The Furby paradox is mind boggling. If the universe is so vast and so old, why haven't we found any evidence of intelligent extraterrestrial life? The universe is about 13.8 billion years old, and there are billions of galaxies in the universe, and each Galaxy contains billions of stars and many of these stars have planets that could potentially support life. And the laws of physics seems to be the same everywhere in the universe, so the chemical reactions.
The led to the formation of life on Earth could have happened on other planets too. So if life is common in the universe, then intelligent life should be common as well. But we haven't found any sign of intelligent extraterrestrial life yet, and there are many possible explanations for the Fermi Paradox. People think that intelligent life is rare, that we're just simply the first ones to evolve and try to find other life out there.
Others believe that intelligent life is common, but that we have not been able to detect it because they're too far away or because they use a form of communication that we just don't understand. And Elon Musk is trying to solve this problem. He believes that artificial intelligence will be the key to answering the question of why we, as an advanced civilization have yet to encounter extraterrestrial life, despite statistical probabilities
suggesting otherwise. And in his recent Twitter Spaces must detail the mission of XAI. It's his new company, and he's not a stranger to space exploration. He has SpaceX working on the Starship to take people to the moon and to Mars eventually. But there are other things that are unexplained, and XAI aims to develop an artificial general intelligence that will surpass human cognitive capabilities.
The a GI, as Musk has said. Is not simply a tool to solve complex mathematical problems or to perform intricate analytical tests. It would go beyond our current grasp of the universe. The safering, the enigmas of dark matter, dark energy and gravity. These are the fundamental forces and elements of the universe. Fermi's genius also led him to a different conclusion. Why of any civilization with even a modest level of rocket technology, they could colonize the entire Galaxy within 10s of
millions of years. Given enough incentive, why haven't we seen them? It's also since spark a myriad of proposed solutions from the scientific community. One theory suggests that other civilizations, mirroring our own dependency on fossil fuels, might have selfdestructed due to unsustainable practices before they had the chance to reach out across the interstellar void, other explanations proposed that alien radio signals are yet to reach Earth.
That intelligent life forms might reside in the interiors rather than the exteriors of planets, or perhaps that they're technologically superior. Aliens might exhibit the great indifference towards lesser intelligent species such as us, kind of like what we do to ants or what we do to bugs. And at the core of Musk's fascination with the Fermi Paradox is this concerned that we may be the only beacon of
intelligence in the universe. This is a troubling thought considering the nature of life on Earth. In a tweet from 2018, Musk said This is why we must preserve the light of consciousness by becoming a space faring civilization and extending life to other planets. And Musk isn't alone at XAI. The team comprises former luminaries of A I organizations such as Open A I and DeepMind, as well as tech giants Microsoft and Tesla and Google.
Additionally Dan Hendricks, director of the Center for a I Safety. Is serving as an advisor, and in recent years, the Center for a I Safety has been vocal about the possible risks A I can pose to humanity's future, mitigating these threats alongside other societal scale dangers like pandemics and nuclear war. And in May, hundreds of A I experts, scientists, and CEO's echoed the sentiment in a joint
statement. However, Elon Musk, while deeply involved in a I advancement, didn't sign this particular statement. Instead. Musk added his signature to an open letter issued by the Future of Life Institute in March. This document urged A I companies to initiate a minimum six month moratorium on the training of a I systems more potent than G PT4. Now, given Musk's history with a I, it is well documented concerns about its potential threats.
His engagement in this A I safety discourse is hardly surprising. Musk, a founding chair of Open A I together with Sam Altman, Open A I's current CEO. And a consortium of investors committed $1 billion to establish Open A I in 2015. Musk himself claimed to have contributed $100 million to the fund, a figure he has also reportedly have in some instances. The narrative surrounding Musk's exit from Open A I is kind of
shrouded in mystery. Musk publicly announced his departure from Open A I in 2018, setting potential conflicts of interest as Tesla began to focus more heavily on A I. And a report from Semaphore in March claimed that Musk had offered to lead open A I, subsequently leaving when his
proposal was rejected. Additionally, the Financial Times reported in April the disagreements with the board members and staff over a I safety issues contributed to Musk's departure, and ever since leaving open a I, Musk has been openly critical of the company's shift in direction. In an interview with Tucker Carlson on Fox News in April, he
remarked. They are now closed source and they are obviously for profit and closely allied with Microsoft. Now Microsoft and Open AI Share a multibillion dollar partnership that offers Open AI. Edit this out Microsoft and Open AI Share a multibillion dollar partnership that offers Open AI access to Microsoft's cloud computing resources in return for the use of Open Ai's AI systems to enhance Microsoft's products.
Now in the same interview, Musk expressed his concern about A I models being trained to be, quote, politically correct and pledged to create a truth GPTA maximum truth seeking a I And his belief in an A I's capability to seek truth underlines his approach to a I safety, a factor that has drawn criticisms from experts and researchers, including ex A I advisor Hendrix. Now concerns are mounting that adding other resource intensive companies to the A I ecosystem
could ignite a competitive rush to develop more powerful A I systems undermining and ferds to ensure their safety. Now echoing these concerns, though, Hendrix wrote in April that the emergence of a new major A I development will likely increase competitive pressures, leading to sacrifices in the tradeoff between safety and competitiveness.
However, in a recent Twitter discussion with Congressman Ro Khanna and Mike Gallagher must defended his approach, stating that a maximally curious a I one that strives to understand the whole universe would inherently be prohumanity, as humanity is inherently more interesting than its absence. Jess Whittlestone, head of a I policy at the Center for Longterm Resilience, which is a UK based think tank, was less optimistic about Musk's approach.
Terming it as pretty unorthodox and quite naive. Will Stone question the clarity and feasibility of an A I being maximally curious and dismiss the presumption that such an A I would naturally be prohuman. Thanks so much for listening to the show today. I do appreciate your time and I appreciate you spending it here with me. If you could take a second and hit they subscribe or follow button on whatever podcast platform that you're on right now, I'd greatly appreciate it. Thanks so much.
Take care of yourselves and each other. And I'll see you in the next one.