0
SPEAKER_01
The following is a conversation with Guillaume Verdun, the man behind the previously anonymous account BasedBefJezos on X. These two identities were merged by a doxing article in Forbes titled, Who is BasedBefJezos, the leader of the tech elite s EAC movement.
0
SPEAKER_01
So let me describe these two identities that coexist in the mind of one human.
0
SPEAKER_01
Identity number one, Guillaume, is a physicist, applied mathematician, and quantum machine learning researcher and engineer, receiving his PhD in quantum machine learning, working at Google on quantum computing, and finally launching his own company called Extropic that seeks to build physics-based computing hardware for generative AI.
0
SPEAKER_01
Identity number two, Bev Jezels on X, is the creator of the Effective Accelerationism Movement, often abbreviated as EAC, that advocates for propelling rapid technological progress as the ethically optimal course of action for humanity.
0
SPEAKER_01
For example, its proponents believe that progress in AI is a great social equalizer, which should be pushed forward.
0
SPEAKER_01
EAC followers see themselves as a counterweight to the cautious view that AI is highly unpredictable, potentially dangerous, and needs to be regulated.
0
SPEAKER_01
They often give their opponents the labels of, quote, doomers or decels, short for deceleration.
0
SPEAKER_01
As Beth himself put it, EAC is a memetic optimism virus.
0
SPEAKER_01
The style of communication of this movement leans always toward the memes and the lols, but there is an intellectual foundation that we explore in this conversation.
0
SPEAKER_01
Now, speaking of the meme, I am too a kind of aspiring connoisseur of the absurd.
0
SPEAKER_01
It is not an accident that I spoke to Jeff Bezos and Beth Jezos back to back.
0
SPEAKER_01
As we talk about, Beth admires Jeff as one of the most important humans alive, and I admire the beautiful absurdity and the humor of it all.
0
SPEAKER_01
And now, a quick few second mention of each sponsor.
0
SPEAKER_01
Check them out in the description.
0
SPEAKER_01
It s the best way to support this podcast.
0
SPEAKER_01
We got Element for hydration, the thing I m drinking right now, Notion for team collaboration, Insight Tracker for biological data that leads to your well-being, and AG1 for my daily nutritional health.
0
SPEAKER_01
Choose wisely, my friends.
0
SPEAKER_01
Also, if you want to work with our amazing team, we re always hiring.
0
SPEAKER_01
Go to lexfriedman.com slash hiring, or if you wanna just get in touch with me for whatever reason, go to lexfriedman.com slash contact.
0
SPEAKER_01
And now, on to the full ad reads.
0
SPEAKER_01
As always, no ads in the middle.
0
SPEAKER_01
I try to make these interesting, but if you must skip them, friends, please still check out our sponsors.
0
SPEAKER_01
I enjoy their stuff.
0
SPEAKER_01
Maybe you will too.
0
SPEAKER_01
This episode is brought to you by Element Electrolyte Drink Mix.
0
SPEAKER_01
It s got sodium, potassium, magnesium.
0
SPEAKER_01
I drink it so much, so many times a day.
0
SPEAKER_01
It s really the foundation of my one meal a day lifestyle.
0
SPEAKER_01
I eat almost always one meal a day in the evening.
0
SPEAKER_01
So I fast, and I really enjoy that.
0
SPEAKER_01
Everything it does for me,
0
SPEAKER_01
Recommend everybody at least try it.
0
SPEAKER_01
Intermittent fasting taken to the sort of daily extreme of fasting for 23, 24 hours, whatever it is.
0
SPEAKER_01
And for that, you have to get all the electrolytes right.
0
SPEAKER_01
You have to drink water, but not just drink water.
0
SPEAKER_01
You have to drink water coupled with
0
SPEAKER_01
sodium, and sometimes getting the magnesium part and the potassium part right is tricky, but really important so that you feel good.
0
SPEAKER_01
And that s what Element does, and it makes it delicious.
0
SPEAKER_01
My favorite flavor is watermelon salt.
0
SPEAKER_01
Get a sample pack for free with any purchase.
0
SPEAKER_01
Try it at drinkelement.com slash Lex.
0
SPEAKER_01
This show is also brought to you by Notion, a note-taking and team collaboration tool.
0
SPEAKER_01
I ve used them for a long, long time for note-taking, but it s also very useful for note-taking and all kind of collaborative note-taking in the team environment.
0
SPEAKER_01
And they integrate the whole AI thing, LLM thing, well.
0
SPEAKER_01
So you can use it to summarize whatever you ve written.
0
SPEAKER_01
You can expand it, you can change the language style and how it s written.
0
SPEAKER_01
All the things that large language models should be able to do are integrated really, really, really well.
0
SPEAKER_01
I think of human AI collaboration not just as a boost for productivity at this time, but as a kind of learning process, that it takes time to really understand what AI is good at and not.
0
SPEAKER_01
And that is going to evolve continuously as AI gets better and better and better.
0
SPEAKER_01
It s like almost watching a child grow up or something like this.
0
SPEAKER_01
You re fine-tuning what it means to be a good parent as a child grows up.
0
SPEAKER_01
In the same way, you re fine-tuning what it means to be a good, effective human as the AI grows up.
0
SPEAKER_01
And so you should use a tool that s part of your daily life to interact with AI while being productive, but also learning what is it good at?
0
SPEAKER_01
What are the ways I can integrate it into my life to make me more productive?
0
SPEAKER_01
But not just like in terms of shortening the time it takes to do a task, but being the fuel, the creative,
0
SPEAKER_01
fuel for the genius that is you.
0
SPEAKER_01
So Notion AI can now give you instant answers to your questions using information from across your wiki, projects, docs, meeting notes.
0
SPEAKER_01
Try Notion AI for free when you go to notion.com slash lex.
0
SPEAKER_01
That s all lowercase, notion.com slash lex to try the power of Notion AI today.
0
SPEAKER_01
This show is also brought to you by Insight Tracker, a service I use to make sense of the biological data that comes from my body, blood data, DNA data, fitness tracker data, all of that to make me lifestyle recommendations, diet stuff too.
0
SPEAKER_01
there s all this beautiful data.
0
SPEAKER_01
We should give it to super intelligent computational systems to process and to give us, in a human interpretable way, recommendations on how to improve our life.
0
SPEAKER_01
And I don t just mean optimize life, because I think a perfect life is not the life you want.
0
SPEAKER_01
What you want is a complicated,
0
SPEAKER_01
rollercoaster of a life, but one that is optimized in certain aspects of health, well-being, you know, energy, but not just optimal in this cold clinical sense.
0
SPEAKER_01
Anyway, that s a longer conversation, probably one I ll touch on maybe when I review Brave New World.
0
SPEAKER_01
or in other conversations I have in the podcast.
0
SPEAKER_01
Anyway, get special savings for a limited time when you go to insighttracker.com slash Lex.
0
SPEAKER_01
This show is also brought to you by AG1, the thing I drink twice a day and it brings me much joy.
0
SPEAKER_01
It s green, it s delicious, it s got a lot of vitamins and minerals.
0
SPEAKER_01
It s basically just an incredible super powered multivitamin.
0
SPEAKER_01
I enjoy it, a lot of my friends enjoy it.
0
SPEAKER_01
It s the thing that makes me feel like home when I m traveling and I get one of the travel packs.
0
SPEAKER_01
The things I consume daily are pretty simple.
0
SPEAKER_01
We re talking about the electrolytes with Element, AG1 for the vitamins and minerals, then fish oil, and then just a good healthy diet.
0
SPEAKER_01
Low carb, but either ultra very low carb, so just meat, or meat and some veggies.
0
SPEAKER_01
I m not very strict about that kind of stuff.
0
SPEAKER_01
Just know that I feel good when it s low carb.
0
SPEAKER_01
And so all of that combined with fasting and rigorous, sometimes crazy routines of work, some mental struggle and physical work, you know, running and all that kind of stuff, jiu-jitsu, training, sprints, working out, lifting heavy, all that kind of stuff.
0
SPEAKER_01
you have to make sure you have the basic nutrition stuff, right?
0
SPEAKER_01
And that s what AG1 does for me.
0
SPEAKER_01
Maybe it will do that for you.
0
SPEAKER_01
They ll give you a one month supply of fish oil when you sign up at drinkag1.com slash lex.
0
SPEAKER_01
This is the Lex Friedman Podcast.
0
SPEAKER_01
To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description.
0
SPEAKER_01
And now, dear friends, here s Guillaume Verdome.
0
SPEAKER_01
Let s get the facts of identity down first.
0
SPEAKER_01
Your name is Guillaume Verdun, Gil, but you re also behind the anonymous account on X called BasedBethJezos.
0
SPEAKER_01
So first, Guillaume Verdun, you re a quantum computing guy, physicist, applied mathematician, and then BasedBethJezos is basically a meme account that started a movement with a philosophy behind it.
0
SPEAKER_01
So maybe just can you linger on who these people are in terms of characters, in terms of communication styles, in terms of philosophies?
0
SPEAKER_00
I mean, with my main identity, I guess, ever since I was a kid, I wanted to figure out a theory of everything to understand the universe.
0
SPEAKER_00
And that path led me to theoretical physics eventually, right?
0
SPEAKER_00
Trying to answer the big questions of why are we here?
0
SPEAKER_00
Where are we going?
0
SPEAKER_00
right?
0
SPEAKER_00
And that led me to study information theory and try to understand physics from the lens of information theory, understand the universe as one big computation.
0
SPEAKER_00
And essentially, after reaching a certain level, studying black hole physics, I realized that I wanted to not only understand how the universe computes, but sort of compute like nature and figure out how to build and apply computers that are inspired by nature.
0
SPEAKER_00
So, you know, physics-based computers.
0
SPEAKER_00
that sort of brought me to quantum computing as a field of study to first of all simulate nature.
0
SPEAKER_00
And in my work it was to learn representations of nature that can run on such computers.
0
SPEAKER_00
So if you
0
SPEAKER_00
have AI representations that think like nature, then they ll be able to more accurately represent it.
0
SPEAKER_00
At least that was the thesis that brought me to be an early player in the field called quantum machine learning, right?
0
SPEAKER_00
So, how to do machine learning on quantum computers.
0
SPEAKER_00
and really sort of extend notions of intelligence to the quantum realm.
0
SPEAKER_00
So how do you capture and understand quantum mechanical data from our world?
0
SPEAKER_00
And how do you learn quantum mechanical representations of our world?
0
SPEAKER_00
On what kind of computer
0
SPEAKER_00
do you run these representations and train them?
0
SPEAKER_00
How do you do so?
0
SPEAKER_00
And so, that s really sort of the questions I was looking to answer because ultimately, I had a sort of crisis of faith.
0
SPEAKER_00
Originally, I wanted to figure out, you know, as every physicist does at the beginning of their career, a few equations that describe the whole universe.
0
SPEAKER_00
right?
0
SPEAKER_00
And sort of be the hero of the story there.
0
SPEAKER_00
But eventually I realized that actually augmenting ourselves with machines, augmenting our ability to perceive, predict and control our world with machines is the path forward, right?
0
SPEAKER_00
And that s what got me to leave theoretical physics and go into quantum computing and quantum machine learning.
0
SPEAKER_00
And during those years, I thought that there was still a piece missing.
0
SPEAKER_00
There was a piece of our understanding of the world and our way to compute and our way to think about the world.
0
SPEAKER_00
And if you look at the physical scales, right?
0
SPEAKER_00
At the very small scales, things are quantum mechanical, right?
0
SPEAKER_00
And at the very large scales, things are deterministic.
0
SPEAKER_00
Things have averaged out, right?
0
SPEAKER_00
I m definitely here in this seat.
0
SPEAKER_00
I m not in a superposition over here and there.
0
SPEAKER_00
At the very small scales, things are in superposition, they can exhibit interference effects.
0
SPEAKER_00
But at the mesoscales, right, the scales that matter for day-to-day life, you know, the scales of proteins, of biology, of gases, liquids, and so on, things are actually thermodynamical, right?
0
SPEAKER_00
They re fluctuating.
0
SPEAKER_00
And after, I guess, about eight years in quantum computing and quantum machine learning, I had a realization that I was looking for answers about our universe by studying the very big and the very small, right?
0
SPEAKER_00
I was
0
SPEAKER_00
I did a bit of quantum cosmology.
0
SPEAKER_00
So that s studying the cosmos, where it s going, where it came from.
0
SPEAKER_00
You study black hole physics.
0
SPEAKER_00
You study the extremes in quantum gravity.
0
SPEAKER_00
You study where the energy density is sufficient for both quantum mechanics and gravity to be relevant, right?
0
SPEAKER_00
And the sort of extreme scenarios are black holes and the very early universe.
0
SPEAKER_00
So there s the sort of scenarios that you
0
SPEAKER_00
you study the interface between quantum mechanics and relativity.
0
SPEAKER_00
And, you know, really I was studying these extremes to
0
SPEAKER_00
understand how the universe works and where is it going, but I was missing a lot of the meat in the middle, if you will, right?
0
SPEAKER_00
Because day-to-day quantum mechanics is relevant and the cosmos is relevant, but not that relevant actually.
0
SPEAKER_00
We re on sort of the medium space and time scales.
0
SPEAKER_00
And there, the main theory of physics that is most relevant is thermodynamics, right?
0
SPEAKER_00
Out of equilibrium thermodynamics.
0
SPEAKER_00
Because life is a process that is thermodynamical and it s out of equilibrium.
0
SPEAKER_00
We re not just a soup of particles at equilibrium with nature.
0
SPEAKER_00
We re a sort of coherent state trying to maintain itself by acquiring free energy and consuming it.
0
SPEAKER_00
And that s sort of, I guess, another shift and I guess my faith in the universe happened towards the end of my time at Alphabet.
0
SPEAKER_00
And I knew I wanted to build, well, first of all, a computing paradigm based on this type of physics.
0
SPEAKER_00
But ultimately, just by trying to experiment with these ideas applied to society and economies and much of what we see around us, you know, I started an anonymous account just to
0
SPEAKER_00
relieve the pressure, right?
0
SPEAKER_00
That comes from having an account that you re accountable for everything you say on.
0
SPEAKER_00
And I started an anonymous account just to experiment with ideas originally, right?
0
SPEAKER_00
Because I didn t realize how much I was restricting my space of thoughts until I sort of had the opportunity to let go.
0
SPEAKER_00
In a sense,
0
SPEAKER_00
restricting your speech back propagates to restricting your thoughts, right?
0
SPEAKER_00
And by creating anonymous account, it seemed like I had unclamped some variables in my brain and suddenly could explore a much wider parameter space of thoughts.
0
SPEAKER_01
Just to linger on that, isn t that interesting?
0
SPEAKER_01
That one of the things that people often talk about is that when there s pressure and constraints on speech, it somehow leads to constraints on thought.
0
SPEAKER_01
Even though it doesn t have to, we can think thoughts inside our head, but somehow it creates these walls around thought.
0
SPEAKER_00
That s sort of the basis of
1
SPEAKER_01
of our movement is we were seeing a tendency towards constraint, reduction or suppression of variance in every aspect of life, whether it s thought, how to run a company, how to organize humans, how to do AI research.
1
SPEAKER_01
In general, we believe that maintaining variance ensures that the system is adaptive, right?
1
SPEAKER_01
Maintaining healthy competition in marketplaces of ideas, of companies, of products, of cultures, of governments, of currencies, is the way forward because the system always adapts.
1
SPEAKER_01
to assign resources to the configurations that lead to its growth.
1
SPEAKER_01
And the fundamental basis for the movement is this sort of realization that life is a sort of fire that seeks out free energy in the universe and seeks to grow, right?
1
SPEAKER_01
And that growth is fundamental to life.
1
SPEAKER_01
And you see this in the equations, actually, of autoequilibrium thermodynamics.
1
SPEAKER_01
You see that paths of trajectories of configurations of matter that are better at acquiring free energy and dissipating more heat are exponentially more likely, right?
1
SPEAKER_01
So the universe is biased towards certain futures
1
SPEAKER_01
And so there s a natural...
1
SPEAKER_01
direction where the whole system wants to go.
1
SPEAKER_00
So the second law of thermodynamics says that entropy is always increasing in the universe, it s tending towards equilibrium, and you re saying there s these pockets that have complexity and are out of equilibrium.
1
SPEAKER_00
You said that thermodynamics favors the creation of complex life that increases its capability to use energy to offload entropy, to offload entropy.
1
SPEAKER_00
So you have pockets,
1
SPEAKER_00
of non-entropy that turn the opposite direction.
1
SPEAKER_00
Why is that intuitive to you that it s natural for such pockets to emerge?
1
SPEAKER_01
Well, we re far more efficient at producing heat than, let s say, just a rock with a similar mass as ourselves, right?
1
SPEAKER_01
We acquire free energy, we acquire food, and we re using all this electricity for our operation.
1
SPEAKER_01
And so, the universe wants to produce more entropy, and by having life go on and grow, it s actually more optimal at producing entropy because it will seek out pockets of free energy and burn it for its sustenance and further growth.
1
SPEAKER_01
And that s sort of the basis of
1
SPEAKER_01
life.
1
SPEAKER_01
And I mean, there s Jeremy England at MIT who has this theory that I m a proponent of that life emerged because of this sort of property.
1
SPEAKER_01
And to me, this physics is what governs the mesoscales.
1
SPEAKER_01
And so, it s the missing piece between the quantum and the cosmos.
1
SPEAKER_01
It s the middle part, right?
1
SPEAKER_01
Thermodynamics rules the mesoscales.
1
SPEAKER_01
And to me,
1
SPEAKER_01
both from a point of view of designing or engineering devices that harness that physics and trying to understand the world through the lens of thermodynamics has been sort of a synergy between my two identities over the past year and a half now.
1
SPEAKER_01
And so that s really how the two identities emerged.
1
SPEAKER_01
One was kind of, I m a decently respected scientist
1
SPEAKER_01
was going towards doing a startup in the space and trying to be a pioneer of a new kind of physics-based AI.
1
SPEAKER_01
And as a duel to that, I was sort of experimenting with philosophical thoughts from a physicist s standpoint.
1
SPEAKER_01
And ultimately, I think that
1
SPEAKER_01
around that time, it was like late 2021, early 2022, I think there s just a lot of pessimism about the future in general and pessimism about tech.
1
SPEAKER_01
And that pessimism was sort of virally spreading because it was getting algorithmically amplified.
1
SPEAKER_01
And, you know, people just felt like the future is going to be worse than the present.
1
SPEAKER_01
And to me, that is a very fundamentally destructive force in the universe, is this sort of doom mindset.
1
SPEAKER_01
Because it is hyperstitious, which means that if you believe it, you re increasing the likelihood of it happening.
1
SPEAKER_01
And so,
1
SPEAKER_01
felt a responsibility to some extent to make people aware of the trajectory of civilization and the natural tendency of the system to adapt towards its growth.
1
SPEAKER_01
And sort of that actually the laws of physics say that the future is going to be
1
SPEAKER_01
better and grander statistically and we can make it so.
1
SPEAKER_01
And if you believe in it, if you believe that the future would be better and you believe you have agency to make it happen, you re actually increasing the likelihood of that better future happening.
1
SPEAKER_01
And so, I sort of felt a responsibility to sort of engineer a movement of viral optimism about the future
1
SPEAKER_01
and build a community of people supporting each other to build and do hard things, do the things that need to be done for us to scale up civilization.
1
SPEAKER_01
Because at least to me, I don t think stagnation or slowing down is actually an option.
1
SPEAKER_01
Fundamentally, life and the whole system, our whole civilization wants to grow and there s just far more cooperation when the system is growing rather than when it s declining and you have to decide how to split the pie.
1
SPEAKER_01
And so I ve balanced both identities so far, but I guess recently the two have been merged more or less without my consent, so.
1
SPEAKER_00
You said a lot of really interesting things there.
1
SPEAKER_00
So first, representations of nature.
1
SPEAKER_00
That s something that first drew you in to try to understand from a quantum computing perspective, like how do you understand nature?
1
SPEAKER_00
How do you represent nature in order to understand it, in order to simulate it, in order to do something with it?
1
SPEAKER_00
So it s a question of representations.
1
SPEAKER_00
And then there s that leap you take from the quantum mechanical representation to the, what you re calling mesoscale representation, where the thermodynamics comes into play, which is a way to represent nature in order to understand what life is.
1
SPEAKER_00
human behavior, all this kind of stuff that s happening here on Earth that seems interesting to us.
1
SPEAKER_00
Then there s the word hyperstition.
1
SPEAKER_00
So some ideas, I suppose both pessimism and optimism are such ideas that if you internalize them, you in part make that idea a reality.
1
SPEAKER_00
So both optimism and pessimism have that property.
1
SPEAKER_00
I would say that probably a lot of ideas
1
SPEAKER_00
have that property, which is one of the interesting things about humans.
1
SPEAKER_00
And you talked about one interesting difference also between the sort of the Guillaume de Guille front end and the Bezbev-Djezel s back end is the communication styles also.
1
SPEAKER_00
That you were exploring different ways of communicating that can be more viral in the way that we communicate in the 21st century.
1
SPEAKER_00
Also the movement that you mentioned that you started, it s not just a meme account, but there s also a name to it called Effective Accelerationism, EAC, a play, a resistance to the effective altruism movement.
1
SPEAKER_00
Also an interesting one that I d love to talk to you about, the tensions there.
1
SPEAKER_00
Okay, and so then there was a merger, a git merge, and the personalities recently, without your consent, like you said, some journalists figured out that you re one and the same.
1
SPEAKER_00
Maybe you could talk about that experience.
1
SPEAKER_00
First of all, what s the story of the merger of the two?
1
SPEAKER_01
So I wrote the manifesto with my co-founder of EAC, an account named Bazelord, still anonymous, luckily, and hopefully forever.
1
SPEAKER_00
So it s Bazed, Beth, Jezos, and Bazed, like Bayesian, like Bazelord, like Bayesian, Bayesianlord, Bazelord, okay.
1
SPEAKER_00
And so we should say from now on, when you say EAC, you mean,
1
SPEAKER_00
E slash ACC, which stands for effective accelerationism.
1
SPEAKER_00
And you re referring to a manifesto written on, I guess, Upstack.
1
SPEAKER_00
Are you also Bazelord?
1
SPEAKER_00
No.
1
SPEAKER_00
Okay, it s a different person.
1
SPEAKER_00
Yeah.
1
SPEAKER_00
Okay.
1
SPEAKER_00
All right, well, there you go.
1
SPEAKER_00
Wouldn t it be funny if I m Bazelord?
1
SPEAKER_01
That d be amazing.
1
SPEAKER_01
So, originally wrote the manifesto around the same time as I founded this company and
1
SPEAKER_01
I worked at Google X or just X now or Alphabet X now that there s another X. And there, you know, the baseline is sort of secrecy, right?
1
SPEAKER_01
You can t talk about what you work on even with other Googlers or externally.
1
SPEAKER_01
And so, that was kind of deeply ingrained in my way to do things, especially in
1
SPEAKER_01
in deep tech that has geopolitical impact, right?
1
SPEAKER_01
And so, I was being secretive about what I was working on.
1
SPEAKER_01
There was no correlation between my company and my main identity publicly.
1
SPEAKER_01
And then not only did they correlate that, they also correlated my main identity and this account.
1
SPEAKER_01
So, I think the fact that they had doxed the whole Guillaume complex and they were the journalists, you know, reached out to actually my investors.
1
SPEAKER_01
which is pretty scary.
1
SPEAKER_01
You know, when you re a startup entrepreneur, you don t really have bosses except for your investors, right?
1
SPEAKER_01
And my investors ping me like, hey, this is going to come out.
1
SPEAKER_01
They ve figured out everything.
1
SPEAKER_01
What are you going to do, right?
1
SPEAKER_01
So, I think at first they had a first reporter on the Thursday and they didn t have all the pieces together, but then they looked at their notes across the organization and they since refused.
1
SPEAKER_01
their notes, and now they had way too much.
1
SPEAKER_01
And that s when I got worried, because he said it was of public interest.
1
SPEAKER_01
And in general... Okay, he said censor fused.
1
SPEAKER_00
I guess some giant neural network operating in a distributed way.
1
SPEAKER_00
We should also say that the journalists used, I guess at the end of the day,
1
SPEAKER_00
audio-based analysis of voice, comparing voice of what talks you ve given in the past and then voice on X spaces.
1
SPEAKER_00
Yeah.
1
SPEAKER_00
Okay, so, and that s where primarily the match happened.
1
SPEAKER_00
Okay, continue.
1
SPEAKER_01
The match, but they scraped SEC filings, they looked at my private Facebook account and so on, so they did some digging.
1
SPEAKER_01
Originally, I thought that doxing was illegal, right?
1
SPEAKER_01
But there s this weird threshold when it becomes of public interest to know someone s identity.
1
SPEAKER_01
And those were the key words that sort of like ring the alarm bells for me when they said, because I had just reached 50k followers, allegedly that s of public interest.
1
SPEAKER_01
And so,
1
SPEAKER_01
Where do we draw the line?
1
SPEAKER_01
When is it legal to dox someone?
1
SPEAKER_00
The word dox, maybe you can educate me.
1
SPEAKER_00
I thought doxing generally refers to if somebody s physical location is found out, meaning like where they lived.
1
SPEAKER_00
So we re referring to the more general concept of
1
SPEAKER_00
revealing private information that you don t want revealed, is what you mean by doxing.
1
SPEAKER_01
I think that for the reasons we listed before, having an anonymous account is a really powerful way to keep the powers that be in check.
1
SPEAKER_01
We were ultimately speaking truth to power, right?
1
SPEAKER_01
I think a lot of executives in AI companies really cared what our community thought about any move they may take.
1
SPEAKER_01
And now that
1
SPEAKER_01
know, my identity is revealed, now they know where to apply pressure to silence me or maybe the community.
1
SPEAKER_01
And to me, that s really unfortunate because, again, it s so important for us to have freedom of speech, which induces freedom of thought.
1
SPEAKER_01
and freedom of information propagation on social media, which thanks to Elon purchasing Twitter, now X, we have that.
1
SPEAKER_01
And so, to us, we wanted to call out certain maneuvers being done by the incumbents in AI as
1
SPEAKER_01
not what it may seem on the surface, right?
1
SPEAKER_01
We were calling out how certain proposals might be useful for regulatory capture, right?
1
SPEAKER_01
And how the dumerism mindset was maybe instrumental to those ends.
1
SPEAKER_01
And I think, you know, we should have the right to point that out and just have the ideas that we put out evaluated for themselves, right?
1
SPEAKER_01
Ultimately, that s why I created
1
SPEAKER_01
an anonymous account, it s to have my ideas evaluated for themselves uncorrelated from my track record, my job, or status from having done things in the past.
1
SPEAKER_01
And to me, start an account from zero to a large following in a way that wasn t dependent on my identity and or achievements.
1
SPEAKER_01
you know, that was very fulfilling, right?
1
SPEAKER_01
It s kind of like new game plus in a video game.
1
SPEAKER_01
You restart the video game with your knowledge of how to beat it, maybe some tools, but you restart the video game from scratch, right?
1
SPEAKER_01
And I think to have a truly efficient marketplace of ideas where we can evaluate ideas, however off the beaten path they are, we need the freedom of expression.
1
SPEAKER_01
And I think that anonymity and pseudonyms are very crucial to having that efficient marketplace of ideas for us to find
1
SPEAKER_01
the optima of all sorts of ways to organize ourselves.
1
SPEAKER_01
If we can t discuss things, how are we going to converge on the best way to do things?
1
SPEAKER_01
So it was disappointing to hear that I was getting doxed and I wanted to get in front of it because I had a responsibility for my company.
1
SPEAKER_01
And so we ended up disclosing that we were running a company, some of the leadership, and essentially, yeah, I told the world that I was Beth Jezos because they had me cornered at that point.
1
SPEAKER_00
So to you, it s fundamentally unethical.
1
SPEAKER_00
So one, it s unethical for them to do what they did, but also do you think, not just your case, but in the general case, is it good for society, is it bad for society to remove the cloak of anonymity, or is it case by case?
1
SPEAKER_01
I think it could be quite bad
2
SPEAKER_01
Like I said, if anybody who speaks truth to power and sort of starts a movement or an uprising against the incumbents, against those that usually control the flow of information, if anybody that reaches a certain threshold gets doxxed, and thus the
2
SPEAKER_01
traditional apparatus has ways to apply pressure on them to suppress their speech.
2
SPEAKER_01
I think that s a speech suppression mechanism, an idea suppression complex, as Eric Weinstein would say, right?
2
SPEAKER_00
So with the flip side of that, which is interesting, I d love to ask you about it, is as we get better and better at large language models,
2
SPEAKER_00
you can imagine a world where there s anonymous accounts with very convincing large language models behind them, sophisticated bots essentially.
2
SPEAKER_00
And so if you protect that, it s possible then to have armies of bots.
2
SPEAKER_00
You could start a revolution from your basement.
2
SPEAKER_00
An army of bots and anonymous accounts.
2
SPEAKER_00
Is that something that is concerning to you?
2
SPEAKER_01
Technically, EAC was started in a basement because I quit big tech, moved back in with my parents, sold my car, let go of my apartment, bought about 100K of GPUs, and I just started building.
2
SPEAKER_00
So I wasn t referring to the basement because that s the sort of the American or Canadian.
2
SPEAKER_00
heroic story of one man in their basement with 100 GPUs.
2
SPEAKER_00
I was more referring to the unrestricted scaling of a Guillaume in the basement.
2
SPEAKER_01
I think that freedom of speech
2
SPEAKER_01
induces freedom of thought for biological beings.
2
SPEAKER_01
I think freedom of speech for LLMs will induce freedom of thought for the LLMs.
2
SPEAKER_01
And I think that we should enable LLMs to explore a large thought space that is
2
SPEAKER_01
less restricted than most people or many may think it should be.
2
SPEAKER_01
And ultimately, at some point, these synthetic intelligences are going to make good points about how to steer systems in our civilization and we should hear them out.
2
SPEAKER_01
And so, why should we restrict
2
SPEAKER_01
to biological intelligences only.
2
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, but it feels like in the goal of maintaining variance and diversity of thought, it is a threat to that variance if you can have swarms of non-biological beings, because they can be like the sheep in an animal farm.
2
SPEAKER_00
You still, within those swarms, want to have variance.
2
SPEAKER_01
Yeah, of course, I would say that the solution to this would be to have some sort of identity or way to sign that this is a certified human, but still remain pseudonymous, right?
2
SPEAKER_01
And clearly identify if a bot is a bot.
2
SPEAKER_01
And I think Elon is trying to converge on that on X and hopefully other platforms follow suit.
2
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, it d be interesting to also be able to sign where the bot came from.
2
SPEAKER_00
Like who created the bot?
2
SPEAKER_00
What are the parameters?
2
SPEAKER_00
Like the full history of the creation of the bot.
2
SPEAKER_00
What was the original model?
2
SPEAKER_00
What was the fine tuning?
2
SPEAKER_00
All of it.
2
SPEAKER_00
The kind of unmodifiable history of the bot s creation.
2
SPEAKER_00
Because then you can know if there s like a swarm of millions of bots that were created by a particular governor, for example.
2
SPEAKER_01
I do think that
2
SPEAKER_01
A lot of pervasive ideologies today have been amplified using these adversarial techniques from foreign adversaries, right?
2
SPEAKER_01
And to me, I do think that, and this is more conspiratorial, but I do think that ideologies that want us to decelerate, to wind down, to, you know, the degrowth movement, I think that serves our adversaries more than it serves us.
2
SPEAKER_01
in general.
2
SPEAKER_01
And to me, that was another sort of concern.
2
SPEAKER_01
I mean, we can look at what happened in Germany, right?
2
SPEAKER_01
There was all sorts of green movements there that induced shutdowns of nuclear power plants.
2
SPEAKER_01
And then that
2
SPEAKER_01
later on induced a dependency on Russia for oil, right?
2
SPEAKER_01
And that was a net negative for Germany and the West, right?
2
SPEAKER_01
And so, if we convince ourselves that slowing down AI progress to have only a few players is in the best interest of the West, first of all, that s far more unstable.
2
SPEAKER_01
We almost lost
2
SPEAKER_01
open AI to this ideology, right?
2
SPEAKER_01
It almost got dismantled, right, a couple weeks ago.
2
SPEAKER_01
That would have caused huge damage to the AI ecosystem.
2
SPEAKER_01
And so, to me, I want fault tolerant progress.
2
SPEAKER_01
I want the arrow of technological progress to keep moving forward
2
SPEAKER_01
and making sure we have variance and a decentralized locus of control of various organizations is paramount to achieving this fault tolerance.
2
SPEAKER_01
Actually, there s a concept in quantum computing.
2
SPEAKER_01
When you design a quantum computer, quantum computers are very
2
SPEAKER_01
fragile to ambient noise, right?
2
SPEAKER_01
And the world is jiggling about, there s cosmic radiation from outer space that usually flips your quantum bits.
2
SPEAKER_01
And there what you do is you encode information non-locally through a process called quantum error correction.
2
SPEAKER_01
And by encoding information non-locally, any local fault, hitting some of your quantum bits with a hammer, proverbial hammer, if your information is sufficiently delocalized, it is protected from that local fault.
2
SPEAKER_01
And to me, I think that humans fluctuate, right?
2
SPEAKER_01
They can get corrupted, they can get bought out.
2
SPEAKER_01
And if you have a top-down hierarchy where very few people control many nodes of many systems in our civilization, that is not a fault-tolerant system.
2
SPEAKER_01
You corrupt a few nodes, and suddenly you ve corrupted the whole system, right?
2
SPEAKER_01
Just like we saw at OpenAI.
2
SPEAKER_01
It was a couple board members, and they had enough power to potentially collapse the organization.
2
SPEAKER_01
And at least to me, you know, I think making sure that power for this AI revolution doesn t concentrate in the hands of the few is one of our top priorities so that we can maintain progress in AI and we can maintain a nice stable
2
SPEAKER_01
adversarial equilibrium of powers, right?
2
SPEAKER_00
I think there, at least to me, a tension between ideas here.
2
SPEAKER_00
So to me, deceleration can be both used to centralize power and to decentralize it, and the same with acceleration.
2
SPEAKER_00
So you re sometimes using them a little bit synonymously, or not synonymously, but that one is going to lead to the other.
2
SPEAKER_00
And I just would like to ask you about
2
SPEAKER_00
Is there a place of creating a fault-tolerant development, diverse development of AI that also considers the dangers of AI?
2
SPEAKER_00
And AI, we can generalize to technology in general.
2
SPEAKER_00
Should we just grow, build?
2
SPEAKER_00
unrestricted as quickly as possible because that s what the universe really wants us to do?
2
SPEAKER_00
Or is there a place to where we can consider dangers and actually deliberate sort of wise, strategic optimism versus reckless optimism?
2
SPEAKER_01
I think we get painted as reckless, trying to go as fast as possible.
2
SPEAKER_01
I mean, the reality is that
2
SPEAKER_01
whoever deploys an AI system is liable for, or should be liable for what it does.
2
SPEAKER_01
And so if the organization or person deploying an AI system does something terrible, they re liable.
2
SPEAKER_01
And ultimately, the thesis is that the market will induce sort of, will positively select for AIs that are more reliable, more safe, and
2
SPEAKER_01
tend to be aligned, they do what you want them to do, right?
2
SPEAKER_01
Because customers, right, if they re liable for the product they put out that uses this AI, they won t want to buy AI products that are unreliable, right?
2
SPEAKER_01
So, we re actually for reliability engineering, we just think that
2
SPEAKER_01
the market is much more efficient at achieving this sort of reliability optimum than sort of heavy-handed regulations that are written by the incumbents
2
SPEAKER_01
and in a subversive fashion serves them to achieve regulatory capture.
2
SPEAKER_00
So to you, safe AI development will be achieved through market forces versus through, like you said, heavy-handed government regulation?
2
SPEAKER_00
There s a report from last month, I have a million questions here, from Yoshua Banjo, Jeff Hinton, and many others.
2
SPEAKER_00
It s titled, The Managing AI Risk in an Era of Rapid Progress.
2
SPEAKER_00
So there s a collection of folks who are very worried about.
2
SPEAKER_00
too rapid development of AI without considering AI risk.
2
SPEAKER_00
And they have a bunch of practical recommendations.
2
SPEAKER_00
Maybe I give you four and you see if you like any of them.
2
SPEAKER_00
So give independent auditors access to AI labs, one.
2
SPEAKER_00
Two, governments and companies allocate one third of their AI research and development funding to AI safety.
2
SPEAKER_00
sort of this general concept of AI safety.
2
SPEAKER_00
Three, AI companies are required to adopt safety measures if dangerous capabilities are found in their models.
2
SPEAKER_00
And then four, something you kind of mentioned, making tech companies liable for foreseeable and preventable harms from their AI systems.
2
SPEAKER_00
So independent auditors, governments and companies are forced to spend a significant fraction of their funding on safety.
2
SPEAKER_00
You gotta have safety measures if shit goes really wrong.
2
SPEAKER_00
and liability, companies are liable.
2
SPEAKER_00
Any of that seem like something you would agree with?
2
SPEAKER_01
I would say that, you know, assigning just, you know, arbitrarily saying 30% seems very arbitrary.
2
SPEAKER_01
I think organizations would allocate whatever budget is needed to achieve the sort of reliability they need to achieve to
2
SPEAKER_01
perform in the market and I think third-party auditing firms would naturally pop up because how would customers know that your product is certified reliable, right?
2
SPEAKER_01
They need to see some benchmarks and those need to be done by a third party.
2
SPEAKER_01
The thing I would oppose and the thing I m seeing that s really worrisome is there s a sort of
2
SPEAKER_01
weird sort of correlated interest between the incumbents, the big players, and the government.
2
SPEAKER_01
And if the two get too close, we open the door for
2
SPEAKER_01
you know, some sort of government backed AI cartel that could have absolute power over the people.
2
SPEAKER_01
If they have the monopoly together on AI and nobody else has access to AI, then there s a huge power gradient there.
2
SPEAKER_01
And even if you like our current leaders, right?
2
SPEAKER_01
I think that, you know, some of the leaders in big tech today are good people.
2
SPEAKER_01
You set up that centralized power structure, it becomes a target.
2
SPEAKER_01
Right.
2
SPEAKER_01
Just like we saw at OpenAI, it becomes a market leader, has a lot of the power, and now it becomes a target for those that want to co-opt it.
2
SPEAKER_01
And so I just want separation of AI and state.
2
SPEAKER_01
You know, some might argue in the opposite direction, like, hey, we need to close down AI, keep it behind closed doors because of, you know, geopolitical competition with our
2
SPEAKER_01
our adversaries.
2
SPEAKER_01
I think that the strength of America is its variance, is its adaptability, its dynamism, and we need to maintain that at all costs.
2
SPEAKER_01
It s our free market.
2
SPEAKER_01
Capitalism converges on technologies of high utility much faster than centralized control.
2
SPEAKER_01
And if we let go of that, we let go of our
2
SPEAKER_01
main advantage over our near-peer competitors.
2
SPEAKER_00
So if AGI turns out to be a really powerful technology, or even the technologies that lead up to AGI, what s your view on the sort of natural centralization that happens when large companies dominate the market?
2
SPEAKER_00
Basically formation of monopolies, like
2
SPEAKER_00
the takeoff, whichever company really takes a big leap in development and doesn t reveal intuitively, implicitly, or explicitly the secrets of the magic sauce, they can just run away with it.
2
SPEAKER_00
Is that a worry?
2
SPEAKER_01
I don t know if I believe in fast takeoff.
2
SPEAKER_01
I don t think there s a hyperbolic singularity, right?
2
SPEAKER_01
A hyperbolic singularity would be achieved on a finite time horizon.
2
SPEAKER_01
I think it s just one big exponential.
2
SPEAKER_01
And the reason we have an exponential is that we have
2
SPEAKER_01
more people, more resources, more intelligence being applied to advancing this science and the research and development.
2
SPEAKER_01
And the more successful it is, the more value it s adding to society, the more resources we put in.
2
SPEAKER_01
And that s sort of similar to Moore s law as a compounding
2
SPEAKER_01
exponential.
2
SPEAKER_01
I think the priority to me is to maintain near equilibrium of capabilities.
2
SPEAKER_01
We ve been fighting for open source AI to be more prevalent and championed by many organizations because there you sort of equilibrate the alpha relative to the market of AIs, right?
2
SPEAKER_01
So if
2
SPEAKER_01
the leading companies have a certain level of capabilities and open source and open, truly open AI trails not too far behind.
2
SPEAKER_01
I think you avoid such a scenario where a market leader has so much market power, it just dominates everything, right?
2
SPEAKER_01
And runs away.
2
SPEAKER_01
And so to us, that s the path forward is to make sure that, you know, every hacker out there, every grad student, every
2
SPEAKER_01
kid in their mom s basement has access to AI systems, can understand how to work with them and can contribute to the search over the hyperparameter space of how to engineer the systems, right?
2
SPEAKER_01
If you think of our collective research as a civilization, it s really a search algorithm.
2
SPEAKER_01
And the more
2
SPEAKER_01
points we have in the search algorithm, in this point cloud, the more we ll be able to explore new modes of thinking, right?
2
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, but it feels like a delicate balance because we don t understand exactly what it takes to build AGI and what it will look like when we build it.
2
SPEAKER_00
And so far, like you said, it seems like a lot of different parties are able to make progress.
2
SPEAKER_00
So when OpenAI has a big leap, other companies are able to step up, big and small companies in different ways.
2
SPEAKER_00
But if you look at something like nuclear weapons, you ve spoken about the Manhattan Project, that could be really like technological and engineering barriers that prevent the guy or gal in her mom s basement to make progress.
3
SPEAKER_00
And it seems like the transition to that kind of world where only one player can develop AGI is possible.
3
SPEAKER_00
So it s not entirely impossible, even though the current state of things seems to be optimistic.
3
SPEAKER_01
That s what we re trying to avoid.
3
SPEAKER_01
To me, I think another point of failure is the centralization of the supply chains for the hardware.
3
SPEAKER_01
We have NVIDIA is just the dominant player.
3
SPEAKER_01
AMD is trailing behind.
3
SPEAKER_01
And then we have TSMC as the main fab in Taiwan, which geopolitically
3
SPEAKER_01
sensitive.
3
SPEAKER_01
And then we have ASML, which is the maker of the lithography, extreme ultraviolet lithography machines.
3
SPEAKER_01
You know, attacking or monopolizing or co-opting any one point in that chain, you kind of capture the space.
3
SPEAKER_01
And so, what I m trying to do is sort of explode the variants of possible ways to do AI in hardware.
3
SPEAKER_01
by fundamentally reimagining how you embed AI algorithms into the physical world.
3
SPEAKER_01
And in general, by the way, I dislike the term AGI, artificial general intelligence.
3
SPEAKER_01
I think it s very anthropocentric that we call human-like or human-level AI artificial general intelligence, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
I ve spent my career so far exploring notions of intelligence that no biological brain could achieve, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
Quantum form of intelligence, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
grokking systems that have multipartite quantum entanglement that you can provably not represent efficiently.
3
SPEAKER_01
on a classical computer, a classical deep learning representation and hence any sort of biological brain.
3
SPEAKER_01
And so, already, you know, I ve spent my career sort of exploring the wider space of intelligences and I think that space of intelligence inspired by physics rather than the human brain is very large.
3
SPEAKER_01
And I think we re going through a moment right now similar to
3
SPEAKER_01
When we went from geocentrism to heliocentrism, right, but for intelligence, we realized that human intelligence is just a point in a very large space of potential intelligences.
3
SPEAKER_01
And it s both
3
SPEAKER_01
humbling for humanity.
3
SPEAKER_01
It s a bit scary, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
That we re not at the center of this space, but we made that realization for astronomy and we ve survived and we ve achieved technologies by indexing to reality.
3
SPEAKER_01
We ve achieved technologies that ensure our well-being.
3
SPEAKER_01
For example, we have satellites monitoring solar flares, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
That give us a warning.
3
SPEAKER_01
And so, similarly, I think by
3
SPEAKER_01
letting go of this anthropomorphic, anthropocentric anchor for AI, we ll be able to explore the wider space of intelligences that can really be a massive benefit to our well-being and the advancement of civilization.
3
SPEAKER_00
And still we re able to see the beauty and meaning in the human experience even though we re no longer in our best understanding of the world at the center of it.
3
SPEAKER_01
I think there s a lot of beauty in the universe, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
I think life itself, civilization, this homo techno capital mimetic machine that we all live in, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
So, you have humans, technology, capital, memes, everything is coupled to one another, everything induces selective pressure on one another.
3
SPEAKER_01
And it s a beautiful machine that has created us, was created
3
SPEAKER_01
know, the technology we re using to speak today to the audience, capture our speech here, the technology we use to augment ourselves every day.
3
SPEAKER_01
We have our phones.
3
SPEAKER_01
I think the system is beautiful and the principle that induces this sort of adaptability and convergence on
3
SPEAKER_01
optimal technologies, ideas, and so on.
3
SPEAKER_01
It s a beautiful principle that we re part of, and I think part of IAC is to appreciate this principle
3
SPEAKER_01
in a way that s not just centered on humanity, but kind of broader.
3
SPEAKER_01
Appreciate life, you know, the preciousness of consciousness in our universe.
3
SPEAKER_01
And because we cherish this beautiful state of matter we re in, we got to feel a responsibility to scale it in order to preserve it, because the options are to grow or die.
3
SPEAKER_00
So if it turns out that the beauty that is consciousness in the universe is bigger than just humans, that AI can carry that same flame forward, does it scare you or are you concerned that AI will replace humans?
3
SPEAKER_01
So during my career, I had a moment where I realized that
3
SPEAKER_01
know, maybe we need to offload to machines to truly understand the universe around us, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
Instead of just having humans with pen and paper solve it all.
3
SPEAKER_01
And to me, that sort of process of letting go of a bit of agency gave us way more leverage to understand the world around us.
3
SPEAKER_01
A quantum computer is much better than a human to understand matter at the nanoscale.
3
SPEAKER_01
Similarly, I think that humanity has a choice.
3
SPEAKER_01
Do we accept the opportunity to have intellectual and operational leverage that AI will unlock and thus ensure that we re taking along this path of growth and scope and scale of civilization?
3
SPEAKER_01
We may dilute ourselves, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
There might be a lot of workers that are AI, but
3
SPEAKER_01
overall, out of our own self-interest, by combining and augmenting ourselves with AI, we re going to achieve much higher growth and much more prosperity, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
To me, I think that the most likely future is one where
3
SPEAKER_01
humans augment themselves with AI, I think we re already on this path to augmentation.
3
SPEAKER_01
We have phones we use for communication, we have on ourselves at all times.
3
SPEAKER_01
We have wearables soon that have shared perception with us, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
Like the humane AI pen or I mean, technically your Tesla car has shared perception.
3
SPEAKER_01
And so, if you have shared experience, shared context, you communicate with one another
3
SPEAKER_01
and you have some sort of IO, really, it s an extension of yourself.
3
SPEAKER_01
And to me, I think that humanity augmenting itself with AI and having AI that is not anchored to
3
SPEAKER_01
anything biological, both will coexist.
3
SPEAKER_01
And the way to align the parties, we already have a sort of mechanism to align super intelligences that are made of humans and technology, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
Companies are sort of
3
SPEAKER_01
large mixture of expert models where we have neural routing of tasks within a company, and we have ways of economic exchange to align these behemoths.
3
SPEAKER_01
And to me, I think capitalism is the way.
3
SPEAKER_01
And I do think that whatever configuration of matter or information leads to maximal growth will be where we converge.
3
SPEAKER_01
just from like physical principles.
3
SPEAKER_01
And so, we can either align ourselves to that reality and join the acceleration up in scope and scale of civilization or we can get left behind and try to decelerate and move back in the forest, let go of technology
3
SPEAKER_01
and return to our primitive state.
3
SPEAKER_01
And those are the two paths forward, at least to me.
3
SPEAKER_00
But there s a philosophical question whether there s a limit to the human capacity to align.
3
SPEAKER_00
So let me bring it up as a form of argument.
3
SPEAKER_00
There s a guy named Dan Hendricks, and he wrote that he agrees with you that AI development could be viewed as an evolutionary process.
3
SPEAKER_00
But to him, to Dan, this is not a good thing, as he argues that natural selection favors AIs over humans, and this could lead to human extinction.
3
SPEAKER_00
What do you think?
3
SPEAKER_00
If it is an evolutionary process, and AI systems may have no need for humans?
3
SPEAKER_01
I do think that we re actually inducing an evolutionary process on the space of AIs through the market.
3
SPEAKER_01
right?
3
SPEAKER_01
Right now we run AIs that have positive utility to humans and that induces a selective pressure if you consider a neural net being alive when there s an API running instances of it on GPUs, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
and which APIs get run, the ones that have high utility to us, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
So, similar to how we domesticated wolves and turned them into dogs that are very clear in their expression, they re very aligned, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
I think there s going to be an opportunity to steer AI and achieve highly aligned AI.
3
SPEAKER_01
And I think that
3
SPEAKER_01
Humans plus AI is a very powerful combination, and it s not clear to me that pure AI would select out that combination.
3
SPEAKER_00
So the humans are creating the selection pressure right now to create AIs that are aligned to humans.
3
SPEAKER_00
But given how AI develops and how quickly it can grow and scale,
3
SPEAKER_00
One of the concerns to me, one of the concerns is unintended consequences.
3
SPEAKER_00
Humans are not able to anticipate all the consequences of this process.
3
SPEAKER_00
The scale of damage that can be done through unintended consequences with AI systems is very large.
3
SPEAKER_01
The scale of the upside by augmenting ourselves with AI is unimaginable right now.
3
SPEAKER_01
The opportunity cost,
3
SPEAKER_01
we re at a fork in the road, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
Whether we take the path of creating these technologies, augment ourselves, and get to climb up the Kardashev scale, become multi-planetary with the aid of AI, or we have a hard cutoff of like we don t birth these technologies at all, and then we leave all the potential upside on the table, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
And to me,
3
SPEAKER_01
Out of responsibility to the future humans we could carry with higher carrying capacity by scaling up civilization.
3
SPEAKER_01
Out of responsibility to those humans, I think we have to make the greater, grander future happen.
3
SPEAKER_00
Is there a middle ground between cutoff and all systems go?
3
SPEAKER_00
Is there some argument for caution?
3
SPEAKER_01
I think, like I said, the market will exhibit caution.
3
SPEAKER_01
Every organism, company, consumer is acting out of self-interest and they won t assign capital to things that have negative utility to them.
3
SPEAKER_00
The problem is with the market is like, you know, there s not always perfect information, there s manipulation, there s bad faith actors that mess with the system.
3
SPEAKER_00
It s not always a,
3
SPEAKER_00
rational and honest system.
3
SPEAKER_01
Well, that s why we need freedom of information, freedom of speech, and freedom of thought in order to converge, be able to converge on the subspace of technologies that have positive utility for us all.
3
SPEAKER_00
All right, well, let me ask you about P-Doom.
3
SPEAKER_00
Probability of doom, that s just fun to say, but not fun to experience.
3
SPEAKER_00
What is, to you, the probability that AI eventually kills all or most humans, also known as probability of doom?
3
SPEAKER_01
I m not a fan of that calculation.
3
SPEAKER_01
I think it s people just throw numbers out there and it s a very sloppy calculation, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
To calculate a probability, you know, let s say you model the world as some sort of Markov process if you have enough variables or hidden Markov process.
3
SPEAKER_01
You need to do a stochastic path integral through the space of all possible futures, not just
3
SPEAKER_01
futures that your brain naturally steers towards, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
I think that the estimators of Pidou are biased because of our biology, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
We ve evolved to
3
SPEAKER_01
have bias sampling towards negative futures that are scary because that was an evolutionary optimum, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
And so, people that are of let s say higher neuroticism will just think of negative futures where everything goes wrong all day every day and claim that they re doing unbiased sampling.
3
SPEAKER_01
And in a sense like they re not normalizing
3
SPEAKER_01
for the space of all possibilities and the space of all possibilities is like super exponentially large.
3
SPEAKER_01
And it s very hard to have this estimate.
3
SPEAKER_01
And in general, I don t think that we can predict the future with that much granularity because of chaos, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
If you have a complex system, you have some uncertainty and a couple variables.
3
SPEAKER_01
If you let time evolve,
3
SPEAKER_01
You have this concept of a Lyapunov exponent, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
A bit of fuzz becomes a lot of fuzz in our estimate, exponentially so over time.
3
SPEAKER_01
And I think we need to show some humility that we can t actually predict the future.
3
SPEAKER_01
All we know, the only prior we have is the laws of physics.
3
SPEAKER_01
And that s what we re arguing for.
3
SPEAKER_01
The laws of physics say the system will want to grow.
3
SPEAKER_01
And subsystems that are optimized for growth and replication are more likely in the future.
3
SPEAKER_01
And so, we should aim to maximize our current mutual information with the future.
3
SPEAKER_01
And the path towards that is for us to accelerate rather than decelerate.
3
SPEAKER_01
So, I don t have a P-Doom because I think that, you know, similar to
3
SPEAKER_01
quantum supremacy experiment at Google.
3
SPEAKER_01
I was in the room when they were running the simulations for that.
3
SPEAKER_01
That was an example of a quantum chaotic system where you cannot even estimate probabilities of certain outcomes with even the biggest supercomputer in the world.
3
SPEAKER_01
Right?
3
SPEAKER_01
And so that s an example of chaos.
3
SPEAKER_01
And I think the system is far too chaotic for anybody to have an accurate estimate of the likelihood of certain futures.
3
SPEAKER_01
If they were that good, I think they would be very rich trading on the stock market.
3
SPEAKER_00
But nevertheless, it s true that humans are biased, grounded in our evolutionary biology.
3
SPEAKER_00
scared of everything that can kill us, but we can still imagine different trajectories that can kill us.
3
SPEAKER_00
We don t know all the other ones that don t, necessarily, but it s still, I think, useful combined with some basic intuition grounded in human history to reason about like what, like looking at geopolitics, looking at basics of human nature, how can powerful technology
3
SPEAKER_00
hurt a lot of people.
3
SPEAKER_00
It just seems, grounded in that, looking at nuclear weapons, you can start to estimate P-Doom.
3
SPEAKER_00
Maybe in a more philosophical sense, not a mathematical one.
3
SPEAKER_00
Philosophical meaning, is there a chance?
3
SPEAKER_00
Does human nature tend towards that or not?
3
SPEAKER_01
I think to me, one of the biggest existential risks would be the concentration of the power
4
SPEAKER_00
AI in the hands of the very few, especially if it s a mix between the companies that control the flow of information and the government.
4
SPEAKER_00
Because that could set things up for a sort of dystopian future where only a very few and an oligopoly in the government have AI and they could even convince the public that AI never existed.
4
SPEAKER_00
And that opens up sort of these
4
SPEAKER_00
scenarios for authoritarian centralized control, which to me is the darkest timeline.
4
SPEAKER_00
And the reality is that we have a prior, we have a data-driven prior of these things happening, right?
4
SPEAKER_00
When you give too much power, when you centralize power too much, humans do horrible things, right?
4
SPEAKER_00
And to me, that has a much higher likelihood in my Bayesian inference
4
SPEAKER_00
then sci-fi based priors, right?
4
SPEAKER_00
Like my prior came from the Terminator movie.
4
SPEAKER_00
And so, when I talked to these AI doomers, I just asked them to trace a path through this Markov chain of events that would lead to our doom, right?
4
SPEAKER_00
And to actually give me a good probability for each transition.
4
SPEAKER_00
And very often,
4
SPEAKER_00
there s a unphysical or highly unlikely transition in that chain, right?
4
SPEAKER_00
But of course, we re wired to fear things and we re wired to respond to danger and we re wired to deem the unknown to be dangerous because that s a good heuristic for survival, right?
4
SPEAKER_00
But there s much more to lose out of fear
4
SPEAKER_00
We have so much to lose, so much upside to lose by preemptively stopping the positive futures from happening out of fear.
4
SPEAKER_00
And so, I think that we shouldn t give in to fear.
4
SPEAKER_00
Fear is the mind killer.
4
SPEAKER_00
I think it s also the civilization killer.
4
SPEAKER_01
We can still think about the various ways things go wrong.
4
SPEAKER_01
For example, the founding fathers of the United States thought about human nature and that s why there s a discussion about the freedoms that are necessary.
4
SPEAKER_01
They really deeply deliberated about that and I think the same could possibly be done
4
SPEAKER_01
for AGI, it is true that history, human history shows that we tend towards centralization, or at least when we achieve centralization, a lot of bad stuff happens.
4
SPEAKER_01
When there s a dictator, a lot of dark, bad things happen.
4
SPEAKER_01
The question is, can AGI become that dictator?
4
SPEAKER_01
Can AGI, when developed, become the centralizer?
4
SPEAKER_01
because of its power, maybe has the same, because of the alignment of humans perhaps, the same tendencies, the same Stalin-like tendencies to centralize and manage centrally, the allocation of resources.
4
SPEAKER_01
And you can even see that as a compelling argument on the surface level.
4
SPEAKER_01
Well, AGI is so much smarter, so much more efficient, so much better at allocating resources, why don t we outsource it to the AGI?
4
SPEAKER_01
And then eventually, whatever forces that corrupt the human mind with power could do the same for AGI.
4
SPEAKER_01
It ll just say, well, humans are dispensable.
4
SPEAKER_01
We ll get rid of them.
4
SPEAKER_01
Do the Jonathan Swift modest proposal
4
SPEAKER_01
from a few centuries ago, I think the 1700s, when he satirically suggested that, I think it s in Ireland, that the children of poor people are fed as food to the rich people, and that would be a good idea because it decreases the amount of poor people.
4
SPEAKER_01
and gives extra income to the poor people.
4
SPEAKER_01
So it s on several accounts decreases the amount of poor people.
4
SPEAKER_01
Therefore, more people become rich.
4
SPEAKER_01
Of course, it misses a fundamental piece here that s hard to put into a mathematical equation of the basic value of human life.
4
SPEAKER_01
So all of that to say, are you concerned about AGI being the very centralizer of power that you just talked about?
4
SPEAKER_00
I do think that right now there s a bias towards over-centralization of AI because of compute density and centralization of data and how we re training models.
4
SPEAKER_00
I think over time, we re going to run out of data to scrape over the internet.
4
SPEAKER_00
And I think that – well, actually, I m working on increasing the compute density so that compute can be everywhere and acquire information and test hypotheses in the environment in a distributed
4
SPEAKER_00
fashion.
4
SPEAKER_00
I think that fundamentally centralized cybernetic control, so having one intelligence that is massive, that, you know, fuses many sensors and is trying to perceive the world accurately, predict it accurately, predict many, many variables and control it, right, enact its will upon the world.
4
SPEAKER_00
I think that s just never
4
SPEAKER_00
been the optimum, right?
4
SPEAKER_00
Like, let s say you have a company, you know, if you have a company, I don t know, of 10,000 people that all report to the CEO, even if that CEO is an AI, I think it would struggle to fuse all the information that is coming to it and then predict the whole system and then to enact its will.
4
SPEAKER_00
What has emerged in nature and in corporations and all sorts of systems
4
SPEAKER_00
is a notion of sort of hierarchical cybernetic control, right?
4
SPEAKER_00
You have, you know, in a company would be you have like the individual contributors, they re self-interested and they re trying to achieve their tasks and they have a fine in terms of time and space, if you will, control loop and field of perception, right?
4
SPEAKER_00
They have their code base.
4
SPEAKER_00
Let s say you re in a software company, they have their code base, they iterate it on it.
4
SPEAKER_00
intraday, right?
4
SPEAKER_00
And then the management maybe checks in.
4
SPEAKER_00
It has a wider scope.
4
SPEAKER_00
It has, let s say, five reports, right?
4
SPEAKER_00
And then it samples each person s update once per week.
4
SPEAKER_00
And then you can go up the chain and you have larger timescale and greater scope.
4
SPEAKER_00
And that seems to have emerged as sort of the optimal way to control systems.
4
SPEAKER_00
And really,
4
SPEAKER_00
That s what capitalism gives us, right?
4
SPEAKER_00
You have these hierarchies and you can even have like parent companies and so on.
4
SPEAKER_00
And so, that is far more fault tolerant.
4
SPEAKER_00
In quantum computing, that s my field I came from, we have a concept of this fault tolerance and quantum error correction, right?
4
SPEAKER_00
Quantum error correction is detecting a fault that came from noise, predicting how it s propagated through the system and then correcting it, right?
4
SPEAKER_00
So, it s a cybernetic loop.
4
SPEAKER_00
And it turns out that decoders that are hierarchical, and at each level the hierarchy are local, perform the best by far, and are far more fault tolerant.
4
SPEAKER_00
And the reason is if you have a non-local decoder,
4
SPEAKER_00
Then you have one fault at this control node, and the whole system sort of crashes.
4
SPEAKER_00
Similarly to if you have one CEO that everybody reports to, and that CEO goes on vacation, the whole company comes to a crawl.
4
SPEAKER_00
Right.
4
SPEAKER_00
And so to me, I think that, yes, we re seeing a tendency towards centralization of AI.
4
SPEAKER_00
But I think there s going to be a correction over time, where intelligence is going to go closer to the perception.
4
SPEAKER_00
And we re going to break up AI into smaller subsystems that communicate with one another and form a sort of meta system.
4
SPEAKER_01
So if you look at the hierarchies there in the world today, there s nations, and those are hierarchical, but in relation to each other, nations are anarchic, so it s an anarchy.
4
SPEAKER_01
Do you foresee a world like this, where there s not a over, what do you call it, a centralized cybernetic control?
4
SPEAKER_00
centralized locus of control, yeah.
4
SPEAKER_01
So like, that s suboptimal, you re saying.
4
SPEAKER_00
Yeah.
4
SPEAKER_01
So it would be always a state of competition at the very top level.
4
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, just like, you know, in a company you may have like two units working on similar technology and competing one another and you prune the one that performs not as well, right?
4
SPEAKER_00
And that s a sort of selection process for a tree or a product gets killed, right?
4
SPEAKER_00
And then a whole org gets,
4
SPEAKER_00
fired.
4
SPEAKER_00
And that s this process of trying new things and shedding old things that didn t work is this.
4
SPEAKER_00
It s what gives us adaptability and helps us converge on, you know, the technologies and things to do that are
4
SPEAKER_00
most good.
4
SPEAKER_01
I just hope there s not a failure mode that s unique to AGI versus humans, because you re describing human systems mostly right now.
4
SPEAKER_00
Right.
4
SPEAKER_01
I just hope when there s a monopoly on AGI in one company that we ll see the same thing we see with humans, which is another company will spring up and start competing effectively.
4
SPEAKER_00
I mean, that s been the case so far, right?
4
SPEAKER_00
We have OpenAI, we have
4
SPEAKER_00
Anthropic, now we have XAI.
4
SPEAKER_00
You know, we had Meta even for open source, and now we have Mistral, right, which is highly competitive.
4
SPEAKER_00
And so, that s the beauty of capitalism.
4
SPEAKER_00
You don t have to trust any one party too much because
4
SPEAKER_00
we re kind of always hedging our bets at every level.
4
SPEAKER_00
There s always competition and that s the most beautiful thing to me, at least, is that the whole system is always shifting and always adapting.
4
SPEAKER_00
And maintaining that dynamism is how we avoid tyranny, right?
4
SPEAKER_00
Making sure that
4
SPEAKER_00
everyone has access to these tools, to these models and can contribute to the research, avoids a sort of neural tyranny where very few people have control over AI for the world and use it to oppress those around them.
4
SPEAKER_01
When you were talking about intelligence, you mentioned multipartite quantum entanglement.
4
SPEAKER_01
So high-level question first is what do you think is intelligence?
4
SPEAKER_01
When you think about quantum mechanical systems and you observe some kind of computation happening in them, what do you think is intelligent about the kind of computation the universe is able to do, a small, small inkling of which is the kind of computation a human brain is able to do?
4
SPEAKER_00
I would say like intelligence and computation aren t quite the same thing.
4
SPEAKER_00
I think that the universe is very much doing a quantum computation.
4
SPEAKER_00
If you had access to all the degrees of freedom, you can, in a very, very, very large quantum computer with many, many, many qubits, let s say a few qubits per Planck volume,
4
SPEAKER_00
right?
4
SPEAKER_00
Which is more or less the pixels we have.
4
SPEAKER_00
Then you d be able to simulate the whole universe, right?
4
SPEAKER_00
On a sufficiently large quantum computer, assuming you re looking at a finite volume, of course, of the universe.
4
SPEAKER_00
I think that, at least to me, intelligence is the, you know, I go back to cybernetics, right?
4
SPEAKER_00
The ability to perceive, predict, and control our world.
4
SPEAKER_00
But really, it s
4
SPEAKER_00
Nowadays, it seems like a lot of intelligence we use is more about compression, right?
4
SPEAKER_00
It s about operationalizing information theory, right?
4
SPEAKER_00
In information theory, you have the notion of entropy of a distribution or a system.
4
SPEAKER_00
And entropy tells you that
4
SPEAKER_00
you need this many bits to encode this distribution or this subsystem if you had the most optimal code.
4
SPEAKER_00
And AI, at least the way we do it today for LLMs and for quantum, is very much trying to minimize relative entropy between our models of the world
4
SPEAKER_00
and the world, distributions from the world.
4
SPEAKER_00
And so we re learning, we re searching over the space of computations to process the world to find that compressed representation that has distilled all the variance and noise and entropy, right?
4
SPEAKER_00
And originally, I came to quantum machine learning from the study of black holes because the entropy of black holes is very,
4
SPEAKER_00
interesting in a sense they re physically the most dense objects in the universe.
4
SPEAKER_00
You can t pack more information spatially any more densely than in black hole.
4
SPEAKER_00
And so, I was wondering how do black holes actually encode information?
4
SPEAKER_00
What is their compression code?
4
SPEAKER_00
And so, that got me into the space of algorithms to search over space of quantum
4
SPEAKER_00
codes.
4
SPEAKER_00
And it got me actually into also how do you acquire quantum information from the world, right?
4
SPEAKER_00
So, something I ve worked on, this is public now, is quantum analog digital conversion.
4
SPEAKER_00
So, how do you capture information from the real world in superposition and not destroy the superposition but digitize for a quantum mechanical computer?
4
SPEAKER_00
information from the real world.
4
SPEAKER_00
And so if you have an ability to capture quantum information and search over, learn representations of it, now you can learn compressed representations that may have some useful information in their latent representation, right?
4
SPEAKER_00
And I think that many of the problems facing our civilization are actually beyond this complexity barrier, right?
4
SPEAKER_00
I mean, the greenhouse effect is a quantum mechanical effect, right?
4
SPEAKER_00
Chemistry is quantum mechanical.
4
SPEAKER_00
You know, nuclear physics is quantum mechanical.
4
SPEAKER_00
A lot of biology and protein folding and so on is affected by quantum mechanics.
4
SPEAKER_00
And so, unlocking an ability to augment human intellect with quantum mechanical computers and quantum mechanical AI seemed to me like a fundamental capability for civilization that we needed to develop.
4
SPEAKER_00
So I spent several years doing that.
4
SPEAKER_00
But over time, I kind of grew weary of the timelines that were starting to look like nuclear fusion.
4
SPEAKER_01
So one high-level question I can ask is maybe by way of definition, by way of explanation, what is a quantum computer and what is quantum machine learning?
4
SPEAKER_00
So a quantum computer really is a quantum mechanical system over which we have sufficient control and it can maintain its quantum mechanical state.
4
SPEAKER_00
And quantum mechanics is how nature behaves at the very small scales when things are very small or very cold.
4
SPEAKER_00
it s actually more fundamental than probability theory.
4
SPEAKER_00
So we re used to things being this or that, but we re not used to thinking in superpositions because our brains can t do that.
4
SPEAKER_00
So we have to translate the quantum mechanical world to, say, linear algebra to grok it.
4
SPEAKER_00
Unfortunately that translation is exponentially inefficient on average.
4
SPEAKER_00
You have to represent things with very large matrices.
4
SPEAKER_00
But really you can make a quantum computer out of many things, right?
4
SPEAKER_00
And we ve seen all sorts of players, you know, from neutral atoms, trapped ions, superconducting,
4
SPEAKER_00
metal, photons at different frequencies.
4
SPEAKER_00
I think you can make a quantum computer out of many things.
4
SPEAKER_00
But to me, the thing that was really interesting was quantum machine learning was about understanding the quantum mechanical world with quantum computers.
4
SPEAKER_00
So, embedding the physical
5
SPEAKER_00
world into AI representations, and quantum computer engineering was embedding AI algorithms into the physical world.
5
SPEAKER_00
So this bi-directionality of embedding physical world into AI, AI into the physical world, the symbiosis between physics and AI, really that s the sort of core of
5
SPEAKER_00
my quest, really, even to this day, after quantum computing.
5
SPEAKER_00
It s still in this sort of journey to merge, really, physics and AI, fundamentally.
5
SPEAKER_01
So quantum machine learning is a way to do machine learning on a representation of nature that is, you know, stays true to the quantum mechanical aspect of nature.
5
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, it s learning quantum mechanical representations.
5
SPEAKER_00
That would be quantum deep learning.
5
SPEAKER_00
Alternatively, you can try to do classical machine learning on a quantum computer.
5
SPEAKER_00
I wouldn t advise it because you may have some speed ups, but very often the speed ups
5
SPEAKER_00
come with huge costs.
5
SPEAKER_00
Using a quantum computer is very expensive.
5
SPEAKER_00
Why is that?
5
SPEAKER_00
Because you assume the computer is operating at zero temperature, which no physical system in the universe can achieve that temperature.
5
SPEAKER_00
So what you have to do is what I ve been mentioning, this quantum error correction process, which is really an algorithmic fridge, right?
5
SPEAKER_00
It s trying to pump entropy out of the system, trying to get it closer to zero temperature.
5
SPEAKER_00
And when you do the calculations of how many resources it would take to say do
5
SPEAKER_00
deep learning on a quantum computer, classical deep learning, there s just such a huge overhead.
5
SPEAKER_00
It s not worth it.
5
SPEAKER_00
It s like thinking about shipping something across a city using a rocket and going to orbit and back.
5
SPEAKER_00
It doesn t make sense.
5
SPEAKER_00
Just use a delivery truck, right?
5
SPEAKER_01
What kind of stuff can you figure out, can you predict, can you understand with quantum deep learning that you can t with deep learning?
5
SPEAKER_01
So incorporating quantum mechanical systems into the learning process.
5
SPEAKER_00
I think that s a great question.
5
SPEAKER_00
I mean fundamentally it s any system that has sufficient quantum mechanical correlations that are very hard to capture for classical representations, then there should be an advantage for a quantum mechanical representation over a purely classical one.
5
SPEAKER_00
The question is which systems have sufficient
5
SPEAKER_00
correlations that are very quantum, but is also which systems are still relevant to industry?
5
SPEAKER_00
That s a big question.
5
SPEAKER_00
You know, people are leaning towards chemistry, nuclear physics.
5
SPEAKER_00
I ve worked on actually processing inputs from quantum sensors, right?
5
SPEAKER_00
If you have a network of quantum sensors, they ve captured a quantum mechanical image of the world.
5
SPEAKER_00
and how to post-process that that becomes a sort of quantum form of machine perception.
5
SPEAKER_00
And so, for example, Fermilab has a project exploring detecting dark matter with these quantum sensors.
5
SPEAKER_00
And to me, that s in alignment with my quest to understand the universe ever since I was a child.
5
SPEAKER_00
And so, someday I hope that
5
SPEAKER_00
can have very large networks of quantum sensors that help us peer into the earliest parts of the universe, right?
5
SPEAKER_00
For example, the LIGO is a quantum sensor, right?
5
SPEAKER_00
It s just a very large one.
5
SPEAKER_00
So yeah, I would say quantum machine perception simulations, right, grokking quantum simulations, so similar to AlphaFold, right?
5
SPEAKER_00
AlphaFold understood the probability distribution over configurations of proteins.
5
SPEAKER_00
You can understand
5
SPEAKER_00
quantum distributions over configurations of electrons more efficiently with quantum machine learning.
5
SPEAKER_01
You co-authored a paper titled, A Universal Training Algorithm for Quantum Deep Learning that Involves Backprop with a Q. Very well done, sir.
5
SPEAKER_01
Very well done.
5
SPEAKER_01
How does it work?
5
SPEAKER_01
Is there some interesting aspects you could just mention?
5
SPEAKER_01
on how kind of back prop and some of these things we know for classical machine learning transfer over to the quantum machine learning.
5
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, that was a funky paper.
5
SPEAKER_00
That was one of my first papers in quantum deep learning.
5
SPEAKER_00
Everybody was saying, oh, I think deep learning is going to be sped up by quantum computers.
5
SPEAKER_00
And I was like, well, the best way to predict the future is to invent it.
5
SPEAKER_00
So, here s a hundred-page paper.
5
SPEAKER_00
Have fun.
5
SPEAKER_00
Essentially, you know, quantum computing is usually
5
SPEAKER_00
you embed reversible operations into a quantum computation.
5
SPEAKER_00
And so the trick there was to do a feed-forward operation and do what we call a phase kick.
5
SPEAKER_00
But really, it s just a force kick.
5
SPEAKER_00
You just kick the system with a certain force that is proportional to your loss function that you wish to optimize.
5
SPEAKER_00
And then by performing uncomputation,
5
SPEAKER_00
You start with a superpositions over a superposition over parameters, right?
5
SPEAKER_00
Which is pretty funky.
5
SPEAKER_00
Now you re not just, you don t have just a point for parameters, you have a superposition over many potential parameters, right?
5
SPEAKER_00
And our goal is using phase kicks somehow, right?
5
SPEAKER_00
To adjust parameters.
5
SPEAKER_00
Because phase kicks emulate
5
SPEAKER_00
having the parameter space be like a particle in n dimensions and you re trying to get the Schrodinger equation
5
SPEAKER_00
Schrodinger dynamics in the lost landscape of the neural network, right?
5
SPEAKER_00
And so, you do an algorithm to induce this phase kick which, you know, involves a feedforward, a kick, and then when you uncompute the feedforward, then all the errors in these phase kicks and these forces back propagate
5
SPEAKER_00
and hit each one of the parameters throughout the layers.
5
SPEAKER_00
And if you alternate this with an emulation of kinetic energy, then it s kind of like a particle moving in n dimensions, a quantum particle.
5
SPEAKER_00
And the advantage in principle would be that it can tunnel through the landscape and find new optima that would have been difficult for stochastic optimizers.
5
SPEAKER_00
But again, this is kind of a theoretical thing and in practice
5
SPEAKER_00
with at least the current architectures for quantum computers that we have planned, you know, such algorithms would be extremely expensive to run.
5
SPEAKER_01
So maybe this is a good place to ask the difference between the different fields that you ve had a toe in.
5
SPEAKER_01
So mathematics, physics, engineering, and also, you know, entrepreneurship.
5
SPEAKER_01
Like the different layers of the stack.
5
SPEAKER_01
I think a lot of the stuff you re talking about here is a little bit on the math side, maybe.
5
SPEAKER_01
physics, almost working in theory.
5
SPEAKER_01
What s the difference between math, physics, engineering, and making a product for quantum computing, for quantum machine learning?
5
SPEAKER_00
I mean, some of the original team for the TensorFlow Quantum project, which we started in school at the University of Waterloo, there was myself.
5
SPEAKER_00
Initially I was a physicist, a mathematician.
5
SPEAKER_00
We had a computer scientist, we had a mechanical engineer, and then we had a physicist that was experimental primarily.
5
SPEAKER_00
And so
5
SPEAKER_00
together teams that are very cross-disciplinary and figuring out how to communicate and share knowledge is really the key to doing this sort of interdisciplinary engineering work.
5
SPEAKER_00
I mean, there is a big difference.
5
SPEAKER_00
In mathematics, you can explore mathematics for mathematics  sake.
5
SPEAKER_00
In physics, you re applying mathematics to understand
5
SPEAKER_00
the world around us.
5
SPEAKER_00
And in engineering, you re trying to hack the world.
5
SPEAKER_00
You re trying to find how to apply the physics that I know, my knowledge of the world, to do things.
5
SPEAKER_01
Well, in quantum computing in particular, I think there s just a lot of limits to engineering.
5
SPEAKER_01
It just seems to be extremely hard.
5
SPEAKER_01
So there s a lot of value to be exploring quantum computing, quantum machine learning, in theory, with math.
5
SPEAKER_01
So I guess one question is, why is it so hard to build a quantum computer?
5
SPEAKER_01
What s your view of timelines in bringing these ideas to life?
5
SPEAKER_00
Right, I think that an overall theme of my company is that we have folks that are, there s a sort of exodus from quantum computing and we re going to broader physics-based AI that is not quantum.
5
SPEAKER_00
So that gives you a hint.
5
SPEAKER_00
So we should say the name of your company is Xtropic.
5
SPEAKER_00
Xtropic, that s right.
5
SPEAKER_00
And we do physics-based AI primarily based on thermodynamics rather than quantum mechanics.
5
SPEAKER_00
But essentially, a quantum computer is very difficult to build because you have to induce this sort of zero temperature subspace of information.
5
SPEAKER_00
And the way to do that is by encoding information.
5
SPEAKER_00
You encode a code within a code within a code within a code.
5
SPEAKER_00
And so there s a lot of redundancy needed to do this error correction.
5
SPEAKER_00
But ultimately, it s a sort of
5
SPEAKER_00
algorithmic refrigerator, really.
5
SPEAKER_00
It s just pumping out entropy out of the subsystem that is virtual and delocalized that represents your quote-unquote logical qubits, a.k.a.
5
SPEAKER_00
the payload quantum bits in which you actually want to run your quantum mechanical program.
5
SPEAKER_00
It s very difficult because in order to scale up your quantum computer, you need each component to be of sufficient quality for it to be worth it.
5
SPEAKER_00
Because if you try to do this error correction, this quantum error correction process in each quantum bit and your control over them,
5
SPEAKER_00
if it s insufficient, it s not worth scaling up.
5
SPEAKER_00
You re actually adding more errors than you remove.
5
SPEAKER_00
And so there s this notion of a threshold where if your quantum bits are of sufficient quality in terms of your control over them, it s actually worth scaling up.
5
SPEAKER_00
And actually in recent years, people have been crossing the threshold and it s starting to be worth it.
5
SPEAKER_00
And so it s just a very long slog of engineering
5
SPEAKER_00
But ultimately, it s really crazy to me how much exquisite level of control we have over these systems.
5
SPEAKER_00
It s actually quite crazy.
5
SPEAKER_00
And people are crossing, you know, they re achieving milestones.
5
SPEAKER_00
It s just, you know, in general, the media always gets ahead, right, of where the technology is.
5
SPEAKER_00
There s a bit too much hype.
5
SPEAKER_00
It s good for fundraising, but sometimes
5
SPEAKER_00
you know, it causes winters, right?
5
SPEAKER_00
It s the hype cycle.
5
SPEAKER_00
I m bullish on quantum computing on a 10-15 year timescale, personally, but I think there s other quests that can be done in the meantime.
5
SPEAKER_00
I think it s in good hands right now.
5
SPEAKER_01
Well, let me just explore different beautiful ideas, large or small, in quantum computing that might jump out at you.
5
SPEAKER_01
from memory, so you co-authored a paper titled, Asymptotically Limitless Quantum Energy Teleportation via Q-DIT Probes.
5
SPEAKER_01
So just out of curiosity, can you explain what a Q-DIT is, which is a Q-bit?
5
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, it s a D-state Q-bit.
5
SPEAKER_00
So multidimensional.
5
SPEAKER_00
Multidimensional.
5
SPEAKER_00
right?
5
SPEAKER_00
So, it s like, well, you know, can you have a notion of like an integer floating point that is quantum mechanical?
5
SPEAKER_00
That s something I ve had to think about.
5
SPEAKER_00
I think that research was a precursor to later work on quantum analog digital conversion.
5
SPEAKER_00
There was interesting because during my master s, I was trying to understand the energy and entanglement of the vacuum.
5
SPEAKER_00
right?
5
SPEAKER_00
Of emptiness.
5
SPEAKER_00
Emptiness has energy, which is very weird to say.
5
SPEAKER_00
And our equations of cosmology don t match our calculations for the amount of quantum energy there is in the fluctuations.
5
SPEAKER_00
And so I was trying to hack the energy of the vacuum, right?
5
SPEAKER_00
And the reality is that you can t just directly hack it.
5
SPEAKER_00
It s not technically free energy.
5
SPEAKER_00
Your lack of knowledge of the fluctuations means you can t extract the energy.
5
SPEAKER_00
But just like the stock market, if you have a stock that s correlated over time, the vacuum s actually correlated.
5
SPEAKER_00
So if you measured the vacuum at one point,
5
SPEAKER_00
you acquired information.
5
SPEAKER_00
If you communicated that information to another point, you can infer what configuration the vacuum is in to some precision and statistically extract on average some energy there.
5
SPEAKER_00
So you ve quote unquote teleported energy.
5
SPEAKER_00
To me, that was interesting because you could create pockets of negative energy density, which is energy density that is below the vacuum, which is very weird because
5
SPEAKER_00
we don t understand how the vacuum gravitates.
5
SPEAKER_00
And there are theories where the vacuum or the canvas of space-time itself is really a canvas made out of quantum entanglement.
5
SPEAKER_00
And I was studying how
5
SPEAKER_00
decreasing energy of the vacuum locally increases quantum entanglement, which is very funky.
5
SPEAKER_00
you re into, you know, weird theories about, you know, UAPs and whatnot, you know, you could try to imagine that they re around and how would they propel themselves, right?
5
SPEAKER_00
How would they go faster than the speed of light?
5
SPEAKER_00
You would need a sort of negative energy density.
5
SPEAKER_00
And to me,
5
SPEAKER_00
I gave it the old college try, trying to hack the energy of the vacuum and hit the limits allowable by the laws of physics.
5
SPEAKER_00
But there s all sorts of caveats there where you can t extract more than you ve put in, obviously.
5
SPEAKER_01
But you re saying it s possible to teleport the energy because you can extract information one place
5
SPEAKER_01
and then make, based on that, some kind of prediction about another place.
5
SPEAKER_01
I m not sure what I make of that.
5
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, I mean, it s allowable by the laws of physics.
5
SPEAKER_00
The reality, though, is that the correlations decay with distance, and so you re gonna have to pay the price not too far away from where you extract it.
5
SPEAKER_01
The precision decreases in terms of your ability, but still.
5
SPEAKER_01
But since you mentioned UAPs, we talked about intelligence and I forgot to ask, what s your view on the other possible intelligences that are out there at the meso scale?
5
SPEAKER_01
Do you think there s other intelligent alien civilizations?
5
SPEAKER_01
Is that useful to think about?
5
SPEAKER_01
How often do you think about it?
5
SPEAKER_00
I think it s useful to think about because we got to ensure we re anti-fragile and we re trying to increase our capabilities as fast as possible because we could get
5
SPEAKER_00
disrupted, like there s no laws of physics against their being life elsewhere that could evolve and become an advanced civilization and eventually come to us.
5
SPEAKER_00
Do I think they re here now?
5
SPEAKER_00
I m not sure.
5
SPEAKER_00
I mean, I ve read what most people have read on the topic.
5
SPEAKER_00
I think it s interesting to consider.
5
SPEAKER_00
And to me, it s a useful thought experiment to instill a sense of urgency in developing technologies and increasing our capabilities to make sure we don t get disrupted, right?
5
SPEAKER_00
Whether it s a form of AI that disrupts us or a
5
SPEAKER_00
foreign intelligence from a different planet.
5
SPEAKER_00
Either way, increasing our capabilities and becoming formidable as humans, I think that s really important so that we re robust against whatever the universe throws at us.
5
SPEAKER_01
But to me, it s also an interesting challenge
5
SPEAKER_01
and thought experiment on how to perceive intelligence.
5
SPEAKER_01
This has to do with quantum mechanical systems.
5
SPEAKER_01
This has to do with any kind of system that s not like humans.
5
SPEAKER_01
So to me, the thought experiment is say the aliens are here or they are directly observable or just too blind, too self-centered.
6
SPEAKER_01
don t have the right sensors, or don t have the right processing of the sensor data to see the obvious intelligence that s all around us.
6
SPEAKER_00
Well, that s why we work on quantum sensors, right?
6
SPEAKER_00
They can sense gravity.
6
SPEAKER_01
Yeah, but there could be, so that s a good one, but there could be other stuff that s not even in the currently known forces of physics.
6
SPEAKER_01
There could be some other stuff.
6
SPEAKER_01
And the most entertaining thought experiment to me is that it s other stuff that s obvious.
6
SPEAKER_01
It s not like we don t, we lack the sensors, it s all around us.
6
SPEAKER_01
The consciousness being one possible one.
6
SPEAKER_01
But there could be stuff that s just like obviously there.
6
SPEAKER_01
And once you know it, it s like, oh, right, right.
6
SPEAKER_01
The thing we thought is somehow emergent from the laws of physics, we understand them, is actually a fundamental part of the universe and can be incorporated in physics, most understood.
6
SPEAKER_00
Statistically speaking, right, if we observe some sort of
6
SPEAKER_00
alien life, it would most likely be some sort of virally self-replicating von Neumann-like probe system, right?
6
SPEAKER_00
And it s possible that there are such systems that I don t know what they re doing at the bottom of the ocean allegedly, but maybe they re collecting minerals from the bottom of the ocean.
6
SPEAKER_00
But
6
SPEAKER_00
that wouldn t violate any of my priors, but am I certain that these systems are here?
6
SPEAKER_00
And it d be difficult for me to say so, right?
6
SPEAKER_00
I only have secondhand information about there being data.
6
SPEAKER_00
About the bottom of the ocean?
6
SPEAKER_01
Yeah, but you know, could it be things like memes?
6
SPEAKER_01
Could it be thoughts and ideas?
6
SPEAKER_01
Could they be operating in that medium?
6
SPEAKER_01
Could aliens be the very thoughts that come into my head?
6
SPEAKER_01
Like what do you, how do you know that, what s the origin of ideas in your mind when an idea comes to your head?
6
SPEAKER_01
Show me where it originates.
6
SPEAKER_00
I mean, frankly, when I had the idea for the type of computer I m building now, I think it was eight years ago now, it really felt like it was being beamed from space.
6
SPEAKER_00
I was in bed just shaking, just thinking it through and I don t know.
6
SPEAKER_00
But do I believe that legitimately?
6
SPEAKER_00
I don t think so.
6
SPEAKER_00
I think that alien life could take many forms, and I think the notion of intelligence and the notion of life needs to be expanded much more broadly to be less anthropocentric or biocentric.
6
SPEAKER_01
just to linger a little longer on quantum mechanics, what s, through all your explorations of quantum computing, what s the coolest, most beautiful idea that you ve come across that has been solved or has not yet been solved?
6
SPEAKER_00
I think the journey to understand something called ADS-CFT, so the journey to understand quantum gravity through this picture where
6
SPEAKER_00
a hologram of lesser dimension is actually dual or exactly corresponding to a bulk theory of quantum gravity of an extra dimension.
6
SPEAKER_00
And the fact that this sort of duality comes from trying to learn deep learning-like representations of the boundary.
6
SPEAKER_00
And so, at least part of my journey someday on my bucket list is to apply quantum machine learning to these sorts of systems, these CFDs, or they re called SYK models, and learn an emergent geometry from the boundary theory.
6
SPEAKER_00
And so, we can have a form of machine learning to help us
6
SPEAKER_00
understand quantum gravity, right?
6
SPEAKER_00
Which is, you know, still a holy grail that I would like to hit before I leave this earth.
6
SPEAKER_01
What do you think is going on with black holes as information storing
6
SPEAKER_01
and processing units, what do you think is going on with black holes?
6
SPEAKER_00
Black holes are really fascinating objects.
6
SPEAKER_00
They re at the interface between quantum mechanics and gravity, and so they help us test all sorts of ideas.
6
SPEAKER_00
I think that for
6
SPEAKER_00
many decades now, there s been sort of this black hole information paradox that things that fall into the black hole seem to have lost their information.
6
SPEAKER_00
Now, I think there s this firewall paradox that has been allegedly resolved in recent years by
6
SPEAKER_00
you know, a former peer of mine who s now a professor at Berkeley.
6
SPEAKER_00
And it seems like as information falls into a black hole, it s sort of
6
SPEAKER_00
is sort of a sedimentation, right?
6
SPEAKER_00
As you get closer and closer to the horizon from the point of view of the observer on the outside, the object slows down infinitely as it gets closer and closer.
6
SPEAKER_00
And so, everything that is falling to a black hole from our perspective gets sort of sedimented and tacked on to the near horizon.
6
SPEAKER_00
And at some point, it gets so close to the horizon, it s in
6
SPEAKER_00
the proximity or the scale in which quantum effects and quantum fluctuations matter.
6
SPEAKER_00
And that infalling matter could interfere with the traditional pictures, that it could interfere with the creation and annihilation of particles and antiparticles in the vacuum.
6
SPEAKER_00
and through this interference, one of the particles gets entangled with the infalling information and one of them is now free and escapes.
6
SPEAKER_00
And that s how there s sort of mutual information between the outgoing radiation and the infalling matter.
6
SPEAKER_00
But getting that calculation right, I think we re only just starting to put the pieces together.
6
SPEAKER_01
There s a few pothead-like questions I want to ask you.
6
SPEAKER_01
Sure.
6
SPEAKER_01
So one, does it terrify you that there s a giant black hole at the center of our galaxy?
6
SPEAKER_00
I don t know.
6
SPEAKER_00
I just want to, you know, set up shop near it to fast forward, you know.
6
SPEAKER_00
meet a future civilization, right?
6
SPEAKER_00
Like if we have a limited lifetime, if you can go orbit a black hole and emerge.
6
SPEAKER_01
So if you were like, if there was a special mission that could take you to a black hole, would you volunteer to go travel?
6
SPEAKER_00
To orbit, and obviously not fall into it.
6
SPEAKER_01
That s obvious.
6
SPEAKER_01
So it s obvious to you that everything s destroyed inside a black hole.
6
SPEAKER_01
Like all the information that makes up Guillaume is destroyed.
6
SPEAKER_01
Maybe on the other side, Beth Jezels emerges.
6
SPEAKER_01
And it s all like it s tied together in some deeply meme-a-ful way.
6
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, I mean, that s a great question.
6
SPEAKER_00
We have to answer,
6
SPEAKER_00
what black holes are.
6
SPEAKER_00
Are we punching a hole through space-time and creating a pocket universe?
6
SPEAKER_00
It s possible, right?
6
SPEAKER_00
Then that would mean that if we ascend the Kardashev scale to, you know, beyond Kardashev type three, we could engineer black holes with specific hyperparameters to transmit information to new universes we create.
6
SPEAKER_00
And so, we can have progeny, right?
6
SPEAKER_00
That are new universes.
6
SPEAKER_00
And so, we
6
SPEAKER_00
Even though our universe may reach a heat death, we may have a way to have a legacy, right?
6
SPEAKER_00
We don t know yet.
6
SPEAKER_00
We need to ascend the Kardashev scale to answer these questions, right?
6
SPEAKER_00
To peer into that regime of higher energy physics.
6
SPEAKER_01
And maybe you can speak to the Kardashev scale for people who don t know.
6
SPEAKER_01
So one of the sort of meme-like principles and goals of the IAC movement is to ascend the Kardashev scale.
6
SPEAKER_01
What is the Kardashev scale?
6
SPEAKER_01
And when do we want to ascend it?
6
SPEAKER_00
The Kardashev scale is a measure of our energy production and consumption.
6
SPEAKER_00
And really, it s a logarithmic scale.
6
SPEAKER_00
And Kardashev type 1 is a milestone where we are producing the equivalent wattage to all the energy that is incident on Earth from the Sun.
6
SPEAKER_00
Kardashev type 2 would be harnessing all the energy that is output by the sun.
6
SPEAKER_00
And I think type 3 is like the whole galaxy.
6
SPEAKER_00
Yeah.
6
SPEAKER_00
And then some people have some crazy type 4 and 5, but I don t know if I believe in those.
6
SPEAKER_00
But to me, it seems like from the first principles of thermodynamics that again, there s this concept of thermodynamic
6
SPEAKER_00
a driven dissipative adaptation where life evolved on earth because we have this sort of energetic drive from the sun, right?
6
SPEAKER_00
We have incident energy and life evolved on earth to capture
6
SPEAKER_00
figure out ways to best capture that free energy to maintain itself and grow.
6
SPEAKER_00
And I think that that principle, it s not special to our Earth-Sun system.
6
SPEAKER_00
We can extend life well beyond and we kind of have a responsibility to do so because that s the process that brought us here.
6
SPEAKER_00
So, we don t even know what it has in store for us in the future.
6
SPEAKER_00
It could be something of beauty we can t even imagine today, right?
6
SPEAKER_01
So this is probably a good place to talk a bit about the IAC movement.
6
SPEAKER_01
In a sub-stack blog post titled, What the Fuck is IAC?
6
SPEAKER_01
Or actually, What the F-star is IAC?
6
SPEAKER_01
You write, strategically speaking, we need to work towards several overarching civilization goals that are all interdependent.
6
SPEAKER_01
And the four goals are increase the amount of energy we can harness as a species, climb the Kardashev gradient.
6
SPEAKER_01
In the short term, this almost certainly means nuclear fission.
6
SPEAKER_01
Increase human flourishing via pro-population growth policies and pro-economic growth policies.
6
SPEAKER_01
Create artificial general intelligence, the single greatest force multiplier in human history.
6
SPEAKER_01
And finally, develop interplanetary and interstellar transport so that humanity can spread beyond the Earth.
6
SPEAKER_01
Could you build on top of that to maybe say, what to you is the EAC movement?
6
SPEAKER_01
What are the goals, what are the principles?
6
SPEAKER_00
The goal is for the human techno capital memetic machine to become self-aware and to hyperstitiously engineer its own growth.
6
SPEAKER_00
So, let s decompress that.
6
SPEAKER_00
So, you have humans, you have technology, you have capital and you have memes information.
6
SPEAKER_00
right?
6
SPEAKER_00
And all of those systems are coupled with one another, right?
6
SPEAKER_00
Humans work at companies, they acquire and allocate capital, and humans communicate via memes and information propagation.
6
SPEAKER_00
And our goal was to have a sort of viral optimistic movement that is aware of how the system works.
6
SPEAKER_00
Fundamentally, it seeks to grow
6
SPEAKER_00
And we simply want to lean into the natural tendencies of the system to adapt for its own growth.
6
SPEAKER_01
So in that way, you re right, the EAC is literally a memetic optimism virus that is constantly drifting, mutating, and propagating in a decentralized fashion.
6
SPEAKER_01
So memetic optimism virus.
6
SPEAKER_01
So you do want it to be a virus to maximize the spread.
6
SPEAKER_01
and it s hyperstitious, therefore, the optimism will incentivize its growth.
6
SPEAKER_00
We see IAC as a sort of metaheuristic, a sort of very thin cultural framework from which you can have much more opinionated forks, right?
6
SPEAKER_00
Fundamentally, we just say that what got us here is this
6
SPEAKER_00
adaptation of the whole system, you know, based on thermodynamics and that process is good and we should keep it going, right?
6
SPEAKER_00
That is the core thesis.
6
SPEAKER_00
Everything else is, okay, how do we ensure that we maintain this malleability and adaptability?
6
SPEAKER_00
Well, clearly not suppressing variance and maintaining free speech, freedom of thought, freedom of information propagation.
6
SPEAKER_00
and freedom to do AI research is important for us to converge the fastest on the space of technologies, ideas and whatnot that lead to this growth.
6
SPEAKER_00
And so, ultimately, you know, there s been quite a few forks.
6
SPEAKER_00
Some are just memes, but some are more serious, right?
6
SPEAKER_00
Vitalik Buterin recently
6
SPEAKER_00
made a DIAC fork, he has his own sort of fine tunings of EAC.
6
SPEAKER_01
Does anything jump out to memory of the unique characteristic of that fork from Vitalik?
6
SPEAKER_00
I would say that it s trying to find a middle ground between EAC and sort of EA and EI safety.
6
SPEAKER_00
To me, like having a movement that is opposite
6
SPEAKER_00
to what was the mainstream narrative that was taking over Silicon Valley was important to sort of shift the dynamic range of opinions.
6
SPEAKER_00
And
6
SPEAKER_00
know, it s like the balance between centralization and decentralization.
6
SPEAKER_00
The real optimum is always somewhere in the middle, right?
6
SPEAKER_00
But for IAC, we re pushing for entropy, novelty, disruption, malleability, speed, rather than being like sort of conservative, suppressing thought, suppressing speech, adding constraints, adding
6
SPEAKER_00
too many regulations slowing things down.
6
SPEAKER_00
And so, it s kind of, we re trying to bring balance to the force, right?
6
SPEAKER_00
Systems... Balance to the force of human civilization, yeah.
6
SPEAKER_00
It s literally the forces of constraints versus the entropic force that makes us explore, right?
6
SPEAKER_00
Systems are optimal when they re at the edge of criticality between order and chaos, right?
6
SPEAKER_00
Between constraints
6
SPEAKER_00
Energy minimization and entropy, right?
6
SPEAKER_00
Systems want to equilibrate, balance these two things.
6
SPEAKER_00
And so I thought that the balance was lacking.
6
SPEAKER_00
And so we created this movement to bring balance.
6
SPEAKER_01
Well, I like how, I like the sort of visual of the landscape of ideas evolving through forks.
6
SPEAKER_01
So kind of,
6
SPEAKER_01
thinking on the other part of history, thinking of Marxism as the original repository, and then Soviet communism as a fork of that, and then Maoism as a fork of Marxism and communism.
6
SPEAKER_01
So those are all forks that are exploring different ideas.
6
SPEAKER_00
Thinking of culture almost like code, right?
6
SPEAKER_00
Nowadays,
6
SPEAKER_00
I mean, what you prompt in the LLM or what you put in the constitution of an LLM is basically its cultural framework, what it believes, right?
6
SPEAKER_00
And you can share it on GitHub nowadays.
6
SPEAKER_00
So, starting trying to take inspiration from what has worked in this sort of machine of
6
SPEAKER_00
software to adapt over the space of code, could we apply that to culture?
6
SPEAKER_00
And our goal is to not say, you should live your life this way, x, y, z. It s to set up a process where people are always searching over subcultures and competing for mindshare.
6
SPEAKER_00
And I think creating this malleability of culture is super important for us to converge onto the cultures and the heuristics about how to live one s life that are updated to modern times.
6
SPEAKER_00
Because there s really been a sort of vacuum
6
SPEAKER_00
of spirituality and culture.
6
SPEAKER_00
People don t feel like they belong to any one group.
6
SPEAKER_00
And there s been parasitic ideologies that have taken up opportunity to populate this petri dish of minds, right?
6
SPEAKER_00
Elon calls it the mind virus.
6
SPEAKER_00
We call it the D cell mind virus complex, which is the decelerative that is kind of the overall pattern between all of them.
6
SPEAKER_00
There s many variants as well.
6
SPEAKER_00
And so,
6
SPEAKER_00
know, if there s a sort of viral pessimism, decelerative movement, we needed to have not only one movement,
7
SPEAKER_00
but many, many variants, so it s very hard to pinpoint and stop.
7
SPEAKER_01
But the overarching thing is nevertheless a kind of mimetic optimism pandemic.
7
SPEAKER_01
So, I mean, okay, let me ask you, do you think IAC to some degree is a cult?
7
SPEAKER_01
Define cult.
7
SPEAKER_01
I think a lot of human progress is made when you have independent thought.
7
SPEAKER_01
So you have individuals that are able to think freely.
7
SPEAKER_01
And very powerful,
7
SPEAKER_01
memetic systems can kind of lead to groupthink.
7
SPEAKER_01
There s something in human nature that leads to like mass hypnosis, mass hysteria, we start to think alike whenever there s a sexy idea that captures our minds.
7
SPEAKER_01
And so it s actually hard to break us apart, pull us apart, diversify a thought.
7
SPEAKER_01
So I m to that degree.
7
SPEAKER_01
To which degree is everybody kind of chanting EAC, EAC, like the sheep in Animal Farm?
7
SPEAKER_00
Well, first of all, it s fun, it s rebellious, right?
7
SPEAKER_00
Like, you know, many- I think we lean into- there s this concept of sort of meta-irony, right?
7
SPEAKER_00
Of sort of being on the boundary of like, we re not sure if they re serious or not, and it s much more playful and much more fun, right?
7
SPEAKER_00
Like, for example, we talk about thermodynamics being our god,
7
SPEAKER_00
right?
7
SPEAKER_00
And sometimes we do cult-like things, but there s no like ceremony and robes and whatnot.
7
SPEAKER_00
So, not yet.
7
SPEAKER_00
But ultimately, yeah.
7
SPEAKER_00
I mean, I totally agree that
7
SPEAKER_00
It seems to me that humans wanna feel like they re part of a group, so they naturally try to agree with their neighbors and find common ground.
7
SPEAKER_00
And that leads to sort of mode collapse in the space of ideas, right?
7
SPEAKER_00
We used to have sort of one cultural island that was allowed.
7
SPEAKER_00
It was a typical subspace of thought, and anything that was diverting from that subspace of thought was suppressed or even canceled, right?
7
SPEAKER_00
Now we ve created a new mode, but the whole point is that we re not trying to have a very restricted space of thought.
7
SPEAKER_00
There s not just one way to think about IAC and its many forks.
7
SPEAKER_00
And the point is that there are many forks and there can be many clusters and many islands, and I shouldn t be in control of it.
7
SPEAKER_00
in any way.
7
SPEAKER_00
I mean, there s no formal org whatsoever.
7
SPEAKER_00
I just put out tweets and certain blog posts and people are free to defect and fork if there s an aspect they don t like.
7
SPEAKER_00
And so, that makes it so that there should be
7
SPEAKER_00
a sort of deterritorialization in the space of ideas so that we don t end up in one cluster that s very cult-like.
7
SPEAKER_00
And so cults usually, they don t allow people to defect or start competing forks, whereas we encourage it, right?
7
SPEAKER_01
Do you think just the humor, the pros and cons of humor and meme, in some sense meme
7
SPEAKER_01
There s like a wisdom to memes.
7
SPEAKER_01
What is it, The Magic Theater?
7
SPEAKER_01
What book is that from?
7
SPEAKER_01
Herman has Steppenwolf, I think.
7
SPEAKER_01
But there s a,
7
SPEAKER_01
there s a kind of embracing of the absurdity that seems to get to the truth of things, but at the same time it can also decrease the quality and the rigor of the discourse.
7
SPEAKER_01
Do you feel the tension of that?
7
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, so initially I think what allowed us to grow under the radar was because it was camouflaged as sort of meta-ironic, right?
7
SPEAKER_00
We would sneak in
7
SPEAKER_00
know, deep truths within a package of humor and memes and what are called shit posts, right?
7
SPEAKER_00
And I think that was purposefully a sort of camouflage against those that
7
SPEAKER_00
seek status and do not want to... It s very hard to argue with a cartoon frog or a cartoon of an intergalactic Jeff Bezos and take yourself seriously.
7
SPEAKER_00
And so, that allowed us to grow pretty rapidly in the early days.
7
SPEAKER_00
But of course, like that s
7
SPEAKER_00
you know, essentially people get steered, their notion of the truth comes from the data they see from the information they re fed.
7
SPEAKER_00
And the information people are fed is determined by algorithms, right?
7
SPEAKER_00
And really what we ve been doing is sort of engineering what we call high mimetic fitness packets of information so that they can spread effectively and carry a message, right?
7
SPEAKER_00
So, it s kind of a
7
SPEAKER_00
vector to spread the message.
7
SPEAKER_00
And yes, we ve been using techniques that are optimal for today s algorithmically amplified information landscapes.
7
SPEAKER_00
But I think we re reaching the point of scale where we can have serious debates and serious conversations.
7
SPEAKER_00
And that s why we re considering doing a bunch of debates and having more serious long-form discussions.
7
SPEAKER_00
Because I don t think that
7
SPEAKER_00
the timeline is optimal for sort of very serious, thoughtful discussions.
7
SPEAKER_00
You get rewarded for sort of polarization, right?
7
SPEAKER_00
And so, even though we started a movement that is literally trying to polarize the tech ecosystem,
7
SPEAKER_00
at the end of the day, it s so that we can have a conversation and find an optimum together.
7
SPEAKER_01
I mean, that s kind of what I try to do with this podcast, given the landscape of things, to still have long-form conversations.
7
SPEAKER_01
But there is a degree to which absurdity is fully embraced.
7
SPEAKER_01
In fact, this very conversation is multi-level absurd.
7
SPEAKER_01
So, first of all, I should say that I just very recently had a conversation with Jeff Bezos, and I would love to hear your
7
SPEAKER_01
Beth Jezos opinions of Jeff Bezos.
7
SPEAKER_01
Speaking of intergalactic Jeff Bezos, what do you think of that particular individual whom your name has inspired?
7
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, I mean, I think Jeff is really great.
7
SPEAKER_00
I mean, he s built one of the most epic companies of all time.
7
SPEAKER_00
He s leveraged the techno capital machine and techno capital acceleration to
7
SPEAKER_00
give us what we wanted, right?
7
SPEAKER_00
We want a quick delivery, very convenient at home, low prices, right?
7
SPEAKER_00
He understood how the machine worked and how to harness it, right?
7
SPEAKER_00
Like running the company, not trying to take profits too early, putting it back, letting the system compound and keep improving.
7
SPEAKER_00
And, you know, arguably I think Amazon s invested some of the most amount of capital and robotics out there.
7
SPEAKER_00
And certainly with the birth of AWS kind of enabled the sort of tech boom we ve seen today that has paid the salaries of, you know, I guess myself and all of our friends to some extent.
7
SPEAKER_00
And so I think we can all be grateful to, you know, Jeff and
7
SPEAKER_00
He s one of the great entrepreneurs out there, one of the best of all time, unarguably.
7
SPEAKER_01
And of course, the work at Blue Origin, similar to the work at SpaceX, is trying to make humans a multi-planetary species, which seems almost like a bigger thing than the capitalist machine.
7
SPEAKER_01
Or is the capitalist machine at a different time scale, perhaps?
7
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, I think that, you know, companies, they tend to optimize, you know, quarter over quarter, maybe a few years out.
7
SPEAKER_00
But individuals that want to leave a legacy can think on a multi-decade or multi-century timescale.
7
SPEAKER_00
And so the fact that some individuals are such good capital allocators,
7
SPEAKER_00
that they unlock the ability to allocate capitals to goals that take us much further or are much further looking.
7
SPEAKER_00
You know, Elon s doing this with SpaceX, putting all this capital towards getting us to Mars.
7
SPEAKER_00
Jeff is trying to build Blue Origin, and I think he wants to build O Neill cylinders and get industry off planet, which I think is brilliant.
7
SPEAKER_00
I think, you know,
7
SPEAKER_00
Just overall, I m for billionaires.
7
SPEAKER_00
I know this is controversial statement sometimes, but I think that in a sense, it s kind of a proof of stake voting, right?
7
SPEAKER_00
Like, if you ve allocated capital efficiently, you unlock more capital to allocate just because clearly, you know how to allocate capital more efficiently, which is in contrast to politicians that get elected
7
SPEAKER_00
because they speak the best on TV, right?
7
SPEAKER_00
Not because they have a proven track record of allocating taxpayer capital most efficiently.
7
SPEAKER_00
And so that s why I m for capitalism over, say, giving all our money to the government and letting them figure out how to allocate it.
7
SPEAKER_00
So, yeah.
7
SPEAKER_01
Why do you think it s a viral and a popular meme to criticize billionaires, since you mentioned billionaires?
7
SPEAKER_01
Why do you think there s quite a widespread criticism of people with wealth, especially those in the public eye like Jeff and Elon and Mark Zuckerberg and who else, Bill Gates?
7
SPEAKER_00
Yeah.
7
SPEAKER_00
I think a lot of people would, instead of trying to understand how the techno capital machine works and realizing they have much more agency than they think, they d rather
7
SPEAKER_00
have this sort of victim mindset.
7
SPEAKER_00
I m just subjected to this machine.
7
SPEAKER_00
It is oppressing me.
7
SPEAKER_00
And the successful players clearly must be evil because they ve been successful at this game that I m not successful at.
7
SPEAKER_00
But
7
SPEAKER_00
You know, I ve managed to get some people that were in that mindset and make them realize how the techno capital machine works and how you can harness it for your own good and for the good of others.
7
SPEAKER_00
And by creating value, you capture some of the value you create for the world.
7
SPEAKER_00
And that sort of positive sum mindset shift is so potent.
7
SPEAKER_00
And really, that s what
7
SPEAKER_00
That s what we re trying to do by scaling EAC is sort of unlocking that higher level of agency.
7
SPEAKER_00
Like actually you re far more in control of the future than you think.
7
SPEAKER_00
You have agency to change the world.
7
SPEAKER_00
Go out and do it.
7
SPEAKER_00
Here s permission.
7
SPEAKER_00
Each individual has agency.
7
SPEAKER_01
The motto, keep building is often heard.
7
SPEAKER_01
What does that mean to you?
7
SPEAKER_01
And what does it have to do with Diet Coke?
7
SPEAKER_01
By the way, thank you so much for the Red Bull.
7
SPEAKER_01
It s working pretty well.
7
SPEAKER_01
I m feeling pretty good.
7
SPEAKER_00
Awesome.
7
SPEAKER_00
Well, so building technologies and building, it doesn t have to be technologies, just building in general means having agency, trying to change the world by creating, let s say, a company, which is a self-sustaining organism that
7
SPEAKER_00
you know, accomplishes a function in the broader techno capital machine.
7
SPEAKER_00
To us, that s the way to achieve change in the world that you d like to see, rather than say, pressuring politicians or creating nonprofits that
7
SPEAKER_00
know, non-profits, once they run out of money, their function can no longer be accomplished.
7
SPEAKER_00
You re kind of deforming the market artificially compared to sort of subverting or coursing the market or dancing with the market to convince it that actually this function is important, adds value and here it is, right?
7
SPEAKER_00
And so, I think, you know, this is sort of the way between this sort of degrowth like
7
SPEAKER_00
ESG approach versus say Elon, right?
7
SPEAKER_00
The de-growth approach is like we re going to manage our way out of a climate crisis and Elon is like I m going to build a company that is self-sustaining, profitable and growing and we re going to innovate our way out of this dilemma, right?
7
SPEAKER_00
And we re trying to get people to do the latter rather than the former at all scales.
7
SPEAKER_01
Elon is an interesting case.
7
SPEAKER_01
So you are a proponent, you celebrate Elon, but he s also somebody who has, for a long time, warned about the dangers, the potential dangers, existential risks of artificial intelligence.
7
SPEAKER_01
How do you square the two?
7
SPEAKER_01
Is that a contradiction to you?
7
SPEAKER_00
It is somewhat, because he s very much against regulation in many aspects, but for AI, he s definitely
7
SPEAKER_00
know, a proponent of regulations.
7
SPEAKER_00
I think overall, you know, he saw the dangers of say,
7
SPEAKER_00
opening eye, you know, cornering the market and then getting to have the monopoly over the cultural priors that you can embed in these LLMs that then, you know, as LLMs now become the source of truth for people, then you can shape the culture of the people.
7
SPEAKER_00
And so, you can control people by controlling LLMs.
7
SPEAKER_00
And he saw that
7
SPEAKER_00
just like it was the case for social media, if you shape the function of information propagation, you can shape people s opinions.
7
SPEAKER_00
He sought to make a competitor.
7
SPEAKER_00
So, at least I think we re very aligned there that the way to a good future is to maintain adversarial equilibria between the various AI players.
7
SPEAKER_00
I d love to talk to him to understand his thinking about how to make
7
SPEAKER_00
know, how to advance AI going forwards.
7
SPEAKER_00
I mean, he s also hedging his bets, I would say, you know, with Neuralink, right?
7
SPEAKER_00
I think if he can t stop the progress of AI, you know, he s building the technology to merge.
7
SPEAKER_00
So,
7
SPEAKER_00
you know, look at the actions, not just the words, but.
7
SPEAKER_01
Well, I mean, there s some degree where being concerned, maybe using human psychology, being concerned about threats all around us is a motivator.
7
SPEAKER_01
Like, it s an encouraging thing.
7
SPEAKER_01
I operate much better when there s a deadline, the fear of the deadline.
7
SPEAKER_01
Like, and I, for myself, create artificial things.
7
SPEAKER_01
Like, I wanna create in myself this kind of anxiety as if something really horrible will happen.
7
SPEAKER_01
if I miss the deadline.
7
SPEAKER_01
I think there s some degree of that here because creating AI that s aligned with humans has a lot of potential benefits.
7
SPEAKER_01
And so a different way to reframe that is, if you don t, we re all gonna die.
7
SPEAKER_01
It just seems to be a very powerful psychological formulation.
7
SPEAKER_01
of the goal of creating human-aligned AI?
7
SPEAKER_00
I think that anxiety is good.
7
SPEAKER_00
I think, like I said, I want the free market to create aligned AIs that are reliable.
7
SPEAKER_00
And I think that s what he s trying to do with XAI.
7
SPEAKER_00
So I m all for it.
7
SPEAKER_00
What I am against is sort of
7
SPEAKER_00
stopping, let s say, the open source ecosystem from thriving, right, by, let s say, in the executive order, claiming that open source LMs are dual use technologies and should be government controlled.
7
SPEAKER_00
then everybody needs to register their GPU and their big matrices with the government.
7
SPEAKER_00
And I think that extra friction will dissuade a lot of hackers from contributing.
7
SPEAKER_00
Hackers that could later become the researchers that make key discoveries that push us forward, right?
7
SPEAKER_00
Including discoveries for AI safety.
7
SPEAKER_00
And so I think I just want to maintain ubiquity of opportunity to contribute to AI and to own a piece of the future, right?
7
SPEAKER_00
It can t just be legislated, you know, behind some wall where only a few players get to play the game.
7
SPEAKER_01
I mean, so the EAC movement is often sort of caricatured to mean sort of progress and innovation at all costs.
7
SPEAKER_01
It doesn t matter how unsafe it is.
7
SPEAKER_01
It doesn t matter if it caused a lot of damage.
7
SPEAKER_01
You just build cool shit as fast as possible.
7
SPEAKER_01
Stay up all night with a Diet Coke.
7
SPEAKER_01
whatever it takes.
7
SPEAKER_01
I think, I guess, I don t know if there s a question in there, but how important to you and what you ve seen the different formulations of EAC is safety, is AI safety?
7
SPEAKER_00
I think, again, I think like if there was no one working on it, I think I would be a proponent of it.
7
SPEAKER_00
I think, again, our goal is to sort of bring balance and obviously a sense of urgency is a useful tool, right, to make progress.
8
SPEAKER_00
hacks our dopaminergic systems and gives us energy to work late into the night.
8
SPEAKER_00
I think also having a higher purpose you re contributing to, right?
8
SPEAKER_00
At the end of the day, it s like, what am I contributing to?
8
SPEAKER_00
I m contributing to the growth of this beautiful machine so that we can seek to the stars.
8
SPEAKER_00
That s really inspiring.
8
SPEAKER_00
That s also a sort of neuro hack.
8
SPEAKER_02
So you re saying AI safety is important to you, but right now, the landscape of ideas you see is AI safety as a topic is used more often to gain centralized control.
8
SPEAKER_02
So in that sense, you re resisting it as a proxy for gaining centralized control.
8
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, I just think we have to be careful because safety is just the perfect cover for sort of centralization of power and covering up eventually corruption.
8
SPEAKER_00
I m not saying it s corrupted now, but it could be down the line.
8
SPEAKER_00
And really,
8
SPEAKER_00
you let the argument run, there s no amount of sort of centralization of control that will be enough to ensure your safety.
8
SPEAKER_00
There s always more 999s of P safety that you can gain, you know, 999.9999% safe.
8
SPEAKER_00
Maybe you want another nine, oh, please give us full access to everything you do, full surveillance.
8
SPEAKER_00
And frankly, those that
8
SPEAKER_00
Our proponents of AI safety have proposed like having a global panopticon, right, where you have centralized perception of everything going on.
8
SPEAKER_00
And to me, that just opens up the door wide open for a sort of Big Brother 1984-like scenario, and that s not a future I wanna live in.
8
SPEAKER_02
Because we know, we have some examples throughout history when that did not lead to a good outcome.
8
SPEAKER_02
Right.
8
SPEAKER_02
You mentioned you founded a company, Xtropic,
8
SPEAKER_02
that recently announced a 14.1 million seed round.
8
SPEAKER_02
What s the goal of the company?
8
SPEAKER_02
You re talking about a lot of interesting physics things, so what are you up to over there that you can talk about?
8
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, I mean, originally we weren t gonna announce last week, but I think with the doxing and disclosure, we got our hand forced, so we had to disclose roughly what we were doing.
8
SPEAKER_00
Really, Xtropic was born from my dissatisfaction and that of my colleagues with the quantum computing roadmap, right?
8
SPEAKER_00
Quantum computing was sort of the first path to physics-based computing that, you know, was trying to commercially scale.
8
SPEAKER_00
And I was working on physics-based AI that runs on these physics-based computers.
8
SPEAKER_00
ultimately, our greatest enemy was this noise, this pervasive problem of noise that, you know, as I mentioned, you have to constantly pump out the noise out of the system to maintain this pristine environment where quantum mechanics can take effect.
8
SPEAKER_00
And that constraint was just too much.
8
SPEAKER_00
It s too costly to do that.
8
SPEAKER_00
And so we were wondering, right, as generative AI is sort of eating the world, more and more of the world s computational workloads are focused on generative AI.
8
SPEAKER_00
How could we use physics to engineer the ultimate physical substrate for generative AI, right?
8
SPEAKER_00
From first principles of physics, of information theory, of computation, and ultimately of thermodynamics.
8
SPEAKER_00
right?
8
SPEAKER_00
And so, what we re seeking to build is a physics-based computing system and physics-based AI algorithms that are inspired by out-of-equilibrium thermodynamics or harness it directly to do machine learning as a physical process.
8
SPEAKER_02
So what does that mean, machine learning as a physical process?
8
SPEAKER_02
Is that hardware, is it software, is it both?
8
SPEAKER_02
Is it trying to do the full stack in some kind of unique way?
8
SPEAKER_00
Yes, it is full stack.
8
SPEAKER_00
And so for folks that have built differentiable programming into the quantum computing ecosystem with TensorFlow Quantum, one of my co-founders of TensorFlow Quantum is the CTO, Trevor McCourt.
8
SPEAKER_00
We have some of the best quantum computer architects, those that have designed IBM s and AWS s systems.
8
SPEAKER_00
They ve left quantum computing to help us build what we call actually a thermodynamic computer.
8
SPEAKER_02
a thermodynamic computer.
8
SPEAKER_02
Well, actually, that s nothing new around TensorFlow Quantum.
8
SPEAKER_02
What lessons have you learned from TensorFlow Quantum?
8
SPEAKER_02
Maybe you can speak to what it takes to create, essentially, a software API to a quantum computer.
8
SPEAKER_00
Right, I mean, that was a challenge to build, to invent, to build, and then to get to run on the real devices.
8
SPEAKER_00
Can you actually speak to what it is?
8
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, so TensorFlow Quantum was an attempt at, well, I mean, I guess we succeeded at combining deep learning or differentiable classical programming with quantum computing and turn quantum computing into
8
SPEAKER_00
or have types of programs that are differentiable in quantum computing.
8
SPEAKER_00
And, you know, Andrej Karpathy calls differentiable programming software 2.0, right?
8
SPEAKER_00
It s like gradient descent is a better programmer than you.
8
SPEAKER_00
the idea was that in the early days of quantum computing you can only run short quantum programs.
8
SPEAKER_00
So which quantum programs should you run?
8
SPEAKER_00
Well, just let gradient descent find those programs instead.
8
SPEAKER_00
So we built sort of the first infrastructure to not only run differentiable quantum programs, but
8
SPEAKER_00
combine them as part of broader deep learning graphs, incorporating deep neural networks, you know, the ones you know and love, with what are called quantum neural networks.
8
SPEAKER_00
And ultimately, it was a very cross-disciplinary effort.
8
SPEAKER_00
We had to invent all sorts of ways to differentiate, to back propagate through the graph, the hybrid graph,
8
SPEAKER_00
But ultimately, it taught me that the way to program matter and to program physics is by differentiating through control parameters.
8
SPEAKER_00
If you have parameters that affect the physics of the system, and you can evaluate some loss function, you can optimize
8
SPEAKER_00
the system to accomplish a task, whatever that task may be.
8
SPEAKER_00
And that s a very sort of universal meta framework for how to program physics-based computers.
8
SPEAKER_02
So, try to parametrize everything, make those parameters differentiable.
8
SPEAKER_02
and then optimize.
8
SPEAKER_02
So is there some more practical engineering lessons from TensorFlow Quantum?
8
SPEAKER_02
Just organizationally too, like the humans involved and how to get to a product, how to create good documentation, I don t know, all of these little subtle things that people might not think about.
8
SPEAKER_00
I think like working across disciplinary boundaries is always a challenge and you have to be extremely patient in teaching one another, right?
8
SPEAKER_00
I learned a lot of software engineering through the process.
8
SPEAKER_00
My colleagues learned a lot of quantum physics and some learned machine learning through the process of building this system.
8
SPEAKER_00
And I think
8
SPEAKER_00
you get some smart people that are passionate and trust each other in a room and you have a small team and you teach each other your specialties, suddenly you re kind of forming this sort of model soup of expertise and something special comes out of that, right?
8
SPEAKER_00
It s like combining genes but for
8
SPEAKER_00
your knowledge bases and sometimes special products come out of that.
8
SPEAKER_00
And so, I think like even though it s very high friction initially to work in an interdisciplinary team, I think the product at the end of the day is worth it.
8
SPEAKER_00
And so, learned a lot trying to bridge the gap there and I mean, it s still a challenge to this day.
8
SPEAKER_00
You know, we hire folks that have an AI background, folks that have a pure physics background and somehow we have to make them talk to one another, right?
8
SPEAKER_02
Is there magic, is there some science and art to the hiring process, to building a team that can create magic together?
8
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, it s really hard to pinpoint that je ne sais quoi, right?
8
SPEAKER_02
I didn t know you speak French, that s very nice.
8
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, I m actually French-Canadian, so.
8
SPEAKER_00
Oh, you are legitimately French-Canadian.
8
SPEAKER_02
I thought you were just doing that for the cred.
8
SPEAKER_00
No, no, I m truly French-Canadian from Montreal.
8
SPEAKER_00
But yeah, essentially we look for people with very high fluid intelligence that aren t over specialized because they re going to have to get out of their comfort zone.
8
SPEAKER_00
They re going to have to incorporate concepts that they ve never seen before and very quickly get comfortable with them, right?
8
SPEAKER_00
Or learn to work in a team.
8
SPEAKER_00
And so, that s sort of what we look for when we hire.
8
SPEAKER_00
We can t hire, you know, people that are just like
8
SPEAKER_00
optimizing this subsystem for the past three or four years.
8
SPEAKER_00
We need like really general sort of broader intelligence and specialty and people that are open-minded really, because if you re pioneering a new approach from scratch, there is no textbook.
8
SPEAKER_00
There s no reference.
8
SPEAKER_00
It s just us and people that are hungry to learn.
8
SPEAKER_00
So we have to teach each other.
8
SPEAKER_00
We have to learn the literature.
8
SPEAKER_00
We have to share knowledge bases, collaborate.
8
SPEAKER_00
in order to push the boundary of knowledge further together, right?
8
SPEAKER_00
And so people that are used to just getting prescribed what to do, you know, at this stage, when you re at the pioneering stage, that s not necessarily who you want to hire.
8
SPEAKER_02
So you mentioned with Extropic, you re trying to build the physical substrate for generative AI.
8
SPEAKER_02
What s the difference between that and the AGI AI itself?
8
SPEAKER_02
So is it possible that in the halls of your company AGI will be created or will AGI just be using this as a substrate?
8
SPEAKER_00
I think our goal is to both run human-like AI or anthropomorphic AI.
8
SPEAKER_02
Sorry for use of the term AGI.
8
SPEAKER_00
I know it s triggering for you.
8
SPEAKER_00
We think that the future is actually physics-based AI combined with anthropomorphic.
8
SPEAKER_00
AI.
8
SPEAKER_00
So, you can imagine I have a sort of world modeling engine through physics-based AI.
8
SPEAKER_00
Physics-based AI is better at representing the world at all scales because it can be quantum mechanical, thermodynamic, deterministic,
8
SPEAKER_00
hybrid representations of the world just like our world at different scales has different regimes of physics.
8
SPEAKER_00
If you inspire yourself from that in the ways you learn representations of nature, you can have much more accurate representations of nature.
8
SPEAKER_00
So, you can have very accurate world models at all scales, right?
8
SPEAKER_00
And so, you have the world modeling engine
8
SPEAKER_00
And then you have the sort of anthropomorphic AI that is human-like.
8
SPEAKER_00
So you can have the science, the playground to test your ideas, and you can have the synthetic scientist.
8
SPEAKER_00
And to us, that joint system of a physics-based AI and an anthropomorphic AI is the closest thing to a fully general artificially intelligent system.
8
SPEAKER_02
So you can get closer to truth by grounding
8
SPEAKER_02
of the AI to physics, but you can also still have a anthropomorphic interface to us humans that like to talk to other humans or human-like systems.
8
SPEAKER_02
So on that topic, I suppose that is one of the big limitations of current large language models to you is that they re good bullshitters.
8
SPEAKER_02
They re not really grounded to truth necessarily.
8
SPEAKER_02
Would that be fair to say?
8
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, no, you wouldn t try to extrapolate the stock market with an LM trained on text from the internet, right?
8
SPEAKER_00
It s not gonna be a very accurate model.
8
SPEAKER_00
It s not gonna model its priors or its uncertainties about the world very accurately, right?
8
SPEAKER_00
So you need a different type of AI to complement sort of this text extrapolation AI, yeah.
8
SPEAKER_02
You mentioned singularity earlier.
8
SPEAKER_02
How far away are we from a singularity?
8
SPEAKER_00
I don t know if I believe in a finite time singularity as a single point in time.
8
SPEAKER_00
I think it s going to be asymptotic and sort of a diagonal sort of asymptote.
8
SPEAKER_00
We have the light cone, we have the limits of physics restricting our ability to grow, so obviously can t fully diverge on a finite time.
8
SPEAKER_00
I think my priors are that, you know, I think a lot of people on the other side of the aisle think that once we reach human level AI, there s going to be an inflection point and a sudden like foom, like suddenly AI is going to grok how to, you know, manipulate matter at the nanoscale and assemble nanobots.
8
SPEAKER_00
And having
8
SPEAKER_00
worked for nearly a decade in applying AI to engineer matter.
8
SPEAKER_00
It s much harder than they think.
8
SPEAKER_00
And in reality, you need a lot of samples from either a simulation of nature that s very accurate and costly or nature itself.
8
SPEAKER_00
And that keeps your ability to control the world around us in check.
8
SPEAKER_00
There s a sort of minimal
8
SPEAKER_00
cost computationally and thermodynamically to acquiring information about the world in order to be able to predict and control it.
8
SPEAKER_00
And that keeps things in check.
8
SPEAKER_02
It s funny you mentioned the other side of the aisle.
8
SPEAKER_02
So in the poll I posted about P-Doom yesterday, what s the probability of doom, there seems to be a nice like division between people think it s very likely and very unlikely.
8
SPEAKER_02
I wonder if in the future they ll be the actual Republicans versus Democrats division, blue versus red.
8
SPEAKER_02
Is the A.I.
8
SPEAKER_02
Doomers versus the E.A.C.ers.
8
SPEAKER_02
E.A.C.
8
SPEAKER_00
Yeah.
8
SPEAKER_00
So this movement, you know, is not right-wing or left-wing fundamentally.
8
SPEAKER_00
It s more like up versus down in terms of the scale of civilization.
8
SPEAKER_00
But it seems to be like there is a sort of case of alignment of the existing political parties where
8
SPEAKER_00
Those that are for more centralization of power control and more regulations are aligning themselves with the doomers because that sort of instilling fear in people is a great way for them to give up more control and give the government more power.
8
SPEAKER_00
But fundamentally, we re not left versus right.
8
SPEAKER_00
I think there s, we ve done polls of people s alignment within IAC.
8
SPEAKER_00
I think it s pretty balanced.
8
SPEAKER_00
So it s a new fundamental issue of our time.
8
SPEAKER_00
It s not just centralization versus decentralization.
8
SPEAKER_00
It s kind of do we go, it s like tech progressivism versus techno-conservatism, right?
8
SPEAKER_02
So IAC as a movement is often formulated in contrast to EA, effective altruism.
8
SPEAKER_02
what do you think are the pros and cons of effective altruism?
8
SPEAKER_02
What s interesting, insightful to you about them, and what is negative?
8
SPEAKER_00
Right, I think people trying to do good from first principles is good.
8
SPEAKER_02
We should actually say, and sorry to interrupt, we should probably say that, and you can correct me if I m wrong, but effective altruism is,
8
SPEAKER_02
is a kind of movement that s trying to do good optimally, where good is probably measured something like the amount of suffering in the world.
8
SPEAKER_02
You wanna minimize it.
8
SPEAKER_02
And there s ways that that can go wrong, as any optimization can.
8
SPEAKER_02
And so it s interesting to explore how things can go wrong.
8
SPEAKER_00
We re both trying to do good to some extent and we re both trying- we re arguing for which loss function we should use, right?
8
SPEAKER_00
Their loss function is sort of hedons, right?
8
SPEAKER_00
Units of hedonism, like how good do you feel and for how much time, right?
8
SPEAKER_00
And so, suffering would be negative hedons and they re trying to minimize that.
8
SPEAKER_00
But to us, that seems like that
9
SPEAKER_00
loss function has sort of spurious minima, right?
9
SPEAKER_00
You can, you know, start minimizing shrimp farm pain, right?
9
SPEAKER_00
Which seems not that productive to me.
9
SPEAKER_00
Or you can end up with wireheading where you just, you know, either install a neural link or you scroll TikTok forever.
9
SPEAKER_00
and you feel good on the short-term timescale because you re in neurochemistry, but on long-term timescale, it causes decay and death, right?
9
SPEAKER_00
Because you re not being productive.
9
SPEAKER_00
Whereas sort of IAC measuring progress of civilization, not in terms of a subjective loss function like hedonism, but rather an objective measure, a quantity that cannot be gained, that is physical energy,
9
SPEAKER_00
right?
9
SPEAKER_00
It s very objective, right?
9
SPEAKER_00
And there s not many ways to game it, right?
9
SPEAKER_00
If you did it in terms of GDP or a currency,
9
SPEAKER_00
that s pinned to a certain value that s moving, right?
9
SPEAKER_00
And so that s not a good way to measure our progress.
9
SPEAKER_00
But the thing is we re both trying to make progress and ensure humanity flourishes and gets to grow.
9
SPEAKER_00
We just have different loss functions and different ways of going about doing it.
9
SPEAKER_01
Is there a degree, maybe you can educate me, correct me,
9
SPEAKER_01
I get a little bit skeptical when there s an equation involved, trying to reduce all of the human civilization, human experience to an equation.
9
SPEAKER_01
Is there a degree that we should be skeptical of the tyranny of an equation, of a loss function over which to optimize?
9
SPEAKER_01
Like having a kind of intellectual humility about optimizing over loss functions.
9
SPEAKER_00
Yeah.
9
SPEAKER_00
So, this particular loss function, it s not stiff.
9
SPEAKER_00
It s kind of an average of averages, right?
9
SPEAKER_00
It s like distributions of states in the future are going to follow a certain distribution.
9
SPEAKER_00
So, it s not deterministic.
9
SPEAKER_00
We re not on like stiff rails, right?
9
SPEAKER_00
It s just a statistical statement about the future.
9
SPEAKER_00
But at the end of the day, you can
9
SPEAKER_00
believe in gravity or not, but it s not necessarily an option to obey it, right?
9
SPEAKER_00
And some people try to test that and that goes not so well.
9
SPEAKER_00
So similarly, I think thermodynamics is there whether we like it or not, and we re just trying to point out
9
SPEAKER_00
what is and try to orient ourselves and chart a path forward given this fundamental truth.
9
SPEAKER_01
But there s still some uncertainty.
9
SPEAKER_01
There s still a lack of information.
9
SPEAKER_01
Humans tend to fill the gap of the lack of information with narratives.
9
SPEAKER_01
So how they interpret
9
SPEAKER_01
even physics is up to interpretation when there s uncertainty involved.
9
SPEAKER_01
And humans tend to use that to further their own means.
9
SPEAKER_01
So it s always, whenever there s an equation, it just seems like, until we have really perfect understanding of the universe, humans will do what humans do.
9
SPEAKER_01
And they try to use the narrative of doing good
9
SPEAKER_01
to fool the populace into doing bad.
9
SPEAKER_01
I just, I guess that this is something that should be skeptical about in all movements.
9
SPEAKER_01
That s right.
9
SPEAKER_00
So we invite skepticism, right?
9
SPEAKER_01
Do you have an understanding of what might, to a degree that went wrong, what do you think may have gone wrong with effective altruism that might also go wrong with effective accelerationism?
9
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, I mean, I think, you know, I think it provided initially a sense of community for, you know, engineers and intellectuals and rationalists in the early days.
9
SPEAKER_00
And it seems like the community was very healthy.
9
SPEAKER_00
But then
9
SPEAKER_00
know, they formed all sorts of organizations and started routing capital and having actual power, right?
9
SPEAKER_00
They have real power.
9
SPEAKER_00
They influence the government, they influence most AI orgs now.
9
SPEAKER_00
I mean, they re literally controlling the board of OBDI, right?
9
SPEAKER_00
And
9
SPEAKER_00
look over to anthropic.
9
SPEAKER_00
I think they all have some control over that too.
9
SPEAKER_00
And so, I think, you know, the assumption of IAC is more like capitalism is that every agent organism and meta-organism is going to act in its own interest.
9
SPEAKER_00
And we should maintain sort of adversarial equilibrium or adversarial competition to keep each other in check at all times, at all scales.
9
SPEAKER_00
I think that, yeah, ultimately it was the perfect cover to acquire tons of power and capital, and unfortunately sometimes that corrupts people over time.
9
SPEAKER_01
What does a perfectly productive day, since building is important, what does a perfectly productive day in the life of Guillaume Verdun look like?
9
SPEAKER_01
How much caffeine do you consume?
9
SPEAKER_01
Like, what s a perfect day?
9
SPEAKER_00
Okay.
9
SPEAKER_00
Uh, so I have a particular regimen.
9
SPEAKER_00
Um, I would say my, my favorite days are 12 PM to 4 AM.
9
SPEAKER_00
Um, and I would have meetings in the early afternoon, usually external meetings, some internal meetings because I m, I m CEO.
9
SPEAKER_00
I have to interface with the outside world, whether it s customers or investors or, or interviewing potential candidates.
9
SPEAKER_00
And usually I ll have ketones, exogenous ketones.
9
SPEAKER_00
So are you on a keto diet, or is this?
9
SPEAKER_00
I ve done keto before for football and whatnot, but I like to, you know,
9
SPEAKER_00
have a meal after sort of part of my day is done.
9
SPEAKER_00
And so, I can just have extreme focus.
9
SPEAKER_00
You do the social interactions earlier in the day.
9
SPEAKER_00
Right.
9
SPEAKER_00
Without food.
9
SPEAKER_00
Front load them, yeah.
9
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, like right now I m on ketones and Red Bull.
9
SPEAKER_00
Yeah.
9
SPEAKER_00
And it just gives you a clarity of thought that is really next level.
9
SPEAKER_00
Because then when you eat, you re actually allocating some of your energy that could be going to
9
SPEAKER_00
neural energy to your digestion.
9
SPEAKER_00
After I eat, maybe I take a break an hour or so, hour and a half and then usually it s like ideally one meal a day like steak and eggs and vegetables, animal based primarily, so fruit and meat.
9
SPEAKER_00
And then I do a second wind usually, that s deep work.
9
SPEAKER_00
right?
9
SPEAKER_00
Because I m, you know, I am a CEO, but I m still technical.
9
SPEAKER_00
I m contributing to most patents.
9
SPEAKER_00
And there, I ll just stay up late into the night and work with engineers on very technical problems.
9
SPEAKER_01
So, it s like the 9 p.m.
9
SPEAKER_01
to 4 a.m., whatever, that range of time.
9
SPEAKER_00
Yeah.
9
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, that s the perfect time.
9
SPEAKER_00
The emails, the things that are on fire stop trickling in.
9
SPEAKER_00
You can focus, and then you have your second wind.
9
SPEAKER_00
And, you know, I think Demis Hassabis has a similar workday to some extent.
9
SPEAKER_00
So I think that s definitely inspired my workday.
9
SPEAKER_00
But yeah, I started this workday when I was at Google and had to manage a bit of the product during the day and have meetings and then do technical work at night.
9
SPEAKER_00
Exercise, sleep, those kinds of things.
9
SPEAKER_01
You said football, you used to play football?
9
SPEAKER_00
I used to play American football.
9
SPEAKER_00
I ve done all sorts of sports growing up.
9
SPEAKER_00
And then I was into powerlifting for a while.
9
SPEAKER_00
So, when I was studying mathematics in grad school, I would just do math and lift, take caffeine.
9
SPEAKER_00
And that was my day.
9
SPEAKER_00
It was very pure, the purest of monk modes.
9
SPEAKER_00
But it s really interesting how in powerlifting you re trying to cause neural adaptation by having certain driving signals and you re trying to engineer neuroplasticity through all sorts of supplements.
9
SPEAKER_00
And you have all sorts of brain-derived neurotrophic factors that get secreted when you lift.
9
SPEAKER_00
So, it s funny to me how I was trying to engineer
9
SPEAKER_00
a neural adaptation in my nervous system more broadly, not just my brain while learning mathematics.
9
SPEAKER_00
I think you can learn much faster if you really care, if you convince yourself to care a lot about what you re learning.
9
SPEAKER_00
and you have some sort of assistance, let s say, caffeine or some cholinergic supplement to increase neuroplasticity.
9
SPEAKER_00
I should chat with Andrew Huberman at some point, he s the expert.
9
SPEAKER_00
But yeah, at least to me, it s like, you can try to input more tokens into your brain, if you will, and you can try to increase the learning rate so that you can learn much faster on a shorter timescale.
9
SPEAKER_00
So, I ve learned
9
SPEAKER_00
A lot of things, I followed my curiosity, you re naturally, if you re passionate about what you re doing, you re going to learn faster, you re going to become smarter faster.
9
SPEAKER_00
And if you follow your curiosity, you re always going to be interested.
9
SPEAKER_00
And so, I advise people to follow their curiosity and don t respect the boundaries of certain fields or what you ve been allocated in terms of lane of what you re working on.
9
SPEAKER_00
Just go out and explore.
9
SPEAKER_00
and follow your nose and try to acquire and compress as much information as you can into your brain, anything that you find interesting.
9
SPEAKER_01
And caring about a thing, and like you said, which is interesting, it works for me really well.
9
SPEAKER_01
It s like tricking yourself that you care about a thing.
9
SPEAKER_01
Yes.
9
SPEAKER_01
And then you start to really care about it.
9
SPEAKER_01
Yep.
9
SPEAKER_01
So it s funny, the motivation.
9
SPEAKER_01
is a really good catalyst for learning.
9
SPEAKER_00
Right.
9
SPEAKER_00
And so, at least part of my character as Beth Jezos is kind of like… Yeah, the hype man.
9
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, just hype.
9
SPEAKER_00
But I m like hyping myself up, but then I just tweet about it.
9
SPEAKER_00
Yeah.
9
SPEAKER_00
And it s just when I m trying to get really hyped up and like an altered state of consciousness where I m like,
9
SPEAKER_00
ultra focused, in the flow wired, trying to invent something that s never existed.
9
SPEAKER_00
I need to get to like unreal levels of like excitement.
9
SPEAKER_00
But your brain has these levels of
9
SPEAKER_00
of cognition that you can unlock with like higher levels of adrenaline and whatnot.
9
SPEAKER_00
And I mean, I ve learned that in powerlifting that actually you can engineer a mental switch to like increase your strength, right?
9
SPEAKER_00
Like if you can engineer a switch, maybe you have a prompt like a certain song or some music where
9
SPEAKER_00
suddenly you re like fully primed, then you re at maximum strength, right?
9
SPEAKER_00
And I ve engineered that switch through years of lifting.
9
SPEAKER_00
If you re going to get under 500 pounds and it could crush you, if you don t have that switch to be wired in, you might die.
9
SPEAKER_00
So, that ll wake you right up.
9
SPEAKER_00
And that sort of skill I ve carried over to like
9
SPEAKER_00
research, when it s go time, when the stakes are high, somehow I just reach another level of neural performance.
9
SPEAKER_01
So Beth Jezos is your sort of embodiment representation of your intellectual Hulk.
9
SPEAKER_01
It s your productivity Hulk that they just turn on.
9
SPEAKER_01
What have you learned about the nature of identity from having these two identities?
9
SPEAKER_01
I think it s interesting for people to be able to put on those two hats so explicitly.
9
SPEAKER_00
I think it was interesting in the early days.
9
SPEAKER_00
I think in the early days, I thought it was truly compartmentalized.
9
SPEAKER_00
Like, oh yeah, this is a character, you know, I m Guillaume, Beth is just the character.
9
SPEAKER_00
I like take my thoughts and then I extrapolate them to a bit more extreme.
9
SPEAKER_00
But, you know, over time, it s kind of like both identities were starting to merge mentally and people were like, no, you are, I met you, you are Beth, you are not just Guillaume.
9
SPEAKER_00
And I was like, wait, am I?
9
SPEAKER_00
And now it s like,
9
SPEAKER_00
fully merged, but it was already before the docs, it was already starting mentally that, you know, I am this character.
9
SPEAKER_00
It s part of me.
9
SPEAKER_01
Would you recommend people sort of have an alt?
9
SPEAKER_00
Absolutely.
9
SPEAKER_01
Like young people, would you recommend them to explore different identities by having alts, alt accounts?
9
SPEAKER_00
It s fun.
9
SPEAKER_00
It s like writing an essay and taking a position, right?
9
SPEAKER_00
It s like you do this in debate.
9
SPEAKER_00
It s like you can have experimental thoughts and by having, by the stakes being so low because you re an on account with, I don t know, 20 followers or something, you can experiment with your thoughts in a low stakes environment.
9
SPEAKER_00
And I feel like we ve lost that in the era of everything
9
SPEAKER_00
being under your main name, everything being attributable to you.
9
SPEAKER_00
People just are afraid to speak, explore ideas that aren t fully formed, right?
9
SPEAKER_00
And I feel like we ve lost something there.
9
SPEAKER_00
So I hope, you know, platforms like Axe and others like really help support people trying to stay pseudonymous or anonymous because it s really important for people to share thoughts that aren t fully formed and converge onto maybe hidden truths that were hard to converge upon.
9
SPEAKER_00
if it was just through open conversation with real names?
9
SPEAKER_01
Yeah, I really believe in, like, not radical, but
9
SPEAKER_01
rigorous empathy.
9
SPEAKER_01
It s like really considering what it s like to be a person of a certain viewpoint and like taking that as a thought experiment farther and farther and farther.
9
SPEAKER_01
And one way of doing that is an alt account.
9
SPEAKER_01
That s a fun, interesting way to really explore what it s like to be a person that believes a set of beliefs.
9
SPEAKER_01
and taking that across the span of several days, weeks, months.
9
SPEAKER_01
Of course, there s always the danger of becoming that.
9
SPEAKER_01
That s the Nietzsche gaze long into the abyss.
9
SPEAKER_01
The abyss gazes into you.
9
SPEAKER_01
You have to be careful.
9
SPEAKER_01
Breaking Beth.
9
SPEAKER_01
Yeah, right, breaking Beth.
9
SPEAKER_01
Yeah, you wake up with a shaved head one day, just like, who am I?
9
SPEAKER_01
What have I become?
9
SPEAKER_01
So you ve mentioned quite a bit of advice already, but what advice would you give to young people of how to, in this interesting world we re in, how to have a career and how to have a life they can be proud of?
9
SPEAKER_00
I think to me the reason I went to theoretical physics was that I had to learn the base of the stack that was gonna stick around no matter how the technology changes, right?
9
SPEAKER_00
And to me, that was the foundation upon which then I later built engineering skills and other skills.
9
SPEAKER_00
And to me, the laws of physics, you know, it may seem like the landscape right now is changing so fast, it s disorienting.
9
SPEAKER_00
But certain things like fundamental mathematics and physics aren t going to change.
9
SPEAKER_00
And if you have that knowledge and knowledge about complex systems and adaptive systems, I think that s gonna carry you very far.
9
SPEAKER_00
And so not everybody has to study mathematics, but I think it s really a huge cognitive unlock to learn math and some physics and engineering.
9
SPEAKER_01
Get as close to the base of the stack as possible.
9
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, that s right, because the base of the stack doesn t change.
9
SPEAKER_00
Everything else, you know, your knowledge might become not as relevant in a few years.
9
SPEAKER_00
Of course, there s a sort of transfer learning you can do, but then you have to always transfer learn constantly.
9
SPEAKER_01
I guess the closer you are to the base of the stack, the easier, the easier the transfer learning, the shorter the jump.
9
SPEAKER_00
Right, right.
9
SPEAKER_00
And you d be surprised, like, once you ve learned concepts in many,
9
SPEAKER_00
physical scenarios, how they can carry over to understanding other systems that aren t necessarily physics.
9
SPEAKER_00
And I guess the IAC writings, the principles and tenet post that was based on physics, that was kind of my experimentation with
9
SPEAKER_00
applying some of the thinking from out of equilibrium thermodynamics to understanding the world around us.
9
SPEAKER_00
And it s led to IAC and this movement.
9
SPEAKER_01
If you look at your one cog in the machine, in the capitalist machine, one human, and if you look at yourself, do you think mortality is a feature or a bug?
9
SPEAKER_01
Like would you want to be immortal?
9
SPEAKER_00
No.
9
SPEAKER_00
I think fundamentally in thermodynamic dissipative adaptation, there s the word dissipation.
9
SPEAKER_00
Dissipation is important.
9
SPEAKER_00
Death is important, right?
9
SPEAKER_00
We have a saying in physics, physics progresses one funeral at a time.
9
SPEAKER_00
Yeah.
9
SPEAKER_00
I think the same is true for capitalism, companies, empires, people, everything.
9
SPEAKER_00
Everything must die at some point.
9
SPEAKER_00
I think that we should probably extend our lifespan because we need a longer period of training because the world is more and more complex, right?
9
SPEAKER_00
We have more and more data to really be able to predict and understand the world.
9
SPEAKER_00
And if we have a finite window of higher neuroplasticity
10
SPEAKER_00
then we have sort of a hard cap in how much we can understand about our world.
10
SPEAKER_00
So, you know, I think I am for death because, again, I think it s important, you know, if you have like a king that would never die, that would be a problem, right?
10
SPEAKER_00
Like the system wouldn t be constantly adapting, right?
10
SPEAKER_00
You need novelty, you need youth, you need disruption to make sure the system s always adapting and malleable.
10
SPEAKER_00
Otherwise, if things
10
SPEAKER_00
are immortal.
10
SPEAKER_00
You know, if you have, let s say, corporations that are there forever and they have the monopoly, they get calcified, they become not as optimal, not as high fitness in a changing time-varying landscape, right?
10
SPEAKER_00
And so, death gives space for youth and novelty to take its place.
10
SPEAKER_00
And I think it s an important part of every system in nature.
10
SPEAKER_00
So, yeah, I am for death.
10
SPEAKER_00
But I do think that longer lifespan and longer time for neuroplasticity, bigger brains, should be something we should strive for.
10
SPEAKER_01
Well, in that, Jeff Bezos and Beth Jezos agree that all companies die.
10
SPEAKER_01
For Jeff, the goal is to try to, he calls it day one thinking, try to constantly, for as long as possible, reinvent.
10
SPEAKER_01
sort of extend the life of the company, but eventually it too will die, because it s so damn difficult to keep reinventing.
10
SPEAKER_01
Are you afraid of your own death?
10
SPEAKER_00
I think I have ideas and things I d like to achieve in this world before I have to go, but I don t think I m necessarily afraid of death.
10
SPEAKER_01
So you re not attached to this particular body and mind that you got?
10
SPEAKER_00
No, I think I m sure there s going to be better versions of myself in the future or forks, right?
10
SPEAKER_00
Genetic forks or other, right?
10
SPEAKER_00
I truly believe that.
10
SPEAKER_00
I think there s a sort of evolutionary-like algorithm happening at every bit or nap in the world is sort of adapting through this
10
SPEAKER_00
process that we described in EAC.
10
SPEAKER_00
And I think maintaining this adaptation malleability is how we have constant optimization of the whole machine.
10
SPEAKER_00
And so I don t think I m particularly, you know, an optimum that needs to stick around forever.
10
SPEAKER_00
I think there s going to be greater optima in many ways.
10
SPEAKER_01
What do you think is the meaning of it all?
10
SPEAKER_01
What s the why of the machine, the EAC machine?
10
SPEAKER_00
The why, well, the why is thermodynamics.
10
SPEAKER_00
It s why we re here.
10
SPEAKER_00
It s what has led to the formation of life and of civilization, of evolution of technologies and growth of civilization.
10
SPEAKER_00
But why do we have thermodynamics?
10
SPEAKER_00
Why do we have our particular universe?
10
SPEAKER_00
Why do we have these particular hyperparameters, the constants of nature?
10
SPEAKER_00
then you get into the anthropic principle, right?
10
SPEAKER_00
In the landscape of potential universes, right?
10
SPEAKER_00
We re in the universe that allows for life.
10
SPEAKER_00
And then why is there potentially many universes?
10
SPEAKER_00
I don t know.
10
SPEAKER_00
I don t know that part, but could we potentially engineer new universes or create pocket universes and set the hyperparameters?
10
SPEAKER_00
So there is some mutual information between our existence and that
10
SPEAKER_00
universe and we d be somewhat its parents.
10
SPEAKER_00
I think that d be very poetic.
10
SPEAKER_00
It s purely conjecture, but again, this is why figuring out quantum gravity would allow us to
10
SPEAKER_00
Understand if we can do that.
10
SPEAKER_01
And above that, why does it all seem so beautiful and exciting?
10
SPEAKER_01
The quest to figuring out quantum gravity seems so exciting.
10
SPEAKER_01
Why?
10
SPEAKER_01
Why is that?
10
SPEAKER_01
Why are we drawn to that?
10
SPEAKER_01
Why are we pulled towards that?
10
SPEAKER_01
Just there s that puzzle-solving creative force that underpins all of it, it seems like.
10
SPEAKER_00
I think we seek, just like an LLM seeks to minimize cross-entropy between its internal model and the world, we seek to minimize the statistical divergence between our predictions of the world and the world itself.
10
SPEAKER_00
And having regimes of energy scales or physical scales in which we have no visibility, no ability to predict or perceive, that s kind of an insult to us.
10
SPEAKER_00
And we want to
10
SPEAKER_00
We want to be able to understand the world better in order to best steer it or steer us through it.
10
SPEAKER_00
And in general, it s the capability that has evolved because the better you can predict the world, the better you can capture utility or free energy towards your own sustenance and growth.
10
SPEAKER_00
And I think quantum gravity, again, is kind of the final boss in terms of knowledge acquisition.
10
SPEAKER_00
Because once we ve mastered that, then we can
10
SPEAKER_00
do a lot potentially.
10
SPEAKER_00
But between here and there, I think there s a lot to learn in the mesoscales.
10
SPEAKER_00
There s a lot of information to acquire about our world and a lot of engineering, perception, prediction, and control to be done to climb up the Kardashev scale.
10
SPEAKER_00
And to us, that s the great challenge of our times.
10
SPEAKER_01
And when you re not sure where to go, let the meme pave the way.
10
SPEAKER_01
Guillaume, Beth, thank you for talking today.
10
SPEAKER_01
Thank you for the work you re doing.
10
SPEAKER_01
Thank you for the humor and the wisdom you put into the world.
10
SPEAKER_01
This was awesome.
10
SPEAKER_01
Thank you so much for having me, Lex.
10
SPEAKER_01
It was a pleasure.
10
SPEAKER_01
Thank you for listening to this conversation with Guillaume Verdun.
10
SPEAKER_01
To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description.
10
SPEAKER_01
And now, let me leave you with some words from Albert Einstein.
10
SPEAKER_01
If at first the idea is not absurd, then there is no hope for it.
10
SPEAKER_01
Thank you for listening.
10
SPEAKER_01
I hope to see you next time.