This episode is hosted by Boundaryless Conversation Podcast host Simone Cicero  with co-host, Stina Heikkilä.

The following is a semi-automatically generated transcript which has not been thoroughly revised by the podcast host or by the guest. Please check with us before using any quotations from this transcript. Thank you.

Simone Cicero:
Welcome everybody the show! Today we have with us, Tomas Diez and we want to start the conversation with Tomas basically exploring how let’s say the democratisation of the production of goods and mainly due to the technological progress and all these massive open knowledge sharing movements might affect, let’s say, the evolution of what we consider today a platform enabled ecosystem driven production. And more specifically, we would like to understand together with Tomas, how these transformations and the changes in policy making as well that we can expect in the coming decades, as well as these new risk factors that are emerging, you know, since today we are living through this COVID outbreak. But you know, our big question is how, you know, basically what the new constituencies and what the new players we can expect, let’s say to see coming into the space of fabrication and manufacturing, and especially we are interested in understanding how much these players would be synergistic, let’s say or integrated with, also the current players like the incumbents and all these globalised let’s say supply chain system that we live these days. So, Tomas as a start, what do you see in the coming in the coming future from this point of view?

Tomas Diez:
Well, thank you Simone. I definitely think that, you know, somehow fiction has overcome reality. And what is happening today is something that we probably will not be anticipated by any means unless we are Bill Gates, of course, in his famous TED talk in 2015. But basically, I think that, you know, before jumping into into that context, I think it’s important to understand how we got here, no, without being so extensive in explaining, you know, dozens of years of story of humanity, I think it’s important to understand different moments of convergence, which have been somehow part of our past. No, you know, I am from Venezuela. For us, there is a very strong moment of convergence, which is the 15th century. And the discovery, quote unquote, of America, right? What happened that moment is that at the same time, which, you know, two new worlds clash together and created somehow, I think like one of the first versions of globalisation. It’s also that it was the same time in which the printing press was invented. And that somehow kept the acceleration of exchange of knowledge which led later on to somehow the Renaissance and you know, as you can see, I’m making like huge, huge steps here. But then I think that takes us to another important moment of convergence, which, for me, is the beginning of the 20th century, in which we somehow invented wireless communications. We started to use a new a new source of materials and also a new source of energy based on oil. Somehow we introduced the assembly line or you know, the highly optimised, super fast way of producing goods and accumulating goods and shipping them around the world using this new form of energy which is supposed to be cheap. So, you know, we can skip the computation revolution and so on, but then jump into the this moment of convergence that we are today, in which we are seeing in one hand, you know, the emergence of distributed networks, so distributed forms of organisation based on the internet and a more advanced forms of communication more advanced than the printing press and more advanced than the wireless networks, invented somehow, quote unquote, by Guglielmo Marconi. And this form actually, this new form of organisation actually changed something that is a maybe it’s a big paradigm change which is, is that access to knowledge. So today we have access to knowledge as we never had before, this access to information good and bad. I think that is somehow not only is something that I say but many people say that we are in the information obesity. And I think that it’s a moment in which we need to reframe the way in which things are distributed and the way things the way that knowledge is somehow administered and somehow spread around the world. So I would I would say that that today, we are in a in a super interesting moment, because it’s, again, a convergence, but this convergence has a different component, which is change of paradigm in the way we access to knowledge. And we have the opportunity to anywhere, in any part in the world to have information, knowledge, blueprints, files, that can be shared instantly. And also, I think that the other important things to consider is that this moment of convergence actually includes other components, which is the introduction or the advancements in synthetic biology and the capacity that we are having to edit and modify natural systems and create life, the synthetic intelligence that we are creating by using computers and being able to somehow process large amounts of information better than a human or even groups of humans. And of course, I think there is a, you know, the since it’s my field is the capacity to turn bits into atoms and atoms into bits using digital fabrication tools, right? When you combine all these together, and you put in the mix, the promise of a blockchain to organise, you know, a new digital economy, then you do realise that we are in a super interesting moment, but at the same time, we still see signs of we’re going back to the 19th and then also the 18th century. So the question is how how we’re going to deal with this moment of convergence. It seems that any plan that we had before has been totally changed because the current situation with the global pandemics.

Simone Cicero:
So do you see this global pandemic as an accelerator, a breakthrough, a turning point? How do you see that?

Tomas Diez:
I think it’s soon to make a strong conclusion. And I know that this is a great opportunity for people to play to be the wizzards of a future and have a point in history, I would say that we still need to see, for sure it is a source of opportunity. Right? I think that, you know, and I’m seeing it with my own students in the master that I am directing with colleagues is that, you know, how do you, you know, in the moment that we are today, how do you go back, not into a classroom because we cannot go back to a classroom but actually how you go back to the screen and you try to tell the students, you know, we need to continue as if nothing has happened, right? So the approach that we’re taking is actually to reframe the project saying introduce a variable of the current global pandemics, knowing the coronavirus and the new forms of working relating with people in the confinement and so on. But the question is, like, how much of this is temporary? And how much of this is going to become permanent? Right? I think that is probably going to be longer than we think. But I think the new normal that we are going to see is not this one for sure. So, I’m trying more or less giving you a response. I’m saying yes, for sure you’re going to change things. I think there’s people that they you know, there are two currents now. Some say if you get you can see how we’re organising extremes now like some people say, “Oh, this is the end of capitalism”. Some people say this is, you know, it’s just like, an update of capitalism on our way to equalise capitalism in a way. They’re strong defend, you know. Slavoj Žižek of course says is the end of capitalism. And then you know, the more neoliberals defend that actually this is just a kind of an adjustment is how they call it. And it’s the same way that you see the response from, you know, more authoritarian regimes to the corona trickling into the citizens and make them to follow instructions, or the other ones that more libertarian try to tell the citizens to just develop their own immune system against the virus. It is super interesting because even that you see they are dealing with these pandemics. You see the ideologies behind? I don’t know Simone. It’s hard to say, but I think that the deep root of the ideologies that we have in the especially in the political leadership an how addictive is the accumulation of capital, I think it’s going to be hard to just say that the virus is going to change is going to destroy them completely. So for sure we’re going to see an update. But it’s I think it’s up to us somehow not only to, to predict it to predict what’s going to happen, but somehow try to play a role on trying to make things different, you know, and this is a great opportunity for that.

Stina Heikkila:
So, no, it’s very interesting what you said. And I couldn’t help to think before our conversation today, that of course, that so many governments are probably going to turn their attention to local production and be less dependent on global supply chains in a lot of things. So I’d be very curious to hear what you think in terms of the maker movement, and so on, around this.

Tomas Diez:
I think that the we haven’t seen yet the real results of the pandemic to really advance and say, wow, now governments are gonna work on being more resilient, because what we are seeing is actually a shifting of power, no? In the way that China responded to the corona virus had put them into kind of a forefront of what is the the fight against a global pandemics. The way South Korea is doing is a slightly different it’s quite interesting as well which without being totally, you know, centralised regime, they are being able to somehow to control the spread of it. And then you have, you know, a United States which seems that they don’t understand what is happening and then the UK which is trying to differently no, which is like driving in the other side of the road. I think it’s too early to say that one or other nations are going to jump -thanks to corona virus — are gonna go and and go into, you know, real localised production. I think it was a trend that was happening already before and, you know, I was never expecting for Fab City to have somehow I wouldn’t say an undesired ally in Donald Trump no, when he claims like that, you know, making America or bring back the production to America. I think, you know, I have mixed feelings when some statements like that come into place. Because of course, I think that’s, you know, the less prepared person in the world to lead with the biggest superpower in the planet is in charge of this, but at the same time, it makes a lot of sense to relocate production for other reasons and not for the nationalism and the other values that that person’s like, like this defend. But at the same time, you see that what I was trying to say before as well is I get China now been in the forefront of you know, not only of manufacturing, but now even on dealing with global pandemics actually, you can even gain more power in relationship to the dependence that the world has on the manufacturing that happens there. So we can go now to even more centralised model of production in which China actually uses this capacity that they had to go before anyone else over the virus to actually relaunch an even more aggressive international strategy to make more nations dependent of Chinese products and I think that that’s going to happen somehow and it’s happening already with the medical supplies. So this is what again, comes to theories is going to be an adjustment of capitalism the in which case will be an update, or is really gonna, we’re gonna be cracking the very first main principles of capitalism now, which is accumulation of the means of production, and the distribution channels and of course, energy sources to move these goods around the world and in the supply chains to meet to make these products. So, I would like to be more optimistic, but that would be to be I don’t want to, you know, to lie to myself. I understand the size of the challenge. I don’t want to rely on external factors, I think that we we need to, you know, to continue push into what we’re doing with Fab Labs with Fab City with reviewing different educational programmes that we are developing as well on trying to make technology more accessible and understand make in help people to understand that the more they know how to produce what they need to consume, the more free they are. And I think that’s, you know, I have to say that for many years, I started to develop part of these projects together with many other people in with a very global perspective, but now I have the feeling that we need to go into the hyperlocal and to start to produce evidence inside the hyper local scale. Start small, and then scale up.

Simone Cicero:
That’s a very interesting point, Thomas and helps me to move into the next question that I wanted to share with you because of our duty here in this podcast and with this research we’re doing is certainly understand how these systems are changing and how they will move forward. And my point here is, when it comes to these hyper localization and re localization that is essential in the picture that you are outlining here. The question that I have is, can we reasonably imagine that in this process of, I would say the universalizing role of technology in manufacturing and embedding this technology into the local systems? And can we expect also that from a perspective of consuming, our expectations need to change. Can we expect that the economy that is evolving in the background, let’s say, through these processes that you are studying, for example, with Fab City, will bring us to not just a Fab City, but also I would say, a fab citizen, someone that is much less specialised in terms of jobs, and much more able to both consume and produce. So I, you know, I always make a connection with these very illuminating book from Wendell Berry, called “The Unsettling of America”, where he makes this point about agriculture and say, you know, basically, when we detached agriculture from humans and we transform that into a process, we did, you know, completely transformed its nature. Can we do the same parallel with manufacturing and craftsmanship and production?

Tomas Diez:
Well, I think that happened somehow that we detach, you know, if you look at the medieval times, and even if you — I mean I’m in Indonesia now — and you look at the way in which, you know, Craftsmanship happens, which is similar to the mediaeval ages in Europe, is quite incredible the capacity that, you know, the skills that people that probably don’t know how to read, has to, you know, to manipulate and to play with the material in order to make something that they decided to create somehow. I think that’s the analogy with agriculture is pretty good, because somehow I think the other thing that it’s other dimension to it to that which is the time dimension, right. And I want you know, since you were quoting a book, I want to add a quote to your quote, which I think is quite complimentary is the book from Peter Novak, and it’s called “Sex, Bombs and Burgers”, which I find fascinating as well, and he talks about how, you know, by detaching ourselves exactly from those parts of the agricultural work in the, in the provision of food as a source of energy. We started to release time from our everyday activities, you didn’t need to take care of your crops and you didn’t, you know, when we were introduced to you know, the microwave, then you reduced the time in which we were cooking therefore, you have more time to do more things. And what do we do? What do you do with that time would actually that was the ideal solution that we came with is to create an entertainment industry. So the entertainment industry is filling the free time that we created out of not being busy by looking for the provision of food for ourselves or for our family somehow, no. And now, you know, the question is what happens when we are the we detach ourselves even more from manufacturing and then you know, from being Craftsman to have Craftsman and craftwomen to have a you know centralised ways of production using factories and we go to some kind of Giga factory style type of tests, I think, a black box inside full of robots and manufacturing goods shipped to us. Then again, where what is going to be the speed the human experience again? No, if you are not in charge of our food, if we’re not in charge of our goods, then what’s the human experience then then we are again, there’s going to be a target or a new upgrade of entertainment experience tourism industries. I don’t know if that makes sense somehow. And that’s when I get that those are the things that we need to revise, no. And yeah, sorry, go ahead.

Simone Cicero:
Sorry. Sorry. I wanted to echo this question on that it makes sense and another question for you to help you and help us in this process. So the question here is, I think we all agree that from a philosophical and cultural perspective, we have this issue of an economy that is completely detached and super specialised. And, you know, basically, we feel like we need to reintegrate production, but also agriculture into the local systems and becoming more resilient. The question I have is, is it really possible? Can we really achieve the expectations that we have now towards this globalised, technologically driven and universal culture? And if not, what do we need to sacrifice? And another question that I want to have still, as a matter of reflection, what kind of organisational tools and new constituencies we need to leverage on we need to empower? So who is going to be the architect of this transformation, and what do we need to sacrifice in this process? If anything?

Tomas Diez:
Those are great questions. And if you ask me, I think that again, the key part of this change of paradigm and part of the distributed ness of, of intelligence, you know, intelligence, per se, is based on the articulation of many small components, you know, you can say like, the human intelligence depends on the connection of neurons, but one neuron is quite stupid. So, since we understand intelligence from this this basic distributed network, we cannot assume that they will be like a one architect, no. So I think that we need, we need to be enabled to provide the connection between people. And I don’t know, I know that the platform is a sacred word he was here, but I don’t know if thinking about platforms is Is the answer as well, right? I think the platform itself, you know, I’ve been myself developer and founder of different platforms. And in when I think of a platform, not just about the website, I think that we need to think about in like a, you know, a full stack that goes beyond the full stack that is describing software. Right. And that full stack is something that we’re working on, on fab city itself, right, which is understanding that you need distrubuted infrastructure, you need new forms of learning, you need to support people to innovate and invent differently. You need those inventions to go and be implemented into the real world into the cities. You need platforms to share those between cities. And then you need those to be changing the policy frameworks that actually allow people you know, as soon as Spain was not allowed to produce or to consume energy that you are producing with your own solar panels until Yes, a couple of years ago, right. So I think that understanding this full stack, you know, extending the platforms as not only something that enables people sharing digital content, but actually allows interventions in the physical space in a distributed way, but at the same time articulated is part of that architecture without just you know, I don’t need I don’t think that it’s going to be one single architect or in when you said you’re gonna be there who’s going to be the architect. See, I think that is going to be the, I wouldn’t say the crowd because I don’t believe in populism and you know, I know there is a wisdom of the crowd, but the the crowd is not so wise. You know, if this sounds politically incorrect, I’m sorry. But I think that you know, we need to create a spaces to nurture, that new architecture somehow, and it’s something that we not don’t create, artificially and construct and build like a big base, you know, big kind of foundations. And on top of that, we put the walls and we put out of stone, and concrete and glass. But actually, for me looks more than like a gardening, no? It looks more like a field that, you know, you create, you make it fertile. You put the right seeds, you try to, you know, enable to protect, to nurture, and somehow then you let things grow, you know, and that that’s the part in which I think that we humans we are probably struggling the most and especially the western centric views and understanding this, you know, more holistic approach on how to enable this transition. And part of that holistic approach is to accept that we are part of something but we are not the main part of that something and that we are playing with all their systems and we’re playing not only you know, the western centric view so men like that the world is so big and you know, we in Europe, are somehow like a lockdown in certain mentality. Same with America with such an arrogant mentality about how the world should be. That is going to take us nowhere. I think we need to go to the peripheries, I think we need to learn from that periphery. Because, you know, I’m now in Indonesia. And I can tell you like, especially the Balinese people, these people that they really play with all the elements that are around them, and they’re trying to integrate them into their everyday life. We need to bring those learnings to the west. And that’s the main challenge we have, you know, it’s not a it’s not technology. It’s not, you know, technology is going to be with us on that. But it’s a main fundamental change that, that is, it’s more simple than that we think.

Simone Cicero:
That’s an interesting point and the question of institutions to somehow you mentioned, you mentioned the city, you know, you mentioned policies, for example, when you were talking about the fab city as as a stack of infrastructure, Learning, Support, policy making, and at the same time, you also mentioned that the new cultural hegemony that probably we are going to see in the next decade coming from China. And you also mentioned this idea of holistic point of view, which is I think very, very strong in Chinese culture, no, if you think about for example, the Daoist perspective, you know, I heard the ones the the CEO of Haier group, Zhang Ruimin, saying, you know, quoting Lao Tzu during a conference and saying, you know, everything is part of a system. So, I think there is this very systemic and collective worldview, which is coming from from the east, but at the same time, it comes with a very strong, institutional and centralised approach. Sorry, on one hand, we have this view and we have this new role from the city from this local institutions. On the other hand, we have this need of more collective policy making and and you know this new culture coming in. So, so, maybe another question that I would like to explore with you, how do you see this new role of institutions in favouring and riding this transition from from a corporate centric world, probably towards a more institutional centric world?

Tomas Diez:
Well, I think that that this again this this, how you call it, this crisis that we have now, we are seeing like, which are the institutions that come out and give responses to citizens. And it’s sad to see it somehow I have to tell you like, yeah, we are relying so much on centralised institutions. So now now more than ever, we are going back to a centralised way of understanding the organisation of society in which someone from very far away from you that you would never see in your life in person is is the determining how do you live, right? So we’re seeing that, in the minimum moment of real crisis, which is somehow threatening human lives, we’re going back to the institutions that we trust. And unfortunately, we are wired for so much time on understanding that those institutions are the nation state, somehow, but that that’s because, you know, the nation states are the responsible of the energy that you use in your house, the nation states are somehow giving you the warranties or the financial institutions that give you the money or giving you the food or the roads or the airports and so on right. So, as long as we keep somehow that you know, the centralised ways of, of producing three basic elements which are food energy and goods, we are going to still having to rely from those same and centralised institutions. And what you say is totally true is like, you know, they, you know, if you look at that, as well as debate between Jack Ma and Elon Musk somehow, you know, I ended up fascinated by the way in which Jack Ma understands the integration of technology into the people’s life and automation and how robots can or you know, or algorithms would replace human activity, actually allowing us to be free and to be happy no and achieving happiness. But I don’t know if that happens would be the happiness that the Communist Party of China would dictate. Or if that happiness is gonna come from a free will. And the free will is something that we still, we need to defend somehow as one of the values of the West. So in a way, I don’t know again, Simone, like I could play to be to make predictions about the new type of institutions, you know that I defend the role of the cities and even like a smaller, in a smaller level, we need a different type of institutions that are somehow given more social response and local response to anything that’s, you know, that, that you as an individual need, but also you in relationship with your community need. And that will come only when we learn to integrate new ways of producing and consuming that will come only when we integrate into our everyday life, that we will change this paradigm in which we are not just working to buy things to keep us alive, we’re actually, that we can work on making the things that keep us alive, available in different forms and all the different forms possible. And this is something that somehow now is a luxury. And and I think that that’s totally wrong somehow, you know, it’s incredible how in such a little time, you know, we changed. Like eating meat was a luxury 20 years ago. And now eating organic food is something that is a luxury for only a few, a few people, you know, you know that 20 years ago, someone that was working with their own hands and doing stuff is someone that you know, from a very low level, and now the people that can dedicate time to work with their hands and so on seem to be only the people in the elites no, so I don’t know, we’re seeing like this change of paradigm so fast and I don’t know when we’re gonna see that transition happening onto the more local power. But definitely, it’s something that the world is demanding for it. The planet is demanding to enable local production to detach from stupid authoritarian leaders and to give more space for social interaction around making something meaningful for society and not making social interaction just to gain likes, in the fucking social media.

Simone Cicero:
So, so, when you say we need this now, the world needs this, you know, also the environment needs this. My question again is what from your understanding of the production and manufacturing process and what what is this is this local production are really capable enough what are the issues are, you know, I mean, what are the limits of this paradigm if they are if there are limits that you want to express?

Tomas Diez:
Yeah, I mean, the one of the main limits is that you cannot compete with the efficiencies that that centralised production has, right. And I’m saying these efficiencies, meaning that the capacity or the speed of production that centralised system have to create again to create stocks or to create an offer that is bigger than the demand which is the fundamental basis of what we what we have in front of us. You cannot compete with local production for sure, right. The other thing you know, the other limitations of local production is that it can be probably noisy. In the past it was dirty, but I think that it can be less dirty now. It involves probably more time for people to dedicate to work on it. But t anyhow, what we’re going to use the time for? And you can keep like listing certain risks that local production has and I think they are fairly endless, similar to be honest, because also it’s very comfortable and very convenient the way that we live in just sitting in your couch, you can press a button and you got something that delivered same day, you know, how you beat that now? When the other hand, I think that the way in which we are now, you know the global economy is working now is based on the assumption. And this is another interesting book that is called, I think seven, seven cheap things that we didn’t know about or something like that. But basically i think that we are now hiding the externalities of this current system of production and consumption. And these externalities are starting to give us a slap in our faces. No, we’re starting to eat microplastics we’re starting to we’re breathing air that is super toxic. Again, I can tell you from living in Barcelona, I’m now in Indonesia and in the ocean is full of plastic and somehow you do see that we don’t want to see what is behind me pressing a button in my mobile phone to get, you know, speakers delivered in my house in the same day. And that’s a lot of you know, cheap labour, which is not cheap. That’s also cheap materials that are not cheap, but actually they are depending on authoritarian regimes controlling supply chains, that depends on authoritarian regimes controlling sources of energy is based on oil. And follow the oil. I tell you follow the oil and tell me, probably the only democracy that has large amounts of oil is is Norway, but still it could be criticised. So in a way that you know, let’s make a fair comparison on which are the real externalities and put on top of the table then the discussion will be will be more fair in relationship with centralised versus versus local production.

Simone Cicero:
That’s a very good point. And yeah, I think whatever we try to do, we cannot remove these convenience question and convenience argument from the table. So we need to learn reckon with this. Stina, please go ahead. I know there are a little bit of delays because the connection is a bit too busy these days with the corona virus with everybody’s working from home. Go ahead.

Stina Heikkila:
Yeah, no one that’s I just wanted to ask a little bit more on this because I agree that it’s very important now to resist this tendency to maybe become nationalistic, like we already mentioned before, and to resort to centralization, centralised institutions, which somehow is countered that trend. And I think what I would be interested to hear more about is that sort of so how can how do you tap in to the good parts of globalisation, let’s say, like open knowledge, and this access to information, and what do you see as the type of technologies emerging that could facilitate more local empowerment, but in a connection to a global knowledge sphere?

Tomas Diez:
Well, I think that, you know, I think I would consider myself a lucky person to be able to enjoy the benefits of globalisation. And I have to say that I’m a self learner myself, no. I don’t know if that’s correct to say but, you know, I manage to learn through the internet a lot. I, you know, locally and probably again, like living in the in the contradictions that we live, I’ve been able to travel many places in the world and get in touch with different cultures and somehow speak the same language and in a way be with — not speak the same language meaning like speaking English — but somehow feeling like we are part of kind of shared system of values now. That’s something that is quite unique from globalisation, and somehow I think that there is an intrinsic message inside The You know what, what is to have connected world that you can now have, you know, you know this overload of internet cables is happening because we are all connected, somehow, no. And then, due to this physical limitation now we or we can even be more connected, which is somehow like a weird and contradictory again. But the message I was mentioning is that this connectedness isn’t only about bits, but also it’s about natural systems. It’s also about, you know, the, the global supply chains, it’s also about how what what I consume every day in starts to understand that the globalisation in those terms, I think, is one of the things that we, we somehow, you know, have to think to this process of getting to know, beyond our small village getting to know beyond our own country, getting to know more people beyond, you know, our own continent somehow no. And then that’s that expansion of vision and making us part of something bigger than we that that was what we know or what we knew so far. So that’s for sure I stay with that convenience part, which is something that we need. I agree with Simone that we need whatever we come up with it needs to be convenient as well. And you need to be satisfied with being part of whatever we come up with. It shouldn’t come from a you know imposition and cannot be an authoritarian measure to say you don’t consume this don’t do this, don’t do that. It needs to make people willing to do it. It’s to make people wanting to be part of it needs to make people you know, a part of a new, I would say, you know, idea of what comfort means no, and what is good for you because again what comfort means now which is sitting in front of a TV, eating McDonald’s And drinking Coca Cola is actually is the long term is super stupid for you right? So but it goes against you so that makes it a stupid decision somehow so it’s not convenient at the end, right? So that convenience should be more like a wide convenience like let’s see convenience in the long term. How are my decisions are affected tomorrow, how my decisions affect the well being of the ones around me of the systems around me. And therefore I make a more convenient decisions not for just now, also for the future for other systems beyond myself. I think that’s super important about to take from globalisation and then sorry if you can repeat the last part of the question, which I just slipped out of my head.

Stina Heikkila:
It was about what kind of technologies could help to enable the local empowerment but tapping into a global knowledge space,

Tomas Diez:
Correct. Well, I mean, you know, part of the work that we have done developing the Fab lab network and Now fab cities to tap into technologies that are kind of a standard, you know, like computation is quite standard. digital fabrication is is based on standard, but they are technologies that are standard in their basic components, but they’re they’re highly customizable. And then actually you can create applications on top of that, that makes not only the tool itself different, but also the application of the tool different in every context. No. So that’s why, you know, CNC machine could be helpful in Iceland, of the 17 islands of Indonesia, or in the centre of New York, right? Because it can provide, you know, a tool to develop an application that is meaningful, or that it’s useful for anyone that is around it, but the question is, like, Who wants who knows how to use it, how to use it with which purpose is to make a business and to create an extractivist model around the small village in an island on Indonesia, or is actually to provide Somehow infrastructure to the villagers and improve the well being of people. You know, as long as we keep on the same logics of extractivism and an accumulation of wealth somehow, on behalf of whatever the fuck everything else is around me is, then for sure the tool will be always conditioned to those principles. So I think the tools are not enough. One of the things we’re starting to explore in that part of the reason that I am here in Indonesia is to set up an institute of technology and design that is going to explore these connections between local knowledge, tradition, wisdom, a different level of wisdom and those very advanced technologies. And we hope that that becomes like a learning space to figure out how these relationships are. I think that rather to think about solutions, one of my learning lessons so far is that we need more spaces for real learning, you know, like, if you think about what traditional schools try to do is somehow they try to educate people, you know, it’s like, you know, the big names, you know, the Ivy League schools, they try to stamp in your face their brand, and they are educating you to be part of something that according to them works. But that thing doesn’t work anymore. Therefore, I think that we need to move away from educating ourselves or educating others, and creating learning spaces in which we we definitely figure out together, how the architecture is going to work for the next for the next 10 years and the next 100 years.

Simone Cicero:
This Tomas reminds me very good point from Zack Stein from a few weeks ago a few months ago, he said, we are pretty much used to an economy and education that is in service of the current economic model. What to do now is to have an economic model than that is in service of our next educational leaps towards what comes up in the next decade. So I think that’s a very good note to end our conversation. Tomas, thanks very much for being with us. I think we got some very powerful insights, and, you know, thanks again for being part of our conversation.

Tomas Diez:
Thank you Stina, thank you Simone. And it’s been a pleasure. Sorry for the little box off of the sound or whatever. But yeah, I mean, the tropics and with that overloaded internet due to the corona crisis.

Simone Cicero:
Thank you again Tomas