△ Is it a new friend? Remember to take note of me first
Rotating editor-in-chief | Zhi Yong Responsible Editor & Duty Editor | Kaneki Ken
The 6661st in-depth article: 12145 words | 25 min to read
Business thinking
Notes Jun said:
The 2022 TED Conference was held in Vancouver. The final interview on Thursday, April 14 was left to Elon Musk and TED Chairman Chris Anderson.
Musk talked about many new topics, including the motivation to buy Twitter and the latest acquisition offer, justifying the famous Tesla privatization plan that year, the "money has been guaranteed" case, and sharing his feelings as an Asperger's syndrome patient.
Original video copyright: Wall Street Journal
Subtitle Translation: Rubble Villager, subtitles are for learning only, non-professional translation.
Video timeline
1:20 Tesla Texas Gigafactory Interview 8 Minute Excerpt: FSD and Tesla Robots
11:46 Motivation and plan to acquire Twitter 27:38 Tesla's privatization plan of the year, "funds have been guaranteed"
32:00 Worst business decision
33:42 Edamame 3 Capacity Hell, sleeping on the factory floor
38:02 "I know more about manufacturing than anyone alive in the world today"
39:13 Grand Plan III and Scale 42:34 Asperger's Syndrome
46:46 Obsession with the truth
49:21 Philosophy, the Meaning of Life, and the "Why"
51:41 Little X grows up in the world, and his future
The following is the full text of the text version of the dialogue:
Chris: In a few minutes, Elon Musk will be with us on stage for a live conversation. But before that, I want you to go with me on a tour of Tesla's huge gigafactory in Austin, Texas. This is Elon Musk's famous "machine that makes machines."
TED 2022 Finale Interview
He believes that the secret to a sustainable future is not just to produce an electric car, but to build a system that produces a large number of electric vehicles and has a certain profit margin so that they can fund further development.
First, FSD's timeline prediction, Tesla humanoid machine
Chris: I want us to switch to thinking about ARTIFICIAL now. I'm curious about your timeline and how you make your predictions and why some are so surprisingly accurate and some aren't.
For example, when it comes to predicting sales of Tesla vehicles, you're always accurate and amazing. I remember in 2014, Tesla sold 60,000 cars that year. You say, I think in 2020, we're going to sell 500,000 units a year.
ELON: Yeah, we're selling almost exactly 500,000 units.
Chris: Five years ago, when you were last at TED, I asked you about FSD and you said, "Just this year, I'm confident that there's going to be a car driving from Los Angeles to New York without intervention."
ELON: Yeah, I don't want to surprise you, but I'm not always right.
Chris: So what's the difference between the two? Why is FSD particularly unpredictable?
ELON: What really makes me understand, and I think, will make a lot of other people understand, is that there are so many pits in autonomous driving. You think you've solved the problem and grasped the crux of the problem, but no, you just hit the south wall.
If you're going to plot progress, progress looks like a logarithmic curve, a series of logarithmic curves. First of all, I guess I don't like the logarithmic curve, but it goes up in a nearly vertical way, and then it starts to slow down and you gain less and less.
Logarithmic curve
In retrospect, this may seem obvious, but in order to properly solve FSD, we have to solve real-world AI problems. Because you said, how is the road system designed?
They are designed to adapt to biological neural networks, namely our brains, and vision, our eyes. So, in order for it to fit into computers, we basically need to solve real-world AI and visual problems.
Because we need cameras and silicon-based neural networks to adapt autonomous driving to a system designed for eye and biological neural networks. I think when you say that, it's clear that the only way to solve FSD is to solve real-world AI and complex visual problems.
Chris: What are your thoughts on the current architecture? Do you think you have an architecture now, a chance to slow down the logarithmic curve so quickly?
ELON: Well, I admit it was probably a notorious last word. But I am confident that we will solve this problem this year.
In terms of the probability of an accident, when will we surpass the average person? I think we're going to go beyond this year. We can still discuss it here a year later, and it may be, yes, after another year, it still hasn't become a reality. But I think this year is the year.
Chris: Is there a factor where you actually deliberately make radical time predictions to drive people's ambitions? If you don't do it, you can't do anything?
It feels like sometime last year, seeing the progress of artificial intelligence understanding, Tesla's artificial intelligence's understanding of the world around it, brought Tesla's epiphany moment.
Because you've really surprised people lately, when you say that the most important product development that Tesla is doing this year is probably this robot, Optimus Prime. Did something happen during the development of the FSD that gave you the confidence to say, "You know, here we can do something special"?
Elon: That's right, it took me a lot of time to realize that in order to solve the problem of autonomous driving, you really need to solve the problem of artificial intelligence in the real world.
If you solve a real-world AI problem for a car, it's actually a four-wheeled robot. You can generalize it to bipedal robots.
What's missing at the moment is intelligence enough to allow robots to navigate the real world and do useful things without clear instructions. The missing elements are basically real-world intelligence and scale-up production, two things that Tesla is very good at.
Therefore, we basically only need to design the special drives and sensors required for humanoid robots. People don't know that this will be a bigger game than a car.
Chris: Speaking of which, I remember the first application you mentioned might be to be manufactured, but the ultimate vision was for people to use those robots at home, right?
If you have a robot that can really understand the three-dimensional structure of your house, and knows where everything in the house is, or should be, and can recognize all these things, it's amazing, isn't it?
What can you ask a robot to do, such as packing things?
ELON: Absolutely. For example, making dinner, mowing the lawn...
Chris: It recognizes everyone in the house and can play peek-a-boo with your kids.
ELON: Yeah, I think obviously we need to be very careful not to let that turn into a terrible situation.
One of the things I think is important is that there's a local read-only chip on the robot that can't be updated online. For example, once you say "stop stop," the robot stops. As soon as someone says that, the robot stops, something like that.
And this can't be updated remotely, I think it's important to have such a security feature.
I do think there should be a regulatory body for AI, and I've been saying that for years. I don't like to be regulated, but I think it's important for public safety.
Chris: Do you think that by 2050, or whatever time, most homes will have robots?
ELON: Yeah, I think they might.
Chris: You're basically going to have your own buddies.
Elon: Yeah, you're going to have your buddy robot, probably.
Chris: What is a partner in the sense of the word? How many applications do you think there will be? Can you have a love partner, a sex partner?
ELON: It's likely that this is inevitable. I did promise netizens that I would produce Catgirl and we could make Robot Catgirl.
Chris: Be careful,... Elon.
ELON: Yeah, I guess it can be any form of what people want.
Chris: What was the timeline we were thinking about, the first ones that were actually produced and sold?
Elon: The first robots we tend to produce are designed for dangerous, boring, repetitive, work that people don't want to do.
And, I think we'll have an interesting prototype sometime this year. Maybe next year we'll be able to produce a useful finished product, but I think it's likely to be at least two years. After that, we will see that the practicality of humanoid robots will grow rapidly year by year, the cost will be reduced, and the production scale will expand.
Chris: Please help me understand the economic situation in this regard, what do you think the cost of these robots will be?
ELON: Well, I don't think the cost is actually going to be too high, maybe less than a car.
Chris: But think about the economic issues involved. If you can replace a worker who earns $30,000-40,000 a year, you have to pay him every year. Instead, pay a lump sum of $25,000 to buy a robot that can work longer and won't go on vacation.
I mean, it could quickly replace certain types of jobs, how worried should the world be about that?
ELON: I don't worry about things that make people lose their jobs. I think we're going to have, and in fact there's been a massive labor shortage. I don't think it's that people are going to lose their jobs, it's actually going to still be a labor shortage, even in the future.
But it will indeed become a world of abundance. Any goods and services can be offered to anyone who wants them, and goods and services will become so cheap, so cheap that they are ridiculously cheap.
Second, the motivation to acquire Twitter
Chris: You made an offer to buy Twitter, why?
Lao Ma wrote an offer letter to the chairman of Twitter's board of directors on April 13
ELON: I think it's very important to have an inclusive arena for free speech. Twitter has become the de facto town square. It is very important that people be able to speak freely within the limits of the law, from reality and feelings.
I believe that one of the things Twitter should do is open source the algorithm. And, if you make any changes to people's tweets, whether it's a recommendation or a stream throttling, that behavior should be widely publicized. As anyone can see, some changes have been made to the act. Whether algorithmical or artificial, there should be no kind of behind-the-scenes operation.
Chris: But last week, Elon, as we talked, I asked you if you were thinking about taking over. You say impossible, you say I don't want to have Twitter. It's a painful secret and anyone will blame me for any problem.
What has changed?
ELON: No, I think everyone still blames me for any problems. Yes, if something went wrong with my acquisition of Twitter, it was my fault, 100 percent. I think a lot of mistakes could be made.
Chris: It's going to be painful, but you still want to do it, why?
ELON: I hope it doesn't get too painful. But I think it's important for democracy to function, for the functioning of the United States as a free nation, and for many other countries. And in fact it will provide broader help to freedom around the world. I think the risk of civilization will be lower if we can increase trust in Twitter as a public platform. So I think there's going to be some pain, and I'm not sure if I'm really going to be able to complete the acquisition.
I should also say that our intention is to be a private company and to retain as many shareholders as the law allows, I think about 2,000 or so. Definitely not, from the point of view of giving me a monopoly or maximizing my ownership of Twitter, we will bring in as many shareholders as possible as we allow.
Chris: You don't necessarily want to pay $40 billion in cash, or something like that. You want them to be with you...
ELON: Technically, I can afford it. But I would say that it's not about making money. I believe that doing so would allow for a public platform of maximum trust and broad inclusion, which is important for the future of human civilization and for it. I don't care about economic issues at all.
Chris: Well, it's important, it's not about economic gain, it's about the moral good that you think can be achieved.
You describe yourself as an absolutist of free speech. But does this mean that there is nothing people can't say, so that it's okay?
ELON: I think it's clear that Twitter, or any forum, is governed by the laws of the country where it operates. In the U.S., there are obviously some restrictions on free speech, and of course Twitter must abide by those rules.
Chris: Yeah, you can't incite people to use violence, just incite violence.
ELON: You can't, it would be a crime.
Chris: But the challenge now is that there are subtle differences between different things.
There is incitement to violence, and if it is illegal, it is not. There's hate speech, and some forms of hate speech are fine, like, I hate spinach.
But the problem is, let's say, there's a tweet here, "I hate Politician X," and the next tweet is, "I hope Politician X is dead." Like some of us have said to Putin right now. This is legitimate speech.
Another tweet was, "I wish Politician X was dead, with a picture of them with a gun on their head, or an added address. I mean, there are times when someone has to make a decision about what's not going to be allowed. Can the algorithm do this? Or is it that sometimes it still requires human judgment?
Third, change Twitter's plan
ELON: Like I said, in my opinion, Twitter should comply with the laws of the country in which I am located. Really, there is an obligation to do that. But if it's out of that range, and it's not clear who made the changes where, and it's not clear who made the changes, and let the tweet mysteriously get recommendations or throttling, with a black box algorithm, pushing some of the tweets without pushing the others, I think it can be quite dangerous.
Chris: The idea of open-source algorithms is a big deal. I think a lot of people would welcome that to understand exactly how the decision was made.
ELON: And criticize it. I mean, I think the code should be put on github so people can look at it and say, I see there's a problem here and I disagree with that. They can point out problems and suggest changes in the same way you update Linux or similar software.
Chris: But as far as I know, right now, at some point, what the algorithm does is it look at, for example, how many people are marking a tweet as obnoxious. Then, at some point, it must be looked at by the person and a decision must be made as to whether this is beyond the line.
But I don't think the algorithms themselves are enough to tell what's legitimate, okay, and absolutely annoying. So the question is, who should make the decision? Do you have an idea for that?
Currently, Twitter and Facebook, as well as other companies that employ thousands of people, work hard to help make informed decisions. The problem is that no one can agree with what is wise. How do you solve this problem?
ELON: Well, I think we want to be cautious on this issue. If in doubt, let this statement exist. If it's in a gray area, I would say, let this tweet exist.
But apparently, in a situation where there might be a lot of controversy, you don't necessarily want to recommend that tweet. I'm not saying that I know all the answers right now. But I do think we want to remove tweets very reluctantly and use permanent bans with great caution. I think a moratorium would be more appropriate than a permanent ban.
Usually, as I said before, this won't be perfect. But I think we want to really achieve that speech is as free as possible, from perception to reality.
Is there a good sign of freedom of speech: Are you allowing people you don't like to say things you don't like? If that's the case, we have freedom of speech.
It's very annoying when someone you don't like says something you don't like, but it's a sign that free speech is working healthily.
Trump was silenced on Twitter
Chris: I think a lot of people will agree with that. Take a look at the online reaction, many people are excited about your arrival and the changes you have proposed. Others were absolutely horrified.
That's how they look at it, they'll say, wait a minute, we agree that Twitter is a very important city square, it's a place in the world where secular opinions are exchanged, how can it be possible for the richest people in the world to have it, that's not right!
What is your response to this? Is there any way you can distance yourself from actual decisions about content, in some very convincing and very clear way?
ELON: As I said before, I think it's important that the algorithms be open source and that any manual tweaks have to be identified. For example, if someone did something to a tweet, there would be information that the series of actions had been taken.
And I'm not going to tweak tweets myself. But if someone does a recommendation, throttling, or something that affects a tweet, you know that.
As for media ownership, you know, Mark Zuckerberg owns Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp. Because of the share ownership structure, Mark Zuckerberg XIV would still be able to control these entities, indeed.
We wouldn't be in This situation on Twitter.
Chris: If you promise to open source the algorithm, it will undoubtedly give people some level of confidence. Talk about some of the other changes you proposed. Edit button, which must have. If it goes well, how are you going to do....
ELON: Frankly, I think my priority is to eliminate spam and scam bots, and the bot army on Twitter. I think they make the product worse.
What would it look like if I could get a Dogecoin for every cryptocurrency scam I saw? 100 billion Dogecoins.
Chris: Do you regret triggering a frenzy of excitement over Dogecoin? And it's gone.
ELON: I think Dogecoin is interesting. I always say, don't bet dogecoin, for reference only. But I love dogs, and I love memes, and it's both.
Chris: But, back to the edit button, how do you fix that?
If someone tweets "Elon Bull X" and two million people retweet it. Then, they edited it to "Elon Silly X", and then, all these retweets of the people, they were embarrassed.
How do you avoid a change in this sense, this situation where the retweeter is being used?
ELON: Well, I think you can only have editing capabilities for a very short period of time. When editing, one of the things you might want to do is zero out all retweets and likes. But I'm open to all kinds of ideas.
Chris: In a way, the current algorithm works well for you. I want to show you this, which is a typical tweet of mine, a bit lame and rambunctious. Look at the amazing feedback it got, oh God, 97 likes.
Then I tried another one, 29,000 likes.
The algorithm looks like this, at least for now. Elon Musk quickly expanded the world, not bad, right?
ELON: Yeah, I think, that's cool.
Chris: Help us understand, how did you build this amazing army of followers on Twitter?
Some of the people who like you the most, read some of your tweets and they think it's something somewhere awkward and crazy, and some are amazing.
ELON: Yes a little.
Chris: But is that the reason for the success, or why it is successful?
ELON: I don't know, I tweet more or less in stream of consciousness. It's not like, let me think about the grand plan of my tweets, I might just be on the toilet or doing something, I thought, oh this is funny, and then send it out on the push.
This is mostly the case, over-sharing.
Chris: But you're obsessed with getting the most out of every minute of the day.
ELON: Why not? I don't know, I just try to tweet something funny or playful and then people seem to like it.
Chris: If you don't succeed... Before I ask that question, let me ask this first, how to say, is the money guaranteed?
"SEC these bastards"
ELON: I have enough assets to do it... It's not a forward-looking statement, but if I have to, I can.
I should say that in fact, even the original Tesla privatization storm, the funds are actually guaranteed, I want to make this clear. In fact, this may be a good opportunity to clarify this, and funding is indeed guaranteed.
I should say, in that case, why didn't I respect the SEC? I'm not trying to blame everyone at the SEC, but at least that includes the San Francisco office.
Because the SEC knows that money is secure. Nonetheless, they conducted an active public investigation. At the time, Tesla's finances were in a precarious position. I was told by multiple banks that if I did not agree to a settlement with the SEC, the bank would stop providing working capital and Tesla would go bankrupt immediately.
It's like pointing a gun at your child's head, so I was forced, unjustifiably, to concede to the SEC. These bastards.
Now, they make people think I'm lying, but I'm not. I was forced to admit to lying to save Tesla, and that was the only reason.
Chris: Given what has happened to Tesla since then, shouldn't you be happy that you didn't go private at the time?
ELON: Yeah, I mean it was hard to put yourself in that position at the time. Tesla was under attack from the most ruthless short-seller in the history of the stock market.
There's something called "shorting and distortion", and what Tesla has experienced, a string of negative news spread by short sellers and Wall Street, is beyond... I believe Tesla is the most shorted stock in the history of the stock market.
This illustrates some of the problems. It affects our ability to hire people, it affects our ability to sell cars. Yes, it sucks. They were so hopeful that Tesla would go out of business so they could taste the sweetness.
Chris: Most of them have already paid the price.
ELON: Yeah, where are they now?
Chris: That was a very strong statement.
Obviously, there are a lot of people who support you. I think they'll say that you can bring a lot of positive insights to the world, don't waste your time, be distracted by these negative battles, and make people feel defensive.
People don't like to fight, especially with powerful government authorities, and they'd rather believe in your dreams. Aren't you inspired by people to drop those temptations and pursue greater achievements?
ELON: I would say that I'm a hybrid personality.
Chris: You're a fighter, you don't like to lose, you're committed.
ELON: Of course, I don't like to fail, and I don't think a lot of people will. But the truth is important to me, and it is as pathologically important to me as it is.
Fifth, the worst business decisions
Chris: If you could go back in time and change a certain decision you made along the way, clicking on your own edit button, which one would it be, and why?
ELON: The worst business decision I've ever made was not to start Tesla alone with J.B Strawbel.
Chris: Okay, J.B Straubel is a visionary co-founder. He was fascinated by batteries and knew a lot about them. And your decision to join Tesla, a company that existed before, means you're locked into what you call a weird architecture.
ELON: There's a lot of confusing claims. When I invested, Tesla was a shell company with no employees and no intellectual property. But one of the co-founders, Martin Eberhard, made up a false story.
I don't want to go into the too hard part here, but I didn't invest in an existing company at the time, we created a company. Ultimately, the creation of the company was done by JB and me. Unfortunately, there's another guy, another co-founder, who made the company his life's mission, and it feels like he created it, which is wrong.
Chris: Isn't there another problem, that in the process of developing the Tesla Edamame 3, Tesla almost went bankrupt. I remember you saying that part of the reason for this was that you overestimated the extent to which factories could be automated at that time? A lot of resources were spent to achieve excessive automation, but it didn't work.
It almost brought the company out of business, am I right?
ELON: First of all, it's important to understand, what exactly are Tesla's most notable achievements?
It's not about creating an electric car, or creating a prototype of an electric car, or a small batch production of a car. Hundreds of automotive startups have emerged over the years, hundreds. In fact, at one point, Bloomberg counted the number of electric vehicle startups, and I remember it almost reached 500.
The difficult part is not creating a prototype or making limited production. What is absolutely difficult is that American car companies have not completed in a hundred years, and it is really difficult to reach mass production without bankruptcy. The last U.S. company to reach mass production without going bankrupt was Chrysler in the 1920s.
Chris: And Tesla is nearly bankrupt.
ELON: Yeah, but that's not to say we'd be fine if we used more manual production. We basically messed up almost every part of the Edamame 3 production line, from the battery cell to the battery pack, to the drive inverter, the motor, the body production line, the paint shop, the final assembly, everything, everything messed up.
I lived in the factories in Fremont and Nevada for three years, repairing production lines and running around the factory like a lunatic. Stayed with the group. I slept on the floor so that the team that was going through that difficult time could see me on the floor. They know I'm not hiding in some ivory tower. No matter what pain they went through, I had to double down on tasting.
Chris: And some people who know you well actually think that you were making a terrible mistake, that you were almost pushing yourself to the brink of a mental breakdown, and that you were in danger of making the wrong choice.
In fact, Elon, I heard you say last week that given Tesla's current value, every minute you spend is important. It doesn't sound too wise that you're in danger and obsessed with spending all this time so much that you're on the verge of a sanite breakdown.
Isn't your time, your perfectly rational, time and decision-making adjusted by rest, more powerful and convincing than the "I'm almost out of sight" situation? Taking care of yourself should definitely be a strategic point.
Elon: There's no other way available. Three hellish years of life, 2017, 18 and 19, were the longest painful periods of my life. There is no other way.
We barely managed to do it, and we've been teetering on the brink of bankruptcy. Do I want this pain? I don't want it. These three years have experienced too much pain, but this must be endured, otherwise Tesla will go out of business.
Chris: When you look around the Gigafactory, we saw quite a bit of footage earlier last week. Looking at the development of the company, do you feel challenged to find new ways of manufacturing?
You actually have an advantage now, and it's different from the way you already master production. Those three years of experience will not be repeated. You've actually found a new way to make it.
ELON: Right now, I think I know more about manufacturing than anyone alive in the world today. I can tell you how every part of this car was produced. Basically, if you live in a factory for three years...
SIXTH, "Grand Plan III" and scale
Chris: You've talked about scaling, and you're writing your new grand plan. You said that scale is at its core. Why is scale important? Why are you obsessed with this? How do you think?
ELON: In order to accelerate the emergence of sustainable energy, there must be scale. Because we want to transition the huge economy that is currently overly dependent on fossil fuels to a sustainable energy economy.
Energy must be generated in sustainable ways such as wind, solar, hydro, geothermal, etc. I'm also a believer in nuclear power, and I think I've discussed that. Then, since solar and wind energy are intermittent, we have to have fixed energy storage batteries. Then we're going to turn all the vehicles into electric.
If these things can be done, we have a sustainable energy future. The faster we do it, the less risk we pose to the environment. The sooner the better, so scaling is very important.
It's not about news coverage, it's about tonnage. What is the tonnage of batteries that can be produced? And this is clearly done in a sustainable way. Our estimate is that about 300 terawatt hours of battery storage is needed to electrify vehicles and transition heating and cooling to a fully electric situation.
There may be some different estimates, but our estimate is 300 terawatt hours.
Tesla battery storage power station in Alaska
Chris: We delved into this in an interview we recorded last week, so you can go in and hear more about it. The context here is that 300 terawatt-hours is a thousand times the current installed capacity of batteries, and the scale required is quite spectacular.
Your vision is for Tesla to work toward a meaningful proportion of this need and call on other companies to complete the rest. This is a human task to change energy networks on a very large scale.
ELON: Yeah, it depends on how quickly we can scale up and encourage other companies to scale up to 300 terawatt-hours of battery capacity.
Of course, there will be a huge demand for these batteries to be recycled. Recycling batteries makes sense because the raw materials are high-quality ore. One should not think that this is a whole bunch of waste batteries. No, they'll be recycled, because even a scrapped battery pack is worth about $1,000. This is exactly what a sustainable energy future requires.
We will try to take a series of actions to make the future of sustainable energy come faster.
Asperger's syndrome, the obsession with the truth
Chris: Okay, when you publish the grand plan, there's a lot of interest. At the same time, I want to know more about what's going on in your brain?
SNL Old Horse presided over the opening remarks
Elon: It's an honor to host Saturday Night Live, and actually, I'm making history tonight as the first Asperger's syndrome patient to host SNL.
Chris: It's brave to say that. But I'd love to know, how do you see Asperger's syndrome? Can you tell us what it's like even when you're a kid? Or, as you are now, after understanding, can you talk about it?
ELON: I think everyone's experience will be different. But I guess, for me, social signals aren't intuitive. I used to just love to read and didn't understand that.
I guess other people can intuitively understand what something means. And I just tend to understand things literally, just literally, literally in the most original sense. But then I found out that I was wrong, they didn't simply say what they wanted to say directly, there were all kinds of other meanings. It took me a long time to understand this.
I was bullied so badly. Frankly, my childhood wasn't happy, it was tough. But I read a lot of books, many, many books. I gradually learned more from the books I read, and I watched a lot of movies. But I spent a lot of time trying to understand things that most people intuitively understand.
Chris: I've been wondering if it could have been a strange way to give you a magical gift, and indirectly to many other people.
Brains are malleable, and they go in a positive direction. If for some reason so many people spend so much time, energy and brain power, wrestling with the outside world and social signals, if those are partially cut off, that's probably part of the reason you can understand the world more deeply than most people, isn't it?
ELON: I think, of course it's possible. I think from a technical point of view, this may also have some value.
Because I found it makes sense to be alone all night programming a computer. And I think most people don't like typing weird symbols on their computers all night, they don't think it's funny. But I thought it was interesting, and I liked it. So, I just programmed all night by myself, and I found that it was a very happy thing for me.
Chris: It's true that every entrepreneur can see what's possible in the future and then take action to make it a reality. In my opinion, the possibilities you see are almost broader than anyone else.
You can piece together clues, so based on a deep understanding of physics, you see the possibilities of science. You know what the underlying equations are, what the techniques based on these sciences are, and where they can go. You see the possibilities of technology, and then, very unusually, you combine with the possibilities of the economy.
For example, what is its actual cost? Is there a system you can envision in which production can be made at affordable cost? Then, sometimes you'll be convinced that there's an opportunity here. Piecing these clues together, you can do something amazing.
ELON: Yeah, no matter what the situation, there's one aspect where I'm obsessed with the truth.
My obsession with the truth is why I studied physics, because physics tries to understand the truth of the universe. Physics is about the verifiable truths in the universe and the truths that have the power to predict.
For me, physics is a very natural science of study, no one forced me to study it, and it is interesting to understand the nature of the universe.
Then, computer science or information theory is also about understanding logic. And there's a theory that information theory actually operates on a more fundamental level than physics. Yes, physics and information theory are very interesting to me.
Chris: When you say the truth, it's not like some people say, what you're talking about is the truth of the universe, like the fundamental truth that drives the universe, like the deep curiosity that explores what the universe really is.
ELON: Yeah, I think it's very important to explore the "why" of things. In fact, when I was a teenager, I was frustrated with the meaning of life. I tried to understand the meaning of life, to read religious texts, and to read philosophical books. I began to study German philosophers.
I have to say that if you're still a teenager and it's definitely not a wise move, it can be a little dark. It would be much better if it were an adult.
Then, I finally read the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. It's actually a philosophy book, but it's disguised as a silly funny book. But in fact, it is actually a philosophical book. Well, Adams makes a point that the question is harder than the answer. It's a bit like a joke, and the answer is 42.
This number does come up quite often, with 420 being 10 times the size of 42.
You can form a triangle with a 42-degree angle and two 69-degree angles. There is no perfect triangle, or does it actually exist?
Chris: But more important than the answer is the question, which is the whole theme of that book. I mean, that's how you see meaning? It is the search for the problem.
ELON: Yes, I have a suggestion for a worldview or a motivational philosophy: to understand the answer to the universe, what kind of questions to ask, to the extent that we are allowed to expand the scope and scale of consciousness, biologically and digitally.
We're going to be able to better ask these questions, structure them, and understand why we're here, how we got here, what's really going on. This is my driving philosophy, which is to expand the scope and scale of consciousness to give us a better understanding of the nature of the universe.
The world in which Little X grew up and his future
Chris: Elon, one of the most touching things last week. Seeing you with your children, what will his future look like? I'm not talking about him personally, but the world he's going to grow up in. What do you think his future will look like?
ELON: A very digital future, a world that was very different from where I grew up, that's for sure. But I think we obviously want to do everything we can to make sure the future is good, for everyone's children.
And you know that the future is something you're looking forward to, not something to be sad about. You want to wake up in the morning and be excited about the future. We should fight for the things that will make us excited about the future.
In the future, it cannot be just one tragic thing after another, solving one sad problem after another. There must be something that excites you and makes you want to live. These things are very important, and you should be more involved.
Chris: All of this is not to say that it is all a foregone conclusion, everything depends on their own efforts. The future can be scary, there are still some situations that are scary, but you see a path to an exciting future, whether it's Earth or Mars, and in our minds, through artificial intelligence, and so on.
At the bottom of your mind, do you really believe you are helping, providing an exciting future for X and others?
ELON: I'm doing my best to do that. I love humanity, I think we should fight for a better future for humanity, I think we should be optimistic about the future and strive for this optimistic future.
*The article is the author's independent opinion and does not represent the position of the note-taker.
Enterprise internal training | Online and offline corporate universities | course group purchases
Share, like, watch, 3 in 3!