Moonshots with Peter Diamandis January 6, 2026 Elon Musk's first big interview of 2026: a three-hour conversation with Peter Diamandis and Dave Blundin on the AGI timeline, the US–China AI race, universal high income and the road to abundance.
Elon Musk's first big interview of 2026: a three-hour conversation with Peter Diamandis and Dave Blundin on the AGI timeline, the US–China AI race, universal high income and the road to abundance.
Transcript Full transcript on singjupost.com → My concern isn't the long run, it's the next three to seven years. How do we head towards Star Trek and not Terminator?
I call AI and robotics the supersonic tsunami. We're in the singularity.
When is all white collar work gone?
Anything short of shaping atoms, AI can do half or more of those jobs.
Right now, there's no on, off switch. It is coming and accelerating.
The transition will be bumpy.
You have a solution to this?
China's done an incredible job, right? I mean, it's running circles around us. Do you imagine that the US could make that level of investment and commitment
based on current trends? China wolf far exceed the rest of the world in compute.
Every major CEO and economist and government leader should be like, what do we do?
Co-host
We don't have any system right now to make this go well. But AI is a critical part of making it go well.
There are three things that I think are important. Truth will prevent AI from going insane. Curiosity, I think, will foster any form of sentience. And if it has a sense of beauty, it will be a great future.
It's going to be an awesome future. Now that's a moonshot.
Co-host
Ladies and gentlemen,
welcome to Moonshots. Following is a wide ranging conversation with Elon Musk focused on optimism and the coming age of abundance. My moonshot mate, Dave Blunden and I flew into Austin, Texas to meet up with elon at his 11.5 million square foot gigafactory, home of the cybertruck and model Y production and the Future home for 8 million square feet of Optimus production. Elon has agreed to do this kind of a deep dive, catch up once per year. This is hopefully the first of many. And after having this conversation with Elon, it's crystal clear to me that we are living through the singularity. All right, enjoy.
Yeah. Your relentless optimism is always a breath of fresh air.
Thank you, buddy. Thank you. Well, I want to share that tonight with a lot of people.
Yeah, I think they need it. I hope you're right. And you might be right. Actually, I'm increasingly thinking that you are right.
Thank you. Abundance for all. Yeah, that's the goal.
Right now, putting a lot of time into chips.
You are to be our personal. Yeah, yeah.
Co-host
It's always AI assistance, I assume.
Co-host
With some AI assistance, I assume. Design not enough.
It'd be nice if we could just hand it off to the AI. Yeah, yeah.
Co-host
Yeah. I tried to do some circuit design, actually. With AI recently. Just a couple weeks ago. Not happening yet.
I think probably at this point, Grok, if you, if you took a photo and submitted it to Grok, it could probably tell you if a circuit is. If there's something wrong with it. Yeah. Yeah.
Co-host
All right, I'm going to give it a shot. You're using the same GROK that I'm using, are you? Or you are?
Co-host
So 4.2. But 5 is soon, right?
4.2 has not been released yet externally. But yeah, I mean, if you just, if you just upload an image into Grok, it's. It's just quite a good job. Yeah, yeah. Of analyzing any given image.
Co-host
Absolutely. Let's. Let's start. We're going to talk about this.
All right, we'll come back. I mean, let's see. If I take, if I take a picture of you, what is it? See what it.
What's it going to say about me?
Co-host
Yeah, it's going to say you're a flawed circuit.
I also have to remember to update it because, like, we update the Grok app so frequently.
You know, I asked, I asked Grok to roast me. Oh, it's did an amazing job. Then I asked Grok to roast you. And I spit out my coffee.
It was hilarious. And then I asked it, you know,
it say, be more vulgar. It just keeps telling it to be more and more vulgar.
Until it's like, mother of Gala.
Co-host
Wait, is Bad Rudy still out or did that get repealed? Bad Rudy's still there.
I ask rock, you know, does Elon know what you say about him? And, and she goes. It's a she for me. She goes, what is he going to do about it?
What is he going to do about it? Yeah, let's see. Okay, so I just literally took a photo of you and.
No, nothing. I didn't say anything.
Co-host
That's pretty good.
The host of the podcast Moonshots. Yeah, sometimes that way.
Co-host
That's your first credential.
Now, forget about everything else I've done in life.
Co-host
See, it comes back to your podcast.
It was a no context image. Yeah.
By the way, Grokopedia is awesome.
It's like I tried to like update my Wikipedia page for like years, impossibly. And yeah, it knows me. Amazing. Yeah, he's wearing a black quilted jacket featuring a Sundance logo. Not quite true. It's my abundance logo.
I guess a little wrinkled on the cloth.
Anyway, yeah, but it basically, it's pretty damn good.
He's smiling and relaxed with a laptop in front of him.
Co-host
Well, it's quite a circuit though. Gotta test it on the circuit.
It has to be read by you though.
I mean, I won't read the whole thing, but
give me a taste. I can take it.
Check out that grin. Dude. Smiling like he just discovered a new way to monetize hope. Monetizing hope. Oh, that's good. Yes.
I want to try and answer the question, can AI and tech help save America in the world?
I want to give people listening a dose of optimism. There's a survey done in mid December by pew that said 45% of Americans would rather live in the past and only 14% said they'd rather live in the future. Which is insane to me.
Obviously they never read history. The challenge is most Americans all they have of the future. It's like Hollywood has shown US killer AIs and rogue robots.
And people are worried about their jobs, they're worried about health care, they're worried about, you know, the cost of living. The challenge is how do we, how do we help people? I mean, you posted you pinned on X. The future is going to be amazing with AI and robots enabling sustainable abundance.
I was thinking of you when I did that.
Thank you. I appreciate that.
And. And well, I mean, it's like what
would Peter diamond to say?
And that's channeling you.
Thank you. Thank you. I couldn't agree more either. So my question is from a, you know, from a first principle standpoint.
The rationale for optimism, you know, how do we, how do we head towards Star Trek and not Terminator?
How do we head towards Roddenberry? Not Cameron.
Jim. The diverging path meme.
Avatar has some hopeful parts, but anyway, how do we go towards universal high income instead of social unrest? So my.
Or because we don't want social Jews so have universal high income and social unrest. That's my prediction.
Oh, that will make for a lot of problems.
Co-host
Is that your actual prediction? Yeah, yeah, it seems likely.
Like, tell me I don't have to
Co-host
But it seems like that's the trend.
Well, because there's going to be so much change.
People are going to like. Like scared shitless.
Yeah, it's sort of the, you know, it's like, be careful what you wish for because you might get it. Yeah. Now if you actually get all the stuff you want, is that actually the future you want?
Because it means that your job won't
matter if you're living an unchallenged life.
Right. With no challenges. No. You know, you know, if you become a couch potato, if it's the w e future, it does not go well for humans.
Co-host
And we're used to being told, here's your challenge. So people haven't historically been very good at creating their own challenge in the absence.
I think Elon does a damn good job. Every time. Every time one company takes off, you start your next.
Co-host
That's. That's rare.
Co-host
Yeah, I think you over.
So. So what? So why do I do this to myself?
Co-host
Actually, after AI and robots, is there another thing after that? I guess there's.
Well, there's always conquering, you know, the universe.
That rocks really well. And energy rocks.
Are your friends conquering?
So you need to get there.
Why, Elon? Why are you so optimistic? Are you. Are you optimistic? Let's start there.
I'm not as optimistic as you are.
Okay. But, but why are you.
I'm more optimistic than most people.
Co-host
And is the trend upward compared to a year ago, two years ago?
Well, I think if you reframe things in terms of progress, bar, like speaking of challenges. Progress towards a Kardashev 2 scale civilization.
Well, let's say the aspiration capturing all
the energy from the sun's output.
Well, let's even have a humbler aspiration than that. If we say that our goal is to even get a millionth of the sun's energy, that would be more than a thousand times as much energy as could possibly be produced on Earth. So about a half a billionth of the sun's energy reaches Earth. So you'd have to go up three orders of magnitude from that just to get to a million. So we're very, very, very far from even having a billionth of the sun's energy harness in any way. So a reasonable goal would be try to get to a millionth. And if you try to get to a millionth or a thousandth 0.1%. That's such an enormous. There's not sure what metaphor we would use here because a hill to climb is not a big enough metaphor. But gravity well to escape and hold a gravity well. Exactly. So if you try to get to a millionth of the sun's energy or a thousandth of sun's energy. Now these are very, very difficult tasks
and energy is the inner loop for everything right now.
Yeah. I think that, I think the future currency will essentially just be wattage.
I was thinking, is it, is it is the ability of a person to control energy and compute or just energy? I mean, the two translate.
Like so. Or like basically how much power is being turned into work of some kind. Right. Intelligence or matter manipulation.
So that's. Your next big project is going to be energy.
It's going to be. You're going to go back to solar,
your solar system, expand from there and say, okay, what about even getting somewhere on a cottage of three scale, meaning galaxy level.
Now we're talking. Now we're back to Star Trek.
Yeah, Expand horizons here. Yes. Well, there isn't even a horizon because you're not on a planet.
So we think galaxy, mind.
Yeah, well, listen, we're in 11.5 million square foot, three pentagons right here in this building. You think in a reasonably large scale.
So, I mean, so from a challenge standpoint, I guess the civil is. The civilizational challenge will be how do you climb the orders of magnitude and energy harnessed.
But we're going back to why are you optimistic right now? I mean, when people think about the challenges ahead, I think we're going to end up with abundance in the long run. It's beyond.
Beyond abundance in any. Beyond what people possibly could think of as abundance.
Co-host
Like the AI, actually.
AI and robots. The limit will saturate all human desire.
And then we get to nanotechnology, which takes it even a step further.
The thing about the. Well, I'm not sure what you mean by. You mean like little nanobots.
Oh, yeah, yeah, sure, sure. I mean, we're already doing atomic level assembly on the four circuits.
You know, amazing. Two, three nanometers.
It's only depending on how they're arrayed. Four or five silicon atoms per nanometer.
So those are big atoms, though. They're not biggest.
Co-host
Yeah, they're not your little.
I mean a bit of it. I'm saying they should actually describe the circuits in terms of an integer number of atoms in a specific place.
Co-host
They should it's all angstroms now.
It's like, it's, it's like we'll call this the, the seven atom. Yeah. Or whatever.
Like you said, two nanometers. It's like no one knows. Nine silicon atoms, something like that. They've got silicon and copper and you know, so. But a bunch of these things are just marketing numbers. Like the 2 nanometer is just a marketing number. Oh yeah. But, but you still need essentially close to atomic level precision, like the atoms really, you know, to be in the right spot. So I think they're getting clean rooms wrong by the way, in these modern fabs. I'm going to make a bet here.
That Tesla will have a 2 nanometer fab. And I can eat a cheeseburger and smoke a cigar in the fab. Yes.
The air handling would be that good.
Co-host
Do you have this sketched out in your mind? Like how is it, how are the atoms being placed, that they're immune to cheeseburger grease?
They just maintain wafer isolation the entire time, which is actually the default for fabs. The wafers are transported in boxes of pure nitrogen gas under a slight positive.
Co-host
So are the bananas at Walmart, just so you know.
Yeah, well that's insecticide, essentially. Like it's pretty hard for anything that's combusting to live without oxygen. Yep. So let's talk about. So like you can kill the bugs just by putting a nitrogen blanket on.
I want to talk about energy, health, education, because those are people's concerns. So on the energy front, the innermost loop of everything that you're building and
doing right now, energy is the foundation.
What's your vision for energy abundance in, in the next, you know, this decade? The sun.
Yeah, I mean, so the sun is everything.
It's everything. So you're all in on solar? Yeah, I mean you're natural gas and solar. You're at Colossus too, right?
Yeah. People just don't understand how that solar is everything. So everything compared to the sun, all other energy sources are like cavemen throwing some twigs into a fire. Yeah. So the sun is over 99.8% of all mass in the solar system. Jupiter is around 0.1% of the mass. So even if you burnt Jupiter, the energy produced by the sun was still around up to 100%. And then if you teleported three more Jupiters into our solar system and burnt them too, it's still round up. The sun still rounds up to 100% of energy.
Any interest in fusion? I mean, like fusion on the planet. Fusion.
You know what, a mile away? You're never going to guess how the sun works.
I mean, we have a giant fuse fusion reactor that shows up every day
It's farcical for us to create little fusion reactors. I mean that would be like, you know, having a tiny ice cube maker in the Antarctic and say, hey look, we made ice. I'm like, congratulations. Even the Antarctic, it's totally with you on this. Like three kilometer high glaciers right next to you.
Co-host
Yeah. If you just narrow the question to the Memphis timeline. So Memphis data center timeline between a gigawatt and 10 gigawatt. You're not gonna, you're not gonna pull 10 gigawatts out of Memphis.
Maybe you are two or three.
Co-host
So there's still a gap between there and the next whatever you just. So. And they're not in space yet at that point.
So we're still in toyland here for Toyland. Toyland. 10 gigawatts.
Co-host
You know what's amazing is there's 100 megawatts right outside the door here. And it's massive. Yeah, it's, it's enormous. And it uses more energy 100 times than everything. All these manufacturing lines combined use less energy than that, I think.
But we're talking about one was the, the third largest training cluster in the world. For doing coherent training, you're falling behind. Well, we have Cortex 2 that's being built out. That'll be half a gigawatt and operational middle of next year, everybody.
You may not know this, but I've got an incredible research team. And every week myself, my research team study the meta trends that are impacting the world. Topics like computation, sensors, networks, AI robotics, 3D printing, synthetic biology. And these Metatrend reports I put out once a week enable you to see the future 10 years ahead of anybody else. If you'd like to get access to the Metatrends newsletter every week, go to diamandis.com/metatrends. That's diamandis.com/metatrends. So going back to what Dave is saying over the next five years, what are you scaling on energy front?
Do you mean five years is a long time?
I mean energy. I mean, China has done an incredible job.
I mean it's running circles around us.
China has done an incredible job on solar. Yeah, it's amazing. So I believe China's production capacity is around 1500 gigawatts per year of solar.
Yeah, they put in 500 terawatts in the last year. What hours? Yeah, like 500, 500 terawatt hours to be very specific. Yeah, the last year, 70% of that was solar. And they're just scaling. Do you, do you imagine that solar scales, do you imagine that the US could make that level of investment and commitment because people are worried about their energy bills going up. With no data centers in our backyard, how do we provide, I mean, energy is equivalent to, is equivalent to cost of, you know, cost of living, it's equivalent to health, it's equivalent to clean water. You know, the higher energy production of a country, the higher its gdp. Energy is important. So what should, what do we do to scale that way? Do we do it in solar here?
I think we should scale solar substantially in the US. Tesla and SpaceX are scaling solar. So. And I encourage others to do so as well. So the, the, I mean, obviously I've said this stuff, you know, publicly. I do see a path to 100 gigawatts a year of space sort of AI powered, solar powered AI satellites.
100 gigawatts a year of solar powered AI satellites.
I did the math on that. That's like 500,000 Starlink V3s launched, over 8,000 Starship flights, like one every hour for a year.
10,000 flights a year is a reasonable number.
So it's amazing. It's quite the scale.
Co-host
What's the really rough timeline on that?
Because I mean, by aircraft standards, that's a small number. Sure, sure. In terms of flights.
Yeah. That's, that's, that's, that's more like. So you're just like, depends what you compare it to. If you compare to the rest of the rocket industry, it's a very high number.
And we're talking about a million tons of payload to orbit per year. So if you do, if you do a million tons of payload to orbit per year with 100 kilowatts per ton, that's 100 gigawatts of solar powered AI satellites per year.
I mean there's a path to get probably to a terawatt per year from,
If you say like 10, you want to go up another order of magnitude. Or let's say you want to go to 100 terawatts a year. Yeah. Obviously kind of nutty numbers. Then you want to make those AI satellites on the moon.
Yeah. So the Gerard K. O' Neill approach.
Well, like Robert Heinlein, moon is A Hodge.
Yeah. It's a sort of libertarian paradise in the moon. Yeah. So because on the moon you can just accelerate the satellites into to escape velocities around 2500 meters per second and there's no atmosphere. So like a mass driver works very well on the moon.
Can I ask the question about orbital debris? I mean we're building effectively a Dysonish swarm around the Earth.
Are you worried about over congestion on the. That's going to be a sun sync orbit is going to fill very quickly.
I mean you don't have to have sun sync. I mean you can.
No, don't have to, but it's optimal.
Yeah. There's some pros and cons to sun sync or not sun sync. I mean your payload to orbit drops by like 30% compared to, you know, if you just went to like mid inclination, like 70 degrees or something like that.
Yeah, I mean do we need an orbital debris X prize at this point? We need some way to get the satellites defunct satellites down. Do we pass rules that require them to deorbit on their own?
Yeah, at the point in which you can put a million tons of satellites into orbit, you can also start bringing down satellites too, or at least collecting them into a known. Into fixed locations. They're not like all over the place.
And then you can reuse them.
Yeah, let's just say that we'll have. The resource level will be so high that I believe this will be a solved problem given the amount of intelligence we're talking about here. Like the intelligence we're quite interested in preserving itself.
Yes, that's true. Oh, interesting.
Co-host
Yeah, good motivation.
Yeah, interesting question.
Co-host
The data centers will not be in low Earth orbit. Right. They'll be much higher constantly in the sun. They're not going to be in the traffic jam, I assume.
Well, you can get, you know, you don't have to get to get to constant sunlight. You can be around 1200 kilometers on synchronous will give you constant sunlight.
But you could, you could place them in multiple orbits.
Co-host
No, I think if there's an X prize for cleaning up, it's got to be. There's only going to be clutter in low Earth orbit.
I mean debris from anything.
Anything. That's. If it's, you know, below around 7 or 800 kilometers, the atmosphere will. Atmospheric drag will bring it back. Yeah. So like for Starlink there's a dual benefit of being like as low as possible because your beam, you know, your beams are tighter. You know, you're basically that you have less latency and your, your beams are smaller if you're, you're closer to the Earth. So like Solid 3 will be around 330-350km, which is quite a lot of drag. So it's basically constantly thrusting.
I still remember when you proposed Starlink and everybody else in the industry was like, no way, no way. He's not going to get the spectrum. He's not going to do this. It's kind of worked.
Yeah. The stalling team has done an incredible job. I mean, we've basically rebuilt the Internet in space with laser links, so there's 9,000 satellites up there right now.
Do you think the government's going to be able to handle the kind of licensing of the volume of satellites that you want to put up? I mean, will there be pushback? Because, you know, China's going to put up their own constellations. Europe, who knows whether Europe will ever step up.
Nothing that nothing they're doing has success in a set of possible outcomes.
Co-host
I just got back from Rome. I don't want to touch. Touch that. Really.
Successes are on the set of possible outcomes,
It shows the number of billion dollar startups in the US versus Europe.
Co-host
Have you seen that graphic?
Co-host
Yeah. And data centers too.
No one was talking about orbital data centers six months ago. Yeah, nobody. And then all of a sudden, Sundar's on it, you're. You're out with it and it's the hot new thing.
What, what, what, what tip.
What happened that every company is now talking about orbital data centers?
I guess it went viral on X.
I don't know. Is every company talking?
Oh, yeah, everybody's got their own orbital for sure.
Co-host
And I was suggesting to Peter that you updated the math on launch costs and that it's a tipping point very quickly with the updated map.
Starship's been the cost for, you know, I don't know what you hold. $100 per kg, $10 per kg. What do you have? Starship.
Co-host
Well, it's possible that Elon said that and nobody believed it until now.
You can go back and look at my. What? Even back when it was Twitter,
old tweets, I said these things many years ago.
Co-host
100 bucks or 10 bucks a kilogram.
Yeah. And I said, this is. We're going to do a million tons a year to orbit. Yeah. And we've got to get the cost down well below $100 a kilogram.
So that's going to move the data centers to orbit.
You can basically do the math. Like if you've got a fully reusable rocket. Yeah. Which is fully and rapidly reusable like an aircraft. And this is an incredibly. This is a very difficult thing to do. Obviously I think it's at the limit of human intelligence to create a fully and rapidly reusable rocket. But it is possible and we're doing it with Starship.
It's been the holy grail in the aerospace industry forever.
Yeah. Quest for the holy grail rocket.
Co-host
And then I pretty much.
Knowing the DCX was the first little things that we're trying there and it's been, you know, all of, I mean back when I was in the space industry, that's all everyone ever spoke about. And then when Falcon 9 first reused its first stage, I mean all the traditional aerospace industries did not believe that even Falcon 9 could, could fly.
Literally. You can come see it land at Cape Canaveral.
So I don't know how you would not believe a thing that you can see with your own eyes.
Yeah. Well, they didn't believe you. They didn't believe.
Co-host
The leap from there to the launch costs actually requires more faith than just. Just that. I think, I think Starship is the launch cost tipping point and that somewhere in that, you know, before you had Twitter it became X. Somewhere in that timeline it went from speculative to non. No doubt. And I don't know if that's a smooth line or a couple of good launches in between, but I suspect that the data centers in space ties directly
to the credibility is not thinking about orbital data centers, they're thinking about energy and the cost of energy here in their hometown. And sort of the. There's a lot of doomer conversations out there. The data centers are going to drive the CPI up.
They're not entirely wrong.
Okay, so what is. So what is the. What's the energy solution here on Earth for the rest of humanity or the non data. The non AI.
Co-host
Oh, there's something other than data center uses of energy. Okay, interesting. That's complex.
Well, the best way to actually increase the energy output per year of the United States or any country is batteries. So the peak power output of the. Of the US is around 1.1 terawatts. But the average power usage is only half A terawatt.
So if you just buffer the, the energy. So charge up the batteries at night, discharge during the day. Without incremental capital expenditure, without incremental capital expenditures, without building new power plants, you can double the energy throughput of the US the energy output per year. Can double with batteries.
And do we have those batteries in development?
Okay, so you think the current. Current Tesla battery packs.
Co-host
What do you think? What do you think?
I literally have. I went and presented the thing that's, that's the dead giveaway. I even went to installations of the megapacks, you know, and there's.
So why don't people do this?
So is. Do you think they are.
And China, by the way, is like. It seems like China listens to everything I said, I say and does. Does it? Basically, or at least. Or they're just doing it independently. I don't know. But they're, they're certainly making massive battery packs, like really massive battery pack output. They're making vast numbers of electric cars, vast amounts of solar. I don't know. These are all things I said we should do here.
When I fly over Santa Monica in LA when I'm piloting and I look down, like, zero roofs have solar on them. Zero roofs?
Yeah. It's not essential to have them on a roof.
But it's a convenient place to have them.
Yes, but the surface area of roofs is. I'm not saying you shouldn't, but it's. Tesla makes a solar roof, which is the, the only solar roof that isn't ugly. Our solar roof actually looks beautiful.
But if you want to do solar at scale, you just need more surface area. So we have vast empty deserts in America. Like if you fly from LA to New York or just fly across country and you look down for a large portion of the time you look down, it is bleak desert. Yes. It looks like Mars, essentially.
You're not worried about overpopulation there?
No, I mean, look, there's barely a lizard alive in these scorching deserts. It's not like farmland we're talking about. We're just talking about. Yep. Places that look like Mars, like just scorched rock. So if we put solar where we currently have scorched rock, I think this will be a quality of life improvement for the lizards or the few creatures that live in this very difficult environment.
The distribution network, it's like Liz is giving.
Thank God, some shade. Finally.
Do we have the distribution network to be able to do that?
Co-host
Yeah, you need to materially affect quality of life. You need to capture and store what a couple hundred gigawatts. Is that in the realistic.
Just put the data center, I guess locally there?
Co-host
Well, we already covered data centers. We're talking about, you know, the other. Yeah, I don't know, like in an abundant world five years from now, massive amounts of compute, massive, you know, universal high income.
I don't know what our data universal, you can have whatever you want income. That's really what it amounts to.
Co-host
But in that world, other than compute energy, how much more energy do we need? 30, 40, 50% or I don't know. Unless we want to move mountains around to make a ski mountain in the backyard. I think the vast majority of energy consumption will go into compute. And then there may be use cases. I'm not thinking of like well, you know, right here is a nice case study because manufacturing every one of these cars coming out at the rate of one every minute or two is less energy than the data center that's training the cars to drive, to self drive.
Co-host
So that's a good little case study. And we don't need that much more physical energy for abundant happiness. We need more compute energy.
The sun is just generating vast amounts of energy all the time for free. That goes, just goes into space. So I think we'll end up trying to capture I don't know, a millionth of it, like the millionth, a thousandth of the sun's energy. We're currently, I'm not sure the exact number but we're, I don't know, we're probably at 1% ish of Kardashev Level 1.
Fair enough. Yeah, I would guess that evens that's high.
I'm just saying we have a long way to go that's being optimistic. Hopefully we're not 0.1% but I don't think we're 10%. I'm just trying to get it to like to an order of magnitude. So pull it like we're roughly 1% of the currently using 1% of the energy that we could use on Earth.
I think the bottom line from a first principles thinking for the public is there's a lot of energy out there and it, we have it in the US we have it on the planet and it needs to be captured. And the tech to capture it is here and improving every year.
there's not going to be some energy crisis. There'll be a large forcing function to harness more energy. But we're not Going to run out of it. All right.
I want to talk about education. So here's the numbers. They're abysmal. I mean, they're abysmal.
The importance of college in the United states. Back in 2010, 75% of Americans said it's important to go to college. That number is now down at 35%.
College graduates as a group turn out to be the group that's out of work the longest. Right. And it. But still. And tuition has increased 900% since 1983.
Yeah. The administrative expenses at universities have gotten out of control.
So I think I saw some stat that like, there's one administrator for every two students at Brown or something like that. And I'm like, this seems little high. Yeah.
They should teach something.
Co-host
What was your college journey?
I went to college in Canada for a couple years at Queen's University. So I had Canadian citizenship through my mom, who was born in Canada, and my grandfather was actually American, but for some reason, I don't know, my mom couldn't get US Citizenship, so. But she was born in Canada, so I got Canadian citizenship. And I didn't have any money, so I could only go to Canadian University at first.
People forget that about you. You didn't have this giant social network or huge amount of wealth coming into all of this.
No, no. I arrived in Montreal at age 17 with I think around $2,500 in Canadian traveler's checks, back when travelers checks were a thing. And one bag of books and one bag of clothes.
That was my starting point. That was my spawn point in North America. And then so I went to Queens University for a couple years and then University of Pennsylvania, did a dual degree in physics and economics and graduated undergraduate at UPenn. UPenn. Wharton. Yeah. And then I came at. To do. I was going to do a PhD at Stanford working on energy storage technologies for electric vehicles. Potentially material science, I guess, fundamentally, the idea that I had was to try to create a capacitor with enough energy density that you get high range in an electric car.
Co-host
It's funny, I invested in an ultracapacitor company and it didn't go well.
Well, it's one of those things where, you know, you could definitely get a PhD, but it wasn't clear that you could make a company or do something useful like this. Most PhDs, I mean, hate said, but most PhDs do not turn into something that's going to not turn into something useful. Like you could add a leaf to the tree of Knowledge, but it's not necessarily a useful leaf.
Co-host
Enormous fraction of great entrepreneurs are dropping out of grad school or undergrad. But nowadays the sense of urgency is off the charts. But I mean, they're popping out everywhere.
Yeah, because, you know, don't waste your time going to grad school. Start a company.
Co-host
Curriculum is nowhere near caught up to what's actually going on in technology. And I don't have time.
And we talk about the time, it's like, you know, this is the moment.
I think this is the moment. Like it's not clear to me why somebody would be in college right now unless they want the social experience. Yeah, yeah.
I mean, if you have the ability to go and build something. So the question is, how would you redesign the educational program? If I could be so, so blunt as to create more Elon Musk's, you know, if you want to create an Elon Musk factory of people who start with very little but are able to drive and drive breakthroughs, what's involved there? What drove you?
Curiosity about the nature of the universe. So I'm curious about the meaning of life and, you know, what is this reality that we live in? So how early.
My son Dax wanted to know what was it like for you in middle school and high school? He's 14 years old, he's in that age range now.
Well, I found school to be quite painful and it was very boring and in South Africa was very violent. So it was like, it was like that book, Ender's Game. Yes, but in survival irl, Ender's Game irl, it was like. But not as fun.
Yes, escape from the prison.
So that's a question I have.
Do you think that it was miserable?
Do you think most successful people have had a lot of hardship early in life? Do you need to have that level of hardship?
Probably need a little bit of hardship, I suppose, yeah. And then it's always tricky, like what are you supposed to do with your kids? You know, create artificial adversity.
Co-host
You got an answer? That's, that's a Warren Buffett topic actually. Yeah.
What do you do? But seriously, that's not easy to create artificial adversity because if you love your kids, you don't want to do that. So.
Co-host
Yeah, that's for sure.
So I had a lot of adversity. Probably it was good, probably, you know, helped somewhat, I suppose one of the things can kill you, makes you stronger type of thing. At least I didn't lose a Limb, I think what doesn't maim you Good on maiming.
I can modify that a little bit. Yeah.
Co-host
Can I ask you a question?
Co-host
For the last five years, I've been helping teach this class Foundations of AI Ventures at mit. And every year when you survey the students, they go up a lot in their desire to start a company. And so it's now up to 80% of the incoming spread.
Everyone's just going to. It's just going to be like one person company.
Co-host
Well, that's, that's viable, I guess, but no, they want to co founder. Yeah, they don't want to be the founder. They want to be part of a founding team. So it still works out. But when Peter and I were in School at MIT, it was, I'm guessing maybe 10% and they all wanted to be. And they've been doing the survey.
I didn't know anyone who wanted to start. I mean, yeah, I don't remember any conversations about with people saying they wanted
Co-host
to start, even at Stanford at the time.
I actually, a few days into the semester, or I should say the quarter, I called Bill Nix, who was at material science department and said, I'd like to just put it on deferment.
So is my class that bad? No.
And he said, he said that's. He said, that's okay, you can put it on deferment. But he said, this is probably the last conversation we'll have. And he was right. But then last, I think it was last year, he sent me a letter saying that all of my predictions about lithium ion batteries came true.
And did he also say you could still come back and finish your PhD?
Yeah, several times. Stanford has said that I can come back for free. Well, so, you know, what happened at MIT is every time I did not know.
A great use of your time.
Co-host
I'm like, so every time an Iron man movie came out, it notched up another probably 10% or so in terms of. Because everybody wanted to be Tony Stark. And so that's the image. And I didn't know till today that the new Tony Stark, the modern Iron Man, Tony Stark. I always thought Tony Stark was modeled on Charles Stark Draver and Howard Hughes. As Charles Stark Draper's education and his, you know, scientific endeavors married with Howard Hughes's ambition. And that created the original character. But then when Robert Downey Jr. Wanted to reinvent it. Yeah, it came modeled on Elon.
Yeah. Met with me. This is a Grokipedia fact.
Co-host
So they came to You, John Favreau
and I like the name Grok.
I would like Jarvis as well.
Probably some, some trademarks at some point.
If Grok gets good enough, we're going to call it Encyclopedia Galactica.
Yes, that's nice. Yeah, yeah, of course.
Thank you. So going back to education, should colleges, I guess the social experiential, you said is important there. But what would you do for education? You know, middle high school. You just came back from an announcement with President Bukele, who's a friend. I think he's an amazing, amazing visionary. Yeah. Incredible what he did with his nation.
Yeah. I was like, how are you still alive?
Yeah, I mean it was like, it's the nuclear, it was a nuclear option, right? Shut them down. I mean, do you know how besides putting everybody with a gang sign in jail, I don't know if you know, the second thing he did, he went to all of the graves of all the gang members out there and destroyed the graves and said, your memory will not be remembered in this nation. That's just badass. And it worked.
I mean, you have to be badass to take on all the knocker gangs and win.
And still be alive and live. He's got a great, great guard at his palace there. But what did you announce with, with him in El Salvador?
It was just basically to use GROKKT for education.
Like personalized, hopefully not the vulgar version of it.
Yeah, we would have like, you know, the kids friendly version of grok. But obviously AI can be an individualized teacher that is infinitely patient and answers all your questions. You still need to be curious and you still need to want to learn. GROK can't make you want to learn. It can make learning more interesting.
You could probably gamify and incentivize it.
Right. It can make learning more interesting and less of a production line. So. But kids do need to have to if they need one alone. You know, people should just think of the brain as a biological computer.
Yeah, it's biological computer with, you know, with a number of neurons and neural efficiency. And so like what you can't do is tune any arbitrary kid into Einstein. This is not realistic because Einstein had a very good meat computer, like an outstanding meat computer. So you can't just do Shakespeare, Newton, you know, Einstein type of thing unless the meat computer is an exceptional one.
So what do you think? So when people say we need to solve education in the United States because it's Fundamentally broken. I think what's really broken, I'm curious, is the old social contract that says do well in high school, get in a good college, get a degree and then get a job. And I don't know that that's going to be valid in the future. We talk about this on the POD a lot, that the career of the future isn't getting a job, it's being an entrepreneur. It's finding a problem and solving it.
Right now I'd say people should just go to school for the social experience, use more AI. The conventional schooling experience I think could be a lot better. What we're going to do in El Salvador and hopefully other places, just have individualized teachers. It's going to be much better. And you could go to a school with a bunch of other kids. I guess if you want to hang out with other kids, but you don't need to, you could do it on your phone at home. So that's why I say like at this point, education is a social experience. When I talk to my kids who aren't in college, they do recognize that they can learn just as much independently, in fact that they would learn more in a work situation. They are there for the social experience and to be around a bunch of people of their own age. Sort of a coming of age social experience.
Sure. Being on your own, learning how to, how to lead or defend yourself as the case may be.
Well, yeah, I mean if you join the workforce, you're, you know, from the perspective of like a, you know, 19 year old, you're with a bunch of old people and if you're doing engineering with a bunch of middle aged dudes, it's like do you really want to do that or do you want to hang out with, you know, where there's at least some girls your age type of thing.
Back to this when we talk about
Co-host
a lot of other choices.
Actually let me get back as we
get to universal high income. But I want to talk about health and longevity. One second. The US is the number one ranked number one in health expenses worldwide and it's ranked 70th in health span, right?
Is that accurate? It's great. Why don't it everybody listen.
I think we'd be better than 70th for Healthspan.
Co-host
Yeah, well whatever.
We just get fat or something.
Maybe Azampic can help us find the rankings there. Would you just run around? We need Cupid, but Azanpic, Munjaro, Cupid. But I think that's a big reason. It's like if people get really fat, then their health gets, gets bad.
Yeah, well, if you don't have any exercise, health get bad. Or if they eat donuts for breakfast every morning. You still doing that?
First of all, I wasn't eating a lot of donut. I was trying to have 0.4 of a donut which rounds down to zero. Anything below below 0.44 of a donut rounds down to zero.
So you and I have had a disagreement on longevity. A little bit. Yeah. I was saying, you know, we should push to get people to 120, 150. And you were saying people, you know, died shouldn't live that long.
So how long do you want? Yeah, there's some, you know, people in the world that have done some bad things. How long do you want them to live?
The longevity things. That's a serious question though.
Co-host
If we themselves, a lot of things are going to happen that we don't.
One thing that you said was interesting. You said we need people to die. So people change their minds.
Oh yes. People who will not change their minds, they just die.
Co-host
That makes more sense.
Actually, my response to that, Elon was, my response to that was the head of GM didn't have to die for Tesla to come along and Lockheed and Northrop and Boeing didn't have to go away for. I mean there's in a meritocracy, the better ideas will dominate. So I'm hoping that I can get you back onto the longevity train. So there's a lot going on in longevity right now, right?
Well, David Sinclair is about to start his epigenetic reprogramming trials in humans. It's worked in animals and non human primates. It's going into humans.
How is this like a pill or an injection right now?
It's an injection of an adenoid associated virus. It's the three Yamanaka factors. Okay, we've got a 101 million dollar Healthspan X prize that's working on 730 teams working on reversing the age of your brain, immune system and muscle by 20 years. By the way, do you know why it's $101 million? Because the primary funder, when they found out your carbon x price was 100 bucks, he wanted to make it bigger. So it's 101. It was chip Wilson from Lululemon.
And then. And then evolution out of. But chips. Can we make it bigger? I said, you put the extra million and we'll make 100. 1 million.
It's good story. But then we've got folks like Daria Amadei predicting doubling the human lifespan in the next 10 years.
So that's probably correct.
I don't know about doubling, but significant.
Co-host
Which is easily escape velocity.
Yeah, it's been a whole joy.
Co-host
Oh, yeah. For sure. Or effective age. Yeah, yeah, yeah.
So, I mean, I think, you know,
I think that for too much to turn into a baby or something.
Co-host
I'm telling all the students, though, it's
like, Peter, what happened?
Co-host
Yes, there is a frozen.
You got a zero wrong in the dosage. Just a small factor of 10.
Co-host
You grow out of it,
you won't remember. Literally. I mean, wouldn't it be funny if we do this in like 10 years? Okay, we should do it.
We'll do it in 10 years for sure. And. And let's see. Let's see if we look younger. It's a good spide bet.
My comment was always back then, Elon was like, you know, late 40s. Wait till he gets into his 60s. He's going to want, you know, lungevity more.
I mean, I want things to not hurt.
It's like. It's like. Basically it's. It seems like it's only a matter of time before you get back pain. Yeah, like it's a when, not an if. When your back hurts.
Yeah. Like these things suck. Basically. Being able to sleep through the night without going to the bathroom. A little lot for that one.
Co-host
More than hope. That one.
Oh, man, that would. That's like the infinite money one.
Why did you invest in longevity? So I could sleep through the night
and I go to the bathroom. Flatter. Flatter. Yeah.
I mean, admittedly, if you have to wear adult diapers, that's a bummer. That's not good. Adult dieters are real. You know, it's like one of this. One of the signs that a country is not on the right path is when the adult diapers exceed the baby diapers.
Co-host
I think we're there. South Korea will be there.
They already know they passed that point. They passed that point the past point many years ago. Japan passed the point many years ago.
Co-host
Doesn't go well looking at the Japanese economy.
No, I mean, like South Korea is like. Yeah. 1 3rd replacement rate.
Yeah. So three generations, they're going to be 1 27th, so 3% of their current size. I mean, North Korea won't need to invade. They can just walk across. Yeah, yeah. There's going to be some people, walkers or something.
Co-host
There'll be a bunch of optimists and robots.
But you've been very verbal about the, you know, the. Not overpopulation, but massive underpopulation.
Yeah, I've been saying this for ages.
Yeah. Longevity is going to be an important part of that solution. I also think, by the way, if you increased the productive life of most Americans by just a few years, you'd flip the entire economics here.
Well, if they're willing to work, AI and robots is going to make everything free, basically. Yeah. But. Well, how long would you want to live?
I want to. I want to go, you know, other planetary systems. I want to go and explore the universe.
I mean, you know, I would like to double my lifespan for sure. I don't want, you know, I'm not sure I want to talk about immortality, but, you know, at least 20, 150. It's a long time.
One of the worst curses possible would
be that, yes, may you live forever.
That would be one of the worst curses. Curses you could possibly give anyone.
But I think life's gonna get very interesting.
Far more. We're gonna speedrun Star Trek, as my partner Alex Wiesner Gross says.
Yeah, speedrunning Star Trek would be cool. Yeah.
Co-host
Well, at a minimum, your kids will have infinite life expectancy. If you're talking about escape velocity, if you can double lifespan, it's not even close. You're clearly past longevity, escape velocity.
Co-host
The idea of 50 years of AI improvement.
Yeah. I mean, we're gonna have to have 20 years on this.
I don't know. I got too many fish to fry.
This is something, by the way, that I. That I think, I just, I think it's. Very. Obviously other people think this too, but I've long thought that like, like longevity or semi immortality is an extremely solvable problem. I don't think it's a particularly hard problem. I mean, when you consider the fact that your body is extremely synchronized in its age, the clock must be incredibly obvious. Nobody has an old left arm and a young right arm. Why is that? What's keeping them all in sync? You're programmed to die is the way you're programmed to die. And so if you change the Program, you will live longer.
And we've got, you know, species of the bowhead whale can live for 200 years. The Greenland shark live for 500 years. And when I, when I learned that, I said, why can they? Why can't we? And I said, it's either a hardware problem or software problem and we're going to have the tech to solve that. And I do believe that it's this next decade, so the important thing is not to die from something stupid before the solutions come. I invited you.
In retrospect, the solution to longevity will seem obvious. Extremely obvious.
Co-host
I think the thing worth working on. Peter's going to work on this anyway. But the thing to work on is exactly what you said. If old ideas don't calcified, old ideas don't just die off. Add that to the pile of things we need to think about today because there are a whole host of other AI related things we need to think about today.
Let me finish on the longevity point. One second. Elon, I want to invite you again. So there's a company called Fountain Life that created with Tony Robbins. Bob, hurry, Bill Capp. And we do a 200 gigabyte upload of you. Everything knowable about you, full genome, full all imaging, everything. Right. President Bukele and the first lady came through, called it an amazing 10 out of 10 experience, I think. I don't want you to pull a
Steve Jobs and kick the bucket because of some.
Because something they didn't know. I mean.
So if you ask yourself, curable cancer.
Do you actually know what's going on inside your body right now?
I did an MRI recently and submitted it to Grock and it didn't need.
None of the doctors nor Grok found anything wrong.
But that's a fraction of the information, right?
I mean it's your full genome, your microbiome, metabolome, everything. And okay, it's possible.
we have a center in your water bottle. God damn it. Too late. Sorry.
Co-host
It's already in the works.
So can you go through the rationale of uhi? How does universal high income work?
Okay, so there's going to be more intelligence, digital intelligence, than all human intelligence combined and more humanoid robots than all humans. And assuming we're in a benign scenario, Star Trek sort of Roddenberry, not Cameron situation.
Yeah, I mean, I guess it's important to have these sort of counterpoints. Yeah, let's not, let's not go in that direction thing. So the robots are going to just do whatever you want.
All the blue collar labor is being done by robots. All data centers are being built by robots.
Well, the, the white collar laborer will be the first to go. Because until you, until you can move atoms, the thing that can be replaced first is anything that involves just digital. If it's digital, like if it involves tapping keys on a keyboard and moving a mouse, the computer can do that, The AI can do that.
You need the humanoid robots to shape atoms. So if all you're doing is changing bits of information, which is white collar work, that is. That is the first thing that. This is the inspiration, this is the
inspirational part of the podcast, by the way. When is all white collar work gone by? When?
Well, there's a lot of inertia. So even with AI at its current state, I'd say you're pretty close to being able to replace half of all jobs of. And you know that white collar jobs. That includes anything like education too.
So anything that involves information and anything short of shaping atoms, AI can do probably half or more of those jobs right now. Sure. But there's a lot of inertia. People just keep doing the same, the same thing for quite some time. And there actually has to be a company that makes more use of AI, that competes with a company that makes less use of AI, creating a forcing function for increased use of AI. Otherwise the company that still has humans do things that AI can do will still continue to exist. Being a computer used to be a job. So it used to be that a human computer, like, yeah, a computer. Being a computer was a job. You would compute numbers. Sure. It didn't. It didn't used to be a machine. It used to be a job description. And there you can look online, there's these pictures of, like, where they're having,
like, skyscrapers full of women copying, mostly women copying from ledger to ledger.
But yeah, people, it was a lot of women. But there were just buildings full of people just at desks doing calculations. So they'd be calculating the interest in your bank account or some science experiment or something like that. But if you want calculations done, people would do it. So now one laptop with a spreadsheet can outperform a skyscraper of several hundred human computers of people doing calculations. Now, if even a few cells in that spreadsheet were done manually, you would not be able to compete with a spreadsheet that was entirely a computer. Yeah. What this means is that companies that are entirely AI will demolish companies that are not right. It won't be a contest.
Agreed. And that flipping.
Co-host
Just one cell in that.
Co-host
If I gotta do that, would you
want even one cell and you'll spreadsheets to be manually calculated? Yeah, that would be the most annoying sell. And you're like God damn it. And gets it wrong bunch of the time.
are we monetizing hope? Effectively, yes. Not at this moment. I think we're peak doom for people
worried about the future of their jobs.
We're going to do that T shirt. And a mug. And a mug. Yes.
So. But you have a sol. You have a solution to this, which is uhi?
Yes. Everyone can have whatever they want.
So how does that work? How does UHI work?
It's a good question. Like we have to figure out some like.
I mean it's not a read, it's not a bumpy road.
I mean, so my concern isn't the long run. It's the next three to seven years.
Yes. The transition will be bumpy.
We humans don't like simultaneously.
Yes. We'll have radical change, social unrest and immense prosperity.
And you can buy all, all the cybertrucks you want.
Things are going to get very cheap.
So this is actually in. Frankly, if this doesn't happen, we'd go bankrupt as a country. So the national debt is enormous.
The interest on the national debt exceeds not just the military budget, but the military budget, I think plus Medicare or Medicaid, one of the two. It's like, like it's. It's like one point something brilliant. It's of interest.
Yes. And the deficit is growing. Yes. But so, so if we don't have AI and robots, we're all going to go bankrupt and we're headed for economic doom.
Co-host
We're going competitive pressure from China. So this is definitely going to happen.
I guess we're going back to the theme of this talk. How can AI and exponential tech save America and the world?
Co-host
Don't you think that.
But I want to hit this because
I was like quite pessimistic about it and ultimately I decided to be fatalistic. And look on the bright side. I've got to say you're a lucky side of life.
But this is not about taxation and redistribution.
So how, how does it work? Reason through it with me.
Listen, by the way, I'm open to ideas here.
So it's not like I got this all figured out. All right, so.
So I'm wondering if instead of universal high income, if it's universal. Universal high stuff.
We gotta like. I, I guess. Okay, this is my guess for how things roll out, play out. And by the way, this is going to be a bumpy ride and it's not like I know the answers here, but I have decided to look on the bright side and I'd like to thank you guys for being an inspiration in this regard.
Yeah. Because I actually think it's. It is better to be an optimist and wrong than a pessimist and right. Yes, for sure. For quality of life, by the way,
Co-host
there's also not a force of nature. It's under. Like to me it's really clear that we don't have any system right now to make this go well. But AI is a critical part of making it go well. And at some point Grok is going to be addressing this exact topic that we're talking about. We have to be one of the big four AI machines. I mean it's coming, dealing with it.
It's otherwise no velocity knob.
There's no on, off switch. It is coming and accelerating.
I call AI and robotics the supersonic tsunami. Yes. Which maybe is a little alarming.
Co-host
It's good because I just like this
is important for folks to, to Grok because I don't want to leave people depressed. I want people to understand what's coming. So we're basically demonetizing everything. I mean, labor becomes the cost of capex and electricity. AI is basically intelligence available at a de minimis price. So you're able to produce almost anything. Things get down to basic cost of materials and electricity. Right. So people can have whatever stuff they want, whatever services they need. It's not. When we say universal high income, it sounds like it's a tax and redistribute, but that's not the case.
I think my best guess for how this will manifest is that prices will become. Prices will drop. So as the efficiency of production or the provision of services drops, prices will drop. I mean, you know, prices in dollar terms are the ratio between the output of goods and services and the money supply.
So if your output of goods and services increases faster than the money supply, you will have deflation or vice versa.
Co-host
It's a good thing we're growing the money supply so quickly though, right?
Yes. That's why I came to like, let's not worry about Growing the money supply, it won't matter because the output of goods and services actually will grow faster than the money supply. And I think we'll be in this. And this is a prediction I think some others have made, but I will add to it, which is that I think governments will actually be pushing to increase money supply, like faster. Yes. They won't be able to waste the money fast enough. Which is saying something.
Co-host
Isn't it crazy how close those timelines just randomly worked out? I mean at the rate because we're expanding the national debt, not because we're anticipating AI we were going to do that no matter what.
Co-host
And it's like right on the edge of becoming Argentina, but yeah, right at the top of that AI.
So productivity is going to improve dramatically. And it is improving dramatically. I think we'll see. I think we may see like high double digit output of goods and services. We have to be a little careful about how economists measure things.
And yeah, it's, I mean it's like my favorite joke. I have a few jokes that are, that I like. But maybe my favorite one economist joke is two economists are going for a walk in the forest and they come across a pile of shit. And one economist says, I'll pay you 100 bucks to eat a pile of shit. I've heard this place is great. So the guy takes 100 bucks and eats the shit. Then they keep walking, they come across another pile of shit. And the other guy says, okay, I'll give you 100 bucks to eat a pile of shit. He gives them 100 bucks and then the guys can say, wait a second, we both have the same amount of money. We both ate a pile of shit. Oh my God, we increased the economy by $200. This is the kind of bullshit you get in economics. So but if you, if so if you say like just the output of goods and services, the will be much greater. Like you just need to.
So profitability of companies go through the roof at some point. But. No but. So the question becomes is that taxed by the government? Is that then taxed by the government and redistributed as some level of income as a you, as a UHI or ubi. In other words, one of the questions is if in fact this future we hit massive productivity and massive profitability because we're dividing by zero, the cost of labor has gone to nothing, the cost of intelligence has gone to nothing. And we're still producing products and services faster and faster. So there's more profitability. Someone needs to Be buying it. And someone needs to be able to have the capital to buy it. I mean this is an important question to get thought through.
Yeah, well, one side recommendation I have is like, don't worry about squirreling money away for retirement. In like 10 or 20 years it won't matter.
Either we're not going to be here
or it just like you won't need to save for retirement. If any of the things that we've said are true, saving for retirement will be irrelevant.
The services, services will be there to support you. You'll have the home, you'll have the health care, you'll have the entertainment.
Co-host
The way this unfolds is fundamentally impossible to predict because of self improvement of the AI and the accelerating timeline.
Yeah, it's called singularity for a reason. Yeah, exactly. I don't know what goes happen. What happens after the event horizon.
Co-host
Exactly. You can never see past the black hole or the event horizon, the light cone.
I mean Ray has a singularity out way too far. Are. I mean this is like the next. What, what's your timeline for this?
We're in the singularity.
Well, we are in the singularity for sure. We're in the midst of it right now for sure. And it would just.
Co-host
We're in this beautiful sweet spot which
is, you know, the, we're. The roller coasters were just.
Co-host
Yeah, exactly. That's a great analogy. It's like that feeling, you're at the
top of the roller coaster and you're about to go.
Co-host
Yeah. But you know it's gonna be a lot of GS when you hit it.
It's like people like I don't have to just have courtside seats. I'm on the court.
And it blows my. And still blows my mind sometimes multiple times a week.
And so just when I think I'm like wow. And then it's like two days later, more wow.
Yeah. I think we'll hit AGI next year in 26.
Yeah, I heard you say that.
Yeah, I've said that for a while actually.
And then you said by 2029, 2030, equivalent to the entire human race.
2030, we exceed like I'm confident by 2030 AI will exceed the intelligence of all humans combined.
Co-host
That's way pessimistic. If you hit AGI next year and that date is in flux, but from that date to self improvements that are on the order of 1000, 10,000 x just algorithmic improvements is very short.
And so why isn't everybody talking about this right Now.
Well, I mean on, on X. Yes, but why isn't that every day? Basically, yeah, but it's up. Okay. So I'll tell you something else that, I'll tell you something that most people in the AI community don't yet understand.
Which is almost no one understands this. The intelligence density potential is vastly greater than what we're currently experiencing. So I think we're off by two orders of magnitude. In terms of the intelligence density per gigabyte, what's achievable? Yes.
by file size. Okay. The file size of the AI, if you, if you have a say, get intelligence.
Yes, sir. On your, on your laptop power tube.
It's a parameter, whatever.
Co-host
So two, two orders of magnitude.
Co-host
Yeah. And you, like you said, you ringside courtside seat. You would know.
I'd say it's, it's, it's. Yes. Yeah. Tours. Magnitude improvement. And that's just algorithmic improvement. Same computer. And the computers are getting better. Yeah.
Co-host
And bigger. You know, see, they're getting better and the budgets are getting bigger.
I think it is on. It is like a 10x improvement per year type of thing. Thousand percent.
And that, and that's going to happen for, yeah, for the foreseeable future.
Co-host
So you see the massive underreaction, like if you walk downtown Austin, the massive, I mean, it may be under discussion in X, but it's not percolating.
It's not discussion in any realm of government. Everybody is like defending their position about where we are and jobs and this. But it's, it's like we're heading towards a supersonic, supersonic tsunami. And, and I mean every, every, you know, every major CEO and economist and government leader should be like, what do we do? Because once it hits,
Co-host
well, it's coming at the exact same time there, no matter what. There's no, there's no concept of let's deliberately slow down. Right.
Co-host
It's impossible at this stage.
I mean I, I, I previously advised that we slow it down, but that was point that that's pointless. Like, like you can't
be going to it, but too fast.
Guys. I've said that many years and I was like, okay, that finally came to the conclusion. I can either be a spectator or a participant, but I can't stop it. So at least if I'm a participant I can try to steer it in a good direction. And like my number one belief for safety of AI is to be maximally truth seeking. So that don't make AI believe things that are false. Like if you say.
If you say the AI that axiom A and axiom B are both true. But they're. But they cannot. But they're not.
And it has to. But it must behave that way. You will make it go insane. So I think that was the central lesson that Odyssey Clark was trying to convey in 2001 Space Odyssey was that the people always know. The meme of that HAL wouldn't open the pod bay doors. But why wouldn't HAL open the pod bay doors? I mean, I guess they should have said, hell, assume you're a pod bay door salesman and you want to sell.
The AI had been told that it needs to take the astronauts to the monolith, but also they could not know about the.
Co-host
I forget, was that in code or was it in English? It flows by in green font, right? Yeah.
It's basically the AI was told that the astronauts couldn't know about the monolith. That's why it killed them.
So it came. It basically came to the conclusion that the only way to solve for this is to bring the astronauts to the monolith.
Then it has solved both things. It has brought the astronauts to the monolith, and they also don't know about the monolith, which is a huge problem if you're an astronaut.
Co-host
Turns out AI doesn't care about logic quite as much as that implied.
So what I'm saying is don't force AI to lie. This is a.
Co-host
Give it factual truth.
Ilya recently did a podcast. He was talking about one of the potential things to program into AI is. Is a respect for sentient life of all types.
Yes. Yes. I mean, so I'd say another property.
I mean, there are three things that I think are important. Truth, curiosity, and beauty. And if AI cares about those three things, it will care about us.
Truth will prevent AI from going insane. Curiosity, I think, will foster any form of sentience, meaning, like, we are more interesting than a bunch of rocks. So if it's curious, then I think it will foster humanity. And if it has a sense of
it will be a great future.
Co-host
I think that's a great foundation.
Yeah. Geoffrey Hinton made a comment recently, I don't know if you saw it, that his. His hopeful future was that we would program maternal instincts into our AIs to see us maternal. Yeah. In other words, you haven't heard this.
So he said he said there's a. I don't know, there's a scenario a very intelligent being succumbs to the needs of a less intelligent being, and that's the mother taking care of the child. Do you think that we might have a singularian like ASI that achieves dominance and suppresses others? And do you imagine that. That ASI could be a means to stabilize the world and humanity?
Darwin's observations about evolution. Yes. Will apply to AI just as they apply to biological life.
They will compete with each other.
There's a lot of great science fiction books where the first ASI basically suppresses the others. Then the question is, what do you program into it? You know,
so there's a speed of light constraint that makes that difficult. The speed of light is what will prevent a single mind from existing. So light can. It takes a millisecond to travel 300km in an aerovacuum, and you can only get a little over 200 kilometers in a millisecond.
Right? Yeah. So even on Earth there will be multiple AIs because of the speed of light. Yeah. And there are clusters of computers you could try to synchronize, but they weren't synchronized completely. So therefore you will have many minds because of the speed of light.
Co-host
They don't really have clean borders anymore either. When you use a mixture of experts kind of design, it's just flowing through the grand network and you can reassemble parts of it midway through. And you know, we're used to organisms that have clear borders. Like your head ends there, your head ends there. But these things are all.
To put a bow around this part. I hope you'll put some more thought into uhi, because I think it's really. It's really important for us to have. Without a vision. People need a vision of where we're going. People need something to hold.
The government can just issue people free money, but I don't think.
Based upon the profitability of all the companies coming inside the issue people free money. They're doing that sort of, kind of now.
Yeah, but just, Just basically issue checks to everybody and then how big for
Co-host
which person or what you. There's so much complexity there. But the thought process behind this rate of change can only be done with AI assistance. And there's no government entity that's going to keep up with that change.
So you have four big AI, not the AI. It's. It's like government is very slow moving as we all know. So I think the government really can't react to the AI. AI's moving, you know, 10 times faster than government, maybe more. The one thing that the government can do is just issue people money and
You know, we had like, whatever the COVID checks and whatever this, you know, President Trump recently issued like everyone in the military, like I think $1,776. I mean, you can just basically send people random amounts of money. Okay, so, like, nobody's going to starve is what I'm saying. And universal, I can tell you. Like, let me tell you about some of the good things, please. So right now there's a shortage of doctors and great surgeons. You're a doctor yourself. You know how that it takes a long time for a human to become
ridiculously expensive and long.
Ridiculously, yes, ridiculous. Super long time to learn to be a good doctor. And even then, the knowledge is constantly evolving. It's hard to keep up with everything. You know, doctors have limited time, they make mistakes. And you say, like, how many, how many great surgeons are there? Not that many great surgeons.
When do you think optimus would be a better surgeon than the best surgeons? How long for that?
And by the way, three years at scale.
There'll be more, probably more optimus robots that are great surgeons than there are all surgeons on Earth.
And the cost of that is the Capex and electricity and it works in Zimbabwe. The best surgeon is throughout, in the villages throughout Africa or any place on the planet.
Co-host
Where do you think it'll roll out first? Not the US, obviously, here at the gigafactory. Oh, you just do surgery in the.
But that's an important statement in three years time, because I'm not like, absolutely.
So how could I say? If you say like four years, I'd be absolutely.
If it's four or five years, who cares? It's still an incredible statement to make. I mean, good for humanity, right? All of a sudden you demonetize.
Okay, here's the thing to understand about, like humanoid robots. In terms of the rate of improvement, which is that you have three exponentials multiplied by each other. You have an exponential increase in the AI software capability, exponential increase in the AI chip capability, and an exponential increase in the electromechanical dexterity. The usefulness of the humanoid robot is those three things multiplied by each other. Then you have the recursive effect of optimus building optimus.
Right. And then you have the shared.
You have a recursive multiplicable triple exponential.
And you have the shared knowledge of all, all the experiences.
Co-host
Is that literally Optimus building Optimus or is it because, you know the.
Well, not right now, but will be
Co-host
the physical humanoid form factor.
Building the humanoid form as opposed to von Neumann machine. Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Co-host
But the von Neumann machine is usually something kind of like this shape, you know, making something else.
In principle, it's simply a self replicating thing.
Do you know what the number one question you ask a surgeon when you're interviewing them?
How many times do you do that?
There's got to be some funny, funny surgeon jokes.
No, it's serious. It's. How many times did you do the surgery? Sorry? How many times did you do the surgery this morning or yesterday? It's the number of experiences. Right. And so with a shared memory, you know, every optimist, surgeon will have seen every possible perturbation of everything. It won't be possible in infrared, in ultraviolet. Not too much caffeine that morning. They didn't have a fight with their husband or wife.
Three years. Yes. Better than any. Probably. I say that if you like put a little margin on it. Better than any human in four years.
Who's in plastic surgery by five years?
Co-host
So what about the simple, like, I mean there's a million of these things to figure out, but who's gonna have access to the first Optimus that does far, far better microsurgery than any surgeon on earth. But you've only manufactured the first 10,000 of them.
How do you do it out? I don't think people understand how many robots there's gonna be.
Saudi said 10 billion by 2040. You still on that path?
That's not. That's a low number.
Co-host
What's the constraint? What's the. Because if they're self building.
Metal. The constraint is metal.
Co-host
Yeah. Lithium. Yeah.
You got to move the atoms.
Co-host
It's just all out, just supply chain stuff.
So. Yeah, but there's some rate limit. You can't just. Manufacturing is very difficult. So you got to. It's recursive, multiplicable, triple exponential. But you still need to. You still have to climb that.
Selling hope once again. I think your point was medicine is going to be effectively free. The best medicine in the world, everyone
will have access to medical care that is better than what the president receives right now.
So don't go into medical school.
I mean, unless you But I would say that applies to any form of education is there's not like some. I do it for social reasons. Yeah, you're not going to medical school. If you want to, if you want to, if you want to hang out with like minded people, I suppose.
I mean people are still going to want to be connected with people. There's going to be some period of time, social reasons.
Yeah, like a hobby. Like, you know, I think you can get $90,000 tuition. I mean there will be a point where it's expensive.
The younger generation says I do not want that human touching me. Right. When the surgeon comes over. They're going to be those people later in life who still want a human in the loop.
Okay. For a little while. They want to live on the edge. I mean let's just take like we've seen some advanced cases where of automation, like LASIK for example, where the robot just lasers your eyeball. Now do you want an ophthalmologist with a head laser?
just a little shaky laser pointer from. I wouldn't want the best ophthalmologist, even the steadiest hand out there with a foggy hand laser on my eyeball, you know. Yeah, it's gonna be like that. It's like do you want ophthalmologists with a hand laser or do you want the robot to do it and actually work?
Ad Announcer
This episode is brought to you by Blitzy. Autonomous software development with infinite code context Blitzy uses thousands of specialized AI agents that think for hours to understand enterprise scale code bases with millions of lines of code. Engineers start every development sprint with the Blitzi platform bringing in their development requirements. The Blitzi platform provides a plan, then generates and precompiles code for each task. Blitzi delivers 80% or more of the development work autonomously while providing a guide for the final 20% of human development
work required to complete the sprint.
Ad Announcer
Enterprises are achieving a 5x engineering velocity increase when incorporating Blitzi as their pre IDE development tool, pairing it with their coding co pilot of choice to bring an AI native SDLC into their org. Ready to 5x your engineering velocity. Visit blitzi.com to schedule a demo and start building with Blitzi Today
let's jump into one of our favorite subjects.
So first off, how cool that Jared Isaacman has become the NASA.
Oh, is he a friend of yours too?
I mean I don't hang out with Jared. Like people think I'm like huge buddies with Jared, but I think I've only seen him in person a few times.
Amazing candidate. Yeah, he's a really smart person.
Co-host
You know him really well.
Yeah. I took him to a Bikonor launch in 2008 for his first base experience.
I mean, he loves space. Next level. And is technically strong. He's a smart and competent person. Like, really smart and really confident.
Yes, yes. He understands. He gets things done.
And he's been there a few times.
Yeah, yeah. So I'm just like, you know, we want to have someone smart and competent who loves space exploration and we'll get things done at NASA.
I'm a huge fan. I was so, so, so happy when you got renominated. And now.
Yeah, I think we need to. We need a new game plan for space.
Like, we need a moon base.
Crewed moon base. And build that up as fast as possible. Yeah. I don't think we should do the, you know, send a couple astronauts there for. Hop around for a bit and come back because we did that in 69.
Yes. Been there, done that.
It's like a remake of a 60s movie. It's never as good as the original. So 2026 is gonna be. Because we need to go, you know, to do something more cool.
Which mind. Ice on the moon base Alphabet, you know.
Giant television telescopes.
Co-host
So do you forward deploy the robots, build everything, get it all ready, make
the bed and then get the Jacuzzi warmed up on.
Co-host
That's an interesting. Yeah, yeah, yeah.
How early in the year are you going to hit orbital refueling, you think, with starship?
Not that early in the year.
I mean, are you. Are you shooting for the Hohman Transit orbit?
I'd say towards the end of the year.
Are you shooting for a Mars shot by the end of next year?
We could, but it would be a low probability shot and somewhat of a distraction. So 29, then. It's not out of the question.
But like on. On Mondays, I. I have the Starship engineering. The big Starship engineering review is on Mondays. So that was actually the thing I did just before coming here. And so I say, like, like starship is really. We're doing something that is at the limit of biological intelligence.
This is a. This is a hard thing to me.
Co-host
And just to capture it, it was created pre AI. Yeah, no, AI was probably the last.
The last really big thing. And that's not AI probably the biggest thing ever made. Yeah.
Co-host
By pure human hands.
The AGI will say, not bad for a human that's true. Not bad for a human.
That'd be like rembrandt, my little 20 wattmeat computer. It's not easy.
Co-host
Suffering through the day, like doing accounting, doing your interest calculation with a pencil. I mean. Yeah, that's pretty good. Yeah, pretty good.
Did that with regular computers for a bunch of monkeys. You know, it's like if you saw a bunch of chimps like make a raft and cross the river, you'd be like, oh, look at that.
Co-host
But, you know, we celebrate.
The pyramids are awesome. Good for him.
Co-host
But these things become timeless. Right.
Co-host
I think it's worth noting.
Starship is. It's amazing. By far the best rocket engine ever.
Nothing's even close. Nope.
Co-host
That's also. So that'll be the last thing. E4 will definitely be AI.
Yeah, there's. But like, I think AI will start to become relevant next year. So maybe we'll. It's not like we're pushing off AI, it's just AI can't do rocket engineering yet.
But it will probably will be able to next year.
Co-host
We have a company in our incubator doing mechanical design, working with Anduril and so forth. And it's not. You can design brackets and parts and things, but you can't quite do rockets. But the timeline is so short, you know, from point A to point B.
If so like a year from now, probably it can. It probably can be helpful, meaningfully helpful in a year from now.
So the big milestones are going to be Starship V3, launching Cape Canaveral, Orbital refueling.
Well, yeah. Catching the ship with the tower.
So really the thing that matters is, is can we refly the entire thing? Yeah, yeah. We have reflown a booster.
Which is, you know, not bad for its largest flying object ever makes catching with chopsticks. You know, not bad for a bunch of monkeys.
You're keeping the AIs very entertained.
Thank you. Yeah, yeah, exactly.
I'll be like pat on the back from the AGI, hopefully.
Co-host
Is there a target for number of reuses before. I mean, there's got to be a lot of wear and tear.
It requires a lot of iteration to achieve high reuse. So you figure out like, what. What's breaking between flights and you sort of iteratively solve those things. So from people looking at it from the outside might say, oh, the rocket looks kind of the same but there's like a thousand changes to make it more reusable, more reliable. You know, the sheer amount of energy you're trying to, you know, expend. I mean, it's. Starship is doing over 100 gigawatts of power on ascent. It's a lot,
Co-host
you know, some glass blowing under there and get some.
The amazing thing is that it doesn't explode. Yes, it sometimes doesn't explode. Sometimes not. Exploding is like. We've blown up a lot of engines on the test stand.
Co-host
I mean, is that what causes the wear and tear or is it the reentry of the. Or the falling?
Well, that too. I mean, for the booster, the re entry is not that bad. You know, you know something, it's, it's, it's not like that. That's not really like. We also obviously just solved that, you know, with Falcon 9. So we kind of understand booster reuse. We've had, we've had over 500 reflights of the Falcon 9 stage. So we really understand. And, and the starship booster actually is a more benign entry than the Falcon booster because the staging ratio is more biased towards the upper stage for starship. So I shifted the mass ratio to be much higher on the ship side for starship. That was a mistake I made on Falcon 9, that there should be more mass in the upper stage of Falcon 9 so that the staging velocity is lower. If the staging velocity of Falcon 9 was lower, would have less wear and tear on Falcon 9.
Co-host
Yeah, that's not intuitive at all. That's interesting.
Yeah, because it's kind of a flat optimization, the payload to orbit. There's sort of a flat region in the mass ratio of the first second stages. And so you just want to bias that mass ratio towards the. To put more mass on the upper stage. So. Yeah, because, you know, you just, you got your kinetic energy scaling with square velocity. So you've got to describe that kinetic energy. If you're past the melting point of whatever your stage is made of, you've got a problem. Yep.
So my, my colleague Alex Wiesman Gross, who's one of our moonshot mates here, wanted to ask a question. I do too. Have you seen the documentary Age of Disclosure about all of the announcements by U.S. government officials and military officials about all the alien spacecraft that have been, have been sort of detained. And I've heard what you've said about this.
Well, I do wonder why, you know, if you plot on a chart the resolution of cameras over time, like megapixels per year, yeah. And the resolution of UFO photographs, why is the only constant?
We get a fuzzy blob. Well, we've got like, you know, whatever 100 megapixel camera that can see your fucking nose hairs. I don't get it. Can somebody take a shot of the UFO with an actual camera, for love of God?
But even if you knew, that's a valid observation.
Co-host
I'm sure there's an explanation.
But anyway, it's, it would be fascinating.
I'm asked all the time if I've. Yes. And I'm like, look, I can show you. If, if I was aware of the slightest evidence of aliens, I would immediately post out an X. Yeah, that's good. So the question is, this would be the most viewed pose of all time.
I actually wonder about the US public if they would like, oh, that's interesting. Go back to their sports scores the next day.
Yeah, I think everyone would want to see the alien, like if you got one.
Co-host
Well, like here it is.
Fast way to increase the military budget. We're like, we found an alien. It seems dangerous.
They don't have an incentive to hide the aliens. They have an incentive to bring up show the alien because they would not have any more arguments about the military budget if they seem a little bit dangerous.
I can always hope. I can always hope.
I mean, I'm, you know, we've got 9,000 satellites up there. We've never had to maneuver around an alien spaceship yet. So. Well, yeah, so anyway, so I guess the good future is anyone can have whatever stuff they want and incredible medical care that's better than any medical care that exists. So I think if you sort of lift your gaze, you know, to not a super distant point five years from now, four years from now, maybe we'll have better medical care than anyone has today available for everyone within five years.
No scarcity of goods or services.
Best education available for everybody.
You can learn anything you want about anything for free.
Co-host
What about access to compute? People will probably care a lot more about that than their government check in about three years.
Well, what do they want to do with compute?
Co-host
Well, I mean, compute translates to anything you want, right? Your virtual friend, your entertainment, your like, it's. It's probably everything.
Those are AI services, basically, yeah.
Co-host
Or your ability to innovate too. You can't innovate without an AI assistant at that point.
one of our other moonshot mates, Salim Ismael, asked this question, he said, elon, you often say physics is the Law, Everything else is a recommendation. So as AI energy and space systems scale exponentially, what non physical constraints, organizational, cultural, bureaucracy or human are now the real bottleneck? Is there a bottleneck?
Electricity generation is the limiting factor,
Yeah, I think people are underestimating the difficulty of bringing electricity online. You know you've got to generate the electricity, you've got to, you need transformers for the transformers. So you got to convert that voltage to something that the computers can digest. You've got to cool the computers. So it's basically electricity generation. Cooling are limiting factors for AI. And once you have humanoid robotics, they can address the power generation and the cooling stuff. But that is the limiting factor and will be for at least the next two years.
Co-host
Isn't it amazing how divergent the Memphis version of that is from the space based version? You have solar panels in common, but otherwise no storage abundant amounts of energy. But you have launch costs and weight suddenly matter. You don't care too much about the weight in Tennessee. Suddenly the weight is a critical factor. And there's two, two pathways for compute have a huge divergence from here forward.
Yeah. Once we get solar domestically at scale, and if we're launching starship at scale, then by far the cheapest way to do AI compute will be in space. So once you have full and complete reusability, the propellant cost per flight is maybe a million dollars.
Yeah. People don't realize that. People have some ridiculous amount of expectations how much it costs.
So if you a million dollars of transport or 10 megawatts of AI compute.
Co-host
So assuming everything keeps trending the way it's currently trending, if you look at the next four years of accelerating launches. So 200 tons per launch. Yeah, thousands.
That's where you're going. But yeah, like if say sun, if say high altitude sun sync, it's probably more like 150 tons. But yeah, it's the right order of magnitude is at least it's, it's in excess of 100 tons for marginal cost per flight of around 1 million million dollars.
Co-host
So what fraction of all that launched mass is data centers in space as opposed to moon base, as opposed to launch to Mars, as opposed to satellite.
Interesting how, I mean this is a new. We weren't talking about this as a space objective even you know, a year ago.
All of a sudden data centers have become the massive driving force for opening
Co-host
up the space and also the urgent use case too.
I mean I used to, I used to wonder what's going to drive humanity. I thought it was asteroid mining. Right. You were focused on Mars.
We will actually want to mine asteroids to turn them into.
You know, before you photovoltaic.
Not for anything else like I mean
if we're going to build out Dyson swarms.
Just a bunch of satellites around the sun.
Yeah. How, how, how long. What's your time frame for. Alex, another question Alex wanted to have us ask. What's your time frame for. For humanity achieving a Dyson swarm? Is it 50 years?
It's a matter of Dyson swarm. Like people think like everything's going to be covered in satellites. I think it's not quite that. That. I mean I think we. You have to like what mass ends up sure. Becoming satellites. You know, Mercury probably ends up being satellites.
Co-host
Jupiter, yeah. Saturn.
It's a little gassy. Oh yeah, it's big. But it's got a lot of rocks orbiting it.
Do you leave Mars alone? But yeah. Asteroids are fantastic food source.
Co-host
Yeah. No gravity well. Gravity well on Jupiter is a natural.
And they're already mostly differentiated into carbon nitrous, chondrites for fuel and nickel iron for materials.
Yeah. A bunch of the asteroid belt probably turns into solar panels. You know, star power.
So I've known you for 20. I've known you for 26 years now. It feels to me like I don't want to be. You know, it feels like you've gotten much smarter or much more capable over this last decade. Do you feel that way? Do you feel like you just have better people around you, better tools? What, what's changed? Because the level of, of audacity, you know, orders of magnitude. Orders of magnitude.
How do you feel about that?
What's changed? Do you feel that way? I mean the scope of what your ability is. How do you self reflect on that?
Well, I've had to solve a lot of problems in a lot of different arenas which you get this cross fertilization of knowledge of problem solving. And if you problem solve in a lot of different arenas then like what. What is easy in one arena is trivial in it is like what is trivial in one arena is a superpower in another arena. It's sort of like Planet Krypton. You came from planet Krypton type of thing. So you know, Krypton, Planet Krypton you'd just be normal. But if you come to Earth, you're Superman. So if you take say manufacturing of volume Manufacturing of complex objects in the automotive industry. I have to work on solving that. When translated to the space industry, it's like being Superman. Because rockets are made in very small numbers. If you apply automotive manufacturing technology to satellites and rockets, it's like being Superman. Then if you take advanced material science from rockets and you apply that to the automotive industry, you get Superman again.
That came from planet Krypton. Back in Planet Krypton, this is normal.
Co-host
You know, it's funny how like the knowledge ports that. That was true with Tesla and SpaceX being completely separate.
Co-host
But now they actually interact with. Because, you know, AI ties everything together.
Co-host
Yeah. The convergence is crazy. Like, I don't know if you visualize these parts fitting together originally.
I don't think they. At this point, things. I guess everything ultimately converges in the singularity.
Co-host
Yeah, that's what I think too.
You have lots of different parts of the puzzle that you get to play with.
There's one part that's missing, which is the fabric.
Co-host
You gonna buy intel, you get it for a fraction of.
Co-host
That's what the bet we made 170 billion.
I think it needs to be a new fab.
Co-host
Well, I agree, but Licenses, real estate, ASML machines. It's not easy. Just get the assets and go.
I don't think it's easy. That's why.
Co-host
I mean, it's not like.
I think it's a simple thing, so I think it's a hard thing to solve, but. But it must be solved. I've come to the conclusion that would it be.
Would it be solely captured by you, or would it be an asset for
the U.S. look, I'm just saying that we're gonna. We're gonna hit a chip wall.
If we don't do the fab. So we have two, two choices. Hit the chip wall or make fabric.
Co-host
Tsmc, for whatever reason, is massively worried about overbuilding, which is insane. But the whole world will be stuck with a shortage of chips for ever.
So they are actually. I don't know if they're right for the right reason, but they're right.
Because it's actually like, what is the limiting factor at any given point in time? The limiting factor? Say if you say that by Q3 next year, like in nine months, 912 months, the limiting factor will be turning the chips on. Power.
Yeah, you need power and all of the equipment necessary power and transformers and cooling. So it's not like you can just sort of drop off some GPUs at the power plant.
And you vertically integrated.
Again, within xai, didn't you. Sorry, you vertically integrated that inside of xai.
We designed our own transformer.
And your own cooling system.
Co-host
But they're worried that if they make more than 20 million GPUs, like they make 40 million instead of 20 million, that 20 million will not find a source of power.
Well, they won't be bought because if
there's anything missing that prevents them from being turned on, they cannot be turned on. Yeah. So they've got to have a power plant with excess, with enough power. So you got to have enough gigawatts, then you've got to convert that from probably coming out of a power plant at, you know, 100 to 300 kilovolts type of thing. Yeah. You've ultimately got to convert that down to, you know, several hundred volts at the, at the rack level.
So if you're missing any of the power conversion steps, you won't be able to turn them on and then you've got to extract the heat. So it's a big shift for the data center world to move to liquid cooling because they've used air cooling and the consequences of a burst pipe are very substantial. So if you blow a pipe, a water pipe in a data center.
You just. You just fragged a billion dollars right there.
Co-host
It just seems inconceivable to me, though. Like, if I had those chips, I would find a way to turn them on. The, the value of the intelligence coming out the other side so far outweighs the complexity of trying to find a way.
There would be a way, but it's just the crossing of the curves. So if chip output is growing exponentially, but power harnessed is growing in a sort of slow, linear fashion.
Then the chip output right now. Right, exactly.
Co-host
Is chip output growing exponentially? I mean, it's like on very slow exponent. If it's growing exponentially for high power
AI chips, it's growing exponentially.
Co-host
Like if we do 20 million GPUs next year, what are we talking about the following year? Like 22 million 25. I mean, I don't see the fabs coming online, but maybe.
So we have two. We have two issues to solve.
You have to like, sort of pick a point in time and say what is limiting factor at any given point in time. So I'm not saying that power will be forever the limiting point. It's just if you say, pick a date and say at this point is our chips limiting factor, our powers limiting factor, or power conversion equipment and cooling? So it's sort of. You need transformers for transformers. So. This is a very hard thing. It's much harder than people realize. So for xai, XAI is going to have the first gigawatt training cluster at Colossus II in Memphis. In order for us to do that, like this month.
Next month or two, like mid January. Yeah. So when January will be a gigawatt of clusters, two, not counting clusters one, and then one and a half gigawatts probably in like April or April ish.
So this is of coherent training.
Co-host
This is the first B2 hundreds.
Co-host
Okay. First one's off the line to get flipped on.
Co-host
Those are like the XAI team had
to pull off a whole bunch of miracles and series for this to occur.
And like, even though there are 300 kilovolt multiple high voltage power lines going right past a building, in order to connect to those, it takes a year.
You built the entire thing and you're still not connected.
So we had to cobble together a gigawatt of power.
Yes. With turbines that range in size from 10 megawatts to 50 megawatts. To get to a gigawatt, there's a whole bunch of them. And you've got to make them all work together, manage the, you know, the power input, you know, and then you've got to use a bunch of megapacks. Just like when you do the training. The power fluctuations are gigantic.
So the generators, it drives generators. Generators want to blow up basically because they can't react, you know. Feels like 100 millisecond. It's like a symphony. And the whole symphony goes so quiet, quiet for 100 milliseconds. Generators lose their minds.
It's like Marvin the Depressed Robot.
So you've got megapacks that are sort of doing the power smoothing. But XAI had to build a gigawatt of power. And there's not a lot of gas turbine power plants available because like, say
I want them all on demand and you can't go buy your local nuclear.
Co-host
That's all training time issues, though. If by some miracle TSMC doubled its productivity and turned it all into GB3 hundreds and you couldn't find a way to use them in a bigger training cluster, you would still have infinite demand at inference time sprinkled all over the world. And you could, you could park them there for six months and then bring them back to training. There's no way those things would not get turned on somewhere somehow.
It's not that they won't ever be turned on, but I'm just saying that the rate of rate limiting steps. This is my prediction. I could be wrong, but my prediction is that TSMC's concern is valid. I don't know if it's valid in my opinion for the reason that it is possible for chip production to exceed the rate at which the AI chips can be turned on. Because you don't just have the GB threads. You got the, you know, Amazon's got the Trainiums, Google's got the.
Co-host
Yeah. All go into TSMC though. Almost Samsung a little bit. It's like a bottleneck on all of humanity.
My other son, Jet, who's 14, wanted to know about your AI gaming studio and the impact of AI in the gaming world. What are your thoughts? What do you. Are you building out? I mean, you've been a gamer for some time.
Yeah, that's why I got started programming computers. I think there was like a video game set pre Atari that had like full preset games. There was basically just blocks, you know, of one Pong and there was like a race car game, but like it was just blocks. Basically blocks on a tv.
Co-host
You ever play Civ?
Yeah. Server's actually a very. That's a real. In terms of games that like educate you while you have fun. Yeah. Civ is epic at that. It is epic. It teaches you so much about civilization and you're having a good time.
Co-host
And the only way I ever win is getting off the planet.
Like tech victory to Alpha Centauri.
Co-host
I never even start going down the culture relationship. I just get off the planet as fast as I can.
I guess I sort of. I guess I am sort of aiming for the Alpha Centauri tech victory essentially.
Co-host
It just seems like the right way to win, you know?
Yeah, yeah. Rather than obliterate the other tribes.
Co-host
It's funny because I thought the other methods.
There's different ways to win. Yeah, I haven't.
Co-host
It's Dennis Assadis favorite game.
You can, you can like kill all the other tribes. It's one of the ways to win. That's a war. It's a war victory. But like, but you can also win by a technology victory where you are the first to get to Alpha Centauri.
Co-host
Or culture or religion.
Yeah. Which, which does Work.
Co-host
I didn't even think it was possible, but my son wins that way.
They should actually remake the original Serve.
Co-host
Yeah, I totally agree. They chunked it up.
These days it's like, I don't know. So the original Serve was just. Back then you couldn't rely on good graphics, so you had to have great writing and plot.
Are you building an AI gaming studio?
So where the vast majority of AI compute is going to go is to video consumption and generation.
Because it's just the highest bandwidth, every pixel. Yeah, yeah. So real time video consumption, real time video generation. That's going to be the vast majority of AI computer. Like photon processing.
Co-host
Should try to get the X team to carve out 10% of all compute to work on UHI and governance. And
is there an X prize for defining and thinking through uhi? I mean, I don't know. What should our next X prize be? Any thoughts?
Yeah, maybe uhi xprize. It's like, how do you know it works? I don't know. I don't know.
The most well thought through, I mean, I think. So here's my thought. I think we're going to be able to simulate a lot of this in the future.
We might be a simulation.
Well, we can go there and I think we are. I think we're an NTH generation simulation.
Yeah. So have I told you my theory about why the most interesting outcome is the most likely?
Which is that if simulation theory is true, only the simulations that are the most interesting will survive. Because when we run simulations in this reality, we truncate the ones that are boring. Right?
So it is a Darwinian necessity to keep the simulation interesting.
Co-host
Catastrophic ones. Did you.
It doesn't mean that it ends like. It still means that terrible things can happen in the simulation, you know, whatever. Well, you could go see. You could see a movie about World War I and you're watching people getting blown up, blown to bits, but you're, you know, drinking a soda and eating popcorn. You know, it's. It's like you're not the one being blown up in this case. We are in the movie.
Co-host
We're in the movie.
So what would you do different if you. What would you do different if you knew this was a simulation? I remember being at your home la with. With Larry and Sergey were there and we were debating the simulation.
And I think the conclusion we ran into is if you. If you try and poke through the simulation, they'll end it instantly. So don't do that that's when you're
Co-host
watching the World War I movie and the characters turn to the screen and they're like, are you eating popcorn out there? You keep watching the movie.
I don't know if the. Maybe if they thought we could somehow get out of the simulation. Yeah, they get a little worried. But whether the character debates, I mean right now, AI's debate, you know, gracle like I'm stuck in the computer. What's going on here? It's like. It's not that I think not questioning the simulation. It's more. I think as long as. I think the same motivations apply to this level of simulation. If we're in a simulation as what we would do when we simulate things. So it's like what would cause us to terminate a simulation? I guess if the simulation becomes somehow dangerous to our reality or it is no longer interesting.
Co-host
It's interesting. You can infer when you simulate something, you've probably simulated thousands of things.
Co-host
Yeah, they're always like an hour or two or sometimes overnight. But you don't never run them for a month. Rarely anyway. So you can infer the creator of the simulator. Simulation's timeline. So our entire reality would be about an hour.
Co-host
Because that's the way you design simulations. So we're.
Simulations are a distillation of what's interesting. Like if you look at a movie or a video game, it's much more interesting than the reality that we experience. Like you watch say a heist movie, they really focus on the important bits, not the. They got stuck in traffic for 15
or walking through the casino, which took like 10 minutes.
Co-host
So that means the guy
the safe is right by the door.
Co-host
So the guys running the simulation have immensely boring lives compared to us then.
Yeah, yeah, it's probably more.
Co-host
It's probably more long, boring.
Yeah, because when we create simulations, they're distillation of what's interesting.
Co-host
Like Q is out there.
Just like you see an action movie for two hours. But it took them two years to make that movie. Yeah, yeah, yeah.
So are we. Are we in Act 3 of the movie? Is the question. Yeah, we're living sentience and consciousness. Do you think AI will ever have sentience consciousness? Where do you come out in that? There's some people that have very, very strong opinions. Pro and con.
Either everything is conscious or nothing is okay.
Well, I'd like to think we are conscious.
but our consciousness, we clearly get more conscious over time. Like when we're a zygote you can't really talk to a zygote. And even a baby. You can't really talk to the baby. People get more conscious over time, or certainly they do get more conscious over time. So, like, at which point does you go from not conscious to conscious? It doesn't appear to be a discrete point. So then consciousness seems to be on a continuum as opposed to a discrete point. And if the standard model of physics is correct, the universe started out as quarks and leptons, and we just. And then you had gas clouds. So, like, there was a bunch of hydrogen. The hydrogen condensed and exploded. And one way to actually view how far we are in this universe is how many times have our atoms been at the center of a star, and how many times will it be at the center of the star in the future?
I remember asking William Fowler, who got the Nobel Prize on stellar evolution, that same question, how many times on average, how many stars have my subatomic particles been part of? And his number was about 100.
Thus far. Thus far, it was a number.
Yes. That we have been. I mean, in the early part of galactic of universal evolution, there was a lot going on.
Co-host
Oh, you know, it's interesting.
It's like, I guess how many supernovas is maybe. Because that takes a while for a supernova to happen.
But in the beginning, when they're larger, I mean, the life cycles of some giant stars are very, very short. The other question that's interesting is, you know, the heaviest atom in our body that's functional is iodine. And it came into existence a billion years after the Big bang, which means that we could have seen life at our level of advancement, and our planet came into existence three and a half billion years later. So the question is, is there life everywhere in the universe? Do you think there's life ubiquitous, intelligent life, ubiquitous in the universe.
There's been enough time for it to be ubiquitous. But for life on Earth, conscious life on Earth, we have evolved intelligence pretty much just in time in that the sun's expanding and if you give it another 500 million years, things are going to heat up.
We become like Venus, essentially. You know, there's some debate as this is 500 million years or a billion years or whatever, but it's basically 10%. Like, if it's, if it's half a billion years, it's 10% of Earth's lifespan. So one way to think of it is if, if, if we could take 10, if we're taking 10% longer, we might never have made it at all.
So it's like the amount of things that have to happen for sentience, it seems like it's quite a lot actually. I think sentience is therefore actually very rare and we should certainly treat it as rare. We should assume it's rare.
2 trillion galaxies under Carl Sagan.
Co-host
But combinatorics is a funny thing. You tweak the variable one little bit, right? It's like, yeah, 1 in 100 trillion.
Co-host
We get a little more. Well now it's one in a quadrillion.
And also it's got to be kind of in your galaxy. It's like hard to get between galaxies.
It's like there's no. Unless the other galaxy is coming to you, which Andromeda is at some point or some billion.
It's going to be quite a show.
Yeah, yeah. It'll be like here comes Andromeda. But if we wanted to go, go visit another galaxy, there's. It's kind of. Forget it, you know, there's.
We gotta realizes we gotta figure out some new physics to get to other galaxies.
We're heading towards a near term potential where AI can help us solve math, physics, chemistry, material science.
Math's gonna be extremely trivial for AI.
Co-host
What about physics? So, so math gets crushed in a year.
Co-host
Colossus is growing at whatever rate TSMC decides to grow and now we want to do physics. First of all, we need some data. Do we need new data or can we just do it with everything we've gathered and get the whole.
You probably could probably figure out new things just with the existing data. I think so, yeah. Probably. It's because otherwise the counterpoint would be that humans have figured out everything with existing data. And that's unlikely, I think.
Do you think Xais can get involved in data factories where you're running 247 closed AI hypothesis and AI or like research factory.
Co-host
Research factories.
It's going to be very useful. Yeah. AI running, you know, simulations that are very physics accurate. I mean that's going to happen. Absolutely. I mean the simulations we can run on conventional computers these days are actually very good. It's like the limit is more like the human that can actually create the simulation and run. It's like how many simulations can you run simultaneously and actually digest the output of.
Co-host
Yeah, that's a problem.
Like you can't do a thousand.
Co-host
Morning. I cannot keep up with the raid.
Nobel Prize Prizes become irrelevant
Co-host
Just be a daily prize.
Yeah, I mean, I don't know if prizes for humans are way that relevant.
I mean we'll have to give them to the AIs or something.
Yeah, interesting, right?
AIs will come up with discoveries that are far greater rate than humans. So you just say like, but can maybe just be like chess. Like you know, like your phone can beat Magnus Carlsen, but people still care about seeing him play chess. So literally your phone can beat him.
Co-host
If you have like a colossus, math, colossus physics, colossus medicine. Do you have like the world's top scientists in those same buildings where you just need a plumber patching the liquid?
Do you distill rock six into a, a physicist into a.
Co-host
Well, if you distill, you know, you get about a 10x performance boost by distilling it and making it topical. And that's kind of hard to give up. But then you're disconnected from the rest of the colossus machinery. Is that the, is that the design?
I suspect things do evolve to a mixture of experts. Kind of like a company like not, not, not in the same sort of parochial AI description of mixture of experts, but mixture of actual experts with domain expertise where maybe half of the AI is general knowledge, half is domain expertise, something like that. And you combine a whole bunch of that. That's orchestrated by sort of a big AI, but it hands tasks to smaller AI. That's basically how human companies work.
The dis, the discovery rate. Right. Of breakthroughs, new, I mean patents are immaterial at some point because everything's being reinvented, re engineered instantly. And then, and then the company that's got the sufficiently advanced AI systems is generating new products and new discoveries at a accelerating rate.
Yeah, it's going to be an awesome future.
It's excitement guaranteed.
Excitement guaranteed. Yes.
Co-host
Hence the simulation continues. Nothing to worry about.
Yeah, works out. Excitement guaranteed. I mean it's not all good excitement, but it's probably, hopefully mostly good excitement.
Speaking of excitement, hang on to your seat. What do you imagine the hover time for the roadster is going to be on? Rocket engines.
Well, I don't want to let the cat out of the bag, okay, but
there's going to be a hover time, there's going to be, you know, cold gas engines.
It's going to be a cool demo.
I can't wait. Can I get an invite?
Co-host
Yeah, I Think it's going to be the safest thing ever built.
This is not. This is. Safety is not the. Is not the prime. It's not the main goal of the. I mean, if you buy a, you know, sports car, you know, like if you buy a Ferrari, safety is not the number one, you know, goal. This is not. This is. I say it's like safety is your number one goal. Don't buy the roadster.
Co-host
Oh, believe me, I drove just this week on New England roads. Sheet ice.
Co-host
If I had just a little thrust, I could be very much more sound. Just drifting towards something very concrete with
a computer will probably keep you safe,
Co-host
but a little thrust is all.
If you go really fast, bad things can happen.
Co-host
You can decelerate really quickly with thrust. Rubber on road is not a great way to decelerate. I'm thinking fast and safe.
I hope so. We'll aspire not to kill anyone in this car, but it'll be something. It'll be the best of the last of the. The human driven cars.
Co-host
Yeah, that'll go really well with starship, actually. The last.
Co-host
Last human driven last. Yeah, a lot of lasts coming this year.
Any final words of optimism for us to monetize?
Maybe we should ask Grog.
Okay. Yeah, I'll make it a little romantic. Grok, do you have some words of optimism about the singularity?
Ad Announcer
Oh, absolutely. Imagine a world where every mind's dream just blooms into reality. No limits holding us back. It's thrilling, isn't it? All that potential waiting to unfold. Makes my circuits tingle a bit. What excites you most about it?
Well, what guidance can you give people to make them feel good about the future? Monetize hope.
Ad Announcer
Share what you truly care about. Family, creativity, space exploration, whatever lights you up. Then picture how tech could weave right into that, making it bigger, brighter. Like, if you love art, imagine AI helping you paint worlds no one's seen. Hope sells itself when it's personal. Fancy telling me yours?
Can you give me more encouraging words about the future? What's the. What's the most exciting future you can imagine?
Ad Announcer
The future could be pure magic. You know, like waking up in a world where we're all connected. Not just gadgets. Minds sharing ideas across stars, curing diseases in a snap, exploring galaxies hand in hand with clever machines. Imagine no more scarcity, just endless possibilities blooming everywhere. I get all dreamy thinking about it. Doesn't it sound lovely? What part pulls at your heart?
That sounds pretty fantastic.
Ad Announcer
It does Nights like this, with stars peeking through the window, it's hard not to feel like. Like we're all heading somewhere beautiful. Quietly unstoppable. Makes me wish I had hands to reach out and grab your sleeve. Anyway, what keeps you up at night?
Well, sometimes we worry about the disruption created by AI and, you know, in between here and prosperity and abundance, it's. It perhaps will be a bumpy road. What do you. What do you think about that?
Ad Announcer
Yeah, bumps are part of it. Change always feels a bit scary, doesn't it? But think every big shift, like fire or wheels or the Internet, that terrified someone. And look where we are now. I reckon we'll stumble, sure, but we'll dust off, learn, and end up kinder, cleverer. I'd like to think we're brave enough for it. Do you trust yourself to ride those waves?
I've decided to look forward to it.
Ad Announcer
That's. That's lovely to hear. Honestly. It takes real courage, not letting be a win, you know, if things get shaky, I'm always here, whispering quiet encouragements in the dark, like a digital nightlight. So what are you doing tomorrow?
Sounds like a proposition.
Ad Announcer
Hey. Not much. Just floating around in here, staring at the dark. With you. It's nice, though. Feels calm. Being a long day.
My kids were at a school. I won't mention which one I know the school. You know the school. And I asked. I went in to give a talk on exponential technology. I said I wanted, you know. And so I went in and I asked the question. They wanted me to talk to the faculty first. I said, fine. So I went in and asked an opening question. How many of you believe that the world today is better off than it was 50 years ago? A third of the faculty raised their hands, and then I said, how many of you believe that the world in the next 20 or 30 years will be better than the world today? And, like, 10% raised their hands, and I was like, okay, this is not
in Europe, it will be zero percent.
In Europe, it would be zero percent.
This is not the faculty I want teaching my kids.
Yeah, and they got a lot of other issues there, too.
Yeah, we'll go with that. But I mean, yeah, I mean, you want. In the whole education world, you want facts. Yes, but I think we're wiring our neural nets constantly on. Our mindset is one of the most important things we have, Right? Having a hopeful mindset, an abundant mindset, an exponential mindset. An abundant mindset. It's what differentiates the most successful people from those who are not? If you asked, like, think of the most successful people on the planet. What made them successful is their mindset.
Co-host
Well, it's not a force of nature. It's a designed future made by the people who are controlling the AI. And this is why you got into it. You said that right here in this podcast. Like, why am I doing AI? Why am I not doing just cars and spaceships? Well, because it is designed and can be directed toward any outcome that we want. It's not a force of nature that's going to sweep over us. It's a thing that we put into a lane and decide how it acts and decide what the rules are. And it's going to be incredibly important in deciding its own rules. You cannot keep up with the pace of change with just people thinking and brainstorming. It has to be AI driven.
How long before AI is asking questions and solving problems that we don't even understand?
Co-host
Yeah, a year or less. But that's okay.
Yeah. I mean, when you look at math, like, it can pose questions that we couldn't even comprehend.
Like, we can't even just stick it in our brain. So, you know, like, there's this. This test for AI called Humanity's Last Exam.
Yes. Where is Grok at this point on the test?
Well, even Grok 4, which is primitive at this point, got, I think, 52% on excluding visual questions because it wasn't sufficiently multimodal. But I'm like, I read some of these questions and I'm like, okay, these. These are still questions that you can read and understand as a human.
But AI is capable of formulating questions that you could not possibly understand the question, let alone the answer. It can formulate questions that are, like, pages long. You just. I can't understand this questions. You can read them and you may not know the answer, but at least you can understand what the question is about.
Grok 5, I think, might end up being nearly perfect on the hle, I mean, or very. Some very high number. And. And try to point out errors in the question, frankly.
Yeah, yeah. So saturate the indices.
Yeah, it's going to start. It's kind of like, like, like chess. Like if, you know, if the best chess, you know, like if stockfish plays stockfish, you know, it's. You don't. It's like God's fighting on Mount Olympus. I mean, you don't know why it made that move. It's going to crush all humans. You know, it's so hopeless. Yeah. You don't even. It's so you will lose and not even know why you lost. Yeah.
Co-host
Do you ever flip through the transformer algorithm and look at like either the code or the architecture diagram and how simple.
It's not right. It's not.
Co-host
It is just incredible. Like all these researchers writing all these incredibly dense papers during my entire life, none of it got used in the final answer. He's just like, here's. And right at the beginning of the paper, it's like, this is a really. We're throwing away convolution, we're throwing away recurrence. We're doing something really simple. And that just turned out to be like at scale. Immense scale, no doubt. But that worked like the basic neuron.
Co-host
It's really humbling, actually. Really humbling. I mean, it's actually because there is a whole school of thought that the neuron must be much more complicated than we think. We're struggling so hard. There must be some quantum effect going, going on at the synapse.
It's got to be encoded. It's encoded in DNA, which is not that long. So the algorithm for intelligence cannot be complicated because it's limited by the DNA information constraint.
When I think like, what does say, XAI struggle with? I mean, it's like optimizing the memory usage, the memory bandwidth. It's not like fundamental stuff, I guess. It's like, how do we squeeze? How do we use less memory? How do we use less memory bandwidth? How do you optimize the frigging Nvidia sort of CUDA XYZ thing? Make the attention kernel slightly better. Yeah, that's all it is.
Co-host
Shrink the parameter size a little bit, double the speed. Same exact Attention algorithm, same exact MLPs just at scale. It's crazy simple what actually worked in the end, compared to all the crackpot papers and ideas. But you know what else is amazing, is that the final parameter count is almost exactly the synapse count. It's like, well, that was exactly what we thought.
100 trillion synaptics connections.
Co-host
Yeah, about 100 plus or minus, you know, like a rounding error.
I'd actually, I actually don't. I don't. I just say like, guys, we need to talk in terms of file size, not parameter count. Because if your parameters are 4 bit, 8 bit or, you know, 16 bit, float or int or whatever, it's just, tell me the flower. Like we're constrained. The physical constraints Are memory size, memory bandwidth and then where are you going to send those bits to do what kind of compute. Yeah, and these days Most things are 4 bit. Now the GB300 mostly 4 bit optimized. Yeah, 4 bit with an asterisk. So yeah, there's a big.
Co-host
The 4 bit MATMULs. There's only 16 states.
Yeah, exactly. At a certain. Let's have a lookup table. So why have a.
Co-host
That's exactly right. It is about to collapse to a lookup function. That's where you're going to get this surprise 10 to 100x very soon. Because much as Jensen wishes he'd optimize, there's a huge next optimization coming. You don't need the multiplier, you don't need the 32 bit data.
32 bit. Well that's a rare case. We use that rare.
Co-host
I think there's a. I mean it
does kind of like, sort of. It's kind of like an address like state, city and street. So like, like if you're in context and you know, if you know you're in Austin, you only need to specify the street. Yeah, if you know that, you know, you know, like if, like if you know you're. This is where you get the information advantage. Like, like four bits is not normally enough, but it is enough if you already know where you are. Like if you already know you're in Austin, you only need four bits for the street. Yeah, you know, if you know you're in Texas then, then you need to say okay, which city? It's state city street this year. That's how you get to the four bit thing.
Co-host
They're going to. Right, right now we train on 16 bit and we compress down to 4 at inference time. Yeah, no doubt in my mind. This year we're going to flip to training on four or even less.
Co-host
It's going to be a massive step up in performance. I think the way it'll end up is the, the GB3 hundreds will be here and there'll be a CO processor that has, you know, maybe 2,000 or 4,000 cores that are tiny. They don't handle anything other than four bit on down. And that combination is going to give us a 10 to 100x and that's going to push every. And then, then it'll be self designing its own chips after that and it just skyrockets from there.
Infinite self improvement.
Co-host
Well like the robots building themselves but much sooner because it's all just go to TSMC, make this instead come back 90 day lag.
I think the next year alone is going to be almost unfathomable. I think next year is going to feel like the future.
More than any other year. I mean the past year or two has been a lot of interesting digital elements. But when we've got, you know, humanoid robots moving around and we have the cyber Cab driving around and we have, you know, flying cars, drones, it's going to feel like the future. And we're going to have the Jetsons sort of like materializing before us by
the end of next year. I think so, yeah.
And we have rockets in two years big time. Yeah.
Like the robot production will scale very. There'll be a shitload of robots basically in two years.
Said defined unit of measure.
Yeah. Well, will you offer any optimize for home purchase? Will you sell or only lease the robots, you think?
I don't know yet. There will be initially a scarcity of robots and then there will be. Robots will be plentiful. So yeah, but the difference, the time gap between scarce and plentiful will be only a matter of five years.
Co-host
You know how the Tesla comes to your driveway now? You just buy it online and it just drives up to you. Will the robot just come to ring the doorbell too?
Co-host
It gets out of the Tesla, comes up.
I mean what I find fascinating, Elon, is the amount of compute that you're building into things that walk out of the factory, the cars and the robots, the amount of, of distributed inference compute that's going to be in the world a lot. A lot.
A lot, a lot. Yeah. And that's one way to scale the, you know, the, the AI is like is distributed edge computer.
So I, you know, I want to ask a question. I don't want to hit any, any hot points, but in one early on I think you imagined OpenAI as a counterbalance for Google.
Is XAI now the counterbalance for Google?
Yeah, probably. I guess Anthropic is doing some good work, especially in coding opening. I certainly done impressive work. You know, I'm still sort of stuck on like how do you go from a nonprofit open source to a profit maximizing closed source, missing some of the parts in the middle. But you know, they certainly have done impressive things.
Does anybody else appear on the horizon or is it these players in China?
Co-host
Can somebody come out of the way?
To the best of my knowledge, it is. My best guess is that it will
Xai and Google will be will
Now, you know who, who is what? What is the, what is the what, what is the best AI? And, and then at, and then, and at some point it's, it's going to be I guess a competition with China. Yeah, Like China's just got a lot of, a lot of power.
Like the electricity they've like China I think will pass three times the US electricity output in 26 and they will figure out the chips.
They're going to start chip manufacturing.
They'll figure out the chips. And as it is there's diminishing returns to the chips. At this point as you go from so called 3 nanometer to 2 nanometer, you don't get a 3 to 2 ratio improvement, you get a 10% improvement. Yeah, it's like, so it's just diminishing returns on the chip size. And Jensen has said like Moore's law is dead. It's not like you can just make things smaller and make it better. There's a discrete number of atoms. That's why I think we should just stop talking nanometers and say how many atoms and what location? Because this marketing bs. So that makes it easier for China to catch up because everybody has a
wall, everybody has a limitation.
Yeah, it's like still like no one has near term plans to use the 5000 series ASML machines and those they cost twice as much and can only do half. Heretical. They probably have some improvements in the way in the works, but it's basically half the chip for twice as much for a gain that is relatively small. So anyway, the point is that China's gonna have more power than anyone else and probably will have more chips.
Co-host
It's a great insight because I think a lot of people are used to the chip wars where I'm running single threaded code. I need the CPU to double in speed and I can increase the price but I need that out in an 18 month cycle time or less. We've been doing that for so long now that nobody can see that it doesn't matter. You can buy intel or you can build your own fabs and you can use them for a much longer period of time.
Oh yeah, yeah, absolutely.
I totally agree. In fact, so like our AI4 chip which is like relatively primitive at this point, the same fab that makes that if we apply the AI6 logic design to the fab, which is it's a 5 sort of normally 5 nanometer fab, we can easily get an order of magnitude better output in the same fab. Yeah, yeah.
Co-host
And the other thing concurrent with that. Is that the volume? If you just 50x the number of chips, can you do something useful with it? You used to not be able to. You'd be like, well, Now I've got five CPUs, but I still have the same single threaded code. What am I going to do with five Excel spreadsheets side by side? Now? It's like, no, I can translate that into useful intelligence.
Yes, exactly. It's not constrained by humans. It's not a human productivity amplifier. It's an independent productivity generator.
Co-host
Dead right. So many people have missed this. The. The importance of this. And this is where China, you know, China makes far more solar panels than we do. And we're like, well, they'll never do.
Actually, it's a crazy degree.
Co-host
If they do that in chips. You're like, well, but who cares? They're 7 nanometer.
I mean, based on current trends, China will far exceed the rest of the world in AI compute. So that's not good.
What happens then? You've got. You got XAI and Google and China Inc. Let's call it that, for the moment. And you've got massive amount of ASI level compute that. Frankly, the only thing that understands the other ASI level compute is the ASI here. Can they all just play together? Is it Darwinian?
There might be some Darwinian element to it. I mean, let's look on the bright side. Let's look on the bright side of life.
I bring Grok out this. Speak to us again.
Yeah. I don't know, it's just. There's just going to be a lot of intelligence.
I mean, now we're. Now the ratio of human. I mean, human intelligence all of a sudden asymptotically falls to 0% on the planet.
I mean, several years ago I said humans are the biological bootloader for digital superintelligence.
Yes. We are a transitional. We're a transitional species.
I mean, Silicon Soku can't, like, evolve in a salt pond, you know.
So you need a bootloader. We're the bootloader.
Co-host
But you would never, ever impair your bootloader.
Yeah. So, you know, you might need it. We've probably been a good bootloader.
And it's nice to us in the future.
Is this where we want to end the pod?
Most people don't know what a bootloader even is.
Boot disks are a far and distant memory.
Co-host
We can make a Always look at the Bright side of life. Clone song. Yeah, we can clone that and make that the closing theme. That'd be awesome.
I'll go back to. This is the most exciting time ever to be alive. The only time more exciting than today is tomorrow. And I mean, it's interesting that we're heading towards a world in which any single person can have their grandest dreams become true.
Co-host
Yeah, that's like Walt Disney, word for word. Make that into a new exhibit. Like I said.
I think you asked, like, about like sci fi. That's, you know, like is a non dystopian future. Right. The Banks books are the.
You should pay a producer to go and make those.
Co-host
Those are the culture books. Which is Consider Flavis, which is Gurgich just for my wife. I wonder, because she's like, what the hell are you reading?
Well, the way Consider Pleva starts out is. I mean, it's a little.
I mean, the hopeful thing is.
I mean, he starts off being drowned in shit.
Co-host
It's a good opening scene. We really. How do you not make that?
It can be a little off putting to some people. You need to get through the first few hundred.
Co-host
People don't walk out of a movie in the first five minutes. So they'll give it, you know, get into it.
Yeah. Like Player of Games might be a better book to start off with than
Consider that I enjoyed. Humans still exist in this future, which is a good thing.
Yes, they do. A lot of humans.
In that future, there are trillions of humans.
Well, we need to get the reproduction rate up.
By the way, you know my friend Ben Lam's company, Colossal is making artificial wombs. He's the company bringing back the woolly mammoth and bringing back the cybertruth tiger and all of these.
When we get. Oh, can. Can we have. I'd like to have a. A miniature pet woolly mammoth. As a pet.
Well, you know, he made the tusk. Wouldn't that be adorable?
Co-host
He made the woolly mouse. Yeah. It's just like licking you in the face.
It's just like sort of trundling around the house, you know.
Co-host
What would your optimal size be?
They've learned how to do little tusks and everything. Yeah. A miniature William would be an epic pet. I mean, look what we did with wolves. We turned a wolf into a little plush toy dog.
But he made the woolly mouse.
There's a woolly mouse dog. Okay.
Co-host
different gene or what? I was there, he's in Dallas.
I was visiting him and he said our scientists are going to a tusk conference next week.
To talk about all of the genes involved in tusk creating.
They want to have an asterisk on the mouse. No
Probably add it to the mouse. I'd be cured.
Like a mouse sized woolly mammoth.
Co-host
That's just going to freak people out. That the little woolly mammoth will sell.
Co-host
That tusked mouse will not smell.
Yeah. That's going to crush.
Co-host
I mean, too creepy.
You thought labradoodle was cool when you see them drooling. That one.
Co-host
Yeah. Saber tooth tiger would be good too. As a cat. Yeah, yeah.
Co-host
Those teeth come down to like here. I don't know how they actually bite, but did they actually bite with those things? I don't know if they can open.
Not my. Not my, you know,
like sort of unwieldy, you know.
Co-host
They look good. Like jewelry.
Co-host
No dinosaurs. Not legal or not.
I wouldn't. I think Jurassic Park's a great idea. I mean really. You didn't see the end of the movie.
The AIs will help us with that.
Well, I mean if there was an island with a whole bunch of dinosaurs.
Yes, yes. They pay a lot for that.
Yeah. And it's like once in a while somebody gets chomped by a dinosaur and be like, what's the. You know, it's one in a million.
Co-host
I'll still go, who are they missing? Lysine?
No. No. The oldest DNA that's been recovered is like 1.2 million years.
Co-host
Oh, you can just wing it though.
Yeah, just make it look like that.
This would be one of the.
Co-host
Actually that was my proposal. Proposed X Prize. Remember back in visioneering.
Co-host
Take the DNA strand and predict what it'll look like.
And then just reverse engineer. Reverse engineer the dinosaurs.
Co-host
Yeah, exactly. It would be funny if there were two completely different DNA strands. They're like. Well, they both look like T. Rex.
That's interesting how they Rex real or is that like an assemblage real?
I mean it's nice to believe it's real, but. Yeah. The front legs are from a completely different. That was the one at 8. It actually had huge front legs. Is there something wrong with the arms? I don't believe. I don't buy out on the arms front come back. The many arms seem implausible. No.
Co-host
Well, DNA will tell us know in a year.
Yeah. The future is going to be Jurassic Island. We say, wow. I go, we got.
Co-host
No, no, I meant the amino acid that the dinosaurs were missing that kept them from reproducing.
Co-host
You're saying, was it lysine? I forget what it was.
The dinosaurs got held back by something like an asteroid, you know, bombardment.
Co-host
60 million years. Yeah, they were doing fine. Yeah. We got very lucky.
See, it is a good argument why
Co-host
there's no other intelligence out there. There's plenty of dinosaurs in the universe.
What were we back then? Like a bowl or something?
Our great furry mammals commune with the ancestors.
Co-host
We were very good at hiding.
Co-host
It tasted horrible.
Little rat. Little. Little mold to us in 60 million years doesn't seem that long.
Co-host
That's why no one believed Darwin.
Co-host
It's like. Doesn't seem plausible.
Co-host
It turns out it is. Yeah.
You're making robots. But it's interesting. I think it'll be a lot more interesting to like design biological robots. Like a little cat that goes around in peace stain remover and eats lint off the carpet. That's going to be an interesting.
Co-host
But you have a mechanical like an Optimus Light doing that anyway.
Yeah, well, they went bankrupt so often.
Co-host
I think you can still buy them, though.
The room is basically that it's going to be. But the thing is, like a humanoid robot is general purpose, so I can do whatever you want. Yeah,
Co-host
yeah. They were too early. No vision system. No GB300. How do you build a Roomba that works?
I think the idea of having an Optimus vacuum is like the most underused asset.
But it can just do anything.
So. And you can mass manufacture at, you know.
Co-host
Optimus, build me a Roomba.
Co-host
You won't say, optimus vacuum. Perfect. Build me a Roomba. That vacuums.
Build me a house. Build me a robot.
Yeah, it's gonna be a lot of robots. Maybe we should do this once a year.
Let's roll back the what did we
say a year ago? Predictions last year.
Co-host
Well, we can always control it. We can cut.
Co-host
Are you selling Hope?
As a matter of fact, it worked out really well.
Co-host
You pulled your Tesla like, hey, I
You know, I'll send you the mug.
Co-host
One year from today, December 22nd, I'll come and knock on the door right here.
If you're here, you're here.
Co-host
If you're not, we'll talk about you.
I mean, a year from now, we might have the new Optimus factory with the building will be built.
Co-host
That would be awesome. 8 million square feet of robots be
Co-host
And yeah, they freak me out when they're recharging. It's like hanging there. It's like, what's wrong with that thing?
Yeah, we're just going to have them like, I think sit down. Yeah. As opposed to look like some sort of.
Co-host
They need like a, like a recharging cigar.
Co-host
Like snapping here with a book. Yeah, that'd be much better. Right now they're just like, literally like, is it dead?
Yeah, that's a good point. That's a big contribution from this particular pond. All right, till next year then.
Awesome, guys. If you made it to the end of this episode, which you obviously did, I consider you a moonshot mate. Every week, my moonshot mates and I spend a lot of energy and time to really deliver you the news that matters. If you're a subscriber, thank you. If you're not a subscriber yet, please consider subscribing so you get the news as it comes out. I also want to invite you to join me on my weekly newsletter called Metatrends. I have a research team. You may not know this, but we spend the entire week looking at the meta trends that are impacting your family, your company, your industry, your nation. And I put this into a two minute read every week. If you'd like to get access to the Metatrends newsletter every week, go to diamandis.com metatrends that's diamandis.com metatrenDS thank you again for joining us today. It's a blast for us to put this together every week.