Man vs. machine
Are robots coming for our jobs? Looks like it. But Elon Musk, CEO of SpaceX and Tesla and foremost authority on futurist this-and-that, believes that a "merger of biological intelligence and digital intelligence" could still ward off the complete extinction of humans in the workforce.
A 'high bandwidth interface to the brain'
Musk told an audience at the World Government Summit in Dubai on Monday that a "high bandwidth interface" to connect the human brain to digital devices could help us better compete with the efficiency of artificial intelligence, CNBC reported.
Computers can communicate thoughts at "a trillion bits per second," he explained, which trounces the human communication method of thinking and then keyboarding it in; that maxes out at around 10 bits per second.
Really smart bots are also a 'dangerous situation'
In his comments Monday, Musk also veered from talk of efficient machines taking jobs to talk of AI one day becoming "smarter than the smartest human on earth," which he called a "dangerous situation."
Musk has a seemingly ironic history of speaking out against the unmitigated rise of artificial intelligence, even going so far as donating $10 million to the Future of Life Institute, an organization to help keep AI “beneficial to humanity.”
Musk, a man of many human jobs himself
When not tending to Tesla or SpaceX business (or fending off an AI-induced dystopian future), Musk plays business advisor to President Trump. This is despite his disagreement with POTUS's on-again, off-again travel ban that Silicon Valley has largely condemned. He tweeted that he believes his opposing voice from within the council is "doing good."
If you can't beat 'em ...
With Musk going public with policy differences with the president, it's clear that his decision to accept the advisory role is for the purposesof making change from the inside.
Or, you could think of it as similar to the way Musk probably sees the whole human/machine "merger" thing in light of his a fear of AI: "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em," right?