and there have always been significant holders, whether it's news corp or — i know bbc is a public service, which is tremendous, the quality of that — but many of the public services have not reached the same quality of the bbc, and the winners in the market have always aggregated into monopoly powers. before we end, i want to get a little bit personal, because again, we're sitting down in this place where there are a very few unimaginably wealthy people, and you're one of them. do you think with that tech wealth comes a clear responsibility to do things for the public good? there are two personalities within that cohort. and i know the personalities, and i know the cohort. the first personality is, "i am going to be the best at reinvesting these dollars in building the next enabling technology set that is going to benefit the world. and that is more important than donating money to non—profits." the second cohort is, "after a certain amount
working on construction projects in qatar in the run—up to the world cup. qatar disputes this — saying there have been just three work—related deaths, and 37 which were not related to work. qatar's spokesman say they will investigate and help the family of the man who died. and they called on the media to concentrate on the football: death is a natural part of life, whether it's at work, whether it's in your sleep. of course, a worker died, our condolences go to his family. there were no games in qatar on thursday — the quarter finals take place on friday and saturday — but that hasn't stopped the fans from partying ahead of the matches. this was the scene in the centre of doha on thursday evening — plenty of argentinian fans in evidence. they have a name for the pre—game festivities — �*banderazo' — it looks like quite a lot of fun. their team plays the netherlands for a semifinal spot.
that's a great bridge, but it doesn't solve the problem. in order to solve the problem, we need to make more food, and we need to make the price of food go down. and technology is the way we do that. and technology will only find its way into the market if someone�*s willing to pay for it because it has a benefit to them. and that means that ultimately, the cost for them to return the cost for them, the return to them is good, the company that provides the technology is good, and for the consumer, it is good because the price comes down. so, when it comes to technological innovation, particularly these sorts of innovations which can offer so much public good, you don't believe in the, sort of, fundamental principle of open sourcing. so, let's use a general technology example, because one could say the same about pharmaceuticals and therapeutics, and so on, and assume that the typical cycle, the investment cycle for a therapeutic orfor an agricultural programme, ora piece of software is $1 billion. it cost $1 billion to invent a technology, to bring it to market that's going to have some benefit. who funds the billion dollars?
species on the planet. now, you say this, you say that, "we do not have to make compromises as we re—engineer life. the ability to re—engineer our systems of production doesn't mean that we have to make compromises." in essence, you're saying we can have our cake and eat it, too. and most human beings, in the end, conclude generally, that is not possible. yes, so i think not today, but it will be. so, there are a number of technologies — so if you look at the cost of clean energy, wind and solar has now dropped in the range of, call it $0.07 per kilowatt hour, on an amortise basis, to produce that energy. and that's a carbon—free energy source. nuclear power is less than $0.05 a kilowatt hour, somewhere between $0.01—5 a kilowatt hour — also a carbon—free energy source. those technologies have really
america. cole has a gift and loves to share it. cole is a therapy dog who happens to be deaf. >> a disability is not an inability. >> a pitbull mix cole was born without the ability to hear, but that hasn't stopped him from making an impact with veterans and students. >> and we've been able to go around to dozens and dozens of schools and to prevent cole's life story about discrimination because of his breed, about the fact he was unadoptable because he was born deaf. >> cole's owner chris hanna teaches at one of those schools in new jersey. how do the students react when they meet cole for the first time? >> it's fun to watch barriers just come down. they become themselves, they become who they are, and any inhibition or any kind of emotions that they were feeling instantly changed. >> cole was just named the 2022 american humane hero therapy dog. hanna acknowledges the
and is the billion dollars ultimately going to yield the best benefit for the market, for the customer, and ultimately for the end user, for the consumer, for the people in need, for the 95% of the world that are desperate to move themselves up the ladder in the world? or will the motivation of the market, the market that says, "if this works, i will get paid for it" — will that source the billion? and by the way, it's not... if i may interrupt, i mean, that sounds like, frankly, a billionaire mounting an extremely, er, persuasive defence of capitalism. but we live on a planet which is dominated by capitalism. and what we see is inequity of every different sort, across this planet. we see billions of people living with virtually nothing. we see a tiny, tiny few in the elite — like you, dave friedberg — living with unimaginable wealth. capitalism doesn't work. capitalism has its downside. have you read any of steven pinker�*s books? yeah, in fact, we've had him on the show.
there was travesty and loss of life, and all these terrible things that happened because of it — but ultimately, it did enable a lot of progress for all of people that i think arose from discovering and realising the opportunities in the new world. so, i'm not going to rush to judgment to say that someone choosing to invest their wealth in discovering new frontiers — whether that's microscopic biological frontiers, or whether that's space frontiers — is doing right or wrong. i think time will tell what the benefits will be that will accrue ultimately to all people, if those discoveries do pan out, and they do yield benefit for us. dave friedberg, we have to end there, but thanks very much forjoining me on hardtalk. thanks for having me.
possession. according to people familiar with the matter. this comes after months of mounting frustrations from the justice department that despite after trump's lawyers provided assurances that a diligent search had been conducted for all of the documents, the fbi amassed evidence suggesting and later confirmed through a court authorized search that many more documents remained. the judge has not yet held a hearing or ruled on the request according to the post. joining me to discuss is charles coleman, civil rights attorney and msnbc legal analyst. charles, i gotta start with this. i get that the doj wants to bring charges against trump's whole team as a staff and a crew. can get it. i understand the anger and frustration. here's my thing. why has no one been arrested for this yet? because it almost seems like it's a good faith act on the part of the doj to think these people are just unaware as opposed to they're just lying. like, why hasn't someone been
everyone under the bus. they're not willing to take that on and potentially risk an entire career over a client they know is dishonest and untruthful even with the people who he retains to represent him. this is more of a trump thing and a difficult tightrope for anyone at this point is left that is willing to take on the responsibility of representing donald trump in court. >> when we first heard about this, i was here this night, when we first heard about the raid at mar-a-lago and we heard about the documents and some of them were in a hallway and may have been corners, it didn't seem like all of them were secure. then we got the impression they may have been at mar-a-lago, they might be in other locations. they might be shifting around and around. how does the doj know how much is actually recovered and is there a possibility, not to suggest that trump isn't corrupt and the people with him aren't corrupt, but is it possible they don't even know the entirety of what they have, and they can't tloekt, which is one of the reasons it hasn't been returned? >> well, jason, between the national archives that have put
the "new york times" hasn't given their workers a raise in two years. this is the same company that savages corporate america for not raising salaries. and writes editorial after editorial demanding we raise the minimum wage now. but, joe biden's economy, "new york times" writers are losing money. and the "new york times," they don't care. all about money. the "new york times" reporters also want to be able to work from home. but the "new york times" wants it employees, you know, to come to the office three times a week. and the workers say no. that's too much. covid is still here. and it can strike at any moment. even though they are all triple boosted. and did you know the "new york times" their healthcare plan doesn't pay for fertility treatments? this "new york times" war on women is outrageous. and the "new york times" reporters they want to have babies, too. they are not sold on aoc's great