Transcription
Hello everyone. Today we welcome Nikolai Tangen, the chief executive of Norest Bank Investment Management, the organization that oversees Norway's government pension fund global, the world's largest sovereign wealth fund with more than $1.9 trillion dollars invested across global markets. Its decisions shape corporate behavior worldwide and under Mr. Tangan's leadership has become known for a greater transparency, active ownership, and a clear long-term investment philosophy.
Before leading the fund, Mr. Tangen founded and ran AO Capital, which was one of Europe's most respected hedge funds, following earlier roles at Kazanov Negaton. He studied finance at the Norwegian School of Economics and Wharton, later adding degrees in art history at Cortel and social psychology at the LSE and Russian at the intelligence services in Norway, a combination that reflects his broad interests.
Please join me in welcoming a financier, a philanthropist, and one of the most influential voices in global investment today, Nikolai Tangen. [applause] >> [applause] >> Welcome.
So, let's begin with your early career. Uh, Mr. Tangan, your early path is anything but typical for a future leader of the world's largest sovereign wealth fund. You trained in Russian and translation with the Norwegian intelligence services. You studied finance at the Norwegian School of Economics and Wharton, and you also studied art history and social psychology with such a diverse background. Can you take us back to the beginning and explain how you first found your way into finance and, more importantly, what it is about investing that's continued to motivate you throughout your career?
Yeah. Well, [clears throat] so why do you go into finance? Typically because you want to make money. No. And so [laughter] I grew up in a small town in Norway. And I was just keen to make money. I thought it was great fun. Started early on to get a part-time job in a stock broking part of a bank. >> And then my dream was just always to work in London, you know. And so then I studied to study finance, went to the US, and uh started to work in London. So that was that was the beginning.
Now, why do you want to work in finance? Why do you want to do asset management? Because it is the most interesting thing you can do. If you think about uh investing, you have to think about who produces what you wear, eat, drive, and consume. You have to think about the new introductions, technology, what's going on. Uh from on the product side of things, you have to look at management. You have to look at psychology of organizations. You have to look at geopolitics, defense, currencies, macro environments. Just absolutely everything that goes on is part of this thing. You could not invent a more exciting game if you tried, and if you're good at it, you make money.
Good. Um, so after establishing yourself, >> and sometimes you make money even if you're pretty bad at it. [laughter] Yeah. Good. So you make money. >> Well, I can. >> So after establishing yourself in the world of finance, you know, with roles such at Kasanov, Eggerton, you made the leap from, you know, a secure corporate career into launching your own firm with AO Capital. >> So what motivated you to take that entrepreneurial jump, and what were the biggest challenges you faced in building a fund from the ground up?
Yeah. Well, I had uh worked uh in a firm called Edition Capital, which was one of the first hedge funds. They had uh I had learned a lot. They had trained me. Um worked with an extremely uh talented group of people set up by uh John Armich and Bill Bolinger. And then uh and then I took a break. I studied art history, but realized quickly I was better at looking at Stokes paintings. And so that's when I stopped studying art history and and decided to set up my own company.
Now, [clears throat] what's the big uh challenge when you set up your own company? Is anybody going to give you any money? Because it's not easy to set up a company because you need to convince people to part with the money so that you can run it. And of course, that means that they have to have trust in you and so on. And so that's the big uh that's the big challenge. It's not easy to set up a company, and it's even more difficult today than it was then.
>> But a lot of our students here at Oxford would presumably, you know, be going on to set up their own companies in the next couple of years. So, what is one piece of advice you have for them that you remember that you wish someone had given you when you were at that early stage in your career, at that time when you were setting up the company from the ground up?
>> Well, I think I got all the advice I could ask for. But the important thing is that asset management is an apprenticeship business. You need to learn it from somebody. You can't just go from school and set up an asset management company because nobody, why would people give you money? You haven't been trained by anybody. You haven't got a track record. You you don't know what you do. So you have to be, you have to work with somebody first who gives you some credibility. I think that's very, very important. And you know, just don't set up too early. Learn as much as you can.
Very many of the successful um entrepreneurs are in the late 30s when they set up. I mean, I was um uh, you know, 37, 36. Uh David Rubenstein, he was the same age when he set up um Carlile. Uh Reed Hastings was in, I think, in the 40s when he started Netflix. You you are not in a hurry, you know, you have a lot of time. Why why is it that when you are 20, uh, you are in such a hurry, when you after all have your whole life in front of you, but when you're 50, you got so much time? And yeah, no problem. It's really very interesting. And I think it's because when you are when you're 20, one year is 5% of your life, and when you're 50, one year is 2% of your life, so you just change your way of thinking about time.
>> Right. Um, you then made, obviously, another major transition, which was leaving Ako to take on the role of CEO at the at the Norwegian Sovereign Wealth Fund. Um, the move required you to sell your stake in the in the firm that you built, which is not a small step for any founder of of the firm. So, can you >> Well, I did actually. I passed it on for free to a charitable foundation. >> So, can you talk us through that? Like, what it meant to let go of Ako, and how your entire perspective had to evolve from going from running a hedge fund to running a sovereign wealth fund?
>> Yeah, so [clears throat] I had then uh run this hedge fund for 15 years. My learning uh was kind of plateauing, and I thought it was time also to pass on the firm to the next generation. So I had started that planning. I actually started to to apply for universities again because I, I think the best place to be is to be at the university. So you are very lucky, and you look forward to leaving this place. You don't know what a wonderful life you have just now, and how much tougher and less good it's going to be when you're out of here. Um, but whatever I had started to apply for uh for university, and then this job came up, and for me, it was the uh it combined the three things that I really believe in. One is asset management. We talked about why that's so interesting. Then um the potential of helping to continue to develop an organization, and I had just studied organizational development, and then doing something good for the country. So we came together in in this job.
>> Right. Um, so let's let's talk more about your job um at the Norwegian Sovereign Wealth Fund in the late 1990s. Um, Norway made a deliberate attempt that set it apart from many of the other resource-rich nations where they channeled um the money into what is now the Government Pension Fund Global to protect the country from volatility and to prepare for a post-oil future. From your perspective, how critical has that structure been in anchoring Norway's economic stability over the past two decades? And how do you see the fund's role in shaping the country's long-term economic resilience and strategic direction? I mean, I know the fund does not invest within Norway, but how important has it been in anchoring the economy and achieving stability?
Well, um, when they found the oil in '69, they decided to, you know, uh, well, they decided to set up a fund after they found the oil in '69. And I would say the politicians did really, really well in Norway. Uh, they first of all decided to save, you know, uh, for for a rainy day. Uh, in many other places, they had not set up a fund, and it had led to kind of corruption and crowding out and and these kind of things. Um, it's been instrumental in helping build the welfare state.
Now, uh, there is a spending rule which means that the fund can, that the politician can spend 3% of the fund every year, and that now accounts for more than 20% of the state budget. So it's been, it's been very important uh for the country. Um, now, there have been a couple of things which have been very important here. One is the broad political anchoring. So when you change government, you don't really change the investment philosophy. There is a very good and strong mandate from the Ministry of Finance which describes how we should be invested, and that's very important. Uh, the spending rule I mentioned, that's important, and then the transparency is important. You know, we are the most transparent fund in the world, and um, that's important in the in the Scandinavian context.
>> So talk us more, take us through your investment philosophy. You said there's a clear mandate from the Ministry of Finance. Could you talk more about that, and then talk us through how you approach investment? Suppose there's a company which comes towards you, and you know you have to evaluate whether to invest in them or not. >> What is the guiding philosophy? What is the thinking behind it? How do you walk us through that stuff, please?
>> Yeah. So uh, we are an index-near fund, right? So we are uh investing close to the index, and the mandate that we have gotten from the Ministry of Finance.
>> Right. We have, we can >> You just explain for the viewers what exactly does that mean? >> Well, so the the the mandate in broad terms means that we are roughly 70% equities, 30% bonds. Within the bonds, we also have some real estate >> and uh some renewable infrastructure uh investments. Uh, but you will classify uh also uh country splits uh and so on. So that's very helpful, and I think it's important because when a fund is so important in a country um, there must be limits for how much money management can lose.
>> Mhm. >> And so you have, in a way, to tie yourself a bit to the mast, and that's what we do. >> Also, because when you go through periods of big uh big swings in markets, we have uh predefined rebalancing rules, which means that when markets go down a lot, we would sell some bonds and buy shares, and it's important to have that a bit on autopilot, and so that's what we do. But talk us through now your investment philosophy as as CEO. What, what >> Talk us through a decision. How do you walk through it? What are some, some industries you look at? Some sectors you look at? How do you evaluate where to invest? Okay. And how does that >> So [clears throat] I don't, I don't personally make investments.
>> Okay. >> Because it's a difficult job, and it needs to be, you need to have people who do this on a on a full-time basis. So we have uh split the money into uh mandates. Mhm. >> We have a large proportion which is index-near, and where we have different overlay strategies, and then we also have sector teams. So we'd have one sector uh team covering pharmaceuticals, industrials, you know, hardware, uh software, and so on. And so that's that's how they do it, and then they go about their business trying to outperform their reference index.
What are some of the sectors currently which are, I mean, obviously AI is one, we discussed before as well, and we'll get into that in a bit. But what are some sectors which are currently booming, or some countries, some areas of the world, geographical regions, sectors which uh which the fund is particularly interested in?
>> Yeah. Well, the now the financial sector has done very well. Uh, the banks. It's partly because of uh, you know, the way the interest rate curve is looking, but it's also renewed activity when it comes to deals >> and M&A activity and so on. So that's been uh that's been good. Of course, we've had periods where the uh where the AI sector has been very strong, and technology has been very strong, but these things, you know, they go in, they go in waves.
>> Right. Um, you know, the fund is often recognized for its climate engagement. Um, you know, supported a lot of emissions commitments and urging energy companies to accelerate their transition plans, but it also faces criticism that it calls for, you know, that it calls for decarbonization can appear hypocritical, given the fund itself has built itself on, you know, oil and gas revenues. So how do you view that tension, and to what extent can a fund which is financed by petroleum wealth, you know, still credibly push for decarbonization while navigating Norway's broader role as an energy producer and a climate-conscious nation?
Hm. Well, so in my mind, there is no contradiction here. >> U because it's not unethical or wrong to uh develop your natural resources. >> And so we have done that, and uh uh, and then the decision is how do you invest that money. >> Now, we are given that we invest across the world, and we own one and a half percent of all the companies in the world. It's important for us to uh think about climate and to think about uh pollution because if one company in a portfolio pollutes, it's being picked up by all the other companies. And so therefore, we really need to think about this uh in a different way. And the second reason why we need to think about it is because we have a very long-term uh horizon when it comes to how we invest, and uh and climate risk clearly is a financial risk. Yeah. And we see it now through uh, you know, higher raw material prices for everything from uh, you know, coffee, cocoa, we see it impacting beef prices, you know, is is an underlying inflationary force which is, everything else being equal, uh, you know, problematic for for financial markets. There was also an underlying inequality exacerbating force, right? Because um, developing countries which have yet, which still have to develop, don't have a lot of them are the ones which are most prone to the to the effects of climate change.
So how, so how's the, how's the fund, is the fund doing anything about that? Is there any activism in any energy in that sector, or not?
>> Uh, so I wouldn't say we are uh activist, but we are constructively having dialogues with companies. We have expectations for what we think they should be doing on the climate side. We advocate that companies should have, you know, net-zero plans, and we follow that up through uh our conversations. Mhm.
Now, early this year, you know, the fund's uh vote against um Elon Musk's compensation package at Tesla attracted a lot of attention, especially because, you know, you've spoken with him on the podcast as well. And you've said in the past that corporate greed has reached an extreme level, and such packages are very, very costly for shareholders ultimately. So what is, what is it exactly about these increasingly outsized compensation structures that you find most problematic, and to what extent do you believe that, you know, large long-term investors like Norges have a responsibility to push back on that trend?
The important thing for us is that uh management compensation is aligned with our interests. >> So they should be uh they should be tied to results. They should be equity-based, and they should vest over a long period, and of course, you also have to look at various dilution effects. >> Right. >> So as long as they are uh really aligned with uh with our interests, and they are fair, we uh we are okay with them.
>> Right. Um, I want to talk about one other thing, you know, obviously the the the, you know, the Finance Ministry has a mandate for for the sovereign wealth fund, but for most parts, we're independent. But, you know, in the wake of recently, we saw um the atrocities committed by the Israeli government, the Norris Bank Investment Fund um announced the exclusion of six Israeli companies over activities which were linked to the West Bank in Gaza. So, for a fund of your scale and your global visibility, decisions like this inevitably, you know, they attract a lot of interest, a lot of attention, not only because of the conflict, but because they sit at the intersection of ethics, risk, and financial stewardship. So walk us through how NOGUS approaches these sort of investments and these exclusions when a lot of the times when these companies are involved in war or involved in things which, you know, atrocities to be committed by the government.
>> Yeah. [cough and clears throat] So the the structure in Norway is that the, it's kind of the, it's the parliament, well, it's the Norwegian people who own the fund. >> The parliament uh looks after it. Uh, it's on a day-to-day basis being done by the Ministry of Finance. They delegate to the central bank, and then we do it within the central bank. In addition to that, there is a separate so-called Council of Ethics, and they would make decisions when it comes to what are ethical considerations that we need to do, that we need to have >> in order to decide where we invest. So, for instance, we don't invest in coal. There have been various weapon criteria. Um, so that's an independent council. Now, earlier this year, it was decided that uh we should have a re-look at that, or the politicians should have a re-look. There is now a committee which is going through that whole way of doing things, and they will decide within a year or two just how one is going to take that process forward.
>> Right. But do you, as CEO, believe that sovereign wealth funds have a responsibility to take principled positions in situations where human rights concerns and financial considerations collide?
>> Well, we have, we have clear expectations when it comes to human rights >> right >> breaches around the world. We have excluded uh many companies because of human rights considerations. I think that's totally key. You will not have uh legitimacy in a country, you know, a fund will not have legitimacy if you, you know, break human rights >> right >> rules, you just cannot do that. And so that's very important.
>> But, but, but there's the, but those are like the extreme situations we're talking about, right? What, what my question refers to is the borderline situations where you have firms, for example, engaging in, you know, there might be a company which engages in sweatshops in Bangladesh where they do the manufacturing, etc. So how much do you, you said there's an ethical board, it's fine, that's considering it. But you, as CEO, what do you think? What is the balance between just investing where you get the best return and make the most money, or you have some ethical considerations you keep there?
>> Absolutely. So, of course, sometimes these concerns, these uh goals come up against each other. >> Our goal is very clear. We are here to make money >> with acceptable amounts of risk in uh in an ethical manner. >> It's useful uh, or that's been the case until now. It's been very useful to have an independent Council of Ethics which takes care of the ethical >> exclusions, which means that it's >> it makes it easier to run the fund uh with one goal in mind.
>> Yeah. >> So it outsources the ethical considerations. >> Well, we also look at ethical considerations, of course, and we also actually exclude companies on >> uh on various uh criteria. So they are so-called risk-based divestments, but it's uh, but, but sometimes uh the situations are very complex, and you want to have a group of specialists really looking into this.
>> Right. Um, you know, speaking about risk, you know, we're living through a time of incredible global um uncertainty and turbulence, especially, you know, you look at Russia's war in Ukraine, escalating tensions in the Middle East, alongside a broad retreat from globalization and the norms which helped uh and increased liberalization which you of the financial markets, especially which shaped the markets for decades now. In this environment, how is Norges navigating this uncertainty, and from your vantage point, what are critical, what are some of the critical geopolitical shifts at the moment that long-term investors should be focusing on, and they should seek to strategically position themselves around? >> What are some key shifts you've seen?
>> Oh, u we see a lot of shifts, and they are very important, right? Um, over the last few years, we have seen a shift in the relationship between uh the US and China, between the US and Europe >> between pretty much all superpowers out there, right? These this whole thing is in has been in flux, and we are not 100% sure how that's going to pan out now. How do you navigate that as an investor? First of all, you, you're widely diversified, and you are very long-term. >> And that's what we do. >> But is there, is there more, more specifically from that? Let's say, you know, you see US-China tensions happening, or you see increasing conflict within with Russia and Europe. How does that actually affect your investment decisions? Are there particular countries which you are now focusing more on, or just diversifying everywhere?
>> Yeah, so we, we don't really do geopolitical investing in that. We don't, we don't do tactical asset allocations. >> Because the interesting thing is that if you had a year ago told me what the world would look like, I would have thought the markets would be down 25%. Now they are up between 15 and 20%. >> And so they have been much more resilient than you would have expected. Also, the the geopolitical situation is changing so fast that there's no way you can move around a whole big investment fund. >> So you need to have this mandate, and you need to stick with your long-term rules, and then it will be okay. And it has been okay. I mean, for 30 years, we have compounded, or the fund has compounded between six and 7%. >> Which is which is good, which is basically, is a is a touch better than than what the financial markets have done.
>> So the sense I'm gathering is that geopolitical shifts, you sort of just don't consider a market. It's more on long-term investment in companies. Those are those are things you consider [clears throat], but it's not the guiding, those are not the guiding investment philosophies.
>> No, I don't think they can.
>> Right. So if, if I had asked you um a year ago, okay um a year from now >> you'll have this is the new geopolitical situation. >> This these are the tariffs. >> Mhm. >> This is what's happening here. This is what's happening here. And here you have a portfolio of uh, you know, you got Microsoft, you got an engineering company here, you got a consumer company there, and >> and you would have made changes on the back of. I mean, what, what kind of changes would you make? >> You know, and what would have been the result? Most likely terrible. You know, it's very, very difficult to make these tactical decisions.
>> Right. Now, turning to AI, you know, you've spoken about NIMS' aim to deliver around 10% efficiency gains annually with AI playing a meaningful role in that transformation. But, you know, AI is shaping also the external investment landscape in far more dramatic ways. Some investors, you know, fear that we are in the early stages of an AI bubble, like the dot-com bubble we saw earlier in the early in the 2000s. You know, some see it as such a profound technological uh rupture that can unleash, you know, such great creativity and overturn industries and a lot more growth. So, given that NOIS is responsible for safeguarding wealth on a multi-generation horizon, how do you, in broad terms, we'll get to more specifics later on, how do you view AI's role in changing industries, and what are your general thoughts on that before we get into some more specifics?
>> Okay, so here we, here we can, here we can go on for for several hours. Okay, because this is the most >> interesting topic there is just now. Um, but it raises a lot of different uh questions. Okay. One, what does it do for society? Well, it's probably going to amplify uh the difference between the haves and have-nots, because if you haven't got that infrastructure, if you have not got knowledge or uh the ability to utilize new technology, you will lag behind. And we see highly educated people probably benefit more than lowly educated people. So that creates uh differences within societies, but also between countries. We see some countries really going all in. You see like Denmark being in a, you know, very early here. Sweden, concerted efforts. Iceland just made a a deal with a whole country for uh with entropics. I mean, so it's really, it's really changing uh societies and relationships between societies. Companies, companies who utilize it and who really push it in >> are pulling apart from the c from the companies which don't. Within companies, you typically see one-third being early adopters, they're doing really well. One-third is coming after, and one-third is not coming after. Well, that has implications for those people and for leadership levels in that part of the company. So we are just seeing it all over the place. And the consequences are enormous. And all I can say to all of you, just like you have to be on top of it. You have to be all in. You have to use it all the time. You have to be totally cutting edge here. Otherwise, uh, you will do much less well. We have seen a shift in society just over the last couple of months in that the big consultancy groups are hiring less. They're freezing salaries for new starters. I mean, this is like deadly serious, and it's happening by the day. So just after this session, go back to the library and just work on it, or go and have a beer or >> both. >> Or both.
So when you say focus on AI, get on top of it, what are, what is some advice you give to someone, let's say who just joined your firm? >> How do you, what, what should people do to get on top of it? Because everyone says get on top of AI, but what are some practical measures that the students here could take?
Well, first of all, if you are not so going forward, if you're not kind of proficient in this, you will not join our firm. That's number one. Um, number two, uh, it's changing the where people recruit from. I think there'd be even more focus on recruiting people with some technical knowledge. So you need to have technical knowledge, even if whatever you study, you just need to, you need to get on board. Um, and what we do is we really force train people. We have mandatory training programs within this. Um, and what we have seen is now we have 100% of people using, well, we we use Claude, right, the Anthropic model, but we have 100% of people using this, I would say pretty much daily. And then now we have 65% using Cursor, which is the uh kind of coding amplification tool. You have, you know, Cursor, you have uh Claude Code, you have these instruments. So 65% is unbelievable. 65% of contributing code.
>> You know, another thing is done, you know, you go back a few is kind of the IT [clears throat] department. They were in a corner in a cupboard, right? They were, you know, they felt a bit as secondary citizens. Now they are the heroes. Uh, the young people who joined the graduate program, they were, many people considered them a bit of a nuisance because, oh my, we have to train them for three years before they make any sense. Well, now they are contributing within 30 minutes. So within just a few years, technology is at the top, and the young people have also or shifted function in the firm. It's very cool. It's so interesting, and it's so fast. I love it.
>> Um, I mean, that's on a firm level. On a more macro level, how do you see it changing, you know, work, employment, and those dynamics in the future? Mis, I mean >> Yeah, it's very, very difficult to say because it's so far, it has not really driven productivity in society, but I, but, but it will. So far, you've got AI, but not AGI. That's where you have the the unemployment aspect coming in.
>> Yeah. I mean, hey, some jobs will disappear, and then it will create some more, some other jobs. So it will, but it will, it will change the way society is. >> But you don't >> I think we'll get rid of a lot of boring stuff. We should not do boring things anymore.
>> Um, now, now this is AI, and then what's the next? Well, uh, robotics, humanoids. It's coming within a few years, not many years, right? You have them kind of coming in from next year, and then the following year. They're coming in. They're coming home to you to do the boring stuff. Going to do the wash, the dishes, do your clothing, make some coffee, clean the floor, all the stuff which is not so much fun. >> It's going to do it for you. >> Um, and you don't need one. You need like, you need them all over the place. And it's one of the few things where people will actually take up debt. They will, they will, they will borrow money in the bank to get one of those, like they did with the cars. You know, you borrow money to buy a car because it's so good. It's so nice to have a car. Of course, people are going to borrow money to buy a humanoid. It's great. By the way, why do they look at human beings? Why do they look so much like humans? Have you ever thought about that? Because the world, and because I hadn't thought about it until I asked the specialist. He's like, "But Nikolite, the world is made for humans. The stairs made for humans. The handles, the washing machine, the dishwasher, you know, is all, you know, iron board, all is made for humans. So, it's kind of a, it's kind of a winning. Being a human is kind of a winning concept, >> you know, and and to make it to you to make it to fit in. That's why they made that way. I think it's just interesting. Have you thought about that?" >> No. Me neither.
We also want to ask about um, you know, you said that so far you haven't seen that much disruption, but which industries has it had the most impact in AI specifically um, and especially within finance? Has it had much impact in terms of guiding investment philosophies, strategies, um, how much you use it there?
>> Yeah, I mean, it's going to take away a lot of uh, you know, blue-collar work. Uh, if you're an accountant or a lawyer, and all these kind of things, it does your job much more efficiently. But also in asset management, it's going to change a lot. It helps us to get uh, you know, our trading costs down. Uh, it should help the analysis. Um, of course, you already have a lot of strategies which is uh which is based on this, the like specific investment strategies. That's difficult to see see from the outside. So we don't know how much of the market is driven by this, but clearly quite a lot.
>> Mhm. >> Yeah.
>> Right. Um, you know, as someone who's also very committed to reducing inequality through your investments and, you know, philanthropy and education opportunity, how do you >> I just have to correct that. Our goal as an investor is not to reduce inequality. >> No, you're as a philanthropist, as an individual, individual >> As an individual, you've given a lot to education, you've given a lot, you signed up the Giving Pledge as well. So how do you see AI-driven investing being used to support developing countries, and how do you see it um playing with inequality between with first within de developing and developed countries, but also within people within those countries who are educated, like you said, or not, or people with more skills?
Well, what is clear is that, you know, used correctly and used properly, this uh is great uh because it basically means that uh knowledge is for free. >> Right. >> So now you have to pay for knowledge, you have to pay for expertise. If you make this available to everybody, you can lift parts of society. Is that happening? I, I don't think it's happening to a very high degree uh just now, but it could do, and there are many philanthropists who are working on making this available on a wider scale uh for educational purposes.
But, but don't you see the, the point there that, you know, if you have, let's say, use the example of ChatGPT or one of these other, you know, open softwares, if someone in the West who has a computer, access to fast internet, um, is able to much better utilize AI, even if you have the same price, even have progressive pricing, let's say, even if people in developing countries can access it, let's say for, you know, adjusting for purchasing power parity at the same price, it's difficult. They don't have the same infrastructure, the same ecosystem, same access to the same infrastructure to be able to use, utilize AI to the same extent.
>> No, absolutely. And you said, and, and you, you kind of given the answer in the question because you said, if you have a computer and if you have access to fast internet, well, hey, already there. How many, what percent of the world are you excluding in your question? Right.
>> Right. Anything else you want to say about that or not? >> No, I mean, used correctly and in a good way, it's fantastic. Um, if you don't do that, it's going to amplify um differences in society and in the world.
And are there any safeguards that governments should be should be engaging in to ensure that it contributes to narrowing inequality rather than widening and further exacerbating global inequality?
>> Well, I think it's difficult for for governments to legislate that. >> Yeah. >> I don't think you can do that. Nothing they can do to safeguard like >> No, you can. I mean, but then we are turning into politics because that's how you redistribute. >> Right. >> Uh, you know, means within a country, but that's outside my scope.
>> Well, okay. Um, let's talk about more about your philanthropy. Staying on the topic of, you know, the common good, away from AI. You've committed more than 100 million pounds to philanthropic causes, and even you, you know, you've joined the Giving Pledge. So how have your priorities in education, culture, and the arts evolved over time, and what impact do you hope that the AKO Foundation will have in those areas in the next decade?
>> Yeah, so I am formerly not involved in the AKO Foundation because I have this job, and so I'm totally independent of everything. The IKO [clears throat] Foundation was set up in 2015 and has been funded up and is involved in uh education, uh climate, and art, and they distribute uh, you know, um significant uh amounts uh every year >> to these uh to these causes.