The future of work

Most people today identify themselves by their work.  We say, “I am a teacher”, or “I am an engineer”.  It is part of our identity in western culture.  In most of my conversations with individuals about a future without the need for work, past their concerns to have their basic needs met, they question the wisdom of eliminating their obligation to work in society.  Most of us believe that work is the only way we can fully contribute to society.

I usually answer: “Do you think raising a child is a significant social contribution?  How about volunteering time for a good cause?”  The point I’m trying to make is that there are many ways to participate and bring value to society.  When we contribute through actions we really care about and enjoy, we don’t care if we get paid or not.  Other examples of free social contributions are programmers working on open source software or people that donate or pledge on systems like Patreon, Kickstarter or donate money to causes.  These contributions lead to further social, service or product development without which some projects, artists and actions could not be pursued.

Thus, being paid for a job is not a reason to live.  We can still be paid for work we do… that doesn’t need to change.  But there should be no obligation to do so.

According to a study made by PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) in 2017, 38% of today’s American jobs will be automated by 2030[1].  In 2013, Oxford University has calculated that about 47 percent[2] of total US employment was at risk due to artificial intelligence and robotics.  That was almost 5 years ago.  According to American census data (2017),70% of all American jobs today are in transportation, manufacturing and services.  Most of those could be partially or fully automated within the next 10 years of we put our minds to it.  We could accelerate the deployment of AI and automation technologies to free human beings from the absolute need to be involved in essential work.  With a smaller percentage of people needed to work to provide basic needs to all members of a nation, those of us who are not required to keep automated systems running, could use our passion and skill to work in non-essential capacities and fill in the gaps that automation cannot until automation catches up.

Human beings have a need to feel part of society[3].  It is embedded into our biology, hence why we feel the urge to contribute in the first place.  In our ideal future we need to change how we define our purpose to better align it with the basic truth:  we want to contribute positively to society by doing what we like to do.

This contribution would be different for every individual, but all contributions add value.  Worried that we don’t cover all the bases to keep our society operate smoothly?  That’s what robotics and AI are for.  We should use them to cover the bases and ensure society runs smoothly as much as possible.   

Innovators and entrepreneurs like myself are trained and enjoy the challenge of finding solutions to problems.  As a society, we can choose to engineer a world where every individual can do what they want.   We still need to monitor and regulate population’s actions to ensure we act according to some accepted social rules of conduct.  Not something unusual or different than what we’re currently doing now with our legislative and judiciary systems.

Social contributors can still be organized in companies to achieve specific goals, just like we’re organized today, with some changes described in the next sections.  Corporations, cooperatives, creative commons and other collaborative systems, for profit or not, are still valid.

We wouldn’t need to reinvent the wheel.  All we really need to do here is give people the basics and many adults will choose of their own free will to find a job or another occupation. The difference is, as seen in UBI pilots of the past[4], the population will spend more time in education, will wait a longer time for the job they will be really interested in or they will start their own innovative exciting businesses.

Some will be passionate parents and strictly focus on that for a while because that’s where their minds and hearts are.  Those parents will produce very well adjusted and socially adept children which will be much better equipped at contributing to society themselves later.

Others will go back to school in fields of interest and then go back to society better educated, happier and more capable.

Live long and prosper

Here is something else to consider:  our next generations could live long, long lives.  It is even foreseeable that we will have the opportunity to live forever.  Several research teams in the US and elsewhere have developed clinically proven treatments to make human lives healthier and longer[5].  We’ve effectively started working on ways to fix with our body’s natural tendencies to deteriorate with age using multiple strategies such as gene editing, stem cells and medicine.  There are no one-treatment-does-all solutions.  Aging is in fact caused by seven very specific biological processes[6].  Modern researchers have already figured out ways to stop and reverse the damages time and use has done to some of those systems. 

The first treatments which should be going to market in the next five years or so should extend the recipient’s lives by a few healthy years, which is good but not enough to really celebrate[7]^,[8].  However, if this gives human beings a few more years of life, on average, this is additional time used to improve on the treatment and find other treatments that deal with one of the seven aging-problematic categories, thus extending our lives further.  This duel between aging and treatments against aging can occur for a while and depending on research success, deployment of treatments to the public and individual health, some people in our youngest generations and the generations following could live healthy for hundreds of years.  Aubrey de Grey, Chief Science Officer at the SENS Research Foundation calls this tug-of-war Longevity Escape Velocity (LEV).  He also told me in an interview the estimated timeline to successfully achieve LEV:

“If you’re asking how soon we will get to longevity escape velocity, I think it’s probably 20 years.  I think the most difficult treatments that we’re talking about are probably a good 10 years away from clinical trial, which means conservatively we should be talking in terms of about 20 years before they actually arrive.”

We really need to consider this as part of our plans.  Not only will AI and other technologies make human work to produce humanity’s basic needs illogical, but humans will be living much longer very soon.  Our economy has difficulty with the average age of death being 80 years old.  People are living much longer than before, and that average will only increase in the next few years.  We are having trouble with the fact that people need to work more than 40 years to sustain our economy.  Are we expected to be forced to work for… say 300 years, just to support a work-free end of life?

That’s just ridiculous. All the more reason to create a new social paradigm and a new economy that supports a healthy population that will live extremely long healthy lives.

Ensuring everyone can support themselves and their families with the basics for the full duration of their lives is an important foundation to our ideal future.

Decentralization and entrepreneurship

I’ve mentioned several times already the importance of innovators such as entrepreneurs in this plan.  Honestly, all the entrepreneurs I know, don’t start new businesses to get rich.  They do it because they frankly can’t do otherwise.  It is a burning passion that allows us to go through incredibly uncomfortable and insecure social positions to complete projects dear to us.  We do it because we want to see our project succeed.  We want to fix problems in we see in the world and we want to make improvements in the world.  Some of us want to be the first to do something that has never been done. 

With the massive amounts of information on the Internet and very advanced software allowing people, AI and information to collide and work together these days, it’s even easier to be an entrepreneur or inventor.  We can develop ideas on our own with limited financial resources.  It is often enough to create a minimal viable product and to test it out to see if it works in the market and if people like it.

It is a glorious time.  Innovators are creating solutions to problems that traditionally required government control or large amounts of funds from companies or controlling benefactors.  Families today can generate their own power (solar panels), make their own drinking water (wells, MOF water extraction technology, etc.) and eliminate their own waste/recycling (this needs a bit more development, but we have solutions for apartment buildings and bathroom blocks already available[9]).

I believe we’ll see a transition from government-controlled energy grids, water purification systems and waste disposal/recycling systems to privately owned systems. This transition is already happening today, and it is a good thing.  Government can take care of regulations to ensure new products sold by businesses won’t be a danger to health or the environment, and just let the private sector create better and better options for the population to choose from.  Offer and demand will balance there rest out.

Decentralization of these services means the same as consumers buying into just any other traditional product today.   That’s great because the bigger the government, the less efficient it is.  Letting us create new products through entrepreneurship and choose the products and services we desire keeps the economy flowing nicely and efficiently.

We can also anticipate more and more families will be using 3D printing technologies or the like to make their own goods at home from raw materials found around the house.  Some of the raw materials could even be what we consider waste or recyclables today.  When you use something up, you need to dispose of, soon, it will eventually become possible to decompose this item at home and then “print” a new one from the components afresh using power pulled from your own personal solar power grid.  Families will be able to control their own needs this way.  Current 3D printers are not efficient enough to be interesting for end users just yet, unless you are producing low quality prototypes, but the technology is rapidly becoming more interesting.  We’re also developing some very neat nanotechnologies that could be used to produce goods.  Not to mention smaller home robots powered by AI. 

The Internet, an essential basic and essential tool for the future of humanity, needs to be updated somewhat as well.  Currently, only a handful of companies control Internet infrastructures.  I believe this needs to change to ensure the Internet is controlled by the whole of humanity and not by central entities that may choose to deprive some of information while others are starved of it.  Some companies, like Substratum.net are trying out a peer-to-peer distributed approach to give individuals Internet access, which is very cool.  Other companies like Elon Musk’s SpaceX have plans to deploy a satellite constellation with ground receivers that will cover the whole planet and thus provide Internet to every individual with access.  The current Internet is old and uses very inefficient communication pathways that could be eliminated through entrepreneur innovation.  Again, offer and demand means people will choose what type of Internet they really want to use and which company they prefer.  It is fair and allows for further iterative innovation down the road.

Finally, we must consider the decentralisation of money.  I’m dedicating a whole section on this subject later in this book since it deserves a lot more attention to fully explain.  However, for the discussion right now the important thing to understand is that we would no longer need fiat currencies controlled by government.  We would still need money to trade for products and services and to participate in the offer and demand market.  Money should be used to acquire goods beyond those required to satisfy basic needs (UBI money is provided for free to ensure that’s covered).  In our global economy, the appearance of blockchain and other cryptographic algorithms like hashgraphs, means we no longer need central authorities that control the value of money and security.  Money systems can be collectively owned by all and thus by none.  It needs to be a way to securely trade for against value in a fair way with no single entity able to dictate fees, changes of values without the consensus of the whole network. 

Ultimately, what we want is full control of our own freedoms, choices, creativity, time and families and create or adapt towards a governance system that takes care of us all without limiting our freedoms and choices.

---

[1] Will robots steal our jobs? The potential impact of automation on the UK and other major economies.  PricewaterhouseCoopers (March 2017) - https://www.pwc.co.uk/economic-services/ukeo/pwcukeo-section-4-automation-march-2017-v2.pdf

[2] Frey, C. B and Osborne, M. A.  (September 2013).  The future of employment:  how susceptible are jobs to computerization? - https://www.oxfordmartin.ox.ac.uk/downloads/academic/The_Future_of_Employment.pdf

[3] Gregg Henriques Ph.D. (2012). Relational Value.  - https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/theory-knowledge/201206/relational-value

[4] Ben Chapman (June 2017).  Finnish citizens given universal basic income report lower stress levels and greater incentive to work.  - http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/finland-universal-basic-income-lower-stress-better-motivation-work-wages-salary-a7800741.html

[5] Fergus Walsh (December 2017).  How long could we live? - http://www.bbc.com/news/health-42404083

[6] A reimagined research strategy for aging.  SENS Research Foundation. - http://www.sens.org/research/introduction-to-sens-research

[7] Michael Irving (March 2017).  DNA-repairing drug could fight aging and radiation damage.  - https://newatlas.com/dna-repairing-drug-nmn/48584/?utm_source=Gizmag+Subscribers&utm_campaign=99a1f64d61-UA-2235360-4&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_65b67362bd-99a1f64d61-92296889

[8] Houston Methodist (July 2017).  Researchers develop technology to make aged cells younger.  - https://m.medicalxpress.com/news/2017-07-technology-aged-cells-younger.html

[9] NYC high-rise reuse proves decentralized system works. Michael Zavoda of Water & Wastewater International   - http://www.waterworld.com/articles/wwi/print/volume-21/issue-1/features/nyc-high-rise-reuse-proves-decentralized-system-works.html

The investor fund and digital game design dilemma

As usual, I was perusing some subjects on my LinkedIn and once more I found some people ranting on why investors don't invest in small unaccomplished firms that have a great digital game design made until the game is actually completed. 

Here is what I responded, roughly, but edited so people that didn't follow the thread can follow.

Click Here for the actual LinkedIn thread if you wish.

There are different types of investors that are willing to put money down, let's not forget that. VCs in the game space will typically fund on design only with the strongest studios with a well proven track record of generating sales. That rings true of Publishers like EA and others which act a bit like VCs. 

If you are a studio that doesn't have a multimillion dollar franchise under your belt, you need more than a design for VC money, you need at least a prototype, and in some cases, a finished product you wish to pitch to get the $$$ to publish properly etc... 

However, if your project is small enough, Angel investment can be a path for a startup, as long as you have a demo OR you have a design and a super strong team with really high class management. 

Friends and family or Kickstarter money can be used to raise small budgets on an idea with a strong team behind it. 

The business model here is simply to match the "story" you are telling to the investor with the amount that needs to be raised to match perceived risks. 

This is true in ANY business, anywhere. 

The advantage I see with Kickstarter is that if you need more than a little, and you have some strength in the team and a few moderately successful titles, you can actually raise funds without giving away equity and you have some pre-sales which is really awesome. 

Sure the bigger companies will also use the system and draw lots of attention and $$$. As a small firm, you just have to ask for less, make your first title a success, then next time you have a better "story" and experience, thus you can ask for more. 

Of course in our industry, we would love to receive $2million for our awesomely designed idea, but that'll never happen if you have never spent $2million in the business making a game yourself with the same team and making a higher ROI off of it. 

Instead of criticising reality, we must create great business "stories" and raise funds that match it, then move on. 

There are LOTS of ways to increase the appeal of a "story", but that's the subject of perhaps another blog post if people want to read up on that.

The Need for funding for a startup right at the start

Typically you want to NOT need funding at the beginning.  Sometimes it is required but its usually best to start with manageable bites for your business through an intelligent strategic plan.

For example, one of my mentored students wants to open up a niche coffee shop but she has no money for an extra rent, staff, furnishings, equipment.  Its a reasonable expense but over her budget or her current ability to raise.

Well, after talking to me and fellow Master Entrepreneur Chris Castillo we elaborated a plan where she leverages things she loves to do such as writing and marketing to draw people to the ideology of her niche cafe idea first, writing a little handbook on the subject and producing podcast-like videos on the subject in the meantime. 

These are things she loves to do and can do for free.

Through this initial process she has a blog and youtube video channel, gathering feedback and followers through her marketing talents while getting the properly tuned materials for the handbook she will write (another thing she loves to do, writing).  After the booklet is finished, she can self publish and share the book at very low cost to her followers, people she meets as well as publishers and media to draw attention to her idea and gather people's attention on her.

At that point, with some reasonable amount of work, she can likely draw funds from multiple sources having gathered a following of interested buyers she can demonstrate, publicity and other forms of leverage that makes it easier to acquire the necessary funds to buy what she needs to make the idea come true in reality.  All the better, she also has regional clients that like the idea and that are waiting for her to open her doors, making it easy for an opening launch.

So you see, there is always a way to even start businesses that require significant funds by strategically preparing through good planning.

Bottom line is you gotta think strategically, creatively and many times sideways to create success with your idea.  Most importantly if you don't have a network of helpful high class advisors, get a mentor to help you out with this.  It will be the best time (and sometimes a bit of $$$) investment you'll ever do.  Be different, be awesome!

If any of you want to have our help from Master Entrepreneur, please feel free to contact me directly and I'll let you know what we can do for you.

Is Starting a Business an Art or a Science?

I found this article on Entrepreneur.com and thought it was real good. So I commented on the subject: http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/222795

I think it is both Art and Science.

It requires instincts and creativity to be able to see ahead and notice patterns that identify needs and opportunities. It takes talent to recruit the right people to surround yourself with and weave your way through the challenges ahead. that's art.

At the same time, in order to maximize your chances of success, you must also do due diligence, market research, and experimentation... and plenty of it in order to get the right mix of elements to make your business a success. That's Science.

The thing is, to succeed, you can't rely on only one or the other.

If you rely only on the Art, then its a hit or miss proposition. If you're really good, you will hit more often but its still a bit blind and on instinct.

If you rely only on the Science, you will fail to notice changes in trends, see how everything converges before the market researchers see it in the data, and you may find great partners on paper but they end up not having the proper passion to achieve objectives or go over the larger challenges your business will face.

Business building is indeed a crazy thing, and we're all a bit crazy to do it, but those of us who are entrepreneurs can't help ourselves.... Like the starving artist, we MUST create!

Hiring Entrepreneurs instead of workers: no resumes!?

Here is a lovely acticle on the subject
When Hiring Entrepreneurs, Ignore Their Resumes

Love the article and its soooo true.

If you look at my resume, I have bachelors degrees in the following subject: Biochemistry, Chemical Engineering and Education. (yes 3 full degrees lol). I've never worked as a scientist or engineer, though I did teach high school for a number of years.

My work history involves teaching to adults as a contractor, startup consultant, game development and publishing company owner, a few interesting MLMs early on, physical and information security work, direct marketing consultant.Basically I'm a serial entrepreneur, but I accept other challenges to grow as a person or to gain knowledge I can only get by "doing" the work itself as an employee.

If I would have stayed "on track" with an employee mentality from university on, I would only know science and engineering and I would probably be working in a lab somewhere right now instead of leading a couple of successful businesses in subjects that fascinate me, connected to hundreds of really successful individuals etc..Choices eh? lol.

Mostly attitude and passion if you ask me.I've hired many people and found many partners for my ventures and while I DO look at the resumes to get an idea of the person's history, what incites me to hire or partner with them is defined by a 30 minute face-to-face casual talk on ambitions and dreams and what projects they were successful in finishing in their history.In a nutshell, I'd rather work with a person that has an awesome attitude and terrific dreams with some cool successes in his past than the most efficient human calculator around.

When my companies reach maturity, that's when I look for the next challenge. There are plenty of C-level managers from the corporate world that enjoy working at the hum drum of leading a company once all the interesting startup challenges have been overcome1 :)

Cheers!

How can conscious entreprise save the planet?

I've been recently associating with excellent individuals with very good projects lately. Patrick Rhein, a friend of mine, has been working on a web business where he tries to attract organizations and individuals who wish to change the world for the better. He was able to gather a few high quality humanitarians, inventors and ideologists to the project. Its called "Creating Our Paradise On Earth", or COPOE.

Here's the link: COPOE

I've been involved more as a consultant to this project since its beginnings and through association and doing research for this one, I've been able to discover several things: 1. Most people WANT change to happen, but they most don't have the motivation to do anything about it that requires effort. 2. People in general have the impression that things are going from bad to worse socially. 3. If the population had a common space in which they could act in a concerted way with minimal effort, they would all act.

Thus creating businesses that leverage people's motivations by allowing them to take baby steps together, en masse, you can not only have a greatly successful business in this time and economy, but help change the world.

For those who are interested, the last book I read is called "Be the Solution" by Michael Strong, is a great resource to really gauge the true state of the world, and how entrepreneurship can solve the world's problems simply by being aware of the state of mind of the population in the developed countries. Underdeveloped countries are getting to this point as well very quickly and getting to the stage where they can also think as responsible entrepreneurs.

So there is hope for us all it seems.