Lex, you asked some questions that many interviewers would dance around and not ask. I really appreciate for asking those questions and the insight they brought. Thank you
Pretty blown away by how truly modest and grounded Eric is. There's not even a tiny hint of self-aggrandizement or ego in the way he comports himself, despite how much he has achieved. Looks like he's living life with a really healthy mindset.
thats the upside of tech companies getting huge, they have a much higher chance of being led by intelligent or "nerdy" people, unlike say an oil company or whatever.
Well, from what I've seen in other interviews and talks, he does show a little bit of ego, but that's just part of what happens when you've achieved what he has.
When i first listened to Eric schmidt i assumed he was just a ceo. I think it's because he's so great at communication that his tech background and sources of knowledge don't become front and center. He's a master of condensing huge amounts of information and I ttuly think every word he speaks is worth hearing. One of my heroes, thank you for Mr. Schmidt for having such developed and clearly worded points of view on so many things I didn't even know I wanted to hear about.
I tell myself long time ago.. That when you get enough of social media nonsense and you wanna listen to someone very smart and eloquent. Listen to Eric Schmidt.
Lex, I was going through several interviews of yours. While each one is a gem, some how this one with Eric Schmidt is so special personally to me, and hopefully many out there. He is with fundamentals, and he is with clarity of thinking, amazingly honest with broader and deeper vision for human~ness. Thank you!!!
That was one of the best yet. There were quotable quotes, deep moments, and a raft of great advice. Really good interview Lex. I really liked your shout out to Josh Tennebaum's work. There is really amazing work going on at MIT in AI.
Loving your interview room. Minded of nice new police station, cosy interview rooms, detectives moved to storage cupboards. It's about answering, not comfort.
Great interview. I like to stop and take a moment to appreciate what a privilege and delight it is to listen to these interviews with such amazing people.. Thanks!
‘Botched’ being relative to your current interview
2 года назад
Like 10% of the interview time is Lex formulating 25:22 question ;) Thank you for having Eric though. I think round 2 would be great, you got so much better.
The level of intellect in Mr Schmidt is truly impressive. And his level of comprehension, and ability to dispart/distill that knowledge in others. Leading Google for a decade, is amazing, but more so as he came from an older age of programmer in the 80's and 90's. He is still super sharp. Amazing.
Eric explains it very clear and easy to understand which reflected his clear mind and fully understand what he is talking about. No wonder why he was hired as Google CEO.
Eric thanks so much for your grand contribution to the field of Engineering and Software you are constantly finding ways to improve and make things better computer and technology wise we the people love it. God has placed each of us here for a purpose and you are surely fulfilling yours. Eric God birth the thoughts that's embedded in your head which sparks the existence of your ideas to come to fruition to unleash what is now your business praise Him for that!!! God bless you from your sister in Christ in Hammond, LA.
Before you praise this man please do some research into all the evil things this man has done while selling America out to China. As an evangelist I wouldn’t be quick to praise men who work overtime everyday to bring about the trans humanist agenda and push forward the goals of the new world order and its dystopian big brother world. Do not be deceived by this man.
I like this episode! It's relatively short, but still so packed full of meaningful insights, without feeling too 'bursty' or 'cramped', and very concise! Thank you both!
Lex, This was very interesting and valuable interview. I am interested in how you got to be in the position you are now, 1.How did you start to be able to interview people like Eric Schmidt? 2.What are your thoughts on block chain? 3.How important is identity in a persons process of creating? 4.What would it take for you to be on my podcast?
I don’t like the “what moment did u X”. It perpetuates this one sudden moment culture that is false. Everything is a process, especially important realizations and skills.
How about "Can you describe your path to arrive at X. What were some of the key moments or insights along the way. The progression, the evolution of your Y to arrive at X."
Lex, your podcasts are a treasure. Thank you. Eric, you are a successful business person and technologist. Both you and Lex, and your friends and associates, are much smarter than I am. Perhaps your mind power can help solve a technological/economics problem. Ray Kurzweil argues that advances in technology are deflationary. Ray Dalio argues that Central Bank efforts to increase the money supply and prevent deflation lead to economic disparity. Some argue that a dystopian world is coming if these forces continue. I hope they are wrong, and anyway why not try and fix things instead of getting scared about it? I see the world economy as a tree with roots that have rotted away. The tree appears to stand straight, held in place by the deflationary force of advancing technology pushing on one side and the re-inflationary force of Central Banks pushing on the other. In a nutshell, I believe that that it works like this: Competition leads to technological advance. Technological advance leads to deflation and ultimately depressions where the obsolete companies go bankrupt and the workers lose their jobs. It the depression can complete its work a new market society emerges with new types of work and new efficient businesses. This process is very, very hard on most people. The massive technological advances more than 100 years ago, which resulted in cars, airplanes, steel, oil and tire companies, and the prior round of super billionaires, such as Ford, Carnegie, and Rockefeller, changed the world. It also led to the Great Depression. We never finished the economic work of that depression; instead, the economic hardships led to rise of Hitler and World War II. Since that time the Central Banks have promised to prevent the deflation and depression from coming back. But technology continues to advance, and the information revolution is at least as powerful in creating a better world as the industrial revolution was; it is also, just as deflationary. So, since WW II governments have borrowed and the Central Banks have encouraged the growth of individual and corporate debt. Anything to increase the money supply (which is mainly debt) and prevent deflation. Governments have prevented deflation and depression, but how much longer will they succeed? Few seem to link the problem of global debt with the deflationary push of technological advance; and few offer a solution other than some vague guaranteed income program. Where does the money come to pay for such a program? Companies have their profits, driven down endlessly by competition, available for the government to tax and then spend. That amount is not sufficient. The problem-how do we preserve the benefits of capitalism? Competition between companies and the search for a return on capital have brought great innovations that have changed the world and will change it even more in the future. We all have benefited. Yet, the massive deflation and the resulting massive debt make several things likely: 1) depression (hyperinflation is possible but usually lasts for only a short time); 2) social unrest; and 3) war. Some countries have tried socialism. They have tried mixed socialism and capitalism, and they continue to try it. So far, no one has found a substitute for a market economy. But massive debt capitalism to prevent depression will not work either. Do we need a new economic model? Some way to pay off the debt without war? Any ideas? Sorry for the long post. I keep trying to condense these ideas. Thank you. William L. Ramseyer
Same. We already have killer robots. Ever heard of drone strikes in the Middle East? The Disposition Matrix? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disposition_Matrix#Drone_strike_casualties
Damn.. its the best thing .. i have listen this year.. thanks man.. by the way what are your views for self driving car in india?? ( As there people are unpredictable and traffic's are excess)
FUN THING: 14:20 the need to take bets (10%, as Schmidt says) is a direct consequence of Natural Selection. The world being an unstable, evolving ecosystem, many new "species and mutations" must be introduced into the overall ecosystem. Most will die, however some new ones will be coincidentally adapted enough to become the dominant ones. None of the "great inventions" of the world were the lucky first ones, such as iPhone or Android. All were among many mutations facing hostile environments, which occasionally happen to be favorable to large and micro ecosystems of their own. Natural Selection isn't an mechanism that arbitrarily decide to limit itself to the confines of "the living". It applies to business too.
I can't find the video, but I recall Elon indirectly hinting that Google is the only company he's concerned about when it comes to AI. In the Future of Life Institute video from last year, he said the biggest problems are 1). I/O bandwidth (for when AGI will be an issue) and 2). Democratization, he emphasized it by rephrasing the Lord Acton quote by saying "Freedom consists of the distribution of power, and despotism in its concentration." Remember, it was the astronauts at Clavius, and their secrecy, that made HAL the way he was. You can't expect Heywood Floyd to tell you what's in the Tycho crater, especially with all he stands to gain from it. Anyway, it would be cool to hear interdisciplinary and/or esoteric AI opinions, especially those that intersect with biology. Like the concept of Artificial Outelligence that Eric Weinstein presents here. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Wu8s0tp9yzY.html Edit: Found it, ironically it was the top left recommendation on my home page. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Se_kLoWYY0w.html
This man sold out algorithm program that can destroy or control a nation at least to communist China they actually have the power to change any election thier way cuz of him selling out Americans but democrats were gonna use it on us and may be
In the 1960's not every boy wanted to be an astronaut! (0:44) there were of course The Beatles, The Doors, Janis, Hendrix, Rolling Stones..... many wanted to be Rockstars
Intried three different ways to talk to anyone at M.I.T., either by email, or directly. I have never got a response. My father taught at M.I.T. in the late 1930's. Radio Engineering... He also got the football team started again around 1938' and became the coach for the team. I have 16mm films he shot of games, and an extraordinary on the field film of a massive tug of war with what seems to be hundreds of people. I'm a film guy, and I've never seen footage like this. I also have his albums from the period, which includes team photos, newspaper articles, interviews with the press, and even a hand made play book. All this was mentioned in my contact attempts to M.I.T., as I thought they'd be interested in this material. I have never heard back from them. I live in San Francisco.
I liked almost everything he said except he seems not concerned about the dangers of AI. I find that there are a lot of good arguments to be afraid AI in the future and we have to think of a plan to handle it as soon as possible.
Lex I don't know where this feeling comes from exactly (I'm not a scientist) but when I think about how humans reason it seems as if our memory is compression based. I think in order for an AI to reason more like a human it needs to save algos in a compressed way and see only the highlights unless further unfolding is required, kind of like origami. Because only when it simplifies an algorithm to its basic structure is it abstract enough to use in combination with other parts and build something entirely new, aka imagination, which leads to improvisation. So we need to go from an entirely linear processing of information to one that's parallel on the subject of building new algo's. Think about what you do when you are faced with a new situation. You try to find where the known/old parts of information stop and the new one begins, then try to decipher whether this new information is made up of multiple old pieces, since everything is just that, to do this we use pattern recognition and scanning of our memory/database. We already have very good pattern recognition and memory storage, what we need now in order to make computers like a more ideal human being is the final part; the right compression algorithm that can transform other algos' shape/structure. I see current computers as having all the memories a human has but with walls around every single one, there's zero connection between them because none of the memories are used as part of another memory. When you think of the girl you love you don't just see the first time you met her, you see all of the moments as well as having the option to use memories of other places in which you can imagine her taking a spot. Because we have the power to chain algos together into new ones in an abstract manner, not just strictly linearly. In order to make something less linear while still processing time linearly one needs to cut out parts of the algos, the question is based on what? I think humans do this in their sleep, probably during REM sleep. I think we scan our daytime memories and decide what is useful for future survival and put the key aspects of algos/memories into long term with the help of compression. How compression algo(s?), pattern recognition and memory work together is the holy grail, solve that and you understand the human mind completely. At least from my perspective, I have no mathematicak backing for any of these claims, these are all just hunches from life experience and my limited understanding of the brain, AI, algorithms, etc. Hope this helps or inspires you or anyone in the field of human-like AI.
I don't want to diminish anybody's hard work or talent but, most of the legendary technological individuals mentioned were years behind the obvious demand of the market. the resource to productivity ratio is pretty bad.
