Are we falling into the trap of using AI as a placebo for human relationships, where interpersonal ... [+] interactions become a luxury that only wealthy populations can afford?gettyPicture the last time you called a service hotline and found yourself stuck in an endless loop of automated responses. Or consider a healthcare clinic that deploys chatbots to manage patient intake, offering quick answers that may skirt a deeper diagnosis. How did you feel?These scenarios illustrate the growing reliance on AI systems that look helpful on the surface yet lead to chronic consumer disempowerment and latent dissatisfaction. Placebo AI can seem like a convenient, cost-effective fix. But it risks normalizing lower standards of care, sidelining genuine human expertise, and quietly chipping away at the dignity and rights we depend on, individually and as society. As more businesses adopt these automated stand-ins, how can we ensure that technology complements rather than compromises our values?Unequal Realities, Divergent TimelinesThe global context for AI adoption is one of striking disparity. As of 2023, approximately 719 million people live on less than $2.15 a day, according to the World Bank. Many struggle to access basic human needs clean water, adequate healthcare, quality education while others debate the nuances of the latest large language model. Our two-speed world raises difficult questions. One of them relates to the appeal of placebo AI. Are we moving toward a future where impoverished communities must settle for automated care delivered by bots because its nominally cheaper than human intervention? Will human relationships become a luxury that only wealthier segments of society can enjoy?Historically, human rights have been upheld as universal non-negotiables. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, established in 1948, asserts everyones right to dignity, respect, fair treatment, and access to education, food, and health care. Yet if cost-cutting and scale become primary drivers for implementing AI, we risk tacitly compromising these values. AI-driven services can quickly become a baseline standard for those who cannot afford human support. Over time, the idea that something is better than nothing morphs into a norm, quietly shifting public perception until the original ideal human care and genuine connection recedes.The History Of Austeritys AllureAusterity, a term that gained prominence during economic downturns such as post-World War II Europe and the aftermath of the 2008 global financial crisis refers to policies aimed at reducing government deficits through spending cuts and tax increases, often at the expense of public services and social safety nets.MORE FOR YOUIn the current context, adopting placebo AI as a fix for unavailable or costly human labor is a prime illustration of austerity in practice. Unfortunately, there is no free lunch austerity measures can inadvertently erode quality of life when budget considerations trigger a shift from human-centered care toward automation that mimics support rather than delivering tangible human assistance.A Future Of AutomationAIs potential for cost reduction is significant. For instance, the global AI market, valued at $87 billion in 2022, is expected to grow to $407.0 billion by 2027, according to MarketsandMarkets. Organizations are drawn to automation because it promises to handle tasks at scale, free human labor from rote or repetitive work, and theoretically open new avenues for human-centric roles. Done well, this redistribution could mean more meaningful human-to-human interactions. Done poorly, it could mean a future where human warmth is a luxury good, and those who struggle to find meaningful work will be even worse off.As of 2023, global unemployment hovered around 208 million people, according to the International Labor Organization. Inflation, declining disposable incomes in G20 countries, and persistent inequalities between high- and low-income nations further exacerbate the situation, with job gaps and unemployment rates significantly higher in low-income countries. Working poverty is also on the rise, with millions of workers living in extreme poverty less than $2.- per day of income, and an even bigger number in moderate poverty less than $4.- a day.AI-driven job displacement and the calls for Universal Basic Income as a social safety net reflect the urgency and complexity of the situation. UBI programs whereby consistent, unconditional payments are distributed by the government to ensure a basic standard of living for every member of a community have been piloted in dozens of countries. From Finland to Kenya they have shown promise in alleviating poverty, but none have scaled globally to solve systemic issues definitively. If implemented without careful safeguards, UBI could mask deeper structural problems, like placebo AI masks the absence of human engagement.BandAid Or Value Barometer Placebo AI can start as a well-intentioned intermediary: a chatbot to assist underserved patients when no doctors are available or a digital teacher to reach students in remote areas. Initially, this might feel like a positive step at least something reaches those in need. But over time, as budgets tighten and automation normalizes, the danger is that these temporary fixes become permanent standards. Instead of solving the root problems lack of equitable resources and insufficient human labor where needed we risk codifying second-tier solutions for second-tier communities. Eventually, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and similar frameworks could be sidelined as ideals too lofty for practical use in an AI-mediated world.Finding Balance: Keeping Humanity At The CenterFor businesses, acknowledging this moral dimension is not just ethically correct; its strategically brilliant. Consumers are increasingly discerning. 63% of consumers expect CEOs to hold themselves accountable to the public, not just shareholders, according to Edelmans 2023 Trust Barometer. Moreover, employees are drawn to organizations that prioritize social impact. Sustainability, diversity, and human-centric values are no longer nice to haves. They are essential to brand identity and long-term resilience.Instead of using AI merely to cut costs, forward-thinking companies can harness AI to do routine work more efficiently and reallocate human workers to roles that emphasize empathy, creativity, and genuine human connection. Imagine a call center that uses AI to handle simple queries but trains its freed-up staff to handle complex, emotionally sensitive calls with better care. Or hospitals where AI streamlines administrative tasks, freeing medical professionals to spend more one-on-one time with patients. AI can handle administrative grading tasks in education, allowing teachers to mentor and guide students more personally.The A-Frame: A Practical Path ForwardBringing awareness to the issue of placebo AI is only the first step. Organizations need a clear framework to remain aligned with core human values. Consider the A-Frame:Awareness: Recognize that AI can unintentionally propagate inequality and diminish human rights if used as a low-cost band-aid. Stay informed about the ethical debates, regulatory changes, and social implications of AI.Appreciation: Value the human element. Dont let better than nothing become the new standard. Appreciate the intrinsic worth of human interaction, empathy, and judgment.Acceptance: Acknowledge the complexity of implementing AI responsibly. Accept that transitioning to responsible AI use requires more than technology; it demands organizational commitment, policy safeguards, and ongoing cultural shifts.Accountability: Hold leadership accountable for ensuring that AI initiatives do not compromise human dignity. Use transparent metrics, public reporting, and stakeholder engagement to ensure your companys AI aligns with ethical standards and human rights ideals.Further And BeyondAs we stand at the intersection of AI innovation and human endeavor, its easy to be swept up in the promise of sleek automation. But we must remember that a future of hollow, impersonal service is no real future at all. Instead of framing our choices as old versus new or human versus machine, we can integrate the best of both to raise living standards, honor human rights, and keep genuine connections within everyones reach. We can create a balanced path where technology supports rather than supplants our humanity, ensuring progress that benefits us all but this requires choices now before the new normal of omnipresent placebo AI has settled in.

Why it matters: The success of Intel's upcoming 18A process node is critical to the company's future. After refuting reports of abysmal yield rates, Intel recently confirmed that 18A has reached a crucial milestone in its effort to regain competitiveness against semiconductor rivals Samsung and TSMC. Interim Intel co-CEO Michelle Johnston Holthaus announced that the first engineering samples of hardware manufactured with the company's 18A semiconductor node have been delivered to customers. Her comments aim to reassure industry observers that Intel's foundry business remains on track to compete with TSMC's and Samsung's 3nm and 2nm nodes starting next year.At the Barclays Annual Global Technology Conference, Holthaus and co-CEO David Zinsner discussed Intel's upcoming Panther Lake processors, which will debut the 18A process node upon their expected launch in the second half of 2025. Holthaus revealed that eight foundry customers have powered on ES0 (likely "Engineering Sample 0") chips built on the 18A node, signaling significant progress compared to six months ago.Intel released version 1.0 of the 18A process design kit in July, enabling customers to begin developing chips based on the node. In August, the company confirmed that internal samples of Panther Lake and Clearwater Forest processors, built on the 18A node, successfully powered on and booted Windows with satisfactory performance. The statements made at the Barclays event mark the first confirmation of 18A usage outside of Intel.Also see: What's next for Intel: Split, sell, or shut down the fabs?Semiconductors produced with the 18A node will integrate Intel's new RibbonFET gate-all-around technology and PowerVia power delivery architecture, both designed to improve performance-per-watt and power efficiency. Intel hopes these innovations will help it reenter the race for leadership against the most advanced nodes from TSMC and Samsung.The successful launch of Panther Lake and the 18A node could provide a desperately needed win for Intel. The company has faced significant challenges recently, including the resignation of former CEO Pat Gelsinger following several disappointing quarters. Skepticism about Intel's foundry business persists, with even industry veterans like TSMC founder Morris Chang expressing doubts about its prospects.Intel has also had to address concerns regarding 18A's yield rates, following reports suggesting that nine out of ten chips manufactured on the node were defective. However, when accounting for factors like die size, defects per square centimeter, and the types of products involved, the outlook appears more optimistic. // Related StoriesPanther Lake CPUs, targeted at laptops, are expected to feature up to six Cougar Cove performance cores and up to eight Skymount efficiency cores. These processors will also include integrated GPUs based on Intel's third-generation Xe graphics architecture, codenamed Celestial.

The big picture: Apple's possible foray into custom AI server processors reflects a broader trend in the tech industry. Companies like Amazon, Meta and Microsoft have already made significant strides in this area. Meanwhile, Google has also been leveraging Broadcom's intellectual property in its Tensor Processing Units. Apple is reportedly developing a custom server processor to power its AI services. Codenamed "Project Baltra," the initiative aims to bolster the AI capabilities integrated into Apple's operating systems, with production expected to begin in 2026, according to The Information, which cites three unnamed sources familiar with the matter.These sources indicate that Apple is partnering with semiconductor giant Broadcom for this endeavor. Apple now possesses a strong history and experience designing its own Arm-based silicon and already maintains an existing relationship with Broadcom in 5G component development.While specific details remain scarce, it is speculated that Broadcom's recent unveiling of its 3.5D eXtreme Dimension System in Package (3.5D XDSiP) technology could play a role in the project's development.This advanced packaging solution offers a multi-die processor architecture, which includes stacked compute dies on logic dies. It also integrates a high-bandwidth memory (HBM) interface and employs a face-to-face chiplet design to boost performance.The 2026 production target for Project Baltra aligns with Broadcom's projections for the production timeline of its 3.5D XDSiP technology. // Related StoriesApple could leverage this technology in several ways. The ability to integrate multiple dies and HBM stacks could allow Apple to create more powerful AI processors with higher compute density and improved efficiency. The 3.5D XDSiP platform also offers flexibility in design, enabling chip designers to pair different fabrication processes for each component, potentially allowing Apple to optimize various parts of its AI processor for specific tasks.The scalability offered by 3.5D XDSiP could help Apple design highly efficient AI processors to meet the demands of large language models and other compute-intensive AI workloads. As Moore's Law scaling becomes increasingly challenging, advanced packaging technologies like 3.5D XDSiP could allow Apple to push the boundaries of AI chip performance beyond the limitations of conventional process node improvements.Source: App Economy InsightsIn related news, Broadcom CEO Hock Tan recently projected the AI semiconductor market to reach $60 $90 billion by 2027, emphasizing strategic partnerships in AI as key drivers of sustained growth. Following the company's latest quarterly report, Broadcom's stock surged over 20%, pushing its market capitalization above $1 trillion, making it the 10th largest company in the world.As with many of Apple's projects, details about Project Baltra are likely to remain under wraps until an official announcement. However, this initiative underscores Apple's commitment to advancing its AI capabilities. At a recent developer conference, Craig Federighi, Apple's Senior Vice President of Software Engineering, described the company's vision for "Apple Intelligence" to function both on-device and in a private cloud powered by Apple Silicon.

Table of ContentsTable of ContentsPerformanceBattery lifeBoth last a long time, but Qualcomm maintains performanceThis was a turbulent year in the world of Windows laptops. The introduction of Qualcomms Snapdragon X chips completely changed the game and I dont say that lightly.They entered the market in such a forceful way that both AMD and Intel were forced to respond quickly with their own more power-efficient chips that could compete. Intels Core Ultra Series 2, otherwise known as Lunar Lake, attempted to beat Qualcomm at its own game, boasting a dramatic improvement in battery life.Recommended VideosBut now that the dust has settled a bit, which chip results in the best laptops you can buy right now? Ive tested a number of systems using both chips, and I finally feel like I can see where the chips are falling.RelatedThe Qualcomm Snapdragon X comes in two variations, the Snapdragon X Elite and the Snapdragon X Plus. As you can see in the chart below, they vary widely in terms of their core counts, speeds, and integrated Adreno graphics performance. Qualcomm doesnt advertise their TDP (thermal design power), but evidence points to their running at between 15 watts and 80 watts.The primary concern with the Qualcomm chipsets is that Windows on Arm requires applications to be written natively for the platform to see the best performance. While the current version of Windows on Arm has a very good emulation engine compared to past versions, and its much more compatible with a variety of applications, there can still be a penalty if an important app wont run at all or at full speed.QualcommIntels Core Ultra Series 2, or Lunar Lake, also has various iterations that are more consistent in their overall design. They all have eight cores with the same number of performance and efficiency versions. Most are 17-watt parts, while the Core Ultra 9 288V is a 30-watt part.We havent yet reviewed a laptop with the Core Ultra 9, so we cant directly attest to its performance. Lunar Lake is an x86 chipset and so uses the same version of Windows as past Intel and AMD chips. Theres no concern about compatibility and no performance concerns around emulation.IntelLooking at our benchmark results, we see that Snapdragon X is a lot faster than Core Ultra Series 2 in CPU-intensive tasks. Theres some variability, but thats generally true. Its not as fast, though, in GPU-intensive tasks. Intels Core Ultra Series 2 chips have the best integrated graphics weve ever seen in a Windows laptop, so we have to give credit where credit is due. Meanwhile, Qualcomms Adreno graphics are in last place among the options, behind AMD and Apple as well.None of the laptops with these chips provide a viable gaming platform for AAA gaming, nor does either chip provide a truly significant performance benefit for creative applications. For that, youll want a discrete GPU, and as of now, that category of laptops dont exist for either platform. Youll have to jump to AMDs latest chips or go back to Intels previous generstion if you want something more powerful.its also important to note that Apples M3 chipset that runs in similar thin-and-light laptops splits the difference in CPU tasks while enjoying faster graphics.But looking at my testing results so far, its clear that Qualcomm has an upper hand against Intel, both in single-core and multi-core performance and for these types of laptops, thats what matters most.Cinebench R24(single/multi)Geekbench 6(single/multi)3DMarkWild Life ExtremeAcer Swift Go 14 AI(Snapdragon X Plus / Adreno)107 / 7162413 / 113883231HP OmniBook X(Snapdragon X Elite / Adreno)101 / 7492377 / 134906165Dell Inspiron 14 Plus 7441(Snapdragon X Plus / Adreno)108 / 4192451 / 87446457Dell XPS 13 9345(Snapdragon X Elite / Adreno)121 / 9212805 / 145116397Acer Swift 14 AI(Core Ultra 7 258V / Intel Arc 140V)121 / 5252755 / 111385294HP OmniBook Ultra Flip 14(Core Ultra 7 258V / Intel Arc 140V)116 / 5982483 / 107257573Lenovo Yoga Slim 7i Aura Edition(Core Ultra 7 258V / Intel Arc 140V)109 / 6302485 / 105695217Asus Zenbook S 14(Core Ultra 7 258V / Intel Arc 140V)112 / 4522738 / 107347514MacBook Air(M3)141 / 6013102 / 120788098Kunal Khullar / Digital TrendsSo, how do they perform in terms of battery life? After all, both chipsets are intended to make more Windows laptops better equipped to compete with Apple MacBooks, which have been significantly longer-lasting.Its a challenge to compare battery life across each platform because weve reviewed laptops with different display technologies and resolutions. The longest-lasting machines have been those with FHD+ (1920 x 1200) IPS displays, while those with 2.8K (2880 x 1800) OLED displays have done the worst. The Acer Swift 14 AI, for example, used Intel Lunar Lake combined with a 14.0-inch FHD+ IPS display and is one of the best performers, while the Acer Swift Go 14 used a Snapdragon X Plus along with a 14.5-inch QHD+ (2560 x 1600) IPS display and it also did very well. The HP OmniBook Ultra Flip 14 combined Lunar Lake with a 2.8K OLED display and wasnt as impressive.Generally speaking, its safest to say that Intels new chipset is likeliest to give the best performance the more the CPU is being pushed. That shows up best in our Cinebench R24 test that runs the chipsets at maximum performance. Here, Intel does better than Qualcomm. When looking at all three scores, the Apple MacBook Air M3 remains a strong option, and its likely that the M4 version arriving early in 2025 will provide even stronger scores.The bottom line is that both the Snapdragon X and Core Ultra Series 2 represent important advances for the Windows platform. Unlike in the past, you can easily select a Windows laptop that will give you all-day and maybe even multiday battery life. Thats huge.Web browsingVideoCinebench R24Acer Swift Go 14 AI(Snapdragon X Plus)15 hours, 29 minutes21 hours, 38 minutes1 hour, 42 minutesHP Omnibook X(Snapdragon X Elite)13 hours, 37 minutes22 hours, 4 minutes1 hour, 52 minutesDell Inspiron 14 Plus 7441(Snapdragon Plus)10 hours, 9 minutes19 hours, 28 minutes2 hours, 25 minutesDell XPS 13 9345(Snapdragon X Elite)12 hours, 29 minutes22 hours, 9 minutes1 hour, 37 minutesAcer Swift 14 AI(Core Ultra 7 258V)17 hours, 22 minutes24 hours, 10 minutes2 hours, 7 minutesHP OmniBook Ultra Flip 14(Core Ultra 7 258V)11 hours, 5 minutes15 hours, 46 minutes2 hours, 14 minutesLenovo Yoga Slim 7i Aura Edition(Core Ultra 7 258V)14 hours, 16 minutes17 hours, 31 minutes2 hours, 15 minutesAsus Zenbook S 14(Core Ultra 7 258V)16 hours, 47 minutes18 hours, 35 minutes3 hours, 33 minutesApple MacBook Air(Apple M3)19 hours, 38 minutes19 hours, 39 minutes3 hours, 27 minutesIf you go exclusively by efficiency, then both platforms are easy enough to recommend. Intels Core Ultra Series 2 is more efficient overall because it maintains efficiency when working harder. But both equip Windows laptops that are so much longe- lasting.However, Qualcomms Snapdragon X is considerably faster. If youre a demanding productivity user, its a stronger choice. Youll still want a discrete GPU if gaming or video editing is your primary usage, and we havent yet reviewed either platform with a discrete GPU. Thats going to take longer with Qualcomm. But for thin-and-light laptops for productivity, the Snapdragon X provides the better combination of speed and battery life right now.Perhaps the strongest point in favor of Qualcomm, though, is pricing. Yes, its been out a bit longer, but as of now, you can pick up Snapdragon X laptops for significantly less than any options for Intels latest chipset.Editors Recommendations

OpenAI has been on a Shipmas product launch spree, launching its highly-awaited Sora video generator and onboarding millions of Apple ecosystem members with the Siri-ChatGPT integration. The company has also expanded its subscription portfolio as it races toward a for-profit status, which is reportedly a hot topic of debate internally.Not everyone is happy with the AI behemoth abandoning its nonprofit roots, including one of its founding fathers and now rival, Elon Musk. The xAI chief filed a lawsuit against OpenAI earlier this year and has also been consistently taking potshots at the company.You cant sue your way to AGI.Recommended VideosNow, the Microsoft-backed company has published a trove of emails and conversations between Musk and OpenAI executives with quite a stunning claim. It was Musk, all along, who was allegedly chasing a for-profit status and sought the CEO role, absolute control, a merger with Tesla, and a majority equity. A few core OpenAI executives were also enthusiastic about a hybrid plan where a research division would function as a nonprofit alongside a for-profit wing exploring hardware partnerships.OpenAI works closely with Microsoft and has also inked a lucrative ChatGPT deal with Apple. Rolf van Root / UnsplashAs the involved parties explored a for-profit arm, Musk wrote to the top OpenAI executives that he would unequivocally have initial control of the company, subject to change in the near future. OpenAI rejected Musks demands, and he eventually left, subsequently starting his own company called xAI.RelatedHe should be competing in the marketplace rather than the courtroom.The current structure provides you with a path where you end up with unilateral absolute control over the AGI, former OpenAI chief scientist Ilya Sutskever wrote to Musk in an email chain. You stated that you dont want to control the final AGI, but during this negotiation, youve shown to us that absolute control is extremely important to you.OpenAI eventually established the capped-profit OpenAI LP entity and claims to have reached out to Musk on multiple occasions with an equity offering, but he declined. But it seems that Musk is not the only party unhappy with OpenAI inching toward a for-profit structure.Mark Zuckerberg training with UFC champions Israel Adesanya (left) and Alexander Volkanovski (right). Meta/Mark ZuckerbergMeta has reportedly written a letter to California Attorney General Rob Bonta, asking for a block on OpenAIs pursuit of transforming into a nonprofit company. The letter, which was first reported by The Wall Street Journal, notes that OpenAI initially gathered funding as it promoted a charitable mission and now wants to amass profits.The Mark Zuckerberg-led company has asked the attorney general to not only stop OpenAIs transformation, but also urgently look into its obligations as a nonprofit in the context of activities like distributing assets to third-party entities.That is wrong.Metas core argument is that OpenAI sets a dangerous precedent where a non-profit gets a fat sum in donations, builds a product or service, and then abandons its charitable roots to seek profits down the road. Of course, the social giant is also competing against OpenAI with its own Meta AI stack, so theres that.Interestingly, Metas letter namedrops Musk, noting that he is qualified and well positioned to represent the interests of Californians in this matter. Notably, Musk hasnt been a fan of Zuckerberg lately, and until a few months ago, the two were butting heads and goading each other in a cage fight.The fight never happened. It would be interesting to see whether OpenAI faces any legal heat in its for-profit while working closely with Microsoft.Editors Recommendations

Authorities say unexplained aircraft over New Jersey is no cause for concern. My neighbors, however, are concerned.

The man who founded Dell in a Texas dorm room has transformed his company. Its not just about PCs anymore.

The lyricist Ira Gershwin outlived his composer brother by more than 40 years, but never quite escaped Georges shadow.

The American revolution produced a new idea: a nation-state united by something other than ethnic affiliations.

Beyond BCIs Werner Herzog muses on mysteries of the brain in Theater of Thought Auteur director's latest documentary runs the gamut from BCIs and how we construct reality to whether fish can dream. Jennifer Ouellette Dec 13, 2024 1:12 pm | 16 Credit: Argot Pictures Credit: Argot Pictures Story textSizeSmallStandardLargeWidth *StandardWideLinksStandardOrange* Subscribers only Learn moreWerner Herzog has made more than 60 films over his illustrious career. His documentaries alone span an impressive topical range, from the life and death of bear enthusiast Timothy Treadwell (Grizzly Man) to people who choose to live and work in Antarctica (the Oscar-nominated Encounters at the End of the World) or a haunting exploration of the oldest human paintings in France's Chauvet Cave (Cave of Forgotten Dreams). His latest offering, Theater of Thought, tackles what might be his most ambitious subject yet: the mysterious inner workings of the brain.Theater of Thought premiered in 2022 at the Telluride Film Festival in Colorado and is now getting a theatrical release. Herzog's inspiration grew out of his conversations with Rafael Yuste, a Columbia University neurobiologist who also served as scientific advisor on the film. "How can we read thoughts?" he writes in his director's statement. "Can you implant a chip in your brain and in my brain, and see my new film without a camera? Why is it that some young people immerse themselves in video games and become addicted to completely artificial worlds? Sometimes mice even prefer invented cartoon worlds, so who is the ghost writer of our mind, of our reality?"The topic might be scientific in nature, but Theater of Thought is not really a science documentary, despite Herzog's use of the classic talking head format. It's more of a personal, almost quixotic quest, with plenty of random branching digressions along the way. "It was like a road movie, one Monument Valley and one Grand Canyon, then one Mount Everest after the other," Herzog told Ars. "You just couldn't stop wondering and enjoying." For the viewer, it's as much a journey through the eccentric workings of Herzog's endlessly curious, nimble mind.That mind is partly revealed through Herzog's running narration, such as when he muses about collective behavior and whether fish have soulsa digression sparked by his interview with Siri co-inventor Tom Gruber. "In the background, I saw his TV screen still on, we didn't switch it off, and I saw some very, very strange school of fish," said Herzog. "I asked him about the school of fish, which he had filmed himself. And all of a sudden, I'm only interested in the fish and common behavior. Why do they behave in big schools, in unison? Why do they do that? Do they dream? And if they think, what are they thinking about? I immerse the audience into a very strange form of underwater landscape and behavior of fish." Werner Herzog's inspiration for Theater of Thought arose from conversations with Columbia University neuroscientist Rafael Yuste, who served as science advisor on the film. Argot Pictures Werner Herzog's inspiration for Theater of Thought arose from conversations with Columbia University neuroscientist Rafael Yuste, who served as science advisor on the film. Argot Pictures Yuste (left) with Kernel founder Bryan Johnson (right). Argot Pictures Yuste (left) with Kernel founder Bryan Johnson (right). Argot Pictures The University of Washngton's Rajesh Rao specializes in human brain-to-brain communications. Argot Pictures The University of Washngton's Rajesh Rao specializes in human brain-to-brain communications. Argot Pictures Yuste (left) with Kernel founder Bryan Johnson (right). Argot Pictures The University of Washngton's Rajesh Rao specializes in human brain-to-brain communications. Argot Pictures University of Washington neuroscientist Eberhard Fetz Argot Pictures Herzog's camera captures a brain surgery in progress, Argot Pictures We glimpse the inner workings of Herzog's mind in the kinds of questions he asks his subjects, such as when he queries IBM's Dario Gil, who works on quantum computing, about his passion for fishing, eliciting an enthusiastic smile in response. He agrees to interview University of Washington neuroscientist Christof Koch after Koch's early-morning row on the Puget Sound and includes music from New York University neuroscientist Joseph LeDoux's band, the Amygdaloids, in the film's soundtrack. He asks married scientists Cori Bargmann and Richard Axel about music, their dinner conversations, and the linguistic capabilities of parrots. In so doing, he brings out their innate humanity, not just their scientific expertise."That's what I do. If you don't have it in you, you shouldn't be a filmmaker," said Herzog. "But you see, also, the joy of getting into all of this and the joy of meeting these scientists. We are talking about speaking parrots. What if two parrots learned a language that is already extinct and they would speak to each other? What would we make of it? So I'm asking, spontaneously, because I saw it, I sensed it, there was something I should depart completely from scientific quests. And yet there's a deep scientific background to it."This sense leads Herzog to make some unexpected connections. Case in point: He deftly segues from an interview with LeDoux on his work mapping the mechanisms of fear in the brain to a visit with veteran tightrope walker Philippe Petit. Petit famously performed a high-wire walk between the twin towers of the World Trade Center in 1974, so he knows something about confronting and conquering fear.At one point, he asks a subject whether it's possible to use brain-reading technology to ask someone who has just died if they are in heaven or hell. Herzog is a filmmaker, so this naturally leads him to a 1930 Soviet silent film called Earth. "It has to do with the joy of filmmaking," Herzog said of his decision to include a clip from Earth. "The beginning of the film, an old peasant is dying under an apple tree, on a big heap of apples. And all the other peasants surround him, and one of them asks, 'Can you give us some sort of sign, when you are dead, whether there is paradise?' It's such a beautiful beginning of a movie."For Herzog, making the documentary was about the journey and following the whims of his insatiable curiosity; he was less concerned about finding definitive answers. It's a wise approach, given how much we have to learn about how the physical mass of tissue that is the brain gives rise to complex human thought and consciousness. "Not a single one of the scientists, not one, could even tell you what a thought is, and not a single one could even tell you what consciousness is," he said. "There are open questions that will remain open for probably a very, very long time. But it doesn't matter. Let's engage in finding out. I'm comfortable that certain things we'll never know. At the same time, there's this great joy of exploration and trying to get answers, even if they're only incomplete."Theater of Thought is now playing in select theaters. Trailer for Werner Herzog's Theater of Thought. Jennifer OuelletteSenior WriterJennifer OuelletteSenior Writer Jennifer is a senior reporter at Ars Technica with a particular focus on where science meets culture, covering everything from physics and related interdisciplinary topics to her favorite films and TV series. Jennifer lives in Baltimore with her spouse, physicist Sean M. Carroll, and their two cats, Ariel and Caliban. 16 Comments