hiding bin laden was in pakistan's interest. we know that the isi hides some people from us but bin laden was one that i think had been known at a high level, would have cooperated with us. we have other problem was pakistan. that's not one of them. >> thank you so much for your time. thank you for watching "state of the union." i'm candy crowley in washington. up next for our viewers in the united states, "fareed zakaria gps." this is "gps." well k078 to all of new the united states and around the world. i'm fareed zakaria. we have a terrific show for you today. first up, one of our grand tours around the world with an all-star panel. we have more of my conversation with condoleezza rice, stanford professor will give a grade to president obama. and to donald rumsfeld who slammed her in his recent memoirs. >> don is a friend but is a grumpy buy. he is.

he doesn't know what he's talking about. >> fascinating discussion with google's executive chairman eric schmidt about the great babble between apple and google. why it matters who will win. here is my take. pakistan's military has been embarrassed, to put it mildly, by the suspicion it must have known where bin laden was hiding. in response it is using its old tricks. hoping to ride out the storm as it has in the past. it is leaking stories to favor right journalists, all with the aim of stoking anti-americanism in pakistan. having been caught in a situation that suggests either complicity with al qaeda or gross incompetence and the realities frontally a bit of both, it is now furiously trying to change the subject. angrily denouncing america for entering the country. pakistani friend put it to me this way. it is like a person caught in bed with another man's wife who

is indignant that someone entered his house. the military has also once again been able to stop the civilian government. according to pakistani source it is speech given at a recent news conference was drafted by the military. so having come to power hoping to clip the military's wings, pakistan's democratically elected government has been reduced to mouthing talking points of written for it by the intelligence service. now some politicians and journalists say they want an inquiry into america entered pakistan. but is that really the issue? the united states has been involved in counterterrorist operations in pakistan for years using drones and people going in and out. the fundamental question is -- how was it that the leading terrorist was living in pakistan with some kind of support network which must have included parts of the pakistani government? how is it every major al qaeda official that has been captured

or killed since 2002 has been found comfortably ensconced in a pakistani city? and how is it that any time these issues are raised, they get drowned out by an organized campaign of anti-americanism or religious fanaticism. washington has given in to the pakistani military time and again. but america has leverage. pakistan needs american aid, arms and training to sustain its army. if the generals are going to receive those benefits, they must become part of pakistan's solution and not its problem. washington should do three things. press for a major national commission in pakistan headed by a supreme court justice, not an army -- to investigate whether bin laden and other al qaeda leaders have been supported and sustained by elements of the pakistani state. demand the provisions of the lugar/kerry bill civilian control on the military be strictly followed. otherwise american aid will be withheld. ask to see a plan for the

pakistani military to go after the major untouched terror networks in pakistan. in the longer run, as the united states scales back its military presence in afghanistan, which i hope it will do, it will need the pakistani military less and less to supply its rooms. pakistan'sive i willian government, business classes, intellectuals, have the largest role in this struggle. they should not get distracted by empty anti-american slogans or hypernationalism. this is their chance to become a normal country. and it might not come again. let's get started. joining me for our tour of world affairses who ex-perfecttees spans the globe but manage to bring them into our studios today. anne-marie slaughter was first one to serve as director of

policy planning, top strategist at the u.s. department of state. she's now returned to princeton to teach. joshua cooper remo, managing director of kissinger associates. before that he was "time" magazine's youngest ever world editor. and kishore mahbubani has been a career diplomat representing singapore around the world and heading its foreign office. he's now the head of the school of public policy. welcome to all of you. kishore, the killing of osama bin laden, how has it been perceived around the world outside of the united states? >> i think the world is better off with osama being eliminated. nobody cried when he left the scene. but at the same time i was actually very troubled by the celebrations that you saw in america about his killing. because it seemed to imply that hey, the problem is over, we can now carry on.

the fundamental problem of disconnect within america and islam yuck world in america at one point, muslims, still remains. it is important to not believe that the killing of osama bin laden has solved all their problem, indeed and there's probably a greater need now for america to engage islamic world mostly to try to bridge this growing disconnect and exists over there. >> what do you think, anne-marie? >> i don't think that the celebrations were -- this is the end of all our troubles. i think this was cathartic after a decade of 9/11 where no matter what we did, we couldn't even capture osama bin laden. particularly important the young people who were 12, 13, coming of age at 9/11 and they are in college now. they are the ones you saw just -- this relief and the sense that a shadow had been lifted. i also think that the real significance is not that al

qaeda is not to be worried about as an enemy but it allows us to pivot to a different face of islam. now you can see the arab spring as the primary face of muslims demonstrating, seeking a better life. which is a far more positive image than that turbanned en. >> i what did you think of obama's leadership? the chinese view these things carefully. you spend half your time in china. >> i think a lot of us reflected on that remarkable image from the situation room. i mean, for all of us who grew upsetting foreign policy and obsessed by the nuances of everything that happens in these moments history is really made to have a photo like that and see the president sitting where he was sitting, to see the secretary of state either because had an allergy or having a human react, this is a horrible thing to be watching unfolding in front of your eyes. i think it demonstrates a real decisiveness to decide what was a clearly risky operation.

you can see the president's instinct even in the photo where he is sitting off to the side to not lead from the center. you would have thought rich daly is the one in charge. that he lights the challenge evening going forward. as they look at the middle east, is america's role in middle east which will continue to evolve and what happened to bin laden is a milestone, to sit off to the side and be part of a group that's making things happen or is it to take a leadership role. i think that's a crucial question they have to answer in the coming weeks. there's huge national security problems we face, issues like iran, those things don't go away just because bin laden is gone. >> how do you think -- i was going to ask you how do you think the world reacts to the lead from behind idea? i will get to anne-marie because she is quoted in that article that phrase comes from. obama's team, somebody said -- to be fair, specifically about libya which was a case where they wanted the europeans to take the lead, isn't this,

though the america that the world wanted to see and cooperative, multilateral america rely on other people to get involved? >> i think -- very important point i need to emphasize here is don't underestimate the sophistication of the elite overseas and understanding of what's happening in the word. they always look at both american remember toric and american power. it is present everywhere. if american power is present in -- israel and palestine, present everywhere, you cannot lead from behind. you are involved. you are there. you are participating. >> i have to say when we lead from the front you call us unilateral. when we lead from behind you say we are not leading from the front. >> no -- >> damned if you do and damned if you don't. >> policies you adopt. whether they work or they don't

work. >> anne-marie? >> i don't think lead from behind is the right expression at all. i don't know where it came from. it is certainly not the way the white house thinks about it. i wouldn't read too much into that picture. i think they were all exhausted. they were all watching, risky operation. but the president came out of this looking like a very decisive person. someone was patient and persistent and ready to make a really tough call when he had to. i think that is true of libya, too. he delayed more than i wanted him to. he was decisive. but the way he describe it is leadership is we create the conditions and the coalitions for others to step up. that's not leading from behind. we are there. we are politically indispensable. we go to the u.n. and have to offer our support. we have to make sure that the other countries are participating. once we have done that, his idea is we shouldn't the global policemen. other countries have a really strong stake in these outcomes. and we should be willing to

share responsibility with them. sometimes that means they will do things in ways we would have done slightly differently. but i don't think that's leading from behind. i think that's leading in a world of many different powers where you are still the dominant player but you immediate to make sure others are taking their share of responsibility. >> in other places, try to lead as the -- speech on the arab sprint or sprint plus the death of osama bin laden. do you think that -- presumably this there will be a chance for the united states to align its win interests with the people of the arab world. >> it is almost exactly would years ago, june 4, 2009, he gave the cairo speech. i think everybody understands the incredible significance of that. that would be example of something seen as a catalyzing event. when you look at it from the standpoint of what america's interest is in the middle east, is it likely to assume it will

get us where we need and that's what's important about this speech. we believe it will stop iranian nuclear proliferation. can we afford to put a few ideas in motion or is that something we need to take charge of? hopefully the speech with l delineate those things. a strong american position is very important. iranian proliferation should be one of them. other cancers this catalytic approach would be appropriate. >> you are saying a nice speech about democracy will not stop iran's nuclear -- >> right, exactly. i think the idea that having democracy promotion as the kortenent of your foreign policy is a very important value. that's who we are. having said that, i don't think that in the time frame which we are talking about the possibility of developments in iran and at a pace that will make a meaningful difference to their nuclear trajectory is likely. i think the implications of a nuclear iran are tremendous. >> we will be back to discuss all of this and more right after

this. >> every united states -- until we get strong again, has to be run through the filter of what does it take to have a strong economy. we have no hope of garnering the sorts of loyalties we immediate. need. ♪

[ man ] at ge capital, we're out there every day with clients like jetblue -- financing their fleet, sharing our expertise, and working with people who are changing the face of business in america. after 25 years in the aviation business, i kind of feel like if you're not having fun at what you do, then you've got the wrong job. my landing was better than yours. no, it wasn't. yes, it was. was not. yes, it was. what do you think? take one of the big ones out? nah. ♪

run through the filter of what what's this option? that's new.

personal pricing now on brakes. tell us what you want to pay. we do our best to make that work. deal! my money. my choice. my meineke. we are back with anne-marie slaughter from princeton. kishore mahbubani from singapore. josh ramo from china and the united states. kishore, one of the things obama has to deal with, no matter what happens in his foreign policy, it is the economy that's going to determine whether he gets re-elected. and you wrote a broadside against base you cannily whole way americans are approaching their economic policy. you are saying it is all about cutting budgets and all about worrying about, you know, medicare and medicaid. what you really need is strong state directed economic planning in the model of surprise, surprise singapore or china.

right? >> well -- i think you sort of exaggerated the argument a bit. >> you know the -- the magazine has two rules that says when it -- hires its young editors. it says simplify and then exaggerate. >> true. i want to emphasize one point. that -- the world wants america to succeed. but now the level of concern about the future of the american economy is the highest i have ever seen in my entire life. and -- there's a sense of hey, what happen it is things go fundamentally wrong in america? i mean, just imagine it is conceivable that within two to three years, the markets or bond markets will say hey, don't touch u.s. treasury bills, what happens then? that's the kind of -- inconceivable but now conceivable and actually have you traders figuring out what might happen and what -- >> is it conceivable, josh?

i mean, look at what's happening in greece right now with europe. when you look at the alternatives -- >> i think one of the -- certain within of the loans the last few years of inconceivable should be conceivable. his point is a good one. i think it is a valid point for a couple of reasons. in terms of domestic economics, we are at three years of 9% unemployment. there is reason to be nervous. we haven't seen that before. i thinking the second point which is how the rest of the world looks at the united states is also very significant. i think every united states -- until we get strong again has to be run through the filter of what it takes to have a strong economy. no hope of garnering sorts of loyalties we need. people think we are weak and declining. >> speak up for america. >> i always do. first place, i don't know, i remember the 1970s, stagflation, the sense we were going

absolutely nowhere. other countries were going to pass us. i see this as absolutely a critical point. this president came in knowing this was his job. he has done a number of things that are going to take a while to -- >> don't you feel a lack of urgency? i look at the amount of urgency there is in beijing about policy planning, economic policy. i come back to the united states and spend time in washington and new york. i don't feel nearly the sense of urgency. >> no. on the contrary. we are having real huge debates. first about the '11 budget and now the debate about the debt ceiling is enormous. we are going to figure out what the consensus is. >> 9% unemployment and no job bill. >> because the american political process has focused first on the debt and deficit. which is right because we know long term we have the chief of -- head of the joint chiefs of staff, admiral mike mullen, says our deficit and long-term debt is the biggest national security threat we face. secretary of state says that. the president as a national security strategy that says we have to rebuild our economic

foundations at home. >> doesn't that make you nervous when there is that much consensus? the debt and immediately makes me think -- these people can't -- >> you don't think -- >> i think the debt is important but every single american discussion a has to be terroristen through issue what does it to create around the world to create a perception we are a strong and prosperous country. >> the perception we are not strong has to do with -- >> sometimes we have to go into debt. like people have to borrow money to invest in their education and other things. debt is a sensible strategy so we -- we are in a position we can take on the debt. >> one more discussion about this. we have to go. anne-in ray slaughter, kishore mahbubani, thank you so much. we will be right back. man: all right. we were actually thinking, maybe... mahbubani, thank you so much. we will be right back. r slaught mahbubani, thank you so much. we will be right back. inie slau mahbubani, thank you so much. we will be right back.

whew! i think it's worth it. working with a partner you can trust is always a good decision. massmutual. let our financial professionals help you reach your goals.

now for our what in the world segmentment here are some aastronautston i sha astonishing numbers. bribery costs a trillion dollars every year. i was intrigued to hear about an innovative idea to deal with corruption. from one of the place most plagued by it -- india. india's chief economic adviser posted a paper on his personal website in which he made a case for legalizing certain types of

bribes. corruption is a huge and growing problem in more than half of all indians said they had to pay a bribe last year. many of those are what are called harassment bribes. illegal payments to get basic servic services. these are the kind of bribes he wants to change. under current law the bribe giver and bribe take rer guilty. if they are caught, both are fined an equal amount. the state gets 200 rupis total. he has a radical proposal. fine the bribe taker 200. led the bribe giver go scot-free. the government collect it is amount in fines but the person who had to pay the bribe is not fined. instead he gets his bribe money back. so how does this reduce

corruption? his theory simulation suggests bribery in general will decrease because people who are asked for bribes can pay the money and they can still go and complain without worrying that they will be prosecuted. and the corrupt official who takes the bribe will know if they take the money they face twice the penalty. it is a fascinating idea. it has come in for lots of criticism. critics are missing the point. india needs creative thinking to cure the cancer of corruption that it actual sly getting much worse and not just in india. take a look at this map. it is a corruption index. put together by transparency international. the redder a country is, the more corrupt are the bureaucrats. yellow spots are less corrupt. you notice here in the u.s. we are not doing too badly. so what's the least corrupt country in the world? singapore. about five decades ago that tiny country was newly independent.

and for all of the rapid growth, it has the usual third world culture. that changed. he decided to pay government officials at power with those in the private sector. that killed the incentive for officials to be corrupt. the singapore solution is expensive especially for large countries with large bureaucracies but would probably still be a bargain considering how much corruption costs most. another idea kim out of africa. a man often wondered why his continent has the richest resources and richest natural resources and yet the poorest people. identifying corrupt leaders is the problem. he tried to change those leaders' incentives. instituted the annual prize, it awards $5 million to an african leader who is not corrupt and leads office peacefully. the winner then goes on to get an additional $200,000 annually

for life. a great incentive, right? the problem is they couldn't find a winner for 2009 or 2010. the jury simply refused to make the award to someone that was not truly deserving. the point of this story isn't to despair. corruption or bribery are not innate cultural qualities. singapore shows that cultures can change and studies show that these crimes are due to inertia. if everyone is doing it, incentive to take bribe as well. but how do you get to a critical mass where people stop doing it? smart government policies, good leadership from the private and public sector, all that helps. it is possible that this is the year of change, after all. remember, much of the popular anger against the arab world this year was fueled by the sense that they were out of touch, repressive, and corrupt. so let's try more ideas like the one from india. we will be right back.

>> i have to ask you, don rumsfeld says that, to put it bluntly, a bad national security adviser. what do you say? copd makes it hard to breathe so i wasn't playing much of a role in my own life. but with advair, i'm breathing better. so now, i've got the leading part. advair is clinically proven to help significantly improve lung function. unlike most copd medications, advair contains both an anti-inflammatory and a long-acting bronchodilator, working together to help improve your lung function all day.

advair won't replace fast-acting inhalers for sudden symptoms and should not be used more than twice a day. people with copd taking advair may have a higher chance of pneumonia. advair may increase your risk of osteoporosis and some eye problems. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking advair. if you're still having difficulty breathing, take the lead. ask your doctor if including advair could help improve your lung function. get your first full prescription free and save on refills at advaircopd.com. [ technician ] are you busy? management just sent over these new technical manuals. they need you to translate them into portuguese. by tomorrow. [ male announcer ] ducati knows it's better for xerox to manage their global publications.

so they can focus on building amazing bikes. with xerox, you're ready for real business.

condoleezza rice, thanks for joining us pleasure to be with you. >> it has been about two years president obama has been in office. you are a former national security adviser, former secretary of state. former and now, again, college professor in american foreign policy. what grade would you give president obama n. >> well, i only give grades to stanford students. but -- i believe that there's a lot of continuity in the policies that have been pursued. and while i may or may not agree with every decision that has been made, i know how hard it is to be in there and to make those decisions. i like president bush said i'm going to make certain i don't chirp at my successors, you know. you are in, you are making difficult calculations every day. i remember very well that sometimes i would get up and would read the newspaper and it would say the bush

administration should get iran to cooperate and they should get sanctions against iran. i think why didn't i think of that? you know. it is just hard. but i think that this is a very good national security team. and they are protecting the the country. >> you know, this is going to horrify both people on the left and the right. the left want ad sharp break with bush's policies and the right thinks obama's betraying the country. you are say nothing, there is an element of continuity. >> the united states set the foreign policy is a great big aircraft carrier. it doesn't turn around quick flip our tintsd to be stable. our interests tend to be stable. while i may not agree with every word uttered with everything that has been done, the united states is a country that is pursuing its interests and its values. that's very -- very important, too. i think what we are seeing is that you have your presidential election, the president becomes president and then he realizes that he's responsible -- his

responsibilities to protect the country look very different from inside the oval office than in an advertise pace of get willing. >> let's talk about some of those decisions. libya, president obama is trying to do something that seems a little different in libya which is to say that the united states wants to help. it wants to be supportive. but this is not an area that defects our core points such an extent that we want to be the lead player. so he is trying this process of letting the europeans take more of the lead, we provide some support. is that the right model? >> well, first let's talk about libya. i am very grateful that we disarmed gadhafi. i'm very happy his wmd are in tennessee because we would be facing a very different situation right now in libya where he's still in possession of those weapons of mass destruction. there are things about the way this operation is unfolding that i think are questionable.

that are troubling. i'm not quite certain what the end game is here. i'm not quite certain who the rebels are and, therefore, what part they will play in the end game. i think it is good that others can take lead like the british and french. you know, nato is not an alien being to us. we are indeed central to nato. so you can't actually hand an operation off to nato. the united states is too central and -- too much important part of its capability. so we will see how this comes out. i don't mind -- >> would have you gone in -- >> this is one, fareed -- i'm usually clear on these. i was 50/50. i could see both sides of this an important set of principles to engage. my concern is that humanitarian interventions are always a bit slippery. are we intervening in

humanitarian affair because someone is about to slaughter his people quickly? on cnn that's probably not a good argument. but we don't intervene if they are slaughting them slow inerint eye of the press. we have to be careful with the argument for humanitarian intervention. i think you could argue in the middle of the arab spring to have gadhafi successfully mow down his people and by brute force stop the demonstrations that that might have been an argument for intervention. >> don't ask, don't tell, do you agree with president obama's decision n. >> i do agree with the decision. this is a country that somehow finds its way around the difficult social issues in time and given enough time. and -- >> why didn't you guys do it then? >> president bush had a lot on his place. lot on his plate. everything can't be done in one administration. true, i think it was time. i think bob gates has handled it very, very well. i think the issue was an issue

of military -- important the military of ever of making certain that we had a military that still functioned well and once the pentagon was satisfied with that, i see no reason not to do it. >> perhaps the biggest strategic decision president obama took in his first two years was the decision to do the surge in afghanistan. close to doubling, tripling the number of troops in total. it is a large commitment to a kind of very comprehensive counterinsurgency campaign that is -- very expensive, can go on for years. is it the right move? >> well, we indeed in the last year or so of the bush administration went through fairly thorough review of afghanistan. it is fair to say -- i want people to understand in 2005/2006 things were not going so badly in afghanistan. they seemed to be going in the right direction. it really was the development of

the safe haven in pakistan. that made the situation in afghanistan look very different by 2008. and so we did start to increase troop presence and to broaden the counterinsurgency effort there. it is now a quite large effort. we can get this done. it may not take -- i don't think it will take forever. what we are looking to do is to build healthy afghans build security forces that can prevent a threat to afghanistan from the taliban. get them more decent government. it is not going to -- like switzerland but more decent government. and then i think we can begin a drawdown safe. >> i have to ask you, don rumsfeld says that you were, to put it bluntly, a bad national security adviser. done take to president bush the hard difficult differences among key national security advise sxwrors that -- had a lot of

dysfunction the people commented it. he puts it squarely on you. what do you say? >> don is a friend and will always be a friend but he is a grumpy guy. he is. he doesn't know what he is talking about. he never followed me from the situation room to the oval office where the president and i would have intense discussions about what was going on in that room, who thought what. and whether the president would decide to go back in and keep seeing if you can find a consensus or whether the president would take a decision. the president was not shy about taking a decision. so don doesn't know what he is talking about. plus, i will write my own book and then we can talk about it. >> condoleezza rice, thank you very much. >> thank you very much. >> next generation of children will grow up with this ubiquitous network of intelligence around them and they will take it for granted and will wonder how did you actually operate without knowing all this all the time? gah! [ children shouting ]

[ grunts ] [ whacking piñata ] [ whacking piñata, grunting ] ♪ i've seen the sunrise paint the desert. witnessed snowfall on the first day of spring. ♪ but the most beautiful thing i've ever seen was the image on a screen that helped our doctor see my wife's cancer was treatable. [ male announcer ] ge technologies help doctors detect cancer early so they can save more lives. bringing better health to more people. ♪ but when she got asthma, all i could do was worry ! specialists, lots of doctors, lots of advice... and my hands were full. i couldn't sort through it all. with unitedhealthcare, it's different. we have access to great specialists, and our pediatrician gets all the information. everyone works as a team. and i only need to talk to one person about her care.

we're more than 78,000 people looking out for 70 million americans. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare.

i'm candy crowley. here are today's top stories. in louisiana, the u.s. army corps of engineers is considering opening at least two more flood gates along the mississippi river which will flood some farm lands and homes but spare larger cities. the flood gates are over 100 miles away from new orleans. the army corps already opened one gate yesterday. the first time in over 40 years. clashes between pro-palestinian protesters and forces along the borders today

left four people dead and 85 wounded. according to the israeli military hundreds of protesters burst through border with syria and soldiers opened fire to stop them. the demonstrations marked the 63rd anniversary of israel's creation. dominique strass-kann was arrested early this morning for the alleged sexual assault of his new york city hotel maid. he will plead not guilt dwroy the charge against him. he is considered the strongest potential challenger to sarkozy in france's 2012 presidential election. those are your top stories. up next, more "fareed zakaria gps" and "reliable sources" at the top of the hour.

there is a good chance that you either have a tablet, one of those computing devices that's larger than a cell phone but much smaller than the laptop, or you thought about buying one. when you look at the shelves have you many options. apple's ipad has 080% of the market right now.

there are many more. my next guest says this isn't just a brand war. it is a war of ideas and war for the future. that next guest is google's executive chairman eric schmidt. i sat down with him for a special we are working on about innovati innovation. take out those tablets and mark your electronic calenders. that special lal awill air on j. schmidt has more than a bit of a bias with google's products but insight into the future of technology are nonetheless absolutely fascinating. you have apple coming out with this extremely elegant ipad that everyone is in love with. but it requires that you follow apple's rules. all the restrictions that are placed. no flash, most prominent. now you have android providing a kind of open platform. obviously -- as the head of

google android will win. but tell me something about this contest. >> it is a classic contest in high-tech. and in that contest, you have a very well-run, very focused closed competitor when builds a great product that does something that's very useful. that will be apple. have you another competitor who makes all the technology available to everybody else and using various creativity and very partnerships and so forth gets the benefit of everyone else's creativity. because there are more people involved in the open side of that, that side will eventually get more volume and have more investment and, therefore have more creativity and more innovation and the end user will choose the open one over the closed one. >> except right now the open one, all these tablets android based, are -- let's be honest, they are not gas as the ipad and are more expensive which strikes me as unusual. >> which approach will produce a

lower product quicker? one manufacturer for a product or many manufacturers competing? the fact of the matter is we are just at the beginning of this fight. and the fight between two very well-run and very large and very significant ecosystem companies will ultimately produce great value to consumers because the fight between them will keep prices low, keep the systems honest and open and encourage the kind of investment that pea want to see. one of the greatest things about this contest is that the people who win in this are the consumer. >> can you imagine that this will end up very much like the pc market where apple had this very elegant product that many people thought was perhaps better but because it stayed closed it ended up bag boutique product and yours will be open, much larger, many more users and many more applications. >> there's pride in both approaches but are completely different. in apple's case, they can continue to build beautiful and

excellent products. the ecosystem that google represents will continue and already has more volume and more users and will have more investment in the platform. ultimately that will will produce cheaper, better, faster products for everybody. >> the actual device does not need to be that powerful because you can connect into it? >> as an experiment turn off all of your devices and disconnect from the internet for six, seven hours. you will realize how dependent have you become on it. not just for communication but for your services and buy movie tickets, what have you. the architecture of the internet is now turning this thing which we all call cloud competing. the information is out there in the clouds somewhere and you just pick up a device, turn it on and it is there. the new generation of devices from google and others, you will be able to just pick them up, log in and then just give it to somebody else and log on and it will erase your information and so forth. all of a sudden the device has become disposable. all of a sudden when you drop or you lose or you break your

computer you won't lose everything. it is stored in the cloud. >> you once said to me mobile phones will be 100 more powerful than they are in ten years. that sounds -- difficult to imagine. >> well, think about mobile phones a decade ago and it is 100 times faster today than it was ten years ago. how quickly we forget the primitive world we lived in 10, 15 years years ago. the future is mobile computing and people will carry any number of devices and connect to the clouds. those devices will provide varying services. today your phone knows who you are, where you are, and where you are going to some degree because you can see your path. and with that, and with your permission, it is possible for software and software developers to predict where you are going to go and suggest people you should meet, suggest activities and so forth. so -- ultimately, what happens is the mobile phone does what it does best which is remember everything and makes suggestions and you can be a better human and have a good time. >> what will the technology look

like ten years from now? >> we do know the devices will be so much faster and so much more useful. the real revolution is in the applications. new standard in the internet called html 5 which everyone is adopting. web applications will run on all these devices in a powerful way. very complex and powerful games that people will spend their time on. whole new generation of social activity of one kind or another. to me the most interesting things about what computelers do will be to allowing us to have more fun. have more rich lives. to -- think about new ideas. computeler suggest things you may get used to them. since i'm a history buff, walking down here, lit tell me the history of the area. lit tell me something that i might be interested in. all of a sudden the augmentation of my human experience, something that's a wow moment every hour. >> of course, after a while we will take it for granted and won't imagine life without it. >> just like your children have

always had -- grown up with cell phones, next generation of children will grow up with this ubiquitous network of intelligence around them. they will take it for granted and will wonder how did you actually operate without knowing all this all the time? how did you determine where to meet somebody? >> should we be teaching the way we are teaching now with intelligence all around? do we need to be drumming noo s nookts -- facts into people's heads? do we need to teach children how to spell? >> there is a lot of evidence the next generation of teachers will use computers much more interrelated in the classroom. an awful lot of learn sing better than self-paced. when it is targeted to the students. if you can come up with teaching programs where there are tests and appropriate metrics and students with appropriate incentives can keep going, a lot of evidence that people learn best in these multiplayer games. all of a sudden audio and visual cues and contests and prizes,

people move very quickly through those. they learn enormous amount. people were concerned when games came along that another generation of people would be stupefied. but somehow the testing indicates that the navigation alas expects and role playing aspects of the games up proves cognition and improves their ability to reason even though you look at and it say how could that be. looks like they are very good for people. >> pleasure to have you. >> thank you very much. [ sneezes ] allergies? you think i have allergies? you're sneezing. i'm allergic to you. >> thank you very much. 'trpleas >> thank you very much. ipleasur >> thank you very much. cpleasur >> thank you very much. o pleas >> thank you very much. spleasur >> thank you very much. g about juice on the zyrtec® label. what? labels are meant to be read. i'd be lost without you. i knew you weren't allergic to me. [ sneezes ] you know, you can't take allegra with orange juice. both: really? fyi. [ male announcer ] get zyrtec®'s proven allergy relief and love the air®.

sadly, no. oh. but i did pick up your dry cleaning and had your shoes shined. well, i made you a reservation at the sushi place around the corner. well, in that case, i better get back to these invoices... which i'll do right after making your favorite pancakes. you know what? i'm going to tidy up your side of the office. i can't hear you because i'm also making you a smoothie. [ male announcer ] marriott hotels & resorts knows it's better for xerox to automate their global invoice process so they can focus on serving their customers. with xerox, you're ready for real business.

. question this week from the gps challenge is what reportedly caused thousands of people to flee rome on wednesday. was it a, a roundup of illegal immigrants? b, a rally to support berlusconi

and his sex trial? c, a prediction of an earthquake? or d, a plague of bedbugs? stay tuned. we will tell thank you correct answer. make sure to go to cnn.com/gps for ten more questions. while there check out our website, the global public square where you will find smart interviews and tapes from our favorite experts and find all of our gps shows. if you missed one, you can click and watch. you can also dvr the show, of course, you can get it on itunes for free. my book of the week is henry kissinger's latest "on china." this is a must read. extensive dealings with chinese leaders over 40 years and part analysis. this is a major work that henry kissinger should write such an ambitious book at the age of 8 is just extraordinary. it will be in bookstores on tuesday. and now for the last look. it was a picture that seemed to

capture the stress and tension of the bin laden raid. as seen in the white house situation room. it has also become the picture that spawned a thousand and one variations. you may have seen this version published in a jewish newspaper where the women in the room were photo shopped out for religious reasons. how about this counter photo where all the men were cut out of the frame? and all the president's men and women look lovely? the fascinator from the royal wedding. this may be my favorite. the superhero one. president obama in america, vice president biden as flash. madam secretary as wonder woman and many more. the correct answer to our gps challenge question was c, a prediction made in 1979 that a massive earthquake would hit rome on may 11, 2011. it is said to have cause an exodus from the italian capital wednesday.