Connect with us

News

Elon Musk and Jack Ma discuss AI’s risks, Mars, and how humans can secure the future

(Credit: Vincent Yu/Twitter)

Published

on

Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk and Alibaba founder and Chairman Jack Ma kicked off the 2019 World Artificial Intelligence Conference in Shanghai, China, with an informal debate about AI and its implications to humanity. Throughout their conversation, Musk and Ma touched on several topics, from jobs, the need for educational reform, moving to Mars, and how humans’ way of life can improve in the future.

Opposing Views

The two billionaires have vastly differing points of view concerning artificial intelligence. While Musk is cautious about AI considering the dangers it may pose to humanity, Ma is far more optimistic. “I don’t think AI is a threat,” Ma said, responding to the Tesla CEO’s introductory points. Explaining further, the Alibaba founder noted that people are “street smart,” and thus, humanity will be fine even when AI evolves. Musk, for his part, doubled down on his point, arguing that AI’s rate of improvement is notable, and there will come a time when computers will outpace humans’ natural ability to understand it.

Making humans multi-planetary

Musk noted that humans have an opportunity today because this is the first time in history that it’s “possible to extend life beyond Earth.” He added that the window for this could either be open for a long or short time. Thus, it is in humanity’s best interest to secure its multi-planetary opportunities as quickly as possible.

Ma, for his part, argued that he has no interest in multi-planetary initiatives. “I’m not a fan of going to Mars,” he noted. Instead, Ma stated that it’s more pertinent for humans to try and preserve Earth. The Alibaba chairman nevertheless stated that the world needs innovators like Elon Musk, in as much as it needs people who are willing to do what needs to be done to save the planet. “We need heroes like you (who want to go to Mars), but we need heroes like us (who will fix Earth),” Ma said.

Musk explained that preserving Earth is a notable part of Tesla’s mission, from transitioning the transportation sector towards sustainability to fostering energy independence through solar power and batteries. Responding to Ma’s statements about using resources to focus on solving Earth’s problems, Musk noted that it will only take a fraction of the world’s GDP to make humans multi-planetary, comparable or even less than what people spend on something like makeup annually. “Spending resources on making life multi-planetary would be enough with just 1% of the earth’s GDP,” Musk noted.

AI’s threat to jobs

“Why do we need that many jobs anyway?” Ma said, explaining that humans have been fearing that tech will take jobs away for over a hundred years, and yet, jobs have increased. Ma believes that with AI’s help, humans can eventually reach a point where the average workweek is only 3 days per week, and the average workday is only 4 hours a day. This, according to Ma, opens the opportunity for humans to enjoy life more, and live even longer. “We need to be ready to enter the era where everyone will get to live 120 years,” he said.

Advertisement
-

Musk, for his part, stated that the advent of AI will likely make most jobs pointless. Considering AI’s evolution, Musk noted that the time will come when computers could eventually make their own software. With this in mind, it would be best for people to embrace areas such as engineering and fields of study that deal with human relations, as these will still be pertinent even in the artificial intelligence age. The Tesla CEO added that this is the reason behind Neuralink and its brain-machine interface, as it will prevent humans from being left behind.

The need for education reform

The Alibaba founder admitted that he is worried about the current educational system, which is still largely designed for the industrial period. Ma argues that today, there is a need to foster more creative and constructive education, which would allow humans to live a happier life. “I want to spend more time training kids on painting, singing, dancing, these creative things that make people live like humans,” he said. Ma added that people have heart, and that is where wisdom comes from. With this in mind, it is best for education to focus on training this aspect of the human being.

The Tesla CEO agreed that creative education is needed, particularly as today’s school system is “low bandwidth and extremely slow.” Musk noted that solutions such as Neuralink’s neural lace could be a difference-maker in this sense, as it would allow people to upload skills and learn them quickly, in a manner that is not too far from the concepts depicted in the sci-fi franchise The Matrix.

The dangers of AI

While the two disruptors agreed that there is a need for educational reform, Musk and Ma disagreed most about the potential risks of AI. Ma argued that compared to humans, computers are just a toy, adding that the best resource in the world is the human brain. “It’s impossible that humans could be controlled by machines. They’re machines that are invented by humans,” Ma said.

Musk noted that he very much disagrees with Ma’s stance. Arguing his point, the Tesla CEO stated that humans are capable of creating things that are superior to people. Humans are not the last step in evolution, Musk said, and people must be wary of thinking that they are smarter than they really are. “The most important mistake smart people make is that they think they’re smart. Computers are already smarter than people. We just keep moving the goalposts,” he stated.

Responding to Musk’s argument, Ma noted that the metrics humans use to benchmark themselves against AI (such as world champions in Chess playing against artificial intelligence) do not make sense, as games like Go are designed for human minds. “Why should humans play against computers? It’s stupid to compete with computers,” Ma quipped, adding that while computers can be clever, humans are smarter and wiser.

The future of humanity

Musk believes that one of the world’s greatest threats lie in its declining birthrate. “The world’s biggest issue in 20 years is population collapse,” he said, adding that this could be a big issue considering that humans generally have a “20-year boot sequence.” Ma agreed, stating that even China’s population, which currently stands at 1.4 billion people, sounds a lot today, but if one factors in the country’s declining birthrate, the country will see a completely different landscape in 20 years.

Advertisement
-

Musk added that more humans are definitely needed, especially with the start of multi-planetary initiatives. “Mars needs people,” he lightly said.

Ma ultimately believes that pursuing AI is wise to make people’s lives better. The Alibaba founded added that artificial intelligence can always do a better job when logic is involved, but when logic is not involved, humans will always be better. To thrive in the future, Ma stated that humans need not just IQ, but emotional intelligence, and (love) intelligence as well. Musk nodded, stating “I agree with him. Love is the answer.”

Watch Elon Musk and Jack Ma’s informal AI debate in the video below.

Simon is an experienced automotive reporter with a passion for electric cars and clean energy. Fascinated by the world envisioned by Elon Musk, he hopes to make it to Mars (at least as a tourist) someday. For stories or tips--or even to just say a simple hello--send a message to his email, simon@teslarati.com or his handle on X, @ResidentSponge.

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

X changed how everyone gets paid, and this lawsuit shows why

X sued a Bitcoin account network over fake payouts as its creator pay model shifts

Published

on

By

Elon Musk’s X has taken a Bitcoin-focused engagement ring to court, and the case doubles as a receipt for how differently the platform pays creators today. The company filed suit in the High Court of England and Wales against Vivek Kumar Sen and Zamyang Sherpa, alleging the pair ran six accounts, including @Vivek4real_, @Bitcoin_Teddy and @TrendingBitcoin, as one coordinated operation to fake the kind of engagement that used to translate directly into money.

According to the filing, first reported by Gizmodo, the accounts posted near identical “BREAKING” crypto headlines seconds apart, in one case 11 seconds, then had three more handles like, reply to and repost the material to manufacture what X called “a false appearance of genuine, human communication and interaction.” X says the scheme pulled in at least £207,384, about $278,000, and pegs its own investigation and remediation costs at another £75,000. The accounts were suspended August 18. X general counsel James Burnham announced the case on X last weekend, writing that the company “will act forcefully to protect our platform and the earnings of genuine creators.” Musk’s own reaction, posted shortly after, was three words: “Don’t mess with 𝕏.”

The timing lines up with a a recent update to how X pays its creators. The program these accounts allegedly gamed, Creator Revenue Sharing, launched in mid 2023 and paid out based on how much a post got engaged with. Originality was never part of the formula, which is exactly how the platform ended up flooded with recycled clips, copy pasted “BREAKING” posts and replies engineered purely to farm reactions from paying subscribers.

X tried patching the model more than once, including an April cut to aggregator payouts and a March regional weighting change that Musk personally paused hours after it was announced. X retired Creator Revenue Sharing for good on September 7 and opened its replacement, Original Content Rewards, the next day.

The new math is stricter. Payouts now come only from qualified impressions, meaning unique Home Timeline views from Premium subscribers where at least half the post is visible, and replies no longer count toward eligibility at all. Copied posts, reuploaded media and reposts without meaningful changes are explicitly excluded. Allegra Jacchia, senior product manager for Creators at SpaceXAI, which now runs X’s product and AI work following xAI’s acquisition of the platform, put it bluntly, saying the goal is to reward creators who bring original ideas and perspective, “not those who have become best at gaming the system.”

Read that way, the lawsuit isn’t really about six crypto accounts. It’s X putting a dollar figure on what the old incentive structure cost, then suing to collect it right as the new one goes live. For live updates on how the case and the new rewards program shake out, follow @Teslarati on X.

Continue Reading

News

Did Tesla make the perfect car for families? Tesla Model Y L Full Review

Published

on

tesla model y l in cosmic grey
Credit: TESLARATI

Last week, Tesla sent me the Model Y L for five days to test, assess, and enjoy for journalistic purposes. It’s always a treat when I get any media vehicle, and I’ve had the pleasure of working with Tesla and Ford for hands-on reviews of their products.

This one was exceptionally exciting for a few reasons: first, because it is the car I own, but bigger, so I was really excited to see if that extra space was worth it; and second, because my Fiancée (we’re down to just 18 days ’til she’s officially my wife!!!) and I plan to fill a car up with kids in the near future, so it was really nice to have a trial with a car that would potentially be in our driveway in a few years.

I did a full 10-minute video review of the Model Y L, which I will post at the bottom of this more condensed written version. If you prefer to watch a review, go ahead and skip to the bottom for that.

For those who prefer the writing, I’ll break down the big things about the Model Y L that I noticed, focusing on the big addition/difference that this car has from the Model Y: the third row. Tesla also added small-but-mighty changes to the Y L that I really wish were on my Model Y Premium, so I’ll be sure to mention those as well.

What Makes It Different from the Model Y?

tesla model y l in cosmic grey

Credit: TESLARATI

The first thing to note is that the interior of this vehicle, from the front row, is generally the same. It truly does feel like you’re in the same exact car with a slightly different seating layout. Of course, Tesla interiors do feel this way, at least with the Model 3 and Model Y, but there are no drastic differences between the Model Y L and the Model Y from the front row.

This should be expected, so definitely do not go into it thinking you’ll know you’re in a different car. It is a very similar experience to the Model Y.

Tesla Model Y L: new features that make it better than the standard Model Y

The true differences come from the back two rows. The only true difference from the front is the addition of a new Dynamics Feature that falls under the “Ride & Handling Priority” menu, which now allows you to adjust the suspension damping to prioritize a comfortable ride for everyone or one that is noticeably better from the rear two rows. In terms of ride comfort, the front rows definitely feel the impact of this; it is a noticeable difference and much stiffer in the driver’s seat with this setting turned to prioritize the rear occupants.

There are also a series of small improvements, like the rear taillight is now up toward the spoiler, which must be a strategy for making the rear glass actually useful in the Y L compared to the regular Y.

Some other small changes are the addition of small magnets for the sub-trunk lid, which is a great addition and something I’d like to do in my Model Y; it sounds to me as if the Model Y L liftgate motor is less whiny than the one in my Model Y; and all three rows of climate are controllable from the front touchscreen.

I talk about them in a short video here:

Second and Third-Row Legroom

The major feature of the Model Y L is the third row, and Tesla did a great job of making it spacious enough for more than just your nine-year-old nephew. It actually does have a suitable amount of legroom for adults, but it is dependent on how tall the people are in the first- and second-row seats in front of you.

This is where I caught some slack from those who have also sat in the Model Y L and believe there is enough room for anyone of any height. I certainly believe that those who are not complainers could sit back there for a multiple-hour drive and not complain. I would enjoy sitting in the back row because I think it is comfortable; the vents for air are perfectly positioned on the C pillars for maximum comfort, and I found that there was enough room back there for me. I’m 5′ 8″, so I’m definitely not tall. However, I found that I had more than enough legroom:

Tesla Model Y L third-row legroom

Credit: TESLARATI

The picture above is where my Fiancèe could sit comfortably in the second row in front of me, and she is 5′ 1″. There is a lot of give and take with these seats, and I believe most groups could make it work. She was comfortable in the second-row seat in front in this position, and as you can see, I have plenty of room. She could easily come back a few inches, and I’d still be comfortable.

This is where I think people would truly benefit from seeing what the space in this car looks like for themselves. To me, I found it more than suitable for a group of friends to go out in and for everyone to be comfortable. There might be some strategy to it if you have some taller friends, but it’s definitely doable.

Overall, the space in the Y L in the back two rows is great: the second-row Captain’s Chairs have mechanical armrests that go down automatically when you exit the car, and come back up on their own when you return. The second row also has ventilated seats; you’ll only have the heat option in the third row.

tesla model y l interior from driver's seat

Credit: TESLARATI

Overall Thoughts

It was really a great five days with the Model Y L, and I do believe that this is a great car for families. I do not believe it is the perfect one. It is really an excellent option for those who can make do with what is truly a compact crossover stretched out to make way for a third row. However, I think that more families simply want something large, like Tahoe or Expedition large, and the Model Y L does not necessarily answer that call.

I think it is more than reasonable for a family of six to have this car and make it work. It is safe, it has Full Self-Driving, which I believe will be a non-negotiable for me moving forward in car buying; and it is relatively affordable, with the Launch Edition coming in at a price of $61,990 before options. Not going to a gas station for the past year has really been a lifesaver for me, especially with home charging saving us so much money.

Tesla will need to have an answer for the families that want something like a Cyber SUV or simply something that qualifies as a full-size SUV. I just truly do not think that every family will see this as enough space, and I think that’s understandable. If someone were to want to take an overnight trip with their four kids, I don’t know if it would be the easiest cargo situation because without that third row folded down, that trunk space is confined to just 14.8 cubic feet. I couldn’t take four kids and a wife to Ocean City for a week with using only the trunk space. We’d likely have to get creative, and I think that’s what many families want to avoid.

For comparison’s sake, a Tahoe offers 25.5 cubic feet of trunk space, which is still tight, but much more manageable and forgiving.

With all that being said, the Model Y L is still a great option and I’d be willing to see past the cargo issues because of FSD and the safety of Tesla vehicles overall. For our full review, check out the video below:

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Why automakers keep turning down Elon Musk’s Tesla Full Self-Driving offer

Elon Musk confirms no automaker has ever accepted Tesla’s offer to license Full Self-Driving software.

Published

on

By

Elon Musk gave a brief answer on X Monday that confirmed that Tesla’s standing offer to license Full Self-Driving to other automakers still has zero takers. Sawyer Merritt wrote that “Tesla has for years openly invited other automakers to license FSD. None of them have accepted,” responding to a prediction from Boom Supersonic founder Blake Scholl that Tesla would eventually open FSD the way it opened its Supercharger network to rival brands. Musk’s reply to Merritt was one word: “Exactly.”

It is not the first time Musk has made this point. He said something similar in November, when he called legacy automakers reluctance to adopt FSD “crazy,” and Tesla has floated the offer publicly since at least 2021. Scholl’s prediction touches on something real. Once NACS became the de facto charging standard, adoption from Ford, GM, Rivian and others followed within about a year. FSD licensing was supposed to work the same way once Tesla built enough of a lead that switching made sense for everyone.

The case for licensing now is stronger than it was two years ago. Waymo and Zoox are logging hundreds of thousands of unsupervised autonomous miles, along with Tesla’s own Robotaxi fleet. Every automaker still selling driver assist systems that lag FSD has given the robotaxi conversation to Tesla, Waymo and Zoox by default. Licensing FSD would let a GM or a Ford compete on the same field without spending a decade and billions of dollars building a stack from scratch, the same argument Tesla made when it opened the Supercharger network to bring more EVs onto its chargers.

But FSD is not a connector standard. As one reply to Musk’s post pointed out, licensing FSD is not a software license the way NACS was a plug spec. It requires adopting Tesla’s eight camera layout and its onboard compute architecture, meaning a licensee’s cars would effectively become Tesla hardware wearing someone else’s badge. That is the visible obstacle. The less visible one is data. A licensed FSD stack would report back the same telemetry Tesla collects from its own fleet, giving Tesla a continuous read on how a competitor’s cars are actually driven, where they struggle, and how often drivers intervene. For an automaker trying to build its own autonomy program, or simply trying to keep its build quality and safety record private, handing Tesla that visibility could be a bigger cost than the hardware bill. It is the reason the Supercharger comparison only goes so far. Opening a charging plug cost Tesla very little. Opening FSD would cost a rival something it cannot get back.

Continue Reading