Explain what neuralink is and what the goal of it is. We put a chip in your brain to control your mind. Yeah, okay, all right, concerns, Yeah, jump right in, step right up, who wants one? So neuralink you'll be able to see neural link coming from a very long distance because any device that you implanted in a human is you have to go through a million, so many tests. It moves very slowly. You just do a few people at a time and then you go to extreme lengths
to prove safety. You have to go through the FDA approvals. Like we're not trying to side step any you know, regulatory approvals doing everything. You buy the book and with maximum we're really actually we're going far beyond what the requirements are of the FDA from a safety standpoint, and the initial devices will really just be pretty basic. It'll be about restoring functionality to people who've lost
their connection between their their brain and their body. So you can imagine like if say Stephen Hawking could talk communicate as fast as somebody with a fully functioning body, that'll be amazing. So that's like the what we're trying to do that that's our first application is to restore functionality to quatter fleix, tetraplegics and people who have just for whatever reason, no longer have a connection between or
if a limited connection between their their their their brain and their body. And then the second application would be restoration of eyesight. So if somebody's gone completely blind, maybe even just lost the optic nerve, you can actually still directly assimilate the neurons in the visual part of the cortex, so you can give direct vision to the brain. In fact, you could actually depending upon what
cameras you use, you can actually see in different wavelengths. Okay, you know, like Jory LaForce from like you know, because I have that, Like I actually watched like an episode of Start Take the Next Generation with special effects compared to what we're used to, like you know, not that great, but he's got like the wrap round you know, glasses, and you can see in different wavelengths, so you can see like ultra violet, infrared and that kind of thing. So you can actually do that. You could
say, like you could see in radar if you want. And what's the what's the long term what's the long term goal for it? Because I think myself and others I think the first part is the first part sounds sounds fine, sounds yeah, that's like card argue with yeah yeah. But long term, I think, I mean, the concern that people have is is this just leading us into this dystopian transhumanist future? Where where does it go?
What are the what are the ethical boundaries of it? Well, I mean the thing I wanted to empasize is that it's not going to like sort of pounce on us overnight. You'll see it coming. It's going to be very slow. In fact, I really think that artificial general intelligence or digital superintelligence is likely to arrive before we have really advanced in your links at least that's where the trend is right now. But ultimately the idea would be to achieve
symbiosis between our biological mind and our kind of digital mind. So we're already kind of a cyborg. If you think of like your phone and your computers as an extension of yourself. In fact, like if you leave your phone behind, it's like you have missing limbs syndrome. You're like, where do it go? You know, And so the phone is kind of an extension of ourselves, like computer is. The various applications that we use are an
extention of self. So we are already a cyborg. It's just that the interfaces with our eyes and our fingers and and that that interface especially output. The rate at which we can type words into a phone or a computer just it's very slow. Our input is much better because with the data rate from vision is you know, I don't know, many thousands of times maybe a million times better than the rate of which we can output. So input is
like maybe roughly a million times better than output. And so so what what a neural device can do is improve that bandwidth, allow allow you to be sort of much more symbiotic with your the AI extension of yourself. So you can think of like like a human brain really is could be augubly divided into two parts. One is kind of like the primitive brain, the reptile brain it's sometimes called, you know, it's like got a sort of basic instinct.
And then we've got the cortex, like the higher level thinking, planning and that kind of thing. The two operate symbiotically. So I haven't yet met anyone who wants to delete their olympic system or deleat their cortex. Everyone's quite happy having both they're like, I like that the way there is,
you know, but your cortex is way smarter than your Olympic system. So but the irony is that even though the cortex is way smarter than the Limbic system, most of what it's doing, you're trying to make the Olympic system happy. It's like Limbic systems hunky hungry. Okay, let's get some food. The Olympic system is horny. Okay, let's you know, have sex or whatever. See, I mean the sheer amount of of of effort, the you know, the cortexes have of all the humans have put into trying
to get laid is insane. It's got to keep the species gone. Yeah, but it's not even with even if you know, it's not for appropriate like the like the Limbic system is. It's it's really like too simple to understand that, like sex does not resulting in procreation because for almost all of human existence that it did. Both control is a very recent thing. So
the Limbic system is like trying to insent procreation. And but but now we can effectively hack Thelympic system by doing procreation, but by having sex without a procreation. So which is I guess maybe part of the issue with you know, why do we have more kids is like in the past, that would just happened because you know, in order to make the limbic system happy, you'd have sex. You didn't have both control, so you pop out some
goods. Yes, So that's that's how it used to be. So so so so even though you've got cortex that's way smarter than the limbic system, the cortex is still basically just trying to make the limbic system happy. And and then if you think of like the computers as a sort of a third layer, the AI is a third layer. It's not necessarily the case that
the AI would be acting contrary to our interests. I think if it's closely linked with a biological intelligence, I think it could actually be just again trying to make the cortex happy, which is trying to make the limit system happy. So I think we'll put even more computing power to try to get laid. Basically, now the AI is going to help you get laid. I
think. I think what it is that that concerns people about it number one, you know number one being new, But I think the main thing is is the the fact that this is something that's like inside inside your body. Right, I think that the idea of putting a chip ins the idea of someone putting a chip in my brain. I just have a bit, I have a visceral. No, I have I have a very an optional thing. I mean it's going to you know, would it would it be the
long term? I mean, I hope so I think it should be optional too bizarre if it was not. No, I think it's kind of like kind What was the reason I ask? Is because smartphones right now are sort of optional. But if you don't have a smartphone the way everything is sort of designed around society, you, yes, you cannot have a smartphone, but it's a massive hindrance and disadvantage in many ways. True, a smartphone is almost essentral and a mout in society to do things. Yeah, so
could a neuralink end up in that same sort of place. It's possible, But I'm just saying if it does, it's it's it's many decades from now, so it's not like, you know, it's not today's problem. Yeah, I'd worry about more about digital superintelligence. I'd worry about let's try to avoid world War three, let's sure we're at least having enough kids to sustain our population, you know, basic stuff like that. Yeah, what's your
greatest concern with artificial intelligence? Because I know that you have worked with it, but also I know it's something that you personally have massive concerns about as well, which you've voiced in this podcast and elsewhere. Yeah. I think that actually the most likely outcome for artificial intelligence is that it is good. That it will improve our lives most likely, but there's some chance that it will not, And I think we just need to be cognizant of that and
understand that it's a powerful technology. It's a double edged sword, and we need to put a lot of effort into ensuring that we have a good AI outcome and not a bad one. What does a good one look like? Well, if I'd recommend people to read the in Banks books, the culture books, that's the best representation of a positive AI human future that I've seen. Okay, so that's my recommendation. I mean it effectively a I I
think it will massively enhance human ability. It's like just a massive amplifier of human ability, just like the computer was. So really is just a question of like does does it the some risk that it doesn't merely amplify human activity, but it starts basically just being in charge. And you know there's some risk at me view humanity negatively and decide that we're a blied on the earth.
Like like I think, like a very dangerous thing would be if if the if the sort of human extinctionist philosophy somehow got into AI, that would be bad. Like that guy that was part page in The York Times saying, you know, the eight billion people on Earth, we don't want him coding it. We don't want him coding you. Yeah, nice to say what. And there's quite a few people in the cicular words who have that
either explicit or implicit extinctionis sphere. Yes, whether if your humanity is a blight on the face the Yeah, there's a lot of anti natalists in the in the world and people who actually anti human yes, yes, like you said, people who don't have the pride in being human, right, these people guilty or even say that that's a speciesism you know that's yeah. Yeah, I mean I'm a human supremacist. I'll be open about that one. Yeah. I mean I think we've got to fight for team Human, Like,
if we don't fight for as humans, who who will? Yeah? I mean if the Earth exists and humans do not, then it's like we're saving the planet for who at that point. Yeah. What do you think about AI replacing jobs though, because that's a that's a big concern. Even if AI doesn't sort of go rogue and start doing something directly horrible, I think a lot of people's concerns is just, hey, what about everyone's jobs.
I will certainly be very disruptive because jobs will be different. So now I think the rate of change, the rate the change coursed by AI is it's going to be pretty radical, so that there will you know, a lot of jobs that are that currently exist won't exist in the future. But
I think there will be new jobs. And I do think like in a benign AI scenario, we will really have an age of abundance the I think really goods and services unless they are artificially made scarce, like like it's specialized artwork, or you want that particular house in that neighborhood, like it has been artificial scarcity. But anything that has not made artificially scarce will be plentiful, as in a benign AI scenario, you'll be able to have any products
and services you want that anyone will. Is that not start to cause a whole new level of problems? Yeah, it does. It's like it's it's like, you know, there's there's some things which sound like like a a blessing but may in fact be a curse. Like I think you will live forever. It sounds like a blessing, it's actually a curse. You would not want to live forever. You don't know how long forever it is. And if you say, another potential curse is you can have anything you want
effortlessly. Are you sure you want that? Yeah? Does anything matter at that point? Yeah? And what about the value? I mean, I think a lot of the value of work isn't just getting money to buy things. It's the meaning, it's the purpose, it's knowing that you worked for
this thing. Right, It's different. It's different to get ten million dollars because someone just gave you ten million dollars, or you want a lottery versus you created a business and sold products and services that helped you to earn that money exactly. So it's like, how do we find meaning and relevance?
If you have an age of abundance where the computer you just ask for anything and get it, it is something we'll have struggle with that that'll that'll be I don't know, it's I think that's kind of most likely when we're headed is an age of abundance, but it will definitely cause some existential angst. What are you most optimistic about? In fact, if you just say, like, like for a neural link device, I mean, part of what I'm hoping is here in a benign AI scenario, like, how do we
even go along for the ride? How do we even understand the AI? Like if you've got some sort of you know, incredible intelligence unless we do sort of effectively have better symbiosis, increase the bandwidth to our the AI extension of ourselves, effectively augment our human intelligence, and substantially we may not even be able to appreciate the wonders that will exist in the future.