>> i gave you in order. >> is that listening right now, lady. john: is this our future? >> we know it's possible to build machines much smarter than our brains. john: also so much good news. >> we have a sea of new media year to capture the lion's. look at that. >> you, the public, will have five days to look on line to find out what did before i sign it. >> citing things that this really don't want us to see. john: what if you are hiding things you don't want the government to see? >> whatever it is that what. >> the founder of with a pds. >> the internet and communication. that would be good.

john: the teacher does not have to be good. john: freedom to put up. >> will increase. john: that's our show. ♪ john: what keeps you safe? what prevents fraud? most people you asks a government. government must lay out the rules and nish fraud. protect people. so government regulates. over the years as more regulations and america we now have 170,000 pages of rules. people think we can't live without these, but then came the internet. almost entirely unregulated, and it works. it is given us a new level of freedom. let's call it freedom -- "freedom 2.0". i could not have imagined it

before coble, would compete. i assume the services like those could not work. what a joke. who would buy an unseen product from a total stranger without government regulation, it wou make sure that the sellers are honest and a product for the. another joke. who would ust it. that is why we need the world but in the encyclopedia of britannica. my dad. even i have constantly complains about government control could @%t imagine what would be created outside them. one who did imagine it is jimmy wales who founded with the pds. how did you think this would work? >> well, it's interesting. when i started that did not think about competing with anybody. i had any ea and a bunch of friends, and we just are typing and try to figure it out as we went along and had some failures and then later some successes along e way. john: you started for something

called nubia combat that did not work. >> the concept was that if we were going to have an internet encyclopedia it needed to be even more academic than a traditional encyclopedia. we had a seven stage review process to organize it. it was very intimidating for people to get involved in. it was a complete failure, and we stumbled across the concept and started using the software. we get more done in two weeks and almost two years. it was amazing. john: and then it built. all of these people are editing in adding things themselves. the usage rate kept rising. >> today we have nearly 500 million people using the website every month. john: just over ten years for nothing to 500 million people. one ofhe biggest upsetin the world, and at the beginning this stuffy establishment said this cannot work. you need editors.

the user o visits with te pds is a visitor to a public restaurant. >> something that is underappreciated. it's clean because reputation makes it. the premise is that you need to at page editors. encyclopedia britannica pays 100 people to check the accuracy of articles. >> a huge community of people who are very enthusiastic, very eager to get things right. john: you pay those people. >> it's a volunteer community, a charitable projects. we are organized as a charity, so we exist from donations from the general public. all of the work that uc, the writing is done by the volunteer community. john: how can you know who is good and who is stupid? >> you know, if nothing is one

thing and always try to remind people is that we don't consider it would appeal to be some kind of wide open former you can come and say and do anything. people will very quickly challenging. we havesome of the best and most interesting discussions you can find anywhere. let's actually find what's true, which sources to rely on the most. it's a fascinating process. john: and it's prett accurate. my site only has one mistake. comparing the accuracy of scientific articles verses encyclopedia britannica. panicle -- panels of experts and the appropriate specialty founder of course harry instapundit.com errors per injury, three in britannica, not much difference. >> not much difference, and that was several years ago.

for me one of the most amusing parts, when the study was being carried out, as soon as it was published some people in the community came to me and said, can you get from the author the list of the errors because we want to fix them. the and the response was to issue a 20 page denunciations of the study. that is the spirit of the times. they can't fix heirs. they printed and shipping out. we just want to make it better. john: and more than a thousand dollars, even to buy the cd. you're freak. >> it's an astonishing thing. we are still not fully all the way to realizing the dream of a free encyclopedia for every single person on the planet, but were getting closer. john: thank you for seeing it -- saying what i could not. >> tnk you. john: the point of "freedom 2.0" is not that we don't need regulation. do.

it doesn't haveo be government regulation. ecomics professor wriing a book called private governments. what do you mean? >> most people assume that rules and regulations need to come from the state. if you look around the world today in history there are lots of examples that come from markets rather than from governments. john: paypall. >> a great example. when they first came out they face fraud from all over the world. they turned to the fbi to try and track these people down, but the fbi has no idea who ese people work, no idea what the technology was. john: it can't work. >> that would be the traditional theory. in reality aypall realized they should take matters into their own hands. they developed a private from detection system where they would use computers to say this might be fraudulent and then send it to a human to investigate. john: another one.

>> if they did not send you $5 a pack. >> at what cost to 500,000. john: people will she. >> that is the theory, but private parties look to problems and solve tem. ebay and other groups developed private reputation mechanisms. the more the these mechanisms work the last 20 government. john: one thing that keeps me out is tt theyreated all this wealth and good stuff o when they weren't connected to government. today they're b in government wants a piece. 114 lobbyists, course of 73. they spend millions and trying to manipulate washington. >> good things are terrible to the private sector. when government gets involved it is really getting regulating, getting people -- getting in the way people doing things. john: another example of that,

years ago they said france's way at of america. giving every person a computer instead of phone book. >> you can't have one organization planning all the things that markets can. markets rely on so many dispersed people to invent, to try new things dry and test their ideas in the marketplace. john: went out of business. still going strong. >> if you look throughout history, there are tons of examples of this. government did not understand financial markets. they thought they were forms of gambling. government refused to enforce all but the most simple contracts. nevertheless, brokers figured out how to do short sales, futures contracts even though none of them were enforceable by law. in london in the 1700's they trad in coffee houses. after a while they decided,

let's create and enforce rules with denn, the house. if you default you are going to get kicked out of the coffee house. we are gong to call you a lame-duck. that is where the expression comes from. they have to waddle out and leave the exchange. john: and the coffeehouse, one of the first ones begin the london stock exchange. >> that's right. the mother became my word is my bond it. john: thank you. we need government. we need regulation to make sure. it does not have to be government regulation. coming up, how smart are robots about to get? also, how the internet helps us keep an eye on government and out government officials pok

this happy couple ed capital one venture miles for their "destination wedding." double miles you can "actually" use. but with those single mile travel cards... [ bridesmaid ] blacked out... but i'm a bridesmaid. oh! "x" marks the spot she'll never sit. but i bought a dress! a toast... ...to the capital one venturcard. fly any airline, any flight, anytime. double miles you can actually use. what a coincidence? what's in your wallet? [ all screaming ]

♪ >> no more screcy. that's a commitment i make to you. john: no more secrecy sods good. everybody applauded. transparency is important in government. government officials get to use force. they spend our money.

we wouldn't be able to see what they do. they like that. once n office evn advocates of transparency kirk -- start keeping stuff secret. bumping his head against e problem. he works for the competitive enterprise institute, a think tank that like to keep it up and governments. they don't like to snooping around in government when you ask questions. >> they don't get the joke any longer. john: you file a freedom of information requests. why? >> we have a legal right to inspect puic records. eir public. i'm paying for this microphone. we're paying for all of this government. the progressives got one right. we have a need for these things. john: and that is why there is the freedom of affirmation th paed during the vietnam war because congress was upset that lyndon johnson was keeping secrets. it allows anyone get even than non citizen to demand correspondents duments, and

the government can refuse only if it can show the national securityssue or just an irrelevant private matter. >> all records are present hours because we are the employer. >> there are nine. >> personal, private, national security, the geologic formations. common-sense exemptions, but the rest is also common sense. these are our records. we have proven we need to see them. john: your book called the liberal warren transparen in the you point out it was the liberals to put these rules in effect. and frankly the boston globe wrote that president bush expanded the number of agencies with authority to classified documents a secret including the epa and the ever pulled department. so the republicans are doing this, not just liberals. >> we have at least five left-wing groups who are actually more concerned about the ansparency that because.

obama is worst in bushes they said was the worst ever or come out right and say obama is the worst ever. the obama administration. john: he has rejected more freedom of information act requests than bush. >> also proecuted more whistle-blowers including as simply because they blew the whistle on software boondoggles and someone. obama is the worst threat comes to transparency ever. we know from their behavior is their hiding things that desperately don't want us to seek. now, -- john: maybe you're a busy body, the political enemy in the dow whatou'd have this stuff. i don't blamethem. >> i'm paying for the microphone. i didn't ask whether they wanted me to see it. these in my records unless the burden is on them and they can provide can't. what they're doing is telling us things that aren't true, finding it increasingly according to their e-mails.

john: the e-mails told us about solyndra and the people who gave money who were getting it back. >> you wanted it, needed it, they don't want us to see what's going on until a carbon tax is enacd, for example. john: the apartment of justice was running an activist website, real climate. were all going to die from global warming. a government offic >> nasa was doing that and doj filed an affidavit admitting to. i said i would like to see what you're doing my time because they erased all the day stamps showing they're doing this from the office. they submitted an affidavit filed by the department of justice who shrug their oulders and walked on. we have an elaborate document destruction under way in violation of the criminal code which is why we are giving you these records. john: now trickier, they use fake names. the head of the epa, using a government account under the fake name richard windsor. he is her dog.

wind a fake name? john: the epa said it created the dresses she would have an e-mail address that would n be flooded with the mills from the public. john: wide a fake name. why don't you want people -- john: tortured. to get anything done you have to have some priva conversations, tests, ideas. >> there i an exemption for that. you don't have to create a fake name. john: president obama was very specific about how the public should know what the government is doing. re's a clip. >> is a bill that ends up on my desk as president. you, the public, have fivedays to look on line and find out what is in the before i sign it. john: again, lots of applause which seems pretty simple. five days. it's pretty good. yet he broke it. the first deal he signed. >> it was too much. the hallrk, you know where they struck those deals with the drug companies?

on al. prate servers run out of the white house to hide from us. they are not that into transparency. john: thank you for trying to helps find out what's going on. coming up, how technology makes it easier for citizens journalists, people like you to expose treachery in government. >> put yourself was up in the air. ♪ [ male announcer ] how do you turn an entrepreneur's dream... ♪ into a scooter that talks to the cloud? ♪ or turn 30-million artifacts... ♪

into a high-tech masterpiece? ♪ whateveyour business challenge, dell has the technology and services to help you solvit. vision expanding to a 5-inch 1080p hd display and camera. touch acquiring nfc. hearing evolving with beats audio. wireless charging activated. troducing droid dna by htc. it's not an upgrade to your r phone. it's an upgrade to yourself.

>> we are a citizen journalism army, and we are goin to take this country back. thank you very much. john: that's a scene from a new documentary about citizen journalism. he died shortly after that speech, but the ideas he expressed live on. no longer do we have to rely on the pompous left-wing coup was from abc, cbs, nbc, pbs. we have choices.

you just expect this, but what he calleditizens journalism is a new freedom to. zero idea. to explain, let's go to the experts. he now all by himself gets more readers than may newspapers used to. we're also joined by a group produced that movie entitled "hating breitbart." why did you call it "hating breitbart"? >> one of the things that we found interesting was the level of venom directed toward him. a lot of people who are in the opinion revenues will get that. he actually seemed to really gain energy from the things that were directed at them. john: you did not mind being paid. >> i think he loved it. i think he loved being hated as much as 11 people agreeing with him. he left the back and forth the idea so much that he drew energy

from it whether or not someone agree with them are not. i think he definitely gained energy. john: and he thrived by reporting things that the mainstream media was just skippingnd the biggest example is the acorn story. you were part of the beginning. do-gooders', helping poor people. it turned out they were sleazy and maybe engaging in voter fraud. then came this pen pen prostitute. utility. >> speaking with james o'keefe about a video he had done. and at a maura flynn at the end of the conversation i asked him, so, what are you working on now. he began to describe the acorn videos that he and anna were working on. i couldn't belie what i was hearing. i thought, well, is this kid has what he says he has this is huge i asked him what his plan ws

for releasing these videos, and he said, he had approached the networks and released in that way. i strongly recommended that he not do that. john: so he went to breitbart to release them gradually. they were encouraging teen prostitution, tax evasion, encouraging peop like to the government. the mainstream media still smeared at this. a columnist at the columbia journalism review said o'keefe and giles do not seem to take a journalistic approach. the conservative activist. and in your film breitbart answers. >> journalism school, yet i happen to believe they are the best jounalists and ever come across in my entire life. john: all right. hyperbole ide. this is what is new to people. going around the mainstream media. >> telling people what they need to know. that is what he did. that is not what most establishment journalists seem to want to do.

they want to peddle the narrative of the date. 's usually one that is politically favorable to the democratic party or at least the establishment in general. >> which was at the time, just nice to my good people. we don't want to touch this icky stuff. >> more than sympathetic. believe the traditional press was protective. and as andrew released the story that proved to be the case. john: they still did not coverage, and congress be funded acorn before that new york times and "washington post" reporter on a. >> that's exactly right. the snate moved to defund. the census severed all its ties. that was all before the new york times or the "washington post" had written a column. john: another widely report piece of propaganda that was debunked by the cell phone cameras that breitbart talked about was the claim from some u.s. congressman the racist the party members screamed and fought in the inward. so he asked tea party members,

send us what is on your cell phones. >> that is the video we found. looking down as they're walking down the stairs, from the bottom of the steps watching. we have a video. of course we have the video with a step off. and then we have video from across the street even. john: he offered 100,000 for anyone who could show someone screaming the in-word. >> i don't think we have never seen anything where you have videos being taken from youtube to piece together a story to be told this way. i think that that is another sign that we are in a new media environment. it's not just that one person can go out and found something with a camera. a hundred people have done that, you can go and find those things and put them together. this is actually what happened. all these disparate pieces.

john: thank goodness since w are all journalists. thank god we have bauxite years. >> you have these ubiquitous tools for gathering information like smart phones and video cameras. then you have these platforms for distributing mike youtube and twitter. then you have blocks and other sites. they can pull it all together and give you a picture of what's going on from a lot of dfferent sides and let eaders make up their own mind. it's not like the mainstream media are still very powerful. they're just not as powerful as they used to be in no longer controlled and there is completely. to me it makes me wonder what historical events would have looked like if we had a bunch of cameras from different angles. john: when you started, you were a hotshot lawyer. you could have had a big deal legal career, and you gave it up to dthis thing called blocking, which is near death when i first heard about it. now all by yourself you get

6 million hits. >> pretty decent for a one-man operation. john: one of the stories citizen journalists broke, dan rather and george brush. >> cbs had a big scoop that dan rather bought out, and it was supposed to be memos from george w. bush's time in that texas international garda suggested he was away without leave. john: used in tustin not serve. >> that's basically the gist of it. kind of familiar, and someone typed in and said the fall settings of microsoft word and it looked exactly the same. i don't think they had microsoft word back in 1970's. the fund did not exist. it was fae. embarrassed. unbelieving and being exiled to wherever the hell he is now. pretty much a major blow to what i think ten years earlier would have been an area of adelle attraction.

john: with that merited bush might not have been elected. and monitor lewinsky likewise. newsweek had it but would not run it. >> that's right. it was spiked. the story leaked, but that was enough to break loose and get out there. they could not to the gate keeping any more. >> i look at these comparisons. getting huge numbers of viewers. and here, you're successful. 90 million, and the 25 million. garrett's 6 million. town hall which carries all of these columnists, iluding my column just its 4 million. how do you get six? >> i have no idea. i think i am a boring guy. >> it's amazing when you think that not very long ago if you wanted to challenge the integrity of the traditional press the only way you could do

was to write a letter to the editor. >> which we ignored. >> or submit an op-ed. hope that your letter might be run. i don't think so much power has ever been transferred from so few people to so many ordinary people almost all the world almost overnight. john: all part of "freedom 2.0". thank you. and coming up, want to buy something the government does not want you to buy? and new on-line currency makes that easier. is that a problem or a good thing? that's next as we return with more of "freedom 2.0". it's the little things in life that make me smile. spending the day with my niece. i don't use super poligrip for hold because my dentures fit well. before those little pieces would get in between my dentures and my gum and it was uncomfortable. even well-fitting dentures let in food particles. super poligrip is zinc free. with just a few dabs, it's clinically proven to seal out more food particles so you're more comfortable and confident while you eat.

so it's not about keeping my dentures in, it's about keeping the food particles out. [ charlie ] try zinc free super poligrip.

♪ john: want to buy some secret stuff, engage in a transaction with some other consenting adult that you don't want the government to know about? that is easier now thanks to a "freedom 2.0" which brought us something called bitcoin, an

on-line currency, oe not controlled by any government or any single company even. instead it is run by many individuals to form a compur network that keeps track of bitcoin prices and how many you have. it's almost completely anonymous now, why is that could you might say? people will use it to buy illegal guns and drugs. they do actually, but reason magazine says on balance that is a good thing. a good thing? why? >> the first thing you have to keep in mind is that they are no more suspicious or anonymous than cash. already people use cash all the time to buy the legal and analysis of the don't want their wife to know about. a lot of room for transactions that we mightot want a permanent record of. right now cash, but now we hav bitcoin. john: who needs digital cash? >> i'm sure you know and certainly i have stopped going

to stores almost completely. i'd buy everything online. for some people everything includes drugs or guns or whatever it is their wont and it would like to be able to buy an online anonymously. john: originally paypall was supposed to do this. >> this was the dream, but it would be a currency and outside of government. there was a central place that could be shut down. you could go to the servers and say we're going to climb down on this. this is different. stored on lots of different computers, a diffuse peer to peer. there is no one place you can go and say now the government knows what your doing whereas you could with paypall. when it came to a terrorism, ney laundering, drugs, it turned out to be easy to shut that down. john: but not bitcoin which makes it sound like it will make it easier for terrorists. >> that is a possible very small side effect, but i tink the much more important factor here is that what it can do in theory

is protect people from their own government. right now the deral reserve can make money less valuable, the money that you have the you learn st devaluing the currency. in theory what they do is take that power away from the government and give it to individuals. you can put your money where everyone. john: that technically is illegal as well because in not allowed add this to been but a basic part of freedom.y. they allow that, but here is the part that freaks' people out. this silk road website where people spend. they sell all kinds of nasty stuff. heroin, cocaine. >> is just like any other on-line retailer. they have user reviews, so you can no his rping you off into selling you did. theact is that anything that kind of normalizes even black markets i thik is ultimately a force for good. people don't get dangerous

products is often, get ripped off. they're still vulnerability. if you bite of lunchthey have to send this summer. john: seven address. >> with the fact is that most of the transactions that are happening have incredibly high user ratings. people like this. they want it. they want to buy these things. just because they don't want a paper trail, it is in a sign of doing something wrong. john: and silk robe was nmed after the silk road that used to trade silk from china, the west gave them wind,oil, and cold. >> in the original silk road was an incredible force for progress. this is one of the very early instances of globalization. spices that were impossible to get in europe and the way back from asia and other things with the other direction. tnt a dead the silk road is somehow bad just because it's anonymous is misguided.

john: that lets people evade taxes. >> well, i guess my response would be amen. john: we need taxes to pay for what government should do. >> ultimately the responsibility to pay for taxs resigns with the individual. we don't blame the retailer if you don't play your taxes. we don't blame your employer if you choose not to pay your income taxes. it's an individual case. other not as an online site that facilitates purchases withut taxes not they're fault. john: and bitcoin is used not just to buy drugs, people use it to by pouring. adelle want someone to se the paper trail. online gbling which is to believe illegal. even for transactions that aren't illegal now but might sometimes be in the future like buying a gun. >> i think it's really reasonable for lots of kinds of purchases which are not totally illegal. you might not want to leave a record of that. guns are a great example.

later onsomebody might go on like a sales records and follow up and come take a gun went. john: my senator whois against everything that's good is trying to ban bitcoin. how frustrating it is that you can't stop this new currency. >> unbelievable it's all hden because they don't use dollars. they use this surrogate currency john: he also wants to ban guns, caffeine sprays, high-frequency trading. they can't ban it because they cannot get their hands on it really. >> sites that allow you to do these kinds of transactions anonymously increase the power of the individual, decrease the power of government. they take some of the control away from people like chuck schumer and give it to you nd me. of course the eighth that. john: of course that's a good thing. thank you. coming up, robots keep getting better.

soon there will be smrter. what does that mean for freedom? ♪ [ male announcer ] how could a luminous proin in jellyfish, impact life expectancy in the u.s., real estate inong kong, and the optics industry in germany? at t. rowe price, we understand the connections of a complex, global econy. it's just one reason over 75% of our mutual funds beat their 10-year lipper average. t. rowe price. invest with confidence. request a prospectus or summary prospectus with investment information, risks, fees and expenses to read and consider carefully before investing. with investment information, risks, fees and expenses ♪ music

kids will spend 15 minutes watching online videos like this one. brushing for two minutes now, can save your child from severe tooth pain later. two minutes twice a day. they have the time.

♪ john: technology has made us richer, given us more choices,

but what is next? smarter robots fr one thing. last year robot clled once and -- watson crushed him in competition in the quiz show. okay. a computer can win in jeopardy. economics professor jim miller says will will come next is much more interesting. >> computers are getting smarter and smarter and eventually there will be able to do everything we can. john: you don't know that. we have special skills. >> readjust machines, and we are machines, our brains run on me. we know it's possible to build machines much smarter than our brains. john: computer power keeps doubling. >> the amount of computer power keeps doubling. twenty doublings is about a million fold increase. we have a computer as fast as a human brain from and 20 years

will be a million times faster and we'd all be obsolete. john: the first that maybe the computers will make their own computers. >> if we had computer smarter than people making computers there's water in them and as they get smarter and better making smarter things we can have an explosion and go from computers being a bit smarter than us. john: the fear then is that companies will hire people. >> the purpose of work is to get stuff to consume. will be great to live in n economy which robusta all the work, there were nice, and we get to enjoy the fruits of the labor. john: that's one possibility. you have others. >> unfortunately these machines would not need us. in my tree just the way we treat chimpanzees. perfectly happy it take a step on leave for dead. john: will merge wit the machines. >> put computers in our brains.

they're getting smaller and faster. if we put computers -- john: we already have thr place of body parts. >>xactly. if we can start augmenting brains we will get smarter, be much more productive and become very rich. >> of the stars to happen criticism, this will be -- this will exacerbate inequality. the rich will merge more quickly >> that is possiblebut i think the other outcome is more likely . if you looked at cell phones, the ridge where the first to mothers now for farmers in bangladesh to have them. a lot of this technology will be the kind which is really expensive to develop but once you develop it will cost that much to make extra copies. the poor might end up getting this of only a few years after the ridge to. john: what do we do to prepare? >> one way as an individual you can prepare is to thinkhow you can continue to be a productive and play in a world in which computers could continue smarter

eventually will be helpless, but along the way there will be a lot of stuff that people can do and computers can't. if you can figure that out in your profession and the will to make a lot of money. john: also possible if we merged the we will live much longer. >> and that's the upsie. if we have medical research being done by super smart computers and they like us, they can extend our lifetime indefinitely. john: what do you mean come if they likeus? out as a machine like us. >> it runs on software, and people will write the software. if we get right the machines will have objectes. be nice to people in the things they care about verses the alternatives, the matrix with a takeover. except as unrealistic because it would need is around for any reason. john: how much time do we have >> well, i would say at a minimum probably at least ten years.

almost certainly this century. i would give about 2045 is the best estimate for women live computers the smartest people. john: of find what you say possible, but i look back at all predictions, 1924 article. the flying automobile, the car of the future. as recently as 1979 that predicted the olympics to be on the moon by the year 2020. it could be totally off about this tuff. >> it's certainlyossible, but there are so many different ways of achieving intelligence enhaements and such tremendous military and economic benefits to doing that that think it's likely we will. the kid had the olympics on the men by now of really wanted to. john: on that note, thank you. coming up, my take on freedom this is $100,000. we asked total strangers to watch it for us. thank you so much.

i appreciate it. i'll be right back. they didn't take a dime. how much in fees does your bank take to watch your money? if your bank takes more money than a stranger, you need an ally. ally bank. your money needs an ally.

john: at the start of the new year as they think about the future it seems bleak. politicians put us deeper into debt. they regulate endlessly. don't do this. do that. freedom decreases with each lot and they pass more. i say this is why our future is bleak. , top of that new technology may give government more power.

wireless communications. who drones make it easier to kill people. better cameras can allow the government to spy on us. new york city will soon have 3,000. then make us safer of the london police use it to spy on women in their apartment. it is scary someday robots could become so quicker smart to decide who needs humans and kill us. that this is science fiction for now but many researchers think it could happen. but. thomas said it is obvious the populaton will outpace the food supply and starvation, famine is inevitable. that was789. then the darling of the left

predicted pollution and global warming saying i not exist by the year 2000.l that was in the '70s. england is still there. thinks to technology there is less pollution in iustrialized countries today. but the media continues to make scary predictions. our kids to wired for their own go? "newsweek" warns of a panic, a depression, a psychosis. scare muggers are always wrong. they make us wealthier and healthier and freedom 2.0 that means new ways to e the internet like with the pds,ace book. free from