Transcription
I'll be honest, of all the things you do and all the companies you run, I think it's all awesome. The one thing that does concern me, and I know concerns a lot of people out there, so I do have to bring it up, which is Neuralink. Sure. So, firstly, can you explain what Neuralink is and what the goal of it is?
"Uh, we put a chip in your brain to control your mind." Yeah, all right. Concerns not alleviated. Um, jump right in. Step right up. Who wants one?
Um, no. So, so Neuralink, you'll be able to see Neuralink coming from a very long distance because any device that you implant in a human, you have to go through so many tests. It moves very slowly. You just do a few people at a time. And then, um, you go to extreme lengths to prove safety. Um, you have to go through the FDA approvals. Like, we're not trying to sidestep any, you know, uh, regulatory approvals. I'm doing everything, you know, by the book. And, uh, maximum, we're really actually, we're going, uh, far beyond what the requirements are of the FDA from a safety standpoint.
Um, and the, the initial devices will really just be a pretty basic. Um, it'll be about restoring functionality to people who've lost their connection between their, their brain and their body. So you can imagine, like, if say, Stephen Hawking could talk or communicate, um, as fast as somebody with a fully functioning body. Every amazing. So that's like the, what we're trying to do. That's our first application is to restore functionality to quadriplegics, tetraplegics, and, and people who have just, for one, eight, whatever reason, and, uh, no longer have a connection between, or a limited connection between their, their, their brain and their body.
Um, and then the second application would be restoration of eyesight. So if somebody's gone completely blind, maybe even just lost the optic nerve, um, you can actually still directly, uh, assimilate the neurons in the visual part of the, the cortex. So you can give a direct vision to the brain. And in fact, you could actually, depending upon what cameras you used, you can actually see in different wavelengths. Okay? You know, like, uh, Jordi La Forge from, like, you know, if you like, have that, like, I actually watched, like, an episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation with special effects compared to what we're used to, like, you know, um, not that great. But he's got like the wrap-around, you know, uh, glasses and you can see in different, uh, wavelengths. Uh, so you can see like, uh, ultraviolet, infrared, and that kind of thing. So you can actually do that. You could say, like, you could see in radar if you want. Yeah.
And what's the, what's the long-term goal for it? Because I think myself and others, I think the, the first part is the first part sounds, sounds fine. Sounds, yeah, that's like hard to argue with. Yeah, yeah. Um, but long-term, I think, I mean, the concern that people have is, is this just leading us into this dystopian transhumanist future? Where where does it go? What are the, what are the ethical boundaries of it?
Well, I mean, the thing I wanted to emphasize is that it's not going to like, sort of pounce on us overnight. It'll, it'll, you'll see it coming. It's going to be very slow. In fact, I, I really think that, um, artificial general intelligence or digital super intelligence is likely to arrive before we have really advanced Neuralinks. At least that's where the trend is right now. So, um, but, but ultimately, the idea would be to achieve a symbiosis between our biological mind and our kind of digital mind. So we're already kind of a cyborg. If you think of like your phone and your computers as an extension of yourself. In fact, like if you leave your phone behind, it's like you have missing limb syndrome. You're like, yeah, where did it go? You know?
Um, and, uh, so the phone is a kind of an extension of myself. A computer is, uh, the various applications that we use are writing an extension of stuff. So we are already a cyborg. It's just that the interface is, uh, with our eyes and our fingers. Yeah.
Um, and, um, and that, that interface, especially output, the rate at which we can type words into a phone or a computer, just, it's very slow. Our input is much better because with, with the data rate from vision is, um, you know, I don't know, many thousands of times, maybe a million times better than the rate at which we can, um, output. So our input is like maybe roughly a million times better than output. And so, so what, what a Neuralink device can do is improve that bandwidth, allow you, allow, um, it'll be sort of much more symbiotic with your, the, the AI extension of yourself.
So you can think of like, like a human brain really is, could be ugly divided into two parts. One is kind of like the primitive, uh, brain, um, the reptile brain, sometimes called, you know, it's like a sort of basic instincts. And, um, and then we've got the cortex, like the higher-level thinking, planning, and that kind of thing. But the two operate symbiotically. So I haven't yet met anyone who wants to delete their limbic system or delete the cortex. Everyone's quite happy having both. Yeah. They're like, I like it the way it is, you know? But your cortex is way smarter than your limbic system. So, but the irony is that even though the cortex is way smarter than the limbic system, most of what it's doing is trying to make the limbic system happy.
"The limbic system is hungry. I'm hungry. Okay, let's get some food." Um, "the limbic system is horny. Okay, let's, you know, have sex or whatever." We'll see. I mean, the sheer amount of of effort the, you know, the cortexes have, of all the humans have put into trying to get laid is insane. It's got to keep the species going. Yeah, right. Even if, you know, it's not for procreation. Like, like the limbic system is, is really like too simple to understand that, like sex does not result in in procreation because for almost all of human existence, that it did. Their birth control is a very recent thing. So the, the limbic system is like trying to incent procreation. And, um, but, but now we can effectively hack the limbic system by doing procreation by having sex without procreation. Um, so which is, I guess maybe part of the, the issue with, uh, you know, why do we have both kids? It's like, in the past, it would just happen because, you know, in order to make a living system happy, you'd have sex. You, you didn't have birth control. So if you out where you'd pop out some kids. Yes. Um, so that's, that's how it used to be.
Um, so, so that, so even though you've got a cortex that's way smarter than the limbic system, the cortex is still basically just trying to make the limbic system happy. And, um, and then if you think like the computers as a sort of a third layer, um, the AI is a third layer. It's not necessarily the case that the AI would be acting contrary to our interests. I think if it's closely linked with biological intelligence, I think it could, um, actually be just again, trying to make the cortex happy, which is trying to make the limbic system happy. So I think we'll put even more computing power to try to get laid, basically. Now, now the AI is going to help you get laid.
I think I think what it is that that concerns people about it, number one, I'm, you know, number one being new. But I think the main thing is is the, the fact that this is something that's like inside your body. Right? I think the idea of putting a chip in, the idea of someone putting a chip in my brain, I, I just have a, I have a visceral. Would it be though, long term? I mean, I hope so. I think it should be optional. Yeah. You're bizarre if it was not.
Um, no, I think it's kind of like, what was the reason I ask is because smartphones right now are sort of optional, but if you don't have a smartphone, the way everything is sort of designed around society, um, you, yes, you cannot have a smartphone, but it's a massive hindrance and disadvantage in many ways. True. A smartphone is almost essential in society to do things. Yeah.
Um, so could a Neuralink end up in that same sort of place? It's possible. But I'm just saying, if it does, it's a, it's, it's many decades from now. So it's not like, you know, it's not today's problem. Yeah. I'd worry a bit more about digital super intelligence. I'd worry about, let's try to avoid World War Three. Yeah. Uh, let's, let's make sure we're at least having enough kids to sustain our population, you know, basic stuff like that. Yeah.
What's your greatest concern with artificial intelligence? Because I know that you have worked with it, but also I know it's something that you personally have massive concerns about as well, which you've voiced in this podcast and elsewhere. Yeah. I, I think that actually the most likely outcome for artificial intelligence is is that it is good. That it will, um, improve our lives, most likely. But there's some chance that it will not. And I think we just need to be very cognizant of that and understand it's a powerful technology. It's a double-edged sword. Um, and we need to put a lot of effort into ensuring that, uh, we have a good AI outcome and not a bad one.
What does a good one look like? Well, if I'd recommend people read the Ian Banks books. Okay. Um, the Culture books. Um, that's the best, uh, representation of a positive AI human future that I've seen. Okay. Um, so that's my recommendation. I mean, it effectively, AI, I think it, it will massively enhance human ability. It's like a, just a massive amplifier of human ability, um, just like the computer was. Um, so it relates this question of like, does, does it at the sum risk that it doesn't really amplify human activity, but it starts basically just being in charge? And, you know, there's some risk it may, you know, view humanity negatively and decide that we're a blight on the earth. Like, like I think, like a very dangerous thing would be if the, if these sort of human extinctionist philosophy somehow got into AI, that would be bad. Like that guy that was on the front page in New York Times saying, you know, the eight billion people on Earth, we don't want him coding. You. Yeah. Safe to say there's quite a few people in the snake other words who have that. Yeah. Either explicit or implicit extinctionist view. Yes. Where they view humanity as a blight on the face. Yeah. There's a lot of antenatalists in the, in the world. And people who are actually anti-human. Yes. Yes. Like you said, people who don't have the pride in being human. Right. There's people who really feel like guilty. Or some people even say that that's speciesism. You know, that's it. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, I'm a human supremacist. I'll, I'll be open about that one. Yeah. I mean, I think, uh, we gotta fight for team human. Like, if we don't fight for as humans, who who will? Yeah. I mean, if the Earth exists and humans do not, then it's like, we're saving the planet for who at that point?
What do you think about AI replacing jobs though? Because that's, uh, that's a big concern. Even if AI doesn't sort of go rogue and start doing something directly horrible, I think a lot of people's concerns is just, hey, uh, what about everyone's jobs?
I will certainly be very disruptive because jobs were different. So no, I think the, the rate of change, the rate, the change caused by AI is going to be pretty radical. So there will, you know, a lot of jobs that are that currently exist won't exist in the future. But I think there will be new jobs. Um, and I do think like in a benign AI scenario, we will really have an age of abundance. The, I think really goods and services, unless they're artificially made scarce, like, like it's specialized artwork, or you want that particular house in that neighborhood, um, like it has to be an artificial scarcity. But anything that is not made artificially scarce will be plentiful. As in a benign AI scenario, you'll be able to have any products and services you want.
Anyone will. Does that not start to cause a whole new level of problems? Yeah, it does. It's like this, it's like, you know, there's some things which sound like a, like a, a blessing, but may in fact be a curse. Like I think you will live forever. It sounds like a blessing. It's actually a curse. You would not want to live forever. You don't know how long forever is. Um, and, uh, and if you say another potential curse is, you can have anything you want effortlessly. Are you sure you want that? Yeah. Does anything matter at that point? Yeah.
Um, and, and what about the value? I mean, I think a lot of the value of work isn't just getting money to buy things. It's the meaning. It's the purpose. It's knowing that you worked for this thing, right? It's different. It's different to get 10 million dollars because someone just gave you 10 million dollars or you won a lottery versus you created a business and sold products and services that helped you to earn that money. Exactly. So it's like, how do we find meaning, um, and relevance, yeah, um, if you have an age of abundance where the computer, you just ask for anything and get it, um, it is something you will have to struggle with. That that'll, that'll be, uh, I don't know, it's, I think that's kind of most likely where we're headed is an age of abundance.
[Music]
Um, but it will definitely cause some existential angst. What are you most optimistic about? In fact, I should say, like, like, okay, for a Neuralink device, I mean, part of what I'm hoping is here in a benign AI scenario, like, how do we even go along for the ride? How do we even understand the AI? Okay? Like you've got some sort of, you know, incredible intelligence, unless we do sort of effectively have better symbiosis, increase the bandwidth to our, the AI extension of ourselves, effectively augment our human intelligence substantially, um, we may not even be able to appreciate the wonders that will exist in the future.