Podcasts about uc berkeley professor

On this episode of Table Talk, we talk with UC Berkeley Professor -- and artificial intelligence and cybersecurity expert -- Hany Farid about scams; how technology is evolving to make scams more believable, and what you can do to spot them.

Donald Trump was granted a partial reprieve as an appeals court drastically cut the $454 million bond he was required to post in his NY civil fraud case; Diddy's Los Angeles, Miami homes were raided as part of a federal sex trafficking investigation; Vice President Kamala Harris claims she has studied the maps, and says there will be consequences possible if Israel raids Rafah; GUEST: Senior Counsel with Alliance Defending Freedom Jeremy Tedesco joins to talk about ADF's recent victory over Apple; UC Berkeley Professor apologizes for 'misogynist' comment on dating in the Bay Area; Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed a new state law regarding kids under 14 being banned from social media accounts.The Officer Tatum Show is now available on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Spotify, and SalemPodcastNetwork.com.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Listen to this clip from The Heidi Harris Show where Heidi discusses a UC Berkeley professor being bashed for telling students to "get out of the Bay Area" if they want girlfriend's.

Pre-Show: Bartenders be so extra when they order a drink. Lyall Behrens talks Kendrick Lamar dissing Drake & J. Cole, Lyall explains why Mos Def saying Drake saying ain't Hip-Hop is rubbish and a UC Berkeley Professor tells his student to 'get out of the Bay Area' if they want a girlfriend. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/lyall-behrens7/message

UC Berkeley Professor Ron Hassner has been living in his office on campus for a little over a week now. He is "Sitting- In" for Jewish Students on Cal's Campus. Listen in to find out why.This is his story.If you have Jewish students on campus or are one, listen up, there's some great wisdom here.Support Chabad on Campus at Uc Berkeley herehttps://www.jewishucb.com/Make a tax deductable donation to the Holy Sparks Podcastto help us keep producing content here!Holy Sparks DONATIONShttp://igfn.us/form/haHSSQ

While the gang take a little holiday break, we thought it was worth revisiting Andy's conversation with AI researcher and UC Berkeley Professor of Computer Science Stuart Russell from wayyyyy back in 2019. Now that we're well into the era of generative artificial intelligence, it's interesting to look back at what experts were saying about AI alignment just a few years ago, when it seemed to many of us like an issue we wouldn't have to tackle directly for a long time to come. As we face down a future where LLMs and other generative models only appear to be getting more capable, it's worth pausing to reflect on what needs to be done to usher in a world that's more utopian than dystopian. Happy holidays!

In the last several years, a cult industrial complex has emerged to capitalize on Americans' fascination with groups such as Jonestown, the Manson Family, the Branch Davidians, and the Rajneeshpuram community in Wasco County, Ore., argues UC Berkeley professor Poulomi Saha. But in her highly sought-after class called Cults in Popular Culture, they emphasize that it's important to look beyond the sensational examples and recognize how cult-like behavior shows up in many facets of our lives and society. We'll talk with Saha about why some groups are labeled as cults, why people are drawn to them, and what cults reveal about spirituality and culture in America. Guests: Poulomi Saha, associate professor of English and co-director of the Program in Critical Theory, UC Berkeley. Saha teaches a course called Cults in Popular Culture.

America's college campuses are roiled by debate and controversy over the war between Israel and Hamas, with sometimes violent clashes between student groups. There have been serious incidents at both Stanford and UC Berkeley, as well as at major universities across the country. But at Berkeley, at least, despite ongoing student walkouts and fierce arguments on Sproul Plaza, two well-known professors on opposing sides of the debate issued a joint statement appealing for peace and civil discourse. We've had one of them, Jewish professor of Israel studies Ron Hassner, on air previously to talk specifically about what was going on in the war. KCBS Radio news anchors Bret Burkhart and Patti Reising and KCBS political reporter Doug Sovern were joined by the other professor, Dr. Hatem Bazian, continuing lecturer in Asian American studies in the department of comparative ethnic studies at Cal and the founder and director of the Islamophobia Research and Documentation Project there, in today's edition of The State of California.  

This is the second of two episodes featuring Aaron's interview with two luminaries of US anti-imperialism—Daniel Ellsberg and Peter Dale Scott. Daniel Ellsberg was an analyst for the Pentagon and RAND before he made the fateful decision to leak the Pentagon Papers—a top secret study on the US involvement in Vietnam from Truman to LBJ. Ellsberg is the author of two memoirs—Secrets: A Memoir of Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers, and The Doomsday Machine: Confessions of a Nuclear War Planner. He is also the subject of The Most Dangerous Man in America: Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers, an Oscar-nominated documentary that Edward Snowden credited for inspiring his own act of whistleblowing. Peter Dale Scott is a former Canadian diplomat and retired UC Berkeley Professor of English. He is the author of numerous books of poetry and prose, including The War Conspiracy, Coming to Jakarta, Deep Politics and the Death of JFK, Cocaine Politics (with Jonathan Marshall), Drugs, Oil, and War, The Road to 9/11, American War Machine, and The American Deep State. This interview was originally recorded in October of 2018 at Marin College during Project Censored's Media Freedom Summit. Big thanks to everybody at Project Censored who helped with this, especially Mickey Huff, Anthony Fest, Dennis Murphy and John Bertucci! Special thanks to Dana Chavarria for producing the episode! Music: "This Nation" by Mock Orange

This is the first of two episodes featuring Aaron's interview with two luminaries of US anti-imperialism—Daniel Ellsberg and Peter Dale Scott. Daniel Ellsberg was an analyst for the Pentagon and RAND before he made the fateful decision to leak the Pentagon Papers—a top secret study on the US involvement in Vietnam from Truman to LBJ. Ellsberg is the author of two memoirs—Secrets: A Memoir of Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers, and The Doomsday Machine: Confessions of a Nuclear War Planner. He is also the subject of The Most Dangerous Man in America: Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers, an Oscar-nominated documentary that Edward Snowden credited for inspiring his own act of whistleblowing. Peter Dale Scott is a former Canadian diplomat and retired UC Berkeley Professor of English. He is the author of numerous books of poetry and prose, including The War Conspiracy, Coming to Jakarta, Deep Politics and the Death of JFK, Cocaine Politics (with Jonathan Marshall), Drugs, Oil, and War, The Road to 9/11, American War Machine, and The American Deep State. This interview was originally recorded in October of 2018 at Marin College during Project Censored's Media Freedom Summit. Big thanks to everybody at Project Censored who helped with this, especially Mickey Huff, Anthony Fest, Dennis Murphy and John Bertucci! Special thanks to Dana Chavarria for producing the episode! Music: “The End of the World” by Mock Orange

This is the second snippet from TRP's 2022 interview with Professor Yoo. John Yoo has taught at UC Berkeley School of Law for nearly 30 years and is the author most recently of Defender In Chief: Trump's Fight for Presidential Power, the focus of the interview. This is Episode 29 of The Republican Professor, originally published on March 23, 2022. https://www.therepublicanprofessor.com/2022/03/23/episode-29-trump-presidential-power-prof-john-yoo-u-c-berkeley-school-of-law/ TRP interviews UC Berkeley Professor of Law John Yoo, author of Defender in Chief: Donald Trump's Fight for Presidential Power. The Republican Professor is produced and hosted by Dr. Lucas J. Mather, Ph.D. and this episode is co-hosted by Mr. Kurtis Olson . The Republican Professor Podcast The Republican Professor Newsletter on Substack https://therepublicanprofessor.substack.com/ https://www.therepublicanprofessor.com/podcast/ https://www.therepublicanprofessor.com/articles/ YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@TheRepublicanProfessor Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/c-1370824 Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TheRepublicanProfessor Twitter: @RepublicanProf Instagram: @the_republican_professor

John Yoo has taught at UC Berkeley School of Law for nearly 30 years and is the author most recently of Defender In Chief: Trump's Fight for Presidential Power. This is Episode 29 of The Republican Professor, originally published on March 23, 2022. https://www.therepublicanprofessor.com/2022/03/23/episode-29-trump-presidential-power-prof-john-yoo-u-c-berkeley-school-of-law/ TRP interviews UC Berkeley Professor of Law John Yoo, author of Defender in Chief: Donald Trump's Fight for Presidential Power, available here : https://www.amazon.com/Defender-Chief-Donald-Trumps-Constitution/dp/1250269571/ref=sr_1_1?crid=2BEMLQQCRABRA&keywords=defender+in+chief&qid=1679410362&s=books&sprefix=Defender+in+chief%2Cstripbooks%2C163&sr=1-1 The Republican Professor is produced and hosted by Dr. Lucas J. Mather, Ph.D. and co-hosted by Kurtis Olson . The Republican Professor Podcast The Republican Professor Newsletter on Substack https://therepublicanprofessor.substack.com/ https://www.therepublicanprofessor.com/podcast/ https://www.therepublicanprofessor.com/articles/ YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@TheRepublicanProfessor Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/c-1370824 Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TheRepublicanProfessor Twitter: @RepublicanProf Instagram: @the_republican_professor

  Aaron speaks with Daniel Ellsberg and Peter Dale Scott about key issues on the 50th anniversary of the Watergate arrests. Specifically, they discuss Nixon's Vietnam strategy, the way these plans were threatened by the leak of the Pentagon Papers, and the mysteries around Watergate which collectively suggest that Nixon's resignation was effected by forces to the right of Nixon himself. Daniel Ellsberg was an analyst for the Pentagon and RAND before he made the fateful decision to leak the Pentagon Papers—a top secret study on the US involvement in Vietnam from Truman to LBJ. Ellsberg is the author of two memoirs—Secrets: A Memoir of Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers, and The Doomsday Machine: Confessions of a Nuclear War Planner. He is also the subject of The Most Dangerous Man in America: Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers, an Oscar-nominated documentary that Edward Snowden credited for inspiring his own act of whistleblowing. Peter Dale Scott is a former Canadian diplomat and retired UC Berkeley Professor of English. He is the author of numerous books of poetry and prose, including The War Conspiracy, Coming to Jakarta, Deep Politics and the Death of JFK, Cocaine Politics (with Jonathan Marshall), Drugs, Oil, and War, The Road to 9/11, American War Machine, and The American Deep State. Special thanks to Casey Moore for the episode art and Dana Chavarria for the sound engineering! Seamus McGuinness is producing a video version of this episode which should be coming soon! Music: "This Nation" by Mock Orange Aaron speaks with Daniel Ellsberg and Peter Dale Scott about key issues on the 50th anniversary of the Watergate arrests. Specifically, they discuss Nixon's Vietnam strategy, the way these plans were threatened by the leak of the Pentagon Papers, and the mysteries around Watergate which collectively suggest that Nixon's resignation was effected by forces to the right of Nixon himself. Daniel Ellsberg was an analyst for the Pentagon and RAND before he made the fateful decision to leak the Pentagon Papers—a top secret study on the US involvement in Vietnam from Truman to LBJ. Ellsberg is the author of two memoirs—Secrets: A Memoir of Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers, and The Doomsday Machine: Confessions of a Nuclear War Planner. He is also the subject of The Most Dangerous Man in America: Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers, an Oscar-nominated documentary that Edward Snowden credited for inspiring his own act of whistleblowing. Peter Dale Scott is a former Canadian diplomat and retired UC Berkeley Professor of English. He is the author of numerous books of poetry and prose, including The War Conspiracy, Coming to Jakarta, Deep Politics and the Death of JFK, Cocaine Politics (with Jonathan Marshall), Drugs, Oil, and War, The Road to 9/11, American War Machine, and The American Deep State. Special thanks to Casey Moore for the episode art and Dana Chavarria for the sound engineering! Seamus McGuinness is producing a video version of this episode which should be coming soon! Music: "This Nation" by Mock Orange

LeBron breaks silence about BG situation, gives absurdly dumb comments; Video shows Minneapolis toddlers/kids yelling and slapping cops, parenting is broken; Jill Biden's comments about the Latin community are insane; Senator Josh Hawley exchange with UC Berkeley law professor about trans people

Hour 2 of The Dawn Stensland Show: In a promo for the fifth season of his show “The Shop,” LeBron James discussed the Russian imprisonment of WNBA star Brittney Griner, criticizing America's response, stating she has been there for “over 110 days…I would be feeling like, ‘Do I even want to go back to America?'” During the seventh day of the House's January 6th public hearings, the investigative committee played recorded testimony from former White House Counsel Pat Cipollone and former Attorney General Bill Barr. Rioter Stephen Ayers told Rep. Stephanie Murphy that he was “just following” what President Trump had said when he broke into the Capitol building. The committee attempted to establish a link between far-right militants and Donald Trump's White House. Charles McElwee—Editor of Real Clear Pennsylvania—joins the show to discuss John Fetterman's Senate campaign raising a record-setting $11 million in the months of April, May, and June. Dr. Mehmet Oz is expected to release his three-month fund-raising numbers by the end of the week. McElwee also talks about Governor Tom Wolf vetoing the bipartisan “Fairness in Women's Sports Act,” and a collection of Pennsylvania Republicans creating a “Never Mastriano” super PAC to prevent PA State Senator Doug Mastriano from becoming governor. On Friday, Elon Musk announced that he was walking away from his $44 billion agreement to purchase Twitter. Musk claimed the deal was scrapped over the company's reluctance to share pertinent information regarding the number of “bot” and “spam” accounts on the platform. Twitter has since filed a lawsuit. During a rally in Anchorage, Alaska, former President Donald Trump had several unflattering things to say about the Tesla CEO. During a Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing, UC Berkeley School of Law Professor Khiara Bridges accused Sen. Josh Hawley of being transphobic for saying that he believed only women are capable of becoming pregnant. While appearing on Meet the Press, Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo told Chuck Todd that the economy is strong, and we are “talking ourselves into a recession.”

Happy Earth Week! This episode offers a reminder of how critical grazing is in California. To discuss the role of grazing, her research and more, Dr. Lynn Huntsinger, a UC Berkeley Professor of Rangeland Ecology and Management and the Russell Rustici Chair in Rangeland Management, joins Katie out at the Koopmann Ranch in Contra Costa County.Learn more about Dr. Huntsinger's research by clicking here to read the paper "Rangeland Land-Sharing, Livestock Grazing's Role in the Conservation of Imperiled Species." 

In this episode we interview UC Berkeley Professor and OBI Director john a. powell. john a. powell is an internationally recognized expert in the areas of civil rights, civil liberties, structural racism, housing, poverty, democracy, and othering, bridging and belonging frameworks-- which he has been critical in developing and translating between academia and fields of practice. In this interview, Professor powell breaks down the definitions of othering, bridging and belonging. Through storytelling he elucidates how both interpersonal and structural othering occurs, and how people and organizations have been successful in addressing it. He gives advice to listeners so that we can all play a role in co-creating a society where everyone belongs. This episode of Who Belongs? is part of a new series of podcasts focused on telling bridging stories. Throughout the series we'll talk to leaders implementing bridging work and individuals who have experienced the bridging transformation. This project is led by OBI's Blueprint for Belonging project (B4B), and hosted by program researcher Miriam Magaña Lopez. This project is funded by The Annie E. Casey Foundation, Inc.

In this episode of Liberty Chats, we speak with Corey DeAngelis, the national director of research at the American Federation for Children. Corey is also the executive director at Educational Freedom Institute, an adjunct scholar at Cato Institute, and a senior fellow at Reason Foundation. He was named on the Forbes 30 Under 30 list for his work on education policy and received the Buckley Award from America's Future in 2020.He's a powerhouse on Twitter and doesn't why away from important conversations. Don't miss this episode to get Corey's perspective on school choice and more! Recent episodes: Saurabh Sharma, American MomentTim Brown, Retired FDNY Firefighter & 9/11 SurvivorJohn Yoo, UC Berkeley Professor of Law

In this episode of Liberty Chats, we speak with Tim Brown. Tim is  a retired, decorated 20-year FDNY firefighter, a survivor of the 2001 terrorist attack on the World Trade Center, a first responder to the 1993 terrorist attack on the WTC, and a veteran of the New York Urban Search & Rescue Task Force team that responded to the 1995 terrorist attack on the Alfred P. Murrah federal building in Oklahoma City.On September 11, 2001, Tim came close to death not once, not twice, but several times. His story is incredible. His recent research has focused on developing the national security required to secure the long-term interests of the United States – protecting the public, providing for economic growth and preserving civil liberties.Tim is also a speaker at the 2021 Freedom Conference. Recent episodes: John Yoo, UC Berkeley Professor of LawGarrett Powell, Former Bachelorette Contestant Oren Cass, American Compass

This week we're joined by former Secretary of Labor and UC Berkeley Professor Robert Reich who teaches us why the middle class is disappearing, why we need to get big corporations out of politics and what tulips have to do with the rise in GameStop stock! See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Black experience in academia and feminizing frogs — two things you'd never thought you'd hear together. On the podcast is Dr. Tyrone Hayes, Professor of Integrative Biology at UC Berkeley, one of the only tenured Black biology professors in the country. Dr. Hayes joins us to share how he stood his ground and followed his values after battling with a corporation that attempted to discredit his work and his name. During the wake of George Floyd's murder and the resulting Black Lives Matter protests, Dr. Hayes penned an open letter to UC Berkeley about the discrimination he faced as a Black professor in his department. Listen in as the doctors discuss with Dr. Hayes confidence, imposter syndrome, and pressure of having the spotlight on you as the only person of color in the room.

In Sunrise Bay Radio's second episode, A Just, Green Recovery, we explore how the current economic crisis compares to previous recessions. Furthermore, we discuss how a green stimulus can simultaneously lift us out of this economic downturn, transform our economy to run on clean, renewable energy and address systemic inequality for people of color. In our first interview, our correspondent Mukta speaks with UC Berkeley Professor, Dr. Ellora Derenoncourt about the history of previous recessions and recovery efforts by the U.S. government. Next, Mukta discusses the Green Stimulus with one of its' coauthors, Dr. Mijin Cha. Dr. Cha lays out the diverse ways in which a green stimulus would impact the U.S. economy, the environment, and racial justice. Finally, our correspondent Noah speaks with a labor historian, Fred Glass, about how labor organizing can help build power to demand a just recovery at both a local and federal level. Our hosts, Maritte and Richard, introduce the THRIVE Agenda, which was introduced last week in congress and would stimulate the economy by creating green jobs and simultaneously address systemic inequality. Call your congressional representatives and encourage them to support the THRIVE Agenda For more information about this episode please contact us at bayarea@sunrisemovement.org Our producers for this episode were Isaac, Noah, Mukta, Ashlyn, Julia, and Elisabeth. Special thanks to Echo Marine for our theme music. sunrisebayarea.com TW: @sunrisebayarea IG: @bayareasunrise FB: Sunrise Movement Bay Area

In this first episode in our 12-part Saturday "AI Futures" series, UC Berkeley Professor and renown AI expert Stuart Russell shares his perspectives on the near and long-term considerations of AI governance. https://emerj.com/ai-podcast-interviews/stuart-russell-ai-governance/ Visit the blog post for this article, and subscribe to the podcast on your favorite podcast platform. From June 27th to September 12th, we'll be covering a new "AI Futures" episode about AI governance every Saturday. This is an experimental series designed to extend current AI trends to long-term AI consequences. We hope you'll enjoy.

Over the past several centuries, the human condition has been profoundly changed by the agricultural and industrial revolutions. With the creation and continued development of AI, we stand in the midst of an ongoing intelligence revolution that may prove far more transformative than the previous two. How did we get here, and what were the intellectual foundations necessary for the creation of AI? What benefits might we realize from aligned AI systems, and what are the risks and potential pitfalls along the way? In the longer term, will superintelligent AI systems pose an existential risk to humanity? Steven Pinker, best selling author and Professor of Psychology at Harvard, and Stuart Russell, UC Berkeley Professor of Computer Science, join us on this episode of the AI Alignment Podcast to discuss these questions and more.  Topics discussed in this episode include: -The historical and intellectual foundations of AI  -How AI systems achieve or do not achieve intelligence in the same way as the human mind -The rise of AI and what it signifies  -The benefits and risks of AI in both the short and long term  -Whether superintelligent AI will pose an existential risk to humanity You can find the page for this podcast here: https://futureoflife.org/2020/06/15/steven-pinker-and-stuart-russell-on-the-foundations-benefits-and-possible-existential-risk-of-ai/ You can take a survey about the podcast here: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/W8YLYD3 You can submit a nominee for the Future of Life Award here: https://futureoflife.org/future-of-life-award-unsung-hero-search/ Timestamps:  0:00 Intro  4:30 The historical and intellectual foundations of AI  11:11 Moving beyond dualism  13:16 Regarding the objectives of an agent as fixed  17:20 The distinction between artificial intelligence and deep learning  22:00 How AI systems achieve or do not achieve intelligence in the same way as the human mind 49:46 What changes to human society does the rise of AI signal?  54:57 What are the benefits and risks of AI?  01:09:38 Do superintelligent AI systems pose an existential threat to humanity?  01:51:30 Where to find and follow Steve and Stuart This podcast is possible because of the support of listeners like you. If you found this conversation to be meaningful or valuable, consider supporting it directly by donating at futureoflife.org/donate. Contributions like yours make these conversations possible.

In this HRchat interview, David Osborne returns to discuss the impact of COVID-19 on the workplace and why providing employees with wellbeing programs is vital in the new normal. Listen and discover:How companies can integrate workforce wellness into their day-to-day activitiesWhat steps HR professionals should take to ensure a successful and safe return to workHow employers can begin to revive cultures as employees return to the workplaceThe mental challenges caused by in-person work interaction following the long period of isolationWays leaders can leverage digital technology to re-emphasize and reinforce company culture, structures, and protocolsAbout David OsborneDavid is a business technology leader with more than 20 years’ experience in global sales, operations, transformation planning, and execution. As CEO of Virgin Pulse, he is responsible for streamlining, optimizing, and scaling Virgin Pulse as the company continues its aggressive growth strategy and solidifies its position as the largest workplace wellbeing company in the world.About Virgin PulseVirgin Pulse, founded in 2004 as part of Sir Richard Branson’s Virgin Group, designs technology that cultivates good lifestyle habits for employees. Throughout June, Virgin Pulse will be broadcasting ThriveX, a virtual event to empower health, wellbeing and safety leaders to connect, plan, and navigate with confidence. Speakers Include Dr. David Katz, Public Health Expert, Dr. Laurie Santos, Cognitive Scientist and Professor of Psychology at Yale University, Dr. Martin Makary, Johns Hopkins Surgeon and Professor of Health Policy, Dr. Matthew Walker, UC Berkeley Professor of Neuroscience and Psychology, and Josh Bersin, Global Industry Analyst.

Sean Foote is a University of Rochester parent who has been a venture capitalist for the last 20 years. He is also a professor at the Haas School of Business at UC Berkeley where he teaches venture capital and private equity. Join us as we pick Sean's brain and hear his perspective on the impact of COVID-19 and what the future may hold.

Robert Alter discusses his new, complete translation of and commentary on the Hebrew Bible. For the UC Berkeley Professor of Hebrew and Comparative Literature, it represents nearly two and a half decades of work. Series: "Taubman Symposia in Jewish Studies" [Humanities] [Show ID: 35794]

Robert Alter discusses his new, complete translation of and commentary on the Hebrew Bible. For the UC Berkeley Professor of Hebrew and Comparative Literature, it represents nearly two and a half decades of work. Series: "Taubman Symposia in Jewish Studies" [Humanities] [Show ID: 35794]

Robert Alter discusses his new, complete translation of and commentary on the Hebrew Bible. For the UC Berkeley Professor of Hebrew and Comparative Literature, it represents nearly two and a half decades of work. Series: "Taubman Symposia in Jewish Studies" [Humanities] [Show ID: 35794]

Robert Alter discusses his new, complete translation of and commentary on the Hebrew Bible. For the UC Berkeley Professor of Hebrew and Comparative Literature, it represents nearly two and a half decades of work. Series: "Taubman Symposia in Jewish Studies" [Show ID: 35794]

Robert Alter discusses his new, complete translation of and commentary on the Hebrew Bible. For the UC Berkeley Professor of Hebrew and Comparative Literature, it represents nearly two and a half decades of work. Series: "Taubman Symposia in Jewish Studies" [Show ID: 35794]

Robert Alter discusses his new, complete translation of and commentary on the Hebrew Bible. For the UC Berkeley Professor of Hebrew and Comparative Literature, it represents nearly two and a half decades of work. Series: "Taubman Symposia in Jewish Studies" [Show ID: 35794]

Robert Alter discusses his new, complete translation of and commentary on the Hebrew Bible. For the UC Berkeley Professor of Hebrew and Comparative Literature, it represents nearly two and a half decades of work. Series: "Taubman Symposia in Jewish Studies" [Show ID: 35794]

Robert Alter discusses his new, complete translation of and commentary on the Hebrew Bible. For the UC Berkeley Professor of Hebrew and Comparative Literature, it represents nearly two and a half decades of work. Series: "Taubman Symposia in Jewish Studies" [Show ID: 35794]

Robert Alter discusses his new, complete translation of and commentary on the Hebrew Bible. For the UC Berkeley Professor of Hebrew and Comparative Literature, it represents nearly two and a half decades of work. Series: "Taubman Symposia in Jewish Studies" [Show ID: 35794]

In this hour, Stephen Henderson speaks with University of Michigan Law Professor Richard Primus ahead of the House Judiciary Impeachment Hearings. Plus, UC Berkeley Professor and Author David Kirp joins Stephen to talk about his new book "The College Dropout Scandal."

Alex Budak co-founded a crowdfunding site called StartSomeGood.com, a platform for social entrepreneurs and other changemakers. As he became acquainted with people around the world who were starting to do some good, his passion increased. He continues to advise StartSomeGood and now works as a full-time faculty member at the Haas School of Business at UC Berkeley. He’s teaching people how to become changemakers. He shares some of his insights below and in the video above. The following is the pre-interview with Alex Budak. Be sure to watch the recorded interview above. Expert Tips: Tip 1: Companies, communities and, indeed, our world are calling out for a new type of leader. A leader who is resilient, creative, collaborative and optimistic. A leader who can work across sectors and hierarchies and defies stereotypes, and the status quo. A leader ready and able to create the future. I call this new type of leader a changemaker. Tip 2: The mindset and leadership skills a changemaker needs are all learnable and practicable by each of us. The mindset includes traits like resilience, humility, trust, collaboration and smart risk-taking. Leadership skills include influencing without formal authority and inspiring others towards a shared vision. Tip 3: To teach changemakers, we must change the way we teach. The best way to become a changemaker is to practice becoming one. My course includes frameworks and theories grounded in research but then encourages and inspires students to take what they are learning and put it all into action. University education must get students out of their seats and into a mode of doing! Never miss another interview! Join Devin here: http://bit.ly/joindevin.

TranscriptLisa Kiefer: [00:00:03] This is method to the madness, a biweekly public affairs show on K-A-L-X Berkeley celebrating Bay Area innovators. I'm your host Lisa Kiefer. And today I'm speaking with Gabriel Zucman Professor of Economics and Public Policy here at UC Berkeley. He has just co-authored a book with Emmanuel Saez called The Triumph of Injustice --How the Rich Dodge Taxes and How to Make Them Pay. Welcome to the program, Gabriel.Gabriel Zucman: [00:00:36] Thanks for having me.Lisa Kiefer: [00:00:37] Why did you write this book. What was the problem or problems you were trying to solve?Gabriel Zucman: [00:00:42] So the main problem is the rise of inequality in the US. So if you look for instance at what has happened to income concentration, in 1980, the top 1 percent highest earners in the U.S. earned about 10 percent of total U.S. national income today they earn 20 percent of U.S. national income. Now contrast that with what has happened for the working class for the bottom 50 percent of earners. They used to earn 20 percent of income and now about 12 percent. So essentially the top 1 percent and the bottom 50 percent have have switched their income share. And the reality of the U.S. today is that the 1 percent earns twice as much income in total than the bottom 50 percent a group that by definition is 50 times larger. So you have this huge level of inequality and this big increase in inequality and the tax system is a key institution to regulate inequality. And so we wanted to know OK does it do a good job? Does the tax system limit inequality or does it exacerbate the rise of inequality?Lisa Kiefer: [00:01:58] And as you say in your book all the way back to James Madison the whole point of taxes yes is to raise revenue but the other significant point was to reduce inequality.Gabriel Zucman: [00:02:07] Exactly.Lisa Kiefer: [00:02:08] And that's something that's been kind of forgotten since 1980.Gabriel Zucman: [00:02:11] That's been forgotten despite the fact that it's deeply rooted in American society. The U.S. was created in large part in reaction against the highly unequal aristocratic societies of of Europe in the 18th century and ever since, many people in the US have been concerned about becoming as unequal as Europe. Europe for a long time was perceived as as an anti model, too unequal, at least until the middle of the 20th century. Now it's the opposite, it's funny to see how these beliefs and perceptions have changed over time. Now many people in the US feel that Europe is too equal, but in fact for most of US history it was it was the opposite. The US invented some of the key progressive fiscal institutions designed to limit inequality to regulate inequality. Let me just give one example. In 1943 Franklin Roosevelt goes to Congress. He makes a famous speech. He says I think that no American should have an income after paying taxes of more than twenty five thousand dollars which is the equivalent of a few million dollars today. Therefore I propose to create a top marginal income tax rate of 100 percent above twenty five thousand dollars. And that's the idea of a legal maximum income. That's an American, a Roosevelt invention. And people in Congress they hesitate a little bit you know 100 percent, maybe it's too much, but they agree on 93 percent which when you think about it is that very far from 100 percent. And then the U.S. kept these very high modern 90 percent top marginal income tax rates for a long time. So there is this deeply rooted tradition in the U.S. of using the tax system to limit the concentration of income. The idea being that wealth is a good thing for the working class, for the middle class. It provides safety, provides security. But for the very rich,wealth is not safety or security. Wealth is power. And an extreme concentration of wealth means an extreme concentration of power, of political power, of economic power, which is detrimental to the rest of society and so one key function of the tax system is to prevent such a concentration of wealth and such a concentration of power from happening.Lisa Kiefer: [00:04:52] You've been consulting with Elizabeth Warren and others adopting pieces of some of the ideas that you had. How does Elizabeth Warren's plan, when you plug it into your model in the book, your 1980 model,what was the outcome of plugging in her wealth tax.Gabriel Zucman: [00:05:09] So Elizabeth Warren proposes to create a wealth tax at a rate of 2 percent above 50 million dollars and 6 percent above 1 billion dollars. So just let me explain what this would do. It means that if you have 50 million dollars in wealth or less, you pay zero. One of the things we do in the book we tried to imagine how the U.S. economy would have looked like if such a tax had been in place since 1982. So let me first start with what has happened to wealth concentration since 1982. If you look at the 400 richest Americans, you know Forbes magazine has estimates every year of their wealth. And according to Forbes magazine, the 400 richest Americans owned about 1 percent of U.S. wealth in 1982. And today they own about three point five percent of U.S. wealth. That is their wealth has been growing much much much faster than the economy as a whole and than average wealth in the economy. If the Warren wealth tax had been in place since 1982, inequality, wealth concentration would have increased much less, it would have increased a little bit. That is, today, the top 400 richest Americans would own about one point five percent of U.S. wealth. So a bit more than 82 but that would be much less than the current three point five percent. So this shows something which is very, to me, is very striking, a 6 percent tax on wealth. It's a big deal. You know it means that someone who has a hundred billion dollars has to pay six billion dollars a year in taxes. So it's big. And even if that tax had been in place since 1982, billionaires would still have seen their share of wealth increase.Lisa Kiefer: [00:07:00] In other words they'd still be billionaires.Gabriel Zucman: [00:07:02] Not only billionaires but multi billionaires. Some of them would still have tens of billions of dollars because the rise of wealth inequality has been so massive. The growth rate of wealth of billionaires has been so much higher than the growth rate of wealth for the rest of the population that even with a big wealth tax you know it would not have been enough to reduce inequality.Lisa Kiefer: [00:07:26] Well you give a good example about Warren Buffett. You know he's always bragging about how "I pay taxes. I pay a lot of taxes."Gabriel Zucman: [00:07:32] Yeah. So Warren Buffett is a good illustration for why we need a wealth tax. He's one of the main shareholders of Berkshire Hathaway. His wealth, according to Forbes magazine again, is about 80 billion dollars. His true economic income is his share of Berkshire Hathaway's profits. It's something like five billion dollars a year. That's his income. But what he does is that he instructs this company that he owns, Berkshire Hathaway, not to pay dividends. And so his only taxable income is when he sells a few shares every year of his company, is a taxable income of the order of 10 to 20 million dollars. And on that 10 or 20 million dollars he pays three or six million in capital gains taxes. And now you do the math. His true economic income is 5 billion. His tax bill is something like 5 million. So his effective tax rate is essentially zero percent.Lisa Kiefer: [00:08:41] It's lower than his secretary.Gabriel Zucman: [00:08:43] It's not only lower than its secretary, it's it's zero. Essentially you know five million compared to five billion. It's nothing. Then you have a number of proposals such as oh but let's just increase the top marginal income tax rate or let's just increase the tax rate on capital gains.But you see the problem....Lisa Kiefer: [00:09:01] That's what Bill Gates says.Gabriel Zucman: [00:09:03] That's what Bill Gates, Warren Buffett himself, there is this so-called Buffett Rule that was popular at some point among Democrats and the idea was we need to increase the tax rate on capital gains. Fine. You know it's not a bad idea. But you have to realize that the Buffett rule itself would make essentially no difference to Warren Buffett's tax bill, because even if you increase the capital gains tax rate to 100 percent let's say, then Warren Buffett would have to pay let's say 20 million in taxes. 20 million divided by five billion, which again is his true income, would still be zero percent. So if you want to tax billionaires like Warren Buffett or like Jeff Bezos or like Mark Zuckerberg, the proper way to do that is with a tax on the stock of wealth itself, with a wealth tax. Because when you're extremely rich it's very easy to own billions or tens of billions while having very little taxable income. And so you cannot tax billionaires well just with the income tax. You also need a wealth tax.Lisa Kiefer: [00:10:10] Gates also argues estate taxes and I like your argument in the book, you say well you know fine but are we going to wait around all these years? Some of these billionaires are very young.Gabriel Zucman: [00:10:21] Yeah exactly. You look at Mark Zuckerberg you know he's in his 30s. He's not paying much taxes today. Just like the Warren Buffett example because Facebook doesn't pay dividends. Facebook doesn't pay a lot of corporate tax. So is it wise to wait for 50 years or more before some of the country's wealthiest individuals stopped paying taxes. I don't think that's very wise. You Know, essentially because there are all these needs for revenue for early education, for university, for health care, for infrastructure. These are immediate needs and some billionaires can contribute much much more than they do today. There's no good reason to wait for 50 years to make them contribute.Lisa Kiefer: [00:11:12] If you're just tuning in, you're listening to method to the madness, a bi weekly public affairs show on K A L X Berkeley celebrating Bay Area innovators. I'm speaking with Professor Gabriel Zucman about his new book The Triumph of injustice how the rich dodge taxes and how to make them pay, co-authored by another economics professor here Emmanuel Saez. They advocate for a progressive wealth tax as a solution to global inequality, one that rethinks both evasion and the goals of taxation.Lisa Kiefer: [00:11:48] You talk about labor versus capital and I want you to explain that a little bit because you said for the first time in history labor pays more than capital. Why do the working class pay so many taxes right now. And that has to do with that labor capital crossover.Gabriel Zucman: [00:12:04] Absolutely. So historically the U.S. has taxed capital a lot. The corporate tax was high. The estate tax. Taxes and dividends, on interest. Property taxes. So there is a long tradition of relatively heavy capital taxation in the US. The main change that has happened since the 1980s is that these capital taxes have been rolled back, have have been cut massively, so the corporate income tax is a prime example. In December 2017, the Trump tax reform slashed the corporate income tax rate from 35 percent to 21 percent. Another good example is the estate tax which used to generate quite a lot of revenue in the 1970s. Today almost nobody pays the estate tax and even the very wealthy who are supposed to pay it can claim valuation discount and avoid it in many ways so that the revenue generated by the estate tax is extremely small. Dividends are taxed less than wages and so on and so on so capital taxation is essentially disappearing,it has not disappeared completely but has it has been dramatically reduced. And at the same time Labor taxation has increased. So Labor taxation, what is it? Taxes on wages, you know the income tax, but also the payroll taxes. So no matter how low your wage is in the United States today, 15 percent of that wage is paid in payroll taxes, that fund Social Security and Medicare, and these payroll taxes they used to be quite small you know in the 50s-60s, less than 5 percent of income. And they've grown a lot and these are taxes that are essentially only on wage income. And so you have this process where wages have stagnated for the working class for the middle class. In fact at the bottom of the wage distribution, wages have declined a lot because the federal minimum wage has declined enormously since the 1970s. Today it's only seven point twenty five dollars. It's a number of states and and municipalities like Berkeley have higher minimum wages. But if you look at Southern states for instance they only have the federal minimum wage seven point twenty five dollars an hour, much lower than in the 70s, and at the same time as minimum wage workers so their income fall, their taxes have increased because of the big increase in payroll taxes. And I don't think that's a sustainable process.Lisa Kiefer: [00:14:40] And not only that, the cost of childcare, education, I mean when you think about it, they could be considered taxes on the working people. You know you're out of pocket for everything and not to mention medical care and a lot of people do not even have medical care.Gabriel Zucman: [00:14:55] Absolutely. And that's a very important point. When you look for instance at health care, health insurance, it is in effect a giant tax today on working families. If you are lucky enough to work for a firm or an employer that has more than 50 workers, the firm has to provide you with health insurance, that's mandatory. And the way this works is that employers pay premiums to insurance companies and these premiums are enormous, the costs for covered work today on average is thirteen thousand dollars. That thirteen thousand dollars that in effect reduces the wage of employees. Okay. That's something that could be added to their wage for instance if there was a public insurance program, if everybody was covered by Medicare, workers could get thirteen thousand dollars more in wages and it would make no difference for employers. These insurance premiums are in effect a huge tax on labor, a huge hidden tax. There mandatory.Lisa Kiefer: [00:16:04] You call it a poll tax.Gabriel Zucman: [00:16:05] We call them a poll tax or head tax because they are of a fixed amount per head, that is, the employer pays those same essentially for a secretary and for an executive-- thirteen thousand dollars. So it's the most regressive type of tax. It doesn't depend on income, it doesn't depend on your ability to pay. It reduces wages by thirteen thousand dollars for all work workers no matter what their wage is. This is a huge problem. This is a big part of the reason why wages have stagnated since the 1980s for the working class and the middle class. Their wages have stagnated because employers have to pay more and more to private health insurance companies and so that leaves less and less money that can be paid in wages.Lisa Kiefer: [00:16:56] In the Democratic debates, why are they not explaining this. They seem to defend the choice of a private insurance tax. "Oh let people choose." It doesn't sound like people truly understand what they are choosing.Gabriel Zucman: [00:17:11] I agree. We are trying to explain that in the book and we are trying to explain that to as many people as we can. There are many problems with the way that healthcare and health insurance currently works in the US, but the main problem is how it reduces wages dramatically for the working class and for the middle class. And we have a solution. In my opinion, this is how things should be presented. If you move to a universal public health insurance program let's call it Medicare for all. What would happen the first Year? Employers would be required to convert insurance premiums into wages. That is, an employer that used to pay thirteen thousand dollars for the health care of each employees, would add thirteen thousand dollars to their wages, so this would be the biggest pay raise in a generation. First year of Medicare for all, everybody's wage increases by thirteen thousand dollars. And then of course you need to collect extra taxes to fund Medicare for all. But if these taxes are smart enough, if they are not head taxes or poll taxes that doesn't vary with income but rather if they are taxes based on your income or your wealth or if you tax corporate profits, you can make sure that the new tax would be much lower for the vast majority of workers than the extra wage that they gained. And so you can make sure that 90 percent of workers would benefit from a transition to Medicare for All in the sense that they would have a huge wage boost. They would have to pay a bit more in taxes but the extra tax would be much less than thirteen thousand dollars. Any my way is the proper way to explain Medicare for all. Your wages have stagnated. Big part of the explanation is there so much money that goes to private health insurance. There's going to be a law that says all the premiums are converted back into wages. Part of your wage was stolen. Now we're giving it back to you. You have a huge wage boost. We're going to raise taxes. But in a progressive manner so that the bottom 90 percent of the income distribution has a big net of tax pay increase.Lisa Kiefer: [00:19:33] With a wealth tax, it seems like the taxes for middle class and lower class would actually go down, even paying for Medicare for all.Gabriel Zucman: [00:19:41] Yes that is, if you include current health insurance premiums in your measure of the tax rate which I think is legitimate since these premiums are essentially like private taxes, mandatory payments. And if you abolish these premiums and replace those by progressive taxes, you get a big tax cut for essentially 90 percent of the population.Lisa Kiefer: [00:20:05] That's something no one's talking about.Gabriel Zucman: [00:20:07] Not yet. I'm not losing hope.Lisa Kiefer: [00:20:09] One of your most interesting chapters is on tax evasion and tax competition, which is going to be a challenge to any kind of change to our tax system. Can you talk about what you discovered and actually it goes back to when you were working as a young man at Exane.Gabriel Zucman: [00:20:26] Yes. So many people have that view that in a globalized world it's impossible to tax multinational companies, impossible to tax corporations, because if you do that they would move their profits to tax havens, the Cayman Islands or Bermuda. Or they will move their factories or their headquarters, their production activities, to low tax places like Ireland. And so according to that view, the only possible future is the race to the bottom with respect to the corporate income tax rate. So countries slashing their rates one after another. And we are very much in that situation today where countries are slashing their corporate tax rate. And for a long time I thought OK no this this makes sense. I understand why in a globalized world, countries want to attract some activity by offering lower rate and there's going to be tax competition and it's the huge pressure that pushes towards lower rates. But what we understood by doing research, that the research is summarised in the book is that this view is actually wrong. That is tax competition, just like tax avoidance or tax evasion, these are not laws of nature. These are policy choices. So we've embraced as nations, collectively we've embraced a certain form of globalization, which is characterized by tax competition and tax avoidance. But that's a choice. It's not a very democratic or very transparent choice, not a very well-informed choice, but it's a choice that's been made, and we can make other choices. There's another form of globalization that's possible. There's no tax competition. There's no profit shifting. There's there's much less tax evasion. So the way this would work for instance is this: right now if you are a U.S. multinational company and you book your profits in Bermuda, for instance, where the corporate tax rate is 0 percent, you don't have to pay taxes. Bermuda chooses not to collect taxes and the U.S. essentially doesn't tax the profits booked by its companies abroad. Okay that's that's a choice but we can make another choice. We could say the U.S. is going to tax all the foreign profits of its companies. It's going to collect the taxes that other countries choose not to collect. If Apple for instance, books a billion dollars in profits in Bermuda, taxed at 0 percent, and then the corporate tax rate is 30 percent in the U.S., the U.S. is going to tax that billion dollar at a rate of 30 percent in the U.S.. If Apple Books profits in Ireland taxed at 2 percent in Ireland the U.S. is going to collect 28 percent, so that the total rate would be 30 percent on a country by country basis.Lisa Kiefer: [00:23:12] So that would change everything.Gabriel Zucman: [00:23:14] That changes everything because then it removes any incentive for firms to book profits in tax havens, or to move real activity to low tax places, one. And second, since firms wouldn't have incentives anymore to do these things, it removes any incentive for tax havens to offer low tax rates in the first place. Now they would have incentives to actually increase that tax rate as so you see how you change the race to the bottom into a race to the top.Lisa Kiefer: [00:23:48] Yes and manufacturing might start to happen more in the countries that had previously been taking them offshore.Gabriel Zucman: [00:23:54] Exactly and what might also happen is that instead of competing by offering low tax rates as countries do today, a very negative form of international competition, we would move to a more positive form of competition, where countries would compete by providing the best infrastructure for companies or by having the most productive workforce thanks to good universities, good schools, good hospitals. So that's how globalization could look like. You know it's good to have some competition but the form of competition that we have today, which is you know countries are competing by slashing their rates, a very negative and bad form of competition. We could have a much more positive form of competition once you put taxes out of the picture.Lisa Kiefer: [00:24:46] So this would require cooperation amongst countries and just the will to do this.Gabriel Zucman: [00:24:52] Yeah and look there's already a lot of international economic cooperation. We've made a lot of progress. For instance, when it comes to trade agreements, some of that is is unraveling today with the Trump administration. But if you take the longer view. We've made tons of progress. Reducing tariffs in terms of facilitating access Lisa Kiefer: [00:25:14] Access to data which helped you with this book.Gabriel Zucman: [00:25:16] Exactly, in terms of access to data, so does there is international coordination. But the problem is that there's way too little coordination on the tax rates themselves. So for instance when countries talk about free trade agreements these days, these free trade agreements are essentially about property protection, protecting the rights of foreign investors and dispute resolution settlements. So know how to protect the rights of investors, but property cannot come with only rights and no duty, no, property also comes with the duty to pay taxes. And so the way to make progress, to reach an international agreement on taxes, in my view. is to put taxes at the center of free trade agreements, is to say, we are not going to sign any of any new free trade agreement if it's only to guarantee new rights to investors and ignores taxes. Any new free trade agreement should have taxes at the center stage and that's how it would become possible to make quickly a lot of progress in terms of tax coordination.Lisa Kiefer: [00:26:19] And that's also true when you think about the constitutionality of any tax reform here in this country, it's going to require the will and the cooperation of our legislatures. It can happen.Gabriel Zucman: [00:26:32] Yeah it can happen because the current situation is is similar in many ways to the discussion during the Gilded Age in the late 19th century early 20th century. Inequality was rising a lot with industrialized nation, with urbanization, you know huge fortunes were being created. And second, the tax system was very unfair. At the time, the only or the biggest federal tax was the tariff. So taxes that essentially exempted the very wealthy and that that made the price of goods more expensive and so that hurt the working class, the middle class. The situation today is pretty much the same. Inequality is rising a lot, the tax system is less regressive than than during the Gilded Age, but this is much less progressive than what people think it is. During the Gilded Age you have all these debates about the creation of a progressive federal income tax. The 16th Amendment 1913 allows the federal government to levy progressive income tax and it was a huge success. So the income tax very quickly became extremely progressive with rates in 1917 of close to 70 percent. So it's it's a huge change in just a few years. In 1912. There's no income tax. People say it would never happen. It's unconstitutional. You know there's no way this is going to become reality. And then in 1913 the constitution changes. 1917, ,70 percent of marginal income tax rates for the highest earners. So I'm not saying that the same process is actually going to happen for the wealth tax today. But when I look at history, I see dramatic U-turns and changes and reversals and retreats so the history of taxation is far from linear. There is progress and that's what fundamentally makes me optimistic about the possibility for change and for reform.Lisa Kiefer: [00:28:27] Well when 50 percent of the population makes eighteen thousand five hundred dollars a year, it's untenable. You created a Web site. Tax Justice now dot org. That's all one word.Gabriel Zucman: [00:28:40] We developed this website to make the tax debate more democratic, because it's not for economists, it's not for experts, to say what taxes should be. It's for the people through democratic deliberation and the vote. And we want to give the tools, the knowledge, to the people. So it's a tool for the people to simulate their own tax reform. It's user friendly, it's very simple to use. Everything is is transparent. It's fully open source, with all the code you know online for people who want to dig into this. But the Web site itself is extremely simple. You don't need to be an expert or to know anything about economics. What the Website does is two things. One, it shows how regressive the U.S. tax system is today. When you take into account all taxes paid at all levels of government, the website shows what the effective tax rate for a group of the population and how it has changed over time. And then you can change taxes. You can change let's say the top marginal income tax rate. You can change a corporate tax rate. You can create new taxes like a wealth tax, change the rates, change the exemption threshold. And the website shows how this would affect the progressivity of the tax system, one. And second, it shows how much revenue would be collected. So let's say you want to fund Medicare for All, or free college, or student debt relief. These things have a cost and there's several ways to fund these things. And so the user can very simply say OK, with that combination of taxes, with that tax refund, I can collect enough revenue to do these important policy changes.Lisa Kiefer: [00:30:24] Obviously you guys have plugged in all the numbers and come up with the ideal type of tax and you call it the national tax. Can you describe that and how it might be different from or in addition to a wealth tax?Gabriel Zucman: [00:30:37] The idea here is, how do we fund universal public health insurance and more broadly how could the U.S. increase its tax collection in a sustainable manner? The way that European countries do this is with value added taxes which are taxes essentially on consumption, better than sales taxes, but still pretty regressive because they're only on consumption and the rich consume a small fraction of their income whereas the poor consume most or even sometimes more than 100 percent of their income. And so what we are saying is look the U.S. doesn't have to introduce a V A T --A value added tax like other countries, it can leapfrog the V.A.T. and create a new tax which like the V.A.T. can collect a ton of revenue, but can do it in a much more progressive manner. And we call it the national income tax. And so the idea is for instance, if you want to fund Medicare for all. Step one is you convert the premiums into wages and so everybody's wage increases by thirteen thousand dollars. Step two, maybe year or year three. You create this new national income tax, which essentially is a tax on all labor costs and all profits made by corporations. So it's the broadest possible form of income taxation. And the beauty of it is that because it's so broad with a tax rate of only 5 percent, you can generate a lot of revenue, enough to replace all the insurance premiums that employers pay today.Lisa Kiefer: [00:32:20] What about education?[00:32:20] And you can increase the rates, go to 6 percent or 7 percent and that generates a lot of revenue that can be spent on early education, an area where there's nothing in the US in terms of public spending essentially, something municipalities do spend some money, but the U.S. is at the bottom of the international ranking when it comes to a public child care and early education in general. So that's a high priority. It's easy to collect a percent of GDP with that national income tax to fund universal early education. It's easy to collect an extra 1 percent if you want to make public universities, much more progressive than than anything else that exists.Lisa Kiefer: [00:33:01] And it's still less than what I would be paying today.Gabriel Zucman: [00:33:03] Of course.Lisa Kiefer: [00:33:04] Way less!Gabriel Zucman: [00:33:05] That's the beauty of it because today you're paying so much in child care, for college, for health, in a way that's very unfair because it doesn't depend on your income. It's the same amount essentially for each individual.Gabriel Zucman: [00:33:22] Essentially what's at stake is the future of globalization and the future of democracy. If globalization means ever lower taxes for its main winners, big multinational companies and their shareholders, and at the same time, higher and higher taxes for those who don't benefit a lot from globalization or sometimes suffer from it, retirees or small businesses, then it's not sustainable, neither economically nor politically. The problem with high and rising income and wealth inequality as as the Founding Fathers themselves understood at the time is that excessive wealth concentration corrodes democracy, corrodes the social contract, and we're seeing this today when you look at, for instance, what has been the main piece of legislation of the Trump presidency so far, it's been a big tax cut for wealthy individuals. So you've had three full decades of rising inequality and then on top of that, a law that adds fuel to that phenomenon. And it's hard to analyze this other than by saying that it reflects a form of political capture of plutocratic drift. That's the reality of the U.S. today and so if democracy is to prevail, and if we want to have a more sustainable form of globalization, we need to tackle this issue of tax injustice.Lisa Kiefer: [00:34:53] Thank you for being on the program,Gabriel.Gabriel Zucman: [00:34:56] Thank you so much for having me.Lisa Kiefer: [00:34:58] The book is The Triumph of Injustice --How the Rich Dodge Taxes and How to Make Them Pay. The website: TaxJusticeNow.org and you also have a profile in the October New Yorker which is really great reading. So thanks again for being on the program.Lisa Kiefer: [00:35:24] You've been listening to method to the madness, a bi weekly public affairs show on KALX Berkeley celebrating Bay Area innovators. Today's guest was Gabriel Zucman, professor of economics and public policy here at UC Berkeley. We'll be back again in two weeks. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Artificial intelligence researcher and UC Berkeley Professor of Computer Science Dr. Stuart Russell joins Andy to talk about his new book Human Compatible: Artificial Intelligence and the Problem of Control, which explores the concept of intelligence in humans and machines, what the benefits and drawbacks of creating superhuman intelligence are, and what AI researchers can do now to help usher in a future that's more utopian than dystopian.

In addition to being one of my favorite instructors, Dr. Erin Kerrison is an Assistant Professor at the UC Berkeley School of Social Welfare. Her mixed-method research approach investigates the impact that compounded structural disadvantage, concentrated poverty and state supervision has on service delivery, substance abuse, violence and other health outcomes for individuals and communities marked by criminal justice intervention. Kerrison discusses what it is like to be an Introvert in this field, and how she manages that with her love and boundaries.  Kerrison is currently working on a book project, Hustles and Hurdles: Law's Impact on Desistance for Job-Seeking Former Prisoners, and has been published in Essence magazine. 

Liberals loathe John Yoo. Some still want him tried as a war criminal for co-authoring the legal memo that the George W. Bush Administration used to justify authorizing “enhanced interrogation”  after 9/11. But Yoo is a sharp legal mind, Never Trumper and Constitutional expert who knows Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh well. In advance of next week’s SCOTUS confirmation hearings, we talk to him about what kind of legal trouble Trump is in and how Kavanaugh might rule. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

State of the Art Podcast was invited to attend and speak with participants in CODAME's Art + Tech Festival, ARTOBOTS at The Midway earlier this month. Part 1 features one-on-one on-site conversations with artists Alexander Reben and Meredith Tromble on art and AI. We conclude the episode with a fascinating conversation with UC Berkeley artist and professor, Ken Goldberg, on the "uncanny valley."Thank you CODAME for inviting us to cover this awesome event, and a special shoutout to Vanessa Chang, CODAME curator, for personally extending the invitation to us. You can listen to our interview with Vanessa Chang here.-About Alexander Reben-Alexander Reben is an artist and roboticist who explores humanity through the lens of art and technology. His work probes the inherently human nature of the artificial. Using tools such as artificial philosophy, synthetic psychology, perceptual manipulation and technological magic, he brings to light our inseparable evolutionary entanglement to invention which has unarguably shaped our way of being. This is done to not only help understand who we are, but to consider who we will become in our continued codevelopment with our artificial creations.Projects referred to in this episode: Boxie, Headgasmatron, and Pulse MachineLearn more at http://areben.com/-About Meredith Tromble-Meredith Tromble is a multimedia artist, writer, performer, and teacher at the San Francisco Art Institute. Learn more about Meredith at http://meredithtromble.net/-About Ken Goldberg-Ken Goldberg is an artist, inventor, and UC Berkeley Professor focusing on robotics. He was appointed the William S. Floyd Jr Distinguished Chair in Engineering and serves as Chair of the Industrial Engineering and Operations Research Department. He has secondary appointments in EECS, Art Practice, the School of Information, and Radiation Oncology at the UCSF Medical School. Ken is Director of the CITRIS "People and Robots" Initiative and the UC Berkeley AUTOLAB where he and his students pursue research in machine learning for robotics and automation in warehouses, homes, and operating rooms. Ken developed the first provably complete algorithms for part feeding and part fixturing and the first robot on the Internet. Despite agonizingly slow progress, he persists in trying to make robots less clumsy. He has over 250 peer-reviewed publications and 8 U.S. Patents. He co-founded and served as Editor-in-Chief of the IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering. Ken's artwork has appeared in 70 exhibits including the Whitney Biennial and films he has co-written have been selected for Sundance and nominated for an Emmy Award. Ken was awarded the NSF PECASE (Presidential Faculty Fellowship) from President Bill Clinton in 1995, elected IEEE Fellow in 2005 and selected by the IEEE Robotics and Automation Society for the George Saridis Leadership Award in 2016. He lives in the Bay Area and is madly in love with his wife, filmmaker and Webby Awards founder Tiffany Shlain, and their two daughters. Tweet him @Ken_Goldberg-About CODAME-Sparked by the network of creative coders, designers, and artists that Bruno Fonzi and Jordan Gray knew from around the world, CODAME was founded to celebrate their passion for art and technology. The CODAME brand of immersive, engaging, and out of the ordinary experiences was coined at the inaugural CODAME ART+TECH Festival in 2010 on a foggy rooftop in downtown San Francisco. CODAME builds ART+TECH projects and nonprofit events to inspire through experience.Follow them @codameTweet them @codameLearn more here-About ARTOBOTS-June 4-7, 2018 @ The Midway, San FranciscoThe annual CODAME ART+TECH Festival is a four-day conference with workshops, talks and nightlife events with immersive, engaging, out of the ordinary experiences. The festival features gallery installations, screenings, and performances.This year’s ART+TECH Festival, codenamed #ARTOBOTS, examines the sphere of robotics, automation, and artificial intelligence. Through art, discussion, play and performance, CODAME probes these potentials.

Ian Shepherdson, Pantheon Macroeconomics Chief Economist, says uncertainty about the tariff war is proving to be painful. Lisa Shalett, Morgan Stanley Wealth Management Head of Investment and Portfolio Strategies, advises her clients to have the maximum level of diversification in equity markets. Paul Sankey, Mizuho Oil Analyst and Managing Director, observes the global economy is stronger than people appreciate. And Brad DeLong, UC Berkeley Professor of Economics, says the 21st century won't be an American century if President Trump's trade and immigration policies continue.                                               

Ian Shepherdson, Pantheon Macroeconomics Chief Economist, says uncertainty about the tariff war is proving to be painful. Lisa Shalett, Morgan Stanley Wealth Management Head of Investment and Portfolio Strategies, advises her clients to have the maximum level of diversification in equity markets. Paul Sankey, Mizuho Oil Analyst and Managing Director, observes the global economy is stronger than people appreciate. And Brad DeLong, UC Berkeley Professor of Economics, says the 21st century won't be an American century if President Trump's trade and immigration policies continue.                                                Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com

At least two bio tech firms are asking the FDA for permission to test CRISPR gene editing technology on humans as disease treatment, as early as this year. And, it was only this past summer that CRISPR gene editing was first tried on live human human embryo cells in the U.S., none of which was ever intended for implantation. But, the fast advancement of this medical technology has some concerned about a lack of standardized controls, especially in the area of so-called designer babies. Multiple parent surrogacy is already putting this issue front and center, and the rights of the children of these reproductive technologies is the subject of the book Babies of Technology. Jane McMillan is joined by its author, Dr. Mary Ann Mason, UC Berkeley Professor.

Last week host Jenna Flanagan spoke to UC Berkeley Professor, Dr. Amani Nuru-Jeter about the physical effects of racism on the body. This week Jenna explores methods for managing that stress. Madeline McCray, a mental health advocate, and Haylin Belay, a sexuality educator and witch, join Jenna to explore both traditional and non-traditional approaches to self-care. MetroFocus airs 7 nights a week on the tri-state region's local PBS stations THIRTEEN, WLIW21 and NJTV. Get the full schedule here: metrofocus.org/tv-schedule/ Get more stories like this at metrofocus.org Like us on Facebook: facebook.com/MetroFocus/ Follow us on Twitter: twitter.com/metrofocus Join the conversation with #MetroFocus

Professor at UC Berkeley, Peiter Abbeel joins us. Pieter grew up in Belgium, came to the US and got his PhD in Robotics and Machine Learning from Stanford. He notes that he and Andrew Ng pushed the envelop at the time on how robots learn from humans demonstrations as well as their own trial and error. Peter graduated and came to Berkeley to continue to work on the junction of robotics and learning, machine learning. He’s been focused on end-to-end reinforcement learning, end-to-end imitation learning. Training the neural net end-to-end without specific structure. Singularity is the notion that a system you build is smart enough to self improve...and things accelerate out of control. How far are we away from this? Pieter notes that 10 years ago computer vision it was difficult to conceive of a solution. Enabling factors and breakthroughs are the keys. Data is an enabling factor. Neural nets are now data driven as opposed to algorithm designed. Will we continue to have more data and can you do things with unlabeled and unstructured data. Being better at unsupervised learning is a frontier that once reached will open up all sorts of possibilities. One question to answer in understanding where we might be in relation to singularity is how many compute cycles were effectively used to go from where we were 5 Billion years ago to where we are now. Do we think we can short cut this? Or will we need the same amount of compute to get to singularity? Pieter doesn’t have the answers. Yet. Both he and the artificial intelligence research community and industry need the best possible global talent to answer those very questions.

UC Berkeley Professor of Psychology Dr. Stephen Hinshaw joins Dr. Drew for an in-depth conversation on phsychology and mental illness.

UC Berkeley Professor of Environmental History, Philosphy and Ethics Carolyn Merchant reads David Iltis’ poem “The Lesson” Series: "Lunch Poems Reading Series" [Humanities] [Arts and Music] [Show ID: 29007]

UC Berkeley Professor of Environmental History, Philosphy and Ethics Carolyn Merchant reads David Iltis' poem “The Lesson” Series: "Lunch Poems Reading Series" [Humanities] [Arts and Music] [Show ID: 29007]

UC Berkeley Professor of Environmental History, Philosphy and Ethics Carolyn Merchant reads David Iltis’ poem “The Lesson” Series: "Lunch Poems Reading Series" [Humanities] [Arts and Music] [Show ID: 29007]

UC Berkeley Professor of Environmental History, Philosphy and Ethics Carolyn Merchant reads David Iltis' poem “The Lesson” Series: "Lunch Poems Reading Series" [Humanities] [Arts and Music] [Show ID: 29007]

UC Berkeley Professor of Environmental History, Philosphy and Ethics Carolyn Merchant reads David Iltis’ poem “The Lesson” Series: "Lunch Poems Reading Series" [Humanities] [Arts and Music] [Show ID: 29007]

UC Berkeley Professor of Environmental History, Philosphy and Ethics Carolyn Merchant reads David Iltis’ poem “The Lesson” Series: "Lunch Poems Reading Series" [Humanities] [Arts and Music] [Show ID: 29007]

Our Word is Our Bond: How Legal Speech Acts (Stanford UP, 2014), by UC Berkeley Professor of Rhetoric Marianne Constable, impels its readers to reassess the dominant methods of considering what is law. Constable’s study of law is informed by both philosophy and sociology; however, she avoids common approaches employed by both disciplines and instead conducts her legal analysis by searching for directives in the form of J.L. Austin’s “speech acts.” Her methods suggest that there is more of a connection between law-in-books and law-in-action than typical sociological research has proposed. Law-in-books, she argues, is active because it hears claims and makes claims within the context of a world that changes. An overview of the claims found within legal speech, such as promises, debts and warnings, reveals a dynamic force. Constable’s way of thinking about law insularly removes it from the debate between natural law and positive law. As the title Our Word is Our Bond suggests, the work seeks to show that legal language commits us. These commitments come directly from law’s speech acts, thus her theory avoids principles derived either from a sovereign or God. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Our Word is Our Bond: How Legal Speech Acts (Stanford UP, 2014), by UC Berkeley Professor of Rhetoric Marianne Constable, impels its readers to reassess the dominant methods of considering what is law. Constable’s study of law is informed by both philosophy and sociology; however, she avoids common approaches employed by both disciplines and instead conducts her legal analysis by searching for directives in the form of J.L. Austin’s “speech acts.” Her methods suggest that there is more of a connection between law-in-books and law-in-action than typical sociological research has proposed. Law-in-books, she argues, is active because it hears claims and makes claims within the context of a world that changes. An overview of the claims found within legal speech, such as promises, debts and warnings, reveals a dynamic force. Constable’s way of thinking about law insularly removes it from the debate between natural law and positive law. As the title Our Word is Our Bond suggests, the work seeks to show that legal language commits us. These commitments come directly from law’s speech acts, thus her theory avoids principles derived either from a sovereign or God. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Our Word is Our Bond: How Legal Speech Acts (Stanford UP, 2014), by UC Berkeley Professor of Rhetoric Marianne Constable, impels its readers to reassess the dominant methods of considering what is law. Constable’s study of law is informed by both philosophy and sociology; however, she avoids common approaches employed by both disciplines and instead conducts her legal analysis by searching for directives in the form of J.L. Austin’s “speech acts.” Her methods suggest that there is more of a connection between law-in-books and law-in-action than typical sociological research has proposed. Law-in-books, she argues, is active because it hears claims and makes claims within the context of a world that changes. An overview of the claims found within legal speech, such as promises, debts and warnings, reveals a dynamic force. Constable’s way of thinking about law insularly removes it from the debate between natural law and positive law. As the title Our Word is Our Bond suggests, the work seeks to show that legal language commits us. These commitments come directly from law’s speech acts, thus her theory avoids principles derived either from a sovereign or God. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Our Word is Our Bond: How Legal Speech Acts (Stanford UP, 2014), by UC Berkeley Professor of Rhetoric Marianne Constable, impels its readers to reassess the dominant methods of considering what is law. Constable’s study of law is informed by both philosophy and sociology; however, she avoids common approaches employed by both disciplines and instead conducts her legal analysis by searching for directives in the form of J.L. Austin’s “speech acts.” Her methods suggest that there is more of a connection between law-in-books and law-in-action than typical sociological research has proposed. Law-in-books, she argues, is active because it hears claims and makes claims within the context of a world that changes. An overview of the claims found within legal speech, such as promises, debts and warnings, reveals a dynamic force. Constable’s way of thinking about law insularly removes it from the debate between natural law and positive law. As the title Our Word is Our Bond suggests, the work seeks to show that legal language commits us. These commitments come directly from law’s speech acts, thus her theory avoids principles derived either from a sovereign or God. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Steve Blank, lecturer Haas School of Business UCB. He has been a entrepreneur in Silicon Valley since the 1970s. He has been teaching and developing curriculum for entrepreneurship training. Built a method for high tech startups, the Lean LaunchPad.TranscriptSpeaker 1: Spectrum's next. Speaker 2: Okay. Okay. Speaker 1: Welcome to spectrum the science and technology show on k a l x Berkeley, a [00:00:30] biweekly 30 minute program bringing you interviews featuring bay area scientists and technologists as well as a calendar of local events and news. Speaker 3: Hello and good afternoon. My name is Renee Rao and I'll be hosting today's show. Today we present part two of two interviews with Steve Blank. I lecture at the High School of business at UC Berkeley. Steve has been a serial entrepreneur in silicon valley since the late 1970s in the early two thousands he retired from the day to day involvement [00:01:00] of running a company. He has been teaching entrepreneurship training ever since. By 2011 he was said to have devised a scientific method for launching high tech startups, dubbed the lean launchpad. The National Science Foundation caught wind of this and asked Steve to build a variation for teaching scientists and engineers how to launch startups. In 2013 Steve partnered with UCLA and the NSF to offer the lean launch pad class for life science and healthcare. In part two, Steve Talks about getting [00:01:30] the NSF lean launch pad classes going, the evolution of startup companies and innovation, and now Brad swift continued his interview with Steve Blank. Speaker 4: Okay. Speaker 5: In your experience with these scientists and teaching them, are these people self selected? They're the ones who are anxious and eager and there are other scientists maybe back in the lab are reluctant afraid of the process. Speaker 4: So just the personality of it. Yeah, so this goes back to the comment I made earlier about entrepreneurs being artists. It was the implicit comment [00:02:00] I just kind of both through in the beginning, but as important is that you can't assign entrepreneurship as a job, right? If you really think about them, you can't split up a room and say, those of you on the left, you're going to be musicians. And those are you on the right, you're working on the assembly line like, Oh yeah, WTI. I mean, it doesn't work. It doesn't work like that. All right. Entrepreneurship is a calling. Just like art, just like music, just like writing is something you have to passionately want to do, but much like art, we've learned something [00:02:30] a couple hundred years ago that very early on in people's lives in elementary school and junior high school in high school, we want to have our depreciation. Speaker 4: They're not intensive classes, but their exposure to art that people might not know their artists. They might not know they have a passion to paint or to sculpt or to write or to entertain. I will contend because entrepreneurship is an art. We actually need those type of classes early on because scientists didn't understand [00:03:00] that not was their passion to invent and create. They might actually have an equal passion to wait a minute, I actually want to take this thing all the way through when I want to see what happens. If hundreds of thousands of people were being affected by this medicine, not just, here's my paper in the latest publication. It doesn't mean everybody could do that, but it means we've not yet gotten the culture to where we could say, well is this something that kind of excites you? And I think we're getting better to understand what it takes to do that. Speaker 4: Would you have any [00:03:30] idea what that would look like? The kind of exposure that you would be talking about in grammar school or Middle School? Sure. It turns out one of the unintended consequences of teaching the scientists that National Science Foundation is, remember their professors, almost all of them tenured running labs and universities across the country. And so here they take this class from the national science foundation and about half or two thirds of them now go back to their own universities, pissed cause they go, how come we're not teaching this? And so what happens is the National Science Foundation asked [00:04:00] me and Jerry Angle, who was the head of entrepreneurship at Haas, why don't you guys put on a course through a nonprofit called NCIA to teach educators in the United States who want to learn how to teach this class. And so we teach the lean launchpad for educators. We teach now 300 educators a year. Speaker 4: One of the outgrowths of that class was entrepreneur educators from middle school and high school started showing up and I went, you're not really teaching this to kids. They went, [00:04:30] oh Steve, you should see our class. And I went, oh my gosh, this is better than I'm doing. So they'd taken the same theory and they modified the language. So it was age appropriate. And so the two schools that had some great programs were Hawkin school outside of Cleveland and Dunn's school here in California. And in fact they're going to hold their own version of the educator class in June of 2014 for middle school and high school educators who were interested in teaching this type of entrepreneurial education. So I think it's starting to be transformative. I think we [00:05:00] have found the process to engage people early and not treated like we're teaching accounting to do, treating it like we're teaching art. Speaker 4: And again, we're still experiment thing. I wish I could tell you we got it now. I don't think so. I think we're learning, but the speed at which we're learning through it makes me smile. That's great. It is great. The Passion of the educators really is exciting. And Are you able to teach us remotely so that scientists from around the country don't have to come to you and sort of stop what they're doing? I was teaching the class [00:05:30] remotely. It's now taught in person in multiple regions. So that's how we solved that problem. But my lectures were recorded and not only were they recorded, they were recorded with really interesting animation. So instead of just watching me was a talking head. These are broken up into two minute clips and it's basically how to start a company and it's on you udacity.com so if you want to see the lean launch pad class in the lectures, it's on your udacity.com it's called the p two 45 but by accident we made these lectures public to not only the [00:06:00] national science foundation scientists, but we opened it up to everybody. Speaker 4: And surprisingly there is now over a quarter million people have taken the class. I've had people stop me at conferences and have told me that the Arabic translation, which I didn't even know existed, it's the standard in the Middle East. I had people from Dubai and Saudi Arabia in Lebanon literally within 10 feet go, oh well we recognize you. And I went, who are you turning over, Mr Blank, you worthy? I went, what's going on? I laugh not because it's me, but because [00:06:30] this is the power of the democratization of entrepreneurship. I have to tell you a funny story is that I grew up with the entrepreneur cluster was silicon valley and something in the last five years that I've gotten to travel with both Berkeley and Stanford and National Science Foundation to different countries to talk and teach about entrepreneurship. And my wife and I happened to be on vacation in Prague and when I really knew the world had changed as my wife had said, you know Steve, we're kind of tired of eating hotel food. Speaker 4: I wonder if there were ending entrepreneurs and Proc, I didn't want to, I [00:07:00] don't know. You know, let me go tweet and any entrepreneurs and Prague, you know, looking for a good check. Brie hall and hour and a half later we're having dinner with 55 entrepreneurs and Prague television is there and they said, Steve, you don't understand. Here's why. Here's an entrepreneur community everywhere. The only thing we still have unique in the bay area is that entrepreneurship and innovation. We've become a company town. That is our product. Much like Hollywood used to be movies in Detroit used to be cars in Pittsburgh steel. [00:07:30] While obviously there are people who do other stuff, teach in restaurants, put the business. The business to the bay area really is entrepreneurship and innovation. While we tell stories about the entrepreneurs, the unheralded part of that ecosystem is that we have equally insane financial people. Speaker 4: Why Silicon Valley happened was that the venture capitalist in the 1970s in Boston when it wasn't clear whether it was going to be Boston or Silicon Valley to be the center of entrepreneurship, the venture capitalist in Boston continued to act [00:08:00] like bankers, venture capitalists in Silicon Valley. They decided to act like pirates and the pirates want and so what really differentiates the observational make with an entrepreneurship is everywhere in the world. Entrepreneurial clusters only happen when all these things, these components, primarily entrepreneurs, but a heavy dose of risk capital capable of writing not only small checks but large checks and doubling and tripling down on startups. That's why you have the Facebooks and the googles and the twitters [00:08:30] around here. You also have a culture let's people know and understand. In the 1950s and sixties people came to San Francisco and Berkeley to live an alternate personal lifestyle, but they were hitting 30 miles south to have an alternate business lifestyle around Stanford and it was this kind of magic combination of great weather, the ability to do things in both business and your personal life that you couldn't anywhere else. These cultural phenomenons actually were and under appreciated until a very smart professor at Berkeley [inaudible] [00:09:00] wrote a book called regional advantage that actually described a lot of these things and open my eyes about why this region actually won. Speaker 1: You're listening to spectrum on k a Alex Berkeley. Steve Blank is our guest. He's a former entrepreneur and current lecturer at the High School of business. And the next segment he talks about how startups has changed since he first began in Silicon Valley in the 1970s Speaker 4: is entrepreneurship then changed as a result [00:09:30] of that. What really happened was the harmonic conversion of a really interesting set of events. One is, is that if you think back on how startups worked in the, in the golden age of Silicon Valley in the seventies and eighties to build a startup required millions if not tens of millions of dollars, not to run it, but just to start it, you needed to buy computers, either mainframes or mini computers and then workstations. You needed to license millions of dollars of expensive software. The only venture people were either in [00:10:00] Boston or silicon valley and they lived on sand hill road and nowhere else, and therefore it was kind of a formal process and the cost of entry was literally millions or tens of millions of dollars. There was no other way to get computing. There was no other way to get money. The second is, we had no theory about startups. Speaker 4: That is, there were no management tools at all. But what happened starting out of the rubble actually of the last Internet bubble, things change in technology in a way. I don't think people outside the technology business appreciate it off. Probably the biggest [00:10:30] one was actually generated by Amazon. It turns out Amazon created something called Amazon web services. And if you're a consumer, all you know is Amazon maybe for kindle and for sure for their books or their website. But if you're a programmer, Amazon has become the computing utility. You no longer have to buy computers from your laptop. You literally log in to hundreds of millions of dollars of computers and you have access to the world's largest computing resource ever assembled [00:11:00] for pennies, for pennies, and you don't need any storage. You're storing it all and online and all the computing. So number one, Amazon web services truly turned computing hardware and software into a pennies per gigabyte and MIPS, et Cetera, in a way that was unbelievable 10 years earlier. Speaker 4: Two is that changed the cost of entry of an early stage venture. You no longer needed millions of dollars. In fact, if you were smart entrepreneur, you could start on your credit card and if you didn't have your credit card, maybe some friends and family, [00:11:30] and that started a very different wave because it changed venture capital. It used to be there were either doctors or dentists or other reform of venture capital firms like Kleiner Perkins and Mayfield and sequoia. But the fact is that now after a ton of entrepreneurs could start on their credit cards, they still didn't need $20 million. Maybe eventually they did, but they could just take $100,000 or half a million dollars and get pretty far. And that created a new class of super angels or angel investors [00:12:00] that just never existed before. Kind of this intermediate level. And so venture capital changed. And also with that change, it changed where they could be located. Speaker 4: You no longer had to be located to be a investor in New York, Boston, or San Diego. Th that amount of capital could be available in the London or Helsinki or Estonia or Jordan, Beijing. Third is, and I will take credit for some of this, the invention of a new way to look and how to build these startups. It used to be that if you were building [00:12:30] a physical product, you would do something called the functional Spec or you'd get requirements from a customer. You build a specification and then you'd make an early version of the product called Alpha test, maybe a less buggy version called Beta test, which foist on some poor unsuspecting customers and then you'd have a party at something called first customer ship and that process was called waterfall development and from beginning to end typically took years and insight in the software business and Toyota had it even [00:13:00] earlier is that we could build products differently, we could build products incrementally and iteratively and that's called agile engineering and for startups, how you want to build your products is agily and iteratively because almost always what you believe on day one are all the customer features that they need. Speaker 4: It's a pretty safe bet. You're not a visionary, you're actually hallucinating and that most of the features you would historically have built in go unused on needed and unwanted. But if [00:13:30] in fact you could actually test intermediate versions of the product iteratively and rapidly on those customers with a formal process which I invented called customer development, those two hand in hand change the speed and trajectory of how startups get built. And so now you see these startups coming out of nowhere and getting acquired in three years, but they have tens of millions of customer. Where did that come from? Well, in the old days we'd still be writing the software, building the hardware. Speaker 6: Aw, it's [00:14:00] a public affairs show, k, a l X. Berkeley. Our guest is Steve Link a lecture at UC Berkeley's Haas School of business. The next segment, Steve Talks about his current work, trying to understand how innovation drives some companies and fails in others. Speaker 4: If I can, the unintended consequence of all this stuff. Remember this whole lean startup stuff has become a movement by itself. Harvard business review contacts me and says, Steve, [00:14:30] every large corporation is now desperately struggling how to deal with continuous disruption in the 21st century. That is all the rules that worked in the 20th century, you know, be number one in market share, you know, like be number one and two, I mean all the Jack Welsh rules, you follow those who be out of business in seven years. Why, you know, globalization in China Inc Internet has made consumers flighty very little brand loyalty. Pricing is almost transparent. Cost of starting a new business is infinitely lower. All of the things [00:15:00] that made you strong in the 20th century as a corporation are no longer true. Some of them are obviously, but not really. And so every large corporation are trying to relearn a set of rules and guess where they're looking for, they're looking at startups of how do we be as innovative as apple as that. Speaker 4: That is, the models are now silicon valley and other technology companies. And so my article, the lean startup changes everything became the cover of the Harvard Business Review and May, 2013 what was interesting is that I started [00:15:30] getting calls from executives whose titles I had never heard of before. It turns out almost every large company is now appointing a VP of corporate innovation. I had never heard of it. You know what's that? And when you go talk to them, and I've talked to a bunch of them, now you find out that they're all struggling to solve this continuous disruption problem by trying to build innovation inside the DNA of large corporations in the u s and overseas and the first sign of companies [00:16:00] trying to do that is appointing somebody typically as a corporate staff person to have some kind of internal incubator. I could politely say, that's a nice first step put it really doesn't solve the problem. Speaker 4: It actually just points out what the problem is and can I digress for another 10 seconds? It turns out that the problem that corporations are having is not a tactical organizational problem. The things I described, the globalization, the effect of the [00:16:30] Internet, et Cetera, are just strategic problems that every corporation is facing. The last time companies faced something, this major was in the 1920s, uh, u s corporations grew from small mom and pop businesses from the 1870s to 1920s and they kind of came up with a form of organization called functional organizations, meaning you had a head of sales, a head of marketing, a head of manufacturing, but by function that was the only way companies were organized. But by 1920, some [00:17:00] u s corporations spans from New York to San Francisco. And so there was a geography problem here. You had a head of sales tryna run multiple geography. Speaker 4: It wasn't even the same time zone. And some companies like dupont had a different problem while they also had geography problems. Dupont made everything from explosives to paint. But you only had one marketing group and one manufacture. How do, how do you manage that? And for about five or six years for corporations, dupont, General Motors, Sears and standard oil, understood. They had a strategy [00:17:30] problem and attacked it by playing with the structure of the company, meaning how the company was organized and they all finally decided that they were going to organize in a radically different form called divisions. Instead of just having functions, they would actually break up like for example, General Motors into the Buick Division and ultimate build division or whatever, or for dupont explosives divisions and the paint division and on top of a thin layer of corporate staff, but now have a company organized by divisions first changed in [00:18:00] 50 years and how companies were organized. Speaker 4: Fast forward 40 years later, the third form of corporate organization to emerged called Matrix organizations where you start with a functional organization, but now all of a sudden we would have specific projects pop up, gee, I want to work on the new fad six fighter. Well, I have an engineering group, but let me put together a team that could pull out of engineering and pull out a product management and put together for our temporary amount of time and then they'll go back into their functions and then be pulled out again. But that's it. Those are the only three forms [00:18:30] of corporate organization. I'll contend that we're facing a common strategy problem that is not solvable by just pasting on vps of innovation. I believe it's solvable by rethinking on the highest possible level is do we need a fourth form of corporate organization? And I gotta tell you I got the answer, but I'm not going to tell you now. Okay.Speaker 5: Is this sort of then turning all the operations research that's been done over the past? You know, since World War II, [00:19:00] that was when it seemed to be salient. Is it on its ear now? Is this, Speaker 4: so if you really think about what we built for the last 150 years is corporations were the epitome of operational efficiency through operations research, the output of business schools. I mean all our stuff has had to be continuous execution, driving to the lowest cost provider and outsourcing and all that stuff. That's great. But you're going out of business and in fact, companies that do that, [00:19:30] I will contend have a much shorter lifespan that companies that now do continuous innovation. That is, if you think about the difference between Amazon and Netflix and apple, when jobs was alive versus standard US companies, the distinction was they were continuously innovating, ruined Leslie, innovating, and it was not some department that was innovating. It's a big idea. It was the entire company was innovating, yet they were making obscene profits. So clearly there are some models of some companies who [00:20:00] have figured out and in fact HP in the 70s and eighties had figured out how to do and then they lost the formula. I think we now actually have a theory, a strategy of how to do that and some really specific tactics. How, I know we could do this in detail for u s corporations and corporations worldwide, but I want to start at the u s and we're going to be talking and writing about that in the next year. Speaker 5: Great. So that's what you're actively working. Speaker 4: Oh, actively working. And I'm Hank Chesboro who have inventor of open innovation here at Haas business school and with Alexander Osterwalder [00:20:30] and venture of the business model canvas. All have been part of some of these discussions. You know, I just get smarter by hanging out with much smarter people. And I'm not the only one who's thinking about that. There are lots of very smart people trying to crack the code and at the same time, companies are raising their hand and the symptom of raising their hand is they're appointing vps of innovation and her likes saying, yeah, you know, here's what we are. Oops, it doesn't quite work. And finance has different rules and but wait a minute, I'm trying to be innovative, but the HR manual doesn't allow me to hire people. No, [00:21:00] no. Legal says I can't use our brand here. So what you're really finding is that it's not an org problem. Speaker 4: It's not anybody's trying to be mean. Is that what we're missing is the CEO and board conversation is, oh my gosh, maybe we need to get innovation in every part of the company, not by exception. That's the idea I'll telegraph for now. And how do you do that without affecting current profits? And it's quite possible because again, there are these experiments of companies that are insanely from a profitable, who've done this. [00:21:30] Now can we just make a teachable and doable by other corporations? And the answer is yes, we're going to go do that. Do you see that pace of technology accelerating? Absolutely. I think we're in the golden age of both technology and entrepreneurship. You ain't seen anything yet. I'm still constantly amazed sitting here smiling. When you say that is why I still love to teach is that, you know, I get to see my students come up with things. Speaker 4: You hear the 400th hotel automation package or the whatever, but you know, and then you see something, again, drones are three d printing [00:22:00] or you could do white with your phone, you're gonna make a turn on or you're a password through. It's just things that are unimaginable. And then you watch the next generation of Steve Jobs that said, you know, the current version silicon valley is you go on much. Who single handedly is val to obsolete the automobile industry? And at the same time just wrecking havoc in this space launch industry, single individual who had, by the way, zero qualifications to do any of those. Congratulations. Welcome to entrepreneurship. He had the will to be disruptive [00:22:30] and he understood that the technology was about at the edge of being able to do what he did. That's how we got the iPod and the iPhone or else in a perfect world and Nokia would still have 89% market share. If I was General Motors and Ford, I'd be really concerned. Steve Blank, thanks very much for coming on spectrum. Great. Thanks for having me. Speaker 6: You'd like more insight into Steve Blank's ideas. Go to his website, Steve blank.com [00:23:00] as Steve mentioned, the Lean launch pad course is available. I knew udacity.com to learn more about the NSF mean launchpad curriculum, search for NSF [inaudible] your local to the bay area. Go to [inaudible] dot com if you're interested in startup appreciation materials for educators, go to n c I n aa.org/l l p. Stretching shows [00:23:30] are archived on iTunes yet it gives created a simple link for you. The link is tiny url.com/calex spectrum and now a few some technology events happening locally over the next two weeks. Brad Swift joins me for the calendar. Speaker 3: California's coastal waters are home to one of the four richest temperate marine biota is in the world. The California Academy of Sciences will be holding [00:24:00] a series of lectures and events to explore this incredible diversity of life. They look, explain what makes this region so productive and why it needs to be protected on Saturday, March 22nd from nine to 11:00 AM a variety of Speakers will consider the impacts of human activity on the local marine ecosystems and the establishment and efficacy of marine protected areas. They will also discuss how diversity is monitored in California's oceans and which areas will need to be most closely scrutinized for future impact. For more information on the [00:24:30] March 22nd event. Please visit cal academy.org Speaker 5: on Monday, March 31st University of Maryland professor of human development, Nathan Fox will give a lecture on his recent studies on whether experiences shaped the brain and neural circuitry for emerging cognitive and social behaviors over the first years of life. Something that many developmental scientists take for granted. Foxes study the Bucharest early intervention project [00:25:00] is the first randomized trial of a family intervention for children who experienced significant psychosocial neglect early in their lives. A group of infants living in institutions in Romania were recruited and randomized to be taken out of the institution and placed into family foster care homes or to remain in the institution. He then followed up with the children several times over the next eight years and examine the lasting [00:25:30] effects of the deprivation and which, if any interventions were successful in assuaging the harmful effects, the free public talk will be held on March 31st from 12 to 1:30 PM on the UC Berkeley campus in room 31 50 of Tolman hall Speaker 3: on Wednesday per second. You see Berkeley's department of Environmental Science Policy and management will present a speech by Chris Mooney, a journalist who's written several books on the resistance that many [00:26:00] Americans have to accepting scientific conclusions. His lecture will be titled The Science of why we don't believe in science and we'll examine the reasons behind Americans disinterest in scientific solutions to the world's problems. The free public lecture will be held on Wednesday, April 2nd at 7:00 PM in the International House Auditorium of UC Berkeley. Here at spectrum, we like to present new stories we find particularly interesting. Brad Swift joins me in presenting the news. Speaker 5: UC Berkeley Professor, Dr. Richard Kramer [00:26:30] and his research team have been able to temporarily restore light sensitivity to mice, missing a majority of their rods and cones in healthy mammals. The eyes detect light with specialized photo receptor cells or rods and cones and then transmit a signal to their optic nerve cells which eventually communicate with the brain. Dr. Kramer and his team explored the effects of a similarly light-sensitive molecule known as d n a Q in healthy mice and mice [00:27:00] with a degenerative disease that caused them to lose nearly all their rods and cones. After dosing, the mice with d n a Q, the mice were exposed to lights and their optic nerve activity was measured via electrode arrays. The diseased mice showed strong light sensitivity. The team next examined a small number of animals in light and dark conditions to test whether the sensitivity conferred any perception of the light. In the diseased mice, [00:27:30] the injected mice were better able to form an association between a light stimuli and electric shock than those in the control group. While millions of humans suffer from similar degenerative retinal conditions, definitive conclusions on the broader therapeutic and deleterious effects of the molecule. D n a Q are still years away. Speaker 3: In a recent study published in the journal bio materials, UC Berkeley researchers were able to eliminate the transmission rep [00:28:00] of a common infection. Staphylococcus Aureus is a bacterium that commonly infects patients who've had surgeries involving prosthetic joints and artificial heart, bowels, staff, or aces. Ability to adhere to medical advices is key to experience as once introduced to the body. It can cause severe illness. UC Berkeley Bio and mechanical engineering, Professor Mohammad [inaudible] fraud and others in his lab examined how the clusters of staff warriors were able to adhere so well to certain Yana surfaces as well as the type of surfaces [00:28:30] that increased or decreased the bacteria's ability to clean. They quickly found that while staff [inaudible] can adhere to a variety of flattened curves services, it does seem to have a preference for certain structures including a tubular pillar where the bacteria was able to partially embed itself within holes in the structure. Professor, my fraud expressed hope that the improved understanding of these preferences could allow the design of medical devices built to attenuate bacterial adhesion while escaping the need to chemically damaged the bacteria to prevent transmission Speaker 7: [00:29:00] [inaudible]. Speaker 5: The music heard during the show was written and produced by Alex Simon. Speaker 1: Thank you for listening to spectrum. If you have comments about the show, please send them to us via email. Our email address is spectrum to a k a l ex@yahoo.com Trina's in two weeks at the same time. [inaudible] Speaker 8: [00:29:30] [inaudible]. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Steve Blank, lecturer Haas School of Business UCB. He has been a entrepreneur in Silicon Valley since the 1970s. He has been teaching and developing curriculum for entrepreneurship training. Built a method for high tech startups, the Lean LaunchPad.TranscriptSpeaker 1: Spectrum's next. Speaker 2: Okay. Okay. Speaker 1: Welcome to spectrum the science and technology show on k a l x Berkeley, a [00:00:30] biweekly 30 minute program bringing you interviews featuring bay area scientists and technologists as well as a calendar of local events and news. Speaker 3: Hello and good afternoon. My name is Renee Rao and I'll be hosting today's show. Today we present part two of two interviews with Steve Blank. I lecture at the High School of business at UC Berkeley. Steve has been a serial entrepreneur in silicon valley since the late 1970s in the early two thousands he retired from the day to day involvement [00:01:00] of running a company. He has been teaching entrepreneurship training ever since. By 2011 he was said to have devised a scientific method for launching high tech startups, dubbed the lean launchpad. The National Science Foundation caught wind of this and asked Steve to build a variation for teaching scientists and engineers how to launch startups. In 2013 Steve partnered with UCLA and the NSF to offer the lean launch pad class for life science and healthcare. In part two, Steve Talks about getting [00:01:30] the NSF lean launch pad classes going, the evolution of startup companies and innovation, and now Brad swift continued his interview with Steve Blank. Speaker 4: Okay. Speaker 5: In your experience with these scientists and teaching them, are these people self selected? They're the ones who are anxious and eager and there are other scientists maybe back in the lab are reluctant afraid of the process. Speaker 4: So just the personality of it. Yeah, so this goes back to the comment I made earlier about entrepreneurs being artists. It was the implicit comment [00:02:00] I just kind of both through in the beginning, but as important is that you can't assign entrepreneurship as a job, right? If you really think about them, you can't split up a room and say, those of you on the left, you're going to be musicians. And those are you on the right, you're working on the assembly line like, Oh yeah, WTI. I mean, it doesn't work. It doesn't work like that. All right. Entrepreneurship is a calling. Just like art, just like music, just like writing is something you have to passionately want to do, but much like art, we've learned something [00:02:30] a couple hundred years ago that very early on in people's lives in elementary school and junior high school in high school, we want to have our depreciation. Speaker 4: They're not intensive classes, but their exposure to art that people might not know their artists. They might not know they have a passion to paint or to sculpt or to write or to entertain. I will contend because entrepreneurship is an art. We actually need those type of classes early on because scientists didn't understand [00:03:00] that not was their passion to invent and create. They might actually have an equal passion to wait a minute, I actually want to take this thing all the way through when I want to see what happens. If hundreds of thousands of people were being affected by this medicine, not just, here's my paper in the latest publication. It doesn't mean everybody could do that, but it means we've not yet gotten the culture to where we could say, well is this something that kind of excites you? And I think we're getting better to understand what it takes to do that. Speaker 4: Would you have any [00:03:30] idea what that would look like? The kind of exposure that you would be talking about in grammar school or Middle School? Sure. It turns out one of the unintended consequences of teaching the scientists that National Science Foundation is, remember their professors, almost all of them tenured running labs and universities across the country. And so here they take this class from the national science foundation and about half or two thirds of them now go back to their own universities, pissed cause they go, how come we're not teaching this? And so what happens is the National Science Foundation asked [00:04:00] me and Jerry Angle, who was the head of entrepreneurship at Haas, why don't you guys put on a course through a nonprofit called NCIA to teach educators in the United States who want to learn how to teach this class. And so we teach the lean launchpad for educators. We teach now 300 educators a year. Speaker 4: One of the outgrowths of that class was entrepreneur educators from middle school and high school started showing up and I went, you're not really teaching this to kids. They went, [00:04:30] oh Steve, you should see our class. And I went, oh my gosh, this is better than I'm doing. So they'd taken the same theory and they modified the language. So it was age appropriate. And so the two schools that had some great programs were Hawkin school outside of Cleveland and Dunn's school here in California. And in fact they're going to hold their own version of the educator class in June of 2014 for middle school and high school educators who were interested in teaching this type of entrepreneurial education. So I think it's starting to be transformative. I think we [00:05:00] have found the process to engage people early and not treated like we're teaching accounting to do, treating it like we're teaching art. Speaker 4: And again, we're still experiment thing. I wish I could tell you we got it now. I don't think so. I think we're learning, but the speed at which we're learning through it makes me smile. That's great. It is great. The Passion of the educators really is exciting. And Are you able to teach us remotely so that scientists from around the country don't have to come to you and sort of stop what they're doing? I was teaching the class [00:05:30] remotely. It's now taught in person in multiple regions. So that's how we solved that problem. But my lectures were recorded and not only were they recorded, they were recorded with really interesting animation. So instead of just watching me was a talking head. These are broken up into two minute clips and it's basically how to start a company and it's on you udacity.com so if you want to see the lean launch pad class in the lectures, it's on your udacity.com it's called the p two 45 but by accident we made these lectures public to not only the [00:06:00] national science foundation scientists, but we opened it up to everybody. Speaker 4: And surprisingly there is now over a quarter million people have taken the class. I've had people stop me at conferences and have told me that the Arabic translation, which I didn't even know existed, it's the standard in the Middle East. I had people from Dubai and Saudi Arabia in Lebanon literally within 10 feet go, oh well we recognize you. And I went, who are you turning over, Mr Blank, you worthy? I went, what's going on? I laugh not because it's me, but because [00:06:30] this is the power of the democratization of entrepreneurship. I have to tell you a funny story is that I grew up with the entrepreneur cluster was silicon valley and something in the last five years that I've gotten to travel with both Berkeley and Stanford and National Science Foundation to different countries to talk and teach about entrepreneurship. And my wife and I happened to be on vacation in Prague and when I really knew the world had changed as my wife had said, you know Steve, we're kind of tired of eating hotel food. Speaker 4: I wonder if there were ending entrepreneurs and Proc, I didn't want to, I [00:07:00] don't know. You know, let me go tweet and any entrepreneurs and Prague, you know, looking for a good check. Brie hall and hour and a half later we're having dinner with 55 entrepreneurs and Prague television is there and they said, Steve, you don't understand. Here's why. Here's an entrepreneur community everywhere. The only thing we still have unique in the bay area is that entrepreneurship and innovation. We've become a company town. That is our product. Much like Hollywood used to be movies in Detroit used to be cars in Pittsburgh steel. [00:07:30] While obviously there are people who do other stuff, teach in restaurants, put the business. The business to the bay area really is entrepreneurship and innovation. While we tell stories about the entrepreneurs, the unheralded part of that ecosystem is that we have equally insane financial people. Speaker 4: Why Silicon Valley happened was that the venture capitalist in the 1970s in Boston when it wasn't clear whether it was going to be Boston or Silicon Valley to be the center of entrepreneurship, the venture capitalist in Boston continued to act [00:08:00] like bankers, venture capitalists in Silicon Valley. They decided to act like pirates and the pirates want and so what really differentiates the observational make with an entrepreneurship is everywhere in the world. Entrepreneurial clusters only happen when all these things, these components, primarily entrepreneurs, but a heavy dose of risk capital capable of writing not only small checks but large checks and doubling and tripling down on startups. That's why you have the Facebooks and the googles and the twitters [00:08:30] around here. You also have a culture let's people know and understand. In the 1950s and sixties people came to San Francisco and Berkeley to live an alternate personal lifestyle, but they were hitting 30 miles south to have an alternate business lifestyle around Stanford and it was this kind of magic combination of great weather, the ability to do things in both business and your personal life that you couldn't anywhere else. These cultural phenomenons actually were and under appreciated until a very smart professor at Berkeley [inaudible] [00:09:00] wrote a book called regional advantage that actually described a lot of these things and open my eyes about why this region actually won. Speaker 1: You're listening to spectrum on k a Alex Berkeley. Steve Blank is our guest. He's a former entrepreneur and current lecturer at the High School of business. And the next segment he talks about how startups has changed since he first began in Silicon Valley in the 1970s Speaker 4: is entrepreneurship then changed as a result [00:09:30] of that. What really happened was the harmonic conversion of a really interesting set of events. One is, is that if you think back on how startups worked in the, in the golden age of Silicon Valley in the seventies and eighties to build a startup required millions if not tens of millions of dollars, not to run it, but just to start it, you needed to buy computers, either mainframes or mini computers and then workstations. You needed to license millions of dollars of expensive software. The only venture people were either in [00:10:00] Boston or silicon valley and they lived on sand hill road and nowhere else, and therefore it was kind of a formal process and the cost of entry was literally millions or tens of millions of dollars. There was no other way to get computing. There was no other way to get money. The second is, we had no theory about startups. Speaker 4: That is, there were no management tools at all. But what happened starting out of the rubble actually of the last Internet bubble, things change in technology in a way. I don't think people outside the technology business appreciate it off. Probably the biggest [00:10:30] one was actually generated by Amazon. It turns out Amazon created something called Amazon web services. And if you're a consumer, all you know is Amazon maybe for kindle and for sure for their books or their website. But if you're a programmer, Amazon has become the computing utility. You no longer have to buy computers from your laptop. You literally log in to hundreds of millions of dollars of computers and you have access to the world's largest computing resource ever assembled [00:11:00] for pennies, for pennies, and you don't need any storage. You're storing it all and online and all the computing. So number one, Amazon web services truly turned computing hardware and software into a pennies per gigabyte and MIPS, et Cetera, in a way that was unbelievable 10 years earlier. Speaker 4: Two is that changed the cost of entry of an early stage venture. You no longer needed millions of dollars. In fact, if you were smart entrepreneur, you could start on your credit card and if you didn't have your credit card, maybe some friends and family, [00:11:30] and that started a very different wave because it changed venture capital. It used to be there were either doctors or dentists or other reform of venture capital firms like Kleiner Perkins and Mayfield and sequoia. But the fact is that now after a ton of entrepreneurs could start on their credit cards, they still didn't need $20 million. Maybe eventually they did, but they could just take $100,000 or half a million dollars and get pretty far. And that created a new class of super angels or angel investors [00:12:00] that just never existed before. Kind of this intermediate level. And so venture capital changed. And also with that change, it changed where they could be located. Speaker 4: You no longer had to be located to be a investor in New York, Boston, or San Diego. Th that amount of capital could be available in the London or Helsinki or Estonia or Jordan, Beijing. Third is, and I will take credit for some of this, the invention of a new way to look and how to build these startups. It used to be that if you were building [00:12:30] a physical product, you would do something called the functional Spec or you'd get requirements from a customer. You build a specification and then you'd make an early version of the product called Alpha test, maybe a less buggy version called Beta test, which foist on some poor unsuspecting customers and then you'd have a party at something called first customer ship and that process was called waterfall development and from beginning to end typically took years and insight in the software business and Toyota had it even [00:13:00] earlier is that we could build products differently, we could build products incrementally and iteratively and that's called agile engineering and for startups, how you want to build your products is agily and iteratively because almost always what you believe on day one are all the customer features that they need. Speaker 4: It's a pretty safe bet. You're not a visionary, you're actually hallucinating and that most of the features you would historically have built in go unused on needed and unwanted. But if [00:13:30] in fact you could actually test intermediate versions of the product iteratively and rapidly on those customers with a formal process which I invented called customer development, those two hand in hand change the speed and trajectory of how startups get built. And so now you see these startups coming out of nowhere and getting acquired in three years, but they have tens of millions of customer. Where did that come from? Well, in the old days we'd still be writing the software, building the hardware. Speaker 6: Aw, it's [00:14:00] a public affairs show, k, a l X. Berkeley. Our guest is Steve Link a lecture at UC Berkeley's Haas School of business. The next segment, Steve Talks about his current work, trying to understand how innovation drives some companies and fails in others. Speaker 4: If I can, the unintended consequence of all this stuff. Remember this whole lean startup stuff has become a movement by itself. Harvard business review contacts me and says, Steve, [00:14:30] every large corporation is now desperately struggling how to deal with continuous disruption in the 21st century. That is all the rules that worked in the 20th century, you know, be number one in market share, you know, like be number one and two, I mean all the Jack Welsh rules, you follow those who be out of business in seven years. Why, you know, globalization in China Inc Internet has made consumers flighty very little brand loyalty. Pricing is almost transparent. Cost of starting a new business is infinitely lower. All of the things [00:15:00] that made you strong in the 20th century as a corporation are no longer true. Some of them are obviously, but not really. And so every large corporation are trying to relearn a set of rules and guess where they're looking for, they're looking at startups of how do we be as innovative as apple as that. Speaker 4: That is, the models are now silicon valley and other technology companies. And so my article, the lean startup changes everything became the cover of the Harvard Business Review and May, 2013 what was interesting is that I started [00:15:30] getting calls from executives whose titles I had never heard of before. It turns out almost every large company is now appointing a VP of corporate innovation. I had never heard of it. You know what's that? And when you go talk to them, and I've talked to a bunch of them, now you find out that they're all struggling to solve this continuous disruption problem by trying to build innovation inside the DNA of large corporations in the u s and overseas and the first sign of companies [00:16:00] trying to do that is appointing somebody typically as a corporate staff person to have some kind of internal incubator. I could politely say, that's a nice first step put it really doesn't solve the problem. Speaker 4: It actually just points out what the problem is and can I digress for another 10 seconds? It turns out that the problem that corporations are having is not a tactical organizational problem. The things I described, the globalization, the effect of the [00:16:30] Internet, et Cetera, are just strategic problems that every corporation is facing. The last time companies faced something, this major was in the 1920s, uh, u s corporations grew from small mom and pop businesses from the 1870s to 1920s and they kind of came up with a form of organization called functional organizations, meaning you had a head of sales, a head of marketing, a head of manufacturing, but by function that was the only way companies were organized. But by 1920, some [00:17:00] u s corporations spans from New York to San Francisco. And so there was a geography problem here. You had a head of sales tryna run multiple geography. Speaker 4: It wasn't even the same time zone. And some companies like dupont had a different problem while they also had geography problems. Dupont made everything from explosives to paint. But you only had one marketing group and one manufacture. How do, how do you manage that? And for about five or six years for corporations, dupont, General Motors, Sears and standard oil, understood. They had a strategy [00:17:30] problem and attacked it by playing with the structure of the company, meaning how the company was organized and they all finally decided that they were going to organize in a radically different form called divisions. Instead of just having functions, they would actually break up like for example, General Motors into the Buick Division and ultimate build division or whatever, or for dupont explosives divisions and the paint division and on top of a thin layer of corporate staff, but now have a company organized by divisions first changed in [00:18:00] 50 years and how companies were organized. Speaker 4: Fast forward 40 years later, the third form of corporate organization to emerged called Matrix organizations where you start with a functional organization, but now all of a sudden we would have specific projects pop up, gee, I want to work on the new fad six fighter. Well, I have an engineering group, but let me put together a team that could pull out of engineering and pull out a product management and put together for our temporary amount of time and then they'll go back into their functions and then be pulled out again. But that's it. Those are the only three forms [00:18:30] of corporate organization. I'll contend that we're facing a common strategy problem that is not solvable by just pasting on vps of innovation. I believe it's solvable by rethinking on the highest possible level is do we need a fourth form of corporate organization? And I gotta tell you I got the answer, but I'm not going to tell you now. Okay.Speaker 5: Is this sort of then turning all the operations research that's been done over the past? You know, since World War II, [00:19:00] that was when it seemed to be salient. Is it on its ear now? Is this, Speaker 4: so if you really think about what we built for the last 150 years is corporations were the epitome of operational efficiency through operations research, the output of business schools. I mean all our stuff has had to be continuous execution, driving to the lowest cost provider and outsourcing and all that stuff. That's great. But you're going out of business and in fact, companies that do that, [00:19:30] I will contend have a much shorter lifespan that companies that now do continuous innovation. That is, if you think about the difference between Amazon and Netflix and apple, when jobs was alive versus standard US companies, the distinction was they were continuously innovating, ruined Leslie, innovating, and it was not some department that was innovating. It's a big idea. It was the entire company was innovating, yet they were making obscene profits. So clearly there are some models of some companies who [00:20:00] have figured out and in fact HP in the 70s and eighties had figured out how to do and then they lost the formula. I think we now actually have a theory, a strategy of how to do that and some really specific tactics. How, I know we could do this in detail for u s corporations and corporations worldwide, but I want to start at the u s and we're going to be talking and writing about that in the next year. Speaker 5: Great. So that's what you're actively working. Speaker 4: Oh, actively working. And I'm Hank Chesboro who have inventor of open innovation here at Haas business school and with Alexander Osterwalder [00:20:30] and venture of the business model canvas. All have been part of some of these discussions. You know, I just get smarter by hanging out with much smarter people. And I'm not the only one who's thinking about that. There are lots of very smart people trying to crack the code and at the same time, companies are raising their hand and the symptom of raising their hand is they're appointing vps of innovation and her likes saying, yeah, you know, here's what we are. Oops, it doesn't quite work. And finance has different rules and but wait a minute, I'm trying to be innovative, but the HR manual doesn't allow me to hire people. No, [00:21:00] no. Legal says I can't use our brand here. So what you're really finding is that it's not an org problem. Speaker 4: It's not anybody's trying to be mean. Is that what we're missing is the CEO and board conversation is, oh my gosh, maybe we need to get innovation in every part of the company, not by exception. That's the idea I'll telegraph for now. And how do you do that without affecting current profits? And it's quite possible because again, there are these experiments of companies that are insanely from a profitable, who've done this. [00:21:30] Now can we just make a teachable and doable by other corporations? And the answer is yes, we're going to go do that. Do you see that pace of technology accelerating? Absolutely. I think we're in the golden age of both technology and entrepreneurship. You ain't seen anything yet. I'm still constantly amazed sitting here smiling. When you say that is why I still love to teach is that, you know, I get to see my students come up with things. Speaker 4: You hear the 400th hotel automation package or the whatever, but you know, and then you see something, again, drones are three d printing [00:22:00] or you could do white with your phone, you're gonna make a turn on or you're a password through. It's just things that are unimaginable. And then you watch the next generation of Steve Jobs that said, you know, the current version silicon valley is you go on much. Who single handedly is val to obsolete the automobile industry? And at the same time just wrecking havoc in this space launch industry, single individual who had, by the way, zero qualifications to do any of those. Congratulations. Welcome to entrepreneurship. He had the will to be disruptive [00:22:30] and he understood that the technology was about at the edge of being able to do what he did. That's how we got the iPod and the iPhone or else in a perfect world and Nokia would still have 89% market share. If I was General Motors and Ford, I'd be really concerned. Steve Blank, thanks very much for coming on spectrum. Great. Thanks for having me. Speaker 6: You'd like more insight into Steve Blank's ideas. Go to his website, Steve blank.com [00:23:00] as Steve mentioned, the Lean launch pad course is available. I knew udacity.com to learn more about the NSF mean launchpad curriculum, search for NSF [inaudible] your local to the bay area. Go to [inaudible] dot com if you're interested in startup appreciation materials for educators, go to n c I n aa.org/l l p. Stretching shows [00:23:30] are archived on iTunes yet it gives created a simple link for you. The link is tiny url.com/calex spectrum and now a few some technology events happening locally over the next two weeks. Brad Swift joins me for the calendar. Speaker 3: California's coastal waters are home to one of the four richest temperate marine biota is in the world. The California Academy of Sciences will be holding [00:24:00] a series of lectures and events to explore this incredible diversity of life. They look, explain what makes this region so productive and why it needs to be protected on Saturday, March 22nd from nine to 11:00 AM a variety of Speakers will consider the impacts of human activity on the local marine ecosystems and the establishment and efficacy of marine protected areas. They will also discuss how diversity is monitored in California's oceans and which areas will need to be most closely scrutinized for future impact. For more information on the [00:24:30] March 22nd event. Please visit cal academy.org Speaker 5: on Monday, March 31st University of Maryland professor of human development, Nathan Fox will give a lecture on his recent studies on whether experiences shaped the brain and neural circuitry for emerging cognitive and social behaviors over the first years of life. Something that many developmental scientists take for granted. Foxes study the Bucharest early intervention project [00:25:00] is the first randomized trial of a family intervention for children who experienced significant psychosocial neglect early in their lives. A group of infants living in institutions in Romania were recruited and randomized to be taken out of the institution and placed into family foster care homes or to remain in the institution. He then followed up with the children several times over the next eight years and examine the lasting [00:25:30] effects of the deprivation and which, if any interventions were successful in assuaging the harmful effects, the free public talk will be held on March 31st from 12 to 1:30 PM on the UC Berkeley campus in room 31 50 of Tolman hall Speaker 3: on Wednesday per second. You see Berkeley's department of Environmental Science Policy and management will present a speech by Chris Mooney, a journalist who's written several books on the resistance that many [00:26:00] Americans have to accepting scientific conclusions. His lecture will be titled The Science of why we don't believe in science and we'll examine the reasons behind Americans disinterest in scientific solutions to the world's problems. The free public lecture will be held on Wednesday, April 2nd at 7:00 PM in the International House Auditorium of UC Berkeley. Here at spectrum, we like to present new stories we find particularly interesting. Brad Swift joins me in presenting the news. Speaker 5: UC Berkeley Professor, Dr. Richard Kramer [00:26:30] and his research team have been able to temporarily restore light sensitivity to mice, missing a majority of their rods and cones in healthy mammals. The eyes detect light with specialized photo receptor cells or rods and cones and then transmit a signal to their optic nerve cells which eventually communicate with the brain. Dr. Kramer and his team explored the effects of a similarly light-sensitive molecule known as d n a Q in healthy mice and mice [00:27:00] with a degenerative disease that caused them to lose nearly all their rods and cones. After dosing, the mice with d n a Q, the mice were exposed to lights and their optic nerve activity was measured via electrode arrays. The diseased mice showed strong light sensitivity. The team next examined a small number of animals in light and dark conditions to test whether the sensitivity conferred any perception of the light. In the diseased mice, [00:27:30] the injected mice were better able to form an association between a light stimuli and electric shock than those in the control group. While millions of humans suffer from similar degenerative retinal conditions, definitive conclusions on the broader therapeutic and deleterious effects of the molecule. D n a Q are still years away. Speaker 3: In a recent study published in the journal bio materials, UC Berkeley researchers were able to eliminate the transmission rep [00:28:00] of a common infection. Staphylococcus Aureus is a bacterium that commonly infects patients who've had surgeries involving prosthetic joints and artificial heart, bowels, staff, or aces. Ability to adhere to medical advices is key to experience as once introduced to the body. It can cause severe illness. UC Berkeley Bio and mechanical engineering, Professor Mohammad [inaudible] fraud and others in his lab examined how the clusters of staff warriors were able to adhere so well to certain Yana surfaces as well as the type of surfaces [00:28:30] that increased or decreased the bacteria's ability to clean. They quickly found that while staff [inaudible] can adhere to a variety of flattened curves services, it does seem to have a preference for certain structures including a tubular pillar where the bacteria was able to partially embed itself within holes in the structure. Professor, my fraud expressed hope that the improved understanding of these preferences could allow the design of medical devices built to attenuate bacterial adhesion while escaping the need to chemically damaged the bacteria to prevent transmission Speaker 7: [00:29:00] [inaudible]. Speaker 5: The music heard during the show was written and produced by Alex Simon. Speaker 1: Thank you for listening to spectrum. If you have comments about the show, please send them to us via email. Our email address is spectrum to a k a l ex@yahoo.com Trina's in two weeks at the same time. [inaudible] Speaker 8: [00:29:30] [inaudible]. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

What does the future hold for the food movement? Join Former U.S. Deputy Secretary of Agriculture under President Obama Kathleen Merrigan and author and UC Berkeley Professor of Journalism Michael Pollan in conversation with reporter and Journalism faculty member Linda Schacht. [Agriculture] [Show ID: 25707]

What does the future hold for the food movement? Join Former U.S. Deputy Secretary of Agriculture under President Obama Kathleen Merrigan and author and UC Berkeley Professor of Journalism Michael Pollan in conversation with reporter and Journalism faculty member Linda Schacht. [Agriculture] [Show ID: 25707]

What does the future hold for the food movement? Join Former U.S. Deputy Secretary of Agriculture under President Obama Kathleen Merrigan and author and UC Berkeley Professor of Journalism Michael Pollan in conversation with reporter and Journalism faculty member Linda Schacht. [Agriculture] [Show ID: 25707]

What does the future hold for the food movement? Join Former U.S. Deputy Secretary of Agriculture under President Obama Kathleen Merrigan and author and UC Berkeley Professor of Journalism Michael Pollan in conversation with reporter and Journalism faculty member Linda Schacht. [Agriculture] [Show ID: 25707]

What does the future hold for the food movement? Join Former U.S. Deputy Secretary of Agriculture under President Obama Kathleen Merrigan and author and UC Berkeley Professor of Journalism Michael Pollan in conversation with reporter and Journalism faculty member Linda Schacht. [Agriculture] [Show ID: 25707]

What does the future hold for the food movement? Join Former U.S. Deputy Secretary of Agriculture under President Obama Kathleen Merrigan and author and UC Berkeley Professor of Journalism Michael Pollan in conversation with reporter and Journalism faculty member Linda Schacht. [Agriculture] [Show ID: 25707]

Geoff Marcy, UC Berkeley Professor of Astronomy and Co-Investigator on Kepler Team, discusses the Keplar Teams efforts to locate earth-like planets by observing orbit, doppler shift, and dimming of Upsilon Andromedae. (January 14, 2010)

UC Berkeley Professor of Public Policy Robert Reich, former Secretary of Labor, is the author of 11 books including "Locked in the Cabinet" and "Supercapitalism.” Professor Reich reads from his works and is interviewed about his writing process. Series: "Writers" [Public Affairs] [Humanities] [Show ID: 15514]

UC Berkeley Professor of Public Policy Robert Reich, former Secretary of Labor, is the author of 11 books including "Locked in the Cabinet" and "Supercapitalism.” Professor Reich reads from his works and is interviewed about his writing process. Series: "Writers" [Public Affairs] [Humanities] [Show ID: 15514]

In this presentation from the Legacy of Slavery series, UC Berkeley Professor and winner of the Pulitzer Prize, Leon Litwack, deals with "Trouble in Mind: African Americans From Emancipation to the 1990's." Litwack talks about the racist treatment of African Americans using examples from the Roaring 20's with lynching occurring weekly to World War II where German soldiers caught by allied troops were treated better than American black soldiers to the Civil Rights' movement of Post World II. Series: "Legacy of Slavery" [Humanities] [Show ID: 8112]

In this presentation from the Legacy of Slavery series, UC Berkeley Professor and winner of the Pulitzer Prize, Leon Litwack, deals with "Trouble in Mind: African Americans From Emancipation to the 1990's." Litwack talks about the racist treatment of African Americans using examples from the Roaring 20's with lynching occurring weekly to World War II where German soldiers caught by allied troops were treated better than American black soldiers to the Civil Rights' movement of Post World II. Series: "Legacy of Slavery" [Humanities] [Show ID: 8112]