Jeremy Rifkin Quotes

When gene therapy was believed to harbor latent risks, research was largely put on hold until the risks were better understood. Sometimes, the theoretical risks have led to a principle of absolutist precaution that impedes progress.

Society will decide after the technology is created what we will and won't accept.

The real world is far too complex and unpredictable to make something like the idea of humanity controlling its own evolution or engineering itself - well, I wouldn't say impossible but it should be approached with a degree of caution.

Now, there is always a tremendous fear of science and progressing forward into areas of the unknown and it is a valid fear. Some of the genetic alterations of food are a little edgy.

Technologists provide tools that can improve people's lives. But I want to be clear that I don't think technology by itself improves people's lives, since often I'm criticized for being too pro-technology. Unless there's commensurate ethical and moral improvements to go along with it, it's for naught.

Faced with the profound changes that AI technologies can produce, pressure for "more" and "tougher" regulation is inevitable. Misunderstanding about what AI is and is not, especially against a background of scare-mongering, could fuel opposition to technologies that could benefit everyone. This would be a tragic mistake. Regulation that stifles innovation, or relocates it to other jurisdictions, would be similarly counterproductive.

The sciences are monuments devoted to the public good; each citizen owes to them a tribute proportional to his talents.

The Church must actualize, be present in the public debate, in our struggle for a true concept of liberty and peace.

If, by demanding revolutionary change, I run the risk of accomplishing nothing on behalf of the public, then I'm not sure that's a responsible course of action.

Technology could benefit or hurt people, so the usage of tech is the responsibility of humanity as a whole, not just the discoverer. I am a person before I'm an AI technologist.

Do you trust in your fellow citizens, in a sense that whatever they will have in additional tools they will use in balance more to the good or more to the bad? If you think they will use it more to the bad, you shouldn't do science, you know.

The products of modern science are not in themselves good or bad; it is the way they are used that determines their value.

All technology should be assumed guilty until proven innocent

I felt I had had enough of politicians and government upheavals …. Suddenly I was enveloped in the feeling that only science is lasting.

There is a cost to every decision, and whether or not you impose a public health order has costs to industry and the public.

Every technology is used before it is completely understood. We are living in that lag, and it is a right time to keep our head.

New technologies are often met with skepticism. But if the world is to continue the remarkable progress of the past few decades, it is vital that scientists, subject to safety and ethics guidelines, be encouraged to continue taking advantage of such promising tools as CRISPR.

The selfie, like all technology, causes us to reflect on our human values. This is a good thing because it challenges us to figure out what they really are.

Science fiction is the WikiLeaks of science, getting word to the public about what cutting-edge research really means.

We necessarily operate in an environment in which there's a great deal of uncertainty. In such an environment, it makes sense to use a risk-management approach to identify and avoid the big mistakes. That's one reason I favor a cautious approach.

It's time to elevate the debate in this country and allow the public to access the same neutral, unbiased, nonpartisan information that we in Congress rely on every day.

When we see a strong correlation, and the matter at-hand is something with major health or safety or security implications, then we are behooved to at least begin taking preliminary precautions in case the correlation proves to be causative.

As a studio executive, I took the approach that people are competent until proven otherwise. But when you make a movie, because there is so little time to fix things when they break, you have to almost come to it with the mindset that everyone is incompetent until proven otherwise.

I don't want to do anything that puts my team members, my camera people or producers, in danger, so it's an ongoing dialogue on all the stories that we do.

While we rejoice in the new possibilities open to humanity, we also see the dangers arising from these possibilities, and we must ask ourselves how we can overcome them.