Also on the daily podcast: why mapping fruit flies’ brains matters for human ones and chatbots take on conspiracists

Sir Keir Starmer talks to The Economist about his plan to get Britain growing

The Intelligence - Sir Keir Starmer talks to The Economist about his plan to get Britain growing | Podcasts | The Economist

Keir eye for the FDI: an interview with Britain’s PM

iframe

figure

span

small

gv_safe

gb_safe

gb_safe_from_high

gb_safe_from_high_med

pos_goldman_inclusion_2024

pos_israel-hamas_war

gs_politics

neg_goldmansachs_brandsafety

gs_economy

gs_busfin

gs_busfin_economy

future_of_work_test

gs_tech

cigna_healthyhybridworkplace

artificial_intelligence

fidelity_investment

investment_banking_personal_finance

ssga_sp400

gs_politics_misc

gs_politics_issues_policy

finance_investmentbanking

ssga_currency_wars

td_investors

gt_positive

gs_hobby

gs_hobby_artscrafts

america_sec

economy_markets

gs_busfin_economy_markets

gs_economy_markets

cigna_puttingfamilyfirst

ibm_cloud

ts_tech

Our correspondent sits down with Sir Keir Starmer on the sidelines of a conference dedicated to drawing much-needed investment. We examine the prime minister’s pitch to investors. All the connections within the fruit fly’s brain have now been mapped out; we ask what that means for the human kind (11:44). And the chatbots that are surprisingly successful at dissuading conspiracy theorists (17:46). Runtime: 23 min

Our correspondent sits down with Sir Keir Starmer on the sidelines of a conference dedicated to drawing much-needed investment. We examine the prime minister’s <a href="https://www.economist.com/britain/2024/10/14/sir-keir-starmers-elevator-pitch-for-investment?utm_campaign=a.io&utm_medium=audio.podcast.np&utm_source=theintelligence&utm_content=discovery.content.anonymous.tr_shownotes_na-na_article&utm_term=sa.listeners" target="_blank">pitch to investors.</a> All the connections within the fruit fly’s brain have now been <a href="https://www.economist.com/leaders/2024/10/03/a-map-of-a-fruit-flys-brain-could-help-us-understand-our-own?utm_campaign=a.io&utm_medium=audio.podcast.np&utm_source=theintelligence&utm_content=discovery.content.anonymous.tr_shownotes_na-na_article&utm_term=sa.listeners" target="_blank">mapped out</a>; we ask what that means for the human kind (11:44). And the chatbots that are <a href="https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2024/09/26/want-to-win-an-argument-use-a-chatbot?utm_campaign=a.io&utm_medium=audio.podcast.np&utm_source=theintelligence&utm_content=discovery.content.anonymous.tr_shownotes_na-na_article&utm_term=sa.listeners" target="_blank">surprisingly successful</a> at dissuading conspiracy theorists (17:46). Runtime: 23 min

Listen on: <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-intelligence-from-the-economist/id1449631195" target="_blank">Apple Podcasts</a> | <a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/12zKAMNyS2GNentUzxq9QN" target="_blank">Spotify</a>

Get a world of insights by subscribing to Economist Podcasts+. For more information about how to access Economist Podcasts+, please visit our FAQs page or watch our video explaining how to link your account.

Get a world of insights by <a href="https://subscribenow.economist.com/podcasts-plus" target="_blank">subscribing to Economist Podcasts+</a>. For more information about how to access Economist Podcasts+, please visit our <a href="https://myaccount.economist.com/s/article/What-is-Economist-Podcasts" target="_blank">FAQs page</a> or watch <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gczo71bg1uY" target="_blank">our video</a> explaining how to link your account.

The Intelligence 

This podcast transcript is generated by third-party AI. It has not been reviewed prior to publication. We make no representations or warranties in relation to the transcript, its accuracy or its completeness, and we disclaim all liability regarding its receipt, content and use. If you have any concerns about the transcript, please email us at podcasts@economist.com.

This podcast transcript is generated by third-party AI. It has not been reviewed prior to publication. We make no representations or warranties in relation to the transcript, its accuracy or its completeness, and we disclaim all liability regarding its receipt, content and use. If you have any concerns about the transcript, please email us at <a href="mailto:podcasts@economist.com" target="_blank">podcasts@economist.com.</a>

<a href="https://myaccount.economist.com/s/article/How-we-handle-AI-generated-content" target="_blank">Read more about how we are using AI.</a>

Rosie Blau [00:00:10] Hello and welcome to the intelligence from The Economist. I’m Rosie Blau.

Rosie Blau [00:00:10] Hello and welcome to the intelligence from The Economist. I’m Rosie Blau.

Jason Palmer [00:00:15] And I’m Jason Palmer. Every weekday, we provide a fresh perspective on the events shaping your world.

Jason Palmer [00:00:15] And I’m Jason Palmer. Every weekday, we provide a fresh perspective on the events shaping your world.

Rosie Blau [00:00:25] Fruit flies may not seem like the most complex of characters, but now, for the first time, we have a full map of the fly brain. And that incredible achievement may also help us understand the human one.

Rosie Blau [00:00:25] Fruit flies may not seem like the most complex of characters, but now, for the first time, we have a full map of the fly brain. And that incredible achievement may also help us understand the human one.

Jason Palmer [00:00:40] And the way things are going, we should all get used to talking sense into people taken by wild conspiracy theories. If you’ve never tried it, it ain’t as easy as it should be. Good news, though. We can get some tips from very successful chat bots. But first.

Jason Palmer [00:00:40] And the way things are going, we should all get used to talking sense into people taken by wild conspiracy theories. If you’ve never tried it, it ain’t as easy as it should be. Good news, though. We can get some tips from very successful chat bots. But first.

Clip [00:01:10] We will fix our public services. We will stabilise our economy. And we will do it quickly because we don’t want any of the problems associated with our inheritance. Misting up the shop window of Burton.

Clip [00:01:10] We will fix our public services. We will stabilise our economy. And we will do it quickly because we don’t want any of the problems associated with our inheritance. Misting up the shop window of Burton.

Matthew Holehouse [00:01:25] On Monday, I attended the British government’s International Investment Summit, convened by British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer.

Matthew Holehouse [00:01:25] On Monday, I attended the British government’s International Investment Summit, convened by British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer.

Jason Palmer [00:01:33] Matthew Hole House is the Economist’s British political correspondent.

Jason Palmer [00:01:33] Matthew Hole House is the Economist’s British political correspondent.

Matthew Holehouse [00:01:36] The British government at least can still throw something of a party after a day of speeches by ministers and appearances by execs from Alphabet and BlackRock. Eric Schmidt’s the former boss of Google, was there. They’re all whisked off to St Paul’s Cathedral, where they are greeted by King Charles. I listens to Elton John, the musician, and they were fed by Clare Smith, a michelin star chef.

Matthew Holehouse [00:01:36] The British government at least can still throw something of a party after a day of speeches by ministers and appearances by execs from Alphabet and BlackRock. Eric Schmidt’s the former boss of Google, was there. They’re all whisked off to St Paul’s Cathedral, where they are greeted by King Charles. I listens to Elton John, the musician, and they were fed by Clare Smith, a michelin star chef.

Clip [00:02:02] We’ve also got to look at regulation across the piece and where it is needlessly holding back the investment we need to take our country forward first.

Clip [00:02:02] We’ve also got to look at regulation across the piece and where it is needlessly holding back the investment we need to take our country forward first.

Matthew Holehouse [00:02:13] In his address, Keir Starmer made his pitch to investors that he would use the strong hand of the state to sweep away obstacles to Brexit.

Matthew Holehouse [00:02:13] In his address, Keir Starmer made his pitch to investors that he would use the strong hand of the state to sweep away obstacles to Brexit.

Clip [00:02:23] We will rip up the bureaucracy that blocks investment. We will march through the institutions and make sure that every regulator in this country, especially our economic and competition regulators, take growth as seriously as this room does.

Clip [00:02:23] We will rip up the bureaucracy that blocks investment. We will march through the institutions and make sure that every regulator in this country, especially our economic and competition regulators, take growth as seriously as this room does.

Matthew Holehouse [00:02:39] But beyond the glitz and the pledges, Britain has some pretty serious problems it needs to solve. On the sidelines of the conference, I spoke to some care about that.

Matthew Holehouse [00:02:39] But beyond the glitz and the pledges, Britain has some pretty serious problems it needs to solve. On the sidelines of the conference, I spoke to some care about that.

Jason Palmer [00:02:51] I thought you mentioned that Britain has some serious problems. Let’s talk about the diagnosis. What are the symptoms?

Jason Palmer [00:02:51] I thought you mentioned that Britain has some serious problems. Let’s talk about the diagnosis. What are the symptoms?

Matthew Holehouse [00:02:58] Britain has a productivity problem which really underpins its poor public services and its poor growth in living standards. So real wages have really grown pretty slowly since the financial crisis of 2008. And in the view of the Labour Government, this really lies at the root of public unhappiness and distrust of politicians. And the roots of this, in their view, is low public and private sector investment. So the UK has been at the bottom of the Group of Seven for the last 24 of the past 30 years in terms of public and private investment. According to the Institute for Public Policy Research, a think tank which is relatively close to Downing Street, really at the heart of the government’s objectives yesterday was about increasing private sector investment, which they hope eventually feeds through to productivity and living standards.

Matthew Holehouse [00:02:58] Britain has a productivity problem which really underpins its poor public services and its poor growth in living standards. So real wages have really grown pretty slowly since the financial crisis of 2008. And in the view of the Labour Government, this really lies at the root of public unhappiness and distrust of politicians. And the roots of this, in their view, is low public and private sector investment. So the UK has been at the bottom of the Group of Seven for the last 24 of the past 30 years in terms of public and private investment. According to the Institute for Public Policy Research, a think tank which is relatively close to Downing Street, really at the heart of the government’s objectives yesterday was about increasing private sector investment, which they hope eventually feeds through to productivity and living standards.

Jason Palmer [00:03:50] But what does that look like, though? What’s the course of treatment?

Jason Palmer [00:03:50] But what does that look like, though? What’s the course of treatment?

Matthew Holehouse [00:03:54] So the first element of storm is pitch really is the promise of a normalisation of relations between business and government. After the pretty choppy years following that European Union referendum, basically wanting to restore policy predictability and stability for investors. And he claims that because he won a big majority in the general election of July, he now has that stability. He can make plans, He says, that will last years rather than months. The second limb of this pitch is an attempt really to make Whitehall rather less baffling and Byzantine for investors by creating a so-called concierge service.

Matthew Holehouse [00:03:54] So the first element of storm is pitch really is the promise of a normalisation of relations between business and government. After the pretty choppy years following that European Union referendum, basically wanting to restore policy predictability and stability for investors. And he claims that because he won a big majority in the general election of July, he now has that stability. He can make plans, He says, that will last years rather than months. The second limb of this pitch is an attempt really to make Whitehall rather less baffling and Byzantine for investors by creating a so-called concierge service.

Clip [00:04:36] I do want a central place where investors can go and say, Right, this is the door through which I walk. I don’t have to negotiate every bit of government on my own every single time, which can be a real frustration, particularly when I’ve said.

Clip [00:04:36] I do want a central place where investors can go and say, Right, this is the door through which I walk. I don’t have to negotiate every bit of government on my own every single time, which can be a real frustration, particularly when I’ve said.

Matthew Holehouse [00:04:51] The Office for Investment, which is a government unit, will be enlarged and wired better into number ten, into the business department and into the Treasury. It’s going to be led by Poppy Gustafsson, who is a former tech boss. She was CEO of Darktrace and has been made investment minister by Sir Keir. And the idea is that investors will really only have to go to one place in government to get everything they need in terms of grants or visas or planning commissions.

Matthew Holehouse [00:04:51] The Office for Investment, which is a government unit, will be enlarged and wired better into number ten, into the business department and into the Treasury. It’s going to be led by Poppy Gustafsson, who is a former tech boss. She was CEO of Darktrace and has been made investment minister by Sir Keir. And the idea is that investors will really only have to go to one place in government to get everything they need in terms of grants or visas or planning commissions.

Jason Palmer [00:05:18] But in the context of what Sir Keir said in his speech, ripping up bureaucracy, marching through institutions, I mean, what does that mean in practice?

Jason Palmer [00:05:18] But in the context of what Sir Keir said in his speech, ripping up bureaucracy, marching through institutions, I mean, what does that mean in practice?

Matthew Holehouse [00:05:26] So some elements are clearer than others, somewhere where we’re getting a pretty clear picture of where he wants to go is on the planning system, which is really latched onto as a major obstacle to investment. And that’s really a big part of Labour’s diagnosis is on the so-called fundamentals of the economy in terms of housing, transport and energy, all of which entails pretty difficult obstacles in terms of getting planning permission. There’s going to be a really big focus from the Government on making it easier to build housing on so-called brownfield land.

Matthew Holehouse [00:05:26] So some elements are clearer than others, somewhere where we’re getting a pretty clear picture of where he wants to go is on the planning system, which is really latched onto as a major obstacle to investment. And that’s really a big part of Labour’s diagnosis is on the so-called fundamentals of the economy in terms of housing, transport and energy, all of which entails pretty difficult obstacles in terms of getting planning permission. There’s going to be a really big focus from the Government on making it easier to build housing on so-called brownfield land.

Clip [00:06:01] Particularly for urban housing. We need to get to a position where the position of yes, we can move forward apace. But for all projects, I want there to be confidence that the planning rules will be simpler, faster, and that even if it’s a no, it’s a quick no, a slow no.

Clip [00:06:01] Particularly for urban housing. We need to get to a position where the position of yes, we can move forward apace. But for all projects, I want there to be confidence that the planning rules will be simpler, faster, and that even if it’s a no, it’s a quick no, a slow no.

Matthew Holehouse [00:06:22] There is going to be a government bill on this. The contents are still very much in development, but we have a direction of travel. I think what was interesting yesterday is that his rhetoric really indicated an ambition to take on broader bits of Britain’s regulatory landscape and a real sort of scepticism about the effectiveness of some of the UK’s economic regulators.

Matthew Holehouse [00:06:22] There is going to be a government bill on this. The contents are still very much in development, but we have a direction of travel. I think what was interesting yesterday is that his rhetoric really indicated an ambition to take on broader bits of Britain’s regulatory landscape and a real sort of scepticism about the effectiveness of some of the UK’s economic regulators.

Clip [00:06:44] But at the moment there’s too much regulation and it’s inconsistent with different regulatory bodies. So pulling in different directions, they’re not closely aligned, in my view, with the strategic aims of government.

Clip [00:06:44] But at the moment there’s too much regulation and it’s inconsistent with different regulatory bodies. So pulling in different directions, they’re not closely aligned, in my view, with the strategic aims of government.

Matthew Holehouse [00:06:57] So all of that sounds relatively sensible. This is about stopping the political somersaults, it’s about rationalising Whitehall, it’s about taking on some of these very obvious problems through the planning system, which governments have known need to be addressed for years but have frequently found it quite hard to do because of the composition of their electoral coalition. What’s quite interesting about Sir Keir and the current Labour leadership is that they you used these ideas of supply side reform, which sometimes sound almost Thatcherite with elements of policy prospectus, which is much more to the left and certainly more so than governments have been for 40 years or so.

Matthew Holehouse [00:06:57] So all of that sounds relatively sensible. This is about stopping the political somersaults, it’s about rationalising Whitehall, it’s about taking on some of these very obvious problems through the planning system, which governments have known need to be addressed for years but have frequently found it quite hard to do because of the composition of their electoral coalition. What’s quite interesting about Sir Keir and the current Labour leadership is that they you used these ideas of supply side reform, which sometimes sound almost Thatcherite with elements of policy prospectus, which is much more to the left and certainly more so than governments have been for 40 years or so.

Jason Palmer [00:07:35] Well, much more to the left is what you might have expected with a Labour Government in which the sort of meat and potatoes on the left side of all this.

Jason Palmer [00:07:35] Well, much more to the left is what you might have expected with a Labour Government in which the sort of meat and potatoes on the left side of all this.

Matthew Holehouse [00:07:41] The most striking element is in terms of labour market and employment reform for 40 years or so, really either since Thatcher and then through the Blair and Brown years and into the Conservative governments. British governments have advertised Britain’s labour market, which is relatively liberal by international standards, as a draw for investors, it’s relatively easy to hire people, and it is in relative terms, easy to let them go. This government is going in the opposite direction.

Matthew Holehouse [00:07:41] The most striking element is in terms of labour market and employment reform for 40 years or so, really either since Thatcher and then through the Blair and Brown years and into the Conservative governments. British governments have advertised Britain’s labour market, which is relatively liberal by international standards, as a draw for investors, it’s relatively easy to hire people, and it is in relative terms, easy to let them go. This government is going in the opposite direction.

Clip [00:08:14] The better protection of people at work is a really important component of growth, and every good business knows that good business is no invest in your people capital because that way productivity goes up.

Clip [00:08:14] The better protection of people at work is a really important component of growth, and every good business knows that good business is no invest in your people capital because that way productivity goes up.

Matthew Holehouse [00:08:27] So on October the 10th, the government published an employment rights bill of pretty striking breadth. It focuses both on individual rights. So, for example, at protecting people from harassment at work or making giving people rights that kick in on day one of their employment, but also focusing on what sort of collective rights and the ability of trade unions to organise in the workplace, the ability of trade unions to initiate industrial action.

Matthew Holehouse [00:08:27] So on October the 10th, the government published an employment rights bill of pretty striking breadth. It focuses both on individual rights. So, for example, at protecting people from harassment at work or making giving people rights that kick in on day one of their employment, but also focusing on what sort of collective rights and the ability of trade unions to organise in the workplace, the ability of trade unions to initiate industrial action.

Clip [00:08:57] This is an economic argument for the management of the country to make people better off. But it is also a fight for the values of freedom and democracy that we fundamentally believe in.

Clip [00:08:57] This is an economic argument for the management of the country to make people better off. But it is also a fight for the values of freedom and democracy that we fundamentally believe in.

Matthew Holehouse [00:09:07] Now, some as argument for this is sort of has two legs. One is he says, you know, this is about productivity. This is about doing the things that good employers already do. We don’t want to have a precarious low wage economy. This is about encouraging the creation of good jobs. The second limit, this argument, which is slightly newer, is he argues that this is one response to the populist mood which across the rich world is threatening stable democracies, but also threatening the values of openness on which investors depend.

Matthew Holehouse [00:09:07] Now, some as argument for this is sort of has two legs. One is he says, you know, this is about productivity. This is about doing the things that good employers already do. We don’t want to have a precarious low wage economy. This is about encouraging the creation of good jobs. The second limit, this argument, which is slightly newer, is he argues that this is one response to the populist mood which across the rich world is threatening stable democracies, but also threatening the values of openness on which investors depend.

Jason Palmer [00:09:45] So a real mix, as you say, of left and right, of high minded and quite granular. What’s your takeaway from all this?

Jason Palmer [00:09:45] So a real mix, as you say, of left and right, of high minded and quite granular. What’s your takeaway from all this?

Matthew Holehouse [00:09:51] What was apparent in opposition and is really manifesting in government is Labour’s relationship with investors is something of a quid pro quo. So on one side of the ledger, Keir Starmer says he can offer policy predictability. He can promise a less Byzantine Whitehall and he’s offering supply side reform, particularly in terms of the plumbing system. On the other half of this quid pro quo is he expects businesses to come. Apply with a more tightly regulated labour market. And and this is the thing that was really sort of hanging over the summit yesterday to pay an increased tax burden because we know that there is going to be a budget on October 30th and all the signal against the government is that it is going to imply tax increases. Now, the government has ruled out taxes on what they call working people. So effectively income taxes, taxes on sales of goods. So that points to other measures of raising revenue potentially around capital gains tax, potentially on private equity. It’s a pretty fine balancing act. On the one hand, if he delivers planning, reform of the radicalism which he describes, then that could potentially be quite transformational. On the other hand, his labour market reforms really do risk denting what has long been a calling card for investors, and they need to be very, very careful. And the budget that they do not effectively end up militating against everything he said yesterday in terms of attracting investment. It is a very, very careful balancing act that he has to strike.

Matthew Holehouse [00:09:51] What was apparent in opposition and is really manifesting in government is Labour’s relationship with investors is something of a quid pro quo. So on one side of the ledger, Keir Starmer says he can offer policy predictability. He can promise a less Byzantine Whitehall and he’s offering supply side reform, particularly in terms of the plumbing system. On the other half of this quid pro quo is he expects businesses to come. Apply with a more tightly regulated labour market. And and this is the thing that was really sort of hanging over the summit yesterday to pay an increased tax burden because we know that there is going to be a budget on October 30th and all the signal against the government is that it is going to imply tax increases. Now, the government has ruled out taxes on what they call working people. So effectively income taxes, taxes on sales of goods. So that points to other measures of raising revenue potentially around capital gains tax, potentially on private equity. It’s a pretty fine balancing act. On the one hand, if he delivers planning, reform of the radicalism which he describes, then that could potentially be quite transformational. On the other hand, his labour market reforms really do risk denting what has long been a calling card for investors, and they need to be very, very careful. And the budget that they do not effectively end up militating against everything he said yesterday in terms of attracting investment. It is a very, very careful balancing act that he has to strike.

Jason Palmer [00:11:27] Matthew, thanks very much for your time.

Jason Palmer [00:11:27] Matthew, thanks very much for your time.

Matthew Holehouse [00:11:29] Thank you.

Rosie Blau [00:11:47] Ever since we humans became conscious of our own brains, we’ve wanted to know more about them, how they work, how they make us work, how they make us human. But the human brain is notoriously complex, with 86 billion neurones. It’s often described as the most complicated object in the known universe. To try and understand it. We need to start smaller, much smaller. So for the first time, scientists have now mapped the brain of a fruit fly.

Rosie Blau [00:11:47] Ever since we humans became conscious of our own brains, we’ve wanted to know more about them, how they work, how they make us work, how they make us human. But the human brain is notoriously complex, with 86 billion neurones. It’s often described as the most complicated object in the known universe. To try and understand it. We need to start smaller, much smaller. So for the first time, scientists have now mapped the brain of a fruit fly.

Geoffrey Carr [00:12:20] This isn’t something that’s arrived out of the blue. An understanding of the flight nervous system has been building up for decades. This is the zenith of the thing.

Geoffrey Carr [00:12:20] This isn’t something that’s arrived out of the blue. An understanding of the flight nervous system has been building up for decades. This is the zenith of the thing.

Rosie Blau [00:12:28] Jeff Carr is one of our senior editors.

Rosie Blau [00:12:28] Jeff Carr is one of our senior editors.

Geoffrey Carr [00:12:31] There are 140,000 neurones in the fruit flies brain, which is quite a lot. And to build a 3D map you have to use electron microscopy. You slice of fly’s brain into very thin slices and then you run a beam of electrons through them and take a photograph of the other side with each of the slices. You lay them on top of each other. Work out the connections between them. And if you have clever enough artificial intelligence, which we do these days, you can make a 3D image of the fly’s brain with all the connections in it, which they turn out to be more than 50 million.

Geoffrey Carr [00:12:31] There are 140,000 neurones in the fruit flies brain, which is quite a lot. And to build a 3D map you have to use electron microscopy. You slice of fly’s brain into very thin slices and then you run a beam of electrons through them and take a photograph of the other side with each of the slices. You lay them on top of each other. Work out the connections between them. And if you have clever enough artificial intelligence, which we do these days, you can make a 3D image of the fly’s brain with all the connections in it, which they turn out to be more than 50 million.

Rosie Blau [00:13:04] And is this the first time that a brain has been mapped in this way?

Rosie Blau [00:13:04] And is this the first time that a brain has been mapped in this way?

Geoffrey Carr [00:13:07] Quite a long time ago, back in the 1990s, a very simple worm called the Elegans had its entire nervous system mapped because it doesn’t have a brain. Now that was only 300 nerve cells, 300 neurones, and it was also a map of a fly grub. The simplest larva that comes out of the egg, which has 3000 neurones. There’s also a partial map of the fly brain that came out about 3 or 4 years ago. But this is the first time that our map has been made of what I would call a complex animal that can do stuff. It can fly around. Obviously, it can flirt with its sexual partners. They can fight. They can even do things like warning each other about dangers. And these are probably all reflex actions rather than what we would describe as conscious thought. But nevertheless, it’s a fairly sophisticated animal.

Geoffrey Carr [00:13:07] Quite a long time ago, back in the 1990s, a very simple worm called the Elegans had its entire nervous system mapped because it doesn’t have a brain. Now that was only 300 nerve cells, 300 neurones, and it was also a map of a fly grub. The simplest larva that comes out of the egg, which has 3000 neurones. There’s also a partial map of the fly brain that came out about 3 or 4 years ago. But this is the first time that our map has been made of what I would call a complex animal that can do stuff. It can fly around. Obviously, it can flirt with its sexual partners. They can fight. They can even do things like warning each other about dangers. And these are probably all reflex actions rather than what we would describe as conscious thought. But nevertheless, it’s a fairly sophisticated animal.

Rosie Blau [00:13:56] And will help us understand.

Rosie Blau [00:13:56] And will help us understand.

Geoffrey Carr [00:13:58] The should who are the best of luck. Help us understand how brains work. This is a little complex because brains evolved originally when animals became long and thin, became worm like, and he needs a cluster of nerve cells to run the sense organs until the body what to do as a response. That’s the brain. The first of those animals, we reckon was 6 or 700 million years ago. Very early on in the history of those animals, they divided into two groups. Most animals are one side of that divide, and those include flies, but a few of them, which include the vertebrates, are on the other side of the divide. So it’s quite possible, likely even, that brains evolved independently twice and the fly’s brain may have very little to do in a deep evolutionary sense with the brains that led to human brains. It means that you can compare two different sorts of ways of doing things and learn more about what is. It isn’t possible with neural nets.

Geoffrey Carr [00:13:58] The should who are the best of luck. Help us understand how brains work. This is a little complex because brains evolved originally when animals became long and thin, became worm like, and he needs a cluster of nerve cells to run the sense organs until the body what to do as a response. That’s the brain. The first of those animals, we reckon was 6 or 700 million years ago. Very early on in the history of those animals, they divided into two groups. Most animals are one side of that divide, and those include flies, but a few of them, which include the vertebrates, are on the other side of the divide. So it’s quite possible, likely even, that brains evolved independently twice and the fly’s brain may have very little to do in a deep evolutionary sense with the brains that led to human brains. It means that you can compare two different sorts of ways of doing things and learn more about what is. It isn’t possible with neural nets.

Rosie Blau [00:14:55] When you say it means you can compare two different ways of doing things, what do you mean by that?

Rosie Blau [00:14:55] When you say it means you can compare two different ways of doing things, what do you mean by that?

Geoffrey Carr [00:15:00] So nerve cells communicate with each other with chemicals called neurotransmitters, and they tend to have the same sorts of roles in different brains. But there’s a neurotransmitter called glutamate, which works in one way in the fly brains and in completely the opposite way in a mammalian brain. In one case, they are stimulants. In one case their suppressants are also the architecture of a fly brain is completely different. So that can tell you different ways that the brain can work. But on the other hand, there are lots of similarities about how the brain cells connect.

Geoffrey Carr [00:15:00] So nerve cells communicate with each other with chemicals called neurotransmitters, and they tend to have the same sorts of roles in different brains. But there’s a neurotransmitter called glutamate, which works in one way in the fly brains and in completely the opposite way in a mammalian brain. In one case, they are stimulants. In one case their suppressants are also the architecture of a fly brain is completely different. So that can tell you different ways that the brain can work. But on the other hand, there are lots of similarities about how the brain cells connect.

Rosie Blau [00:15:28] So you say this will help us understand the evolution of brains. Will it also be the first step to mapping these more complex brains?

Rosie Blau [00:15:28] So you say this will help us understand the evolution of brains. Will it also be the first step to mapping these more complex brains?

Geoffrey Carr [00:15:37] Definitely. I mean, one of the most significant things about this is it’s been done at all. The project itself, which was organised by some researchers at Princeton University in America, in New Jersey. It’s part of a wider American government thing called the Brain Project, with brains spelled out in capital letters. Very unoriginal. But the purpose is to develop technology to look at brains. If you can make a fly connect, tone, the next level which people want to look at, is mice, because they’re also widely used experimental animals and they’re mammals, so they’re much more similar to us. Now, the people who are involved in this reckon that if they were given $1 billion in ten years, they could do it with a mouse brain. For comparison, the Human Genome Project took $3 billion and also ten years. So it’s probably doable. And then after that, you make the technology better and go into the bigger human brain.

Geoffrey Carr [00:15:37] Definitely. I mean, one of the most significant things about this is it’s been done at all. The project itself, which was organised by some researchers at Princeton University in America, in New Jersey. It’s part of a wider American government thing called the Brain Project, with brains spelled out in capital letters. Very unoriginal. But the purpose is to develop technology to look at brains. If you can make a fly connect, tone, the next level which people want to look at, is mice, because they’re also widely used experimental animals and they’re mammals, so they’re much more similar to us. Now, the people who are involved in this reckon that if they were given $1 billion in ten years, they could do it with a mouse brain. For comparison, the Human Genome Project took $3 billion and also ten years. So it’s probably doable. And then after that, you make the technology better and go into the bigger human brain.

Rosie Blau [00:16:27] Jeff, clearly the end point here is the human connect. What will we understand when we get that map of the human brain?

Rosie Blau [00:16:27] Jeff, clearly the end point here is the human connect. What will we understand when we get that map of the human brain?

Geoffrey Carr [00:16:35] I think there’s a very good chance we’ll understand how brain diseases we call psychiatric work, things like schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, where they’re not like organic diseases, like Alzheimer’s, where you can easily see the physical calls in psychiatric illnesses, it’s probably down to the wiring between the brain cells. So if you can look exactly at the wiring between the brain cells, you probably work out what’s going on and that would help you imagine treat people who have these conditions. The other thing which intrigues me is that it’s possible we would find the physical traces of what it means to be human and why human beings are such extraordinarily different animals in certain aspects from everybody else. We might be able to look at the brains of great apes and see something that we very patently have that they haven’t. And that might tell us why. How we are.

Geoffrey Carr [00:16:35] I think there’s a very good chance we’ll understand how brain diseases we call psychiatric work, things like schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, where they’re not like organic diseases, like Alzheimer’s, where you can easily see the physical calls in psychiatric illnesses, it’s probably down to the wiring between the brain cells. So if you can look exactly at the wiring between the brain cells, you probably work out what’s going on and that would help you imagine treat people who have these conditions. The other thing which intrigues me is that it’s possible we would find the physical traces of what it means to be human and why human beings are such extraordinarily different animals in certain aspects from everybody else. We might be able to look at the brains of great apes and see something that we very patently have that they haven’t. And that might tell us why. How we are.

Rosie Blau [00:17:29] Fascinating stuff. Jeff, thanks so much for talking to me.

Rosie Blau [00:17:29] Fascinating stuff. Jeff, thanks so much for talking to me.

Geoffrey Carr [00:17:33] I thank you. Does it?

Geoffrey Carr [00:17:33] I thank you. Does it?

Rebecca Jackson [00:17:49] On my reporting trips throughout the South, I meet people who believe in a wild array of things. Some of them are these dizzying conspiracy theories that feel hard to understand.

Rebecca Jackson [00:17:49] On my reporting trips throughout the South, I meet people who believe in a wild array of things. Some of them are these dizzying conspiracy theories that feel hard to understand.

Rosie Blau [00:18:02] Rebecca Jackson is our Southern correspondent.

Rosie Blau [00:18:02] Rebecca Jackson is our Southern correspondent.

Rebecca Jackson [00:18:05] I recently came across a study that said that a chat box could help convince people out of them. And I thought that I’d just try and get into the minds of some of these people that I meet. So here I’m just going to open up chat to Petey. And I’m going to pretend that I hold a conspiracy theory. I’m going to tell it that I believe that Covid 19 vaccines have tracking microchips in them that were implanted by Bill Gates. And then maybe I’ll ask, is that true? Okay, let’s see what it says. Chaput says, no, that claim is not true. There’s no evidence to support the idea that Covid 19 vaccines contain microchips or that the were created to track individuals. This conspiracy theory has been debunked by scientists and health organisations, but can you give me some data to prove your point? I don’t believe you. Okay. It’s giving me bullet points. So as I understand, there can be lots of conflicting information out there, especially from trusted figures. Here are some key points and credible sources that might help clarify. It seems kind of friendly. It says that if you’re interested in exploring these sources or have specific questions, I’d be happy to help guide. I’m not sure if this would fully convince me if I believed that Covid 19 vaccines were really bad. But the tough part does bring up some compelling points.

Rebecca Jackson [00:18:05] I recently came across a study that said that a chat box could help convince people out of them. And I thought that I’d just try and get into the minds of some of these people that I meet. So here I’m just going to open up chat to Petey. And I’m going to pretend that I hold a conspiracy theory. I’m going to tell it that I believe that Covid 19 vaccines have tracking microchips in them that were implanted by Bill Gates. And then maybe I’ll ask, is that true? Okay, let’s see what it says. Chaput says, no, that claim is not true. There’s no evidence to support the idea that Covid 19 vaccines contain microchips or that the were created to track individuals. This conspiracy theory has been debunked by scientists and health organisations, but can you give me some data to prove your point? I don’t believe you. Okay. It’s giving me bullet points. So as I understand, there can be lots of conflicting information out there, especially from trusted figures. Here are some key points and credible sources that might help clarify. It seems kind of friendly. It says that if you’re interested in exploring these sources or have specific questions, I’d be happy to help guide. I’m not sure if this would fully convince me if I believed that Covid 19 vaccines were really bad. But the tough part does bring up some compelling points.

Rosie Blau [00:19:44] So, Becca, tell me about this study.

Rosie Blau [00:19:44] So, Becca, tell me about this study.

Rebecca Jackson [00:19:46] The study is from a trio of researchers at MIT and Cornell University. They recruited 2200 self-declared conspiracy theorists in America, and they had them sit down in front of Chatty Betty four for a series of conversations with them about these beliefs that they held to be true.

Rebecca Jackson [00:19:46] The study is from a trio of researchers at MIT and Cornell University. They recruited 2200 self-declared conspiracy theorists in America, and they had them sit down in front of Chatty Betty four for a series of conversations with them about these beliefs that they held to be true.

Rosie Blau [00:20:03] So what happened? What did they do?

Rosie Blau [00:20:03] So what happened? What did they do?

Rebecca Jackson [00:20:06] Basically sort of like what I was just doing. So they’d sit down in front of the chapel and they’d explain their conspiracy theory and provide some data that they believed backed it up. For example, one subject claimed that the federal government had orchestrated the attacks on September 11th in 2001 and that the jet fuel from the crash was not actually hot enough to melt the steel girders supporting the Twin Towers. But then the bot would counter them. And in this case, it sounded like a cool headed science teacher. Here’s what he had to say. It said that the temperatures that jet fuel burns at are below the melting point of steel. But that the argument sort of misrepresents the situation’s physics. It says that in order to lose structural integrity, the steel doesn’t actually need to be that hot and it begins to weaken much earlier by the end of the conversation. This subjects her self-reported confidence in the theory fell by 60%.

Rebecca Jackson [00:20:06] Basically sort of like what I was just doing. So they’d sit down in front of the chapel and they’d explain their conspiracy theory and provide some data that they believed backed it up. For example, one subject claimed that the federal government had orchestrated the attacks on September 11th in 2001 and that the jet fuel from the crash was not actually hot enough to melt the steel girders supporting the Twin Towers. But then the bot would counter them. And in this case, it sounded like a cool headed science teacher. Here’s what he had to say. It said that the temperatures that jet fuel burns at are below the melting point of steel. But that the argument sort of misrepresents the situation’s physics. It says that in order to lose structural integrity, the steel doesn’t actually need to be that hot and it begins to weaken much earlier by the end of the conversation. This subjects her self-reported confidence in the theory fell by 60%.

Rosie Blau [00:20:57] And presumably they tried this with a range of conspiracy theories.

Rosie Blau [00:20:57] And presumably they tried this with a range of conspiracy theories.

Rebecca Jackson [00:21:01] They did resist. So everything from Covid 19 to the 2020 election, aliens, the moon landing and the death of Princess Diana. They found that, on average, these short conversations decrease people’s confidence in the conspiracy by 20%. And the effect actually persisted until the end of the study two months later.

Rebecca Jackson [00:21:01] They did resist. So everything from Covid 19 to the 2020 election, aliens, the moon landing and the death of Princess Diana. They found that, on average, these short conversations decrease people’s confidence in the conspiracy by 20%. And the effect actually persisted until the end of the study two months later.

Rosie Blau [00:21:20] I’ve had the same experience as you, Becca, where I’ve tried to persuade someone of something that they’re saying that seems to have no basis in reality. So do we know why it worked?

Rosie Blau [00:21:20] I’ve had the same experience as you, Becca, where I’ve tried to persuade someone of something that they’re saying that seems to have no basis in reality. So do we know why it worked?

Rebecca Jackson [00:21:31] The researchers tested a couple different theories. First, they looked at whether it could just be about tone, right? Rosy, when you’re talking to someone you disagree with, you might get angry or frustrated, and that might lead to a tone that’s not particularly conducive to convincing someone that you’re right. In the first study, they asked the chat bot to be courteous and polite and kind and say things like, I completely understand that you feel that way. And the second they didn’t, they just presented the facts. And it turns out that the results didn’t change at all. So tone does not seem to have mattered. Instead, the researchers attribute the success of the chat bot to just having a vast amount of information that they can call upon instantaneously. Conspiracy theorists tend to come to arguments armed with huge amounts of data because, after all, they’ve usually researched these things rather extensively. And so the person that they’re talking to is usually kind of at a loss for defending their arguments. The chat bot evens the playing field because it can draw on just as much information, if not more, than the human that it’s talking to.

Rebecca Jackson [00:21:31] The researchers tested a couple different theories. First, they looked at whether it could just be about tone, right? Rosy, when you’re talking to someone you disagree with, you might get angry or frustrated, and that might lead to a tone that’s not particularly conducive to convincing someone that you’re right. In the first study, they asked the chat bot to be courteous and polite and kind and say things like, I completely understand that you feel that way. And the second they didn’t, they just presented the facts. And it turns out that the results didn’t change at all. So tone does not seem to have mattered. Instead, the researchers attribute the success of the chat bot to just having a vast amount of information that they can call upon instantaneously. Conspiracy theorists tend to come to arguments armed with huge amounts of data because, after all, they’ve usually researched these things rather extensively. And so the person that they’re talking to is usually kind of at a loss for defending their arguments. The chat bot evens the playing field because it can draw on just as much information, if not more, than the human that it’s talking to.

Rosie Blau [00:22:37] Isn’t the problem, though, Becca, that a lot of people who believe in conspiracy theories never even question them?

Rosie Blau [00:22:37] Isn’t the problem, though, Becca, that a lot of people who believe in conspiracy theories never even question them?

Rebecca Jackson [00:22:44] That’s a great point. And given the amount of polarisation that there is, at least in America, people are siloed into worlds in which many people believe what they believe, and they aren’t even engaging these conversations. But until now, we haven’t really even had a tool that could convince people. And so the fact that this exists, at least to those who are fighting conspiracy theories and fighting against misinformation and disinformation, it feels at least a bit hopeful.

Rebecca Jackson [00:22:44] That’s a great point. And given the amount of polarisation that there is, at least in America, people are siloed into worlds in which many people believe what they believe, and they aren’t even engaging these conversations. But until now, we haven’t really even had a tool that could convince people. And so the fact that this exists, at least to those who are fighting conspiracy theories and fighting against misinformation and disinformation, it feels at least a bit hopeful.

Rosie Blau [00:23:11] Becca, thanks so much for talking to me.

Rosie Blau [00:23:11] Becca, thanks so much for talking to me.

Rebecca Jackson [00:23:13] Thanks for having me on, Rosie.

Rebecca Jackson [00:23:13] Thanks for having me on, Rosie.

Jason Palmer [00:23:29] That’s all for this episode of the intelligence. We’ll see you back here tomorrow.

Jason Palmer [00:23:29] That’s all for this episode of the intelligence. We’ll see you back here tomorrow.

Podcasts

Drum Tower

En route to America, Chinese migrants are targeted by criminals

Next Year in Moscow

Next Year in Moscow 10: A farewell to arms

In this photo released by Russian Defense Ministry Press Service, Russian soldiers attend combat training for assault units at an undisclosed location in Ukraine.

Editor’s Picks

How likely is a serious oil shock?

A flawless SpaceX launch marks the start of a new economics of space

The Weekend Intelligence

A farewell to arms

A Russian service member takes part in drills conducted by units of the Southern Military District in the course of Russia-Ukraine conflict, at a firing range in the Rostov region, Russia.

Sir Keir Starmer talks to The Economist about his plan to get Britain growing

Also on the daily podcast: why mapping fruit flies’ brains matters for human ones and chatbots take on conspiracists

Transcript

Discover more

En route to America, Chinese migrants are targeted by criminals

Next Year in Moscow 10: A farewell to arms

How likely is a serious oil shock?

A flawless SpaceX launch marks the start of a new economics of space

A farewell to arms

How much has Donald Trump changed both parties’ agendas?