The writer George Eliot cautioned us that, among all forms of mistake, prophesy is the most gratuitous. The person that we would all acknowledge as her 20th-century counterpart, Yogi Berra, agreed. He said, "It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future."
Shkrimtarja George Eliot na terhoqi vemendjen se, nga te gjitha format e gabimit profesia eshte me e lira. Personi qe te gjithe do njihnim si homologu i saj i shekullit te 20-te, Yogi Berra, ra dakort me te. Ai tha, "Eshte e veshtire te parashikosh, sidomos mbi te ardhmen."
I'm going to ignore their cautions and make one very specific forecast. In the world that we are creating very quickly, we're going to see more and more things that look like science fiction, and fewer and fewer things that look like jobs. Our cars are very quickly going to start driving themselves, which means we're going to need fewer truck drivers. We're going to hook Siri up to Watson and use that to automate a lot of the work that's currently done by customer service reps and troubleshooters and diagnosers, and we're already taking R2D2, painting him orange, and putting him to work carrying shelves around warehouses, which means we need a lot fewer people to be walking up and down those aisles.
Une do anashkaloj paralajmerimet e tyre dhe do bej nje parashikim shume specifik. Ne boten qe ne po krijojme shume shpejt, do shohim gjithnje e me shume gjera qe ngjajne me fantashkence, dhe shume pak gjera qe ngjajne me pune. Makinat tona shume shpejt do drejtohen vete qe do te thote se do na duhen me pak shofera kamioni. Do lidhim Siri me Watson dhe ta perdorim ate per te automatizuar shume pune qe momentalisht behen nga perfaqesues te sherbimit te klientit dhe ekspert dhe diagnostikues, dhe tashme po marim R2D2, te lyer portokalli, dhe e veme ne pune per te mbajtur rafte ne magazina, qe do te thote se na duhen me pak njerez per te ecur larte e poshte neper ato korridore.
Now, for about 200 years, people have been saying exactly what I'm telling you -- the age of technological unemployment is at hand — starting with the Luddites smashing looms in Britain just about two centuries ago, and they have been wrong. Our economies in the developed world have coasted along on something pretty close to full employment.
Per rreth 200 vjet, njerezit kane thene ekzaktesisht ate cka po ju them une-- mosha e papunesise teknologjike eshte afer-- duke filluar me Ludditet qe shkaterruan tezgjahet ne Britani rreth dy shekuj me pare, dhe eshte e gabuar. Ekonomite tona ne boten e zhvilliuar kane arritur ne dicka qe ngjason me punesim te plote.
Which brings up a critical question: Why is this time different, if it really is? The reason it's different is that, just in the past few years, our machines have started demonstrating skills they have never, ever had before: understanding, speaking, hearing, seeing, answering, writing, and they're still acquiring new skills. For example, mobile humanoid robots are still incredibly primitive, but the research arm of the Defense Department just launched a competition to have them do things like this, and if the track record is any guide, this competition is going to be successful. So when I look around, I think the day is not too far off at all when we're going to have androids doing a lot of the work that we are doing right now. And we're creating a world where there is going to be more and more technology and fewer and fewer jobs. It's a world that Erik Brynjolfsson and I are calling "the new machine age."
E cila sjell nje pyetje kritike: Pse eshte ndryshe kete radhe, nese eshte vertet? Arsyeja pse eshte ndryshe eshte sepse vitet e fundit makinerite tona kane filluar te demostrojne aftesi qe nuk i kane pasur kurre me pare: per te kuptuar, te folur, te degjuar, te shikuar, per tu pergjigjur, te shkruar, dhe jane ne kerkim te aftesive te reja. Per shembull, robotet humanoid te levizshem jane akoma teper primitiv, por sektori i kerkimit ne Departamentin e Mbrojtjes sapo hapi nje konkurs per te arritur qe ata te bejne gjera si keto, dhe nese gjykojme nga publikimet e meparshme, ky konkurs do jete i suksesshem. Kur shikoj perreth, mendoj se nuk eshte aspak e larget dita kur androidet do te bejne shumicen e punes qe ne bejme tani. Ne po ndertojme nje bote ku do te kete shume e me shume teknologji dhe pak e me pak pune. Eshte nje bote qe Erik Brynjolfsson dhe une e quajme "Epoka e re e makines."
The thing to keep in mind is that this is absolutely great news. This is the best economic news on the planet these days. Not that there's a lot of competition, right? This is the best economic news we have these days for two main reasons. The first is, technological progress is what allows us to continue this amazing recent run that we're on where output goes up over time, while at the same time, prices go down, and volume and quality just continue to explode. Now, some people look at this and talk about shallow materialism, but that's absolutely the wrong way to look at it. This is abundance, which is exactly what we want our economic system to provide. The second reason that the new machine age is such great news is that, once the androids start doing jobs, we don't have to do them anymore, and we get freed up from drudgery and toil.
Dicka per tu mbajtur ne mendje eshte se keto jane absolutisht lajme te mira. Keto jane lajmet me te mira ekonomike ne planet ne kete moment. Jo se ka shume kompeticion, apo jo? Keto jane lajmet me te mira ekonomike keto dite per dy arsye kryesore. E para, eshte progresi teknologjik ai qe na lejon ne te vazhdojme kete vrap mahnites ne te cilen ndodhemi aty ku prodhimi rritet gjate kohes, ndersa cmimet bien, dhe sasia dhe cilesia thjesht vazhdojne te shperthejne. Disa njerez e shohin kete si materialismin e ceket, por kjo eshte absolutisht menyra e gabuar per ta pare ate. Ky eshte bollek, qe eshte saktesisht ajo qe duam qe te siguroje sistemi ekonomik. Arsyeja e dyte, qe epoka e re makines eshte kaq lajm i mire eshte sepse, sapo androidet te fillojne te kryejne pune, nuk do na duhet me ti bejme ne dhe do te lirohemi nga angaria dhe punet e rendomta.
Now, when I talk about this with my friends in Cambridge and Silicon Valley, they say, "Fantastic. No more drudgery, no more toil. This gives us the chance to imagine an entirely different kind of society, a society where the creators and the discoverers and the performers and the innovators come together with their patrons and their financiers to talk about issues, entertain, enlighten, provoke each other." It's a society really, that looks a lot like the TED Conference. And there's actually a huge amount of truth here. We are seeing an amazing flourishing taking place. In a world where it is just about as easy to generate an object as it is to print a document, we have amazing new possibilities. The people who used to be craftsmen and hobbyists are now makers, and they're responsible for massive amounts of innovation. And artists who were formerly constrained can now do things that were never, ever possible for them before. So this is a time of great flourishing, and the more I look around, the more convinced I become that this quote, from the physicist Freeman Dyson, is not hyperbole at all. This is just a plain statement of the facts. We are in the middle of an astonishing period.
Kur e diskutoj kete me miqte e mi ne Cambridge dhe ne Silicon Valley, ata thone, "Fantastike. Nuk ka me angari, nuk ka me pune te rendomta. Kjo na jep mundesine te imagjinojme nje shoqeri komplet ndryshe, nje shoqeri ku krijuesit dhe zbuluesit dhe performuesit dhe novatoret bashkohen me klientet dhe financuesit e tyre per te diskutuar mbi subjekte te ndryshme, frymezojne dhe konfrontojne njeri tjetrin." Eshte nje shoqeri, e cila ngjason shume me Konferencen TED. Dhe ka nje te vertete te madhe ketu. Po shohim nje lulezim te mahnitshem. Ne nje bote ku eshte po aq e thjeshte te prodhosh nje objekt apo te printosh nje dokument, kemi mundesi te reja te mahnitshme. Njerezit te cilet kane qene mjeshter dhe amatore tashme jane krijues, dhe jane pergjegjes per nje numer te madh risish. Artiste qe me pare kane qene te limituar tashme mund te bejne gjera qe nuk kane qene kurre te mundshme me pare per ata. Pra kjo eshte nje kohe lulezimi dhe sa me shume shoh perreth, me shume bindem qe citati i fizikantit Freeman Dyson, nuk eshte aspak hiperbolik. Kjo eshte thjesht nje deklarate e qarte mbi fakte. Jemi ne mes te nje periudhe mahnitese.
["Technology is a gift of God. After the gift of life it is perhaps the greatest of God's gifts. It is the mother of civilizations, of arts and of sciences." — Freeman Dyson]
("Teknologjia eshte nje dhurate nga Zoti. Pas dhurates se jetes eshte dhurata me e bukur nga te gjitha dhuratat e Zotit. Eshte nena e civilizimit, e artit dhe shkences." Freeman Dyson)
Which brings up another great question: What could possibly go wrong in this new machine age? Right? Great, hang up, flourish, go home. We're going to face two really thorny sets of challenges as we head deeper into the future that we're creating.
Qe sjell nje tjeter pyetje te madhe: Cfare mund te shkoje keq ne kete epoke e re te makines? Apo jo? Mire, mjaft, perparon, shko ne shtepi. Do perballemi me dy seri sfidash te veshtira ndersa futemi me thelle ne te ardhmen qe po krijojme.
The first are economic, and they're really nicely summarized in an apocryphal story about a back-and-forth between Henry Ford II and Walter Reuther, who was the head of the auto workers union. They were touring one of the new modern factories, and Ford playfully turns to Reuther and says, "Hey Walter, how are you going to get these robots to pay union dues?" And Reuther shoots back, "Hey Henry, how are you going to get them to buy cars?"
Te parat jane ekonomite, dhe qe permblidhen shume mire ne nje histori fiktive rreth komunikimit ndermjet Henry Ford II dhe Walter Reuther, i cili ishte kryetar i sindikates se punetoreve te automobilave. Po vizitonin nje nga fabrikat e reja moderne dhe Ford me shaka kthehet nga Reuther dhe i thote, "Hej Walter, si do ti besh keta robote te paguajne detyrimet e sindikates?" Dhe Reuther ja kthen, "Hej Henry, si do ti besh ata te blejne makina?"
Reuther's problem in that anecdote is that it is tough to offer your labor to an economy that's full of machines, and we see this very clearly in the statistics. If you look over the past couple decades at the returns to capital -- in other words, corporate profits -- we see them going up, and we see that they're now at an all-time high. If we look at the returns to labor, in other words total wages paid out in the economy, we see them at an all-time low and heading very quickly in the opposite direction.
Problemi i Reuther ne ate anektode ishte se eshte e veshtire te ofrosh punen tende ne nje ekonomi e cila eshte e mbushur me makineri, dhe kete e shohim shume qarte neper stastistika. Nese do kthehesh te shohesh disa dekada perpara ne kthimet e kapitalit -- e thene ndryshe, perfitimet e korporatave -- i shohim ne ngritje, dhe shohim qe tani ato jane me te larta se ne te gjitha koherat. Nese shohim ne kthimet mbi punen, ose ndryshe paga totale te paguara ne ekonomi, i shohim si me te ultat e te gjithe koherave dhe i jane drejtuar shume shpejt drejtimit te kundert.
So this is clearly bad news for Reuther. It looks like it might be great news for Ford, but it's actually not. If you want to sell huge volumes of somewhat expensive goods to people, you really want a large, stable, prosperous middle class. We have had one of those in America for just about the entire postwar period. But the middle class is clearly under huge threat right now. We all know a lot of the statistics, but just to repeat one of them, median income in America has actually gone down over the past 15 years, and we're in danger of getting trapped in some vicious cycle where inequality and polarization continue to go up over time.
Pra keto jane lajme te keqija per Reuther. Duket sikur mund te jene lajme te mira per Ford, por realisht nuk jane. Nese doni te shisni sasi te medha te mirash materiale te shtrenjta tek njerezit, realisht ju doni nje klase te mesme te madhe, stabel dhe te suksesshme. E kemi pasur nje te tille ne Amerike per gjithe periudhen pas lufte. Por klasa e mesme eshte qartazi ne rrezik te larte tashme. Dihen shume statistika, por po perseris nje nga ato, e ardhura mesatare ne Amerike eshte ulur per 15 vitet e kaluara dhe jemi ne rrezik te zihemi ne kurth ne nje cikel vicioz ku pabarazia dhe polarizimi vazhdojne te ngrihen ne lidhje me kohen.
The societal challenges that come along with that kind of inequality deserve some attention. There are a set of societal challenges that I'm actually not that worried about, and they're captured by images like this. This is not the kind of societal problem that I am concerned about. There is no shortage of dystopian visions about what happens when our machines become self-aware, and they decide to rise up and coordinate attacks against us. I'm going to start worrying about those the day my computer becomes aware of my printer.
Sfidat shoqerore qe vine me ate lloj pabarazie meritojne vemendje. Ka nje grup sfidash shoqerore per te cilat nuk shqetesohem shume, te cilat tregohen ne keto imazhe. Ky nuk eshte lloji i problemit shoqeror per te cilin shqetesohem. Nuk na mungojne vizionet anti-utopike per ate cka ndodh kur makinerite tona behet te vetedijshme, dhe vendosin te ngrihen dhe te kordinojne sulme ndaj nesh. Do filloj te shqetesohem per ato diten qe kompjuteri im do te njohe printerin tim.
(Laughter) (Applause)
(Te qeshura) (Duartrokitje)
So this is not the set of challenges we really need to worry about. To tell you the kinds of societal challenges that are going to come up in the new machine age, I want to tell a story about two stereotypical American workers. And to make them really stereotypical, let's make them both white guys. And the first one is a college-educated professional, creative type, manager, engineer, doctor, lawyer, that kind of worker. We're going to call him "Ted." He's at the top of the American middle class. His counterpart is not college-educated and works as a laborer, works as a clerk, does low-level white collar or blue collar work in the economy. We're going to call that guy "Bill."
Pra ky nuk eshte grupi i sfidave per te cilat ne duhet te shqetesohemi. Per t'ju treguar llojet e sfidave shoqerore qe do shfaqen ne epoken e re te makines, dua t'ju tregoj nje histori per dy punetore tipik Amerikane. Dhe per ti bere ata tipik te vertete, le t'i supozojme te dy te bardhe. I pari eshte nje i edukuar ne universitet profesionist, tip krijues, drejtues, inxhinier, doktor, avokat, ky lloj punonjesi. Do ta quajme "Ted." Ai eshte ne maje te klases se mesme Amerikane. Homologu i tij nuk eshte i edukuar ne universitet dhe punon si nje punetor, punon si nje nepunes, ben pune te nivelit te ulet ne zyra ose te klases punetore qe kryen pune manuale. Do ta quajme ate person "Bill."
And if you go back about 50 years, Bill and Ted were leading remarkably similar lives. For example, in 1960 they were both very likely to have full-time jobs, working at least 40 hours a week. But as the social researcher Charles Murray has documented, as we started to automate the economy, and 1960 is just about when computers started to be used by businesses, as we started to progressively inject technology and automation and digital stuff into the economy, the fortunes of Bill and Ted diverged a lot. Over this time frame, Ted has continued to hold a full-time job. Bill hasn't. In many cases, Bill has left the economy entirely, and Ted very rarely has. Over time, Ted's marriage has stayed quite happy. Bill's hasn't. And Ted's kids have grown up in a two-parent home, while Bill's absolutely have not over time. Other ways that Bill is dropping out of society? He's decreased his voting in presidential elections, and he's started to go to prison a lot more often. So I cannot tell a happy story about these social trends, and they don't show any signs of reversing themselves. They're also true no matter which ethnic group or demographic group we look at, and they're actually getting so severe that they're in danger of overwhelming even the amazing progress we made with the Civil Rights Movement.
Dhe nese kthehesh pas rreth 50 vjet, Bill dhe Ted benin jete shume te ngjashme. Per shembull, ne 1960 kishte shume mundesi qe te dy te kishin pune me orar te plote, nga 40 ore ne jave. Por sic ka dokumentuar edhe studiuesi social Charles Murray, nderkohe qe filluam te automatizojme ekonomine, dhe ne 1960 sapo kishte filluar qe bizneset te perdornin kompjutera, nderkohe qe filluam progresivisht te injektojme teknologjine dhe automatizimin dhe dixhitalizimin ne ekonomi, pasurite e Bill dhe Ted ndryshuan shume. Gjate kesaj kornize kohe, Ted ka vazhduar te mbaje nje pune me orar te plote. Por jo Bill. Ne shume raste, Billi ka qene pa pune fare, kurse Ted shume rralle. Gjate kohes, martesa e Ted ka qene plotesisht e lumtur. Por jo ajo e Billit. Femijet e Ted jane rritur ne nje shtepi me dy prinder, gje qe s'ndodhi me ata te Billit. Menyra te tjera si Bill po mbetet jashte shoqerise? S'merr pjese ne votimin per zgjedhjet presidenciale, dhe ka filluar te hyje me shpesh ne burg. Pra nuk mund te them nje histori te gezuar per keto prirje shoqerore, dhe te cilet nuk tregojne asnje shenje per te rikthyer veten. Jane gjithashtu te verteta, pavaresisht te kujt grupi etnik apo demografik qe shohim, dhe realisht po rendesohen me shume saqe jane ne rrezik per derrmim edhe pas progresit te mahnitshem qe beme me Levizjen e te Drejtave Civile.
And what my friends in Silicon Valley and Cambridge are overlooking is that they're Ted. They're living these amazingly busy, productive lives, and they've got all the benefits to show from that, while Bill is leading a very different life. They're actually both proof of how right Voltaire was when he talked about the benefits of work, and the fact that it saves us from not one but three great evils.
Dhe ajo cka miqte e mi ne Silicon Valley dhe Cambridge po vene re, eshte se ata jane Ted. Po jetojne keto jete shume te angazhuara, produktive, dhe i kane te gjitha perfitimet lidhur me to, ndersa Bill po jeton nje jete shume ndryshe. Jane te dy deshmi te saktesise se Voltaire kur fliste per perfitimet e punes, dhe per faktin qe na shpeton ne nga jo nje por tre te keqija te medha.
["Work saves a man from three great evils: boredom, vice and need." — Voltaire]
("Puna e shpeton njeriun nga tre te keqija te medha: merzitja, vesi dhe nevoja." - Voltaire)
So with these challenges, what do we do about them?
Pra me keto sfida, cfare bejme ndaj tyre?
The economic playbook is surprisingly clear, surprisingly straightforward, in the short term especially. The robots are not going to take all of our jobs in the next year or two, so the classic Econ 101 playbook is going to work just fine: Encourage entrepreneurship, double down on infrastructure, and make sure we're turning out people from our educational system with the appropriate skills.
Skenari ekonomik eshte cuditerisht i qarte, cuditerisht i hapur, sidomos ne terma afatshkurter. Robotet nuk do na marin te gjithe punet per nja dy vjet, pra skenari klasik Econ 101 do funksionoje shume mire: Inkurajoni siperrmarresin, investoni ne infrastrukture, dhe sigurohuni qe sistemi i edukimit te nxjerre njerez me aftesite e duhura.
But over the longer term, if we are moving into an economy that's heavy on technology and light on labor, and we are, then we have to consider some more radical interventions, for example, something like a guaranteed minimum income. Now, that's probably making some folk in this room uncomfortable, because that idea is associated with the extreme left wing and with fairly radical schemes for redistributing wealth. I did a little bit of research on this notion, and it might calm some folk down to know that the idea of a net guaranteed minimum income has been championed by those frothing-at-the-mouth socialists Friedrich Hayek, Richard Nixon and Milton Friedman. And if you find yourself worried that something like a guaranteed income is going to stifle our drive to succeed and make us kind of complacent, you might be interested to know that social mobility, one of the things we really pride ourselves on in the United States, is now lower than it is in the northern European countries that have these very generous social safety nets. So the economic playbook is actually pretty straightforward.
Por ne afagjate, nese po shkojme drejt nje ekonomie qe eshte e rende ne teknologji dhe e lehte ne fuqi punetore, qe eshte e vertete, atehere duhet te marim parasysh disa nderhyrje me radikale, per shembull, dicka si garantimin e te ardhurave minimale. Kjo ndoshta do te merzise disa nga ju, sepse idea shoqerizohet me krahun ekstrem te se majtes dhe me skema radikale per rishperndarjen e pasurise. Kam bere nje studim te vogel mbi kete nocion, dhe mund te qetesoje disa njerez duke ditur se idea e nje garancie mbi te ardhurat minimale neto eshte mbrojtur nga ajo mase shkumuese socialiste Friedrich Hayek, Richard Nixon dhe Milton Friedman. Dhe nese e gjeni veten duke u shqetesuar se dicka si te ardhurat e garantuara do mbyse udhen tone drejt suksesit dhe te na beje te vetekenaqur, mund te jeni te interesuar te dini se levizshmeria sociale, nje nga gjerat mbi te cilet ne krenohemi ne Shtetet e Bashkuara, eshte tani me e ulet se sa ne shtetet veriore Europiane te cilat kane ato sistemet sociale te sigurta e bujare. Pra skenari ekonomik eshte aktualisht shume i hapur.
The societal one is a lot more challenging. I don't know what the playbook is for getting Bill to engage and stay engaged throughout life.
Ai shoqeror eshte shume me sfidues. Une nuk e di cili eshte skenari per ta bere Bill te angazhohet dhe te qendroje i angazhuar gjate jetes se tij.
I do know that education is a huge part of it. I witnessed this firsthand. I was a Montessori kid for the first few years of my education, and what that education taught me is that the world is an interesting place and my job is to go explore it. The school stopped in third grade, so then I entered the public school system, and it felt like I had been sent to the Gulag. With the benefit of hindsight, I now know the job was to prepare me for life as a clerk or a laborer, but at the time it felt like the job was to kind of bore me into some submission with what was going on around me. We have to do better than this. We cannot keep turning out Bills.
Por di qe edukimi eshte nje pjese shume e madhe e saj. Jam deshmitar i kesaj. Kam bere shkollen Montessori ne vitet e para te edukimit tim, dhe ajo qe mesova eshte se bota eshte nje vend interesant dhe puna ime eshte ta eksploroj ate. Shkolla mbaroi ne klasen e trete, dhe une hyra ne nje shkolle publike, dhe kisha ndjesine sikur me kishin derguar ne Gulag. Tani me pas kur e mendoj, e di se detyra ishte te me pergatisnin per jeten si nje nepunes ose nje punetor, por ne ate kohe dukesh sikur puna e tyre ishte te me merziste deri ne nenshtrim ndaj asaj qe po ndodhte rreth meje. Duhet te bejme me shume se aq. Nuk mund te vazhdojme te kthehemi ne Bill.
So we see some green shoots that things are getting better. We see technology deeply impacting education and engaging people, from our youngest learners up to our oldest ones. We see very prominent business voices telling us we need to rethink some of the things that we've been holding dear for a while. And we see very serious and sustained and data-driven efforts to understand how to intervene in some of the most troubled communities that we have.
Po shohim disa filiza jeshile se gjerat po permiresohen. Shohim teknologjine e cila influencon thelle edukimin dhe angazhon njerezit, duke filluar nga nxenesit me te rinj deri tek me te vjetrit. Shohim disa zera shume spikates te cilet na thone se duhet te rimendojme disa nga gjerat qe po ruajme per ca kohe. Dhe shohim perpjekje serioze e te qendrueshme te bazuara ne te dhena per te kuptuar si te nderhyjme ne disa nga komunitetet me shqetesuese qe kemi.
So the green shoots are out there. I don't want to pretend for a minute that what we have is going to be enough. We're facing very tough challenges. To give just one example, there are about five million Americans who have been unemployed for at least six months. We're not going to fix things for them by sending them back to Montessori. And my biggest worry is that we're creating a world where we're going to have glittering technologies embedded in kind of a shabby society and supported by an economy that generates inequality instead of opportunity.
Pra filizat jeshile jane dukur tashme. Nuk po pretendoj per asnje moment se ajo cka kemi do jete mjaftueshem. Po perballemi me sfida shume te ashpra. Per te dhene nje shembull, ekzistojne me perafersi pese milion Amerikane te cilet jane te papune per te pakten gjashte muaj. Nuk do ti riparojme gjerat per ta duke i derguar ata mbrapsht ne shkollen Montessori. Dhe shqetesimi im me i madh eshte se po krijojme nje bote ku do te kemi teknologji vezelluese te ngulitura ne nje shoqeri te lene pas dore dhe te mbeshtetur nga ekonomi e cila gjeneron pabarazi ne vend te mundesive.
But I actually don't think that's what we're going to do. I think we're going to do something a lot better for one very straightforward reason: The facts are getting out there. The realities of this new machine age and the change in the economy are becoming more widely known. If we wanted to accelerate that process, we could do things like have our best economists and policymakers play "Jeopardy!" against Watson. We could send Congress on an autonomous car road trip. And if we do enough of these kinds of things, the awareness is going to sink in that things are going to be different. And then we're off to the races, because I don't believe for a second that we have forgotten how to solve tough challenges or that we have become too apathetic or hard-hearted to even try.
Por realisht une nuk mendoj se ne do te bejme ate. Une mendoj se do bejme dicka shume me mire per nje arsye shume te qarte: Faktet jane te dukshme. Realiteti e kesaj epoke te re te makines dhe ndryshimi ne ekonomi po behet me i perhapur. Nese donim ta pershpejtonim ate proces, mund te benim gjera si p.sh. te vendosnim ekonomistet dhe politikeberesit me te mire te luanin "Jeopardy!" kunder Watson. Mund te dergonim Kongresin ne nje udhetim me makina robotike. Dhe nese bejme mjaftueshem nga keto lloj gjerash, ndergjegjesimi do mbytet ne ate qe gjerat do jene ndryshe. Dhe atehere ne jemi jashte garave, sepse nuk mendoj per asnje sekond se kemi harruar te zgjidhim sfida te veshtira ose jemi bere shume apatik ose zemer-ngurte per te provuar.
I started my talk with quotes from wordsmiths who were separated by an ocean and a century. Let me end it with words from politicians who were similarly distant.
E fillova fjalimin tim me citate nga ekspert te fjales te cilat ndaheshin nga nje oqean dhe nje shekull. Me lejoni ta mbyll me fjale nga politikane te cilet ishin njesoj te larget.
Winston Churchill came to my home of MIT in 1949, and he said, "If we are to bring the broad masses of the people in every land to the table of abundance, it can only be by the tireless improvement of all of our means of technical production."
Winston Churchill erdhi ne shtepine time te MIT ne 1949, dhe tha, "Nese do sjellim masen e gjere te njerezve te seciles toke ne tryezen e bollekut, mund te ndodhe vetem nga permiresimi i palodhshem i te gjitha mjeteve te prodhimit teknik."
Abraham Lincoln realized there was one other ingredient. He said, "I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth, they can be depended upon to meet any national crisis. The great point is to give them the plain facts."
Abraham Lincoln zbuloi se kishte nje tjeter perberes. Ai tha, "Une jam nje besimtar solid i njerezve. Nese u jep te verteten, ata mund te krijojne varesi mbi te per te perballuar cdo krize nacionale. Pika kryesore eshte ti japesh atyre fakte te qarta."
So the optimistic note, great point that I want to leave you with is that the plain facts of the machine age are becoming clear, and I have every confidence that we're going to use them to chart a good course into the challenging, abundant economy that we're creating.
Pra shenimi optimist, pika kryesore qe une dua t'ju le eshte se faktet e qarta te epokes se re te makines po qartesohen, dhe une kam besim se do ti perdorim ato per te hapur nje rruge te mire drejt ekonomise se bollekut qe po krijojme.
Thank you very much.
Falemnderit shume.
(Applause)
(Duartrokitje)