The most influential mathematical theory of all time is Euclidean geometry. Most people, when they think about geometric objects like squares or cubes and spheres and cylinders, they think in terms of Euclidean geometry. And in fact for thousands of years, learning mathematics began with, and was sometimes synonymous with, learning Euclidean geometry. So most people are content with accepting the premises of Euclidean geometry. They think that if the best minds for millennia have been examining this theory, well, the theory has got to be correct. Who am I to think that maybe the theory is wrong? And so they just accept that the fundamentals have been sorted out and work on higher levels of mathematics from there. Unfortunately, I think this is the way that dogma gets perpetuated. We can think of lots of other ideas which have been around for a few thousands of years that actually are incorrect or even fundamentally incorrect. So, though it might seem like at first glance, skeptical inquiry into Euclidean geometry is crazy, I think as will be revealed in a fairly short period of time, there is room for skepticism here. And maybe some of the principles of Euclidean geometry simply aren't true. So the purpose of this video and the next few videos on this topic is going to be to examine with a skeptical eye Euclidean geometry. The purpose is not to tell you about orthodox opinion so that you might repeat it and appear intelligent amongst civilized company. The purpose is to try to grasp the concepts of geometry ourselves. And if some ideas don't make sense to us, then we have to investigate until they do make sense, even if that means coming up with new theories in the process. So the first question that we need to examine is a very big picture. What is geometry? What is geometry about? What is it trying to describe? Geometers, I think, would generally agree that geometry is about the taking up of space, the nature of shape, position, maybe distance, length. And I think that geometry can actually be completely reduced to, fundamentally, the taking up of space. And then the objects which take up space, there are various properties. You get things like shape when you have objects which take up space and so on. Now if that's true, if that's what geometry is about, then it immediately presents us with a really big problem with Euclidean geometry for the following reason. Euclidean geometry is a theory that's based on an axiomatic deductive framework, meaning you start with premises, you start with self-evident premises in this case, or very intuitively appealing premises, and then you use logical deduction to see what follows from those premises. So the geometric objects in Euclidean geometry are defined by the axioms, and you get more and more advanced objects, all of which can be reduced to the fundamental objects defined by the axioms. So if it's the case that there's a problem with an axiom or a definition of an object, then it's the case that the conclusions which follow from that axiom contain errors and might be fundamentally completely wrong. And go figure, I think it's the case that in the defining of geometric objects, Euclidean geometry makes a rather large mistake. First object is that of the point, arguably the most important object in all of Euclidean geometry. What is a point? Well the English translation, modern English translation for what Euclid said a point was, is that which has no part. I really like this definition, but I like the modern English translation of it. What Euclid probably actually meant, which is coherent with his theory, would be something more analogous to that which has no dimension, has no length, has no width, has no depth, that I really don't like. But from the point we also get the next geometric object which is the line, which is a one dimensional object, that which only has breadth or length or what have you. Along that line you have an infinite number of points. So immediately we run into kind of a big problem with these definitions, or at the very least it's unclear. What exactly is a point? What is a geometric something which takes up no space and has no dimensions? Have you ever experienced or encountered a point? Something which has some spatial thing which has no length, breadth or depth. Have you ever encountered a line which only has length and no breadth? Have you ever encountered a circle? Something I'll talk about more, I would say no. According to the mathematicians nobody's encountered a circle, it's got really remarkable properties which I'll talk about in a minute. So the entire structure of Euclidean geometry is built on the axiomatic notion of the point in the line and the objects that are constructed by various assortments of points and lines. But it's not exactly clear what those are. This problem runs very deep and when you talk to mathematicians about it they give you some remarkable stories. They'll say things like, well, yeah, nobody's ever actually experienced points or lines or shapes or cubes or spheres. These are ideal platonic objects. They exist in another dimension, not the one that we directly experience. We don't see them, we don't visualize them, and we don't encounter them in the physical world. Well, is that an area that we can be skeptical? Can we say, hey, it's a nice theory you have, but I'm interested in a geometric theory about objects that take up space because, believe it or not, if you construct a geometric theory in which objects take up space, points take up space, things are composed of points which take up space, then you do not get the conclusions of Euclidean geometry. The entire theory falls apart. Take, for example, the geometry of the computer screen you're looking at right now. You might think that you've seen lines and points and circles on your computer screen, but according to the Euclidean geometry, no, in fact, you haven't. All of those objects and things that you see and experience are mere imperfect approximations of their ideal lines and circles and squares. Take a humble circle.  This, they say, the perfect circle that you see is not actually a circle. In fact, this circle that you think you're talking about has a rational pie. It has a rational ratio. It's circumference to its diameter. It's made up of a finite number of pixels which take up space, and so it is imperfect. Again, are we allowed to be a little skeptical of this? Are we allowed to develop a theory of geometry which explains the phenomena that we experience, namely things that we see, things that we visualize, things that we can clearly conceptualize? I think so. One more problem in this video that's very related to this notion of zero dimensionality is the question, how can it be that zero-dimensional objects can compose objects which have dimensions? For example, along the line, there lay an infinite number of zero-dimensional points. How is that possible? What does that mean? It seems like it's saying if you add up a bunch of zeros, an infinite number of zeros, you will get a one, which of course doesn't make any sense. It doesn't matter how many zeros you add together, you're never going to get a one. I'd say it seems intuitive to say it doesn't matter how many zero-dimensional objects you have, you're never going to get an object that takes up space. Now, again, the remarkable thing is a lot of the mathematicians will agree and they'll say, aha, that just demonstrates that Euclidean geometry is not about all this regular stuff that we experience, no, it's a higher level of abstraction. Well, maybe that's true, but that sure presupposes a whole bunch of metaphysics about how we have access to this knowledge, whether or not this mathematical theory applies to the world, none of which is laid out in Euclid's axioms. So right off the bat, with definitions of Euclidean geometry, it gives us plenty of room for skepticism and I would say alternative theories of geometry, which we'll cover more in the future. I will say in all of my investigations in lots of different areas of thought and lots of different topics, I find mathematics to be really remarkable. The history of mathematics, the logic of mathematics, and the argument of mathematicians. Never have I encountered so many people who are so quick to say, ah, math doesn't apply to reality, aka, my theory doesn't apply to reality, as if it's a defense for the theory. They say, oh, well, you've never encountered any of the objects. You can't even clearly conceive of any of the objects in my theory. In any other area of thought, that would be synonymous with saying, oh, you got me, my theory is flawed. But no, not with the mathematicians. Much more to be said on that topic.


Today in Talking Science and Tech, we will be looking at the scrutiny that big tech companies have been facing in the last few months for anti-competitive practices. We see that both in the US and in Europe, big tech companies such as Facebook, Google, Apple, Amazon primarily are facing probes for exercising monopoly power and there are debates going on on how to limit this power. A US House final has recently released a report on this issue and today we are joined by Praveepur Kaisal who will be talking about these investigations, the behavior of these big tech companies and the dangers posed by the power they currently hold. So the monopoly power of these companies is what has drawn the attention of various regulatory agencies. In the United States, the Congress Judiciary Committee, whatever it's called, took up this issue and they identified four companies, Google, Facebook, Amazon and Apple. In the UK, also we have what's called a competition market authority. They have also taken up these issues and they have also talked about how the monopolization of these big platforms, it is harming both the interests of the users and a lot of other people too. So there are these two sets of issues. Earlier you had the European Union take up what would be called the privacy issues that these companies do not obey. The privacy laws that the European Union has passed and therefore they need to localize their data and also they have to obey the privacy concerns if they take data out of the European Union jurisdiction. We have also a similar set of issues but framed slightly differently in Australia where they have said if Google and Facebook uses information of these news platforms, they have to pay these news platforms. There's a whole range of issues which have been identified and as you know with Facebook, there's an additional issue both in the United States and in India regarding the role that Facebook plays in what is called promoting hate or building networks of people who essentially are militias, violent in their discourse if not anything else and therefore there is a promotion of a certain kind of networks within Facebook which are certainly not helpful to democracy. So these are the broad issues that have been framed. I'm going to talk about only two sets of issues here that what is it that Google and Facebook do and how do they earn their money and therefore how is it that what they're doing in terms of maximizing the revenue, how is against public interest. This is really the issue that I would like to take up. It's not only harming others which of course it is but it is also harming public interest and I think these are the two issues that we need to take up and if we start with this then we have to see the similarity between Google and Facebook, not so much others, Google and Facebook that the both really are dependent on advertising revenue. Google for about 82% of its more than 80% of its revenue that comes from essentially advertising and we have Facebook 98% of its revenue comes from advertising. So they are the two platforms today who have become dominant in terms of advertising or getting the ad revenues. Now if you take the ad revenues who does it hit? Okay Google and Facebook target consumers better that's the argument they can do better targeting they know what we are likely to buy what is it that we are looking for and therefore targeting ads better is more benefit for the companies giving advertisements and therefore they would like to of course use these platforms in preference to others that they can micro target the consumer. Now the problem is that if you take Google and Facebook in terms of information they are not platforms which produce anything they actually just make information available to their those who look at Google search engines use Gmail or various other tools that Google provides or of course Facebook Facebook itself now of course we also have WhatsApp and Instagram but primarily Facebook is the place where the users are the most engaged and therefore that has become the primary reason why advertisers give them ads that people are there eyeballs are there and now both these platforms do not produce any news they do not produce any content they are both produce serving us content produced by others so what happens to those who actually generate content they are generating content free for Google and Facebook make money but they themselves then don't have a revenue model and this has been the crisis of the newspaper or the larger media industry that increasingly there is a revenue model only for Google and Facebook nobody else and if that happens it destroys the basis of the news industry itself and that increasingly is also going to affect television already it is in the offing but certainly likely to increase but newspapers have been hit in a very big way so given that the primary news producers are not only the big New York Times or financial Times or the Wall Street Journal and so on but the regional papers the local papers the country specific papers all of them then don't have a revenue model and while New York Times or a Wall Street Journal may still survive these papers are not likely to survive either so what happens to this entire news gathering news platforms really what I would call content creation in terminologies of today what happens to them and if that completely is destroyed then of course you have a situation where you will not have democracy either because the lifeblood of democracy is press now even if the press wasn't free even if the press was biased at least there was a press which had certain rules certain rules of the game and were also regulated to a certain extent all of that goes through the window by the window and if that happens what is it that we can then expect in terms of content in the future I think that's a big question that is there and that is the existential crisis of media and in the larger sense it's existential crisis of democracy because we don't have information and at least a variety of information available to us variety of views available to us which we can go look at or subscribe to then we have a situation where just two players will decide in the world what is news and what is fake news and what is not to be promoted what is to be promoted this is mind control at a level which is far beyond anything that people in the 20th century those who are critical of the way the world was going the brave new world or 1984 none of them have predicted a level of mind control which is now open to Facebook and Google and both of them of course operate differently but nevertheless the net result is really this both of course have social media platforms of different kinds but Google has the search engine as its primary way of gathering information and of course the search engine is also what all of us use for doing various things as also the other tools Facebook really is the Facebook world that's the primary place it is in and both of them have different ways of keeping people and the dangers they both have are of a different kind so let's talk about what does Google do and I think that's a very important issue as we know Google in its search engine puts up certain set of results now before we go into the partiality of Google to itself that is something that we are going to discuss a little later but Google's basically the search engine results are such that if a search result comes say on the fourth page the likelihood of people seeing the result is very low so most of the people more than I think about 80 percent of the people will stop on the first page of the search and not go beyond it some who are more persevering will go to the second maybe the third very few will go to the fourth and beyond so given that Google's basic power comes from what it shows and what it doesn't show so if you decide that the world is what you would like it to be in the Google's world in that case what you show are results which conform to Google's view of the world so that's that is one issue so if you take Nelson Mandela you will find he was a Gandhian he believed in non-violence he won't find two things which are central to Nelson Mandela's life that he actually called for arm struggle against the Tappatid regime in South Africa he's a member of the communist party and it was they had given a call for an arm struggle he was very much a participant in arm struggle where he was arrested he in fact had a revolver with him which he decided not to use against the policeman who had accosted him so this is Nelson Mandela and he was not a Gandhian in the way people have portrayed him to be just because he agreed for a peaceful transfer of power in 90s didn't make him a Gandhian he certainly was not he considered himself a Marxist and a communist when he went to jail which is where he stayed for more than 30 years so now second part of it is that there is no mention of the role of the American embassy in his arrest while we now know that that played a very important role as well because they had known about his coming to town that day that he did you where he was likely to be and they were the one who passed the information on that's the information you will find maybe maybe you go to the seventh eighth page of a search you might find this information otherwise this has been sort of scrubbed from google so what you get therefore is a worldview according to google in this particular case worldview according to the united states what's conducive to the united states to show so there is an alignment that you have with google as a the largest search engine and a lot of other tools besides the its worldview and the worldview of the united states that is one part of it but the second and this is a business part of it that's important is that it also shows that if you want an information you don't today need to leave the google search engine what you tend to do is to just look at the results that come and most of the part of the question you have asked it tries to extract from the first site that you see on the second side that you see and condenses it in in that page in that in that ranked two lines of the show so that you actually quite often will not even need to leave the search page in order to click that link go down to the original page and see what has actually what was said over there now the important part of it is that if that does not happen then of course advertisements only go to google because you're not leaving the google world so what you get essentially is a situation where you don't have to leave the google world and if you're only in the google world only google advertise google advertisements then are something that you will watch and maybe you will click and that's where google makes its money so google's attempt is therefore to be predatory in the way it operates by not taking you to any other page except google itself so that is one part of it and therefore being able to retain your attention in this way it's a matter of selection it is not really a matter that if you're it's promoting you to connect with others but it is just retaining you in the google world itself that you want to see where the suppose you want to buy something you can see where to buy it we want to go to a restaurant you can go to a google map and get the directions so the attention of that you have is then restricted to what would be called the google properties so it's a more of not showing you or taking you to other pages and of course there is a more even worse violations that if there is something that google itself offers travel and so on then those are the ones which are likely to be shown and not the competitors products if the competitors are there then be shown below google in fact one of the internal documents with the congressional committee refers to is the fact that they have said the way ranking is done if google properties are ranked in the same way then they would not appear in a search engine on google search itself they would not appear so the rules of the search engine are tweaked in order to show google and a much higher ranking and this is what i talked about when we talked about the ranking part of it and why the ranking algorithm actually promotes google now if you look at facebook facebook is actually a different product so facebook operates by trying to create and this is the other part of it which i think the competition marketing authority of the uk points out that it operates on the basis of the social network social graph so it wants to connect you to people and there is now enough material evidence available in fact there is a particular person in facebook is quite high up he actually said our business is only to connect people that's all our business is and whether out of that evil happens that's not our problem so effectively connecting people is the business and if the connection leads to violence in the real world that is not the facebook's problem is effectively the position that is taken by this person who is a very senior facebook executive now what it's saying if you take away all the other parts of it that facebook's business is connecting people and the second part of its business is retaining them within the network itself and you don't leave facebook so you connect to others feeds what you show all of that is meant to retain your interest and the algorithm therefore when it wants to retain you wants to put you in touch with people who hold similar views then it slowly leads to the social graph your social graph being built in a way that you then connect to people who are like-minded you see posts which are of similar views to yours and also as we know emotions play a big part on people being retained to see facebook so those which can rake up hatred in fact tend to then also attract attention and then engage the people more you want to give comments you want to give your expressive opinions on that so this kind of divisive activities which is what is what is being now identified as hate speech fake news all of these things are in fact what keeps the facebook algorithm ticking because this is what makes people stay on facebook and facebook algorithms will suggest people with similar views therefore it builds a network if we take the recent recent exposures that have come this is very clear that facebook is not interested in controlling fake news or hate speech on its platform those which have real world consequences unless they're embarrassed unless it becomes a public relations disaster and this is something which again Sophie Zhang who came out gave wrote a 6600 word memo which Buzzfeed is reported in quite details but they it makes clear that they were not interested spending money on curbing this menace in fact insiders of facebook again which has been brought to public notice i think in wall street journal center 64 percent of the right wing network in Germany was because facebook itself promoted its members to talk to each other put you put each member the members in touch with each other through its recommendation of the facebook algorithms itself so what i'm saying is facebook and trying to build this network of like-minded people who will talk to each other exchange information and that's how the q and on controversy arose that's how also the whole issue about the shushant singh rajput in fact this is one of the issues that is there that a lot of this is like-minded people promoting it and finding each other through facebook and using facebook in a particular way this is what facebook actually is designed for to promote this kind of engagement and they know that this is so the intention is we shall allow this to happen and when we are embarrassed we'll say we are taking action we are doing something but in effect as many times they have said it nothing has really happened and this is the other part that why facebook is not simply a monopoly but some monopolies which algorithms promote hatred and divisive activities and this has real world consequences particularly in a number of countries in fact united nations report is there the human rights report is there on rohingyas and facebook's role and it's interesting that they have while they have castigated facebook that facebook did not cooperate with the united nations investigations on this count but they have held the facebook's posts were responsible and we know facebook and whatsapp have both have been responsible for real world violence now these are the issues that what that we need to also consider how do you address the monopolies is one part but how do you address the algorithmic spread of views which could have real world consequences i think this is the other issue we need to take up and therefore one thing is for sure while both of these reports have talked of different regulatory activities the US congress committee in fact that's a staff report suggesting that monopoly should be broken up that is the position they have taken but at the least both have said monopolies need to be regulated and that's something we need to consider that we need to regulate them and i think the most important part of that regulation is also making them transparent if there is a complaint to facebook today we do not know who it goes to who sees it what redress is done is there any answer given to us why it happened what if did it go to which human being did it go to can i bounce that complaint up if it has not been acted upon to a higher level all these are completely opaque facebook says it has an internal mechanism but it is completely opaque about its internal regulatory mechanism as we know that this is what sophie zang's article said and what all street journal also said that they act only when they're embarrassed and that we know that for instance the raja singh the telangana mla who posted in fact anti rohingya violent messages and other violent messages who had been flagged internally as a dangerous person along with anand tegre and kapil misra that this should be permanently banned from facebook facebook didn't take it down even when there were public complaints about it not only from individuals but ours and equality labs had done a detailed report submitted it to facebook given the complaints to them no action was taken till wall street journal asked the questions and when wall street journal asked the questions that's what when facebook takes action that's what in fact sophie zang says that when they're likely to be embarrassed only then does facebook takes action in fact when she raised some of the issues of the problems they said well press hasn't talked about it and this is sophie's memo which as i said bus feed has put made put in public domain at least parts of it she said they said well you know this does not have any implication that you are talking about if it was then press would have written about it and by press they mean actually uh us press and european union at best european union others don't count so i think these are the reasons why we are in the situation we are today that we need to consider that these monopolies need to be controlled they are danger to democracy in different ways the monopoly power is destroying the media industry as we know so all of this needs to be now taken into consideration how we do it is a challenge but various issues that that have been raised need certainly to be addressed otherwise as judge brandis said democracy and wealth are not compatible but the same way this amount of media power without generating any content is also not compatible and media is today the life blood of democracy


What's good YouTube? This is what you were all back at y'all again with another speed art video. If you're new to the channel Go ahead and hit that like button Comment subscribe. Make sure you click post notifications so you will be notified of your time. Good job to me He and today's video. I'm finna drop some single cover art for that man flight Very dope YouTube. I've been a fan of his channel for quite some time He hit me up on Instagram for some work and we finna jump right into it. Let it go


You were talking to a lot of people who were referencing the movie, Idiocracy, the Mike Judge film, which has a very famous introduction. And I've also pulled that clip, which I want to roll and talk about a little bit. Best, could you play the Idiocracy clip? Evolution does not necessarily reward intelligence with no natural predators within the herd. It began to simply reward those who reproduced the most and left the intelligent to become an endangered species. Having kids is such an important decision. We're just waiting for the right time. It's not something you want to rush into, obviously. No way.  Shit!  I thought you was on the peel of some shit! Oh, no? That's the thing with Brittany. Brittany? No, you didn't! There's no way we could have a child now. Not with the market the way it is, no. No, that just wouldn't make any sense.  He don't care about you! Yeah, well, there must be something he likes over here! Give me that to me, baby! It wasn't me! Well, we finally decided to have children, and I'm not pointing fingers, but it's not going well. And this is helping? I'm just saying that before I have an in-beat trail, maybe you should be willing to... It's always me, right? Well, it's not my sperm count. So, implications are obvious.  It's a real class endeavor, right? Like, that's the... Yeah, exactly. Why do you think that it has such cultural resonance? Was that say about attitudes towards kids and family? And I love it because I first heard about that movie. The first time anyone ever asked me, have you watched Idiocracy? I was at a Reason Happy Hour and said to one of my friends there that I was expecting my second in 2008. And she said, oh, have you seen Idiocracy? And I think she meant it in a friendly, joking way. But then when she explained the plot, I wasn't sure how to take it. And yeah, and this is something I encountered in Playground and New Milford, Connecticut, which I highlight as a shrinking town. The Playground was outside of an elementary school that's closed down and was currently hosting Senior Yoga instead as sort of the future. And I think, again, the idea that it's smart... And both sides get mocked in this movie, right? Like, the yuppie couple with 140 IQs are not coming out as the, you know, the prudent, the people to look up to. But really the idea that raising kids is this... Because it's become such a choice, because it's not just kind of something you do. Now, there are subcultures where finished school, get a job, get married, have kids. It's just kind of what you're expected to do. And well, if you're going to deviate from that, you're making a different choice. That's fine. But now it's not even that. It's not expected. It's like choosing what color sweater you're going to put on in the morning. It's an explicit choice. It's a lifestyle choice. Because of that, A, it leads to a culture that says it's your problem if you have kids. But B, it makes you feel, and I quote Stephanie Murray. He was a great parenting writer on this. Once it becomes a choice, then you have to do it all exactly right. It's like you... I would tell my kid, don't go to college if you're not going to try to get good grades and that kind of thing. And this is what people say. You're not going to absolutely do it right. Make sure you have everything in order. Make sure you have the house in the right school district and you have the savings to send them to college and you have lined up the piano teacher, etc. Then don't do it. And so that's, again, the way in which I think it's a self-reinforcing thing. As people have fewer children, their perception of the amount of inputs you need to do into child rearing goes up, which then makes parenting seem more daunting, which causes people to put it off. Sometimes you put it off too long and it's no longer in the cards for you. To me, the opposite vision of this is the sound of music, right? There's a little bit of horseshoe theory at play where it's like, okay, the poor and low-class family and idiocracy, okay, they have a ton of kids, but then there's also, we see this actually in a lot of the data surrounding this. Sometimes it's the ultra-wealthy families like Christopher Palmer's family and Sound of Music who end up having a whole bunch of kids who essentially live the libertarian dream, right? Like they have a governess, they do micro-schooling. Like it's an awesome sort of like means of, you know, you can really scale up the family. But so do we need cultural messages like that where we also show this being like a very high-class thing or do we need cultural messages where it's just seen as like ultra-attainable? To you, what's the, what's the ideal? Universal manners. Yeah. One job to come and raise all of the children for all of the families. I don't think the image of perfectly-behaved kids is the right one. To give an example, I try to get my kids to hold, especially my sons, to hold open doors for people because that's really easy to teach them and it's really easy to just say one word as you walk by them door and then they'll hold the door open. And that makes other people happy and it's really, my kids can't sing in unison. I have a son who can play the guitar and that's the extent of the music. And I actually go- They don't wear the outfits made out of curtains. You don't have anybody making them outfits out of drapes or anything. What's the point of having- I criticize the mom fluencers in my book. The, you know, the Instagram moms who everything is perfect and specifically the ones who, they all live in farmhouses. It's a bizarre thing that I can't understand. And the reason it's, I can't understand because it's supposed to look, oh, well, we are going a simple route. I mean, that farmhouse they made with the first five million they made off of their influencer cash. They often started with cash and the simple route, like you notice a denim is all like made to point perfectly towards the hues of the ballerina mother's blue eyes, right? Like it's, none of it is simple. It's all extremely curated. None of that helps people have kids because that's what causes people say, oh, I have to have my life that much in order to raise kids, to have kids who are basically happy who, you know, and they eat nuggets and french fries for dinner at least once a week. That's the kind of attainable image of the parent. I actually praise in family unfriendly. I praise the lawn that's scattered with like footballs and tricycles. And there's some dead grass from where the, you know, the home plate was left or the skateboard was left upside down to be a little bit messy and happy and that sort of thing. And not, not perfect kids, not Ivy League kids. So I, you know, have lower ambitions for your kids is one of the messages I have in the first two chapters for the book. Maybe it's not any accuracy or sound of music. Maybe it's like cheaper by the dozen. Remember like that movie, I guess there was the original one and then the Steve Martin remake, right? Even cheaper by the dozen, because he's like militaristic, that did set for me a tone. And I admit in the book, I say, when I'm a bad dad, when I lose my temper, it's because I want to think of myself as militaristic. Like if I whistle, my dogs come a certain whistle and cheaper by the dozen, he has a certain whistle where his 12 kids come. And again, there's a couple of things I'm good at, which is my kids open the door and they behave well and mass. But after that, I try to be, you know, relatively laissez-faire with the kids. Don't always succeed at that. But yeah, that model, that the things you think you need to do for your kids, you don't. They might look like a mess sometimes. Your house will look like a mess sometimes. Your kids won't get into Harvard, but that those things are all fine. That's the main message that I think needs to get conveyed to people.  Well, those sound the same to you. I'm sorry, I don't have much to say, but I think you can see sort of a stable couple with a moderate income and just trying to raise happy kids that that definitely is doable. Even in this world, you do have to change your expectations. That's all for this episode. I hope you enjoyed it. If you did, don't forget to click here or the full episode here. New episodes drop every week, so subscribe to Reason TV's YouTube channel to get notified when that happens or to the Just Asking Questions podcast on Apple, Spotify, or any other podcatcher. See you next week.


Wow jeez no pressure, huh? Thank you so much for that really warm introduction and thank you for having me. Thank you NDF organizers for bringing me down It's been really exciting to catch these sessions and and to meet all of you guys down here I've never been to this part of the world, so it's been a treat So It's supposed to be this way As we all know cultural institutions are Recalibrating for the 21st century. I don't have to tell you all this that's been the topic of conversation these past two days You all know this better than anyone and you are the ones leading that charge We're re-evaluating how we perform our core activities in the digital age Strategizing for how to evolve with the times better serve our missions and our audiences Investigating and inventing best practices for the age of big data of iPhones and 3d printing and virtual reality And the next new fangled thing that hasn't yet been invented So how do cultural memory institutions evolve in the information age when all the world's information is at our fingertips? Some of us are activating our spaces in new and interesting ways Serving our local communities by offering things like community yoga Of course, there are many excellent media lab cultural lab initiatives Some of which are springing up others which are shutting down This is a project from the MET museums media lab that recently closed But did some incredible work such as color the temple the project shown here Which was a light installation that transformed the Mets iconic temple of Dendur Using projection mapping to digitally restore color on the temple's etchings We're starting our indeed apartments where and we can investigate ideate and prototype possible museum futures For those of you who don't already follow Paola Antonelli's R&D salons from MoMA. I highly recommend it She brings together some excellent Speakers from different disciplines to address pressing topics that are relevant not only to cultural institutions But culture more broadly and they're all archived online And I encourage watching them if only to catch Paola's excellent introductions And most recently we're launching incubators and co-working spaces. Here's a pick of our own initiative new Inc As you know we at the new museum were one of the first museums to start a cultural incubator And I'm happy to say that we're no longer the only one and that each approach has offered something new and taken a unique spin and continued to experiment with the model and before I delve into the specifics of our program and how and why we started it and What we've learned I want to talk about what is an incubator and define the term because it means different things to different audiences and In the States especially I think it's taken on a very specific definition as it relates to startup culture and Silicon Valley and Other centers of technological innovation. So what is an incubator? and In some ways incubators in all their forms remain consistent to their original definition the term incubator first appeared in 1845 to describe an apparatus for hatching eggs by applying artificial heat Though the root term dates back to the mid 1600s It was a life-giving and life-sustaining apparatus that helped to nurture and care for hatchlings that were unable to care for themselves From chickens it evolved to perform the same function for human life in the late 1870s a French obstetrician named Dr. Stefan Tonya witnessed an incubator warming baby chickens at a Parisian zoo and sought to apply the technology to the problem of infant mortality From there the idea spread initially as a medical curiosity. It was presented at various expositions and world fairs such as a baby incubator exhibit pictured here in Berlin from 1896 and this particular exhibition Documented here via an engraving from the illustrated London news spawned many imitators including side shows at the Trans Mississippi Exposition the Chicago Century of Progress Exhibition the Pan American Exposition New York World's Fair and most famously at the Coney Island theme park In New York infant incubators were a popular Coney Island Sideshow attraction for decades Situated alongside the sword salt swallowers bearded ladies and Lionel the lion-faced man The exhibition ran from 1903 to the early 1940s and by the time that it closed in 1941 the exhibit Went on to a preemie ward at Cornell's New York Hospital Incidentally 1941 was also the year a young man named Joseph Mancuso was born in 1959 at the age of 18 Mancuso founded the Batavia Industrial Center in New York Which is reported to be the first business incubator Much like chicken and infant incubators before it the business incubator was designed to help fledgling businesses In this case light manufacturing businesses get off the ground and learn to be self sufficient by providing them Affordable shared workspace business training access to loans and other crucial administrative services Most new businesses fail in their first two years of operations So incubator programs were designed to help them get through this volatile and vulnerable period and to increase their Likelihood of survival and bring new jobs and economic growth to the towns The concept of providing business assistance services to early-stage companies didn't catch on right away And it wasn't until the 1980s that we saw this model proliferating in the 1980s There were about 12 business incubators in the US all of them in the industrial northeast Which had been hard hit by plant closures in the previous decade But the idea proliferated in the 90s and 2000s and as of October 2012 there were over 1,250 incubators in the US alone and about 7,000 incubators worldwide according to the International Business Innovation Association The incubation model has been adapted to meet a variety of needs from fostering Commercialization of university technologies to increasing employment in economically distressed communities To serving as an investment vehicle for venture capitalists at their core all business incubators Nurture the development of young companies helping them survive and grow during the startup period It may surprise some of you to learn that an overwhelming majority of incubators some 93% as of 2012 are Non-profit and are focused on economic development That is creating jobs by supporting and attracting new businesses to their towns and cities Incubators provide a variety of services that can include business training programs Affordable or free workspace Equipment discounted or free administrative services networking and access to funding and they can target and serve a wide variety of industries Such as technology which we all know which makes about 37% of incubators, but also food fashion Manufacturing medical entertainment and of course the arts most incubators about 54% are mixed use meaning that they serve multiple industries Incubators have business models of their own and are designed to be self-sustaining Most of them charge rent or other fees from the companies they serve They typically receive some startup funding and grants or corporate sponsorship But are expected to be self-sufficient in the long term who sponsors incubators about 32% of North American business incubators Are sponsored by academic institutions two to four-year colleges? 25% are sponsored by economic development organizations 16 by government entities four percent of Incubators are hybrids with more than one sponsor 4% are sponsored by for-profit entities like venture capitalist firms and The others don't have a sponsor or host organization Today due to the success and popularity of several high-profile American startup programs There's a bit of confusion around the term incubator People often associate it with programs like why combinator and tech stars because of their fame But those programs are actually Accelerators whereas an incubator will take very early stage companies that may still be in the concept idea phase and teach them how to put together a business plan prototype Do product development and understand their market? Accelerators look for companies that already have what's known as a minimum viable product They already built something tested it and have some traction going incubators are much longer term and typically Companies can stay for one to three years whereas Accelerators are usually a three-month program most importantly though incubators are typically nonprofit They usually charge rent from the companies that work out of their space But they don't often invest in the companies they work with Accelerators on the other hand usually provide some seed investments and take between six to eight percent equity from the companies They work with meaning that they become a co-owner They have a vested interest in seeing those companies succeed so that they can reap the return on that investment when the company grows Is acquired or goes for an IPO? This accelerator model emerged during the dot-com boom in the 90s and has really spread in the recent startup boom and Somewhere along the line the terms became somewhat conflated So when we said we were starting an incubator people thought we were starting an accelerator and they were very confused So why an incubator at a contemporary art museum good question As I hope you can tell from my brief overview incubators can take many forms and span many industries as Economic development initiatives they help breathe life into struggling neighborhoods cities communities or industries Our incubator is focused on the creative industry because that's our core community. That's who comes to the museum That's the the vitality of the city that we are part of and want to support And these programs are most effective when they are site specific and respond to the needs of a particular community Let me tell you a little bit about the new museum to contextualize this the new museum was founded in 1977 by Marsha Tucker who is interested in bringing the scholarly practices of museums to younger artists and their work She imagined an institution devoted to presenting Studying and interpreting contemporary art which hard to believe though it may be amidst the current frenzy for contemporary art was a novel idea in 1977 and here she's pictured with the first exhibition memory at sea space Which was in our first location at the new school? The new museum's mission is simple new art new ideas We are not a collecting institution which allows us to stay focused on the present and the future and to take greater risks Throughout our history. We've always been a radical Experimental institution that was among the first museums to show artists like Joan Jonas Bruce Nauman Hans Hawk and Jeff Koons who's pictured here at our Broadway storefront window gallery in 1980 We've also long embraced artists working with new technology here We have a show from rhizomes art base rhizome is one of our affiliates and partners They've been an affiliate of the museum since 2003 And they are digital arts focused institution that also does quite a bit of work and digital preservation So if you aren't already following their work, definitely look them up. They're also currently one of the anchor tenants at new ink in 2007 after 30 years of existence, we moved into our current home on the Bowery, which was our first building designed by the Pritzker Prize winning Japanese architects sauna and Then we promptly turned our brand new building over to artist Karsten Holler who drilled massive holes through the fourth third And second floor is to install his famous slide in 2011 in response to the recession in the global financial crisis We launched a new initiative called idea city Dedicated to exploring the role of culture in shaping the future of our cities The festival brings together artists architects urban planners activists and policymakers to collectively imagine and discuss how we might tackle some of the biggest challenges Facing our cities today and the years to come this last initiative is Important because although it predates my time at the new museum I think it is a major precedent that informed and influenced the eventual idea of new ink the very notion of a museum led incubator And I think it was a turning point where the museum started to understand its civic impact and to think of itself Not only as a public servant, but also as a citizen The new museum's director Lisa Phillips and deputy director Karen Wong became attuned to the ways in which our city was changing through their engagement with organizations like the Municipal Arts Society and the Center for an urban future They met the founders of companies like Kickstarter and we work a massive Co-working chain who were having a profound impact on the way the creative sector and many other sectors Were making and working today and their work with the idea city festival caused many to ask These conversations that you're hosting are great, but what are you doing in your own backyard and how are you serving your own community? So the museum said about Investigating and imagining what kind of impact we could have on the local community The museum had been fortunate enough to acquire the building next door in early 2008 Shortly after moving on to the Bowery So we had real estate to work with and the museum the building came with some tenants So we hadn't actually activated yet And so we said about imagining what we can do with this space that was different from our core exhibition activities They researched what was already happening in the creative sector in New York City to learn more about where the gaps were For instance a report from the Center for an Urban Future found that while New York graduates more art and design Graduates than any other US city many of them want who want to stay and build their businesses and careers here a Staggering 88 percent felt like they did not have the adequate business and entrepreneurial training in order to do so And that's a big problem because in today's shifting work culture Increasingly these skills matter more and more as the workforce and more importantly job Opportunities continue to move away from full-time employment to freelance and contract positions And this is being sold to many of us as a new source of freedom and empowerment in the digital age You know quit your day job do what you love set up an Etsy store and you know kickstart your project But you know these new opportunities also come with greater risks and liabilities that many of us Especially those who I think come from the creative sector are not incredibly well equipped to tackle It's not something that we learned in art school And there are few resources in place to help artists and designers develop these strategic skills And also to understand the way that business works both in the worlds of art and entrepreneurship We surveyed the landscape We studied and drew inspiration from existing programs that occupy similar spaces and set about building a community and a professional Development program geared towards creatives who are tackling entrepreneurial questions New Inc is not an artist residency although new museum does do residencies and will continue to do them And it's not a replacement for the residency It's not a co-working space because we do have a very rigorous professional development program And it is a curated space It's not a tech incubator in the sense that you know or I should say it's not a tech accelerator Because it's not trying to accelerate businesses Nor is it a university media lab Because we are not only trying to invent things although that's definitely something that we hope will happen but also to provide infrastructure and Logistics support to some of the things that have already been invented So we were able to raise over two million from our board of trustees and some government and philanthropic funding to build out an 8,000 square foot space on the second floor of 231 Bowery the building next door to the museum We also Assembled an incredible advisory council to help guide and steer us in this initiative Because we didn't know a whole lot about running an incubator program and the advisory council is a mix of People like Nancy Strickler who's the CEO of Kickstarter Fred dust who's a partner at IDO Andy Weissman who's a partner at Union Square Ventures a major capital firm and Thought leaders like John Maeda Kate Crawford our own Lauren Cornell What were our goals? I think first and foremost we aim to build community and I think that's where we've seen the most traction It's a very interdisciplinary community and I'll get more into that later To establish a new platform to support creative work Creative work that didn't necessarily fit into our existing purview, but that we felt was related to The greater scope of what we were interested in and talking about in spaces like idea city Investigate new models to support and sustain creative practice new models that were kind of Responding to the shifting economic and also information age infrastructure Expand our impact through collaborations with civic and industry partners We've done a few small collaborations with companies like Microsoft Connect But and we're about to announce a big partnership with Bell Labs Which for those of you who don't know has had a historic Legacy of supporting artists and technology initiatives And to also catalyze the growth and development of New York City's creative economy I want to pause for a moment and kind of talk about what I mean by the creative economy These are some of what falls under this category of the creative industries and In your cities, I imagine as in ours People are looking at what the impact of the creative economy is how does culture drive? business tourism Create new jobs. What does it do? And I should add that all of these categories In some way shape or form have been represented at new ink in the form of new Businesses independent artists or designers who are working in these spaces and disciplines This is just a snapshot of Some stats about the creative economy in the US, but also in Europe and Asia Just to give you a sense of its impact and scale and increasingly, you know We're looking at these things to try and understand What is the need and the opportunity and the obligation of programs like ours which are looking at this kind of cross-section of the arts? the city and Small business development economic development And why does it matter? I think we tend to associate innovation and Economic development with big business with the technology sector But as one of our advisors John Mayetta likes to say innovation doesn't just come from Maths and sciences and new chemicals and equations it comes from a human place It comes from human experiences and I think the arts do that better than anyone else I think artists and designers and creative thinkers. They're Divergent thinkers they explored a wider range of possibilities and that Allows them to come up with ideas that someone who's typically focused on the end product the bottom line May not allow themselves to venture and explore So the program what is it that we are actually doing a Couple of nuts and bolts New ink has 40 full-time and 40 part-time members many of these are teams the largest team I think currently is about four or five We have several of that size and we also have the majority of them are probably about teams of two as well as many individuals some of whom are artists and dancers and musicians and We have two anchor tenants as I mentioned Rhizome is one of them and the other is Columbia University's Graduate School of Architecture Planning and Preservation Who run kind of an incubator within our incubator where they select about 20? Post-graduates who have come out of their school and who are launching new studios and businesses and publications and things like that We do have a business model. We are self-sustaining So like a co-working space and like traditional incubators our members pay six hundred dollars a month for a full-time membership and 350 a month for a part-time membership and this is pretty consistent with what they might pay out of we work Or another co-working space Our members retain a hundred percent of their intellectual property their ideas are entirely their own We do not have a stake to it And we offer a weekly professional development programs Mentorship program wherein we pair our members with a dedicated mentor shared equipment access to tools like 3d printers a laser cutter cameras projectors Office hours with new ink staff and new museum staff as well as some outside experts And we have a team of five support staff and are growing a Snapshot of what our community looks like as we're entering into our third year Diversity has been really important for us and has been one of the things that we've looked at from the beginning We often kind of started out talking about cognitive diversity and The value of interdisciplinary environments as being generative spaces for new ideas new ways of thinking and working and Likewise for collaboration, but we've also made sure that our space is inclusive and is Allowing for women and people of color in communities that may not Have the means to participate in a program like ours or may kind of self-select out of these types of programs That they have access to the space as well and We've seen an uptick in the caliber of applicants This year. We also have a strong social impact social justice and education focus I attribute that in part due to the uptick in the number of women and people of color members but also in to the political climate as well and About 40% of our members receive some sort of financial assistance The bulk of this goes to support diversity initiatives in the space and as you can see also Our community is quite a split in terms of the types of business models So we do have individual artists some design studios that work with clients Startups that are building a digital or physical product as well as nonprofits Some of the sectors that we're currently looking at our virtual reality Artificial intelligence immersive theater and interactive storytelling responsive architecture These I think you know vary from year to year Some of them are Directed by calls that we pull out that say, you know, we're really interested in artificial intelligence And what it's going to mean for the creative sector We're looking for projects in this space and some of it like for instance education and we also have a strong Contingent of groups this year addressing accessibility and disability and this was something that we saw happening in the application pool So sometimes trends are revealed to us I think the the desire to make it so interdisciplinary is really rooted in this belief of creative ecosystems and wanting to build a space Where we can create a network that goes on to serve our core community our members after they leave here What we've seen is a lot of people working together Developing new initiatives new partnerships Hiring one another and each person in the cohort is essentially a node into an even broader network within New York City so if I'm a musician and I'm working on New performance piece and I am developing say a set design I might collaborate with the architect sitting next to me or the fashion designer for the costumes or the software programmer to have some sort of projection mapping happening so this type of Ecosystem environment was something that was really intentional and part of the way that we curate the space The space as I mentioned is very collaborative and we encourage this through the programs that we run through community building initiatives through social activities And through facilitation on behalf of the staff in this piece of you know How do we bring people together create a cohesive community culture with a group as large as ours is one of the pieces that I think has been evolving over the past three years The program design has also been I think the biggest area that has evolved and that we've been iterating on because in starting a program like this, it's not enough to simply look at a business Curriculum or a lean startup methodology and adapt it for this type of space most of those Practices and case studies and even just the language itself really doesn't translate people look at you and be very confused about What you mean when you say minimum viable product? and One of the things that we've really had to do is Figure out how to design a program that cuts across many of these different sectors and ways of working This is a snapshot of what a typical month looks like for us We have different types of things happening, but there's a lot going on all the time We hold two demo days One at the midway point six month mark and one at the 12 month mark Our program lasts a year and this is an opportunity for our members to present their work to the public Receive feedback and they present before a curated audience that includes Potential funders like venture capitalists or philanthropists, but also curators creative directors influencers from the art tech and business worlds We at the end of the year also do a showcase This is where we present some of the more experiential projects from the cohort and so In our first year the showcase was incredible because of the eight projects that we presented all of them were collaborations that emerged from the community and we've also started running a conference on Virtual reality and augmented reality because so many of our community members were Investigating these spaces So really quick. I just want to go over a couple of case studies about what we've seen over the past Two two and a half years now So over the past two years, we've incubated 80 new ventures and that includes individuals as well as companies of up to 11 people 160 new jobs created in that process And collectively they've raised over 8 million in capital Not everyone was pursuing Fundraising but that includes grants it includes crowdfunding it includes VC funding and angel funding So who were some of these companies and individuals and what did they work on? One common theme that we see at new ink and that I think was an inspiration for new ink is this idea of the artist as an inventor in this case this company depth kit they Hacked together standard SLR camera and a Microsoft connect to create a new form of filmmaking a volumetric filmmaking tool or it's basically using the depth data from a connect And layering the image data from an SLR to create this 3d film And they created this for themselves because they were artists and filmmakers and they were using it in their own work They released it open source it Attracted a lot of attention and got a ton of traction Eminem even used it in a music video and they received a lot of inquiries from the visual effects industry and many people working in VR for a Professional version of this tool and these guys really Had an identity crisis in the program because they saw themselves as artists and all of a sudden They were exploring this idea of potentially starting a company And pursuing venture capital to develop this professional tool At the end of the first year they left thinking they were going to continue as artists Six months later they came back to us and they said you know what we're gonna do. We're gonna build a company We're gonna raise some funding. Can you connect us to some VCs and? They just closed a round of a million dollar funding A different example is a company called monograph Which is a platform that makes it easy for digital creators of all kinds to construct Licenses for the commercial use of their digital work. It's built using the blockchain So for those of you who attended Eric's keynote yesterday, it's that encryption technology and It was similarly created by an artist artist who's been working with digital media for almost 20 years His work is in the Whitney and the MoMA and the Guggenheim and he has been very frustrated at the fact that Collectors don't view digital work with the same kind of Seriousness that they view you know a painting or a sculpture or photograph something that's physical and tangible And you know he came up with this idea of using the blockchain chain to track the provenance and the Authentication of ownership of these digital works And the idea has evolved and expanded since then but the company has grown They were with us for two years and they're at I think 10 staff now And have moved out to another space Print all over me is another company that was with us for two years. It is a fashion platform It's essentially designed to democratize the creative act of designing your own clothes It's a platform where you can go and upload any image Whether it's one of your own design or something that you found on tumblr and create custom garments or accessories At the time I last checked they had eight million designs uploaded onto their site And growing they're really interesting. It's a brother and sister duo and they're incredibly creative They've gotten to a point with this company where it's kind of working You know pretty smoothly. They even own their own manufacturing and have relocated it from China to Georgia because they're very committed to sustainability But in their second year at New Inc They launched a second company because they're just overachievers And This company Cocoa is Essentially an easy tool to create 3d environments With the craze around VR and AR the barriers to entry are still quite high You need to learn how to 3d model you need to learn how to use Unity or even if you're doing 360 video you still need to stitch together six video streams from your GoPro Or use one of the new fangled Samsung cameras But in this start-up they essentially created the drag-and-drop Interface tool to create these 3d environments that you can view cross platform You can view it in your browser on your phone in an oculus rift or a Google Glass Or wait not Google Glass Google Cardboard VR is a trend at New Inc right now This is a different group, which is a content studio They're filmmakers they created a virtual reality film called giant which was a sensation at Sundance last year It's a story about a family that's stuck in the makeshift Bomb shelter in their basement and they can't leave they waited too long to leave And they're telling their young child the story of a giant stomping overhead as Bombs are exploding. It's a very emotional tale the director Grew up in Serbia and so it's a very personal story as well and Yeah, it's been one of the most kind of written about and and lauded virtual reality Pieces they're currently working on their second story, which was also just accepted to Sundance Rachel Rossin is a visual artist who's a painter but also works with virtual reality I believe it was Emily from from Curio Or not Curio, but who is showing the tilt brush video yesterday and Rachel is the artist in that video actually And her work is just pure art, you know She's experimenting with this new technology from a completely different left of center Perspective than what you typically see She's playing with themes like gravity and physics and time Really kind of investigating the boundaries of this new tool in ways that People that are I think are coming from the gaming or film world are not doing quite so much And I think this is one of the reasons why it's important to keep artists in the mix and spaces like this We have several studios that are exploring things like interactive sound and Exhibition design. This is one studio Dave and Gabe that has again been very successful They were awarded to can lions at can this past July Another company this one is called Artifon. It is a digital music instrument It's essentially an instrument that you can play like a guitar like a violin like a cello like a drum pad like a piano It's designed to make Music really accessible for beginners so you can pick it up and play something that's gonna sound fantastic But also it's going to scale with you as you grow So a professional musician can pick this up and use it to compose, you know on the road on the go and This year we have started incubating museums miniature museums This is a project called micro museums It is a mobile museum It's about six feet high by three feet wide about the size of say a vending machine and features 15 exhibitions or exhibits and They collaborated with 35 scientists on this first museum, so it's quite rigorous In its research and these are designed to go to say outer borough schools But also to places like the DMV or hospital waiting rooms That they have termed kind of dehumanized zones Education is a big theme this year as I mentioned this is an initiative called power plant Which is a digital art school an artist runs school that is located in Bushwick and Provides free digital art classes to teens They're a nonprofit. They're trying to understand how to be Sustainable how to work with a board and these are things that we can help them with because we are we have some expertise in that We also work with artists disability is a focus this year as well This is Alice Shepard. She is a wheelchair-based dancer and she is working on a new performance and building this system of ramps that she wants to disseminate open source into different spaces the project looks at the aesthetics of differently abled bodies Explores new forms of movement and at new Inc. She's working on the kind of administrative side of how to Develop a touring production how to fund finance this project and how to build a team around it You know all of these things that are kind of the invisible Aspects of producing work of this nature and also the the marketing and storytelling aspect of this is equally important because for her It is very much an advocacy project And the last project I'll show is a project called elia life technology Which is an initiative to redesign Braille and this is a major initiative They've received two million dollars in funding from the National Institute of Health and They're trying to design a more intuitive Braille That's based on the kind of visual design of the Roman alphabet because apparently The majority of visually impaired folks Actually can't read Braille It's very difficult to learn it's very difficult to differentiate between letter forms, especially when they're in a sentence and basing it on the letter form of the Roman alphabet makes it easier for people to Learn it because most people Used to be able to read at some point They no longer have literacy because of their visual impairment, but they can kind of more easily identify This the letter forms in this design because they have a reference point already So whereas typical Braille it might take someone 12 months to learn This one is about three months And they're currently working with industry partner hp to develop printers to start to put them into workplaces Classrooms and other spaces to disseminate this new form of Braille and Finally, I will just say I think our initiative is about Re-envisioning the incubator model to Foster cultural value not just capital value and to reimagine the museum as a space that helps Generate and support new ideas that I think benefit the cultural sector, but also Our cities more broadly And I'm excited to see how this idea gets Interpreted in different ways and site specific ways in other institutions as it has been here at Taipapa with the mohuki initiative Thank you so much for your time So I was just wondering I think we've got a few minutes where we can throw a few cash questions at If you're feeling so inclined before you run off too far Does anybody got any questions? I was a little bit bowled away there by the kind of endless stream of amazing things coming out of there It's fantastic. Has anybody got any questions from the audience you'd like to discuss? If so, I can't quite see to be honest. There's no hands going up Adrian down the front. Can we get a microphone down the front here? Thanks The idea of cultural value is obviously a really big thing. That's the you know the slide that really got me Um, how do you measure it? You know, it's something that we're grappling with now because we're trying to you know think about working in ways that Well, we have to um, I do start to measure some of these impacts But we're using models that are designed for startups and things like that which is primarily based on finance And so we're grappling with the various models that we could look at But do you have a model that you you pitch to the participants or are they coming up with their own or? To the participants, um, I don't know that we have a model that we pitch to participants but in terms of How do you measure cultural value? I mean, it's a really big tough question. I don't know that we've cracked it yet We you know, we do look at some of the typical Economic development factors like the jobs created the number of funding raised, but we're also looking at Kind of peer recognition, right? You know are the artists that are coming out of our program Getting great residencies and awards of distinction are some of the studios getting, um, you know, great portfolio clients and awards of distinction in their industry As far as the nonprofits go, you know, are they still around, you know, and I think time is really The main metric, you know, are these initiatives around in five years in ten years? And if they're not, um, that may be okay, too And where have the founders of these initiatives gone, you know, um, it's as much about creating leaders in the community as it is about creating, uh viable ventures and I think as far as cultural value goes a big metric for me personally is about relationships um between the various, uh Companies and and individuals at New Inc. Um, how do they? Build and sustain their relationships during their time here, but also after they leave And their relationship with the museum and with New Inc after that In our panel earlier Seb Mentioned the alumni effect and that's something that is I think really important for us as well to to create Ever-expanding Community around us as a museum and as this incubator program anyone else The microphone didn't have to go very far Kia ora, um, thank you for your presentation. I was interested in that You talked about the some of the new, uh Projects you're supporting. I'm having more of a social justice bench This this time and I I wondered I may have missed it, but to what extent does New Inc Set some themes or sets of priorities with which it It makes decisions about which which projects to support or not or do those themes just kind of come through naturally Sorry, can you Freeze that one more time to what extent does it is it conscious or is it? Yeah? Yeah, do you guys sort of set a program around certain themes? Yeah, or do they just sort of come through? Sort of naturally. Yeah, it's funny because When we were first writing the kind of objectives of the program and the values of the program Social impact was one of the terms that we put in there and we kind of take it out We really I think we were uh, you know, it's such a weighted term these days And we were like, oh, maybe we don't want to like put that out at first And so for us, it's very much been a process of discovery about what feels right and seeing the kind of initiatives that we feel like we can impact That we are proud to say we supported And thinking about what kind of impact they're going to have in the world after they leave our space And so it was interesting to kind of come back around to that in our third year in a much more Committed way as opposed to, you know, maybe Having to pull back from it if we felt like it wasn't the right focus, but ultimately I think We are excited about maintaining that as a continuous thread I don't think that it is a criteria For the program, but it is definitely something that we want to continue to develop and cultivate more of in the space. Yeah Yeah Good um The you talked a bit about um the location that you're in being incredibly important and you're also At a slightly wider level within a city that has an amazing density of creative people and creative money compared to other places What do you think best generalizes from your experiences to I guess the rest of us Mm-hmm. Yeah, um, we talked a little bit about this as well in our last panel. I wish I had that slide. Um So real estate, uh, is challenging in new york and uh being able to offer space Is one of the main I think points of attraction and the proximity to the museum is a main point of attraction, but I think um any museum, uh Acts as a credentializer. I think the new museum's reputation and what uh the affiliation With the museum means for these creative ventures is not to be overlooked and I would say in Some ways it's even more important than the physical space. Um I think when I mentioned that all of these initiatives should be site specific um, a big part of it is looking at what your Um, what type of community you want to serve how it relates to your institution and your institution's mission Um, as well as what that community needs What is the value add that only you can provide that is something that's missing from the local Uh ecosystem and for us, you know when I showed that slide about artist residencies and co-working spaces and tech incubators and media labs um, that sweet spot for us became apparent as an area that We felt like we could uniquely fill Based on some of the things that we saw were lacking And the people who felt like they didn't neatly fit or belong into these existing programs um, the other thing that you know from a funding perspective that I think is really interesting is that um This initiative has Uh allowed us to connect with different funders who may not be typical funders of the museum um, and uh, that has allowed us, uh, for instance, you know for um The some of the diversity scholarships that we do at new Inc. Um Kate spade and company foundation had a fund specifically to support women entrepreneurs and women creatives But women entrepreneurs and so they Underwrote 10 women fellows in our space and that's something that we wouldn't have Had access to with any of our existing programs One more. All right. Nope anyone. Okay. All right. Thank you