« Artificial Intelligence and 3D Printing Market Growth | Main | ATOM Award of the Month, January 2017 »


Stephen Murray

Good to see you the ATOM getting some real coverage. This will be a good vector for the dissemination.

Kartik Gada

Thanks, Stephen.

It is still hard to get the right people to look at it, but we will get there.

Stephen Murray

You need to get onto a TED talk for maximum exposure...no idea how to do this though. You talk at google was good , very clear.

Kartik Gada


Oh, thanks! I was not too satisfied with the quality of my presenting and oratory skills (at least in relation to professional presenters), and only give myself a 6/10 in that regard. But I am practicing, so hope to be better at future opportunities.

Inch by inch, we will get there..


Congrats KG,
It looks the talk was received very positively .
It is far from mainstream but is a step for wider re ignition.
I think you should add an article based on the questions you got after the talk

Robert N

At 55m10 you were asked a two-part question. Your reply addressed the first part of the question, but not the second part.

I would be very interested in your reply to this:
As an investor what assets would you look to, to protect yourself from those negative effects?



For more general audiences, you may find it useful to create a narrative based on your ideas, how one person or family might be affected by the ideas you discuss.

I find your ideas fascinating, but I have considerable skepticism.

In general, it's not at all apparent to me that technology is on an exponential trend in creating palpable substantive improvement in the average Westerner's life. Maybe I'm just young and spoiled. I define real improvement as: better health, stronger enduring real-life relationships (family, romantic, friends), cleaner/safer environments (e.g. air quality and early deaths), more affordable essentials (housing, health, education) and more opportunity for meaningful employment. Improvement in these areas ranges from gradual to stagnation and even regression. You can find reasons for hope (e.g. Coursera for education, synthetic meat), but it's not evident that these will become widespread.

Like you, I think part of the problem is that government regulations have made innovation and economy in some sectors difficult or illegal. But it's hard to see this changing. For instance, a topic close to my heart is housing - we already have the technology to build decent housing for say, $500-1000 a month for a studio apartment. Yet Silicon Valley is hopelessly expensive to live in, thanks to politics. That's the irony of Silicon Valley - it's throwing geniuses and millions if not billions at solutions in search of a problem (like smartwatches), yet it's mired in problems whose solutions are old and banal. This is a variant of the 'streetlight effect.'

So I'm not as sanguine about political barriers to improvement. On the one hand, you're citing history and extrapolating to the future - but that same history shows plenty of stagnation, in the things that actually matter.

Kartik Gada


As a registered FINRA advisor, I can't give specific answers in public venues.

But I will be teaching a class at Stanford in Spring Quarter, on the subject of Options and Futures, in case you live in the Bay Area..

Kartik Gada


I do have some use cases in Chapter 11. I agree that more of that might be better.

One has to look at technology improving human lives on a worldwide basis exclusively. That is the only true measure.

Regarding the life of Westerners, the problem is the government. Every gain that technology produces is seized by the government and distributed towards counterproductive causes. This is the core reason that emerging markets are gaining so much ground (6-7% growth there vs. 1-2% in the West)..

Nonetheless, the environment in the US is much cleaner than 30 years ago, life expectancy is rising (but the healthcare industry is a huge misallocation for government reasons), the essentials have gotten cheaper as well (minus govt. meddling), and relationships....well, read this.

Now, what can force the government to reform?

Artificial Intelligence! Over time, it starts to swiftly erode the tax bases of high-tax locations, and will start flagging graft, bad laws, subsidies with high negative multiplier effects, etc. with greater precision. If one country obstructs it, others will use it to become more competitive.

I don't agree that there is stagnation, on a worldwide basis, on any of the things that matter. The West is choosing to fall below the trendline, partly due to bad policies and a public that decides to focus on the wrong distractions.


ironically North Korea can check all the boxes :
better health - less sedentary lifestyle, no junk food, all the benefits of calorie restriction and a lot of day-to-day exercise .

stronger enduring real-life relationships (family, romantic, friends) - less time spent chasing the american dream and more time to socialize, shared hardship, etc

cleaner/safer environments (e.g. air quality and early deaths) - almost no industry, nor automotive traffic, farming practices are very close to the organic ideal

more affordable essentials (housing, health, education)and more opportunity for meaningful employment. the big brother takes care about that


A.M., K.G.,
Regarding the life of Westerners, the problem is the government. Every gain that technology produces is seized by the government and distributed towards counterproductive causes. This is the core reason that emerging markets are gaining so much ground (6-7% growth there vs. 1-2% in the West)..
I would be very surprised if any government doesn't seize as much resources from the tax base as it can get way with.
It is just that in the emerging economies you have clear areas where you can pour money and get economic growth. They want to emulate the western success and they do what worked for the now developed economies. However, the same policies that work for the catch-up economies cannot work for a developed one. In fact, it is not even clear what would work best. All we know is what doesn't work, and yet the social and cultural inertia is so large , and the conflicting groups and interest lead to the same failing policies.

Kartik proposes an inflationary monetary policy and universal stipend to redistribute the wealth. It can please both the executive government - printing free(yey!!!!) money and the people (getting free money). Now it has to please the establishment...

Kartik Gada


However, the same policies that work for the catch-up economies cannot work for a developed one.

But the reverse is also true. An advanced economy can do a DUES right now, while a poorer country cannot. A technologically dense economy is better than having an oil reserve the size of Saudi Arabia's.

Now it has to please the establishment...

Yes. But note that the intrusiveness of government goes down, as well as the opportunities for graft (which is why they will oppose it). Nonetheless, when a couple of small countries start it, the success will be hard to ignore.


Hey K.D.,
But your proposal is two-fold: an endless and ever increasing QE/money printing which is distributed in the form of DUES. And the distribution part is were the devil hides. If it is not strictly unconditional then it can be prone to all kind of grafts and programme bloat. It is always easier to absorb a budget then to actually collect it.

If we take your number of 208G$/month of world QE needed, and if US can capture some 20% of that, we have ~42B$/month. Let’s pump it up to 50$B/mo(0.6T$/y). It is a handsome amount but still a small fraction of the total US federal budget (~4T$). And we don't event touch the individual states and cities, which could probably double the needed amount. The QE can barely cover the current deficit, which basically is a form of QE on itself. And that’s how you probably came to that number :)

So now US cannot really do a DUES/UBI but can cover the budget deficit and if targeting a higher inflation can cover the interest of the current debt. It is really tempting even at this level. Forget about ever increasing and perpetual. Just do “one-off” technological monetary QE to accommodate the increased economy size and provide liquidity…

Kartik Gada


If it is not strictly unconditional then it can be prone to all kind of grafts and programme bloat.

Yes, it is unconditional. All US citizens over age 18 get it.

It is not meant to cover the the entire budget from the start. It is meant to attain that by 2025. It has nothing to do with the deficit.

One-off is not sufficient, for a paradigm shift is needed. Phase-out of all income tax is a crucial component of the whole thing. Plus, the QE required to offset deflation is rising exponentially.


My point is that if the establishment subscribes to your theory of ever increasing QE, they won't necessarily subscribe to DUES part.

Kartik Gada


That will certainly be true at first. But public pressure will rise when it becomes more apparent that delaying consolidation causes 25-40% graft/wastage, particularly when some smaller country starts outperforming the US.

Remember, the ATOM always finds a way to topple or bypass something that is obstructing technological progress. If corrupt politicians are too much of an obstacle, this will be matched with AI that swiftly and prominently flags graft and calculated the negative multiplier effects of subsidies, tariffs, and regulations.

AI for governmental accountability is not far off.



What would you recommend for someone who has just read your whitepaper and wants to take advantage of the future ATOM opportunities to build a new source of income/profession?

James Deus

Computer_Guy524 that is a great question that I would love to hear Kartik's detailed answer of...

It is my contention that we have an opportunity (some may say obligation) to create our own, individual ATOM's with attendant DUES. It may well turn out that the ATOM will decentralise governance itself completely eliminating (outcompeting) any and all central banks. No central bank, no federal reserve, no DUES.

Kartik Gada

CG524 and James Deus,

Some of it is in Chapter 11 of the ATOM.

For a more detailed answer :

Think of the obvious, and the less obvious. It is sometimes something as simple as using YouTube to replace the spark plugs and timing belt in your car, saving $150 vs. going to a mechanic. Sometimes, it is less obvious, such as using Artificial Intelligence to generate a revenue stream without having to have staff on payroll. Or just using AI and other technological tools to double your output in your primary job. The avenues are endless..


20 years ago was a big fan of Kurzweil and have been reading the Futurist for over 10 years - loved seeing so much of it on target. Enjoyed the ATOM publication and this talk too.
WAS REALLY nice to be able put a name, face, and voice to your writing !

Sure you saw the news about Gates recommending taxing robots as a way to make the transition for to your standard income paid by govts....seems like a bad implementation of some of the same concepts & scenarios you touch on with the universal income. I think your implementation is much more sound and thought out. Gates plan is basically taxing efficiency gains and really irks me as we should be rewarding them (read: like protectionist/European style policies !).

Won't even try to argue against it as it's so silly....so for plenty of arguments against Bill Gates proposal, just read the comment sections: What really stands out is the Slashdot comments, while usually 2 sided and encompassing all kinds of viewpoints, the ones for this see through Gates plan all in agreement, hahahaha so quickly.



Stephen murray

Have you thought about getting on any of the big podcasts? FDR, Rogan etc? Some have millions of listeners per episode.

Could be good.

Kartik Gada


I would like to, but they get so many requests that it may be a long shot..

Stephen murray

Perhaps one of the several futurist podcasts? They would be relatively easier to get onto.

Kartik Gada


That would be great. If you have a contact, that can clear through the red tape..

At present, I am talking to a couple of foreign governments about custom reports. None are ideal candidates for a DUES (they are too poor), but are at least willing to think through the topics.

Stephen murray


might be a start?

The comments to this entry are closed.