card image

Radio show date 04-16-2021

Watch this Episode Now


John C. Morley: We've got to give users the choice. Who says 10 days, suppose you're doing work at a hospital? And the technique just keeps coming back. And now, you can't connect to the network, because Apple now decides that they don't want to re-send authentication. Now, it's technically not your Wi-Fi networks problem, but it is because Apple says it is. So everybody's pushing the ball back and forth with each other. So I think we need choices. And I think people need to understand what technology is going to cause us. And when you talk about, you know, the pen or any other device, this consortium needs to be set up. I mean, most people don't realize that the big g letter, I'm not going to mention the name, but we know who I'm talking about, said that they came up with a chip, because they came up with the idea of no trust, they didn't come up with no trust. They said they were the first, let's say, search partner to say that everything had to be no trust, including their own devices. Well, that did come from them paying for the WD 50. They took credit for it, and said that it was their idea, but it wasn't. And I think it would have been passed off as a standard. You know, unless you're part of the W three c Consortium, nobody really knows what's going on, Paul.


Paul Claxton: Exactly.


John C. Morley: And that's your shim for iOS, it's going to be an issue. And I think another problem I see is that now that we have drones, I always joke about this team, you're going to have a rider on your insurance policy. Because if you get more than two deliveries, let's say a year, well, you might have an additional $5 writer to cover yourself and other people that the drone may possibly express to like the window or the binding or sign up with 3210.


Well, welcome once again to the JMOR Tech Talk Show. Welcome, Marcus, it's great to have you here. How are you doing this fine Friday afternoon or evening? I should say, 


Marcus Hart: Oh, I'm doing outstanding. John, it's great to be back with you again, can get some of your good wisdom.


John C. Morley: Oh, it's great to be here again, to see you as well. You know, something happened this week, I'm not sure if you're familiar with you know, a lot of times things happen with technology. And some people, you know, kind of sweep it under the rug like it never happened. Well, this week, we really couldn't do that. Microsoft really got caught with their hand in the cookie jar. Now, it wasn't Microsoft's fault, I'm going to say, per se. But it is because Microsoft had vulnerabilities in their software. And that allowed, let's say, the Chinese and the Russian people to basically pop in. And I want to make a quote that they said, and I quote, they're being hacked faster than we can count. So the security company. So that's a problem. Because what happened this week, Marcus should have never happened. There were issues with solar winds having basically patches that were not deployed, and they're causing issues to the Microsoft Exchange servers, which is a big, big thing, because Microsoft Exchange is what encompasses more than I'm going to say 75% or more of corporate email for a lot of your publicly traded companies, when you hear office 365 or somebody has a hosted 365 account. Well, that's using Microsoft Exchange. And the cyber people will really have a field day with this. And cyber criminals are just doing things to basically try to take us apart, Marcus, and even this week, I got to tell you, we're really putting a lot of fires out for things coming in from Russia and China just bots trying to attack web forms like crazy. I mean, we're blocking them and they would literally keep changing IPS and not just one IP, we get rid of an entire block and they come up with another one. So they couldn't do it right away. We took them 24 hours, but they kept grabbing another one. And because they're overseas, their regulations over there aren't too strong. And so they could do whatever the heck they want. Unfortunately,


Marcus Hart: I got to tell you one thing about it is that like, whenever you hear just someone say by the 1000s that they couldn't count. It is so scary in the mention of corporations involved in corporations involved and they're being susceptible to this. This is scary. It is so scary.


John C. Morley: It is because, you know, a lot of times people are told that there's a challenge, and they need to take care of it, but they don't. I'm not going to mention the company, but a client we're working with this week, one of their companies that does, let's say, their medical billing, we found vulnerability. So we reported it, and we blocked them from accessing that billing server this week. And they called us up and said, Hey, John, we can't get through. I said, I know you can't get through, we blocked you. Why do you do that? Well, because the site you're going to is masquerading as something else than what we expect it to be. So now we're having a conversation with this third party company. And they're not admitting there's a problem. But they're asking me what we have, what equipment we have. And they want to give me a band aid to work around and disable my firewall so that it allows the traffic to go through. I said, well, that's lying. We don't want to do that. No, I said, No, we don't want to do that. So they have all these people call me. I said, I just want to let you know, you guys are basically a real problem here in hot water, because you're border lining, a HIPAA violation. And I want to remind you that we started a $20,000 fine per violation. And if your company is found to be responsible for this, not only are you responsible, but my client is also responsible, and I'm sure they're going to come after you for damages. Okay, okay, we understand what's going on, you know, we want to keep everybody happy. But we don't really know what we need to do is really the long and the short of it. And they don't even want to talk to me anymore, because now they know what's going to cost some bucks to come up with a secure extended validation certificate, they send me all these documents to read Marcus and I said, I don't need to know how to get around it. Okay, I want to fix the problem. And it's obvious you guys don't want to spend the money. And I have to let my client know that you are in a serious predicament because you're not willing to fix it today, you're saying you're going to fix it, but it might take weeks. You know, this is not like fixing a roof or some drywall where you can just patch it up and keep it moving. And, you know, if corporations don't start realizing this very early on, when they set up some of these perimeters, the s, you know, they're going to put everybody at risk of just being hacked all the time and having precious data's token. And not only that, Marcus, it is phi personal health information. And that is so serious, I mean, financial data series to personal health information. That's critical. And I think, you know, this needs to be addressed. And right now, everybody's got so much going on with COVID that the HIPAA police really don't have time to be monitoring this. And I think that's why a lot of these countries right now are really trying to attack us, because we've got our head focused on saving the population and not worrying about a breach. Well, you and I have talked about this before we talked about the world going into automation, you know, it's already happening, factories, and we talked about that one robot that could even bring you and your partner dinner and pour a glass of wine, or possibly throw the wine at you. But, you know, it's getting more into artificial intelligence, robotics, and having a collaboration of where that's going to go with our world and affect the production, productivity and the growth of our economy and the ecosystems of our world. Our next guest, Marcus, is an amazing man, Mr. Paul Claxton. He is with a company called the robotics hub. He's a venture partner. He's an AI robotics entrepreneur. He's a board advisor. He's a public speaker. He is a US Marine veteran. And thank you so much, Paul, for your service. We really appreciate that. And he is just a wealth of knowledge when it comes to innovation and robotics. And he's currently working on a program with the Harvard Extension School. Please help me welcome today to Jay Morrison. Report Claxton to talk to us about where robotics is going with artificial intelligence. And welcome to the show, Paul, it's great to have you here tonight.


Paul Claxton: It's good to be here. John, thank you for having me.


John C. Morley: It is my pleasure. You have an amazing background. And although tonight, we're not going to cover everything. I'm sure we're probably going to ask you to come back because you have some very interesting areas. Being an engineer. I'm very, let's say interested in a lot of the different disciplines that you've got wrapped up in, which is pretty amazing. But the one that really comes to mind is the robotic hub. And before we get into that, can you just tell us a little bit about how you get involved in that particular area and what made you passionate about pursuing it.


Paul Claxton: I think it's a mixture of childhood dreams. I always love the movies, Robocop and Terminator two Judgment Days. But it's kind of, you know, where destiny took me in terms of my professional career and technology, I've kind of done a lot of different things over the past 20 years of my career, but a lot of that has obviously centered around tech. I've been passionate about using my business endeavors to hopefully advance society forward and improve people's lives. It's kind of my model that I do business by. And I've always been very, very, very, admire and admiration of some of the most successful technologists, for example, Mark Cuban, Jeff Bezos, and so forth. And I have always had an interest in anything that relates to you know, AR, VR technologies, and where that can potentially take us as a human race. And I actually found out about the robotics hub, by way of just simply networking, which I'm, I'm a power networker, I'm an avid networker, and I got introduced to them through some previous colleagues of mine. And we decided, you know what, maybe it makes sense to do some work together. And so they've been very hospitable with inviting me into the opportunity of being a venture partner at the robotics hub. So, yeah, and we work together in consulting and investment opportunities.


John C. Morley: Now, you mentioned some interesting names. He didn't mention Elon but I'm sure he's in there, too. When we think about Jeff, you know, and we'll get back to what you're doing in a second. But you brought up a point. So Jeff's left Amazon and he went off to pursue this space career. What do you think about that? Do you think there's really some viability in what he's doing? Or is this just something he's doing? Because let's face it, Mr. Elon Musk was kind of beating him to the punch. What do you think?


Paul Claxton: I think that spatial exploration is I think that's a smart move on, on, on Jeff's part. Spatial exploration is kind of the new frontier, so to speak. And I believe that, you know, every entrepreneur needs to be concerned about spatial explorations, he's certainly blazing the path and leading the way there. But those two are just kind of kings of the jungle, so to speak, you know, two lions sort of kind of roll roaming the technology jungle. And I'm excited to see what Jeff has in store for us in terms of spatial exploration, and, you know, taking robotics and, you know, some kind of the Amazon network of companies, so to speak, and applying that to that realm of human evolution. 


John C. Morley: Now, they're kind of rivals a little bit. I mean, sometimes when you're both in the same field, that's going to happen. I have an inside joke, but it's really the truth. If everyone likes you, 24 seven, I don't mean people hate me. But if everyone likes me every single moment, I'm not bringing my game. And as being a serial entrepreneur, sometimes people aren't going to like you. They just are not going to align with your beliefs and, and your ideals and what you want to do, everybody wants it their way. Because it's easier that way. And you bring up another interesting point. So I'm not sure if you know, but every week I write some very interesting blog articles on j And we wrote one just a few weeks ago about, you know, the differences between augmented reality and virtual reality. And that's really kind of shaping our world. But as we get into this robotics up, which is our main topic here tonight, everyone's very concerned, Paul, are they going to lose their jobs? Because we remember about oh, I don't know was about 10 or 15 years ago, when that big two letter company with an M, starting with the new I mean, thought that they were going to just replace everybody in the kitchen with robots, and they were going to flip hamburgers and do everything. But I guess they realize the cost and maybe the feasibility and they didn't do it. So what happened there, Paul, and what do you see on these things?


Paul Claxton: Well, we're all very fortunate to have had individuals like Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk. Like I said, blazing the path for us. But I'd love to talk about this because I do not think that robots are going to take our job. I think that what they're actually doing, what robots are going to do is they're going to reshape our economy; they're going to reshape the very nature of the employment market. And they're actually creating more jobs. Case in point if you look at Amazon, I believe they're the fifth largest employer in the world. And the second largest employer, I believe, behind Wal-Mart in the US, excluding the military, of course. And so you look at Amazon and all the jobs that they create. But Amazon has more robots, I think they have over like 200,000 robots working, working in their factories. And yet, they've managed to create more jobs than most 99% of other companies. So I think that's a good example, that robots are just simply reshaping our workforce. And we need quite honestly; we need to learn to live with them, almost like we have learned to live with cars on the road, right? How animals have evolved to learn to live with cars on the road. And humans, we all live on this earth together, right. And so, you know, I think that that is a naturally evolving process. And robots are here to stay. So we definitely need to kind of adapt and figure out how to, you'll make them a part of our economy and a part of business, creating new business opportunities.


John C. Morley: I agree with you, Paul. Robots are changing the way we do business, and they're also making it safer. Being a first responder and having to deal with things firsthand. Safety is a concern, whether it be contamination, whether it be an issue with rods being used to sterilize medical equipment, or any other type of supplies that go out to hospitals, or long term care facilities. You know, I know people that had worked in these facilities, and they had to sign a waiver, because they're working with these rods so close. And that's killing their life. So the fact that a robot can be there, and now we don't have to sacrifice a human life, or just using one as a bomb detector. I remembered that I don't know, maybe about 10 years ago, back in my condo, where they had kept everyone out of the building. And they sent these one or two robots in. And what they found was there was a case, so a guitar violin case. And that there was nothing in the case, it was perceived that something dangerous was in the case. And after four hours of these mini robots going around the complex and the building, they were able to clear the facility. And everyone stayed outside safe. And there was no threat to anyone's life. So I think that's an amazing thing. But let's talk about the different types of robots. So we see robots that obviously you see from Arnold Schwarzenegger and these other movies, and, you know, you see a lot of the sci-fi, but things like you know, moving screens, we're not too far away from stuff like that, right now. It's not tomorrow, but we're already starting to see prototypes of that. What are the different types of robots that that we can experience, we hear about the one armed bandits, we hear about the one now that actually can pour you and your date a glass of wine? And somebody said, if it's not correct, you'll probably throw the bottle at you. But so what are the different types of robots, then we can maybe talk about the applications?


Paul Claxton: Great question. So there are several different types of robots, I think, you know, to the unfamiliar AI, to the unfamiliar mind, you know, we kind of go with what we see off of Hollywood and so forth. You know, like movies like Ex Machina, or, you know, Terminator two, but actually, today's robot is actually far less advanced. You know, we have manufacturing type robots that are nothing more than an arm or with actuators and, you know, different joint mechanisms that can actually provide like 360 degree movement or limited movement to accomplish a specific task, perhaps within a manufacturing facility. So you have those manufacturing type robots. Some good examples are cuca is 1k u k. And then you also have kind of, we're starting to get more into that space where you're now we have robots that almost kind of take on like a more of a conventional life like form, so to speak. And so now we're getting into, you know, they have robots that can, you know, be friends with you or provide companionship, right. And they look very human. And so you know, we're starting to go down that path. We also are getting in, particularly with the pandemic, you know, disinfectant robots are very important now. So robots that like you said, Can you know they can serve you a drink, or they can clean a facility. And so what's going to be really important there is how we implement security into these things. So cyber security is going to be very important to how we bring and integrate these machines into our daily lives.


John C. Morley: Paul, you didn't know it, but that's actually is a string to my heart. I'm not sure if you watch the other episodes, but security with me is so Paramount, being lucky to be one of the companies that maintains the largest international banks on Wall Street, even before that security to me is next to air. Yes, so many things are being developed. Like, you know, whether it's an Alexa or these other devices, I won't have those devices in my home or office, they're always listening. Now, yes, you have your phone, apple, I have to believe is a little bit more selective in whom they have access to that API. So I'm not saying that they're totally dismissed from security, but I have a little more trust in Apple, I'm not saying I'm going to marry them tomorrow. But I have a little bit more of an understanding of Amazon, I don't have that trust because they've made mistakes in the past, yes, they've done a lot of great things, I'm not going to dispute that. But the fact of the matter is, they have got caught with their hand the cookie jar a couple times. And I can't trust somebody with their hand in the cookie jar, even once. So that's a problem of mine. And when we get into the Internet of Things, every device you have, that's on a network, wireless network, that's to communicate. And with edge computing, and everything happening, I use this analogy, Paul, which if you were to go to a park, and you went with some of your friends, or you're on a date, and you have this great big bucket of water, or beer, whatever it is, doesn't matter. And you all want to drink from that bucket well, and one of you had a cold, while the other one could catch the cold, right. So unless every area of that bucket had compartments and was filled, that'd be the only way you could prevent yourself from not getting a cold because it would be separate.


Paul Claxton: Yep. 


John C. Morley: Now, when you talk about distributed computing, all the data is going into a central area. And it's not being isolated. That's a problem.


Paul Claxton: It's serious.


John C. Morley: So I don't know if you like my analogy, but that's kind of what's happening. I mean, we're not drinking. But it's a very similar analogy, because people will think that it's going to be saved. Because in the cloud, I got to tell you, just because it's in the cloud doesn't mean its safe. So every device we have, whether it's a drone, whether it's one of those little quick orders on Amazon, those little fast buttons, or whether it's your car, whether it's your Bluetooth headset, it doesn't matter what it is. Now, you've got irons and devices, and all kinds of appliances that are becoming smart. And although I like this, I am not a big believer that everything should be interconnected to one system. Even though I love technology, I feel there is a risk. When everything is connected. I don't want my stove connected. I don't want my, you know, air conditioning heat, that's fine. But I don't want my blinds lock connected to something. I like that they are electronic or that they can be used. But I don't like the fact that they're tied into an app, I want them on a remote control, just a plain 2.4 gigahertz remote control that I can pick up and use where a blind I want. That's what I want. And I feel that everybody's trying to make things simple by putting it into an app. The problem is, all these app developers are not realizing what the potential is if this gets into the wrong hands. We have just learned from about a month or so ago, I had a show where I talked about clubhouse. And the clubhouse actually is getting in trouble right now. Because the company has another, let's say a partner that has offices not only in the US, but they have them in China. And because of that, now this causes some concern for security treaties and laws. And we have to realize, you know, our government's not going to react to this anytime soon. Not that they don't want to, I just don't think they have the manpower and the resources, just like laws for cyber things are not going to be tomorrow. I'm not saying they're never going to come around. But laws generally get built, when there's a challenge, right? When there's a lawsuit, when there's a problem now it becomes a case now becomes a new law that they can cite. And I feel that we have to be very careful when it comes to security, a lot of people are out there poor because they want to make that fast buck. Correct. And they really got to take the time. I'm very concerned when it comes to robots and stuff like this, I know it's just processing data, because they're basically just CNC machines is really what they are computer number of generating machines. And by having, you know, a CNC machine, it, you know, it's supposed to have a function. But now that you can have these CNC milling machines, it changes things. And then when we could put that on to, you know, an internet habit, Lincoln with stuff like that, it can be a challenge, because, you know, Computer Numerical Control Systems, basically, are really what robots are, they do things over and over again, a million times, I still remember being on a project in college. And I'm not going to mention the name of the company, but we actually helped them with their blades. And every million blades, we kicked out and made a server with adjustment on a machine. So something like that was done a long time ago, but we're getting a lot more specific. So security, obviously, is a big concern. What do you think is needed to get these machines in the workplace once we get past security?


Paul Claxton: So I think that there has to be a whole new set of standards created, you know, I believe that that the future, you know, and how we are, as we continue to evolve as humans, we're becoming more and more dependent on technology, right? That's just the true hard fact. And as we become more and more dependent on technology, we need to completely look at your building new demographics in society, revamping business models, revamping government policies, you know, we need to look at completely remodeling our globe, and just, you know, how we look at things is a global human population. And so when we talk about bringing robots into the workplace, the workplace has changed. You know, 90% of the workplace now is remote. So when we look at robots in the workplace, there's a disconnection for sure, from the average remote worker, and the robot that might be performing automated tasks in the workplace. And we're not even talking about necessarily conventional office environments. But we're more so talking about things like manufacturing, facilities, things that are connected to the power grid. And I like some of the things that you said, about not wanting everything in your house connected, you know, to some sort of IoT infrastructure. Unfortunately, that is the way that I think that we're headed. You know, everything in the future is technology. You can look at this pen here, this pen could be a piece of technology, this pen could have hardware in it that is connected to an infrastructure, and the pen tells you, okay, you're 25% left on ink. Because how many times have we been somewhere and we needed a pen, and we're running out of ink, right? So it's, we're solving a problem. But every time you solve a problem, you create 10 new problems. So there's actually more problems in this world than there are solutions. And the thing is, is that with everything headed towards technology, security is one of the biggest, most important priorities that we need to address moving forward, and we're not doing it. And that is why you see companies like Amazon, Tesla, Elon Musk, they're getting in trouble with the government, like you mentioned, because they're, they're not regulated. And so we slap them on the wrist, we find them and we make an example out of them. But you're going to start to see more technology executives involved with governmental policy and decision making. And so that hopefully, that answers your question, john, as far as, you know, how are you going to look at bringing robots into the workplace? It's going to before that even happens, there's going to be a massive policy shift.


John C. Morley: I agree with that. And you said a lot of interesting things. The first thing I want to go back to is when you talked about the pen Then how anything even my, let's say, paperclip could have a Bluetooth connection to my phone to tell me that I'm running out of paper clips or paper or staples or what have you, or to tell me that something jammed or batteries are going low. We already have that on our keyboard. But the difference is they're not connected to something that's reporting that to the internet. They're just a one way communication. I think that these devices are great in one way capacity. And I think that if two way communication is enabled, a user should have the choice of whether to enable that or not, because maybe I want to know, when my pen is running out of ink. But I don't necessarily want that reported anywhere other than a one way app. And I think that's something just like the web. United standards, the W three C, I think a consortium, Paul needs to be formed for not only the Internet of Things, but I'm going to say, our privacy of all data that extends past a wired connection, because we have it for Wired very well. You know, we have ports that won't be enabled unless certain things are put in place. But on the wireless, were very loose. And just to give you an example, 802.11 a x, which is the latest Wi-Fi technology. Now, a lot of people don't know what that is, it is one of the most expensive Wi-Fi because it's brand new. Well, there was a challenge. When that came out, there was something called Riki AIG, when the original manufacturers Broadcom, which is the ones that they're one of the big ones. They're setting the standard. But they're presuming that people will be leaving a worksite or a location and coming back within an hour, or that the devices are not going to leave the worksite. So what does this mean? It means that if I have my phone, and let's say I leave the worksite for an hour for lunch, and I come back, my phone isn't going to find the network anymore if it's a truly hidden, secure network. So there are things that are being done that are extending that to 10 days. But I said why it is 10 days? And they're measuring in seconds? I'm like, what are you guys doing? Why are we measuring in seconds? Minutes? Makes no sense. So what I think has to happen is we've got to give users the choice, which says 10 days, suppose you're doing work at a hospital, and a technician, and just keeps coming back. And now you can't connect to the network, because Apple. Now besides that, they don't want to re send an authentication. Now, it's technically not your Wi-Fi networks problem, but it is because Apple says it is so everybody's pushing the ball back and forth with each other. So I think we need choices. And I think people need to understand what technology is going to cause us and when you talk about, you know, the pen or any other device, this consortium needs to be set up. I mean, most people don't realize that the big letter. I'm not going to mention the name, but we know who I'm talking about, said that they came up with a chip, because they came up with the idea of no trust. They didn't come up with any trust. They said they did. And we're the first, let's say, search partner to say that everything had to be no trust, including their own devices. Well, that did come from them. It came for the WCC. But they took credit for it, and said that it was their idea, but it wasn't. And I think if it would have been passed off as a standard, you know, unless you're part of the W three c Consortium, nobody really knows what's going on, Paul.


Paul Claxton: In fact, exactly.


John C. Morley: And, you know, Consortium for the IoT and privacy, it's going to be an issue. And I think another problem I see is that now that we have drones, I always joke about this, you're going to have a rider on your insurance policy. Because if you kept more than two deliveries, let's say a year, well, you might have an additional $5 writer, to cover yourself and other people that the drone may possibly crash into, like their window or their dining room. Now, I know we laugh about this, but this is very feasible. 


Paul Claxton: Yeah. 


John C. Morley: Nothing, nothing's really being done about this. And if a work robot makes a mistake, okay, chances are, it's probably not going to be a big deal. But then again, it is because if the sensors don't catch it, you could be talking about 1000s of items that could be miss-produced, correct. So I think what has to be in place is multiple checkpoints. And they're not going to be human eyes; they're going to be sensors. And then those sensors need to be checked or calibrated almost reminds me like a ride, a great adventure. And I remember the first ride I took many years ago; I took because I was not a roller coaster person. And we went there because it's part of my physics class. And I spent; I'm going to say a latter part of the morning, maybe two hours of the morning meeting, the engineer who managed the ride. And after having a conversation with him for a while, I then got enough courage and confidence to go check the ride, because he told me how everything worked. And that he goes through and checks every sensor every morning before the ride starts. That made me very comfortable. Because even though each car had six sensors, if one sensor failed, the ride would still operate. If two sensors failed, it would still operate. If three sensors failed, the ride would operate in a diminished capacity. And if four sensors failed, the ride would be operable, but it was recommended that it was not used. So you know, you have manual overrides, and things like that. But you mentioned something else. That's very important, Paul, we talked about the notion of human relations. And there are lots of omnipresent devices we saw with Sheldon and some other shows on TV where you know, somebody who may be sick, can't go somewhere, or maybe because of the pandemic, they want a virtual robot of themselves moving around the world to interact, maybe it can't get COVID or something like that. But you know, when you think about things like that, a robot has a security issue too, because now that information being sent, let's take a look at that doll a few about a year or two ago, that doll got hacked, because the manufacturer didn't put a lousy PIN code on there. I mean, something so simple and so trivial, a child would think of that. 


Paul Claxton: Sure. 


John C. Morley: And now, their personal information that's being shared is being hacked. So that's one thing. But the other area I'm concerned about is that now you have this device. And now people want this to be like you said a companion robot. Okay, so the robot can perform safety tasks, notify authorities, call for help, and alert the police and things like that, and be a video device and all kinds of great things via a resource that's connected to the internet, that you can ask questions, almost like a big Alexa on wheels. And obviously, the whole brain of it is actually in the cloud. You know, we see this now on Amazon, all these devices, those devices can do half the things they do or even a fraction of them without the internet. Intelligence isn't in that little thing. It's all on the cloud. So the question comes, what happens if the cloud goes down? How does that device function? Is there enough intelligence on board to make it usable? In that type of environment? Is there enough that it downloads I don't know. And how often does it have to download and communicate the information and I guess my last point would be, you know, these robots; they can be programmed to look at your face. They can be programmed to hear the tonality in your voice. And yes, they can be programmed to simulate emotion, they can program to simulate love, and they can have an arm that warms up. We see right now an adult toy manufacturer making a $10,000 robot, he just made dolls many years ago, now he's making a robot that starts at 10,000. That's an AI robot companion. That's much more than a companion in the adult world. And these things, I don't know if people are realizing you know, what they're getting involved with, not just the safety point about it. But also the fact that they're creating a facade. And now when a robot gives you an emotion, it's not an emotion. And I just can't believe that's healthy for people. Because now the robot is starting to teach what you do and mimic things. But it's not making the decisions itself, even though it is AI. And the decisions are probably coming from a person; I just don't see it as real. What do you think I know, I've dumped a lot on you?


Paul Claxton: Well, I'll try to respond to everything in short form, because you definitely did cover a lot. The first thing is that we already have robotics in our lives, maybe not in the, in the, what we would call your Webster's def definition, Webster's dictionary definition of what a robot should be, in terms of like, form. But in terms of the mechanics, we already have robots in our life, you know, Alexa is a type of robot, right? Anything that uses AI, or machine learning is a robot, what I would call a robot inspired technology or a kind of Kwazii, robot functionality to it. So we already have these things that are happening to us where we don't, we don't make decisions. You know, I don't even make decisions necessarily on my own conscious, well, you know, I have, you know, apps on my phone that do predictions about, you know, they, they market products to me, or they market services, or they market options, to me, that are more of a predictive analysis of my previous decision making. And so there is a certain amount of waiver, that we inevitably sign when we download an app, or there's a certain disclaimer, and I call it more of like, an intangible disclaimer, it's that it's, it's like the air we know it's there, right? But because it's always there, you know, we're not necessarily conscious of it. And these companies have protected themselves, and ultimately protected. Consumers it you know, if we actually read the fine print, right, if we read the disclaimer, so it really is an education piece, which comes, which brings in the fact of consulting, right, so the robotics hub, where we're, I'm a venture partner, we're not just an investment fund, but we, we also help our portfolio companies grow, right, and that's, that's, that is the consulting piece, we also help them you know, build their brands and get, get their technologies, their services, their products into the hands of the right people, the right companies, that can really use this for sustainable good and sustainable impact technology, innovation, for good, and for the impact and the general welfare of our society. And I think what we've seen in the last year or so since this pandemic started, is much more of a need for these robotic type technologies, or these AI type technologies. And one key thing that we do need to remember when we're talking about robots, is that, you know, stay away from the hype, you know, and, and kind of use our own bit. We're all smart people; a lot of us went to college, right? Where we have the power to deduce information in ways that are intelligent and well thought out, right? And so take a minute from the TV, take a minute from what you're listening to on YouTube and this and that and just take some time to meditate about what is really going on. And I think when we look at robotics, we need to look at it as a way of like robotics being integrated into our society to make our society more secure, safer. Hopefully reduced crime, hopefully reduced traffic because you don't necessarily have to travel anywhere anymore, you can have a drone deliver it to your house, right? You can have all sorts of all sorts of value add from your robotics and robotic type products and services, there are all sorts of value points that can be implemented into our society to make our society more safe and more secure, right. And so we all know that humans are the most fickle creatures of all. And we're also some of our biggest liabilities. As we grow, you know, we lose value over time, we get Oh, we, you know, we develop, we contract, you know, diseases or develop diseases. And we're less efficient as we get older, which makes us more and more of a liability, the benefit of robotics that we have to think about the paradigm, right. And so the thing with robotics is that robotics can be maintained and renewed over time. But they can also be limited in terms of their functionality, which therefore, you know, allows some safety factors to be created, and some element of safety to be dependent, dependable, right to be relied upon, and our society, we can depend on that. And I think that's what robotics and AI technologies are ultimately doing is they're creating more factors, more,

They’re creating a larger source of dependability for us as a technology dependent global population. But we definitely when we're building these things, and when we're implementing them, we do need to make security a main priority. Hopefully that answers your question.


John C. Morley: It does. And I know this is obviously you know, very broad in the sense of, you know, robotics is kind of like talking about air. Because there's so many facets of air or talking about conductivity on a network, okay, there's so much of conductivity when you refer to a network. And same thing with robotics, there's so many different types of automation, I feel there are some people in the world that are going to embrace robotics and see it as a benefit. And there are going to be other people that are going to be petrified of it, and see it as something they just want to stay away from. I know that robotics is definitely a plan of the future. And it has a lot of positives. But there are areas that like you said, and I mentioned before the security, we have to definitely look at very, very seriously, I think the idea of having a robot in your plant, and having it communicate to an intranet is fine. The minute we start having that intranet be part of an internet for the robotic functions, I'm not talking for them to search the internet, and I’m just talking about the data on there. And I think most of the robots that are in factories today are not connecting to a cloud. They're basically pulling things down. But I see that changing. Because robots are going to become, let's say more specific, but they're going to be able to handle more specific jobs, and then be able to download out I see a different personality is the best way or a trait set. You know, you go to a game and you think about downloading your latest character, or maybe downloading some things that lets the character do more. Same thing in robotics, you're going to pay so many $1,000 or 10,000, or a million dollars to have this new library that now gives the robot the ability to handle delicate welding, as opposed to rough when I'm just giving you an example. But this is what I see. And then those skill sets are going to be constantly refined, based on a library, which will have a yearly subscription. And maybe it's weekly, maybe it's monthly, and it will keep updating that profile that you purchase. But the thing is, they have to grab the data from somewhere. So if you're a site, and let's say I pay a million dollars for this license, but now I want to be part of the environment that actually teaches the system. Well, maybe I should get a huge discount, like 50% or something more, because now my data is going back now even though they're going to say that, you know, they're only taking numerical data. I don't know if I trust that. I mean, that's really all they Need, they just need to learn how different a piston needs to be or what type of response should happen based on the fact that when I did it last time, well, I cut it wrong, and then it fell apart because I was a fraction to the edge too much. And so I see it just being very similar to that project I worked on, which was adjusting servo motor wheels. And I see the same thing happening, but I see it happening with software.


Paul Claxton: Why? I think, you know, we have to, so the way we have to look at the evolution of technology is almost, you know, going back to the beginning of humankind, right, mankind go back to the Stone Age, for example, you know, a rock was a rock was basically, you know, cutting edge technology, that's how we kept warm, we rub two rocks together, we start a fire, you know, but today, Iraq is just a block, we kick it out of the way. And the same thing with an iPod, nobody uses iPods anymore that is as good as a rock. And so the thing is, over time, you have vulnerabilities that increase if you don't adapt to new type cloud technologies, right. And when you talk about, you know, integrating these things in the society, you got to remember is that with one click, you know, you can have a hacker halfway around the world, shut down an entire country, you know, with one click so and that will put us back in the rat cage, that will put us back in the Stone Age. So rock is not just a rock, we have to look at it as something much more. Right. And, and so when we're talking about products, and integrating, you know, robots into such society and whatnot, we really need to think about, you know, how, how are we going to do that from an innovative standpoint, right. And if we don't integrate robots into our society, we're going to fall back into the Stone Age. And that's, that's one of the things that I see. Because here's the thing, if you go to the world website, there's, there's a bunch of calculations on there. And it has numbers on there, it says 20 years until we run out of water, it has the population counter for the global population, and it's going up by the quarter, the second. And so as we continue to grow, and this is why exploration of other planets, right, so we can, so we can, you know, explore other resources that can save us, they can help us live longer, and so forth. But as we continue to grow, there are going to be more and more problems, and you can't build enough machines, you can't build enough machines for the amount of problems that needs to be solved that are out there. And that's, that's why I see that robots are so important. And it's so important to build entrepreneurs in both first world countries, but third world countries as well. Think about Africa, one of the most underserved underdeveloped markets in the world; think about all the resources that were missing all the ingenuity, all the great minds. And robots certainly cannot do it all. But we certainly do have to integrate them into our daily lives and society, or else we will fall behind as a human species.


John C. Morley: I do agree with that. I think it's a catch 22 in the fact that, you know, we're using technology now we're using phones that are a fraction of the size. They're only bigger now, because we want bigger screens, but they're much thinner than they were in the past. Wi-Fi keeps going up. Why? Because people's demand for the internet keeps increasing. And as we're getting into the new Wi-Fi, six, this will be coming out. There are no differences in the type of internet, in the sense that nothing more happens, only that it's faster and more reliable. That's it, there's nothing else. So when they create a reason to have more bandwidth, that's when people want it. Just like with Microsoft, you need to have the latest version of something on your operating system be able to download or be compatible or hardware etc. It's this catch 22. And I see the same thing with robots. I had a guest not too long ago who actually uses CNC machines across the world. And he builds all kinds of chairs and any kind of let's says furniture that you need. You go to his app, and you can build it. And the neat thing is that the piece of furniture will be built within 30 minutes of your home and delivered within seven to 14 days and comes with money back return policy, which I thought was pretty neat, because when you're making custom furniture, he's willing to take it back. If you don't like it, or if there's a problem with it for any reason, that's pretty amazing. Because a lot of these machines he was mentioning, they just sit in factories for hours a day. And he gets a reduced rate to run them. But it's still a good thing. Because the people that own these machines are still leasing them. So they're happy to get any money toward these machines. Definitely, our world is changing. People have to embrace this change, you know, or get out of the way, because this is going to happen, but things like the Amazon store not too long ago, that was a flop. I mean, it was too early. It had a great concept. I think it was five years too early. They rushed with the sensors and the technology. And it was just terrible. I mean, you walk into a store and you touch something and you're billed for something. I mean, it just, it just didn't it didn't work. Right. And I think there's still nothing really bad with the fact that you pick up something you scan it. I mean, I think you know Shoprite stockfish. I mean, they have the right idea. It's not hard to scan something. It's really simple. I mean the fact that you pick something off the shelf and it charges you that is so ridiculous.


Paul Claxton: It's funny you mentioned that because I just watched a documentary on Shenzhen and China the other day, and they've got like 300 of these stores throughout Shenzhen where there's no there's no people in the store. It's just you come in; you pick up what you want. And then you go and you scan it.


John C. Morley: You scan it; you don't just take it off the shelf. You scan it.


Paul Claxton: Yes, yes. Correct.


John C. Morley: Like airports do.


Paul Claxton: Yeah, yeah. And I wonder, you know, I look at our society. And we talked about integrating robots. And I think that there are models that already exist, like, how do we build? How do we build the roadways? How do we know how a deer knows not to walk out in the middle of the road, and get hit by a car because cars have been living in our society for almost 100 years now? So it's the evolution process, but we made it work with the vehicle with the system of vehicles with the industry of vehicles, and we've built tons of roadways, but I'd look at economies like China, and I'm like, wow, you know, it took us like, half a century or almost a whole century to, to build, you know, that infrastructure. Now, I've looked at China Shenzhen. And 30 years ago, they were a shanty town Shenzhen was, there's only 300,000 people that live there. Now there's 11 million, they've got skyscrapers, then more skyscrapers than I can see. And they've got a bullet train that goes 250 miles an hour. You know, I think that I think that in terms of kind of global arbitrage, global opportunity, we really need to, you know, as Americans, as Westerners, as technologists in the Western world, we can we can actually look to China to see what are what are they doing, right, how did they do so much innovation so fast? It seemed to make it work. And the funny thing is that, despite the trade war with the US and China, there are more. I was surprised at the amount of tech companies, the amount of American companies that are in China, I was just truly amazed.


John C. Morley: I had a guest out a few weeks ago. And he was from China. And he actually lived in China when he grew up. But he wasn't born in China. He was born in Germany. At the end of his career, he was kind of retiring. He went back to Germany. And then he came back to China. And he did something different. He was a salesperson. And in China, a salesperson is a very low man on the totem pole, unfortunately. And he came back. And now he became a manager to manage those sales people. And he said, that's like one of the highest things you can do. And China will actually pay a person 10 times more than what they're worth, when they come from outside of China. Doesn't matter if they're Germany, doesn't matter. But if they're from within China, they get a different pay. So they're paying people from the US to come over there, but they have to re uplift their lives. Make a big sacrifice. I mean that.


Paul Claxton: Yep, yep. And yeah, I think we look at China's you don't come out like the conventional communists, but um, or at least that's what they've called themselves, but they're actually one of the best at capitalism. And so I think that we can, you know, as technologists, and we talked a lot about robots here. And I think that we can even look at, you know, models, like example, like the roadway system, but we can also look at, you know, how can we do it better, you know, in the future, you know, look at look at our, you know, our, our brother, your, so to speak our opponent there to the east, China, and look at the way that you know, they've done things And, you know, how can we maybe make that work in American society? Because the true thing is like, you know the technological race to advance. It's not slowing down. And so, you know, I think that, you know, innovation is going to be key when it comes to robotics, and integrate, you know, integrating that, merging that into our society, but also the way that we think of things and like you said, You know, I think you were talking a little bit about Moore's Law, they're basically, how can you build smaller but faster, right, so phones are a lot smaller than they used to be. But they're 10 times more powerful. I mean, even the largest computer in the world 30 years ago, didn't have this much power. And so, you know, when we look at it, that, you know, technology is eventually going to be invisible. We're going to have things in our heads, plant implants in our head, and how do you control that? And, you know, how do you make it work? Because the race to be better, to be faster, to be smaller? It's not slowing down? And, you know, so I think that there is an invisible component, intangible components, all of this as well.


John C. Morley: I think things like that are good for people that need it. You know, they have all kinds of different devices for your body if you lose a limb and things and that's good, but I think our body is very smart. And the electrical power we have in our potential is amazing. I mean, most people only tap about 1% of it. 


Paul Claxton: Yep. 


John C. Morley: So our bodies are much smarter than any robotic system. In fact, it's the robotic systems that want to learn from our body. So I think the robotic and the implants are things that are great for people that need that or have a deficiency, but I don't want to shorten our body or our Creator, I think what we have is amazing. And I think that we can surpass any robot from a technological perspective. I'm not saying we're as fast as a robot, nor what I want to be. But I think robots are good for doing a task over and over and over again, and they're great with crunching numbers, and giving us answers very, very quickly, when somebody wouldn't want to spend those hours, even if you're an engineer like myself, or if you're a financial person, you're still not going to want to crunch that many numbers.


Paul Claxton: Exactly. 


John C. Morley: Leave that. You know, there always is that, let's say that avenue, that I'm happy that technology exists for people that may have, like I said, a limb issue or, or they had a problem or something of that nature. But I think we have to be careful as a society. And I'll tell you this real quick, when I was graduating college, I was offered a position for a very large company not going to mention the name. And they asked me if I knew all these things. And I said, yes. And I said, I'm more than happy to work for you. I said, the only thing I have is one question for you. So I'm happy to do everything you want me to do. As long as I'm not part of a team that manufactures a robot? No, not just any robot, a robot that is going to be killing people. 


Paul Claxton: Yes. 


John C. Morley: And he sat down on the chair to sky in the suit. And he said, well, that's a relief. He says, Well, I'm glad you told us that. I said, Okay, so where's the papers? He says, I don't think you're going to be happy with us. So well, can I ask you, bye? Yeah. We're actually part of a defense contract. And one of the major projects, you'd be working on our robots, intelligence and then being able to undermine other countries so that we can attack them with technology. And I was like, yeah, we're not a match. It's like, I'm sorry. And I turned that down. Because I just don't want to be part of something that is going to hurt our human race. I love technology, more than anyone. But I'm very passionate about knowing that when we use technology, just like we're a person and we're in a relationship, we can hurt that relationship, or we can make it flourish. And I tell people this from the very first show ahead, you can use technology for good and you can use technology for bad technology itself is not evil, and it's not good. It's how you choose to use it and apply it. I think a lot of people don't get that they see the dollar signs. Yeah, they don't really look at the consequences to what's happening. Our worlds are definitely going to shape and it's going to change and morph into lots of different things. But as we're kind of rounding out here, our time together, this has been really interesting, Paul learning about, you know, what you're doing with robots. And this takes me back to another thought I had. And you remember iRobot, and Roomba. And just, you know, they have a device that has sensors, and it's a very basic robot. But I do want to quote, Merriam Webster. And she says, a robot is a machine that resembles a living creature in being capable of moving independently, as by walking or rolling on wheels and performing complex actions, such as grasping and moving objects, when the next space launch heads for Mars on board will be dozens of tiny mobile robots that will fan out across the Martin landscape, exploring every nook and cranny. So when they say complex things, the thing that I loved about this new robot that came out is it's able to sense the tactile difference of how much to grasp a piece of crystal, or a chocolate bar, or a metal pole. And just knowing that, and this takes me back to the thought of virtual reality, in the fact that we're now going to have suits, we already have gloves that are about $5,000, we're going to have suits, pretty soon, you'll be able to wear with sensors and your whole body to give you sensations when you're playing the game. I mean, that's wild. Because I feel when people play games right now, they play them, because there are no consequences. I'm not saying people should have pain. But I feel that if people actually understood how that felt a little bit, it's going to make them think and maybe not be so violent. So its okay, they want to play the game, but now playing it 10 hours a day as opposed to maybe one hour, because maybe they have a sore leg or a sore back or a sore stomach, because they're getting a little jolt from it. I think it's going to change people and make people understand that it's really real.


Paul Claxton: I love that you brought that up, John, actually one of our portfolio companies in the robotics hub is an exoskeleton, they built exoskeleton suits for like limited people who have limited mobility or assisted need assisted movement and so, so forth, the company is called seismic wwMy Sites But I love that you brought that up. And that you also brought up the fact that like, we should never use technology for anything other than positive reasons. Not making money, only solving or only solving problems, and advancing society for improving people's lives, which is my model. If you go to my personal CV website, bam bim you will see that model. As I describe how I view capitalism, capitalism and making money as a byproduct of all of that you solve problems. You help people out; you give them something that they need, not necessarily something that they want. Some people want drugs, right, but they don't need it. So you give them what they need. And, you know, the thing is being a Marine Corps veteran, I spent 10 years on active duty with the infantry, I did four tours in Iraq. And I see the good that technology, have we had more advanced technology during the early 2000s when I was in the Iraq invasion 2003 have we had more advanced technology than just imagine the amount of lives that could have been saved?


John C. Morley: So thank you for and thank you so much, Paul, for you and your troops' service to us. We're very grateful for that. 


Paul Claxton: Appreciate that. Thank you. 


John C. Morley: It's been a pleasure having you on the show today and getting to learn, you know, your thoughts on some things that are coming up and going to be changing our world. And just giving people I guess, a snapshot of you know, what's not too far around the corner, but my only message is that when you venture around that corner, make sure you're doing it for the right reasons. Well, thank you so much, Paul. We wish you all the best. And I know you have lots of other endeavors. So we look forward to having you back and you have lots of many areas and disciplines to cover. Unfortunately, we didn't have time to cover them on this show, but we will invite you back for another episode.


Paul Claxton: I really appreciate you having me. 


John C. Morley: It is our pleasure, All the best to you. And thank you, take care.


Paul Claxton: You too.


John C. Morley: Well, Mr. Paul Claxton, with, you know, doing so much for our country and being a US Marine veteran. What did you think about what he had to say about robotics?


Marcus Hart: Well, first of all, its one vessel to another, you know, thank you for his service, but he's still paying it forward. And he's definitely bringing some different revolutionary stuff, you know to our favor, you know, showing us a way in which we can, you know, develop some sustainable goals with robotics.


John C. Morley: I agree. He's definitely helping not only to implement the robotics, but he's serving on boards and teams to make other people aware, kind of like a coalition. So I think that's good for collaborating. So I think that was really great. Paul, I definitely want to thank you for your time, we had an outstanding interview with you. And it was just great to learn from you, and to hear all the wonderful things you're doing. And once again, Marcus, and I say thank you so much for your grateful service to our country, and to all of us. So our last point for today's show is sound. Well, we deal with sound every day with recording our show and video. But it's not so much just hearing great quality sound, it's more than that. Imagine for a second Marcus, that you could have sound that actually blends into your environment. Now, what the heck is he talking about? Well, let's talk about sound that could blend right into the environment you have such as, um, maybe a light, maybe another piece of furniture, okay. And imagine that becoming part of your home or your office decor? Well, you don't have to imagine anymore. The new sonos and IKEA Wi-Fi speakers are coming. And what you need to know is Sonos is going to lead the way we all know sonos very well. And we know how they have led the world in Symphony mystic ways with their new technology and their speakers. They call it the symphonic speakers. So sonos has teased the symphonic update on Instagram, and lots of great things, and being more than just a wireless speaker. But really, Marcus, a piece of art that you really don't even know is a speaker, and one of the best Bluetooth speakers that are possibly around. So this is pretty amazing because you're going to get a really high quality speaker, and you're going to get one that blends in with your furniture, and you're going to be able to get it at IKEA.


Marcus Hart: Yeah, talk about saying goodbye to all of the bulky extra equipment and wires, you know, totally in disguise. This is something out of a movie almost. And I'm highly impressive and geek up about it. And the fact that like, this clearly does work. So something actually clearly does work is something that we can all be really geared up to, you know, take part