Return to Transcripts main page
Amanpour
Interview with Former White House National Climate Adviser Gina McCarthy; Interview with The Atlantic Staff Writer Caitlin Dickerson; Interview with Photojournalist and "It's What I do" Author Lynsey Addario; Interview with Google DeepMind Co-Founder and CEO Demis Hassabis; Interview with "If Beale Street Could Talk" Director Barry Jenkins. Aired 1-2p ET
Aired August 16, 2024 - 13:00:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[13:00:00]
BIANNA GOLODRYGA, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, everyone, and welcome to "Amanpour." Here's what's coming up.
The impact of climate change is visible everywhere. Two years since the Inflation Reduction Act, I asked former White House climate czar Gina
McCarthy about the stakes of the U.S. election.
And, 70 miles in the Darien Gap. The Atlantic's Caitlin Dickerson and photojournalist Lynsey Addario on the treacherous route migrants take
through the jungle to the U.S. border.
Also, ahead --
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DEMIS HASSABIS, CO-FOUNDER AND CEO, GOOGLE DEEPMIND: I'm very optimistic obviously that we'll -- you know, human ingenuity collectively will work
this all out.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: Co-founder and CEO of Google DeepMind, Demis Hassabis, talks to Walter Isaacson about the huge potential of artificial intelligence, from
driverless cars to medical breakthroughs.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BARRY JENKINS, DIRECTOR, "IF BEALE STREET COULD TALK": Then James Baldwin is a genius, period.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: 100 years since the birth of iconic American author James Baldwin. We look back at Christiane's conversation with the Oscar winning
filmmaker, Barry Jenkins, as he brought Baldwin's "If Beal Street Could Talk" to the big screen.
Welcome to the program, everyone. I'm Bianna Golodryga in New York, sitting in for Christiane Amanpour.
Well, this week, U.S. presidential candidates Kamala Harris and Donald Trump have been digging into the economics, talking about inflation and
issues like price gouging. But so far in their campaigns, one big topic has gone almost unmentioned, climate.
And while the candidates are quiet, the Earth, well, it's screaming. Temperature records are being shattered. Wildfires are spreading and new
studies are revealing a terrifying reality. One European report finding that heat turbocharged by carbon pollution killed up to 50,000 people on
the continent last year alone.
Two years ago today, the Inflation Reduction Act was signed into law, the largest ever investment in renewables and clean energy jobs. But challenges
continue, many arguing that it's not going far enough, and some political entities like the pro Trump Project 2025 trying to wipe away clean energy
initiatives altogether.
Gina McCarthy served as EPA administrator and then as inaugural White House National climate adviser, where she helped craft the Inflation Reduction
Act, and she joins the show from Boston. Gina, it is good to see you again. What a wild few weeks it has been. A new candidate at the top of the
Democratic ticket.
And I'm curious, just at the top of this conversation, if you're surprised that of all of the topics that have been discussed thus far, I know that
it's early days for her campaign, but the campaigns themselves are winding down, the election just a few months away, that we haven't heard
specifically from Kamala Harris on the issue of climate.
GINA MCCARTHY, FORMER WHITE HOUSE NATIONAL CLIMATE ADVISER: Well, I'm not surprised at all, frankly. I am ecstatic right now about the change that is
happening and the ability to have this Harris team move forward. And Walz is just amazing.
So, I think that many of us have been listening and heard snippets about climate, but I don't have any question about the commitment Vice President
Harris and the commitment of Governor Walz. It -- I mean, they've displayed it by their work so far in government, and I'm excited about it.
And frankly, this two-year anniversary of the Inflation Reduction Act is the biggest birthday present that I could ever get. It's just amazing how
it's moving our country towards clean energy, and I have no doubt that will continue under a Biden-Walz administration.
GOLODRYGA: Yes.
MCCARTHY: I'm sorry, Harris-Walz administration.
GOLODRYGA: Yes. Well, the vice president was the one who had the breaking vote there, right, to actually see this through the finish line. But you
talk about what you're excited for, looking at this new ticket. And you look at Governor Walz's record in particular. He made climate a huge issue
for Minnesota. He signed a law last year mandating that Minnesota get to all of its electricity from solar, wind, and other carbon free sources by
2024.
[13:05:00]
I'm wondering, as we're entering next week with the DNC and each night having a different theme, on the night that it focuses more on the economy,
are you expecting to hear more about some of the initiatives that Governor Walz introduced in his state and how that could have appeal perhaps
nationwide in a Democratic vision in terms of both combining improvements and growth to the economy while also addressing climate?
MCCARTHY: Yes, I do expect more to come. And I do know that Vice President Harris is going to be discussing some of the new policies that her and
Governor Walz are planning to move forward with. So, I'm excited to hear what she has to say.
But look, the Democratic National Convention this year is going to be an exciting one that's filled with hope and opportunity, because that's what
people need to hear about is the Democratic Party knows how to make things happen in our country that benefits every state, every district, and every
family. That's what the Inflation Reduction Act was intended to do and is really over overcompensating for what we thought was going to be a shift.
Now, it's monumental.
So, I do think that we're going to be at the DNC sort of celebrating the change, celebrating the opportunity and really just moving forward to talk
about every aspect of policy we can to make sure that this movement to help people in our country and grow good, clean energy jobs and save families
money, that all of this will continue.
GOLODRYGA: We haven't heard much of an energy plan from Former President Trump either than perhaps drill, baby drill. I know that climate activists
like yourself are concerned about what another Trump administration could see given that the last time he took the U.S. out of the Paris Climates
Accords.
You told The Guardian, specifically with reference to Project 2025, which we should note Former President Trump has really distanced himself from,
though the officials who are behind it were some of his closest advisers in his previous administration, including his former OMB director. But here's
what he told The Guardian about it. Quote, it seems like the road to hell made with evil intentions.
Just explain to us and our viewers what you mean by that and what kind of warning you're giving viewers with regards to how you fear he may handle
climate.
MCCARTHY: Yes. Well, I think the differences between a Trump and Harris administration are pretty stark, and he may want to disown Project 2025,
but he cannot. That is his baby. And I think he's recognizing that it is very extreme. I mean, we are talking about eliminating tremendous amounts
of agencies in the federal government, which he may find joyful. I find threatening.
It is absolutely a threat that undermines a democracy if you look at that in detail, and frankly, even just glimpse at it. It really has a shocking
number of ridiculous -- if you care about America and our country, ridiculous proposals that would eliminate not just whole agencies, but
frankly, totally undermine our democracy.
And so, hopefully, you know, he's walking away from that, recognizing that it was not an appropriate response in terms of developing his vision of the
future. But my fear is that's exactly what he wants the future to look like.
GOLODRYGA: It's interesting. Some of the players, the traditional players you would think from industries that would go and support wholeheartedly
another Trump administration have now made so many advancements, have moved forward regarding the Inflation Reduction Act, involving climate change,
with regards to renewable energies. I mean, I'm talking about the energy sector itself. That now, they view, if anything, another Republican --
another Trump administration would be -- they'd have to walk back some of the investments they've already made. That coupled with some of Trump's
biggest supporters actually embracing climate research and investment like Elon Musk, for example, have made for strange bedfellows and put
Republicans and Donald Trump in an awkward position.
I'd like to play sound for you from the interview, however you want to call it, between Donald Trump and Elon Musk on X earlier last week -- this week.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT AND REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: You know, the biggest threat is not global warming where the ocean's going
to rise one-eighth of an inch over the next 400 years. The big -- and you'll have more oceanfront property, right?
[13:10:00]
ELON MUSK, CEO, TESLA MOTORS: I'm pro-environment. But I'm not against -- you know, I'm not like -- I don't think we should vilify the oil and gas
industry because they're keeping civilization going right now. And -- but I do think we want to move, you know, a reasonable speed towards a
sustainable energy economy.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: So, is that reassuring at all to you, Gina, that regardless of how he may feel personally, that Trump, because of his relationship with
Elon Musk, as he jokes, has embraced electric vehicles and just the way Elon has described it himself, that he, for one, doesn't want to vilify the
energy industry at this point.
MCCARTHY: Look, in the end, I think what they both care about more than anything is money. And let's be clear about that. I mean, clearly, Elon
Musk has to be talking in those terms about clean energy because he's one of the driver of clean energy with electric vehicles. So, he's not going to
undermine his own business.
But President Trump, you know, to say that the good news is that homes will be destroyed along our oceanfront properties is just -- you know, I have to
say it, it's not just strange, it is weird. I think weird is the word I would use for both of those folks in the conversation that they had.
You know, we have to get smart in this country. We have to recognize that the Inflation Reduction Act actually resulted in $493 billion in
investments in just its two-year history, and this is a 10-year horizon. Why is that happening? Because businesses want to invest. They want to make
money. This gives them an opportunity to make money in a way that's going to benefit all of us.
Lots of new jobs, lower family costs. We are talking about the opportunity of our lifetime. We have to get away from two people that are disconnected
in many ways with reality and talk about real human beings. 3.4 million homes have invested in energy using the rebates, the new clean energy using
the rebates and efficiency programs that we have available to them.
Look, the United States deserves better than to listen to those two. We have to listen with our heart and listen with our head and talk to real
life human beings and what they need. The Inflation Reduction Act has created 330,000 jobs. We need. It has provided families cheaper energy
costs. They need that. Let's keep focused on reality here and let's keep pushing because we're going to have eight years of the Inflation Reduction
Act and I am hugely excited about the technologies and opportunities that we're going to see during that period and grab for ourselves and, frankly,
for the entire world. Because the United States needs to lead, and you know as well as I, climate change is real, and it is, in fact, killing people.
GOLODRYGA: Well, let's see, we'll be watching closely how the Harris-Walz campaigns focus next week at the DNC on this very important issue, as you
note. Gina McCarthy, anybody, anything but weird, thank you so much for joining us. Good to see you again.
MCCARTHY: Thanks so much.
GOLODRYGA: Well, climate change is also a crucial factor that's fueling record levels of migration across the globe. Now, migration is already a
key touchstone in the approaching U.S. election, both candidates talking about it at their rallies.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAMALA HARRIS, U.S. VICE PRESIDENT AND U.S. PRESIDENTIAL DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE: We know our immigration system is broken, and we know what it
takes to fix it. Comprehensive reform that includes, yes, strong border security and an earned pathway to citizenship.
DONALD TRUMP, FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT AND REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Most of the job creation has gone to migrants. In fact, I've heard that
substantially more than beyond -- actually beyond the number of a hundred percent, it's a much higher number than that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: But what's behind all of this talk and who are the human beings making the terrifying decision to flee their homes? That's the focus of
this month's cover story for The Atlantic by journalist Caitlin Dickerson and photographer Lynsey Addario, who alongside migrants journeyed twice
through the notorious and lethal Darien Gap route towards the United States. And they both join me now. Caitlin and Lynsey, thank you so much
for taking the time.
Caitlin, I'll start with you. This is an issue you've been covering for many, many years. I'm wondering what finally led you earlier this year to
start making this trek yourself.
CAITLIN DICKERSON, STAFF WRITER, THE ATLANTIC: The numbers. I watched the Darien Gap, this area that was once thought to be completely impassable.
You know, going back to the 1700s, other nations have tried to colonize this very, very dense jungle. As you said, It's the only way to walk north
out of South America.
[13:15:00]
And so, prior to the year 2015, when we saw the first little spike, you would really only see a few hundred people attempt to brave this area each
year. And it's completely changed. We're talking about more than half a million people who did this journey last year alone. And they're coming
from all over the world. The largest number come from Venezuela, but you have representation from all over Africa, East and South Asia, and
throughout Latin America.
And as somebody who covers migration, it was just something that I could no longer ignore. I think the severity of the movement through this part of
the world, it just highlights how significant the global migration crisis has become, how desperate people all over the world have become to take
this journey. And so, it was something that I felt I had to see for myself.
GOLODRYGA: And I want to get to you, Lynsey, in terms of what you actually saw and the migrants that you met and encountered along this grueling
journey. But, Caitlin, just on the issue in this delicate balance that numerous administrations time and time again have had to make in terms of
deciphering those who are leaving for safety reasons and those who are leaving for economic reasons.
And you spoke to the U.S. ambassador to Panama about this, other State Department officials. And what you note is so important because you say
that people migrate for overlapping reasons. It's usually not a binary option for so many of these people. And in terms of hearing from both
candidates at the introduction of this piece, it really stood out to me that many of these migrants are well aware of the legal system here, in
terms of what they're doing.
And I'll quote from your piece. Many of the migrants I met in the Darien Gap knew which types of cases prevail in American immigration courts and
which do not. They were prepared to emphasize whichever aspect of their story would be most likely to get their children to safety. I found that
fascinating, Caitlin.
DICKERSON: It is. You know, one of the things that I focused on in my work, and that was a priority for me in the Darien Gap, was to look at the
tools that the U.S. government has relied on again and again to respond to global migration. It grows each year. Right now, you have one in 69 people
on the planet who are currently migrating from their homes. Over 170 million people total.
And you know, I've spent years looking at how we've responded to that, largely through deterrent policies. So, policies put into place at the
southern U.S. border, as well as by pressuring other nations, especially in Latin America, to crack down on their own immigration systems and basically
try to stop people either before they leave home or en route to the United States.
Another of these tools is -- has been to distinguish between who qualifies under the law as a legitimate refugee or asylum seeker versus an economic
migrant. But I felt it was important to convey in this piece that, you know, again, years of experience has shown me that people have many reasons
for which they're migrating and they know the American immigration system.
You know, our Congress has been stuck on this issue for years with no movement since the '90s. And in that time, the international smuggling
networks that move people across the globe are sort of running circles around our enforcement apparatus. They know what the rules are. And you
know, these are people who are very, very desperate. Carrying their children through, you know, unimaginably harrowing scenes, which I'm sure
we'll get into.
And so, you know, any rational or logical person knowing the laws is going to respond in interviews in a way that they know is going to be more likely
to get their children and themselves to safety.
GOLODRYGA: Yes, Democrats historically have been criticized for not taking this issue seriously enough. Republicans have been criticized for
instilling fear mongering and dehumanizing these migrants. The president there expressing falsehood after falsehood, saying that they're taking more
than 100 percent of U.S. jobs. That doesn't even make sense.
But, Lynsey, let's talk about these people and show some of the photos that you took here because it really -- it paints the picture of a system that
is broken not only here in the United States, but in many countries that is driving all of these people to seek shelter, security, jobs for their
children and in the United States and in Mexico for some of these families.
You photographed a group of over 600 people sitting off in the jungle at the start of this trail. In a weird way, it almost -- here, we're showing
that picture, it almost looks like some kind of excursion. That's not the case here though, because these are people who are desperate, who are
carrying their children. Literally their bags that you see them carrying, have all of their belongings that they brought with them to start new
lives. Explain for us what you saw at the start of this trek.
[13:20:00]
LYNSEY ADDARIO, PHOTOJOURNALIST AND AUTHOR, "IT'S WHAT I DO": Yes, I think what was so surprising at the beginning of the trail was how much stuff
people brought along not really knowing how physically grueling it would be. I think it's one thing to have a sort of understanding of how tough the
trail would be. It's another thing to be 24 hours in to start running out of food and water, to be carrying mats for sleeping and many changes of
clothes, and then starting to realize that it was just physically impossible to be able to carry one's own children, the things they needed.
And so, people started just abandoning things along the way, along the route.
So, yes, while in the beginning of this trail, it seemed almost like a tourism track through a river, of course, the irony is these are people
fleeing for their lives. You know, some were more informed than others. Some were better prepared than others. But some people, it was sort of
shocking how little they had to be able to survive.
GOLODRYGA: And how little they knew about how grueling this trek actually would be. Some were told it would just take a couple of days. It wouldn't
be that difficult. And as you note in this piece, that obviously was not the case.
Caitlin, you spent a lot of time focusing on a Venezuelan family. A father traveling with the mother of his children, his partner, and his partner's
cousin, there are four children with them in total, and they've had to make those decisions in real-time. Children hungry, tired, they're having to
lose some of their belongings as they're going. The internal tension between this group as they're going on these sleepless, grueling days.
But what really stood out to me is that you told us a bit more detail about who they were. He trained -- he went to college, studied to be an engineer.
His partner, a nurse. You know, when we ask the question, who are these people? That gives you a bit of a sense of their backgrounds.
DICKERSON: That's right. And you can see her, Lynsey did such an incredible job documenting how physically grueling this journey was. And
there are so many layers to their story. They're almost a classic case in the Darien Gap. I mentioned there's an incredible amount of diversity,
people from all over the world and all different backgrounds. But there are a lot of people like this family, you know, Burk Han (ph) and Orly Marr
(ph), the two parents were from middle-class homes. Burk Han's mother was a lawyer, Orly Marr's (ph) mother was a doctor. He had been studying to
become an engineer, as you mentioned, she a nurse.
And so, they had this whole life set out in front of them. They were in college when the Venezuelan economy began to spiral, and that was around
2014. Obviously, it hasn't recovered since. Things have only become more dangerous, more unstable, and certainly, economically untenable. And so,
they sort of watched this middle-class future that they were planning for vanish before their eyes.
And another thing that makes their case a common one in the Darien Gap is that they tried to resettle elsewhere before moving toward the United
States. You know, they were very clear with us. Their goal is to get back to Venezuela. They're not chasing an American dream, and they'd prefer to
be at home. But because Venezuela was so impossible for them as a family, they moved first to Peru. You know, they were working odd jobs, they were
sleeping in a studio apartment on a mattress that they dragged in from the street and they weren't able to feed their kids.
And so, they were given an opportunity when a family member's boyfriend who lived in Texas offered to lend them some money to get to the United States
and they really felt like that was throwing a Hail Mary pass to try to save their lives and their children's futures not something that they wanted to
be doing, but they felt they had no other choice.
GOLODRYGA: And so, much of this, and rightly so, is focused on the children who are brought along this journey and make this dangerous trek.
So, many, sadly, don't make it through. 160,000 children, according to UNICEF, crossed the Darien Gap this year. That's a 34 percent increase just
from last year alone.
And Lynsey, you photograph a really intimate moment between a seven-year- old girl comforting her crying mother, a child comforting her mother. Tell us about this picture.
ADDARIO: Yes, I mean, this moment in particular was so heartbreaking because you see these children, and many of the parents say we're going on
an adventure. They're trying to sort of a lay any fears and make it seem like they're doing something fun and not something, of course, that is
life-threatening and is extraordinarily difficult.
[13:25:00]
But most of the parents we saw, most of the people we accompanied had a moment where they broke down because it's just so physically grueling but
also, emotionally terrifying because so many things can go wrong at so many different points along the journey. And so, in that moment, Susedg (ph) was
-- her mother was crying and it was just amazing to see this young girl come over and comfort her mother because, of course, these kids are forced
into these roles suddenly where they have to be almost like a caregiver in certain moments, or they have to provide some sort of support and say, it's
OK, we're going to make it, it's OK, let's keep going.
And, you know, the whole time I thought about my own children while I was taking these photographs and making this journey, you know, the courage
that it takes to be able to bring your children on a journey like this.
GOLODRYGA: Yes.
ADDARIO: I mean, some of the scenes we cross were boulders, wet boulders where people had to scale the walls with ropes and hope that the ropes were
attached strongly enough that that would hold the weight of whoever was crossing, walking through rivers for hours at a time. You know, in and out
of rivers, sleeping in hammocks or on the ground being constantly wet. It was very difficult.
GOLODRYGA: And we don't have specific numbers as to how many people actually die along this trek, but you took one photo, it's very chilling,
gives you a sense that many don't make it. It's just -- it's a skull by a tree trunk that you also took there. You see there a reminder that not
everyone comes out of this alive.
And I have to say, Lynsey, what would really stood out to me, there was an interview that you conducted with a Vietnamese mother who made the trek
with her young son. On the fifth day of this trek, she lost him. They got both pulled into water, in a flood, and she never found him again and moved
to the United States. Now, I believe works at a nail salon in Boston, and is constantly asking you if there's any information about her son.
Really important piece and really humanizes this tragic story that the whole world really should be focused on because it is something that
impacts all of us. Caitlin Dickerson, Lynsey Addario, thank you so much.
DICKERSON: Thank you so much for having us.
ADDARIO: Thank you.
GOLODRYGA: Well, next to something that has the potential to influence several of the issues we have discussed in the show so far, from climate
change to presidential elections, and that is artificial intelligence. Demis Hassabis is the co-founder and CEO of one of the world's leading A.I.
research groups, Google DeepMind. And he tells Walter Isaacson why he takes a cautiously optimistic approach to the much-discussed technology.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
WALTER ISAACSON, CO-HOST, AMANPOUR AND CO.: Thank you, Bianna. And, Sir Demis Hassabis, welcome to the show.
DEMIS HASSABIS, CO-FOUNDER AND CEO, GOOGLE DEEPMIND: Thanks for having me.
ISAACSON: We now -- I think you're in your London office there. And behind you probably is that wonderful first edition of Alan Turing's 1950 paper in
which he asks -- proposed to address the question, can machines think. Now, we've got a lot of large language models such as Google Gemini, which you
helped create and ChatGPT from OpenAI. How do we get from a chatbot that kind of can pass a Turing test, fool a person into thinking it's human, to
something that's really serious, like Artificial General Intelligence, AGI, what you call the Holy Grail?
HASSABIS: Yes. Well, look, it's a great question. And of course, there's been unbelievably impressive progress and fast progress in the last decade.
Plus, as you say, getting towards systems that we have today that can pass a Turing test. But it's still far from general intelligence.
What we're missing is things like planning and memory and tool use. So, they can actively, you know, solve problems for us and actually do tasks.
So, right now, what we have is kind of passive systems. We need these active systems.
ISAACSON: Wait, explain to me what planning is. I know you and I do it. How does a machine do it?
HASSABIS: Well, we've experimented a lot in the past with planning, actually using games. So, one of our most famous programs back in 2016 was
AlphaGo, which was the program that we built to beat the world champion at Go, the ancient game of Go. And it involves building a model of the board
game and what kinds of moves would be good.
And then, on top of that's not enough to play really well. You also need to be able to try out different moves sort of in your mind, and then plan and
figure out which one, which path is the best path. And so, today's models don't do that, the language models. And really, we need to build that
planning capability, the ability to break down a task into its subtasks and then each one in the right order to achieve some bigger goal. They're still
missing that capability.
[13:30:00]
ISAACSON: Tell me why the use of games is so important to the development of artificial intelligence.
HASSABIS: Yes, games, well, got me -- it was what got me into artificial intelligence in the first place. It was playing a lot of chess for the
England junior teams and then trying to improve my own thought process has led me to thinking about mechanizing intelligence and artificial
intelligence.
And so, we used games when we started DeepMind back in 2010 as a testing ground, a proving ground for our algorithmic ideas and developing
artificial intelligence systems. And one reason that's so good is because games have clear objectives, you know, to win the game or maximize the
points that you can score in a game. So, it's very easy to sort of map out and track if you're making progress with your artificial intelligence
system. So, it's a very convenient way actually to develop the algorithmic ideas that, you know, now underpin modern A.I. systems.
ISAACSON: I think most of us have now used the chat bots like Gemini or ChatGPT. But you've talked not only about moving us to artificial general
intelligence. In other words, the type of intelligence that can do anything a human can do. But also, I guess I'd call it real world intelligence, you
know, robots or self-driving cars, things that could take in visual information and do things in the physical world. How important is that? And
how do you get there?
HASSABIS: Yes, it's incredibly important. I think this idea of embodied intelligence is sometimes called and, you know, self-driving cars are an
example of that and robotics is another example, where these systems can then actually interact with the real world, as you say, the -- you know,
the world of atoms, so to speak, and not just be stuck in the world of bits. So, that's going to be huge advances I think we're going to see in
that space in the next few years.
And, you know, that's also going to involve this planning capability and the ability to sort of do actions and carry out plans that in order to
achieve certain goals. And that's not the only area of real world, I would say application, the one other area that I'm super passionate about and the
reason I have spent my whole career building A.I. is to apply A.I. to science, scientific problems, scientific discovery and, you know, including
our program AlphaFold that cracked the ground challenge of protein folding.
ISAACSON: Yes, tell me a little bit more about AlphaFold, because what it can do is understand RNA, DNA, all these things that we think determine
what a protein looks like. But actually, it's the folding of the protein. How important and hard was that? And what is it going to do for us?
HASSABIS: Well, the protein folding problem is a 50-year kind of grand challenge in biology. One of the biggest challenges in biology was sort of
proposed in the 1970s by a Nobel Prize winner, Anfinsen. And the idea was that, can you determine the 3D structure of a protein? You know, everything
in life depends on proteins, all your muscles in your body, everything, all the functions of your body are governed by -- supported by proteins.
And what a protein does depends on its 3D shape, how it folds up in the body. And the conjecture was, could you predict the 3D shape of a protein
based just on its two-dimensional -- sort of one-dimensional genetic sequence, right? So, just a string of numbers. Sometimes it's called the
amino acid sequence. And can you predict the 3D structure of the protein just from its amino acid sequence? And if you could do that would be really
important for understanding biology and the processes in the body, but also, designing things like drugs and cures for diseases and understanding
when something goes wrong and how to design a drug to bind to a certain part of the protein.
So, it's a really foundational, fundamental problem in biology. And we managed to pretty much sort of crack that problem with AlphaFold.
ISAACSON: There's so many large language models competing. It's almost like a racetrack in which Google Gemini, yours is up there against OpenAI
and against Grok A.I., Grok from xAI, and Meta, I think, has its own in Anthropic.
One of the things that seems to distinguish the latest model of Google Gemini is that it's multimodal, meaning it can look at images, it can hear
words, not just deal with text. Explain that to me, and if that's a differentiator.
HASSABIS: Yes, that was one of the key things we did when we were designing our Gemini system was to make it, as you said, so-called
multimodal from the beginning. And what that means is it doesn't just deal with language and text, but also images and video processing and code and
audio. So, all the different modalities we as human beings sort of use and exist in.
And we've always thought that was critical for the A.I. systems and models to be able to understand. If we want them to understand the world around us
and build models of the world and how the world works and be useful to us as perhaps digital assistance or something like that, they need to really
have a good grounding and understanding of how the world works. And In order to do that, they have to be multimodal. They have to process all
these different types of information, not just text and language.
[13:35:00]
And so, we built Gemini from the beginning to be natively multimodal. So, it was had that ability from the start. And we were envisaging things like,
you know, a digital assistant, a universal assistant that can understand the world around you and therefore, be much more helpful. But also, if you
think about things like robotics or anything in the operating in the real world, it also needs to interact with and deal with real world problems.
Things like spatial relations and context that you're in. So, we think it's kind of fundamental for general intelligence.
ISAACSON: The big news in the past week or two was Meta, the Facebook, coming out with Llama. It's form of a competitor in some ways to Google
Gemini and OpenAI's system. And Mark Zuckerberg, when he introduced it, made a big deal about it being open source. You've been on -- you know that
debate better than anybody.
Tell me why the full-fledged Google Gemini is not open source and whether Mark Zuckerberg is right to say this is important.
HASSABIS: It's definitely very important. We're huge -- Google DeepMind and Google, in general, are huge supporters of open source software. We've
put out -- I mean, we were just discussing AlphaFold earlier. That is open source, you know, over 2 million biologists and scientists around the world
make use of it today. And, you know, pretty much every country in the world to do their important research work.
We've -- we published, you know, thousands of papers now on all the underlying technologies and architectures required for building modern A.I.
systems, including most famously the transformers papers, that is the architecture that underlies pretty much all the modern language models and
foundational models. So, we very much believe in that's the fastest way to make scientific progress is to share information. That's always been the
case. That's why science works.
Now, in this particular case with AGI systems, I think we need to think about as they get more powerful. So, not today's models. I think that's
fine. But, you know, as we get closer to artificial general intelligence, you know, what about the issues around bad actors, whether that's
individuals or up to nation states, using these things, repurposing these same models, their dual purpose, they can be used for good, obviously,
that's why I've worked on A.I. my whole career is, you know, to help cure diseases and maybe help with things like climate change and so on and
advanced science and medicine. But they can also be used for harm if incorrectly used by bad actors.
So, that's the question, I think, the -- that we're going to have to sort of resolve as a community and a research community is, how do we enable all
the amazing good use cases of A.I. and share information amongst well- meaning actors, you know, researchers and so on to advance the field and come up with amazing new applications that are benefiting humanity? But at
the same time, restrict access to would be bad actors to do harmful things with those same systems by repurposing them in a different way.
And I think that's the conundrum that there's -- we're going to have to sort of solve somehow with this debate about open systems versus closed
systems. And I don't think there's a clear answer yet or consensus about how to do that as this, as these systems improve. But of course, you know,
I congratulate Mark Zuckerberg and Meta on, you know, their great new model. And I think this is a useful to stimulate the debate on this topic.
ISAACSON: One of the things that can make an A.I. system really great is the training data that it can use. And you're at Google, you own YouTube,
this show will be on YouTube, our segment pretty soon. Is Google Gemini -- it trains on YouTube, unless somebody stops it. It also can train on my
books. It could read any book I wrote. What is to -- how do we regulate that Google Gemini can't just take all this data and intellectual property
without some deals?
HASSABIS: Yes, we're very -- well, we're very careful at Google to respect all of those kind of copyright issues and to only train on the open web,
whether that's YouTube or the web in general. And then, obviously, we have content deals as well.
And so, you know, this is going to be an interesting question as well for the whole industry and the whole research industry is how to tackle this
going forwards. We also have a Google opt outs to allow any websites to opt out of those -- of training if they want to do that. And many people take
advantage of that.
And then, in the fullness of time, I think we need to develop some new technologies where we can do sort of attribution or some form of, you know,
this input, training input helped in some fractional way, some output, and then derive some commercial value from that can flow back to the content
creators.
[13:40:00]
I think that technology is not there yet, but I think we need to develop that. You know, analogous to that would be content ID for YouTube. That's
YouTube has had for many years and runs very well in order for the creator community as well to benefit massively from the distribution that YouTube
gives. And I think that's a good example that we're trying to follow, you know, with the -- in the A.I. space, you know, as an example, like the way
YouTube is -- the YouTube ecosystem is developed.
ISAACSON: In the fascinating biography of your life, there's something almost as important as being a game player in a game designer, and that's
you have a PhD in cognitive neuroscience. You love the human brain. How important is it to understand how the human brain works in order to do
A.I.? And is there something that's always going to be fundamentally different between a silicon based digital system and the wetware of the
human brain?
HASSABIS: Yes, you're right. So, I did my PhD, you know, nearly 20 years ago now in the mid-2000s. And I think back in those times in the early
parts of DeepMind, early 2010s, it was very important to have inspiration from both from machine learning and mathematics, as well as neuroscience
and inspiration for the human brain as to how intelligence might work.
So, it's not that you want to slavishly copy how the brain works, because as you pointed out, the brain -- our brains are carbon based and our
computers are silicon based. So, there's no reason why the mechanics should work in the same way. And in fact, they work quite differently. But a lot
of the algorithmic principles and the systems and the architectures and the principles behind intelligence are in common, including, you know, in the
first -- the early days of neural networks, you know, the things that underpins all modern A.I. were originally inspired by neuroscience and
synapses in the brain.
And so, the implementation details are different, but the algorithmic ideas were extremely valuable in terms of kickstarting what we see is the modern
A.I. revolution today including this idea of learning systems, reinforcement learning and systems that learn for themselves, very much
like biological systems and our own brains do.
And then ultimately, you know, maybe when we build AGI, we'll be able to use that to back -- to analyze our own minds so that we can understand the
neuroscience better and finally understand, you know, the workings of our own brain. So, I love the kind of whole circle here of -- this kind of
virtuous circle of them influencing each other.
ISAACSON: Here's something you've said, quote, mitigating the risk of extinction from A.I. should be a global priority. What are those risks?
HASSABIS: Look, I think that was a sort of open letter that I and many others signed, and I think it was important to put that in the Overton
window of things that need to be discussed. You know, I think nobody knows the timescales of that yet or the worries of that. I think we're still --
the current system is impressive, though they are still quite far from artificial general intelligence.
And also, we don't know what the risks levels are of that. Look, maybe it'll turn out to be very simple to navigate, you know, controllability of
these systems. How do we interpret them? How do we make sure when we set them goals, you know, these more agent-based systems, they don't go and do
something else on the side that we didn't intend, unintended consequences? You know, there's lots of science fiction books written about that. Most of
Asimov's books are about those kinds of scenarios.
So, we want to avoid all those things so that we make sure we use systems for good and for amazing things, you know, solving diseases, you know,
helping with climate, inventing new materials, all these incredible things that I think are going to come about in the next decade or so. But we need
to understand these systems better.
And I think over that time, we'll also understand the risks involved about runaway systems that are doing unintended consequences or bad actors using
these systems in nefarious ways. You know, that may end up all to be very low probability likelihood, and let's hope that's the case. But right now,
it's -- there's a lot of uncertainty over it.
So, as a scientist, you know, the way I deal with that, I think the only sort of responsible approach to that is to approach with cautious optimism.
So, I'm very optimistic, obviously, that we'll -- you know, human ingenuity collectively will work this all out. You know, I'm very confident of that.
Otherwise, I wouldn't have started this whole journey 30 years ago for myself.
But, you know, it's not a given, right? So, there are some unknowns that we need to do research on and focus on to understand, and things like analysis
of the system. So, they're not just black box systems that we actually understand and can control and look at how knowledge is represented in
these systems. And then, we'll be able to understand the risks and the probability of those risks and then mitigate against those.
So, really, it was just a call to action to pay more attention to that, as well as all the exciting commercial potential that everyone's wrapped up
in. We should also think, at the same time, about the risks. But, you know, still be optimistic about that, but approach it with the respect that it
deserves for such a transformative technology that A.I. is.
[13:45:00]
ISAACSON: Sir Demis Hassabis, thank you for being with us.
HASSABIS: Thanks for having me.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
GOLODRYGA: And now, we look back at the moment a giant of American literature and a cinema mastermind came together. The first big screen
adaptation of a James Baldwin novel, "If Beale Street Could Talk," displays all the cinematic GIFs of Oscar winning director Barry Jenkins, telling the
complicated love story of devoted couple Tish and Fonny derailed by a false rape accusation.
And as we commemorate Baldwin's 100th birthday this month, we revisit Christian's conversation with Jenkins speaking about what drew him to the
story and why more diversity is needed in the entertainment industry.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BARRY JENKINS, DIRECTOR, "IF BEALE STREET COULD TALK": Yes, for me, you know, I've always been a really big fan and admirer of James Baldwin's
work. And Mr. Baldwin had quite a few voices he wrote in, but two of those voices in particular that always stood out to me was the one voice that was
obsessed with romance, romanticism, interpersonal relationships. And the other voice that was just as obsessed and passionate about pointing out
systemic injustice.
I felt like in this book, "If Beale Street Could Talk," those two voices were perfectly fused in the story of Tish and Fonny.
CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: I mean, they really are perfectly fused. So, Tish is the young girl, she's 19, Fonny is her
boyfriend, they've known each other, you know, from when they were little, little children, and they grew up into this really deep and sweet and
wonderful love.
And then he gets framed for a rape that he didn't do, that his family is trying to get him out of jail for.
But here's this moment, we want to play a fairly lengthy clip of Tish's family telling Fonny's family that she's actually pregnant. Let's just
listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REGINA KING, ACTRESS. "IF BEALE STREET COULD TALK": The child that's coming, it's your grandchild.
AUNJANUE ELLIS, ACTRESS, "IF BEALE STREET COULD TALK": I don't understand you.
KING: It's your grandchild. What difference does it make how he gets here? The child ain't got nothing to do with that. Ain't none of us got nothing
to do with that.
ELLIS: That child, that child, that child, that child.
KING: Get your -- take your -- with you.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: It is such a remarkable scene and such a remarkable event for a family to stick up so dramatically for their unwed pregnant daughter and to
kick the other one out of the house. Tell me what you were saying about the African-American family in that scene?
JENKINS: You know, for one, you know, has taken directly from the source material. So, Mr. Baldwin brings these two families together in the novel
and I felt like that scene was so powerful on the page that it will be just as powerful on screen.
You know, I think for me, it was a few different things. One of particular is, you know, we have eight, you know, black adults, you know, sitting in a
living room confronted with the same situation, and we assume that black people are a monolith and they all think the same way in respond to the
same stimulus and the same way.
But I think in the sequence, we see these two families, you know, were from the same place and the same time, take very different approaches to how to
deal with the situation and the circumstance. And, you know, for me, as a director, you know, I love getting into the nuance of interpersonal
relationships and I think Regina King in that clip and Aunjanue Ellis just do such a great job as two black mothers, you know, responding in very
different ways but have to say as much about themselves as people, as adults, to the situation in front of them.
AMANPOUR: And Regina King, we've already pointed out, did win a Golden Globe as best supporting actress in that drama, and remarkable and her
speech was remarkable too. She says that, in the next two years, everything that I produce, I'm making a vow that it's going to be tough to make sure
that everything I produce is 50 percent women. And I just challenge anyone out there who's in a position of power to do the same.
I mean, you know, taking on the whole issue of women in film today obviously in the post MeToo environment as well. What do you make of that
challenge? Is that something that you would take up?
JENKINS: Yes, yes. My company, Pastel, agrees with Regina's mandate and we have undertaken it ourselves. You know, when we make half the movie going
audience, you know, they make half the population. You know, Sundance, the Sundance Film Festival this year, they'll make up half the directors in
competition and yet, they somehow end up making up only 4 percent of studio directors. So, how do we get the 4 percent to 8 percent to 12 percent, it's
by creating mandates like Regina stated.
[13:50:00]
You know, Ava DuVernay who won -- was the first woman to win -- the first black woman to win the directing prize at the Sundance Film Festival, she
started a show on own called "Queen Sugar" and she made the mandate that every director of that series would be a woman. And what's happened is the
woman who directed on "Queen Sugar" have not gone on to direct episodes of other television shows and created their own television shows.
And clearly, they have the aptitude, they have the talent, but they did not have the access. And I think Regina's mandate is about creating the access
because the people are there.
AMANPOUR: And even obviously Frances McDormand when she won her last Oscar talked about inclusion mandate. So, you're getting a lot of support from a
lot of corners. And I wonder whether you think this explosion and diversity is real and it's here to stay.
You know, you mentioned Ava DuVernay, "A Wrinkle in Time," Spike Lee, of course, " Blackkklansman," Steve McQueen's, "Widows," Boots Riley's, "Sorry
to Bother You," Ryan Coogler, "Black Panther," all these films making so many waves over the last year or so.
JENKINS: Yes. I think it takes a multi-pronged approach. And I think, also, we have to look at things over the duration of time. You know, we've
had these moments of diversity and inclusion that have popped up over the course of the last few decades but they're reduced to moments, you know,
they're not an actual process.
And so, I think right now we're trying to build a process. That's why I use Ava as a perfect example. That show, "Queen sugar" is now in its third
season. So, I believe that's about 30 episodes of television directed by women. When typically, women are 10 percent, I want to say, of television
directors.
And so, I think by creating a fertile ground, you know, where these directors who have typically been excluded from the process can be included
to prove that they can do the same work as their counterparts, I think that's the way we have a continual progress that becomes a direction, not
necessarily a destination.
AMANPOUR: Let me ask you also about the topic. You've talked a lot about women, but also you take on black -- rather male masculinity. You did it --
well, black male masculinity, frankly. You did it in "Moonlight," a young gay man, boy growing up. Mother was a crack addict. It's the first time
that character has been so portrayed.
And again, here in "If Beale Street Could Talk," you know, the quintessential love and goodness that -- you know, that the male character,
Fonny, displayed, even as he was being railroaded, you know, framed for this crime that he did not commit, these are very special portrayals.
JENKINS: Yes. You know, I just happen to have the honor of adapting, you know, really amazing writers. You know, Tarell Alvin McCraney even wrote
the play that "Moonlight" is based on, is a MacArthur genius. And James Baldwin is a genius, period. So, in a way, I'm kind of, cheating.
But I think that Both between myself and the actors, we're looking to just basically reflect the world that we see. You know, black men have innocence
and tenderness in their hearts, you know, but we rarely see that innocence and tenderness rendered, you know, in mass media.
So, I think for us, when we're making these films, it's just about reflecting the characters that we see in our everyday lives, you know,
Brian Tyree Henry, Estefan James, you know, a very warm, very just amazing young men. And I think they bring part of themselves to these roles.
And you're absolutely right, you know, part of what I love about this job is getting the opportunity to show all the multitudes, you know, of
blackness, you know, and I think working from this book by James Baldwin, which does contain multitudes, we can speak to both the light, you know,
and the darkness of this particular aspect of the black experience.
AMANPOUR: And I mean, on a larger level, is that what you're trying to build, this engagement between different elements of society at a time when
everything is so polarized, not to mention the enduring racism?
JENKINS: I do believe so. And I think it was one of the main reasons why I gravitated towards this book. You know, if I was to go to a desert island,
you know, I wouldn't take any of the films I've made with me, you know, because it's not about me, you know, I think a film is meant to be shared.
And I also feel like, too, in this novel, Mr. Baldwin is unpacking so many things, and I think he's implicating all of us in a certain way. You know,
Fonny is falsely accused of a crime he did not commit, but he's not falsely accused of anything. He's chosen out of a police lineup, and he's placed in
a police lineup by an officer who has decided to manipulate the system. Because of that, the actual victim in the story has been disenfranchised,
and the truth or justice is not what's at stake. You know, is not what the system is trying to arrive at.
So, I think in that way, Mr. Baldwin points out so many of these things, and I think in making the film, you know, I'm hoping that we can, you know,
just raise a mirror to show how the systems we've chosen to engage in, whether it's through elections or whether it's through the way we vote, all
these things in a certain way, you know, if they're not serving us, who are they serving? And then, I think, ultimately, we're all being
disenfranchised on some level.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
[13:55:00]
GOLODRYGA: A really inspiring conversation with Barry Jenkins there.
Well, coming up next week, a Broadway hit for the TikTok generation. The new play, "Job," tackles social media toxicity head on as its main
character, Jane, an online content moderator, suffers a breakdown and works through it with a therapist. Lots of twists in this one. Tune in for my
interview with playwright Max Wolf Friedlich and actors Peter Friedman and Sydney Lemmon, who tell me about the intense experience of delving into the
darkest recesses of the internet each night on Broadway. That's next week.
Well, that is it for us now. If you ever miss our show, you can find the latest episode shortly after it airs on our podcast. And remember, you can
always catch us online, on our website, and all-over social media.
Thank you so much for watching, and goodbye from New York.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[14:00:00]
END
