This week, Greta Thunberg, the Swedish teenager, stole the show at the United Nations General Assembly. Thanks to her, climate change is on the minds of the world. I was invited to discuss climate change action on the BBC World Service this month and we explored the role of activists like Thunberg, indigenous people, and technology pioneers like Elon Musk.
With visible rage, Thunberg described the urgency of action in stark terms on Monday.
”People are suffering, people are dying, entire ecosystems are collapsing. We are in the beginning of a mass extinction and all you can talk about is money and fairytales of eternal economic growth.”
Then Thunberg made a passionate plea to each one of us, especially political leaders, to examine our consciences.
“How dare you continue to look away? The eyes of all future generations are upon you. And if you choose to fail us, I say: We will never forgive you.”
Greta Thunberg’s fury was evident to everyone who watched her, but she ended on a positive note:
“Right here, right now is where we draw the line. The world is waking up. And change is coming, whether you like it or not.”
BBC host, Jamie Robertson led a lively discussion exploring the urgency of climate change action and we were joined by ABC Australia’s Clare Negus. I took the opportunity to praise Thunberg’s tenacity.
The program started with a soulful report by the BBC’s Frey Lindsay. He reported on a gathering of indigenous community leaders from around the world who met at University College London to listen, exchange ideas and build solidarity in the fight against environmental degradation and climate change.
Listen to the podcast at the BBC World Service (environmental discussion starts at 10:40)
Here’s a transcript of conversation highlights (edited for length and clarity):
Jamie Robertson: In California, you’re very much on the front line, we think of the wildfires…do indigenous people have a role to play here?
Alison van Diggelen: It’s important for us in California, and around the world, to listen to the indigenous people. What we do over the next ten to twenty years is going to determine the fate of humanity. We need to remember environmentalist, John Muir, who said:
“When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the universe.”
Technology plays a role in this by increasing transparency. Almost everyone has a mobile phone (and can take photos of environmental abuses), so multinationals can’t get away with what they used to.
Jamie Robertson: How high up the news agenda are questions about environmental problems and climate change?
Alison van Diggelen: Greta Thunberg, bless her heart, is keeping it on our agenda, but I wish it were higher. Looking at the Democratic Party Presidential debates, climate change was there, but I wish we could raise the issue more. People are concerned about what’s impacting them on a daily basis. There’s not enough of a long term view. We need more people like David Attenborough (and Greta Thunberg and Bill McKibben) speaking up for the environment.
Jamie Robertson: Clare ?
Clare Negas: It’s a major criticism of ABC Australia that we do too much on climate change and not enough on cost of living stories!
Jamie Robertson: I want to take the conversation on to the Frankfurt Motor Show and the extraordinary confrontation between the “Lords” of the auto industry and ordinary citizens worried about climate change, worried about cars and what they’re doing to the environment.
Alison, you’re in California at the forefront in the development of electric vehicles and things which could actually make a difference. Is there a sense of optimism that these things will work?
Alison van Diggelen: Absolutely. California is where Elon Musk jumpstarted this electric vehicle revolution. Tesla is doing phenomenally well. They’re due to sell about half a million electric cars this year. California is a state that is doing all it can to boost the sales of electric vehicles (EVs). It accounts for half of all U.S. sales of EVs thanks to rebates and state government policies. It has a goal of getting 5 million EVs on the road by 2030 and it does things like fast tracking permissions for charging infrastructure; that’s a key part of making EVs the number one form of transport.
Elon Musk has predicted that within 10 years, the majority of cars produced will be electric. Others like Morgan Stanley say it’s more like 20 years. It may be somewhere in the middle.
Jamie Robertson: Clare, do you have such faith?
Clare Negas: I do! I think globally electric cars will be the future. In Australia it’ll be a bigger battle because there is such a cultural identity around petrol and diesel fueled engines. We’re a strong car culture and that will continue. A few years ago, we drove a Tesla hundreds of kms to prove it wouldn’t run out of energy. There were no problems. Check out Clare’s fascinating report here.
End of Transcript
Extra: The program included a discussion about the college admissions scandal and I made a shout out to the hard working team and students at Breakthrough Silicon Valley who arguably have the most to lose. Their leader John Hiester recently wrote a moving oped about his outrage at cheaters like Felicity Huffman.
Find out more about clean tech and technology’s role in climate action at Fresh Dialogues.
Last week, I was invited to join the BBC World Service program “Business Matters” to discuss business ethics and the trade war. To give a flavor of the Silicon Valley zeitgeist, I shared highlights of my interview with Scott Kupor, a prominent venture capitalist (VC), and author of the book, “Secrets of Sand Hill Road.”
On the never ending drama of the US/China trade war, I came up with an apt way of describing Trump’s strategy: “Like a bull in a China shop.” (Listen at 15:45 in the BBC podcast)
This view was bolstered, just four days later, when we saw the biggest drop in the Dow Jones all year, and experts blamed it on Trump’s escalation of trade tensions. Headlines like this one are now common: Have U.S. Tariffs backfired? I won’t be surprised if an impulsive tweet from Trump plunges the world economy into recession.
But meantime, here’s a transcript of my conversation with the BBC’s Fergus Nicoll and author Jasper Kim in Seoul. It’s been edited (and italicized) for length and clarity.
Fergus Nicoll: Silicon Valley has had its fair share of “fake it till you make it” stories, would-be billionaire entrepreneurs who talk a great game and acquire a loyal and admiring following, then they go bust and sometimes go to jail. And it’s not just the tech sector. It’s fair to say the chance of hearing unvarnished, unpartisan truth from any given politician might be lowish. Alison, who’ve you been discussing ethical behavior with?
Alison van Diggelen: I had a great discussion recently with VC Scott Kupor…We talked about Facebook’s mantra of “moving fast and breaking things” and he feels the rules are different for small startups which have limited impact. He calls them “the pirates.”
I asked him: Are you saying it’s OK to be a pirate in the early stages of a startup?
Scott Kupor: It depends on what pirate means (audience laughter).
Fraud and misleading people is clearly not right. But the idea that you might enter into a market where you’re not exactly sure what the product should look like, you might have a theory on what your regulatory structure is, but you’re not 100% sure.
[Photo credit:Sarah Gonzalez/Commonwealth Club]
I’ll give you a great example: we’re investors in Airbnb and Lyft. These companies probably couldn’t have been successful if they’d asked for permission every time they went into a new market. You could argue that was unethical: They should’ve got permission first. The reality is, they said: we’re going to go into a new market, we believe we have a defensible theory that why what we’re doing is appropriate from a regulatory perspective, but we also know we’re likely to get challenged on that. But over time, if a consumer utility is big enough, there is a way to deal with these issues. So that’s my definition of a pirate: I think that’s reasonable acceptable behavior. Fraud and misleading people is not acceptable behavior.
Alison van Diggelen: In order to create a startup that’s potentially going to change the world, you have to break some rules and the question is: which rules? You have to question the status quo. Theranos –– the blood testing company that famously imploded last year and the CEO has been charged with fraud –– is a great example of going too far, going to the dark side. One of the Theranos whistleblowers, Tyler Schulz, has started a nonprofit called Ethics in Entrepreneurship to teach ethics, get the basics down.
This is why I asked Scott Kupor about ethics. VCs work closely with startups (they often join their board of directors) and I wanted to hold his feet to the fire and say: You (and your colleagues) have a responsibility to make sure your entrepreneurs are thinking about ethics. It’s one thing to be a pirate in the early days, but at some point you have to grow up and be like the navy and play according to the rules and respect the nation’s laws.
Fergus Nicoll: Do you think these internal debates translate across Asia in terms of startups, Jasper? For example, startups in Vietnam saying: we think we’ve got a space in the market, but we’ll have to break the rules to get there, then grow…and then we’ll behave?
Jasper Kim: There are some minute cultural nuances, but similarities. If you look at Steve Jobs. His famous quote is:
“All the great ideas were stolen.”
If you look at Apple in the early days: they flew a pirate flag and were unabashed by the fact that they basically ripped off or stole ideas from here and there. The genius of it was connecting different technologies that existed before, like the touch screen, with ATM machines, like the wheel on the iPod, and use that to make genius products like the iPhone.
What is ethical? That’s a big question. Kupor’s defense is that it’s all for consumer utilitarianism, but there’s also the other side of what’s ethical and that’s Immanuel Kant, and his theory of Categorical Imperative. You have to have certain values as inputs, you shouldn’t just deal with outcomes to justify your behavior.
Of course, the trade war and piracy (of IP) are connected at the core, but that’s a discussion for another day…
The BBC program aired live on August 1, 2019 and my conversation with Scott Kupor took place in front of a live audience at the Commonwealth Club in Silicon Valley on June 10, 2019.
This month, the modern space race is really firing up. Three of the world’s most exciting entrepreneurs are vying for supremacy in space exploration: Elon Musk of SpaceX, Jeff Bezos of Blue Origin and Richard Branson of Virgin Galactic.
Last week, I joined Rob Young on the BBC World Service to explore: who’s most likely to win today’s space race; and what’s motivating them?
Richard Branson is focused on taking tourists into space. His Virgin Galactic company offers sub-orbital space flight for a cool $250,000 a ticket. He plans to be one of Virgin’s first “citizen astronauts” later this year.
Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos have much more ambitious goals – to establish colonies in space. But that’s where their missions diverge: Bezos wants to create a colony on the moon and on multiple giant space stations orbiting the Earth. He just released detailed plans for Blue Origin’s “Lunar Lander.”
“We will go back to the moon,” Bezos says, “This time to stay!”
But Musk has even loftier goals. He famously told me, “I want to die on Mars, just not on impact!”
Musk envisions a thriving colony on Mars. To fund that mission, he has created a booming SpaceX business, launching private satellites into space, as well as offering rocket-courier service to the International Space Station. But Musk is also vying for a slice of the Trillion dollar internet connection business.
This month, SpaceX’s plans to launch its first 60 satellites in the Starlink mission to bring fast internet connection to billions of the world’s unserved population. Bullish as ever, Musk’s ultimate plan is for 12,000 satellites in low earth orbit.
Rival, OneWeb, backed by Richard Branson has more modest plans for a 600 satellite constellation. The race is on!
The BBC’s Rob Young started by asking my fellow guest, Liz Gwynn, Prime 7 TV Anchor (from Wagga Wagga, Australia) if she’d take up Richard Branson’s invitation to go for a ride on Virgin Galactic’s VSS Unity. Her answer made me chuckle!
Here’s a transcript of some of our conversation:
Rob Young: Which of the billionaires will win this space race?
Alison van Diggelen: I’d put money on Elon Musk. He’s defied naysayers time and time again. His company – SpaceX – has pioneered reusable rockets which has driven down the cost by a factor of four.
This summer, they plan to be the first private company to launch astronauts to the International Space Station. Previously, it’s just been superpowers.
Rob Young: Is it a serious business, or just bragging rights?
Alison van Diggelen: Elon Musk has had a lifetime ambition. He’s famously said: I want to die on Mars. Just not on impact!
He’s doing it for the adventure, but also as an inspirational objective, and something that can make humans a multi-planetary species. It’s a big dream, a big vision.
***
Find out more
Our BBC conversation moved on to Clean Energy and California’s ambitious goals to decarbonize its energy sources. Listen to the BBC World Service @42:30 when we discuss Governor Gavin Newsom and his bold stance on clean energy.
Perhaps you weren’t shocked by the college applications scandal that recently broke in the United States? I must confess, I was deeply upset because it reveals a low tide mark in our society’s ethics today and underlines the absence of integrity in so many people’s lives. But I’m also saddened because “Operation Varsity Blues” has wider implications for our colleges and our communities. Fresh Dialogues host, Alison van Diggelen reports for the BBC World Service.
(Photo credit above: Daniel Gaines Photography via Breakthrough Silicon Valley)
The stories of college applications doctored with photo-shopped pictures of athletes; blatant bribery and cheating on SAT scores made my blood boil. So I was delighted to have the opportunity to share my views on the BBC World Service.
These rich elites – venture capitalists, actors and prominent business people – confused their privilege for merit; and by cheating they crushed the hopes and dreams of the least fortunate and most deserving students in our communities.
The BBC’s Fergus Nicoll asked me about the reputation damage to schools and I shared an interview I did recently with former President of Stanford University, John Hennessy. At the time, he was outraged at colleges “debasing themselves” and forgetting their values in the pursuit of athletes over academics. Watch the video (@3:00): Hennessy is known for his tact, but here, his anger is palpable.
Previous commentators on the BBC program, including Stephanie Studer of the Economist in China, and Kay Hymowitz of the City Journal in New York, talked about the destruction of meritocracy. That’s definitely under threat, both here and around the world. But who’ll suffer most from this scandal?
The hard working students and families from less advantaged communities. Like the inspiring students at Breakthrough Silicon Valley, a nonprofit here in California, that works to mentor and nurture first generation immigrants to achieve their college dreams. For them, it’s a double whammy: First: The opportunity cost. For every rich kid who got into college through a side door, there’s a student who worked like a Trojan to get the scores necessary to win a place, and lost out. But it’s more than that: What will this scandal do to the aspirations of these students and families who feel that the playing fieldjust got even steeper? And more broadly, how will our communities suffer if these well deserving youth lose out on taking their shot at a better future? The opportunity cost is both acute and enduring, both personal and wide ranging.
Is it too much to hope that colleges and communities can return to decent values and bring ethics back from its long holiday?
We should all be outraged when such revered institutions fail our society by creating shortcuts for those with wealth and privilege when they could be a powerful force for equity in our society.
Certainly, the staff and students of Breakthrough Silicon Valley are frustrated. As Diana, a high school junior, put it, “I’m sad but not shocked. I’ve always known that there are people who play the system, it just hurts to have this out there when I’m working so hard to get my shot.”
For the past five years, my team has cheered Diana on as she works incredibly hard to get to college. She grew up in a family that grapples with the constant stress of financial instability. They got home internet access just last month, and few in her community have gone to college, but Diana is blazing an impressive path. She has a 4.29 GPA while enrolled in the most rigorous courses her district offers. She founded a community service club and helps facilitate Breakthrough’s after-school program for 7th graders. She is proud of her community service, her persistence, and her identity as a strong Mexican-American woman. Diana is not just “qualified” to attend college, she is ready to lead when she gets there.
When colleges reinforce class divisions through legacy admissions and bend to the will of deep pockets, they miss out on students like Diana. Read more here. (NB: Names have been changed to protect student privacy)
Have you ever considered the benefits of fasting, but feared the challenges? Here in Silicon Valley, Sumaya Kazi is the poster child for intermittent fasting, a new trend in weight control that’s popular among the tech set. Intermittent fasting involves abstaining from food anywhere from sixteen hours to several days – with “normal” eating resumed in between. Enthusiasts say the health benefits extend far beyond weight loss. The BBC’s Health Check team sent Alison van Diggelen to explore the evidence.
“The effects were almost immediate for me: the weight started melting off really early on… I lost about 50 lbs over the first 7 1/2 months.” Sumaya Kazi
Here’s a transcript of my report (edited for length and clarity):
Alison van Diggelen: When 36-year old Sumaya Kazi launched her tech startup in 2010, the long hours, constant traveling and too much eating-out made her pack on the pounds. At over 200 lbs (90 kg), she tried to lose weight by exercising compulsively, trying weightloss groups, and doing weekly meal planning.
Sumaya Kazi: None of them stuck with me or showed me enough progress to stick with it. None of them felt like a lifestyle. When I found IF, it absolutely did for me.
Alison van Diggelen: For Kazi, fasting offered quick results:
Sumaya Kazi: The effects were almost immediate for me: the weight started melting off really early on, to my surprise, because I wasn’t working out at the time. I lost about 50 lbs over the first 7 1/2 months.
Alison van Diggelen: It was a BBC television documentary about fasting that convinced her to give it a try. Research from Johns Hopkins University in animals and humans suggested that fasting could enhance brain function and might evenhelp protect against cancer, strokes and degenerative diseases like Alzheimer’s.
Fasting advocates claim it can reduce weight, improve blood sugar,can “re-set” the metabolism, boosts the immunesystem andcan even slow down aging. So what was Kazi’s personal experience?
Sumaya Kazi: I no longer had issues with high blood pressure. I was pre-diabetic early on and no longer have those issues. I no longer have issues of sleep apnea. Also I have more energy, I’m more productive, I feel more focused, I feel food tastes better.
Alison van Diggelen: So what does it involve? Kazi points out that the most popular form of intermittent fasting – or IF – is called “16-8.” That’s 16 hours of fasting followed by 8 hours of eating. Simply cutting out breakfast and eating an early dinner can accomplish that.
But Kazi prefers “alternate day” fasting. For her, Monday, Wednesday and Friday are fast days. The other days she calls “feast days.” This being Silicon Valley, she frames it in binary terms:
Sumaya Kazi:It’s almost like an on-off switch: I know when I should be eating, I know when I should be feasting. It keeps it simple for me. IF isn’t a magic pill. It works when you put it to work. It’s not a diet, it’s not about WHAT you eat, it’s about WHEN you eat. …
Alison van Diggelen: But how does it compare to other weight loss regimens? And are its claims backed up by research?
A professor of nutrition at the University of Illinois at Chicago recently completed a fasting study with 28 obese patients and found that – like traditional diets – the 16-8 fast could offer an effective method for losing weight – but cautioned that longer-term, large-scale controlled trials are needed.
Santa Clara University Prof Heidi Lidtke, Nutritionist explains fasting for the BBC. Photo by Alison van Diggelen, Fresh Dialogues
I went to a coffee shop in a local bookstore to chat with a nutrition expert, Professor Heidi Lidtke.
Alison van Diggelen: Heidi and I assess the vast array of diet books on the bookstore walls. It’s quite overwhelming.
Heidi Lidtke: What I tell my students is: we should eat real food, mostly plants, not too much and we should enjoy what we eat.
Heidi is an adjunct professor at Santa Clara University in Silicon Valley.
Heidi Lidtke: The most exciting research has been done in yeast and it shows that cancer in yeast can be totally stopped…the yeast cells are healthy and the cancer cells die after chemo and fasting. But it’s yeast and humans are NOT yeast. I don’t know how we can translate single cell organisms (yeast) to multi cell organisms – humans.
Alison van Diggelen:So it would be a stretch to say IF can cure cancer?
Heidi Lidtke:There are a lot of studies in rats and mice…It has cured and totally reversed diabetes in rats, not humans…But it’s not totally transferable, right?
Alison van Diggelen: What about studies on humans and diabetes?
Heidi Lidtke: There have been some studies on some of precursors, sugar levels and insulin levels – those can go down in the first couple of months of IF. But all human studies have been small – 35 people….it’s hard to say 35 Turkish people are the same as 35 Americans… It’s hard to extrapolate from the research.
Alison van Diggelen:What would be required to convince scientists, to show this causal connection?
Heidi Lidtke: There would need to be multiple studies in multiple population groups…We’re in the process of doing that, but it takes time.
Alison van Diggelen: But Lidtke remains skeptical, especially about the cancer claimswhich could influence people when they’re feeling vulnerable.
Heidi Lidtke: My initial reaction? Interesting…I have concerns for some people at risk…people are forgoing scientifically validated treatment…that people are going to fast instead of getting chemo…I have concerns.
Alison van Diggelen: Lidtke also points out that fasting is not for everyone – and could be dangerous for those with eating disorders (like anorexia or bulimia). And she recommends discussing it witha doctor before trying it.
Heidi Lidtke: For someone who’s got disordered eating it just feeds into that and gives them a framework.
Alison van Diggelen: So how does IF compare to other diets?
Heidi Lidtke: The research on IF is really slim and then research comparisons are even slimmer. It’s hard to do comparisons. The diet that works is the one you stick to. If you’re able to stick and keep the weight off, then that’s the one that works.
Alison van Diggelen: Lidtke emphasizes that there’s no diet that works for everyone and scientific research is limited, but she does single out the “DASH” diet which has been studied by the National Institutes of Health and is recommended by the US Dept of Agriculture in its nutrition guidelines. It’s rich in fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and low-fat dairy foods; and limited in sweetened foods and drinks, red meat, and fatsand has been proven to reduce blood pressure and hypertension, even without weight loss.
So, after hearing all the caveats, foranyone still keen to try fasting, Sumaya Kazi has three top tips….
Sumaya Kazi:
Look at IF as an experiment – It’s really better to approach it as something that you’re trying on for size…Feel free to experiment with the different schedules.
Give it some time. The first couple of days, you’ll likely be hangry, mad about starting. It’s about getting into the habit. Give it a fighting chance, push through and understand why you’re feeling what you’re feeling. After 2 weeks it’s going to start feeling like something you can actually do.
Sparkling water will be your best friend…carbonated water can help you feel full on fast days.
Alison van Diggelen: A small study in the US recently showed that fasting caused some people to experience lower blood pressure and improvements in processing sugar. But downsides like headaches, drowsiness and increased thirst were also reported. The bottom line is this: Despite Sumaya Kazi’s impressive transformation, to say that intermittent fasting is an enduring answer for everyone’s weight loss and general health: larger, longer-term studies are needed.
