# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Keynote at Mundura Begira Bilbao (English) Nov 10 2021

# data[].attributes.headline
👀 Watch Futurist Gerd Leonhard talk about the Great Transformation, live in Bilbao

# data[].attributes.subject
👀 Watch Futurist Gerd Leonhard talk about the Great Transformation, live in Bilbao

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
"The Great Transformation" Gerd Leonhard's Nov10 2021 #Keynote at Mundura Begira Bilbao (English)

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
The next 10 years: #Digitization #Decarbonization Reformation 

# data[].attributes.headline
📼 Gerd's Virtual Keynote for Inofest 2021

# data[].attributes.subject
📼 Gerd's Virtual Keynote for Inofest 2021

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The next 10 years: #Digitization #Decarbonization Reformation Futurist Keynote Speaker Gerd Leonhard

# data[].attributes.headline
🇺🇾 Gerd's excerpt of his keynote for the Fortune CEO Initiative, in Greece 

# data[].attributes.subject
🇺🇾 Gerd's excerpt of his keynote for the Fortune CEO Initiative, in Greece 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Digitization #Decarbonization Reformation: #Greece? Fortune CEO Initiative Keynote by Gerd Leonhard

# data[].attributes.headline
🎙 Gerd Leonhard talks on the future of mobility at IAAMobility 2021

# data[].attributes.subject
🎙 Gerd Leonhard talks on the future of mobility at IAAMobility 2021

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Future of #Mobility: Digitization #Decarbonization #Futurist Gerd Leonhard at #IAAMobility  2021

# data[].attributes.headline
🌱 Green is the New Digital - Gerd's excerpt of his talk at Entel, Chile (Subtitled in Spanish)

# data[].attributes.subject
🌱 Green is the New Digital - Gerd's excerpt of his talk at Entel, Chile (Subtitled in Spanish)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Green is the New Digital, Covid19 is a Test-Run for #ClimateChange: #Futurist Speaker Gerd Leonhard

# data[].attributes.headline
🗑 Gerd at the Zero Waste Conference 2021: Unlocking our future

# data[].attributes.subject
🗑 Gerd at the Zero Waste Conference 2021: Unlocking our future

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
ZWC21 Unlocking our Future: Digitization #Decarbonisation Reformation Futurist Speaker Gerd Leonhard

# data[].attributes.headline
The Future of Africa, Gerd's virtual keynote at Alu FutureFest 2021 (Virtual)

# data[].attributes.subject
The Future of Africa, Gerd's virtual keynote at Alu FutureFest 2021 (Virtual)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
ALU FUTUREFEST Keynote Futurist Gerd Leonhard #Africa #Digitisation #Decarbonisation Democratization

# data[].attributes.headline
👁 A Brave New World - Gerd's live keynote at the Social Innovations Forum 2021, Moscow

# data[].attributes.subject
👁 A Brave New World - Gerd's live keynote at the Social Innovations Forum 2021, Moscow

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
#Futurist Gerd Leonhard Keynote 'Brave New World' at Social Innovations Forum 2021 Moscow (ENGLISH)

# data[].attributes.headline
 📖  #decarbonization 'Is the fossil fuel economy ending?' Read Gerd Leonhard's high-lights on this Economist piece 

# data[].attributes.subject
 📖  #decarbonization 'Is the fossil fuel economy ending?' Read Gerd Leonhard's high-lights on this Economist piece 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"FOR MUCH of the past half-decade, the operative word in the energy sector was "abundance". An industry that had long sought to ration the production of fossil fuels to keep prices high suddenly found itself swamped with oversupply, as America's shale boom lowered the price of oil around the world and clean-energy sources, such as wind and solar, competed with other fuels used for power generation, such as coal and natural gas." Read more via The Economist 'The age of fossil-fuel abundance is dead'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
" Is the fossil fuel economy ending? Futurist Gerd's high-lights from a recent Economist piece [Gerd Leonhard Futurist Humanist Author Keynote Speaker]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"FOR MUCH of the past half-decade, the operative word in the energy sector was "abundance". An industry that had long sought to ration the production of fossil fuels to keep prices high suddenly found itself swamped with oversupply, as America's shale boom lowered the price of oil around the world and clean-energy sources, such as wind and solar, competed with other fuels used for power generation, such as coal and natural gas."

# data[].attributes.headline
#digitization must read: Gerd Leonhard's most recent blog post on VR, sims and the Metaverse

# data[].attributes.subject
#digitization must read: Gerd Leonhard's most recent blog post on VR, sims and the Metaverse

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Great Reduction: Futurist Gerd Leonhard's take on virtual reality, sims and the Metaverse
Post summary: The so-called metaverse is the latest and the boldest attempt to replace human relationships and experiences with highly monetizable simulations, reducing complex human life to data feeds, fancy graphics and AI-fuelled convenience: Consensual hallucinations sold as 'human empowerment'. We should be careful what we wish for - such as to live in an ultra-convenient, amazing new world where we can be anyone and do anything - as we may find that our new virtual dwellings may seemingly allow us to gain a few new riches while endangering our very humanity and leading us away from real happiness.
" The metaverse is a hypothesized iteration of the internet, supporting persistent online 3-D virtual environments through conventional personal computing, as well as virtual and augmented reality headsets" ( Wikipedia)

"The metaverse will feel like a hybrid of today's online social experiences expanded into three dimensions or projected into the physical world" Facebook's Meta Announcement.

When Covid19 struck in March 2020, my work as a Futurist and Keynote Speaker was changed forever. Instead of traveling to some 100+ events per year, and speaking to / with actual people, I now do what I call ' Keynote Television' i.e. I present virtually, remotely, via video. While I really enjoy this, as well - and I have spend a lot of time perfecting it - I really miss the feeling of being in front of a real-life audience, with all that entails, and all the messiness it can include. One look at the room in front of me tells me everything I need to know to change my story and delivery, and better connect with people. Try that on Zoom:)

After having done some 150 online events in the past 18 months, I have come to the conclusion that doing virtual talks is neither better or worse than doing real-life events - it's just a different beast altogether. It's television, basically, and it opens up an entire new world of possibilities.

Enter Virtual Reality and the so-called Metaverse, takings us way beyond online video calls, Zoom and Skype, into a world where we can gather virtually, without the need to travel (and spew more CO2), without the need for a body and without all of our real-life impediments. Using photo-realistic avatars and augmented reality glasses we can transport ourselves into a world that can be created entirely to our liking, where we can be anything and meet with anyone. A world without limits, a world where we work, live, play, meet and communicate. Kind of a world of 'artificial humans' (as Samsung boldly calls their new super-realistic avatars, Neon).

On the one hand, being a bit of a geek, I can see the how exciting this could be, and of course as a futurist I know that technologies will keep evolving at exponential pace no matter what anxieties we may have, and yes, every time there has been a major step forward in how humans use technology to see or shape the world, there have been pundits that warned of the 'end of humanity' as we know it. Point taken. Luddite hat ditched.

On the other hand, I sense that a new era of seriously reductionist 'innovation' is ahead. Sure, confusing fancy simulations (including deep-fake videos) and clever algorithmic content with real-life is a problem that already manifests itself in social media (such as the Instagram-fuelled fear of not looking as amazing as the other teenage girls that show off their makeup in your feed). Addiction to mobile devices and real-time services (what I have called the rise of the Sofalarity before) is already widespread, as well - but what VR and the Metaverse is capable of will be exponentially more impactful.

I would define reductionism as the concept of depicting something - or rather mirroring or simulating something - that can pass as a useful and entertaining copy of the real thing. It is the effort of creating an acceptable result without having to go through all of the work first, the idea of getting most of the benefits of something without needing to go through the efforts.

Take for example the Venetian Hotel in Las Vegas which strives to make visitors feel as if they were actually in Venice - and if you've never been in Venice Italy, you'd probably be delighted to experience a pretty amazing (simulation) of it, and in a much more convenient way. Or take online dating, which caters to the idea that selecting potential partners based on their explicit attributes (such as height, hair, education, income etc) will result in finding strong candidates for a 'successful' date or subsequent relationship. While online dating is, by and large, deemed to work well for a good many people, those that have tried online dating are probably familiar with what happens all too often when we meet a seemingly perfect online candidate in real-life - within 20 seconds we know how wrong we've been all along:)

Here are the things that bother me most about the Metaverse concept:

LAZINESS: The idea that we can experience a more convenient and infinitely easier, more effortless reality

ESCAPISM: The idea that we can escape to a virtual world where we can leave the real world behind and start again

NIHILISM: The idea that for those with the means, possibilities are infinite - we can just create a new world if the old one is boring us!

DISEMBODIMENT: The idea that we don't need a body to think and to communicate or to learn; all we need is a head and our brains.

OBSESSION WITH EFFICIENCY: The idea that convenience, productivity and efficiency matters more than humanity: Let's just do away with all those clumsy human limitations and make everything seamless, easy and convenient in the sparkling new metaverse. And finally, let's upgrade ourselves so we can keep up with the machines!

Of course, reductionism isn't just limited to virtual or augmented reality or the Metaverse (wether Zuck's or MSFT's or Nvidia's or...) , it's also evident within many other recent developments, such the so-called exogenesis (babies 'bred' in artificial wombs - yes, I know, it sounds and looks crazy), the social credit scoring system that is already widely deployed in China (with obvious Black Mirror connotations) and the accelerating race to create better human-like robots.

So will the concept of replacing uniquely human processes, relationships and experiences with AI-powered technological simulations become the biggest business opportunity ever? Will we stop bothering with a complicated, confusing and often exhausting reality when we can live in a perfectly orchestrated and comfortable virtual reality?

I conclude that we must on the one hand start to REFUSE TO PARTICIPATE when technologies (or those purveying them) become overbearing or when alleged progress threatens to dehumanise us ( yes, Facebook is a great and real-time example for this), while on the other hand we can't just reject the positive aspects of exponential innovations, either. Our future will very likely not entail a lot of simple yes/no answers (aboard from a few clear NO's such as on AI-fuelled weapons that can kill without human supervision) but will involve many 'it depends' scenarios that we must learn how to live with, and that we must carefully investigate and regulate.
Some bottom-lines

We think with our bodies (not just our brains)

You will not find happiness on the screen or in the cloud.

Algorithms know the value of everything but the feeling of nothing.

The more we connect with technology the more we must protect what makes us human.

Too much of a good thing can be a very bad thing - this is a key issue with all exponential technologies and therefore with AR/VR and the Metaverse, as well. As my fav sci-fi writter William Gibson likes to say: "Technology is morally neutral - until we use it". So who will we define what 'good moral usage' is? This video - a person sleeping while driving in a Tesla - illustrates this point very well: in principle, these technologies are beneficial - but how will we keep people from abusing them, causing real harm to themselves and to society at large?

Here is my bottom line on the Metaverse. Watch the entire talk here.

Related must-reads:

Related videos and films

How can we design a GOOD FUTURE?

Despite all of this... there is hope!

My 2020 - pre-covid film

The film that started it all: Technology vs Humanity, Barcelona, 2018

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
" The Great Reduction: Futurist Gerd Leonhard's take on virtual reality, sims and the Metaverse [Gerd Leonhard Futurist Humanist Author Keynote Speaker]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Post summary: The so-called metaverse is the latest and the boldest attempt to replace human relationships and experiences with highly monetizable simulations, reducing complex human life to data feeds, fancy graphics and AI-fuelled convenience: Consensual hallucinations sold as 'human empowerment'. We should be careful what...

# data[].attributes.headline
📱 #digitization When 'too much of a good thing can be a very bad thing'. Blog post by Gerd Leonhard

# data[].attributes.subject
📱 #digitization When 'too much of a good thing can be a very bad thing'. Blog post by Gerd Leonhard

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Too much of a good thing can be a very bad thing: Technology's Future

Why we must act now to ensure that exponential technological progress remains a benefit for humanity and the planet.

Gerd Leonhard, Futurist & Humanist. Zurich, Switzerland May 17 2021. Also published on Cognitive World. Portuguese version here. German version here. Spanish version here. Related: read my new European Policy Paper.
UPDATE Dec 1 2021: Read my latest post on the Metaverse: The Great Reduction
Technology has undoubtedly been good to us. AI systems are now able to detect some forms of skin cancer at a higher rate of accuracy than human doctors. Robots perform ultrasound exams and surgery, sometimes with little to no human intervention. Autopilots fly and land planes in the most adverse conditions and may soon be able to steer personal air taxis. Sensors gather live data from machinery and their "digital twins" to predict upcoming failures or warn of crucial repairs. 3D printers are capable of spitting out spare parts, improving maintenance options in remote locations.

Yet as technology and AI systems in particular become ever more powerful, the downside of exponentially accelerating technological progress also comes into sharp focus. Riffing off Marshall McLuhan (57 years ago!), every time we extend our capabilities, we also amputate others. Today, social media promises to "extend us" by allowing all of us to share our thoughts online, yet it also 'amputates' us by making us easy targets for tracking and manipulation. We gain the reach but we lose the privacy.

The impact of exponential change is incredibly hard to imagine

We should take note that while today's technological progress often seems very impressive and useful, mostly harmless and easily manageable, it would be very foolish indeed to assume that this will remain the same in the near future, as we're literally leaping up the exponential curve from 4 to 8 to 16 and on. 30 steps linearly may get me across the street, 30 exponential steps equals 26 trips around the globe. The scope of magnitude is utterly different and whatever may have worked before the pivot point may prove disastrous later on.

Right here, right now we are at the take-off point for many of the foundational sciences and technologies of the 21st century, from artificial intelligence and deep learning to human genome editing to geo-engineering, longevity and human enhancement - our entire framework is about to change - not just the picture!

During the next decade, every single one of the domains mentioned above (what I often call the Game-Changers) has more change in store than we witnessed in the entire previous century, in total. Science fiction is increasingly becoming science fact - and since humans are biological ( for now) and don't progress exponentially, we often have a very hard time understanding where all of this is going. What may be really amazing, magical and "good" for us today, may soon become "too much of a good thing", and go from being a tool to being the purpose, from being a god-send to being a doomsday machine.

Whether it's enhancing humans, designing chimeras or robots going to war: What will happen during the next 10 years will sweep away most of our notions about gradual progress and upend our views about how technological innovation usually and maybe even inadvertently furthers the common good.

Defining 'The Good Future'

In my view, what I recently started calling " the good future" (i.e. a utopia or better yet a protopia as opposed to a dystopia) is now at stake, and we cannot afford to shy away from the hard work such as collectively defining what a "good future" actually means for us, collectively and as a species, and how we can best shape it, together. As arduous as a consensus on the question of "good" may seem, the future must be created collectively or there will be none at all - at least not one that involves us humans (see the nuclear treaty / NPT analogies below).

Right now, as we see some semblance of a light at the end of the pandemic tunnel, is a good time to start an honest and open discussion about our shared goals and our telos (i.e. the purpose), and about the policies we will need in order to create that ' Good Future '. One thing is certain: The free-market doctrine has recently failed us a least twice (during the 2007 financial crisis, and during the Covid crisis), and the role of government as a market-shaper is bound to be much more prominent in the coming decade. The Good Future is not likely to come about with good old-fashioned capitalism, and neither will it be ushered in by technology. Rather, it is a question of ethics, values - and the policies we craft based on them.

Time to Rehumanize!

Now is the time to think about and act on "civilizing" or "re humanizing " and yes, regulating (but not strangulating) the global giants of technology - because in this age of advanced exponential change, today's amazing breakthroughs may well turn out to be major problems not too far down the road. What looks just fine at "1" may no longer be ok when we reach "16" on the exponential curve (i.e. after 5 doublings). We urgently need to look much further ahead as we are moving into the future at warp-drive speed. Foresight is simply mission-critical now and no longer "nice to have." 'The Future' is becoming a daily agenda item for every leader and public official.

So let's stop asking "what will the future bring" - it can soon, quite literally, bring almost anything we can imagine. Instead, we need to ask: "what kind of future do we WANT?

The amazing feat of developing not just one but several efficient vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 is a case in point as far as our accelerated exponential status goes. What used to take a decade and more, now took a mere 12 months, thanks in large part to the global capabilities of cloud computing and AI. Within a decade, that development cycle is likely to shrink to six weeks or less. Just imagine.

Yet this accomplishment should not distract from the basic truth that technology always has dual usages; it can be both good and not so good at the same time: It's "morally neutral until we use it" (W. Gibson). " Too much of a good thing " describes this conundrum very well: something quite useful can quickly become something deeply harmful and corrosive to society - as recently evidenced with social media, which suffers from excessive monetization obsession and utter lack of accountability.

This is why I think the European Commission is on the right track with its recent AI and technology regulation efforts. Yes, it's complicated, it's painful and may sometimes be overbearing - but somehow, we must get started to look beyond economic factors and growth at all costs, and to move towards what I've been calling the quadruple bottom line of " people, planet, purpose and prosperity " (extending the work done by Elkington and others on the triple bottom line).

"Too much of a good thing" - sound familiar?

It is not a coincidence that the overuse and dependency on devices and online services are often considered an addiction. Many of us use drugs in some form, from alcohol and tobacco to even controlled substances. Societies have learned how to deal with those addictions by way of laws, regulations, and a slew of social contracts designed to limit their reach and negative impact. Technology is not dissimilar in that excessive use or over-exposure also ruins lives. Many studies have documented that social network power users frequently rank at the top of suicide-prone lists, and that FOMO (far of missing out) can lead to serious anxiety disorders. But just wait until we have 5G and pervasive virtual reality applications and "smart glasses".

There is a palpable danger that this rapid and leaping technological progress may not be governed wisely before its constantly expanding capabilities overwhelm us, and presents us with a de-facto future most of us would not wish for their children. We therefore need a mix of "new norms" and social contracts, demonstrated responsibility and accountability in business and industry, and real safeguards such as regulation, laws and treaties. Our response must be broad and flexible, fair and democratic yet decisive when it comes down to acting on the side of precaution.

Imagine, for example, what will soon become possible once most of us have our healthcare data stored in the cloud and regularly interact with digital assistants and chatbots for things like mental health support. Pooling massive datasets derived from the human genome, biome and from behavioural observations (for instance when using a mobile device or a smart watch or when wearing a VR set) can give us tools to detect degenerative diseases and possibly even pre-diagnose cancer. Yet the consequences of privacy breaches in this domain could also be a thousand times worse than today's pitfalls e.g. when people's location data is illicitly captured. Again, as the song goes: "You ain't seen nothing yet".

Regulation and the challenge of a global consensus: the nuclear analogy

A useful example exists in the way we dealt with the threat of nuclear proliferation. Unfortunately, it took two nuclear bombs and almost 25 years of hard work before the global NPTs went into force in 1970. Today, given how fast and wide technology is advancing, we won't have the luxury of such a long runway anymore - and it's a lot harder to build a nuclear bomb than to write code. Or - taking a dimmer view - could it be that in a not-too-distant future, we must first experience catastrophic incidents caused by over-relying on unfit and unsafe "intelligent machines," or face even more ecosystem collapse due to hasty experiments with geo-engineering?

Locally, nationally, regionally and inevitably on a global scale, we need to agree on the bottom lines of what we can agree on, and set realistic 'lowest common denominator' thresholds beyond which certain technological applications cannot be pursued just "because we can" or because enormous economic benefits may be achievable. One such example of attainable consensus is a ban of autonomous weapons systems that kill without human supervision, or to ban the use of face recognition and more recently affect recognition for dubious commercial purposes. It's another issue the EU Commission has started to address.

The only question that really matters: What kind of world do we want to leave to our children?

We must realize that within this coming decade it will no longer be about what future we can build, but what future we want to build. It will no longer be just about great engineering or clever economics, it will be about values, ethics and purpose. Scientific and technological limitations will continue to fall away at a rapid pace, while the ethical and societal implications will become the real focal point. As E.O. Wilson famously said: "The real problem of humanity is the following: we have paleolithic emotions; medieval institutions; and god-like technology "

Further to this, Winston Churchill proclaimed: " You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else," and I often adapt this quote to read "humans" instead of Americans. But there will inevitably be things that should never be tried because they may have irreversible and existential consequences for humans and our planet, and that list is getting longer every day. Starting with the pursuit of artificial general intelligence, geo-engineering and human genome editing - all of these technologies could potentially be heaven, or they could be hell. And who will be "mission control" for humanity?

In particular, Silicon Valley's well-documented approach to experiment with almost anything and ask for permission later ("Move fast and break things," in Zuckerberg's pre-IPO parlance) will take us down a very dangerous road. This notion may have been tolerable or even exciting at the beginning of the exponential curve (where it looks almost the same as a linear curve), but going forward this paradigm is decidedly ill-suited to help bring about "the good future." Asking for forgiveness simply doesn't work when technology can swiftly bring on existential threats that may be far beyond the challenge we face(d) with nuclear weapons.

Take the idea to somehow make humans "superhuman" by chasing extreme longevity or by connecting our brains to the internet (yes, Elon Musk seems to be clamouring to become leading purveyor of these ideas). I fear we risk ending up with half-baked solutions introduced by for-profit corporations while the public has to pick up the pieces and fix the externalities - all for the sake of progress.

We are at a fork in the road: The future is our choice, by action or by inaction

Time is of the essence. We have ten short years to debate, agree on and implement new, global (or at least territorial) frameworks and rules as far as governing exponential technologies are concerned.

If we fail to agree on at least the lowest common denominators (such as clear-cut bans on lethal autonomous weapons systems, or bans on using genetic engineering of humans for military purposes) I worry that the externalities of unrestrained and unsupervised technological growth in AI, human genome editing and geo-engineering will prove to be just as harmful as those that were created by the almost unrestricted growth of the fossil fuel economy. Instead of climate change, it will be 'human change' that will present us with very wicked challenges if we don't apply some more 'precautionary thinking' here.

Going forward, no one should be allowed to outsource the negative externalities of their business, whether it is in energy, advertising, search, social media, cloud computing, the IoT, AI or with Virtual Reality.

When a company such as Alphabet's Google wants to turn an entire Toronto neighbourhood into its smart city lab ( Side Walks Lab), it is the initiating business - not the community and civil society - that has to be held accountable for the ensuing societal changes that pervasive connectivity and tracking bring about - both good and bad. Companies like Google must realize that in this exponential era (i.e. "beyond the pivot point") they are indeed responsible for what they invent and how they roll it out. Every technological issue is now an ethical issue, as well, and success in technology is no longer just about "great science, amazing engineering and scalable business models" (and maybe it never was).

Instead, the responsibilities for addressing potentially serious (and increasingly existential) downsides need to be baked into each business model, from the very beginning, and consideration must be given to all possible side-effects during the entire business design process and all subsequent roll-out phases. We need to discard the default 'dinner first, then morals' - doctrine of Silicon Valley or its Chinese equivalents. Holistic approaches (i.e. models that benefit society, industry, business and humanity at large) must replace " move fast and break things" attitudes, and stakeholder logic must replace shareholder primacy (*watch Paul Polman, former Unilever CEO, speak about this, here)

3 of my 6 Future Principles

Within the next five years, I think we are going to see new stock markets emerge (such as the still-nascent LTSE in San Francisco) where companies that operate on the premise of "People, Planet, Purpose and Prosperity" will be listed. EUROPE should seize this opportunity and take the lead!

Call me an optimist or a utopian, but I am convinced that we can still define and shape a "good future" for all of mankind as well as for our planet.

Here are some suggestions to guide this debate:

1. The ethical issues of exponential technologies must be deemed as important as the economic gains they may generate. Technology is not the answer to every problem, and we would be ill-advised to look to technology to "solve everything." If there is one thing I have learned in my 20 years as a Futurist, it is this: Technology will not solve social, cultural or human problems such as (in)equality or injustice. On the contrary, it often make matters worse because technology drives efficiency regardless of its moral consequences. Facebook is the best example for this effect: a really powerful concept, very cleverly engineered, working incredibly well (just as designed) - and yet deeply corrosive to our society (watch my talks on this topic, here). Apple's CEO Tim Cook nails it when he says: "Technology can do great things, but it doesn't want to do great things. It doesn't want anything." The "want" is our job, and we shouldn't shirk that responsibility just because it is tedious or may slow down monetization.

2. Humans must remain in-the-loop (HITL): For the foreseeable future and until we are much further along with understanding ourselves (and not just our brains) and capable of controlling the technologies that could potentially "be like us" (aka AGI or ASI), I strongly believe that we need to keep humans in the loop, even if it's less efficient, slower or more costly. Otherwise, we may be on the path towards dehumanisation a lot faster than we think. Pro-action and pre-caution must be carefully considered and constantly balanced.

3. We need to ban short-term thinking and get used to taking both an exponential and a long-term view - while respecting the fact that humans are organic (i.e. the opposite of exponential). As mentioned above, we are just now crossing that magic line where the pace of change rockets skywards: 1-2-3 may look a lot like 1-2-4, but leaping from 4 to 8 to 16 is very different from going from 3 to 4 to 5. We must learn and practice how to live linearly but imagine exponentially; one leg in the present and one leg in the future.

4. We need new "non-proliferation treaties." Artificial general intelligence (AGI), geo-engineering or human genome editing are both magical opportunities as well as significant existential threats (just like nuclear power, some would argue), but we will probably not have the luxury of dabbling in AGI and then recover from failure. An "intelligence explosion" in AI may well be an irreversible event, and so might germ-line human genome modifications. We will therefore need forward-looking, binding and collective standards, starting with an international memorandum on AGI.

5. I have been speaking about the need for a "Digital Ethics Council" a lot during the past five years, starting with my 2016 book "Technology vs Humanity." Many countries, states and cities have started establishing similar bodies lately, such as the EU's European Artificial Intelligence Board. We need more of these, regionally, nationally, internationally, and globally!

So here we are in 2021, standing at this fateful and also very hopeful fork in the road. It is upon all of us to choose the right path and start building the "good future."
It is not too late - have hope, have courage and pursue wisdom!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
" Too much of a good thing can be a very bad thing: Technology's Future [Gerd Leonhard Futurist Humanist Author Keynote Speaker]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Why we must act now to ensure that exponential technological progress remains a benefit for humanity and the planet. Gerd Leonhard, Futurist & Humanist. Zurich, Switzerland May 17 2021. Also published on Cognitive World. Portuguese version here. German version here. Spanish version here. Related: read...

# data[].attributes.headline
📉 #reformation Read Gerd's thoughts on why 'Capitalism as we know it is unfit for the future'

# data[].attributes.subject
📉 #reformation Read Gerd's thoughts on why 'Capitalism as we know it is unfit for the future'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Why Capitalism as we know it is unfit for the Future

Written by Gerd Leonhard and Matt Ward

Covid-19 has accelerated the demise of traditional corporate capitalism

2019 was a year of great prosperity and innovation, with stock markets booming, democracy largely thriving (well, apart from what went down in Trump's USA), and unemployment at near-record lows throughout much of the developed world. But then, Covid-19 struck and changed everything as half the world went into lock-down, economies and supply-chains ground to a halt, unemployment skyrocketed, and the world suffered its greatest health/humanitarian crisis since World War II. All of a sudden, the future look bleak.

The myth that many people want to believe is that things will somehow go ' Back to Normal' - that sooner or later, the world will return to its pre-pandemic ways. But is that really possible, and is it really what we want - or indeed, what we need? Was the good old 'Normal' really good enough? Was the world really doing that well 'before covid' - considering the growing political polarization, increasing inequality (especially in the US and Brazil), and the escalating climate crisis? Could it be that because of the hardships and pains of the Corona crisis, we've talked ourselves into believing that 'Normal' was good enough in the first place?

Covid has amplified both the divisive as well as the unifying forces in our society

None of the consequences of Covid-19 are entirely new. All of the trends such as remote work / WFH, the move to digital/virtual everything (watch: ' The end of Analog'), and the increasing gap between productivity increases due to technological innovation, on the one hand, and workers' stagnant compensation and declining economic perspectives, on the other hand, were already present prior to Covid. While the crisis has served as a major accelerant of many positive trends (such as faster digital transformation and increased climate change awareness), it has also forced us to pay more attention to those enormous challenges we've been facing for quite some time, already, such as underfunded healthcare systems, unequal access to education, and an over-reliance on just-in-time manufacturing. And as Gerd likes to say, Covid-19 a mere test run for the challenges we are facing from climate change (Moving Beyond Corona has been Gerd's most requested speaking topic of 2020/21).

Fixing the broken incentives of corporate capitalism will require a complete system overhaul

Albert Einstein once said, "We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them." And when it comes to problems like climate change, income inequality, polarization, disinformation and algorithmic manipulation we couldn't agree more.

To tackle these existential problems, we must address the underlying operating system that created them: Extreme corporate capitalism and Milton Friedman's enormous influence on the outmoded principle of ' shareholder return above all else '

As we stand here today looking back at the past 14 months, it is now glaringly obvious that ' shareholder return' simply can no longer be more important than everything else. This kind of thinking (sorry, Milton) has led us to the anthropocene - it's an outmoded and increasingly harmful leftover of the industrial economy. After all, who can do business on a broken planet? While the rising tide can usually floats all boats, the absence of any water whatsoever will equally impact anyone, rich or poor. If the stock markets around the globe continue to incentivise short-term profits and perpetual growth at the expense of 'people and planet ', the future of our children will be bleak.

Capitalism is both the biggest source of prosperity as well as the greatest threat

The pursuit of profit and growth built the modern world. It brought us iPhones and the Android OS, free phone calls, music & films in the cloud, increased life expectancy, a decline of extreme poverty, and of course the creation of the Covid-19 vaccine in less than 12 months. So it seems that overall, capitalism worked better than anything else we tried - until we got to the top of the growth spiral, until we used up all the 'free' supplies of nature as well as of people (see Facebook), and until we ran out of space we could annex for the sake of monetization.

Corporate capitalism as Friedman propagated it has now outlived its purpose. But yet: "When you're a hammer, everything looks like a nail."

"Capitalism is the worst economic system, except for all the others..." ?

The world has changed since everything around us went digital (5G, IoT, AI...), and today we are truly at the pivot point of exponential change. While ' trickle down economics' may once have worked in some countries or regions (like Germany) to "redistribute" wealth across society, those days are gone. In this exponential era where a small team of some 13 people can create something like Instagram and be quickly sold to Facebook for a billion dollars, and where global tech-companies are formed from a few lines of code, the "economic pipes" have gone logarithmic, as well. No longer do the fruits of labor flow proportionally to the factory workers assembling Ford's cars. Instead, software (written and controlled by few) is eating the world, and now, AI is eating software. Digital darwinism and the surveillance economy, everywhere.

A slave to the markets

Most public companies today cannot escape the 'growth at all costs' dogma of the stock markets driven by short-term thinking. This is how we got into the Facebook dilemma that has now proven to be so detrimental to our democracies, as Gerd laid out 3 years ago, here on this blog. Because of this narrow focus on GDP-growth and corporate profits, it is entirely possible - and in fact, considered 'normal' - to make oodles of money doing things that are detrimental to society. In fact, every time Facebook is ordered to pay a steep penalty for privacy and data violations, data-breaches or worse, their stock goes up.

Patagonia or maybe even Unilever may beg to differ, but even the Business Roundtable's CEOs seem to be only at their very beginning in terms of actually changing the way they operate. Until Covid-19 happened, we didn't really reward a focus on sustainability - but because of the tough Covid-19 learnings we set forth that 'Green is the new Digital, and Sustainable will become the New Profitable'.

Our apparent inability to act BEFORE facing an emergency situation or disaster makes solving long-term problems like climate change incredibly difficult. To make things even more challenging, we tend to believe there is no way that we will really tackle this massive challenge without changing the underlying paradigm of traditional capitalism first (a good example for this tragedy of the commons might be that reducing CO2 emissions is in all of our best interests, but we are likely to only do so if others do the same).

An entirely different form of capitalism?

No, we are not proposing a kind of 'digital socialism' as the answer to humanity's woes. And we're not saying that simply more and 'better technology' will solve all of these problems, either. But Europe's 'social capitalism' seems like a good starting point, though, despite all all its issues (be sure to watch Gerd's keynote at the European Liberal Forum, on these topics, below or here).

We believe the key to designing a better future is to lessen the focus on GDP-growth, and to instead set our eyes on a new operating principle and a new set of metrics we like to call the 4Ps: People, Planet, Purpose, and Prosperity (see Gerd's speaking topic for more details). We will be elaborating on this in a series of upcoming posts (in the meantime, be sure to read about John Elkington's related work on People, Planet, Profit in the meantime).

Winston Churchill allegedly said, "You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they have tried everything else." We like to say that this also applies to humans, generally (watch Gerd's video on Pain and Love, below).

We have great hopes that Covid-19 can be the catalyst for the sweeping economic and societal changes that are urgently needed to create A Good Future for all of us because we are truly at a fork in the road (JOIN US!!) in humanity's history - the next 10 years will determine our future!
The good news is that it is up to us. And the #1 challenge is this: While we will have all the tools, will we have the TELOS (will, purpose and wisdom)?

The Future of Europe, Media and Technology

Pain and Love - that's how humans change

"As we see future, so we act; as we act, so we become" (Barbara Hubbard, Buckminster Fuller's protege)

Interested in the Post-Covid Future and Moving Beyond Corona? Check out Gerd's #1 most requested speaking topic of 2020/21 or review his Core Topics.

MUST WATCH: Conversation with Green CEO Jennifer Morgan

https://forkintheroadproject.com/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
" Why Capitalism as we know it is unfit for the Future [Gerd Leonhard Futurist Humanist Author Keynote Speaker]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Written by Gerd Leonhard and Matt Ward Covid-19 has accelerated the demise of traditional corporate capitalism 2019 was a year of great prosperity and innovation, with stock markets booming, democracy largely thriving (well, apart from what went down in Trump's USA), and unemployment at near-record...

# data[].attributes.headline
'What kind of Future do we want to leave our children? Rapid #decarbonization is our future' Blog post by Gerd Leonhard

# data[].attributes.subject
'What kind of Future do we want to leave our children? Rapid #decarbonization is our future' Blog post by Gerd Leonhard

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
" What kind of Future do we want to leave our children? Rapid decarbonisation is our duty. [Gerd Leonhard Futurist Humanist Author Keynote Speaker]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
" What kind of Future do we want to leave our children? Rapid decarbonisation is our duty. - This chart says it all. No wonder millennials are having such a difficult time during the Covid-Crisis. Found in Azeem Azhar's cool newsletter. More on Millennials via GerdFeed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHndQgTeOXU

# data[].attributes.headline
#reformation People, Planet, Purpose and Prosperity and the Future of Greece. Read this Fortune Greece Interview with Gerd Leonhard

# data[].attributes.subject
#reformation People, Planet, Purpose and Prosperity and the Future of Greece. Read this Fortune Greece Interview with Gerd Leonhard

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
» Fortune Greece Interview with Gerd Leonhard: People, Planet, Purpose and Prosperity – and the Future of Greece [Gerd Leonhard Futurist Humanist Author Keynote Speaker]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Fortune Greece Interview with Gerd Leonhard: People, Planet, Purpose and Prosperity - and the Future of Greece

# data[].attributes.headline
🌱 DDR: Gerd's ELF Policy Paper on the Future of Europe: Capitalism, Technology and Sustainability 

# data[].attributes.subject
🌱 DDR: Gerd's ELF Policy Paper on the Future of Europe: Capitalism, Technology and Sustainability 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
» Here is my ELF Policy Paper on the Future of Europe: Capitalism, Technology and Sustainability [Gerd Leonhard Futurist Humanist Author Keynote Speaker]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It was a great pleasure to contribute a virtual keynote at the European Liberal Forum, on March 20, 2021 and today I am delighted to be able to share my new Policy Paper

# data[].attributes.headline
🎞 'The Good Future': Gerd Leonhard's NEW short film  with resources 

# data[].attributes.subject
🎞 'The Good Future': Gerd Leonhard's NEW short film  with resources 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
» The Good Future: The new short film by Futurist Gerd Leonhard [Gerd Leonhard Futurist Humanist Author Keynote Speaker]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Here is what you’ll see in this film: I first speak about why we are at such a crucial moment in human history right now, why our current economic story and logic won’t work in the future, and why we need to move from a focus on profit and growth to a focus on people, planet, purpose and prosperity.…

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.embed_code
The Good Future: The new short film by Futurist Gerd Leonhard

# data[].attributes.headline
Circular economy because there is no vaccine for the climate crisis

# data[].attributes.subject
Circular economy because there is no vaccine for the climate crisis

# data[].attributes.headline
Too much of a good thing can be a very bad thing

# data[].attributes.subject
Too much of a good thing can be a very bad thing

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
" Decarbonisation [Gerd Leonhard Futurist Humanist Author Keynote Speaker]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Futurist, Humanist, Keynote Speaker, Author and Film-Maker: Gerd is CEO of the The Futures Agency and the global expert and presenter for Technology and Humanity, Digital Ethics, Artificial Intelligence and Digital Transforming

# data[].attributes.headline
💻 Gerd's hub on Digital Ethics #digitization

# data[].attributes.subject
💻 Gerd's hub on Digital Ethics #digitization

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
" digitalethics [Gerd Leonhard Futurist Humanist Author Keynote Speaker]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Futurist, Humanist, Keynote Speaker, Author and Film-Maker: Gerd is CEO of the The Futures Agency and the global expert and presenter for Technology and Humanity, Digital Ethics, Artificial Intelligence and Digital Transforming

# data[].attributes.headline
📈 Gerd's hub on the Future of Capitalism #reformation

# data[].attributes.subject
📈 Gerd's hub on the Future of Capitalism #reformation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
" The Future of Capitalism [Gerd Leonhard Futurist Humanist Author Keynote Speaker]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Futurist, Humanist, Keynote Speaker, Author and Film-Maker: Gerd is CEO of the The Futures Agency and the global expert and presenter for Technology and Humanity, Digital Ethics, Artificial Intelligence and Digital Transforming

# data[].attributes.headline
📖 Gerd's must read high-lights and links 🔗

# data[].attributes.subject
📖 Gerd's must read high-lights and links 🔗

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Gerd Leonhard is a leading Futurist & Humanist, Keynote Speaker, Author of 5 books (most recently: Technology vs Humanity), Film-Producer, CEO of The Futures Agency, and a Fellow of the Royal Society for the Arts. This blog shares his latest reads, high-lights and saved articles.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
GerdFeed: Futurist Gerd Leonhard's Best Links

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Gerd Leonhard is a leading Futurist & Humanist, Keynote Speaker, Author of 5 books (most recently: Technology vs Humanity), Film-Producer, CEO of The Futures Agency, and a Fellow of the Royal Society for the Arts. This blog shares his latest reads, high-lights and saved articles.