of humans such as you and me in the very
long term with regards to AI what's our
what does our role become and also um we
often frame you know because of the
value systems the US China debate as a
competition but is there is there value
to thinking about that in terms of a
collaboration and maybe more
interestingly you know you mentioned
Europe being maybe somewhat disorganized
but they also have enormous strength and
enormous talent like Mistral and France
and so on is there something to do there
with um collaboration
Um, so, so a couple comments on Europe.
Um, I was the first investor in Mstral,
so I'm a big MRO fan. Mistral cannot
raise the money that they're US
competitors. They have the same problem
and they're working on solutions to
that. Um, with respect to US and China,
the um,
I started because of Henry, I I spent
about five years looking at Chinese peer
competition.
And I thought that it would be possible
to get closer to China. And I eventually
through his work and others discovered
that the Chinese were more afraid of
competing partnering with us than we
were with them. So it takes two to
tango, right? And I think it's highly
unlikely. I think you're going to see in
your lifetime
um
hopefully understanding that we have to
coexist but it's highly unlikely that
the two systems will become best buddies
for the obvious reasons. I think on this
this other question about what does what
are humans useful for uh in the very
long term um it's very very clear that
humans are social animals and want to be
around other humans. It's also very
clear that there are some things that we
need medical care and so forth which
will be delivered by humans. I think
that the it's a rough way to say this is
most other functions will be doable by
computers.
Will we allow them? That's a question
for your research, right? Is where is
that line? My my old example was the
following. This is back when we were
building Whimo at Google. So the thought
experiment is New York City is nothing
but Whimo and competitor automobile cars
and the engineers at Google and the
other companies have figured out how to
completely optimize the traffic so that
there's the streets which don't change.
You have the absolutely mathematically
true highest loading per street ever and
it's seamless. And then you have
somebody with an emergency, a pregnant
woman, you know, whatever who has to get
to the hospital and needs an exception.
Is there an exception button in the car
which says you have to violate all the
rules because there's something now if
there is not an exception button in the
car then that's dominance of humans by a
computer and humans will revolt if I go
back to the pickaxe versus religion
humans will fight that that will be seen
as oppression by the government in this
case in the governor New York City
whatever metaphor you want and the
computer companies themselves
If the system on the other hand is
adaptable to human needs and says, "Ah,
we have an actual, you know, medical
emergency and not somebody who's high on
drugs or, you know, whatever who's just
goofing around or some kid who's, you
know, playing with the buttons." Um, and
it reasons and it says, "Oh my god, I've
got to do everything I can to get the
the person to the hospital." Then it'll
be more accepted. So, a lot of this
depends on whether it integrates with
our human experience and needs. Does it
limit our freedom or does it increase
freedom? I've come to the view, I'm old
enough now to believe that preserving
our freedom, our freedom of thought, of
motion, of assembly, of gathering, you
know, if all of the things, right, u are
really, really important, if they
impinge on our freedom, then they will
be fought and I will be leading that
fight.
>> Please