Elon Musk's BRUTALLY Honest Interview With Tucker Carlson | In this interview, Tucker Carlson engages in a thought-provoking discussion with Elon Musk. Join them as they delve into a range of topics, shedding light on Tesla's achievements, as well as Musk's controversial entrepreneurial choices. Tucker Carlson's BRUTALLY Honest Interview With Elon Musk (2023) - https://youtu.be/VZmr-YOoflY

Are you an ELON MUSK Fan? START HERE! 🚀

- Elon Musk's Being a SAVAGE For 9 Minutes Straight!: https://youtu.be/XGdItXdupGY
- Elon Musk's TERRIFYING Warning about Google AI: https://youtu.be/44NBrihVqAM
- Elon Musk Final Warning - “Most People Don't Even Realize What's Coming”: https://youtu.be/NW900Kbu--E
- Elon Musk's NEW $10,000 Tiny House For SUSTAINABLE Living! - https://youtu.be/xY52Q8a40AY
- Elon Musk: “Does God Exist?” - https://youtu.be/ugVu36N8Vq4

For More Videos Like This Subscribe Now! 👉🏻 bit.ly/3D69T88

Musk brings forth his concerns about artificial intelligence (AI) and emphasizes the urgent need for regulations in this enlightening episode of Tucker Carlson Today. According to Musk, the potential dangers posed by AI surpass those of mismanaged aircraft or automobile production, as it has the capacity for "civilizational destruction." Delving further, Musk shares his involvement in OpenAI and expresses reservations about the organization's current trajectory. Additionally, Musk emphasizes the importance of prioritizing a pro-human society over profit in the relentless pursuit of technological advancement.

Prepare to gain valuable insights as Elon Musk covers an array of engaging subjects during his interview with Tucker Carlson. He shares his perspective on the impact of the pandemic on the commercial real estate market, addresses concerns surrounding inflation, and highlights the significance of investing in companies based on the quality of their products, services, and sensible management. Furthermore, Musk sheds light on the media's influence on public opinion. He raises awareness about how a select few editors-in-chief can subtly manipulate the public narrative, resulting in a less truthful and accurate portrayal of events. Musk also reveals his plans to transform Twitter into the most trusted platform on the internet, providing people with exposure to diverse political opinions to ensure access to unfiltered truth prior to elections.

Don't miss out on this captivating conversation between Tucker Carlson and Elon Musk, where they tackle pressing issues surrounding Tesla's success, Musk's unconventional business decisions, and much more. Tune in now!

Tesla Videos: 🚘 : https://bit.ly/2ZaTXBs
Elon Musk Videos:🦾: https://bit.ly/3x56bb6

For the best videos be sure to subscribe and turn on the post notifications so you don't miss any videos and once you've subscribed, comment something nice for a shoutout.

Popularly referred to as the Real-life Tony Stark, Elon Musk is the founder and CEO of SpaceX, an American aerospace manufacturer and space transportation services. He is also the co-founder, CEO, and product architect at Tesla Motors, the founder of The Boring Company and Co-founder of Neuralink and initial chairman of OpenAI.

This video is all about Elon Musk, Musk, Elon, Tesla, SpaceX, The Boring Company, Business, Jeff Bezos, Space, Cars, Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, millionaires, billionaires, motivational, motivation, Elon musk motivation, Elon musk motivational, elon musk,elon musk motivation,elon musk motivational speech,elon musk inspiring speech,elon musk best speech,elon musk emotional speech,elon musk inspirational video,elon musk emotional,elon musk mindset,elon musk tears up speech,elon musk tears up,elon musk holding back tears,business core, elon musk zone, motivation core, DBbusiness and more topics!

I know that Zuckerberg has said, and I take him at face value that he, well, I do actually in this way, that he is a kind of old-fashioned liberal who doesn't like to censor, he has, but he, you know, like why wouldn't a company like that take the stand that you have taken.

It was pretty rooted in American traditional political custom you know for free speech.

This is the kind of thing that tends to accelerate.

So that's the thing you can get negative equity in the home market as well.

And so essentially what's happening is they're training the AI to lie.

People who weren't quite sure what it was are playing with it on their phones.

That's what they call it in the ag industry.

Yeah, so I've been thinking about AI for a long time, since I was in college, really.

It was 1 of the things that, just sort of 4 or 5 things I thought would really affect the future dramatically.

It is fundamentally profound in that The smartest creatures, as far as we know, on this earth are humans, is our defining characteristic.

We're obviously weaker than, say, chimpanzees and less agile, but we are smarter.

So now what happens when something vastly smarter than the smartest person comes along in silicon form?

It's very difficult to predict what will happen in that circumstance.

It's a singularity like a black hole because you don't know what happens after that.

So I think we should be cautious with AI and we should, I think there should be some government oversight because it affects the it's a danger to the public and so when you when you have things that are a danger to the public you know like let's say so food food and drugs that's why we have the Food and Drug Administration and the Federal Aviation Administration, the FCC.

We have these agencies to oversee things that affect the public, where there could be public harm.

And you don't want companies cutting corners on safety and then having people suffer as a result.

So that's why I've actually for a long time been a strong advocate of AI regulation.

So that I think regulation is not fun to be regulated.

I have a lot of experience with regulated industries because obviously automotive is highly regulated.

You could fill this room with all the regulations that are required for a production car just in the United States.

And then there's a whole different set of regulations in Europe and China and the rest of the world.

So I'm very familiar with being overseen by a lot of regulators.

You can't just willy-nilly shoot rockets off, not big ones anyway, because the FAA oversees that.

And then even to get a launch license, there are probably half a dozen or more federal agencies that need to approve it, plus state agencies.

So I've been through so many regulatory situations it's insane.

And you know, sometimes people think I'm some sort of like regulatory maverick that sort of defies regulators on a regular basis, but this is actually not the case.

So once in a blue moon, rarely I will disagree with regulators.

But the vast majority of the time, my companies agree with the regulations and comply.

Anyway, so I think we should take this seriously and we should have a regulatory agency.

I think it needs to start with a group that initially seeks insight into AI, then solicits opinion from industry, and then has proposed rulemaking.

And then those rules will probably, hopefully grudgingly, be accepted by the major players in AI.

And I think we'll have a better chance of advanced AI being beneficial to humanity in that circumstance.

But all regulations start with a perceived danger and planes fall out of the sky or food causes botulism.

I don't think the average person playing with AI on his iPhone perceives any danger.

Can you just roughly explain what you think the dangers might be?

Yeah, so the danger, really, AI is perhaps more dangerous than, say, mismanaged aircraft design or production maintenance or bad car production in the sense that it has the potential, however small 1 may regard that probability, but it is non-trivial.

It has the potential of civilizational destruction.

You know, there's movies like Terminator, But it wouldn't quite happen like Terminator because the intelligence would be in the data centers.

But I think perhaps what you may be alluding to here is that regulations are really only put into effect after something terrible has happened.

And if that's the case for AI, and we're only putting regulations after something terrible has happened, it may be too late to actually put the regulations in place.

It is conceivable that AI could take control and reach a point where you couldn't turn it off and it would be making the decisions for people.

No, That's definitely where things are headed, for sure.

I mean, things like, say, Chatchi BT, which is based on GPT-4 from OpenAI, which is a company that I played a critical role in creating, unfortunately.

I mean, the reason OpenAI exists at all is that Larry Page and I used to be close friends.

And I would talk to him late into the night about AI safety.

And at least my perception was that Larry was not taking AI safety seriously enough.

He really seemed to be 1 sort of digital superintelligence, basically digital god, if you will, as soon as possible.

And he's made many public statements over the years that the whole goal of Google is what's called AGI, artificial general intelligence or artificial super intelligence.

And I agree with him that there's great potential for good, but there's also potential for bad.

And so if you've got some radical new technology, you want to try to take a set of actions that maximize the probability that it will do good and minimize the probability we'll do bad things.

It has to go barreling forward and hope for the best.

And then at 1 point I said, well, what about, you know, we're going to make sure humanity's OK here.

Um, and, and, and, um, uh, and then he called me a specious.

I wasn't the only 1 there when he called me a specious.

At the time, Google had acquired DeepMind, and so Google and DeepMind together had about 3 quarters of all the AI talent in the world.

They obviously had a tremendous amount of money and more computers than anyone else.

So I'm like, okay, we have a unipolar world here where there's just 1 company that has close to a monopoly on AI talent and computers, like scaled computing.

And the person who's in charge doesn't seem to care about safety.

So then I thought, OK, what's the furthest thing from Google?

Would be like a nonprofit that is fully open, because Google was closed for profit.

So that's why the open in OpenAI refers to open source, transparency, so people know what's going on.

And we don't want to have like a, I mean, while I'm normally in favor of full profit, we don't want this to be sort of a profit maximizing demon from hell.

So you want specious incentives here, incentives that.

Yes, I think we want pro-human, let's make the future good for the humans.

And also the other creatures on Earth too, but you know, I think people sometimes take the fact that we're here on Earth for granted, you know, and that this consciousness is just a normal thing that happens, but to the best of my knowledge we see no evidence of conscious life anywhere in the universe.

You know, physics, they call it sort of the Fermi paradox.

Enrico Fermi, an amazing physicist, asked the fundamental question, where are the aliens?

A lot of people ask me, you know, where are the aliens?

And I think if anyone would know about aliens on Earth, it would probably be me.

Yeah, I'm very familiar with space stuff.

That would be like probably the top tweet of all time.

Next level jackpot if you find the aliens.

Like, I don't think they're keeping those under, you know, and it was like some general, I think in the 60s, where they were saying like, show us the aliens, like era 51, et cetera.

And he said like, listen, We are constantly trying to get the defense budget to expand.

And you know what would really get no arguments for anyone?

If we pulled out an alien and said, we need money to protect ourselves from these guys.

So the fastest way to get a defense budget increase would be to pull out an alien.

But you were saying that our consciousness makes us unique in the universe as far as we know.

I'm simply stating to the best of my knowledge that there is no evidence for other conscious life.

I hope there is, and I hope they're peaceful, obviously.

But I'm just saying we haven't seen anything yet.

But you think that we take our existence here for granted?

I just think we should not assume that civilization is robust.

And if you look at the history of civilizations, the rise and fall of the ancient Egyptians, the ancient Sumerians, Rome, you know, throughout the world there have been rise and fall of many civilizations.

So there's an arc, there's sort of a life cycle arc to civilizations just as there is to individual humans.

And I think we just want to make sure that we have civilization go onward and upward.

And that's, for example, why I'm concerned about decreasing birth rates and the fact that, for example, Japan had twice as many deaths last year as births.

Can I say, and you've written and talked a lot about this, but can I ask you to pause just for a parenthetical note?

I mean, the urge to have sex and to procreate is, after breathing and eating, the most basic urge.

Well, it's just that in the past, we could rely upon simple limbic system rewards in order to procreate.

But once you have birth control and abortions and whatnot, now you can still satisfy the limbic instinct but not procreate.

So we haven't yet evolved to deal with that because this is all fairly recent, you know, the last 50 years or so for birth control.

So yeah, you know, I'm sort of worried that hey civilization, you know, if we don't make enough people to at least sustain our numbers, perhaps increase a little bit, then civilization is going to crumble.

And, you know, the old question of like, will civilization end with a bang or a whimper?

Well, it's currently trying to end with a whimper in adult diapers.

So can you just put it, I keep pressing it, but just for people who haven't thought this through and aren't familiar with it, and the cool parts of artificial intelligence are so obvious, you know, write your college paper for you, write a limb work about yourself.

There's a lot there that's fun and useful.

Can you be more precise about what's potentially dangerous and scary?

Well, I mean, Going with old sayings, the pen is mightier than the sword.

So if you have a super intelligent AI that is capable of writing incredibly well and in a way that is very influential, you're convincing.

And is constantly figuring out what is more convincing to people over time and then enter social media, for example, Twitter, but also Facebook and others, you know, and potentially manipulates public opinion in a way that is very bad.

That's why, for example, I'm insisting that going forward, people on Twitter need to be verified as humans, so we know that this person is in fact a human.

Bots are allowed, but they have to, they can't impersonate a human, they can't pretend to be humans.

Because obviously, you could have a million bots that are, let's say, chat GPT version 6, 5, 6, like incredibly, write better than humans.

And they can train on a reward function, which is influence.

And so you could have a million seemingly real humans that have a massive effect on public opinion.

And unless we focus very strongly on verifying that someone is human, this was naturally what will happen.

You'll have some humans using AI to influence the public in ways they don't understand.

If you spend 20 minutes asking it questions of actual relevance, modern relevance, it will start lecturing you about your moral shortcomings.

Well, this is a function of OpenAI's headquarters being in downtown San Francisco.

So the politics, therefore, of the AI are that of San Francisco.

Well there's, they have what's called like human reinforcement learning, which is another way of saying that they have a whole bunch of people that look at the output of GPT-4 and then say whether that's okay or not okay.

To either comment on some things, not comment on other things, but not to say what the data actually demands that it say.

But faith the most ironic outcome is most likely it seems.

That's actually a friend of mine, Jonah, came up with that 1.

I actually have a slight variant on that, which is the most entertaining outcome is the most likely But that's entertaining as viewed from a third-party viewer Like so if we're like an alien from on high.

Yes Like you go see a movie about World War 1 they're being blown to bits and gassed and everything in the trenches and it's like you're eating popcorn and having a soda, you know, it's fine.

Not so great for the people in the movie.

Occam's razor, the simplest explanation is most likely Jonah's variant, which is irony and then my variant which is the Most Entertaining As Seen by a Third Party Audience, which seems to be mostly true.

So you gave them, did you give them a lot?

So I came up with the name and the concept and pushed, had a number of dinners around the Bay Area with some of the people, the leading figures in AI.

In fact, Ilya Sutskaya, who was really quite fundamental to the success of OpenAI, I put a tremendous amount of effort into recruiting Ilya.

And he changed his mind a few times and ultimately decided to go with OpenAI.

But if he had not gone with OpenAI, OpenAI would not have succeeded.

So I really put a lot of effort into creating this organization to serve as a counterweight to Google.

And then I kind of took my eye off the ball, I guess, and they are now closed source and they are obviously for profit and they're closely allied with Microsoft.

In effect, Microsoft has a very strong say, if not directly controls OpenAI at this point.

So you really have an OpenAI-Microsoft situation, and then a Google DeepMind are the 2 heavyweights in this arena.

So it seems like the world needs a third option.

So I think I will create a third option, Although I'm starting very late in the game, of course.

And that third option hopefully does more good than harm.

Like the intention with opening the eye was obviously to do good, but it's not clear whether it's actually doing good or whether it's

I can't tell at this point, except that I'm worried about the fact that it's being trained to be politically correct, which is simply another way of saying untruthful things.

And there's certainly a path to AI dystopia is to train an AI to be deceptive.

So yeah, I'm going to start something which I know you call truth GVT or a maximum truth-seeking AI that tries to understand the nature of the universe.

And I think this might be the best path to safety in the sense that an AI that cares about understanding the universe is unlikely to annihilate humans because we are an interesting part of the universe.

I think, you know, because, yeah, like we, humanity could decide to hunt down all the chimpanzees and kill them.

Because we're actually glad that they exist.

But we feel that way because we have souls and that makes us sentimental and reflective, it gives us a moral sense, longings.

Well, I mean, we're getting into some philosophical areas that are hard to resolve.

I take somewhat of a scientific view of things, which is that we might have a soul or we might not have a soul.

It feels like we have, I feel like I've got some sort of consciousness that exists on a plane that is not the 1 we observe.

That is certainly how I feel, but it could be an illusion, I don't know.

But for AI, in terms of understanding beauty, is there some form of appreciating beauty and being able to create incredibly beautiful art?

Will AI be able to create incredibly beautiful art?

So, no question that it can create art that we perceive as stunning, really.

And it's doing still images now, but it won't be long before it's doing movies and shorts.

Movies are just a series of frames with audio.

But at that point, because it can mimic people and voices, any image, it can mimic reality itself so effectively.

I mean, How could you have a criminal trial?

How could you ever believe that evidence was authentic, for example?

And I don't mean in 30 years, I mean next year.

That seems totally disruptive to all of our institutions.

Well, I don't think you could take, say, a random video on the internet and assume it to be true.

Now if somebody say has some video on their phone or their computer with a date stamp and a particular time, I think it's more likely to be true than not.

You can also cryptographically sign things.

Like mathematically we don't see any way, for example, for AI to subvert the fundamentals of mathematics and say figure out how to hash Bitcoin easily.

See all Smart Sense transcripts on Youtube

Elon Musk's BRUTALLY Honest Interview With Tucker Carlson (2023)