English | EN 
When Andrew Keen and Ray Wang share a stage, you don’t get a polite exchange—you get a philosophical boxing match. The theme of their showdown at the 2025 Sogeti Executive Summit was simple but explosive: should we ‘smash the AI hype’ or ‘ride the wave’?
Warming Up: “No Biting, No Scratching”
Moderator Menno van Doorn set the tone: “No biting, no scratching—only with words.” Keen smirked. “Is cursing allowed?” Menno nodded: “Absolutely.” And off they went.
The opening “lightning round” showed the contrast immediately. When asked whether governments should step in to regulate Agentic AI, Keen shot back, “Neither. We need guardrails to protect human privacy.” Wang countered cheerfully, “Yes, but let’s make sure those guardrails don’t slow down the car.” Would Agentic AI create more jobs than it
destroys? “No,” said Keen flatly. “No in the short term, yes in the long term,” said Wang. Keen sighed: “There is no long term. We’re all dead in the long term.” It was the perfect setup: the pessimist with a master’s degree in history versus the optimist with a degree in momentum.
Cultural AI and the Israeli Negotiator
Things got spicy when Wang predicted that future AI’s would develop cultural “personas.”
“You’ll have a Shanghai agent, an Israeli agent, a Gujarati agent, a Dutch agent — all with
different negotiation styles,” he said. Keen practically leapt from his chair: “That’s
ridiculous. In an age already poisoned by nationalism, you want ethnic AI’s? We’re barely
surviving identity politics as humans — why replicate it in machines?” Wang smiled. “I think
it’s great. Celebrate your heritage. AI should reflect cultural diversity, not erase it.” Keen
wasn’t convinced. “Technology was supposed to make us global citizens. Instead, we got digital tribalism and fascism with better UX. You’re proposing to turbocharge that.”
On Hype and Hope
Asked if he was guilty of overselling AI’s short-term potential, Wang grinned. “No. We’re not hyping — we’re painting a vision. The goal is the Star Trek economy, not the Black Mirror one.” Keen rolled his eyes. “My critique isn’t fear of the unknown — it’s knowledge of the known. I’ve seen this movie before. We had Internet 1.0, Web 2.0. Each time we were promised utopia. Each time, a handful of corporations walked away with the profits while everyone else got banner ads.”
That sparked one of the debate’s sharpest exchanges. “We agree on the diagnosis,” Keen
conceded. “Big Tech is centralized, monopolistic, and powerful. But you think we can fix that. I don’t. You’re a techno-optimist. I’m a technorealist.” Wang nodded. “Yes, and it’s up to you — in this room — to decide what kind of humanity we want. Decentralized abundance or centralized scarcity. That’s the choice.” Keen deadpanned: “If Europe can’t even fix its Wi-Fi, I’m not betting on abundance.” The audience roared.
Europe: Museum or Marketplace?
When the topic turned to energy and economics, Wang went full macroeconomist.
“The U.S. has data, chips, and expensive energy. Europe has none of them. You need to get energy to two cents a kilowatt hour. If the economics don’t work, don’t push ideology.” Keen didn’t miss a beat: “You’re talking to Europe as if it were a startup. None of that will happen. Not in five years, not in fifty. Europe will be a museum for Chinese and American tourists. That’s the business model.” Wang laughed, unfazed. “Fine but at least make it a profitable museum.”
He pivoted to solutions. “You have gas fields in the Mediterranean, nuclear infrastructure, hydro in the Nordics — use them! Energy and compute are the new oil. Saudi Arabia gets it; Europe doesn’t.” Keen raised an eyebrow: “So your plan is to make Europe the new Saudi Arabia? That’s cheerful.”
Humanity and Its Discontents
When the debate turned philosophical, things got both funny and profound. “Is Agentic AI
humanity’s greatest tool or final mistake?” asked Menno. Wang replied: “Technology isn’t good or bad — it’s what we make of it. But we need rules. Remember Asimov’s three laws of robotics? You can’t build a species that kills you.” Keen smirked: “Every time someone uses the word ‘humanity,’ check your pocket. It’s self-evident. Why say it so often? What’s the point of creating technology if humanity isn’t already implied?” Wang countered: “Because humanity forgets. Machines don’t care about meaning. That’s our job.” Keen offered a more poetic retort: “If you want to understand humanity, don’t read Asimov. Visit the Rijksmuseum and look at Rembrandt’s self-portrait. That’ll teach you more about consciousness than any algorithm.”
On Leadership and the Future of Work
When asked what kind of leadership is needed for this new era, Keen went first. “My hope,” he said, “is that AI becomes something we can believe in again — a body of knowledge we can trust. We’ve lost faith in institutions, media, even truth itself. Maybe AI, paradoxically, can restore that trust — not as a god, but as a mirror of our collective intelligence.” Wang followed, pragmatic as ever. “Let’s be honest,” he said. “You are the last generation of humans who will manage humans. From here on, you’ll manage agents — and they’ll manage you.” He painted a stark future of disappearing white-collar jobs
and shrinking universities. “We’ll need maybe 20% of today’s college students. The rest will go into trades, technical roles, or entrepreneurship. The idea of lifelong corporate employment is gone. So, let’s stop pretending otherwise.” Keen chuckled: “So now Ray’s the dystopian, and I’m the optimist. What happened?” Wang grinned: “That’s progress.”
Closing Blows: Hope, Irony, and Stroopwafels
As the debate drew to a close, the moderator asked each for final advice. Wang: “Be bold, be practical, and don’t let ideology block innovation. You can’t regulate your way to
leadership. You have to build it.” Keen: “Be skeptical, not cynical. Smash the hype, but don’t kill the dream. If AI becomes religion, make sure it’s one worth believing in.” Their chemistry was undeniable — equal parts brawl and bromance. At one point, Wang offered a plan for Europe’s energy revival, and Keen interrupted with a grin: “So your revolution starts with stroopwafels and ends with nuclear power?” Wang laughed. “Exactly. Powered by caramel and compute.”
Verdict: Definitely Maybe
By the end, neither man had converted the other — but both had won the audience. Wang’s optimism — his vision of agentic abundance and decision velocity — sparkled with possibility. Keen’s skepticism — his warnings about identity, inequality, and cultural erosion — kept the dream tethered to reality. Their final exchange summed it up best:
Keen: “AI should reflect our knowledge of the world, not replace it.” Wang: “And it should make that knowledge actionable.”
As the applause faded, one thing was clear: whether you believe in smashing the hype or
riding the wave, the future of Agentic AI will need a bit of both — a dose of Keen’s conscience and a shot of Wang’s caffeine.
Get your copy of the Autopilot Yes/No Report.
Please note – This report was created by almost exclusively using available AI-tools except for minor editorial tweaks and some limited lay-out changes.