This content is an in-depth interview with Elon Musk, covering a wide range of topics from the future of social media and AI to space exploration, economics, philosophy, and personal views on life, family, and entrepreneurship.
Mind Map
Genişletmek için tıkla
Tam etkileşimli Mind Map'i keşfetmek için tıkla
audience is largely wannabe
entrepreneurs in India. And I feel like
all of us have so much to learn from you
because you've done it so many times
over in so many different domains. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> Uh so we will speak to them today and I
will try and center all my questions in
that direction so they can take
advantage of this conversation and maybe
You want a coffee?
>> Um, sure. Why not? >> Okay.
>> Okay.
>> Okay. Are we going to be talking for a while?
while?
>> I hope we are.
>> Okay. Good. Sure. Um,
Um, >> Mna,
>> Mna,
>> may I trouble you for a coffee?
>> Can we get another coffee?
>> Anything? Uh, cappuccino, I guess. All right.
right.
>> Are you a coffee drinker, El? Oh,
>> yeah. Yeah. I mean, yeah, I copy once
usually in the mornings, you know. >> Okay.
>> Okay.
>> One a day kind of thing.
>> You want to wait for it?
The first thing I must say is you're a
lot bigger and bulkier, muscular than I
would have thought you are. >> Oh.
>> Oh.
>> Oh, stop. You must make me blush.
>> Really? Seriously?
>> Yeah. I mean, look on the internet. I'm
>> Yeah. Essentially,
what percentage of internet
>> Yeah. is spend on Twitter. Is there a
number to it on X?
>> Well, so we have like about 600 million
monthly users.
>> Um well, although it it can spike up if
there's if there's some major event in
the world, it can get up to I don't know
800 million or or or a billion.
>> Um if there's some major event in the
world. So, uh so so that there's I don't
know 250 300 million per week type of
thing. It's a pretty decent number. It
tends to be
>> um readers, you know, people that read words.
words.
>> Um you know, so
>> do you think that'll change? Um yeah, I
mean there's
uh there's certainly a lot of video on
on um on the X systems, but uh at this
point increasing amounts of video, but I
think where where uh the X network is
strongest is among people who who think
who think a lot and read a lot, you
know. So it's that's where it's going to
be strongest because we have words
and and you know so um am among readers
writers and thinkers I think X is number
one in the world
>> as far as social media goes the form factor
factor
if you had to wager a guess for tomorrow
>> how much is text how much is video
I've heard you speak about maybe voice
and hearing being the next form of
communication with AI, what happens to X
in its true form? How does it evolve?
>> Yeah. So, I I do think most interaction
is going to be video in the future. Uh
most interaction is going to be uh
real-time video with AI. So, real-time
video comprehension, real-time video
generation. Um that's going to be most
of the load. And that's how it is for
most of the internet right now. It's um
most of the internet is video. Um text
is a pretty small percentage but the the
text tends to be higher value generally
or more it's more densely compressed
information like um
yeah so
but if you say like what is the most
amount of bits generated and compute
spent it's certainly going to be video
>> so I used to be a shareholder of X a
very small one okay
>> and I got paid when you bought it when
you bought Twitter and you made it U
U
happy decision. Glad you did it.
>> Yeah. Yeah. I think it was important. Um
you know, I felt like uh Twitter was
heading in or had had gone in a
direction that had sort of a more of a
negative influence on the world. Um you
know, it was it was I mean, of course,
this depends on one's perspective. Some
people will say, well, actually, they
liked the way it was and now they don't
like it. Um but the I think the
fundamental thing was that um Twitter
was amplifying
I would say a fairly pretty far left by
most people's standards in the world's
ideology because of where it was based
in San Francisco. So and and they
actually suspended a lot of people on
the right. Uh um so
uh so from their perspective even
someone in the center would be would be
far right. If you're if you're far left
anyone in the center is far right
because you're you it's just a political
on the political spectrum they're um
they're just as far left as you get in
the United States and in San Francisco.
So what I've tried to do is just restore
it to be balanced and and uh centrist.
So there haven't been any left-wing
voices that have been suspended or you
know banned or uh deamplified or
anything like that. Now some of them
have chosen to just go go somewhere
else. Um but uh but at this point it is
the the the operating principle of the
of the X system is to adhere to any
country's laws but not to put our thumb
on the scale beyond the laws of a country.
When I think of social media, um,
>> thank you. When I think of social media, Elon,
Elon,
I feel like even data suggests that the
current incumbents seem to be losing
traction amongst the youngest of audience.
audience. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> Even platforms like Instagram, uh, I
mean, they're not exactly like Twitter,
but platforms across the board. If one
had to rework social media and build
something bottom up, what do you think
>> Well, I mean, I I don't think that much about
about
um about social media to be frank. I
mean, it's I can mostly just want to
have have something where there's um a
in the case of of X, kind of a global
town square,
>> uh where where people can say what they
want to say uh with words, pictures,
video um where there's a secure
messaging system. We've recently added
the ability to to do audio and video
calls. Um, so you're really trying to
bring the the the world the world
together into um a a collective
consciousness and um
that that's I guess different from just
saying like what is the most dopamine
generating video stream that one could
make? Um which uh you know you I think
can be a little bit of brain rot
frankly. um you know, if if you're just
watching videos that just cause dopamine
hits one after another, um but lack
substance, then I think those those are
not great that that's not a great way to
spend time. Um but I I do think that's
actually what a lot of people are going
to want to watch. Um, so if you say like
total internet usage, it's going to
probably be optimizing for, you know,
neur neurotransmitter generation, like
it it there's somebody getting like a a
kick out of it, >> right?
>> right?
>> But it's it's it's it becomes like a
drug type of thing. So,
>> um, but I'm not really after
my goal is not to do that. I I guess I
could do that if I if I wanted to, but
um uh that's I I just want to really
have um a a global platform that brings together
together
like like I said like it's come becomes
as close to sort of a collective consciousness
consciousness
uh of humanity as possible. Um and um
you know like and one of the things that
we've introduced uh for example is
automatic translation. So um so because
I think it would be great to bring
together uh what what people say in many
different languages um and but
automatically translated for the
recipient. So you have the collective
consciousness not not just of of say
people in a particular language group
but you have
um the thoughts of of people in you know
every language group. And why is that
important collective consciousness to
have one platform?
>> I I guess uh
I I guess it's you could also say like
like why uh
you know if you consider humans like
humans are composed of around 30 to 40
trillion cells um
um and
and
you know there's trillions of synap
but but but there's there's no the why a
bit. I mean I guess it's just so we can increase
increase
our understanding our our understand
understanding of the the universe. Um, so
I I guess I like I had this sort of
question about what's the meaning of
life, you know, um like why
why is anything important? Um
um you know why why why are we here? Um
what's the origin of the universe? Where
what is the end? Um
What are the questions that we don't
even know to ask? Um,
and probably the questions we don't even
know to ask are the most important ones.
Um, so I'm just trying to I guess
understand what's going on. What is what
is going on in this reality? Um,
is is this is this reality? And um >> um
>> um
>> and where did you get when you asked
what is the point of life?
>> Yeah. So I
I came to the conclusion that um which
is somewhat in the Douglas Adams
Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy school
of thought which is
>> what he do.
>> Yeah. He you know he sort of Hug's Guide
to the Galaxy is like a book on
philosophy disguised as humor. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah. >> And
>> And
the that's where you know Earth turns
out to be this computer to understand to
get to figure out the answer of the
meaning of life
>> and it comes up with the answer 42
>> and but then it's like what the heck
does 42 mean? Um, and it turns out,
well, actually the hard part is
the question, not the answer. And for
that, you need a much bigger computer
than Earth. That's so basically what
Douglas Adams was saying is that we we
actually don't know how to frame the
questions properly. Um, and um, and so,
so I think by expanding the scope and
scale of consciousness, we can better
under understand what questions to ask
about the answer that is the universe.
Do you believe the collective
You know when when I I was watching this
movie recently called the gladiator
Russell Crowe. Have you seen it? >> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> In Gladiator in Rome when people are fighting
fighting >> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> and the crowd is cheering when people
kill each other. >> Uh
>> Uh
the collective is very much like the
mob. It doesn't have
nuance in its opinion per se.
>> Well, I that's a particular kind of mob.
I mean, the sort of going there to see
people kill each other, you know.
>> Do you suspect the society we live in
today is very different?
>> Well, we don't we don't generally uh at
this point we don't,
you know, go watch people kill each
other. Uh >> maybe
>> maybe
some kind of euphemism of that
>> sports, I suppose.
Uh so people do sports without um
where teams attempt to defeat each other
>> but minus the death >> right.
>> right.
>> Um so
just going back to the
uh consideration of a human we all
started out as one cell but now we are
over 30 trillion cells. Mhm. >> Um
>> Um
and uh
but I think most people like feel like
they're one one body like you know
usually your right hand's not fighting
your left hand type of thing you know
>> to to sort of cooperate. Um your mind is uh
uh
just a vast number of neurons but but
most of the time it doesn't feel like
there's you know a trillion voices in
your brain. Hopefully not. Um
Um
so so there there's there's clearly
more that happens when you have
trillions of cells uh working as a
cellular collective than say one cell or
um a a small you know small
multisellular creature. There's there's
clearly some something different that
happens like you can't talk to a
bacteria you know. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> It's very silent.
um they just sort of wiggle around and
you know from their perspective I don't
know I sort of what is what is life like
from the perspective of a sing of of an
amoeba you know um but I know you can't
talk to amoeba like they don't talk whack
whack
>> um but you can talk to humans
>> so there's just something obviously
qualitatively fundamentally different um
for humans once you have a large number
of cells and you know sufficiently large
brain type of thing. There's you can now
talk to humans
>> and they they and they can say things,
they can produce things. Um but uh
bacteria are not going to produce a
spaceship for example. Um but humans can.
can.
So I think there's something
qualitatively different that also
happens when there's a collection of
humans. In fact, in fact, it's safe to
say that a single human cannot make a
spaceship. I could not make a spaceship
by myself. But but uh with a collection
of humans uh we can make spaceships. So
there's there's something obviously
qualitatively different
um about
a collection of humans. In fact, it
would be impossible for me to learn all
of the areas of expertise. There
wouldn't be enough time in one lifetime
to even learn all the things before I
was dead.
>> So um so you really fundamentally have
to have a collection of humans to make a rocket.
rocket. Um
Um
then I think there probably some other scaling
scaling
qualitative scaling things that happen
when you have groups of humans and then
if the
quality of the interaction or the
quality of the information flow
um is the the better it is the more the
human collective will achieve.
Um, and I'm I like said I'm just curious
about the nature of the universe and and
I think if we it's safe to say like if
if we increase the scope and scale of
consciousness, we're much more likely to
understand the nature of the universe
than if we reduce it.
>> Is that a bit like spirituality? A lot
of people talk to me about spirituality, >> right?
>> right?
>> I still don't know what it actually
means. Like I keep asking them, what do
you mean?
What do you mean?
>> Uh yeah, I mean a lot of people have
spiritual feelings, >> right?
>> right?
>> Um and um and I wouldn't try to deny
that those spiritual spiritual feelings
are real to them. Um but it's it's uh
it doesn't entirely translate. I can't
just because somebody else has a
spiritual feeling doesn't mean that I
would have that spiritual feeling. Um so
um you know I I tend to be kind of
physics pulled which is like if
something has predictive value >> then
>> then
I you know I'll pay more attention to it
than if it doesn't have predictive value >> right
>> right
>> u so
you know physics I would say is the
study of that which has predictive value
uh I think it's pretty good definition
um so
>> my primary job elon is a stock broker
and stock investor Okay.
>> There is no predictive value. Nobody
knows what will happen tomorrow.
>> Well, but I think you can generally say,
you know, um that
um if if if it's long-term for a company,
company,
>> then you can say like, well, does that
is that do you like the products or
services of that company? And is it
likely to
>> do you like the the product roadmap?
like it seems like they they make great
products and they're likely to make
great products in the future. If that's
the case, then I would say that's
probably a good company to invest in.
Um, and I think you also want to believe
in the the team. So, if you think, well,
that's a talented and hardworking team.
They make good products today. They seem
to be still motivated to make things in
the future, then I'd say that's that's a
good company to invest in.
>> Um, fair point.
>> Yeah. And now that that that that
won't solve for the daily fluctuations
which happen and sometimes are pretty
extreme. Uh but over time it would that
that is the the right way to invest in
stocks because a company is just a group
of people assembled to create products
and services. So you have to say what
are how good are those products and
services? Are they likely to continue to
improve in the future? If so, then you
should buy the stock of that company and
and then don't worry too much about the
daily fluctuations, >> right?
>> right?
What's got you most excited now, Elon,
in terms of all that you're building?
You're doing so much. So, let me just
preface and contextualize
who is watching this. Uh, our audience
is largely wannabe entrepreneurs in India.
India. >> Okay.
>> Okay.
uh really ambitious, really hungry, want to
to
take the risk and build something and I
feel like all of us have so much to
learn from you because you've done it so
many times over in so many different domains.
domains. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> Uh so we will speak to them today and I
will try and center all my questions in
that direction so they can take
advantage of this conversation and maybe
start take a chance and build something.
yeah, I guess the most important thing
make useful products and services. Um
>> yeah. Um
>> which one of all that all the products
and services that you're building has
Well, I I think that there's
increasingly a a convergence actually
between SpaceX and Tesla and XAI
um in that if the future is um solar
powered AI satellites, which it pretty
much needs to be in order to um in in
order to harness a non-trivial amount of
the energy of the sun, you have to move
to solar powered AI satellites in deep
space. um which somewhat is a confluence
of Tesla expertise and SpaceX expertise um
um
and XAI on the the AI front. So
it does feel like over time there's
somewhat of a convergence there. Um but
all the companies are doing doing great
things. Um very proud of the teams. They
do great work. Um so you know we're
making great progress with Tesla on the
autonomous driving. I don't know if
you've tried the self-driving. >> Mhm.
>> Mhm.
>> Have you tried it?
>> I've tried it in the Whimo, not in the Tesla.
Tesla.
>> Yeah, it's worth
>> uh We actually have it here in in
Austin, so you can
>> I'd love to try it.
>> You can you can literally just download
Tesla app. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> And I and I think I think it's open to
to any to anyone. Definitely try it out.
I mean,
>> you know, let me know how it goes. Um
but uh you know we've made a lot of
progress with electric vehicles with uh
battery packs and solar and but and very
much so with self-driving. So basically
real world AI um Tesla is the world
leader in real world AI I would say. So,
um, and then we're going to be making
this robot Optimus, which is, you know,
starting production hopefully some next
year, um, at scale. Um, and I think
that's going to be pretty cool. That'll
be like I think everyone's going to want
their own personal C3PO R2-D2,
>> you know, helper help a robot. Like, it
would be pretty cool. Um and then SpaceX
is doing great work with the Starlink
program, you know, providing uh lowcost,
reliable uh internet throughout the world.
world.
>> Hopefully India. So we'd love to be
operating in India. That would be great.
We're operating in 150 different
countries now with Starlink.
>> Can you give me a bit about Starlink and
how the tech works
>> cuz somebody I was speaking to uh I
don't know if you know this company
called meter out of San Francisco. uh
they're trying to replace network
engineers, but
>> I know it now.
>> Um so he was telling me about how in
densely populated areas, Starlink works
differently than it might be in a place
with not as many people. Can you explain
how it works?
>> Yeah, so Starink um there's several
thousand satellites in low Earth orbit
and they're moving around 25 times the
speed of sound um in these, you know,
they're zipping around the Earth
basically. And um they're uh they're at
an altitude of about 550 km. >> Mhm.
>> Mhm.
>> Um which is called generally low earth
orbit. Um because they're they're at low
earth orbit, they're um the latency is
is low like the the distance because the
distance is is not that far compared to
a geostationary satellite uh 36,000 km.
Um so you've you've got um
thousands of satellites providing uh low
latency high-speed internet throughout
the world and
um and they are interconnected as well.
So there's there are laser laser links
between the satellites. So it forms sort
of a a laser mesh so that the if if
let's say uh fi let's say if cables are
damaged or cut like fiber cables the
satellites can communicate between each
other um and provide connectivity uh
even if uh there's there's a uh the
cables are cut so for example when the
red sea cables were cut uh I think a few
months ago
>> the satellite the the stinking satellite
network continued to function without a hitchh
hitchh
>> so it's it's particularly helpful for
disaster areas. So, but if an area has
been hit with uh some kind of natural
disaster, floods or fires or
earthquakes, that that tends to damage
the the ground infrastructure. Uh but
the Starink satellites still work. So,
um and generally when whenever there's
some sort of natural disaster somewhere,
we we always provide people with free
Starlink uh internet connectivity. You
know, we don't want to charge we don't
take advantage of a a tragic situation.
So, um, so always, you know, if there's
natural disasters, we like, okay, it's
it's free during the natural disaster.
You know, we we don't want to say like,
um, you know, put a pay wall up while
somebody's trying to get help. That
would be wrong. Um, so so that's it's
it's it's a very robust system. It's
it's complimentary to ground systems
because uh the satellite beams um work
best in uh sparsely populated areas. Um
but because you you've got a you've got
a satellite beam, it's a pretty big
beam. So you have a and you have a fixed
number of users per beam. So, um, it
tends to be very complimentary to the
groundbased cellular systems because
those are those are very good in cities
because you've got these cell towers
that are, you know, only a kilometer
apart type of thing.
>> But, uh,
but but but cell towers tend to be
inefficient in the countryside. So in in
uh rural rural areas is where you tend
to have the worst internet because uh
it's very very expensive and difficult
to lay to do all these do all the fiber
optic cables uh or to have um high
bandwidth cellular towers. So Starlink
is very complimentary to the existing
telecom companies. Um it it basically
tends to serve the serve the least
served which I think is is good. Um
that's um
>> will that change tomorrow? Like today as
you explained the the beam is quite
broad and it can't work in a densely
populated area with high buildings maybe.
maybe.
>> But can that change and tomorrow it
becomes really efficient
in a densely populated city where it is
competitive with the local network providers?
providers?
>> It's it's unfortunately so the physics
don't allow for that. So
>> we're too far away. Um so at 550 km and
even if we try to reduce it which about
as low as we can go is about 350 km
still very far away you you you've just
you can think of like a like a
flashlight which is it's you know that
flashlight's got a cone and and and that
that cone is is coming at you know today
550 km in the future we try to get down
to 350 km but we can't beat something
that's 1 kilometer away which the cell
tower uh physics is not on our side here,
here,
>> right? So it's not it's not physically
possible for us for stalling to serve uh
densely populated cities like you can
serve a little bit maybe 1% of the
population and sometimes people get you
know even in in crowded cities there
might be you know no fiber link up their
road like sometimes somebody's on a
culde-sac or something or in a a place
in in cities there are sometimes
underserved areas for random reasons and
so can serve like said maybe 1% or 2% of
of of a densely populated city. Um, but
it can be much more effective in like I
said in rural areas where the internet
connection is much worse and often
people either have sometimes no access
to internet or it's extremely expensive
or the quality is not very good. So
So
>> if I were to ask you to wager a guess
Elon, do you think India will go down
the path of urbanization like China did
with more people moving in from rural
economies to urban centers? Um or do you
think we
>> I suppose some some amount of that has
happened, right? Um I mean I'm actually
I I'm curious to sort of ask you some
questions as well. Is because of course
isn't isn't that the trend or is it not
the trend in India?
It is the trend largely. I think a
little bit changed during co when a lot
of urbanization slowed down and that was
not organic. It was very artificially
artificially manifested. >> Right?
>> Right?
>> But one does question that
with AI if productivity were to go up
and I heard you speak about UHI instead
of UBI.
>> Yeah. Uh
>> I think I think it will be universal
high income.
>> In a world like that, I wonder if more
people want to live in cities which are
always going to be more polluted
and not offer the quality of lifestyle
that a rural environment might.
>> Well, I guess it's up to some people
want to be around a lot of people and
some people don't. You know, it's going
to be a maybe a matter of personal
choice. But I think in the future it
won't be I I think it won't be the case
that you have to be in a city for a job.
Um because I I think I I my prediction
is in the future working will be optional,
optional, >> right?
>> right?
>> We seem to be moving from not in India
but in in some parts of the west from 6
days to 5 days to 4 days to three.
>> I think the Europeans.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Uh
um yeah. Yeah. There's I mean I I think
if you're trying to make a startup
succeed or you're trying to make a
company do very difficult things then
you you you definitely need to put in
serious hours. I think that's >> right.
>> right.
>> That's how it goes.
>> And if we were to move from 5 to 4 to 3
days, how do you think society changes
when people have to work half the week?
What do they do with the other half?
Well, I I think it'll actually be that
people don't have to work at all in the
in the um and it may not be that far in
the future. Maybe only I don't know 10 I
say less than 20 years.
In less my prediction is less than in
less than 20 years working will be
optional. working at all will be optional
like a hobby
pretty much
>> and that would be because of increased
productivity meaning people do not have
to work
>> they don't have to I mean look this
obviously people can play this back in
20 years and say look Elon made this
ridiculous pred prediction and it's not
true but I think it will turn out to be
true that in less than 20 years maybe
even as little as I don't know 10 or 15
years um the advancements in AI and
robotics will
bring us to the point where working is optional
optional
um in the same way that like say you
could you can grow your own vegetables
in your garden or you could go to the
you know
>> it's much harder to grow your own vegetables
vegetables
But but you know some people like to
grow their vegetables which is fine you
know um but it it'll be optional in that
way is my prediction.
>> If one were to argue that humans are
innately competitive and everything is
relative from the time of hunters.
Somebody wanted to be the alpha hunter
or the biggest farmer. If everybody gets
a universal high income and everybody
has enough
>> what do you compete for? Uh, it would be
relative, right? Like if we all had
enough, enough is not enough. >> Um,
>> Um,
yeah. I I guess I I I'm not exactly
sure. Um, cuz we're we're really headed into
into
the singularity as it's called, which
you know, they refer to AI sometimes as
the kind of like a black hole, like a
singularity. You don't know what happens
after the event horizon. It doesn't mean
that something bad happens. It just
means you don't know what happens. Um, so
so
like I'm I'm confident that if AI and
robotics continue to advance, which they
are advancing very rapidly, like I said,
working will be optional. Um, and people
will have any goods and services that
they want.
Um, if you if you can think of it, you
can have it type of thing. Um
and but then at a certain point
AI will actually saturate on anything
humans can think of
and then at at that point it it becomes
a situation where AI is doing things for
AI and robotics are doing things for AI
and robotics because they've run out of
things to do to make the humans happy
you know because there's a limit you
know they say like there's only people
can only eat so much food or
you know if but I it's going to be I
think if you can think of it you can
have it will be the future
>> you know the Austrian school of
economics if you go back in time they
were the digression from Adam Smith
>> they talk about the marginal utility of everything
everything
having one of something has value having
two of the same thing has lesser value
and having 10 of the same thing has no value
value >> yes
>> yes
>> so if we could have everything we wanted
>> One's one's plenty.
>> It's like the marshmallow taste. You're
like, you can have two marshmallows
later or one marshmallow now. And I'm
like, I'll have one marshmallow. I don't
want two marshmallows.
>> That's interesting.
>> What would you pick?
>> Well, I I don't One marshmallow is
enough. I always question marshmallows
as being like not the most, you know,
the best candy, you know? >> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
Well, I don't yearn for marshmallows.
>> I think you're the best.
>> Who does?
>> You're the best testament to the
marshmallow experiment. I think
>> I suppose so. Well, I mean, like delayed
gratification essentially. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> You were able to delay it more than
most. You know, I have a tattoo which
says delay gratification.
>> Yeah. Wow. Okay. What's this? Okay.
You're really taking the marshmallow test.
>> I feel like I can't remember when I'm
trading or when I'm buying into
>> delay gratification. Yeah. Yeah,
>> it helps.
>> Wow. Okay, that's a good
>> Okay. Well, that's it's good advice. I
mean, you can't miss it.
>> If you could get
>> If you could get a tattoo, what would
you get?
>> I guess maybe my kids' names or something,
something, >> right?
>> right?
>> Why do you like the letter X as much as
you do? Well,
I mean, yeah, it's a good question.
Honestly, sometimes I wonder what what's
um so um I mean it started off with
where I think so way back in ancient
the pre the pre-Cambian era when there
were only sponges. Um the
I I there were only three onelet domain
names um
>> and I think it was XQ and Z and uh and I
was like okay I want to have create this
place where it's the um
the financial crossroads or like the the
financial exchange you know um
>> um it's essentially solving money from
an information theory standpoint where
the current banking system is is a large
number of uh heterogeneous databases
with batch processing that uh are not
secure. Um, and if we could have a
a a sort of a single database that was
real time and uh secure, that would be
more efficient from a monetary from an
information theory standpoint than, you
know, a large number of heterogeneous
databases that batch process very slowly
and securely. Um, so, um, so that that
was that was sort of X.com way back in
the day, which kind of, um, became
PayPal. Um,
and then um,
and was acquired by eBay. And then eBay,
someone reached out from eBay and said,
"Hey, do you want to buy the domain name
back?" And I was like, "Sure." You know,
and so I had the domain name for quite a
while. Um
and then uh
and then yes then I was like well maybe
this may maybe this acquiring Twitter
would also be an opportunity to
revisit the original plan of of X.com
which is to create this um
this like clearing house of
of financial transactions like like
basically to create a more efficient
datab money database is a way to think
about it is um like like people like
money is really a an information system
for labor allocation like people think
sometimes think money is power in and of
itself but it it doesn't it doesn't
really it's if there's no labor to
allocate it it's meaningless. So if you
were to be on a desert island with a
trillion you know dollars or whatever
doesn't matter.
>> Oh yeah. Why speculate when you can be real?
I just hope I don't end up on a desert
island, you know, it's not going to be
very useful to me. Um, but but it
illustrates my point that if if you're
if you're stranded on a on a on a desert
island with a trillion dollars, it's not
useful because there's no there's no
labor to allocate. You just allocate
yourself. So um
so so it's so anyway so it's so this
longwinded way of saying that it's uh
it it's just really like
I'm I'm just kind of slowly building
revisiting this idea that I had 25 years
ago to create a more efficient um
money database. Um,
and and if that's successful, people
will use it. If it's not successful,
they won't use it. Um, you know, and and
and then I also like the idea of like
sort of having a unified
app or or or website or whatever where
you can do like it can you can do
anything you want there. Um, so you
know, sort of China has this with WeChat
somewhat, you know, where you can
>> you you can exchange information, you
can publish information, you can
exchange money, uh, you can um, you
know, you sort of people kind of live
their life on WeChat in in China. It's
and it's it's it's quite useful, but
there's no u there's no real WeChat
outside of China. Um, so it's like it's
kind of WeChat++
I'd say is is the idea for for X.
Anyway, so then, uh, Space Exploration
Technologies is the full name of the
company, but I was like, that's too
much. That's a mouthful. So I was like,
we'll just call it SpaceX, like FedEx
for space.
>> Um, it just hasn't happens to have X in
the, you know, cuz exploration has an X,
but you know, and I was like, well, I
like the idea of capitalizing the X just
artistically. So, um, so then, uh,
that's why it's SpaceX. But, uh, and
then, um, what else have we got? We got
a kid.
>> Uh, he's called X2. Um, but that's his
mother is the one that named him X.
>> And I said, you know, people are really
going to think I've got a thing about X
if we name our kid X2, you know, and and
I I said to her, like, look, I do have
X.com, you know.
So, people are going to really think
I've got a somewhat of a fetish for this
letter. Um, but she's she said, "No, I
she likes X and she wants to call him
X." I'm like, "Okay."
>> Is this a new thing or have you had it
growing up?
>> No, I'm saying it's it's somewhat of a
co coincidence, you know. >> Um,
>> Um,
>> like not everything's called X. I mean,
Tesla's there's no X's in Tesla, you know.
know. >> Um,
>> Um,
>> what do you think money will be in the
future, Elon?
I I I think I think long term
I think money disappears as a concept.
Honestly, it's it's kind of strange, but
um in in a future where anyone can have anything,
anything,
uh I think you no longer need money as a
database for labor allocation.
Um if if there's if AI if AI and
robotics are big enough to satisfy all
human needs then then money is no longer
it's it's relevance declines
dramatically. It's I'm not sure we will
have it. So
you the best sort of uh imagining of
this future that I've read is uh from
Ian Banks the culture books. So, I
recommend people read the culture books.
You in the sort of far future of the
culture books, there's they don't have
money either. Um, and everyone can
pretty much have whatever they want. So,
there there there are still some fundamental
fundamental
currencies, if you will, that are
physics- based. So, energy is energy is
the real is the true currency. This is
why I said Bitcoin is based on energy.
You you can't legislate energy. You
can't just, you know, pass a law and
suddenly have a lot of energy. Um
you it's very difficult to to to
generate energy or especially to harness
energy in a in a useful way to do useful
work. So, so I think that probably
we we probably won't have money and
probably we'll just have energy,
you know, power generation as the de
facto currency.
So I mean I think one way to frame
civilizational progress is the
percentage completion on the Kadeshv
scale. So we're, you know, cottage one
is what percentage of a planet's energy
are you successfully turning into useful
work? And I'm maybe paraphrasing here a
little bit, but a caut would be what
percentage of the sun's energy are you
converting into useful work? Um, Kesha 3
would be what percentage of the galaxy
are you converting to useful work. Um
Um
so so things really I think become
energy based. >> Um
>> Um
>> but if you have solar powered AI
satellites energy is also free and
abundant cuz we'll never be able to
utilize all the solar energy available
to us. So it can't be a store of wealth
essentially in that lens can it?
you know, there's not really s you can't
really store wealth in in like you you
can only
you um
you you you can accumulate numbers in
currently currently you can accumulate
numbers in a database that
uh allow you to um
um
to some degree to to incent the behavior
of other humans in particular directions.
directions.
>> Yeah. Um, and I guess people call that
wealth. Um, but again, if if there's no
humans around, there's no wealth
accumulation is meaningless.
>> It's a digression, but if you were to
consider food as the energy for a human
to thrive,
>> yeah, food is energy. It's literally got
calories just means energy.
>> So, can a farm which is self-sustaining
>> um
I'm not sure what that means but you
know there's
I I I like I think the the at a certain
point you you do complete the the cycle where
where
and you I think at a certain point you
decouple from the the sort of
conventional economy if you have um
AI and robots producing chips and solar panels
panels
um and you know and mining resources in
order to make chips and robots in order
to make you you sort of complete that
cycle once that cycle is complete once
that that cycle is complete uh I think
that's the point at which you decouple
from the monetary system
>> is that the way forward for the US by
virtue of
how much debt they have today. Do they
deflate away their currency and
transition into this new form and lead
that push because it would make more
sense to them?
>> Well, in this future that I'm talking
about, the notion of countries uh
becomes sort of inacronistic. Um
Um
>> do you believe in it today? Do you believe
believe
>> I certainly believe in it today. And I I
want to just separate like something
that I like these are just what I think
will happen based on what I see as
opposed to I think these are
fundamentally good things and I'm trying
to make them happen. It it's like I
think this would happen with or without
me um whether I like it or not.
>> Um as long as civilization keeps
advancing we we we will have AI and
robotics at very large scale. Um
the uh
I I think that that's that's pretty much
the only thing that's going to solve for
the US debt crisis. You know, the
because currently the US debt is
insanely high and uh the interest
payments on the debt exceed the entire
military bud budget of the United
States, just the interest payments. And
that that's that's at least in the short
term going to continue to increase. So,
so I think I think actually the only
thing that can solve for uh the debt
situation is um Zean robotics and but it
will more than
it might cause it pro I guess it
probably would cause significant
deflation because
you know deflation or inflation is it's
really the ratio of goods and services
produced to the the change in the money
supply. So like so if if if goods and
services output increases faster than
money supply you will have deflation. If
goods and services decreases if if real
goods and services output increases
slower than the money supply you have
inflation. It's that simple. People try
to make it more complicated than that
but it but it it just isn't. Um so if
you have AI and robotics and a dramatic
increase in the output of goods and
services probably you will have deflation.
deflation.
That seems likely
because you you simply won't be able to
to increase the money supply as fast as
you can increase the output of goods and services
services
>> with all
>> supply is a real hazard here.
>> Should we do something about it?
>> Maybe we can convince it to go somewhere else.
else. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> Entic it elsewhere.
>> It actually left, I think. Okay.
Maybe it's attracted to the light.
>> If deflation want some coffee,
>> If deflation is inevitable because of
AI, why do
>> That's most likely the case. Yeah.
>> Right. Why do we have inflation again
all over in society today? Has AI not
led to increased productivity yet?
uh it's not AI has not yet made enough
of an impact on productivity to increase
the goods and services faster than the
increase in the money supply. So the inc
the US is increasing money supply quite
substantially with you know deficits
that are on the order of $2 trillion. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> Uh so so you have to have um
you know goods and services output
increase more than that in order to not
have inflation. So, we're not there yet.
But if you say like like how long would
it take us to get there? I think it's 3 years.
years.
Probably 3 years before
in 3 years or less
my my guess is goods and services output
will exceed the rate of inflation like
money goods and services growth will
exceed money money supply growth in
about 3 years.
Maybe after those three years you have
deflation and then interest rates go to
zero and then the debt is a smaller
problem than it is. >> Yes.
>> Yes. >> Right.
>> Right.
>> That's most likely the case.
>> You spoke about being in a simulation
earlier. I love the Matrix.
>> Yes. Yes.
>> If you were to be a character from the
Matrix, who would you be?
>> Well, there's not that many characters
to pick from, you know. Um hopefully not
Agent Smith.
He's my hero.
Um, I mean, Neo is pretty cool. Um, the
architect is interesting. >> Mhm.
>> Mhm. >> Um,
>> Um,
>> the Oracle.
>> So, Oracle. Um, sometimes I feel like
I'm I'm an anomaly in the Matrix.
>> That is Neo. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> Do you believe you're in a matrix
though? Like actually believe?
I I think you have to just think of
these things as probabilities, not certainties.
certainties.
>> Um there's some probability that we're
in a simulation.
>> What percentage would you attribute to that?
>> Probably pretty high. I would say it's
pretty high. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. Um, so one way to think of this is
to say if you look at the advancement of
video games in in our lifetime, or at
least in my lifetime, it's gone from
very simple video games with where
you've got like Pong. You've got two
rectangles in a square just batting it
back and forth to
uh photorealistic realtime
um games with millions of people playing simultaneously.
simultaneously.
>> Mhm. Um,
and that's happened just in the span of
50 years. So,
if that trend continues, video games
will be indistinguishable from reality, >> right?
>> right?
>> Um, and we're also going to have very
intelligent characters, like non-player
characters in these video games. Think
of how sophisticated the conversations
are you could have with an AI today, and
that's only going to get uh more
sophisticated. the you you you'll be
able to have
uh conversations that are
more complex and and
more sophisticated than any almost any
human conversation
maybe maybe any um so then so you have
so the future if civilization continues
will be millions maybe billions of of
of
photorealistic like indistinguishable
from reality
video games with characters in those
video games that are
uh very deep and and and where the the
dialogue is not pre-programmed. Um
Um
that's for sure what's going to happen
in in this in this level of the
simulation, if you could call it. So
then then what are the odds that we are
in base reality
and that and that this has not happened before?
>> If I were to buy into that and assume
that we are in a simulation
as Neo of the story, what do you know
that I don't and I can learn from? I
think most likely
if we if outside the simulation would be
less interesting than in the simulation
because we're most likely a distillation
of what's interesting
because that's what we do in this that's
what we do in our reality. Um and then
I do also have a theory which is like
the most interesting outcome is the most
likely outcome as seen by a third party.
um the god the gods or god of the simulation
simulation um
um
because when we do simulations
when humans do simulations
we we stop those simulations that are
not interesting.
So like if SpaceX is doing simulations
of rocket flights,
>> uh the you know the the boring ones we
we we discard because they're not
they're just not we don't learn anything
from those. or when when Tesla is doing
uh simulations for self-driving, uh
Tesla's actually looking for the most
interesting corner cases because the the
normal stuff we already have plenty of
of of uh data on, you know, driving on a
straight road on a sunny day.
We don't need more of that. Uh we we
need like heavy weather conditions on a
small windy road with two cars that are
you know coming at each other with a
almost head-on collision. We need like
weird stuff basically uh interesting
stuff. Um, so I think that
from a Darwinian perspective, the
simulations most likely to survive are
going to be the ones that are the most
interesting simulations,
which therefore means that the most
interesting outcome is the most likely.
>> And the people who simulated our world,
if one were to extrapolate, they
themselves might in turn be in another simulation.
simulation.
>> Yes. And there could be many layers of simulation.
simulation. >> Yes.
>> Yes.
>> Beyond all of these layers of simulation,
simulation,
do you think there's something I I read
somewhere that you used to ascribe to
Spinoza's god in a way?
>> No describ I was really just pointing
out that that you don't you don't have
to have um it's like one of the things
Spinoza was saying is that you don't you
you can have morals in the absolute. You
don't need need to have morals to be
handed to you. You know, it's like the
question is can morality exist outside
of a religious context and Spinosa was
arguing that it can.
>> Wasn't he arguing for the laws of nature
should be where we seek our laws of
morality from to a certain extent.
>> Yeah. But when I think of laws of
nature, I see a tiger eat a deer and a
So in Spininoza's morality, that's fair
game, right? Um
Um
you can I I think there's a lot of
things you can take from from Spinosa,
but I the only point I was making in
referencing Spinosa was that that you
you can have a set of of of morals that
that make society functional um and productive
productive
with and in but without you you don't
necessarily have to have religious
doctrine for that. Um, so that's uh,
yeah, I think that's that's the main
thing I was trying to say there.
>> Like like I don't think people just like
if somebody is it doesn't if if there's
if if there's not like a commandment not
to kill, you know, like people doesn't
mean somebody's without that they will
run around murdering people, you know,
like you don't you don't have to have a
commandment not to kill. Have you played
GTA religious edict to run around
people? I I actually I I've only played
a little bit of GTA cuz I didn't like
the fact that um like in GTA 5 you
literally can't pro progress unless you
killed the police. And I'm like
this doesn't work for me. Um I actually
don't like killing the NPCs in the video
games. It's not my thing, you know. So,
um, actually I didn't like I didn't like
GTA cuz it I actually stopped when it
said you have to know way to proceed to
shoot at the police. I'm like, I don't
want to do that.
>> Maybe that's why us as the NPCs of our
you know anyway I think you can just
sort of say there's some common sense
things that
you know any civilization that
uh runs around you know where people
just murder each other wantingly is not
You seem to be changing a bit towards
religion though faith like off late
you've said a bunch of things which are
pro- religion almost not pro- religion but
on those lines I
>> I mean I think are there other religious
are there principles in religion that
make sense yeah I think there are um
>> is it easier for our simulation to have
a pro- relligion
projection for the world that we live in. We become more relatable. It's
in. We become more relatable. It's easier.
easier. >> Well, which religion though?
>> Well, which religion though? >> Any depending on where you live?
>> Any depending on where you live? >> So, pick one, you know.
>> So, pick one, you know. >> Um, it's it's pretty rare that kids are
>> Um, it's it's pretty rare that kids are said, you know, which religion would you
said, you know, which religion would you like, you know,
like, you know, it's pretty rare, right?
it's pretty rare, right? >> I don't know too many situations where
>> I don't know too many situations where kids got were offered like, you know,
kids got were offered like, you know, uh, you know, like what what do you want
uh, you know, like what what do you want to major in type of thing. Uh
to major in type of thing. Uh it's usually like they you get you get
it's usually like they you get you get given a religion by your parents and
given a religion by your parents and your community. Um, so
your community. Um, so you know, um,
but you know, I mean, I think, you know, there's there's
you know, there's there's good things in in in in in all religions
good things in in in in in all religions that are good principles um
that are good principles um that you you can sort of read any
that you you can sort of read any religious text and say, "Okay, this is a
religious text and say, "Okay, this is a good principle. This is going to be this
good principle. This is going to be this is going to lead to a better society
is going to lead to a better society most likely, you know." Um so
most likely, you know." Um so um I mean in Christianity sort of love
um I mean in Christianity sort of love thy neighbor as thyself which is you
thy neighbor as thyself which is you know have empathy for fellow human
know have empathy for fellow human beings uh is a good one I think for uh
beings uh is a good one I think for uh good society you know uh basically just
good society you know uh basically just consider the feelings of others and uh
consider the feelings of others and uh treat treat other people as you would
treat treat other people as you would like to be treated.
like to be treated. If you had to redraw, resketch the
