Ep-11 Always Creating Value™ Podcast for Successful Businesses –Panel Discussion on A.I.

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Unknown (00:15):
Good morning. This is Mark Fowler, and I'm the host
for the always creating valuepodcast. And today we have a
panel. You know, we started outin September last year and
interviewing individuals abouthow they create value in their,
in their careers in theirbusinesses in their, in their
personal life. And we decided tobring back three of our three of

(00:41):
our previous podcasts,individuals, Lon Safco, who was
involved in creating the firstcomputer that saved a person's
life. Marty Cooper, who is thefather of the handheld cell
phone, and David C. Slack, whohas been involved with the
accounting profession nationallyand locally in California for

(01:05):
many, many, many years. He'sHe's considered the go to person
about computers and how theywork for clients and CPAs. And
he has a program called theInspector Gadget that, that my
California CPA committee, I haveevery December to come in and
talk about what's new. And he'sfabulous. And as many of you who

(01:28):
have attended our podcast know,this is about creating value.
And this is interesting, becausewe've always had an individual,
but we're looking at a panel andhow they can look at, in
particular how humans can bemore involved in our computer
world, in the technology worldand on many aspects of our

(01:49):
technology world as well. We'relooking forward to doing more of
these panels as time goes on.
We're thinking about reachingback to some of the other people
that we've had historically, andalso reaching forward to maybe
even have people who areinvolved in our previous
podcast. This podcast programbegan in developing several

(02:10):
years ago, and I wanted to startacknowledging all the work that
that we had done, or I had donein developing companies and
rebuilding companies and being abusiness architect, and how much
of that much of it happenedbecause of our focus. And our
clients focus on consistentlycreating value. And getting a

(02:33):
habit of consistently creatingvalue in order to be able to not
only worry, not have to wait toworry about a problem coming but
be consistently be thinkingabout the future looking at the
horizon and how you can getbeyond the horizon, as you are
constantly looking at how youcan add more value to yourself

(02:54):
and others. So let's start.
Let's meet Lon and let's meetDavid and let's meet Marty,
thank you very much look forwardto your feedback. Go ahead, Lon,
if you can kind of just driftinto it. Let's have a few bars
and then we can you know, it'san ambiguous thing. I know that

(03:15):
like I said, for me, I wasalways focused on integrating
the human with the newtechnology. But I wouldn't
consider myself a big expert inthat. And you've designed things
that really did help people. SoI really liked the topic. I
thought it was interestingbecause too often, we start with
technology, we force it uponhumans, and we keep our fingers

(03:37):
crossed that it's something thatthey like. And often it's not I
mean, the VCR didn't warm up toconsumers for quite a while. I
mean, I remember I had a VCR.
Five years later, it was stillflashing 12. So putting those
locks onyour lawn, so that's okay.

(04:01):
So looking at it in reverse, Ithink is a great idea. And the
reason I'm particularly excitedabout it is the first major
company that I built, I've built14 companies, most of them were
big failures, a couple of morebig successes was I invented the
first computer to save the humanlife. I didn't even realize that
at the time. I just was seeingwhat I could do with computers.

(04:24):
And I taught it to speak Itaught the lesson I taught. It
was the world's firstenvironmental control. First
Virtual Reality operating systemand everything. All those firsts
were because I was working withdisabled people. First
electronic Users Guide apple andI got into the biggest fight

(04:46):
over that. I said it should beelectronics. Everybody can use
it. It's easier for nondisabled, and people who don't
have either the use of theirarms and don't have arms can't
read one of your heavy spiralbound users guides and apple and
C insisted that I created apaper User's Guide, or they
weren't, let me use the logo andthey weren't going to support
me. So I paid I don't know,$20,000 to a marketing company

(05:09):
just to develop an entire guide,according to Apple
specifications. Okay, and now,as you know, everybody uses
electronic user guides in theform of a PDF. So I mean, that's
just one example of you. I hadto build the technology to
bridge the physical disabilitiesand physical limitations of my

(05:31):
customers. So my entire careerhalf first half of my career was
focused on how do you createtechnology that humans need and
have to have you designed itaround the human and not the
other way around?
My question would be How did youstart? I mean, David, can,
Marty, I don't want you to feelbad. We did start without you

(05:53):
for a bit. And we did talk quitea bit about you. Yeah, we were
go under my ears were burning.
That's true. That should haveMarty, you've not met either of
these two gentlemen. You know,and and, you know, James, from
our previous endeavors, LonSafco. From, from a computer

(06:18):
perspective, has been involvedwith 14 computer companies that
he invented. He started andinvented technology in
particular that I'm familiarwith is the technology related
to talking and working with acomputer from the human
perspective. He can explain youknow, a bit more but we were we

(06:40):
were dialoguing before you goton about the some of the work
that he's done with people whoare quadriplegic hands, they
their hands don't work theirvoices do, but they're able to,
to, you know, to live a life.
David C. Slack is an individualwho's the world's very well
known in the in the accountingprofession nationwide, and has

(07:03):
done a lot of computerdevelopment, helping Collins
working with the AICPA. He, he'svery kind to do a hour hour and
a half presentation every yearfor us called Inspector Gadget,
which he talks about all thetechnology about how it relates
to clients, as well as CPAfirms. And you know, you're

(07:27):
famous for being the father ofthe cell phone. And we'd like
today to talk about how thehuman interaction is essential
in being able to move forwardand being more effective and
which is going to try to stayaway from you know, all the big
IT problems that are going onand think, think outside the box

(07:51):
and think from a creativeperspective about, you know,
what, what can we suggest? Orwhat can we do, in helping
humans be a lot more in controlof, of what they get what they
receive. I remember you sayingan area, your interview was
that, you know, here's here's aphone, it's flattened and
doesn't miss, it doesn't connectto my head. So I'm gonna go back

(08:14):
to lawn and lawn if you can backup a little bit and talk about
where you came from, from thehuman perspective and in your
technology, and that needsdefinition. And we'll, we'll go
around, go around the room abit. So
okay, thank you. Yeah, cool.
Yeah, my early part of mycareer, I was working with

(08:34):
computers back in the 70s,before anybody even knew what to
do with them. And I thought,wouldn't it be cool if I could
teach it to speak? So I wrotesome I taught myself how to
program I took a couple ofcollege courses, I taught it to
speak. And then I thought,wouldn't it be really awesome if
I taught it to listen? Well, Itook another several years, four
or five years. But I finally gotit to the point where it would
listen. And I didn't realizethat I created the world's first

(08:56):
chatbot, where I just would havea conversation using my voice
and it would know who I was. Andit was a little bit of AI built
into it. Also, I didn't knowthat at the time, you would
remember who was talking to soit was kind of cool. It was good
parlor trick. And then Iconnected the house to it
environmental control. And itturned out to be the first
computer controlledenvironmental control system

(09:18):
ever. So at that point, somebodycame to me says, Well, did you
ever think of working with thedisabled and never crossed my
mind? But they said aquadriplegic can't turn on a
light or lock a door or change atelevision channel or answer a
phone or type a letter. So Iworked with a physically
disabled person, and it actuallysaved his life. And NBC did a
story about it. And that endedup on the satellite. And next

(09:43):
thing I know, my office phonerang and my secretary says, take
this call and it was JohnSculley, CEO of Apple and they
flew me to Cupertino and I builtmy company and ran it for 15
years, and actually helped buildthe entire Assistive Technology
Industry, which is valued atabout $15.3 billion. And pretty

(10:03):
much all the technology that yousee today for physically
disabled I developed in theearly 80s through the mid 90s.
And your focus on that waslooking for looking for a knee
and looking for, you know,something that would help humans

(10:24):
or it was just an evolutionarything for you.
Yeah, the first when I firststarted out, it was just for
fun. What What can I make acomputer do you know what keep
pushing the envelope keeppushing the limits. And it was
literally it was for fun. Butthen when I had my purpose, my
goal and I built my company toto help physically disabled
especially quadriplegics. Matterof fact, the last person I

(10:44):
personally worked with wasChristopher Reeve Superman,
after his accident. And seeingall of their physical
limitations, they couldn't doanything they've never used, the
computer can't use, the phonecan't change, a channel can't
turn on a light. So I looked atthe humans and studied what
their needs, and what theirlimited abilities were, and then

(11:04):
bridge the gap between thedisabled, and the computer
technology. And that's how I gotinto the Smithsonian. By the
way, David Allison, who is thedirector of the American Museum
of Museum of American History,said that him and his staff had
done extensive research, andthey felt that I had made more
of a contribution to the humancomputer interface, as did

(11:27):
anyone. So they have 18 of myinventions and 30,000. To my
professional records.
A lot. I'm a little suspiciousof your comment that you had no
purpose in studying this issueof computers speaking, and
listening. Because you must havehad some thought in the back of

(11:47):
your mind and how this could beuseful. You sound like too much
too practical guy. Do they justfor the fun of it? I don't know
if you've heard my comments. Idon't think technology has any
value at all, unless there is ahuman experience. And well.
Call me on that. I like that.
Honestly, in the beginning, Ijust thought it would be fun. I

(12:13):
didn't know I mean, a computerspeaking to you, rather than
typing it out reading it on thescreen, that was the state of
the art for nearly a half adecade, even after I did it. I
thought it was a much moreeffective way to interface with
computer technology. So talkingto it and hearing it in human
speech, that that was veryeffective. But I didn't know

(12:35):
what how to apply it at thatpoint.
So a precursor to you know whatwe today think of it in terms of
Siri or Amazon, Alexa, all thatnatural language processing that
AI layer at all. That's, that'sfabulous.
Yeah, that was the groundworkand I worked with Apple and

(12:56):
apple and I worked really close,they had come out with something
on the Macintosh calledMacintosh because they saw what
I was doing. And then they didit. But then they dropped it.
And then I had a petition for ayear and a half to put Macintosh
back into the Macintosh. And Idid a lot of the design work on
it to actually make it soundbetter. And then eventually that

(13:16):
caught on, and then it startedgoing mainstream. And once
things go mainstream, it thengets socially accepted. But it
from the time that I did it tothe time it was mainstream 30
years.
So Marty, can we go back to whatyou're talking about the that

(13:37):
was an IT and in intellectualproperty, AI or whatever you're
talking about technology ingeneral that needs to have some
kind of important need to the tothe human or to the user?
Well, there's no question in mymind, that's the case. And I see
so many examples of peoplegetting caught up in the

(13:58):
coolness, if there is such aword of their technology, and
they forget that there's got tobe a purpose. And I suppose I
could contradict myself bysaying that the entire
industries have been createdstarting out with games. You

(14:18):
know, if you think about it, thethe whole personal computer
industry who really started withthe game of punk, you guys are
all too young to remember punkrock. This was a totally
mindless game. But on the otherhand, it did teach people how to

(14:39):
interact with a screen. And thenext thing you know, we
graduated the Pac Man and thenthe personal computer came. So
there is something to be saidfor games as being the
initiating stimulus. But thereare just too many you know, I
serve on an FCC The AdvisoryCouncil, and people are so

(15:03):
caught up in the idea of six gand terahertz spectrum, none of
which by itself as any humanvalue at all. It'll be 10 years
before we even haveapplications. And yet there are
really serious problems that weshould be addressing today with

(15:27):
wireless, and like the digitaldivide, healthcare, all of those
kinds of things. So I didn'tmean to pick I do about the,
your feelings at the beginning.
But we are over emphasizingtechnology for the sake of

(15:48):
technology. And I have a poston a Marty, I think that was
well said. And I would just kindof add, I think the conversation
often starts with technology.
You know, and I've always lookedat technology as a tool tool in
the toolbox. But it's what youdo with it. And I think some of
the most exciting days intechnology are when you're no

(16:11):
longer talking about thetechnology itself and said,
you're talking about what it'ssolving for, what it's being
applied to how it's benefitingus. And so while it's in I think
about just any technologies overtime, we may start and I think
you just mentioned, you know,60, but even where we're at with
5g, you know, any of these pointtechnologies early on, it's you

(16:33):
know, I think everybody, youknow, tends to go a bit crazy
on, on just talking about thetechnology, but it's the
practical application thatreally, in when it almost kind
of fades away, because we lookat the utility of it, the the
benefit of it, and and you know,not really looking under the
hood anymore, and thinking aboutwhat's the actual underlying
technology, I think that is someof the most exciting time is

(16:56):
when we finally get to thatpoint, because everybody always
says I said, likes to talk aboutthe technology, I like to talk
about the practical problemswe're solving
with a great observation.
Absolutely. When the technologydisappears from the
conversation, it's successful.
Yeah.
Well, you know, one of thethings that, you know, I used to

(17:17):
do a lot of work in themanufacturing area. And one of
the things that happens, so manythings got over engineered, over
engineered to the point wherepeople didn't know they wanted
to do what they wanted to do,and they're sort of enforced. Or
the next technology comes in,they have to, they're forced to
almost go to where the newtechnology wants them to go, as

(17:39):
opposed to, you know, what theycan actually appreciate and use
any thoughts about that? Becausewe do get excited, we invented
something and now we want it tobe better, right? It's always
like, Well, wait till the nextversion to technology. Yeah,
that'sMicrosoft Word. I mean, there it
is. Well, I want to do is typeit down letter.

(18:01):
I was totally fine with PFS,right.
You know, you have been aroundfor a while, yes. Right.
And then I know, my hair colordoesn't suggest that. But so,
but then you look at things likeWordPerfect, and what a just a
schoolyard beat down thatproduct was, and, and just in
thank goodness, you know, wordcame along and kind of saved us
all. But you're right, I thinkat the end of the day, it's just

(18:24):
you know, solving for, and Iwanted to kind of, you know,
then go one step further what Iwas just saying a moment ago, I
think, you know, it's one thingto say we've got technologies,
you know, practicalapplications, I think it really
all comes together and reallysings, when you've, you know,
you're now able to create anecosystem around it. And so I

(18:45):
look at the value of ecosystems,and I think of, you know,
clearly the iPhone wasn't thefirst you know, cellular phone,
but you look at what iOS hasdone. And you know, how that is
just so multifaceted. The it'sthe end and delightful user
experience, really taking all ofthat technology, almost kind of
making it, you know, invisible.
And it's in so people, you know,when they experience, you know,

(19:09):
an iPhone or an Android device,it's all about you know, what am
I doing with this everything'sfrom you know, cameras to clocks
and timers to mean it's, it's,it's, it's a, you know, an
incredibly powerful computer inour pocket. But it's, you know,
all sorts of things that, youknow, we rely on it for now
with, you know, throughout theday. And to me, it's the

(19:30):
ecosystem that you know, reallythen you know, everybody falls
in love with and that's wherethey start to really experience
the value.
I picked up on my turn. You guysall had the experience with your

(19:52):
iPhone, like you can't dosomething that you shouldn't be
obvious like answer the call. Ido I just have had that
experience at least a half adozen times over the past few
months. And it's especiallyembarrassing to me. People, I
can't work by cell phone. Eveneven Apple's got a way to go.

(20:17):
And I'm delighted to be backcompetition. So that hopefully,
we can improve the humanexperience with cell phones. And
I still named say that cellphones are in their present form
or suboptimal? Because we'retrying to create one answer to a

(20:39):
hugely complex cohort of people.
Every person that exists todayis different than every other
person, including the historicaland for the foreseeable future.
And the idea that one cell phoneis going to solve a problem for
everybody, to me is ludicrous.

(20:59):
And we need a little morepersonalization. And the idea
that apps are the answer topersonalization, I think is
equally ludicrous. Because it'sour thing, we're going to take
the simple problem, and all youhave to do is select among 2
million apps, find the right onefor you. So got a ways to go. To

(21:22):
give you a credit, David, I doagree with you that look against
the whole ecosystem, instead ofjust building a piece of
hardware is part of the answer.
So it's deathby 1000 little apps, isn't it?
Yeah, it sure feels that way.
And one of the earlier examples,I think, was when we went from
the C prompt to the Macintosh. Imean, if you had a Windows

(21:46):
machine, you really had to knowhow to install drivers. And you
had to have a screwdriver inyour pocket so that you can put
in all of the different daughterboards in the back. And so you
had to be a bit of a technician.
But then when the Macintosh camealong, it was all in one box,
you plugged it in, like Jobsaid, it's an appliance, you put
in toasts, and it could put inbread and burns it and make
toast. So I think that I thinkthat does happen through the

(22:09):
lifespan of a technology. Butyeah, Macintosh, there's a
billion different applicationsthat you can put in it. And mine
doesn't look anything likeanybody else's. So yeah,
completely agree. It'soverwhelming, and it has to be
personalized. But I thinkthis is where AI now when you
get a chance to introduce that,and you know, it's been around

(22:29):
for a long time, but I thinkit's making its presence, you
know, more and more felt, youknow, more recently, you know,
that's where it has thatopportunity to say, Great, now
I've got, you know, apps, I'vegot, you know, a platform, you
know, technology, you know,device, you know, how can I be
assistive, you know, to the enduser, looking at what they're

(22:52):
doing, how they're doing itwhere they are, you know, would
you? And and I think you know,this is where the kind of the
hand to hand combat is going onright now. Is you know, how much
of that is invasive? How much ofthat is even potentially
intrusive? You know, in becominga net negative. And I think
rightfully, there's a lot ofconcern that, you know, you

(23:13):
know, what is my device doing?
What's at listening to what's,uh, you know, wait a minute, I
didn't sign up for this. Itfeels like I've, you know, it's
being monitored. And we justcreated the Hal 9000 Here,
potentially. And again, goingback and giving us some some
good historical references. Butit what point you know, and

(23:37):
that's the kind of the, the yinand the yang or the double, it's
the two sides of the sword, youknow, is really maximizing
utility and at the same time,doing so in a way that doesn't
compromise. You know, the veryend users we're trying to serve.
You know, whyhow God has name? I do not. I
was friends with Marilyn Clark.

(23:59):
Okay, oddly enough. And she toldme the secret before she passed
before Arthur passed. He was inSri Lanka. And he was very ill.
How, if you take the letters andyou're moving forward one, it
spells IBM.
Oh my word. I'm sorry, Dave. I'mafraid I can't do that. My

(24:20):
favorite phrase over all theseyears now great, and everybody
recognizes that. Wow, that'sthat's a great that's a great
factoid. Thanks for sharing.
Intrusive is absolutely right. Igiven my daughter a little box
from Amazon. If I say she'sgonna wake up and start talking,
and she's afraid to plug it in,she's afraid is gonna listen.

(24:40):
And I said, Well, who cares?
It's not gonna listen, you haveto give it the awake word. My
granddaughter's came over thispast weekend and they were doing
tick tock and some other stuff.
And she says, you know, yourphone, even if it's shut off, it
still listens. I said, That'snot possible. So She shut her
phone off, set it down on thetable, and I said, Make
something up. I said, Let'spretend we're gonna go on
vacation. He's in Mexico. So shesay, Oh, I love Mexico, I would

(25:03):
love to go to a resort inMexico, I'm gonna buy a bathing
suit and go to Mexico to turnyour phone back on. And all of a
sudden, all the ads were aboutresorts and bathing suits in
Mexico. And the phone's off.
Yep. Wow.
Whoa, how could that bepossible?
That's what I've said. And Ihaven't been able to find
anything online or anybody hasexperienced, but I watched it.

(25:26):
Well, and, and I've done thatsame kind of experiment, you
know, said, You know, I'd liketo learn more about Subaru. I've
heard that's a good brand andinsurance. And of course, my
phone's right here, and I'mgoing to be tortured this
afternoon by it. But you know,you do we get all this in place
advertising. And you're goingokay, I don't know that I signed
up for this. And, and I don'tthink there's enough ability for

(25:49):
end users to really, you know,opt in opt out gate, you know,
some of that, you know, in yoursidebar conversations shouldn't
turn into just a relentless, youknow, marketing campaign that,
you know, ultimately turnsagainst
damn cell phone technology. Whoelse? I'd really

(26:13):
like to talk to whoever came upwith that idea. Marty, you got
anything?
You guys are trying to get evenI could tell.
You knew it was coming.
Set up? Well, Marty, why don'tyou take a little time, you
know, you and I've talked acouple of times, want to talk a
little bit about how you didcome up with the cell phone, oh,

(26:36):
handheld, the handheld, theactual, as opposed to the, you
know, there was always a cellphone somewhere in the car or
whatever, whatever. SoWell, I do the same thing that
all the rescue did I just anobserver, I was in the to a
radio business. And I discoveredthat, first of all, that people
couldn't run their businesseswithout at the game of the

(26:59):
communicate. And then wediscovered that when we finally
got to the point, we could builda two way radio you can hold in
your hand. That's exactly whatpeople did. It sounds kind of
ridiculous. But you know, we'retrying to build a product that
serves everybody. And so we madea holster that you could put on

(27:19):
your belt and keep yourself outthere. And I'd walk through the
airport and every person with aMotorola two way radio, have it
in their hands. If there was,there was a message they're
coming up with the handheld cellphone, especially when the Bell

(27:42):
System was telling us first ofall, that nobody needs a
handheld phone is really notgoing to be very important. It's
powerful and will serve thatpurpose. And we are going to
build all the curves. So if youneeded a stimulus, that was our

(28:03):
stimulus, but the market wasobvious to us, and not to
anybody else. I had people tellme, Marty, we understand that a
few you techies will want totalk out of portable phone. But
I had a guy from London say,well, we've done a market study.
And our observation of a totalmarket in London is 12,000.

(28:27):
Handheld cell phones. And ofcourse they were wrong. Or
narrow, more cell phones orhandheld cell phones in the
world today than there arepeople. And as I guess, we
started out with Mark waspulling my chain which people

(28:48):
have a tendency to do that thecell phone is early stages.
We're still learning how to copewith it in so many different
ways. Social media, in some wayshas become a central other ways.
It's gotten totally out of hand.

(29:10):
There are so many doom and gloomerrs about social media. I think
it's it's a we're in the gamestage. We got to grow out of it
and learn how to do social mediain a constructive way and
eliminate fake fake news and allthese destructive kinds of

(29:35):
things. Evolutionis there is there you know one
of the questions that evolvedout of the work on my talking to
you guys and you know fromprevious interviews, was you
know, does technology drivecivilization or does Seville
civilization drive technology?

(29:55):
And you know, where you know,where are we on that if if If so
many things are happening. Imean, we're is there at some
point in time that we need tosay, where do we step in? Where
do we where do we have a vote?
Years ago, I wrote a book calledin the absence of sacred and
it's, it's a 1991 book, it'stalks about technology and kind

(30:18):
of compares technology to thenative the native cultures and
looks at different, differentdynamics. And now the question
was, you know, are we are weserving the human? You know, are
we really paying attention tothat interactive that
evolutionary or environmentalconsideration that you talked

(30:41):
about? Are we really payingattention to that? And how do
you go about doing that? I do iton an individual basis, do it on
a global basis? How do you stepin? Well, and you know, and I
would, I think that's, uh, youknow, that's the challenge, I
think you've done a great job ofjust kind of a numerating that,
but I think the answer is both.

(31:04):
I mean, so, you know, wastechnology driving, you know,
humanity's humanity drivingtechnology? And, you know, so I
kind of worry or worry, youknow, my concerns would be, you
know, underneath the surface ofthat, you know, what are the
motives of, you know, theorganizations that are, you
know, ultimately, you know,mobilizing this technology, and

(31:27):
I think that's probablyeverybody's, you know, kind of,
you know, the concern is, youknow, what lies beneath, you
know, what, what maybe is hiddenfrom view. So, you think about
social media, you know, and Ithink there's, you know,
tremendous of, you know, upsidesto it, but I think, you know, as
a society, we're also seeing,you know, kind of how that's,

(31:49):
you know, weaponized isn't maybethe right word, but you know,
how it can become, you know, anet negative, as well. So, you
know, my, my concern always is,you know, how do you leverage a
tool, you know, you know, forgood, and not necessarily,
ultimately have that somethingthat's, you know, just what,

(32:11):
what's, what's the potential fordamage for that, too. And so, I
think, you know, profit motives,and, you know, some of the
organizations behind some ofthese products, potentially, can
turn, you know, what could be apositive that can turn them
sour? And and I think that'sthe, you know, that's the
concern. That's, that's thechallenge.
David, don't you? Would youagree that a market is the best

(32:36):
answer that I have anoverweening belief in people.
And you can post, I don't wantto quote that think about, you
can fill so many people. But thebottom line is, if you come up
with a product that doesn'tserve people, they're not going
to buy it. And somebodymentioned John Sculley, he

(32:59):
really did come up, or at leastin his working at Apple, the
first smartphones, and they werea total disaster. And I'm not
crazy about Steve Jobs, as aperson, but he certainly

(33:21):
understood design.
Same thing with Elon Musk, Ithink there's a lot of, you
know, I think there's been a lotof just, you know, those who
have pushed the envelope. ButMarty, I think, you know, to
your point, you know, some ofthat is just maturity. And I
don't mean, you know, ourmaturity, but the maturity of
the technology, and I like you Ihave an undying and an unceasing

(33:42):
faith in humanity. But, youknow, where are we, you know, on
that, maybe that continuum. And,you know, I think some of the
most compelling conversationsI've had with a number of folks
in these last few years is, youknow, giving ourselves a, you
know, a break from our digitaldevices taking, you know, just
stepping back and, you know,going outside and, you know,

(34:05):
putting the cell phone, youknow, leave it behind. I think
there's so much value in justsaying, Look, you know, we've
maybe gotten a little toowrapped around the spokes on
some of this stuff. We couldprobably all use a little bit of
a digital diet.
Completely agree. But that'shard because we they are
especially the younger audience,and millennials are absolutely

(34:27):
physically addicted. It's theadrenaline it's the endorphins
of seeing your friends andhearing your friends say Oh, I
love that dress. You look sobeautiful. I mean, I watch it
again. My granddaughters andit's got 75 People said how
beautiful she looked in thatdress. And that's the endorphins
that they're living on, and youcan't necessarily even have to
send them to a 28 day program. Ican't get dinner. You gotta go

(34:53):
to rehab.
That yeah, and I think thatactually read it. You know, it's
the endorphins you You hit itright on the head. And I've got
one of the podcasters I listenedto, as, you know, Barry Weiss
and she had, you know, someoneon, you know, she interviewed
and kind of went down thatwhole, you know, path in talking

(35:15):
about, you know, rehab and 28days and, and how do you break
the cycle and, you know, so I, Iwent looking on Amazon and you
can buy lockers, you know, withtimers on them. And so you know,
I'm gonna put it in the locker,set it and you know, I can't get
my hands back on that device forthe next hour, two hours, you
know, six hours, whatever thatis, give yourself gonna force

(35:35):
that digital diet.
And then you could sit andstares at that box for six
hours.
For a walk, wait, waiting,waiting, waiting?
Well, I don't know about therest of you. But you know, it's
impacted me I'm not I don'tthink I'm as good a writer as I
used to be. Because of, youknow, we're I'm always being

(35:58):
interrupted with my I probablycould shut it off. But you know,
the, the, the helper that movesalong and puts changes my words
and moves forward. And it'sdistractive sometimes it's, it's
fun. From an email perspective,you want to do something sharp,
but if you want to sit down anddo something consciously or

(36:18):
unconsciously trying to createsomething, it's just, you know,
it's just a distraction toimpairment. Marty, what do you
think you're always doing? Ihappen to see ah, an interview
with you with British Britishwas at the Daily Mail, you had a
you were on the Daily Mail youwere talking about kind of the

(36:41):
same thing, as David was talkingabout getting away from your
cell phone. That was quite anice interview. And it comments.
If you posted an example of howthe world is looking for sound
bites. These specific good wasthat this woman reporter said
that she spends five hours a daytalking about her cell phone, I

(37:05):
guess they call it a mobilephone in the UK. And my reaction
to that was get a lifeall the contributions I'm trying
to make in my lifetime are theypicked out at what's out. But
next to get over, I got moreresponses, people sending me

(37:26):
emails, and that that anythingthat I've ever said before. But
the fact is, I do believe thatcell phones are an extension of
the person today, even in theirprimitive form, and the benefits
that come from having a usefulscar photo, or we're just just

(37:54):
scratching the surface.
So why do you think we go withthat, Marty, that, you know, you
use the word primitive form?
What's your vision for maybe,you know, kind of the road ahead
on that?
Well, my immediate response tothat is, I have written a book

(38:14):
on the subject that you may beinterested, it's called cutting
the cord, let me show you, Ijust happen to have a copy here.
Nicely, Nicely played, yeah.
But I do have a vision of whatthe future is. And that is
application basedcommunications, not a universal

(38:39):
device, it has everything. So asan example, there is the
potential of cell phonetechnology, virtually
eliminating disease. Now, it isa very grand statement. And but
the fact is, we already knowthat if we can identify a

(39:06):
disease in a person's body,before it really takes hold,
that we can stop it. And theonly way you can do that is to
have a personal device that doessomething like give you a
physical examination. Not once ayear, actually, I get to annual
examination every five years orso. But not once a year, but

(39:28):
every minute refraction ofillness. And if you do that, and
you analyze, you'll be able tohead off every disease before it
happens. We don't know how to docancer yet, but there's no doubt
in my mind that we're going tolearn how to do that. So really,
this is an extension of havingsome communication and

(39:51):
processing ability that expandsthe human mind. And I think that
is it over whether the cellphone is becoming an extension
of the person, and you will havethe cell phone will be your
assistant. And the idea ofhaving an assistant that really

(40:13):
understands you, and and worksto make you stronger, more
powerful, more effective, is theultimate of what the cellphone
is going to be. Actually, it'snot quite the ultimate, because
ultimately, this personalitythat said, what we now,

(40:33):
ludicrously call a cell phone isgoing to be able to see better
and we can see here better thanwe can maybe think better. And
at some point, it may decidethat we are superfluous. And
we'll get rid of us. But I don'tthink anybody here is going to
have to worry about that.

(40:54):
We still got a plan, plug themin.
So we're not gonna see thematrix in our lifetime has so
many generations to go beforethey require an
awful lot of AI. And that's onit CUSP right now as well. I
mean, it's, it's close to thesingularity even now.

(41:19):
Well, there are a lot ofarguments about that.
Yeah, well, Google thought theyhad it last week. But
you're a this is one person atGoogle. That's
one person. That's right. SoMarty, that and thank you for
sharing that. I I agree, by theway, regarding the you know, the
medical applications, and youknow, and I'm not just talking

(41:39):
about things like CRISPR, and,you know, and then you add
quantum computing to the mix,and you think about just, you
know, the horsepower, you know,coming our way. But yes, if we
can more intelligently make, youknow, the thing on our wrist, or
the phone in our pocket, youknow, kind of that, you know,
always on always monitoring, youknow, that early warning system,

(42:01):
you know, like, like manypeople, I get my annual
physical, and in yet, you'rejust going so what did I learn,
and you realize, I didn't learna whole lot, because, you know,
I ended up recently goingliterally in the last few weeks,
I ended up going into thehospital, because I had a DVT in
my leg. And, you know, so turnedinto a pulmonary embolisms, and

(42:21):
I'm going, like, two months ago,I was physically fit what what
happened. And it just yourealize, and I was just
literally talking to somebodythis morning, and just going, we
have the technology, and maybetoday, at least, on some of
these friends, but you know,it's it's still regarded as too
expensive. So, you know, howabout giving people you know, a

(42:43):
more appropriate scan everyyear? And whether that's a CAT
scan, or an MRI, or whateverthose you know, whatever those
tests are? Oh, no, no, can't dothat. That's way too expensive
and annoying. But that actually,is an incredibly predictive, you
know, incredibly insightfultool. So what do we got to do to
get ourselves to a place wherethat becomes a part of, you

(43:04):
know, if it's not our smartwatchor our smartphone, or smart
mobile devices? How do we get,you know, kind of the rest of
the technology into the, youknow, onto the table and into
the mix? So we get far moreinsightful, predictive, you
know, take advantage of thetechnology that's already out
there to help us, you know,better monitors people's health,

(43:25):
I think it's a perfectapplication.
I totally agree. And it's movingin that direction. I've seen
some phones now medical phonesthat the back plate of the phone
actually senses the thechemicals that come out of your
skin and can determine certainpeople there was the Fitbit, no,
it was the iPhone, I watch, justsave somebody who was having a

(43:47):
heart attack, he was on thetrail. And he fell off, he was
having a heart attack, and itsensed his heartbeat, and
automatically dialed 911. Theparamedics showed up before he
died and saved him. So we'removing in that direction.
Now, I think that's the watchhas the perfect, I mean, as long
as people are wearing it, it'sit's that's the perfect place to

(44:07):
bring some of that to bear.
Well, I think that goes back towhat somebody Marty said that
the cellphone didn't have to bethe be all and end all. But if
I'm, if I'm wrong, I apologize.
But I sort of got the idea thathe mentioned that it didn't have
to be the you know, the singleone. One thing that did it so.

(44:29):
Well. I agree with whateverybody has said here. We
still have a long way to go todemocratize the cell phone
because one of my passions iseducation. I don't think it's
possible to get a moderneducation without having full

(44:49):
time access to the internet. Andyet, I don't know if you're
aware of the fact that somethinglike half of our students Today,
for one reason, or do not haveaccess to the internet, or at
least not full time access, theyeither don't have coverage,
could you imagine them in anadvanced country like the US,

(45:13):
and something like 70% of ourpopulation has no cell phone
coverage at all, doesn't makeany sense at all. So, and
another 30, or 40% of ourstudents can't afford cell
phones. And so you have thespecter of, of a significant

(45:38):
percentage of the population,being highly educated, having
access to the internet, we knowthat that stimulates the mind, I
hate to admit it, but these kidstoday are going to grow up
smarter than any of the rest ofus as a whole. I sure hope so.

(45:59):
And now we're gonna say, Well,we're gonna half of our
population are going to be thedummies, the ones that didn't
have access to the internet, Idon't think our society could
accept that. That is smart classand a dumb class. So we got some
huge problems. Just there's aproblem with this group bark is

(46:25):
where too much of agreement eachother. I've always looked
at fight the contrarian.
I start talking to these peoplethat are talking about 5g and
six g and millimeter waves. AndI think they are off on a
different planet.

(46:45):
Marty, I chose the three of you,because I felt after
interviewing all three of youthat you were on the same page,
and the only way you're going tomake changes in this world is
really realistically, I mean,obviously, you all have
different opinions on differentthings. But that doesn't mean
you're not on the same page. Youhave a certain historical
knowledge, base and experience.
And it really helps. You know,I've turned around an awful lot

(47:08):
of companies and I didn't do itwithout people being on the same
page, getting them on the samepage. So you want to make I
think you want to make somemajor changes in the world. You
got to get some people that say,you know, it's like a community,
the community gets together andthose that baseball field or,
you know, does whatever theywant, you know, they don't they
do something constructive.

(47:30):
Because they get on the samethey get on the same page.
So Marty, any, you know, I'dlove to get in lawn both, you
know, thoughts on the metaverse.
I'm sorry, David. I didn't likethe metaverse, any thoughts on
the metaverse? Oh, yeah.
There's another. If you couldtell me what the metaverse is.

(47:55):
I might be accused of leadingthe witness, though, then. But I
got a lotto say about the metaverse. It
was nonsense. That video thatZuckerberg put together was just
total PR crap with the stuffthat he showed, I totally have
an opinion on this. I mean, hewas way over selling the
capabilities. I mean, he had AIand virtual reality and

(48:18):
augmented reality, when in fact,most computers can't handle what
he was even showing. Nobody hadthe bandwidth to do it. Nobody's
paying 350 bucks for a set ofgoggles to do that. And it's
never gonna go mainstream. Andhe talks about it like it's, oh
my gosh, we invented the mostamazing thing. I've been on
Second Life since 2007 15 years,I've been doing everything that

(48:42):
he said. That's nothing new.
It's been around for 15 years.
And there's other platforms forBella and some other ones. I had
two ecommerce stores I taughtclasses on Second Life, I did
all the stuff that he's braggingabout that he can't do in his
video that we have been doingfor 15 years. It was all about
pumping the stock. The stock wastanking, because what was going

(49:04):
on with the elections, he had todo something to distract to the
shareholders.
Well, you finally got a littlebit of discord. It was
a controversy.
You just got to know where thehand grenades are located mark.
Even a skeptic like land willhave to agree that sooner or

(49:26):
later, I've been everybody isgoing to be a useful tool. So
virtual reality. We're still inthe game stage are we learned?
Yeah, we are. I totally agreewith it. Yes. And lon I did an
interview a few weeks back, youknow, and the question came up,
you know, in and around themetaverse and and i i Can the

(49:47):
angle I took was one more ofjust look we've we've just come
in we're coming out of two yearsof lockdown and and you know,
separation and you knowliterally just inside our heads
and inside our digital devices,and you're telling me we're
going to double down on that viasome kind of metal, it's just
like no. In fact, I think that'sjust further compounds the

(50:10):
problem. I mean, we don't wantmore disintermediation, we want
more human connection. And Iliterally, that to me is that
gets back to the yin and theyang, we need, we need this, we
need to be able to connect talk,dialogue, agree, disagree. But
you know, it's what we're, it'sit's, it's what we're designed

(50:30):
for. That's fundamentally who weare, well put
in doing some research for ourour interviews, I went around
and looked at, you know,different, not just the IT area,
but you know, change in general.
And there's an organizationcalled the association of

(50:51):
leadership, associatedleadership. It's, you know,
nonprofits associated Cal, CPAs,and association, something like
that. And they have developedmajor drivers, and one of the
major drivers that I found thatwas fairly new to them, for them
was more human humane, morehuman humans. In the face of

(51:12):
expanding automation, therelative value of certain human
qualities, including socialskills, and creativity will
increase markedly. In otherwords, taking, you know, this
has gotten to be one of ourmajor drivers and only went on
their list in 2020. But humanswill remain relevant less by
knowing and more by thinking,listening, relating and

(51:34):
collaborating at the highestlevel. And creating. Yep, yeah.
Well, so it kind of speaks towhat you're talking about.
Very well put. Yeah. Appreciatethat.
Marty, you want to you want tojump in on that Metaverse, you
were the first one to get theball over there.
Oh, I think I have it's anotherbuzzword. I want to understand

(52:03):
how this is going to affect mychildren. By the way, I have two
and a half great grandchildrennow. So I can't brag about being
the oldest guy around becauseit's not a great advantage. But
having all those lovely childrenbecause associativity is

(52:26):
awesome. Once again, these arethe executives, these Zuckerberg
talking to Zephyr Gerber, not tothe rest of us. What is this
multiverse concept? Is thescience fiction kind of
something. In here, we got somepractical problems, like the

(52:50):
biggest problem we've got isprivacy. You know, for years,
I've been telling people thatprivacy doesn't exist anymore.
But the reality is that wedepend upon privacy to to keep
our financial system going. Toavoid fraud, or to all of those

(53:13):
kinds of things that we're notdoing very well at the moment.
And you know who the biggestenemy is? Its ourselves. We have
learned Amazon and Google thatpersuade us is that our
information, our likes anddislikes, and who we talked to

(53:34):
that it's, they can have it fornothing. They could just use all
this thing and make tons ofmoney and have us only benefit
peripherally. So somehow, wehave a fundamental change, where
somebody puts a value on ourinformation and gives us
something in return. We got abig challenge. In that regard.

(53:59):
With social media. We've got thebig challenge of how do you
separate out fake news from RealNews. The internet's gonna be a
educational tool. How do weteach our students to
discriminate between the goodstuff and the bad stuff? So

(54:21):
thank goodness, there are noproblems for us engineers would
go out of business, right.
I have one big, you know, we'rekind of coming up to the end.
But I want to give an end Jamesa little bit of questions. But I
it's kind of a long question,but I'd like to kind of shorten
the answer a little bit. Allthree of you have been involved

(54:43):
in developmental aspects of itor, you know, just creativity in
general. I'm wondering ifthere's any particular project
where you wished that you hadbeen able to keep going, and now
you had reached a certainplateau? and either, you know,
any number of variables can, youknow, any different distraction

(55:06):
can come by and you, you don'tget a chance to take something
to a fuller, you know, towardsfull value. I'm gonna start with
David and then lon and thenwe'll end with Marty on that
one. So David, anything, youdeveloped a lot of things in
your life?
Yeah. And I would say, I don'tknow that I feel like there's
anything where, you know, kindof, you know, cut cut out early

(55:30):
or, or that didn't take itthrough to, you know, it's, you
know, what I would have hopedfor, you know, it's logical, you
know, a better endpoint. And soI'm just, and I'm absolutely
the, the glass half full guy,I'm, I'm excited to see where we
go with AI. And again, not newtechnology, but the influence

(55:51):
that it's got. And we know,there's headwinds, and we've
talked about him, you know, interms of, you know, everything
from truth to versus fake news,and you name it and, or, you
know, utilizing, you know, ourown information against us, I
really, we've got some, somesome incredible opportunity in
front of us, we got some hugechallenges, too. And so it's

(56:16):
just really, I hope we don't, weare able to, to really continue
to have clarity, we don't becomea victim of ourselves. As we
kind of move on, we try to moveall this forward, and it just
bears out every day, you know,you hear you see, you know, just
I mean, just hanging out, and,you know, any of the comments

(56:39):
sections, and any, you know, youknow, any, anything you read on
the internet, you're just goingholy cow, I really, you know,
that's if I've got concerns,it's that, you know, I think
we're, you know, we arepotentially, you know, very
exposed to, you know, evenmanipulating ourselves, right.
And I just finished an article,you know, I keep mentioning

(57:02):
reengineering a lot ofcompanies, and probably the
number one thing that I've hadto do over the years is
eliminate distractions, as bestI can, as you can get those
distractions down. And thosedistractions can be anything. I
mean, it doesn't mean it's justtechnology, it's humans, it's
all kinds of things. You know, Isaw it on the newspaper today.
And now we have to do this, youknow, people get reactive to

(57:25):
stuff like that. And I agree,we're not educating ourselves to
process information in a waythat
critical thinking and use itYeah, critical thinking,
wow, what do you?
Yeah, I look back on a lot ofthe major projects that I've
worked on, and I don't, I don'tfeel like I wish I would have
stayed with it any longer. Andthe reason is, is that those

(57:47):
projects evolved as technologyevolved, and I evolved the
technology and things werealways changing the there was
this evolution. So at the end ofeach project, the logical
because there was alwayssomething new, there was some
kind of a breakthrough in theinternet, that computers changed
everything in my lifetime. Andthe next biggest change was by
far, the internet. And theyprovided new opportunities. So I

(58:13):
felt very comfortable that I hadtaken whatever I was working on
as far as I could. And that nowit's time to take advantage of
whatever the newest technologieswere. And in order to stay on
the cutting edge, you alwayshave to stay ahead of that wave.
And it's difficult. It takes alot of work. But it's also the
most exciting place by far tobe. So yeah, I was excited about

(58:37):
that. So I evolved ascivilization and technology
evolved over the last 30 years.
And for example, over the lastfour years, maybe I teach top
executives, AI, ar, VR, and IoT,because those four technologies
are going to impact us more thansocial media, as much as the
internet, they are the four mostimpactful and they're in our

(59:00):
lives already. And we don't evennotice that they're embedded in
our lives. But if you have adoorbell that talks to you, you
have aI if you're watchingNetflix, you have AI, if you're
driving a car that's five yearsor or less old, it's got AI, VR,
virtual reality, augmentedreality. And of course, Internet

(59:21):
of Things, Internet of Things isgoing to be really huge. When
all these devices startcommunicating with one another.
And they're already beginning todo that. So I want to drop
whatever I'm doing and now geton that next get ahead of that
next wave and focus on thosefour technologies. And I'm
excited about it because theopportunity is limitless.

(59:44):
like Elon, how about you,Martin? Anything, anything that
you wish you'd take into abetter better level or how it
might impact you might haveimpacted you today.
Mark if you haven't figured itout by now I am the app For most
of the world, I have had manymore failures than my life that

(01:00:07):
I have successes. And I wouldnot change a single one of those
things because I know that if Ichange something, somebody else
would change. And what are thebest things that ever happened
to me when I joined Motorola, in1954, that's probably before any
of you were born. The thefounder of Motorola, actually,

(01:00:33):
moderately successful, Motoroladidn't happen until the several
failures. And one of them is anexample of automobiles at that
time, around 1928. When I wasborn, and didn't have heaters or
radios, they were just both havetransportation. And Paul Galvin

(01:00:57):
came up with a to car heater,and managed to get it funded and
started building him. And he didgreat until the heater started
exploding. That took care ofthat. Fortunately, you did get
ultimately got into the puttingradios in cars. And even there,

(01:01:18):
the first banker that he wentto, said, Well, okay, if you
could put a radio in the car,see if you can put it into my
Cadillac. And that didn't workout very well, because the
Cadillac caught fire, as theyweren't ready to drill a hole
for the radios. So being able tohandle failure is extraordinary

(01:01:43):
requirement. And the reality is,that's the only way you could
learn if you don't take achance. You don't learn anything
new. So I don't believe youlearn that you have had only a
one long series of successes.
Oh, no, no, anybody. Were asbasic as Mike's learned from
them, and became a better personwhen they did that. And I think

(01:02:07):
that that is a feedback loop.
Loop that puts us into what Icall I forgot what I call it.
Self optimization, nice things,you get enough feedback, you
correct things, and the world isgetting better we are today in

(01:02:32):
the world, healthier, richer,believe it or not, we are more
ecology conscious than everbefore. And we've got problems
every one of these areas, butthe trend is upward. And I have
a great belief. It's repeated inboth people and technology. They

(01:02:59):
it's very hard to predict thefuture, other than to know that
things have been getting better.
And go reasonably, they're notgoing to keep improving in the
future.
Oh, you'll keep us positive.
That's for sure. David, I'mwatching your face. And I'm
thinking do you have a question?
Or you want to say something?
Oh, and I just I think Marty dida good, you know, it's the whole

(01:03:20):
end of innovators dilemma. And,you know, just trying to think
about? Yeah, you know, you know,it's learning from failure. And,
and, you know, in really evenleveraging that. So leveraging
technology and leveraging thelearning that comes through
trying and, and, you know, youthink of all the Near Death

(01:03:41):
Experiences that so many of the,you know, the amazing
entrepreneurs, even in ourlifetime have survived, and you
know, and thrived ultimately, asa as a as a part of that. And
it's, and that should inspire usall. That would be my only
thought.
Sometimes the harder it is, thebetter it is, you know,
sometimes. And you all you andJames, always love to ask you a

(01:04:06):
few questions. So if these guysare ready for you,
I have really less of a questionand more of a statement and that
is that I adore you all andenjoy listening to you
immensely. And lon, I'm rightwith you on an early adapter.
And I'm with David on all thegadgets I love. But my biggest

(01:04:27):
revelation, both calls has beenMarty on a democratization of
access to education to thesetools and a we're never gonna
get better until we bringeverybody to a platform that
works. And I was so completelynaive until the pandemic I was

(01:04:50):
not aware that these kids had tobe driven to the library to get
on the internet or sit outsidetheir uncle's house seems to be
on the internet, I was notaware. And so I think that more
noise needs to be made byprobably all of us. In fact,
until we get, you know, allboats rise, we're not going to

(01:05:11):
get where we want to be. Verynice. Thank you, Marty.
Um, I have a ton of things I'dlike to talk about, but we don't
have time. And then you guys arejust the kind of people that
provoked that kind of thinking.
And some of his pessimistic andI'm not going to do anything
pessimistic in the presence ofMarty, that's fantastic. I will

(01:05:31):
say this, though, to kind ofpiggyback a little bit in my own
way on what Anne was saying, I,I feel like you really hit the
nail on the head, because Inever liked thinking of myself
as a consumer. And I don't likethe idea that this technology
becomes a consumer issue. We'resomebody who can afford to

(01:05:53):
spend, you know, $1,000 on acell phone has access to
technology that somebody whocan't afford it does. And I just
think that that's a big issue tohit hit on, because there's so
much momentum in the otherdirection. You know, I never
thought of myself as a consumer.
And I like to think of myself, Ilike to think of myself as not a

(01:06:16):
consumer, but I have to have acellphone, I have to have 24
hour, seven day a week access tothe internet, or I can't
function. So I have to be aconsumer of this technology. And
I have to have conversationswhere you know, I'm in this I
live in the same house as mydaughter who pays twice as much
for cellular access than I do.
You know, it's just you see thatkind of disparity happening even

(01:06:37):
within your own domicile. Sothat's just I really appreciate
you guys bringing that thattopic up. And I think a lot of
what we're talking about willdovetail through it'll go
through that Gris, no matterwhat it's going to, it's going
to have to run up against thatthat litmus test. And I just
hope our society rises to theoccasion and sides. It's not a

(01:07:00):
consumer issue. It's a equalaccess. It's an equity issue.
And we're about equity, I hope.
Well,Jack barca, these comments a bi
N and N j's are veryappropriate. Because right now,
we have left our big carriers, Ihope that none of you are

(01:07:24):
associated with T or Verizon, orwe'll let them kind of control
the conversation. And they areinvesting hugely, in a segment
of the market that excludesmaybe 70 or 80% of the
population. They're they'reputting high density millimeter

(01:07:45):
waves in the middle of New York.
And when there are places inSouth Dakota, and Indiana and
places like that, that have zerocoverage. So somehow rather, FCC
who somewhat controls thesethings, a radio spectrum, it's

(01:08:06):
got to shape up. And so far,they're down to a very good job.
And I'm, I hope they're notlistening to this thing, because
they could kick me off thisadvisory council. And they are,
yeah, that's why you're there.
Give me an example. And theirsolution to the digital divide
that that we've been talkingabout here, is let's subsidize

(01:08:29):
the cable companies. So theycould give cable to people at a
lower price. You know, first ofall, cable doesn't do it all.
And second of all, who couldafford even the subsidize cable?
So I was dismayed by the factthat we had four carriers. And

(01:08:52):
two of them combined. Theyshould never have let that
happen. We need morecompetition. Right now. All
these carriers at least a TN Tand Verizon are trying to copy
each other instead of competewith each other. And they're
still acting like they're theirbell system. Like there were now
please. Much as I'm optimisticabout things I'm still an

(01:09:18):
engineer and I still feel flawseverywhere. And the only bad
things about this session yousit up Marcus, is all the
panelists agree with me? Sothat's not very interesting.
That's the first that's thefirst shot you ever took out?
You gotta get an argument going.

(01:09:39):
Yeah.
I want to I want somethingcreative. Anyway, David, I watch
I watch you get your mind rightunder me. So you were there.
What are you thinking there?
No, I I again, I appreciate youknow, all of you know just that.

(01:09:59):
That concerns regarding thedigital divide, you know, where
we go with? You know, it doesyou want to talk about, you
know, anything, anything aroundsocial justice and and, you
know, equity I think, you know,it has to be, you know, equal
access or or, you know,essentially access for all.
Because otherwise, you know, wealready, you know, are

(01:10:23):
struggling with, you know, thehaves and the have nots, and
this has the this, this couldexponentially, you know,
exacerbate that. And that'sthat's a huge issue.
Thank you, Lauren. You want onemore? One more shot? Yeah, I
completely agree. I did a lot ofwork in India. And if you want
to see have and have nots, andI'm not just talking about cell

(01:10:44):
phone, I'm talking about basichuman rights. It I couldn't
believe it in till I wasactually there and experienced
it. And I saw what happened tothat country because of that
divide, that was a human divide.
And yeah, you're absolutelyright. My daughter is a teat, my
both of my daughters areteachers. And during the COVID,
she had a really terrible,terrible time trying to keep

(01:11:06):
those students occupied tryingto get them online and trying to
have the resources becausenobody was prepared for this.
And you're right until the US,which is one of the greatest
countries in the world, if notthe best, until we realize that
and make it equal opportunityfor everybody. It shouldn't be
like some of the ADEA rules. Itshould be equal for all,

(01:11:30):
you're absolutely right, commondenominator.
So you know, even though wedidn't have a lot of discord,
you did agree that probably thestepping point here is the
educational perspective and theequity aspect of it, that
everybody gets an opportunity tobe part of the solution. Part of

(01:11:51):
the development and with morepeople, more people having
larger needs that just drives alarger market. At the same time.
You know, if you're missing 70%,you're missing an awful lot on
the market, right? You'remissing a lot of business,
you're missing a lot ofopportunity. So I think you did
come up, ultimately, with thelast three, the last three

(01:12:13):
statements on all three of youis that together, you're agree
you can put your hands togetherand say we could do something in
that in that area. Because webelieve it when you experience
it every day in one way or oneway or the other. I want to
thank you both. All three ofyou. I said bold I apologize all
three, subconsciouslyeliminating on that one market,
just just asking, just asking.

(01:12:38):
Should I keep out?
I vote it was Marty, I've justgiven him
a zinger. Well, I haven't pickedon Marty and I haven't picked on
anybody. But I will say that.
For me, when you talk abouteducation, and you talk about I
totally believe everybody shouldhave information. But I don't, I

(01:12:59):
don't believe that the internetcan help us with wisdom. And we
are losing wisdom. You know, yousee it in all aspects of our,
our life, whether it'sgovernmental, political,
whatever, there's the idea ofwisdom, understanding, and
working through things from froma sense of understanding and

(01:13:20):
understanding, you know,everything, you got to find
thing other things out, youknow, I think, you know,
Creative Conversations, theability to not bifurcate each
other because I have moreinformation in new ways to learn
how to use information in a waythat really does advance the
process, as opposed to using itto you know, you talked about

(01:13:43):
the word weaponized. David, inmany ways information can be
weaponized to keep other peopleout. Maybe that's part of what
goes on with Marty says it's,it's, you know, the information
isn't getting to other people,because it allows others to have
power. Anyway, I'm glad you guyswere able to get here and chat
and take the time to do it. Andyour information was phenomenal.

(01:14:06):
Mark, thankyou proud to be part of this.
Yeah. Thank you. This was anhonor. Thank you.
You're always stimulating work.
Thank you. Sorry, I might haveto, I might have to accuse you
of being wise. You learn that.

(01:14:26):
wisdom, wisdom is important. Butthank you for inviting me to do
like to meet the rest of you insession. Five,
we will. We will make sure youall have your information about
each other. Don't hesitate toconnect and chat with each
other. So I would love it.
Excellent. Have a nice day. Havea nice week. Thank you all.

(01:14:47):
Thank you

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Ep-11 Always Creating Value™ Podcast for Successful Businesses –Panel Discussion on A.I.

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

All Episodes

Ep-11 Always Creating Value™ Podcast for Successful Businesses –Panel Discussion on A.I.

Stuff You Should Know