Skip to content

Interview with Dr. Ricardo Rosselló


Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

Publication (Outlet/Website): WIN ONE/Phenomenon (World Intelligence Network)

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2021/03/12

Ricardo Rosselló Nevares holds a PhD in Bioengineering and Biotechnology. He graduated from Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) with a Bachelor’s degree in Chemistry and Biomedical Engineering with a concentration in Developmental Economics. Rosselló continued his academic studies at the University of Michigan, where he completed a master’s degree and a PhD in Bioengineering and Biotechnology. After finalizing his doctoral studies, he completed post-doctoral studies in neuroscience at Duke University, in North Carolina, where he also served as an investigator. Dr. Rossello was a tenure track assistant professor for the University of Puerto Rico Medical Sciences Campus and Metropolitan University, teaching courses in medicine, immunology, and biochemistry.   Dr. Rossello’s scientific background and training also makes him an expert in important developing areas such as genetic manipulation and engineering, stem cells, viral manipulation, cancer, tissue engineering and smart materials.

In 2010 Dr. Rossello cofounded Prosperous Biopharm, a company that works with protein therapeutic its patented products TransBody™; a class of re-designed, engineered stable proteins that can specifically bind intracellular targets, providing a powerful new way to create novel drugs and targeted delivery. Dr. Rossello has two patents under his name; one as an HIV-1 fusion protein inhibitor (A long-acting hiv-1 fusion inhibitor (Patent ID: CN103755810B)), and another for chronic pain (Nav1.7 inhibitor and its remodeling method for Chronic Pain and Cancer Targeting (Patent ID: CN105348392B).  He is currently working on COVID19 drug therapeutic compounds to inhibit viral infection. 

His experiences in the intersection of policy and science thus give him a unique perspective on a variety of critical issues for the present and the future. In addition, Mr. Rossello possesses a broad academic background, being a tenure track professor in the University of Puerto Rico and The Metropolitan University for 5 years, and having research experience for over 15 years. His work centered around reprograming cells and stem cells, using viral transfection and viral design, to understand their nature and develop tools and strategies that can be beneficial basic and translational research.  His investigative work with stem cells has been recognized by various societies.  His research has been published in prestigious journals such as Th Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, eLife and others. Dr. Rossello was recognized as a member of the Iberoamerican Academy of Science and Culture for his scientific and academic achievements, the youngest to ever receive this recognition.

As an executive, Dr. Rossello was known for a strong focus on transformational policy execution. He led Puerto Rico as Governor for two and a half years, was able to, among many other things, reduce unemployment to the lowest levels in the island’s history, establish positive economic growth for the first time in over social and economic structural reform.  He also has broad experience managing disasters and recovery response.  As Governor of Puerto Rico, he spearheaded two major emergency responses, recovery and rebuilding efforts, in the aftermath of the largest natural disaster in modern US history (Hurricane Maria, 2017).

Governor of Puerto Rico (2017-2019)

Twelfth elected governor of Puerto Rico. Second youngest governor in the history of Puerto Rico, and the youngest in the United States during his tenure. Served during a time in which a US Government-created fiscal oversight board limited the island’s expenditures. Embarked on significant fiscal structural reforms that reduced the size of government by 20% (eliminating or consolidating over 30 agencies in a 2 year span) and operational costs by 17%, the single largest reduction in budget expenditures in the US.  Led the largest municipal restructuring in the history of the US. Spearheaded two major emergency responses, recovery and rebuilding efforts, in the aftermath of the largest natural disaster in modern US history. Embarked on economic and labor reforms that produced the first year of growth in over a decade in Puerto Rico (4.1% overall growth), and oversaw the lowest unemployment rates in the history of Puerto Rico. Created a local Earned Income Tax Credit, Baby Bonds and, Welfare to Work programs to enhance labor participation and diminish poverty. In 2018, his administration recorded the lowest poverty rates in the history of Puerto Rico.  Increased salaries for teachers and police officers.  Established equal pay for equal work for women (4th state/territory to do so) and increased minimum wage for construction workers to $15/hr. Created The Governors’ women affairs council, to establish progressive policy towards equality, protect women’s rights, and ensure real-time actions by the government.  Created new markets such as Medical Cannabis, Crypto Currency, Block Chain, Sports Booking, and e-gaming. Externalized tourism and investment from government to steer away from political whims, enhance effectiveness and stability.  By the same token, externalized the selection of the University of Puerto Rico’s President (first time ever), and director of the Puerto Rico Energy and Power Authority.  Implemented an incentives code reform to give transparency and visibility to all expenditures and investments made by the government, while giving a clear defined set of rules to the market.  Designed, enacted and led Education Reform (Choice, organization, transparency, and voucher programs), New Healthcare Model (Offering choice and broader coverage, guaranteeing access for all, Medicaid fraud detection unit and MMIS implemented, Medical malpractice framework), Climate Change Action (Reducing carbon emissions by 50% in 7 years, and establishing adaptation strategies), Energy Reform (42% renewables by 2023, 100% by 2050), Permits Reform (reducing the time to get permits by 80%), Anti-corruption (created the anti-corruption committee by law, created the Office of the Inspector General, established a transformational Procurement Reform).  Abolished conversion therapies for LGBT by executive order, established anti-bullying protocols, included LGBT couples in domestic violence issues, police received human rights training and created the first ever LGBTQ Governor’s Advisory Council.  Reduced crime rates by 20% during tenure, including murder rates.  Embarked on pensions reform that saved and guaranteed payment with operational expenses (paygo system, first in the US) after the pensions fund was completely decimated one month after the administration started.  Created a bill of rights for the elderly. Secured over 19.9 billon dollars from Congress in recovery funding for the island in a bi-partisan effort, this being the single largest grant from the federal government in the history of Puerto Rico. Rossello resigned office in the summer of 2019, amidst a wave of social unrest.   Frequent speaker, including delivering key-note addresses, notably on Climate Change (X-prize), Equality (NAACP, LULAC), Emergency Response and Rebuilding (Aspen Institute), and Fiscal policies (Heritage Foundation).  Participated in numerous US House and Senate hearings on energy, emergency response, fiscal crisis and political status. Governor Rossello was also elected in 2019 to be the President of the Council of State Governments (CSG), one of the largest and most prestigious organizations, comprising elected officials at the state level. 

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: So, we’ve done an extensive interview before. This one, we’re going to be focusing on high-IQ communities and the sense of community, mainly. You take these tests. You score really well. By definition, that’s not something people can do very often.

As far as a research tells us, it is mostly an innate capacity. It develops over time, but it is mostly an innate capacity – especially in adults. So, when you are finding these communities, when you are taking these tests, what is the sense of community?

What are the types of community or people can find when looking around for high-IQ societies?

Dr. Ricardo Rossello: In my case, I sort of got into this high-IQ community a little bit later in life. I took these tests for a variety of other reasons. One was the normal route. The other were tests to do some research. I was a guinea pig in one of those.

Lastly, some of them were for fun, e.g., the Titan Test, and some others that are psychologist proctored. Once I finished my term in office (Puerto Rico), I moved away from the island. I wanted to connect with certain communities of interest.

I had a scientific network based on my tenure in academia. Also, I had other public official networks. But something I never thought about presented itself, which was, “Why don’t I become a part of these high-IQ communities and figure out how to interact with some of these folks and get some very good conversations going, high-level?”

At that level, based on my experiences in public office, and so forth, I was looking for people to engage there. The full serious part was to engage and analyze everything that had just happened and see what escaped my peers and myself, to see others who were thoughtful and smart what their views were, and to connect with new friends and have new avenues to do that.

That was the objective. Unfortunately, as I started get into them, the pandemic hit.

Jacobsen: [Laughing].

Rossello: [Laughing] It becomes more of a distant setting. I am looking forward to some of the events, whether it’s Mensa International or Triple Nine Society gatherings. I’m looking forward to them. A lot of last year got cancelled.

That has been my objective. I have been able to connect virtually with some of them. I have been able to publish in some of the journals that they have; it has helped in a way as an escape for me. It helped me putting my thoughts out there and getting feedback from people in the community.

I still haven’t been able to fruitfully experience the one-on-one, which, hopefully, in 2021, I will be able to experience at some point.

Jacobsen: With Mensa International and Triple Nine Society, those are two big ones. They have that kind of size, where people can come out together and meet one another. American Mensa has upwards of 50,000 people in their membership. What have you heard about these meetups?

When I talked to the current elected Chair of American Mensa, LaRae Bakerink, she mentioned nothing this like them because they have so many things going on at various sophisticated levels, also fun things, e.g., ‘beauty’ contests [Laughing] or something. They had those at one point. [Ed. “Beauty” meaning different talents and qualities showed off.]

What would be the main attraction to you, in regard to those? For example, those scientific associations will have very niche interests and attract highly qualified people in particular areas. Mensa International is going by people who are very intelligent.

Rossello: When I approach these things, I believe I spoke to you a little bit about this last time. I divide them up into two buckets. The first bucket is classical music approach. What in theory would be my plan moving forward to structure and organize? The other is the jazz music approach.

Let’s go out there and see what happens, my goal was to see the structure, see the special interest groups, and so forth. Even though, my experience [Laughing] is somewhat unique. My goal was to see people on the frontier of those experiences and be able to relate to it.

It is to develop things moving forward. I have a two-pronged thought process on where things are going in terms of policy and politics and the role of science. I have been involved in both worlds. I could mesh those.

Practical policy on one side and a set of very niche science in stem cell research. I was looking forward more to how we could use the tools of science to not only measure them as they effect policy moving forward, but see how to make that happen.

One of my big pet peeves is that right now everybody in politics says, “Let’s follow the science,” “Let’s follow the experts.” It is a neat tagline. But there is no institutionalized way to do it. In a 12 steps ahead view of things, my bigger vision was seeing if I could find smart and interested folks, creative folks, where I can download a little of what I’ve experienced and some of my original thoughts.

My goal, in my view, was finding people committed to an endeavour like this or designing what I call a Foresight Function for government. My basic premise is policy and politics has changed in its complexity in the last 20 to 30 years.

I believe we’ve talked a little bit about this last year. In order to address complex situations, you can’t have the same run-of-the-mill answers. I think there’s  sweet spot there, where we can take this generalized mentality, “Let’s listen to the experts, let’s listen to the scientists,”and actually put it to practice and benefit society.

I think that’s one of my longer-term ambitions, finding people to coalesce behind that idea.

Jacobsen: What do you think is this barrier in political discourse to listening to experts and trusting the science? It’s not just intelligence. It’s also a kind of critical thoughtfulness about the application about what is known rather than starting from scratch when you don’t have to.

Rossello: I agree. I think the big challenge is having had worn both hats: scientists, typically, spend a lot of time studying and giving you every detail that they know about a certain thing. When it comes time to a conclusion, they don’t have one.

Politicians on the other side are 180-degrees in the other direction. They don’t spend much time wondering about the news. But they have views: Yes to this policy; no to that policy. [Laughing] My thought process behind this is how do you bridge that really big divide between that.

Because if we don’t find a way to bridge it, politicians will find the best tagline, which is “let’s listen to the experts, let’s trust science” at this point. Instead of giving a straight line to a better solution, it allows a reverse engineering to whatever it is that I want to do in an act of policy.

There are some areas, where it is evidence is clear to the me and the scientific community is climate change. It is not unanimous. That will provide some argument whereby we shouldn’t worry about climate change.

Some will gravitate towards it. Not because it fits the evidence but because it fits some narrative. I think there needs to be an institutionalized version, longstanding version that does science. That prepares for the unknown and the complex.

They likely won’t be there. It is like a SWAT squad. These very specialized police officers who are called up in really complex situations when they happen. That is the way that I see it. You institutionalize it.

Instead of searching at random where you can get your best storyline, it gets generated from within. It is complex because, like any human institution, it can go one way or the other. That’s where I think the thoughtfulness of it, the initial design in it, and the initial people in it, is really crucial.

Jacobsen: Doing the interviews with a lot of people in the communities, I’ve heard two things. It is applied to the larger, older societies. One is, “It’s just a social club.” The other is, “It’s a social club!”  

It depends about sensibility. What do you think this says about individuals looking for communities coming forward? On the one hand, they are finding something that they are precisely wanting, which is a social club.

On the other hand, there is another group. They find what they don’t want, which is a social club. They, maybe a debate club. Something more intensive.

Rossello: Let me say, I think it’s positive that it is a social club. I just don’t think both are necessarily mutually exclusive. I would tell those whoever is not quite as a happy, at least have a center where other folks can go. A certain percentage who may not be quite as happy.

You can find your brethren there on whatever interests you. I fully understand it is a social platform first and foremost. From there, the general idea is: These people get together socially and interesting thins might ensue.

I am looking forward to sitting with other people and getting ideas. If the worst thing that happens is you make one or two new friends, that’s a good outcome in my view. You just have to have those expectations.

When I go into it, I go into those two boxes. Professionally and intellectually, I would like to develop. You should never underestimate the value of relationship-creating. I found that out the hard way as a governor.

I did minimize, at one point, what somebody told me, “You need to make time to waste time.” I didn’t get it. I set it to the side as a little old man giving outdated advice. He was much smarter than I was and quite wise.

His point was: Listen, you need to set aside time to talk to people, make friendships, have friends. So, when you make policy and do these things, it is not just the intellectual or ideological binding of what you’re doing to move things forward.

It is the personal relationship in binding. In a sense, I do look forward to doing that. Because it is one of those things. From the get-go, it is unclear where it is going. Part of life is a journey. Part of life is meeting new people.

Things will likely evolve from that. In the worst-case scenario in the case of someone for social interaction, I think even for people who are introverts. It is a good exercise.

Jacobsen: What about like online fora, where people can join? There they can have formalized debate clubs, formalized conversations with people. If they are shy, they could use it more. Any thoughts on that?

Rossello: We are in a current place and time where the correct use of language matters. When I got into it, there were battles about being insulting, being too harsh. All these nasty things. I reached the immediate effect that I had seen from it.

I saw these groupings being very cautious about how they approach this. One of those is tiptoeing into the Zoom conversations.

Jacobsen: Tiptoeing [Laughing].

Rossello: They said, ‘Okay, we’re having it. We’re having a moderator. If anyone says anything insulting, and so forth, then you’re booted off forever.” It is a little daunting. Sometimes, it is a find line, particularly in these settings that are international.

Some folks from other countries may have different sensitivities than others or not at all. I think it will be challenging to moderate that kind of things. Something that I see more of a future in is the groups externalizing responsibility of these things.

We know you want to talk. We won’t get in the middle of it. We will get people. It is people from X society, but not necessarily under the umbrella of the society when you connect. I’ve seen that.

Again, I think it’s good! Particularly for somebody who may have a tougher time going into these  in-person meetings, maybe, you can connect with some of the folks. Then you have something to bind, and then you can go to in-person meetings.

I think it is a value and non-trivial, and a challenging task. It depends on what your objective is. If you go on this draconian thing, or hint at something might be wrong, I am not criticizing it. I think it will be hard for people to get into it.

People might hold back a little bit. I think that will be resolved when the pandemic ends, when you have the combination of both online and in-presence fora. That’s one point. Another added value of the online fora is seeing the developing, as a higher form of Twitter if you will…

Jacobsen: …[Laughing]…

Rossello: …You can see the thought process of it on a particular topic. That’s something also of value. Right now, I am swimming around and seeing what the best parking spot, if there is a parking spot for us there.

Jacobsen: There’s also a sensibility about not telling smart people what to do.

Rossello: [Laughing].

Jacobsen: You form a society around bringing in really smart people or extraordinarily smart people and then telling them what to do or what to say seems really wrong. It seems against proof of concept if you’re trying to do that.

If you’re thinking about some things that might round out the edges of some of these digital forms of societies, what might be some recommendations coming to mind?

Rossello: First, externalize it, empower people to monitor themselves, as you would in regular society. I think that is one of the core components. Number two, there are levels and there are levels. There needs to be a reasonable level of respect.

But obviously, when it comes to debates, sometimes, people can get aggressive. The thing is you can be aggressive about the idea. It is making the warning of “none of this language will be tolerated” is fine.

You can also state that in the forums; you can get smart people to disagree with one another. Also, another thing is levels. You don’t have to have one umbrella about it. You can say, “This forum is for us to chat, talk, know each other, to not fight, and so forth. These ones are to deal with harsher, more complex issues.”

Let’s say, if you bring about an issue of women’s rights or LGBTQ, or racism, and so forth, those are likely to turn strong opinions in one direction or another. It’s, as you stated, the premise here that people are smart. They should know where they are going and should know what to expect.

What I would not want to see is it become a sort of one-sided issue, I am seeing this in society, unfortunately, sometimes. It depends on who the messenger is, if it is a bad message of a good message.

I would hope that these communities bring forth a certain higher-level understanding, a gray area, and people can choose if they want to be more on the comfort side of things or want to engage in battle on some of these issues.

Externalizing to me is the best way to allow the reputation of the society not to be hindered by something that somebody says, at the same time, it is allowing people to move freely. It is kind of like these opinion shows.

“The opinion of x, y, and z, do not necessarily reflect the views of CNN.”

Jacobsen: [Laughing].

Rossello: I think there needs to be that sort of disclaimer.

Jacobsen: What about qualifications for societies? A large contingent of them, they’ll take the alternative tests, which may or may not measure general intelligence. If they do it, then they may not measure it very well, or in non-standard ways, as you mentioned earlier, like the Titan Test.

There are some societies that can give proctored, mainstream intelligence tests like the Bonnardel, the Stanford-Binet, the WAIS, etc. A sort of proof of IQ or something like this. Do you have any thoughts on the different levels of requirements or qualifications societies have for joining them?

Rossello: I think the way you build your society and the robustness behind it will eventually showcase the value of it. Depending on your prism of evaluation, I have taken a lot of these tests. [Laughing] Take the Cattell Culture Fair exam, it is rapid-fire, quick.

You do as much as you can. It’s standardized. You can check it what your raw score is. You put that to the percentile. It’s very tough to argue against that. On the other hand, you have these other tests that are not proctored; that they make a time recommendation.

But you can have an infinite amount of time. They do tap these more complex, elaborate problems, which I did just for fun to see where it took me. So, you know from the get-go. They’re measuring different things.

One is this crude, quick response to certain observations like the culture fair or the verbal knowledge like some of the other exams out there. These other ones are seeing what capacity you have to solve problems. Of course, on those, you can get help.

You can search for similar problems. You have all the time in the world to do so. It is measuring something different. It is, certainly, not measuring the same thing. You go from simple to complex and come back out in what might seem like the simplest outcome.

Again, the basis of these societies is being social n part. Sometimes, the social implies a negative. But it is a social environment. In IQ, you get people of a certain breadth of IQ. If you both get 160, it doesn’t mean you’re going to connect.

You might connect with somebody higher or lower in the spectrum. It doesn’t matter. It narrows down the group of people. Where you know, they are likely to be curious, likely to be looking for other people to balance ideas, likely to connect in some sort of deeper forum. You get it.

I understand that you can do this nuanced thing about “These ones are no good because they allow these” or “these ones are good…” Fine, everyone is entitled to their opinion. But they all could offer something valuable.

We are getting people interested in engaging, which have either this capacity for problem-solving, critical thinking, and creativity, or who are very much seeking to be part of that community. I think the value of that is the role of the individual to segregate how you use that, where do you participate.

So, obviously, you can see in Mensa, which I have been a longstanding member. It has this enormous structure. The value is in the big structure. From there, you can follow into the smaller structures. That has a value.

Triple Nine Society or other of these societies, they have a certain reputation for how they have been doing things all along. The other ones, and I don’t mean to mention those two, there are plenty of them.

Other newer ones that come along with different objectives. Recently, I engaged in one because they were interested in finding the role of human intelligence and artificial intelligence moving forward. I am not an expert by any stretch of the imagination on that.

But I do see the value in this foresight function in addressing 5 or 6 key questions into the future. That is one of them. One of them is artificial intelligence.

Jacobsen: What do you see as the other questions for the future?

Rossello: The climate question to me is fundamental. I not only know it scientifically. Puerto Rico is the third jurisdiction hardest hit by climate change. I – literally – saw a small island on the edge of Puerto Rico disappear in the span of a year and a half.

In 2017, I saw this happening. The artificial intelligence question is another one. Synthetic biology and what we’re going to do with it. Another one parallel to that is aging and research on aging, which is really going to put us into a position from the biological sphere.

There’s no reason why we can’t live to 200-years-old. Although, that’s wonderful. It has enormous implications for society as a whole, as the globe keeps evolving. Those are, at least, a  few of the ones at the intersection between those and how they interplay.

The role of space and sort of ‘conquering space,’ if you will, is another one. Not only scientifically because of climate change and the capacity to have a livable planet to live here on Earth. I see there is a lot of culture clash and interactions between people beating on each other. I think we need to learn a big united goal moving forward.

Half-jokingly, I said that many of these fights might end if aliens come tomorrow.

Jacobsen: Right [Laughing].

Rossello: Everyone has a uniting objective in how we confront or fight the threat if it is a threat. Parallel to that, I think space travel is another one. It could be a fun competition between countries rather than a clashing confrontation between them.

I think all these questions are important. The ethics behind those questions are important as well. You bring automated cars. It is slightly going to reduce what you have in regards to some accidents now.

But what is the automated car going to do when it decides to kill the driver or kill the pedestrians in that situation? What’s the ethics behind that? What is the boundary that we  are going to push in terms of biological information, synthetic information, and biological transformation on human beings?

I think those are relevant ethical questions moving forward. The way we are currently divided. It is going to be different answers in different places. I use this example because it is my area. Stem cells, you had the United States for a while. George Bush, Jr. never used executive power or seldom did. He used it twice for banning or limiting the scope of stem cell research.

Then you have other countries completely abolishing it. Other countries using it with complete liberal motions through it. Then you have weird intermediates. Germany was you can use human fetuses for stem cell research, but they can’t be German human fetuses.

Jacobsen: [Laughing].

Rossello: These sort of things arise in complex situations. The last century, we were used to a linear approach to solving problems. I think it is complex. I think it exponential in nature. How do we manage the downsides of technology?

It is the first set of questions I tackled. We spoke about climate change, but also pandemics before. Pandemics aren’t going anywhere anytime soon [Laughing]. You can anticipate in the next 5 or 20 years another COVID-27 coming along. Let’s hope it’s not something worse.

I think the major flaw in the response in the world in general to the virus. Policymakers were solving the problem of the virus today when the virus was 14 days ahead. I think those are the sorts of questions that are out there.

That I think are important to start addressing and to see the overall effect on society because of this.

Jacobsen: What are the barriers when public officials try to make a point with a snowball, like (Sen. James) Inhofe (R-OK, in the United States)? These  sorts of cases not just on climate change, but on any of the questions you’re proposing.

It’s not just about a scientifically literate public. It is also about leaders who are scientifically literate, more importantly probably. Yet, they are representative of the public because they are voted in by the public.

What is your prognosis in terms of these things when you have some concerns in those domains?

Rossello: It is not a straightforward answer because it is complex. I have arrived at certain thoughts on the matter. I still think whoever is the leader needs to have two general buckets now. General bucket number one is having high bandwidth.

If you’re not capable of understanding that pushing a small lever here will have an enormous repercussion over here, you’re, essentially, a figure. You’re not able to discriminate or make a smart decision based on the things moving forward.

By the same token, I think leaders need to be great storytellers as well. I think in large part this is something that I worked at; I wasn’t particularly great. I think, as you can see from this interview, I can be verbose.

Part of that quality is balancing and understanding, “If I do something here, if I was to do an honest assessment, I would need to talk to you for, probably, three hours.” The expectation is needing to express it in 180 characters or less.

Who is best suited to having the quality of understanding what is going on and making it as succinct and direct a message as possible across? I think that’s the secret sauce moving forward. I’ll give an example where I failed.

I would have press conferences. My thought process is that I’ll get a pace and answer questions. They would take two hours, and so forth. The media side would cut a 15 second snippet of something that I said, which could very easily be taken out of taken out of context within the whole of the words said by me.

I think leaders have to learn how to be smarter with that. Even though, when you understand the motor, the black box, and what is going on, it is hard to not want to explain all of it. You have to be very disciplined and make sure you say what you need to say.

Even though, you’re never going to be comfortable that you’ve explained the whole story. On top of all of that is the enormous scrutiny, if don’t say something and then something blows up, they’ll say, “You’re hiding something,” or whatnot.

Again, Scott, I don’t think there is a simple solution. What I do think, there are qualities that we should look for in future leadership. One is high bandwidth of understanding. The second is the capacity to adjust.

Things are changing so much. If you don’t change, if you just sit on your plans, then you’re likely going to crash into a wall. Third, you should have this capability of communicating effectively, storytelling.

The only way I foresee going long-term objectives nowadays is embedding them into a larger story. The best example of this is John Kennedy when he said, ‘Send somebody to the Moon.’ [Laughing] Simple, everybody understood, to the day, we use these high objectives.

We call them a moonshot. You have to be very careful and nuanced now on how you’re going to get to the moonshot. If you’re going to do things in a larger scale, where you’re going to be pressed by different angles to produce, then you’re going to have to be thoughtful about that.

Jacobsen: Ricardo [Laughing], we are out of time [Laughing].

Rossello: [Laughing] Sorry for overextending it, I hope it was useful for what you wanted to do. Thanks again for doing the first interview.


In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Based on a work at


© Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing 2012-Present. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing with appropriate and specific direction to the original content. All interviewees and authors co-copyright their material and may disseminate for their independent purposes.

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: