1
00:00:01,370 --> 00:00:07,460
Hi, my name is Mike Wooldridge, I am head of Department of Computer Science at the University of Oxford.

2
00:00:07,460 --> 00:00:13,850
I am, as you might guess, home. I like, I guess most people on this on this webinar are.

3
00:00:13,850 --> 00:00:17,820
It's my very great pleasure to welcome you to the straight.

4
00:00:17,820 --> 00:00:26,780
She lecture for Michaelmas term 2020. This is, I think, the first straight lecture that has been completely virtual.

5
00:00:26,780 --> 00:00:31,480
You could regard that as a feature or a bug, depending on your point of view.

6
00:00:31,480 --> 00:00:39,200
As with all of these kind of events, glitches happen. The technology is not perfect and we're having to coordinate things very remotely.

7
00:00:39,200 --> 00:00:43,850
So if things go wrong back with us, we will recover very, very quickly, I'm sure.

8
00:00:43,850 --> 00:00:50,330
So on to today's lecture. Today's lecture is by Matt Ridley.

9
00:00:50,330 --> 00:00:59,960
Matt Ridley is a Matt Ridley, sits in the House of Lords on the conservative benches.

10
00:00:59,960 --> 00:01:04,910
He has been there since 2013. His books have sold over a million copies.

11
00:01:04,910 --> 00:01:09,140
They've been translated into 32 languages and they've won several awards.

12
00:01:09,140 --> 00:01:14,210
His books include The Red Queen Genome, The Rational Optimist and the Evolution of Everything.

13
00:01:14,210 --> 00:01:18,860
And the reason he's here today is that his most recent book is entitled How Innovation Works.

14
00:01:18,860 --> 00:01:24,530
It was published in 2020. He joined the House of Lords in February 2013.

15
00:01:24,530 --> 00:01:31,780
He served on the Science and Technology Select Committee in the Artificial Intelligence Select Committee.

16
00:01:31,780 --> 00:01:35,410
He was founding chairman for the International Centre for Life in Newcastle.

17
00:01:35,410 --> 00:01:40,750
He created the Mind and Matter column for The Wall Street Journal in 2010, and he was a columnist for The Times.

18
00:01:40,750 --> 00:01:47,740
In 2013 through to 2018, he is a fellow of the Royal Society of Literature and the Academy of Medical Sciences.

19
00:01:47,740 --> 00:01:54,220
And he is a foreign honorary member of the American Academy of the Arts and Sciences, and he lives in Northumberland.

20
00:01:54,220 --> 00:01:58,690
You may wonder what is the special interest in maths? Well, two reasons.

21
00:01:58,690 --> 00:02:03,790
Firstly, I encountered maps through his service on the House of Lords Select Committee for Artificial Intelligence,

22
00:02:03,790 --> 00:02:09,490
which I gave evidence at, and and he has a special interest in that.

23
00:02:09,490 --> 00:02:17,080
But in addition, his most recent book is on innovation and Innovation is something which in the Department of Computer Science,

24
00:02:17,080 --> 00:02:26,680
we are extremely active in at the moment. This is an unprecedented time with respect to innovation in the Department of Computer Science.

25
00:02:26,680 --> 00:02:32,080
We have a range of spin off companies which have been enormously successful over the last few years.

26
00:02:32,080 --> 00:02:37,090
So we look forward to hearing what Matt has to tell us about how innovation actually works.

27
00:02:37,090 --> 00:02:42,700
Before I go any further, I have to give a very big shout out to our sponsors.

28
00:02:42,700 --> 00:02:50,050
We are this year, as always, extremely grateful to acknowledge the sponsorship of Oxford Asset Management.

29
00:02:50,050 --> 00:02:53,230
They had been sponsoring our lectures now for a number of years,

30
00:02:53,230 --> 00:02:59,230
and they have enabled us to do things with these lectures that simply weren't possible previously to take to bring PE,

31
00:02:59,230 --> 00:03:04,450
bring over speakers and to reach an audience that we wouldn't have been able to do previously.

32
00:03:04,450 --> 00:03:10,590
So we are extremely grateful to Oxford Asset Management. I think they would probably like me to say that they are hiring.

33
00:03:10,590 --> 00:03:17,050
So if you're interested in machine learning, for example, if you're interested in finance, Oxford Asset Management are currently hiring.

34
00:03:17,050 --> 00:03:23,230
And a number of our graduates and indeed one of my DFL students says has gone to work for them in the past.

35
00:03:23,230 --> 00:03:27,730
So that's Oxford Asset Management. As always, we are extremely grateful to them.

36
00:03:27,730 --> 00:03:32,830
So without further ado, what I'm going to hand over now would do now is hand over to Mat's lecture.

37
00:03:32,830 --> 00:03:47,610
So let's go live with Mat's lecture. Thank you. Good afternoon.

38
00:03:47,610 --> 00:03:55,380
It's great to be with you. It's a huge honour to deliver the stretchy lecture, and I'm most grateful to Michael Wooldridge for inviting me to do this.

39
00:03:55,380 --> 00:04:03,420
I've learnt a lot from him about artificial intelligence and other matters, and it's a real honour to be with you this afternoon.

40
00:04:03,420 --> 00:04:08,070
I only wish I could be in Oxford in person.

41
00:04:08,070 --> 00:04:18,210
The topic of my talk is innovation, and that's an enormous important subject and one on which an awful lot of people know an awful lot.

42
00:04:18,210 --> 00:04:28,660
What am I trying to bring to this topic? I think I'm trying to bring the perspective of an evolutionary biologist who has written about technology

43
00:04:28,660 --> 00:04:37,300
for 20 or 30 years and who has become more more interested in this mysterious phenomenon called innovation.

44
00:04:37,300 --> 00:04:41,500
What it is, why it happens to human beings at all.

45
00:04:41,500 --> 00:04:44,320
Why it happens when and where it does.

46
00:04:44,320 --> 00:04:56,140
And why it takes place quickly in some sectors and slowly and others and at different times and in different places at different rates.

47
00:04:56,140 --> 00:05:01,750
I believe it's a somewhat mysterious phenomenon. I don't think we fully understand innovation.

48
00:05:01,750 --> 00:05:12,130
Economic theory struggles to formally incorporate innovation and to explain why it's occurring, even though it relies upon it.

49
00:05:12,130 --> 00:05:16,450
Innovation is the main theme of the last few hundred years of human history.

50
00:05:16,450 --> 00:05:25,210
I would argue it explains the extraordinary enrichment of the human species, the incredible decline of poverty of recent decades.

51
00:05:25,210 --> 00:05:32,710
But also many of the trends that affect our politics are economics, our warfare and so on.

52
00:05:32,710 --> 00:05:39,520
So innovation matters. And this has been driven home to us enormously by the current pandemic.

53
00:05:39,520 --> 00:05:46,330
The fact that we entered this pandemic without having done enough innovation to our method of developing vaccines,

54
00:05:46,330 --> 00:05:52,210
for example, is, I think, an important point lesson that we need to learn.

55
00:05:52,210 --> 00:06:01,180
We haven't been able to improve the rate at which we produce vaccines or the efficiency with which they work much in recent decades.

56
00:06:01,180 --> 00:06:10,270
That may be changing. These messenger RNA vaccines and the one from Oxford have been developed at great speed and look to be very promising.

57
00:06:10,270 --> 00:06:17,440
But it took the pandemic to shake us out of what was essentially a complacency about medical innovation.

58
00:06:17,440 --> 00:06:21,700
In recent years, I would argue. So we need more innovation, not less.

59
00:06:21,700 --> 00:06:27,370
If we are to survive the 21st century in good order.

60
00:06:27,370 --> 00:06:35,720
Well, what I want to do is start sharing a few slides and talk through what I think are the important themes of innovation,

61
00:06:35,720 --> 00:06:44,190
and these come from my new book, How Innovation Works, which essentially tells a bunch of stories.

62
00:06:44,190 --> 00:06:52,230
I tell stories about the search engine and the steam engine, about vaccines, about vaping and after telling stories.

63
00:06:52,230 --> 00:06:57,660
I then try and distil out some lessons about what the patterns of innovation are.

64
00:06:57,660 --> 00:07:09,690
And I think they're slightly different from what we generally assume. So let me start by sharing some slides on my desk at home sits this object.

65
00:07:09,690 --> 00:07:14,850
It's an Australian handshake's of the kind used by Homo erectus.

66
00:07:14,850 --> 00:07:19,940
Half a million years ago, my wife bought it for me on eBay.

67
00:07:19,940 --> 00:07:25,450
And right next to it sits an object of exactly the same size and shape.

68
00:07:25,450 --> 00:07:31,790
And it sent a real shiver down my spine when I noticed the similarity. These two objects both designed to fit the human hand.

69
00:07:31,790 --> 00:07:36,980
Half a million years apart. It's an extraordinary connexion with our ancestors.

70
00:07:36,980 --> 00:07:45,120
And obviously, in a sense, that is half a million years of innovation to go from one object to the other.

71
00:07:45,120 --> 00:07:47,370
The differences between them are quite instructive, I think,

72
00:07:47,370 --> 00:07:54,180
because whereas the axe is made from a single substance and used by a single person who also made it.

73
00:07:54,180 --> 00:08:03,480
The mouse is not made by me, but it is used by me and it's made of lots of different substances, plastic and silicon and metal and so on.

74
00:08:03,480 --> 00:08:09,270
And it embodies lots of different ideas, ideas that occurred to different people at different times, in different places.

75
00:08:09,270 --> 00:08:12,520
And that, to me, is what innovation is all about,

76
00:08:12,520 --> 00:08:20,130
is about the sharing of ideas to increase the usefulness and efficiency of the objects and indeed the habits.

77
00:08:20,130 --> 00:08:26,890
The nonmaterial things by which we organise our world.

78
00:08:26,890 --> 00:08:32,550
And just to drive home what innovation can do.

79
00:08:32,550 --> 00:08:43,690
This is a chart of the number of people dying of malaria in the world between 1990 and 2003, and it was increasing at that time.

80
00:08:43,690 --> 00:08:49,110
And because of climate change, there were widespread predictions that it would increase even faster in the 21st century.

81
00:08:49,110 --> 00:08:53,370
That malaria mortality was something that was going to get worse, not better.

82
00:08:53,370 --> 00:08:57,970
But then in 2003, the graph simply went into reverse.

83
00:08:57,970 --> 00:09:10,440
And a huge decline in mortality from malaria ensued, largely thanks to improvements in the dreadful malaria mortality in sub-Saharan Africa.

84
00:09:10,440 --> 00:09:17,430
What happened in 2003? In 2003, an innovation was promulgated.

85
00:09:17,430 --> 00:09:23,970
Was was was spread across the continent of Africa, largely with the help of the Gates Foundation.

86
00:09:23,970 --> 00:09:30,150
It wasn't antimalarial drugs. It wasn't anti mosquito campaigns.

87
00:09:30,150 --> 00:09:41,490
It was the mosquito sorry. The insecticide impregnated bed net, the mosquito net with insecticide painted on it, a very simple low tech solution,

88
00:09:41,490 --> 00:09:46,980
which turns out to have been responsible for the vast majority of that decline in malaria mortality.

89
00:09:46,980 --> 00:09:53,420
And I was curious as to where this innovation came from, who came up with the idea and why has it been so effective?

90
00:09:53,420 --> 00:10:04,200
And I eventually tracked it back to a paper that was published in 1983 by some scientists from France,

91
00:10:04,200 --> 00:10:12,780
Vietnam and Burkina Faso who did a rather beautiful experiment in which they simply set up 36 huts in Burkina Faso,

92
00:10:12,780 --> 00:10:18,810
each designed as mosquito traps, as well as to mimic ordinary hut design.

93
00:10:18,810 --> 00:10:24,900
And they caught all the mosquitoes that tried to get into the huts and they caught all the mosquitoes trying to get out of the Hudson.

94
00:10:24,900 --> 00:10:29,370
They measured whether they were alive or dead and whether they had eaten a blood meal or not.

95
00:10:29,370 --> 00:10:34,020
And so on. And volunteers slept in these huts for several weeks.

96
00:10:34,020 --> 00:10:38,970
And they found that a mosquito and it was very helpful.

97
00:10:38,970 --> 00:10:42,060
Mosquito net with holes in it was not very helpful.

98
00:10:42,060 --> 00:10:48,930
Mosquito net with insecticide impregnated into it was very helpful, even more so than an ordinary mosquito net.

99
00:10:48,930 --> 00:10:55,200
A huge deterrent effect and remain just as effective even if it had holes in it.

100
00:10:55,200 --> 00:11:03,360
So having holes in it, which is mosquito nets often do after a time of use, did not detract from the effectiveness of this technology.

101
00:11:03,360 --> 00:11:08,400
It's a beautiful experiment. My point is that nobody's heard of this experiment.

102
00:11:08,400 --> 00:11:12,330
Nobody knows who Frederick Dairy at is. Who is the lead author on this?

103
00:11:12,330 --> 00:11:19,500
I contacted him and my bad French. I had communicated with him about how this came to be.

104
00:11:19,500 --> 00:11:29,610
And it's this sort of low tech, unheralded, unprofitable innovation that really can change the world.

105
00:11:29,610 --> 00:11:38,730
My first point that I took from the world, from the stories of innovation that I told, is that innovation is different from invention.

106
00:11:38,730 --> 00:11:43,500
It's not the same thing. Invention means coming up with a new device.

107
00:11:43,500 --> 00:11:49,920
Innovation means making that new device practical, affordable, available.

108
00:11:49,920 --> 00:11:55,740
And that isn't easy. In fact, it's often a lot more work than coming up with a new device in the first place.

109
00:11:55,740 --> 00:12:05,160
And there are innovations such as container shipping, which drastically reduce the cost of shipping goods around the world starting in the 1960s,

110
00:12:05,160 --> 00:12:09,600
which are not inventions at all, are not based on new technologies.

111
00:12:09,600 --> 00:12:18,330
They are simply taking existing technologies and redesigning them in in useful ways.

112
00:12:18,330 --> 00:12:26,250
So it's very important, I think, not to get hung up just on the famous inventor who has the first idea,

113
00:12:26,250 --> 00:12:35,750
but to think about the people who then take these ideas and turn them into practical, reliable and affordable technologies.

114
00:12:35,750 --> 00:12:41,720
To drive home the point, there's a rather funny story that was told by Charles Townes, the inventor of the laser.

115
00:12:41,720 --> 00:12:48,110
He said, there's a beaver and a rabbit. Looking at the Hoover Dam at the beaver says to the rabbit.

116
00:12:48,110 --> 00:12:52,390
No, I didn't build it. But it is based on an idea of mine.

117
00:12:52,390 --> 00:12:56,210
An all too often we focus on the person, on the beaver,

118
00:12:56,210 --> 00:13:02,630
on the person who first has the idea rather than on the people who turn those ideas into practical realities.

119
00:13:02,630 --> 00:13:08,290
I think that's an important lesson of innovation. Innovation is also serendipitous.

120
00:13:08,290 --> 00:13:10,510
That is to say, there's a lot of accidents,

121
00:13:10,510 --> 00:13:17,360
a lot of times people set out to invent one thing and they end up inventing something completely different.

122
00:13:17,360 --> 00:13:22,560
And just as useful or more so. Kevlar, Teflon.

123
00:13:22,560 --> 00:13:28,270
The Post-it note were all invented by people looking for something completely different.

124
00:13:28,270 --> 00:13:34,370
In the case of the Post-it note, Art Fry was one of the people working at 3M.

125
00:13:34,370 --> 00:13:37,930
They were looking for a glue that would work with paper. They couldn't find one.

126
00:13:37,930 --> 00:13:43,930
They came up with this substance that worked as a temporary glue and they thought, that's useless.

127
00:13:43,930 --> 00:13:50,080
And then after I thought, I have to go to choir practise this evening, if I put this glue on the back of some bits of yellow paper,

128
00:13:50,080 --> 00:13:57,520
I can keep my place in my hymnbook and not damage the handbook when I take those bits of paper away and the Post-it note was bought.

129
00:13:57,520 --> 00:14:07,390
Something like DNA fingerprinting is a fine example of an incredibly important technology used in forensics and other methods,

130
00:14:07,390 --> 00:14:13,120
which was invented completely unexpectedly.

131
00:14:13,120 --> 00:14:22,240
It was thought that DNA work was going to be useful in medicine. Nobody saw it transforming criminology, and yet it did in the hands of Alec Lester.

132
00:14:22,240 --> 00:14:27,130
That's our Alec Jeffries of Lester. Now, innovation is disruptive.

133
00:14:27,130 --> 00:14:34,060
We know this. This is the famous point that innovation comes along and changes the world rather dramatically.

134
00:14:34,060 --> 00:14:40,600
Here's a good example of this. A picture of Easter morning in nineteen hundred on Fifth Avenue,

135
00:14:40,600 --> 00:14:51,280
one car amongst hundreds of Horse-Drawn vehicles, the same place on the same day, 13 years later.

136
00:14:51,280 --> 00:14:58,240
Not a single horse in sight. Hundreds of cars. That is the speed at which innovation can change the world.

137
00:14:58,240 --> 00:15:02,110
Just 13 years between those two pictures.

138
00:15:02,110 --> 00:15:13,060
But I make the case that the more you look into disruptive innovations, the more you find that they are actually underpinned by gradual processes,

139
00:15:13,060 --> 00:15:22,660
by processes that build very slowly towards the moment when disruption happen and continue to evolve after the disruption has happened.

140
00:15:22,660 --> 00:15:27,970
So the most disruptive thing that has happened in our lifetime has been the rise of the silicon chip,

141
00:15:27,970 --> 00:15:34,110
the integrated circuit and the whole digital world that has come with it.

142
00:15:34,110 --> 00:15:36,570
And that seems very sudden in many ways.

143
00:15:36,570 --> 00:15:48,030
But when you look at what's happened, the incremental improvement in computing as a result of miniaturisation of silicon technologies,

144
00:15:48,030 --> 00:15:52,980
which we call Moore's Law after Gordon Moore, who noticed it in the 1960s,

145
00:15:52,980 --> 00:16:02,550
has inched forward incrementally for not just 50 years, but more than 100 years, because the last of the old technologies,

146
00:16:02,550 --> 00:16:08,340
things like vacuum tubes, were almost as good as the first of the new ones, the transistor.

147
00:16:08,340 --> 00:16:15,150
There are no step changes on this chart. This is the performance of computers over time.

148
00:16:15,150 --> 00:16:22,170
Basically, in terms of calculations per second, per thousand dollars. And it just marked she's incrementally upwards.

149
00:16:22,170 --> 00:16:25,290
You had to invent each new technology to move on to the next one.

150
00:16:25,290 --> 00:16:33,870
And even when Gordon Moore identified Moore's Law in 1964 and said this process is going to double every 18 months.

151
00:16:33,870 --> 00:16:39,600
We weren't able to say, well, to [INAUDIBLE] with that, let's double it in six months.

152
00:16:39,600 --> 00:16:43,170
Let's jump ahead. If we're gonna we're gonna double it every 18 months.

153
00:16:43,170 --> 00:16:47,500
Why do we quadruple it in 18 months? It turned out not to be possible.

154
00:16:47,500 --> 00:16:54,850
And I think this is a general observation that there is actually much more gradual background to disruptive

155
00:16:54,850 --> 00:17:01,990
innovations than we've tended to get a bit hung up on the idea of disruptive innovation recently.

156
00:17:01,990 --> 00:17:07,030
Innovation is also an evolutionary phenomenon. I wrote a whole book called The Evolution of Everything,

157
00:17:07,030 --> 00:17:14,560
arguing that evolution is a good explanation of how our technology and all our other parts of culture change.

158
00:17:14,560 --> 00:17:24,130
You can see descent with modification in our devices. You can see how one thing is derived from a parent and gives rise to offspring.

159
00:17:24,130 --> 00:17:32,590
The first motorcars looked like a cross between a horse carriage and a steam engine with a little bit of bicycle thrown in and so on.

160
00:17:32,590 --> 00:17:37,300
It was only after that that they took on characteristic features of being a car.

161
00:17:37,300 --> 00:17:42,850
The mobile phone has evolved to get smaller and smaller and then to get bigger and bigger again.

162
00:17:42,850 --> 00:17:48,340
Or recently. And evolution is innovative in another way.

163
00:17:48,340 --> 00:17:49,720
When you get on an aeroplane,

164
00:17:49,720 --> 00:17:58,870
you probably hope that it is designed by an intelligent designer that a clever person put together design for this aeroplane.

165
00:17:58,870 --> 00:18:05,260
But actually, when you think about it, he didn't. All he did was take a previous design and adapt it and so on.

166
00:18:05,260 --> 00:18:10,210
Back to the Wright brothers. People don't start from scratch.

167
00:18:10,210 --> 00:18:14,320
And along the way, there are failed designs that don't work and get discarded.

168
00:18:14,320 --> 00:18:22,090
This is exactly like natural selection. Here is the French philosopher Allar making the same point in nineteen hundred and eight.

169
00:18:22,090 --> 00:18:25,240
Every boat is copied from another boat. That's reason as follows.

170
00:18:25,240 --> 00:18:32,110
In the manner of Darwin, it's clear that a very badly made boat will end up at the bottom up to one or two voyages and thus never be copied.

171
00:18:32,110 --> 00:18:39,340
One could then say with complete rigour that it is the sea herself who chooses the boats to designs the boats,

172
00:18:39,340 --> 00:18:44,470
choosing those which function are destroying the others.

173
00:18:44,470 --> 00:18:52,360
One of the consequences of this way of seeing the world is that you suddenly realise that we are too creationist about the world.

174
00:18:52,360 --> 00:18:55,510
We have learnt not to be creationist about the natural world.

175
00:18:55,510 --> 00:19:01,450
When we see a rainforest, we don't immediately assume that its complexity is the result of an intelligent designer.

176
00:19:01,450 --> 00:19:04,420
But we are creationists about the human world.

177
00:19:04,420 --> 00:19:11,320
When we see order in the human world, we assume that someone, whether it's a government, government or or a designer, is in charge.

178
00:19:11,320 --> 00:19:18,370
But actually, there are lots of things that, in the words of Adam Ferguson, the 18th century Scottish philosopher,

179
00:19:18,370 --> 00:19:23,760
are the result of human action, but not the execution of any human design.

180
00:19:23,760 --> 00:19:28,020
So the English language, for example, is a human invention.

181
00:19:28,020 --> 00:19:34,380
It's not a natural phenomenon, but there is no sense in which it is the execution of design.

182
00:19:34,380 --> 00:19:38,690
There is nobody in charge of designing it. There was nobody who started designing it.

183
00:19:38,690 --> 00:19:48,390
If it evolved through the use of certain habits in language by some people and the discarding of other habits until it became the English language.

184
00:19:48,390 --> 00:19:52,860
And the same is true of modern the modern economy in many ways.

185
00:19:52,860 --> 00:19:58,170
Ten million people eat lunch on a normal day, or at least they did before the pandemic.

186
00:19:58,170 --> 00:20:06,600
The amount of food that they need and the right types of food are available for them every day, day in, day out.

187
00:20:06,600 --> 00:20:12,480
Despite the fact that they might make up their mind at the last minute what they're going to eat.

188
00:20:12,480 --> 00:20:17,430
How is that possible? Who's in charge? Who is London's lunch commissioner?

189
00:20:17,430 --> 00:20:24,000
And why is he so incredibly clever? And of course, the answer is there is no such person.

190
00:20:24,000 --> 00:20:28,880
It's a market. It's a bottom up process, not a top down one.

191
00:20:28,880 --> 00:20:36,920
Now, evolution works by recombination. That is to say, different genetic sequences get mixed together in the process called sex.

192
00:20:36,920 --> 00:20:43,070
So that you get new combinations of genes and that enables evolution to be innovative.

193
00:20:43,070 --> 00:20:52,520
The same is true of technology, that we will recombine existing technologies in new forms to make new technologies.

194
00:20:52,520 --> 00:20:58,160
In fact, almost every technology you can think of is actually a combination of other technologies.

195
00:20:58,160 --> 00:21:01,940
And often it's just the same technologies combined in different ways.

196
00:21:01,940 --> 00:21:08,510
My favourite example is this thing. It's called the pill camera. It takes a photograph of your insides if you swallow it.

197
00:21:08,510 --> 00:21:15,680
It came about after a conversation over a garden fence between a gastroenterologist and a guided missile designer.

198
00:21:15,680 --> 00:21:27,130
That's the process that I call ideas having sex, because it is a very precise analogy with the way sex works in evolution.

199
00:21:27,130 --> 00:21:32,140
Now, the other lesson that I learnt was that innovation is collaborative.

200
00:21:32,140 --> 00:21:39,220
It is not something that people hardly ever achieve on their own or in secret.

201
00:21:39,220 --> 00:21:45,730
The idea of the brilliant inventor sitting in his ivory tower scratching his head is generally a myth.

202
00:21:45,730 --> 00:21:53,680
The more you look into them, the more it turns out that these stories are just not true, that people were having to build on the work of other people,

203
00:21:53,680 --> 00:21:59,680
but also talk to other people and share ideas with other people in order to be innovative.

204
00:21:59,680 --> 00:22:07,630
Here's a very nice example of that process. This is a photograph of an epic moment in the history of flight.

205
00:22:07,630 --> 00:22:18,160
This is Samuel Langley's attempt in nineteen hundred and three to take off from the roof of a houseboat on the Potomac River near Washington.

206
00:22:18,160 --> 00:22:22,570
In a aeroplane designed from scratch.

207
00:22:22,570 --> 00:22:28,030
Samuel Langley was a brilliant man. He was an astronomer. He was the head of the Smithsonian Institution.

208
00:22:28,030 --> 00:22:32,350
He got an enormous grant from the US government to build an aeroplane. He said, I know how to do it.

209
00:22:32,350 --> 00:22:38,260
He went off in secret and did it. And as you can see, it flopped straight into the water.

210
00:22:38,260 --> 00:22:44,610
It barely went 20 yards. The pilot was wearing a Coke.

211
00:22:44,610 --> 00:22:56,550
Bob to the surface and swim to safety 10 days later on a beach off North Carolina to humble bicycle mechanics from Dayton,

212
00:22:56,550 --> 00:23:01,260
Ohio, managed to achieve what Langley had failed to achieve.

213
00:23:01,260 --> 00:23:08,790
The Orville and Wilbur Wright got an aeroplane into the air and they had done everything right.

214
00:23:08,790 --> 00:23:14,460
That Langley had done wrong. They had collaborated with other people.

215
00:23:14,460 --> 00:23:21,500
They had, particularly a man named Octave Chanute in Chicago, had been an incredibly important source for them.

216
00:23:21,500 --> 00:23:27,810
He was a sort of node in a network who communicated with everyone in the world who was interested in flight.

217
00:23:27,810 --> 00:23:36,690
And he downloaded their brains to find out what they knew about gliders, about kites, about aerofoils files, about wind tunnels, about everything,

218
00:23:36,690 --> 00:23:43,140
and particularly the ideas of a brilliant Australian named Lawrence Hargrave, who had made real progress,

219
00:23:43,140 --> 00:23:50,580
particularly in the development of the box kite, as a way of understanding how to how to do a controlled flight.

220
00:23:50,580 --> 00:23:56,940
And all of this was what the Wright brothers were drawing on. And then they were doing a ton of experiments themselves.

221
00:23:56,940 --> 00:24:00,870
They were not pretending to know the answer from scratch.

222
00:24:00,870 --> 00:24:10,200
They did years and years of experiments with gliders in North Carolina before they ever added an engine to their aeroplane.

223
00:24:10,200 --> 00:24:13,770
So our technology is an incredibly collaborative thing.

224
00:24:13,770 --> 00:24:20,520
When you think about it, there's a famous essay by a man named Leonard Reid written in 1958 called A Pencil,

225
00:24:20,520 --> 00:24:25,050
which is a by a pencil trying to work out how it came into existence.

226
00:24:25,050 --> 00:24:32,400
And the pencil concludes that it was the result of collaboration between millions of people, hundreds of thousands,

227
00:24:32,400 --> 00:24:37,150
at least, because there were people who were cutting down trees to make the wood for the pencil.

228
00:24:37,150 --> 00:24:41,100
But they were drinking coffee and the coffee was drunk by somebody else.

229
00:24:41,100 --> 00:24:43,080
Sorry, it was grown by somebody else.

230
00:24:43,080 --> 00:24:51,390
And and that their wood was taken by somebody to a mill where it was milled and then it was shipped to a factory.

231
00:24:51,390 --> 00:24:56,730
And all these people were involved in this process, hundreds of them, thousands,

232
00:24:56,730 --> 00:25:01,770
maybe hundreds of thousands or even millions, as I say, involved in making one pencil.

233
00:25:01,770 --> 00:25:10,540
And yet the amazing thing was. In all those millions of people, there is not one person who knows how to make a pencil.

234
00:25:10,540 --> 00:25:15,190
The knowledge is not held inside a single head. It's shared between heads.

235
00:25:15,190 --> 00:25:21,250
The person working on the factory floor in the pencil factory doesn't know how to cut down a tree.

236
00:25:21,250 --> 00:25:34,470
And so on. So the reason innovation happens to our species, I reckon, and not to others, except with very few very minor exceptions.

237
00:25:34,470 --> 00:25:39,480
Is because our species is uniquely fascinated by the process of exchange.

238
00:25:39,480 --> 00:25:48,540
It's very, very hard to find other examples in the animal kingdom of animals that want to swap one thing for another and do so regularly.

239
00:25:48,540 --> 00:25:55,290
And yet we're obsessed with it. It comes very naturally to us in all societies at all times.

240
00:25:55,290 --> 00:25:59,730
It has been a feature and it's been part of human life forever, a hundred thousand years.

241
00:25:59,730 --> 00:26:09,960
Adam Smith spotted this. He said no man ever saw a dog make Ferencz deliberate exchange of a bone with another dog.

242
00:26:09,960 --> 00:26:16,680
One of the consequences of the importance of experimentation to reach innovations

243
00:26:16,680 --> 00:26:21,900
is the trial and error features in all the stories about great innovators.

244
00:26:21,900 --> 00:26:27,360
If you ask innovators like Art, pray with the Post-it note or Thomas Edison with the light bulb, how did you do it?

245
00:26:27,360 --> 00:26:32,160
They always say, I just tried and failed. Tried and failed. Tried and failed until I succeeded.

246
00:26:32,160 --> 00:26:38,550
Or other as Adam as Edison said, I've not failed. I've just found 10000 ways that won't work.

247
00:26:38,550 --> 00:26:49,050
Edison tried six thousand different types of plant material before he settled upon Japanese bamboo to make the filament of his first light bulb.

248
00:26:49,050 --> 00:26:56,880
He was searching and searching for something that would have durability that would last a long time when you switch the light bulb.

249
00:26:56,880 --> 00:27:00,600
And he wasn't satisfied until he'd found the perfect thing.

250
00:27:00,600 --> 00:27:05,640
That's an incredibly important feature of innovation and it's one that is often not appreciated.

251
00:27:05,640 --> 00:27:11,130
You don't get the answer right first time you keep trying until you do.

252
00:27:11,130 --> 00:27:18,810
Now, there's another weird thing about the light bulb. 21 different people invented the light bulb independently.

253
00:27:18,810 --> 00:27:26,080
There was Edison in England. There was sworn inward. Russia, there was digging and so on.

254
00:27:26,080 --> 00:27:29,240
And as far as we can make out, none of these people communicate with each other.

255
00:27:29,240 --> 00:27:33,490
We all came up with the idea independently and this is a very common phenomenon.

256
00:27:33,490 --> 00:27:42,610
It's called simultaneous. Kevin Kelly writes about it very entertainingly in his book, What Technology Wants and.

257
00:27:42,610 --> 00:27:46,060
At first sight, it seems rather weird,

258
00:27:46,060 --> 00:27:54,580
almost as if there is a deity reaching down from the sky and implanting the idea of the light bulb in 21 different minds at the same time.

259
00:27:54,580 --> 00:28:01,030
But when you think about it, it's much more likely that what's going on is that the contributing technologies of electricity,

260
00:28:01,030 --> 00:28:08,540
of glass, of vacuums, et cetera, have just reached the point where it's inevitable someone will see this,

261
00:28:08,540 --> 00:28:15,100
that there's something wholly inexorable about innovation in certain fields once it gets to a certain point.

262
00:28:15,100 --> 00:28:20,350
You can't stop it even if you want to. This is probably more easy to understand.

263
00:28:20,350 --> 00:28:28,960
If you think about a more recent example, the search engine is probably the most useful invention of my lifetime.

264
00:28:28,960 --> 00:28:33,430
I use it pretty well every day. It was invented in the early 1990s.

265
00:28:33,430 --> 00:28:41,140
Soon after the Internet, and in retrospect, it's kind of inevitable that it would get invented then,

266
00:28:41,140 --> 00:28:47,530
because if Sergei Brin had never met Larry Page and founded Google, we would still have search engines.

267
00:28:47,530 --> 00:28:52,240
There were lots around before Google and there were lots of rivals.

268
00:28:52,240 --> 00:28:59,290
And they all came up with search engines because it was sort of obvious that

269
00:28:59,290 --> 00:29:04,700
people were going to want to search the Internet to find what they wanted.

270
00:29:04,700 --> 00:29:15,420
So it didn't matter if by chance, Larry Page had not met Sergei Brin, we would still have search engines today.

271
00:29:15,420 --> 00:29:22,780
But if you go back to the late, late 1980s and you read the literature about the Internet.

272
00:29:22,780 --> 00:29:30,560
The nascent Internet, nobody sees search engines coming, at least very few people, and they only very sketchily,

273
00:29:30,560 --> 00:29:34,910
and indeed, the people who invented search engines didn't really understand what they were doing.

274
00:29:34,910 --> 00:29:38,330
Page and Brin didn't think they were inventing a search engine.

275
00:29:38,330 --> 00:29:46,670
They thought they were cataloguing the Internet. At first. So there's something strangely asymmetric about innovation.

276
00:29:46,670 --> 00:29:56,420
It's fantastically obvious that it would happen when and where it does. When you look backwards, but it's not at all obvious when you look forwards.

277
00:29:56,420 --> 00:30:02,630
So innovation is inexorable, but it's also unpredictable.

278
00:30:02,630 --> 00:30:10,120
To illustrate this, let me just tell you the story of the 20th century in terms of two particular technologies.

279
00:30:10,120 --> 00:30:19,700
In the first half of the 20th century, there was a ferment of innovation in transport and almost no innovation in communication and computing.

280
00:30:19,700 --> 00:30:23,930
There were cars that were planes, there were helicopters that were rockets.

281
00:30:23,930 --> 00:30:33,780
Space travel, those you know, all this kind of stuff began in roughly the first half of the 20th, 20th century.

282
00:30:33,780 --> 00:30:42,570
Whereas the telephone predates the 20th century and it was still around in 1950 in very similar form.

283
00:30:42,570 --> 00:30:48,120
So no wonder in the 1950s, future ologists are obsessed with transport.

284
00:30:48,120 --> 00:30:53,670
They go on and on about how in the future we're going to have flying cars and personal

285
00:30:53,670 --> 00:30:58,200
jet packs and routine space travel and supersonic airliners and all that kind of thing.

286
00:30:58,200 --> 00:31:05,280
None of which happened because in the second half of the 20th century, almost nothing came along in the way of transport.

287
00:31:05,280 --> 00:31:12,110
I mean, we flew seven full sevens for 50 years without changing TEAC design.

288
00:31:12,110 --> 00:31:18,280
Whereas there was a ferment of innovation in computing and communication.

289
00:31:18,280 --> 00:31:26,190
Now, I don't believe you could have predicted that switch. And indeed, I don't think we fully understand why it happened in some sense.

290
00:31:26,190 --> 00:31:31,190
Transport hit a brick wall. It hit diminishing returns.

291
00:31:31,190 --> 00:31:36,600
And by the way, it implies that computing and communication might do the same at some point in the near future,

292
00:31:36,600 --> 00:31:45,280
the next 50 years might not be about computing and communication to the degree we expect it will be today.

293
00:31:45,280 --> 00:31:52,130
Here's an image from the year I was born, 1958, of what they think the future is going to be like in the year 2000,

294
00:31:52,130 --> 00:31:54,520
mailmen are going to be delivering ordinary mail.

295
00:31:54,520 --> 00:32:00,820
There's no such thing as e-mail, but they're going to have rockets strapped to their backs so they can jump from house to house.

296
00:32:00,820 --> 00:32:05,530
Didn't quite turn out like that. Not everybody gets prediction wrong.

297
00:32:05,530 --> 00:32:15,990
Here's a picture from Germany in the 1930s showing us doing pretty well exactly what we're doing right now.

298
00:32:15,990 --> 00:32:20,660
But one of the things about the unpredictability of innovation is that it leads some very,

299
00:32:20,660 --> 00:32:27,040
very clever people to say some very, very stupid things about the future. And I'm sorry, but I'm going to embarrass four of them.

300
00:32:27,040 --> 00:32:29,180
And his brother, the man who split the atom,

301
00:32:29,180 --> 00:32:36,290
said in 1933 that anyone who expects a source of power from the transformation of the atom is talking moonshine.

302
00:32:36,290 --> 00:32:41,570
Ken Olsen, chairman of the company that made the mini computer and was one of the most successful companies,

303
00:32:41,570 --> 00:32:50,350
computer companies of the 1970s making the smallest computers, said there's no reason I want a computer in there at home.

304
00:32:50,350 --> 00:32:56,610
Paul Krugman, Nobel prise winning economist, said in 1998, by 2005 or so,

305
00:32:56,610 --> 00:33:02,020
it will become clear that the Internet's impact on the economy will be no greater than the fax machines.

306
00:33:02,020 --> 00:33:09,730
And Steve Ballmer, chief executive, Microsoft 2007, said there's no chance the iPhone is going to get market share in this market.

307
00:33:09,730 --> 00:33:16,620
No chance. They are being wrong footed by the unpredictability of innovation.

308
00:33:16,620 --> 00:33:27,730
These people. And I think the main reason and it comes back to disruption, to gradual trends suddenly turning sudden.

309
00:33:27,730 --> 00:33:36,370
Is because innovation is non-linear. It doesn't progress in a straight line from one technology to the.

310
00:33:36,370 --> 00:33:40,540
Roy Emara is the person who said the cleverest thing about this.

311
00:33:40,540 --> 00:33:49,570
I think he was a computer scientist in Silicon Valley in the 1960s and he said we underestimate the impact of a new technology in the long run.

312
00:33:49,570 --> 00:33:55,570
But we overestimate it in the short run. It's more like that.

313
00:33:55,570 --> 00:34:01,680
Nothing much happens for some years, and then suddenly the world has changed.

314
00:34:01,680 --> 00:34:07,110
And it's worth thinking about where today's technology sit on that curve.

315
00:34:07,110 --> 00:34:10,620
I mean, the Internet isn't. I think we can all agree not disappointing.

316
00:34:10,620 --> 00:34:19,470
Whatever Paul Krugman might have said it is, it is outperforming our expectations at this stage.

317
00:34:19,470 --> 00:34:28,020
Genomics has been disappointing. Bill Clinton in 2000, when the first human genome was sequenced, talked about the imminent curing of cancer.

318
00:34:28,020 --> 00:34:35,760
We haven't achieved nearly as much as we would like with genomics, and yet we are suddenly seeing some pretty dramatic breakthroughs at the moment.

319
00:34:35,760 --> 00:34:40,950
Think again of the messenger RNA vaccines, for example. I.

320
00:34:40,950 --> 00:34:42,720
Well, Michael might put me right here,

321
00:34:42,720 --> 00:34:49,080
but I suspect we aren't quite through the disappointing phase with some of the technologies we're excited about yet.

322
00:34:49,080 --> 00:34:53,760
The driverless cars may prove a little more difficult than we think before.

323
00:34:53,760 --> 00:35:00,450
Indeed, they do change the world at some point. And as for block chain, I believe that it's hardly begun to disappoint us.

324
00:35:00,450 --> 00:35:05,280
But that doesn't mean we should write it off in the long run.

325
00:35:05,280 --> 00:35:10,600
Now, there was a very important point that the merged from the stories that I told in my book,

326
00:35:10,600 --> 00:35:16,120
and that is that whereas we think in terms of the linear model of science and technology,

327
00:35:16,120 --> 00:35:23,330
that science leads to technology, which leads to applications, which leads to business.

328
00:35:23,330 --> 00:35:32,600
In fact, it's very rarely as simple as that, because technology is often the seed of science as well as the fruit and can sometimes be both.

329
00:35:32,600 --> 00:35:39,440
It can sometimes come out of science, but then lead to new scientific breakthroughs is quite a nice example.

330
00:35:39,440 --> 00:35:41,180
This man is called Philip Horvath.

331
00:35:41,180 --> 00:35:54,950
He worked for a yoghurt making company in France and the Nobel Prise that was won this year by two brilliant scientists,

332
00:35:54,950 --> 00:36:03,400
Jennifer Doudna and Emmanuelle Charpentier, for the invention of Crispell gene editing.

333
00:36:03,400 --> 00:36:10,070
Looks at first sight like a purely academic discovery made in universities.

334
00:36:10,070 --> 00:36:14,500
But actually, where did they find out about crisper?

335
00:36:14,500 --> 00:36:23,740
Where did they find out about these strange palindromic sequences in genomes of bacteria that could be repurposed to editing genes?

336
00:36:23,740 --> 00:36:28,300
They found out about them from Felipe Horvath in the yoghurt industry.

337
00:36:28,300 --> 00:36:33,100
And why was the yoghurt industry studying bacteria and their genes?

338
00:36:33,100 --> 00:36:38,800
Because the yoghurt industry depends on bacteria and sometimes they get viral infections.

339
00:36:38,800 --> 00:36:43,510
So they need to understand the immune system of the bacterium and the immune system of the bacterium

340
00:36:43,510 --> 00:36:51,130
turns out to be to carry libraries of virus genomes so they can be recognised by the defensive system,

341
00:36:51,130 --> 00:36:58,080
which chops up the DNA of the viruses. And this is what we have repurposed for gene editing.

342
00:36:58,080 --> 00:37:04,250
So in a sense, it comes out of industry and goes into academia rather than the other way round.

343
00:37:04,250 --> 00:37:10,160
Now, you take the story further back to Francisco. He Mahiga in Al Jazeera said it's back in university again.

344
00:37:10,160 --> 00:37:22,870
So these tech technologies, these innovations can start in industry or they can start in academia and they can go in both directions.

345
00:37:22,870 --> 00:37:31,070
An even more dramatic example when you think about it, is vaccination itself or rather inoculation as it was when it first started.

346
00:37:31,070 --> 00:37:37,940
Which was brought to Britain and thereby to Western Europe by a rather remarkable woman,

347
00:37:37,940 --> 00:37:49,100
literary woman called Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, who was in that she was the wife of the ambassador in Constantinople.

348
00:37:49,100 --> 00:37:58,340
And she then picked up while there this habit of inoculating people against smallpox, children against smallpox.

349
00:37:58,340 --> 00:38:03,620
She brought it back to England, persuaded the Prince Wales and others to try it and did to our own children.

350
00:38:03,620 --> 00:38:11,570
And despite being extremely unpopular with the medical profession, it caught on and it saved a lot of lives about the same time.

351
00:38:11,570 --> 00:38:21,200
The same thing happened in North America because of a preacher named Cotton Mather who had a

352
00:38:21,200 --> 00:38:29,510
slave called Uneasiness and the slave brought with him from Africa the concept of inoculation.

353
00:38:29,510 --> 00:38:39,830
Cotton mother gave it as Abdelal Boylston, a medick who inoculated half the students at Harvard when a smallpox epidemic was

354
00:38:39,830 --> 00:38:46,250
threatened and had to lock himself in a cupboard for more than a week to escape the mob,

355
00:38:46,250 --> 00:38:53,380
which wanted to kill him for this dangerous experiment. But it succeeded and it proved it right.

356
00:38:53,380 --> 00:38:57,790
The point is that these people have a humble slave.

357
00:38:57,790 --> 00:39:01,590
A woman with no scientific education.

358
00:39:01,590 --> 00:39:11,220
Invented this, and it was used for hundreds of years without us having the slightest scientific idea of white work.

359
00:39:11,220 --> 00:39:20,220
It wasn't till well after Pasteur that we really understood why inoculation or vaccination works.

360
00:39:20,220 --> 00:39:26,570
So technology can precede science by quite a long time.

361
00:39:26,570 --> 00:39:37,130
Another theme that emerged is the common fear that innovation will destroy jobs from the Luddites in the 18th century to today.

362
00:39:37,130 --> 00:39:42,950
It's been there's been repeated waves of worry that automation is going to steal jobs.

363
00:39:42,950 --> 00:39:45,470
It doesn't happen. It won't happen.

364
00:39:45,470 --> 00:39:59,210
And the reason is because it creates new kinds of work and because it although it does save us time, it doesn't replace work.

365
00:39:59,210 --> 00:40:08,130
If you. And trying to explain what a software engineer is.

366
00:40:08,130 --> 00:40:13,290
Innovation also enables us to do more with less thanks to innovations in agriculture.

367
00:40:13,290 --> 00:40:19,500
We grow 68 percent. We use 68 percent less land to produce a given amount of food.

368
00:40:19,500 --> 00:40:24,300
We use 13 percent as much aluminium and a drinks cannas. We did when they were first invented.

369
00:40:24,300 --> 00:40:31,660
LCD lights use less than a quarter as much electricity to produce the same amount of light as they did.

370
00:40:31,660 --> 00:40:38,940
Now, one of the consequences of this is that innovation enables us to use fewer resources.

371
00:40:38,940 --> 00:40:51,300
And that means that innovation is potentially infinite because we won't run out of resources if we are able to use this through innovation.

372
00:40:51,300 --> 00:40:57,780
That is to say, innovation and economic growth can simply ask us to do more with less.

373
00:40:57,780 --> 00:41:06,400
And that will enable us to keep innovating pretty well indefinitely into the future.

374
00:41:06,400 --> 00:41:10,530
I also came up with the conclusion that a bad and innovation,

375
00:41:10,530 --> 00:41:19,150
great big employers that are huge free trade zones like the Ottoman Empire, for example, was very resistant to innovation.

376
00:41:19,150 --> 00:41:26,770
Something similar in the Ming Empire in China. Even the Roman Empire wasn't actually very innovative compared with the dark

377
00:41:26,770 --> 00:41:32,040
edges that came after or compared with the Greek city states that came before.

378
00:41:32,040 --> 00:41:41,250
And why? Because attention, essentially their very top down bureaucratic places where people at the centre tell people what they should do.

379
00:41:41,250 --> 00:41:45,360
They don't allow for the freedom and experimentation to trial and error.

380
00:41:45,360 --> 00:41:50,160
That is so crucial to innovation. Something similar happens in big companies.

381
00:41:50,160 --> 00:41:55,500
Kodak was blown away by digital photography.

382
00:41:55,500 --> 00:42:02,640
Nokia became the most spectacular success story of the mobile phone industry and hugely innovative company.

383
00:42:02,640 --> 00:42:09,010
I was then blown away by the switch in mobiles from voice to data.

384
00:42:09,010 --> 00:42:14,040
Big companies just become too invested in existing technologies to bureaucratic

385
00:42:14,040 --> 00:42:18,360
and slow in their decision making and too intolerant of experimentation.

386
00:42:18,360 --> 00:42:29,520
And maverick ideas. We think we're all in favour of innovation, but actually there is huge resistance to innovation.

387
00:42:29,520 --> 00:42:34,920
It comes from big companies that try to put barriers in the way of competitors.

388
00:42:34,920 --> 00:42:43,660
It comes from pressure groups that play on our conservatism and our caution about the future.

389
00:42:43,660 --> 00:42:52,770
And it comes from our interest in regulating, which often leads to barriers to innovation.

390
00:42:52,770 --> 00:42:58,830
He's a very nice example of how. Hope stick in the mud.

391
00:42:58,830 --> 00:43:10,920
We are sometimes about new stuff. Coffee. Coffee was an innovation in the 16th century in all of Europe where wherever it appeared, it was banned.

392
00:43:10,920 --> 00:43:16,470
It was made illegal. It was forbidden. It was driven out.

393
00:43:16,470 --> 00:43:23,230
There was coffeehouses, but closed down coffee pots were were destroyed.

394
00:43:23,230 --> 00:43:29,040
It's an it's an extraordinary story. And the attitude was very similar to the attitude.

395
00:43:29,040 --> 00:43:35,430
Genetically modified crops. Today in Europe, frankly. This stuff is dangerous.

396
00:43:35,430 --> 00:43:40,980
We don't know enough about it. The precautionary principle says we should not have it.

397
00:43:40,980 --> 00:43:49,290
Now, where was this opposition coming from? A lot of it was coming from the beer and wine industry, which in one case in Marseilles,

398
00:43:49,290 --> 00:43:55,260
actually paid for a university to produce a pamphlet saying that coffee was bad for you.

399
00:43:55,260 --> 00:44:01,050
So science could be bought and paid for in those days, as it can be.

400
00:44:01,050 --> 00:44:16,740
Occasionally today. But the other source of opposition to coffee was from rulers because rulers didn't like the fact that people met in coffee houses.

401
00:44:16,740 --> 00:44:27,050
And gossiped. And when they go sit in a coffee house gossiping, they might talk about whether the king is doing a good job or not.

402
00:44:27,050 --> 00:44:32,040
And they might even decide that he's not. And this is not to be encouraged.

403
00:44:32,040 --> 00:44:39,420
Basically, coffeehouses are the source of fake news. Here is King Charles, the second banning coffeehouses, the source.

404
00:44:39,420 --> 00:44:48,580
By the way, of the Royal Society. It was a coffeehouse here in Oxford. But here he is banning coffee in the 60s, 70s.

405
00:44:48,580 --> 00:44:51,030
As for coffee, tea and chocolate, I know you could they do.

406
00:44:51,030 --> 00:44:57,790
Only the places where they are sold are convenient for purses, peasants to meet in, sit half day and discourse with all companies that come in.

407
00:44:57,790 --> 00:45:03,520
Of state matters. Talking of news and broaching of lies are reigning the judgements and discretion of their governors.

408
00:45:03,520 --> 00:45:08,290
Censoring all their actions and insinuating into the is that the people are prejudice against them,

409
00:45:08,290 --> 00:45:12,880
extolling and magnifying their own past knowledge and wisdom and blah, blah, blah.

410
00:45:12,880 --> 00:45:19,240
You get the point. He didn't like fake news. Fortunately, it proved impossible to ban coffee.

411
00:45:19,240 --> 00:45:26,010
It just kept coming back. Now, if, as I argue.

412
00:45:26,010 --> 00:45:31,380
The great theme of innovation is freedom. The freedom to experiment, the freedom to make mistakes.

413
00:45:31,380 --> 00:45:36,360
The freedom to change direction. The freedom to to fail and start again.

414
00:45:36,360 --> 00:45:43,980
The freedom as the consumer to express a preference amongst different competing innovations, particularly.

415
00:45:43,980 --> 00:45:50,010
How do I explain China being one of the innovative parts of the world today?

416
00:45:50,010 --> 00:45:57,900
Is that not because actually China is innovative, because it has a policy, a top down policy of innovation?

417
00:45:57,900 --> 00:46:06,030
I don't believe that's the right way to read China at all. I think what happened after the fall of Mao Tse tung in 1970.

418
00:46:06,030 --> 00:46:16,040
A pin was that China became a very free place economically, even while it was a very unfair.

419
00:46:16,040 --> 00:46:22,580
I'm not sure that a new political party, but if you invented a new widget and you just joined us,

420
00:46:22,580 --> 00:46:30,680
you faced many that you are actually bureaucratic rules and delays than you did in the West.

421
00:46:30,680 --> 00:46:37,840
You actually could get up and running with your new factory and you selling a new device much quicker than in the West.

422
00:46:37,840 --> 00:46:43,870
And that has been true for most of the last four decades. Branding.

423
00:46:43,870 --> 00:46:53,730
I believe the Xi Jingping regime is now economically illiberal as well as politically, and that we will see innovation stifled in China in the future.

424
00:46:53,730 --> 00:46:57,620
Something similar happened in China a very long time ago.

425
00:46:57,620 --> 00:47:11,470
Around a thousand years ago in the song Dynasty, China was an incredibly innovative place with the invention of gunpowder, compasses.

426
00:47:11,470 --> 00:47:15,910
Printing money. The printing press. All these kind of things.

427
00:47:15,910 --> 00:47:27,450
It was it was a time of rich innovation. And the reason was because that dynasty ran a very decentralised empire.

428
00:47:27,450 --> 00:47:32,430
Essentially, it was a series of city states that were self-governing, that were run by merchants.

429
00:47:32,430 --> 00:47:37,170
They could do what they want. They could trade. They could experiment. They could innovate.

430
00:47:37,170 --> 00:47:44,040
Then after Ramon Mongul interregnum, along comes the Ming Empire and says no, from now on, we are going to tell you what you can do from the centre.

431
00:47:44,040 --> 00:47:50,250
The capital is going to be full of mandarins who are going to organise the economy. They banned foreign trade.

432
00:47:50,250 --> 00:47:54,720
They told merchants that they could not leave their home town without a permit.

433
00:47:54,720 --> 00:48:02,970
They told them that they must send a memo to a Mandarin every month describing how much stock they

434
00:48:02,970 --> 00:48:10,440
had in their warehouse so that the mandarins could calculate how to feed the people of China.

435
00:48:10,440 --> 00:48:18,200
The result was disaster. The result was the total impoverishment of the Chinese nation for many centuries.

436
00:48:18,200 --> 00:48:27,360
So China does teach the lesson that freedom is important, but innovation.

437
00:48:27,360 --> 00:48:32,310
This is what innovation has done to the human race. This is GDP per capita.

438
00:48:32,310 --> 00:48:39,490
Since sixteen hundred, the most extraordinary hockey stick of a graph you will ever see.

439
00:48:39,490 --> 00:48:46,620
Data visualisation by our world in data. Max here in Oxford and.

440
00:48:46,620 --> 00:48:53,380
At every stage in. Intellectual people have said, by the way, this can't carry on.

441
00:48:53,380 --> 00:49:00,300
It's about to stop. We're about to hit the buffers. Pessimism has always been a bestseller.

442
00:49:00,300 --> 00:49:10,710
Throughout this period, just one example, Thomas Babington, Macaulay Macaulay, writing in 1830 reviewing a pessimistic book by Robert Subi,

443
00:49:10,710 --> 00:49:16,020
says, We cannot absolutely prove that those are in error, who say society's reached a turning point.

444
00:49:16,020 --> 00:49:20,260
We have seen our best days, but so said all who came before us.

445
00:49:20,260 --> 00:49:25,890
And with just as much apparent reason or more principle is that with nothing but improvement behind US rhetoric,

446
00:49:25,890 --> 00:49:36,910
expect nothing but deterioration before us. So actually, because of innovation, we face a bright future.

447
00:49:36,910 --> 00:49:45,380
Thank you very much. I will now. Stopped sharing my slides.

448
00:49:45,380 --> 00:49:50,210
OK, so are we. I enjoyed that lecture very, very much.

449
00:49:50,210 --> 00:49:55,160
We are struggling at the moment with the connexion to match for a Q and A,

450
00:49:55,160 --> 00:50:00,920
we know he's only got a few minutes, so it could conceivably be that he's been pulled out.

451
00:50:00,920 --> 00:50:09,470
We literally on the case. Now, if you go to the Q and A bar, you can enter some questions.

452
00:50:09,470 --> 00:50:15,980
We've already got one question in from Jeremy Gibbons. I've read it out. Jeremy says, You observed that innovation is serendipitous.

453
00:50:15,980 --> 00:50:19,820
What do you think about the incentives placed on academics by national research funders such

454
00:50:19,820 --> 00:50:24,200
as you can go awry towards planned innovation and research projects rather than serendipity?

455
00:50:24,200 --> 00:50:35,900
Wouldn't we be better with reliable, modest funding for following curiosity rather than a lottery for fewer targeted grants?

456
00:50:35,900 --> 00:50:40,630
Some interesting observations about artificial intelligence. And it would be fascinating.

457
00:50:40,630 --> 00:50:49,430
We could have an entire we could have an entire discussion about artificial intelligence are suspect and where that's going.

458
00:50:49,430 --> 00:50:55,100
We've got another question. Impacts of trade, limitations between countries on innovation.

459
00:50:55,100 --> 00:51:13,080
That's published on.

460
00:51:13,080 --> 00:51:19,770
I believe the vaccination map mentioned two referred to rather than variation, exposure to people to small amounts of the true smallpox virus.

461
00:51:19,770 --> 00:51:36,130
It wasn't quite the vaccination, but the somewhat truly dangerous variation.

462
00:51:36,130 --> 00:51:58,900
In your book, you're quite dismissive about the role of academia and government in promulgating innovation.

463
00:51:58,900 --> 00:52:03,600
Do you think any apparent inevitability of particular innovations when we look back is an illusion,

464
00:52:03,600 --> 00:52:09,300
where we just tell us after a story that something was inevitable to make sense of history in hindsight?

465
00:52:09,300 --> 00:52:12,130
I personally think there's a good deal of truth to that.

466
00:52:12,130 --> 00:52:23,170
I think we do tend to create stories to explain things in a way that doesn't necessarily reflect what actually happened on the ground.

467
00:52:23,170 --> 00:52:27,520
I suspect that innovation cannot be free for all, especially when it comes to medicine or weaponry or DNA data.

468
00:52:27,520 --> 00:52:48,370
What goals should future governments play? While we're waiting, let me just do a shout out again to Oxford Asset Management,

469
00:52:48,370 --> 00:52:53,770
our sponsors, but the tremendous over the last few years and as I said at the beginning,

470
00:52:53,770 --> 00:53:01,120
we've been able to bring in speakers that we simply wouldn't have been able to previously and to greatly expand the range of these these lectures.

471
00:53:01,120 --> 00:53:08,630
So we really are very, very grateful. And as I said earlier, Oxfam are hiring and they would love to hear from you if you're interested in finance,

472
00:53:08,630 --> 00:53:17,570
machine learning, artificial intelligence generally. And you could easily find them online.

473
00:53:17,570 --> 00:53:23,600
Okay, I'm afraid bad news. So it seems we've lost maths East has to get on at this point now to another engagement.

474
00:53:23,600 --> 00:53:28,310
That's a tremendous pity because I thought that was a really, really wonderful lecture.

475
00:53:28,310 --> 00:53:32,540
And we've got some great questions. So I am very sorry for that.

476
00:53:32,540 --> 00:53:36,140
Everybody, tech glitches, these things happen, it seems.

477
00:53:36,140 --> 00:53:42,650
Matt was having some connexion problems with teams and then just timed out and had to get off to another engagement.

478
00:53:42,650 --> 00:53:48,740
Well, I'm very, very grateful for Matt for a really, really thought provoking lecture.

479
00:53:48,740 --> 00:53:57,290
Can I suggest Matt is on Twitter, very active on Twitter. And perhaps one way forward might be to post some of the questions on Twitter.

480
00:53:57,290 --> 00:54:00,440
But I say I thought that was a genuinely fascinating lecture.

481
00:54:00,440 --> 00:54:04,730
Something a bit different, but something very, very thought provoking and something very,

482
00:54:04,730 --> 00:54:13,790
very relevant for a Department of computer science for which innovation is is is absolutely central to what we do now.

483
00:54:13,790 --> 00:54:16,190
So thank you, everybody. Thank you again to our sponsors.

484
00:54:16,190 --> 00:54:22,700
Apologies that we weren't able to deliver the Q&A session, but we were able to deliver, I think, a wonderful lecture.

485
00:54:22,700 --> 00:54:28,880
We will not be back to life straight. He lectures next term and I suspect we will not be back in Trinity term,

486
00:54:28,880 --> 00:54:33,290
even though I think the world will be looking at a lot better by Trinity term.

487
00:54:33,290 --> 00:54:40,910
In no small part, thanks, of course, to the wonderful work of our colleagues at Oxford and the development of the Oxford vaccine.

488
00:54:40,910 --> 00:54:43,370
But we will be having Straight's lectures.

489
00:54:43,370 --> 00:54:48,710
Clearly, we will have learnt from the experience today and we'll be able to deliver a much more polished Q and A,

490
00:54:48,710 --> 00:54:55,250
and I hope that by then I will have learnt to finally share my slides when I do my introduction.

491
00:54:55,250 --> 00:55:02,676
So thank you everybody for joining and we hope to see you again in Hilary to thank you.