Sorkin interviewed Elon Musk.
The most important points were:
The Large Language Model AIs have all been trained on copyrighted data.
We will reach ASI (Artificial Super Intelligence, AI able to do innovative science, discover new technology and perform innovative physics and be better than most people at nearly all things within 3 years). This will not be better than all people at all things especially when people can use other computers to augment themselves.
Elon is very optimistic about Neuralink and how it will enhance humans and take human communication to the next level.
Elon will not bend to an advertising boycott. If there is an effective advertising boycott that is strong enough to kill X (Twitter) then he would try avoid X getting destroyed but he would just use his own funds to avoid it.
The controversial tweet- He regrets it but his actual intended communication is that wealthy jewish people were funding the category of oppressed people in an unselective way. This resulted in those wealthy people funding Hamas and people that want to kill all jews. Those wealthy jewish people made a mistake by not being careful about what they were funding.
The New York Times did not pay $1000/year for a corporate subscription and this resulted in their tweets not getting recommended. People have to pay the New York Times for their paper subscriptions. The New York Times needed to pay X for their subscription to get the benefits of a subscription.
0:00 Intro
0:16 Elon on his latest controversy
2:30 Elon gets emotional
3:10 Don’t advertise on X (Twitter)
4:20 GFY
4:40 Advertisers will kill the company
5:15 Let’s see how Earth responds to that
5:20 Will Elon keep funding X if all avertisers leave
6:40 Elon’s approach
7:05 Tesla sells without advertising
7:35 Elon gets seriously upset (explicit)
8:25 Elon about Cybertruck
9:00 Elon: “one of the most foolish things I’ve said”
11:00 Funding Hamas
11:30 Elon’s regrets
12:30 Elon’s aspiration
14:30 Algorithm
15:10 Is Elon upsetting people on purpose?
16:20 Elon’s mind “they do not understand”
17:20 Elon’s jet idea
18:00 Elon admits to having demons?
19:40 Tesla
21:00 Elon’s philosophy, existential crisis
23:00 Elon’s purpose, what he’s excited about
26:30 Confidence
26:55 “Elon, you’re wrong”
27:40 Haters. Does Elon think he’s usually right
29:30 About Jeff Bezos (enemy)
30:10 Elon humbles the audience
31:20 Elon’s huge power,
33:00 Power China has over Elon Musk
34:00 Who has leverage over Elon Musk
35:20 “Elon is a hypocrite, does business in China but is pro free speech”
37:15 Open AI (leading into Sam Altman firing; Chat GPT)
38:30 Elon called out by Google founder
40:30 Sam Altman firing, behind the scenes
41:30 Is Sam Altman corrupt (Open AI (Chat GPT) CEO)
42:40 Magic genie
44:40 AI speed
45:35 Elon makes a shocking prediction
46:20 Elon has the best data
47:50 It’s a lie, for sure it is a lie
49:30 Future lawsuits
50:00 The most interesting of times
50:50 Had trouble sleeping
51:20 Regulation
51:50 More dangerous than nuclear bombs
52:20 Elon pushes back against regulation?
53:20 Tesla and regulations
54:30 TikTok
55:30 China
56:00 Content production
56:30 Elon’s politics, moving to the right
57:00 Tesla, Biden, General Motors
59:00 “Climate issue is a hoax”
59:40 Endorse a presidential candidate?
1:01:00 Would Elon vote for Biden?
1:01:30 Elon calls out a presidential candidate
1:02:10 Canada – rights in Canada
1:02:50 Which party?
1:04:30 Honesty will win over time
1:05:30 New York Times throttled on X (Twitter)?
1:06:45 Free speech costs a little bit of money
1:07:30 Cybertruck, car business
1:08:10 Demand
1:08:40 Tesla Model Y, competitors
1:09:40 Unions & Tesla
1:10:45 Elon calls out General Motors
1:11:20 Tesla & unions
1:12:35 how much time Elon spends on social media
1:14:00 friendly confrontation
1:15:00 Fighting Apple?
1:15:50 If Elon went into phone business
1:16:30 Paradise (Neuralink)
1:17:45 Big change coming
1:19:10 Self driving cars
1:21:30 Timeline, regret?
1:23:00 Self driving is already safer
1:24:05 Amplify empathy
Brian Wang is a Futurist Thought Leader and a popular Science blogger with 1 million readers per month. His blog Nextbigfuture.com is ranked #1 Science News Blog. It covers many disruptive technology and trends including Space, Robotics, Artificial Intelligence, Medicine, Anti-aging Biotechnology, and Nanotechnology.
Known for identifying cutting edge technologies, he is currently a Co-Founder of a startup and fundraiser for high potential early-stage companies. He is the Head of Research for Allocations for deep technology investments and an Angel Investor at Space Angels.
A frequent speaker at corporations, he has been a TEDx speaker, a Singularity University speaker and guest at numerous interviews for radio and podcasts. He is open to public speaking and advising engagements.
I may be overblowing the problem somewhat – IP more often covers product design rather than basic research. However I can think of at least two specific examples where coorporation made decisions specifically to hide research into some very important problems – one: the tobacco industry where research was done where they found out that smoking caused various health problems. And again where the oil conglomerates never published their studies on the effects their industries had on world climate. Much other research remains withheld from publication by coorporate decision just to hide data in the hope it will give them an edge over the competition.
Clearly, human laws are going to need to change to fit reality, not the other way around.
What would become of copyrights if we all had eidetic memories?
What would become of copyrights if people reproduced by mitosis, with both new organisms having all the memories of the original?
What would become of copyrights if people lived thousands of years? Or even longer if they occasionally made an additional copy of themselves?
These are the questions AI is forcing us to consider, and the same considerations may eventually be applicable to us, as well. It may sound farfetched, but whatever we come up with could become the way things are done for a very, very, long time.
And telling folks that AIs (and other potential immortals) are not allowed access to copyrighted materials is going to get less traction than Prohibition did. Neither is insisting the AI, or its users, pay a royalty anytime it uses any form of information not obtained from public domain materials.
Separate but related problem. Ninety-five years after an author’s death is too long for copyrights. And this becomes even more of a problem when the authors begin gaining access to radical life extension.
If we don’t find a way to sort this all out then maybe the real reason people will eventually find ways to cross interstellar distances and colonize elsewhere will be to evade the embedded copyright laws of the old world.
Doing up to date science requires access to up to date information. Most of which is locked up as corporate IP. Unless the AI companies can get access to this info (or figure out how to steal it), their AI models will be hamstrung on producing the BEST new science. It will be able to do alot with what is available, but some of the best info will not be available. Corporations may be able to make models that use their own data stores on top of available info, but still will be locked away from other corporations IP. This will be a problem.
To get the best science, you need to synthesise ALL info, accross various domains. Other companies will have studied a problem from a very different viewpoint than your own. Perhaps multiple companies will agree to share info, which will help. Probably there will be competing blocs with info NOT shared with other blocs. It will be interesting to watch what unfolds.
Just a thought – You all have a good day.
Up to date science is PUBLISHED every day. Patents are public too. You have to pay licences/royalties/etc… IF you want to use the discovery in a for-profit way, you do not pay licences or royalties if you use that knowledge to advance the knowledge (i.e.to do science) furthermore many scientific discoveries are free also for commercial use (for example many universities licenses are).
We’ve all been trained on copyrighted data. College textbook companies are going to sue us all for thinking.
I think the authors and publishers of those textbooks were paid for their work. My textbooks often cost more than $100/book when I was in college.
Which AI company is paying the authors, writers, creators, etc. for the use of their writings, music, videos, etc.?
Ok, so buy one copy of a book and it’s ok to train on it, same as people?
Or are they supposed to pay tons of royalties anytime the AI uses what it learned?
How about if the AI checks a book out of a library, trains on it, and then puts it back in the library, just like people can do?
they haven’t paid royalties or book fees.