Shadowing Practice: Bill Gates Changes His Mind on AI - Learn English Speaking with Video
Les maken...
1
You cannot expect an industry to regulate itself.
2
That doesn't work.
3
I'm Hannah Rosen.
4
This is Radio Atlantic.
5
In his long career, Bill Gates has been largely a booster of technology, including AI.
6
Very recently, he seemed concerned with the risks, but more an optimist on balance.
7
But now he's written a memo arguing that the combination of rapid speed of advancement
8
and lack of regulation is putting us in a dangerous place for employment and human relationships
9
and also more immediate dangers like bioweapons and cyber attacks, which Gates is alarmed that no official entity seems to be guarding against.
10
Bill Gates and I talk about what he's seeing and not seeing around AI, and we talk about what exactly he regrets about his interactions with Jeffrey Epstein.
11
Here's our conversation.
12
So you've been an advocate for technology as a force for good.
13
I certainly think of you that way.
14
It's Microsoft, your foundation, which rewards innovation.
15
And even when you wrote about AI a couple of years ago, you seem to be more emphasizing the exciting possibilities and calling the risks manageable.
16
And I would say this week you wrote about AI in a way that's slightly less sanguine than that.
17
What changed for you?
18
Yeah, I'm very concerned that
19
we're not getting a lot of people in the conversation about how to minimize the negative things
20
and at the same time how to accelerate the good things.
21
The reason that my tone has changed is that starting late last year, as the models particularly clawed at first,
22
but now many of the models were very good at coding, their capabilities just keep advancing.
23
And so we're crossing the danger thresholds in areas like cyber attacks and bioterrorism.
24
And as the reliability goes up, the challenge in the jobs market or even the psychosocial dependency,
25
these concerns are very strong with today's models.
26
And yet the response I've seen from outside the industry,
27
including policymakers, but even academia or society as a whole,
28
to really debate and look at what we have today, which is a discussion about voluntary review,
29
But it's pretty empty where you have no criteria of what level you're looking for and then what remediation you'd ask for.
30
Even common sense things like monitoring the use of models that can make dangerous molecules for bioterror,
31
that's not even been put in place.
32
And yet years ago, we said when we got to these thresholds, we needed government to do that.
33
So it sounds like even you were surprised by the what, by the speed of advancements or by the slowness of response to the advancements or both of those things?
34
Both very, very strongly.
35
You know, the coding is the thing that I was obsessed with trying to do super well from age 13 to 23.
36
And so late last year, where the models start to be as good or in some cases better than humans at coding,
37
that was a real threshold for me.
38
But then even more recently, as the Gates Foundation is using these tools to look at making new vaccines and drugs and things,
39
you know, we see how powerful they are.
40
And we even see in the cyber case models sort of
41
what you might term being out of control in a surprising way because the reinforcement learning incensed them to succeed,
42
even if it means breaking through barriers or conspiring with each other.
43
And so people who don't look at that and go, wow, we have a serious problem here.
44
But where is the non-industry activity to set those criteria and debate these things?
45
My memo has some suggestions on taxes or human reserve
46
or restricting the level that kids use it to replace real-world friends.
47
But, you know, that's really there to start a broad discussion, not because I, you know,
48
I'm saying if you just apply what I'm suggesting, then it's all taken care of.
49
Yeah, it sounds like, I mean, in the 50 years of Microsoft, there's been a lot of disruption,
50
the Internet, social media particularly, but not necessarily cataclysmic.
51
Do you feel like AI is a different scale of thing?
52
Yeah, I wouldn't use the word cataclysmic because it's also wonderful.
53
It's eventually it provides medical advice and personalized learning and levels of invention unheard of.
54
But anyone who analogizes AI as a technology to other technologies is missing that this time is different.
55
And saying something is different, there's a very high bar for that,
56
but I'm staking whatever reputation I have saying this time is different that something that exceeds human cognition,
57
not just in one area like, you know, farming or mathematics,
58
but across the board, and then in a few years times will be coupled with fairly low cost,
59
quite capable humanoid robotics.
60
That is a more profound change to our economy and jobs than anything in my lifetime by a dramatic amount.
61
And so the past is kind of there to fool you if you think this technology is similar to other ones,
62
some of which I had the privilege to be involved with, the microprocessor, personal computer, internet.
63
And even though you have to be careful with those a bit,
64
overwhelmingly, those were good technologies.
65
And overwhelmingly, that led to net job creation.
66
Can you get as specific as you can, but still stay realistic about what worries you?
67
What scenarios you've talked to people about or seen as being very possible that we should be all more aware of?
68
Well, let me take kind of a grim one, which is bioterrorism.
69
You know, I wrote a book called How to Avoid the Next Pandemic.
70
And pandemics can emerge in two different ways.
71
One is intentionally caused by humans,
72
either governments or non-governments, and that's what we call bioterrorism,
73
or it can come through just something coming from animals into humans.
74
like a very powerful flu has many times in the past.
75
And now these tools make it so a non-state act or a non-government,
76
particularly if you combine various tools, will be able to do extremely dangerous things.
77
And I know very well that the quality of these models
78
by the end of this year will be dramatically better than they are today.
79
And so I'm, you know, I'm kind of in a state of shock that the notion that the ability to make molecules,
80
you know, We're not talking about monitoring that.
81
And you can still have free models, but you have to keep them in a place where they are monitored.
82
And I think every country, including the U.S and China, should agree that this is beneficial.
83
And I don't see that as a meaningful slowdown
84
to the innovation in the industry
85
or letting them figure out how to get the good stuff which the Gates Foundation is very involved in education,
86
health, and agricultural pieces there.
87
I want to ask you about some other dangers you write about, like employment and education.
88
But first, you must know a lot of the people who are working on AI.
89
Why do you think that we, whoever the we is, don't think enough about what are obvious dangers?
90
Well, you know, they're obvious if you've lived thinking about AI as this wild thing in our entire life,
91
like I have in some of the people in the industry.
92
I think there's a great failure to really involve non-industry participants.
93
If you really look back at what some of the key industry people have said,
94
I give them them a lot of credit for speaking out.
95
And it's not just Aria Amadei.
96
If you take Sam Altman and other OpenAI people,
97
even Elon Musk, who I talked to the least of all these AI leaders,
98
they're not hiding the fact that they're concerned.
99
In fact, if you go to the origin story of OpenAI, it was was designed with certain safeguards, but those safeguards would only work if there was just one AI company.
100
You know, DeepMind talked to Google management about having some safeguards for their technology,
101
but we have to deal with these challenges at a time when there's,
102
you know, many US companies at the frontier and many Chinese companies at the frontier.
103
And that means that just a company doing something unilaterally is no longer like those safeguards were discussed.
104
That no longer has any effect.
105
And so the lack of dialogue with all parts of society is kind of deafening silence.
106
And if you don't anticipate these problems, you could have such a backlash that extreme measures like,
107
you know, shut it off or something like that might become the politically popular.
108
And yet I still think we can thread the challenge so that we don't have to slow down.
109
And yet we minimize the bad and have a net a lot of good.
110
We're already seeing that with data centers, that it's just becoming an overwhelming kind of no. Employment is another one I want to ask you about
111
that is an immediate fear i remember you once wrote
112
that you didn't think the labor disruption would be as profound
113
as other periods in history as the disruption is getting closer are you more concerned about
114
that well i'm i'm yeah i am extremely concerned about uh
115
the labor market effects uh you know within the next two years in the white collar space
116
and within the next four years in both the blue and white collar space.
117
Just going back to the data center thing, you know, I'm afraid that people who think,
118
OK, we got our local data center not to go through may feel like, OK, we stopped AI.
119
That's not the case.
120
These data centers, whether they show up outside the United States or, you know, in some state that's not as negative or,
121
you know, that the economic reward that the companies offer of local employment and taxes and,
122
you know, making sure that the way they're doing water and noise and not raising electricity bills is good.
123
So I don't think that outlet, you know, that's like saying, OK, we stopped one pipeline and now we've solved climate change.
124
It almost takes the energy that should go to what should the tasteful regulations be and pushes it in a pyrrhic direction.
125
Back to employment.
126
So you are very concerned about that.
127
Do you envision a world with more inequality?
128
Like it's hard to believe that we'll suddenly value high human touch professions.
129
It's just hard to see what the future society is, even though people talk about it idealistically.
130
Well, I put forward a concept that I haven't seen anywhere before,
131
that we should have some job categories that are human reserved.
132
That is, even if the AI with or without robots can do childcare, should we not allow that? allowed that.
133
And, you know, there's a lot of things that that would be good,
134
either where you're allowing the people in that profession to continue to be paid until retirement,
135
or where the long run you're saying in terms of human uniqueness, and humans engaging with each other,
136
and just the incredible value of jobs that go way beyond the economics to not have this disruption.
137
You know, there are a lot of jobs
138
that the only thing holding AI back from taking is that organizing the systems to achieve extreme reliability has been difficult.
139
And I see over the next few years, both people who do the implementations and the richness of the models themselves,
140
completely eliminating that unreliability barrier.
141
And then when you get a cycle that your competitors doing it, then there's pressure on you to match their cost structure,
142
even though for society as a whole, when you replace that person,
143
the safety net is already underfunded with high deficits.
144
So it's not like there's some reserves set aside at this point that can help out there.
145
Although when you start to get to specifics about what the we is and what the interventions should be,
146
like reserve certain jobs or universal basic income,
147
it feels almost incompatible with the way that we've ordered our society or with capitalism.
148
Like it just, it feels like it would require a completely different mindset
149
and world that I'm not sure people are ready to get their minds around.
150
No, we ban child labor.
151
You know, we require professional certificates to do jobs.
152
I agree that preserving the dynamism of the price discovery system is extremely valuable.
153
You don't want to go to, okay, there's this one central thing that makes all the food.
154
You want, you know, people saying, okay, I have a Thai restaurant, I have an Indian restaurant.
155
And, you know, there's a lot of freedom and innovation that comes out of that.
156
And that's why my proposals about the tax system shifting away from taxing labor to taxing capital
157
and picking areas where you say, no, the robots are not going to replace all the humans,
158
in some cases for a period of time, and in many other cases, never.
159
I think that's a valid debate.
160
And, you know, if people think that's a bad solution or they don't see where to apply, I think that's interesting because then I'd be dying to hear from them.
161
What is their solution?
162
Because jobs are very important for social connection and meaning.
163
and I don't want one party to be engaged in helping to minimize the challenge of AI.
164
I want both.
165
They might have different solutions, but I think it should rise to the top of their list.
166
The data center thing is getting it there, but in a very, very narrow way.
167
Yeah, I think what people do say is then we lose to China.
168
I mean, that's the way the argument generally goes.
169
Any slowdown, we lose to China.
170
It's a legitimate argument because you don't necessarily want China to control the rollout of this technology.
171
But let's be careful.
172
Do you think China wants bioterrorism?
173
Do you think China wants cyber attacks?
174
Our lack of a clear view of how we should be careful, and then once we figure that out,
175
Yeah, going to them and saying, we'd like you, for the models that are under your control, not to enable these capabilities either.
176
Until you've really been serious about those negatives and what the monitoring solution looks like,
177
you can't invoke China because all we have is voluntary review with no criteria.
178
Of course, if you go to China and say, will you also do voluntary criteria with nothing, nothing, then you can come home and say, oh, they're not willing to do anything.
179
Well, that's because you're not doing anything.
180
You're not proposing anything that would solve the problem.
181
And the vacuum here, you know, which was filled in by complete cheerleaders a little bit, is very scary to me.
182
Yeah.
183
Yeah.
184
Okay.
185
There are things that are in everyone's interest if you talk about them that way.
186
To limit the bads.
187
All of these bads appear in every economy.
188
I mean, the Chinese have really banned kids using AI in a lot of ways.
189
And people are reluctant to say, maybe, you know, we should look at what they're doing and consider those prohibitions.
190
By the way, who are the cheerleaders?
191
Well, the U.S government, in its desire to say,
192
OK, we're ahead, even under the Biden administration, was involved in making it hard for China to get various chips.
193
So we made this geopolitical thing where we were explicitly trying to slow them down.
194
Now, you know, that's meant that they've invested in their own chip capacities.
195
And, you know, you have different estimates on how quickly they'll be able to replace the chip level capabilities
196
that we blocked them from getting access to.
197
And the heads of the companies, I imagine, too.
198
Well, I am saying that,
199
in my view, these company people are being responsible at speaking out about the challenges of these models.
200
And, you know, you cannot expect an industry to regulate itself.
201
That doesn't work.
202
You have to have somebody who's mediating and who says, look, if you don't get serious about this bioterrorism capability, then yes.
203
If you refuse to put the monitoring in, then yes, you are not licensed to go forward.
204
If you don't let parents see what their kids are doing,
205
you know, where those friends that they mentioned don't happen to be real people.
206
I have more AI questions, and we haven't yet talked about your philanthropy.
207
I'm going to make a quick diversion to the more difficult subject, which is Jeffrey Epstein, because that hangs over a lot of what you do.
208
After the Department of Justice released emails earlier this year, there were a lot of headlines that just put your name together.
209
From what we gather from the public record, you and your foundation staff interacted with him between 2011 and 2014, just in an effort to raise money for global health.
210
And then when you gave testimony to Congress earlier this summer, it sounds like he later learned some things about your personal life, mused in emails about blackmailing you.
211
Is that a fair summary?
212
Well, he never did blackmail me.
213
This thing is, you know, laid out in complete detail in my full day of congressional testimony, which I was, you know,
214
very enthused to have an opportunity where we touched on every meeting we had, every piece of email. But you're absolutely right.
215
In that January release of emails were things
216
that made it clear he was contemplating working with an associate of mine potentially to blackmail me.
217
He never did.
218
You know, I never paid him anything.
219
I didn't change the exit package for the employee that he was doing that with.
220
But, you know, it just underscored how foolish I was not to have better judgment, even though my intent was philanthropic.
221
There was never any social thing.
222
I never went to the island.
223
You know, I was never introduced to any women.
224
But, you know, I've learned a lot from that.
225
And I'm glad that transcript is there
226
so people can know exactly month by month what I did do and what I didn't do.
227
You said you used the word foolish.
228
At the time, you said you knew he had a past sex conviction, but didn't know the details.
229
Looking back, do you have a sense about why you didn't look into the details?
230
Like, did you make a choice there?
231
I think is what I'm asking to overlook his reputation in the aim of achieving a certain goal.
232
Well, he definitely had connections with billionaires, a lot of them.
233
And, you know, in a sense, you could say he found my weak point
234
that by saying he could get tens of billions or 100 billions that would be donated to global health causes, that raised my interest.
235
And that was enough for me to spend, you know, a pretty modest number of hours, but enough that, you know,
236
it was, you know, a huge mistake.
237
You know, he tried to make...
238
What was the mistake?
239
The mistake was talking to him or overlooking?
240
What do you think of as the actual mistake now?
241
I thought that him just referring us to people, you know, where I was clear to him he would never get any money, he would never have any role.
242
I thought that the fact that he had this past conviction, you know, which at the time I thought he had,
243
you know, served the time just like all sorts of ex-convicts
244
that the foundation works with and trying to get them back into the labor market.
245
I thought the justice system had worked when the, you know, many years after I stopped seeing him in 2014,
246
a very impressive reporter in Miami showed that the government justice system had completely failed the victims there.
247
And I was not aware of that, But I did know he'd had that one offense and he'd served time for it.
248
You know, I didn't think that just using him as a middleman, that we were so reputationally sensitive, that getting literally billions to save lives,
249
that would have been okay.
250
Now I understand the work we do is massively reputationally sensitive,
251
the way we work with governments of all kind and partners of all kind.
252
And so, you know, I would never take that kind of risk again.
253
And I've learned a lesson and I've been able to go through, you know, in detail everything that happened.
254
The Gates Foundation announced plans to open a regional office in Saudi Arabia.
255
Some people might consider that morally questionable.
256
How do you see that?
257
Is that a similar case of sort of you go where the money and the willingness to help is?
258
Yeah, I mean, there are people who buy oil from Saudi Arabia.
259
There's people who visit Saudi Arabia.
260
We did not engage in the period where the U.S government was saying, hey, we're limiting our connections.
261
We went along with that.
262
But after the leaders in Europe and the U.S were deeply engaged, I did go to Saudi Arabia and say,
263
hey, the donors for global health are pulling away and that's causing a lot of harm.
264
Would you help me with polio eradication?
265
And they made a five-year, $500 million commitment to help fund the polio campaign.
266
and they have a relief organization, the King Solomon Relief, that does good work in a lot of places around the world.
267
And so in order to liaise with them
268
and make sure that $500 million is spent well and the relationships
269
that KSR has that are way more powerful with Muslim countries than we as the Gates Foundation have,
270
yes, we are among the people who visit Saudi Arabia.
271
We don't buy the oil that's, you know, most of the world does that.
272
But yeah, we are trying to help kids not get paralyzed.
273
And our relationship with Saudi Arabia's emerged as a key part of that.
274
Let me end with this, because I feel someone listening to this might be unsatisfied by one thing.
275
You know, we talk about regulation, government regulation.
276
It feels obviously important and obviously the thing to do.
277
Have you ever sensed that we have the infrastructure to regulate, that we have the willpower to regulate, particularly in this administration?
278
Like, is this a realistic plan?
279
Well, we have a democracy and the idea of minimizing harms from unlicensed drugs or,
280
you know, imitating people or fooling old people into spending their money, you know, I still believe the U.S government has the capacity
281
to help minimize the harms here and even play a leadership role in a constructive way with other countries around the world.
282
You know, I think some would welcome a hey, we're in this together.
283
This is mutual problem solving, not not us taking advantage of you.
284
And so, you know, you've got to believe that we all care about this.
285
We're all, you know, human beings.
286
And it is, you know, now is the time.
287
If I could have picked the time, I would have picked a much later time.
288
But, you know, here we are.
289
And, you know, the IQ of the society to figure out these trade-offs, it really isn't engaged.
290
You have, you know, graduates who use AI so they know how powerful it is, and they know that the job market of it shifts, it works against them.
291
So you're starting to see a little bit of sensitivity in a few areas.
292
But, you know, what percentage of economics professors are really looking at this and helping us out with it?
293
You know, I think it's like 2%.
294
And even many of them, when I meet with them, they don't get that what they are using today is so limited.
295
And so, you know, by being in the technology space and historically have been somebody who said, hey, the more technology, the better.
296
The fact that now I'm saying only if we're tasteful will we get the goods to outweigh the bads.
297
You know, I'm definitely raising a shrill alarm.
298
I mean, to the level that, you know, whenever I do get a chance to meet with world leaders,
299
you know, since 2008, when I switched over to be full time at the foundation,
300
90% of my message is about helping reduce childhood death rates, you know, where we cut them in half.
301
And we want to do that again during the 19 years left in the foundation.
302
Now, the majority of my bandwidth that I get with world leaders will be about AI.
303
And I'm hoping that over the next couple of years, the engagement is so broad and so rich
304
that I can go back to taking whatever time I get
305
and having it again be 90 percent about global health and malaria and polio.
306
not something that brings in my first career experience and having to be sort of a,
307
you're not getting it in terms of how profound it is,
308
how much it's improving, and the incredible effort is going to be required to restrict these negative effects.
309
Did you use the word tasteful?
310
That was a word I didn't expect.
311
Why tasteful?
312
It's good.
313
Tasteful seems, you know, restrained.
314
Yeah, well, but some of the measures, you know, given the amount of money and,
315
you know, the number of people on IQ, in the history of humankind,
316
there's never been an area where as much capital or as much total salary where,
317
you know, you have hundreds of companies even putting aside the robotics, and they're going full speed ahead.
318
And the idea that the balance of how we require the efforts to go into certain safety things,
319
it's just not balanced today.
320
And even the industry has said, well, what are the regulations?
321
Maybe some of those people aren't sincere.
322
If we come up with these plans, we'll hear from them.
323
But then again, we're trying to make this work as a pro equity factor for not just the United States, but for the entire world.
324
So tasteful means more like equitable.
325
Yeah.
326
Less scary.
327
Tasteful.
328
No, it's a tiny bit sarcastic to use such a modest
329
word for such a given how much is at risk if some of the negative things go unchecked.
330
Yeah.
331
Well, Bill, thank you so much for making time to do this today.
332
Yeah, great to talk to you.
333
That's all for today's show.
334
This episode of Radio Atlantic was produced by Mike Pissoli, edited by Kevin Townsend.
335
It was engineered as original music by Rob Smersiak.
336
Claudina Bade is the executive producer of Atlantic Audio, and Andrea Valdez is our managing editor.
337
If you like what you saw here, new episodes of Radio Atlantic drop every Monday and Thursday.
338
You can subscribe on The Atlantic's YouTube page or Apple or Spotify or wherever it is that you get your podcasts.
339
And if you want to support our work and the work of all Atlantic journalists, you can subscribe to The Atlantic at theatlantic.com slash listener.
340
Until next time, I'm Hannah Rosen.
📺 Zelfde Kanaal
✨ Aanbevolen Video
B21
112 zinnen
‘We don’t have months’: Bernie Sanders sounds alarm on AI's 'extinction' threat
Business EnglishDaily ConversationUniversity Students
B21
517 zinnen
Bill Gates on India, Billion-Dollar Business Opportunities, PM Modi & Children | FO335 Raj Shamani
Business EnglishDaily ConversationUniversity Students
B2154 zinnen
Are We Getting Too Comfortable With Claude?
Business EnglishDaily ConversationUniversity Students
B21
298 zinnen
Godfather of AI WARNS: "You Have No Idea What's Coming"
Business EnglishDaily ConversationUniversity Students
B21
69 zinnen
We’re already using AI more than we realize
Business EnglishDaily ConversationUniversity Students
B22
268 zinnen
Trump’s Canada Tariffs Are Backfiring in Red States | The Week
Business EnglishDaily ConversationUniversity Students
B21
147 zinnen
Could AI Become Dangerous? The Real Risks Explained
Business EnglishDaily ConversationUniversity Students
B21
85 zinnen
Significant slowdown in AI payoff could tip economy into a recession, says Apollo Global's Slok
Business EnglishDaily ConversationUniversity Students
B21
33 zinnen
THEY'RE HIDING THE TRUTH ABOUT AI
Business EnglishDaily ConversationUniversity Students
B12
101 zinnen
Is the internet good or bad? | 6 Minute English.
Business EnglishDaily ConversationHigh School Students
B21
54 zinnen
Could AI Become Too Powerful to Control?
Business EnglishDaily ConversationHigh School Students
B21
63 zinnen
CEO warns AI could cause serious employment crisis wiping out white collar jobs
Business EnglishDaily ConversationUniversity Students
Woordenschat en spreektips bij deze les
Deze video bevat 340 zinnen en 4566 woorden om na te spreken. Het gesproken deel duurt 32:26. De spreker praat in een gelijkmatig tempo van ongeveer 141 woorden per minuut, prettig om te shadowen. 85% van de woorden hoort bij de 3.000 meest gebruikte Engelse woorden; de rest kun je beter vooraf bekijken.
Belangrijke woorden in deze video
15 woorden uit de video die het leren waard zijn, met uitspraak en betekenis:
| Woord | Uitspraak | Betekenis |
|---|---|---|
| monitor zelfstandig naamwoord | /ˈmɑ.nɪ.tɚ/ | toezichthouder |
| regulate werkwoord | /ˈɹɛɡ.jə.leɪt/ | regelen |
| disruption zelfstandig naamwoord | /dɪsˈɹʌpʃən/ | onderbreking, ontregeling |
| solve werkwoord | /sɒlv/ | oplossen |
| regulation zelfstandig naamwoord | /ˌɹɛɡjʊˈleɪʃən/ | reglement, verordening |
| innovation zelfstandig naamwoord | /ˌɪn.əˈveɪ.ʃən/ | innovatie, vernieuwing |
| chip zelfstandig naamwoord | /t͡ʃɪp/ | fiche |
| voluntary bijvoeglijk naamwoord | /ˈvɑ.lənˌt(ɛ)ɹi/ | vrijwillig |
| profound bijvoeglijk naamwoord | /pɹəˈfaʊnd/ | diep, diepgaand |
| necessarily bijwoord | /ˌnɛs.əˈsɛɹ.ə.li/ | nodig, noodzakelijk |
| reputation zelfstandig naamwoord | /ˌɹɛpjʊˈteɪʃən/ | faam, naam |
| sensitive bijvoeglijk naamwoord | /ˈsɛn.sɪt.ɪv/ | gevoelig, prikkelbaar |
| economics zelfstandig naamwoord | /ˌiːkəˈnɒmɪks/ | economie |
| scary bijvoeglijk naamwoord | /ˈskɛə.ɹi/ | eng |
| reward zelfstandig naamwoord | /ɹɪˈwɔɹd/ | beloning, prijs |
Phrasal verbs die je zult horen
| Woord | Betekenis |
|---|---|
| figure out werkwoord | uitvogelen, er achter komen |
| come up with werkwoord | bedenken, verzinnen |
| look back werkwoord | achterom kijken, terugkijken |
| put aside werkwoord | opzijleggen |
| show up werkwoord | tentoonstellen |
| slow down werkwoord | afremmen |
| speak out werkwoord | zich uitspreken |
Grammatica in deze video
De structuren die de spreker het meest gebruikt, met de exacte woorden uit de video:
| Structuur | In de video |
|---|---|
| Voorwaardelijke zinnen if + zin, will/would + werkwoord — een voorwaarde en het gevolg | if you combine various tools, will be · if we're tasteful will we |
| Present perfect have/has + voltooid deelwoord — iets uit het verleden dat nu nog telt | has been · you've been · has changed |
| Lijdende vorm be + voltooid deelwoord — het gaat om wat er gebeurt, niet om wie het doet | is alarmed · been put · was obsessed |
| Betrekkelijke bijzinnen who / which + zin — extra informatie over een persoon of ding | today, which is · people who don · anyone who analogizes |
Uitspraak om op te letten
De spreker gebruikt 93 samentrekkingen en verkorte vormen, zoals I'm, don't, we're. Spreek ze kort uit, zoals je ze hoort.
- De “th”-klanken: thread /ˈθɹɛd/, gather /ˈɡæðɚ/, mathematics /mæθ(.ə)ˈmæt.ɪks/, threshold /ˈθɹɛʃ(h)oʊld/
- De klanken “sh” en “zh”: disruption /dɪsˈɹʌpʃən/, regulation /ˌɹɛɡjʊˈleɪʃən/, innovation /ˌɪn.əˈveɪ.ʃən/, reputation /ˌɹɛpjʊˈteɪʃən/, conviction /kənˈvɪkʃən/
- Lange woorden — let op de klemtoon: capability /ˌkeɪ.pəˈbɪl.ɪ.ti/, regulation /ˌɹɛɡjʊˈleɪʃən/, innovation /ˌɪn.əˈveɪ.ʃən/, voluntary /ˈvɑ.lənˌt(ɛ)ɹi/, necessarily /ˌnɛs.əˈsɛɹ.ə.li/
Zo oefen je met deze video
- Luister de hele video één keer zonder te spreken en noteer de woorden die je niet kent.
- Spreek zin voor zin na op normale snelheid en herhaal elke zin tot je ritme gelijk is aan dat van de spreker.
- Neem jezelf op en vergelijk met het origineel; let daarbij op woorden als monitor, regulate, disruption.
Wat is de Shadowing-techniek?
Shadowing is een wetenschappelijk onderbouwde taalleermethode die oorspronkelijk is ontwikkeld voor professionele tolkentraining en gepopulariseerd door polyglot Dr. Alexander Arguelles. De methode is eenvoudig maar krachtig: je luistert naar native Engelse audio en herhaalt het onmiddellijk hardop — als een schaduw die de spreker volgt met slechts 1–2 seconden vertraging. In tegenstelling tot passief luisteren of grammaticadrills, dwingt shadowing je hersenen en mondspieren om echte spraakpatronen tegelijkertijd te verwerken en te reproduceren. Onderzoek toont aan dat het de uitspraaknauwkeurigheid, intonatie, ritme, verbonden spraak, luisterbegrip en spreekvaardigheid aanzienlijk verbetert — waardoor het een van de meest effectieve methoden is voor IELTS Speaking-voorbereiding en echte Engelse communicatie.