Elon Musk: Neuralink, AI, Autopilot, and the Pale Blue Dot | Lex Fridman Podcast #49

The following is a conversation with Elon Musk, part two. The second time we spoke on the podcast, with parallels, if not in quality, then in outfit, to the objectively speaking, greatest sequel of all time, Godfather Part II. As many people know, Elon Musk is a leader of Tesla, SpaceX, Neuralink, and The Boring Company. What may be less known is that he's a world-class engineer and designer, constantly emphasizing first principles thinking in taking on big engineering problems that many before him would consider impossible. As scientists and engineers, most of us don't question the way things are done. We simply follow the momentum of the crowd. But revolutionary ideas that change the world on the small and large scales happen when you return to the fundamentals and ask, "Is there a better way?" This conversation focuses on the incredible engineering and innovation done in brain computer interfaces at Neuralink. This work promises to help treat neurobiological diseases, to help us further understand the connection between the individual neuron to the high level of function of the human brain, and finally, to one day expand the capacity of the brain through two-way communication with computational devices, the internet, and artificial intelligence systems. This is the Artificial Intelligence Podcast. If you enjoy it, subscribe by YouTube, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, support on Patreon, or simply connect with me on Twitter, @lexfridman, spelled F-R-I-D-M-A-N. And now, as an anonymous YouTube commenter referred to our previous conversation, as the, quote, "Historical first video of two robots conversing without supervision," here's the second time, the second conversation with Elon Musk. Let's start with a easy question about consciousness. In your view, is consciousness something that's unique to humans, or is it something that permeates all matter, almost like a fundamental force of physics?

I don't think consciousness permeates all matter.

Panpsychists believe that.

Yeah.

There's a philosophical...

How would you tell? (laughs)

(laughs) That's true. That's a good point.

I believe in scientific method. I don't want to blow your mind or anything, but the scientific method is like, if you cannot test a hypothesis, then you cannot reach meaningful conclusion that it is true.

Do you think consciousness, understanding consciousness, is within the reach of science, of the scientific method?

We can dramatically improve our understanding of consciousness. You know, I would be hard-pressed to say that we understand anything with complete accuracy, but can we dramatically improve our understanding of consciousness? I believe the answer is yes.

Does an AI system, in your view, have to have consciousness in order to achieve human level or superhuman level intelligence? Does it need to have some of these human qualities like consciousness, maybe a body, maybe a fear of mortality, capacity to love, those kinds of silly human things?

(sighs) E- b- there's- it's- it's different... O- o- you know, there's this- there's the scientific method, which I very much believe in, where something is true to the degree that it is testably so. And- and otherwise, you're really just talking about, you know, preferences or un- untestable beliefs or that, you know, that kind of thing. So ends up being somewhat of a semantic question, where we are conflating a lot of things with the word intelligence. If we parse them out and say, you know, w- o- are we headed, uh, towards the future where an AI will be able to outthink us in every way? Then the answer is unequivocally yes.