datapreprocessing/data/IWSLT17.TED.tst2017plus.en-id.tok.en

TED Talk Subtitles and Transcript : Zaria Forman's large-scale compositions of melting glaciers , icebergs floating in glassy water and waves cresting with foam explore moments of transition , turbulence and tranquility. Join her as she discusses the meditative process of artistic creation and the motivation behind her work. " My drawings celebrate the beauty of what we all stand to lose ," she says. " I hope they can serve as records of sublime landscapes in flux . "
Zaria Forman : Drawings that show the beauty and fragility of Earth
I consider it my life's mission to convey the urgency of climate change through my work .
I've traveled north to the Arctic to the capture the unfolding story of polar melt , and south to the Equator to document the subsequent rising seas .
Most recently , I visited the icy coast of Greenland and the low-lying islands of the Maldives , connecting two seemingly disparate but equally endangered parts of our planet .
My drawings explore moments of transition , turbulence and tranquility in the landscape , allowing viewers to emotionally connect with a place you might never have the chance to visit .
I choose to convey the beauty as opposed to the devastation .
If you can experience the sublimity of these landscapes , perhaps you'll be inspired to protect and preserve them .
Behavioral psychology tells us that we take action and make decisions based on our emotions above all else .
And studies have shown that art impacts our emotions more effectively than a scary news report .
Experts predict ice-free Arctic summers as early as 2020 .
And sea levels are likely to rise between two and ten feet by century's end .
I have dedicated my career to illuminating these projections with an accessible medium , one that moves us in a way that statistics may not .
My process begins with traveling to the places at the forefront of climate change .
On-site , I take thousands of photographs .
Back in the studio , I work from both my memory of the experience and the photographs to create very large-scale compositions , sometimes over 10 feet wide .
I draw with soft pastel , which is dry like charcoal , but colors .
I consider my work drawings but others call them painting .
I cringe , though , when I'm referred to as a " finger painter . "
But I don't use any tools and I have always used my fingers and palms to manipulate the pigment on the paper .
Drawing is a form of meditation for me .
It quiets my mind .
I don't perceive what I'm drawing as ice or water .
Instead , the image is stripped down to its most basic form of color and shape .
Once the piece is complete , I can finally experience the composition as a whole , as an iceberg floating through glassy water , or a wave cresting with foam .
On average , a piece this size takes me about , as you can see , 10 seconds .
Really , more like 200 hours , 250 hours for something that size .
But I've been drawing ever since I could hold a crayon , really .
My mom was an artist , and growing up , we always had art supplies all over the house .
My mother's love of photography propelled her to the most remote regions of the earth , and my family and I were fortunate enough to join and support her on these adventures .
We rode camels in Northern Africa and mushed on dog sleds near the North Pole .
In August of 2012 , I led my first expedition , taking a group of artists and scholars up the northwest coast of Greenland .
My mother was originally supposed to lead this trip .
She and I were in the early stages of planning , as we had intended to go together , when she fell victim to a brain tumor .
The cancer quickly took over her body and mind , and she passed away six months later .
During the months of her illness , though , her dedication to the expedition never wavered , and I made a promise to carry out her final journey .
My mother's passion for the Arctic echoed through my experience in Greenland , and I felt the power and the fragility of the landscape .
The sheer size of the icebergs is humbling .
The ice fields are alive with movement and sound in a way that I never expected .
I expanded the scale of my compositions to give you that same sense of awe that I experienced .
Yet , while the grandeur of the ice is evident , so , too , is its vulnerability .
From our boat , I could see the ice sweating under the unseasonably warm sun .
We had a chance to visit many of the Inuit communities in Greenland that now face huge challenges .
The locals spoke to me of vast areas of sea ice that are no longer freezing over as they once did .
And without ice , their hunting and harvesting grounds are severely diminished , threatening their way of life and survival .
The melting glaciers in Greenland are one of the largest contributing factors to rising sea levels , which have already begun to drown some of our world's lowest-lying islands .
One year after my trip to Greenland , I visited the Maldives , the lowest and flattest country in the entire world .
While I was there , I collected images and inspiration for a new body of work : drawings of waves lapping on the coast of a nation that could be entirely underwater within this century .
Devastating events happen every day on scales both global and personal .
When I was in Greenland , I scattered my mother's ashes amidst the melting ice .
Now she remains a part of the landscape she loved so much , even as it , too , passes and takes on new form .
Among the many gifts my mother gave me was the ability to focus on the positive , rather than the negative .
My drawings celebrate the beauty of what we all stand to lose .
I hope they can serve as records of sublime landscapes in flux , documenting the transition and inspiring our global community to take action for the future .
Thank you .
TED Talk Subtitles and Transcript : In the US , the press has a right to publish secret information the public needs to know , protected by the First Amendment. Government surveillance has made it increasingly more dangerous for whistleblowers , the source of virtually every important story about national security since 9 / 11 , to share information. In this concise , informative talk , Freedom of the Press Foundation co-founder and TED Fellow Trevor Timm traces the recent history of government action against individuals who expose crime and injustice and advocates for technology that can help them do it safely and anonymously .
Trevor Timm : How free is our freedom of the press ?
So this is James Risen .
You may know him as the Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter for The New York Times .
Long before anybody knew Edward Snowden's name , Risen wrote a book in which he famously exposed that the NSA was illegally wiretapping the phone calls of Americans .
But it's another chapter in that book that may have an even more lasting impact .
In it , he describes a catastrophic US intelligence operation in which the CIA quite literally handed over blueprints of a nuclear bomb to Iran .
If that sounds crazy , go read it .
It's an incredible story .
But you know who didn't like that chapter ?
The US government .
For nearly a decade afterwards , Risen was the subject of a US government investigation in which prosecutors demanded that he testify against one of his alleged sources .
And along the way , he became the face for the US government's recent pattern of prosecuting whistleblowers and spying on journalists .
You see , under the First Amendment , the press has the right to publish secret information in the public interest .
But it's impossible to exercise that right if the media can't also gather that news and protect the identities of the brave men and women who get it to them .
So when the government came knocking , Risen did what many brave reporters have done before him : and said he'd rather go to jail .
So from 2007 to 2015 , Risen lived under the specter of going to federal prison .
That is , until just days before the trial , when a curious thing happened .
Suddenly , after years of claiming it was vital to their case , the government dropped their demands to Risen altogether .
It turns out , in the age of electronic surveillance , there are very few places reporters and sources can hide .
And instead of trying and failing to have Risen testify , they could have his digital trail testify against him instead .
So completely in secret and without his consent , prosecutors got Risen's phone records .
They got his email records , his financial and banking information , his credit reports , even travel records with a list of flights he had taken .
And it was among this information that they used to convict Jeffrey Sterling , Risen's alleged source and CIA whistleblower .
Sadly , this is only one case of many .
President Obama ran on a promise to protect whistleblowers , and instead , his Justice Department has prosecuted more than all other administrations combined .
Now , you can see how this could be a problem , especially because the government considers so much of what it does secret .
Since 9 / 11 , virtually every important story about national security has been the result of a whistleblower coming to a journalist .
So we risk seeing the press unable to do their job that the First Amendment is supposed to protect because of the government's expanded ability to spy on everyone .
But just as technology has allowed the government to circumvent reporters' rights , the press can also use technology to protect their sources even better than before .
And they can start from the moment they begin speaking with them , rather than on the witness stand after the fact .
Communications software now exists that wasn't available when Risen was writing his book , and is much more surveillance-resistant than regular emails or phone calls .
For example , one such tool is SecureDrop , an open-source whistleblower submission system that was originally created by the late Internet luminary Aaron Swartz , and is now developed at the non-profit where I work , Freedom of the Press Foundation .
Instead of sending an email , you go to a news organization's website , like this one here on The Washington Post .
From there , you can upload a document or send information much like you would on any other contact form .
It'll then be encrypted and stored on a server that only the news organization has access to .
So the government can no longer secretly demand the information , and much of the information they would demand wouldn't be available in the first place .
SecureDrop , though , is really only a small part of the puzzle for protecting press freedom in the 21st century .
Unfortunately , governments all over the world are constantly developing new spying techniques that put us all at risk .
And it's up to us going forward to make sure that it's not just the tech-savvy whistleblowers , like Edward Snowden , who have an avenue for exposing wrongdoing .
It's just as vital that we protect the next veteran's health care whistleblower alerting us to overcrowded hospitals , or the next environmental worker sounding the alarm about Flint's dirty water , or a Wall Street insider warning us of the next financial crisis .
After all , these tools weren't just built to help the brave men and women who expose crimes , but are meant to protect all of our rights under the Constitution .
Thank you .
TED Talk Subtitles and Transcript : Anyone who has lost a loved one to pancreatic cancer knows the devastating speed with which it can affect an otherwise healthy person. TED Fellow and biomedical entrepreneur Laura Indolfi is developing a revolutionary way to treat this complex and lethal disease : a drug delivery device that acts as a cage at the site of a tumor , preventing it from spreading and delivering medicine only where it's needed. " We are hoping that one day we can make pancreatic cancer a curable disease ," she says .
Laura Indolfi : Good news in the fight against pancreatic cancer
By raising your hand , how many of you know at least one person on the screen ?
Wow , it's almost a full house .
It's true , they are very famous in their fields .
And do you know what all of them have in common ?
They all died of pancreatic cancer .
However , although it's very , very sad this news , it's also thanks to their personal stories that we have raised awareness of how lethal this disease can be .
It's become the third cause of cancer deaths , and only eight percent of the patients will survive beyond five years .
That's a very tiny number , especially if you compare it with breast cancer , where the survival rate is almost 90 percent .
So it doesn't really come as a surprise that being diagnosed with pancreatic cancer means facing an almost certain death sentence .
What's shocking , though , is that in the last 40 years , this number hasn't changed a bit , while much more progress has been made with other types of tumors .
So how can we make pancreatic cancer treatment more effective ?
As a biomedical entrepreneur , I like to work on problems that seem impossible , understanding their limitations and trying to find new , innovative solutions that can change their outcome .
The first piece of bad news with pancreatic cancer is that your pancreas is in the middle of your belly , literally .
It's depicted in orange on the screen .
But you can barely see it until I remove all the other organs in front .
It's also surrounded by many other vital organs , like the liver , the stomach , the bile duct .
And the ability of the tumor to grow into those organs is the reason why pancreatic cancer is one of the most painful tumor types .
The hard-to-reach location also prevents the doctor from surgically removing it , as is routinely done for breast cancer , for example .
So all of these reasons leave chemotherapy as the only option for the pancreatic cancer patient .
This brings us to the second piece of bad news .
Pancreatic cancer tumors have very few blood vessels .
Why should we care about the blood vessel of a tumor ?
Let's think for a second how chemotherapy works .
The drug is injected in the vein and it navigates throughout the body until it reaches the tumor site .
It's like driving on a highway , trying to reach a destination .
But what if your destination doesn't have an exit on the highway ?
You will never get there .
And that's exactly the same problem for chemotherapy and pancreatic cancer .
The drugs navigate throughout all of your body .
They will reach healthy organs , resulting in high toxic effect for the patients overall , but very little will go to the tumor .
Therefore , the efficacy is very limited .
To me , it seems very counterintuitive to have a whole-body treatment to target a specific organ .
However , in the last 40 years , a lot of money , research and effort have gone towards finding new , powerful drugs to treat pancreatic cancer , but nothing has been done in changing the way we deliver them to the patient .
So after two pieces of bad news , I'm going to give you good news , hopefully .
With a collaborator at MIT and the Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston , we have revolutionized the way we treat cancer by making localized drug delivery a reality .
We are basically parachuting you on top of your destination , avoiding your having to drive all around the highway .
We have embedded the drug into devices that look like this one .
They are flexible enough that they can be folded to fit into the catheter , so the doctor can implant it directly on top of the tumor with minimally invasive surgery .
But they are solid enough that once they are positioned on top of the tumor , they will act as a cage .
They will actually physically prevent the tumor from entering other organs , controlling the metastasis .
The devices are also biodegradable .
That means that once in the body , they start dissolving , delivering the drug only locally , slowly and more effectively than what is done with the current whole-body treatment .
In pre-clinical study , we have demonstrated that this localized approach is able to improve by 12 times the response to treatment .
So we took a drug that is already known and by just delivering it locally where it's needed the most , we allow a response that is 12 times more powerful , reducing the systemic toxic effect .
We are working relentlessly to bring this technology to the next level .
We are finalizing the pre-clinical testing and the animal model required prior to asking the FDA for approval for clinical trials .
Currently , the majority of patients will die from pancreatic cancer .
We are hoping that one day , we can reduce their pain , extend their life and potentially make pancreatic cancer a curable disease .
By rethinking the way we deliver the drug , we don't only make it more powerful and less toxic , we are also opening the door to finding new innovative solutions for almost all other impossible problems in pancreatic cancer patients and beyond .
Thank you very much .
TED Talk Subtitles and Transcript : Conceptual artist and TED Fellow Sanford Biggers uses painting , sculpture , video and performance to spark challenging conversations about the history and trauma of black America. Join him as he details two compelling works and shares the motivation behind his art. " Only through more thoughtful dialogue about history and race can we evolve as individuals and society ," Biggers says .
Sanford Biggers : An artist's unflinching look at racial violence
As a conceptual artist , I'm constantly looking for creative ways to spark challenging conversations .
I do this though painting , sculpture , video and performance .
But regardless of the format , two of my favorite materials are history and dialogue .
In 2007 , I created " Lotus ," a seven-and-a-half-foot diameter , 600-pound glass depiction of a lotus blossom .
In Buddhism , the lotus is a symbol for transcendence and for purity of mind and spirit .
But a closer look at this lotus reveals each petal to be the cross-section of a slave ship .
This iconic diagram was taken from a British slaving manual and later used by abolitionists to show the atrocities of slavery .
In America , we don't like to talk about slavery , nor do we look at it as a global industry .
But by using this Buddhist symbol , I hope to universalize and transcend the history and trauma of black America and encourage discussions about our shared past .
To create " Lotus ," we carved over 6,000 figures .
And this later led to a commission by the City of New York to create a 28-foot version in steel as a permanent installation at the Eagle Academy for Young Men , a school for black and latino students , the two groups most affected by this history .
The same two groups are very affected by a more recent phenomenon , but let me digress .
I've been collecting wooden African figures from tourist shops and flea markets around the world .
The authenticity and origin of them is completely debatable , but people believe these to be imbued with power , or even magic .
Only recently have I figured out how to use this in my own work .
( Gun shots ) Since 2012 , the world has witnessed the killings of Trayvon Martin , Michael Brown , Eric Garner , Sandra Bland , Tamir Rice and literally countless other unarmed black citizens at the hands of the police , who frequently walk away with no punishment at all .
In consideration of these victims and the several times that even I , a law-abiding , Ivy League professor , have been targeted and harassed at gunpoint by the police .
I created this body of work simply entitled " BAM . "
It was important to erase the identity of each of these figures , to make them all look the same and easier to disregard .
To do this , I dip them in a thick , brown wax before taking them to a shooting range where I re-sculpted them using bullets .
And it was fun , playing with big guns and high-speed video cameras .
But my reverence for these figures kept me from actually pulling the trigger , somehow feeling as if I would be shooting myself .
Finally , my cameraman , Raul , fired the shots .
I then took the fragments of these and created molds , and cast them first in wax , and finally in bronze like the image you see here , which bears the marks of its violent creation like battle wounds or scars .
When I showed this work recently in Miami , a woman told me she felt every gun shot to her soul .
But she also felt that these artworks memorialized the victims of these killings as well as other victims of racial violence throughout US history .
But " Lotus " and " BAM " are larger than just US history .
While showing in Berlin last year , a philosophy student asked me what prompted these recent killings .
I showed him a photo of a lynching postcard from the early 1900s and reminded him that these killings have been going on for over 500 years .
But it's only through questions like his and more thoughtful dialogue about history and race can we evolve as individuals and society .
I hope my artwork creates a safe space for this type of honest exchange and an opportunity for people to engage one another in real and necessary conversation .
Thank you .
TED Talk Subtitles and Transcript : When Ameera Harouda hears the sounds of bombs or shells , she heads straight towards them. " I want to be there first because these stories should be told ," says Gaza's first female " fixer ," a role that allows her to guide journalists into chaotic , war zone scenarios in her home country , which she still loves despite its terrible situation. Find out what motivates Harouda to give a voice to Gaza's human suffering in this unforgettable talk .
Ameera Harouda : Why I put myself in danger to tell the stories of Gaza
Hello .
This is my first trip , first time in life I'm outside of the walls of Gaza .
I'm so happy to be here .
My ambition always was to be a pilot , to fly a plane , to feel free to fly the sky , to touch the sky .
But that didn't happen .
Simply , I live in Gaza , there is no airport .
All borders are closed on every side .
We live in one of the biggest prisons in the world .
The only thing I can do is just to look up to the sky .
On some days , we are lucky if we have electricity for four or five hours .
When it's cold , we make a fire on the front or on the roof of our homes .
Sometimes we make food , too .
My job in Gaza is to arrange everything for journalists who come to my homeland to tell the stories about what's going on in Gaza .
Many mornings , I had to go to the border area to collect a journalist .
If anything should happen to the journalist , or if the journalist decides to cover a story the government doesn't want us to cover , bad things could happen .
Navigating through my country helping journalists , filmmakers , news crews , is my working life .
I believe my success comes from building a relationship not only with journalists and the news crews , but also with the communities in the Gaza Strip .
These communities who don't want their stories to be told , I never looked to them as stories or numbers .
But like me , they are human beings .
I have built up many relationships over 10 years .
And guess what ?
This gives me the chance to get access to people , to stories that others can't .
In some certain situations , I feel , as a woman , I have more power .
Many male journalists in my society , they want to cover a story about drug addiction in my country .
That problem started when the Gaza tunnel was being built .
With the siege on Gaza , tunnels brought people all the basic needs like food , building material , other stuff we needed .
But not anymore , because the Egyptian side flooded them up with water and they are not working anymore .
Drugs were being smuggled , and many young people got addicted , too .
In the tradition of the Palestinian society , it's forbidden for men to enter the household .
So , no male journalists get the story .
But I did .
I have a wonderful husband , a wonderful husband who supports me despite all the criticism he gets from the society .
He's at home now with my two kids , and I have another one that's growing in here .
When I'm working , I call him every two hours , and he knows if he doesn't hear from me , he should call my contact , the one who gives me access to the story , which is the one who I trust .
One of the times in Gaza , during the kidnapping of the British journalist Alan Johnston , I was asked by an American magazine to set up a meeting with the kidnappers in Gaza , and I did .
The journalist covering the story and I were asked to meet outside of his hotel .
They came , they picked us up in a black van with black windows , they were wearing masks on that day .
And they drove us away , far away in the middle of a field .
They took our cell phones and we did the interview with the kidnapper outside in that field .
I was so scared that day , a day I will never forget .
So , why do I do what I do ?
I do it because I believe if I didn't , a huge part of the story about Gaza will be missing .
There are some more stories I could tell you about my country .
And not all of them are bad .
I love my country , despite the terrible situation we live in -- siege , poverty , unemployment -- but there is life .
There are people who are dreamers and amazing people full of energy .
We have wonderful music , and a great music school .
We have parkour dancers who dance in the rubble of their homes .
And Gaza is the only place in the Arab world where Muslims and Christians live in strong brotherhood .
During the time of war , the hardest part for me is leaving the house early in the morning , leaving my children .
I take a picture of them everyday because I never know if I will make it back to them .
Being a fixer and a journalist is difficult and dangerous in Gaza .
But when I hear the sound of the shelling or the sound of the bombing , I just head straight toward it , because I want to be there first , because these stories should be told .
When my children were small and we heard the sound of the war , I used to tell them that they were fireworks .
Now they are older , they understand .
I do have terrible nightmares because of all that I witnessed during war times , especially these lifeless bodies of young children .
I still remember a little girl , her name is Hala .
She's the only survivor from her family .
Her picture will be with me forever .
I will never forget her .
I'm proud that I can stand here and be here today with you .
I'm proud that I can tell you stories , sad and happy , stories about my small corner of the world , Gaza .
I'm proud that I am the first female fixer working in Gaza .
And the funny thing is they call me Mr. Rambo in Gaza .
I hope one day , I will get the chance to tell the stories of all other women , all other amazing women I know in my country .
I hope that one day I can help other women in my country to be fixers like me .
And of course sometimes , I feel I can't do this work anymore , it's just too much for me .
But I remember these words : " Don't limit your challenge , but challenge your limit .
Don't allow others to stand in front of your dreams . "
Thank you .
TED Talk Subtitles and Transcript : On April 3 , 2016 we saw the largest data leak in history. The Panama Papers exposed rich and powerful people hiding vast amounts of money in offshore accounts. But what does it all mean ? We called Robert Palmer of Global Witness to find out .
Robert Palmer : The Panama Papers exposed a huge global problem. What's next ?
[ On April 3 , 2016 we saw the largest data leak in history. ] [ The Panama Papers exposed rich and powerful people ] [ hiding vast amounts of money in offshore accounts. ] [ What does this mean ?] [ We called Robert Palmer of Global Witness to explain. ] This week , there have been a whole slew and deluge of stories coming out from the leak of 11 million documents
from a Panamanian-based law firm called Mossack Fonseca .
The release of these papers from Panama lifts the veil on a tiny piece of the secretive offshore world .
We get an insight into how clients and banks and lawyers go to companies like Mossack Fonseca and say , " OK , we want an anonymous company , can you give us one ? ?
So you actually get to see the emails , you get to see the exchanges of messages , you get to see the mechanics of how this works , how this operates .
Now , this has already started to have pretty immediate repercussions .
The Prime Minister of Iceland has resigned .
We've also had news that an ally of the brutal Syrian dictator Bashar Al-Assad has also got offshore companies .
There's been allegations of a $ 2 billion money trail that leads back to President Vladimir Putin of Russia via his close childhood friend , who happens to be a top cellist .
And there will be a lot of rich individuals out there and others who will be nervous about the next set of stories and the next set of leaked documents .
Now , this sounds like the plot of a spy thriller or a John Grisham novel .
It seems very distant from you , me , ordinary people .
Why should we care about this ?
But the truth is that if rich and powerful individuals are able to keep their money offshore and not pay the taxes that they should , it means that there is less money for vital public services like healthcare , education , roads .
And that affects all of us .
Now , for my organization Global Witness , this exposé has been phenomenal .
We have the world's media and political leaders talking about how individuals can use offshore secrecy to hide and disguise their assets -- something we have been talking about and exposing for a decade .
Now , I think a lot of people find this entire world baffling and confusing , and hard to understand how this sort of offshore world works .
I like to think of it a bit like a Russian doll .
So you can have one company stacked inside another company , stacked inside another company , making it almost impossible to really understand who is behind these structures .
It can be very difficult for law enforcement or tax authorities , journalists , civil society to really understand what's going on .
I also think it's interesting that there's been less coverage of this issue in the United States .
And that's perhaps because some prominent US people just haven't figured in this exposé , in this scandal .
Now , that's not because there are no rich Americans who are stashing their assets offshore .
It's just because of the way in which offshore works , Mossack Fonseca has fewer American clients .
I think if we saw leaks from the Cayman Islands or even from Delaware or Wyoming or Nevada , you would see many more cases and examples linking back to Americans .
In fact , in a number of US states you need less information , you need to provide less information to get a company than you do to get a library card .
That sort of secrecy in America has allowed employees of school districts to rip off schoolchildren .
It has allowed scammers to rip off vulnerable investors .
This is the sort of behavior that affects all of us .
Now , at Global Witness , we wanted to see what this actually looked like in practice .
How does this actually work ?
So what we did is we sent in an undercover investigator to 13 Manhattan law firms .
Our investigator posed as an African minister who wanted to move suspect funds into the United States to buy a house , a yacht , a jet .
Now , what was truly shocking was that all but one of those lawyers provided our investigator with suggestions on how to move those suspect funds .
These were all preliminary meetings , and none of the lawyers took us on as a client and of course no money moved hands , but it really shows the problem with the system .
It's also important to not just think about this as individual cases .
This is not just about an individual lawyer who's spoken to our undercover investigator and provided suggestions .
It's not just about a particular senior politician who's been caught up in a scandal .
This is about how a system works , that entrenches corruption , tax evasion , poverty and instability .
And in order to tackle this , we need to change the game .
We need to change the rules of the game to make this sort of behavior harder .
This may seem like doom and gloom , like there's nothing we can do about it , like nothing has ever changed , like there will always be rich and powerful individuals .
But as a natural optimist , I do see that we are starting to get some change .
Over the last couple of years , we've seen a real push towards greater transparency when it comes to company ownership .
This issue was put on the political agenda by the UK Prime Minister David Cameron at a big G8 Summit that was held in Northern Ireland in 2013 .
And since then , the European Union is going to be creating central registers at a national level of who really owns and controls companies across Europe .
One of the things that is sad is that , actually , the US is lagging behind .
There's bipartisan legislation that had been introduced in the House and the Senate , but it isn't making as much progress as we'd like to see .
So we'd really want to see the Panama leaks , this huge peek into the offshore world , be used as a way of opening up in the US and around the world .
For us at Global Witness , this is a moment for change .
We need ordinary people to get angry at the way in which people can hide their identity behind secret companies .
We need business leaders to stand up and say , " Secrecy like this is not good for business . "
We need political leaders to recognize the problem , and to commit to changing the law to open up this sort of secrecy .
Together , we can end the secrecy that is currently allowing tax evasion , corruption , money laundering to flourish .
TED Talk Subtitles and Transcript : Is it possible to run a company and reinvent it at the same time ? For business strategist Knut Haanaes , the ability to innovate after becoming successful is the mark of a great organization. He shares insights on how to strike a balance between perfecting what we already know and exploring totally new ideas -- and lays out how to avoid two major strategy traps .
Knut Haanaes : Two reasons companies fail -- and how to avoid them
Here are two reasons companies fail : they only do more of the same , or they only do what's new .
To me the real , real solution to quality growth is figuring out the balance between two activities : exploration and exploitation .
Both are necessary , but it can be too much of a good thing .
Consider Facit .
I'm actually old enough to remember them .
Facit was a fantastic company .
They were born deep in the Swedish forest , and they made the best mechanical calculators in the world .
Everybody used them .
And what did Facit do when the electronic calculator came along ?
They continued doing exactly the same .
In six months , they went from maximum revenue ...
and they were gone .
Gone .
To me , the irony about the Facit story is hearing about the Facit engineers , who had bought cheap , small electronic calculators in Japan that they used to double-check their calculators .
Facit did too much exploitation .
But exploration can go wild , too .
A few years back , I worked closely alongside a European biotech company .
Let's call them OncoSearch .
The company was brilliant .
They had applications that promised to diagnose , even cure , certain forms of blood cancer .
Every day was about creating something new .
They were extremely innovative , and the mantra was , " When we only get it right ," or even , " We want it perfect . "
The sad thing is , before they became perfect -- even good enough -- they became obsolete .
OncoSearch did too much exploration .
I first heard about exploration and exploitation about 15 years ago , when I worked as a visiting scholar at Stanford University .
The founder of the idea is Jim March .
And to me the power of the idea is its practicality .
Exploration .
Exploration is about coming up with what's new .
It's about search , it's about discovery , it's about new products , it's about new innovations .
It's about changing our frontiers .
Our heroes are people who have done exploration : Madame Curie , Picasso , Neil Armstrong , Sir Edmund Hillary , etc .
I come from Norway ; all our heroes are explorers , and they deserve to be .
We all know that exploration is risky .
We don't know the answers , we don't know if we're going to find them , and we know that the risks are high .
Exploitation is the opposite .
Exploitation is taking the knowledge we have and making good , better .
Exploitation is about making our trains run on time .
It's about making good products faster and cheaper .
Exploitation is not risky -- in the short term .
But if we only exploit , it's very risky in the long term .
And I think we all have memories of the famous pop groups who keep singing the same songs again and again , until they become obsolete or even pathetic .
That's the risk of exploitation .
So if we take a long-term perspective , we explore .
If we take a short-term perspective , we exploit .
Small children , they explore all day .
All day it's about exploration .
As we grow older , we explore less because we have more knowledge to exploit on .
The same goes for companies .
Companies become , by nature , less innovative as they become more competent .
And this is , of course , a big worry to CEOs .
And I hear very often questions phrased in different ways .
For example , " How can I both effectively run and reinvent my company ? ?
Or , " How can I make sure that our company changes before we become obsolete or are hit by a crisis ? ?
So , doing one well is difficult .
Doing both well as the same time is art -- pushing both exploration and exploitation .
So one thing we've found is only about two percent of companies are able to effectively explore and exploit at the same time , in parallel .
But when they do , the payoffs are huge .
So we have lots of great examples .
We have Nestlé creating Nespresso , we have Lego going into animated films , Toyota creating the hybrids , Unilever pushing into sustainability -- there are lots of examples , and the benefits are huge .
Why is balancing so difficult ?
I think it's difficult because there are so many traps that keep us where we are .
So I'll talk about two , but there are many .
So let's talk about the perpetual search trap .
We discover something , but we don't have the patience or the persistence to get at it and make it work .
So instead of staying with it , we create something new .
But the same goes for that , then we're in the vicious circle of actually coming up with ideas but being frustrated .
OncoSearch was a good example .
A famous example is , of course , Xerox .
But we don't only see this in companies .
We see this in the public sector as well .
We all know that any kind of effective reform of education , research , health care , even defense , takes 10 , 15 , maybe 20 years to work .
But still , we change much more often .
We really don't give them the chance .
Another trap is the success trap .
Facit fell into the success trap .
They literally held the future in their hands , but they couldn't see it .
They were simply so good at making what they loved doing , that they wouldn't change .
We are like that , too .
When we know something well , it's difficult to change .
Bill Gates has said : " Success is a lousy teacher .
It seduces us into thinking we cannot fail . "
That's the challenge with success .
So I think there are some lessons , and I think they apply to us .
And they apply to our companies .
The first lesson is : get ahead of the crisis .
And any company that's able to innovate is actually able to also buy an insurance in the future .
Netflix -- they could so easily have been content with earlier generations of distribution , but they always -- and I think they will always -- keep pushing for the next battle .
I see other companies that say , " I'll win the next innovation cycle , whatever it takes . "
Second one : think in multiple time scales .
I'll share a chart with you , and I think it's a wonderful one .
Any company we look at , taking a one-year perspective and looking at the valuation of the company , innovation typically accounts for only about 30 percent .
So when we think one year , innovation isn't really that important .
Move ahead , take a 10-year perspective on the same company -- suddenly , innovation and ability to renew account for 70 percent .
But companies can't choose .
They need to fund the journey and lead the long term .
Third : invite talent .
I don't think it's possible for any of us to be able to balance exploration and exploitation by ourselves .
I think it's a team sport .
I think we need to allow challenging .
I think the mark of a great company is being open to be challenged , and the mark of a good corporate board is to constructively challenge .
I think that's also what good parenting is about .
Last one : be skeptical of success .
Maybe it's useful to think back at the old triumph marches in Rome , when the generals , after a big victory , were given their celebration .
Riding into Rome on the carriage , they always had a companion whispering in their ear , " Remember , you're only human . "
So I hope I made the point : balancing exploration and exploitation has a huge payoff .
But it's difficult , and we need to be conscious .
I want to just point out two questions that I think are useful .
First question is , looking at your own company : In which areas do you see that the company is at the risk of falling into success traps , of just going on autopilot ?
And what can you do to challenge ?
Second question is : When did I explore something new last , and what kind of effect did it have on me ?
Is that something I should do more of ?
In my case , yes .
So let me leave you with this .
Whether you're an explorer by nature or whether you tend to exploit what you already know , don't forget : the beauty is in the balance .
Thank you .
TED Talk Subtitles and Transcript : If we hope to one day leave Earth and explore the universe , our bodies are going to have to get a lot better at surviving the harsh conditions of space. Using synthetic biology , Lisa Nip hopes to harness special powers from microbes on Earth -- such as the ability to withstand radiation -- to make humans more fit for exploring space. " We're approaching a time during which we'll have the capacity to decide our own genetic destiny ," Nip says. " Augmenting the human body with new abilities is no longer a question of how , but of when . "
Lisa Nip : How humans could evolve to survive in space
So there are lands few and far between on Earth itself that are hospitable to humans by any measure , but survive we have .
Our primitive ancestors , when they found their homes and livelihood endangered , they dared to make their way into unfamiliar territories in search of better opportunities .
And as the descendants of these explorers , we have their nomadic blood coursing through our own veins .
But at the same time , distracted by our bread and circuses and embroiled in the wars that we have waged on each other , it seems that we have forgotten this desire to explore .
We , as a species , we're evolved uniquely for Earth , on Earth , and by Earth , and so content are we with our living conditions that we have grown complacent and just too busy to notice that its resources are finite , and that our Sun's life is also finite .
While Mars and all the movies made in its name have reinvigorated the ethos for space travel , few of us seem to truly realize that our species' fragile constitution is woefully unprepared for long duration journeys into space .
Let us take a trek to your local national forest for a quick reality check .
So just a quick show of hands here : how many of you think you would be able to survive in this lush wilderness for a few days ?
Well , that's a lot of you .
How about a few weeks ?
That's a decent amount .
How about a few months ?
That's pretty good too .
Now , let us imagine that this local national forest experiences an eternal winter .
Same questions : how many of you think you would be able to survive for a few days ?
That's quite a lot .
How about a few weeks ?
So for a fun twist , let us imagine that the only source of water available is trapped as frozen blocks miles below the surface .
Soil nutrients are so minimal that no vegetation can be found , and of course hardly any atmosphere exists to speak of .
Such examples are only a few of the many challenges we would face on a planet like Mars .
So how do we steel ourselves for voyages whose destinations are so far removed from a tropical vacation ?
Will we continuously ship supplies from Planet Earth ?
Build space elevators , or impossible miles of transport belts that tether your planet of choice to our home planet ?
And how do we grow things like food that grew up on Earth like us ?
But I'm getting ahead of myself .
In our species' journey to find a new home under a new sun , we are more likely than not going to be spending much time in the journey itself , in space , on a ship , a hermetic flying can , possibly for many generations .
The longest continuous amount of time that any human has spent in space is in the vicinity of 12 to 14 months .
From astronauts' experiences in space , we know that spending time in a microgravity environment means bone loss , muscle atrophy , cardiovascular problems , among many other complications that range for the physiological to the psychological .
And what about macrogravity , or any other variation in gravitational pull of the planet that we find ourselves on ?
In short , our cosmic voyages will be fraught with dangers both known and unknown .
So far we've been looking to this new piece of mechanical technology or that great next generation robot as part of a lineup to ensure our species safe passage in space .
Wonderful as they are , I believe the time has come for us to complement these bulky electronic giants with what nature has already invented : the microbe , a single-celled organism that is itself a self-generating , self-replenishing , living machine .
It requires fairly little to maintain , offers much flexibility in design and only asks to be carried in a single plastic tube .
The field of study that has enabled us to utilize the capabilities of the microbe is known as synthetic biology .
It comes from molecular biology , which has given us antibiotics , vaccines and better ways to observe the physiological nuances of the human body .
Using the tools of synthetic biology , we can now edit the genes of nearly any organism , microscopic or not , with incredible speed and fidelity .
Given the limitations of our man-made machines , synthetic biology will be a means for us to engineer not only our food , our fuel and our environment , but also ourselves to compensate for our physical inadequacies and to ensure our survival in space .
To give you an example of how we can use synthetic biology for space exploration , let us return to the Mars environment .
The Martian soil composition is similar to that of Hawaiian volcanic ash , with trace amounts of organic material .
Let's say , hypothetically , what if martian soil could actually support plant growth without using Earth-derived nutrients ?
The first question we should probably ask is , how would we make our plants cold-tolerant ?
Because , on average , the temperature on Mars is a very uninviting negative 60 degrees centigrade .
The next question we should ask is , how do we make our plants drought-tolerant ?
Considering that most of the water that forms as frost evaporates more quickly than I can say the word " evaporate . "
Well , it turns out we've already done things like this .
By borrowing genes for anti-freeze protein from fish and genes for drought tolerance from other plants like rice and then stitching them into the plants that need them , we now have plants that can tolerate most droughts and freezes .
They're known on Earth as GMOs , or genetically modified organisms , and we rely on them to feed all the mouths of human civilization .
Nature does stuff like this already , without our help .
We have simply found more precise ways to do it .
So why would we want to change the genetic makeup of plants for space ?
Well , to not do so would mean needing to engineer endless acres of land on an entirely new planet by releasing trillions of gallons of atmospheric gasses and then constructing a giant glass dome to contain it all .
It's an unrealistic engineering enterprise that quickly becomes a high-cost cargo transport mission .
One of the best ways to ensure that we will have the food supplies and the air that we need is to bring with us organisms that have been engineered to adapt to new and harsh environments .
In essence , using engineered organisms to help us terraform a planet both in the short and long term .
These organisms can then also be engineered to make medicine or fuel .
So we can use synthetic biology to bring highly engineered plants with us , but what else can we do ?
Well , I mentioned earlier that we , as a species , were evolved uniquely for planet Earth .
That fact has not changed much in the last five minutes that you were sitting here and I was standing there .
And so , if we were to dump any of us on Mars right this minute , even given ample food , water , air and a suit , we are likely to experience very unpleasant health problems from the amount of ionizing radiation that bombards the surface of planets like Mars that have little or nonexistent atmosphere .
Unless we plan to stay holed up underground for the duration of our stay on every new planet , we must find better ways of protecting ourselves without needing to resort to wearing a suit of armor that weighs something equal to your own body weight , or needing to hide behind a wall of lead .
So let us appeal to nature for inspiration .
Among the plethora of life here on Earth , there's a subset of organisms known as extremophiles , or lovers of extreme living conditions , if you'll remember from high school biology .
And among these organisms is a bacterium by the name of Deinococcus radiodurans .
It is known to be able to withstand cold , dehydration , vacuum , acid , and , most notably , radiation .
While its radiation tolerance mechanisms are known , we have yet to adapt the relevant genes to mammals .
To do so is not particularly easy .
There are many facets that go into its radiation tolerance , and it's not as simple as transferring one gene .
But given a little bit of human ingenuity and a little bit of time , I think to do so is not very hard either .
Even if we borrow just a fraction of its ability to tolerate radiation , it would be infinitely better than what we already have , which is just the melanin in our skin .
Using the tools of synthetic biology , we can harness Deinococcus radiodurans' ability to thrive under otherwise very lethal doses of radiation .
As difficult as it is to see , homo sapiens , that is humans , evolves every day , and still continues to evolve .
Thousands of years of human evolution has not only given us humans like Tibetans , who can thrive in low-oxygen conditions , but also Argentinians , who can ingest and metabolize arsenic , the chemical element that can kill the average human being .
Every day , the human body evolves by accidental mutations that equally accidentally allow certain humans to persevere in dismal situations .
But , and this is a big but , such evolution requires two things that we may not always have , or be able to afford , and they are death and time .
In our species' struggle to find our place in the universe , we may not always have the time necessary for the natural evolution of extra functions for survival on non-Earth planets .
We're living in what E.O. Wilson has termed the age of gene circumvention , during which we remedy our genetic defects like cystic fibrosis or muscular dystrophy with temporary external supplements .
But with every passing day , we approach the age of volitional evolution , a time during which we as a species will have the capacity to decide for ourselves our own genetic destiny .
Augmenting the human body with new abilities is no longer a question of how , but of when .
Using synthetic biology to change the genetic makeup of any living organisms , especially our own , is not without its moral and ethical quandaries .
Will engineering ourselves make us less human ?
But then again , what is humanity but star stuff that happens to be conscious ?
Where should human genius direct itself ?
Surely it is a bit of a waste to sit back and marvel at it .
How do we use our knowledge to protect ourselves from the external dangers and then protect ourselves from ourselves ?
I pose these questions not to engender the fear of science but to bring to light the many possibilities that science has afforded and continues to afford us .
We must coalesce as humans to discuss and embrace the solutions not only with caution but also with courage .
Mars is a destination , but it will not be our last .
Our true final frontier is the line we must cross in deciding what we can and should make of our species' improbable intelligence .
Space is cold , brutal and unforgiving .
Our path to the stars will be rife with trials that will bring us to question not only who we are but where we will be going .
The answers will lie in our choice to use or abandon the technology that we have gleaned from life itself , and it will define us for the remainder of our term in this universe .
Thank you .
TED Talk Subtitles and Transcript : Conservatives and liberals both believe that they alone are motivated by love while their opponents are motivated by hate. How can we solve problems with so much polarization ? In this talk , social scientist Arthur Brooks shares ideas for what we can each do as individuals to break the gridlock. " We might just be able to take the ghastly holy war of ideology that we're suffering under and turn it into a competition of ideas ," he says .
Arthur Brooks : A conservative's plea : Let's work together
I come from one of the most liberal , tolerant , progressive places in the United States , Seattle , Washington .
And I grew up with a family of great Seattlites .
My mother was an artist , my father was a college professor , and I am truly grateful for my upbringing , because I always felt completely comfortable designing my life exactly as I saw fit .
And in point of fact , I took a route that was not exactly what my parents had in mind .
When I was 19 , I dropped out of college -- dropped out , kicked out , splitting hairs .
And I went on the road as a professional French horn player , which was my lifelong dream .
I played chamber music all over the United States and Europe , and I toured for a couple of years with a great jazz guitar player named Charlie Bird .
And by the end of my 20s , I wound up as a member of the Barcelona Symphony Orchestra in Spain .
What a great life .
And you know , my parents never complained .
They supported me all the way through it .
It wasn't their dream .
They used to tell their neighbors and friends , " Our son , he's taking a gap decade . "
And -- There was , however , one awkward conversation about my lifestyle that I want to tell you about .
I was 27 , and I was home from Barcelona , and I was visiting my parents for Christmas , and I was cooking dinner with my mother , and we were alone in the kitchen .
And she was quiet , too quiet .
Something was wrong .
And so I said , " Mom , what's on your mind ? ?
And she said , " Your dad and I are really worried about you . "
And I said , " What ?" I mean , what could it be , at this point ?
And she said , " I want you to be completely honest with me : have you been voting for Republicans ? ?
Now , the truth is , I wasn't really political , I was just a French horn player .
But I had a bit of an epiphany , and they had detected it , and it was causing some confusion .
You see , I had become an enthusiast for capitalism , and I want to tell you why that is .
It stems from a lifelong interest of mine in , believe it or not , poverty .
See , when I was a kid growing up in Seattle , I remember the first time I saw real poverty .
We were a lower middle class family , but that's of course not real poverty .
That's not even close .
The first time I saw poverty , and poverty's face , was when I was six or seven years old , early 1970s .
And it was like a lot of you , kind of a prosaic example , kind of trite .
It was a picture in the National Geographic Magazine of a kid who was my age in East Africa , and there were flies on his face and a distended belly .
And he wasn't going to make it , and I knew that , and I was helpless .
Some of you remember that picture , not exactly that picture , one just like it .
It introduced the West to grinding poverty around the world .
Well , that vision kind of haunted me as I grew up and I went to school and I dropped out and dropped in and started my family .
And I wondered , what happened to that kid ?
Or to people just like him all over the world ?
And so I started to study , even though I wasn't in college , I was looking for the answer : what happened to the world's poorest people ?
Has it gotten worse ? Has it gotten better ? What ?
And I found the answer , and it changed my life , and I want to share it with you .
See -- most Americans believe that poverty has gotten worse since we were children , since they saw that vision .
If you ask Americans , " Has poverty gotten worse or better around the world ?" , 70 percent will say that hunger has gotten worse since the early 1970s .
But here's the truth .
Here's the epiphany that I had that changed my thinking .
From 1970 until today , the percentage of the world's population living in starvation levels , living on a dollar a day or less , obviously adjusted for inflation , that percentage has declined by 80 percent .
There's been an 80 percent decline in the world's worst poverty since I was a kid .
And I didn't even know about it .
This , my friends , that's a miracle .
That's something we ought to celebrate .
It's the greatest antipoverty achievement in the history of mankind , and it happened in our lifetimes .
So when I learned this , I asked , what did that ? What made it possible ?
Because if you don't know why , you can't do it again .
If you want to replicate it and get the next two billion people out of poverty , because that's what we're talking about : since I was a kid , two billion of the least of these , our brothers and sisters , have been pulled out of poverty .
I want the next two billion , so I've got to know why .
And I went in search of an answer .
And it wasn't a political answer , because I didn't care .
You know what , I still don't care .
I wanted the best answer from mainstream economists left , right and center .
And here it is .
Here are the reasons .
There are five reasons that two billion of our brothers and sisters have been pulled out of poverty since I was a kid .
Number one : globalization .
Number two : free trade .
Number three : property rights .
Number four : rule of law .
Number five : entrepreneurship .
It was the free enterprise system spreading around the world after 1970 that did that .
Now , I'm not naive .
I know that free enterprise isn't perfect , and I know that free enterprise isn't everything we need to build a better world .
But that is great .
And that's beyond politics .
Here's what I learned. This is the epiphany .
Capitalism is not just about accumulation .
At its best , it's about aspiration , which is what so many people on this stage talk about , is the aspiration that comes from dreams that are embedded in the free enterprise system .
And we've got to share it with more people .
Now , I want to tell you about a second epiphany that's related to that first one that I think can bring us progress , not just around the world , but right here at home .
The best quote I've ever heard to summarize the thoughts that I've just given you about pulling people out of poverty is as follows : " Free markets have created more wealth than any system in history .
They have lifted billions out of poverty . "
Who said it ?
It sounds like Milton Friedman or Ronald Reagan .
Wrong .
President Barack Obama said that .
Why do I know it by heart ?
Because he said it to me .
Crazy .
And I said , " Hallelujah . "
But more than that , I said , " What an opportunity . "
You know what I was thinking ?
It was at an event that we were doing on the subject at Georgetown University in May of 2015 .
And I thought , this is the solution to the biggest problem facing America today. What ?
It's coming together around these ideas , liberals and conservatives , to help people who need us the most .
Now , I don't have to tell anybody in this room that we're in a crisis , in America and many countries around the world with political polarization .
It's risen to critical , crisis levels .
It's unpleasant. It's not right .
There was an article last year in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , which is one of the most prestigious scientific journals published in the West .
And it was an article in 2014 on political motive asymmetry .
What's that ? That's what psychologists call the phenomenon of assuming that your ideology is based in love but your opponents' ideology is based in hate .
It's common in world conflict .
You expect to see this between Palestinians and Israelis , for example .
What the authors of this article found was that in America today , a majority of Republicans and Democrats suffer from political motive asymmetry .
A majority of people in our country today who are politically active believe that they are motivated by love but the other side is motivated by hate .
Think about it. Think about it .
Most people are walking around saying , " You know , my ideology is based on basic benevolence , I want to help people , but the other guys , they're evil and out to get me . "
You can't progress as a society when you have this kind of asymmetry .
It's impossible .
How do we solve it ?
Well , first , let's be honest : there are differences .
Let's not minimize the differences. That would be really naïve .
There's a lot of good research on this .
A veteran of the TED stage is my friend Jonathan Haidt .
He's a psychology professor at New York University .
He does work on the ideology and values and morals of different people to see how they differ .
And he's shown , for example , that conservatives and liberals have a very different emphasis on what they think is important .
For example , Jon Haidt has shown that liberals care about poverty 59 percent more than they care about economic liberty .
And conservatives care about economic liberty 28 percent more than they care about poverty .
Irreconcilable differences , right ?
We'll never come together. Wrong .
That is diversity in which lies our strength .
Remember what pulled up the poor .
It was the obsession with poverty , accompanied by the method of economic freedom spreading around the world .
We need each other , in other words , if we want to help people and get the next two billion people out of poverty .
There's no other way .
Hmm .
How are we going to get that ?
It's a tricky thing , isn't it .
We need innovative thinking .
A lot of it's on this stage .
Social entrepreneurship. Yeah. Absolutely. Phenomenal .
We need investment overseas in a sustainable , responsible , ethical and moral way. Yes. Yes .
But you know what we really need ?
We need a new day in flexible ideology .
We need to be less predictable .
Don't we ?
Do you ever feel like your own ideology is starting to get predictable ?
Kinda conventional ?
Do you ever feel like you're always listening to people who agree with you ?
Why is that dangerous ?
Because when we talk in this country about economics , on the right , conservatives , you're always talking about taxes and regulations and big government .
And on the left , liberals , you're talking about economics , it's always about income inequality .
Right ? Now those are important things , really important to me , really important to you .
But when it comes to lifting people up who are starving and need us today , those are distractions .
We need to come together around the best ways to mitigate poverty using the best tools at our disposal , and that comes only when conservatives recognize that they need liberals and their obsession with poverty , and liberals need conservatives and their obsession with free markets .
That's the diversity in which lies the future strength of this country , if we choose to take it .
So how are we going to do it ? How are we going to do it together ?
I've got to have some action items , not just for you but for me .
Number one. Action item number one : remember , it's not good enough just to tolerate people who disagree .
It's not good enough .
We have to remember that we need people who disagree with us , because there are people who need all of us who are still waiting for these tools .
Now , what are you going to do ? How are you going to express that ?
Where does this start ? It starts here .
You know , all of us in this room , we're blessed .
We're blessed with people who listen to us .
We're blessed with prosperity. We're blessed with leadership .
When people hear us , with the kind of unpredictable ideology , then maybe people will listen .
Maybe progress will start at that point .
That's number one. Number two .
Number two : I'm asking you and I'm asking me to be the person specifically who blurs the lines , who is ambiguous , who is hard to classify .
If you're a conservative , be the conservative who is always going on about poverty and the moral obligation to be a warrior for the poor .
And if you're a liberal , be a liberal who is always talking about the beauty of free markets to solve our problems when we use them responsibly .
If we do that , we get two things .
Number one : we get to start to work on the next two billion and be the solution that we've seen so much of in the past and we need to see more of in the future. That's what we get .
And the second is that we might just be able to take the ghastly holy war of ideology that we're suffering under in this country and turn it into a competition of ideas based on solidarity and mutual respect .
And then maybe , just maybe , we'll all realize that our big differences aren't really that big after all .
Thank you .
TED Talk Subtitles and Transcript : Joe Gebbia , the co-founder of Airbnb , bet his whole company on the belief that people can trust each other enough to stay in one another's homes. How did he overcome the stranger-danger bias ? Through good design. Now , 123 million hosted nights ( and counting ) later , Gebbia sets out his dream for a culture of sharing in which design helps foster community and connection instead of isolation and separation .
Joe Gebbia : How Airbnb designs for trust
I want to tell you the story about the time I almost got kidnapped in the trunk of a red Mazda Miata .
It's the day after graduating from design school and I'm having a yard sale .
And this guy pulls up in this red Mazda and he starts looking through my stuff .
And he buys a piece of art that I made .
And it turns out he's alone in town for the night , driving cross-country on a road trip before he goes into the Peace Corps .
So I invite him out for a beer and he tells me all about his passion for making a difference in the world .
Now it's starting to get late , and I'm getting pretty tired .
As I motion for the tab , I make the mistake of asking him , " So where are you staying tonight ? ?
And he makes it worse by saying , " Actually , I don't have a place . "
And I'm thinking , " Oh , man ! !
What do you do ?
We've all been there , right ?
Do I offer to host this guy ?
But , I just met him -- I mean , he says he's going to the Peace Corps , but I don't really know if he's going to the Peace Corps and I don't want to end up kidnapped in the trunk of a Miata .
That's a small trunk !
So then I hear myself saying , " Hey , I have an airbed you can stay on in my living room . "
And the voice in my head goes , " Wait , what ? ?
That night , I'm laying in bed , I'm staring at the ceiling and thinking , " Oh my god , what have I done ?
There's a complete stranger sleeping in my living room .
What if he's psychotic ? ?
My anxiety grows so much , I leap out of bed , I sneak on my tiptoes to the door , and I lock the bedroom door .
It turns out he was not psychotic .
We've kept in touch ever since .
And the piece of art he bought at the yard sale is hanging in his classroom ; he's a teacher now .
This was my first hosting experience , and it completely changed my perspective .
Maybe the people that my childhood taught me to label as strangers were actually friends waiting to be discovered .
The idea of hosting people on airbeds gradually became natural to me and when I moved to San Francisco , I brought the airbed with me .
So now it's two years later .
I'm unemployed , I'm almost broke , my roommate moves out , and then the rent goes up .
And then I learn there's a design conference coming to town , and all the hotels are sold out .
And I've always believed that turning fear into fun is the gift of creativity .
So here's what I pitch my best friend and my new roommate Brian Chesky : " Brian , thought of a way to make a few bucks -- turning our place into ' designers bed and breakfast ,' offering young designers who come to town a place to crash , complete with wireless Internet , a small desk space , sleeping mat , and breakfast each morning .
Ha ! !
We built a basic website and Airbed and Breakfast was born .
Three lucky guests got to stay on a 20-dollar airbed on the hardwood floor .
But they loved it , and so did we .
I swear , the ham and Swiss cheese omelets we made tasted totally different because we made them for our guests .
We took them on adventures around the city , and when we said goodbye to the last guest , the door latch clicked , Brian and I just stared at each other .
Did we just discover it was possible to make friends while also making rent ?
The wheels had started to turn .
My old roommate , Nate Blecharczyk , joined as engineering co-founder .
And we buckled down to see if we could turn this into a business .
Here's what we pitched investors : " We want to build a website where people publicly post pictures of their most intimate spaces , their bedrooms , the bathrooms -- the kinds of rooms you usually keep closed when people come over .
And then , over the Internet , they're going to invite complete strangers to come sleep in their homes .
It's going to be huge ! !
We sat back , and we waited for the rocket ship to blast off .
It did not .
No one in their right minds would invest in a service that allows strangers to sleep in people's homes .
Why ?
Because we've all been taught as kids , strangers equal danger .
Now , when you're faced with a problem , you fall back on what you know , and all we really knew was design .
In art school , you learn that design is much more than the look and feel of something -- it's the whole experience .
We learned to do that for objects , but here , we were aiming to build Olympic trust between people who had never met .
Could design make that happen ?
Is it possible to design for trust ?
I want to give you a sense of the flavor of trust that we were aiming to achieve .
I've got a 30-second experiment that will push you past your comfort zone .
OK , I need you to take out your phones .
Now that you have your phone out , I'd like you to unlock your phone .
Now hand your unlocked phone to the person on your left .
That tiny sense of panic you're feeling right now -- is exactly how hosts feel the first time they open their home .
Because the only thing more personal than your phone is your home .
People don't just see your messages , they see your bedroom , your kitchen , your toilet .
Now , how does it feel holding someone's unlocked phone ?
Most of us feel really responsible .
That's how most guests feel when they stay in a home .
And it's because of this that our company can even exist .
By the way , who's holding Al Gore's phone ?
Would you tell Twitter he's running for President ?
OK , you can hand your phones back now .
So now that you've experienced the kind of trust challenge we were facing , I'd love to share a few discoveries we've made along the way .
What if we changed one small thing about the design of that experiment ?
What if your neighbor had introduced themselves first , with their name , where they're from , the name of their kids or their dog ?
Imagine that they had 150 reviews of people saying , " They're great at holding unlocked phones ! !
Now how would you feel about handing your phone over ?
It turns out , a well-designed reputation system is key for building trust .
And we didn't actually get it right the first time .
It's hard for people to leave bad reviews .
Eventually , we learned to wait until both guests and hosts left the review before we reveal them .
Now , here's a discovery we made just last week .
We did a joint study with Stanford , where we looked at people's willingness to trust someone based on how similar they are in age , location and geography .
The research showed , not surprisingly , we prefer people who are like us .
The more different somebody is , the less we trust them .
Now , that's a natural social bias .
But what's interesting is what happens when you add reputation into the mix , in this case , with reviews .
Now , if you've got less than three reviews , nothing changes .
But if you've got more than 10 , everything changes .
High reputation beats high similarity .
The right design can actually help us overcome one of our most deeply rooted biases .
Now we also learned that building the right amount of trust takes the right amount of disclosure .
This is what happens when a guest first messages a host .
If you share too little , like , " Yo ," acceptance rates go down .
And if you share too much , like , " I'm having issues with my mother ," acceptance rates also go down .
But there's a zone that's just right , like , " Love the artwork in your place. Coming for vacation with my family . "
So how do we design for just the right amount of disclosure ?
We use the size of the box to suggest the right length , and we guide them with prompts to encourage sharing .
We bet our whole company on the hope that , with the right design , people would be willing to overcome the stranger-danger bias .
What we didn't realize is just how many people were ready and waiting to put the bias aside .
This is a graph that shows our rate of adoption .
There's three things happening here .
The first , an unbelievable amount of luck .
The second is the efforts of our team .
And third is the existence of a previously unsatisfied need .
Now , things have been going pretty well .
Obviously , there are times when things don't work out .
Guests have thrown unauthorized parties and trashed homes .
Hosts have left guests stranded in the rain .
In the early days , I was customer service , and those calls came right to my cell phone .
I was at the front lines of trust breaking .
And there's nothing worse than those calls , it hurts to even think about them .
And the disappointment in the sound of someone's voice was and , I would say , still is our single greatest motivator to keep improving .
Thankfully , out of the 123 million nights we've ever hosted , less than a fraction of a percent have been problematic .
Turns out , people are justified in their trust .
And when trust works out right , it can be absolutely magical .
We had a guest stay with a host in Uruguay , and he suffered a heart attack .
The host rushed him to the hospital .
They donated their own blood for his operation .
Let me read you his review .
" Excellent house for sedentary travelers prone to myocardial infarctions .
The area is beautiful and has direct access to the best hospitals .
Javier and Alejandra instantly become guardian angels who will save your life without even knowing you .
They will rush you to the hospital in their own car while you're dying and stay in the waiting room while the doctors give you a bypass .
They don't want you to feel lonely , they bring you books to read .
And they let you stay at their house extra nights without charging you .
Highly recommended ! !
Of course , not every stay is like that .
But this connection beyond the transaction is exactly what the sharing economy is aiming for .
Now , when I heard that term , I have to admit , it tripped me up .
How do sharing and transactions go together ?
So let's be clear ; it is about commerce .
But if you just called it the rental economy , it would be incomplete .
The sharing economy is commerce with the promise of human connection .
People share a part of themselves , and that changes everything .
You know how most travel today is , like , I think of it like fast food -- it's efficient and consistent , at the cost of local and authentic .
What if travel were like a magnificent buffet of local experiences ?
What if anywhere you visited , there was a central marketplace of locals offering to get you thoroughly drunk on a pub crawl in neighborhoods you didn't even know existed .
Or learning to cook from the chef of a five-star restaurant ?
Today , homes are designed around the idea of privacy and separation .
What if homes were designed to be shared from the ground up ?
What would that look like ?
What if cities embraced a culture of sharing ?
I see a future of shared cities that bring us community and connection instead of isolation and separation .
In South Korea , in the city of Seoul , they've actually even started this .
They've repurposed hundreds of government parking spots to be shared by residents .
They're connecting students who need a place to live with empty-nesters who have extra rooms .
And they've started an incubator to help fund the next generation of sharing economy start-ups .
Tonight , just on our service , 785,000 people in 191 countries will either stay in a stranger's home or welcome one into theirs .
Clearly , it's not as crazy as we were taught .
We didn't invent anything new .
Hospitality has been around forever .
There's been many other websites like ours .
So , why did ours eventually take off ?
Luck and timing aside , I've learned that you can take the components of trust , and you can design for that .
Design can overcome our most deeply rooted stranger-danger bias .
And that's amazing to me .
It blows my mind .
I think about this every time I see a red Miata go by .
Now , we know design won't solve all the world's problems .
But if it can help out with this one , if it can make a dent in this , it makes me wonder , what else can we design for next ?
Thank you .
TED Talk Subtitles and Transcript : When you look at Muslim scholar Dalia Mogahed , what do you see : a woman of faith ? a scholar , a mom , a sister ? or an oppressed , brainwashed , potential terrorist ? In this personal , powerful talk , Mogahed asks us , in this polarizing time , to fight negative perceptions of her faith in the media -- and to choose empathy over prejudice .
Dalia Mogahed : What do you think when you look at me ?
What do you think when you look at me ?
A woman of faith ? An expert ?
Maybe even a sister .
Or oppressed , brainwashed , a terrorist .
Or just an airport security line delay .
That one's actually true .
If some of your perceptions were negative , I don't really blame you .
That's just how the media has been portraying people who look like me .
One study found that 80 percent of news coverage about Islam and Muslims is negative .
And studies show that Americans say that most don't know a Muslim .
I guess people don't talk to their Uber drivers .
Well , for those of you who have never met a Muslim , it's great to meet you .
Let me tell you who I am .
I'm a mom , a coffee lover -- double espresso , cream on the side .
I'm an introvert .
I'm a wannabe fitness fanatic .
And I'm a practicing , spiritual Muslim .
But not like Lady Gaga says , because baby , I wasn't born this way .
It was a choice .
When I was 17 , I decided to come out .
No , not as a gay person like some of my friends , but as a Muslim , and decided to start wearing the hijab , my head covering .
My feminist friends were aghast : " Why are you oppressing yourself ? ?
The funny thing was , it was actually at that time a feminist declaration of independence from the pressure I felt as a 17-year-old , to conform to a perfect and unattainable standard of beauty .
I didn't just passively accept the faith of my parents .
I wrestled with the Quran .
I read and reflected and questioned and doubted and , ultimately , believed .
My relationship with God -- it was not love at first sight .
It was a trust and a slow surrender that deepened with every reading of the Quran .
Its rhythmic beauty sometimes moves me to tears .
I see myself in it. I feel that God knows me .
Have you ever felt like someone sees you , completely understands you and yet loves you anyway ?
That's how it feels .
And so later , I got married , and like all good Egyptians , started my career as an engineer .
I later had a child , after getting married , and I was living essentially the Egyptian-American dream .
And then that terrible morning of September , 2001 .
I think a lot of you probably remember exactly where you were that morning .
I was sitting in my kitchen finishing breakfast , and I look up on the screen and see the words " Breaking News . "
There was smoke , airplanes flying into buildings , people jumping out of buildings .
What was this ?
An accident ?
A malfunction ?
My shock quickly turned to outrage .
Who would do this ?
And I switch the channel and I hear , "... Muslim terrorist ...," "... in the name of Islam ...," "... Middle-Eastern descent ...," "... jihad ...," "... we should bomb Mecca . "
Oh my God .
Not only had my country been attacked , but in a flash , somebody else's actions had turned me from a citizen to a suspect .
That same day , we had to drive across Middle America to move to a new city to start grad school .
And I remember sitting in the passenger seat as we drove in silence , crouched as low as I could go in my seat , for the first time in my life , afraid for anyone to know I was a Muslim .
We moved into our apartment that night in a new town in what felt like a completely different world .
And then I was hearing and seeing and reading warnings from national Muslim organizations saying things like , " Be alert ," " Be aware ," " Stay in well-lit areas ," " Don't congregate . "
I stayed inside all week .
And then it was Friday that same week , the day that Muslims congregate for worship .
And again the warnings were , " Don't go that first Friday , it could be a target . "
And I was watching the news , wall-to-wall coverage .
Emotions were so raw , understandably , and I was also hearing about attacks on Muslims , or people who were perceived to be Muslim , being pulled out and beaten in the street .
Mosques were actually firebombed .
And I thought , we should just stay home .
And yet , something didn't feel right .
Because those people who attacked our country attacked our country .
I get it that people were angry at the terrorists .
Guess what ? So was I .
And so to have to explain yourself all the time isn't easy .
I don't mind questions. I love questions .
It's the accusations that are tough .
Today we hear people actually saying things like , " There's a problem in this country , and it's called Muslims .
When are we going to get rid of them ? ?
So , some people want to ban Muslims and close down mosques .
They talk about my community kind of like we're a tumor in the body of America .
And the only question is , are we malignant or benign ?
You know , a malignant tumor you extract altogether , and a benign tumor you just keep under surveillance .
The choices don't make sense , because it's the wrong question .
Muslims , like all other Americans , aren't a tumor in the body of America , we're a vital organ .
Thank you .
Muslims are inventors and teachers , first responders and Olympic athletes .
Now , is closing down mosques going to make America safer ?
It might free up some parking spots , but it will not end terrorism .
Going to a mosque regularly is actually linked to having more tolerant views of people of other faiths and greater civic engagement .
And as one police chief in the Washington , DC area recently told me , people don't actually get radicalized at mosques .
They get radicalized in their basement or bedroom , in front of a computer .
And what you find about the radicalization process is it starts online , but the first thing that happens is the person gets cut off from their community , from even their family , so that the extremist group can brainwash them into believing that they , the terrorists , are the true Muslims , and everyone else who abhors their behavior and ideology are sellouts or apostates .
So if we want to prevent radicalization , we have to keep people going to the mosque .
Now , some will still argue Islam is a violent religion .
After all , a group like ISIS bases its brutality on the Quran .
Now , as a Muslim , as a mother , as a human being , I think we need to do everything we can to stop a group like ISIS .
But we would be giving in to their narrative if we cast them as representatives of a faith of 1.6 billion people .
Thank you .
ISIS has as much to do with Islam as the Ku Klux Klan has to do with Christianity .
Both groups claim to base their ideology on their holy book .
But when you look at them , they're not motivated by what they read in their holy book .
It's their brutality that makes them read these things into the scripture .
Recently , a prominent imam told me a story that really took me aback .
He said that a girl came to him because she was thinking of going to join ISIS .
And I was really surprised and asked him , had she been in contact with a radical religious leader ?
And he said the problem was quite the opposite , that every cleric that she had talked to had shut her down and said that her rage , her sense of injustice in the world , was just going to get her in trouble .
And so with nowhere to channel and make sense of this anger , she was a prime target to be exploited by extremists promising her a solution .
What this imam did was to connect her back to God and to her community .
He didn't shame her for her rage -- instead , he gave her constructive ways to make real change in the world .
What she learned at that mosque prevented her from going to join ISIS .
I've told you a little bit about how Islamophobia affects me and my family .
But how does it impact ordinary Americans ?
How does it impact everyone else ?
How does consuming fear 24 hours a day affect the health of our democracy , the health of our free thought ?
Well , one study -- actually , several studies in neuroscience -- show that when we're afraid , at least three things happen .
We become more accepting of authoritarianism , conformity and prejudice .
One study showed that when subjects were exposed to news stories that were negative about Muslims , they became more accepting of military attacks on Muslim countries and policies that curtail the rights of American Muslims .
Now , this isn't just academic .
When you look at when anti-Muslim sentiment spiked between 2001 and 2013 , it happened three times , but it wasn't around terrorist attacks .
It was in the run up to the Iraq War and during two election cycles .
So Islamophobia isn't just the natural response to Muslim terrorism as I would have expected .
It can actually be a tool of public manipulation , eroding the very foundation of a free society , which is rational and well-informed citizens .
Muslims are like canaries in the coal mine .
We might be the first to feel it , but the toxic air of fear is harming us all .
And assigning collective guilt isn't just about having to explain yourself all the time .
Deah and his wife Yusor were a young married couple living in Chapel Hill , North Carolina , where they both went to school .
Deah was an athlete .
He was in dental school , talented , promising ...
And his sister would tell me that he was the sweetest , most generous human being she knew .
She was visiting him there and he showed her his resume , and she was amazed .
She said , " When did my baby brother become such an accomplished young man ? ?
Just a few weeks after Suzanne's visit to her brother and his new wife , their neighbor , Craig Stephen Hicks , murdered them , as well as Yusor's sister , Razan , who was visiting for the afternoon , in their apartment , execution style , after posting anti-Muslim statements on his Facebook page .
He shot Deah eight times .
So bigotry isn't just immoral , it can even be lethal .
So , back to my story .
What happened after 9 / 11 ?
Did we go to the mosque or did we play it safe and stay home ?
Well , we talked it over , and it might seem like a small decision , but to us , it was about what kind of America we wanted to leave for our kids : one that would control us by fear or one where we were practicing our religion freely .
So we decided to go to the mosque .
And we put my son in his car seat , buckled him in , and we drove silently , intensely , to the mosque .
I took him out , I took off my shoes , I walked into the prayer hall and what I saw made me stop .
The place was completely full .
And then the imam made an announcement , thanking and welcoming our guests , because half the congregation were Christians , Jews , Buddhists , atheists , people of faith and no faith , who had come not to attack us , but to stand in solidarity with us .
I just break down at this time .
These people were there because they chose courage and compassion over panic and prejudice .
What will you choose ?
What will you choose at this time of fear and bigotry ?
Will you play it safe ?
Or will you join those who say we are better than that ?
Thank you .
Thank you so much .
Helen Walters : So Dalia , you seem to have struck a chord .
But I wonder , what would you say to those who might argue that you're giving a TED Talk , you're clearly a deep thinker , you work at a fancy think tank , you're an exception , you're not the rule .
What would you say to those people ?
Dalia Mogahed : I would say , don't let this stage distract you , I'm completely ordinary .
I'm not an exception .
My story is not unusual .
I am as ordinary as they come .
When you look at Muslims around the world -- and I've done this , I've done the largest study ever done on Muslims around the world -- people want ordinary things .
They want prosperity for their family , they want jobs and they want to live in peace .
So I am not in any way an exception .
When you meet people who seem like an exception to the rule , oftentimes it's that the rule is broken , not that they're an exception to it .
HW : Thank you so much. Dalia Mogahed .
TED Talk Subtitles and Transcript : When your job hinges on how well you talk to people , you learn a lot about how to have conversations -- and that most of us don't converse very well. Celeste Headlee has worked as a radio host for decades , and she knows the ingredients of a great conversation : Honesty , brevity , clarity and a healthy amount of listening. In this insightful talk , she shares 10 useful rules for having better conversations. " Go out , talk to people , listen to people ," she says. " And , most importantly , be prepared to be amazed . "
Celeste Headlee : 10 ways to have a better conversation
All right , I want to see a show of hands : how many of you have unfriended someone on Facebook because they said something offensive about politics or religion , childcare , food ?
And how many of you know at least one person that you avoid because you just don't want to talk to them ?
You know , it used to be that in order to have a polite conversation , we just had to follow the advice of Henry Higgins in " My Fair Lady " : Stick to the weather and your health .
But these days , with climate change and anti-vaxxing , those subjects -- are not safe either .
So this world that we live in , this world in which every conversation has the potential to devolve into an argument , where our politicians can't speak to one another and where even the most trivial of issues have someone fighting both passionately for it and against it , it's not normal .
Pew Research did a study of 10,000 American adults , and they found that at this moment , we are more polarized , we are more divided , than we ever have been in history .
We're less likely to compromise , which means we're not listening to each other .
And we make decisions about where to live , who to marry and even who our friends are going to be , based on what we already believe .
Again , that means we're not listening to each other .
A conversation requires a balance between talking and listening , and somewhere along the way , we lost that balance .
Now , part of that is due to technology .
The smartphones that you all either have in your hands or close enough that you could grab them really quickly .
According to Pew Research , about a third of American teenagers send more than a hundred texts a day .
And many of them , almost most of them , are more likely to text their friends than they are to talk to them face to face .
There's this great piece in The Atlantic .
It was written by a high school teacher named Paul Barnwell .
And he gave his kids a communication project .
He wanted to teach them how to speak on a specific subject without using notes .
And he said this : " I came to realize ... .
" I came to realize that conversational competence might be the single most overlooked skill we fail to teach .
Kids spend hours each day engaging with ideas and each other through screens , but rarely do they have an opportunity to hone their interpersonal communications skills .
It might sound like a funny question , but we have to ask ourselves : Is there any 21st-century skill more important than being able to sustain coherent , confident conversation ? ?
Now , I make my living talking to people : Nobel Prize winners , truck drivers , billionaires , kindergarten teachers , heads of state , plumbers .
I talk to people that I like. I talk to people that I don't like .
I talk to some people that I disagree with deeply on a personal level .
But I still have a great conversation with them .
So I'd like to spend the next 10 minutes or so teaching you how to talk and how to listen .
Many of you have already heard a lot of advice on this , things like look the person in the eye , think of interesting topics to discuss in advance , look , nod and smile to show that you're paying attention , repeat back what you just heard or summarize it .
So I want you to forget all of that. It is crap .
There is no reason to learn how to show you're paying attention if you are in fact paying attention .
Now , I actually use the exact same skills as a professional interviewer that I do in regular life .
So , I'm going to teach you how to interview people , and that's actually going to help you learn how to be better conversationalists .
Learn to have a conversation without wasting your time , without getting bored , and , please God , without offending anybody .
We've all had really great conversations .
We've had them before. We know what it's like .
The kind of conversation where you walk away feeling engaged and inspired , or where you feel like you've made a real connection or you've been perfectly understood .
There is no reason why most of your interactions can't be like that .
So I have 10 basic rules. I'm going to walk you through all of them , but honestly , if you just choose one of them and master it , you'll already enjoy better conversations .
Number one : Don't multitask .
And I don't mean just set down your cell phone or your tablet or your car keys or whatever is in your hand .
I mean , be present .
Be in that moment .
Don't think about your argument you had with your boss .
Don't think about what you're going to have for dinner .
If you want to get out of the conversation , get out of the conversation , but don't be half in it and half out of it .
Number two : Don't pontificate .
If you want to state your opinion without any opportunity for response or argument or pushback or growth , write a blog .
Now , there's a really good reason why I don't allow pundits on my show : Because they're really boring .
If they're conservative , they're going to hate Obama and food stamps and abortion .
If they're liberal , they're going to hate big banks and oil corporations and Dick Cheney .
Totally predictable .
And you don't want to be like that .
You need to enter every conversation assuming that you have something to learn .
The famed therapist M. Scott Peck said that true listening requires a setting aside of oneself .
And sometimes that means setting aside your personal opinion .
He said that sensing this acceptance , the speaker will become less and less vulnerable and more and more likely to open up the inner recesses of his or her mind to the listener .
Again , assume that you have something to learn .
Bill Nye : " Everyone you will ever meet knows something that you don't . "
I put it this way : Everybody is an expert in something .
Number three : Use open-ended questions .
In this case , take a cue from journalists .
Start your questions with who , what , when , where , why or how .
If you put in a complicated question , you're going to get a simple answer out .
If I ask you , " Were you terrified ? ?
you're going to respond to the most powerful word in that sentence , which is " terrified ," and the answer is " Yes , I was " or " No , I wasn't . "
" Were you angry ?" " Yes , I was very angry . "
Let them describe it. They're the ones that know .
Try asking them things like , " What was that like ? ?
" How did that feel ? ?
Because then they might have to stop for a moment and think about it , and you're going to get a much more interesting response .
Number four : Go with the flow .
That means thoughts will come into your mind and you need to let them go out of your mind .
We've heard interviews often in which a guest is talking for several minutes and then the host comes back in and asks a question which seems like it comes out of nowhere , or it's already been answered .
That means the host probably stopped listening two minutes ago because he thought of this really clever question , and he was just bound and determined to say that .
And we do the exact same thing .
We're sitting there having a conversation with someone , and then we remember that time that we met Hugh Jackman in a coffee shop .
And we stop listening .
Stories and ideas are going to come to you .
You need to let them come and let them go .
Number five : If you don't know , say that you don't know .
Now , people on the radio , especially on NPR , are much more aware that they're going on the record , and so they're more careful about what they claim to be an expert in and what they claim to know for sure .
Do that. Err on the side of caution .
Talk should not be cheap .
Number six : Don't equate your experience with theirs .
If they're talking about having lost a family member , don't start talking about the time you lost a family member .
If they're talking about the trouble they're having at work , don't tell them about how much you hate your job .
It's not the same. It is never the same .
All experiences are individual .
And , more importantly , it is not about you .
You don't need to take that moment to prove how amazing you are or how much you've suffered .
Somebody asked Stephen Hawking once what his IQ was , and he said , " I have no idea. People who brag about their IQs are losers . "
Conversations are not a promotional opportunity .
Number seven : Try not to repeat yourself. It's condescending , and it's really boring , and we tend to do it a lot .
Especially in work conversations or in conversations with our kids , we have a point to make , so we just keep rephrasing it over and over .
Don't do that .
Number eight : Stay out of the weeds .
Frankly , people don't care about the years , the names , the dates , all those details that you're struggling to come up with in your mind .
They don't care. What they care about is you .
They care about what you're like , what you have in common .
So forget the details. Leave them out .
Number nine : This is not the last one , but it is the most important one .
Listen .
I cannot tell you how many really important people have said that listening is perhaps the most , the number one most important skill that you could develop .
Buddha said , and I'm paraphrasing , " If your mouth is open , you're not learning . "
And Calvin Coolidge said , " No man ever listened his way out of a job . "
Why do we not listen to each other ?
Number one , we'd rather talk .
When I'm talking , I'm in control .
I don't have to hear anything I'm not interested in .
I'm the center of attention .
I can bolster my own identity .
But there's another reason : We get distracted .
The average person talks at about 225 word per minute , but we can listen at up to 500 words per minute .
So our minds are filling in those other 275 words .
And look , I know , it takes effort and energy to actually pay attention to someone , but if you can't do that , you're not in a conversation .
You're just two people shouting out barely related sentences in the same place .
You have to listen to one another .
Stephen Covey said it very beautifully .
He said , " Most of us don't listen with the intent to understand .
We listen with the intent to reply . "
One more rule , number 10 , and it's this one : Be brief .
[ A good conversation is like a miniskirt ; short enough to retain interest , but long enough to cover the subject. -- My Sister ] All of this boils down to the same basic concept , and it is this one : Be interested in other people .
You know , I grew up with a very famous grandfather , and there was kind of a ritual in my home .
People would come over to talk to my grandparents , and after they would leave , my mother would come over to us , and she'd say , " Do you know who that was ?
She was the runner-up to Miss America .
He was the mayor of Sacramento .
She won a Pulitzer Prize. He's a Russian ballet dancer . "
And I kind of grew up assuming everyone has some hidden , amazing thing about them .
And honestly , I think it's what makes me a better host .
I keep my mouth shut as often as I possibly can , I keep my mind open , and I'm always prepared to be amazed , and I'm never disappointed .
You do the same thing .
Go out , talk to people , listen to people , and , most importantly , be prepared to be amazed .
Thanks .
TED Talk Subtitles and Transcript : Through treating everything from strokes to car accident traumas , neurosurgeon Jocelyne Bloch knows the brain's inability to repair itself all too well. But now , she suggests , she and her colleagues may have found the key to neural repair : Doublecortin-positive cells. Similar to stem cells , they are extremely adaptable and , when extracted from a brain , cultured and then re-injected in a lesioned area of the same brain , they can help repair and rebuild it. " With a little help ," Bloch says , " the brain may be able to help itself . "
Jocelyne Bloch : The brain may be able to repair itself -- with help
So I'm a neurosurgeon .
And like most of my colleagues , I have to deal , every day , with human tragedies .
I realize how your life can change from one second to the other after a major stroke or after a car accident .
And what is very frustrating for us neurosurgeons is to realize that unlike other organs of the body , the brain has very little ability for self-repair .
And after a major injury of your central nervous system , the patients often remain with a severe handicap .
And that's probably the reason why I've chosen to be a functional neurosurgeon .
What is a functional neurosurgeon ?
It's a doctor who is trying to improve a neurological function through different surgical strategies .
You've certainly heard of one of the famous ones called deep brain stimulation , where you implant an electrode in the depths of the brain in order to modulate a circuit of neurons to improve a neurological function .
It's really an amazing technology in that it has improved the destiny of patients with Parkinson's disease , with severe tremor , with severe pain .
However , neuromodulation does not mean neuro-repair .
And the dream of functional neurosurgeons is to repair the brain .
I think that we are approaching this dream .
And I would like to show you that we are very close to this .
And that with a little bit of help , the brain is able to help itself .
So the story started 15 years ago .
At that time , I was a chief resident working days and nights in the emergency room .
I often had to take care of patients with head trauma .
You have to imagine that when a patient comes in with a severe head trauma , his brain is swelling and he's increasing his intracranial pressure .
And in order to save his life , you have to decrease this intracranial pressure .
And to do that , you sometimes have to remove a piece of swollen brain .
So instead of throwing away these pieces of swollen brain , we decided with Jean-François Brunet , who is a colleague of mine , a biologist , to study them .
What do I mean by that ?
We wanted to grow cells from these pieces of tissue .
It's not an easy task .
Growing cells from a piece of tissue is a bit the same as growing very small children out from their family .
So you need to find the right nutrients , the warmth , the humidity and all the nice environments to make them thrive .
So that's exactly what we had to do with these cells .
And after many attempts , Jean-François did it .
And that's what he saw under his microscope .
And that was , for us , a major surprise .
Why ?
Because this looks exactly the same as a stem cell culture , with large green cells surrounding small , immature cells .
And you may remember from biology class that stem cells are immature cells , able to turn into any type of cell of the body .
The adult brain has stem cells , but they're very rare and they're located in deep and small niches in the depths of the brain .
So it was surprising to get this kind of stem cell culture from the superficial part of swollen brain we had in the operating theater .
And there was another intriguing observation : Regular stem cells are very active cells -- cells that divide , divide , divide very quickly .
And they never die , they're immortal cells .
But these cells behave differently .
They divide slowly , and after a few weeks of culture , they even died .
So we were in front of a strange new cell population that looked like stem cells but behaved differently .
And it took us a long time to understand where they came from .
They come from these cells .
These blue and red cells are called doublecortin-positive cells .
All of you have them in your brain .
They represent four percent of your cortical brain cells .
They have a very important role during the development stage .
When you were fetuses , they helped your brain to fold itself .
But why do they stay in your head ?
This , we don't know .
We think that they may participate in brain repair because we find them in higher concentration close to brain lesions .
But it's not so sure .
But there is one clear thing -- that from these cells , we got our stem cell culture .
And we were in front of a potential new source of cells to repair the brain .
And we had to prove this .
So to prove it , we decided to design an experimental paradigm .
The idea was to biopsy a piece of brain in a non-eloquent area of the brain , and then to culture the cells exactly the way Jean-François did it in his lab .
And then label them , to put color in them in order to be able to track them in the brain .
And the last step was to re-implant them in the same individual .
We call these autologous grafts -- autografts .
So the first question we had , " What will happen if we re-implant these cells in a normal brain , and what will happen if we re-implant the same cells in a lesioned brain ? ?
Thanks to the help of professor Eric Rouiller , we worked with monkeys .
So in the first-case scenario , we re-implanted the cells in the normal brain and what we saw is that they completely disappeared after a few weeks , as if they were taken from the brain , they go back home , the space is already busy , they are not needed there , so they disappear .
In the second-case scenario , we performed the lesion , we re-implanted exactly the same cells , and in this case , the cells remained -- and they became mature neurons .
And that's the image of what we could observe under the microscope .
Those are the cells that were re-implanted .
And the proof they carry , these little spots , those are the cells that we've labeled in vitro , when they were in culture .
But we could not stop here , of course .
Do these cells also help a monkey to recover after a lesion ?
So for that , we trained monkeys to perform a manual dexterity task .
They had to retrieve food pellets from a tray .
They were very good at it .
And when they had reached a plateau of performance , we did a lesion in the motor cortex corresponding to the hand motion .
So the monkeys were plegic , they could not move their hand anymore .
And exactly the same as humans would do , they spontaneously recovered to a certain extent , exactly the same as after a stroke .
Patients are completely plegic , and then they try to recover due to a brain plasticity mechanism , they recover to a certain extent , exactly the same for the monkey .
So when we were sure that the monkey had reached his plateau of spontaneous recovery , we implanted his own cells .
So on the left side , you see the monkey that has spontaneously recovered .
He's at about 40 to 50 percent of his previous performance before the lesion .
He's not so accurate , not so quick .
And look now , when we re-impant the cells : Two months after re-implantation , the same individual .
It was also very exciting results for us , I tell you .
Since that time , we've understood much more about these cells .
We know that we can cryopreserve them , we can use them later on .
We know that we can apply them in other neuropathological models , like Parkinson's disease , for example .
But our dream is still to implant them in humans .
And I really hope that I'll be able to show you soon that the human brain is giving us the tools to repair itself .
Thank you .
Bruno Giussani : Jocelyne , this is amazing , and I'm sure that right now , there are several dozen people in the audience , possibly even a majority , who are thinking , " I know somebody who can use this . "
I do , in any case .
And of course the question is , what are the biggest obstacles before you can go into human clinical trials ?
Jocelyne Bloch : The biggest obstacles are regulations. So , from these exciting results , you need to fill out about two kilograms of papers and forms to be able to go through these kind of trials .
BG : Which is understandable , the brain is delicate , etc .
JB : Yes , it is , but it takes a long time and a lot of patience and almost a professional team to do it , you know ?
BG : If you project yourself -- having done the research and having tried to get permission to start the trials , if you project yourself out in time , how many years before somebody gets into a hospital and this therapy is available ?
JB : So , it's very difficult to say .
It depends , first , on the approval of the trial .
Will the regulation allow us to do it soon ?
And then , you have to perform this kind of study in a small group of patients .
So it takes , already , a long time to select the patients , do the treatment and evaluate if it's useful to do this kind of treatment .
And then you have to deploy this to a multicentric trial .
You have to really prove first that it's useful before offering this treatment up for everybody .
BG : And safe , of course. JB : Of course .
BG : Jocelyne , thank you for coming to TED and sharing this .
BG : Thank you .
TED Talk Subtitles and Transcript : When Ebola broke out in March 2014 , Pardis Sabeti and her team got to work sequencing the virus's genome , learning how it mutated and spread. Sabeti immediately released her research online , so virus trackers and scientists from around the world could join in the urgent fight. In this talk , she shows how open cooperation was key to halting the virus ... and to attacking the next one to come along. " We had to work openly , we had to share and we had to work together ," Sabeti says. " Let us not let the world be defined by the destruction wrought by one virus , but illuminated by billions of hearts and minds working in unity . "
Pardis Sabeti : How we'll fight the next deadly virus
You may never have heard of Kenema , Sierra Leone or Arua , Nigeria .
But I know them as two of the most extraordinary places on earth .
In hospitals there , there's a community of nurses , physicians and scientists that have been quietly battling one of the deadliest threats to humanity for years : Lassa virus .
Lassa virus is a lot like Ebola .
It can cause a severe fever and can often be fatal .
But these individuals , they risk their lives every day to protect the individuals in their communities , and by doing so , protect us all .
But one of the most extraordinary things I learned about them on one of my first visits out there many years ago was that they start each morning -- these challenging , extraordinary days on the front lines -- by singing .
They gather together , and they show their joy .
They show their spirit .
And over the years , from year after year as I've visited them and they've visited me , I get to gather with them and I sing and we write and we love it , because it reminds us that we're not just there to pursue science together ; we're bonded through a shared humanity .
And that of course , as you can imagine , becomes extremely important , even essential , as things begin to change .
And that changed a great deal in March of 2014 , when the Ebola outbreak was declared in Guinea .
This is the first outbreak in West Africa , near the border of Sierra Leone and Liberia .
And it was frightening , frightening for us all .
We had actually suspected for some time that Lassa and Ebola were more widespread than thought , and we thought it could one day come to Kenema .
And so members of my team immediately went out and joined Dr. Humarr Khan and his team there , and we set up diagnostics to be able to have sensitive molecular tests to pick up Ebola if it came across the border and into Sierra Leone .
We'd already set up this kind of capacity for Lassa virus , we knew how to do it , the team is outstanding .
We just had to give them the tools and place to survey for Ebola .
And unfortunately , that day came .
On May 23 , 2014 , a woman checked into the maternity ward at the hospital , and the team ran those important molecular tests and they identified the first confirmed case of Ebola in Sierra Leone .
This was an exceptional work that was done .
They were able to diagnose the case immediately , to safely treat the patient and to begin to do contact tracing to follow what was going on .
It could've stopped something .
But by the time that day came , the outbreak had already been breeding for months .
With hundreds of cases , it had already eclipsed all previous outbreaks .
And it came into Sierra Leone not as that singular case , but as a tidal wave .
We had to work with the international community , with the Ministry of Health , with Kenema , to begin to deal with the cases , as the next week brought 31 , then 92 , then 147 cases -- all coming to Kenema , one of the only places in Sierra Leone that could deal with this .
And we worked around the clock trying to do everything we could , trying to help the individuals , trying to get attention , but we also did one other simple thing .
From that specimen that we take from a patient's blood to detect Ebola , we can discard it , obviously .
The other thing we can do is , actually , put in a chemical and deactivate it , so just place it into a box and ship it across the ocean , and that's what we did .
We sent it to Boston , where my team works .
And we also worked around the clock doing shift work , day after day , and we quickly generated 99 genomes of the Ebola virus .
This is the blueprint -- the genome of a virus is the blueprint .
We all have one .
It says everything that makes up us , and it tells us so much information .
The results of this kind of work are simple and they're powerful .
We could actually take these 99 different viruses , look at them and compare them , and we could see , actually , compared to three genomes that had been previously published from Guinea , we could show that the outbreak emerged in Guinea months before , once into the human population , and from there had been transmitting from human to human .
Now , that's incredibly important when you're trying to figure out how to intervene , but the important thing is contact tracing .
We also could see that as the virus was moving between humans , it was mutating .
And each of those mutations are so important , because the diagnostics , the vaccines , the therapies that we're using , are all based on that genome sequence , fundamentally -- that's what drives it .
And so global health experts would need to respond , would have to develop , to recalibrate everything that they were doing .
But the way that science works , the position I was in at that point is , I had the data , and I could have worked in a silo for many , many months , analyzed the data carefully , slowly , submitted the paper for publication , gone through a few back-and-forths , and then finally when the paper came out , might release that data .
That's the way the status quo works .
Well , that was not going to work at this point , right ?
We had friends on the front lines and to us it was just obvious that what we needed is help , lots of help .
So the first thing we did is , as soon as the sequences came off the machines , we published it to the web .
We just released it to the whole world and said , " Help us . "
And help came .
Before we knew it , we were being contacted from people all over , surprised to see the data out there and released .
Some of the greatest viral trackers in the world were suddenly part of our community .
We were working together in this virtual way , sharing , regular calls , communications , trying to follow the virus minute by minute , to see ways that we could stop it .
And there are so many ways that we can form communities like that .
Everybody , particularly when the outbreak started to expand globally , was reaching out to learn , to participate , to engage .
Everybody wants to play a part .
The amount of human capacity out there is just amazing , and the Internet connects us all .
And could you imagine that instead of being frightened of each other , that we all just said , " Let's do this .
Let's work together , and let's make this happen . "
But the problem is that the data that all of us are using , Googling on the web , is just too limited to do what we need to do .
And so many opportunities get missed when that happens .
So in the early part of the epidemic from Kenema , we'd had 106 clinical records from patients , and we once again made that publicly available to the world .
And in our own lab , we could show that you could take those 106 records , we could train computers to predict the prognosis for Ebola patients to near 100 percent accuracy .
And we made an app that could release that , to make that available to health-care workers in the field .
But 106 is just not enough to make it powerful , to validate it .
So we were waiting for more data to release that .
and the data has still not come .
We are still waiting , tweaking away , in silos rather than working together .
And this just -- we can't accept that .
Right ? You , all of you , cannot accept that .
It's our lives on the line .
And in fact , actually , many lives were lost , many health-care workers , including beloved colleagues of mine , five colleagues : Mbalu Fonnie , Alex Moigboi , Dr. Humarr Khan , Alice Kovoma and Mohamed Fullah .
These are just five of many health-care workers at Kenema and beyond that died while the world waited and while we all worked , quietly and separately .
See , Ebola , like all threats to humanity , it's fueled by mistrust and distraction and division .
When we build barriers amongst ourselves and we fight amongst ourselves , the virus thrives .
But unlike all threats to humanity , Ebola is one where we're actually all the same .
We're all in this fight together .
Ebola on one person's doorstep could soon be on ours .
And so in this place with the same vulnerabilities , the same strengths , the same fears , the same hopes , I hope that we work together with joy .
A graduate student of mine was reading a book about Sierra Leone , and she discovered that the word " Kenema ," the hospital that we work at and the city where we work in Sierra Leone , is named after the Mende word for " clear like a river , translucent and open to the public gaze . "
That was really profound for us , because without knowing it , we'd always felt that in order to honor the individuals in Kenema where we worked , we had to work openly , we had to share and we had to work together .
And we have to do that .
We all have to demand that of ourselves and others -- to be open to each other when an outbreak happens , to fight in this fight together .
Because this is not the first outbreak of Ebola , it will not be the last , and there are many other microbes out there that are lying in wait , like Lassa virus and others .
And the next time this happens , it could happen in a city of millions , it could start there .
It could be something that's transmitted through the air .
It could even be disseminated intentionally .
And I know that that is frightening , I understand that , but I know also , and this experience shows us , that we have the technology and we have the capacity to win this thing , to win this and have the upper hand over viruses .
But we can only do it if we do it together and we do it with joy .
So for Dr. Khan and for all of those who sacrificed their lives on the front lines in this fight with us always , let us be in this fight with them always .
And let us not let the world be defined by the destruction wrought by one virus , but illuminated by billions of hearts and minds working in unity .
Thank you .
TED Talk Subtitles and Transcript : Have you wondered why politicians aren't what they used to be , why governments seem unable to solve real problems ? Economist Yanis Varoufakis , the former Minister of Finance for Greece , says that it's because you can be in politics today but not be in power -- because real power now belongs to those who control the economy. He believes that the mega-rich and corporations are cannibalizing the political sphere , causing financial crisis. In this talk , hear his dream for a world in which capital and labor no longer struggle against each other , " one that is simultaneously libertarian , Marxist and Keynesian . "
Yanis Varoufakis : Capitalism will eat democracy -- unless we speak up
Democracy .
In the West , we make a colossal mistake taking it for granted .
We see democracy not as the most fragile of flowers that it really is , but we see it as part of our society's furniture .
We tend to think of it as an intransigent given .
We mistakenly believe that capitalism begets inevitably democracy .
It doesn't .
Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew and his great imitators in Beijing have demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt that it is perfectly possible to have a flourishing capitalism , spectacular growth , while politics remains democracy-free .
Indeed , democracy is receding in our neck of the woods , here in Europe .
Earlier this year , while I was representing Greece -- the newly elected Greek government -- in the Eurogroup as its Finance Minister , I was told in no uncertain terms that our nation's democratic process -- our elections -- could not be allowed to interfere with economic policies that were being implemented in Greece .
At that moment , I felt that there could be no greater vindication of Lee Kuan Yew , or the Chinese Communist Party , indeed of some recalcitrant friends of mine who kept telling me that democracy would be banned if it ever threatened to change anything .
Tonight , here , I want to present to you an economic case for an authentic democracy .
I want to ask you to join me in believing again that Lee Kuan Yew , the Chinese Communist Party and indeed the Eurogroup are wrong in believing that we can dispense with democracy -- that we need an authentic , boisterous democracy .
And without democracy , our societies will be nastier , our future bleak and our great , new technologies wasted .
Speaking of waste , allow me to point out an interesting paradox that is threatening our economies as we speak .
I call it the twin peaks paradox .
One peak you understand -- you know it , you recognize it -- is the mountain of debts that has been casting a long shadow over the United States , Europe , the whole world .
We all recognize the mountain of debts .
But few people discern its twin .
A mountain of idle cash belonging to rich savers and to corporations , too terrified to invest it into the productive activities that can generate the incomes from which you can extinguish the mountain of debts and which can produce all those things that humanity desperately needs , like green energy .
Now let me give you two numbers .
Over the last three months , in the United States , in Britain and in the Eurozone , we have invested , collectively , 3.4 trillion dollars on all the wealth-producing goods -- things like industrial plants , machinery , office blocks , schools , roads , railways , machinery , and so on and so forth .
$ 3.4 trillion sounds like a lot of money until you compare it to the $ 5.1 trillion that has been slushing around in the same countries , in our financial institutions , doing absolutely nothing during the same period except inflating stock exchanges and bidding up house prices .
So a mountain of debt and a mountain of idle cash form twin peaks , failing to cancel each other out through the normal operation of the markets .
The result is stagnant wages , more than a quarter of 25 - to 54-year-olds in America , in Japan and in Europe And consequently , low aggregate demand , which in a never-ending cycle , reinforces the pessimism of the investors , who , fearing low demand , reproduce it by not investing -- exactly like Oedipus' father , who , terrified by the prophecy of the oracle that his son would grow up to kill him ,
unwittingly engineered the conditions that ensured that Oedipus , his son , would kill him .
This is my quarrel with capitalism .
Its gross wastefulness , all this idle cash , should be energized to improve lives , to develop human talents , and indeed to finance all these technologies , green technologies , which are absolutely essential for saving planet Earth .
Am I right in believing that democracy might be the answer ?
I believe so , but before we move on , what do we mean by democracy ?
Aristotle defined democracy as the constitution in which the free and the poor , being in the majority , control government .
Now , of course Athenian democracy excluded too many .
Women , migrants and , of course , the slaves .
But it would be a mistake to dismiss the significance of ancient Athenian democracy on the basis of whom it excluded .
What was more pertinent , and continues to be so about ancient Athenian democracy , was the inclusion of the working poor , who not only acquired the right to free speech , but more importantly , crucially , they acquired the rights to political judgments that were afforded equal weight in the decision-making concerning matters of state .
Now , of course , Athenian democracy didn't last long .
Like a candle that burns brightly , it burned out quickly .
And indeed , our liberal democracies today do not have their roots in ancient Athens .
They have their roots in the Magna Carta , in the 1688 Glorious Revolution , indeed in the American constitution .
Whereas Athenian democracy was focusing on the masterless citizen and empowering the working poor , our liberal democracies are founded on the Magna Carta tradition , which was , after all , a charter for masters .
And indeed , liberal democracy only surfaced when it was possible to separate fully the political sphere from the economic sphere , so as to confine the democratic process fully in the political sphere , leaving the economic sphere -- the corporate world , if you want -- as a democracy-free zone .
Now , in our democracies today , this separation of the economic from the political sphere , the moment it started happening , it gave rise to an inexorable , epic struggle between the two , with the economic sphere colonizing the political sphere , eating into its power .
Have you wondered why politicians are not what they used to be ?
It's not because their DNA has degenerated .
It is rather because one can be in government today and not in power , because power has migrated from the political to the economic sphere , which is separate .
Indeed , I spoke about my quarrel with capitalism .
If you think about it , it is a little bit like a population of predators , that are so successful in decimating the prey that they must feed on , that in the end they starve .
Similarly , the economic sphere has been colonizing and cannibalizing the political sphere to such an extent that it is undermining itself , causing economic crisis .
Corporate power is increasing , political goods are devaluing , inequality is rising , aggregate demand is falling and CEOs of corporations are too scared to invest the cash of their corporations .
So the more capitalism succeeds in taking the demos out of democracy , the taller the twin peaks and the greater the waste of human resources and humanity's wealth .
Clearly , if this is right , we must reunite the political and economic spheres and better do it with a demos being in control , like in ancient Athens except without the slaves or the exclusion of women and migrants .
Now , this is not an original idea .
The Marxist left had that idea 100 years ago and it didn't go very well , did it ?
The lesson that we learned from the Soviet debacle is that only by a miracle will the working poor be reempowered , as they were in ancient Athens , without creating new forms of brutality and waste .
But there is a solution : eliminate the working poor .
Capitalism's doing it by replacing low-wage workers with automata , androids , robots .
The problem is that as long as the economic and the political spheres are separate , automation makes the twin peaks taller , the waste loftier and the social conflicts deeper , including -- soon , I believe -- in places like China .
So we need to reconfigure , we need to reunite the economic and the political spheres , but we'd better do it by democratizing the reunified sphere , lest we end up with a surveillance-mad hyperautocracy that makes The Matrix , the movie , look like a documentary .
So the question is not whether capitalism will survive the technological innovations it is spawning .
The more interesting question is whether capitalism will be succeeded by something resembling a Matrix dystopia or something much closer to a Star Trek-like society , where machines serve the humans and the humans expend their energies exploring the universe and indulging in long debates about the meaning of life in some ancient , Athenian-like , high tech agora .
I think we can afford to be optimistic .
But what would it take , what would it look like to have this Star Trek-like utopia , instead of the Matrix-like dystopia ?
In practical terms , allow me to share just briefly , a couple of examples .
At the level of the enterprise , imagine a capital market , where you earn capital as you work , and where your capital follows you from one job to another , from one company to another , and the company -- whichever one you happen to work at at that time -- is solely owned by those who happen to work in it at that moment .
Then all income stems from capital , from profits , and the very concept of wage labor becomes obsolete .
No more separation between those who own but do not work in the company and those who work but do not own the company ; no more tug-of-war between capital and labor ; no great gap between investment and saving ; indeed , no towering twin peaks .
At the level of the global political economy , imagine for a moment that our national currencies have a free-floating exchange rate , with a universal , global , digital currency , one that is issued by the International Monetary Fund , the G-20 , on behalf of all humanity .
And imagine further that all international trade is denominated in this currency -- let's call it " the cosmos ," in units of cosmos -- with every government agreeing to be paying into a common fund a sum of cosmos units proportional to the country's trade deficit , or indeed to a country's trade surplus .
And imagine that that fund is utilized to invest in green technologies , especially in parts of the world where investment funding is scarce .
This is not a new idea .
It's what , effectively , John Maynard Keynes proposed in 1944 at the Bretton Woods Conference .
The problem is that back then , they didn't have the technology to implement it .
Now we do , especially in the context of a reunified political-economic sphere .
The world that I am describing to you is simultaneously libertarian , in that it prioritizes empowered individuals , Marxist , since it will have confined to the dustbin of history the division between capital and labor , and Keynesian , global Keynesian .
But above all else , it is a world in which we will be able to imagine an authentic democracy .
Will such a world dawn ?
Or shall we descend into a Matrix-like dystopia ?
The answer lies in the political choice that we shall be making collectively .
It is our choice , and we'd better make it democratically .
Thank you .
Bruno Giussani : Yanis ...
It was you who described yourself in your bios as a libertarian Marxist .
What is the relevance of Marx's analysis today ?
Yanis Varoufakis : Well , if there was any relevance in what I just said , then Marx is relevant .
Because the whole point of reunifying the political and economic is -- if we don't do it , then technological innovation is going to create such a massive fall in aggregate demand , what Larry Summers refers to as secular stagnation .
With this crisis migrating from one part of the world , as it is now , it will destabilize not only our democracies , but even the emerging world that is not that keen on liberal democracy .
So if this analysis holds water , then Marx is absolutely relevant .
But so is Hayek , that's why I'm a libertarian Marxist , and so is Keynes , so that's why I'm totally confused .
BG : Indeed , and possibly we are too , now .
YV : If you are not confused , you are not thinking , OK ?
BG : That's a very , very Greek philosopher kind of thing to say -- YV : That was Einstein , actually -- BG : During your talk you mentioned Singapore and China , and last night at the speaker dinner , you expressed a pretty strong opinion about how the West looks at China .
Would you like to share that ?
YV : Well , there's a great degree of hypocrisy .
In our liberal democracies , we have a semblance of democracy .
It's because we have confined , as I was saying in my talk , democracy to the political sphere , while leaving the one sphere where all the action is -- the economic sphere -- a completely democracy-free zone .
In a sense , if I am allowed to be provocative , China today is closer to Britain in the 19th century .
Because remember , we tend to associate liberalism with democracy -- that's a mistake , historically .
Liberalism , liberal , it's like John Stuart Mill .
John Stuart Mill was particularly skeptical about the democratic process .
So what you are seeing now in China is a very similar process to the one that we had in Britain during the Industrial Revolution , especially the transition from the first to the second .
And to be castigating China for doing that which the West did in the 19th century , smacks of hypocrisy .
BG : I am sure that many people here are wondering about your experience as the Finance Minister of Greece earlier this year .
YV : I knew this was coming. BG : Yes .
BG : Six months after , how do you look back at the first half of the year ?
YV : Extremely exciting , from a personal point of view , and very disappointing , because we had an opportunity to reboot the Eurozone .
Not just Greece , the Eurozone .
To move away from the complacency and the constant denial that there was a massive -- and there is a massive architectural fault line going through the Eurozone , which is threatening , massively , the whole of the European Union process .
We had an opportunity on the basis of the Greek program -- which by the way , was the first program to manifest that denial -- And , unfortunately , the powers in the Eurozone , in the Eurogroup , chose to maintain denial .
But you know what happens .
This is the experience of the Soviet Union .
When you try to keep alive an economic system that architecturally cannot survive , through political will and through authoritarianism , you may succeed in prolonging it , but when change happens it happens very abruptly and catastrophically .
BG : What kind of change are you foreseeing ?
YV : Well , there's no doubt that if we don't change the architecture of the Eurozone , the Eurozone has no future .
BG : Did you make any mistakes when you were Finance Minister ?
YV : Every day .
BG : For example ? YV : Anybody who looks back -- No , but seriously .
If there's any Minister of Finance , or of anything else for that matter , who tells you after six months in a job , especially in such a stressful situation , that they have made no mistake , they're dangerous people .
Of course I made mistakes .
The greatest mistake was to sign the application for the extension of a loan agreement in the end of February .
I was imagining that there was a genuine interest on the side of the creditors to find common ground .
And there wasn't .
They were simply interested in crushing our government , just because they did not want to have to deal with the architectural fault lines that were running through the Eurozone .
And because they didn't want to admit that for five years they were implementing a catastrophic program in Greece .
We lost one-third of our nominal GDP .
This is worse than the Great Depression .
And no one has come clean from the troika of lenders that have been imposing this policy to say , " This was a colossal mistake . "
BG : Despite all this , and despite the aggressiveness of the discussion , you seem to be remaining quite pro-European .
YV : Absolutely .
Look , my criticism of the European Union and the Eurozone comes from a person who lives and breathes Europe .
My greatest fear is that the Eurozone will not survive .
Because if it doesn't , the centrifugal forces that will be unleashed will be demonic , and they will destroy the European Union .
And that will be catastrophic not just for Europe but for the whole global economy .
We are probably the largest economy in the world .
And if we allow ourselves to fall into a route of the postmodern 1930's , which seems to me to be what we are doing , then that will be detrimental to the future of Europeans and non-Europeans alike .
BG : We definitely hope you are wrong on that point .
Yanis , thank you for coming to TED .
YV : Thank you .