In 2017, you said the third world war will be a war with or about AI. Now we have a very conventional war. Can AI help?
One of the reasons for World War three would be if one country has or one place has advanced AI technology and the other powers want it, or they're worried about some country gaining advanced AI that would would give them a strong advantage in war, then they may be tempted to attack before the country that is developing the strong AI has that, for use in in weapons technology.
Russia said that they are going to stop the delivery of rocket engines. Is that for SpaceX a threat or an opportunity?
Well, SpaceX, we design and manufacture our own rocket engines. So we do not rely on any Russian components at all. Will affect For
for The United States Of America, it is dangerous or
Well, the Boeing and Lockheed have historically relied on the Russian RD one eighty engine, which I should say, to be fair, is a great engine. They are hoping to move away from that in the future with engines from Blue Origin, but those engines are not yet ready for flight. There is also the Antares vehicle which is the RD one eighty one, I believe. They will not be able to fly as a result.
With all your knowledge and products, services, you are almost a strategic weapon in modern warfare. How do you see your role in that context? Ukraine shows that there are opportunities that you're needed.
Well, certainly hope that SpaceX and Tesla do not are not forced to develop any kind of weapons technology. Obviously, we would only do such a thing if it was the last resort.
I mean it more in the metaphorical sense. Not that you produce weapons, but that you are that your knowledge can be used in order to make a difference in conventional warfare or in the warfare of the future, which is AI.
I think I can be helpful in conflicts. Yeah. I mean, I try to take the set of actions that are most likely to improve the probability that the future will be good. And so obviously sometimes I make mistakes in this regard, so it's not like I always get it right, but I aspire to get it right. And so whatever, you know, I think is most likely to ensure that the future is good for, you know, all of humanity, that that's does the actions that I will take. Yeah.
A couple of months ago, we had an exchange about Ernst Junger's famous
Oh, yeah. Book.
Of Steel. Yep. You were very fascinated by that book which has been published roughly a hundred years ago Yeah. About Jung's experiences in the First World War. Why is why is that book so important for you?
Well, I I read a lot of books, and I and I and for some reason I'm like fascinated by war and and history in general. I I thought Jung's book was, you know, an excellent firsthand account of World War one. And I mean, it's certainly, I think a lesson taken from that book is we don't ever want to do that again.
That's that's interesting that you're saying that because there's a big controversy around that book and some people are saying this is glorifying war.
Yeah. It's definitely not.
And other people are saying it is a warning for not having a war ever again. So you're clearly in the second camp.
Well, I think like the those who are don't like Jung's book are basically, you know, just because it's not 100% anti war in the most extreme way then that therefore, it's bad.
No. It's like a report. It's just neither Yeah.
He's just saying negative.
It's just describing what happened in a terrible way.
Yes. I mean, nobody's reading nobody's reading that book and say, wanna be do that. I wanna do that. Sounds I mean, he makes it very clear. It's a terrible situation. But but he but he also said like it's it's not like it's it's not like there's no good that comes out of even a terrible There's some good that comes out of it, but it's overwhelmingly bad. So it's just it's just really interesting to to read about history. I mean, learn the lessons of history such that we do not, repeat the the mistakes of the past. Well,
we know that saying history doesn't repeat, but it rhymes, and we see it these days. Back to the bigger strategic, picture. I mean, the the the terrible actions of Putin are, to a certain degree, also a result of strategic mistakes that Europe, particularly Germany, has made. The dropout of nuclear energy.
Actually, can I just say I think it's very important that Germany not shut down its nuclear power stations? I think this was extremely crazy.
I just wanted to ask a question on that because if we if we really wanna reduce Putin's power and Europeans and Germany's dependence on Russian energy, this works only through decarbonization. So my question to you is should we have even more nuclear energy in order to get faster independent from Putin and to resolve the climate issues.
I wanna be super clear. My opinion, Germany should not only not shut down the nuclear power plants, it should reopen the ones that shut down. And those are those are the fastest ones to restart. It's crazy to shut down nuclear power plants. Now, especially like if you're in a place where there's not natural disasters, you know. So like if you're maybe somewhere where there's severe earthquakes or tsunamis or something like that, it's more, you know, of a question mark as to I mean, maybe you you know, but if if there's not, like, massive natural disaster risk, which Germany does not have, then there's really no danger with the nuclear power plants.
And you don't see any, safer alternatives that could have a similar effect? So solar and wind is not going to do it. Do have any other ideas in mind about future energy policy?
I I think long term, most of civilization's energy is gonna come from solar, and then you you need to store it with a battery because obviously the sun only shines during the day and sometimes it's very cloudy. So you need solar batteries is is is will be the main long term way that civilization is powered. But between now and then, we we need to maintain nuclear. I I can't emphasize enough. Please do not shut down the nuclear power plants, and please reopen the ones that have been shut. This is total madness to shut them down. I wanna be clear. Total madness.
Let's see whether your very clear words are heard in Germany.
I'm trying to use the strongest words.
Yeah.
I would say this is a national security risk. It's not like like, listen, playtime is over. Okay? Obviously, playtime is over. So it's a national security it's a national security risk to shut these things down.
It's another bitter lesson of that war. It is not only an issue with regard to climate. It is Yeah. Very much an issue.
It's a national security risk and it's a climate issue for for, replacing I think people don't understand like, you know, coal power plants because of their emissions they cause a certain number of deaths every year, far more dangerous than nuclear power plants.
Do you have any other, let's say unconventional ideas to deal with the challenge of climate change? Is it possible through the reduction of consumption and through new forms of energy to resolve it completely without China being completely aligned? Or should we have a different way to look at it? Some people are saying perhaps instead of just trying to avoid a warmer climate, we should focus on how to live with a warmer climate and adapt to that. Is that an option?
I think we just want to take the set of actions that accelerate the transition to a sustainable energy economy. And that sustainable energy economy is going to be, like I said, primarily solar with wind. You absolutely need stationary storage batteries because of the intermittency of solar and wind. And then there will also be hydroelectric, geothermal, nuclear. These are all fine. And the but we want to, you know, just move as quickly as we can to a a sort of a solar electric economy. So, you know, sometimes people say, oh, well, it's cloudy or something. You know, what about solar? And it's like, do plants grow? They're a solar powered chemical reaction. If plants grow, you have solar power, obviously. How do you think they grow? I think we just want to try to move there as quickly as possible. And I do wanna emphasize that while I think solar will be the the main source of energy, it it it won't be everything. It's it will like I said, there'll be nuclear, hydroelectric, geothermal, wind. And and the faster we get there, the better for the world. It's really we're we're kind of running this climate experiment, but it's an experiment where we know that that's pointless because we know ultimately we will run out of coal oil and gas. This is a it's not going to last forever. And so we have to transition to something that is long term in any case because we will run out of hydrocarbons to burn. So then let's just not run the experiment. But I'm much less of a climate alarmist than people might think. Although, of course, my words are taken, you know, sometimes always amplified. But
How is it going to look like in fifteen years? Better than today? Much better than today?
From a sustainable energy standpoint? Much better. Yeah. Much better.
So your bet is we are going to solve the climate issue?
Yes. Absolutely. We will solve the climate issue. It's just a question of when. And and I'd say, like, the fundamental good of Tesla should be thought of as by how many years did Tesla accelerate the sustainable energy revolution. That's the fundamental historic good of Tesla. Not whether it would occur. It would occur anyway. But by how many years did can Tesla accelerate that transition?
You once told me about a population that the decrease of reproduction rate, birth rate, is one of the most underestimated problems of our times.
Yes.
Can you explain?
Yeah. So most people in the world are operating under the false impression that that there are too many people. This is not true. Earth could maintain a population many times at the current level. And the birth rate has been dropping like crazy. So the and and unfortunately, like, have these, like, ridiculous population estimates from the UN that need to be updated because they're just don't make any sense. Really, you can just look and say, what was the birth rate last year, how many kids were born, multiply that by the life expectancy, and say okay that's how many people will be alive, you know, in the future. And then say is the trend for birth rate positive or negative? It's negative. So that's the best case unless something changes with the birth rate. I mean you can look at take take Japan for example. I think I'm just going off memory here, but I think the population is roughly 110,000,000. But last year, if you take the number of children born times the life expectancy, which is 85, it's very impressive life expectancy, then Japan would have I think around 68,000,000 people, roughly half of the current population. That does not tell the full story because those that you would have an upside down demographic permit. You already have an upside down demographic permit where, you know, a lot of old people, very few young people. And, you know, so how is this that upside down demographic permit is unstable?
Let's also hear why we need alternatives. You have recently presented Optimus and human you shared great expectations what that could do for the world. Yeah. Could you explain a little bit your motivation? I assume it's not only about the first visit to Mars that could be done by Optimus. It is more than that, a game changer in AI. Could you share a little bit your your vision?
Yeah. I mean, with respect to AI and robotics, I always approach these things with some trepidation because I certainly do not want to be play a hand in anything that could potentially be harmful to humanity. Now humanoid robots, they're clearly happening. I mean, you look at, like, Boston Dynamics, they their demonstrations are better every year. So there will be humanoid robots. I mean, the rate of advancement of AI is very rapid. Even if Tesla stopped doing AI that I think we're still on a track to develop artificial general intelligence, meaning intelligence smarter than the smartest human.
Concretely, Optimus is going to be used in Tesla factories. That's one of the use cases. But what is the broader use case beyond Tesla?
Yeah. I mean, Optimus is a general purpose sort of worker droid. So the initial roles for Optimus would be in work that is repetitive, boring, dangerous, that kind of thing. Basically, work that people don't want to do unless they're paid to do it.
Why has Optimus two legs? Just because it looks like a human being or is it more practical? I thought four legs are better.
Four legs good, two legs bad. It reminds me of oil. Humanity has designed the world to interact with a bipedal humanoid with two arms and, you know, 10 fingers. So if you want to have a robot fit in and be able to do things that humans can do, it must be of roughly the same size and shape and capability.
The prototype is going to be ready by the end of this year. When is it a product that can be mass marketed?
Mass produced, that's the hard part. I don't know. I think we'll have something pretty good at the prototype level this year. And it might be ready for at least moderate volume production, you know, towards the end of next year.
Do you think that Optimus is going to play a role in our daily life helping us in the household and things like that?
I think it probably would. Yeah. I think so. It's just like I said, general purpose humanoid, yeah. So You said the
potential is bigger than the than the potential of Tesla. If that's true
For cars, yeah.
Then it must be really a mass market product.
Yeah. Sure. Well, I mean, say like what is an economy? Like what's people get confused. Sometimes they think an economy is money. Money is a database for exchange of goods and services and for time shifting the exchange of goods and services. That's it's a is it money is a database. Money doesn't have power in and of itself. Like, can run the thought experiment of you're you're trapped on a, you know, a remote island, a shipwrecked on an island, and you've got a trillion dollars in a Swiss bank account. It's worthless. You'd rather have a can of soup. So, you know, all the Bitcoin in the world, and you're still gonna starve. So the actual economy is goods and services. So then what limits the output of goods and services? The limiter is labor. Even capital is distilled labor. So the limiting factor for the economy is labor. And so if you address the limiting factor for the economy, then it's not clear that an economy in a traditional sense has any meaning anymore because you have no constraint on on goods and services. The only the only things that we'll be missing are things that have artificial scarcity. So that way we decide to make it scarce, like a particular piece of art or a particular, you know, home in this exact location or something like that, you know. But there will be no shortage of goods and services.
But in a way, Optimus is also an answer to the problem of drop in birth rates. If we have not enough human people, we need more bots.
For Optimus Optimus will be helpful with respect to dropping birth rates. But I mean, like I said, you have to say, like, if these things continue, then what happens? Humanity dies out? Is that what we want?
Or step by step replaced by artificial intelligence human beings that Neuralink is empowering?
Well, yeah, I mean Neuralink in the short term Neuralink is just about solving you know, brain injuries and spinal injuries and that kind of thing. So to be clear, for many years Neuralink's products will just be helpful to someone who has lost the use of their arms or arms and legs or who has just a traumatic brain injury of some kind. That's what Neuralink will be useful for for many years.
But in our last conversation you said that Neuralink is among all your projects for you the most important one. Is that still true?
I know. I said it could be. I wouldn't say for sure it is the most important, but it could be the most important in that there is a long term mitigation to artificial intelligence, which is that we could effectively merge with artificial intelligence by improving the speed of interaction between our cortex and our tertiary layer, which is already silicon. We're basically we're already a sort of a three level intelligence creature. The base level is the limbic system, the sort of animal brain or reptile brain essentially. The sort of fundamental, you know, yeah, the animal or reptile brain. And then there's the cortex, which the cortex by the way is largely in service to the the reptile brain.
Imagine that one day we would be able to download our human brain capacity into a optimus?
Yes. I think that is I'm not saying this is I think it is possible I think to do that. It is possible.
Which would be a different way of eternal life because we would also download our personalities into a bot.
Yes. We download the things that we believe make ourselves unique. Now, course, if you're not in a body anymore, there's definitely going to be some difference there, you know. But as far as preserving our memories, personality if you will, I think we could do that.
The moment of singularity that Ray Kurzweil has I think predicted for '25 is approaching fast. Do you think the timeline is still realistic?
Well, I don't I I see this as not I used to I'm not sure this is a singularity meaning, I'm not sure this is a very sharp boundary. I mean, already there's there's so much compute that we outsource. Know, our memories are stored in our phones and computers with the pictures and video. You know, computers and and phones amplify our ability to communicate, enabling us to do magic things that would have been considered magical and had had you burned at the stake in, you know, maybe three hundred years ago. And, you know, you you could have two people to have a a video call basically for free from two parts of the world, you know, on opposite sides of the world. It's amazing. So we've already amplified our sort of human brains massively with computers. And I think an interesting ratio to roughly calculate would be the amount of compute that is digital divided by the amount of compute that is biological. And how does that ratio change over time? And with the so much digital compute happening so fast that that ratio is increasing rapidly.
Talking about speed, you have the vision that one day Starship could be able to get from A to B in thirty minutes all around the globe. Is that correct? And if so, what would the time frame for this vision? It's like a global super taxi. You can just go from
I mean it's
San Francisco to Nairobi.
Yeah. I mean, the landing the landing will be allowed. So you'd wanna probably be connecting, you know, cities that are next to oceans or seas such that you can land maybe, I don't know, far enough offshore that the landing noise is not disturbing to people.
But coast to coast that would be a realistic one. Absolutely.
Yeah. Yeah. It's like an ICBM, but change the option package from nuclear to landing. Delete the nuke, add landing.
Elon, you have solved so many problems of mankind and presented so many solutions. I'm surprised that one topic seems not to be too fascinating for you and that is the project of longevity and increased lifespan significantly. Why are you not passionate about that? Well, you're not personally interested in living longer?
I mean, I don't I don't think we should try to have people live for a very long time, for a very long time. It would cause ossification of society because the truth is most people don't change their mind, they just die. And so if they don't die, they will be be stuck with old ideas and they won't society won't advance. I think we already have quite a serious issue with the gerontocracy, where the the leaders of so many countries are extremely old. Look, I mean, The US, it's, you know, very very ancient leadership. And it's just impossible to stay in touch with the the people if you are, you know, at the you know, if you're if you're like many generations older than them. And the founders in The US, they put minimum ages for political office, but they did not put maximum ages because they did not expect that people will be living so long, but they should have. Because you really want, in order for a democracy to function well, the leaders must be reasonably in touch with the bulk of the population. And if you're too young or too old, it's you can't say that you would be in touch.
Is there a kind of ideal age, and how old would you like to get?
Well, think for political leadership I think you want to be, I don't know, within ideally within ten or at least twenty years of the average age of the population. This doesn't sound too crazy. So, you know, for me, I don't know. I mean, I certainly would like to maintain health for a longer period of time, But I'm not afraid of dying. I think it will come as a relief.
Although you may not be able to see the vision of SpaceX come true in your life?
Well, I'd like to live long enough to see that.
Being at a net worth of 230,000,000,000 roughly, being perceived as the richest person on earth.
Well, I think Putin is significantly richer than me.
You really do, yeah?
Yes. Well, I I mean, I can't go invade countries and stuff. I I believe I mean, there's like some old quote that from was it Crassus or that you're not really rich unless you can afford a legion?
Do you know John Law?
I don't know.
John Law used to be the richest person on earth three hundred years ago.
Okay.
He was a poker player, a gambler, on the farm. He was the biggest art collector on earth, so a lot of superlatives.
Wow.
In the end, he went bankrupt.
What? That's pretty far to fall.
Did you ever thought about that option that something could go wrong and that you could one day lose everything?
I mean, there's been many times where I expected to lose everything. Not, you know, I mean, who starts a car company and a rocket company expecting them to succeed? Certainly not me. I thought they both had less than a 10% chance of success. And frankly, I wasn't wrong, in that in 2008, we had the third failure of SpaceX. And if the fourth launch had failed, SpaceX would be dead in 2008. We didn't have no money for a fifth launch. And for Tesla, were Tesla's got got been on the verge of bankruptcy many times. And we we closed the last you know, the financing round in 2008 because remember at the 2008, General Motors and Chrysler were going bankrupt and Ford was almost bankrupt. So imagine trying to raise money for electric car startup while General Motors is going bankrupt. And people were angry that I even asked. So but we were able to just barely raise enough money to squeak by, and close the financing round for Tesla on the last hour of the last day that it was possible in Christmas Eve two thousand and eight. And if we had not closed that financing round then, it would've gone bankrupt two days after Christmas.
So you know what you're talking about. Yes. This John Law Like, I
go bankrupt, fine. Whatever. I don't care.
John Law got famous with a sentence, the economy is me.
Is this guy French or English? Spanish, she said. Yeah. But
worked in France and his main language then was France. So, the question is, do you see any danger that one day not only big platforms like Google or Facebook could face much more rigid regulation, but that Elon Musk could be regulated because of
Actually, as it is, you know, SpaceX and Tesla are regulated
No. But mean that that that there could be a discussion that it's just too much Like in too many areas.
I I have, like, I have too much power personally or something?
Well, I mean, if you if you build in many sectors that are absolutely crucial to society, very dominantly See
you on Mars, suckers. Just kidding. That's
the option then.
Yeah. Okay. So
one way one way to to avoid that is to be a good citizen, and you are and you have your own foundation. Could you tell us a little bit about your projects, what your foundation is going to do in the future, what your priorities are to donate money and to improve the world beyond your business activities?
Yeah. I mean, I do want to emphasize that SpaceX and Tesla fundamentally intended to improve the probability that the future is good. So this will do more they will do more than anything I do from a charitable standpoint, in terms of of usefulness to humanity. I mean, Tesla is about accelerating sustainable energy. Obviously, that's important. SpaceX is about, making life multi planetary and, of course, providing a global Internet through Starlink. These are fundamental goods that the good of those companies will far exceed anything that, I do from a charitable standpoint. And I have to say it is very difficult to give away money effectively, if you care about the money actually doing good and not merely the perception of doing good.
But do you see any concrete project that you would like to focus on, like for example food supply, starvation as a big topic or anything else that comes to your mind for your foundation activities?
Well, you know, like I said, it's a big struggle to give away money effectively.
Yeah.
If you care about, like I said, if you care about the reality of doing good and not the perception of doing good, then it is very hard to give away money effectively. And I care about the reality. Perception would be damned. So there's, you know, obviously, environmental causes. There's education, especially science and engineering education, pediatric health care. Know, hunger these days is more of a political and logistics problem than it is not having enough food. There's a lot of food. In fact, in The US and many, many countries, the issue is more obesity than it is hunger. But So always, like, I'm looking for ways to give away money that are effective. Like, what do you think I should do?
You know what heroes of, underrated heroes are the people who are doing a service in hospitals helping elderly people. And I think they don't have a lobby. Okay. So I think to do something for them because we all need them if we are in trouble.
Sure.
Think about it. If you Google Elon Musk, think you have 156,000,000 search results.
Really?
76,000,000 Twitter followers. You're definitely one of the most popular people on earth. Is popularity a pleasure or a liability for you?
Well, makes it difficult to go buy a coffee at the corner store, that's for sure. So it's hard to go around places, you know. I used to be able to just, you know, go to the store or walk down the street, and now it's quite difficult to do that.
It reminds me a bit of the former chancellor of Germany, Helmut Kohl, who once told me, you cannot imagine how terrible it is to go to a restaurant and everybody recognizes you, comes to your table, asks you for an autograph. That's terrible. There is only one thing in life that is worse if nobody comes to your table anymore.
I suppose I really it's hard for me to go to a restaurant. So and if I do, I just try to find a corner table that's kind of dimly lit or something where I can sort of stay out of the way.
But you cannot turn around. Is there anything that you most urgently wanna achieve?
Well, I mean, the whole I mean, it's the in in the you know, the the pressing items in the short term are com completing full self driving so that we have full self driving operating at a substantially safer level than humans. Basically, it's it's it's it comes down to solving the the problem of real world AI. That's that consumes a lot of my mind. And then, getting Starship to work, not just to get to orbit, but to achieve full and rapid reusability, which is really the holy grail of rocketry that is necessary for humanity to become a multi planet species.
Is there anything that you would
I don't think those things might happen this year.
Is there anything that you really would like to achieve which you think is going to be impossible?
Impossible is a strong word, but
You don't like that word?
Well, it's just a strong word. I mean, I sort of approach things from a physics standpoint and the word impossible is, you know, more or less banned in physics. So I'm really worried about this birth rate thing. That's been troubling me for many years because I just don't see it turning around, you know? Every year it's worse. And I drive my friends crazy by
Perhaps that's a project for your foundation.
Sure.
Okay. You are a multi talented person. Is there any field
of total incompetence? I'm terrible at dancing.
Although you like techno music so much.
Yeah. But the nice thing about techno is you don't have to be able to dance very well. You can just jump around, basically.
Walter Isaacson is planning a biography, and he has written a biography on Einstein, on Steve Jobs, on Benjamin Franklin, and Leonardo da Vinci among the four. With whom would you like to meet and have a glass of wine? Well, I mean,
we've been honored to meet any of them for even for a minute. I think Frank think Ben Franklin would be the most fun at dinner.
And who is the one where you would say I'm closest to him? Would it be Leonardo da Vinci?
I think I'm a
You are a Renaissance
man. Pretty different from all those people, you know, everyone there. It might actually be Ben Franklin, frankly. You know, he he did a lot of science and engineering stuff. I I don't know. But, you know, it's funny. Da Vinci, thought of himself first and foremost as an engineer. And in in his, like, application like, when he applied for, you know, for his position, you know, for that that that led him that enabled him to create a lot of the art. His application was all all about his engineering stuff, and then at the end and also I do some art. It was just funny that that that Da he Vinci really thought of himself as an engineer. And, you know, I mean, for the time he was pretty impressive.
The German author Thomas Mann once said, the purpose of life to be an engineer in the interest of progress of mankind. Sure. Is that a good definition for your own ambitions?
Yeah. Think that is a good definition.
Is freedom for you the most important value of the society?
No. Think not being dead is. I mean like what would that do
with the society if everybody just cares about that?
No. I'm just saying there's a Maslow's hierarchy, you know, of of like Okay. You know, these days we you know, back in the old days, I mean, a good year would be a year where not that many people died of hunger, you know, plague, not that many people froze to death, and not that many people were killed by the neighboring tribe. Back in the the old days that if it was like, hey, we only lost 5% last year. That was great. You know? Now now now those things are really, you know, not not concerns anywhere near the level of what they would be in the past.
What did COVID do to the freedom to freedom in our society?
Well, I think freedom took what was severely restricted with with with COVID.
Do you think it's a long term effect? Do do you think we are going back to old norms?
Well, the jury's out on that front. You know?
Are you worried?
Yeah. I think the the I think I think we should roll back, government power, that was massively increased in the COVID times. And I think we're at the at this point, the tail end of it, or it's no longer, you know, a major concern. And so we need to actively roll back the powers of government that were created during COVID.
You once said on Mars, if there's human life, there should be direct democracy.
Yes. I I think direct democracy is less susceptible to corruption than representative democracy. I mean, the other recommendations that I'd like I'd say, like, and any laws need to be short enough that that everyone can read them as well. And and there should be some it should be easier to get rid of a law than make one.
Do you see any positive effects in the COVID pandemic?
I think there are many many sort of linings. The advancement of synthetic RNA was accelerated significantly because of COVID.
And it's going to help with cancer, allergies, bacteria diseases. Yes.
Mean synthetic RNA is a revolution in medicine that most people are not aware of just how much of a revolution that is. I would say this is like medicine going from analog to digital.
And that could be the big accelerator here, like during the plague, which also was an accelerator of progress in society and medical progress big times.
Yes. It's actually interesting. You know, English was was suppressed in England for quite a long time because William the Conqueror was Norman French. I mean, so it wasn't even French French. Was like a different version of French. Yeah. But that was the official language, and the courts were only in French for hundreds of years in England. If wanted to go to court, had to you had to either be able to speak Norman French or hire someone who could. And then actually the plague got so bad that so many lawyers died in the plague that they didn't have enough people who could speak French, for the courts. So they said, we have to have the courts in English because there aren't enough people alive who can speak no French.
So indirectly, the plague was a trigger of democratization of society?
I mean, yeah. I mean, it was it it actually did, I think, for society as a whole improved things, at least at least based on my observation of things in England, the, people were actually able to speak English in courts, because they had no other choice. And and a lot of other things were improved. There was a labor shortage, because of the plague, and so, that that gave put a lot more power in in the hands of laborers, so and and gave them more freedom of action.
Ilan, I think we have to come to an end, but just a couple of very brief questions. What is your biggest fear?
Well, I think there's you have to say, like, what are the existential threats that humanity faces? We spent a lot of time talking about the birth rate thing, that that might be the biggest single threat to the future of human civilization. Then there's, you know, artificial intelligence gone wrong is a big concern. I think religious extremism is a concern. Yeah.
What is your biggest hope?
My biggest hope is that humanity creates a self sustaining city on Mars.
You said that you cannot be and don't want to be alone. I very much share that feeling.
Yeah. Where does it come from? I think it's just a natural human reaction. I mean most people A
lot of people are happy if they are alone.
I don't I I really that's I think most people are not happy being alone.
Do you do would you are you do you feel lonely?
I mean, there are times when I feel lonely. Yes. But I mean, I think it's it's pretty basic. Like, if I'm, say, working on the Starship rocket, down at, you know, South Texas, and I'm just staying in my little house by myself, especially if I get my dog. You know, if my dog is not with me, then I feel quite lonely because I'm just in a little house by myself with not even a dog.
Last question. You have once said, if I'm not in love, I cannot be happy. Are you happy at the moment?
I think there's degrees of love. But certainly for one to be fully happy, I think you have to be happy in work and happy in love. So I suppose I'm medium happy. There are degrees of happiness.
Can love for projects, for work, compensate love among people?
I think love of work, in my experience, could at best make one halfway happy.
Perhaps that's your biggest hope, to be really in love.
I have been in the past. I I try to be as literal as literal as possible. I I would be happy if humanity has a self sustaining city on Mars because then the probable lifespan of humanity is much greater. You know, I think we really just got this, you know, consciousness, like this little candle of consciousness, like a like a little small light in the void, and we don't want that small candle in a vast darkness to be put out.
Thank you very much, Ehren, for that conversation.
Alright. Thank you.
No messages found