特別節目·中文精讀

萊克斯獨白 #2:Neuralink 的未來

Lex Solo #2 – The Future of Neuralink

單獨一期談腦機介面公司的長期設想:傳輸頻寬、植入手術、與 AI 共生,以及落地面臨的現實障礙。

官方音訊00:00 / --:--
中文精讀由 AI 基於原始訪談改寫,非官方翻譯,可能存在偏差或錯誤;表述以原音訊與官方文稿為準。說明

Neuralink 現在能同時從大腦裡讀到 1024 個通道的訊號,這個數字是市面上其他同類裝置的 100 倍。而在這期獨白裡,萊克斯·弗裡德曼(Lex Fridman)幾乎沒花時間講這 1024 個通道是怎麼造出來的,他講的是這臺機器最終會把人類帶到哪裡去。

2020 年 8 月那場進度釋出會,他是以普通觀眾的身份到場的,沒有內部訊息,也不想要內部訊息。現場他碰見了吉姆·凱勒(Jim Keller),一個他稱為“我認識的人裡最聰明、最有趣的之一”的晶片工程師,兩人之前錄過一期播客,已經約好再錄一期。除此之外,他和在網上看直播的人沒有區別,只是一個長期對人類大腦著迷的粉絲。

讓他記住的並不是那幾個技術指標。釋出會快結束時,馬斯克讓臺上每個人輪流回答一個問題:這項技術在十年、二十年、更遠的將來,你最想看到什麼。每個人給了自己的一版答案。萊克斯說,正是這段臨時加出來的問答,讓他決定錄這期獨白。他在現場感受到的是,那間屋子裡飄著大量的想法和大量聰明的人,一群工程師正在啃一堆又大又雜的難題。

他把這些可能性歸成八類:減輕人的痛苦、理解意識與智慧、增強身體與心智、遊戲與虛擬世界、生物系統與計算系統之間的介面工程、心靈感應、記憶與心智狀態的儲存回放,以及與人工智慧融合。他先宣告,這些絕大部分是長期願景,每一條落地都需要一連串的突破。但他的判斷是,這些問題已經從“科幻”挪進了“偉大的團隊加上大膽的創新就有可能解決”的區間裡,而且不該只有 Neuralink 一家在做,最好有很多家,最好有競爭對手互相推著往前。

先把痛苦解決掉,這條最不浪漫也最實在

他說,因為自己是俄羅斯人,所以從痛苦開始講。這話是玩笑,但順序有它的道理。

神經系統在最基本的層面上就是疼痛的來源,物理的疼痛和心理的疼痛都算。焦慮、抑鬱、各種型別的創傷,最終都要落到大腦這個硬體上。能測量大腦的訊號,更重要的是能向大腦傳送訊號,形成持續的雙向閉環,這就提供了一套很豐富的工具箱。近期目標很明確:先用它去理解神經系統的疾病,再去治療。

這裡有個視角的轉換,萊克斯講得很清楚。我們平時談痛苦,習慣把源頭放在外部環境上:糟糕的處境、不公的對待、創傷性的事件。這種歸因方式有它的好處,因為環境是可以改的,所以人有希望。政治討論裡翻來覆去講的也就是這些,都是“我們能做點什麼”的東西。

換個角度看,痛苦和疼痛的真正源頭是心智本身。外部環境和內部環境的感知,都要經過心智才能變成“被經歷過的體驗”。冥想、運動、社會專案、教育,都在幫這顆心智,腦機介面提供的是另一條路:直接加速我們對心智內部環境的理解、治療和控制。

他也沒把話說滿。世界上有不義,有惡,Neuralink 或者任何一項技術都消不掉人間的仇恨。能做的是在個體層面,幫著緩解一部分神經性的痛苦來源。這個分寸感,比很多技術佈道者要誠實得多。

從看懂大腦,到把意識變成工程問題

第二類可能性是對大腦和心智運作方式的理解,以及由此衍生出來的一切。用他的說法,這相當於給今天的神經科學研究裝一個渦輪增壓。

第一步是功能層面的拆解:記憶、感知、認知,以及每一塊下面的子模組。把這些零件一個個攤開,反過來會指導工程側,啟發全新的學習演算法、推理系統、知識獲取方式。兩個方向都在流動,神經科學給 AI 提供靈感,AI 給神經科學提供工具。

再往上走,才是他作為 AI 研究者真正興奮的部分。智慧在大腦裡到底是從哪裡升起來的,注意,是功能意義上的“哪裡”,解剖位置上的定位沒有太多意義。這個問題有了像樣的答案,“什麼是智慧”也就有了像樣的答案。

然後是那個更難的問題。他說,大腦研究裡最迷人、最硬、最有趣的問題,是意識的難問題(the hard problem of consciousness)。智慧之外,意識從哪裡來?意識是物質的一種屬性?是人腦獨有的湧現屬性?還是某種我們完全沒搞懂的東西?他半開玩笑地提了一個大膽猜想:心智也許是通往另一個維度的一把鑰匙,只有致幻劑和 Neuralink 這樣的裝置才可能把它擰開。他自己也說,這話說出來冒著被當成瘋子的風險。

緊接著他給出了真正的野心:把意識從 20 世紀的哲學問題,變成 21 世紀的科學與工程問題。

自由意志也一樣。人在做選擇、做決定時那種“我在控制未來怎麼展開”的體驗,到底是從哪裡來的?它是現實結構的一部分,還是大腦自己編出來的?這些問題今天還待在哲學系,他認為有可能被搬進實驗室。

作為科學家、工程師,還有一點點哲學家,我把它看成一種翻過工廠圍牆、去看看裡面機器怎麼運轉的方式。(萊克斯·弗裡德曼)

這個比喻是他第二次和馬斯克對話時用的,整期節目裡最好用的比喻也是它。腦機介面的價值,短期是修好某個壞掉的零件,長期是讓人第一次有機會讀到工廠的運轉日誌。

增強不只是把失去的拿回來

第三類是各種形式的增強。

最直接的是運動能力。讓無法移動身體某部分的人重新動起來,讓不能走路的人重新走路,或者第一次走路。他說,如果你看過那些透過技術第一次看見顏色、第一次獲得某種原本沒有的功能的人的錄影,眼裡的那種喜悅是有魔力的。

增強不必停在恢復原有功能。視覺可以這樣接:把攝像頭接到視覺皮層上,用刺激造出影象。這條路走通了,下一步就是超越人類的視覺。擴充套件光譜,看見紅外;或者做點基礎版的增強現實,移動的物體、物體的類別,這些檢測在裝置端先做完,再直接送進視覺皮層。

和 AR 眼鏡、抬頭顯示器相比,差別在哪裡?他的判斷是頻寬和閉環速度。眼鏡和 HUD 受限於光學,受限於你眼球和螢幕之間的那條通道,腦機介面有可能做出頻寬高得多、延遲低得多的感知閉環。眼鏡不會因此失去價值,只是這兩類方案的上限不在一個量級上。

他還補了一句值得記的話:這項技術的歷史意義大概不在那些演示影片裡。控制一根機械臂很好看,但那只是重新走通一條舊線路。真正的新東西,是在人的輸入輸出埠之外再開一個口。

遊戲和虛擬世界,一條被低估的路徑

第四類是沉浸式遊戲體驗。他自己說,這對曾經是玩家或者現在還是玩家的人特別有吸引力。

淺層的做法很樸素:讀出興奮度、情緒水平,用這些訊號去調節遊戲節奏和難度。這算不上什麼革命。

深層的是刺激視覺皮層,直接造出沉浸式的視覺體驗。從這裡往外擴一步,就是虛擬世界、虛擬現實。他很謹慎地承認這是個開放問題:用頭顯做一個高頻寬、足夠沉浸的體驗,和用腦機介面做同樣的事,哪條路在歷史的長弧上更容易?短期看,頭顯顯然更可行,畢竟另一個選項要開顱。但把時間尺度拉長,“繞開眼睛直接對接大腦”這條看起來更麻煩的路,有可能反而是更省事的那條。

他提到經常有人給他寫信講致幻劑,他自己從沒試過。這條路用在致幻劑式的體驗上,就是一個現成的場景:視覺體驗可以被安全、可控地生成,也許能把人送到那些說不清的“多維空間”裡,只是過程更可控。再退一步,回到最普通的場景,視覺化和冥想。

冥想這件事值得多說一句。如果能同時讀和寫大腦,形成一個閉環,“清空腦子裡的念頭”這句話就可以有字面和比喻兩層意思。念頭多的時候,裝置知道你在走神,也知道怎麼把你拉回來。這個想象很具體,也很生活化,比“用意念控制機械臂”更貼近普通人的日常。

讓演化的產物和程式設計的產物互相聽懂

第五類是純工程問題:人造的電子計算系統和生物系統之間的雙向通訊。

他描述這兩種系統的差別很有意思。生物系統是演化出來的,用他的原話,是一團有韌性的、亂七八糟的糊狀物;電氣系統是明確程式設計、結構清晰的架構。這兩個世界怎麼對話,怎麼越靠越近,本身就足夠令人興奮。

最底層是機器人神經外科手術,或者更廣義的機器人手術。讓機器人做窄 AI 最擅長的事:環境完全已知、系統完全可控、有視覺有控制的重複性任務,把操作風險壓到最低,把成功率拉到最高。

中間層是材料和計算。把電極線接進大腦,讓電子器件和生物器件真正接上,這裡面有大量的材料工程問題。做這件事的過程,會逼著我們學會怎麼造出具有生物系統那種韌性的物理計算系統。學會之後,這些系統不但能和生物系統更好地共處,自身也會更皮實、更耐用、更能適應環境,甚至可能長出全新的學習方式,像生物系統那樣在多個層級上認識環境。

頂層是通道數。現在是 1024,已經是市面上其他裝置的 100 倍。往上擴,1 萬、10 萬、100 萬,他不敢說具體數字,說可能到十億量級。製造本身還在其次,真正的難點是這些連線要在生物環境裡成功存活幾個月、幾年、幾十年。這是個強制函式(forcing function),逼著我們把工程系統做得越來越像生物系統。“強制”兩個字用得很準,它不給退路。

心靈感應,提高的是頻寬

第六類是團隊裡被提到好幾次的“心靈感應”,他們用的說法是“概念性的、雙方同意的心靈感應”。

萊克斯把它翻譯成一句更平實的話:提高兩個人之間交流的頻寬,既包括數量,也包括質量。

現在的交流被壓在一維的文字和語音裡。如果能把視覺概念傳過去,把腦子裡那張多維的概念地圖傳過去,哪怕只是部分傳過去,收益也很大。他說不必追求完美複製,任何程度的頻寬提升都有價值。

他舉了三個例子。藝術:一個人不需要先學會把腦子裡的畫面轉換成物理世界中可被他人觀察的作品,就能把那些東西分享出去。很多有創造力的人卡在技法上,並不卡在想法上。程式設計:結對程式設計這個詞會多出一層含義,兩個人可以在同一個概念空間裡協作,不用先把想法翻譯成語言再讓對方翻譯回來。設計、建築、插畫,所有智力協作的場景都適用。

第三個例子是播客,他說這對播客行業應該挺不錯。那些不喜歡自己聲音、也不喜歡出現在鏡頭前的人,不用再費勁地把想法轉成單調的聲波送進麥克風。

從一個大腦修理工的角度看,我腦子裡那個轉換器工作得不太好。(萊克斯·弗裡德曼)

他說,腦子裡那些想法和畫面,比從嘴裡說出來的東西要雄辯得多、有趣得多。這話大概每個做過公開表達的人都有共鳴。他還補了一句,期待有一天這檔播客能被心靈感應地消費和生成。

這裡藏著一個不太被注意的社會含義。人類的智力協作一直受限於表達能力的分佈:想法多的人不一定表達好,表達好的人不一定想法多。如果頻寬能提上去,中間那個轉換環節被削弱,很多被語言能力篩掉的人會重新進入協作網路。受益者大概不只是內向的技術人。

回放記憶,儲存心智狀態

第七類是儲存和回放記憶,以及更進一步,儲存和回放心智狀態。

他引了丹尼爾·卡尼曼(Daniel Kahneman)的觀察:很多人是靠記憶活著的。那些特別的事情,我們在回憶裡反覆體驗它們的深度和頻率,往往超過第一次親身經歷的時刻。Neuralink 在這件事上能提供的,是提高回放的解析度。我們本來就在回放,只是畫質糊。

反過來的能力更微妙。記憶可以被修改、刪除、削弱。心理層面最黑暗的用法是抹掉創傷,或者至少削弱那些記憶對認知的持續影響。另一個方向是把潛意識裡的東西拉出來看看,他稱之為弗洛伊德會喜歡的那套工具箱,用來探索自己的心智,去認識自己的惡魔。

他順帶說了自己的做法:最近走的是大衛·戈金斯(David Goggins)路線,用近乎瘋狂的訓練量去跟自己的惡魔對話。腦機介面提供的是同一個目標的另一條路徑,更可控、更安全。

還有個和機器學習呼應的細節,很值得記下來。強化學習系統裡有經驗回放(experience replay)的機制,把過去的經驗反覆餵給模型。人的記憶回放是同一個機制的生物版本。把過往經歷變成資料之後,一個屬於你個人的機器學習系統就可以反覆回放這些資料,從中提煉出策略,告訴你下次怎麼避開同樣的坑。它相當於一個私人行政助理,只不過服務的物件是你自己的決策質量。

他也提醒,這類應用的前提是隱私和安全,這是 Neuralink 從第一天起就在做、並且永遠要做的事。他自己的看法是,早年做社交網路時對使用者資料粗放一點還能矇混過去,往後不行了,科技公司會在這件事上沉或浮。人們會要求更多的資料控制權和更高的透明度。他自己承認這個判斷偏樂觀,但他認為這是現實的走向。

再往前一步,就是儲存心智狀態,也就是通往數字永生那條路。把心智的內容,或者至少是核心內容,存成數字形式,然後轉移到別的系統裡、機器人裡、行星上。他提到和薩拉·西格(Sara Seager)的一次對話,她是找太陽系外宜居行星的科學家。兩人聊過一個設想:抵達那些遙遠可能有生命的星球,一種方式是傳送數字人類。把心智的關鍵內容存好,飛過去,到了再載入進某個生物或機器人系統。雷·庫茲韋爾(Ray Kurzweil)長期談的也是這件事。

與 AI 融合,本質是一道風險管理題

第八類,也是這家公司最初的動機之一:當人工智慧達到人類水平甚至超人水平之後,人的大腦、人類社會用什麼方式和它接上。

AI 這個領域從誕生到現在,幾乎所有的進展都可以歸到窄 AI 裡。但一個被反覆討論的可能性是,人類這種有侷限的存在,某一天會造出在某些維度上遠比我們聰明的系統,而那些維度會從根本上改變人類社會的結構。今天已經有大量窄任務上遠超人類的系統,真正的問題是:會不會存在一組維度,在那上面通用智慧的泛化能力超過人類,並且構成對人類的生存性風險。

他給了兩個具體的壞結局。一個是回形針式的:一個只管造回形針的 AI,為了讓效率再高一點點,把人類全滅了。另一個更現實也更滲人:一個比今天的社交網路複雜得多、也聰明得多的分散式系統,某種從 GPT-3 一路演化到 GPT-20 的組合體,像溫水煮龍蝦一樣慢慢滲進來,不知不覺把人類文明的資源和容量吃乾淨。

那個時間點可能很遠,也很難預測。但他說,很難理性地斷言我們永遠不會走到那一步。一旦承認這是個可能,工程上的問題就變成了:怎麼把這種存在性風險降到最低。融合是選項之一。人類搭上 AI 這波浪,AI 搭上人腦這波浪。

他先把最樸素的一層講清楚,這一層跟 AGI 無關。他自己深度思考的方式是:坐下來,幾個小時盯著一個想法,一張紙一支筆。問題是,他總得查資料。查論文,查背景,有時候只是查個維基百科的詞條。每一次查都是一次打斷,注意力被切碎,思考的節奏被打亂,腦力被消耗在檢索上而不是思考上。

如果能把這個環節的頻寬接上,讓“想到”和“查到”之間幾乎零延遲,收益就已經很大了。這不需要什麼超級智慧,今天的推薦系統、搜尋引擎、GPT-3 級別的來回對話就夠用了。它能給大腦正在進行的深度思考加一個外掛。

再往上,如果雙向通道完全開啟,讓 AI 學大腦、大腦學 AI 這兩件事都變得順暢,那麼通用智慧把我們甩在後面的機率會低一些。他說這是個既可怕又令人興奮的未來,而且人類在這種狀態裡大概會做出自己最好的工作。

最後他回到現實。經濟上有痛感,政治上有撕裂,他說自己從那些大膽推進人類知識與能力邊界的公司、人、科學家身上汲取了很多力量。他們在建東西,在儘自己所能建一個更好的未來。

這期獨白真正在講什麼

表面上看,這期節目是發散出來的清單,八個類別各自展開。往深一層看,他其實在區分兩件事:近期能治病的東西,和遠期可能改造人類的東西,共用同一套硬體,卻需要完全不同的證據標準和社會討論。釋出會上的 1024 個通道屬於前者,那八類願景屬於後者。

他把這兩件事放在同一期節目裡講,風險是讓人覺得他在為後者背書。他的處理方式是反覆加限定詞:長期、可能、需要一連串突破、沒有內部訊息。這個分寸值得學,因為大部分技術討論翻車,都是把遠期願景當成近期承諾來賣。

還有一個細節值得留意。他講的八類裡,有好幾類的核心詞都能歸到“頻寬”上:感知的頻寬、交流的頻寬、思考時查資料的頻寬。限制神經系統的那個瓶頸,很大程度上落在進出通道的寬度上,算力本身倒不緊缺。眼睛、耳朵、手指、聲帶,這幾個埠的資料率極低,人腦的絕大部分計算能力被堵在門口。

如果這個判斷成立,腦機介面的歷史意義就不在“控制機械臂”這種展示上,而在於給人類心智開了一個新的出入口。歷史上每一次人類能力的大跳,背後都有輸入輸出埠的擴張:語言、文字、印刷、電話、網際網路。腦機介面把自己放在了這條序列的下一格。

他自己也說了,人類在這件事上做的最好的工作,大概發生在既害怕又興奮的那個狀態裡。太樂觀會魯莽,太恐懼會停手。這期獨白的分寸,正好卡在中間。

可以馬上去做的幾件事

  • 找那場 Neuralink 釋出會的最後十幾分鍾看一遍。技術引數會過時,那圈人回答“你想看到什麼”的那段不會。
  • 讀卡尼曼關於“體驗自我”和“記憶自我”的區分。弄清楚自己有多少時間是在回放而不是在經歷,這件事本身就值。
  • 以後評估任何互動技術,都問一句:它提高的是頻寬還是解析度?頭顯提高的是解析度,腦機介面想提高的是頻寬。這兩個詞能幫你判斷哪些是打磨,哪些是換路。
  • 區分“能讀”和“能寫”。單向讀取是監測,雙向閉環才叫介面。看到一條腦機相關新聞,先找它有沒有閉環。
  • 把隱私預設設成零信任。這類技術的所有美好設想,前提都是資料控制權在你手上。這個前提需要被持續追著要,不會自動到來。
  • 別把十年期的願景當成兩年期的產品來期待,也別因為它遙遠就不參與討論。技術路線的方向,往往是在還很粗糙的時候被討論出來的。
  • 練深度思考的習慣。介面做出來那天,你得有值得傳的東西。腦子裡沒貨,頻寬再高也是空的。
  • 關注 Neuralink 之外的學術路線和非侵入式方案。他自己在節目裡反覆說,希望有很多公司、很多競爭者一起推邊界,參與者越多,這條路越快。
文稿由本站用語音識別模型(基於官方釋出音訊)機器轉寫,可能有識別錯誤,人名與數字請以音訊為準。
Lex Fridman Podcast – Lex Solo #2: The Future of Neuralink Machine transcription by Whisper large-v3-turbo (MLX, local). May contain recognition errors. This is a solo episode of the podcast, one of many, I think. I'll add these to the RSS feed so you can listen to them as well. Hopefully it's interesting to some folks. These will probably have a Lex solo number before the title of the episode, as opposed to just a number for the regular interviews. The aim is for these episodes to be focused on a particular topic, at times challenging, at times personal, at times exciting to me on a technical or philosophical level like the episode today. This episode is on the long-term future possibilities of brain-computer interfaces in general, and Neuralink specifically, based on the recent update on progress from the Neuralink team. I have a basic outline in front of me with some ideas, but most of it is just off the top of my head, so I hope you're okay listening to that kind of thing, about my general thoughts about Neuralink and the recent update of progress. I was fortunate enough to attend the demo in person as a random visitor, really, and chat with another random, but much, much smarter visitor, Jim Keller, with whom I did a podcast a while ago, and we agreed to do another with him soon. He's one of the most interesting and brilliant people I know, so it was great to catch up. But outside of that, I was just a spectator like everybody else watching online. I have no insider information, have no interest in insider information. I'm just a fan, long-time fan of the human brain, and anyone who's working hard to understand its inner workings. The general sense I got is that there's a lot of exciting engineering and scientific challenges that the big and varied team there is tackling. I think it's a really exciting place to be. Just lots of ideas swimming in the air and lots of brilliant people. It's always exciting to me to sort of be in the presence of great engineering teams, so it's exciting to see that. But what I found especially exciting for my romantic and scientific soul is the long-term vision, the dreams, the possibilities that were mentioned by the team in a spontaneous final question that was asked where every member of the team up there answered their own version of what they're excited about to see in the next decade, two decades, long-term, future possibilities of this technology. So this video is about that. My thoughts about the possible ways that Neuralink might change the world and the human condition. I'll try to stick to some categories, some structure, and try to discuss off the top of my head my thoughts of the possibilities that fall within those categories. I should note here that a lot of the things I'll discuss are long-term visions of the future. To make all of these visions a reality is exceptionally difficult, there's a journey of many breakthroughs required. But I think we are now in the realm where a lot of these things are scientific and engineering challenges that can be solved by great teams, by bold innovation from many companies, not just Neuralink, hopefully many others, hopefully many competitors, that push the boundaries of what is possible. But this video is about the visions of the possible futures. And I think great efforts of humankind start with a vision. Let me give you a quick outline of categories within which I see some exciting possibilities. So first is alleviation of human suffering. Second is understanding of consciousness, intelligence. Third is augmentation of the body and mind, and generally augmenting reality. Fourth is gaming, and beyond that, virtual worlds, virtual reality. Fifth is all the engineering challenges around merging biological systems and computational systems, basically tech. Sixth is telepathy, much richer forms of different communication. Seventh is saving and replaying of memories, but also saving and replaying of mental state or mind states, period. And finally, eighth is merging with artificial intelligence, all the exciting possibilities around that that I'd like to discuss. So since I'm Russian, let's start by discussing human suffering. I think first and foremost, as was mentioned by the team, is the possibility that Neuralink might help alleviate human suffering. The nervous system, the brain, at the very basic level is the source of pain. That's both physical pain and psychological pain. So you can talk about anxiety, depression, trauma of all different kinds. The ability to measure signals from the brain, and perhaps more importantly, the ability to send signals and in a closed loop interact continuously with the brain, sending signals in both directions. It seems like it provides a very rich toolkit with which to start to deeply understand the human brain generally, but in the nearest term, to focus that exploration on the understanding of neurological diseases so that we may first, of course, understand, and second, to treat them. A huge number of mysteries yet to be uncovered at the very basic level of how do we treat some of these diseases. And that falls into the category of human suffering. You know, we often think about suffering as arising from the environment within which the individual lives. So by placing the focus on the environment, it allows us to kind of be hopeful because we can make the environment better. The source of trauma, the source of anxiety, the source of depression, all of the things that come up in political discourse, these are all things that we can do something about. So that's what we focus on when we try to alleviate human suffering. But from another perspective, the real source of suffering and pain is the human mind, which creates the experience, the lived experience from the perception of the external environment and the perception of the internal environment. Now, there's a lot of discussion of meditation, exercise, a lot of social programs and education, all kinds of things that aim to help the mind. But in addition to that, the exciting possibility with a brain-computer interface is that we might be able to accelerate our understanding and treatment and control of the internal environment of the mind. Now, of course, it's also important to say that there's injustice in the world, there's evil in the world. Neither Neuralink or any other piece of technology will be able to get rid of hatred in the world. But the hope is that at the individual level, you'll be able to aid in the alleviation to some degree of all the sources of neurological suffering. So second category of future possibilities in Neuralink have to do around our understanding of how the brain and the mind works and all of the things that derive from that. So basically, we'll supercharge research going on in neuroscience today. So first is understanding how the brain works at the functional level. So all the different modules from memory to perception to cognition and all the sub-modules of that. And as we untangle those pieces, it's possible that it will inspire or instruct us on the engineering side of how to build smarter and smarter artificial intelligence systems. So inspire totally new algorithms for learning systems, for reasoning systems, for knowledge base, knowledge acquisition, and so on. And as you push that further, of course, to me, as an artificial intelligence researcher, the exciting possibility is that we may be able to understand human intelligence where, not location-wise, but functionally, where intelligence arises in the brain or good answers to the question of what is intelligence. And the next step is, beyond just engineering AI systems, that may help us understand how we enhance it. You have all these productivity hacks, all these kind of life hacks, understanding from where our ability to reason about this world comes from might help us to really have some nice brain hacks to improve our ability to reason in a purely natural way I'm referring to. This is before any kind of augmentation from a computational device. Now, the next level of understanding the human brain, as was mentioned by the team, as I bring up often, is the fascinating, hardest, most interesting problem, I would say, of the mind is the hard problem of consciousness. Beyond intelligence, where does consciousness arise from the brain? Again, not location-wise, but functionally. And again, to be able to, with more scientific rigor, answer the question, what is consciousness? Is it a property of matter? Is it a unique, emergent property of the human brain? Is it something totally different that we don't even understand? Like, our mind is some kind of key into an alternate dimension that only psychedelics and a device like Neuralink may be able to unlock. So, at the risk of sounding crazy, it's an exciting possibility to take consciousness from, I would say, a field of philosophy in the 20th century to a field of science and engineering in the 21st century. To me, that's deeply interlinked with intelligence because I think there's a beautiful dance there between consciousness and intelligence in the human mind that's not easy or even necessary to untangle, but I think understanding one will help us understand the other. And finally, perhaps, interconnected with consciousness and intelligence, it might help us take the question of, is there free will into the realm of science and engineering versus the realm of philosophy? To try to make a rigorous study of where does this experience of making a choice, making decisions, like we humans have a control of the way the future unfolds from where that arises. Is that a real part of the fabric of reality or is that something that the brain conjures up? What I see Neuralink as, as I talked with Elon the second time on the podcast, I see it as a way to sort of get beyond the factory walls and see how the inner workings of the factories operate. As a scientist, as an engineer, and a bit of a philosopher, that's truly exciting. Third future possibility of Neuralink is augmentations of all different kinds. So, regaining the ability to move for people who can't move parts of their body. I mentioned neurological conditions that affect the mind, but certainly there's neurological conditions that affect the body. I mean, giving people who can't walk the ability to walk again or to walk for the first time is such an exciting possibility. If you've seen videos of people who for the first time are able to see color or gain a function that they didn't have before through technology, the bliss in their eyes is magical. Now, the augmentation doesn't have to be just in regaining the physical function of the body. It could be augmentation to the mind. It could be, for example, regaining the ability to see by stimulating the visual cortex, connecting a camera to the visual cortex. And perhaps more than regaining regular visual function, it could lead to superhuman level vision, whether that's expanding the spectrum, like ability to see infrared, or it's doing some basic augmented reality kind of things where some of the detections are done for you about moving objects, about the categories of objects, and all that kind of stuff. Many of the ideas here are the same as those explored by the work that people are doing in augmented reality devices, but it's very possible that the difference between a brain computer interface and glasses, for example, or heads-up displays is that BCIs might be able to create a much richer high-bandwidth experience with a fast, closed loop of perception, more so than the constraints that you have to operate under with glasses or HUDs. Fourth, a super exciting possibility for those of us who were once gamers, or still are gamers, is by creating an immersive gaming experience. So, BCIs might be able to, once again, read the brain and stimulate parts of the brain that enrich in some way the gaming experience. This could be very shallow kind of basic enrichment, just being able to measure levels of excitement, emotion, those kinds of things that can aid in the experience of the game. But also, again, as I said, with augmented reality, being able to stimulate the visual cortex in order to create an immersive visual experience. So, with a brain computer interface, beyond just gaming, you can start to think about creating virtual worlds, virtual reality. That's very useful for games, but just creating an immersive experience of all different kinds. Again, this is an open question, but there could be technical barriers in creating an immersive, rich, high bandwidth experience with a virtual reality headset versus a brain computer interface. It's an open question, of creating a fully immersive experience, what is easier to do in the long sort of arc of history. With the technology we have today, it seems clearly more doable in the short term to create virtual reality experiences with a headset as opposed to something that requires brain surgery. But that's not to say if we look at the long arc of technological progress, that the much easier solution won't come from the direct access to the brain through something like a brain computer interface. And again, I think bigger than gaming, a lot of people write to me about psychedelics, for example, which I've never done. But this would be an example of something where you can create visual experiences that are safe and controlled and can take you perhaps to some of those different multiple dimensions or wherever the heck you go when you take psychedelics in a more controlled way perhaps. And maybe even taking a step back into more kind of vanilla experiences of visualizations and meditation. So imagine the closed loop of being able to write and read from the brain in aiding the meditation experience. sort of emptying your brain from thoughts figuratively and literally. The fifth exciting future possibilities of Neuralink and brain computer interfaces is all the innovation engineering around the two-way communication between a human-made electrical computational system and a biological system. Just the fabric, the nature of the two design paradigms, not saying biological systems are designed, but they are designed through evolution. Whatever that resilient mess, mush of biology to the more structured, architectured electrical systems that are programmed explicitly and clearly, the communication between these two different worlds and bringing them closer and closer together is super exciting. First, at the very basic level, that could be all the innovation around robotic neurosurgery or even surgery in general. So, allowing robots to do what narrow AI systems do best, which is for basic tasks that have vision and control where everything is controlled in the environment, fully actuated system to be able to minimize the risk of injury, maximize the probability of success. so there's a lot of interesting innovations around just the robotic side of that. The next layer of that, when you look at some of the materials engineering and even the computational side of connecting the laces to the brain, so connecting the electrical device to the biological device, we may be able to understand how to engineer sort of physical computational systems that have some of the same nice properties of resilience that biological systems have. And in so doing, be able to work better with biological systems, but also just be able to be more resilient, more robust, more adaptable perhaps, or maybe come up with totally different ways that such systems can learn about their environment, just like our biological systems can at multiple levels. And another layer of that, when you look at what Neuralink is currently doing, they have 1,024 channels, the engineering around scaling that to, I don't want to put numbers out, but any number above that is super exciting. It's already 100x anything else that's out there, but you can imagine, especially long term, it being 10,000, 100,000, I mean, it could be millions, maybe billions. I mean, there's so much possibility of engineering breakthroughs about the number of channels that are possible that we can't yet imagine. And that's an engineering challenge of how to scale these number of connections, which are tricky to do because they have to live, exist successfully in cooperation with biological systems for months, years, you know, for long periods of time. That's really interesting. I feel like that's a forcing function for us to understand really how we can engineer systems that in the best possible ways are not only able to work with other biological systems but become more like those biological systems. So, sixth possible future of Neuralink and BCIs was mentioned a few times by the team under the flag of telepathic communication or telepathy, conceptual and consensual telepathy. So, I think in general to enrich the bandwidth in quantity and quality of the communication between two human beings. So, you can imagine being able to communicate not just through this kind of 1D realm of words but to communicate visual concepts first of all but also kind of mind maps of like multi-dimensional concept maps that are in our mind when we're trying to reason through things to be able to communicate those in some way. It doesn't even have to be kind of perfect replication but any kind of improvement, increase in the bandwidth of the communication between humans on the visual or on the conceptual side is super interesting. I think somebody on the team mentioned kind of art to be able to communicate creative, artistic the kind of things in your mind and share them with others without having to learn the skill of converting that art into something in a physical world that can be observed by others. You can sort of directly without learning the skill be able to communicate all the crazy beautiful things that are in your mind. I think for my world of like programming for example, it'd be exciting to think that two human beings at any level could sort of collaborate together. It gives a whole other meaning to pair coding where two people can collaborate together as they work on a project of any kind whether it's in the programming world or any kind of design world, architecture, any kind of illustrations, all that kind of stuff. Collaborations between humans for intellectual labor, for design, for engineering work or any kind of collaboration in the intellectual space. And finally, I think it'd be pretty good for podcasting. So for those of us who don't like the sound of our voice and funny enough don't like to be in front of the camera, instead of having to convert my thoughts awkwardly in a monotone voice into a microphone, I can somehow communicate them in a much richer way, which I think at least for an introvert, I think the kind of things going on in my mind seem to be much more eloquent and interesting than the kind of things that come out of my mouth when I perform the conversion. So from like a car mechanic or maybe I should say like brain mechanic perspective, my converter is not working very well between the brain thoughts and visualizations and concept space to mouth speaking speaking different English concepts. So I look forward to this podcast being consumed and generated telepathically. So seven possible future application of Neuralink will be the ability to save and replay memories or save and replay mind states. it's a way to do what Daniel Kahneman, for example, talks about as many of us kind of live life through memories of previous events. So kind of the memorable, special things that happen to us are experienced more deeply and more frequently through our memories than directly when we actually experience them for the first time. And the exciting possibility of Neuralink is basically improving the resolution of that memory replay that we generally do anyway. As people should check out Daniel Kahneman's work, he describes it quite eloquently. And it's true. Many of us live in our memories. It's also from a certain perspective, nice to be able to modify, delete, or alter some of those memories. memories. So for example, on a darker side, it could be traumatic events that, you know, from a psychological perspective could be haunting. You can remove or at least alleviate the impact of those memories onto your cognition. Or maybe pull stuff from the subconscious. You can think of it as a Freud's favorite kind of toolkit to play around and explore with our own mind to discover our demons. demons. So as opposed to the David Goggins approach that I've taken recently of doing insane amounts of exercise to discover and have a conversation with my demons. Could do it in a more controlled and safe environment of brain computer interfaces. As a quick side note, there's interesting echoes of the memory replay that you've seen our reinforcement learning systems. So it's kind of interesting to think that instead of just us being able to replay our memories, it could be our own little machine learning systems that can learn something from our previous memories by replaying them over and over to try to give us maybe a strategy of how to avoid those memories in the past. So it's basically converting our prior experiences into data. And once it's converted into data, that could be used for all kinds of applications. So you can think of like a personal machine learning system that can replay your memories and try to figure out, try to be a personal executive assistant to you to advise you what to learn from those experiences. With a lot of these applications that I've already discussed, privacy and security is of paramount importance. I mean, like with actually a lot of our technology, but this is very much at the forefront of what Neuralink is working on currently and always will be. And I think a lot of companies in general in the tech space will sink or swim based on how much they respect privacy and security. I think in the early days of our development with social networks and so on, you could get away easier by being careless with people's data. I think my long-term, perhaps optimistic, but I think it's a realistic view of the future that people will demand much more control over their data, demand much more transparency around privacy and security, transparency and clarity. So of course, that's underlying all the different futures that I'm discussing. And finally, to move a little bit beyond the ability to save and replay memories is to save mental states. And that's essentially a path towards digital immortality. So you can think of being able to save the contents or the critical contents of your mind into digital form and then being able to transfer to other systems, to robots, planets. Or as in, for example, my discussion with Sarah Seeger, who searches for habitable planets outside our solar system, exoplanets, we discussed the idea that one way, perhaps, to reach far away, livable planets that might have extraterrestrial intelligent life on them is by sending digital humans there. So being able to save essential or entire contents of the human mind and to be able to reload it once you arrive into any kind of, whether it's a biological or a robotic system. So that's the kind of stuff that Ray Kurzweil thinks about. It's also a kind of stuff that I think a lot of people are excited about is the ability to store and digitally transfer the contents, the important, the beautiful contents of the human mind. Finally, the eighth future possibility of Neuralink and also one of the original motivations behind the company is the methodology by which the human mind, the human brain, the human society can merge with artificial intelligence systems once they're able to achieve human level and superhuman level intelligence. Since the origins of the field of AI, most, if not all, of the progress that's been made has been in what might be called narrow artificial intelligence. But as a lot of people have discussed, now there's a lot of debates around this, there's a lot of thoughts, but it seems very possible that humans, limited though we are, will one day be able to engineer systems that are far more intelligent than us human beings in some dimension that fundamentally changes the fabric of human society. So we already have AI systems that are much better at a lot of things in humans in a narrow way. But there might be a set of dimensions where an intelligence system is able to generalize better than humans in a set of tasks that can lead to existential risks to human beings, where artificial intelligence systems essentially become a kind of direct or indirect competitor. Whether that's a paperclip paperclip manufacturing AI systems that destroys all humans, just to make its manufacture paperclips a little bit more efficient. Or if it's a much more complex distributed system, kind of like our social networks of today, but much smarter, with some kind of combination of GPT-3 or GPT-20 systems that kind of creep up on us, like the boiling water creeps up on the lobster and overwhelms the resources or the capacities of human civilization in a way that's fundamentally traumatic or destructive or poses an existential risk. Even if that point is far away in time, and that's difficult to predict, I think it's very difficult to rationally say that we will never reach that point. So once you allow that as a possibility, you start to think from an engineering perspective, how can we minimize the existential risk associated with that? And then creating ways to merge with the AI. So we kind of ride the wave of AI and they ride the wave of the functionalities of the human brain is an interesting possibility. I think it's a beautiful vision of a future that's mostly filled with mystery. So we don't know how AGI systems will evolve, but it's an interesting idea that as AI systems become smarter and smarter, it is one way to ensure our survival is to expand the capacity of the human mind to communicate with AI and with the AI to communicate with the human mind. At the basic level, to me, that's super exciting because AI systems can learn from the brain. The brain can learn from AI systems. And I'm, as a person who is a big fan of deep thinking, of sitting for multiple hours and focusing on a single idea and just thinking with a sheet of paper and thinking about an idea, I find myself needing to look up things a lot. And that's actually a huge distraction and it's a huge drain on my mental resources and the kind of distraction. The timing of the thinking is disrupted by having to look up different kinds of information, to look up different kinds of papers, to look up even basic information on Wikipedia. So the ability to kind of close the loop, to increase the bandwidth of thinking of the lookup of the information that's available online is super exciting to me. Now that's not even AGI. That's just like basic recommender systems, basic search engines, basic even like GBT 3++ type of communication back and forth. I think it's really exciting to empower the brain as it's doing the usual kind of deep thinking that it's capable of. And then, of course, but then of course you could take that farther as the AI systems get smarter and smarter and smarter. If we completely open the gates of the communication in two ways, then it increases the likelihood of AGI not leaving us behind. And I think that's a scary and exciting future. And that's probably where we humans do our best work. I hope these thoughts were interesting, useful to some of you. In these difficult times of economic pain, of political division, I personally, and I hope others do too, draw a lot of inspiration from companies, from people, from scientists that are boldly pushing forward the limits of human knowledge, the limits of human capability, and just engineering and building, doing their best to engineer and build a better future for our world. So I hope you find it inspiring as well. And as always, I love you all and hope to see you next time. Thank you.

本集資源與出處