Browsing Tag: film

    HOW TO TRAIN YOUR DRAGON 2 – Official Trailer 2
    Articles, Blog

    HOW TO TRAIN YOUR DRAGON 2 – Official Trailer 2

    October 10, 2019

    HICCUP: Come on, bud.
    There’s a whole other world of dragons out there Unbelieveable. What do you say? What should we name it? Itchy armpit it is. VALKA: I bet you think you know a lot about
    dragons. HICCUP: Should I know you?
    VALKA: No, but a mother never forgets. VALKA: Every dragon has its secrets.
    I’ll show them all to you! HICCUP: Did you know about this? ASTRID: That’s your mother?! HICCUP: Now you know where I get my dramatic
    flair! VALKA: (laughs) He likes you.
    HICCUP: Wow… VALKA: Something is coming. Something you’ve
    never faced before. ASTRID: What’s down there? DRAGO: I alone control the dragons!
    STOICK: Drago Bludvist is a madman. TUFFNUT: I’ll bloody his fist with my FACE
    if he tries to take my dragon!
    RUFFNUT: Aww… HICCUP: Dad, there’s something you need to know GOBBER: Oh boy. VALKA: I know what you’re gonna say- STOICK: You’re as beautiful as the day I lost you STOICK: We’re a team now. Now what do you want to do? HICCUP: Drago’s coming for our dragons. We have to stop him. Together. Don’t worry, bud. I’m not gonna let anything happen to you. VALKA: You have the heart of a chief, STOICK: That’s my boy! VALKA: and the soul of a dragon. HICCUP: Aghh! You KNOW that doesn’t wash out. DRAGO: Cut them down! TUFFNUT: Dragon riders, coming through!
    FISHLEGS: Wooo! GOBBER: Heads up! TUFFNUT: We can’t fly these things! HICCUP: They’re babies! They don’t listen
    to anyone. ASTRID: Take ’em down, babe! HICCUP: Come on, bud! Hold on! HICCUP: Distract the alpha!
    GOBBER: Have a nice flight! [laughter]
    SNOTLOUT: Uh oh. HICCUP: Yeah, baby!


    Assemble a monorail view camera

    September 24, 2019

    welcome back today I’m going to show you how
    to assemble a monorail view camera. the first thing you need to do is set up your
    tripod. rail cameras are quite heavy so you need to
    select a tripod that can support the weight of the camera and lens. this is about the
    smallest tripod you can get away with, and only if you’re using a smaller lens. set up
    the tripod head so that the front is facing over one of the tripod legs. this will ensure that the lens of the camera
    has enough support. the first part of the camera is the rail clamp.
    this is sometimes referred to as the tripod mount. it has the channel through the top that holds
    the monorail in place. on the bottom you’ll find a standard thread
    for mounting onto the tripod. if you have a quick-release tripod head that makes setting
    up the camera even faster. the rail clamp is the foundation that holds
    all the other parts of the camera onto the tripod. it’s important to make sure that it’s
    completely secure and tight on the tripod head. the next part of the camera is the monorail
    or rail. these come in different lengths. you will want to have a larger rail for longer
    focal length lenses and for focusing close-up. shorter rails are usually used for wide-angle
    lenses or when you only plan to focus into the distance, such as with distant landscapes. mount the rail by opening the rail clamp and
    placing the rail into the channel. for most lenses you want the rail to be centered
    on the rail clamp this will ensure the best balance of weight. for wide-angle lenses you may want to have
    the rail clamp towards the back of the camera this will ensure that the rail clamp does
    not get in the way of focusing. the next parts to assemble or the standards. the front standard and rear standard are exactly
    the same. they are interchangeable in every way with
    all the same knobs and movements in both the front and the back. you will need to position the rear standard
    so that the frame area is sticking out toward the back. this is important to ensure that the camera
    parts do not get in the way and you have a clear path to insert the film holders later. the rail has a small spring-loaded pin to
    prevent the standard from falling off. you will need to push this in to get the standard
    on to the rail. once the standard is threaded onto the rail, you should be able to push
    it forward toward the middle of the rail. if it doesn’t push easily check that the standard
    is unlocked. there are two knobs at the base of the standard. one will lock or unlock the standard on the
    rail and the other will roll the standard forward and back. now assemble the front standard. it’s customary to have the front standard
    oriented the same way as the rear standard this makes it easier to use and apply movements
    because all of the knobs will be oriented in the same way. Again, snap the standard past the spring pin
    onto the rail. fortunately you only have to do this once. the next part is the bellows. the bellows are a collapsible, flexible, accordion
    shaped housing that seals the sides of the camera. be sure to inspect old bellows for damage
    or pin holes. on either side of the bellows there is a frame
    that will fit into the front and rear standard. you will also notice notches on the frame. those notches must be aligned with the frame
    on the standard to fit properly. here is a different type of bellows called
    a bag bellows. these are typically used for wide-angle lenses. they can expand and collapse just like the
    standard bellows, but they can collapse much smaller. this allows the camera to be compressed smaller,
    which is necessary for wide-angle lenses. to attach the bellows be sure the lock is
    open at the top of the standard. place the bellows into the frame and align
    the notches. when the bellows frame is seated push the lock lever back into place. pull the other bellows frame to the opposite
    standard. seat it into the frame and lock it into place. make sure both sides of the bellows are secured. next we put the lens board on. for my camera
    I have a lens board reducer. it’s a large lens board with a place to mount
    a smaller lens board into it. you can also use a standard lens board. I find the reducing lens board convenient
    because it allows me to use a smaller lens board. this smaller lens board is interchangeable
    with my other large format cameras. it allows me to avoid having to remount my
    lenses when I change cameras. if this is your first time using a view camera
    lens, please check out my other video that covers the basic lens use. just as you did with the bellows open the
    lock at the top of the front standard it’s very easy to move the lock too far, so be
    careful. the same lock controls both sides of the frame. it’s always best to hold on to the most delicate
    thing whenever you’re moving the lock just to be sure, now that I have my reducing lens
    board in place, I can take my smaller lens board with the lens already mounted and place
    it into position. it tips into a lip on the bottom and then
    a lock slides down to hold it into place. make sure the lens is secure before letting
    go. the final part of the camera is the ground
    glass back. the ground glass is in a separate frame with
    a spring-loaded hinge. this allows you to place film holders into the back of the camera
    and hold them tightly against the back so no light gets in. a ground glass back like this one is called
    a graflock back. it allows the removal of the ground glass
    frame and the use of numerous different accessories such as roll film adapters. to remove the ground glass push the spring
    hinges in to release the frame and slide it out. this frame has two metal sliders that move
    to lock the accessories in place. to replace the ground glass realign it within
    the frame and push the spring hinges back into place. install the ground glass back on the rear
    standard just as you did the lens board. unlock the frame, tip the ground glass back
    into place and lock it. be sure it’s secure before letting go. you can orient the ground glass back to make
    a horizontal or vertical picture. simply remove the back and realign it to the
    desired position. so that’s how you assemble a basic monorail
    view camera and all of the basic parts. check back for more videos where I will discuss
    the basic sequence of photographing, and how to use a view camera lens. for this video
    this is the end

    On-Time Metro – In Japan, The Train Is Never Late // Discovery on
    Articles, Blog

    On-Time Metro – In Japan, The Train Is Never Late // Discovery on

    September 9, 2019

    Secret codes, signals, and a mysterious language. All used for a single strict purpose: To master time Yet below the world capital of High-tech, automation is not replacing people Less than half a second out Going behind the scenes of the world’s busiest Metros to explore Japan’s unique relationship with time We’ll show how Tokyo Metro’s reputation for timekeeping is built on a unique alliance between digital precision and intuitive human skills. We’ll show how Tokyo Metro’s reputation for timekeeping is built on a unique alliance between digital precision and intuitive human skills. What does it take to bring safe efficient and reliable service to Tokyo Metro’s six million daily passengers? “The trains are always on time. It’s amazing, yeah.” By 5:00 a.m. each morning, all Tokyo Metro stations are open for business with the same ritual. And after each entrance is raised a finger is pointed as a signal By 8:00 a.m. One of the Metro’s busiest stations Ikebukuro is swamped by commuters who know their trains will arrive exactly as scheduled Approximately 300,000 passengers crowd onto the Marounuchi Line during rush hour but everyone waits patiently and this man is on hand ready to pull a low-tech rope trick. Crowd control and a compliant public help keep trains running on time Commuters have space to rush out of the carriages since others wait in line before boarding Another batch of passengers move on to the platform. It’s a cyclic slow motion ballet which commuters have performed for decades But it prevents causing overcrowding, accidents, and delays Beyond time gurus are the drivers. They spend their working life on one line and don’t need Speedometers to tell them how fast to go to reach each station on schedule Drivers must pass a rigorous training process along with random checks by Chief instructor, Mr. Hatoba The test requires the driver to travel this [distance] in precisely one minute five seconds The Margin of error is less than a second This stretch must be covered in 1 minute 45 seconds. His margin of error was just 0.19 seconds This building is the driving training HQ complete with the simulator loadout scenarios for every emergency from catastrophic earthquakes to a kite on the power lines it’s presiding genius Kazunori Fujishiro The simulator is just like a real train: the same controls realistic visuals and even the same vibrations and sense of movement This kind of computer game technology sharpens the reflex skills needed to deal with real-life emergencies and minimize disruption At the end of the day tokyo metro gets millions of commuters home on time Yuko Mito is an authority on Japan’s Railways. She wrote a book which connects the Nation’s focus with time to an earthquake in tokyo To cope with the number of commuters from the suburbs Railways started to run trains in units of seconds Passengers soon Learned to behave in an orderly way and the unwritten code about waiting on the platform reflects the unique Relationship between tokyo metro and its passengers based on the shared interest in being on time Once the commuter rush is over the next challenge is to get over-tired stragglers onto the last train The last train has left and the late shift puts the system to bed Large stations have so many entrances that biking is the best way to get around to close thee.One must cover some two kilometers of distance to reach all of the 24 entrances within Otemachi station In the small hours the above-ground City shuts down But tokyo Metro never sleeps. the only time to check the tracks and other hard assets is when the trains aren’t running It takes eight years for this team to check the entire tunnel network for structural problems because this work cannot be done by machine Masanori Noguchi’s skill is his ability to understand different sounds He marks the sections that needs repair to prevent structural collapse disrupting the timetable, aware that keen observant skills are vital for maintaining the infrastructure Coming up: we explore cutting-edge technology that keeps tokyo metro on time Discover the importance of autopilot and how do train drivers gauge their speed by instinct Another day, another crowd of patient satisfied commuters Today this instinct takes the form of training a chance for Mr. Hakoba to show off his drill The driver continues to accelerate and decelerate as Mr.. Hakoba dictates. Precisely 35 km/h 36 Km/h This technique has a colorful history Kookie Yuki’s method involved memorizing the passing scenery and using landmarks as markers for accelerating or slowing down With no instruments drivers were able to gauge time by instinct, allowing trains to run on time. This method is still in use today But speed isn’t everything New train conductors must learn the correct signaling procedure Finger pointing confirmation is a key symbol of Railway and Metro men Japanese Railway workers learn to confirm what they have seen by voicing and pointing a mysterious white glove (?) and the ultimate symbol of Japan’s love affair with time With so many passengers customer service is a big deal for tokyo Metro. No other [metro] gives it greater importance An entire building is devoted to training recruits in the mysterious art of customer service Inside there’s a mock-up station with the same hardware as real stations But the focus is people and today a class of recruits is meeting the director of customer service, Mr. Kamei First steps in hospitality training include learning how to greet customers, Counting out change, Mr. Kamei’s passion for customer service means new technology depends on important people skills Trains can’t run on time if tracks aren’t maintained and machines do this far better than humans The multiple tight /ampere/ or /mutter type/ is a special train that straightens bench rail tracks Vibrations from the passage of trains loosen the crushed stones, distorting the rails above them the machine lifts up the rails and repacks the crushed stones this corrects the distorted rails It can fix 200 meters of track in half an hour After the /motto tie/ comes the ballast engine complete with a special brush to disperse loose gravel It can clean one kilometre of rail in 30 minutes Tokyo Metro would not run on time without its maintenance yard Every year the wheels of each carriage are skinned so they can roll like new Every four years the body is removed from the flat car and the /bogies/ rolled away for cleaning The man in charge is Mr. Yasuniwa When the /bogle/ emerges it looks new, yet it is deconstructed even further for cleaning and inspection Once fully deconstructed the train becomes this set of minute components Each piece is hand polished, ultimate proof that hard technology relies on a human touch This is certainly true of the train driver. Whose constant companion is: Dead man, an automatic system [that] stops the train safely if the driver is suddenly incapacitated Even though these trains can stop automatically drivers are proud this function is only used in an emergency Yet where necessary technology plays its part high-tech safety features have also been fitted onto platforms staff learn the precise workings of platform doors through a simulator in order to ensure passenger safety It’s the end of the day the last train is left, but another arrives for maintenance duty after midnight It’s loaded with platform doors which the team must install before the metro starts up again in the morning Platform doors prevent accidents, they’re the perfect example of the alliance between technical and human solutions installation was completed within two hours Tokyo lives in fear of another major earthquake Coming up: we see how Tokyo Metro prepares for the worst Japan’s motivation to be precisely on time impresses everyone. “The trains are always on time It’s amazing, yeah.” “I didn’t have to wait at all. The train’s already there.” New technology is already on its way for the future LEDs will be installed on all trains for the sake of the environment and reliability the Alliance between man and Machine Advances even further Platform doors and movable steps like these are intended to avoid failures and keep trains running on time Doors on new Carriages will be 50 centimeters wider than existing ones making boarding time 3 to 4 seconds faster There are also plans to Introduce Solar power at stations Even in this evacuation drill signs, vocalization of commands, and signals abound That subway system should be a matter of pride shows tokyo metro has cracked the challenge of creating a genuine partnership between the High-Tech and human Perhaps, it’s not just about using new technology to improve safety and reliability but valuing the commitment and skills of its people above all else But what would a train geek /earn/ from the ultimate Rail service?


    Save Miranda!

    August 29, 2019

    yes this week it’s a really moving tale and that’s a pun haha so what happens to it all right the wrong side of the track well what turns out when your legs are three inches long being inside railroad tracks is basically like being in a prison you can’t get out I’ll get me between the trial and a ties there between the tracks it’s actually that when they get into the tracks they overheat cuz they can’t get out they can’t climb back over the track ring it’s just too high so what did we do so this is officer Liu Shan around Alou little driver put your hands out the window I can see you went out in video the video taped his turtle bridges and the turtles woke up with the left hand open the door step out and execute very stay facing away from us a step back you can tell you to stop and they’re able to stop stepping right we’re tracking it shake jam behind your hip here’s the little girl’s room where she little girl oh yeah know what we’re talking about where’s the little girl I can oh here’s the little Cory yeah show us the little girl I don’t know any little girl whoa oh girl what do you know I don’t know where she I you’re going away for a long time I don’t know hairs the little girl see yes you can see it on our website in action Turtles escaping their death with these tiny verges how many breaches are there a lot of bridges that’s like every 50 feet or 50 yards their bridges

    Was the Killing Joke That Bad?
    Articles, Blog

    Was the Killing Joke That Bad?

    August 28, 2019

    Hello, I’m the Nostalgia Critic. I remember it, so you don’t have to. A while ago I did an editorial about the death of the Joker, in which I referenced the comic book classic, The Killing Joke. This, not surprisingly, got people talking about the animated adaptation released on DVD, and even on the big screen for one night. There was a lot of hype around this. People have wanted to see this for years, Mark Hamill said he wouldn’t play the Joker again unless it was in The Killing Joke, which naturally led to his return, it looked like the comic, it had an R-rating, all the pieces seemed to fit into place. But then following a disastrous preview, people suddenly turned. A scene of Batman and Batgirl doing each other started circulating, reviews were turning out very rotten, and what was originally the most anticipated animated DC release ever became the most dreaded. Thus, when it was released, almost inevitably, people hated it. What happened? Who thought these were good choices? Where’s the cinematic portrayal of the timeless classic we all know and love? While I, too, was pretty surprised at how bad some of the choices were, as the smoke clears, I do have to ask: Is it as bad as everybody says it is? Now some of you might be wondering, how the hell can I even ask that? Well, let me start off by saying, like many of you, I hated the first third. A pointless story involving Batgirl was thrown in that literally didn’t connect to any of the rest of The Killing Joke, outside of the fact that Batman and Batgirl were in it. And I mean, “in it.” The reasoning for this was, not only did the film need to be longer for a theatrical release – adapting the original comic would probably run about 46 minutes – but Batgirl in the Killing Joke comic gained controversy from leaning too much on the “Woman in the Fridge” trope, where a female character is killed or maimed just as a plot device. I guess it was done a lot at the time but, I don’t know, I think a lot of comic book characters would be grateful to have that treatment nowadays. Hell, even a few Robins I bet wish for that outcome. I can see where people are coming from, though, and the idea of giving Batgirl more to do didn’t seem like a bad one. Especially seeing how she did little in the original and making her role bigger would make her fall all the more tragic. Ironically, though, in trying to make her stronger, they actually made her weaker. By bat-bonking in what many consider an uncle-niece relationship, obsessing over said bonk by talking to her gay best friend – yeah, we’re doing that thing – and, like I mentioned, having no connection to The Killing Joke whatsoever. Even the dialogue seems jarringly different when the word-for-word text begins in the Killing Joke portion. Just compare them. Batman: I need to know that I’ve made a genuine attempt to talk things over, to try and avert the inevitable. Batgirl: It was just sex, for God’s sake! It doesn’t have to mean anything! It’s not like we have to care! I don’t care! The Joker: Somewhere dark and cold, filled with the damp, ambiguous shapes of things you’d rather forget. Paris Franz: Must be that time of the month. Batman: I don’t know what it was that bent your life out of shape, but maybe, I’ve been there too. Reese: And they say the gay scene is complicated. What? Two different people wrote these parts?
    They blend so seamlessly together! To its credit, the first third is animated well, paced well, and acted well, but for many people there was no overcoming this distracting mess that left a bad taste in everyone’s mouth through the rest of the actual Killing Joke portion. That’s a shame because when it actually gets to the Killing Joke part, it isn’t that bad. It’s actually incredibly faithful. It’s crazy how much they tried to get down the exact look and feel of the comic. It’s about as close an adaptation you can get to a panel by panel interpretation. In an online world that hates variations from the original source material, The Killing Joke, when it gets started, actually strays very little. Like the first third, the acting, animation, and pacing all seem on track. Except this time, it actually has good writing to back it up. It’s incredible to hear Mark Hamill do his Joker voice to this unbelievable dialogue. It’s so cool to see Kevin Conroy’s Batman talk about what could be the beginning of the end. I can’t help but wonder, if the first third of this movie never happened, would it have gotten all the hate that it got? After all, people still like Return the Jedi despite the Ewoks and a lot of repeats. People still went nuts for The Avengers despite the first third being pretty slow. And with Batgirl’s story having nothing to do with the Killing Joke portion, it’s really not that hard to block it from your mind. Again, even the dialogue shows there’s pretty much no connection in this world. I did an editorial about whether or not the ending can ruin an otherwise good film, and like many things it depends on the eye of the beholder. And for many people, the sins of the first third are so bad they can’t be removed from the final product; whenever they think of the animated Killing Joke they’ll always connect this first part. But let’s just try it. Let’s pretend the first third of this movie never happened, and The Killing Joke started when The Killing Joke starts and it’s only 45 minutes. How would it rate? Would it be seen as the masterpiece we were all hoping it to be? Well, if we want to be honest, there would still be a few problems. Ironically, its biggest strength, portraying the comic line by line, is also kind of its biggest weakness. Everything from the angles to the dialogue seem copied from the original perfectly, but there is one problem with that sentence: the word “copied.” If you read the comic, there’s almost no point in seeing The Killing Joke. It adds very little in terms of a new layout or designs. At least with something like Sin City, which was also faithful almost panel to panel, they had a third dimension, which meant some things had to be different no matter what, and we could see the live-action interpretation, which seems to create a different realm of reality. But because both of these are drawn, and, to be fair, isn’t a ton of movement because they want to replicate the original panels, there seems to be a touch less life in the animated movie than in the comic. Strangely enough, because comics are still pictures, you fill in the blanks about what kind of movement is taking place. It’s similar to how your mind fills in what a character looks like in a book just through the descriptions. In the comic, this image leaps off the page because it’s indicating the movement through the insanity of the lettering, the layout of the pose, and the crispness of the still image. Your imagination fills in the rest of the motion. In the movie It’s taken a little too literally. So, rather than seeing an incredible moment leap off the screen, we’re seeing an image from a comic book moved around a little bit. It looks just like it, but nothing much is really being added to it. The amount of detail you can do in a still image but not in animation should have been reversed with the amount of detail you can do in animation and not in a still image. And funny enough, if the same amount of attention went in to applying the movement of the first third into the story of The Killing Joke, this could have been amazing. Imagine the movement of the truck scene done with this reveal of the Joker. There’s other missing details too that would have helped make this more of a spectacle. Joker sees an image of a fat lady at a carnival and thinks back to his pregnant wife. In the comic, it just cuts to a flashback, but in a movie you can maybe show the picture transforming into his wife, or maybe the picture even comes to life starting the flashback, blending realities for him. The Joker says he remembers his past differently every time, almost like it’s multiple choice, so why not have him hold his drink up and through the reflection we see his old self at a bar talking to the gangsters? That wasn’t in the comic, but it would have helped give the film more of its own identity rather than just using the comic as storyboards. It’s kind of like when Mel Brooks did the Broadway version of The Producers and the Broadway version of Young Frankenstein. The Producers was based on the original story, but there were a lot of changes to it, making it enough of its own thing. Young Frankenstein was all the same, just with songs put in, thus it didn’t do as well. Being your own interpretation, even if it’s already based on something else, is very important. There are one or two differences, though. Like there’s a song sequence when the Joker is torturing Commissioner Gordon. Now, that’s not in the original, but let’s be honest: if the Joker could put one in, he would. It’s really not a bad idea, especially, again, in giving the film a little bit more of a unique energy. But it seems a little toned down. If the Joker is going to do a song and dance number, it’s going to be an amazing song a dance number. Joker: The Musical. Think about that. It would be mind-blowingly insane. But this is just him and his carnies walking back and forth and not much else. Again, if more time went into developing this instead of developing: And they say the gay scene is complicated. What? that.
    This could have really stood out. In fact, the pacing could have been amazing too. Even though It’s totally decent and passable, imagine if even more time was given to the Joker realizing his family was gone. Imagine if, instead of a few seconds, a few minutes were dedicated to him going nuts and realizing what he’s become. If several minutes were added to each scene, either in dialogue or visual storytelling, this could have been phenomenal. With a comic you have to keep things short and tight because you only have so many pages you can print and so many word bubbles you can fill. And truth be told, Killing Joke was probably pushing both of those already. But in a film that’s already short on time, fill it up. Maybe Batgirl could have been helping Batman find the Joker before she gets shot. Maybe the Joker could return to his empty home after he’s transformed. Maybe he can tear it apart or set it on fire or laugh. I don’t know. Maybe everybody could visually take in what’s being lost as opposed to just talking about it. Even the final scene, which people in the comic are still up in the air about whether or not Batman is placing his hands on the Joker’s chest laughing or strangling him to death. Granted, it’d be very tough to keep that open to interpretation in a movie, but it could be done. Have the Joker’s laughs spring louder when Batman puts his arms on him, and have the Joker sway back and forth in emotion where it can either be him laughing or being strangled. It’s tricky, but it could work. So much of this could have been downright brilliant. But for all the talk of me saying how much better it could be, here’s the thing. The Killing Joke did technically give us exactly what it promised. It gave us The Killing Joke. Even the first third is described as a prologue, a separate story to get you ready for when The Killing Joke actually starts. It just sucked at it. However, when The Killing Joke started it did everything in its power to give us The Killing Joke. This both worked for and against it.
    It does look like the comic, It does follow it as closely as possible, and it does try to add one or two new elements. Like I said, audiences can get very fickle when anything is changed from the original source material, and while the critiques I gave earlier definitely bother me, can we really be that angry at The Killing Joke for giving us The Killing Joke? It’s like if before Harry Potter there was a prologue on Ron Weasley’s backstory that was written horribly. And that would be weird and suck but Harry Potter fans would still get an obsessively faithful version of Harry Potter. Would that prologue be enough to throw the whole thing off or would they still be satisfied? Personally, I think when The Killing Joke part starts, it’s okay. It definitely raises the question of what adaptation should leave in, take out, or add, but you can’t argue that the film isn’t giving exactly what it advertised: The Killing Joke with an extra prologue attached. I know a lot of hard work goes into making any of these movies, and even though the mistakes of the prologue are pretty painful, it doesn’t necessarily mean it should erase what many would consider on its own an adequate representation. Amazing? No, but not awful either. Had the prologue not been there the reaction most likely would have ranged from good to okay, and not gotten nearly the backlash that it got. But many can’t separate the prologue, and I guess that’s kind of understandable too. It is part of The Killing Joke. They could have cut it out, but they left it in. You can’t help what you like or dislike. It just leaves whatever impression it leaves on you. But for fans that wanted to see The Killing Joke on the big screen, maybe, like the comic, It’s an interpretation you possibly may want to think about one more time. I’m the Nostalgia Critic.
    I remember it so you don’t have to. [“The Review Must Go On”] [Channel Awesome outro]

    Was Family Guy Meant to be a Kids’ Show?
    Articles, Blog

    Was Family Guy Meant to be a Kids’ Show?

    August 27, 2019

    ♪ [“The Review Must Go On”] ♪ Hello, I’m the Nostalgia Critic! I remember it so YOU don’t have to! We’re all familiar with the show Family Guy. Either fondly… Peter Griffin: Okay, that is the LAST time you are gonna pull that crap! [whack]
    Lucy: AAAHH! NC: Not so fondly… Peter: Sssssssssss….. Aaaaaaaaaaaaahhhh. Sssssss– NC: Or… seasons-one-through-six fondly enough. But here’s something you may not have known: Before the long-running series… well… briefly short-running series, THEN long-running series… I know nothing about that! Cartoon Network ran a short in 1997 you MAY find a little familiar. Familiar-sounding dog: Uh, Larry, it says here your license is suspended. Familiar-sounding Larry: Aw, no, they-they-they just put it away temporarily. NC: Yep! That’s Seth MacFarlane doing an eerily similar Brian the Dog as well as an eerily similar Peter Griffin, only here, they’re not called Brian and Peter, they’re called Larry and Steve. And yes, this was played on Cartoon Network during the day, NOT during Adult Swim! This was meant for kids! It was part of Cartoon Network experimenting with cartoon pilots on a section they called What A Cartoon!, which resulted in several popular shows being made. So… was the original idea for Family Guy supposed to be a kids’ show? It certainly seems that way. The seven-minute short begins with Steve talking to a camera explaining his situation: that being stuck with Larry. Steve: Hi, there. My name’s Steve. I’m a dog, in-in case you were, um… …well, stupid. NC: Apparently, he was at the pound, and out of all the humans, Larry was the only one who can understand him. This is hilariously never explained, as everyone else just hears him bark. It’s… just kind of how this world works. Steve: You will be indirectly responsible for the resulting euthanasia. Larry (hearing it as “youth in Asia”): Oh, boy, they got enough kids over there as it is. NC: Steve, of course, is an intelligent cynic, and Larry is a brainless doofus, and somehow, they have to survive mundane adventures like getting a new lamp. With Larry, however, that proves difficult as he’s constantly getting them into trouble. [whapping] Larry: How do you feel, Steve? Steve: Like Agamemnon after the fury of Clytemnestra. NC: Think kind of Inspector Gadget and Brain going to the grocery store; he’s always gotta save him. The humor isn’t hilarious, but it’s not bad, either, It has a lot of slapstick cartoony jokes, as well as a good line here and there. Larry: I-I think I know what I’m talking about, alright? Alright? I- [stammers] I didn’t spend twelve years in kindergarten ‘cuz I’m stupid! NC: It even has bits of surreal humor similar to what Family Guy would eventually incorporate. Saleslady: Just ask our spokesman, Mickey the Xenophobic Scotsman! [zip] [Mickey exclaims in shock] ♪ [demented bagpipe music] ♪ [glass smashes] NC: What especially funny is all the foreshadowing to the Family Guy show that ends up here. For example, the names of one of the stores they’re looking for is Stewie’s, which would eventually be Peter’s son in the show. Larry: Uh, Stewie’s has usually got good stuff. NC: This guy looks pretty close to Peter’s dad. Either that, or… Ehhh, let’s just hope it’s not HIM! Steve’s design, you can certainly see elements of Brian in, and Larry, though seemingly different in layout, actually is very similar! Just trim down the nose, change the hair, it’s surprisingly really close! Overall, it’s a cute little short, and honestly might’ve been a decent kids’ show. Maybe along the lines of Johnny Bravo, Dexter’s Lab, and so on. However, while those shows were picked up, Seth’s wasn’t. The network passed on this show, but liked Seth’s style so much, that they brought him on to be a writer on some of the shows that DID get picked up. He would try again on another show, though, called Zoo Mates! Another pilot, but this time for Nickelodeon
    (for Oh Yeah! Cartoons). And this time with the help of Butch Hartman, who would go on to develop hits like Fairly Oddparents and Danny Phantom. It was…. odd… but, for different reasons his other shows are odd. It was just animals trying to live together in an apartment, but messing things up. Standard enough, but, there was a laugh track over the entire show! Polar bear: I’m gonna bust your head when I’m finished! [laugh track] [laugh track]
    Polar bear: Who-o-oa, I’m dizzy! NC: To this day, I have no idea if this was done ironically, or in the same spirit as The Flintstones, where we’re supposed to believe somehow an audience is laughing at this! [laugh track] NC: No surprise, this one was not picked up. However, executives from Fox saw Larry & Steve, and were interested in Seth creating a show based on the concept, except with an adult edge. This is naturally where Family Guy came from. So, there it is! Family Guy was originally mean for kids, right? Well, there’s another part of the story. You see, while at the Rhode Island School for Design, Seth had to put together a thesis film in 1995. It starred himself introducing his animated characters living in an everyday suburban home, embarking on surreal adventures with cutaways. The name of that thesis? The Life of Larry. Which once again, stars a doofus named Larry, and his talking cynical dog named Steve. Larry: Yeah, oh-I-oh-I think what happens is he, uh, eats his food, and then whatever Spot can’t finish. Steve: Wh-wh-where did you– where did you hear that? Larry: Episode 65.
    Steve: Oh. NC: And wouldn’t you know it, he also has a patient wife named Lois… Prototype-Lois: Fine! Let’s have this conversation for the ten millionth time, Larry! NC: …an overweight son named Milt, instead of Chris, and a much more adult tone. In fact, many of these jokes would eventually make its way into the Family Guy pilot, which would eventually make its way into the Family Guy show. It’s actually kind of eerie how similar these jokes are in every incarnation. Larry: I got it! That’s the guy from Big! Pilot-Peter: Tom Hanks! That’s it! Aw, funny guy! Series-Peter: Everything he says is a stitch! Tom Hanks in Philadelphia: I have AIDS. Series-Peter: [laughing uproariously] Pilot-Peter: [laughing uproariously] Larry: [laughing uproariously] NC: So when Fox saw this was also part of the Larry & Steve portfolio, they said that matched their animation outline perfect. Although… maybe not perfect enough. It was decided they should fatten up their lead, give them a baby, add a geeky daughter, and focus more on the family dynamic, hence the title, Family Guy. Looking all too familiar to another animated Fox family. So… there’s kind of a lot to be discovered here, isn’t there? Was Family Guy originally meant to be a kids’ show? For a short amount of time. Originally, it was an adult comedy film thesis about a guy and his dog, which turned into a kids’ show pilot about a guy and his dog, which turned into an adult show pilot that was made to be more like The Simpsons, because it was on Fox. So not only was it at one point a kids’ show, it actually had little-to-no tie-in with The Simpsons at all! Which is a criticism the show has had to fight for years. Even in the Simpsons/Family Guy crossover, they referenced it, and the Simpsons took more than their fair share of punches at them. Homer Simpson: It’s just a lousy ripoff! Peter: It may have been INSPIRED by Duff, but I… I like to think it goes in a different direction. NC: While it’s pretty obvious where that later influence came from for Family Guy, You can see the original idea has no connection. So the evolution of an idea isn’t always as simple as you think. Actually, many times, it’s very complicated! From an adult show, to a kids’ show, to an all-too-familiar Fox formula, this idea has gone through SO many versions. But truth be told, all of them are interesting to check out. If you can find them, obviously, you can tell from the quality here they’re not the easiest to locate, they’re certainly worth viewing to witness the creative process. Whether you love Family Guy, hate it, used to love it, or used to hate it, there’s no denying the content-changing ways and ideas for it… is intriguing to watch. But seriously, that “hurt knee” joke has to stop. I’m the Nostalgia Critic. I remember it so YOU don’t have to! WHOOOAA–
    [thud] Sssssssssss….. Aaaaaaaaaaaaahhhh. Sssssssssss….. Aooow, Goddammit! ♪ [“The Review Must Go On”] ♪ ♪ [Channel Awesome theme] ♪ Doug: Hello! Doug Walker here! And a special “hello” to all the YouTube comments wondering where the review is! Thank you for watching ’til the end! [chuckles] Uh, pretty much, uh, I’m out of town, uh, I’m at a Con, and I, um, uh, also on vacation! Taking a short vacation, but I didn’t want to leave you guys with nothing, so I did a fast little editorial here. Uh, but the reviews will go right back up next week. So it’ll be right back on track. A review, an editorial, review, editorial… so on, so forth. Uh, so, yeah! Either way, I hope you guys enjoyed watching, and I’ll see you next week for the review, and, uh, here’s me shot a week ago doing the Charity Shout-Out! Doug from last week: Hey! Doug Walker here, doing the Charity Shout-Out, and this week, we are doing the Marine Mammal Center. These people are guided and inspired by a shared vision of a healthy ocean for marine mammals and humans alike. Their mission is to advance global ocean conservation for marine mammal rescue and rehabilitation, as well as scientific research and education. Since 1975, they’ve rescued and treated nearly 20,000 marine animals. They rescue marine mammals for different reasons, including malnourishment, separation, entanglements, and diseases. They’ve recognized the fundamental relationship that binds humans, animals, and the ocean. They also partner with leading scientists and other professionals in order to learn from the patients in their care. Patients from healthy, endangered, and at-risk populations. To expand and advise scientific knowledge, enhancing understanding of the health of our oceans, and the implications for human health. They spread knowledge to members of the scientific community and general public of what they find out. If you look at their site and their YouTube page,
    [] you can see not only all the amazing discoveries they’ve come across, but also all the remarkable creatures they save. Look at these guys! How can you say no to them? You can show you care by looking at their site, and helping the oceans stay amazing for years to come. Take a click, and take a look.

    Pebble and the Penguin – Nostalgia Critic
    Articles, Blog

    Pebble and the Penguin – Nostalgia Critic

    August 26, 2019

    Helloooooooo I’m the Nostalgia Critic. I remember it, so you don’t have to! Today, we’re going to look at a film by Don Bluth- GODDAMN IT! How come he keeps turning up here?! I mean it’s not like the guy isn’t a good director. He’s directed some great movies! Like The Land Before Time, An American Tail, and the Secret of Nimh, one of my all-time favorite films. But, much like Schwarzenegger, for every good film he’s made, he’s also made a bad one. And not only are they bad, they’re weird. Un-BELIEVABLY weird. Case in point: The Pebble and the Penguin. [ ♪ one perfect pebble, just one humble stone ♪ ] If you took a combination of Nyquil and Vicodin and decided to watch Happy Feet for an hour, this is probably what you’d see. Yet another strange and often clumsily animated film that wants to look nice as opposed to making any logical sense. It’s weird, it’s sloppy, I have 20 minutes to waste, so let’s take a look. NARRATOR: There is a charming tradition observed by the adélie penguins CRITIC: Okay, which British chick who will have little to no character outside of narrating is this? Shani Wallis? Who’s that? [DING!] Oh, the woman from Oliver! Neat. So she talks about how penguins use a pebble to give to their loved ones as a mating ritual, Which starts off our tale of The Pebble and the Penguin, As the story book explains. Oh, I mean as the SONG book explains. Apparently, the film is so cheap it couldn’t afford a story book, so it resorted to the sheet music instead! [ ♪ one perfect pebble, just one humble stone ♪ ] So as the credits roll, we get a unique – but still very strange – opening. It’s the penguins swimming and singing through the sheet music of the movie, Which looks nice, but what the hell’s the point of it? Are they gonna go tap dancing through the script next, marking off the bad lines they don’t like? The script would only be a page long if they did that! [ ♪ Now and forever, we’ll do like birds do ♪ ] By the way, is it just me, or does this sound like the meeting song from The Great Muppet Caper? [ ♪ Now and forever, I’ll show her I care ♪ ] (Strikingly similar tune) – [ ♪ First time you see her, those magical shades ♪ ] What hack songwriter wrote this, anywa– AAAAHHH, That explains a lot. From the BRILLIANT mind who brought you “Marry the Mole.” In fact, that’s probably how Manilow agreed to do this film. He’s sick and tired of people saying his kids songs are unoriginal, So he shouted “YOU SHOW THEM MY MUSIC,” “NOTES AND EVERYTHING!” “THEN THEY’LL SEE I REALLY WROTE THIS SHIT!” PENGUIN: Knock it off, romance has nothing to do with it, listen, MARINA: You know, I just don’t think a pebble should be that important, PENGUIN: Marina, if you don’t care about the pebble, how will you choose? [ HAPPY DAYS THEME SONG ] CRITIC: So our narrator finally starts to introduce us to our characters. NARRATOR: Of all the penguins in all the world– — She walks into mine. — NARRATOR: the most romantic was Hubie. CRITIC: So this is Hubie, played by Martin Short. He’s in love with a female penguin named Marina, Played by Annie Golden. They make awkward small talk that’s supposed to represent a “relationship” as an EEEVIL penguin named Drake, played by Tim Curry, watches over them. TIM CURRY PENGUIN: Marina doesn’t know it yet, but she’s going to be MY wife. CRITIC: I didn’t get these pengroids for nothing, you know! So as they sit on top of that thing from The Nightmare Before Christmas, They start to sing a song so forced and contrived that it wouldn’t make it into a Teddy Ruxpin cartoon. 【 ♪ Sometimes, I wonder what the colors mean ♪ 】 Uh, why don’t you figure out what that lyric means, first? It’s like saying, “I wanna figure out what the sounds smell like!” 【 ♪ Like your eyes ♪ 】 【 ♪ Where was I? ♪ 】 MARINA: Choosing a mate– CRITIC: Uh, is that choker trying to…choke her? MARINA: I don’t think it’s nonsense at all! Even if you are a bit wacky. ( soft strings music ) NARRATOR: The rookery buzzed with excitement. All the bachelors took to the beaches to find their engagement pebbles. CRITIC: You know, it’s a shame this came out when it did, because I could totally see Morgan Freeman narrating all this. [ Morgan Freeman impression ] Here, we see the penguin try desperately to get a laugh. His antics fall short to underwritten slapstick and heavily confused himeny. Thus, he will not find a mate. He will spend the rest of his years knowing that his sperm will never carry on. HUBIE: Star light, star bright, first star I see tonight, wish I may, wish I might, have the wish I wish tonight. CRITIC: ( bzzt ) This is the wishing star, our attorneys advise you to stop ripping off Disney, or we’ll sue you for the little that you have. Thank you, and never call us again. [ DRAMATIC GASP ] But thankfully, the last son of Krypton is sent to Earth, As Hubby[sic] plans to use one of the scorching hot rocks – that doesn’t seem to burn him at all – as a pebble for Marina. But, unfortunately, Drake catches him before he can see her [ DRAMATIC MUSIC ] TIM CURRY PENGUIN: So, nerd, (bad, fake, American accent) I hear you wanna be a big ladies’ man! CRITIC: Boy, Tim Curry’s American accent is almost as good as his Romanian one, isn’t it? — Free now of the chains of Cho Chesku, traveling the world and doing good. — CRITIC: Is it wrong to say the muscle-bound penguin sounds more credible? TIM CURRY: NO!! NO!! [ TIM CURRY PENGUIN LAUGHS ] Hope you can swim, little– CRITIC: Well, he IS a penguin… [ HUBIE SCREAMS ] [ DRAMATIC MUSIC ] [ LOUD SPLASH ] CRITIC: So, while on the water, he comes across the world’s FRIGGIN’ LARGEST SEAL! And don’t think that this means that the penguins are just small. We SEE them compared to the size of humans. They’re regular size! This seal must have been, like, a radioactive mutation experiment at Seaworld or something. MARINA: Hubie!! CRITIC: So because of the storm and the seal, I guess, he can’t swim back. So we cut to…him in a cage? Hi, when did that happen? When he comes across a bunch of other penguins, who also somehow knitted their own clothes. (Badly) 【 ♪ If you love the great indoors, welcome to the good ship Misery ♪ 】 CRITIC: God, don’t people talk any more?? You could buy a pack of Skittles and it would result in a musical number! Also, has anybody noticed? They’re out of their friggin’ cages! JUST LEAVE! Stop TORTURING us with Manilow’s rejected commercial jingles! (in a chorus) 【 ♪ And then we all throw up! ♪ 】 Just then, another penguin is thrown into the cellar, named Rocko, Played by James Belushi. JIM BELUSHI PENGUIN: Who’s with me? Who’s for busting out of here? Bunch of birdbrains! Seal Bait! Get me out of here! So, Hubie, through his magic…space pebble… can see what’s going on back home. TIM CURRY PENGUIN: I want you to be my mate! MARINA: Drake! I love Hubie! CRITIC: Dude, this scene is so blurry, you could host a Barbara Walters special in it! TIM CURRY PENGUIN: And remember, you must choose a mate before the full moon mating ceremony, or — You’re banished! That’s the law! CRITIC: Really? They had to make a law about that? Was there…really some penguin who was just refusing to mate, so they had to create a law to enforce it? Sometimes, I don’t want to know about the animal kingdom. HUBIE: Sir! Take me with you! ROCKO: You talkin’ to me? {Yes sir, I am!} Don’t call me ‘Sir!’ ROCKO: Call me Rocko. CRITIC: So Hubie and Rocko work out a plan to get themselves off of the ship. MAN: Come back here, you– Come back! CRITIC: You’re gonna be Gordon Fisherman’s fish sticks and like it!! [ CHEAP THUNDERSTORM SOUND EFFECT ] 【 ♪ Gilligan’s Island theme song ♪ 】 [ SPLASHING, YELLING ] CRITIC: So, as they perform penguin Amistad, they get off the ship and swim for some Hawaiian island. ROCKO: You’re lost? Then I’m looking at a dead penguin. HUBIE: Getting back to Marina is all that matters to me! I mean, Rocko, look! I dream about her night and day! I see her face when I close my eyes. CRITIC: I do things when that happens!! Things that my Penguin minister says makes baby Jesus cry. CRITIC: So while Rocko refuses to help Hubie(by the way, hi, unfinished vine), Hubie gets Rocko to admit what he’s really been looking for. HUBIE: What is it? ROCKO: You’re lookin’ at it. [ SEAGULLS CRYING ] CRITIC: You wanna bonk a seagull…? HUBIE: You, you, you…wanna fly? ROCKO: Don’t laugh! {Rocko!} HUBIE: You’ve gotta, j-just accept it! ROCKO: No! ‘I’m gonna fly, AND NO-ONE’S GOING TO STOP ME, I’M FLYIN’ !! CRITIC: So Hubie convinces Rocko that he knows a penguin named Waldo: (Last known photograph), Who can help show him how to fly if he gets him back home. [ DOLPHINS SQUEALING] ROCKO: Captain, full speed ahead! Here we go!! [ Indiana Jones theme song ] CRITIC: Meanwhile, at Frankenberry’s house, We see Drake continues to try and put the moves on Marina. TIM CURRY PENGUIN: No?! Oh, I get it You’re joking. (evil laughter) [ORCHESTRA HIT] 【 ♪ Don’t make me laugh! ♪ 】 CRITIC: Oh, gooooood, another song! The endless musical of West Ice Story can fucking continue. 【 ♪ Say yes, my love, and go with a winner ♪ 】 Is it weird that all I’m thinking about during this song is why penguins have hands? 【 ♪ Don’t make me laugh! ♪ 】 【 ♪ ha ha ha ha! ♪ 】 【 ♪ I’ll slap my knee ♪ 】 CRITIC: Blah, blah, blah, Tim Curry is evil. So we cut back to our heroes, who found a… Very odd island of wood… As Hubie admits a saaaad secret that he’s been keeping from Rocko. HUBIE: Rocko, there’s something you should know. CRITIC: Your Modern Life is no longer in reruns. HUBIE: Waldo isn’t real. ROCKO: What?! HUBIE: I needed you to…show me the way home. I– I didn’t think you’d do it if I just asked. CRITIC: Next, you’ll be telling me the CAKE is a lie! ROCKO: You decided to LIE to me! To drag me through three thousand miles of water and killer whales! [ HUMOROUS FART-LIKE CHOKING NOISE ] HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH ahahahahahaahahahahahahah! CRITIC: What the hell? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Ah [ more laughter ] [ even more laughter ] [ continuous laughter ] ROCKO: You’re either the greatest romantic hero of all time, or you’re the stupidest penguin who ever lived! [ GUNSHOTS AND SCREAMING ] CRITIC: So, because they…laughed, for no apparent reason, I guess that means they’re friends again. (sarcastically) Makes sense to me! Meanwhile, back at home, we find that musical numbers don’t need to have a point or lead in anymore. Nooo, they can just start and come out of nowhere. 【 ♪ Sometimes I close my eyes and say a prayer ♪ 】 She’s sad! Next? We get yet another chase scene with the world’s largest seal, which seem to be Don Bluth’s new underwater cats. What’s taking that seal so long, anyway? Is he just enjoying his time shitting around with them? Harry Callahan: I know what you’re thinking. “Did he fire six shots, or only five?” You’ve got to ask yourself one question. “Do I feel lucky?” Well, do you, punk? — Dirty Harry (1971) So they swim, swim, and swim around until they finally outrun the beast, which results in yet another argument. ROCKO: You risk your life to get back to that chick and give her the blasted pebble. YOU’RE CRAZY! You’re INSANE! You’re– You’re amazing! CRITIC: Boy, Rocko really seems to mood swing to the convenience of the plot, doesn’t he? ROCKO: Get out of my face, I didn’t say nothin’ like that. HUBIE: You do like m-me! ROCKO: I don’t like anybody! {Oh, yes you do!} HUBIE: And I knew it all along! 【 ♪ 】 CRITIC: Oh, god, no, NO NO no, not another one! HUBIE: Hey, Rocko! I guess this means we’ve put our differences…on ICE? CRITIC: Alright, I’ll take that joke, I’ll even laugh at it – ha ha ha! – but please, NOT ANOTHER ONE! 【 ♪ Look how we get along to– ♪ 】 (screaming) Please, no more! I’m done! I’m done with these fucking songs, there’re like a bajillion of them in this movie! Can you just SAY things? Can you just speak for one minute?! 【 ♪ 】 【 ♪ We’ll find our way through stormy weather, ♪ 】 【 ♪ Just you and me, right to the end ♪ 】 If you’ll excuse me, I feel rather dirty. I’m gonna take a bath for a minute. 【 ♪ And gee, it looks like I’ve got me a friend ♪ 】 HUBIE: What do you call a flower before it opens? ROCKO: A bud? HUBIE: I love it when ya call me bud!! (Rocko groans) HUBIE: You mean you like me?! ROCKO: A little, HUBIE: Ya mean it? ROCKO: Don’t push it. BOTH: 【 ♪ Looks like I got me aaaaaaa ♪ 】 【 ♪ Frieeeeeee [ ELECTRICITY SOUNDS ] eeeeeend ♪ 】 CRITIC: So if you’re still alive after your brush with death, the penguins catch a ride on yet another ship. How do they keep finding all these ships? But they run into a rather hungry bunch of whales looking for some penguin chow. [ FREE WILLY THEME ] So after the whales finally piss off, we see that Rocko apparently got killed in the process. Of course he did. HUBIE: Oh, Rocko… CRITIC: Well, after that 100% NOT fake-out, we see that Drake has kidnapped Marina to force her to be his bride. [ LAUGHING IN A FAKE AMERICAN ACCENT ] HUBIE: Get your filthy flippers off my girl! CRITIC: Man tits, awaaaaay! Well, yeah. What did you think was gonna happen, dumbass? ???: Get up, now open your eyes! HUBIE: I didn’t come three thousand miles and, lose my best buddy to be stopped by the likes of you! CRITIC: I came here to lose my virginityyyyyyyy!!! HUBIE: Come on!! CRITIC: So he defeats Drake and – oh, what a “surprise”, Rocko isn’t dead! Yeah, you really had me going there, movie. Good one. TIM CURRY PENGUIN: Say your prayers, you fool! CRITIC: (Tim Curry impression) No, my conveniently shaped location!! Dude, that was a pretty harsh death! I mean, just because you don’t show blood doesn’t mean that wasn’t gruesome! In fact, let’s put some blood in that scene and see how it looks. [ COMICAL SQUISH NOISE] Yeah. Disturbing! ROCKO: Hubie!!! Yeah. What they don’t show you is the angle he’s really going. [ CRASHING NOISE ] No, of course Rocko can fly now. Breaking the laws of nature and gravity, because… He ate a fairy. I don’t know. But it seems to have saved the day. So Marina and Hubby[sic] get together, they fly into the sunset and they all wear Santa hats. Because…? I guess this was a Christmas film. That’s The Pebble and the Penguin. So, did any of it work? Well, how do I put this? Out of all the bad Don Bluth movies, this one is probably the least bad. It almost works, The voice acting isn’t bad, and while the animation can be sloppy, it’s still Don Bluth animation, which is always impressive. It just gets lost in the generic story and those few really weird turns that that either work to Bluth’s advantage, or don’t. And in this case, they don’t. It’s not really a film I’d recommend for kids, as there are much better films to show them, But as is, it’s not terrible. And if a kid really wanted to see it, I guess there’d be no harm in showing it to them. And besides, it’s just false advertising. When I hear the title “The Pebble and the Penguin,” THIS is what I expect to see: Now THAT would have been an interesting crossover. I’m the Nostalgia Critic, I remember it so you don’t have to. 【 ♪ I wonder what the colors mean ♪ 】

    CAIRO’s Beloved Metro
    Articles, Blog

    CAIRO’s Beloved Metro

    August 26, 2019

    Hi, I’m Karin, and welcome to Our Human Planet. Cairo may be congested and confusing, but it does have one thing that few African countries can boast about. A metro system. The metro is universally loved. It has saved the city from complete paralysis. When it gets hot, the population escapes underground. In this often chaotic city, the metro is something of a miracle. Efficient and orderly, Egyptians often say it’s the only thing in Cairo that never breaks down. Even in the middle of a revolution. It’s extremely inexpensive – a metro ride costs one Egyptian pound about sixteen cents and best of all it’s air conditioned. Almost 4 million people ride Cairo’s subways every day. It’s one of only two metro systems
    in all of Africa. On every train the fourth and fifth cars are reserved for women. It’s meant to protect them from sexual harassment and it’s made the subway one of the safest forms of transport in Egypt. Though the women can push just as hard as the men. Mostly they chat comfortably with each other, or read the Koran. Though they do insist their carriage smells much better than the men’s.


    The Third Industrial Revolution: A Radical New Sharing Economy

    August 24, 2019

    “The value of information does not survive the moment
    in which it was new. It lives only at that moment; it has to surrender to it
    completely and explain itself to it
    without losing any time.” “A story is different.
    It does not expend itself. It preserves and
    concentrates its strength and is capable of releasing it
    even after a long time.” — Walter Benjamin Vice Documentary Films
    IMPACT PRESENT THE THIRD INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION A RADICAL NEW SHARING ECONOMY The global economy is in crisis. Economists warn that we face
    another 20 years of declining productivity,
    slow growth, steep unemployment and increasing inequality. The economic downturn is fueling
    growing discontent toward governing institutions and spawning
    extreme political movements around the world. And now, after 200 years
    of industrial activity, scientists report that
    climate change is ravaging the planet,
    taking us into the sixth mass extinction
    of life on Earth. Where do we go from here? Jeremy Rifkin is
    an economic and social theorist and the author of
    over 20 books including “The Zero Marginal Cast Society,”
    “The Third Industrial Revolution,” and “The Empathic Civilization.” He is an advisor
    to the European Union and The People’s Republic of China, and a principal architect of their
    Third Industrial Revolution plans. Let me start on a very somber note. I hope it will end up being
    a liberating reflection. You’ll have to judge. GDP is slowing
    all over the world everywhere. And the reason is productivity
    has been declining for twenty years
    all over the world. The result: Unemployment
    is very high everywhere. And nowhere is it
    more pronounced than among the Millennial Generation
    coming into the workforce. Our economists tell us
    that we can look forward to slow productivity and slow growth
    for the next 20 years. And let me do the math for you: At the end of two
    industrial revolutions in the 19th and 20th century,
    here’s the equation: We have to admit that
    half the human race is far better off today than our ancestors were before
    we began this industrial experiment. Granted? Also we need to acknowledge
    that 40% of the human race are making $2 a day or less. And arguably they are worse off than their ancestors were before
    the Industrial experiment. And the final equation: The industrial era, while
    it’s benefited half the human race in detriment to
    the other half of the human race, the well-off, the
    very wealthy have done quite well. Today, the 62 wealthiest
    human beings in the world —we could put them in this
    little section of the room. The 62 wealthiest human beings
    in the world today their combined wealth
    equals the accumulated wealth of one half the human population
    living on Earth. Three and a half billion people. There’s something
    really dysfunctional about the way
    the human family is organizing its economic relationships
    on this Earth. It’s clear we’re in a long-term
    structural economic crisis at the end of the
    2nd Industrial Revolution. But now this industrial air
    has given rise to a much more profound crisis
    —an environmental crisis. We have spewed
    massive amounts of CO₂ and methane and nitrous oxide
    into the atmosphere of this planet to create this
    industrial way of life. And now we have so much CO₂, methane and nitrous oxide
    in the atmosphere that is blocking the sun’s heat
    from getting off the Earth. We are in real time climate change. This is no longer a theory. This is no longer
    looming on the horizon. This is no longer imminent. Climate change is now
    at the house, in the door. What’s terrifying
    about climate change —and unfortunately
    it’s never explained, because if it were explained, our human family would be
    justifiably terrified and motivated and driven
    to begin to transform this planet. Climate change changes
    the water cycles of the Earth. That’s what this is all about.
    It’s never explained. We’re the watery planet. Our satellite probes
    go to other planets and what’s the first thing
    we look for? Water. No water? Not interested! Recently they discovered what
    they think is dirty water on Mars and everybody is thrilled. Our ecosystems on Earth have
    developed over millions of years based on the water cycles, the cloud cycles that
    traverse them across the Earth. For every one degree that the
    temperature of the planet goes up because of industrial induced
    CO₂ emissions— For every one degree that the
    temperature goes up on this planet, the atmosphere is
    actually sucking up 7% more precipitation
    from the ground. The heat is forcing
    the precipitation into the clouds, so we’re getting
    more concentrated precipitation, more violent water events,
    but they’re more infrequent, throwing the entire water cycle
    of the Earth off kilter. More blockbuster winter snows. Eight feet in Boston
    at last season? My gosh! More dramatic spring floods —that flood in the Carolinas,
    remember? They said this flood only will
    occur once every thousand years. It’s the new normal. More prolonged summer droughts. My wife and I were in
    British Columbia and we’re coming into Vancouver. The pilot says, “We have
    some smoke coming in.” I turned to my wife and I said,
    “You mean smog?” No, he meant smoke. Wildfires from
    British Columbia to California. Summer droughts and wildfire. We have Category 3, 4, and 5
    hurricanes now —so dramatic that
    they’re destroying infrastructure and killing people
    all over the world. That hurricane that
    hit the Philippines— This was the most
    powerful hurricane ever recorded. This is the new normal. What I’m saying here
    is that climate change is dramatically changing
    the water cycles. They’re out an exponential curve. This is absolutely frightening. It’s terrifying. And, if you are a young millennial
    about to start a family— If you’re a parent here
    or a grandparent. I want you to listen to this. Our scientists now tell us
    that we are in the sixth extinction event of life on Earth. It doesn’t even make the headlines. This is the most dramatic story
    a human family has ever faced. There have been five
    mass extinction events on Earth in 450 million years. And each time the chemistry
    of the planet shifts very quickly —there’s what we call
    a turning point— and massive die out. And after the massive die out of life, it takes upwards of 10 million years to get new life back on Earth. Our scientists now tell us we are
    in the sixth extinction event This is not a model—
    we’re chronicling it in real time. And what they’re saying is that
    over the next seven decades —and many of you will
    be around for a lot of that, and your children will
    —in the next seven decades we could lose over half
    the species of life that now inhabits this
    little oasis in the universe. As my wife says,
    we just are not grasping the enormity of this moment. We might acknowledge
    climate change, but we’re going on
    as business as usual, with a little green washing. 99.5% of all the species
    that ever been on this planet have come and gone.
    Those are not good odds. And what’s interesting is,
    human beings— We’re the actual youngest species,
    we’re the babies. Anatomically modern humans have
    only been here about 200,000 years. There’s no guarantee
    we’re gonna make this. And the new studies
    that have just come out they’re even more terrifying
    because they’re seeing the freshwater melts in the Arctic, now
    in Greenland and now in Antarctica much quicker than we expected
    changing the ocean currents. And they’re talking about storms that are beyond
    anything we can imagine, that we’ve ever seen in human history
    by the end of this century. Talking about
    the major coastal cities, where much of our
    urban population is, underwater. This is not a century from now. This is in the lifetime of
    many young people who are four and five now
    and will be my age when we’re in full steam
    into this new era, this abyss. So what do we do? We need a new
    economic vision for the world. It has to be compelling. We needed a game plan
    to deploy that vision and it needs to be quick. It needs to move as quickly
    in the developing countries as in the industrialized nations. If we have any chance of arresting
    the worst of this climate change we’re gonna have to be off carbon
    in four decades everywhere. This is beyond anything we’re
    talking about at global conferences. How do we begin to tackle
    something of this magnitude? We need to step back and reflect on how the great economic
    paradigm shifts in history occur. If we know how they occur, we’re gonna get a road map here
    in this room and around the world, and we’re gonna get a compass that
    allow us to navigate a new journey to completely transform the way
    we handle life on Earth. CHAPTER ONE: The Great
    Economic Revolutions in History There have been at least seven major economic paradigm shifts
    in history, and they’re very interesting
    anthropologically because they share a common denominator. And that is at
    a certain moment of time three technologies emerge
    and converge to create what we call
    in engineering a general-purpose
    technology platform. That’s a fancy way of saying
    “a new infrastructure.” It fundamentally changes the way we manage power
    and move economic life. What are those three technologies? First, new
    communication technologies to allow us to more efficiently
    manage our economic activity. Second, new sources of energy to allow us to more efficiently
    power our economic activity. And third, new modes of mobility
    —transportation logistics— to allow us to more efficiently
    move the economic activity. So when communication revolutions
    join with new energy regimes, and new modes of transportation it does change the way we manage
    power and move economic life. It changes
    temporal spatial orientation. It changes our habitats. It allows us to integrate
    in larger units. It actually even changes
    consciousness and governance. Let me give you two examples: First Industrial Revolution,
    19th century. Second Industrial Revolution,
    20th century. The Brits took us into
    the first Industrial Revolution. And first there was
    a communication revolution. They invented
    steam-powered printing. No more manual print presses. Steam power printing
    was a big leap forward, because it allowed us to mass
    produce very cheap print quickly. Then, in the
    second half of the 19th century, the Brits lay out a telegraph
    system across the British Isles. Steam power printing and the telegraph: those communication technologies
    then converged with a completely new source of energy
    in Britain called coal. But how are they gonna
    take that coal and harvest it? They invented the steam engine. Then this is ingenious: They figured out that they should
    put the steam engine on rails, for locomotives,
    national transport and logistics. Urban life,
    the Industrial Revolution, steam power. Second Industrial Revolution:
    the United States. Centralized electricity and especially the telephone. I know we think
    the Internet’s a big deal, but a telephone
    was a really big deal. All of a sudden,
    people could communicate at vast distances
    at the speed of light. Later, radio and television. These communication technologies converge in the United States with
    a completely new energy source. Cheap Texas oil. Then, Henry Ford
    put everybody on the road with cars, buses, and trucks. Second Industrial Revolution changed the way we manage power
    and move economic life. That second Industrial Revolution
    took us through the 20th century. It took the whole world
    through the 20th century. And it peaked in July 2008. Hi! Welcome back to the show here:
    Oil! Oil! Oil! To $147 we went— Remember that month? In that month, Brent crude oil had a record price of $147 dollars
    on world markets and, when it hit that record price, the whole global economy shut down. Silence. Completely gone. That was the economic earthquake. The collapse of the
    financial markets 60 days later was the aftershock. Mayhem, carnage, and bloodbath. Call it what you want,
    but what we saw on global stock markets today
    was ill-disguised panic. Good evening.
    This was the day after what may someday be called
    Black Monday on Wall Street because it was perhaps
    the worst financial collapse since the Great Depression. Our policy leaders are
    still dealing with the aftershock, not the Earthquake. Why was it the Earthquake? Because the entire
    Industrial Revolution that we’ve gone through is all dependent on
    the carbon deposits of a previous period in history. You know, if we look back
    let’s say that we make it through this
    next period of history. I always wonder what will
    future generations think of us, maybe in a
    hundred thousand years from now. They’ll say,
    “Oh, yes, we remember them.” “There was
    the Bronze Age, the Iron Age.” “These were
    the fossil fuel people.” “They dug up the burial grounds
    of the Carboniferous era and created a short-lived dramatic
    and very dangerous civilization.” It’s all about fossil fuels. Our fertilizers and pesticides
    are made out of fossil fuels. Our construction materials
    are made out of fossil fuels. Most of our pharmaceutical products
    are made out of fossil fuels. Our synthetic fiber, our power, our transport, our heating lights— all made out of,
    moved by fossil fuels. When the price of oil
    goes over around $95 a barrel, all the other prices go up. When we get into the zone of
    around $115 a barrel, prices become so high,
    the purchasing power slows. This is the sunset
    of a great industrial era. Now you remember in 2009
    oil went down to 50 a barrel, because the economy had shut down. There was no activity. In 2010, we tried
    to regrow inventories, so oil prices started to go up
    all the other prices go up. In 2014 we hit a new peak of
    $114 or $115 a barrel. Purchasing power slowed down again. This is a convulsion of
    growth-shutdown, growth-shutdown. And the only reason oil went down in the last few years
    to $30 a barrel is now the fossil fuel industry
    is fighting among themselves. In the sunset. OPEC said, “We’re gonna keep
    the oil spigot open.” “We’re gonna
    flood the world with oil.” “And that’s gonna take
    the price down the $30 a barrel and wipe out our new competitors,
    the more exotic fossil fuels: shale gas in the US,
    tar sands in Canada.” Guess what? They wiped them out
    —only took a year and a half. Bankruptcies across the USA
    in the shale gas industry. And now tar sands in Canada. The pipeline’s not happening. And do you hear anybody talking
    about energy independent right now? It’s over! And, as soon as the
    bankruptcies complete themselves, the oil prices are now
    starting to go back up. But now we have failed states
    where there’s oil production. We have failed States. So this is a volatile,
    convulsive sunset over the next 40 to 50 years
    —an unstable world. Where do we head from here? Let me share an anecdote. When Angela Merkel became
    Chancellor of Germany, she asked me to come to Berlin in the first couple of weeks
    of her new government to help her address
    the question of how to grow the German economy
    on her watch. Now, remember:
    In terms of per capita Germany’s the most robust capitalist
    market economy in the world. When I got to Berlin, the first question I asked
    the new chancellor— I said, “Madam Chancellor how are
    you gonna grow the German economy when your businesses are plugged in
    to a platform, an infrastructure of centralized telecommunication, fossil fuel nuclear power, internal combustion,
    road rail water, and air transport —and that infrastructure
    peaked in its productivity, in Germany, years ago? CHAPTER TWO:
    The Science of Productivity. Let me talk about productivity. This is crucial. Our economists are lamenting. They’re asking, “Why’s productivity
    been declining for 20 years?” “We have all these new killer products
    coming out of Silicon Valley.” “Why is productivity declining?” I’m gonna share with you
    a dirty little secret in economics that economists
    don’t like to talk about. We used to believe that
    there are two factors that drive productivity
    in standard economic theory: Better machines and
    better performing workers. But when Robert Solow
    won the Nobel Prize for economic growth theory
    in the mid-1980s, he actually let
    the little secret out. He said,
    “We’ve got a problem here.” When we trace every single year of
    the Industrial Revolution these two factors
    —better machines, better workers— it only accounts for about
    14% of the productivity. So Robert Solow
    asked the big question: “Where does the other
    86% of productivity come from?” Don’t know. Moses Abramowitz,
    the former head of the American Economic Association said, “This is a measure of our ignorance.” Now wouldn’t you think
    economists would know where productivity comes from, because that’s the basis
    of the discipline? Here’s why they don’t know. When classical economic theory
    was penned in the late seventeen hundreds, the Vogue was Newton’s physics. Newton was the big guy in town. Everybody wanted to use
    Newton’s metaphor so they could be more scientific because he had discovered the laws
    that run the universe—supposedly. The economists also fell in line. For example, you know Newton’s law: “For every action there’s
    an equal and opposite reaction.” Adam Smith borrowed that metaphor for his invisible hand
    of supply and demand. “For every action on the supply side there’s an equal and opposite
    reaction on the demand side.” Newton’s law: “A body in motion
    stays in motion unless disrupted.” Baptiste Say borrowed that metaphor
    —the French economist. And he suggested that,
    “Well supply will stimulate demand, which will generate supply,
    which will stimulate demand —unless disrupted.” All of our economic theory, if
    you go back and take a look at it— it’s all based on Newton’s
    metaphors in physics. There’s only one problem with this: Newton’s physics has absolutely
    nothing to do with economics. Nothing. Nothing. economics is governed by the
    same laws that govern the universe, the solar system,
    the biosphere on Earth, and every single thing you and I
    do in our economic life while we’re here on this planet. Here are the two laws that govern
    everything in the universe, including our economy. The first law of Energy says: “All the energy in the universe
    is constant.” “Since the Big Bang,
    no new energy has been created.” “No energy has been destroyed
    since the Big Bang.” That’s the conservation law. The second law of energy
    says that’s true that the energy isn’t created
    or destroyed, but it always changes form,
    but only in one direction. From concentrated—the Big Bang—
    to dispersed through the galaxies. From hot to cooled off
    through the galaxies. From order to disorder.
    From available to unavailable. Entropy is a measure of the
    energy that’s still there, but not available to do useful work. There are three systems that
    we can talk about in thermodynamics: an open system that exchanges matter
    and energy with the outside world; a closed system, which exchanges
    energy with the outside world, but does an exchange matter; and an isolated system, which
    doesn’t exchange matter or energy with the outside world. The Earth in relation to the
    solar system and Sun is B. We get plenty of energy
    from the Sun, we don’t have to worry about this
    for billions of years. But in terms of the fixed matter
    on this planet we don’t have a lot of
    additional matter coming down here. We get a few meteorites,
    a little cosmic dust, but whatever we have
    in terms of fixed matter —which is a form of energy—has been
    here since we blew off the Sun and cooled off. All of you have smartphones
    on you right now and there are little granules
    of rare Earths in those phones. They’ve been here since
    the Earth has been here. That’s a form of energy
    as a material form. So here’s what
    economics is all about: We extract low entropy,
    available energy in nature —a rare Earth, a metallic ore,
    a fossil fuel— we extract it and then,
    through our value chains, we store it, we ship it, we produce
    goods and services from it, we consume it,
    we recycle it back to nature. Those are value chains. At every step of conversion,
    —when we take nature’s resources and move it through society—
    at every step of conversion we have to embed energy
    into that good or service to get it to the next stage
    of what it becomes. But we lose some energy in the
    process of that conversion. This is called
    “aggregate efficiency” in economics. Aggregate efficiency is the ratio
    of the potential work versus the actual useful work
    you actually embed in the good or service. Let me give you an example. Nature has the same
    economic conditions that we have in our human economy. If a lion chases down
    an antelope in the wild, then kills it, about 10-20% of the total energy
    that’s in that antelope gets embedded into the lion. The rest is heat
    lost in the conversion. That’s the aggregate efficiency. What does this have to do
    with my conversation with the Chancellor of Germany? She’s a physicist, you know,
    by background. So here’s what I said to her. We started the 2nd Industrial
    Revolution in 1905 in the USA with 3% aggregate efficiency. At every conversion of nature’s
    resources through the value chain, we lost about 97%—it didn’t
    get into the product or service. By 1990, the US got up to about
    14% aggregate efficiency. That was our ceiling
    —nothing’s changed since then. And I reported to the Chancellor that
    Germany got up to about 18.5% aggregate efficiency. That was their ceiling.
    Nothing’s changed. Anybody wanna guess
    which country led the world in aggregate efficiency? —China?
    —Japan? Japan! 20% aggregate efficiency,
    1990s, reached its ceiling. What I’m saying
    to the Chancellor is this: You can have market reforms,
    labor reforms, monetary reforms. You can create incentives
    for killer new products. You can try to create
    a million Steve Jobs. It won’t make
    a damn bit of difference. If your businesses
    are still plugged in to a 2nd Industrial Revolution
    infrastructure you can’t get above the ceiling of 20% aggregate efficiency
    anywhere in the world. Why is this important? A new generation of economists
    who happen to study physics have gone back and
    looked at the industrial record and they added
    a third factor to productivity: better machines, better workers,
    aggregate efficiency. The ratio—yes, it’s so obvious!
    The ratio of potential to useful work. When they put in that third factor, it accounts for
    much of the rest of productivity. Henry Ford could have told you this. In fact every engineer
    could have told you this. Every architect
    could have told you this. Every biologist
    could have told you this. Every chemist
    could have told you this. They all have to start
    their training in school by learning these two laws
    of energy that govern the universe. I teach in the oldest
    Business School in the world. I taught the
    advanced management program at the Wharton School for 15 years. Not a single business school
    in the world today, right now,
    requires that you learn about the 1st and 2nd laws
    of thermodynamics that govern economic activity. How shameful is this? So, in that first day
    with the Chancellor we discussed
    a 3rd Industrial Revolution: a new convergence of
    communication, energy and transportation to manage power and move Germany. At the end of the day,
    in a private session, the Chancellor said, “Mr. Rifkin, we will have this
    3rd Industrial Revolution here in Germany. CHAPTER THREE:
    A New Smart Infrastructure The communication internet
    is now mature. It’s been 25 years since
    the World Wide Web. We have digitalized communication. Now this communication
    internet is converging with a nascent, digitalized,
    renewable-energy internet. And now both those Internets
    are converging with a fledgling, automated, GPS,
    and very soon driverless road, rail, water,
    and air transport internet to create three Internets: communication internet, renewable energy internet, automated
    transportation-logistic internet. One super internet to manage,
    power, and move economic life. These three internets ride on top
    of a platform called the “Internet of Things.” We’re embedding sensors
    in all of our devices, as you know, so they can monitor
    real-time activity and then talk to other machines
    and talk to us. So we have sensors now
    in the agricultural fields and they’re actually monitoring
    the growth of crops the soil salinity,
    the moisture in the crops, etc. They’re sending that data. We have sensors now
    in the factories that are monitoring
    our economic data. We have sensors in smart homes monitoring how the energy
    is used in our buildings. We have sensors in smart vehicles,
    warehouses, smart roads. All of them collecting data. But where does that big data go? It goes to communication, energy,
    and transport Internets to manage, power,
    and move economic life. As this new system comes in it’s gonna be ubiquitous by 2030, connecting everything with
    everything with everyone. We are essentially creating
    an external prosthesis —a distributed nervous system— that’s gonna allow
    everyone on this planet, at very low cost, to begin directly engaging
    each other on a global Internet of Things and bypassing a lot of the
    vertical integrated organization and middlemen that kept us
    away from each other. We can have direct engagement now. This is the revolution. This evens the playing field. There’s been a long discussion
    among the Millennials— You started this:
    Occupy movements. Saying, “What about the 1%?
    The 99%?” Now we have a new platform. The Internet of Things platform
    is of a different nature than the platforms in the
    1st and 2nd Industrial Revolution. The new platform is really radical, because this 3rd
    Industrial Revolution platform is designed to be distributed,
    not centralized. It works best
    when it’s collaborative, and open and transparent,
    rather than closed and proprietary. And the benefits come when more
    and more people join the network and each of us
    contributes our talents, which benefits the network
    and then benefits us. It’s designed to be laterally scaled,
    not vertically integrated. And this is what moves us
    from the 1% of the 99% to a vast, vast expansion
    of social entrepreneurialism and global networks. That’s the upside. On the other hand, how do we
    deal with network neutrality? How do we ensure that everyone
    has equal access to this new
    Internet of Things platform, this 3rd Industrial Revolution? How do we make sure governments
    don’t purloin this platform for political purposes
    —it’s already beginning. How do we make sure
    that giant monopoly companies, some of them on the Internet, don’t use that data for their own
    commercial purposes at our expense? How do we ensure privacy
    when everyone’s connected? How do we ensure data security
    when everyone’s connected? How do we prevent cyber crime
    and cyber terrorism that could disrupt the system
    and take it down when everyone’s connected? This is the DarkNet, and what
    I’m saying to you today is that the DarkNet is as impressive
    as the opportunity of the BrightNet. And I would say that
    the next three generations, beginning with you and
    your children and grandchildren— You’re gonna be heavily engaged
    in a new political movement. And that movement is
    going to be to ensure against the DarkNet prevailing, and making sure that we all
    have equal access, so the human family can engage
    in a distributed nervous system and begin to have a vast expansion
    of social entrepreneurialism. This is the political struggle
    that starts with the Millennials, your children and grandchildren. This is an uphill battle. This is not a cakewalk. I’m not a technological determinist
    and I’m not a utopian. Technology just enables,
    then the question is, How will that journey end? It’s a big question mark right now. But let’s assume,
    for the sake of this afternoon, that we’re gonna be able
    to deal with all the complexities of the DarkNet
    —and it’s a big challenge. Here’s what this Internet of Things
    platform provides. Let’s say here at Brooklyn
    you’re a SME —small and medium-sized enterprise,
    or cooperative, or nonprofit. You can go up on this nascent
    Internet of Things platform that’s already emerging. It’s not theoretical. And you can have
    a transparent picture of all the economic data
    flowing through the world —if it stays network neutral. The power here is enormous. We think Snowden was a big deal? Now all the economic data
    is gonna be open to everyone, not just a few government secrets. But in a network neutral world you’re gonna be able to go up
    on this platform and have a completely transparent
    picture of all the data. You can go up on the platform
    and cut your big data on your value chain
    out from the noise. Then, you can mine your big data
    with analytics. Then you can create your own
    algorithms and apps. They’ll allow you to dramatically
    increase your aggregate efficiency at every step of conversion
    on your value chain. And, as you do that, dramatically
    increase your productivity, dramatically reduce
    your ecological footprint, and dramatically
    plunge your marginal cost. Some of those marginal costs
    are gonna get so low —they head to zero marginal cost. And when they hit near
    zero marginal cost, it gives rise to a completely
    new economic system. CHAPTER FOUR: Zero Marginal Cost
    and the Rise of the Sharing Economy. In economic theory,
    the optimum market is where you sell at marginal cost. Marginal cost is after fixed costs. Once you pay for
    whatever the technology is. The marginal cost is
    what it costs to produce a unit. Classical economic theory,
    we’ve always said that the most optimum market is
    where you sell at marginal cost. Here’s the problem we
    never expected a technology revolution
    —digital revolution— that would be so powerful
    in its potential productivity that it could actually reduce
    the marginal cost for some goods and services
    to near zero. Meaning there’s no longer
    a profit margin and you can produce goods
    and services for each other beyond the market
    in the sharing economy for nearly free. This sharing economy
    didn’t come out of the blue. Capitalism gave birth
    to the sharing economy. Let me be clear: As muddy as
    the sharing economy is, it’s the first
    new economic system to enter onto the world stage since capitalism and socialism
    in the 19th century. It’s a remarkable historical event. This is already happening. Zero marginal cost phenomena
    is not theoretical. It’s been how many years since
    Napster—the file-sharing service? About 17 years? 17 years! Well, this little file-sharing
    service started a revolution. We have 3 billion people
    right now on the internet —and now the Internet of Things— who are actually producing
    and sharing virtual goods at near zero marginal cost
    beyond the market, disrupting entire industries. We have young people that are
    producing their own music. And what does it cost to have a little technology,
    a little machine that allows you studio-quality music when
    you wanna record in your home? And then,
    whether you send that music to one person on the web or a billion— It’s zero marginal costs. You just need a service provider
    to keep your power up. I was surprised when that
    Korean performance artist a couple years ago— A billion people
    went to his website! Zero marginal cost. We have millions of young people,
    any given day, who are producing their own
    YouTube videos. Take a little video,
    put it up on the web, a billion people can see it. Zero marginal cost. We have people producing their own
    news blogs and social media. Near zero marginal cost. We have millions of people
    contributing to Wikipedia and constructing the knowledge
    of the world on a non-profit website for free. This is the most improbable
    experiment I could ever imagine. I don’t know how Jimmy Wales
    came up with this. I would have said,
    “This cannot succeed!” Adam Smith said,
    “Each individual pursues their own self-interest
    and never cares about the public good.” But in pursuing their self-interest and not giving a damn
    about the public good— By pursuing their self-interest,
    the society is better off. I always thought
    it was a little dubious, but that’s how we grew up. But apparently, none of the
    Millennials have read Adam Smith. Because, for example,
    in Wikipedia you’re all freely giving your talent, putting things up on Wikipedia, constructing the knowledge
    of the world. You’ve democratized knowledge
    in less than 15 years and the accuracy is… Now: Book publishing. What’s happening? People are creating
    their own free eBooks. My new book came out
    on the Pirate Bays before we could publish
    in our languages and —God bless them—
    they were ranking it before Amazon could even touch it. We have 6 million
    college students taking massive open online college courses
    taught by the best professors at the best universities.
    They’re getting college credits. It’s free! You can’t win here.
    You Millennials have won. Unless we outlaw
    all the technology, we’ve got to find
    a way to live with it and find value with it. Entire industries
    have been disrupted in the 17 years since Napster. The music industry has shrunk. Television has declined ’cause everyone’s producing
    their own YouTube videos. You’re all producers
    sharing with each other. Newspapers and magazines
    have gone out of business with social blogs. But thousands of
    new enterprises have emerged. Not just Google, Facebook, and
    Twitter—all of these are new. But thousands of
    startup enterprises —profit and nonprofit— they’re creating the platforms, they’re creating the apps, they’re creating the connectivity, they’re using the
    analytics and the data. It’s a revolution! Well, we thought
    there’d be a firewall here. And certainly we could understand how zero marginal cost
    brought on by digitalization would affect the virtual world, but we didn’t think
    it would move over the firewall to the physical world. What I’m saying, with the zero marginal cost society is that firewall is broken now —it’s called the Internet of Things—
    completely gone. We have millions of people now producing their own
    renewable energy, right now,
    at near zero marginal cost. Free! And now,
    as we move to car sharing, and as we move to
    driverless transportation, we’re gonna see
    the marginal cost plunge toward near zero
    in transport logistics in the next 20 years. Let’s go back to Germany. What’s happened in the 10 years since that first conversation
    with the Chancellor? We are now in Germany at 32% of all the electricity power
    in Germany now is solar and wind, right now.
    In ten years. And this is a northern country
    —doesn’t have a lot of Sun. We’re gonna be 35%
    of the electricity, solar and wind, by 2020— We’re gonna be 100%
    renewable energy by 2040. Absolutely! And what’s interesting is
    the fixed cost of introducing the solar technology
    and the wind turbines and the geothermal heat pumps— Solar and wind are
    on an exponential curve, just like computers! When I was a kid
    in the 1940s and 50s, there’s only a few computers. They cost millions of dollars. And the chairman of IBM
    at the time said, “We probably will need
    a total of seven computers.” “Maybe seven!” It was just an optimistic forecast. We did not anticipate
    exponential curves in computer chips. Moore’s law. So all of a sudden,
    Intel figures out that their engineers are doubling
    the capacity on that chip every two years.
    This is still going on. So, even if you’re making
    $2 dollars a day, everyone’s going to be connected
    to the Internet of Things within less than 15 to 20 years. And the cost—the fixed costs
    are gonna be as cheap as your cell phones in 20 years. Everyone’s gonna produce
    their own green electricity. These exponential curves
    are not going away. You know how much
    a solar watt used to cost? $78 dollars to generate
    one watt solar in 1978. You know how much it costs
    to generate one watt solar today? Not $78 dollars; 50 cents. It’s gonna be 35 cents
    in 18 months from now. This is really moving quick. And this is what you’re not told
    here in the United States by the energy companies. We have power and utility companies —some of them in my group,
    Global Group— and they’re quietly, right now, buying long-term 20-year contracts for solar and wind electricity
    in Europe and America, quietly right now,
    for 4 cents a kilowatt hour. And the Berkeley National Labs, government labs just announced they’re generating
    wind and solar— I think it’s somewhere between 2.8 and 3.5 cents a kilowatt hour. It’s over actually for
    fossil fuel and nuclear. And the next big bubble
    —I will tell you now— is gonna be the 100 trillion
    dollars in stranded assets in the fossil fuel industry. This is gonna make
    the subprime mortgage look like the small-time game. Because we’re moving
    toward parity and then solar and wind
    are getting cheaper and cheaper. That’s what’s going on
    behind the scenes, right now. But what’s interesting in Germany, once you pay
    the fixed cost for your solar panel and wind turbine— The marginal cost of producing
    the energy in Germany today? It’s zero! The Sun has not sent us
    a bill in Germany. The wind hasn’t invoiced us. The geothermal heat has not
    come to us with a bill. It’s free! So what happens when
    German businesses can plug in to a communication internet
    that then converges with an energy internet and we digitalize
    the electricity grid, so everyone can produce
    their own solar and wind, and either use it off-grid
    or sell it back to the grid? What happens
    when companies plug in to an energy internet where the cost of the energy
    is near zero marginal cost. Think about when they have
    to move across their value chain, and at each step of conversion
    on their value chain, their energy cost is near zero. How does any 2nd
    Industrial Revolution country compete with that? And it’s not big Germany only —little Denmark’s done this. Anybody can do this. Who’s producing all the new energy? In Germany, there are four
    major power companies: MBW, RWE, E.On and Vattenfall —these giant, global,
    vertically integrated companies. And, frankly, we thought
    they were invincible. What’s happened to them in 10 years is what happened
    to the music industry, television, newspapers, magazine,
    and book publishing. Thousands of small players
    have come together in electricity cooperatives. Farmers, small businesses,
    neighborhood associations. All of them went to the banks
    and got loans —these electricity cooperatives— and every bank
    was completely fine about giving them the loans.
    Why? Because they knew that
    the energy they generated would get a premium price when
    they sell it back to the market. Nobody was turned down. They’re creating
    all the new energy. This is power to the people —literally and figuratively—
    power to the people. What happened to the big 4
    power companies? They’re producing less than
    7% of the new power. And they acknowledge
    they’re out of the game. Why? To their credit,
    they were the most efficient means to produce and distribute
    centralized power —fossil fuel and nuclear power,
    vertical integration. But the new energies— They require
    millions of small players connecting where they are
    in collecting. You have to collect the Sun
    everywhere in little amounts. And the wind everywhere
    where you are. And the geothermal heat
    everywhere where it is. And you—We reward cooperatives
    who laterally scale and join together in networks. Big companies can’t put
    all these players together. The players come together in their own regions of cooperation,
    and they join together. It is power to the people. Does this mean this is the end
    of the energy companies? Not necessarily. Many will go out of business.
    Some will not. About seven years ago, the EON—one of the
    giant four companies— they asked if I would debate
    their Chairman, Mr. Tyson, but in a neutral country,
    the Netherlands. We had a three-hour debate. you’re not leaving
    the 2nd Industrial Revolution And I said to him, “Look, tomorrow morning. But you also have to be
    in the 3rd Industrial Revolution tomorrow morning, because you have a
    25, 30-year transition to get from the 2nd to the 3rd
    and find new value. And I said in the new system, it operates quite differently
    than the old system. In the new
    3rd Industrial Revolution you make more money by selling
    less and less and less electricity. I said, what you do is, you set up partnerships
    with thousands of enterprises. And you help manage the energy
    flow through their value chains. You help them with their big data. You help them mine
    that big data with the analytics. You help them with their
    algorithms and apps. Dramatically increase
    their productivity. In return, those thousands
    of enterprises will share their gains back
    with the power companies. It’s called
    “performance contracts.” We’re now doing it,
    and guess what? Last year, the chairman of Eon —took him 7 years— they’re moving to
    renewable energies and they want to help manage parts of the energy internet
    with energy services. EDF, the great nuclear power,
    in France has joined our group. We’re doing
    the whole build-out of the 3rd Industrial Revolution
    in parts of Europe: in northern France,
    the Netherlands, Luxemburg… And EDF said, “We’re with you.” They’re on the ground
    helping lay this out. They’re not leaving
    nuclear tomorrow, but they see that
    the handwriting is on the wall. So the companies
    that don’t go there; we don’t need them. It’s not just Europe; now China. When President Xi came in to power
    with Premier Li— Premier Li announced that he —and I was pleased—
    he announced he’d read my book,The Third Industrial Revolution.He put out a public announcement.
    I’d never met him. I never even been to China. And he instructed
    the central government of China to begin looking at these themes
    that I’m laying out to you to move China to
    a 3rd Industrial Revolution. There mindful in China. They lost the whole
    1st Industrial Revolution. They missed almost all the
    2nd Industrial Revolution and came it in the tail
    in the last 10 years. And they said, “We’re not gonna
    lose the 3rd Industrial Revolution.” “We wanna collaborate with the
    3rd Industrial Revolution.” And they said,
    “Be among the leaders.” To show you how fast they move, I’ve been shuttling back and forth,
    but after the first visit —it was about eleven weeks later. The chairman of the state grid, which is the largest electricity grid
    in the world, announced an $82 billion dollar,
    four-year commitment to digitalize the Chinese grid so the millions of Chinese people could produce their own solar
    and wind in their local communities and share it back
    on an energy internet. That started this year, yeah. Watch Europe. Watch China. The coming together
    of the communication internet, with the renewable energy internet gives rise to the automated,
    GPS, driverless, transportation logistics internet. We built the whole global economy
    in the 2nd Industrial Revolution around car ownership. That’s what this was all about. You’ve thrown us a curve.
    You really have. Apparently you don’t wanna
    own cars anymore. This is Grandma and Grandpa. They got two cars
    sitting in the driveway cleaning and waxing them
    every few weeks, and they’re never used. Or they’re at the office 90%
    of the day never used. You don’t wanna own cars. You want access to mobility and
    car sharing networks, not ownership of
    cars in markets, correct? So there’s a problem here. The problem is
    for every car shared in car sharing
    in the sharing economy, we’re eliminating 15 cars. This is both the problem
    and the opportunity. Larry burns was the former
    Vice President of General Motors until a few years ago, now he’s a professor
    at the University of Michigan. So Larry just did a study
    —very revealing. He studied Ann Arbor, Michigan. We can eliminate 80% of vehicles
    with better mobility, cheaper. Now let’s
    extrapolate Larry’s study. We’ve got a billion cars,
    buses, and trucks choking us in traffic
    around the world. They’re the 3rd major cause
    of global warming emissions. The number 1 cause of global
    warming emissions is buildings. But in Europe, we’re now
    retrofitting those buildings, transforming into
    micro power plants and big data centers off carbon. Anybody know what the
    number 2 cause of climate change, global warming emissions are
    by industrial activity? Number 1 is buildings
    —we always talk about it. Number 3 is transport.
    What’s number 2? —Consumption of meat
    —Meat, meat, meat. We have 1.3 billion cows. They take up about 23%
    of the land mass of the Earth. I love cows,
    but the methane they produce is a major contributor
    to global warming, —much more powerful than CO₂— and then,
    when we pasture those animals, we have the fertilizers
    that emit nitrous oxide. And it goes on and on. And I should say that,
    without mentioning names, even some of the
    prophetic voices in the climate change debate
    will never mention this. Because they do not want
    to antagonize people and even suggest that
    we may wanna change our diet and move down the food chain so that we can live healthy, respect our fellow creatures, and at the same time
    mitigate climate change. So, you never hear
    this in the debate. Never! Number 3 is transport. So, if Larry’s right
    —Larry Burns— we’re gonna eliminate probably
    80% of the vehicles in the world in the next two generations because the Millennials,
    your children, and grandchildren are never going to own cars again. This I know. And the remaining
    200 million vehicles— They’re gonna be electric. They’re gonna be fuel-cell driven. They’re gonna be operated by
    near zero marginal cost renewable energy. This is already happening. They’re gonna be 3D printed, with composite recycled materials
    at low marginal cost. They’re gonna be driverless. This is already happening. This gets to the question of, “Is this the end of the world
    for transportation companies?” Not necessarily. But they have to change
    their business model while they’re still in the
    2nd Industrial Revolution, selling cars, buses, and trucks. They have to move to the
    3rd Industrial Revolution, where they help
    manage vast networks along with all the other players. This is a very cool thing that
    happened about six weeks ago. Daimler asked me to join them— Daimler invented the
    internal combustion engine. So I’m always mindful
    they’re a step ahead. And the chairman of Daimler Trucks brought together 350 journalists
    from around the world in Germany asked me to come in— I laid out the same story
    we’re talking about here. And then the chairman
    of Daimler Trucks —he’s one of the eight
    board of directors— He announced that Daimler
    is in a new business. And that is logistics,
    on the transportation internet. And he announced that Daimler
    had equipped, in the last three years,
    300,000 trucks full of sensors. —300,000 vehicles, and they’re on the roads now. These are what I call “big data,”
    “mobile big data centers.” And these trucks
    are collecting data all across the transport corridors
    of Europe, on traffic flows,
    weather conditions, availability of warehouses… All of the data you would need
    if you’re a small business, a large business,
    or just a home owner, to be able to increase
    your aggregate efficiencies and productivity,
    reduce your ecological footprint, and anytime you’re involved in
    moving shipments from A to B. Then this is
    what’s really interesting. He dimed the lights
    and they went to a helicopter feed, live on the German Expressway. And the helicopter zooms in
    on these three trucks on the German Expressway, and then they went right into
    the cab of the trucks and the drivers are waving and
    talking to everybody in the room. And the chairman of
    Daimler Trucks said, “Okay, gentlemen.
    Take your hands off the wheel. Take your feet off the pedals.” All of a sudden, the drivers
    became software analysts. No longer drivers. They were software analysts
    monitoring the data. The trucks then started
    to platoon together, automated, into a mobile data, almost a train
    going down the highways, collecting data. So they’re providing the data,
    and then the analytics, so that you will have apps, so that you can find ways to increase your
    aggregate efficiency and be a player in the system. Smart! How do we finance this?
    How do we pay for this? CHAPTER FIVE:
    Financing the Transition We are laying out a plan in Europe
    called “Digital Europe,” “Smart Europe.” And working with the
    European Commission, we’re building this out
    over the next 10 years. But the big question is, “How do we pay
    for this infrastructure, region after region,
    across all of Europe to connect us in a digital world, where we can begin
    to enjoy the new opportunities?” So the question came up in Brussels
    and I said, “We’ve got all the money we need.” Problem’s not the money; it’s
    what we’re doing with the money. I’ll give you an example—
    in America is the same situation. In Europe, we spent 741 billion equivalent US dollars
    on infrastructure in 2012. One year alone. That’s just a bad
    recession year, typical. The problem is what we spent it on. We spent the money on an old
    2nd Industrial Revolution platform. Remember what I said
    to Chancellor Merkel? and we peaked in the productivity 20 years ago at 20% ceiling, and we can’t get
    anything more out of it. We’re stalled, which stalls the economy, stalls the smart startups, stalls the entrepreneurial expansion. So I said, if we simply
    reprioritize our investments, spend some of it patching up
    the old infrastructure —we don’t want it to collapse— but we prioritize, so part of those funds each year
    go to each region, so that they can begin
    to build out and scale up a 3rd Industrial Revolution
    infrastructure. With an
    Internet of Things platform, we will be there in 30 years. This year, we reprioritized
    our funding at the EU and, beginning in January
    of next year, regions across the EU
    will secure EU funding, leverage against private equity, and each region will
    customize and build out, like Wi-Fi, their plan
    and then connect up region to region to region. We call it “Digital Europe.” We have a similar plan called
    “China Internet Plus” across the regions of China. Where’s the US here? CHAPTER SIX: TWO GENERATIONS
    OF MASS EMPLOYMENT The coming together
    of this revolution will involve every industry: telecom, cable, ICT,
    consumer electronics, transport, logistics,
    construction, and real estate —all the retrofitting— all the industries are involved. And it means work. What I’m suggesting here is that we have one last surge
    of massive employment involving semi-skilled, unskilled
    professional and conceptual labor. We have to build out
    this smart infrastructure. Robots aren’t gonna do this. We have to take the entire energy
    complex of the United States. Think of all the infrastructure and all the technology,
    all those stranded assets. We have to convert all of that infrastructure
    from fossil fuel, nuclear to distributed renewable energy. We have to retrofit
    every building in the USA. That’s what
    we’re gonna do in Europe. Because you can’t install the renewable technologies
    until the buildings are efficient. That means huge jobs
    for energy service companies and for the construction
    and real estate industry. Robots won’t put in the insulation, and the new windows, and the doors. And then we have to install all
    the renewable energy technology. Human beings have to
    install that technology, and all the smart technologies
    that monitors the equipment, and puts in the
    digital advanced meters. We have to take the entire
    electricity grid of the USA, which is dumb, servo mechanical,
    embarrassing —it’s 60 years old;
    it barely functions. And we have to transform
    the entire electricity grid to smart, digital so that we can
    manage these three internets. This is gonna require
    professional talent and unskilled and skilled labor
    for two generations. We have to take the entire
    transportation grid of the USA and turn it from dumb to smart
    road, rail, water and air. Who’s going to install
    the thousands of charging stations in all the buildings? Fuel cell outlets?
    Smart sensors? This requires human beings. This means two generations of work
    and guess what? It’s financed by the payback
    of the energy savings. You don’t have to have huge
    government involvement here. You simply have to
    have the enablement, so energy service companies
    can be set up, and we transform every building
    in the USA to a node. These nodes then connect, and they are the big data centers. They are the micro power plants. They are the transport hubs
    with electric charging stations. The nodes connect like Wi-Fi
    and all those nodes, those buildings
    —homes, offices, factory— that’s your Internet of Things. That’s a huge job
    for the construction industry and you pay back
    by the energy savings. You can’t default on the loans. But the technology
    doesn’t do it alone. We have to change consciousness. I’m only guardedly hopeful. You know, I’m not naive;
    I’m guardedly hopeful. I think that what I’ve said
    is really a tough challenge. But I’m guardedly hopeful because human beings are the most
    social creature on this planet. When we get the story right,
    we move quickly. I’m always amazed
    when I fly and I see electricity grids
    across continents, and highways and urban centers. And I think, “My God!
    That was all done in 50, 60 years?” It’s amazing! When we get the story,
    we move quick. We’re a very social creature. They’re coming together,
    these three Internet’s —communication, energy
    and transport internets on top of
    an Internet of Things platform. It changes the way
    we think about life. CHAPTER SEVEN:
    A New Consciousness for a New Era Let me give you the best example. We’ve got millennial parents now
    that are sharing toys on these millennial websites, where you go up and
    you pay a subscription fee, one time and you’re in the system. Then you can get a toy
    —any kind of toy you want— by age category,
    and give it to your child. This is creating
    the real revolution. The parent traditionally
    brings home a toy. And they say to the daughter,
    “This is not Christmas.” “Santa Claus
    didn’t get you this toy.” “We bought this toy at a store
    and we’re giving this toy to you.” “This is your property.” “This is not your brother’s toy,
    and this is not your sister’s toy.” “This is your toy.” “You need to take responsibility
    for it and take care of it.” “What did mom and dad
    just say to me?” The first thing I caught is, “This isn’t
    my brother and sister’s toy.” That’s pretty relevant. Now, status, power, negotiability. “I’ll never let
    my siblings ever use this, unless they pay the price.” They’re learning possession
    of property and markets. There’s nothing wrong with that. But now, on these
    toy-sharing websites, parents are
    bringing home these toys —and pretty soon they’re gonna
    come in a driverless drone at near zero marginal cost. Now the parents are
    giving this toy and saying, “Another little child
    played with this toy, and she had a lot of fun with it and she really took good care of it ’cause she knew one day
    you’d want to play with the toy.” “And we hope you
    take good care of it ’cause one day another child
    will wanna play with the toy.” What the child is learning now
    is this toys not a possession, it’s not status, it’s not power,
    it’s not negotiable. It’s simply access to an experience
    for a moment of time, then another child gets to use it. They’re learning how to be
    part of a circular economy, where we distribute things
    in the sharing economy over and over and over. Nothing goes to the landfill. I like a system where you have
    both opportunities. There’s nothing wrong
    with being property. There’s nothing wrong
    with having possessions and some status, but it’s also
    nice to have another option where part of her life
    is being able to access an experience in time, and
    then share it with someone else. I don’t think capitalism
    is gonna disappear, but I think it’s gonna find value
    by creating a relationship, so that it finds value with the child that gave birth
    through the sharing economy. And, right here in this room,
    you are already in two economic systems
    day to day right here in Brooklyn. Part of the day,
    you’re in the market. You’re sellers, you’re buyers, you’re owners, you’re workers, you’re producing goods
    and services for each other for a profit in the marketplace, and you have property. But part of the day
    you’re in the sharing economy. You’re sharing virtual goods,
    entertainment, news, social blogs, Wikipedia. And now energy and car sharing. And, while it has
    capitalist parts to it, it’s also a sharing economy
    where you can reduce the cost. And, by 2050, we will have
    two mature systems: part of the day, capitalist market, with a profit margin producing
    and selling to each other; part of the day
    in the sharing economy beyond the market, freely producing goods and services
    for each other. That’s already started. That is not gonna go away. Your generation is moving
    from ownership to access, from markets to networks, from consumerism to sustainability, from market capital
    to social capital. Does this all sound familiar? It’s a revolution. None of this is being taught
    in the schools, by the way. That’s why this is
    really a revolution. And there are three things
    that I’ve noticed that give me some guarded hope. There’s a basic change going on
    with you people in this room. It’s strange to older people. There’s a change in the way
    you define freedom. The way you define power. And the way you define community. And these changes really
    suggest the real revolution. For my generation,
    and generations before me, freedom was very simple,
    since the Enlightenment. To be free,
    in Enlightenment perspective, is to be an autonomous agent. To be self-sufficient.
    To be independent. To be not beholden to others. To be an island to oneself, so that one can have freedom
    as exclusivity. For the millennial generation
    that grew up on the Internet, autonomy is death. Being an island to oneself
    is death. Because for your generation you ask the question, “How can I flourish
    to the full extent of my possibilities
    here on the planet?” And it’s clear
    that your answer to that is “I flourish to the extent
    that I’m embedded in network after network, after network; community after community,
    where I can share my talents. And those talents
    can benefit the network and come back to benefit myself. I’m free because I have access.” And, for you,
    freedom is not exclusivity. It’s not being an autonomous agent. It’s inclusivity. It’s access to others in networks. Do I have this right? This is very alien to our generation. We may have to change
    all the constitutions in the world. This is a completely
    different idea about freedom. You have a different sensibility
    about power, which makes the older generation
    very nervous. We essentially believe that power
    always has to be a pyramid. It goes from the top down.
    That is power. There’s no other way
    to define power. It’s a pyramid
    —from the one to the many. But young people
    that grew up on the Internet— It’s strange because you grew up
    thinking that power has to do with the networks
    you’re engaged in. For you, power is not vertical;
    it’s lateral. For you, power is being a mesh
    in network after network where you benefit each other. Open source. This is so strange
    to our older generation. We do not have
    this notion of power. It makes no sense to us, actually. But it makes total sense to you. And, finally,
    I think most importantly, we’re seeing a change in the way a younger generation perceives
    identity to community. I grew up in a post Westphalian
    world, the nation-state. We were very clear on community. That is, each individual is born
    to be an autonomous agent and we’re each sovereign. We are each a sovereign
    to ourselves. And each of us
    as a sovereign to ourselves— We compete with
    other sovereign individuals, in the marketplace, for scarce resources,
    in a zero-sum game. Our nations represent us
    because they are sovereigns. And they represent all the
    millions of individual citizens who are sovereigns
    against other nations. And each nation then competes
    with every other nation for scarce resources in the
    marketplace of the battlefield in a zero-sum game. That’s the post Westphalia
    nation-state world. Here’s my question: Does anyone here believe that we’re gonna be able to address climate change and
    bring the human family together and take our responsibility
    for our fellow creatures in the Earth we live in
    with that worldview? Anybody? What we’re beginning to see
    with Millennials —and I don’t wanna
    overstretch this— but I’m beginning to sense a shift from geopolitics
    to biosphere consciousness. Just beginning to see it. I hope it doesn’t go away.
    I don’t think it will. The biosphere is that 19 km
    from the stratosphere to the ocean, where all life
    and all the chemicals on the planet interact to maintain
    the ecosystems, the biology of the Earth. We’re getting 14-year olds
    coming home with biosphere consciousness. They’re becoming
    the biosphere police. We got young people coming home
    and saying to their father, “Why are you using so much water
    here while you’re shaving?” “Can’t we turn it off
    once in a while?” “We’re wasting the water.” They’re saying to their parents, “Why is the little red light
    on on the TV?” “We haven’t been in that room
    for three weeks!” Wasting electricity… They’re saying to their parents, “Why are there two cars
    in the driveway?” “Why can’t we at least
    car share one?” They’re saying to their parents, And this is the one
    I’m particularly fond of. It brings a smile to me. We actually have young people
    coming home and, at dinnertime,
    they’re asking their parents where the hamburger came from
    on the table. Yes, I’m sure some of you
    have this experience. They’re saying,
    “Did that hamburger come from a rain forest?” “Did they have to destroy the trees
    for four little inches of topsoil, which only gives you
    three years of grazing, so that that cow
    could become my hamburger?” And when those trees are destroyed
    for the topsoil to graze the cow for the hamburger, the kids are
    smart enough to understand —the high school kids— that those trees harbor rare
    species of plant and animal life that only live in those canopies.
    They go extinct. And then they connect the dots. If the trees disappear for the soil to graze the cow
    for the hamburger, those trees are not there to absorb
    CO₂ from industrial emissions. And that means the
    temperature the planet goes up. So then, a mother cannot feed
    her children if she’s on the farm, because she’s getting
    spring floods, summer droughts, and wildfires
    because of the hamburger. These kids are learning
    ecological footprint. Junior high school. And they’re coming home. They’re beginning to understand
    that everything each of us does, all day long,
    even when we’re sleeping, intimately affects
    some other human being, some other creature, and the planet we live in. This is so alien to the way
    your previous generations grew up. You’re beginning to
    connect the dots and say, “We live in an indivisible
    biosphere community; there’s no escape.” “This isn’t just academic:
    our well-being depends on the well-being of the whole
    system and all the creatures in it. We have young people
    who are beginning to extend their empathic concern
    to the rest of the human family, because you’re all skyping
    on global classrooms. Heck—a billion of you on Facebook. That’s the largest fictional family
    in history! And what’s promising to me
    is that part of this generation is also beginning to
    empathize with our fellow creatures. Not just the polar bears
    and the penguins on the poles, but all of our fellow creatures.
    And I gotta tell you, my wife and I are into animal rights
    and animal protection. Our fellow creatures
    have a right to be here. We do not have a right
    to end existence for them. This is their planet,
    as well as our planet. So I think we’re beginning to see
    a shift the notion of freedom. How we perceive power,
    our sense of community. We’re heading to a biosphere frame. This is all good. Let me be clear on why
    I’ve been doing this work. I’m terrified about climate change. I began working on energy issues—
    it was in 1973. And wrote a book, “Entropy
    on Climate Change,” in 1980. I thought we had more time. I did not anticipate
    the feedback loops. We couldn’t even see them
    until they came, and then each feedback
    decreased ten more on an exponential curve.
    And we just didn’t see it. We thought linear. Now we’re really scared. I’m gonna tell you,
    we are really really scared. ‘Cause now we’re in a runaway
    exponential curve on the water cycles.
    We didn’t see it. The fortunate thing is,
    we now have a new infrastructure paradigm
    —a 3rd Industrial Revolution. That can allow us
    to move off carbon quickly, in three decades. We have the technology
    that allows us to do this, because zero marginal cost
    is the ultimate metric for reducing ecological footprint. If people equipped
    with a little technology are constantly finding
    new analytics and apps to increase
    their aggregate efficiency at whatever value chain they’re in, it means we’re using
    less of the Earth and getting more out of it. In other words, more
    of the energy and materials gets into the product,
    less is lost. Then, if what we do produce
    is shared —share the cars, share the homes
    share the toys— we’re distributing a
    circular economy over and over. Nothing needs to go
    to the landfill. Every resource is
    always there for us. If we move to the energy internet,
    there’s no reason why everyone on this planet
    shouldn’t be producing their own green electricity,
    right where they are at very low cost
    in 25 years from now, on this exponential curve, and sharing across
    continental energy Internets. And if we go to a car sharing,
    driverless transport grid, we can eliminate
    80% of those vehicles that have taken
    a big hunk of the Earth to put online. This is a plan
    and what we’ve done— a lot of businesses are working
    with us around the world on this— and we say to people,
    “If you have another plan, step forward and tell us
    what it might be to address climate change
    and move the economy.” And I always get silence. ‘Cause the only other plan
    is to stay where we are and that’s taking us
    to an economic crisis and an environmental abyss. But here’s what I’d like to do: I’m gonna turn it over to you. Let’s think about your sensibilities and find out if we can
    come to some common ground on how we can begin to move this
    from this little room out to all the larger communities
    and networks are in. Is that a deal? Who wants to start? Hello, my name is Lena. And my question will be related to
    technological unemployment. What is your take on that? We are moving to
    an automated world. There’s no doubt about it. However, as I said during the talk, we’ve got two generations of
    massive employment, that’s clear,
    to lay out this infrastructure. That’s gonna require
    millions and millions of jobs. We know this on the ground
    as we’re laying this out in Europe right now. It’s a huge amount of jobs. Robots can’t do it.
    AI can’t do it. This is infrastructure shift. However, as this smart digital
    economy and society moves in, it can be run by very small
    supervisory workforces with analytics, big data,
    algorithms and apps —that’s why we call it
    “smart world,” “smart society,” “smart economy.” Then, what do we do
    once we have the smart society in and it’s automated,
    running by analytics? We’re not gonna pay people
    just to do nothing. We already know
    where the employment is going. And that is, as we continue to automate
    the market economy, employment is shifting to
    the nonprofit social economy and the sharing economy
    —we already know that. The nonprofit sector
    is the fastest growing employment sector right now
    in the world. It’s about 9.5, 10% of the
    American employment— paid employments and nonprofit. Why is it heading there? Because, in the social economy,
    the nonprofit economy, and large sections
    of the sharing economy, social capital is as important
    as market capital. And, in this realm —the nonprofit realm,
    the social economy, the sharing economy— it requires human beings
    engaged with other human beings. Machines aren’t only supplemental. We will never have a robot raising a child and interacting
    with them in a childcare center to develop their brain.
    It’s never gonna happen. They may bring the lunch to the kid
    —the robot— but it’s gonna require human beings
    working with those children. And whether it’s
    in parts of healthcare and the knowledge industries,
    in cultural areas, humans with humans. The only other question is, how does this sector
    survive financially? Johns Hopkins University does a study of nonprofits
    in 40 countries every few years. And guess what they found: Over half the income for nonprofits which are one of the
    biggest employers now, comes with fees for services. If you’re doing health research,
    you set up a health clinic. You get fees for services and then you can continue
    to do your nonprofit research. If we get any
    of this transition right, we automate the market, we move to social capital where we can use our minds
    much more expansively, so we can learn to live
    as a human family and steward each other
    steward our fellow creatures, steward the Earth. That’s a much more noble mission. I believe that in order to
    create a better tomorrow, we also need to look at
    rehabilitating our psychology. Yeah, I’m in agreement with you. You know, and I have to say,
    our academic disciplines —I’m gonna step on more toes. The academic disciplines in
    our school systems are so moribund. It’s dysfunctional. We have an internet generation
    that lives one way of life in terms of their mind
    outside the classroom, and another inside the classroom. In the classroom, for example,
    when we think about education, the first thing we realize is the classroom looks a little bit
    like a factory. These big, giant institutions. And the kid comes in there
    in 1st grade —a little boy or girl— and they immediately realize there’s a central authority
    of the teacher, they have to be silent, if they share knowledge
    with each other it’s called cheating,
    and they’re expelled. And they learn that
    their mission is to be efficient, but only in the sense of being
    able to have the skills they need to follow orders and
    tend the machinery of the Industrial Revolution. Yet, an internet generation
    out of school— You’re all sharing knowledge. The whole point of the Internet is
    to share your talents and skills, open-source,
    no intellectual property and begin to crowdsource the
    knowledge of the world together. That is so different than
    what you’re getting in school. So let me say one thing about this. You know what we’re doing
    in northern industrial France? All 7 universities
    have come together and 200 high schools, and the universities are led by
    Catholic University of Lille. Here’s what they’ve done: all faculty now teach
    interdisciplinary so that you learn various perspectives and there’s more than one way
    to look at things and you have to
    share a common language. No silence. Secondly, all the students now
    are put into modules, in teams,
    and they work with their teams and the students have to
    teach each other. The teacher becomes
    a facilitator and a guide, but the students have to
    teach each other. If they share knowledge,
    it’s good—it’s not cheating. Then they learn that
    knowledge is not power and something one possesses
    at the expense of the other. Knowledge is the shared experience
    you have as a social being. And the learning now is clinical. What’s the good of learning if theory isn’t
    brought together with practice? So their learning is clinical. They’ve taken service-learning,
    which you all did here, and they’ve elevated to pedagogy. So whatever you’re learning, you have to apply it
    with your fellow citizens in the neighborhoods
    where these universities are. How do you like that? Catholic University of Lille. That’s the revolution. I believe in the Darwinian theory of humanity being
    more Darwinian than utopian. What would you do about
    basically corruption and fraud? Let me be very clear:
    I am an anti-utopian. If you read my books,
    I don’t believe in utopias. I don’t like utopias.
    I think utopia is are dangerous. Our human spirit,
    the empathic spirit, is designed to show compassion
    to our frailties —our precarious existence. An empathic world is
    never a utopian world. Utopias are
    worlds that are perfect. There’s no mortality, there’s no pain,
    there’s no suffering, and every moment is perfect. There’s no such world. I looked through history
    and it says that the most civilized societies are the ones that can
    move empathy to larger reigns. And there’s a history of that,
    of empathy. So I like an empathic world where we understand
    each other’s frailties, we show compassion with
    each other’s desires to flourish, we reach out to each other
    —and we do this every day. And when someone that we know
    is in joy, or pain, or suffering— We do this with our fellow
    creatures that are in trouble. It’s the empathy that runs
    day to day life, not utopias. And I think George Frederick Hegel
    got it right. He wrote a little passage
    that I read 40 years ago. He said, “Happiness are
    the blank pages of history, because they are
    the periods of harmony.” I thought, “What does that mean?” Over and over
    I kept thinking of it. Well, he’s right because,
    when you read historians and you read their view of history, you think we’re pretty
    pathological creatures. because historians always chronicle the mayhem,
    the genocides, the wars, the redress of
    social grievances because those moments
    are extraordinary, not ordinary. They imprint a stamp on us,
    they move us to fright and flight because they’re so extraordinary
    their remembered for generations. But when you then chronicle
    all of history as if it’s a series of these very very
    dysfunctional episodes in life, you get a pretty dire picture
    of the human race, correct? Happiness of the
    blank periods in history, where most of us, as we evolve our empathic concerns
    to larger social units, our day-to-day life is
    reaching out to each other in some ways to help,
    to show our concern, to provide our compassion. It’s not the few
    —we do this as the multitudes. I’ll give you an example:
    Cooperatives. You never hear about
    cooperatives in business school. There are banking cooperatives,
    and housing cooperatives, and agricultural cooperatives
    instruction cooperatives. In some countries
    they’re the largest banks. They’re the social housing. It’s never mentioned
    in business school, because it’s a different form. It’s people coming together
    and sharing their destiny. This is the true sharing economy:
    Cooperatives. And that’s why
    they’re the engine, the vehicle for the new sharing economy. But they’re never mentioned. Societies that are able to nurture
    the empathic sensitivities that are in our neural circuitry are the ones that don’t have
    to worry as much about the secondary drives, which are brutality, and corruption, and all
    the bad things that go with them. So I have a little bit
    better picture in my mind of the evolution
    of the human race. What I’m suggesting is
    the next stage is biosphere consciousness. As we begin to see climate change
    impacting our entire community, and there’s nowhere to escape, we begin to realize
    we’re part of that community. And so we’re getting
    our younger generations beginning to empathize with our fellow human beings
    and our fellow creatures in one biosphere. This is a hopeful narrative
    of the human race, with all the
    dark periods in between. So I hope you leave
    with that message— At least I believe that
    the history the human race is to overcome,
    and to transcend ourselves, and to empathize
    in larger social units until we see ourselves as part
    of one life force on the planet. I’m Tony. I think you might be
    coming up against something with these new corporate agreements
    that they want to force on us: TPP, TTIPS and so on. But they do seem to contain
    provisions that would put corporations that are
    at an advantage over governments —over elected governments. Well, let me give you
    a counter pose: There’s another kind of
    agreement emerging with very different politics. President Xi and Premier Li
    introduced an idea called “Belt One…” “Belt One Road”
    —the Belt and Road initiative. This is a very different initiative
    because here’s the US trying to isolate
    —if you will—China with its specific agreements;
    corporate led. And the belt road initiative
    is the idea of resurrecting the old Silk Road,
    from Shanghai to Rotterdam. But it requires a
    different sensibility. Originally it was designed
    just to get a railroad across the hinterlands, crossing
    the stands all the way into Europe and The Mediterranean, a route around the southern edge,
    and Italy. But then it quickly
    escalated to a conversation— Wait a minute!
    Europe’s doing “Digital Europe,” the Internet of Things platform, 3rd Industrial Revolution,
    and that— It not only will be in the EU,
    but our partnership regions in the Mediterranean. That’s a billion people market: 500 million in the Union, 500 million in
    our partnership regions in the Mediterranean
    and North Africa. China has a similar plan that
    we’ve worked with with them. It’s identical, called
    “China Internet Plus.” So the conversation quickly
    went to, “Wait a minute! Europe is China’s
    largest trading partner. China is Europe’s
    second largest trading partner. How about a belt road initiative
    from Shanghai to Rotterdam? That’s now in deep conversation, but it requires
    a different sensibility. No one can control the Internet of Things platforms
    centrally, because it’s designed
    to be distributed— that’s the resiliency
    of the system. And so that, if anyone power or any nation
    across the region, you know, is going to
    try to control it from the top, you can’t do it
    because you can go off-grid. And I think all
    the parties are aware of this. And in my dealings
    in Beijing, in Brussels, in Berlin, they’re aware that
    this is a new partnership. It requires collaboration.
    You gotta share. You gotta share best practices. You gotta share
    the science and technology. You gotta get over the suspicion— Everyone benefits in a network. That’s the—it’s not geopolitics. It isn’t, “We control. We close.
    And then we overpower you.” It doesn’t work in
    an Internet of Things world. You have to have it borderless.
    It has to be open. It has to allow you
    to have a distributed ability to go off and on
    when you want, and have block chains. So, I think this belt Road initiative
    is quite interesting because it may not just be for Eurasia. This may be a vision that would be,
    for a millennial generation, a vision that could move
    from the Americas, from Canada and the United States
    down to Chile— then you have really a distributed biosphere infrastructure revolution, not a traditional
    geopolitical revolution. And, therefore, it requires
    everyone to be involved, because everyone’s a player. My name is Denille.
    How do you see your vision and what you’ve been talking about
    affecting large food systems in industrialized countries,
    as well as developing countries? You know how much energy
    the agricultural system uses? About a third of their cost
    —our energy costs. The fertilizers;
    those are fossil fuels. The pesticides;
    those are fossil fuels. The machinery;
    it’s all run by fossil fuels. The packaging, the plastics;
    it’s made out of fossil fuels. The water that they
    have to bring in to irrigate, the electricity grids; run by
    fossil fuel and nuclear power to move the water. So, if you wanna
    take a look at agriculture, it is a huge player.
    Not only that: The fertilizers
    emit nitrous oxides, which are much more potent
    in terms of their impact than CO₂. You know that 40%—I believe it is— of the land that’s used
    for agriculture in the world today is to grow feed for animals? It takes at least 8 pounds of feed
    to create 1 pound of beef. That makes the transport industry
    look like super efficient. It’s the most inefficient system
    we know on the food chain. If you look at pure injustice, you’d have to say the shift
    to a feed grain animal culture and a chemical farming culture
    for pasturing animals is one of the great injustices
    in the history of the world. Some of us live high up
    on the food chain; the rest are denied
    access to the land. We got to turn that around so, in Europe, we are interested
    in organic agriculture. We’re interested in moving from
    pesticides and chemical agriculture to ecological agriculture, where we learn to live with
    the surrounding flora and fauna, and we find ways to encourage
    the flora and fauna to be able to be compatible
    with what we’re growing. In the old chemical world,
    if it moves, kill it. Everything surrounding your crops
    should be killed. So we live in a chemical wasteland
    across the agricultural fields with runoff poisoning our water. It sounds shameful. So we wanna move
    to organic agriculture. We had mechanical agriculture
    in the 1st Industrial Revolution. It started late
    1st Industrial Revolution. We had chemical agriculture
    in the 2nd Industrial Revolution. We need to have smart, organic,
    ecological agriculture in the 3rd Industrial Revolution, and we have to bring back
    regional and local agriculture that supports local communities. It’s absurd to ship
    a tomato around the world. Ridiculous! Hi, I’m Rochelle. I was wondering if you could talk
    a little bit about water. And how water plays into this
    decentralized vision. How the privatization of water
    plays out. I was just hoping
    you could speak to that. There’s only a small amount
    of water on this planet that’s available for human reuse. Less than 1%;
    the rest is not available. There is a deep nexus between
    energy and water that’s never, just never explained. You have to have energy
    to move water. And that is that 8% of all the
    energy we generate in the world —power—
    goes to extracting water, treating water, moving it
    through pipelines in water, and recycling the waste. But you need water
    to move energy. This isn’t well known. And, that is,
    the energy industry uses— Over half of all the water we use
    goes to the power industries. Of all industries, over half. And this will surprise you: In France,
    which is 80% nuclear power, you know how much
    of the water they use for cooling off nuclear reactors
    in France? Almost 50% of all the
    fresh water consumed in France goes to cooling
    the nuclear reactors. Yeah, and when the
    water comes back, it’s heated. So it’s dehydrating ecosystems
    that are already facing drought for their agriculture. And now, sometimes
    the water is so hot because of climate change
    in the summer, they can’t even use it
    to cool the nuclear reactors and they have to
    slow down the electricity. So what’s the nexus? We have to begin to create
    a new plan, so that people get control
    over their water in a distributed system that
    brings water together with energy. I’ll give you an example of why: If the electricity grid is disrupted
    —let’s say one of the transformers, big electricity transformers,
    either through cyber crimes, cyber terrorism,
    or natural disaster goes down and your power goes down—
    there’s no water. We’re dead in three weeks.
    That’s how vulnerable system is. That’s why we have
    to build in resilience by keeping it so distributed. So what do we do? I’m in Hauts-de-France
    a couple of weeks ago. This little startup— They’ve taken a whole
    social housing complex, huge housing complex. They took the whole roof
    and turned it into a cistern. Why did they do that? Because the water falls,
    and as it falls, it generates electricity
    in a turbine. So they’re using for electricity,
    but now we’re saying, “Use it as a cistern.” So if the power grid goes out
    and you can’t get water, you’re dead in a couple of weeks. You have the water right built-in
    to your home office and factory, on the roofs or nearby,
    you can share it in a cooperative. And then that water can be used,
    potable for fresh water. And then we’re now talking
    with companies about… With housing,
    that you can take the water, use it for your toilet water, and you will be able to recycle it
    right back on site. So you can go distributed
    and decentralized when the real power grid goes out. They key to maintaining this system
    is it’s distributed. If anything happens
    in one part of the system, you can go off. Well distributed and decentralized,
    and share your water, share your energy. So water and energy go together,
    and you’ve just hit —and I’m glad you said this— something that has really come to
    the top of the agenda for us now: How do we create a
    distributed water internet to go side-by-side
    with the energy internet? Very cool thinking. My name is Elizabeth and
    I just have a question for underdeveloped countries. How do they play a part in this
    whole 3rd Industrial Revolution? Can they sort of skip the gun, because they don’t have
    an established infrastructure? Yeah, you just answered
    the question I was about to answer. Very good!
    Well here’s what we realize, just what you said. What we finally realized is
    in the developing world, their liability is their key asset. Their liability is:
    they have no infrastructure. That’s their asset. Because, it’s easy to build
    virgin infrastructure, with new codes and regulations
    from scratch, than to take an old infrastructure with old codes and regulations
    and transform it. So what we’re learning
    in the developing world is this can move more quickly. We saw the opportunity
    that the developing world can leapfrog right past the 1st and 2nd
    Industrial Revolution into the 3rd. So the United Nations
    has now embraced the 3rd Industrial Revolution narrative that we’ve just
    talked about tonight. The biggest problem
    in the developing world: No electricity. Ban Ki-moon has made this
    his pledge: Universal electricity. We got a billion people
    that have no electricity. They’re in the dark. We have 40% of the human race
    with infrequent, not reliable electricity. And what keeps women
    enslaved in this world? It’s no electricity. And what we see
    with these big families, in these patriarchal,
    brutal conditions, and male-oriented cultures?
    No electricity. Why? Because, with no electricity,
    women are the slaves, the children of the slaves,
    more children, more hands on deck that can actually
    carry the energy load. We forget the relationship
    between electricity and freeing women in the West. Women were the slaves
    at the hearth until electricity came in. Electricity freed women
    from that slavery, if you will, to go to school
    beyond the first 5 grades, and then electricity
    created new skills that didn’t require
    upper-body strength, but up here. Electricity revolution created
    all sorts of new skills. And, when that happened, as women became more educated
    and more independent, and had the new skills
    of the 2nd Industrial Revolution? Fewer babies. You can give out
    millions of condoms; it’ll make no difference, until you bring electricity
    into the developing world, free the women,
    and you have them get educated, and have them be recognized
    as half the human race. And what’s interesting
    is the women are setting up these micro grids—a lot of it. So, you see it in rural Africa,
    they go into a village —it’s happening in India, too—
    and small startups. They come in, they lease
    a solar panel on each roof. They give you a lease, and
    then they give you a cell phone. This is happening all across rural
    India and now sub-Sahara Africa. But instead of a big centralized grid
    then you go village, to village, to village and you create micro grids
    that are laterally scaled. This is going to take off
    very, very quickly—it already is. This is the smart social entrepreneurs
    of the next generation. This is why I’m really pleased
    to see this happen. It brings confidence
    that we can do better. I’m Ray, and I’ve been thinking
    during your whole talk about how do we overcome monopoly? We have to worry about
    a new kind of monopoly. Now, I’m gonna be honest with you:
    I love Google! It is the magic box! I’m now so lazy that
    anything that comes up, especially in my age,
    I ask the magic box. It is a great research engine.
    However, when everybody needs Google,
    and it’s the only research engine, and it’s our window
    to the research we need, it starts to look like
    a global monopoly, and it starts to look like
    a public utility. What did we do
    with successful businesses that had a product line
    that was so important that everybody needed it,
    and it was a public good. What did we do in
    the 2nd Industrial Revolution with the telephone industry? We, in America—
    In other parts of the world, the government
    took over a lot of it— but in America we kept them
    in the private sphere, like AT&T, but we regulated them as utilities. And we did this across
    the electricity utilities, the many of the power utilities.
    We regulated them. I think it’s naive to believe
    that we won’t do this. The Millennials and your children—
    This is the new political movement. You’re gonna be asking the question: How do we get the best
    out of these new enterprises, but they have to be regulated
    as public goods, in the realm, so that we all we all ensure
    that we get equal access, that we have some control
    over our creative content and data, may be through block chains, and that we’re able
    to secure our privacy, etc. Facebook? Same thing. When the whole human family
    has to come together on Facebook to communicate with each other,
    it’s a great service, but it looks like a public good,
    it’s a utility. And we’re gonna have to have
    some kind of global authorities to regulate them.
    Does this make sense? This is the politics of your generation. This is the politics of the new
    3rd Industrial Revolution. Hi, I’m Carlin. In the words
    of your Wharton alumni, how do we make America great again? Let me say something
    to take us from another corner. President Obama
    wanted a green economy. He spent billions and billions
    of dollars of our tax money for a green economy,
    and we don’t have a green economy. Why did this happen? Because the mentality
    here in this country is all we need to do is
    use tax money to incentivize, ’cause we want a million Steve Jobs. So, what happened
    with President Obama is he would incentivize, give
    some money to a solar factory here, a battery factory over there…
    Incentivize. But you can’t start with that. You have to start with incentivizing
    the infrastructure itself, which requires everybody
    coming together. Now, he made
    a very famous statement during his second
    presidential campaign, which got to the heart of it. You may recall that
    he was speaking of small businesses and he made an offhanded comment
    saying, “You didn’t build that.” Remember this comment?
    It went viral: “You didn’t build that.” And they went they went nuts. He was referring to infrastructure, and he was trying to say
    the infrastructure comes first. Then you can create
    your new businesses with it. The problem is, they went viral
    because the small business said, “No, we create America!
    It’s the entrepreneurial spirit!” We’ve actually so
    dummy down our country that we actually have no idea how businesses feed off
    the infrastructure that come from public-private partnerships: government, industry,
    and civil society. Who do they think
    created the public school systems, so that we could train
    the workforces? Private businesses didn’t do that. Who laid out the interstate highways
    with tax money? You think private businesses will
    lay out an interstate highway system with no lights from coast-to-coast? Who under wrote all the pipelines
    that had to bring in the electricity, the gas and
    the telephone industry? On and on and on…
    In fact, let’s look at Steve Jobs! The fact is that most of the research
    that went into his smartphone was government-funded research;
    he marketed the product! But we’ve so dummy down that half the country or more
    doesn’t want the government to do anything—
    They don’t even want the government. This is the failure of the USA. We do not have a
    social market economy. Europe does;
    other parts of the world do. But, in America,
    we have this whole idea that it’s just
    the entrepreneurial spirit. Let the companies rule,
    let the marketplace reign. This is our death now. Because, if we can’t work together
    in each county, in each state with business, civil society,
    and academia, to lay out this platform and create the regulations codes
    and standards, then the new businesses come,
    then the new models plug in. So what I’m saying is,
    look to the infrastructure. And your millennial generation, it’s up to you now to bring this
    sense of a social market economy back into the dialogue. We need government,
    we need business, we need the civil society, we need public capital,
    we need private capital, and we need social capital. All three equal players
    at the table. So, here’s
    what I will say in closing: I know you get frustrated
    and sometimes you think, “My Gosh, it’s going too slow!” But now’s the time
    to redouble your efforts. We all have to
    really come together. We’ve got one generation
    —yours— to lay down this new consciousness,
    this biosphere for consciousness. Your responsibility to carry this on is the weight that
    no generations had in history. I don’t know of
    any period in history where one generation was
    called upon to save the species. And, if you believe
    this is really happening, and it is, this is actually the responsibility
    of the Millennials in this room. We now have, I think,
    potentially a road map and a compass. It’s gonna be up to
    the younger generations now. This is the digital revolution. You are the digital revolution.
    It’s your turn. It seems to me,
    if the millennial generation is ready to create this
    new digitally connected world, it helps us create peace between
    economy and society and the balance for the planet.
    It should be now. And what you have to do is
    you have to join together in the virtual world,
    in the physical world, on the ground, in the communities, both in the infrastructure
    and the politics, and the social engagement. You got to make this happen. I’ll give you one little mission: How long is it gonna take
    for a millennial generation to prepare a bill of particulars
    for a declaration of human responsibilities
    and stewardship of our human race, our fellow creatures
    in the planet we live in? And then you have
    a billion young people in a cohort in Facebook,
    and they’re all declaring this, then you’re at the table. You’re at the table,
    virtually and physically, and then a billion people strong, you should be able to do this
    in a very short period of time. This doesn’t take
    a lot of organizing. Then you’re at the table,
    with the new potential monopolies. You’re at the table
    with the governments who would purloined
    this for their own ends. You’re at the table
    with the special interests —they want to drag us back
    to the 2nd Industrial Revolution. Come to the table.
    Make it happen. Pass on this legacy, so when your grandchildren
    look back at you they can say you did the right thing: You helped replenish the planet, got us off carbon, helped show our proper respect
    to generations not yet here, including our fellow creatures. Thank you. Good night. Join us. —Hi.
    —Hi, I’m Kelsey. I study Design and Technology.
    What I wanted to say is that— —You’re at Parsons?
    —No, SVA. But, like,
    the real problem is that, a lot of people
    who have this passion and who, like,
    really do care about this stuff— We’re getting purchased out, and… —Yeah.
    —So, the real thing is, like, everyone doesn’t have
    the same enemies. Like, the people who really care, like, they’re going
    to be purchased, and they’re going to end up
    working for someone, somewhere, and they’re gonna feel like
    they have to compromise. Yeah, I understand…
    Well, it’s a delicate game every day. You know, as you get older
    you have to think about what is— Life goes really quickly. And, if one doesn’t have
    the commitment at 25, you’re not gonna have it at 50. And, this time,
    we need a generation that can stay close to the mission
    all the way through their life, and pass it on to the kids. And I understand how
    difficult this is. Believe me. Hi! Thanks for coming. Thank you so much for this
    —very enlightening. —My pleasure.
    —Is there any recommendations on how to get more involved
    at a local level? Brooklyn’s ideal.
    Brooklyn should be the place. Absolutely! This is where
    a lot of the startups are. I 100% agree with you. I interviewed like 30 people
    for the documentary I worked on, including Global Dryden,
    and they all are optimistic long-term. I’m only guardedly hopeful
    that demographics is on our side. It’s called “the Millennials.” Millennial generation
    is more sustainable, more ecological oriented,
    but I think it’s an uphill battle. As Thomas Paine said, “Every generation must recreate
    the world anew.” The digital generation;
    you’re there. Do it! You don’t need to look back
    at those who are our history. Look to the future of
    what you want for your children. —Hi! How are you?
    —I just wanna shake your hand. Thanks for coming. So, zero marginal cost is possible
    if the data centers are for free. —Yeah.
    —We need it! Well, you have, you know—
    it’s Wikipedia. They do nonprofit,
    they get contributions, it’s tough, but they make it
    because enough people believe in it. Or you look at Blah Blah Car Etsy. They’ve done it with
    a little bit commissions. Look at Patagonia—
    they’ve become a benefit company. And they say—
    There are eight or nine states that passed legislation now saying, “Look, if you’re a benefit company, profits don’t have to be
    a first motive; therefore you won’t risk
    hostile takeovers. So there’s a lot of stuff moving,
    but it’s difficult. So are you—
    I encourage you to do that. Take some risk.
    Don’t sell out. That’s what I’m saying.