The Furby paradox is mind boggling.
If the universe is so vast and so old, why haven't we found any
evidence of intelligent extraterrestrial life?
The universe is about 13.8 billion years old, and there are
billions of galaxies in the universe, and each Galaxy
contains billions of stars and many of these stars have planets
that could potentially support life.
And the laws of physics seems to be the same everywhere in the
universe, so the chemical reactions.
The led to the formation of life on Earth could have happened on
other planets too. So if life is common in the
universe, then intelligent life should be common as well.
But we haven't found any sign of intelligent extraterrestrial
life yet, and there are many possible explanations for the
Fermi Paradox. People think that intelligent
life is rare, that we're just simply the first ones to evolve
and try to find other life out there.
Others believe that intelligent life is common, but that we have
not been able to detect it because they're too far away or
because they use a form of communication that we just don't
understand. And Elon Musk is trying to solve
this problem. He believes that artificial
intelligence will be the key to answering the question of why
we, as an advanced civilization have yet to encounter
extraterrestrial life, despite statistical probabilities
suggesting otherwise. And in his recent Twitter Spaces
must detail the mission of XAI. It's his new company, and he's
not a stranger to space exploration.
He has SpaceX working on the Starship to take people to the
moon and to Mars eventually. But there are other things that
are unexplained, and XAI aims to develop an artificial general
intelligence that will surpass human cognitive capabilities.
The a GI, as Musk has said. Is not simply a tool to solve
complex mathematical problems or to perform intricate analytical
tests. It would go beyond our current
grasp of the universe. The safering, the enigmas of
dark matter, dark energy and gravity.
These are the fundamental forces and elements of the universe.
Fermi's genius also led him to a different conclusion.
Why of any civilization with even a modest level of rocket
technology, they could colonize the entire Galaxy within 10s of
millions of years. Given enough incentive, why
haven't we seen them? It's also since spark a myriad
of proposed solutions from the scientific community.
One theory suggests that other civilizations, mirroring our own
dependency on fossil fuels, might have selfdestructed due to
unsustainable practices before they had the chance to reach out
across the interstellar void, other explanations proposed that
alien radio signals are yet to reach Earth.
That intelligent life forms might reside in the interiors
rather than the exteriors of planets, or perhaps that they're
technologically superior. Aliens might exhibit the great
indifference towards lesser intelligent species such as us,
kind of like what we do to ants or what we do to bugs.
And at the core of Musk's fascination with the Fermi
Paradox is this concerned that we may be the only beacon of
intelligence in the universe. This is a troubling thought
considering the nature of life on Earth.
In a tweet from 2018, Musk said This is why we must preserve the
light of consciousness by becoming a space faring
civilization and extending life to other planets.
And Musk isn't alone at XAI. The team comprises former
luminaries of A I organizations such as Open A I and DeepMind,
as well as tech giants Microsoft and Tesla and Google.
Additionally Dan Hendricks, director of the Center for a I
Safety. Is serving as an advisor, and in
recent years, the Center for a I Safety has been vocal about the
possible risks A I can pose to humanity's future, mitigating
these threats alongside other societal scale dangers like
pandemics and nuclear war. And in May, hundreds of A I
experts, scientists, and CEO's echoed the sentiment in a joint
statement. However, Elon Musk, while deeply
involved in a I advancement, didn't sign this particular
statement. Instead.
Musk added his signature to an open letter issued by the Future
of Life Institute in March. This document urged A I
companies to initiate a minimum six month moratorium on the
training of a I systems more potent than G PT4.
Now, given Musk's history with a I, it is well documented
concerns about its potential threats.
His engagement in this A I safety discourse is hardly
surprising. Musk, a founding chair of Open A
I together with Sam Altman, Open A I's current CEO.
And a consortium of investors committed $1 billion to
establish Open A I in 2015. Musk himself claimed to have
contributed $100 million to the fund, a figure he has also
reportedly have in some instances.
The narrative surrounding Musk's exit from Open A I is kind of
shrouded in mystery. Musk publicly announced his
departure from Open A I in 2018, setting potential conflicts of
interest as Tesla began to focus more heavily on A I.
And a report from Semaphore in March claimed that Musk had
offered to lead open A I, subsequently leaving when his
proposal was rejected. Additionally, the Financial
Times reported in April the disagreements with the board
members and staff over a I safety issues contributed to
Musk's departure, and ever since leaving open a I, Musk has been
openly critical of the company's shift in direction.
In an interview with Tucker Carlson on Fox News in April, he
remarked. They are now closed source and
they are obviously for profit and closely allied with
Microsoft. Now Microsoft and Open AI Share
a multibillion dollar partnership that offers Open AI.
Edit this out Microsoft and Open AI Share a multibillion dollar
partnership that offers Open AI access to Microsoft's cloud
computing resources in return for the use of Open Ai's AI
systems to enhance Microsoft's products.
Now in the same interview, Musk expressed his concern about A I
models being trained to be, quote, politically correct and
pledged to create a truth GPTA maximum truth seeking a I And
his belief in an A I's capability to seek truth
underlines his approach to a I safety, a factor that has drawn
criticisms from experts and researchers, including ex A I
advisor Hendrix. Now concerns are mounting that
adding other resource intensive companies to the A I ecosystem
could ignite a competitive rush to develop more powerful A I
systems undermining and ferds to ensure their safety.
Now echoing these concerns, though, Hendrix wrote in April
that the emergence of a new major A I development will
likely increase competitive pressures, leading to sacrifices
in the tradeoff between safety and competitiveness.
However, in a recent Twitter discussion with Congressman Ro
Khanna and Mike Gallagher must defended his approach, stating
that a maximally curious a I one that strives to understand the
whole universe would inherently be prohumanity, as humanity is
inherently more interesting than its absence.
Jess Whittlestone, head of a I policy at the Center for
Longterm Resilience, which is a UK based think tank, was less
optimistic about Musk's approach.
Terming it as pretty unorthodox and quite naive.
Will Stone question the clarity and feasibility of an A I being
maximally curious and dismiss the presumption that such an A I
would naturally be prohuman. Thanks so much for listening to
the show today. I do appreciate your time and I
appreciate you spending it here with me.
If you could take a second and hit they subscribe or follow
button on whatever podcast platform that you're on right
now, I'd greatly appreciate it. Thanks so much.
Take care of yourselves and each other.
And I'll see you in the next one.