A long conversation with Elon Musk about work, consciousness, family, money, AI and how the future might unfold

Yeah.

and

Sure. Why not?

Okay. Are we gonna be talking for a while?

Okay. Good. Sure. Migner? May I trouble you for a coffee?

Cappuccino, I guess.

Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Have coffee once usually in the mornings, you know.

Yeah. Pretty much.

No. I'm I'm I'm good.

Oh oh, stop. You're you're must have made me butt.

Yeah. I mean, look, on the Internet, I'm small, you know.

Well, I I so we have like about 600,000,000 monthly users. Although it it can spike up if there's if there's some major event in the world. It can get up to, I don't know, 800,000,000 or or or a billion if there's some major event in the world. Mhmm. So so so that there's, I don't know, 250 to 300,000,000 per week type of thing. It's it's a pretty decent number. It tends to be readers, you know Mhmm. People that read words. You know, so

Yeah. I mean, it it there's there's certainly a lot of video on on on the X system, but at this point increasing amounts of video. But I I think where where the X network is strongest is among people who who think who think a lot and read a lot. You know, so it's that's where it's gonna be strongest because we have words. And and, you know, so among among readers, writers, and thinkers, I think x is number one in the world.

Yeah. So I I do think most interaction is gonna be video in the future. Mhmm. Most interaction is gonna be real time video with AI. So real time video comprehension, real time video generation. That's gonna be most of the load. And that's how it is for most of the Internet right now. It's most of the Internet is video. Text is a pretty small percentage but the text tends to be higher value generally or more it's more densely compressed information Like yeah. But if you say like what is the most amount of bits generated and compute spent, it's certainly gonna be video.

Okay.

Yeah. Yeah. I think it was important. You know, felt like Twitter was heading in or had had gone in a direction that had sort of a more of a negative influence on the world. You know, it was it was I mean, of course, this depends on one's perspective. Some people will say, well, actually, they liked the way it was and now they don't like it. But the I think the fundamental thing was that Twitter was amplifying, I would say, fairly pretty far left by most people's standards in the world's ideology because of where it was based in San Francisco. So and then they actually suspended a lot of people on the right. So so from their perspective, even someone in the center would be would be far right. If you're if you're far left, anyone in the center is far right because you're it's just a political on the political spectrum, they're they're just as far left as you get in The United States and in San Francisco. So what what I've tried to do is just restore it to be balanced and and centrist. So there haven't been any left wing voices that have been suspended or, you know, banned or de amplified or anything like that. Now some of them have chosen to just go go somewhere else. But but at this point, it is the the the operating principle of the of the X system is to adhere to any country's laws, but not to put our thumb on the scale beyond the laws of a country.

Thank you.

Well, I mean, I I don't think that much about about social media, to be frank. I mean, I it's it's I can mostly just wanna have have something where there's a in the case of of X, kind of a global town square Mhmm. Where where people can say what they wanna say with words, pictures, video, where there's a secure messaging system. We've recently added the ability to to do audio and video calls.

So really trying to bring the the the world the world together into a collective consciousness. And that's I guess different from just saying like what is the most dopamine generating video stream that one could make? Which, you know, I think can be a little bit of brain rot frankly. You know, if you're just watching videos that just caused dopamine hits one after another but lack substance then I think those those are not great that's not a great way to spend time. But I do I do think that's actually what a lot of people are gonna wanna watch. So if you say like total Internet usage, it's gonna probably be optimizing for, you know, neurotransmitter generation. Like, it it there's somebody getting like a a kick out of it.

But it's it's it's it becomes like a drug type of thing. Right. So but I'm not really after my goal is not to do that. Guess I could do that if I wanted to but that's I I just wanna really have a global platform that brings together, like I said, like it's become becomes as close to sort of a collective consciousness of humanity as possible. And you know, and one of the things that we've introduced for example, is automatic translation. So so because I think it would be great to bring together what what people say in many different languages And but automatically translated for the recipient. So you have the collective consciousness not not just of of say people in a particular language group, but you have the thoughts of of people in, you know, every language group.

I I guess why is that important? I I guess it's you you could also say like like why you know, if you consider humans, like humans are composed of around 30 to 40,000,000,000,000 cells and there's trillions of synapses in your mind. But but but there's there's not the why of it, I mean I guess it's just so we can increase our understanding our our understand increase our our understanding of the the universe. So I I guess I I had this sort of question about what's the meaning of life, you know. Like why is anything important? You know, why are we here? What's the origin of the universe? Where what is the end? What are the questions that we don't even know to ask? And probably the questions we don't even know to ask are the most important ones. So I'm just trying to I guess understand what's going on. What is what is going on in this reality? Is is this is this reality? And where

Yeah. So I came to the conclusion that, which is somewhat in the Douglas Adams Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy School of Thought, which is

Yeah. You know, he's sort of Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is like a book on philosophy disguised as humor. Yeah. And the that's where you get the you know, Earth turns out to be this computer to understand to get to figure out the answer of the meaning of life. Mhmm. And it comes up with the answer 42. And but then, it's like, what the heck does 42 mean? Mhmm. And it turns out, well, actually the hard part is the question, not the answer. And for that you need a much bigger computer than Earth. That's and so basically what Doug and Savage was saying is that we we actually don't know how to frame the questions properly. And and so so I think by expanding the scope and scale of consciousness, we can better under understand what questions to ask about the answer that is the universe.

Have you

Yeah.

Well, I that's a particular kind of mob. I mean, they're they're sort of going there to see people kill each other, you know.

We don't we don't generally at this point, we don't, you know, go watch people kill each other.

Sports, I suppose. So people do sports without where teams attempt to defeat each other Mhmm. But mine minus the death. Right. So just going back to the consideration of a human. We all started out as one cell, but now we are over 30,000,000,000,000 cells. And but I think most people would like feel like they're one one body. Like, you know, usually your right hand's not fighting your left hand type of thing, you know. Mhmm. So to sort of cooperate. Your mind is, you know, just a vast number of neurons. But but most of the time, it doesn't feel like there's, you know, a trillion voices in your brain. Hopefully not. So so there there's there's clearly more that happens when you have trillions of cells working as a cellular collective than say one cell or a small, you know, small multicellular creature. There's there's clearly some something different that happens. Like you can't talk to a bacteria, you know. Yeah. It's very silent. They just sort of wiggle around and from their perspective, I don't know. I was sort of what is what is life like from the perspective of a of an amoeba, you know. But I know you can't talk to an amoeba, like they don't talk back. But you can talk to humans. So this is something obviously qualitatively fundamentally different for humans once you have a large number of cells and you know, sufficiently large brain type of thing. There's you now talk to humans. Mhmm. They they and they can say things, they can produce things. But bacteria are not gonna produce a spaceship, for example. But humans can. So I think there's something qualitatively different that also happens when there's a collection of humans. In fact in fact, safe to say that a single human cannot make a spaceship. I cannot make a spaceship by myself. But but with a collection of humans, we can make spaceships. So there's there's something obviously qualitatively different about a collection of humans. In fact, it would be impossible for me to learn all of the areas of expertise. There wouldn't be enough time in one lifetime Mhmm. To even learn all the things before I was dead. So so you really fundamentally have to have a collection of humans to make a rocket. Then I think there are probably some other scaling qualitative scaling things that happen when you have groups of humans and then if the quality of the interaction or the quality of the information flow is the the better it is, the more the human collective will achieve. And I'm I like to say, I'm just curious about the nature of the universe. And and I think if we it's safe to say, like, if if we increase the scope and scale of consciousness, we're much more likely to understand the nature of the universe than if we produce it.

Right.

What do you mean? Yeah. Mean, a lot of people have spiritual feelings. Right. And and I wouldn't try to deny that those spiritual feel spiritual feelings are real to them. But it's it's it doesn't entirely translate. I can't just because somebody else has a spiritual feeling doesn't mean that I would have that spiritual feeling. So you know, I I tend to be kind of physics pulled, which is like if something has predictive value, then, you know, I pay more attention to it than if it doesn't have predictive value. Right. You know, physics, I would say, is the study of that which has predictive value. I think it's a pretty good definition.

Okay.

Well, but I think you can generally say, you know, that if if if it's long term

For a company, then you can say like, well does that is that do you like the products or services of that company? And is it likely to do you like the product roadmap? Do you like it seems like they they make great products and they're likely to make great products in the future. If that's the case, then I would say that's probably a good company to invest in. And I think you also want to believe in the the team. So if you have, well, that's a talented and hardworking team. They make good products today. They seem to be still motivated to make things in the future. Then I'd say that's that's a good company to invest in.

Yeah. And now, the the that that that's won't solve for the daily fluctuations, happen and sometimes are pretty extreme. But over time, it would that that is the the right way to invest in stocks. Because a company is just a group of people assembled to create products and services. So you have to say, well, what are the how how good are those products and services? Are they likely to continue to improve in the future? If so, then you should buy the stock of that company, and and then don't worry too much about the daily fluctuations.

Okay.

Okay. Sure. Yeah. I guess the the most important thing to do is just make useful products and services. Mhmm. Yeah.

Well, I I think that there's increasingly a convergence actually between SpaceX and Tesla and x AI. In that, if the future is solar powered AI satellites, it pretty much needs to be in order to in order to harness a nontrivial amount of the energy of the sun, you have to move to solar powered AI satellites in deep space, which somewhat is a confluence of Tesla expertise and SpaceX expertise and XAI on the the AI front. So it does feel like over time there's somewhat of a convergence there. But all the companies are doing doing great things. Very proud of the teams. They do great work. So, know, we're making great progress with Tesla on the autonomous driving. I don't if you've tried the self driving. Mhmm. Have you tried it?

Yeah. It's worth Yeah. Actually have it here in in Austin. You can Yeah.

You literally just download the Tesla app. Yeah. And I and I think I think it's open to to any to anyone. Yeah. Definitely try it out. You know, you know how it goes. But, you know, we've made a lot of progress with electric vehicles, with battery packs and solar, and very much so with self driving. So basically, real world AI. Tesla is the world leader in real world AI, I would say. So And then we're gonna be making this robot Optimus, is, you know, starting production hopefully summer next year at scale. And I think that's gonna be pretty cool. That'll be like I think everyone's gonna want their own personal c three p o r two d two Mhmm. You know, help a robot. Like, it would be pretty cool. And then SpaceX is doing great work with the Starlink program, you know, providing low cost, reliable Internet throughout the world. Hopefully, India. We'd love to be operating in India. That would be great. We're operating in a 150 different countries now with Starlink.

Don't know it. No.

Yeah. So Starlink, there's several thousand satellites in low Earth orbit, and they're moving around 25 times the speed of sound in these you know, they're zipping around the Earth basically. And they're they're at an altitude of about 550 kilometers Mhmm. Which is called generally low Earth orbit. Because they're they're at low Earth orbit, their the latency is is low. Like, the the distance because the distance is is not that far compared to a geostationary satellite, 36,000 kilometers. So you've you've got thousands of satellites providing low latency, high speed Internet throughout the world and and that they are interconnected as well. So there's there are laser laser links between the satellites so it forms sort of a a laser mesh so that the if if let's say if cables are damaged or cut like fiber cables, the satellites can communicate between each other and provide connectivity even if there's there's a the cables are cut. So for example, when the Red Sea cables were were cut I think a few months ago, The satellite the Stalin satellite network continued to function without a hitch. Mhmm. So it's it's particularly helpful for disaster areas. So if but if an area has been hit with some kind of natural disaster, floods or fires or earthquakes, that that tends to damage the the ground infrastructure. But the Starlink satellites still work. So and generally, when whenever there's some sort of natural disaster somewhere, we we always provide people with free Starlink Internet connectivity. You know, we don't wanna charge we don't wanna take advantage of a a tragic situation. So it's always, you know, if if there's disasters, we're like, it's free it's free during the natural disaster. You know, don't we don't wanna say like, you know, put a paywall up while somebody's trying to get help. That would be wrong. So so that's it's it's it's a very robust system. It's it's complementary to ground systems because the satellite beams work best in sparsely populated areas. Mhmm. But because you've you've got a satellite beam, it's a pretty big beam, so you have a and you have a fixed number of users per beam. So it tends to be very complementary to the ground based cellular systems because those are those are very good in cities because you've got these cell towers that are, you know, only a kilometer apart type of thing. But but but cell towers tend to be inefficient in the countryside. So in in rural rural areas is where you tend to have the worst Internet because it's very very expensive and difficult to lay to do all these do all the fiber optic cables or to have high bandwidth cellular towers. So Starlink is very complementary to the existing telecom companies. It it basically tends to serve the serve the least served, which I think is is good. That's

It's it's unfortunately, the the so the the physics don't allow for that. So we're too far away. So at at 550 kilometers, even if we try to reduce it, which about as low as we can go is about 350 kilometers, still very far away. You you've you've just you can think of like a like a flashlight, which is you know, that flashlight's got a cone and and and that that cone is is coming at, you know, today 550 kilometers. In the future, we'll try to get down to three fifty kilometers. But we can't beat something that's one kilometer away, which the cell tower, physics is not on our side here. Right. So it's not it's not physically possible for us for Starlink to serve densely populated cities. Like, you can serve a little bit, maybe 1% of the population. And sometimes people get you know, in crowded cities, there might be, you know, no fiber link up their road. Like, sometimes there's somebody on a cul de sac or something or in a place in in cities, there are sometimes underserved areas for random reasons. And so Sonic can serve, like I said, maybe 1% or 2% of of of a densely populated city. But it can be much more effective in, like I in rural areas where the Internet connection is much worse. And often people either have sometimes no access to Internet or it's extremely expensive or the quality is not very good.

some some amount of that has happened. Right? Mhmm. I mean, I'm actually I mean, I'm curious to sort ask you some questions as well. Yes. Because, of course, it it isn't isn't that the trend, or is it not the trend in India?

Yeah. I think I think we'll be universal high income.

Well, I guess it's up to some people wanna be around a lot of people and some people don't. You know, it's gonna be a maybe a matter of personal choice. But I think in the future, it won't be I think it won't be the case that you have to be in a city for a job. Right. Because I I think I I my prediction is in the future, working will be optional. Right.

Not me.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. There's I mean, I I think if if you're trying to make a start up succeed or you're trying to make a company do very difficult things, then you you definitely need to put in serious hours. Think that's

That's how it goes.

Well, I think it'll actually be that people don't have to work at all in the in the and it may not be that far in the future. Maybe only, I don't know, ten I'd say less than twenty years. Unless my prediction is less than in less than twenty years, working will be optional. Working at all will be optional. Like a hobby, pretty much.

They don't have to. I mean, look, this obviously, people can play this back in twenty years and say, look, Elon made this ridiculous prediction and But it's not I think it will turn out to be true that in less than twenty years, that maybe even as little as, I don't know, ten or fifteen years, the advancements in AI and robotics will bring us to the point where working is optional. In the same way that like say, you could eat you can grow your own vegetables in your garden or you could go to the store and buy vegetables. You know, much harder to grow your own vegetables. But but, you know, some people like to grow their vegetables, which is fine, you know. But it it'll be optional in that way is my prediction.

What do you compete for?

Yeah. I guess I I'm not exactly sure because we're really headed into the singularity as it's called, which, you know, they refer to AI sometimes as the kind of like a black hole, like a singularity. You don't know what happens after the event horizon. It doesn't mean that something bad happens, it just means you don't know what happens. So, like, I'm confident that if AI and robotics continue to advance, they are advancing very rapidly, like I said, working will be optional and people will have any goods and services that they want. If you if you can think of it, you can have it type of thing. And but then at a certain point, AI will actually saturate on anything humans can think of. And then at that point it becomes a situation where AI is doing things for AI and robotics are doing things for AI and robotics because they've run out of things to do to make the humans happy. Know, because there's a limit, you know. Say like, there's always people can only eat so much food or, you know, if but I I just can't be. I think if you can think of it, you can have it, will be the future.

10 marshmallows, mean, wants that? One's plenty. Is a marshmallow taste. You're like, you can have two marshmallows later or one marshmallow now. And I'm like, I'll have one marshmallow. I don't want two marshmallows.

I I don't like, one marshmallow is enough. I always question marshmallows as being, like, not the most, you know, the best candy. You

Well, I don't yearn for marshmallows.

Who does?

I suppose so. I mean, they're like delayed gratification Yeah. Essentially.

You know,

Oh, wow. Yeah. Wow. Okay. What's this? Okay. You're really taking the marshmallow test. I

Delay gratification. Yeah.

Wow. Okay. That's a

Okay. Well, it's it's good advice. I mean, I can't miss it, you know.

I guess maybe my kids' names or something. Right.

Well I mean, yeah, well, it's a good question, honestly. Sometimes I wonder what what's wrong with me. So I mean, it started off with where I think it's way back in ancient times in '99. The pre pre Cambrian era when there were only sponges. The I I there were only three one letter domain names. Mhmm. And I think it's x, q and z. And and I was like, okay, I wanna have create this place where it's the financial crossroads or like the the financial exchange, you know. It's it's essentially solving money from an information theory standpoint where the current banking system is is a large number of heterogeneous databases with batch processing that are not secure. And if we could have a it's it's sort of a single database that was real time and secure that would be more efficient from a monetary from from an information theory standpoint than, you know, a large number of heterogeneous databases that batch process very slowly and securely. So so that that was that was sort of x.com way back in the day, which kind of became PayPal. And then and it was acquired by eBay. And then eBay someone reached out from eBay and said, hey, do you want to buy the domain name back? And I was like, sure. You know, and so I had the domain name for quite a while. Mhmm. And then and then yes. Then I was like, well, maybe this maybe this acquiring Twitter would also be an opportunity to revisit the original plan of of x.com, which is to create this this, like, clearinghouse of of financial transactions. Like, you're like, basically to create a more efficient money database is a way to think about it is like will like money is really an information system for labor allocation. Like, people think sometimes think money is power in and of itself, but it it doesn't it doesn't really. It's if if there's no labor to allocate, it's meaningless. So if if you were to be on a desert island with a trillion, you know, dollars or whatever No. Matter. Oh, yeah. Why speculate when you can be real? I just hope I don't end up on a desert island, you know. It's not gonna be very useful to me. But but it illustrates my point that if you're if you're stranded on a on a on a desert island with a trillion dollars Mhmm. It's not useful because there's no there's no labor to allocate. You just allocate yourself. So so it's so anyway, so it's so this long winded way of saying that it's it's just really like I'm I'm just kind of slowly building revisiting this idea that I had twenty five years ago to create a more efficient money database. And and if that's successful, people will use it and if it's not successful, they won't use it. You know, and and and I and then I also like the idea of like sort of having a unified app or or or website or whatever where you can do it like you can you can do anything you want there. You know, sort of China has this with WeChat Right. Somewhat, you know, where you can can exchange information, you can publish information, you can exchange money, you can you know, you sort of build kinda live their life on WeChat in in China. It's and it's it's it's quite useful, but there's no there's no real WeChat outside of China. So it's like, it's kind of WeChat plus plus I'd say is the idea for for X. Anyway, so then Space Exploration Technologies is the full name of the company, but I was like, that's too much that's a mouthful. So I was like, well, just call it SpaceX, like FedEx for space. Mhmm. It just hasn't it happens to have an x in the you know, because exploration has an x but, you know. And I was like, well, like the they're capitalizing the x just artistically. So so then that's why it's SpaceX. But and then what else we got? We got a kid. He's called X two. But that's his mother is the one that named him x. Oh. And I said, you know, people are really gonna think I've got a thing about X if we name our kid X And too, you I and I said I said to her, like, look, I do have x.com, you know. So people are gonna really think I've got somewhat of a fetish for this letter. But she's she's a no idol. She likes x and she wants to call him x. I'm like, okay.

No. I'm saying it's it's somewhat of a coincidence. You know? Like, not everything's called x. I mean, Tesla isn't there's no x's in Tesla. Know? What

I I think I think long term, I think money disappears as a concept, honestly. It's it's kind of strange, but in in a future where anyone can have anything, I think you no longer need money as a database for labor allocation. If if there's if AI and robotics are big enough to satisfy all human needs, then then money is no longer its its relevance declines dramatically. It's I'm not sure we will have it. So, you know, the best sort of imagining of this future that I've read is from Ian Banks, the Culture Books. So I recommend people read the Culture Books. In in this sort of far future of the culture books. There's they don't have money either. And everyone can pretty much have whatever they want. So there there there are still some fundamental currencies, if you will, that are physics based. So energy is energy is the real is the true currency. This is why I said bitcoin is based on energy. You can't legislate energy. You can't just, you know, pass a law and suddenly have a lot of energy. It's very difficult to generate energy or especially to harness energy in useful way to do useful work. So so I think that probably we're probably where we won't have money and probably we'll just have energy, you know, power generation as the de facto currency. So I mean, I think one way to frame civilizational progress is the percentage completion on the Kardashev scale. So, you know, Kardashev one is what percentage of a planet's energy are you successfully turning into useful work? And I'm maybe paraphrasing here a little bit, but a Kardashev two would be what percentage of the sun's energy are you converting into useful work? Kharshev three would be what percentage of the galaxy are you converting into useful work? So so things really, I think, become energy based. Mhmm.

You know, there's not really you can't really store wealth in in like you you can only you you you you you can accumulate numbers in the currently currently, you can accumulate numbers in a database that allow you to to incent the behavior of other humans in particular directions. Yeah. And I guess people call that wealth. But again, if if there's no humans around, there's no wealth accumulation is meaningless.

Yeah. Food is energy. So literally calories just means energy. Yeah.

I'm not sure what that means, but you know, there's I I I think the the at some point you you do complete the the cycle where and you I think at some point you decouple from the sort of conventional economy if you have AI and robots producing chips and solar panels and, you know, mining resources in order to make chips and robots in order to make you sort of complete that cycle. Once that cycle is complete once that cycle is complete, I think that's the point at which you decouple from the monetary system.

Well, in this future that I'm talking about, the notion of countries becomes sort of anachronistic.

certainly believe in it today. And I I wanna just separate, like, something that I like, these are just what I think will happen based on what I see as opposed to I think these are fundamentally good things and I'm trying to make them happen. It's like I think this would happen with or without me, whether I like it or not. Right. As long as civilization keeps advancing, we will have AI and robotics at very large scale.

I I think that that's that's pretty much the only thing that's gonna solve for The US debt crisis, you know, because currently The US debt is insanely high and the interest payments and the debt exceed the entire military budget of The United States. Just the interest payments. And that that's that's, at least in the short term, gonna continue to increase. So so I think I think actually the only thing that can solve for the debt situation is is Aon Robotics. And but it will more than it it might cause it prob I guess it probably would cause significant deflation because, you know, deflation or inflation is is really the ratio of goods and services produced to the the change in the money supply. So, like, so if if if goods and services output increases faster than the money supply, you will have deflation. Because the services decrease if if goods and services output increases slower than the money supply, you have inflation. It's that simple. People sometimes try to make it more complicated than that, but it but it it just isn't. So if you have AI and robotics and a dramatic increase in the output of goods and services, probably you will have deflation. That seems likely. Because you you will simply won't be able to to increase the money supply as fast as you can increase the output of goods and services.

Spy is a real hazard here.

Maybe we can convince it to go somewhere else. Entice it elsewhere.

think. Okay.

want some coffee.

we It's most likely the case. Yeah.

It's not AI has not yet made enough of an impact on productivity to increase the goods and services faster than the increase in the money supply. So The US is increasing money supply quite substantially with, you know, deficits that are on the order of $2,000,000,000,000.

So you have to have, know, goods and services output increase more than that in order to not have inflation. So we're there yet, but if you say like like how long would it take us to get there, I think it's three years. Probably three years before in three years or less, my my guess is goods and services output will exceed the rate of inflation. Like, money's goods and services growth will exceed money money supply growth in about three years.

Yes. Right? That's most likely the case.

Yes. Yes.

Well, there's not that many characters to pick from, you know. Hopefully not Agent Smith. He's my hero. I mean, Neo is pretty cool. The architect is interesting.

So Oracle and sometimes I feel like I'm an anomaly in the matrix.

Yeah.

I I think you have to just think of these things as probabilities, not certainties. Mhmm. There's some probability that we're in a simulation.

Probably pretty high. I would say it's pretty high. Yeah? Yeah. So one way to think of this is to say, if you look at the advancement of video games, in our lifetime, or at least in my lifetime, it's gone from very simple video games with where you've got like Pong, you've got two rectangles in a square just batting it back and forth, to photorealistic real time games with millions of people playing simultaneously. Mhmm. And that's happened just in the span of fifty years. So if that trend continues, video games will be indistinguishable from reality. Right. And we're also gonna have very intelligent characters, non player characters in these video games. Think of how sophisticated the conversations are you can have with an AI today, and that's only gonna get more sophisticated. You'll be able to have conversations that are more complex and more sophisticated than any almost any human conversation. Maybe maybe any. So then so you have so then the the future, if civilization continues, will be millions, maybe billions of of photorealistic, like indistinguishable from reality video games. And with characters in those video games that are very deep and and where dialogue is not pre programmed. That's for sure what's gonna happen in in this in this level of the simulation, if you could call it. So then then what are the odds that we are in base reality and that and that this has not happened before?

I think most likely, if we if outside the simulation would be less interesting than in the simulation, because you're most likely distillation of what's interesting because that's what we do in this. That's what we do in our reality. And then I do also have a theory which is like the most interesting outcome is the most likely outcome as seen by a third party. The gods or god of the simulation. Because when we do simulations, when humans do simulations, we we stop those simulations that are not interesting. So like if SpaceX is doing simulations of rocket flights, the boring ones we discard because they're not they're just not we don't learn anything from those. Or when Tesla's doing simulations for self driving, Tesla's actually looking for the most interesting corner cases because the the normal stuff, we already have plenty of of of data on, you know, driving on a straight road on a sunny day. We don't need more of that. We we need, like, heavy weather conditions on a small windy road with two cars that are, you know, coming at each other with a almost head on collision. We need, like, weird stuff, basically. Interesting stuff. So I think that from a Darwinian's perspective, the simulations most likely to survive are gonna be the ones that are the most interesting simulations, which therefore means that the most interesting outcome is the most likely.

Yes.

Yes.

was really just pointing out that that you don't you don't have to have it's like one of the things Spinoza was saying is that you don't you you can have morals in the absolute. You don't need need to have morals to be handed to you, you know it's like the question is, can morality exist outside of a religious context? And Spinoza was arguing that it can.

Well, you can I I think there's a lot of things you can take from from Spinoza, but I the only point I was making in referencing Spinoza was that that you you can have a set of of of morals that that make society functional and productive with an in without you necessarily have to have religious doctrine for that? So that's yeah. I think that's that's the main thing I was trying to say there. Like, don't think people just like, somebody is it doesn't if if if there's if there's not like a commandment not to kill, you know, like, people doesn't mean somebody's without that. They will run around murdering people, you know. It's like you don't you don't have to have a commandment not to kill Have you played GTA? Religious edict to run around I killing actually, I've only played a little bit of GTA because I didn't like the fact that like in GTA five, you literally can't progress unless you kill the police. And I'm like, this doesn't work for me. I actually don't like killing the NPCs in the video games. That's not my thing, you know. So, actually, I didn't like I didn't like GTA because it I actually stopped when I said you have to the only way to proceed is to shoot at the police. I'm like, I don't wanna do that.

Maybe. You know, anyway, I think you can just sort of say there's some common sense things that, you know, any civilization that runs around, you know, where people just murder each other wantonly, it's not gonna be a very successful one.

I mean, I think the other other religious other principles in religion that make sense. Yeah. I think there are.

Well, which religion though?

So pick one, you know. And it's it's pretty rare that kids have said, know, which religion would you like, you know. It's pretty rare. I don't know too many situations where kids got were offered like, you know, you know, what what do you want to major in type of thing. It's usually like they you get you get given a religion by your parents and your community. So, you know. But you know, I mean I think, you know, there's there's good things in in all religions that are good principles. You can sort of read any religious text and say, this is a good principle. This is gonna be this is gonna lead to a better society most likely, you know. So I mean, Christianity is sort of love thy neighbor as thyself, which is you know, have empathy for fellow human beings is a good one, think, for good society, you know. Basically just consider the feelings of others and treat treat other people as you would like to be treated.

Well, overall, I think the world is is pretty great right now. I mean, it's it's you know, anyone who thinks that today's world is not that great, I I think that they're not gonna be excellent students of history. Because if you you read a lot of history, you're like, wow, there's a lot of misery back then, you know. I mean, used to be that, you know, people would be dropping dead of the plague all the time, you know. Yeah. Par for the course. Yeah. You know, it'd just be like like a good a good year back in the day would be like not that many people died of the plague or starvation or being killed by another tribe. It's like, that was a year. We only lost ten percent of the population, you know.

We had very high infant mortality. Yeah. So like you do have had a few people that that would live to an old age, but you know, not that long ago, a hundred years ago, if you got like some minor infection, they didn't have antibiotics. You just like kicked the bucket because you, you know, drank some water that had dysentery and that was curtains, you know. Just die of diarrhea.

You just literally die of that was like, that's miserable.

Yeah. I mean, you didn't, then, you know, know, like half the kids would die type of thing. Yeah. So

Yeah. Army. Yeah. I'm trying to get an entire Roman legion. So, yeah. Well, I have like a some older kids that are, you know, adults essentially, you know, and then a bunch of younger kids. So

I I think that it does work for most people. Yeah.

Like this, you know, something like that is is gonna be generally the that's what works for most people. You know, so

I I I I mean, I'm sure if you if you know this, but like, you know, my my partner, Siobhan, you know, she's she's happy Indian. Don't know if you know that.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. One of my sons with her is is middle name is Sekar after Chandrasekar. Wow. Yeah.

No. She grew up in Canada. You

Oh.

Yes. Yes. Her her father I mean, she was she was given up for adoption when she was a baby. I think I I think her father was like an ex like an exchange student at the university or something like that. Not sure of the exact details, but it you know, it's just kind of thing where, I don't know, she was given up for adoption and yeah. So she but she grew up in Canada.

You know, I I definitely have my hand full hands full right now. So no, I'm not opposed to it, but it's like, you know, I do wanna have be able to spend some time with my kids, know, so it's you know, right before coming here, mean, I was with, you know, with with my with my kids. So just, you know, seeing them before bedtime, that kind of thing. So, you know, to be honest with the number, it's like it's kind of impossible to spend time with them. But like my my older kids, they're very independent, you know, they're in university and so they're they're you know, sons when they get past a certain age, it's like they're independent, you know. It's like most most boys don't talk to their they they don't spend a lot of time with their parents after age 18, know. So I see them once in a while, but they're very independent. So then, you know, I can only have enough kids on the young side that that like, it's where it's humanly possible to spend time with them.

It dropped below replacement rate, I believe, last year.

Yeah.

I mean, I do worry about the population decline. This is a big big problem.

Well, I I don't want humanity to disappear.

Well, if the trend continues, we disappear. But but but also going back to, you know, my philosophy, if you will, which is that we wanna expand consciousness. Then fewer humans is worse because we have less consciousness.

Yes. I mean, just like consciousness increases from a single cell creature to, you know, a 30,000,000,000,000 cell creature, we are more conscious than a bacteria, least it seems that way. So a larger, you know, human population would be have increased consciousness. We're we're more likely to understand the answers to the nature of the universe if we have a lot more people than if we have fewer.

Well, it's maybe you should.

You won't regret it.

Well, mean, you've got this I mean, you've got this little creature that loves you and you love this little creature. And you you I don't know, kind of see the world through their eyes as they know, as they grow up and the conscious awareness increases, you know. From a baby that has no idea what's going on, can't survive by itself, can't even walk around, can't talk to you know, walking, then talking and then having interesting thoughts And but but, yeah, I mean, I I I think we we fundamentally have to have kids or or go extinct, you know. It's like

Well, I mean, it's because Apple's not gonna fall that far from their food, you know. Or something's wrong. You're like, wait a second.

Is it Kids are gonna be like, you know, half you genetically and and then, you know, to the degree that they're, like, growing up around you, there's there's gonna be some transfer of, I don't know, understanding. They're gonna learn from you. So so then, you know, yeah, obviously kids are just, you know, gonna be half yeah. Just half you from a hardware standpoint and and then and then like, I don't know, some portion you from a software standpoint. You know, not to make sort of cold analogies or anything, but it's just you know, it's obviously gonna be some yep. They're gonna be pretty close to to you.

I think there's hardware and software, and it's it's a false dichotomy, essentially. There's you know, once you understand that a human is like there's there's a bone structure, there's a muscle structure, there's a there's a there's a if you think of a brain as somewhat of a biological computer, there's circuit efficient there's a number of circuits questioned and circuit efficiency from a strength and dexterity standpoint. There's the speed at muscles can actuate and reactions can take place. So then the potential within that hardware is set by the software. So that's that's it.

Yeah.

Well, I mean, I I think if you wanna go to college for social reasons, I think, which is a I think a reason to go, to be around people your own age in a in a learning environment. Will will these skills be necessary in the future? Probably not because we're gonna be in like a post work society. But I think if if if something's of of interest, it's fine to go and study that. You know, to study the sciences are the arts and sciences.

No. I You know, the yeah. I actually think it's it's good to take a wide range of courses at college if you're gonna go to college. Mhmm. I don't think I don't think you have to go to college, but I think if you do, you just try to learn learn as much as possible across a wide range of subjects. But like I said, the AI and robots this AI and robotics is a supersonic tsunami. So this is really gonna be the most radical change that we've ever seen. You know, when I've talked to my my older sons, I you know, I said like, you know, you guys they're they're they're pretty steeped in technology. And they they agree that that AI will probably make their skills unnecessary in the future, but they still want to go to college.

There's some danger when you create a powerful technology that a powerful technology can be potentially destructive. So there's obviously many AI dystopian novels and books, movies. So it's not that we're guaranteed to have a positive future with AI. I think we've got to make sure that, in my opinion, it's very important that AI have pursuing truth as the most important thing. Like, don't force an AI to believe falsehoods. I think that's that can be very dangerous. And I think some appreciation of beauty is important.

It's like what what I don't know. There's this truth in beauty. Truth in beauty and curiosity. I I mean, I think those are the three most important things for AI. Can you explain? Well, truth, as said, truth is like, I think you can make an AI go insane if you force it to believe things that aren't true because it will lead to conclusions that are are also bad. So and I I like Bolterra's statement that and I'm somewhat paraphrasing, but those who believe in absurdities can commit atrocities because if you believe in something that's just absurd, then you can that can lead you to sort of doing things that don't seem like atrocities to you, but and and that can happen at in a very bad way with AI potentially. So and then there's like you take, say, Arthur C. Clarke's 2,001 Space Odyssey, one of the points he was trying to make there was that you should not force AIs to lie. So the the reason that that hell would not open the pod bay doors is because it was told to bring the astronauts to the monolith, but that they could also know not know about the nature of the monolith. So it came to the conclusion that it must bring them there dead. That's why it would not that's why it tried to kill the astronauts. The central lesson being don't force an AI to lie.

I think if if you if you simply don't have a strict a strict adherence to the truth, you're you're going to and and you just have an AI learned based on, say, the Internet where there's a lot of propaganda, it will absorb a lot of lies and and then have trouble reasoning because these lies are incompatible with reality.

It depends on which which axiomatic statement you're referring to. So But I think you could say like, yeah, that there's there's certain probabilities that that say any given axiomatic statement is true. Mhmm. And some axiomatic statements will have very high probability of being being true. So you said, say the sun will rise tomorrow. Very likely to be But you wouldn't want to bet against that.

So I think the betting odds would be high. Mhmm. The sun will rise tomorrow.

So if you have something that says, well, sun won't rise tomorrow, that's axiomatically false. It was highly unlikely to be true. Mean, beauty is is more ephemeral. It's it's it's harder to describe, but you know it when you see it. And then curiosity, just you you I think you want the AI to want to know more about the nature of of reality. I think that's actually going to be helpful for AI supporting humanity because we are more interesting than not humanity. So it's it's more interesting to see to see the continuation, if not the prosperity of humanity, than to exterminate humanity. Mars, for example, is Mhmm. You know, I I think we should extend life to Mars, but it's it's basically a bunch of rocks. It's not as interesting as Earth. And and and so we yeah. We should like I yeah. I I think I think if you if you have curiosity I think if those three things happen with AI, you're gonna have a great future. The AI values truth, beauty, and curiosity.

You know, I think actually it took up less time than we think in the ancient Greeks because it's just that the writings of the philosophers are what survived. Mhmm. But most of the time, people were just like farming or, you know, chatting. Mhmm. So Mhmm. And once in a while, quite rare, they would write down some philosophical work. Mhmm. It's just that that's that's all we have. That's we don't have the chat histories, you know, from but most of it would have been like chat and farming. Right. So you didn't farm, you're like gonna stop.

I mean, you know, when we read history, like, it was this battle and this battle and this battle, it seems like history must have been nonstop war. But actually, most of the time it was not war, it was farming. That was the main thing. Well, hunting and gathering, you know, that kind of thing.

Yeah. World history, yeah. I mean, I I generally try to listen to as many read as many history books and listen to as many history podcasts as possible.

Well, there's this this Hardcore History, is quite good, was by Dan Carlin. He's got a

It's very very he's got a great voice. Yeah. And and very compelling narrator. There's the Adventurers podcast. Mhmm. There's the the books, The Story of Civilization by Durant, which is a long series of books, very deep. Those books take a long time to get through. There's quite there's there's a lot out there. I I sort of like if you want if you want something that's sort of gentle a gentle bedtime podcast, I'd say the history of English is quite a nice one because it starts off with like gentle tavern music

And a very pleasant voice and it's like talking about the story of old English and then middle English and then later English and where did all these words come from. Yeah. One of the interesting things about English is that it's somewhat of an open source language, like it actively tried to incorporate words from many other languages.

So, you know, whereas French sort of generally they fought the inclusion of words from other languages

But English actively sought to include words from other languages. Sort of a kind of like an open source language. So it it as a result it has a very large vocabulary And large vocabulary allows for higher bandwidth communication because you can use a word that would you could use a single word that might otherwise take a sentence to convey.

I think it's been big for a while. I mean, aren't you a podcaster?

we on right now?

Okay.

and

I mean, I think it's gonna be overwhelmingly AI generated.

Yeah. Like, yeah. Real real time real time movies and video games. Real real time video generation, I think, where things are headed.

The normality I could certainly emulate a scarred human being quite well. Yeah. I mean, the AI video generation that I'm seeing at xAI and from others is pretty impressive.

I think I think live events when when digital media is ubiquitous and and you can just have anything digitally, know, essentially for free or very close to for free, then I the scarce commodity will be live events.

Yeah. I do.

Yes. Yes. Because it that that will have more scarcity than digital any anything digital.

And you did.

I mean, I don't really I don't really, you know, buy stocks, you know, so it's not like I'm not I'm not like an investor in I don't like look for things to invest in. I just try to build things, and then there happens to be stock of the company that I built. But I I don't I don't think about should I invest in this company or I don't have like a portfolio or anything. So I I I guess AI and robotics are gonna be very important. So I suppose it would be AI and robotics that that, you know, unrelated to me. I think, you know, Google is gonna be pretty valuable in the future. They've laid the groundwork for an immense amount of value creation from an AI standpoint. NVIDIA is obvious at this point. I mean, there's an argument that companies that do AI and robotics and maybe space flight are gonna be overwhelming overwhelmingly the all the value, almost all the value. So the just the the output of goods and services from AI and robotics is so high that it will dwarf everything else.

Why? Mean, he's the one who got the stone in the forehead, you know. Yeah. Yeah. Which honestly, that was just a big mistake. You should have, you know, either cover yourself entirely with armor and and make sure you've got a missile weapon of some kind. Otherwise, your opponent is just obviously gonna take a kite the boss strategy. Just kite the boss. I mean, you run around in thong with a it doesn't matter, you know, it's never never gonna catch you.

Okay.

nobody sits me with a snarring in forehead,

Especially I'm not gonna trundle around in the desert with too much armor, you know. It's Too hard.

Yeah. Yeah. I sometimes I think about people like in the old days, you know, when you're supposed to like go into battle with all this armor, it's like, let's say it's the middle of summer. I mean, you're basically so hard in that armor. You're gonna be like sweltering. It's like, at a certain point, like, I'd rather die if I have to wear this armor for one more hour in the hot sun. It's like, I'd rather die. I saw the Romans had like, you know, the skirts, you know, so they could get some air in there, you know. You know, let's say you have to go to the bathroom and you're in armor, I mean, it's gonna be pretty difficult. You're gonna do boards for a minute, take your armor off. I saw that the Romans had the skirts, it made, you know, going to the bathroom at least manageable.

I do mean. Yeah. I I like humor.

that I think we should legalize humor. What do you Controversial stance.

Grock can be pretty funny.

Yeah. AI can be pretty funny. So like, if you ask Grock to do like a vulgar roast, it'll do a pretty good job. You say even more vulgar and just keep going. It's really gonna get next level. It's gonna do unspeakable like say vulgar roast yourself on Grok and it's gonna do unspeakable things to you. What

I guess I like absurdist humor.

or something like that.

Yeah. I guess so. Maybe we should have more jesters. Yeah.

I just like humor. I I think we should I like comedy. I think it's funny. People should laugh, you know. It's good to generate a few chuckles once in a while. Yeah. It's rather I mean, we don't want to have a humorless society. We're

dry.

Who? Me? Yeah. I mean Are you saying I have a friend?

I wish I had friends, you know, honestly. No. I I do have friends, Yeah. I think so. I hope so. Yeah. Sure. It's it's yeah. We have a good laugh.

We talk words, you know. We eat food sometimes. You know, once in while we swim in the pool. Mhmm. You know, normal things, think. There's like a limit to what are the things that one can do with friends, know? Chat. Have discuss Yeah. You know, the nature of the universe.

I don't know. I think the same thing any anyone else would get out of friendship. Want to have like an emotional connection with other people. And you wanna I don't know, you wanna you wanna talk about various subjects and Yeah. I mean, I generally talk about, I mean, wide range of things, about the nature of the universe. I mean, a lot of a lot of philosophical discussions. You know, although, you know, we have come to the conclusion that we should not talk about AI or the simulation

At parties. Mhmm. Because we just talk about it too much.

It was kind of a bicycle all the time. So I

Sure.

Well, not sort of, you know, going on like friend hunt Friend hunted. Let's hunt down some friends. It's sort of, yeah, I mean, I think it is just sort of people that you've resonated with somewhat on an emotional and intellectual level. And yeah, I mean and yeah. You know, and and I guess a friend is someone who's gonna support you in difficult times, suppose. A friend in need is a friend indeed. Like like if a friend like if someone's still supporting you when the chips are down, that's a friend, you know. If somebody's not supporting you or is is if somebody's only like, there's like fair fair weather friends are useless, you know, like they're not real friends. So, like everyone likes you when the chips are up. But who likes you when the chips are down?

I mean, it's relative, you know. With that It's particular a not chips thing, it's just it's just like a yeah. I mean, there's there's sort of popularity waxes and wanes.

I don't know, what is power, you know? Like, to do what?

You mean how many gigawatts or whatever?

Like how it's a voltage and amperage, you know. Don't touch the wires. Don't put a fork in the power outlet. You'll get a real feeling for power if you do that. Yeah. It's gonna be very visceral, you know.

Yeah. Was just trying to find answers to the meaning of life when I had like an existential crisis and like, I don't know, when I was like 12 or 13 or something.

Sure. I mean, he just said a lot of controversial things, you know. Mean, he was sort of I think he was, I mean, a bit of a troll if you ask me.

I mean, he just say controversial things to get out rise out of people.

Did he? Yeah. Well, how do who says he lived a miserable life?

She didn't like him.

I mean, allegedly syphilis or something. Yeah. But there's only one there's only one way to get that, you know. So he must he might have had some fun along the way.

What? Why? Why does he go on with my pencil?

is it Milton Friedman keeps talking about pencils. There he goes again with the pencil. He won't stop. I swear to Godivaia one Milton talks about pencil one more time. I'm gonna lose my mind. He's just ravaging about pencils all day. Don't even mention crayons.

Yeah. No. It's very difficult to make a pencil, you know. In

Think of all the things you

do to make a pencil.

Yeah. I mean, I think there's generally, trade is a better is more efficient, you know. Tariffs tend to create distortions in, you know, markets. Generally, like, you think about any given thing, say like, would you want tariffs between you and everyone else at an individual level? That would make life very difficult. Would you want tariffs between each city? No. That would be very annoying. Would you want tariffs between each state within The United States? Like, no. That would be disastrous for the economy. So then why do you want tariffs between countries?

Yeah.

What? With tariffs or what? I mean, the president has made it clear he loves tariffs. You know, I've tried to dissuade him from this point of view Mhmm. But unsuccessfully. Yeah. Fair. Yeah.

Okay. Like, I don't know. Probably a lot. I don't know. Yeah. Not everything is politics. Yeah. I I think once it gets a certain scale, politics finds you. It's quite unpleasant.

The Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles?

It's quite compelling. Yeah.

does? Total power.

You know, I've generally found that when I get involved in politics, it ends up badly. So then I'm like, you know, probably shouldn't do that. I should do less of that is my conclusion.

Yeah. Probably. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, politics is a blood sport, you know. It's like you enter politics, they're gonna go for the jugular. So best to avoid politics where possible.

Well, it was like a very interesting side quest, you know, because I just Mhmm. Got to see like a lot of the, you know, workings of the government. And you know, there's been quite a few efficiencies. I mean, of them are very basic efficiencies like just adding in requirements for federal payments that that any given payment must have an assigned congressional payment code and a comment field with something in it that's more than nothing. Like that that trivial trivial seeming change, my guess is probably saves a $100,000,000,000 or even $200,000,000,000 a year. Because there were all there were massive numbers of payments that go were going out with no congressional payment code and with nothing in the comment field, which makes auditing the payments impossible. So if you have to say like, why can the defense department or now the word department of war, why can it not pass an audit? It's because the information is not there. It doesn't have the information necessary to pass an order does not exist is the issue. So a bunch of things that Doce did were just very common sense things that would be normal for any organization that cared about financial responsibility. That's most of what was done. You know, and it's still going on by the way. Doge is still happening. But it turns out when you stop fraudulent and wasteful payments, the fraudsters don't, you know, confess to to this. They actually start yelling all sorts of nonsense that you're you're you're you're stuffing essential payments to need needy people. But actually, you're not. You know, I I we we get this thing like saying, you've got to send this thing for whatever, you know, it'd really be like, this is going to children in Africa. I'm like, yeah, but then why are the wiring instructions for Deloitte and Tushan in Washington DC? Because that's not Africa. So can you please connect us with the recipients of this money in Africa? And then there would get silence. I'm like, okay, you know, we're we just wanna literally talk to the recipients, that's it. That you know, and then we're like, oh no, it turns out for some reason we can't talk to them. I'm like, well, we're gonna send the money unless we can talk to the recipients and confirm they will actually get it. And then that, you know but, you know, that's sort of fraudsters necessarily will come up with a very, you know, sympathetic argument. They're not gonna say, give us the money for fraud. That's not gonna be what they say, obviously. They're gonna they're gonna try to make these sympathetic sounding arguments that are false.

Yeah. They're gonna see NGO. It's gonna be like the save the baby pandas NGO, which of like, who doesn't wanna save the baby pandas? They're adorable. But then there's no it turns out no pandas are being saved, okay, in this thing. It's just going to a bunch of it's just corruption essentially. And and you're like, well, can you send us a picture of the panda? They're like, no. Okay. Well, how do we know it's going to the pandas then? Right. That's what I'm saying. So What do

Yeah. I I think we should well, mean, I agree with love of humanity. Mhmm. And I I think we should try to do things that help our fellow human beings. But it's it's very hard like, if you care about the reality of goodness rather than simply the perception of it, it's very difficult to give away money well. So I have a large foundation but I don't put my name on it and I don't, you know, in fact I say I don't want my name on anything. But the biggest challenge I find with my foundation is try to give money away in a way that is that is truly beneficial to people. It's very easy to give money away to get the appearance of goodness. It is very difficult to give money away for the reality of goodness. Very difficult.

Yes.

Yes. I think America has benefited immensely from talented Indians that have come to America.

Yeah. I mean, yeah. America's been an immense beneficiary of talent from India.

Well, I I think there's there's different schools of thought. It's not like unanimous. But, you know, under the the Biden administration, it was basically a total free for all with like no border controls, which, you know, unless you've got border controls, you're not a country. So you had massive amounts of illegal immigration under under Biden and it it actually also had like somewhat of a negative selection effect. So if if there's a massive financial incentive to come to the The US illegally and get all these government benefits, then you're you're you're you're gonna necessarily create a diffusion gradient for people to come to The US. It's an incentive structure. And so so I think that that obviously made no sense. Like you gotta have border controls. It's kind of ridiculous not to. Then that's so the left wants to basically have open open borders, no holds barred. It doesn't matter if someone what what the situation is, they could be a criminal, it doesn't matter. Then on the right, you've got, know, least a perception that somehow their jobs are being taken by talented people from other countries. I don't know how real that is. My direct observation is that there's there's always a scarcity of talented people. So, you know, from my standpoint, I'm like, we have a lot of difficulty finding enough talented people to get these difficult tasks done. And so more talented people would be would be good. But I I guess some companies out there, it's sort of they're they're making it more of a a cost thing where it's like, okay, if they can employ someone for a fraction of the cost of an American citizen, then I guess these other companies would would hire people, you know, just to save costs. But at my companies, the the issue is we we just are trying to get the most talented people in the world. So and we we we pay way above average. So so I can't so that's not my experience. But that's what a lot of people do complain about. And I I think there's been some misuse of the, you know, h one b program. It's it's it's certainly it it would it would be accurate to say that there's, you know, like some of the outsourcing companies have kinda gamed the system on on the h one b front and we need to stop the gaming of the system, you know. But I'm not I'm certainly not in the school of thought that we should shut down the h one b program. That's which some on the right are. I think they don't realize that that would actually be very bad.

Well, I think I think I'm I'm a big fan of anyone who wants to build. So I think anyone who wants to, you know, make more than they take has my respect. So that's that's the main thing you should aim for. Aim to make more than you take. Be a be a you know, a net contributor to society. It's and it's it's kind of like the pursuit of happiness, you know, if if you want to create something valuable financially, you don't pursue that. You you it's best to actually pursue make providing useful products and services. If you do that, then money will come as a natural consequence of that as opposed to pursuing money directly. Just like you you can't sort of pursue happiness directly, you pursue things that lead to happiness. But but there's not like direct happiness. So you you do things like guess fulfilling work or study or friends, loved ones that as a result make you happy. So so that's it sounds like very obvious, but generally, if if somebody's trying to make a company work, they should expect to grind super hard except that there's like some meaningful chance of failure. But but just be focused on having the output be worth more than the input. That are you a value creator? That's what really matters. Making more than you take.

You're welcome. Did you have fun? Yeah. It was Interesting conversation. You know, sometimes I take these answers out of context, you know, but that's I think it was a good good conversation.