“Every job that we have is going to be affected.”

In her FCC Club Lunch titled “The Future of Work in an AI-Powered World”, Diana Wu David gave an overview of how generative AI has inevitably changed the workforce across nearly all sectors and what the future of employment may look like. Moderating the discussion was FCC First Vice President Jennifer Jett.

David, a future-of-work strategist and best-selling author, finds that there are two responses that working adults have taken in response to AI’s boom over the past year — one, to deny its rise and refuse to use it, or two, to “play” with AI and see what’s possible.

David’s suggestion: response number two.

“It [AI] helps a lot! If you can think about it, if you’re not really sure what to say, or you’re not really sure what to write, being able to use ChatGPT or some kind of machine learning to prompt you or write it for you is really amazing. You all-of-a-sudden can learn faster and produce faster,” she said.

While she admitted that AI has certainly changed hiring strategies and job openings (citing her own company’s use of AI for marketing materials and presentations), the bigger impact she mentioned was the transformation in how organizations think of value at work. David then cited an MIT study that showed a 14% improvement in low-level performers, as well as faster onboarding periods and a higher focus on the “fun parts” of work over completing mundane, time-consuming tasks.

“What it [AI] is doing is upgrading the ‘normals,’” she said.

In the case of journalism, David elaborated that AI can allow journalists to spend more time diving deep into their reporting and having AI write for them, which could then lead to a shift in media organizations valuing a journalist’s access and ideas over how well they may be able to write in English (or any other language).

“If that [writing well] doesn’t matter because ChatGPT can write in the style of the Financial Times or the Lex column, then who we’re hiring might change. Maybe it doesn’t matter to find the best writer,” she said.

Truly demonstrating her profession as a futurist expert, David also gave her thoughts on what students who aren’t currently working can do now in order to set themselves up for success in a future career alongside AI. She mentioned two qualities, adaptability and lifelong learning, as more important than the overall focus of a student’s degree program.

“The reality is that whatever major you choose is probably not that important. It’s more about how you can continue to learn over time and be adaptable,” she said.

Watch the full talk on our YouTube channel below:

While AI technology isn’t an entirely new concept, headlines regarding its growth and increasing uses have become more frequent in 2023.

Open AI generating over $1 billion in revenue, military applications, ChatGPT being allowed (or banned) at Hong Kong universities, the Hollywood writers’ strikes, and even philosophical debates are all stories that have gotten more people interested in AI over the past year.

In response to the increased interest, the FCC held a Club Breakfast panel on September 4th with two of Hong Kong’s leading AI experts: Jack Lau and Sophiya Chiang, both who are experts in AI development and AI startup investment respectively.

The breakfast panel was moderated by FCC Journalist Board Member Joe Pan.

Lau, CEO of Swanland.AI, began the talk with an overview of AI’s capabilities, particularly with what are its current limitations.

“We have to really understand that although we are fascinated by AI, even as of today, some of the easiest things are completely messed up by AI,” he said.

Lau then explained a theory by Daniel Kahneman, a Nobel Prize-winning psychologist, that proposed that there are two systems of human thinking: System 1, which is based on our habits and experiences; and System 2, which is based on logic and reasoning. 

“There’s no AI currently that I am aware of that does level two well,” he said, which backed his belief that AI should be used as a “co-pilot” with the human workforce.

After Lau’s overview, Chiang shared her analysis on how Hong Kong can continue to embrace the advancing technology at schools and universities — instead of banning or ignoring it.

“I think it’s more about how you use AI in your daily learning and education that’s more important than actually banning it outright, because it’s inevitable,” she said.

Her point was made in specific reference to HKU’s initial ban of ChatGPT-4, which was dropped just last month. Meanwhile, HKUST and other universities in the city have allowed students to use AI in their coursework.

“This technology is advancing whether we like it or not, and so the best way that we can approach it would be to make sure we have the infrastructure in place to teach with AI,” Chiang said.

The panel also discussed AI’s lack of cultural context, Language Learning Models (LLMs), AI regulation, and how Hong Kong can stand out as an AI testing ground.

Watch the full talk on our YouTube channel below:

With Hong Kong’s housing issues consistently making headlines — cage homes, sky-high rent, and long wait times for public housing — the Foreign Correspondents’ Club (FCC) assembled a Club Lunch panel to attempt to answer a longstanding question: Is Hong Kong’s housing problem solvable?

The panel, held on August 28, consisted of Legislative Council (LegCo) members Doreen Kong, Andrew Lam, and Dominic Lee, as well as Sze Lai Shan, Deputy Director of the Society for Community Organisation (SoCO). Moderating the panel discussion was FCC First Vice President Jennifer Jett.

When asked about the biggest housing issue that Hong Kong faces, the panel didn’t give a single answer. Instead, they agreed that the variety of problems in the city are all intertwined with one another and must be addressed in a multi-faceted way.  

“I’ve got the feeling that the Hong Kong government does not know how to deal with this complex issue,” said Kong, who has focused a core part of her LegCo career on making more housing affordable for residents.

A part of the complex issue that Kong refers to is the city’s public housing system. Scoring factors such as age, income, family size, and residence/citizenship are what the Hong Kong Housing Authority (HKHA) uses to determine who is eligible for public housing.

While the panel agreed that this system isn’t perfect and that there are cases of people abusing public resources, an overhaul of the HKHA’s scoring system still might not be helpful.

“Even if you adjust the [public housing] scoring system, it’s not actually going to help because you’re only moving the distribution from one demographic to another demographic,” said Lee.

Lee also said that while addressing multiple housing issues at once is a good strategy, there still must be some kind of prioritisation of these issues when considering economic feasibility, especially those that involve land reclamation.

Lam, former Executive Director of the Urban Renewal Authority, noted that acquiring land may take longer than planned, but that it is worth the wait.

“I’m all for [land] reclamation. That’s the only place where the government can take full charge,” he said.

Lee disagreed, saying, “Lantau Tomorrow is a ‘vision’… a 20-year project. Most of us are not going to be around in 20 years … they consider that area the third [Central Business District] of Hong Kong. But to be honest, are you going to put your HSBC headquarters in that area? Probably not.”

Lantau Tomorrow Vision is a government project that aims to create artificial islands in the waters near eastern Lantau Island, reclaiming about 1,700 hectares of land, and is expected to cost an estimated HK$624 billion (US$80 billion).

Also concerned with land supply, Sze explained how less land leads to less public housing and the over 220,000 people now living in cage homes – the primary focus of her SoCO work.

She noted that over her career, the number of illegal cage homes has increased and that the overall quality of cage homes hasn’t improved, but that the media’s focus on them overshadows a newer — and perhaps more problematic — type of housing issue: subdivided flats.

“Visually, the cage homes are more sensational … journalists always take photos,” Sze said. “Subdivided [flats] are not so sensational, but they’re still a serious housing problem.”

She listed some of the issues with subdivided flats (despite having better living conditions than cage homes), including increased plumbing and structural issues that can harm entire buildings.

Sze views both the cage homes and subdivided flats as issues that can be solved as long as the government takes an active role in addressing these residents’ needs.

“It depends on ourselves whether we want to help those people that are so poor. They are underprivileged,” she said.

Lee also agreed with Sze’s analysis of the cage homes and subdivided flats, and added that cage homes are a result of poverty, income inequality, and the overall housing shortage, all of which should be included in the city’s efforts to reduce the number of cage homes.

“If we’re facing as a city a huge housing shortage, then no matter how much public housing we have, we’re still going to have these cage homes,” Lee said.

Despite the various issues discussed throughout the panel, as well as the obstacles faced when trying to solve Hong Kong’s housing issues, the panellists agreed that their plans are within their reach.

“I’m optimistic about how it’s heading towards. We have a lot of work to do, but as long as we keep our hopes up, I think we will do just fine,” said Lee.

For Kong, her belief in change lies in the government’s commitment to listening to all members of society and developing clear plans to solve their problems.

“If we really want to solve the housing problems — all sorts of housing problems in Hong Kong — we need to have a very clear, very defined and integrated strategy to deal with all kinds of housing issues and also different needs of different segments of Hong Kong people,” she said.

Watch the full talk on our YouTube channel below:

As Hong Kong enters its third year under the Beijing-imposed National Security Law (NSL), a panel of legal experts and politicians gathered at The Foreign Correspondents’ Club (FCC) to discuss its effect on the city. 

Sitting on the panel were John Burns, Honorary Professor of Politics and Public Administration at The University of Hong Kong (HKU); Albert Chen, Chair of Constitutional Law at HKU; former Legislative Council member Emily Lau; and Senior Counsel/Executive Council member Ronny Tong. The talk was moderated by FCC President Lee Williamson. 

“When it comes to Hong Kong, the sky falls down,” said Tong when pointing out the support behind other countries’ national security efforts and the criticism Hong Kong’s NSL receives from the international community. 

Burns agreed that all states must ensure national security, however he emphasised that interpretation was key in how national security laws are enforced. He believes that the local government has been using the NSL to intimidate the public and encourage self-censorship, ultimately changing political behavior in the city despite how vague he finds the NSL to be. 

Chen, on the other hand, described NSL offenses as “narrowly-defined” and added that most of the ongoing cases dealt with sedition, not the NSL. He explained that sedition falls under the Crimes Ordinance, which has been a part of Hong Kong’s legal system since the city’s days as a British colony. 

“Political offenses are not subject to extradition,” Chen said when asked about the eight self-exiled activists who are wanted by Hong Kong’s national security police. 

He added that returning the wanted activists to Hong Kong would only work if the countries they fled to had extradition agreements with the city, but that many countries had abolished their agreements due to the NSL. 

For Lau, the strongest critic on the panel, her biggest concern with the NSL is Article 29, which prohibits “provoking hatred” among Hong Kong residents towards the local and central governments. She argued that criticising the government does not equate to provoking hatred but that Article 29 implies as such. To her, this results in the criminalisation of free speech in Hong Kong. 

Lau also criticised the continued detention of the 47 Democrats who have now spent over 90 days in court. 

“This is a question of humane treatment,” Lau said, citing this case as one of the “shockwaves” felt across Hong Kong since the NSL’s enactment along with the various news organisations and NGOs that have either disbanded or left the city. 

“I have strong faith in One Country, Two Systems, and the judiciary,” Tong repeated several times during the discussion. “As a lawyer myself, I know many of the judges and I don’t believe any of them are corrupt. If you think they are corrupt, please tell me.” 

The four panelists were also asked about their thoughts on Article 23, the potential ban of the 2019 protest anthem “Glory to Hong Kong,” and “soft resistance.” 

Watch the full discussion on our YouTube channel:

“Some questions never change.” 

Dr. Tao Wang came to this conclusion after decades of covering China’s economy and her past 15 years of working at UBS Investment Research. Questions about China’s sustainability for economic growth, state and market relationships, and structural issues are what inspired her to write her new book Making Sense of China’s Economy, which was published earlier this year. 

Dr. Wang spoke about her book at The Foreign Correspondents’ Club (FCC) alongside Andrew Chan, a member of the FCC’s Professional Committee who has worked in risk management. 

Her first point: there is no simple narrative regarding China’s economy. The “doom predictions” that Dr. Wang would often hear hadn’t materialized yet, reinforcing her advice to not extrapolate when monitoring the mainland’s economic development. 

Dr. Wang also used her talk to address some of the common misconceptions, one of which is that the Chinese government is a monolithic entity, as well as the concerns about the rising role of the state versus the market. Through graphs and charts, she showed the drop in state ownership in the economy across various sectors between the 1980s until mid 2000s, which has stopped over the past one and half decade. While the state increased its role in social areas (though China still lags OECD countries in social spending) and regulations in recent years, she believes that the lack of progress in SOE reforms contributed to the perception of an ever-larger role of the state. 

“I’m not as pessimistic,” she said when addressing the decline of China’s working population and long-term potential growth. 

Acknowledging the challenges of decline in the working-age population, she pointed out that there is still surplus labor to be transferred out of farming, and that China’s actual retirement age of 54 is very young when compared to China’s average life expectancy (78 years). A gradual and modest extension of retirement age can help increase labor supply this decade.  

Along with the declining work population, Dr. Wang mentioned other challenges to China’s economy: social inequality between urban and rural citizens, rising debt, access to technology, and geoeconomic issues. She believes that while problems in accessing advanced technology will be negative for China, the country still has plenty of room to catch up and move up the technology ladder by applying existing mature technologies. 

Dr. Wang noted that economic reforms and “opening up” to the rest of the world were key behind China’s economic success. One thing the government did right was being pragmatic and adaptive to different challenges, she highlighted.  

But will China continue to be pragmatic and adaptive? Dr. Wang said that is perhaps the biggest question. The answer is not clear, however she is “cautiously optimistic.” 

Making Sense of China’s Economy is now available on Amazon.

Watch the full discussion on our YouTube channel:

At the FCC’s Club Lunch on June 26, William Kirby, the T. M. Chang Professor of China Studies at Harvard University, talked about his book Empires of Ideas: Creating the Modern University from Germany to America to China, which was published last year.

His latest work chronicles the origins of modern universities in Europe and how they have evolved through American and Chinese institutions. It also discusses China’s role in global tertiary leadership amidst changing philosophies towards university governance and academic freedom.

The talk was moderated by Jennifer Jett, the FCC’s First Vice-President.

After giving an overview of how German institutions provided the foundation for American universities to improve and expand upon, Professor Kirby described how the US was “disinvesting” in its own public universities while China’s academic aspirations continued to rise.

“How could China not lead?” he asked the audience. To Kirby, there is no doubt that China has the capacity to lead the world in higher education.

However, he believes China’s goal cannot be reached without partnerships with universities in the United States, Europe, and elsewhere across the globe. Kirby emphasized that both intellectually and architecturally, Chinese universities (as well as American universities) are linked to the international community. 

He expressed concern about China’s relative lack of international students, particularly Americans, but said their numbers were likely to increase now that China has lifted its “zero-Covid” restrictions.

The other major obstacle to the advancement of Chinese universities, Professor Kirby said, is political interference, citing the seven topics that mainland universities are forbidden from discussing.

Universities should be a place where “not one question cannot be asked,” he said, explaining that even if they are unpleasant or unpopular, ideas should be heard instead of silenced.

Empires of Ideas: Creating the Modern University from Germany to America to China is now available on Amazon.

Click here to watch the full talk on the FCC’s YouTube channel:

At the FCC’s June 14th lunch discussion on the government’s reform plan for the District Councils, a panel of former and current district councillors remained divided over the future of the city’s elections.

Moderated by FCC President Lee Williamson, the panel consisted of Legislative Council member Joephy Chan, district councillors Christine Fong and Paul Zimmerman (who is retiring at the end of his term), and former district councillor Fred Li.

While both Zimmerman and Li opposed the reforms, Fong said that she is welcome to any changes. Chan maintained the strongest support for a District Council overhaul, claiming the proposals were “much needed” and that they put Hong Kong “back on track according to the Basic Law.”

Last month, Chief Executive John Lee announced the reform plan which would result in only 88 of the 470 District Council seats being directly elected, less than 20% of the total. Currently, the proportion of directly elected seats is around 90%. 

The new plan would also increase the number of government-appointed seats to 179, while 176 seats would be decided by indirect elections which require candidates to secure nominations from three committees and be screened for political loyalty and national security risks. 

Li, as a member of the District Board which preceded the District Councils, noted that the new reforms (and the Legislative Council reforms) were in direct response to 2019, but he mainly criticized the increase of government appointees. He described his past experience of working with appointees as “nonsense” and clarified that he was never an appointee himself when challenged by the panel. 

“This is like chopping off your ears or being blindfolded,” said Zimmerman, the strongest critic on the panel. He questioned the necessity of reforms given the existence of the National Security Law and the oaths that public figures must take before entering office. Zimmerman also faced questions from Chan regarding his own resignation and was accused of quitting too quickly without giving the government a chance for dialogue. 

“[I] will not be a flag for dramatic change,” Zimmerman said to defend himself. “[I] cannot pretend it’s a democratic system.”

Fong reminded the panel that the District Councils are meant to make residents’ lives better and have a duty to serve people. 

In response to a question if there was any more room for democracy in Hong Kong, Chan claimed that direct elections don’t work due to their “loss of efficiency” and “political chaos.” She cited cases of filibustering in the 2015 District Council elections and emphasized that Hong Kong’s political system shouldn’t be judged by Western values. 

An attendee commented that filibustering exists on all sides of the spectrum, citing the various District Council walkouts staged by pro-establishment officials after the implementation of the Beijing-imposed National Security Law. 

Former FCC president and Director of HKU Journalism Keith Richburg asked about future voter turnout. The 2019 District Council elections had around a 70% voter turnout almost all in favor for the pro-democracy camp, but the 2021 Legislative Council elections had barely 30% of the city’s voters participate. 

Chan reiterated that voter turnout was not the sole indicator of a good election and compared local elections to elections in overseas cities like New York. 

Li opposed such a comparison and instead suggested Hong Kong compare itself to its own history. To him, not doing so would be like “putting our heads under sand.”

In a final question posed by Hong Kong Free Press, the panelists were asked if government appointees truly understand their role and the communities they serve, and what the voter turnout for the upcoming November elections might mean for Hong Kong. 

“Fantastic! Low turnout!” Zimmerman said with a chuckle. 

Chan mentioned that she collaborates with government appointees to do district work, and then criticised Western politicians for polarising people to vote with emotion. She also reiterated her earlier point that a high voter turnout doesn’t signify a good election or that the people care about their livelihood. To her, these circumstances mean that the voters care more about politics above all else. 

Sharing his final thoughts on the district council reforms, Li said, “We’ve lost checks and balances.”

Click here to watch the full panel discussion on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jr71oGWSsOA