AI, Robots and the Future of Tech | Kevin Kelly

The main use of AIS right now is in coding. And that I would have put kind

coding. And that I would have put kind of like at the last end of what they were useful for. Someone was saying the other day that the image of the world in

the future was that the AIS would take out the garbage so you could write poetry. And it's turning out that the

poetry. And it's turning out that the AIS are writing poetry and you're going to have to take out the garbage.

[Music] Today on the Growth Manifesto podcast, we're speaking with Kevin Kelly, founding executive editor of Wide Magazine, a best-selling author, and one

of the most original thinkers on the future of technology, artificial intelligence, and human progress.

Kevin's been ahead of the curve for decades, predicting the rise of the internet, exploring the deeper implications of AI and robotics, and even writing about decentralized systems

before Bitcoin existed. In this episode, we unpack how AI and robots are going to reshape the way we live and work, what Bitcoin signals about the next chapter of the internet, and why Kevin believes

that optimism is not just a mindset, it's a strategy for building the future.

I hope you enjoy this episode, and make sure to subscribe to get the latest episodes as soon as they're released.

Now, let's get into it. So, how much have you seen technology shift over the last 30 years since the founding of the Wired magazine? because I was a person

Wired magazine? because I was a person who read Wired magazine every single uh month for a decade. And so you've been around for a while. How much have things uh shifted in 30 years?

>> Five out of 10.

>> Only five of the years >> Well, there's been a shift. Is that what you're saying?

>> Um how would you like to give the what kind of answer are you looking for?

>> How much are you seeing things have shifted? I mean, in the early '9s, I

shifted? I mean, in the early '9s, I remember um >> The Matrix came out and that looked like it was the future. And I actually saw as part of uh the biography that um your

book Out of Control actually was uh required kind of reading uh for people on the Matrix, right? And so you saw things like at that time that were well

that are that seem to be coming to fruition in 2025. So what did you see back then and how much of that um is coming into kind of like how the world

is operating right now?

>> Maybe if you're asking is this the future that I expected?

>> Is this Yeah, that is a good question.

Yeah. So is this the future that you expected? In some ways maybe some of the

expected? In some ways maybe some of the technology is but in other ways the actual wider world is absolutely not. Um

Stuart Bran has a saying which says that um this present moment was once the unimaginable future and that's so true

because I was involved with dozens and dozens and dozens of scenarios making in the '9s for

corporate America. So I worked with a

corporate America. So I worked with a group that was producing scenarios of the future for corporate America, you know, Disney's and the Kodaks and the

uh ABCs of the world. And in not one single one of them was the scenario of today ever considered because had you

presented what is going on today, nobody would have believed you. It would

have been dismissed as ridiculous.

So in that sense no this future was not the expected future even technologically we might have had some AI by now that

was sort of expected but I also expected that there would have been augmented reality by now and that hasn't happened also I probably would have expected that

there would be flying cars by now and they they kind of tried to happen but haven't happened at the same time There

are maybe more drone wars than I would have imagined. So I would say,

have imagined. So I would say, you know, I'm five out of 10.

>> You're five out of 10 >> in terms of the expected future versus the future that we actually have.

>> So what has happened that you didn't expect to happen that you're happy that that's happened? that I did not expect

that's happened? that I did not expect to happen. Um,

to happen. Um, I think we're a little bit ahead in the AI reasoning department. I I I think the

ability of the AIS to reason is happening faster than I thought it would given the pace that we were on.

you know like even three or four years ago if you had suggested that AIS would be now where they are that that didn't seem reasonable given the slow pace we

were going. So I'd certainly expected

were going. So I'd certainly expected AIs to be coming on but they are a little bit ahead of um their reasoning

is ahead and I also did did not guess that they would have been most useful for coders.

The main use of AIS right now is in coding and that I would have put kind of like at

the last end of what they were useful for. Someone someone was saying the

for. Someone someone was saying the other day that um the image of um of the world in the future was that um

the AIS would take out the garbage so that you could write poetry. And it's

turning out that the AI are writing poetry and you're going to have to take out the garbage. Humans will take the garbage out. So, so, so there's kind of

garbage out. So, so, so there's kind of a little bit of an aversion of like what's going to be affected most by AI in the beginning. And it was it would be

that they're writing code and poetry, but they still can't open a door. So um

so so there was it was that's uh the unexpected thing was that they're so good at poetry and writing code.

>> That's really interesting. And it seemed that up until a few years ago like up until I think chat GPT come onto the scene everyone was thinking the AI would

um it would disrupt first the blue collar roles.

>> Right.

>> But now it seems to be disrupting the white collar roles first.

>> Exactly. That's what I meant by taking out the garbage.

>> Yeah. But that's so interesting. So, how

did that happen? Because everyone was expecting this one thing and then like kind of just kind of just magically the LLMs just became super smart by

predicting the next kind of word that someone was going to.

>> Yeah. I mean, they were they were they were they were invented to do language translation and out of that came reasoning which was a shock. And now

that reasoning came the ability to write code which was another shock. But of

course in retrospect code is a kind of a language and they're kind of doing the translation. So those things were the

translation. So those things were the unexpected uh in in the last decade.

>> So like I think that this shift I think it was in 2023 chat GPT was launched. So a couple of years I think maybe a year and a half ago now it feels like maybe bit longer.

It seems that there was some initial buzz and then there's a segment of society now who embraces chat GPT and Geminis and all that right and there's a

segment who doesn't right now I'm in your TED talk so you talk about the importance of optimism so to the people who haven't embraced it can you talk

through why they should and why they should be optimistic about it because I do feel like there is a bit of a uh separation between societies now there's one that's going all in on AI and there's one is saying hey like I want to

stay kind of organic and natural and >> I I prefer to stay human.

>> So I would separate those two out the embracing and the optimism and I would say first of all that um I think everybody should try the AI.

I think you should have some familiarity with it. I don't think is actually that

with it. I don't think is actually that useful for everybody necessarily right now. Though there's no commandment that

now. Though there's no commandment that you need to keep using something you don't find useful,

but you should give it a good try out.

And also once you try it out, you should be aware that it's going to change very rapidly and that um you need to try it every 6 months or something before you

dismiss it. So that I think the reason

dismiss it. So that I think the reason why you want to try it and embrace it at that level is that's how we steer it. There's a

fallacy called thinkism that I call thinkism which is this idea that we can solve problems we can anticipate the future by thinking about it. And when

you have things that are complex enough you can't figure things out by thinking about them. You have to actually use

about them. You have to actually use them. You have to put them in the real

them. You have to put them in the real world and and it's the actual use on a day-to-day basis that we figure out what they are good for, what they're not good

for, and we arrive at things that we can't get to just by thinking about them. Thinkism is something that

them. Thinkism is something that middle-aged men who think a lot think it's useful for. And you can't just get

where you want to go by thinking about them. You have to use things. And so we

them. You have to use things. And so we want to try these things out and use them in order to find out what they're about, in order to find out what they're good for, and in order to find out what they're bad for and where the harms are

and where the benefits. We can't get there by thinking about them. And so if you want to steer the technology, you've got to use the technology. And if you

don't use it, you don't get to steer it.

And thinking about it, it's not going to make much difference. So you don't want to think about AI, you want to use AI and it's through the use able to steer it, make a use,

whatever it is. And if you aren't using it, it's fine. Then you don't necessarily get to steer it.

Okay? So you don't have to use it, but if you're not using it, you don't get to steer it. So that's the embrace part.

steer it. So that's the embrace part.

The optimism part is that all the good things in your room right now, your piano, the guitar, the microphone, the

headsets, the lights, these were all once strange ideas, impossible ideas

that somebody saw in their mind could be possible and believed could work. And

that's a form of optimism to imagine something that isn't that could be and to imagine that it could really happen and then to work to make it happening.

And that means that that our present today >> has been shaped by optimists of the past.

And if you want to make a future in the world that's good and friendly that you want to live in, it's not going to happen accidentally. It's not going to

happen accidentally. It's not going to happen inadvertently. It's not going to

happen inadvertently. It's not going to happen while you stand there.

It's going to require having a vision of what that world looks like. If having a vision of what the AI

like. If having a vision of what the AI that works looks like, of having a vision of the communicator so that you can make an iPhone. It's having

something and believing that it's possible and that's optimism. And so the future is going to be shaped by the optimist

today. And if you want to shape the

today. And if you want to shape the future, you have to be more optimistic than you are ordinarily.

You have to be as optimistically optimistic as possible to envision a world that you want and to believe that it's possible otherwise it's not going

to happen. So I see optimism as an asset

to happen. So I see optimism as an asset that you choose to acquire. It's it's a deliberate choice of not it's not a

temperament per se. There are people who are temporarentially optimistic, but you can choose to be more optimistic than you are to begin with. You can improve

and your optimism is learned and you want to be as optimistic as you can in order to be someone who shapes the future.

So do you think it's past the point of no return right now with AI that the people who are choosing to not be optimistic are going to be at the beckon of the ones who are because the ones who

are are going to be identifying solutions to problems that haven't been kind of thought about before experimenting and kind of just changing the world around.

>> No. Um AI has not even started yet.

>> Say more please.

In 30 years from now, we'll look back and we'll say there was no AI in 2025.

So, so it's not too late. I'm saying

it's not too late. I'm saying it has not even started.

Where do you see it evolving to? Like,

as someone who's who's been pretty good on predictions and, you know, like who wrote the books and magazines and who's posting on blogs and who've been talking about this stuff for 30 plus um years,

you're pretty accurate, right? Like I

would say even kind of 50% is a very high accuracy for the future of like where technology could go just to be clear right so this is the '9s this is before the in like this is at the very

start of the internet right this was at the very start was 93 I remember I got the internet the sound of the phone like like this was then and so from that

point to even envisaging AI that's pretty that's very impressive Kevin so I take a lot of um like I respect the vision and so

>> from today you know how do you see the future in the next 30 years if this is the start or this is not even the start yet this is you know just before the start of AI

>> the the main mind shift that I would um suggest is that we'll be talking about AI plural

that there'll be hundreds if not thousands of different species of AI who We're all engineered to do different things and some of them will be very

primitive and others will be incredibly complex and there will be an ecosystem of them

kind of like a rainforest or coral reef of all of them codependent on each other and there'll be some very large scale AIs that are conglomerates of sub AIs

which is actually already happening even within the current models they have called a mixture of experts where they they have a bunch of different kinds of AIs and so we'll continue to have this

sort of um collective aggregate compounding aspect of it and we'll compound different AIs to do different things um

and they'll be regulated and managed in different manner just like we have different rules for different kind of machines we don't have the machine we have machines industrial age it's not

about one big machine that's ruling everything It's about hundreds of machines. And so we we we manage and

machines. And so we we we manage and regulate jet engines, differently from watches, different from hammers, different from computers versus farm machinery. These

are all different species. And we're

going to have many varieties of minds engineered to do different things. Some

will be very small, some be very large, and they'll make an ecosystem.

And for most of them or or or for all of the AIs that we make, none of them will think exactly like a human,

they're what I call alien intelligences.

They're they're alien.

They think differently and that's their main benefit is because they don't think like us. So that so together with them

like us. So that so together with them our minds plus the alien AI minds can achieve things that our minds alone cannot. Vice versa together we can do

cannot. Vice versa together we can do things that they can't do and there will be lots of things that they can do by themselves. It's kind of like a an

themselves. It's kind of like a an second nature, a kind of a ecosystem of

different entities and agents that are that are engineered to do different things. And

things. And um a common trope is that you make an AI that can

create an AI smarter than itself and it cascades into this instant godhood.

And um I think that is uh that's a fantasy. It's a romantic fantasy. It's it's a mythological it's

fantasy. It's it's a mythological it's almost a religious uh statement because we don't have any evidence of that so

far and it's the speed that people find scary that that all of a sudden there is a presence that's bigger than us and uh

will take over and there's several things about that that I think are misunderstood and one is this idea that intelligence is like decibb

it goes on I think intelligence is not an element. It's a compound.

an element. It's a compound.

Um it it it's made up of bunch of different things. In other words, it's

different things. In other words, it's not a single dimension. It's

multi-dimensional.

There are all kinds of factors and we already see that in order to really achieve what we want just in the current models, we have to have a mixture of

different kinds of thinking. And so

there isn't a ladder. There isn't a sense of something being a ladder of things. It's a much bigger

space in which you cannot optimize everything.

This is the engineering realism. There's

no way that you can optimize everything.

You can't say I want to make an animal that has optimized everything about animalness. It's both the biggest and

animalness. It's both the biggest and the smallest. is both the fastest and

the smallest. is both the fastest and the most flexible. It's the most economical and the most powerful.

That's just not reality. Reality is

about trade-offs. There's always

trade-offs. And when you make AI, they're going to be trade-offs. So the

idea you can make one AI that's optimized everything, that is just a fantasy. What it is is if to optimize

fantasy. What it is is if to optimize one thing, you're going to have to trade off something else over there and there's going to be another AI that could do this thing in the other direction. And so the same thing with a

direction. And so the same thing with a machine. You say, "I'm gonna make the

machine. You say, "I'm gonna make the most powerful machine that optimizes everything about machines."

No, you're gonna make a you can make a Swiss Army knife. That's a general thing that's mediocre in everything. That's

what you can do. So So I refute and deny and contest the idea that this happens instantly. I think we will have enough

instantly. I think we will have enough time even if the frontier models happen and invent very fast. So right like as they

are right now. So every day there's an announcement about something new. So the

frontier is very fast but the adoption is very slow. M

>> right now it would take us a decade just to absorb the current AI that we have. It's like

we have time. We have time to it because just because it exists doesn't mean that it's going to take over because we're not letting it take over. We don't

we the the the the AI that we have hasn't taken over. Why? because people

don't find it useful because because it it the absorption of it the the use of it takes time and so

the idea of the urgency is I think the urgency makes people stupid the urgency because it's not true because there is

no urgency in 30 years we'll have time to adjust to the AIS that we make and there will be multiple of them. Most of them will

have a relationship with us. I will also say that in 30 years we will be adding emotions to the AIS that will be capable not just of intelligence and thinking

but also of emotions, perplexity, surprise, anger and love. And that our bonding with these will be very very

strong. People will be shocked in 10

strong. People will be shocked in 10 years from now about the degree that people will bond with the AI agents who know themselves. People will fall in

know themselves. People will fall in love with them. People will have very very strong relationships like they do with their pets and and even stronger where they will really grieve for them.

they will they will feel incredibly close to them and because they're going to respond with emotions because that's a very very powerful interface. So for

me the next big hysteria is going to be people freaking out about the emotional nature of the A's not their intelligence

>> but the fact that people are very attracted to them that they're become friends constant companionships I've already seen some young people who have

always on AI who always have it on who are talking to this all the time already and it's uncanny penny. It's a little disturbing

the way in which they're dependent on it. And we might say, well, that's an

it. And we might say, well, that's an addiction, and it is, but there are people today who go through

life addicted to eyeglasses, who could not function without their eyeglasses. Are we upset by that? No.

eyeglasses. Are we upset by that? No.

What we just have to make sure is they always have glasses. You don't say, "Well, you can't have glasses cuz you're going to be addicted to it." But no, we say we just make sure you always have glasses. Maybe you wear contacts. That's

glasses. Maybe you wear contacts. That's

one way to always have them. And it's a similar to electricity. If we turned electricity off for a week, people would just we wouldn't know what to do. We

couldn't do very much. So, so we're wholly dependent on electricity. And the

solution is make sure the electricity never goes off and we'll have AI and people will be addicted to it.

And the solution is not to prevent that, but to make sure the AI is never turned off. That's my vision is is that we'll

off. That's my vision is is that we'll have thousands of different varieties of AIS and some of them will be AIS that we

invent to help us solve problems like quantum gravity or figuring out what dark matter is or workable fusion, economical fusion.

problems that we cannot solve with our own minds. So we invent these other

own minds. So we invent these other minds to work with us to do things that we cannot do alone.

And I think just as a lot of computers are involved in the creation process for a lot of creators

whether they use them for photoshopping or whatever. A lot of the the generative

or whatever. A lot of the the generative AI tools will be part of the creative process for people who are being innovative that that they will work with

these interns, they will work with these assistants, they work with these agents in doing whatever they're doing and that just becomes the common. It's like

having power tools. It's like using electricity. Yes, that's sort of what I

electricity. Yes, that's sort of what I do. And yes, you can make a painting by

do. And yes, you can make a painting by hand without using electricity, by candle light. And some people will.

candle light. And some people will.

That's good. And there will be people who will will generate music without any computers or AI. And that's fine.

But a lot of creators will be assisted by these agents in all different capacities and they'll they'll make things that we

can't even imagine right now. So

together these kinds of minds to us will have versions of things that we ourselves couldn't get to ourselves.

>> So it's like the brainstorming kind of process where there's something that happens between kind of two entities just when they have a conversation about an idea that's like the third entity,

right? So it's almost like the AI

right? So it's almost like the AI facilitates that process and helps you to find that part between the II and between how you think about things like like is that a good way to think about it is kind of

>> that's one that's one way and the other important way which I don't want to neglect you reminding me of is is that the AIS will be very very instrumental in allowing us to collaborate between

humans at a scale we've never been able to do before. Like like for instance, we'd like to have a collaboration of a million humans working in real time together. And right now that's really

together. And right now that's really almost impossible to do just keeping track of it. And part of it is like there's a mismatch where the person human who knows the most about what

needs to be solved next is not in the room. And so you have to have some way

room. And so you have to have some way to match the talents with the current problem and making sure they get to it.

And that's something that AI could do.

AI could be watching the whole thing and oh wait this person knows here Alex he know he knows all about this you're now brought in and you solve this and then

you go on to the next thing. So there we can invent new tools using AI and AI to make new tools that allow us not just to collaborate with the AIs but to

collaborate with other humans in a way that we've never done before >> at that level of scale. Yeah, that would be very interesting. It almost kind of feels like that's happening just by accident now just through chat GPT. Um

the answers it comes up with probably has come from uh the learning of you know like how many hundreds of millions of people kind of feeding it right. So it's kind of on that pathway.

>> Um let's talk about um the robotic side of things, right? Because

>> I think everyone saw recently the Tesla robot, right? And that's just an example

robot, right? And that's just an example of a robot. Like I know that Boston Dynamics is like um has kind of the dogs in war and there's all these different things. It feels like that's where the

things. It feels like that's where the it starts to get maybe a bit scarier is when you combine uh you combine the AI that has all the emotions and has all of

the thoughts and has all of the understandings of how to manipulate someone or not, right? Or how to understand someone or not. And then all the history from talking to it for like 10 years before the robots came.

>> Yeah. Where do you see that area going?

Because that's an area I have no idea about. Like I can have some like like

about. Like I can have some like like some guesses on AI, but I I don't know just where the robots are going to like is that something that I'm essentially everyone is going to have at home. Are

they going to be there? Like like how kind of humanoid are they going to get?

>> Yeah. Yeah. you know, going back to this this analogy that it's the um white collar workers occupations who seem to be most replaceable

whereas the blue collar physical things aren't because robots are really really hard to do and that's still true. Um

there is a special a spatial intelligence that they're not capable of right now. The earliest LLMs had a real

right now. The earliest LLMs had a real difficulty with near and far and ordering and some fundamental things that even a toddler human would

understand. That's because they were

understand. That's because they were disembodied. And so if you give them the

disembodied. And so if you give them the idea is if you give them bodies, they would learn this. And and some people have theories that even

consciousness may require a body and we don't even know. But making bodies is actually hard and the AI part of it, the

intelligence part of it is almost not as difficult as the physical part.

So one of the the the the challenges for a say a household robot

or are is the energy. So here here you sitting right there me we have a 25 watt supercomput and we have a quarter horsepower

body.

The current robots are with megawatt brains and mega

horsepower bodies and that amount of power untethered is very very very difficult for us to do. So the

efficiency is sort of beyond having something that could work even go for an hour without having to plug in. Going for a day

without needing auxiliary power unless it's a massive huge humongous thing is the challenge. So there's a bunch of

the challenge. So there's a bunch of very I'm not it's not impossible. I'm

just saying that this is going to be slow coming because it's the mechanical compression that that our bodies have

done. The efficiency of our biological

done. The efficiency of our biological system is so evolved that coming close to it and for a lot of

robots it's not necessary in factories and stuff. They can be big. They can be

and stuff. They can be big. They can be monstrous. They don't have to be

monstrous. They don't have to be anything like us. But in our homes, we want human scale things. We want things that we can interface. We want things that can work walk through our doorways

and climb our stairs and work in our kitchens, whatever it is. And that's an incredible challenge. So um I expect

incredible challenge. So um I expect them but I don't expect them immediately for like power reasons for just the

necessary inventions and innovations that we need to compress either to make it more efficient or to compress more power in it. The the the danger of just

making them bigger more capacity batteries is that you basically have a bomb. you have so much energy

bomb. you have so much energy contained in that battery to run, you know, the the 100 horsepower that you need for the day that if something

happens, it's going to blow up. And so,

um, so to make them much more efficient, we're a long way from that. We're a long way from just that that kind of efficiency. We could certainly make that

efficiency. We could certainly make that kind of concentration at higher powers, but um we need, you know, different kind of motors. You have to have more things

of motors. You have to have more things that are more like muscles that are more efficient. And so there's going to come,

efficient. And so there's going to come, but not immediately. And so assume that that can be figured out and that we can figure out

the battery part of it or the or the power part of it.

Once that is figured out, is that when it starts to just be unleashed at that point? Like if they can figure out how

point? Like if they can figure out how to kind of maintain, you know, the robot just going for a whole day and it can sleep at night, you know, just like a human, right? Once that happens, is that

human, right? Once that happens, is that like like is that the point that the world starts to change how it looks at that point?

>> It it might um it might uh I don't know. It's like it's like okay um what do you want your robot to do?

>> Like a barista at a coffee shop for example. All right. Or

example. All right. Or

>> you know I essentially all the retail jobs ever are the people who get the tips right them right. So that

>> so how many retail jobs are there? I

don't know how many what percentage of the people are working in a barista. Um

I think yes that you know it might change it superficially but I'm not sure how much it would change it. And by the way most of the

change it. And by the way most of the jobs that will replace would be jobs that people don't really want to be doing. I mean, I can imagine there might

doing. I mean, I can imagine there might be some number of people in the world who love being a barista and they would they would do that service and people

would probably pay a little premium to interact with a human.

>> I love that. That that becomes like the novelty. There's a human.

novelty. There's a human.

>> There's a human. you gotta go to this one because there's a human serving you and for some reason they love this job and they're getting paid well to do it.

They're supporting themselves just like >> and I like the chance that it might not be perfect. It might not be perfect

be perfect. It might not be perfect once. I like the risk.

once. I like the risk.

>> Right. Right. Exactly. And so there'll be that kind of equivalent, but most of the It's the same way with cooking. Most

of the stuff will be done by robots of some sort whether they're a human or not working in McDonald's. Hopefully, one

one hopes that in 30 years most of the food in McDonald's is not being made by underpaid, >> but it's being done with robots. Why

would you care? You don't never see them. I mean, it's like, yeah, sure. So,

them. I mean, it's like, yeah, sure. So,

yes, I think that, you know, you would go to McDonald's and behind the scenes are robots cooking it. I mean, people would probably assume that they're robots right now anyway. I don't that

part I, you know, I'm not sure how much is going to change. How many robots do you want in your home? Do you need more than one? I don't know. But I think a

than one? I don't know. But I think a lot of the work in say warehouses and and things again jobs that people don't

really want to do really should be doing done with with AI robots. And I think people h will feel

robots. And I think people h will feel relieved that it's being done this way.

Um, I think it's a shame that there's any human whose job it is is to collect money.

>> It's like that's a waste of a human life. I really like the Amazon

life. I really like the Amazon um version where you where you just wave your palm to pay for things. That's

brilliant. That's that's perfect.

There's there's a there's enough of a deliberateness to it that you can't inadvertently be charged. You've got to show your pal and show your palm and then you pay for it. or even that, you know, like even the Amazon whole food

things where you didn't even have to pay. You just walked in, showed your

pay. You just walked in, showed your problem, and you took what it is, and you walked out the store. There's so

much so many jobs that we don't want humans to be wasting their lives doing that um I I think that kind of an adjustment

is going to is is is not going to be as disruptive as people think. And I also think like like if you were to think about the iPhone, you know, you know,

people upgrade their iPhone every year.

The phone is perfectly fine. Like it

doesn't have any scratches on it, but now there's like another version, right?

The waste of upgrading a robot if everyone has a robot and now there's another version. I mean, we don't know

another version. I mean, we don't know where to put them, right? That's going

to be the next biggest challenge is kind of >> storing the upgrades or storing the ones that have kind of Yeah. storing the ones that haven't been upgraded.

>> I don't I mean again in the ideal system they're totally recyclable. They're just

you recover the metal, you reforge it, you you extract out things. So So

there's absolutely no reason. Again, you

want a biological model. You want to have an ecosystem. in the ecosystem is is that there's an entire category

of industry that is recycling things and they don't have to be accumulated. They

they should be recycled as quickly as possible in terms of the materials. It's

just rearranging the atoms. So if energy is as cheap as we could make it, we have robots recycling other robots and um >> All right. That's another job that they

should be doing. I understand.

>> Exactly. Right. Right. Right. And also I think over time this is a this is something that we should be doing more and mandating it which is um designed

for recycle. So you you are forcing

for recycle. So you you are forcing companies to take in account the end of life of their products where you not just maximizing the use of them but

their disposal and recycling. You have

to take that into account. And so

there's there's been ideas about requiring the the manufacturers

to absorb the cost of disposal in some ways. And so that gets them to have to

ways. And so that gets them to have to think about how do we make this easy to recycle.

>> That's interesting. And then it sounds like the AI and the robots are not going to overtake humanity, right? It sounds

like the human structure uh the mind, the body is a pretty advanced thing just when you're trying to replicate it is with machines and AI and so on. But

where do you see humans participating in society? If all the jobs that you don't want to do are basically now handled and all the jobs that you need to pay per hour and that

is kind of simple enough, I assume all of the employers are going to hire some robots because they work 24 hours a day and they don't have to pay them, right?

So I assume that's going to happen. So

where do >> where does humanity go with that? Like

is it more in the arts? Is it more in creative? Is it more in community? Like

creative? Is it more in community? Like

how do you see the evolution of the world?

>> All all the above. All the above. And so

if I gave you a billion dollars with my magic wand, um what do you do for tomorrow and the next day? And um you

would do things that you I mean maybe some of the things you were doing you you say, "Well, an AI could do them, but I just want to do them myself." in terms of creating things for the pleasure of

it. I think a lot of the creation that

it. I think a lot of the creation that we'll do will have an audience of one.

Um that we'll do for the joy of the creating of it, not even just for the audience. I think a lot of what we would

audience. I think a lot of what we would do is hang out with other humans and do stuff with them because it's joyful. So, um

could people make a living doing it?

Yes. I I mean I just suggested that there will be something that you might enjoy that you would almost pay to do that you love doing so much and because

human attention is the scarcity um and we're always attracted to other humans and so I think that even for as

long as I can imagine we'll always be able to tell the difference between a human and a robot And that's because there really isn't universal

computation.

That's because the the substrate, the platform that the that the thinking is happening on makes a difference to the outcome.

And the only way to really have the kind of thought, the kind of sense of humor that humans have is to run it on wet wear, run it on a a tissue. If you're

running it on silicon, it just behaves differently and it's going to think a little differently. It's going to be

little differently. It's going to be like spock. It's going to make data.

like spock. It's going to make data.

It's going to be smart, conscious, but not quite us. And we are incredibly

at ease with us. We even hang out with people of our own nationality first.

Why? They're just as smart. just we're

just more comfortable with someone who grew up in our part of the woods >> that we tend to hang out with them

versus someone else who is equally as interesting and whatnot because we will hang out with humans

first and probably even pay for the privilege of that over an AI

and roid artificial alien who is interesting in many ways and we'll spend a lot of our time with them but they won't be as valuable to us >> and so um we'll have economies built

around people spending time with each other you can you'll get a fantastic therapist some of the best therapists in the world

will be AIS people will still pay for human therapists who may not be even as good

But they like that face to face. And so

you'll have both people will will have a human therapist and the AI therapist and and sometimes the human therapist will be working with an AI therapist themselves. It's really

interesting to think about like essentially all the places that it could touch like for example schooling school education who's educating are there teachers are the teachers actual humans or the teachers actually kind of robots

are there like individual lessons per student because now you know each student has like their own personalized AI that >> teaches them integrates and so it's really fascinating. Um

really fascinating. Um >> one more big area to ask you about like um for cryptocurrency. So, back in the early 90s, you know, had you foreseen

something like this happening? Um,

because I think uh Bitcoin I think was 2008, if I'm correct, that was like 15 years after the launch of kind of wide magazine. So, I'm just wondering like

magazine. So, I'm just wondering like how much you saw that coming and then like how fast were you on it and how many bitcoins do you have? No, the third question I can just ignore, but like as a futurist, >> right? Yes.

>> right? Yes.

>> So, um, in my first book, which was published in 94 and I wrote in the early 90s, there's a chapter on crypto >> in the early 90s.

>> Before blockchain.

>> Wow.

>> So, there was crypto before blockchain.

>> I I had some Bitcoin, but I sold it and so I don't have any more Bitcoin. And um

I'm not that bullish on Bitcoin um because it's basically a kind of

gambling um because in my observation, nobody spends Bitcoin except if you're in the underground um criminal market, but nobody's

spending Bitcoin. It's not a currency.

spending Bitcoin. It's not a currency.

It's not being used in that way at all.

There are uh blockchain currencies that that you know Ethereum and others that stable coins that can be used but Bitcoin is kind of a special case. Um

it's not going to go away except very slowly as people die off and they keep their secrets with them. So over time less and less of the Bitcoin will ever

be spent because people who have it will die with it. And um

so it I I think the idea of using blockchains and I have from the very beginning thought that there was a very interesting model for doing decentralized stuff and there are a lot

of people still working true believers working on ways to figure out but but but the thing about it is is it's a lot more expensive than people. So the idea of having like

than people. So the idea of having like you know micro payments and using it to pay for a couple cents hasn't really

worked out because it is computationally expensive to to to to do. And so part of

what crypto is looking for is still the killer apt that um makes it useful. And

so, you know, my my whole family, my, you know, son-in-law were into crypto for a while. And here's and and and I would say, look, I'm I'm willing to have a conversation about crypto with one

caveat that we don't talk about money.

So, talk about all the things you can do.

>> Say that again. Do it. But don't talk about I say so you don't think it's going to be a currency as way, but it can change how things happen behind the

scenes. So tell me all the values that

scenes. So tell me all the values that it brings other than making money. So

once you take out making money from it, there's it's a very short conversation.

M I mean the original idea was that it would replace the monetary system and I think it did start to maybe take off but then it just turned that's money right and then it turned into like an asset holding

>> talk about things it can do other than anything to do with finance or money >> and there's very there are some things but so far they haven't really proven to

be economically feasible >> and so tell me about the values of crypto other than financial and So um

uh and I do believe there are some so so I still have hope. I would say that the people who

hope. I would say that the people who are working on you know web 3 ways of you know like the Dows were an example of crypto that wasn't just about money.

It was about organizing a way for a self-governing organization. That's

self-governing organization. That's fantastic. actually actually was trying

fantastic. actually actually was trying to get funded in the original DAO um um the one that eventually collapsed. But

um that's where I think the promise is that has yet to be realized as far as I can

see. Um because

see. Um because organizations are much more than just the rules. And and and here's here's one

the rules. And and and here's here's one little thing I'll say about this. the

the one of the perceived advantages of having something like Gadal which is a distributed you know autonomous organization the idea was is that you have this thing with immutable laws that

so it can't be hacked so they can fulfill its promise without diversion.

Well the thing about making a like a smart contract the thing about contracts is that in real life they are always renegotiated all the time. There's always things that

come up that you want to be able to go.

And so this idea of this immutability is actually not a feature, it's a bug >> for long-term organizations.

>> Innovation needs that flexibility, right?

>> Flexibility. You have to things happen that you haven't foreseen at all. And

how do you deal with that? And so so so that's the rub is that you know theoretically in in in theory these things can be very useful but when you

actually try to put them in the world the world is so unpredictable and uneven and ragged that you have these adjustments sort of work

against us having this completely coded driven world view and so um >> so that's I think where some of the challenges are of implementing crypto

outside of finance. Um, you know, and so within the world of finance, will it change things? Sure. I'm just not that

change things? Sure. I'm just not that interested in it. Um,

>> because right now the problem with crypto is there was so much money involved that it disguised and obscured anything else about it and it became very very hard to even think about it

without being overwhelmed by the amount of money that was flowing around.

>> Exactly. Yeah, that makes sense. And I

do like that thinking and what's interesting of the three kind of topics I asked you about that was the least interesting for the future which is fascinating right because it's all about now and like how was like like it was

supposed to change the world but it it just became um like like an asset class and a speculative tool um and so on. Um

finally so this book right um um it's called excellent advice for living right um uh the wisdom I wish I had known earlier. So, uh, this is a fantastic

earlier. So, uh, this is a fantastic book for everyone, um, who wants to get some ideas on how to live a better life.

But what's interesting, there's no talk of technology in this book at all. It's

all things that are non-technical. So,

where did you get this idea from as someone who spent their whole life in kind of in kind of um the tech space in futurism, who understands kind of um the

problem of Yeah. Just uh, how did you get the concept for this? Um,

>> yeah. Yeah.

>> And why did you do it? Well, first of all, like Wired was really not about technology. Wired was the magazine was

technology. Wired was the magazine was about the culture around technology. And

the great innovation that Lewis Rossto had um the true founder of Wired was to wrap these technological things around

people, to put people on the cover, to make the geeks, the stars, the heroes, to ask the people who are making these things what their dreams were. And so it

was from my perspective always a human um experiment and I'm I've always been interested in in that cultural aspect of

the technology and not the technology itself. And so um

itself. And so um um this also the book it represents sort of the while I've been a science nerd all

my life I also been an artist all my life and I was went into photography because it was a nice combination of merging of science and and art back in

the day when you had to know chemistry and optics to do photography which is what it was in the 60s and 70s. And so

um so the artistic side of me has always paid attention to you know the the emotional state the the um the very

human condition that we're in. And um I think um I was writing down quotes as I

went along um in part to remind myself of these things. And uh I have three kids which we did not preach to very much. We were the opposite of a

much. We were the opposite of a helicopter parent. We we were lighthouse

helicopter parent. We we were lighthouse parents which were stationed far away watching over with the light always shining and knowing that we were there

and available. And um

and available. And um but as I went along, I realized there were things that I was realizing even my older age that I really wished I had

known earlier. And I started to write

known earlier. And I started to write those down to tell my adult children like I wish I when I was your age some I had told someone had told me these

things because it took me a long time to um to get to them. So I started writing these things down and then once I got going I found I had a lot more to say.

So originally it was me trying to remind myself of the own things like you know the the one of my favorites which was um if you lose something lose a device or something in your house that you know

you have you can't lose track of it. I I

know I have this hook somewhere but I can't remember where it is and you look around and you finally find it when you go to put it back.

Put it back where you first looked for it.

>> Okay. And so I I I remind myself of that when I when I'm doing this. And so I started to write these things down as reminders to myself and then realized that they should really share them with

my children. And so it was became an

my children. And so it was became an exercise in kind of trying to distill what I knew

about life into a few words as possible um in in a memorable way in a way that that you could remember or be reminded at the very least. And so, um, it was a

gift for my kids.

>> And there's 450 in there. Um, which

piece of advice, uh, is the one that, um, you would worry if the kids ignored it? Is there kind of one that you're like, I really wish that

they were to follow this one, and if they were to ignore this one piece of advice, like that would be the one, you know, just follow that one. Is there one that stands out >> to you?

>> I mean, yeah. I mean, I would be horrified if they ignore the golden rule.

All right. I mean, to do unto others as you do unto yourselves, which I'm not sure I put in there, but um >> you did say the golden rule in there.

>> Yes.

>> Yeah. Right. So, that would be horrible if they were ignoring that because that is the golden rule. But there is one

that I hope that they're able to to follow through on and it is something that took me I was pretty old before I

realized it myself. I was kind of doing it but not really understanding that I was doing it. And that is is don't aim to be the best.

Try and be the only.

The only is where you want to aim for.

And and that's a very high bar to to be the only to be authentically yours to do some things that only you can do or

you're you're the category of one. And

for most people like me, it will take most of your life to even understand what it is that you might do uniquely.

But I truly believe that every one of us has a unique mixture of talents and experience that would enable them to have a certain unique genius

if we have the right tools and technology and environment to allow it to to be released and unleashed. And so

in addition to having that be in people's minds, we also need to equip everybody in the world with education and hygiene and

opportunity and tools that will allow them to try and have a chance at being the only. So it's a big thing and part

the only. So it's a big thing and part of what technology is about is is equipping people with very special talents.

Um if you could imagine um the musician Mozart being born before we had invented the piano and the symphony he was what would

he have done he maybe he good drummer I don't know but that genius would have been lost and so what if George Lucas had been

born before there was cinema and computers what a loss to the world so so there is somewhere in the world there's is a young Shakespeare and she's waiting

for us to create the tools that she needs to unleash her unique genius in the world.

And that's why I think when we're making new things, it's not just consumerism.

It's not just um it's not just capitalism. It's actually we're

capitalism. It's actually we're increasing the opportunities and choices of everybody hoping that they are on their path to being the only

That's a deep one and yeah, that is a that is a really good one and a really hard one because even to figure out who you are and what you have that stands out and then how do you kind of leverage that uh to help society or to help your

family and so on. Um it's a really hard one.

>> It's a big bar and you might spend your life doing it.

>> Yeah. Um there's one question uh because there was one which I really like.

>> The last question >> the last question right the first step is usually to complete the last step.

The first step is usually to complete the last step. What does that mean?

>> My friend was the one who reminded me of this is that um when you go to wash the dishes, put them in the dishwasher, you have to unload the dishwasher first before you

can put dishes into the dishwasher. You

have to finish the previous job.

>> Ah, I like it.

>> Unload the dishwasher before you can load the dishwasher.

>> I get it. Oh, that's deep. Okay, so

look, I just quickly just showed just um in terms of the viewers, right? There's

like >> 450 of these. Super easy to read. I

mean, it's fantastic for a coffee table or for the side of the bed or for your young kids or for whatever. So, highly

recommended. The book's going to be in the show notes. Uh how do people just connect with you? Um if they want to subscribe, if they want to learn more, if they want to follow,

>> my website is my initials k.org.

>> Wow. Good domain name. this quick side.

That's hard to get there.

>> And my email is the same. kk.org.

And um uh everything's there. Uh you

know, websites, cool tools, podcasts, our five newsletters. And the one that I'm most active in right now is the Recommendo newsletter, which is a free

newsletter. Free, free, free. It comes

newsletter. Free, free, free. It comes

every Sunday morning. And there's six very very brief a few sentence recommendations of cool stuff. So it's

all one it's one page in total and it's about cool people to follow books to read uh maybe a program to watch a

destination place to go to that's worth going away um an article to read an app to use a really cool tool. Um every year

every week is a little different. Um but

um recommendo.com >> I'll put that in the show notes as well.

Kevin, thank you so much for talking about the future of everything with me.

I really appreciate your time and I really appreciate kind of all your contributions um just to myself even because I was a person who consumed half your content. So uh thank you so much um

your content. So uh thank you so much um um and it's been nice to talk to you.

>> It's been really great. Thank you for having me and um don't be the best, be the only. Thanks for listening to the

the only. Thanks for listening to the Growth Manifesto podcast. If you enjoyed the episode, please give us a five-star rating on iTunes. For more episodes, please visit growthmanifesto.com/mpodcast.

growthmanifesto.com/mpodcast.

And if you need help driving growth for your company, please get in touch with us at webprofits.io. io.