Biohacker Bryan Johnson trusts AI will solve human aging

[0:00] You've been emphatic that humans need to lean into AI to survive. [0:04] So tell me the specifics, and I'd like specifics, of how superintelligence is going to overcome [0:09] that and deliver on this imagined future, where AI cures all disease and allows us to [0:13] live forever. [0:14] Sundar announced yesterday, with Demis, that... [0:18] Demis Hibabas and Sundar Pichai from Google. [0:19] Yep. [0:20] They created a new model that created a novel hypothesis about a way to turn a cold cancer [0:27] into a hot cancer. [0:28] So oftentimes, cancers sit in the body, undetected by the immune system. [0:32] They made it hot. [0:33] And so the immune system would say, like, there you are, or you can treat it. [0:37] So a lot of people have criticized AI, like, oh, AI can't do anything novel. [0:41] It just replicates human understanding. [0:43] But yesterday was one of the first demonstrations of a genuinely novel insight. [0:49] It thought it up itself. [0:50] That you showed AI understands how cells communicate, understands the context in which they exist, [0:58] and can talk back and say, what about this? [1:00] And then it was replicated in an experiment that it was correct. [1:04] So this is what I've been hoping for, for years, like, we're going to start making these [1:09] little breakthroughs, then big breakthroughs, and then we're all going to say, huh. [1:14] And so all of a sudden, this idea that we may be the first generation who won't die, [1:19] people may say, like, maybe it's not crazy. [1:22] Won't die, but won't die of that. [1:24] Take that and multiply it by every disease out there. [1:27] The study that just came out of China, if it replicates, they showed age reversal of [1:34] equivalent of 9 to 15 years in humans across over 50% of human tissue, which is a gigantic [1:42] demonstration. [1:43] I have no doubt we were going to be living longer. [1:45] It's not, I don't think, you know, maybe not today, but it's sort of like, probably back [1:49] in when Orville Wright took off, I'm not going to be the person on the beach saying, he only [1:54] went eight feet. [1:55] Yeah. [1:56] You go, oh my fucking god, he flopped. [1:57] Exactly. [1:58] That's the point. [1:59] But again, you're saying, we won't die. [2:01] We will die, we just will die later. [2:03] If we travel back in time, and we're hanging out with Homo erectus, and I say, hey, Homo erectus, [2:10] tell me about the future of our existence, what's going to happen? [2:14] They will use their existing mental models and say, I will hunt, and I will forage, [2:18] and I'll do this and that. [2:19] They will not say that you're going to discover a microscopic world of atoms and molecules. [2:24] You're going, right? [2:25] They couldn't have imagined it. [2:26] Exactly. [2:27] And I'm saying that right now, relative to AI, it is possible we are as naive as Homo erectus. [2:34] Certainly. [2:35] But that's like the idea, I mean, you had a Dan Brown book here, I saw it, which he just [2:39] wrote about in his recent book, that if Mozart came back and heard a speaker, he'd think there [2:44] was a little orchestra in the little box, but he certainly would have soon understood [2:49] it. [2:50] We have a rate of adaptation as a species. [2:52] For a new idea to be presented, for me to ingest it, for me to be like, I'm okay with [2:56] it now. [2:57] So we have a certain rate. [2:58] Then AI has a certain rate. [2:59] And if you start pairing those rates, you just have an open question and say, will we [3:03] keep up to date with what's happening to AI or will it exceed us? [3:06] And if it exceeds us, will it exceed in ways we can't quite comprehend? [3:08] And so I'm not stating with any certainty, whether it's good or bad. [3:12] All I'm saying is, this is a big moment. [3:15] And what we don't want to do is walk into this moment as a war-faring, sick, addicted [3:22] culture that kills ourselves for these points. [3:26] I imagined being in the year 2500. [3:29] And you're looking back at the early 21st century, our time and place, and you're wondering, [3:33] what did Homo sapiens do in that moment, in that century? [3:37] And I thought they might say two things. [3:38] One is, this is when Homo sapiens gave birth to super intelligence, and this is when we [3:43] figured out we would no longer die. [3:45] It's solely a question, as a species, what are we capable of? [3:50] And that's where I arrived at. [3:51] It wasn't like, I want to live forever, therefore I'm going through this. [3:54] It was that, trying to put a finger on what is the thing that can be done. [3:58] So why do you phrase it like that? [3:59] Because it is phrased and you market it, and it's quite marketed, I want to live forever. [4:03] Oh, I don't. [4:04] And I specifically do not say, I want to live forever. [4:08] Mm-hmm. [4:09] Okay. [4:10] But you said you don't want to die. [4:11] Don't die is very different. [4:12] Okay. [4:13] Explain that for me. [4:14] Okay. [4:15] Don't die is what you experience right now, and what I experience right now. [4:17] Like if we felt the windows shatter, you and I would leave this room and seek protection, [4:23] right? [4:24] Like we'd go to a safe place. [4:25] So don't die is our instinct in not wanting to die in this moment. [4:30] And so this goes back to, this is going to be one more step for you. [4:32] Okay. [4:33] So in marrying the two concepts of giving birth to super intelligence and we are the first [4:37] generation who won't die, my entire endeavor is not about health, it's about AI alignment. [4:44] If you just have to create a practical map and say what things need to happen in order [4:48] for us to solve aging. [4:49] We know a jellyfish can be immortal. [4:52] We know a hydra can be immortal. [4:53] We know that immortality has been solved in biology. [4:55] Mm-hmm. [4:56] We know a lot in the human species. [4:57] To do that, you probably need to have like a scientific- [4:59] You mean the jellyfish at the bottom of the sea, those jellyfish? [5:01] Yes, exactly. [5:02] Okay. [5:03] If you say, how could you practically take those learnings and apply them to human? [5:06] You need a certain level of scientific understanding and tools to do that. [5:10] We have those. [5:11] Sure. [5:12] But why not just study jellyfish instead of yourself? [5:14] Measure everything. [5:15] Because I think it comes from a mentality that a lot of people, and I'm not, I will lump you [5:19] in with people, that everything is measurable. [5:22] And every single thing is measurable, when in fact the human body is a very, I mean, or [5:27] everything's like a computer. [5:29] It's not like a computer. [5:30] The human brain is not like a computer. [5:32] If you look at the depths of it, I've become the most measured person in the world, offering [5:36] a demonstration of what characterization can happen. [5:39] And then I sift through the entire thing and say, I'm going to give it to you for free. [5:44] I open source those and say, you can do your own thing. [5:46] I will tell you exactly how to make it. [5:48] And when you go out in the world right now, it's an absolute disaster. [5:50] So how do you isolate the impact of each of these protocols, especially about short-term [5:55] and long-term safety, and confidently endorse their effectiveness? [5:59] Yeah. [6:00] I mean, we do this. [6:01] We just completed a study looking at hyperbaric oxidant therapy. [6:03] We just did it with sauna, where we measured over a hundred biomarkers before I did hyperbaric [6:08] oxidant therapy. [6:09] I did the therapy. [6:10] We isolated all my therapies during that time period, and we measured my biomarkers again. [6:14] So yes, it's imperfect because there are variables we can't control in the world, but generally [6:19] speaking, it's a fairly controlled experiment. [6:21] Many of the studies around hyperbaric are mixed. [6:24] Hyperbaric oxidant therapy has been the most efficacious therapy we've done. [6:29] That you've done? [6:30] Yeah. [6:31] For your body? [6:32] But we look at population level evidence. [6:33] So it's not just mine. [6:34] We say, what does all the evidence say of the people who have done this? [6:38] What kind of effect size did they see in their brains, in the microbiome, in the telomeres? [6:42] Then we say, what does mine show? [6:45] Right. [6:46] So we just have a comparative set. [6:47] Yeah. [6:48] So what I'm seeing, considering the wide variations in human biology, are they even comparable? [6:52] That is possibly irresponsible to say one thing that happens to you is the thing that happens [6:57] to another. [6:58] Large scale, double blind, placebo controlled trials are the gold standard. [7:02] Sure. [7:03] We all want them. [7:04] Yes. [7:05] In the meantime. [7:06] In the meantime. [7:07] Everybody needs to make decisions on what they do in life. [7:10] And so what I'm trying to do is I say, okay, look, here's the evidence base for hyperbaric [7:14] oxidant therapy. [7:15] Here's the population level data. [7:17] I'm going to do this experiment, measure this, do the therapy, and share my results. [7:22] So I share it. [7:23] Then I can say, hey, everybody, if you want to repeat my experiment, you can do the following [7:27] thing. [7:28] The vector of criticizing me for experimenting and sharing results, it's such a narrow... [7:33] Well, I think it's because you're an influencer. [7:36] There's plenty of bad information. [7:38] What is the alternative? [7:39] So what do we do? [7:40] Do the standard gold standard of double blind? [7:42] Who's going to fund it? [7:43] Well, you're rich. [7:44] Yeah. [7:45] How many studies could I fund? [7:46] A lot. [7:47] So could all of you. [7:48] Yeah. [7:49] But like for the number of variables, but the thing is like, this is the thing is it's [7:52] not practical to get there and gripe and be like, don't run experiments on yourself [7:56] and share your data. [7:57] Just wait for everybody to do shit. [7:59] Like, how do you get by in life? [8:00] What do you do? [8:01] Well, I think people think you should not be using your data to represent things and [8:07] make decisions. [8:08] But it isn't the gold standard of double blind. [8:09] So nobody should experiment. [8:10] No. [8:11] I didn't say that. [8:13] I said, I think you are under describing your influence, I would say. [8:19] If you look at the range of the health advice out in the world, we're probably the safest [8:24] vector of advice out there. [8:27] You are. [8:28] Yeah. [8:29] Because? [8:30] Because it happened to you? [8:31] Nope. [8:32] Because we follow the most robust scientific evidence in the world. [8:36] You really do not worry if they're not gold standard studies. [8:39] It's just, this is what happened to me, folks. [8:42] Even in the gold standard studies, you're going to have limitations and every scientist [8:46] that has written a paper knows that they have arranged that data in a certain way and [8:52] made certain complicated decisions with that data. [8:55] It is never clean, it is always complicated. [8:58] And so this is the thing is, when scientists come at me and they somehow want to maintain [9:03] some kind of higher position, that is not the case. [9:05] Do you think that's just it? [9:07] Maybe some of them are worried. [9:08] Hey, look. [9:09] Safety. [9:10] I have seen this behind the scenes process now. [9:12] I did not, I did not become educated as a scientist. [9:15] I have sat in these rooms and had, I've been in these conversations where people are trying [9:19] to figure out how to present a data set to the world in the paper they're writing. [9:23] They have incentives to write papers that achieve certain outcomes to be in certain journals. [9:28] It is not a sacred process. [9:31] It is a vicious competitive process. [9:33] So when they attack you, when these scientists attack you for being, you know, a con man, [9:38] I've heard that many times. [9:40] Yeah. [9:41] I'm not, first, I'm not a con man. [9:43] I'm just telling you what they're doing. [9:44] I'm doing my experiments, I'm sharing my data, right, to the best of my ability. [9:48] But when they come at this as somehow, I'm the person that needs to be ridiculed because [9:52] this method is not good, I'm going to point the spotlight back and say, the public is [9:59] not aware of what you do, I understand what you do. [10:01] It does remind me a little bit of tech people who do this, where they go, I remember having [10:06] a very elaborate conversation with Mark Zuckerberg about problems on social media, anti-Semitic [10:11] stuff many years ago. [10:12] This was a decade ago, and I said, down the line, this is going to be bad, like ultimately [10:16] when the toxic stew gets down the line, it's going to cause problems. [10:20] And he literally goes, but what about cable? [10:22] I'm like, yeah, no, that's an industry that's declining, so I'm going to look at you, who's [10:26] going on the up. [10:27] And he goes, well, what about newspapers? [10:28] And I'm like, again, it feels a little shifty. [10:31] It's like, they're also corrupt, is your argument, or they're not corrupt? [10:35] No, I'm saying that I am trying to solve a very practical problem that exists for billions [10:42] of humans. [10:43] What do I do? [10:45] And on that stream of thought, it's like, who do I trust? [10:48] How do I know what to do? [10:49] How do I know what a process is? [10:50] And I'm trying to say, here's a way to think about it. [10:53] Here's how you understand scientific evidence. [10:55] Here's how you understand measurement. [10:56] I'm trying to take a basic class in scientific method and medical measurement of the human [11:01] body. [11:02] Then I become a focal point of criticism of how everyone disagrees with that method [11:06] ology. [11:07] Right. [11:08] Which is fine. [11:09] Like, that's what science is, what society is. [11:10] That's why... [11:11] So you think it's because they're priests and don't want to give up their priestly [11:14] robes? [11:15] That is the natural human response to any kind of situation. [11:19] When every ounce of your life is measured, are you living? [11:23] If you have a dashboard on your car, you're not going to be like, way too much information, [11:27] really don't care about the oil. [11:28] You know, the oil is different than all the rest of the nonsense. [11:32] Or when a baby is born, you're like, honestly, too many panels for the baby, too excessive. [11:37] Just give me half the measurements. [11:38] So it's always the context on the frame. [11:41] When LeBron James goes to bed on time and eats well and exercises and measures the metabolic [11:45] activity, people are like, that's amazing, LeBron. [11:48] When I do it, the reason why they criticize me is they don't know the category I belong. [11:53] Except LeBron James plays basketball then. [11:55] What is your goal in that regard? [11:57] I'm trying to demonstrate the science of aging. [12:00] So a living experiment to actually quantify. [12:03] Now this is useful because if somebody has a health issue, it becomes real, right? [12:07] It's no longer like this. [12:08] Oh, this dude is a motherfucker. [12:09] It's like, how do I actually know what works? [12:13] And that's what I'm trying to show them is there is a scientific process to measure, do [12:19] something and then measure, which is weirdly absent from medicine. [12:22] The point I'm trying to make is not that we've solved aging, not that we know everything. [12:26] I'm trying to show that you can approach health with a scientific method. [12:31] That's it. [12:32] Which a lot of people do. [12:33] I think you're not the first to do it. [12:35] Just you. [12:36] Sure, sure, sure. [12:37] But I'm saying like, this is the point I'm trying to make though, right? [12:39] Is that health generally in America right now does not follow the scientific method. [12:45] Please elaborate. [12:47] When you go into your doctor, right? [12:49] And it's like, I have a blank thing going on. [12:53] You get prescribed the drug, right? [12:55] Sometimes. [12:56] It's usually not like, let's do a comprehensive panel of markers. [12:59] Let's assess where you're at now. [13:01] Let's assess what the potential therapies could be. [13:04] Let's then do that therapy and measure the markers again. [13:07] Right. [13:08] It's expensive. [13:09] It doesn't fit into... [13:10] You're talking about preventative care over the course of a lifetime, constant monitoring. [13:12] Even robust care, if I have an issue. [13:15] And it just, it doesn't operate enough in that capacity. [13:19] Well, it's solving a problem in the immediate. [13:21] That's what you're talking about. [13:22] Yeah. [13:23] Versus a systemic. [13:24] You're talking about a systemic solution. [13:26] Yeah, exactly. [13:27] And I'm trying to basically say that like, this is a reasonable approach of how everybody [13:30] should be managed to. [13:31] Okay. [13:32] You got a lot of attention for publicly saying you're no longer taking rapamycin after nearly [13:36] five years of experimentation, off-label experimentation. [13:39] It's still far from being proven to extend life in humans. [13:44] But doing things to your body based on preliminary and cherubic data hasn't stopped people from [13:49] doing it. [13:50] So why make such a big stink about this change in protocol when in fact there is potential? [13:57] Why did you do that? [13:58] Do you worry that your public criticism might have real impact on funding for necessary research [14:02] around something like this that might be helpful to people? [14:05] I mean, as you said, the rapamycin is kind of like the golden child of the longevity [14:11] community. [14:12] It's one of very few things that actually gets a high praise from a wide range of scientists. [14:16] Right. [14:17] A little bit like Ozempic right now. [14:19] It's a drug that suppresses the immune system. [14:21] And so it's not free. [14:22] You have to pay the consequence of a whole bunch of side effects like mouth sores, disrupted [14:27] lipids, metabolic activity, et cetera. [14:29] Yep. [14:30] You said that. [14:31] It also suppresses cancer surveillance cell activity. [14:33] So it's suppressing an important part of your body which otherwise looks for cancer. [14:37] And so we just said, we don't think this trade-off is worth it because we have risks that we're [14:41] not quite certain what they are and how significant they are. [14:44] And then a month later, there was a study that came out in Yale that showed that on 16 epigenetic [14:49] clocks, methylation clocks, it increased the speed of aging. [14:52] Right. [14:53] You said that. [14:54] And so, yeah, I mean, I think it's like one of these things where we're early, early [14:57] days for biological aging. [14:58] We don't know what's going to work and what's not going to work. [15:00] It was a reasonable decision. [15:02] Do you think you did damage to real research into something that might potentially be very important? [15:07] for humans? [15:08] Maybe. [15:09] Because you have influence. [15:10] Pretending you don't have influence is kind of silly. [15:11] Maybe even increase it. [15:12] Increase funding because they don't believe you? [15:16] Because it now has a new hurdle to overcome. [15:18] There's a new objective to demonstrate that's efficacious in certain ways. [15:23] You're a friend by being difficult. [15:25] Yeah. [15:26] What you're trying to do is you're trying to characterize the drug. [15:29] You're trying to basically say, how can we see both the benefits and the side effects [15:33] in the way those two? [15:35] So we offered further characterization of it. [15:37] How do you handle the criticism that you were doing it to take attention away from that New [15:41] York Times piece about you? [15:42] For example, that was one of the accusations. [15:44] Oh, no. [15:45] It's not related. [15:46] Not related. [15:47] Yeah. [15:48] So you don't feel like this author is saying you're doing damage to real longevity research [15:53] by saying it doesn't work, essentially, to your followers. [15:57] Yeah. [15:58] I mean, you could easily frame that and say I'm doing them a favor. [16:01] Right? [16:02] We identified it's increasing the speed of aging. [16:04] We identified the side effects. [16:06] The strongest proponent of rapamycin died of brain cancer. [16:12] We don't know if that's why. [16:14] We don't know if that's why. [16:15] We don't know why. [16:16] We don't know. [16:17] We don't know why. [16:18] Right? [16:19] But he was on a very high dose. [16:20] But I'm just saying it's potentially useful to call attention to something that's not. [16:23] Yeah, but that's a little bit like the vaccine people. [16:25] Like, ah, I found six cases. [16:28] There's nothing wrong with looking at it. [16:29] But it's certainly, you know, we have measles now after 20 years of not having measles. [16:34] Yeah. [16:35] I mean, it's a question. [16:36] We're just asking questions sometimes. [16:39] Or ignorant. [16:40] Or trying to create ignorance. [16:41] No? [16:42] No. [16:43] No. [16:44] This is all about characterization. [16:45] This is all about how do you make informed decisions with very complicated topics. [16:48] I felt like I was in the room with RFK Jr. there for a second. [16:51] Like, this, circumcision, autism. [16:53] I'm like, what? [16:54] Like, how did... [16:55] And there were no studies there. [16:56] There was nothing. [16:57] And there are plenty of studies showing the other way. [16:59] But you don't think there's a problem raising things like this? [17:02] No, so I think that... [17:04] So he... [17:05] The gentleman who died of brain cancer actively raised this, right? [17:09] To pose the question. [17:10] Because one of the side effects is it lessens cancer surveillance activity in the body. [17:15] Sure, but you know it before. [17:16] We know that's the case. [17:17] And so we were concerned in my body, is that a problem? [17:20] So we know it lessens cancer surveillance. [17:25] If it lessens cancer surveillance, it increases cancer risk potentially. [17:29] That would be causative. [17:30] Possibly. [17:31] So we're curious. [17:32] Yeah. [17:33] We didn't say if it did. [17:34] We just said, that's interesting. [17:35] Mm-hmm. [17:36] And if that's something that could happen, we definitely want to be aware of it. [17:39] Right. [17:40] But getting back to the complexity, it could have been, he had the gene. [17:42] Entirely. [17:43] He could have been walking near, too close to a cell tower. [17:45] Who knows? [17:46] Entirely. [17:47] Someone could have hit him at some point when he was seven. [17:48] Yep. [17:49] You know, you just don't know. [17:50] Yeah. [17:51] Right? [17:52] Yeah. [17:53] So we're not... [17:54] I'm not saying it's causative. [17:55] I'm saying it's an open question that we should investigate. [17:56] Yeah. [17:57] But then you have people down in Texas not getting their measles shots and all these kids dying [18:00] of measles. [18:01] Like, it has repercussions. [18:02] What? [18:03] Yeah. [18:04] Correct? [18:05] Do you think you're responsible for the repercussions? [18:06] No. [18:07] Measles is different than an apple mice. [18:08] Sure. [18:09] I'm just using it as an example. [18:10] Yeah, yeah, yeah. [18:11] People just asking questions. [18:12] Yeah, yeah. [18:14] Yeah. [18:15] The top line debates would be much better to have with, like, robust scientific data. [18:20] Mm-hmm. [18:22] Those are well-characterized diseases. [18:23] Mm-hmm. [18:24] It's well-characterized reactions. [18:26] It's a different conversation. [18:27] Right. [18:28] Okay. [18:29] One of the things that's a problem in our society, people can't get doctor's appointments. [18:32] They can't afford to buy fresh produce, for example. [18:35] Good things to put in your body. [18:37] And you've earned your money. [18:39] You're entitled to spend it any way you want to. [18:41] Do you think there's anything toned up about promoting expensive and time-consuming protocols [18:46] for people, if that's the case? [18:48] I wish there was somebody in the world that helped them understand how to figure out what [18:52] things work for them and how to test foods. [18:54] Mm-hmm. [18:56] So you're doing it for them. [18:57] This is the point I'm trying to make. [18:59] I'm trying to say there is a deficiency in the world. [19:02] Right. [19:03] Of people knowing practically what to do. [19:05] Mm-hmm. [19:06] And then if I do something, then, you know, the rebuttal is, well, it's not a placebo-controlled [19:09] double-blind study, so therefore it shouldn't exist. [19:11] Meanwhile, what does the average person do? [19:14] Mm-hmm. [19:15] How do they think through, how do I figure out what is wrong with me? [19:18] How do I actually address, is this therapy good for me? [19:20] What do I measure? [19:21] So you're moving into, you think you're moving into an empty space that they're not [19:26] Entirely. [19:27] I mean, no matter, Kara, no matter where I go, if the person's a billionaire or the person [19:31] has no money, they are in almost the same space of lack of understanding of the most basic [19:37] things on health. [19:38] It is, that society does not know how to sleep. [19:41] Mm-hmm. [19:42] We have not ever- [19:43] This is true. [19:44] So it is like, we're at such a elementary level on every vector of health. [19:48] Mm-hmm. [19:49] Who's going to fill the void? [19:50] And so if people out there are talking about their various things, what I would prefer is, [19:54] they use scientific evidence and try to be robust with what they're saying. [19:58] Because right now, it's very confusing. [20:00] What about you do something, someone tries it because they believe in you, and bad things [20:07] happen? [20:08] Are you ready to take responsibility if something you say or advise hurts someone? [20:13] It's the natural process. [20:14] I mean, I could be talking about coffee, and somebody tries coffee and they have a negative [20:18] reaction to coffee. [20:19] Like, you know, am I responsible for that? [20:21] I mean, that's just the natural part of people trying stuff. [20:23] I mean, it's inevitable. [20:24] Like, you can't have a controlled experiment with billions of humans. [20:27] Like, we all try things for a day. [20:28] Right. [20:29] But if you say, stick it up your ass, and someone dies from it, yes, it is. [20:32] This is the thing. [20:33] Well, if you give a specific, you know. [20:35] This is why I have not done coffee colonoscopy, or coffee enemas, because the evidence is [20:41] not great. [20:42] Why not put your vast sums of money, and again, you can spend it any way you want, into something [20:46] like gun control, big killer of people, or unprocessed foods in schools that would actually [20:51] help people. [20:52] Yeah. [20:53] In this short term, I guess. [20:55] Yep. [20:57] I'm trying to find the fulcrum with the biggest leverage. [21:01] Uh-huh. [21:02] My formula has been go to the root of that problem and try to solve the foundational issues. [21:07] Uh-huh. [21:08] The guns and the other things, they live downstream from other things. [21:13] And this is what I've been trying to tell, like, very basic, like, causative relationships. [21:17] Uh-huh. [21:18] If you don't get good sleep, your willpower... [21:21] Certainly. [21:22] ...falls off a cliff. [21:23] Uh-huh. [21:24] Your sex drive falls off a cliff. [21:26] You know, sometimes I think, someone asked me what I thought about why I was so intriguing [21:30] to people like you, and you're very typical of entrepreneurs I've met over the many years, [21:34] and they all have a certain thing. [21:35] And for some reason, I said, well, men can't have babies, and therefore this is their version [21:40] of that. [21:41] Uh-huh. [21:42] Uh-huh. [21:43] And, of course, it's narcissistic rather than community-based. [21:45] How do you think about that? [21:46] I mean, what's more community-based than the human race? [21:49] Like, what more could be a communal endeavor? [21:52] And you felt dying was what was happening to us, and you're trying to solve that problem? [21:57] What problem are you solving for, exactly? [21:59] Yep. [22:00] So, the primary objective function of the world right now is power, wealth, and status. [22:05] Uh-huh. [22:06] Those are the biggest... [22:07] Nothing new. [22:08] Exactly. [22:09] And so, if you take those objective functions, and you then take this powerful new intelligence, [22:13] you point it at those ends, you question, is that the right goal? [22:17] Uh-huh. [22:18] Do you want to do that? [22:19] Or, is there something else? [22:20] And what I'm suggesting is, as a species, we are going to transition into a new era, [22:27] Uh-huh. [22:28] where existence itself is the highest virtue. [22:31] So, you're in it for humanity, not for self-aggrandizement. [22:35] Like, what else is there to play for? [22:38] I mean, self-aggrandizement is like such a ridiculous notion. [22:41] We're such a minuscule and insignificant part of this galaxy. [22:44] Like, why would it even matter? [22:46] I think the narcissist accusation is really lazy, actually. [22:49] Okay. [22:50] It's like, it doesn't understand the depth of what I'm trying to do. [22:53] The headlines have painted this superficial, narcissistic story that people grab onto. [22:59] Uh-huh. [23:00] If you look at the depths of it, I've become the most measured person in the world, offering [23:04] a demonstration of what characterization can happen. [23:07] So, when you say narcissism is lazy, you also play into it with your photos of your chest, [23:13] and, you know, holding this thing with your son, and talking about blame. [23:17] You're doing it on purpose, presumably, correct? [23:20] Uh- [23:21] You know it's like catnip to media to do that. [23:24] Absolutely. [23:25] Right. [23:26] So, why are you doing it that way? [23:27] That the world is in a ferocious match of competition. [23:30] Uh-huh. [23:31] And you need your thing to be understood. [23:33] And like when you play out there, you just play the game. [23:36] Play the game. [23:37] Yeah. [23:38] Explain rejuvenation athlete. [23:40] When you're an entrepreneur, the playbook is you martyr yourself in the pursuit of wealth, [23:46] which means you don't sleep very much, you don't exercise. [23:48] Right. [23:49] Hustle porn. [23:50] So, then you want to flex like I only get three or four hours of sleep a night and I'm [23:54] pretty badass. [23:55] It's the Elon thing. [23:56] It is, right? [23:57] So, that's the cultural norm. [23:58] And so, if you can quantify that trade-off, your wealth may be increasing over the time [24:03] duration, but you're destroying your health. [24:06] Would you have characterized yourself as a hustle porn guy? [24:10] 100%. [24:11] How did you feel doing that? [24:12] It was disastrous. [24:13] I would have committed suicide had not been with my kids. [24:16] Most of society has a pretty serious mental health issue. [24:19] And so, that's what I'm saying. [24:20] When the people are criticizing me, I don't think it's about me. [24:23] So, how do you want to die? [24:26] I want to die in the most ridiculous way possible. [24:29] Okay. [24:30] Go for it. [24:31] Because irony is the ultimate language of the universe. [24:34] Yeah, it's going to be a great headline. [24:36] Hit by a truck. [24:37] 100%, right? [24:38] Like, hit by a bus would be one like choking on broccoli, you know, an experiment that I [24:42] accidentally give myself cancer with, you know, like, it's just, it's, I'm guaranteed [24:47] to die in the most ridiculous way possible. [24:50] It's just going to happen. [24:51] Okay. [24:52] So, say you see it coming. [24:53] What's your last words? [24:55] Oh, fuck. [24:56] It would be something like, have fun with it. [25:02] I thought it was it.