-
Bryn Freedman: You're a guy
-
whose company funds
these AI programs and invests.
-
So why should we trust you
to not have a bias
-
and tell us something really useful
for the rest of us
-
about the future of work?
-
Roy Bahat: Yes, I am.
-
And when you wake up in the morning
and you read the newspaper
-
and it says, "The robots are coming,
they may take all our jobs,"
-
as a start-up investor,
focused on the future of work,
-
our fund was the first one to say
-
artificial intelligence
should be a focus for us.
-
So I woke up one morning
and read that and said,
-
"Oh, my gosh, they're talking about me.
-
That's me who's doing that."
-
And then I thought, wait a minute.
-
If things continue,
-
then maybe not only will the start-ups
in which we invest struggle,
-
because there won't people to have jobs
-
to pay for the things
that they make and buy them,
-
but our economy and society
might struggle, too.
-
And look, I should be the guy
-
who sits here and tells you,
"Everything is going to be fine."
-
It's all going to work out great.
-
Hey, when they introduced the ATM machine,
-
years later there's more
tellers in banks, it's true.
-
And yet, when I looked at it, I thought,
-
"This is going to accelerate,
and if it does accelerate
-
there's a chance the center doesn't hold."
-
But I figured somebody must know
the answer to this,
-
there's so many ideas out there.
-
And I read all the books
and I went to the conferences,
-
and at one point we counted
more than 100 efforts
-
to study the future of work.
-
And it was a frustrating experience,
-
because I'd hear the same back-and-forth
over and over again:
-
"The robots are coming,"
-
and then somebody else would say,
-
"Oh, don't worry about that,
-
they've always said that
and it turns out OK."
-
And then somebody else would say,
-
"Well, it's really about the meaning
of your job anyway."
-
And then everybody would shrug
and [unclear] and have a drink.
-
And it felt like there was this
Kabuki theater of this discussion
-
where nobody was talking to each other.
-
And many of the people
-
that I knew and worked with
in the technology world
-
were not speaking to policy makers,
-
the policy makers
were not speaking to them,
-
and so we partnered with a non-partisan
think tank NGO called New America
-
to study this issue.
-
And we brought together a group of people
-
including an AI tzar
at a technology company,
-
and a video game designer,
and a heartland conservative,
-
and a Wall Street investor,
and a socialist magazine editor,
-
literally, all in the same room,
it was occasionally awkward,
-
and tried to figure out
what is it that will happen here.
-
The question we asked was simple.
-
It was, what is the effect of technology
on work going to be?
-
And we looked out 10 to 20 years,
-
because we wanted to look out far enough
that there could be a real change,
-
but soon enough that we weren't
talking about teleportation
-
or anything like that.
-
And we recognized,
-
and I think every year
we're reminded of this in the world,
-
that predicting what's
going to happen is hard,
-
so instead of predicting,
there are other things you can do.
-
Which is, you can try to imagine
alternate possible futures,
-
which is what we did,
we did a scenario-planning exercise,
-
and we imagined cases
where no job is safe.
-
We imagined cases where every job is safe.
-
And we imagined every
distinct possibility we could.
-
And the result, which really surprised us,
-
was when you think through those futures
and you think what should we do,
-
the answers about what we should do
-
actually turn out to be the same
no matter what happens.
-
And the irony of looking out
10 to 20 years into the future
-
is you realize that the things
we want to act on
-
are actually already happening right now.
-
The automation is right now,
the future is right now.
-
BF: So what does that mean,
and what does that tell us,
-
if the future is now, what is it
that we should be doing
-
and what should we be thinking about?
-
RB: We have to understand
the problem first.
-
And so the data are that as the economy
becomes more productive,
-
and individual workers
become more productive,
-
their wages haven't risen.
-
If you look at the proportion
of prime working-age men,
-
in the United States at least,
-
who work now versus in 1960,
-
we have three times
as many men not working,
-
and then you hear the stories.
-
I sat down with a group
of Walmart workers
-
and I said, "What do you think
about this cashier,
-
this futuristic self-check out thing?"
-
They said, "That's nice,
-
but have you heard
about the cash recycler,
-
that's a machine that's being
installed right now,
-
it's eliminating two jobs
at every Walmart right now."
-
And we thought we didn't
understand the problem,
-
and we looked at the voices
that were the ones that were excluded.
-
Which is, all of the people
affected by this change.
-
And we decided to listen to them,
-
sort of, automation and its discontents.
-
I've spent the last
couple of years doing that.
-
I've been to Flint, Michigan,
and Youngstown, Ohio,
-
talking about entrepreneurs,
-
trying to make it work
in a very different environment
-
from New York or San Francisco
or London or Tokyo.
-
I've been to prisons twice,
-
to talk to inmates about
their jobs after they leave.
-
I've sat down with truck drivers
to ask them about the self-driving truck,
-
with people who, in addition
to their full-time job,
-
care for an aging relative,
-
and when you talk to people,
-
there were two themes
that came out loud and clear.
-
The first one was that people
are less looking for more money
-
or get out of the fear
of the robot taking their job,
-
and they just want something stable.
-
They want something predictable.
-
So if you survey people and ask them
what they want out of work,
-
for everybody who makes
less than 150,000 dollars a year,
-
they'll take a more stable
and secure income, on average,
-
over earning more money.
-
And if you think about the fact that
-
not only for all of the people
across the earth who don't earn a living,
-
but for those who do,
-
the vast majority earn a different
amount from month to month
-
and have an instability,
-
all of a sudden you realize,
-
"Wait a minute, we have
a real problem on our hands."
-
And the second thing they say,
which took us a longer time to understand,
-
is that they say they want dignity.
-
And that concept
of self-worth through work
-
emerged again and again
and again in our conversations.
-
BF: So, I certainly
appreciate this answer,
-
but you can't eat dignity,
-
you can't clothe your children
with self-esteem.
-
So, what is that, how do you reconcile
what does dignity mean
-
and what is the relationship
between dignity and stability?
-
RB: You can't eat dignity.
-
You need stability first.
-
And the good news is,
-
many of the conversations
that are happening right now,
-
are about how we solve that.
-
You know, I'm a proponent
of studying guaranteed income,
-
as one example.
-
Conversations about how
health care gets provided
-
and other benefits.
-
Those conversations are happening,
-
and we're at a time
where we must figure that out,
-
it is the crisis of our era.
-
And my point of view
after talking to people
-
is that we may do that,
-
and it still might not be enough.
-
Because what we need to do
from the beginning,
-
is understand what it is about work
that gives people dignity,
-
so that they can live
the lives that they want to live.
-
And so that concept of dignity is ...
-
it's difficult to get your hands around.
-
Because what many people hear,
and especially, to be honest, rich people,
-
they hear meaning.
-
They hear "my work is important to me."
-
And again, if you survey people,
-
and you ask them,
-
"How important is it to you
that your work be important to you?"
-
only people who make
150,000 dollars a year or more
-
say that it is important to them
that their work be important.
-
BF: Meaning, meaningful?
-
RB: Just defined as,
"Is your work important to you?"
-
Whatever somebody took that to mean.
-
And yet, of course dignity is essential,
-
we talked to truck drivers who said,
-
"I saw my cousin drive,
-
and I got on the open road
and it was amazing,
-
and I started making more money
than people who went to college."
-
And then they'd get
to the end of their thought
-
and say something like,
-
People need their fruits
and vegetables in the morning,
-
I'm the guy who gets it to them."
-
And we talked to somebody who,
in addition to his job,
-
was caring for his aunt.
-
He was making plenty of money,
and at one point we just asked,
-
"What is it about caring for your aunt,
can't you pay somebody to do it?"
-
He said, "My aunt doesn't want
somebody we pay for, she wants me."
-
And so there was this
concept there of being needed.
-
And if you study the word
"dignity," it's fascinating,
-
it's one of the oldest words
in the English language,
-
it's from antiquity
and it has two meanings:
-
one is self-worth,
-
and the other is that something
is suitable, it's fitting.
-
Meaning that you're part
of something greater than yourself,
-
and it connects to some broader whole,
in other words, that you're needed.
-
BF: So how do you answer this question,
-
this concept that we don't pay teachers,
and elder-care workers
-
and we don't pay people
who really care for people
-
and are needed, enough?
-
RB: Well, the good news is,
people are finally asking the question,
-
so as AI investors,
we often get phone calls
-
from foundations or CEOs
and boardrooms saying,
-
"What do we do about this?"
-
And they used to be asking,
-
"What do we do about
introducing automation?"
-
And now they're asking,
"What do we do about self-worth?"
-
And they know that the employees
who work for them,
-
who have a spouse who cares for somebody,
-
that dignity is essential to their
ability to just do their job.
-
I think there's two kinds of answers:
-
there's the money side
of just making your life work.
-
That's stability.
-
You need to eat.
-
And then you think about
our culture more broadly,
-
and you ask who do we make into heroes?
-
And, you know, what I want
is to see the magazine cover
-
that is the person
who is the heroic caregiver.
-
Or the Netflix series
that dramatizes the person
-
who makes all of our other lives work
so we can do the things we do.
-
Let's make heroes out of those people,
-
that's the Netflix show
that I would binge.
-
And we've had chroniclers of this before,
-
Studs Terkel,
-
the oral history of the working
experience in the United States.
-
And what we need is the experience
of needing one another
-
and being connected to each other.
-
Maybe that's the answer
for how we all fit as a society.
-
And the thought exercise to me
is if you were to go back 100 years,
-
and have people, you know,
my grandparents, great-grandparents,
-
a tailor, worked in a mine,
-
they look at what all of us
do for a living,
-
they say, "That's not work."
-
We sit there and type and talk
and there's no danger of getting hurt.
-
And my guess is that if you were
to imagine 100 years from now,
-
we'll still be doing things
for each other.
-
We'll still need one another.
-
And we just will think of it as work.
-
The entire thing I'm trying to say
-
is that dignity should not
just be about having a job.
-
Because if you say
you need a job to have dignity,
-
which many people say,
-
the second you say that,
you say to all the parents,
-
and all the teachers
and all the caregivers
-
that all of a sudden,
-
because they're not being paid
for what they're doing,
-
it somehow lacks this
essential human quality.
-
To me, that's the great
puzzle of our time --
-
can we figure out how to provide
that stability throughout life,
-
and then can we figure out
how to create an inclusive,
-
not just racially, gender,
but multigenerationally inclusive,
-
I mean, every different human experience
-
included in this way of understanding
how we can be needed by one another.
-
BF: Thank you.
RB: Thank you.
-
BF: Thank you very much
for your participation.
-
(Applause)