02/06/2016 Newsnight


02/06/2016

The EU opens the way for Uber. BHS collapse. Cameron's big TV grilling. Mikhail Khodorkovsky interview. And are we unknowingly living in a simulated reality?


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 02/06/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!

Transcript


LineFromTo

Message from the EU to member states - stop trying to get

:00:00.:00:07.

What does Uber make of this pronouncement on the collaborative

:00:08.:00:20.

economy? Obviously something

:00:21.:00:23.

that is happening not only in transportation but in many other

:00:24.:00:24.

sectors and great We'll ask whether the concerns

:00:25.:00:26.

about technology and its power This is not

:00:27.:00:30.

about scaring anybody. I am genuinely worried

:00:31.:00:35.

about what would With just three weeks

:00:36.:00:37.

to go David Cameron faces And serious people are

:00:38.:00:49.

taking this seriously. You wake up in your bed and believe

:00:50.:00:53.

whatever you want to You take the red pill, you stay

:00:54.:01:03.

in Wonderland, and I show you Could we really be living an

:01:04.:01:09.

advanced civilisation's video game? Technology can boost

:01:10.:01:23.

competition and help consumers. It's undermined the newspaper,

:01:24.:01:28.

virtually wiped out travel BHS could be said to be a victim -

:01:29.:01:30.

we'll be talking about that later. But the revolution is not over -

:01:31.:01:36.

it's hitting minicabs and hotels through companies

:01:37.:01:38.

like Uber and Airbnb. And today, the European Commission

:01:39.:01:43.

took a stand in favour It declared that EU member states

:01:44.:01:48.

should not be unduly restricting companies in the so-called

:01:49.:01:54.

collaborative economy, or banning them,

:01:55.:01:56.

except as a last resort. The verdict was aimed

:01:57.:02:00.

at cities that have tried But the Commission view will only

:02:01.:02:02.

exacerbate the arguments over those services,

:02:03.:02:07.

and the fears of some here, that their uncontrolled explosion

:02:08.:02:09.

will disrupt businesses, It is Uber that has caused

:02:10.:02:11.

the biggest arguments. Private hire minicabs on demand

:02:12.:02:20.

via an app. Convenient, sometimes

:02:21.:02:23.

cheap, cashless. It operates in cities and towns

:02:24.:02:26.

across the country, but it is The sheer numbers of drivers signing

:02:27.:02:30.

onto it in the capital are huge. Since 2013, 25,000 drivers

:02:31.:02:40.

have hit the streets - that's equal to the

:02:41.:02:43.

number of black cabs. The drivers are self-employed

:02:44.:02:47.

and work flexible hours. They just pay a commission to Uber

:02:48.:02:51.

of 25% of takings for the When a Uber comes along at work soon

:02:52.:03:05.

industry as Uber house there will be complaints and a lot will be

:03:06.:03:09.

dismissed. But the company raises an important issue. Is it creating a

:03:10.:03:15.

Uber competitive society? Because the technology it employs enables a

:03:16.:03:21.

huge increase in the supply of drivers, of labour in the taxi

:03:22.:03:25.

industry, which is great for customers but it does imply a change

:03:26.:03:29.

in the balance of power between Labour and consumer. For the

:03:30.:03:33.

workers, the fear is it creates a race to the bottom. Minicabs have

:03:34.:03:43.

begun to invade the streets of London, small cars charging a third

:03:44.:03:48.

less than ordinary cabs. Taxi drivers thing, blimey, they will be

:03:49.:03:50.

using scooters next. This is from 1961, when the cabbies

:03:51.:03:52.

resisted the arrival of But as we see opposition today,

:03:53.:03:55.

the question arises - is the economy Uber is helping

:03:56.:04:01.

to shape having effects on a different scale and at

:04:02.:04:06.

a different speed to anything we've Well, the EU Commission policy

:04:07.:04:09.

is that the Ubers of the world should not be stopped

:04:10.:04:17.

or restricted with Earlier today, I spoke to the woman

:04:18.:04:19.

who runs Uber in the UK and several other European

:04:20.:04:24.

countries, Jo Bertram. First question - what's her reaction

:04:25.:04:25.

to the Commission policy? It is great to see the European

:04:26.:04:35.

Commission is looking forward and embracing the collaborative economy

:04:36.:04:38.

and starting to issue guidelines in this area. It is something happening

:04:39.:04:43.

in transportation and many other sectors and great to see the

:04:44.:04:48.

Commission embrace that. There is a concern there will be too many

:04:49.:04:52.

people touting for passenger higher on the roads of London. Is it your

:04:53.:04:57.

position you will limit the number, or will you let the numbers grow and

:04:58.:05:02.

if the drivers are there to do it, you will let them sign-on and be

:05:03.:05:08.

drivers? We want to make sure the opportunity to earn money at the

:05:09.:05:11.

touch of a button continues to be there for drivers. If there were too

:05:12.:05:15.

many drivers compared to the number of people wanting to use the act,

:05:16.:05:19.

they would not be able to earn enough money. There was research

:05:20.:05:24.

done about congestion in London, where they found the numbers of car

:05:25.:05:29.

vehicles going in and out of the congestion charge but also central

:05:30.:05:34.

London has not actually changed over recent years, so it suggests if

:05:35.:05:39.

anything, the growth of companies like Uber is replacing people who

:05:40.:05:42.

would have otherwise taken their private car into the capital. Do you

:05:43.:05:46.

know how many of your drivers earn less than minimum wage? It is

:05:47.:05:51.

probably not a good comparison. All the drivers are free to use the

:05:52.:05:56.

platform as much or as little as they want and on a nonexclusive

:05:57.:06:02.

basis. Most work part-time and combine it with starting their own

:06:03.:06:07.

business, other sources of income or family commitments, and they may use

:06:08.:06:11.

their car with other operators as well. It is not difficult finding

:06:12.:06:15.

the drivers who say they are earning less than the minimum wage per hour,

:06:16.:06:20.

does it surprise you? There are a few who say that and it depends on

:06:21.:06:25.

when they work. We find on average drivers working in London take home

:06:26.:06:31.

after the service fee, ?15, ?16 per hour. After the service fee. What

:06:32.:06:36.

are they taking home after their cut? It depends on their costs. You

:06:37.:06:43.

must have researched it. We have but for example if you own your car and

:06:44.:06:48.

use it to work with us and another private hire operator... The average

:06:49.:06:53.

drivers earn after reasonable costs are deducted, after what they pay

:06:54.:06:59.

you, do you know the answer? It is probably not a mean. If you have

:07:00.:07:03.

your own car and work 30-40 hours per week you could be taking home

:07:04.:07:09.

more than someone renting their car and is only working a fewer hours a

:07:10.:07:14.

week. Let's take someone who owns the car. You said you know the

:07:15.:07:18.

answer. What are they roughly getting per hour they are working on

:07:19.:07:23.

Uber? It is a computer business. It depends on how many hours a week

:07:24.:07:28.

they work. They pay fixed costs over the month and insurance. Suppose

:07:29.:07:34.

they do a 40 hour week. They could take home ?9, ?10 per hour. And what

:07:35.:07:38.

proportion take home less than ?6 per hour? We do not know the details

:07:39.:07:44.

exactly how many drivers rent and hours they work. Because of the way

:07:45.:07:49.

the private hire regime works in the UK you probably need to work a

:07:50.:07:54.

certain number of hours a week. If you get to 60,000 drivers, one would

:07:55.:07:57.

expect the rates huge driver gets will go down. Only if the demand

:07:58.:08:05.

does not rise in a similar way. 30,000 riders are downloading and

:08:06.:08:08.

using the app every week in London and demand for the service has been

:08:09.:08:14.

huge. We did polling of drivers and the results were amazingly positive.

:08:15.:08:17.

The biggest thing coming from that was the drivers are valuing the

:08:18.:08:25.

flexibility. Most drivers coming from other operators tell us they

:08:26.:08:29.

moved because they do not want set hours and they want to take holiday

:08:30.:08:33.

and switch off when they can. They can now get work at the touch of a

:08:34.:08:38.

button. You are a data driven business, do you know how many of

:08:39.:08:42.

your drivers work more than 60 hours per week? I don't have those numbers

:08:43.:08:46.

but on average they use the app 28 hours a week. This is one of those

:08:47.:08:54.

ones where I don't mind if they are working 28 or 40, even 45, I don't

:08:55.:08:59.

want to get in a car where the driver works 70, 80 hours per week.

:09:00.:09:04.

Can you tell if they work 70 hours a week and do you stop them working 70

:09:05.:09:09.

hours? We monitor the hours drivers working and notify them if they work

:09:10.:09:15.

excessive hours. Do you stop them if they work excessive hours? It is

:09:16.:09:18.

difficult to know if are taking trips. We can tell when they are

:09:19.:09:24.

logged on but they might be logged on at home. I think you can tell

:09:25.:09:30.

when they are driving, can't you? You can see if they are doing trips

:09:31.:09:36.

but what we find is after every trip, we have the customer rating

:09:37.:09:41.

the driver. We get real-time feedback no other companies have to

:09:42.:09:45.

see how they are performing. I don't know whether my driver has driven 80

:09:46.:09:51.

hours when I take a Uber. I can tell you he has not crashed while I have

:09:52.:09:56.

been in the car but I would hold it to a higher standard than that. I

:09:57.:10:00.

would expect you to know the driver has not driven 80 hours because you

:10:01.:10:04.

know when the driver is driving stop I am surprised you don't know, or

:10:05.:10:08.

you don't tell the driver, get out of the car because you have driven

:10:09.:10:14.

80 hours. We monitor the hours the drivers work and notify them and

:10:15.:10:18.

ensure they are not working excessive hours. You notify them,

:10:19.:10:27.

instruct them,? We notify them and talk to them and look at driving

:10:28.:10:32.

behaviours and if there are safety concerns but essentially the drivers

:10:33.:10:35.

are independent business people who are running their own business and

:10:36.:10:38.

combining it with many other things as well. Do you think the scale of

:10:39.:10:45.

the disruption Uber is causing, causing people to say, let's think

:10:46.:10:50.

about how this is working, this is not a minicab office, a company with

:10:51.:10:56.

30,000 people at its fingertips, what do you think about it? I

:10:57.:11:00.

believe the competition is good for consumers. Three or four years ago

:11:01.:11:07.

you could not have got a car within three minutes anywhere in London and

:11:08.:11:11.

many other cities in the UK. One thing that worries me is I think

:11:12.:11:17.

that the drivers' stories are not being heard. Every time I get in a

:11:18.:11:22.

car I talk to the drivers and the stories of how they have used Uber

:11:23.:11:27.

to change their lives are inspiring and their appreciate it and we want

:11:28.:11:32.

to tell those positive stories, not just the handful of drivers who are

:11:33.:11:34.

unhappy. Thanks. I'm joined now by the economist

:11:35.:11:40.

Ann Pettifor, director of Policy Research in Macroeconomics

:11:41.:11:43.

and a member of Labour's And by the venture capitalist

:11:44.:11:45.

Julie Meyer, who specialises in I can see your face frowning as he

:11:46.:11:58.

listens to the interview. Do you think Uber is a force for bad in

:11:59.:12:04.

society? I do and not because of the relationship between driver and

:12:05.:12:09.

consumer. The consumer benefits and there is demand for this form of

:12:10.:12:11.

transportation. It is the relationship between Uber and

:12:12.:12:18.

California, via a smartphone, the remoteness of the smartphone and

:12:19.:12:23.

these drivers, who invest all the capital in the venture. They buy the

:12:24.:12:28.

car, they pay for petrol and pay insurance or don't pay insurance, so

:12:29.:12:33.

they are the capitalists, investing in these assets, and someone in

:12:34.:12:38.

Santa Monica, California, is diverted the cash flow from that,

:12:39.:12:44.

25% of that. Nobody forces the driver to give 25% to Uber, they

:12:45.:12:50.

have to log on to do that. What she said it is these drivers are

:12:51.:12:54.

probably flipping burgers during the day and earning little and having to

:12:55.:12:58.

supplement their income. It is what is happening to the economy, the

:12:59.:13:02.

flattening of incomes and prices which in the end is bad for

:13:03.:13:07.

business. I want to say one thing stock can you draw the distinction

:13:08.:13:12.

between workers and consumers you are drawing? These drivers, who are

:13:13.:13:17.

low paid, maybe going to a low-cost supermarket that has squeezed down

:13:18.:13:22.

prices, getting on a low-cost airline, they may be beneficiaries

:13:23.:13:31.

of the squeezed price. They are both being milked, drivers and consumers.

:13:32.:13:36.

Consumers get a cheap ride but at risk. They take the risk because

:13:37.:13:40.

they are not sure if they have done 80 hours a day already driving and

:13:41.:13:46.

whether they have insurance or are covered. There is the risk to

:13:47.:13:52.

women... Consumers are taking the risk. How is the consumer taking the

:13:53.:14:00.

risk, they just pay perhaps a cheaper fare for a convenient taxi?

:14:01.:14:05.

It is cheap and very convenient but the key relationship is between the

:14:06.:14:10.

remote capitalist milking if you like a cash flow, not just from one

:14:11.:14:15.

industry but from a whole sector. Is that how you see it? Not at all. The

:14:16.:14:21.

world has been driven by networks and Uber, Airbnb, these companies

:14:22.:14:28.

are networks and platforms and that is the future, we cannot stop it

:14:29.:14:33.

happening. What is interesting is these platforms enable people with

:14:34.:14:36.

excess capacity, a spare bedroom in the case of Airbnb, to leveraged

:14:37.:14:43.

their freedom and the excess capacity to make money. If you have

:14:44.:14:48.

a free bedroom, know how to drive, you cannot say you cannot make money

:14:49.:14:53.

and get a job. There is an ability to earn money and so what I see

:14:54.:14:58.

happening is you can choose to optimise. There is an optimisation

:14:59.:15:05.

model to optimise to the platform in California, to a car in France,

:15:06.:15:09.

those decisions about who makes more money, it is an optimisation play.

:15:10.:15:14.

Do you think the Commission that a Uber charges which is not out of

:15:15.:15:22.

line with other minicab proprietors, from what they've brought to the

:15:23.:15:26.

party which is a sophisticated piece of software, is the 25%, 20%, is

:15:27.:15:32.

that it if their return for what they have done? Uber is the

:15:33.:15:39.

fastest-growing company in the history of the planet. They have

:15:40.:15:45.

enabled people to become drivers. They have enabled the future

:15:46.:15:48.

infrastructure of the transportation industry. What is fair? It is that

:15:49.:15:53.

they determining the economics of this 3-way split between the driver,

:15:54.:15:59.

the passenger and Uber. So that is why they are winning. So if the

:16:00.:16:06.

black cap industry could have done that... Other people could have done

:16:07.:16:11.

that, they did not. They do not differ any bit from the barons in

:16:12.:16:15.

medieval times that stood through the roads in that land and collected

:16:16.:16:22.

a toll. This is an idea. What you could do is, if it is so easy and

:16:23.:16:27.

simple to set up a network like this, you could set one up and it

:16:28.:16:31.

could be called something else and you could take a smaller Commission.

:16:32.:16:35.

I give them credit for the network and the technology. I think that the

:16:36.:16:40.

driver should form their own workers Association and negotiate their own

:16:41.:16:43.

terms. The terms gets set by Santa Monica in California. They basically

:16:44.:16:51.

said when I did ask about that, we really prefer to talk to the drivers

:16:52.:16:55.

one on one rather than the collective and that is a weakening

:16:56.:16:59.

of the Labour power. There will be certain places where those attempts

:17:00.:17:03.

to do that will happen. But what is interesting as a social trend is

:17:04.:17:07.

that we are going to see that the winners in any industry,

:17:08.:17:13.

transportation, hotels and so one, it will be the organisations who

:17:14.:17:17.

organise the economics for these ecosystems. So we will see this in

:17:18.:17:22.

banking, insurance and retail. Just because Uber does its super well.

:17:23.:17:28.

That is a utopian idea. No, it is a fact. The economics happened to be

:17:29.:17:36.

in organised -- organised by Uber and Facebook, it could be the banks

:17:37.:17:40.

of the future and the retailers but they have to understand the problems

:17:41.:17:44.

and the solutions. It is a delusional utopian idea and it is

:17:45.:17:52.

working. And what do we see? Trump in the United States. Marine Le Pen

:17:53.:17:59.

in France. It is nothing to do with that not assist! Nothing to do with

:18:00.:18:07.

Trump, nothing. It has everything to do with him. It is a fascinating

:18:08.:18:12.

topic that raises great emotion, thank you very much indeed.

:18:13.:18:15.

Well, there was a huge piece of separate business news

:18:16.:18:18.

in this country today - the demise of BHS.

:18:19.:18:21.

No saviour in sight, it is to be liquidated.

:18:22.:18:26.

The BBC's Business Editor Simon Jack joins me.

:18:27.:18:34.

Simon, would you categorise this as a normal business failure, companies

:18:35.:18:40.

do have bad luck and bad performance and they go out of performance, or

:18:41.:18:45.

is there more to this? In one way, it is not a unique story, it is, is.

:18:46.:18:50.

Some companies adapt to changing needs and give customers what they

:18:51.:18:53.

need and they flourish. Others lose touch with their customers and they

:18:54.:18:59.

perish and the ecosystem changes. And that is just life. That is, is.

:19:00.:19:04.

But there will be questions about technical and legal issues -- that

:19:05.:19:10.

is business. There will also be moral issues because some people

:19:11.:19:14.

made a lot of money about this and is there -- is it right to take that

:19:15.:19:20.

much money out leaving a company we cut and 11 million employees to fend

:19:21.:19:24.

for themselves? Others say that is rubbish and it is business, grow up.

:19:25.:19:28.

But there are issues, Hartley because of the characters involved,

:19:29.:19:32.

Sir Philip Green is expecting a delivery of another yacht against

:19:33.:19:37.

the backdrop of thousands out of work. It is the end of BHS but not

:19:38.:19:42.

the end of the process because what are the main question is now about

:19:43.:19:49.

that business? Two committees of MPs looking at it, insolvency services,

:19:50.:19:52.

the Serious Fraud Office and may take it further. The key question

:19:53.:19:57.

is, did Philip Green knowingly sell a company to somebody who was

:19:58.:20:03.

totally qualified and had zero retail experience and may be no

:20:04.:20:07.

ability and inclination to turn this business around? And so was

:20:08.:20:10.

knowingly condemning his workforce to the fake that we see today. The

:20:11.:20:16.

other one is, how was it that somebody who was a former racing

:20:17.:20:20.

driver, a former bankrupt with a very patchy business history, how

:20:21.:20:24.

did he take over a concern of this size? Philip Green will say, I know

:20:25.:20:30.

he will because I have spoken to him, this guy had money in the bank

:20:31.:20:34.

and a fleet of professional advisers. Blue-chip firms involved

:20:35.:20:38.

in this transaction. All of whom are supposed to have due diligence

:20:39.:20:44.

controls, corporate governance controls and what has emerged for me

:20:45.:20:48.

from the sessions so far is everybody was looking at this tiny

:20:49.:20:54.

bit of the deal. Rather than anybody taking a long, hard look, does this

:20:55.:20:58.

make any sense? I suspect that will be the question and the only people

:20:59.:21:03.

who can respond that is Sir Philip Green himself. Simon, thank you.

:21:04.:21:06.

Did you see David Cameron on Sky News tonight?

:21:07.:21:08.

It was one of the series of formal so-called referendum debates,

:21:09.:21:14.

except it wasn't a debate, it was a one-on-one.

:21:15.:21:17.

First half with Sky's political editor Faisal Islam,

:21:18.:21:18.

and then with questions from an audience,

:21:19.:21:20.

Watching it was our political editor, Nick Watt.

:21:21.:21:26.

It was a confidence David Cameron who arrived for his first

:21:27.:21:32.

uncontrolled encounter with voters in what has so far been a highly

:21:33.:21:37.

choreographed campaign. The way to meet that challenge must not be to

:21:38.:21:41.

leave the single market and to harm our economy and to hurt jobs and

:21:42.:21:46.

damage our country. All the preparations in the world can read

:21:47.:21:48.

even the most accomplished television performer momentarily

:21:49.:21:53.

phased when voters decided to vent their anger. I have seen nothing but

:21:54.:21:59.

scaremongering, no valid facts I have seen no pros and cons. I think

:22:00.:22:04.

there is a very positive case. You said Sadiq Khan was not to be

:22:05.:22:08.

trusted a couple of weeks ago and a couple of weeks later, you appear on

:22:09.:22:12.

a platform with him. Is that not an example of your hypocrisy and

:22:13.:22:15.

scaremongering over the course of this campaign? Obviously, I do not

:22:16.:22:22.

think so and I will try and convince you why it was the right thing to

:22:23.:22:27.

do. Do you get the personal damage your scaremongering campaign has

:22:28.:22:30.

done to your reputation and legacy. With respect, I do not agree.

:22:31.:22:34.

Attacks about scaremongering go-to the heart of the criticism of the

:22:35.:22:40.

Remain campaign, accused of being alarmist and exaggerated about the

:22:41.:22:43.

danger of a British exit from the EU.

:22:44.:22:51.

What comes first, World War 3 or the global Brexit recsssion?

:22:52.:22:54.

The words 'World War 3' never entered my lips.

:22:55.:23:00.

The Prime Minister kept his poise at the brand of Cameron may look

:23:01.:23:05.

bruised. Before the debate, there were questions about his brand, his

:23:06.:23:09.

party's strongest asset for more than a decade, is still trusted. If

:23:10.:23:13.

recent poll suggested the Prime Minister trailed Boris Johnson when

:23:14.:23:16.

asked who was more likely to tell the truth about the EU. 21% opted

:23:17.:23:26.

for David Cameron and 45% chose the former London mouth. There is a

:23:27.:23:29.

difference between trusting telling the truth and credibility or wanting

:23:30.:23:33.

what is best for Britain. When we looked at who was best for Britain,

:23:34.:23:38.

David Cameron comes out top. David -- Boris Johnson Haslett on trusting

:23:39.:23:42.

to tell the truth on the EU perhaps because people did not know much

:23:43.:23:46.

about his view previously. David Cameron often wins on credibility

:23:47.:23:52.

more than likeability or popularity. The Remain side have done their own

:23:53.:23:57.

research into Boris. They find he is held in great affection, he is seen

:23:58.:24:02.

as Bonnie and distrusted because voters regard him as authentic.

:24:03.:24:06.

Research also suggests the former London Mayor is something of an

:24:07.:24:09.

entertainer who cannot be taken seriously. Confident the referendum

:24:10.:24:15.

will not be won and jokes, the Prime Minister Chandra jokes but he had to

:24:16.:24:20.

address allegations of scaremongering and to put the debate

:24:21.:24:24.

on his strongest ground, the economy. To me, this is not about

:24:25.:24:29.

scaring anybody, I am genuinely worried about what would happen if

:24:30.:24:33.

we leave. The Prime Minister went home with something of a bloody

:24:34.:24:36.

nose, but he will be hoping that he can repeat the success of the

:24:37.:24:40.

Scottish referendum. Voters may be disgruntled but in the end, they

:24:41.:24:43.

will opt for the status quo. Elaborate on what you took of that

:24:44.:24:54.

60 minute experience. That was an uncomfortable encounter with the

:24:55.:24:57.

Prime Minister and voters, raising this scaremongering and exaggerated

:24:58.:25:03.

claim either Remain campaign, but some of the concerns held within the

:25:04.:25:06.

Remain campaign. There is concern the Chancellor have been

:25:07.:25:11.

exaggerating by saying the average household will be worse off by ?4000

:25:12.:25:16.

by 2030 if we left the EU and the Prime Minister did not mention that

:25:17.:25:20.

figure. He was asked about it and he did not repeat it, he talked about

:25:21.:25:25.

that level of figure. I think there is a feeling that what they need to

:25:26.:25:29.

do is guess one people that there will be a negative effect on the

:25:30.:25:34.

economy but voters are saying, it is you make these predictions into the

:25:35.:25:38.

future, they just voters do not believe them. So simple, de clutter

:25:39.:25:43.

the debate and be much creeper -- and be much clearer. Thank you very

:25:44.:25:46.

much. Now, each week on Newsnight,

:25:47.:25:48.

during this referendum campaign, we've been trying to help

:25:49.:25:50.

you make your decision on how to vote by offering a little space

:25:51.:25:52.

to some people who are not involved in the campaigns, to tell us

:25:53.:25:56.

about their decision. Tonight, the Editor

:25:57.:25:58.

of the Times Literary Supplement, and former Managing Editor

:25:59.:26:01.

of the Sun, Stig Abell, takes us through his thought

:26:02.:26:04.

processes for My Decision. I'm not qualified to

:26:05.:26:18.

make this decision. It's very hard to find people

:26:19.:26:21.

who are qualified to make the decision, because we are

:26:22.:26:24.

basically having to juggle all sorts of macro-economic ideas

:26:25.:26:26.

and futurology to say what's And I don't know what

:26:27.:26:28.

the best is for Britain. So I think what worries me,

:26:29.:26:37.

and should worry anyone in this And one of the unattractive

:26:38.:26:40.

things about this debate The In versus the Out,

:26:41.:26:43.

it's a very binary fight. I would love both sides

:26:44.:26:52.

in the campaign to say, Instead, you have lots of people

:26:53.:26:54.

shouting and tweeting about, you know, Shakespeare would

:26:55.:27:01.

want to stay in, or whatever else And it becomes a row

:27:02.:27:04.

in the playground. So the fear is that our playground

:27:05.:27:08.

row, it becomes the most significant decision the country has made

:27:09.:27:11.

in the last 30 years. Maybe I'll be gripped

:27:12.:27:18.

by the paralysis of uncertainty I don't feel sufficiently strongly

:27:19.:27:20.

at the moment in either direction. You can end up saying,

:27:21.:27:32.

is Britain strong enough to survive

:27:33.:27:36.

outside the EU? Are there people who believe that is

:27:37.:27:37.

the right thing to do? Is Britain

:27:38.:27:41.

sufficiently strong So actually, I think there

:27:42.:27:43.

is a certain fatalism that can take over and say nobody has made

:27:44.:27:56.

a silver bullet, all-encompassing argument that one way

:27:57.:27:58.

is better than the other. Also, quite a lot of the people

:27:59.:28:00.

on both sides couldn't convince you to vote yourself out of a paper

:28:01.:28:03.

bag, because you wouldn't Probably, that is on the Brexit side

:28:04.:28:06.

of the ball most significantly - if you see the crazed demagogues

:28:07.:28:10.

of Galloway and Farage sort of sweatily exhorting

:28:11.:28:13.

you to do something. It's not your immediate instinct

:28:14.:28:16.

to follow them down the road. Before the Russians reintroduced it

:28:17.:28:23.

for us in the 1990s, the word "oligarch" had more or less

:28:24.:28:28.

disappeared as a contemporary label. But suddenly, along came this

:28:29.:28:31.

new breed of dubious billionaire. Among the oligarchs,

:28:32.:28:33.

one had an extraordinary story. Mikhail Khodorkovsky became possibly

:28:34.:28:37.

Russia's richest man but, at age 39, he openly criticised

:28:38.:28:41.

President Putin, who responded by opening a case against him

:28:42.:28:43.

in court and getting him locked up. He went from having $15 billion,

:28:44.:28:49.

to ten years in a Russian jail. Mr Khodorkovsky has lost most

:28:50.:28:54.

of his money, but he has enough cash to support candidates standing

:28:55.:28:59.

in the Russian duma elections later this year, aligned

:29:00.:29:01.

to his Open Russia movement. Earlier today, I sat down

:29:02.:29:07.

with Mr Khodorkovsky to talk about Putin,

:29:08.:29:08.

Russia and prison, and asked him whether he expected to get anywhere

:29:09.:29:11.

in the upcoming elections. How should we think

:29:12.:29:18.

of President Putin? Is he just a populist like

:29:19.:30:20.

Donald Trump? What was the worst thing

:30:21.:30:26.

you did, the most sinful thing you did, in the

:30:27.:31:08.

accumulation of your wealth Because you've really gone

:31:09.:31:10.

from Russia's richest man I just wonder what

:31:11.:31:54.

you think about the Because some say this

:31:55.:33:04.

is a financial centre that helps corrupt Russians

:33:05.:33:08.

launder their money. Do you have experience or knowledge

:33:09.:33:14.

of whether London is Are you saying you think

:33:15.:33:17.

Western politicians and governments should

:33:18.:34:39.

do more to regulate the banks, for example,

:34:40.:34:41.

and the money they take

:34:42.:34:44.

from Russians, rich Russians? And obviously, the big debate

:34:45.:35:09.

here right now is about Britain leaving, or not,

:35:10.:35:11.

the European Union. Many say the only person,

:35:12.:35:14.

the only international leader who wants

:35:15.:35:17.

Britain to leave is President Putin. Do you think it's something

:35:18.:35:23.

that matters to him? Do you think he would

:35:24.:35:25.

like Britain to leave? Do you think he sees

:35:26.:35:27.

that as a route to Mikhail Khodorkovsky,

:35:28.:35:29.

thank you so much for He's the man behind Tesla, SpaceX,

:35:30.:36:28.

and a co-founder of PayPal. And today, he said something

:36:29.:36:41.

that is either brilliant or barmy. I incline to the latter,

:36:42.:36:45.

but you judge. no, that we are almost certainly

:36:46.:36:47.

computer-generated entities living inside a more advanced

:36:48.:36:51.

civilization's video game. Well, actually, I won't explain his

:36:52.:36:57.

point, because it has been made before by Nick Bostrom,

:36:58.:37:04.

Professor of Philosophy Just explain why this barmy idea

:37:05.:37:22.

might be plausible. The thought is that if technology continues to

:37:23.:37:27.

develop them in the future, perhaps the distant future, civilisation

:37:28.:37:31.

will have the ability to create entirely realistic virtual worlds,

:37:32.:37:36.

with simulated observers in them. Not just create one or two of these

:37:37.:37:41.

simulations, but such a mature civilisation could run millions or

:37:42.:37:46.

billions. A world where everybody has a planet of their own with a few

:37:47.:37:52.

million people in. Then you have to ask yourself, for every person with

:37:53.:37:57.

humanlike experiences that live in the original history there are

:37:58.:38:03.

millions of observers with human life experiences that live in a

:38:04.:38:06.

similar worlds, which one are you more likely to be, and so that then

:38:07.:38:16.

is the thought. I can see it is a possibility. Now you have to get to

:38:17.:38:24.

the bit that makes it an interesting possibility, or a possibility likely

:38:25.:38:27.

enough that this could really be... Elon Musk said... That parts...

:38:28.:38:39.

There is an argument for taking this seriously and the simulation

:38:40.:38:42.

argument tries to show one of three propositions is true, but it does

:38:43.:38:51.

not tell us which one. The first is that those civilisations in current

:38:52.:38:56.

development go extinct before maturity. Those who reach

:38:57.:39:03.

technological maturity, they all lose interest in creating these

:39:04.:39:06.

answers to simulations, they do different things. There are no

:39:07.:39:11.

advanced beings, or non-that play advance games or they do. And then

:39:12.:39:17.

the simulation hypothesis becomes likely, if most people with our

:39:18.:39:22.

experiences are simulated. One of those three sorters has to be true,

:39:23.:39:29.

doesn't it? Would advanced civilisations have other forms of

:39:30.:39:33.

entertainment, or maybe we do not have the imagination to think about

:39:34.:39:37.

how advanced civilisations will entertain themselves because we have

:39:38.:39:40.

not reached that level. Certainly it is conceivable, but there might be

:39:41.:39:47.

other reasons that entertainment, for creating these realities, trying

:39:48.:39:54.

to figure out how other civilisations bite behave should you

:39:55.:39:58.

encounter them, there might be other reasons as well. If it is the case

:39:59.:40:03.

that anyone mature civilisations could create millions, only a small

:40:04.:40:08.

fraction would have to decide to deploy their resources, even if they

:40:09.:40:12.

are not interested in the scientific study of the past. Only one in a

:40:13.:40:16.

million decides to do this and they would still dominate. We would be so

:40:17.:40:21.

cheap to reproduce. What probability would you put on this scenario that

:40:22.:40:27.

we are sitting in a video game? I tend to dodge that question. What I

:40:28.:40:36.

think is that it should be a substantial probability. I believe

:40:37.:40:40.

in the simulation argument, at least one of the three is true but we do

:40:41.:40:43.

not have strong evidence to pick one. Does this matter? What is the

:40:44.:40:48.

difference between the scenario in which we are virtual creatures in a

:40:49.:40:52.

game and the one where we are not? Is there any way we would ever know,

:40:53.:40:57.

find out or would it make a difference? We do not know if it

:40:58.:41:01.

would make a difference, it would depend on the simulation we were in,

:41:02.:41:05.

the reason for creating the simulation so if you have a theory

:41:06.:41:11.

about why these decided to be one simulation or not alert is hard to

:41:12.:41:17.

tell. There are that would exist otherwise. The world could pop out

:41:18.:41:22.

of existence if somebody switches of the simulation. Was he maybe that

:41:23.:41:26.

could not happen if we were in physical reality. You can read more

:41:27.:41:31.

about this on the web. A quick look at the papers. The Times

:41:32.:41:42.

newspaper... The independent leading on the BHS and so is the Financial

:41:43.:41:46.

Times. Emily Baldwin back tomorrow. Have a good night.

:41:47.:41:57.

Good evening. Time to get the weather details for Friday and no

:41:58.:42:08.

major changes for the eastern half of the UK. It will remain cloudy and

:42:09.:42:09.

Download Subtitles

SRT

ASS