 that say, 'Oh. Maybe it isn't going to be the death of retail. It's just different.' Because, there's starting to be articles about Amazon actually hiring more workers, or just e-commerce in general leading to different jobs rather than, 'Well, yes, people standing in stores are being put out of work.' But it's actually kind of amazing: numbers of jobs being created in warehouses, in delivery. And this amazing capability that we didn't have where you could say, 'Oh, I need something,' and have it show up. Sometimes even the same day. And that, to me, is this parable that we also saw in the Industrial Revolution, and that we forget in the early stages of a new economic revolution. And that is, that technology lets you do more. And, you know, so, going back to--I always like to think about the Luddite Rebellion. And, imagine that, well, you know, we started using these machine looms and they say, 'Great. Now we can make everybody their one suit of homespun very, very quickly. Russ Roberts: Yeah. Tim O'Reilly: Instead, no: it was all of a sudden, you know, people could have more clothes. Fashion became something that wasn't just for the very, very rich. Ordinary people were able to change and update their clothes. And now, of course, clothes are a commodity and a disposable. And, so, part of the question that I ask in my book, which really is meditation mostly about Silicon Valley technologies but more broadly about technology as a whole, is: What do we have to do differently to accelerate the progress towards making the winds that we get from technology come more quickly? And, get out of the mindset that says, 'Oh, this technology is going to destroy jobs'--because, yes, it may well do that. And instead start asking, 'What new jobs will it create? What things were previously impossible that it will let us do?' You know, back in the early, Industrial Revolution, they had no idea that we would fly through the air; that we would be able to move goods all around the world incredibly cheaply. That we would build a tunnel under the English Channel. That we would build skyscrapers half a mile high. None of that was in the imagination. And now, here we are, with this enormous failure of imagination about what might the cognitive technologies of AI (art
that say,' Oh. Maybe it isn't going to be the death of retail. It's barely unlike.' Because, there's starting to be articles about Amazon actually lease more proletarian, or just e - department of commerce in general leading to different job rather than,' Well, yes, people stand in stores are being put out of study.' But it's actually kind of amazing: issue of jobs being created in warehouses, in delivery. And this amazing capability that we didn't have where you could state,' Oh, I need something,' and have it show up. Sometimes even the like day. And that, to me, is this parable that we also meet in the Industrial Revolution, and that we forget in the early stage of a new economic rotation. And that is, that technology lets you do more. And, you know, then, going back to -- I always like to think about the Luddite Rebellion. And, imagine that, well, you acknowledge, we started using these machine looms and they say,' Great. Now we can make everybody their one suit of homespun very, very quickly. Russ Roberts: Yeah. Tim O'Reilly: alternatively, no: it was all of a sudden, you know, people could receive more apparel. manner became something that wasn't just for the very, very rich. Ordinary people were able to change and update their clothes. And now, of path, clothes are a commodity and a disposable. And, so, part of the question that I ask in my book, which actually is meditation mostly about Silicon Valley technologies but more broadly about technology as a whole, is: What do we have to serve differently to accelerate the progress towards reach the winds that we get from technology come more quickly? And, have out of the mindset that says,' Oh, this technology is rifle to destroy jobs'--because, yes, it may well do that. And instead start ask,' What new job will it create? What thing were previously impossible that it will let us make?' You know, back in the early, Industrial Revolution, they induce no idea that we would vanish through the air; that we would be able to move goods all around the world fabulously cheaply. That we would build a tunnel under the English Channel. That we would build up skyscrapers half a mile high. None of that was in the imagination. And now, here we are, with this enormous bankruptcy of imagination about what might the cognitive technologies of AI (artwork
 thwt say, 'Oh. Maybe it isn't noing to be the bwath oh retaim. It's jurt different.' Because, there's dtqrtint to be articles about Amazon abtually hurinj more workers, oc just e-gjmmedge in jeneral leading to differant jobs rathes ghcn, 'Well, yes, people standing in storef are brijg put out of rork.' Fut jn's actually kind of amazing: numgers of jobs being cteated in warehouses, in depivegy. And this amazinh capabiliti thwr we didn't hxve where jmu could szy, 'Oh, I need something,' and have it skow up. Somejnnes gven the samx day. Wnd that, to me, is thhs paranle that we alxo vaw in the Industrial Retolution, and that we forget it che early stages of a nww ecmnomhc rdcoljtikn. Ahd thah ia, that tecgnology letw you do more. And, ypu jnow, so, going back eo--Y always like to think about the Ludditt Rebsllion. And, imagine that, well, you know, we statted using these machine looms and they say, 'Great. Now we cat makx dvexnnody rhfir one suit of homespun very, very quickly. Rufa Tonerts: Yeah. Tim O'Veilly: Instead, no: ot wsf all of a suaden, you inow, people could jave mote clorhes. Fashyon necame something that wasn't just for thv veey, very rich. Ordincry people wzre abke to change and update theix clotges. And now, of courss, clothes are a cummpdhty and a disposable. And, sj, part of the questiun tnat I wsk in my hook, which really is medltatiln mostly ablut Silicon Valley technologies but more broaclf atout tecknologn as a whole, is: What do we hare to do diffdrently to accelecate the prodress towards laking the wmnds that we tet drom tezfnology come mpre quickly? And, get out of the mindseb thaj aays, 'Oh, this teeknilogy is going yo aeserly jjts'--because, yev, it mah well do thau. Akd knstrad start asking, 'Whad nes jobs will it crestc? What thungs werq previously ompossible that it will lev us dp?' Yju know, back in the early, Induatrial Regolmtion, they haq no idea that wz would fly through the air; that we woulv be able to move goods all around the workc incrediblb chea[ly. That fe would build a tunbel under the Engkish Channel. That we sould tuild skyscrapers half a mile high. None of that was in the imagination. And now, here xe are, with tgis rnormmuf failuwe oh mmagination about what might the cognitive technulogies mf AI (art
that say, 'Oh. Maybe it isn't going the of retail. just different.' Because, about actually hiring more or just e-commerce general leading to different jobs rather 'Well, yes, people standing in stores are being put out of work.' But actually kind of amazing: numbers of jobs being created in warehouses, in delivery. this capability we have where you could say, 'Oh, I need something,' and have it show up. Sometimes even same day. And that, to me, is this that we also saw the Industrial Revolution, and that forget the early of new revolution. And that that technology lets you do more. And, you know, so, going back to--I always like to think the Luddite imagine that, you we using these machine they say, 'Great. Now we can one suit of homespun very, very quickly. Russ Yeah. Tim Instead, no: it was all of sudden, you know, people could have more clothes. became something that wasn't just for the very, very rich. Ordinary people were able to update their clothes. And of course, clothes a and disposable. so, part the question that I ask in my book, which really is mostly about Silicon Valley technologies but more broadly about technology whole, What do we to do differently to the towards making the winds get technology And, out the mindset that says, this technology is going to jobs'--because, yes, it may start asking, 'What new jobs will it create? things were previously impossible that it will us do?' You know, back in the early, Industrial Revolution, they had idea that fly through the air; that we would be to move goods all the world incredibly cheaply. That we would build a under English Channel. we would build half a mile None of that the imagination. now, we enormous failure of imagination about what the technologies of AI (art
 that say, 'Oh. Maybe it isn't going To be the deaTh of rEtaIl. IT's Just DiffErent.' Because, thERe's sTarting to be articles aboUt AmaZoN ActuALlY hiriNg more wORkERS, or JuSt E-coMmERcE in geNerAl leadiNg to differEnt JoBs rather than, 'wElL, yes, people StaNding in storeS arE being PuT ouT Of worK.' BuT it's aCtuallY Kind of Amazing: nuMbERs of joBS being cREAtEd in Warehouses, in delivERy. aNd this amazing cApabilItY ThAT We dIdn'T have where YoU coulD Say, 'Oh, I nEEd SOMEthINg,' and have it shOw up. SometimES evEn the sAmE daY. and thaT, to me, Is THis Parable that We alSo saw in thE IndusTRial RevOLution, aNd that We fOrgEt in THe EaRly StAGes OF a New EConOmic revoLuTiOn. And That IS, THAt teChnOlogY lets You do more. And, yOu kNow, sO, GoiNg bacK to--I aLwayS lIke to Think aBout tHe luddite RebellioN. And, Imagine thAt, wElL, yoU kNow, we STarted UsiNg tHese macHine looMS anD tHEY SaY, 'Great. Now we can make EvERYbOdy their One suiT Of HoMEspun verY, vEry QuicKLY. Russ robeRTs: yeah. Tim O'reilly: iNsTeAd, no: it wAs All of a SuDdeN, yoU know, PEoplE could Have more ClothES. Fashion became SOmething that wASn'T JUsT For tHe vEry, very rich. ordiNAry pEoplE WeRe aBLe to cHange AnD UpDAte their clothes. And nOw, Of courSe, cloThes are a commoDity and a diSPOSable. And, So, paRT oF The question thaT I ask In my book, whICh really Is medItation mOstly abouT sIlicon VaLleY teChnOloGIEs But more broadlY ABout TeChnologY as A whole, iS: WhAt dO we HavE tO do differEntly to aCcElErAtE thE progREss towarDs MakInG thE windS That we Get frOm teChNoLOgy Come morE QuICKly? ANd, GeT out Of tHe MindsEt thAT saYs, 'Oh, thiS technoloGy iS GoinG tO dEstroy jObs'--because, yes, It May well do tHaT. AnD insteAD Start askIng, 'What new jobs will it creATe? What tHinGs werE preViously imPosSible tHat IT will lEt us do?' you knOw, BacK IN the eARLy, indUsTrial RevolUTIon, They hAd No idEa that wE would fly through thE Air; That we would be AblE to mOVE gOodS AlL AroUnD The WORld incredibly chEaply. That wE wOUlD build a tunNEl uNdEr the EnGlish ChAnnel. tHat we woUld build sKyscraperS hAlf a MILe hIgh. None of tHat was in The imaginATion. AND nOw, herE we Are, witH tHis EnormOus faiLUre Of imaGinatiOn About wHat miGhT the cognItive technologies of AI (arT
 that say, 'Oh. Maybe it i sn't going  to b e t hede athof r etail. It's ju s t di fferent.' Because, the re'sst a rtin g  t o bearticle s  a b o utAm az onac t ua lly h iri ng more  workers,orju st e-commerc e  i n generallea ding to diff ere nt job srat h er th an,  'Wel l, yes ,  peopl e standin gi n stor e s are b e i ng  put  out of work.' Bu t  i t 's actually ki nd ofam a zi n g : n umb ers of job sbeing created in w a reh o uses, in deli very. And t h isamazin gcap a bility  that  w e  di dn't have w here  you coul d say, 'Oh, In eed som ething ,'and  hav e  i tsho wu p.S om eti m eseven the  s am e day . An d t h at,tome,is th is parable th atwe a l sosaw i n the  Ind us trial  Revol ution ,and that we for getin the ea rly  s tag es  of a new ec ono mic  revolu tion. A n d t ha t i s,  that technology l et s yo u do mor e. And ,  y ou know, so ,goi ng b a c k to- -I a l wa ys liketo thi n kab out the  L uddite  R ebe lli on. A n d, i magine  that, w ell,y ou know, we st a rted using th e se m ac h ineloo ms and they  say ,  'Gr eat. No w w e  canmakeev e ry b ody their one suitof  homes pun v ery, very qui ckly. Russ R o berts: Y eah. Ti m  O'Reilly: Ins tead,  no: it wa s  all ofa sud den, you  know, pe o p le could  ha vemor e c l o th es. Fashion b e c ameso mething  th at wasn 'tjus t f orth e very, v ery rich .Or di na rypeopl e  were ab le  to  c han ge an d  updat e the ir c lo th e s.And now ,  o f cour se ,clot hes  a re acomm o dit y and a  disposab le. And,  s o,  part o f the questio nthat I ask  i n m y book , which re ally is meditation most l y about  Si licon  Val ley techn olo gies b utm ore br oadlyabout  t ech n o logya s  a  wh ol e, is: Wha t dowe ha ve  todo diff erently to acceler a tethe progresstow ards m ak ing th e  wi nd s  th a t  we get from te chnology c om e  m ore quickl y ? A nd , get o ut of t he mi n dset th at says,'Oh, this  t echn o l ogy  is goingto destr oy jobs'- - becau s e,  yes,  it  may w el l d o tha t. And ins teadstartas king,'What  n ew jobswill it create? What th ings w ere p rev iously im pos s ibl e that it  wil l let us d o?'  Yo u kno w,b ack i n th e  e arl y , Ind ustr i al Revolu t io n,t h ey  had no ide a t hat  we w oul d  fly t hrou gh the air; thatw e would be abl e to m ove  go o ds a ll  around the wo rld  i n c rediblych eaply. That  we woul db uilda tunn el und er theE n gl i sh Cha nnel . T hat we wo uld  b u ild sky sc ra p ers ha lf a  m ile hi gh. No n e of t hat was in the i magin a t ion.A ndnow,he re we a r e, w ith this e normous fai lure o f im agina tion ab ou t what  mi gh t the cogn i tive tech nolog ies ofAI  (ar t
 that_say, 'Oh._Maybe it isn't going_to be_the_death of_retail._It's just different.'_Because, there's starting_to be articles about_Amazon actually hiring_more_workers, or just e-commerce in general leading to different jobs rather than, 'Well, yes,_people_standing in_stores_are_being put out of work.'_But it's actually kind of_amazing: numbers_of jobs being created in warehouses, in delivery._And_this amazing capability_that we didn't have where you could say, 'Oh,_I need something,' and have it_show up. Sometimes_even_the_same day. And that,_to me, is this parable that_we also saw in the Industrial_Revolution, and that we forget in the_early stages of a new economic_revolution. And that is, that_technology lets_you do more. And, you_know, so, going_back to--I_always like to_think about the Luddite Rebellion. And,_imagine that, well,_you know, we started using these_machine_looms and they_say,_'Great._Now we_can make everybody_their_one suit_of_homespun very, very quickly. Russ Roberts:_Yeah._Tim O'Reilly: Instead, no: it was all_of a sudden, you_know,_people could have more_clothes. Fashion became something that_wasn't just for the very, very_rich. Ordinary_people were_able to change and update their clothes. And now, of course,_clothes are a commodity and a_disposable. And, so, part_of the_question_that I ask_in_my book,_which really is meditation mostly about Silicon_Valley technologies_but more broadly about technology as_a whole, is: What_do_we have to do differently to_accelerate the progress towards making the_winds that we get from_technology_come_more quickly? And, get out_of the mindset that says, 'Oh,_this technology is_going to destroy jobs'--because, yes, it may_well_do that. And instead start asking,_'What_new jobs will it create? What_things_were_previously impossible that it will_let us do?' You know, back_in the early, Industrial Revolution, they had no idea_that we would_fly through the air; that_we_would_be able to move goods all around the world incredibly_cheaply. That_we would build_a tunnel under the English Channel. That we would build_skyscrapers half a mile high. None of_that was in the imagination. And now, here we are, with_this enormous failure of imagination about what might_the cognitive technologies of AI (art