Transcription
If you're a travel agent or if you're a an you know an executive assistant or you know a call center agent, you may want to worry already and then that will be followed with intelligent jobs. So, a paralegal and accountant and so on. Jobs that require intelligence but don't require labor. And then eventually over maybe 5 to 10 years when the economies of scale start to hit, you're going to see even labor jobs being handed over to robotics.
>> is the former chief business officer for Google X who now travels the world as a public speaker and author. This week he's been warning that AI is likely to cause unemployment on a huge scale. But ultimately, he concludes any short-term gains will be bad for business overall. Mo joins us now. Mo, good morning.
>> Good morning.
>> Could you Could you tell us what your predictions are? Let's say We know that Tony Blair's been talking this week about the sort of mass technological revolution that's taking place because of AI. We know things are changing. On what scale? Talk us through the summer of 2028.
>> Oh, 2028 is a is plenty time for my predictions to start happening. We're in the middle of a perfect storm. On one side, you have economic challenges that are facing the world as a result of our geopolitical choices recently, which basically may put pressure on businesses everywhere including in the UK. But you also have for the very first time a way to replace productivity of humanity with machines. You know, I I I think the big miss that people normally think about is oh, but there have been machines before and those machines were used by humans to create new jobs. But we never really had machines that were fully autonomous and intelligent to the point where they can actually completely replace a job. And so, over the next few years, you're going to start by seeing mundane jobs, jobs that, you know, are very repetitive and that can be easily taught to artificial intelligence, uh which will be which will start to be taken away. You know, if you're a travel agent or if you're a an uh you know, an executive assistant or um you know, a a a call center agent, uh you may want to worry uh already. And then that will be followed with intelligent jobs. So, a paralegal, an accountant, and so on. Uh jobs that require intelligence, but don't require labor. And then eventually, over maybe 5 to 10 years when the economies of scale start to hit, uh you're going to see even labor jobs uh being handed over to robotics.
>> What What might those be?
>> Uh everything, really. If you're a car mechanic, uh you know, I think I think people uh differentiate or let's call it this way, the innovators try to convince you that um that robotics have to look like a human and humanoids are a little delayed, if you want, because we're solving multiple problems uh that will will will lead to versatility of those machines where they can genuinely replace the labor of humans in any kind of situation. But special purpose robots are already there, you know, a self-driving car is a self-purpose robot. And uh you know, there are already hundreds of thousands of them on the road, even though regulation has not yet allowed them to to take over. But sooner or later, you're going to see fleets with no drivers. What happens to drivers then? Uh is is a question we need to ask.
>> This sounds extremely alarming as analysis. And it kind of begs the question, and I know you hinted at this already this week, but if AI is going to overwhelm and dominate the industry, many areas of industry to the extent at which you suggest, so few of us will have jobs that we won't be able to use the services that businesses that dominate with AI are providing. We won't be able to afford them.
>> Correct. That's exactly You see, this is the individual benefit of a capitalist overriding the overwhelming benefit of a society in which the capitalist operates. So, you know, in in a very interesting way, there is absolutely no need for AI to replace jobs. You know, one way to use AI and robotics is to is to reduce cost you know, or slightly increase productivity. And the other way, interestingly, is to boost intelligence of every worker. You know, in in in boost the abilities of every worker and continue to have a society where everyone participates. I think the challenge we have is that, you know, as the individual companies and corporates try to survive in a world where competitive you know, costs and productivity are their primary target, they end up laying off people who then use their lose their income in ways that stop them from being able to purchase the products of those very companies. So, the the consumption side of GDP disappears and the economy collapses as a result.
>> It It sounds like the the potential solution you're suggesting is that you need to tell those businesses, persuade them that it would be better in the long run for the entire economy if everyone collectively doesn't get rid of their employees because they can use AI instead. But who's going to be convinced that by that on an on an individual business-by-business case, why wouldn't each one say, "We'll do the best thing for our bottom line?"
>> Remember when when 9/11 happened and George W. Bush came out and and told the American citizens, "Just keep consuming. Everything will be fine." Right? I We We've sadly built an an economy that's not just based on productivity. 70% of the US economy and close to that here in the UK is consumption, right? And And, you know, it's in a very interesting way. It's that healthy circle of economic activity where, you know, innovators innovate and, you know, manufacturers make things and, you know, hopefully we consume consume them responsibly and protect the environment, but that is what creates everything. And sadly, you know, unless governments engage in ways that say that explain clearly that this is a bigger problem that you than your individual quarterly profits, we're going to have to unfortunately hit a point where, you know, somehow people recognize first that oh, all of the layoffs that I have chosen to make are are coming back to bite me.
>> Yeah.
>> We can We can predict that with mathematics and and make it clear so that government and policy leaders make decisions, but sadly it's not the topic of conversation at all.
>> Is there an alternative where AI ends up doing a lot of the labor-intensive things that maybe we didn't like doing in the first place? Maybe the repetitive things and frees up more of our time to do creative things, things about relationships that actually this does become an asset in the long run rather than something that cripples the economy.
>> Absolutely. I mean, think about it this way and I I don't mean that in in any disrespectful way, but the questions that you asked me could have been blabbered out by an AI and nobody would ever listen. You know, the reality is because you're a human and humans relate to you and they love your show and they relate to what you're saying, they want to hear from you. When you talk about something emotionally, they you that you've actually experienced it. There is a place for humanity in terms of all things that require trust, all things that require human connection, all things that require interactions. I think should remain and should, you know, be maximized. If If AI can can create music today to replace a composer, you know, in reality it doesn't create, you know, it doesn't replace a live performance where you go and you know, associate experience with other people, you know, the art of humanity, the creativity of humanity. And that absolutely before AI and before capitalism was the way we lived. Everyone had a bit of contribution that contributed to their small society and we all thrived as a result. I think we're going to have to go back there. Unfortunately, it might have to go through a little bit of pain before everyone wakes up.
>> We We've heard from the Pensions Minister Torsten Bell on this program. He told us today the government's ready to embrace AI but also ready to protect us from the negative effects of it. I wonder how convinced you are of what the UK government and other governments around the world are doing to insulate and protect the economy and everyone working in it.
>> I I I I don't have the right as a non-British citizen to comment on on the UK government, but I can easily tell you very few government governments in the world are even paying attention. I think the problem is that governments are still stuck in slogans of like, "Yeah, we've looked at that." because maybe they've approved a program of upscaling 100 people or 1,000 people or whatever. The The challenges we have are much bigger than that. But I But I have to admit to you, which I think is one of the biggest myths, is that people think that AI is the culprit here. AI isn't. I I intelligence is as force with no with no polarity. You apply it to good and you get good. You apply it to challenges, you know, and you'll get a dystopia. And I think the reality is we are in a place where governments can choose the UK government specifically, if you're asking me, they can choose to stop importing technology that, you know, ships the entire economy out to across the Atlantic and realize that AI is the ultimate equalizer. You know, you can genuinely rebuild every technology we've ever built before from ERP to CRM to everything using AI in in a matter of weeks. You just have to change your mindset and say, "I'm going to triple the size of my economy because of AI and as a result I will have a place for every citizen." Instead of deciding to import technology and continue to ship revenues out.
>> Is there an example of a technology you believe we are importing?
>> Every, you know, all of your all of the all of the language models that every British citizen uses, every e-commerce technology that is happening in the UK, every you know, licensed software that runs CR CRM, ERP, everything. And and all you know, even your you know, the government surveillance technology, monitoring technology, law enforcement technology is all imported from the US.
>> Final thing I want to ask you, Mo, and just briefly if that's okay. We are right now having dealing with one crisis the government are focusing on and this is this generation who risk of being written off because of they're not working, they're not in training, they're not employment, they're not in employment. And they are really young. These are children who have grown up with a the smartphone technology in their hands. They've actually sort of become addicted to it. You think if anything, they would be the most tech-savvy generation ready to use AI. If you are looking and hearing your analysis about what's going to happen to the economy and thinking, "Where is the hope for me? What would be your advice now to a teenager, an 18, 19, maybe someone who's just gone to university about how to best position themselves for the economy that is to come?
>> Learn learn the tools. Learn AI. You know, be the best at something that you're passionate about because AI makes you more intelligent at it. Learn human connection. Go out of your dorm room. Go out of your, you know, of your little screen and just meet real humans and learn the skills of of influencing and and, you know, and connecting and debating with humans. And in all honesty, I will openly say I think the top skill is learn to find the truth. Learn to learn to understand where you stand within all of the propaganda slogans that are around you so that you can make choices for yourself and basically decide what it is that is going to make you shine. You know, it's it's it's a it's a chance to take charge and actually be ahead of everyone else because you're right when you say they're more tech-savvy than all of us.
>> Mo, thank you. Mo Gawdat, former chief business officer at Google X.
>> What an important conversation. Some of you, this is David. Great interview. Not sure whether to be scared or hopeful. And that is often the case with AI. But but actually there's quite quite a quite a reassuring take, I think, from Mo because actually the reassurance I I take from it is that he and people like him are wrestling with this. They have expertise and knowledge in this and so they're able to talk about it in a way that perhaps is informative and more helpful than me who just sort of, you know, bangs things into Google Gemini every now and then.