Who Wants to Live Forever?

Thanks for the backup there, Joe. Yeah, all right. So we recently had an episode about longevity and uh, and if you were to extend that logically, then you would see that beyond longevity, we'd be talking about the possibility of actually attaining immortality or at least prolonging our lifespan to the point where, um, we we tend to live indefinitely. This is a dream that a lot of futurists have, uh, and there are various ways that they have proposed that

we might actually achieve this dream. Um. But we want to talk about sort of a couple of those different ideas and then what would that ultimately mean to humans. If we were to actually get this ability to live effectively for as long as we want to, it raises a lot of questions. I'd say more than raises questions.

I mean getting rid of death, well, not getting rid of death, because we should make sure to make a distinction between uh, the sort of natural immortality, meaning making you immune to dying by old age and stuff like that,

essentially eliminating aging. Yeah, it would be not quite the same thing as eliminating death completely, because you if you were never we can never make it so that if injury or disease were eliminated, that would be an entirely different thing, right if you were, if you were able to somehow find a medical cure for say, getting hit by a bus, then maybe that would lead to effective

immortality in all aspects. But really, you know, there are going to be cases where, unless we find a way to make ourselves invulnerable Superman style, uh, death will still be something that could happen to you. It's just it won't be something that would happen to you just from being around the earth too long, unless we're talking about digital immortality. Yeah, in that case, you might be talking about the death of a physical body, but not of

the consciousness. But we'll we'll kind of we need to break all that down and define it first and then talk about what the the concerns are. Right, what I started to say about the concerns is that this seems to me like it would just completely change what it means to be alive, what it means to be humans.

So much of human civilization, as you know, some kind of morbid psychologists might say, is based around avoiding thinking about your impending death, or it's about dealing with the death of others, or it's about accepting your impending death, depending upon which culture you're talking about and how they view mortality. And it could be argued that, um that we find all of our meaningfulness in life due to

the fact that it won't last forever exactly right. So if you if you remove that, if life lasts indefinitely, do you in fact remove meaning or does that just mean that we have to redefine it? Uh. These are all good conversations that I want to get into. But before we get into the philosophical stuff, let's talk about some of the actual ways that people have said we might somehow achieve immortality. Now, you mentioned digital immortality, Lauren. Now, this is an idea that I I personally think is

very science fiction. E um. It's the idea that we're somehow able to port our consciousness what it is that makes us us into some sort of electronic mechanical, you know, system. So essentially the way most people use shorthand as they say, you upload your brain to a computer. Now, there are a lot of problems with this, chief among them is how do you actually get the whatever it is in our consciousness that makes us who we are out of

our minds and into a machine. Yeah. Right, now, there's so much that we don't understand about human consciousness in the brain that it seems like an impossibility. And there may not be any sort of way to to interconnect our consciousness with a machine beyond a very surface level. So in other words, uh, you might be able to interact with a computer with a brain computer interface. We've

seen those already and they're getting better every year. But being able to make a computer do what you want by thinking about it and making a transition from your body into a computer are huge orders of magnitude apart from one another. Yeah, and if the language on this hasn't been clear yet. It's worth making a really fine distinction on the difference between having a copy of your brain in a computer and having that be the thing

that is currently your experience. Right, So, even if we get to a point where we can simulate a human brain down to the last luron, imagine they could actually copy it. So somebody could go interact with that computer, and to them it would be like interacting with you. The personality would be identical. However, that computer have the

experience of interacting with that person. Well, and even even if we can't answer that question, we still are bothered by the question of well, yeah, okay, so we've got a computer copy, but I'm still in my body, right, that's it. It's not like it's not like me that that somehow my own experience of the universe as I know it continues on. There's just a copy of me. It's almost as if you were to make a physical

clone of me. If you were to clone me and there was a second me there, that second me which might have very similar personality traits and actually might not. But that's kind of interesting too. But anyway, let's assume that somehow it's a perfect copy of me. That doesn't mean that if my clone goes out the door and talks to someone, I suddenly have that experience of talking to that person. That's two totally separate experiences of reality.

So I still lose it when I die. I'm gone. Well, however, I mean, if that clone has all of your experiences up until the point that you die, if it's made at your death and then can still go out and update Twitter and have all of your memories, then to everyone else, I seem alive. To me, I'm still dead. Well, but that but how do you How do you know that if you're, if you're because your consciousness, if you're continues on. But no, no, no, no, it's not my consciousness,

it's his consciousness. See. That's the problem is that it becomes his as soon as that becomes a thing. Same thing with the digital model is that there are two consciousness is now conscious nigh whatever the plural of consciousness would be. But there are two of them and so and that's the problem is that they're distinct from one another. They both are based on the same thing. But this is the same problem I have with transporter technology. By

the way, Yeah, it's essentially cloning. It's breaking down a body and then reconstructing it. So every single time anyone on Star Trek is using the transporter, and this is something that Bones himself points out a couple of times. They die and resurrected, but it's it's a copy of

the person. It's the next generation. Dealt with that in a very important episode about Riker, but it wasn't every episode, and an important episode about Riker and how he sits down in the manliest of ways and every chair he comes into contact with. Is he his action man, it's not. It's not his faulty. He also walks through doors sideways because his shoulders are just far too wide to fit through. Uh kid, Jonathan breaks He's a nice guy. I met him a couple of times. I love you Jonathan anyway.

Uh So that but that's a real that's a real thing though. That's a real thing in science fiction, and it's a real thing. That people have argued is that the you could maintain the illusion of immortality that way to everyone, to any outside observer, it would be as if you were living forever, but you, the actual entity, would cease to be upon your death right. That the so the new you might have the sense of continuity, right, the new you might continue on and it would be

as if you had actually been transported. It's just that your consciousness ends, which not acceptable. We're talking, We're getting into a very metaphysical conversation about what it means to be conscious and what I mean because I I would I would argue the counter. I would argue that if if you can wake up in a new body, but you're not as all of your memories, you're not waking

up someone else is waking up with all your memories. No, but if it's all of your memories, it's still you, but it's not you the person individually, because you both exist at the same time, Lauren, If you clone yourself right now and your clone walks outside and does stuff, you are not going to know what's happening. So your consciousness is existing independent. It doesn't matter. But that's that's

the whole pay We're trying to avoid death, right. Okay, So, so digital immortality, we've got a problem with consciousness porting and all that aside. But how would digital immortality be different from physical immortality? So digital immortality, let's let's say that somehow we have reached a point where we actually can move a person's consciousness from a physical body into a digital construct. I don't know how we did it, but somehow we magically found the way. You know, we've

got the USB port. You just transferred your brain over USB sevn D three and uh it went really quickly. And then you're seeing from this computer. That's where your your consciousness has now been transported into a computer, whether that computer is a giant mainframe, or it's inside a robotic body, or it's some sort of weird free form literal cloud computing. Because we've gone so far that nanotechnology

has taken. Okay, I I put in right now for electronic jellyfish, electronic jellyfish from I'm just gonna say goo like magic, Google magic, goof for Joe personally, I want a flame breathing unicorna but that's close enough. A lama in a unicorn. Our world's apart. But anyway, so, so all right, we we've reached that point. In this case,

we're talking about a continuing consciousness. But there's you. You are separated from what was your body, right you are not now you might be able in this weird science fiction world, to reconstruct your body in some way so that you can at least continue the experience of going through the world as if you were in a human body. Can change mind to mechanical shark, mechanical shark body, you're

in goo. You can take whatever form you want, all right, But the point being that, you know, if you could support your brain so that you could be in a digital format, you would not be limited to the human experience anymore. Uh. There are a lot of other questions that happened, Like what happens if you were to upload to justness? Is this this is to the same computer? Then would they merge in some way? What happens if we were to port the entire human race into some

sort of digital format. What happens with reproduction? Would we actually be able to create brand new digital life forms that never once we're inside a human body? Uh? Again, I think all this is pure science fiction. I don't see us ever getting there. But these are kind of those cool science fiction e like ideas that you get when you're yeah, yeah, yeah, it's are we going to be the borg? Like would we have a shared consciousness

at that point? Or uh, you know, would it be would the human race essentially become a giant ant colony, like every single consciousness actually becomes more like an individual neuron in a giant hive brain. Um. I honest, again, I don't think we're ever going to get there, So it's almost a moot discussion in my mind. But you know, I could be totally wrong. Well, so it does seem to me that it's slightly more probable that we will

achieve something like a physical immortality. And again to clarify, not in vulnerability, but conquering aging because we can actually zero in on what aging is. Yeah, and uh, and if we zero in on the genes that govern aging to a point where we can uh make meaningful decisions so that we counteract the aging process, we could indefinitely halt aging. Now, these are all a lot of ifs, and on the scientific level, I think all of that

is achievable. Um, I don't. I don't think there's anything fundamentally uh that would be a fundamental barrier to that. But I do think that in order for that to happen, there'll be a lot of hurdles to overcome. However, I do think that between the two major roads, digital immortality or conquering aging. I think the aging one is the one that's actually more plausible. It looks it looks more

likely right now. I mean, we already know that the hey flick limb it um, which is which is the limited which cells stop dividing and go through a programmed cell death. Uh, we know what that is. We know that there's a protein um telomerase that has to do with with with triggering that and that if you can remove that limit, then stuff like cancer cells don't have that.

So I mean, you know, we we've already looked at it and said, hey, that thing, it's just yeah, yeah, this is an idea where uh well, like like the idea that you know, you have the the caps on the end of uh, genetic material, the telomeres, right that get a little shorter every time the cell divides, and once they get down to the end, that's pretty much

game over for that cell um. If we were able to reverse that process or halt that process, then in theory, we would be able to to hold off death indefinitely. And we've seen experiments like this in h on the cellular level, but not anything that's human as far as

we know. I mean, there are some conspiracy theorists out there who believe that there are folks who are already in possession of this immortality, but for fear of the mass of of of the unwashed, charging with pitchforks and pistols in hand, they have not revealed their immortal status. Perhaps they even glitter in sunlight. I do not know, but I don't hold those conspiracy theories in in. I'm

skeptical all of them. Let's say that I'm quite skeptical too, but I don't think part of that idea is unreasonable, not necessarily that somebody has actually figured this out. But uh, let me introduce a little thought experiment. So imagine you discover the cure to a disease, you know, like polio. You know you were the discoverer of the polio vaccine. Do you have a moral duty to share that knowledge of how to create that vaccine with the rest of

the world. I would say yes, Like you have an obligion, I would say. I would say ethically, not morally, but yes. But I just make that distinction between ethics and morality because I think morality suggests there's a specific belief system that is usually tied to religious affiliation, But I think ethically you would certainly be expected to share that. Yeah, semantic distinctions, you would have an ethical responsibility. Would you have the same responsibility if what you discovered was the

cure to aging? I and just intuitively don't feel that

you necessarily would. I think that that's a tougher question. Well, it's certainly if we were to somehow discover with irrefutable proof that we had found a way too safely stop the aging process, and we were to just spontane eviously roll that out throughout the entire human population, there would clearly be some massive consequences we would have to deal with, and I honestly think that, uh, we would really have to think about, discuss consider the consequences of those actions

before rolling that out. So I think that while this this conversation is largely philosophical, uh, it's it's an important one. And I think in order for us to ever get to a future where we do actually roll out some form of of defeating the whole aging process, we have to have these conversations now, because if we don't, we're

gonna be dealing with some ugly consequences further down the road. Yeah. Yeah, it more depends on on a bunch of other ethical considerations that are brought up if the possibility of of

this longevity becomes real. So for example, like, uh, you know, there's there's the idea that we talked about this in another episode of forward Thinking, the idea that there's a capacity that any particular region has to support life on it, a particular type of life, right like, and once you once you exceed that, you've actually gone beyond the capacity of that area to support that life, then you have

massive die offs. So you're saying, like, imagine we we keep breeding, but we mostly stop dying, right So in other words, uh, there's a question is it does it become unethical to h to reproduce if you are creating a greater burden on the entire planet to provide the resources necessary for everyone to continue to survive. Then there's I mean that that's and is it for the more ethical to tell people that they can't reproduce? Is is

removing that capacity, you know, violating basic human rights? Right? Do you therefore make a distinction and say any who wants to reproduce, that's fine. You don't get the magic serum that keeps you alive forever, and then what would

what would most people choose? And then on the on top of that, you've got the question of if it's a if it's a private company that comes up with this this approach like they've got gene therapy that will um conquer aging uh, And it's a private company, and you know, private companies exist in order to make a profit. That's the business. That's ultimately what the goal is. Now, there are different ways of going about it, and you can do it in ethical ways, you can do it

in unethical ways, but that's really beside the point. The whole purpose of a business is to make money. That's why they exist. So if you have a business that comes up with this plan, um, what happens when how do you set your price? Like you've got something that you know lots of people are going to want, Maybe not everyone. There might be people out there who have no interest in living forever. They don't they think for whatever reason that that is not for them. Well, I'd

imagine there's a huge middle category. I'd probably include myself in this that would probably like to live a good bit longer than people usually naturally live, but would really probably not like to live forever, right, right, So well, and and there's you know, well, first of all, we're talking about prolonging life indefinitely, but that does not necessarily mean well, I mean we're talking about a practical forever. I mean, obviously we're not going to billions of years

until keep death of the Unix. Just a bunch of us sitting there going, well that was something, wasn't you know? But but right, so so let's just let's say, uh, five hundred thousand years. I mean, yeah, that's I'd like to I'd like to live longer than I probably naturally will, but I don't want to live five hundred thousand years. That's fair, And that's a good question. Maybe maybe maybe you get you get seven eight hundred years into it, and you go and you know, this is pretty cool.

That's true. You can't really predict. But then maybe seven hundred hundred years after that, you're like, I'm done at last five years was a bear? You know, you don't know, you don't know. But but here's here's the things that that's a good question. I mean, would you would that mean if we if we get to a point where

people were able to achieve immortality. Would um, would suicide be a permissible thing in this society where someone has felt that they have lived long enough and they do not wish to continue living if it's if it's something that requires uh, you know, periodic treatments. I can imagine a world where if you are able to demonstrate this This is a weird concept, but if you're able to demonstrate that you are mentally sound, that you would halt

those treatments and allow the aging process to continue. Can you imagine that where I'm sorry, you're not You're not mentally capable, so we have to keep you alive indefinitely. That's kind of an interesting, but but possible future. This converse station introduces such a weird instability in the way I'm viewing humans. I had the question popped into my mind, like, would be would mental soundness still be the same thing in this world? I mean, that's how fundamentally I feel

this would alter the human experience. So like, if someone said that they no longer wish to live, would that person be viewed as truly crazy? Yeah? Well, I mean can and can you imagine? I mean, because losses is a big scary part of our lives right now. Can you imagine losing someone that you've known for eight hundred years? Yeah, yeah, I can imagine wanting to know just just just just how to relationships work at that point, you know how? Right?

I mean that there are a lot of I mean fundamental questions about what it is to have the human experience. That's another question is if you were able to do this, would it mean that you were no longer actually human at least as the way, not not from a you know, necessarily from the genetically, but from an experience from what from what? If a human condition depends upon death, then by defeating death are we human? And and which which

also gets into the questions of spirituality. I mean, because most lots of religions um base a lot of their philosophy on what happens after you die. If you don't die, then then you know, then what does that mean? What are you? You know? If God has a plan for us, what does that mean? If if reincarnation is the road to um enlightenment, then what does that mean? Right? I can imagine one way that that might be dealt with is just purely practically, like if if you want to

talk about heaven and hell, or other versions of afterlife. Um, you could merely fall back on the fact that, well, I mean, this isn't going to mean actual immortality, so maybe it takes you a hundred thousand years to uh face your judgment or whatever. But I think that will happen. I think it would widely. It would wide be very

depending upon the various religious faiths out there. Obviously, Yeah, so there'd be some that would probably uh embrace this, and there'd be some that might say, you know, this is not right, uh, And I think I can't imagine a world where this would really become compulsory. In fact, I can I can much more imagine a word. Well, you say, of course, but we're talking about a world where people don't die. We might as well go ahead and go so far as to say that might not necessary.

I mean, I can't imagine that compulsory immortality would be sustainable. I mean that would be that would sort of for that that would foreclose on humanity too quickly to be now I can I I can see it, though. I can see someone like we were saying a minute ago, like if if you don't want to live forever, what's wrong with you? You're probably you need to be a ward of the state. You need to be protected from yourself because you want to die. And how weird is that?

So let's and let's say that there is some sort of system in place to to guide reproduction. What happens when two people reproduces the baby immediately treated so or even treated before born to not age after a certain amount? Uh, does the baby get any say in that? It's I mean, they're they're weird questions, but these are things that actually pop up. And when you start having this discussion, I

had one pop into my mind. Sure, this is kind of a weird concern, but it actually it seems very grave. Imagine you get to the points where where pretty much everybody has access to this um you can stop aging. How would that change ideas of punishment? Sure, let's say that you live in a state which does not have the death penalty but will give you life in prison for a horrible crime, and you get convicted of that crime.

What does your life in prison mean? Does that mean you go to prison for five dred thousand years or however long you live, or I mean, how how would that change idea of what punishment is? Also, before you even get to to what punishment means? How would what would people still enact in criminal behavior if they were going to live forever? If your permanent record lasts five thousand years, are you going to blemish it? Are you

going to be more likely or less? Like, I think there's always going to be people who are going to act in in whatever way gives them the greatest advantage, and regardless of whether it's legal or not. Also, I mean, if you get to first assuming that we still have the same sort of emotions that we do now, and I see no reason to assume otherwise, you're still going to have interpersonal conflict passion, Oh yeah, lead to like think about murder in a world where people would otherwise

live forever, How how do you punish that? You know, when you think not only what not only did this person have so much, so much more to do, they had so much more to do indefinitely. Yeah, I mean that's you know, we had a discussion before we actually started recording where I propose the idea that if if this is something that requires periodic treatments so that you continue to live forever, then what happens would uh would

a prison sentence? That's for life also include the you know, interruption of those treatments, and in a weird way sort of amount to a kind of indirect death penel. Right, instead of instead of directly killing someone, you're allowing them to die. And that's a very tiny distinction. Personally, I don't see any real difference between throwing a switch and allowing someone to die. But from a very from a legal perspective, there could be a world of difference because

legality and rationality don't necessarily go hand in hand. Plus, my definition of rationality could be very different from someone else's. On top of that, you know I mentioned before, you're talking about the possibility of the private company. Um, this could lead to a world of haves and have nots. That is hard to imagine. I mean, you know, I mean it could act upon the world that is already of haves and have nots in a way that makes the distinction or makes that completely even worse than it

is now. Yeah, to the to the absolute extreme where you have a very very wealthy, tiny percentage of humanity, maybe less than a fraction of a percent of all of humanity that can afford this, uh, and then everyone else can't, so can you imagine the social disruption that

would result in that. I mean, now you will in just the inherent unfairness well, and that which would lead to the social But yeah, I mean now, granted, like I said, they're going to be people I think who will look at this and say, you know, this really isn't what I want. I don't want to live forever. That's not I don't place value in that. And uh, and for those people it may be that you know that they will experience it's whatever social disruption there is,

but they won't be taking an active role in it. Uh. I don't know what percentage of people would long for immortality. I suspect it's a fairly large one. But that also, I'm looking at this from a very privileged perspective as well. My life is pretty amazing and awesome, and so when I take that into account and I think what I want to live forever, I'm thinking, well, you know, look how amazing my life is. I don't want this to

go away. But then I don't live in a condition where I would be thinking this is what I have to live through and I have to live through it forever. Yeah, but then again, you you probably wouldn't assume that people would like want to die. I mean, I'd say the desire to stay alive is is a nearly universal and if you had, if you had an infinite period of time, then you could grow your wealth and you could better yourself, and you could but you could get to a position

that you weren't. The question becomes what would would we do enough to improve the lives of everyone instead of

just the few who would have access to this. I mean, even if we go into let's let's look at it as saying we're going to be in an altruistic future where whatever company or organization comes up with this shares it fairly uh generously, that's rollout is still going to be fairly gradual, at least at first, and that alone is going to cause problems, which is why some people are suggesting that this could already be happening and therefore you know it's a secret, because if it weren't a secret,

people with good nuts. Um. But then when you look at parts of the world that are really uh impoverished, that have already are lacking for very basic resources, that are in in areas of high conflict, how do you extend this to those areas, right, how do you how do you if or do you not? And if you don't, are you essentially telling these people you have to die? I mean, these are weird, tough questions that arise from this concept. I had another question, sure, do we have

an inherent ethical responsibility to reproduce? I mean that I think these days you you'd probably say no, right, I mean no if you don't want to have children, of course not. But then again, the it starts getting weird when you think about the idea that, Okay, there's one generation where imagine everybody has access to this, everybody has the option to live forever, and they just stopped making babies. So essentially what you're saying is there's a generation that

is the last. Yeah, suddenly you're part of the last people, and these people just keep going. It certainly seems very egocentric to suggest that that the that generation would be the ultimate one, that would be the last one, and that that nothing following that would be worth the trade off of immortality. Right, that's I mean, you know, to say that is pretty Look, I'm an egocentric guy. I got an ego a mile ye, I would not be

comfortable saying that I'll still take your immortal juice, thank you. Well, it's weird, and it certainly wouldn't translate to saying now that that anybody should have the responsibility to have children. I mean, that seems absurd to me. But well, there's certainly a lot of religions that say that. Sure, sure, that's fine. I mean, I'm just saying I wouldn't personally, but but that's somehow that seems completely upset by this

living for everything. If your if your plan is to live forever and never replace yourself, that that does strike me as odd. I don't expect anyone to replace me, and I actively work to prevent that because I like my gig. That's right. You fear being usurped I do. I do. I undercut my my colleagues at every opportunity. Yeah, this is not true. I'm not sure, absolutely not right. So if you saw the emails I wrote in support

of you, you change your tune suet um. But we're we're having fun with this because if we didn't, we'd probably go crazy trying to discuss it. Pretty dark topic it is in many ways, because again, you know, you're talking about changing one of the fundamental experiences of what it is to be human. I mean, this is every human from the very first Homo sapien up until today, has the knowledge that one day they are not going to be around anymore. In fact, that's often involved in

in what consciousness is. Right when people try to define it, one of the things that comes up, as they say, it's the awareness of your own death. That's that's one one facet of what people will use to describe consciousness. Keeping in mind, the consciousness is one of those things that no one has ever been able to truly define. Like the best definition I ever see is that we start to define things about the mind, and whatever has

left is consciousness. So every year that goes by, as we define more things about the mind, that the concept of consciousness gets smaller, but it becomes that undefined variable that we see in other like crazy mathematic equations where you know, they say, look, this makes the universe makes sense as long as something happens over here in this part of the equation that we can't really explain yet, but hopefully one day we will discover what it is.

The same sort of thing holds true with the mind and consciousness well, and as we discussed in the very last podcast we recorded it. It might not be a thing at all. It might be an emergent property of neurons in your brain. Sure, I definitely think it's you know that it's I'm a pragmatist. I think it's based on physical matter. It's not a thing but an interaction. Yeah, yeah, I personally don't see it as being some other kind

of energy type experience. But we don't have like an unfound gland somewhere in there that goes, oh, that's a consciousness place, right, or that, or that there is some other element that is not not directly relatable to physical matter. But that's just one view. I understand. There are people who have very different views on that, and I totally respect that because I'm not a neuroscientist or a psychologist and it's just my own personal perspective. Um So, but

you are a shaman of the future. I am that. I am that it's a heavy burden. But if you reference queen lyrics and you know, just keep on keeping on, I think it's fine. All right. Well, okay, quick quick pole, quick Pole, You've got the choice. You can take the immortal pill. Where you are going to live indefinitely. So really, the only way you die is through severe injury or illness, or you take your own life, or you can walk away knowing that you know, if you take care of yourself,

you can live a good long life. But you're an not going to be living anywhere close to what someone who would take that pill would experience. Joe, what do you do? I don't know. I mean, honestly, I guess my gut reaction is I probably wouldn't. I'd rather take the not die soon pill, right, that's not an option you got that you not die ever, or you've got the if you take care of yourself and you avoid illness and injury, you'll live a good long while, assuming

all the other variables. I guess I'd say, no, No, it's just too it's too and it's too scary. I don't know. Joe walks away from the pill. Lawrence, Oh yeah, no, no, I take it. Yes, I take I take my pill and Joe's pill Immortal times too. You become the future vampire, draining the life force of other isn't roaming the waste land I will. You'll find me at a parking lot at Masson Square garden carrying a sword that has no

there can be only one. It'll come down. It'll come down between me and Lauren, and she'll win because she's got some lamping experience that I don't have. So but but until that day, I will still battle for the prize. What's the future of LARPing? That's another podcast, very good question, guys. If you want to know what the future of lamping is, then I suggest you right in and you ask, and

then we will actually answer that question. But to do that, you've got to send us an email that addresses f W Thinking at Discovery dot com or go to f W Thinking dot com. That's where you can find all the videos, the blogs, podcasts, and links to our social media. Get in touch with us. Let's know what you like about the show, let us know what you are excited about in the future, and ask us some questions that you really want to answer. We're really excited to hear

from this and we will taught you again. Really sick for more on this topic and the future of technology, visit forward thinking dot com brought to you by Toyota. Let's go places