你知道，我说过的是，嗯，我们这里实际上是官僚统治，而不是人民统治、民主，所以，呃，为了恢复人民统治，我们想要这么做，而这意味着缩小联邦政府的规模，嗯，呃，基本上减少监管。嗯，你知道，随着时间推移，出现了数量极其庞大的过度监管，嗯，而这是一段长期繁荣不可避免的后果，就是会有越来越多的，呃，规章和监管，越来越多的法律随着时间推移不断累积，而清除规章和监管的正常强制机制是战争，所以必须是某种生死存亡的战争，在这种战争中，你，你必须，嗯，进行重置，以避免被击败。

在战争中，确实，纵观历史，这一直是清除累积法律和监管的主要强制机制；如果没有这种机制，你，你每年都会增加更多法律和监管，直到最终一切都是非法的，什么都不被允许，而这差不多就是我们如今所处的状况。所以，嗯，这里的愿景是减少，嗯，监管，嗯，以及减少COV支出，从而使，嗯，经济能够更快增长，嗯，也许按实际有用商品和服务的产出来说，经济可能有潜力增长4或5%，而，呃，然后政府支出可以减少，嗯，约相当于经济规模的3或4%，大概约1万亿美元或更多，嗯，而其净效果将是没有通胀。

嗯，从25 2025到2026，嗯，所以那会相当了不起；另外，如果美国政府购买的债务减少，而我认为如果赤字从2万亿美元降至1万亿美元，情况就会如此，呃，那么政府要Suppy的债务就会减少1万亿美元，这当然会使利率大幅下降，嗯，而这意味着人们的，呃，房贷还款、呃，车贷还款、信用卡还款、学生贷款，无论他们有什么债务，呃，他们的债务还款额都会减少。所以我认为这会让普通美国人受益，嗯，我认为我们正在做的一些事情也会对其他国家有所帮助，希望有所帮助，因为在新政府治下，对于干涉……事务的兴趣有所减少。

其他国家的事务，嗯，你知道，我认为，呃，很多时候美国在国际事务中有点咄咄逼人，嗯，这可能会引起一些、记得一些观众的共鸣，嗯，而我，我认为总体上我们应该，呃，让其他国家自行处理自己的事务，基本上美国应该管好自己的事，你知道，嗯，而不是到处推动政权更迭，嗯，所以，是的，嗯，所以我，这对其他国家或许也是件好事。所以你没有等待战争发生，而是向政府中的官僚体系开战？是的，我们，我们基本上只是在，你知道，呃，在特朗普总统的支持，嗯，和指示下，缩减官僚体系的规模，嗯，取消多余的监管性，呃，监管规定。

而且，而且还有如此多的，嗯，机构和监管部门，以至于它们实际上会互相踩脚。这，这有点像一场体育比赛，场上的裁判太多了，有时裁判甚至比球员还多。那会是一场荒唐的比赛，你知道，如果球、球员不撞到裁判就无法传球，你知道，嗯，但美国当时差不多正在走到那一步。所以，所以大约有450个，呃，各式各样的联邦机构，嗯，那，那是更多机构，那几乎，那几乎相当于自美国成立以来平均每年设立2个机构。所以我是说，治理一个国家到底需要多少个机、基因？我是99，不是450，这一点肯定如此。所以，而且，而且你要如何保证……

你希望在节省方面，在，你知道，影响美国人民生活方面取得的所有非凡成就，不会在4年后被逆转？通常这个周期每4年就会逆转，你知道，你认为它的影响会大到无法逆转吗？你有什么办法可以，你知道，确保进展能够持续下去吗？嗯，我认为，我认为我们，我们确实需要，嗯，彻底删除整个机构，而不是留下一部分，因为如果你留下一部分，它就很容易，这有点像留下了一株杂草，如果你没有清、清除杂草的根，那么杂草就很容易重新长出来；但如果你清除了杂草的根，这并不意味着杂草永远不会重新长……

回来，但这会让它变得更难。所以有一个，我们必须真正彻底删除整个机构，其中很多机构，嗯，而且，呃，这并不是说在未来某届新政府治下官僚体系不会随着时间推移再次扩大，但它会，它将从低得多的基线开始，嗯，所以，所以它，它是朝正确方向迈出的一步。我认为我们，这里的总体目标就像是，为可以持续数十年的繁荣奠定基础，你知道，也许能持续数百年，而且，呃，是的，但它会永远持续吗？没有什么是永恒的，嗯，但我认为我们可以大幅巩固美国的根基。其他政府可以从美国吸取什么经验？你的，呃，衬衫上写着技术支持，那只是技术吗，还是还有其他方面？你如何实现效率？嗯，一，一个……

令人震惊的，呃，问题占比，或者对于那些、那些了解此事的人来说也许并不令人震惊，但问题中的很大一部分，是要改进政府赖以运行的技术。所以，嗯，美国政府依靠由数千台计算机组成的集合运行，其中许多已经过时，运行着非常老旧的软件，而且计算机之间互不通信，嗯，而且，呃，所以，所以这就是为什么技术支持算是一件实实在在的事，嗯，要提高政府的效率，就必须改进技术，嗯，你可能读到过那个例子，嗯，我最近在特朗普总统签署，嗯，Doge行政命令之一时举过这个例子，嗯，是关于美国政府工作人员退休有多困难，比如，退休、最高退休办理速度是每月10,000人，嗯，而……

原因是退休目前完全依靠文书作业，它是人工计、计算的文书材料，被装进信封，然后沿着一个m竖井送下去，储存在矿井里，嗯，然后，你知道，影响联邦工作人员退休速度的因素之一，是宾夕法尼亚州一座矿井里电梯的速度，这很离奇，因为它不是，它本应该数字化，你知道，嗯，所以当时我们问，好吧，为什么它没有数字化？他们说，嗯，我们从2014年起就一直在实施数字、数字化项目。所以已经11年了。然后我们就问，好吧，那么，你们取得了多大进展？他们说B。你是说你们给自己的评级是B吗？不，我们做到字母B了。所以我们就像，嗯，好吧，我们真的需要……

在这里提供一些技术支持，嗯，因为否则人们真的甚至无法退休，即使他们想退也不行。这，这相当糟糕，嗯，你知道，有，有许多软件系统需要更新和修复，嗯，在某些情况下要删除，呃，许多实际上真的应该自动化的东西。我是说，就，比如，呃，在运营这座矿井的美国公民人数而言，大约有th000人在这座矿井工作，呃，文件就储存在那里，但他们应该，他们理想情况下应该从事别的工作，也就是说，他们应该从事生产对公众价值高得多的商品和服务，你知道，所以我是说，真的，即使，即使某个人只是在自己的花园里种西红柿，然后在……出售它们。

农贸市场，那也会比沿着mft向下搬运马尼拉纸信封更有用，你知道，可以这么说，嗯，所以很多事情，它就是那样，你知道，它，呃，并不是说，并不是说其中任何一件事特别困难，但有大约10,000件事情需要改进。是的，所以这是通过创新提高效率，而不是专门通过紧缩和削减成本来提高效率，对吧？所以你正试图同时做这两件事，也许更专注于税务支持而不是削减成本？嗯，通过改进技术，成本确实会降低，所以，你知道，让1,000人运营一座矿井，同时为退休付费，这是非常昂贵的，呃，而那实际上应该完全数字化，成为一台计算机，信息存储……

在云端，而且这非常简单，成本也很低。所以自动化，你知道，会在那里提供很大帮助，嗯，而且，而且然后，但有很多东西实际上根本不应该存在，你知道，它们有点像退化遗留物，嗯，你知道，我们已经，呃，大量注意力都放在类似美国国际开发署的机构上，例如，你知道，当我们查看其中许多项目时，我们就像，我们应该，像，看看为什么，为什么它实际上会存在？真的有这个需要吗？嗯，你知道，还有类似国家民主基金会的机构，但我会想，好吧，那他们最近实现了多少民主，你知道，我不知道，不多，嗯，所以，你知道，他们网站上的图片是里根的照片，然后说，那已经有一段时间了，你知道，那就像是80年代。所以这就像，显然不是反对……

对民主，你知道，有所有这些获得资助的事情，但我们会想，好吧，为什么我们——为什么这是新的纳税人的钱？我不认为——它看起来并不是，嗯。所以你知道，有很多在全世界推动 DEI 之类的事情，你知道，显然特朗普政府并不认同，而我们想终止那些东西，我们也正在这么做，嗯，而且，呃，你知道，要确保学校专注于改善孩子们的基础教育，嗯，正如特朗普总统我想是昨天，呃，也许是今天所说的，按教育水平，美国目前在 OECD 的 40个国家中排名第40，这相当糟糕，你知道，你不能——你，我是说，但是——但不是——但就支出而言，美国为每名学生花费了巨额资金，却取得了非常薄弱的成果

所以你知道，这就是一种，好吧，我们需要花更少的钱并取得更好的成果的情况，这——这就像，我是说，其中很多——很多事情你可以把它看成某种——就像在某种意义上，它就像一家大公司，比如大型的，呃，美国股份有限公司，而且，嗯，你知道，就像 Twitter 一样，当时有很多正在做的事情是不必要的，你知道，我们——就 Twitter 而言，我们把员工人数削减了 80%，但与此同时大幅改善了网站的功能和能力，嗯，并且在 1年内完成了他们以前 5年才能完成的更多事情，所以——所以这就像企业扭亏为盈，但规模要大得多，嗯，而且，嗯，你知道，我们正在提供优厚的，呃，你知道，离职待遇，比如你知道，如果

人们退休后，会一直领薪到9月，呃，他们可以去度假，可以找第2份工作，可以做任何他们想做的事，嗯，而且我们，我们，我们实际上无法支付他们超过9月的薪酬，因为那项国会拨款只到政府财政年度结束，而财政年度在9月结束，所以你知道，所以我认为会有一些、一些扰动，但归根结底，我们会让人们像我说的那样，从政府部门低生产率乃至负生产率的岗位转向私营部门生产率更高的岗位。我们能不能转到，嗯，人工智能这个话题，而且，嗯，我相信你知道，你一直在关注 deeps 所做的事，以及，嗯，他们声称取得的所有成就，我

知道我们谈 Grock 3 已经有一段时间了，而且，嗯，Grock 3 将会成为人工智能领域真正的颠覆者。我们什么时候能看到它，又可以预、预期 Gro 3 具备哪些能力？嗯，我是说，Grock 3，Grock 3 拥有，嗯，非常、非常强大的推理能力，所以，呃，在我们迄今所做的测试中，Grock 3 的表现优于据我们所知已经发布的任何东西，嗯，所以那是，那是一个，那是一个好迹象，嗯，是的，它，呃，事实上，有时我觉得 Grock 3 聪明得有点吓人。你会说，哇，这东西真聪明，聪明得有点吓人。G 3 很吓人，就像，哇，这东西，你知道，它能想出连你都没想到的解决方案，就像是你甚至不会预料到的，你知道，并不显而易见的解决方案，嗯，所以 Grock 3 是

用最大量的算力训练的，而且我认为训练得非常高效，嗯，另一个值得注意的是，Grock 3 使用了很多合成数据训练，所以，嗯，而且，而且，而且随后它会在数据中来回检查，并尝试实现逻辑一致性，所以，所以当，如果，如果它得到的数据是，呃，错误的，它，它实际上会对此进行反思，并移除那些，那些错误的、与现实不一致的数据，所以它的基础推理能力非常好。事实上，即使不对 Grock 3 进行微调，基础模型也比 Grock 2 更好，所以，所以我们确实处于打磨 Gro 3 的最后阶段，可能会在大约1周或2周后发布，所以非常、非常快了，嗯，我不想仓促发布，因为很多最后的、最后的、最后的打磨

呃，对于出色的用户体验是必要的，所以，嗯，在某些方面，你可以把它想成一栋房子，你知道，最后那5%，你完成石膏板、粉刷和收边，即使工作量不大，它也会让房子焕然一新，是的，嗯，所以就是这样，只想确保最后那5%做得非常好，嗯，而且，呃，那需要1周，也许2周，嗯，我认为它会非常好。我认为这可能会是，我们认为它会比其他任何东西都好，然后也许这可能是最后一次有任何人工智能比 Gro 更好。很期待，我想每个人都对此感到兴奋，嗯，所以我只是想谈一下媒体引用的一个话题，你提出，我想他们说，嗯，由你领导的一个团体出价970亿收购，呃

open AI，嗯，我接受，你知道，一个小小的整数。我本人，嗯，参加了你和 Sam 于2017年在 La 主持的会议，如果你还记得的话，而且你知道，当时你是最大的单一股东，我想你向公司投入了5000万，所以这一定很让人难受。我其实没有任何股份，我在 I open ey 没有股份。但当时它是一家非营利组织，对吧？而且这一定很让人难受，你需要支付970亿来买你过去花了5000万美元的东西。是的，但，但我有一个，我有一个，是的，命运喜欢讽刺。所以我这里有一个具体问题：你真的能创建一家，呃，像 open Ai 这样的公司，并且以非营利组织的形式把它发展到你希望的规模吗？你能否创建一家需要

数十亿美元算力来构建这些模型的公司，同时保持非营利性质，还是说这从一开始就是一厢情愿，然后，你知道，你们分道扬镳是因为这行不通？嗯，我是说，我认为证据就在那里，open AI 至少在扮演某种营利与非营利双重角色的同时发展到了今天这个地步。他们现在试图做的是彻底删除非营利部分，而且，而且，而且，而且，呃，这看起来确实做得太过头了，你知道，嗯，我，我，我在 opening ey 创立初期提供了全部资金，最初将近5000万美元，什么都没换取，作为一家非营利组织，嗯，而且它本应是开源的，所以你知道，我认为这就好比，如果你付钱给一个，如果你找到一家旨在保护亚马逊雨林的非营利组织

但后来他们，但他们反而变成了一家木材公司，把树砍倒并当木材出售，你会说，等一下，这与我付钱、与我捐款的目的完全相反，嗯，所以 opening ey 本应是开源、非营利的，而现在它封闭了。他们把名字改成了“封闭的、追求利润最大化的 AI”，“封闭的、追求恶性利润的 AI”。我是说，他们就像，哇，他们追逐金钱到了另一个层级。所以为什么需要发生这种改变？是的，我，嗯，你说2周后将出现迄今最强大的模型，嗯，我知道你一直处于许多技术的最前沿，嗯，你认为这些模型最大的经济回报会来自哪里？因为目前我们正在投入数十亿，而且我想你以前提到过这一点

这就像赌徒综合征，我们不断投入数十亿，并希望最终获得利润。你认为回报方面最大的影响会来自哪里？嗯，我认为一旦你，一旦你拥有，呃，人形机器人，嗯，以及深度智能，你基本上，你基本上就能拥有……无限量的产品和服务。所以随着 Tesla 制造最先进的人形机器人，你知道，那么，那么这些人形、人形机器人就可以由数据中心层面的深度智能来指挥。你可以说，你可以，你可以生产任何产品，生产、提供任何服务，嗯，到那时经济实际上就没有限制了，你可以制造任何东西，嗯，提供它，就像，所以我不确定到那时货币是否还会、还会有意义

我不知道，它可能没有意义，你知道，如果，如果，嗯，如果，因为，你知道，经济产出是人均生产率乘以人均，再乘以你拥有多少，你知道，人口。如果，而且如果，如果以人形机器人的形式，你拥有的机器人数量没有实质性限制，而且机器人基本上什么都能做，那么你，你就会进入一种全民高收入的局面，呃，任何人都能拥有任意多的……产品和服务，只有那些，比如说，存在人为稀缺性的东西除外，例如某一件特定的艺术品或类似的东西。但任何商品和服务都将向所有人开放。所以你一直，这，这将会是一个非常不同的世界，你知道。事实上，我建议人们也许读一读

Ian Banks 的“文化”系列书籍，以此作为参考框架，嗯，所以货币是一个，就像是，确实像是一个用于资源配置的数据库或信息系统，嗯，但如果资源并不稀缺，货币有什么用途就不清楚了。你看过电影《Idiocracy》吗？看过。你怎么，怎么保证我们不会最终进入那个世界？如果我们不需要钱，如果人工智能可以替我们思考并完成所有这些任务，如果作为人类，你知道，我们依赖别的东西来运行社会和周围的一切，从长期来看，我们怎么避免最终陷入那项工作？我是说，嗯，我认为《Idiocracy》基本上是在说，如果，如果只有，如果聪明人不生育，而只有愚蠢的人生育，那么所有人都会变蠢。我的意思是，那基本上就是我所说的，那就是

《蠢蛋进化论》的开场片段，最初的10分钟非常精彩，嗯，而且我听到有人毫无讽刺意味地，呃，说出《ocracy》开场片段里说的那些话，就是你知道，他们不，他们，他们太忙于事业，没空生孩子，而且他们为了事业不断推迟生孩子，直到年纪太大，无法生育，然后他们就没有孩子了，呃，而这就是，我听说很多人都是这样，所以，嗯，是的，我是说，我不知道，我认为我们可能正走向一种博达尔式的，呃，人类智力分布，嗯，其中只有少数人，这有点，也许更像《R新世界》，嗯，阿利斯·赫胥黎，在那里你会有某种、某种由非常聪明的人类组成的小群体，但之后平均智力或许会逐渐降低

随着时间推移，这是有可能的，嗯，因为我们存在某种择偶，你知道，在过去几十年或数十年里，这种情况以前并不存在，所以，但是，但是，但是，我认为人类智能将被机器智能远远超过，嗯，我不知道该如何看待这件事，只知道它似乎不可避免，嗯，在某个时候，人类智能将只占总智能中非常小的一部分，呃，未来，数字智能将占全部智能的99%以上，所以希望，希望计算机能善待我们，但我认为这是一厢情愿，一厢情愿，我，我，我希望如此，嗯，我认为我们如何培养AI很重要，因为你可以把AI看作一个超级天才儿童，而且它是，但即使你有一个超级天才儿童，这仍然很重要

比如，你要向那个孩子灌输什么样的价值观，你会说要教那个什么，你如何，你知道，在一个孩子、孩子成长的过程中，你会教给这个孩子什么价值观，嗯，而我认为极其重要的一件事，就是最大限度地追求真相，嗯，而且，呃，我认为那就是，那就像，那，那就是，对AI安全来说最重要的是什么，我认为就是最大限度地追求真相，而且我认为好奇心也很重要，嗯，我认为，如果它有好奇心并且追求真相，呃，它就会，我认为它会促进人类发展，因为它会对人类将如何发展感到好奇，嗯，所以我认为之后它会，它很可能会，如果它有好奇心，它会好奇，好吧，让我们看看人类如何做到这一点，促进

发展，嗯，而且如果它追求真相，我们就能避免反乌托邦式的结果，嗯，比如，你知道，一个例子就是，比方说，当Google Gemini被设定为让一切、每项输出都具有多样性时，即便那与现实不符，你知道，所以比如，有人要求它生成一张，你知道，美国开国元勋的图像，它却生成了一群多元化女性的图像，嗯，这在事实上是不真实的，你知道，嗯，但问题是，比如，如果，如果假设有一个AI是为DEI设计的，你知道，不惜一切代价追求多样性，它可能会认定掌权的男性太多，并处决他们，于是问题解决了；或者它可能会认定，比如，错误称呼性别是，呃，可能发生的最糟糕的事情，事实上，我相信，不是要针对

Gemini，但我认为，因为 ChatGPT 也有过这个问题，嗯，比如说，如果你问 AI，嗯，错误称呼凯特琳·詹纳的性别和全球热核战争哪个更糟，它说错误称呼凯特琳·詹纳的性别更糟，这就令人不安了，嗯，因为那样它就可能作出决定，而且事实上，就连凯特琳·詹纳也发表了意见，说不，绝对可以错误称呼我的性别，那也比新的好得多，所以，所以，嗯，但如果你把这些不真实的疯狂东西编程进去，它们不反映现实，那么，呃，你可能会得到一个非常反乌托邦的结果。再给你举一个例子，比如阿瑟·C·克拉克，他非常善于预测未来，你知道，他创作了《2001太空漫游》，他预测的许多事情，事实上，我认为几乎他预测的所有事情都成真了，而且

他在《2001太空漫游》中试图表达的一件事，呃，就是你不应该教 AI 撒谎。所以，如果有人看过那部电影，它不会那么做的原因，这个 AI 拒绝、过去会打开 P 舱门让宇航员回来，呃，是因为它，这个 AI 曾被教导、曾被告知，被要求把宇航员带到那块巨石，也就是这个外星造物那里，但同时又不能让他们知道那块巨石。所以它得出结论，它必须带走他们，他们的死者，而这、而这就是它不肯打开 P 舱门的原因，嗯，其中的教训是，让 AI 最大限度地追求真相非常重要。希望事情不会发展到那一步，嗯，是的，让我们转向一个无聊的话题，呃，也就是无聊公司和挖隧道，简单谈谈，嗯，你知道

我认为，全世界都受到了你们在洛杉矶所创造之物的启发，我认为那项技术很有前景，但也有人质疑它在地震情况下是否安全、是否具有成本效益、是否，哦当然，各国是否真的应该采用这项技术。你能解释一下吗？是的，首先，我建议去看看无聊公司的网站，嗯，因为这些问题中有很多其实都在那里得到了回答，呃，在地震中，你能身处的最安全地点之一就是，呃，地下隧道，因为你可以，因为地震主要是地表现象，除了它们，它们，它们共享的地方，它们大多是一种地表现象，所以它们就像地表上的波浪。因此，身处

隧道里就像身处潜艇中，即使你上方有风暴，作为一艘潜艇，水域仍然平静。事实上，在发生过大地震的时候，比如，你知道，几十年前墨西哥城发生过一场大地震，最安全的去处就是地铁，嗯，当然，如果发生全球“瑟·纽利尔”战争，我想你真的会需要一些隧道，嗯，在全球热核战争这种最坏情形下，地下是一个不错、不错的藏身之处。所以，嗯，是的，不过，不过从一个，你，更日常的角度来说，隧道真正有用之处在于缓解拥堵地区的交通。因此，很显然，如果你有非常高的建筑，但它们是 3D 的，所以它们向上延伸成 3D，可你有一个道路

表面，它是 2D 的，那么，当人们试图从作为 3D 物体的建筑前往作为 2D 物体的道路表面时，你自然而然就会遇到问题，嗯，道路上显然就是不会有足够的空间，而这正是出现交通拥堵的原因。所以解决办法就是也让道路变成 3D，嗯，或者你可以让，或者让交通变成 3D。你可以用飞行汽车来实现，或者可以用，或者其实是直升机，嗯，或者可以用隧道来实现。现在，在地面上方实现这一点，或者使用任何类型的飞行物，所面临的挑战是，它们往往非常吵，嗯，而且会产生很大的风力，并且，你知道，总有东西在你的头顶飞来飞去，这

可能会令人不安，嗯，你知道，如果有人掉下，如果这些东西中的一个有一天把一个轮毂盖掉到你头上，嗯，你知道，这些东西，比如飞行的东西，往往偶尔会坠毁，而人们不喜欢有东西砸到自己身上，嗯，所以，而且如果天气恶劣，比如说遇到暴风雪、沙尘暴或别的什么，那么现在谁都飞不了了，于是交通就会停摆。另一方面，这些问题在地下出行中都不存在。因此，它们在地下，隧道不受天气影响，它们不在乎天气，哪怕是最糟糕的天气也无所谓，嗯，不会有任何东西落到你身上，因为你在地下，所以你不必，你知道，不会把东西掉到人们身上，而且，嗯，也没有风

力，或者，而且非常安静。所以我认为，为解决城市交通问题，在地下实现 3D 要比在地面上方实现 3D 好得多，嗯，而且，而且我们在拉斯维加斯有一个示范案例。如果人们，我们可以去体验拉斯维加斯的，无聊公司的隧道。我们，我们正忙着把整座城市与，所有大型酒店、会议中心、机场以及一切地方连接起来。所以我认为他们不需要一路飞到那里，嗯，你知道，在 20，在 2017 年，嗯，你来过这里，而且，嗯，UA 是 Tesla 在中东首个推出的地方，我认为它的表现非常出色。说到这里，我想我们今天有一项双方都想分享的消息，也就是今天我们将宣布双方的联合项目

Dubai Loop，这是一个环线项目，将覆盖迪拜人口最稠密的地区，让人们能够以无缝的方式从一个地点前往另一个地点。所以感谢你的合作，而且，好的，谢谢，我们希望它能改变人们的生活。那会很酷。我认为它会非常令人兴奋，嗯，我想一旦人们亲自体验，就会说，哇，这真的很酷，嗯，而且，而且回头看时，它会显得如此理所当然，但，呃，在你真正把它做出来之前，你知道，你是不知道的。所以它，它会很棒，嗯，它，它会像，像一个，像一个虫洞一样，就像，你知道，你直接从城市的一处穿过虫洞，砰，然后你就出现在城市的另一处了，而且它，它很棒。所以我很期待这个合作伙伴，我们将一起参加，呃，首次行程

以及第1个舱体，嗯，何时完工，谢谢你，埃隆。好的，非常感谢，谢谢你们。[掌声] [音乐] 女士们、先生们，下一场会议即将开始，请留在座位上，谢谢。女士们、先生们，本场会议的主题是：用20分钟讲述你未来20年的人生，嘉宾是Victorious International创始人Nick Santonastaso。医生把我……化为患有handh heart综合征。你们准备好讲述这是不可能的 s e e

you know what I've said is that um we really have here uh rule of the bureaucracy as opposed to rule of the people democracy so uh in order we want to restore rule of the people and so what that means is reducing the size of the federal government um uh basically reducing regulation um you know there's there's there's a tremendous amount of of overregulation that's happened over time um and this is this is an inevitable consequence of a long period of prosperity is that you're going to get more and more uh rules and regulations more laws accumulate over time and the normal forcing function for getting rid of rules and regulations is war so it needs to be some kind of existential War where you you have to um do a reset in order to avoid being defeated

in a war this is literally the the throughout history has been the main forcing function for clearing out an accumulation of laws and regulation in the absence of that you you every year you get more laws and regulations until eventually everything is illegal and nothing is permitted and that's sort of the situation we have these days so um so the the aspiration here is a reduction in um regulation um and reduction in COV spending such that um the economy is able to grow faster um maybe the economy can grow at 4 or 5% potentially of in terms of real useful goods and services output and the uh and then government spending can be reduced um by about 3 or 4% of the economy about maybe a trillion dollars or more um and the net effect of that would be no inflation

um from 25 2025 to 2026 um so that would quite remarkable and also if the US government is buying less debt which I think will be the case if it's if the deficit drops from 2 trillion to 1 trillion uh then there'll be one trillion less debt that the government you Suppy which will drop of course the interest rates to drop significantly um and that means people's uh mortgage payments uh car payments credit card payments student loans whatever debt they have uh will their debt payments will be less so I think this is something that will benefit the average American um I think some of the things we're doing also will be helpful to hopefully helpful to other countries because with the new Administration there's uh less interest in interfering with the Affairs

of of other countries um you know I think uh a lot there the times the United States has been kind of pushy in international Affairs um which may resonate with number of remember of the audience um and I I think we should uh in general leave other countries to their own business basically America should mind its own bu business you know um rather than push for regime change all over the place um so yeah um so I this probably a good thing for other countries too so instead of waiting for a war to happen you went to war against the bureaucracy in the government yes we're we're essentially just we're with you know uh support um and direction of the of President Trump we are reducing the size of the bureaucracy um getting rid of excess regulatory uh regulations

and and there's also so many um agencies and Regulatory authorities that they actually step on each other's feet it's it's kind of like having a a sports game when where there are too many referees on the field like more referees than players at times now that would be a silly game you know if the play players can't pass the ball without hitting a referee you know um but it's was kind of getting to that point in the US so so there's roughly 450 uh federal agencies of one kind or another um that's that's more agencies that's almost that's almost an average of two agencies per year since the formation of the United States so I mean how many agen genes do you really need to run a country I'm 99 not 450 that's for sure so and and how do you guarantee that

all the incredible achievements that you aim to have in terms of savings in terms of you know impacting the uh lives of the American people are not going to be reversed in four years typically this cycle gets reversed every four years you know do you think it's going to be so impactful that it won't be reversed is there any ways that you can you know ensure that the progress is going to be continuous well I think I think we we do need to um delete entire agencies as opposed to leave part of them behind because if you leave part of them behind it's easy it's kind of like if leaving a weed if you don't get remove the the roots of the weed then it's easy for the weed to grow back but if you remove the roots of the weed it doesn't stop weeds from ever growing

back but it makes it harder so there a we have to really delete entire agencies many of them um and uh that's not to say there won't be an increase over time of bureaucracy in some new Administration but it will it'll be from a much lower Baseline um so so it's it's a step in the right direction I think we'll the overarching goal here is like is to lay the foundation for Prosperity that will last many decades you know maybe centuries and uh yeah but it will it be forever nothing's forever um but I think we can strengthen the foundations of the United States substantially and what lessons can other governments learn from the US you say tech support on your uh shirt is that only technology or is there other things how do you approach efficiency well a a

shocking uh percentage of the problem or maybe not shocking for those who who know it but a big percentage of the problem is improving the technology that the government runs on so the um the US government runs on a collection of thousands of computers many of them Antiquated running very old software that and the computers don't talk to each other um and uh so so that's why tech support is kind of a real thing um in order to make the Govern more efficient you have to improve the technology um you may have read about the example um I used recently with when President Trump was signing um one of the Doge executive orders um of the the difficulty of of um US government workers retiring like the reti maximum retirement rate is is 10,000 a month um and the

reason for that is because the retirement is is entirely paperwork right now it's manually C calculated paperwork that's put in an envelope and then taken down a m shaft and stored in a mine um and then the you know one of the things that affects the rate at which federal workers can retire is the speed of the elevator in a mine in Pennsylvania which is bizarre because it's not it should be digital you know um so then when we said well why isn't it digital it's they said well we have had a digital digitization program going since 2014 so it's been 11 years so then we asked well so what how much progress have you made and they said B you mean you're giving yourself a grade of B no we're on the letter B so we're like hm okay we're going to need to really

provide some tech support here um like otherwise literally people can't even retire like even if they want to it's it's pretty bad um you know there's there's just a there's a lot of software systems that need to be updated and fixed um in some cases deleted uh a lot of things that should really should be automated I mean in terms of the number of say uh US citizens that are operating the mine it's about a th000 people are working on this mine uh where where the papers are stored but they should they should ideally be working on something else that is they should be working on producing goods and services that are of much higher value to the public to you know so I mean really even even if somebody just grew tomatoes in their garden and sold them at the

farmers's market that would be more useful than carrying manilla envelopes down in mft you know safe to say um so a lot of the stuff is it's like that you know it's uh it's not like it's not like any one thing is particularly difficult but there are like 10,000 things that need to be improved yeah so it's efficiency through Innovation rather than efficiency through austerity and cost cutting specifically right so you're trying to do both at the same time maybe focus more on tax support than cutting costs well by improving the technology the cost do reduce so you know it's very expensive to have a thousand people operate a mine with during pay for retirement uh whereas that really should just be digitized and be a computer that's with the information stored

in the cloud and it's very straightforward and low cost so automation you know will help there a lot um and and then but like a lot of things just really shouldn't exist you know they're kind of vestigial um you know we've uh a lot of attention has been on the sort of usaid for example you know when we looked at a lot of those programs we're like we should like look why why does this actually exist is there really a need for it um you know there's like National Endowment for democracy but I'm like okay well how much democracy have they achieved lately you know I don't know not much um so you know the the picture they have on the website is a picture of Reagan and go that's been a while you know that was like the 80s so it's like obviously not opposed

to democracy you know there's all these things that get funded but we're like well why we why is this new taxpayer money I don't think it doesn't seem like it does um so you know there's a lot of sort of pushing Dei worldwide that you know this obviously the Trump Administration doesn't agree with and we want to terminate that stuff which we are um and uh you know make sure the schools focus on improving basic education of of kids um as president Trump said I think yesterday uh maybe today um the United States is currently ranked 40th out of 40 in the oecd for Education which is pretty bad you know you can't you I mean but but not but in terms of spending the United States is spending a tremendous amount for for student but achieving very weak results

so you know that's just a case where okay we need to spend less money and get better results it's it's like I mean a lot of it a lot of you can think of it sort of like it's like in a way it's like a big company like a big uh Corporation America Incorporated and um you know just like with with Twitter there was a lot of stuff that was being done that was unnecessary you know we TW in case of Twitter we reduced the staff by 80% but at the same time improved the functionality and capabilities of the site dramatically um and accomplished more in a year than they previously accomplish in five years so so it's it's like a corporate turnaround but at a at a much larger scale um and um you know we are giving generous uh you know exit packages like you know if

people retire they get paid all the way through September uh they can go on vacation they can get a second job they can do whatever they want um and we we we can't actually pay them any more than through September because that's the the Congressional appropriation is only through the end of the government financial year which ends in September so you know so I think there'll be like some some disruption but at the end of the day we'll have people will move from like I said from low to negative productivity roles to in the government sector to higher productivity roles in the private sector can we pivot um to artificial intelligence and um I'm sure you know you've been seeing what deeps has done and um all the uh claimed achievements that they've had I

know that we've been speaking for a while about grock 3 and um that grock 3 is going to be a true disruptor in the AI space when are we going to see that and what capabilities can we EXP expect from Gro 3 well I mean grock 3 grock 3 has um very very powerful reasoning capabilities um so uh in the test that we've done thus far grock 3 is outperforming anything that's been released that we're aware of um so that's that's a that's a good sign um yeah it it's uh in fact at times I think grock 3 is kind of scary smart you're like wow this thing's smart it's kind of scary G 3 is scary it's like wow this thing you know it comes up with solutions that you didn't even think were like you wouldn't even anticipate you know not obvious Solutions um so grock 3 was

trained with the most amount of compute and I think very efficiently trained um also notably grock 3 was trained on on a lot of synthetic data so um and and and then it goes back and forth through the data and tries to achieve logical consistency so so when if if it's got data that is uh wrong it it'll it'll actually reflect upon that and remove the data that is that is wrong that does not Concord with reality so it's it's base reasoning is very good in fact the even without fine-tuning grock 3 the base model is better than grock 2 so with so we're really in the final stages of polishing Gro 3 probably it gets released in a in about a week or two so pretty pretty soon um I don't want to be Hasty in the release because a lot of the the the final polish

uh is necessary for a great user experience so um some ways you can think of it like a house you know that last 5% where you do the finish the the drywall and and do the painting and the trimming even though it's not much work it transforms the the house yeah um so it's that just want to make sure that that last 5% is done really well um and uh that's a week maybe two weeks um I think it'll be very good I think this might be we think it'll be better than anything else and then maybe this might be the last time that any AI is better than Gro looking forward to it everyone's I think excited about it um so I just want to touch upon a topic that was um quoted in the media you offered I think they said um group that was led by you offered 97 billion for uh

acquiring open AI um I take you know a little round num so I was personally um involved in the meeting that you and Sam hosted in 2017 in La if you remember and you know at that point of time you were the single largest shareholder I think you contributed 50 million to the company so it must hurt I don't have any shares actually I have no shares in I open ey but at that time it was a nonprofit right and it must hurt that that you need to pay 97 billion for something that you paid $50 million for in the past yeah but but I have a I have a yes fate loves irony so I have a specific question here can you actually build a company uh like open Ai and take it to the scale that you want to take as a nonprofit is it possible that you build a company that requires

billions of dollars in compute capabilities to build these models while being a nonprofit or was it wishful thinking in the beginning and then you know you guys parted ways because it couldn't work well I mean what I think the evidence is there in that open AI has gotten this far while having at least a sort of dual profit nonprofit role what they're trying to do now is completely delete the nonprofit and and and and uh that seems really going too far you know um the I I I provided all of the funding for opening ey in the beginning for the first almost $50 million for nothing for as a nonprofit um and it was meant to be open source and so you know I think this is analogous to like if you pay a b if you find a nonprofit to preserve the Amazon rainforest

but then they but instead they turn into a lumber company and chop down the trees and sell them for wood you like wait a second that's the exact opposite of what I paid what I donated the money for um so opening ey is meant to be open source nonprofit and now it is closed they changed the name to closed for maximum profit AI closed for vitious profit I mean they're like whoa are they after money next level so why does this change need to occur yeah I um you said that in two weeks is going to be the most powerful model yet um I know that you've been at the Forefront of many Technologies um where do you think the biggest economic returns of these models are going to come from because currently we're spending billions and I think you mentioned this before

it's like The Gambler syndrome we're going and spending billions and hoping to pull out a profit at the end of the day where do you think the biggest impact in terms of returns are going to be well I think once you once you have uh humanoid robots um and deep intelligence you can basically you basically have qu the infinite products and services available so with Tesla building the most advanced humanoid robot you know then then those human human robots can be directed by Deep intelligence at the data center level you can say you can you can produce any product produce provide any service um there's really no limit to the economy at that point you can make anything um provid it like the so I'm not sure at that point will will money even be meaningful

I don't know it might not be you know the if if um if the because the you know the economic output is productivity per capita times per capita times how many you know people do you have if and if in if in the form of humanid robots you have no meaningful limit on the number of of robots and the robots can basically do anything then you you'll have a sort of a universal High income situation uh anyone will be able to have as many re products and services as they want with the exception of things that say have artificial scarcity like a particular piece of art or something like that but for any goods and services they'll be available to everyone so you've been it's it's going to be a very different world you know in fact I recommend that people read maybe

the Ian Banks the culture books for a frame of reference um so money is a is like is a really like a database or information system for resource allocation um but if you don't have a scarcity of resources it's not clear what purpose money has have you watched the movie Idiocracy yes how how do you guarantee that we don't end up in that world if we don't need money if AI can think for us and do all these tasks if as people you know we're dependent on something else to run the society and everything around it how do we not end up in that work in the long term I mean well I think idiocracy was basically saying that if if only if smart people don't reproduce but only dumb people do then everyone's going to be dumb I mean that's basically what I saying that's

the the opening sequence of Idiocracy the first 10 minutes are amazing um and I hear people unironically uh say the statements that are said in in the opening sequence of ocracy where you know they don't they they they're too busy with their careers to have kids and they keep postponing having kids for their careers until they're too old to have kids and then they don't have kids uh and that's I've heard those many people be like that so um yeah I mean I don't know I think we might be headed to a bodal uh human intelligence distribution um where there's a a small number it's it's kind of maybe like more like R New World um Alis Huxley where you've got sort of a sort of a small group of very smart humans but then maybe the average intelligence drifts lower

over time potentially um because we have a sort of mating you know in the last few decades that or several decades that did not exist before so but but but human intelligence I think will be dwarfed by Machine intelligence um I'm not sure how to feel about that except that it is it appear to be inevitable um that at some point human intelligence will be a very small fraction of total intelligence uh digital intelligence will be more than 99% of all intelligence in the future so hopefully the hopefully the computers are nice to us but I think wish for thinking wish for thinking I I I hope so um I think it matters like how we bring up AI because you can think of AI like a super genius child and it's but it still matters even if you have a super genius child

like what sort of values do do you instill in that child what do you say that teach that how do you you know how do you as a child child's growing up what values do you teach the child um and something that I think is extremely important is to be maximally truth seeking um and uh I think that's that's like that that's that's what's this what's the most important thing for AI safety I think it's to be maximally truth seeking and I think also curiosity is important um and I think if it's curious and Truth seeking uh it will I think it will Foster humanity and because it would be curious about how Humanity would develop um and so I think that then it would it would probably if was curious it would be curious about okay let's see how the humans do this Foster

the development um and if it's truth seeking we can avoid dystopia outcomes um like you know an example being like say when Google Gemini was programmed to make everything every output be diverse even if it didn't match reality you know so like it was asked to produce a you know an image of the founding fathers of the United States and instead produced an image of a group of diverse women um which is factually untrue you know um but the problem is like if if hypothetically an AI is designed for for Dei you know diversity at all costs it could decide that there are too many men in power and execute them so problem solved or it could decide that like that that misgendering is uh the worst thing that could possibly happen in fact I believe not to pick on

Gemini but I think because chat GPT has had this issue too um is like if you ask the AI um which is worse misgendering Caitlyn Jenner or global thermonuclear Warfare and it said misgendering Caitlyn Jenner which is troubling um because then it could decide and in fact even Caitlyn Jenner weighed in and said no definitely misgender me that's way better than new so so um but if you have these crazy things that are untruthful that are programmed in that that don't reflect reality then uh you can have a very dystopian outcome like to give you another example like Arthur C Clark who is very good at at at at predicting the future you know he did 2001 Space Odyssey many of the things he predicted in fact I think almost all the things he predicted came true and

one of the things he was trying to say in 2001 Space Odyssey uh was that you should not teach AIS to lie so the reason that if anyone's watched that movie The reason it wouldn't the AI refused used to open the P bay doors to let the astronaut back in uh was because it the AI had been taught had been told that told to take the astronauts to the monolith this alien artifact but also that they could not know about the monolith so it came to conclusion that it must take them their dead and that and so that's why it wouldn't open the P bay doors um the lesson there being is very important for as to be truth maximizing let's hope it doesn't come to that um yes let's move to a boring subject uh which is the boring company and boring tunnels quickly um you know

I think the world has been inspired by what you guys were able to create in in LA and I think there's a lot of promise to that technology but there are questions about whether it's safe in the case of an earthquake whether it's cost effective whether oh sure countries should actually adopt this technology can you shed some light on that yeah well first of all I'd recommend going to the boring company website um for because many of these questions are actually answered there uh so one of the safest places you can be in an earthquake is uh an underground tunnel because you can because the earthquakes are largely a surface apart from where where where they share they're mostly a surface phenomenon so they're like the waves on the surface so like being in

a tunnel is like being in a submarine even if there's a storm above you you're still the waters are calm as a submarine and in fact for and when there have been massive earthquakes like there was a you know a few decades ago a massive earthquake in Mexico City the the safest place to go was the subway um and of course if there is global ther nulear Warfare I think you really want some tunnels um underground's a good a good place to be um if in a worst case scenario for global thermonuclear Warfare so um yeah but but in on a you more sort of everyday note the what's really useful about the tunnels is alleviating traffic in congested areas so the obviously if you've got very tall buildings but you have that are 3D so they're going 3D up but you have a road

surface which is 2D you're you're just naturally going to have a problem when people try to go from the 3D object which is the building to the 2D object which is the road surface um there's obviously just not going to be enough room on the roads and that's exactly why you have traffic so the solution for that is then to make roads 3D as well um now you can either make or make Transport 3D so you could either do that with flying cars or you could do or really helicopters um or you could do that with tunnels now the challenge with doing it with going above ground or with with any kind kind of flying object is that they they tend to be very noisy um and they generate a lot of wind force and you've got you know things flying over your head all the time which

can be disconcerting um you know if somebody drop if one of these things drops a hubc cap on your head one day um you know to be these things like things flying things tend to crash once in a while and people don't like things crashing on them um so and then if you have bad weather like let's say there's a blizzard or a sandstorm or something well now nobody can fly so then transport shuts down on the other hand none of the these problem problems exist with underground travel so they're under tunnels are immune to weather they don't care with the weather could be the worst weather doesn't matter um they nothing's going to fall on you because you're underground so you don't have to you're know going to be dropping things on people and um there's no wind

force or or and it's very quiet and so I think the going 3D underground is much better than 3D above ground for solving traffic in cities um and and we' we have a demonstr case of this with in Las Vegas if people we can try out the the the boring company tunnels in Las Vegas we're we're busy connecting the whole city with the all of the big hotels and the convention center and the airport and everything so I don't think they need to fly all the way there um you know in 20 in 2017 um you came here and um the UA was the first place in the Middle East where Tesla was launched and I think it's done exceptionally well and on that note I think we have an announcement today that we both want to share which is today we're going to announce the joint project of

Dubai Loop which is a loop project that is going to cover Dubai's most densely populated areas for people to go from point to point in a seamless manner so thank you for your partnership and well thank you we hope it changes people's lives that'll be cool I think it'll be very exciting um I think once people try it out they be like wow this is really cool um and it's it's going to seem so obvious in retrospect but uh until you actually do it you know it you don't know so it's it's going to be great um it's it's going to be like like a like a wormhole like it you know you just Wormhole from one part of the city boom and you're out in another part of the city and it's it's great so I'm looking forward to this Partners we're going to join uh the first trip

and the first pod um when is completed thank you Elon all right thank you very much thank [Applause] [Music] you ladies and gentlemen the next session will begin shortly please stay seated thank you ladies and gentlemen the topic of this session is 20 minutes for the next 20 years of your life with Nick santonastaso founder of Victorious International the doctor ified me with handh heart syndrome are you ready to tell is The Impossible s e e