and. >>

>> host: patrick your book could not be tied mayor given the use of surveillance how government and corporations keep track of what we do. but it is important to mention do the discussion the libertarians are having about privacy. something you wrote early on

that we instinctively find government as the provider during an emergency. to call my 11 to ask for services you write it is the inefficient way to collect and distribute information during a time of crisis. you say how we trust those to have more information they and we do. is there a strategy you can describe to rely on the friends that call for information? >> we should trust people in position of authority. with that information and dispersal it is not nearly as efficient as it could be

considering you are talking about a population of of television stations around omaha. with a conversation that i had there was an act called guardian watch. but in a time of emergency you can take a picture of what you see it said to a central location that can be distributed to everybody who may be affected. so compare that to the way we deal with the emergency communication witches of a sudden turning to one information source relying on whatever date it can get to relate information and from a distance.

so they have a decision to make in that moment. in that situation that they talk to a emergency regulator and that a centralized information distributor is back at a slower rate and information now not just spoken words. like literal destruction and what we have the capacity to do is take visual information and distribute visual information to the central agency with the incoming data but given the

limitations this is just an example to me whether we create much more information than we did previously and that changes the tools of decision making. >> talk about the internet of things. >> what we see right now with capabilities into the environment. i personally consider what the information is a trademark example we because of human sensors with an extremely powerful computer but it takes the form of

radio frequency that we pass underneath as the access is ez pass on the turnpike it takes the place of the pleasure centers all around us. for those that collect data and then sent that somewhere else. with the imbedding of computers. the idea comes from mark to work for xerox in the '80s and he envisioned the future really interact with computers it is very different than now. but we take out our hands to created directly but instead to interact pass of the. to actually retreat.

we did not be lip the same way we do now. as it becomes smaller and more powerful. that is the internet e fact. >> host: you talk about issues of privacy and wonder how you collect information they want to hold onto it and how to reorder data is also something we create acxiom partners with verizon and at&t.

when you rot -- walk around you create for ration from where you are. location old data there is a lot of different things about you to suggest day particular type of person to have that characteristic. but acxiom connects with different companies to tries to sell you stuff based on who you are and where you are. but explicitly and specifically you cannot use names so all that information's is an anonymous. but that is a nominal consideration. is only because because the elected the privacy law but they do want this category

to be as specific as possible with the smallest group of people to do that at scale over and over again. having said that, you are the point of origin to see what they see when they both get you. you can download your apps to your location so you can understand where you have been, what you have did there in where you went because you are a better judge of yourself. there is a number of services you can use to understand where you fit with your demographic profile. most importantly when you

make the decision what you want to buy are not, with all those decisions can be remembered by someone somewhere then will get to you in the form of marketing. you may feel empowered by that but if he remembers the interaction then you have taken the first up to protect yourself. realizing that marketing but until the of revelations to the government partners private industry but did ways but do you think they

contributed to raise an awareness? how we could possibly use data to public sell blood dash public health or safety? >> batted say good development. >> i am not sure what to make of edward snowden as a person. but the of revolution -- revelation i am in favor of more people and knowing more things but it is inevitable. but we think of these big institutions to hold some sort of permanent advantage of concrete leverage. this data is not plutonium plant in a box in order to

use it and passed to get out the law under you have it then that is so we saw here particularly with edward snowden so if you think he is the hero or a villain or will face prosecution because of first amendment one thing for certain he was a contractor for the government he did not work for them and had a pretty innocuous job but yet he was able to do to the nsa like they do to us and that is the nature of this stuff. the more you collect eventually will reach more and more people that is what we have seen. but these revelations raised certainly alarm.

it has been revealed that nsa holtz and stores a lot of medical data and information is specially telephone even foreign citizens legally they could do into infinity as part of the chart they can watch foreigners as much as they want for as much as they please but also u.s. citizens. we predict what i talked about at&t, verizon have this data they use it to market to you. why be more comfortable with a private company with at&t exclusively holding my data speaks to a somewhat irrational fear for fear of

being misidentified and falling into a land of governments over it -- surveillance. and we're more likely to be identified as a potential customer for those would be coerced into buying but that is the fun part. we have private companies having a problem because it was the responsibility into the private sector. >> i will interrupt. the llord data that is out there that goes to the title of your book "the naked truth" less of a chance that i might be stigmatized for my activities? >> guest: you are less likely to miss stigmatized less likely to be accused of something you did not do.

you may be stigmatized for something that you did do. and the tremendous opportunities but also of alert them to the fact that unless we have a conversation all the opportunities are turned in to threats. and with the naked future knowing much more about your propensity is inevitable. >> right now there is a lot of misinformation like acxiom. i booked myself and it had errors about these. >> right. contributes to a process. >> guest: i did not corrected because i do not want them to have more information but the point is people don't how the ability

to go into the files to correct inaccuracies right now. >> guest: no. this is another case in point. there is a program at airports use side that to give the government to a little bit of information then you can bypass certain lines misinformation and with those other features talking about how invasive to push everyone to that higher the level of surveillance. higher than the irs. it is amazing the data and the irs has compared to the nsa might have. and it is not exactly accurate but all together it is inevitable.

and that is the process with acxiom please come to correct the data to reveal at least what they had that is part of the revelation process. but eventually went other people there is of higher chance there is not in your particular case to have a better understanding but you play a part to know that so is this arms race. that is the future the escalation of intelligence what they will do to be based on what i will do and with that opportunity in our favor is much smarter about ourselves. >> i want to talk about specifics from education to

online dating and health care millions of people get the flu shots and still get sick even the cdc says they cannot predict with accuracy what strains of the flu would be germane. you talk about sharing more information to predict what trends may have been. how you envision the health care movement but it shares data how i may have cancer i am not denied health insurance spinet yes. but take your genetic data. it is information that we want everyone to have we want everyone to get their genome screening all

broadside and helps humans everywhere and then to pay the 23 anti-the so it is part of a large data center. and to discriminate in terms of health care but of an extremely for cited law enacted 2008 so to discriminate on the basis of genetics there is precedent for legislating against discrimination on the basis of data. we have to demand more laws like that. when we decide it is good for people to contribute more data. when you make the case to the public to increase the

amount of data on the field with those major diseases of the 21st century and the army and from discriminatory harm to figure out it takes place but physically there is a great organization he is the fantastic researcher in california. >> the framework in which to contribute personal medical information in a way that protects them but it is useful for design for research. to make sure the protections are in place otherwise the

benefits are born collectively. this is something you have to be aware of and to one example i'm not sure if this is reality yet but you talk about the cap that says my friend has the flu right now and what is the percentage that i would get it from jade or spread it? in a way yes that technology exists for what we give to our phone all the time but a couple of researchers from johns hopkins with 600,000

tweets from here in new york bay analyzed to trade a computer program to know when someone was tweeting hell they were feeling. sexually was difficult because of the terminology that suggest a sickness like i have beaver fever. [laughter] so you have to trade it to distinguish between actual illness and use of real words. >> host: or that they felt feverish. >> right to. then they looked at where we were and for how long. and 18% with the people they

were looking at. that is amazing. with all the of variables to predict that number would be even higher if more participated if we had some way to understand data on the surface blue transmission or if you get the flu that way. >>. >> with businesses and nonprofit organizations. >> exactly. also that we have to have this conversation a tremendous capability with the person about to give you

the flu should be regarded as a superpower but so that term superinduces its context but it awaits all of us see you have to have the big discussion how to implement because will show up on your phone the likelihood based on the amount of time or how long they have been sick but if you talk about managing that perspective member couple of kids coming to school with the 20 percent chance of but it is not that high. this has a 10% threshold to sit next to that child but

why does my kid have to miss a day because this kid will show up with a cold? it will turn into a of a nightmare. it has a the to do with becoming that much more intelligent. >> host: you think the speed with which technology has a danced with the advent of the internet has met paulists -- policy has lacked? all lots of information technology we are tremendously behind we can see it very clearly with all of the telephone. >> host: team because i think a lot of people in

washington thinks this is a capability we need to have. that begins to change behavior and among those behaviors that other governments have taken money out of silicon valley because they don't feel their data is secure and there is the big difference that internet service companies have interacted with the government around and say compared to the telecom. bay and the government have a much closer relationship fanlike google or yaw do that is part of the reason why somebody at the nsa engineers back doors.

>> host: the technological way that law enforcement could get into their hardware? >> that speaks exactly to the point and google even before that baum dup p encryption and after that program was revealed yahoo! took steps to do encryption but but now they talk about that. what was they said that existed on and google or servers the government was able to engineer so now they have a conversation that is the way information works it gets cheaper then becomes more widely available. so the way computers went to the size of gymnasium's but

only one on a university campus and only five thank that they have 100 times more powerful the save is to with the information that is not comforting but it will change the way we live for the better. >> with the telecommunications it is worth noting years ago with the warrantless wiretapping program may be found the government had given immunity to the telecoms against a lawsuit. that will be changing but we will take a break. when we come back to talk about things like whether in addition to health that it will benefit all of us.

we will be right back. >> host: patrick you write we're moving backward on the issue of climate change. >> guest: plein-air research is the bright spot of cultural analysis but it becomes more vulnerable to political forces that change the way we feel about climate change. pedal on climate change this

is a body that takes research from all over to come up with the assessment that we use and no one is happy about it ever at all then the scientists feel their findings were squished into a consensus finding business is never too happy it is always bad news. born of a 6 degrees centigrade -- centigrade and the public as different feelings depending on things like how well they do economically so with economic growth what we see as luxury policies during the 2008 recession with

climate change regulation we are moving back also the data that we use to make climate change assessments. >> host: a and from other countries to what we have earths monitoring satellites and a first of these will be out of operation in 2016 we have plans to bring more online 2017 but contribute not nearly as much climate and weather data as we used to and other are increasing the data collection of what is happening and this has the potential to become politicized. when we start talking about climate change in the future researchers will do it with

the international array of data that lends itself that the house of representatives or the chamber of commerce works to have a lot of resistance that could increase even though we've no war about the climate and the potential to stave off climate change in increase the dated to be politicized. >> host: what do you mean when you say politicized? ways that may not necessarily be in the best interest of the public? >> guest: exactly. we have a lot of different interests that are competing to climate policy. the bottom line is regardless of what you hear four people that are big it will never be more profitable or cheaper to fix

our addiction to colbert and just continue it for ever that just continuing on that path is such a disaster. what i thank you will see as we become more aware how the climate is changing how more international data feed into that understanding there is the exhaustion point with the public. >> host: "the naked truth" how can we address the problem? >> guest: the solution one of the end points comes from the private sector and what they do is take a huge abundance of data and some of having the intergovernmental report that says by the way instead

it outputs to farmers a particular store how much the weather will cost and to have an insurance contract they issue the check before anybody else. >> host: so the farmers can be reimbursed before they suffer? >> guest: bright. reimbursed for future crop losses based on these models. they are issued automatically. is efficient and that is what i am talking about. part of their recent it is politicized it is not something that the folks get there is some high-school textbook experience but this

speaks to the of meteorologist community is not fully evidenced man-made climate changes happening they're not part of the computers or the panel so there is a system. we feel like private data is the tidy group of pointy headed academics. this is the suspicion that is so exploitable by those said congress but the future rather and directions did what they mean to us to have a sense of connection and that is what will change.

>> the radically what you described as wonderful but monsanto block that this is a company that would it tolerates olibanum how do we deal with the fact that it seems to be moving away from the politics the you identified those that have their bottom-line to guard against that? i guess they have more people involved? >> get more information out to with monsanto is now the world's largest insurer for farming that is ripe for

innovation. i have mixed feelings about monsanto. not for the novel strains of crops this is an end of broad interest of everybody but i am opposed to the of business practices like copyright infringement this speaks to the point what if you have day legal dispute? all i can offer is this is a market where it may not be the only insurance corporation that can give out checks because they look at different models but the

potential to understand regardless how i feel about monsanto or the corporation the potential exists to understand what the weather will cost of the individual basis and that is the good they broadly speaking. in the fact we can talk about whether or not monsanto should be the only player in town with access to the information is also a good thing even though it does not feel like it right now. >> host: going back to you dated aggregation with a different thing go. you talk about wal-mart and other retailers how they train regulate our habits and if at&t what i found interesting is how we as individuals influence others

our friends and community. are we all advertising to our friends and colleagues such as facebook or twitter? >> there is a big push at facebook to a understand exactly what we just described above time ago they would influence one another to make a consumer decision there was no way to collect it because with human beings walking around to have every conversation but now we increasingly have these exchanges where they can take that information to be collected and analyzed and used so there is said data science team but the

interactions with the technological perspective from a simple mathematical perspective to understand to have the good proxy who influences who? you end your friends who exhausts whom? >> you all have the one friend on facebook that says nothing about stuff about themselves? i am not sure which friend of mine that is but i think all of my friends think it is me. [laughter] but i am probably friends so

if i tried to influence if you are my friend don facebook if i try to influence my friends to buy something i would be a loser and they could say that is because they are so bright be all the time. >> but the tool that saturates the market too much? >> it is possible to observe i've aport influence on my friend's decision corpses' it is possible to see but the facebook key and just looking at these exchanges look at the conversation whether or not to people can join in to aid with the ship their patterns increase a particular way ben when they are in a relationship it drops off because they don't

have to when they are to gather. >> host: how great an influence you are an influence on the broader public how good it influence you go from everybody what facebook is doing is understanding that that i may have personal feelings towards that i have never expressed to anybody it influenced me that i could be coerced into doing. if i have a crush on somebody i could check their profile then the next thing of people say this is happening just to understand their response function to take a look which one of

your friends is the best pitchman. we talk about it. this is the future of advertising. the decisions that your friends make show up on your phone trying to influence you. there is a way to control that. first is to be aware. >> host: and corporations using predictive analytics so you suggest that we could see a shift that consumers could calculate their own metric. >> guest: yes. if they can do it so can we. it is based it is a way to

understand probability of information and to itself it is not that hard. which is the of mathematical thinking is to understand how probability is staging on the basis of new information. so we have much more controlled than we ever realized. it is true. eventually it is not hard to find a how much time you are on facebook. if it continues to lead on the metric of time on site. rethink it is old hat that you communicate with relatives but not friends but leading articles of time

on site to share information there is nothing to stop us from understanding. it is still the opportunity that is out there. here is sell the influence others benedick celebrates and keeps going. >> host: you assert that digital information can be used to help us live more healthy as we discussed as many cities are using predictive technology such as to triangulate with a gunshot has been fired talk about surveillance drones

that you consider in the crime field. >> guest: i don't think technology by itself by the end of 2016 because a federal order of than judge police departments have to figure out how to work it that into the facet but a key police officers say to expand and situational awareness there are ways you can send them to look into people's windows to do terrible things but the technology by itself is benign. it amplifies it. that is another reason it is important to have this conversation because the

capabilities of law enforcement to unforced of law hall excited are we about the law's very capable of enforcing? we want people better public servants to be able to do their job much better and more efficiently and less cost. the bias of this progress now follow up with a conversation how interested are you really we have not had that conversation yet but but police departments working better and more efficiently in terms of whether or not it can be

evasive you can get a false positive but but there are some cautionary tales with the city of new york it did realize through the use of crime but also got into a lot of trouble with zero tolerance tactics you don't want to pare your predictive capability is and that potential is there that is a decision somebody made. an alternative is the case that very few people know about. a sociologists which with

the head of police to different neighborhoods to tell them this is what we are looking at this is how we would like to be involved. they actually gave away the element of surprise to continually have conversations here is what you can do with this new capabilities of that has not had the same amount of resistance or of legal problems. there is totally of a good way or of bad way but they have a completely different decision making mechanism the police have a very different mandate. >> host: if you have to compare the united states in terms of policy hell we use

technology how do we ranked? >> host: where we get community by a hidden -- with the policies that don't violate does it start in that way? there is a lot with the policy making of riga. >> guest: there are a lot of reasons to be optimistic. it prohibits discrimination based on genetic information. it is president.

-- president but understand the information in you create that once you acknowledge that then you also open yourself up to do a much better. having said that i am alarmed that we are about to increase the capability of the local police department to enforce more laws. this gives me a lot of claus with a lot of destruction with the simple municipal issues and also broadly speaking national issues. this is part of the reason why we feel right now as though we give away information through our devices to what we cannot

hear or see. of revelations that june through 2013 from that and a say russia posted another outlet but ultimately it speaks to what i talk about. the time to have this conversation is right now and i am hopeful but it will be constructive. >> host: we only have the few minutes left you interviewed hackers, police hackers, police, what surprises did you encounter during the process? >> i interviewed a lot of different people even one who tried to put sensors in the cirrus system when there would be an overflow but to do a job that the cities should to i that that was

interesting i talk to the guy who created the self driving cars. >> with that being artificial intelligence and he is interesting example was able to do all the records in self earlier than the rest of us because he was good at computer science so something that was seen as a strange behavior with the details with personal record keeping but with that chief intelligence officer but to get on stage to talk about how good he was the

potential government to use. that no one is id charge of what we do it could have the addition but eventually that is passed to all of it in changes the decision making process. >> i just want to briefly and because you are a futurist i was not aware large corporations use consultants? >> they do. i consider myself a journalist but i have not a futurist but they should call themselves a future is whether or not they are a consultant. the organization that i work

for is a neutral clearinghouse of you have any idea if you call yourself a futurist but having said that but what is remarkable right now a few years ago there was this market for people to have the advantage in those that are so terrible in to fill the important role in the that have special access to the future. but through this data and how available is have the potential to access it radiated a complete the new way.

i see that era of the of flashy corporate futurist but having said that the only thing that they can do well it is unable to whomever they are speaking to to launch toward opportunities. the matter how inhibited you may feel the inevitable fact is you are creating much more information with a lot of opportunity there then when it arrives you know, you've made the right decision. >> host: patrick tucker you have given us hope for the future to add to the many others from big data. a thank you so much.

>> guest: the queue for having me.

for. . . . .

>> coming up next on the half king bar and restaurant in new york city, carlotta gall and willem marx talk about their books. in "the wrong enemy," carlotta gall argues that following 9/11 the u.s. should have focused on

pakistan instead of afghanistan. she says that the afghans have paid a heavy price for pakistan's treachery. willem marx talks about the border region between pakistan and afghanistan and iran, an area called balochistan, and the civil conflict that is happening there. this is about whatever. >> -- one hour. >> you're going to look, good evening and thank you for coming. you will look at a beautiful picture but that's willem. part of the place i know well and i recorded from as well. make a sign if you can't hear me. i'm going to tell you about "the wrong enemy" which is my book. "the wrong enemy: america in afghanistan, 2001-2014". it's the story of the war. i reported that for over 10 years from afghanistan. also in pakistan. i wanted to write a book