"press: here" is sponsored in part by barracuda network, storage solutions to simplify i.t. city national bank, providing loans of credit to help northern california businesses grow. big thinker tim o'reilly is joining me for a wide ranging discussion on the future of work and a mayor trying to tame a hot economy. palo alto mayor pat burt said there's too many jobs. our reporters from yahoo! finance, and "usa today's" john schwartz, this week on "press: here."

>> good morning, everyone. i'm scott mcgrew. we have been thinking a lot lately about the future of work. certainly how robots will replace many of us at work. but a very smart fellow points out we may have been ignoring something called augmented work. technology working with us, not against us to make us the worker more effective. this is video from microsoft, but there are any number of companies developing these sorts of ideas. headsets and holograms, giving us very new views of work. tim o'reilly is famous for something called his o'reilly radar. the ability to predict the next big thing. i can tell you that tim's ability not magical. it's because he's a voracious listener and a good learner. tim o'reilly is the founder of o'reilly media. he's the leading intellectual. so leading intellectual is a lot to live up to over the next few

minutes. >> i like to say my reputation precedes me. >> augmented work. this is wearing the goggles. what else with might we see in the future that we're still getting employed and drawing a paycheck, but doing something better. >> i think it's important to think that augmentation doesn't mean augmented work. uber driver is an augmented work. >> in what way? >> could a taxi driver find you on a random street corner? no, they're augmented by the smartphone. could a random person step into the job and find any address in the city? no, they're augmented by waze and google map. uber and lyft, all of those things is because beuse technology to augment the workers. there are more people working in the industry than there were before. because it's better. you can do things that you could

not do more. >> are there certain industries that lend themselves more toward augmented industry? that helps them rather than replaces them? >> i think there are certainly some industries where this is going to be the case. but i think it's super important to realize that the opportunity that is afforded us by technology is to discover how we can use people to do things that were previously impossible. so often because of all of the financial incentives that drive us in the opposite direction, people think first only of how can we use machines to put people out of work? but great fortunes are made when you figure out how to use machines to do things that were previously impossible and create new industry. >> one or two examples that you're following really closely? for me, when google glass came out, whether it's medicine or architecture or elsewhere -- >> well, absolutely.

the industrial applications of augmented reality are enormous. and i think google made a massive mistake with the first release of glass by trying to make it this cool consumer device. i think it was a famous misstatement by a google executive that said if u.p.s. drivers are wearing it, will it fail? no, if they had been wearing it, you would have succeeded. so very clearly, you know, augmented reality and architecture is going to be huge. when you -- even in the office setting. i was up there with della at microsoft recently. he said i do a lot of my work on the lens. i have a bigger workplace. i put my xcel and my web browser over here and then you look around and there it is. >> you mentioned google glass taking a consumer first approach and then trying to go into enterprise later on. but we're seeing the sort of same thing happening right know when it comes to playstation and

the playstation headset. >> more for recreation. >> right. more for recreation, exactly. is that the right approach? >> first off, the approach 0 -- of those devices is more towards virtual reality than augmented reality. virtual reality is entertainment at the present. there are entertainment in augmented reality as we saw with pokemon go. it was unexpected. >> you're looking at artificial intelligence as well. what are you -- some are very concerned. i mean, some fairly famous names are concerned about it. what are you thinking about it entering the workplace? >> well, the first thing i would say is there's a lot of fear mongering about a.i. and if you actually talk to practitioners in the field, as opposed to famous people in tech

who are not practitioners in the field you will find that the practitioners say that the fears of sky net and, you know -- >> it's the first thing they -- >> -- the intelligence are just overblown. but that being said, you know, narrow artificial intelligence is around us everywhere. it's a continuum between algorithms, you know, big data. and a.i. i mean, what we used to call a.i. today we just say it's a programming technique. >> and political campaigns are getting involved in big data. not necessarily a.i. the way you and i would think of it, big data. >> i think the thing that's most interesting to think about is the way that algorithms are increasingly ruling our lives. and, you know, there's been a discussion of that in media, for example. focused on consumer. where you say, hmm, you know, the filter bubble of people are being fed news stories that already match what they're

looking for and that changes what consumers read and see. but it's important to realize that it shapes what people produce. you know, as a business model of newspapers for example, it's increasingly driven by online advertising rather than subscription. that is fundamentally changed their independence. >> you're saying that writers or tv would follow what their customers want as opposed to what they should be writing? >> that's correct. look at the coverage of the presidential election for example, it's clearly been driven by chasing page views. or chasing views of video views or social media mentions rather than what's the real story here? >> i know you have a follow-up question. fit it in before the commercial. >> it's interesting you talk about how the media is covering this election in particular. it is in a sense chasing where the algorithms is and it's like a shot clock era really. we have a shot clock going down to the next event. just wondering which of the

candidates do you think in terms of we talk about their use of this data is better -- >> i don't think it's the candidates' use of the data that i'm concerned about. i think there's no question in my mind in terms of a sort of data infrastructure for, you know, electioneering, clinton and trump has an innate feel for social media. what i was talking about really was the fact that in the same way that kennedy understood t t that, you know, television was going to be game changing i think trump does understand that this is a massive loophole in the intelligence of our media which can be exploited. and that if you just make news, make crazy statements, you will get coverage. and he works it and works it and works it and, you know, i have to say, i am incredibly disappointed by our media.

the very, very little of what we used to think of as the legitimate role as the fourth estate is just not there. >> well, i saw a sound bite and we ran it in which trump said, you know, open borders. that's all she's going to have, folks, is open borders, then we talked about something else. no fault to the person running the sound bite, wait, that's not true. we have to go back and say, that isn't true. you mentioned the shot clock. i have a shot clock and that is a commercial break. we'll do that. we'll be back with tim o'reilly in a moment.

welcome back to "press: here." we are talking with tim o'reilly and john schwartz has been itching to a ask a question. >> we have talk about how trump has used social media so adroitly, kind of manipulated the press conference which has fallen behind him lock, stock and barrel. but what precludes a cnn or a network from showing a live speech and then revisiting it a day or two later with the fact check. so that when he or hillary clinton said something, a bubble would burst or something would dispute what they said or correcting what they say? >> i think the algorithms. because in the end it's not news anymore. and so it's going to get less coverage and so they would go, well, it's not worth our while.

>> even taking something like matt lauer's now notorious interview this past week? >> yes, absolutely. you can in fact, you know, media can do a good job and in fact individuals do it always the time, finding something and then turning it into say an animated gyf or little posterized image and they get recirculated on social media. but you have to understand that when the business model is advertising, it changes the coverage. >> we're wondering if the audience would buy into the idea of fact checking the reporter. like when they asked a question or failed to ask the follow-up question, what he or she should have done -- >> we are seeing that on twitter. i mean -- >> but i mean -- >> it's keeping us honest which it certainly did in the instances you spoke of. let me change the subject slightly. i said in the beginning that you were voraciously curious.

you have a next economy summit coming up in october. one of your keynote is called what problem are we trying to solve? i think it's a great question. so many of these conferences and discussions begin with all right, here's what we'll talk about. your question at the beginning of the next economy summit is, what should we try to solve? >> well, i'm really trying to wrestle with the question of technology and the future of work. it seems to me that we -- we as a society are facing a lot of really wicked problems. you know, we have growing income inequality. we don't know what causes it. we have lots of theories but we haven't figured that out. we have fears of technology which may in fact be the solution. we have massive problems like climate change or the demographics of ageing populations. >> are you going to solve all of these -- it's two days. >> we're not going to try to solve all of these, but what

we'll talk about is how to think about these things. because that's the real problem that we face, that we don't actually have a -- sort of the right mindset for tackling problems. so for me, one of the things that i'm focused on is in an odd way, the more i thought about the question of technology and the future of work, the algorithms that i become concerned about are not the algorithms of a.i. but some of the broader algorithms that we have encoded into this machine that we call the market. you know? people think that the market is sort of like a fact of nature when in fact it's a set of rules that we build up. and four years, for example, we put in place this bad rule which the program has been executing ever since which is if corporation only focuses on making money for itself everything else will work out fine. and it has not turned out very well. you know? now we have to actually rewrite the rules of business and the

focus is really to ask ourselves how should we be rewriting those rules? >> jump in, we have about 30 seconds. >> okay. do you think -- [ indiscernible ] like homelessness or income disparity or -- or is it just too concerned with profits? >> you know, it's interesting because there are a lot of people in tech who are trying to solve big problems. and, you know, there's no question in my mind that if you look in general at the track record of tech versus the track record of say wall street, you know, wall street is a heck of a lot more self-serving. a lot of tech entrepreneurs who are going, yeah, let's really tackle a real problem. of course, there are also tech entrepreneurs who are really kind of playing in the financial

betting markets. many start-ups are just financial instruments just like wall street, you know, cbo. >> tim o'reilly is head of o'reilly media. the summit starts october 10th in san francisco. >> yeah. through the 11th. well, up next, silicon valley mayor says we have too many jobs. "press: here" will be back soon.

welcome back to "press: here." in the news business, every once in a while a perfect symbol just drops into your lap. in the case of high house prices that's kate downing. she posted an open letter to the internet announcing her resignation because she said she couldn't afford to live in palo alto despite the fact she's a corporate lawyer. are we building enough homes, can we make them more affordable? in palo alto there's an interesting reversal, are there too many jobs? is there way to slow the number of companies moving in? can city hall fight a good economy? the mayor of palo alto said the greatest prob right now is the bay -- problem right now is the massive job growth. he's also a high-tech ceo in his own. can you clarify that for me? i understand you want everyone

to have a job but i can kind of see what you mean. >> it's the rate of the job growth in the region. we have been growing for the last five years or more, six years at a rate that is really u.n. unsustainable for the region. healthy base, to keep enwith the housing growth and transportation transformation is a good thing. and it's disruptive in a negative way. it really damages the social fabric. it damages the opportunity for people who aren't in those $200,000 a year high-tech jobs to be able to live and survive here. >> you're doing that in part by saying no, you may not build new buildings or make buildings a certain height downtown. you are -- >> we're moderating. >> moderating, okay. >> big difference. >> between controlling and moderating. >> yeah. we're trying to have some degree of metering on the rate of growth. i mean, we think that's a

strange concept. we look to the federal reserve to very carefully look at how to affect our economy in ways that will not overheat it or underheat it. even if question do in i kind of government -- do any kind of government boundaries it's an odd thing. >> is it working or too early to tell? >> well, we're having some benefits. we're beginning to slow the rate of job growth as we're also taking that -- those same developments that would have been to new office, we're changing our zoning and our incentives to have them emphasize new housing in those areas. in fact, in the downtown areas and the transit corridors. so that's a transformation that begins to try to address this problem. not going to solve it, but improve it or mitigate the problem. >> what kind of -- too much job

growth, what kind of a strain does it put on the city? in terms of services, does it become a major inconvenience because there are too many people in this one area? >> certainly congestion is a big issue. we throughout the valley are hitting a lot of areas where we're in virtual gridlock. that's not good, it's not good for commuters, not good for people who just are trying to go to deal with their kids' activities or any of those things. so that's one thing. the other is frankly the astronomical cost of housing. and my point wasn't that we shouldn't address the housing needs, it's that we can't possibly keep one this rate of job -- >> like an issue in san francisco. so there was so much construction, so not enough housing so you have this consequently a strange dichotomy, you have the housing going up and people homeless in the same block.

>> we saw it during the dotcom bust and maybe you can speak to, mr. mayor, in san francisco, all the buildings going up. we know there will be a cycle. now, it may not be as devastating as the dotcom bust. san francisco may not be prepared for the down cycle. you can hire too many police officers basically and then all of a sudden, couldn't afford to pay them when we got into the down cycle, right? >> it's both that and it's also the need to continue to have some diversity to our economy. so to the extent that we are emphasizing one economic sector and not just tech, but more software than ever, as we get those big ebbs and flows, those of us who have been in this economy a long time know this is a boom and bust economy. when we have a bust, it becomes even more disruptive. whereas if we're a more diverse economy it's less impact. >> mayor, are you seeing a

softening at all with regards to the rental market? john, you bring up that influx of luxurious apartments permeating throughout. and are you seeing something on that end as well? >> not really yet. >> i'll give you a figure, i know you're talking about residential, but office space i read somewhere that palo alto, $103 per square foot. it's more expensive to open up in palo alto as in san francisco. as you try to moderate people as they -- as palo alto grows, if i had my job at apple or cupertino, i'd still want to live in palo alto because it's a livable and wonderful city. that you can't control because those jobs are not in your -- in your city limits. >> that's right. two-thirds of the people who live in palo alto work in --

outside of palo alto. most of our people who work in tech don't work in palo alto and vice versa. we won't change that, that ratio very much as we build more housing. so it's not a panacea, but it does have to be part of a balance. >> you've got a cloud -- they're moving from one to another. but it's the largest i think real estate so far, so what percentage of downtown is palantir? >> well, they're -- they're around 200,000 square feet out of 1.3 million. amazon is very big downtown. that's one of our sub issues is that our downtown area had been a general business environment and had morphed into having a lot of start-up environment. but we have a couple of large companies who decided to grow and expand and essentially take over major portions of our

downtown. so we're relooking at frankly the zoning code that's currently there. doesn't appear to have permitted big r&d companies. >> you'll have trouble keeping the cute little sidewalk cafe if somebody is willing to pay a ton of money for that -- >> well, we have retail protection ordinances but we're losing the business start-ups downtown. they're being squeezed out. the thing that makes downtown different from sanford research park, this incredible ecosystem whereas you go into a cafe and you might have ten start-ups being -- deals being discussed as you're surrounded. that's we're losing. >> pat burt is the may yosh of -- mayor of palo alto with a problem that most mayors would love to have. thank you for being here. "press: here" will be back in a moment.

welcome back to "press: here." we have a veteran of this tv

show, but for other organizations, now you're with yahoo! finance. how is that going? >> good. week five, so far so good. i'm traveling a lot between l.a. and san francisco and moving back in november. but it's good i got my feet wet this week with the apple event. >> yeah. with yahoo! and all of the changes, i mean, as a place to work it feels stable and a good place to work? >> you know, absolutely it does. we've -- i'm in the media group and we do our own sort of thing and there's a lot of optimism and excitement. it's a great question, it was one i was asking myself thinking about taking the job. i announced my job three days after the verizon news hit and people are wondering what are you doing? interesting timing. but for me it seemed like a good time to jump in. verizon acquired aol and gadget, a lot of other media properties. >> people are used to this? >> people are used to it. it's kept like a hands off

approach with properties. >> john schwartz, that apple meeting was a big one. it was a crowded one. >> usually is now. they have moved to the auditorium, they had sia yesterday. it was great. they have the car pool karaoke which i think was a highlight of the event. >> yeah. >> but it was -- you know, with apple, i kind of went in with middle expectations, i don't know about you. >> i did too. >> i was somewhat pleasantly surprised. but i think they're in a holding pattern before the next thing hits. >> it will be the tenth anniversary. >> it will be big, the iphone 8. a break through probably. apple is buying all the machines and learning the a.i. start-up, in the auto -- >> i wouldn't give up on apple. >> exact what i. >> thanks for being with us this morning and thank you. that's our show for this week. thanks to my guests. tim o'reilly is the founder of reilly media. his next economy conference is

october 10th. well worth your time. pat burt was my other guest, dealing with a problem that some mayors would love to have. if you missed the interviews they're available online at pressheretv.com. i'm scott mcgrew. thank you for making us part of your sunday morning. >> "press: here" is sponsored in part by barracuda network. and by city national bank to help northern california businesses grow. damian trujillo: hello and welcome to

"comunidad del valle." i'm damian trujillo, and today, my tocayo, charley trujillo from chusma house publications is back on our show. he's bringing another new author with him on your "comunidad del valle." male announcer: nbc bay area presents "comunidad del valle" with damian trujillo. damian: we begin today with some great things happening at the silicon valley education foundation. muhammed chaudhry is ceo of this great organization. welcome to the show. we're talking about how pleasant it is for you to be on this community show, given that you've been all over network news the last couple of months. thank you for being here. muhammed chaudhry: thank you for having me. this is more fun! damian: right! so, talk about the foundation. tell us what the goal is and the mission. i mean, it's been some great work, especially in some of the pockets of this valley that really need that help. talk about that work. muhammed: so, at silicon valley education foundation, we are absolutely obsessed with preparing students