- 20/5/2025
Categoría
🗞
NoticiasTranscripción
00:00Hello, everyone and Elon Musk. Welcome to Qatar Economic Forum. How are you? Thank you for having me. I'm fine. How are you?
00:12Very well, thank you. I'm very pleased to have you with us. You know, among those here in the audience in Doha are some you will
00:18know, people who have backed you financially over the years. Since you last spoke here in 2022, a lot has changed in your life.
00:26You're not only running multiple companies. You were doing that then. But now you also have a role in government. So first of all, I
00:32hope you won't mind if from time to time I have to move you from one topic to another because we have a lot to cover in the time we
00:39have. That will be all right. OK, well, let's start then with exactly the fact that you now have this combination of being a CEO and
00:48having a role as a government adviser. Tell me about your week. How does it work? What's the split of your time?
00:54Well, I travel a lot. So I was in Silicon Valley yesterday morning. I was in L.A. yesterday evening. I'm in Austin right now. I'll be in D.C.
01:07tomorrow. I'll be there after having dinner with the president tomorrow night, I believe. And then. A bunch of cabinet secretary meetings and
01:18then back to Silicon Valley on Thursday night. But I mean, the balance of your time is it is it. Well, clearly it's a lot. But is it
01:27still the case, as you said a while ago, that it's about one to two days a week on your government work? Yeah, that's correct. And what
01:36does that mean for your corporate life? Because if we start with Tesla, the company has suffered in recent months what you've called
01:44blowback. So what is your plan for turning that around the declining sales picture? And by what stage do you think you're going to be able to
01:55turn it around? Oh, it's already turned around. Give me some evidence for that. I've just been looking at the sales figures for Europe in
02:05April, which show very significant declines in the big markets. Europe is our weakest market. We're strong everywhere else. So sales are
02:17doing well at this point. We don't anticipate any meaningful sales shortfall. And. The you know, the obviously the stock market
02:29recognizes that since we're now back over a trillion dollars in market cap. So clearly the market is aware of the situation. So it's already
02:37turned around. But sales still down compared to this time last year. In Europe, in Europe. OK. And that's that's true of of all
02:48manufacturers. There's no exceptions. Does that mean that you're not going to be able. Does that mean you're quite weak? OK. But you would
03:00acknowledge, wouldn't you, that what you are facing? OK, let's just take it as Europe. What you are facing is a significant problem. This Tesla is an
03:06incredibly aspirational brand. People identified with it. It's so it they saw it being at the forefront of the climate crisis. And now people are
03:13driving around with stickers in their cars saying, I bought this before we knew Elon was crazy. And there are also people who are buying it
03:22because Elon's crazy or however they may view it. So, yes, we've lost some sales, perhaps on the left, but we've gained them on the right.
03:32The sales numbers at this point are strong and we see no problem with demand. So what do you mean? I mean, you can just look at the stock price.
03:41The if you want the best insider information, the stock market analysts have that and stock wouldn't be trading near all time highs if it was not if
03:56things weren't in good shape. They're fine. Don't worry about it. I was citing sales figures rather than share price. Well, tell me then how
04:03committed you are to Tesla. Do you see yourself and are you committed to still being the chief executive of Tesla in five years time?
04:13Yes. No doubt about that at all.
04:18Well, no, I die.
04:21Okay, short of that, let me see if I'm dead. So does that mean that the value of your pay doesn't have any bearing on your decision?
04:35Well, that's not really a subject for discussion in this forum. I think, obviously, there should be a conversation for if there's a starting
04:47conversation for if there's something incredible is done that compensation should match that something incredible was done.
04:58But I'm confident that whatever the whatever some activist posing as a judge in Delaware happens to do will not affect the future compensation.
05:08This is the judge who twice struck down the $56 billion pay package that was that was awarded to you. I think the value on the basis on the
05:17current value of stock options. Yeah, not a judge, not a judge, the activist who is cosplaying a judge in a Halloween costume.
05:27Okay, that that's your characterization. I think the value on the current value of stock options. I think the actual justice according to the
05:35law, on the current value of stock options, I think the value of that pay package stands at about $100 billion. Are you saying you are
05:42relaxed about the value of your future pay package, your decision to be committed to Tesla for the next five years, as long as you are still
05:52with us on this planet is completely independent of pay?
05:57No.
06:00It's not independent. So pay is a relevant factor, then to your commitment to Tesla.
06:06It's sufficient voting control such that I cannot be ousted by activist investors is what matters to me. And I've said this publicly many
06:14times. But let's not have this whole thing be a discussion of mileage pay. It's not a money thing. It's a reasonable control thing over the
06:22future of the company, especially for building millions, potentially billions of humanoid robots. I can't be sitting there and one day get
06:31tossed out by political reasons by activists. That would be unacceptable. That's all that matters. Now let's move on.
06:38Okay, well, just one question. Well, one question before we move on to other companies, which is that I wonder if some of what you've has
06:49happened to Tesla in the last few months. Did you take it personally?
06:54Yes.
06:56And did it make you regret any of or think twice about your political endeavors?
07:10Because it is
07:12I did what needed to be done. The violent antibody reaction. And I'm not someone who's ever committed violence. And yet, massive violence was
07:24committed against my company's massive violence was threatened against me. Who are these people? Why would they do that? How wrong can
07:35they be? They're on the wrong on the wrong side of history. And that's an evil thing to do. To go and damage some innocent person's car to
07:47threaten to kill me. What's wrong with these people? I've not harmed anyone. So something needs to be done about them. And a number of them are going to
07:59prison. And they deserve it.
08:03You're referring to the attacks on Tesla showrooms. But I think
08:09what
08:10bullets into showrooms and burning down cars is unacceptable. Yeah, those people go to prison. And the people that funded them and organized them
08:17will also go to prison. Don't worry. But wouldn't you wouldn't wouldn't you
08:28wouldn't wouldn't you acknowledge that some of the people who turned against Tesla in Europe were were upset at your politics, and very few of them
08:37would have been violent in any way they just objected to to what they saw you say or do politically?
08:45Well, it's certainly fine to object to political things. But it's not it's not fine to resort to violence and hanging someone in effigy and death
08:53threats. That's obviously not okay. You know, that's absurd. That is in no way justifiable at all. In any way, shape or form. And some of the
09:08the legacy media nonetheless have sought to justify it, which is unconscionable. Shame on them.
09:13Let's talk about your other companies and another business area SpaceX. I saw that you said in a speech at the West Point Military Academy
09:21recently that the future of warfare is AI and drones. And obviously, defense is an increasingly booming sector with the state of the world at the
09:32moment. Do you see SpaceX moving into weaponized drones?
09:36You certainly ask interesting questions. That answer. So SpaceX is is the space launch leader. So SpaceX doesn't do drones. SpaceX builds rockets,
09:59satellites and internet terminals. So SpaceX has a very dominant position in space launch. So of the mass launch to orbit this year, SpaceX will probably do 90%.
10:17China will do the remain half half of the remaining amounts of 5%. And the rest of the world, including the rest of the US will do about 5%. So SpaceX will do about 10 times as much as the rest of all combined or 20 times as much as China, which is in China is doing actually a very impressive job. The reason for this is that we're putting it into into orbit, the largest satellite constellation the world has ever seen by far. So I think at this point, about maybe approaching 80% of all active satellites in orbit are satellites.
10:47SpaceX. And they're providing global high bandwidth, global connectivity throughout the world. In fact, this connection is on a SpaceX connection. So I think this is a very good thing, because it means that we can provide low cost, high bandwidth internet to parts of the world that don't have it or it's very expensive.
11:07And I think the single biggest thing you can do to lift people out of poverty, and help them is giving them an internet connection. Because once you have the internet connection, you can learn anything for free on the internet. And you can also sell your goods and services to the global market. And once you have knowledge by the internet, and the ability to engage in commerce, that this is going to greatly improve quality of life for the people of the world.
11:37And it has. And I'd just like to thank anyone in the audience who may have been helpful in, you know, with Starlink and getting it approved in their country. And I think it's doing a lot of good in the countries that have approved it, which is, I think, at this point, 130 countries are very happy with it. I don't currently anticipate SpaceX getting into the weapons business. That's certainly not an aspiration. We're frequently asked to do weapons programs, but we have thus far declined.
12:08Do you envisage SpaceX or indeed Starlink as a separate entity publicly listing in the near future or at all?
12:20It's possible that Starlink may go public at some point in the future.
12:26And what would be the what would be the timeframe?
12:30What kind of timeframe you consider?
12:32I'm in no rush. I'm in no rush to go public.
12:35The public is, I guess, a way to potentially make more money, but at the expense of a lot of public company overhead and inevitably a whole bunch of lawsuits, which are very annoying.
12:51So really, something needs to be done about the shareholder derivative lawsuits in the U.S. because it allows plaintiffs, law firms who don't represent the shareholders to pretend that they represent the shareholders by getting a public plaintiff with a few shares to initiate a massive lawsuit against the company.
13:11And the irony being that extreme irony that even if the class they purport to represent were to vote that they don't want the lawsuit, the lawsuit would still continue.
13:23So how can it be a class action representing a class if the class were against it?
13:28And that's the bizarre situation we've got in the U.S.
13:30That needs a dire need of reform.
13:34As anyone who's run a public company experiences, it's an absurd situation that needs to change.
13:39Well, do you think Donald Trump might change it?
13:41You've certainly got his ear.
13:42I imagine that you've put this to him.
13:45Is this something you're trying to change before any Starlink IPO?
13:51Well, it would need a law to be passed.
13:56The trouble being that you need 60 Senate votes and the Democrats will vote against it.
14:04The plaintiff's bar is, I believe, the second largest contributor to the Democratic Party.
14:14That's the issue. At the state level, this can be solved.
14:17And I should say, Texas recently passed a law which, at least at the state level, made sectional lawsuits much more reasonable because you have to get at least one in 33 shareholders to agree that they are part of a class of shareholders.
14:34Three percent. This is what we really help with frivolous lawsuits.
14:42Let's talk about AI, which is in so many of your businesses and in all our worlds in different ways.
14:50It's one of the big changes, the development of generative AI, since you last spoke to this forum three years ago.
14:57You're in this space, of course, with Grok, which almost everyone will know.
15:01You co-founded Open AI and then left.
15:04And you've obviously got a legal battle with Open AI and Sam Altman.
15:09I wonder if you could say something about the status of that, because you were together in Saudi Arabia with the president last week with Sam Altman in the same place at the same time in the neighborhood.
15:24Does that mean you are pushing ahead with the lawsuit against Open AI?
15:29Yes.
15:31So I came up with the name Open AI as an open source and as a non-profit.
15:38And I funded Open AI for the first roughly $50 million, and it was intended to be a non-profit open source company.
15:50And now they're trying to change that for their own financial benefit into a for-profit company that is closed source.
15:58So this would be like, let's say you funded a non-profit to help preserve the Amazon rain forest.
16:06But instead of doing that, they became a lumber company, chopped down the forest and sold the wood.
16:11You'd be like, wait a second, that's not what I funded.
16:14That's Open AI.
16:15They've made some changes to their corporate structure, though, haven't they, since?
16:19In recognition of what you've said.
16:23No, that's just what they told the media.
16:26OK.
16:31They have partly walked back their plan to restructure the business.
16:37I guess that's made no difference to how you feel about it.
16:39So you're determined to see them in court?
16:42Of course.
16:44OK, well, that's certainly going to be one to watch.
16:46I also wanted to ask you about AI and regulation, because when you were here last talking to John
16:51Micklethwaite, you had some pretty strong words about the risk that AI poses.
16:57And you said that you really felt what the US was missing was a federal AI regulator,
17:03that something along the lines of the Food and Drug Administration or the Federal Aviation
17:08Administration.
17:09Now, you're clearly now in a zone where you're more on the cutting regulation side than wanting
17:15new regulators.
17:16So has your view changed on the need for an AI regulator?
17:21Well, it's not that I don't think there should be regulators.
17:24You can think of regulators like referees on the field in sports.
17:28There should be some number of referees, but you shouldn't have so many referees that you
17:32can't kick the ball without hitting one.
17:36So in most fields in the US, the regulatory burden has grown over time to the point where
17:45it's like having more referees than players on the field.
17:51And this is a natural consequence of an extended period of prosperity.
17:54It's very important to appreciate this.
17:57This has happened throughout history.
17:59When you have an extended period of prosperity with no existential war, there's no cleansing
18:05function for unnecessary laws and regulations.
18:11So what happens is that every year more laws and more regulations are passed because legislators
18:19are going to legislate, regulators are going to regulate.
18:22And you will get the steady pile of more and more laws and regulations over time until
18:28everything is illegal.
18:31And let me give you an example of a truly absurd situation.
18:35Under the Biden administration, SpaceX was sued for not hiring asylum seekers in the
18:42US.
18:44Now, the problem is it's actually illegal for SpaceX under ITAR, International Traffic
18:49and Arms Regulations, to hire anyone who is not a permanent resident of the United States
18:54because the premise being that they will take advanced rocket technology and return to their
18:58home country if they're not a permanent resident.
19:00So we're simultaneously in a situation where it is illegal to hire asylum seekers and is
19:06also illegal to hire asylum seekers.
19:11And the Biden's Department of Justice chose to prosecute us despite both paths being illegal.
19:17Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
19:18But my question was specifically about a regulator for AI, which you said three years ago was
19:25needed.
19:25And you said we need to be proactive on the regulation of AI rather than reactive.
19:31Have you changed your mind on that?
19:33No, of course not.
19:35No, of course not.
19:36What I'm saying is that there should be some referees on the field, a few referees.
19:41But you shouldn't have a field jam-packed with referees such that you cannot kick a
19:46ball in any direction without hitting one.
19:48So the fields that have been around for a long time, such as automotive, aerospace,
19:58the sort of food and drug industries, are overregulated.
20:02But the new fields, like artificial intelligence, are underregulated.
20:07In fact, there is no regulator at all.
20:09So there should be.
20:10Do you still think that?
20:12Yes, I'm simply saying, which I think is just basic common sense, that you want to
20:18at least have a few referees in the field.
20:20You don't want to have an army of referees, but you want to have a few referees on any
20:25given field, in any given sport, or any given arena, industrial arena, to ensure that public
20:33safety is taken care of.
20:36But you don't want to have—so there's a proper number of referees.
20:41Like I said, it's actually very easy to visualize this when compared to sports.
20:45If the whole field is packed with referees, that would look absurd.
20:50But if there were no referees at all, your game's not going to be as good.
20:54OK.
20:55So let's then talk about your new world, your role advising government.
21:00You are in this unique and unprecedented position of having billions of dollars' worth
21:06of contracts with the federal government yourself, mostly through SpaceX, and also now an insider's
21:12knowledge of it because of Doge.
21:14Can you see that there is a conflict of interest or a potential conflict of interest in broad
21:21terms just through that very fact?
21:25I don't think so, actually.
21:26There have been many advisors throughout history in the U.S.
21:31government and others who have had economic interests.
21:35And I am simply an advisor.
21:37I don't have formal power.
21:40And that's it.
21:42The president can choose to accept my advice or not.
21:45And that's how it goes.
21:47If there's a single contract that any of my companies have received that people think
21:52is somehow not—was awarded improperly, it would immediately be front-page news, to say
22:01the least.
22:02And if I didn't mention it, certainly my competitors would.
22:06So if you're not seeing that, then clearly there's not a conflict of interest.
22:09There's another way, though, to look at it, that, for example, you have many competitors,
22:17whether it's companies like Boeing or companies who would like to do more of the kind of work
22:21you do for NASA, Blue Origin, Rocket Lab.
22:23And because Doge is in every federal government department, you or people who work for Doge
22:33and you are the driving force behind it have an insight into those companies' affairs
22:39and those companies' relationships with the federal government.
22:44No, all we do is we review the organization to see if the organization has departments
22:53that are no longer relevant.
22:56And are the contracts that are being awarded good value for money?
23:01In fact, frankly, the bar is not particularly high.
23:03Is there any value for money in a contract?
23:06And if there isn't, then we make recommendations to the secretary.
23:10The secretary can choose to take those actions or not take those actions, and that's it.
23:15And then any action that is as a function of Doge is posted to the Doge website and
23:22to the doge.gov or at Doge handle on the X platform.
23:26So it's complete transparency.
23:29And I've not seen any case where, to the best of my knowledge, there's even been an
23:35accusation of conflict because it is completely and utterly transparent.
23:41That's it.
23:41And what about the international dimension?
23:43Now, let's think about Starlink.
23:45Starlink is obviously a very, very good internet service.
23:48It's sought after all over the world.
23:50It's critical to the front line in Ukraine.
23:53It has also had more contracts coming its way.
23:57And there is some evidence that companies are allowing access to it because they want
24:02to be close to the Trump administration and send the right signal.
24:05So Bloomberg broke news today that the South African government is working around the rules
24:10on black ownership in order to allow Starlink in.
24:12And that is being done on the eve of the visit that President Ramaphosa is going to make
24:18to the White House.
24:19Do you recognize that as a conflict of interest?
24:23No, of course not.
24:24First of all, you should be questioning, why are there racist laws in South Africa?
24:28That's the first problem.
24:29That's what you should be attacking.
24:31It's improper for there to be racist laws in South Africa.
24:34The whole idea with what Nelson Mandela, who was a great man, proposed was that all races
24:40should be on an equal footing in South Africa.
24:42That's the right thing to do, not to replace one set of racist laws with another set of
24:46racist laws, which is utterly wrong and improper.
24:49So that's the deal, that all races should be treated equally and there should be no
24:55preference given to one or the other.
24:58Whereas there are now 140 laws in South Africa that basically give strong preference to if
25:08you're a black South African and not otherwise.
25:11And so now I'm in this absurd situation where I was born in South Africa but can't get a
25:14license to operate in Starlink because I'm not black.
25:18Well, it looks like that's about to change.
25:24I just asked you a question.
25:25Please answer.
25:26Does that seem right to you?
25:27Well, those rules were designed to bring about an era of more economic equality in South
25:36Africa.
25:36And it looks like the government has found a way around those rules for you.
25:42I asked you a question.
25:44This is your interview.
25:45Everyone wants to hear from you.
25:46I asked you a question.
25:47Yes or no?
25:50Not for me to answer.
25:51I have got a question for you about your government work and the amount of savings.
25:56Why do you like racist laws?
25:59This is not for me to answer.
26:01Come on.
26:02Yes, it is.
26:02Now, you wouldn't be trying to dodge a question that is difficult for you to answer.
26:07No, you answer mine.
26:10I'm sure you can have that conversation directly with the South African government if you want
26:14to.
26:14I want to ask you about the total...
26:16I can't believe it.
26:16That's not good.
26:17I want to ask you about the total amount...
26:19I don't even like racist laws.
26:21I want to ask you about the total amount that you're planning to save through DOGE's work.
26:26Before the election, you said it was going to be at least $2 trillion.
26:29The number currently on DOGE.gov is $170 billion.
26:35That's a big change.
26:37What happened to the $2 trillion?
26:40Well, do you expect it to happen immediately?
26:42Well, is it going to happen?
26:43Because DOGE is supposed to run until next July.
26:46I mean, your question is absurd in its fundamental premise.
26:50Are you assuming that within a few months, there's an instant $2 trillion saved?
26:55No, I'm not at all.
26:56I'm just asking you, is that still your aim then?
26:58Is it still your aim to get to $2 trillion?
27:01Have we not made good progress given the amount of time?
27:05That's exactly what I'm asking.
27:06So is it still your aim to go from $170 billion to $2 trillion?
27:11The ability of DOGE to operate is a function of whether the government,
27:19and this includes the Congress, is willing to take our advice.
27:24We're not the dictators of the government.
27:26We are the advisors.
27:28And so we can advise.
27:30And the progress we've made thus far, I think, is incredible.
27:32DOGE team has done incredible work.
27:34But the magnitude of the savings is proportionate to the support we get from Congress
27:41and from the executive branch of the government in general.
27:47So we're not the dictators.
27:50We are the advisors.
27:52But thus far, for advisors, the DOGE team, to their credit, has made incredible progress.
28:01You've talked about $4 billion a day being saved, but that won't get, which isn't…
28:12And I think everyone can agree that combating waste and inefficiency in government is a very
28:17good thing.
28:18But if you add that up, it's not going to get to $2 trillion over the lifetime of DOGE.
28:25I'm sorry?
28:26The $4 billion a day, if DOGE is going to run until next July,
28:30is not going to get you to $2 trillion.
28:37But you still say it's your aim, so we'll take that as read.
28:43There's what DOGE…
28:44I mean, I feel you're somewhat trapped in the NPC dialogue tree of a traditional journalist.
28:52So it's difficult when I'm conversing with someone who's trapped in the dialogue tree
28:56of a conventional journalist, because it's like talking to a computer.
29:00So DOGE is an advisory group.
29:05We are doing the best we can as an advisory group.
29:09The progress made thus far as an advisory group is excellent.
29:12I don't think any advisory group has done better in the history of advisory groups of the
29:16government.
29:17Now, we do not make the laws, nor do we control the judiciary, nor do we control the executive
29:26branch.
29:27We are simply advisers.
29:29In that context, we are doing very well.
29:32Beyond that, we cannot take action beyond that, because we are not some sort of imperial
29:38dictator of the government.
29:40There are three branches of government that are, to some degree, opposed to that level
29:45of cost savings.
29:48Let's not criticize whether there's $4 trillion and instead look at the fact that $160 billion
29:56has been saved, and more will be saved too.
29:59And as I said, I think everyone can agree that cutting waste and indeed fraud in any
30:05government and being responsible with taxpayers' money is a very good thing.
30:10So I can see that you're proud of that work.
30:14I do want to ask you about USAID and the comments that Bill Gates made the other day, which
30:21I know that you called him...
30:22Yeah, because he gives an eye out.
30:24I know.
30:25You've said that already.
30:26I wondered...
30:27That's terrible.
30:28Also, who does Bill Gates think he is to make comments about the welfare of children, given
30:35that he frequented Jeffrey Epstein?
30:38OK, well, he said he regrets that.
30:43And he spent a lot of his own money on philanthropy around the world over the years.
30:51My question to you is, have you looked at the data to check if he might be right that
30:58the cuts to USAID might cost millions of lives?
31:04Yes.
31:05I'd like him to show us any evidence whatsoever that that is true.
31:08It's false.
31:10What we've found with USAID cuts...
31:13And by the way, they haven't all been cut.
31:14The parts of USAID that we found to be even slightly useful were transferred to the State
31:20Department.
31:21So they've not been deleted.
31:22They've simply been transferred to the State Department.
31:25But many times over, with USAID and other organizations, when they said, oh, well,
31:30this is going to help children or it's going to help some disease eradication or something
31:38like that.
31:39And then when we ask for any evidence whatsoever, I say, well, please connect us with this
31:44group of children so we can talk to them and understand more about their issue.
31:48We get nothing.
31:50We don't even try to come up with a show often, meaning it's sort of like, well, can
31:58we at least see a few kids?
32:01Where are they if they're in trouble?
32:03We'd like to talk to them and talk to their caregivers.
32:06And then we get nothing as a response, because what we find is an enormous amount of fraud
32:13and graft.
32:14OK, let me put this example.
32:16Very little of it actually gets to the kids, if anything at all.
32:19OK, let me put this example to you, because you grew up in South Africa, so you'll know
32:24the impact of HIV AIDS well.
32:26And this is why I asked about the data.
32:28The US led on international efforts to combat HIV AIDS treatment, prevention.
32:34And there's an initiative called PEPFAR, which is credited with saving 26 million lives
32:39in the last 20 years.
32:40It was part of the foreign aid freeze.
32:42Then there was a limited waiver.
32:44The services are disrupted.
32:47And U.N. aid says if permanently discontinued, there will be another 4 million AIDS related
32:53deaths by 2029.
32:55So if you look at that example, which is backed up by data, in 2023, 630,000 died of AIDS
33:04related illnesses, then perhaps Bill Gates's figures are not wrong.
33:07Millions of lives could be lost.
33:11First of all, the program, the AIDS medication program is continuing.
33:20So your fundamental premise is wrong.
33:23It is continuing.
33:24Now, do you have another example?
33:26Not since it's not, you know, not in its entirety, not in its entirety.
33:33The program, there's a limited waiver and U.N.
33:36AIDS have said that not all of the services that were previously funded by USAID are continuing.
33:41So that's that's why that's why I put that example to you.
33:45OK, well, which ones aren't being funded?
33:47I'll fix it right now.
33:49OK, well, actually, they're all on the U.N.
33:52U.N. AIDS website, so you'll be able to see them.
33:54But mostly they are to do with mostly they are to do with prevention.
33:58And for example, the rollout of a drug called Glenacapavir, which was hailed as one of the
34:03biggest breakthroughs against AIDS for many years, which came out last year.
34:08So if you are perhaps I'm sure you and you and AIDS would be delighted if you're able
34:12to look at that again.
34:14Yes, but if in fact this is true, which I doubt it is, then we'll fix it.
34:18OK, fine.
34:20So finally, political your political influence.
34:25I wondered whether you have decided yet how much you're going to spend on the the upcoming
34:32midterms.
34:34Is it you?
34:35You spent a lot more money on the last U.S. election than you envisaged when you were
34:39speaking here three years ago.
34:42Are you going to continue to spend at that kind of level on future elections?
34:46I think.
34:50In terms of political spending, I'm going to do a lot less in the future.
34:55And why is that?
34:58I think I've done enough.
35:02Is it is it because of blowback?
35:07Well, if I see a reason to do political spending in the future, I will do it.
35:11I don't currently see a reason.
35:12What about political influence beyond the U.S.?
35:14How often do you speak to President Putin?
35:19I don't speak to President Putin.
35:21You've never spoken to President Putin?
35:25I was on a video call with him once about five years ago.
35:28That's the only that's the only thing I speak to President Putin.
35:32Oh, you must.
35:33I get it because I speak.
35:35Actually, I've heard you.
35:36I've heard you speak about it.
35:37For example, you said you were going to speak to President Putin.
35:40I've heard you speak about it, for example, in your West Point speech.
35:43You said, oh, I challenged President Putin to to was it an arm wrestle?
35:48And I know The Wall Street Journal has reported your reported conversations.
35:52If you're if you're saying they haven't happened other than once, I'll take that as read.
35:57Is there a worse publication on the face of the earth than The Wall Street Journal?
36:01I wouldn't use that to line up my cage for power truffles.
36:06That newspaper is the worst newspaper in the world.
36:10And there's and if there's one newspaper that should be pro capitalist,
36:15it's the one with Wall Street in the name.
36:17But it isn't.
36:19So I have the very lowest opinion of The Wall Street Journal.
36:23That's absolutely nonsense.
36:24And you clearly believe the tribe that you've written that you've read in those papers.
36:27I read I read very widely.
36:29And I'm putting these questions to you so that you have an opportunity to respond to them,
36:34which you are and and for which we're all grateful to hear your responses.
36:37OK, we are we are out of time.
36:40You mentioned you mentioned it to be challenging.
36:42I did so on on the X platform.
36:45I challenged Vladimir Putin to say no comment over the.
36:50I didn't talk to him.
36:51That was a post on the X platform.
36:54That's why I asked you.
36:55And you've and you've clarified and explained.
36:57That's that's why I was asking whether you have had reported conversations.
37:01And and you said.
37:05OK, typical legacy media lies.
37:08OK, listen, I actually thought I might give Brock the last word,
37:12because when I asked Brock what your hardest challenge is,
37:16it said the strain of managing multiple high stake ventures
37:21amid financial regulatory and public relations crises.
37:25And I wondered whether you recognize that characterization
37:29and whether you do think that this is a pivotal year in your life.
37:34Well, every year has been somewhat pivotal, and this one's no different.
37:40So in terms of interesting things that probably are accomplished this year,
37:45the getting Starship to be fully reusable so that the we catch both the booster and the ship,
37:56which will be the first fully reusable orbital rocket ever in history,
37:59which is would be the first fully reusable orbital rocket ever in history,
38:02which is would be a profound breakthrough as the essential breakthrough
38:06necessary to make life multi planetary and ultimately become a space faring civilization.
38:12We've got Neuralink, which is now helped five patients restore capability
38:20using the telepathy implants where they're able to control a computer simply by thinking.
38:26We'll be doing our first
38:28patient to restore site with our blind site implant, which is the end of this year or early next.
38:37In fact, that first patient might be in UAE,
38:40since we have a relationship with UAE and the Cleveland Clinic there.
38:48I think we're starting on the AI front. We are close to what you might call AGI,
38:53or digital superintelligence. I think we'll see that we are seeing an explosion in digital
39:02superintelligence here. And then we've got Tesla, the will be launching unsupervised autonomy,
39:09basically self-driving cars with no one in them in Austin next month. So it's a big year for sure.
39:15And many other things in the works too. I'm a technologist first and foremost.
39:24Elon Musk, thank you very much for joining us here at Qatar Economic Forum. Thank you.
Recomendada
1:16
|
Próximamente
15:11
1:01
1:11
1:04
21:45