The implications of the change are so profound that at first we can only get frustration as to the change of the model we have been living so far. Day by day traditional business models are broken, disintermediation spreads, dissipation of rents continues unabated, unequality grows, knowledge innovation jumps everywhere but all this now destroy more than create jobs. And will continue to do so. We need to think unconventionally. There is no way all world population will move apace to the technological change. We need to get a simpler life: consume less, live with less, as we really never needed much of what we have! Or share jobs, multiemployment, or multitasking without a formal employment contract, etc,...That will be the only way forward, in short term, for a huge part of the world population. Other segments will quickly adapt and lead the wave. As the book suggest, "we cannot compete against the machines, but work with the machines, creating spaces in which human intelligence will not be challenged,,,". But this is out of reach for the majority. Welcome to the MIT initiative and keen to follow on their progress and recommendations.

This is an excellent thought. It is important to difine what innovation means. I guess Mr Gordon refers to innovation which can make a change in stimulating job creation, and it is clear that under the industrial revolution the inventions of a few changed the lives of all us, drove consumption up which also propper up job creation because we wanted to "have and hold" things. This is now what is happening in emerging economies: their inhabitants now want to pave their piece of the cake. The new knowledge society and associated innovation does not itself create net jobs (losses minus new ones), but lay the foundations to "individual connected thinking" which can be extremely rich in driving innovation with a less spectacular sense of success in identyfying one or a few single recipes of new job creation through innovation. But small job creations enterprises begin to abound in myriads. Question is how long the society in general, not just the digital natives, will begin to benefit and push up this trend

Different skills for a different society, evolution pace is gathering momentum, and while the second revolution companies are still the bulk of the employers, technology, web 2.0, social media, nanotechnology and so on requires different skillset, and I am alarmed of the lack of supply through education models of the skills which now is most required: creativity, ability to imagine, create and innovate at a fast pace never seen before, and this will exacerbate the different income distribution in global population, those who lead and adapt and those who lag behind. We need to all move up and stop the income distribuition widening gap