“In the Age of AI, Are We Losing the Right to Say ‘Wait’?”
“In the Age of AI, Are We Losing the Right to Say ‘Wait’?”
Blog Article
Inside the auditorium of the Asian Institute of Management, Joseph Plazo—AI investor and founder of Plazo Sullivan Roche Capital—delivered not predictions, but a pointed pause.
In a city speeding toward fintech supremacy — the atmosphere inside AIM’s lecture hall was not electric, but charged—with thought.
Plazo, a man whose trading systems are trusted by institutional investors across continents and have posted a 99% win rate, did not arrive to dazzle.
“Speed is nothing without direction.”
???? **The Code Breaker Who Stopped to Ask Why**
This is no abstract philosophy. It’s professional reflection. He built the bots that move the markets.
Which makes his unease all the more compelling.
“What machines optimise, humans must justify.”
He referenced an early pandemic incident: an AI under his firm flagged a short trade on gold—right before central bank intervention reversed market expectations.
“We stopped it. It crunched numbers, not nuance.”
???? **The Case for Slowness in a Market That Won’t Wait**
Plazo warned against the growing cultural obsession with speed—particularly in finance.
“Delay isn’t inefficiency—it’s responsibility.”
He introduced a three-question model he calls **Conviction Calculus**—a checklist not for technical performance, but for ethical clarity:
- Is this trade aligned with the values of the firm—or just its ambition?
- Is this merely a technical position—or a real-world one?
- Are we hiding behind the algorithm?
???? **Asia’s AI Boom—and the Accountability Gap**
Across Asia, AI and fintech are racing ahead—with minimal restraint.
Plazo asked a harder question: “We’re expanding capacity, not responsibility.”
AI models executed flawlessly—right into catastrophe.
“The systems are functional—but are they wise?”
???? **Trading Tools That Can Read the World, Not Just the Market**
Plazo isn’t calling for a retreat from technology.
He is instead building what he terms **“narrative-integrated AI”**—systems that assess not just numbers, but context, tone, and geopolitical undercurrents.
“A good algorithm predicts price. A better one understands pattern. The best? Purpose.”
The idea drew immediate attention.
One called the model:
“A desperately needed alternative to automation without conscience.”
???? **Final Line: The Crash That Won’t Be Loud**
Plazo closed with a sentence that now circles boardrooms like a quiet echo:
“The next crash won’t be emotional. It will be rational—executed too quickly, without website dissent.”
Not fear. Foresight.
Because in a world ruled by automation, the last act of leadership may simply be to ask: why?