing gearshift doesn 't tell me anything about my preferences for interior decor , it still prepares me for how to choose .
it also gets me excited about this big product that i 'm putting together , so i 'm more willing to be motivated to be engaged .
so let me recap .
i have talked about four techniques for mitigating the problem of choice overload -- cut -- get rid of the extraneous alternatives ; concretize -- make it real ; categorize -- we can handle more categories , less choices ; condition for complexity .
all of these techniques that i 'm describing to you today are designed to help you manage your choices -- better for you , you can use them on yourself , better for the people that you are serving .
because i believe that the key to getting the most from choice is to be choosy about choosing .
and the more we 're able to be choosy about choosing the better we will be able to practice the art of choosing .
thank you very much .
hi . i 'm kevin allocca , i 'm the trends manager at youtube , and i professionally watch youtube videos .
it 's true .
so we 're going to talk a little bit today about how videos go viral and then why that even matters .
we all want to be stars -- celebrities , singers , comedians -- and when i was younger , that seemed so very , very hard to do .
but now web video has made it so that any of us or any of the creative things that we do can become completely famous in a part of our world 's culture .
any one of you could be famous on the internet by next saturday .
but there are over 48 hours of video uploaded to youtube every minute .
and of that , only a tiny percentage ever goes viral and gets tons of views and becomes a cultural moment .
so how does it happen ?
three things : tastemakers , communities of participation and unexpectedness .
all right , let 's go .
oh , my god . oh , my god .
oh , my god !
wooo !
ohhhhh , wowwww !
last year , bear vasquez posted this video that he had shot outside his home in yosemite national park .
in 2010 , it was viewed 23 million times .
this is a chart of what it looked like when it first became popular last summer .
but he didn 't actually set out to make a viral video , bear .
he just wanted to share a rainbow .
because that 's what you do when your name is yosemite mountain bear .
and he had posted lots of nature videos in fact .
and this video had actually been posted all the way back in january .
so what happened here ?
jimmy kimmel actually .
jimmy kimmel posted this tweet that would eventually propel the video to be as popular as it would become .
because tastemakers like jimmy kimmel introduce us to new and interesting things and bring them to a larger audience .
it 's friday , friday . gotta get down on friday . everybody 's looking forward to the weekend , weekend . friday , friday . gettin ' down on friday . so you didn 't think that we could actually have this conversation without talking about this video i hope .
rebecca black 's " friday " is one of the most popular videos of the year .
it 's been seen nearly 200 million times this year .
this is a chart of what it looked like .
and similar to " double rainbow , " it seems to have just sprouted up out of nowhere .
so what happened on this day ?
well it was a friday , this is true .
and if you 're wondering about those other spikes , those are also fridays .
but what about this day , this one particular friday ?
well tosh.0 picked it up , a lot of blogs starting writing about .
michael j. nelson from mystery science theater was one of the first people to post a joke about the video on twitter .
but what 's important is that an individual or a group of tastemakers took a point of view and they shared that with a larger audience , accelerating the process .
and so then this community formed of people who shared this big inside joke and they started talking about it and doing things with it .
and now there are 10,000 parodies of " friday " on youtube .
even in the first seven days , there was one parody for every other day of the week .
unlike the one-way entertainment of the 20th century , this community participation is how we become a part of the phenomenon -- either by spreading it or by doing something new with it .
so " nyan cat " is a looped animation with looped music .
it 's this , just like this .
it 's been viewed nearly 50 million times this year .
and if you think that that is weird , you should know that there is a three-hour version of this that 's been viewed four million times .
even cats were watching this video .
cats were watching other cats watch this video .
but what 's important here is the creativity that it inspired amongst this techie , geeky internet culture .
there were remixes .
someone made an old timey version .
and then it went international .
an entire remix community sprouted up that brought it from being just a stupid joke to something that we can all actually be a part of .
because we don 't just enjoy now , we participate .
and who could have predicted any of this ?
who could have predicted " double rainbow " or rebecca black or " nyan cat ? "
what scripts could you have written that would have contained this in it ?
in a world where over two days of video get uploaded every minute , only that which is truly unique and unexpected can stand out in the way that these things have .
when a friend of mine told me that i needed to see this great video about a guy protesting bicycle fines in new york city , i admit i wasn 't very interested .
so i got a ticket for not riding in the bike lane , but often there are obstructions that keep you from properly riding in the bike lane .
by being totally surprising and humorous , casey niestat got his funny idea and point seen five million times .
and so this approach holds for anything new that we do creatively .
and so it all brings us to one big question ...
what does this mean ?
ohhhh .
what does it mean ?
tastemakers , creative participating communities , complete unexpectedness , these are characteristics of a new kind of media and a new kind of culture where anyone has access and the audience defines the popularity .
i mean , as mentioned earlier , one of the biggest stars in the world right now , justin bieber , got his start on youtube .
no one has to green-light your idea .
and we all now feel some ownership in our own pop culture .
and these are not characteristics of old media , and they 're barely true of the media of today , but they will define the entertainment of the future .
thank you .
how can i speak in 10 minutes about the bonds of women over three generations , about how the astonishing strength of those bonds took hold in the life of a four-year-old girl huddled with her young sister , her mother and her grandmother for five days and nights in a small boat in the china sea more than 30 years ago , bonds that took hold in the life of that small girl and never let go -- that small girl now living in san francisco and speaking to you today ?
this is not a finished story .
it is a jigsaw puzzle still being put together .
let me tell you about some of the pieces .
imagine the first piece : a man burning his life 's work .
he is a poet , a playwright , a man whose whole life had been balanced on the single hope of his country 's unity and freedom .
imagine him as the communists enter saigon , confronting the fact that his life had been a complete waste .
words , for so long his friends , now mocked him .
he retreated into silence .
he died broken by history .
he is my grandfather .
i never knew him in real life .
but our lives are much more than our memories .
my grandmother never let me forget his life .
my duty was not to allow it to have been in vain , and my lesson was to learn that , yes , history tried to crush us , but we endured .
the next piece of the jigsaw is of a boat in the early dawn slipping silently out to sea .
my mother , mai , was 18 when her father died -- already in an arranged marriage , already with two small girls .
for her , life had distilled itself into one task : the escape of her family and a new life in australia .
it was inconceivable to her that she would not succeed .
so after a four-year saga that defies fiction , a boat slipped out to sea disguised as a fishing vessel .
all the adults knew the risks .
the greatest fear was of pirates , rape and death .
like most adults on the boat , my mother carried a small bottle of poison .
if we were captured , first my sister and i , then she and my grandmother would drink .
my first memories are from the boat -- the steady beat of the engine , the bow dipping into each wave , the vast and empty horizon .
i don 't remember the pirates who came many times , but were bluffed by the bravado of the men on our boat , or the engine dying and failing to start for six hours .
but i do remember the lights on the oil rig off the malaysian coast and the young man who collapsed and died , the journey 's end too much for him , and the first apple i tasted , given to me by the men on the rig .
no apple has ever tasted the same .
after three months in a refugee camp , we landed in melbourne .
and the next piece of the jigsaw is about four women across three generations shaping a new life together .
we settled in footscray , a working-class suburb whose demographic is layers of immigrants .
unlike the settled middle-class suburbs , whose existence i was oblivious of , there was no sense of entitlement in footscray .
the smells from shop doors were from the rest of the world .
and the snippets of halting english were exchanged between people who had one thing in common , they were starting again .
my mother worked on farms , then on a car assembly line , working six days , double shifts .
somehow she found time to study english and gain it qualifications .
we were poor .
all the dollars were allocated and extra tuition in english and mathematics was budgeted for regardless of what missed out , which was usually new clothes ; they were always secondhand .
two pairs of stockings for school , each to hide the holes in the other .
a school uniform down to the ankles , because it had to last for six years .
and there were rare but searing chants of " slit-eye " and the occasional graffiti : " asian , go home . "
go home to where ?
something stiffened inside me .
there was a gathering of resolve and a quiet voice saying , " i will bypass you . "
my mother , my sister and i slept in the same bed .
my mother was exhausted each night , but we told one another about our day and listened to the movements of my grandmother around the house .
my mother suffered from nightmares all about the boat .
and my job was to stay awake until her nightmares came so i could wake her .
she opened a computer store then studied to be a beautician and opened another business .
and the women came with their stories about men who could not make the transition , angry and inflexible , and troubled children caught between two worlds .
grants and sponsors were sought .
centers were established .
i lived in parallel worlds .
in one , i was the classic asian student , relentless in the demands that i made on myself .
in the other , i was enmeshed in lives that were precarious , tragically scarred by violence , drug abuse and isolation .
but so many over the years were helped .
and for that work , when i was a final year law student , i was chosen as the young australian of the year .
and i was catapulted from one piece of the jigsaw to another , and their edges didn 't fit .
tan le , anonymous footscray resident , was now tan le , refugee and social activist , invited to speak in venues she had never heard of and into homes whose existence she could never have imagined .
i didn 't know the protocols .
i didn 't know how to use the cutlery .
i didn 't know how to talk about wine .
i didn 't know how to talk about anything .
i wanted to retreat to the routines and comfort of life in an unsung suburb -- a grandmother , a mother and two daughters ending each day as they had for almost 20 years , telling one another the story of their day and falling asleep , the three of us still in the same bed .
i told my mother i couldn 't do it .
she reminded me that i was now the same age she had been when we boarded the boat .
no had never been an option .
" just do it , " she said , " and don 't be what you 're not . "
so i spoke out on youth unemployment and education and the neglect of the marginalized and the disenfranchised .
and the more candidly i spoke , the more i was asked to speak .
i met people from all walks of life , so many of them doing the thing they loved , living on the frontiers of possibility .
and even though i finished my degree , i realized i could not settle into a career in law .
there had to be another piece of the jigsaw .
and i realized at the same time that it is okay to be an outsider , a recent arrival , new on the scene -- and not just okay , but something to be thankful for , perhaps a gift from the boat .
because being an insider can so easily mean collapsing the horizons , can so easily mean accepting the presumptions of your province .
i have stepped outside my comfort zone enough now to know that , yes , the world does fall apart , but not in the way that you fear .
possibilities that would not have been allowed were outrageously encouraged .
there was an energy there , an implacable optimism , a strange mixture of humility and daring .
so i followed my hunches .
i gathered around me a small team of people for whom the label " it can 't be done " was an irresistible challenge .
for a year we were penniless .
at the end of each day , i made a huge pot of soup which we all shared .
we worked well into each night .
most of our ideas were crazy , but a few were brilliant , and we broke through .
i made the decision to move to the u.s .
after only one trip .
my hunches again .
three months later i had relocated , and the adventure has continued .
before i close though , let me tell you about my grandmother .
she grew up at a time when confucianism was the social norm and the local mandarin was the person who mattered .
life hadn 't changed for centuries .
her father died soon after she was born .
her mother raised her alone .
at 17 she became the second wife of a mandarin whose mother beat her .
with no support from her husband , she caused a sensation by taking him to court and prosecuting her own case , and a far greater sensation when she won .
" it can 't be done " was shown to be wrong .
i was taking a shower in a hotel room in sydney the moment she died 600 miles away in melbourne .
i looked through the shower screen and saw her standing on the other side .
i knew she had come to say goodbye .
my mother phoned minutes later .
a few days later , we went to a buddhist temple in footscray and sat around her casket .
we told her stories and assured her that we were still with her .
at midnight the monk came and told us he had to close the casket .
my mother asked us to feel her hand .
she asked the monk , " why is it that her hand is so warm and the rest of her is so cold ? "
" because you have been holding it since this morning , " he said .
" you have not let it go . "
if there is a sinew in our family , it runs through the women .
given who we were and how life had shaped us , we can now see that the men who might have come into our lives would have thwarted us .
defeat would have come too easily .
now i would like to have my own children , and i wonder about the boat .
who could ever wish it on their own ?
yet i am afraid of privilege , of ease , of entitlement .
can i give them a bow in their lives , dipping bravely into each wave , the unperturbed and steady beat of the engine , the vast horizon that guarantees nothing ?
i don 't know .
but if i could give it and still see them safely through , i would .
and also , tan 's mother is here today in the fourth or fifth row .
i 'm here to share my photography .
or is it photography ?
because , of course , this is a photograph that you can 't take with your camera .
yet , my interest in photography started as i got my first digital camera at the age of 15 .
it mixed with my earlier passion for drawing , but it was a bit different , because using the camera , the process was in the planning instead .
and when you take a photograph with a camera , the process ends when you press the trigger .
so to me it felt like photography was more about being at the right place and the right time .
i felt like anyone could do that .
so i wanted to create something different , something where the process starts when you press the trigger .
photos like this : construction going on along a busy road .
but it has an unexpected twist .
and despite that , it retains a level of realism .
or photos like these -- both dark and colorful , but all with a common goal of retaining the level of realism .
when i say realism , i mean photo-realism .
because , of course , it 's not something you can capture really , but i always want it to look like it could have been captured somehow as a photograph .
photos where you will need a brief moment to think to figure out the trick .
so it 's more about capturing an idea than about capturing a moment really .
but what 's the trick that makes it look realistic ?
is it something about the details or the colors ?
is it something about the light ?
what creates the illusion ?
sometimes the perspective is the illusion .
but in the end , it comes down to how we interpret the world and how it can be realized on a two-dimensional surface .
it 's not really what is realistic , it 's what we think looks realistic really .
so i think the basics are quite simple .
i just see it as a puzzle of reality where you can take different pieces of reality and put it together to create alternate reality .
and let me show you a simple example .
here we have three perfectly imaginable physical objects , something we all can relate to living in a three-dimensional world .
but combined in a certain way , they can create something that still looks three-dimensional , like it could exist .
but at the same time , we know it can 't .
so we trick our brains , because our brain simply doesn 't accept the fact that it doesn 't really make sense .
and i see the same process with combining photographs .
it 's just really about combining different realities .
so the things that make a photograph look realistic , i think it 's the things that we don 't even think about , the things all around us in our daily lives .
but when combining photographs , this is really important to consider , because otherwise it just looks wrong somehow .
so i would like to say that there are three simple rules to follow to achieve a realistic result .
as you can see , these images aren 't really special .
but combined , they can create something like this .
so the first rule is that photos combined should have the same perspective .
secondly , photos combined should have the same type of light .
and these two images both fulfill these two requirements -- shot at the same height and in the same type of light .
the third one is about making it impossible to distinguish where the different images begin and end by making it seamless .
make it impossible to say how the image actually was composed .
so by matching color , contrast and brightness in the borders between the different images , adding photographic defects like depth of field , desaturated colors and noise , we erase the borders between the different images and make it look like one single image , despite the fact that one image can contain hundreds of layers basically .
so here 's another example .
one might think that this is just an image of a landscape and the lower part is what 's manipulated .
but this image is actually entirely composed of photographs from different locations .
i personally think that it 's easier to actually create a place than to find a place , because then you don 't need to compromise with the ideas in your head .
but it does require a lot of planning .
and getting this idea during winter , i knew that i had several months to plan it , to find the different locations for the pieces of the puzzle basically .
so for example , the fish was captured on a fishing trip .
the shores are from a different location .
the underwater part was captured in a stone pit .
and yeah , i even turned the house on top of the island red to make it look more swedish .
so to achieve a realistic result , i think it comes down to planning .
it always starts with a sketch , an idea .
then it 's about combining the different photographs .
and here every piece is very well planned .
and if you do a good job capturing the photos , the result can be quite beautiful and also quite realistic .
so all the tools are out there , and the only thing that limits us is our imagination .
thank you .
i would like to talk to you about why many e-health projects fail .
and i really think that the most important thing of it is that we stopped listening to patients .
and one of the things we did at radboud university is we appointed a chief listening officer .
not in a very scientific way -- she puts up a little cup of coffee or cup of tea and asks patients , family , relatives , " what 's up ?
how could we help you ? "
and we think , we like to think , that this is one of the major problems why all -- maybe not all -- but most of the e-health projects fail , since we stopped listening .
this is my wifi scale . it 's a very simple thing .
it 's got one knob , on / off .
and every morning i hop on it .
and yes , i 've got a challenge , as you might see .
and i put my challenge on 95 kg .
but the thing is that it 's made this simple that whenever i hop on , it sends my data through google health as well .
and it 's collected by my general practitioner as well , so he can see what 's my problem in weight , not on the very moment that i need cardiologic support or something like it , but also looking backward .
but there 's another thing .
as some of you might know , i 've got more than 4,000 followers on twitter .
so every morning i hop on my wifi scale and before i 'm in my car , people start talking to me , " i think you need a light lunch today , lucien . "
but that 's the nicest thing that could happen , since this is peer pressure , peer pressure used to help patients -- since this could be used for obesity , it could be used to stop smoking in patients .
but on the other hand , it also could be used to get people from out of their chairs and try to work together in some kind of gaming activity to get more control of their health .
as of next week , it will soon be available .
there will be this little blood pressure meter connected to an iphone or something or other .
and people will be able , from their homes , to take their blood pressure , send it into their doctor and eventually share it with others , for instance , for over a hundred dollars .
and this is the point where patients get into position and can collect , not only their own control again , be captain of their own ship , but also can help us in health care due to the challenges that we face , like health care cost explosion , doubled demand and things like that .
make techniques that are easy to use and start with this to embrace patients in the team .
and you can do this with techniques like this , but also by crowd-sourcing .
and one of the things we did i would like to share with you introduced by a little video .
we 've all got navigation controls in our car .
we maybe even [ have ] it in our cellphone .
we know perfectly where all the atms are about the city of maastricht .
the other thing is we know where all the gas stations are .
and sure , we could find fast food chains .
but where would be the nearest aed to help this patient ?
we asked around and nobody knew .
nobody knew where the nearest life-saving aed was to be obtained right now .
so what we did , we crowdsourced the netherlands .
we set up a website and asked the crowd , " if you see an aed , please submit it , tell us where it is , tell us when it 's open , " since sometimes in office hours sometimes it 's closed , of course .
and over 10,000 aeds already in the netherlands already have been submitted .
the next step we took was to find the applications for it .
and we built an ipad application .
we made an application for layar , augmented reality , to find these aeds .
and whenever you are in a city like maastricht and somebody collapses , you can use your iphone , and within the next weeks also run your microsoft cellphone , to find the nearest aed which can save lives .
and as of today , we would like to introduce this , not only as aed4eu , which is what the product is called , but also aed4us .
and we would like to start this on a worldwide level .
and [ we 're ] asking all of our colleagues in the rest of the world , colleague universities , to help us to find and work and act like a hub to crowd-source all these aeds all around the world .
that whenever you 're on holiday and somebody collapses , might it be your own relative or someone just in front of you , you can find this .
the other thing we would like to ask is of companies also all over the world that will be able to help us validate these aeds .
these might be courier services or cable guys for instance , just to see whether the aed that 's submitted still is in place .
so please help us on this one and try to make not only health a little bit better , but take control of it .
thank you .
today i 'm going to talk about unexpected discoveries .
now i work in the solar technology industry .
and my small startup is looking to force ourselves into the environment by paying attention to ...
... paying attention to crowd-sourcing .
it 's just a quick video of what we do .
huh . hang on a moment .
it might take a moment to load .
we 'll just -- we can just skip -- i 'll just skip through the video instead ...
no .
this is not ...
okay .
solar technology is ...
oh , that 's all my time ?
okay . thank you very much .
so a couple of years ago i started a program to try to get the rockstar tech and design people to take a year off and work in the one environment that represents pretty much everything they 're supposed to hate ; we have them work in government .
the program is called code for america , and it 's a little bit like a peace corps for geeks .
we select a few fellows every year and we have them work with city governments .
instead of sending them off into the third world , we send them into the wilds of city hall .
and there they make great apps , they work with city staffers .
but really what they 're doing is they 're showing what 's possible with technology today .
so meet al .
al is a fire hydrant in the city of boston .
here it kind of looks like he 's looking for a date , but what he 's really looking for is for someone to shovel him out when he gets snowed in , because he knows he 's not very good at fighting fires when he 's covered in four feet of snow .
now how did he come to be looking for help in this very unique manner ?
we had a team of fellows in boston last year through the code for america program .
they were there in february , and it snowed a lot in february last year .
and they noticed that the city never gets to digging out these fire hydrants .
but one fellow in particular , a guy named erik michaels-ober , noticed something else , and that 's that citizens are shoveling out sidewalks right in front of these things .
so he did what any good developer would do , he wrote an app .
it 's a cute little app where you can adopt a fire hydrant .
so you agree to dig it out when it snows .
if you do , you get to name it , and he called the first one al .
and if you don 't , someone can steal it from you .
so it 's got cute little game dynamics on it .
this is a modest little app .
it 's probably the smallest of the 21 apps that the fellows wrote last year .
but it 's doing something that no other government technology does .
it 's spreading virally .
there 's a guy in the i.t. department of the city of honolulu who saw this app and realized that he could use it , not for snow , but to get citizens to adopt tsunami sirens .
it 's very important that these tsunami sirens work , but people steal the batteries out of them .
so he 's getting citizens to check on them .
and then seattle decided to use it to get citizens to clear out clogged storm drains .
and chicago just rolled it out to get people to sign up to shovel sidewalks when it snows .
so we now know of nine cities that are planning to use this .
and this has spread just frictionlessly , organically , naturally .
if you know anything about government technology , you know that this isn 't how it normally goes .
procuring software usually takes a couple of years .
we had a team that worked on a project in boston last year that took three people about two and a half months .
it was a way that parents could figure out which were the right public schools for their kids .
we were told afterward that if that had gone through normal channels , it would have taken at least two years and it would have cost about two million dollars .
and that 's nothing .
there is one project in the california court system right now that so far cost taxpayers two billion dollars , and it doesn 't work .
and there are projects like this at every level of government .
so an app that takes a couple of days to write and then spreads virally , that 's sort of a shot across the bow to the institution of government .
it suggests how government could work better -- not more like a private company , as many people think it should .
and not even like a tech company , but more like the internet itself .
and that means permissionless , it means open , it means generative .
and that 's important .
but what 's more important about this app is that it represents how a new generation is tackling the problem of government -- not as the problem of an ossified institution , but as a problem of collective action .
and that 's great news , because , it turns out , we 're very good at collective action with digital technology .
now there 's a very large community of people that are building the tools that we need to do things together effectively .
it 's not just code for america fellows , there are hundreds of people all over the country that are standing and writing civic apps every day in their own communities .
they haven 't given up on government .
they are frustrated as hell with it , but they 're not complaining about it , they 're fixing it .
and these folks know something that we 've lost sight of .
and that 's that when you strip away all your feelings about politics and the line at the dmv and all those other things that we 're really mad about , government is , at its core , in the words of tim o 'reilly , " what we do together that we can 't do alone . "
now a lot of people have given up on government .
and if you 're one of those people , i would ask that you reconsider , because things are changing .
politics is not changing ; government is changing .
and because government ultimately derives its power from us -- remember " we the people ? " -- how we think about it is going to effect how that change happens .
now i didn 't know very much about government when i started this program .
and like a lot of people , i thought government was basically about getting people elected to office .
well after two years , i 've come to the conclusion that , especially local government , is about opossums .
this is the call center for the services and information line .
it 's generally where you will get if you call 311 in your city .
if you should ever have the chance to staff your city 's call center , as our fellow scott silverman did as part of the program -- in fact , they all do that -- you will find that people call government with a very wide range of issues , including having an opossum stuck in your house .
so scott gets this call .
he types " opossum " into this official knowledge base .
he doesn 't really come up with anything . he starts with animal control .
and finally , he says , " look , can you just open all the doors to your house and play music really loud and see if the thing leaves ? "
so that worked . so booya for scott .
but that wasn 't the end of the opossums .
boston doesn 't just have a call center .
it has an app , a web and mobile app , called citizens connect .
now we didn 't write this app .
this is the work of the very smart people at the office of new urban mechanics in boston .
so one day -- this is an actual report -- this came in : " opossum in my trashcan . can 't tell if it 's dead .
how do i get this removed ? "
but what happens with citizens connect is different .
so scott was speaking person-to-person .
but on citizens connect everything is public , so everybody can see this .
and in this case , a neighbor saw it .
and the next report we got said , " i walked over to this location , found the trashcan behind the house .
opossum ? check . living ? yep .
turned trashcan on its side . walked home .
goodnight sweet opossum . "
pretty simple .
so this is great . this is the digital meeting the physical .
and it 's also a great example of government getting in on the crowd-sourcing game .
but it 's also a great example of government as a platform .
and i don 't mean necessarily a technological definition of platform here .
i 'm just talking about a platform for people to help themselves and to help others .
so one citizen helped another citizen , but government played a key role here .
it connected those two people .
and it could have connected them with government services if they 'd been needed , but a neighbor is a far better and cheaper alternative to government services .
when one neighbor helps another , we strengthen our communities .
we call animal control , it just costs a lot of money .
now one of the important things we need to think about government is that it 's not the same thing as politics .
and most people get that , but they think that one is the input to the other .
that our input to the system of government is voting .
now how many times have we elected a political leader -- and sometimes we spend a lot of energy getting a new political leader elected -- and then we sit back and we expect government to reflect our values and meet our needs , and then not that much changes ?
that 's because government is like a vast ocean and politics is the six-inch layer on top .
and what 's under that is what we call bureaucracy .
and we say that word with such contempt .
but it 's that contempt that keeps this thing that we own and we pay for as something that 's working against us , this other thing , and then we 're disempowering ourselves .
people seem to think politics is sexy .
if we want this institution to work for us , we 're going to have to make bureaucracy sexy .
because that 's where the real work of government happens .
we have to engage with the machinery of government .
so that 's occupythesec movement has done .
have you seen these guys ?
it 's a group of concerned citizens that have written a very detailed 325-page report that 's a response to the sec 's request for comment on the financial reform bill .
that 's not being politically active , that 's being bureaucratically active .
now for those of us who 've given up on government , it 's time that we asked ourselves about the world that we want to leave for our children .
you have to see the enormous challenges that they 're going to face .
do we really think we 're going to get where we need to go without fixing the one institution that can act on behalf of all of us ?
we can 't do without government , but we do need it to be more effective .
the good news is that technology is making it possible to fundamentally reframe the function of government in a way that can actually scale by strengthening civil society .
and there 's a generation out there that 's grown up on the internet , and they know that it 's not that hard to do things together , you just have to architect the systems the right way .
now the average age of our fellows is 28 , so i am , begrudgingly , almost a generation older than most of them .
this is a generation that 's grown up taking their voices pretty much for granted .
they 're not fighting that battle that we 're all fighting about who gets to speak ; they all get to speak .
they can express their opinion on any channel at any time , and they do .
so when they 're faced with the problem of government , they don 't care as much about using their voices .
they 're using their hands .
they 're using their hands to write applications that make government work better .
and those applications let us use our hands to make our communities better .
that could be shoveling out a hydrant , pulling a weed , turning over a garbage can with an opossum in it .
and certainly , we could have been shoveling out those fire hydrants all along , and many people do .
but these apps are like little digital reminders that we 're not just consumers , and we 're not just consumers of government , putting in our taxes and getting back services .
we 're more than that , we 're citizens .
and we 're not going to fix government until we fix citizenship .
so the question i have for all of you here : when it comes to the big , important things that we need to do together , all of us together , are we just going to be a crowd of voices , or are we also going to be a crowd of hands ?
thank you .
because i usually take the role of trying to explain to people how wonderful the new technologies that are coming along are going to be , and i thought that , since i was among friends here , i would tell you what i really think and try to look back and try to understand what is really going on here with these amazing jumps in technology that seem so fast that we can barely keep on top of it .
so i 'm going to start out by showing just one very boring technology slide .
and then , so if you can just turn on the slide that 's on .
this is just a random slide that i picked out of my file .
what i want to show you is not so much the details of the slide , but the general form of it .
this happens to be a slide of some analysis that we were doing about the power of risc microprocessors versus the power of local area networks .
and the interesting thing about it is that this slide , like so many technology slides that we 're used to , is a sort of a straight line on a semi-log curve .
in other words , every step here represents an order of magnitude in performance scale .
and this is a new thing that we talk about technology on semi-log curves .
something really weird is going on here .
and that 's basically what i 'm going to be talking about .
so , if you could bring up the lights .
if you could bring up the lights higher , because i 'm just going to use a piece of paper here .
now why do we draw technology curves in semi-log curves ?
well the answer is , if i drew it on a normal curve where , let 's say , this is years , this is time of some sort , and this is whatever measure of the technology that i 'm trying to graph , the graphs look sort of silly .
they sort of go like this .
and they don 't tell us much .
now if i graph , for instance , some other technology , say transportation technology , on a semi-log curve , it would look very stupid , it would look like a flat line .
but when something like this happens , things are qualitatively changing .
so if transportation technology was moving along as fast as microprocessor technology , then the day after tomorrow , i would be able to get in a taxi cab and be in tokyo in 30 seconds .
it 's not moving like that .
and there 's nothing precedented in the history of technology development of this kind of self-feeding growth where you go by orders of magnitude every few years .
now the question that i 'd like to ask is , if you look at these exponential curves , they don 't go on forever .
things just can 't possibly keep changing as fast as they are .
one of two things is going to happen .
either it 's going to turn into a sort of classical s-curve like this , until something totally different comes along , or maybe it 's going to do this .
that 's about all it can do .
now i 'm an optimist , so i sort of think it 's probably going to do something like that .
if so , that means that what we 're in the middle of right now is a transition .
we 're sort of on this line in a transition from the way the world used to be to some new way that the world is .
and so what i 'm trying to ask , what i 've been asking myself , is what 's this new way that the world is ?
what 's that new state that the world is heading toward ?
because the transition seems very , very confusing when we 're right in the middle of it .
now when i was a kid growing up , the future was kind of the year 2000 , and people used to talk about what would happen in the year 2000 .
now here 's a conference in which people talk about the future , and you notice that the future is still at about the year 2000 .
it 's about as far as we go out .
so in other words , the future has kind of been shrinking one year per year for my whole lifetime .
now i think that the reason is because we all feel that something 's happening there .
that transition is happening . we can all sense it .
and we know that it just doesn 't make too much sense to think out 30 , 50 years because everything 's going to be so different that a simple extrapolation of what we 're doing just doesn 't make any sense at all .
so what i would like to talk about is what that could be , what that transition could be that we 're going through .
now in order to do that i 'm going to have to talk about a bunch of stuff that really has nothing to do with technology and computers .
because i think the only way to understand this is to really step back and take a long time scale look at things .
so the time scale that i would like to look at this on is the time scale of life on earth .
so i think this picture makes sense if you look at it a few billion years at a time .
so if you go back about two and a half billion years , the earth was this big , sterile hunk of rock with a lot of chemicals floating around on it .
and if you look at the way that the chemicals got organized , we begin to get a pretty good idea of how they do it .
and i think that there 's theories that are beginning to understand about how it started with rna , but i 'm going to tell a sort of simple story of it , which is that , at that time , there were little drops of oil floating around with all kinds of different recipes of chemicals in them .
and some of those drops of oil had a particular combination of chemicals in them which caused them to incorporate chemicals from the outside and grow the drops of oil .
and those that were like that started to split and divide .
and those were the most primitive forms of cells in a sense , those little drops of oil .
but now those drops of oil weren 't really alive , as we say it now , because every one of them was a little random recipe of chemicals .
and every time it divided , they got sort of unequal division of the chemicals within them .
and so every drop was a little bit different .
in fact , the drops that were different in a way that caused them to be better at incorporating chemicals around them , grew more and incorporated more chemicals and divided more .
so those tended to live longer , get expressed more .
now that 's sort of just a very simple chemical form of life , but when things got interesting was when these drops learned a trick about abstraction .
somehow by ways that we don 't quite understand , these little drops learned to write down information .
they learned to record the information that was the recipe of the cell onto a particular kind of chemical called dna .
so in other words , they worked out , in this mindless sort of evolutionary way , a form of writing that let them write down what they were , so that that way of writing it down could get copied .
the amazing thing is that that way of writing seems to have stayed steady since it evolved two and a half billion years ago .
in fact the recipe for us , our genes , is exactly that same code and that same way of writing .
in fact , every living creature is written in exactly the same set of letters and the same code .
in fact , one of the things that i did just for amusement purposes is we can now write things in this code .
and i 've got here a little 100 micrograms of white powder , which i try not to let the security people see at airports .
but this has in it -- what i did is i took this code -- the code has standard letters that we use for symbolizing it -- and i wrote my business card onto a piece of dna and amplified it 10 to the 22 times .
so if anyone would like a hundred million copies of my business card , i have plenty for everyone in the room , and , in fact , everyone in the world , and it 's right here .
if i had really been a egotist , i would have put it into a virus and released it in the room .
so what was the next step ?
writing down the dna was an interesting step .
and that caused these cells -- that kept them happy for another billion years .
but then there was another really interesting step where things became completely different , which is these cells started exchanging and communicating information , so that they began to get communities of cells .
i don 't know if you know this , but bacteria can actually exchange dna .
now that 's why , for instance , antibiotic resistance has evolved .
some bacteria figured out how to stay away from penicillin , and it went around sort of creating its little dna information with other bacteria , and now we have a lot of bacteria that are resistant to penicillin , because bacteria communicate .
now what this communication allowed was communities to form that , in some sense , were in the same boat together ; they were synergistic .
so they survived or they failed together , which means that if a community was very successful , all the individuals in that community were repeated more and they were favored by evolution .
now the transition point happened when these communities got so close that , in fact , they got together and decided to write down the whole recipe for the community together on one string of dna .
and so the next stage that 's interesting in life took about another billion years .
and at that stage , we have multi-cellular communities , communities of lots of different types of cells , working together as a single organism .
and in fact , we 're such a multi-cellular community .
we have lots of cells that are not out for themselves anymore .
your skin cell is really useless without a heart cell , muscle cell , a brain cell and so on .
so these communities began to evolve so that the interesting level on which evolution was taking place was no longer a cell , but a community which we call an organism .
now the next step that happened is within these communities .
these communities of cells , again , began to abstract information .
and they began building very special structures that did nothing but process information within the community .
and those are the neural structures .
so neurons are the information processing apparatus that those communities of cells built up .
and in fact , they began to get specialists in the community and special structures that were responsible for recording , understanding , learning information .
and that was the brains and the nervous system of those communities .
and that gave them an evolutionary advantage .
because at that point , an individual -- learning could happen within the time span of a single organism , instead of over this evolutionary time span .
so an organism could , for instance , learn not to eat a certain kind of fruit because it tasted bad and it got sick last time it ate it .
that could happen within the lifetime of a single organism , whereas before they 'd built these special information processing structures , that would have had to be learned evolutionarily over hundreds of thousands of years by the individuals dying off that ate that kind of fruit .
so that nervous system , the fact that they built these special information structures , because evolution could now happen within an individual .
it could happen in learning time scales .
but then what happened was the individuals worked out , of course , tricks of communicating .
and for example , the most sophisticated version that we 're aware of is human language .
it 's really a pretty amazing invention if you think about it .
here i have a very complicated , messy , confused idea in my head .
i 'm sitting here making grunting sounds basically , and hopefully constructing a similar messy , confused idea in your head that bears some analogy to it .
but we 're taking something very complicated , turning it into sound , sequences of sounds , and producing something very complicated in your brain .
so this allows us now to begin to start functioning as a single organism .
and so , in fact , what we 've done is we , humanity , have started abstracting out .
we 're going through the same levels that multi-cellular organisms have gone through -- abstracting out our methods of recording , presenting , processing information .
so for example , the invention of language was a tiny step in that direction .
telephony , computers , videotapes , cd-roms and so on are all our specialized mechanisms that we 've now built within our society for handling that information .
and it all connects us together into something that is much bigger and much faster and able to evolve than what we were before .
so now , evolution can take place on a scale of microseconds .
and you saw ty 's little evolutionary example where he sort of did a little bit of evolution on the convolution program right before your eyes .
so now we 've speeded up the time scales once again .
so the first steps of the story that i told you about took a billion years a piece .
and the next steps , like nervous systems and brains , took a few hundred million years .
then the next steps , like language and so on , took less than a million years .
and these next steps , like electronics , seem to be taking only a few decades .
the process is feeding on itself and becoming , i guess , autocatalytic is the word for it -- when something reinforces its rate of change .
the more it changes , the faster it changes .
and i think that that 's what we 're seeing here in this explosion of curve .
we 're seeing this process feeding back on itself .
now i design computers for a living , and i know that the mechanisms that i use to design computers would be impossible without recent advances in computers .
so right now , what i do is i design objects at such complexity that it 's really impossible for me to design them in the traditional sense .
i don 't know what every transistor in the connection machine does .
there are billions of them .
instead , what i do and what the designers at thinking machines do is we think at some level of abstraction and then we hand it to the machine and the machine takes it beyond what we could ever do , much farther and faster than we could ever do .
and in fact , sometimes it takes it by methods that we don 't quite even understand .
one method that 's particularly interesting that i 've been using a lot lately is evolution itself .
so what we do is we put inside the machine a process of evolution that takes place on the microsecond time scale .
so for example , in the most extreme cases , we can actually evolve a program by starting out with random sequences of instructions .
say , " computer , would you please make a hundred million random sequences of instructions .
now would you please run all of those random sequences of instructions , run all of those programs , and pick out the ones that came closest to doing what i wanted . "
so in other words , i define what i wanted .
let 's say i want to sort numbers , as a simple example i 've done it with .
so find the programs that come closest to sorting numbers .
so of course , random sequences of instructions are very unlikely to sort numbers , so none of them will really do it .
but one of them , by luck , may put two numbers in the right order .
and i say , " computer , would you please now take the 10 percent of those random sequences that did the best job .
save those . kill off the rest .
and now let 's reproduce the ones that sorted numbers the best .
and let 's reproduce them by a process of recombination analogous to sex . "
take two programs and they produce children by exchanging their subroutines , and the children inherit the traits of the subroutines of the two programs .
so i 've got now a new generation of programs that are produced by combinations of the programs that did a little bit better job .
say , " please repeat that process . "
score them again .
introduce some mutations perhaps .
and try that again and do that for another generation .
well every one of those generations just takes a few milliseconds .
so i can do the equivalent of millions of years of evolution on that within the computer in a few minutes , or in the complicated cases , in a few hours .
at the end of that , i end up with programs that are absolutely perfect at sorting numbers .
in fact , they are programs that are much more efficient than programs i could have ever written by hand .
now if i look at those programs , i can 't tell you how they work .
i 've tried looking at them and telling you how they work .
they 're obscure , weird programs .
but they do the job .
and in fact , i know , i 'm very confident that they do the job because they come from a line of hundreds of thousands of programs that did the job .
in fact , their life depended on doing the job .
i was riding in a 747 with marvin minsky once , and he pulls out this card and says , " oh look . look at this .
it says , ' this plane has hundreds of thousands of tiny parts working together to make you a safe flight . ' doesn 't that make you feel confident ? "
in fact , we know that the engineering process doesn 't work very well when it gets complicated .
so we 're beginning to depend on computers to do a process that 's very different than engineering .
and it lets us produce things of much more complexity than normal engineering lets us produce .
and yet , we don 't quite understand the options of it .
so in a sense , it 's getting ahead of us .
we 're now using those programs to make much faster computers so that we 'll be able to run this process much faster .
so it 's feeding back on itself .
the thing is becoming faster and that 's why i think it seems so confusing .
because all of these technologies are feeding back on themselves .
we 're taking off .
and what we are is we 're at a point in time which is analogous to when single-celled organisms were turning into multi-celled organisms .
so we 're the amoebas and we can 't quite figure out what the hell this thing is we 're creating .
we 're right at that point of transition .
but i think that there really is something coming along after us .
i think it 's very haughty of us to think that we 're the end product of evolution .
and i think all of us here are a part of producing whatever that next thing is .
so lunch is coming along , and i think i will stop at that point , before i get selected out .
my story begins right here actually in rajasthan about two years ago .
i was in the desert , under the starry skies with the sufi singer mukhtiar ali .
and we were in conversation about how nothing had changed since the time of the ancient indian epic " the mahabharata . "
so back in the day , when us indians wanted to travel we 'd jump into a chariot and we 'd zoom across the sky .
now we do the same with airplanes .
back then , when arjuna , the great indian warrior prince , when he was thirsty , he 'd take out a bow , he 'd shoot it into the ground and water would come out .
now we do the same with drills and machines .
the conclusion that we came to was that magic had been replaced by machinery .
and this made me really sad .
i found myself becoming a little bit of a technophobe .
i was terrified by this idea that i would lose the ability to enjoy and appreciate the sunset without having my camera on me , without tweeting it to my friends .
and it felt like technology should enable magic , not kill it .
when i was a little girl , my grandfather gave me his little silver pocket watch .
and this piece of 50-year-old technology became the most magical thing to me .
it became a gilded gateway into a world full of pirates and shipwrecks and images in my imagination .
so i felt like our cellphones and our fancy watches and our cameras had stopped us from dreaming .
they stopped us from being inspired .
and so i jumped in , i jumped into this world of technology , to see how i could use it to enable magic as opposed to kill it .
i 've been illustrating books since i was 16 .
and so when i saw the ipad , i saw it as a storytelling device that could connect readers all over the world .
it can know how we 're holding it .
it can know where we are .
it brings together image and text and animation and sound and touch .
storytelling is becoming more and more multi-sensorial .
but what are we doing with it ?
so i 'm actually just going to go in and launch khoya , an interactive app for the ipad .
so it says , " place your fingers upon each light . "
and so -- it says , " this box belongs to ... " and so i type in my name .
and actually i become a character in the book .
at various points , a little letter drops down to me -- and the ipad knows where you live because of gps -- which is actually addressed to me .
the child in me is really excited by these kinds of possibilities .
now i 've been talking a lot about magic .
and i don 't mean wizards and dragons , i mean the kind of childhood magic , those ideas that we all harbored as children .
this idea of fireflies in a jar , for some reason , was always really exciting to me .
and so over here you need to tilt your ipad , take the fireflies out .
and they actually illuminate your way through the rest of the book .
another idea that really fascinated me as a child was that an entire galaxy could be contained within a single marble .
and so over here , each book and each world becomes a little marble that i drag in to this magical device within the device .
and it opens up a map .
all along , all fantasy books have always had maps , but these maps have been static .
this is a map that grows and glows and becomes your navigation for the rest of the book .
it reveals itself to you at certain points in the book as well .
so i 'm just going to enter in .
another thing that 's actually really important to me is creating content that is indian and yet very contemporary .
over here , these are the apsaras .
so we 've all heard about fairies and we 've all heard about nymphs , but how many people outside of india know about their indian counterparts , the apsaras ?
these poor apsaras have been trapped inside indra 's chambers for thousands of years in an old and musty book .
and so we 're bringing them back in a contemporary story for children .
and a story that actually deals with new issues like the environmental crisis .
speaking of the environmental crisis , i think a big problem has been in the last 10 years is that children have been locked inside their rooms , glued to their pcs , they haven 't been able to get out .
but now with mobile technology , we can actually take our children outside into the natural world with their technology .
one of the interactions in the book is that you 're sent off on this quest where you need to go outside , take out your camera on the ipad and collect pictures of different natural objects .
when i was a child , i had multiple collections of sticks and stones and pebbles and shells .
and somehow kids don 't do that anymore .
so in bringing back this childhood ritual , you need to go out and , in one chapter , take a picture of a flower and then tag it .
in another chapter , you need to take a picture of a piece of bark and then tag that .
and what happens is that you actually create a digital collection of photographs that you can then put up online .
a child in london puts up a picture of a fox and says , " oh , i saw a fox today . "
a child in india says , " i saw a monkey today . "
and it creates this kind of social network around a collection of digital photographs that you 've actually taken .
in the possibilities of linking together magic , the earth and technology , there are multiple possibilities .
in the next book , we plan on having an interaction where you take your ipad out with the video on and through augmented reality , you see this layer of animated pixies appear on a houseplant that 's outside your house .
at one point , your screen is filled up with leaves .
and so you need to make the sound of wind and blow them away and read the rest of the book .
we 're moving , we 're all moving here , to a world where the forces of nature come closer together to technology , and magic and technology can come closer together .
we 're harnessing energy from the sun .
we 're bringing our children and ourselves closer to the natural world and that magic and joy and childhood love that we had through the simple medium of a story .
thank you .
well this is a really extraordinary honor for me .
i spend most of my time in jails , in prisons , on death row .
i spend most of my time in very low-income communities in the projects and places where there 's a great deal of hopelessness .
and being here at ted and seeing the stimulation , hearing it , has been very , very energizing to me .
and one of the things that 's emerged in my short time here is that ted has an identity .
and you can actually say things here that have impacts around the world .
and sometimes when it comes through ted , it has meaning and power that it doesn 't have when it doesn 't .
and i mention that because i think identity is really important .
and we 've had some fantastic presentations .
and i think what we 've learned is that , if you 're a teacher your words can be meaningful , but if you 're a compassionate teacher , they can be especially meaningful .
if you 're a doctor you can do some good things , but if you 're a caring doctor you can do some other things .
and so i want to talk about the power of identity .
and i didn 't learn about this actually practicing law and doing the work that i do .
i actually learned about this from my grandmother .
i grew up in a house that was the traditional african american home that was dominated by a matriarch , and that matriarch was my grandmother .
she was tough , she was strong , she was powerful .
she was the end of every argument in our family .
she was the beginning of a lot of arguments in our family .
she was the daughter of people who were actually enslaved .
her parents were born in slavery in virginia in the 1840 's .
she was born in the 1880 's and the experience of slavery very much shaped the way she saw the world .
and my grandmother was tough , but she was also loving .
when i would see her as a little boy , she 'd come up to me and she 'd give me these hugs .
and she 'd squeeze me so tight i could barely breathe and then she 'd let me go .
and an hour or two later , if i saw her , she 'd come over to me and she 'd say , " bryan , do you still feel me hugging you ? "
and if i said , " no , " she 'd assault me again , and if i said , " yes , " she 'd leave me alone .
and she just had this quality that you always wanted to be near her .
and the only challenge was that she had 10 children .
my mom was the youngest of her 10 kids .
and sometimes when i would go and spend time with her , it would be difficult to get her time and attention .
my cousins would be running around everywhere .
and i remember , when i was about eight or nine years old , waking up one morning , going into the living room , and all of my cousins were running around .
and my grandmother was sitting across the room staring at me .
and at first i thought we were playing a game .
and i would look at her and i 'd smile , but she was very serious .
and after about 15 or 20 minutes of this , she got up and she came across the room and she took me by the hand and she said , " come on , bryan . you and i are going to have a talk . "
and i remember this just like it happened yesterday .
i never will forget it .
she took me out back and she said , " bryan , i 'm going to tell you something , but you don 't tell anybody what i tell you . "
i said , " okay , mama . "
she said , " now you make sure you don 't do that . " i said , " sure . "
then she sat me down and she looked at me and she said , " i want you to know i 've been watching you . "
and she said , " i think you 're special . "
she said , " i think you can do anything you want to do . "
i will never forget it .
and then she said , " i just need you to promise me three things , bryan . "
i said , " okay , mama . "
she said , " the first thing i want you to promise me is that you 'll always love your mom . "
she said , " that 's my baby girl , and you have to promise me now you 'll always take care of her . "
well i adored my mom , so i said , " yes , mama . i 'll do that . "
then she said , " the second thing i want you to promise me is that you 'll always do the right thing even when the right thing is the hard thing . "
and i thought about it and i said , " yes , mama . i 'll do that . "
then finally she said , " the third thing i want you to promise me is that you 'll never drink alcohol . "
well i was nine years old , so i said , " yes , mama . i 'll do that . "
i grew up in the country in the rural south , and i have a brother a year older than me and a sister a year younger .
when i was about 14 or 15 , one day my brother came home and he had this six-pack of beer -- i don 't know where he got it -- and he grabbed me and my sister and we went out in the woods .
and we were kind of just out there doing the stuff we crazily did .
and he had a sip of this beer and he gave some to my sister and she had some , and they offered it to me .
i said , " no , no , no . that 's okay . you all go ahead . i 'm not going to have any beer . "
my brother said , " come on . we 're doing this today ; you always do what we do .
i had some , your sister had some . have some beer . "
i said , " no , i don 't feel right about that . y 'all go ahead . y 'all go ahead . "
and then my brother started staring at me .
he said , " what 's wrong with you ? have some beer . "
then he looked at me real hard and he said , " oh , i hope you 're not still hung up on that conversation mama had with you . "
i said , " well , what are you talking about ? "
he said , " oh , mama tells all the grandkids that they 're special . "
i was devastated .
and i 'm going to admit something to you .
i 'm going to tell you something i probably shouldn 't .
i know this might be broadcast broadly .
but i 'm 52 years old , and i 'm going to admit to you that i 've never had a drop of alcohol .
i don 't say that because i think that 's virtuous ; i say that because there is power in identity .
when we create the right kind of identity , we can say things to the world around us that they don 't actually believe makes sense .
we can get them to do things that they don 't think they can do .
when i thought about my grandmother , of course she would think all her grandkids were special .
my grandfather was in prison during prohibition .
my male uncles died of alcohol-related diseases .
and these were the things she thought we needed to commit to .
well i 've been trying to say something about our criminal justice system .
this country is very different today than it was 40 years ago .
in 1972 , there were 300,000 people in jails and prisons .
today , there are 2.3 million .
the united states now has the highest rate of incarceration in the world .
we have seven million people on probation and parole .
and mass incarceration , in my judgment , has fundamentally changed our world .
in poor communities , in communities of color there is this despair , there is this hopelessness , that is being shaped by these outcomes .
one out of three black men between the ages of 18 and 30 is in jail , in prison , on probation or parole .
in urban communities across this country -- los angeles , philadelphia , baltimore , washington -- 50 to 60 percent of all young men of color are in jail or prison or on probation or parole .
our system isn 't just being shaped in these ways that seem to be distorting around race , they 're also distorted by poverty .
we have a system of justice in this country that treats you much better if you 're rich and guilty than if you 're poor and innocent .
wealth , not culpability , shapes outcomes .
and yet , we seem to be very comfortable .
the politics of fear and anger have made us believe that these are problems that are not our problems .
we 've been disconnected .
it 's interesting to me .
we 're looking at some very interesting developments in our work .
my state of alabama , like a number of states , actually permanently disenfranchises you if you have a criminal conviction .
right now in alabama 34 percent of the black male population has permanently lost the right to vote .
we 're actually projecting in another 10 years the level of disenfranchisement will be as high as it 's been since prior to the passage of the voting rights act .
and there is this stunning silence .
i represent children .
a lot of my clients are very young .
the united states is the only country in the world where we sentence 13-year-old children to die in prison .
we have life imprisonment without parole for kids in this country .
and we 're actually doing some litigation .
the only country in the world .
i represent people on death row .
it 's interesting , this question of the death penalty .
in many ways , we 've been taught to think that the real question is , do people deserve to die for the crimes they 've committed ?
and that 's a very sensible question .
but there 's another way of thinking about where we are in our identity .
the other way of thinking about it is not , do people deserve to die for the crimes they commit , but do we deserve to kill ?
i mean , it 's fascinating .
death penalty in america is defined by error .
for every nine people who have been executed , we 've actually identified one innocent person who 's been exonerated and released from death row .
a kind of astonishing error rate -- one out of nine people innocent .
i mean , it 's fascinating .
in aviation , we would never let people fly on airplanes if for every nine planes that took off one would crash .
but somehow we can insulate ourselves from this problem .
it 's not our problem .
it 's not our burden .
it 's not our struggle .
i talk a lot about these issues .
i talk about race and this question of whether we deserve to kill .
and it 's interesting , when i teach my students about african american history , i tell them about slavery .
i tell them about terrorism , the era that began at the end of reconstruction that went on to world war ii .
we don 't really know very much about it .
but for african americans in this country , that was an era defined by terror .
in many communities , people had to worry about being lynched .
they had to worry about being bombed .
it was the threat of terror that shaped their lives .
and these older people come up to me now and they say , " mr. stevenson , you give talks , you make speeches , you tell people to stop saying we 're dealing with terrorism for the first time in our nation 's history after 9 / 11 . "
they tell me to say , " no , tell them that we grew up with that . "
and that era of terrorism , of course , was followed by segregation and decades of racial subordination and apartheid .
and yet , we have in this country this dynamic where we really don 't like to talk about our problems .
we don 't like to talk about our history .
and because of that , we really haven 't understood what it 's meant to do the things we 've done historically .
we 're constantly running into each other .
we 're constantly creating tensions and conflicts .
we have a hard time talking about race , and i believe it 's because we are unwilling to commit ourselves to a process of truth and reconciliation .
in south africa , people understood that we couldn 't overcome apartheid without a commitment to truth and reconciliation .
in rwanda , even after the genocide , there was this commitment , but in this country we haven 't done that .
i was giving some lectures in germany about the death penalty .
it was fascinating because one of the scholars stood up after the presentation and said , " well you know it 's deeply troubling to hear what you 're talking about . "
he said , " we don 't have the death penalty in germany .
and of course , we can never have the death penalty in germany . "
and the room got very quiet , and this woman said , " there 's no way , with our history , we could ever engage in the systematic killing of human beings .
it would be unconscionable for us to , in an intentional and deliberate way , set about executing people . "
and i thought about that .
what would it feel like to be living in a world where the nation state of germany was executing people , especially if they were disproportionately jewish ?
i couldn 't bear it .
it would be unconscionable .
and yet , in this country , in the states of the old south , we execute people -- where you 're 11 times more likely to get the death penalty if the victim is white than if the victim is black , 22 times more likely to get it if the defendant is black and the victim is white -- in the very states where there are buried in the ground the bodies of people who were lynched .
and yet , there is this disconnect .
well i believe that our identity is at risk .
that when we actually don 't care about these difficult things , the positive and wonderful things are nonetheless implicated .
we love innovation .
we love technology . we love creativity .
we love entertainment .
but ultimately , those realities are shadowed by suffering , abuse , degradation , marginalization .
and for me , it becomes necessary to integrate the two .
because ultimately we are talking about a need to be more hopeful , more committed , more dedicated to the basic challenges of living in a complex world .
and for me that means spending time thinking and talking about the poor , the disadvantaged , those who will never get to ted .
but thinking about them in a way that is integrated in our own lives .
you know ultimately , we all have to believe things we haven 't seen .
we do . as rational as we are , as committed to intellect as we are .
innovation , creativity , development comes not from the ideas in our mind alone .
they come from the ideas in our mind that are also fueled by some conviction in our heart .
and it 's that mind-heart connection that i believe compels us to not just be attentive to all the bright and dazzly things , but also the dark and difficult things .
vaclav havel , the great czech leader , talked about this .
he said , " when we were in eastern europe and dealing with oppression , we wanted all kinds of things , but mostly what we needed was hope , an orientation of the spirit , a willingness to sometimes be in hopeless places and be a witness . "
well that orientation of the spirit is very much at the core of what i believe even ted communities have to be engaged in .
there is no disconnect around technology and design that will allow us to be fully human until we pay attention to suffering , to poverty , to exclusion , to unfairness , to injustice .
now i will warn you that this kind of identity is a much more challenging identity than ones that don 't pay attention to this .
it will get to you .
i had the great privilege , when i was a young lawyer , of meeting rosa parks .
and ms. parks used to come back to montgomery every now and then , and she would get together with two of her dearest friends , these older women , johnnie carr who was the organizer of the montgomery bus boycott -- amazing african american woman -- and virginia durr , a white woman , whose husband , clifford durr , represented dr. king .
and these women would get together and just talk .
and every now and then ms. carr would call me , and she 'd say , " bryan , ms. parks is coming to town . we 're going to get together and talk .
do you want to come over and listen ? "
and i 'd say , " yes , ma 'am , i do . "
and she 'd say , " well what are you going to do when you get here ? "
i said , " i 'm going to listen . "
and i 'd go over there and i would , i would just listen .
it would be so energizing and so empowering .
and one time i was over there listening to these women talk , and after a couple of hours ms. parks turned to me and she said , " now bryan , tell me what the equal justice initiative is .
tell me what you 're trying to do . "
and i began giving her my rap .
i said , " well we 're trying to challenge injustice .
we 're trying to help people who have been wrongly convicted .
we 're trying to confront bias and discrimination in the administration of criminal justice .
we 're trying to end life without parole sentences for children .
we 're trying to do something about the death penalty .
we 're trying to reduce the prison population .
we 're trying to end mass incarceration . "
i gave her my whole rap , and when i finished she looked at me and she said , " mmm mmm mmm . "
she said , " that 's going to make you tired , tired , tired . "
and that 's when ms. carr leaned forward , she put her finger in my face , she said , " that 's why you 've got to be brave , brave , brave . "
and i actually believe that the ted community needs to be more courageous .
we need to find ways to embrace these challenges , these problems , the suffering .
because ultimately , our humanity depends on everyone 's humanity .
i 've learned very simple things doing the work that i do .
it 's just taught me very simple things .
that each of us is more than the worst thing we 've ever done .
i believe that for every person on the planet .
i think if somebody tells a lie , they 're not just a liar .
i think if somebody takes something that doesn 't belong to them , they 're not just a thief .
i think even if you kill someone , you 're not just a killer .
and because of that there 's this basic human dignity that must be respected by law .
i also believe that in many parts of this country , and certainly in many parts of this globe , that the opposite of poverty is not wealth .
i don 't believe that .
i actually think , in too many places , the opposite of poverty is justice .
and finally , i believe that , despite the fact that it is so dramatic and so beautiful and so inspiring and so stimulating , we will ultimately not be judged by our technology , we won 't be judged by our design , we won 't be judged by our intellect and reason .
ultimately , you judge the character of a society , not by how they treat their rich and the powerful and the privileged , but by how they treat the poor , the condemned , the incarcerated .
because it 's in that nexus that we actually begin to understand truly profound things about who we are .
i sometimes get out of balance . i 'll end with this story .
i sometimes push too hard .
i do get tired , as we all do .
sometimes those ideas get ahead of our thinking in ways that are important .
and i 've been representing these kids who have been sentenced to do these very harsh sentences .
and i go to the jail and i see my client who 's 13 and 14 , and he 's been certified to stand trial as an adult .
i start thinking , well , how did that happen ?
how can a judge turn you into something that you 're not ?
and the judge has certified him as an adult , but i see this kid .
and i was up too late one night and i starting thinking , well gosh , if the judge can turn you into something that you 're not , the judge must have magic power .
yeah , bryan , the judge has some magic power .
you should ask for some of that .
and because i was up too late , wasn 't thinking real straight , i started working on a motion .
and i had a client who was 14 years old , a young , poor black kid .
and i started working on this motion , and the head of the motion was : " motion to try my poor , 14-year-old black male client like a privileged , white 75-year-old corporate executive . "
and i put in my motion that there was prosecutorial misconduct and police misconduct and judicial misconduct .
there was a crazy line in there about how there 's no conduct in this county , it 's all misconduct .
and the next morning , i woke up and i thought , now did i dream that crazy motion , or did i actually write it ?
and to my horror , not only had i written it , but i had sent it to court .
a couple months went by , and i had just forgotten all about it .
and i finally decided , oh gosh , i 've got to go to the court and do this crazy case .
and i got into my car and i was feeling really overwhelmed -- overwhelmed .
and i got in my car and i went to this courthouse .
and i was thinking , this is going to be so difficult , so painful .
and i finally got out of the car and i started walking up to the courthouse .
and as i was walking up the steps of this courthouse , there was an older black man who was the janitor in this courthouse .
when this man saw me , he came over to me and he said , " who are you ? "
i said , " i 'm a lawyer . " he said , " you 're a lawyer ? " i said , " yes , sir . "
and this man came over to me and he hugged me .
and he whispered in my ear .
he said , " i 'm so proud of you . "
and i have to tell you , it was energizing .
it connected deeply with something in me about identity , about the capacity of every person to contribute to a community , to a perspective that is hopeful .
well i went into the courtroom .
and as soon as i walked inside , the judge saw me coming in .
he said , " mr. stevenson , did you write this crazy motion ? "
i said , " yes , sir . i did . " and we started arguing .
and people started coming in because they were just outraged .
i had written these crazy things .
and police officers were coming in and assistant prosecutors and clerk workers .
and before i knew it , the courtroom was filled with people angry that we were talking about race , that we were talking about poverty , that we were talking about inequality .
and out of the corner of my eye , i could see this janitor pacing back and forth .
and he kept looking through the window , and he could hear all of this holler .
he kept pacing back and forth .
and finally , this older black man with this very worried look on his face came into the courtroom and sat down behind me , almost at counsel table .
about 10 minutes later the judge said we would take a break .
and during the break there was a deputy sheriff who was offended that the janitor had come into court .
and this deputy jumped up and he ran over to this older black man .
he said , " jimmy , what are you doing in this courtroom ? "
and this older black man stood up and he looked at that deputy and he looked at me and he said , " i came into this courtroom to tell this young man , keep your eyes on the prize , hold on . "
i 've come to ted because i believe that many of you understand that the moral arc of the universe is long , but it bends toward justice .
that we cannot be full evolved human beings until we care about human rights and basic dignity .
that all of our survival is tied to the survival of everyone .
that our visions of technology and design and entertainment and creativity have to be married with visions of humanity , compassion and justice .
and more than anything , for those of you who share that , i 've simply come to tell you to keep your eyes on the prize , hold on .
so you heard and saw an obvious desire by this audience , this community , to help you on your way and to do something on this issue .
other than writing a check , what could we do ?
well there are opportunities all around us .
if you live in the state of california , for example , there 's a referendum coming up this spring where actually there 's going to be an effort to redirect some of the money we spend on the politics of punishment .
for example , here in california we 're going to spend one billion dollars on the death penalty in the next five years -- one billion dollars .
and yet , 46 percent of all homicide cases don 't result in arrest .
56 percent of all rape cases don 't result .
so there 's an opportunity to change that .
and this referendum would propose having those dollars go to law enforcement and safety .
and i think that opportunity exists all around us .
there 's been this huge decline in crime in america over the last three decades .
and part of the narrative of that is sometimes that it 's about increased incarceration rates .
what would you say to someone who believed that ?
well actually the violent crime rate has remained relatively stable .
the great increase in mass incarceration in this country wasn 't really in violent crime categories .
it was this misguided war on drugs .
that 's where the dramatic increases have come in our prison population .
and we got carried away with the rhetoric of punishment .
and so we have three strikes laws that put people in prison forever for stealing a bicycle , for low-level property crimes , rather than making them give those resources back to the people who they victimized .
i believe we need to do more to help people who are victimized by crime , not do less .
and i think our current punishment philosophy does nothing for no one .
and i think that 's the orientation that we have to change .
bryan , you 've struck a massive chord here .
you 're an inspiring person .
thank you so much for coming to ted . thank you .
threats , in the wake of bin laden 's death , have spiked .
famine in somalia . police pepper spray .
vicious cartels . announcer five : caustic cruise lines .
societal decay . 65 dead .
tsunami warning . cyber-attacks .
drug war . mass destruction . tornado .
recession . default . doomsday . egypt . syria .
crisis . death . disaster .
oh , my god .
so those are just a few of the clips i collected over the last six months -- could have easily been the last six days or the last six years .
the point is that the news media preferentially feeds us negative stories because that 's what our minds pay attention to .
and there 's a very good reason for that .
every second of every day , our senses bring in way too much data than we can possibly process in our brains .
and because nothing is more important to us than survival , the first stop of all of that data is an ancient sliver of the temporal lobe called the amygdala .
now the amygdala is our early warning detector , our danger detector .
it sorts and scours through all of the information looking for anything in the environment that might harm us .
so given a dozen news stories , we will preferentially look at the negative news .
and that old newspaper saying , " if it bleeds it leads , " is very true .
so given all of our digital devices that are bringing all the negative news to us seven days a week , 24 hours a day , it 's no wonder that we 're pessimistic .
it 's no wonder that people think that the world is getting worse .
but perhaps that 's not the case .
perhaps instead , of what 's really going on .
perhaps the tremendous progress we 've made over the last century by a series of forces are , in fact , accelerating to a point that we have the potential in the next three decades to create a world of abundance .
now i 'm not saying we don 't have our set of problems -- climate crisis , species extinction , water and energy shortage -- we surely do .
and as humans , we are far better at seeing the problems way in advance , but ultimately we knock them down .
so let 's look at what this last century has been to see where we 're going .
over the last hundred years , the average human lifespan has more than doubled , average per capita income adjusted for inflation around the world has tripled .
childhood mortality has come down a factor of 10 .
add to that the cost of food , electricity , transportation , communication have dropped 10 to 1,000-fold .
steve pinker has showed us that , in fact , we 're living during the most peaceful time ever in human history .
and charles kenny that global literacy has gone from 25 percent to over 80 percent in the last 130 years .
we truly are living in an extraordinary time .
and many people forget this .
and we keep setting our expectations higher and higher .
in fact , we redefine what poverty means .
think of this , in america today , the majority of people under the poverty line still have electricity , water , toilets , refrigerators , television , mobile phones , air conditioning and cars .
the wealthiest robber barons of the last century , the emperors on this planet , could have never dreamed of such luxuries .
underpinning much of this is technology , and of late , exponentially growing technologies .
my good friend ray kurzweil showed that any tool that becomes an information technology jumps on this curve , on moore 's law , and experiences price performance doubling every 12 to 24 months .
that 's why the cellphone in your pocket is literally a million times cheaper and a thousand times faster than a supercomputer of the ' 70s .
now look at this curve .
this is moore 's law over the last hundred years .
i want you to notice two things from this curve .
number one , how smooth it is -- through good time and bad time , war time and peace time , recession , depression and boom time .
this is the result of faster computers being used to build faster computers .
it doesn 't slow for any of our grand challenges .
and also , even though it 's plotted on a log curve on the left , it 's curving upwards .
the rate at which the technology is getting faster is itself getting faster .
and on this curve , riding on moore 's law , are a set of extraordinarily powerful technologies available to all of us .
cloud computing , what my friends at autodesk call infinite computing ; sensors and networks ; robotics ; 3d printing , which is the ability to democratize and distribute personalized production around the planet ; synthetic biology ; fuels , vaccines and foods ; digital medicine ; nanomaterials ; and a.i .
i mean , how many of you saw the winning of jeopardy by ibm 's watson ?
i mean , that was epic .
in fact , i scoured the headlines looking for the best headline in a newspaper i could .
and i love this : " watson vanquishes human opponents . "
jeopardy 's not an easy game .
it 's about the nuance of human language .
and imagine if you would a.i. ' s like this on the cloud available to every person with a cellphone .
four years ago here at ted , ray kurzweil and i started a new university called singularity university .
and we teach our students all of these technologies , and particularly how they can be used to solve humanity 's grand challenges .
and every year we ask them to start a company or a product or a service that can affect positively the lives of a billion people within a decade .
think about that , the fact that , literally , a group of students can touch the lives of a billion people today .
30 years ago that would have sounded ludicrous .
today we can point at dozens of companies that have done just that .
when i think about creating abundance , it 's not about creating a life of luxury for everybody on this planet ; it 's about creating a life of possibility .
it is about taking that which was scarce and making it abundant .
you see , scarcity is contextual , and technology is a resource-liberating force .
let me give you an example .
so this is a story of napoleon iii in the mid-1800s .
he 's the dude on the left .
he invited over to dinner the king of siam .
all of napoleon 's troops were fed with silver utensils , napoleon himself with gold utensils .
but the king of siam , he was fed with aluminum utensils .
you see , aluminum was the most valuable metal on the planet , worth more than gold and platinum .
it 's the reason that the tip of the washington monument is made of aluminum .
you see , even though aluminum is 8.3 percent of the earth by mass , it doesn 't come as a pure metal .
it 's all bound by oxygen and silicates .
but then the technology of electrolysis came along and literally made aluminum so cheap that we use it with throw-away mentality .
so let 's project this analogy going forward .
we think about energy scarcity .
ladies and gentlemen , we are on a planet that is bathed with 5,000 times more energy than we use in a year .
16 terawatts of energy hits the earth 's surface every 88 minutes .
it 's not about being scarce , it 's about accessibility .
and there 's good news here .
for the first time , this year the cost of solar-generated electricity is 50 percent that of diesel-generated electricity in india -- 8.8 rupees versus 17 rupees .
the cost of solar dropped 50 percent last year .
last month , mit put out a study showing that by the end of this decade , in the sunny parts of the united states , solar electricity will be six cents a kilowatt hour compared to 15 cents as a national average .
and if we have abundant energy , we also have abundant water .
now we talk about water wars .
do you remember when carl sagan turned the voyager spacecraft back towards the earth , in 1990 after it just passed saturn ?
he took a famous photo . what was it called ?
" a pale blue dot . "
because we live on a water planet .
we live on a planet 70 percent covered by water .
yes , 97.5 percent is saltwater , two percent is ice , and we fight over a half a percent of the water on this planet , but here too there is hope .
and there is technology coming online , not 10 , 20 years from now , right now .
there 's nanotechnology coming on , nanomaterials .
and the conversation i had with dean kamen this morning , one of the great diy innovators , i 'd like to share with you -- he gave me permission to do so -- his technology called slingshot that many of you may have heard of , it is the size of a small dorm room refrigerator .
it 's able to generate a thousand liters of clean drinking water a day out of any source -- saltwater , polluted water , latrine -- at less than two cents a liter .
the chairman of coca-cola has just agreed to do a major test of hundreds of units of this in the developing world .
and if that pans out , which i have every confidence it will , coca-cola will deploy this globally to 206 countries around the planet .
this is the kind of innovation , empowered by this technology , that exists today .
and we 've seen this in cellphones .
my goodness , we 're going to hit 70 percent penetration of cellphones in the developing world by the end of 2013 .
think about it , that a masai warrior on a cellphone in the middle of kenya has better mobile comm than president reagan did 25 years ago .
and if they 're on a smartphone on google , they 've got access to more knowledge and information than president clinton did 15 years ago .
they 're living in a world of information and communication abundance that no one could have ever predicted .
better than that , the things that you and i spent tens and hundreds of thousands of dollars for -- gps , hd video and still images , libraries of books and music , medical diagnostic technology -- are now literally dematerializing and demonetizing into your cellphone .
probably the best part of it is what 's coming down the pike in health .
last month , i had the pleasure of announcing with qualcomm foundation something called the $ 10 million qualcomm tricorder x prize .
we 're challenging teams around the world to basically combine these technologies into a mobile device that you can speak to , because it 's got a.i. , you can cough on it , you can do a finger blood prick .
and to win , it needs to be able to diagnose you better than a team of board-certified doctors .
so literally , imagine this device in the middle of the developing world where there are no doctors , 25 percent of the disease burden and 1.3 percent of the health care workers .
when this device sequences an rna or dna virus that it doesn 't recognize , it calls the cdc and prevents the pandemic from happening in the first place .
but here , here is the biggest force for bringing about a world of abundance .
i call it the rising billion .
so the white lines here are population .
we just passed the seven billion mark on earth .
and by the way , the biggest protection against a population explosion is making the world educated and healthy .
in 2010 , we had just short of two billion people online , connected .
by 2020 , that 's going from two billion to five billion internet users .
three billion new minds who have never been heard from before are connecting to the global conversation .
what will these people want ?
what will they consume ? what will they desire ?
and rather than having economic shutdown , we 're about to have the biggest economic injection ever .
these people represent tens of trillions of dollars injected into the global economy .
and they will get healthier by using the tricorder , and they 'll become better educated by using the khan academy , and by literally being able to use 3d printing and infinite computing [ become ] more productive than ever before .
so what could three billion rising , healthy , educated , productive members of humanity bring to us ?
how about a set of voices that have never been heard from before .
what about giving the oppressed , wherever they might be , the voice to be heard and the voice to act for the first time ever ?
what will these three billion people bring ?
what about contributions we can 't even predict ?
the one thing i 've learned at the x prize is that small teams driven by their passion with a clear focus can do extraordinary things , things that large corporations and governments could only do in the past .
let me share and close with a story that really got me excited .
there is a program that some of you might have heard of .
it 's a game called foldit .
it came out of the university of washington in seattle .
and this is a game where individuals can actually take a sequence of amino acids and figure out how the protein is going to fold .
and how it folds dictates its structure and its functionality .
and it 's very important for research in medicine .
and up until now , it 's been a supercomputer problem .
and this game has been played by university professors and so forth .
and it 's literally , hundreds of thousands of people came online and started playing it .
and it showed that , in fact , today , the human pattern recognition machinery is better at folding proteins than the best computers .
and when these individuals went and looked at who was the best protein folder in the world , it wasn 't an mit professor , it wasn 't a caltech student , it was a person from england , from manchester , a woman who , during the day , was an executive assistant at a rehab clinic and , at night , was the world 's best protein folder .
ladies and gentlemen , what gives me tremendous confidence in the future is the fact that we are now more empowered as individuals to take on the grand challenges of this planet .
we have the tools with this exponential technology .
we have the passion of the diy innovator .
we have the capital of the techno-philanthropist .
and we have three billion new minds coming online to work with us to solve the grand challenges , to do that which we must do .
we are living into extraordinary decades ahead .
thank you .
i think we have to do something about a piece of the culture of medicine that has to change .
and i think it starts with one physician , and that 's me .
and maybe i 've been around long enough that i can afford to give away some of my false prestige to be able to do that .
before i actually begin the meat of my talk , let 's begin with a bit of baseball .
hey , why not ?
we 're near the end , we 're getting close to the world series .
we all love baseball , don 't we ?
baseball is filled with some amazing statistics .
and there 's hundreds of them .
" moneyball " is about to come out , and it 's all about statistics and using statistics to build a great baseball team .
i 'm going to focus on one stat that i hope a lot of you have heard of .
it 's called batting average .
so we talk about a 300 , a batter who bats 300 .
that means that ballplayer batted safely , hit safely three times out of 10 at bats .
that means hit the ball into the outfield , it dropped , it didn 't get caught , and whoever tried to throw it to first base didn 't get there in time and the runner was safe .
three times out of 10 .
do you know what they call a 300 hitter in major league baseball ?
good , really good , maybe an all-star .
do you know what they call a 400 baseball hitter ?
that 's somebody who hit , by the way , four times safely out of every 10 .
legendary -- as in ted williams legendary -- the last major league baseball player to hit over 400 during a regular season .
now let 's take this back into my world of medicine where i 'm a lot more comfortable , or perhaps a bit less comfortable after what i 'm going to talk to you about .
suppose you have appendicitis and you 're referred to a surgeon who 's batting 400 on appendectomies .
somehow this isn 't working out , is it ?
now suppose you live in a certain part of a certain remote place and you have a loved one who has blockages in two coronary arteries and your family doctor refers that loved one to a cardiologist who 's batting 200 on angioplasties .
but , but , you know what ?
she 's doing a lot better this year . she 's on the comeback trail .
and she 's hitting a 257 .
somehow this isn 't working .
but i 'm going to ask you a question .
what do you think a batting average for a cardiac surgeon or a nurse practitioner or an orthopedic surgeon , an obgyn , a paramedic is supposed to be ?
1,000 , very good .
now truth of the matter is , nobody knows in all of medicine what a good surgeon or physician or paramedic is supposed to bat .
what we do though is we send each one of them , including myself , out into the world with the admonition , be perfect .
never ever , ever make a mistake , but you worry about the details , about how that 's going to happen .
and that was the message that i absorbed when i was in med school .
i was an obsessive compulsive student .
in high school , a classmate once said that brian goldman would study for a blood test .
and so i did .
and i studied in my little garret at the nurses ' residence at toronto general hospital , not far from here .
and i memorized everything .
i memorized in my anatomy class the origins and exertions of every muscle , every branch of every artery that came off the aorta , differential diagnoses obscure and common .
i even knew the differential diagnosis in how to classify renal tubular acidosis .
and all the while , i was amassing more and more knowledge .
and i did well , i graduated with honors , cum laude .
and i came out of medical school with the impression that if i memorized everything and knew everything , or as much as possible , as close to everything as possible , that it would immunize me against making mistakes .
and it worked for a while , until i met mrs. drucker .
i was a resident at a teaching hospital here in toronto when mrs. drucker was brought to the emergency department of the hospital where i was working .
at the time i was assigned to the cardiology service on a cardiology rotation .
and it was my job , when the emergency staff called for a cardiology consult , to see that patient in emerg .
and to report back to my attending .
and i saw mrs. drucker , and she was breathless .
and when i listened to her , she was making a wheezy sound .
and when i listened to her chest with a stethoscope , i could hear crackly sounds on both sides that told me that she was in congestive heart failure .
this is a condition in which the heart fails , and instead of being able to pump all the blood forward , some of the blood backs up into the lung , the lungs fill up with blood , and that 's why you have shortness of breath .
and that wasn 't a difficult diagnosis to make .
i made it and i set to work treating her .
i gave her aspirin . i gave her medications to relieve the strain on her heart .
i gave her medications that we call diuretics , water pills , to get her to pee out the access fluid .
and over the course of the next hour and a half or two , she started to feel better .
and i felt really good .
and that 's when i made my first mistake ; i sent her home .
actually , i made two more mistakes .
i sent her home without speaking to my attending .
i didn 't pick up the phone and do what i was supposed to do , which was call my attending and run the story by him so he would have a chance to see her for himself .
and he knew her , he would have been able to furnish additional information about her .
maybe i did it for a good reason .
maybe i didn 't want to be a high-maintenance resident .
maybe i wanted to be so successful and so able to take responsibility that i would do so and i would be able to take care of my attending 's patients without even having to contact him .
the second mistake that i made was worse .
in sending her home , i disregarded a little voice deep down inside that was trying to tell me , " goldman , not a good idea . don 't do this . "
in fact , so lacking in confidence was i that i actually asked the nurse who was looking after mrs. drucker , " do you think it 's okay if she goes home ? "
and the nurse thought about it and said very matter-of-factly , " yeah , i think she 'll do okay . "
i can remember that like it was yesterday .
so i signed the discharge papers , and an ambulance came , paramedics came to take her home .
and i went back to my work on the wards .
all the rest of that day , that afternoon , i had this kind of gnawing feeling inside my stomach .
but i carried on with my work .
and at the end of the day , i packed up to leave the hospital and walked to the parking lot to take my car and drive home when i did something that i don 't usually do .
i walked through the emergency department on my way home .
and it was there that another nurse , not the nurse who was looking after mrs. drucker before , but another nurse , said three words to me that are the three words that most emergency physicians i know dread .
others in medicine dread them as well , but there 's something particular about emergency medicine because we see patients so fleetingly .
the three words are : do you remember ?
" do you remember that patient you sent home ? "
the other nurse asked matter-of-factly .
" well she 's back , " in just that tone of voice .
well she was back all right .
she was back and near death .
about an hour after she had arrived home , after i 'd sent her home , she collapsed and her family called 911 and the paramedics brought her back to the emergency department where she had a blood pressure of 50 , which is in severe shock .
and she was barely breathing and she was blue .
and the emerg. staff pulled out all the stops .
they gave her medications to raise her blood pressure .
they put her on a ventilator .
and i was shocked and shaken to the core .
and i went through this roller coaster , because after they stabilized her , she went to the intensive care unit , and i hoped against hope that she would recover .
and over the next two or three days , it was clear that she was never going to wake up .
she had irreversible brain damage .
and the family gathered .
and over the course of the next eight or nine days , they resigned themselves to what was happening .
and at about the nine day mark , they let her go -- mrs. drucker , a wife , a mother and a grandmother .
they say you never forget the names of those who die .
and that was my first time to be acquainted with that .
over the next few weeks , i beat myself up and i experienced for the first time the unhealthy shame that exists in our culture of medicine -- where i felt alone , isolated , not feeling the healthy kind of shame that you feel , because you can 't talk about it with your colleagues .
you know that healthy kind , when you betray a secret that a best friend made you promise never to reveal and then you get busted and then your best friend confronts you and you have terrible discussions , but at the end of it all that sick feeling guides you and you say , i 'll never make that mistake again .
and you make amends and you never make that mistake again .
that 's the kind of shame that is a teacher .
the unhealthy shame i 'm talking about is the one that makes you so sick inside .
it 's the one that says , not that what you did was bad , but that you are bad .
and it was what i was feeling .
and it wasn 't because of my attending ; he was a doll .
he talked to the family , and i 'm quite sure that he smoothed things over and made sure that i didn 't get sued .
and i kept asking myself these questions .
why didn 't i ask my attending ? why did i send her home ?
and then at my worst moments : why did i make such a stupid mistake ?
why did i go into medicine ?
slowly but surely , it lifted .
i began to feel a bit better .
and on a cloudy day , there was a crack in the clouds and the sun started to come out and i wondered , maybe i could feel better again .
and i made myself a bargain that if only i redouble my efforts to be perfect and never make another mistake again , please make the voices stop .
and they did .
and i went back to work .
and then it happened again .
two years later i was an attending in the emergency department at a community hospital just north of toronto , and i saw a 25 year-old man with a sore throat .
it was busy , i was in a bit of a hurry .
he kept pointing here .
i looked at his throat , it was a little bit pink .
and i gave him a prescription for penicillin and sent him on his way .
and even as he was walking out the door , he was still sort of pointing to his throat .
and two days later i came to do my next emergency shift , and that 's when my chief asked to speak to me quietly in her office .
and she said the three words : do you remember ?
" do you remember that patient you saw with the sore throat ? "
well it turns out , he didn 't have a strep throat .
he had a potentially life-threatening condition called epiglottitis .
you can google it , but it 's an infection , not of the throat , but of the upper airway , and it can actually cause the airway to close .
and fortunately he didn 't die .
he was placed on intravenous antibiotics and he recovered after a few days .
and i went through the same period of shame and recriminations and felt cleansed and went back to work , until it happened again and again and again .
twice in one emergency shift , i missed appendicitis .
now that takes some doing , especially when you work in a hospital that at the time saw but 14 people a night .
now in both cases , i didn 't send them home and i don 't think there was any gap in their care .
one i thought had a kidney stone .
i ordered a kidney x-ray . when it turned out to be normal , my colleague who was doing a reassessment of the patient noticed some tenderness in the right lower quadrant and called the surgeons .
the other one had a lot of diarrhea .
i ordered some fluids to rehydrate him and asked my colleague to reassess him .
and he did and when he noticed some tenderness in the right lower quadrant , called the surgeons .
in both cases , they had their operations and they did okay .
but each time , they were gnawing at me , eating at me .
and i 'd like to be able to say to you that my worst mistakes only happened in the first five years of practice as many of my colleagues say , which is total b.s .
some of my doozies have been in the last five years .
alone , ashamed and unsupported .
here 's the problem : if i can 't come clean and talk about my mistakes , if i can 't find the still-small voice that tells me what really happened , how can i share it with my colleagues ?
how can i teach them about what i did so that they don 't do the same thing ?
if i were to walk into a room -- like right now , i have no idea what you think of me .
when was the last time you heard somebody talk about failure after failure after failure ?
oh yeah , you go to a cocktail party and you might hear about some other doctor , but you 're not going to hear somebody talking about their own mistakes .
if i were to walk into a room filled with my colleages and ask for their support right now and start to tell what i 've just told you right now , i probably wouldn 't get through two of those stories before they would start to get really uncomfortable , somebody would crack a joke , they 'd change the subject and we would move on .
and in fact , if i knew and my colleagues knew that one of my orthopedic colleagues took off the wrong leg in my hospital , believe me , i 'd have trouble making eye contact with that person .
that 's the system that we have .
it 's a complete denial of mistakes .
it 's a system in which there are two kinds of physicians -- those who make mistakes and those who don 't , those who can 't handle sleep deprivation and those who can , those who have lousy outcomes and those who have great outcomes .
and it 's almost like an ideological reaction , like the antibodies begin to attack that person .
and we have this idea that if we drive the people who make mistakes out of medicine , what will we be left with , but a safe system .
but there are two problems with that .
in my 20 years or so of medical broadcasting and journalism , i 've made a personal study of medical malpractice and medical errors to learn everything i can , from one of the first articles i wrote for the toronto star to my show " white coat , black art . "
and what i 've learned is that errors are absolutely ubiquitous .
we work in a system where errors happen every day , where one in 10 medications are either the wrong medication given in hospital or at the wrong dosage , where hospital-acquired infections are getting more and more numerous , causing havoc and death .
in this country , as many as 24,000 canadians die of preventable medical errors .
in the united states , the institute of medicine pegged it at 100,000 .
in both cases , these are gross underestimates , because we really aren 't ferreting out the problem as we should .
and here 's the thing .
in a hospital system where medical knowledge is doubling every two or three years , we can 't keep up with it .
sleep deprivation is absolutely pervasive .
we can 't get rid of it .
we have our cognitive biases , so that i can take a perfect history on a patient with chest pain .
now take the same patient with chest pain , make them moist and garrulous and put a little bit of alcohol on their breath , and suddenly my history is laced with contempt .
i don 't take the same history .
i 'm not a robot ; i don 't do things the same way each time .
and my patients aren 't cars ; they don 't tell me their symptoms in the same way each time .
given all of that , mistakes are inevitable .
so if you take the system , as i was taught , and weed out all the error-prone health professionals , well there won 't be anybody left .
and you know that business about people not wanting to talk about their worst cases ?
on my show , on " white coat , black art , " i made it a habit of saying , " here 's my worst mistake , " i would say to everybody from paramedics to the chief of cardiac surgery , " here 's my worst mistake , " blah , blah , blah , blah , blah , " what about yours ? " and i would point the microphone towards them .
and their pupils would dilate , they would recoil , then they would look down and swallow hard and start to tell me their stories .
they want to tell their stories . they want to share their stories .
they want to be able to say , " look , don 't make the same mistake i did . "
what they need is an environment to be able to do that .
what they need is a redefined medical culture .
and it starts with one physician at a time .
the redefined physician is human , knows she 's human , accepts it , isn 't proud of making mistakes , but strives to learn one thing from what happened that she can teach to somebody else .
she shares her experience with others .
she 's supportive when other people talk about their mistakes .
and she points out other people 's mistakes , not in a gotcha way , but in a loving , supportive way so that everybody can benefit .
and she works in a culture of medicine that acknowledges that human beings run the system , and when human beings run the system , they will make mistakes from time to time .
so the system is evolving to create backups that make it easier to detect those mistakes that humans inevitably make and also fosters in a loving , supportive way places where everybody who is observing in the health care system can actually point out things that could be potential mistakes and is rewarded for doing so , and especially people like me , when we do make mistakes , we 're rewarded for coming clean .
my name is brian goldman .
i am a redefined physician .
i 'm human . i make mistakes .
i 'm sorry about that , but i strive to learn one thing that i can pass on to other people .
i still don 't know what you think of me , but i can live with that .
and let me close with three words of my own : i do remember .
i 'm going to speak about a tiny , little idea .
and this is about shifting baseline .
and because the idea can be explained in one minute , i will tell you three stories before to fill in the time .
and the first story is about charles darwin , one of my heroes .
and he was here , as you well know , in ' 35 .
and you 'd think he was chasing finches , but he wasn 't .
he was actually collecting fish .
and he described one of them as very " common . "
this was the sailfin grouper .
a big fishery was run on it until the ' 80s .
now the fish is on the iucn red list .
now this story , we have heard it lots of times on galapagos and other places , so there is nothing particular about it .
but the point is , we still come to galapagos .
we still think it is pristine .
the brochures still say it is untouched .
so what happens here ?
the second story , also to illustrate another concept , is called shifting waistline .
because i was there in ' 71 , studying a lagoon in west africa .
i was there because i grew up in europe and i wanted later to work in africa .
and i thought i could blend in .
and i got a big sunburn , and i was convinced that i was really not from there .
this was my first sunburn .
and the lagoon was surrounded by palm trees , as you can see , and a few mangrove .
and it had tilapia about 20 centimeters , a species of tilapia called blackchin tilapia .
and the fisheries for this tilapia sustained lots of fish and they had a good time and they earned more than average in ghana .
when i went there 27 years later , the fish had shrunk to half of their size .
they were maturing at five centimeters .
they had been pushed genetically .
there were still fishes .
they were still kind of happy .
and the fish also were happy to be there .
so nothing has changed , but everything has changed .
my third little story is that i was an accomplice in the introduction of trawling in southeast asia .
in the ' 70s -- well , beginning in the ' 60s -- europe did lots of development projects .
fish development meant imposing on countries that had already 100,000 fishers and this boat , quite ugly , is called the mutiara 4 .
and i went sailing on it , and we did surveys throughout the southern south china sea and especially the java sea .
and what we caught , we didn 't have words for it .
what we caught , i know now , is the bottom of the sea .
and 90 percent of our catch were sponges , other animals that are fixed on the bottom .
and actually most of the fish , they are a little spot on the debris , the piles of debris , were coral reef fish .
essentially the bottom of the sea came onto the deck and then was thrown down .
and these pictures are extraordinary because this transition is very rapid .
within a year , you do a survey and then commercial fishing begins .
the bottom is transformed from , in this case , a hard bottom or soft coral into a muddy mess .
this is a dead turtle .
they were not eaten , they were thrown away because they were dead .
and one time we caught a live one .
it was not drowned yet .
and then they wanted to kill it because it was good to eat .
this mountain of debris is actually collected by fishers every time they go into an area that 's never been fished .
but it 's not documented .
we transform the world , but we don 't remember it .
we adjust our baseline to the new level , and we don 't recall what was there .
if you generalize this , something like this happens .
you have on the y axis some good thing : biodiversity , numbers of orca , the greenness of your country , the water supply .
and over time it changes -- it changes because people do things , or naturally .
every generation will use the images that they got at the beginning of their conscious lives as a standard and will extrapolate forward .
and the difference then , they perceive as a loss .
but they don 't perceive what happened before as a loss .
you can have a succession of changes .
at the end you want to sustain miserable leftovers .
and that , to a large extent , is what we want to do now .
we want to sustain things that are gone or things that are not the way they were .
now one should think this problem affected people certainly when in predatory societies , they killed animals and they didn 't know they had done so after a few generations .
because , obviously , an animal that is very abundant , before it gets extinct , it becomes rare .
so you don 't lose abundant animals .
you always lose rare animals .
and therefore they 're not perceived as a big loss .
over time , we concentrate on large animals , and in a sea that means the big fish .
they become rarer because we fish them .
over time we have a few fish left and we think this is the baseline .
and the question is , why do people accept this ?
well because they don 't know that it was different .
and in fact , lots of people , scientists , will contest that it was really different .
and they will contest this because the evidence presented in an earlier mode is not in the way they would like the evidence presented .
for example , the anecdote that some present , as captain so-and-so observed lots of fish in this area cannot be used or is usually not utilized by fishery scientists , because it 's not " scientific . "
so you have a situation where people don 't know the past , even though we live in literate societies , because they don 't trust the sources of the past .
and hence , the enormous role that a marine protected area can play .
because with marine protected areas , we actually recreate the past .
we recreate the past that people cannot conceive because the baseline has shifted and is extremely low .
that is for people who can see a marine protected area and who can benefit from the insight that it provides , which enables them to reset their baseline .
how about the people who can 't do that because they have no access -- the people in the midwest for example ?
there i think that the arts and film can perhaps fill the gap , and simulation .
this is a simulation of chesapeake bay .
there were gray whales in chesapeake bay a long time ago -- 500 years ago .
and you will have noticed that the hues and tones are like " avatar . "
and if you think about " avatar , " if you think of why people were so touched by it -- never mind the pocahontas story -- why so touched by the imagery ?
because it evokes something that in a sense has been lost .
and so my recommendation , it 's the only one i will provide , is for cameron to do " avatar ii " underwater .
thank you very much .
in the 1980s in the communist eastern germany , if you owned a typewriter , you had to register it with the government .
you had to register a sample sheet of text out of the typewriter .
and this was done so the government could track where text was coming from .
if they found a paper which had the wrong kind of thought , they could track down who created that thought .
and we in the west couldn 't understand how anybody could do this , how much this would restrict freedom of speech .
we would never do that in our own countries .
but today in 2011 , if you go and buy a color laser printer from any major laser printer manufacturer and print a page , that page will end up having slight yellow dots printed on every single page in a pattern which makes the page unique to you and to your printer .
this is happening to us today .
and nobody seems to be making a fuss about it .
and this is an example of the ways that our own governments are using technology against us , the citizens .
and this is one of the main three sources of online problems today .
if we take a look at what 's really happening in the online world , we can group the attacks based on the attackers .
we have three main groups .
we have online criminals .
like here , we have mr. dimitry golubov from the city of kiev in ukraine .
and the motives of online criminals are very easy to understand .
these guys make money .
they use online attacks to make lots of money , and lots and lots of it .
we actually have several cases of millionaires online , multimillionaires , who made money with their attacks .
here 's vladimir tsastsin form tartu in estonia .
this is alfred gonzalez .
this is stephen watt .
this is bjorn sundin .
this is matthew anderson , tariq al-daour and so on and so on .
these guys make their fortunes online , but they make it through the illegal means of using things like banking trojans to steal money from our bank accounts while we do online banking , or with keyloggers to collect our credit card information while we are doing online shopping from an infected computer .
the u.s. secret service , two months ago , froze the swiss bank account of mr. sam jain right here , and that bank account had 14.9 million u.s. dollars on it when it was frozen .
mr. jain himself is on the loose ; nobody knows where he is .
and i claim it 's already today that it 's more likely for any of us to become the victim of a crime online than here in the real world .
and it 's very obvious that this is only going to get worse .
in the future , the majority of crime will be happening online .
the second major group of attackers that we are watching today are not motivated by money .
they 're motivated by something else -- motivated by protests , motivated by an opinion , motivated by the laughs .
groups like anonymous have risen up over the last 12 months and have become a major player in the field of online attacks .
so those are the three main attackers : criminals who do it for the money , hacktivists like anonymous doing it for the protest , but then the last group are nation states , governments doing the attacks .
and then we look at cases like what happened in diginotar .
this is a prime example of what happens when governments attack against their own citizens .
diginotar is a certificate authority from the netherlands -- or actually , it was .
it was running into bankruptcy last fall because they were hacked into .
somebody broke in and they hacked it thoroughly .
and i asked last week in a meeting with dutch government representatives , i asked one of the leaders of the team whether he found plausible that people died because of the diginotar hack .
and his answer was yes .
so how do people die as the result of a hack like this ?
well diginotar is a c.a .
they sell certificates .
what do you do with certificates ?
well you need a certificate if you have a website that has https , ssl encrypted services , services like gmail .
now we all , or a big part of us , use gmail or one of their competitors , but these services are especially popular in totalitarian states like iran , where dissidents use foreign services like gmail because they know they are more trustworthy than the local services and they are encrypted over ssl connections , so the local government can 't snoop on their discussions .
except they can if they hack into a foreign c.a .
and issue rogue certificates .
and this is exactly what happened with the case of diginotar .
what about arab spring and things that have been happening , for example , in egypt ?
well in egypt , the rioters looted the headquarters of the egyptian secret police in april 2011 , and when they were looting the building they found lots of papers .
among those papers , was this binder entitled " finfisher . "
and within that binder were notes from a company based in germany which had sold the egyptian government a set of tools for intercepting -- and in very large scale -- all the communication of the citizens of the country .
they had sold this tool for 280,000 euros to the egyptian government .
the company headquarters are right here .
so western governments are providing totalitarian governments with tools to do this against their own citizens .
but western governments are doing it to themselves as well .
for example , in germany , just a couple of weeks ago the so-called state trojan was found , which was a trojan used by german government officials to investigate their own citizens .
if you are a suspect in a criminal case , well it 's pretty obvious , your phone will be tapped .
but today , it goes beyond that .
they will tap your internet connection .
they will even use tools like state trojan to infect your computer with a trojan , which enables them to watch all your communication , to listen to your online discussions , to collect your passwords .
now when we think deeper about things like these , the obvious response from people should be that , " okay , that sounds bad , but that doesn 't really affect me because i 'm a legal citizen .
why should i worry ?
because i have nothing to hide . "
and this is an argument , which doesn 't make sense .
privacy is implied .
privacy is not up for discussion .
this is not a question between privacy against security .
it 's a question of freedom against control .
and while we might trust our governments right now , right here in 2011 , any right we give away will be given away for good .
and do we trust , do we blindly trust , any future government , a government we might have 50 years from now ?
and these are the questions that we have to worry about for the next 50 years .
this may sound strange , but i 'm a big fan of the concrete block .
the first concrete blocks were manufactured in 1868 with a very simple idea : modules made of cement of a fixed measurement that fit together .
very quickly concrete blocks became the most-used construction unit in the world .
they enabled us to to build things that were larger than us , buildings , bridges , one brick at a time .
essentially concrete blocks had become the building block of our time .
almost a hundred years later in 1947 , lego came up with this .
it was called the automatic binding brick .
and in a few short years , lego bricks took place in every household .
it 's estimated that over 400 billion bricks have been produced -- or 75 bricks for every person on the planet .
you don 't have to be an engineer to make beautiful houses , beautiful bridges , beautiful buildings .
lego made it accessible .
lego has essentially taken the concrete block , the building block of the world , and made it into the building block of our imagination .
meanwhile the exact same year , at bell labs the next revolution was about to be announced , the next building block .
the transistor was a small plastic unit that would take us from a world of static bricks piled on top of each other to a world where everything was interactive .
like the concrete block , the transistor allows you to build much larger , more complex circuits , one brick at a time .
but there 's a main difference : the transistor was only for experts .
i personally don 't accept this , that the building block of our time is reserved for experts , so i decided to change that .
eight years ago when i was at the media lab , i started exploring this idea of how to put the power of engineers in the hands of artists and designers .
a few years ago i started developing littlebits .
let me show you how they work .
littlebits are electronic modules with each one specific function .
they 're pre-engineered to be light , sound , motors and sensors .
and the best part about it is they snap together with magnets .
so you can 't put them the wrong way .
the bricks are color-coded .
green is output , blue is power , pink is input and orange is wire .
so all you need to do is snap a blue to a green and very quickly you can start making larger circuits .
you put a blue to a green , you can make light .
you can put a knob in between and now you 've made a little dimmer .
switch out the knob for a pulse module , which is here , and now you 've made a little blinker .
add this buzzer for some extra punch and you 've created a noise machine .
i 'm going to stop that .
so beyond simple play , littlebits are actually pretty powerful .
instead of having to program , to wire , to solder , littlebits allow you to program using very simple intuitive gestures .
so to make this blink faster or slower , you would just turn this knob and basically make it pulse faster or slower .
the idea behind littlebits is that it 's a growing library .
we want to make every single interaction in the world into a ready-to-use brick .
lights , sounds , solar panels , motors -- everything should be accessible .
we 've been giving littlebits to kids and seeing them play with them .
and it 's been an incredible experience .
the nicest thing is how they start to understand the electronics around them from everyday that they don 't learn at schools .
for example , how a nightlight works , or why an elevator door stays open , or how an ipod responds to touch .
we 've also been taking littlebits to design schools .
so for example , we 've had designers with no experience with electronics whatsoever start to play with littlebits as a material .
here you see , with felt and paper water bottles , we have geordie making ...
a few weeks ago we took littlebits to risd and gave them to some designers with no experience in engineering whatsoever -- just cardboard , wood and paper -- and told them " make something . "
here 's an example of a project they made , a motion-activated confetti canon ball .
but wait , this is actually my favorite project .
it 's a lobster made of playdough that 's afraid of the dark .
to these non-engineers , littlebits became another material , electronics became just another material .
and we want to make this material accessible to everyone .
so littlebits is open-source .
you can go on the website , download all the design files , make them yourself .
we want to encourage a world of creators , of inventors , of contributors , because this world that we live in , this interactive world , is ours .
so go ahead and start inventing .
thank you .