In a keynote address that fused engineering insights with emotional intelligence, financial technologist Joseph Plazo issued a warning to Asia’s brightest minds: the future still belongs to humans who can think.

MANILA — What followed wasn’t thunderous, but resonant—it reflected a deep, perhaps uneasy, resonance. At the packed University of the Philippines auditorium, students from Asia’s top institutions came in awe of AI’s potential to dominate global markets.

What they received was something else entirely.

Joseph Plazo, long revered as a maverick in algorithmic finance, refused to glorify the machine. He began with a paradox:

“AI can beat the market. But only if you teach it when not to try.”

Students leaned in.

It wasn’t a sermon on efficiency—it was a meditation on limits.

### Machines Without Meaning

Plazo systematically debunked the myth that AI can autonomously outwit human investors.

He displayed footage of algorithmic blunders—algorithms buying into crashes, bots shorting bull runs, systems misreading sarcasm as market optimism.

“ Most of what we call AI is trained on yesterday. But investing happens tomorrow.”

His tone wasn’t cynical—it was reflective.

Then he paused, looked around, and asked:

“ Can your code feel the 2008 crash? Not the price charts—the dread. The stunned silence. The smell of collapse?”

Silence.

### When Students Pushed Back

Bright minds pushed back.

A doctoral student from Kyoto proposed that large language models are already picking up on emotional cues.

Plazo nodded. “Yes. But sensing anger is not the same as understanding it. ”

Another student from HKUST asked if real-time data and news could eventually simulate conviction.

Plazo replied:
“Lightning can be charted. But not predicted. Conviction is a choice, not a calculation.”

### The Tools—and the Trap

He shifted the conversation: from tech to temptation.

He described traders who waited for AI signals as gospel.

“This is not evolution. It’s abdication.”

Yet he made it clear: AI is a tool, not a compass.

His systems parse liquidity, news, and institutional behavior—but humans remain in charge.

“The most dangerous phrase of the next decade,” he warned, “will be: ‘The model told me to do it.’”

### Asia’s Crossroads

In Asia—where AI is lionized—Plazo’s tone was a jolt.

“There’s a spiritual reverence for AI here,” said Dr. Anton Leung, an ethics professor from Singapore. “Plazo reminded us that website even intelligence needs wisdom.”

In a follow-up faculty roundtable, Plazo urged for AI literacy—not just in code, but in consequence.

“We don’t just need AI coders—we need AI philosophers.”

Final Words

The ending wasn’t applause bait. It was a challenge.

“The market,” Plazo said, “isn’t just numbers. It’s a story. And if your AI doesn’t read character, it won’t understand the story.”

No one clapped right away.

The applause, when it came, was subdued.

Another said it reminded them of Steve Jobs at Stanford.

He didn’t market a machine.

And for those who came to worship at the altar of AI,
it was the lecture that questioned their faith.