Friedberg

Yeah, and we may end up being the Luddite state, and we'll end up just saying, you know what? We're not going to adopt new technology, including things like— gene editing and cell therapies. And I'll go through the list of new technology sets.

You could make the argument that there's a low probability of a high risk event, but the fact is that the progress that it enables is worth so much more than the risk that we would be taking on.

You could make the argument that there's a low probability of a high risk event, but the fact is that the progress that it enables is worth so much more than the risk that we would be taking on.

The countries and the businesses that have a lower cost of electricity and a more abundant source of electricity will end up winning as the economy continues to progress towards a much more kind of digital state and automated state over the next decades. So if we're going to be slower, we're going to suffer the consequences of that as a country. So we'll see how it plays out.

The countries and the businesses that have a lower cost of electricity and a more abundant source of electricity will end up winning as the economy continues to progress towards a much more kind of digital state and automated state over the next decades. So if we're going to be slower, we're going to suffer the consequences of that as a country. So we'll see how it plays out.

I just think that economic incentives will ultimately drive, hopefully, a change.

I just think that economic incentives will ultimately drive, hopefully, a change.

I'm not sure. I haven't thought much about what the incentives or subsidies would be.

I'm not sure. I haven't thought much about what the incentives or subsidies would be.

What would be the number? I think that people have a very deep fear

What would be the number? I think that people have a very deep fear

of you know what is deemed to be cataclysmic technology i do think a lot of this was rooted in the evolution of the atomic age where we basically have these nuclear warheads mounted to missiles that can travel at 20 times the speed of sound and land on your city and wipe out your city i mean that that is also nuclear technology and people conflate the two as being similar and even three mile island there were you know no deaths it was a shocking scary thing for people but

of you know what is deemed to be cataclysmic technology i do think a lot of this was rooted in the evolution of the atomic age where we basically have these nuclear warheads mounted to missiles that can travel at 20 times the speed of sound and land on your city and wipe out your city i mean that that is also nuclear technology and people conflate the two as being similar and even three mile island there were you know no deaths it was a shocking scary thing for people but

statistically speaking and historically speaking and technically speaking, it's a lot more complicated to explain to people what happened and why and why now is different. And no one has the time for that. No one wants to hear that. They want to hear a very simple, do you really want a nuclear power plant in your backyard? No way. What about you? No way. All right, let's vote to stop it.

statistically speaking and historically speaking and technically speaking, it's a lot more complicated to explain to people what happened and why and why now is different. And no one has the time for that. No one wants to hear that. They want to hear a very simple, do you really want a nuclear power plant in your backyard? No way. What about you? No way. All right, let's vote to stop it.

Do you have any data on the safety record of nuclear technology? Because I'm not sure you do. I think my point is like, you're just making a statement out of fear.

Do you have any data on the safety record of nuclear technology? Because I'm not sure you do. I think my point is like, you're just making a statement out of fear.

You know that.

You know that.

That's not true. You're saying something that's not true.