镜像世界、手机消失、人类爱上AI：“硅谷精神之父”凯文·凯利的2049预言【专访】

AI worked. Everybody loves it. I just

gave birth to a baby boy 2 months ago.

His name is Benjamin. Whatever Benjamin

will be doing in 25 years, that job does

not exist today. Do we still need

reporters? Maybe even more of them. You

picture the future when smart glasses

are going to replace them. We go into

the mirror world to interact with AIS

and robots. I would probably bet on a

Chinese company over Apple of figuring

this out. Robotics. In 25 years, they'll

be cheaper, but they won't be any

better. Ton of striving. Getting a

license might become more difficult.

Space Tech. I don't think there will be

any cities on Mars ever. Are you a fan

of chasing longevity? I don't want to

die, but I'm not afraid of it. Lastly,

BCI. This is one area that is moving

faster than I thought. How will Silicon

Valley be different in the next 20

years? That's a great question.

Hello.

Fore

speech.

So my first question, tell us a bit

about your new book. It's called 2049,

the next 10,000 days. Why did you write

this book or what message do you want to

deliver to the audience? So this is a

little prototype of the book. It's a

book that is trying to imagine

a world in 25 years that's actually a

world that we want to live in an

optimistic world a world in which things

work out and it tries to imagine

multiple ways in which transportation

employment internet entertainment work

out well as well as trying to imagine

the way in which China's role in the

world also works out well. So these are

optimistic scenarios in 25 years.

you made a few predictions in the book

which we will go into details later. Um

but I would say some of them are quite

ambitious and optimistic. I'm wondering

what's your matrix when making those

predictions. I I will clarify and this

might be a matter of translation but um

I'm trying not to do predictions. These

are scenarios. A scenario is comes in a

set. There's multiple answers. It's not

saying this is how it's going to be.

It's saying this is how it could be. The

method is trying to um work backwards

from imagining in 25 years from now if

someone came back from the future and

said it really is great. AI worked.

Everybody loves it. Not that it was

perfect, but just that it worked. And so

the question will be well how do we get

there? What would be the steps in 25

years for us to arrive at that moment?

And so that's what the book that's one

of the methods for the book is is to try

and and think about the best case

scenario. Not a perfect one but one that

worked. You said in your book that most

of these predictions or scenarios won't

necessarily become the reality but the

purpose is just to make people think and

reshape the future. So what kind of

future you want to reshape? Sure. And

that's a fair question. The the idea is

is that um the f these technologies

stuff is so complicated that it's very

unlikely that we could have a desirable

future accidentally. We kind of have to

actually you can't have it

inadvertently. You actually have to kind

of make it happen. And you can't make it

happen unless you can see it first. So

part of the book is trying to help

people imagine a world in which they um

would want to live and then try to make

it happen. But if you can't imagine it

then it doesn't you won't get there and

most of the science fiction stories and

movies are all disasters about the

future. Yeah. So the world is in 25

years again it's not perfect right. Um

at the same time I think people know

that tac is double-edged sword. Yes. Uh

the Black Mirror episodes coming out

this year shows a lot of dark side of

the tech. People were talking about it.

Um AI expert like Jeffrey Hinton is

warning about the dark side of AI as

well. Are you concerned? I I am not very

concerned. I don't spend much time with

scenarios that are negative because

thousands and thousands of people, most

reporters,

most book writers, most TV people, most

Hollywood movies are are exploring the

downsides, right? So I don't need to do

that. What I'm my job is to talk about

the upside because very few people are

talking about that. So I I I think

they're real. I think those

possibilities are real. They're

significant. But I don't mention them

because I don't need to. Everybody knows

them. That's the first thing they have.

If you talk about AI in the future, it's

only negative. So I don't need to to do

that, right?

AI agent.

I just gave birth to a baby boy two

months ago. Um, his name is Benjamin.

I'm thinking when he grows up, you know,

the way, you know, he's using Chbt and

all the AI tools and his like growth

environment will be so different from my

age. True. Will our education system be

totally different for the next 25 years?

And how should we prepare for that?

Right now, I think most students are

learning more on YouTube than at school.

I think that will continue. Schools will

will have to adapt. Right now, there's a

big controversy about kids using um chat

AIs to write papers. And the question

is, well, why is that important? Of

course, they're going to use AI to help

write papers. You don't want to prohibit

it. You want to help them do it well. AI

will obviously be a central factor in

learning. And I think as I said, one of

the main things it can do is it can um

enable each student to progress at the

own pace. M but more importantly I think

the skill what you when you graduate

from high school say is not any

particular knowledge that you have and

it's even not even a major skill other

than the primary skill of being able to

maximize your learning knowing how to

learn. So what you want to learn in

school is learning how to learn. You

want to graduate being very conscious of

exactly how to optimize your own

learning because whatever occupation you

go into does not exist today. All right?

Whatever Benjamin will be doing in 25

years, that job, that role does not

exist today. So even probably when they

graduate from high school, it doesn't

exist. They're going to have to learn

it. So

we want to have kids graduate really

knowing how to optimize their own

learning in the many different ways that

are to learn physical things conceptual

things and so learning how to learn

becomes the central course and asking

questions so answers the AIS will give

you all the answers you want you don't

have to make answers as a student you

have to learn how to ask questions

questions are much more valuable much

more creative much harder for even an AI

to do good questions. Asking questions,

learning how to learn, moving at your

own pace. Those are some of the things I

see in education, right? Uh in China

this month, over 13.3 million Chinese

students attended the college entrance

exam and they're going to universities

in September later this year. Many of

them are quite anxious about the major

that they should choose at university

level for undergrad study because that

decides what kind of job they will go

after four years when they go to you

know society. uh what's your advice to

them or doesn't matter anymore because

AI will take most of the jobs or no AI

is not going to take the jobs that's

what I'm saying AI is not taking the

jobs a will do a lot of their tasks

so the the nature of the job will change

you'll have different tasks my advice

for people graduating is um to really

follow their enthusiasm

to not be concerned about the economic

ics of it because that's changing very

very fast and it's very hard to predict

what's going to be the highest paying

job. Yeah. And that that money should

not be the thing that they're focused

on. Money is a byproduct of other

satisfactions. Money is a byproduct of

doing something fabulous, doing it well,

the money will come. People think that

that's something that you can say if

you're privileged, but it's absolutely

true even for poor people. You want to

be useful. You want to do things well.

You want to be um valuable first and

then the money will come. That's true in

occupation. Follow something that you

love to do that you're good at. Master

something. So the thing I tell young

people and it would be true in China is

master something. It doesn't matter what

it is. Become the expert on something.

It could be something frivolous like a

sport. It could be a hobby where you

become a master knitter or sewer.

Whatever it is, become master of that

and that will take you on a journey to

somewhere that you didn't expect. And so

don't try to be don't think that you

need to be a doctor or a lawyer because

that's some pathway to something. It's

not. Yeah.

talk at the if you really want to become

a doctor or a lawyer, spend a week

shadowing a doctor or a lawyer and see

what their life is like. See if you want

that life.

I want to ask about AI in content

creation and the media industry because

that's relevant to my job and decides

whether I will be replaced by AI very

soon. So you mentioned in your book that

due to AI the bar uh of the media

industry will become even lower. Do we

still need reporters in uh 25 years in

2049? Yes, for sure. Maybe even more of

them. The thing about the AIS, what

we're learning about them is that again

they can produce answers. They can do

research. Maybe in 25 years they'll be

able to do enough to call up somebody or

email

what they may read a paper and oh

understand this is an important paper

and here's the name of the professor and

they'll contact this professor and ask a

question I think that's very very

possible

but

where the human will be involved is

overseeing all these agents and taking

responsibility for the output

right now if an AI gets something wrong

who do you blame right who who's going

to guarantee

that and part of what a job is is not

just doing the job but you are promising

the job will be good and if not you'll

make it good. I mean that's part of what

a job is. If you hire someone and they

don't do it right, it's their

responsibility. They've got to make it

right or do whatever. In AI there isn't

that responsibility.

There's no accountability. There's no

there's nothing saying I ensure I

guarantee that this will be good. And so

for at least in 25 years that's a job

for a human. You'll be overseeing AI who

doing research but you are going to be

the one the reporter the human reporter

is the one who's guaranteeing the

responsibility of the job and saying you

can trust me. It's so interesting to

observe the shift of media power uh over

the past 20 years. It was firstly

centralized in newspapers and television

and then uh with the rise of com and

mobile the power shifted to digital

media like the wired magazine which you

founded um and also Twitter Instagram

and other social media as everyone can

become what's called citizen journalist

right so I'm wondering like with so much

content being produced by AI the next 25

years um whether it's good or bad what

will be the next platform for voices and

public opinion It's a good question and

I think many of the forums that we have

now we have blogs which are sort of

turned into Substack newsletters which

are kind of the same thing. They're just

push version instead of you going to it

they're going to put out their blog. So

I think the idea of having individuals

writing stuff that will still be there

in 25 years um I think there'll still be

um streams of news

which are like TV stations or newspapers

they have video whatever but they're

streaming recent updates that that'll

continue but we'll have we'll have some

new things as well which is um much more

experiential

where um wearing some kind of glasses is

that can immerse you in another world.

Someone will take you to Tran on the

streets of Tran today and you will walk

around with them to experience the

bombing structures. You can feel it and

look around and it'll be like you are in

Tan. So the experiential nature of

things like news will increase. So it's

not just that you are someone's

reporting standing there with a

microphone. No, no, you you will be

there. you'll feel like you're there

yourself looking around and um that you

know that could be manipulated like

other things but that will be another

component in the news in 25 years as I

continue to build value one I want to

get your advice on how should I prepare

for the media thing that I'm building

the thing about media because observing

the media over time which is the the

bigger and more successful a media

property is the harder it is to adapt to

something new because they have much

more to lose. And they have a machine

that needs to be fed and they if they

take resources from feeding the machine,

a lot of people are impacted. If they

make a mistake and bet on the wrong

thing, a lot of people are impacted. If

you're a startup, you have very little

to lose. It's a couple people and if you

bet wrong, you go out of business, okay,

there's no commitment, you don't have

obligations and stuff. So the bigger you

get, the more successful you are, the

harder it is to adapt to the new thing.

It's not easier. You would think, well,

you have the resources to it, but it

doesn't work out that way. It's actually

harder. So in some senses, if you are

small, you actually have an advantage to

adapt to whatever is coming next. I I

would say that you um you just have to

keep trying things or you have to budget

a certain amount to try know that you're

going to fail on that. It's an

experiment that's unlikely to succeed.

Um, and you have to kind of pers

persevere and then you have to be

willing to when that fails to do it

again, which is very very hard in a

media world where you try something. Oh,

we tried that and it didn't work.

And no, you have to keep trying because

the first 10 aren't going to work. And

so um so I would say you know like for

me one of the things right now I you

know I say that YouTube is way way

underrated. It is powerful. It is

becoming more powerful and once Google

ads the AI search and stuff is going to

become even more powerful. And so the

YouTube YouTube verse

is something that I think is sort of

like the next big thing where you're

putting out your video, you you know,

you have your channels, whatnot. There

is some compensation. Um, and they're

trying, you know, to have VR and they'll

they'll once there are spatial video

stuff, they'll they'll take that

You picture the future when smart

glasses are going to replace our

smartphones. Um, and we're living in the

so-called mirror world, which is the

digital twin of our real world. Can you

elaborate a little bit more of the

concept? There's like maybe four

different ways to think about this

mirror world. One is just that it's like

um it's like virtual reality where you

put on the glass the goggles and you you

block out the real world and you can see

an imaginary world but it but it's in

three dimensions with sound and it feels

very very real. For anybody who's had

the chance to try it, it can be very

persuasive. That's the second part of it

where you have a spatial

digital twin. So your digital twin, your

avatar and you are at home with a camera

and and you see me as a digital twin.

You can do things with training,

education, surgery, all kinds of stuff.

Once you have that ability to merge the

real world and the digital world into

one thing, so that's at one level what

it is, but it's also more than that.

It's also the world that a self-driving

car like a whimo car when it's driving

down the road. The the world that it

sees is that world. It sees not just the

physical world, but it sees all the

other layers of it. It knows when the

traffic lights are turning. It knows the

signs. It It knows the speed limit. It

It has an overlay of all this other

information that it been told about the

map information in addition to what it

sees. And so that combined world is the

world that robots and AIs work in. So

when we meet or work with AIs and

robots, we go into that world. We go

into the mirror world to interact with

AIS and robots. That's the second or

third level. And and then there's even

another additional level of this mirror

world, which is that it is only possible

to render this because of AI. AI has to

be really cheap, really fast. has to

work at the level of your goggles, not

just back at headquarters. Your goggles

have to have some level of intelligence

in it as your glasses as well in order

to to do this. And so this world is only

possible if AI becomes really cheap and

it fuses the world. But also once AI

comes into the world, this world, the

real world is inev is ine inevitable.

You you you have that world. When you

put the glasses on and look around, it

starts to map the whole world. It's

mapping it. It's recording it and it's

digesting. It's, "Oh, that's a stairs.

That's a stairs. It goes up there. Oh,

there's a door there. So, you can go up

there." It's it's understanding the

whole world. So, once we put glasses on,

we make that world no matter what. It's

a consequence of the fact that AI is

seeing the whole world and understanding

it by having a million people wearing

glasses and having all scanned. So, so

it's just the natural outcome of having

AI and smart glasses, you're going to

get that world. But I think a bigger

shock is coming in the next 25 years and

that is the shock of how emotional the

AIs will be and how we will emotionally

bond to them. Right now, people can love

their dogs. They have a very strong

relationship with a dog that doesn't

even talk. Imagine if a dog could talk

back to you and answer questions, chat

with you, and tell you things that you

didn't know and tell you things about

yourself. And how how strong would you

have a relationship with that dog? Well,

that's what the AIS are going to be

doing. The emotion will be like those

are just going to go really high. And

there's definitely going to be people

who fall in love with them. There

definitely going to be people who have

very strong friendships, very strong

working relationships with these and at

an emotional level. And there'll be

people who will get very angry at the

AIS or they will get furious. I mean

there it's the emotional level that

we're going to have and we're going to

program in emotions to the AIs because

humans respond to that. That's a human

scale thing. We we respond to emotional

signals. And so there will be AIS people

will put in delight, surprise,

perplexity,

seriousness, joking into the AIS because

that's will be very attractive to to

people. And I think that's going to be a

real shock.

I think the competition of smart glasses

is getting really intense this year. I'm

wondering at the end of this glass war,

right, who will be the final winner or

what what makes a final winner? Yeah, I

I have no idea who who who will win, but

I I I I think the the the challenge we

know from I saw first virtual reality in

1987.

Wow. And I thought that it was going to

happen very fast. I was wrong. I was

very very wrong. Yeah. So, so the

technical challenges of doing this are

very very extreme. And it's not just

one. There are there are many including

power. the the the I mean we don't want

to have a a tether. We don't want to

have a cable. So just giving enough

power to these glasses to be able to do

what we want to do for hours. That's a

huge huge technological innovations

needed to do that. The um field of view

is huge. So, so the the answer is is

this the winner will be a company that

figures out how to solve five major

breakthroughs all at once. Even, you

know Apple

it's they can't do it. I mean, they

might do it, but they haven't been able

to do it. And so, there's just a lot

that they were asking for. From what I

see so far, I think we're still

5 to 10 years away. Mhm. before uh we

get the smart glasses that people will

wear. I mean maybe more than 10 years. I

again I think 25 years it may take

because I think there's the the the it's

I don't think we're close yet to them.

Maybe each company can solve part of the

question and then they combine them

together. Right. Right. It's sort of

like, you know, we had cell phones for

many many years, but there were these

big things and um it it took, you know,

it took something like smartphones, even

smartphones, but took something like an

iPhone to really bring it together. So,

that was 15 years or more after the cell

phones. It took tremendous amount of

work to kind of bring it all together in

a form that you know a slab like this

that didn't have a keyboard. It had a

touch. So, so just inventing the

touchscreen thing to make it work. That

was a critical component of that.

Without it, if you just had buttons,

it's just not going to or keyboard, it's

just not going to work. And so, there

were so many things. It took a long time

to turn the cell phone into the smart

mobile phone. M yeah and and and that's

where the the smart glasses are. It's

it's at least a decade, maybe two

decades. Yeah. Do you think Chinese

companies have a chance? Absolutely.

Chinese companies because of the supply

chain. Yes. All kinds of reasons. So So

you know I would I would probably bet on

a Chinese company over Apple of figuring

this out. I I I you know, if I had to

make a bet, I would bet that it would be

a Chinese company that makes this the

smart glasses that everybody wants.

Um but it but it'll still take a decade.

Yeah. The reason being because the

hardware is cheaper in China. in in a

curious way. I think there's there's uh

there's a technical know-how that's very

a lot of this is very materials oriented

and I think there's an advantage of the

ecosystem that China has to accelerate

that and also I think that um there is a

little bit more willingness to

experiment to to do something halfway

that's not quite there and yet maybe

find some use for it or make it work for

them at a halfway. So I I think a number

of things conspire to to make it more

more likely for China to invent this.

First of all, robotics. So, can humanoid

robots go into billions of family um

homes or we're only talking about like a

robotic arms in the factory? Yeah. Um

the humanoid I I I I think we're going

to confront or see humanoids in our work

like before we see their home. Though I

think the home is sort of the last place

that we'll see it. I think we'll see

like a warehouses where they're moving

around to do things or in fast food

restaurants that there could be cooking.

Um I think because one thing is is um we

we do want a much more constrained set

of um chores, right? Home

it's very wide open. I think it's really

hard. Um and also like like humanoids we

think of hands, arms and hands. the the

hand is one of the most remarkable

things what we can manipulate like

sewing a needle with this at the same

time we can use it to lift right 100

pounds it's like there's that that's so

hard for for machines to do and it's not

just IQ it's not just intelligence

there's there's there's some physical

material things to re replicate the

touch that we have we we can we can use

it to press at the same time pressing we

feel it. I mean, it's like that's really

hard. So, so I think this is um a home

robot is maybe not really even in 25

years. I think there will be some for

sale but not in millions. Yeah. But I

feel like companies and some people are

very obsessed with making the humanoid

like mask and others. I think I learned

from virtual reality which I saw almost

40 years ago and I thought okay it's

pretty good. It's if you know if you saw

it now say it's pretty good and yet 40

years later

what happened is that it it it mostly

just decreased in cost. The VR is

actually not better. It's just that it's

millions times cheaper because back then

it took millions of dollars to do it.

And I think this the same way with the

home robots right now to do one of those

things is probably you know hundreds of

thousands of dollars. And I think in 25

years they'll be cheaper but they won't

be any better.

All right. You'll have the Tesla,

whatever it is, the human robot.

It'll be only $1,000, but it's not going

to be any better than the one that they

have right now. It I mean that that it's

serving a little bit better, but it's

it's it's I think it's really really

hard. So, we will get it. We're on that

path. I'm just saying it's going to be

slower than most people think. Great.

Fair enough. And a ton of striving. Um,

so in 25 years, do human beings still

need to drive? Um, there's no need for

our next generation to get a driver

license. Um, that's a good question. Um,

getting a license might become more

difficult. Oh,

why? Because if you have enough AI

driven cars, they drive better than

humans. Yeah. Much better. Much better.

And so you have to learn how to drive

when you're surrounded by other smart

drivers smarter cars which means that

your driving skills have to be better.

So I think there it would be more

difficult in the sense that you will

that the the the skill that you would

need will go up and I think the where

you can drive yourself would also start

to shrink. M. So, you might not be able

to drive in certain cities in the

downtown because they don't want you

there because you're not driving as well

because they can control um the traffic

better with the AI. And so, you may not

be able to drive downtown or you may

only be able to drive on certain highway

lanes. So, it's possible in 25 years

that the appeal of driving is not as

great. Mhm. And so you may have a choice

of like, do you want to to buy a

self-driving car? I mean, maybe you

can't drive a self-driving car. It only

there's no wheels. There's no wheels and

stuff. And so you have the choice and

well, I'm going to buy the self-driving

car because it'll pick me up whenever I

need it in a park and whatever rather

than having two cars. So, so I think

there will be people driving with a but

it'll be like getting a pilot's license.

M I think it'll be a little bit rarer

and you have to have a little bit higher

quality training, right? Interesting.

And uh space tech. So I think people

like Elon Musk kept talking about going

to Mars. Yeah. And make human beings

multilanetary. Uh do you see the need of

Mars to be multilanetary? Well, well, I

I I don't think there will be any cities

on Mars

ever. Then what's the purpose of going

there? I think um it's like going to the

moon. There's no real economic reason to

go to the moon. I mean, it's not.

There's spin-offs of the technology that

you devised. Going to the moon help give

us a technology to have satellites which

are very, very valuable. So, there will

be some economic indirect economic

benefits of going to Mars. Just learning

how to do that, learning how to have

self-contained living services for two

years. The technology used to get to

Mars would also be useful for mining

asteroids near Earth. So I think most of

the space that's economically valuable

is within near Earth.

It makes sense to have these theatrical

gestures of having a research station on

the moon or a research station on Mars,

but that's all it will ever be. It'll be

a research station very expensive to

maintain and there will be it's not a

very good life. You have to live

underground. Yeah. It's like, who wants

to live underground for two years? If

something happens, you're stuck there.

You're more likely to die. So, I don't

think there going to be very many people

who are It's going to be small group,

maybe eight people at the most. I mean,

there's people who live on the South

Pole. It's a research station. So,

there'll be a research station on Mars,

but that's it. That's all there will be.

Nobody. It's It's um a million times

easier to build a city at the bottom of

our oceans on Earth. Yeah. But we

haven't done that. Why not? It's hard.

And and building on Mars is a million

times more difficult. Yeah. So, we we'll

have a research station at great

expense, but but that will teach us a

lots of things. Yeah, it there will be

economic benefit indirectly from that

research, but there's no reason why

people will live on Mars in a city. It's

just not Yeah, I think I don't think it

was going to happen. Probably one of the

reasons being um multilanetary is to

find the next Earth. Yeah, but that's

we'll send out probes, AIS.

That's a good reason. And that's the one

of the reasons why the Mars doesn't work

is we can send out an AI. We can send

out cameras. We can send out a virtual

reality that will be just as good as a

human. Humans don't need to go. We could

have an AI drive a cart around and do

the exploring and report back to us

every hour. We don't need to send flesh,

human flesh. It's just we don't belong

in space. Yeah, agreed. Then next, let's

talk about life science and also

longevity. A personal question. Are you

afraid of death? I don't want to die,

but I'm not afraid of it. Yeah. In

Silicon Valley, we now see many

billionaires like Brian Johnson are

trying different methods to live longer,

stay young, and become, you know, or at

least look younger. Um, are you a fan of

chasing longevity? No, I'm I'm not. Uh,

I also think that's um over the actual

longevity part. I mean, there's two

parts of longevity. One is you want to

you want to extend your healthy period.

You don't you don't it's not just a

matter of extending your years. You want

to extend how long you're healthy which

is I I am all favor of that. That is a

really good idea. I think the idea of

extending the actual age limit is will

progress very very slowly and just not

happening as fast. So, so I'm all for

the idea of trying to maximize your

healthy age, but I don't see the age

extension. I think I think it's slow.

Some people say, well, if you can extend

it for one year per year, if every year

you can extend how long people live,

then in theory you could keep going. But

I don't think we're anywhere near one

year per year. I think um you know it's

it's even the outliers even the the most

extreme versions are not living that

much longer. Extending the healthy age

is a fantastic idea. Great. Um I know AI

is being used in many um verticals in

biotech as well as pharmaceutical

industry and we are making huge progress

um which means maybe major disease like

all kinds of cancers will be cured very

soon. Yeah, people are living longer and

healthier. Maybe they will retire much

later as well. What does it mean to our

society? Will that shift the society

structure and the order? I I do think

that there's a chance to have like a um

pan viral vaccine and even cancer

vaccines we're talking about. um those

seemed 25 years those seem reasonable,

possible that we could have a vaccine

for most viruses across all viruses. We

do see people living longer and we also

in 25 years we're going to see the um

Earth's population shrink as a whole,

China as well. And so that's combining.

So we have fewer and fewer children and

more and more old people. And so that's

true not just in China, but it's gonna

be true for a lot of the world, but

especially for China. That's going to be

um that's a challenge for innovation and

new ideas when you have mostly old

people and fewer young people willing to

take chances and with very little to

lose. So I think that is I think that

it's going to be a challenge for for us

even in 25 years. I think one of the

solutions to that is AI where you have

AI who also consume things not just

generate things um where you have an

economy built so economically I think we

could solve the problem culturally

that's a little bit more difficult um

because in Japan we see a little bit

that where the young people are sty

because all the old people still have

jobs and there's no way to move up and

there's no room for a crazy idea so

they're socially there might be some

innovation needed to overcome the

demographics that we'll see in 25 years.

Um I I'm a little bit more radical in my

prediction about the global collapse

officially.

The World Health Organization and UN

says it's not going to happen until

2070, but I think it's going to happen

in by 20 46 15 years from now. will

begin to have a smaller earth. It won't

be noticeable right away because it's

just at the beginning, but I think the

consequences are already starting to

happen. Lastly, BCI, we are witnessing

big progress in companies like

Neurolink. There are many startups in

this field as well. Um, how far can we

go in the next 25 years? Yeah, that that

this is one area that is moving faster

than I thought. M it would be hundred

years before we have something that

could read our mind. But there's lots of

experiments and startups happening where

you put a cap on your head and it can

extract out signals. You can, you know,

control things by thinking about it. You

can go back and forth, have feedback. I

think there's going to be very few

people who will drill things into their

head. I mean who have um invasive

surgery that's I just don't think I mean

people who are medically need it you

know parallegics and others yes for sure

but I think a normal person I think is

not there'll be some crazies but I don't

think most people don't want to put

something in their head so it has to be

something that you wear on your head

non-invasive non-invasive I think in 25

years we will have non-invasive

brain mind connection I can't say how

accurate or how how it will be used. But

I think it'll be there. Maybe gamers

play it because it might give them a

tiny edge in terms of latency,

how fast they can respond. They don't

have to go through their arm. They can

just Yeah. think it. So maybe the gamers

play it. Maybe this is for people who um

like maybe artists, maybe this is a form

of art where you can just it doesn't

have to go through your arms again. You

can just sort of imagine it. Maybe

there's a way to build worlds. I it's

really unclear exactly how you use it in

a non-medical way. So maybe it's not as

useful as we think.

Maybe it's something that we could have

imagined it being cooler than it really

is. I don't know.

Last question. How will Silicon Valley

be different in That's a great question.

Um Huh. I haven't thought about that.

Maybe some of the big tech will fall and

some new names will rise. Well, of

course. I mean I've been I mean I've

been talking about AI for at least 15

years and I've almost every talk said

that the disruption is unlikely to come

from the establishment like Google

Facebook Amazon is going to come from a

startup which is exactly what happened

open AI anthropic so for sure there will

be a whole new crop rising stars in the

valley but I wouldn't say that's

changing the valley any because because

the the question I would have is is you

know that's like the current it's the

same race when you have new contestants

but the question is does the race change

does the game change does the how does

the process of Silicon Valley itself

change and that's a little bit more

interesting you know does VC change any

and you know there there has been uh

adaptions and how much does AI change

the nature of of funding and hiring um I

haven't thought about that but it's a

good question. I would guess that the

the special place that Silicon Valley

has in the world will continue just like

the role of Shenzen in the Delta area

will continue in China no matter what

happens in the US. There's enough of a

critical mass and it's deep enough that

in terms of manufacturing and materials

that part of China will continue in 25

years. But there might be ways in which

um the path of how you succeed through

Silicon Valley could change. Um one of

the things is the housing issue where

people simply can't afford to take a

chance. So So if there was things like

that that happened, I think that would

be really good. But there might be ways

in which AI could change the nature of

Silicon Valley and the funding making it

even easier to start something easier

than it is today. So there's even more

startups. I'm not really sure. It's a

good question. I haven't thought about

it. I was a little more interested in

what rather than the old ones dying is

how would the new ones change? What

would that process be? What would the

path the typical path be? Maybe there's

more crowdfunding. It's possible AI

might help that a little bit. People

investing even earlier like VCs do. A

Kickstarter version of VC. That might

could be something. Yeah.

Well, it was a great conversation

anyway.

for

the Benjamin.

Bye.