Highlights from parallel frontiers: Race in America, Autonomous vehicles, and revisiting 1970's jazz fusion

Reflections on interviews with Randall Kennedy & Kyle Vogt; and Miles Davis' electric music from the 1970's

Right now it feels like there is exponentially more happening, in more domains, than ever before. I could have said the same exact thing last year, 5 years ago, or even 20 years ago and it would have been equally true. At this moment however, things feel more exciting to me than things have felt during past moments.

It is difficult to keep up with all the interesting literature, podcasts, scientific discoveries, and music available to me right now. Although this material is available to all people, as I learned recently, it is predominantly consumed by WEIRD people (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic).

Cephalopod nightmares or hopping robots anyone?

One of the key challenges to consuming new information is the fact that I am busy. Between family and friends, work, and all the other responsibilities, it takes effort to find time to explore new ideas. I’ve come to realize that busyness is as much a mindset as it is a state of being. Even in the face of a packed schedule, I prioritize carving out moments for discovery and intellectual growth.

Writing commits me to continuously seek out and engage with new people, ideas, and music. Although my work at Future Frontier Capital, UC Berkeley, and IP Checkups is challenging and fulfilling, it is critical for me to stay focused and fresh. I do this in part by constantly immersing myself in new ideas.

I believe that if something captivates my interest, there are likely others that would find it equally intriguing. So, in the spirit of sharing, here are a few highlights from three distinct frontiers: a thought-provoking discussion on race and racism in America, an interview with the CEO of a leading autonomous vehicle company, and a revisit to the work of an early jazz fusion pioneer.

The Lex Fridman podcast

Earlier this week, Lex Fridman published an interview with Professor Randall Kennedy from Harvard Law School. First off, I really appreciate Lex Fridman interviews. He takes his time with guests, digs deep into a variety of issues, and mostly listens while his guests get most of the airtime. Many of these one-on-one conversations last over 2 hours. Fridman’s podcast has exposed me to many intelligent and thoughtful people that I wasn’t previously exposed to. I appreciate that.

The first couple podcasts I watched were with people familiar to me. Sam Altman, CEO of Open AI and Ray Kurzweil from Google. More recently, I watched fascinating interviews with people unfamiliar to me, UC Berkeley mathematician Edward Frenkel and computational biologist Manolis Kellis to name a couple. I found all of these interviews interesting, and with each, I learned something new.

Randall Kennedy, an inspiring speaker, and thinker

Randall Kennedy is someone I was not previously familiar with. After listening to the 3+ hour interview, I am a fan. Kennedy and Fridman touched on a variety of controversial issues related to race and racism in America, policing and profiling, African American history, “Critical Race Theory,” and Affirmative Action.

I highly recommend that you watch the entire video, however for those of you who are busy, here are a couple of clips that stood out to me.

In the section between 1:09 and 1:15, Kennedy discusses the requirement of applicants to write a statement outlining their commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in order to be hired at many universities in the US. He rhetorically asks, “why does this commitment [to DEI] necessitate whether or not I am qualified to do this job?” He then suggests an alternative example. He asks how applicants might feel if they were trying to get hired or promoted at a university and were asked to make a statement related to “the advancement of American Capitalism as we know it." He says, what if you had to answer the question, “what have you done that shows us [the University] that you believe in the advancement of capitalism in America.”

I am a proponent of DEI. It helps advance opportunities and equity within an academic environment. That said, I am aware that some people are not particularly excited about DEI initiatives. My issue is not with DEI, it is with the idea that there is a litmus test, determined by popular culture, to which applicants must satisfy in order to be hired. Professor Kennedy’s example on capitalism, got me thinking. What if the context, time, or place was different? How would I feel if I lived in a dictatorship, or during World War II, where the cultural mainstream promoted ideas that were contrary to my own world view, how would I proceed with regards to making a statement in order to get hired? I realize these are different circumstances, DEI is about promoting inclusiveness while World War II was about exclusiveness. However, I believe the fact that these types of tests exist is problematic, particularly in the context of having a free and open society.

Another part of the interview that resonated with me relates to Kennedy’s thoughts on the historic and current “under-protection” of African Americans by the police. This starts around 1:35 and continues through 1:56. Kennedy makes several solid points around the lack of fairness, transparency, and accountability of the police in the United States, particularly when it comes to black people. He eloquently explains that, as a law professor, he understands that the laws are very complicated, and that policing is an extremely important job. However, it would be preferable (and equitable) for black people to receive the same protections afforded to ALL people in the US. To achieve this, he argues that police officers should be paid MORE money than they currently are (rather than be defunded), BUT they should also be held accountable for their actions. His points were very compelling.

Professor Kennedy provides a refreshing, level-headed perspective on several issues related to policing, racial profiling, affirmative action, and other issues, which often get politicized by the media. He addresses many of these topics head-on without sugar coating. I believe we need a more open and frank discussion on these issues in the United States. Rather than the current climate which either involves shying away from these issues entirely, or a lot of yelling and screaming. In a world where the media spends most of its time amplifying the voices of the few (10% on the extreme sides of issues), it is encouraging to hear Kennedy’s sensible perspectives.

Thank you, Lex Fridman, for exposing me to Randall Kennedy, and thank you Professor Kennedy for offering an inspiring and logical voice in the face of so much partisan rhetoric.

The current state of autonomous vehicles

A friend recently recommended I check out the Hard Fork podcast hosted by author and NY times columnist Kevin Roose and journalist Casey Newton. I looked up some of the recent episodes and was curious to listen to the interview from May with Kyle Vogt, CEO of the General Motors autonomous vehicle subsidiary Cruise. The interview, starting around minute 39:00 and lasting until 1:09 of the podcast is interesting and worth a listen.

Beyond my general interest in autonomous vehicle technology, I was interested in hearing Vogt’s thoughts because I recently heard Takedra Mawakana, Co-CEO of Waymo, a competitor to Cruise speak at UC Berkeley.

Mawakana is a great speaker. I found her thoughts and vision around leading people very inspiring. However, after listening to her, I am unconvinced on Waymo’s potential of winning the race to dominate self-driving cars (which is ironic as being CEO, one of her main goals is to sell people on the vision of how the company will succeed). The recent announcement of the partnership between Waymo and Uber is interesting but ultimately, I believe the winner of the race to dominate the future of mobility will be won by a company that has its own fleet of vehicles, i.e. GM, or Tesla.

This primarily stems from the fact that these companies control the design and development of their cars. GM and Tesla get to select the semiconductors the use, the types of cameras, where the cameras are positioned, etc. In addition, these companies have existing customers who drive their vehicles every day. Therefore, the companies can gather data while humans drive their vehicles and then use that data to train autonomous systems and update the software (and hardware). I believe an automotive company is much more likely to dominate this area than Waymo.

The interview with Vogt covers several topics relating to current advancements in autonomous vehicle technology, regulatory hurdles, and the Cruise’s ability to deal with unusual situations that don’t occur frequently but nonetheless must be addressed. These include situations where passengers don’t close the door to the vehicle after exiting (Cruise fixes this with self-closing doors), swarms of people rollerblading or biking through city streets, and even people purposefully jumping in front of moving vehicles to see if they will stop (not something I could have anticipated but after hearing about it, I’m not surprised).

At the end of the interview, one of the hosts asked Vogt about reasons that Cruise will not reach its goals. He asks Vogt, “What do you think could go wrong that would not lead to mass adoption of autonomous vehicles?”

Vogt suggests the main blockers could be insurance based, regulatory obstacles, or due to international competition.

“Well, I’m very confident in the cost coming down. I’m confident in the capabilities of the technology improving. I’m confident in how attractive and preferential this is going to be, in terms of a ride experience compared to the status quo. And I’m confident in the safety performance.

And so if it doesn’t get there, it would be for something that is valid but maybe not in the best interests of society. Like maybe we do struggle with how to rationalize collisions caused by robots instead of humans, even though there are fewer of them. Like, that could cause delays or cause, like a shift of this deployment to going to other countries first.

In particular, if you at China, they’re wide open. The government gets it. They’re going full speed. I think that is a risk to the US economy if we’re caught a decade behind on that. Or it could be, if not for that, then maybe one of these other forms of transportation, like electric vertical takeoff and landing plane comes in and we’re not really talking about cars anymore.

But, I mean, you tell me. Like, it really seems like at this point we’re past the critical gate. We’ve gone from R&D to these products scaling out there in the field. And it just seems very obvious that this is the way the world is going. And it’s a matter of time. And I think from a pure system of constraint standpoint, unless we as a society do something to block this or slow it down, I think it’s going to happen really soon and I think we’re all going to benefit.”

I tend to agree with Vogt. From the perspectives of cost of ownership and safety, it seems like a no-brainer that subscription-based autonomous driven vehicles should overtake traditional vehicle ownership. I’d personally give up car ownership including driving, repairs, insurance, gassing up/charging, and parking in exchange for an all-inclusive subscription service, right now.

However, I suspect most people in America are less excited about this change. Many Gen X’ers and Boomers I speak with, especially outside of Silicon Valley, are loath to give up car ownership. They claim to enjoy driving and have little interest in a robotic car being in “control” of their trips to Costco.

It is plausible that with enhanced safety data, insurance companies will raise the price of insurance for automobile owners to levels that will highly encourage people to favor robo-taxis. There certainly are a lot of interesting start-ups working on autonomous insurance policies.

Another wild-card to consider are very the inexpensive, allegedly high-quality, Chinese EV’s that will eventually be sold in the US in the coming years. This article discusses a joint venture between US based companies SAIC and General Motors, along with Chinese company Wuling Motors that offers a 180 mile range EV for under $5,000 with a battery subscription plan for another $80 per month. For those traveling shorter distances, they offer an EV with an 80-mile range for $2838 plus a $28 per month battery fee for five years. As far as car ownership goes in the US, this is incredibly inexpensive.

That said, for someone like me that drives less than 5k miles per year, a robo-taxi subscription is a much cheaper and more appealing choice when compared to any type of car-ownership. Tasha Keeney an analyst at Cathie Wood’s Ark Investments proposed a cost of around .25 cents per mile for autonomous ride-hailing platforms when they reach scale by 2024. This would cost me around $1250 per year without any of the hassles of owning a vehicle. Though there would likely be different hassles, I strongly favor a subscription robo-taxi to car ownership. I am enamored by the thought of never having to drive a car again.

Revisiting Electric Miles Davis from the early 1970’s

I am constantly on the lookout for new and interesting music. Over this past weekend, listening to the radio, I heard the end of the song Miles Runs the Voodoo Down from Miles Davis’ seminal album, Bitches Brew. I dialed that song up on YouTube Music and several other songs from Davis’ electric era popped up on the side bar.

One of the first tunes I put on was a video of Spanish Key from a live performance at the Isle of Wight from August of 1970.

It was great to see the band playing live. I was surprised at how young everyone looked, especially Keith Jarret (Electric Piano) and Dave Holland (Electric Bass). Miles’s proficiency never disappoints…funky, distinctive, staccato trumpet lines, played so confidently and cool. He really make this track go.

This led to another side-bar recommendation. A version of Spanish Key (which included Wayne Shorter) playing live at the Filmore East in March of 1970. This recording sounds much stronger to me. It could be the up-tempo groove, or the sound quality of the recording, or simply having Wayne Shorter playing with the band. Either way, Miles, and the band sound more inspired to me.

Next, I listened to another track from the same album, called Directions. Jack DeJohnette’s loose, hard-funk style drives the band forward. Miles sounds incredible as well…all the while, Brazilian master percussionist Airto Moreira keeps everything glued together with his percussive sprinkles.

And finally, exhilarated after hearing Directions from the Filmore East, I listened to another version of Directions from one month later, April 1970, live at the Filmore West. This recording is featured on Miles’ album Black Beauty and this track is definitely my favorite. Along with stellar performances by Davis and Moreira, saxophonist Steve Grossman’s solo is a standout.

Grossman’s frenetic style on the Soprano sax reminds me of a Moroccan Rhaita player free-flowing improvisation over a couple of drummers. Grossman, riffs intermittently on top of Chick Corea’s wild Fender Rhodes, all the while, DeJohnette propels the band with a groovy, hard-driving cacophony of drums and cymbals while Holland stakes down the fort. Near the end of the track, Grossman drops out and Corea, DeJohnette, and Holland shine. Corea spouts tightly articulated piano phrases, while DeJohnette and Holland are locked in, intervening with bursts of their own to make the whole groove highly communicative and infectious.

These musicians are some of the all-time greats… and these recordings are top-notch. If you are enticed at all by rock or funk music these tracks are definitely worth a listen. If you’re a jazz purist, then you probably already know you won’t enjoy electric Miles. Finally, if you’re busy, and you’re only going to listen to one of the track discussed, this is the one I’d recommend.

So, there it is, a mash-up of newly discovered (or rediscovered in the case of electric Miles) snippets on race in America, driverless cars, and 70’s jazz fusion. The connection that I see between these parallel frontiers is the inspiration I experienced through the discovery and digestion process. I hope you feel the same. If you see some other connections, I would love to hear from you.

Either way, make sure to ignore the confusion!