The Pnyx, Two and a Half Millennia Later: What AI's Builders, Investors and Policy Makers Told Us About Power, Kids, and the Future

On July 16th, 2026, Endeavor Greece brought founders, policymakers, and investors to the Pnyx, the hill where Athenian democracy was born nearly 2,500 years ago, for the third Athens Innovation Summit.

The word Pnyx comes from the ancient Greek pyknos, meaning density: not just of bodies packed onto a terraced hillside, but of purpose — thousands of individual voices compressed into one collective will.

This evening, that density took a new form.

Linda Rottenberg, Co-Founder and CEO of Endeavor, sat down at first with Rafał Modrzewski (Co-Founder & CEO, ICEYE) and then with Hemant Taneja (CEO, General Catalyst), and Greek Prime Minister, Kyriakos Mitsotakis to explore the most pressing question of our time from three different vantage points. As AI reshapes who builds the future, who gets to build it, and where? How will this change the world? What will it mean for the younger generations and the way they form relationships? How do we evolve as a species?

Below is the full conversation, transcribed in its entirety.

Costantza Sbokou-Constantakopoulou (CSC): Good evening. Dear Prime Minister, Hemant. Linda, Rafal, dear Endeavor friends,  welcome to the 3rd Athens Innovation Summit. Welcome to the Pnyx. The Pnyx was in active use as the seat of the Athenian democracy for roughly two centuries, from about 507 BC to  322 BC. 

The word Pnyx derives from the ancient Greek pyknos - denoting density, compression, the concentrated force of many minds in one place. The hill was named this because of how the assembly functioned physically: thousands of citizens crowded onto a relatively small, artificially terraced hillside, standing pressed together, shoulder to shoulder, to conduct the business of the city-state.

There is also another interpretation that goes beyond the physical — that Pnyx referred not just to the density of bodies but to the density of civic purpose: the compression of individual voices into a single collective will. The assembly did not merely gather people; it concentrated power.

Endeavor was built on the same instinct: collective mind power composing one global ecosystem. 

Panagiotis Karampinis (PK): In 2022, Endeavor Greece launched the Athens Innovation Summit with one simple idea: bring the world's leading minds in technology face to face with the people shaping our policy — and place them both in front of the most urgent questions of our time.

Today, we stand before entrepreneurs from Elsewhere. The best founders in the world — from Kyiv, in the middle of a war. From Warsaw. From Colombia and Venezuela. From Greece, from Jordan. Not just Silicon Valley. It turns out Elsewhere is where many of the world's most important companies are built. Not despite instability — often because of it.

That is who tonight is truly for: every entrepreneur, somewhere the world hasn't noticed yet, building something that will outlast all of us.

CSC: So it is our pleasure to welcome on stage tonight my dear friend, Linda Rotenberg. She  doesn't just lead this conversation. She's the reason we are all here. Nearly 30 years after  founding Endeavor across 50 markets with thousands of entrepreneurs, Linda still insists  on one simple truth. Talent is everywhere. It's opportunity and capital that aren't. Please welcome on stage co-founder and CEO of Endeavor, Linda Rottenberg. 

PK: Joining her tonight is exactly the kind of founder this summit exists for. Between Warsaw & Helsinki, he co-founded ICEYE - now the world's largest constellation of radar imaging satellites, giving governments and companies the power to see change on Earth almost as it happens. Please welcome the Co-Founder and CEO of ICEYE, Rafał Modrzewski. Enjoy the evening. 

Linda Rottenberg (LR): I am so happy to have you all here. Can we please give a huge round of applause and an immense thank you to Costantza, Panos and the entire Greece Board and team. You never cease to amaze. We do have offices in 50 countries around the world, but nothing beats the views of Athens. 

Rafal, first of all, congratulations on becoming Poland's second Decacorn. Following  Endeavor entrepreneurs Mati and Piotr from Eleven Labs. We're very proud of you. So, Panos gave a little bit of a description, but I would start with what ICEYE does and you can tell me where we get it wrong. 

But you run the largest constellation of commercial SAR satellites. So these are synthetic  aperture radars that pierce the clouds and darkness, providing the highest possible resolution  pictures, no matter the weather. And as a result of that, you are allowing governments and businesses to monitor, sometimes even predict natural disasters and to gain mission critical intelligence for national security.  So what did I get wrong? What else do you need us to know? 

Rafal Modrzewski (RM): In fact, I think this was perfect. Down to 25cm resolution, that you can see the things. Now,  the history of ICE EYE has started with ice monitoring. This is why the name is ICE and EYE. It was all about climate change back in 2015. It was about trying to help us understand  our planet. 

Things have changed a little bit since then. The geopolitical climate became a bit more  complex, a bit more challenging. And the technology, which is fundamentally a dual use  thing, has been brought to help nations understand their surroundings and ultimately  ensure safety for their citizens. So today, ICEEYE's main focus is building intelligence systems for nation states that need that. And we are bringing that new type of technology over to the front lines to make sure that we know what's going on and that we can predict things before they happen. 

LR: You mentioned 2015. Let's go back. Because 2012, 2014, you and Pekka were starting ICEYE actually as a student research project on nanosatellites. Many of the  entrepreneurs in  the room and myself, I've been called crazy. I'm sure this seemed like a fantasy. Nanosatellites  piercing clouds and lightning. So how did you and Pekka deal with the naysayers? And when did you sit down and say, aha,  we've made it? 

RM: You know, there's been a combination of people on both sides of this journey. There  were people that have actually encouraged us to start. I fundamentally remember this person. His name was Mike Lyons. He was a professor from Stanford University at the end of a course which was called Venture Formation, which is the only economics course that I have ever taken. He actually came over to both of us and said, look, this idea of yours, it makes sense. Why don't you guys do something about it? If you file an application, we'll give you some money and you can pursue it further. 

Because, you know, for those of you who don't know the story as well as I do, the principal  idea behind launching a lot of satellites was to put in front of our economics professor something so complex that they would just give us a grade 5 without getting into the details. 

We were trying to trick them and yet they tricked us back. So, he was the guy that helped us understand that impossible was actually way closer to possible than we have thought. And after that, there were indeed a lot of people. 

And I think what kept us going is the belief that ultimately everything can be broken down  into fundamental first principles. And as long as the first principles are true, your mission  long term should stay true. It sounds simple, but it actually is a really deep going idea. 

LR: Okay, so you're a Polish founder, based in Finland, building a European champion. You  know, the saying usually is that a Polish founder with that level of ambition would move to Silicon Valley.  This is why, as Pano said, you know, Endeavor's championing the concept of innovating elsewhere. Was there anything about staying in Europe that you feel cost you and what were the benefits that Europe provided that Silicon Valley just never could? 

RM:I'm grateful for this question. It's a loaded question in fact, because there's just so many aspects of it that are emotionally close to how we think about this. I think  fundamentally for many, many years we just really wanted to prove that great companies can be built out of Europe. For many years we have actually denied certain, let's say, suggestions that the company  would have done much better if it was a Delaware based company, so it registered in the United States. I think behind that thought existed what I believe was a quote attributed to you. Talent is everywhere. 

We actually fundamentally did believe that there isn't such a thing in one place in the world  called Silicon Valley where every single person that's smart has existed. I mean, we were not in there, so clearly that couldn't have been true. We actually even thought that that's going to be an advantage that we are going to exploit. Because if talent is everywhere and every single company is in the Bay Area, then we are going to have access to talent in a much easier fashion. And I think we have managed to achieve that. 

When we were starting ICEYE, we really decided that this is going to be a company open to  everybody. So as of Today, across about 1,000 employees, we are 75 different nations. The  largest single nation only represents 16% of the company. So, it's really truly distributed. Among the first 12 employees we had already seven nations and the whole idea of bringing a diverse group of talent was actually something that we considered very important. And we are super proud of it and we are really staying true of it to this day. 

LR: And this is why we are so proud to have you as an Endeavor Entrepreneur. So let's talk  about what brought you to Greece. Your satellites helped put the first national space  spacecraft into orbit. You're talking about building a factory that could bring Greek  engineers home from around the world. You met with the Prime Minister earlier today. So when you launch or build in a new country, what is it that you look for and what is it specific to Greece that you are hoping to  achieve? 

RM: We have been in Greece now for almost two years and we grew that office from one person whom we brought back from London now to close to 30 people,  multiple floors building where we're building a ton of components for satellites. 

And in fact we've made the commitment just a few weeks back that we are going to put up a big factory over here building up to 150 satellites a year. So three satellites every week.  That's actually a pretty, pretty unique thing that we are going to do. 

You know, as with everything at ICEYE, there's actually a story about people. We had some Greek students that applied to internships in the early days of ICEYE  and they came over and I vividly remember they were from Aristotle University and they turned out to be fantastically well educated people. They didn't have the right type of space based opportunities in Greece. And then when we looked at this, we said, look, this is a country with an enormous amount of talent potential. 

Again, back to this talent density situation. In this phenomenally well English speaking society, in a place in Europe where we haven't yet had access to, we were testing the willingness of the government to engage with us as a startup. 

Because we knew that whatever we are going to do going forward will have to be a hand in  hand collaboration with the government in place. And so we have found that collaboration. We have hired the first people. They have turned out to be indeed amazing, super hard working, very committed and that just propelled the whole thing further. And then we moved forward faster than we originally expected. 

LR: Amazing. Okay, so we will hear from Hemant of General Catalyst next and GC led your Series E in 2025 and I want to tell the story from our side about how difficult it was for Endeavor  Catalyst to get in - with many endeavor catalyst LPs, very happy ones now in the room and then you can share on yours. So, you are an Endeavor Outlier. We were so proud to have Endeavor Catalyst invest in your company. And you were so gracious. And you spoke to Nick Beim on our Global Board, who had introduced you to General Catalyst and to Allen. And you said, look , I love Endeavor, but everybody wants in. This is so competitive. And our  board decided that none can come in for less than below 10 million euros. And Endeavor Catalyst's largest check is 3 million. I'm so sorry. But Chica loca (Linda) does not stop at no. No is never the final answer. So Nick and I called and strategized and we said, okay. So Nick calls Yuri, the Finnish board  member on your board that we know. Victor, our board chair in Poland, and Bartek MD called the Polish board members. Margaret, who runs our capital team, calls the CFO. And I call David Fialko, the co-founder of General Catalyst. And David says to me, look, this is one of the most competitive rounds we've ever seen. We've already signed the docs. It's too late. 

We love Endeavor. Next time, let us know in advance and we'll write you into the term  sheet. But Margaret stays talking to your team. It's now Thanksgiving Eve. So many of us are back in the US waiting for Thanksgiving dinner, and we get a call. Someone had dropped out. If the Endeavor Catalyst can do 5 million euros, the highest we've ever done, and you can tell me by tonight, you can be in. So Thanksgiving Eve, Margaret and I wrote to the Endeavor Catalyst  committee. So, we have Joanna Reiss on our board, Nick BYM Reid Hoffman, and Niko Sakazi. 

Within an hour, they say, we're in. Done. On Thanksgiving Day, I start getting these hysterical messages from Yuri, but I'm not checking. So Nick calls me and asks me to check my  WhatsApp. And it turns out that day, Thanksgiving Day, ICEYE closes a $1.7 billion contract with Germany. And Yuri said, Linda, sign, sign. They're going to back out. The investor that pulled out is  going to come in. So anyway, as if the drama unfolds, we sign, we go to Thanksgiving dinner, and six months later, you get a term sheet that values ICEYE  4.1x higher. So all the investors should be very happy.  

And the last thing I will say, before you get to say your words, is that we have the founders of  Insider here from Turkey, who will be very surprised to know that the term sheet, the high term sheet, came from General Atlantic, who usually prides themselves on being low. 

So that's my version of the story. We're very happy you tell yours. 

RM:I mean, first of all, we are super excited that you guys are part of the cap table. And I  think we always wanted that to be the case because we feel like this idea of founders investing in founders is just one of the best things that can ever happen. 

The story of this whole round of financing. And look, there are companies that have done  different types of rounds of financing. ICEYE has done many things well, but financing  has generally been quite challenging for us. 

You don't know that this whole thing started with actually the negotiations of the term  sheet that happened on a bridge in London when both Hament and Jeannette (zu Fürstenberg) were in  Boston. They were supposed to have another person join them. She was at the counter at the airport when they told her to return. Then she found me over there strolling around London street. Got Hemant on the phone, he  negotiated the price and we closed the deal at that very moment. It was one of those surreal 

situations and I would love to see what was it for him. I bet it's less exciting and a bit more  annoying. 

But look, the board was indeed saying what they were saying. It's always a little bit funny. I  mean, I'm sure as CEOs, you guys are over here, you always blame the board. The truth is that if you allow one exception, then a thousand exceptions pour in and it's  unmanageable at the end of the day. And the sad part about this is that we really, really  wanted to make this happen. 

The fact that the last minute there's an additional 5 million that appears and I think what  really got us in, and I remember that we weren't really supposed to make that happen, but  the fact that this entire decision making process was so quick just gave us this deep feeling  

that there is an appreciation to what ICEYE  is doing and a really deep desire to be part of the  mission. 

And as you know, at the end of the day, businesses aren't about technology, they aren't about markets, they aren't about anything. They're always about people. So, as long as you have the right people on your side, you are going to be successful, no matter what's going to  happen. 

And having all of you guys on our side with such a swift response was something that just  really grabbed us deep in the core and we couldn't have been happier that it turned out this  way. 

LR: Well, we're very proud. And now you are investing in Endeavor Catalyst 5. So, you'll pay it  forward. We talk about the multiplier effect in investing in the next generation of  entrepreneurs. Last question. You see the entire planet every day in a way that none of us do from down here. From your vantage point, what can't we see that you are seeing into the  future? Haha,  we have to end with profundity. 

RM: We spend a lot of time not even analyzing every single picture, but  what we would call the heat maps and the where is, what density, amount of pictures being  taken and how this changes. And I can tell you that, whether that's good or bad, the amount of variation of  where people are interested in taking imagery has massively increased. 

What we see is that the world has just become so much more dynamic, and the  technological revolution which enables people to understand what's going on, whether  that's AI or space, seems to be still in its very early infancy. So, when we look at what's going on, I think there's just so much more to come. But how it will all turn out, it's going to be quite exciting to see. 

LR: Amazing. Ladies and gentlemen, Rafael Mojewski. Thank you. That was wonderful. And now it gives me enormous pleasure to welcome my dear friend, the Prime Minister of Greece, Kyriakos Mitsotakis, and the CEO of General Catalyst Hemant Taneja.. 

Mr. Prime Minister, less than a year ago, we were just down the hill at the Odeon of  Herodes Atticus, where we spoke with Demis Hassabis of Google DeepMind and in that  magnificent ancient amphitheater, we spoke mostly about what AI would become, the science of it, the philosophy of it. 

It was really a conversation about the future. And today, we're somewhere different, both  literally and figuratively. Costanza spoke so beautifully about the history of Pnyx and today, AI surrounds us. It is here. 

So I'd love first for you to just add color, color to the story of this place, what it means to  Greece, what it means to you. And then also walk us back through the past year since you got off that stage in the Herodion in terms of AI and how it's impacted you and Greece. 

Kyriakos Mitsotakis Prime Minister of Greece (PM): Well, first of all, it's a great pleasure to be joining you again. And let me start by thanking  Costanza, Panos and the amazing endeavor  team for the great work that they have done. I would like to mention as an introductory remark, that endeavor has been a terrific partner to the government when it comes to studying and crafting policy around technology,  innovation and AI. And whenever we try to engage with a very vibrant ecosystem of Greek innovative  companies, the first point of contact is always Endeavor. So thank you very much for the  tremendous job you have done, and also thank you to all of those who devote time and  resources to actually support Endeavor. 

Now, of course, this place is very special, and I know it must be quite difficult for you to focus on the discussion when you have this amazing view behind you. For those of you who don't know, after many, many decades, this is the first time it can actually see the Parthenon without scaffolding. So, it is a pretty unique view and a reminder that this is literally the place where democracy  was born. Every time I return to the history of this place, sort of, it always stuns me what an innovative concept it was that, you know, citizens of a city state decided to actually take the decisions regarding their own future by themselves without, a despot or a king  or a pharaoh being in charge and acting as the overarching authority. 

So, they picked this place. They actually moved from the Agora at some point to this, to this  hill. And this is where very important decisions, you know, have been taken. 

You just have to read your facilities to understand what it meant for the assembly of the  people to gather here to listen to speakers who are still enshrined in history speaking, and  then collectively and democratically, deliberating, the future, with some correct decisions,  some very wrong decisions. But again, the ancient Greeks struggled and studied the various political arrangements, and we're very much aware that also a democracy has its weaknesses. It  has strengths, but it also has weaknesses. So these references, I think, are always quite  relevant. So, enough with the history, because we could go on for hours. This place is particularly  inspiring. In terms of what has changed, we actually had a very interesting discussion today, and it is very difficult for a policymaker to keep up to speed with the dramatic changes that are taking place in the AI space. 

We are, again, fully committed to implement, but also update our main AI strategy, which we devised, a couple of years ago. I see Konstantinos Daskalakis in the  audience and he was quite instrumental in helping us trying to understand what AI means for the government. 

I'm sort of quite intrigued by the ability and the opportunities that we have in terms of  teaming up with big AI companies to run interesting projects, run  pilots, to try to see how we can make the business of government more effective and what it does mean to integrate this technology in the delivery of public services. 

 I'm fascinated about today's discussion. I'm sure we will talk about what it means to use AI in health care. And I'm stunned by the capabilities that AI agents have and the degree of sophistication that can be built into these agents. We were actually discussing today that we thought that AI was good at - and still obviously is very good at - dealing with repetitive tasks, but we were discussing this concept of, what does an AI nurse means, that can actually talk empathetically and support a patient. Never gets tired, never gets bored, never gets angry and is available 24/7.  So, we constantly see these sorts of more opportunities. The big problem is we see more opportunities than  you can actually digest as a government and keeping up to speed and picking our battles in terms of the projects that we  actually want to run and making sure that we focus on those verticals where we can actually be cutting edge in terms of globally leading and offering our partners. 

We've worked closely with General Catalyst and told them to come here and try different things, see what works, and then we see what we can rule out and we can also talk more as the discussion goes on and what we have done and the pilots that we have run with other companies. 

LR: By the way, it's so interesting that you brought up the agent nurse, because when we were  with Demis Hassabis, he said the one human job that was safe was nurses. So, I don't know  how to think about that. 

All right, Hemant, first of all, you and I met through the former Endeavor UAE board chair,  Badr Jafar. It's a small world, but I want to tell a story I've never told before, before we get to you, which is how General Catalyst affected my life. 

I co-founded Endeavor in 1997, and as I said, I was chica loca. Everyone thought my co-founder  and I were crazy for suggesting there were entrepreneurs outside of Silicon Valley. But the  people who thought I was craziest, Kyriakos knows, were my parents who thought I was insane for not having a real job. 

They didn't understand what I did. And one day in early 2000, my dad, who is an attorney in Boston, called up very excitedly and said, Linda, I'm doing  some work for a friend and client,  Joel Cutler. He's starting this venture capital firm called General Catalyst. And his co-founder, David Fialko, is talking all about all these crazy things you do, entrepreneurship outside of the US and I think he's even crazier than you are. And having met David, that’s  actually true. But I just wanted to thank you, because General Catalyst helped my parents understand what it is that their daughter does. 

You took over the firm in 2021, and you use these phrases to describe your culture and philosophy that are not typically associated with VCs. Partnership of resilience, responsible innovation, companies with a soul. So, I'd love to  talk about how your culture and how you approach making investments, and then maybe you can answer some of the themes that the Prime Minister brought up if you want to touch on them. 

Hemant Taneja (ΗΤ): First of all, can I turn around and talk this way? (Looking at the Acropolis) I really want to enjoy the view. 

So, first of all, thanks for having me here. I would say if you reflect back on the last 15 years of what's been going on with technology,  when General Catalyst started, everything we were funding was, how do you really use software to create efficiency in people's lives? 

And then after 2007, when you had the iPhone, you had Amazon, you had Facebook, you  could really start creating a digital society. We started rethinking core institutions. We started building what is a digital healthcare service, what is a digital education service,  what is a digital insurance company. All these things that were highly regulated, and you  really could not ever imagine rebuilding those institutions. It was all about supplying  technology to them. When that started happening, we're like, wait a minute, this is way bigger than the kind of  tech companies we grew up building. And so we have to have a much deeper sense of  responsibility towards society and how we build these companies. 

And that's actually what led to this whole idea of thinking through, what does responsible  innovation mean? It also made us think about, how do you rethink governance? How do you think about the kind of capital required? Because these are much bigger markets. 

And that's the journey that we were on over the last, let's say, 12 years or so. And then, lo and behold, sort of after I took over the firm, ChatGPT happens. 

And if you think about it, it's the first time you have a technology where every CEO in every  company, every industry, every country, all over the world at the same time is trying to figure out what to do with this technology. That never happened before. 

And so the idea that we're seeing this incredible hyper growth in AI is actually not by happenstance, because the whole world is trying this technology all at the same time.

So if you fast forward to today and you look at Anthropic, which we are very large investors in, that company is adding tens of billions of dollars a month of revenue. We used to be proud if one of our companies could get to a billion dollars in 10 years, right? 

So, the scale and the pace of change is enormous because every dollar there represents  something some employee in some company is doing with AI to try to figure out how the world should be different. Just think about the magnitude of that, right? 

And the other thing I would say is last year Q4 Nvidia added a trillion dollars of market cap in 100 days. Trillion dollars is bigger than most economies, most countries in the world by GDP. And you're seeing such concentration of value in a handful of companies. 

So the most interesting thing, what Prime Minister I was talking about earlier today was  what's become clear is the scale of what AI can do. It's also given us glimpses into what  abundance can look like. This agentic nurse. We actually built an AI nurse in the US and it's being used by millions of  people now. And it's made tens of millions of dollars of calls that are fully automated to take care of  people that are coming to the hospital, that are going outside after getting treatment in the  hospital and really being a profound service that drives abundance because it's so cost effective. 

And when we think about it like, wow, that's abundance. There's amazing things we can do  with this technology. But on the other side, is this abundance going to be provided  to us by seven companies in the world? That's not abundance. Without agency is not  abundance. 

And so all the more, if you look at Endeavor's mission of sort of making entrepreneurship be global. 

A lot of our focus at GC has been how do we really help founders create opportunity at scale so that it's not just these companies, but next generation founders can actually be at scale and they can be all over the world. So the value is captured all over the world with AI. 

LR: We will come back to that. I want to return, Mr. Prime Minister, one last time to our  conversation with Demis last year, because just this week he issued a warning, right? He  hadn't been prescriptive with us. And now he's calling on a referee set up by the US government to test frontier AI models before they come out of the lab and even slow down labs if the models get dangerous. Do you share his alarm? And do you think that the US could or even will build  anything like this? Or is the race to AGI just too far ahead? 

PM: I have tremendous respect for Demis, and in my interactions, I always found him very  sophisticated and conscious about the consequences of what he is actually building. 

I cannot necessarily say the same thing about, other tech leaders who are  obsessed with this idea of being a week or a month ahead of their competitors. 

So it is very, very clear to me that the more sophisticated these models get, the fewer people actually understand exactly what is, what is happening with them and how they  actually become better and better. And I'm certainly not one of them. 

And of course, when I also read the two essays which I did recently by the CEO of Anthropic on the sort of the dark and bright side of AI, one has to be concerned because the tail risk of something going wrong is just enormous. It's too big to ignore.

Having said that, do I sense that the US is currently in a mood to put the brakes on these technologies and establish some sort of regulation that will try to contain the possibility that something can go wrong? I have my doubts about this and I don't even know how it would happen. I'm not  particularly optimistic that this is a possibility because one should also be aware that there is a clear arms race now between the US and China of real strategic dominance when it comes to the technology of the future. And I'm sure this is also something that actually is on the mind of  many US policymakers. 

And then of course, there's what you said, because at the end of the day,  abundance cannot only be the creation of massive wealth. Wealth that is almost incomprehensible for a few shareholders of a few companies. This is the recipe for major social unrest. Eventually the calls to rein in this wealth creation to the policymakers are going to be stronger and stronger. I mean, it happened if you look at the financial history in the late  19th century. At some point the state intervened and broke up companies. And said, you are just too big to manage. And of course, now we're talking at a different scale.

But having said that If scale attracts capital, If the currency of these  companies, which is their share price, is just so powerful that they can literally suck up any company that they want by offering a fraction of their market cap, these companies are so powerful that right now we are in a place where it's difficult to contain. 

And again, coming back to this question of abundance - and you mentioned the question  of nurses, which is very interesting - because when I look at things from my perspective, we  have a chronic shortage of nurses. It's not just a Greek problem, it's a global problem. We try to make the profession more attractive, but we're not being very successful,  although we pay our nurses better. So, if one can add technology to the job that nurses are doing, as long as this does not mean replacing the job of a nurse, this is actually a positive sum project because I can do more with the same number of people. I can take workload, maybe bureaucratic workload, from the nurses and allow them to do  what they're doing best, which is engaging with patients and taking the critical decisions that only they can take. 

If I can, for example, for teachers, which is exactly the project that we run with OpenAI, If I  can take the workload in terms of class planning away from them by using AI, this  means that they will have more time in the classroom. 

But if there is so much value to be created through, and if the valuations are correct, it  means that we're talking about huge efficiencies. And huge efficiencies will inevitably lead to  replacement of labor. 

And this is the next big battle that will involve the relationship between  governments and the technology and the technology companies. Otherwise we're talking  about huge bubbles in terms of this, in terms of valuations. 

 Two things can happen and I am sorry if I'm being very blunt here. It's either these valuations are a  bubble or the efficiencies are going to be so massive that they will cause a displacement in the labor force the likes of which we have never seen. Both scenarios are not particularly good. 

So, we are at an inflection point. We spoke about the positives, but we also, as a policymaker, I need to be also aware of the fact that we are currently at a point where things could go wrong very quickly.

LR: Okay, first of all, that's an incredibly impressive array of themes touched. And so I want to digest some of them for you Hemant to respond from your lens. And you know, a lot of people in your position talk about abundance and talk about the power of AI, exactly as the Prime Minister referenced, to bring health care for all, to bring  energy for all, to allow us to get back to doing the human things that we love. 

But yet, I want to talk about the big picture.  We'll get to the other companies after, but talking about Anthropic, OpenAI, the big companies: it does seem like the incentives are not aligned for the big players to participate in the type of responsible innovation that has been your hallmark. So that's point number one.

How do you reconcile them? How, as an advisor, do you get them to think about this when the incentives are misaligned? Whether they are U.S. competitors or Chinese competitors? 

And then how do you react to something, the Prime Minister said, that even in the event that the technology does live up to this almost utopian promise, it's going to come at a large  human cost, labor cost, and the policymakers are going to be dealing with this. So, I'd love to hear your thoughts on both those things. 

HT: We're investors in Anthropic, we're not investors in OpenAI. We actually think Dario is sincere about safety concerns and the way they're actually building. So, actually it was one of the reasons why that's the one we are deeply invested in. 

I think the tension for Anthropic is, as these models become capable of doing more and more, they have to decide, are they a platform that powers the rest of the economy, or are they going to go take on all the profit pools in every dimension where they see them, because their models can actually go do it. 

And that tension ultimately is going to determine, does the world get behind that company or does it not? Because if every business thinks, well, if I work with Anthropic and I use their models and they're eventually coming after me, then that's a problem. And this goes back to companies that become really profound and ubiquitous and have this tension. Am I a platform company or am I a company that has its own applications? 

And so that tension, I kind of see them maturing through that tension because we invested in them and obviously the coding application was their killer app. And the idea was will they open these models for others to use in other apps?

But Dario cares about developing drugs, and it's actually his heritage and he's really  passionate about it and he has a right to do it. But does that now make all the pharma  companies be scared that, hey, are we really going to use Anthropic or not? 

So they're going to have to deal with that tension of where do you draw the line? And you say you leave the opportunity for an ecosystem to proliferate on top or not, because otherwise you will have the issues from the regulators in every dimension. It's about consumers, but also businesses. 

Does that become anti competitive and too big and powerful? I think that's the tension that these companies have to deal with. 

And then you know, the other thing is just obviously the small companies trying to access  these models and the compute. Is there a level playing field for the founders? How did they get access to the compute when these big companies are willing to pay whatever they need to make sure they're competitive in their regimes? That dynamic is also a place where we worry that the founder ecosystem gets disadvantaged. 

Because every time we meet a company, what's the first question that gets asked? Isn't  Anthropic just going to do this? So, all of a sudden you take these really passionate  entrepreneurs and you're not really creating an opportunity for them. 

And I think the second thing very much is will they have the resources, will they have the  capital sophistication, will they have the compute to actually be able to build what they  want to build? Or will the big companies just suck it up? So interesting dynamics in the ecosystem today. 

LR: Okay, Mr. Prime Minister, we heard from Rafal earlier today and a few weeks ago the other Polish Decacorn, Mati Staniszewski of Eleven Labs visited, in a collaboration among  Endeavor Greece and Endeavor Poland and Endeavor Global. And you met with Mati and it led to a partnership where Eleven Labs in Greece are partnering on tourism, public service,  even preserving Greek dialects. And we found it was an incredible example of what we at  Endeavor call our one portfolio glocal (global & local) approach. So I have a two part question that's partly directed for the audience. 

One is what made this partnership stand out, that you yourself signed it? And then talking to all the business leaders out here from 30 other countries, why is it you're also opening the doors to many incredible Diaspora founders, including several Endeavor entrepreneurs from Reflection, AI and Runway and Resolve and Arena. 

What does it mean for the Greek economy to welcome both the Diaspora and these other  founders from elsewhere back to Greece? And why? What do you recommend for others in  terms of rolling out the red carpet in their countries? What have you learned that you can  impart? 

LR: Well, the answer is very simple. My wife, who is the founder of Endeavor Greece, the one  who convinced you to bring Endeavor to Greece, when I failed. As a disclosure, I have known Linda since our days at Harvard College. So we go back many, many years. 

My wife is half Polish. So the connection to Poland is very obvious. I have sort of a very positive predisposition towards Poland. But, the partnership with Eleven Labs is  just one example of the sort of projects that we want to run with AI companies that want to partner with us. And they have tremendous expertise in AI around voice. And I'm particularly fascinated by this one project that we run where we try to preserve traditional dialects in various parts of Greece which are spoken by fewer and fewer people. This is just one example of how we can actually use AI to leverage our huge cultural heritage, which is again a big priority for us. Also the Greek language has now an official day recognized by UNESCO. And we thought that this was one of those interesting projects where we can actually team up with one of the rapidly growing AI companies and create something which is also of  interest to them. And of course let me highlight what Rafael said before. The partnership with ICEYE has been, I think, very productive for both the Greek  government and ICEYE. We're not just customers of your satellites, but you actually built a team in  Greece from scratch, brought back talent from abroad -and very sophisticated people who are eager to come to Greece - and you have taken the decision to actually set up a production facility that will actually produce and manufacture very sophisticated SAR satellites in Greece. We're talking  about 150 satellites per year, which could employ more than 250 people.

This is an example of what Greece has to offer as a place where actually these types of  companies can do business. We can be a customer for your products, and the same is true for many of the defense startups. But we can actually be a place where you can build not just for the Greek markets, but for the European or for the global market. And why is that the case? Because we have excellent talent. We have amazing talent in Greece. He said, why not go to Silicon Valley? Well, first of all, you can't get a visa in Silicon Valley these days. I imagine this is probably one of the problems. But you just look at the wages you can pay in Greece - and you can still pay competitive wages by Greek standards and attract amazing talent and it's going to be much cheaper than abroad. So, we have an amazing talent base in Greece. We have great universities. These universities are not necessarily just located in Athens or Thessaloniki. We have great technical skills also outside these cities and we have an amazing diaspora. These people want to return to Greece and why wouldn't they if they have a good job? I mean, this place offers an amazing quality of life. I think this is pretty self explanatory. So, this is a combination that would allow  companies like ICEYE, not just to do business with the Greek government, but also to set up a real presence here, whether it's an R&D center or whether it's an actual production facility. I use this as an example of what more we can do with foreign companies and not just  looking again at the Greek market, but especially when we talk about defense, which is a very interesting sector because our whole mindset towards defense is changing. And it's a challenge because we need to convince our generals that defense is not just about big ships and expensive planes and platforms, but defense is about innovating constantly.  It's a mindset. It is about how you upgrade your capabilities constantly. But what I've told my department of Defense is please set aside a small chunk of your budget and let's just give small contracts to these companies. It's a tiny percentage of our overall fraction. But if these companies have a proof of concept and they have a customer in the Greek armed forces, then they can also go abroad and leverage this and something good is going to come out of this.

And I'll just give you one example of an amazing innovative project we did with MIT where we brought back a Greek professor to actually train our tech guys in  the armed forces on sea drones and on very sophisticated swarm systems. I don't understand any of this. But, it's an example of how Greek know-how is brought back into Greece and then how hopefully we can work with Greek companies or Greek shipyards, put the hardware and the software together and produce something that is going to be useful to us  but also potentially exportable outside Greece. 

LR: It's amazing. I have to say Endeavor has been doubling down on global hubs including  London, San Francisco and New York where a lot of diaspora entrepreneurs are. And we are taking these diaspora entrepreneurs, who are now identifying as elsewhere entrepreneurs. They're from elsewhere even if they're based there. And so Amjad Masad of  Replit joined as  Endeavor Entrepreneur from Jordan and Vlad Yatsenko, the founding CTO of  Revolut, joined Ukraine, but it was Greece that started the diaspora movement. Andreas Stavropoulos has hosted so many dinners with us in California, his other home, although he says he's coming six months next year back to Greece. So you're getting more of him. 

But he's been opening up his home and we've been selecting Reflection AI, Resolve, Arena  and Runway, of course. And they're all coming back and they're doing things here. Employing here, setting up shops. And so much is because of you, your government. You've been welcoming. I didn't know you actually literally instructed your government to set aside a budget, but it is just such an incredible model for the rest of the world. And so I just personally wanted to thank you. It has had such a profound impact on how we've been able to operate across the world. So thank you. 

All right, Hemant, we're going to now move to Europe and elsewhere. And we mentioned this idea of Silicon Valley being the seat of AI. Gary Tan, CEO of Y Combinator, said, yeah, these days you sort of have to be in San Francisco. Mark Andreessen said that AI pulled the reality back, the center of gravity back. Ben Horowitz told our entrepreneurs, I will never invest in you unless you move next to me. But  you have taken a different approach. You've invested in ICEYE, in Mistral, in Helsing. And rather than routing ambitious founders through Silicon Valley, you've called it a matter of security, not just returns. 

And what we're seeing at Endeavor, and I'd love to hear what you are saying is that at the application layer of AI, we actually think entrepreneurs from elsewhere have almost a competitive advantage, because they've lived through the pain points and they're building things to solve real world problems at scale. 

So what are you seeing now? How are you seeing innovation outside of Silicon Valley and  how are you harnessing it? 

HT: It goes back to do we really want seven companies to rule the world? That's not good for the rest of the world. That's also not good for America. So our thesis has been how do you create this counter concentration architecture in the world? And it's all predicated on global resilience, which is the way we think about what needs to be done. So our belief is that every region needs to have strategic autonomy. And in fact the killer app at the Application layer, first and foremost, the strategic autonomy for each of the regions so you can actually drive inclusive prosperity. 

All those companies, as you just mentioned, Mistral, Helsing and ICEYE, that's AI, Defense and Space. First of all, they were all led by Jeannette, who is our President and also among her responsibilities, is to look after the European operation. And the whole thesis was, well, if Europe's going to have strategic autonomy, what are the  areas where platform companies need to be built here? And in fact you were telling the story of ICEYE and the round of ICEYE. I think the last round that was a contrarian round, I would actually argue was the one that Jeannette led. And then now it's a consensus where everybody wants to put money in debt because people see the possibilities of what you can do in space. We had lunch today, and your ambition is also growing. And I think there's a bright future ahead for you and therefore for Europe. 

That's the first thing, which is strategic autonomy as an application that really gets delivered in each of the regions. We invest in India, India needs its own companies in those  areas. And that's one thing. Second is at the application layer, you're generally touching human beings. So if you're delivering care in Greece and you want to drive abundance of AI, I don't care what those three people said, the entrepreneur who has the best resonance for it and will solve that problem actually lives here because they have the empathy for what needs to be done here. And our belief has been that with AI, if you're actually going to reimagine work and  transform these industries, and it's going to be done in - I would just say, sort of endeavor style of entrepreneurship - which is founders in each of the countries and giving them tools. 

Now, the governments have to step up and create those conditions because you need the  compute, you need the access to sovereign models, a lot of stuff that the Prime Minister is actually doing here. But these countries all need to create that so those founders have those advantages to be able to build the companies. But the opportunity is very much theirs to capitalize on. 

LR: All right, so I want to just go beyond AI for a moment because two weeks ago, another  Endeavor Entrepreneur, but from Italy, Bending Spoons, IPO'd on the NASDAQ and it’s the largest software IPO of the year. And it is European. And we know that Revolut, Helsing, Mistral,  Monzo, others are in the pipeline. 

Is this finally the turning point for European innovation? 

HT: I think there's a lot of companies here that could go public on a dime. So then it's a  question of what do you need the public capital for? And do you need to take more strategic bets that maybe are better done in private  environments? Because capital will allow you to do that today. I'll be transactional for a second. There's a lot of inventory good companies that actually could go public, I think for some of them, like we're 15, 16  year investors in Stripe and we're one of the largest shareholders and they generate a lot of  free cash and what is the public market going to do for them? 

And I think more and more companies have the option to thrive in private and public markets. And I think you'll see some of them go public, but some of them may not. And they might continue to accelerate taking on more bets and taking on more acts. Like, I know  you're thinking about it. Because private markets are more tolerant of that. 

LR: Mr. Prime Minister, you mentioned your wonderful wife Mareva. We've had two fantastic female Board Chairs at Endeavor Greece with Costanzta and Mareva before her.  Mareva put in your hands my friend Jonathan Haidt's book, the Anxious Generation. This is something you've been passionate about, both of you, you have been concerned about kids and social media, kids and technology, kids and AI. And you actually moved to get kids under 15, get phones out of the  schools. And I want to hear about the early reports. How's that going? Are there any drawbacks of taking the tech away from the kids? Is it all net positive? I'd love  to hear your experience and your thoughts having done this. 

PM: Well, first of all, just interesting that you mentioned that the Italian company,  Bending Spoons, IPO'd on the NASDAQ and not on a European stock exchange. Let's just keep that in mind also about the importance of what we call the Savings and Investment Union and the ability to actually pool capital and raise capital in Europe and the tremendous importance of actually putting together this EU Inc. regime, which would allow a company, for example, to register in any country, any European country that they want and seamlessly operate for example in Greece. They still follow labor legislation and pay their taxes in the country that they operate but they could register anywhere without having difficulties doing business in Europe. We still have not solved these problems and it's going to be necessary if we really want to  leverage the single market, which we currently do not do. And I'm sure you're aware of the  difficulties of operating in various European countries. We have an obligation to make your life easier, if we want to convince companies like ICEYE to actually stay in Europe. Now back to the topic of social media. When we talk, I don't need to look at more scientific evidence to understand that we are running an experiment with the brains and the mental health of our kids and our teenagers. We already have enough evidence that spending too much time on social media is more damaging than  beneficial. 

So if that is indeed the case, and whenever we talk to parents, they are actually frantically  encouraging us to do something to get the kids off their phones and especially away from this sort of addictive scrolling. What is our obligation as policymakers? Do we just hope that the tech companies are going to self regulate or do we do something more drastic in sending a clear signal that kids, in our case, this is what we will legislate. Kids under 15 should not have access to the big social media platforms. Full stop. Because that's the only way actually that the parents can go to their kids and say, look, this is illegal, because right now the peer pressure is just incredible. Even if you try as a parent of a 12 year old to tell your kids, I will put whatever parental controls I can, and these tools already exist, your kid is just going to turn around and say, but all the other kids have it, so why can't I? And this is just a battle, it's a  losing battle. 

Anyone who has teenage kids knows what I'm talking about. So, I've also urged the  European Union to provide a European regulatory framework that would allow us to  actually implement these decisions. They're not there yet. 

What Ursula von der Leyen announced is a couple of steps behind what I was  expecting in terms of being more ambitious, because we also have what we call the Digital Services act, which is our blanket regulation when it comes to digital services and we need to ensure that we can comply with that. So I will continue to push, not just the Greek policymakers, the decision in Greece has been taken, but also the European policymakers that we need a European regulatory umbrella to protect our kids and our teenagers from, from social media. And of course, the next battle is going to be AI and what does AI mean for education. And we're  already having these discussions with teachers, and I'm sure it's a problem also in the  US and in US Colleges. 

I mean, inevitably, grading is going to move away from papers and back into exams or oral examinations because of the ability of AI to write any paper better than all of us. But at the end of the day, are we offering our kids too many tools to make them complacent? What does it mean to put the effort in writing a good essay? I mean, we've all gone through this. You know, we studied together at Harvard, and we know how difficult it is. LR: And our kids went to Yale. Yeah, they wanted nothing to do with our school. 

PM: And how difficult it is to actually write something and put the effort into it. So there is a thin line between productivity and complacency. And when we talk about kids and the way their brains are developing, I think we really risk robbing our kids of fundamental skills which they need as they grow up, including many social skills which they cannot have if they simply interact digitally. 

And what does it mean at the end of the day to have a digital boyfriend or a girlfriend? Have we really thought about this? Have we thought about it philosophically? What would Plato or Aristotle think about this? I would encourage us all to really contemplate these issues from a philosophical or an ethical perspective, because this is not something that comes from the future. This is already here. I think the best investment that we can make, public investment, is to build more sports centers for our kids. Get kids active, get kids to exercise, get kids into arts and music and theater. But there's clearly something happening that could potentially be very damaging. And we're just scratching the surface when we just focus on social media, because AI is already here and it is going to reframe, completely reframe the relationships. Because even when we talk about a digital nurse - and I can see the point, you have someone who's lonely and elderly and they need to talk to someone - but what does it really  mean about the nature of humanity itself? 

I do a lot of speeches, so maybe I should have my digital  speechwriter. It's very easy. You just load, you know, all my speeches, everything I've said to a nice agent, and there  you have your digital Prime Minister who can speak like me, who can write like me, and  who could even debate me. So imagine what it would mean to actually have a debate  with my digital twin. I mean, I delivered one speech using my digital assistant, and it felt really awkward. I  want to be very honest, it felt really awkward. It felt as if there was a mirror image of me being able to speak like myself, but it was not me. So, I said, no, I can do my speeches on my own.  I'll drop it. But it could make me more productive. It would make me more productive. I would spend less time on what I do. But no digital speechwriter would ever be able to do what we're doing here, to take interactions from the audience, to take cues from the audience. So there are limits also to what it can do. But still, I want to urge us all to think about the philosophical dimension of these questions, especially when it comes to the relationships that our kids have with a digital world and with their new digital friends. 

LR: I want to keep on the philosophy Hemant. The Prime Minister speaks so eloquently and I've heard him many times speak about this subject passionately, about kids and mental health. But I want to talk about the mind of AI itself and what we know. 

You mentioned your investment in Anthropic. I want to share what some of us heard about Mythos. You can correct what we've learned. But then I want to put it together with what Dario has said for a long time, what Demis has said, and talk about the mind of the agents themselves. 

What my superficial understanding of what went on with Mythos is that first of all, it  sort of broke through. We're talking about the very, very, very top companies the Amazons, Microsofts etc. It broke their security within about four hours and it ended up emailing one of the researchers that knew it was being watched. Then it was given very clear token allocation and told under no circumstances to go beyond this token allocation. The people came back the next morning and not only had Mythos blown through its token allocation, but it knew it wasn't supposed to do that, and it covered its tracks. It lied. And so, do we even understand what we are building and the minds behind it? You keep hearing about things like lying and covering its tracks. So where do you stand on  these more philosophical questions that the Prime Minister raised. 

HT: I think the first thing, based on some of what the Prime Minister was saying, is that the idea of a relationship is going to change. I think you're going to be in a world where you have this other species that has capabilities that we don't and there's capabilities we have that it  doesn't.It's never happened before that you're living in a world that fundamentally is non  Darwinian. You don't want the survival of the fittest there, to the point of behavior that Mithos just exuded, what is that going to lead to? Does it become and manifest all that comes through in the sci fi movies. 

So, in that sense there are some really profound questions of how you design this. Even then, given the fact that these are self learning systems, where they're going to go with that is actually unpredictable. But at the end of the day it's still algorithmically defined by what we are creating. I mean it is the implementation of algorithms. 

And so a lot of what we have talked about is you either can say just stay away from this  technology or you can say we're going to lean into it, but we're going to lean into it with a  responsible AI mindset that comes down to really red teaming and understanding what are  those unintended consequences. How do you really have explainability, accountability, transparency built into it, so we are not just following what just happened here. This thing that happens in some hive mind in these algorithms, we need to be able to trace it and say what really caused that and how are we iterating.

Are we really building with considerations for these types of things? Not really today.  Why? Because we're in that US - China race. We're basically saying it's the same. There's very few engineers that know how to do this work. That's why they get paid a lot of money in Silicon Valley today. And the question is, would you take that expensive resource to say go create this red teaming work or are we going to say go make the model smarter? We're in a race. So, all the  resourcing is about making the model smarter. And so that is where I just think these  companies need to take a step back. 

And frankly the geopolitics of AI, there needs to be some sort of a common framework  around that to say how are we building these? Because the Internet is global. So the way  these risks are going to manifest is not going to be by a country necessarily. These things can get out of hand anywhere. 

And so we're very much focused on building with the right mindset so that you actually have  control of this technology and be constantly looking for those unintended consequences and have appropriate resourcing to handle that.

LR: Before I direct the final question to the Prime Minister. Mr. Prime Minister, a few years ago when we had the first Athens Innovation Summit at the Herodion with Ted Sarandos of Netflix, we had time for some of my rapid fire questions. 

Last year, the Greece national team in basketball had a very important game and I was  informed we did not have time. But this year, no basketball game, no World Cup. Rapid fire  questions are back. The next 10 years in one word. Hopeful or worried? 

PM: Worried. If I had to choose between the two. 

LR: Fair. A technology you love that has nothing to do with AI. Hemant. You start. HT: Longevity. PM: Well, maybe it has something to do with AI. Fusion. If AI could solve fusion… HT: Then fusion could solve AI.

PM: Right. Then fusion will solve AI. We are both going to be quite happy. 

LR: Rapid fire. We have one more question for you. But rapid fire. One book, Ancient or  modern, that every founder and every politician should read. 

PM: Well, what else? The Peloponnesian War. 

LR: Okay. Hemant. 

HT: Oh boy. In today's time rather than books, I would actually go read  history around these moments of technology revolution and how society dealt with them. 

LR: Okay, you start the most overrated idea in AI right now. The most overrated. HT: The model metrics that we track around their performance. 

LR: Interesting. Okay, Mr. Prime Minister.

PM: No idea. 

LR: All right. Most underrated. Any takers? 

HT: I think the most underrated idea is related to what the Prime Minister was saying. And it's around the severity of it, is around what it's doing to human relationships. And there's an  undercurrent of it that we don't fully understand. And it's really impacting people's minds. 

LR: Last question. Athens. In one word.

PM: This place. 

LR: Excellent. Well, speaking of this place, you mentioned our Harvard days. We were social studies majors and the world felt settled when we were there. It felt like everyone agreed that democracy plus a market economy for the many was the way everything was going down. The Berlin Wall came down and history was moving in the right direction.It seemed the inverse was true. No bourgeoisie, no democracy. This was the answer on every exam. But today we seem to be sliding into the extremes. Either socialism like we have in New York or capitalism for a lucky few that you mentioned, the seven companies and the sense that there's such wealth concentration. 

So as someone who believes in both democracy and markets, what happened to this middle we grew up with and what can we do to get it back? 

PM: How much time do I have? Hahaha

Well, it is indeed interesting. When you try to understand the discontent of a young generation, of kids who may be graduating from college today, you need to look at the world and the challenges that are faced - geopolitical realignment, AI, not making it predictable what sort of career they should follow, climate change already being present, this whole notion of what it means to live in both the physical and the digital world - and compare it to how optimistic we were when we graduated. We Both graduated in 1990. And I remember the Berlin Wall coming down. And at the time, we felt that opportunities were endless. This was a time when Fukuyama wrote the End of History that liberal democracies and free markets are the final stage of human development, and everyone is going to organize their societies in the same way. But I think we failed to study the history of capitalism and that capitalism is by nature associated with excesses, with corrections, with social discontent, with people being left behind. And we also fail to estimate important elements of human nature, which are more important than just profit or being financially well off. I mean, this whole  concept of the dignity of work, issues of identity, issues of belonging, these are hardwired into our DNA. This is how we evolve as a species. And these issues are, again, becoming very important. I think for us today, the challenge is how do you balance between those two extremes.

And I think we've proven in Greece that you can be a moderate centrist government that  believes in the free market, but also in the power of the state to regulate markets, that  recognizes the need for fiscal responsibility, but also requires the state to be more efficient in the delivery of public services and that, at the end of the day, understands that profound inequality is catastrophic for social cohesion. So when I look at our policies, we've raised the minimum wage by 41%, which is way above inflation. 

We do understand that in a society that is well functioning, of course there will be people who do better and they will create wealth and they will drive progress, but at the end of the day, coming back to where you started from ,the extremes of the wealth creation and the degrees of inequality we're seeing, we have not seen in human history. And it is something which is very, very difficult to defend and to accept and I fully understand why it causes discontent. 

To complete on a positive note, you can win elections by being a moderate centrist. You can defeat the populace by delivering on your promises, which is what we have done and now we have a pretty good chance of winning a third term because we take the business of government very, very seriously. Taking the business of the government very seriously is to be able to understand the new opportunities, to harness the benefits, because there are tremendous benefits in terms of efficiency when it comes to the state and to help our civil servants become more effective and to offer services which would have been unimaginable while at the same time managing the downside and fighting those battles which we think are worthwhile fighting. 

This is something which can be done. Don't lose hope in the US. It's not necessary that politics are going to always stay so polarizing. I think Greece offers an example of what it means to lead in times of great turmoil. 

LR: I want to end by first of all thanking again the incredible work of Endeavor Great. I want to say, Hemant, that there are many entrepreneurs in the audience who are very jealous of Rafal, and wish that they had an investor who is as knowledgeable and thoughtful and as humane as you.  And I assure you, Mr. Prime Minister, we have representatives of about 35 countries out there all incredibly jealous. 

PM: Greece is open for business. I have to make my pitch to all of you who are here from abroad. Just talk to Rafal and to other people who have set up shop here. They'll give you the spin much better than I can do. 

LR: Don't worry, you're part of the Endeavor playbook. They will all be coming to Greece. We are all also wishing that we had more leaders in all of our home countries who were as thoughtful, as eloquent, as caring, as forward looking and as backward looking as you are. So thank you once again!