Elon Musk on Future Tech, AI, Social Media, and Entrepreneurial Advice for India

Heat. Heat. Our 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. >> 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. You want a coffee? >> Um, sure. Why not?

>> Okay. >> Okay. Are we going to be talking for a while?

>> I hope we are. >> Okay. Good. Sure. Um,

>> Mna, >> may I trouble you for a coffee? >> Can we get another coffee?

>> Anything? Uh, cappuccino, I guess. All right. >> Are you a coffee drinker, El? Oh,

>> yeah. Yeah. I mean, yeah, I copy once usually in the mornings, you know. >> Okay.

>> One a day kind of thing. >> Yeah, pretty much. >> You want to wait for it?

>> No, I'm I'm I'm good. The first thing I must say is you're a lot bigger and bulkier, muscular than I

would have thought you are. >> Oh. >> Oh, stop. You must make me blush.

>> Really? Seriously? >> Yeah. I mean, look on the internet. I'm small, you know.

>> 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. >> 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

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 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, I feel like even data suggests that the

current incumbents seem to be losing traction amongst the youngest of audience.

>> 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

could work for the world of tomorrow? >> Well, I mean, I I don't think that much 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?

>> 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 like like I said like it's come becomes

as close to sort of a collective 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 yeah why is that important? Um 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 and

you know there's trillions of synap synapses in your in your mind Um but but but there's there's no the why a

bit. I mean I guess it's just so we can increase our understanding our our understand

increase our 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 >> 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. >> 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

consciousness of society? You know when when I I was watching this movie recently called the gladiator

Russell Crowe. Have you seen it? >> Yeah. >> In Gladiator in Rome when people are

fighting >> Yeah. >> and the crowd is cheering when people

kill each other. >> 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

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.

>> 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

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 you know 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 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. >> 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 >> 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. 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.

Um then I think there probably some other 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? >> 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?

>> 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 I you know I'll pay more attention to it

than if it doesn't have predictive value >> 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,

>> 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?

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. >> Okay. uh really ambitious, really hungry, want

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.

>> 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.

>> Okay. Sure. Um yeah, I guess the most important thing to do is just

make useful products and services. Um >> yeah. Um >> which one of all that all the products

and services that you're building has got you most excited today? 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 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.

>> Have you tried it? >> I've tried it in the Whimo, not in the 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. >> 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.

>> 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. >> 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 >> 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. >> But can that change and tomorrow it becomes really efficient

in a densely populated city where it is competitive with the local network 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,

>> 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 >> 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? >> 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,

>> 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. >> Uh not me. >> 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. >> 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 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 store and buy vegetables

you know >> it's much harder to grow your own 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,

yeah. I I guess I I I'm not exactly sure. Um, cuz we're we're really headed 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 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 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

>> yes >> so if we could have everything we wanted 10 marshmallows. I mean, who wants that?

>> 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. 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.

>> 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 >> It's pointing at me, so it reminds me of

>> 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, >> 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 wrong with me. Um um so um I mean it started off with

where I think so way back in ancient times in 99 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, >> like not everything's called X. I mean, Tesla's there's no X's in Tesla, you

know. >> 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,

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

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 so so things really I think become energy based.

>> 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 to some degree to to incent the behavior of other humans in particular

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 be a commodity? that is

>> 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

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 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 >> do you believe in it today? Do you

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. 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 >> with all >> supply is a real hazard here.

>> Should we do something about it? >> Maybe we can convince it to go somewhere else.

>> Yeah. >> Entic it elsewhere. >> It actually left, I think. Okay.

>> Oh no, it's back. Maybe it's attracted to the light. >> If deflation want some coffee,

>> mine is over. >> 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.

>> 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. 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. >> 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.

>> Um, >> the Oracle. >> So, Oracle. Um, sometimes I feel like

I'm I'm an anomaly in the Matrix. >> That is Neo. >> 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. >> 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. 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. >> 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? >> 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

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 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

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. >> Yes. And there could be many layers of simulation.

>> Yes. >> Beyond all of these layers of 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

well 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 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

simulation are not dying. Maybe um 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 going to be a very successful one. 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

easier. >> Well, which religion though? >> Any depending on where you live?

>> So, pick one, you know. >> Um, it's it's pretty rare that kids are said, you know, which religion would you

like, you know, it's pretty rare, right? >> I don't know too many situations where

kids got were offered like, you know, uh, you know, like what what do you want to major in type of thing. Uh

it's usually like they you get you get given a religion by your parents and your community. Um, so

you know, um, but you know, I mean, I think, you know, there's there's

good things in in in in in all religions that are good principles um that you you can sort of read any

religious text and say, "Okay, this is a good principle. This is going to be this is going to lead to a better society

most likely, you know." Um so um I mean in Christianity sort of love thy neighbor as thyself which is you

know have empathy for fellow human beings uh is a good one I think for uh good society you know uh basically just

consider the feelings of others and uh treat treat other people as you would like to be treated.

If you had to redraw, resketch the world, Elon, uh, think morality, politics, economy,

how would you change the world we live in today? >> Um, if you had to have Elon simulation

of things, >> well, overall, I think the world is is pretty great right now. I mean it's it's

uh you know anyone who thinks that like today's world is not that great. I I think they're they're

not going to be excellent students of history cuz if you >> if you read a lot of history like wow

there's a lot of misery back then you know um I mean it used to be that you you know people would be dropping dead

of the plague all the time you know >> part of the course. >> Yeah. you know, just be like a good a

good year back in the day would be like not that many people died of the plague or starvation or being killed by the

another tribe. >> It's like that was good year. We only lost 10% of the population, you know?

>> Like I think like 100 years ago we lived up until 35 or 40, right?

>> We had very high infant mortality. >> Yeah. Um, so like you do had had a few people that that would live to an old

age, but you know, not that long ago, 100 years ago, if you got um like some minor infection, they didn't have

antibiotics. So you just like kick the bucket because you, you know, drank some water that had dentry and that was it.

Curtains, you know, >> just die of diarrhea. >> Maybe that's just literally that was

like that's miserable. Maybe that's why people had as many kids as they did back then.

>> Yeah. I mean, if you didn't, then you know, you >> you know, like half the kids would die

type of thing. >> Yeah. >> So,

>> you have a lot of kids now. >> Yeah. Like an army.

>> I'm trying to get a an entire Roman legion. >> Um so, um yeah. Um well I have like a

some older kids that are you know adults essentially you know um and then a bunch of younger kids.

>> So um >> do you still believe in the concept of not still do you believe that the

concept of one child, one mother, one father works? >> I I think that it does work for most

people. Yeah. >> Right. like that's, you know, something like

that is is going to be generally the uh that's what that's what works for most people. Um,

you know, so um >> changing though >> I I and and I mean I'm not sure if you

if you know this but like um you know my my partner Siobhan you know she's she's she's half Indian. I don't know if you

know that. >> I didn't know that. >> Yeah. Yeah.

>> Yeah. Um and um uh one of my sons with her is is uh middle name is Seeker after Chandra Secker.

>> Wow. >> Yeah. >> Very interesting.

Did she spend any time in India? Shimon. >> Uh no she grew up in Canada. >> You mean origins?

>> That's right. >> Ancestry like Oh. Um >> her parents or grandparents were from

there? Yes. Yes. Yes. Her her father uh I mean she was she was given up for adoption

when she was a baby. Um so I think I think >> I think her father was like a

like an like an exchange student at the university or something like that. I'm not sure the exact details but um it you

know it was kind of thing where I don't know she was uh g given up for adoption um and um

yeah so but she grew up in Canada. >> Would you adopt kids? >> You know I I definitely have my handful

hands full right now. Um, so no, I'm not opposed to it, but it's like, um, you know, I I I do want to have be able to

spend some time with my kids, you know. So, it's >> um, you know, right before coming here,

I mean, I was with um, you know, with with my my with my kids. Um, so just, you know, seeing them before bedtime,

that kind of thing. So, you know, beyond a certain number, it's like it's kind of impossible to spend time with them. But

like my like I said, my my older kids, they're uh very independent. You know, they're in university and uh

so they're they're um you know, especially sons when when they get past certain age, it's like they're very

independent. you know, it's like uh most most uh boys don't talk to their they they don't spend a lot of time with

their parents after age 18, you know. So, um so I see them once in a while, but they're very independent. Um

so then uh you know, I can only have enough kids on the young side that that like it's where

it's humanly possible to spend time with them. So um

>> any views on the future of marriage, family? What do you think happens to uh people having lesser kids everywhere

including India? I think our replenishment rate is down to >> right

>> I mean our fertility >> it dropped below replacement rate I believe last year

>> below 2.1. >> Yeah. >> What do you think happens tomorrow? Does

the world just get older and then there is a phase where the world again is replenished but with a less with a

smaller population than we had to go begin with. >> I mean I do worry about the population

decline. This is a big big problem. >> Why is that? >> Well I I don't want humanity to

disappear. >> But a decline and disappear are completely different things, right?

Well, if the trend continues, it just we disappear. Uh but but but also going back to you know my philosophy if you

will which is that we want to expand consciousness then fewer humans is worse because uh we have less consciousness.

>> Do you think consciousness will go up by virtue of the number of people in there? >> Yes.

I mean just like consciousness increases from a single cell creature to you know a 30 trillion cell creature. Um

we're are more conscious than a bacteria at least it seems that way. Um so a larger you know human population would

be have increased consciousness. We're more likely to understand the answers

to the nature of the universe if we have a lot of more people than if we have fewer.

>> Right. I don't have kids. >> Well, it's uh maybe you should. Yeah.

>> A lot of people tell me I should. >> You won't regret it. What's the best thing about having kids?

>> Well, I mean, you've got this uh I I mean, you've got this little

creature that loves you and you love this little creature. Um and uh you you I don't know you you kind of see

the world through their eyes as they you know as they grow up and the the their conscious awareness increases you

know from a baby that has no idea what's going on can't survive by itself can't even walk around can't talk to you they